Originally Posted by
strfyr51
Even if they were the CFM56-5's We can work that engine in our shops at SFO. To carry a separate engine type as a problem" is a myth.
We Already fly the CFM67-7 and we've already handled the CFM56-2 and -3 I'm not worried because it's just not that serious.
We can Overhaul whatever Engine they drag through the doors and we have the test Cells to put them through their paces before we hang them back on the airplane.
Don't sweat it. If you can fly it? We can fix it!!
There's a lot more to carrying another engine than just repairing/maintaining the engine. You've got to have some bench stock for that engine type in several hubs. You've got to have a CFM-56 simulator. You've got to do some differences training for every pilot.
At my previous airline, we flew both V2500 and CFM-56 engined aircraft so it can be done but it wasn't optimal.
Given the number of airbii available on the market today, it wouldn't make sense to buy CFM engined aircraft when there are more than a few V2500s available. Having written that, I'm sure management will prove me a fool yet again (not hard to do) and will buy CFM airbii.
Plus, as pointed out by someone else, Franke and Indigo are getting F9 ready for an IPO. It's more profitable for them to IPO the company than to sell it in a private transaction.
Just look at Virgin America's IPO. The insiders made much more money by IPOing the company than they would have made in a private sale.
As far as the poster (Captain Carrot) that suggested United was buying F9,
1) It's a new APC account, only opened this month.
2) The profile says CRJ 7/900 FO; F9 doesn't fly CRJs. (upon further investigation, neither does Republic)
3) The poster stated 51 F9 airbii; their fleet count is higher than 51.
While it's possible that United would buy F9, I don't see it as a likely solution to simply adding airframes to the fleet.