Originally Posted by
C11DCA
So if UAL cancels the 359’s and gets just 787 or 777x as replacements for the 777-200’s then there will be a big seat gap between the 787-9 and the 787-10 (currently it is 66 seats). The 777x’s will have even more capacity.
Yes from a commonality perspective an all 787/777 fleet saves some $$. But also at a cost of not having the most efficient plane flying a certain route. Either not enough seats or too many to fill.
The 66 seat gap between 787-9s & -10s is exaggerated by the dramatically different seating allocations tailored to the markets they serve.
787-9: 48BF/88E+/
116Y
787-10: 44BF/21PE/45E+/
208Y (Polaris)
Now that the 787's battery issues are fixed it blows the competition away on cost and can replace 777s in most of the markets they serve. Operating an additional fleet of less efficient aircraft based on a seating gap that is easily addressed by reconfiguring existing aircraft is not compelling as UA management understands.
https://simpleflying.com/boeing-787-vs-the-airbus-a350/
It is amazing to me that DAL is not able to operate A350s on LAX-SYD when UAL has done it with 747s, 777s, & 787s. Must be an ETOPS authorization issue.