Originally Posted by
VacancyBid
the 764 and 753 are the wildcards. They’re newer, useful, cost effective… and as long as they are around keeping the 752 and 763 is minimal extra expense. I
Bingo... Though I will add that the high-J 767 has its place too for now. If a (new) route can pay for that with almost identical premium seat counts, then that route will likely be able to support a 787 in the future. Replacing the 767 high-J with a standard 787-9 upgrades the total passenger experience and gives another 90 econ seats for very little additional direct operating cost (+ ~7% on hourly gas, but much less per pax). The 767 is the perfect "pathfinder" for such medium haul routes. UA is behind on widebody capacity for now, so the 767s (high-J and -400) will likely hang around for some time.
As mentioned, the 757-300 has no replacement either, but it's not nearly as good on CASM as the slightly-fewer-seat A321Neo. The 753 has 17% more seats, but a much larger fuel penalty (~50% more gas!). Increasing frequency (where airport capacity/slots/gates allow) makes more sense than hanging on to a 757-300.
Originally Posted by
MasterOfPuppets
there will be 767s and 757s in the fleet into 2030. The real question is how big the fleet will be. If the economy craps out the 757-200s will be gone 1:1 with XLRs. If the economy does well then the -200s may last longer to fill gaps or new route growth. The 767-300s will start going once 787 growth and intl expansion stops.
Yes, 764s almost certainly beyond 2030. But the economy and reputation of the company will drive the rest of the fleet as replacements continue to arrive. I agree that the 757 will be used to explore or confirm routes that will work for the XLRs, like the high-J 767 is being used today for the 789s...