|
|
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1278474)
There are quite a few sources of slightly used AirBus aircraft on the market. They don't sell as well in the used market because the reputation they have for being expensive to maintain.
|
Originally Posted by Fly4hire
(Post 1278476)
Did you mean narrow body?
|
Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy
(Post 1278481)
When you say new south runway, do you mean replacing one of the existing south runways, or actually building a new runway (six in total?)
|
Originally Posted by Fly4hire
(Post 1278460)
He's been one of the most successful volunteers in recent memory in fighting said entrenched bureaucracy. He 's not on full time flight pay loss.
The biggest question in my head is how in the world they talked him into doing the EVP... Nu |
Originally Posted by flyguy1
(Post 1278503)
I heard a new south runway will be built for a total of 6.
|
Originally Posted by grasshopper
(Post 1278467)
So if one believed these were dots, a common theme of airbus and west coast still come forth...no hawaiian...airbus leaves one player
why the @#$% would United give us anything...unless we gave them something really juicy...like removing a competitor or a gate swap of sorts...and probably on the west coast a bit of a focus on transcon flights Europe is a mess...would like to get into LHR...might be opportunistic time for a partnership? bahhh...probably nuttin' didn't Etihad just get a little cozy with AF? Aren't they an investor in someone else? nahh...maddog concussion kicking in again probably |
Originally Posted by N9373M
(Post 1278515)
From the above article: He said the most pressing of those needs is gates, not runways. It is easier to bring a bigger plane to a gate than to add new gates. As air traffic increases - One BIG plane, 1 Slot, 1 Gate. Regionals wither away. |
Originally Posted by hockeypilot44
(Post 1278529)
Who's the one player? Frontier, Virgin Atlantic, Spirit, Jetblue, etc?
|
Originally Posted by CAAC ATP
(Post 1278532)
Buy Virgin A for the ac and remove a thorn in United's SFO side.
I'm pretty sure his NDA/fiduciary responsibilities would trump anything said in a pubic forum. In other words, he can lie to us with impunity, but to disclose what we're about to do would incur legal and financial problems. |
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 1278508)
He wouldn't be doing basic due dilligence if he didn't at least go check it out. And even if we got some, that doesn't mean we'd have to get the first lot. I'd like to see at least 100 roll off the line first before we get any, negotiate a longer warranty period with free upgrades for known issues, penalties for missed performance metrics and excessive operational dispatch deviations (related to MX and reliability) outside the advertised expectations and of course, a sweet price.
Then we insist on strict delivery deadlines with severe prenegotiated penalties for missed deliveries so if (when) another 787esque situation developes we get paid mad money to get even more useful life out of our cheaper existing fleet. What? You're not willing to stand behind your product? Hmmm, OK. Maybe Boeing will be. Bonsoir, gotta jet, we'll be in touch. If you are 'negotiating' with Boeing for new airplanes, wouldn't you tell them; 1. You don't really want the 787 and 2. You are going to check out what Airbus has to offer and 3. Those A320 NEO and A350 sure look nice.... How much did you say you wanted for those 100 737 Max's and 50 787's again? Really? Well, I'll be in Paris...call me after you talk to the sales manager. :D |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:03 AM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands