US Airways to aquire widebody jets????
03-01-2007, 02:36 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 345
Originally Posted by Typhoonpilot
The A340-500 is not economical. It was when oil was $35/barrel or less, but the differentials between it and the 777 are huge. For the same mission the 777 can carry 10 tonnes more payload while burning 10 tonnes less fuel and will do it with a shorter flight time. There really is no competition.
For an East coast to China trip the 787 and A350 are too small. Yes, they can make the flight but the revenue potential is too small to make it very viable. The airplane that would be viable on the route is a 777-200LR. It can make it any time of the year with a full payload.
I would love to see USAirways get the route. They had an opportunity for a Japan route back in the mid 90s, but the union screwed it up for fear they would have to wet lease it out for a few years until they got the airplane to operate it themselves
Typhoonpilot
For an East coast to China trip the 787 and A350 are too small. Yes, they can make the flight but the revenue potential is too small to make it very viable. The airplane that would be viable on the route is a 777-200LR. It can make it any time of the year with a full payload.
I would love to see USAirways get the route. They had an opportunity for a Japan route back in the mid 90s, but the union screwed it up for fear they would have to wet lease it out for a few years until they got the airplane to operate it themselves
Typhoonpilot
It makes more sense then buying two 777LR's just to do that route. Even if the 777 is more economical
03-01-2007, 03:22 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 116
You guys are correct. An article I saw said US Airways was looking at either the A340 or 777. Same article that said Parker was looking at a large order to totally replace the aging 737-300/400 fleet.
For what it's worth, America West had 747s and went to Japan so Asia won't be totally new for them.
I also heard a rumor that US Airways is thinking about moving the 767s to Hawaii and having a Hawaii base.
For what it's worth, America West had 747s and went to Japan so Asia won't be totally new for them.
I also heard a rumor that US Airways is thinking about moving the 767s to Hawaii and having a Hawaii base.
03-01-2007, 03:59 PM
#13
AAmerican Way for AA Pay
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: B-737 Pilot
Posts: 1,617
Originally Posted by Linebacker35
THe A340-500 can make that trip no problem. I imagine they will order those since it has the same type rating as the 330.
03-01-2007, 04:09 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 345
Originally Posted by B757200ER
Not exactly; A-330 is a 2-engine jet, A-340 has 4-engines. Different type rating. But, the A345 can definately fly that route nonstop.
03-02-2007, 03:13 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Position: tri current
Posts: 1,485
The 330 and 340 are co-flown at my airline as well. The differences training is just a few sims.
Someone in management will have to do the math for total cost of each type versus total profit potential. My gut feeling will still be for the 777. It's dispatch reliability is also far superior.
Totally different situation. With the Japan route the talk was having someone esle fly it, a charter airline perhaps, only till USAir had the planes and pilots to do it themselves.
TP
Someone in management will have to do the math for total cost of each type versus total profit potential. My gut feeling will still be for the 777. It's dispatch reliability is also far superior.
You mean they should have allowed it just like they did with British Airways on the London routes? You see how good that turned out for the Pilots. USair forfitted all the London routes they had been awarded as well as the ones they purchased from TWA for a few hundred million. The Union didn't screw it up MGT did.
TP
03-02-2007, 01:45 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Position: Retired 121 pilot
Posts: 1,032
Originally Posted by Typhoonpilot
The 330 and 340 are co-flown at my airline as well. The differences training is just a few sims.
Someone in management will have to do the math for total cost of each type versus total profit potential. My gut feeling will still be for the 777. It's dispatch reliability is also far superior. TP
Someone in management will have to do the math for total cost of each type versus total profit potential. My gut feeling will still be for the 777. It's dispatch reliability is also far superior. TP
03-02-2007, 06:33 PM
#18
Tri-tanic operator
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Doggie
Posts: 2,382
Leased for sure
Originally Posted by swaayze
Rumor is that a deal is close to acquire (lease I think) a couple of A340-500s from Air Canada, contingent upon route approval.
I don't think the NEW USAirways owns anything but DEBT ...
03-04-2007, 07:50 PM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: A320 CA
Posts: 973
Originally Posted by Typhoonpilot
For an East coast to China trip the 787 and A350 are too small. Yes, they can make the flight but the revenue potential is too small to make it very viable. Typhoonpilot
I wonder why NWA plans to use the 787 from JFK-NRT and DTW-PKG then.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Frisky Pilot
Regional
20
01-01-2022 05:02 PM
