UAL Insight
 

Ok, assume all is well (No Tilton), I have read where UAL is still a likely candidate for the B787 / B748 / B773....
Anyone see this happening in the near future? How would the recent tie with Continental affect this? At all?
Please don't just say "No Money". Remember I said if all is well! Ha!

If all was well I wouldn't be working for the airlines.

As for UAL...well, they might get those. Then again, they might not.

GP

grant, are you:

high
drunk
doped up on meth


none of those will happen. we dont have a big plane problem, we have alittle plane problem.

we have 70 seaters, and when the 737 goes buh bye-- the airbus carries what 128?ish

so you have a decent market in b/w--- they want 90-95 seaters--- Cal already showed their hand-- the difference b/w a 50 seater and a 737-700 is nuts and thats where the scope comes in

I Agree
 

United has 52 777s, and at one time had 44 747-400s. We have plenty of big jets. So you won't see 777-300s or 747-800s.

The 787 is a 767 replacement in size, range/capacity. It's only advantage is supposedly fuel efficiency--yet to be proven. Buying/leasing a replacement can easily eat-up any fuel savings. So, probably no-dice there. Even if they did, it would be one-for-one replacements...no gain.

To get more jets, you need more destinations. We generally stop serving destinations.

With the demise of the Guppie (737), we are short in the small jet department. Do you think Tilton's replacement will:

a. Get EMB-170s for mainline UAL?
b. Get more A-320s or 319s?
c. Farm-out more flying to UAX?

If you've ever listened to "John Boy and Billy in the Morning" and "The Stoopie Quiz," pick "C."

(For those who don't know, it's a Redneck-humor radio show; syndicated throughout the US. The answer to the quiz is always "C").

The 787's range far excedes the range of the 767. That is if it actually ever flies.:)

Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner
Fact Sheet
Brief Description:
The Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner is a super-efficient airplane with new passenger-pleasing features. It will bring the economics of large jet transports to the middle of the market, using 20 percent less fuel than any other airplane of its size.

Seating:
210 to 250 passengers

Range:
7,650 to 8,200 nautical miles (14,200 to 15,200 kilometers)

General Terms
 

Yes, it has more range than the 767 in general, although there may be some version that is long-legged.

I think UAL likes the 777 for long-haul. I don't see them using a 787 for a "long and lean" route, but that's just my opinion.

I'm just used to the way CAL uses airplanes. 737 where a 76 should be used and so on.:)

The picture in your avatar, was it taken southeast of Austin?

Not Sure...
 

I've been accused of being the man in the picture, but I never flew F-4Ds...just Es and Gs. A friend sent it to me..and he never said where he got it, or if it was him!!

I think the picture is either Smokey Hill range in Kansas, or a bomb-range in Oklahoma. Hard to tell in the avatar, but the range-control tower is visible at the bottom.

Austin (Bergstrom AFB) had RF-4Cs once upon a time, and the jet in the pic isn't one...doesn't rule out the location, though.

theres a trip tomorrow thats a 737 ORD-SFO blocked at 4:57. i mean is this a joke?

lets take the most inefficient plane and put it on the longest route- brilliant-- someone must know oil was going to 108. UFB

Hey AA flies MD80s on the same route.

Management should give themselves another raise.

sort of like CAL putting our wingleted 300's,500's on IAH-DFW, IAH-MFE and flying a non wingleted one to BOS, PHL, etc.

Before they shut it down i commuted home from JFK on a small 737-500 to IAH and then to AUS in a gigantic 737-900. Never understood that.

That is mostly because of loads we fly 900ER's and 757's to AUS, SAT, and MSY, it still makes no sense. Rember when DAL had 777's doing ATL-MCO.

Yeah, we had to protect Florida. We did that well didn't we. :-) Finally we got some smart network planners (thanks CAL!) we don't fly them to MCO anymore.

"""Rember when DAL had 777's doing ATL-MCO.""""

I had heard the reason for that was it made for a good route for checking out new Captains and getting used to the 777s before putting them on longer routes.

Belly freight. Gazillions of pounds of mail IAH-SAT and IAH-AUS. Only bags and not too many pax out of JFK. Non-revving was always a breeze.


Management isn't always dumb. But its usually a safe bet.:p