United to order Boeing and Airbus
12-08-2009 | 11:51 AM
#31
Works Every Weekend
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,506
Likes: 0
From: 737 ATL
I recommend a good single malt.
12-08-2009 | 12:06 PM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,415
Likes: 0
From: B-777 left
12-08-2009 | 07:54 PM
#33
New Hire
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
just out of curiosity, the A350 has longer range than the 787, correct? Since both have the option for 50 more jets, could it be that they're taking a wait and see outlook on the economy? say markets begin to expand and require larger airplanes, they go for the 787, cancel the A350, and order the 747-800 as a supplement for longer routes. or, markets continue to shrink, then they can use the A350 on their transcon, and the 777 as the supplement for routes with more pax density, also transcon. And the 787 on routes between hubs and other high density routes. All of this in the mean time is just public relations and such. Your thoughts?
12-08-2009 | 08:34 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,001
Likes: 0
Different aircraft
. . . for different market segments.
This guy says it better than me.
Check out "Travel Options by United: A guide to fleet renewal" for a great chart of United's fleet options.
This guy says it better than me.
from 'Flightblogger', written before the announcement:
The Case for the A350
Though an inelegant replacement for the 767-300ER, the A350-800 fits with United's fleet as a chance to take advantage of the trend in up-gauging aircraft while reducing overall capacity. For example, five 244 seat 767-300ER flights can be consolidated into four 270 seat A350-800s. The A350 family offers models in the -900 and -1000 that can also replace both the 777-200/200ERs and 747-400s in a single common platform. The commonality between all three variants offers flexibility for United's pilots, as well as consolidating three wide-body aircraft types into one while streamlining maintenance and operations.
Across the Pacific to Australia, United can leap frog over Delta ( 777-200LR), V Australia ( 777-300ER) and QANTAS ( A380) with the A350-1000 while going from a four engine to a two engine platform with next-generation technology. The investment new United business class interiors suggest that the airline is in no rush to retire its existing wide-body fleet, meaning the 2013-2015 EIS for the A350 family variants makes the timing attractive to coincide with fleet retirement.
The Case for the 787
Even with the 787 potentially being overweight, the -8 will offer superior fuel burn performance on same-sized routes currently flown by the 767-300ER by comparison. As the oldest aircraft currently in the fleet, United's 767-300ERs are the first candidates for retirement. The A350 is too large to act as a suitable replacement for this aircraft. By Airbus' own admission, the A350 covers the larger 787-9, 777-200ER and 777-300ER market more than the 767 market. The training commonality between the 777 and 787 also offers an advantage for crews transitioning between types.
Implementation plans for 787-8 with airlines like QANTAS and Ethiopian have shown these carriers' intention to deploy the aircraft as a replacement to routes currently flown by 767-300s. Not only can the 787-8 act as a replacement for the 767 fleet for trans-Atlantic routes, but the aircraft could open lower density long-range flights to China, India or Japan. The 787-9 could also replace the 777-200ERs flying with 258 seats on long-haul segments to Asia offering greater efficiency in an optimized platform. The 787-3 in a high-capacity medium haul role also would also be ideal for high-density routes for vacationing travelers to Hawaii from the west coast, acting as a replacement for the older shorter-range 777-200s that fly the routes today.
The 787 could also be available earlier to United than any A350 variant with the Charleston 787 final assembly line coming online in 2012. While initially sized for three aircraft per month along with Everett's seven per month, Boeing could hold the surge line in place or potentially boost Charleston to meet the demand of early delivery dates.
The Case for the A350
Though an inelegant replacement for the 767-300ER, the A350-800 fits with United's fleet as a chance to take advantage of the trend in up-gauging aircraft while reducing overall capacity. For example, five 244 seat 767-300ER flights can be consolidated into four 270 seat A350-800s. The A350 family offers models in the -900 and -1000 that can also replace both the 777-200/200ERs and 747-400s in a single common platform. The commonality between all three variants offers flexibility for United's pilots, as well as consolidating three wide-body aircraft types into one while streamlining maintenance and operations.
Across the Pacific to Australia, United can leap frog over Delta ( 777-200LR), V Australia ( 777-300ER) and QANTAS ( A380) with the A350-1000 while going from a four engine to a two engine platform with next-generation technology. The investment new United business class interiors suggest that the airline is in no rush to retire its existing wide-body fleet, meaning the 2013-2015 EIS for the A350 family variants makes the timing attractive to coincide with fleet retirement.
The Case for the 787
Even with the 787 potentially being overweight, the -8 will offer superior fuel burn performance on same-sized routes currently flown by the 767-300ER by comparison. As the oldest aircraft currently in the fleet, United's 767-300ERs are the first candidates for retirement. The A350 is too large to act as a suitable replacement for this aircraft. By Airbus' own admission, the A350 covers the larger 787-9, 777-200ER and 777-300ER market more than the 767 market. The training commonality between the 777 and 787 also offers an advantage for crews transitioning between types.
Implementation plans for 787-8 with airlines like QANTAS and Ethiopian have shown these carriers' intention to deploy the aircraft as a replacement to routes currently flown by 767-300s. Not only can the 787-8 act as a replacement for the 767 fleet for trans-Atlantic routes, but the aircraft could open lower density long-range flights to China, India or Japan. The 787-9 could also replace the 777-200ERs flying with 258 seats on long-haul segments to Asia offering greater efficiency in an optimized platform. The 787-3 in a high-capacity medium haul role also would also be ideal for high-density routes for vacationing travelers to Hawaii from the west coast, acting as a replacement for the older shorter-range 777-200s that fly the routes today.
The 787 could also be available earlier to United than any A350 variant with the Charleston 787 final assembly line coming online in 2012. While initially sized for three aircraft per month along with Everett's seven per month, Boeing could hold the surge line in place or potentially boost Charleston to meet the demand of early delivery dates.
'flightblogger' analysis after the announcement:
. . .Though for Boeing, a split buy is a troublesome sign for the 777. In the most direct sense, the airline that launched the 777 had an opportunity to reinvest in the aircraft and declined. This could hasten the ascent of a next generation 777 or an equivalent option in the 305-365 seat segment.
For Airbus, while it has made significant inroads into the 777 market, its flank remains exposed where the 787 excels. The A330-200 remains an option for interim lift aircraft as airlines wait for their 787s or smaller A350s, but the reality is that the 220-270 seat market is extremely vulnerable for Airbus in the long run.
Now let's see if these reports become reality, but I'm left wondering: How does this help United control its costs? Why order one type when you can order two for twice the price?
. . .Though for Boeing, a split buy is a troublesome sign for the 777. In the most direct sense, the airline that launched the 777 had an opportunity to reinvest in the aircraft and declined. This could hasten the ascent of a next generation 777 or an equivalent option in the 305-365 seat segment.
For Airbus, while it has made significant inroads into the 777 market, its flank remains exposed where the 787 excels. The A330-200 remains an option for interim lift aircraft as airlines wait for their 787s or smaller A350s, but the reality is that the 220-270 seat market is extremely vulnerable for Airbus in the long run.
Now let's see if these reports become reality, but I'm left wondering: How does this help United control its costs? Why order one type when you can order two for twice the price?
Last edited by Sniper; 12-09-2009 at 06:51 AM. Reason: the chart shows up for those logged-in only I think, but not for a 'guest' on the board. It's a great chart though.
12-09-2009 | 03:09 AM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
From: 737
just out of curiosity, the A350 has longer range than the 787, correct? Since both have the option for 50 more jets, could it be that they're taking a wait and see outlook on the economy? say markets begin to expand and require larger airplanes, they go for the 787, cancel the A350, and order the 747-800 as a supplement for longer routes. or, markets continue to shrink, then they can use the A350 on their transcon, and the 777 as the supplement for routes with more pax density, also transcon. And the 787 on routes between hubs and other high density routes. All of this in the mean time is just public relations and such. Your thoughts?
Don't be surprised if in the end there is an order for more A320's thrown in with the A350-900 order....kinda like your coke at MacDonalds that is thrown in with your value meal.
12-23-2009 | 11:47 AM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
From: Sabre 60
United has 50+ 777's, 30+ 747's, and 30+ 767's. All of them will need to be replaced one day, but certainly the 767's and 747's are up first on the replacement block.
United buys aircraft at the absolute bottom of the market (this is something management did right!) They get a favorable deal in terms of discount pricing, as well as financing and delivery timing terms, both of which are very important for UAL in the current environment. But as you can see from above, United is going to need more than 25+25 of these types of aircraft. So you take delivery of both. Then down the line, depending on what manufacturer has been the most favorable (in terms of pricing, offering better financing, being more flexible on delivery dates, etc..), you order the remainder from that supplier. I think United did a really good job getting the best leverage they could in the current market.
Someone somewhere has ran the cost/benefit analysis of operating a single fleet type (savings in maintenance, training, etc..) versus operating two types of aircraft (flexiblity in markets, revenue, and ability to negotiate favorable supplier terms). For United, I am sure the benefits of two aircraft outweighed just a sole replacement. Lets just hope their assumptions are correct!
United buys aircraft at the absolute bottom of the market (this is something management did right!) They get a favorable deal in terms of discount pricing, as well as financing and delivery timing terms, both of which are very important for UAL in the current environment. But as you can see from above, United is going to need more than 25+25 of these types of aircraft. So you take delivery of both. Then down the line, depending on what manufacturer has been the most favorable (in terms of pricing, offering better financing, being more flexible on delivery dates, etc..), you order the remainder from that supplier. I think United did a really good job getting the best leverage they could in the current market.
Someone somewhere has ran the cost/benefit analysis of operating a single fleet type (savings in maintenance, training, etc..) versus operating two types of aircraft (flexiblity in markets, revenue, and ability to negotiate favorable supplier terms). For United, I am sure the benefits of two aircraft outweighed just a sole replacement. Lets just hope their assumptions are correct!
12-23-2009 | 02:57 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
From: 737
United has 50+ 777's, 30+ 747's, and 30+ 767's. All of them will need to be replaced one day, but certainly the 767's and 747's are up first on the replacement block.
United buys aircraft at the absolute bottom of the market (this is something management did right!) They get a favorable deal in terms of discount pricing, as well as financing and delivery timing terms, both of which are very important for UAL in the current environment. But as you can see from above, United is going to need more than 25+25 of these types of aircraft. So you take delivery of both. Then down the line, depending on what manufacturer has been the most favorable (in terms of pricing, offering better financing, being more flexible on delivery dates, etc..), you order the remainder from that supplier. I think United did a really good job getting the best leverage they could in the current market.
Someone somewhere has ran the cost/benefit analysis of operating a single fleet type (savings in maintenance, training, etc..) versus operating two types of aircraft (flexiblity in markets, revenue, and ability to negotiate favorable supplier terms). For United, I am sure the benefits of two aircraft outweighed just a sole replacement. Lets just hope their assumptions are correct!
United buys aircraft at the absolute bottom of the market (this is something management did right!) They get a favorable deal in terms of discount pricing, as well as financing and delivery timing terms, both of which are very important for UAL in the current environment. But as you can see from above, United is going to need more than 25+25 of these types of aircraft. So you take delivery of both. Then down the line, depending on what manufacturer has been the most favorable (in terms of pricing, offering better financing, being more flexible on delivery dates, etc..), you order the remainder from that supplier. I think United did a really good job getting the best leverage they could in the current market.
Someone somewhere has ran the cost/benefit analysis of operating a single fleet type (savings in maintenance, training, etc..) versus operating two types of aircraft (flexiblity in markets, revenue, and ability to negotiate favorable supplier terms). For United, I am sure the benefits of two aircraft outweighed just a sole replacement. Lets just hope their assumptions are correct!
12-23-2009 | 03:42 PM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,045
Likes: 0
Good point. It could be something similar though. ie: United buys $10B worth of planes 5 years from now if Airbus/Boeing loan them $1B right now.
Either way, this deal seems odd and theres got to be more to the story than is being told. United is simply not in the financial position to do something like this without someone taking on a lot of risk.
Either way, this deal seems odd and theres got to be more to the story than is being told. United is simply not in the financial position to do something like this without someone taking on a lot of risk.
Airlines have to make progress payments on aircraft at various stages of manufacture. Ever wonder how NWA managed to order B787's while they were operating under Chapter 11?
Simple Vendor Financing!
NWA ordered the aircraft, and Rolls Royce financed them in return for a Trent 1000 engine order and Totalcare MX contract. It's pretty common these days.
Perhaps UAL did a similar deal. They ordered the Rolls engines too.
Al
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
