A320

It is still a 1957 Boeing 707 technojet. Imagine if the IRS added 20 pages to the tax code and then claimed they completely improved the tax code.

Itsajob

That’s exactly what Congress does, except on a much larger scale. The 737 is outdated, but it makes money, there aren’t a lot of other options, and it’s here to stay. We have 161 max’s on the way so I guess we should just make our peace with it and enjoy the paychecks.

It would be interesting to see actual numbers comparing the real operating cost of various airlines between the 737 and 320. When you bring in purchase price, mechanical reliability, operating cost, and so on I’m sure the numbers get pretty tight. Our bean counters simply picked the max over the neo.

joepilot

Depends on which "pond" you are talking about. On the longer Pacific routes the flight time savings would closer to an hour, not counting the time for a fuel stop that the 767 would need.

Joe

Dave Fitzgerald

I think the reason UAL chose guppies over new airbi, Jeffery at the time was fairly anti-Airbus. I have no idea why.

I think for a long time, the guppie edged out the A320 on fuel numbers, in part because of the more efficient winglets, vs. the Airbi sharklets. Airbus couldn't be seen doing the same thing Boeing does, let alone make it look like a Boeing. But as an outsourced product, the new winglets must be ok. I'll really laugh when/if the airbi go with the curb feelers too.

Regularguy

I believe to this day, exception SST, the 707 had a faster wing than any other airliner out there. When they designed the 747 it basically inherited the same wing design and was capable of also cruising at .90 (yes at a very high FF).

It has been also said the 737 was purchased by Jeff because he hated the Airbus. I would wager the 737 order was in process before Jeff and had more to do with deal making and $$ than manufacturers.

The UAL A350 order appears to be no more than a token to show UAL’s viability as an ongoing Corp. during some pretty dark financial times.

Grumble

Airbus has always been more efficient than the 73. Winglets on the NG (along with a new wing) were an attempt to catch up. The NEO only widens that gap, hence Boeing’s last minute panic attempt at a response (Max).

Airhoss

Maybe Boeing could add some strakes and vortex generators. I mean why not? They already have curb feelers and a fancy new spring operated extra extendable gear.

AV82SKI

Maybe you should compare the 787-10 pay rate to the 767-300er then you would feel better about it. The 787-10 is planned to have 316 seats or 67% more than a 767-300er.

I personally would like to see a single pay rate for each fleet type to simplify some things. The 787-8 with 219 seats already pays the same as a 787-10 with 316 seats but we split the A319 from the A320 over 22 seats.

Im sure I will get flamed for this, but how about one rate for all 767's and one rate for all 757's? It would simplify pay but also bidding. The rate would obviously be corrected up first and there wouldn't be a need to chase the 767-400. How many guys/gals bid down to IAD to follow the 767-400 pay only to have the rug pulled out from under them as the airplane shifted back to EWR? How many people took a pay hit when that happened or bid up (to 777) just to protect their pay?

Spicy McHaggis

Convair 990 baby. That thing was a rocket.

Slats Extend

I wager the 737 max versus NEO decision had a lot more to do with 787 delay compensation than real numbers. UAL's own internal numbers projected the A321 Neo to have much lower operating costs than the MAX 9.

At the time UAL made the 737 MAX 9 orders, airlines were banging the drums for 787 delay compensation and the 321 NEO was outselling the MAX9 4 to1.

After UAL ordered the MAX 9's, now converted to MAX 10's, the subject of 787 delay compensation was never mentioned again.

Honestly, even though I gladly jump on the guppy hate band wagon, I hope the MAX -10 turns out out be a better airplane than the 900 ER. They will be around a long time...