Second narrow-body order
02-22-2016, 10:40 PM
#21
Don't say Guppy
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: Guppy driver
Posts: 1,926
I am sure the engines will be derated to our level, if they save money doing it. I can't remember what the normal flex temp was. If I remember right, it was 80 deg C. Even on short runways. If they have that engine, they were probably the "high-altitude" version, including aux O2 tanks in the aft cargo.
02-22-2016, 10:53 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,244
I am sure the engines will be derated to our level, if they save money doing it. I can't remember what the normal flex temp was. If I remember right, it was 80 deg C. Even on short runways. If they have that engine, they were probably the "high-altitude" version, including aux O2 tanks in the aft cargo.
02-22-2016, 11:25 PM
#23
Don't say Guppy
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: Guppy driver
Posts: 1,926
They probably also have a significantly lower MTOW than UAL's. Yeah, I know, a bunch more power, lower MTOW. Doesn't make sense. That is the way they were. Or, they could be a config that I have never heard of. UAL's 319's will fly a long way with a bunch less power.
It will be interesting to see how they are when they show up.
It will be interesting to see how they are when they show up.
02-23-2016, 01:17 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2015
Position: B777 CA
Posts: 753
Since it has always been about consumer votes and not "market fairness," you are probably correct. "Made in America" does not apply to air travel...just price and convenience.
With their state subsidies, their internal company costs are cents to our dollars. We wouldn't hold up for long. When the polished cabin service is added in, the disparity becomes even more pronounced.
However "fair" or "unfair," the market always wins. It is unlikely to be held off for very long.
With their state subsidies, their internal company costs are cents to our dollars. We wouldn't hold up for long. When the polished cabin service is added in, the disparity becomes even more pronounced.
However "fair" or "unfair," the market always wins. It is unlikely to be held off for very long.
As long as we can prevent ME3 from coming into our hubs and directly completing with us. (at current US law prevents). Due to the large O/D traffic at all our international hubs, no matter how good the service difference . No one is connecting thru the Middle East to go to Europe or Asia from the US.
Last edited by Boeing Aviator; 02-23-2016 at 01:51 AM.
02-23-2016, 04:57 AM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 215
Dumping the 737 at L-UAL was so the merger would be approved by the DOJ.
02-23-2016, 06:26 AM
#27
Orbis Non Sufficit
Joined APC: Oct 2015
Posts: 735
02-23-2016, 09:21 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Position: 777FO
Posts: 770
Don't get too excited, there's evidence suggesting this isn't all topline growth (see my previous post). If it is, awesome! But, I'd rather be pleasantly surprised than disappointed.
02-23-2016, 09:51 AM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: UAL Guppy CA
Posts: 233
I just took a look at the newly posted UCH Annual Report (10-K). Most of the document frightens and confuses me, but it appears that Aircraft Operating Leases for 2016 and 2017 are projected at 1.3 Billion each year followed by steady decline to 700 million by 2020 (page 98). So, it seems that UAL might indeed be buying to replace aircraft coming off of leases that won't be renewed. Roughly two thirds of our 700/800s (99 aircraft precisely) are leased and have an average age of about 15 yrs (pg 22). So, I am not at all sure that these latest purchase announcements in themselves amount to very much end growth. But hey, I got to fly a shiny new ER the other day with the new hot mic switch. Beats a rubber band!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
