A350-900

OP
autofixer

autofixer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,804
241
www.usaviation.com
1AA said:
Maybe if we are lucky AA will cancel their order. All we need is another airbus to our already diverse fleet.
I found the part about it being far superior to the 777 interesting; however, I am not emotionally invested in the 777.  
 
OP
autofixer

autofixer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,804
241
www.usaviation.com
jimntx said:
Is there a particular reason why an article about Singapore Airlines taking delivery on the A350 posted in the American Airlines forum?
Really?  Because AAL about to take delivery of A350-900s and the article compared the 777 to the A350-900. I guess you have to be in the weird clique to post around here? 
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

jcw

Veteran
Aug 12, 2004
2,053
2,716
autofixer said:
Really?  Because AAL about to take delivery of A350-900s and the article compared the 777 to the A350-900. I guess you have to be in the weird clique to post around here? 
actually unless you are here to bash management or the union the forum is not for you
 
it will be great to see the AA colors on a 350 - wonder if there will be any product enhancements with the 350 delivery
 
Maybe AA will start some Asia flights from PHL with it
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

jimntx

Veteran
Jun 28, 2003
11,218
3,301
Dallas, TX
www.usaviation.com
Right.  Attack the person,not the issue.  Very strong intellectually.  Besides for all you or I know, the Singapore A350 may be configured totally differently from the AA version.  So any comparisons are meaningless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people

IORFA

Veteran
Feb 7, 2003
1,908
854
autofixer said:
Really?  Because AAL about to take delivery of A350-900s and the article compared the 777 to the A350-900. I guess you have to be in the weird clique to post around here?
About to take delivery? You mean over a year from now. That's not really "about to take delivery!"
 

FWAAA

Veteran
Jan 5, 2003
10,251
3,900
jcw said:
Maybe AA will start some Asia flights from PHL with it
Perhaps, but I'd bet money against it.

I realize that US had grand ambitions of flying PHL-Asia but had no suitable airplanes to do so. In 2006 or so, US successfully applied for PHL-PEK, said it would procure used A340s to fly it, and then deferred the launch due to reality setting in (and then the Great Recession nearly killed US).

Now, there are suitable airplanes, like the 777, 77W and 787s. And next year, the A350s. But I don't believe that AA will fly to Asia from PHL despite all those capable airplanes. Why? If PHL-Asia was attractive, then wouldn't ANA or JAL or CX or SQ or another Chinese airline be flying to PHL? The absence of PHL on any of their route maps is some evidence that it's not all that viable.

All of them, of course, fly to JFK, and many of them have done that for years. If anything, AA needs to fly to Asia from NYC.

When the merger was announced, I did not post that PHL would be de-hubbed - in fact, I posted that maybe PHL would see a 788 to NRT. That's still a possibility, but Japan is becoming a less important destination relative to China and others, where there is more economic growth. The A350 is a big airplane - and AA is currently flying the smaller 788 to Asia from ORD and DFW, so I don't see the larger A350 flying to Asia from PHL, where the Asian O&D is low.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

topDawg

Veteran
Nov 23, 2010
2,957
2,353
1AA said:
Maybe if we are lucky AA will cancel their order. All we need is another airbus to our already diverse fleet.
less diverse fleet means less employees......why do you want that exactly?
 
autofixer said:
I found the part about it being far superior to the 777 interesting; however, I am not emotionally invested in the 777.  
Because it is superior to the 777, at least the 777-200 and 777-200ER. Double digit fuel burn reduction between the two and the same legs.
 
however the 777-200ER can carry a little bit more weight.
 
 
(for the record the 787-9 is also superior to the 777-200/200ER) 
 

1AA

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
6,054
4,303
www.usaviation.com
topDawg said:
less diverse fleet means less employees......why do you want that exactly?
 

Because it is superior to the 777, at least the 777-200 and 777-200ER. Double digit fuel burn reduction between the two and the same legs.
 
however the 777-200ER can carry a little bit more weight.
 
 
(for the record the 787-9 is also superior to the 777-200/200ER)
Not true on less employees. 1000 aircraft is 1000 aircraft. A diverse fleet from a maintenance standpoint is a challenge to maintain. Try making gate calls one from the other. Pilots are qualified one fleet only. The only cross over is the 757/767. Maintenance on the other hand has to be qualified on all fleet types that cross their path. 737/757/767/777/787/MD80/A319/A321. Then throw in USAIR fleets when the integration is complete. A330-200/300/A320 and the upcoming A350. Then pilots get upset when we take our time figuring out how to accomplish a repair. There's more but I'm sure you get my point. For maintenance it's a nightmare.
 

700UW

Corn Field
Nov 11, 2003
37,637
19,488
NC
Same pilots fly the A319, A320 and A321, and its only like a several week class for them to go from the A320 family to the A330.
 
And the same pilots also fly the A332 and A333.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

topDawg

Veteran
Nov 23, 2010
2,957
2,353
1AA said:
Not true on less employees. 1000 aircraft is 1000 aircraft.
That is simply not true. Simple fleets will have less employees. That is a fact. (and a well documented fact by your company)

1AA said:
A diverse fleet from a maintenance standpoint is a challenge to maintain.
I work for an airline that has 23 different types of airplanes and 15 different engine types. You don't have to tell me what maintaining them is.

But I also know that if we were to say go to a 717/737/757/767/777/787 airline that we would be over staffed.

1AA said:
Try making gate calls one from the other. Pilots are qualified one fleet only. The only cross over is the 757/767. Maintenance on the other hand has to be qualified on all fleet types that cross their path. 737/757/767/777/787/MD80/A319/A321. Then throw in USAIR fleets when the integration is complete. A330-200/300/A320 and the upcoming A350. Then pilots get upset when we take our time figuring out how to accomplish a repair. There's more but I'm sure you get my point. For maintenance it's a nightmare.
few things, pilots are going to be upset if you don't do what they want if you are Delta or Southwest in fleet. So I don't care about that.

The simple fact is, unless you are a "I hope they shut down Tulsa and outsource everything but line maintenance type (not saying you are for the record) then it means more engines, more components and more airframe check lines. More of that means more employees. More employees is better for labor.

and FWIW as I said above, my airline has made it very clear that fleet complexity means more employees. Maintenance and pilots see the bulk of these extra employees.

Oh and I don't think its a nightmare. I'm in the minority but I try to get as much training as I possibly can. I enjoy learning about airplanes. (I want to go to A330/717/E90 school for example)
 

topDawg

Veteran
Nov 23, 2010
2,957
2,353
700UW said:
Same pilots fly the A319, A320 and A321, and its only like a several week class for them to go from the A320 family to the A330.
 
And the same pilots also fly the A332 and A333.
I think its a two week difference class 320 to 330
On the 330 to 350 I don't believe the FAA has said yet.