REDUCE THE FLEET TYPE TO FOUR AIRCRAFT

[AIRCRAFTMECHANIC]

I would like to see the company reduce the fleet types to 4 and to increase the numbers to around 400. The airbus is a great aircraft and from what ive seen is easy to work on and trouble shoot wich reduces down time. The 757 is a proven winner and will be a revenue champion well into the future. The decision to increase there numbers shows a good management that is thinking correctly.Great job!

I have been to the parts wharehouse in charlotte wich provides parts for the whole company, it has a system called the litton that has 66000 different class control numers and over 7.5 milloin parts.

My thinking is to steamline the parts that are needed to be in stock and to reduce the manuals and everything else thats needed to provide maintence for so many fleet types.

Southwest does have a good idea gentleman in having only a couple different aircraft types.

I suggest someone look into having the best 4
and to trade in the rest on only those type.

From my experience it is in my opinion the
757/321/320/330 and maybe the 319 also.

I would also like to see the heavy maintence on the airbus done in Charlotte...all of them.

your thoughts:

*Edited by Moderator to remove double post/quote only

 

[Phantom Fixer]

I would like to see the company reduce the fleet types to 4 and to increase the numbers to around 400. The airbus is a great aircraft and from what ive seen is easy to work on and trouble shoot wich reduces down time. The 757 is a proven winner and will be a revenue champion well into the future. The decision to increase there numbers shows a good management that is thinking correctly.Great job!

I have been to the parts wharehouse in charlotte wich provides parts for the whole company, it has a system called the litton that has 66000 different class control numers and over 7.5 milloin parts.

My thinking is to steamline the parts that are needed to be in stock and to reduce the manuals and everything else thats needed to provide maintence for so many fleet types.

Southwest does have a good idea gentleman in having only a couple different aircraft types.

I suggest someone look into having the best 4
and to trade in the rest on only those type.

From my experience it is in my opinion the
757/321/320/330 and maybe the 319 also.

I would also like to see the heavy maintence on the airbus done in Charlotte...all of them.

your thoughts:

Being Charlotte (CLT) Based...I'd like to see CLT get more work and really use the facility that we have to its fullest capacity. However..I do not want to see PIT or even PHX slighted to achieve this. The ideal scenario is for all work to return to being performed in-house.

The CLT Hangar leases were never abrogated while in either visit to CH 11...so use it like it needs to be used. US has also recently entered into longer term agreements with PIT in regards to Hangar 5 and the RON Hangar 3/4..Use them to the max too.

I have no idea what the situation is in PHX? But I'd like to see work return to PHX as opposed to GYR and El Salvador. Those are jobs that we are more than capable of doing there..if the support to do the job is put in place.

CLT and PIT are already geared to work on everything we fly..and I'm sure the PHX facility would only need some tooling added or returned to them from the 3rd party MRO's to do exactly the same...and more bodies to do the work too.

US Spent a fortune on installing the Tail Dock to handle both the A330-300's as well as the B767-200's Then the work ended up in BFM and YUL. A total mistake as these Heavy Check planes all too often become our only source of spare parts.

A like parts of what you are saying on the Fleet Types..but I do not agree with you on keeping the A321. The A321 is under-powered and limited in its capabilities..it also have just enough differences in it to destroy the so-called commonality with the A319/320 series.

The differences are many...and this creates a logistical support problem in the event the Airbus does not stock a given item. AC and NK are the only other North American operatores of the type..so when an extreme need arrises..its costly and often time constrictive to fill the needs. (extended down time)

Areas of difference are clearly in the Emergency Slides , that all too often get blown , certain engine items that do not interchange with the A319/A320's...The Wheels and Tires are also an area that is unique unto itself. These differences are just off the top of my head..thier are more.

Yes...The B737-300/400's are aging...but for the most part they are aging well. CLT is cranking out 737 Q-Checks at a record pace of late..and that is in direct perportion to the lack of major defects being noted during the check. This speaks well in terms of lasting value.

My big concern about the 737's leaving is due in part to their ease in being able to obtain parts to repair them. The same cannot be said of any of the Airbus variants. I'm also concerned about the 737's being replaced with the EMB-190 and all the problems that B6 is having with them.

Lastly..If the EMB-190 does replace the 737-300's? Where will they be worked?..and by whom?

I agree with you compeltely on the 757's..the more we have , the greater our overall capabilities as a revenued airline become.

 

[PhillyAir5]

AIRCRAFTMECHANIC,

You will not get an argument with me. My best and most comfortable flights have been on the 757 aircraft. I for one, am not comfortable flying on "express" planes outside the Embraer family. I'm not alone in that feeling either. Most of my colleagues stay away from smaller aircraft as well. Its just a matter of personal comfort.

Is it feasible to operate those aircraft only? We'll see. But it sure does seem that US is stretched out a bit in terms of servicing multiple aircraft.

 

[FCYTravis]

My only concern with the A321 is configuration. Currently, those jets ply the core transcon routes to SFO/LAX, and have 26 First Class seats. That vast F cabin keeps upgrading elites like me very, very happy. Replacing them with 757s even in the HP configuration would mean, at best, twelve fewer F-cabin seats and correspondingly a sharp decline in upgrades. Any A321 replacement has got to keep that 26-seat First Class cabin.

Not to mention the vastly better IFE system, more comfortable seats and in-seat Empower ports.

Yes, the A321 is an underpowered, slow-to-climb pig, but it's a very passenger-friendly pig.

 

[usairways85]

Well it's all well and good what you want US to do, but they are simply not going to get rid of all of the HP/US 733's and 734's and replace them with Airbus narrowbodies. They have gotten rid of many 737's, and the eventual deliveries of the 190's will take their place somewhat, but it is obvious US east is short aircraft given the fact that US needed the CR9's in CLT badly. When there are enough A332's and A350's on line then the 762's will start to go.

 

[AL-PS-PI-AW]

Well it's all well and good what you want US to do, but they are simply not going to get rid of all of the HP/US 733's and 734's and replace them with Airbus narrowbodies. They have gotten rid of many 737's, and the eventual deliveries of the 190's will take their place somewhat, but it is obvious US east is short aircraft given the fact that US needed the CR9's in CLT badly. When there are enough A332's and A350's on line then the 762's will start to go.

Man..that is going to be a sad day when the 767s are gone. As a FA, they are my favourite airplane to work. Very FA friendly aircraft to work.
Im sure if some work is done on the insides, they can continue to fly for many years to come.

 

[Phantom Fixer]

Man..that is going to be a sad day when the 767s are gone. As a FA, they are my favourite airplane to work. Very FA friendly aircraft to work.
Im sure if some work is done on the insides, they can continue to fly for many years to come.

You have hit the nail on the head friend. US's 767's have a ton of life left in them..as they have been used as they were intended for the most part.

U's 767's have not seen a lot of Domestic travel in terms of short haul bounces like a some other carriers have done with theirs. They are still relatively low cycle compared to high cycle...and when this subject was brought up before and others from UA and DL chimed in...ours are rather low timed too. They have plenty of leg left in them.

The 767 Fleet needs nothing more than an ownership group that's motivated to keep the interiors nice...and from what some have said (desertgal) for example about HP's 757's smelling and the alike...a complete change in thinking needs to take place from both sides of the spectrum (West and East)

 

[usairways85]

Im sure if some work is done on the insides, they can continue to fly for many years to come.

I don't know exact timetables as to when the 332's and 350's will be delivered but its probably a good 6-8 years when the 762's may be considered for retirement.

 

[N924PS]

Well it's all well and good what you want US to do, but they are simply not going to get rid of all of the HP/US 733's and 734's and replace them with Airbus narrowbodies. They have gotten rid of many 737's, and the eventual deliveries of the 190's will take their place somewhat, but it is obvious US east is short aircraft given the fact that US needed the CR9's in CLT badly. When there are enough A332's and A350's on line then the 762's will start to go.

The CRJ's in CLT are nothing more than outsourced mainline flying and the jobs that went along with it. The flights being flown by MESA were once F100's, DC9's or 737's.

The EMB 190 will be an eventual replacement for the 737's. The pay rates, unless modified in the future, are $40/hr less for Captain's pay. Which aircraft will be here in 5 years? Airbus, B757/767 and E190's is my guess.

 

[LCC_#1]

As a f/a who works the A321, I love the plane. Of course, I am not a mechanic or pilot, so I could care less about their side of the equation. I care about comfort and space.

You guys can rally behind the 757 all you want, but the extra width of the 321 and the 757 feel makes it popular with the customer. I get many more compliments of a better ride from customer about the A321 than I ever got from the 757.

My only complaint about the A321? The mid cabin has no thermostate and it is always so hot and stuffy.

And I must agree that for the FF, this ac gives them the lift to be rewarded for their loyalty. Believe me when I say that on a typical transcon flight, over 50% in fc are US1's.


IF we are going to expand the 757 fleet, please clean all of them up.

 

[nycbusdriver]

IF we are going to expand the 757 fleet, please clean all of them up.

... and put the 24 first class seats back in!

 

[PHL]

I've often wondered if the 26F seats are there rather than more Y seats because that would add more gross weight when fully loaded with pax. As it is now, the A321 is a pig to get up in the air, so removing 10 F seats and putting in 15 Y seats would add about 1000 lbs of payload + baggage. Maybe it is or isn't significant, but I can't think of any other reason US hasn't cut the 26F seats back to something like 16 or 20 if more money could be made cramming a few more coach bodies in there.

 

[SpinDoc]

I would like to see the company reduce the fleet types to 4 and to increase the numbers to around 400.

From my experience it is in my opinion the
757/321/320/330 and maybe the 319 also.

SpinDoc replies:

The best combination for the future US is:

50 E190 - 90-100 seats
60 A319 - 100-115 seats
60 A320 - 120-145 seats
40 B757 - 185-210 seats
50 A330 - 180-230 seats (200's and 300's)
20 B777 - 230 -260 seats

Notice I left out the A321 and the A350. Fughettaboutit. Neither will fit the mission for the future "new" US. If US has a mixed fleet of the aircraft listed above, they will dominate domestically and internationally for many years to come.

If I were Dougie Parker, this would be my future airline.

 

[FCYTravis]

210-seat 757s? Are you frigging insane? That's a slave ship. :down:

 

[Prince of PAWOBs]

210-seat 757s? Are you frigging insane? That's a slave ship. :down:

I agree with Travis. The 757 is tight enough as it is right now. I personally hate being cramped in one on a four hour leg from LAS to PIT. I'd rather take any Airbus on that trip than a 757.

The advantage of a heterogenous mix of aircraft is being able to move them around systemwide when passenger loads require different seating needs (and therefore maximizing load factor). Yes, multiple aircraft require more parts and more mechanics, but is that really so bad? After all, that suggests more work (and workers, too). Of course, we all know that one possible outcome is outsourcing the maintenance, but I think level heads are starting to see what happens when you move from quality in-house work to El Cheapo third parties that save you a couple of pennies.

I think discounting the usefulness of Express aircraft is short-sighted. They have their place in the system by serving cities that would never benefit from service by a 737 or 319.