הכול
← Back to Squawk list
United is on the edge of separation from Boeing's NMA program
United Airlines is looking for an efficient replacement for the 130 Boeing 757 and 767 jets in its fleet and wants Boeing to make a clear statement if there will be a new Boeing jet for the middle of the market in the foreseeable future. (airlinerwatch.com) עוד...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
But a new 757 would still be hampered by the too narrow cabin.
I have tried for months to buy tickets from UAL on a direct flight from IAH to LHR. The cost of Business Class seats for me and my wife fluctuated daily between $20,834.46 and $5,841.46 for the exact same flight and seats. We finally bought a ride on British Airways and saved ourselves $2,100 compared to UAL. If this retail example of pricing strategy indicates how United manages maintenance, staffing and other aspects of their business, I can only wonder how long the once proud bird with the golden tail will remain aloft.
This sounds like a competitive, globalised market working for the consumer; you may choose to apply brand loyalty or go for the lowest price. We plan ahead for our transatlantic trips and, as it happens, both the October hop and the Thanksgiving trip will be on British Airways.
"Golden Tail"? I though that United adopted the lovely ex-Continental "globe" tail design after the merger?
"Golden Tail"? I though that United adopted the lovely ex-Continental "globe" tail design after the merger?
From someone with no knowledge of aircraft design maintenance etc. Why can't an older aircraft be fitted with newer engines?
found my answer
https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/24277/can-old-passenger-airplanes-be-refitted-with-latest-engines-to-extend-their-life/24285
https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/24277/can-old-passenger-airplanes-be-refitted-with-latest-engines-to-extend-their-life/24285
Perhaps (I have no inside info so take the perhaps seriously) Boeing is not so much distracted by the 737 MAX debacle as it is learning from it and making sure they get their NMA right.
As to the A321XLR being "better", the base A321 without auxiliary fuel tanks is not able to cruise anywhere near as far as the base 757-200, which never had auxiliary fuel tanks. The biggest mistake with scrapping the 757 program was doing so before ETOPS became a thing. Foreknowledge could have prevented this mess, but it wasn't there. Had Boeing not decided to go with the stretched 737NG and ultimately the MAX, we would have seen a newer, more efficient version of the 757 series. It's a shame that the MAX being unbalanced would lead to major delays in the NMA project, which would make Airbus eat up even more of a market share. Heck, if Boeing offered auxiliary fuel tanks on a revamped 757 aircraft, it would be able to cruise much further than the A321 in any form.
Either way, Boeing is paying the price for bad decisions, and Airbus is eating up Boeing's mistakes.