Swissair A320's For Us?

[BoeingBoy]

It was mentioned in the last month or so that we "might" get some A320's that were parked by Swissair. I found this in an AWST article on the Boeing/Airbus competition...

Jim

------------
Stuart Mann, the A320-series' director of product marketing, expresses great satisfaction about recently placing aircraft that were parked in the aftermath of operator bankruptcies. Aces, Aero Lloyd, Ansett Australia, Canada 3000, Sabena Belgian World Airlines and Swissair, which all ceased operations in the past three years, operated a combined 128 A320-series twinjets. Today, 125 have a new owner, the remaining three are under offer. The absence of parked A320s underscores the residual value of European twinjets and bolsters ongoing sales campaigns, Mann says.
------------

 

[mweiss]

They should replace the 737s with 320s ASAP. Why both types are still on the property is a bit of a mystery to me.

 

[BoeingBoy]

As much as I hate to see the Boeings go, logically you're right. I think that the desire of management is to use the E-190's as replacements, though. At MDA, of course.

Jim

 

[mweiss]

Yeah, I figured you wouldn't like that one much...you'd have to learn to use a sidestick, for one thing.

I'd imagine that the crossover from 737 to 320 is one of the more difficult moves, because of the significantly different controls.

The 190s will not be good replacements for the 737, I'm afraid.

 

[BoeingBoy]

From all reports, the transition to the sidestick is pretty easy. But the pilot in me doesn't like the thought of two things - the computer getting the last word and nothing in the cockpit moving unless you move it (no tactile feedback from the "autopilot").

I tend to agree on the E-190's - too great a loss of capacity (20% or almost 50% depending on whether -300 or -400). My prediction is the 190 will have about a 1 cent higher DOC than the 300/400.

Jim

 

[mweiss]

...the pilot in me doesn't like the thought of two things - the computer getting the last word and nothing in the cockpit moving unless you move it (no tactile feedback from the "autopilot").

I hear you. Part of the sensation of flying is feeling the machine pushing back on you. It's the same thing in a car, for that matter.

The computer getting the last word concerns me too...and it's more because of my background in technology than in piloting.

 

[USA320Pilot]

The transformation plan calls for 320 mainline jets.

At the June 17 meeting between Bruce Lakefield and the pilots, the CEO said he was going to talk with the Airbus senior vice president of sales for North America the next day on US Airways obtaining A320 family deliveries beginning in 2005.

The company has been and continues to seek 90-seat RJ scope relief.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[mweiss]

The company has been and continues to seek 90-seat RJ scope relief.

...which is beyond stupid. What's the point?

 

[USA320Pilot]

MWeiss:

The company wants to fly a 90-seat RJ, probably the EMB-190, at Express rates across-the-board for all work groups. Do not be surprised if the company increases the mainline minimum fleet count to 320 jets in exchange for authorization to fly the EMB-190/195 at MDA.

With a competitive cost structure, US Airways can return to the capital markets and it would not surpirse me to see the B767/B757s replaced with a combination of A330-200s, A321s, and A320s. In addition, the B737s could be replaced by A320s/A319s.

For example, the long-term fleet plan for a stand-alone business enterprise could be:

A330-300s - 9
A330-200s - 11
A320 family - 300
MDA EMB-195/190/175/170s - 150 (speculative number)

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

 

[BoeingBoy]

"At the June 17 meeting between Bruce Lakefield and the pilots, the CEO said he was going to talk with the Airbus senior vice president of sales for North America the next day on US Airways obtaining A320 family deliveries beginning in 2005."

And nothing has been heard since.....

Jim

 

[javaboy]

Uair's original airbus order was for 400 jets 200 firm, 200 options.
there are approximately 80 firm orders that have been slid backwards twice (new buses at 1997 prices).

 

[Rico]

...which is beyond stupid. What's the point?

The point is fleet flexibility, without the added cost of an additional fleet type. The 100-110 seat market has been very successful for outfits like Air Tran, and it is exactly where jetBlue is positioning itself in the future.

Yet rather than add on a third aircraft type like say, the B717, US now can stick to basically two types of aircraft alone. The other advatage is customer acceptance of the better seating configuration and increased space found on the E Jets.

The point is to have the right sized aircraft on each route, and to have aircraft well suited for point to point flying on both short and long routes. IF fleet consolidation was brought out where the E Series Family and Airbus Family aircraft alone, US Airways would then have the most flexible, yet cost savvy fleet in the industry.

Growth is the answer, both with Airbus and E-Jets

 

[Dont call me Shirley]

MWeiss:

The company wants to fly a 90-seat RJ, probably the EMB-190, at Express rates across-the-board for all work groups. Do not be surprised if the company increases the mainline minimum fleet count to 320 jets in exchange for authorization to fly the EMB-190/195 at MDA.

If the reports of what the company has in mind for customer service are true, all of C/S will be at "express pay rates"!
RJs or Airbii would make no difference.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Rico,

The problem with an aircraft type that covers the "100-110 seat market" is that we pretty much have that aircraft now - the A319 with 120 seats. Plus it can perform missions that the E-190/195 simply cannot.

The more general question for pilots is "What is the limit to allowing airplanes to be operated at express?" It is currently 76 seats. It appears that the company wants to move that to at least 90 seats (E190/CRJ900). The E-195 can go as high as 118 seats (A319/737-300 capacity). In a few years there could very well be a Canadair C-XXX in the 110-130 seat range (they're in the decision making process now). That's getting close to the A320/737-400 capacity.

Jim

 

[Furloughedagain]

sooo... why not eliminate the "Express" classification entirely. Bring EVERYTHING in-house from the Dash-8s to the A330s.

Absorb Piedagheny and PSA, merge them according to ALPA's merger policy with fences to protect "career expectations" and prevent windfalls .

If you want to split the contract to make it more palatable for the company, then fence the MidAtlantic side i/e everything above 100 seats operates under contract "A". Everything less than 100 seats operates under contract "B".

Then it simply wouldn't matter. Every single airplane with US Airways on the side could be operated by US Airways employees and the scope clause could be deleted leaving only the following very simple scope statement:

"All aircraft flown operated by US Airways will be operated by employees on the US Airways system seniority list."