Re: Airbus on a roll

Date:         11 Nov 96 01:50:36 
From:         Chuanga@cris.com (H Andrew Chuang)
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
References:   1 2 3
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1996.2334@ohare.Chicago.COM>,
Malcolm Weir  <malc@deltanet.com> wrote:
>McElravy wrote:
>> The article made no mention of any other orders, but I suspect that USAir
>> may yet order some Boeings -- 777s maybe.
>
>Why?  USAir's current route system certainly doesn't justify 777's, and
>even assuming USAir wins big in its ploy of getting London routes, most
>of the arguments in favor of these routes focus on the smaller markets,
>like Charlotte, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia (smaller than, say, New
>York!).
>
>For these markets, the 767 and the 757 make a lot of sense, perhaps the
>757-300 would be a better candidate for the sort of airline that USAir
>is?
>
>Or perhaps the A330 or A340, offering some cockpit commonality with the
>A320 class?

Haven't you just said  the B777 is too big for USAir?  Then, the same
argument should apply to the A330 or A340.  Unless you are talking
about A330-200 and/or A340-200.  However, I don't think Airbus has sold
many A340-200s for quite a while.  The A330-200 is really competing
with the B767-300ER.  Since USAir already has some B767s, the -300ER
makes more sense than the A330-200.  Nevertheless, many aircraft
acquisitions by airlines don't make common sense.

>
>The 777 does seem to be just a bit of a status symbol to some people
>(for the airline that has everything)!
>

Nonsense!  The B777-200 is an ideal replacement for the L-1011 and the
DC-10.  The B777-200IGW can do anything that the MD-11 (and the A340)
can do.  The B777-300 is an excellent replacement for the
B747-100/200.