Date: 19 Aug 98 16:01:38
From: m.weber@duc.com.kw (James Matthew Weber)
References: 1 2
Followups: 1 2
View raw article
or MIME structure
On 18 Aug 98 01:04:30, jla wrote:
>I have discussed this with several friends, all of us UA employees. The
>logical assumption we have come to is that the A319/320 aircraft were
>purchased to replace some 727-200/737-300/500 and 757 aircraft on specific
>routes (in addition to replacing aircraft pulled to make up the Shuttle
>fleet).
>
>The Airbus aircraft are faster than the 737's, very fuel-efficient (much
>moreso than the 727), and have a longer range than the 737's or 727's.
>However they have less capacity than the 757, making them ideal to use in
>markets where lower capacity is needed, or higher frequency (thus leading to
>a lower demand for the increased capacity on the larger craft) is desired.
>The A319 configuration is the same as the 737-300, while the A320 is almost
>identical to the 727-200.
With all due respect, this is the proverbial apples and oranges. You
are comparing the 737-200/300 and 727-200 to the A320, which is a much
later aircraft. The 737-200 was current in the 1960's and 70's, the
-300's entered service about 1980. I think the 727 was out of
production well before the first A320 flew.
If you would like to compare the A320 to the 737-NG, I think you
will find the 737-NG actually flies a good faster than the A320, has
longer range than the A320, and is probably at least as fuel
efficient. The -600 to -900 range covers wider range of capacities
than the A319-A321.
