1. I was not comparing CR2 with 175's.

2. It IS a great plane, that is now over 80% through certification. The fact that a plane is not certified yet, so it should not be ordered? What about the 1000 orders the 787 had before Boeing even had built a test plane?

3. Every plane that has many customers, some of their priorities will change. A350 had huge cancellations, the 747-8, bunch of customers have deferred or canceled A380 orders. I do not see your point that since some customers have changed their situation since the plane was ordered, it should not be considered by UA?

4. What I am saying is scrap the UAX, add the UAX to UA and stop having two airlines. Yes its a big undertaking, but it would be much better that way. The CS100 would carry around 95 -110 pax depending on config. Thats roughly 20 -30 more than the 170/175. Fuel burn would be roughly the same amount, and they could add 20-30 seats. They could fly into smaller airports because of noise restrictions, and easily do thin transcon routes.
Pax would love the plane, and would give UA a leg up.

Give me a brand new plane designed from scratch, that is miles ahead of its competition, that has not had delays, cost overruns, and other issues. Yes it sucks, and it should not have happened, but sometimes thats the cost of innovation. I for one would cut it some slack and would love to see it replace the crappy old CR2, 145 and 170x planes. I would fly UA alot more.