Originally Posted by
jsloan
Much of UA's maintenance is done at sites where they don't have any passenger traffic at all, and both the A350 and B787 are new, shiny planes.
While I think the 787-10 makes sense for East Coast operations, I don't think that's related to any maintenance planning.
When you have existing facilities, I guess I get that on some level... When you're subcontracting the work out, I definitely get that - gotta fly to where the contractor is ...
But if you're adding new facilities, why would you run the planes through "dry"? Why not plan for such a thing?
Simple stuff - I'm in the midst of re-reading From Worst to First, and this is actually one of the topics in the book... CO had their A300 maintenance base in Greensboro NC. Where they didn't fly any A300's. Didn't make a lick of sense then, at least from a 50k foot view... maybe it did to the parts folks because they had room at GSO, but ... not from a scheduling/ops/dollars-and-cents perspective.
We're so far past the merger at this point, I can't even blame it on that... it just seems silly to me to do line maintenance on a fleet in a place you don't usually fly them to.