Boeing 787-9 (789): Discussion of AA 787-9
 

Any word on these deliveries and what routings/configs we might see? Apologies in advance if there's a thread on this already, couldn't find it.

I presume we may see it on the recently announced NZ routes.

I'm hoping for it to be a bit more spacious in Y/MCE than the 8's and maybe an F cabin, but I am fully aware that is a pipe dream.

Edit: nvm about cabin config, found info on here about that

<redacted>

Later in 2016, around October we will see the first 787-9 delivered from Charleston SC. AA just received 787-8 number 12 yesterday. Only one more on the schedule to built in Everett, the remaining 787-8's will come from Charleston as well as the -9's.(credit all things 787 web site for the info)

Pretty safe to assume these aircraft will be primarily used to fly TransPacs. I don't think the 788 will be flying TransPacs long term as their size is better suited for replacing 767s on TATLs. Move to 788 was prompted more by performance as the high CASM 777s just aren't cutting it. The 789 will have even better economic performance on these routes and should make AA's Pacific flights break even for once.

I think you're right. I could also see a small (4 seat?) F cabin on the 787-9 if it is going to primarily be flying Asia routes. Not sure what kind of demand the 772 flights to Asia see these days, though

There will not be a first class cabin on the 787-9s. The announced configuration is 28 J seats, same as the 787-8s. Much smaller premium cabin than any of the competition, so AA has set its sights rather low.

Is that confirmed somewhere on here? Or just leaks/anonymous sources?

The 789 has been created as the VFR beast, for lack of a better term. AA has historically had very "un"-dense cabins, that were premium heavy. It caused MAJOR problems for profitability in VFR/ethnic markets due to lack of premium demand. The 789 will be ideal for markets like PEK, AHN, India, etc. Will AA ever fly India again? Probably not, but it would be the perfect airplane for it. It'll burn like 20% less gas than the 772 it would replace and seat about 25% more than the old configuration.

What's interesting is that AA created essentially 3 categories of long-haul aircraft. The 77W will be the long-haul premium heavy product. The A359 and 772 will be the "middle of the road" premium product and the A333, A332, 789, 788 and 763 will be the "cattle car" product that will be very low premium numbers and pack em in the back.

From a fleet planning/network planning point of view, its actually the perfect situation. So AA will be able to go from 60 premium seats down to 20 in a long-haul market based on what the demand truly is. That is something the old AA/US could never do. For AA, the market had to either be premium heavy or "suffer" with losses due to the aircraft makeup.

So AA's aircraft will be:

77W - Medium Density, Premium product (310 seats; 60 premium)
333 - High density, low premium (291 seats; 28 premium)
772 - Ultra High Density, fairly heavy premium (289 seats; 45 premium)
789 - Ultra High Density, low premium (289 seats; 28 premium)
772 - Sorta High Density fairly heavy premium (260 seats, 45 premium )
332 - High Density, low premium (258 seats; 20 premium)
788 - Moderate density, low premium (226 seats; 28 premium)
763 - Low Density, moderate premium (209 seats; 28 premium)

I think you'll see the 787-8/9 rotate based on seasonal demand. The -8 is likely to take over the longer european/south American non-premium routes from the 767 over time, the -9 will primarily be tpac, but might flip as the northern/southern summer flows change. I'd expect AKL to be a perfect example of that, -8 in southern winter, -9 during southern summer peak season. I can see a phl/mia rotation for the 332/767s based on seasonal needs as well.

you think they'll switch between the 8 and 9 seasonal for a capacity difference of ~20-30 Y pax? (serious question as that's an interesting take)

The difference is 63 Y passengers. 198 Y on the 787-8 and 261 Y on the 787-9.

ignore me, then

Lol, like said above its rumored to be more than 20-30 seats, but I'd actually think it would still make sense, put the capacity where its more likely to be sold since they 8/9 will have the same crews etc no reason not to.

+1 to all of this. With the 789/A350 COULD potentially make India work (It would have to be BOM than DEL as at least BOM does have some premium traffic). However, I don't we'll see AA attempt India for a long long time. I see the A350/789 covering most of AA's future TransPac operations with a few 77Ws mixed in as they will be the most fuel and cost efficient aircraft in their fleet when all are delivered by 2019.

I'm not sure how much longer the 767 has with AA's fleet. By year's end 13 will be gone. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere the last of the non-CIP 767s will be retired in 2017. With 22 A350s starting to arrive in 2017, I don't think there will be much of a future for the 767 unless AA really expands internationally. Once the 789s start showing up, they'll likely start to take over some existing TransPac routes operated by the 788. The 20 788s will probably end up replacing the 767s on TATL flights.

With the 772 going to have the highest fuel based CASM, in both configurations, in AA's widebody fleet, they'll probably end up doing TATL and Deep South America. We've already seen some of this in the upcoming summer schedule. Originally, the high J was supposed to be temporary, but AA has indicated they'll keep 13 772s with 45 J. They'll probably end up doing GRU/LHR flights not operated by the 77W and a few others like EZE.

There are a lot of moving parts to AA's widebody fleet over the next four years with reconfigurations, retirements, deliveries, and Pacific expansion occurring. AA will finally be able to have a competitive Pacific operation and may eventually find its way into flying to Africa from MIA. This is just all pure speculation on my part and based on what AA has done over the past year.