UA orders 25 B787s and 25 A350s [Merged threads].
 

Moderator Note: On December 8, 2009, (see p. 9 of the thread), UA announced its decision to purchase 25 B787s and 25 A350s


EDIT: 12/8/09: Thanks to Ocn Vw 1K for graciously adding the above note. As the OP of the thread, I'll go ahead and post the link to United's Press Release below, and will update this post as details become available:

http://www.united.com/press/detail/0,7056,61384,00.html

787 Please!

This will probably be linked to whatever they choose for that 150 narrow-body order so they can cut training and maintenance costs.

I think one of the big benefits of the 787 will be higher cabin pressure and humidity. Any thoughts on this?

The 787 has the cabin pressure set to 6,000ft. We don't know what the A350 will be set at, but the A380 is running at 5,000ft already. I would assume the A350 will have the same or lower in-cabin altitude than the 787.

As the article says, Airbus receives subsidy from both France and German governments and Boeing will have a hard time matching Airbus' prices.

Anyone flown the 380 long haul and have any thoughts on cabin pressure?

+1 - I hope that Boeing can compete on price with Airbus. I really like it when US airlines buy American.

I wonder if HizHonor in Chicago might have some say (two Chicago companies are involved here, and after losing the Olympics, this would be a big blow). For once, use the family "influence" for good Mr Mayor.

I agree with SF1K. I will really re-think flying UA if/when they take delivery of more Airbus aircraft. I already hate the current Airbus fleet they have.

It's no coincidence AirTran and Southwest and even Continental are some of the most profitable airlines out there. UA needs to think long-term and not what is going to save them money now.

I think the Boeing fleet they have has treated them very well...

Good. That means the French and German taxpayers will be subsidizing my (soon to be cheaper) flying.

What is there to hate about them? The cabin is wider than the 737 and in all other respects the planes are virtually identical from a bare-metal perspective. I see no real downside of the A320 family and a significant upside relative to the 737 from a passenger comfort standpoint.

Yes, and some of the worst performers are also big Boeing customers. What's your point?

Past performance is no indicator of future quality. Currently, both Airbus and Boeing offerings are basically identical except in terms of minor differences in width and length. I'm for whichever one will be delivered sooner and cheaper.

It's good to try out capital acquisition strategy on public frequent-flyer boards; that way you won't become CEO without the wisdom of the FT masses. :)

So, you want it now and you want it cheap. Makes sense, you sound American, so we expect that of you. But you may want to look at the total cost of ownership as well, including the utilization rate, cost of maintenance, depreciation, training, etc., amongst many other factors. The equation is much bigger and much riskier and more complex than "now and cheap." Back to the books for you, you have mid-terms coming up! :p

With all due respect to my fellow FT'ers, I would really want UA to select whichever aircraft manufacturer that can provide the best cost/performance basis, on the overall scale.

If Airbus makes a better product for a lower cost; the onus would be on Boeing to improve itself and vice versa.

Har har. I'm speaking from the perspective of a flyer, not as a CEO (since none of us on this board are presumably airline CEOs). TCO and whatnot are fine for United to worry about, but I don't care about them insofar as they don't affect 1 & 2 below.

I want from a new plane acquisition:

1. Cheaper fares
2. A more enjoyable cabin

From a bare metal perspective, Airbus and Boeing offerings are basically identical on point 2, with both being significantly better than what United's got now. Point 1 is a factor of both of TCO + discounts being offered.

Hence, I (as a frequent flyer) am in favor of whichever one maximizes my single-peaked utility over the {sooner, cheaper} variables.

I'm not sure why it would be hard for Boeing to match Airbus prices. Airbus is going to have to makeup the exchange rate (their costs are in EUR and their revenue is USD). Airbus can't drop too far in this low dollar environment.

not quite true, EADS receives loans to finance development costs, which must be repaid. the loans have wonderfully favorable terms, but have been repaid along with those governments receiving a portion of the profits from the products that those loans helped finance. airbus is not just getting free money from the french and german governments.

some believe that boeing's endless stream of US government contracts amounts to a form of subsidy, but that's another debate for another time.