787 vs A350 - Why Boeing For United?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 апр 2024
- United Airlines was pitched aircraft from Airbus and Boeing when it was looking to develop its widebody and narrowbody fleet. However, for its widebody purposes, the airline selected Boeing-produced planes, specifically the 787; why is United relying so heavily on the Dreamliner? Is this the right decision? Does it make sense, and are there risks involved?
BECOME A MEMBER:
/ @globetrottingatdjsavi...
🔔 Subscribe to GlobeTrotting: bit.ly/SubscribeGlobeTrotting
🖥️ Visit the website: djsaviation.net
CONNECT WITH GLOBETROTTING
🐦 Twitter: / djsaviation
👥 Facebook: / djsaviation
💬 Discord: / discord
💻 Patreon: / djsaviation
BUSINESS ENQUIRIES
📧 Email: contactdjsaviation@gmail.com
CHECK OUT THE PODCAST
🎙️ Spotify: bit.ly/DjsAviationPodcast
🎙️ Apple: bit.ly/DjsPodcastApple
SUBMIT VIDEO IDEAS
✍️ Form - bit.ly/SubmitVideoIdeas
ℹ️ MORE INFORMATION ℹ️
creativecommons.org/
Licensed under CC-BY-SA 2.0
- www.flickr.com/photos/1309612...
-
-
-
-
🎵 OUTRO TRACK 🎵
Krys Talk - Fly Away [NCS Release]
Music provided by NoCopyrightSounds.
• Krys Talk - Fly Away |...
Free Download / Stream ncs.io/flyaway
#aviation #news #flight #aircraft #avgeek #airplane #airlines #airport #planespotting #airbus #boeing
United and Boeing used to be one company. You forgot that.
Like 90 years ago. Enough time has passed that that’s not really relevant anymore.
I guess some airlines have to keep Boeing in business.
That’s a dumb comment they’ll always be in business
@@yuriymiami2816that's a pretty strong statement!,I'm sure that's what Buick and Mercury said.
@@yuriymiami2816Laughs in Lockheed Commercial Jets…
@@smoketinytom Lockheed makes the best fighter jet in the world right now if you didn’t know and they never really been in commercial aviation with both feet in . Also don’t forget Boeing is not just making commercial planes they are huge company that makes stuff for NASA and also produce fighter jets as well as others with huge contracts worldwide just think about that for a second before you make that stupid comparison.
@@jasoneldridge4738 comparing mercury and Buick to Boeing is another dumb statement. That’s like comparing an elephant and a mouse lol 😂
If its boeing I aint going
Perfectly reasonable for an airline to favour one manufacturer, particularly if they have had close links over the years (one of the many companies that merged over the years to form United was Boeing Air Transport). Strong reliance on one manufacturer though can bring its own problems, as we've seen with the well publicised problems with Boeing.
That is not the exact story. In the 1920s there evolved in the US large aviation conglomerates that comprised airlines and aircraft, engine and propeller manufacturers. One was United Aircraft, a merger of Boeing and Pratt and Whitney. It owned Boeing (and its airline) , Sikorsky, Chance Vought, Stearman, Pratt and Whitney and Hamilton Standard and gobbled up other airlines. The airlines including Boeing Air Transport, were merged to form United Air Lines. In 1934 the Air Mail Act barred the cross ownership of airlines and aircraft manufacturers and United Aircraft was broken into three. United Air Lines, Boeing Aircraft west of the Mississippi and United Aircraft (Sikorsky, P&W and Hamilton Standard) to the east.
At the time United had an exclusive deal with Boeing for Boeing 247 airliners. They were the latest thing - all metal, retractable undercarriage, fast. Locked out by this deal TWA, put out a request for a modern airliner to compete. The DC-2 won and soon evolved into the DC-3 for American, which itself had hived off another conglomerate called Avco. The rest is history and Boeing became an also-ran behind Douglas and Lockheed in the airliner business for the next 20+ years until the jet age.
Great video thanks
That’s a huge order and I’m happy United chose Dreamliner which is my favorite plane in the world 🔥💯🙂
You have not, obviously, flown a 12 hour or so flight in a 9 abreast economy class in a "Dreamliner".
@gordansavin6871 , I have, on both the 787 and A350. Outside of the A350 having and extra 5" (12.7cm) cabin width, I didn't see any difference. Even if the additional cabin width is allocated for seating only, we're talking about .54" (1.4cm) per seat. That is negligible. I fly a lot. Frankly, the seats and pitch an airline chooses, is what really makes the difference in comfort. PS..I can't wait until these high density airlines start paking 10 abreast on the A350. It's a bit tight on a 777. It'll be that much worse on an A350. Again, comfort is more about pitch and the actual seats themselves.
@@toms1348Not yet…
Love your videos.
@DJ, maybe this would have been too short, but it would have been the clearest explanation for your audience:
The A350-900 has much higher payload/range than the 787-9, but also needs to fill more seats at slightly higher seat costs which means substantially higher trip costs. The A350-1000 still has better payload/range than the 787-9 while slightly beating it at a seat cost level, but needs to sell many more seats to cover the much higher trip cost. The 787-10 is compromised on payload/range, but on the segments it has enough range to fly, it offers unbeatable seat and trip costs for what you get. Best in widebody aviation.
Considering that United's international route network is mostly to S. America, Europe, and the Far East, and that they don't have nearly as many flights to farther destinations like SE Asia, the middle east, southern africa, or india, United simply does not need the payload/range capabilities of the A350, they can fly their routes carrying all the payload they need with the 787. Most passengers traveling farther will be connecting onto Lufthansa/ANA. The 787-9 lets them fly thinner nonstop routes than their competition. The 787-10 has outrageously good seat costs for the routes it can fly. Right now there is a 777-sized gap in the 787's capabilities where it can't fly a lot of passengers a long way, but certainly Boeing will develop a 787-10ER or whatever they call the eventual airplane with the capacity of the -10 but a lot more payload/range. And mark my words, United will buy those as well.
Is it the 787s lower weight that makes the most difference in its trip cost?
@@andreaskole958 lower weights, smaller fuselage, smaller wing, smaller engines…
Well said and explained
Exactly. The 787 and A350 are not the same class of aircraft. They compete only in the very narrow ultra-long range market (eg Sydney-London) where being able to complete the sector regularly with a commercially viable payload is the prime consideration. But otherwise the A350 is more a competitor for the 777.
@@CharlieHP1also smaller seats
Great video. Just wondering, what type of camera did you use to record your video? It was very high quality. The way you recorded your video is very stable, did you use any sticky mount or just by hand? And what software app did you use to edit your youtube video and is it free to use? I am currently learning on how to record and edit my travel videos. Any advice is very much appreciated.
Thanks dj!!
Issues concerning 787 fuselage joints.
That’s not confirmed that’s just he said she said at this point
@@yuriymiami2816its Whistleblower vs company that lied for years and continues to lies despite 346 killed and nearly taking out a plane over US airspace.
Whistleblowers have been saying these things for years and were ignored, then the planes started crashing and bolts never got used.
He said, she said… Nah, He said the aircraft is dangerous, the FAA should investigate in detail from a company of liars.
There are over 1000 787s delivered and not one has fallen apart in the air or on the ground. No 787s have been scrapped because of failed fuselage joints.
Great for United!! The order makes sense. Since the 787 has been a very integral piece into United's long-haul area, they must think the airplane has faired very well within their fleet. With the huge delay the 777-9X has had, and if Boeing somehow thins out some of their problems somewhat, this new airplane will probably be a key interest within the industry. So yes, United still has their eyes on Boeing aircraft and if these airplanes have been profitable and safe, then why not? (not to include the 737-MAX-9 recent trouble) American Airlines recent order of the 737-MAX-10 proves that they too will continue to order Boeing aircraft as well. They too seem to trust Boeing and continue to use their airplanes because they also need them to replace aging aircraft in their fleets.
Whether they order the A350 or not, certainly in no rush to do so...
Yep, they are pushing for A321XLR instead.
There are some a350s on order though and with a321s coming in this order might not be cancelled. If they really want it at this point it's probably gonna keep being deferred once crew and maintenence team for airbus widebodies actually materializes since they're unfamiliar with airbus widebodies
I’m very convinced that they will take delivery of their a350s. I genuinely think they are just planning on using them to replace their 777s. The 787 and a350 are different categories of long haul. Yes, the 350 can be used for operations the 787 runs, but the 787 cannot run ultra long haul flights as easily as the 350. I hope I’m right, but perhaps not.
Wow!
Thanks DJ 😊
🚀🚀
Great for United , but with the commonality strategy of Airbus a pilot can as far as I know fly A350 and 330 and with the strategy with reduce training trained on A320 … so if you have an Airbus fleet , flexibility beyond one family 🎉
With United and Boeing both having HQs in Chicago they are home town sweethearts
Boeing HQ is now Arlington, VA.
@@DillonPrecisionFan they still have a Chicago HQ too
I think United is making a huge mistake going all in on the 787. With all the problems Boeing is having and the delays United could very easily end up with an out dated fleet of long haul aircraft. I'm sure the US government would not allow Boeing to fold, but another long delay or grounding would not only hurt Boeing, but many airlines. Especially those that have put all their eggs in one basket. I for one refuse to fly on any Boeing airplanes less than 10 years old. I have lost all trust in Boeing.
Way back when Boeing built the B-247 United was owned by Boeing. United was promised the first 60 B-247's leaving United ahead of the competition. TWA went to Douglas to build a plane better than the B-247 and the prototype DC-1 was built and then DC-2 then the most built aircraft at that time the DC-3..
Glad to see united is *kind of* trusting Boeing
The Question is WHY? There is NO REASON to trust Boeing so it is simple, Below Actual Cost of Goods Pricing, subsidised by the UNREQUESTED order for Boeing FA-18 Super Hornets that resulted in Lockheed Martin LOSING F-35C orders from USN. BACK DOOR SUBSIDY against the promise agreed at WTO and in BREACH of the WTO Agreement. This could be $Billions in FINES for both Boeing and the White House.
Boeing and United used to be one company. They are the same.
@@JingJao oh, makes sense
Almost half of the list price??? Give me 1000!
And there it is.. overstaffed.. United is not overstaffed.. because of the age of there fleet (Continental merger) the replacement have been slow and that has hindered expansion.
Big discounts from Boeing don't hide the flaws in that company.
Can't go wrong with the 787. The A350 is an excellent plane, but you can't go wrong with the equally excellent 787.
The delivery of the A350 was postponed simply because the retirement of the 777 was postponed. UNITED has 96 of them that all have to be replaced in a few years. Airbus has a firm contract with UNITED for 45 planes, and if the Chicago guys wanted to step away from that contract it would cost them real money. As far as I know, there has not been a single statement by higher UNITED management that the fulfillment of the A-purchase was in doubt. That opinion was only pushed by the fanboy league in online debates.
There is one more point: UNITED has started very serious considerations how to reduce its dependency from Boeing on the SA (single aisle) side. If they wanted to succeed, they would need to buy 'busses massively. Airbus, OTOH, is now in a position that they can leverage their superior reign in the upper SA segment (A321neo) by requesting WB purchases if they allocated early slots becoming available (like those being returned by SPIRIT) to an airline in desire.
I have always wondered why United would deem the 787 a perfect replacement for the many 777s currently in the fleet. The A350 is a better replacement for the 777 - same class of aircraft. Anyway, by then United will have lots of A320neos in its fleet and since cockpit commonality is a thing with Airbus planes, their pilots would switch between the A320s and A350s.
The reason many American airlines have started buying Airbus is not necessarily because Airbus make better airplanes. The reason is simply that Boeing as a company at the moment is not really reliable. When you order an airplane and are being told you will get the airplane in 3 years, it's unacceptable if the airplane maker suddenly tells you that the delivery will be in 6 years........maybe.
If Boeing could get the engineers back in control and ensure the production is transparent and flawless, then there would be no reason not to order a Boeing.
The problem for Boeing is that they have gotten sucked into the typical business culture of profit before anything else.
The Airbus culture is typical European in that quality comes before profit.
i'll never fly [post-headquarters-moved-out-of-seattle-to-chicago]boeing jets 737s maxs 787s 777x ill tather choose to be rebooked even if its on a united 767
United are NOT in a hurry BUT know that Boeing will offer below cost price for a deal?
And Airbus won't? You are naive
@@davidcarter4247 Domestic trade doesn't subject to the same rules as international. There's only so much Airbus can undercut to a US based airline before the dumping investigation kicks in.
But Airbus nowadays enjoy a fairly healthy backlog and market share that they don't have to undercut hard anyway.
@@steinwaldmadchen I can assure you Airbus will act to cause as much damage to Boeing as it can even if it means selling below cost.
@@davidcarter4247 Can you read? Airbus selling to United is a trade between an EU entity and US one, which is subject to anti dumping laws.
In fact dumping is exactly what Boeing accused Bombardier for their CSeries sales to Delta, despite that's not even remotely true.
A 292% punitive tariff would negate any price advantage Airbus can undercut, and a smart Airbus would try not to trigger that.
Meanwhile trade between Boeing and United is domestic, and not subjected to the same rules.
@steinwaldmadchen A320s are built in the US. Then it is not dumping
It’s quite simple. United are backing America… I know that sounds like a political slogan but United favour US products, nothing to do with capabilities or design of competing aircraft.. secondly, airlines buy aircraft for their missions but the most important of all is on price. They won’t give a dam about the pax comfort lol, that’s way way down the list because all they will do is boast re the new aircraft and whatever bonuses they bring, which all new aircraft will.
Now to commonality of fleet, it can be of great help, but it can also ground you. Buy one type of aircraft and if it develops problems then your whole fleet is grounded. Imagine if you were a start up airline and you based your airline around the 737-10. You would be sunk because of it not being certified or unlikely to be for quite some time of ever.
In the old steam engine days did you ever wonder why there where so many different type from different manufacturers ? Because they would be built for a specific service or mission if you like, their weight power etc where all geared to a specific area/service. United having ordered the 3 variants of the B787 might be seen as a clever cost saving aspect But there are problems with the 787 as with all Boeing aircraft at the moment and if the 787 is grounded again it will severely hamper United and you could see those A350 being on the order book rather than deferred. Airbus are smiling anyway because should United decide not to take them, other airlines will snap up their delivery slots. It’s better to have a mix of long haul aircraft and a common fleet of short haul…. That’s the clever way to go 😅
United airline Should Cancel the A350 order! American airlines is NOT Planning to Sign Up for A350s as of 2024 after cancelling the order in 2018!
Because 787s fit perfectly in United's fleet.
And Boeing likely accepted their discount price negotiation.
Any large aircraft order from either manufacturer involves discounts.duh...
Because their an American company. That's the only reason
Isn’t there a “proudly all American” airline that almost exclusively only buys Airbus these days?
I think there's more than one company in the states that's American and uses just Air Bus
That’s not true it’s all about money for airline companies and not whether one American or French .
Boing made UA an offer they couldnt refuse. Bottomline ☑️
Reasons :
1. Discount
2. American company
United used to be a part of Boeing. That's also a huge reason. 🇺🇸
Exact same reason why many European airlines are buying airbus.
Discounts
European company
😊
@@mmm0404European airlines are going to Airbus as they produce a safer and more product.
We all know why united chose them.
As a trainspotter/railfan, I actually don't know so please tell me
I fly United domestically and fly only Airbus planes. I would avoid flying any Boeing planes for next 5-10 years if possible. I would never fly any US airlines flying abroad. Asian and middle eastern airlines are much better with much much better food and service.
United will regret going with Boeing for their wide body planes specially with current situation od delayed deliveries.
United now shifting to Airbus.
United have ordered 45 Airbus A350's. Direct competitor with 787.
Not a direct competitor.
The 787-10 isnt as good a replacement for United's 777-200ERs as the A350-900.
Why not choose American Boeing for an American airline. Keep the economy alive.
Breaches Anti-Trust Law
Breaches WTO Agreement
Could be the Nail in the Coffin in FINES
It may keep the economy alive ,not sure about the passengers though ?
Trump's America strikes again
@@astir0412 well he did poke America into motion and stand as a positive front.