Should airlines have a commitment to one manufacturer?

D

DL_767_400ER

New Member
Should airlines have a commitment to one manufacturer?

Delta, Continental, and American currently are very loyal to Boeing, and are not considering Airbus in any way.

U.S. Airways, who is now merging with America West, has a plan to go to an all Airbus fleet.

Northwest currently has Boeing and Airbus aircraft on order, so they are not commited to one manufacturer.
 
Not really, or maybe so.

It all depends. Having a diverse fleet costs money in logistics. Single-config fleet, ala Southwest, costs less.

Airbus is infusing money into the AmWest/US Air merger, so there's incentive there, especially since AWAs A320s are coming to needing replacement, or so I've heard.
 
first off American has both airbus and boeing aircraft in their fleet. as for the rest im no expert on the matter but here is what ive gathered. when you consider maintaining various types of aircraft think of all the different parts, tools, and mechanics it would take, so it would make sense just to run one type. just a thought once again im dont claim to know but have been told.....
 
I wouldn't say that having an exclusive contract with a manufacturer would be a good idea, but showing customer loyalty definately helps when it comes time for financing. SWA has a killer relationship with Boeing, but they don't have an exclusive agreement. In fact, I've heard from other SWA employees that if Boeing knows you're an employee of SWA, you get the royal treatment on the factory tour. Unfortunately, I never had the opportunity to take advantage of that when I was an employee there. Also, I feel that exclusive agreements would diminish the competition between the two airlines (except when contract times are up), and this would cut back on any technological advances.
 
Thinking as a customer, I would say yes. The type of plane you purchase a ticket in reflects tremendously on the airline. That combined with customer service are the products for sale, so I think there should be loyalty to a particular manufacturer. If that manufacturer isn't putting out a product that reflects well then go to the next one. There should be some sense of loyalty though. Maintenance and operating costs are another ball of wax!!!!!!!
 
[ QUOTE ]
Should airlines have a commitment to one manufacturer?

Delta, Continental, and American currently are very loyal to Boeing, and are not considering Airbus in any way.

U.S. Airways, who is now merging with America West, has a plan to go to an all Airbus fleet.

Northwest currently has Boeing and Airbus aircraft on order, so they are not commited to one manufacturer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your bout a decade or so late!
In the early days of commercial aviation airlines had exclusive ties to only one manufactuer.
In fact United Airlines in it's earliest humble beginnings was created, wholly owned and operated by Boeing INC.
TWA had exclusive ties to Douglas Aircraft.
Their thought was to start an airline that would purchase only their equipment and thus have a loyal customer.
So you could almost hear Boeings heart stop when United bought Airbus A320's over 737's!

-Matthew
 
[ QUOTE ]
TWA had exclusive ties to Douglas Aircraft.

[/ QUOTE ]

Until Hughes came along and hooked up with Lockheed and the Connie. It was a lot similar back then as it is now. There was probably a lot more involved in being the "launch customer," though. Generally, the airline that placed the first orders and put up the development cash tended to get an exclusive on the airframe for a while. The Connie was an example of that. TWA worked with Lockheed to develop the plane, placed the first orders, and they got a buffer time frame where they were the ONLY airline that flew them. Pan Am placed and order, but they had to wait to take their first deliveries until after the TWA grace period had expired. United started out with the Boeing 247s, but they switched to DC-3s as soon as they could afford it since it was a better airframe. United was more or less forced out of Boeing's control in the early thirties through one of the Air Mail acts that claimed airlines and manufacturers owned by the same companies had a competitive advantage over the other carriers.
 
[ QUOTE ]
TWA had exclusive ties to Douglas Aircraft.

[/ QUOTE ]

Until Hughes came along and hooked up with Lockheed and the Connie.

[/ QUOTE ]

My bad I had meant Lockheed. My brain sometimes forget that they were in the airline business!

-Matthew
 
[ QUOTE ]

In fact United Airlines in it's earliest humble beginnings was created, wholly owned and operated by Boeing INC.
-Matthew

[/ QUOTE ]

But, didn't United used to use Caravelles? Or was that later?
 
They should if that manufacturer bailed them out of trouble. CAL is committed to Boeing because, A.) Gordon used to work there and B.) They gave a lot of money to CAL in '94 to avoid bankrucptcy. I don't think you'll see any Airbus products at CAL any time soon. Interestingly enough, GE also provided help, so the 767s and 777s are GE powered. The 737s are GEs via way of CFM.

USAirAmericaWest is Airbus because Airbus is provided the cash to help them out. In turn, the carrier buys the buses.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

In fact United Airlines in it's earliest humble beginnings was created, wholly owned and operated by Boeing INC.
-Matthew

[/ QUOTE ]

But, didn't United used to use Caravelles? Or was that later?

[/ QUOTE ]

Dunno all I know is that in the beginning United was created and 100% owned by Boeing. As per what Kellwolf said due to mail contracts they severed there relationship with Boeing and became there own company.
Though I'm sure Boeing still had considerable influence with them.
Though they have in the past and continue in the present to operate types other then just Boeing.
They are very loyal Boeing customers and will prolly remain so should they remain in service in the future.

-Matthew
 
I say it's all about what you'll do for the airline. Help them get out of chapter 11? That gets you some loyalty. Cut the airline a sweetheart deal that allows them to pretty much pay nothing for the leases and maintenance for a few years? That'll get you some as well.

But it only goes so far. If you're an all Boeing fleet, and Airbus comes to you and pretty much gives you the airplanes and offers to pay for your training transition costs, you'd be a fool not to consider it.
 
[ QUOTE ]
They should if that manufacturer bailed them out of trouble. CAL is committed to Boeing because, A.) Gordon used to work there and B.) They gave a lot of money to CAL in '94 to avoid bankrucptcy. I don't think you'll see any Airbus products at CAL any time soon. Interestingly enough, GE also provided help, so the 767s and 777s are GE powered. The 737s are GEs via way of CFM.

USAirAmericaWest is Airbus because Airbus is provided the cash to help them out. In turn, the carrier buys the buses.

[/ QUOTE ]

AA refuses to by Airbus this day due to the disaster in November 2001.


Why is Delta totally committed to Boeing? While I am proud of that, I wonder what the reason was.

Along with Continental, Delta got a deal with Boeing to get 767-400ERs as a special L-1011/DC-10 replacement. Does this have anything to do with Delta's loyalty toward Boeing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top