Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 301 posts

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#161

Post by bgorman »

nutjob2 wrote: post #75
rsynnott wrote: post #11

> United’s 757 planes will reach the end of their lifespan in about a decade About a decade?! I was on one of their 757s returning to Dublin a while ago; it felt like they were already pushing the end of its lifespan. I suppose the repair of the interior doesn’t say much about the airframe...

You can install new interiors at any time, it's just not worth it for old planes with a limited future (because they're gas guzzlers). Planes can essentially fly indefinitely if you're willing to put money into ongoing maintenance. For instance some B-52s will have served for roughly 100 years by the time they are retired.

It may be worth it on more premium airlines. United and Delta don't retrofit old planes, but Delta does for example.

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#162

Post by briandear »

jussij wrote: post #88
dbcurtis wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been thinking about how to implement that after the MAX starts flying again. Flight search interfaces don’t seem to filter on equipment. And of course, equipment gets changed at times, so you may book one aircraft and have a different one swapped in on the ramp. I wonder if after you have checked in, and the airline swaps in a MAX, if you can get credit for your ticket if you refuse to board a MAX? I would gue…

> Flight search interfaces don’t seem to filter on equipment. I suspect this is going to change as booking web sites can use that feature as a selling point. Here in Australia just recently I booked a flight for mid December and was very surprised to see the type of aircraft listed on the bookings page. Now that I have seen this information, I myself will be expecting to see this information and will happily change b…

United.com shows the airplane for each flight.

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#163

Post by throw0101a »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #127
throw0101a wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how has the KC-46 done compared to the A330 MRTT?

Per a quick check of Wikipedia it seems like they're about equal. The KC46 is being fielded by the US and a few nations that the US traditionally use the same arms. The A330 is fielded by the UK, a couple commonwealth nations and KSA Total number built is in the 30s for both.

The MRTT is being used in the field. The KC-46 not so much:

* https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29933/air-force-says-i...

* https://www.aerotime.aero/clement.charpentreau/24184-no-fix-...

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#164

Post by yyhhsj0521 »

blahyawnblah wrote: post #156
roymurdock wrote: post #118

It will be interesting how Boeing/Airbus/traditional carriers react when China fully enters the market with Comac-built/branded planes. Commercial flights of its first plane, the C919 are slated for 2021. The whole 737 MAX fiasco really came at a bad time for the US aerospace industry, and if the other comments about Airbus being just as bad culture-wise are true (profits/jobs over serious engineering), then China co…

Does that plane actually fly? The stealth fighter jet they revealed years ago (made from various manufacturer's stolen plans) was nowhere near flying

Which one are you talking about? The J-20 or FC-31?

The J-20 has appeared (and flied and demonstrated its weapon bay) on multiple public air shows where foreign medias were invited. I believe they also have a few squadrons in service already.

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#165

Post by yyhhsj0521 »

landcoctos wrote: post #89
whatshisface wrote: post #7

America is going to pay for the cronyism that merged every airplane manufacturer into one and eliminated internal competition. If you don't have internal competition, you'll collapse in the face of external competition. There is no way to get away from Boeing without getting away from the American aerospace industry entirely, a problem that didn't exist back when McDonnell Douglas was around.

Nearly 50% of part content of Airbus planes are American made.

Do you know how is the situation in reverse?

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#166

Post by distances »

dbcurtis wrote: post #33
rburhum wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not that. It is that regardless if the plane is "fixed" or not, many frequent travelers will refuse to fly on a 737 MAX from now on. Last year I took 73 flights. At least three of those were on a MAX. I profusely refuse to get on one of those, regardless if they are fixed or not.

I have been thinking about how to implement that after the MAX starts flying again. Flight search interfaces don’t seem to filter on equipment. And of course, equipment gets changed at times, so you may book one aircraft and have a different one swapped in on the ramp. I wonder if after you have checked in, and the airline swaps in a MAX, if you can get credit for your ticket if you refuse to board a MAX? I would gue…

Fleets are often completely from one manufacturer. For example, easyJet is all Airbus while Ryanair is all Boeing. I can reasonably easily avoid all Ryanair flights in favour of easyJet.

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#167

Post by aidenn0 »

tw04 wrote: post #25
rburhum wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not that. It is that regardless if the plane is "fixed" or not, many frequent travelers will refuse to fly on a 737 MAX from now on. Last year I took 73 flights. At least three of those were on a MAX. I profusely refuse to get on one of those, regardless if they are fixed or not.

I flew about the same, fortunately never on a MAX. That being said I'm in the same boat, you couldn't pay me enough money to take a ride on a plane that the pilot literally cannot fly without the MCAS system functioning perfectly. Maybe I'm just blissfully ignorant to how bad all the planes in the air are... but I feel like pilots would be screaming bloody murder if they were all as bad as the MAX.

If the MCAS completely disengages, the plane is perfectly flyable under most conditions. It will just pitch up more than other planes in turns, which could be manually fixed by adjusting the trim. The MCAS system is set to automatically adjust the trim, and the crashes were caused by it doing so when there was no need.

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#168

Post by yyhhsj0521 »

ISL wrote: post #60
Angostura wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only the cars that are subject to mandatory recalls.

After the recalls have been addressed?

Depends on if they cheated through the initial inspection. Of course mistakes happen, but Boeing explicitly bribed FAA.

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#169

Post by Iwan-Zotow »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #132
roymurdock wrote: post #118

It will be interesting how Boeing/Airbus/traditional carriers react when China fully enters the market with Comac-built/branded planes. Commercial flights of its first plane, the C919 are slated for 2021. The whole 737 MAX fiasco really came at a bad time for the US aerospace industry, and if the other comments about Airbus being just as bad culture-wise are true (profits/jobs over serious engineering), then China co…

It will be blocked from purchase in the U.S. https://www.wired.com/story/us-china-cybertheft-su-bin/

So china won't buy boeings (for safety or other reasons), us won't by comacs, seems fair...

Re: United orders 50 new Airbus long-range jets to replace Boeing 757s

#170

Post by seanmcdirmid »

roymurdock wrote: post #118

It will be interesting how Boeing/Airbus/traditional carriers react when China fully enters the market with Comac-built/branded planes. Commercial flights of its first plane, the C919 are slated for 2021. The whole 737 MAX fiasco really came at a bad time for the US aerospace industry, and if the other comments about Airbus being just as bad culture-wise are true (profits/jobs over serious engineering), then China co…

China is still heavily dependent on Western jet engines and avionics. But they are getting experience building airframes, and they could potentially catch up in a generation or two on that given how slowly that part evolves. They won’t be able to build a 787/350 or even a 777 style carbon fiber airframe overnight, however.

There is no reason for the USA to block out Comac if they are flying with Pratt&Whitney or GE/CMF engines or Honeywell flight controls.

Post reply on HN