So, i hear a lot about the benefits of fleet commonality around here, well, not specifics, but...
so my question is, if it's such a great thing, why would aa have announced that monster order several months ago and include a boatload of buses when they have an all boeing fleet (mainline anyway)?
Because the sub fleet is big enough. (and they are broke and had to take second best for less)
That "second best" had over 75% market share of the orders only a week ago. It took the 737MAX a bunch of record deals to climb over 30%.
Not that I expect you to change your opinion when faced with actual facts, but I thought I'd put this out there anyway: http://www.pdxlight.com/neomax.htm
There is always a business case made before making such decision. The purchase price offered by Airbus may be so attractive that overall the savings there would offset the incremental cost of having another type in the fleet. The size of both the 737 and A320 fleet themselves are large enough in AA that they both would reach the critical mass so increasing the fleet size of any of the type does not deliver more incremental savings.
AA is not the only one having split fleet. DL is actively buying MD90 and now 717 to supplement its fleet of 737NG.
Air France flies both 777-200ER and A340-300.
Business and financial decisions are not straight forward. They are not like running through a check list and you know yes or no right away after that. There are a lot of considerations and calculations.
Fleet Commonality?
you've got to love the Fanboy comments on these sites. I reckon Av enthusiasts are more one eyed than football fans.
Hybrid Mode
