For a long time now, we’ve known that American Airlines is in negotiations on a new wide body aircraft order. While there still hasn’t been a formal announcement, executives at the airline are in recent times being a bit more transparent about what they’re thinking, and it’s not necessarily what everyone would expect.
Long story short, we should see a wide body aircraft order in the very near future, and it could be for up to 65 planes from either Airbus or Boeing, with deliveries in the 2030s.
In this post:
American ordering wide body planes, Airbus and Boeing in running
Among the “big three” US carriers, American has by far the weakest long haul network, especially when you take Latin America out of the equation. As I view the long haul network, American primarily likes to fly to joint ventures markets, to Latin America, and then do some seasonal summer flying to Europe (of course that’s a slight oversimplification, but you get the point).
I’d say we’ve gotten to this point due to a combination of some strategic blunders (retiring the Boeing 757s, Boeing 767s, and Airbus A330s early), along with American’s failed strategy of over-focusing on domestic flying, as part of Vasu Raja’s high conviction El Paso world domination strategy.
Looking at American’s wide body fleet, the airline has 67 Boeing 777s (47 777-200ERs and 20 777-300ERs), along with 70 Boeing 787s (37 787-8s, 33 787-9s). At this point, American’s remaining wide body order book includes just 19 787-9s, so that’s not a whole lot of planes.
As a point of comparison, Delta has 78 wide body planes on order, while United has a jaw-dropping 135 wide body planes on order. So yeah, American is increasingly falling behind when it comes to its wide body fleet, not to mention you need to order planes with quite a bit of lead time, so if you want to become more competitive, that takes time.
In recent months, insider JonNYC has shared how American is looking to place a new wide body aircraft order soon, and that this could be with either Airbus or Boeing.
This week, American executives have spoken more transparently about this, as reported by FlightGlobal:
- American is looking to order up to 65 planes to replace existing Boeing 777-200ERs; let me emphasize that’s an “up to” number, so that could include firm orders and options
- The airline is in the “seventh or eighth inning” when it comes to making a decision (if you know as little about sports as I do, that’s a baseball reference, and there are nine innings, or so I’m told) 😉
- These planes are expected to be delivered in the 2030s, which isn’t surprising, given the current backlog for the popular models from Airbus and Boeing; for that matter, American is even retrofitting 777-200ERs with new interiors, so expect them to stick around for years to come
- The order “could go either way” between Airbus and Boeing, so Airbus has some upside here, given that American currently has an all-Boeing wide body fleet
Which wide body aircraft will American select?
This is where I think it gets interesting. Ultimately there are four wide body aircraft families to choose from — the A330neo, A350, 777X, and 787. Which could American order?
I think one important thing to remember is that American executives simply don’t want very high capacity long haul aircraft. They’ve said it repeatedly, and for that matter, if United can’t make a next generation plane bigger than the 787-10 work despite its huge global network, then American likely can’t either. So I believe that the 777X and A350 are highly unlikely to be chosen:
- It would be shocking if American orders the 777X, despite that recent rumor we saw; the plane isn’t even certified, and it’s “too much plane” for American anyway, especially as the airline increasingly focuses on lower capacity planes
- I also don’t see American ordering the A350; both variants are larger than American’s 787-9s, the plane is expensive, and there’s quite a bit of demand for it
So that leaves us with the 787 and A330neo. Logically, you’d think American would just keep increasing its 787 fleet, and would even order the 787-10, the largest variant of the plane. That seems like the obvious choice — it’s higher capacity, very fuel efficient, and has amazing per seat economics. For that matter, American eventually needs to replace its aging 777-300ERs, and it’s not like the airline is using the full range of those planes.
The catch is that the 787 is expensive, and there’s a long wait to get the planes. For example, Delta recently ordered the 787-10, and the first delivery will only happen in 2031. Now, the timeline might not be an issue, since American is only looking at ordering planes for the 2030s.
That brings us to the A330neo, which might seem like an odd plane for American to order, but I actually increasingly think we could see that become a reality. Compared to the 787, the plane is a bit cheaper, a bit smaller, and it can also be ordered with less lead time.
While it might seem like a wild card, it does strike me as the most likely option for American, if it doesn’t go with the 787. I think there’s another hint here. Nat Pieper is American’s fairly new Chief Commercial Officer, and he spent a decade at Delta, including being VP of Fleet Strategy & Transactions.
This coincided with when Delta ordered the A330neo, and Pieper very much seems to be calling the shots at American nowadays (which is a good thing). So obviously he’s a fan of the A330neo, and that’s another reason to think things could play out this way.
It’s just amazing to me how much money American has wasted on its long haul fleet strategy. American retired its entire (ex-US Airways) A330 fleet at the start of the pandemic, even though those planes were largely still quite new.
American had the opportunity to bring those back, but just decided not to. Instead, those planes are now being acquired by Vietnam’s Sun PhuQuoc Airways. It’s just so bizarre how American has so much debt, yet is obsessed with flying new planes, despite not actually having a lot to show for it in terms of passenger experience.
Like, American has the youngest fleet of the “big three” US carriers, but when you step onboard the average American plane, you wouldn’t know it. That’s because American has spent all its money on the metal and new engines, rather than on the passenger experience. The airline is of course now trying to reverse that (including installing seat back TVs on narrow body planes), but it definitely feels a bit like it’s “too little, too late.”
So anyway, we’ll mark this as “developing” for now, but I imagine that either we’re going to see a 787-10 order, or an A330-900neo order.
Bottom line
American is nearing a new wide body aircraft order, which isn’t necessarily surprising, given the carrier’s lack of an order book. The airline is expected to order up to 65 planes from either Airbus or Boeing, with deliveries expected in the 2030s. Based on what JonNYC has shared, we should sort of “expect the unexpected,” so my guess is that this won’t exclusively be a 787 order (which otherwise seems like the most logical option).
I think a 777X or A350 order is highly unlikely, given their size and cost. Logically, you’d think American would keep growing its 787 fleet, and maybe even order the 787-10, given its great economics (despite American’s lack of desire for large long haul aircraft).
However, I think the wild card would be an A330-900neo order, since that actually seems like a pretty good fit for American, at least based on its (questionable) strategy. The plane is more readily available, not terribly high capacity, and a bit cheaper than the alternatives.
What wide body plane do you think American will ultimately order?
The A330-900 would be a better fit for the direction of AA's network than more 787s. While the 787s would be a commonality advantage, all but a handful of AA's routes don't need the range of the 787-8 or -9 or the capacity of the 787-10, which is unlikely to change with AA's strongest hubs of DFW, CLT, and MIA being where they are. The A339 by contrast is well-suited to servicing medium haul Europe...
The A330-900 would be a better fit for the direction of AA's network than more 787s. While the 787s would be a commonality advantage, all but a handful of AA's routes don't need the range of the 787-8 or -9 or the capacity of the 787-10, which is unlikely to change with AA's strongest hubs of DFW, CLT, and MIA being where they are. The A339 by contrast is well-suited to servicing medium haul Europe and Latin flying as operators like DL and TAP have demonstrated, and likely available on a more accelerated timeline than the 787s.
Throw in a handful of 787-10s to replace the -300ER flying to places like LHR (do they even fly that plane on any routes that actually need the 777-300ER's full range capabilities besides SYD?).
The A339NEO is a big plane too. Yes, not as big as the B787-10 however AA can use the B787-10 for many routes and literally replace its B77E's on a 1-for-1 basis.
My guess is that its going all Boeing but we'll see.
I like 339, more efficient, and as others have said 2-4-2 in economy is better than 3-3-3; that said, I suspect American (like United) is just pretending to go with Airbus, only to use it as a bargaining chip for a better deal on some more 787s (or eventually 777X). We'll see...
What's "more efficient"? That's rather a vague term as it really depends on a multitude of factors.
I think the A330 would be a great choice for a number of reasons that seem to fit with AA's needs.
Easily do Europe and deep South America. Not to large nor small and the aircraft has a very nice main cabin layout witeh the 2-4-2 configuration.
I love this fake journalism. Like how many planes does UA have on order vs thos planned for retirement etc
And always convenient to say american has no longer haul "when you remove the area they are dominant " haha what a joke
Even if you expected United to retire EVERY 777-200s (74), EVERY 767-400s (16), and EVERY 767-300 (38) - which even includes some odd-ball airframes not flying, like a parked ex-Hawaiian 767, that's 128 maximum total replacements vs. 135 orders.
But there isn't an existing "one for one" retirement of those airframes as new 787s come on line. United has said it plans to fly the 767s thru 2030 at least. And there is still the...
Even if you expected United to retire EVERY 777-200s (74), EVERY 767-400s (16), and EVERY 767-300 (38) - which even includes some odd-ball airframes not flying, like a parked ex-Hawaiian 767, that's 128 maximum total replacements vs. 135 orders.
But there isn't an existing "one for one" retirement of those airframes as new 787s come on line. United has said it plans to fly the 767s thru 2030 at least. And there is still the order for 45 A350s that isn't dead yet (not included in that "135 WB orders") which would be the natural replacement for the oldest UA 777s (currently 52 of them, with 42 flying / 10 in storage).
So there is still plenty of growth baked into the pending WB orders plan.
Agreed…
American could do a lot worse.
I have just crossed the Atlantic twice in an A330neo and because of its 18” seat width it was certainly a better experience than in a 787 17” economy seat.
The A330-900neo is less expensive than the 787-9 (the closest 787 match in cabin capacity), is available reasonably soon (unlike the other alternatives) has attractive economics (even more so if you factor in capital costs), and...
Agreed…
American could do a lot worse.
I have just crossed the Atlantic twice in an A330neo and because of its 18” seat width it was certainly a better experience than in a 787 17” economy seat.
The A330-900neo is less expensive than the 787-9 (the closest 787 match in cabin capacity), is available reasonably soon (unlike the other alternatives) has attractive economics (even more so if you factor in capital costs), and has a clean safety record. American also has a pool of pilots that used to be qualified on A330’s.
For routes that may require the extra range that the 787-9 has they could fall back on their existing 787-9 fleet. If it works for Virgin, it should work for American.
The idea of AA flying A330-900 is just fantasy. Why in the world would they ? A350-900 would be far better. 787-10 would be perfect. 20-30 777-9 would also great for expansion to London, Sydney, and deep Latin Markets.
I think Ben layed out the reasons why the A350 and 787-10 would be a poor fit, namely cost, delivery order and the aircrafts are simply too large for AA's needs.
No wide body order is coming. Instead AA will announce an order for 100 E175s.
Why couldn’t a 777-x work on any of their Heathrow routes? Or even a few domestic transcon routes to make them more comfortable? Not that I’m advocating bringing back the coach piano bar, but some more room would help.
How many LHR routes would it work on, though? JFK and DFW, for sure. Maybe LAX, ORD, MIA, and SFO. There's probably enough demand to send them down to SYD from LAX during the holiday peak, and maybe... Maybe... Even a seasonal DFW-SYD service. Other than a few niches, though, it would be very expensive metal not really doing the job it was built for. The 789 or 359 would be more logical; and given their existing fleet, adding more 789s seems like the obvious choice.
777-X works on network routes with a single, large hub instead of multiple hubs. BA has Heathrow, Cathay has Hong Kong, Etihad has Abu Dhabi, etc. With all their traffic forced into one hub, one big, large plane for international travel makes sense.
But American - with international travel to the same locations overseas from multiple US hubs - doesn't see the same math. It's too hard to fill that big a plane from one...
777-X works on network routes with a single, large hub instead of multiple hubs. BA has Heathrow, Cathay has Hong Kong, Etihad has Abu Dhabi, etc. With all their traffic forced into one hub, one big, large plane for international travel makes sense.
But American - with international travel to the same locations overseas from multiple US hubs - doesn't see the same math. It's too hard to fill that big a plane from one of your several hubs. Better to operate multiple flights on slightly smaller planes from different hubs.
Same calculations for Delta and United, even with "fortress" hubs like Delta has in Atlanta. It's better to have more seat capacity from several hubs than having most of the capacity focused in one hub when you have more than one hub serving international markets.
Alternate Theory:
just lease a few A330 from Hawaiian (oops, I mean Alaska) for a few years till the B787 come thru the pipeline.
This would plug a hole and Alaska would appreciate the extra cash.
Espouse the virtues of OneWorld interconnect and restore the hot pockets to the unwashed in Economy during Hawaiian flights.
Alternate Alternate Theory:
American buys Global Airlines out of liquidation, takes over all the A380s, and trades frequency on routes like LGA-ORD for once daily, high capacity service.
Actually AA should lease/buy some 773ER's from QR. Unfortunately given how things are shaping up in the middle east, there maybe a a few ME3 carriers with excessive widebodies. Would be better than parking those aircraft in IST, MEL and SYD.
No one parks aircraft in IST, MRL or SYD. You park them in California or Spain.
Plus Turkish out of IST is probably doing great considering its two strongest competitors are hurting.
What I find surprising is that we think AA is that adventurous. Of course they could order Boeing or Airbus, that has been every US airline campaign for the past 30 years. Will they order the 330NEO? And further complicate their fleet? Probably not. AA will keep it simple and just load up on the 787-10 as their competitors have done. 330neo which is the same size as the 787-9 but less capable will show...
What I find surprising is that we think AA is that adventurous. Of course they could order Boeing or Airbus, that has been every US airline campaign for the past 30 years. Will they order the 330NEO? And further complicate their fleet? Probably not. AA will keep it simple and just load up on the 787-10 as their competitors have done. 330neo which is the same size as the 787-9 but less capable will show that AA management are really as stupid as everybody thinks. Whatever AA is saving in purchase price will be usurped by reintroducing a fleet type they’ve already exited and the fleet savings they get from commonality, evaporated.
AA does have some "rights" with both Airbus and Boeing to move up deliveries as part of the order back when LAA placed a320 and Max orders so not our of the realm that they could order the 787. I would love to see more 787-9 and add the -10. The cost benefit of a common fleet in the long run out ways a low price in the near term in some cases. Either way,...
AA does have some "rights" with both Airbus and Boeing to move up deliveries as part of the order back when LAA placed a320 and Max orders so not our of the realm that they could order the 787. I would love to see more 787-9 and add the -10. The cost benefit of a common fleet in the long run out ways a low price in the near term in some cases. Either way, would like to see both European and Asian expansion especially out of PHX (Japan and Spain, with seasonal Rome?) to start. And YES! PHX can support it, 5.5 million people a now the US largest chip and growing high tech and defense industries, we are not the dusty western one horse town anymore.
Y class on 787 is way too tight and everyone walking aisle hits my shoulder. Would be nicer to have 330neo for that reason. Not sure how fast AA can get them though - the entire industry still suffers from the supply chain issue.
I have said for quite some time that a 339 order makes sense for AA
the 339 is readily available and far more economical to operate than the 772s. AA could easily spend a big chunk of the cost refurbushing 777s and still pay 25% more for fuel for 10 more years.
Airbus can price 339s well below the 787 and deliver them sooner.
The339 and 789 cost about the same to operate on 4000-4500 mile routes
It just might make sense for AA to buy a large fleet of 330NEOs
Don’t knock it until you have tried it ORD …. the superiority of AirBus aircraft …. :-)
The French haven't been superior in anything dealing with aviation since Bleriot.
The French haven't been superior in anything dealing with aviation since Bleriot.
I disagree. My croissant is absolutely lighter than air!
I don't recall any recent Airbus plane killing people because of a manufacturing error.
Very thoughtful argument.
I hadn’t thought of that…
Did you really waste all those pixels and brain cells (yours and mine!) to come to the blindingly obvious conclusion that an airline seeking to acquire more widebodies is going to acquire them from either Boeing or Airbus?
Hard-hitting journalism there, bud.
@ CaNerdIan -- I think you didn't read the post. My commentary centered primarily around *which* of those planes the airline may order.
AA is missing out where the probably only profitable part of the airline business is, long haul premium. It makes sense to close that loop. And if 330NEO are available in the short term that's what AA may have to go with, ironic as it is that the airline had 330s to begin with.
looking forward to TD's analysis that the A330-900 is great when DL flies it, but terrible when AA flies it
Calling a TD comment an analysis is way too much overstated lol
The only logical options (and given how conservative AA is about fleet strategy and long haul route planning) are more 787-9s or the 787-10 or a mix of 9s and 10s. There will be zero chance of an Airbus wide body at AA. That would require a new fleet type, for what would be a small-ish size (20-40 frames) and would then put its fleet development strategy further into complex orders it doesn't want.
I agree 100% no chance AA will add the 330s for 20 planes it might need. The order will be for 787-10s
Bring back the A300s! That aside, I do hope the 787-10 is the choice. Hate to think the 777X would never be considered.
I'd rather ride a blimp , than AA .
They're called dirigibles or airships, you simpleton!
A "blimp" is a specific type of lighter-that-air craft. Alert might have intended to refer to that specific type as opposed to the more general category.
A "blimp" is a specific type of lighter-that-air craft. Alert might have intended to refer to that specific type as opposed to the more general category.
"American could order Airbus or Boeing wide body planes"
That's the type of hard hitting journalism I came here for.....
@ TC -- I get you're being sassy, but JonNYC has some great scoops, and with what he writes, you sort of have to read between the lines. When he says things, it's intentional.
I think a vast majority of people would assume that only Boeing planes are under consideration, so the fact that American could order Airbus planes is pretty significant.
The a330neo is actually great from a passamger perspective and could work very well in many AA hubs given the range they need.
I’d imagine they would be primarily focused at CLT and PHL to focus on leisure travel while AA gives the business hubs the 787 because they need the extra range; like LAX and JFK.
Remember when US Airways ordered the A350
@ PW -- Especially in retrospect, everything related to US Airways is fascinating, when you consider how both American and United are run by US Airways alum.
And then Raja compared the 359 to a lawnmower or something completely insane. How that didn't get him fired is beyond my comprehension. United should be careful with someone like that. The 339 makes sense for CLT and PHL but so did the 332. I'd love to see the 339 but I think 789 for PHL and CLT and some 781 (as a 772 replacement) for other hubs likely makes the most sense, unless Airbus gives a very good deal.