460 jets ordered

[Bob Owens]

You're right about mechanics doing their own thing in GA.....But how much would you like to wager that NONE of them want to hear the word UNION ever again!

They dont need one, the situation is different , many (but fewer and fewer) suppliiers are dealing individually with more and more individual consumers.

In our industry you have a few consumers and several suppliers. These consumers have political clout and craft the laws to put the suppliers at a disadvantage, that plus the suppliers have failed to consolidate . Unions are supposed to act as a means to consolidate and equalize the leverage that collective capital has over labor. As the industry consolidated labor made no counter moves and therefore became weak.

 

[1AA]

American announced today that we will be getting A319's as well as A321's. So with the 319's coming it is safe to say that some or most American Eagle routes will be returning to American Main line flying again. Pulling the RJ's and replacing with 319's will go head to head on some routes with the competition. American has plans to move forward.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/American-Airlines-Chooses-prnews-3879295634.html?x=0&l=1

 

[damajagua]

I wonder how they are going to fly these aircrafts without a pilot contract agreement?

 

[Hopeful]

I wonder how they are going to fly these aircrafts without a pilot contract agreement?

It's called BANKRUPTCY!

Doesn't everyone realize that WITH OR WITHOUT contracts, AA will get what they want? Except a happy dedicated workforce!

 

[Frank Szabo]

It's called BANKRUPTCY!

Doesn't everyone realize that WITH OR WITHOUT contracts, AA will get what they want? Except a happy dedicated workforce!

Accountants need numbers, not happiness.

 

[Hopeful]

Accountants need numbers, not happiness.

Some people truly amaze me thinking the AA world is going to end because of no agreements..BK will fix everything! Or so the pro company ilks beleive!

 

[Frank Szabo]

Some people truly amaze me thinking the AA world is going to end because of no agreements..BK will fix everything! Or so the pro company ilks beleive!

Naw - the world (nor the world of AA) won't come to an end. Some here are saying that because of the attitudes expressed on these threads but we're about 20-30 people - not an entire company.

Reality says the twu will ratchet up its fear campaign shortly in preparation for the next vote on a TA (the text of which is probably ready to be distributed).

 

[damajagua]

It is obvious that the company is forging ahead with the aircraft order
So they must have some kind of plans. Wether it includes bankruptcy
or not remains to be seen.

 

[FWAAA]

American announced today that we will be getting A319's as well as A321's. So with the 319's coming it is safe to say that some or most American Eagle routes will be returning to American Main line flying again. Pulling the RJ's and replacing with 319's will go head to head on some routes with the competition. American has plans to move forward.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/American-Airlines-Chooses-prnews-3879295634.html?x=0&l=1

I think that's a completely unfounded assumption. "Some or most?" IMO, it will be "none or perhaps a couple." AA's A319s will probably feature 125-130 seats depending on the number of F seats and whether AA competes with UA and DL with some form of E+. Very few current Eagle routes need that many seats per flight.

More likely is that A319s (and probably 73Gs, also with 125-130 seats) will be flown on routes currently flown with MD-80s where 160-seat 738s are just too many seats. During MRTC, MD-80s had just 129 seats.

Yes, there may a few Eagle routes that could support 125 seats per flight, but those will be few and far between.

 

[will fix for food]

American announced today that we will be getting A319's as well as A321's. So with the 319's coming it is safe to say that some or most American Eagle routes will be returning to American Main line flying again. Pulling the RJ's and replacing with 319's will go head to head on some routes with the competition. American has plans to move forward.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/American-Airlines-Chooses-prnews-3879295634.html?x=0&l=1

The 319 seats almost twice as many pax as Eagle's largest aircraft. Unless they plan on halving the frequencies that Eagle currently flies that doesn't make much sense.

There is still a need for a gap jet. I don't think the 319 fits that role.

 

[Buck]

The 319 seats almost twice as many pax as Eagle's largest aircraft. Unless they plan on halving the frequencies that Eagle currently flies that doesn't make much sense.

There is still a need for a gap jet. I don't think the 319 fits that role.

That is a good thing, because with deregulation at full swing, will fill those seats no matter the cost to the company or the employees.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I am sure there is an element of AA's desire to have a small mainline jet as something of a substitute for a large RJ which AA may or may not get the right to operate.... even if the APA agreed to increased use of 76 seat aircraft, it could be a long time before AA could build a sufficiently sized fleet.
.
it is noteworthy that none of AA's network peers former CO, DL, or UA and even some of the LFCs at least are not ordering 120-130 seat aircraft any longer, favoring 150-160 seaters for which the trip costs are almost identical to the similar family 120-130 seat aircraft (ie 319 vs 320, 73G vs 738).
AA's desire to staff its 319s w/ lower paid pilots is clearly an attempt to put in a smaller mainline aircraft while keeping the CASM comparable to the standard size 320. But you can't change the fact that the 319 will burn about as much fuel as the 320 and it will still have to be staffed by 3 FAs. And as the new generation 320 and 737 come online the 319s fuel burn per seat will be even less favorable.
.
I suspect history will show that AA's decision to add the smaller variant in an aircraft family against the trends in the rest of the industry will turn out to be a money losing proposition which can't be undone for years to come.

 

[Buck]

It is my belief that with the divestiture of Eagle, that AA will continue to fly some of the Eagle feeder routes, only with these new jets. Possibly with fewer departures. Eagle will of course become a provider for AA and all other airlines as available. But that is just an opinion.

 

[WorldTraveler]

one would like to believe that AA will insource some of the fying it has outsourced... and if the choice is between flying it on 50 seat RJs or 130 seat mainline aircraft, the CASM will certainly be lower on the mainline aircraft.
But AA's network is all built around highly competitive and/or high capacity markets - DFW and MIA are largely "monopoly" hubs while the rest of AA's system is highly competitive. In both cases, if you reduce frequencies and use larger aircraft while your competitors use smaller gauge with higher frequency, the most valuable customers will migrate to the high frequency carrier... because market dominance is built more around high frequency than larger aircraft size... that is why carriers that operated 747s on transcon markets once or twice a day never were able to attract the high value customers that carriers like AA can offer with smaller aircraft operating throughout the day.
.
AA's strategy COULD be to upgauge the size of its entire network and use larger aircraft such as the 321 which is a very low CASM aircraft to push alot of low cost capacity through AA's existing network.... if AA essentially upgrades its largest routes that are now operated with 738s to 321s, M80s to 738s, RJs to 319s etc, then perhaps AA could regain market share while also upgrading the lowest segment of the market to mainline jets instead of large RJs that other carriers are using....
but that theory argues against what the rest of the industry is doing, in part because as costs rise (and no one expects fuel over the long term to stay flat but rather to continue increasing in price), then it becomes harder and harder to fill the same amount of capacity without having to discount to fill seats.... which hurts yields.
.
AA's strategy will be very interesting to watch - assuming they can hold things together long enough to be able to implement it - but I fear that AA's desire to do something capacity-wise that is different from the rest of the industry will only result in another strategic failure, not much different from AA's decision to not merge when other carriers were merging, take 8 years to get serious about a restructuring process that others completed years ago, and to rely on partner airlines (domestic and int'l) when other carriers are flying a larger percentage of their network on their own metal.
.
And ultimately, it has been employees in the airline industry who pay a high price for their employers' strategic failures.

 

[FWAAA]

I am sure there is an element of AA's desire to have a small mainline jet as something of a substitute for a large RJ which AA may or may not get the right to operate.... even if the APA agreed to increased use of 76 seat aircraft, it could be a long time before AA could build a sufficiently sized fleet.
.
it is noteworthy that none of AA's network peers former CO, DL, or UA and even some of the LFCs at least are not ordering 120-130 seat aircraft any longer, favoring 150-160 seaters for which the trip costs are almost identical to the similar family 120-130 seat aircraft (ie 319 vs 320, 73G vs 738).
AA's desire to staff its 319s w/ lower paid pilots is clearly an attempt to put in a smaller mainline aircraft while keeping the CASM comparable to the standard size 320. But you can't change the fact that the 319 will burn about as much fuel as the 320 and it will still have to be staffed by 3 FAs. And as the new generation 320 and 737 come online the 319s fuel burn per seat will be even less favorable.
.
I suspect history will show that AA's decision to add the smaller variant in an aircraft family against the trends in the rest of the industry will turn out to be a money losing proposition which can't be undone for years to come.

Overall, I agree. Trip costs will be similar, although the A319 should burn slightly less fuel because of lower weight. AA is proposing a mild B scale for the flight deck but without a B scale for the three FAs, these just wouldn't make all that much sense. Of course, if AA sees some FA retirements, the A319s should be staffed primarily with new-hires and their first few years is basically a B scale compared with their topped out pay.

You've pointed out before the absurdity of jetBlue flying 190s that seat just 2/3 as many passengers as their A320s yet paying the pilots 85% to 90% of the A320 payrates. And since the day B6 announced its mistake of adding the 190s, it's been basically break-even instead of the profits that preceded the 190 orders.

Only advantage to the A319 is that it can reliably fly thin transcons where the A320 and A321 fall short and need those winter fuel stops. If A319s and 73Gs make sense now, they would have made more sense several years ago - so why the sudden desire to fly higher CASM small mainline jets?