And that is the truth- plain and simple. Everything in the airline industry is about to change... the strong will survive and and hopefully make their way through high fuel costs and the recession. As for the rest well...wait and see!AA and US?
- Thread starter luvthe9
- Start date
And that is the truth- plain and simple. Everything in the airline industry is about to change... the strong will survive and and hopefully make their way through high fuel costs and the recession. As for the rest well...wait and see!
bagchucker
Senior
The MD-80's gotta go. They are gas hogs and cramped. From a ramper standpoint, they are the worst ergonomically... talk about back-breaking, they are an OJI waiting to happen!! I have worked a few in my 12 years in the biz. I understand they have some 300 in their fleet. Airbus planes we have would be a better replacement. Could happen. Get rid of the aging Mad-Dogs.....
RowUnderDCA
Veteran
- Oct 6, 2002
- 2,123
- 1
yes.. the md 80s are old gas hogs, but I still think that the end goal of a capacity rationalizing AA/LCC merger has got to be to reduce the capacity of the 50 seat jets. If one or both of AA/LCC could find a way to remove their respective rj express capacity, then LCC's mainline capacity and growth aircraft could fill that role and replacement of md 80s.
Can that be done without a bankruptcy?
Can that be done without a bankruptcy?
FCYTravis
Senior
Probably - at least, some of it can. AA can substantially downsize its wholly-owned American Eagle operation without violating any rent-a-jet contrAActs - the 37-seat ERJ-140s in particular are dead planes flying with oil at $120/bbl.
Then figure in the US side downsizing the Mesa ops as fast as they possibly can, and the AA side can renegotiate the Chautauqua/Trans States ERJ contracts (bye bye RP ERJs in favor of RW EMB-175s, for example.)
jimntx
Veteran
We understand that. Personally, I think the E190 is a slick airplane. However, it does not make economic sense for AA to try to operate the a/c at mainline pilot rates, and the APA refused to even consider allowing the a/c to be flown by AE.The EMB-190 is not an express aircraft on US. How many times does that have to be said? The 190s are mainline jets operated by US East crews, with an 11F/88Y configuration - actually a quite generous First cabin, all things considered.
Of course, management didn't do that out of generosity, they did that so that they could fly around with two FAs.
CLT CS AGENT
Advanced
- Feb 28, 2007
- 119
- 0
I wonder if the AA-CO "alliance" means AA will take US East and CO will take US West?
FCYTravis
Senior
I definitely agree with the APA on not allowing it as an Eagle plane. 100-seat aircraft should NEVER be allowed to be contracted out. As far as I'm concerned, that has to be the permanent stopline on scope clauses. US Airways has set the benchmark there, as has jetBlue.
But 100-seat jets are a right-sized aircraft for the future, and at some point it may make sense for AA to fly them. Pilots aren't going to get paid MD-80 wages to fly them, but neither should they fly them for ERJ wages.
The days of the 50-seat jet are numbered, and obviously an MD-80 is way too big for routes like DFW-SHV. 70-100-seat jets have an important role to play in fleet mixes, IMO.
In my opinion, I highly highly doubt US would ever be broken up. I believe it will either be all or nothing.
All the west really is is Pheonix...
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
what about the F-100 I remember US and AA having them but I know US got rid of theirs shortly after 9/11/01 Im just wondering Does AA still fly them and if so are they considered fuel effiecient for today
LGA Fleet Service
Veteran
Thankfully all the Dutch Ovens are long gone, hated that plane.
flybynite
Veteran
I don't think they have them anymore either. To my knowledge they were fuel efficient. I never heard otherwise. They were great little money makers. We had the Rolls engines on them so the pilots or mechanics can better answer that question.
I seem to remember one of the reasons we got rid of them was because getting the parts was becoming a problem. We had at one time been the parts distributor for Fokker and got out of that end of the deal for whatever reason and we also did sim training for some of the AA pilots. But I'm sure the biggest reason was because of the labor costs.
I enjoyed working the Fokker but it was one of those planes you either loved or hated.
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
I remember working ours and flyin on it. working it well i didnt care too much for the cargo bins for which the EMB-170s remind me of but I truly loved flying on it it was very quiet
FCYTravis
Senior
Fokker went bankrupt and that probably made the parts situation quite difficult. :blink:
Be Careful What You Wish For.
Veteran
- Dec 23, 2006
- 2,269
- 571
Why are you so confident?
In the position that US will not be split off?
- Continental should put it's money else where as opposed to Pheonix with all the trouble that would come along with it.
- Why would Continental Help American gain US Airway's CLT, PHL, DCA, LGA, PIT, and Boston in exchange for Las Vegas and Pheonix?
- Pheonix is a large city where American could just concentrate on O&D and as a reliever for LA.
