Aal Nwa Merger? Forbes Magazine

[eolesen]

I agree. The 717s were said to be very fuel efficient and I think AA should have kept them. There are many routes that would have been perfect for that aircraft. I think AA got rid of them because the leases were too high and they wanted to eliminate a fleet type. AA did their analysis and they determined it would save more money by dumping this fleet type. I have to wonder, if they knew that oil was going to be $65 a barrel (compared to $30 a barrel when they did the analysis) would they have come to a different conclusion and decided it would have been better to keep them?

[post="289463"][/post]​

If we would have known oil would be at $65/barrel, I think there are a lot of decisions which we would have rethunk...

As for the 717's, it probably would have resulted in the same decision -- it would eventually be another fleet of Fokkers, i.e. a small fleet of niche aircraft no longer in production.

Boeing's lack of enthusiasm for the 717 pretty much killed it -- they didn't want to support two production lines for small narrowbody aircraft, and they'd rather have more sales for the 737NG's.

 

[LGA Fleet Service]

As for the 717's, it probably would have resulted in the same decision -- it would eventually be another fleet of Fokkers, i.e. a small fleet of niche aircraft no longer in production.

[post="289501"][/post]​

Big difference between Boeing and bankrupt DOA Fokker wouldn't you say?

Have you flown STL-JFK on the E135 yet?

How about that DFW-SYR segment on the Hoser jet?

Or any of these other groovy RJ segments that are getting longer and longer and longer.

Never mind there is no "bridge" in capacity either,it's either 35/45 seat RJ or 135 seat S80.There are countless segments that are being operated by high CASM Eagle RJ's that could be operated by mainline 717's.


What about that half assed shuttle Eagle has been pretending to run? Reliability is a joke, "We'd like to send you to Boston, but the plane is stuck in Detroit, so the flight is cancelled,here's a voucher for USAir."

Yeah "We know why you fly" alright...

 

[LGA Fleet Service]

Boeing's lack of enthusiasm for the 717 pretty much killed it -- they didn't want to support two production lines for small narrowbody aircraft, and they'd rather have more sales for the 737NG's.

[post="289501"][/post]​

And be shut completely out of the 100 seat market?

Yay for the 737!

 

[FWAAA]

If we would have known oil would be at $65/barrel, I think there are a lot of decisions which we would have rethunk...

As for the 717's, it probably would have resulted in the same decision -- it would eventually be another fleet of Fokkers, i.e. a small fleet of niche aircraft no longer in production.

Boeing's lack of enthusiasm for the 717 pretty much killed it -- they didn't want to support two production lines for small narrowbody aircraft, and they'd rather have more sales for the 737NG's.

[post="289501"][/post]​

You may be right, but had AA not come close to bankruptcy, and been able to secure favorable financing, I imagine that an AA order for 250-300 717s would have brought Boeing around to wild enthusiasm about the former MD-95.

Of course, lots of other issues would have needed resolution, like pilot pay rates, as AA would have probably demanded a good haircut from the F100 rates. Something higher than the CRJ700 rates at Eagle, but less than the Fokker rates.

Had AA simply kept the 30 TWA 717s and ordered no more, then you're absolutely right. Then the proper decision was to dump them.

And of course, there's still the 90-100 seat EMBs and CRJs on the horizon that might replace the 100 seat need (asuming there IS a need for 100 seats).

AirTran manages to fly 717s and pays its pilots decent rates for those planes, and is making money. So it's theoretically possible for AA mainline service to extend down to 100 seats without blowing the economics.

 

[LGA Fleet Service]

Of course, lots of other issues would have needed resolution, like pilot pay rates, as AA would have probably demanded a good haircut from the F100 rates. Something higher than the CRJ700 rates at Eagle, but less than the Fokker rates.

[post="289546"][/post]​

If I'm not mistaken there were payrates established for the 717.

 

[Oneflyer]

And be shut completely out of the 100 seat market?

Yay for the 737!

There is a very simply solution to this. Fly a market with half ERJs and half S80s. Just like we with DFW-CMH,DAY,SDF,HSV, BMH, etc..........

AA does fly a lot of city pairs fewer than 4 times a day, which it justs splits the difference, even better you put the S80 on during the peak demand times and the ERJ on during the low demand times.

 

[FWAAA]

If I'm not mistaken there were payrates established for the 717.

[post="289551"][/post]​

True, there were, but I think we can probably agree that AA will demand lower rates than those if/when it ever orders 90-100 seat jets (if the APA wants to fly them as mainline AA aricraft).

 

[Bob Owens]

<_< Bob, if you dovetailed them, you'de have to dovetail all!!!

Define all? Should everyone, the guys from EAL, American Eagle, Pan Am all get credit?

I've gone over the reason why I felt that TWA people should not have been dovetailed. I didnt think that workers at AA should be penalized so TWA workers could be rewarded for making Ichann rich with their concessions. You guys even gave away your pension instead of fighting. I'm not saying our behavior as a group has been stellar (we were industry leaders in concessions too) but it would have been a slap in the face to the EAL guys who fought. I realize that many, especially those from New York and other higher cost areas, were swept into those concessions by MCI, as we were swept in by Tulsa but we cant individualize the cause, we can only go by the net result.

If they were, I'de be the first one in line to fill a discrimination lawsuit against either Union, or Company, or both!!!!!


Well I thought you already had? One critical difference is that AMFA would not waive the successorship clause as the IAM did.

And yes, they deserve to be dovetailed! But so did we!!!!!I'm sorry, but as you see, even though we may agree on most points, we do have our differances!!!!I guess that's as it should be! :down: Signed: "Just anotherone of aa's redheaded stepchildren!"