American Airbuses to Hawaii ?

[Jester]

 

 

[WorldTraveler]

since you didn't even bother to properly quote, let alone comment on the post, we can't begin to know what you are thinking but once again, there is factual information regarding aircraft performance and historical performance including cargo carried that is verifiable and not simply a matter of one's imagination.

the A321ceo won't be carrying any significant amounts of cargo between the mainland and Hawaii.

if that plus blocked seats is worth more than the fuel savings on 757s will certainly be something the bean counters will have to determine.

but as much as some people would like to think otherwise, the answer won't be a secret because there are really very few secrets in the industry.

 

[phllax]

I may be wrong, but I'm going to guess that those will be weight restricted both directions. From LAX to OGG and LIH, weight restrictions due to the westbound "into the wind" 2,500 mile flight with the fuel tanks completely full, which may cause some payload restrictions.From OGG and LIH, the short runways at both airports will definitely cause weight restrictions. The earlier planned configuration of 24F/150Y (before the configurations were "Parkerized") would have been ideal.

The westbound will most likely be weight restricted too during times of the Pineapple Express weather system which are prevalent during January-March and make Westbound times at or over 6 hours. The plus is that you'll get home in around 4 hours, but it may be with no service as the rides can be quite rough.

 

[ChrisUS]

Obviously, AA retirees and US retirees are accessing two totally different websites.  Wonder when that will end.  If they can get the two frequent flyer programs merged with a minimum of delay and/or pain, seems as if they could get the retiree non-rev travel systems merged.

I would imagine it will end with the switch to one PSS, mid October. 

 

[eolesen]

Is everything in the same HR system yet? That probably drives the nonrev portal access issue more than the PSS does, especially if US hadn't changed HR systems after the HP/US merger.

 

[N628AU]

Addressing on line access for non-revenue passengers, active or retired, is understandably an emotional subject for some on here.

What one must keep in perspective is that addressing that issue is going to tie up IT resources. Right now, the company needs to dedicate existing resources to current operations and the res cutover. Those are the only two priorities that need to be prioritized. A flub in either will have huge long term consequences.

Back to the thread at hand, once again WT beats the drum of cargo revenue. Does he fail to understand that the executive team that makes those decisions has no doubt performed detailed cost/benefit analysis on all of that? Everytime DL uses a larger aircraft on a route the cargo justifies it. Everytime another carrier does they are maligned for it (ie AA using a 777 to routes DL uses a 767 to).

 

[Overspeed]

E,
HR is still running on two separate systems. Baby steps going on. Heard lost of talk about single FOS and PSS mainly. Tech Ops just switched over to a single MX front end feeding separate systems for now until single FOS is up and running.

 

[eolesen]

What one must keep in perspective is that addressing that issue is going to tie up IT resources. Right now, the company needs to dedicate existing resources to current operations and the res cutover. Those are the only two priorities that need to be prioritized. A flub in either will have huge long term consequences.

Yeah, that's a great bullet point, but it's still a load of crap. The IT resources needed to merge the HR systems are working largely in SAP, and there's no crossover between SharpHR and FOS, PSS, or even Jetnet. Even if they were outsourced, they'd still be different entirely programming skills.

Back to the thread at hand, once again WT beats the drum of cargo revenue. Does he fail to understand that the executive team that makes those decisions has no doubt performed detailed cost/benefit analysis on all of that? Everytime DL uses a larger aircraft on a route the cargo justifies it. Everytime another carrier does they are maligned for it (ie AA using a 777 to routes DL uses a 767 to).

It's just a convenient whipping horse since he has nothing else of value to contribute to the discussion... Then again, he's probably bored since nobody but WT has posted to the DL forum in the last three days...

 

[WorldTraveler]

Back to the thread at hand, once again WT beats the drum of cargo revenue. Does he fail to understand that the executive team that makes those decisions has no doubt performed detailed cost/benefit analysis on all of that? Everytime DL uses a larger aircraft on a route the cargo justifies it. Everytime another carrier does they are maligned for it (ie AA using a 777 to routes DL uses a 767 to).

I'll quote you AA's own statistics instead of the DOT today.

From its own annual report, AA carried over 2.3 billion cargo ton miles at 37 cents per ton mile.

for those that stayed awake in math class, it shouldn't be hard to figure what 10,000 pounds of cargo on a 2500 mile flight segment would be.... and if you want to argue that the 757 should be compared, then you should use AA's west coast 757 average of about 1500-1700 pounds per flight.

AA or any other passenger carrier won't get rich on cargo but it absolutely does generate revenue.

and even on the JFK transcons where DL has picked up 2 million pounds of cargo which AA is no longer carrying, the amounts add up. but what's an extra +/- $10,000 in cargo revenue per widebody flight? psst it more than covers the additional fuel burn of a 763 vs an A321. and the 767 even in comparable configurations would carry about 50 more passengers.

so, yeah, cargo does matter. which is why I mention it.

given that a lot of people don't want to discuss facts, then it is no surprise that they run from discussions which I participate in.

and when people quote statistics like inaccurate load factors, I don't hesitate in the least to verify and correct when and where it is necessary

 

[topDawg]

since you didn't even bother to properly quote, let alone comment on the post, we can't begin to know what you are thinking but once again, there is factual information regarding aircraft performance and historical performance including cargo carried that is verifiable and not simply a matter of one's imagination.

the A321ceo won't be carrying any significant amounts of cargo between the mainland and Hawaii.

if that plus blocked seats is worth more than the fuel savings on 757s will certainly be something the bean counters will have to determine.

but as much as some people would like to think otherwise, the answer won't be a secret because there are really very few secrets in the industry.

few things. 
1) AA is wanting to dump the very old HP 757s that fly PHX-Hawaii. I imagine they will shift the LA 757s to PHX. 
2) because of AA's network to hawaii from other hubs cargo loss shouldn't be a big deal. They can just send it to PHX or DFW
3) Airlines don't make a move like this and plays the lets see what happens game. The bean counters have already figure it out..... 

 

[Overspeed]

topDawg,
Heard all LUS 757s are slated for retirement next year. They are much older than LAA at between 26 and 30 years old. Makes sense to run the LAA ones to PHX but they are about 22 years old so gaining some breathing room but not much. Boeing and Airbus need to come up with a 757 replacement.
 
I am sure someone has run the numbers a crap load of times. It sounds like blocked seats will only be on OGG and LIH. The 321neo will alleviate that problem in 2017 when LAA gets its first ones. HAL is due to start 321neos in 2017 as well. I think FA commuter won't like the 321 though since I believe it only has 5 jumpseats.

 

[topDawg]

topDawg,
Heard all LUS 757s are slated for retirement next year. They are much older than LAA at between 26 and 30 years old. Makes sense to run the LAA ones to PHX but they are about 22 years old so gaining some breathing room but not much. Boeing and Airbus need to come up with a 757 replacement.
 
I am sure someone has run the numbers a crap load of times. It sounds like blocked seats will only be on OGG and LIH. The 321neo will alleviate that problem in 2017 when LAA gets its first ones. HAL is due to start 321neos in 2017 as well. I think FA commuter won't like the 321 though since I believe it only has 5 jumpseats.

agreed 100%. 
 
I don't know about AA but we are running them up on cycles now. They stay till they are due for a 5th overhaul then they leave. 
 
Just bought the last 4 or 5 757-200s ever built from China. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

DL still expects to keep 757-200s longer than AA is.

and US simply doesn't have enough routes that require 757s to take all of AA's 757s off of the Hawaii routes that AA operates plus the other routes that will lose 757s.

The bean counters at AA just as at UA said the 757s will go based on fuel prices and maintenance; problem is that fuel is not high enough to justify the expenditures now.

AA has long had a much higher intolerance for fleet subtypes than DL has which is part of why they have not entertained used aircraft and don't want small subfleets that have come from US.

and although UA is operating 737s from the west coast to Hawaii, it still has widebodies on some routes. according to people here, AA will only use the 321 on west coast to Hawaii flying. if that's true then AA will lose the cargo market because only a widebody can carry what current widebodies carry. Although AA will retain widebodies for interior US hubs, it will make no sense to compete in the west coast to Hawaii cargo market via DFW.

by Labor Day, AA is out of the west coast to Hawaii widebody market.

 

[topDawg]

DL still expects to keep 757-200s longer than AA is.

and US simply doesn't have enough routes that require 757s to take all of AA's 757s off of the Hawaii routes that AA operates plus the other routes that will lose 757s.

The bean counters at AA just as at UA said the 757s will go based on fuel prices and maintenance; problem is that fuel is not high enough to justify the expenditures now.

AA has long had a much higher intolerance for fleet subtypes than DL has which is part of why they have not entertained used aircraft and don't want small subfleets that have come from US.

and although UA is operating 737s from the west coast to Hawaii, it still has widebodies on some routes. according to people here, AA will only use the 321 on west coast to Hawaii flying. if that's true then AA will lose the cargo market because only a widebody can carry what current widebodies carry. Although AA will retain widebodies for interior US hubs, it will make no sense to compete in the west coast to Hawaii cargo market via DFW.

by Labor Day, AA is out of the west coast to Hawaii widebody market.

AA has PHX-HNL/LIH/KOA/OGG just like they do from LA. I don't know if the frequencies are the same but if they are going to park all the LUS 757s that operate these routes something has to replace them. Makes total sense to shift the LAX 757s to PHX and replace with the 321s.  

 

[WorldTraveler]

US operates up to 8 flights/day this summer from PHX to Hawaii compared to AA's 12 from LAX and one of AA's LAX-HNL flights is on a 763.

US operates more than 550 block hours of 757 time per day as of this summer, including to Europe, Latin America, and within the US, largely on AA-US hub routes but also to other Florida cities.

AA might intend to replace all of US' 757s but Hawaii flying is a small part of US' overall 757 operation and most of it except for Europe can be operated by 321s.

AA is also shrinking its own 757 fleet.