Delay-Virgin ready to take on AA to London

[AdAstraPerAspera]

Cargo can go through DFW or ORD, particularly if the contracts are already in place

 

[FWAAA]

Cargo can go through DFW or ORD, particularly if the contracts are already in place

Agreed.   Unlike high-fare transcon passengers (like the ones AA captures a lot of), cargo doesn't mind connecting.   

 

[WorldTraveler]

Cargo can go through DFW or ORD, particularly if the contracts are already in place

on what? how many widebodies does AA have on those routes?

and 2 million pounds per month.

If it doesn't fly DL, it will be on FedEx or UPS or other freight carriers. It is precisely because DL is offering multiple widebody flights DURING THE DAY that it will be able to win over much of the cargo business that AA is walking away from.

2 million pounds of cargo is a whole lot of revenue to walk away from in a month - all in the name of trying not to carry as many low fare coach passengers which AA has decided aren't worth competing with VX and B6 for.

 

[700UW]

And AA is turning the JFK-LAX market into hourly flights.

 

[robbedagain]

which would mean cargo cld be on on any one or all of the hrly flights

 

[FWAAA]

which would mean cargo cld be on on any one or all of the hrly flights

IIRC, the A321s can't do palletized cargo but they can use the shorter-height LD3s.    

 

[WorldTraveler]

And AA is turning the JFK-LAX market into hourly flights.

 all still operated by 321....
 

which would mean cargo cld be on on any one or all of the hrly flights

AA was carrying on average 10K pounds of cargo per flight between JFK and LAX.

there is no way in God's blue sky that they will come anywhere close to being able to do that without adding widebody aircraft back to the schedule.

the irony is that the 321s were chosen and the 767s were tossed aside because the focus was going to be on high frequency service with limited coach seats and the same number of premium seats.

If Parker really does move forward with adding seats back to the 321s on the basis that the first class cabin really doesn't generate the revenue necessary to justify it - and that will be known fairly quickly since UA has had higher average fares for quite some time since it went with the same concept but is now eliminating FC, then the possibility is really high that AA will be back to a high density configuration, perhaps still using 321s, but having lost the cargo revenue. Even if they add back 763s tomorrow, the chances of recovering all of that cargo revenue are somewhere between slim and none.

 

[DFWFSC]

IIRC, the A321s can't do palletized cargo but they can use the shorter-height LD3s.

AAs A321s are free loaded by hand, no containers. AA is trying to send all the JFK-LAX cargo LGA-DFW-LAX on the 738s, but there's not enough ground time or space to load 6K or 7K of cargo and mail on a LAX 738....we do get a bit out on the widebodys.

 

[WorldTraveler]

again, FWAAA, tell me how connecting service on 738s is going to come even close to competing in a market that generates over 3 million pounds of cargo per month, of which AA has 2/3 as of the last month of 767 operations.

further, from a network optimization perspective, the chance is very high that AA can get higher cargo revenues on flights from NYC to DFW and then on to other cities OTHER than to LAX where they have to compete with nonstop pricing.

Cargo is revenue managed just like passenger revenue.

the only way that AA will be a major player in the transcon cargo market again is if they put 767s back into the market - but that will only happen if they fundamentally change the way they intend to compete against low fare carriers that are major forces in the transcon markets and aren't going anywhere.

DL has embraced competition with low fare carriers including adding service directly competitive with B6 from JFK in markets that AA has either abandoned or reduced while AA has shown no sign of changing its strategy at JFK which looks more like what UA did years ago than what DL is doing.

and specific to the LHR market that we are discussing here, every dollar of revenue that DL gains (or that AA walks away from) in markets that can allow one or the other to grow is one more dollar that can be used to help support growth in competitive markets like LAX and MIA where DL has continued to improve its performance relative to AA.

 

[robbedagain]

can the LD3s hold as much as a palletized or no

 

[DFWFSC]

can the LD3s hold as much as a palletized or no

The AA 777s can take pallets as high as 10K, but I forget what the weight limit on a LD3 is. The 767s use LD8s or LD3s. The LD8s are bigger to fit the contour of the 767.

 

[robbedagain]

thanks

 

[Kev3188]

AAs A321s are free loaded by hand, no containers. AA is trying to send all the JFK-LAX cargo LGA-DFW-LAX on the 738s, but there's not enough ground time or space to load 6K or 7K of cargo and mail on a LAX 738....we do get a bit out on the widebodys.

That makes my shoulders hurt...
 
 

The AA 777s can take pallets as high as 10K, but I forget what the weight limit on a LD3 is.

It's been awhile, but I know it's nowhere near 10k for an LD3

 

[Kev3188]

IIRC, the A321s can't do palletized cargo but they can use the shorter-height LD3s.

The only carrier I've ever seen do that in N. America is AC. Anyone know if they still use those?

 

[JAFA]

as I recall LD3's max out at 3500, but like Kev it has been quite some time.