Route/Equip changes; including a new 777 market

M

MAH4546

Veteran
Aug 22, 2002
1,457
1,004
American Airlines will resume seasnal non-stop service between Boston Logan and Cancun 14 June 2003. Flight operates ThSaSu with a 757-200 through 3 Sept. 2003.

American Airlines has suspended non-stop service between San Juan and Caracas. Resumes 14 June 2003.

American Airlines has re-introduced the 777-200 on both daily services between Miami and Buenos Aires.

American Airlines will introduce the 777-200 on services to Montevideo, Uruguay. Service operates daily from Miami to Montevideo via Buenos Aires effective 14 June 2003.

American Airlines will add a 5th daily between Miami and Caracas effective 14 June 2003. Operates daily 737-800.

American Airlines will discontinue non-stop serviec between JFK and Orlando effective 30 April 2003. American Airlines operated three daily 757-200s on the route.
 
----------------

American Airlines will discontinue non-stop serviec between JFK and Orlando effective 30 April 2003. American Airlines operated three daily 757-200s on the route.


----------------​
Why fly our MRTC 757s when you can fly Song and get martinis and direct TV.
 
----------------
On 4/27/2003 3:35:17 PM s80dude wrote:

American Airlines will discontinue non-stop serviec between JFK and Orlando effective 30 April 2003. American Airlines operated three daily 757-200s on the route.

----------------​

All three of the JFK-MCO trips move over to LGA. Currently 3x goes up to 6x on 4/30.
 
----------------
On 4/27/2003 3:35:17 PM s80dude wrote:

Why fly our MRTC 757s when you can fly Song and get martinis and direct TV.

----------------​

Because I can bring my discman, MP3 player, or computer with DVD player along (and normally do anyway) and use those for entertainment, but I certainly can''t bring along a few extra inches of legroom for my 6''5" frame. Some of us could care less about alcohol and TV....
 
----------------
On 4/27/2003 11:28:40 PM lownslow wrote:

Because I can bring my discman, MP3 player, or computer with DVD player along (and normally do anyway) and use those for entertainment, but I certainly can''t bring along a few extra inches of legroom for my 6''5" frame. Some of us could care less about alcohol and TV....

----------------​

Song planes will have 33 inch pitch which is roughly equivalent to AA''s MRTC.
 
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #7
----------------
On 4/28/2003 8:00:47 AM DLFlyer31 wrote:

----------------
On 4/27/2003 11:28:40 PM lownslow wrote:

Because I can bring my discman, MP3 player, or computer with DVD player along (and normally do anyway) and use those for entertainment, but I certainly can''t bring along a few extra inches of legroom for my 6''5" frame. Some of us could care less about alcohol and TV....

----------------​

Song planes will have 33 inch pitch which is roughly equivalent to AA''s MRTC.


----------------​

Not really, considering MRTC pitch is usually 35", sometimes 34", sometimes 36", but the majority are 35".
 
----------------
On 4/28/2003 11:20:10 AM JS wrote:

How is that possible? Pre-MRTC pitch was approximately 31", right? Take out 2 of 25 rows, and new pitch averages 33.7". Big whup.


Straight from the horse''s mouth...

33 to 35 inches:
http://www.aa.com/content/aboutAA/ourPlanes/boeingMD80.jhtml
http://www.aa.com/content/aboutAA/ourPlane...ing737800.jhtml
http://www.aa.com/content/aboutAA/ourPlanes/boeing757.jhtml
http://www.aa.com/content/aboutAA/ourPlanes/AirbusA300.jhtml

Wow, 34 to 35, too bad it''s going away:
http://www.aa.com/content/aboutAA/ourPlanes/fokkerF100.jhtml

Oooh, up to 34 inches:
http://www.aa.com/content/aboutAA/ourPlanes/boeing767.jhtml
http://www.aa.com/content/aboutAA/ourPlanes/boeing777.jhtml

----------------​
Well, Yao, it may not be much for you, but the rest of us tall people like it.
 
FWAAA, I''m 6''3" (tall, but not that tall), and I think MRTC was a waste of resources.
 
IMHO, the extra room is worth it, and I for one will pay a premium for it, even though I am on a tight budget. My wife won''t fly on anyone else as the cattle-car carriers she has flown on have made her extremely claustrophobic and uncomfortable (she hates flying anyway, and the closed in feeling makes it much worse. On AA, she is a little more at ease.)

I don''t think it''s worth 30% premium, but since that number is against the Southwests and JetBlues of the world, and those airlines don''t fly where I need to go, AA is my carrier of choice vs. the other airlines because of MRTC.

TANSTAAFL
 
MRTC seems to me to be designed to help build and retain a customer base over a long period of time, which I still believe it will do.

But that''s long-term thinking, i.e. thinking past the end of your nose. The last few weeks have proven that is a difficult concept for some people to understand.

TANSTAAFL
 
Our 30% premium comes from having first class. I doubt that we get much of a premium at all on the main cabin, which makes MRTC a mistake, yet probably too expensive to undo.
 
----------------
On 4/28/2003 5:35:37 PM Connected1 wrote:

Our 30% premium comes from having first class. I doubt that we get much of a premium at all on the main cabin, which makes MRTC a mistake, yet probably too expensive to undo.

----------------​
Maybe MRTC was a $70 million mistake (that''s about what AA said it spent to remove the seats).

Then again, can anyone really say what AA''s revenue would be without MRTC? Maybe, just maybe, MRTC is keeping revenue as high as it is (like maybe it would be even worse without MRTC).

One other thing - if AA''s load factor had been above 93% when MRTC was introduced, then it would have meant turning people away.

But with 25%-30% of seats flying empty (during the good times; more like 35% empty during the lean times), it is possible to compute how much fuel has been saved by NOT flying all those empty seats all around the country and world.

And one last thing: AA has never turned away an elite flyer wishing to purchase a full fare Y ticket at the last minute because of MRTC. When that happens, AA gladly hands a voucher to a volunteer (probably on an L fare) to accomodate the full Y pax. Accordingly, MRTC doesn''t even cost AA revenue when flights are full, contrary to popular belief.

Was MRTC worth it? Who knows, since September 11 happened not all that long after MRTC was finished. Let''s give it some time (the long-term view) before discarding it.

Besides, until load factors are in the high 90s, the seats would fly empty anyway.
 
2 777 from MIA-EZE is just what the doctor calls for. Its about time we get 2 MIA-LHR year-round. More 777 from Miami to GRU & SCL is the next order of business.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #15
----------------
On 4/28/2003 8:28:52 PM JFK777 wrote:

2 777 from MIA-EZE is just what the doctor calls for. Its about time we get 2 MIA-LHR year-round. More 777 from Miami to GRU & SCL is the next order of business.

----------------​

I think that both MIA-GRU flights will be 777s this fall. MIA-SCL for the Chilean summer as a 777 would not surprise me. Hope that when the second MIA-LHR returns this October, it will stay permanent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
miami- montevideo back
Replies
0
Views
863
FA Mikey
F
F
Miami and NY all 777 to EZE this winter
Replies
11
Views
2K
jimntx
J
M
More Venezeula problems
Replies
6
Views
1K
eolesen
eolesen
M
Jfk-ccs Is Back
Replies
2
Views
957
kirkpatrick
K
M
  • Locked
AA to launch Miami-Las Vegas, finally!
Replies
4
Views
2K
1AA
1AA

Latest posts

Back
Top