Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
100 Seater For AA,more Of A Reality?  
User currently offlineFuelhog From United States of America, joined Feb 2003, 50 posts, RR: 0
Posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2503 times:

As a AA employee I;m hearing more and more about the possible replacements for the F100.This was confirmed today in a article in the Dallas Morning News,in which CEO Aprey said he is intersted in going to the Unions to get more input about a possible 100 seater and how to make it work profitably.And I hear more discussions about from pilots at work too.I think this could be the beginning of seriously looking at a real option to purchase a new aircraft in the future.Just wondering if anybody else had any thoughts on it? Thanks.

6 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAIR757200 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1579 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2468 times:


Fuelhog, We need an aircraft for the 100-129 seat market, despite what people say on this site. If the unions can agree to a wage to make this "aircraft" profitable, I see AA getting some.



User currently offlineSean-SAN- From United States of America, joined Aug 2002, 770 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2414 times:

Besides pay rates, the real issue about using mainline pilots on an aircraft like this is work rules and efficiency in AA’s own scheduling and route planning. AA will need to operate these flights Southwest style, quick turn-arounds, short hops, etc. Longer duty days and shorter breaks between trips for crew will be a must. Pay really isn't the issue, Southwest proves you can pay pilots $1XX,XXX and still have a very profitable airline.

User currently offlineBr715-a1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2389 times:

I hope they purchase some 717-223s

User currently offlineTekelberry From United States of America, joined May 2003, 1459 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2389 times:

If they go for it, the only options I see AA going for are either the 737-600, 737-700, 717-200s, and/or 717-300.

After the whole TWA 717 thing, I would suspect AA would jump for the 737-600 or 737-700. Most likely the -700.

Either way, if they go with the 737NGs, they've got compatibility with their 737-800s, if they go with the 717s, they've got compatibility with their SP80s (I believe, don't quote me on that though).


User currently offlineOkie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3116 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2373 times:

I think its a fishing trip to see the response from the union side. Apparently due to the scope clause <70 seats goes to AE.
I would guess that AA management side would quote wages at starting levels close to the low end and ALPA towards the high end. Hopefully there will be a comprimise reached that will be at least acceptable to all parties.
I think that one of the reasons that AA is parking the F100 (besides the AD requirements, and being a orphan) they want some concessions on their pilots wage contract for planes between 70-130 passengers. I'm thinking 717/190-195.
Being somewhat of a realist, I would guess these days and economic times there will have to be some conncessions to keep pilots employed on the AA side.

"THE FLOGGINGS WILL CONTINUE UNTIL MORAL IMPROVES"


User currently offlinePSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 7669 posts, RR: 27
Reply 6, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2307 times:

Its not surprising to read this, because whether AA likes it or not, those CR7's they have really don't cut it. Its an RJ pretty much stretched to the max. There are/will be better products available in the near future. The 73G's are likely at some point in time but those are likely to come later when AA wants to start replacing some MD-80 capacity, they are more akin to the 738's and wouldn't be considered as a true 100 seater.

Aircraft that would be under consideration would be: E170/E190 and the 717. With AA's route stucture, especially out of ORD & DFW there are many lengthy routes that need a larger aircraft than a CR7 but not an MD-80. One would think that AA has more than enough mainline aircraft at this point though. I'm sure they are thinking ahead for the future though.

An interesting comment was make yesterday by Richard Anderson at NW, he stated that NW's DC-9's have the cheapest costs for a non-RJ aircraft in the 70-125 seat range.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Equipment Changes For AA Out Of SFO 9/6 posted Fri Aug 4 2006 21:05:20 by Funbird1
ExpressJet To Fly For AA Out Of LAX? posted Fri May 26 2006 01:25:29 by Atomother
What Kind Of Future For The 100-Seater? posted Tue Jul 3 2001 17:14:12 by DCA-ROCguy
AA Disposal Of F-100 & A-300 posted Tue Jul 30 2002 09:07:35 by LMP737
AA More Room For Coach posted Wed Apr 24 2002 15:41:37 by Cactuscmh
AA F-100 - Scraped For Parts? posted Mon Apr 8 2002 23:56:03 by N757tw
Is This The Beginning Of The End For AA? posted Mon Nov 12 2001 23:57:16 by Beefmoney
More 717 Vs F100 Garbage For AA posted Tue Mar 20 2001 16:41:19 by Spacepope
Looking For AA Registration Numbers From Yesterday posted Tue Dec 19 2006 22:49:15 by RJpieces
Rough Night For AA 1226 posted Wed Dec 13 2006 22:05:29 by 71Zulu