Fuelhog From United States of America, joined Feb 2003, 50 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 6358 times:
Working at American,I know there is discussion going on between Aprey and the unions about possible buying a new 100-seater.Talking to pilots it is tending to focus on the 717 or Emb-190.Just wondering from anybody,what would be the most logical choice for American.Thanks
Wedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5760 posts, RR: 5 Reply 2, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 6192 times:
Although AA sold off or returned all of TWA's 717's, I think the 717's would be most logical choice considering their fleet of MD-80's...that's just my opinion. Also, AA has an "exclusive" (not formally) arrangement for Boeing to supply AA with aircraft.
Atrude777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5672 posts, RR: 53 Reply 3, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 6164 times:
while it may seem odd if AA busy the 717 I think it is also the most practical choice, plus it would help STL very well, its not a regiona l jet but its not huge either, so it will fit nicely for routes to small for MD-80 but to large for RJ's.
Hope it works out!! 717 would look awesome in AA colors
Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
Okie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2719 posts, RR: 3 Reply 4, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 6108 times:
This would be a tough one.
I have been on a many of the 717's and would say it is a very fine aircraft.
You just don't know what goes on in those sales pitches.
The 717 would be a plus for several reasons, being of the DC9-S80 series there would probably be enough commonality that present simulators could easily be modified or reprogrammed to train S-80 and 717. Even though the S80 & 717 have considerably different airframe there should be at least enough commonality that MX would not be a major problem. Even as in the case of WN there is a heck of a difference between a 737-200 and 300 but still pretty much the same MX. The 717 line could be closed down before AA decides to order.
The 190, as I understand a light weight efficient aircraft. Is it a 25,000 cycle disposable airframe, or is a 100,000 cycle? Would EMB give AA some type of guarantee as to operating cost? Is it similar enough that the 145 simulator be modified to train with? Will it be an Electra? Does EMB have a good relationship with AA? Would EMB give a huge discount to have the AA feather in its cap?
I would guess that cost structure on the EMB-190 would make it a favorable selection although I am a 717 fan.
AA717driver From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 1566 posts, RR: 13 Reply 5, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 6028 times:
Okie--The cockpits on the S80 and 717 have no more in common than the 737-200 and the A320. So, the only way to use the S80 sim would be to get someone a type in the -80 and do a short differences course in the 717 sim.
Actually, the MD11 cockpit is virtually identical to the 717(the 717 even has three IRS knobs even though the center IRS doesn't exist).
The MD80 and the 717 are the same type rating but have totally different flight guidance "switchery" and the only "round" gauge on the 717 is the cockpit O2 gauge.
I believe the 717 has shorter legs than the 190. We did STL-PHX but I don't know the mileage on that.TC
Okie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2719 posts, RR: 3 Reply 6, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 5889 times:
Thanks for the info AA717driver, much appreciated.
I guess I was assuming that the 717's that Boeing would offer would be the 300 series that is suppose to be in the works giving the plane longer legs.
I am also guessing that with the proven track record of the 717 that it would have at least one leg up on the competition. I personally, after riding a enough of the ERJ's, CRJs much prefer the larger fuselage diameter.
Plugger From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 83 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 5845 times:
I agree that the EMB 190s would be preferable due to their wider fuselage and, hopefully, wider seats than provided in the very narrow DC9 family, including the 717s. I don't know anything about the 717-300 program and can't comment on it other than to wonder if it will be carried out at all. It seems a superfluous project for Boeing given their wide variety of 737 choices.
I hope AA goes with the EMB 190 which is set to blow Canadair's little pencil tubes outta here with any luck. Wishful thinking.
Srbmod From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 17288 posts, RR: 51 Reply 8, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 5795 times:
AA was happy with the 717s, but were unhappy with the leasing terms they were saddled with. TWA was paying very high leasing rates due to their bad credit, and the leasing/financing companies would not or could not get the payments down to a rate at which AA was willing to pay. AA would probably be in CH. 11 if they still had the TWA 717s just because of the payments. AA really isn't in a great position to buy any new a/c right now. Sure they managed to squeeze out a miniscule profit, but until they can start on a streak of profitable quarters, they won't be ording any new a/c. I think they will go with the 717, as they already do have a pool of pilots trained on the type, and the Embraer 190 still a paper a/c (and therefore an unproven one) and combined with the troubles Embraer is having with the 170 (it's becoming a bit of a black eye for them, as it has delayed service entry by almost 2 years), American may stick with Boeing (even though American Eagle is an Embraer operator).
AA717driver From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 1566 posts, RR: 13 Reply 9, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 5755 times:
Srbmod--Those of us who were 717 Captains will be furloughed after the new year. Only a handful of management types and a few really senior people who flew the 717 will remain.
AA really likes the Embraer on paper. If it can be made to work, they will take it over the 717 if only to avoid looking like they made a mistake in the first place. I agree with Srbmod to an extent. I have been told by a management pilot that Boeing offered AA the 717 at the same price as a CRJ-700 shortly after 9/11. But AA was in their fleet-type-reduction mode.TC
Tekelberry From United States of America, joined May 2003, 1459 posts, RR: 4 Reply 10, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 5692 times:
You've got to understand the logic in AA getting rid of the 717s. TWA got a TERRIBLE lease deal for these planes. They were paying WAY TOO MUCH. AA didn't want to waste their money on them and figured the F100s could fill the void, so they returned them.
The EMB-190 would be an odd aircraft in AA's mostly-Boeing fleet. Any Embraer sounds more like an aircraft for American Eagle since they already have tons of them. I believe I read somewhere that it's only 30 minutes of training for S80 pilots to train for the 717 (don't quote me on this, though).
PSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 7186 posts, RR: 29 Reply 11, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 5523 times:
Honestly I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see the E170 / E190 program not be all its being talked up to be. Listening to the media, airlines, and analysts I feel they are overhyping this aircraft just a little too much. Lets not start making these statements til it starts proving itself in revenue service.
Wedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5760 posts, RR: 5 Reply 12, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 5450 times:
AA717driver...I don't think you made a very convincing comparison between the MD-80 and the 717. Your comparison between the 737-200 and the A320 is comparing apples with oranges. I think a better comparison would have been between the 737-300's and the 737-800's.
Besides Boeing can alter the cockpit configuration for any customer. One example is the difference between UA's 737-300's and US 737-300's. The UA 737-300's have glass cockpits, where the US airplanes do not.
There's no reason why Boeing could not or would not hybridize the 717 cockpit to match AA's MD-83's if the order quantity warranted it.
737-990 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 364 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 5396 times:
I'm surprised that the 737-700 isn't being considered. If I'm not mistaken AA has 400 options on the 737NG's when they placed their exclusivity deal with Boeing back in the mid 90s. The way AA configures their aircraft with MRTC the 73G would probably be close to 100 seats (their 737-800s are configured with 138 seats vs. 156 for Continental). The other issue is First Class on the EMB 190, they would be unable to offer 2x2 seating in F-Class. The 73G would give AA true commonality with the 738s in their fleet, although I'm sure they would probably have different pay scales for pilots.
Qqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2221 posts, RR: 14 Reply 15, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 5295 times:
I don't think AA would be in the market for a new 100-seater when their retiring their 70+ strong fleet of F-100s, all of which are 1990 or newer aircraft. The F-100 is currently fitted with 8 first and 79 coach seats. In contrast, the MD-80 is equipped with 14 first and 115 coach seats. AA is dumping the F-100 for a couple of reasons. First, they're reducing the number of aircraft types in the fleet (adding a 717 or 190 would defeat this), two, too much capacity over too many aircraft - all the 767-200 (non -ER variants) and nearly 30 -80s are parked in the desert. Third, AA can't afford any aircraft, having postponed deliveries on all 777 and 737 aircraft orders for this year and next, with the exception of 8 767-300s which they had to take delivery of earlier this year.
I just don't see it likely when they have a large fleet of young, efficient and modern 100-seaters and they're getting rid of them.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
Motech722 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 211 posts, RR: 3 Reply 16, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks ago) and read 5215 times:
I heard from a few folks at AE that they were looking at the 190. Supposedly the scope clause is trying to be worked out so that AE can fly larger aircraft. It seems to me that since AE already flies a large number of Embraer products, the 190 would be a good fit. It would give AA the 100 seat aircraft they want but keep them under the AE title, reducing the types of mainliners while expanding the types of regional aircraft.
Airways6max From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 494 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5176 times:
I would imagine it will be the EMB-190. American seems more interested in growing the American Eagle sector. The 717 is probably too big for the routes in question and American dumped the 717s it acquired in the TWA merger.
DAL12 From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 89 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5152 times:
Srbmod, the original scheduled certification for the 170 (then ERJ-170) was 4th quarter of 2002, which makes it exactly one year late. And given that the schedule was completely unrealistic in that it only allocated three years for certification, one year late is not bad.
The first 190 will be completely assembled this year, and may make its first flight in the final months of the year -- which basically means that there is no way they will be this late on the 190.
Plugger, the fuselage for the 170/190 is not really wider than the 717. But since it is 4 abreast with a double-bubble fuselage, it will have marginally better passenger comfort than the 5-abreast 717.
Syncmaster From United States of America, joined Jul 2002, 1998 posts, RR: 13 Reply 19, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5139 times:
Airways6max, AA did not drop the 717 because it was a bad aircraft. As stated many times above, it was dropped because the payments for these ex-TWA aircraft's were way too high. From a financial stand-point it only made sense, from the look of the American public, it was a blow to TWA and Boeing. AA was never unhappy with the 717's, but they simply could not afford them.
If you were making car payments and could no longer afford them, would you keep putting yourself into debt?
Delta767-400er From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 11 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5092 times:
If aint Boeing AA is not going. When it comes to making a choice for the 100 seat category AA should buy the B737NG 600 series, AA would not have to introduce a new type of Aircraft into the fleet and this would save them thousands dollars In training flight crews, and cabin attendants.
The B717 is a nice plane as I really enjoyed Airtran and it would fit in very well with AA, but in my opinion the NG 737 is a bit stronger and if AA needs to Transcon the aircraft, they can use the equipment to do so.
BR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5093 times:
There's no reason why Boeing could not or would not hybridize the 717 cockpit to match AA's MD-83's if the order quantity warranted it.
Actually, When the MD-95 was first designed, it had an MD-90 flight deck incorporated, but when FL launched it (Then J7), they opted for the Honeywell VIA 2000 Avionics with the Six LCD Display screens, and being the launch, and only customer at the time, they got pretty much whatever they wanted.
Aaway From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1492 posts, RR: 14 Reply 22, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 5003 times:
In reference to your F100 remarks...there is another reason why AA is dumping the Fokkers. When Fokker closed it's doors, it became necessary for AA to manufacture replacement parts for the F100. From what I recall, AA has, or had, a line at TUL devoted to such processes.
Simply stated, it became exorbitanly expensive for AA to continue maintaining the Fokker fleet considering it's financial situation.
With a choice between changing one's mind & proving there's no need to do so, most everyone gets busy on the proof.
Wedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5760 posts, RR: 5 Reply 23, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4965 times:
I have to agree about the 737NG's...AA should look into the smaller 737NG's if they are looking for a 100-seat aircraft. Although, I have heard that the 737-600 was unattractive because of its weight and price relative to the 700's.
Tekelberry From United States of America, joined May 2003, 1459 posts, RR: 4 Reply 24, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4925 times:
Get your facts straight. Gerard Arpey specifically stated in the Dallas Morning News last Sunday that they may be in the market for a new 100-seater. They are retiring the F100 because it's costly to maintain them and a tiny bit of capacity reduction.
25 Startvalve: Geez yet another oh the 717 is so damn wonderful post. Guys get over it!! It is the retarded step child in the Boeing family. They will sell 737-700s
26 AA717driver: Wedgetail--Have you ever been inside a 717? To change the cockpit that radically would require recertification of the 717 in that configuration. You'r
27 Planemaker: AA717driver: AE has a total of 25 CRJ-700's having recently taken delivery of the last one allowed under scope. I can only guess what 100 seater AA wi
28 Qqflyboy: Tekelberry... I never offered up my opinion as fact. I mearly took the information I know to be true and formed my own opinion, hence the "I don't thi
29 Thrust: I think the 737NGs would be a great choice, because of their fuel efficiency and longer range. However, I think if AA wanted the 717, they would have
30 Elwood64151: AA is in a finacial crunch right now. They're going to look at whoever gives them the best deal for the planes. As I understand it, FL is getting its
31 Proudtoflyaa: AE has a total of 25 CRJ-700's having recently taken delivery of the last one allowed under scope. There's only fourteen or fifteen on the property a
32 Midway2airtran: EMB170-190 is getting to be way over-hyped. If AA is truely looking at the 100 seaters, which does make sense, the reliable and already proven B717 wi
33 PSU.DTW.SCE: Midway2airtran, I totally agree with you. I can't believe the way everyone is drooling over the EMB170/190. They really aren't doing anything that has
34 QANTAS747: I must put an Australian side into this "debate" as QF already operates the 717's and is looking at replacing the RJ fleet with one type. They are hea
35 Planemaker: Midway2airtran: I don't think that EMB170/190 is getting over-hyped, nor that the 717 is being discredited. I think that the majority of people will a
36 Midway2airtran: Planemaker, "It is a better all round performer" -The EMB170-190 hasn't even flown commercial, NOT yet proven. What are these hard facts comparing the
37 JA54123: It really sounds like Boeing should probably look at the 737-600 and find a way to make a lighter version for WN & AA so that they could have fleet co
38 AA737-823: Jason, The 717 will always be more efficient than the 736, due to it's design purpose. The 736 (this has been said a zillion times on this forum, I am
39 Startvalve: Hell yes its a repeat post AA717 it goes well with the repeat thread... I know Air Tran and Midex love the 717 but have any new airlines placed orders
40 Dtw9: have any new airlines placed orders for 717s since Boeing took over? how about turkmenistan,hawaiian,barvaria leasing, pembroke leasing,midex,twa only
41 Planemaker: Midway2airtran: Yes, you have a point that the 190 has not yet flown, and yes, some unforseen major problem may crop up but... The 190 engines are fro
42 Sllevin: It really sounds like Boeing should probably look at the 737-600 and find a way to make a lighter version Actually, it already exists. It would be cal