Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Mexicana´s 767-300. Plans to acquire more?  
User currently offlineHenpol747 From Mexico, joined Jun 2001, 588 posts, RR: 1
Posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 6346 times:


As far as I know Mexicana has only 1 767. Are there any plans to acquire more of these aircrafts?

Hope you can help me on this one!


Vive la France! ¡Viva México!
43 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFly727 From Mexico, joined Jul 2003, 1789 posts, RR: 19
Reply 1, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 6241 times:

Yes. Mexicana plans to close the year with at least a fleet of 4, if not 6 widebodies. Ghost77 should have more information on this subject.

RM  Smile



There are no stupid questions... just stupid people!
User currently offlineNAVEGA From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 741 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 6175 times:

Fly 727 is correct except that they are currently analyzing
the A330 instead of the B767 because of the common cockpit with the A320, A319 and the soon to acquire A318's. This way their pilots can fly the 4 Airbus family.

Keep us posted.


User currently onlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6357 posts, RR: 31
Reply 3, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 6068 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The information that I have is that they will ONLY stay with their 1 763 and won't get anymore of them. Right now they are evaluating the 777 and the A330's.

User currently onlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7592 posts, RR: 42
Reply 4, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 5965 times:

I think it partly depends on (i) when the elusive flights to European cities start and (ii) the terms of the agreement that MX has with SK. Many threads have been started in connection with this matter and, to summarize, it has been said that more 767ER's will come, they will be used for new routes to European destinations and that they will be eventually replaced by more modern and bigger aircraft, such as 777's, A330's or even A340's.

Does anybody know if MX has decided which cities in Europe it will serve later this year or early in 2005 and if more long-haul routes to/from South America will be started?



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently onlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6357 posts, RR: 31
Reply 5, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5866 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Eddiedude,

Again, the info, that I have is that they will start to fly first to the US. The strategy being to compete directly with UAL. The first route is rumored to be IAD or BWI, although IAD is the strong contender. Then SEA, PHL will follow. Probably San Juan, Puerto Rico too. Then, they'll strategize about Europe, but that apparently will happen when they decide wether to go with the A330's, 777's or more 763's, which is the most unlikely. The EZE route with the 763 was sort of a Beta test. They are very happy with the results and the performance of the plane, but the issue is capacity. They've decided they need more capacity than what the 763 can offer. So maybe we will see sooner an A330 or 777 in MX colors than we thought. However, they are definitely not looking at the A340. Personally, I'm praying for some 777's.

Regards,


User currently offlineFly727 From Mexico, joined Jul 2003, 1789 posts, RR: 19
Reply 6, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5823 times:

A330's would be cool. Training-wise that is a good choice due that the crews are already familiar with the Airbus type of handling.

RM  Smile



There are no stupid questions... just stupid people!
User currently onlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7592 posts, RR: 42
Reply 7, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5707 times:

Very interesting AR385, thanks a lot for the info.

The strategy being to compete directly with UAL. The first route is rumored to be IAD or BWI, although IAD is the strong contender.

I think this is very smart. To go squarely against UA sounds like a good plan to me. IAD would be a great addition to MX's route system. Is DCA a domestic-only airport? Perhaps DCA could also be an alternative (better than BWI in my opinion). I was in Washington in 1999 and I flew nonstop to IAD with UA and I remember the ride from IAD to the campus of American University was long. I don't know if DCA is closer to downtown D.C. than Dulles.

SEA, PHL will follow. Probably San Juan, Puerto Rico too.

Didn't MX fly to SEA in the past? I have the impression that they did and that it did not work out very well. I would think that if they fly to YVR from MEx and GDL, and to PDX from GDL and MXL, perhaps SEA is a bit redundant. What do you make of it? PHL is smart move, I think. US had plans to do PHL-MEx using an Airbus A320, but their problems have prevented them from starting it. If MX does it first it would be to their advantage. As for SJU, I just don't know. They did it in the past as an extension of a MEx-CUN or MEx-CZM flight, right? And with the codeshare with AA, MX and AA can probably offer a good connection to SJU from MIA, don't you think?

Then, they'll strategize about Europe, but that apparently will happen when they decide wether to go with the A330's, 777's or more 763's, which is the most unlikely.

Sorry for making such a dumb question but, will they get more 767ER's in the coming months (from SK or from anybody else), or not? I agree that their current 763ER is not very good for them in terms of number of passengers. It carries the same amount of pax as AM's 762ER's and about the same number of passengers that a cattle-car 752 can carry. They definitely should go for something bigger (although I personally love the 2-3-2 configuration of 67's). I think that if CINTRA is sincere in its statements that there will be no merger, MX will likely get A330's for commonality's sake. But yeah, I agree, getting 777's would be a more prestigious move, wouldn't it? About Europe, I think that LHR should be very high in their priority list. I hope LHR will be the first destination in Europe offered by MX.





Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlineNAVEGA From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 741 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5633 times:

The routes in Europe that I have heard are MAD or BCN then FRA
and possibly Milan.

In the USA I have heard of MCI, STL, DTW, SEA, SJU, Charlotte N.C, PHL,
and JFK

In Canada, Calgary
and in South America,

Quito and Santiago.

This starting December of 2004 and throught 2005.

I strongly believe that they are about to take over AM or merge.


User currently offlineJoseMEX From Mexico, joined Oct 1999, 1539 posts, RR: 24
Reply 9, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5573 times:

Eddie,

>Didn't MX fly to SEA in the past? ... PHL is smart move, I think..... As for SJU, I just don't know. They did it in the past as an extension of a MEx-CUN or MEx-CZM flight, right?<

MX did fly to SEA in the past. They also flew MX), Mexico">MEX-PHL. The MX), Mexico">MEX-SJU flight was nonstop.


User currently onlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7592 posts, RR: 42
Reply 10, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5566 times:

will they get more 767ER's in the coming months (from SK or from anybody else), or not?

Sorry AR385, I forgot your earlier posting that they may not get any more 67's. So forget about it, I got it now.

NAVEGA,

I honestly don't know what to make of all these new routes you mention (especially since the rumors of a merger are strongly denied by CINTRA):

MAD - An AM destination. I thought that MX's only plan to enter the Mexico-Spain market was through the codeshare with IB. In fact I recall MX's CEO publicly saying that MAD was not in the cards because it was decided that it should remain an AM destination.

BCN - IB flies BCN-MAD-MEx-MAD-BCN and I don't know if a non-stop MEx-BCN would work. Perhaps it would, due to the number of Catalans in Mexico, but perhaps 3x weekly or something like that.

FRA - I think FRA will definitely happen. LH's load factors are very, very good. The market can definitely support another carrier, and since MX and LH remain codeshare partners, they won't be really competing, but rather cooperating.

MXP - It is a more or less important SkyTeam hub and since it is very clear that AZ won't be flyng to MEx any time soon, it is only logical for AM to offer this route. I just can't imagine how CINTRA would allow MX to offer this route instead of AM (in a no-merger scenario).

MCI - I don't think there is sufficient demand for this service.

STL - It could work because it is an AA hub, right?

DTW - Wasn't AM going to start this route once they got more 73W's? It is a major NW hub (NW already flies DTW-MEx) so, again, I tend to think AM would have a stronger interest in flying this route now that NW will join SkyTeam.

SJU - See reply 7.

CLT - This is a US hub (US is doing CLT-MEx already) and MX does not have any relationship whatsoever with US, so this is strange. Is there sufficient demand to support both US and MX doing this route? I know Charlotte is the home to many huge banks and transnational companies but I still don't know.

PHL - See reply 7.

YYC - Even with the AC codeshare, I don't know if there is sufficient demand for such a route. I would think that connecting in YVR is a good enough option for people from Calgary and surroundings wanting to fly to MX), Mexico">MEX.

UIO - Nice, although in my opinion the pax will be more leisure and ethnic than business, so I don't know if it is a sound business proposition.

SCL - LA flies daily and offers a high-quality product. AM flies 5x weekly and probably its service is good too (if MEx-GRU-MEx, which I have done twice, is an indication, it is good). I don't think there is room for a third carrier in this route, especially because CM is also a good alternative thanks to its attractive fares and smart connection times in PTY. Could it be that AM will drop this route in order to free its 763ER, assign the 763ER to the GRU route and use the 762ER that it currently flies to GRU for more frequencies to MAD or CDG or for a new European destination (or maybe even for LIM now that LANPerú will start flying LIM-MEx 4x weekly using a widebody)?. The rumor of MX starting flights to SCL really makes me wonder what exactly is cooking at CINTRA.



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlineNAVEGA From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 741 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 5431 times:

EddieDude,

I must say that you make these forums extemely intersting and make
me look for your answeres and inputs.

I think that Mexicana will expand to most of these cities I mentioned and
I strongly believe that they will take over AM or become the important
airline of the two in CINTRA.

At this point the Airlines that is better run and who is in a better financial
situarion will become the strong one and from everything I have read and
seen, MX seems to be the one.


User currently offlineAM772 From Mexico, joined Mar 2004, 135 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5344 times:

What I've read in the Airways Magazine, is that it's now a fact that Mexicana will get 3 more B763, to get a fleet of 4, and they are considering the A330 more than the 777 because of their Airbus preference, so I think that Mexicana is getting stronger everyday and AM is going down AGAIN....
Good luck for both and the routes they are planning are Frankfurt, Madrid, Amsterdam, London and some city in Italy, maybe Rome or Milan.
Cheers
AM772


User currently onlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6357 posts, RR: 31
Reply 13, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5287 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

EddieDude,

In the last 10 years, more and more Mexicans and Central Americans are moving to live in the CLT area and sorrounding states, like Southern Virginia, Northern North Carolina, Kentucky and Tennessee so it definitely would be a good choice for MX to fly this route. Other than that it is a US hub, as you correctly stated, but it´s more a regional one to serve the less populated areas of the Eastern Seaboard. So I believe the competition with MX would be minimal.

AM772,

Again, no more 763´s for MX.


User currently onlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7592 posts, RR: 42
Reply 14, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5210 times:

In my opinion LHR is a destination that MX or AM needs to start serving soon. In fact, London should be high in the priority list of almost any airline since it is the most important financial center in Europe. I understand that demand for BA's LHR-MEx flight is very high at the moment and BA cannot increase frequencies unless a Mexican carrier starts operating the route between MEx and LHR (perhaps someone knows if that is part of the agreement between Mexico and the U.K. or something), so there is a huge untapped market.

About the new long-haul planes, if MX has decided to not get any more 767's, then I think we will see it getting A330's for fleet commonality purposes. I am guessing MX would go for the short A330-200... what do you think? According to the a.net database, the A332 can seat up to 293 pax in a two class configuration (although MX would probably have a larger business class so we might see something like 275 pax cabins or something like that). If this becomes a reality, MX will look very similar to JJ, with A32x's for short and medium haul flights and A332's for long haul routes (the difference being the F100's in JJ's fleet and the A318's in MX's fleet).

If MX decides to do MEx-CLT, they may a good chance of having nice loads if the demand exists like AR385 kindly explains, due to the goodwill of the MX brand in the U.S. and its codeshare with AA. The only thing I see is that US has a good f.f. program (Dividend Miles or something like that) and I fear that most business pax will stick to US, while ethnic and leisure travelers will prefer MX. Hopefully MX will find a way to make a profit in spite of this.



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlineJopavon From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 304 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (10 years 7 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5124 times:

According to AeroTransport Databank, MX originally intended 2 B763s (ex-SAS) they got one and cancelled the second one. Those are the facts.

On the wish side, hopefully they'll go Airbus 330s and start Europe...

The most likely destinations are LHR (intended since the 80s), FRA (in cooperation with LH) and BCN (where I agree with EddieDude on the 3x).



Come fly Mexicana, to Mexico!
User currently offlineCx340 From Mexico, joined Sep 2000, 609 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (10 years 7 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4928 times:

In my opinion, the logical solution for MX would be getting A330-200s. They are not as big as the 777, but they have enough range for most European routes. Plus, you get the much discussed cockpit commonality, so you only need MX's pilots to take simpler (and therefore cheaper, I suppose) conversion courses. I also suppose that the A330-200 is cheaper than a 777, at least in normal retail values.

I guess the problem, however, is how fast can they get these aircraft. The A330, specially the 200 series, seems to be a very popular aircraft with world airlines. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but there aren't many A330s sitting unused in the desert or just held by the leasing companies without use, and getting them directly from Airbus would take some time, I guess.





User currently offlineXA744 From Mexico, joined Mar 2004, 734 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (10 years 7 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4855 times:

CX340, you are absolutely right.

I also consider the A330 being the most suitable airliner for MX in view of the imminent addition of transatlantic operations to its network. Having in mind aircraft acquisition or leasing costs, together with crew training and maintenance , going A330 and phasing out the 767´s is the wise thing to do.

I just hope MX really comes up with a well furnished aircraft. For instance, an state of the art IFE is absolutely necessary in order to become truly competitive across the Atlantic. I also would get rid of that "Clase Ejecutiva" name which sounds cheap and of course unattractive. Bring back "Azteca de Oro " or "Golden Aztec" please !

Regards



No matter how you fly...just never get your wings clipped !
User currently offlineGhost77 From Mexico, joined Mar 2000, 5224 posts, RR: 51
Reply 18, posted (10 years 7 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4740 times:

This far all I've heard is that MX intend to open four destination in the US., two in Canada, one in the Carribean and one more in South America.

This far the first announcement has been made. MX will launch flights to Varadero. I was expecting another destination in the Carribean but at the end its a new route and maybe they'll open the other one also.

At the same time next April 5th MX will start running charters to La Romana. And got intentions to start charter flights to Santo Domingo.

As for the long haul fleet, I was told that its very highly that MX will step from the 767 to the A330. Hence, the reason of why they are not getting more 767s.

Ricardo APM  Smile




Ricardo Morales - flyAPM - ¡No es que maneje rapido, solo estoy volando lento!
User currently onlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7592 posts, RR: 42
Reply 19, posted (10 years 7 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4683 times:

I wonder what those new U.S. destinations will be. I am betting IAD is one of them (MEx-IAD is a route that UA has all for itself, so I wish MX will put some pressure). I hope to see MX flying to DFW too. Although now that AA and MX have decided to codeshare, this might not happen and, if it does, this might not lower the high fares that AA charges in this route that it almost monopolizes (I prefer AM over AA but they only have one daily flight, at very inconvenient times and using an MD-87). On second thoughts, AM is the one who should add at least one more daily MEx-DFW flight.

As for Canada, I guess Calgary and Edmonton are the new routes (or could it be Calgary and Ottawa), but I fear there is not sufficient demand for non-stop flights between Mexico and those cities... even with a 2x or 3x weekly frequency. Perhaps the idea is to do a XXX-MEx-CUN itinerary or something like that, don't you think?

The fact that they are adding a new South American destination is very cool. I don't know when this route will be launched but I guess that, since MX won't be getting any more widebodies soon, this new destination will be a not-so-far city... I am betting UIO. An A319 or A320, depending on the demand, would suffice. Any ideas?



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlineFLYACYYZ From Canada, joined Jan 2004, 1914 posts, RR: 12
Reply 20, posted (10 years 7 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4645 times:

Can see MX expanding it's operations in Canada, but not expanding cities served. Based on market demand could see the following:

YYZ-MX), Mexico">MEX (from 5 weekly to daily) They've dicked around with frequency and times since day 1.
YYZ-CUN
YUL-CUN
YVR-CUN
YVR-PVR

Calgary is a remote possibility to generate sufficient traffic. YOW & YEG --not at this point in time.



Above and Beyond
User currently onlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6357 posts, RR: 31
Reply 21, posted (10 years 7 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4608 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

On the contrary.

Calgary is an important ENERGY business hub. For two countries whose energy industry is as important a part of their GDP as it is for Mexico and Canada, it would not surprise me if Calgary becomes a new MX destination. Calgary is home to TransCanada for example who has some business with PEMEX and with many other small energy industry goods suppliers in Mexico. There are also other energy companies in Calgary that constantly send engineers to Mexico and Vice-Versa for courses, consultancy work, etc. This is why the CO flights from IAH to Calgary have become so successful. If to that type of traffic you add the leisure part, I believe you have some potential, for at least filling up an A-319 5 times x week or more. Besides, he who doesn't risk, doesn't win. MX should be more risk taking and more agressive when planning potential routes.

Routes to Ecuador will work, basically because of all the Ecuadoreans who study in Mexico, both from Quito and Guayaquil, plus the leisure traffic and the "I'm just here to cross the river traffic". Guayaquil also has the potential for becoming a natural hub in South America, in competition with Lima. I agree with EddieDude, I believe routes to Ecuador would work for MX. Remember that for many years we had the Ecuatoriana beautiful, pshycodelic 720's and later their less physodelic but still striking DC-10's and A-313 flying to MX), Mexico">MEX at least 3 to 4 times x week. So the market is there. Plus, TAME is no competition as they have a serious safety problems.


User currently onlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7592 posts, RR: 42
Reply 22, posted (10 years 7 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4554 times:

So if people seem to agree that YYC is one of the new destinations, which will the second, new, Canadian city be? I don't see another one with sufficient business potential. Maybe, as FLYACYYZ suggests, its a new non-stop flight to an existing Canadian destination from a city in Mexico other than Mexico City. If this is the case, then I would say it is CUN-YUL, because AC already offers a daily, non-stop flight between CUN and YYZ, doesn't it?

I hope all this information will be made public soon, this is so exciting!!!



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlineFLYACYYZ From Canada, joined Jan 2004, 1914 posts, RR: 12
Reply 23, posted (10 years 7 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4501 times:

To the MX experts:

Why is YYZ service not sustainable on a daily basis? Since its inception, MX has done morning, afternoon, and evening service. They've gone from daily to weekends only, and now back to 5 daily morning departures.

Why does MX even bother with EWR, which I believe operates only 4 days a week, and at very off peak hours??




Above and Beyond
User currently onlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7592 posts, RR: 42
Reply 24, posted (10 years 7 months 14 hours ago) and read 4421 times:

FLYACYYZ, the last time I checked, MX was doing 5 weekly non-stops between MEx and YYZ as you well say, leaving YYZ in the morning and leaving MEx on its way back in the early afternoon. In addition, AC is doing the same route on a 7x weekly basis with very similar schedules... maybe the market cannot support more than 12 weekly non-stop flights. In addition, perhaps die hard AM/DL fliers are willing to connect in ATL or JFK, and AA fliers are willing to connect in DFW for the miles, so there is competition from U.S. carriers too. And I can also think that MX maybe has a shortage of A319's for some other important routes and that's why YYZ gets MX service only 5x weekly.

About EWR, I also wonder why MX is so weak in the highly demanded and highly profitable MEx-NYC market. The last time I checked, it was flying MEx-EWR 3x weekly using an A319. It doesn't make any sense to me. AM has 14 weekly flights to JFK on 752's and DL has at least 7 weekly also on a 752. In addition, CO serves very well the MEx-EWR route since EWR is one of its hubs (I don't know how many times a week, but definitely 7 at least). I do not think the off-peak hours of the MX flights are that bad, though. Actually I really like MX's times because you don't lose daylight hours flying. Now that CO has joined the DL/AM alliance and that is close to becoming a SkyTeam member, the vast majority of the traffic in the MEx-NYC route will be served by SkyTeam carriers, so I definitely see MX adding more frequencies (hopefully). And, as someone said, maybe fly to JFK instead of EWR too, in order to benefit from AA feeding, who does not fly non-stop between the two cities.



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
25 AR385 : EddieDude The reason MX flights into EWR are measly is because aside from CO's hub, EWR is an O&D destination for the Newark metro area and New Jersey
26 EddieDude : This is interesting. Thanks a lot for the input AR385. The thing is that I still don't get it. Just as I find the schedules attractive, I believe a lo
27 AR385 : Eddiedude EWR does have an excellente cheap link to Manhattan. It think it's sort of like a speed rail but I haven't taken it so far. There are also c
28 Post contains links and images Ghost77 : I haven't been told what will be MX flights to Canada but....... I can think on Calgary and Hamilton. With the time I think MX will start flying more
29 CAL : Ghost, Just wanted to let you know that AeroMexico already serves ORD.....
30 Post contains images Ghost77 : CAL, Yes, AM serves ORD from MEx 2x a day compared to MX..... 10x a day or more from several points in Mexico.... they amost have a complete terminal
31 NAVEGA : MX was in Hamilton doing charter flights. It has been doing these charter flights for the past 5 years. MX will fly to JFK instead of EWR or maybe bot
32 EddieDude : MX will fly to JFK instead of EWR or maybe both by this December. Has this been confirmed NAVEGA? I am sure that if MX increases frequencies to New Yo
33 NAVEGA : EddieDude, Yes the JFK is official, but what is not is if they also fly to EWR. I hope they fly to JFK only. AM has a code share with CO so they will
34 EddieDude : Thanks so much for the info. Although MX should and will move to JFK, I am not sure if AM should move to EWR just because of the codeshare with CO. I
35 Post contains images Ghost77 : Dude, I think it wouldn't be smart if MX rotated their 767 to ORD.. just for one reason.... there's a very small difference pax between the 57 (181) a
36 EddieDude : Oh, I see. I was thinking that only Airbuses flew the MEx-ORD route... how could I forget that the 752's are also used. I agree that it doesn't make s
37 AR385 : Eddiedude, Look at reply 27. Delta has an international hub in JFK, so AM will fit nicely in the strategy of Skyteam. AA has an international minihub,
38 Post contains images Ghost77 : Dude, A332s to ORD..... my opinion..... too big for a 'short route'! Why? MX Dc10s leave the fleet and for a long time MX stayed with no wide bodies a
39 EddieDude : So many things to discuss!!! AR385, I agree that with both carriers flying to JFK we will see strong competition (if MX does something about its frequ
40 XAAAM : As far as I know they will recieve 3 more 767-300, actually I saw one all white landing this afternoon in MEX, and then saw it in their mainteinance b
41 AR385 : XAAAM Check reply 15. I find it highly doubtful that they will get more 763's. They have not announced routes for them. Check my reply 37 to EddieDude
42 Post contains links and images Ghost77 : Dude, I think a Mexican airline could also lower some costs and maximize profits by sending a widebody to a very demanded destination in the U.S. (ORD
43 NAVEGA : I don't thing the B767 is for Mexicana. They are seriously looking at Quito and to Spain. I believe MAD but not sure as it could be Barelona also. Thi
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...
Hawaiian Announces Plans To Acquire 4 More 767s posted Tue Feb 14 2006 15:38:24 by Trvlr
Mexicana To Acquire 4 More 767-300 By End Of 2004! posted Sun Feb 1 2004 04:10:55 by DFWMEX
767-300 Overkill To Latin America? posted Tue Mar 28 2006 11:30:22 by FLY777UAL
MEA Planning To Acquire More Aircraft posted Sat Oct 15 2005 07:23:40 by BA
Delta Boeing 767-300 Diverted To YUL posted Sun Jun 8 2003 04:22:26 by Quebecair727
DAL 767-300 Going To MCI Right Now posted Sat Nov 9 2002 18:19:52 by Atcboy73
Delta 767-300 Domestic To Int'l Conversion? posted Tue Oct 15 2002 18:13:03 by CF-CPI
Will TWA 767-300's Go To HA? posted Tue Apr 10 2001 01:15:04 by HA_DC9
DL Lets Go 1000 And Plans To Cut 300 More Possible posted Mon Jun 30 2003 07:22:31 by Deltadude8
767-300 To OGG posted Sun Jun 4 2006 06:08:33 by HnlBoi