Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why No 747's At AA?  
User currently offlineRwylie77 From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 367 posts, RR: 2
Posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10350 times:

I know a lot of other airlines do not operate any 747's, but American Airlines is the largest airline in the world and I'm surprised that they do not even operate a couple, and appear not to have done for quite a while. The same with Delta I believe. Is there a reason, such as they are more of a domestic US airline and do not fly as many long haul international flights such as United? Or is it because there are so many US airlines flying internationally they go for a higher frequency of smaller planes? It just seems stupid on busy routes where slots are at a premium such as ORD/JFK to LHR, which BA and VS both use 744's on (plus A346 on some).

55 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12110 posts, RR: 49
Reply 1, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10291 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I think you answered your own question smaller planes offering more flights. Remember with each additional fleet type you add, it adds to the bottom line, training for the employees, spare parts to have on hand and the list goes on and on. Remember pre 9-11 AA operated 11 different fleet types for mainline aircraft, they are now down to 6 types.


You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4106 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10284 times:

AA did have some 747s a while back, but I believe they were unhappy with their performance, and opted for the DC-10/MD-11 instead. They used to operate them between LAX and JFK I believe, but only for a short time.

User currently offlineBobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6477 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10279 times:

They got to be the world's largest airline without 747's. They must be doing something right!!

User currently offlineUshermittwoch From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 2965 posts, RR: 16
Reply 4, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10255 times:

Well you can also say that they are the world's largest, NOT BEST, airline through NOT having a 747. Since you need more planes to haul around the same number of people...
 Big grin



Where have all the tri-jets gone...
User currently offlineRwylie77 From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 367 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10233 times:

Bobnwa - in fact I would say the opposite! They are certainly the largest (by number of aircraft), but maybe this is why they are not the largest by market capitalisation or profits! Would reducing the number of planes by introducing the 744 or A380 to replace smaller 767's etc increase their profitability?

User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12110 posts, RR: 49
Reply 6, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 10221 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

AA would argue it is all about offering choices and one flight on a bigger plane does not do that.


You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineCkfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5242 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 10170 times:

AA operated either 747-100s or -200s in the 70s, and they didn't make much money. It also operated the 747SP in the late 80s and early 90s when it started flying DFW-NRT.

I think the planes last flew DFW-LGW. They were a stop gap until AA got enough MD-11s.

When AA started flying trans-Atlantic, AA made a decision not to invest in aircraft with 4 engines, as a cost-savings measure. That's according to friend of mine who flies AA 757/767.


User currently offlineN1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26501 posts, RR: 75
Reply 8, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 10074 times:

Hey, you don't need big planes to haul a lot of PAX, just look at Southwest. AA has gone to a policy of only flying twins. They have stated this many times andthey seem to do ok with it. One of the main reasons they don't have 747s is because they have never had a really big Asia presence. What they have had, they have been able to serve with MD-11s, DC-10s and 777s. Again, they did have 741s when everyone had 741s and bought some TWA SPs as a stopgap, as said before. They really don't serve the highest traffic routes internationally and the ones that do have a lot of traffic, they fly against a lot of competition and choose frequency over capacity. They also seem to not care about using up their LHR slots on better routes and using Gatwick for secondary routes like DFW and RDU.


Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 9925 times:

AA decided that it couldn't even [profitably] fill 773As yearround, what on Earth would they want/need with 747s?  Nuts

User currently offlineRwylie77 From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 367 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 9889 times:

ConcordeBoy - that is very worrying if BA is able to run 744's from LHR to the US profitably and AA thinks it is unable to fill anything more than a 772...lack of confidence in their own product vs. BA and Virgin?

User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 9770 times:

lack of confidence in their own product vs. BA and Virgin?

...or the fact that it has eight gateways through which to funnel transoceanic traffic, compared to their two. You decide  Laugh out loud








[Edited 2004-09-07 18:41:54]

User currently offlineClipper002 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 679 posts, RR: 13
Reply 12, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 9633 times:

American did indeed operate 742's. Two of them were converted to frieghters and leased to Pan Am. N9673 and N9674 if my memory serves me correctly. The best thing about them was that they were noseloaders, no playing with pallets on a loader 20 feet up in the air.

Ed



Ed
User currently offlineJAXpax From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 9613 times:

I'm sorry, but I fail to see any reason why American should be presently operating B747s. Did I miss the day in school where they taught that "Your airline should plan its fleet around cool looking aircraft" ??

User currently offlineMSPXJGuy From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 150 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 9227 times:

Well, I think it was pretty much stated that they have 8 different gateways here in the U.S. but they don't have any intl hubs that they need to get a lot of people to and from out of there.

When you look at the two US carriers that have 747s (Northwest and United) they have a large presence in Asia and both have a hub in NRT. They need those big birds to transfer people through with limited slots.

American doesn't have a hub like this internationally.



User currently offlineErj145lr From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 9174 times:

what planes have they retired since 9-11?

User currently offlineDeltaMD11 From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 1701 posts, RR: 34
Reply 16, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 9121 times:

They've retired the 727-200 fleet, and as of tomorrow the F-100 fleet.

Edit: Well, you could count the MD-11 also, but they were already on their way out well before 9/11/01

[Edited 2004-09-07 21:27:23]


Too often we ... enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. - John Fitzgerald Kennedy
User currently offlineErj145lr From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 9102 times:

yeah but, Luv2Fly said they had 11 pew 9/11 and now they only haev 6 mainline.

User currently offlineErj145lr From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 9100 times:

yeah but, Luv2Fly said they had 11 pre 9/11 and now they only haev 6 mainline.

User currently offlineFedExDC-10 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 196 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 8966 times:

Forgive me, but I question that statement of 11 different aircraft.

FedExDC-10


User currently offlineFLFlyGuy From United States of America, joined May 2004, 244 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 8618 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Bob Crandall put it this way back in the 80's-- he would rather turn passengers away from a full 767 sometimes, than to fly a half-empty 747 for half of the year.

Many of our large markets are seasonal and would not support 747 service year-round. What do you do with the plane when it isn't needed? It becomes an unnecessary expense.

Arguably we could find some use for a limited number of 747s year round, but right now they are trying to reduce the number of fleet types. There's not that much that a 747 can do that a 777 can't, these days.



The views expressed are my own, and not necessarily those of my employer.
User currently offlineN1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26501 posts, RR: 75
Reply 21, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 8552 times:

I can see AA, when they get their finances back online, which is happening slowly, ordering the 772LR, and possibly growing routes to get the 773ER. And definately the 7E7. They also retired the 717, though those came from TW.


Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineBobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6477 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 8449 times:

FedExDC-10,
In July of 2001 American was operating the following type of aircraft.
1. 777-200ER
2. 767-200
3. 767-200ER
4. 757-200
5. 737-800
6. 727-200
7. MD-11
8. MD-80
9. A300-600
10. Fokker 100
11. MD-90

Source: Air Transport World July 2001 page 134


User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16285 posts, RR: 56
Reply 23, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 8394 times:

When AA applied for ORD-NRT in the early 90's, their plan was to operate the route with 2 744's seconded from partner CP. As it turned out, UA was awarded the route.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineDeltaMD11 From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 1701 posts, RR: 34
Reply 24, posted (10 years 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 8387 times:

Bob,
The MD-11 and MD-90 fleets were already well under retirement way before 9/11 (I think that AA had 2 MD-11 airframes operational after 9/11 and those were only used to fill in as equipment subs), so I don't know if you can rightly count them. As for the TWA 717's, they were still on TWA operating certificates and leases when AMR made them get rid of them, so I don't think that you can count those either.

As I stated above, the fleets that AA has truly dumped post 9/11 are the 727's and effective tomorrow the Fokker 100's.



Too often we ... enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. - John Fitzgerald Kennedy
25 Aa777jr : It is way more profitable for AA to operate 772 on the routes were they used the 742s in the 80s and early 90s. They were using a 742 to fly into LGW
26 AA B777-200 : I think the last 747SPs flew JFK-LHR and JFK-BRU. That is after the MD11 took over the DFW-NRT and AA started getting more MD11s.
27 Bobnwa : AA777jr, I don't believe that AA ever operated the 747-200. What market share was dominated by US with the 747?
28 Yyz717 : I think the last 747SPs flew JFK-LHR and JFK-BRU. AA used the SP on JFK-LHR and then DFW-NRT. I don't believe that AA ever operated the 747-200. Corre
29 Learjet23 : I used to fly the AA 742 flight #7 from LAX to HNL Hawaii back in the early 1980's always in first, and always in 1-A. It was a seat all to its self t
30 Aa777jr : I meant UA not US, crucify me holy one bob.[Edited 2004-09-07 23:49:40]
31 Aa777jr : also, AA did fly the 741 and SP, my brother is a currier with Fed Ex and confirmed 20653 (237) 747-273C 15/04/1984 The flight was DFW-HNL. [Edited 200
32 Thrust : AA operated between 10 and 20 747-100s in the 1970s....unfortunately they were not the airline back then that they are now....they had mostly transcon
33 Texdravid : As the 747-400 is in the twilight of its career, AA will never have a 744, even if it is awarded new Asian gateways. AA loves its 777's and 767's and
34 Thrust : Yep, I read that orders on the 747 are slowly drying up...it cannot continue to sell well as it is...twin jets and more modern four engined jets like
35 FedExDC-10 : Indeed, my apologies. I did not realize that the MD-11 flew that late. So I make eight current types off of that list, seven taking into account the-I
36 Hirnie : "It was a seat all to its self the way the seating was laid out. Really cool to be in the nose all alone! no one on you side to bother you! Just wonde
37 Starlionblue : Lets face it A.netters, the 747 is a dying beast. I love it more than anyone, but airlines just feel it is uneconomical and unneeded. Boeing is right,
38 UA772IAD : I agree with you Starlionblue. In fact, this is also true in the US... In 2003, UA pulled a bunch of 744's out of storage in California and returned t
39 Learjet23 : I love the 747!! Can't get enough of this big mama! Flew home from Vietnam in one in 1971, will go out again next month to Asia on nwa #1 !! 34 years
40 FedExDC-10 : ROFL. I hereby contribute five dollars, with the understanding that I get custody on weekends.
41 VirginAtlantic : At least there's still the European and Asian lines, who are still heavy 747 users. So I think we're still safe for a few more years.
42 Post contains images Wdleiser : As an American I am proud to say United is my flagship carrier. In my opinion a great airline must have the 744 if it want's true greatness Status
43 Thrust : What people are failing to realize is that while yes, the Boeing 744 continues to be a very popular aircraft, new orders for it are dwindling. It will
44 Texdravid : Starlionblue, You state that SQ, et. al are huge 747 operators. True, but SQ is retiring them and by 2007 or so they will be no 744's in SQ colors. Al
45 Aa777jr : SQ retiring their entire fleet of 747 by 2007? Are you flipping insane? SQ is the most (I think) profitable carrier worldwide. Their governement subsi
46 Lakerskytrain : Aa777jr You argue that SQ have one of the youngest fleets. Their hardly going to keep a 744 going for that long are they if they wish to keep its aver
47 Post contains links and images FLYSSC : To go back to the Topic.... AA operated either the 747-100s or -200s in the 70s Ckfred, Actually AA operated some B747 as late as mid-80's, as shown o
48 3lions : i have to agree with what you said
49 Bredman1 : The 2 that NASA uses to transport the shuttle are ex-American. Going to be flying on EVA 744 to Taiwan tomorrow!!!!
50 Mikeycpvd : You argue that SQ have one of the youngest fleets. Their hardly going to keep a 744 going for that long are they if they wish to keep its average down
51 Rwylie77 : ConcordeBoy - "or the fact that it has eight gateways through which to funnel transoceanic traffic, compared to their two. You decide" I disagree with
52 Dayflyer : Two words: Worldwide Overcapacity. There are not enough passengers flying AA due to: 1-The rise of the LCC taking cross country flights in USA 2-Incre
53 Rwylie77 : Dayflyer - yes I buy into that, but how can BA keep flying 744's on these routes and be profitable?
54 Aerosol : I think it is also the lack of international importance. The share of International air travel is a lot lower than at BA, Air France, SQ or Cathay.
55 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : OK, AA fly from 8 cities in the US to London. But BA fly 744's from London to those 8 cities and more such as Pheonix, so what is the difference? ....
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...
Why No 747 For AA? posted Mon Apr 5 2004 06:00:23 by Aa777jr
Why No 747's At Bwi? posted Fri May 31 2002 04:09:03 by Airhead711
AA, CO, Why No 747? posted Wed Mar 23 2005 00:12:54 by ATAIndy
Why No DL Or AA 747's Anymore? posted Mon Feb 5 2001 00:01:26 by Amtran727
Why No AZ At IAD? posted Wed Nov 1 2006 03:45:28 by Mk777
Why No WN At LGB? posted Sat Oct 28 2006 18:02:18 by 28L28L
Why No Engines At The Front? posted Mon Oct 23 2006 04:23:17 by GAIsweetGAI
Why No Props At ORD? posted Tue Sep 26 2006 08:16:38 by FlyingNanook
Why No F Class On AA 767-300s posted Thu Sep 14 2006 03:20:59 by Albird87
LAN Airlines: Why No Pics At Heathrow In Database posted Sun Sep 10 2006 12:28:18 by BA787