Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA To Delay Delivery Of 738's And 777's  
User currently offlineHz747300 From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2004, 1656 posts, RR: 1
Posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5716 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I am only rec'ing a headline right now from Dow Jones News Service. It states that agreement has been reached between AA and Boeing. AA will take 2 777s in 2006, including one scheduled for 2007 delivery.


Keep on truckin'...
27 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlinePSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 7533 posts, RR: 28
Reply 1, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5590 times:

Yes.

54 of 56 aircraft between 2006 and 2010 will be deffered.

The only aircraft they will receive in that time period will be 2 777's.

This along with the cancelled postponed ERJ deliveries effectively means that AA will be keeping their current fleet at status quo for the next five years.

This is actually a good measure by AA to not incur further debt by taking on unneeded aircraft. With the enormous MD-80 fleet, and some 762ER's in storage, AA has the ability to respond better to market demand without having the burden of new aircraft payments.

Although, this could put AA in a disadvantage in 5 years, finding themself forced into a massive fleet renewal. AA's MD-80's will become as notorous as the NW DC-9's. A proven workhorse that can easily put in 30 years (the oldest ones) of service and will become a much debated and hated topic on A.net


User currently offlineAa777jr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5410 times:

some 762ER's in storage

Currently, all 10 767 AA has stored are non ER versions. These planes are 20+ yrs old and will not come out of retirement.

AA will defer options for all those planes they ordered from Boeing in hopes they can save some more money, stay out of BK, and order replacements for the A300 in 4-6 yrs.

AA777jr


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 3, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5394 times:

Why would replacements for their A300s be their number one priority?

I doubt, seriously, that it is.

N


User currently offlineAa777jr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5378 times:

Order the 7E7 AA!!!  Smile



User currently offlineMlsrar From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 1417 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5368 times:

This move is clearly a sensible one. The idea of freezing their fleet size until the traffic warrants the deliveries will certainly help them to get closer to the black.


I mean, for the right price I’ll fight a lion. - Mike Tyson
User currently offlineNWAFA From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1893 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5261 times:

A very smart and prudent move on AA...they are doing what they need to...looking for ways to save money right now instead of waisting money..those decsions will keep them OUT of BK.


THANK YOU FOR FLYING NORTHWEST AIRLINES, WE TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR BUSINESS!
User currently offlineAa777jr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5133 times:

I agree with all above statements, AA has money in the bank and wants to keep it that way. Their current fleet serves all their needs for right now. Smart business plan will keep AA around for a long time.

Can AA defer the above a/c entirely and use the money they would have fronted for a entirely new order from Boeing? Like a 7E7 order in the future?

AA777jr


User currently offlineFlagshipAZ From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3419 posts, RR: 14
Reply 8, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4937 times:

AA has only 8 non-ER 762s. The other 21 762ERs will probably see service again, if not with AA then with another carrier. So if I did the math right, AA will have 47 772s & 77 738s until 2010. The A300s will start being phased out in 5 years, to reduced the number of aircraft types in the fleet. Is this what the fleet will look like by year-end 2006?

34 A300-605s
77 737-823s
124 757-223s
21 767-223ERs
58 767-323ERs
47 777-223ERs
362 MD-82/83s

Feel free to correct me on this...and I'm sure that AA777jr will be the first.  Wink/being sarcastic Regards.



"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
User currently offlineHz747300 From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2004, 1656 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4925 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

That's just an astonishing number of MD-80's!!! I wonder when the phase out will begin for those?


Keep on truckin'...
User currently offlineAAplatnumflier From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4790 times:

I believe that AA has
140 757-223s
77 767's weather they be ER or not in service as of now
32 A300s also.
This is their fleet as of now. Weather or not that will change...that is up to AA. But I think this is a smart move by AA!!


User currently offlineCkfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5181 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4778 times:

It seems to me that with the announced increase in service to Japan, possible service to China, the long-discussed service to Hong Kong, and the rumored start of service to Vietnam, AA needs more than 2 777s between now and 2010.

Deferring some of the 737 deliveries makes sense, but considering some of the MD-80s will be turning 22 years, it would make sense for AA to take delivery of even 2 or 3 737s each year between 2006 and 2010. Unless AA plans to re-engine the MD-80 fleet, AA ought to consider a slow, measured replacement of the fleet.

The other question remains as to AA's plans for replacing the F100s. A friend of mine who flies for AA told me that Gerard Arpey, AA's CEO has said that AA can't go on indefinitely without a 100-seat airplane. There a a gap between the 70-seat CRJ and the 129-seat MD-80, which becomes the 136-seat MD-80 after MRTC is removed, that has made flight scheduling difficult.

Maybe, by deferring the 777 and 737 deliveries, AA is allowing for the possible purchase or leasing of 717s.


User currently offlineUA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4757 times:

Couldn't some of the non-ER 767's be converted into ER's? UA and AA have both done this before in the past.

Thanks again.

UA777222



"It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark."
User currently offlineThrust From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 2688 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 4734 times:

Actually, it is impractical for AA to convert the 767-200 non-ERs to ERs nowadays, though it has indeed been done in the past by AA, UA, and TWA. That was also in the mid and late 1980s. This is 2004. The 762s are being used exclusively on transcontinental routes and are 20 plus years old. It is not worth the expenses of converting these into ERs. The non-ERs as they are can operate the routes AA is using the 762ERs on. I would expect AA to try to phase out the older aircraft as part of their cost cutting plans. Reducing the average age of the fleet is always a good thing.


Fly one thing; Fly it well
User currently offlineAa777jr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 4718 times:

Maybe, by deferring the 777 and 737 deliveries, AA is allowing for the possible purchase or leasing of 717s

where did you get a silly idea like that?  Nuts


User currently offlineFlewGSW From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 148 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4566 times:

So, from now on, when AA opens up a new route, they'll have to close down another. And on May 1, AA will start flying to Ireland. Details are:

Announcement to press will be made on or about December 15"

ORD-DUB with a 767-300 that had been flying the 2nd daily ORD-HNL.
BOS-SNN with a 757-200 that had been flying trans-con.
BOS-GLA with a 757-200 that had been flying domestic routes.

If AA does not get the authority to fly ORD to Shanghai route, then AA will go back to flying DFW-Osaka.


User currently offlineERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6756 posts, RR: 17
Reply 16, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4545 times:

Does anyone think that AA will convert their 777 order to 787s? Seems like they have pushed it back just far enough that it could be a possibility... just a thought to chew on..


Aiming High and going far..
User currently offlineScott4AA From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 321 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4494 times:

FlewGSW. Hasnt AA already announced DFW-KIX starting in Nov 2005 along with ORD-NGO? Would ORD-PVG really replace DFW-KIX?


American Airlines - We Know Why You Fly
User currently onlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8191 posts, RR: 8
Reply 18, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4493 times:

I also think that AA made a wise decision, and feel that B is probably happy to go along with them for a while.

The first issue for AA is their current costs & debt. With fuel prices unstable for a while they need to hold onto cash. The other issue is the cost of their retirement program. With the competition using BK to get out of THEIR retirement obligations AA might be stuck with this non-competitive cost and need time to work out a better cost base with the unions.

In terms of planes there is no reason to add more planes while the industry is under the pressure it is. The 80s are well taken care of in Tulsa and can go for a long time in the future. They can probably last until B is able to transfer their 7E7 technology to the 737 platform, which might be the best option for AA.

I would be very surprised if AA didn't move some of their current commitments to the 7E7 in the future - even the near future with deliveries down the road. That would help Boeing hit the magic 200 mark and get AA involved with the program.

For aircraft needs that "pop up" because of new routes there will probably be lease options that can hold them over until their financial situation is a lot stronger.


User currently offlineRwylie77 From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 367 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4485 times:

Why were the 737's ordered? Were they designed to be MD80 replacements or just additional aircraft for fleet expansion?

User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 962 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4463 times:

There a a gap between the 70-seat CRJ and the 129-seat MD-80, which becomes the 136-seat MD-80 after MRTC is removed, that has made flight scheduling difficult.

The MRTC will remain on the MD-80s and 738s, otherwise it will be removed from all other domestic aircraft.

Maybe, by deferring the 777 and 737 deliveries, AA is allowing for the possible purchase or leasing of 717s.

AA might want a 100 seater, but they need to keep fleet types down. Also, they have very limited funds to buy aircraft with. AA has still paid for these aircraft, they just won't recieve them for a few more years.

If AA wanted to convert these orders for another Boeing type, that might be possible. But again, AA is trying to stabilize their fleet rather than introduce new types.

Does anyone think that AA will convert their 777 order to 787s? Seems like they have pushed it back just far enough that it could be a possibility...

There's no such thing as a 787. If AA wanted to convert their 737/777s into 7E7s, I'd expect its possible. But again, I think AA just wants to stop all fleet growth of any kind. They want to stabilize.

Why were the 737's ordered? Were they designed to be MD80 replacements or just additional aircraft for fleet expansion?

A mix of 727 replacement, MD-80 supplementation, and fleet growth. The 738 is one of the vertebre in their domestic backbone, filling the gap between the MD-80 and 757.


User currently offlineDtw9 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1155 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4448 times:

"AA has still paid for these aircraft, they just won't recieve them for a few more years" They have not paid for anything. they have placed deposits on these delivery positions, they make progress payments as the aircraft is being produced, paying in full at time of delivery

User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 22, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4447 times:

AA has still paid for these aircraft, they just won't recieve them for a few more years.

No, most of the capital expense of an aircraft is due at delivery. AA has probably made some material payments, but nowhere near the cost of the airplane.

Were they designed to be MD80 replacements or just additional aircraft for fleet expansion?

Both. They were intended to replace the 727 and begin the replacement of the M80 (which is about the same passenger capacity).

N


User currently offlineERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6756 posts, RR: 17
Reply 23, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4347 times:

There's no such thing as a 787.

787 = 7E7... same thing..



Aiming High and going far..
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 962 posts, RR: 51
Reply 24, posted (9 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4328 times:

No, most of the capital expense of an aircraft is due at delivery. AA has probably made some material payments, but nowhere near the cost of the airplane.

Well then... that's my bad

787 = 7E7... same thing..

No... they don't. Not yet at least


25 Boeing767mech : The NON ER 767-200's are getting converted to beer cans. I have talked to a couple of scrappers that are bidding on a tear down and scrapping contract
26 FlewGSW : To: Scott4AA On Ocober 19, 2004, AA announced DFW-OSA as of 11/1/05. But if the ORD-Shanghai does not get awarded to AA, and as of now it looks like C
27 Ckfred : Aa777Jr: I got the idea from another A.Net thread. Namely, there is talk of ordering 717s while replacing the JT8Ds on the MD-80 fleet with engines us
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...
TG To Delay Delivery Of Airbus? posted Sat Jul 16 2005 00:33:59 by Echster
AA Finally Taking Delivery Of New 777s posted Thu Jan 19 2006 01:36:18 by Kaitak744
AA To Pull Out Of ASU posted Fri Dec 16 2005 21:01:31 by MaverickM11
AA To Slash 1,000's Of Jobs/ Pay Cuts. posted Wed Oct 19 2005 15:38:47 by Aa777flyer
Continental To Take Delivery Of Additional Boeing posted Thu Mar 31 2005 17:52:35 by STT757
Employee Trips To Take Delivery Of New Aircraft? posted Sun Sep 12 2004 11:11:59 by UAL747DEN
Cost Of A 747 And 777 posted Fri Mar 19 2004 00:25:32 by Skyguy
AA To Launch Service Between Dallas And Guatemala posted Tue Mar 5 2002 22:35:49 by Mah4546
AA To Get Rid Of TWA 717's By End Of The Year? posted Wed Jan 30 2002 05:04:26 by Westjet_8
Dedicated To The Pilots Of Continental And CoEx posted Sat Jan 12 2002 10:19:55 by Kdca4life