Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Pan Am III Back In Business!  
User currently offlineAkjetblue From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 790 posts, RR: 5
Posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 7943 times:

Just got this emailed to me today from them:

http://www.flypanam.com/dest.html


Save a horse! Ride a Cowboy!
19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinePanamair From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4956 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 7855 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

ALPA has gone to court to try to shut them down, saying that Guilford (the parent company) is unfit to operate as management deliberately closed the other Pan Am (on the Pan Am Airways certificate) down to bust the union and then restart with an all non-union carrier (this version of Pan Am or Clipper Connection (on the Boston-Maine certificate). Notice that those routes in the link above do not duplicate any of the routes previously served by Pan Am so that they cannot be accused of shifting the unionized Pan Am flights to the non-union Boston-Maine company...

User currently offlineMxCtrlr From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 2485 posts, RR: 35
Reply 2, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7502 times:

They just need to let the Blue Ball rest in peace! Juan T. Trippe's Pan American World Airways died in 1991 from piss-poor management, idiotic union contracts, worker apathy and fears of terrorism (Lockerbie was the final nail in the coffin). Unless someone had the hordes of cash it would take to bring back PA as it should be - a major international player with a decent domestic feeder network - then it should be allowed to die with dignity.

To see what the Blue Ball has become, thanks in part to Marty Shugrue's ill-advised resurrection attempt in the late 1990's, and completely degraded by what Guildford Transportation is doing to it now, is a travesty to a great, pioneering airline's name and legacy! This "version" of Pan Am is a farce as an airline and shouldn't be allowed to further sully the name and logo of Pan American World Airways!

Edit: (Just in case anyone wants to call in my qualifications for saying this, I worked for all three incarnations of Pan Am - I (The REAL Pan Am), II (Carnival/Pan Am) and the current farce so I feel more than qualified to speak about the topic)!

MxCtrlr  Smile/happy/getting dizzy
Freight Dogs Anonymous - O.O.T.S.K.  Smokin cool


[Edited 2005-01-07 05:05:17]


DAMN! This SUCKS! I just had to go to the next higher age bracket in my profile! :-(
User currently offlineINTENSS From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 317 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7431 times:

For someone that was so "in the know" you should realize that Martin Shugrue's "ill-advised" resurrection attempt was in the mid 1990's. I also totally disagree with you pertaining to your opinion of this. It was an excellent idea until the merger with Carnival....

-Rich


User currently offlineCapri From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 452 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7413 times:

Where are those days, as a young kid growing up in another country, thinking america's only carriers are PanAM and TWA, never heard of the others, AA, DL, Ua,...till i came to live in USA, who ever thought then they will go bust, like if thinking today BA or LH will go bust, but never trust the businessmen/politicians.

User currently offlineSidishus From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 519 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7360 times:


This rendition appears headed to Florida...

http://www.seacoastonline.com/news/01062005/news/57500.htm

Dave Mullen, deputy director of the Pease Development Authority, said he was caught by surprise by news reports that Pan Am had been discussing transfer of its Federal Aviation Administration operating-certificate status from Pease to Sanford, Fla.






the truth: first it is ridiculed second it is violently opposed finally it is accepted as self-evident
User currently offlineTheiler From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 633 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7324 times:

As far as I'm concerned, the folks at Pease need to stick it to Pan Am for the remainder of their lease at the field, and then wave goodbye - and good riddence.

My initial interest in the Guilford incarnation disappeared last year. With some of their latest stunts, they just need to disappear.


User currently offlineMxCtrlr From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 2485 posts, RR: 35
Reply 7, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 7131 times:

For someone that was so "in the know" you should realize that Martin Shugrue's "ill-advised" resurrection attempt was in the mid 1990's. I also totally disagree with you pertaining to your opinion of this. It was an excellent idea until the merger with Carnival....

Rich,

Forgive me if I may be off a year or so one way or the other but it matters little...I started working for KW in 1995 and was out of work with them by 1998 - a few months after Pan Am 2 "took over" - and PA2 was only about 1 year old at that point. That makes it the "late 1990's" as I stated earlier.

As for not agreeing with my position, that's fine however, I stick to my assertion that resurrecting Pan Am was ill-advised. The KW/PA2 "merger" was simply KW paying PA2 a bunch of money for KW to take over PA's name and PA to run it. It was doomed from the start but then again, so was PA2. When Shugrue spouted off (at the first flight) "This isn't K-Mart, this is Tiffiny's" and the consistantly dropped service levels to the point that it was lower than K-Mart, that is what I consider to be "ill-advised".

MxCtrlr  Smile/happy/getting dizzy
Freight Dogs Anonymous - O.O.T.S.K.  Smokin cool



DAMN! This SUCKS! I just had to go to the next higher age bracket in my profile! :-(
User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6997 times:

Guilford is horrible. Those three words sum up the situation. Unpaid debts? The list of those who are owed by this sham of a company are endless; Pease, of course, but every airport the 'new' Pan Am left in its wake after leaving under cover of darkness. Happily, every airport that this carrier wishes to fly to will (or should) insist upon pre-payment. Any creditor that doesn't insist upon this as a condition of doing business with Guilford and Pan Am will get what they deserve.

User currently offlineThrust From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 2690 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6066 times:

I bet Pan Am III is going to be even more successful than Pan Am II  Yeah sure

I agree completely with MxCtrlr, starting a Pan Am II was ludicrous in the first place. Almost nothing was accomplished by starting a PA2. PA2 was a complete mockery of the "real" Pan Am. Why don't they just let the company go down in the history books as one of the world's greatest airlines rather than the one of the world's greatest airlines whose name was used in one of the most pathetic airlines i have ever come across, PA II.



Fly one thing; Fly it well
User currently offlineClipper002 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 679 posts, RR: 13
Reply 10, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 5536 times:

As a 29 year vet with the original Pan American World Airways, I have to agree wholeheartedly with MxCtrlr. Let the name die once and for all.

Rgds,
Ed



Ed
User currently offlineNm19371 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 70 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5225 times:

Guilford itself is a rogue sham of a company. They bought up a bunch of ailing railroads in New England back in the early 80s, including the venerable Boston and Maine and bled all of them dry, eliminated thousands of miles of track in favor of selling off valuable real estate and have pretty much ruined passenger and freight rail service in northern New England. I have no idea what they want with Pan Am but given their management of the railroads, Id say that they are the kiss of death and an insult to the name of this fine airline.

User currently offlineNWAFA From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1893 posts, RR: 15
Reply 12, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5184 times:

Personally I hate the fact they use the wonderful name of PanAm!

Im a former Pan Am employee and miss and love it there so much!



THANK YOU FOR FLYING NORTHWEST AIRLINES, WE TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR BUSINESS!
User currently offlineAtaIndy From United States of America, joined May 2004, 615 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4913 times:

I like the fact that there are planes with the blue ball still flying, since Pan Am went under before my time. I do respect the fact that the orginal carrier should go down with diginty, but seeing Pan Am planes today makes me feel like I lived when Pan Am ruled the airways.


Boiler up! - Next flights: IND-DFW-AUS, AUS-DFW-IND
User currently offlineRyanL1011 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3846 times:

I for one wish nothing but success for Pan Am, it is possible to resurect a dead airline and make it successful, take Frontier for example. I hope to someday see the return of TWA and Braniff (wishful thinking I know)

User currently offlineAloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4521 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3787 times:

I completely agree with Ryan. Pan Am could once again be a household name and a fantastic product if only it were to be resurrected by management that actually cares and is willing to bust their butts to get it right.


What we've seen is a bunch of half-assed management teams attempting to start half-assed airlines hoping that the name itself will sell the product.

It won't. Pan Am wasn't just a name. It was an experience. Something these assholes seem to forget. We need someone who remembers.


User currently offlineINTENSS From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 317 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3662 times:

"Forgive me if I may be off a year or so one way or the other but it matters little...I started working for KW in 1995 and was out of work with them by 1998 - a few months after Pan Am 2 "took over" - and PA2 was only about 1 year old at that point. That makes it the "late 1990's" as I stated earlier.

As for not agreeing with my position, that's fine however, I stick to my assertion that resurrecting Pan Am was ill-advised. The KW/PA2 "merger" was simply KW paying PA2 a bunch of money for KW to take over PA's name and PA to run it. It was doomed from the start but then again, so was PA2. When Shugrue spouted off (at the first flight) "This isn't K-Mart, this is Tiffiny's" and the consistantly dropped service levels to the point that it was lower than K-Mart, that is what I consider to be "ill-advised".

MxCtrlr,

While I agree the latest incarnation of PA has been nothing less than horrific, I stick by my assertions that PA II had a good business plan led by highly qualified mangement.

I'd also like to add that 2 other major contributors leading to the demise Pan American World Airways was the lack of CAB support (due in part to the company's reluctance to pay off the right people at certain times including politically) to gain route authority (specifically domestic) and the lack of proper management to guide the carrier just prior and into deregulation including the purchase of National Airlines and the establishment of a suitable domestic feeder system. Coupled with the reasons you stated above....it all spelled the end of an aviation era.

And while I would hate to see the name tarnished with would-be pseudo Pan Am's.....it's sometimes nice to see the meatball flying in every now and then.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

-Rich








User currently offlineMiamix707 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3440 times:

They have been operating the 727s to and from Sanford, for about a week or two now using the code CXS which is Boston-Maine..?

User currently offlineRomeokc10fe From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3201 times:

Hey guys, I was at Barnes & Nobles book store looking at latest aviation mags, and the Jan. 2005 issue of Airliners World said that Pan Am had terminated the contract of all of it's pilots on Oct. 31. So what gives are they stil in business or what, I flew for them from Jan. 2000-Sept 2001 as Flight Engineer. as for the company and management, well I won't even get into that, let's just say they leave a lot to be desired.
For those of you that don't know, Pan Am is primarily owned by Tim Mellon of the banking Mellon family of Pittsburgh (Mellon Arena), Dave Fink runs the airline, ask any of the railroad guys from the New England area about Fink and his dislike for unions.



User currently offlineHlywdCatft From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 5321 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3175 times:

So with it starting again, can we now call it Pan Am IV?

Maybe they should grab some cheap 747-200s and retired L1011s so they can at least look like Pan Am.


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...
Pan Am Back In Business !?!?!? posted Wed Jan 19 2000 00:17:20 by Baec777
Pan Am Is Back! (Train) posted Tue Nov 14 2006 02:17:05 by Jepstein
Pan Am's 747s Still In Use? posted Thu Jul 20 2006 18:55:28 by Eastern023
Pan Am Is Back! posted Sun Apr 9 2006 18:46:15 by DeltaL1011man
KLM & Pan Am Crash Today In 1977 posted Mon Mar 27 2006 12:06:00 by Trekster
Pan Am/National Terminal In TPA posted Fri Dec 2 2005 22:17:21 by MSYtristar
194AT Back In Business? posted Fri Nov 4 2005 00:17:15 by Wjcandee
Pan Am Worldport Expansion In 70s posted Wed Nov 2 2005 22:02:14 by Nwray
Pan Am Transatlantic Aircraft In '30s-'40s? posted Mon Aug 1 2005 17:40:57 by Ssides
Pan Am & TWA In Canada posted Wed Jul 6 2005 03:39:18 by Vingt20cent