Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 12305 posts, RR: 62
Reply 1, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 6368 times:
Yes -- AA is slowly but surely modifying the interiors of the TWA MD-80s to meet AA standard, including installing solid divider partitions between F and Y and changing the seat covers. Most MD-80 modification work is being performed as the planes come in for overhaul servicing in TUL or MCI. Most MD-80s will probably be modified within the next two years, as many have already been switched over to AA interiors.
The 757s, on the other hand, are not being as heavily modified as AA will be returning nearly all of these planes in the next 2-3 years as their leases expire. AA doesn't want non-standard 757s with Pratt engines complicating their all RR-powered 757 operations.
I am not certain, but I don't believe any of the remaining TWA planes with AA have ETOPs certifications. TWA obviously had ETOPS-certified 757s that flew to LIS, MAD, BCN, etc. and also on longer Caribbean flights to ANU, CUN, etc. but I think AA has already returned them to lessors. I could be wrong, though.
AA717driver From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 1566 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 6258 times:
The ETOPS has probably been allowed to lapse. With the lower power engines, AA wouldn't put them on the longer flights and the rafts were pulled out shortly after 9/11.
Also, the 757's that were used on the LIS/BCN routes had higher allowable gross weights but it was just a paperwork thing--write Boeing a check and viola! you have a high gross weight 757! That didn't last.TC
Ckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5419 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 5943 times:
I seem to remember that AA is also installing the extended bins on the ex-TW MD-80s this year. If a plane is going into TUL or MCI for something less than a C-check, the bins will be replaced, although the rest of the cabin upgrades will be left for a full overhaul.
QQflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2305 posts, RR: 13
Reply 7, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5845 times:
The good news is AA stepped up the installation schedule for installing power ports and expanded overhead bins to TWA MD-80s. As of May 1, 94% of all AA MD-80s (including TWA) have expanded bins and power ports. AA has 336 MD-80s in service, including TWA, and to be more specific, 316 have the bigger bins and power ports.
In addition, 263 MD-80s have been reconfigured, adding two more seats to f-class (16 in all) and five more seats to main cabin (120) in all. I know AA has taken a lot of flack for removing MRTC, however, AA removed a closet behind first class and a closet in the very back of the plane. Since these two closests were removed, the legroom in coach is still generous... it didn't go back to where it used to be. Remember, AA took out 10 seats from coach before and only added back five, after removing two closets.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
PSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 7900 posts, RR: 27
Reply 9, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5745 times:
The TWA 757's aren't being replaced by anything. AA inherited about 30 P&W powered 757-200's from the TWA merger. The large fleet of RR 757's that AA has always had will take over all necessary routes with others changing gauge as necessary.
KYAir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 362 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5669 times:
I flew from DFW on Fri and noticed a couple AA MD-80's and one 757 that still have TW tail numbers. One MD-80 I saw for sure while on the taxiway waiting to take off was N-707TW. Haven't had a chance yet to see if there's a pic of it in the photo's section. When will all the tail numbers change? I thought this was already done.
Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened - Dr. Seuss
Ckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5419 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 5635 times:
I don't think AA is going to change any tail numbers on ex-TWA MD-80s. I remember seeing DL 737s and 727s in ATL with tail numbers that ended with the letters WA, making them former Western aircraft. This was several years after the merger, and the aircraft were all in DL colors.
YukonTrader From Switzerland, joined May 2005, 207 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 5625 times:
Quoting KYAir (Reply 11): When will all the tail numbers change? I thought this was already done.
Do they actually plan to do so, and if so, for what reason? Except for generating paper-work and the cost involved, there's not much return from such a scheme...
I dare to ask
a) after a quick glance at the AA fleet in jp 2004/05 - it doesn't list a single ex TW aircraft that would already have been re-registered into a registration (tail number) with AA, AM, AN... suffix, and
b) as I have never heard of it being planned?
I doubt AA will change them any time soon, if ever. There is no need to pay the fees, etc. to reregister an airplane with a new tail number. It costs too much, for virtually no benefit except that the N---TW can become N---AA or -AN or -AM. It would be a waste of money and AA has been extremely fiscally responsible lately with very little money wasting.
N501US From United States of America, joined May 2005, 227 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5451 times:
From the "A/C Data" tab here at A.net:
Two 166.4kN (37,400lb) RollsRoyce RB211-535C turbofans, or
178.8kN (40,200lb) RB211-535E4s, or
193.5kN (43,500lb) RB211-535E4-Bs, or
162.8kN (36,600lb) Pratt & Whitney PW2037s, or
two 178.4kN (40,100lb) PW2040s, or
189.5kN (42,600lb) PW2043s
Fools and thieves are well disguised in the temple and the marketplace.....
DALMD88 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2653 posts, RR: 14
Reply 21, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5312 times:
Many also consider the RR to be more reliable. The PW have had pylon crack issues from the very start and a few years ago The entire fleet was having Stator Crack problems. I remember at DL we had engine less 757s everywhere while they were tearing down the bad ones. PW couldn't produce the parts fast enough. There was also a huge backlog of customer engines with the same problems.
Can't comment specifically, but I know that AA is extremely pleased with the RB211 and 757 performance in general and those hard-working, reliable 757s have found a place as a workhorse in the AA fleet. They will be around for quite some time. AA is steadily returning the Pratt-powered 757s to lessors and will continue to out to 2007. The small sub-fleet of Pratt-powered planes does not fit with AA's over 100-strong RR-powered fleet. The Pratt fleet also costs more to maintain because AA has to send the engine overhauls out to DL for maintenance whereas the RB211s are maintained in-house at AFW.