United1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 6881 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (10 years 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 4897 times:
UA initially flew from SEA, LAX, SFO, IAD, JFK/EWR, and MIA (MIA route authority was returned to PA after about 6 months although now out of LGW). ORD was added much later and was never flown by PA. PA retained service to LGW from DTW and MIA till the authority was sold to DL as part of the JFK/FRA hub sale.
AA started flying LAX, BOS, JFK/EWR, ORD, MIA. AA also flew PHL-LHR at one time (1994 I think).
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 13185 posts, RR: 62
Reply 7, posted (10 years 1 week ago) and read 4858 times:
Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 5): There are even some photos of the AA 747sp in LHR, also the A300 is in the photo data base photo taken in LHR as well.
The 747SP was not operational at Heathrow when flights launched in July 1991, IINM. It was added later, and only on the JFK-Heathrow route alone. The A300 did not enter the Heathrow market, IIRC, until the 1993-1994 range, and even until they left around 2002-2003, they were only in very limited use there (BOS/EWR/JFK-Heathrow only).
Ckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5778 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (10 years 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 4721 times:
Actually, AA bought the ORD-LHR route authority separately from the authority from the other gateways.
I believe didn't takeover flying ORD-LHR, until it started flying the other routes, because the bi-lateral agreement didn't permit AA to fly into LHR solely from ORD.
As an aside, TW was required to keep the STL-LGW route, because of its hub at STL. I also recall TW being forced to sell the PHL-London route to US, because AA didn't have a large operation at PHL, and thus, little connecting traffic.
Right...and one of the conditions UA had to agree to was that they couldn't operate a 747 on the route for a number of years afterward. They eventually operated it with either a 742 or 744 for a while, but they realized it was better to operate it with 772's and 763's.
I believe UA also had BOS from the start, but along with EWR, that slot and authority was sold in a silent bid, which BA won.
Many of the flight numbers are still the same... #930/931 for the SFO flights, for example. The SEA flight (which I flew in June '91) was #934 to LHR, and I believe #933 coming back.
LTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 14222 posts, RR: 46
Reply 11, posted (10 years 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4683 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 7): The A300 did not enter the Heathrow market, IIRC, until the 1993-1994 range, and even until they left around 2002-2003, they were only in very limited use there (BOS/EWR/JFK-Heathrow only).
Weren't the A300s used as a kind of stopgap while MD-11s were being phased out and 777s introduced? Because nonetheless, it is strange to see an AA A300 hop across the pond to such a high capacity destination as LHR.
UAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (10 years 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4639 times:
Quoting StevenUhl777 (Reply 9): I believe UA also had BOS from the start, but along with EWR, that slot and authority was sold in a silent bid, which BA won.
Nope BOS was not at the start, it was something like mid 90's, flight 998/999 flown by 763. It only lasted a few years (not sure of exact dates) but know that it only kept going that long because of cargo.