Clippern7471sp From Australia, joined Jul 2006, 2 posts, RR: 0 Posted (8 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 6350 times:
As a former pan am frequent flyer who flew many american routes on our favorite clippers now past and gone would any one out there or business person consider restarting pana am and bring her out of the moth balls again. It can be done to see the former queen of the skies and the pioneers of aviation who broke records flying around the world and became the first airline to bring the jet age error into the future with 707 jets 747-121 jumbo jets and the first airline to order the baby jumbo jet known as the 747sp speacail preformance jet. we dearly miss her and would like to see pan am re appear in her former decals and flying newer 747 aircraft around the world. what do you all think. Can it be done or not?
What a fantasy. Pan Am's routes, equipment and personnel, all of which "make" a company, were chopped up and sold off to other airlines. All three components were integrated into the operations and cultures of other airlines.
Part of what killed Pan Am (I was there; I was part of the Delta acquisition of the North Atlantic Division) was the inability of the culture to change. Pan Am was VERY old-school at a time when revolutionary ideas about our business were being implemented all around us.
The same people could never recreate a profitable company. And without those people, you would never have the same company.
I have worked for Eastern Air Lines, Pan Am and Delta. Delta is a nice place to work even with all of the financial chaos going on. Eastern was a fun place to work. Pan Am was a chaotic mess of a place to work and had been for decades.
I would guess that what you "miss" so much is the glitz and glamour of the past. That, i'm afraid, is gone forever.
Tired of airline bankruptcies....EA/PA/TW and finally DL.
KSUpilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 656 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 6269 times:
There have been attempts at a Pan Am rebirth:
"Pan Am II
A new investment group including Charles Cobb, the former Ambassador to Iceland, purchased the rights to the Pan American brand after the original carrier declared bankruptcy. In September 1996, Pan Am II was started with an Airbus A300 named the Clipper Fair Wind. The goal was to provide low-cost, long-distance travel to major U.S. and Caribbean cities. The new airline was led by the last Vice Chairman and Chief Operations Officer of Pan Am, Marty Shugrue, who also helped in the creation of the WorldPass frequent flyer program and who served as President of American Airlines and later trustee of the Eastern Air Lines estate.
In September 1997, Pan Am Corporation, the airline operation's holding company, bought Carnival Airlines. However, the rapid expansion and economic troubles of the two companies were too much for the new Pan Am—it only survived for two years before declaring bankruptcy. Before Pan Am and Carnival could fully merge, the holding company and its two independently operated airlines, Pan Am and Carnival, filed bankruptcy and ceased scheduled flight operations in February 1998. The operating certificate used for the first reincarnated Pan Am was abandoned in favor of the acquired Carnival's operating certificate. Pan Am, now operating with the Carnival certificate, quickly resumed limited charter operations while new owner Guilford Transportation Industries acquired certain assets of the bankrupt companies after court approval. The new company emerged from bankruptcy in June 1998.
Pan Am III
In June 1998, the Pan Am brand was sold to Guilford Transportation Industries, a railroad company headed by Tim Mellon of the Pittsburgh banking family. Guilford launched Pan American Airways with a fleet of seven Boeing 727s. The third incarnation resumed scheduled operations in October 1999 and flew to nine cities in New England, Florida, the Canadian Maritimes and Puerto Rico. The focus was on secondary airports such as Orlando Sanford International Airport instead of Orlando International Airport, and Pease International Airport and Worcester Regional Airport instead of the crowded Logan International Airport in the Boston area. Pan Am later had cooperative service arrangements with Boston-Maine Airways, a subsidiary incorporated by the airline in March 1999. Guilford ceased operating Pan Am on November 1, 2004. Operations were transferred to Boston-Maine Airways, which resumed 727 service under the "Pan Am Clipper Connection" brand from February 17, 2005."
Afay1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 1293 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 6223 times:
Aside from the hilarious spelling errors (not to be overly pedantic), it is an impossible dream. An immediate launch of a large, American, 747-based airline is next to impossible. Only two large American carriers even operate the 747, and both of them have financial difficulties and rapidly aging 747 fleets in dire need of in-cabin overhauls. It would pretty much take the Bill Gates-level capital and even after startup, how could a business model based on essentially an all-first class glamorous experience ever succeed in today's market (it couldn't succeed in even the 1980's market)....
CXB744 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 232 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 6196 times:
Nothing is impossible, but this is improbable.
Someone, or organization, would need to have a lot a cash to literally burn to return Pan Am to the skies. Routes and aircraft have to be obtained as well as ground facilities at airports, not to mention maintenance, reservations, so on and so on.
Delta seems to be filling the Pan Am void has it expands to more and more international destinations.
Would it be great to see Pan Am as an international carrier from the US again, Sure! We all can dream.
What is it? It's A 747-400, but that's not important right now.
AAL0616 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 272 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (8 years 4 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 6131 times:
Interesting comment Sparkling Wave. Although Delta acquired Kennedy, Atlantic authorities and the shuttle, I've always considered United the successor carrier to Pan Am, for many reasons. First, the dedicated and classy people of the Pacific Division, its very considerable assets and history, for $750 million, an unbelievable bargain; the marquee flagship authority to London Heathrow, and, last but not least, the Latin American Division based in Miami, at auction, which Delta (unwisely) did not take along with New York. With all its financial problems, associated with the cyclical rise and fall of North Atlantic revenues, the local union stuff, the (shh!) "mob" and others in New York raking money off the company (a.k.a, outright theft) and unwise, come and go Acker domestic route whims a la Braniff following deregulation, thrashing the National folks and culture, etc. etc., the "real deal" is:
The Pacific and Latin America always made money and were the soul of the company. Acker sold San Francisco, Los Angeles, Honolulu and Tokyo; cut off Pan Am's arms and legs, and all of it eventually saved United, actually; later, Miami, which for Pan Am (less National but also National solo) always made money on its own (given high Latin yields), was ironically ignored by Delta when they could have had a deal for it (blinked when challenged by American grabbing Eastern's carcass?), but then was smartly grabbed by United but then abandoned due mostly to the bankruptcy in retrospect. So many threads of history.
All perhaps inevitable. Rather than wish Pan Am back, which is certainly beyond belief unless, yes, United, the route-map successor, changes its name and restores many services, I imagine the sale of New York; possibly Acker's idea of building up Dulles to escape the Kennedy black hole (which he tried to start doing half-heartedly before being let go, and Steve Wolf then did), but most importantly, what about the fantasy of:
Pan Am kept the Pacific and Latin America and sold the Atlantic except London?
I know. Fantasy. Almost like calling the current little 727-thing Pan Am.
PWM2TXLHopper From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1360 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (8 years 4 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 6124 times:
Quoting Clippern7471sp (Thread starter): s a former pan am frequent flyer who flew many american routes on our favorite clippers now past and gone would any one out there or business person consider restarting pana am and bring her out of the moth balls again. It can be done to see the former queen of the skies and the pioneers of aviation who broke records flying around the world and became the first airline to bring the jet age error into the future with 707 jets 747-121 jumbo jets and the first airline to order the baby jumbo jet known as the 747sp speacail preformance jet. we dearly miss her and would like to see pan am re appear in her former decals and flying newer 747 aircraft around the world. what do you all think. Can it be done or not?
As already mentioned, Pan Am is still around even though it's not the original, and is far from it.
MalpensaSFO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5671 times:
Sorry, but how can anything call itself Pan Am? This business of buying and selling names only cheapens the legacy of what once was. For many of us Pan Am was the 747, Pan Am was JFK, Pan Am was LHR, Pan Am was San Francisco, Pan Am was elegance.. The same as for many of us.. TWA was the 747, TWA was the L1011, TWA was JFK, TWA was STL, TWA was Rome, TWA was a recognized leader.. Now we all are hear talking about a name that someone purchased to use on a lowly airline that flys cheap gamblers from A to B, and overall only tarnishes what we once loved about a great and wonderful airline.
As far as Pan Am goes, there is a number of ex Pan Am In-Flight Management and Crew Members working for EOS(Hector Adler of note), Delta, and United Airlines.
ChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4163 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5669 times:
Quoting SparkingWave (Reply 8): All it would take would be for someone to buy United Airlines and the Pan Am trademark and slap that blue meatball over the UA "U" on the tail.
That's not far from what Pan Am III did. They purchased several United 727-200s and flew them up to Portsmouth, New Hampshire and repainted the 'U's' with blue meatballs.
As a New Hampshire resident, I am tremendously embarrassed that this current incarnation of Pan Am has anything to do with New Hampshire. But Guilford Transportation is--in my opinion, so as not to run the risk of defamation--the sleaziest outfit going. That, of course, is a function of the people. But they purchased the Pan Am logo and some other assets and ran roughshod all over it, leaving unpaid bills and angry airport operators in their wake. Now you know why Pan Am III barely stays long enough at any one airport, and why they fly to no-name airports in the first place. A charade, an embarrassment, a folly, a crime that Guilford has anything to do with Pan Am. They can't even run their railroad operations well, never mind an airline.
AAL0616 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 272 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 5632 times:
Chris NH is absolutely right about the current Pan Am III owners, or how they are viewed by virtually everyone in the original Pan Am community and anyone who has come in contact with them or worked with them.
It is very sad and strange, and given the issues surrounding them, it would not be surprising to see legal actions regarding several serious possible charges become public in the near future.
Personally, seeing the Pan Am logo on railroad rolling stock is particularly galling, let alone the sleazy operating certificate shenanigans.
Georgiabill From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5584 times:
Ditto AAL0616. It's sad to see freight cars with Pan Am's logo on them. Yesterday I saw one passing through Durham N.H. northbound. All I can say the owners of this once proud name and logo have certainly tarnished the image.
AwysBSB From Brazil, joined Sep 2005, 565 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5493 times:
I do not understand why anyone miss United, American and Delta that existed during 70`s.
Why Pan Am and TWA have to be the missed ones?
It seems Pan Am and TWA are fated to be images of the past.
I think we should start to imagine how would be those two airlines, if they had not ceased operations and have been progressing in the same way of British, United or JAL.
WesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5723 posts, RR: 24
Reply 23, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 5402 times:
Quoting Jetdeltamsy (Reply 11): He killed Pan Am. He left a trail of bankrupt carriers...Braniff, BWIA, Pan Am and FlyI.
Pan Am was rapidly sliding towards failure ever since Juan Trippe bought the 747's. PA ddt need THAT manyof them (I believe 25 was the original order?). That put PA in a HUGE financial black hole. Najeeb Halaby, Ed Acker and everone else running PA was so mesmerized by the history and grandeur of what WAS, that they couldnt see ahead. Much like Braniff, and other airlines.
Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 15): The same as for many of us.. TWA was the 747, TWA was the L1011, TWA was JFK, TWA was STL, TWA was Rome, TWA was a recognized leader..
TWA was ATH as well...and in my mind...SLC...read back to their early history and find out what i mean.