Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Did The 747 Or USA Deregulation Kill PanAm?  
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4019 posts, RR: 11
Posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 9776 times:

USAToday has a great article in it's on-line edition about the final paychecks and payments coming from the PanAm liquidation trust, nearly 15 years after it ceased to operate as the USA's premiere overseas carrier. The article further took an in depth look at what brought about PanAm's demise and the mistakes made along the corporate history road-path.
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2006-10-30-pan-am-usat_x.htm
Your thoughts?


DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
46 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineStokes From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 27 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 9760 times:

I doubt this contributed much to the fall of PanAm, but I loved their liberal upgrade policy. I traveled every few weeks to Europe through JFK on a coach ticket, could waltz into the business lounge, say "please" and walk out with a biz class ride. Worked equally well on the other end, esp. Vienna, once you got to know the staff.

PA also famous for the easiest phone # asks off flight attendants in airline history! Is it a coincidence that I got married a year after PA went belly up?

Gawd I miss Pan Am.


User currently offlineNosedive From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 9748 times:

There were the problems of digesting the National acquisition as well....

User currently offlineKevin777 From Denmark, joined Sep 2006, 1165 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 9741 times:

I'm sure Pan Am was a wonderful airline to fly on (a bit too young to have tried it, or at least remember..) - but IMHO neither the 747, nor U.S. deregulation brought Pan Am down. They can only thank themselves for that - inefficient operations, costs out of control, fire sales of their most precious assets (routes) etc.. They dug they're own grave..

Kevin777



"I was waiting for you at DFW, but you must have been in LUV" CPH-HAM-CPH CR9
User currently offlineMilesrich From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1988 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 9637 times:

Pan Am was destroyed by the following decisions and events:

1. The granting of Trans Atlantic Routes to other airlines, i.e: AA and DL from DFW, DL from ATL, BN from DFW, NA from MIA. These inroads negated the need for passengers to connect to Pan Am flights at their transatlantic gateways.

2. The introduction of too many 747's, creating too much capacity. Pan Am made other bad equipment decisions too, the most glaring waiting to buy the L-1011-500 rather than opting for the DC-10-30 or 40. Their lack of preventive maintenance early on also led to higher costs in the 80's. When they traded the NA DC-10's to AA for 747-123's, American sued them for fraud, for misrepresenting the condition of the former National Airplanes.

3. Terrible management and service. Believe it or not, TWA became the preferred carrier where they competed with Pan Am. As my dad, who was a frequent Trans Atlantic business passenger, used to say: "Pan Am acts like they are doing you a favor to give you a seat.

4. The acquisition of National Airlines. Wrong airline, terrible timing, and paid way to much, thanks to the price being bid way up by Frank Lorenzo and Frank Borman. National gave little feed to the JFK Transatlantic Hub (Florida Cities, CHS, PHF, ORH only), and the acquisition was made right at the time it wasn't needed, as deregulation took effect soon after. Their Pacific routes were only fed from IAH and MSY. At the time, the story of the acquisition was they were really getting the routes for free, because of the then value of the National's fleet of 727's and DC-10's. The used airplane increased price value was a short lived phenomena. Plus Pan Am got stuck with a work force and seniority list problems that really never were solved.

5. Concentration on North Atlantic routes which had poor yields due to the subsidies paid to their competition, which were mostly government owned carriers.

6. Then later, sale of their two best assets: The LHR routes, and the high yield Pacific routes.

7. A VERY poor safety record, prior to the bombing of PA 103. Pan Am had several 707 fatal crashes, two in Pago Pago I recall, and a two or so others, caused by pilot error, that exposed problems with their training program.

If my last Pan Am trip in 1989 had been the rule and not the exception, they might have made it. I flew MIA - GIG in Business Class on a 747-122 acquired from United, that was a great flight, with great service, food and a crew that was the best. Senior flight attendants that started on the 377 that gave the absolutely best service.

I have not read the USA Today article, but one thing that is certain, Delta Air Lines did not cause Pan Am to shut down, contrary to what many have posted here.


User currently offlineDoor5right From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2005, 707 posts, RR: 16
Reply 5, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 9617 times:

The airline never recovered from the horror of Pan Am 103 blowing up over Lockerbie in 1988. Passenger numbers plumeted thereafter although the airline was already in serious financial trouble by that stage.


My soul is in the sky...
User currently offlineWalter747 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 1440 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 9594 times:

such a shame to see a great american airline fail


Hussel, Hussel, Husel, Grind, Grind, Grind
User currently offlineLawnDart From United States of America, joined May 2005, 969 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 9563 times:

Quoting Milesrich (Reply 4):
Pan Am was destroyed by the following decisions and events:

Milesrich...a very intelligent post, thanks!

Quoting Milesrich (Reply 4):
Pan Am made other bad equipment decisions too, the most glaring waiting to buy the L-1011-500 rather than opting for the DC-10-30 or 40.

And then adding the A300/A310...what widebody aircraft didn't Pan Am operate? The one they should've...the B767.

Quoting Milesrich (Reply 4):
3. Terrible management and service.

Notably C. Edward Acker...

Quoting Milesrich (Reply 4):
6. Then later, sale of their two best assets: The LHR routes, and the high yield Pacific routes.

Although I agree with you, it begs the question...why didn't UA become one of the strongest carriers in the U.S., since they acquired both of these assets.

Quoting Milesrich (Reply 4):
4. The acquisition of National Airlines.

I'm still in mourning...


User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4019 posts, RR: 11
Reply 8, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 9554 times:

Quoting Door5right (Reply 5):
The airline never recovered from the horror of Pan Am 103 blowing up over Lockerbie in 1988. Passenger numbers plummeted thereafter although the airline was already in serious financial trouble by that stage.

That said, I think the Canary Islands carnage from 1977 was the start of that downfall.

Quoting Milesrich (Reply 4):
I have not read the USA Today article, but one thing that is certain, Delta Air Lines did not cause Pan Am to shut down, contrary to what many have posted here.

The article is a GREAT READ for all the PanAm enthusiasts here on a.net, so I suggest they take a good in-depth read. But thank you for clarifying that Delta did not destroy PanAm. In fact they hurt themselves financially for too long by paying too much for PanAm's trans-Atlantic routes.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineJfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8248 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 9206 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Pan Am was hurt by too many 747's, inefficient 747SP just to fly to NRT from JFK and the Arab oil embargo of the late 1970's. Pan AM never invested in the mid 1980's in 747-200B with capabilty to fly from nonstop JFK to NRT. They kept using the same old ones, with less range and payload, had since 1970 until they closed in 1991. PA should have purchased UA or AA with the big ORD midwest hub so crucial to the international operations of those airlines today.

User currently offlineN231YE From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 9157 times:

Quoting Milesrich (Reply 4):
4. The acquisition of National Airlines. Wrong airline, terrible timing, and paid way to much, thanks to the price being bid way up by Frank Lorenzo and Frank Borman.

Thank you for posting this. This is probably the biggest of all of PA's mistakes. I learned this in an air transport class; after deregulation, PA, who was mostly an international carrier, wanted to increase their presence nationally. In doing so, they bought National Airlines, and expanded too rapidly, and the income from the domestic operations could not pay off the sale. Thus Pan Am never made a profit in the 1980s, and by the late 80s/early 90s, in the sale of its routes and liquidation, PA literally bled to death. Interesting that the article failed to mention this.

Quoting Milesrich (Reply 4):
I have not read the USA Today article, but one thing that is certain, Delta Air Lines did not cause Pan Am to shut down, contrary to what many have posted here.

Most certainly. Delta bought many of PA's routes, but did not take the risk of purchasing the defunct airline. AA took the risk and bought bankrupt TWA, and then...9/11. AA came close to the brink of bankruptcy (which AA is the only carrier to have never been in bankruptcy), but they were lucky, and pulled through.

Quoting Milesrich (Reply 4):
2. The introduction of too many 747's, creating too much capacity.

Unfortunately for PanAm, they never saw it coming. It was known that air travel had increased exponentially throughout the 1960s, and both PA and Boeing saw this as an opportunity to create a bigger aircraft to accomodate more passengers. However, the oil embargo caused damage to both sides (the 747 line slowed to a trickle in the 1970s), while high costs killed the airline industry,and the 747s for which PA was eager to use, did not become economically viable.

*It should also be mentioned, that PA was one of the airlines that thrived in the regulated environment-not a well run business. When the CAB sunset started to occur, PA was left on its own, and could not compete. It joined Braniff and Eastern as causalities of deregulation.

[Edited 2006-11-01 00:55:24]

User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4019 posts, RR: 11
Reply 11, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 9147 times:

Quoting LawnDart (Reply 7):
Milesrich...a very intelligent post, thanks!

Very much agreed!

Quoting LawnDart (Reply 7):
And then adding the A300/A310...what widebody aircraft didn't Pan Am operate? The one they should've...the B767.

Going with Airbus at that point was not very smart. Sticking with Boeing and perhaps adding the 762LR first and later the 763 ER would have been VERY good for PanAM, just ask DL today.

Quoting LawnDart (Reply 7):
Notably C. Edward Acker...

Is he closely related to Leo Mullin or Ronald W. Allen? The two who nearly destroyed DL.

Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 9):
Pan AM never invested in the mid 1980's in 747-200B with capability to fly from nonstop JFK to NRT. They kept using the same old ones, with less range and payload, had since 1970 until they closed in 1991.

This and the lack of 762s and 763s was a killer. They took delivery of too many 747s right out of the chute, and really never found a way to use these a/c in an operationally efficient manner.

Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 9):
PA should have purchased UA or AA with the big ORD midwest hub so crucial to the international operations of those airlines today.

By the time the era of De-regulation had stated PA was already seriously wounded and could not afford to merge with AA or UA, and get a viable interior USA hub at ORD or DFW. DL clearly saw this in the late 1980s and having just swallowed Western, they really couldn't afford what they paid for the PA Trans-Atlantic routes not to mention the worthless Airbus A310s they inherited with that acquisition.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4104 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 9129 times:

Quoting LawnDart (Reply 7):
Although I agree with you, it begs the question...why didn't UA become one of the strongest carriers in the U.S., since they acquired both of these assets.

During most of the 90's, I'd argue that UA WAS the strongest carrier in the US.


User currently offlineSteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9174 posts, RR: 18
Reply 13, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 9071 times:

I did like seeing PanAm with the 747, but 78 of them? That IS way to many to operate. How many does the average international airline have now, like 30 or 40 at the most? With that oil situation from the '70s, I would have sold some of those gas guzzling planes... Some 747s, L1011, the 707s, what was PanAm doing with all of those expensive planes that they had trouble filling? I mean, the 707 had how many seats, well over 200, like upwards of 220 or 230 seats, and that was the smallest of the 707, L1011, A300, and 747 aircraft!

What was the deal with National Airlines? Yeah, someone said that they provided very little connectivity and feed to the JFK transatlantic hub. What did PanAm do that lead them to buying that airline? What did they consider, observe, review, etc...?

Man, If I win the super jackpot of like 300million, I would like to buy that airline and restart it the correct way. Then again, there is already quite a bit of capacity now and it would only lead to yet another downfall...



Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
User currently offlineLijnden From Netherlands, joined Apr 2003, 561 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 9066 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Pan Am was struggling for years economical, selling off all key assets to keep investors pleased for about 5 to 10 years. Even with the low fuel prices of the late 80's and early 90's Pan Am simply couldn't cope and fill the planes with good paying passengers. One of the reasons was that there was never a true replacement for the B707 and that Pan Am never expected the twin engines to be granted to fly ETOPS. There was also some sort of problem between Boeing and Pan Am and because of this and Pan Am never bought a Boeing again. I think the B757 and B767 would have been perfect for Pan Am as would be the F-100 as a feeder. So, I think the direct factors that caused PA to go belly up was the ETOPS, the lack of B757/B767 as a replacement for the B707 and a very poor feeder network. If Pan Am would have survived they would have flown mainly with A310/A330/A340 internationally and B727/F-100 domestic. I think they would have joined the star*-alliance.


Be kind to animals!
User currently offlineJfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8248 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 9025 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Pan A, did operate many 747 but never 60-something, they operated 45 in the mid 1980's before the Asian sale to UA. 40 747 for service to Europe and South America wouldhave been too much after Asia was sold.

User currently offlineUSPIT10L From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 3295 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 8998 times:

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 13):
What was the deal with National Airlines? Yeah, someone said that they provided very little connectivity and feed to the JFK transatlantic hub. What did PanAm do that lead them to buying that airline? What did they consider, observe, review, etc...?

Pan Am decided to buy another airline with the money that had been earned from 1977-1979, instead of investing that money in new equipment and routes to build up a domestic network. If they had built their own domestic network, JFK, MIA and SFO would've had more of a chance to make money on their own, instead of relying on interline connections. Network-wise that was Pan Am's biggest problem after deregulation, and it was one reason why the company ultimately failed.

The 747 did contribute to Pan Am's demise, but by the time they went belly-up, twenty years had gone by--the business changed--and Pan Am was unable to adapt.



It's a Great Day for Hockey!
User currently offlineUalcsr From United States of America, joined May 2006, 485 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 8820 times:

Can anyone recommend a good book about the demise of Pan Am; something similar to John Nance's Braniff book, "Splash of Colors"? Thanks in advance.

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21456 posts, RR: 60
Reply 18, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 8776 times:

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 13):
How many does the average international airline have now, like 30 or 40 at the most?

It's actually 30-60 or so for the biggest airlines (who operate the 747 at all), but many carriers are phasing some out and not replacing them with more 747s...



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineMovingtin From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 183 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 8712 times:

Quoting LawnDart (Reply 7):
Although I agree with you, it begs the question...why didn't UA become one of the strongest carriers in the U.S., since they acquired both of these assets

I believe UA has been in the top 3 of US airlines since those purchases! care to elabarate on your comment?


User currently offlineZippyjet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 5467 posts, RR: 13
Reply 20, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 8705 times:

""You'll never get on an airline that is as good as Pan Am was," says 83-year-old Mary Goshgarin, the unofficial keeper of the Pan Am flame. For 35 years she worked in the Clipper Club, Pan Am's lounge for VIPs at the Miami airport. Now she runs, on a strictly volunteer basis, the Pan Am Aware store, a treasure trove of Pan Am memorabilia at the Miami airport."

A paragraph from this story. I visited the little store/shrine of Pan Am classic.
It is a 5 minute ride from MIA terminal. There is a 1960s vintage no tell motel called the Airways Inn that has free shuttle bus to their lobby. The Pan Am Aware store is across busy S.W. 36th. st. Cross at your own risk but, it is worth it! My buddy and I shuttled over to the no tell motel, and quickly scurried across the bustling multi laned street to the museaum/store. We both bought wall clocks with the Pan Am "meatball" and the second hand has a little jet at the end. Cool! Though we are both FL crew, I and my buddy don't think we are traders to our own company. There will never be another Pan Am classic! And, with Pan Am passing, that has paved the way for our company to take over many of those old National/Pan Am domestic routes and do quite well. A lot of A-Netter's consider us the next incarnation of Eastern! (our route structure)



The 747 being the beginning of the end for Pan Am? Maybe yes and maybe no!
Back in the swinging 60s it was the three B's Beetles, Batman and Bond. And, if you flew, it was Pan Am and Eastern! Who knew dreregulation would be flying their way in a dozen years? Pan Am and other international carriers relyin on 707 and DC-8s? Both excellent birds but, thirsty and inefficient as the first of the oil shortages and price gouging started. 40 years ago, it was projected that air travel would grow even under the regulated system. It did!
Though the hump nosed jumbo was costly, it proved superior over it's airliner brothers from Lockheed and Douglass. The latter two companies encountered financial issues (lockheed) and reliability and safety issues (Douglass).

Pan Am was always a trendsetter! First 707 service in '58. They even ordered the De Havilland Comet before, it imploded in midair back in the early 50s.
Pan Am was even one of the first to sign on the dotted line for the Boeing 2707 supersonic.



OK so these are models. But, I know online there are actual artist renderings of Boeing 2707 jets with the "meatball" on them.

The other reasons stated in the article are on the money or for Pan Am lack of.

And, to end on a lighter note, the two of us took our lives in our hands and crossed the street back to the roach motel to get the shuttle back to MIA.
They eyed us suspicially with all the booty we bought from the Pan Am Aware store!
They asked if we were guests of their lodging establishment? With quick Zippyjetthinking, I whipped out a picture of this blonde sexy flight attendant named Muffy who likes to wear her blues as short as possible; I told the dude, I think his name was Riande: "We have to pick up my friend Muffy and then arrange to have your van pick us up at the airport. Well, folks, a good source says Riande and company are still asking where the two dudes and the hottie flight attendant are? Soon, I'll post a pic of Muffy.  bouncy 



I'm Zippyjet & I approve of this message!
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4019 posts, RR: 11
Reply 21, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 8644 times:

Zippyjet: What airline nowadays has the torch been passed to that reminds you and others of what PanAm was once upon a time? Emirates? Singapore? Cathay Pacific?

I think it was a combination of several things that spiraled out of control: Too Many 1st generation 747s along with other significant fleet errors, Energy spikes of the 1970s, De-regulation of the domestic market in the USA along with the allowing of other carriers aside from PanAm and TWA to do overseas flying and the poor management that didn't know how to deal with change and do a significant paradigm shift from the late 1970s onward ultimately doomed this storied carrier. When it rains it pours and by the 1980s it was.

For some nostalgia, go and rent Steven Spielberg's "Catch Me If You Can" starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Tom Hanks. You'll see PanAm featured with all of its 1960s and early 1970s nostalgia we all enjoy and wish could some how return.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineLawnDart From United States of America, joined May 2005, 969 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 8567 times:

Quoting Movingtin (Reply 19):
I believe UA has been in the top 3 of US airlines since those purchases! care to elabarate on your comment?

Sure, I'll elaborate...having purchased both Pan Am's lucrative Pacific and Heathrow rights, I wondered why UA hadn't become on of the strongest carriers in the U.S. Not one of the largest (they are that), but one of the strongest.

I think their recent trip through Chapter 11 is elaboration enough.


User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9601 posts, RR: 69
Reply 23, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 8535 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

The end of the Cold War killed Pan Am. Pan Am was a great airline, but was also a tool of the US Government...once the wall fell it was all over.

When the Russians started retreating out of places like Africa in the early 80s Pan Am closed down a lot of routes that received under the table government $$$.


User currently offlineL1011Lover From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 989 posts, RR: 14
Reply 24, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 8476 times:

Quoting LawnDart (Reply 7):
Although I agree with you, it begs the question...why didn't UA become one of the strongest carriers in the U.S., since they acquired both of these assets.

The acquisition of these routes is one reason why UA is still around!


25 AirFRNT : It's a rather unpopular truth, but it's still a fact that the huge boom in 747s did a amazing amount of damage to international carriers. Even Pan Am
26 Milesrich : Peoples Express purchased their 747's used some 13-14 years after they were introduced into service. But most airlines had trouble filling them. Other
27 BostonBeau : A decent book about the demise of Pan Am is "Skygods: The Fall of Pan Am" by Robert Gandt ISBN: 1888962119.
28 BHMNONREV : From my perspective, this was the principle reason for the beginning of the end for PanAm. I have heard several people make this same claim, this jus
29 Dtwclipper : and just for fun:
30 Jcavinato : In 1969 PanAm was taking reservations for what would be their (and anyone's) first commercial flight to the moon. This was a carrier that knew how to
31 Post contains links Magyarorszag : There are two books you must read I thinkand if you can get your hands on them: http://www.amazon.com/American-Icaru...Majestic-Tragic-Fall/dp/156167
32 Tu154 : United is the airline that Pan Am built. Saw that on a t-shirt once and thought it was cute, and in some ways true.
33 N231YE : Nice point, I failed to mention that. It was Juan Trippe who worked with Boeing to develop the 747, brought PanAm as the first American airline into
34 N766UA : Both! PA had very little domestic network pre-deregulation. Thus when it came about they had no feed for their 747s. They couldn't fill their airplane
35 Walter747 : so now what airline do you think is the closest to becoming the next pan am maybe UA
36 TAN FLYR : IIRC, PA's Intercontinental 707's had something close to 146 in coach and 24 in first. They also operated a number of "Charter Configured" 707's in a
37 Magyarorszag : I've searched in "Pan Am - An airline and its aircraft" and it is said that the B707-120 had 143 seats (no mention of how many in which class) and th
38 TAN FLYR : OK..I was close..No cigar, but close for remembering stuff from the late 70's on their 707's!
39 Post contains images Zippyjet : It's totally fictitious! But, my fellow A-Netter and airline buffs would love this exciting read about the resurgance of a new Pan Am Classic! A litt
40 Charlienorth : After $190 mil 3rd qtr? Maybe NWA
41 Steeler83 : Right, and now there's the A380. Does anyone really see this thing selling if airlines arent even buying more 747s to replace existing older ones? Oo
42 Post contains images BHMNONREV : I would guess that is accurate. TWA ran a 16F/129Y configuration on their International 707-331B right up until the end. I don't know how you could e
43 Alias1024 : If we are talking about airlines from the US, I would have to point to Continental. They have the most international focus of any of the majors. Tons
44 SLCUT2777 : Which is my point. I think the A380 could be the downfall of a few airlines who overplay this addition to their fleet. Could Qantas become the next P
45 DETA737 : I agree with what many people are saying about Pan Am's decision to buy National Airlines. A three-way bidding war with Eastern and Texas Internationa
46 Milesrich : Pan Am had NO domestic routes pre deregulation, inside the lower 48. They did fly to Fairbanks, AL (FAI) from SEA, and to HNL from the West Coast, but
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...
Did The 747 Meet Pre-launch Expectations? posted Mon Nov 14 2005 17:16:14 by JAM747
Cheap Routes For The 747 Or 777 posted Sun Dec 9 2001 08:13:53 by Dash8King
When Did Cathay Retire The 747-200 And -300? posted Wed Aug 30 2006 10:09:31 by Airbus_A340
Did The Boeing 747 400 Live Up To It's Expectation posted Sat Mar 5 2005 18:36:39 by 747400sp
Delta Did Operate The 747! posted Tue Nov 9 2004 02:32:58 by September11
Is This A 747 In The Backround Or What? posted Mon Mar 29 2004 04:21:50 by Trijetfan1
How Much Did Boeing Spend On The 747 Project? posted Wed Aug 20 2003 20:06:18 by Notar520AC
"Sum Of All Fears" - Which 747 Did The Movie Use? posted Thu May 30 2002 16:03:16 by Bobcat
Will CX Go For The B 747-400LR? Or More B 744s? posted Mon Mar 12 2001 05:50:55 by United Airline
Will SIA Purchase The B 747-400LR? Or More B 744s? posted Sun Mar 11 2001 09:44:33 by United Airline