AirT85 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (14 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2003 times:
As we all know Air Tran is the former ValuJet. Well last year they lost 49 million dollars and are still losing money after losing flight 592 and the merger. After the FAA backed off, they began having accidents again. A 737 landed in ATL and the gear failed, a DC-9 lost hydraulic pressure while waiting to cross the runway in ATL and was narrowly missed by the plane taking off when it shot across the runway. Service is still a little bad, and much more "incidents" have occured. So do you think they will make it or end up folding?
Cody From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1928 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (14 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1905 times:
All airlines have little mishaps or maintnenance problems like this. It's just that the media is too foolish too understand. I think AirTran will be OK. They seem to have some sort of magic formula. I no longer consider it the former ValuJet. Hardly any of the original employees are there (I was once one) and the only left over is the actual aircraft they use.
ATL Traveller From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 166 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (14 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1885 times:
God, I hope they don't go away. They're the only thing keeping Delta's fares relatively low in Atlanta, especially on the Florida and Boston routes which I use often. I fly AirTran about half time and have no problem with them or their service.
Asqx From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 601 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (14 years 6 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1872 times:
What is so bad about a landing gear failure? In the 1990s Alaska Airlines had had atleast 2 nose gear collapses on landings I can rememeber and that is just with MD80s at Sea-Tac. And Alaska is a pretty safe airline to fly.
Air Tran is NOT JUST VALUJET. There was another company with which they merged to create the new Valujet. When they did this, they created problems for themselves. These are the same problems any airline(s) get when they merger or buy out another airline. They now have a much larger workforce with many posistions that overlap in areas where both airlines had operations. It can be an expensive and time consuming process to reorganize two airlines and streamline the operations to make it more profitable and more productive. That combined with orders for BRAND NEW aircraft is probably why Air Tran isn't making a lot of money. Think of this though. When Air Tran gets all of their 717s, they will have a VERY young fleet of aircraft which will increase safety on their flights because of the newer more advanced systems then the DC-9s and 737s they fly now.
What do you mean by "service is still a little bad.."? Is it bad compared to small, full fare carriers such as Singapore, Cathay Pacific, or Virgin Atlantic? Or is it bad compared to the CRAPTASTIC service that you get on ANY domestic US flight on ANY airline where you only pay $200 hundred bucks and expect to get waited on hand and foot during the whole flight with the f/a cattering to your every whim?
I say, give them 5 - 10 years then see how they are doing. Besides, I kinda like the paint scheme coming out on the 717s. It looks a lot better than the typical "great white whale" schemes that seem to be EVERYWHERE these days.
William From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1231 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (14 years 6 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1861 times:
The only problem Airtrans has is ATLANTA. If Delta is complaining about growth problems,don't you think it will also effect Airtran? Capacity at ATL is nil for growth until they build more runways. Thats the only thing standing in Airtrans way. Its definately not competition form Delta that will cause any problems.
What may worry Airtran officials is that SWA is rumored to be looking into the ATL market again,and is scouting some unserved airports around the area to start up .
24291 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (14 years 6 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1848 times:
It may be a gamble, but I think with the 717, AirTran could operate a very competitive point-to-point system. I'm not saying they should give up their operations out of ATL, but they could have flights skipping all over the country. It's a big country, Southwest hasn't reached many parts of it yet. I think they could move up into Colorado and the Dakotas and make a killing! (Maybe not the best choice of words)
AirT85 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (14 years 6 months 3 weeks ago) and read 1832 times:
Okay i have read all your comments and just wanted to know what you all thought. when i said service was still a little bad i meant that compared to other airlines flying out of atlanta and to any low fare carrier on the east coast- i fly them alot.
NAL757 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (14 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1823 times:
Those of you who are making negative comments about AirTran obviously haven't looked into their history, even as Valujet. AirTran has a very knowledgable leadership and have basically pulled themselves out of one of the biggest media holes that could possibly be made. Surviving major quarterly losses should prove to any half-brained person that AirTran will be just fine. Like someone said earlier, the only reason you hear about the common, minor mechanical problems is because the media has blown this up. With the new aircraft coming on board, expect AirTran to rule many of the markets, very soon. Don't blink!