Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Does AA Not Have B747's?  
User currently offlineEUROBUS From Spain, joined Nov 2004, 313 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 6 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 17348 times:

Sorry if this has been brought up before.

I am curious to know why AA have no B747's. If I am not wrong, it seems to be the only US airline with trans-continental flights and one of the few major airlines in the world not to have them. Any specific reason why? If it's because of the 777's, well... others have both. Why not AA?

Thanks for your comments.


Who says airports are boring places?!
73 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16810 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 17356 times:



Quoting EUROBUS (Thread starter):
If I am not wrong, it seems to be the only US airline with trans-continental flights and one of the few major airlines in the world not to have them. Any specific reason why? If it's because of the 777's, well... others have both. Why not AA?

Most of the big six have operated 747s at one point or another, US Airways being the exception.

AA, CO, DL, UA, NWA.

For most carriers the 777 more than enough.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12090 posts, RR: 49
Reply 2, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 17325 times:

CO no longer operates them and until recently neither did DL.


You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 17276 times:



Quoting EUROBUS (Thread starter):
I am curious to know why AA have no B747's.

Because they don't need them...and they have 777's.



"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineORDagent From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 823 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 17269 times:

When I worked for AA the resoning was that more frequency with smaller aircraft is a more profitable than less frequent larger aircraft. In other words the high yield business traveler would rather have a choice of four daily flights to LHR at convenient times rather than only one choice a day.

User currently offlineCitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2420 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 17219 times:

Quoting EUROBUS (Thread starter):
it seems to be the only US airline with trans-continental flights


Alaska Airlines, JetBlue, and Continental have non-stop transcon flights and they don't have 747s. Alaska and JetBlue don't have 777s.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 1):
For most carriers the 777 more than enough.

US carriers wtih transcontinental flights don't use 747s on them even if they have them. Most US transcons are flown with 757s, 767s, A319s, A320s and some 737s.

http://flightaware.com/live/findflight/KJFK/KLAX

http://flightaware.com/live/findflight/KLAX/KBOS

http://flightaware.com/live/findflight/KJFK/KSFO

.

[Edited 2009-01-18 10:27:19]


Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
User currently offlineEUROBUS From Spain, joined Nov 2004, 313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 17199 times:



Quoting ORDagent (Reply 4):
high yield business traveler would rather have a choice of four daily flights to LHR at convenient times rather than only one choice a day

This makes all the sense in the world.... when this is possible, like JFK-LHR. But recently I flew the LHR-LAX route on AA and it was a complete load. And there is only one flight a day. This happens on many important rAA outes. This is why I am curious. BA, VS and others will be using 744's and gain extra pax.



Who says airports are boring places?!
User currently offlineMayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10342 posts, RR: 14
Reply 7, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 17174 times:



Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 2):
CO no longer operates them and until recently neither did DL.

I think the poster was referring to the U.S. carriers that have, at one time or another, operated the 747. DL did operate them from 70-77 and of course, now with the NW 747's.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineBurnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7529 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 17150 times:



Quoting EUROBUS (Thread starter):
I am curious to know why AA have no B747's. If I am not wrong, it seems to be the only US airline with trans-continental flights and one of the few major airlines in the world not to have them.

Well really on NW and UA operate them, and they have been the only ones that could succesfully do it for quite some time.

Quoting EUROBUS (Reply 6):
But recently I flew the LHR-LAX route on AA and it was a complete load. And there is only one flight a day. This happens on many important rAA outes. This is why I am curious. BA, VS and others will be using 744's and gain extra pax.

Well it would add more cost, so they would be better off getting the 777-300. But just because the load is full on a 777 doesn't mean that it warrants a 747.



"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
User currently offlineNWADC9 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4896 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 17119 times:



Quoting EUROBUS (Thread starter):
I am curious to know why AA have no B747's. If I am not wrong, it seems to be the only US airline with trans-continental flights and one of the few major airlines in the world not to have them. Any specific reason why? If it's because of the 777's, well... others have both. Why not AA?

Those "others" are retiring their 747s and replacing them with more economical aircraft. Would you rather fill the tank up with gas for four gas-guzzlers or two?

In AA's case...

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Joe Pries - ATR Team



MD-11s replaced the 747s, which were then replaced with 777s.



Flying an aeroplane with only a single propeller to keep you in the air. Can you imagine that? -Capt. Picard
User currently offlineEUROBUS From Spain, joined Nov 2004, 313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 17018 times:



Quoting CitationJet (Reply 5):
US carriers wtih transcontinental flights don't use 747s on them even if they have them

You see a lot of United 744's at FRA, and even NorthWest Jumbo's at AMS.



Who says airports are boring places?!
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21471 posts, RR: 60
Reply 11, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 16996 times:

There is a language barrier here it seems. Transcon does not mean to/from Europe...


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineB707forever From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 459 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 16996 times:



Quoting ORDagent (Reply 4):
When I worked for AA the resoning was that more frequency with smaller aircraft is a more profitable than less frequent larger aircraft. In other words the high yield business traveler would rather have a choice of four daily flights to LHR at convenient times rather than only one choice a day.

 bigthumbsup   bigthumbsup 
Add to that cheaper operating costs and wanting to streamline their fleet.

Don't forget. AA was out in front with the 767 too for similar reasons, as it relates to overseas flights, and even the A300 went over water to Europe. AA has/was always about economy over service and will likely continue to stay that way. It did help them outlast TW, PA, EA, NE, etc.


User currently offlineEUROBUS From Spain, joined Nov 2004, 313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 16964 times:



Quoting NWADC9 (Reply 9):
MD-11s replaced the 747s, which were then replaced with 777s.

If it is all about cost and fuel efficiency, this also makes all the sense in the world. But yet again, we can all think of the major airlines all currently using 747's on long-haul, at least on this side if the ocean. BA, AF, KL, LH all use them. And all the main Asian carriers; JAL, ANA, China Airlines, CX, Thai, Singapore Airlines, Malaysian,.... further South; QF and NZ. Surely they have the same in mind?



Who says airports are boring places?!
User currently offlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17050 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 16964 times:

Transcons are flights between the US east and west coast. I think the word you are looking for is maybe Transatlantic flights.


Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently offlineNWADC9 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4896 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 16948 times:



Quoting EUROBUS (Reply 13):
If it is all about cost and fuel efficiency, this also makes all the sense in the world. But yet again, we can all think of the major airlines all currently using 747's on long-haul, at least on this side if the ocean. BA, AF, KL, LH all use them. And all the main Asian carriers; JAL, ANA, China Airlines, CX, Thai, Singapore Airlines, Malaysian,.... further South; QF and NZ. Surely they have the same in mind?

...and they're retiring them...



Flying an aeroplane with only a single propeller to keep you in the air. Can you imagine that? -Capt. Picard
User currently offlineNA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10630 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 16925 times:

AA had some 747s in the 70s. The oil crisis of 1973 meant that they were soon found to be too big, so that a number was converted to freighters and operated until the mid-80s. They were replaced by DC-10s, which were found to be perfect and later MD-11s, which were quickly replaced when the 777s arrived.
I also find it a bit odd for such a big airline not to operate VLAs as the main domestic routes should be busy enough to operate something bigger and more interesting than a 777. Seems AA concentrates on thinner routes and on trunk routes prefers frequency. I dont know wether AA has some routes that could justify VLAs, but if so, that cant be sufficiently enough to justify a subfleet, as otherwise they would have 744s.
Overall its sad that the proudest airliner the US ever built is not too highly valued there anymore.


User currently offlineEUROBUS From Spain, joined Nov 2004, 313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 16926 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 11):
There is a language barrier here it seems. Transcon does not mean to/from Europe...

Correct!  yes  What about the flights to HKG or NRT, for example.



Who says airports are boring places?!
User currently offlineCitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2420 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 16899 times:

There may be some confusion on the term "transcontinental" in the original post. Transcontinental means across a single continent such as North America; flights such as LAX to JFK.

United or NW flights to Europe would be intercontinental; or flights between two different continents.



Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
User currently onlineBigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2910 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 16900 times:



Quoting STT757 (Reply 1):
Most of the big six have operated 747s at one point or another, US Airways being the exception.

Not completely accurate. America West operated 747s to Nagoya for 20 minutes.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21471 posts, RR: 60
Reply 20, posted (5 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 16899 times:



Quoting EUROBUS (Reply 13):
If it is all about cost and fuel efficiency, this also makes all the sense in the world. But yet again, we can all think of the major airlines all currently using 747's on long-haul, at least on this side if the ocean.

This was a comment specifically about AA thought.

At AA, the MD11 replaced the 747SP (not a VLA in any sense, people make this mistake a lot, but it was a midsized long range aircraft). Then the 777 replaced the MD11, at AA.

AA has not had a VLA since their original 747s. Even back then, they found they preferred the smaller DC10s, and once the DC10 had transatlantic range, the 747 was out of the fleet.

It would never have returned had AA not been granted NRT rights and needed a plane to use before MD could deliver the MD11.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineEUROBUS From Spain, joined Nov 2004, 313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (5 years 6 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 16854 times:



Quoting CitationJet (Reply 18):
Transcontinental means across a single continent such as North America; flights such as LAX to JFK.

I'm sorry! my mistake.  duck  I was translating from Spanish, where it means from one Continent to the other. The term otherwise sould be intra-continental?  scratchchin 



Who says airports are boring places?!
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19363 posts, RR: 58
Reply 22, posted (5 years 6 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 16706 times:

The more interesting question is why neither AA nor DL is interested in the 773.

User currently offlineORDagent From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 823 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (5 years 6 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 16624 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 22):
The more interesting question is why neither AA nor DL is interested in the 773

I've wondered that too. However I think it really all comes down to the question of does a another aircraft type, even if a compatible sub type, make enough money versus the extra logistics involved. As far as DL goes they now operate the 747 from NW.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21471 posts, RR: 60
Reply 24, posted (5 years 6 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 16576 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 22):
The more interesting question is why neither AA nor DL is interested in the 773.

DL is interested in the 77W from what we hear. It's just they had no money to buy it, the same reason their 77E fleet was stalled out at 8 aircraft.

I expect the new DL to look seriously at the 77W to retire the 744.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
25 ElmoTheHobo : US Airlines split their traffic across multiple hubs. It makes sense to use smaller aircraft if your traffic is fragmented across three or four hubs,
26 DfwRevolution : DL has apparently shown some interest in the 773ER AA has said within the last few years that they don't have enough routes that could fill a 773 yea
27 JetJeanes : one of the only 747,s i was ever on was a 747 sp american had and the original delta 747 but for some reason they kept ordering more dc-10,s and had a
28 Viscount724 : AA took delivery of 16 747-100s in 1970-71. Like the 747s operated by most other US carriers that had no longhal international routes then, they prov
29 StarAC17 : AC is a pretty major international airline and they gave up the last of their 747's in 2004 and now use 333's, 763's, 77L's, and 773's and they seem
30 Luv2fly : I thought it had more to do with the pilots contract then anything else?
31 EXAAUADL : 747s arent really a flexible aircraft. You can really only use them on long haul high density markets. Where as a 763 can fly CDG-ORD then go fly LAX
32 HOOB747 : I would guess they are interested, but don't want to spend the money on new airframes in the current economic climate, more so in AA's case. But the
33 Badbda4 : DL had 747's before I think...
34 Mayor : Yes, we did. From 70-77, I believe.
35 Ikramerica : That was part of it. Especially from a PR front.
36 Mountain : I flew DL's 747 between DFW and ATL during the mid 1970's. Also, observed DL 747 service between Love Field and Atlanta prior to the opening of DFW. T
37 Jfk777 : AA doesn't have any 744 because the world has progressed. In 1970 there was a 747 and then a DC-10 and a 707. The 1980's bought us the efficiency of t
38 Viscount724 : 3 747-100s delivered in 1970 and 2 in 1971. First one sold in 1974, another in 1975, and the last 3 in 1977.
39 PGNCS : Who says DL isn't interested? Not saying you are wrong, I just haven't heard that. Everything I have heard is that DL wishes they had more 777's, and
40 Brilondon : This is the reason for the A380 not being ordered by any U.S. based airlines. They 747 is used on pacific routes by DL and UA. But AA finds the T7 ad
41 Jfk777 : Because Boeing gave us the 777-300ER. BY the time the 787-9 comes Boeing is going to be a twin heaven, by then the "new" 777 will be in the horizon as
42 Nycbjr : not sure any one mentioned but one of the reasons that AA hasn't ordered the 773ER is its GE only.. and they were very upset at the lack of rollers op
43 SYfan100 : It is all about putting the right type of aircraft on the proper routes so there is a strong effort on not only saving money, but also aiming for maki
44 HAMAD : my god! i couldn't stop laughing when i read this comment, thinking more about it, this is the perfect example of comparing 767 and 777...
45 CrAAzy : Wasn't it also true that AA didn't want a plane that required a 3 person cockpit crew? But I guess that's a moot point now with the current generation
46 JFKPurser : When Bob Crandall became CEO, one of the first things he did was get rid of the 747-100s by trading them for DC10s with Pan Am to standardize on the D
47 SSTsomeday : I agree completely. I could not have put this better myself. Also, the reality of frequency being a major concern for high yield passengers is a stro
48 DocLightning : The OP raises a very good point. If you flightaware the JFK-SFO route you'll often see little "packets" of 2 A320s' a 738, and a 757 all winging their
49 MEA-707 : That's the main reason indeed. Traffic to/from the USA is spread over dozens of mid sized cities, in Europe and Asia their capitals are usually the o
50 Cpd : QF certainly isn't retiring plenty of 747s. The 747-338s are gone now - with the obvious (but sad) benefit of removing the flight engineers. I say sa
51 Jfk777 : While the DC-10-30 was far better for AA on LGW to DFW, the ability of he 747-100 not being able to fly from LGW to DFW ? DFW to LGW is 4800 miles, T
52 NA : Twin hell, you mean. A twin monopoly is as boring as aviation can get.
53 AirbusA6 : It is an interesting question, frequency vs size, certainly passengers like frequency, but then looking at the vast amounts of red ink in the US aviat
54 ATAflyer : Yes, AA did operate 747's, although it seemed like a very brief period. If you ever saw the movie " Airport 1975" that was a clear example of an AA 74
55 Mayor : Well, it's this thing called "competition", you know. In your example you probably have 4 different airlines....B6, UA, AA & DL. So, do you expect th
56 Brilondon : WN would think so would J6. AA is using more 757's on its less popular off season routes. Most U.S. based carriers have service from more then one ai
57 DocLightning : And that view is completely illogical. It means that more planes, more crews, more fuel, and more departures are necessary to get the same passengers
58 Viscount724 : It certainly does make sense on a heavily business-oriented route like JFK-LHR where passengers put a high value on frequency and having another flig
59 Post contains links BN747 : Here is rare video of an American Airlines 747... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuLEhBo5eyU BN747
60 Mayor : While not applicable to this route, everybody's favorite airline, Southwest, does exactly this on many of its routes.....hourly service. No one seems
61 RJ111 : If this isn't Alan Mullaly's login i will eat my hat.
62 Viscount724 : How was Braniff able to operate LGW-DFW nonstop with the 747-100, and how was Pan Am and TWA able to use the 747-100 for many years on much longer no
63 RJ111 : I think the thing with US airlines is they have a lot of cities to play around with. Airlines in Europe and the far east (minus china perhaps) are pre
64 MakeMinesLAX : Actually, TWA had a reasonable number of 747s for an international airline - they started with 11 747-100s, to which they later added 3 SPs and a han
65 Post contains links and images CitationJet : That is not true. I flew a BN 747-100 a few times from LGW to DFW and made it nonstop each time. Here is a photo of N601BN leaving LGW for DFW. View
66 US330 : IIRC, in the late 80s, AA and UA were competing for the right to serve ORD-NRT. At the time, AA didn't have an aircraft that could fly the route, so t
67 Post contains images Viscount724 : I think you may be thinking of something else. I can't recall Canadian leasing 747-400s to AA. With only 4 744s they couldn't have spared them anyway
68 SEPilot : Well, unless he is lying on his profile, your dinner is waiting (do you want fries with that?) The age, location, and occupation are all wrong. Is is
69 Jetstar : In September 1981, I flew round trip from JFK to LAX on an AA 747 to go to the NBAA convention in Anaheim, CA. I remember as we taxied in at LAX they
70 SSTsomeday : I agree with you in principle, regarding the high traveled domestic routes. But I would suggest a return to the medium sized twins is more desirable
71 AADC10 : One of the big reasons AA does not operate 747s anymore is the lack of Pacific routes. ETOPS 180 is relatively recent and the US carriers with extensi
72 Ikramerica : that's a good point. AA started with 747SPs for the pacific, then went to tri-jet MD11s, and finally to 77Es when ETOPS was proven for them. But had
73 AADC10 : What were AA's Pacific routes other than the recent ORD-PVG? I only recall SJC-NRT, which could be operated under ETOPS 90 if they stayed close enoug
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...
Why Does DFW Not Have Many International Airlines? posted Fri Jun 30 2006 03:56:52 by UAL747
Why Does AC Not Have Dedicated Freighters posted Mon Dec 6 2004 03:28:54 by Dakotasport
Why Does AA Eagle Have A Toy Plane On Its Site? posted Sat Oct 19 2002 11:11:56 by Flyboy36y
Why Does A WN 737 Have An AA Tail Number? posted Sun Mar 26 2006 23:00:31 by AA777SJC
Why Does AA Have 2 First Classes? posted Sun Jul 25 2004 15:33:22 by COEWR2587
Why Are AA Not Good Enough And We Need To Have D posted Thu Nov 11 1999 04:59:50 by Iainhol
Why Does Rekkof Not Close Their Web-page? posted Tue Nov 25 2008 13:33:33 by Beaucaire
Why Does Thomas Cook Have 3 Different Websites? posted Fri Sep 19 2008 04:05:30 by 8herveg
Why Does LH Not Fly From LHR To TXL? posted Sat Aug 30 2008 04:48:40 by Hywel
Why Does Skyeurope Not Fly To Germany? posted Thu Apr 17 2008 02:15:46 by Beaucaire