KELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6833 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 25196 times:
One of the biggest hurdles to fleetwide 738 adoption is a decision AA made a long time back to confine all 738 flying to and from the DFW hub, and keep ORD as an MD-80 only base (for shorthaul narrowbodies, at least). It may have saved a few bucks back then, but I've always wondered if this was a penny-wise and pound foolish decision. I'm wondering if this lead directly to AA having to drop several mainline ORD routes about this time last year when oil was near record highs?
I'm assuming that part of this plan is to re-introduce 738 hub operations at ORD....which would be a good move.
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
Eghansen From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 25130 times:
One of the reasons I don't fly AA very much is because of the dreadful MD-80s. The overhead bins are too small, the droning of the engines in the back seating is numbing, and the fuselage curvature makes window seats cramped.
It is unfortunate that AA is not equipping their new 738s with personal video screens which Delta is doing for theirs. It is also sad that AA and DL will still be flying MD-80s for a long time when they are disappearing in Europe and Asia. I guess they still have financial problems.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 23635 posts, RR: 60
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 24956 times:
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 1): It may have saved a few bucks back then, but I've always wondered if this was a penny-wise and pound foolish decision. I'm wondering if this lead directly to AA having to drop several mainline ORD routes about this time last year when oil was near record highs?
AA has known for some time that the Mad Dogs were going to be phased out. They are roughly equivalent to the 733. The decision to restrict them to certain hubs was a wise one as it simplifies maintenance.
If they are going to phase out the MD's, they know they are going to have to replace them with a comparable A/C. Obviously, that would be the 738. They will probably have to buy more to replace the capacity.
I don't see how mixing narrowbody fleets would simplify the situation now and I don't see how it would have saved any money then or now.
Eghansen From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 24788 times:
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 3): AA has known for some time that the Mad Dogs were going to be phased out. They are roughly equivalent to the 733.
Actually, they are much worse. They are considerably noisier than the 737-300 and the JT8D turbofans are not as efficient as the CFM56s. The JTs have a lower bypass ratio than the CFMs. Also, the MD80 went into service 4 years earlier than the 737-300.
Futurestar68 From Austria, joined May 2004, 235 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 24447 times:
okay, pax are looking on more frequencies instead of bigger airplanes, thats what the general trend to regional jets is showing us... so is AA really going to replace the MDs with 737? what about some smaller jets? how are the chances that AA does NOT replace at least some of their MDs with Boeing-airplanes (the A319 or the E190 come to my mind...)?
The 734 is much more efficient than the MD80. Same number of seats rougly but the 734 has lower fuel consumption with the CFMs than MD80 does with the JT8Ds. The 734s main problem is it is underpowered.
Airnerd From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 416 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 24164 times:
I thought the question was about the phase-out program - not if you like or don't like flying AA MD80s. And it's a good question too. Last I checked AA was flying 272 MD80s. Obviously that's going to take awhile. AA's got 85 738s on order. Those will take a few years to deliver, and will still leave close to 200 MD80s unreplaced. Even if AA cuts back on capacity and parks quite a few of them permanently, they're going to have to order more aircraft, and it'll take even longer to get rid of all the MD80s. I have a hard time imagining any scenario that takes less than 5 years to phase them all out - and even that would be really aggressive.
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 13451 posts, RR: 62
Reply 16, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 23562 times:
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 1): One of the biggest hurdles to fleetwide 738 adoption is a decision AA made a long time back to confine all 738 flying to and from the DFW hub, and keep ORD as an MD-80 only base (for shorthaul narrowbodies, at least).
It was not about making ORD an MD80 base and only DFW a 737 base. There are other 737 bases - including LAX and MIA. The issue was simplification. It cost less money to simplify the number of aircraft types at major hub stations.
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 1): It may have saved a few bucks back then, but I've always wondered if this was a penny-wise and pound foolish decision.
Not in the slightest. It was a very prudent decision.
There was no need to pay for the spare parts, equipment, materials, training, etc. for all these years for the 737s to be at ORD when there was only a fleet of 77 of them spread across the entire system. And especially once the 727s were retired, and a great deal of the 737 flying was concentrated solely in Miami, it really made no sense to spread the fleet that thing. Now, with 76 new 737s arriving, it will make sense to bring them back into ORD a bit because there will be more of them flying around, and because the longer ORD-West Coast MD80 runs have become more expensive with fuel.
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 1): I'm assuming that part of this plan is to re-introduce 738 hub operations at ORD....which would be a good move.
And by that I assume you mean re-open a 737 crew base at ORD, and the answer is yes, the 737 base reopened in the last few weeks.
Quoting Futurestar68 (Reply 9): so is AA really going to replace the MDs with 737? what about some smaller jets? how are the chances that AA does NOT replace at least some of their MDs with Boeing-airplanes (the A319 or the E190 come to my mind...)?
Until AA gets some sort of a deal worked out on smaller (than MD80) jets worked out with the pilots, I doubt we'll see anything smaller than an MD80 anytime soon.
Quoting Jaws707 (Reply 12): I'll miss the 2/3 seating on the MD-80's the most. I love getting the window seat and only having one person to crawl over if I want to leave my seat rather than 2 people.
I will miss the Super 80s so much. As I have long said - and as many, many AA frequent flyers I know can appreciate: as long as you're not sitting in the last 5 rows of Coach, the Super 80 is one of the most comfortable rides in the sky, at least in my experience. I love the 2-3 seating, which greatly reduces my chances of getting a middle, and with the engines at the back, the cabin - especially in F or the first 10-15 rows of Y - is remarkably quiet. Plus, with the cabin retrofits AA did to the MD80s around 1998-2001, I find the MD80 cabins now to be among the nicest of any in the AA fleet.
Quoting Airnerd (Reply 13): AA's got 85 738s on order. Those will take a few years to deliver, and will still leave close to 200 MD80s unreplaced. Even if AA cuts back on capacity and parks quite a few of them permanently, they're going to have to order more aircraft, and it'll take even longer to get rid of all the MD80s. I have a hard time imagining any scenario that takes less than 5 years to phase them all out - and even that would be really aggressive.
Nobody is saying that these 76 new 737s will replace all of AA's existing MD80 fleet. This is just the beginning of the MD80 phaseout. But yes, as you rightly say, it is going to be years - at least another decade and probably closer to two, depending on what happens in the world - before you see the last of the AA MD80s gone.
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 14): I expect we'll see the 738s replace the longest S80 flying, which is mostly ORD- and STL-west coast, along with ORD-PVR and a handful of DFW routes (SEA, PDX, YYC, BOS).
I expect that the longest MD80 routes will see the most 737s the soonest. That means ORD-LAX/SFO/SEA/SAN, etc. and DFW-SEA/PDX/SFO, etc.
Eghansen From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 23521 times:
Quoting DingDong (Thread starter): First of 76 B738s to replace about 25% of the venerable AA workhorses, the MD-80s.
I don't think it is accurate to state that the 738 is replacing the M80 anyway. I think it must be more complicated than that.
The A300s are being eased out of service with no direct replacement planned. Some of the A300 routes are being replaced with 757s and others with 767s. In addition, AA is increasing service to Brazil and Latin America which will use more 757s, 767s and possibly some 738s.
The 738 is a much more capable aircraft than the M80 since it is able to fly transcon and 6 hour flights to northern Latin America. It is also to be equipped with video monitors for movies which the M80 is not.
I suspect some of the 738s will replace 757s or 767s and those aircraft will be redeployed on other international flights and to the Caribbean. Some of the "thin" transcons such as SAN-BOS and SAN-JFK could be downgraded to 738 instead of current 757/767.
Ozark1 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 713 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 23193 times:
From a flight attendant's perspective, the MD80 has gone from being a favorite to work, to one to be avoided, at least in coach.. Flying up front is great---nice galley----away from the pax so no one has to watch you work and get set up for the service, but the back is a claustrophobic sardine can with no where to go. They took out the rearmost galley and added 4 seats when they did away with "More Room Throughout Coach". These planes are a real challenge to work on a DFW-SEA leg when every single storage space is full---two services done, including a can to each person on the first run through. When I worked a 737 for the first time the biggest difference to me was how much wider the aisle was. That and the back galley have been instrumental in making this a F/A favorite. The overhead bins on the MD80 are larger than those on the 737, although no matter what the size, we are having to check LOTS more luggage since the $15 bag fee came into effect. It seems like on every flight i am rearranging rollerboards so that more can be accommodated. I do understand, from a pax perspective, the enjoyment of the 3-2 seating.
In a delay, the MD80 is a challenge because there is nothing to keep the pax occupied. On planes with some kind of entertainment, a wait on the tarmac becomes a little more tolerable.
Many of them with be based at Chicago, but there is almost no question that least some of these planes will find their way to D/FW and Miami, and probably a few onto transcons out of LAX and possibly JFK as well.
Moman From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1054 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 22669 times:
It's really sad when we as a society cannot go more than 2-3 hours without seeing things on a moving video screen.
Regardless, I enjoy the MD's but find the 738 to be more roomy in both F and Y. I especially like the bins on the 738 as a rollerboard can fit wheels in on both sides, where on the MD it's only on the DEF side.
My local station (TPA) is now down to only 738 and MD-80 flying, and soon the ORD runs will be 738, leaving only JFK and DFW with the MD-80.
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 10040 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 22363 times:
Quoting Eghansen (Reply 17): I don't think it is accurate to state that the 738 is replacing the M80 anyway. I think it must be more complicated than that.
Sure, the 738 are going in to replace M80 where they provide the biggest bang for the buck. New planes are expensive, so they will take advantage of the 737's greater capability. This means longer routes where comfort, quiet, are a bigger priority. They will take that duty from the M80s and extend it.
Is it "replacement.." Kinda sorta. Only in some areas of the M80 game.
: I know its a phaseout, but please, we're talking north of 275 frames right?. This would be the largest phaseout in aviation history. They outnumber th
: Somewhere in that neighborhood, but it's hard to track down a definitive number of frames that are actually operating - until the next quarterly SEC
: As for the phasing out, I don't think it will be a one for one process. Here's a thought. Does anyone see the 737-700 is AA's future? But as others ha
: Here are the long (>1400 nm) M80 flights ORD-LAX 6x (and 1x 752, 1x 763), 1516 nm (2 738s start next week) ORD-PVR 1x seasonal, 1549 nm ORD-SAN 4x 14
: Yep. It almost certainly won't be a 1-for-1 thing. It will probably be a more than 1-for-1 scenario - in other words: 76 new 737s in, more than 76 ol
: I'm with you man. Yeah, in a perfect world it would be nice to see DL/AA/UA, etc pick up a whole punch of 100+ seater a/c into their fleet because the
: I don't know about the 73G. The costs of the 73G and the 738 aren't too much different, so unless AA never fills the additional seats, they might not
: You are right and this is something I don't understand about any 73G operator. If a 738 and a 73G cost nearly the same and operate for the same money
: A good point. The 700s and 800s are almost identical, so there would be very little in the way of marginal cost associated with a fleet of 700s. Trai
: Take DL as a good example. It was a pretty good niche for them to place the a/c on "hot & high" routes and other short field-type routes were the 757
: It just seems the biggest problem AA has with with longterm fleet renewal is that they have such a huge, but simple fleet. Large numbers of any partic
: So you have what, SNA and TGU? The 73G isn't needed for SNA-DFW (the 738 can do it), and the 752 is probably the right aircraft size-wise for TGU-MIA
: The same story in the Chicago Tribune adding that all new 737-800s will be based in Chicago. http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...-737-fleet-april13
: Well I guess the example works best for DL as they have plans to fly to quite a Central/South cities. With AA as you've said, markets are much more m
: The 737-700 has too high of a CASM, CO stopped taking delivery of them years ago. The 737-900ER is the sweet spot, it has a rock bottom CASM that wou
: More info from the Dallas Morning News - the planes will be based in ORD partially due to the new seating config - 160 pax vs 148 for the older 738s.
: I figured that was a give. ------------------- My only thing with the 73G and the 738 is why WN hasn't ordered any yet. Maybe it's because it best fi
: WN doesn't regularly fill the 73Gs on very many routes. It's a different business model from legacies, which tend to have a much higher average load
: That concurs with what AA has said in the past about their MD-80s and 738s. It looks to me like they ordered 19 more on February 21, 2008 Most airlin
: I'd bet they didn't want to have to add the extra F/A on the 738. Without F, they really don't have the option of cutting enough seats to get by with