Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA's New 737NGs  
User currently offlineHighliner2 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 696 posts, RR: 2
Posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3570 times:

I know AA is going to be recieving a ton of NG's over the next few years to replace the Mad Dog fleet.

Are they all going to be -800s?

I know AA is redeploying some 757s for Trans-Atl service and the -900ER would be a great replacement for them in domestic use (I believe the -900ER can do transcon no?), and isn't the 73G closer capacity-wise to the MD80?

I was under the impression that originally the -800s were to replace the 727s, as they were roughly the same size seat-wise.

If the firm orders are for -800s, how difficult is it to change to a different model?

CO seems to be doing quite well with the whole range of NGs (except the -600), is there a unique situation that makes the different models (such as the -700 and -900) necessary whereas AA could get by solely with the baseline -800?


Go Cubs!
12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4416 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3461 times:

I thought that AA was going to go with the 800's for the bulk of the maddog replacements and on the thinner routes they would use American Eagle ERJ's and CRJ's where the routes are going to be thinner.


Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3777 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3332 times:



Quoting Highliner2 (Thread starter):
Are they all going to be -800s?

Yes. All of them.

Quoting Highliner2 (Thread starter):
I know AA is redeploying some 757s for Trans-Atl service and the -900ER would be a great replacement for them in domestic use (I believe the -900ER can do transcon no?), and isn't the 73G closer capacity-wise to the MD80?

AA is only redeploying 15 or so 757s out of a large fleet. The slack can be picked up by the 738s and the MD80s. AA flies the '57 on many routes that don't necessarily require a 757 so it shouldn't be that difficult to replace that lift. AA has historically never been fond of operating multiple derivatives of the same type - the 737 shouldn't be any exception.

Quoting Highliner2 (Thread starter):
If the firm orders are for -800s, how difficult is it to change to a different model?

Not difficult at all, but there's no chance AA is going to change its order.

Quoting Highliner2 (Thread starter):
CO seems to be doing quite well with the whole range of NGs (except the -600), is there a unique situation that makes the different models (such as the -700 and -900) necessary whereas AA could get by solely with the baseline -800?

Well, considering AA has gotten by with a large number of very similar MD80s for years, I doubt you'll see AA considering purchasing a different derivative.



PHX based
User currently offlineAA1818 From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Feb 2006, 3439 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2988 times:



Quoting 777STL (Reply 2):
AA is only redeploying 15 or so 757s out of a large fleet.

There are 18 planned Trans-Atlantic 757 conversions.

Quoting Highliner2 (Thread starter):
and isn't the 73G closer capacity-wise to the MD80?

What has been revealed on here numerous times is that:

AA/ Boeing have realized that the 738/ 737 have similar operating costs and the 738 wins out if a fe of the extra seats are filled.

AA sees less of a need for a direct MD replacement. Rather many routes could handle the upgrade to a 738 while others need to be downgraded to a -100 seat aircraft like the Fokker (which has left the fleet) and that the -100 seater should be flown by AA's regional partners. Of course pilot contracts wouldn't allow it at the the moment.

For schedulling, maintenance and ease of swappage etc, having a diverse fleet of different tyes of one model may not tbe the most efficient model. Of course this argument is negated by a true NEED for a particular sized aircraft.

AA1818



“The moment you doubt whether you can fly, you cease for ever to be able to do it.” J.M. Barrie (Peter Pan)
User currently offlineNorthstarBoy From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1876 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2981 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

On a related note, when AA runs out of 900 reg numbers, then what?


Why are people so against low yields?! If lower yields means more people can travel abroad, i'm all for it
User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5947 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2689 times:



Quoting Highliner2 (Thread starter):
I was under the impression that originally the -800s were to replace the 727s, as they were roughly the same size seat-wise.

They are the same size. However, the AA has stated that the 738 burns (roughly) the same amount of fuel as the 738, yet the 738 has a lot more seats. So, frequency can be reduced, or prices can be altered to stimulate demand, and you still go home at the end of the day with an operational improvement.

Quoting Highliner2 (Thread starter):
CO seems to be doing quite well with the whole range of NGs (except the -600), is there a unique situation that makes the different models (such as the -700 and -900) necessary whereas AA could get by solely with the baseline -800?

CO has publicly stated that there will be NO MORE 737-700 orders ever. They're the least efficient narrowbody in the fleet, after the 735s. The 733s, while engine burn per X is higher, also are a lighter airframe. But, they're being retired due to age anyhow.


User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15836 posts, RR: 27
Reply 6, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2648 times:



Quoting 777STL (Reply 2):
Not difficult at all, but there's no chance AA is going to change its order.

The only way AA will ever fly the 73G is if they want to shift some Central American flights away from 757s, similar to DL. It is a long shot at best, and if it does happen it will be a small subfleet.

Quoting Brilondon (Reply 1):
they would use American Eagle ERJ's and CRJ's where the routes are going to be thinner.

Yes, but AA is extremely hamstrung with RJs. They have a quota of RJs over 44 seats, so often the choice is between a 44 seater or an MD-80. The F100s or ex-TW 717s would come in pretty handy, but a number of factors made it fall through.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineBrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4416 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2586 times:



Quoting BMI727 (Reply 6):
Yes, but AA is extremely hamstrung with RJs. They have a quota of RJs over 44 seats, so often the choice is between a 44 seater or an MD-80. The F100s or ex-TW 717s would come in pretty handy, but a number of factors made it fall through.

Do they have some sort of rule about this and if they do could enlighten me as to what it is please?



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineHighliner2 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 696 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2579 times:

Wasn't the 44 seat clause removed as part of the post-9/11 concessions? I thought it was increased to 50 seats, so Eagle could operate as many -145's as they wanted, but nothing bigger outside of that 25 airframe limit (filled by the CR7), maybe i'm wrong however.

I understand about the -700/-800 comparison, what mission does the -900 serve for CO that the -800 cannot?

I also wonder how much AA does in terms of belly cargo on the MIA-South America routes? I have heard that was what made the A300 so valuable in its time. I know comparing the A300 to the 737 is apples and oranges because one is wide-body and one is not. But, my question would the 739 offer additional cargo space versus the 738? With the A300s going bye it seems there is a gap in capacity there, and it looks like the A300 fleet is being replaced by 763/757/737 on the routes out of MIA and what's left of SJU.



Go Cubs!
User currently offlineCALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2728 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2560 times:



Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 5):
CO has publicly stated that there will be NO MORE 737-700 orders ever. They're the least efficient narrowbody in the fleet, after the 735s. The 733s, while engine burn per X is higher, also are a lighter airframe. But, they're being retired due to age anyhow.

I'd probably agree this is what CO's experience is for the 73G. But, one wonders why WN flies only the 73G version of the 737NG? If WN looks at CO's experience, just think how much money WN could make using 738 aircraft.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23308 posts, RR: 20
Reply 10, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2511 times:



Quoting BMI727 (Reply 6):
The only way AA will ever fly the 73G is if they want to shift some Central American flights away from 757s, similar to DL.

Realistically, is there any Central American station besides TGU that would need it? SJO and GUA are sort of high, but has a fair amount of runway and IIRC no terrain. SAL, MGA, and PTY are practically at sea level.

Quoting Highliner2 (Reply 8):
I thought it was increased to 50 seats, so Eagle could operate as many -145's as they wanted, but nothing bigger outside of that 25 airframe limit (filled by the CR7), maybe i'm wrong however.

I believe that's correct.

Quoting 777STL (Reply 2):
AA has historically never been fond of operating multiple derivatives of the same type - the 737 shouldn't be any exception.

OTOH, though, if they need the extra seats, they may look into a small-ish 739 subfleet. 30 frames or so would probably be cost-effective given the commonality with the 738.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineNomorerjs From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2504 times:

The new 738's for AA will be flown out of ORD. LAX and MSP are the first two stations to receive them, but RNO, TPA, MSY, PHL and others are on the way. They will replace mad dogs (and a 757 in the case of RNO).

User currently offlineDTW757 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1595 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2437 times:



Quoting Highliner2 (Reply 8):
Wasn't the 44 seat clause removed as part of the post-9/11 concessions? I thought it was increased to 50 seats, so Eagle could operate as many -145's as they wanted, but nothing bigger outside of that 25 airframe limit (filled by the CR7), maybe i'm wrong however.

MQ had 25 options on additional CR7 as well. However I believe that 1 or 2 of those options had expired. It was ruled that they may now proceed with the options for the remaining aircraft minus the expired ones. However, currently the problem is finding the financing to do so.



721,2,732,3,4,5,G,8,9,741,2,3,4,752,3,762,3,4,772,3,788,D93,5,M80,D10,M11,L10,100,AB6,319,20,21,332,3,346,388,146,CR2,7,
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...
AA New NBC Universal Programing posted Tue Apr 7 2009 13:35:34 by Avionpg
AA New 737 Deliveries posted Tue Jan 13 2009 08:06:15 by Miaami
AA: New ORD-MBJ Service posted Thu Jul 17 2008 15:05:01 by MAH4546
AA New Business Class posted Tue Feb 19 2008 10:13:32 by BAMAN77
AA New J Class Product Question posted Sat Jan 19 2008 22:58:59 by Cleared2Land4
Status Of AA's New Business Class Seats? posted Sat Aug 18 2007 23:35:26 by Ssides
AA's New Business Class - Not Impressed! posted Tue Jul 3 2007 03:16:11 by Gh123
AA's New MSP-LGA--NWA Response? posted Wed May 30 2007 03:31:01 by Seatback
AA New Service- Carribean posted Mon May 7 2007 18:59:03 by MEACEDAR
A New Plan For The A380F? posted Fri Apr 27 2007 22:58:47 by Confuscius