MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31155 posts, RR: 76 Posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3797 times:
American Airlines has applied with DOT for all three of the remaining Miami-Ecuador frequencies that are currently unused, to expand MIA-GYE service to 10x weekly starting in April.
The new schedule to compliment the daily 767-300ER:
AA 927 MIA 1630-1950 GYE 738 MoThSa
AA 928 GYE 0750-1320 MIA 738 TuFrSu
Qqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2200 posts, RR: 14 Reply 1, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3450 times:
An interesting fact about GYE... when we fly there our crew shuttle is equipped with an armed guard, and another vehicle trails us with another armed guard. Our hotel, which is beautiful and modern, is equipped with metal detectors. Always interesting that we're sent to such places where our safety is at that much risk (kidnapping is the risk, so we're told), but I guess wherever they can make a buck! The unfortunate part of it is due to the security risk we are strongly advised not to leave the hotel; therefore, we don't get to learn much about the city or its people.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31155 posts, RR: 76 Reply 2, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3421 times:
Quoting Qqflyboy (Reply 1): Always interesting that we're sent to such places where our safety is at that much risk(
Why? It's part of the job. AA obviously takes all the steps necessary to protect its employees to the fullest, and nothing has happened, so it is obviously doing its job.
Though that's weird that employees are urged not to leave the hotel. It's not that unsafe of a city. Bolivia I would understand taking precautions, but Ecuador?
Qqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2200 posts, RR: 14 Reply 3, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3356 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 2):
Why? It's part of the job. AA obviously takes all the steps necessary to protect its employees to the fullest, and nothing has happened, so it is obviously doing its job.
I didn't question that... I just said it's "interesting." Many would think such necessary precautions would be enough for a company to shy away -- but not AA. They know their market and where they can make money. I don't blame them for that.
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 2): It's not that unsafe of a city. Bolivia I would understand taking precautions, but Ecuador?
Quito doesn't have the same precautions. Only Guayaquil. It's based on the destination, not the country. A recent kidnapping attempt was made on a pilot in Santa Cruz (VVI), although I'm not sure if the same precautions are in place there as they are in GYE. Having said that, I know GYE is not the only destination AA serves where such precautions are in place and VVI might very well be another one. It's important to note the pilot was not transiting to/from the hotel and airport, but returning to the hotel from an outing on the layover.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
AA767400 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2271 posts, RR: 25 Reply 4, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3321 times:
However, I don't think most AA destinations are life treating. PAP can sometimes be a problem if you are stuck there if the plane goes tech. But I guess it's all relative. I mean you could layover in downtown ghetto Albany and get mugged. The difference for some Flight Crews is the language, and of course if they stand out.
This second flight will complement the market well. I just hope we see some new movement up at JFK. I am surprised we have not seen an upgrade of equipment on one of the JFK-SJU flights. Or at least an additional flight. But I guess B6 has covered the market very well.
Luftfahrer From Germany, joined Mar 2009, 975 posts, RR: 5 Reply 5, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3119 times:
I could think of other countries or cities where transportation with armed guards and vehicles is essential for the safety and well-being of those involved. If I'm not mistaken, Arik Air, a Nigerian carrier, has their crews transported to the airport with armed personnel, this makes me believe that foreign carriers must be taking similar precautions to protect their employees. Lagos is among the cities with the worst crime rates, so I've heard. There are probably more places on earth where such precautionary measures are necessary, particularly in Africa and South America.
Et là tu montes encore plus haut et ça persiste, alors on vole
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31155 posts, RR: 76 Reply 6, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3106 times:
Quoting AA767400 (Reply 4): This is not TowerAir/Peace Corps.
No. It's being a flight attendant. And when one is a flight attendant flying international routes, they accept the fact that many airlines - in fact just about every major U.S., Asian and European carrier - flies to destinations in parts of the world, especially in Africa and South America, that require heightened security. If one can't accept that fact/responsibility, quit or fly for a domestic carrier.
Yellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 5276 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3039 times:
you sure that armed guard is not stipulated in union contracts......I know BA crews to KIN (via union contract) use this "safety" thing as a means to get BA to send them to BGI for the layover. When IMHO KIN is no worse that any other destination BAA flies to...including NYC
When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
AA767400 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2271 posts, RR: 25 Reply 8, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2932 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 6): No. It's being a flight attendant. And when one is a flight attendant flying international routes, they accept the fact that many airlines - in fact just about every major U.S., Asian and European carrier - flies to destinations in parts of the world, especially in Africa and South America, that require heightened security. If one can't accept that fact/responsibility, quit or fly for a domestic carrier.
The ones that can't accept flying abroad stay domestic. That is why being a Flight Attendant is one of the most flexible jobs out there. And yes like any job, if you don't like it than move on.
But of course that is the number one statement said on Airliners.net when it comes to ANY concern a Flight Attendant has of something. Almost as if all Crews are tired, old, and nasty. Just because a person does not like a certain destination, does not make it an automatic "quit your job then". People have options. But of course Mark, you never have hid your dislike for Flight Attendants.
Super80DFW From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 1642 posts, RR: 11 Reply 9, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2926 times:
Would AA want to start a DFW-GYE flight? Maybe 3-4x weekly with a 738 or 752? Could a 738 even go that far?
Right now there is an AA MD-80 flying over my house.
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10224 posts, RR: 62 Reply 10, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2849 times:
It makes sense. Since the reduction in capacity in going from the A300 to the 767, they have lost several hundred seats per week down to GYE. This will help make that up - this would actually be an over 8% increase in capacity for GYE compared with the A300 days - although still possibly a reduction in overall cargo capacity.
Quoting Super80DFW (Reply 9): Would AA want to start a DFW-GYE flight? Maybe 3-4x weekly with a 738 or 752? Could a 738 even go that far?
There's no market for it. MIA is where the business traffic - and the cargo - is.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31155 posts, RR: 76 Reply 11, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2777 times:
Quoting Super80DFW (Reply 9): Would AA want to start a DFW-GYE flight? Maybe 3-4x weekly with a 738 or 752? Could a 738 even go that far?
Zero market. U.S.-Ecuador traffic is close to non-existent east of the Mississippi, and the little west traffic there is comes from Los Angeles.
Also, there are no available frequencies. There are currently only 18 unused U.S.-Ecuador frequencies for U.S. carriers: 3 from MIA, 15 from NYC, and zero from non-MIA/NYC.
Quoting AA767400 (Reply 8): But of course that is the number one statement said on Airliners.net when it comes to ANY concern a Flight Attendant has of something. Almost as if all Crews are tired, old, and nasty. Just because a person does not like a certain destination, does not make it an automatic "quit your job then". People have options. But of course Mark, you never have hid your dislike for Flight Attendants.
I dislike Flight Attendent unions (and any union for that matter), not the flight attendants themselves. I've actually noticed far better on-board service on AA in the past year of flying than ever before.
That being said, there are plenty of legit things that FAs can complain about, "I don't like flying to XXX" isn't a legit complaint. FAs need to deal with it and do their job.
COflyerBOS From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 292 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2757 times:
If CO couldn't make GYE work from IAH, then I doubt AA would want to try it from DFW. That said, there were some rumors right after CO cancelled GYE and CLO that they regretted that decision. Any word on those fronts?
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31155 posts, RR: 76 Reply 13, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2735 times:
Quoting COflyerBOS (Reply 12): That said, there were some rumors right after CO cancelled GYE and CLO that they regretted that decision. Any word on those fronts?
I really don't know what is to regret about canceling Cali when the planes were rarely going out with more than 40 people.
Although maybe they regret forfeiting the frequencies rather than using them elsewhere or asking for temporary dormancy. They have now been distributed to other carriers (not surprisingly, Delta, who received the Ecuador frequencies, rarely uses all their U.S.-Ecuador frequencies at once and also suspended GYE for the fall travel period).
2travel2know From Panama, joined Apr 2005, 3580 posts, RR: 4 Reply 14, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2616 times:
Quoting Super80DFW (Reply 9): Would AA want to start a DFW-GYE flight?
The B737-700/800 has the range, but there's no market in GYE for DFW or Western U.S. except in California (LAX) and that's a tiny one.
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 11): There are currently only 18 unused U.S.-Ecuador frequencies for U.S. carriers: 3 from MIA, 15 from NYC, and zero from non-MIA/NYC.
AA JFK-GYE would make more sense and that new MIA-GYE-MIA would work well for red-eyes to and from JFK (if there are B767-300 R.O.N. in JFK), but that route would be mostly a VFR market, limited business traffic. Anyhow the frequencies are there for the U.S. airline to take them.
Qqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2200 posts, RR: 14 Reply 15, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2580 times:
Quoting Yellowtail (Reply 7): you sure that armed guard is not stipulated in union contracts.....
This is not stipulated in our contract with AA. However, AA is, for the most part, vigilant about our safety while abroad. There are criticisms at time the company doesn't act quick enough when certain political/civil unrest breaks out at foreign destinations, but, for the most part, AA attempts to keep us safe.
Mark -- I didn't bring up the issue of armed guards as a reason not to fly somewhere, or as a complaint of my own about flying to certain locations. I merely said it was "interesting" that when we fly to GYE these precautions are taken. Most wouldn't realize that crews face these conditions while on layover, and many would assume that if such precautions are necessary that airlines A) wouldn't fly there or B) not have crews layover there.
In PAP, we do not layover there unless the a/c goes tech. If we do have to layover there, and it's happened, not only do the crews have armed escorts, but at the hotel the crew is placed on the same floor in close proximity to one another, and an armed guard is placed on that floor.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31155 posts, RR: 76 Reply 16, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2562 times:
Quoting Qqflyboy (Reply 15): Most wouldn't realize that crews face these conditions while on layover, and many would assume that if such precautions are necessary that airlines A) wouldn't fly there or B) not have crews layover there.
These precautions are taken all over the world in various cities. I'm not surprised they are taken in general, I am surprised they are taken in Guayaquil, which isn't really that dangerous of a place.
Clo1973 From Colombia, joined Apr 2006, 237 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 2313 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 13): I really don't know what is to regret about canceling cali when the planes were rarely going out with more than 40 people.
You should be careful when making such strong statements when you do not have the hard data. For your information, CLO-IAH load factor was close to 65% (data from CLO's airport).
Quoting COflyerBOS (Reply 12): That said, there were some rumors right after CO cancelled GYE and CLO that they regretted that decision. Any word on those fronts?
Load factors in CLO where not spectacular, but decent enough to keep the frecuencies. I never understood CO's decision to cease operations.
COflyerBOS From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 292 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (3 years 9 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2124 times:
65% load factors isn't as bad as I thought... especially with the fares CO seemed to charge. I was hoping to see CO return to CLO and GYE but I guess it isn't in the cards.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31155 posts, RR: 76 Reply 20, posted (3 years 9 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2126 times:
Quoting Clo1973 (Reply 18):
You should be careful when making such strong statements when you do not have the hard data. For your information, CLO-IAH load factor was close to 65% (data from CLO's airport).
During peak or when they were operating one flight a week? Sure. Still, 65% for a weekly flight? Horrendous.
Quoting Clo1973 (Reply 18): but decent enough to keep the frecuencies. I never understood CO's decision to cease operations.
Obviously it wasn't decent enough. The flight operated once-weekly most of the year and was discontinued. The frequencies were never kept.
Clo1973 From Colombia, joined Apr 2006, 237 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (3 years 9 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1807 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 20): Obviously it wasn't decent enough. The flight operated once-weekly most of the year and was discontinued
You are unbelievable. At some point, I even trusted your posts here, but with this type of statements now I have serious doubts about the quality of your comments.
I will repeat myself......before making such strong statements, be SURE about them!.
CO flew to Cali. Daily in summer and 3x/4x in the rest of the year.
Sponsor Message: 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31155 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2200 posts, 
From Germany, joined Mar 2009, 975 posts, 
From Panama, joined Apr 2005, 3580 posts, 
From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Feb 2006, 3348 posts, 
From Colombia, joined Apr 2006, 237 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
