COSPN From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Oct 2001, 1619 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10291 times:
Not wanting to chage things as others flew 777's JAL kept flying 747-200 and 400's even NRT-GUM, NRT-HNL and many other loosing routes...they always had more seats for sale than pax to fill them....JAL will be fine now the 747's are heading to the Scrapyard in Arkansas....
Quoting 777way (Reply 5): Any chances of ANa taking over JAL in the future?
Taking over? No, don't expect it. Merging? Yes, maybe some day. Future will tell... Both airlines, but especially JL, are struggling at the moment.
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 2): JAL also flew some routes that were loosers like Osaka to Paris & Tokyo to Rome.
Many airlines do. Just money losers in a route network is not the main reason to get close to bankruptcy. It's the whole way the company is running behind the scenes which is causing the major problems in JL. Building up a good network for your clientele can also mean to operate a few routes which perform less, but you have to compensate it with another route or elsewhere.
e.g. NRT-DME is also loosing money, but kept for political reasons. The flight has bad load factors and cargo is almost nothing also.
"The whole world steps aside for the man who knows where he is going"
mighkal From Hong Kong, joined Oct 2005, 14 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 7751 times:
Quoting United Airline (Thread starter): Even though they have financial problems they need not sell all their B 747-400s for cash since a lot of their routes are very busy.
JAL's relationship with the 747s has been so long-standing it's hard to imagine them breaking up.
But i suppose the newer 777s are much more attractive than the 747s. And during tough times, they have to make tough choices.
Correct me if i'm wrong, i read somewhere that the 747s are inefficient in that reducing load factor does not save on fuel consumption. So for example if a flight has a 70% load, it would burn almost as much fuel as it would with 100% load.
I don't think a major airline in the cusp of a massive down-sizing which inc. eliminating their entire cargo division and getting rid of their entire passenger Boeing 747 fleet ... which was once the largest in the industry ... will be seeking to purchasing massive A380s and 747s in the near future. I am so glad that a lot of posters on here don't run their own airlines, because if they did, they'd run them straight into the ground. Not every airline needs or wants A380s and 747s. JAL has made that more than clear. It almost seems as if their 77W fleet is more capacity than they need. Let's just focus on JAL becoming profitable and strong again, not purchasing aircraft they don't need so they can have bragging rights.
First flight aboard a Northwest B727-251ADV out of BWI Thurgood Marshall Airport, my hometown airport.
kiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8553 posts, RR: 13
Reply 12, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 7013 times:
Quoting FlyNWA727 (Reply 13): I am so glad that a lot of posters on here don't run their own airlines, because if they did, they'd run them straight into the ground.
So true , I can be as guilty as the next person of dreaming up amazing fantasy networks and fleet plans for my favourite airlines , but for the sake of the passengers and employees it is just as well that I am in no position to get those schemes out of my dreamworld and into the real one . I hate to think how many people I would put out into the unemployment lines .
Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
carpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2954 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (3 years 5 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6332 times:
There are a lot of reasons behind JL's bankruptcy. Very bureaucratic way of running its business, too many employees (particularly white collar), running too many loss making routes due to political pressure, etc.
While their fleet was very diversified due to the merger of JAL & JAS back in 2003, its age certainly wasn't the biggest problem. The 747 classics certainly needed to go. However, after 2008 downturn, their 747 fleet was certainly too big to sustain its downsized-capacity. I still contend that not all the 747s needed to go because they can still be used on domestic trunk runs and certain int'l routes where moving lots of people is called on for like NRT-HNL.
The recent deliveries of the 738s & E-170s have speeded up the retirement of the MD80s and A300s. Over the last six months, they have also taken delivery of four 763ERs. Frankly, an airline in bankruptcy should not be taking delivery of anything large as a 767.
Lastly, JL is in no shape to be ordering anything bigger than the 787. The 787s will be certainly welcome to replace some of the older 767s remaining in its fleet but with the A300s soon to be history, they could defer some of the 787s to a later date. The 738s are needed to replace the MD90s that are being sold to Delta unless they want to downgauge even more.
ordjoe From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 701 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (3 years 5 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 6053 times:
Quoting carpethead (Reply 16): There are a lot of reasons behind JL's bankruptcy. Very bureaucratic way of running its business, too many employees (particularly white collar), running too many loss making routes due to political pressure, etc.
I have hear similar. Back during the government run go go 80's (heck all of Japan was riding high in the 80's) they spent money like there is no tommorow. This is probably why they have so many routes and such a huge fleet. They continued to spend like this until very recently. Way too many losing routes, way too much capacity, far over staffed. I flew them 3 years ago HND-OKA on the 747D and 777. Both flights were about 40%LF, and they are sending a widebody on this route pretty much on the hour. On both flights also there were 3 or 4 gate agents just standing around. They basically failed to adapt to expensive fuel and cost structures needed to run an airline in these trying times.
On them getting the 748 and A380, while the aviation lover inside of me would love to see these purchases, it would be very foolish. They did this with the 747's back in the day and look where that got them.
Cargolex From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1263 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (3 years 5 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5831 times:
I think JAL was gravely hurt by nearly 20 years of economic malaise at home. It seems like they were always planning on the boom times of the 1980s returning and when they never did, they were stuck with a huge fleet of planes they couldn't fill and a style of operation that was alright, but profligate, during good times but waaaay too fat and inflexible during economic contractions.
The Bankruptcy was the result of adapting too late to a changing market and changing position in the world. Nowadays, they don't need those 747s, and the definitely don't need A380s. Growth is great. Bragging rights are great. But you have to fly what the market will support or you go out of business.
carpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2954 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (3 years 5 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5630 times:
Quoting ordjoe (Reply 17): I flew them 3 years ago HND-OKA on the 747D and 777. Both flights were about 40%LF
You must have flown those segments on the weekdays because they are packed on the weekends and on most days thus the 744Ds and 777s are (were) assigned on that route.
Last night I pondered on the fact that the fleet of 773ERs that JAL has now was not really needed. The 744s were perfectly suited to the JL's long-haul route structure much like how other legacies like BA and UA use their 744s on long-haul routes.
Heck, they could have elected not to retire the MD-11s and hence the 772ERs would not be needed too.
Then again, that would be bad news for Boeing though.
jaylink From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 41 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (3 years 5 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5606 times:
One time I took an international transfer flight from NRT to KIX on JAL Express. Didn't really pay attention to others during the boarding process as we had a small child to watch and we were in the first group. Later, looking around during decent, I could only see about 10 people in the plane. I thought this must be why they went bankrupt, if government forces them to fly nearly empty planes. Then when we landed, about 100 people stood up. I just couldn't see them over the backs of the seats! ha.
Burkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4395 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (3 years 5 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 5264 times:
Quoting United Airline (Reply 23): If they go up again will they have the chance to get the B747-8 or the A380?
They should bother about this once they have good LF @ sufficient margins in the 77W. Problem is that the competition at least from Europe already comes with the better products, so their battle is uphill and they only can get good LF for their noisy twins over low ticket prices, and that is the end I'm afraid.
: Finally, someone says the answer. All that talk about fleet types and management are missing the biggest point. The Japanese economy has been in defl
: As fuel prices rise, a fleet of 744s and MD-11s would have just killed JAL even faster. The 77W, being the best long-haul aircraft of flexible size c
: I didn't JAL had any noisy twins since the YS11s?
: I preferred Arc of Sun livery, the new one is as plain as can be, it gives a rather negative impression of the airline to me as someone fond of the i
: Makes you wonder who thought in the middle of all of this trauma that it would be a good idea to change the livery!!! More money that they don't have.
: And sadly the ego driven will not even be humbled to admit thats it was a mistake or that its no longer relevant after the earthquake to waste money o
: Staying with AMR sure didn't help them!
: Well, there are plenty of airlines out there that operate 744s, both profitable and non-profitable. Yes, they would be a niche carrier to operate pax
: I tend to agree with this. That's exactly what DL did. DL wasn't too fond of keeping NW's 744s at all. In fact, the plan was to completely phase out
: Ok, let's take it from another angle: What could JAL have done to prevent bankruptcy? I remember being on Waikiki in the late '80s as a teenager and s
: Seriously, are you just making it up as you go? Fact: JAL serves over 60 domestic destinations with more than 650 domestic flights daily. Take a look
: http://www.japantoday.com/category/b...-jumbo-jet-to-retire-after-march-1 In 1970, JAL started flying a Boeing 747-100 aircraft, the first in the seri
: Ok, so I excessively down-played that; thank you for the stats. But, fact is, internally Japan is far more of a rail country than an aviation country
: Have you looked at Japan's geography recently? It's composed of 2,456 islands. Trains don't travel too well across water. What does 650 daily flights
: So if the MD90s work to save money for Delta why don't they work to save money for JAL? To sell these planes super cheap to Delta only to turn around
: JAL has been faithful to Boeing since 1970....and with the exception of the A300s inherited from JAS, JAL has never had an Airbus aircraft in their f
: Politics were involved in decisions by Japanese carriers to order US aircraft, to help offset the trade imbalance which was heavily in Japan's favour
: Japan is not Micronesia. The islands are close together, and there are several bridges and tunnels. The trains DO travel from island to island. There
: What works for Delta doesn't mean it will work for JAL. There were only a limited number of MD-90s built. Delta is making a conscious effort to buy t
: Yeah, that'll do it That's true of most aircraft anyway. The 744 is incredibly efficient if you load it. As fuel prices rise, having a lower CASM air
: It never hurt that what 10% and high teens % of the 767 and 777 airframes are made in Japan. The imbalance with the EU isn't exactly small either
: Very interesting discussion indeed, but I'm surprised to read that few people mentioned personnel costs. I read, probably it was the Japan Time in Oct
: Well it's no mystery that the three Japanese Heavies always worked with Boeing and, if I remember well, their share in the 787 program is an all-time
: Actually, domestic flying is and always has been profitable. There is more revenue by flying internationally but depending on the economy circumstanc
: So, pretty much wrong on all counts.
: The best thing is to manage the existing fleet so well that it makes profit, and then take all of its net profit to purchase new planes from money yo