FLY777UAL From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4512 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (14 years 6 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 815 times:
Not to be anal or anything, but both Pan Am and National have already started operations, Pan Am with 727's, and National with 757's.
As for National, I don't believe that they chose the name for the "legendary name" ...they just wanted something to describe what they plan to become. It seems as if they don't want any other part but the name, otherwise you'd see that Godawful "SUNKING" plastered to the tail, along with planes named "Mary" and "Dynah".
Markdc10 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (14 years 6 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 802 times:
I think its great that someone is using the great names of yester year. Actually National has been flying for some months now and from what I've heard their doing pretty good. My guess as to why they picked the name National was due in part to the great reputation the orginal National had. As for Pan Am! That one is too early to call yet. Maybe they'll make it as a niche carrier.
Delta737 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 516 posts, RR: 10
Reply 4, posted (14 years 6 months 2 days ago) and read 800 times:
Personally, I thought the sun king was pretty cool, but keep in mind that the year that National was using that image. Of course the idea is goofy in the 90's but consider that people are already looking back and grimacing when they hear "Rhapsody in Blue".
I think the reason that a lot of airlines are buying old airline names is for two reasons (of course I may be wrong).... But the first reason is probably because all of the good airline names are already gone. Think of a good, professional airline name and it's already been used. With a previous name and an updated livery, voila, you save millions on trial and error for your corporate image.
Secondly, some of the public probably feels a small bit more comfortable flying on the "new" National as opposed to someone like a never name like "Jet Blue" or whoever those folks are in JFK.
Besides, most folks don't know what an "LP" or a "45" are, better yet know that Pan Am (new) isn't the old Pan Am and surely they don't remember who National was.
I wouldn't be suprised to see someone use "C&S" for an upstart name.
Delta 737 Pilot
http://www.mindspring.com/~dltaylor (new updates!)
William From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1239 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (14 years 6 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 770 times:
Hey,there are many of us out here that have very fond memories the "SUN KING". Flying was truly special back then,not like the cattle call of today. Airlines,such as the old National did not have to run commercials stating they are reaching excellence as a goal,service was already excellent. Oh the memories.
Pilot1113 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2333 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (14 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 762 times:
I have to agree with Dougie (Delta737) on this call. All the good names have already been used.
Let's take an original name that is going to a new carrier that is starting up some in the near future called "Jet Anywair." Now, if that isn't the most god awful name I have ever heard of, I don't know what is. That is a true sign of all the good names being used up.
BTW, I don't think "JetBlue" is bad. It isn't great either, but 500% better than "Jet Anywair." I can't take that name seriously, makes me think it's an airline that you'd find in MS Flight Simulator.
- Neil Harrison
P.S. Yes, "Jet Anywair" is a true airline. It was in Aviation Week Magazine. I'm not joking here... okay... you have to stop laughing...
Charles802 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 380 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (14 years 6 months 9 hours ago) and read 755 times:
The new National scheme is just fine...it is right for the 90s. I certainly would not want to fly on any airplane with a reference to Louis XIV! I think National made a good marketing decision, because they are keeping the name, AND keeping a high level of service.
Ducker From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 137 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (14 years 6 months 8 hours ago) and read 753 times:
Who cares if a new airline uses the same name as a defunct airline? Each new airline exists because investors choose to invest in these airlines. PanAm is still a known name to many travellers, obviously important to the investors. As for National, it ceased to exist in 1980 with the merger
SEA nw DC10 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 491 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (14 years 6 months 7 hours ago) and read 751 times:
Personally, I think that it is great to see airlines back into service that went under a few years ago. It's not bad they are using the same name, there are all new employees. I wish both National and Pan Am luck in the future, 'tis great to see those birds up and flying once again!
LH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 54
Reply 11, posted (14 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 745 times:
Does anybody find this ironic: The original PanAm bought National for an hugely inflated price, which contributed to their downfall (of course Lockerbie was the death-blow) in the early 80's. And the newer PanAm bought Carnival Airlines, and that contributed to their fall. I just hope that the latest PanAm realises the earlier PanAm mistakes, and will refrain from buying any airlines before they have a well capitalised safety net to fall upon.
« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
Markdc10 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (14 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 739 times:
Sorry to disagree with you LH423 but National wasn't the downfall of Pan Am. Pan Am's troubles started back in the late 60s when they decided to buy a huge fleet of 747s. It wasn't until around 1976 or so that Pan Am was able to produce a profit. As a former National flight attendant, all I can say is there wasn't one person I talked to at NA that wanted Pan Am to buy us. Pan Am on the other hand just had to have us and once they got us, found they couldn't operate a domestic route system. Also mis management caused the demise of Pan Am. Not National.