DeltaOwnsAll From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1173 posts, RR: 1 Posted (11 years 10 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1902 times:
How big was Pan AM as compared to the modern day major airlines like Delta, American, and United? How many planes did they have in their fleet? If they weren't the major U.S. domestic carrier when they were around who was in the 80s? Thanks for any info
Skyhawk From United States of America, joined May 2001, 1065 posts, RR: 4 Reply 2, posted (11 years 10 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1628 times:
A lot depends on what you mean by "big"? Do you mean strictly the amount of aircraft they had? That has been answered. But do you mean big as in relation to their importance to the aviation industry as a whole? Most everybody knows that they set many firsts throughout their life, around the world speed flight, first commercial 747, etc. Big company, known around the world to many third world countries as the USA.
777gk From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1641 posts, RR: 20 Reply 5, posted (11 years 10 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1538 times:
Pan Am's domestic network was simply set up to feed its international services. It gained a lot more territory in the 1979 acquisition of National Airlines, but it never became the large domestic player that Eastern, Delta, or United was at the time. Of course, Pan Am was the undisputed leader of international service, with TWA following somewhat close behind.
VirginA340 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (11 years 10 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1524 times:
PA had tried to merge with TWA in the 1970s to get domestic routes among other international routes but the CAB put an end to that. Currently UAL and AA are much larger that PA at it's peak. Before the AA/TW merger UA was cosidered by some as Earth's largest airline.
FTraveler From United States of America, joined exactly 12 years ago today! , 72 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (11 years 10 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1498 times:
Pan Am's domestic presence was miniscule compared to its extensive international network which included major cities in North America, Asia, Africa, South America and Europe. Pan Am also owned Inter-Continental hotels. I would venture to say that at its peak, Pan Am actually flew to more international destinations than any other carrier in commercial aviation history.
Deltaflyertoo From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 1589 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (11 years 10 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1474 times:
688 a/c for Pan Am is wrong.
While I have no exact figures, common logic dictates the fleet was no bigger than 200-250 a/c. As of 91 they were in serious, serious trouble and were selling assets left and right. They only narrowbodies they had were 727s and 737s. There definetly was not a combination of 688 Airbuses, 747s and 727/737s.
Also keep in mind they did not have any domestic hubs but focus cities, the biggest of which was JFK in 91.
To answer the original question, the major players in the 80s were Eastern, United, Delta, American and to a lesser extent Continental, Western, TWA and Pan AM. The 80s were a crazy time and deregulation was the begining of the end for Pan Am. Unfortunately they just didn't move as fast as all the others in making strategic decisions for routes, fleet and image.
Deltaflyertoo From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 1589 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (11 years 10 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1465 times:
I don't think Pan Am was that big. Their route network was nowhere near what DL's is today. They had a big operation at JFK and spotty service everywhere else in the US. In order to be near the size of DL they would have been operating at least 3 major hubs, coast to coast.
Also remember, Pan Am sold the Pacific routes to UAL in 85, this considerably shrunk the airline.
VirginA340 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (11 years 10 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1451 times:
Don't forget about PA's other gateway to South america and Carribean...MIA. Remeber that PA had a huge hub but they were based out of MIA. JFK served as a second home. Then it was their euro hub FRA. The JFK and their Euro hub of FRA all went to DL which explains their large presence at the two airports.
Tan flyr From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1847 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (11 years 10 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1432 times:
Sorry Guys, I don't think Pan Am even had more than 100-120 aircraft in the mid-80's.
I used to have a website that gave a lot of history, though it was in German.
To the best of my memory, in the mid-80's(before the Pacific div went to UA) the fleet would have been somthing on ther order of:
35-42 747's inc the SP"s
and I think there were a few 737's leased from someone.
thats it.Remember the domestic side was only feed to JFK & MIA. many flights stopped at 2 cities before JFK..ie: IND-CLE-JFK
IMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6201 posts, RR: 43 Reply 13, posted (11 years 10 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1428 times:
Pan Am never had 688 aircraft in the fleet at one time. 250-300 is most likely. If necessary I can provide exact figures for any date from the 60s until the demise.
As for it's size. In terms of route network it was huge. Much more extensive than any other international carrier, with the exception of todays BA. True RPK could noy compare to UA,AA,DL,NW,WN etc of today, but we must remember that Pan Ams heyday was the sixties and seventies. Times have changed.
What is it with all the "is there a possibilty airline X will.." threads? The answer it'll is possible.
Notdownnlocked From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 915 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (11 years 10 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1397 times:
Don't forget that while PA flew all over the world the US government did not allow them to fly US domestic passenger carrying routes before deregulation. Just an example is the route they had in 1976 from HNL-DFW-JFK they couldn't carry PAX from DFW to JFK. Others for example are PDX-SEA, LAX-SFO(747 9flights a week), TPA-MIA, DTW-BOS and many others on the domestic routes. These examples are from only one timetable alone. Had PA been allowed to build a domestic system before all the other airlines were allowed to fly internationally on PA's routes I think PA would no doubt be here today as the original and not Pan Am Mark III the re-incarnate.
Skyhawk From United States of America, joined May 2001, 1065 posts, RR: 4 Reply 16, posted (11 years 10 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1382 times:
If I am not mistaken, when Notdownlocked said PAA wasn't allowed to carry pas from DFW-JFK as the continuation from HNL, I believe that only referred to persons getting on in DFW. The people from HNL could go all the way to JFK. As far as them(PAA) being able to still exist if they had been allowed to create a domestic system, I don't agree. I say that as a former FA for them. The powers in charge - Juan Trippe, William Sewell, Edward Acker - in their days raped the company completely. For example, on the 747 in the First Class section we always carried a fresh floral arrangement on each flight. Just a way to make that section look a little more like home. Anyway, William Sewell's wife received a reported $90,000 salary per year just to pick out the flowers we would use. Can you believe that? Just constant episodes like that one. One more, Edward Acker's wife - on a trip to Nice, France there was about 6 or 7 bottles of champagne left on the plane, she told the head purser(a friend of mine) that she wanted to take the rest of it with her to their house. He asked her to sign for it as we had to keep track of all liquor on the plane. She didn't want to do that. Talk about cheap! With her money she could buy the finest of French champagnes but she would rather take the companies property(and before someone says her husband owned PAA so she should be allowed to take what she wanted, Acker did not "own" PAA, he was simply an employee just like the rest of us. If any of the rest of us had taken champagne, we would have been fired on the spot.) By the way some of the champagne was Rose' and she drank it on ice! P.S. She didn't get to take the champagne.
ACVITALE From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 921 posts, RR: 13 Reply 19, posted (11 years 10 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1327 times:
While the fleet list in 1991 looks ok it is incorrect. It shows the 727-100s that Pan Am had but, was not flying. It also neglects to show the 6 then later 4 737-200s these were used on routes like MIA-ATL-JFK-ATL-MIA and SFO-LAX-SFO and MIA-MCO-IAD-MCO-MIA and others.
Notar520AC From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1606 posts, RR: 4 Reply 20, posted (11 years 10 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1314 times:
Ok, so maybe the site was wrong or something- it listed all of the aircraft Pan American Airlines had since they started, not saying they were all in service! Also, Pan Am loaned, sold, and did joint opperations with other major airlines with their aircraft suggesting the "difference" in our sources.
Iflewrepublic From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 537 posts, RR: 3 Reply 21, posted (11 years 10 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1292 times:
The success of airlines such as Pan American World Airways, Eastern Airlines, and Braniff International was their ultimate undoing. They all grew too big too fast and were unable to find ways of fending off the death blows of deregulation.
One more thing, just thought I should point out that Northwest's combined fleet of leased and owned aircraft totaled somewhere in the neighborhood of 445 give or take...doesn't take much to have a fairly substantial sized fleet.
Aviation is proof that, given the will, we have the capacity to achieve the impossible.