Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA At LAX. Only 5 MD-80 Departures A Day?  
User currently offlineAmerican 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4016 posts, RR: 12
Posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 15527 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Anyone who works for American or flies American to LAX often noticed this?

American has only 5 MD-80 departures a day out of LAX, that is less than 10pc of all AA mainline (not Eagle) departures a day out of LAX. I know the MD-80 phase out has already begun but American still has a massive fleet of those, that's why I am surprised to see fewer MD-80 departures out of LAX where American is pretty strong. I believe that until recently American still had over 10 MD-80 departures a day out of LAX.

AFAIK, the 5 daily MD-80 departures are as follows: 3 to STL (3 flights a day LAX-STL) and 2 to LAS (5 flights a day LAX-LAS, the other 3 are 737s). What surprises me the most is LAX-DFW sees no more Super 80, because DFW is Super 80 heaven. If anyone has to add something or correct something, please do so, because again that is as far as I know.

Slightly off topic, three weeks ago I flew on a 737 from ORD to LGA. I was expecting an MD-80.

Ben Soriano


Ben Soriano
53 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 15536 times:

Quoting American 767 (Thread starter):
AFAIK, the 5 daily MD-80 departures are as follows: 3 to STL (3 flights a day LAX-STL) and 2 to LAS (5 flights a day LAX-LAS, the other 3 are 737s). What surprises me the most is LAX-DFW sees no more Super 80, because DFW is Super 80 heaven. If anyone has to add something or correct something, please do so, because again that is as far as I know.

I am surprised LAX-DFW doesn't have them anymore.

Quoting American 767 (Thread starter):
Slightly off topic, three weeks ago I flew on a 737 from ORD to LGA. I was expecting an MD-80.

They have a heaping helping of flights on the ORD-LGA/LGA-ORD route, consisting of a vast variety of 738s and MD80s. Was your flight scheduled as an MD80? Because otherwise their really isn;t any reason to be surprised and if you want, you can still fly an MD80 from ORD-LGA about 6-7x daily.


User currently offline4engines4lnghll From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 77 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 15445 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Theres a few more like AUS, SJD , etc. but not much.


4engines4lnghll
User currently offlineAmerican 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4016 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 15364 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

No it was not scheduled as MD-80, I was already unpleasantly surprised when I saw it was a 737 upon booking on aa.com
I booked the flight a few days before, I thought most ORD-LGA flights were MD-80s as it always was since the mid 90s (1994 or so). I was quite disappointed.
However, I flew about a week ago EWR-DFW-EWR roundtrip, both flights were MD-80s.

4engines4longhaul, you are partially right.

AUS-LAX that's MD-80 equipment 3x daily, but SJD-LAX is now 737 equipment 2x daily. So that s 8 MD-80 departures a day out of LAX.

[Edited 2012-09-20 20:36:28]


Ben Soriano
User currently offlineqqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2298 posts, RR: 13
Reply 4, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 15292 times:

Quoting 4engines4lnghll (Reply 2):
Theres a few more like AUS, SJD , etc. but not much.

LAX-SJD is now a 738 too. But yes, the one LAX-AUS flight is an S80, and the 115am redeye from LAX to DFW is still an MD-80. But it's the only LAX-DFW flight that's still an MD-80. Just like when AA starting pulling down the 727 fleet, they left the west coast first. We're beginning to see the same with the MD-80 fleet.

FYI, AA now has 185 738 a/c in service, and 196 MD-80s. AA will be taking three 738s a month through the end of the year, with many more to follow for the foreseeable future. With that information, AA's 738 fleet will be near 200 a/c by the end of year, and finally match or surpasse the MD-80 in fleet size.



The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26175 posts, RR: 50
Reply 5, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 15238 times:

If you remember back several years, AA optimized its schedule and isolated fleets and tried to minimize equipment variation at stations.

While LAX is a big station, same thing happened here - much of the MD80 flying turned into 738s.

You want to see something more interesting look at MIA -- out of 220 or so mainline departures - 0 are normally planned on the MD-80.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineLonghornmaniac From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 3363 posts, RR: 46
Reply 6, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 15116 times:

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 4):
one LAX-AUS flight is an S80

LAX-AUS is 3x, all S80.

Cheers,
Cameron


User currently offlinePSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 7775 posts, RR: 27
Reply 7, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 15066 times:

As AA has acquired more 738s, they have attempted to pull the MD-80s off the longer routes as much a possible. Primarily for fuel efficiency reasons.

User currently offlineBDL757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 152 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 14695 times:

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 4):
FYI, AA now has 185 738 a/c in service, and 196 MD-80s. AA will be taking three 738s a month through the end of the year, with many more to follow for the foreseeable future. With that information, AA's 738 fleet will be near 200 a/c by the end of year, and finally match or surpasse the MD-80 in fleet size.

Off topic but I have a question about AA's 738s; I was chatting with an AA employee the other day and he said that American was going to configure their -800s with 150 seats instead of the 160 seat most other carriers use. I had to go meet my flight and couldn't ask anymore questions but I was wondering why they would be doing this? My only thought was for the new Main Cabin Extra but pulling out 10 seats seemed like a lot.


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26815 posts, RR: 75
Reply 9, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 14610 times:

The MD80 makes less sense at LAX because of its location. You can hit anywhere in the Lower 48 and basically any mainline Canadian or Mexican destination with an MD80 from DFW or ORD. You can't do that at LAX.

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 1):
I am surprised LAX-DFW doesn't have them anymore.

I'm not surprised that there is only one LAX-DFW running the MD80. They need more capacity on that route most of the time.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 5):
If you remember back several years, AA optimized its schedule and isolated fleets and tried to minimize equipment variation at stations.

That plan was drawn down quite a bit as more 737s came into the fleet.

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 7):
As AA has acquired more 738s, they have attempted to pull the MD-80s off the longer routes as much a possible. Primarily for fuel efficiency reasons.

Not really fuel efficiency. More than anything, its simply an issue of the MD80 not having even close to the range of the 738. Within its range band, the MD80 is still reasonably efficient because of its low weight.

Quoting BDL757 (Reply 8):
Off topic but I have a question about AA's 738s; I was chatting with an AA employee the other day and he said that American was going to configure their -800s with 150 seats instead of the 160 seat most other carriers use. I had to go meet my flight and couldn't ask anymore questions but I was wondering why they would be doing this? My only thought was for the new Main Cabin Extra but pulling out 10 seats seemed like a lot.

MCE is definitely the reason for this, and it allows AA to staff with one fewer FA in addition to monetizing MCE and giving an elite perk. Remember that AA already has sub-150 seat 738s flying around, the ones without the "sliding" seats in Y.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3462 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 14457 times:

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 7):
As AA has acquired more 738s, they have attempted to pull the MD-80s off the longer routes as much a possible. Primarily for fuel efficiency reasons.

Still see them at PDX & SEA all the time, that's 4 hours or so on the M80, oddly the same trip on an A319 was half an hour shorter on average than the M80 has been for me in the past. Difference was I am generally in F when flying with AA.  



AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently offlineAmericanAirFan From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 408 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 14019 times:

SFO actually went to having ZERO MD-80s, and I'm not %100 sure, but I heard they went back to 1X daily into SFO. It's a new age in aviation sadly. On the plus side, DL is keeping their DC-9 series aircraft around and even acquiring the 717. Also the MD-80/87 are currently G4's bread and butter. So they will still be around for a little while, but they're definitely becoming a more scarce sight.


"American 1881 Cleared For Takeoff One Seven Left"
User currently offlineBobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1725 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 13872 times:

The MD80 has high operating costs and low ownership costs. So it makes sense to keep them on shorter routes where they will have lots of idle time. Since idle time is less expensive on a M80 than on a 738. This is a good move by AA.

User currently offlineAAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3498 posts, RR: 46
Reply 13, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 13770 times:

Quoting BDL757 (Reply 8):
Off topic but I have a question about AA's 738s; I was chatting with an AA employee the other day and he said that American was going to configure their -800s with 150 seats instead of the 160 seat most other carriers use. I had to go meet my flight and couldn't ask anymore questions but I was wondering why they would be doing this? My only thought was for the new Main Cabin Extra but pulling out 10 seats seemed like a lot.

AA will have 4 different configurations for 738s... at least for a while. Today's fleet count shows 30 acft remaining w/148 seats and 152 acft with 160 seats. Main Cabin Extra original plan was to remove a row from coach (154 seats) but I don't see any acft listed as configured that way. Recently employees were informed the "revised" MCE configuration would be 150 seats (two rows having a "desk" between the seats) providing an extra "selling point" (and reducing FAR required F/A manning to 3). Again, I don't see any configured that way at the moment.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 9):
Not really fuel efficiency. More than anything, its simply an issue of the MD80 not having even close to the range of the 738. Within its range band, the MD80 is still reasonably efficient because of its low weight.

Fuel efficiency is absolutely the reason. The longer the flight, the less "efficient" the MD80s are compared to the 738s. The shorter the flight, the less economic difference there is and the less pressure to change equipment type. Hence, MD80s are slowly being replaced on flights to the west coast (market-by-market decisions).



*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
User currently offlinesw733 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6372 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 13738 times:

Quoting AmericanAirFan (Reply 11):
SFO actually went to having ZERO MD-80s, and I'm not %100 sure, but I heard they went back to 1X daily into SFO.

Yesterday and today, at least, were:

LAX - All 738
DFW - All 738 except for 1x 763
ORD - All 738
MIA - All 757 and 763
JFK - All 762 except for 1x 763

Again, this is all just today and yesterday, but no AA MD80s seem to have made regularly scheduled flights to SFO.


User currently onlinemhkansan From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 720 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 13553 times:

The M80s are best used now for short-haul flying as they should be. I think that's where we'll see the last of them in 2017 - flying short-haul routes in and out of DFW and ORD to places like STL, SAT, OKC, AUS, IAH, LIT, XNA, ABQ, BHM - etc. The nature of the West Coast flying is longer block times, It is natural/obvious/smart that they draw down flying on those longer flights. I think the next routes to lose the S80 are the long haul West Coast routes ex-DFW, like YYC, SEA, and PDX. Then we'll see them infill the S80 flights to BWI, PHL, BDL, etc unless AA wants to rid each hub of them one by one. LAX and ORD are certainly more competitive than DFW for AA, so it might make sense to draw down S80 flying in those hubs first. Personally I think they keep a few S80s around for awhile and use some of the new 737s for new flying, especially for international flights to Central and South America. Its a good airplane for MIA/DFW-Central America. DFW-BOG anyone?

User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13552 posts, RR: 100
Reply 16, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 13425 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting American 767 (Thread starter):
What surprises me the most is LAX-DFW sees no more Super 80

Yea!    Sitting in the back next to those loud engines (even if Pratts...) is no fun. It is good to see AA has enough 738s to make this happen now.

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 12):
The MD80 has high operating costs and low ownership costs. So it makes sense to keep them on shorter routes where they will have lots of idle time. Since idle time is less expensive on a M80 than on a 738. This is a good move by AA.

Exactly. Get it off long routes where the fuel burn advantage of the 738 makes it cheaper to fly *and* it carries more people. As the A319s enter the fleet, I expect the MD-80 operating radius to drop sharply.

Quoting mhkansan (Reply 15):
I think the next routes to lose the S80 are the long haul West Coast routes ex-DFW, like YYC, SEA, and PDX.

If that hasn't already been done, it should be.

Quoting mhkansan (Reply 15):
Personally I think they keep a few S80s around

AMR is not set up to economically operate a small number of a type. Other airlines could, but not AA. Not with their current labor relations. I think you'll see a push to buy "88 seats" ASAP to ensure the MD-80s are retired on schedule.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently onlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17156 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 13222 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 16):
Sitting in the back next to those loud engines (even if Pratts...) is no fun.

Tell me about it! I flew on the MD80 LAX-ORD redeye this past summer and sitting close to the engines made it really hard to get any sleep.

So no more AA MD80s between LAX-ORD?



Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently offlineJAAlbert From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1626 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 13191 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 16):
Yea! Sitting in the back next to those loud engines (even if Pratts...) is no fun. It is good to see AA has enough 738s to make this happen now.

Usually the airlines and flights I fly use the reliable but oh-so-common 737. So I was excited when I was able to fly a Delta MD-80 awhile back. It was a pleasant ride up front, but I was stunned at how noisy it was in the back. The entire cabin seemed to vibrate and rattle. I couldn't imagine riding in the back for 3-4 flight in one of them. Was the 727 as noisy? I don't ever recall rear-engined planes making quite so much a racket, but perhaps I wasn't paying attention back then.


User currently onlinemhkansan From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 720 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 12992 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 16):
AMR is not set up to economically operate a small number of a type. Other airlines could, but not AA. Not with their current labor relations. I think you'll see a push to buy "88 seats" ASAP to ensure the MD-80s are retired on schedule.

The ownership costs are low on the S80s now. The ones they keep will be the ones they own, are relatively new, and will likely fly them until their cycles run them up to a D-Check. As you know, some of the S80s are newer than the oldest 737s. AA has a lot of spare parts for S80s and a healthy, small fleet of 'em in DFW is something I AA will find prudent. Its a card they should take from DL. Perhaps as more 319s come online, we'll see them in smaller markets like AMA, LBB, SHV, etc. where there is very little mainline competition and they can park it overnight.

Don't get me wrong the S80s are definitely on their way out. I don't think AA will let a good airframe waste in the desert if they can fly them cheaply on short hops around the South and use up the rest of their lifetime cycles.

Also, quick look at some long S80 markets ex-DFW to the West Coast for next Sunday.

DFW-PDX 4x
DFW-YYC 2x
DFW-FAT 2x
DFW-SJC 5x
DFW-RNO 2x
DFW-SAN 6x
DFW-SMF 4x
DFW-DFW-SJD 2x
DFW-PSP 2x
DFW-PVR 1x
DFW-GDL 1x

As far as ORD goes they used to send them ORD-PSP and still fly a few ORD-LAS (kind of W.C.) but everything else is 738. That, and AA doesn't do a lot of ORD-W.C. compared to UA. AA ORD is a better Midwest-to-Northeast hub.

[Edited 2012-09-21 07:42:08]

User currently offlineTan Flyr From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1920 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 12845 times:

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 7):
As AA has acquired more 738s, they have attempted to pull the MD-80s off the longer routes as much a possible. Primarily for fuel efficiency reasons.
Quoting mhkansan (Reply 19):
The ownership costs are low on the S80s now. The ones they keep will be the ones they own, are relatively new, and will likely fly them until their cycles run them up to a D-Check. As you know, some of the S80s are newer than the oldest 737s. AA has a lot of spare parts for S80s and a healthy, small fleet of 'em in DFW is something I AA will find prudent. Its a card they should take from DL. Perhaps as more 319s come online, we'll see them in smaller markets like AMA, LBB, SHV, etc. where there is very little mainline competition and they can park it overnight.

Don't get me wrong the S80s are definitely on their way out. I don't think AA will let a good airframe waste in the desert if they can fly them cheaply on short hops around the South and use up the rest of their lifetime cycles.

Also, quick look at some long S80 markets ex-DFW to the West Coast for next Sunday.

DFW-PDX 4x
DFW-YYC 2x
DFW-FAT 2x
DFW-SJC 5x
DFW-RNO 2x
DFW-SAN 6x
DFW-SMF 4x
DFW-DFW-SJD 2x
DFW-PSP 2x
DFW-PVR 1x
DFW-GDL 1x

As far as ORD goes they used to send them ORD-PSP and still fly a few ORD-LAS (kind of W.C.) but everything else is 738. That, and AA doesn't do a lot of ORD-W.C. compared to UA. AA ORD is a better Midwest-to-Northeast hub.

Following up from these two responses...late last spring I was told by agents at FAT and several crews on DFW- FAT flights that FAT was due to go to 738's by mid summer or so. Tht was part of a plan to reduce MD-80s at the coasts from DFW for several reasons: stage length (keep them closer home as indicated above) and higher fuel costs on both coasts. So LAX having only a few MD 80's now makes perfect sense since they are used on shorter hauls, less fuel load needed.

I'm hoping someone in AA knows when FAT will see the change to 738's? or are we on the list far down the road for 319's? Since the laods in the morning in particular are almost 100% I believe they could easily sell teh extra seats a 738 over the 80 any day. Just my 2 cents! any info is welcome.


User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5312 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 12092 times:

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 13):
AA will have 4 different configurations for 738s... at least for a while. Today's fleet count shows 30 acft remaining w/148 seats and 152 acft with 160 seats. Main Cabin Extra original plan was to remove a row from coach (154 seats) but I don't see any acft listed as configured that way. Recently employees were informed the "revised" MCE configuration would be 150 seats (two rows having a "desk" between the seats) providing an extra "selling point" (and reducing FAR required F/A manning to 3). Again, I don't see any configured that way at the moment.

If so many of the 738s now have 160 seats, why do seating charts on AA.com still show the old seating chart with 148 seats? It makes it hard to pick a seat in coach, ahead of the wing, if you want to avoid the row(s) that don't have windows.


User currently offlineTUSdawg23 From United States of America, joined May 2010, 149 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 12068 times:

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 7):
As AA has acquired more 738s, they have attempted to pull the MD-80s off the longer routes as much a possible. Primarily for fuel efficiency reasons.

If that's the case, then why is AA using them on routes like ORD-PHX and ORD-TUS regularly? The ORD-TUS flight I've flown numerous times and I know it's about 3 hours gate to gate. I know the ORD-PHX will mix in 738's, but why not the TUS flights I wonder?


User currently offlineTan Flyr From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1920 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 11682 times:

Quoting TUSdawg23 (Reply 22):
I know the ORD-PHX will mix in 738's, but why not the TUS flights I wonder?

One of the things as I understand it is having spare parts, etc on hand. Also training of ground crews..so until they can perhaps schedule all that, then it is just as easy to keep the Mad Dogs...just like FAT.


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13552 posts, RR: 100
Reply 24, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 11565 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 18):
It was a pleasant ride up front, but I was stunned at how noisy it was in the back. The entire cabin seemed to vibrate and rattle. I couldn't imagine riding in the back for 3-4 flight in one of them. Was the 727 as noisy? I don't ever recall rear-engined planes making quite so much a racket, but perhaps I wasn't paying attention back then.

The rear of even the L1011 was loud. But back then, life was louder. Remember how *little* noise insulation cars had back then? Do you recall what a 'step-change' in automotive noise the Lexus LS-400 was? Ever ride in a VW beattle pre-super beatle? They are *not* quiet inside. Heck, Honda is getting bad reviews for cars with road noise yet they are far quieter than the Hondas from the 1980s.

For years I avoided AA due to the MD-80 noise (in the aft cabin). I'm happy to see it is a non-issue. I rode an AA MD-80 in February (right at the engines) and that was enough to remind me why I dislike the type. Since then, I've picked the 738, 752, or 767 (not sure if it was 762 or 763...) flights.

Quoting mhkansan (Reply 19):
The ownership costs are low on the S80s now. The ones they keep will be the ones they own, are relatively new, and will likely fly them until their cycles run them up to a D-Check.

Let's break it down. For longer missions, the ownership costs are about 15% of the cost of flying, fuel is going to be 30% to 35%. However, the MD-80s have a maintenance issue and fewer seats than the 738 (160 now).
1. The JT-8Ds are very dependable for their 8,000 cycles. Compare that to 20,000 for a CFM-56-7. Even though a JT8D overhaual is much lower cost than a CFM-56-7 (last I looked, about 60%), 2.5X * 60%=150% of the total maintenance bill.
2. The MD-80s have zero predictive maintenance capability. In other words, they will always have more last minute (flight delay) maintenance items. It is one reason the current AA pilot action is being so effective. I know the CFM-56-7s have some predictive maintenance. I'm not sure how much the 738 has, but it is more than the MD-80.   
3. Many of the MD-80s need new avionics. Why spend the retrofit money on an airframe to be replaced?

MD-80s are being retired. No longer will other airlines share the costs of buying parts/engineering for the MD-80:


While I agree with your theory, the reality is that the added costs of operating an MD-80 (fuel, maintenance, and less revenue due to fewer seats) is why their resale is so poor. They burn 25% more fuel than a 738 or, for a short flight, 5% to 6% of the costs (recall, the lease is at most 15% and will be *far* less on the A319s). If the route fills an A319, there is the advantage of:
1. Additional savings of 5% to 8% on maintenance
2. paperless cockpit? (returns about 2 hours of the day back to the pilots personal life)
3. New airplanes (maintenance holiday)

For the first few years, the A319s should have a 1% or so *lower* cost per flight than the newest MD-80s. Why pay to keep the old planes around? e.g., flight training (different pilot pool), pay to train F/As on one more type, etc.

For those short missions, why not fly a lighter 88 (or less) seat aircraft? CASM will be about the same and the per flight costs far less. Too many 'close to DFW' missions are boarderline to fill a MD-80 but are too 'thick' for a 50-seat RJ (e.g., ICT).

I agree AA should milk out the MD-80 life. But they should have stopped D-checks 18 months ago. (Does anyone know?) If not, they should have for 2012. This puts a 2019 cap (maybe 2020) on the MD-80 fleet. By 2017, when the MD-80s should be retired, there will not be enough left with D-check life.

In fact, the economics of the MD-80 really do not pay for a C-check! There is no ROI versus using the money for a new A319.    Thus, I expect in mid to late 2015 for AA to stop even performing C-checks on the MD-80s. Stop paying the staff to maintain an run the simulators after early 2017...

Quoting mhkansan (Reply 19):
AA has a lot of spare parts for S80s and a healthy, small fleet of 'em in DFW is something I AA will find prudent.

But there is no ROI on a C or D-check. Better to bring in A319s, E-jets or MRJs. Please recall we're talking a transition in 2015 to 2017. The A319 will have a 90k cycle life then (low maintenance costs on short haul). I fail to see how AA would pay to keep a type in service with no defined economic mission.

Also realize that the AMR MD-80 retirement will only temporarily cut the costs of MD-80 parts. It will also push vendors out of the business of supplying some MD-80 parts. Thus by 2020 or so, part costs will actually increase. AMR is just not set up to efficiently manage a small subfleet. Republic or any of the other RJ vendors could. Cut the expense.

Keeping the MD-80s would also curtail AA's in terminal advertisements on how they'll have the youngest fleet.  

Note: I have a different opinion for airlines with proven strategies for low utilization (e.g. Allegiant). But AMR is not set up for 3X/week operation of an aircraft.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
25 laca773 : I've wondered about this as well. It would seem routes such as these as well as DFW-SEA/PDX/SJC/FAT/ONT would be flown with the 738s now. Is it possi
26 N737AA : I'm always amazed at all of the experts on this board.......Armchair experts that is... BTW....the "D" Check type maintenance program went away long a
27 ripcordd : Well I think AA switchs over to a 738 based on the length the longer the better vs 80 and the yeild of the route markets like TUS AA prob gets a highe
28 N1120A : Of course. Exactly. This will be their mission more and more. That and some bridge turns. That's really the reason the MD80 still hits LAX as it is.
29 Post contains images lightsaber : As I noted "in the back" the MD80s are too loud. My company won't pay for the forward cabin for me, thus as far as I'm concerned those seats do not e
30 N1120A : Upgrades baby!
31 AAR90 : You've hit upon my personal "problem" with AA management. It isn't the decisions but rather the lack of execution (especially the speed). Can't tell
32 penguins : Two years ago I flew S80 LAX-SFO. The route was only S80 at that time (or just about).
33 Viscount724 : I expect the reference to "forward cabin" was not meant to refer to first class, but to the entire forward part of the cabin, meaning all except the
34 qqflyboy : Which is interesting because the company is seeking a waiver from the FAA to exclude those "blocked" seats so they can reduce the FA headcount to thr
35 TrijetsRMissed : ORD-TUS will likely become the longest standing 3+ HR MD-80 route with AA. Also, while ORD-PHX sees a mixture with the 738 for parts of the year, it
36 TrijetsRMissed : Respectfully, I think both of these points are factually incorrect. There is no outstanding MX issue or AD/mod required on the MD-80, and the lack of
37 TrijetsRMissed : Perhaps for AA, but they would phase the fleet out today if they could. I remember way back in the fall of 1997, when AA first announced intent to ph
38 RWA380 : As stated above, the joys of engines mounted to the fuselage aircraft, 727's, DC-9's, even L-1011's, DC-10's, I still miss them all, I've been in tha
39 Tan Flyr : Westbound DFW-FAT is usually right at 3 to 3hr and a handful.Winter time can easily run 3 hr and 15-20 min. East bound usually right at 2hr 38-45 min
40 Super80DFW : You just haven't been paying attention. At DFW, all 738 flights are scheduled with the F16/Y144 birds, so you'll always find the proper map. I'll giv
41 Post contains images AAR90 : As my kids like to say: "looks like someone needs to take a chill-pill."
42 Post contains images TrijetsRMissed : For DFW, I would agree; PDX will win that award. Back when AA was still successful, (3-4 years ago), I recall ORD had 4 MD-83s daily to PDX. As a nat
43 mhkansan : DFW-PDX is the longest S80 flight systemwide. Until very recently, AA had a scheduled S80 on the ORD-SJD flight but that has since gone to a 737. ORD
44 Post contains images TrijetsRMissed : Exactly why a 738, sooner rather than later, is inevitable on DFW-PDX. As I said; so you agree... I can see DFW-YYC going to AE before the MD-80 is r
45 RWA380 : Having lived in Portland a good chunk of my life, and an AA gold member for several of those years, I do remember many an M80 flight to ORD, DFW &
46 Post contains images lightsaber : Alas, I'm saving my miles for vacations. I'm sure there were other savings I didn't put it. e.g., the A319 could fly DFW-LAX-OOG while the MD-80 coul
47 TrijetsRMissed : Maybe the daily flights decreased before falling off altogether. Perhaps you can speak better to the number of daily flights during the routes' tenur
48 laca773 : Does the M80 fleet have a lot of mechanical delays at this point in their lifespan? I know when a/c get up there in years, they start having mechanica
49 Beardown91737 : 4x. It is a little under 3 hours eastbound. I think my daughter took that trip in a F100 in 2002.
50 TrijetsRMissed : This quote was from mhkansan. I suppose it's possible there was a one-off, but doubtful. A few reasons why: The route is within 75 nm of the F100's m
51 N737AA : Nope the AA F100 never operated that route, didn't have the range. N737AA
52 AAR90 : Nope the AA F100 never operated that route, didn't have the range.[/quote]IIRC, the farthest west we flew F100 was COS. We didn't have single-engine
53 Post contains links LV : I know flight 1843 from LAX to LAS is still and MD-80 every day. I caught it last week.... http://youtu.be/QdxsIvHL6b4
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 Won't Re-Engine MD-80 Fleet posted Fri Nov 17 2006 03:57:58 by PanAm_DC10
AA #1 At LAX posted Sun Jul 16 2006 09:18:54 by BALAX
AA's F/A Staffing For MD-80 And 757 posted Wed Dec 13 2000 19:11:50 by Jacobcal
AA Still Upgrading Their MD-80's? posted Wed Dec 13 2000 01:23:52 by Landgreen
AA,TW And DL MD-80, 2-3 Or 3-2? posted Sat Dec 9 2000 01:57:15 by TWA902fly
AA MD-80 Damaged At LAX posted Sun Feb 15 2009 07:26:13 by FlyDeltaJets
AA MD-80 At SJU, 01/11/2011 posted Wed Jan 12 2011 07:14:30 by eastbay
AA MD-80 Crossing The Street At MIA posted Sun May 16 2010 19:41:52 by flymia
Man Opens Door, Deploys Slide On AA MD-80 At DFW posted Tue Mar 3 2009 13:03:43 by FrequentFlyKid
AA MD-80 At SJC X-wind Take Off Video posted Fri Apr 4 2008 06:48:49 by SJC-Alien