Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
United Will Become United  
User currently offlineCALTECH From Poland, joined May 2007, 2195 posts, RR: 25
Posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 25514 times:

On April 1st, Continental Airlines and United Airlines shall become one legal entity named United Airlines. Some 250 aircraft will need to be re-registered with the FAA.

Slowly it is coming together.


UNITED We Stand
97 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offline777ord From United States of America, joined May 2010, 490 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 25528 times:

That is very exciting news!!!! I am a fully supporter of this merger and each check in the box is a great accomplishment!  

Is this posted on flyingtogether? I can't find it on our employee portal. You on the 27th floor, too?


User currently offlinewarreng24 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 707 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 25342 times:

Quoting CALTECH (Thread starter):
Some 250 aircraft will need to be re-registered with the FAA.

So, will the sUA aircraft be re-registered? Or are we talking about the sCO aircraft?


User currently offlineJohn From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 1374 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 25274 times:

Do you mean they will no longer be United-Continental Holdings?

User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7075 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 24640 times:

Quoting CALTECH (Thread starter):
Some 250 aircraft will need to be re-registered with the FAA.

Now that the sequester has kicked in and the FAA has advised of all the cuts in staffing, towers, traffic delays etc. etc. etc. will the timeline of April 1st be met?
Hey its a serious question, I'm simply going by what the President and Head of the various government departments have said, they are the actual managers.


User currently offlinerising From United States of America, joined May 2010, 269 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 24586 times:

At last- the sUA and sCO talk is frustrating and somewhat confusing at times.

Bittersweet though as it brings to the end of the line a company with a long, and proud history. But it's for the better. Gordon Bethune likes to talk about how when he joined Continental, the employees would rarely say I work for Continental, but rather I'm from Frontier, People Express, or TI. That was one of the first things he needed to change. He wanted people to say I work for Continental- and be proud of it.

Hopefully with new contracts, and the operations issues mostly behind them, everyone will be on the same page, and employees can say , at last, I'm from United.



If it doesn't make sense, it's because it's not true.
User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7075 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 24477 times:

Quoting rising (Reply 5):
Bittersweet though as it brings to the end of the line a company with a long, and proud history. But it's for the better.

Better for who, the existing workers and shareholders or their kids who are one day looking forward to working for CO the airline that their parents worked for and gave them a good life?
Just once in my lifetime I want to see a large transaction like this where folks say they only want the physical assets and will leave the name alone for another investor who may want to restart the brand and continue its heritage.


User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2129 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 24349 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 6):
Better for who, the existing workers and shareholders or their kids who are one day looking forward to working for CO the airline that their parents worked for and gave them a good life?

Better for the existing workers and shareholders as, you know, those are actually the people that matter in the company.. If their kids really want to follow in their parent's legacy they are still more than welcome to work for UA in the future.

Quoting par13del (Reply 6):
Just once in my lifetime I want to see a large transaction like this where folks say they only want the physical assets and will leave the name alone for another investor who may want to restart the brand and continue its heritage.

Since that worked out so well for the Pan Am and Braniff brands. I'm sure that the employees of the original companies loved seeing the trainwrecks that followed helping to further tarnish the brand.

[Edited 2013-03-02 07:09:49]

User currently offlineJBo From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 2313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 23849 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 6):
Just once in my lifetime I want to see a large transaction like this where folks say they only want the physical assets and will leave the name alone for another investor who may want to restart the brand and continue its heritage.
Quoting Polot (Reply 7):
Since that worked out so well for the Pan Am and Braniff brands. I'm sure that the employees of the original companies loved seeing the trainwrecks that followed helping to further tarnish the brand.

Exactly what Polot said. Sometimes a brand name should just be put to rest. I worked for Midwest/Skyway, and as far as I'm concerned, there will never be another Midwest. Even if someone bought the brand rights and started a new company, it would be very difficult to capture the spirit of the original YX, especially in today's industry. Some legacies are just plain meant to be put to rest.



I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day.
User currently offline777ord From United States of America, joined May 2010, 490 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 23657 times:

Quoting Polot (Reply 7):
Quoting par13del (Reply 6):
Better for who, the existing workers and shareholders or their kids who are one day looking forward to working for CO the airline that their parents worked for and gave them a good life?

Better for the existing workers and shareholders as, you know, those are actually the people that matter in the company.. If their kids really want to follow in their parent's legacy they are still more than welcome to work for UA in the future.

Very well said! That was then, this is now. If you want United to be this amazing airline. Drop your personal vendetta's and pride and work together to make it happen. If you want the "friendly Skies" to be the friendly skies... ACT IT. Believe it. Embrace it. If not, get out of the way for those of us who do. I don't care if you're CO or UA. You're my colleague and I will treat you and with the same respect. I love how people act like this merger is the end of the world...


User currently offlinejayunited From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 893 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 22778 times:

Quoting rising (Reply 5):
Bittersweet though as it brings to the end of the line a company with a long, and proud history. But it's for the better. Gordon Bethune likes to talk about how when he joined Continental, the employees would rarely say I work for Continental, but rather I'm from Frontier, People Express, or TI. That was one of the first things he needed to change. He wanted people to say I work for Continental- and be proud of it.

Hopefully with new contracts, and the operations issues mostly behind them, everyone will be on the same page, and employees can say , at last, I'm from United.

You are correct and I think we are finally starting to get there. It is tuff bringing two completely different companies together and trying to make them one. The easy part was rebranding the aircraft, terminals ECT. The hard part is getting the employes to come together and work together. I think United finally is focusing on that aspect that this merger will never work as long as the employees still identify themselves as sUA and sCO employees. Continental employees took pride in their airline and were sad, upset, even furious to see their name go. United employees took pride in their airline and we felt like the only thing that survived the merger was the United name. A lot of the horrible customer service that many passengers have experience since the start of this merger is because many employees are frustrated because they feel like their individual airline is being destroyed by this merger. But it is now time for all employees to let go of the old United and Continental and embrace the new United. Because if we don't then United will never actually be United. Finally the company is focusing on this problem and I hope all employees moving forward will take pride in the merged United and work our butts off to regain the publics trust and finally thru exceptional customer service remove this black cloud that has been hanging over this airline since the merger began. If we don't then then there may not be a United because customers do have choices and they can choose to move on to our competitors.


User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6098 posts, RR: 23
Reply 11, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 22509 times:

Quoting rising (Reply 5):

At last- the sUA and sCO talk is frustrating and somewhat confusing at times.

Unfortunately not going away to fast. This is just a minor detail really. The airline still needs to get all pilots in the right place, the ramp and CS on the same contract (getting close)........and then there is the FA's.

There is a feeling the FA's contract talks will go for a while as they aren't in the same ballpark. So till that happens, your still going to have sub-CO FA's staying on their own metal or at the very least working in a group together and vice versa.



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlineSESGDL From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3466 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 22470 times:

Quoting 777ord (Reply 1):

That is very exciting news!!!! I am a fully supporter of this merger and each check in the box is a great accomplishment!  

It's always so much fun to lose more variety, choices, decrease payrolls, wages and workforces, and to make richer the already wealthy.  

Jeremy


User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7075 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 21633 times:

Quoting 777ord (Reply 9):
If you want United to be this amazing airline. Drop your personal vendetta's and pride and work together to make it happen.

No personal vendetta, just a personal observation of the way business is today versus yesteryear. Business world today is about holding companies and financial institutions.
The bulk of the past great companies that have gone like the dodo were all founded and run by individuals who had a vision and worked hard to implement that vision, when those individuals passed away or moved on the companies in general loose their identify, most think that there is no correlation between that and making money.

Companies today are run from the top down, if the friendly skies are every going to show again it is going to have to start with management, they set the tone, workers are required to do their jobs.
I'm sure the general consensus is that if UA and CO employees were doing that this merger would have been much smoother and service to customers would be industry leading - some say it already is -.

If the AA / US merger comes off we will have 3 of the same, will be interesting to see how the industry goes in the next few years, legacy consolidation is over, only thing left from a legacy stand point is LCC contraction / elimination.


User currently offlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 5970 posts, RR: 14
Reply 14, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 21215 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 4):
Now that the sequester has kicked in and the FAA has advised of all the cuts in staffing, towers, traffic delays etc. etc. etc. will the timeline of April 1st be met?

More than likely not needed. I'm sure that UA has already has a broker in OKC ready to strike with a stack of AC8050-2 forms, to be handed over to the aircraft registration branch at a specific time. The trick is that it will take time to process them to permanent registration certificates.

The big issue here, though, is that many countries won't allow an aircraft to enter with a temporary registration (one of the carbon copies from the AC8050-2.)



Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4384 posts, RR: 19
Reply 15, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 19210 times:

A very sad day, Continental should have been the surviving name.


The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 11
Reply 16, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 19098 times:

Quoting Max Q (Reply 15):
A very sad day, Continental should have been the surviving name.

Absolutely not. Continental's brand recognition was very poor worldwide compared to United.



"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently offlineChicagoflight From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 18866 times:

Quoting Max Q (Reply 15):
A very sad day, Continental should have been the surviving name.

Outside the U.S. the Continental name was more known as a tire manufacturer


User currently offlineJpax From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1018 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 18721 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 16):
Absolutely not. Continental's brand recognition was very poor worldwide compared to United.


Yet it was the better airline.

[Edited 2013-03-02 12:40:30]

User currently offlineVC10er From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 2866 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 18311 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Jpax (Reply 18):

You all seem to have the post in reverse. Call it Continental and give me back my tulip!

The point of this post was for people to FINALLY stop it with comments like "Continental name should have survived" it's going to be a new airline: with an old name and an old livery! But new in terms that neither great legacy is coming back and a new great one will take their place. Hopefully. But I have to admit that the 3 giants we will be left with will be much the same.

I think UNITED should take the opportunity to become the most innovative and premium of the three.



The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 17865 times:

Quoting Jpax (Reply 18):
Yet it was the better airline.

Definitely not by the end. Meals were BOB in Y, IFE was PPV, and the "Jeff McMuffin" was already a first class breakfast staple by 2010.



"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently offlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4105 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 17075 times:

Quoting Jpax (Reply 18):

It's been almost three years since the merger announcement. The airlines previously known as Continental and United no longer exist, no matter anyone's opinion. There is a new airline that happens to be called United. It's time to move on instead of bickering like a bunch of 6 year olds at the playground, "yes it is, no it's not, yes it is, no it's not..."

Back to the original post, i am curious how they an legally merge the companies without joint CBAs? I always assumed that was the reason there still WERE two subs.


User currently offlinerising From United States of America, joined May 2010, 269 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16618 times:

Quoting Jpax (Reply 18):

I am not going to take the bait.  

But I will add this- UAL was poorly managed prior to Tilton, with a corporate governance structure that was essentially a joke. The profits from the late 90's were not reinvested in the company, and labor was scapegoated for years of bad route planning, no capacity discipline, and over-leverage. Then you had the failed US Airways takeover, 9/11, and lastly bankruptcy, and the company simply never recovered from those issues and was left with the bitter perception many have of the carrier.

CAL was not always a poster-child of great management either. The company went through bankruptcy, twice, and was a complete disaster prior to 1994. They had time to turn things around though in better days for the industry and with better management.

The Go Forward plan from Continental is in place now at United, and I think they have made adopting CALs culture the biggest goal, thankfully. Jeff made it quite clear in an interview recently, that those who do not want to take care of customers either need to change, or leave. Goes for both ex-UA and ex-CO employees.

You might find this Q and A interesting:

http://www.towerswatson.com/assets/p...ight-Doug-Rose-United-Airlines.pdf



If it doesn't make sense, it's because it's not true.
User currently offlinenimool From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2012, 94 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16478 times:

i though they already became one...


If its not Boeing im not Going!
User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5204 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16439 times:

Quoting rising (Reply 22):
They had time to turn things around though in better days for the industry

While I loved Continental for the great carrier that it was, this is a very good point. By doing the whole bankruptcy thing during the 1990s the airline had the golden days of 95-01 to recover from that period whereas UA (and US, NW, DL) had that morale wrenching experience during some of the industry's darkest days. That made it much harder to move on.

At first I was very upset to see CO go, but having now flown the New United I have come around. United can be a truly great carrier, and holding onto the past isn't helping that happen. Both Continental and United are dead, it's time to create something new.



Worked Hard, Flew Right
25 united319 : It's very sad actually. Yes I am a former UA Employee, but I have a great deal of fondness for the CO Brand as well. I grew up exclusively on CO and U
26 727LOVER : Will the legal entity that was Trans Texas still exist?
27 strfyr51 : Yeah it was posted Thursday, Except in Tech ops because temp registration has to be installed by March 13th
28 strfyr51 : Then thank Jeff the Next time you see him. He was the one who went on the "Chase" to find Tilton wasn't he?? He KNEW what the deal was, and that's pr
29 Sulley : As a CO guy that lives in Houston, I'd jump at the chance to go to Chicago. Let's see, real city or not...
30 Max Q : It's true United was known far better all over the world, as a VERY average Airline. While Continental was not as well known, our reputation was deser
31 cjg225 : I agree in re the reputation of the airline. I can see that United's reputation has won through. Another subpar experience with them the last two days
32 strfyr51 : right now we're running as 2 airlines and nobody is really talking as far as I can see. they really need to get it together. if one side is in troubl
33 cjg225 : Things did seem disjointed. I spent a lot of time the last two days standing at UA customer service desks dealing with my own flight issues as well a
34 blueflyer : So now that there won't be separate sCO and sUA fleet, are we going to go through another round of flight re-numbering?
35 777ER : What does sUA and sCO mean?
36 strfyr51 : I doubt it , but we sure might go through a couple of rounds of equipment changes when the pilots work out their seniority. There are still some IT p
37 N505FX : On top of that, there is a good portion of us that remember Continental as a cut rate, constantly in bankruptcy airline that everyone wanted to avoid
38 strfyr51 : Y'know? I hear that sentiment LOT from the "Southern Guys" and I've YET to see any evidence of it !! Better run? REALLY?!?! I see a LOT of micro mana
39 N505FX : You totally contradict yourself...Patterson ran his airline from the top down, Trippe ran his airline from the top down, Smith ran his airline from t
40 AeroWesty : A way of referring to UA or CO post-merger: sUA = subsidiary United sCO = subsidiary Continental ... as in subsidiary of United Continental Holdings.
41 N505FX : That seems to be the arrogance that pervades the behavior of Houston....quick to point out how inferior UAL was, but not so quick to point out that U
42 EWRCabincrew : This thread went downhill fast. Zero do to do with the OP.
43 Post contains images scbriml : Don't worry, he won't be running the largest combined carrier in the World for much longer.
44 astuteman : If I can offer the experiences of someone who has no horse in this thread.. I am fortunate enough to be able to compare flying CO in the 80's, 90's a
45 antoniemey : Calling them rounds really doesn't fit. It seems (at least from my perspective) that it's an on-going process of number-changing with anything from o
46 Max Q : You are right Str. the last time CO was well run was under Bethune, we were still doing pretty well up until the merger but things were deteriroratin
47 stealthz : Might be a Houston thing. For some considerable time after the Hewlett-Packard takeover of Compaq(or merger if your company was based in Houston) the
48 Post contains images 777ord : Regardless of whether you think CO is better than UA. The majority of that feeling is because they prefer Bethune. Although I never worked under him.
49 GALLEYSTEW : IT HAD to BE named UNITED..........Continental had filed bankruptcy 2 times.........you can't file three.
50 AeroWesty : Was that part of the bankruptcy reform laws? TWA certainly filed BK three times.
51 Post contains images IAHFLYR : Nothing like what the OP had in mind......but there is one post I found completely on the money!
52 par13del : Yes, in most instances their airlines, today most large companies are not owned by individuals but by financial houses looking at number not an indiv
53 VC10er : In the future, when new generations of flyers come on board, they won't have any of our baggage (no pun intended) we have. In the abstract United is a
54 klwright69 : This thread is off track some. I am a CO fan, but am happy with the UA name. Continental is also a tire company that is global, so I think that does m
55 kgaiflyer : I was on two different aircraft last week on which I'd *swear* the FA's were combinations of ones I've flown with formerly on pmCO flights or pmUA fli
56 IAHFLYR : Those would be the correct FA for those airplanes. And no they don't mix crews, yet.
57 CWAFlyer : The third time was part of the per-arrangement to be bought by AA. They didn't operate as TWA after the third BK, but rather as an LLC.
58 Post contains images Sulley : I think it's funny. A few years from now, everything will be merged - work groups, computer systems, processes, etc. Yet I still think pax will be fig
59 sxf24 : Like many threads of this type of topic, more emotion than facts or logic... You're entitled to this subjective opinion; however, if you're going to a
60 tommy767 : Bethune was great for Continental -- that much is true. We need to separate the two stewardship's at CO: The ignorance of the current CO regime at UA
61 sxf24 : Rant all you like against lawyers (and finance types). We all know how well it's worked when "airline people" ran airlines - about 100% rate of bankr
62 Post contains images tommy767 : Um, yeah OK, because Smisek has really been leading UA into unsung profitability
63 Post contains images Sulley : ...and here are the pax, still fighting in the aisle
64 sxf24 : Can you legitimately claim with a straight face that having another individual as CEO would have changed how well the UA-CO integration worked? It se
65 UAL747DEN : You are confusing a business with a family. You seem to think that it's a bad thing that the airline is better for "existing workers and shareholders
66 jayunited : This entire merger has been approached from a position of arrogance from the beginning by both sides. Both airlines thought they were better than the
67 777ord : give it a couple years... It'll be better. Im in it for the long haul. I just hope all my colleauges are, too.
68 ORDBOSEWR : That is a little revisionist history, but I will only comment on the supposed 2nd demand. If the new airline moved the WHQ then they would have owed
69 jayunited : They would not have owed the City or the state any money. The executive offices of United were and still are located at 77 W. Wacker however when mer
70 sxf24 : There were tax incentives related operations in the city of Chicago and the state of Illinois - not specific office buildings. Failing to maintain th
71 cjg225 : I don't see how it "says a lot" that I was at a service desk in the first place. Are you implying that it was my fault...? Yes, all airlines have iss
72 tommy767 : Not at all. I'm sure there are several senior managers from both airlines that could have done a better job. Smisek (in all likelyhood, not a bad guy
73 N505FX : Additionally, cash held in the bank isn't earning a return as revenue generating asset - sitting on too much cash can be viewed by investors and the
74 N505FX : Probably the smartest thing ever said on a.net
75 sxf24 : Whom? It is time to either provide some specifics names and facts, or end this line of discussion.
76 strfyr51 : Gordon Bethune came to power when Continental was on the BOTTOM. He made it better no doubt, But ! having said that ?? It Couldn't have gotten much W
77 AADC10 : I believe the change on April Fools Day will be mostly symbolic. Bigger integrations such as the switch to SHARES have already happened and other mor
78 ORDBOSEWR : There was a TA agreed to between the sUA and sCO FA groups that allowed a one-way transfer for any flight attended from sUA to sCO. There were a numb
79 UAL747DEN : United's best customers do not stand in line anywhere for service. We proactively take care of those customers before they even know of a disruption.
80 cjg225 : This is what we call a "non-response." If you don't mind me asking, what functional area are you in...?
81 par13del : They forget because they are still trained to have a vested interestor "buy in" to the company versus getting the best salary. A CEO cutting losses v
82 Post contains images RDH3E : Not quite yet! Next week I believe is the final transition. Nonsense. Wall Street loves him, he's doing just fine. Especially so now that some of the
83 IAHFLYR : I will have to agree with the above statemet as we've had it happen a couple of times. The latest was a trip from IAH-NAP late last summer we made co
84 CALTECH : Looks like the first improvement to SHARES is coming out tomorrow. Much better interface for the Customer Service Folks, It is going to be called AERO
85 ORDBOSEWR : I am sure that they did not plan a major storm to hit when rolling this out to 3 hubs (ORD, EWR & IAD). Would they delay the rollout so they do n
86 CALTECH : If it is a better system, it will make things easier when the stuff hits the fan. And that's what is being said about it. It makes a CSR's job much e
87 zippyjet : Congratulations! I hope all is well with employees from both companies as they officially become one. However I was hoping y'all would go with Unenta
88 Stratacruiser : Does re-registration require new numbers? Will ex-CO aircraft get the "UA" suffix found on ex-UA aircraft? Dave
89 smi0006 : Are all United staff wearing the same uniform yet? Must look messy for the gate staff if they are not. Are all gate staff crossed trained? Do they wor
90 FlyDeltaJets : The new uniforms are to be debuted sometime this month, gate staff have been crosstrained since the deployment of SHARES systemwide last year.
91 antoniemey : Not yet. Depends. A LOT of the uniform items look close enough that you wouldn't know if you didn't know they were two different uniforms. Yes. That
92 kgaiflyer : Not really. Probably only the red-coat supervisors at IAH stand out right now. But I'm seeing fewer and fewer of them -- don't know if red blazers ar
93 psa188 : FWIW, I think they should have gone with "United Continental" and kept a small UA logo next to the name. Of course, let's be glad they didn't call it
94 RyanairGuru : I agree. If the two airlines had one, distinct uniform each - say BA and LH - then it would be very obvious. But both carriers had multiple uniform p
95 Stratacruiser : I flew CDG - EWR last Friday on UA57, which had a 767-200 subbing for the usual -400. The prerecorded welcome and safety announcements were pre-merge
96 CODC10 : The IFE and automated announcements for the 5 762s and 3 remaining 76H ships are old Continental and will not be changed. The 5 762s will be retired
97 tommy767 : Odd. That seems easy to change.
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...
What Will Become Of American Eagle? posted Mon Dec 12 2011 15:35:05 by GEN2STEW
What Will Become Of UA's Red Carpet Club At EWR? posted Fri Sep 24 2010 11:01:24 by TOMMY767
AYs HEL-HKG Will Become Non-stop Year Around posted Fri May 12 2006 17:14:46 by LordHowe
What Will Become Of JFK AA After New Terminal? posted Wed Feb 15 2006 10:12:04 by AEroc
The A350 Will Become The Airbus Flagship posted Sun Jan 1 2006 20:12:58 by Moparman
What Will Become Of All The 767's Belonging To NH? posted Thu Feb 17 2005 09:07:55 by Ktachiya
What Will Become Of Nashville's D Concourse? posted Sat Jan 29 2005 00:12:14 by JetSOUTHEAST
What Will Become Of South African Airways posted Tue Jan 6 2004 20:11:30 by AirJamPanAm
Aero Lloyd Will Become Low Cost Airline... posted Fri Nov 7 2003 14:53:31 by Setjet
Seems That STR Will Become Second Germanwings Hub posted Fri Jul 25 2003 20:03:52 by Sabena332