SpaceshipDC10 From Canada, joined Jan 2013, 411 posts, RR: 0 Posted (2 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5829 times:
On the production list published by TAHS, I've seen that there were three positions (msn 20337-20338-20339) intended for Western Airlines but were NTU. They are visible on airlinerlist too. I've searched here through the archives without any luck. So did WA ever ordered or took options on any B747s before cancelling them or, has Boeing reserved these positions in case the airline would join the ranks of its 747 customers?
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2307 posts, RR: 7 Reply 3, posted (2 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5640 times:
Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 2): Thanks. Do you remember when and why they cancelled the order ?
I don't know when, but my understanding is they didn't have the financial backing to afford the 747s. So they were cancelled. Somewhere I saw a rendition of a 747 in the old Indian Head livery (which I far prefer to the big red W).
It's also been posted before that AS either ordered one 741 or were about to order one to serve Russia, I believe.
RWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2160 posts, RR: 4 Reply 8, posted (2 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5182 times:
Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 6): Interesting but unless they had some ambitious growth plans (other than mainland to/from Hawaii) I don't see why the 747 would have been a good fit.
Quoting FI642 (Reply 7): Not to mention it was just too much plane for them
That didn't stop DL, EA, NA, or AA, all of these airlines only kept their 741's for a relatively short time. The 747 proved to be too much aircraft for several airlines. WA likely ordered them for the same reason the rest did, prestige.
[Edited 2013-03-17 17:02:29]
Next Flights: AS PDX-SEA-KOA on DH4/738 in F, HA KOA-OGG on 717 in Y, AS OGG-PDX on 738 in F
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21481 posts, RR: 24 Reply 9, posted (2 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5152 times:
Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 2): Thanks. Do you remember when and why they cancelled the order ?
Western was a very well-run airline. They probably quickly realized that the 747 was inappropriate for their route network. Unfortunately a few other U.S. carriers like Delta, Continental and National had to take delivery and put their early 741s into service before discovering that they had no appropriate routes for them and that flying 747s often much less than half full wasn't very economic.
American 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3321 posts, RR: 14 Reply 10, posted (2 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5059 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 9): They probably quickly realized that the 747 was inappropriate for their route network.
Even if WA took delivery of those, they would not have lasted long in the fleet. They would have been phased out a long time ago, no doubt about that. The only route I see that would have maybe supported the 747 is LAX-HNL.
Ben Soriano
"Aimer jusqu'a l'impossible, c'est possible". Tina Arena.
bohica From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2409 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (2 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4869 times:
The executives at WA came to their senses early enough to cancel the 747 order. Prestiege is one thing but being financially smart is another. The 747 did not fit in WA's route structure. Other than Hawaii, there was nowhere to fly it. It would have been too big for Alaska, Mexico, or anywhere domestically WA flew. The DC-10 was a better fit for WA and their route structure. I believe the 747 orders were converted to 727 and 737 orders.
HNL-Jack From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 793 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (2 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4677 times:
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 4): It's also been posted before that AS either ordered one 741 or were about to order one to serve Russia, I believe.
They did and it was going to feature their Golden Nugget Service complete with a piano bar in the upstairs lounge. The airplane ultimately went to Braniff, their first and was the orange pumpkin that flew the DAL/HNL run.
Grew up in the business and continued the family tradition.
SpaceshipDC10 From Canada, joined Jan 2013, 411 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (2 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 4082 times:
Quoting RWA380 (Reply 8): That didn't stop DL, EA, NA, or AA,
Actually, Eastern cancelled its order and slot were allocated to WA Transworld Airlines (USA)">TW. EA then leased several PA aircraft.
Quoting American 767 (Reply 10): Even if WA took delivery of those, they would not have lasted long in the fleet
Just like DL, NA and CO. NA used them to LHR before the DC-1o arrived.
Quoting FCKC (Reply 13): If my memory works well , Universal had also ordered some 741s , and were cancelled before being built.
Actually, or at least the only thing I know of here is Universal though for a while to buy Braniff undelivered second 747 (N602BN to become N810U). Instead, the aircraft went to Wardair (C-FDJC).
EDIT: Universal Airlines went bankrupt in May 1972, this is probably why the 747 deal never materialized.
SpaceshipDC10 From Canada, joined Jan 2013, 411 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (2 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3680 times:
I completely forgot I have a great book that could answer my questions.
On January 4, 1969, President Johnson confirmed a CAB decision awarding Western routes between eleven Mainland cities and Hawaii, including ANC-HNL. [...] Drinkwater was overjoyed. Shortly after the Hawaiian award was announced, he placed orders with Boeing for twelve new jets -- three 747s, five additional 707 Intercontinentals, and four more stretched 727s. The contracts were conditional on Western's obtaining lender approval and satisfactory financing arrangements. [...] The trio of jumbo jets were easy to justify - they were scheduled for delivery starting October 1970, and Terry (Drinkwater) was not alone in believing that Western had to have wide-bodied aircraft to compete in the Hawaii market; Pan Am, United, and Continental all had ordered the 747. pages 406-407
When things began to go bad at Western, Kerkorian gave him his orders. Benninger wasn't happy about them, but he was a crack executive officer to a ship's captain; Kerkorian had told him, "Well, I guess you're elected--see if you can straighten things out," and Benninger had taken him at his word.
Western's equipment problems came up at the first eighteen-man Board meeting held after the near-proxy brawl. Benninger asked bluntly why WAL wanted to buy the giant plane, and listened quietly to various officials defending its purchase--the chief justification being that it was needed for competitive reasons. When all the pros had been enunciated, Benninger demolished them with a single con:"Listen,he said, as long as I'm director of this company, I'll vote against the 747." There were protests - Drinkwater and Shatto were enraged, and Kelly, although he agreed with Benninger's gloomy analysis of Western's financial situation, still was concerned about competing against the magnificent new jumbos with narrow-bodied 707s. It wasn't much of a contest, however; most of the new Kerkorian-picked directors knew virtually nothing about aviation and went along with Benninger, not only in his opposition to the 747 but also in his suggestionthat Western temporarily abandon equipment expansion until it got back to a more solid financial position.
The result was cancellation of the agreements for the three 747s, five 707s, and four 727s. pages 414-415
jfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 7345 posts, RR: 7 Reply 16, posted (2 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3513 times:
Western was another medium sized airline caught up in the "hype" of the 747. It ordered them to keep up with other airlines. Like Eastern, National and other they decided smaller DC-10 or L-1011 were better for them.
sunking737 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1930 posts, RR: 9 Reply 17, posted (2 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3405 times:
By the way, The Only Way To Fly - Robert J. Serling, is a very good book on the history of Western. I had a copy and read it many times. It covers the company from its founding in 1926 to I believe 1976. It was written for their 50th anniv.
WA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2042 posts, RR: 13 Reply 19, posted (2 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2644 times:
Quoting RWA380 (Reply 8): Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 6):
Interesting but unless they had some ambitious growth plans (other than mainland to/from Hawaii) I don't see why the 747 would have been a good fit.
Quoting FI642 (Reply 7):
Not to mention it was just too much plane for them
That didn't stop DL, EA, NA, or AA, all of these airlines only kept their 741's for a relatively short time.
AA grounded seven of their 747-123s in 1974, but kept the remaining nine until 1984/85.
One of the grounded aircraft went to NASA for the space shuttle program, two were turned into freighters for AA, three were converted into freighters for Flying Tigers, and the remaining aircraft was converted into a freighter for TMA. All of the Flying Tigers and TMA freighters were later re purchased by AA.
AA did lease one of their 747s to Braniff in 1978 after BN was awarded DFW-LGW. The aircraft operated in a non-standard AA metal scheme, with just an orange stripe covering AA's red / white/blue stripes.
MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 15728 posts, RR: 47 Reply 20, posted (2 months 5 days ago) and read 2297 times:
Quoting RWA380 (Reply 8): That didn't stop DL, EA, NA, or AA, all of these airlines only kept their 741's for a relatively short time. The 747 proved to be too much aircraft for several airlines. WA likely ordered them for the same reason the rest did, prestige
Hard to believe we're still seeing the same scenario play out with a good number of 380 customers.
Frankly, I am surprised that Western didn't take up the B747 order, as they were entering the Hawaii market. Certainly, the competitors would be flying a B747, and that is a huge disadvantage. If Western were new in the market, and UA, PA, AA, CO, etc. were all flying a wide body aircraft, and they weren't ... I am surprised they were successful at all.
A lot of the younger people on here don't understand the huge advantage a wide body aircraft was in competition. Remember, fares were regulated, and the same ... it was service that dictated airline choice. That is why you had domestic airlines like UA, EA, AA all flying B747s around the US. It was for that all important bold faced type in the timetable.
Granted, WA was wise in waiting for the DC-10, an aircraft better suited to its needs. But I sure, during that two year gap, using a B707 to compete against a B747, they questioned that decision more than once!
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2307 posts, RR: 7 Reply 24, posted (2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1862 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 23): Granted, WA was wise in waiting for the DC-10, an aircraft better suited to its needs. But I sure, during that two year gap, using a B707 to compete against a B747, they questioned that decision more than once!
WA wasn't just competing with 747s. Each route had a mix of wide-body and narrow body airplanes. For example, in 1973 PA had three daily SFO-HNL flights. One was a 747 and two were 707s. It wasn't like every PA passenger was on the one 747 flight. Same with UA. Some SFO or LAX-HNL flights were 747s; some were DC-8s.
WA also flew some routes that were more suited to the 707 or 720 like SAN-HNL; OAK-HNL and SJC-HNL.
sunking737 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1930 posts, RR: 9 Reply 25, posted (2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1911 times:
How times have changed with many carriers now flying narrow body vs wide body. Remember Boeing had problems with the "new" engines from P&W and Rolls Royce was having money problems. Too many airlines got into the keeping up with the Jones's mentality, "we need the 747 because they bought them too."
I certainly agree, and in hind-sight WA made the correct decision.
But, I also remember AA flying the B747 from ORD-PHX, DL from ORD-ATL and EA from JFK-MIA! Simply for competition. As soon as the DC-10s and L1011s started flying, the B747 was all but obsolete for domestic airlines, and it certainly showed ... they didn't hang around long.
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 24): WA also flew some routes that were more suited to the 707 or 720 like SAN-HNL; OAK-HNL and SJC-HNL.
Yes, and those continued well into the wide-body era. In fact I flew on a WA B720, HNL-SAN-LAX, because it was more "interesting" than the DC-10s on the non-stop to LAX!
But really what I was implying is that WA was very new in the market, and up until then was likely still regarded as a small, regional, local type airline. Up against some pretty heavy hitters like UA and PA, it was a pretty gutsy move to forego the B747 and wait for the better suited DC-10.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
SpaceshipDC10 From Canada, joined Jan 2013, 411 posts, RR: 0 Reply 27, posted (2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1896 times:
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 24): WA wasn't just competing with 747s. Each route had a mix of wide-body and narrow body airplanes.
Of course, but the CAB's decision was not necessarily fair to WA since all its LAX-HNL flights had to start at a point east of California while CO didn't have that restriction as the fourth carrier in that ruling. The CAB also granted TW and NW flying rights on that route as well as limited Mainland-Hawaii authority to AA, BN, NW and TW.
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2307 posts, RR: 7 Reply 28, posted (2 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1717 times:
Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 27): The CAB also granted TW and NW flying rights on that route as well as limited Mainland-Hawaii authority to AA, BN, NW and TW.
IIRC, AA did STL-HNL and ORD-HNL. BN did DAL-HNL/ITO. NW did SEA-HNL, PDX-HNL and TW did only LAX-HNL. TWA's flights each did SFO-LAX-HNL actually.
EA is the one that got shafted. Apparently they wanted to do Hawaii and got shut out.
WA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2042 posts, RR: 13 Reply 29, posted (2 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1588 times:
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 24): Quoting longhauler (Reply 23):
Granted, WA was wise in waiting for the DC-10, an aircraft better suited to its needs. But I sure, during that two year gap, using a B707 to compete against a B747, they questioned that decision more than once!
WA wasn't just competing with 747s. Each route had a mix of wide-body and narrow body airplanes. For example, in 1973 PA had three daily SFO-HNL flights. One was a 747 and two were 707s. It wasn't like every PA passenger was on the one 747 flight. Same with UA. Some SFO or LAX-HNL flights were 747s; some were DC-8s.
I believe Western combatted the 747's appeal by reducing the number of seats in coach, and offering "first class legroom at coach prices" to Hawaii.
Also, the 747 was very unreliable in its first two years of service, mainly because of engine problems. Some passengers actually avoided the 747 because of reliability concerns.
WA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2042 posts, RR: 13 Reply 30, posted (2 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1581 times:
Quoting FI642 (Reply 7): BTW, Indian Head is perhaps my favourite of the old liveries!
I agree. It looked great on every aircraft except the 727-247, on which the Indian Head scheme looked terrible. I think their 727s would have looked better if they had painted the #2 engine inlet red, instead of starting the red above the top of the inlet.
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2307 posts, RR: 7 Reply 31, posted (2 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1541 times:
Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 30): Quoting FI642 (Reply 7):
BTW, Indian Head is perhaps my favourite of the old liveries!
I agree. It looked great on every aircraft except the 727-247, on which the Indian Head scheme looked terrible. I think their 727s would have looked better if they had painted the #2 engine inlet red, instead of starting the red above the top of the inlet.
Oh, the 727-200 was my very favorite in the old scheme. I liked the way the read band flowed on the tail.
Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 29): I believe Western combatted the 747's appeal by reducing the number of seats in coach, and offering "first class legroom at coach prices" to Hawaii.
Yep, 36" pitch in coach. Can you imagine that now? Now you'll see stuff like 3-4-3 on 777s and 31" pitch.
WesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5395 posts, RR: 25 Reply 34, posted (2 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1434 times:
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 3): I don't know when, but my understanding is they didn't have the financial backing to afford the 747s. So they were cancelled. Somewhere I saw a rendition of a 747 in the old Indian Head livery (which I far prefer to the big red W).
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 4): No, but WA also cancelled some 707 and 727 orders in the late 60's also. Perhaps overall financial difficulties.
Western was NOT in a healthy financial state after Kerkorian bought the airline. Drinkwater was brought in after he left Continental (and American) to fix things, and he did. He brought Western into the jet age, he trimmed a LOT of the routes in the system that needed to be cut (including selling a recently hard fought and won DEN-LAX nonstop to UA), and solidified Western into a surviving carrier when Kerkorian came around. The 747/707/727 order, in my opinion, needed to be cut, as it turned out the 737's were a better fit for the majority of the WA system at the time, and the 727's were perfect fits on the trunk and high yield/medium haul routes.
After the 747 cancellation, Drinkwater (after getting the axe by Kerkorian and Benninger) silently kept shopping WA to AA for merger proposals, and had worked out a deal with George Spater, but the Kerkorian caught wind and AA backed away, making room for Kerkorian and Stan Shatto to entice CO into merger talks. The AA deal though, came away with one little benefit, as it was spelled out in The Only Way To Fly, AA had several DC-10 delivery positions reserved for WA (or something to that effect).
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 9): Western was a very well-run airline. They probably quickly realized that the 747 was inappropriate for their route network. Unfortunately a few other U.S. carriers like Delta, Continental and National had to take delivery and put their early 741s into service before discovering that they had no appropriate routes for them and that flying 747s often much less than half full wasn't very economic.
Western, in terms of reliability, was running 707's and 720's to HNL with a FAR better on-time rate than ANY of the 747 operators, who were still having engine issues.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 23): Frankly, I am surprised that Western didn't take up the B747 order, as they were entering the Hawaii market. Certainly, the competitors would be flying a B747, and that is a huge disadvantage. If Western were new in the market, and UA, PA, AA, CO, etc. were all flying a wide body aircraft, and they weren't ... I am surprised they were successful at all
As I said before, the 707's and 720's were givign the 747's a run for their money in reliability. Not to mention, WA and CO were both beating the crap out of everyone else in terms of levels of service in all classes.
Woohoo! Back to Beirut in Oct '13! (Along with a stop in DOH for 4 days)
SpaceshipDC10 From Canada, joined Jan 2013, 411 posts, RR: 0 Reply 35, posted (2 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1364 times:
Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 34): The AA deal though, came away with one little benefit, as it was spelled out in The Only Way To Fly, AA had several DC-10 delivery positions reserved for WA (or something to that effect).
Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 34): Western was NOT in a healthy financial state after Kerkorian bought the airline.
Another quote from the book:
Inability to finance wide-bodied jets was one of the key arguments advanced in favor of the merger.
[...]but as Western's financial posture steadily improved even as American's worsened, it became obvious that WAL couldn't delay a wide-bodied program much longer. And its implementation was made possible by a clause in the merger agreement.
American had exercised an option for four DC-10s subject to the CAB's approving the merger. Western in turn agreed to assume the contract if the merger fell through and to reimburse American for its $24 million down payment on the four aircraft valued at some $90 million, including space engines and parts
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21481 posts, RR: 24 Reply 36, posted (2 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1348 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 23): If Western were new in the market, and UA, PA, AA, CO, etc. were all flying a wide body aircraft, and they weren't ... I am surprised they were successful at all.
Western's service, even in Y class, on their 720Bs and 707s was excellent. I would have booked Western regardless of widebodies on their competitors.
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2307 posts, RR: 7 Reply 37, posted (2 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1268 times:
Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 34): He brought Western into the jet age, he trimmed a LOT of the routes in the system that needed to be cut (including selling a recently hard fought and won DEN-LAX nonstop to UA),
What are the routes that he cut in that time frame?
Inability to finance wide-bodied jets was one of the key arguments advanced in favor of the merger.
[...]but as Western's financial posture steadily improved even as American's worsened, it became obvious that WAL couldn't delay a wide-bodied program much longer. And its implementation was made possible by a clause in the merger agreement.
American had exercised an option for four DC-10s subject to the CAB's approving the merger. Western in turn agreed to assume the contract if the merger fell through and to reimburse American for its $24 million down payment on the four aircraft valued at some $90 million, including space engines and parts
Thats what I was getting at!! Thanks!
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 36): Western's service, even in Y class, on their 720Bs and 707s was excellent. I would have booked Western regardless of widebodies on their competitors.
Even in those days, travelers picked reliability over the "new thing".
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 37): What are the routes that he cut in that time frame?
I'm gunna have to flip through the book again, but if Spaceship beats me to it, so be it.
Woohoo! Back to Beirut in Oct '13! (Along with a stop in DOH for 4 days)
SpaceshipDC10 From Canada, joined Jan 2013, 411 posts, RR: 0 Reply 45, posted (2 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 712 times:
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 37): Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 34): He brought Western into the jet age, he trimmed a LOT of the routes in the system that needed to be cut (including selling a recently hard fought and won DEN-LAX nonstop to UA),
What are the routes that he cut in that time frame?
Route 68 (LAX-DEN) was sold for $3.75 million, including four DC-4s and related ground facilities. That was in 1947. That year, UA also assumed a WA contract for five DC-6s still on order. From Oct 1946 to Oct 1947 he reduced payroll from about 2,600 to less than 1,600. All this give an idea of how he trimmed the airline.
WesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5395 posts, RR: 25 Reply 46, posted (2 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 452 times:
Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 45): Route 68 (LAX-DEN) was sold for $3.75 million, including four DC-4s and related ground facilities. That was in 1947. That year, UA also assumed a WA contract for five DC-6s still on order. From Oct 1946 to Oct 1947 he reduced payroll from about 2,600 to less than 1,600. All this give an idea of how he trimmed the airline.
That's what I was alluding to. He kept Western a pretty much tight ship until the mid-60's or so...when Kerkorian came in. The two butted heads almost frequently.
Woohoo! Back to Beirut in Oct '13! (Along with a stop in DOH for 4 days)
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined Jan 2013, 411 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2307 posts, 
From Monaco, joined Mar 2005, 1056 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21481 posts, 
From France, joined Nov 2004, 2347 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
