TWFirst From Vatican City, joined Apr 2000, 6346 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (13 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1419 times:
I just found out this Saturday from a reliable source within TWA that AA's long-term plan is to get rid of the 717's and the F100's and replace them all with 737's (she didn't know what series 737 though). She said crews LOVE flying the 717 and of course it does have excellent fuel efficiency but there were a couple of problems: 1) The 737 has very similar fuel efficiencies but offers more seating, and 2) the Rolls Royce engines on the 717 don't allow for powerbacks, and AA wants its planes to have that ability (being able to push back from the gate without equipment). Another little flaw with the 717: she said there are circuit panels at floor level in the equipment storage area in the front of the cabin, and you can't spill any liquid on the floor as there could be a danger of shorting out the circuits if the liquid came in contact with the circuitry (she cited an incident with a 717 landing at DFW due to the 717 losing power). She didn't give a time-frame for AA's 737 plans, but said they were long-term. Given the current situation, I would say it would be awhile before AA goes forward with this. As for where they would go, one good guess would have to be AirTran. Midwest Express might be a candidate as well.
AmericanF100 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 244 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (13 years 8 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1308 times:
Well, I heard from my good friend who is a pilot at American that the rumour going around is that Boeing is going to pay American for their F-100's and then AA will buy 717's. It's only a rumour but it could very well be true.
P.S.- I really hope they don't get rid of
the F-100's, they are so much nicer than
Flyinryan99 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 2063 posts, RR: 14
Reply 13, posted (13 years 8 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1228 times:
<<2) the Rolls Royce engines on the 717 don't allow for powerbacks, >>
That must only be for AA's 717s...at AirTran..that's all we do unless they are going out of a few select gates. Powerbacks w/ the 717 is a normality out of ATL. From the way I understand it...most planes with engines on the wings can't do a powerback....can anyone confirm this??
Iflewrepublic From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 537 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (13 years 8 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1231 times:
All right...I've figured it out...I have the cans of red spray paint, boxes of DC-9 safety cards, etc...all I need you to do is distract them. When the bossman asks, we can respond with "Hey...er...umm...that's a nice looking 'DC-9' there. Imagine what a 717 would look like."
I honestly would love to see that plane in our fleet. I don't think I'm the only one around here. I think the future of that plane rests in our hands...we can be the ones to secure it's place.
Aviation is proof that, given the will, we have the capacity to achieve the impossible.
AAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3527 posts, RR: 44
Reply 16, posted (13 years 8 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1186 times:
>I believe AA's current plan is to have the 717s back in Boeing's
>hands by 31 Dec 02. Sadly...
Nope. 2002 will see little change for the moment. The current plan (changes hourly in this new world we live in) has AA deferring most new deliveries and as earlier stated, AA wants to replace 717s with additional 737s.
>Well, I heard from my good friend who is a pilot at American that
>the rumour going around is that Boeing is going to pay American for
>their F-100's and then AA will buy 717's. It's only a rumour but it
>could very well be true.
Boeing made a strong pitch to AA on a one-for-one purchase of 717s for F100s (to include any/all USAir planes if that deal went thru). Ultimately the whole thing fell apart with AA's requirement that Boeing not sell/lease the used F100s to any North American operations --didn't want someone getting AA's airplanes cheaply and using them against AA.
>Who owns TWA's 717s?
All of TWA's new delivery aircraft were on pretty ugly lease terms (approximately double AA's lease payments for the same aircraft models).
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
Woodsboy From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 1035 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (13 years 8 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1131 times:
I have only ever seen 727s, MD80s, F100s and DC-9s do powerbacks from gates. Yes, I have seen AirTran 717s powerback in ATL so I know its possible, why wouldn't it be?
Also, from what I see, the reason a 737 (or other aircraft with wing mounted engines) couldnt do a powerback may be a combination of two things. The type of thrust reverser on a 737 is different from the clamshell types on MD-80s etc, maybe it doesnt give the right kind of "push" and mostly, I think that the possibility of the engine sucking in FOD on a 737 is much breater since its SO close to the ground, everything stirred up from the thrust reverser is going to go right into the engine!
Delta- replace your 737-200s on the shuttle runs with 717s!! Also, how about some 717s for SkyWest, those damn little CRJs are so full out of Salt Lake City to points north that you have to sometimes wait all day for a seat to a market like Boise, Billings or Calgary- wait, sometimes I have to wait 2 days for a seat to Calgary!
CannedSpam From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (13 years 8 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1068 times:
> Nope. 2002 will see little change for the moment.
> The current plan (changes hourly in this new world > we live in) has AA deferring most new deliveries and > as earlier stated, AA wants to replace 717s with
> additional 737s.
I think AAR90's watch and mine are set on different time zones. I'd wager that they are gone a lot sooner than that and won't be around to see the big ball drop in 2003. But then again, I'm on Pacific time and Andy is probably used to being on Zulu time...