Panamfanatic From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (14 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1263 times:
I was wondering how can AWA survive with a safety record about the same as ValuJet? AWA has TERRIBLE service, there flights are NEVER on-time (infact they have the worst on-time record in the industry), and just today the FAA banned them from introducing new aircraft unless they improve their rediculousely sloppy and shaddy maintenance facilities in PHX. Even more about a year ago, AWA was fined $500 million by the FAA for bad maintence or something. How can they stay alive? Dont people reckognize what is happening with this airline?
Matt D From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 47
Reply 1, posted (14 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1147 times:
It's quite simple: as long as the planes generate revenue, there is no impetuous to do anything about it. It is a lot cheaper for (large) airlines to pay out 20 million in a crash claim (which the insurance probably pays), then to spend 100 million in maintenance.
If there are 10 or 20 years between crashes, why spend the extra money? Even if it is badly publicized, and they pay a fine, and lose some business, it gets quickly forgotten. Therefore, in the long run, they will still be money ahead by skimping on maintennance.
BigO From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 109 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (14 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1136 times:
It's the mighty dollar my friend. The same way that they are able to sell cheap but crappy product. People have tunnel vision and forget things quickly. If you have a good advertising campaign (not that AWA does) you can make things go away. It's just the way this world is. Try to keep yourself and your loved ones out of the mainstream stupidity and you'll be ok.
24291 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (14 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1126 times:
There safety record is far better than Valujet. The problems AWA is having are a somewhat recent phenomenon. Most of the issues are paperwork related--that is, it's not as if the planes they're flying are unsafe.
But I agree it's no way to run an airline. Continued cancellations, delays, and bad reputation certainly aren't going to help them any.
BTW, it was a $5 million fine that was reduced to $2.5 million when the FAA was satisfied that AWA had taken adequate action--far from your purported $500M. I don’t want to defend them too much, but let’s be realistic and not try and slander them blindly.
FLYAWA From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 201 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (14 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1106 times:
Even with the operational challenges of running 80%+ loads in a system designed to carry 60% (which is burning out employees, and creating a revolving door of training, etc.), HP still earned big money in 99 in this robust economy. Who knows what the future holds, with the interest rate increase yesterday and another planned for March. If the economy slows, there is going to be a lot of seats chasing fewer passengers.
By the way, how could TWA lose $353m in this environment? The techs and guys on the flight deck must be taking it home in suitcases.
Panamfanatic From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (14 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1095 times:
As for TWA, it is called HORRIBLE management...The money TWA lost was a whole list of things compiled into one...like disposing of their fleet early, etc.
As for ValuJet, they made HEAPS of cash when they were alive.
As for AWA, when the FAA fines an airline (and you know how lax the FAA is) it is a bad thing. When the FAA says you cant put any more planes in your fleet because your maintenance is too bad, that is VERY VERY bad thing. When your flights are constantly cancelled, delayed, change of equip., terrible horrific service, that is VERY VERY VERY bad...which makes a VERY VERY VERY VERY bad airline!
Atleast ValuJet was not cancelled or delayed alot, was on-time and had good service equal to low-fare standards.
Acvitale From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 922 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (14 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1093 times:
I don't know what planet AWAFLYER is on but, the FAA (who does have the authority) told HP they could not accept anymore aircraft until they were satisfied that the abysmal maint. operation HP runs is cleaned up.
TWA is still cleaning up a decade and a half of issues... Karabu was a deal they entered into when TWA was fighting to survive a second bankruptcy. It kills off 45% of the fare on ANY published fare issued thru Global Discount Travel (aka Icahn... aka Lowestfare.com) This deal was originally intended to be an alternative form of paying off the debt to Icahn industries and it would not be available to the general public... (that's why they didn't put a cap on it). Icahn sells to the general public beat TWA in court and they are stuck with this rediculious deal until I believe 2002 or 2003 then it goes away and will save hundreds of millions of lost revenue. TWA is also having to refurb a fleet that under Icahn and prior managment was neglected since 1973/74. They have down an excellent job of refurbing the fleet in 3 years.. (retire 747,L1011,727,DC-9-10/20/40/50, older 767-200's) and replace with 717,757,767-300ER,MD80's... This all comes with a lot of expense.. additionally, The European city closing although not pleasant saves millions long term (FCO,MAD,BCN) (I personally think a 757 tag end could have kept BCN-MAD alive. FCO was hopeless due to Karabu). TWA needs work rule relief from the IAM they are the only airline that still uses an A&P to push back aircraft and to escort catering trucks. 1 minute of mech. overtime buys an hour on the paychecks... Get the work rules under control and the airline is gonna make a turnaround. They have to get the net contracts lined up and out from under Karabu and look out they will be a force to be reckoned with. TWA hopefully will make it.