airxliban
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 12:14 pm

AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 3:07 am

I was just curious as to what the future of AA 767-200s are.

It seems like they are basically only used on the transcons and to Bermuda, with the odd JFK-MIA and possibly a couple others that I have missed out on.

Here are my questions:

1. Is AA planning on refitting their interiors with the new business class used for international flights?

2. If so, what are they going to do with the First Class section?

3. Are the first class cabins important to AA from a revenue point of view on the transcons?

4. Has AA announced a retirement date for the 762s?

5. What is the future of the LAX-JFK route in terms of the F cabin offering and the equipment used?

Edit: Thought that BDL was Bermuda, but apparently it isn't. So I changed it and wrote out Bermuda. BDM is it?

[Edited 2006-02-21 19:13:43]
PARIS, FRANCE...THE BEIRUT OF EUROPE.
 
md90fan
Posts: 2798
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 11:15 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 3:16 am

AirxLiban, the airport code for Bermuda is BDA
http://www.devanwells.blogspot.com/
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 3:22 am

AA will need to do something to respond to PS, in my opinion.

N
 
masseybrown
Posts: 4413
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:40 pm

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 3:32 am

PS ... I decided not to take the cheap shot.  Smile
 
sevenheavy
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:30 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 3:43 am

There are no current plans to do anything with the B762 fleet.

AA has a number of contracts with various film studios which require both first and business class, and at the moment there is no better aircraft to fulfill this niche. It is my understanding that although UA's P.S. is arguably a better service in some respects there are still some high paying regular passengers who prefer flying widebodies.

These flights are often full up front, and coupled with a healthy cargo capacity they can be very profitable when compared with most domestic services.

The B762's do indeed fly almost exclusively LAX-JFK but as there is never a need to utilise the entire fleet they also visit (as you say) MIA, BDA, SJU and SDQ.

There are no plans whatsoever for refitting of the fleet, partly due to American's current reluctance to spend money on non essentials. However you can be sure that this stance would change should they ever see any erosion in their market to UA (which up until this point has been negligible) due to an inferior product.

regards
So long 701, it was nice knowing you.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 3:53 am

From someone that regularly flies he AA 762s and UA's p.s., I have to say AA needs to do something.

While the AA transcon 762s are somewhat newer, being all 767-200ERs as the older basic 767-200s have all been withdrawn something needs be done particularly in the cabins to keep up with UA.
I used to give the edge to American over UA's 767s particularly AA's biz class and at that time its MRTC seating. However with the superior p.s. product in all classes, and AAs continued downgrade of its offerings by the eliminations of MRTC, elimination of meals in Y class, reduction in meal service and choice in the premium cabin, UA has pulled far ahead in my view.

AA's sole advantage in the market in my view is, its greater frequency particularly on the LAX-JFK route, and the new terminal it has at JFK. Otherwise UA gets the nod.

To improve and stay competitive AA definitely needs a new F class product, a slightly improved C class product with the elimination of nickel and dimming small service items such as linens, meal choices etc, and improvement of its Y class products in seating configuration and return of meal service ala United.

While the transcon market it very competitive and cut throat, it is one of the few markets where there is constant demand for premium traffic. While personaly it does not botter me much as I tend to sleep, going 5+ hours with only a soda or BOB product is a little too much for most travellers.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 4:19 am

As stated, because UA and AA are the only airlines offering a 3 class transcon product in that market, they are the preferred carriers with Hollywood. Most contracts in Hollywood have First or Business travel built in. CO and DL domestic first does not count for these flights (treated as Business usually).

Unless Hollywood decides to spend more money on making good movies and less money on stuff that doesn't contribute what so ever to making a good movie, AA won't lose the F cabin on these routes.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
Okie
Posts: 3533
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 6:20 am

Quoting SevenHeavy (Reply 4):
The B762's do indeed fly almost exclusively LAX-JFK but as there is never a need to utilise the entire fleet they also visit (as you say) MIA, BDA, SJU and SDQ.

AA could use a couple of those excess 762's for a little one upmanship against WN at DAL. Wide body service out of DAL to STL and MCIBig grin

sorry could not resist

Okie
 
eyeonthesky17
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 8:42 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 8:22 am

What type of premium product is offered on the AA 763 two class cabins used on the trans cons?
 
upsmd11
Posts: 642
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 10:56 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:22 am

AA does not regularly fly the 763 on transcon flights between JFK - LAX or even SFO for that matter. This route is one that I track on a regular basis and I have not seen a 763 on the route that I can remember.

John
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:25 am

Occasionally B767-300s do appear particularly on the JFK-SFO run. These aircraft being only two class are sold as business and economy.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
upsmd11
Posts: 642
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 10:56 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:28 am

Yes, I do stand corrected on this. There are actually some 763 aircraft on the SFO flights. I don't look at this route too often but took a look tonight on flightaware and saw several 763 on the route.
 
DL4EVR
Posts: 635
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 3:46 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:35 am

Let's wait till the end of this year/beginning of next year, when Delta's new long-haul service comes into the picture. Then things should get really interesting.
We Love To Fly And It Shows.
 
MalpensaSFO
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:17 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:40 am

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 2):
AA will need to do something to respond to PS, in my opinion

They have... Unfortunately it is called... NOTHING!  Sad

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 10):
Occasionally B767-300s do appear particularly on the JFK-SFO run. These aircraft being only two class are sold as business and economy

They were using the 763 on SAN-JFK in 2005!
TO FLY IS TO SERVE
 
AA 777
Posts: 706
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 9:34 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:16 pm

Two of the five daily JFK-SFO flights are on 767-300's. AA 179 and 177.

-Matt
CRJ-700 FO
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 7982
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:40 pm

I think if AA were smart they would upgrade their 767-200(ER) planes on the LAX-JFK service with better First and Business class seats (possibly a larger premium cabin!), and possibly offering improved secure departure and arrival lounges to serve the entertainment community.
 
AA 777
Posts: 706
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 9:34 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:45 pm

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 15):
and possibly offering improved secure departure and arrival lounges to serve the entertainment community.

They have two of the newest Admirals Clubs at JFK and LAX (The LAX one is extremely nice, and yes I know Qantas paid for some of it). In addition, for those that pay full fare first, they can use the Admirals Club at JFK/LAX and the Flagship Lounge at LAX free of charge.
CRJ-700 FO
 
eyeonthesky17
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 8:42 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:43 pm

Quoting UPSMD11 (Reply 11):
Yes, I do stand corrected on this. There are actually some 763 aircraft on the SFO flights. I don't look at this route too often but took a look tonight on flightaware and saw several 763 on the route.

So are these 763 F cabins on JFKSFO the same as the international J class, say on ORDFRA or JFKCDG??? Curious because I'll be flying them in the next couple of weeks.
 
tommy767
Posts: 4658
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 12:18 pm

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:52 pm

from a coach perspective, it seems that P.S. is probably better because of Economy plus and free meals. However, I just prefer flying on widebodies. AA takes very good care of those 762s from an interior perspective.

Tommy in EWR/LAX.
"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
 
commavia
Posts: 9651
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 2:03 pm

Quoting Eyeonthesky17 (Reply 17):
So are these 763 F cabins on JFKSFO the same as the international J class, say on ORDFRA or JFKCDG???

Yes. The 763 F class on JFK-SFO is the same as J on ORD-FRA or JFK-CDG.
 
ilyag
Posts: 169
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2001 12:58 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 9:39 pm

Took AA on JFK-SFO-JFK run last summer and hated every minute. Lack of room and any kind of service in coach is far from outweighing widebody aircraft advantage (if there is any ...). The 762 on my way back was really worn out, but 763 to SFO wasn't much better either. Never again.
 
airxliban
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 12:14 pm

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:06 pm

I wonder how much sense it would make to refurbish the 762 interiors, especially considering that the average age of the 762 fleet has got to be pushing 20 years or so. In addition the CASM on those old dogs has got to be horrendous.

I believe the AA 762s are configured F9 C30 Y126.

On the other hand the 752s are F22 Y166.

Let's say that AA were to configure the 752 with 3 rows of proper first class seats for a total of 12 and put 24 proper (well the blue ones, anyway) business class seats, then they should still be able to accomodate about 100 economy seats or so at their measly pitch.

If UA can fit F12 C26 Y+72 with 68" and 54" pitch in the front cabins, then I think my assumptions above are reasonable with AA's 62"/50"/32" pitch.

So if AA was to do that with the 752s, the total decrease in capacity would only be about 20 Y seats or so.

With something like 10 daily flights or something, perhaps the odd 752 in this configuration could make things more efficient.
PARIS, FRANCE...THE BEIRUT OF EUROPE.
 
upsmd11
Posts: 642
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 10:56 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:23 pm

What is the average age of the UA 757 fleet being flown in p.s. configuration? I know people who have flown on the UA p.s. and they said it was amazing. I wonder if the celebrities really care that the AA product is not up to snuff with UA p.s. or if they even know. I did read that some C-level folks are taking UA p.s. instead of flying the corporate jet because they can get better service and seats. Makes sense to me.

I personally think AA should update the 762 fleet, even though it's a bit older, and enhance the service on the trans-con routes before they have to. It seems that proactive vs. reactive is better but I'm not paying the bills at AA.

Cheers,
John
 
nyd686
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 3:37 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Thu Feb 23, 2006 2:39 am

I was in BOS today and was talking to a pilot who flies 767s for AA on domestic transcon routes. I think he said he mainly flew to the west coast and to MIA.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Thu Feb 23, 2006 5:24 am

Quoting UPSMD11 (Reply 22):
What is the average age of the UA 757 fleet being flown in p.s. configuration? I

UA uses a wide range of their B757s for the p.s service the oldest being from 1989 to the newest 1996.
Eitherway its really not the aircraft age that matters, but instead them all sporting new interiors.

Quoting AirxLiban (Reply 21):
In addition the CASM on those old dogs has got to be horrendous.

AA 762 hourly block cost was $5,260 versus $4,443 for its B757s according to DOT 3Q05 numbers.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
airxliban
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 12:14 pm

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Thu Feb 23, 2006 5:42 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 24):
AA 762 hourly block cost was $5,260 versus $4,443 for its B757s according to DOT 3Q05 numbers.

Divide by 164 for the 762 and 188 for the 752.

Works out to:

$32.07 per seat per hour for the 762
$23.63 per seat per hour for the 752.
PARIS, FRANCE...THE BEIRUT OF EUROPE.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Thu Feb 23, 2006 5:52 am

Quoting AirxLiban (Reply 25):
Divide by 164 for the 762 and 188 for the 752.

Works out to:

$32.07 per seat per hour for the 762
$23.63 per seat per hour for the 752.

I'd be leery of making a per-seat comparison of AA 757 vs 762 fleet for the reason they are equipped with total different type configurations.
A more realistic comparison might have been when AA had 2 class 762 (F24Y180) or a proposed premium configuration 757.

To add to the conversation UA's per hour block cost on its 757s was significantly less then AA's coming in at $3,791 for the same period.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
ContinentalEWR
Posts: 3619
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 2:50 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:43 am

American's 767-300ER's (excluding the 9 newer ones with the 777 style interior) are really nothing to rave about either. I flew in them JFK-EZE and EZE-JFK. They were worn, tidy, but you could tell they needed an upgrade on the interior.
 
aaden
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 9:49 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:04 pm

i had the privilege of flying 762 lax-mia last year and i found the aircraft to be in good condition they had new seats and it was a 2-5-2 configuration. they might want to work on the ife though. but AAs ife is bad all around.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:21 pm

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 2):
AA will need to do something to respond to PS, in my opinion.

Absolutely, particularly in Y class and F class where the service levels are no comparison. United's massive gain in yields and recovery in premium traffic has been nothing short of astounding and has made a lot of skeptics (including me) eat their words about CASM concerns.

Quoting SevenHeavy (Reply 4):
AA has a number of contracts with various film studios which require both first and business class, and at the moment there is no better aircraft to fulfill this niche.

Going by the huge jump in yield and premium class paid patronage, UA has taken a good chunk of the business they lost to AA in 2000

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 5):
AA's sole advantage in the market in my view is, its greater frequency particularly on the LAX-JFK route

Since UA added an 8th flight, the advantage is only 3 on LAX-JFK. UA actually has the advantage on SFO-LAX (6-5)

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 6):
Unless Hollywood decides to spend more money on making good movies and less money on stuff that doesn't contribute what so ever to making a good movie, AA won't lose the F cabin on these routes.

Just because you are a CO flyer doesn't give you license to take pot shots at other people's airline choices. F is seen as a perk that pulls in good actors and directors and makes better films. Be happy that they fly commercial at all.

Quoting Tommy767 (Reply 18):
AA takes very good care of those 762s from an interior perspective.

Um, there is no comparison between AA's F and UA's F. UA's F is actually better than either carrier's international C.

Quoting UPSMD11 (Reply 22):
What is the average age of the UA 757 fleet being flown in p.s. configuration?

Well, like Laxintl said, they come in all ages. The one I flew on was N502UA, the second one in the fleet

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 26):
To add to the conversation UA's per hour block cost on its 757s was significantly less then AA's coming in at $3,791 for the same period.

Is this for all 757s or the lighter p.s. ones? Also, does this include maintainance?

Quoting AAden (Reply 28):
i had the privilege of flying 762 lax-mia last year and i found the aircraft to be in good condition they had new seats and it was a 2-5-2 configuration.

No 767 in the world has ever been in a 2-5-2 configuration. The most dense ones are 2-4-2 and those are for high density cargo carriers. AA's are in the much more common 2-3-2
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
DL4EVR
Posts: 635
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 3:46 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:29 pm

About how full is the F section filled on PS flights? I can't see too many people paying $4500+ for a 5 hour trip. I could definitely afford it, but for a 5 hour flight, I definitely would pay no higher than the $1500 for J. An extra $3000 for 5 hours is rediculous. However, do the normal domestic upgrade rules apply? Or does pS have a special set of rules? Thx.
We Love To Fly And It Shows.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:29 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 29):
Is this for all 757s or the lighter p.s. ones? Also, does this include maintenance?

They dont publicly report p.s. vs non p.s. 757's numbers. If you are considering the p.s. being physically lighter and requiring slightly less fuel burn, those savings are negated by a higher crew count on p.s. which would drive up the crew cost anyways making it a wash.
Yes on Maintenance. Breaks down to Direct Airframe & Engine-$593, Maintenance Burden/Accrual-$280 per block hour.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
commavia
Posts: 9651
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:45 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 29):
Going by the huge jump in yield and premium class paid patronage, UA has taken a good chunk of the business they lost to AA in 2000

AA has seen virtually no impact on loads nor yields on JFK-LAX and JFK-SFO since the p.s. introduction.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:56 pm

Quoting Commavia (Reply 32):
AA has seen virtually no impact on loads nor yields on JFK-LAX and JFK-SFO since the p.s. introduction.

Well I'd question that, as UA has publicly stated the p.s. product has improved the yields and fare mix in all classes, while in internal releases has provided actual percentage numbers which are not bad, considering the razor thin margins it can take to swing a flight to/from a loss or profit.

As stated way back in reply#5, I travel on both UA p.s. and AA JFK-LAX services as often on a bi-weekly basis can have heard nothing but good comments from fellow travellers about p.s. and have run into more then a few converts from AA. In addition I am aware p.s. has helped swing a few corporate accounts in UA's favor.

While not a terrible product, AA just needs to freshen it up in all classes and stop the nickle and dimming in degrading service if it wants to keep up with UA. It certainly does not have to as people will always still fly AA for various other reasons, just if its based on service, UA has them beat with p.s.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
wilax
Posts: 448
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2002 2:39 pm

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:59 pm

Quoting AAden (Reply 28):
i had the privilege of flying 762 lax-mia last year and i found the aircraft to be in good condition they had new seats and it was a 2-5-2 configuration. they might want to work on the ife though. but AAs ife is bad all around.

That had to be a 777-200. I don't remember ever seeing 762's on that route, just 763's and 777's lately. There were AB6's way back, but a 2-5-2 config had to be a 777 or a 747, and it wasn't a 747...
 
AA 777
Posts: 706
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 9:34 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Thu Feb 23, 2006 2:37 pm

Quoting Wilax (Reply 34):
That had to be a 777-200. I don't remember ever seeing 762's on that route, just 763's and 777's lately. There were AB6's way back, but a 2-5-2 config had to be a 777 or a 747, and it wasn't a 747...

I don't know if it happened in 2005 (dont think so) but in 2004 there was one 777 doing an early morning MIA-LAX followed by a 1pm turn back to MIA. It was the only domestic 777 that was sold 3 classes in a very long time.
CRJ-700 FO
 
by738
Posts: 2412
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2000 7:59 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Thu Feb 23, 2006 8:10 pm

Quoting Ilyag (Reply 20):
Lack of room and any kind of service in coach is far from outweighing widebody aircraft advantage (if there is any ...).

Well...you will fly economy  Wink
 
aaden
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 9:49 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:09 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 29):
No 767 in the world has ever been in a 2-5-2 configuration. The most dense ones are 2-4-2 and those are for high density cargo carriers. AA's are in the much more common 2-3-2

it was a 2-3-2 typo sorry

Quoting Wilax (Reply 34):
That had to be a 777-200. I don't remember ever seeing 762's on that route, just 763's and 777's lately. There were AB6's way back, but a 2-5-2 config had to be a 777 or a 747, and it wasn't a 747...

March 19 2004 AA flight 234 was a 762 and I booked it a month in avdance and that was the schedule.

you are right though they haven't used 762 on that route since 2004 they only use 738s and 752s
 
777STL
Posts: 2770
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:22 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:37 pm

Quoting Okie (Reply 7):
AA could use a couple of those excess 762's for a little one upmanship against WN at DAL. Wide body service out of DAL to STL and MCI. Big grin

That's hilarious considering the load factors of the upcoming DAL-STL-DAL flights....
PHX based
 
laca773
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:10 am

RE: AA 767-200 Fleet And Transcon Future

Fri Feb 24, 2006 3:15 pm

When you compare UA to AA on the LAX/SFO-JFK transcon runs, in my opinion there's no longer any comparison between the two. UA has AA beat on that route, plain and simple as that. They still offer full meal service in Y+, it's roomy, the cabin crew has always been excellent and attentive, J class is wonderful, have yet to go in P and don't know if I'll ever be able too. I think it was the smartest move UA made considering their financial situation and that most people talked down or negatively about it.

AA's inflight product is worse than what B6 offer's by a long shot [compliemtary snacks, IFE, leg room]. AA is getting to the point where they will be considered an LCC if they keep this up. I did read a recent article through a link on www.airliners.net that AA is going to spif up their inflight catering for P & J. They way the AA spokesperson spoke it was like the main cabin is just an after thought and those passengers are not important [that's the impression I got].

UA also has much better cabin crews than AA ever has. Again taking into consideration what they had been going through with the bankruptcy, pay issues and etc., they still gave service with a geninue smile and went out of their way to help the passenger who's paying their paychecks, not providing inconsistent service. I hope more corporations will switch over to UA thus giving them a reason to increase their frequency on this high yield route.

LACA773

Who is online