MR27122
Topic Author
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:00 am

National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Wed Nov 27, 2019 5:32 pm

Hi All....

I have a quick question re: National Airlines rev 1.0.

Just to confirm what appears to be the reality of the timeline:

-= NAL never ordered the 757/6..."Yes/True".
-= The unsolicited Pan Am takeover "bid" was tendered on 8/23/78. NAL was @ the time fighting the "bid" by Texas Air.
-= On 7/14/78 UAL placed 1st order for 767 & on 8/31/78 British/Eastern placed the 1st orders for the 757.

Just an assumption....did the PA bid for NAL quash any potential order---during that '78 time-frame----from/by NAL??? Did NAL have any future fleet planning that is known??

I know, per the Interwebnet that NAL Flight Attendants went on strike for several months in '78....what was NAL's "financial condition" prior to the PA offer being accepted?

Lastly, didn't NAL own most of it's fleet?

Thanks!
 
SpaceshipDC10
Posts: 6631
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Wed Nov 27, 2019 5:46 pm

MR27122 wrote:
-= NAL never ordered the 757/6..."Yes/True".


Indeed true.
 
FLALEFTY
Posts: 475
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:33 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Wed Nov 27, 2019 6:29 pm

The Pan Am take over National was a reaction to the Airline Deregulation Act. Pan Am was trying to pick up the domestic route structure that they lacked at the time. However, the integration did not so smoothly: National's route network was relatively thin, running up and down the East Coast of the US and East-West from Miami & Orlando through their IAH focus city. Pan Am stuggled to integrate National's (relatively-new) DC-10's into the post-merger network & quickly (and expensively) moved them on in favor of the L-1011-500. They wasted large amounts of money trying to turn MSY into a domestic hub before dismantling it, while they were too slow in building-up IAH into a true hub.

As for the 757/767, neither airline showed interest. National was still cash-strapped having recently bought DC-10's, while Pan Am was still digesting the expenses of obtaining their large B747 fleet. Both airlines had pilot's unions that actively fought using any aircraft without a 3-crew cockpit. At the time, neither the 757/767 were not considered to be long-range aircraft, so that turned off Pan Am's interest in 1978 (although they would later opt for the A310 in the 1980's).
 
NorthwestB744
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2019 4:49 pm

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Wed Nov 27, 2019 6:40 pm

FLALEFTY wrote:
The Pan Am take over National was a reaction to the Airline Deregulation Act. Pan Am was trying to pick up the domestic route structure that they lacked at the time. However, the integration did not so smoothly: National's route network was relatively thin, running up and down the East Coast of the US and East-West from Miami & Orlando through their IAH focus city. Pan Am stuggled to integrate National's (relatively-new) DC-10's into the post-merger network & quickly (and expensively) moved them on in favor of the L-1011-500. They wasted large amounts of money trying to turn MSY into a domestic hub before dismantling it, while they were too slow in building-up IAH into a true hub.

As for the 757/767, neither airline showed interest. National was still cash-strapped having recently bought DC-10's, while Pan Am was still digesting the expenses of obtaining their large B747 fleet. Both airlines had pilot's unions that actively fought using any aircraft without a 3-crew cockpit. At the time, neither the 757/767 were not considered to be long-range aircraft, so that turned off Pan Am's interest in 1978 (although they would later opt for the A310 in the 1980's).

This is supported by a Pan Am book I own, Pan Am: Personal Tributes to a Global Aviation Pioneer, written by Pan Am Employees
 
MR27122
Topic Author
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:00 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Wed Nov 27, 2019 7:30 pm

FLALEFTY wrote:
The Pan Am take over National was a reaction to the Airline Deregulation Act. Pan Am was trying to pick up the domestic route structure that they lacked at the time. However, the integration did not so smoothly: National's route network was relatively thin, running up and down the East Coast of the US and East-West from Miami & Orlando through their IAH focus city. Pan Am stuggled to integrate National's (relatively-new) DC-10's into the post-merger network & quickly (and expensively) moved them on in favor of the L-1011-500. They wasted large amounts of money trying to turn MSY into a domestic hub before dismantling it, while they were too slow in building-up IAH into a true hub.

As for the 757/767, neither airline showed interest. National was still cash-strapped having recently bought DC-10's, while Pan Am was still digesting the expenses of obtaining their large B747 fleet. Both airlines had pilot's unions that actively fought using any aircraft without a 3-crew cockpit. At the time, neither the 757/767 were not considered to be long-range aircraft, so that turned off Pan Am's interest in 1978 (although they would later opt for the A310 in the 1980's).


Terrific & insightful response. Thanks. Indeed PA/NAL merger was the result of looming Dereg...I think Texas Air's "play" for NAL was predicated upon post Dereg (& death of the CAB) "growth" & they got fortunate that they "bought low" & "sold high" once PA made an unsolicited bid. Anybody know why NAL was perceived to be an attractive take-over target in any regard?? Prior to posting this thread I read the Wash Post article re: the PA bid for NAL...the hyperbole re: PA & NAL being totally complimentary is kinda funny...anybody @ PA (Seewell?) break out a NAL route-map? :-).

I learned that NAL's DC-10's were indeed pretty new & I think "owned". The 3-crew cockpit Union dictate @ the time explains a lot re the 757/6 & NAL...& PA! How did EA convince it's Pilots?

***I know "what if's" are exactly that (i.e. guesswork). What if Pan Am pulled out as NAL stock value increased & Tx Air had to proceed w/ a takeover @ great cost? Lorenzo gets no "war chest"...& (this is for fun), People Express somehow succeeds in being an ULCC circa 1981...perhaps EA & NAL merge, etc-etc-etc. Lastly, what if PA wholly dedicated itself to it's overseas route authorities post dereg, was profitable & then focused upon domestic growth. Immediately post dereg, nothing "changed" over the atlantic/pacific---it remained PA & TW v. Flag Carriers, right?
 
User avatar
northstardc4m
Posts: 3326
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 11:23 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Wed Nov 27, 2019 8:10 pm

National was possibly looking at MD-80s, there is an artists concept somewhere, but not 757s or 767s that I've ever heard of, and their finances were not the best at the time either.

Pan Am should never of chased National into a bidding war with Lorenzo anyways... at the original price is was barely worth it.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10019
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Wed Nov 27, 2019 8:18 pm

MR27122 wrote:
The 3-crew cockpit Union dictate @ the time explains a lot re the 757/6 & NAL...& PA! How did EA convince it's Pilots?


Remember EA had a huge DC-9 fleet (a two man plane) that they had been operating since the mid 60s. So adding the 757 was not as big of a deal in terms of pilot count. Contrast that National and Pan Am, whose narrow bodies were all 707/727/DC8 with little to no DC9s/737s (I’m not sure when Pan Am had the 732, but they were never a huge part of their US operations then).
 
MR27122
Topic Author
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:00 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Wed Nov 27, 2019 9:22 pm

northstardc4m wrote:
National was possibly looking at MD-80s, there is an artists concept somewhere, but not 757s or 767s that I've ever heard of, and their finances were not the best at the time either.

Pan Am should never of chased National into a bidding war with Lorenzo anyways... at the original price is was barely worth it.


So true.....and obvious in "retrospect". It's difficult to understand the logic that existed. Would it be fair to say that PA recognized they had a serious post-dereg domestic network problem & NAL was the 1st airline to be put into "play" due to Tx Air so PA perceived NAL as an "opportunity"? Then as the price for NAL went up-up-& away...PA was too "proud"/hubris-driven to lose a bidding war to Tx Air. Just my opinion, but I don't believe the PA Exec's feared Tx Air & Lorenzo re: competition to PA post dereg. It was such a senseless merger....heck Pan Am could've looked @ any airline @ that time & considered their domestic route map to be "complimentary" (Allegheny, Braniff, Western, etc).
 
MR27122
Topic Author
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:00 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Wed Nov 27, 2019 9:24 pm

Polot wrote:
MR27122 wrote:
The 3-crew cockpit Union dictate @ the time explains a lot re the 757/6 & NAL...& PA! How did EA convince it's Pilots?


Remember EA had a huge DC-9 fleet (a two man plane) that they had been operating since the mid 60s. So adding the 757 was not as big of a deal in terms of pilot count. Contrast that National and Pan Am, whose narrow bodies were all 707/727/DC8 with little to no DC9s/737s (I’m not sure when Pan Am had the 732, but they were never a huge part of their US operations then).


Terrific point re EA 2 crew DC-9's! Thanks!!! (If recall is correct, same would be true of UA & it being 767 launch buyer....they had 737's @ the time... I think)
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 4636
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Wed Nov 27, 2019 10:45 pm

Yes, 737s with three-pilot crews! Yes, that’s true, one pilot sat in the jump seat reading the checklists and doing the preflight.

GF
 
User avatar
OzarkD9S
Posts: 5482
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 2:31 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Wed Nov 27, 2019 11:06 pm

[quote="MR27122"]

"Anybody know why NAL was perceived to be an attractive take-over target in any regard??"

It did make sense for Texas Air. Texas International's shorter haul network @IAH combined with NA's longer haul network probably would have achieved much of what TI+CO eventually did. TI/NA would have leapfrogged the merged carrier to #1 status at IAH. Then they might have been in a good position to lease/buy Braniff's Latin American operation in 1982 which would have really boosted the NA MIA hub. The alternate "what if" merger scenarios from that era would make a great thread.
"True, I talk of dreams,
Which are the children of an idle brain." -Mercutio
 
jfk777
Posts: 7199
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Wed Nov 27, 2019 11:44 pm

National was a pioneering airline in Miami which ironically did not fly to Latin America. They pioneered Europe from Miami with London starting with two leased DC-8's than they purchased two 747 and then Dc-10-30, The 747 were sold off after a few years to Northwest. By the time they merged with PA they had London, Paris, Amsterdam, FRA and ZRH on their route map from MIA. PA dismantled that quickly except for LHR.

Pan AM got National because they overpaid, the stock was $16 a share when the first merger offer was made and PA paid $50 a share. PA was bidding against the infamous Frank Lorenzo's Texas International. Lorenzo walked away with lots of money enabling him to expand his small operation.
 
FLALEFTY
Posts: 475
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:33 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Thu Nov 28, 2019 12:54 am

MR27122 wrote:
Polot wrote:
MR27122 wrote:
The 3-crew cockpit Union dictate @ the time explains a lot re the 757/6 & NAL...& PA! How did EA convince it's Pilots?


Remember EA had a huge DC-9 fleet (a two man plane) that they had been operating since the mid 60s. So adding the 757 was not as big of a deal in terms of pilot count. Contrast that National and Pan Am, whose narrow bodies were all 707/727/DC8 with little to no DC9s/737s (I’m not sure when Pan Am had the 732, but they were never a huge part of their US operations then).


Terrific point re EA 2 crew DC-9's! Thanks!!! (If recall is correct, same would be true of UA & it being 767 launch buyer....they had 737's @ the time... I think)


I remember how EA pulled a fast one on their pilot's union with the 2-crew DC-9. In the mid-60's, Eastern had lots of smaller routes in the NE and Midwest that they still used (piston) CV440's & DC7B's for service. When the Jet Age became the rage and the (turboprop) Electra had its safety troubles, EA went to the union and promised the last of the piston airliner drivers a chance to graduate to jets if only they would approve the 2-man cockpit of the DC-9. EA was also going up against regional airlines on some of those routes that were getting their first jets (e.g. Mohawk & Allegheny, who had already ordered the 2-crew, BAC1-11). EA made the case that they might drop those regional-type routes (and the pilots that flew them) if they couldn't compete with their own jets. The union conceded & the DC-9's were ordered, much to the annoyance of union reps at other major airlines who were still fighting a defensive battle against the "evils" of a 2-crew jet airliner cockpit.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4261
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Thu Nov 28, 2019 12:55 am

[quoteow COUPLWEime either.

Pan Am should never of chased National into a bidding war with Lorenzo anyways... at the original price is was barely worth it.[/quote]
the 767 had am option for a 3 crew cockpit as United had as 767 simulator with a 3 crew cockpit that really only got used for Maintenance taxi and High power Run training at DENTK. But it did work and if flown for pilot training solely then it might have worked but maybe not for much else. I've heard they refitted the simulator to the standard cockpit I know a couple of guys who actually built time in it to prepare for their own checkout for a bid to become United Pilots.
 
FLALEFTY
Posts: 475
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:33 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Thu Nov 28, 2019 2:03 am

strfyr51 wrote:
[quoteow COUPLWEime either.

Pan Am should never of chased National into a bidding war with Lorenzo anyways... at the original price is was barely worth it.

the 767 had am option for a 3 crew cockpit as United had as 767 simulator with a 3 crew cockpit that really only got used for Maintenance taxi and High power Run training at DENTK. But it did work and if flown for pilot training solely then it might have worked but maybe not for much else. I've heard they refitted the simulator to the standard cockpit I know a couple of guys who actually built time in it to prepare for their own checkout for a bid to become United Pilots.[/quote]


The defunct Australian airline, Ansett used to fly 767's with a 3-crew cockpit since they couldn't get their pilot's union to budge on the issue. It was said that the 2nd-officer didn't have much to do on those flights. However, I'm not sure if there were any A310 operators that had a 3-crew cockpit.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10019
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Thu Nov 28, 2019 2:27 am

FLALEFTY wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
[quoteow COUPLWEime either.

Pan Am should never of chased National into a bidding war with Lorenzo anyways... at the original price is was barely worth it.

the 767 had am option for a 3 crew cockpit as United had as 767 simulator with a 3 crew cockpit that really only got used for Maintenance taxi and High power Run training at DENTK. But it did work and if flown for pilot training solely then it might have worked but maybe not for much else. I've heard they refitted the simulator to the standard cockpit I know a couple of guys who actually built time in it to prepare for their own checkout for a bid to become United Pilots.


The defunct Australian airline, Ansett used to fly 767's with a 3-crew cockpit since they couldn't get their pilot's union to budge on the issue. It was said that the 2nd-officer didn't have much to do on those flights. However, I'm not sure if there were any A310 operators that had a 3-crew cockpit.

I believe when first delivered AF and maybe LH operated the A310 with three people in the cockpit (because of the pilot unions). They (their unions) were certainly pushing hard for it during development.
 
mga707
Posts: 242
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 5:52 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Thu Nov 28, 2019 4:10 am

National was 'low-hanging fruit' at the start of deregulation 40 years ago. If neither Pan Am nor Lorenzo's Texas Air Corp. had gotten control of them someone else would have very quickly. I seem to remember that Northwest was also interested in them at that time.
 
PSAatSAN4Ever
Posts: 1013
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2018 5:38 pm

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Thu Nov 28, 2019 4:27 pm

Outstanding responses, one and all.

I can add only that one must remember that in the pre-deregulation era, no one knew what deregulation was going to be like. Pan Am, which had never been allowed to operate domestic flights at all, was now going to have to compete with domestic carriers, and they panicked. They found National, which they had blindly hoped would make them competitive, but turned out to be the textbook case of "look before you leap".
 
PSAatSAN4Ever
Posts: 1013
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2018 5:38 pm

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Thu Nov 28, 2019 4:27 pm

Outstanding responses, one and all.

I can add only that one must remember that in the pre-deregulation era, no one knew what deregulation was going to be like. Pan Am, which had never been allowed to operate domestic flights at all, was now going to have to compete with domestic carriers, and they panicked. They found National, which they had blindly hoped would make them competitive, but turned out to be the textbook case of "look before you leap".
 
cschleic
Posts: 1769
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:47 pm

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Thu Nov 28, 2019 5:26 pm

MR27122 wrote:
northstardc4m wrote:
National was possibly looking at MD-80s, there is an artists concept somewhere, but not 757s or 767s that I've ever heard of, and their finances were not the best at the time either.

Pan Am should never of chased National into a bidding war with Lorenzo anyways... at the original price is was barely worth it.


So true.....and obvious in "retrospect". It's difficult to understand the logic that existed. Would it be fair to say that PA recognized they had a serious post-dereg domestic network problem & NAL was the 1st airline to be put into "play" due to Tx Air so PA perceived NAL as an "opportunity"? Then as the price for NAL went up-up-& away...PA was too "proud"/hubris-driven to lose a bidding war to Tx Air. Just my opinion, but I don't believe the PA Exec's feared Tx Air & Lorenzo re: competition to PA post dereg. It was such a senseless merger....heck Pan Am could've looked @ any airline @ that time & considered their domestic route map to be "complimentary" (Allegheny, Braniff, Western, etc).


Lots of good points in this thread. And thinking about other possible merger targets, looking at 1978 era route maps on departedflights.com.... there might have been reasons why National looked good at the time along with Pan Am's urgency, it was in-play and cheap, etc. National wasn't "too large" as United or Delta would have been. Interestingly, it flew to all of Pan Am's international route jump-off points....New York, Washington, Miami (important for Pan Am's Latin and South America routes), LAX and SFO and could have naturally provided feed to overseas flights. It also had European routes that generally didn't overlap with Pan Am's. AA didn't fly anywhere southeast of Tennessee at the time. Braniff, with its large South America network from the east and west coasts, wouldn't have been allowed, and it was on an expansion tear of its own that proved less than successful. Probably the same overlap issue for Northwest with its extensive Asian and European routes. Western was too western focused and Allegheny in the Northeast. So National might have looked good on paper.
 
User avatar
northstardc4m
Posts: 3326
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 11:23 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Thu Nov 28, 2019 5:44 pm

cschleic wrote:
MR27122 wrote:
northstardc4m wrote:
National was possibly looking at MD-80s, there is an artists concept somewhere, but not 757s or 767s that I've ever heard of, and their finances were not the best at the time either.

Pan Am should never of chased National into a bidding war with Lorenzo anyways... at the original price is was barely worth it.


So true.....and obvious in "retrospect". It's difficult to understand the logic that existed. Would it be fair to say that PA recognized they had a serious post-dereg domestic network problem & NAL was the 1st airline to be put into "play" due to Tx Air so PA perceived NAL as an "opportunity"? Then as the price for NAL went up-up-& away...PA was too "proud"/hubris-driven to lose a bidding war to Tx Air. Just my opinion, but I don't believe the PA Exec's feared Tx Air & Lorenzo re: competition to PA post dereg. It was such a senseless merger....heck Pan Am could've looked @ any airline @ that time & considered their domestic route map to be "complimentary" (Allegheny, Braniff, Western, etc).


Lots of good points in this thread. And thinking about other possible merger targets, looking at 1978 era route maps on departedflights.com.... there might have been reasons why National looked good at the time along with Pan Am's urgency, it was in-play and cheap, etc. National wasn't "too large" as United or Delta would have been. Interestingly, it flew to all of Pan Am's international route jump-off points....New York, Washington, Miami (important for Pan Am's Latin and South America routes), LAX and SFO and could have naturally provided feed to overseas flights. It also had European routes that generally didn't overlap with Pan Am's. AA didn't fly anywhere southeast of Tennessee at the time. Braniff, with its large South America network from the east and west coasts, wouldn't have been allowed, and it was on an expansion tear of its own that proved less than successful. Probably the same overlap issue for Northwest with its extensive Asian and European routes. Western was too western focused and Allegheny in the Northeast. So National might have looked good on paper.
Well if you want to look at the best complimentary route network in 1978... The other blue airline would of been ideal. Eastern had massive feed at both MIA and JFK to match PanAms eastern hubs and covered the entire east coast to Mississippi pretty much solid. And at the time EA only had limited flights to Mexico, Canada and a few Carribean islands, nothing long haul at all... Didn't even really have a long haul plane after the DC8s were all retired.

Western ops could of been filled in after the fact.

Problem is... Way to big of a merger.

More realistically, Republic might of been a possibility but didn't really click with the eastern PA hubs. Allegheny would of covered NY well but none of the other hubs, out west both PSA and Air Cal would of been possible targets though expensive... There isn't a simple one among them though.

I did once read a silly idea... Cleave TWA in two, give Pan Am the domestic network and sell the international part to the highest bidder. Might actually of worked but no way it ever would of happened.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 
cschleic
Posts: 1769
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:47 pm

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Thu Nov 28, 2019 6:17 pm

northstardc4m wrote:
cschleic wrote:
MR27122 wrote:

So true.....and obvious in "retrospect". It's difficult to understand the logic that existed. Would it be fair to say that PA recognized they had a serious post-dereg domestic network problem & NAL was the 1st airline to be put into "play" due to Tx Air so PA perceived NAL as an "opportunity"? Then as the price for NAL went up-up-& away...PA was too "proud"/hubris-driven to lose a bidding war to Tx Air. Just my opinion, but I don't believe the PA Exec's feared Tx Air & Lorenzo re: competition to PA post dereg. It was such a senseless merger....heck Pan Am could've looked @ any airline @ that time & considered their domestic route map to be "complimentary" (Allegheny, Braniff, Western, etc).


Lots of good points in this thread. And thinking about other possible merger targets, looking at 1978 era route maps on departedflights.com.... there might have been reasons why National looked good at the time along with Pan Am's urgency, it was in-play and cheap, etc. National wasn't "too large" as United or Delta would have been. Interestingly, it flew to all of Pan Am's international route jump-off points....New York, Washington, Miami (important for Pan Am's Latin and South America routes), LAX and SFO and could have naturally provided feed to overseas flights. It also had European routes that generally didn't overlap with Pan Am's. AA didn't fly anywhere southeast of Tennessee at the time. Braniff, with its large South America network from the east and west coasts, wouldn't have been allowed, and it was on an expansion tear of its own that proved less than successful. Probably the same overlap issue for Northwest with its extensive Asian and European routes. Western was too western focused and Allegheny in the Northeast. So National might have looked good on paper.
Well if you want to look at the best complimentary route network in 1978... The other blue airline would of been ideal. Eastern had massive feed at both MIA and JFK to match PanAms eastern hubs and covered the entire east coast to Mississippi pretty much solid. And at the time EA only had limited flights to Mexico, Canada and a few Carribean islands, nothing long haul at all... Didn't even really have a long haul plane after the DC8s were all retired.

Western ops could of been filled in after the fact.

Problem is... Way to big of a merger.

More realistically, Republic might of been a possibility but didn't really click with the eastern PA hubs. Allegheny would of covered NY well but none of the other hubs, out west both PSA and Air Cal would of been possible targets though expensive... There isn't a simple one among them though.

I did once read a silly idea... Cleave TWA in two, give Pan Am the domestic network and sell the international part to the highest bidder. Might actually of worked but no way it ever would of happened.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk


Yeah, I thought about Eastern as well but like you said...too big. Plus Pan Am didn't need a huge Atlanta hub and Eastern was a mess, too. Interesting idea about TWA. In the end, it kind of happened to Pan Am...domestic went away and someone else got the international routes. In the end, it made more sense for the major domestic operators to pick up international networks rather than the other way around.
 
catiii
Posts: 3284
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:17 pm

FLALEFTY wrote:
MR27122 wrote:
Polot wrote:

Remember EA had a huge DC-9 fleet (a two man plane) that they had been operating since the mid 60s. So adding the 757 was not as big of a deal in terms of pilot count. Contrast that National and Pan Am, whose narrow bodies were all 707/727/DC8 with little to no DC9s/737s (I’m not sure when Pan Am had the 732, but they were never a huge part of their US operations then).


Terrific point re EA 2 crew DC-9's! Thanks!!! (If recall is correct, same would be true of UA & it being 767 launch buyer....they had 737's @ the time... I think)


I remember how EA pulled a fast one on their pilot's union with the 2-crew DC-9. In the mid-60's, Eastern had lots of smaller routes in the NE and Midwest that they still used (piston) CV440's & DC7B's for service. When the Jet Age became the rage and the (turboprop) Electra had its safety troubles, EA went to the union and promised the last of the piston airliner drivers a chance to graduate to jets if only they would approve the 2-man cockpit of the DC-9. EA was also going up against regional airlines on some of those routes that were getting their first jets (e.g. Mohawk & Allegheny, who had already ordered the 2-crew, BAC1-11). EA made the case that they might drop those regional-type routes (and the pilots that flew them) if they couldn't compete with their own jets. The union conceded & the DC-9's were ordered, much to the annoyance of union reps at other major airlines who were still fighting a defensive battle against the "evils" of a 2-crew jet airliner cockpit.


How did they pull a “fast one” if it was collectively bargained and approved by the union? Seems like a pretty standard process.
 
catiii
Posts: 3284
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: National Airlines (757/767) & Pan Am Merger?

Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:21 pm

FLALEFTY wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
[quoteow COUPLWEime either.

Pan Am should never of chased National into a bidding war with Lorenzo anyways... at the original price is was barely worth it.

[i][color=#BF40FF]the 767 had am option for a 3 crew cockpit as United had as 767 simulator with a 3 crew cockpit that really only got used for Maintenance taxi and High power Run training at DENTK. But it did work and if flown for pilot training solely then it might have worked but maybe not for much else. I've heard they refitted the simulator to the standard cockpit I know a couple of guys who actually built time in it to prepare for their own checkout for a bid to become United pilots. The defunct Australian airline, Ansett used to fly 767's with a 3-crew cockpit since they couldn't get their pilot's union to budge on the issue. It was said that the 2nd-officer didn't have much to do on those flights. However, I'm not sure if there were any A310 operators that had a 3-crew cockpit.


The -200s (at least the ones we had when I was at Delta) had what essentially was the space and a “panel” for a S/O. You can see that the design at the time contemplated a world where carriers would operate it with a 3 pilot cockpit.

If you ever visit the Delta Museum look in the cockpit of 102 in the hangar. You’ll see what I mean.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos