The last one finished up in May 2022, the Span for just Oasis was 25-30 days, but at least half the fleet went through a heavy structures check at the same time which doubled the span. They were done at GSO, INT, TUL SAL and SAT.

UpNAWAy wrote:

The last one finished up in May 2022, the Span for just Oasis was 25-30 days, but at least half the fleet went through a heavy structures check at the same time which doubled the span. They were done at GSO, INT, TUL SAL and SAT.

Thank you, UpNAWAy - most appreciated! What work is completed at BFM on the A321s, I presume no re-configuration work?

Nothing in the last year or two that I recall. I do think they used BFM prior for some one-off Mod lines. US Airways used them for the Airbus Heavy Checks along with SAL.

Any idea when the MAXs start coming in?

avi8 wrote:

Any idea when the MAXs start coming in?

Speaking of deliveries, will AA have any A321XLRs by Summer 2024

avi8 wrote:

Any idea when the MAXs start coming in?

A few have been spotted at Renton.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/148006280@N03/

theVagabond wrote:

avi8 wrote:

Any idea when the MAXs start coming in?

Speaking of deliveries, will AA have any A321XLRs by Summer 2024

I believe 4th quartet 2024 is now the first delivery. But ABs delivery schedule has been sliding too.

Could we see AA focus their narrowbody fleet around a single engine type (based on recent deliveries, CFM) instead of having multiple types (CFM & IAE) across the Airbus & Boeing fleet? Would allow them to have a common stash of spare engine parts along with reducing related maintenance expenses.

MavyWavyATR wrote:

Could we see AA focus their narrowbody fleet around a single engine type (based on recent deliveries, CFM) instead of having multiple types (CFM & IAE) across the Airbus & Boeing fleet? Would allow them to have a common stash of spare engine parts along with reducing related maintenance expenses.

The youngest A321CEOs are equipped with IAE engines and sharklet winglets so they will likely be in the fleet for another 10-15 years. AA has enough scale with IAE and CFM to justify having both.

UpNAWAy wrote:

The last one finished up in May 2022, the Span for just Oasis was 25-30 days, but at least half the fleet went through a heavy structures check at the same time which doubled the span. They were done at GSO, INT, TUL SAL and SAT.

All done by vendors not in-house.

They have two engine types due to performance issues at different airports.

Boof02671 wrote:

They have two engine types due to performance issues at different airports.

I know the LAA A319s have the uprated engines but is there a difference between the LAA and LUS equipped with the IAE engines besides the winglets? During the US days after the pilots integrated it seemed like IAE equipped aircraft were still more prevalent in PHX. I assumed it was because HP originally ordered them and was better equipped to perform maintenance on them. Are the IAE engines better in hot climates?

JohanTally wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

They have two engine types due to performance issues at different airports.

I know the LAA A319s have the uprated engines but is there a difference between the LAA and LUS equipped with the IAE engines besides the winglets? During the US days after the pilots integrated it seemed like IAE equipped aircraft were still more prevalent in PHX. I assumed it was because HP originally ordered them and was better equipped to perform maintenance on them. Are the IAE engines better in hot climates?

My recollection from when AA made the massive order was that they thought IAE were better for longer flights and CFM were better for shorter flights as well as Hot & High airports. HP and US chose different engines for their Airbuses. And, AA originally ordered 100 of each A319 and A321 but converted 67 A319s to A321s. Point being, they had critical mass for both engines.

JohanTally wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

They have two engine types due to performance issues at different airports.

I know the LAA A319s have the uprated engines but is there a difference between the LAA and LUS equipped with the IAE engines besides the winglets? During the US days after the pilots integrated it seemed like IAE equipped aircraft were still more prevalent in PHX. I assumed it was because HP originally ordered them and was better equipped to perform maintenance on them. Are the IAE engines better in hot climates?

I think it had to due high and hot airports. PHX is hot, so I believe so. but the CFMs were more economical and used on transcons more if I remember correctly

Boof02671 wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

They have two engine types due to performance issues at different airports.

I know the LAA A319s have the uprated engines but is there a difference between the LAA and LUS equipped with the IAE engines besides the winglets? During the US days after the pilots integrated it seemed like IAE equipped aircraft were still more prevalent in PHX. I assumed it was because HP originally ordered them and was better equipped to perform maintenance on them. Are the IAE engines better in hot climates?

I think it had to due high and hot airports. PHX is hot, so I believe so. but the CFMs were more economical and used on transcons more if I remember correctly

Just my anecdotal experience but at CLT premerger it seemed as though TCON flights were more frequently operated by IAE aircraft. That may been because they would likely rotate through PHX and were better suited for the climate there.

JohanTally wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

I know the LAA A319s have the uprated engines but is there a difference between the LAA and LUS equipped with the IAE engines besides the winglets? During the US days after the pilots integrated it seemed like IAE equipped aircraft were still more prevalent in PHX. I assumed it was because HP originally ordered them and was better equipped to perform maintenance on them. Are the IAE engines better in hot climates?

I think it had to due high and hot airports. PHX is hot, so I believe so. but the CFMs were more economical and used on transcons more if I remember correctly

Just my anecdotal experience but at CLT premerger it seemed as though TCON flights were more frequently operated by IAE aircraft. That may been because they would likely rotate through PHX and were better suited for the climate there.

This is all correct. The CFM-equipped A321's (N150-199US/UW) have problems on longer hauls out of LAS (LAS-CLT/PHL/ORD) in the summer, which typically means bumping a not insignificant amount of passengers off if its particularly hot there. As a result ops/dispatch tries to avoid sending any of the CFM A321's through LAS between roughly May and September. This can also be an issue sometimes on PHX-East Coast flights with the CFM A321's.
Otherwise all of the LUS/non-sharklet A321's are all considered part of the same sub-fleet regardless of engine type - the IAE-powered LAA A321's are considered a separate sub-fleet, along with the A321T's and NEO's. So on the non-sharklet A321's, you won't see IAE-powered aircraft specifically assigned to longer flights compared to the CFM-powered aircraft or vice versa.

747fan wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

I think it had to due high and hot airports. PHX is hot, so I believe so. but the CFMs were more economical and used on transcons more if I remember correctly

Just my anecdotal experience but at CLT premerger it seemed as though TCON flights were more frequently operated by IAE aircraft. That may been because they would likely rotate through PHX and were better suited for the climate there.

This is all correct. The CFM-equipped A321's (N150-199US/UW) have problems on longer hauls out of LAS (LAS-CLT/PHL/ORD) in the summer, which typically means bumping a not insignificant amount of passengers off if its particularly hot there. As a result ops/dispatch tries to avoid sending any of the CFM A321's through LAS between roughly May and September. This can also be an issue sometimes on PHX-East Coast flights with the CFM A321's.
Otherwise all of the LUS/non-sharklet A321's are all considered part of the same sub-fleet regardless of engine type - the IAE-powered LAA A321's are considered a separate sub-fleet, along with the A321T's and NEO's. So on the non-sharklet A321's, you won't see IAE-powered aircraft specifically assigned to longer flights compared to the CFM-powered aircraft or vice versa.

Thank you that definitely sheds light on my observations. Does the LAA A321 have the same thrust rating as the LUS IAE A321s? Obviously the LAA A321 has the aero improvements but I was wondering if there is anything else that sets it apart.

Thrust ratings on AA Airbii

319 non sharklet CFM. 23,500
319 sharklet CFM. 27,000
319. IAE. 24,480
320 CFM. 27,000
320. IAE. 24,800
321. CFM. 32000
LEAP. 32,160
IAE. 31,600

The 319 sharklet is a rocket ship. 320 IAE is underpowered.

Airbuser wrote:

Thrust ratings on AA Airbii

319 non sharklet CFM. 23,500
319 sharklet CFM. 27,000
319. IAE. 24,480
320 CFM. 27,000
320. IAE. 24,800
321. CFM. 32000
LEAP. 32,160
IAE. 31,600

The 319 sharklet is a rocket ship. 320 IAE is underpowered.

Your not kidding about the 319 sharklet that is impressive. This also makes sense why the IAE 319s are more prevalent in PHX with a slight advantage over non-sharklet CFM 319s.

Airbuser wrote:

Thrust ratings on AA Airbii

319 non sharklet CFM. 23,500
319 sharklet CFM. 27,000
319. IAE. 24,480
320 CFM. 27,000
320. IAE. 24,800
321. CFM. 32000
LEAP. 32,160
IAE. 31,600

The 319 sharklet is a rocket ship. 320 IAE is underpowered.

Very interesting comparison! Not sure why, but I'm surprised the LEAP doesn't have higher thrust? I just assumed it might be closer to 35k. Along with its efficiency, I thought it had a thrust-bump as well.

Airbuser wrote:

Thrust ratings on AA Airbii

319 non sharklet CFM. 23,500
319 sharklet CFM. 27,000
319. IAE. 24,480
320 CFM. 27,000
320. IAE. 24,800
321. CFM. 32000
LEAP. 32,160
IAE. 31,600

The 319 sharklet is a rocket ship. 320 IAE is underpowered.

How much longer for the A320 fleet which are Usair or America West airplanes ?

All LUS A320 are CFMs.

There’s are the active LHP A320s

647AW
649AW
650AW
651AW
652AW
653AW
654AW
655AW
656AW
657AW
658AW
659AW
660AW
604AW
661AW
662AW
663AW
664AW
665AW
667AW
668AW
669AW
673AW
679AW
680AW

jfk777 wrote:

Airbuser wrote:

Thrust ratings on AA Airbii

319 non sharklet CFM. 23,500
319 sharklet CFM. 27,000
319. IAE. 24,480
320 CFM. 27,000
320. IAE. 24,800
321. CFM. 32000
LEAP. 32,160
IAE. 31,600

The 319 sharklet is a rocket ship. 320 IAE is underpowered.

How much longer for the A320 fleet which are Usair or America West airplanes ?

End of the decade at least, there is no current order to replace them.

Since we're on the topic of Airbuses, I thought I read somewhere a while back that AA was considering reconfiguring the A319's to put in more First Class (and likely "oasis-them" I would presume)? Does anyone know if that is still under consideration?

theVagabond wrote:

Since we're on the topic of Airbuses, I thought I read somewhere a while back that AA was considering reconfiguring the A319's to put in more First Class (and likely "oasis-them" I would presume)? Does anyone know if that is still under consideration?

N778XF is the only A319 in Oasis, but it's the same number of seats. Just has the updated interior with the device holders etc. I think they were looking at rolling out it all to provide a better customer experience (device holder, USB power, etc) but no other plane has it. My guess is it would only make sense to roll out if they did add some First seats. Be nice if they could do 12 instead of 8.

It is my understanding that IAE has lower cruise fuel burn but higher cycle mx costs than CFM. It is better suited for long legs while the CFM is better suited for multiple short hops.

rising wrote:

theVagabond wrote:

Since we're on the topic of Airbuses, I thought I read somewhere a while back that AA was considering reconfiguring the A319's to put in more First Class (and likely "oasis-them" I would presume)? Does anyone know if that is still under consideration?

N778XF is the only A319 in Oasis, but it's the same number of seats. Just has the updated interior with the device holders etc. I think they were looking at rolling out it all to provide a better customer experience (device holder, USB power, etc) but no other plane has it. My guess is it would only make sense to roll out if they did add some First seats. Be nice if they could do 12 instead of 8.

Wooton!
Can't put in another row of first without removing two rows of coach.

alasizon wrote:

rising wrote:

theVagabond wrote:

Since we're on the topic of Airbuses, I thought I read somewhere a while back that AA was considering reconfiguring the A319's to put in more First Class (and likely "oasis-them" I would presume)? Does anyone know if that is still under consideration?

N778XF is the only A319 in Oasis, but it's the same number of seats. Just has the updated interior with the device holders etc. I think they were looking at rolling out it all to provide a better customer experience (device holder, USB power, etc) but no other plane has it. My guess is it would only make sense to roll out if they did add some First seats. Be nice if they could do 12 instead of 8.

I
Wooton!
Can't put in another row of first without removing two rows of coach.

I would welcome another row (or two) of F on the 319, but I doubt it will happen. With many exceptions, I generally see the 319 on routes with considerably less demand in F, so I don’t see AA reducing Y on these birds.

Still always interesting that the E175 has more F seats than the 319, though.

IIRC the 321s got an extra F row because the 5th flight attendant would not have been financially worth the extra Y rows (200+ seats), hence an extra row of F. Not an issue on the 319s.

DFWGlobeTrotter wrote:

alasizon wrote:

rising wrote:

N778XF is the only A319 in Oasis, but it's the same number of seats. Just has the updated interior with the device holders etc. I think they were looking at rolling out it all to provide a better customer experience (device holder, USB power, etc) but no other plane has it. My guess is it would only make sense to roll out if they did add some First seats. Be nice if they could do 12 instead of 8.

I
Wooton!
Can't put in another row of first without removing two rows of coach.

I would welcome another row (or two) of F on the 319, but I doubt it will happen. With many exceptions, I generally see the 319 on routes with considerably less demand in F, so I don’t see AA reducing Y on these birds.

Still always interesting that the E175 has more F seats than the 319, though.

We all know the only reason the 175s have 12F is due to scope (and it keeps elites happy getting upgrades)

UpNAWAy wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

Airbuser wrote:

Thrust ratings on AA Airbii

319 non sharklet CFM. 23,500
319 sharklet CFM. 27,000
319. IAE. 24,480
320 CFM. 27,000
320. IAE. 24,800
321. CFM. 32000
LEAP. 32,160
IAE. 31,600

The 319 sharklet is a rocket ship. 320 IAE is underpowered.

How much longer for the A320 fleet which are Usair or America West airplanes ?

End of the decade at least, there is no current order to replace them.

Regarding the 320s, although AA does not have another 150 seat aircraft on order to directly replace them I do not think that guarantees them any longevity in the fleet. With 88 Max8’s, 50 321XLRs and 789s coming, there is more than enough capacity to make up for the 48 which remain. Im sure there is someone more knowledgeable on missions but I do not think there is anything on the AA route map that only 320s can do. The fact that no plans have been shared around Oasis type modifications and the AA commitment to densifying the fleet would also lead me to believe that 320s will not make it beyond 2025 or so in the fleet.

brooklynchris13 wrote:

UpNAWAy wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

How much longer for the A320 fleet which are Usair or America West airplanes ?

End of the decade at least, there is no current order to replace them.

Regarding the 320s, although AA does not have another 150 seat aircraft on order to directly replace them I do not think that guarantees them any longevity in the fleet. With 88 Max8’s, 50 321XLRs and 789s coming, there is more than enough capacity to make up for the 48 which remain. Im sure there is someone more knowledgeable on missions but I do not think there is anything on the AA route map that only 320s can do. The fact that no plans have been shared around Oasis type modifications and the AA commitment to densifying the fleet would also lead me to believe that 320s will not make it beyond 2025 or so in the fleet.

The issue isn't their mission per say - it is the size. It is a big jump from 128 seats to 172 seats.

The 150-seat 320s don't cost anything extra in spares or parts that wouldn't be there if it was a mix of 319s/738s but instead they give AA another capacity class. The EOW ones also provide some better Caribbean routings out of CLT and PHL

alasizon wrote:

rising wrote:

theVagabond wrote:

Since we're on the topic of Airbuses, I thought I read somewhere a while back that AA was considering reconfiguring the A319's to put in more First Class (and likely "oasis-them" I would presume)? Does anyone know if that is still under consideration?

N778XF is the only A319 in Oasis, but it's the same number of seats. Just has the updated interior with the device holders etc. I think they were looking at rolling out it all to provide a better customer experience (device holder, USB power, etc) but no other plane has it. My guess is it would only make sense to roll out if they did add some First seats. Be nice if they could do 12 instead of 8.

Wooton!
Can't put in another row of first without removing two rows of coach.

AA could add an additional F row in the A319 while removing one Y row. Which would yield a config of 12F and 114Y for 126 seats total - United has this config on their A319.

747fan wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

I think it had to due high and hot airports. PHX is hot, so I believe so. but the CFMs were more economical and used on transcons more if I remember correctly

Just my anecdotal experience but at CLT premerger it seemed as though TCON flights were more frequently operated by IAE aircraft. That may been because they would likely rotate through PHX and were better suited for the climate there.

This is all correct. The CFM-equipped A321's (N150-199US/UW) have problems on longer hauls out of LAS (LAS-CLT/PHL/ORD) in the summer, which typically means bumping a not insignificant amount of passengers off if its particularly hot there. As a result ops/dispatch tries to avoid sending any of the CFM A321's through LAS between roughly May and September. This can also be an issue sometimes on PHX-East Coast flights with the CFM A321's.
Otherwise all of the LUS/non-sharklet A321's are all considered part of the same sub-fleet regardless of engine type - the IAE-powered LAA A321's are considered a separate sub-fleet, along with the A321T's and NEO's. So on the non-sharklet A321's, you won't see IAE-powered aircraft specifically assigned to longer flights compared to the CFM-powered aircraft or vice versa.

The very old, US Air, non-sharklet IAEs have a bump thrust option as well, so they can use more thrust out of some hot and high airports (LAS, RNO). Very rarely used, but it is available.

alasizon wrote:

brooklynchris13 wrote:

UpNAWAy wrote:

End of the decade at least, there is no current order to replace them.

Regarding the 320s, although AA does not have another 150 seat aircraft on order to directly replace them I do not think that guarantees them any longevity in the fleet. With 88 Max8’s, 50 321XLRs and 789s coming, there is more than enough capacity to make up for the 48 which remain. Im sure there is someone more knowledgeable on missions but I do not think there is anything on the AA route map that only 320s can do. The fact that no plans have been shared around Oasis type modifications and the AA commitment to densifying the fleet would also lead me to believe that 320s will not make it beyond 2025 or so in the fleet.

The issue isn't their mission per say - it is the size. It is a big jump from 128 seats to 172 seats.

The 150-seat 320s don't cost anything extra in spares or parts that wouldn't be there if it was a mix of 319s/738s but instead they give AA another capacity class. The EOW ones also provide some better Caribbean routings out of CLT and PHL

Agreed...the gap between A319 and 738/Max8 is large. If Airbus goes ahead with the A220-500, then a mix of these and A220-300s would fit nicely into AA's fleet. Another fleet type, yes, but AA is large enough to have economies of scale (and DL came to the same conclusion). But that's many years down the road.

Would AA be able to fly the 320's into JAC and EYW if they wanted to? Please say no ... lol

theVagabond wrote:

alasizon wrote:

brooklynchris13 wrote:

Regarding the 320s, although AA does not have another 150 seat aircraft on order to directly replace them I do not think that guarantees them any longevity in the fleet. With 88 Max8’s, 50 321XLRs and 789s coming, there is more than enough capacity to make up for the 48 which remain. Im sure there is someone more knowledgeable on missions but I do not think there is anything on the AA route map that only 320s can do. The fact that no plans have been shared around Oasis type modifications and the AA commitment to densifying the fleet would also lead me to believe that 320s will not make it beyond 2025 or so in the fleet.

The issue isn't their mission per say - it is the size. It is a big jump from 128 seats to 172 seats.

The 150-seat 320s don't cost anything extra in spares or parts that wouldn't be there if it was a mix of 319s/738s but instead they give AA another capacity class. The EOW ones also provide some better Caribbean routings out of CLT and PHL

Agreed...the gap between A319 and 738/Max8 is large. If Airbus goes ahead with the A220-500, then a mix of these and A220-300s would fit nicely into AA's fleet. Another fleet type, yes, but AA is large enough to have economies of scale (and DL came to the same conclusion). But that's many years down the road.

I would think the MAX 7 is the more plausible addition at AA although I'd prefer the A223. If the regional model faded away at AA I could see an opening for the A220 family. The A225 would be a direct competitor to the MAX 8 and might be redundant at AA depending how it would be used.

AAtakeMeAway wrote:

Would AA be able to fly the 320's into JAC and EYW if they wanted to? Please say no ... lol

They would block a ton of seats since the CFM A320s have the same thrust as the LAA A319s used at EYW and JAC. The IAE 320s wouldn't stand a chance.

theVagabond wrote:

alasizon wrote:

brooklynchris13 wrote:

Regarding the 320s, although AA does not have another 150 seat aircraft on order to directly replace them I do not think that guarantees them any longevity in the fleet. With 88 Max8’s, 50 321XLRs and 789s coming, there is more than enough capacity to make up for the 48 which remain. Im sure there is someone more knowledgeable on missions but I do not think there is anything on the AA route map that only 320s can do. The fact that no plans have been shared around Oasis type modifications and the AA commitment to densifying the fleet would also lead me to believe that 320s will not make it beyond 2025 or so in the fleet.

The issue isn't their mission per say - it is the size. It is a big jump from 128 seats to 172 seats.

The 150-seat 320s don't cost anything extra in spares or parts that wouldn't be there if it was a mix of 319s/738s but instead they give AA another capacity class. The EOW ones also provide some better Caribbean routings out of CLT and PHL

Agreed...the gap between A319 and 738/Max8 is large. If Airbus goes ahead with the A220-500, then a mix of these and A220-300s would fit nicely into AA's fleet. Another fleet type, yes, but AA is large enough to have economies of scale (and DL came to the same conclusion). But that's many years down the road.

Although there is a significant gap, I think this may be one of those Airliners operational rules that may not be as real for the actual airlines as some may assume.

First, the gap between a 175 and the next sized aircraft is 52 seats. AA did have a plane in the middle (the 190) and they were one of the first casualties of the Pandemic’s impact on fleet.

Additionally, the airline is taking well over 150 aircraft in the next couple of years. Thats a massive jump in capacity that would blow out growth plans. (I think they generally had stated 3-5% growth year over year) Bringing back the 738s they had planned to retire on top of the additional aircraft to be delivered only puts more pressure on that growth management plan. One other related item is AAs now frequent talk of getting more utilization out of their aircraft. They can not fly 1100ish planes, even more often, with higher priced crew, and not do something to manage the capacity growth. (Else they will end up flying 777s CLT to MIA and MCO with a bunch of $59 leisure fares on them). Might as well paint them yellow at that point.

All that to say, if there has been no investment in the 320 fleet, if they do not serve a specific role, and if there are a ton of aircraft coming online that can cover the capacity and help meet the airlines goals, I still they are not long for the fleet. Now, what will be interesting is the potential future 319 replacement and older 738 replacement which are probably.. 10 years away or so?

Anybody know the current delivery schedule for N882BL, N883BM and new aircraft N886BR? If I remember correctly, N882BL flew out of storage at San Antonio in Sept, and N883BM flew out of storage at Victorville in Oct. Both are long in the tooth for entry into service. Is AA slowing down delivery dates, or should Boeing take the blame?

anymaninfc wrote:

Anybody know the current delivery schedule for N882BL, N883BM and new aircraft N886BR? If I remember correctly, N882BL flew out of storage at San Antonio in Sept, and N883BM flew out of storage at Victorville in Oct. Both are long in the tooth for entry into service. Is AA slowing down delivery dates, or should Boeing take the blame?

I don't believe AA is to blame with these frames. AA is announcing summer route reductions due to delayed deliveries.

It's Boeing 100%. Original 12 where to be delivered in 2020 (4 where) 12 in 2021. 1 delivered in 2021, 8 in 2022, 1 so far in 2023 with 3 more expected and the rest are now 2024. I have seen no dates or time line but I am sure there are some out there. Then 30 of the higher density premium -9s start coming at some point in 2024 maybe?

UpNAWAy wrote:

It's Boeing 100%. Original 12 where to be delivered in 2020 (4 where) 12 in 2021. 1 delivered in 2021, 8 in 2022, 1 so far in 2023 with 3 more expected and the rest are now 2024. I have seen no dates or time line but I am sure there are some out there. Then 30 of the higher density premium -9s start coming at some point in 2024 maybe?

I'm sure you meant lower density for the 789s. I can't wait to see these premium heavy 789s.

Yes, I was thinking higher density premium when I typed that.

I noticed that 10 A320-Family ceo's from Americain Airlines have been flown to San Salvador since the beginning of the year and are stored there (3 A319, 3 A320, 4 A321). What is the reason for this? Long term storage? Technical modifications? Future resale? Thanks!

sergegva wrote:

I noticed that 10 A320-Family ceo's from Americain Airlines have been flown to San Salvador since the beginning of the year and are stored there (3 A319, 3 A320, 4 A321). What is the reason for this? Long term storage? Technical modifications? Future resale? Thanks!

SAL is a huge maintenance center.

Ok thanks! So no withdrawal is envisaged for the ceo's? And what about the last 737-800s in storage? Are they all scheduled to return to service?

theVagabond wrote:

alasizon wrote:

brooklynchris13 wrote:

Regarding the 320s, although AA does not have another 150 seat aircraft on order to directly replace them I do not think that guarantees them any longevity in the fleet. With 88 Max8’s, 50 321XLRs and 789s coming, there is more than enough capacity to make up for the 48 which remain. Im sure there is someone more knowledgeable on missions but I do not think there is anything on the AA route map that only 320s can do. The fact that no plans have been shared around Oasis type modifications and the AA commitment to densifying the fleet would also lead me to believe that 320s will not make it beyond 2025 or so in the fleet.

The issue isn't their mission per say - it is the size. It is a big jump from 128 seats to 172 seats.

The 150-seat 320s don't cost anything extra in spares or parts that wouldn't be there if it was a mix of 319s/738s but instead they give AA another capacity class. The EOW ones also provide some better Caribbean routings out of CLT and PHL

Agreed...the gap between A319 and 738/Max8 is large. If Airbus goes ahead with the A220-500, then a mix of these and A220-300s would fit nicely into AA's fleet. Another fleet type, yes, but AA is large enough to have economies of scale (and DL came to the same conclusion). But that's many years down the road.

For a fleet of under 50? Why bother? Just use a combo of A319 and 737-800/MAX 8 or order a handful of MAX 7s.

sergegva wrote:

I noticed that 10 A320-Family ceo's from Americain Airlines have been flown to San Salvador since the beginning of the year and are stored there (3 A319, 3 A320, 4 A321). What is the reason for this? Long term storage? Technical modifications? Future resale? Thanks!

AA uses Aeroman in SAL, majority of overhaul is done in-house with a smaller percentage of some being done by MROs

planecane wrote:

theVagabond wrote:

alasizon wrote:

The issue isn't their mission per say - it is the size. It is a big jump from 128 seats to 172 seats.

The 150-seat 320s don't cost anything extra in spares or parts that wouldn't be there if it was a mix of 319s/738s but instead they give AA another capacity class. The EOW ones also provide some better Caribbean routings out of CLT and PHL

Agreed...the gap between A319 and 738/Max8 is large. If Airbus goes ahead with the A220-500, then a mix of these and A220-300s would fit nicely into AA's fleet. Another fleet type, yes, but AA is large enough to have economies of scale (and DL came to the same conclusion). But that's many years down the road.

For a fleet of under 50? Why bother? Just use a combo of A319 and 737-800/MAX 8 or order a handful of MAX 7s.

If they were to order the A220 it would need to be the A319 replacement. 90 of the 130 A319s are over 20 years old and will at some point need to find their heir apparent. An order of roughly 100 A223s would then make the prospect of ordering additional A220 variants more palatable.