Just a curious question... When Pan AM ceased ops who got their aircraft? Was it one airline in particular or did they scatter to the wind and the bone yard?


Sorry if this has been posted before did a search and couldn't find anything


-Carl

I believe Evergreen and Polar Air Cargo both got most of Pan Am's 747's, as they were among the oldest birds in the sky:

View Large View Medium Photo © Andrew Hunt - AirTeamImages

View Large View Medium Photo © Andrew Hunt - AirTeamImages

Side note: if you search for Polar Air Cargo 747-100's, the first four slides are 747-121, 747-122, 747-123, and 747-124!! How funny is that? Ex PA, UA, AA, and BN!!

View Large View Medium Photo © Adam Samu - AIRportal Hungary

View Large View Medium Photo © Mika B Virolainen - FAP

However, in a book I have called "Desert Airliners" by Graham Robson, published in 1995, there are many pictures of some of the early 747's of Pan Am that were cut up and disposed of. Very sad to see.

Kiwi got a number of 727's...one of them I remembered was registered N360PA.

DL got some of their A310's. Maybe they got all of them, not sure???

View Large View Medium Photo © David Oates

View Large View Medium Photo © Gerard Helmer

I know JALCargo got two 747F's... That would be JA8160 and JA8165. 8165 has left our fleet this year, but 8160 soldiers on.

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 1): Ex PA, UA, AA, and BN

You mean PA, UA, AA, and CO. The -24 designation is for Continental.

Quoting Dalb777 (Reply 3): DL got some of their A310's. Maybe they got all of them, not sure???

All the A310s went to DL - 7x A310-200 & 14 A310-300.

The A300B4-203 went to Sempati, Carnival, Air Jamaica, Philipppines, Apollo, Dominicana, althought some spent some months over even years parked and not used after Pan Am bankruptcy before flying for one of the above airlines.

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 1): Ex PA, UA, AA, and BN

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 4): You mean PA, UA, AA, and CO. The -24 designation is for Continental.

BN designation was 27.



Cheers.

[Edited 2007-07-23 05:23:34]

By 1992-1994, Aero Costa Rica (no longer in service) utilized two B727-200 ex-Pan Am, registered as N353PA and N354PA. Some photos are shown in the database.

Isn't it interesting that the scheme, albeit of course a temporary one ... in this pic... are quiet similiar to the font and simplicity of today's livery for DL?

https://www.airliners.net/open.file/1004803/M/

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 1):

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 1): Side note: if you search for Polar Air Cargo 747-100's, the first four slides are 747-121, 747-122, 747-123, and 747-124!! How funny is that? Ex PA, UA, AA, and BN!!

747-124 was built and delivered to CO, not BN. The Orange Pumpkin was a 747-127. Another side note, PA acquired most of AA's 747-123's in trade for NA's DC-10's, and PA acquired five UA 747-122's.

Delta also acquired a good many 727's in addition to the aforementioned A310's.

Quoting Cubastar (Reply 9): Delta also acquired a good many 727's

Not that many, about four. But there are ten other B727s that were leased by PA from CO which the former returned during August 1991. Later that same month, DL leased them directly from Continental. And I think but am not sure that those former PA aircraft were used by DL in Europe from FRA.

It's interesting that Pan Am acquired everyone else's 747's after they discovered they couldn't make money with them. Of course Pan Am needed the range, which I guess at that time wasn't available in anything else. But perhaps they would have lasted longer had they opted for smaller planes and fuel stops?

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 11): It's interesting that Pan Am acquired everyone else's 747's after they discovered they couldn't make money with them. Of course Pan Am needed the range, which I guess at that time wasn't available in anything else. But perhaps they would have lasted longer had they opted for smaller planes and fuel stops?

Well, some of their second hand B747s were acquired during the second half of the '70s, but most arrived during the '80s, including a bunch of former SQ B742s.

That means that at the time other aircraft were available on the market like the B742, DC-10-30, L-1011 and B762. I know that during the '80s and before Lockerbie, Pan Am had lost something like $1 billion. During that decade they have had to digest the very expensive National merger, the arrival of the TriStar while they had DC-10s too, deregulation and other factors. I guess they couldn't afford for a while to buy new aircraft. But then came the Airbus deal for some of its white tails.

Quote: You mean PA, UA, AA, and CO. The -24 designation is for Continental.

Quote: BN designation was 27.

Quote: 747-124 was built and delivered to CO, not BN. The Orange Pumpkin was a 747-127.

  

It was late and I confused -24 and -27...forgiveness, please!!   

Quote: DL got some of their A310's. Maybe they got all of them, not sure???

If I remember right, DL got rid of the 310's pretty quickly...didn't Aerolineas Argentinas get a few?

Quote: It's interesting that Pan Am acquired everyone else's 747's after they discovered they couldn't make money with them. Of course Pan Am needed the range, which I guess at that time wasn't available in anything else. But perhaps they would have lasted longer had they opted for smaller planes and fuel stops?

I think the problem that both Pan Am and TWA both had was that in the 1980's the 747-100 was simply too much plane for their networks. Fuel costs and an entrenched mentality of "no new planes" helped to hasten the end for both airlines (among other reasons).

I wish Pan Am had been able to do the JetBlue thing - build a successful domestic hub at JFK not dependent entirely on international connections. I'd also like to think that they were flying 757's internationally on the "thin" routes, as CO has discovered is so profitable. Sigh...I miss the blue globe!!   

Quoting OceansWorld (Reply 10): Not that many, about four. But there are ten other B727s that were leased by PA from CO which the former returned during August 1991. Later that same month, DL leased them directly from Continental. And I think but am not sure that those former PA aircraft were used by DL in Europe from FRA.

I never said bought. "Acquired" can also mean take possession. Anyway, they were used on the mainline system here in the states for awhile prior to moving them to the FRA "Hub". Many remained in the PanAm colors for quite some time.....understandable when considering Delta's usual "speedy" painting pace.   

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 13): It was late and I confused -24 and -27...forgiveness, please!!

Sure, and

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 13): If I remember right, DL got rid of the 310's pretty quickly...

Of those they got when they took over PA trans-Atlantic operations in November 1991, most were gone during 1994, with the last few leaving the fleet by the end of April 1995. The nine that DL received new from Airbus during 1993 had all left the fleet by the end of 1995.

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 13): didn't Aerolineas Argentinas get a few?

The A310-200s went to FX, while AR got three A313s, the others went to Air Jamaica, Aeroflot, Air Club International, Diamond Sakha, Tarom.

Quoting Cubastar (Reply 14): I never said bought. "Acquired" can also mean take possession.

I know that, and what I meant was to say that there has been a time gap of a few weeks between the moment Pan Am returned the aircraft to CO and the moment DL leased them. Plus the four that were former National jets.

[Edited 2007-07-23 19:54:01]

Quoting Dalb777 (Reply 3): DL got some of their A310's. Maybe they got all of them, not sure???

Yes I flew on one from FRA to ATH over 12 years ago and in the toilet there was still a Pan Am logo on the wall.

Not quite on topic since it happened 5 years before PA shut down, but UA acquired PA's 11 747SPs and 6 of their 12 L1011-500s as part of their purchase of PA's Pacific routes in 1986. UA sold most if not all of the L1011s to DL in 1988/89. DL had previously bought a couple of other L15s from PA, so they finally wound with at least 8 of the original 12 PA L11011-500s. UA kept the ex-PA 747SPs until about 1995.

One of the 11 ex-Pan Am 747SPs was an ex-Braniff. Being nick-picky here, Pan Am operated 65 different 747s over the years, 45 of them being Pan Am's own code of -21... 33 -121s, 2 -221s and 10 SP21s. Other widebodies included 12 A300s, 21 A310s, 11 DC-10-10s, 5 DC-10-30s & 12 L-1011-500s. Pan Am was one of a few carriers operating all the first-generation widebodies. The airline is missed by yours truly. Regards.

Quoting FlagshipAZ (Reply 18): Pan Am was one of a few carriers operating all the first-generation widebodies.

How much a part did this play in their demise? Actually my take on the demise of PA was that there was a huge backlash against Juan Trippe's heavy-handed political tactics that left PA with few friends once he had departed which prevented them from getting any domestic routes, which in turn led to the disastrous National merger. It was not helped by a series of less than stellar successors to Trippe, and Lockerbie was the final blow, but it only accelerated what by then was probably inevitable. But very mixed fleet combined with planes flying half empty (or less) certainly didn't help things at all.

Quoting FlagshipAZ (Reply 18): One of the 11 ex-Pan Am 747SPs was an ex-Braniff. Being nick-picky here, Pan Am operated 65 different 747s over the years, 45 of them being Pan Am's own code of -21... 33 -121s, 2 -221s and 10 SP21s.

Just to be picky, the 2 -221 were cargo planes. Other than all the 747s you've already mentioned, the 20 other jumbos were 5 -122 (SCD), (2) -123 (SCD), 1 -123SF, 2 -132 (SCD), 5 -212B, 4 -212B (SCD) and -273C (1). Amongst the -121, three were converted to Special Freighter, and six others equipped with a Side Cargo Door for CRAF operations.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 19): Quoting FlagshipAZ (Reply 18):Pan Am was one of a few carriers operating all the first-generation widebodies. How much a part did this play in their demise?

Pan Am has operated the three first-generation widebodies during the first half of the '80s (1980-1985), which was quite a harsh time for the airline following the deregulation and thus the expansion on international routes of the other "major" US airlines, plus the costly National acquisition.

[Edited 2007-07-23 22:07:11]

One of my father's closest friends worked for PanAm in administration for decades and retired in the mid 80s. A few years ago I asked him his views on what had happened to PanAm. He said many things contributed to PanAm's demise, but he thought the main reason was the airline's inability to compete after Deregulation. He told me the company was used to being "The Chosen Instrument" and never adjusted to the post-Regulation reality. Once PanAm was no longer the airline that got the juiciest and profitable international routes, and other airlines started to compete with them on those routes, especially from other cities allowing passengers to by-pass JFK, the decline started.

He told me too many people in the airline still arrogantly assumed that since "we are PanAm", that passengers would continue to fly PanAm regardless of competition. He believes this arrogance contributed to the botched National merger. Several times during our conversation, he insisted arrogance had been the key factor in everything that went wrong.

Cheers, Ralph

Quoting MD80Nut (Reply 21): Once PanAm was no longer the airline that got the juiciest and profitable international routes, and other airlines started to compete with them on those routes, especially from other cities allowing passengers to by-pass JFK, the decline started.

Good info, MD80Nut.

To add, in their final few years, PA realized that airlines such as UA had what PA needed: a strong national route network to better feed their multiple international routes (which they relied too heavily upon post-deregulation). It was too late. that, and other questionable tactics...I still wonder if PA could have better utilized the 747s that showed up so many times on the JFK-DEN route in the early 1990s...never understood that one...and I never remember the loads being such that it was a feasible use of the giant a/c.

I highly recommend the book Skygods if people are interested in Pan Am.

Quoting MD80Nut (Reply 21): One of my father's closest friends worked for PanAm in administration for decades and retired in the mid 80s. A few years ago I asked him his views on what had happened to PanAm. He said many things contributed to PanAm's demise, but he thought the main reason was the airline's inability to compete after Deregulation.

Pan Am outside of the 30s never actually received chosen instrument status. The US prefered to use multiple carriers to encourage competition and lower costs. Pan Am's success was mostly centered around how tailored the 707 was for it's operations, and the fact that they had the inside track on sales and orders with Boeing.

The biggest reason is because while Trippe and Pan Am in general supported the Democratic party (where most of the Presidents came from during Pan Am's existence), they also pissed of JFK's father, who then made it a point to screw Pan Am every chance he got. The disastrous leadership that Pan Am encountered after Trippe left was due to the board trying to find people with enough political influence to counteract that problem.

Quoting MD80Nut (Reply 21): Once PanAm was no longer the airline that got the juiciest and profitable international routes, and other airlines started to compete with them on those routes, especially from other cities allowing passengers to by-pass JFK, the decline started.

The decline started well before then. Pan Am had not turned a profit in almost 8 years before deregulation occurred, with the exception of a year that they and TWA pulled off a route swap (which would not fly today). How bad was it? Before deregulation even started the NYT times had a death watch on, and trumpeted that "Pan Am was saved" when the Shah of Iran offered to buy it.

What really caused the decline? As you said it was primarily arrogance. Pan Am beat everyone else to the 707 and made a fortune. They then believed that their predictions where infalable and no one else knew how to really fly. That led to a spate of horrible air crashes with pilots that felt that they were Gods in the cockpit. The 747 was also a disaster. They were never really able to both fill a plane, and maintain a suitable margin on the plane. They also were the biggest earlier customer on the 747 which meant that they had huge issues with engine reliability etc. They never re-examined their fleet choices until it was far to late, and they didn't have the capital to right size their fleet.

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 23): I highly recommend the book Skygods if people are interested in Pan Am.

Thanks for your input; I also highly recommend Skygods. Your info on JFK's father is new to me; I had never heard that before. From what I have learned about Juan Trippe, he seemed to prefer political wheeling and dealing to building a sound business, and tried very hard to achieve his dreams that way. The movie "The Aviator", while about Howard Hughes, certainly showed this side of Trippe's character. From what I have read and heard elsewhere I am inclined to believe that the portrayal of Trippe was basically accurate. I did not realize that the political backlash against Trippe started even before he left.

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 23):

"That lead to a spate of horrible air crashes with pilots that felt they were Gods in the cockpit"
Explain/expand please ?

I have wanted to ask this question before, but did not want to start a thread for it, but I think it fits this topic.

While in MIA last October I saw a PanAm 727 setting on the tarmac along the northeast corner, near several hangers. It was near the main highway you drive on along the east end of the airport. I was wondering why was the PanAm name still around? Is there still a charter service or cargo service with the name. Or, something else.

Thanks.

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 1): Side note: if you search for Polar Air Cargo 747-100's, the first four slides are 747-121, 747-122, 747-123, and 747-124!! How funny is that? Ex PA, UA, AA, and BN!!

Certainly an interesting coincidence. However, the 747-124 would have been an ex-Continental, not ex-Braniff, although Braniff did lease a couple of 747-123 aircraft from American at one time.

Another interesting coincidence: Most of Polar Air Cargo's newer 747 aircraft have the "PA" suffix in their registration number just as Pan Am's Jet Clippers did for many years!

Quoting MYT321 (Reply 25): Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 23): "That lead to a spate of horrible air crashes with pilots that felt they were Gods in the cockpit" Explain/expand please ?

I always felt very safe on PA, but they did have a spotty accident record during certain periods. They had an especially bad 9 months between July 1973 and April 1974 when they wrote off 5 707s with 317 fatalities (would have been more except one was a freighter). Another was a terrorism incident on the ground at FCO.

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19730722-0
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19731103-1
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19731217-3
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19740130-0
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19740422-0

Between 1963 and 1974 they wrote off 12 707s, an averge of more than one a year. All except one (a runway overrun into the water at JFK in 1964) involved fatalites.

The former Guilford Transportation, a northeastern transportation company owned by an heir of the Mellon family, bought the Pan Am name and logo when the second version of the airline (the one that merged with Carnival Air Lines) went bankrupt in 1998. The company in turn operated Pan Am with a small fleet of 727's trying initially to set up a Spirit Air-like discount route network, supported by charter flights. Poor route choices, lack of marketing and no commitment to markets once started basically gave the airline no chance to succeed. Guilford's version of Pan Am ceased operations in 2004. However, the 727's still operate charter flights, and a subsidiary flying the Clipper globe on commuter J-31 aircraft still exists (Boston-Maine Airways dba Pan Am Clipper Connection) for the time being. Guilford changed its name to Pan Am Systems a couple of years ago, and also operates a rail subsidiary (Pan Am Railways) in New England, with blue-and-white painted cars with the Clipper globe on them.

Quoting Md94 (Reply 26): I have wanted to ask this question before, but did not want to start a thread for it, but I think it fits this topic. While in MIA last October I saw a Pan Am 727 setting on the tarmac along the northeast corner, near several hangers. It was near the main highway you drive on along the east end of the airport. I was wondering why was the PanAm name still around? Is there still a charter service or cargo service with the name. Or, something else.

I have seen Pan Am 727 aircraft in Miami occasionally in recent years. Although someone bought the "Pan Am" name, this is not the same airline anymore. Pan Am has been resurrected at least twice since its demise. Its latest incarnation is an airline called Pan Am Clipper Connection, which uses the same logo and livery that the original Pan Am used (right before it went under) plus the words "Clipper Connection" in "small print".

Quoting OceansWorld (Reply 10): Not that many, about four.

What airplanes did they use when they first acquired the Shuttle? Were they all DL 727's or were they the PA 727's?

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 17): DL had previously bought a couple of other L15s from PA,

In fact, when the rudders were hard over to the right or left, you could see the remnants of the blue meatball that PA had on their tail.

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 23): I highly recommend the book Skygods if people are interested in Pan Am.

Ditto on that recommendation. An EXCELLENT book. Written by Robert Gandt.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 24): Thanks for your input; I also highly recommend Skygods. Your info on JFK's father is new to me; I had never heard that before. From what I have learned about Juan Trippe, he seemed to prefer political wheeling and dealing to building a sound business, and tried very hard to achieve his dreams that way. The movie "The Aviator", while about Howard Hughes, certainly showed this side of Trippe's character. From what I have read and heard elsewhere I am inclined to believe that the portrayal of Trippe was basically accurate. I did not realize that the political backlash against Trippe started even before he left.

I would not go that far. They portrayed Juan Trippe as a cartoon villain in that movie, which I must disagree with. Juan Trippe was (hands down) the most influential aviation boss ever. Juan Trippe's impact is frankly second to none. He opened three different markets (Pacific with flying boats, Caribbean with sea planes and the Atlantic with the 707), gave the entire naval theme to aviation, basically specified both the 707 (and thus the 727 and 737) as well as the 747.

But he did loose sign of the fact that he was infalable. The 747 order ultimately is the seed of Pan Am's downfall.

Quoting MYT321 (Reply 25): "That lead to a spate of horrible air crashes with pilots that felt they were Gods in the cockpit" Explain/expand please ?

From Skygods:

Most of the captains on the 707's where ex flying boat guys. They were used to flying their own way with very little corporate oversight. They were commanders pure and simple of a "sea plane." When the 707 came around, these captains (some of whom actually referred to themselves as the Skygods) tended to fly their own way, and ignore/not know standard operating procedures. This led to a spike in crashes and with the US government threating to shut Pan Am down. (To be fair to Pan Am, they also were flying into some very sketchy airfields).

When the 747 came around, Pan Am was able to change the culture with the new pilots, which led to Pan Am's 747 fleet being one of the safest in the world.

Ironically enough, the website www.airliner.net is a website about the Pan Am flying boats...

acrually, it's just a few photos.

Over the years UPS has operated a number of ex-Pan Am 747-100's (-121's). There are currently 2 ex-Pan Am birds still in service with UPS, both were made in 1971 (N682 and N683UP). One ex-Pan Am 741 recently was retired from the UPS fleet (N681UP - #70 off the assembly line!) a few months ago, so it'll most likely be scrapped if it hasn't been already. There were 3 other ex-Pan Am plane's that ended up w/ UPS that have been scrapped, including one that was #7 off the assembly line! By the way, the oldest 747 operated by UPS is N676UP, which is from American Airlines and was #57 off the assembly line! So if you want to know where many of the early 747 (-100's) have ended up, look no further than UPS and other freight carriers such as Evergreen and Kalitta.

Thank you for the info on the current 727s.

Not to get off the subject...towards the end of Pan Am when they
competed head-on with AA in Miami, I remember reading that AA
stated something like "The Beatings will not stop until they go down"
always wondered what dirty tricks were going on here.

While Pan Am had an interesting mix of aircraft, bad decisions were made in the desperate attempt to stay aloft. Building up a large fleet of old fuel thirsty 741's was not the smartest move. Especially when you consider they flew three hour routes that were half full, clearly being misused.

Pan Am should have never given away the L-1011-500's. They were brand new, more economical, and filled the capacity gap nicely. Not to mention the Tristars had adequate range. The ex-National DC-10's could have been given back to McDonnell Douglas in return for a nice MD-80 discount. Would have supplemented the 727 fleet nicely, much like AA did.

Quoting GeorgeJetson (Reply 30): I have seen Pan Am 727 aircraft in Miami occasionally in recent years. Although someone bought the "Pan Am" name, this is not the same airline anymore. Pan Am has been resurrected at least twice since its demise.

It is a bit humorous how the name Pan Am continues to stick around, as fake as it is. At least they're flying good old 727's... it just wouldn't seem right seeing a 737NG or A320 series in that livery.

KW...Carnival airlines, got a few A300's from PA, and at least one re-engined B727. I know a few B727's went to KIWI and a 747 or two to Aeropostal and Tower.



I miss Pan Am  

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 32): I would not go that far. They portrayed Juan Trippe as a cartoon villain in that movie, which I must disagree with.

What the movie portrayed was a tycoon with at least one senator at his beck and call who tried to push through a bill essentially giving PA a monopoly on the Atlantic; I believe this did happen. The hearing certainly did; I believe the movie used the transcript. Certainly the movie only showed the manipulative side of Trippe; he was, as you said, a visionary who did much to develop air transport. I do think you overstate his influence on the 707, although he was the one who pressed for a longer range version, which Boeing probably would not have built at that time if he hadn't. But the decision to widen the fuselage was made after two other airlines (I believe it was AA and UA) opted for the DC-8 over the 707 after Pan
Am had ordered 20 707's and 25 DC-8's. Trippe certainly made his preferences known but when other airlines followed his lead Allen bit the bullet and widened the fuselage. This was an extremely expensive decision as it was made after the KC-135 had entered production (with an order for only 25-and that was supposed to be the end forever, as Lockheed had won the contract. Boeing got the order for 25 because Curtis LeMay threw a fit    and said he wanted jet tankers NOW and so they bought the KC-135.) The outlook at the time the decision was made was that they would have to make 25 KC-135's with one fuselage and the 707's with another, which meant that the KC-135 program would be a money loser, and there was no guarantee that the 707 would beat out the DC-8 and make money. It was only after the 707 was established that it became apparent that the Lockheed tanker was not going to make it and the Air Force then ordered the KC-135 in quantity.