User avatar
gdg9
Topic Author
Posts: 982
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:42 am

American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:18 am

Filing to Reject Certain Aircraft and Engine Leases - http://bit.ly/vafhWZ

F100s
N1402K, N1403M, N1404D, N1405J

Super 80
N227AA, N569AA, N570AA, N571AA, N462AA, N463AA, N464AA, N465AA, N249AA, N251AA, N452AA, N453AA, N457AA, N458AA, N459AA, N460AA,N461AA, N939AS, N940AS, N941AS

How long have 939AS, 940AS and 941AS sat in the desert? Are the other frames due for heavy checks or anything particular that would make them destined for being retired from AA?
@dfwtower
 
luckyone
Posts: 2913
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:23 am

I didn't even know they were still paying for an aircraft (F100) they haven't operated in years. That's incredible.
 
User avatar
gdg9
Topic Author
Posts: 982
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:42 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:27 am

Yeah, I found that amazing too. The F100s were retired in 2004!
@dfwtower
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7857
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:28 am

Quoting gdg9 (Thread starter):
Are the other frames due for heavy checks or anything particular that would make them destined for being retired from AA?

If the aircraft are leased they will need to perform all current maintenance. Every leasing company I have had dealings with require the airline to perform the next check due before turning the aircraft back.
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
User avatar
gdg9
Topic Author
Posts: 982
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:42 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:32 am

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 3):
If the aircraft are leased they will need to perform all current maintenance. Every leasing company I have had dealings with require the airline to perform the next check due before turning the aircraft back.

Makes complete sense. So simple I hadn't even thought about that! Thanks.
@dfwtower
 
AALuxuryLiner
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 5:49 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:55 am

gdg9, Thanks for posting this. I've wanted to read the facts about what AMR is trying to do instead of sifting through conjecture on forums, blogs, and news or the aa website.

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 3):
If the aircraft are leased they will need to perform all current maintenance. Every leasing company I have had dealings with require the airline to perform the next check due before turning the aircraft back.

I'm not sure how bankruptcy works exactly, but Section 12 of the linked court document states:

"The Lessors must remove such Excess Leased Equipment from the location designated in the applicable exhibit. If a Lessor does not retrieve the Excess Leased Equipment within fifteen (15) days of the later of the date of entry
of the Order and the relevant Effective Date, such Lessor shall be responsible for the costs of
storing such equipment and other attendant costs as determined by the Debtors, including the costs
of insuring the relevant Excess Leased Equipment."

I don't think a heavy check can be done within 15 days and the document doesn't state maintenance must be performed prior to return to the Lessor.

Quoting luckyone (Reply 1):
I didn't even know they were still paying for an aircraft (F100) they haven't operated in years. That's incredible.

That's shocking to me also. I guess AMR wasn't able over the years to sublease these remaining F100s to another carrier?
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7857
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:22 am

Quoting AALuxuryLiner (Reply 5):

That just means the lessor has 15 days to move it or they are start paying for insurance and parking fees.
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
jj8080
Posts: 47
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 7:04 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:43 am

Why does AA still pays for F100s retired many years ago??
100 146 319/20/21 332 722 732/3/4/5/G/W/8/H/9 742/3/4 752/3 762/3 772/W BE2 BET E75 CNJ CR2 D10 F27 F50 ER4 LRJ M11 M80
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 9852
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:46 am

Quoting jj8080 (Reply 7):
Why does AA still pays for F100s retired many years ago??

Leases can be 30 years. It doesn't matter whether they are being used.
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7857
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:48 am

Quoting jj8080 (Reply 7):
Why does AA still pays for F100s retired many years ago??

My guess would be the F100's were still under a lease contract. It was cheaper to park them then to fly them.... or pay the penalty to return them early.
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
N1120A
Posts: 26541
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:50 am

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 3):
If the aircraft are leased they will need to perform all current maintenance. Every leasing company I have had dealings with require the airline to perform the next check due before turning the aircraft back.

Not when you are rejecting them.

Quoting jj8080 (Reply 7):
Why does AA still pays for F100s retired many years ago??

Long term leases can be onerous. I'm guessing AA did sublease these for a while.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
jj8080
Posts: 47
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 7:04 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:51 am

Quoting enilria (Reply 8):
Quoting EMBQA (Reply 9):

I wonder how many F100s (and for how long) does AA still have on lease.
100 146 319/20/21 332 722 732/3/4/5/G/W/8/H/9 742/3/4 752/3 762/3 772/W BE2 BET E75 CNJ CR2 D10 F27 F50 ER4 LRJ M11 M80
 
hatbutton
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:39 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:03 am

Talk about a burden to your bottom line that provides you no value anymore. It must have been really beneficial to keep 24 aircraft parked instead of at least flying some of them, but nevertheless a cost still carried on the income statement providing no return.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7486
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:31 am

Please review the 2010 10-K filing:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/da...000095012311014726/d78201e10vk.htm

Page 20 & 21.

The 4 F-100's are listed in the table as Flight Equipment - Not Operating.
Did AA previously get rid of the A300s and SF3's listed in here as well or are those likely to be disposed of soon too?

Also of interest is the table toward the end of page 21 showing lease expirations by aircraft type by year. This shows what was previously planned at year-end 2010.

It is not uncommon to see such listings of non-operating equipment. It is the nature of the business as economic cycles, demand, lease terms, and maintenance checks do not necessarily align. Airlines will make decisions that should be in the best interest of the business and sometimes it is more cost-effective to park an aircraft and continue to pay for it rather than fly it.

Remember that the F-100s were removed from the fleet well before the end of their expected life.
 
threeifbyair
Posts: 939
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 1:44 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:38 am

Quoting gdg9 (Thread starter):
How long have 939AS, 940AS and 941AS sat in the desert?

Probably been a while:

939 was last spotted by an A.net photographer (flying) on 3/15/2004. Engineless at ROW on 1/19/2006.
940 was last spotted 2/4/2004
941 was last spotted 7/8/2005
 
LipeGIG
Posts: 5063
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:33 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 4:44 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 10):
Long term leases can be onerous. I'm guessing AA did sublease these for a while.

It all depends on the lease clauses.
The lessor can just be smart and put a huge penalty fee for breaking the agreement. G3 have the same situation with some 763 equipment.
New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3546
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:37 am

Wouldn't a lease generally involve tracking hours used, and maintenance costs accruing? Otherwise in a bankruptcy the owners could really take a hit.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
ScottB
Posts: 6748
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:51 am

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 16):
Not when you are rejecting them.

It's not that simple. This is a dance. There is plenty of law out there on how this all works, and the bankruptcy laws have been modified over the years to address perceived inequities arising from previous airline bankruptcies. So, this rejection is just Step One in a process.

Well, yes and no. In the case of the F100's and the derelict MD-80's, the lessor is pretty much going to get the aircraft as-is and AA's lease obligation will be terminated. The lessor will then have to file a claim against the bankruptcy estate and presumably will receive some significantly reduced value in cash or shares of the "new" AMR Corporation.

The example you gave of the former DL MD-11's, while interesting, does nothing to demonstrate that Delta retained any obligation with respect to those aircraft once the leases were rejected; the resulting transactions were between the lessors, WO, FX & 5X.

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 13):
Did AA previously get rid of the A300s and SF3's listed in here as well or are those likely to be disposed of soon too?

Reading back through an old 10-K, the last of the A300 leases expired or will expire this year. The Saabs are/were owned so there's no lease to reject.

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 3):
If the aircraft are leased they will need to perform all current maintenance. Every leasing company I have had dealings with require the airline to perform the next check due before turning the aircraft back.

As others have noted, the rejection of the leases will end AMR's contractual obligations with respect to the aircraft, including performing maintenance checks.
 
IndustryInsider
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 5:47 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:06 am

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 3):
If the aircraft are leased they will need to perform all current maintenance. Every leasing company I have had dealings with require the airline to perform the next check due before turning the aircraft back.

This is true unless the airline negotiates and then "buys out" of the lease. Then they are free to do what they want with the aircraft. Sometimes it is a win-win for the leasing company and for the airline. The leasing company gets money in their pocket for an aircraft they might otherwise not be able to see a return on and the airline avoids having to do expensive Heavy Check work which could actually cost more than the actual buy out amount.
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1981
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:25 am

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 3):
Every leasing company I have had dealings with require the airline to perform the next check due before turning the aircraft back.
Quoting N1120A (Reply 10):
Not when you are rejecting them.

Exactly. In bankruptcy the lessor cannot force AA to do anything - other than return the plane. When a lease is rejected under the bankruptcy code, all its terms and conditions are rejected and AA simply walks away, which is what it sounds like is happening.

I am surprised only 24 leases are being rejected. I would have thought they might shed more aircraft.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 8319
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:57 am

Quoting ScottB (Reply 17):
As others have noted, the rejection of the leases will end AMR's contractual obligations with respect to the aircraft, including performing maintenance checks.

Last time I looked, the law was unsettled as to whether breach of return conditions was an administrative expense. If they make an 1110(a) Election to reject, and then operate the a/c, it's pretty clearly an admin expense, IIRC, but less obvious if no operation takes place. Even with a first-day rejection, there is some push and pull over whether the airline has returned the proper records, engines, etc.; i.e. all the collateral covered by the financing lease.
 
JU068
Posts: 2094
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 8:23 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:38 am

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 9):
My guess would be the F100's were still under a lease contract. It was cheaper to park them then to fly them.... or pay the penalty to return them early.

But why would it uneconomical for them to operate the F100s when there are numerous airlines around the world using them and seem quite happy (Austrian Airlines, KLM...)?
 
andrewuber
Posts: 2142
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 10:45 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:36 am

The F100's are all receiving regular maintenance checks and are airworthy, they are parked in a neat little row in ROW.
I'd rather shoot BAD_MOTIVE
 
nutsaboutplanes
Posts: 545
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 3:37 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:51 am

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 12):
Talk about a burden to your bottom line that provides you no value anymore. It must have been really beneficial to keep 24 aircraft parked instead of at least flying some of them, but nevertheless a cost still carried on the income statement providing no return.

The F100 situation does not surprise me and I would bet that most airlines have this happen at some point as they transition fleets. I know for a fact that many AS MD-80's that are sitting in the desert are still being paid for by AS even though most will never fly again. AS determined that the sunk cost of paying for these idle aircraft was far outweighed by the benefits of transitioning to an all 737 fleet.

I would be willing to bet that this was the case with F9's transition to Airbus and multiple airlines as they parked droves of B727's after September 11th.
American Airlines, US Airways, Alaska Airlines, Northwest Airlines, America West Airlines, USAFR
 
bigb
Posts: 949
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:05 am

Quoting ju068 (Reply 21):
But why would it uneconomical for them to operate the F100s when there are numerous airlines around the world using them and seem quite happy (Austrian Airlines, KLM...)?

My guest would be because their CASM is higher in the US. F100s would have been flow by mainline pilots and crews thus higher cost to crew the flights vs having a American Eagle fly the route with regional crew pay...
 
bmibaby737
Posts: 1602
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 1:07 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:40 am

Quoting gdg9 (Thread starter):
How long have 939AS, 940AS and 941AS sat in the desert?

Information I have is that they all ferried on the same date to ROW...

N339AS ferried DFW-ROW 23 August 2005 for storage
N940AS ferried DFW-ROW 23 August 2005 for storage
N941AS ferried DFW-ROW 23 August 2005 for storage

In addition, it would seem all of those listed above are now stored.

N227AA ferried DFW-ROW 12 March 2010 for storage
N249AA ferried DFW-ROW 29 October 2010 for storage
N251AA stored ROW June 2011
N452AA ferried DFW-ROW 03 November 2010 for storage
N453AA stored ROW December 2010
N457AA stored?
N458AA stored ROW December 2010
N459AA ferried DFW-ROW 19 October 2011 for storage
N460AA ferried DFW-ROW 04 November 2011 for storage
N461AA ferried DFW-ROW 01 October 2011 for storage
N462AA ferried DFW-ROW 04 November 2011 for storage
N463AA ferried DFW-ROW 04 November 2011 for storage
N464AA ferried DFW-ROW 23 September 2011 for storage
N465A ferried DFW-ROW 07 November 2011 for storage
N569AA ferried DFW-ROW 27 September 2011 for storage
N570AA ferried DFW-ROW 21 September 2011 for storage
N571AA ferried DFW-ROW 16 September 2011 for storage

Information from various sources, and now submitted to Planespotters

[Edited 2011-12-01 02:34:21]
 
divemaster08
Posts: 187
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 1:45 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:22 pm

What happened to the fate of their old B762/3s that they retired after 9/11? were they bought or leased?

I guess that they were probably from the 70s, so they were already pretty near the end of leases/payments by the time they were retired.
My dream, is to fly, over the rainbow, so high!
 
FlyASAGuy2005
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:55 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:25 pm

Well, they are not wasting in time. It will be interesting to see what big moves they make in the coming weeks and months that has direct bearing on their bk process. I say that because the 77W news does not. They would have done that regardless and they need as much good press as possible although it seems like this is AA's style. Right after the Q results they had the big press about the Airbus order and Boeing LOI.
What gets measured gets done.
 
JU068
Posts: 2094
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 8:23 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:32 pm

Quoting BigB (Reply 24):
My guest would be because their CASM is higher in the US. F100s would have been flow by mainline pilots and crews thus higher cost to crew the flights vs having a American Eagle fly the route with regional crew pay...

Thanks for the reply. But would it be a problem to transfer them to American Eagle?
 
User avatar
gdg9
Topic Author
Posts: 982
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:42 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:43 pm

Thanks bmibaby - great update!

I wonder who might pick up these Super 80s, if anyone... I'm sure Allegiant has bought enough already?
@dfwtower
 
TWA1985
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:24 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:52 pm

So when will these MD80's be pulled from service, or are they already parked? Will it affect any routes near-term?
Be Young. Be Wild. Be Free.
 
superjeff
Posts: 1300
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 2:14 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 1:56 pm

Quoting ju068 (Reply 28):

Quoting BigB (Reply 24):
My guest would be because their CASM is higher in the US. F100s would have been flow by mainline pilots and crews thus higher cost to crew the flights vs having a American Eagle fly the route with regional crew pay...

Thanks for the reply. But would it be a problem to transfer them to American Eagle?

It would be a problem because (1) AA still owns Eagle, and (2) Eagle is also in bankruptcy. They would have to get bankrutpcy court permission to do something like this. And what would Eagle do with an F100 fleet anyway? Their only current contracts are flying for AA, and the scope clause wouldn't permit AA to contract out flying a 100 pax ac to another carrier anyway.
 
elmothehobo
Posts: 983
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:10 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:35 pm

Quoting divemaster08 (Reply 26):
What happened to the fate of their old B762/3s that they retired after 9/11? were they bought or leased?

The ex-TWA 767-300s were returned to lessors and all found new careers abroad by 2003. Those aircraft were replaced by new build 767-300s and 2 777-200s. The 15 or so 767-200s that were retired were parked in the desert, some were picked up for freighter conversion.
 
VZLA787
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:43 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:50 pm

This is very shocking news to me! Paying for aircraft that they're not operating? I'm not that much into the specific financials of the airlines, but if we do the following simple math:

- Lease of MD-80 (cash out)
- Lease of 737-800 (cash out)
- Operating expense of 737-800 (cash out)

The above sum has to be lower than: Lease MD-80 + operating expense of MD-80 in order for a parking of leased planes to make sense. At the end of the day, you have to look at cash flows, not only operating expenses.

So, in other words, are the operating expense savings generated by a new plane (say 737-800) enough to offset having to pay two leases?

Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers
 
LAXtoATL
Posts: 596
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:55 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:02 pm

Quoting VZLA787 (Reply 33):
So, in other words, are the operating expense savings generated by a new plane (say 737-800) enough to offset having to pay two leases?

One thing to remember, the lease rates on the MD80s are very inexpensive, so they wouldn't weigh heavily on the decision. The decision to park an MD80 and continue making the lease payment is a lot easier than parking 777 (even an old one) and continueing to make the lease payment.
 
hatbutton
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:39 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:42 pm

Quoting nutsaboutplanes (Reply 23):

The F100 situation does not surprise me and I would bet that most airlines have this happen at some point as they transition fleets. I know for a fact that many AS MD-80's that are sitting in the desert are still being paid for by AS even though most will never fly again. AS determined that the sunk cost of paying for these idle aircraft was far outweighed by the benefits of transitioning to an all 737 fleet.

There are 2 AS MD-80s still in the dessert and are about to be offloaded off the books. I understand that because the transition to the 737 was necessary. Just like I can understand why AA won't fly the F100s anymore. But the MD-80s are still very active in their fleet so those are the ones that throw me off a little bit. Unless these frames were just that in need of maintenance or something like that, it seems strange that they wouldn't have found their way back to flying service.
 
User avatar
gdg9
Topic Author
Posts: 982
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:42 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:48 pm

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 35):
But the MD-80s are still very active in their fleet

But are being replaced of course with 738s. AA are up to around 175 or so now, give or take a few.
@dfwtower
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7486
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:09 pm

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 35):
Unless these frames were just that in need of maintenance or something like that, it seems strange that they wouldn't have found their way back to flying service.

Airlines idle capacity all of the time. Remember how A.net went on an uproar the other year when DL parked some A330s for the winter that were pending maintenance.

Aircraft are parked to keep capacity in check with the goal of reducting unprofitable flying. This can include leased aircraft.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18831
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:15 pm

This is just the 'easy start' getting rid of parked aircraft. I expect AA to reject many leases over the next year.   Much of what happens will depend on the union contracts (future economics).

Quoting luckyone (Reply 1):
I didn't even know they were still paying for an aircraft (F100) they haven't operated in years. That's incredible.

I'm glad I'm not the only one surprised!

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 13):
Also of interest is the table toward the end of page 21 showing lease expirations by aircraft type by year. This shows what was previously planned at year-end 2010.

Thank you for the data. It shows that AA is starting by rejecting the un-operated aircraft (I assume the A300s were disposed of.)

I find it interesting how quickly the MD-80s are scheduled to be retired. I suspect that will be accelerated as much as possible.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 17):
Well, yes and no. In the case of the F100's and the derelict MD-80's, the lessor is pretty much going to get the aircraft as-is and AA's lease obligation will be terminated. The lessor will then have to file a claim against the bankruptcy estate and presumably will receive some significantly reduced value in cash or shares of the "new" AMR Corporation.

That will be the case.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
hatbutton
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:39 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:20 pm

Quoting gdg9 (Reply 36):
But are being replaced of course with 738s. AA are up to around 175 or so now, give or take a few.

I am aware of this yes. But the fact that they are still flying MD-80s you'd assume they could find somewhere to fly these planes. They look like they've been sitting there for a while, long before getting up to 175 737s.

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 37):
Airlines idle capacity all of the time. Remember how A.net went on an uproar the other year when DL parked some A330s for the winter that were pending maintenance.

Aircraft are parked to keep capacity in check with the goal of reducting unprofitable flying. This can include leased aircraft.

I know this. I work for AS and am very aware of why we parked our last 2 MD-80s. But that was for wanting to get to a 737 only fleet. I am only saying I am curious why they parked this many MD-80s, aircraft that are still flying in their fleet on a large scale. We may never know the reasons unless someone who works for AA chimes in. I'm not stating that I don't understand why an airline would park any leased aircraft. The number of these that are parked considering they are still a workhorse in the fleet is what I wonder about.
 
LJ
Posts: 4990
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 1999 8:28 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:31 pm

Quoting ju068 (Reply 21):

But why would it uneconomical for them to operate the F100s when there are numerous airlines around the world using them and seem quite happy (Austrian Airlines, KLM...)?

KLM doesn't operate the F100 anymore. The only 5 they still have are on "stand by" only and will leave KL next year. Both Austrian and KL like the F70, not F100.
 
ScottB
Posts: 6748
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:39 pm

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 19):
I am surprised only 24 leases are being rejected. I would have thought they might shed more aircraft.

These are likely aircraft leases which AMR will not choose to assume under any circumstances. IIRC they have 60 days to make a decision whether to assume or reject the rest of leases, and they will be running the numbers and negotiating with the lessors for relief before choosing which leases to reject (if any) from the active fleet.

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 20):
Even with a first-day rejection, there is some push and pull over whether the airline has returned the proper records, engines, etc.; i.e. all the collateral covered by the financing lease.

True, but those items are the property of the lessor (blurred a bit in the case of a capital lease) and as such the lessor does have the right to take possession of them. The high relative value of the engines makes it imperative that the lease will cover the aircraft as a collection of multiple assets -- and, of course, the aircraft is virtually worthless without up-to-date maintenance records.

Quoting VZLA787 (Reply 33):
are the operating expense savings generated by a new plane (say 737-800) enough to offset having to pay two leases?

They can be if the lease on the older aircraft is low enough. Also consider that the choice really is whether or not to use the aircraft, since deliveries of new aircraft are scheduled years in advance. The real equation is more akin to: "Will the losses incurred by operating the plane be higher than the cost of the leases?"

Quoting ju068 (Reply 28):
would it be a problem to transfer them to American Eagle?

Yes, the American Airlines pilot contract requires all flying with aircraft over 70 seats to be performed by American Airlines (not Eagle) pilots.
 
777STL
Posts: 2770
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:22 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:43 pm

One thing to remember, an aircraft losing money in the air is more expensive than an idle one on the ground. Just because an aircraft is in active service doesn't mean its generating a profit.
PHX based
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:05 pm

Quoting VZLA787 (Reply 33):
- Lease of MD-80 (cash out)
- Lease of 737-800 (cash out)
- Operating expense of 737-800 (cash out)

The above sum has to be lower than: Lease MD-80 + operating expense of MD-80 in order for a parking of leased planes to make sense. At the end of the day, you have to look at cash flows, not only operating expenses.

It is also about revenue potential. Additional passengers and ability to fly better routes can add up too.
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22685
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:27 pm

Quoting andrewuber (Reply 22):
The F100's are all receiving regular maintenance checks and are airworthy, they are parked in a neat little row in ROW.

Thanks for the info, but I imagine no one here knows if that will continue now that AA is in BK.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
wjcandee
Posts: 8319
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:40 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 44):
Thanks for the info, but I imagine no one here knows if that will continue now that AA is in BK.

Actually, the proposed order says that AA will continue the storage maintenance program through 15 days after the later of the date the order is granted or the effective date of the rejection.
 
User avatar
LOWS
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:37 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:48 pm

Quoting LJ (Reply 40):
KLM doesn't operate the F100 anymore. The only 5 they still have are on "stand by" only and will leave KL next year. Both Austrian and KL like the F70, not F100.

VO as Austrian Arrows also fly the F100. Including one per day on VIE-AMS!
 
ckfred
Posts: 5169
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:05 pm

I thought AA had either sold or sublet all of the F100 fleet. I thought one or more Latin American carriers were flying the fleet, with AA performing the heavy maintenance at TUL.

I seem to recall that AA was taking delivery of used MD-80s in 2001, as part of some expansion in domestic service planned for 2001 and 2002. With 9/11 taking place, some of those deliveries were cancelled. It may have been that AA had already taken the MD-80s from AS, and the decision in light of the downturn in traffic was to fly them until a heavy check was due. Then, they went to the desert.
 
Algoz66
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 2:07 pm

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:31 pm

As an ignorant English colonial, I fail to understand the ethics and logic of chapter 11,
If I may may make a similar comparison:
My outgoings are more than my income....
I don't like my old car any more cos it's a gas guzzler
I tell the dealer I don't want it and he can have it back....tough luck if this affects his bottom line
I go and order a new shiny economical car which I guess I can't really afford either because I'm bankrupt

Only in America!!
 
Mikey711MN
Posts: 1248
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:19 am

RE: American Files To Reject 24 Aircraft Leases

Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:49 pm

Quoting Algoz66 (Reply 48):
I go and order a new shiny economical car which I guess I can't really afford either because I'm bankrupt

If the total cost of ownership - i.e. lease payments and cost of fuel & maintenance - is, in fact, less than your income, then yes you can afford it. To stretch the analogy a bit, the shiny new car may have a certain configuration or feature set that increases your income, thus widening your operating margin.

-Mike
I plan on living forever. So far, so good...

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