American Airlines Eyes New Pacific Routes

Miami · Thu Jan 29, 2015 9:55 pm

According to 'The Street', American Airlines is eying new Pacific routes, possibly on the 787. AA is waiting for the results of an ongoing vote on a new pilot contract that would provide more flexibility in pilot scheduling on long-haul Pacific routes.

Quote:
A change in a contract clause, proposed by American, would allow the carrier to count pilot time on a different clock than it currently uses, enabling more flexibility and therefore more flying on the 787 and other long-haul aircraft.

"If American wants to fly those Dreamliners from (Los Angeles International Airport, or LAX) to Asia and Oceania, this contract may help facilitate that flying for American pilots," said a pilot who asked not to be named.

American Airlines' President, Scott Kirby, said that American plans more trans-Pacific from LAX, but he declined to say what routes the 787 will fly.

http://www.thestreet.com/story/13027...oeing-787s-if-contract-passes.html

I do sure hope AA is smart in terms of using their 787s correctly. Hopefully the 787 will give them the AAdvantage. See what I did there?

Anyone have a prediction on where the AA 787 will fly to/from?

-Miami

nomorerjs · Thu Jan 29, 2015 9:58 pm

LAX and ORD to Asia seem to make sense, but the crews are initially all DFW based. With the 767 retirements and 772 changes, I would suspect the 772s to replace some SA and Europe routes while the 787s go to Asia. Now will AA ever open up ORD-GRU with open skies?

Miami · Thu Jan 29, 2015 11:47 pm

Quoting nomorerjs (Reply 1):
LAX and ORD to Asia seem to make sense

Yes. But I'd think LAX is ideal. I would like to see LAX-PEK, LAX-HKG, LAX-ICN on a 787.

I'd also hope AA can start LAX-Australia with a 787.

Sydscott · Fri Jan 30, 2015 12:36 am

Quoting Miami (Reply 2):
I'd also hope AA can start LAX-Australia with a 787.

I doubt you'll see LAX - Australia on AA however LAX-AKL on AA 787 metal is entirely feasible and, given the monopoly pricing NZ now charges along with JQ feed from domestic NZ services and QFF's, AA should be able to make a profitable route out of it.

Outside that the 787 priority out of LAX is probably going to be swapping the 772 off of LAX-PVG and then building from there. LAX-ICN, LAX-HKG all make sense as does LAX-PEK. With 12 787's coming into the fleet in 2015 that gives them plenty of options to build off of.

777Jet · Fri Jan 30, 2015 12:36 am

Quoting Miami (Thread starter):
Anyone have a prediction on where the AA 787 will fly to/from?

I would love to see AA metal return to SYD, but their good mate QF does have a lot of capacity on the LAX-SYD route already... Having said that, *occasionally* the rumor comes around that QF is considering a third LAX-SYD flight... Nonetheless, AA could make LAX-SYD work with the 788. Also, they could offer a different departure / arrival block than the usual times - perhaps a mid-morning LAX departure arriving in SYD in the late evening???

AKL is another possibility.

Quoting Miami (Reply 2):
I'd also hope AA can start LAX-Australia with a 787.

superjeff · Fri Jan 30, 2015 12:48 am

I think the chances of AA operating LAX-SYD is slim. The Australian government apparently only approved their joint venture based on the two airlines not competing directly on that route. That being said, LAX-AKL or even LAX-AKL-SYD is probably possible. Just my two cents' worth.

RWA380 · Fri Jan 30, 2015 12:56 am

Quoting sydscott (Reply 3):
I doubt you'll see LAX - Australia on AA however LAX-AKL on AA 787 metal is entirely feasible and, given the monopoly pricing NZ now charges along with JQ feed from domestic NZ services and QFF's, AA should be able to make a profitable route out of it.

With QF operating the lions share of seats LAX - Australia already, there is no reason for AA to jump into an already crowded long haul market, when they can open up LAX-AKL & run against one well established competitor. AA should drop the shoe & get on with it now, the 787s are on property lets get LAX-AKL on the AA route map.

qf2220 · Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:24 am

Quoting Miami (Reply 2):
I'd also hope AA can start LAX-Australia with a 787.

Do we know how this JV works? Is it metal neutral? I suspect not, but if yes, there would be no point in AA operating the route no?

777ER · Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:24 am

AA LAX-AKL is strongly rumoured and QF have expressed their strong thoughts on AA operating the route with a QF codeshare.

Quoting superjeff (Reply 5):
LAX-AKL-SYD is probably possible

Interesting thought! Could AA join the Trans-Tasman QF/EK alliance and allow QF to remove an aircraft from the route for possible use elsewhere?

777Jet · Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:35 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 8):
AA LAX-AKL is strongly rumoured and QF have expressed their strong thoughts on AA operating the route with a QF codeshare.

Given that both are One World, have a decent relationship, and, moreover, that QF used to operate AKL-LAX anyway, I would expect any AA LAX-AKL flight to be operated with a QF codeshare.

LAX-AKL is the perfect route for the 788 and for AA to return to the South Pacific. IMHO if any new entrant in the AKL-LAX market is going to take on NZ and their dominance then the 788 is the ideal plane to start it with.

However, I don't really see the benefit of an AKL-SYD tag on sector, unless the plane is scheduled to sit at AKL for a very long time and otherwise wouldn't be doing anything. The QF / EK flights between AKL-Australia provide more than enough feed

[Edited 2015-01-29 17:37:25]

29erUSA187 · Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:35 am

Quoting Miami (Reply 2):
LAX-HKG

I don't think that there is a huge benefit in this. AA's OW parter, CX, flies the route 3 or 4x daily.

I'd like to see LAX-ICN, LAX-MNL, and LAX-PEK. From ORD I could see ORD-NRT, ORD-PEK, or ORD-PVG

aerohottie · Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:47 am

I'd really love to see AA operate the following;

SYD-AKL-DFW
MEL-AKL-LAX

with the flights arriving and departing at similar times through AKL

MAH4546 · Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:52 am

Quoting aerohottie (Reply 11):
From ORD I could see ORD-NRT, ORD-PEK, or ORD-PVG

AA flies all three.

Gemuser · Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:02 am

Quoting superjeff (Reply 5):
The Australian government apparently only approved their joint venture based on the two airlines not competing directly on that route

Actually, in the Australian Government approval the fact that they did not compete on ANY route was a major factor in granting that approval. [If they don't compete the JBA cannot lessen competition between the parties]. Should that change it would trigger an automatic review of the approval [standard procedure}. This is not to say that there would be any change to the approval, just an administrative review.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 9):

LAX-AKL is the perfect route for the 788 and for AA to return to the South Pacific

Does AA not have a more profitable route on which to deploy the B787? I ask because I don't know, although my gut feel is that there must be several, after all NZ is a small market and Air NZ must defend AKL-LAX unto the death, lest it go out of business.

Gemuser

DDR · Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:03 am

Quoting nomorerjs (Reply 12):

AA does a decent job at ORD. No reason for them to leave. By the way, not sure how they could "sell" it. What exactly would they be selling?

smi0006 · Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:06 am

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 6):
With QF operating the lions share of seats LAX - Australia already, there is no reason for AA to jump into an already crowded long haul market, when they can open up LAX-AKL & run against one well established competitor. AA should drop the shoe & get on with it now, the 787s are on property lets get LAX-AKL on the AA route map.

I think this would be a fantastic route for AA. NZ have almost three daily 777 at some times of the year. A 787 wouldn't add a huge amount of capacity into the market, at least that can't be sustained. I'm sure there are a number of one world FF who would much rather go AKL-LAX then AKL-MEL/SYD-LAX. QF are also offering atm free FF membership to NZ residents.

How are the AA 787s configured are they two class only?

777Jet · Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:07 am

Quoting gemuser (Reply 15):
Does AA not have a more profitable route on which to deploy the B787?

More profitable routes would justify something larger than the 788.

IIRC part of the purpose of the AA 788 was to launch new routes.

Launching LAX-AKL makes sense.

AA's alliance partner QF operated it for some time, and the QF/EK partnership provides a lot of feed into AKL. A market for somebody other than NZ is there IMHO.

If anybody is going to take on NZ on this route then starting it with something like the 788 is ideal - which AA has and is looking to use on new routes.

TWA772LR · Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:24 am

How about LAX-KIX/SAP/FUK? Don't they have a JV with JAL?

Or something bold like LAX-GUM as a shot across UAs bow?

On HKG, I think we will see a UA flight before AA out of LAX.

One that would blow everyone's minds is LAX-KUL. Since MA pulled out and AA will have the aircraft to serve nonstop, I can see this one being a hit to SE Asia.

Freshside3 · Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:29 am

BKK, perhaps, if they get something with enough range....

I been noticing, on their Facebook page lately, they have been occasionally featuring pictures of Thailand.

ipodguy7 · Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:31 am

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 20):
How about LAX-KIX/SAP/FUK? Don't they have a JV with JAL?

JAL have already announced LAX-KIX, SAP is in Honduras not Japan, and I just don't think the demand for FUK-Continental USA exists for a non-stop, just my 2c.

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 20):
Or something bold like LAX-GUM as a shot across UAs bow?

Would love to see a Continental US-GUM flight, but if it were to ever happen it would almost certaintly be on UA.

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 20):
One that would blow everyone's minds is LAX-KUL. Since MA pulled out and AA will have the aircraft to serve nonstop, I can see this one being a hit to SE Asia.

Way too long, low demand, and low yield. Further, MH is (was) on the verge of insolvency/bankruptcy, so don't hold your breath on that connection. If the Malay-govt-backed MH can't hold on to an LAX flight (granted it was one-stop via NRT), I sure don't see AA trying it.

[Edited 2015-01-29 18:32:32]

LAX772LR · Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:40 am

Quoting 29erUSA187 (Reply 10):
I don't think that there is a huge benefit in this. AA's OW parter, CX, flies the route 3 or 4x daily.

AA and CX are still 100% competitiors... they are not (and cannot be) in a J/V, thus they do not split revenue or jointly plan/coordinate routes.

There's no benefit to AA to not fly the route with their own metal, if they fill they can fill it to yield; versus sending their point-of-sale tix solely on CX.

777Jet · Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:46 am

Quoting Freshside3 (Reply 21):
BKK, perhaps, if they get something with enough range....

I been noticing, on their Facebook page lately, they have been occasionally featuring pictures of Thailand.

What routing / equipment combo?

I really don't see BKK in with a chance - niether as a non-stop (which they can't do anyway with their current fleet) nor as a one-stop...

infinit · Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:49 am

Quoting ipodguy7 (Reply 22):
Way too long, low demand, and low yield. Further, MH is (was) on the verge of insolvency/bankruptcy, so don't hold your breath on that connection. If the Malay-govt-backed MH can't hold on to an LAX flight (granted it was one-stop via NRT), I sure don't see AA trying it.

Interestingly, now that Malaysia and Thai pulled out of LA, Singapore Airlines is the only Southeast Asian carrier flying to the US on their own metal.

With this drop in capacity, and AA's extensive coverage of the Americas and increasing trade and FDI between the US and Southeast Asia (which is supposed to become an ASEAN Community on 31 Dec 2015), maybe AA could work a US-Southeast Asian route

I imagine adding a Chinese destination or increasing frequency to existing ones seems the most logical. But rather than codesharing for flights to Southeast Asia, I believe there is significant connecting and O&D business traffic between most major Chinese destinations and SIN or KUL.

KUL as the main economic strategy of Malaysia's current administration is to cozy up to China and attract Chinese investment in Malaysia and that has been working despite issues like MH370

zkncj · Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:50 am

LAX-CHC-MEL would open an new market, AKL-LAX is already over crowed by NZ.

CHC would help pull people that don't want to travel up to Auckland

HKG212 · Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:53 am

Quoting ipodguy7 (Reply 19):
don't really see ORD/JFK gaining anything.

I wonder. As I mentioned in another post, JFK-HKG is a gravy train for CX, at least partially thanks to AA's lucrative business clients in NYC. Unlike JL, AA does not have a JV with CX, so I'm guessing they have a strong incentive to get their own skin in the game. If they do though, I'm sure we would be looking at a 77W, not 787.

Otherwise, I'm not sure why everybody here seems so focused on LAX. I can see others, like the no-brainer MIA-NRT, and also PHL-NRT, CLT-NRT, PHL-HKG, and JFK-ICN (big gap in the OW network).

Miami · Fri Jan 30, 2015 3:00 am

Im going to agree with most of you. I'd enjoy LAX-AKL on a 787. Hopefully it comes to reality.

MIA-AKL anyone? It's in 787 range.

But no serious, I'd expect AA to announce MIA-NRT on a 787. (Fingers crossed)

& also.. DFW gets too much love. I hope JFK and ORD get plenty of love from the 787.

covert · Fri Jan 30, 2015 3:03 am

Quoting infinit (Reply 26):
Interestingly, now that Malaysia and Thai pulled out of LA, Singapore Airlines is the only Southeast Asian carrier flying to the US on their own metal.

Philippine airlines is ASEAN and serves the U.S. with their own aircraft.

757usairways · Fri Jan 30, 2015 3:13 am

Quoting HKG212 (Reply 28):

I could see a PHL-NRT/HKG and a CLT-NRT flights, I know US was eyeing flights to Asia from PHL back in 2012.

777ord · Fri Jan 30, 2015 3:14 am

Quoting Miami (Reply 2):
Yes. But I'd think LAX is ideal. I would like to see LAX-PEK, LAX-HKG, LAX-ICN on a 787.

I'd also hope AA can start LAX-Australia with a 787.

I can say this: AA is currently training 4 FA classes. One of them is STRICTLY various Asian language speakers. So, the beginning of this plan is well underway for our expansion. Today alone, I saw them practicing with the new Pacific "china" an silverware to be used in the future. Was unable to confirm of 787 or 777 metal. The route is being kept secret, but it will be NEW. HKG, TPE- who knows.

AKL, is definitely a possibility, but, not likely. If anything, they may attempt it from DFW where is few flights to the region (ie. QF-SYD) and thus would have the monopoly. That, and being a 787 base would make transition easy.
AKL is purely speculation!!!

MIA-TLV is still strongly being considered.

Regardless, I am so thrilled to be back at American and seeing all the amazing work being done!!!!

JetBlueCLT · Fri Jan 30, 2015 3:17 am

Quoting 757usairways (Reply 31):

I second that!

777ord · Fri Jan 30, 2015 3:25 am

lol and it'll probably cause this discussion to get locked.

GSPFlyer · Fri Jan 30, 2015 3:57 am

I could see PHL/CLT/MIA-NRT on the 787. It is a perfect aircraft for those routes. I wouldn't rule out DFW/LAX-AKL either.

What about LAX-BNE? I know QF already operates it, but what happens after the 744's are gone? I've always thought the A380 was too much plane for the route. If they opened the route soon, it could free up a QF 747 for the (rumored) return of SYD-SFO.

slcdeltarumd11 · Fri Jan 30, 2015 4:15 am

I would think there s strong change for PHL-NRT

For LAX theres a lot of options to Asia, but with such an amazing and profitable partnership to Australia in place at LAX I see no reason to rock the boat. Maybe AA can start LAX-NZ? That would be a nice compliment

Gemuser · Fri Jan 30, 2015 4:16 am

Quoting GSPflyer (Reply 37):
What about LAX-BNE? I know QF already operates it, but what happens after the 744's are gone? I've always thought the A380 was too much plane for the route. If they opened the route soon, it could free up a QF 747 for the (rumored) return of SYD-SFO.

The question "will BNE-LAX sustain an A380 when the B744s go" is the subject of debate over on Australian Aviation from time time. I have no idea, but some knowledge posters seem to think it will. If it will than a B788/789 would require multipul frequencies, which will not attract enough additional traffic to justify two aircraft v one [trip cost differences included].

As for SFO I really, really doubt you will see it before the B789 arrive [assuming they are ordered this year]. Once that happens I think it will be an early new route.

Gemuser

commavia · Fri Jan 30, 2015 4:20 am

Where there is smoke there may well be fire, and while thus far further AA growth on LAX-Asia has been more "smoke" than "fire," I think it's reasonable to assume that, at a minimum, AA are very seriously and clearly focusing on LAX and LAX-Asia in particular given that this now makes at least the third or fourth time in the last twelve months that an AA executive has publicly stated that LAX-Asia was being looked at.

I think AA's prospects for growth are pretty narrow, and obvious. AA's VP-Network Planning Chuck Schubert has already said that AA's initial focus in any prospective LAX-Asia growth would likely be concentrated on larger markets, with ICN, PEK and HKG specifically mentioned. Given the extensive coverage by Cathay on LAX-HKG, I think the first two are more likely, at least initially. Beyond that, I think AA's realistic options get far narrower. KIX would be one - but that will soon be covered by JV partner JAL. TPE is certainly another dense O&D and connecting market, but also particularly low-yielding. I agree with some others that AKL could make sense. All of these - ICN, PEK, HKG, TPE, AKL - sound like 787 markets to me.

Beyond LAX, I don't really see much more opportunity for meaningful growth by AA into Asia outside of PHL-NRT, either operated by AA or JAL.

Kashmon · Fri Jan 30, 2015 4:21 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 27):

just NO

NZ has a monopoly
AKL would do well
and with QF they have all the aussie routes from AKL and domestic NZ via Jetstar.

again CX has one hub, AA has nine, AA-CX have been doing fine for more than a decade- AA best not damage that and invest its resources in routes that are Star Alliance dominated.

like- TPE
Seoul
etc

Kashmon · Fri Jan 30, 2015 4:25 am

actually AA should not fly to any OW market from LAX so they use their resources to get into the Star /Skyteam markets, this would be the most effective way to counter DL/UA and make LAX their hub.

So no Aussie,Fiji,Hong Kong or any more Japan

need more China- secondary cities, South Korea, Taiwan, NZ, Philippines
these are the only destinations that could make a profit, then LAX would truly be an AA hub- also AA should strengthen LAX-Central/South America...

when you have partners let them waste money fending of competition on routes you already have covered with those partners...

Sydscott · Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:08 am

Quoting gemuser (Reply 43):
The question "will BNE-LAX sustain an A380 when the B744s go" is the subject of debate over on Australian Aviation from time time. I have no idea, but some knowledge posters seem to think it will. If it will than a B788/789 would require multipul frequencies, which will not attract enough additional traffic to justify two aircraft v one [trip cost differences included].

I've long argued that the answer to that question will be in 2 parts:

1. Yes BNE-LAX will go 789 because:
2. Either QF or AA will start BNE-DFW.

LAX than becomes a West Coast O&D/connections place while DFW carriers everything going further east, South and to Mexico.

Quoting commavia (Reply 44):
AA's VP-Network Planning Chuck Schubert has already said that AA's initial focus in any prospective LAX-Asia growth would likely be concentrated on larger markets, with ICN, PEK and HKG specifically mentioned.

Which makes sense. They would want to target the larger markets with larger traffic flows first and then build out from there. PEK will be interesting because they'll most likely get some appallingly timed slots for any LAX service. So they may not be as competitive in PEK as they would be in HKG and ICN.

Quoting commavia (Reply 44):
Beyond LAX, I don't really see much more opportunity for meaningful growth by AA into Asia outside of PHL-NRT, either operated by AA or JAL.

You don't think a MIA-NRT or JFK-PVG service would be on the cards using a 787?

DXBDFWHGA · Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:14 am

PHL-NRT will be a great 787 route for AA. What are you waiting for Dougie?

Boeing778X · Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:19 am

Quoting DXBDFWHGA (Reply 48):
PHL-NRT will be a great 787 route for AA. What are you waiting for Dougie?

Is there even any demand for that route?!

Wouldn't it make more sense to do NRT from JFK, only a few hundred miles away?

masseybrown · Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:25 am

Quoting Miami (Thread starter):
American Airlines' President, Scott Kirby, said that American plans more trans-Pacific from LAX, but he declined to say what routes the 787 will fly.

He emphatically restated that during the earnings conference call.

Noise · Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:28 am

Does the 788 have the legs to do LAX-MEL?

slcdeltarumd11 · Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:42 am

Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 49):
Is there even any demand for that route?!

Yeah there is zero demand from PHL one of the largest metro areas in the country to Asia Plus its connecting major one world hubs

Wouldn't it make more sense to do NRT from JFK?

Theres ALOT ALOT more feed at PHL. AA flew this route for years from JFK and it never seemed to hit it out of the park. Too much competition at JFK/EWR on this route. They would be the only player in the PHL market and probably be able to find an incentive or reduced fees from the airport to start the first Asian route. Its all about $$$$ and PHL makes more sense for AA IMHO with the 787. JFK was flown for years and its too competitive a market plus they can rely on JAL for the route for their frequent flyers and one world flyers.

zkncj · Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:50 am

Quoting Noise (Reply 50):
Does the 788 have the legs to do LAX-MEL?

Yes - but only in an low density configuration, and limited cargo space.

NZ has said that the 789 can't make LAX-AKL with there current 313 configuration, at an profitable load.

aklrno · Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:52 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 27):
LAX-CHC-MEL would open an new market, AKL-LAX is already over crowed by NZ.

CHC would help pull people that don't want to travel up to Auckland

CHC would surprise me.

There aren't that many people in the area to support much traffic from locals. They would be be catering to Americans heading to NZ on holiday, a seasonal business, mostly people heading to Queenstown. There isn't much reason for tourists to visit CHC any more. There isn't much left of the city center and won't be much for several more years.

If you are going to transfer to a flight to Queenstown I don't think you would care if you did it in AKL or CHC. Granted the CHC airport is nicer, but few people heading to NZ on holiday would know that.

If AA could cut the price by just 10% (which seems possible given NZ's price structure), that and one world miles and awards should be enough to fill several 787's weekly to AKL.

If NZ felt pressure then they could always switch one of those LAX flights to IAH or DEN to meet up with domestic star alliance flights.

DeltaXNA · Fri Jan 30, 2015 6:04 am

Could AA bring back ORD-DEL with the 787? Would it work this time if they did?

Sydscott · Fri Jan 30, 2015 6:13 am

Quoting zkncj (Reply 43):
NZ has said that the 789 can't make LAX-AKL with there current 313 configuration, at an profitable load.

Yet United's 789 does LAX-MEL in a 252 seat configuration. Not that it matters because NZ is using their 787's on Asian Routes while the 777's do North America.

Quoting aklrno (Reply 44):
If NZ felt pressure then they could always switch one of those LAX flights to IAH or DEN to meet up with domestic star alliance flights.

Considering NZ's routes to SFO and YVR they already have pretty good access to Star Hubs in North America. The LAX flights, aside from the one going onwards to LHR, are taking O&D plus some Australian traffic. It will be interesting to see if the new UA LAX-MEL direct flight has diminished some of that transfer traffic.

continental004 · Fri Jan 30, 2015 6:17 am

Quoting aklrno (Reply 44):
CHC would surprise me.

NZ tried and failed before with CHC-LAX.

777ER · Fri Jan 30, 2015 6:24 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 9):
However, I don't really see the benefit of an AKL-SYD tag on sector, unless the plane is scheduled to sit at AKL for a very long time and otherwise wouldn't be doing anything. The QF / EK flights between AKL-Australia provide more than enough feed

Having AA operating a AKL-SYD tag would enable QF to remove a B738 for use elsewhere if AA can join the EK/QF Tasman deal

Quoting zkncj (Reply 23):
AKL-LAX is already over crowed by NZ.

I don't believe its over crowded, but the fares are higher without competition.

Quoting Miami (Reply 25):
MIA-AKL anyone? It's in 787 range

Wouldn't say no to that!

Jetstar315 · Fri Jan 30, 2015 6:54 am

I can't see the point in AA operating a Trans Tasman flight AKL-SYD-AKL which would only be once daily(?). The Jetconnect B738s operated as QF only operate on the Tasman from AKL/WLG/CHC so there would be no advantage in removing one of these for another operation - where to??

You have to remember that AA operated through LAX/HNL with extensions through PPT/PPG/NAN to AKL and on to Australia with B707s in the 1970s and DC-10s in the 1980s. On both occasions they lost money and pulled out twice. I can't really imagine why they'd want to lose money a third time. Also, QF pulled out of AKL with their once daily service to LAX because they couldn't make it pay either!! IMHO I'd be very surprised to see AA down under again!

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net