AA hires outside consultants!

[LGA Fleet Service]

Does everyone remember JFK-LHR using the A300?

Pffft...can't tell you how many times we'd lock up 132 only to have it go OTS and on the next gate 116 would crap out as well, usually within ten minutes of 132 going under.


The sooner those things start their second careers as box haulers at FedEx or UPS, the better.


Considering all the name calling and finger pointing between AA and Airbus after 587, I wouldn't expect to see a new 'bus order here again...ever.

 

[TWU informer]

What amazes me the most is how AA Management now has to hire outside consultants for every little issue.

AA Manaagement wants the "unions" to manage from the inside, and hired consultants to manage from the outside.

Then they sit on their puds drawing millions in bonuses for "superior" performance.

Why don't we get rid of 50% of management and let the unions and consultants get the millions for management of the airline?

 

[777 fixer]

What amazes me the most is how AA Management now has to hire outside consultants for every little issue.

AA Manaagement wants the "unions" to manage from the inside, and hired consultants to manage from the outside.

Then they sit on their puds drawing millions in bonuses for "superior" performance.

Why don't we get rid of 50% of management and let the unions and consultants get the millions for management of the airline?

Does anybody know for sure that AA has actaully hired any sort of consulting firm to look a the reliability of the A300 fleet. If so what's the name of this comapny and is AA really paying for it? If this is about Airbus possibly trying to get AA to order their aircraft I would suspect that Airbus is footing the bill.

Now lets say that AA has hired an outside firm and it has nothing to do with Airbus. I would be the first to say what a waste of money since AA is perfectly capable of looking at fleet reliabiity issues themselves.

 

[eolesen]

I do think consultants are an extreme waste of money, but just to play devils advocate for a moment...

Who has more credibility right now with the rank and file -- a consultant, or management?

If a consultant suggested that it was time to park the bus, my guess is that the unions would be far more accepting of that decision than if management were to simply announce they were parking the fleet.

 

[Skymess]

All good points! Politics always plays a role. Does everyone remember JFK-LHR using the A300? What a disaster considering the critical fuel factor for that aircraft.

But does anyone else remember roughly 7 or 8 years ago, American announcing to go exclusively Boeing over the next 25 years? Thats when they were rolling in the dough.
The only thing I can see is that Airbus is well aware AA will eventually need to replace the A300 and since finances are not what they were once were, Airbus might be willing to deal with AA and help replace that fleet.

I think the 787 fits the bill, but the A350 is being designed to compete head on with the 787.
Also, If Airbus were to help replace the A300 with the A350, and if they were to do it quickly, A300 heavy checks would be eliminated.
Stay tuned

I had a great time working those flights to LHR. Slow, but fun.

The Bus needs to go out. No question.

AA probably doesn't want anymore Airbus planes considering their blame game over 587 and lack of responsibility for poor craftmanship.

AA has no money and if Airbus offers us a giveaway I doubt that we will turn it down.

It is my understanding that the leases were supposed to be up this year but AA had extended it to 2009. Don't remember where I heard it and don't know if it is rumor or not. I just don't see how they will make it that long.

 

[FWAAA]

It is my understanding that the leases were supposed to be up this year but AA had extended it to 2009. Don't remember where I heard it and don't know if it is rumor or not. I just don't see how they will make it that long.

Looks like the leases on 3 of them expire in 2008, 3 more in 2009, and 18 more in 2010 and beyond. The rest are owned:

http://www.shareholder.com/aa/EdgarDetail....-3726&SID=05-00 (page 13)

 

[Skymess]

Looks like the leases on 3 of them expire in 2008, 3 more in 2009, and 18 more in 2010 and beyond. The rest are owned:

http://www.shareholder.com/aa/EdgarDetail....-3726&SID=05-00 (page 13)

Like I said, I don't know how they will make it that long.

The A300 is to airplanes what Betamax is to video entertainment systems. Obsolete.

 

[Bob Owens]

Rumor has it that these guys are here to try and make the A300 more reliable. It seems that there is always one, or more, in the hangar and they stay for days on end.

Good thing they have all those spare aircraft. How much does a lease for a widebody go for? Is it cheaper to lease extra aircraft or pay your mechanics?

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

There is NO a/c in operation today, that would/could Idealy replace the A-300, as AA uses them !

(777 is too big)

If airbus is dealin', AA IS listenin'(587 or no 587) !!

Now, of all the current airbii products, engine commonality notwithstanding, the A-330 comes closest.

(I don't see 330 sales breaking any records) !!

The 330's could be used for Carib, Trans Atlantic,and SA.

"where do the current 777's flying Trans Atlantic, and some SA go, you ask" ???

"Why, over the Pacific, I say" 🙄 🙄

Folks, "It's not Rocket Science" !!

One very NAGGING fact. The A-300 needs to "go bye bye", and(very) SOON !


NH/BB's

ps,
"What say you....FWAAA"............???

 

[jimntx]

I do think consultants are an extreme waste of money,

Hey, now! Let's not get personal. I was a consultant for many years. Do you know the insider's definition of a consultant? A consultant is someone who steals your watch to tell you what time it is.

And, I think it applies in this case. I was still in training in 2000 the first time I heard a 300 referred to as a Scarebus.

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

A300=job security
😀

Another day in Airbus aviation. Wed Feb 08 MIA

Airbus pushes back onto November starts to taxi loses green system hydraulics. Back to the gate OTS.

At approx 2000 hrs Airbus returning to MIA problem unknown

AA flies em we fixes em

 

[Skymess]

no comment

 

[eolesen]

There is NO a/c in operation today, that would/could Idealy replace the A-300, as AA uses them !

(777 is too big)

I disagree, Bears. There's no such thing as having too much belly space in the Caribbean...

The ideal A300 replacement would be "A-market" 777's. They're starting to hit the used market already, and would be a perfect fit from a cockpit standpoint, although finding them with Trents would be impossible since very few A-models were built.

Pretty much everywhere AA flies the A300 today was flown with a DC10 at one time or another. While I don't have specs available on the DC10, the usable belly space on the B777 is almost identical to that of the MD11, and having the additional 10 LD3 positions or 5 LD5 positions would be a huge benefit and justify carrying a little more airframe.

 

[Skymess]

I disagree, Bears. There's no such thing as having too much belly space in the Caribbean...

The ideal A300 replacement would be "A-market" 777's. They're starting to hit the used market already, and would be a perfect fit from a cockpit standpoint, although finding them with Trents would be impossible since very few A-models were built.

Pretty much everywhere AA flies the A300 today was flown with a DC10 at one time or another. While I don't have specs available on the DC10, the usable belly space on the B777 is almost identical to that of the MD11, and having the additional 10 LD3 positions or 5 LD5 positions would be a huge benefit and justify carrying a little more airframe.

While I agree with you that a 777 would definitely fit in nicely in the caribbean, I also agree with bear that another Airbus is NOT out of the question if the price were right.

As another poster said, I remember a few years ago a statement that we were going toward an all Boeing fleet. AA management does a lot of things they said they would never do so it wouldn't surprise me to be flying on a different Airbus plane down the road.

Now to follow up with a little conjecture along FWAA's lines:
The 787 would fit seamlessly into all of the AA international markets and if AA doesn't get them from the NWA fire sale than we might actually get them when and if AA and NWA merged. (God forbid!!!) :down:

 

[FWAAA]

There is NO a/c in operation today, that would/could Idealy replace the A-300, as AA uses them !

(777 is too big)

One very NAGGING fact. The A-300 needs to "go bye bye", and(very) SOON !
NH/BB's

ps,
"What say you....FWAAA"............???

I'm very wishy-washy flying the A300s. I've got times when I think "NO F'ing way will I ever fly those trash cans on overnights to Lima again." If it ain't Boeing, I ain't Going. And then I buy another great D fare and do it again. Right now, the overnight is a 757 and the A300 is an evening flight. Neither airplane is humane.

The A300s would be a helluva lot nicer if AA installed the 763 J seats with about 48-50 inches of pitch (so I could at least recline and get some better sleep) as it replaces the 763 J seats this spring with the new lie-flat-at-an-angle LH-inspired Recaros.

But that ain't gonna happen.

I know the 777 is big, but big holds lots and lots of cargo. Upstairs it holds lots and lots of seats. Conventional wisdom is that the A300s fly the Caribbean and Central American routes where cargo is king, and where heavy pax loads are common. Markets with several flights a day to SJU on A300s.

I've said it before - if subbing 777s one-for-one on those A300 routes results in too much capacity, then reduce freqency by one or two daily flights. Hell, those markets aren't ORD-LGA or ORD-LAX where freqency is paramount. Sure, there's some non-leisure pax traffic, but the A300s were first to be LRTC'd, because they were predominantly leisure markets.

JFK-SJU: 7 daily flights. 5 or 6 777s wouldn't cause massive pax defections. Same thing MIA-SJU with 7 daily flights. Five daily 777s on each route would easily replace the seven current flights (not all of which are currently A300s).

IMO, 747s would be TOO BIG to fly those routes, but as I posted something like a year ago (and which FM recently posted), some used non-ER (non-IGW) 777s would make perfect sense as the eventual replacement. Configure them in two classes, probably get 300+ coach seats and a couple dozen used 763 J seats as I wished for above for the A300s.

And nobody would ever again have to worry that the damn vertical stab would break off. That peace of mind alone would be worth another $5 in fare.