Additional widebody aircraft

[eolesen]

Hmm. Borrowing money to pay employees. Sounds like a winning idea. I'm sure there would be banks just lining up to hold the title to AMR's workers future, if it weren't for those pesky laws banning slavery and indentured servitude...

AMR getting used aircraft (outside a merger) is something that hasn't happened since the DC10 days (omitting the 74SP's, which were a very unique situation to accommodate the stage length on DFW-NRT). I'm still doubtful it would happen. But if the price is right, they'd be foolish not to take advantage of the market.

 

[Hopeful]

Hmm. Borrowing money to pay employees. Sounds like a winning idea.

Hmmmm...Why not? AA borrowed billions from the employees and now they don't want to repay the loan! Now that's a winning idea....isn't it Eric!

 

[upsilon]

Hmmmm...Why not? AA borrowed billions from the employees and now they don't want to repay the loan! Now that's a winning idea....isn't it Eric!

Not Eric, but I don't recall AA signing any note to repay any "loan". And I specifically recall that there was no "snapback provisions" it the document that was negotiated in which it might be claimed that employees gave any monies to AA.
Hard to collect repayment on a "loan" when there is no documentation.

 

[Hopeful]

Not Eric, but I don't recall AA signing any note to repay any "loan". And I specifically recall that there was no "snapback provisions" it the document that was negotiated in which it might be claimed that employees gave any monies to AA.
Hard to collect repayment on a "loan" when there is no documentation.

So much for sarcasm,.... :unsure:

 

[eolesen]

Heard from a non-AA source that insert pages on the 777-300 were being circulated. If so, then there's more legs to this rumor than I gave credit for last month.

Maybe someone can call Tech Services and ask for help on the GE90?....

 

[Hopeful]

Heard from a non-AA source that insert pages on the 777-300 were being circulated. If so, then there's more legs to this rumor than I gave credit for last month.

Maybe someone can call Tech Services and ask for help on the GE90?....

Right now, it is still rumor to Tech Svcs as well. I would imagine that if this rumor comes to bear fruit, maintenance will also have to attend a 777-300 differences course as well, and to date our training instructors have not heard anything yet or have been trained themselves. Time will tell. Adding a different model to an existing fleet type can take almost as long as adding a totally different fleet type as far as training goes.

 

[eolesen]

Right now, it is still rumor to Tech Svcs as well. I would imagine that if this rumor comes to bear fruit, maintenance will also have to attend a 777-300 differences course as well, and to date our training instructors have not heard anything yet or have been trained themselves. Time will tell. Adding a different model to an existing fleet type can take almost as long as adding a totally different fleet type as far as training goes.

For all intents and purposes, the -300 will be a new fleet type. I'd imagine there's >80% parts commonality, but it's the engines and differences in avionics that really screws things up...

 

[Hopeful]

[deleted..duplicate post.]

 

[Hopeful]

For all intents and purposes, the -300 will be a new fleet type. I'd imagine there's >80% parts commonality, but it's the engines and differences in avionics that really screws things up...

Not necessarily, the 767-300 is different engine wise from the -200. Still a GE, but different model. But for maintenance training purposes, the course would be only for the differences. Engine, some landing gear items.
they would not give us another 80 hour course. 40 hours at most which would be mainly for the GE90.

 

[FWAAA]

With JAL's financial troubles and the now-approved ATI and closer cooperation between JAL and AA, my guess is that JAL will use AA for line maintenance on its 777-300s at JFK, ORD and LAX as it disposes of its 744s, and that will require that AA mechanics learn about them - perhaps a "differences" training program? But AA acquiring 777-300s? While theoretically possible, I still give it a zero percent chance of happening. More 777-200s? Certainly. A few 777-200LRs? Conceivable, since they would give AA the additional range that AA was hoping to get in the 787-9s that will be at least two years late and perhaps even later in delivery.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I don't know AA's plans but I would say that AA strategically needs a larger aircraft. DL and UA both have 744s which are necessary to maximiize the value of access to key markets. Further, AA's 772s are one of the more costly aircraf in the US aircraft fleet on a per seat cost basis partly because of the low seat count. AA could reconfigure the 772s to add seats but they will still not be able to put the number of seats on a 772 that other airlines put on larger aircraft which limits AA's ability to provide access to key routes.

Also, are these 773 basic or ERs that JAL is getting rid of? I find it hard to believe they can justify parking their 744 fleet and getting rid of 773ERs? If they are not ERs, then the real value to AA is primarily to Europe and potentially some S. American routes. With the TATL joint venture, AA can easily justify more capacity on key TATL flights, esp. to/from LHR - and the backfill would more flights available on 772ERs.

I would add my "not likely" vote to the 744 rumor unless it is a fairly short term 5-7 year deal until 789s can be obtained.

Of course any new aircraft requries APA approval and it can only be hoped that they would look at the prospect of a significant amount of new int'l capacity as something that should be accepted on its own merit rather than trying to renegotiate the whole pilot working agreement.

But strategically AA needs more capacity at lower costs and used widebodies - if available - are an inexpensive and relatively fast way to add more capacity to the system which does help drive down costs and compete with other carriers. All of the fleet commonality and training issues can be resolved if there is a recognition that growth is necessary and good for AA - and all efforts should be put forth to make it happen.

 

[eolesen]

JAL currently shows 46 passenger B777s having been delivered from Boeing: 7 -300, 13 -300ER, 15 -200, and 11 -200ER. The non ER's are predominantly domestic and intra-Asia aircraft (7 of the -200s are at JAL Domestic).

JL is supposedly pulling down long-haul capacity by about 40-50%. If so, they probably only need about 27-30 long range aircraft. They could eliminate any of the four subfleets except the -300ERs and still be near that number.

If they're -300's, this would probably help out on the North Atlantic and LatAm as WT suggested, and allow -200ERs to shift to the Pacific where capacity is less critical than the range.

Of course any new aircraft requries APA approval and it can only be hoped that they would look at the prospect of a significant amount of new int'l capacity as something that should be accepted on its own merit rather than trying to renegotiate the whole pilot working agreement.

Not necessarily.

If they're -200ERs, there's not much room to renegotiate. AA already has book rates for that type.

If they're -300s, they might have some argument for renegotiation, but what's the past practice? Did they have separate rates when there was a -200, -200ER and -300ER? Are there separate book rates for the 767-200ER and -300ER today?

 

[aapitbull]

The number we keep hearing at DFW is 15 to 18 777 300's coming from JAL I have not heard anything for awhile but know several pilots that say it's true. I have heard some maybe orders not yet delivered to JAL but cannot confim or deny it today.

Pitbull

 

[damajagua]

The number we keep hearing at DFW is 15 to 18 777 300's coming from JAL I have not heard anything for awhile but know several pilots that say it's true. I have heard some maybe orders not yet delivered to JAL but cannot confim or deny it today.

Pitbull

That would be welcome news.

 

[eolesen]

Boeing's website shows no outstanding orders aside for 787s. ( http://active.boeing.com/commercial/orders/index.cfm?content=displaystandardreport.cfm&pageid=m25064 )

They only have a total of seven -300's and thirteen -300ERs, so I don't see how they sell off (or sub-lease) anywhere near fifteen to eighteen shells without doing serious damage to their remaining long-haul capability.

The other flaw in pulling another 15-18 aircraft is crews. I'd guess there are probably 10 crews for every aircraft. That's 300 pilots, and probably 1400 flight attendants... You'd exhaust the recall lists and jam the schoolhouse for months. Somehow I don't think AA is quite ready to add that much capacity and that many employees...