Bye-Bye AirBii Fleet retirement begins

[eolesen]

FWAAA has it right on the A- model 777's. It's a match on cargo capacities. What I don't know is if it would make more sense to get them on the used market, or to convince Boeing to slap a couple together...

 

[LGA Fleet Service]

While 763s would be cheap and available on short notice, I thought the problem with the 767 series on these Caribbean routes was the 767's inability to fit two LD-3s side by side; the 767 is just a little too narrow and has to use the smaller LD-2s.

The LD-4 and LD-8 containers fill the entire width of the belly on the 767.I've never seen LD-2's coming off our 767's, in fact the only carriers I've seen using the LD-2 have been Delta and LOT.There are also pallets called FQA's which have the same floor dimension as the LD-8.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

IMO if AA is going to order any aircraft to replace the A300 that they can get rather quickly they might as well get more 767-300. While there may be similarities between the A300 and A330 they are two different animals. Kind of like the 767 and 777. Buying A330's would mean getting pilots type rated for it, added maintenance training, buying spare parts etc, etc. With the 767-300 the support network is already in place.

The 767-300 is the cheaper option. And now that Boeing has lost the USAF tanker contract AA probably could get a real good price on them.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The bigger story within this topic, is as "fixer" has just mentioned.......Boeing getting SCREWED by the FEDS !!

You "seasoned vets" will remember how (uncle) Bobby CRANDALL STOLE the Airbii (rented them) from AB, and "flaunted" it under Boeing's nose when making a CRANDALL deal for the 767's.

"PERHAPS" Boeing could "be had" again ?

Then again, Arpey is DEFINITELY no CRANDALL :down: :down:

 

[flyhigh]

NHBB-

THat was only after Boeing tried a royal screwing on you & I who are going to pay for the planes. Two people are sitting in jail after the last go around of this bid.

While some people are saying the 777 is too big for the markets the A-300's serve now, will that be the case in a couple years when the current economy comes back? It might be a good strategy to plan for some growth by buying a slightly bigger a/c than needed today to be prepared for tmrw. Plus you get some economy of having all the tooling, etc. for the 777 already.

 

[AAviator]

Two airline execs in jail? Thats a good start!!! What did they do? Who are they?

Isn't the AA vs. Airbus -587 final lawsuit starting this summer? Hmmmm .

 

[The Goose]

Two airline execs in jail? Thats a good start!!! What did they do? Who are they?

Isn't the AA vs. Airbus -587 final lawsuit starting this summer? Hmmmm .

I was always under the impression that was how we ended up with so many 80s after that DC-10 cartwheeled - kind of an unspoken settlement to keep the heat off of Douglas for not using fuses in the hydraulic lines as Boeing had done for years.

As for the execs in jail - those are the two, I believe, that were employed by Boeing while still able to steer military contracts, not quite military retired.

 

[eolesen]

You "seasoned vets" will remember how (uncle) Bobby CRANDALL STOLE the Airbii (rented them) from AB, and "flaunted" it under Boeing's nose when making a CRANDALL deal for the 767's.

Bears, sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but you might be giving Crandall credit for something Carty did...

I'm fairly certain Don was responsible for the walkaway leases with the A300, 767, and MD80.

Then again, Arpey is DEFINITELY no CRANDALL :down: :down:

Again, your hero worship betrays you, my old Jedi master.... Arpey and Crandall are a lot alike. The difference is that Arpey doesn't get as emotionally attached to decisions as Bob did. I've wondered a few times how Bob would have handled 9/11 and the 2003 concessions. I don't think the outcome would have been much different. If anything, the proposed cuts would have gone deeper, and the unions would have rebelled because it was Crandall asking for them, and then we would have all gone thru bankruptcy...

Personally, I think the only real black mark against Arpey's record as CEO is the bonuses. That's a highly contentious issue with the employees, and it damaged whatever good relations might have existed between management and labor, but at the same time, the relationships would have soured regardless during contract negotiations.

I see Arpey's tenure being a lot like Nixon's... Nixon lead the country during one of the more difficult times in history, yet the only thing people remembered was a pretty insignificant crime, especially when compared to some of the political scandals that have happened since... It wasn't until after well after he was out of office that people started to recognized all the good he'd done.

 

[777 fixer]

NHBB-

THat was only after Boeing tried a royal screwing on you & I who are going to pay for the planes. Two people are sitting in jail after the last go around of this bid.

Boeing definetly screwed up on that one. Funny thing is they did not seem to have these kind of ethics problems till after the merger with MD.

 

[777 fixer]

As for the execs in jail - those are the two, I believe, that were employed by Boeing while still able to steer military contracts, not quite military retired.

One was a Boeing executive and the otehr was a DOD official trying to land a job with Boeing.

 

[The Goose]

One was a Boeing executive and the otehr was a DOD official trying to land a job with Boeing.

I stand corrected - thanks.

 

[alfista_1]

NHBB-

That was only after Boeing tried a royal screwing on you & I who are going to pay for the planes.

Well, at least that was what was reported. But like so many stories, you can't believe everything that was published in the news media. I worked at Boeing during the time that the KC-767 was being developed. What Boeing was really doing was an unconventional means of providing the USAF with new Tankers quickly (via a lease-then-purchase program). It was a process that the military brass wasn't used to (they were used to outright purchases).

Enter John McCain's - Boeing/USAF didn't get McCain's buy-in to the idea early enough. At the time, McCain was on a Senate sub-committee that over saw such purposes. I don't remember the details, but either he was absent when the KC-767 was discussed, or that sub-committee somehow got "bypassed", or something like that. Maybe Boeing/USAF knew that he'd not like the lease idea... anyway, the lease got approved, McCain found out, and things came to a halt. Personally, from reading the goings-on on a daily basis back in 2003-2004-2005, I think that McCain was on a bit of a power trip, and he really didn't like having a program of this magnitude out there without his fingerprints on it.

Having said that, that does not in any way excuse or explain what Darleen Druyun and Mike Sears did. They were wrong and deserved to go to jain. And Phil Condit should have resigned (as he did) - this wasn't the only breach in ethics at Boeing during Condit's tenure.

As far as the "royal screwing" goes, don't worry everyone, it's all taken care of now. You can look proudly to the skies, seeing those new KC-45As, know that your tax francs are hard at work.