Bye-bye Boise

Aug 20, 2002
664
50
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/21/2002 6:16:00 PM MAH4546 wrote:

Last Boise service is 31 January.
----------------
[/blockquote]


Is that the CRJ route?
 
Aug 20, 2002
664
50
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/21/2002 6:16:00 PM MAH4546 wrote:

Last Boise service is 31 January.
----------------
[/blockquote]


Is that the CRJ route?
 

Busdrvr

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
2,217
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/21/2002 9:07:39 PM AAmech wrote:

What happened? Are the #'s not good or do they need that plane somewhere else?
----------------
[/blockquote]

Need the airplane somewhere else?!! Where have you been for the last 15 months?
 

Busdrvr

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
2,217
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/21/2002 9:07:39 PM AAmech wrote:

What happened? Are the #'s not good or do they need that plane somewhere else?
----------------
[/blockquote]

Need the airplane somewhere else?!! Where have you been for the last 15 months?
 

dfw79

Senior
Aug 20, 2002
308
0
They could always get that CRJ on a TOL-DFW run...at least before they are having to play catch up against a SkyWest (DL) DFW sucking up all the O/D traffic.
 

dfw79

Senior
Aug 20, 2002
308
0
They could always get that CRJ on a TOL-DFW run...at least before they are having to play catch up against a SkyWest (DL) DFW sucking up all the O/D traffic.
 

planemech669

Member
Aug 20, 2002
74
0
GSW/LAW
www.linkedin.com
Loads are alright for the route, in the 90s with many flights blocking out full. IMHO it's a reliability issue. D+0 performance on the route was dismal, mostly due to integrating a new airframe into Eagle. It just took too long to troubleshoot the mechanicals that came up due to the learning curve for a new airframe, which is typical. It usually takes maintenance a year to work all the bugs out of a new system under operational conditions. Also, with the full loads and weather, it stretched CRJs performance envelope to it's upper limits for capacity and range.
 

planemech669

Member
Aug 20, 2002
74
0
GSW/LAW
www.linkedin.com
Loads are alright for the route, in the 90s with many flights blocking out full. IMHO it's a reliability issue. D+0 performance on the route was dismal, mostly due to integrating a new airframe into Eagle. It just took too long to troubleshoot the mechanicals that came up due to the learning curve for a new airframe, which is typical. It usually takes maintenance a year to work all the bugs out of a new system under operational conditions. Also, with the full loads and weather, it stretched CRJs performance envelope to it's upper limits for capacity and range.
 

DLFlyer31

Senior
Aug 20, 2002
444
0
Could this have any thing to do with the accelerated F100 retirement?[BR][BR]The CRJ700's are going to be needed to replace routes where the F100 is going away. I figure that AA can make more money replacing an F100 with a CRJ700 on an existing route, rather than launching brand new service to markets unfamiliar with the AA product.
 

DLFlyer31

Senior
Aug 20, 2002
444
0
Could this have any thing to do with the accelerated F100 retirement?[BR][BR]The CRJ700's are going to be needed to replace routes where the F100 is going away. I figure that AA can make more money replacing an F100 with a CRJ700 on an existing route, rather than launching brand new service to markets unfamiliar with the AA product.