Reply With QuoteAA flight made an emergency landing at Fort Worth's Naval Air Station
http://blogs.star-telegram.com/sky_t...#ixzz1KEYsZfoZ
AA 737 Makes Emergency Landing
http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/news/042...rgency-Landing
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/01/...-engine-fails/
http://latinamericacurrentevents.com...nding-jamaica/
Faulty maintenance probed in flaming landing.
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/NTS...y-Landing.html
Hole in American Airlines plane caused cabin decompression, emergency landing
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot...rgency-landing
http://www.examiner.com/airlines-air...irlines-flight
Does AA often violate minimum fuel requiments because of high fuel prices?
http://nycaviation.com/2010/05/ameri...-control-tower
Was another flight short on fuel?
http://wireupdate.com/local/american...ase-in-alaska/
Fumes force emergency landing.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/04...nding-iceland/
http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/...rss_local-news
Fumes force yet another emergency landing.
http://consumerist.com/2011/04/ameri...assengers.html
http://www.inquisitr.com/25677/ameri...ng-in-halifax/
http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/st...4/daily22.html
http://abcnewsradioonline.com/nation...-new-york.html
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/01/...-engine-fails/
http://www.google.com/search?q=aa+em...ficial&spell=1
Last edited by TexasPlus; 22 April 2011 at 03:27 AM.
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
AA flight made an emergency landing at Fort Worth's Naval Air Station
http://blogs.star-telegram.com/sky_t...#ixzz1KEYsZfoZ
AA 737 Makes Emergency Landing
http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/news/042...rgency-Landing
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
The point was TP that American has more people per plane because they do their own heavy maintenance on their fleet instead of outsourcing the work overseas.
But I am glad that you had so much fun looking for each and every derogatory report you could find on AA.
The troll is strong in you.Originally Posted by PuddinHead
AA and SW are both fantastic airlines. Both support the local economy so much that DFW is only eclipse by Toulouse and the Seattle area in terms of aviation related industry jobs. Cheering against either one is cheering against the North Texas.
From the WSJ APRIL 23, 2011, 8:22 P.M. ET
Manufacturing Issues Suspected in Southwest Jet Rupture
By ANDY PASZTOR and PETER SANDERS
Investigators increasingly are focused on manufacturing-related issues, rather than a possible design flaw by Boeing Co., as they strive to unravel what caused the midair fuselage rupture of a Southwest Airlines Co. jet earlier this month, according to government and industry officials.
The officials said it's too early to draw definitive conclusions, and National Transportation Safety Board investigators haven't issued any statements hinting at what they suspect. But areas that federal and industry experts are examining as part of the probe, according to these officials, include riveting techniques, fixtures used to hold parts of the planes during assembly and uses of sealants on the 15-year-old Boeing 737.
The plane suffered a rapid decompression and had a five-foot gash rip open in the upper part of its cabin, about four feet above the windows, while cruising at about 34,000 feet.
Nobody was seriously hurt and the twin-engine jet, with 122 people aboard, made an emergency landing at a military base in Arizona on April 1. But the incident prompted Southwest to temporarily ground and inspect 79 of its other older Boeing 737s, and it also sparked a round of swift inspections of about 100 additional aging Boeing 737 models worldwide.
Four other Southwest jets were found to have fuselage cracks requiring repairs, but at this point no similar problems have been discovered on other airline fleets.
The primary reason for emphasizing potential manufacturing-related lapses or problems, according to these officials, stems from the fact that a number of the Southwest planes with fuselage cracks were built around the same time. And jets flown by other carriers, even some with a larger number of takeoffs and landings that the Southwest plane with the hole, haven't shown any signs of structural weakness or fatigue.
So far, according to one official familiar with the investigation, investigators have spent the most effort to understand the manufacturing history of the Southwest planes that had significant cracking of their aluminum skins. The plane with the rupture had logged about 39,000 takeoffs and landings, substantially fewer than the point at which Boeing experts anticipated it could face serious metal fatigue.
But according to officials familiar with the investigation, it's still too early to know whether the suspect Southwest jets illustrate a possible quality-control or manufacturing problem of relatively short duration, or some other potential causes.
The stresses planes undergo each time their cabins pressurize and then depressurize during a trip are major factors in creating cracks and possibly causing metal fatigue.
Possible production problems were first reported on Saturday by ABC news.
Federal Aviation Administration chief Randy Babbitt previously suggested that production issues were under heightened scrutiny. He told an industry conference in Miami earlier this month that the agency, among other things, was looking into "manufacturing techniques" along with Boeing. Mr. Babbitt said agency experts were examining existing aging-aircraft inspection rules and seeking to determine "are we looking at the right things?"
Eventually, more than 400 additional older 737 jets will have to be inspected around the globe, as a result of safety mandates by the FAA and foreign regulators.
On Saturday a Southwest spokeswoman declined to comment on the investigation. She said the incident plane was still undergoing repairs, but the five others identified with cracks have been fixed and were returned to service.
Boeing officials have said that the particular fuselage design on the affected airplanes was changed when a new version of the model was introduced in 1993. The so-called 737 "Next Generation" is the type still being built today and Boeing has delivered more than 3,500 of those, according to company data.
The safety mandates issued by the FAA cover certain 737-300, 737-400 and 737-500 versions, and they kick in based on the number of takeoffs and landings planes have logged.
Over the years, the FAA and industry have developed a comprehensive set of inspection standards and procedures to identify and repair fuselage cracks on older planes before they can result in major problems. The April Southwest incident shocked the airline industry, surprised regulators and spooked many travelers because until it happened, Boeing had concluded that the plane didn't need to undergo detailed structural inspections on that part of its fuselage until much later in its life.
The planes under scrutiny feature a certain type of "lap joint" -- the area where Boeing and government investigators have said the structural cracks originated -- and surrounding strengtheners designed to prevent cracks from growing.
The twin-engine 737, the company's most popular jet and a workhorse for carriers around the globe, first entered service in 1968. Since then, the more than 6,600 have been completed at Boeing's factory in Renton, Wash., just south of Seattle, and more than 2,000 remain on order. The planes requiring inspection were built between 1993 and 2000.
Before reaching Washington state, however, 737 fuselage barrels are assembled at a factory in Wichita, Kan. That facility, now owned by Spirit AeroSystems Holdings Inc., a major aerospace supplier, was at the time a wholly-owned Boeing factory. Boeing spun off its commercial airplanes unit in Wichita in 2005.
On Friday, Boeing said it continues to work closely with the safety board and the FAA to determine what caused the April 1 event.
In its statement, the Chicago aerospace giant said that "to date, inspections have been completed worldwide on approximately 75 percent of the 190 airplanes affected" by mandatory inspection rules, and only the handful of Southwest planes have "shown small subsurface cracks." "Portions of the panels from those airplanes have been shipped to Boeing, and we are conducting analyses to validate the initial inspection findings."
According to Boeing, "no conclusions have been reached about the root cause of the inspection findings" or how they may relate to the April 1 event, and "any attempt to draw conclusions on either would be premature and speculative."
—Timothy W. Martin contributed to this article
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000..._wsj#printMode
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
Does it make you wonder if Southwest did their own maintenance in house instead of farming it out to the lowest overseas bidder they may have caught the crack/defect before it ruptured?
Last edited by PuddinHead; 24 April 2011 at 09:33 PM.
Interesting article from one of the few reporters that stuck with facts, rather than embellish with ignorance.
Reader wonders why we're not reporting much on Southwest Airlines' maintenance problems
By Terry Maxon/Reporter
6:00 AM on Wed., Apr. 6, 2011
I received this email Tuesday afternoon:
Mr. Maxon
I am an avid reader of your articles concerning the airlines. I was wondering why you haven't said too much about the serious maintence problems that South West Airlines is having with their 737's.
I travel a lot and am worried about their safety since the Boeing 737 is the only jet they have and their average age of their fleet is 19 years old. The investigators are saying this is a metal fatgue problem that normally comes with age of the aircraft. Is there any reason why you are not saying too much about this? If this were another airline would you say more about it? As readers we need more unbiased opinions from experts like yourself. What we don't need is sugar coating! Thank you for your response.
From a Concerned reader.
Let me throw out these points.
1. The average age of Southwest Airlines' Boeing 737s as of Dec. 31 was 11 years. The Boeing 737-300s that have been in the news have an average age of 19 years. The majority of Southwest's fleet is comprised of Boeing 737-700s, which averaged 7 years.
2. Among the five largest carriers in fleet size, Southwest's fleet age is the lowest. Delta's average is 15.6 years; American's is 15 (like Southwest, it rounds its age to a whole number); US Airways' average is 12.3 years; and United Continental's average is 12.0 years.
3. Southwest's Boeing 737-300s rank 10th among the oldest types in the airlines' fleets. The oldest are the Douglas DC-9s that Delta picked up in the Northwest Airlines' merger, average age 34.1 years. Delta will be parking those airplanes soon. Seventh oldest are Southwest's 737-500s, tied with American's MD-80s which also average 20 years.
4. From people like me, you don't need unbiased opinion. You need unbiased reporting. I shouldn't be putting my opinion in my stories.
5. If this were another airline, I'd be saying less. North Texas readers care more about Southwest Airlines and American Airlines than they do about JetBlue or Delta, and we try to report more closely on Southwest and American..
6. The issue on metal fatigue is the number of takeoff and landing cycles, not years. Southwest's airplanes as a rule operate more cycles over a given period of time than most other mainline carriers. So I'd say that if you want to worry, worry about the cycles issue.
7. The Dallas Morning News reported aggressively on the FAA/maintenance issues in 2008, and we're trying to be aggressive on this story, too.
8. Many people have said that the Boeing 737-300 damaged last Friday must have been the result of Southwest's practice of outsourcing some of its maintenance to places like El Salvador. The NTSB said that airplane underwent its March 2010 heavy maintenance check in Dallas.
9. You may believe that the airplane developed a hole because of shoddy maintenance, but I can't report that because that's not what the evidence is showing so far. I can't make it up.
10. Boeing said there was no inspection requirement for the lap joint where the split occurred, and Boeing didn't think one would be needed for some time. That's the problem we face when cracks appear where the aircraft manufacturer didn't expect cracks. Should we ding Southwest for not doing the eddy current test on the lap joint when Boeing had not yet recommended such a test?
11. The NTSB said the jet in question had had all required maintenance work and inspections done, its papers were in order and there were no outstanding maintenance items.
12. As of this time, I've written five stories for the DMN, four stories for dallasnews.com and, including this item, 12 blog items about the airplane accident and subsequent events. But I haven't written that there are "serious maintenance problems at Southwest Airlines," which you would like to see.
We'll keep working the story and see where it takes us.
I think the basic question, restated, was: Why aren't you a better reporter?
Sigh. I ask myself that every day. I'm working on it, as I have for the past 38 years.
(As a side note, the name in the email address seems to be the same as that of a commercial airline pilot. But that may just be a coincidence.)
http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/a...re-not-re.html
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
My experience on recent AA flights (DFW, MIA, SXM, TPA) showed service with a snarl attitude was alive and well at 3 domestic airports. In SXM the attitude was great and upbeat, one would have thought we were with a totally different airline. I doubt this info released over a semi-holiday weekend is going to improve AA management/employee relations.
TWU: AMR executive pay is 'red hot poker' in employees' eyes
By Terry Maxon/Reporter
tmaxon@dallasnews.com
12:11 PM on Fri., Apr. 22, 2011
On Thursday when we had to take a day off, AMR released its proxy statement showing what the top executives made.
Using the valuation methods that companies use, chairman and chief executive Gerard Arpey earned $5,952,675 in 2010: $669,646 in salary; no bonus; $94,660 for personal allowance, free travel and family security; $3,280,680 in stock awards he may receive in the future and $1,185,940 in stock options.
The total is up 5.7 percent from the $5,631,002 compensation package he received in 2009, AMR said.
Other 2010 compensation totals were AMR president Tom Horton, $3,695,621; executive vice president Dan Garton, $2,908,090; EVP Bob Reding, $2,754,08; general counsel Gary Kennedy, $2,179,526; and CFO Bella Goren, $2,011,650.
Gary Drummond, Transport Workers Union's air transport division director, used a different method of calculation to come up with a $5.2 million increase in Arpey's pay, as well as for other executives.
In any case, he's outraged, it appears:
"It's almost beyond belief and certainly shameless that Arpey's compensation grew 11 percent over the previous year and AMR President Tom Horton saw an increase of 45 percent.
"Along with their announcement yesterday, AMR's leadership should have stuck a red-hot poker in the eye of every employee, it would have had the same effect as this proxy statement.
"Our members sacrificed to keep this airline out of bankruptcy eight years ago, we have boosted productivity and brought in new revenue, yet only the top managers receive rewards. I could use a lot of four letter words to describe what our members think of this behavior, to be civil, let me use five letters, this is G-R-E-E-D."
American and the TWU have been negotiating a new contract since fall 2007. Stores employees and mechanics and related employees turned down proposed deals last August. The fleet service clerks and other ground workers backed out of a tentative agreement last spring without sending it to members for a vote.
The Association of Professional Flight Attendants picketed at a number of airports Wednesday accusing AMR/American Airlines executives of corporate greed and mismanagement.
American has defended its executive compensation program as appropriate and says it wants a contract that takes care of employees as well as the company's long-term success. That's the short version.
http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/a...-is-red-h.html
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
SOUTHWEST AIRLINES RELEASES STATEMENT REGARDING FLIGHT 1919 AT CHICAGO MIDWAY
Plane Slides Off End of Runway Upon Landing; No Injuries Reported
DALLAS—April 26, 2011—Southwest Airlines (NYSE:LUV) confirmed this afternoon that flight #1919, scheduled service from Denver to Chicago Midway, slid off a runway upon landing at Chicago’s Midway Airport. Local officials report heavy rain in the area at the time the aircraft landed.
Initial reports are that no one was injured. The passengers have been safely deplaned from the aircraft using air stairs and have been bused to the terminal. Southwest officials will be working with passengers to get them to their final destinations.
The aircraft is a Boeing 737-700.
[IMG]WN in the Mud!.jpg[/IMG]
Last edited by PuddinHead; 27 April 2011 at 02:37 PM.
Not really. Aeroman is considered to be one of the top heavy aircraft maintenance shops in the world and realizes it has to go "above and beyond" in terms of level of service to compensate for the negative bias associated with having maintenance performed offshore; the people working at the facility have some of the best paying jobs in the country, and know that the slightest mistake can result in a contract cancellation, throwing them and many of their countrymen out of work (and essentially marking them as permanent outcasts).
Compare that to an AA union lifer that is basically impossible to fire seems perpetually angry about being "underpaid," and frequently considers the prospect of going out on strike.
PuddinHead, in all seriousness, have you ever considered starting your own website/blog? You could call it something like "I hate, hate, hate Southwest and everything about it!!!! and it could feature the world's most comprehensive catalog of every single negative piece of information on Southwest you could find.
Last edited by UptownDallas; 30 April 2011 at 11:42 PM.
...and he could continue to embellish, invent, spin, and otherwise make things up just as he has always done in this forum.
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
No matter how good aeroman is airlines like southwest who use them are not using American workers. At least those unhappy union lifers at AA still have a job and are still able to contribute to the United States economy.
uptown why not chastise tp as well for all of his negative postings and comments against AA?
FYI, whois southwest sucks.com guess who owns it?
Last edited by PuddinHead; 03 May 2011 at 10:33 PM.
http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/ne...w-service.html
Interesting comments following the Dallas Morning News article linked above.As Southwest Airlines Co. moves toward closing down AirTran operations at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, the airline is considering ways to accommodate passengers who’ve already booked AirTran flights at D/FW.
Southwest completed its $1 billion purchase of AirTran on Monday. The deal triggered a provision of the 2006 Wright Amendment compromise that doesn’t allow Southwest or its affiliates to operate at D/FW without shutting gates at Love Field.
Southwest has not set a date for closing AirTran’s two gates at D/FW, but the airline won’t serve D/FW “indefinitely,” Southwest spokeswoman Whitney Eichinger said Friday. Eichinger said AirTran customers holding D/FW reservations should continue with their plans.
Southwest’s plan is to “put in motion an orderly and reasonable schedule for relocating the AirTran DFW operations to Love Field,” she said.
Southwest will find a way to move AirTran’s operations over to Love Field, but has no plans to fly AirTran flights at Love Field, Eichinger said.
“We would be reaching out to any customers that did affect, so they would have adequate time to adjust their travel plan,” Eichinger said.
The mayors or Fort Worth and Dallas, both cities that are parties to the 2006 Wright Amendment compromise, said Thursday that they want Southwest to move out of D/FW in a “reasonable” amount of time, but not as late as December, according to a Friday report in The Dallas Morning News.
“Once the legal close was finally completed on Monday, we are now looking at schedules across the country,” Eichinger said. “D/FW is one of those, and the D/FW situation we have said we won’t serve D/FW indefinitely.”
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
"BOSTON | Tue Jun 21, 2011 12:43pm EDT
BOSTON (Reuters) - Saddled with added fees and higher fares, travelers are fed up with paying more and getting less from major airlines, survey results released on Tuesday showed.
With the exception of Southwest, the no-frills airline where bags fly free, major airlines fail to satisfy leisure travelers and disappoint business travelers even more, according to the annual American Customer Satisfaction Index.
"There's been a bubbling discontent for airlines for some time, but the situation has worsened slightly from a year ago," said ACSI managing director David VanAmburg.
Travelers cited poor service, higher prices and fees for baggage and other services as the main causes of their discontent, it said.
Passenger satisfaction with airlines dropped by 1.5 percent to a score of 65 on ACSI's 100 point scale. Scores have generally hovered in the mid-to-low 60s for the last decade.
Southwest continues to reap top customer service ratings -- and a score of 81 -- in part because it has not taken anything away from customers and then offered it back for a fee, said VanAmburg.
"Now it's the Deltas and Uniteds and Americans that have to act like Southwest has for years," said VanAmburg of Southwest's minimalist service model.
Behind Southwest, Continental scored 64, American 63, United and US Airways tied at 61 and Delta dropped to 56 on the ACSI scale."
Full story at:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...75K4VK20110621
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
How much did Southwest pay for this fluff piece?
They paid for it by forsaking that revenue and not ripping off passengers for bag fees.
Are bag fees rip offs? Why I should I subsidize the cost of someone carrying more luggage than me. If weight affects fuel costs, certainly I should not pay the same as someone who is carrying more.
Tighten the female dog!
If they stick it in the overhead, it does not become weightless.
The only reason American et al don't charge for overhead weight is because it would cause a really messy scene at the gate. They don't want to charge premium fliers but would want to charge the herd. Like cattle, the herd gets upset if they see something outrageous in front of them. With check bag fees, the computer systems can waive it for premium fliers out of sight from the herd. No cattle will know.
"Customer Satisfaction with Airlines Increases for a Second Consecutive Year,
But Gains Are Tempered By Dissatisfaction with Costs and Fees among Traditional Network Carriers"
Full report at:
http://businesscenter.jdpower.com/JD...11075-nals.pdf
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
A subscription is needed to read the Consumer Reports airline ratings directly: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/m...view/index.htmConsumer Reports studied 10 of the nation's biggest airlines, evaluating them on check-in ease, cabin-crew service, cabin cleanliness, baggage handling, seat comfort and in-flight entertainment.
The survey includes responses from 14,861 readers who reported on their experiences on 29,720 domestic flights from January 2010 to January 2011, according to the magazine.
The biggest complaints among customers were uncomfortable seats and excessive fees.
Here are the Consumer Reports airline ratings, on a 0-to-100 scale:
* 1. Southwest (87)
* 2. JetBlue (84)
* 3. Alaska Airlines (79)
* 4. Frontier (78)
* 5. AirTran (74)
* 6. Continental (72)
* 7. American (65)
* 8. Delta (64)
* 9. United (63)
* 10. US Airways (61)
http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/ne...west-best.html
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
It'll be interesting to see what happens at Hartsfield-Jackson, if anything.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...le-planes.htmlIt must be a cold day in Hell. However it would be hard to believe they would defect B for A, but this has to put Boeing under some kind of crazy pressure.American Airlines, the operator of an all-Boeing Co. (BA) jet fleet, is in talks with Airbus SAS about buying at least 100 narrow-body planes, two people familiar with the matter said.
Southwest Pilot's Crude Rant About Flight Attendants Caught on Open Mic
http://abcnews.go.com/US/pilots-rant...ry?id=13903790
Good things can take time.... This Sept. 2005 article is interesting in light of recent developments. http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/s...2/daily38.html
This Airtran 737 was parked nose to nose with a Southwest 737 at Southwest headquarters celebration just a short time before this video was taken. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqtlEGc77UQ
Updates can be found here: http://www.lowfaresfarther.com/
Last edited by TexasPlus; 23 June 2011 at 09:03 AM.
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
The rest of the article http://www.cnbc.com/id/43714139Forty years ago, Southwest Airlines made its debut as a small airline in Dallas, Texas, struggling to keep pace in the business. Today, Southwest is the top domestic carrier in the United States. But on the way to becoming the travel bellwether it is now, Southwest has been met with plenty of tension and turbulence.
The primary obstacle along Southwest’s path to success was a piece of legislation called the Wright Amendment, sponsored by former Fort Worth Congressman Jim Wright in 1979.
Wright’s aim was to protect competing airport Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport from losing business when Southwest refused to stay out of Dallas Love Field airport. The law was an amendment to the International Air Transportation Act of 1979, restricting passenger flights out of Love Field to locations within Texas and to four neighboring states — Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma and New Mexico.
Since long-haul flights out of Dallas were limited to 56 passengers or fewer, Southwest relied on many shorter flights to build up and bolster its Love Field operation. Some passengers even managed to “work” the system and bypass limits completely – by flying out from Dallas, changing planes and then flying to any other city that Southwest served, with two tickets in each direction.
After D/FW’s annual air traffic began to exceed capacity, the amendment was modified to add Alabama, Kansas, Mississippi and Missouri to the Wright zone.
In 2004, Southwest launched a massive public relations campaign in an effort to rally support for a full repeal of the amendment, and created a website called “Set Love Free.” D/FW and its primary tenant, American Airlines then launched an opposing campaign and designed a website called “Keep DFW Strong” — even painting ads onto one of its water tanks.
When Southwest threatened to pull out of Dallas Love Field, the amendment was finally repealed in 2006. The repeal lifted most restrictions but left others, such as the “Wright zone,” intact until 2014. (See a complete timeline of the Wright Amendment.)
“Travelers have been burdened for nearly 30 years with the higher airfares the Wright Amendment nurtured by preventing competition,” Southwest CEO Gary Kelly said in a press release. But "the public has spoken out for change, and a plan was developed that brought together parties from both ends of the spectrum.”
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
When did Southwest ever say they were going to pull service from Love Field?
Gee golly whiz, that would have solved the whole problem.
Fluffy, oh fluffy
Must be a slow news day at CNBC.
http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/p...rding/175704/1American Airlines has changed the way it boards its flights, choosing to board fliers in the order they checked in.
Previously, AA -- after starting with its elite passengers and those with special needs -- had boarded by row, beginning at at the back of the aircraft
The Los Angeles Times describes the new method, writing:
Once the first-class and executive-class passengers and other travelers with priority seating get onboard, the airline gate agents now board coach passengers in the order they checked in, regardless of where they are seated.
AA made the change in early May after testing the concept at its Los Angeles and San Francisco stations, Bloomberg News reports.
TODAY'S TALKER: How do you think airlines should board their customers?
AA spokesman Ed Martelle tells Bloomberg the airline is hoping to create "a quieter, calmer" gate area while also reducing crowds on jetways.
"The whole process may take a little longer, but you're not standing in line as long," Martelle tells Bloomberg. "It seems to be working well. We're pretty much happy with it."
The flight attendants, however, are not.
The Association of Professional Flight Attendants (APFA) says the move has led to "complete chaos" on AA flights.
"More often than not, the result is congested aisles and flight attendants having to explain to bewildered and already stressed passengers why there is complete chaos in the cabin," APFA says on its website.
The union also notes: "Our flight pay does not begin until boarding concludes and the flight departs."
Still, APFA pledged on its website that its members would do their best under the new policy.
"Being the consummate professionals, we do the best we can with what (little) we have to work with and our Agent colleagues to get the plane out on time," the union says.
And, in case you're wondering, other U.S. airlines board by a variety of methods -- ranging from Southwest's open-seating process to "outside-in," where window fliers are seated first before moving toward the aisle.
The fastest method?
"Our data confirms that pure random boarding is faster," Sandy Stelling, Alaska Airlines' managing director of airport services, tells the Times.
"However, we determined the negative impact, measured by our customers — elite Mileage Plan members and non-elites alike — was not worth the small gain in time," she adds.
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
The author missed the real story, how Southwest leveraged various federal politicians' desires for for low cost air fare to medium markets plus antipathy to stupid regulations in general and Speaker Wright in particular. Southwest used powerful senators to get exemptions to contiguous rule, gradually expanding the reach. Then they publicized every stupid, ciontradictory aspect of the rule giving idea that it stood in the way for other politicians' markets. With the ground giving away underneath, AA went for the compromise. Southwest did not hold all the cards since the upcoming election could and did turn out many Republicans that wanted Wright gone. Not sure if 2007 Congress would have felt same way.
The author almost drowned in the canyon blue cool aid.
Southwest leveraged time before pushing for repeal so that those people closest to the situation when the WA was agreed to in 1979 who would be gone. This enabled WN to paint history in their favor.
Don't forget the fact that Southwest Air won concessions on the future of Love Field, too: they got the total number of gates (read: competition) reduced, to ensure almost a virtual monopoly on the space. Additionnally, SWA has repeatedly refused to initiate any kind of service out of DFW, even after being openly invited (there were numerous ads) to do so by the airport. Those of us that live in the "Center City" of Dallas think it's pretty convenient to get to DAL, but there are likely folks in other areas of the Metroplex who find reaching DFW that much easier--or prefer using it for some other reason.
I'm not saying the last few decades of North Texas air travel haven't included some shifty business; I'm just saying there's plenty of acrimony (and blame) to go around.
We have made DFW American Airline's sandbox. They set the rules and they set them to the disadvantage of competitors. If you want entry to the market like Virgin, you can allow for that game. Southwest does not need it and sees no need to do anything to mitigate DFW's higher costs for AA.
Fair enough; but, can't the same be said for SWA at DAL?
Nope not even close, when the WA was implemented there was more competition at DFW than today, TI, Braniff died because of poor management. Delta left but United, Continental, Northwest, US Air remained. Granted mergers combined some of the remaining players but the market made DFW AA's so called sandbox not politcal BS like what happened at DAL with WN.
Sure DFW Airport publicly invited SWA to move operations to DFW. Many of us saw the adds funded by AA suggesting this. This was all part of the attempt by AA, DFW Airport and their lawyers, (Ray Hutchison and his powerful, influential law firm of Vinson and Elkins), to gain public support. Anyone that has observed AA tactics at DFW knows it would have been like the spider attracting an insect to climb onto its web. http://forum.dallasmetropolis.com/showthread.php?t=7443
SWA management of course was not about to fall for this tactic.
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (wife of Ray Hutchison) was a key player in crafting the amended WA (WA2). One of the provisions of the final version of WA2 would severely penalize SWA if they operate secluded flights out of any airport within an 80 mile radius of DAL.
That is why before the FAA issues a single operating certificate combing SWA and AirTran into a single carrier (expected the 1st quarter of 2012) AirTran will stop flights at DFW. Some of the signatories to WA2 are even complaining that November 21, 2011 is not soon enough for them. So you see as was stated many times (including here in this forum) SWA is not going to operate scheduled service at DFW.
Last edited by TexasPlus; 14 July 2011 at 02:28 PM.
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
I knew that, as a result of its acquisition by Southwest, AirTran would have to cease service from DFW. I wasn't sure why exactly, so thanks for clearing it up.
Further, I understand that companies will act in their best interests--both airlines and airports fit that bill--and that "sweetheart" deals are made for "better customers", but it seems a little dumb to institute another federal law which singles out capable, competitive parties in what's really a regional (state, at most) issue. (Yes, I know the jets come and go from all over, but that argument is non-party to and beyond the scope of this debate.)
The adds were funded by AA? Come on.
DFW was looking for a new airline specifically Southwest. Imagine what a 100 or more flights per day at the airport would have done for the finances of the airport.
Not only did they originally offer funds to WN to subsidise start up, they also suggested that they would build WN its own terminal on the East Side of the airport to support WN's operations model.
We all know what happened in the end since the only goal for southwest was its own airport that it could control lock stock and barrell.
FYI, those gate restrictions on service started at any other airport within an 80 radius of DAL,well guess what they work the other way to. Delta, United and AA if they start service at another airport besides DFW they two have to give up gates at Love Field.
No they do not. Southwest & American are the only two airlines with gate restrictions at Love Field. See
Five-Party Agreement
Item #10 describes the gate restrictions that apply to Southwest. Item #11 describes the gate restrictions that apply to American. Where in this agreement does it say that any other airlines at Love Field have these types of restrictions?
LoneStarMike
Your right it does not say anything about any airline other than AA and wn. Regardless the gate restrictions cut both ways.
DFW get ready to start flying Airbus. They are coming.
Interesting....Previous to this the potential fuel burn reduction from a re-engined 737 was pegged by Boeing at 5%. I wonder what "Magic Wand" the Boeing salesmen found to gain that additional 10%....Tue Jul 19, 2011 3:44pm EDT
* Sources: Boeing would put new engine in 737
* Sources: AMR in last-minute talks with Boeing, Airbus
* Deal could be unveiled Wednesday (Rewrites with new sourcing; adds details, background, comment)
By Kyle Peterson and Tim Hepher
CHICAGO/PARIS, July 19 (Reuters) - Scrambling to rescue a potential $20 billion plane order from American Airlines, Boeing Co (BA.N) has offered to put a new engine on its current version of the 737, retreating from an ambitious plan to completely redesign its best-selling aircraft, sources said on Tuesday.
If AMR Corp's (AMR.N) American accepts Boeing's offer to build a re-engined 737, the carrier would become the launch customer for the upgraded narrowbody, which has yet to receive the official green light from Boeing's directors, two sources with knowledge of the talks told Reuters.
A deal is not final as American Airlines is still weighing a generous offer from Boeing's chief rival Airbus, a unit of EADS EADS, for the A320neo, a re-engined A320.
Two knowledgeable sources predicted a split order. The order could be for 200 to 300 narrowbodies, but the exact number is unclear, and there could be be last-minute changes.
"American is very active with Airbus in talks right now," a senior industry source said, asking not to be identified.
AMR, Boeing and Airbus declined to comment on the talks.
The Wall Street Journal reported that the airline had asked Boeing to counter an Airbus offer that included a generous $6 billion financing package, and that Boeing had responded by offering to re-engine the 737.
American Airlines last ordered Airbus planes in the late 1980s but declared in 1996 that Boeing would be its exclusive airplane provider through 2018. If Airbus wins all or even part of a big order from the carrier, it would be a coup.
AMR managers are expected to make their recommendation to the company's board of directors at a two-day board meeting that starts on Tuesday. The company could announce a decision with its quarterly earnings report on Wednesday.
Top aircraft leasing companies are said to be jockeying for position to help facilitate a transaction.
COMPETITION IN THE US
The market for narrow-body jet sales is estimated at $1.7 trillion over the next 20 years and is split between Boeing and Airbus, whose A320 has made substantial inroads in U.S. markets.
The European company said last year it would put a more fuel-efficient engine in its A320 and call it "neo." The A320neo aircraft is scheduled to enter service in late 2015.
Airbus dominated the Paris Air Show last month as it basked in orders for the A320neo while Boeing asked airlines for six months to make a decision on the 737. Airbus has firm orders or provisional commitments for 1,029 neos.
For more than a year, Boeing has debated whether to redesign its 737 narrowbody, a workhorse for airlines around the world, or put a new engine in it.
Experts say re-engining should deliver cost savings of as much as 15 percent. Savings of up to 25 percent could be achieved by an all-new plane. A re-engined plane could be brought to market around 2016. Boeing says it could deliver an all-new 737 around 2020.
The option to re-engine the 737 has remained under consideration, although Boeing has long said it would prefer to redesign the aircraft with new technology showcased in its upcoming 787 Dreamliner.
The 787 is a wildly popular airplane that has attracted more than 800 orders, but it is three years behind schedule due to snags in development.
Boeing's recent history of 787 delays, coupled with a lack of a definitive plan for a redesigned 737, could make buyers skeptical that Boeing could produce an all-new 737 only a few years later than a re-engined one, said Adam Pilarski, senior vice president at AVITAS, an airline consulting company.
"They know that it is not a few years," Pilarski said.
If American Airlines places an order with Boeing or Airbus, or both companies, pressure will be on rival carriers in the United States to follow with their own orders to blunt the advantage American Airlines would gain from flying more fuel-efficient planes.
Delta Air Lines (DAL.N) also is in talks with plane makers and says it aims to decide on an order for as many as 200 planes by the end of the year. Southwest Airlines (LUV.N) and United Continental Holdings (UAL.N) reportedly are also talking about potential orders.
"Given the time requirements for the U.S. majors, I don't think Boeing has much of a choice here besides new engines," Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace analyst at The Teal Group. "There's not that much else worth paying for." (Additional reporting by Karen Jacobs, editing by Gerald E. McCormick and Tim Dobbyn)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...76I1N020110719
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
American Airlines confirms deal to buy 460 aircraft, spin off American Eagle
By TERRY MAXON Staff Writer
Published 20 July 2011 06:23 AM
http://www.dallasnews.com/business/a...ican-eagle.ece
American Airlines Inc. is buying 460 airplanes from Airbus and the Boeing Co., the company announced Wednesday, calling it the biggest aircraft purchase in aviation history.
As part of the deal, American is getting about $13 billion in committed financing from the two companies, covering the first 230 deliveries.
“These new deliveries are expected to pave the way for American to have the youngest and most fuel-efficient fleet among its U.S. airline peers in approximately five years,” American said in its announcement.
Parent AMR Corp. disclosed the major purchase as it announced a $286 million loss for the three months ended June 30.
In addition, AMR outlined its plans to spin off its American Eagle regional carrier to AMR shareholders in coming months.
...
Tangent moved.
An interesting point in the dozen or so articles I read on this because of one word that was not used.
That word is "Options". Typically a buyer (airline or leasing company) will commit to buying X number of aircraft, and Y number of "Options to buy aircraft". Options are basically a reserved slot on the manufactures production line a few years in the future. A way of hedging on the future.
The fact that Options were not mentioned (yet) could just be the typical media stupidity on aviation in general, or this is an extremely rare case where a buyer is actually committing to a firm buy many years downstream. I bet the word Options will be tagged to this "buy" at some future date.
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
The commitment may be linked to the the seller financing and AA source of benefits. That is also what is unique about this deal. Normal 3rd parties like GE Finance are not involved. AA wants to replace that number of planes with every replaced plane generating positive cash flow. I don't know how it all can work, but if AA believes it, then future purchases need not be governed by realization of demand, a typical constraint driving options.
Is is firm order for 460 and options for another 465.
The aircraft from the Boeing 737 and Airbus A320 families offer a 35% advantage in fuel efficiency over the MD-80s that they’ll be replacing, the executives said.
American expects to get another 15% bump in efficiency when it begins receiving versions with more fuel-efficient engines.
Note: Only half of the order, which arrive much later in the cycle, include the new, more efficient engines.
Airbus neo = new, more fuel efficient engines
Boeing RE = new, more fuel efficient engines
And that's assuming the new engine passes all the hurdles on time....
Questions:
Does anyone know if one or the other vendor, or both vendors, planes will be set up for frequent short hop flights?
Seems logical that one would, while the other will be optimized for longer flights. Which is which?
Last edited by electricron; 22 July 2011 at 01:45 AM.
Before this deal was announced AMR had said they would eventually replace all MD80s with 737s. So the short hop-route is probably going to be filled by the new (NG and RE [Next Generation (current generation...) and Re-Engined]) 737s while the A32xs will be added to longer range routes. I think the vast majority of the A32x order is for the A321, which will be replacing American's B757s in the 200-220 seat category. No verison of the 737 offers seating arrangements that can compete with the size of the A321
PC Revised Headline: "American Airlines faces bumpy road getting back in the black
by: D.R. STEWART World Staff Writer
Sunday, July 31, 2011
7/31/2011 3:27:23 AM
AMR Corp.'s American Airlines struck historic deals recently to buy, over the next 14 years, up to 925 Airbus and Boeing aircraft worth $38 billion, but it doesn't ensure the Fort Worth carrier's survival, industry analysts and observers say.
With a 600-aircraft fleet averaging 15 years old - one of the oldest fleets in the industry - American needs new aircraft because fuel costs are eating its lunch, analysts say.
E1AA0731.jpg
"They had no choice," said Fred Russell, CEO of Fredric E. Russell Investment Management Co. in Tulsa. "When you consider how many flights are canceled (due to aircraft repairs), leading to tremendous disgust and alienation by the public and loss of good will and revenue, they had to do something. Their planes are like the battlefield walking wounded."
But the company's problems run much deeper than the age and inefficiency of its aircraft.
American's difficulties include insufficient revenue, dismal management/labor relations and intense competition from healthier rivals, industry officials say.
"Clearly, this aircraft order is an investment in the future of the airline," said Alex Eaton, president of World Travel Service in Tulsa. "It's good for the company and its employees, it's good for the industry, and it's good for Tulsa.
"I wish, though, it was an indication of the good health and viability of the airline for the long term, but it's not. This is an indication of American Airlines' need to curtail losses in the short term."
Earlier this month, American's parent, AMR Corp., reported a second quarter loss of $286 million that included a second quarter fuel bill of $2.2 billion, a 33.1 percent increase compared with 2010's second quarter.
At the same time AMR reported its second quarter results, CEO Gerard Arpey announced the Airbus and Boeing aircraft orders, saying they would give American the youngest and most fuel-efficient fleet within five years.
But with more than $12 billion in losses over the past 11 years and long-term debt of $17.1 billion, the company is moving close to a financial precipice, industry analysts said.
"American can't really afford to do this, but they cannot afford not to do it," said Robert Herbst, industry analyst and founder of AirlineFinancials.com. "American's in serious financial trouble. They had to order these aircraft because without more fuel-efficient aircraft requiring less maintenance, American can't compete. In the end, it could break American, but they really can't afford not to order new aircraft," Herbst said.
Michael Boyd, an industry analyst, consultant and founder of Boyd Group International Inc. in Evergreen, Colo., said American can reverse its financial course by reducing its fuel costs and raising revenue through its joint business agreements across the Pacific with Japan Airlines and across the Atlantic with British Airways and Iberia.
"The joint business agreements with British Airways and Japan Airlines have not really been tapped yet," Boyd said. "There are two sides of the balance sheet. If they can get the fuel costs down and they can get the revenues up, I would reject the conclusion that American Airlines is automatically going under.
"I also reject the idea that they have to have a merger partner. There is no merger partner out there domestically. US Airways doesn't bring anything to the table."
Boyd and Herbst, both former American employees, said resolving the breach between management and labor is critical for American's survival.
Management/labor relations are at a low point as unionized mechanics, pilots and flight attendants have been unable to reach agreement with the company on new contracts after more than four years of negotiations.
American employs 6,000 mechanics and 7,000 people overall at its Maintenance & Engineering Center, its largest maintenance base, at Tulsa International Airport.
In 2003, the mechanics, pilots and flight attendants agreed to $1.6 billion a year in wage and benefit concessions to help American avert a bankruptcy filing.
All of American's major airline competitors filed for bankruptcy protection from creditors, canceled union contracts and slashed wage rates.
Herbst said American's management deserves most of the blame for the deterioration in morale among employees and the hostility between labor and executives.
"In the 1990s, American Airlines was known as the businessman's airline. Flight attendants were trained and catered to the premium passenger," Herbst said. "All flight attendants working for American today were hired before 9/11, and they were trained to think they would have 60 to 70 percent load factors (percent of seats filled).
"I fault American's management, which never went to the employees to tell them that we are no longer a premium airline and we're going to have to change to a low-cost airline - it isn't going to be like it used to be. A lot of employees don't understand what happened. They tend to see the industry through their tunnel vision. Management could have had great impact by selling employees on what was happening, but there is so little contact between management and employees at American that there is no airline with worse management/labor relations."
Boyd credits American's management with integrity for not filing for bankruptcy in 2003.
"It would have defrauded lenders, employees and employee pension funds," Boyd said. "But management/labor relations are important because if you don't have the employees behind you, you're dead. Unless the employees feel they are part of the company, they won't perform."
The onus is on American's management to turn around the state of management/labor relations, Boyd said.
"It can be done, but it's going to take some reaching out," Boyd said.
Herbst said he sees a bumpy ride ahead for American, a proud company that traces its lineage to Robertson Aircraft Corp. in the 1920s.
On one side, a merged United Airlines and Continental Airlines will be nipping at its international routes. Delta Air Lines' merger with Northwest Airlines will provide formidable competition on other international destinations, and the merger of Southwest Airlines and AirTran Airways will give American low-cost competition on domestic routes.
"I don't know if there's going to be room for American in the longer term," Herbst said. "There's only one way they can survive: if labor and management sit down, find a way to work together as hard as they possibly can to be competitive."
The alternative?
"We've seen TWA, Eastern, Braniff and Pan Am disappear because they failed to be competitive in this industry," Herbst said.
Original Print Headline: Drowning in debt"
http://www.tulsaworld.com/site/print...E1_ULNSnA54227
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
AA has been kicking that can full of debt down the road for a long time now. Could that road be nearing a dead end?American Parent AMR Posts $162 Million Loss as Fuel Prices Damp Fare Gains
By Mary Schlangenstein - Oct 19, 2011
American Airlines parent AMR Corp. (AMR), stung by bankruptcy speculation and the U.S. industry’s longest profit drought, reported a third-quarter loss of $162 million as jet-fuel prices soared.
Costs to fly each seat a mile, the company’s “immediate top priority,” will rise as much as 6.6 percent this quarter excluding spending on fuel and any new labor accords, Fort Worth, Texas-based AMR said today. It didn’t outline any fresh steps to trim spending.
A $4.8 billion cash balance “calms any immediate bankruptcy concerns,” Michael Derchin, a CRT Capital Group LLC analyst in Stamford, Connecticut, said in an interview. “But it certainly doesn’t alleviate the longer-term issues of the company needing to get its act together on both the cost and revenue side.”
The shares plunged 33 percent on Oct. 3 on concern that the owner of the third-largest U.S. airline could be forced into bankruptcy unless it can cut costs with new union contracts. AMR’s labor expenses as a percentage of sales are the highest among U.S. carriers, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
The company’s cash and short-term investment total as of Sept. 30 slipped from $5 billion a year earlier. The total at the end of June was about $5.6 billion.
Quarterly Results
Last quarter’s loss of 48 cents a share compared with net income a year earlier of $143 million, or 39 cents, AMR said. That was wider than an average estimate of 43 cents among 12 analysts surveyed by Bloomberg.
AMR fell 7.4 percent, the most in two weeks, to $2.61 at 4:01 p.m. in New York trading, as other airlines also declined. The shares have tumbled 66 percent this year, the most among the 10 carriers in the Bloomberg U.S. Airlines Index. Derchin recommends holding the stock.
Today’s loss was the 14th in the past 16 quarters for AMR, which has registered annual losses since 2008. AMR is the first major U.S. airline company to report results for the quarter and the only one expected by analysts to have a loss.
“Achieving a competitive cost structure is the one area where, despite a lot of hard work, we have not completed the job,” Chief Executive Officer Gerard Arpey said in a message to employees today. “Whether we like it or not, there is simply no path to long-term success without competitive costs in every aspect of our business, including our labor costs.”
Sales, Fuel
Sales rose 9.1 percent to $6.38 billion. The results included costs of about $50 million, or 15 cents a share, from foreign exchange rates as the dollar strengthened and contracts relating to fuel purchases, AMR said.
Spending on fuel rose 40 percent to $2.26 billion, AMR’s biggest expense, as the average price paid per gallon climbed 41 percent from a year earlier, according to the company. Those costs damped gains from higher ticket prices that boosted the yield, or the average fare per mile flown, by 7 percent for American’s main jet operations.
Long-term debt, including capital leases, airport bonds and aircraft operating leases as of Sept. 30, was $16.9 billion, AMR said. That compared with $16.2 billion a year earlier.
Bargaining is set to resume today between American and the Allied Pilots Association, which represents pilots who fly the carrier’s mainline jets. The two sides took a break yesterday after making what American said was “significant progress” in discussions from Oct. 11 through Oct. 17. Jeff Brundage, American’s senior vice president for human resources, declined today to set a time frame for reaching an accord.
Analyst’s View
“We increasingly believe that a tentative agreement between AMR and its pilots may be reached in coming days, and we remain steadfast in our view that near-term Chapter 11 rhetoric is significantly overstated,” Jamie Baker, a JPMorgan Chase & Co. analyst in New York, said in a report today. He rates AMR as neutral.
Negotiations were stepped up last week after American sought waivers to help cover crew shortages caused by pilot retirements.
Staffing was “critically short” as retirements ran at 10 times the normal average in September and this month, American said last week. The airline is paring seating capacity 3 percent this quarter and shutting a San Francisco crew base in response to the shortage, high fuel prices and a weak economy. It also plans to retire as many as 11 jets in 2012.
Eagle Divestiture
American’s cost-saving steps also include the planned spinoff of the American Eagle regional unit. AMR said today Eagle had reached an agreement in principle with the Air Line Pilots Association in preparation for the divestiture.
AMR hasn’t set a date or an exchange ratio for the spinoff of Eagle, which provides more than 90 percent of passenger feed from smaller cities to American’s hubs.
The tentative agreement on an eight-year pilot contract at Eagle would help trim costs so the regional unit can compete to fly for American and other carriers, AMR said today. The accord also would set new terms for the flying that Eagle initially will provide to American.
Negotiators are still completing language in the contract proposal before it goes to union leaders and then rank-and-file pilots for ratification, said Dave Ryter, vice chairman of ALPA’s master executive council at Eagle.
To contact the reporter on this story: Mary Schlangenstein in Dallas at maryc.s@bloomberg.net
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/...s-rise-1-.html
They obviously need the new aircraft recently ordered from Airbus and Boeing, but how can they pay for them......or will Airbus and Boeing be the new owners of AA?
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
Southwest Airlines posts $140 million loss on fuel hedging charge
By Terry Maxon/Reporter
tmaxon@dallasnews.com
6:30 AM on Thu., Oct. 20, 2011
http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/a...sts-140-m.html
Southwest Airlines lost $140 million in third quarter 2011 after it was recorded a $239 million charge related to its fuel hedging contracts.
The charge was related to accounting rules that require companies to record a loss or gain on the value of fuel hedging investments based on their market value at the end of the quarter.
Excluding the $239 million item and other one-time items totaling $23 million, the Dallas-based carrier said it would have earned $122 million in the three months ended Sept. 30.
...
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks