V-Flyer

American Airlines confirmed orders for:

100 Boeing 737s, plus 100 new engine variants to be confirmed, with 100 options
260 Airbus 320s with 465 options :0

Phew!

Phew indeed!

I read earlier today that the AA fleet is at least 15 years old and they want more fuel efficient planes.

I also saw here that Boeing offered AA to re-engine the 737's

Very interesting indeed. Just some lunch hour thoughts from me on this:
- massive kick in the teeth for Boeing. Aside from the A300's which are now retired, AA has always been a 100% Boeing customer. Shows that their dithering over the 737 replacement is costing them big time. It's amazing to see the 'buy American' or 'if it ain't Boeing I ain't going' comments on the AA Facebook page, and other forums.
- no idea where the money is coming from on AA's side to finance this. I understand that they (along with virtually all US legacy carriers) are a financial basket-case. Airbus must be willing to take some serious risks on credit.
- I hope these new aircraft will bring with them a drastic improvement to the domestic service offering.

Nice For AA but ill still avoid them at all costs!

I wonder if they're buying them on AmEx?

That would be the ultimate miles-whoring.

Luke085 wrote:Nice For AA but ill still avoid them at all costs!

I've never flown with them, what's wrong with them?

Luke085 wrote:Nice For AA but ill still avoid them at all costs!

Having flown several times in first and coach internally i mirror those sentiments.
Its a great step forward for AA though and huge kick in the teeth for Boeing.

cheers

alex

Miss G wrote:

Luke085 wrote:Nice For AA but ill still avoid them at all costs!

I've never flown with them, what's wrong with them?

Poor cabins, surly cc atleast mine were, and there business product internally is almost as bad as Uniteds "now dont get me started on United" ii)

cheers

alex

The AA 777 from lhr to Mia beats VS. Economy seating much better and although crew are a touch on the old side they actually do provide good service

I have flown with AA a few times over the years.
In the mid 90's I won a raffle which included 2 return economy AA flights to any US destination from London and 5 internal flights within the US.
The transatlantic flights were on a B767 which I loved because of the 2-4-2 seating.
The internal flights were on a B737,a B757, a A300 a ATR!!! and their infamous DC10 which was a really good ride from MIA-LAX. So in that trip most of their types were flown.
When AA were promoting their MRTC (More Room Throughout Coach) in the early 2000's we flew with them LHR-JFK-LHR with a return trip on TED to LAS in between.
I must say it was the best economy trip to the USA I've had.
The leg room was great on the B777 and the service and food whilst not quite up to VS was very good.
The B757 TED flights were just like a busy Monarch flight to Spain - cramped.
It would be so good if they were to bring back MRTC.

paulicklow wrote:When AA were promoting their MRTC (More Room Throughout Coach) in the early 2000's we flew with them LHR-JFK-LHR with a return trip on TED to LAS in between.
I must say it was the best economy trip to the USA I've had.

I couldn't agree more, up to 2001 the #1 and I, in poorer days, flew AA all the time to the US, to ORD, JFK, MIA, LAX,and also DFW. My company policy at the time was to travel with AA and so we used miles everywhere in Y. Then as a AAdvantage Platinum we could book the exit row seats in Y, 31 AB if I recall, which were fantastic. For work I was usually in J or F (we had a policy to be auto upgraded if space). Back then AA was great, in Y the more room in coach was really good, the food was OK, drinks flowed.

Then 911 happened.

Everything got worse, more room in coach went, drinks went, good cabin crew went, I recall being on one flight and the meal was a box of snacks and suites and a coca cola.

Never again I said - we then flew in Y on BA to MIA soon after and it was dire in comparison to the old AA Y.

Then fortune's improved as well as free choice and it's been VS all the way since!

Good news for Flintshire . Personally I rate AA Y WAY above VS, having used them a few years ago for a very last minute trip to the USA (VS were prohibitive cost wise).
Decent seats, decent seat pitch , decent food and mature competent CC. I'd happily use them again if I had to travel Y.
DL

The AA 777 from lhr to Mia beats VS. Economy seating much better and although crew are a touch on the old side they actually do provide good service

I don't often contribute on this forum and tend to just 'read' with much interest. However have to agree 100% with sickbag on this one.

I've flown AA several times and only since 2001. I have found their economy product to NYC & Boston very confortable. Leg room equal to VS. Their IFE was super - working from the moment you sit down rather than waiting for it to be turned on after takeoff. The cabin crew were friendly and efficient and the food was quite ok. Added bonus, you get to see a seat plan and choose a seat (although not guaranteed of course) prior to hitting the 'book' button. All this is comparing to the VS product on same routes in Economy.

I've also recently flown a couple of times in AA business class and personally prefer it to VS UC because I travel with a partner and hate the UC isolation. Just a personal view but I believe credit where credit is due. No offence to anyone who has a different opinion. Major disadvantage is that BA are now working so many of the old AA routes and as a result, fare prices have been hiked. v(

tontybear wrote:Phew indeed!

I read earlier today that the AA fleet is at least 15 years old and they want more fuel efficient planes.

I also saw here that Boeing offered AA to re-engine the 737's

Not quiet correct, AA have been taking delivery of 738's for the last couple of years, having flown on them a couple of times they are not a bad place to be. The 752's suck, I avoid them at all costs.

Boeing is going to offer a new engine on the 737 series, it's the leapX engine, they will not be putting new engines on old planes.

The domestic F product is not impressive, though the food isn't bad.

MRTC was fantastic, but not enough of us were prepared to pay the extra couple of dollars to keep it.

As with any airline I have come across great employee's and some that would be better employees at the local DMV.

I've flown transatlantic a few times with AA in Y, all since 2001, and sort of agree with the people who are defending the product here. I quite liked the 777, and liked the fact you can view the seat map prior to booking (the blocks of 2 seats by the windows are good for couples). The IFE was then poor in comparison to v-port -- it may have improved since then. The food was revolting, with the exception of some pizza we once had en route to ORD which was quite fun. Then again, last time I flew VS Y (2009 I think) the food was pretty awful too.

The AA cabin crews tended to be brisk, rather older than the average VS equivalent, and not particularly friendly -- but I'm not that bothered. I've had young VS crews who have been superficially friendly but pretty disinterested. Horses for courses.

Probably the best thing I remember about AA was flying home from their then brand new terminal at JFK. It was so new, half of it was still roped off by the builders, and the guy driving the transit bus from Grand Central seemed shocked that two Brits were prepared to disembark into what looked like a building site. He was desperate to take us to a different terminal...

Good way to cover up bad news...

http://www.rttnews.com/Content/QuickFac ... 69253&SM=1

AMR Corp. ,the parent company of American Airlines, Inc., Wednesday reported a net loss of $286 million for the second quarter compared to a net loss of $11 million a year ago. On a per share basis, loss widened to $0.85 from $0.03 in the second quarter of 2010.

Scrooge wrote:

tontybear wrote:Phew indeed!

I read earlier today that the AA fleet is at least 15 years old and they want more fuel efficient planes.

I also saw here that Boeing offered AA to re-engine the 737's

Not quiet correct, AA have been taking delivery of 738's for the last couple of years, having flown on them a couple of times they are not a bad place to be. The 752's suck, I avoid them at all costs.

Grrr I meant to write AVERAGE age not that they don't have any younger planes than 15 years old !

tontybear wrote:

Scrooge wrote:

tontybear wrote:Phew indeed!

I read earlier today that the AA fleet is at least 15 years old and they want more fuel efficient planes.

I also saw here that Boeing offered AA to re-engine the 737's

Not quiet correct, AA have been taking delivery of 738's for the last couple of years, having flown on them a couple of times they are not a bad place to be. The 752's suck, I avoid them at all costs.

Grrr I meant to write AVERAGE age not that they don't have any younger planes than 15 years old !

Those 225 MD 80's certainly bring the average age up, though IMHO they are a great aircraft to fly on, at least up front, very very quiet.