ARCHIVE: Airbus A321 Transcon / A321T / "32B" 3 class (consolidated 2012-2014)
Jul 23, 2012, 11:52 am
#91
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: PHL / NYC / PSA-BLQ
Programs: AA PPRO, Marriott/Hilton Gold, AMX-Plat, Global Entry
Posts: 3,109
That's not happening anytime soon. To illustrate why:
DL 4x JFK-SEA, 2x JFK-PDX, 2x JFK-SAN
B6 2x JFK-SEA, 1x JFK-PDX, 2x JFK-SAN
AA 1x JFK-SEA, 0x JFK-PDX, 1x JFK-SAN
And it's not like AA couldn't put their current 738s on those routes right now if it wanted to to add frequency, but they don't. They're very weak transcon outside of their LAX/SFO strongholds (you can toss LAS into that too if you'd like).
And all that being said... their non-AFS F cabin doesn't look so bad, and would be completely competitive with what DL flies on those routes (DL doesn't generally fly their JFK-SFO/LAX outside of those markets either, so older 752s or 738s).
So the opportunity for AA to win customers on superior hard/soft product in F will be there. I just wouldn't expect them to fly the AFS planes anywhere other than where they currently fly.
DL 4x JFK-SEA, 2x JFK-PDX, 2x JFK-SAN
B6 2x JFK-SEA, 1x JFK-PDX, 2x JFK-SAN
AA 1x JFK-SEA, 0x JFK-PDX, 1x JFK-SAN
And it's not like AA couldn't put their current 738s on those routes right now if it wanted to to add frequency, but they don't. They're very weak transcon outside of their LAX/SFO strongholds (you can toss LAS into that too if you'd like).
And all that being said... their non-AFS F cabin doesn't look so bad, and would be completely competitive with what DL flies on those routes (DL doesn't generally fly their JFK-SFO/LAX outside of those markets either, so older 752s or 738s).
So the opportunity for AA to win customers on superior hard/soft product in F will be there. I just wouldn't expect them to fly the AFS planes anywhere other than where they currently fly.In previous waves, the industry went in big for hub and spoke and lower unit costs through plane scale. I think there is now some realization it came at the expense of flexibility which has hurt in a flat/down market with volatile fuel costs. IMO, these decisions reflect both good tactical and strategic thinking on AA's part - the big question is can they not just strategize but also execute on key elements of their plan (costs, customer retention/loyalty...).
Jul 23, 2012, 12:03 pm
#93
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: PHL / NYC / PSA-BLQ
Programs: AA PPRO, Marriott/Hilton Gold, AMX-Plat, Global Entry
Posts: 3,109
This is certainly a stride in the right direction, clearly AA gets a lot of paid revenue for F and J otherwise they would have created smaller cabins.
Having lie flat beds on A321's seems quite a phenoenom, British Midland intended to put lie flat seats on A321 a/c from Heathrow to the middle east with Swiss seats. They put it on hold until BA bought them and BA are going ahead with the conversions.
Anyone noticed on the video link the complete lack of any branding? No AA logo and with the AA and the V thing between the 2 letters, no livery. Normally videos like that would open up with the AA title and logo and end with them, aswell as containing the livery among other branding related items. Looks like a new brand is on the way.
Looks a lot better than the UA/CO PS service, newer and more efficient aircraft, the seats look a lot nicer also.
Looks like a lot of 'AA needs to merge' people are keeping quiet with all the recent positive developments.
Having lie flat beds on A321's seems quite a phenoenom, British Midland intended to put lie flat seats on A321 a/c from Heathrow to the middle east with Swiss seats. They put it on hold until BA bought them and BA are going ahead with the conversions.
Anyone noticed on the video link the complete lack of any branding? No AA logo and with the AA and the V thing between the 2 letters, no livery. Normally videos like that would open up with the AA title and logo and end with them, aswell as containing the livery among other branding related items. Looks like a new brand is on the way.
Looks a lot better than the UA/CO PS service, newer and more efficient aircraft, the seats look a lot nicer also.
Looks like a lot of 'AA needs to merge' people are keeping quiet with all the recent positive developments.
Jul 23, 2012, 12:03 pm
#94
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LAX
Programs: oneword Emerald
Posts: 20,600
More photos:
First Class:
Business Class:
First Class:
Business Class:
Jul 23, 2012, 12:25 pm
#96
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St Louis, MO
Programs: AA L.T. PLT
Posts: 3,265
Airbus huh? Is this AA's first use of that Mfg'er?
As a (ret) pilot friend of mine once said... "If it ain't Boeing, we ain't going" I got the feeling he didn't like the Airbus product all that much.
As a (ret) pilot friend of mine once said... "If it ain't Boeing, we ain't going" I got the feeling he didn't like the Airbus product all that much.
Jul 23, 2012, 12:30 pm
#97
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
Jul 23, 2012, 12:31 pm
#98
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Austin, TX
Programs: AA LT Plat, UA 1k/1mm+, National EE, IC Plat, Bonvoy Gold
Posts: 2,605
Flying with 102 pax solves the problem of westbound range. The A321neo can't fly transcon west with a standard configuration without stopping. It sounds as if AA has decided that the combination of lower operating costs plus premium revenue will make this work. That's good news for pax, because it means that without major advances in engine efficiency, they are unlikely to change their minds and try to cram in more seats.
Jul 23, 2012, 12:32 pm
#99
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2002
Location: NYC, USA
Programs: AA EXP 3MM, Lifetime Platinum, Marriott Titanium, HH Gold
Posts: 10,967
Heavens no! Surely you haven't forgotten the venerable A300-600 fleet that AA had? (mostly leased, IIRC) By the end, they were being held together literally with duct tape!
Biggest joke at AA was that the MIA ground staff would send the broken AB6s up to JFK because they didn't want to fix them at MIA. And then JFK would send them back down to MIA, or perhaps SJU.
Jul 23, 2012, 12:38 pm
#100
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2006
Programs: AAdvantage PP
Posts: 13,913
Heavens no! Surely you haven't forgotten the venerable A300-600 fleet that AA had? (mostly leased, IIRC) By the end, they were being held together literally with duct tape!
Biggest joke at AA was that the MIA ground staff would send the broken AB6s up to JFK because they didn't want to fix them at MIA. And then JFK would send them back down to MIA, or perhaps SJU.
Biggest joke at AA was that the MIA ground staff would send the broken AB6s up to JFK because they didn't want to fix them at MIA. And then JFK would send them back down to MIA, or perhaps SJU.
Even a few years back any thought of AA buying Airbus again would have been considered almost laughable. But time and money seems to have changed that belief.
And yes I remember a fair number of double (and even triple once) A300s being taken out of service. Including in MIA having 250+ paxs schlep from C to the high E gates (or vice versa) to reboard an equally drab, dirty and dingy A300.
Jul 23, 2012, 12:40 pm
#101
Join Date: Jun 2010
Programs: AA EXP
Posts: 57
I fly LAX-JFK and vv on cheapo fares often for leisure, and I choose to fly AA over B6 or VX because of my ability as an EXP to snag upgrades to J with a high success rate. So you might think that diminished upgrade potential would send me back to B6, but this announcement makes me more likely to stick with AA.
I do not like the Y product on the 762 and tell people that I wouldn't fly AA on this route without the upgrades to J. However the inclusion of Y+ (which will be comped with EXP vs. extra legroom on B6) will make me stay. I will still have the chance of getting an upgrade, and I'm hoping the Y+ will be just as good for me as a flight on B6 (apart from driving to LAX vs. BUR).
I do not like the Y product on the 762 and tell people that I wouldn't fly AA on this route without the upgrades to J. However the inclusion of Y+ (which will be comped with EXP vs. extra legroom on B6) will make me stay. I will still have the chance of getting an upgrade, and I'm hoping the Y+ will be just as good for me as a flight on B6 (apart from driving to LAX vs. BUR).
Jul 23, 2012, 12:49 pm
#102
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2006
Programs: AAdvantage PP
Posts: 13,913
I fly LAX-JFK and vv on cheapo fares often for leisure, and I choose to fly AA over B6 or VX because of my ability as an EXP to snag upgrades to J with a high success rate. So you might think that diminished upgrade potential would send me back to B6, but this announcement makes me more likely to stick with AA.
I do not like the Y product on the 762 and tell people that I wouldn't fly AA on this route without the upgrades to J. However the inclusion of Y+ (which will be comped with EXP vs. extra legroom on B6) will make me stay. I will still have the chance of getting an upgrade, and I'm hoping the Y+ will be just as good for me as a flight on B6 (apart from driving to LAX vs. BUR).
I do not like the Y product on the 762 and tell people that I wouldn't fly AA on this route without the upgrades to J. However the inclusion of Y+ (which will be comped with EXP vs. extra legroom on B6) will make me stay. I will still have the chance of getting an upgrade, and I'm hoping the Y+ will be just as good for me as a flight on B6 (apart from driving to LAX vs. BUR).
Jul 23, 2012, 12:51 pm
#103
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: YYZ/YUL
Programs: UA 1K, AC nadda, DL, WS-Nadda
Posts: 1,476
Not totally familiar with how AA treats OW status pax. I have sapphire as MPC
Gold. Would that qualify for the extra comfort seating.
Gold. Would that qualify for the extra comfort seating.
Jul 23, 2012, 12:51 pm
#104
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Programs: AA EXP
Posts: 637
I fly LAX-JFK and vv on cheapo fares often for leisure, and I choose to fly AA over B6 or VX because of my ability as an EXP to snag upgrades to J with a high success rate. So you might think that diminished upgrade potential would send me back to B6, but this announcement makes me more likely to stick with AA.
I do not like the Y product on the 762 and tell people that I wouldn't fly AA on this route without the upgrades to J. However the inclusion of Y+ (which will be comped with EXP vs. extra legroom on B6) will make me stay. I will still have the chance of getting an upgrade, and I'm hoping the Y+ will be just as good for me as a flight on B6 (apart from driving to LAX vs. BUR).
I do not like the Y product on the 762 and tell people that I wouldn't fly AA on this route without the upgrades to J. However the inclusion of Y+ (which will be comped with EXP vs. extra legroom on B6) will make me stay. I will still have the chance of getting an upgrade, and I'm hoping the Y+ will be just as good for me as a flight on B6 (apart from driving to LAX vs. BUR).
Jul 23, 2012, 1:00 pm
#105
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
Although with 1,000 Y seats being taken out of daily capacity (probably a little less since another frequency or two might be added) I'm not sure how cheapo Y fares there will be. Its seems as though AA is ceding that part of the market to B6 and other carriers. Even as it is I'm not finding much below $500ai RT for the JFK/LAX route. Of course, possibly to get a cheaper fare (and better chance at upgrading) one will now need to connect rather than take the direct flight.
No way could all ten daily flights be flown with 777s, but three or four? Anything's possible.
For random dates this fall, I'm finding $330 all-in LAX-JFK nonstop roundtrips.