Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Good bye Saabs on American Eagle?

 
Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 1, 2008, 10:00 pm
  #1  
In memoriam
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: La Jolla, CA, USA
Posts: 765
Good bye Saabs on American Eagle?

On flights from SBA and LAX this afternoon the crew announced that today was the last day for Saabs being used on those routes. They referred to these last flights as "historic." Apparently, starting tomorrow, the RJs will be the aircraft being used for all of the AE flights (although they didn't categorically say that).
normcpa is offline  
Old Nov 1, 2008, 10:06 pm
  #2  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Programs: AA EXP, 1 MM, AC, HH Diamond, Marriott Silver, Hertz 5*
Posts: 4,010
Originally Posted by normcpa
On flights from SBA and LAX this afternoon the crew announced that today was the last day for Saabs being used on those routes. They referred to these last flights as "historic." Apparently, starting tomorrow, the RJs will be the aircraft being used for all of the AE flights (although they didn't categorically say that).
The tired, fuel-guzzling Saabs were already eliminated on most other routes in September.

I wouldn't say goodbye, but good riddance. They've been replaced by RJs and some ATRs.
videomaker is offline  
Old Nov 1, 2008, 10:43 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: All over
Programs: AA-LTP, HH-DIA, Marriott-LT+AMB, Hyatt-Globalist, Hertz-PC, UA-GS
Posts: 6,828
I'm looking foward to the RJ's.
chanp is offline  
Old Nov 1, 2008, 11:15 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Programs: AA EXP, DL Plat, US Chairman, SPG Plat, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Gold, IC RA
Posts: 1,436
Aww... I'm gonna miss the Slobbs.
stratofortress is offline  
Old Nov 2, 2008, 12:18 am
  #5  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: DFW/DAL
Programs: AA Lifetime PLT, AS MVPG, HH Diamond, NCL Platinum Plus, MSC Diamond
Posts: 21,422
Originally Posted by chanp
I'm looking foward to the RJ's.
Yes, they will make a huge difference in this 89 mile route.
mvoight is offline  
Old Nov 2, 2008, 7:17 am
  #6  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: SBP
Programs: AA Executive Platinium 1.55MM AVIS Preferred Hertz Gold Marriott Platinum
Posts: 235
The Saabs suffered from the public perception that because they had propellers, they were therefore old technology. In fact the turbo-props used on the Saabs were very efficient for the shorter routes upon which they were used.

I will miss the Saabs.

I will also miss AE service at SBP.

-Mike
slomike is offline  
Old Nov 2, 2008, 8:35 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,184
Originally Posted by videomaker
The tired, fuel-guzzling Saabs
Fuel-guzzling? They burn less than the ATR and a lot less than the RJs.
LarryJ is offline  
Old Nov 2, 2008, 8:40 am
  #8  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: All over
Programs: AA-LTP, HH-DIA, Marriott-LT+AMB, Hyatt-Globalist, Hertz-PC, UA-GS
Posts: 6,828
Originally Posted by mvoight
Yes, they will make a huge difference in this 89 mile route.
Well 209 miles for me
chanp is offline  
Old Nov 2, 2008, 9:09 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Programs: AA EXP, 1 MM, AC, HH Diamond, Marriott Silver, Hertz 5*
Posts: 4,010
Originally Posted by slomike
The Saabs suffered from the public perception that because they had propellers, they were therefore old technology.
Did you fly on any of AA's Saabs lately?

I don't mind the turboprop part. But the interiors of these planes were just ragged, the overhead bins on some models were incredibly small (for those of us carrying very fragile items that cannot be gate checked), and, IIRC, AA made the switch because they were not that fuel-efficient for the number of pax they carried.

Again, good riddance.
videomaker is offline  
Old Nov 2, 2008, 9:11 am
  #10  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Programs: AA EXP, 1 MM, AC, HH Diamond, Marriott Silver, Hertz 5*
Posts: 4,010
Originally Posted by LarryJ
Fuel-guzzling? They burn less than the ATR and a lot less than the RJs.
Less than the ATR per pax?
videomaker is offline  
Old Nov 2, 2008, 9:35 am
  #11  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NYC/MIA/DFW
Programs: Aadvantage
Posts: 157
Originally Posted by videomaker
Did you fly on any of AA's Saabs lately?

I don't mind the turboprop part. But the interiors of these planes were just ragged, the overhead bins on some models were incredibly small (for those of us carrying very fragile items that cannot be gate checked), and, IIRC, AA made the switch because they were not that fuel-efficient for the number of pax they carried.

Again, good riddance.

The ATRs have pretty small overhead bins too.
dcameron is offline  
Old Nov 2, 2008, 9:42 am
  #12  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: DFW/DAL
Programs: AA Lifetime PLT, AS MVPG, HH Diamond, NCL Platinum Plus, MSC Diamond
Posts: 21,422
Originally Posted by chanp
Well 209 miles for me
Different calculator? Flying Fish said it was 89 miles.
mvoight is offline  
Old Nov 2, 2008, 9:58 am
  #13  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: SBP
Programs: AA Executive Platinium 1.55MM AVIS Preferred Hertz Gold Marriott Platinum
Posts: 235
Originally Posted by LarryJ
Fuel-guzzling? They burn less than the ATR and a lot less than the RJs.
They also had that nice feature of not dropping out of the sky in icing conditions.

I would rather have the Saab on my 155 mile route than no service.
slomike is offline  
Old Nov 2, 2008, 10:34 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: RDU
Programs: AA LTP, Bonvoy Titanium; AA CK before I retired
Posts: 1,597
I'll miss Saabs for the same reason I miss Jetstream 31s... many airports that AA no longer serves at all. SBP is just the most recent in a long list. As a consequence we spread our flying across more airlines than we once did... although one could say that mergers like DL+NW or AA+TW are working in the opposite direction.

Looking back on 20 years of flying American Eagle and the other commuter affiliates of the big six, I'm unconvinced that RJs have improved the airlines' position. When RJs first arrived, they were used to service routes that were too long for turboprops but too thin for mainline jets. No one could quarrel with that. But then we began to see RJs bought to replace turboprops (very questionable economics) or to reduce capacity on mainline routes (unfortunate for passengers).
ccengct is offline  
Old Nov 2, 2008, 2:22 pm
  #15  
HNL
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 10,949
Originally Posted by mvoight
Different calculator? Flying Fish said it was 89 miles.
chanp lives in Fresno.
FAT-LAX = 209

Santa Barbara (SBA) - LAX = 89
HNL is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.