Originally Posted by
Antarius
they were 6 years old when they were retired. That's basically brand new for a low cycle wide body. AFAIK, they're stored and AA was still paying for some of them.
I believe they sold some of the a333s for parts. Those were 20+ years old and were headed to the boneyard regardless.
Can they can just reactivate (or unretire) some of these planes? I realize it's probably difficult or expensive, as their pilots would need type-ratings and an entire maintenance operation needs to be stood up, but it seems like some carriers have done just that.
Originally Posted by
IADCAflyer
I agree that part of the drawdown is likely owing to equipment mismatches. 787s and 777s are just too much metal (seat count) for some of these secondary cities, and a 737 or the Airbii are either too not big enough (especially a lack of cargo capacity) or simply not enough range. The 767 was the right airplane for these routes. The A321XLR will have the range, but the lack of cargo capacity (especially container positions) means that the A321XLR still isn't optimal from a cargo perspective.
Isn't it possible to containerize narrow-bodies?
Is the problem then that narrow-body containers are too small (and some individual items only fit in a wide body's container) or that in general a narrow body doesn't have enough cargo space (to even make a cargo operation worth it)?