LHR Wannabee

Flew my second domestic non CO (or CO codeshare flight) in over 10 years on AA. It was a 3 cabin transcon service on a 767. I could not believe how old the plan was. It was so old that I did not recognize the overhead bins. If you were a passenger seated in a middle row, the overhead bins could not fit a standard bag at any angle. Although I was in First, the seat size was the same as CO domestic first, but with more leg room and an angled bed. Food service and attention was on par with CO. Since it was an older plane, it had personal dvrs and Bose headphones. Apparently this is the norm for this route since on return flight, but different plane, it had an aircraft of similar age. (As a side note, AA has a separate special lounge at LAX and JFK for First Class Transcon passengers usually reservedfor international that would be on par with most lounges when flying from Europe to the US.) This really made me appreciate CO's newer aircraft!! (As a point of comparison a recent United flight from Tokyo to LAX, the 777 must have been one of the first off the line since it looked quite worn.) It was nice to see the competition, but after trying them, I am sticking with CO to see how next year plays out after operations are 100% merged with the United side of the family.

bniu

haha, those planes are from 1985. Older than me . I chose to fly on one of those over the 763 just so I could complete my tour of AA's fleet.

The thing is, those 762s aren't so great for TATL, aren't so useful for normal domestic flights, and they're so old that AA isn't going to get much money out of them by selling them, and since they're so old, they're already paid off and they're the perfect size for that low density 3 class flagship transcon run. I believe they have just 180 seats, which is slightly less than their 757s. Since each plane only does 2-3 flights a day, the cycles on those birds are quite low and even though they guzzle fuel, there's no lease payments to deal with and the revenue earned from potentially 40 business and first fares is worth it to keep these planes running.

Next time on this route, pick the afternoon departure. That one is a 767-300 which is an international bird with the international biz seats up front.

EWR764

(emphasis added)

Transcon Business and First fares aren't nearly enough to offset the expense of the fuel that these aircraft consume at current prices. Look for AA to announce major changes to their transcontinental product within the year. If fuel prices stay like this, the service is unsustainable in its current form.

sts603

Do you have any basis for that or is that conjecture? Do you realize that transcon F fares exceed $4K r/t?

UA-NYC

For a 2,500 mile flight I would happily take an older widebody plane with recliner-style seating (and footrests), along with a personal entertainment unit, over a newer narrowbody with basic domestic F seating and maybe DTV

rjque

I'd probably prefer the DTV, but otherwise agreed. Though old, I just prefer the widebodies, particularly in coach.

J.Edward

I've found the service on AA's transcons (most recent one I was on was BOS-LAX yesterday) to be in line with CO and UA. Like CO, and unlike UA, AA offered a printed menu for the two dinner options, a salad, decent appetizer, and cheese & crackers or a sunday for dessert with backed onboard cookies right before landing.

If I had to choose between the food on AA vs. CO, I'd say CO has the edge as they offer more main choices and do the service better (first they bring the nuts/bread, then the app, then the main, etc.) than compared to AA where they do it all at once except for dessert.

IMHO both AA and CO beat UA for transcon meal services.

Equipment wise I think it boils down to CO having the newer planes but AA's offer inflight WiFi and inseat power, which is a welcome addition.

Moreover, AA does a better job with inventory management as they'll hold back a few F seats until the DOD meaning as a customer I have the option to jump around without having to loose my upgrade (or paid F seat.)

Have not been on their Flagship Service (AA's version of p.s.) recently so I can't comment on that aspect.

MrAndy1369

AA does transcon/longer midcon meals in courses as well? Did the BOS-LAX flight you flew offer the meal on one tray? That doesn't sound right for an AA transcon.

FlyerChrisK

AA's environmental page http://www.aa.com/i18n/aboutUs/envir...l/article2.jsp states "For example, an average transcontinental flight on a Boeing 767 (New York to Los Angeles) consumes more than 7,400 gallons of fuel" At about $6 per gallon for Jet A (I'm willing to assume that AA can beat quoted general aviation prices at JFK), they're spending $45k each way for fuel alone. A few full-fare premium customers could easily cover this, but how many seats are actually occupied by full-fare flyers?

Off topic from the finances, I'll take UA p.s. any day over AA on JFK-LAX.

bniu

BOS-LAX premium cabin is really Business Class service. The only true First Class service on AA is on JFK-SFO/LAX 762 operated flights and the daily 777 flight MIA-LAX. In True First Class, it's done in courses. In Business Class/Rebranded 2 cabin First Class, it's done on one tray. Entertainment is the same in both cabins (though I own the same headphones and have an iPad which beats that handheld DVR).

MrAndy1369

Not true. I flew F on BOS-SFO last year when it was still in service (not flagship; was on a 757), and the meal was served on a tray, but in courses. ALL AA transcons (JFK-SEA/SNA/SAN, LAX-BOS/IAD) offer meals in courses (first the appetizer, then salad, followed by the main course and the traditional sundae service). At least, that's what it's supposed to be, AFAIK, unless there was a recent change I was unaware of?

Even longer midcons (ORD-LAX/SFO/SEA, DFW-BOS/EWR/LAX, etc. are supposed to serve the appetizer and salad on one tray, then the main course, then the "sludge" icecream/dessert.

EWR764

At $4kr/t, that's a bit less than $2k each way, and using the figures cited below by FlyerChrisK, you would need more than 20 such travelers just to cover the fuel expense. That's before you even get to other operating costs, namely labor, which is another high-cost area for AA.

I also realize that the three-class market has fundamentally changed after the revision of the SAG contract, which no longer requires three-cabin F service for certain travelers.

AA will have trouble competing once UA upgrades its p.s. product to flat beds in the premium cabin with already lower-cost 757s.

cesco.g

How would you rate the on CO transcons (F) compared to UA p.s. C-class?

UA-NYC

Other than (maybe) food, and assuming no 752s in the mix - what's there really to compare?

EWR764

Food is better on CO, but UA p.s. C beats a 737 F seat any day of the week. IMO, CO 752 F is the best transcontinental ride out there, but there are so few daily flights (which usually sell out up front) that it's not really fair to include them in a CO vs. XX transcontinental comparison.

All things being equal, I'd rank the NYC-LAX/SFO seats this way, from top to bottom:

1) CO 752 BF
2) UA p.s. F
3) AA 762 F
4) AA 763 C
5) VX A320 F
6) DL 757 BE
7) UA p.s. C
8) AA 762 C
9) CO 737/753 F

From a service standpoint:

1) AA F
2) UA p.s. F
3) VX F
4) DL BE
5) CO F
6) UA C
7) AA C