Plan for the 11 787p's?
 

What's the plan to use the 787ps coming this year? Last I heard we are getting 11 but haven't added the flying for the summer. Are they just going to be sitting around?

I believe our filings show 8 coming this year.

https://s202.q4cdn.com/986123435/files/doc_downloads/fact-sheets/fleet/Fleet-count.pdf

Lets hope Airbus and Boeing can deliver a fraction of these on time

thanks. Would have never found that.

That has changed.
It's 11 this year, 2 next month, 2 in may and then 1 every month for the rest of the year.
2026 we will only get 1 now.

35 321neo in 2027? Good Lord.

Call me a pessimist but I'm going to take the under on that.

Nevermind, The announcement on jetnet makes it clearer what they are going to do.
Hope you like South America.

I could use a new family

As in we're only getting 8 or something else?

They are disappointed at the destinations added.

Post of the day

Not doubting you, but do you have a source for my own information?

Curious too, last quarterly report even showed 8 this year and 4 next year.

I mean hey, if it makes us the most money. LA and SA is the one single area in the world we dominate right now. I don't want to give that up just to be 3rd place everywhere.

Yup, we can't afford to lose any more markets. It's ridiculous how much we've given up in LAX, NYC, ORD. Management should be spending 24/7 figuring out how to get that market share back. And maybe more importantly, figuring out why we lost it in the first place.

That news has been floating around the training center.

The 4 we are getting in the next two months were supposed to have come last year but have been sitting in Charleston waiting on the first class doors to be certified by the faa. So in a way the plan for 8 in 2025 was/is correct but the 4 from last year still haven't come.

Now the bad news, Supposedly we also lose the use of the crew rest bunk jump seat for jump seaters. So we go down to only being able to have 2 jump seaters domestically vs. the 3 currently allowed when you're un-augmented, 1 j/s when there are three pilots and 0 when there are 4 pilots. So all the people who like to risk the J/s to Japan watch out, it might get you left behind.

I get it but it just feels like this company can only add a certain amount of new cities and then just add more frequency. If I read that announcement right at our peak we're doing 7 flights a day to Buenos Aires and 6 to Sao Paulo? Are those really the most profitable cities?

Why not maintain year round service to Australia or god forbid launch some new Asian destinations.

The new 787 deliveries won't have the Overhead Flight Crew Rest (OFCR) occupiable for takeoff and landing??

Nope. Apparently the FAA said because the doors in the business class suite can close it would be a hazard for the drop-down escape hatch and would cause an obstacle to escape.

You've got to be kidding me. Please tell me this is a joke.

Any reference? Or is this just word of mouth.

Wish I was.
Saw it written in black and white.

Apparently the FAA has a big bug up their asses about these doors. JetBlue had to disable theirs because the FAA came back and wanted another flight attendant. Looks like someone at the FAA is making this their "thing" to "do something" about.

Seems like an efficient use of their resources. What a joke.

Probably the same fed that got upset about iPad chargers and electrical tape on the reading lights.

Two things... I think the OFCR can't be occupied because the door can't be latched open due to the new galley config.
if you want to Jumpseat to Japan, seat 1D will still be available to you​​​​​.

That's not allowed to be used by jump seaters.

1D is a JCBA protected not a "FAA rest facility" seat. I believe this was asked and answered on "The Line."

The doors they spent over a year figuring out to guarantee would be open for takeoff and landing?

Yea, the same FAA that has allowed for decades that route 4 for helicopters to fly underneath jetliners within a 75’ margin of safety in DCA and only shut it down after 67 people lost their lives, that FAA.

But jump seaters can't occupy it.

They can at specific times during 4 pilot operations.
Check the manuals. "Class 3 "is the key.

I see what you're saying.
So they can occupy the 1D seat for Take-off and landing. Good luck getting some of these captains to think that critically about it though. Especailly if a flight attendant tries to make a comment about it. Lets hope APA (lol, who are we kidding) puts out some kind of guidance for that.

Using the F/C rest seat, and cycling jumpseaters through it for takeoff and landing, has been known to w/b Captains for years (over a decade). If you're pointing fingers don't point it at the old/older/senior Captains.

Do we still dominate LA/SA?? I'm curious to see the data on how we stack up against the Delta Latam combo.

Latam is doing what they always have been doing and Delta just added a few more flight to miami form their hubs and a few bigger us cities. But nothing else has changed and I'm not sure delta even does all the cities they added after latam.

We still have more daily flights into brazil and argentina than delta and united have to all of south america, not that I would really brag about that.

[size=0pt]Don't have data, but every time I am down there I always see more AA aircraft than any other American carrier. Until somebody shows me different, there is no reason to think that AA doesn’t dominate that area. [/size]

I'm not talking about flights operated by mainline equipment today. I'm talking about which brand is going to dominate that region over the long run. My guess is that Delta chips away at AA and eventually becomes the dominant brand in Latin America. AA has historically dominanted due to the partnship with Latam. We had connections all over South America via Latam. We could sell a ticket from just about anywhere in the US to just about anywhere in Latin America. Much like our situation in LHR. We fly a ton of pax to BA's hub and they take it from there. When Delta snagged Latam they changed the math overnight.

example: Someone wanting to fly from LAX to Lima next month could choose from 2 non-stops on Delta (via Latam) or they could take a 12 hour journey with a connection in Miami on AA. From LAX to the capital of Brazil requires 2 flights under the Delta brand vs 3 with AAL. It's also interesting to see Delta A350s in Lima vs our A321s.

I don't think that's how the airline business works these days (just comparing mainline acft on the ground between US carriers). If we can't offer as many connections, frequency, and convenience as the other brand then we eventually lose. According to this article Delta overtook AA a couple years ago between N and S America. I was just wondeirng if anyone here had the acutal ASM numbers for Latin America between the Delta umbrella and OneWorld.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/delta-...nture-update/#

So then AA was number one in the NE when we had the NE Alliance?

Domestically I have no idea. But the company stated they needed the NE alliance to be competitive in JFK and Isom said "there is no Plan B" during one of our earnings calls in regards to the JFK market. We wanted to boost our frequency in and out of JFK to support our international flights. The idea was JetBlue would feed JFK and we would send them onwards. I believe Latam used to serve that role for AA in S. America. Without onward connections from Sao Paulo, Santiago, BA, etc our product offering isn't as compelling. We might dominate MIA-GRU but what about the US at large to Salvador, Manaus, Brasilia, etc, etc? Or secondary S. American cities to the US? We have GOL, but I don't think there network is nearly as robust as Latam. This isn't a theory I invented. I think it's airline business 101 and why our BA partnership is so critical to our Atlantic network.