AirTran in talks with Airbus

[-9Capt]

The rumor was just confirmed by our union.

Klaus Gorsch, VP of Flt Ops, is in Europe talking with Airbus. Some think management is trying to twist Boeings arm for some cheap 737's.

Personally I'd be suprised to see anything Airbus on the property with Boeing as heavly invested in AirTran as it is.

 

[ifly4food]

Sounds like a scheme to me. I'll believe it when I see A320s pulled up to Concourse C.

 

[Pilot69]

I would like to see B757 or B737-800 at concourse C That would be better than Airbus since Boeing has alot in us right now.

 

[jackofdiamonds]

airbus

actually you wont see the airbus pulling up to the "C" concourse but going over to the maintainence area!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[TurboS7]

You will see a B737-800 at concourse C in about 3 weeks, it was on our bid sheets.Done deal. I agree with the above, you guys are getting B737-800's but they are checking out Airbus just to make sure. Personally for Airtran the 738 is perfect, you can make non-stop ATL-LAX with 174 pax and land with about 5K on the fuel, or 12,000 pounds. There are a lot of cheap( if you want to call 150,000 per month cheap) leases out there right now.

 

[DCitrus9]

turbos7, what is the seating configuration on your -800's? Just wondering how many seats we could run if we had 12 or 16 business class seats.
Although 757's would be great, I'm fairly sure the 737-800 is going to be our best priced deal out there- and they're shopping for new or at least young airplanes.

 

[TurboS7]

When we do contract work in Europe we have the aircraft in 189 seat configuration. The Brits don't seem to mind, they are going on holiday. We have ours in 174 seat configuration no first class. I heard from a bird on the wall that we are going to configure the airplane with a first class for you guys( we have authorization from the FAA to do all kinds of configurations) My guess is that you would have 12 to 16 first class with 130 to 140 in the back. I have about 1000 hours in the 737-800 now and it would be a dynamite airplane for your type operation. I wish that we had 757 as we do a lot of long haul flights and we have to still make a fuel stop to get to Europe from the U.S. I call it the Voltswagon, cause that is what it is. Reliable and cheap to operate. I didn't bid Airtran stuff for personal reasons, it is just FLL-ATL-FLL anyway, maybe I'll pick some of it up on my days off. My guess is that you guys will use us as a stepping stone to getting your own. All that is left is a security and ground handling training for your people. Part of the deal is we give you all the numbers so they can use the airplane for analyis.

 

[sabreliner]

Is that Miami Air that will be doing that -800 flying? If it is, then they were here a bunch this summer with the -800 and 727's. Also saw Trans-Meridian on AirTran gates a bunch.

Sounds like the AirTran guys have the same problem we do at ASA-

WE NEED SCOPE!!!

 

[Flynfish]

It's my understanding that the only 73-800's you'll see on concourse C will be Miami Air's planes. At least for the time being. I heard that there won't be any new types of planes till next year.

 

[TurboS7]

We fly for everyone, AA,Airtran, Suriname Airways, Bahamasair, etc. etc. Your scope stuff doesn't work very well when you write something up and ground and airplane and go home. The people have to move and if you don't have the equipment you call a charter operator. Once your equipment is on line, or your training is done we disappear, this has nothing to do with scope.

 

[Boeingman]

The people have to move and if you don't have the equipment you call a charter operator. Once your equipment is on line, or your training is done we disappear, this has nothing to do with scope.

Moving any revenue passenger of another carrier, for whatever reason or excuse, is a scope issue.

 

[TurboS7]

Sorry guy, free skies, free country, and everything is deregulated SCOPE in your context went out in the 70's.

 

[DougCorp-9]

Miami Air at Airtran

Our contract at Airtran allows management to contract out a certain amount of flying for 6 months in a 12 month period. This was allowed so that when a market opportunity arises that we can get in even if we don't have the crews or equipment available. The contracting is only used until we can get the new equipment and crews to operate the route ourselves. We make more cash when we operate them ourselves. If we did not allow this then opportunities would pass and be taken by other carriers. We have been doing alot of expanding in the BMI market and cannot train the crews fast enough. Miami Air has been contracted to to do some of our ATL-FLL routes. It just so happens that these routes are usually overbooked. With Miami Air using a 738 we will be able to sell more seats in that market and generate more revenue untill we can increase the frequency ourselves.

 

[TurboS7]

Thankyou. I did start a new thread with some issues that we are dealing with more than U.S. carrier to carrier scope. We should all be concerned about these issues as the world gets smaller and smaller. Check it out.

 

[Boeingman]

Sorry guy, free skies, free country, and everything is deregulated SCOPE in your context went out in the 70's.

Youre talking in circles here. It has nothing to do with deregulation.

Our contract still has Scope clauses in black and white terminology and it was negotiated in the 90's.

I would expect you to argue about it because it is a threat to your type of operation.