Thanks AA...this sucks!

STEVEJ · 09-30-2005, 04:57 PM

After going through great pains back in May to swap vacations just so we could book a non-stop flt on AA JFK-SXM and return, the SOB's have cancelled the non-stop flight and routed us through SJU. The return non-stop has also been canceled and instead of a 3 1/2 hr flt home, we have been routed thru MIA with a long lay over... dep SXM 2 pm arrv JFK at midnight....10 hours ! The worst part was they didn,t notify me of the change, I printed out the tickets on-line and said WTF is this. When I called reservations they said "yeah your original flt must have been cancelled".

Now heres the mystery....I had a tough time adjusting my vacation because just about every AA non-stop JFK-SXM was booked solid and the same on the the return, we even had to cut the stay in SXM short by one day because everything was booked coming home. Good work AA, you'll really go far cancelling all those booked up flights. And yes, I am pissed because instead of a 757 to SXM, now I'm booked on a scarebus to SJU and I don't like it one bit!

OK I feel better now.

dylan · 09-30-2005, 05:06 PM

Steve, in November, Im traveling from SLC to MZT via Skywest and AeroLittoral (?). Leave SLC at 8:20a change in TUS, stop in 3 cities in Mexico, and arrive Mazatlan at 2050. 12 hours. I feel your pain.

STEVEJ · 09-30-2005, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dylan

Steve, in November, Im traveling from SLC to MZT via Skywest and AeroLittoral (?). Leave SLC at 8:20a change in TUS, stop in 3 cities in Mexico, and arrive Mazatlan at 2050. 12 hours. I feel your pain.

The pain will be deadened after a few at the Sunset Beach bar and with camera in hand taking a picture of the KLM 744 passing 5 ft over my head on final.

MaxPower · 10-01-2005, 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEVEJ

The pain will be deadened after a few at the Sunset Beach bar and with camera in hand taking a picture of the KLM 744 passing 5 ft over my head on final.

Oh thats better. Sirr, May we see one the 744 landing ?

ZX1100F1 · 10-01-2005, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEVEJ

Good work AA, you'll really go far cancelling all those booked up flights.

Now you can stop wondering why AA and all the other major's are in trouble and headed for worse.

AA767Lover · 10-03-2005, 05:22 PM

Hahahah! Give me your ticket and itinerary Steve and I'll fly those darn gorgeous routes! It's amazing what they did! Yes, they should have notified you, but nowadays, that means extra costs. Cost-cutting is almost ridiculous to the proportions they're doing it at! Must be painful for you.
I'd take it anyday and go island hopping.

STEVEJ · 10-09-2005, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AA767Lover

Hahahah! Give me your ticket and itinerary Steve and I'll fly those darn gorgeous routes! It's amazing what they did! Yes, they should have notified you, but nowadays, that means extra costs. Cost-cutting is almost ridiculous to the proportions they're doing it at! Must be painful for you.
I'd take it anyday and go island hopping.

People were not happy. The A300 that arrived Sat morning sprung a fuel leak on landing, so the outbound pax were put up in hotels and were told they were leaving this morning (Sunday). When I left on the ATR72 at 10:15 AM the A300 was still parked and still leaking. SJU was complete chaos, 2 flts leaving for JFK at the same time and both full, one, an A300 and I lucked out and got the 763. We arrived at JFK 20 min early but had to wait 20 min for a gate.

AA767Lover · 10-10-2005, 11:01 AM

Kinda balances it! 20 mins early, but 20 min wait for a gate. But it is bad luck that you ended up with a 763. I like the A300 on short flights. They're comfortable. Not bad. But springing a leak?!!!!!!!!!!!! I think AA needs to really consider its A300 even if it's good. It's going to be a long-term liability when it comes to passenger safety. I flew Scarebuses from MIA-LIM, and SJO-MIA and they seemed ok, but i admit it was scary to tink about them, especially after AA 587 a few years back.

a_loser · 10-10-2005, 01:29 PM

While it may not have been AA, it was still an Airbus product, so I think it's still (mostly) on topic.....

Back in 2002 I flew to Switzerland on United Express and Lufthansa, with a routing of GRB -> ORD -> FRA -> ZRH -> MUC -> ORD -> GRB (United Express to/from Green Bay and Lufthansa on the rest).
GRB -> ORD -> GRB was a BAe146 which wasn't bad; definitely the most comfortable regional I was on. ORD -> FRA was a 747; I felt very safe (the plane seemed to be solidly built). FRA -> ZRH was an A320; my first impression was that it seemed "flimsy" (watching the other A32x series planes taking off, they all seemed to be "flimsy" since all of the other planes were keeping their wings level.
ZRH -> MUC was a CRJ; again, seemed to be "flimsy" since all of the other planes were keeping their wings level. And, it also proved the "joke" that you can tell who the captain is and who the FO is based on which way their head is tilted... Our passenger seats seemed to be the same.
MUC -> ORD was an A340. Now, I know the A340 is Airbus' response (right word?) to the 747, so I expected that it would seem just as solidly built as the 747. I soon realized that, like the A320, the A340 seemed to be "flimsy" (compared to the 747). Oh, and for comparison, when I flew to TX on an American Eagle E140, which also seemed pretty solid, so it's not "just" due to being a regional plane that the others seemed flimsier - again, I thought the BAe146 was solid too.

I guess the point is that Airbus really isn't all they're hyped up to be...

Hapag-Lloyd · 10-10-2005, 02:12 PM

Have you ever seen a 777 inflight, or taking off? Seen how the "flimsy" wings reeeeeaaallly bend upwards?

AA587 was pilot´s error, the guy obviously thought he was still flying a USAF fighter plane. A fuel leak is a maintenance problem, not one of the plane´s design (else we´d have Lufthansa A300-600s falling out of the sky on a daily basis). Now, if AA decides to cut their expenses on maintenance, then maybe it is time to switch the airline, not the plane.

As for the flimsyinterior , I never had that experience on an Airbus; I prefer them over Boeing products for their safety standards. Beauty, however, is in the eye of the beholder.

Edit: The A340 is not a "response" to anything. Still, it competes with the 777. The A380 would be the closest Airbus design to a 747, albeit the A380 is at least one generation ahead.

STEVEJ · 10-10-2005, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hapag-Lloyd

As for the flimsyinterior , I never had that experience on an Airbus; I prefer them over Boeing products for their safety standards. Beauty, however, is in the eye of the beholder.

.

Nach fliegen an beide, Ich habe Boeing an liebsten.

09-30-2005, 04:57 PM	#1
STEVEJ Insane Collector Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Stony Brook, N.Y. Age: 99 Posts: 1,593	Thanks AA...this sucks! After going through great pains back in May to swap vacations just so we could book a non-stop flt on AA JFK-SXM and return, the SOB's have cancelled the non-stop flight and routed us through SJU. The return non-stop has also been canceled and instead of a 3 1/2 hr flt home, we have been routed thru MIA with a long lay over... dep SXM 2 pm arrv JFK at midnight....10 hours ! The worst part was they didn,t notify me of the change, I printed out the tickets on-line and said WTF is this. When I called reservations they said "yeah your original flt must have been cancelled". Now heres the mystery....I had a tough time adjusting my vacation because just about every AA non-stop JFK-SXM was booked solid and the same on the the return, we even had to cut the stay in SXM short by one day because everything was booked coming home. Good work AA, you'll really go far cancelling all those booked up flights. And yes, I am pissed because instead of a 757 to SXM, now I'm booked on a scarebus to SJU and I don't like it one bit! OK I feel better now. Last edited by STEVEJ; 09-30-2005 at 05:01 PM.

09-30-2005, 05:06 PM	#2
dylan Village Drunkard Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert... Age: 31 Posts: 1,938	Steve, in November, Im traveling from SLC to MZT via Skywest and AeroLittoral (?). Leave SLC at 8:20a change in TUS, stop in 3 cities in Mexico, and arrive Mazatlan at 2050. 12 hours. I feel your pain. __________________ mmmmm, beer.

10-10-2005, 01:29 PM	#9
a_loser His Royal Geekiness Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: WI Age: 27 Posts: 11	While it may not have been AA, it was still an Airbus product, so I think it's still (mostly) on topic..... Back in 2002 I flew to Switzerland on United Express and Lufthansa, with a routing of GRB -> ORD -> FRA -> ZRH -> MUC -> ORD -> GRB (United Express to/from Green Bay and Lufthansa on the rest). GRB -> ORD -> GRB was a BAe146 which wasn't bad; definitely the most comfortable regional I was on. ORD -> FRA was a 747; I felt very safe (the plane seemed to be solidly built). FRA -> ZRH was an A320; my first impression was that it seemed "flimsy" (watching the other A32x series planes taking off, they all seemed to be "flimsy" since all of the other planes were keeping their wings level. ZRH -> MUC was a CRJ; again, seemed to be "flimsy" since all of the other planes were keeping their wings level. And, it also proved the "joke" that you can tell who the captain is and who the FO is based on which way their head is tilted... Our passenger seats seemed to be the same. MUC -> ORD was an A340. Now, I know the A340 is Airbus' response (right word?) to the 747, so I expected that it would seem just as solidly built as the 747. I soon realized that, like the A320, the A340 seemed to be "flimsy" (compared to the 747). Oh, and for comparison, when I flew to TX on an American Eagle E140, which also seemed pretty solid, so it's not "just" due to being a regional plane that the others seemed flimsier - again, I thought the BAe146 was solid too. I guess the point is that Airbus really isn't all they're hyped up to be... Last edited by a_loser; 10-10-2005 at 01:33 PM.

10-10-2005, 02:12 PM	#10
Hapag-Lloyd Insane Collector Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 40 Posts: 2,353	Have you ever seen a 777 inflight, or taking off? Seen how the "flimsy" wings reeeeeaaallly bend upwards? AA587 was pilot´s error, the guy obviously thought he was still flying a USAF fighter plane. A fuel leak is a maintenance problem, not one of the plane´s design (else we´d have Lufthansa A300-600s falling out of the sky on a daily basis). Now, if AA decides to cut their expenses on maintenance, then maybe it is time to switch the airline, not the plane. As for the flimsyinterior , I never had that experience on an Airbus; I prefer them over Boeing products for their safety standards. Beauty, however, is in the eye of the beholder. Edit: The A340 is not a "response" to anything. Still, it competes with the 777. The A380 would be the closest Airbus design to a 747, albeit the A380 is at least one generation ahead. __________________ THIS SPACE 4 RENT!!! Last edited by Hapag-Lloyd; 10-10-2005 at 02:14 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

10-03-2005, 05:22 PM	#6
AA767Lover Collector Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Panama City Posts: 83	Hahahah! Give me your ticket and itinerary Steve and I'll fly those darn gorgeous routes! It's amazing what they did! Yes, they should have notified you, but nowadays, that means extra costs. Cost-cutting is almost ridiculous to the proportions they're doing it at! Must be painful for you. I'd take it anyday and go island hopping.

10-10-2005, 11:01 AM	#8
AA767Lover Collector Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Panama City Posts: 83	Kinda balances it! 20 mins early, but 20 min wait for a gate. But it is bad luck that you ended up with a 763. I like the A300 on short flights. They're comfortable. Not bad. But springing a leak?!!!!!!!!!!!! I think AA needs to really consider its A300 even if it's good. It's going to be a long-term liability when it comes to passenger safety. I flew Scarebuses from MIA-LIM, and SJO-MIA and they seemed ok, but i admit it was scary to tink about them, especially after AA 587 a few years back.