Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AA flies 5 passengers from US to London

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AA flies 5 passengers from US to London

    Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../nplane105.xml

    American Airlines is under fire from environmentalists for flying an aircraft across the Atlantic with only five passengers on board.


    It is estimated that each passenger produced 43 tons of CO2 – consuming enough fuel to carry a Ford Mondeo around the world five times.
    Operating the near empty flight is estimated as having cost American about £30,000. But a spokesman said it had no alternative.

    "With such a small passenger load we did consider whether we could cancel the flight and re-accommodate the five remaining passengers on other flights.

    "However, this would have left a plane load of west-bound passengers stranded in London Heathrow who were due to fly back to the US on the same aircraft.

    "We sought alternative flights for the west-bound passengers but heavy loads out of London that day meant that this was not possible."




    *******


    Can't say that AA is eco-friendly.

    However those lucky passengers can choose whatever seat they want on the aircraft.
    Inactive from May 1 2009.

  • #2
    Let's not forget that there was cargo on board and that without that flight, a full 777 load of passengers would be stuck in London. In this industry its a case of you are damned if you do and damned if you don't.

    Comment


    • #3
      As stated cargo is an issue not mentioned here. Some airlines make more from the cargo they carry than the passenger revenue on certain flights....

      Ive been on a a flight when i was the ONLY passenger. Now that was fun

      Comment


      • #4
        These environmentalists here really have their priorities out of whack. Much bigger fish to fry than one AA jet crossing the pond with 5 people on board.

        Comment


        • #5
          Bigger fish like climbing on an A320 at LHR?

          Comment


          • #6
            That's nothing!! Watch the cost of fuel and operation of taking people to space....in the shuttle...!

            Environmentalists sometimes don't have much work to do.

            Comment


            • #7
              Geez, I feel like talking about Al Gore and his single-person transoceanic flights on a gas-guzzling Gulfstream...

              Originally posted by Bok269
              Let's not forget that there was cargo on board and that without that flight, a full 777 load of passengers would be stuck in London.
              Two good points, but then again, these points require thinking further, which treehugggers are incapable of.

              Originally posted by Bok269
              In this industry its a case of you are damned if you do and damned if you don't.
              Very true. Had AA cancelled the flights, people would have b!tched that AA left people stranded, on their own, without hotel accomodations, yadda yadda yadda.

              Comment


              • #8
                Yeah I agree that the flight shouldnt have been cancel. I'm surprised to see that people react so strongly to this incident while there are other flights that are sometimes virtually empty.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I've always thought "Carbon Footprint" is a stupid term describing environmental impact.
                  Follow me on Twitter! www.twitter.com/flyingphotog

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    My only reaction to this is how awesome it would be to have a 772 pretty much to myself. I wonder if they bumped all 5 up to first?

                    These enviornmentalists need a life. How about the 747F's which cross the atlantic everyday with ZERO pax on board? How do they make a profit...oh wait...I guess cargo needs to be transported too somehow. Gee wiz! So I guess theres a chance AA made some $ off of the cargo, huh?

                    Just the fact that enviornmentalists would find this out, and create a big piss fit over one flight...wow, people these days.
                    sigpic
                    http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=170

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Oh they should just cry themselves a river... then hopefully they'll get stuck on the other side since building a bridge would harm the environment

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I guess beavers could build them a crossing, but then again that might create .0000000000000000000000001% of the day's greenhouse gasses.
                        sigpic
                        http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=170

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I am sorry to sound like sour grapes, but I seriously doubt that AA flew that flight soley for the sake of exemplary customer service for those 5 passengers.

                          I imagine they could have easily bought first-class tickets for them on another carrier, given them a free-flight voucher, and gotten them to the destination within an hour of the original schedule.

                          I'm sure AA would have LOVED to "simply" park the aiplane and pocket the jet fuel, except as everyone has said before, there was cargo to be flown and other flights that needed that aircraft.

                          Bottom line: "Yeah, what everyone said above!" AND if it was SIMPLY Carbon, fuel and operation costs, they could EASILY have parked the plane.'

                          They flew the flight for good reasons, and I hope those passengers got to sit where they wanted, run laps, have the FULL can of soda and the whole 9 yards
                          Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I think the more interesting question not yet addressed is why, in these days of sophisticated yield management systems, American allowed itself to be down to just 5 passengers on a transatlantic trip. Yes, it's low season, and it's a competitive market across the Atlantic, but I am surprised that their pricing mechanism allowed this sort of load to be the result, especially given that US/UK traffic across the water is very strong.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by 3WE
                              I am sorry to sound like sour grapes, but I seriously doubt that AA flew that flight soley for the sake of exemplary customer service for those 5 passengers.

                              I imagine they could have easily bought first-class tickets for them on another carrier, given them a free-flight voucher, and gotten them to the destination within an hour of the original schedule.

                              I'm sure AA would have LOVED to "simply" park the aiplane and pocket the jet fuel, except as everyone has said before, there was cargo to be flown and other flights that needed that aircraft.

                              Bottom line: "Yeah, what everyone said above!" AND if it was SIMPLY Carbon, fuel and operation costs, they could EASILY have parked the plane.'

                              They flew the flight for good reasons, and I hope those passengers got to sit where they wanted, run laps, have the FULL can of soda and the whole 9 yards
                              Knowing AA, I highly doubt they Op/Up'd anyone.

                              I think apart from the cargo consideration the fact that there was more than likely, 200+ passengers awaiting the aircraft at LHR for their flight had something to do with the flight operating as it did.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X