AA flies 5 passengers from US to London

[BA747-436]

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.

Id imagine it had something to do with the fact that passengers have a choice of which carrier they fly (As AA so nauseatingly mentions on every dam flight) and they chose and airline that a) doesn't charge them for alcohol, b) gives them the whole can, c) has On demand IFE, d) has a more suitable arrival time and departure time, and finally d) is more cost effective for the ticket purchaser.

[Bok269]

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?

From what I heard they all were bumped up to C.

[MaxPower]

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

Did you care to even read the first post. It's all there. Otherwise check the link.

"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."

Just imagine how it disrupts the flight ops.

[Foxtrot]

Re:

The stupid tree-huggers can go take a hike as far as I'm concerned, they're becoming more ignorant AND arrogant with each passing day. Someone should really put them in their place.

[tommyalf]

Someone should tell these folks about the amount of ferry flights that take place everyday with ZERO passengers on board. This is a non issue. They also fail to realize that the plane more then likely was carry 200 people back to Dallas or whatever AA gateway it was being dispatched to. If AA grounded the flight how were those people to get home or to wherever it is they were going? I'm all for protecting the Earth but these people are just plain stupid..

[Mungous]

Okay so plants and trees consume CO2 in their food process

So if anything, more jets flying = healthier trees

[JordanD]

I'm all for protecting the Earth but these people are just plain stupid..

There's actually an anti-aviation group in Europe called "Plane Stupid". How fitting. There's also "Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution", or CRAAP around SMO.
In all seriousness though, there certainly are bigger issues than one "emtpy" 777 flying across the Atlantic. But of course being environmentally conscientious has become more of a "look at me, my farts smell good" bandwagon than anything that actually does any good, and aviation has become an easy scapegoat.

[AR342]

Don't be so harsh with the environmentalists. They are wrong, yes, very wrong, because they surely know how to save earth but I bet they know nothing about running an airline, which AA sure does.

For ordinary people who don't know nothing about commercial aviation it would sound very logic to accommodate those 5 pax on other flights, that's the problem. What they don't know is what you all have stated above -cargo, pax waiting in London, etc-

The example some of you gave of ferry flights or cargo flights, in my opinion, is also wrong. Those flights are scheduled to be without pax and they have a totally different purpose. It's easy to see why they don't try to stop these flights, they understand that these MUST be done, whereas, on the other hand, AA could have just cancelled the flight.

[JordanD]

Don't be so harsh with the environmentalists.

It's hard not to when they give other rational people who care about the environment such a bad name.

[AASuper80Fan]

Geeze, shouldn't the Da*n tree huggers not bitch about this and think about the convience of others passengers.

[3WE]

Did you care to even read the first post. It's all there.

Sure did....one of the the bottom lines / take-home messages of that post said:

Can't say that AA is eco-friendly. [plus an emoticon showing shock and horror]

To which there were at least 10 replies that it isn't exactly right to accuse AA of being environmentally irresponsible.

[thxcollins]

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?

From what I heard they all were bumped up to C.

Read the article, it will answer Crunk's question and remove your speculation Bok269.

[Bok269]

Read the article, it will answer Crunk's question and remove your speculation Bok269.

They were upgraded to C.

Better?

[Will M]

I don't see them bitching when NASA sends 7 guys about 40 times further in a Space Shuttle

[AA 1818]

I don't see them bitching when NASA sends 7 guys about 40 times further in a Space Shuttle

VERY WELL SAID!!! Made me laugh.