www.fgks.org »
Address
:
[go:
up one dir
,
main page
]
Include Form
Remove Scripts
Accept Cookies
Show Images
Show Referer
Rotate13
Base64
Strip Meta
Strip Title
Session Cookies
FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1986
1986 - 2017.PDF
To South America North American route map ^Barbados fe'Port of Spain Panama City ] I \: The airline is able now to concentrate its operations on fewer hubs ment strategy, because the shuttle is to LaGuardia and our development strategy is centred on JFK." Pan Am's development of feeder routes has become more important because, as Acker explained, "the airline's route struc ture is now firmly based on a hub-and- spoke strategy". In April Pan Am announced that it was buying Ransome Airlines, which would become a subsidiary known as Ransome Express. "Its route system in the north eastern US", said Acker, "fits nicely with our operation at New York's. Kennedy Airport." In June Pan Am announced a new joint marketing programme with Presidential Airways at Miami and Dulles Airports. Shugrue said that the two airlines were looking at the possibility of a joint facility at Dulles, and commented: "That is envi sioned as a long-term relationship. And we are searching for a partner in the southeast". Pan Am does have a feeder arrangement with Air Atlanta at Miami and Atlanta Airports. But Shugrue now says: "Mar keting arrangements are not enough; you have to lock them up". He points out that Pan Am had a marketing arrangement with Empire Airlines which was then acquired by Piedmont, which entered into a marketing arrangement with TWA. Pan Am reacted to that by buying Ransome. And many other feeder carriers have recently switched from one major carrier to another. "Some people believe", Shugrue said, "that there will not be an unaffiliated commuter operator left in the country in a few years. They will be strongly affiliated with a major operator or they will be out of business. "I don't buy the argument that we are going to wind up with five or six mega- carriers and then a whole bunch of little guys. There might be six, seven, or eight mega-carriers owning all the other carriers ... I believe that there is a place for an airline that seeks to prosper without becoming a giant. But that airline must have an enlightened idea of its role and a plan that is realistic and works." Pan Am's idea of its role since the sale of the Pacific Division is embodied in what it calls "The New World of Pan Am". Its routes extend from Honolulu to Bombay. They include transcontinental domestic routes and an extensive network of feeder services in Europe. It boasts that it already services more foreign points than any other US carrier, and it is planning to increase its transatlantic and Latin American services. This summer, although it had to cut back on the transatlantic routes, Pan Am doubled its capacity in Latin America by adding some flights and by replacing L-lOlls with 747s. "We're doing very well in the Caribbean," Shugrue said, "and we're having good traffic on our long-haul Latin American routes. "We think there is some growth poten tial in Central America, and we are look ing into what opportunities we might have from the West Coast of the United States down into Central and South America". Perhaps the best example of the pace of change at Pan Am these days, and the confidence—almost cockiness—it displays is in the matter of terminal facilities at Kennedy Airport. In its annual report, and in all the speeches by Acker and Shugrue in the first five months of this year, Pan Am talked about the recent improvements it had made in its "Worldport" at Kennedy. Nothing was said about any need for more or better facilities. In early June, in a conversation with Flight, Shugrue called Pan Am's world- port "the best terminal at JFK—bar none". New terminal at JFK? But three weeks later Acker made a speech to the JFK Chamber of Commerce and dropped this bombshell: "Pan Am will be the primary tenant of a land-efficient, 'high-tech' 48-gate passenger terminal to be constructed at JFK Airport and ready for use in the early 1990s". Acker's speech, and the press release which Pan Am issued, described "a $500 million facility to be built on a site which now includes the existing United Airlines terminal". He said that Pan Am and United (and presumably all of their tenant airlines) would move to the Northwest Airlines terminal during the construction period, and that Northwest and Delta "will move to other quarters at JFK". It all sounded very definite because Acker did not mention any requirement for approval by anybody else, and said: "Construction is expected to begin in early 1987, with completion scheduled for no later than 1993". When Flight asked for details, a Pan Am spokesman suggested that the questions be put to the airport operator, The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. But a spokesman for the Port Authority said that the Pan Am plan was only one of many plans the Authority was considering as part of a new "mega-terminal" for the airport. A spokesman for Northwest said that it was seeking larger facilities at the airport, including inspection facilities for incom ing international passengers. He said that Northwest was discussing its needs and how they might mesh with the needs of other carriers, with the Port Authority, but that nothing was definite. A spokesman for United said that it was aware of the Port Authority's long- discussed plans for a mega-terminal and of the Pan Am plan "because we know what we read in the papers". But he said: "We have not participated in any discussion with Pan Am or the Port Authority". When asked about these contradictory statements, Shugrue admitted that there were many questions "for which there are no answers as yet", and that the series of moves described by Acker was "one alter native among many". When I asked how Pan Am could set specific dates under these circumstances, Shugrue replied: "That's what we are looking to achieve and that's what we intend to do. Could someone say that's a pretty ambitious timetable considering all the things that need to be done? Of course it's ambitious. We are not noted around here for being hesitant these days. "We know we need a new facility out there; we know the Port wants one; we know the City of New York wants one. We are the biggest operator at JFK now, and we will be bigger still in '87, '88 and '89— so we need to press forward to get it done." If Pan Am doesn't "get it done" it won't be for lack of effort—and it certainly won't be for lack of confidence. D FLIGHT INTERNATIONAL, 23 August 1986 23
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events