American Airlines has today announced that it will start selling premium economy on one of its premium transcon routes. However, perhaps what’s most interesting is what American isn’t directly announcing.
In this post:
American will fly Boeing 777s between JFK & LAX
Currently, American’s premium transcontinental flights are exclusively operated by special three cabin Airbus A321Ts, featuring first class, business class, and economy. That will soon be changing.
For flights as of October 5, 2025, American will progressively start flying Boeing 777-200ERs on select flights between New York (JFK) and Los Angeles (LAX). Schedules are expected to be updated by July 28, 2025, to reflect these changes. American’s 777-200ERs are configured with 273 seats, including 37 business class seats, 24 premium economy seats, and 212 economy seats.
Obviously this aircraft swap has major implications for the passenger experience. These frequencies will feature premium economy rather than first class, and business class will be a much improved experience. Furthermore, overall per-aircraft capacity is increasing massively, given that the A321Ts only feature 102 seats.
American specifically highlights how premium economy passengers will receive priority check-in, security, and boarding. They’ll also receive an amenity kit, and a pillow and blanket. Once inflight, passengers will receive complimentary alcoholic drinks, plus a hot meal.
Here’s how American Chief Customer Officer Heather Garboden describes the premium economy angle:
“We are excited to provide customers the opportunity to experience our Premium Economy service on our premier domestic route. With the domestic debut of Premium Economy, customers will enjoy a more comfortable seat, enhanced amenities and elevated dining with hot entree choices when traveling coast-to-coast.”
This is the start of the end of the Airbus A321Ts
Why is American suddenly starting to fly 777s between New York and Los Angeles? Well, we know that American is planning a major strategy shift over the coming months and years:
- American plans to reconfigure all of its special A321Ts with the standard “Oasis” product, so these planes will have the same layout as American’s other A321s
- Then American plans to eventually start taking delivery of A321XLRs, which will be used in premium transcontinental markets; these planes will feature business class, premium economy, and economy, as American eliminates its “premium” first class
So yeah, it sounds like the A321T retrofits are starting, in anticipation of the A321XLRs joining the fleet. And that also lets American start to sell premium economy in this market, since those A321XLRs will also have premium economy. That way when the switchover from 777s to A321XLRs happens, it’ll be pretty seamless.
Both Delta and United also sell premium economy in premium transcontinental markets, so American is following competitors here.
Bottom line
As of October 2025, American will begin flying 777s between JFK and LAX, meaning American will start selling premium economy in the market. This represents a major shift for the airline, which has exclusively flown its A321Ts between the two airports for years.
This will be gradual, but we’re going to see A321Ts reconfigured with a standard domestic layout, in anticipation of upcoming A321XLR deliveries.
What do you make of these updates to American’s service between JFK & LAX?
I'm focused on the expanding transcon premium economy products becoming available rather than what's being offered in business or economy. It seems to me and to the airlines that many non-business travel customers who are paying for their own travel are willing to pay the upcharge to P/E in order to get back to a level of service offered in economy decades ago - reasonable legroom and a hot meal on a 5-hour flight mean everything to me.
I'm glad to see the increased capacity for AA. As a OW Emerald, I haven't flown a single AA transcon this year due to limited capacity - even booking 4-6 weeks out, only middle seats left in economy, if that. Once the Northeast alliance fell apart, their frequency and capacity to JFK and BOS sunk.
For the past few years we have flown the 321T many times between LAX-JFK and love the business class service. It's the only plane we have flown on those routes and will miss it's compact size.
I'm flying LAX-JFK in J on Oct 4, the day before this starts going live. I don't even want to think about the state the cabin will be in on a plane AA may phase out as soon as the next day.
Presumably they're there as a stop gap during the winters months with reduced European flying. Interesting that AA never tried PE on widebody MIA/LAX flights.
Guessing this won’t be too good for B6 or DL or AA, unless they see a real need for increased freight capacity, for the short term, Kind of feel B6 will be least affected, and AA and DL neutrally affected as they are both after the same flyer… but a 777-200! Dang the airlines must really be desperate for a middle market twin aisle to have to go to these lengths on transcons. Boeing? Lockheed? Where are ya’!
Lockheed? They’ve been out of the commercial sky bus game for decades. May as well ask Blue Bird or Gillig to build a plane - the development and ground infrastructure costs would run about the same.
AA suddenly moving into 2nd place with the transcon game for client experience.
1. B6 - Mint reigns
2. AA
3. UA (would be 2nd if they didn’t have some frequencies operated by 8 across 777)
4. DL - holding the 767s crop dusters together with chicken wire and duct tape, ya little country bumpkins!
True, but if you manage to get DL's A330neo on a rotation for JFK-LAX, it's really solid imo.
and yet DL manages to carry as much revenue and traffic from NYC as AA and B6 COMBINED.
even in the transcon markets, your perception of client experience doesn't translate into customer buying.
A little off-topic, but I saw that Delta is seemingly succeeding w/ SEA-TPE with over 90% loads in June and has been averaging about 80% since the start of the year. Not bad! I think the D1 lounge will boost SEA performance too.
Please share your thoughts :)
DL was bound to discount as necessary to fill its flights. They clearly aren't going anywhere from TPE.
Are they making money? hard to know but the A350 is certain to be carrying much more cargo and also fly a little faster.
You need only look at what is happening on PHX-TPE to see how badly the Taiwanese airlines are not willing to let any other airline gain an advantage.
It is...
DL was bound to discount as necessary to fill its flights. They clearly aren't going anywhere from TPE.
Are they making money? hard to know but the A350 is certain to be carrying much more cargo and also fly a little faster.
You need only look at what is happening on PHX-TPE to see how badly the Taiwanese airlines are not willing to let any other airline gain an advantage.
It is a tough market but it is precisely because DL is doing what it needs to do in TPE that it is taking on HKG and specifically UA and CX with UA already recording low LFs on its double daily flights.
sidetrack, indeed but it shows that DL is willing to take on stronger carriers in markets including in Asia while AA could not compete in those markets and pulled its Asian network down
But this is a MASSIVE DOWNGRADE for anyone who cares about having reliable fast WiFi.
Going from Viasat to the crappy Panasonic wifi is going to be awful. For that reason alone, I'll stick to the narrow bodies on this route.
Good point.
This eliminates access to Chelsea on transcons as there is no F product.
I'm guessing they won't open Chelsea to Biz on transcons
It will be a paid add-on. This is already in the works for when the XLRs enter transcon serve.
Meh been to Chelsea plenty of times it's ok. The fireplace is nice during Christmas. Also stop by the Soho on the way out to grab drinks. Much better light there.
Will any other domestic PE flights get the enhanced benefits as well? I’m flying AA 787 in premium economy for the first time from ORD to HNL in January.
I agree with Mary - I am still skeptical about the apparent move to narrow bodies on these transcon routes. We just saw the route by route revenues. Delta and United make a ton of money flying big planes on these routes. AA apparently moving to wide bodies in a temporary move. AA moving back to narrow body Airbuses, and Delta doing the same thing, seems to imply a big drop in capacity and revenue...
I agree with Mary - I am still skeptical about the apparent move to narrow bodies on these transcon routes. We just saw the route by route revenues. Delta and United make a ton of money flying big planes on these routes. AA apparently moving to wide bodies in a temporary move. AA moving back to narrow body Airbuses, and Delta doing the same thing, seems to imply a big drop in capacity and revenue generation for these routes. I just don’t see it happening the way it is being explained. United certainly isn’t going to downguage if/when it gets back into JFK.
Wanted to post this as a main comment, not as a reply
Probably not until either the 777s get expanded to other transcon routes (we'll see) or the A321XLRs come online (which are confirmed to have PE). At that point, AA can standardize the J and PE transcon offering across all of its flights.
the 777 is a heavy aircraft for domestic routes. It is, at best, a stopgap aircraft.
On a per seat cost basis, the 787-8 is much better suited and probably has similar if not better acquisition costs as the 321XLR on a per seat basis.
the 767 was originally designed as a domestic widebody and Boeing managed to squeeze range out of it; it is still the right size for domestic routes and can carry...
the 777 is a heavy aircraft for domestic routes. It is, at best, a stopgap aircraft.
On a per seat cost basis, the 787-8 is much better suited and probably has similar if not better acquisition costs as the 321XLR on a per seat basis.
the 767 was originally designed as a domestic widebody and Boeing managed to squeeze range out of it; it is still the right size for domestic routes and can carry cargo. The 767 fleet is paid off which is why the 763s work for DL and the 764s will likely take that place in a few years.
Tim - I and others have long suspected the 787 would be the eventual solution for a lot of this. Delta could run 787s on almost all of the current 767 routes, including transc
ons. Maybe AA runs a mix of the new airbuses, 777 and 787 eventually. Unless you run planes every half hour, or you can charge 50% more for tickets, there is too much revenue to be lost by going all narrowbody.
Anthony,
I always look forward to your comments.
The NE transcon markets for DL will move from 763s to 764s to A330CEOs.
If DL buys the 787s, they will be for TATL and S. America use.
sure an occasional a/c like the 339 end up on a transcon route because of aircraft routing or available time in the schedule but transcon markets for DL will use smaller and paid-off widebodies.
Let's...
Anthony,
I always look forward to your comments.
The NE transcon markets for DL will move from 763s to 764s to A330CEOs.
If DL buys the 787s, they will be for TATL and S. America use.
sure an occasional a/c like the 339 end up on a transcon route because of aircraft routing or available time in the schedule but transcon markets for DL will use smaller and paid-off widebodies.
Let's see how long the 764s remain in the fleet but supposedly some of the older ones (there isn't that much age difference in the entire 764 fleet between DL and UA) are coming up for another complete overhaul. If so, then the chances are that they will time out again in the early 2030s which says that the 787s will need to be arriving by then -if not to finish up the 763 retirements.
AA has no older widebodies that are well-suited for domestic anymore; the 777 is a heavy aircraft but also has great cargo capacity. its best use is MIA to S. America where it sits for half of the day and comes back full of cargo.
the 787-8 is a good transcon aircraft and is comparable in size to what DL will offer until the 330CEOs start taking over.
DL and UA have widebodies on the LAX-JFK/EWR route.
Why would anyone (with money) choose to fly a narrowbody on this route beats me.
AA has been flying A321T's for years now. The Flagship First seat is better than D1 but not as good as B6 intl Mint. If B6 had a lounge I'd choose them every time. Now with the partnership with UA probably only a matter of time before that happens.
UA flies out of Newark only, not JFK: a big NO except for those looking to travel to lower Manhattan.
And have you been on one of those 35 year old Delta 767's lately? They are literally held together with duct tape.
While a narrow body, the A321T's fly from JFK and have a very nice 1 + 1 first class seat and are fairly new and modern
Rob, UA has, by far, the most revenue between NYC and SFO/LAX, so looks like they’re doing pretty well on those flights with a lot of people who want the product.
You have to see FC on the 321T narrow body. It is no cattle car and a beautiful plane and great experience.
Flagship First Dining at LAX will remain "temporarily" closed for the foreseeable future. But, Mr Isom aspires to AA being a premium airline. It's this nickel and dime mentality that will prevent that from happening.
Shocker.
It will ease the transition to the A321XLR I suppose.
this is far from just about PE.
It is about AA's need to get the 321Ts out of the market; they didn't make money and AA has to cut the losses; they could have put 787-8s on the routes but those aircraft are much more economical on international routes.
Also, AA and DL gained a significant amount of share from UA as a result of EWR capacity cuts. It is absolutely a given that AA's...
this is far from just about PE.
It is about AA's need to get the 321Ts out of the market; they didn't make money and AA has to cut the losses; they could have put 787-8s on the routes but those aircraft are much more economical on international routes.
Also, AA and DL gained a significant amount of share from UA as a result of EWR capacity cuts. It is absolutely a given that AA's reconstituted sales team is trying to win over transcon business on a longer term basis and putting more capacity into the market is a way to help capture that.
There will be pressure on AA's pricing as they more than double the number of seats - but the 777s aren't going to be on every flight.
Who said they didn't make money? AA has routinely called out the LAX domestic network as quite profitable as well as the JFK transcons. They lost AA share, but losing share while still being profitable but not maximizing profits optimally is two completely different things.
Jeremy outing himself as an AA employee. Welcome Jezza.
whoever Jeremy is doesn't matter.
AA has said that LAX domestic did lose money; they haven't said that about the A321T strategy but it was obvious that their fare premium was too low relative to their higher CASM.
and they lost the cargo revenues when they ditched the 767-200s which DL promptly picked up.
I suspect that AA's version of profitability includes fully and disproportionately allocating credit card revenues to JFK.
@Tim Dunn Care to share that source or data behind that speculation? Here's one from 2021 and late 2022 with AA's network planner has said LAX domestic has long been profitable and makes them money. They literally highlighted New York-Los Angeles as a profitable route they wanted to deploy more capacity to.
Plus, if you look at actual DOT data on LAX O&D passenger avg. domestic fare in 2024 btw, AA was at 260 while...
@Tim Dunn Care to share that source or data behind that speculation? Here's one from 2021 and late 2022 with AA's network planner has said LAX domestic has long been profitable and makes them money. They literally highlighted New York-Los Angeles as a profitable route they wanted to deploy more capacity to.
Plus, if you look at actual DOT data on LAX O&D passenger avg. domestic fare in 2024 btw, AA was at 260 while DL was 257.
Source: https://viewfromthewing.com/american-airlines-says-they-cut-their-la-asia-flying-because-of-too-much-competition/
and https://viewfromthewing.com/american-airlines-explains-the-future-of-lax-and-their-new-asia-gateway-airport/
@UncleRonnie why would I be an AA employee just for calling out a statement that is almost certainly inaccurate? I like to have factually based conversations with data, and when I see things that negate the facts and reporting that is out there, I'd call it out.
I shared actual statements by AA on LAX domestic and transcon performance but even Crankyflier did an analysis on this noting AA's declining performance:
https://crankyflier.com/2024/04/11/americans-revenue-performance-sinks/
Doing some...
@UncleRonnie why would I be an AA employee just for calling out a statement that is almost certainly inaccurate? I like to have factually based conversations with data, and when I see things that negate the facts and reporting that is out there, I'd call it out.
I shared actual statements by AA on LAX domestic and transcon performance but even Crankyflier did an analysis on this noting AA's declining performance:
https://crankyflier.com/2024/04/11/americans-revenue-performance-sinks/
Doing some basic math with the data we have given LFs are comparable for everyone ~85% on the route (look at loadfactors.net) and the B767's cost is ~1.7-2x the A321 given more staffing, landing fees, and higher fuel burn (but lower CASM overall if you can fill the seats which DL does):
B767: 190 passengers * $400= $76k. Say the cost is $50k for a profit of ~$20k
A321T: 85 passengers * $500= $43k. Say the cost is $30k for a profit of ~$13k
DL is more profitable, but given the fare and LF information we have it's really hard to accurately claim AA's transcons are unprofitable unless you think DL is slightly above break-even on its transcons. Is AA not as profitable as DL -absolutely but that wasn't the claim.
No matter how great an AI bot is, there will always be the tell.
Today I see it, and I'll leave it at that.
Is it only going to be 772s taking over some of those frequencies? The press release didn’t say anything about the equipment they’re going to run (as far as I could tell)
How it has taken them this long to realize they needed to put a competitive product on this “flagship” route now, not 2-5 years from now, is beyond me. The revenue results by route published the other day really drove that home. Whether they are just trying to show the financial markets that they are trying harder, still good news for domestic customers.
Or the hundreds of thousands "loyal" AA flyers who wouldn't fit on the plane since AA made capacity so small compared to their competitors. Especially, Delta. Will be hard to claw any of that business back.
That too of course! And what are you winning business back with - the ground experience? Delta you can go to JFK T4 and either go to the D1 lounge if in D1 or if you are in economy/PE go to SkyClub, Centurion, Chase or CapOne.
AA… you can go to Greenwich if in Business (can’t even go to Soho if you have status) and that’s about it unless you have regular Admirals Club...
That too of course! And what are you winning business back with - the ground experience? Delta you can go to JFK T4 and either go to the D1 lounge if in D1 or if you are in economy/PE go to SkyClub, Centurion, Chase or CapOne.
AA… you can go to Greenwich if in Business (can’t even go to Soho if you have status) and that’s about it unless you have regular Admirals Club access. 772s don’t have first but I suppose you can buy “business plus” and go to Chelsea, but who is really doing that? And Greenwich is a fine lounge, not a great lounge, nowhere near D1 or even the made to order food at Chase / CapOne in T4.
In general would I rather fly a 777 versus a 767? Sure (although plenty of AA 777s still have backwards facing business seats). Is a 767 good enough for a transcon flight? Absolutely.
I personally find it telling that they announced this as a premium economy expansion, not as a better business class / overall product expansion. They obviously haven’t figured out how to make the business transcon experience better yet. At a minimum if you are flying in business and you are EP/PPro, you should be able to access Soho instead of Greenwich when flying JFK/LAX.
The future is all Airbus it seems. Does Boeing not have a A321XLR competitor?
Not even close. The B38M is the “closest” and its range pales in comparison at ~3700nm versus ~5400 for the XLR.
My sincere apologies - I quoted the 38M range in NM and the XLR range in statue miles. The XLR has a range of ~4700nm. Realized right after I hit the button.
Where are the 777's coming from? Is AA dropping some International flights?
What will be the Comp upgrades from > to?
What will be the SWU or points+copay upgrades from > to?
AA is getting 11 B789Ps this year (4 already delivered) and expects 5 XLRs this year (1 will be delivered next week but w/o seats so will go to storage).
Those new wide bodies should free up some capacity though some will have to cover the 77Ws for retrofits until the Spring.
This also starts in the fall... low season for AA widebodies that I have seen flying from CUN to JFK before.
Yes..making CDG, MAD (to name a few)seasonal and losing them in the Fall.
So this makes sense from an aircraft availability perspective because American has lots of wide bodies sitting around in winter.
When are they getting the 321xlr? sure hope it is before April because American will need some 777 back unless they don’t want to fly all their trans atlatnics.
Drat - just booked a flight JFK-LAX for the end of September. Would have been nice to fly on a widebody, and my employer won’t pay for J but they will pay for W.
I hope they keep the JFK-SNA and BOS-LAX 321Ts for now; those BOS flights are pretty easy upgrades on certain days of the week.
Nope. All 321T's as we know it are going to be gone by the end of this year. No more 3 class. 321T beats the monstrous 777 imo.
XLR's are def gonna be a while..
https://bsky.app/profile/xjonnyc.bsky.social/post/3lupxrafq422r
and part of this is because US airlines have no interest in taking delivery of Airbus aircraft that are built in Europe (as all XLRs are) as long as tariffs remain an issue. the seat issue just gives them yet another reason.
Even if they are forced to take delivery of the aircraft - which Airbus is increasingly requiring US airlines to do - US airlines are putting them in storage in Europe pending...
and part of this is because US airlines have no interest in taking delivery of Airbus aircraft that are built in Europe (as all XLRs are) as long as tariffs remain an issue. the seat issue just gives them yet another reason.
Even if they are forced to take delivery of the aircraft - which Airbus is increasingly requiring US airlines to do - US airlines are putting them in storage in Europe pending not only resolution of the tariff issue but also to get the seats certified.
It is mind-boggling how messed up premium seat certification has become.
Is BOS losing the 321T on BOS-LAX? They rotate JFK-LAX-BOS.
Yes. XLR replacing it .
Honestly, would've been a great move for AA to keep these A321Ts around and just sold them on various transcon routes. Things like LAX-MIA would've made sense imo.
Can't be that cheap or efficient to retrofit and downgrade a whole fleet of aircraft.
@ yoloswag420 -- "Can't be that cheap or efficient to retrofit and downgrade a whole fleet of aircraft." I have to imagine that American gets a volume discount there. ;-)
The issue that’s come up in the past is capturing the premium revenue on flat-bed seats to justify the space.
Outside NYC-SFO, NYC-LAX, BOS-LAX, US-Hawaii, and a few other routes (LAX-DCA, NYC-SNA), no airline has been able to get the 3-4x pricing premium on a route to justify the lie-flat product. The one airline that has tried en masse - B6 and look at their financials. They’ve put all the A321LR and XLR deliveries on...
The issue that’s come up in the past is capturing the premium revenue on flat-bed seats to justify the space.
Outside NYC-SFO, NYC-LAX, BOS-LAX, US-Hawaii, and a few other routes (LAX-DCA, NYC-SNA), no airline has been able to get the 3-4x pricing premium on a route to justify the lie-flat product. The one airline that has tried en masse - B6 and look at their financials. They’ve put all the A321LR and XLR deliveries on pause since they have far more MINT seating than they need.
So the problem for AA is not sure there are that many markets that can use the A321T configuration outside transcons.
I think you're correlating unrelated things with the current financial status of JetBlue.
JetBlue's Mint product did work and allows it to get yields comparable to big 3 carriers on these routes.
It's strategic decisions and operational issues that have led to their problems. Things like poor on-time performance, inability to monetize its FF program well, the disastrous LAX expansion, etc.
Mint is not a reason why JetBlue is doing poorly. If premium seating was...
I think you're correlating unrelated things with the current financial status of JetBlue.
JetBlue's Mint product did work and allows it to get yields comparable to big 3 carriers on these routes.
It's strategic decisions and operational issues that have led to their problems. Things like poor on-time performance, inability to monetize its FF program well, the disastrous LAX expansion, etc.
Mint is not a reason why JetBlue is doing poorly. If premium seating was an issue, then they wouldn't be introducing more of it.
Mint is not the reason why it is doing poorly, but JetBlue has more MINT seating than it can effectively utilize outside of the transcons. If you look at the revolving door of routes that it does / does not offer MINT service outside the transcons this becomes readily clear.
AA's exec did also publicly come out and say why they don't offer a lie-flat product consistently on LAX-MIA for that same reason.
interesting side conversation but the big difference between Mint and the A321T is dozens more total seats.
there will be at least 4 US airlines with premium configured 321NEO aircraft that will be used at least partially on transcon routes.
The 321T is just too small but the fact that every airline is shooting for 145 seats or more (I think DL's will have the fewest number of total seats) says that airlines believe a...
interesting side conversation but the big difference between Mint and the A321T is dozens more total seats.
there will be at least 4 US airlines with premium configured 321NEO aircraft that will be used at least partially on transcon routes.
The 321T is just too small but the fact that every airline is shooting for 145 seats or more (I think DL's will have the fewest number of total seats) says that airlines believe a premium transcon product can work and several airlines believe it can work on int'l routes but it needs to have a whole lot more seats than the 321T has had.
I think AA does run premium transcon service on LAX-MIA at least some of the time if not all flights, but they use the 777 for it as they will temporarily now be doing on LAX-JFK.
I used to pay for premium (e.g. Mint) on BOS-LAX/SFO but have reevaluated doing so lately. Flights are so short there is no time to really enjoy the product. I now prefer selecting the exit row for free.