Legal Proceedings	6 Months Ended
Legal Proceedings	Jun. 30, 2014
Loss Contingencies [Line Items]
Legal Proceedings	Legal Proceedings Chapter 11 Cases. As previously disclosed, on the Petition Date, November 29, 2011, the Debtors filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. On October 21, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court entered the Confirmation Order confirming the Plan. On the Effective Date, December 9, 2013, the Debtors consummated their reorganization pursuant to the Plan, principally through the transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement pursuant to which Merger Sub merged with and into US Airways Group, with US Airways Group surviving as a wholly-owned subsidiary of AAG. From the Petition Date through the Effective Date, pursuant to automatic stay provisions under the Bankruptcy Code and orders granted by the Bankruptcy Court, actions to enforce or otherwise effect repayment of liabilities preceding the Petition Date as well as all pending litigation against the Debtors generally were stayed. Following the Effective Date, actions to enforce or otherwise effect repayment of liabilities preceding the Petition Date, generally have been permanently enjoined. Any unresolved claims will continue to be subject to the claims reconciliation process under the supervision of the Bankruptcy Court. However, certain pending litigation related to pre-petition liabilities may proceed in courts other than the Bankruptcy Court to determine the amount, if any, of such litigation claims for purposes of treatment under the Plan. Pursuant to rulings of the Bankruptcy Court, the Plan established the Disputed Claims Reserve to hold shares of AAG Common Stock reserved for issuance to disputed claimholders at the Effective Date that ultimately become holders of allowed Single-Dip Unsecured Claims. The shares provided for under the Plan were determined based upon a Disputed Claims Reserve amount of claims of approximately $755 million, representing the maximum amount of additional distributions to subsequently allowed Single-Dip Unsecured Claims under the Plan. As of June 30, 2014, approximately 30.4 million shares of AAG Common Stock were held in the Disputed Claims Reserve. As disputed claims are resolved, the claimants will receive distributions of shares from the Disputed Claims Reserve on the same basis as if such distributions had been made on or about the Effective Date. However, AAG is not required to distribute additional shares above the limits contemplated by the Plan, even if the shares remaining for distribution are not sufficient to fully pay any additional allowed unsecured claims. On July 1, 2014, approximately 2.9 million of the approximately 30.4 million shares held in the Disputed Claims Reserve were distributed to holders of allowed Single-Dip Unsecured Claims, to holders of certain labor-related deemed claims, and to holders of certain non-management, non-union employee deemed claims as specified in the Plan, and shares were withheld or sold on account of related tax obligations. To the extent that any of the reserved shares remain undistributed upon resolution of all remaining disputed claims, such shares will not be returned to AAG but rather will be distributed to former AMR shareholders as of the Effective Date. However, resolution of disputed claims could have a material effect on recoveries by holders of additional allowed Single-Dip Unsecured Claims under the Plan and the amount of additional share distributions, if any, that are made to former AMR shareholders as the total number of shares of AAG Common Stock that remain available for distribution upon resolution of disputed claims is limited pursuant to the Plan. There is also pending in the Bankruptcy Court an adversary proceeding relating to an action brought by American to seek a determination that certain non-pension, post-employee benefits are not vested benefits and thus may be modified or terminated without liability to American. On April 18, 2014, the Bankruptcy Court granted American's motion for summary judgment with respect to certain non-union employees, concluding that their benefits were not vested and could be terminated. The summary judgment motion was denied with respect to all other retirees. The Bankruptcy Court has not yet scheduled a trial on the merits concerning whether those retirees' benefits are vested, and American cannot predict whether it will receive relief from obligations to provide benefits to any of those retirees. The Company's financial statements presently reflect these retirement programs without giving effect to any modification or termination of benefits that may ultimately be implemented based upon the outcome of this proceeding. Merger Class Action. On March 1, 2013, a complaint captioned Plumbers & Steamfitters Local Union No. 248 Pension Fund v. US Airways Group, Inc., et al., No. CV2013-051605, was filed as a putative class action on behalf of the stockholders of US Airways Group in the Superior Court for Maricopa County, Arizona. On July 3, 2013, an amended complaint, captioned Dennis Palkon, et al. v. US Airways Group, Inc., et al., No. CV2013-051605, was filed with the same court. The amended complaint names as defendants US Airways Group and the members of its board of directors, and alleges that the directors failed to maximize the value of US Airways Group in connection with the Merger and that US Airways Group aided and abetted those breaches of fiduciary duty. The relief sought in the amended complaint included an injunction against the Merger, or rescission in the event it has been consummated. The court in the above-referenced action denied the plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order that had sought to enjoin the US Airways Group Annual Meeting of Stockholders. On May 6, 2014, the court granted defendants' motion to dismiss this action. On May 27, 2014, plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of the court's decision to dismiss the action, and that motion was denied and judgment entered in favor of the defendants, and the complaint was dismissed with prejudice, on July 14, 2014. As of the date of this report, the Company does not know if the plaintiff will appeal the dismissal. Private Party Antitrust Action. On July 2, 2013, a lawsuit captioned Carolyn Fjord, et al., v. US Airways Group, Inc., et al., was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint names as defendants US Airways Group and US Airways, and alleges that the effect of the Merger may be to substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act. The relief sought in the complaint includes an injunction against the Merger, or divestiture. On August 6, 2013, the plaintiffs re-filed their complaint in the Bankruptcy Court, adding AMR and American as defendants, and on October 2, 2013, dismissed the initial California action. The Bankruptcy Court denied plaintiffs’ motion to preliminarily enjoin the Merger. On January 10, 2014, the plaintiffs moved to amend their complaint to add additional factual allegations, a claim for money damages and a request for preliminary injunctive relief requiring the carriers to hold separate their assets. On March 14, 2014, the Court allowed plaintiffs to add certain allegations but denied plaintiffs' requests to add a damages claim or seek preliminary injunctive relief requiring the carriers to hold separate their assets. On June 2, 2014, plaintiffs filed an amended motion for leave to file a second amended and supplemental complaint, which motion is currently being briefed by the parties. There is currently no trial date set. The Company believes this lawsuit is without merit and intends to vigorously defend against the allegations. US Airways Sabre Matter. On April 21, 2011, US Airways filed an antitrust lawsuit against Sabre Holdings Corporation, Sabre Inc. and Sabre Travel International Limited (collectively, Sabre) in Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York. The lawsuit, as amended to date, alleges, among other things, that Sabre has engaged in anticompetitive practices to preserve its market power by restricting the Company's ability to distribute its products to its customers. The lawsuit also alleges that these actions have permitted Sabre to charge supracompetitive booking fees and to use technologies that are not as robust and as efficient as alternatives in a competitive market. The lawsuit seeks both injunctive relief and money damages. Sabre filed a motion to dismiss the case, which the court denied in part and granted in part in September 2011, allowing two of the four counts in the complaint to proceed. On April 1, 2014, Sabre filed motions for summary judgment that are pending before the court. The Company intends to pursue its claims against Sabre vigorously, but there can be no assurance of the outcome of this litigation. General. The Company and its subsidiaries are also engaged in other legal proceedings from time to time. Legal proceedings can be complex and take many months, or even years, to reach resolution, with the final outcome depending on a number of variables, some of which are not within the control of the Company. Therefore, although the Company will vigorously defend itself in each of the actions described above and such other legal proceedings, their ultimate resolution and potential financial and other impacts on the Company are uncertain.
AA [Member]
Loss Contingencies [Line Items]
Legal Proceedings	Legal Proceedings Chapter 11 Cases. As previously disclosed, on the Petition Date, November 29, 2011, the Debtors filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. On October 21, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court entered the Confirmation Order confirming the Plan. On the Effective Date, December 9, 2013, the Debtors consummated their reorganization pursuant to the Plan, principally through the transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement pursuant to which Merger Sub merged with and into US Airways Group, with US Airways Group surviving as a wholly-owned subsidiary of AAG. From the Petition Date through the Effective Date, pursuant to automatic stay provisions under the Bankruptcy Code and orders granted by the Bankruptcy Court, actions to enforce or otherwise effect repayment of liabilities preceding the Petition Date as well as all pending litigation against the Debtors generally were stayed. Following the Effective Date, actions to enforce or otherwise effect repayment of liabilities preceding the Petition Date, generally have been permanently enjoined. Any unresolved claims will continue to be subject to the claims reconciliation process under the supervision of the Bankruptcy Court. However, certain pending litigation related to pre-petition liabilities may proceed in courts other than the Bankruptcy Court to determine the amount, if any, of such litigation claims for purposes of treatment under the Plan. Pursuant to rulings of the Bankruptcy Court, the Plan established the Disputed Claims Reserve to hold shares of AAG Common Stock reserved for issuance to disputed claimholders at the Effective Date that ultimately become holders of allowed Single-Dip Unsecured Claims. The shares provided for under the Plan were determined based upon a Disputed Claims Reserve amount of claims of approximately $755 million, representing the maximum amount of additional distributions to subsequently allowed Single-Dip Unsecured Claims under the Plan. As of June 30, 2014, approximately 30.4 million shares of AAG Common Stock were held in the Disputed Claims Reserve. As disputed claims are resolved, the claimants will receive distributions of shares from the Disputed Claims Reserve on the same basis as if such distributions had been made on or about the Effective Date. However, AAG is not required to distribute additional shares above the limits contemplated by the Plan, even if the shares remaining for distribution are not sufficient to fully pay any additional allowed unsecured claims. On July 1, 2014, approximately 2.9 million of the approximately 30.4 million shares held in the Disputed Claims Reserve were distributed to holders of allowed Single-Dip Unsecured Claims, to holders of certain labor-related deemed claims, and to holders of certain non-management, non-union employee deemed claims as specified in the Plan, and shares were withheld or sold on account of related tax obligations. To the extent that any of the reserved shares remain undistributed upon resolution of all remaining disputed claims, such shares will not be returned to AAG but rather will be distributed to former AMR shareholders as of the Effective Date. However, resolution of disputed claims could have a material effect on recoveries by holders of additional allowed Single-Dip Unsecured Claims under the Plan and the amount of additional share distributions, if any, that are made to former AMR shareholders as the total number of shares of AAG Common Stock that remain available for distribution upon resolution of disputed claims is limited pursuant to the Plan. There is also pending in the Bankruptcy Court an adversary proceeding relating to an action brought by American to seek a determination that certain non-pension, post-employee benefits are not vested benefits and thus may be modified or terminated without liability to American. On April 18, 2014, the Bankruptcy Court granted American's motion for summary judgment with respect to certain non-union employees, concluding that their benefits were not vested and could be terminated. The summary judgment motion was denied with respect to all other retirees. The Bankruptcy Court has not yet scheduled a trial on the merits concerning whether those retirees' benefits are vested, and American cannot predict whether it will receive relief from obligations to provide benefits to any of those retirees. American's financial statements presently reflect these retirement programs without giving effect to any modification or termination of benefits that may ultimately be implemented based upon the outcome of this proceeding. Merger Class Action. On March 1, 2013, a complaint captioned Plumbers & Steamfitters Local Union No. 248 Pension Fund v. US Airways Group, Inc., et al., No. CV2013-051605, was filed as a putative class action on behalf of the stockholders of US Airways Group in the Superior Court for Maricopa County, Arizona. On July 3, 2013, an amended complaint, captioned Dennis Palkon, et al. v. US Airways Group, Inc., et al., No. CV2013-051605, was filed with the same court. The amended complaint names as defendants US Airways Group and the members of its board of directors, and alleges that the directors failed to maximize the value of US Airways Group in connection with the Merger and that US Airways Group aided and abetted those breaches of fiduciary duty. The relief sought in the amended complaint included an injunction against the Merger, or rescission in the event it has been consummated. The court in the above-referenced action denied the plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order that had sought to enjoin the US Airways Group Annual Meeting of Stockholders. On May 6, 2014, the court granted defendants' motion to dismiss this action. On May 27, 2014, plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of the court's decision to dismiss the action, and that motion was denied and judgment entered in favor of the defendants, and the complaint was dismissed with prejudice, on July 14, 2014. As of the date of this report, American does not know if the plaintiff will appeal the dismissal. Private Party Antitrust Action. On July 2, 2013, a lawsuit captioned Carolyn Fjord, et al., v. US Airways Group, Inc., et al., was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint names as defendants US Airways Group and US Airways, and alleges that the effect of the Merger may be to substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act. The relief sought in the complaint includes an injunction against the Merger, or divestiture. On August 6, 2013, the plaintiffs re-filed their complaint in the Bankruptcy Court, adding AMR and American as defendants, and on October 2, 2013, dismissed the initial California action. The Bankruptcy Court denied plaintiffs’ motion to preliminarily enjoin the Merger. On January 10, 2014, the plaintiffs moved to amend their complaint to add additional factual allegations, a claim for money damages and a request for preliminary injunctive relief requiring the carriers to hold separate their assets. On March 14, 2014, the Court allowed plaintiffs to add certain allegations but denied plaintiffs' requests to add a damages claim or seek preliminary injunctive relief requiring the carriers to hold separate their assets. On June 2, 2014, plaintiffs filed an amended motion for leave to file a second amended and supplemental complaint, which motion is currently being briefed by the parties. There is currently no trial date set. American believes this lawsuit is without merit and intends to vigorously defend against the allegations. General. American is also engaged in other legal proceedings from time to time. Legal proceedings can be complex and take many months, or even years, to reach resolution, with the final outcome depending on a number of variables, some of which are not within the control of American. Therefore, although American will vigorously defend itself in each of the actions described above and such other legal proceedings, their ultimate resolution and potential financial and other impacts on American are uncertain.