Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
American Eagle Going All-jet At SJT  
User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4092 times:

http://www.reporter-news.com/abil/nw_business/article/0,1874,ABIL_7948_3446027,00.html

SUMMARY:

American Eagle will go all-jet from DFW to San Angelo, TX (SJT) beginning Feb. 1. Currently, Eagle flies 6 dailies on the route; 3 on SF3s and 3 on ERJs. Beginning Feb. 1, Eagle will fly 5 daily ERJs.

CoEx used to fly one jet daily on its IAH-SJT route, accompanied by two or three SkyWest CoConnection EMB-120s, but the route is now all-prop.

San Angelo is probably the smallest DFW market to go all-jet. Its distance from DFW was probably a key factor in making this decision; larger markets such as SPS, ABI, ACT, and TYR are much closer to DFW.

Maybe we'll see all the props gone from DFW in a few years!


"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineEjmmsu From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1692 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4021 times:

Although this is good for SJT pax, I don't know how good of a business move it would be for AA to get rid of all their props, since props cost 70% less to operate. Of course, SJT was their longest prop route if I'm not mistaken.

I think the best thing for AA to do would be to cancel some of their ERJ options and replace them with a Q400 order to replace all the Saabs. This would give them an option that increases comfort, speed, and capacity over the Saabs, but still makes these short routes more economically profitable. We all know what happened to DL when they went all jet at DFW.




"If the facts do not conform to the theory, they will have to be disposed of"
User currently offlineAAgent From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 560 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3998 times:

There are many passengers that will be overjoyed to learn that San Angelo, Texas will soon be all jet service. I believe the announcement indicates February 2, 2005 as the start date, but the all-jet service actually starts one day earlier on January 31, 2005. I'm curious to know how American Eagle's competition, SkyWest, is going to react, if at all. For several months, SkyWest operated a single daily jet (in addition to prop service), but the jet was dropped a short while back. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. American Eagle has offered consistent service to the San Angelo community for many years (something like 20 years or so) while competing airlines have come and gone many times over. It will be a mini-experiment in which we'll see if American Eagle's all-jet service will outperform SkyWest's all-prop service. The game goes on...

Respectfully,
AAgent



War Eagle!
User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 3, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3948 times:

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the following are the only remaining AAEagle Saab markets from DFW:

ABI (mix) - 157 miles
ACT (all-prop) - 89 miles
CLL (all-prop) - 164 miles
GGG (all-prop) - 140 miles
GRK (mix) - 130 miles
LAW (all-prop) - 140 miles
SHV (mix, but only 1 prop per day) - 190 miles
SPS (all-prop) - 113 miles
TXK (mix) - 181 miles
TYR (all-prop) - 103 miles

(SJT is 228 miles)

Based on this, I'd expect Eagle to go all-jet in Shreveport before anywhere else. Abilene, College Station, and Texarkana would likely be next, but given the size of those communities, it's iffy. In 10 years, I believe RJ economics will render the turboprops more or less obsolete, but for now, it's still difficult to make RJs work on shorter, less-traveled routes.



"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
User currently offlineEjmmsu From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1692 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3800 times:

In 10 years, I believe RJ economics will render the turboprops more or less obsolete

What exactly do you mean by this. RJ's aren't going to get any cheaper over the next ten years. On these shorter routes, RJ's simply don't make any sense. I still think the best thing is a Q400 order to replace the aging saabs.



"If the facts do not conform to the theory, they will have to be disposed of"
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3789 times:

With the emergence of Embraer I hope in a few years we don't see any prop jobs in commercial travel!

User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3774 times:

RJ's aren't going to get any cheaper over the next ten years.

Why not? No one knows what will happen to fuel prices over that time. Plus, the capital acquisition costs will be lower by that time. In addition, most of the flying public will view props as antiquated, resulting in a greater competitive edge for the RJs.



"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
User currently offlineEjmmsu From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1692 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3774 times:

With the emergence of Embraer I hope in a few years we don't see any prop jobs in commercial travel!

That sounds very nice. However, the economics just arent there for RJ's on routes that are under 250 miles. Props are 70% cheaper to operate. AA would be shooting themselves in the foot by going all jet at DFW. Look what happend to DL when they eliminated their prop service at DFW.



"If the facts do not conform to the theory, they will have to be disposed of"
User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 8, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3742 times:

the economics just arent there for RJ's on routes that are under 250 miles. Props are 70% cheaper to operate. AA would be shooting themselves in the foot by going all jet at DFW. Look what happend to DL when they eliminated their prop service at DFW.

They aren't there now, but they will likely be there in 10 years or so. First, as they age, the Saabs will cost more and more in maintenance. Second, the upfront costs of investing in RJs will likely go down. Third, the public will continue its desire to fly on the (perceived) latest and greatest technology.

I'm not saying it will definitely happen, but I think as the industry recovers jets will become more viable. As far as I know, no US major or LCC is investing in props right now. Given this, I think RJs will be the wave of the future.

In addition, DL's decision to go all-jet at DFW really wasn't a part of their financial situation or their pullout there. For the most part, the prop routes they operated from DFW (SPS, TXK, ILE) were dropped altogether, not converted to jets. Routes like DFW-AMA and DFW-LBB are both large enough and distant enough for jets to be profitable. DL's faltering at DFW had nothing to do with its decision to go all-jet.



"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
User currently offlineEjmmsu From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1692 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3693 times:

First, as they age, the Saabs will cost more and more in maintenance.

Thats why I suggested AA purchase some Q400's instead of ERJ's.

Second, the upfront costs of investing in RJs will likely go down.

I don't disagree with this, but the market is already saturated with RJ's. If i remember correctly, AA has delayed or cancelled many of its future ERJ options. Even if you could buy an RJ for 10 bucks, it still doesn't change the fact that props are 70% cheaper to operate than RJ's.

Third, the public will continue its desire to fly on the (perceived) latest and greatest technology.

I think RJs will be the wave of the future.

The "greatest technology" and "wave of the future" is here and now. The market is already saturated with RJ's. Things are not looking good for Brombadier, and the only reason things look halfway decent for Embraer is due to their new 70-100 passenger line of aircraft. Delta is learning first hand what happens to costs when your route network gets saturated with RJ's. I think regional jets are great for long thing routes. However, I don't think the RJ was ever intended on routes less than 250 miles. Delta was running 3/4 of its movements at DFW with RJ's. That has to be a major reason why they were not doing well at DFW. Who really wants to fly DFW-OAK on a CRJ?





"If the facts do not conform to the theory, they will have to be disposed of"
User currently offlineAv8trxx From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 657 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3677 times:

They may bring back the Saab in this market if it doesn't turn out the way the bean counters want. Jet service to SBP from SJC was a big deal. Service has been trimmed to one flight a day and the only reason SBP has that is due to the mx base there. Wait & see how the numbers for SJT crunch after a year and you may yet again have turboprop service.

As far as costs go, there is a reason the Saab is still around. On some short hauls the Saab burns the same amount of fuel gate to gate that the EMJ does on taxi. She's very dependable too, all factors considered. The jungle jet is a bit more finicky. AE cancelled their additional 18 EMJ delieveries a few months ago. The reason was supposedly the high cost to finance, yet some believe the cost to run them was just too high compared the next generation of jets that are rolling out in Brazil. AMR would surely like to have the cost efficient 170s...where they are going to put them is another issue.


User currently offlineEjmmsu From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1692 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 3635 times:

Av8trxx,

As a captain, what aircraft do you fly for AA?

I was also wondering if there were any rumors at all that AA would purchase any kind of new turboprops to replace the saabs at some point.

Thanks for the great Info!



"If the facts do not conform to the theory, they will have to be disposed of"
User currently offlineLt-AWACS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 3577 times:

I lived in San Angelo for a time and I am sure folks will be overjoyed with the service, as many drove to Midland MAF for "jet" service and often lower fares. When it was just AA fares were "a bit high". I hope they don't lose the CO connect service option at Mathis Field. I think they applied for EAS money for that route also.

Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,
Capt-AWACS, Veni, Vidi, Bibi


User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 13, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3527 times:

I think they applied for EAS money for that route also.

I don't think so. From what I understand, San Angelo wouldn't be eligible for EAS money because it has demonstrated that it can support air service without the subsidies. I believe Brownwood and Victoria are the only cities in Texas with EAS-supported flights.

However, I do know that the City of Abilene offered SkyWest some tax incentive packages to fly the IAH-ABI route; I wouldn't be surprised if San Angelo did the same.



"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 14, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3528 times:

Delta is learning first hand what happens to costs when your route network gets saturated with RJ's. I think regional jets are great for long thing routes. However, I don't think the RJ was ever intended on routes less than 250 miles. Delta was running 3/4 of its movements at DFW with RJ's. That has to be a major reason why they were not doing well at DFW. Who really wants to fly DFW-OAK on a CRJ?

Again, probably 90% of Delta's RJ routes from DFW replaced mainline aircraft, not turboprops. If anything, costs on those routes declined after RJs were brought in.

I don't disagree with you that RJs have not wholly been used as intended. I think the airlines are starting to learn they can't fly routes like DFW-OAK and AUS-SFO on RJs without making some customers unhappy. However, I do think that RJs have a chance of entirely replacing props in the US in the next 10 years. It all depends on a myriad of factors -- the economy, fuel prices, and the business market in individual communities. One simply can't tell. The Q400 may be a great prop aircraft (probably the best out there), but it's a 70-seater. Markets like DFW-SJT, DFW-ABI, DFW-ACT, DFW-TYR, etc., don't justify a 70-seat aircraft. If Bombardier were to come up with a 40-seat Q400, I think that would definitely be a great option.



"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
User currently offlineLt-AWACS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 3433 times:

I though I saw that on an EAS post by MAH4546 a while back,but can't find it on a search. I thought they applied, but did not get it. Either way, for my own convience I hope the Houston flights stay  Big grin

Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,
Capt-AWACS, Watching you from 30,000 feet


User currently offlineEjmmsu From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1692 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3385 times:

Does anyone know if the skywest props are ever coming to SPS?


"If the facts do not conform to the theory, they will have to be disposed of"
User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 17, posted (9 years 6 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3295 times:

Does anyone know if the skywest props are ever coming to SPS?

I haven't seen or heard anything about it recently. From what I understand, SkyWest only has a limited number of EMB-120s, which may keep them from serving additional cities from IAH. Remember, their operation in this region is still relatively new.

However, SPS seems like a perfect match, given SkyWest's other routes from IAH. I am very surprised that they decided to go with Del Rio, but they probably see Del Rio as underserved when compared to Wichita Falls (which is so much closer to DFW).

I think Wichita Falls' proximity to DFW hurts it when it seeks additional air service. It's closer to DFW than Abilene, and smaller than Tyler and Waco, so it's a difficult air market to gauge.



"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 18, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3236 times:

Looks like AA is slowly (very slowly) adding jets to some more Texas markets.

Here's the rundown of Eagle flights in Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Arkansas from DFW, beginning Jan. 31. New flights are in bold:

Abilene, TX (ABI): 6 daily flights; 3 ERJ, 3 SF3
Amarillo, TX (AMA): 7 daily flights; all ERJ
Baton Rouge, LA (BTR): 6 daily flights; all ERJ
College Station, TX (CLL): 7 daily flights; 1 ERJ, 6 SF3
Corpus Christi, TX (CRP): 7 daily flights; 6 ERJ, 1 CRJ
Ft. Smith, AR (FSM): 6 daily flights; all ERJ
Houston, TX (HOU): 9 daily flights; all ERJ
Houston, TX (IAH): 11 daily flights; 3 ERJ, 1 CRJ, 7 MD80
Killeen, TX (GRK): 11 daily flights; 6 ERJ, 5 SF3
Laredo, TX (LRD): 5 daily flights; all ERJ
Lawton, OK (LAW): 7 daily flights; all SF3
Little Rock, AR (LIT): 17 daily flights; 8 ERJ, 9 CRJ
Longview, TX (GGG): 3 daily flights; all SF3
Lubbock, TX (LBB): 7 daily flights; all ERJ
Midland/Odessa, TX (MAF): 7 daily flights; all ERJ
Northwest Arkansas, AR (XNA): 10 daily flights; 4 ERJ, 3 CRJ, 3 MD80
Oklahoma City, OK (OKC): 10 daily flights; 4 ERJ, 1 CRJ, 5 MD80
San Angelo, TX (SJT): 5 daily flights; all ERJ
Shreveport, LA (SHV): 11 daily flights; 10 ERJ, 1 SF3
Texarkana, AR (TXK): 3 daily flights; 2 ERJ, 1 SF3
Tulsa, OK (TUL): 10 daily flights; 5 ERJ, 1 CRJ, 3 MD80s, 1 757
Tyler, TX (TYR): 7 daily flights; 2 ERJ, 5 SF3
Waco, TX (ACT): 6 daily flights; all SF3
Wichita Falls, TX (SPS): 7 daily flights; all SF3

Interesting to me that:

1) AA still has one Saab lingering on the DFW-SHV route ... and that single Saab flight is the one that carries the BA codeshare!

2) AA thinks it can make jet service to Tyler and College Station work. If it can pull this off, look for more jets in the future. If it can't, most of these communities will see props for many years to come.

3) I can't believe we're seeing RJs on the DFW-IAH route.

4) Such a mix of aircraft on the TUL and OKC routes

5) The rationale behind the BA-AA codeshare in these smaller markets. ACT, SJT, TYR, SPS, LAW, and GRK carry the codeshare, but ABI, LBB, AMA, GGG, TXK, and CLL do not.






"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
American Eagle RJ Build-up At MIA posted Fri Apr 23 2004 21:57:53 by MAH4546
UA Going All RJ At IAD? posted Fri Jan 30 2004 16:12:49 by CV990A
Continental All Jet At EWR posted Fri May 3 2002 00:19:11 by I LOVE EWR
American Eagle Jet Loses Hydraulic Power At PIT posted Mon Jun 12 2006 22:15:28 by N670UW
American Eagle All Jet Fleet? posted Wed Mar 21 2001 00:46:34 by YHU
What Will Happen To American Eagle At LAX? posted Sun Sep 3 2006 08:12:17 by Trvlr
American Eagle Changing Gates At CLE posted Sat Feb 4 2006 06:22:17 by N766UA
American Eagle Back At AEX? posted Sun Feb 13 2005 01:07:45 by Refueler1974
American Eagle MX At MQT posted Mon Feb 7 2005 00:09:47 by Aviationhack
Good Bye American Eagle At ISP posted Mon Nov 1 2004 04:04:03 by IslipWN