Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
FAT - More Mainline Equipment And Flights In April  
User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5803 posts, RR: 15
Posted (8 years 6 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5879 times:

Fresno, which to many has seemed like the turboprop capital of the US in the last 10 years, will see several flights added on mainline equipment in April.

As Ca2ohHP pointed out last month, US/HP will upgrade 1 FAT-LAS flight from a CRJ-900 to an A319 in April. The 2nd FAT-LAS will remain a CRJ-900 for the time being.

Mexicana is on track to start flights on FAT-GDL on April 1 using an A318. I had a chance to drive by FAT this weekend and the FIS exterior looks complete, it looks like only interior work left to finish.

Also, UAX/Skywest is going from 3 to 4 Brasilia flights on FAT-LAS in April. That LAS route is getting busy with UAX, G4 and US all competing.


"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
79 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5803 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5856 times:

By the way, FAT finished 2005 with an increase of 6.5% more passengers than in 2004.

December 2005 was 15% more passengers than December 2004.

With those growth rates I expect FAT will be seeing more equipment upgrades and flights added over the next year.



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently offlineQQFLYER28 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 59 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5832 times:

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 1):

What a great thing to see for FAT. I am glad they are seeing decent sequential growth in passenger boarded. I cannot remember the last time FAT had a mainline upgade.


User currently offlineCory6188 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2686 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 5715 times:

Whatever happened to IAH-FAT on COEx? I thought that a while back, it was essentially a done deal?

User currently offlineCopaair737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5682 times:

This is awesome, an A319 on the FAT-LAS route is something I didn't see coming, but it is nice to have. The CR9's aren't that bad, but seeing an A319 is better than seeing just another version of the Bombardier jets we see everyday there. I would have figured we would see PHX-FAT go mainline before LAS-FAT did.

-Copa


User currently offlineFlyboy80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1878 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5667 times:

was FAT a mesa station, or HP? Does HP (US) have any contracts that would allow mesa to ground handle a mainline jet, or a number of mainline jets before before having to change the station to mainline?

User currently offlineExFATboy From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2974 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5667 times:

This is great news for FAT, now if we can get the F9 flights upgraded....

Does G4 get enough hotel/air package sales to keep the 4x/week service competitive? It'd be a shame to see G4 leave what was once its HQ city.


User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5803 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 5604 times:

Quoting Cory6188 (Reply 3):
Whatever happened to IAH-FAT on COEx?

That seems to have been pushed back for the time being. Personally with MX starting I think it would be a good time for COEx to also start and piggyback on the publicity about using FAT for flights to Mexico. COEx could push the number of connections to Mexico at IAH.

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 4):
I would have figured we would see PHX-FAT go mainline before LAS-FAT did.

I did too but it may have been a combination of demand plus aircraft scheduling. LAS is a shorter flight than PHX.

Quoting Flyboy80 (Reply 5):
was FAT a mesa station, or HP?

It is a Mesa station and I assume it will remain for the time being since this is only 1 flight out of 7.

Interestingly, I got a copy of the Mesa codeshare agreement with HP a few years ago. It said Fresno and several other cities would be Mesa exclusively. So either that agreement ended or was changed with the merger. Hopefully demand will lead to more upgrades on LAS and/or PHX.

Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 6):
Does G4 get enough hotel/air package sales to keep the 4x/week service competitive?

I hope so. G4 saw load factors at FAT below 70% for much of the last half of 2005. I'm not sure what happened. Hopefully it wasn't a long term problem.



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently offlineAvConsultant From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1360 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 5543 times:

Sounds like FAT will go from a turboprop market to an Airbus market. Interesting.

User currently offlineTan Flyr From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1906 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 months 23 hours ago) and read 5523 times:

Quoting AvConsultant (Reply 8):
Sounds like FAT will go from a turboprop market to an Airbus market. Interesting.

Not so fast. If anything FAT has been an MD-80 market with AA and G4. AA has been MD-80's since the mid 1990's ( 727's prior to that, since 6/90).

For sure more mainline service enhances the appeal of FAT and we are all glad for that. Is this 319 service to LAS a temporary thing or at least planned to be permanant?

Perhaps someday we will have a 100 seater flight to ORD from FAT for alternative connections to the Great Lakes/ Northeast.


User currently offlineCopaair737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 6 months 23 hours ago) and read 5516 times:

FATFlyer- If ORD-FAT were to start, who would you think would start it--AA or UA? I'd bet AA, because they already have mainline at FAT. UA would be more of a longshot, unless they put one of their new Embraer jets on it.

-Copa


User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5803 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (8 years 6 months 22 hours ago) and read 5497 times:

Quoting Tan Flyr (Reply 9):
Is this 319 service to LAS a temporary thing or at least planned to be permanant?

Currently it shows in the schedule through the end of the year. I would not be surprised to see it stay if the revenue supports it since a number of the CR9s seem to be finding a home in the east these days.

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 10):
If ORD-FAT were to start, who would you think would start it--AA or UA? I'd bet AA, because they already have mainline at FAT.

I'd tend to agree. But you never know what kind of move UA might make if they thought they needed to do something competitive against AA or F9 or US.



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently offlineQXatFAT From Israel, joined Feb 2006, 2404 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5307 times:

This is just great! I love hearing this about FAT. Our little airport haha. The FAT-ORD talk, now I think that AA might start this up before UA does. AA would bring in a MD and UA would eventually bring in a A319 I would assume. Whoever does it first would keep it longer I believe. UA might be able to do it 3x or 4x? Do you think that AS would then take a flight from FAT-SEA on an 737? I hear quite a few people love to travel to SEA such as myself  Smile Lastly, could we then be seeing people from Merced, CA down to Bakersfield, CA traveling out of FAT instead of SMF, SFO, LAX? I am affraid that once something gets started that WN might come in and kick everyone back out  footinmouth 


Don't Tread On Me!
User currently offlineWedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5902 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5258 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I think FAT could sustain a 737-700 during the summer season at minimum. But I think AS is pretty strapped for airplanes at the moment...and probably for a little while since they will be getting rid of their MD-80's faster than anticipated.

User currently offlineCoronado990 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1597 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5210 times:

Someday, someone will have to explain to me why the SAN-FAT market only has 19 PAX per day. A metro area of 3.2 million to a metro area of almost 1 million over 300 miles apart and in the same state. Also, San Diego is also a tourist destination. My neighbor is from Fresno and attends SDSU. She must drive the stretch every break. There is no direct rail link. Driving thru L.A.'s 70 miles of urban traffic stinks.

I noticed SAN-CRW gets 19 PAX a day. Now that I can understand. But SAN-FAT only getting 19 PAX does not seem right to me. Somebody is missing the boat.



Uncle SAN at your service!
User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 8
Reply 15, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5166 times:

Quote:
This is just great! I love hearing this about FAT. Our little airport haha

In the eyes of someone who grew up near BFL, your "little" airport is HUGE compared to the miniscule services available at Bakersfield! You've got two airlines competing (with RJ's) to AND CURRENT: Denver - International (DEN / KDEN), USA - Colorado">DEN, AND you've got mainline equipment!!

Quote:
Someday, someone will have to explain to me why the SAN-FAT market only has 19 PAX per day. A metro area of 3.2 million to a metro area of almost 1 million over 300 miles apart and in the same state. Also, San Diego is also a tourist destination. My neighbor is from Fresno and attends SDSU. She must drive the stretch every break. There is no direct rail link. Driving thru L.A.'s 70 miles of urban traffic stinks.

My kingdom for ANY kind of service from San Diego to the central valley that does NOT go through Los Angeles!!

San Diego to Bakersfield:

Driving: I have made it in 3 hours breaking every known traffic law (as well as a few laws of physics). It once took me seven hours in the rain to get from San Clemente to Santa Clarita - about 70 miles.

Amtrak: A breathtaking but slow ride along the Pacific coast makes San Diego to Los Angeles take just under 3 hours scheduled time. Then one transfers to a bus to Bakersfield (over the mountains - the track is not double-lined, so Amtrak will not operate on it) and add another two hours.

United Express: The only airline to fly LAX-BFL. One MUST transfer at LAX to get to Bakersfield. Figure a round-trip cost of $400.

And that's just to Bakersfield. Add another two-three hours travelling time to Fresno, and you get truly a very isolated region within one of the largest economies on the planet.

It makes no sense to me, either.



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineQQFLYER28 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 59 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5145 times:

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 15):

I would have to agree that the area, to a certain degree, has been air transportation isolated. I think though, as current mainline markets are becoming saturated, airlines are searching for new pots of highly profitible revenue. Areas like FAT and BFL will benifit from this trend in my IMO, as airlines begin to see the light.


User currently offlineSJCRRPAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5118 times:

Quoting Coronado990 (Reply 14):
I noticed SAN-CRW gets 19 PAX a day. Now that I can understand. But SAN-FAT only getting 19 PAX does not seem right to me. Somebody is missing the boat.

I can't figure it out either, especially when you consider SJC has 25 daily non stops to SAN (8 AA, 7 Alaska , 10 WN )

My Guess is:

1. People in Fresno are accostomed to driving to LAX to fly, so they just figure its not that much further to San Diego and drive instead of fly.

2. The current airlines are charging top dollar out of FAT. Maybe they need WN to come in and shake things up a little with $29 one way fares to San Diego, to build up the market.

FAT is a lot like SJC, they both get no respect. Only Fresno has a better college football team.


User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5803 posts, RR: 15
Reply 18, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5114 times:

Quoting Coronado990 (Reply 14):
I noticed SAN-CRW gets 19 PAX a day. Now that I can understand. But SAN-FAT only getting 19 PAX does not seem right to me. Somebody is missing the boat.

I don't believe the data is as accurate as people like to think.

I understand not all regional data gets reported on the O&D and T-100 form. Aircraft under 60 seats are exempt from reporting. So on a route like FAT-SAN where UAX would connect a pax in LAX from a turboprop to a turboprop the data may be missing.

If you look at all of the data for FAT, UA is listed as having the largest market share in only a few destination markets out of FAT. Yet they carry 45% of Fresno passengers. So the problem to me lies with the UAX numbers.

The Bureau of Transportation Statistics last year was working on changing the reporting rules. In its comments about the change it said, "Exemptions from reporting, granted in the 1960s, have become a major problem in today's O&D Survey. For example, Carriers flying planes with 60 or fewer seats are exempt from reporting. As such, passengers whose entire itineraries are flown on smaller Carriers will not be reported, yet their participation in the air transportation system is critical. Similarly, code-share agreements between large and small Carriers were non-existent when the current O&D Survey was designed. Today, Carriers of all sizes are connected to a global air transportation system through global alliances and international ticket agreements. This intertwining of service adds complexity and increases the potential for error when reporting Ticketed Itineraries."

So don't take FAT numbers from the Consumer Air Fare report or faremeasure.com as accurate.



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently offlineCoronado990 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1597 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 5055 times:

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 18):
If you look at all of the data for FAT, UA is listed as having the largest market share in only a few destination markets out of FAT. Yet they carry 45% of Fresno passengers. So the problem to me lies with the UAX numbers

Yes, I see that. It shows that AA is the largest carrier from FAT to LAX and FAT to SAN...49 and 19 PAX respectively. On top of that SAN-LAX shows 82 PAX a day, again AA being the largest carrier.

I would have thought that UAX would have been the bigger player in the FAT-LAX-SAN corridor. So the problem is that only AA reports numbers in these markets? However, I do see UA being the biggest airline between ACV and SAN at 27 PAX a day! That is on UAX. Wow! More people from SAN to Eureka then Fresno. Huh...



Uncle SAN at your service!
User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5803 posts, RR: 15
Reply 20, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 5015 times:

Quoting Coronado990 (Reply 19):
However, I do see UA being the biggest airline between ACV and SAN at 27 PAX a day! That is on UAX. Wow! More people from SAN to Eureka then Fresno. Huh...

ACV-SAN would be the result of passengers out of SAN on mainline equipment to SFO, so there are more people vs FAT because the ACV pax are being counted by UA instead of UAX.

AA may operate a little differently since they own AmEagle.



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26449 posts, RR: 75
Reply 21, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 5013 times:

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 15):
(over the mountains - the track is not double-lined, so Amtrak will not operate on it)

Actually, they did operate the Coast Starlight over it during some track works last year.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 5001 times:

Quote:
Actually, they did operate the Coast Starlight over it during some track works last year.

To clarify, I meant the railroad tracks running from Los Angeles to Lancaster, Palmdale, Mojave, Tehachapi, and then into Bakersfield. The section of track between Bakersfield and Tehachapi is single track in places, and Amtrak will not run a train on a single line stretch. Big grin



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineKlwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 2030 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4941 times:

Yes, yes, with COex going to BFL, they need to add FAT. I bet it is right around the corner.

User currently offlineFCYTravis From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 1191 posts, RR: 6
Reply 24, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4908 times:

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 22):
The section of track between Bakersfield and Tehachapi is single track in places, and Amtrak will not run a train on a single line stretch. 

Sure they will. Most of the line between Oakland and Bakersfield is single-track. Most of the former Rio Grande through Colorado is single-tracked... etc. etc.

The reason they don't run the San Joaquins through the Tehachapi line is simple: It's excruciatingly slow and congested with freight traffic. Much faster to put the pax on buses at Bakersfield.



USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
25 Post contains images QXatFAT : That would just kill all traffic out of FAT. No one would bother flying anything but WN then at that price. It is rediculous. If it is WN, I say take
26 FATFlyer : Until the recent change in their strategy (going to OAL's hubs), WN was giving FAT some serious consideration. I think now there are a number of citie
27 QXatFAT : Dont you think this will kill travel out of FAT? No compotition then am I correct?
28 B737100 : At one time, PSA flew SAN/FAT with a 727-100. Don't know if it was a thru flight.Regards,Will
29 Aeroman62 : UA at one time or another flew FAT-LAX, FAT-SFO, FAT-DEN, and I believe even FAT-ORD. I have old OAG's that show FAT-DEN on a D8S, and SFO-FAT on a DC
30 Wedgetail737 : As I mentioned in a different thread, Morris Air used to fly to FAT with 733's. I believe they served OAK, SLC and LAX.
31 ExFATboy : I'm not sure if UA flew FAT-ORD nonstop, but I seem to remember flying FAT-DEN-ORD back in the '70s. DC-8, if I remember right.
32 QXatFAT : I dont think a FAT-ORD. I may be wrong. Not recient though UAX FAT-SFO FAT-DEN FAT-LAX FAT-LAS (?) AE FAT-LAX FAT-SAN AA FAT-DTW F9 FAT-DEN (operated
33 MtnWest1979 : Why? A. If WN came it, chances are better than not that overall airport traffic would rise, benefitting all or most carriers there. B. WN has entered
34 ExFATboy : The G4 services to LAS is mainline equipment - MD-80, not sure which variant. I have to agree - they should have left the centre open as much as poss
35 Iowaman : -83. It might be similar to what happened at ISP, some carriers reduced service and even pulled out, however overall airport traffic went way up do t
36 Stirling : You must mean DFW. Yes they did, mid to late 70's, but only from Fr-Su. One little known fact, PSA operated the 737, and this is what provided many o
37 J.mo : For those interested in spotting at FAT, there is currently a British registered BAE-146 parked near Mercury Air. It will be doing some air sampling w
38 D L X : Still no jets from Frontier, huh? Interesting.
39 ATCRick : No offense FATFlyer, but Fresno? Tell me the big reason for ANYBODY(other than G4 to fly there because half of the company lives there). Fresno is onl
40 Stirling : WN is starting RNO-MDW soon, if it hasn't already started. Check their routemap
41 Iowaman : It is basically Saturday only, comes in from MDW on Friday night, goes out Saturday morning. LAS would be in there for sure, considering it's one of
42 Post contains images Stirling : Then somebody else will have to go Buh-Bye..between G4, UA, and US. But what am I talking about....WN isn't going to FAT....at least yet.
43 SJCRRPAX : I would think a good way to start service would be to take these following flights (there is only about 10 each of these every day, so no big deal to
44 Iowaman : G4 would be the first to go Buh-Bye probably, followed by UA.[Edited 2006-03-22 04:33:41]
45 CentralCA : Good to hear about the A319 upgrade. Is it the evening LAS flight (the one that leaves around 9pm) or an earlier one? I flew the route a few months ag
46 Post contains links and images FATFlyer : LOL, boy this has turned into an interesting conversation on what was a 2 week old thread. The ticketing lobby was just partially remodeled, the "L" s
47 Post contains images QXatFAT : FATFlyer...you forgot Yosemity National Park! That is a HUGE attraction! Fresno is a booming area right now. Everyone is moving from the Bay Area to
48 Iowaman : What you have to figure is WN will more than replace all that with just a few 737's. Again as I said with ISP is they had some airlines leave but the
49 Lindy Field : I don't see Southwest coming to FAT in the very near future - I think they're more likely to take the opportunity to attack more fortress hubs like PH
50 QXatFAT : The Q400 has been here before. I would agree with you though. If QX offered a few flights, not a lot then they would still be in good shape. The airl
51 Stirling : 11L/29R is around 9200', so I'm sure a 757 would be no problem. If UA ran DC8s to FAT in the past as mentioned, it should be able to handle just abou
52 Xpfg : Yes. I have seen Hooters Air 757's in there a few times, and UPS brings in 757's as well. FedEx operates 727's.
53 Tan flyr : Gretings from the Admirals club at ORD..I was surprised to see so many reply to A FAT thread! WOW! Yes, UA flew FAt-ORD in the 70's/early 80's with a
54 Ca2ohHP : Actually we have a new face in route planning...that exclusivity deal is out the window...
55 Coronado990 : I've got a suggestion for a QX. It requires one dedicated Q400... FAT... 7:00A SAN... 8:20A SAN... 8:50A FAT...10:10A FAT...10:30A RNO...11:30A RNO...
56 Post contains links FATFlyer : I don't think you would see most of that happen, maybe a few dropped frequencies but not dropped airlines. If you want a good example look at SMF. Fe
57 PanAm747 : Hey, don't forget to include a BFL-SAN roundtrip in there!
58 ATCRick : FATFlyer, Impressive information previously unknown by me. Thank you. Rick
59 Post contains images FAT5DEP : Too many good items of discussion which compelled me to sign up. I used to work for Delta and Skywest as a ramper in the mid 90's. I am a pilot but no
60 Post contains images PanAm747 : I remember in the 1980's I used to drive out to BFL and pester the airline workers relentlessly for their printed timetables...always fascinated to s
61 Post contains images ExFATboy : Heh...when I lived in the Big Raisin, my friends and I used to joke that the only reason Bakersfield existed was so that Fresno had someone to look d
62 Post contains images FAT5DEP : My dad was an FO on the 737 back in the 70's and he used to fly up and down the valley going into BFL, VIS, FAT, MCE, MOD, and SCK. I have some of his
63 FATFlyer : Less of a market on the gambling or entertainment side these days but more on the outdoor recreation. Reno is doing a good job of promoting sports ac
64 RentonView : That UA 744 photo rocks! Must've been quite a sight. Reminds me of when Pope John Paul II flew into MRY with two TW L1011s.
65 Post contains images QXatFAT : Boy I would sure love to see a 747 fly into here. I know you guys have said some have came in, I wish I was on this site then . I like the airlines th
66 Post contains images FATFlyer : I had to miss them. It was a choice between good seats to see the Pope at one of the appearances or see a couple of widebodies at MRY. I took the cha
67 Post contains images RentonView : Well, who knows, maybe Boeing's vision of the future will go wild and NH will start a "Golf & Raisin Express" service using a 788... NRT to MRY with
68 Wedgetail737 : There was another airline that served FAT quite a bit and that was Western Airlines (WA). They flew OAK-FAT (continuing to SLC) using 732's. I don't r
69 Post contains images FAT5DEP : Sorry I keep posting photos but you mentioned UA in VIS and I had to post this one of my dad taxiing out at VIS. I know the quality is bad but its nea
70 FATFlyer : Thanks, nice photo. I can remember going out to VIS in the mid-to-late 1960's to see an uncle off on UA. That's probably when I got hooked on commerc
71 QXatFAT : Okay, I just might get burned on this one but, a big BUT, what if Hawiian Airlines wanted to fly into FAT? Do you think it could last? Would the 717-2
72 FATFlyer : Fresno to the Islands was being kicked around a few years ago but the talk focused mainly on Aloha not HA. The 717 couldn't reach so it would take so
73 DesertAir : Thanks FAT5DEP for the memory of the SFO-MOD-SCK flight. I flew on it in the early 70s. It was the last flight of the day and it was a hoot; one of th
74 Stirling : I think they need to start kicking it around again! At least seasonally, doesn't need to be daily, maybe 3-4 days a week. Hawai'ians equipment is too
75 QXatFAT : Well its to large because no way can they fill up a 767. I think it would be a good thing and profitable from FAT 3x weekly suring the spring and sum
76 FATFlyer : I know that FAT administration was working on Aloha in the past. I don't know what meetings, if any, they have ever had with HA.
77 Post contains images FAT5DEP : You're welcome DesertAir. Do you remember if there were a lot of people on board that flight? I was looking at my dad's log book this weekend and saw
78 FATFlyer : I believe they have shifted the UAX flights back into the main terminal, no more bus. Skywest is arriving and departing from the concourse "thumb", g
79 FAT5DEP : I was out at the Guard base yesterday and saw America West's A319 land. I was curious where they were going to park because with the RJ's you don't ne
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...
Buzz Cancels All Flights In April posted Tue Feb 25 2003 13:46:23 by Lapper
Airfare Between SYD And AKL In April 2003 posted Mon Oct 28 2002 11:56:45 by United Airline
Domestic Flights In Bolivia, Peru And Argentina posted Wed Oct 18 2006 17:02:10 by Pe@rson
More Airlines And Flights For CVT posted Sun Oct 15 2006 13:15:15 by Humberside
AA Flights Between IAH And ORD IN 1987 posted Sat Jul 15 2006 18:10:27 by Airlinebuff77
FAT Pax Counts Up 14.6% In April Over April 2005 posted Thu Jun 1 2006 20:25:41 by FATFlyer
Midwest To Move And Add Flights In PHL posted Sat Mar 18 2006 20:08:16 by N917ME
Any And All Transit Only Flights In The US? posted Sun Feb 12 2006 21:07:32 by UAL747
Monarch To Offer More Routes And Flights At BHX posted Thu Sep 22 2005 22:53:28 by BCAL
No More BA 757s On Domestic Flights From April posted Fri Sep 2 2005 12:24:23 by Gkirk