MSYtristar From United States, joined Aug 2005, 5422 posts, RR: 55 Posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1697 times:
New nonstop service eff. 5/3/06:
MSY-STL
UA8072 dp. 805a ar. 958a
STL-MSY
UA8070 dp. 1040a ar. 1230p
It seems that Trans States is seeing some success at MSY with their recently launched service to OKC and SAT. I can't say I saw service to STL coming. A pleasant surprise.
UA/UA Express will then offer 13 daily nonstops to LAX, SAT, OKC, DEN, ORD, STL, and IAD from New Orleans.
UA's 744 Y-class seat is more comfortable than DL's new 77L Y-class seat.
Stl1326 From United States, joined Jun 2005, 412 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1680 times:
Wow. That's all I can say. Basically they are competing against their self. They operate daily non-stop service between STL-MSY on AA Connection. We will see how long this will last, but always good to see additional flights.
STLGph From United States, joined Oct 2004, 8036 posts, RR: 32 Reply 2, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1680 times:
wow, I admit that this is even a bit of a surprise. I was suspecting that United Express, being flown by Trans States, would be coming up from San Antonio before New Orleans.
Even though it looks to be a quick turn, does anybody know if Trans States might be doing a crew change while it's on the ground, or anything of that nature?
Eternal darkness we all should dread. It's hard to party when you're dead.
LambertMan From United States, joined Aug 2003, 1757 posts, RR: 45 Reply 3, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1646 times:
What the.......
Loads on STL-MSY pre-Katrina were always real good, enough to the point where I thought it would become 3x daily at some point in time. I guess this is the 3rd daily.
Caleeiii From United States, joined Aug 2005, 54 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1588 times:
Pre-Katrina, Southwest operated SIX nonstops a day between MSY-BHM. Would be nice if UA would try maybe ONE rotation of this route a day. I know there must be at least one CRJ load out there today!
UAL#1fan From United States, joined May 2001, 88 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1560 times:
So is UA opening a string of focus cities across the South now? They just expanded United Express service from SAT, and they appear to be doing the same thing at MSY. Perhaps to draw some traffic away from CO at IAH, NW at MEM, and DL at ATL?
WesternA318 From United States, joined Oct 2004, 4346 posts, RR: 28 Reply 8, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1550 times:
Quoting UAL#1fan (Reply 6): Perhaps to draw some traffic away from CO at IAH, NW at MEM, and DL at ATL?
It's a viable theory, however, CO and DL are pretty much entrenched in IAH and ATL, respectively. I think this either aimed at AA in STL (doubtful), WN in MSY (I smell another "shuttle' coming around, lol), or NW in MEM.
Get that worldly look, one country at a time. Work Hard, Fly Right.
MSYtristar From United States, joined Aug 2005, 5422 posts, RR: 55 Reply 11, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1518 times:
Quoting CRGsFuture (Reply 9): Great news, did they annouce the aircraft or can we viable deduct that it will be a CRJ-300?
ERJ-145
Quoting UAL#1fan (Reply 6): So is UA opening a string of focus cities across the South now? They just expanded United Express service from SAT, and they appear to be doing the same thing at MSY.
I doubt that they are going to build up MSY like they have built up SAT, but you never know. There is more than enough gate space for them here now on Concourse C, so from an operational standpoint it is possible anyway. I'll snoop around and see what I can come up with.
UA's 744 Y-class seat is more comfortable than DL's new 77L Y-class seat.
MSYtristar From United States, joined Aug 2005, 5422 posts, RR: 55 Reply 13, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1490 times:
Quoting BNinMSY (Reply 12): wish UAExp would consider a nonstop SHV-MSY - would be far more beneficial to them than STL-MSY which they will only compete with AA on.
Or MCI...or BHM...or IND...or RDU...I can think of several routes which seem to make more sense. I guess they see some potential for success though, so more power to them.
Also remember that AA is bringing back MD-80 service in the market as of 4/3.
UA's 744 Y-class seat is more comfortable than DL's new 77L Y-class seat.
WesternA318 From United States, joined Oct 2004, 4346 posts, RR: 28 Reply 15, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1470 times:
Anyone remember when National was one of the bigger players in MSY?
Get that worldly look, one country at a time. Work Hard, Fly Right.
Iowaman From United States, joined May 2004, 3482 posts, RR: 8 Reply 16, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1446 times:
Quoting MD90fan (Reply 7): Good to see UA in expansion mode lately
Quoting BNinMSY (Reply 12): wish UAExp would consider a nonstop SHV-MSY
Quoting UAL#1fan (Reply 6): So is UA opening a string of focus cities across the South now? They just expanded United Express service from SAT, and they appear to be doing the same thing at MSY.
The only thing UA has in relation to this is they have there named slapped on the side of Trans States planes, and when you book it it shows up as a UA coded flight. All these flights from SAT and MSY (excluding the actual UA hubs) are at-risk flights operated by TSA, and has nothing to do with UA planning. TSA is launching these routes by themselves, and not being payed by United to operate this, however UA is getting no revenue off the actual flights either, except when TSA pays them for gate usage/ground handling in some cities. These flights have nothing to do with UA, just the paint on the side of the plane. It's basically a whole seperate operation.
BNinMSY From United States, joined Nov 2005, 332 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1446 times:
Well a MSY-SHV-ORD would provide good intra-state service (getting people off I-49) and then great opportunities for international connections for SHV boarding guests.
MSYtristar From United States, joined Aug 2005, 5422 posts, RR: 55 Reply 18, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1437 times:
Quoting Iowaman (Reply 16): These flights have nothing to do with UA, just the paint on the side of the plane. It's basically a whole seperate operation.
Well, the flying public likely won't know that. These new flights will probably increase UA's brand recognition in these markets at the very least.
UA's 744 Y-class seat is more comfortable than DL's new 77L Y-class seat.
PSU.DTW.SCE From United States, joined Jan 2002, 4834 posts, RR: 29 Reply 19, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1416 times:
Thanks for clearing that up Iowaman.
I wouldn't read too much into this, it is also likely some sort of aircraft/crew positioning flight since Trans State is based in STL.
Iowaman From United States, joined May 2004, 3482 posts, RR: 8 Reply 20, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1389 times:
Quoting MSYtristar (Reply 18): Well, the flying public likely won't know that. These new flights will probably increase UA's brand recognition in these markets at the very least.
I agree.
Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 19): it is also likely some sort of aircraft/crew positioning flight since Trans State is based in STL.
Might possibly, but again this city pair was launched by TSA, not UA so I would doubt it.
STLGph From United States, joined Oct 2004, 8036 posts, RR: 32 Reply 21, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1321 times:
Quoting LambertMan (Reply 3):
Loads on STL-MSY pre-Katrina were always real good, enough to the point where I thought it would become 3x daily at some point in time. I guess this is the 3rd daily.
AA was 3 daily. One M80 and two ERJ.
Now it's one M80 and one ERJ on AA with one ERJ on UA.
Quoting MSYtristar (Reply 13): Or MCI...or BHM...or IND...or RDU...I can think of several routes which seem to make more sense.
Indianapolis could use a nonstop to New Orleans again since Southwest seems to have abandoned the route...and they no longer serve Houston at the very least. United has the space there....
Quoting Iowaman (Reply 20): Might possibly, but again this city pair was launched by TSA, not UA so I would doubt it.
Trans States is based in St. Louis and has a base there for their crews...whether flying United or American services.
Eternal darkness we all should dread. It's hard to party when you're dead.
Air1727 From United States, joined Aug 2003, 325 posts, RR: 12 Reply 22, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1273 times:
Quoting BNinMSY (Reply 17): All these flights from SAT and MSY (excluding the actual UA hubs) are at-risk flights operated by TSA, and has nothing to do with UA planning. TSA is launching these routes by themselves, and not being payed by United to operate this, however UA is getting no revenue off the actual flights either, except when TSA pays them for gate usage/ground handling in some cities. These flights have nothing to do with UA, just the paint on the side of the plane. It's basically a whole seperate operation.
Who told you that?
In the Alaska bush I'd rather have a two hour bladder and three hours of gas than vice versa.
Uadc8contrail From United States, joined Sep 2003, 1782 posts, RR: 14 Reply 24, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1191 times:
iowaman,
the new flts operated by tsa from sat and msy are a shared risk by-both-airlines(and it even includes shared costs for fuel). tsa has extra planes from the usair/air wisc deal and they gave all the other carriers a op to add planes...after no one took them up on the offer. ual and tsa came up with the shared risk flights idea. ual would never let a tsa plane in ual colors fly a route with out some type of revenue from that.
Air1727 From United States, joined Aug 2003, 325 posts, RR: 12 Reply 25, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1099 times:
Quoting Uadc8contrail (Reply 24): the new flts operated by tsa from sat and msy are a shared risk by-both-airlines(and it even includes shared costs for fuel). tsa has extra planes from the usair/air wisc deal and they gave all the other carriers a op to add planes...after no one took them up on the offer. ual and tsa came up with the shared risk flights idea. ual would never let a tsa plane in ual colors fly a route with out some type of revenue from that.
Exactly. Trans States does not make it up as they go. You don't fly around with someone elses service mark without the holder getting a piece of the pie. United knows exactly what is going on, they had a say in the route(s) at hand, and they make money on it.
In the Alaska bush I'd rather have a two hour bladder and three hours of gas than vice versa.
26 USXguy: anyone ever bother to think this is an aircraft maintenance swap out? Its cheaper to run it as a scheduled flight and try to get some revenue on board
27 RoseFlyer: I have read that yes these are flights being started by Trans States and they are the ones assuming all the risk. This is the same thing that Skywest
28 N1120A: There is no such thing as a CRJ-300, and these are being operated by ERJ-145s MSY-STL was started in order to rotate the aircraft out of the system f
29 MalpensaSFO: TWA routed a STL-MEX flight via MSY in the late 1990's...
30 MSYtristar: Actually that flight was routed JFK-MSY-MEX....TW708 and 709...operated with M80's...lasted for about a year before the MEX segment was switched to S
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Aug 2005, 5422 posts, 
From Bahamas, joined Jul 2005, 2931 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Oct 2001, 2879 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
