Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA DFW-ORD Vs. UA DEN-ORD  
User currently offlineTheweave33 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 41 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 7 months 4 days ago) and read 6913 times:

I've noticed that UA has only 11 flights between DEN-ORD and AA has 17 flights between DFW-ORD. Judging that the DFW and DEN are relatively close in terms of size and traffic and that UA uses mainly larger a/c for DEN-ORD why doesn't AA use larger a/c for DFW-ORD and therefore cut flights and thus expenditures?

Is one technique wiser than the other or is it a matter of higher business complexity?

And why a triple seven on AA 66?

20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLfutia From Netherlands, joined Dec 2002, 3305 posts, RR: 28
Reply 1, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days ago) and read 6899 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

AA66 continues on to LHR while 67 returns from London.

Same goes for some UA flights from DEN. 9** continue on to Europe. Some 9** flights stop in Washington and continue on to Europe.

Leo/ ORD



Leo/ORD -- Groetjes uit de VS! -- Heeft u laatst nog met KLM gevlogen?
User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11120 posts, RR: 62
Reply 2, posted (7 years 7 months 4 days ago) and read 6856 times:

Quoting Theweave33 (Thread starter):
why doesn't AA use larger a/c for DFW-ORD and therefore cut flights and thus expenditures?

AA is able to derive a unit revenue premium by offering so expansive a schedule that gives corporate customers enormous scheduling flexilibity.

Example: you're an ad executive in Dallas who's flying up to Chicago for a meeting with a new client. You're on the first 6am flight out of DFW, at O'Hare by 8:30am, and at your client's office in downtown by 9:30. You're in all-day meetings but you see that you and the client are wrapping up early and are moving through your objectives quicker than expected. You're not scheduled to get out of O'Hare until the 8pm flight, but because you're done early, you leave downtown and head to the airport around 4pm instead. You hit traffic, of course, and get to O'Hare around 5:15 and notice there's a flight leaving in one hour. You make the switch of flights, clear security, get on your earlier flight, and you're at home reading to the kids by 9:30.

While some might find it surprising, it's amazing how many high-end customers and companies are willing to pay a premium to have this "shuttle" type of schedule. It's the same reason why there's a flight ever hour between Boston, LaGuardia and Reagan in D.C. -- the schedule convenience is extremely valuable to premium customers.

So, while AA may not fill up every single flight to 95% load factors with paying customers (although I have definitely seen it before where every flight all day long is oversold) AA can derive a higher revenue from the customers because of the enormous flexibility AA's schedule provides.

Quoting Theweave33 (Thread starter):

Is one technique wiser than the other or is it a matter of higher business complexity?

It's not better or worse, just different strategies for approaching a similar situation (i.e., a major trunk hub-to-hub route).


User currently offlineTheweave33 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 41 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 6626 times:

Quoting Commavia (Reply 2):

So, while AA may not fill up every single flight to 95% load factors with paying customers (although I have definitely seen it before where every flight all day long is oversold) AA can derive a higher revenue from the customers because of the enormous flexibility AA's schedule provides.

Does AA really get that many premium paying customers to offset their shuttle-like schedule expenditures?

Are their any stats on that anywhere?


User currently offlineCcrlR From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2223 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 6600 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

AA only has one 777 flight DFW-ORD and ORD-DFW going on to or from LHR. I rode on one and it wasn't that bad.


"He was right, it is a screaming metal deathtrap!"-Cosmo (from the Fairly Oddparents)
User currently offlineFuturecaptain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 6600 times:

Quoting Theweave33 (Thread starter):
why doesn't AA use larger a/c for DFW-ORD and therefore cut flights and thus expenditures?

Don't have enough extra widebodies and don't need to position planes between the two hubs as often?


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26196 posts, RR: 76
Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 6590 times:

Quoting Theweave33 (Thread starter):
I've noticed that UA has only 11 flights between DEN-ORD and AA has 17 flights between DFW-ORD. Judging that the DFW and DEN are relatively close in terms of size and traffic and that UA uses mainly larger a/c for DEN-ORD why doesn't AA use larger a/c for DFW-ORD and therefore cut flights and thus expenditures?

AA has a larger fleet in pure numbers than United but a smaller fleet of large and very large aircraft. This means they can't absorb major traffic times with a large aircraft but they can offer greater frequency with lower risk

Quoting Theweave33 (Thread starter):
And why a triple seven on AA 66?

Repositioning

Quoting Lfutia (Reply 1):
Same goes for some UA flights from DEN. 9** continue on to Europe. Some 9** flights stop in Washington and continue on to Europe.

Not completely true. Many 900 series flights at UA change gauge.

Quoting Commavia (Reply 2):
It's the same reason why there's a flight ever hour between Boston, LaGuardia and Reagan in D.C.

There are at at least 2 flights every hour between Logan, LaGuardia and National  Wink



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2356 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 6533 times:

Both routes probably handle a similar amount of daily traffic, but United elects to operate their flights with larger equipment than AA. IIRC, at least 5 of the UA ORD-DEN flights are 767/777, and a handful of the remainder are 757 as well. In the past, 747 service (especially Classics when they were still in the fleet) was common on this leg for positioning purposes and to handle the massive traffic between UA's two largest hubs.

AA's 17 or so ORD-DFW frequencies are all (save 66/67) operated by MD-80 equipment, so extensive departure and arrival options are available, but fewer seats per flight are offered. I would venture to say that there is more O/D traffic between Chicago and Dallas than there is between Chicago and Denver, so AA is able to make money on this route through higher yields rather than greater volume.


User currently offlineHPAEAA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6462 times:

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 7):
Both routes probably handle a similar amount of daily traffic, but United elects to operate their flights with larger equipment than AA. IIRC, at least 5 of the UA ORD-DEN flights are 767/777, and a handful of the remainder are 757 as well. In the past, 747 service (especially Classics when they were still in the fleet) was common on this leg for positioning purposes and to handle the massive traffic between UA's two largest hubs.

AA's 17 or so ORD-DFW frequencies are all (save 66/67) operated by MD-80 equipment, so extensive departure and arrival options are available, but fewer seats per flight are offered. I would venture to say that there is more O/D traffic between Chicago and Dallas than there is between Chicago and Denver, so AA is able to make money on this route through higher yields rather than greater volume.

Bingo, AA wants frequency not capacity... they've backed off a little recently however that's there general stratagy for strong business markets... ORD LGA is another good example..



Why do I fly???
User currently offlineGalapagapop From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 910 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6444 times:

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 7):
Both routes probably handle a similar amount of daily traffic, but United elects to operate their flights with larger equipment than AA. IIRC, at least 5 of the UA ORD-DEN flights are 767/777, and a handful of the remainder are 757 as well. In the past, 747 service (especially Classics when they were still in the fleet) was common on this leg for positioning purposes and to handle the massive traffic between UA's two largest hubs.

AA's 17 or so ORD-DFW frequencies are all (save 66/67) operated by MD-80 equipment, so extensive departure and arrival options are available, but fewer seats per flight are offered. I would venture to say that there is more O/D traffic between Chicago and Dallas than there is between Chicago and Denver, so AA is able to make money on this route through higher yields rather than greater volume.

Note that DEN is NOT a European Getaway for UA. So flights start in DEN get on to ORD and then either connect or continue on to Europe. DFW on the otherhand may not have a huge European presence either but AA has some flights to work with that.

On top of the already mentioned facts of AA's frequency use and lack of widebodies (Wish they had a couple more 777's though, would be nice to catch a few more domestically).

Cheers!


User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6376 times:

All I can say is thank heavens for United's decision to run so many widebodies DEN-ORD...it gave my chance to fly a 777 - twice!! And both times were the three-class:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Joe Fernandez - Aviation Photography of Miami
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © UAFlyer



As long as I have the chance to fly one a wide-body, I'll be happy!!  cloudnine 



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 offlineNorjet From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 72 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 6343 times:

Doesn't the AA schedule also have something to do with the "separate systems" scheduling model talked about a few years ago?

The thinking was that weather delays at either ORD or DFW would create cascading schedule failures throughout the system. An aircraft arriving at an outstation late from ORD would be late going out to DFW, and so on.

Isolating the hubs - essentially scheduling two separate fleets - would prevent problems from propogating precipitously.

The MDs on the ORD-DFW run are essentially shock absorbers, then. AA could cancel one or two flights if there are weather holds but the overall system would maintain balance.

Whereas if there are snowstorms in DEN and ORD, the entire UA system is shut down -- not just the DEN-ORD flights, but also the DEN-OMA/OMA-ORD type runs contributing to the failure.

Or so the theory went...

--Scott



Publishing travel advice for adopting families - to justify being an airline geek
User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11120 posts, RR: 62
Reply 12, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 6322 times:

Quoting Norjet (Reply 11):
Doesn't the AA schedule also have something to do with the "separate systems" scheduling model talked about a few years ago?

That scheduling system had more of a direct impact on the outstations than the hub-to-hub routes. The plan was more focused on make sure that ORD planes that landed at outstations turned and went back to ORD, and not to DFW, or MIA, or LGA, etc. That was where the major intanglements were happening. So, for example, now when an MD80 does ORD-PHL, it more often than not turns around and goes back to ORD, and thus isolates any OSO that may be occuring in the ORD system, whereas say 10 years ago that plane might have done a DTW-ORD-PHL-DFW-ATL-MIA routing in a single day, allowing a single OSO (especially at the beginning of the day) to screw up thousands of people's plans in 5+ different cities.


User currently offlineCkfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5067 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 6179 times:

Until about 1994, AA used to fly various types of aircraft on ORD-DFW, including 767s and DC-10s. A friend of mine used to take the 5pm departure out of DFW, and the DC-10 was often overbooked.

Then, when AA suffered through a downsizing, it went with a shuttle schedule on ORD-DFW, going from 12 roundtrips to 20 or 21. ORD-LAX also went from nothing but DC-10s and 767s to mostly MD-80s and 757s at about the same time, going from 9 or 10 roundtrips to 16.

There were several reasons for the change.

First, a number of DC-10s were retired.

Second, a number of mainline routes switched to Eagle, freeing up MD-80s.

Third, with a shuttle-style schedule, it did give people traveling on ORD-DFW and ORD-LAX more choices.

Fourth, with the extra flights on ORD-DFW, it also gave AA some flexibility, when the weather became a problem. If a passenger arriving at ORD missed a connection going south or west, and rebooking to a later non-stop flight wasn't possible, that passenger could probably be sent through DFW, even thought that would mean an extra connection.

But then, an extra connection at DFW is probably better than getting a room, or worse, sleeping in the terminal, at ORD.


User currently offlineTheweave33 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 41 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 6114 times:

Quoting Ckfred (Reply 13):
But then, an extra connection at DFW is probably better than getting a room, or worse, sleeping in the terminal, at ORD.

Done that more than once in ORD!

Anyway thanks for all the input and description of AA scheduling theories and practices. It does make alot of sense the way they do that but does UA suffer when there's horrible weather ORD more then AA? Are there figures to back that up?


User currently offlineAA777223 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1219 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 6094 times:

Quoting Theweave33 (Thread starter):
Judging that the DFW and DEN are relatively close in terms of size and traffic

Is that really true? I thought that DFW handled quite a bit more traffic than DEN. Feel free to enlighten me if not.



Sic 'em bears
User currently offlineTheweave33 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 41 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 5993 times:

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 15):
Is that really true? I thought that DFW handled quite a bit more traffic than DEN. Feel free to enlighten me if not.

Mostly likely you're right but for two relatively (not identical) same sized cities AA and UA still have traffic patterns between their two hubs that are really distinct.


User currently offlineMCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8625 posts, RR: 15
Reply 17, posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 5447 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 6):
Quoting Commavia (Reply 2):
It's the same reason why there's a flight ever hour between Boston, LaGuardia and Reagan in D.C.

US and DL run shuttle services to LGA, DCA and BOS. US is hourly I believe while DL may be hourly. This advantage is good for business travelers as others have said due to that many people commute in that area.

MCOflyer



Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
User currently onlineLonghornmaniac From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 3244 posts, RR: 45
Reply 18, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4764 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 6):
Quoting Theweave33 (Thread starter):
And why a triple seven on AA 66?

Repositioning

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by repositioning. Where does the actual aircraft that originates as AA 66 from DFW-ORD go after that? Is it not the same aircraft that continues to LHR?

I'm not meaning to be argumentative, I'm just trying to clear up some confusion. If it is the same aircraft (which I thought it was), than its not really repositioning, but rather just the only way American can fly DFW-LHR.

I know you know a lot more about this sort of thing than I do, so I'm probably wrong.  Wink

Cheers,
Cameron


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26196 posts, RR: 76
Reply 19, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4754 times:

Quoting Norjet (Reply 11):
Whereas if there are snowstorms in DEN and ORD, the entire UA system is shut down

First, it takes a hell of a storm to shut down DEN because of the way it is designed. Second, it would be difficult to have two catostrophic storms at the same time in both cities

Quoting Commavia (Reply 12):
That scheduling system had more of a direct impact on the outstations than the hub-to-hub routes. The plan was more focused on make sure that ORD planes that landed at outstations turned and went back to ORD

Of course, that trades one evil for another by making fleet usage less efficient

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 15):
Is that really true? I thought that DFW handled quite a bit more traffic than DEN. Feel free to enlighten me if not.

DFW is number 4 in the US, DEN is number 5

Quoting Longhornmaniac (Reply 18):
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by repositioning. Where does the actual aircraft that originates as AA 66 from DFW-ORD go after that? Is it not the same aircraft that continues to LHR?

I'm not meaning to be argumentative, I'm just trying to clear up some confusion. If it is the same aircraft (which I thought it was), than its not really repositioning, but rather just the only way American can fly DFW-LHR.

I know you know a lot more about this sort of thing than I do, so I'm probably wrong.

While the same aircraft may continue on, it still remains that that aircraft can come from anywhere to get to DFW in the first place. The route isn't designed as much to be a LHR route as BA's IAH-ORD-LHR is specifically to get oil executives to onward connections to Africa and the Middle East because AA can still connect DFW PAX on in a more efficient way through JFK, BOS or MIA.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineCIDflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2223 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4659 times:

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 15):
Is that really true? I thought that DFW handled quite a bit more traffic than DEN. Feel free to enlighten me if not

I believe you are correct,AA's DFW operation is about twice as large as UA's DEN operation. I think its roughly about 800 daily flights for AA at DFW whereas UA is just a little over 400 daily at DEN.


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...
AA-TWA-AAEAGLE VS UA-US. Which One Is Bigger? posted Wed Apr 11 2001 11:52:00 by United Airline
AA's Flagship Suite *VS* UA's First Suite posted Sun Feb 11 2001 18:24:35 by AA@DFW
UA Vs. AA At ORD posted Sat Oct 1 2005 23:10:46 by MD90fan
Non-Duplicate Routes By UA & AA From ORD? posted Thu Feb 17 2005 03:48:02 by ORD777
STL,DFW,ORD,MIA Aa? posted Mon Sep 16 2002 20:02:25 by Dfw-man
AA, DFW & ORD posted Sat Apr 6 2002 22:01:49 by Scott4AA
AA DFW-ORD 777? posted Sat Sep 22 2001 18:41:04 by Airbus380
AA DFW-ORD With A B777? posted Thu May 17 2001 12:19:40 by Gunfighter 6
AA's ORD-LHR Goes "All 777"; DFW-MIA Gets 2nd 777 posted Thu Nov 2 2000 00:43:32 by AA@DFW
Here's the skinny on UA/AA in ORD!! posted Thu Mar 18 1999 00:37:19 by wackylink