Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
American Eagle DFW-FWA Route: Why?  
User currently offlineSmithAir747 From Canada, joined Jan 2004, 1619 posts, RR: 29
Posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2887 times:

Why does American Eagle have a DFW-FWA route?

FWA is my hometown airport, so I closely watch the developments there (and have done so since I was a child in the 1980s).

Currently (since becoming all-regional in the 1990s), FWA is served by the regional affiliates of DL, NW, UA, AA, and CO. And the only LCC we have is Allegiant Air, which just recently started service there.

Most of the regionals at FWA serve nearby hubs (within an hour or 1.5 hours of FWA), such as ORD, CVG, ATL, DTW, and CLE, with their regional aircraft (CRJs and ERJs for everyone except CO, with BE1900s).

However, the American Eagle route that is the oddball is the 2.5-hour flight between FWA and DFW in an ERJ-145. I have flown that route twice, and may be doing so again in the near future. This route has been in existence since 1999, when it was heavily advertised locally. (Don't forget AA Eagle also serves the ORD-FWA route).

Why did American Eagle start such a route, between its world headquarters and our tiny station (FWA)? Do the load factors and profits justify it? Is it an important route for business travellers, or who does it attract? What's the rationale behind this oddball route at FWA?

A very curious Fort Wayner,
SmithAir747!


I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made... (Psalm 139:14)
12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTOLtommy From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3276 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2846 times:

Quoting SmithAir747 (Thread starter):
Why did American Eagle start such a route, between its world headquarters and our tiny station (FWA)

Obviously because they think it can make money! There must be enough demand and high yield passengers on the route, or AA would have dropped it. Out TOL-DFW service didn't last long here.


User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 2, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2826 times:

I can't say for sure -- but coming from a hometown similar in size to FWA (ABI), let me say you should be very happy and not ask any questions! (I would love for ABI to have service to ORD!)

Interestingly, DFW has nonstop service to many small and mid-size cities in this region (FWA, GRR, DAY, EVV, CMI, etc.). My guess is that (1) there are enough passengers connecting from these cities to Mexican destinations that are not served from ORD, or (2) AA is trying to balance the routing of passengers bound for the west coast through DFW rather than ORD, given the delay-prone ORD and the underutilized DFW.



"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3639 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2797 times:

Here's a bit of food for thought: According to Dave Young (VP of new air service development at FWA), DFW is a top 5 O&D city from FWA, and is a huge connecting point for pax flying to the West.

DFW-FWA is now served 3x daily by AA Eagle (up from 2x before), which is a good sign. Plus, the flights always go out full.



I don't work for FWA, their tenants, or their ad agency. But I still love FWA.
User currently offlineLGAtoIND From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 490 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2763 times:

My guess is that ORD is not particularly good for connecting FWA pax to certain parts of the country. For example, for passengers going to/coming from the Southeast U.S., Texas, Mexico, Central/South America/Carribean, it makes much more sense to connect through DFW than ORD. It also gets rid of many double connections that would have to be made to reach certain destinations not served through ORD.

User currently offlineAA61Hvy From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 13977 posts, RR: 57
Reply 5, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2661 times:

Quoting Ssides (Reply 2):
DAY

DAY also gets AA mainline



Go big or go home
User currently offlineElmoTheHobo From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1534 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2610 times:

Quoting TOLtommy (Reply 1):
Out TOL-DFW service didn't last long here.

Toledo along with a couple other routes to the upper Midwest, Long Beach, Providence, Long Beach and Lima (Peru) were dumped when American went through its "Everyone feel bad for us because the Wright Agreement is falling apart" stage.

Toledo, along with the other routes, would probably work if they tried them again.


User currently offlinePSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 7343 posts, RR: 28
Reply 7, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2533 times:

There is a lot of manufacturing, both auto-related and non-auto located in Northeast Indiana / Western Ohio that has ties to operation in Texas, Mexico, and other parts of the US. There is enough demand for DFW and other DFW-exclusive spokes to warrant FWA-DFW service. In addition, it routes some traffic over DFW versus ORD, (e.g., FWA-DFW-SAN vs. FWA-ORD-SAN) which opens up some capacity out of ORD for local ORD based O&D traffic to places like SAN, which is needed since ORD operations are capped due to slot constraints. DFW is virtually limitless in that regard.

User currently offlineOzarkD9S From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4878 posts, RR: 22
Reply 8, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2475 times:

Quoting LGAtoIND (Reply 4):


My guess is that ORD is not particularly good for connecting FWA pax to certain parts of the country. For example, for passengers going to/coming from the Southeast U.S., Texas, Mexico, Central/South America/Carribean,

I would consider ORD a far better connection point for FWA to the Southeast and The Carribean. DFW is a heck of a backtrack for example FWA-MCO of FWA-SJU than ORD is.



Next Up: STL-TPA-BWI-PWM-BWI-STL
User currently offlineVictorKilo From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 301 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2379 times:

Quoting Ssides (Reply 2):
Interestingly, DFW has nonstop service to many small and mid-size cities in this region (FWA, GRR, DAY, EVV, CMI, etc.). My guess is that (1) there are enough passengers connecting from these cities to Mexican destinations that are not served from ORD, or (2) AA is trying to balance the routing of passengers bound for the west coast through DFW rather than ORD, given the delay-prone ORD and the underutilized DFW.

In the case of CMI:

(3) MQ has 3 ERJ's from ORD that RON at CMI for maintenance at CMI-based FlightStar. MQ was impressed by FlightStar's work, and wanted to give them more business. Having their ERJ undergo FlightStar maintenance at CMI made the economics of a daily DFW-CMI flight that RONs at CMI viable.


User currently offlineBigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2887 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2362 times:

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 6):
upper Midwest, Long Beach, Providence, Long Beach and Lima (Peru)

Wow they left Long Beach twice just to prove their point about the Wright Amendment.  rotfl 


User currently offlineFlyinryan99 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1986 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2345 times:

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 7):

Hit the nail on the head.

Also, the reason why FWA got a 5th to ORD and a 3rd to DFW was because of a very generous incentive program through TRIP. One of these days I'll have to look up and see what their loads actually look like from the DOT.

*edit - Toledo - DFW did just fine in terms of passenger numbers...added 1,000 passengers each way, came out to about a 70% load factor. Yields were fairly low due to the timing of the flight. I'm sure if it would've returned as planned in January as an originator/terminator, the flight would've yielded much better and probably even had a better load factor. It's par for the course at Toledo though...always crapped on by the airlines.

[Edited 2007-05-24 03:29:28]

User currently offlineElmoTheHobo From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1534 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2284 times:

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 10):
Wow they left Long Beach twice just to prove their point about the Wright Amendment.   

oops. I bet you they would have if they could've, just to make a point.


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: DFW-MLU posted Wed Apr 19 2006 20:06:29 by Commavia
American Eagle DFW-GPT Starts Tomorrow! posted Wed Dec 14 2005 21:19:38 by DLCnxgptjax
American Eagle @ DFW Terminal A posted Wed Nov 16 2005 01:20:55 by AAtakeMeAway
All American Eagle DFW-MKE Upgraded To CR7 posted Wed Aug 6 2003 08:02:38 by Tekelberry
American Eagle @ DFW posted Sat Jun 22 2002 17:41:54 by Hole_courtney
American Eagle DFW - BOI In A CRJ posted Mon Mar 4 2002 19:55:31 by Mls515
American Eagle To Fly DFW-ROW posted Sat May 5 2007 09:01:40 by ABQ747
American Eagle May Begin DFW-ROW posted Sat Mar 31 2007 06:40:42 by WTXJET
American Eagle To Resume 2nd Daily PIA-DFW! posted Thu Feb 15 2007 22:18:56 by FlyPeoria
Does American Eagle Plan To Start DFW-CHA posted Fri Jun 24 2005 03:27:37 by AAtakeMeAway