Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why No MAXjet Or Eos At ORD?  
User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3827 posts, RR: 2
Posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4008 times:

As we all know, Chicago is the third-most traveled city to/from London. Only New York City and Dubai have more volume to/from there.

Subsequently, UA, AA, BA, and VS all serve ORD-LHR. However, there's no all-business-class service from either MAXjet or Eos between ORD-STN. Even though Silverjet plans to serve ORD-LTN later in the year, an ORD-STN would be better for connecting pax.

I wonder if the reason why Eos and MAXjet don't serve ORD is due to ORD slot rules. ORD's slot rules allow new foreign-owned international carriers to get a free pair of ORD slots, but not new US-owned carriers. Since Eos and MAXjet are both US-based/owned carriers (Silverjet is a British carrier, so they can get slots), I wonder if this is the reason why neither of the carriers serve ORD yet. If so, I don't see either coming to ORD until fall 2008, when the first new runway opens and the slot rules are subsequently lifted by the FAA as planned. Too bad.


"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23302 posts, RR: 20
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3927 times:

Quoting FWAERJ (Thread starter):
ORD's slot rules allow new foreign-owned international carriers to get a free pair of ORD slots, but not new US-owned carriers.

It's not quite that easy, because under the most recent order "limited incumbents" can also get some 'free' slots if they want them. If foreign owned new entrants can get slots and any limited incumbent can get slots, a domestic new entrant would have a pretty good case that they ought to get slots too. I think the FAA would probably give either Eos or MAXjet a pair of slots or two if they asked.

The bigger thing keeping them out of ORD, IMO, is the significant amount of competition from four carriers on the route, and while no one is flying an all-J aircraft (this may change when Open Skies comes into effect), there are certainly carriers with competitive J offerings on the route.

A more interesting proposition might be the use of a 752 on MDW-STN. It's theoretically possible (particularly if the 752 is in a low-density configuration), though there might be some runway performance issues in the summer. But that avoids Terminal 5 congestion at ORD and also provides an easy way for the carrier to differentiate itself from all of those at ORD.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineEXAAUADL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3915 times:

perhaps the lack of aircraft expains it better.

Could you please post where you saw that ORD is the third most traveled city from LON?

In terms of PAX it should be DUB. Revenue of course is a different story.

Virgin really struggled the last time they were in ORD


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3878 times:

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 2):

Virgin really struggled the last time they were in ORD

...they actually didn't struggle too much on the route....there was 9/11 which made them cut some less profitable routes as well as the fact they were going to retire their old B742's....speaking of their B742's, I flew ORD-LHR-ORD on VS back in 2001 on the B742's...it had to be one of my worst set of flights I've ever experienced.. spin ..which was interesting given that I flew VS back in 1999 out of JFK and loved it.....



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineUPPERDECKFAN From Spain, joined Jun 2007, 992 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3783 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 1):
A more interesting proposition might be the use of a 752 on MDW-STN

A question from someone who has never been there........is there inmigration and customs at MDW?



744,742,741,772,773,762,732,735,738,752,727,717,DC10,DC9,M82,M87,319,320,321,343,346,L1011,CRJ2,CRJ9,E190,ATR42,DSH8,
User currently offlineORDagent From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 823 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3771 times:

MDW does have INS/Customs facilities. IIRC it's only one or two gates. TZ uses it seasonally and IIRC MX or AM tried MEX and GDL to MDW but it didn't work for them. I flew a TZ 757-300 out of MDW. I thought were going to use Cicero avenue to take off as well!

It would be cool to see FI come back to Chicago via MDW!


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33280 posts, RR: 71
Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3744 times:

Quoting ORDagent (Reply 5):
TZ uses it seasonally

ATA's service from Midway to Guadalajara and Cancun operates year-round.



a.
User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3827 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3552 times:

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 6):
Quoting ORDagent (Reply 5):
TZ uses it seasonally

ATA's service from Midway to Guadalajara and Cancun operates year-round.

F9 also uses it; they run a weekend charter service to CUN for Apple Vacations.



"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
User currently offlineEXAAUADL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3529 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 3):
...they actually didn't struggle too much on the route....there was 9/11 which made them cut some less profitable routes as well as the fact they were going to retire their old B742's....

They must have been dstruggling if after a while they were offering free limos to any upper class passengers within a 200 miels radius. That means IND, MSN, SPI, CID were all within their limo area. I also know people who travelled VS in 2001 and they said that Upper Class was empty


I'd would still like to see hwere ORD is the #3 market from LON.


User currently offlineCheckraiser From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3519 times:

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 8):
I'd would still like to see hwere ORD is the #3 market from LON.

Maybe he's only referring to longhaul.


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3500 times:

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 8):

I'd would still like to see hwere ORD is the #3 market from LON.



Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 8):
I also know people who travelled VS in 2001 and they said that Upper Class was empty

...and I also know people who traveled on VS in 2001 who stated Upper Class was quite full... Wink

..not to mention, your comments go into my argument that the flights weren't as profitable as other routes and it was better to end the route, especially given the planes were going to be retired...

Right now, VS is running ORD with an A340-600 occasionally (upgrade from A340-300), which to me ostensibly means ORD is doing well..

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 8):
I'd would still like to see hwere ORD is the #3 market from LON.

Regarding ORD-London only 3rd to DXB and New York:

"Nearly 1.9 million air passengers traveled between London and Chicago last year, making Chicago the third-most traveled destination from the United Kingdom city, after New York and Dubai."*

Crain's Chicago Business-December 2006

Regards



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineEXAAUADL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3447 times:

I'd like to see actual numbers such as PAX PDEW...I would think LON-DUB would be much larger than ORD.

This means that ther eare 5205 per day or say 2602 PDEW. Seems high, given the frequencies plus large amount of connecting traffic on UA/AA/BA


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3420 times:

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 11):
I'd like to see actual numbers such as PAX PDEW...I would think LON-DUB would be much larger than ORD.

This means that ther eare 5205 per day or say 2602 PDEW. Seems high, given the frequencies plus large amount of connecting traffic on UA/AA/BA

You are entitled to your opinions.......I gave a reference to the numbers from a credible paper (Crain's Chicago Business)...maybe you can provide some references to show otherwise, as I'm not going to go further (unless I see something to disprove Crain's)

Regards...



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineN770WD From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 126 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3361 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 12):
You are entitled to your opinions.......I gave a reference to the numbers from a credible paper (Crain's Chicago Business)...maybe you can provide some references to show otherwise, as I'm not going to go further (unless I see something to disprove Crain's)

UK CAA publishes traffic data on their website and for US destinations this mirrors T-100 reporting.
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/80/airport...tl_Air_Pax_Route_Analysis_2006.csv

Rank 2006 Pax Route
1 2,751,835 HEATHROW-NEW YORK (JF KENNEDY)
2 1,990,817 HEATHROW-DUBLIN
3 1,970,532 HEATHROW-PARIS (CHARLES DE GAULLE)
4 1,846,171 HEATHROW-AMSTERDAM
5 1,520,978 HEATHROW-CHICAGO (O'HARE)
6 1,513,158 HEATHROW-FRANKFURT MAIN
7 1,430,025 HEATHROW-LOS ANGELES INTERNATIONAL
8 1,416,789 HEATHROW-HONG KONG (CHEP LAP KOK)
9 1,374,451 HEATHROW-DUBAI
10 1,120,572 HEATHROW-MADRID
11 1,086,322 HEATHROW-SINGAPORE
12 1,045,538 HEATHROW-TORONTO
13 1,040,222 HEATHROW-WASHINGTON (DULLES)
14 1,032,184 STANSTED-DUBLIN
15 1,027,864 HEATHROW-SAN FRANCISCO
16 1,027,735 HEATHROW-MUNICH
17 1,006,862 HEATHROW-MUMBAI
18 997,694 HEATHROW-JOHANNESBURG
19 954,966 HEATHROW-ROME (FIUMICINO)
20 944,797 GATWICK-MALAGA
21 940,097 HEATHROW-ZURICH
22 931,456 HEATHROW-BOSTON
23 915,122 HEATHROW-TOKYO (NARITA)
24 893,414 HEATHROW-STOCKHOLM (ARLANDA)
25 890,703 HEATHROW-COPENHAGEN
26 837,465 HEATHROW-MIAMI INTERNATIONAL
27 824,043 MANCHESTER-TENERIFE (SURREINA SOFIA)
28 808,482 MANCHESTER-PALMA DE MALLORCA
29 796,929 HEATHROW-SYDNEY
30 773,643 HEATHROW-BARCELONA


User currently offlineEXAAUADL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3342 times:

While Crains is reputable, it is also media. And we know that media is how shall we say, sometimes inaccurate. It does look as though I was right. DUB from both LHR and STN is about 3m pax per year (doesnt include LGW or LTN or LCY)
Thanks for the numbers....would you happen to know LON-DUB?


User currently offlineAirportPlan From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 469 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3334 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 12):
This means that ther eare 5205 per day or say 2602 PDEW. Seems high, given the frequencies plus large amount of connecting traffic on UA/AA/BA

AA 777 X 4 = 980
UA 777 X 3 = 876
BA 777 X 2 = 452
VS 343 X 1 = 240
AI 744 X 1= 431

Total = 2,979 X 85% Load Factor = 2,532 PDEW

The seating numbers above are estimates but should be pretty close to the actual.


User currently offlineEXAAUADL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3281 times:

Quoting AirportPlan (Reply 15):
Total = 2,979 X 85% Load Factor = 2,532 PDEW

Problem with that is youre ignoring connecting passengers.....VS is probably 90% local. AI is probably less than 50% local with most going on to India. BA/UA/AA are probably around 50% local but could be higher depending on departrue time. AA's AM flight is probably heavily local.

The actual number is more like 2082 PDEW (1.5M/730)...probably carriers like NW/CO/DL get less than 5% of the market.


User currently offlineDaron4000 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 712 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3242 times:

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 8):
I'd would still like to see hwere ORD is the #3 market from LON.

Also included in the VS press release when they announced ORD service. Take it for what you want but its a fact, just maybe subject to certain restrictions (such as intra-Europe) although ones that may not be important to VS (which make sense since they don't serve any intra-Europe markets anyways and would want to expand to longhaul markets with high demand).


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...
Why No UAX or American Eagle Service ORD-ERI? posted Tue Aug 14 2007 03:28:34 by KDCA
Why No EWR Or IAH To BUR On CO? posted Wed Nov 22 2006 03:28:19 by COEWRNJ
LOT And JAT, Why No A320 Or 737NG? posted Mon Mar 6 2006 01:00:20 by MD90fan
SEA.. Why No JAL Or ANA Or CX Service? posted Mon Aug 22 2005 12:51:20 by B6sea
Why No Airbus Or Boeing RJ? posted Fri Jun 17 2005 05:12:22 by Airbus3801
Why No IAM Or Amfa Flaming? posted Thu May 19 2005 02:33:00 by 1rocco
345 Or 772LR At ORD? posted Fri Mar 18 2005 03:51:12 by NomoreRJs
Why No NW Or SK MSP-ARN Flight? posted Fri Mar 4 2005 04:50:06 by Lufthansa
Why No A340 Or A320 For KLM? posted Sun Aug 22 2004 14:45:59 by Kl911
Why No 717 Or 757 For AF? posted Sun Apr 25 2004 12:45:24 by Airtrainer