Surf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2424 times:
In the case of the UAL/US merger:
Philly is just so close to Washington where they already have a hub and Charlotte?.....WHY? JFK/LGA would be a better hub city for UAL. I say, forget Charlotte and Philly and Pitt and make JFK/LGA the new UAL east coast hub. Thoughts?
RyeFly From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1396 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2331 times:
Charlotte would be one of their best choices for a super hub. Don't forget Delta is not far away over in Atlanta. Pitt is another good solution because it is a new airport in a good area for expanding route stuctures. Philly is a good alrenative for passengers although I aggree that this hub may is the least attractive of the three for expansion in my opinion due to Washington.
UPS Pilot From United States of America, joined May 1999, 871 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2312 times:
JFK/LGA as hubs?
Apparantly you haven't experienced air traffic around New York recently. You think flight delays are bad now, if UAL would make either of these two hubs then look out.
U.S. Airways is building a large maintenence hangar at PIT. plus has the majority of the landing slots in PIT. I had heard United was to keep PIT as a hub. This would cover the north east and mid atlantic area.
Philly is a different story other than being close to NYC and having quite a few flights to Europe. But you made a good point about Washington being close. Maybe AMR will use Philly as a hub?
CLT would be great for United. This allows them a large hub for the South East with plenty of slots and direct competition with Delta.
Surf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2303 times:
Acutally I *have* experienced air traffic in NYC lately, quite often enough...though I never use LGA only JFK, and I've never had a delay problem due to traffic. What I mean by "hub" is like what Delta, American, and (for not much longer) TWA and like what Pan Am used to have at JFK. I mean, it's NYC, one of the countries two most important cities (the other being L.A.). I would think United might want a large presence here.
Thomacf From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 546 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2294 times:
The traffic has declined alot over the last few years in Pitt. UAL will use it as a hub for a few years just to please the Penn. Legislature, but down the road I can't see it being a very large hub with ORD, IAD and Philly so close by, with higher populations also.
USFlyer MSP From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2504 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2272 times:
It must be remembered that Philadelphia is the 4th largest city in the country. It is building new regional and international terminals for US/UA and it, along with Newark, are really the only true connecting hubs in the NE. I highly doubt UA will rid itself of this goldmine w/ 70% marketshare. It is very congested, but I think the O&D traffic makes up for it.
RAI From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2239 times:
UPS Pilot, LGA is BAD! EWR is much the same. But JFK is way under capacity. UAL can add plenty of flights. The main problem I see is passenger connections, but this is a short term. They're building much larger terminals at JFK. The Air-Train should also help things emmensely once it's completed.
Yaki1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2228 times:
JFK needs some major improvements before it could be a hub for UAL and there are very few connections to its other major hubs. Amongst the foreigners I know, all are amazed that such a great city has such a terrible airport.
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7876 posts, RR: 14
Reply 11, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2224 times:
The more I think about the UA WOULD NOT eliminate any of the US hubs.
First of all by buying USAirways they would be adding nearly 400 aircraft, give or take the planes that are destined for DCAir, and with that many aircraft come hundreds of daily flights. Where would United put them. The only hub in UA's network that has room for expansion right now is Dulles. ORD is overcapacity, Denver needs more terminal space, SFO is waiting for a new runway, and LAX can only handle small scale expansion.
Secondly, the reason behind buying USAir was to get its extensive East Coast network, why then abandon the route system after going through the trouble and expense of getting it. This is not a merger for the sake of getting extra equipment and personel.
But since we are speculating... here are mine.
Charlotte gets built up into a superhub... possibly bigger than Denver, but along the same size, with some international flights... LGW, CDG, FRA.
Pittsburgh stays for the immediate long term... it is a fairly large airport with room to grow, it could suppliment ORD and DEN well as a trans-con hub from the northeast.
Philly is the odd man out, the international slots could very well be moved to IAD, CLT, or ORD. But it is a large city and US has a dominating presence there. But it is also the smallest of the US hubs too.
BWI, hasn't been a real hub in ages... look for Southwest to take over the place.
My 2 cents worth.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
ScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 7273 posts, RR: 30
Reply 13, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2206 times:
United keeps the hub at PHL due to the high O&D traffic there - that means high fares and big profits. They also keep CLT, but it will not be anything like ATL or DEN because the Charlotte metro area simply isn't large enough to support that. And CLT already has service to LGW, CDG, FRA.
PIT is sort of the odd man out, though I suspect they'll also keep it in order to help relieve pressure on the hub at ORD.
As for BWI, Southwest already owns the place. MetroJet is flying 737-200's which are all 17-21 years old. And United wasn't able to directly compete on the West Coast with their United Shuttle (well and make a profit doing it). The new pilots' contract won't help. BWI doesn't fit with the IAD hub there.
Yaki1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2187 times:
I don't think UAL is that concerned with the NE Shuttle, they have already agreed to share it with American. UAL needs USAir to feed there Asia routes. Currently UAL enjoys the majority of the Asian market from Chicago west, soon they may have the same market advantage east of Chicago to Asia.
Pitrules From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 3497 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2165 times:
I think PHL would stay because of its population, even though the airport sucks and has no more runway capacity for expansion.
PIT has had its traffic fall off, but because it has so many competing hubs in the region (ORD, CLE, CVG, DTW, IAD, PHL, etc.), and because Wolf has successfully turned PHL into a congested version of EWR instead of expanding PIT. I think it would be a mistake for United to dump PIT because it is the only airport with existing capacity for growth in the Northeast (IAD has plans for a new concourse, but when it is finished, the existing C & D gates will be torn down, so I don't see the total number of gates increasing much until well into the future). US Airways' int'l flights at PIT are doing pretty well too, that Frankfurt A330 is always packed. I think things at PIT would look up if United would put some RJs in here. ACA is getting at least one per month for the next few years, but has no room to put them at IAD or ORD.
CLT is in a great position as it has only ATL and RDU as competing hubs.
Travelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3600 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2142 times:
I'm sorry, but I don't see ANY airline needing FOUR hubs within a few hundred miles of each other. UAL will keep maybe TWO of those cities at the most (IAD plus one). Whether it is PHL (doubtful), PIT (maybe), or Charlotte (maybe) is TBD.
Remember, folks, having a hub does not JUST mean having a significant presence. It means having a significant connection operation, and you just don't need that many hubs. For instance, AA/Eagle has something like over 200 daily flights out of LAX, but they do not call LAX a "hub" because most of the traffic is O/D, with only limited connections.
So even if United decides to only keep one or two hubs, it doesn't necessarily mean that the other cities will be abandoned.
DCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4608 posts, RR: 31
Reply 20, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2143 times:
DesertJets, I agree that Charlotte would probably be built into a superhub. United has been upfront from the beginning that it wants to compete big in the Southeast--they surely envy Delta having taken O'Hare's title, and want a piece of that massive SE region action. Charlotte has a good layout, room to radically rebuild the terminal into a more hub-friendly design, and a strong local economy to generate O&D traffic. Look for more flights to Europe indeed.
(I write all of this undecided on the merits of the UA-US-AA-TW square dance on the table right now. But now that AA has jumped in, UA-US is suddenly a possibility again. Before it was rightly dead in the water on antitrust grounds. But now it needs to be pondered again.)
Philly will do extremely well. Philly is a huge O& D market that was ignored for years, especially by international carriers, because of the proximity of NYC. It's got lots of O& D to support a hub, and it's well located to funnel Mid-Atlantic pax south, west, and transatlantic. The return of LH, the arrival of AF, and US's continued strength there are only the beginning. If Philly figures out some way to get *widely spaced* parallel runways--eg moving UPS and building one south side, or buying land across I-95 and building one North Side--its value as a hub would shoot up even more.
BWI will become a Southwest stronghold as you say. US has decreasing use for it other than as an O& D market where they're competitive, I think, and I don't see how that situation would change with United colors on the planes.
PIT may be the odd man out, but I think it's going to stay in the game, whether with United or someone else. PIT's O& D base can support a 20 million pax hub if not a larger one, and it's not congested and has one of the best connecting terminals in the country. Edwin Colodny made it richly profitable for USAir, and I think it's still going to be a substantial hub, if not on the scale UA would build CLT or PHL.
All that open unused runway and terminal space makes me wonder if PIT is ripe for a WN invasion. Then the O&D and connecting possibilities would swell. AirTran is already building up there. That complex could handle 30 million with little modification and someone will likely make money doing just that. What do others think?
Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
RyeFly From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1396 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2142 times:
I wonder how much of an increase the US will see of international carriers to these hubs. With United being part of the Star alliance I'm not sure it really matters. Although perhaps in some cases it could make a major difference in the ammount of slots offered, correct?
N628AU From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 355 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2133 times:
PIT...Yes. United has agreed to open another large maintenace facility there. Godd reliever for ORD, especially when the Chicago weather goes down.
CLT...Yes. United will build it to compete with Delta at ATL. Few delays, a new runway to built, and new commuter and international concourses are under construction. Also a very friendly local government, who makes a ton of money off US already.
PHL...Yes, but will be changed IMO. Will see more long-haul service I would assume because of the high O&D. I would be very happy to see it used less for North-South connections because of the ATC problems they have there.
Krushny From Spain, joined Dec 2000, 776 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (14 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2105 times:
UAL will sure keep CLT as a hub. Only hub in the Southeast, it's one part of the country which has been growing a lot lately. They can compete head to head with Delta at their home , put more international flights to CLT and they could get a lot of intl passengers from/to Dixieland...
As for the Northeast, UA/US has too many hubs and I do not think they will keep the three. And probably IAD is not the best positioned one, it is basically at the center of the East Coast, PHL area has more inhabitants... What do you think?
25 Philly phlyer
: UAL will keep all the hubs (IAD, CLT, PIT and PHL). You need to quit thinking only in terms of distance and begin thinking in terms of market and capa
: UAL isn't *willing* to share the shuttle, they are doing it to satisfy antitrust concerns, for both UAL *and* AA.
: Not to be discouraging, but I highly doubt CLT would ever be made into a 'Super Hub' as some have stated. No matter how good the expansion opps and on
28 D L X
: Some stats for you: Denver: 1,978,991 (-) Charlotte: 1,417,217 (+) Washington/Baltimore: 7,359,044 (+) Philly: 5,999,034 (+) North Carolina is the 11t
: Hi Greg/USAFHummer From where have you heard that UA/US is going to start a PHL-CPH service. AFAIK the plan was to start a IAD-CPH service with UA B76
: SAS767, Straight from UA's website, they used to have a map (i think it was recently taken away) showing the new routes they were going to add, and PH
: USAFHUmmer Sorry but this is Wrong - the UA map shows IAD-CPH and not PHL-CPH. Anyway I would like to see a PHL-CPH route, but it's probably very unli
: I have the route map from United's site right in front of me. The route is IAD-CPH, not PHL-CPH. Of course, PHL-CPH may be in the works as well.