FATFlyer From United States, joined May 2001, 4977 posts, RR: 39 Posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 3291 times:
There has been a thread on flyertalk this weekend discussing that UAX flights between LAX-SNA and LAX-ONT do not show in the schedules after the first of the year.
I checked a couple of places myself and also do not see the routes operating after January 6.
Has anyone heard that these are being dropped? Although short they did seem to do OK.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
RoseFlyer From United States, joined Feb 2004, 5633 posts, RR: 27 Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3153 times:
I'm not that surprised that they might be going. These routes are almost always filled with connecting passengers. Passengers can transit SFO or DEN, but it was easy to do a simple hop to LAX before continuing to anywhere else in the UA network.
My job is to make it so your flight is not delayed. Come fly the friendly skies!
Goldenshield From United States, joined Jan 2001, 4066 posts, RR: 13 Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2996 times:
Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 2): I'm not that surprised that they might be going. These routes are almost always filled with connecting passengers. Passengers can transit SFO or DEN, but it was easy to do a simple hop to LAX before continuing to anywhere else in the UA network.
With LAX kicking out all of the turboprops, sans Horizon's Q400's, there's nowhere for these planes to go, but elsewhere, or retire.
And the whole Q400 issue was argued a while back. I'm not going to rehash it.
"I heard that there are rumors on the internets" -- G. W. Bush at the second 2004 debate
1011 From United States, joined Feb 2001, 309 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2967 times:
Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 3): With LAX kicking out all of the turboprops, sans Horizon's Q400's, there's nowhere for these planes to go, but elsewhere, or retire.
Are they kicking turboprops out or are they just making them use the dumpy remote terminal
RoseFlyer From United States, joined Feb 2004, 5633 posts, RR: 27 Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2936 times:
Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 3): With LAX kicking out all of the turboprops, sans Horizon's Q400's, there's nowhere for these planes to go, but elsewhere, or retire.
Please explain that. I missed the news. Without turboprops how would all the local destinations from LAX like Santa Barbara, Oxnard, Palm Springs, Bakersfield, San Diego, and Monterrey keep service? These are useful routes. It's not like LAX doesn't have the runway capacity. Unless there is fog, there's almost never a delay there.
My job is to make it so your flight is not delayed. Come fly the friendly skies!
Flyboy80 From United States, joined Jul 2001, 1644 posts, RR: 5 Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2936 times:
If I recall the article correctly, the city had an argument moreorless to the extent that the area occupied by the OO EMBs could be used for bigger and better things, and that Skywest would move their props back to their old location...who knows. I know at QX, we still haven't fully commited to LAX as a hub because of the parking issue, everytime I work an LA flight we usually wait for a gate. Its just too congested over there. Makes me wonder why QX doesn't park a few airplanes over at Eagle gates.
Pacallen From United States, joined Jun 2004, 27 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2731 times:
Wow I didn't even know such short routes even existed... LAX-SNA is only about 45 minutes by car. With connection times and the possibility of flight delays (I assume it's 99.9% connecting pax), it would seem a lot simpler to just drive to/from LAX.
DeltAirlines From United States, joined May 1999, 7347 posts, RR: 16 Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2685 times:
Quoting Pacallen (Reply 7): Wow I didn't even know such short routes even existed... LAX-SNA is only about 45 minutes by car. With connection times and the possibility of flight delays (I assume it's 99.9% connecting pax), it would seem a lot simpler to just drive to/from LAX.
A great thing about this flight is for someone who is in the OC quite a bit, I can go to SNA (takes me 15-20 minutes to get there from pretty much any place in Orange County), quickly check-in and clear security (takes no more than 10 minutes) and go get on my plane. I can leave 60 minutes before my flight and still make it. I get to LAX 90 minutes later and wait for my connecting flight.
It could easily take me 90 minutes sitting in the parking lot known as the 405 to make it to LAX. Then, you've got to deal with parking/getting to the terminal (much more congested there), clearing security (can be a bit longer at LAX), etc. It's a lot more user-friendly using the quick 9 minute flight up. I'm gonna miss this short hop (plus, great views of the LA area if sitting on the C side of the Brazzy).
PanAm747 From United States, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 11 Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2519 times:
For the business traveller, the business will pay for a short hop route - that is generally what these planes are filled with.
American Eagle is a shell of what it used to be in California - SBA, MRY, FAT, and SAN are about all that's left, if I remember. United Express to SFO and LAX is the big business. BFL-LAX is served ONLY by UAx, and I doubt they're going anywhere soon - but it's certainly not being upgraded to an RJ! That would be extremely uneconomical.
SNA and ONT may be gone, but SkyWest's EMB's will still be flying California's skies for a long time!
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
LAXintl From United States, joined May 2000, 12176 posts, RR: 22 Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2480 times:
Yes LAX-SNA and ONT are gone. Probably a combination of things killed the route including, fuel prices, LAWA legal push to remove prop ops at T-8 and Skywest desire to shrink the EMB120 fleet in favor of larger jets.
UA/UAX are making other long term changes changes as well that will see lots of 3 class ExPlus CRJ-700s based at LAX and discussed in another thread last week. -- For our San Diego friends you'll even see a few CR7s on LAX-SAN as soon as Feb08 IIRC mixed in with the EMBs.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
RoseFlyer From United States, joined Feb 2004, 5633 posts, RR: 27 Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2175 times:
Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 10): For the business traveller, the business will pay for a short hop route - that is generally what these planes are filled with.
Ok someone would pay for the route, but given the position of LAX, how would that really help a business traveller. LAX is still a good distance from downtown LA, or other business areas. LAX is next to the beach but is surrounded by a lot of residential areas except for the businesses right near the airport. I don't think anyone would want to go through the effort of flying SNA/ONT-LAX. It can take the same amount of time to get to downtown LA from LAX as it does from ONT driving.
My job is to make it so your flight is not delayed. Come fly the friendly skies!
SuseJ772 From United States, joined Aug 2005, 513 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1730 times:
Quoting Pacallen (Reply 7): Wow I didn't even know such short routes even existed... LAX-SNA is only about 45 minutes by car. With connection times and the possibility of flight delays (I assume it's 99.9% connecting pax), it would seem a lot simpler to just drive to/from LAX.
Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 9): It could easily take me 90 minutes sitting in the parking lot known as the 405 to make it to LAX. Then, you've got to deal with parking/getting to the terminal (much more congested there), clearing security (can be a bit longer at LAX), etc. It's a lot more user-friendly using the quick 9 minute flight up. I'm gonna miss this short hop (plus, great views of the LA area if sitting on the C side of the Brazzy).
Bingo! I did the ONT-LAX route numerous times becuase getting to and in/out of ONT is so much easier than LAX. Given peek driving times (which in LA is pretty much between 6 am to 9 pm), these short hop flights were a life saver if you lived anywhere near the alternative airports. (Plus, it ain't bad getting 500 FF miles for a 47 mile flight).
KLM11 From United States, joined Dec 2003, 180 posts, RR: 2 Reply 18, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1401 times:
Let's hope that CLD doesn't go as well, seeing that AA dropped the same route years back. Every time I fly CLD-LAX the flight is at least to 70% capacity, and its not uncommon to see more gold UA tickets and priority luggage tags than not...
LAXdude1023 From United States, joined Sep 2006, 4430 posts, RR: 22 Reply 19, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1332 times:
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8): Or 2 hours. Seriously. It's taken me two hours.
Much like everything else in Southern California, it just depends on traffic. Traffic in LA and OC is hell on earth. But without traffic ive done it in 35 minutes. However most of the time traffic is horrible on the 405.
PanAm747 From United States, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 11 Reply 20, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1233 times:
Quote: Ok someone would pay for the route, but given the position of LAX, how would that really help a business traveller. LAX is still a good distance from downtown LA, or other business areas. LAX is next to the beach but is surrounded by a lot of residential areas except for the businesses right near the airport. I don't think anyone would want to go through the effort of flying SNA/ONT-LAX. It can take the same amount of time to get to downtown LA from LAX as it does from ONT driving.
For the busy business traveller who has a meeting in Orange County, being able to use much less crowded SNA and still use the large numbers of flights available at LAX can be quite valuable. If you have never experienced rush hour traffic on the 405, it is beyond description as to how crowded and slow it can be. What might be a twenty minute drive in ideal circumstances could turn into a multiple hour ordeal. I know - it has happened to me. I do dances of joy knowing that ExpressJet lets me bypass the ordeal of driving through Los Angeles to get visit family in Bakersfield.
As for the "effort" of flying out of SNA to do SNA-LAX, ten minutes of security at a smaller station such as SNA or even SAN sure beats the hour plus at LAX!! The time saved by business travellers is not just on the freeways - it's at the airport as well!
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
Access-Air From United States, joined Sep 2000, 1858 posts, RR: 28 Reply 21, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1149 times:
Guys, is this really any kind of surprise to anyone???? Major airports all over are doing this very thing...I wonder if the airlines are planning on adding flights with full size jets or are they simply going to replace the EMB 120s with those God Forsaken 50 Passenger CRJs that fully loaded cant carry anymore than a fully loaded EMB 120????
To me it just seems like airlines have no interest in serving smaller communities PERIOD!!!!
The prevailing mentality says that it doesnt matter to cut off smaller communities because allegedly they contribute little or nothing the the whole picture. This kind of thought and action further isolates smaller cities from the transportation options that the "large cities" seem to enjoy in abundance....
I wonder if a local service PROP airline wanted to start service into LAX from smaller cities if they would even be allowed because the LAX board has convinced themselves that they have bigger fish to fry......or more appropriately, bigger planes to fly.....I am surprised major airports have not banned ALL Propeller planes from landing on their property....
I certianly hope that UAL rethinks this stupid move.....
Xjet on those route would be a suicide mission for a company that just post a loss last quarter. The economics of a regional jet on such a route would lose money as the route is announced.
Horizon is not effected by the move of props to remotes. The issue with United, and LAXINTL can clear it up better, was that a clause with the original move was they could be moved back to remotes by the airport. With American I think it was their choice to build the commuter terminal, but will now need to relocate it.
Horizon will continue to use T-3 gates, but arises a problem of little room for expansion. Horizon has looked at LAX-SAN/PSP,etc. But couldn't offer frequency operating out of so few gates. The Q400's continue to come for Horizon, along with the returning CR7's. You will see more in LAX.
ASSFO
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
Goldenshield From United States, joined Jan 2001, 4066 posts, RR: 13 Reply 23, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1089 times:
Quoting Access-Air (Reply 21): wonder if the airlines are planning on adding flights with full size jets or are they simply going to replace the EMB 120s with those God Forsaken 50 Passenger CRJs that fully loaded cant carry anymore than a fully loaded EMB 120????
Last I checked, a 50 passenger CRJ can carry more than a 30 passenger EMB-120, which is more often than not restricted to 28 due to high passenger weights.
"I heard that there are rumors on the internets" -- G. W. Bush at the second 2004 debate
Daron4000 From United States, joined Mar 2005, 663 posts, RR: 2 Reply 24, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1021 times:
Quoting Access-Air (Reply 21): Guys, is this really any kind of surprise to anyone???? Major airports all over are doing this very thing...I wonder if the airlines are planning on adding flights with full size jets or are they simply going to replace the EMB 120s with those God Forsaken 50 Passenger CRJs that fully loaded cant carry anymore than a fully loaded EMB 120????
To me it just seems like airlines have no interest in serving smaller communities PERIOD!!!!
The prevailing mentality says that it doesnt matter to cut off smaller communities because allegedly they contribute little or nothing the the whole picture. This kind of thought and action further isolates smaller cities from the transportation options that the "large cities" seem to enjoy in abundance....
I wonder if a local service PROP airline wanted to start service into LAX from smaller cities if they would even be allowed because the LAX board has convinced themselves that they have bigger fish to fry......or more appropriately, bigger planes to fly.....I am surprised major airports have not banned ALL Propeller planes from landing on their property....
I certianly hope that UAL rethinks this stupid move.....
Access-Air
I think one of the largest factors here is that with LAWA being so stubborn and kicking props out of United's T8 at LAX, it no longer becomes convenient for those people making the connection to LAX (since the route has no O+D) since they have to switch terminals from the remote terminal and its easier for them to drive. Now the route is uneconomical and not worth it for UA. I doubt it is their fault since it is not like they need these planes for other routes, rather it is the government making a stupid decision (putting pressure on UA to release some of its gate space) and UA reacting by introducing other routes with CRJ-700 to keep the gate space but hurting those passengers in smaller markets.
McMax From United States, joined Dec 2005, 182 posts, RR: 0 Reply 25, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1000 times:
Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 10): American Eagle is a shell of what it used to be in California - SBA, MRY, FAT, and SAN are about all that's left, if I remember.
Actually, Eagle still serves SFO and SJC from SNA.
De minimis non curat lex
26 Boston92: Eagle still has the ERDs/Saabs from SBP to LAX as well.
27 Matt D: Oh to go back to the good ol' days. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MD-U
28 Mdw22l31c: Will UA place mainline back on ONT-SFO?
29 Planespotting: While you're mostly correct about airlines' apprehension to serve small communities, Orange County could hardly be described as a small community.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined May 2001, 4977 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
