Seatback From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 584 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 5852 times:
I was surprised to see that AA mainline has topped United mainline service (in terms of pax carried) at LAX for the 12 month period ending in August. AA had 19.86 while UA had 19.52.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22064 posts, RR: 51 Reply 1, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 5806 times:
While United has consistently beaten AA in mainline boardings the numbers have been quite close last several years. For instance in both in 2005 and 2006 the difference was only a little over 100,000.
Similarly this year thru September the difference between AA and UA mainline is mere 60,000 boardings. With 3 more months of statistics to go its probably too hard to call it either way quite yet.
Add in express operations however, and United soundly exceeds AA's boardings.
[Edited 2007-11-19 18:42:01]
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10193 posts, RR: 62 Reply 2, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 5749 times:
Well, we'll see if that trend continues.
But wow, I must say - I never thought I'd live to see the day when AA mainline would be moving more people through LAX than United.
It's also important to note, of course, that even with this, United + United Express is still far larger than AA + Eagle.
Laxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22064 posts, RR: 51 Reply 3, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 5696 times:
And to put things in perspective with about 10mil annual mainline boardings each, the 100,000 difference is merely a 1% swing either way. So its been very close these last couple years for the two.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10193 posts, RR: 62 Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 5680 times:
Quoting Laxintl (Reply 3): And to put things in perspective with about 10mil annual mainline boardings each, the 100,000 difference is merely a 1% swing either way. So its been very close these last couple years for the two.
Indeed. The difference is basically a rounding error, and has been for the last few years, although I remember back in the late 1990s and early 2000s when AA was #4 at LAX behind United, Southwest and Delta. Now they're #2.
LAXdude1023 From Lebanon, joined Sep 2006, 6780 posts, RR: 25 Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 5633 times:
Im not surprised at all. UA has been switching service to RJ's for alot of flights that used to be mainline (ex. DFW and PDX). AA has flown the same amount of mainline consistantly here for a while now. UA fluxes more.
DFW Fan Boy: Im crude, irreverent, and blunt, but Im not clueless. I offer no apologies.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22064 posts, RR: 51 Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 5616 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 4): I remember back in the late 1990s and early 2000s when AA was #4 at LAX behind United, Southwest and Delta. Now they're #2.
Indeed.
We all know what happened to DL (whom today is a distant #4), while SWA has been land locked and stuck at about 110-115 departures forever at LAX. United also shrunk a bit after 9/11, while AA has seen growth over the year (particularly after the Term-4 renovation) to jockey for the top mainline spot. However with AA somewhat shrinking as a corporation, they might have plateaued this year in LA.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
LACA773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3749 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5257 times:
Do you think this might have to do with AA offering many more seats on the JFK flights than UA offers?
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10193 posts, RR: 62 Reply 8, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5210 times:
Quoting LACA773 (Reply 7): Do you think this might have to do with AA offering many more seats on the JFK flights than UA offers?
AA does offer substantial more capacity on LAX-JFK than United, but as we all know, the LAX market - for both AA and UA - is much larger than just JFK.
I think this has more to do with the relative steadiness of AA at LAX in the post-9/11 period, versus the continual decline of UA during the same timeframe. Since 9/11, AA has stayed relatively stagnant - not much growth - at LAX, while UA has cut nonstop service altogether to several markets they served pre-9/11 (ATL, IAH, MEL and AKL come to mind).
In the last few years, AA has subtracted some, including the second dailies to KOA, LIH and YYZ, along with reducing frequency/capacity in some markets like EWR and IAD. AA has also added some minimal mainline service back, including the second SJD flight, some more capacity to MIA, SAL and the seasonal SJO, both of which launched - IIRC - around 2003-2004.
In addition to that, I think what this really reflects more than anything else is the continually eroding level of UA mainline service in lots of markets that used to be dominated by it: I'm thinking of cities like OAK, SJC, SMF, PHX, TUS, etc. Pre-9/11, and right after the attacks, UA has all or mostly mainline to all these cities, whereas now many have been transitioned more or less to Express RJs. And, given that we're talking about these very high-density, high-frequency markets, the move from 125-seat 737s to 50-seat RJs has done an enormous amount to reduce UA's mainline boarding totals over the last few years.
LACA773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3749 posts, RR: 2 Reply 9, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5166 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 8):
AA does offer substantial more capacity on LAX-JFK than United, but as we all know, the LAX market - for both AA and UA - is much larger than just JFK.
I think this has more to do with the relative steadiness of AA at LAX in the post-9/11 period, versus the continual decline of UA during the same timeframe. Since 9/11, AA has stayed relatively stagnant - not much growth - at LAX, while UA has cut nonstop service altogether to several markets they served pre-9/11 (ATL, IAH, MEL and AKL come to mind).
In the last few years, AA has subtracted some, including the second dailies to KOA, LIH and YYZ, along with reducing frequency/capacity in some markets like EWR and IAD. AA has also added some minimal mainline service back, including the second SJD flight, some more capacity to MIA, SAL and the seasonal SJO, both of which launched - IIRC - around 2003-2004.
In addition to that, I think what this really reflects more than anything else is the continually eroding level of UA mainline service in lots of markets that used to be dominated by it: I'm thinking of cities like OAK, SJC, SMF, PHX, TUS, etc. Pre-9/11, and right after the attacks, UA has all or mostly mainline to all these cities, whereas now many have been transitioned more or less to Express RJs. And, given that we're talking about these very high-density, high-frequency markets, the move from 125-seat 737s to 50-seat RJs has done an enormous amount to reduce UA's mainline boarding totals over the last few years.
You make some very good points, Commavia. It makes complete sense. Especially with all the discontinuation of all the mainline service to the cities you mentioned and transfering them over to UAX makes a remarkable difference.
I do see UA adding quite a few more seats with their new nonstops to HKG, & FRA.
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10193 posts, RR: 62 Reply 10, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5153 times:
Quoting LACA773 (Reply 9): I do see UA adding quite a few more seats with their new nonstops to HKG, & FRA.
Indeed. HKG and FRA are going to add big time to those numbers, which is why I don't realistically see this rounding error of a difference lasting too long before shifting back in UA's favor.
WA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2043 posts, RR: 13 Reply 11, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5072 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 6): SWA has been land locked and stuck at about 110-115 departures forever at LAX. United also shrunk a bit after 9/11, while AA has seen growth over the year (particularly after the Term-4 renovation) to jockey for the top mainline spot. However with AA somewhat shrinking as a corporation, they might have plateaued this year in LA.
AA is also pretty much maxed out at T 4. Unless AA is able to get additional gates at T-5 (unlikely) or upgrades the equipment on some flights from MD-80s to 757s / 767s (equally unlikely), we're unlikely to see AA get any bigger at LAX any time soon.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4790 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 10):
Indeed. HKG and FRA are going to add big time to those numbers, which is why I don't realistically see this rounding error of a difference lasting too long before shifting back in UA's favor.
...and I imagine that, even now, UA still has significantly more mainline ASMs than does AA.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
Kanebear From United States of America, joined May 2002, 953 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4733 times:
There's also the issue of UA having a decent-sized hub up at SFO... where AA has minimal presence. UA has gigantic presence in the west compared to AA.
HUbsnotDubs From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 49 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4278 times:
I know that the UA express operation is large at LAX but how large?
PanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 10 Reply 15, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4278 times:
An interesting caveat to all of this is that LAX is the largest O&D airport in the U.S., and possibly the world. This means the vast majority of seats offered are for people beginning or ending their trips at LAX.
I am impressed that both airlines offer so many mainline flights from LAX, but I think in terms of customer service, it would be more interesting to see where these mainline destinations are. For example, I'm quite certain that AA offers many daily MD80, 757, 767, and maybe an occasional 777 flight to JFK, DFW, ORD, BOS, and MIA, as well as a few others (someone help me out here). The shell of American Eagle adds a few Saabs and EMB RJ's to a few California locations, but I would imagine that UA's destination list - when one includes Express destinations - would easily outnumber AA's choices.
Quote: There's also the issue of UA having a decent-sized hub up at SFO... where AA has minimal presence. UA has gigantic presence in the west compared to AA.
VERY true!! In the west, there's United, Southwest, and Alaska/Horizon. Intra-Pacific Time Zone flying is almost totally dominated by those three.
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
AADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 1837 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3979 times:
UA's shrinkage at LAX was part of a deliberate post 9/11 strategy to shift flights to maintain the fortress hub at SFO. LAX is an impossible hub to defend and AA took the opposite approach and shrank SJC and RNO but maintained LAX. If WN had the gate space they would probably swamp UA and AA however.
Actually, UA never fully implemented its alleged LAX hub. At one time, LAX expansion plans included an additional runway and more gates but the new runway was dropped and all current terminal plans result in a reduction of gates. UA had planned to expand to use the new capacity but backed off when it became clear that it was not going to happen.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22064 posts, RR: 51 Reply 17, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3843 times:
Here is a profile of each airlines ops at LAX inclusive of express operations as of the 12 months ended Sept. 2006.
One interesting thing to note, is that AA uses LAX very much as an O&D station, while UA with its much larger express network and also international flying sees a much higher percentage of transfer traffic at LAX compared to AA.
American
Total boardings: 9,528,688
Avg Daily Dep - 84 (mainline)
Avg Daily Dep - 57(express)
% traffic O&D - 80.6%
Top markets(avg daily one-way pax)
DFW - 2179
JFK - 1548
ORD - 1393
MIA - 967
SFO - 660
HNL - 590
BOS - 501
STL - 469
SAN - 447
IAD - 356
United
Total boardings: 12,712,840
Avg Daily Dep - 96 (mainline)
Avg Daily Dep - 136 (express)
% traffic O&D - 65.8%
Top markets (avg daily one-way pax)
ORD - 1817
SFO - 1626
DEN - 1385
IAD - 1126
HNL - 796
LAS - 791
JFK - 622
OGG - 507
SEA - 456
SAN - 432
Lastly, if one looks at the "big picture" at LA's satellite airports, United presence and market share compared to AA increases even further.
source: LAWA & Aviation Daily stats.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31119 posts, RR: 73 Reply 18, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3827 times:
Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 15): For example, I'm quite certain that AA offers many daily MD80, 757, 767, and maybe an occasional 777 flight to JFK, DFW, ORD, BOS, and MIA, as well as a few others (someone help me out here).
In terms of mainline service they offer an almost identical number of destinations - 25 on AA and 26 on UA. AA provides more trans-con capacity, especially with heavy lift to South Florida (nine daily flights, including a 777) and New York (15 daily flights, 12 on widebodies).
UA - Baltimore, Boston, Cancun, Chicago/O'Hare, Denver, Frankfurt, Guatemala City, Hong Kong, Honolulu, Kona, Lihue, London/Heathrow, Maui, Mexico City, New Orleans, New York/JFK, Newark, Orlando, Philadelphia, Sacramento, San Francisco, San Salvador, Seattle, Sydney, Tokyo, Washington/Dulles
PanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 10 Reply 19, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3729 times:
Quote: In terms of mainline service they offer an almost identical number of destinations - 25 on AA and 26 on UA. AA provides more trans-con capacity, especially with heavy lift to South Florida (nine daily flights, including a 777) and New York (15 daily flights, 12 on widebodies).
Thank you!! I did not know about some of AA's destinations from LAX. I stand corrected.
Including Express/Eagle destinations, I'd love to see statistics as to how many TOTAL destinations are served, including numbers of seats and destinations. Would UA win that battle?
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
ElmoTheHobo From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1515 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3210 times:
Eagle currently serves seven cities (Las Vegas, San Diego, Fresno, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, San Jose CA, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara), and will go up to eight in January when they launch their new Santa Fe weekend service.
United serves at least double, if not triple that number from Los Angeles.
26 flights on American if you include the seasonal Vail/Eagle flight. I was under the impression that American also serves San Salvador, turns out they don't. Since when has that been? In August they still had the signs up for San Salvador check in.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31119 posts, RR: 73 Reply 21, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3181 times:
Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 20): 26 flights on American if you include the seasonal Vail/Eagle flight. I was under the impression that American also serves San Salvador, turns out they don't. Since when has that been? In August they still had the signs up for San Salvador check in.
They do, daily. I left it out. That makes 27, more than UA.
AA1818 From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Feb 2006, 3348 posts, RR: 4 Reply 22, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3139 times:
What about Int'l lift. Besides LHR, where else does AA serve.
I know US beats AA hands down on international lift, but how do they compare out of LAX??
Cheers
AA1818
25 AA1818: Yea- typo...should have been UA!! Sorry! I always assumed that UA was bigger Internationally! hmmm- learn something new everyday!! Cheers AA1818
26 Commavia: And this is an important point to remember. Much like at JFK and in New York where - similarly - several major airlines (both legacy and low-cost) ar
27 ElmoTheHobo: Absolutely. American connects a huge number of transcon passengers onto Qantas flights alone. The Eagle flights also carry a dozen (probably more) co
28 LAxintl: True. Also a fair deal of LAX-SFO/LAS/Hawaii connections for OW However total AE annual boardings were only about about 500,000 annually while UAX bo
29 Eghansen: And American Eagle's service from LAX is terrible. You have to ride a bus from Terminal 5 to a dinky midfield terminal near the AA hanger. There is n
30 ElmoTheHobo: That may/will change with the new midfield concourse they're going to build where the commuter terminals stands. Sure it isn't the most convenient th
31 RyDawg82: Gotta correct this statement as it pertains to LAX as I understand from press releases and date found on LAWA's website itself... Alaska Airlines (AS
32 Commavia: I think he was speaking about the entire market overall, where AA is definitely - by far - the largest U.S. international carrier in terms of passeng
33 Eghansen: Sorry, brother, but the new midfield terminal at LAX ain't never gonna happen. Welcome to aviation in California. The City of Los Angeles settled a l
34 MAH4546: AA carries more international passengers than any other U.S. airline. That statement didn't pertain to just LAX. Though it is indeed surprising that
35 Flighty: Can we see a rundown of AA's mainline operation at LAX? What are their 757 cities? 737 or MD-80 cities? 767? 777, LHR only? Thanks.
36 LAXintl: Incorrect. First phase of the midfield concourse was approved earlier this year and is planned to open January 2012. Matter of fact on November 5th c
37 MAH4546: Three daily 777 flights to LAX - one each to Heathrow, Miami, and Narita.
38 Eghansen: I'll believe it when I see it. The contract is only to hire an architect. I worked for Landrum & Brown from 1989 to 1990 and did environmental studie
40 MAH4546: Not just this summer. That's a permanent cancellation.
41 LAXintl: Its not "might", it has been approved. Actually the near 25 gate facility is one one of the many green lighted projects as part of the 2005 LAX Maste
42 Commavia: Okay, for those of us not knowing that much about LAX nor its Master Plan, can somebody help us out: what does this Midfield project have to do with
43 LAXintl: The new midfield terminal will be located North-South along the back of the TBIT terminal and be connected under the taxiways via people mover system
44 Commavia: By the looks of that configuration sketch, it appears that midfield concourse is going to be pretty huge. What are they planning to use all that spac
45 LAXintl: International facility connected to TBIT. Basically replace the 20+ remote gates on the Westside of the airport with an actual terminal facility. As
46 LAXdude1023: LAX-LHR is still in schedule for AA to run 2x daily from April 7. Both LAX-LHR flights are bookable on AA.com. You left out the biggest one: DFW. DFW
47 MAH4546: Thanks for the correction. Looks like they changed their mind.
49 ElmoTheHobo: How are they pulling this off with the Heathrow slots they have? With JFK dropping to 5 daily from six, LAX was supposed to drop to daily to allow fo
50 LAXdude1023: Here are the number of LHR flights on AA starting April 7: 5 from JFK 5 from ORD 1 from MIA (on Saturday 2x) 2 from BOS (on Saturday 1x) 1 from DFW 1
51 MAH4546: They picked up a slot from Gulfair. Unfortunately, they weren't able to pick up a slot from Luxair to start a 2nd MIA-LHR as planned. They are shoppi
52 Jacobin777: ..I've flown there a number of times..its not bad at all.... ..now that they will be commencing DFW-LHR soon, it will give me a 3rd gateway out of SJ
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 584 posts, 
From Lebanon, joined Sep 2006, 6780 posts, 
Indeed.
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31119 posts, 
From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Feb 2006, 3348 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
