Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Alaska Getting Rid Of SNA-OAK?  
User currently offlineSocalatc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 527 posts, RR: 1
Posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4430 times:

Looking on the Website, Alaska is not selling seats to OAK out of SNA starting April 27th. So I called my friend at JWA and he said that they are adding a 9th SNA-SEA and giving the remaining slots back to the airport.

There is nothing official regarding this, however they are not selling SNA-OAK seats after Apr 27th.

Personally, I think that getting rid of the SNA slots is not smart, those are very hard to come by and should be able to use them for other routes that will make money.

28 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 5432 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4385 times:

I wonder if those SNA slots can remain dormant for a while or do they "expire" immediately if not used? I would think AS would hang on to them for at least a while (if possible) rather than just letting go of them. It will be interesting to see who gets said slots; I'm sure several cx are ready to pounce. Is it a lottery, or the first one with their checkbook out, or based on current usage and seniority? Who knows, maybe someone new coming to town?

bb


User currently offlineEIPremier From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1549 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4375 times:

They are still showing one flight on the sna-oak route after 4/27, but only one.

User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3805 posts, RR: 29
Reply 3, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4354 times:



Quoting EIPremier (Reply 2):
They are still showing one flight on the sna-oak route after 4/27, but only one.

However.... is it possible to actually book and purchase a ticket SNA-OAK and/or v.v. on AS after 4/27?


User currently offlineEIPremier From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1549 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4344 times:

When I attempted to book a ticket on alaskaair.com, the AS 353 (snaoak) and AS 470 (oaksna) flights were still listed. Of course, I didnt actually go so far as to purchase.

User currently offlineSocalatc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 527 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4340 times:

I just attempted again to book SNA-OAK the 27th and OAK-SNA on the 28th and it said nothing was available.

This was on www.alaskaair.com.. On orbitz its letting me book Alaska 353 but nothing non-stop returning.


User currently offlineWedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5910 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4340 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Interesting. If AS is pulling out of the OAK-SNA market after all these years, I wonder who will move in. I wouldn't be surprised if WN adds more. Maybe AQ will add a roundtrip.

User currently offlineThreeIfByAir From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 676 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 4132 times:

How are SNA "slots" managed exactly?

I have always wondered why AS flies OAK-SNA. When the OAK MX base was open, I just assumed it was for aircraft rotation purposes, but with that long gone, I don't know. OAK is not a core market for AS and WN competition is pretty substantial. AS has no nonstop competition on SEA/PDX-SNA.

Since SNA seems to always be excluded from WN fare sales and AS tends to charge a premium for SEA-SNA flights versus ONT/LGB/LAX, I think it is fair to say that money is there to be made. So, I can't see why AS would walk away from SNA-OAK without using the slots on PDX or SEA flights. There is a massive vacation package market, which is probably more profitable than the flights themselves.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25369 posts, RR: 49
Reply 8, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4085 times:



Quoting ThreeIfByAir (Reply 7):
How are SNA "slots" managed exactly?

In 1985 communities adjacent to SNA and the County reached a settlement agreement that governed operations at the airport in return for the significant facility improvements. The original agreement was amended slightly in 2003 and runs thru the end of 2015.

Highlights of the current agreement are:
Maximum of 85 daily passenger air carrier movements
Maximum of 4 daily all cargo movements (two are temporarily assigned to passenger carriers)
Maximum 10.3mil annual passengers through December 2010
Maximum 10.8mill annual passengers through December 2015
Maximum of 20 jetway gates (currently there are 14)
Curfew on departures between 22:00 and 07:00 (08:00 on Sundays) and arrivals between 23:00 and 07:00 (08:00 on Sundays).

There perse are no "slots" but instead movement rights that air carriers can use anytime they wish during operating hours. Only real restriction is that much coveted overnight parking ops are restricted to a maximum of 18 flights IIRC.


Something interesting to watch is what will happen in 2008 if the airport finally reached its 10.3mil annual passenger cap. With 2007 growth running about 5% the airport should end up with just about 10.0mil passengers. The airport authority again last fall advised airlines to consider voluntary schedule adjustments to help keep the airport from reaching its 10.3mil cap. Once the cap is reached, the airport would be forced to enforce mass flight cancellations, so its very much to the airlines benefit to ensure the caps are not reached unless if they all want to experience a very difficult December some year.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineAloha73G From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2362 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4021 times:

If AS's slots are available, I hope AQ jumps at them!!

If they don't have a long-haul route to add (another HNL or OGG....or ITO/LIH/KOA) they could definately add SNA-OAK/SMF/LAS/RNO flights as placeholders. Longshot hope.....SNA-DCA....or even JFK. More SNA slots could justify more 737NGs (pipe dream....4 738s).

SMF-OGG pulls the highest loads and SNA-OGG has the highest yields.

-Aloha!



Aloha Airlines - The Spirit Moves Us. Gone but NEVER Forgotten. Aloha, A Hui Hou!
User currently offlineThreeIfByAir From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 676 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3921 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
Highlights of the current agreement are:
Maximum of 85 daily passenger air carrier movements
Maximum of 4 daily all cargo movements (two are temporarily assigned to passenger carriers)
Maximum 10.3mil annual passengers through December 2010
Maximum 10.8mill annual passengers through December 2015
Maximum of 20 jetway gates (currently there are 14)
Curfew on departures between 22:00 and 07:00 (08:00 on Sundays) and arrivals between 23:00 and 07:00 (08:00 on Sundays).



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
There perse are no "slots" but instead movement rights that air carriers can use anytime they wish during operating hours. Only real restriction is that much coveted overnight parking ops are restricted to a maximum of 18 flights IIRC.

Thanks for the summary! I take it that a quick look at daily SNA ops will give me the breakdown by carrier easily enough.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
Something interesting to watch is what will happen in 2008 if the airport finally reached its 10.3mil annual passenger cap. With 2007 growth running about 5% the airport should end up with just about 10.0mil passengers. The airport authority again last fall advised airlines to consider voluntary schedule adjustments to help keep the airport from reaching its 10.3mil cap. Once the cap is reached, the airport would be forced to enforce mass flight cancellations, so its very much to the airlines benefit to ensure the caps are not reached unless if they all want to experience a very difficult December some year.

That looks like a situation that could get pretty ugly. No carrier has an incentive to cut back on routes unless rivals do too, and working together isn't exactly a strong suit for airlines. JFK is the poster child at the moment. Nothing "voluntary" will work without some serious negotiations. Since SNA has been a popular destination for decades and the movement cap is fixed, I take it the passenger traffic increases are due to larger aircraft, rather than higher load factors or more flights. Perhaps SNA should impose a seat limit per aircraft? Negotiating with the NIMBYs doesn't sound promising, given the level of restrictions in the current agreement.


User currently offlineWedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5910 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3815 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Could the OAK-SNA flights be a victim of the MD-80's leaving the fleet and other 737's having to fill some voids? I would imagine AS is probably divesting itself of MD-80's faster than received 738s.

User currently offlineAmwest2United From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 409 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3731 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
There perse are no "slots" but instead movement rights that air carriers can use anytime they wish during operating hours. Only real restriction is that much coveted overnight parking ops are restricted to a maximum of 18 flights IIRC.

Do forget that there are noise level slots as well, unless they have been changed in the last year. Each carrier has certian number of arrival and takeoff slots for noise levels. If my memory serves me correctly, they are A, AA and E slots, which allow for certian decibles on take-off. A being the loudest and E being the quietest. Used to work with them.



Life is what happens to you while you making plans to live it!
User currently offlineSpencerII From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3707 times:



Quoting Socalatc (Thread starter):
he said that they are adding a 9th SNA-SEA and giving the remaining slots back to the airport.

I had heard that this was coming, and AS is attempting to convert those slots over to QX. Because it is an airline that operates under a different certificate, they cannot just up and change it without approval from the powers that be at the airport. Also at SNA these slots cannot be sold by existing carriers to other carriers. I would think we would be attempting to convert these to CRJ operations on the slots. But I cannot see AS "turning them in" to be allocated to someone else.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25369 posts, RR: 49
Reply 14, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3696 times:

All 89 commercial air carrier operations are defined at Class A operation as a baseline, however some flight a day operate under the Class E (Exempt) if they can demonstrate a noise level below 93.5 decibels. Currently the biggest beneficiary of this is Southwest Airlines which is able to run the majority of its flights as Class E's. The only other carriers which have managed Class E ops recently have been Alaska (737-700), America West(A320) and United (757) with only one of two daily flights. -- Basically planes really need to be very quiet and likely light to barely register on the airports 10 noise monitors.

Quoting ThreeIfByAir (Reply 10):
Negotiating with the NIMBYs doesn't sound promising, given the level of restrictions in the current agreement.

With the community growing around SNA I doubt much real airport growth will be possible. Just recently the airport had to back off plans to build a new parking structure that would impinge on a Newport Beach golf course.
The maximum annual passenger limit will be reached one of these years with the airport and airlines having to figure out how to deal with them.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineSocalatc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 527 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3662 times:



Quoting SpencerII (Reply 13):
But I cannot see AS "turning them in" to be allocated to someone else.

That would shock me also. QX would be a good fit into SNA, maybe with a BOI flight or two.


User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3640 times:

When HP discontinued the SFO-SNA route is wasn't about a money, but they needed the 733's elsewhere, although they were making a profit on the route, they thought they could make more elsewhere. Maybe its the same concept behind AS move. I don't have any idea why the SMF-SNA and RNO-SNA routes were discontinued, perhaps not getting the state contract was a factor?

[Edited 2008-01-13 10:34:37]

User currently offlineHawaiian717 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3195 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3570 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 14):
The only other carriers which have managed Class E ops recently have been Alaska (737-700), America West(A320) and United (757) with only one of two daily flights.

Do you happen to know where the MD-90 fits in? It's considered a rather quiet aircraft, and wasn't a major reason Reno Air bought them in the first place was for SNA? I see DL is still using MD-90s on its SNA-SLC flights that haven't been moved over to RJs.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25369 posts, RR: 49
Reply 18, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3556 times:



Quoting Hawaiian717 (Reply 17):
Do you happen to know where the MD-90 fits in?

All of DL's flights (incl MD-90) fall within Class A ops. Class E really requires a light aircraft, on a short hop to beat the 93.5 decibel limit. DL's shortest SNA route is still the 2hr hop to SLC.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineAAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3474 posts, RR: 46
Reply 19, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3532 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
Only real restriction is that much coveted overnight parking ops are restricted to a maximum of 18 flights IIRC.

Perhaps you are referring to non-gate parking locations? There are 14 acft parked at gates overnight and a lot of others (I never bothered counting, but a lot more than 4) at the North and South RON spots.



*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
User currently offlineRW717 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 289 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3450 times:

I flew AS OAK-SNA in mid Dec. and paid $69.00 each way last minute. The flight was only about half full, however between the holidays is typically a light travel period.


Reno Air - The Biggest Little Airline in the World
User currently offlineEIPremier From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1549 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3167 times:

OK, here's what I found out.

OAK-SNA is being discontinued. AS needed to cut something in order to achieve its goal, which is increasing schedule frequency between Seattle and Bay Area/Southern California in order to compete better against Virgin America. Eff April 27, Alaska will increase frequencies between Seattle and Los Angeles, Oakland, Orange County, San Diego, San Francisco and San Jose and more evenly distribute flights throughout the day. VX is only going to be flying SEA-LAX and SEA-SFO initially, but I'm sure AS wants to ward off further expansion by VX.

AS will be spreading out flights more evenly throughout the day. For example, SEA-LAX flights will operate every hour on the hour between 6 am and 7 pm on weekdays. This schedule is effectively "depeaked" from in the past, when AS used to have more early AM departures on SEA-LAX and more evening departures on LAX-SEA. Basically AS is adding 1-2 round-trips a day between SEA and SNA/SAN/LAX. On the SEA to Bay Area routes, the flights will run every two hours.

[Edited 2008-01-14 15:42:04]

User currently offlineThreeIfByAir From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 676 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3090 times:



Quoting EIPremier (Reply 21):
OK, here's what I found out.

OAK-SNA is being discontinued. AS needed to cut something in order to achieve its goal, which is increasing schedule frequency between Seattle and Bay Area/Southern California in order to compete better against Virgin America. Eff April 27, Alaska will increase frequencies between Seattle and Los Angeles, Oakland, Orange County, San Diego, San Francisco and San Jose and more evenly distribute flights throughout the day. VX is only going to be flying SEA-LAX and SEA-SFO initially, but I'm sure AS wants to ward off further expansion by VX.

AS will be spreading out flights more evenly throughout the day. For example, SEA-LAX flights will operate every hour on the hour between 6 am and 7 pm on weekdays. This schedule is effectively "depeaked" from in the past, when AS used to have more early AM departures on SEA-LAX and more evening departures on LAX-SEA. Basically AS is adding 1-2 round-trips a day between SEA and SNA/SAN/LAX. On the SEA to Bay Area routes, the flights will run every two hours.

Interesting news. It doesn't seem like VX could be getting into the OAK-SNA market though, so I assume OAK-SNA was just not very profitable for AS and thus it gets chopped to supply the aircraft for the SEA-California service expansion.


User currently offlineSocalatc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 527 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3044 times:



Quoting ThreeIfByAir (Reply 22):
It doesn't seem like VX could be getting into the OAK-SNA market though

VX is not going into the OAK-SNA market, he was saying that AS is cutting the route in order to add frequency ( LAX, SNA to SEA) And compete with VX. Nowhere did it say that VX is adding SNA-OAK


User currently offlineMcMax From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 304 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 2936 times:

Too bad SNA-OAK is being cut. For us AA flyers, it was another option to get to the Bay Area from SNA (AA flies to SFO and SJC). And, SNA-OAK fares, as another poster mentioned, were often cheaper than SJC (and always cheaper than SFO). I guess I should have suspected something was up when I noticed today that my SNA-SEA-YVR flights on AS for June all had schedule adjustments. I had always thought it was odd AS flew SNA-OAK, especially when OAK was not even a focus city for them.

Someone else posted a question about what would happen to the "slots" at SNA which AS is giving up. If a slot remains unused for a certain period of time, it is returned to the airport, who then allocates it to the next carrier on the waiting list. This is what happened a few years back when AA cut some of their flights to ORD. The slots were returned, and WN ended up getting those additional slots. Whether or not AS is able to transfer the slots to QX is another question. Given they are sister companies, it may be possible. I base this on the fact that AA almost all of their SNA-SFO/SJC operations to Eagle, and they were not forced to return the slots back to the airport first.

Quoting Wedgetail737 (Reply 11):
Could the OAK-SNA flights be a victim of the MD-80's leaving the fleet and other 737's having to fill some voids? I would imagine AS is probably divesting itself of MD-80's faster than received 738s.

SNA-OAK has been run by 737s for a while now. Typically, it's the 737-400 that makes the run.

Quoting ThreeIfByAir (Reply 22):
Interesting news. It doesn't seem like VX could be getting into the OAK-SNA market though, so I assume OAK-SNA was just not very profitable for AS and thus it gets chopped to supply the aircraft for the SEA-California service expansion.

Even with AS's lower costs, I can't imagine it was *that* profitable on the SNA-OAK run, especially with WN as the dominant carrier on that route. The average fare I've paid has been $98 roundtrip. And, I doubt VX will start SNA-OAK. My guess is that SNA may be on VX's list of airports it wants to serve, but given the waiting list to get into SNA, I doubt you will see VX here any time soon.



De minimis non curat lex tamen ego curao
25 ScottB : Believe it or not, AS is the low-fare carrier on OAK-SNA; WN's average yields are about 15% higher. And yet WN still leads in that market with over 7
26 Wedgetail737 : I guess even though WN has been scaling OAK back a little. Is it possible that WN might increase frequency between OAK-SNA? Perhaps they could move a
27 McMax : I think that's a good supposition. I would have liked to see additional WN destinations out of SNA, but given that SNA-MDW is not on the schedule any
28 Post contains links SANFan : The puzzle has been solved... http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/080116/aqw042.html?.v=38 (Note the statement at the bottom of the article: "To add frequency
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...
Delta Getting Rid Of Eyebrows On 737 Fleet? posted Sun Jun 17 2007 09:10:24 by AlitaliaMD11
Is LH Getting Rid Of Their A300's? posted Sat May 13 2006 12:42:14 by SKA380
Regionals Getting Rid Of Crj's posted Fri Nov 4 2005 03:51:14 by Soaringadi
Aeroflot Getting Rid Of TU 134s posted Sat Oct 1 2005 00:43:19 by Kevin
HRL And LRD Getting Rid Of Cargo Before Emily posted Tue Jul 19 2005 19:41:36 by Skywatch
What Prevents CO From Getting Rid Of Their 735s? posted Sun Mar 13 2005 23:53:45 by Cory6188
Why Is Aeromexico Getting Rid Of Their 757 posted Wed Aug 11 2004 06:09:41 by Flydc10
SAS Getting Rid Of A321s posted Thu May 27 2004 14:53:25 by Cloud4000
Getting Rid Of 777 Or What? posted Sat Apr 24 2004 11:13:32 by Businessboy
Condor (TCA) Getting Rid Of The 757-200 posted Fri Jan 9 2004 09:30:12 by Godbless