Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
More On AA's ORD-DME Flight  
User currently offlineAddd From United States of America, joined May 2007, 397 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6746 times:

The topic has been covered here before:

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...general_aviation/read.main/4124370
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...eneral_aviation/read.main/4092720/

but I thought I'd share my personal experience with the AA158/159. I flew ORD-DME-ORD recently on weekends in both directions - on the outbound sector, I caught one of the last 777 flights on the route, and on the return leg it was 763.

Granted, it is low season for transatlantic fights, but load factors on this flight really made me wonder whether it is going to survive - on ORD-DME segment there were approx. 65 (by my own count), and on DME-ORD leg - 46 (!) paying passengers on the plane (the latter number according to a flight attendant) of which 7 were in Business. It will be a shame if it will get nixed.

On the plus side, Domodedovo Airport with its perennial construction is shaping up nicely, but it still feels relatively small for the number of passengers - I would not like to be in the concourse from which we were departing (gate A13) in the middle of the summer.

39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineUN_B732 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 4289 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 6629 times:

It's really too bad. I'm gonna be hitting this service in December ($680 round-trip DME-LGA via ORD.. how could I resist?!). Hopefully (for AA) It'll be more full; but doesn't seem like it.
They have a fair amount of billboards advertising the DME-ORD service, but it doesn't seem.. so far.. to really be helping.

-A



What now?
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32737 posts, RR: 72
Reply 2, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6532 times:

I think AA will stick it out in Moscow, even though they didn't at say, Nagoya.

The service could run fuller if it was out of New York or Miami, but New York has a lot of competition and they would never be able to get the yields they need from Miami.



a.
User currently offlineCIDflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2286 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 6040 times:

Would the flight do better if it moved to DFW? Granted Europe service from DFW on AA seems to be limited to just LHR, CDG and FRA, but the hub there is much larger than AA at ORD.

User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32737 posts, RR: 72
Reply 4, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 6018 times:



Quoting CIDflyer (Reply 3):
Would the flight do better if it moved to DFW? Granted Europe service from DFW on AA seems to be limited to just LHR, CDG and FRA, but the hub there is much larger than AA at ORD.

It wouldn't stand a chance at DFW. The geography doesn't work and the local market does not exist.

Is the hub larger? Yes, but what does that matter? One-stops to Santa Barbara, Lawton, Corpus Christi and Roswell? Big deal.

Chicago provides the best mix of feed and local traffic; and probably 95%+ of the U.S.-Russia market can connect one-stop via Chicago.



a.
User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11559 posts, RR: 62
Reply 5, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 6002 times:



Quoting CIDflyer (Reply 3):
Would the flight do better if it moved to DFW?

No, the Metroplex would provide a fraction of the traffic to Russia that Chicago - a far larger and more 'international' metro area - can provide.

In addition to that, moving the flight to DFW - which is almost 700 miles farther than ORD - would likely necessitate a switch to the 777, which is simply too big and poorly configured (too much premium with F/J) for the Moscow market.

Quoting CIDflyer (Reply 3):
Granted Europe service from DFW on AA seems to be limited to just LHR, CDG and FRA, but the hub there is much larger than AA at ORD.

I would wager that 95% of the connections being made off this flight are going to probably less than 20 major cities in the United States, probably all of which are served from Chicago by AA in addition to just DFW.


User currently offlineATLFlyer323 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 614 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5923 times:

I do not mean to start anything,

but how does Delta do to Moscow in comparison?

~Brandon



Everyday, the fluffy temptation of wheat!
User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5249 posts, RR: 25
Reply 7, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5893 times:



Quoting ATLFlyer323 (Reply 6):
I do not mean to start anything,

but how does Delta do to Moscow in comparison?

From what I know, they do fairly well. For instance, ATL has been upgraded from a 763 to a 764. Honestly, while it's doesn't seem to be a popular opinion on here, I think that AA will do just fine with ORD-DME especially now that the flight is being downgraded to a 763.



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11559 posts, RR: 62
Reply 8, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5868 times:



Quoting ATLFlyer323 (Reply 6):
I do not mean to start anything,

but how does Delta do to Moscow in comparison?

I think quite well.

Delta benefits from have a long-established (almost 20 years now) presence in the market, plus a partnership with Russia's national airline, Aeroflot, that doesn't hurt.

In addition, the markets they serve are markets that are easier to make work profitably: New York is the largest market in the U.S. for Russian traffic, and while Atlanta isn't that big a market for Russia, it offers connections to tons of places - one of the most important of which is Florida, which is a huge market for Russia. It's a lot easier to get someone to connection Moscow-Atlanta-Florida than, say, Moscow-Chicago-Florida.

Quoting OA412 (Reply 7):
Honestly, while it's doesn't seem to be a popular opinion on here, I think that AA will do just fine with ORD-DME especially now that the flight is being downgraded to a 763.

I tend to agree, and hope that this flight makes it - as it provides some good competition in the otherwise fairly-lightly-competitive U.S.-Russia market where Delta+Aeroflot handily dominate.

The flight is long, which was killing AA with skyrocketing fuel costs, but with those coming down, hopefully this will improve. Then again, though - the global economy being what it is, and Russia's new-found wealth being pretty much entirely built on oil, I guess we'll have to wait and see...


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32737 posts, RR: 72
Reply 9, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 5810 times:



Quoting OA412 (Reply 7):
I think that AA will do just fine with ORD-DME especially now that the flight is being downgraded to a 763.

And also now that fuel is $60/bbl, instead of $140/bbl like during the summer.

FYI, the busiest connecting markets from this flight I was told are Miami, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, and Fort Lauderdale. No surprise there.



a.
User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5685 times:

SVO has long been one of DL's most profitable stations. NYC is a huge destination and between ATL and JFK, DL has every conceivable market covered. DL's real advantage is that it has such a huge marketing presence in/to Eastern Europe, Russia included.

Keep in mind also that the Russian economy has taken a major downturn in the past couple months as oil prices have fallen. The economic situation that existed when AA launched the flight is far different than it is now - and it will likely be a long time if ever before the economy of Russia ever returns to where it was before.

AA might stick it out in Russia but if the route fails, I would say the route failure is more about a drastically changed economic situation than anything AA could have done or not done to make the route work. Very few economies have been subjected to such dramatic change. Trying to start a route in that kind of environment may well be more thanAA can overcome.


User currently offlinePRAirbus From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2005, 1137 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5306 times:

Oddly enough Delta seems to fly to all the places AA cries it would not make money. I seriously doubt Delta likes to waste money or burn fuel flying to places that are not profitable (like AA claims). Delta seems to have a hold of the holy grail and keeps expanding like crazy meanwhile AA is extremely shy on its hit or miss strategy...I wonder what AA Management is smoking??????? AA has the infrastructure at places like JFK to fly wherever they want and yet Delta with is dingy terminal in JFK is really going places...KUDOS to Delta for innovating...AA is resting at the end of the runway, just watching.

User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 5283 times:

tough verdict, PR Airbus but there may well be some truth to it.

I wouldn't be too hard on AA alone, though. Most of the US airlines have shown very little innovation in their route development. It is because DL has sought out unique markets along with connecting major markets like Tokyo and Tel Aviv to all of the US that DL is able to expand as much as they are.


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32737 posts, RR: 72
Reply 13, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 5255 times:



Quoting PRAirbus (Reply 11):
AA is resting at the end of the runway, just watching.

They won't be watching this summer...



a.
User currently offlineTUSAA From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 240 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 5238 times:



Quoting PRAirbus (Reply 11):
Delta seems to have a hold of the holy grail and keeps expanding like crazy meanwhile AA is extremely shy on its hit or miss strategy...I wonder what AA Management is smoking???????

If Joyner and Aue would pull their heads out of their butt's and take a few risks, and quit worrying about where to send Eagle to next, AA just might capitalize on a few new TATL routes. In the meantime AA is going to sit back and watch. Those 18 757's should have been reconfigured and deployed a long time ago.


User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 5160 times:

DL takes a different strategy than AA. DL, never having had the LHR rights (or the partnership there) has diversified their TATL route structure, whereas AA has focused on consolidating its market share on a few destinations. AA also focuses to a much greater extent on South America, as opposed to Europe. Perhaps if they had focused their business there.

I think this route is the beginning of their proliferation and a new focus on Europe.

Ultimately, I think that they need to bulk up their long haul fleet. I think the new 757 ETOPS aircraft will be useful in Europe expansion.

AA is also limited by their lack of an eastern hub. They face stiff international competition at JFK, as well as from larger competitor DL, and CO over at EWR. ORD they face stiff competition from UA, and the geography isn't as ideal and is hard to run 757s from.

MIA expansion across the pond is a possibility, I suppose.

Maybe BOS as a new eastern hub? No where is closer to Europe.



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineHPAEAA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 5124 times:



Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 15):
AA is also limited by their lack of an eastern hub.

to a certain extent.. but in terms of focus cities and hubs AA has more than any other carrier... by focusing on O&D they've maintained alot of routes where most carriers (especially in downturns) have focused on retreating to hub routes.. if you ask me, AA's network including MQ probably most closely resembles WN compared to the rest of the legacies... I don't think we'll see much change in terms of their strategy, actually I think we'll probably just see more of it... on a side note, the east coast has lots of strong markets, why focus on only one?



Why do I fly???
User currently offlineTUSAA From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 240 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 5105 times:



Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 15):
AA is also limited by their lack of an eastern hub

JFK will work best for AA, and it's doesn't need to be a massive hub. Having connecting flights from key cities such LAX,SFO,MIA, and DFW and ORD will help out as well. JFK has enough O&D to support any TATL's AA has up their sleeve since most should be 757's to start with.


User currently offlineAA777223 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1245 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4847 times:



Quoting PRAirbus (Reply 11):
Oddly enough Delta seems to fly to all the places AA cries it would not make money. I seriously doubt Delta likes to waste money or burn fuel flying to places that are not profitable (like AA claims). Delta seems to have a hold of the holy grail and keeps expanding like crazy meanwhile AA is extremely shy on its hit or miss strategy...I wonder what AA Management is smoking??????? AA has the infrastructure at places like JFK to fly wherever they want and yet Delta with is dingy terminal in JFK is really going places...KUDOS to Delta for innovating...AA is resting at the end of the runway, just watching.

I agree here. As an AA. Oneworld flier, I have been disappointed, that DL with a minuscule 777 fleet and gobs of 767s have taken off in recent years while AA has been sitting fallow. How is t possible that the world's largest airline can serve so relatively few international destinations in Europe and Asia. They were late to the China dn India party, and have lost their competitve advantage, shared with UA of LHR exclusivity. I am not Arpey, I know, but they need to seriously research new international growth routes. Before you know it, they'll be like US, with virtually no international service, or WN with just blankets and pillows.

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 15):
AA is also limited by their lack of an eastern hub. They face stiff international competition at JFK, as well as from larger competitor DL, and CO over at EWR. ORD they face stiff competition from UA, and the geography isn't as ideal and is hard to run 757s from.



Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 16):
Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 15):
AA is also limited by their lack of an eastern hub.

to a certain extent.. but in terms of focus cities and hubs AA has more than any other carrier... by focusing on O&D they've maintained alot of routes where most carriers (especially in downturns) have focused on retreating to hub routes.. if you ask me, AA's network including MQ probably most closely resembles WN compared to the rest of the legacies...

I'm gonna have to agree with HPAEAA and TUSAA and call you out on the lack of an eastern hub. We can't forget about incredibly strong ops at both JFK and MIA, as well as healthy ops at RDU and BOS. While not major international hubs, both have had international flights for AA before.



Sic 'em bears
User currently offlineUN_B732 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 4289 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4759 times:

DL does do very well, I saw a list of their top 10 international markets and DL was up there (It was posted here a year or two ago). They go out oversold almost every day during the summer.

How United will do, time will tell.

-A



What now?
User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 20, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4722 times:



Quoting AA777223 (Reply 18):
Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 15):
AA is also limited by their lack of an eastern hub. They face stiff international competition at JFK, as well as from larger competitor DL, and CO over at EWR. ORD they face stiff competition from UA, and the geography isn't as ideal and is hard to run 757s from.



Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 16):
Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 15):
AA is also limited by their lack of an eastern hub.

to a certain extent.. but in terms of focus cities and hubs AA has more than any other carrier... by focusing on O&D they've maintained alot of routes where most carriers (especially in downturns) have focused on retreating to hub routes.. if you ask me, AA's network including MQ probably most closely resembles WN compared to the rest of the legacies...

I'm gonna have to agree with HPAEAA and TUSAA and call you out on the lack of an eastern hub. We can't forget about incredibly strong ops at both JFK and MIA, as well as healthy ops at RDU and BOS. While not major international hubs, both have had international flights for AA before.

Airlines with strong TATL portfolios:

DL (Hub @ JFK and ATL)
CO (Hub @ EWR)
US (Hub @ PHL, CLT)
UA (Hub @ IAD)

MIA is great for South America, and to some extent has good routes to Europe, but it requires the range of a 767.

Their presence at JFK is hard because DL is more built up and the competition for foreign carriers offsets the O/D out of JFK. AA will always have strong South American ops out of MIA and have strong ops into One World hub LHR, but they need to build up an eastern hub. Their TATL out of BOS is no stronger than NW, for instance and RDU is a one-off point to point TATL to LHR, which is not unique.

If they want to be a major player across the Atlantic like CO and DL, I really and truly believe they need to build up an eastern hub. They need more than just O/D, they need connectivity too.

We ask why DL can succeed on European cities AA cannot, I think that's why. DL has the JFK hub. If AA wants to build up their JFK focus city to a hub and compete head to head with DL and across town with CO, they are welcome to, but that leaves them competing head to head with a more entrenched rival at two of their major hubs.

I think they need to look into building up BOS.



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4519 times:

It's fine to say that AA focused on large cities in its alliance network but that strategy clearly is not built on the new reality of global carriers. AA could choose to continue to be a "British Airways connecting carrier" or it can compete on a global basis in its own right. DL may have focused on serving dozens of secondary cities a decade ago but it now serves LHR, GRU, and is the largest carrier to every region of the world except for Latin America where it is #2.

Again, I think AA happened to pick a horrible time to start service to MOW and I can't be optimistic about its success for reasons that are far bigger than AA. Nonetheless, AA has to move faster and more aggressively into markets where it is possibl to get good revenues even in economic downturns. MOW/DME doesn't look like the place for that to happen in the foreseeable future.


User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11559 posts, RR: 62
Reply 22, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4452 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 21):
but that strategy clearly is not built on the new reality of global carriers.

In your opinion.

I think the "new reality of global carriers" is very much an open question at this point.

I agree - in principle - that AA should be more aggressive in taking advantage of global growth opportunities when and where they exist. That is true. And I think AA could do well to be a bit less conservative and risk-averse when it comes to international growth.

However, that being said, AA didn't have the luxury of wiping out organized labor, investors, creditors and debtors in bankruptcy court, and thus have had to be a lot more risk-averse in order to dig themselves out of the financial whole they were in. And in that regard, they have done an exceptionally impressive job.


User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 23, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4410 times:

I personally am confused why they did not choose to fly to HKG on their own yet... why connect traffic onto CX flights in North America instead of flying pax to HKG on their own, picking up the O/D traffic on that end too, and connect pax on CX flights onward from HKG. It's hard for them to lose there. DME was certainly a calculated risk, just perhaps not the best one.


"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineLuckyone From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 2168 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4362 times:



Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 20):
but they need to build up an eastern hub.

I personally think that will be very difficult to do for the reason that all of the major east coast cities already have an entrenched carrier. I'll list as many cities that come to mind, feel free to add to it.

In the Northeast we have New York, Boston, and Philadelphia. New York obviously has every airline under the sun plus Delta and Continental. Philadelphia to my knowledge has never been a big AA city and is a huge hub for US Airways. Boston is an odd duck as no airline has managed to operate a successfull hub there, and its geographic location makes it a horrible connecting point.

Moving further south there is Baltimore and DC. DC has United and Baltimore has WN + plus proximity to DC.

Further South the only major city (3 million +) is Atlanta, and we all know who rules the roost there. There are other cities such as Raleigh where AA has tried a hub, but the O&D isn't there for a large-scale hub. Charlotte suffers from being between ATL and RDU, having US, and an even smaller market.


25 FlyDreamliner : I agree. I just believe the reason they can't compete in opening new European with Delta is because DL has ATL and JFK, and this is why AA has focuse
26 STT757 : For all of DL's "Unique" International routes from JFK AA still is the dominant carrier at JFK when it comes to International traffic, AA handles hal
27 DeltAirlines : I'm curious as to what the breakdown is between regions. There is little doubt in my mind that AA absolutely whoops DL's behind on JFK-Latin America
28 AA1818 : AA should look at BUD and connecting pax throughout eastern europe on oneWorld partner MA. Also what about a flight to AMM? I would have thought that
29 MAH4546 : If the 757 had the range, I think they would serious consider it. RJ covers it very well with their JFK and ORD service. Maybe some day they will res
30 WorldTraveler : no it's really not. It doesn't take too long reading this forum to know that consolidation and globalization is happening in the industry. If AA or y
31 FlyDreamliner : But almost all of that is one route - JFK-LHR, where their OneWorld position and old Bermuda II status allowed them to build up a huge chunk there. A
32 SCL767 : An ORD-DXB would be awesome, along with an MIA-JNB-CPT-MIA. But I guess we will be lucky if they even have the audacity to launch a daylight MIA-EZE
33 LAXdude1023 : AA wont fly to TLV and you know why. The only country AA could support from MIA in Africa is South Africa. AA wont fly anywhere random from DFW. AA d
34 MAH4546 : Yes, I know why, but 2-3 years in the future, things can change just as quickly. Nigeria could be easily supported as well.
35 EXAAUADL : no it wouldnt. The market size is much smaller and it is only an illusion that DFW is bigger than ORD hub wise for international flights. People will
36 TUSAA : Maybe on the domestic side' but there's still some money to be made flying international. There's still enough demand for F and J seats to Europe, NR
37 Panamair : Not just that but the slot constraints at JFK will put a damper on any significant expansion. The one thing that AA has going for it out of the NYC m
38 EXAAUADL : it a global recession. EU might be worse than the US, that is why the Eruo has fallen so rapidly
39 STT757 : AA should have never dismantled their large Eagle operation at JFK, a year or two after they started their JFK Terminal project AA ditched Eagle serv
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...
AA ORD-DME Now Officially 763 posted Sun Sep 28 2008 02:25:48 by UN_B732
AA: ORD-DME Performance? posted Thu Aug 28 2008 13:23:13 by Flyyul
AA ORD-DME posted Sun Aug 3 2008 10:25:48 by IrishAyes
AA's ORD-DME Route Performance? posted Fri Jun 27 2008 11:59:05 by Addd
Govt Approval Of AA ORD-DME posted Thu Feb 21 2008 16:46:54 by Addd
Load Factors On AA ORD-EZE posted Thu Jan 10 2008 20:39:58 by Ghillier
Govt Approval Of AA ORD-DME? posted Thu Jan 3 2008 11:18:48 by Transpac787
AA ORD-DME posted Sun Nov 25 2007 21:52:46 by JDAirCEO
AA ORD EZE Flight posted Mon Nov 12 2007 22:27:21 by Tsaord
Non-Reving On BA's ORD-IAH Flight? posted Fri Oct 14 2005 21:13:15 by LHUSA