Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
OAG Changes 10/23/09:AA/AM/CO/DL/NW/YX  
User currently offlineEnilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7036 posts, RR: 13
Posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 6752 times:

This compares what is for sale this week for the stated period versus what was for sale the prior week...NOT the prior year.

How to read:
AAA-BBB 3>2 APR means a reduction in one roundtrip from 3 to 2 for April only
AAA-BBB 4>6 MAY- means an increase from 4 to 6 roundtrips starting in May and continuing
AAA-BBB 3.2>5.6 In some big posts I don't spend the time rounding fractional roundtrips. Fractional roundtrips are usually caused by day of week cancellations, but can also result from a schedule change during the month that is averaged.

AA
JAN-APR ONLY
ORD-CLE 6>5
ORD-DTW 8>7
ORD-EVV 5>4
ORD-RST 6>5
ORD-SDF 5>4
ORD-TYS 4>3
ORD-YUL 5>4

These cuts move Apr reductions earlier to Jan
STL-ATL 4>3
STL-BNA 3>2
STL-IND 4>3
STL-ORF 2>1

AI
IAD-JFK 0>1 DEC-MAR (777 EQP) ???


AM
DEN-MEX 1>5/WK JAN-MAR
LAS-HMO 0>2/WK HOLIDAYS
LAX-AGU 0>2/WK HOLIDAYS

B6
BOS-BUF 3>2 JAN-FEB
BUF-MCO 1>2 JAN-
BOS-FILL 5>6 DEC-FEB
BOS-PIT 2>1 JAN-
DEN-JFK 2>1 FEB-

CO
GPT-JAX 0>3/WK FEB- PREV ENDED IN FEB
GPT-TPA 0>3/WK FEB- PREV ENDED IN FEB
HNL-SNA 0>4/WK MAR-
HNL-LAX 1>2 MAR-
LAX-OGG 0>1 MAR-

DL
ATL-CHS 12>10 JAN-MAR (FL RELATED?)
ATL-IAD 10>8 JAN-MAR
DTW-SLC 2>0 JAN- (TO NW)
CVG-MSN 2>1 JAN-
CVG-OKC 2>1 JAN-
JFK-SVO 5/WK>1 FEB-
JFK-BOG 1>4/WK MAR- (PLANNED INCREASE SHELVED)
JFK-VCE 5/WK>1 MAY-
SLC-YEG 1>0 JAN-

LH
ORD-DUS APPEARS SUSPENDED FOR FEB ONLY

NW
DTW-DAY 3>5 JAN-
DTW-LEX 3>4 JAN-
DTW-OKC 1>2 JAN-
DTW-SLC 2>4 JAN- (FROM DL)
MEM-SAN 1>0 JAN-
MSP-YEG 2>3 JAN-
MSP-YVR 1>2 FEB-

YX
MKE-LAX 13/WK TO 8/WK JAN
MKE-LAX 17/WK TO 10/WK FEB
MKE-LAX 19/WK TO 13/WK MAR-
BASICALLY THEY DROPPED 1 ROUNDTRIP...

29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMKE22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1129 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6347 times:



Quoting Enilria (Thread starter):
YX
MKE-LAX 13/WK TO 8/WK JAN
MKE-LAX 17/WK TO 10/WK FEB
MKE-LAX 19/WK TO 13/WK MAR-
BASICALLY THEY DROPPED 1 ROUNDTRIP...

They used to be able to fill 2x Md-80s.. How aren't they able to fill 2x E190s..? O wait.. FL has 2x 737s.. I wonder who is winning that route..



If Your not pissed, your not trying
User currently offlineFL787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1540 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6301 times:



Quoting Enilria (Thread starter):
B6
DEN-JFK 2>1 FEB-

So, B6 will have only 1 DEN-JFK but 2 DEN-BOS? I have a feeling the double daily to BOS will be back down to 1 soon considering we know WN won't ever reduce anything from DEN.



717,72S,732/3/4/5/G/8/9,744,752/3,763/4,772/3,D9S/5,M8/90,D10,319/20/21,332/3,388,CR2/7/9,EM2,ER4,E70/75/90,SF3,AR8
User currently offlineAirguardtn From United States of America, joined May 2007, 53 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6303 times:

I saw earlier this week DL was adding MEM-PBI and I wondered where the plane would be pulled from? How I know with the dropping of MEM-SAN. Guess DL doesn't want to add to any more congestion at MEM.

User currently offlineBobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6444 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6299 times:



Quoting Airguardtn (Reply 3):
Guess DL doesn't want to add to any more congestion at MEM.

Congestion at MEM??? Since when


User currently offlineEwRkId From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 594 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6288 times:



Quoting Enilria (Thread starter):
LAX-OGG 0>1 MAR-

Does UA fly this route?


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22723 posts, RR: 20
Reply 6, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6275 times:



Quoting MKE22 (Reply 1):
I wonder who is winning that route..

So number of seats determines who is "winning?"

Quoting MKE22 (Reply 1):
They used to be able to fill 2x Md-80s.. How aren't they able to fill 2x E190s..?

If they sold seats for $1, they could probably fill ten 190s!



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineAirguardtn From United States of America, joined May 2007, 53 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6261 times:

That was a joke Bob.

User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8193 posts, RR: 24
Reply 8, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5797 times:

Worth noting, it looks like DAL mainline will be coming back to MHT. One daily MD-88 (Flt 1003 to ATL) starts 1/6/10.


This Website Censors Me
User currently offlineEnilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7036 posts, RR: 13
Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5722 times:



Quoting FL787 (Reply 2):
Quoting Enilria (Thread starter):
B6
DEN-JFK 2>1 FEB-

So, B6 will have only 1 DEN-JFK but 2 DEN-BOS? I have a feeling the double daily to BOS will be back down to 1 soon considering we know WN won't ever reduce anything from DEN.

I had the same thought. I don't think B6 has ever done well in DEN. The only reason they added another BOS is the holy war they are fighting with WN.  Smile

Quoting Airguardtn (Reply 3):
Guess DL doesn't want to add to any more congestion at MEM.

glad that was a joke, I spit out my drink after reading it! The only congestion at MEM is at 2 am.

Quoting MKE22 (Reply 1):
They used to be able to fill 2x Md-80s.. How aren't they able to fill 2x E190s..? O wait.. FL has 2x 737s.. I wonder who is winning that route..

While I agree seats don't reflect profitability it is generally true that successful routes grow in capacity and the reverse as well. There are exceptions such as BOS-DEN above  Wink


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22723 posts, RR: 20
Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5710 times:

Quoting Enilria (Reply 9):
While I agree seats don't reflect profitability it is generally true that successful routes grow in capacity and the reverse as well.

Seems like YX can't win - if they had thrown a bunch of capacity at it to respond to FL, you'd criticize them for doing that.

[Edited 2009-10-23 19:24:27]


I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineYXwatcherMKE From United States of America, joined May 2007, 969 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 5484 times:

I thought F9 was going to operate a daily flight MKE-LAX for YX to give more capacity on the route and that YX was going to have 5 of their 190's in DEN to work thinner routes. maybe that is why we see less YX flights on the MKE-LAX route.


I miss the 60's & 70's when you felt like a guest on the plane not cattle like today
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25005 posts, RR: 85
Reply 12, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 5482 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting MKE22 (Reply 1):
How aren't they able to fill 2x E190s..?

Isn't it the A319 by then?

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25005 posts, RR: 85
Reply 13, posted (4 years 9 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 5445 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Enilria (Reply 9):
While I agree seats don't reflect profitability it is generally true that successful routes grow in capacity and the reverse as well.

Fun and games while they sorts out the fleets and the E190 deliveries perhaps?

A couple of weeks ago, your OAG report said that YX was going to 3 in February:

OAG Changes 10/23/09:AA/AM/CO/DL/NW/YX (by Enilria Oct 23 2009 in Civil Aviation)

Enilria: YX LAX-MKE 2>3 FEB-

That's assuming I'm reading "2>3" correctly?

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineEnilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7036 posts, RR: 13
Reply 14, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5173 times:



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 10):
Seems like YX can't win - if they had thrown a bunch of capacity at it to respond to FL, you'd criticize them for doing that.

They already did rush in with a bunch of new capacity which they are now scaling back, but I don't remember specifically criticizing it. I do, however, think they are screwed in MKE so they don't have a lot of plays in the playbook for that...other than selling out to GO/Mesa. ;->

Quoting Mariner (Reply 13):


Quoting Enilria (Reply 9):
NW/YX (by Enilria Oct 23 2009 in Civil Aviation)

Enilria: YX LAX-MKE 2>3 FEB-

That's assuming I'm reading "2>3" correctly?

mariner

Correct and above it is reversed. I missed your point. To the wary observer it appears they rushed into low season with a lot of seats to show their muscle and then flinched at the lack of bookings that it accompanied.  Smile


User currently offlineLACA773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4002 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5090 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 11):
I thought F9 was going to operate a daily flight MKE-LAX for YX to give more capacity on the route and that YX was going to have 5 of their 190's in DEN to work thinner routes. maybe that is why we see less YX flights on the MKE-LAX route.

I believe they are suppossed to upgauge one of the 3 flights from a E90 to a 319. So even if they are losing one roundtrip, will we still see an increase in seats? Probably not as the speard between the two is not that vast.


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25005 posts, RR: 85
Reply 16, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5090 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Enilria (Reply 14):
Correct and above it is reversed. I missed your point. To the wary observer it appears they rushed into low season with a lot of seats to show their muscle and then flinched at the lack of bookings that it accompanied.

I am scarcely surprised you look at it that way.

But I remember posting a few weeks ago that the schedule for the first few months of the combo could be highly due to fleet issues.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineKnope2001 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2871 posts, RR: 30
Reply 17, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 4836 times:

The MKE-LAX findings are nothing more than a schedule anomaly in the OAG tapes from one week to the next. Yet several people jump on it to bang their chests as proof of their own pre-conceived notion of who is toast and who is kicking ass.

Far worse things come to mind, but let’s just say it is par for the course.

The change which Enilria saw essentially boils down to this.

MKE-LAX’s second trip, a red-eye, was changed from A319 to E190. The E190 was added one week but the drop of the A319 did not hit OAG until the next week. Hence last week it looked like MKE-LAX added another round trip in last week’s report, and this week it’s back to how it was the week before. That’s a simple anomaly with how the swap hit the OAG tapes, folks, and nothing more.

Anybody who actually bothered to look at the schedule when the 3rd trip showed up last week might have figured this out be noting that the new LAX-MKE flight…an E190…departed LAX at exactly the same time (11:30pm) as the previously-listed A319 flight. It’s pretty absurd to think that they’d really schedule two wing-tip redeye flights on LAX-MKE in February with 235 seats to fill.

But this week it shouldn’t even have taken any extra effort to figure out what had been going on. Even without looking into the schedules themselves, perhaps it might have rung a bell that just last week MKE-LAX showed an increase to 3x with the spring peak…an unprecedented level…and just a week later dropped back down to 2x. Certainly casual observers could not be expected to remember this, but there are more than few people who follow this stuff very closely and contribute regularly.

As for “Midwest used to fly two M80’s and can’t even fill two E190’s” now, there are several issues with that statement”

(1) Midwest almost never flew 2x/day MKE-LAX in the dead of winter, the period we’re talking about. When they did, the red-eye flew largely empty most days of the week.

(2) The daytime LAX flight is a 319, not an E190. The Midwest winter 2010 MKE-LAX nonstop capacity is very comparable to historical winter averages.

(3) The E190 / A319 shift is definitely influencing the schedule this winter. Before Frontier became part of the picture, MKE-LAX was loaded as twice-daily E190…a 7:00am flight which routinely has demand well beyond 99 seats, and a 7:35pm flight also with 99 seats which gets some spill as the 7:00am flight fills up. That second red-eye flight was added in part because the 7:00am flight is often full or nearly so with the E190.

With the A319 – E190 swap between Midwest and Frontier, the 7:00am MKE-LAX gets additional much-needed seats. But Midwest no longer has an E190 available to fly the 7:35pm flight. Instead, the best they can do for the MKE-LAX red-eye is to fly an A319 leaving at 10:15pm. That’s far less attractive for local traffic, has fewer connecting possibilities (no GRR, MSN, etc), doesn’t have as much “spill” from the early-morning flight, and yet has 38 more seats to fill. That’s a recipe for 30% load factors in mid winter. So the red-eye only operates during the Thanksgiving and Christmas peaks. Come February, they are again showing an E190 flight for sale at 7:35pm. By that point they are apparently planning to have more E190’s in the Midwest rotation.

So to summarize MKE-LAX on Midwest:

--There never was an intention of a 3rd flight this winter…it was a schedule anomaly.

--This winter’s nonstop schedule, which has 1x/day in the dead of winter and a second red-eye flight during the holidays and resuming later in February, is very near their historical averages.

--The E190 / A319 swap means that they are not able to fly an evening red-eye until more E190’s come later. The only red-eye option they have -- a 10:15pm A319 red-eye -- is simply a non-starter in winter.


User currently offlineRampGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4283 times:

On another note, effective November 1, DL is once again yanking the only 757 on ATL-IND-ATL and from what I can find, it's going to ATL-SATL-ATL. Can anyone tell me if that is the case, if so, why is SAT getting our 757? With the exception of Tuesday and Wednesday, that flight went out with very high passenger loads. Certainly past the MD88 capacity.

User currently offlineEnilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7036 posts, RR: 13
Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4251 times:



Quoting Knope2001 (Reply 17):
The MKE-LAX findings are nothing more than a schedule anomaly in the OAG tapes from one week to the next. Yet several people jump on it to bang their chests as proof of their own pre-conceived notion of who is toast and who is kicking ass.

Actually I said that AirTran also has way, way, way too much capacity in the Winter MKE schedule. Plz look at the MKE capacity thread I posted a week or so ago.

Quoting Knope2001 (Reply 17):
MKE-LAX’s second trip, a red-eye, was changed from A319 to E190.

Still a substantial reduction in seats and the point is coincidentally still valid.

Quoting Knope2001 (Reply 17):
Anybody who actually bothered to look at the schedule

BTW, since you seem to have the time to pour over *all* the schedules in much greater detail than my apparently poor attempt, I invite you to begin posting all the schedule changes yourself each week and spare me the 5 hours per week I'm wasting. Then you can devote the time you feel is needed to each of the hundreds and thousands of weekly changes only a slim % of which I even post.

If you do not wish to invest the time to do that, but instead wish to pick a single route of the hundreds I have posted this month for complaint (even though you admit the mistake was YX's errant filing and not mine) I will quote Mariner's oft-used comment...I shrug...

OTOH, I do not have the time to whip out my divining rod and look, not at what the airlines actually published as a schedule, but what you think they intended to publish as a schedule and post my interpretations of the schedulers real, but unstated, schedule plan.


User currently offlineMKE22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1129 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4237 times:



Quoting Knope2001 (Reply 17):
Yet several people jump on it to bang their chests as proof of their own pre-conceived notion of who is toast and who is kicking ass.

Yep, thats exactly what I was doing..  Yeah sure

Quoting Knope2001 (Reply 17):
(2) The daytime LAX flight is a 319, not an E190. The Midwest winter 2010 MKE-LAX nonstop capacity is very comparable to historical winter averages.

You could have just said that, which wasn't stated with the change, which makes it look like a capacity reduction..



If Your not pissed, your not trying
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24834 posts, RR: 46
Reply 21, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4174 times:



Quoting EwRkId (Reply 5):
Does UA fly this route?

Yes 3x daily most of the year with 757 and 763s.

Quoting Enilria (Reply 19):
spare me the 5 hours per week I'm wasting

If its a waste, why are you even posting to start with?



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25005 posts, RR: 85
Reply 22, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4153 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting MKE22 (Reply 20):
You could have just said that, which wasn't stated with the change, which makes it look like a capacity reduction..

Personally, I'm glad he didn't just post that.

We've known for some time that this starting of the combo is going have fascinating fleet issues and it is extraordinarily interesting to me to see them play out.

Example: in November 2, Frontier flies a single Airbus OKC-MCI. On November 3, they fly a single Airbus MCI-OKC.

Obviously, it has to do with the fleet changes that are happing at that time, but how or why, and how the Airbus gets to OKC, is beyond my ken.

I'm not a "schedule guy"- I'm not built that way, I rely on other for that - and just as I find these OAG threads of Enilria's excellent, often, as here, for the anomalies they raise, so I am extremely grateful for Knope2001's marshalling of facts.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineHVNandrew From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 428 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3994 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 21):
Yes 3x daily most of the year with 757 and 763s.

Also, LAX-OGG is flown (daily?) by AA and DL. There are going to be lots of seats on that route.


User currently offlineEnilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7036 posts, RR: 13
Reply 24, posted (4 years 9 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3843 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 21):

If its a waste, why are you even posting to start with?

Meaning if he is willing to do a so much more thorough job than me, then he can do the work and I will simply read his post thus sparing me 5 hours each week...


25 Panamair : JFK-VCE is also going back to a 764ER much earlier next year, starting with the spring schedule at the end of March 2010, instead of the summer. Also
26 Knope2001 : Enilria, I do appreciate the hours of time and effort put into the weekly schedule change posts, and I've made that comment multiple times before. I
27 Enilria : I'll accept that, your comment just implied otherwise to me. It is largely a thankless job relative to the amount of work.
28 JohnJ : MEM-SAN has pretty much always been a seasonal route. Of course things change, but as of now the flight is listed on Delta.com for sale in summer 201
29 YXwatcherMKE : Please don't take the negative comments about the information you present to this forum as a negative comment directed towards you and your research.
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...
OAG Changes 10/1/09:AA/B6/CO/DL/FL/NW/UA/US/YX posted Fri Oct 2 2009 06:23:47 by Enilria
OAG Changes 4/10/09:AA/CO/DL/FI/NW/UA posted Thu Apr 9 2009 21:11:08 by Enilria
OAG Changes 9/11/09: AA/AC/AM/CO/DL/FL posted Thu Sep 10 2009 15:43:15 by Enilria
OAG Changes 7/10/09: 3E/AC/AM/DL/NW/SY/UA/VS/VX posted Thu Jul 9 2009 06:49:46 by Enilria
OAG Changes 3/27/09: AA/CO/DL/NW/UA posted Fri Mar 27 2009 06:15:35 by Enilria
OAG Changes 6/26/09:AA/AS/BA/DL/F9/NK/NW/PD/US/WN posted Wed Jun 24 2009 22:28:57 by Enilria
OAG Changes 10/8/09: CO/FL/US posted Fri Oct 9 2009 19:44:41 by Enilria
What's Next For CO, DL, NW After AA Move? posted Mon Jan 8 2001 05:38:55 by Watewate
OAG Week Of Feb2709: FL Closes BTV/AS/DL/NW posted Fri Feb 27 2009 19:43:51 by Enilria
B6, HP, AA, UA, CO, DL In NYC-CA Game posted Tue Mar 16 2004 21:37:49 by Jetbluefan1