Enilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 6136 posts, RR: 13 Posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 5557 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
MKE22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1111 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 5152 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..
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.
Airguardtn From United States of America, joined May 2007, 44 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 5108 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.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21244 posts, RR: 19 Reply 6, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5080 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
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.
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
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21244 posts, RR: 19 Reply 10, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4515 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
YXwatcherMKE From United States of America, joined May 2007, 799 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4289 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
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 22719 posts, RR: 88 Reply 13, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4250 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.
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:
Enilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 6136 posts, RR: 13 Reply 14, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3978 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 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.
LACA773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3749 posts, RR: 2 Reply 15, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3895 times:
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.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 22719 posts, RR: 88 Reply 16, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3895 times:
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.
Knope2001 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2555 posts, RR: 31 Reply 17, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3641 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.
RampGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3088 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.
Enilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 6136 posts, RR: 13 Reply 19, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3056 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.
MKE22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1111 posts, RR: 2 Reply 20, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3042 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..
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..
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 22719 posts, RR: 88 Reply 22, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2958 times:
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.
Enilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 6136 posts, RR: 13 Reply 24, posted (3 years 7 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2648 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.
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 6136 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1111 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 22719 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
