Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UAX EMB 120 Downsizing At LAX  
User currently offlineWhatUsaid From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 667 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 6208 times:

With LAX-SAN and LAX-MRY now CRJ's, any guesses as to the future for the remaining EMB 120 flying at LAX? MQ is running ERJ's to FAT and SBA, while OO is not (with a couple exceptions to FAT due to the maintenance base there). You'd think that from a competitive position that the 120's would transition to CRJs in those markets. But, then these are airlines we're talking about and nothing is that simple. We've heard rumors for months if not years as to the downsizing of 120 flying at LAX for OO - maybe it's now well underway?

22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDL767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 6147 times:

The EMB 120 will still be doing LAX-CLD (Carlsbad) hopefully that doesn't disappear any time soon.

User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5846 posts, RR: 28
Reply 2, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 6021 times:

I haven't seen one of their updated fleet schedules posted in a while. So I'm curious about next year's Brasilia retirements, if any then how many.


"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently offlineSan747 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4966 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5887 times:



Quoting DL767captain (Reply 1):
The EMB 120 will still be doing LAX-CLD (Carlsbad) hopefully that doesn't disappear any time soon.

I don't even think the CRJ can fly out of CLD, can it?



Scotty doesn't know...
User currently offlineC767P From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 893 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5836 times:



Quoting San747 (Reply 3):
I don't even think the CRJ can fly out of CLD, can it?

I believe it has been mentioned here a number of times that a CRJ would take weight penalties to do it.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26168 posts, RR: 50
Reply 5, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5826 times:

I forget what the exact count is but Skywest is in the process of returning leases and parking half or so of the E120 fleet and has stated so over previous earning calls.

I know United is removing remaining 23 fee-for-departure Brasilias tails from its network thru 2010. The remaining UA tails, which make up about 45% of flying are under at-risk pro-rate arrangement, which I have no clue if OO will continue to purse on its own.

From SEC filings as of 9/30 - Skywest had 51 Brasilias. 40 at United and 11 with Delta.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineWedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5951 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5790 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 5):
I know United is removing remaining 23 fee-for-departure Brasilias tails from its network thru 2010. The remaining UA tails, which make up about 45% of flying are under at-risk pro-rate arrangement, which I have no clue if OO will continue to purse on its own.

I'm still wondering how much longer OO (UA Exp) will continue their service in the PNW. I think they only operate 4 to 5 destinations up here.

I still wonder about the feasibility of another 30-pax and 19-pax operator up here should UA Express discontinue service up here.


User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11979 posts, RR: 62
Reply 7, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5767 times:



Quoting Wedgetail737 (Reply 6):
I'm still wondering how much longer OO (UA Exp) will continue their service in the PNW. I think they only operate 4 to 5 destinations up here.

It does seem amazing how small the UAX operation has gotten in the Pacific Northwest - especially at SeaTac. But, I suppose it's to be expected, given that United was always fighting for a distant #2 there up against the regional 800-lb gorilla Alaska/Horizon.

Quoting Wedgetail737 (Reply 6):
I still wonder about the feasibility of another 30-pax and 19-pax operator up here should UA Express discontinue service up here.

Once again you have the problem of going up against Alaska/Horizon which has an unequalled network in the region and good service, plus they dominate the only viable regional hubs in Seattle and Portland.


User currently offlineFL787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1551 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5692 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 5):
I forget what the exact count is but Skywest is in the process of returning leases and parking half or so of the E120 fleet and has stated so over previous earning calls.

I know United is removing remaining 23 fee-for-departure Brasilias tails from its network thru 2010. The remaining UA tails, which make up about 45% of flying are under at-risk pro-rate arrangement, which I have no clue if OO will continue to purse on its own.

What does this mean for the EM2 routes and destinations out of SFO and LAX?



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 offlineMrSkyGuy From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1214 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5683 times:

For SkyWest, it's about performance. Some (not all) of their LAX destinations cannot handle anything larger than the EMB-120, or a suitable replacement is just too expensive.

Personally, LAX-SGU is my rally cry. Hope they don't close it up.



"The strength of the turbulence is directly proportional to the temperature of your coffee." -- Gunter's 2nd Law of Air
User currently offlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 6119 posts, RR: 14
Reply 10, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5668 times:



Quoting MrSkyGuy (Reply 9):
Personally, LAX-SGU is my rally cry. Hope they don't close it up.

Sorry, boss. You missed the boat there the first week of September.



Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26168 posts, RR: 50
Reply 11, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5640 times:



Quoting FL787 (Reply 8):
What does this mean for the EM2 routes and destinations out of SFO and LAX?

Well in the long run markets will either go jet, or be dropped.

OO is adding 18, 66-seaters to the UA system by end of 2010, plus the recently announced ASA flying which will back fill Mesa at ORD and IAD.

Quoting MrSkyGuy (Reply 9):
Personally, LAX-SGU is my rally cry. Hope they don't close it up.

That non-rev special was discontinued by OO already.
SkyWest To Drop SGU-LAX (by Ridgid727 Jun 24 2009 in Civil Aviation)



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineFL787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1551 posts, RR: 12
Reply 12, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5562 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 11):
OO is adding 18, 66-seaters to the UA system by end of 2010

Is this in addition to the 8 they have on order now? I thought OO used to have 50 CR7s for UA, then they ordered 20 and now they have 62 CR7s with 8 on order for UA. How many is OO supposed to have at the end of next year?



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 offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4317 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4492 times:

What about the IYK route? This is a big military contract route, and I just don't see that route working with a Jet. As it is, the airport is a special crew qualification required airport, and the crews that operate up there recieve special training.

User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11979 posts, RR: 62
Reply 14, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4386 times:



Quoting Apodino (Reply 13):
What about the IYK route? This is a big military contract route, and I just don't see that route working with a Jet. As it is, the airport is a special crew qualification required airport, and the crews that operate up there recieve special training.

While I'm not familiar with IYK specifically, I would submit that - if SkyWest is to slim down or eventually eliminate its EMB flying - then it will likely have to eliminate service to a slew of the LAX/SFO spoke markets that cannot support, either technically or economically, RJs.

I don't if cities like not only Inyonkern, but Chico, Crescent City, Modesto, Santa Maria, Imperial, Yuma or even Bakersfield or Palm Springs (from LAX) can profitably support 50-seat regional jets replacing far-lower-cost 30-seat props. Maybe, but I think some of those markets could be a stretch.

It is conceivable that the United Express operation at LAX specifically could ultimately end up looking more like the slimmed-down Eagle operation of the last decade - probably still larger, and serving more markets, but overall reduced from what it is now.

As costs continue to rise, the number of markets that can even hope to consistently, profitably support CRJs is getting smaller and smaller - not just in California, but nationwide.


User currently offlineMrskyguy From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1214 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4011 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 11):
Quoting MrSkyGuy (Reply 9):
Personally, LAX-SGU is my rally cry. Hope they don't close it up.

That non-rev special was discontinued by OO already.
SkyWest To Drop SGU-LAX (by Ridgid727 Jun 24 2009 in Civil Aviation)

I guess I'll be flying *sigh* to Vegas, and driving 2 hours to SGU. What a shame.



"The strength of the turbulence is directly proportional to the temperature of your coffee." -- Gunter's 2nd Law of Air
User currently offlineJayDub From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3433 times:



Quoting Mrskyguy (Reply 15):
I guess I'll be flying *sigh* to Vegas, and driving 2 hours to SGU. What a shame.

Escaping SGU sucks these days. I keep hoping it will make a comeback now that the city realizes they've got to sell reasons for this new airport that is being built.


User currently offlineRamprat74 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1547 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2966 times:

It seems UAX operation in PDX is growing over the last couple of years. They added LMT and OTH when Horizon cut them. They bid for PDT, but Sea-Port won that EAS bid. So what will they do with the PDX mini-hub when the 120's go? The feed into PDX on UA is at a all time low, this has to hurt the feed onto RDM, EUG, MFR and the two new cities.

User currently offlineMdw22l31c From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 218 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2686 times:

I miss the UAX Flights ONT-LAX SNA-LAX EMB120's. The convenient connections to the East Coast Cities.

User currently offlineDl767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2618 times:



Quoting San747 (Reply 3):
I don't even think the CRJ can fly out of CLD, can it?



Quoting C767P (Reply 4):
I believe it has been mentioned here a number of times that a CRJ would take weight penalties to do it.

I'm a little surprised they haven't decided to use a CRJ200 or and ERJ to replace the EMB out of CLD. it's not like a weight penalty would matter all too much for such a short hop to LAX.


User currently offlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 6119 posts, RR: 14
Reply 20, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2536 times:



Quoting Dl767captain (Reply 19):
'm a little surprised they haven't decided to use a CRJ200 or and ERJ to replace the EMB out of CLD. it's not like a weight penalty would matter all too much for such a short hop to LAX.

From numbers I've seen, it's about the same percentage of weight penalty, but in the end, the CRJ-200 takes more passengers overall. For a flight to SLC, PHX, or SFO, a CRJ-700 would work, but will see a penalty.

Overall, CLD is a not a very friendly airport for part 121 operations.



Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
User currently offlineF9Animal From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 5126 posts, RR: 28
Reply 21, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2377 times:



Quoting Mrskyguy (Reply 15):
I guess I'll be flying *sigh* to Vegas, and driving 2 hours to SGU. What a shame.

I remember the good days when they flew LAS to SGU. Can't you go through SLC?



I Am A Different Animal!!
User currently offlineC767P From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 893 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2355 times:



Quoting Dl767captain (Reply 19):
I'm a little surprised they haven't decided to use a CRJ200 or and ERJ to replace the EMB out of CLD. it's not like a weight penalty would matter all too much for such a short hop to LAX.

Right now, why do it? You have the right plane for the job. No sense to upgrade equipment, taking it off another, and not be able to fill it up.

Quoting F9Animal (Reply 21):
I remember the good days when they flew LAS to SGU. Can't you go through SLC?

Yes, I think they have around 7 flights a day on SLC-SGU.


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...
UAX Turboprops Forced Out Of T-8 At LAX posted Wed Jun 20 2007 14:36:39 by Lowecur
UAX Gates At LAX? posted Sun Mar 20 2005 07:53:19 by United4everDEN
Republic/YX E190 Almost Touches NW 757 At LAX posted Tue Oct 27 2009 18:31:26 by Jreuschl
Oasis Hong Kong 744 At LAX 10/20 posted Wed Oct 21 2009 18:00:52 by MCO2BRS
Fire At LAX posted Mon Oct 19 2009 21:00:31 by MrSkyGuy
Terminal 2 @ At LAX posted Thu Oct 15 2009 17:38:11 by 767ER
Post Security Transfers Between Terminals At LAX posted Tue Oct 13 2009 17:03:32 by RICBWI
Emergency 757-200 Landing At LAX. AA 414 posted Fri Aug 21 2009 19:18:33 by Swalifebtw
NW 742 At LAX 17 Aug ; Where To/from? posted Tue Aug 18 2009 00:54:07 by The777Man
Virgin America A320 Damaged At LAX (pics Included) posted Sat Jul 25 2009 10:16:20 by 777-500ER