Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
DFW Summer 2010 Upgrades  
User currently offlineSuper80DFW From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 1664 posts, RR: 11
Posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 6010 times:

Well, Summer 2010 is proving to be a big summer for DFW.
1) LHR once again sees the addition of American 80, which departs DFW around 9pm. It will be DFW's only transatlantic 763 for part of the summer.
2) MAD goes from 763 to 777, just one year after starting up.
3) CDG goes from 763 to 777, after being one of AA's most solid and consistant routes in their entire system.
4) GRU gets a 2nd flight departing around 530pm.
5) KE is going from 772 to 744 on ICN-DFW-ICN. This will remain 3x weekly.

This leaves me wondering what is in store for DFW after all of this.


"Things change, friends leave, life doesn't stop for anybody." -- EAT'EM UP EAT'EM UP KSU!!
39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32190 posts, RR: 72
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 6005 times:

Quoting Super80DFW (Thread starter):
2) MAD goes from 763 to 777, just one year after starting up.



Quoting Super80DFW (Thread starter):
3) CDG goes from 763 to 777, after being one of AA's most solid and consistant routes in their entire system.

These, to note, are, IIRC, June 10th-August 23rd only. The 777 for MAD will then switch to MIA (not showing in schedules yet).

It does create an interesting situation, though, with DFW-MAD: it is now an important hub route. The 763 is too small during the summer, but the 772 is too low density. It's an imperfect solution, because the F cabin will be filled with op-ups, or simply just empty. Which makes me wonder if Iberia is in DFW's future, because they have the large, high-density 2-class plane the route needs.

AA had a problem with the 772 on ORD-BRU this past summer that I think will repeat on DFW-MAD: empty F (my friend was on a flight in late July: him and a UM), healthy C, oversold Y, constantly (though I flew the route this summer and benefited from the situation, so I'm not complaining).

[Edited 2009-12-04 21:34:38]


a.
User currently offlineBigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2888 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 5943 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 1):
It's an imperfect solution, because the F cabin will be filled with op-ups, or simply just empty.

It'll get filled with nonrevs.

Good news for Dallas though.


User currently offlineSATexan From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 5909 times:

Thats quite a Summer! I am extremely curious to see how the 777s perform on the CDG and MAD routes. They perform very well on the NRT, LHR and FRA routes out of DFW. If AA can generate good premium loads on the CDG and MAD routes then that certainly will pave way for retaining the 777s beyond Summer as well as considering adding another route to Europe.

Additionally, I would love for AA to start a couple of Mexico/Canadian routes

Finally a passenger 744 in DFW after a long time! I would also love if KE brought its seasonal 4th frequency back.


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7322 posts, RR: 24
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 5892 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 1):
It does create an interesting situation, though, with DFW-MAD: it is now an important hub route. The 763 is too small during the summer, but the 772 is too low density. It's an imperfect solution, because the F cabin will be filled with op-ups, or simply just empty. Which makes me wonder if Iberia is in DFW's future, because they have the large, high-density 2-class plane the route needs.

Great minds think alike!  Smile

DFW-MAD needs an IB aircraft. As you correctly point out, the 763 is not enough capacity, but DFW-MAD has no real need for an F cabin. IB could throw a 2 class 343 or even a 346 on DFW-MAD and it would perfect.

DFW-CDG however, can support an F class. They should take the 777 off of DFW-EZE in the Northern summer and rotate it onto DFW-CDG and vice-versa.

As for KE, the 744 is probably a better solution than the 4x 777. DFW-ICN for KE is a mostly a VFR route. However I have heard rumblings from the boys in Fort Worth that DFW-ICN might be a future AA route (particularly if they lose JL).

As for LHR, once ATI hits, they will probably settle on 3x 777 or 1x 744 and 1x 777. That last 763 is drowning the hell out of the yields.

DFW-GRU is one of the few routes that turned a profit from the day it started. That being said the whole reason for the 2nd flight is all cargo. DFW-GRU makes a killing in cargo and does extremely well in pax loads. However, purely from a passenger perspective, a daily 777 is perfect for DFW-GRU. They are picking up some of the slack that CO left when they downgraded IAH-GRU to a 762.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineDFW13L From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5877 times:

This is great news for DFW and shows AA building up its home turf.

Quoting Super80DFW (Thread starter):
5) KE is going from 772 to 744 on ICN-DFW-ICN. This will remain 3x weekly.

So nice to have a token passenger 744 back in the picture!

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 1):
(though I flew the route this summer and benefited from the situation, so I'm not complaining).

I did too! I flew the ORD BRU and easily got F as I made my way to the Paris Air Show.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 1):
Which makes me wonder if Iberia is in DFW's future, because they have the large, high-density 2-class plane the route needs.

Very interesting. Yes it would make sense being the best plane for the market, but I see a huge scope grievance from APA if AA tries it! I kind of doubt it due to the labor issues with that, but you never know. Perhaps it would work if IB and AA traded out the DFW and ORD flights, but I wouldn't know if that would be a better mix or just create the same problem for ORD rather than DFW.

In the mean time, I might actually get a chance to nonrev on it!

Matt


User currently offlineAznMadSci From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 3635 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5873 times:



Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 4):
As for LHR, once ATI hits, they will probably settle on 3x 777 or 1x 744 and 1x 777. That last 763 is drowning the hell out of the yields.

By whom? All on AA or BA or still the combination of both BA and AA to DFW?



The journey of life is not based on the accomplishments, but the experience.
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32190 posts, RR: 72
Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5874 times:



Quoting SATexan (Reply 3):
If AA can generate good premium loads on the CDG and MAD routes then that certainly will pave way for retaining the 777s beyond Summer as well as considering adding another route to Europe.

Highly unlikely they will stay past summer. Extremely seasonal demand we are talking about.

The 777 on DFW-MAD goes back to Miami in the fall. I have no doubt AA knows the F cabin will be going out empty on this. I think the Y demand will be so heavy and C demand very healthy that they are okay with it and can roll the cabins forward often like they did with ORD-BRU last summer.

I think there is room for another route to Europe, but the problem is that whatever route you can name, it is just a better idea to do it from JFK/ORD/MIA. FCO/MXP? Better from MIA. BCN? MIA. BRU? MIA. DUB? JFK. ZRH? ORD. DUS? JFK. And on, and on. If KLM wasn't on DFW-AMS, though, I think it might have otherwise presented room.



a.
User currently offlineSATexan From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5856 times:

Next Summer AA will have 9 international flights operated by 777s. I am guessing that this is the first time AA is operating this many 777s on international routes out of DFW. Am I right?

User currently offlineLipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11365 posts, RR: 59
Reply 9, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5844 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR



Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 4):
DFW-GRU is one of the few routes that turned a profit from the day it started. That being said the whole reason for the 2nd flight is all cargo. DFW-GRU makes a killing in cargo and does extremely well in pax loads. However, purely from a passenger perspective, a daily 777 is perfect for DFW-GRU. They are picking up some of the slack that CO left when they downgraded IAH-GRU to a 762

But they always offer a 5x weekly DFW-GRU in the past with 763, now will offer 3x weekly and seems that 1 or 2 frequencies will be used to make MIA-GIG 13x weekly (11x weekly in Summer 2009) . I disagree they were taking traffic from CO because they use to sell 50% to GRU and 50% to GIG so in fact the 762 is an upgrade to IAH-GRU and the most business traffic goes to IAH-GIG.



New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
User currently offlineBigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2888 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5800 times:



Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 9):
But they always offer a 5x weekly DFW-GRU in the past with 763, now will offer 3x weekly and seems that 1 or 2 frequencies will be used to make MIA-GIG 13x weekly (11x weekly in Summer 2009) . I disagree they were taking traffic from CO because they use to sell 50% to GRU and 50% to GIG so in fact the 762 is an upgrade to IAH-GRU and the most business traffic goes to IAH-GIG.

Bilateral notwithstanding, is Dallas-Rio a viable nonstop market?


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32190 posts, RR: 72
Reply 11, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5777 times:



Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 10):
Bilateral notwithstanding, is Dallas-Rio a viable nonstop market?

No. U.S.-GIG market is heavily concentrated on the East Coast.



a.
User currently offlineCrosswinds21 From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 698 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5690 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 1):
It does create an interesting situation, though, with DFW-MAD: it is now an important hub route. The 763 is too small during the summer, but the 772 is too low density. It's an imperfect solution, because the F cabin will be filled with op-ups, or simply just empty. Which makes me wonder if Iberia is in DFW's future, because they have the large, high-density 2-class plane the route needs.

This seems to be the case for most of AA's 777 routes. I don't have the statistical data, but I do know that on most routes, the amount of paying F pax seems to be close to zero. On other, more "premium" routes, such as those to LHR or NRT, it may not be zero but it's definitely far from the 14 or 15 available seats. Much of the F cabin seems to be filled with award travelers, EXPLAT SWU upgrades, non-revs, or op-ups.

So it is just me or does AA need to reconfigure their 777s? Perhaps creating a sub fleet of a configuration with no or little F that can be used to fly routes to cities where there is no demand for F? I really don't think that there is a need for F on routes other than LHR, NRT, or EZE and just having J would suffice. And even on these three routes, perhaps reduing the size of the F cabin could be beneficial. I don't know, this may be far fetched, but I just can't help but think that AA is losing a lot of revenue by having all that space up front that almost no one pays for.


User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15493 posts, RR: 26
Reply 13, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 5665 times:



Quoting Crosswinds21 (Reply 12):
I don't know, this may be far fetched, but I just can't help but think that AA is losing a lot of revenue by having all that space up front that almost no one pays for.

You may be on to something. AA has 16 F seats in their 777. UA has either 12 or 8. Looking around the world at other 777-200 (longer range) operators, BA has 14 seats (but also have a configuration with no F section). LY has 12, EK, KE, and AI have 8. Also, many other large airlines (DL, CO, KL, and AC to name a few) have dispensed with F completely in their 777-200 fleets. Maybe AA does just have too many premium seats to fill which will limit the utility of their 777 fleet and at worst be a serious factor inhibiting their 777 routes.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32190 posts, RR: 72
Reply 14, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5611 times:



Quoting Crosswinds21 (Reply 12):
I don't have the statistical data, but I do know that on most routes, the amount of paying F pax seems to be close to zero. On other, more "premium" routes, such as those to LHR or NRT, it may not be zero but it's definitely far from the 14 or 15 available seats.

I do know LAX-LHR, MIA-LHR and MIA-EZE have strong paid F loads. JFK-LHR traditionally has, but right now I don't think that is the case.

Quoting Crosswinds21 (Reply 12):

So it is just me or does AA need to reconfigure their 777s? Perhaps creating a sub fleet of a configuration with no or little F that can be used to fly routes to cities where there is no demand for F? I really don't think that there is a need for F on routes other than LHR, NRT, or EZE and just having J would suffice. And even on these three routes, perhaps reduing the size of the F cabin could be beneficial. I don't know, this may be far fetched, but I just can't help but think that AA is losing a lot of revenue by having all that space up front that almost no one pays for.

AA has a quite a high-density J cabin, and, to be honest, AA's F soft service isn't that much an improvement over J. Considering that it likely doesn't cost as much money to cater F per passenger, the extra revenue from selling just half the cabin, along with the opportunity cost of selling the entire cabin, probably make it worthwhile.

I however, do think that when AA re-starts 777 deliveries in 2013, they will use it as an opportunity to introduce a brand-new 3-class product with 8 to 12 seats in F in a reduced space, and maybe add a row or two to J, but a new J seat and layout that will allow true lie-flat.



a.
User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7322 posts, RR: 24
Reply 15, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 5492 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 7):
Highly unlikely they will stay past summer. Extremely seasonal demand we are talking about.

For Madrid, absolutely. For Paris, not as much. DFW-CDG has year good round demand. Maybe it wouldnt need a 777 between Mid-November and April, but thats why I think they should swap it out with DFW-EZE during those months. DFW-EZE sees spikes in demand between those months.

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 9):
But they always offer a 5x weekly DFW-GRU in the past with 763, now will offer 3x weekly and seems that 1 or 2 frequencies will be used to make MIA-GIG 13x weekly (11x weekly in Summer 2009) . I disagree they were taking traffic from CO because they use to sell 50% to GRU and 50% to GIG so in fact the 762 is an upgrade to IAH-GRU and the most business traffic goes to IAH-GIG.

Last summer they did 3x addition weekly. I still think just a daily 777 would be a good fit, however cargo is too strong for that.

As for IAH-GRU, most of the IAH-Brazil traffic is headed to GIG. I still wonder why IAH-GRU couldnt support a 764 on its own.

Quoting AznMadSci (Reply 6):
By whom? All on AA or BA or still the combination of both BA and AA to DFW?

Any of the above. In the end, its all about the who has the right plane. DFW-LHR needs either 2-3 very high capacity flights or a higher frequency with lower capacity.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineDFWEagle From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1070 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 5464 times:



Quoting SATexan (Reply 8):
Next Summer AA will have 9 international flights operated by 777s. I am guessing that this is the first time AA is operating this many 777s on international routes out of DFW. Am I right?

As far as I know, you are correct. I can find no other time when there were as many international 777's.

I wonder if AA would ever consider opening a Flagship Lounge in DFW now that the number of 777 flights have increased, especially to GRU/EZE. They already have Flagship Lounges at ORD, MIA, JFK and LAX (as well as LHR) – I think it would be a good addition to DFW’s International Terminal D. Then they would offer this facility at all five “cornerstones” of the network, and at all the US cities which have 3-class international or transcon service on AA.



Ryan / HKG
User currently offlineFlyfree727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 645 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 5172 times:



Quoting BMI727 (Reply 13):
Quoting Crosswinds21 (Reply 12):
I don't know, this may be far fetched, but I just can't help but think that AA is losing a lot of revenue by having all that space up front that almost no one pays for.

Interestingly enough, at the purser conference this year, our regional manager stated that AA is considering if they still want to offer a 3 class product on the 777. Seems the 2-class on the 767 has proven to be sucessful and from what I gathered the thought process for a 2 class 777 has been started. I havent heard anything since then (that was June) but if I hear more news on this i'll pass it along.

AA ORD


User currently offlineDiscoverCSG From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 812 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 5030 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 14):
Considering that it likely doesn't cost as much money to cater F per passenger,

How is it cheaper to cater F than J ... in other words, if F is cheaper, why is it F?


User currently offlineDeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8868 posts, RR: 12
Reply 19, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4754 times:



Quoting DiscoverCSG (Reply 18):

How is it cheaper to cater F than J ... in other words, if F is cheaper, why is it F?

My guess is that the cost to cater F vs J is substantially lower on a scale of proportions than the cost of F vs J.

If anything (with economies of scale), it probably costs no more than $20-30 to cater an F pax vs a J pax, with the majority of that cost probably going to the wine list. The fact that F probably costs a minimum of four-figures over the cost of J, and the margins are much higher.


User currently offlineFXramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7129 posts, RR: 87
Reply 20, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3497 times:



Quoting Super80DFW (Thread starter):
2) MAD goes from 763 to 777, just one year after starting up.

I've heard from more than one person, if the flagship service doesn't attact more people, they are gonna dump DFW-MAD completely.

 twocents 


User currently offlineSurfandSnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2797 posts, RR: 30
Reply 21, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3475 times:



Quoting FXramper (Reply 20):
they are gonna dump DFW-MAD completely.

DFW also had a flight to ZRH that didn't stick around. Seems like the big three euro hubs at London, Paris, and Frankfurt are just about all that AA can serve from DFW.



Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7322 posts, RR: 24
Reply 22, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3475 times:



Quoting FXramper (Reply 20):
I've heard from more than one person, if the flagship service doesn't attact more people, they are gonna dump DFW-MAD completely.

Im assuming thats sarcasm?



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32190 posts, RR: 72
Reply 23, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3338 times:



Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 19):
My guess is that the cost to cater F vs J is substantially lower on a scale of proportions than the cost of F vs J.

If anything (with economies of scale), it probably costs no more than $20-30 to cater an F pax vs a J pax, with the majority of that cost probably going to the wine list. The fact that F probably costs a minimum of four-figures over the cost of J, and the margins are much higher.

Correct. It does not cost AA much more to carry an F passenger than it does to carry a J passengers (with J and F, AA is really charging more for the hard product, not the soft product). So until it gets to the point where the additional revenue from adding C and Y seats is higher than the revenue lost from removing F seats, AA keeps F. And even if the F cabin goes out with 4F most the time, if it can go out with 14F 20% of the time, then it might still make economic sense.

AA loses very little by op-ups from C to F, although it does gain them loyalty.

That being said, I totally expect AA to reduce F seating in favor of increased Y and J seating - maybe even a Y+ cabin - when new long-haul plane deliveries start up again in '13.



a.
User currently offlineFXramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7129 posts, RR: 87
Reply 24, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3244 times:



Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 22):
Im assuming thats sarcasm?

Not sarcasm; that is the rumor floating around.


25 IrishAyes : I'm confused here. Why are they upgrading this flight if the likelihood of filling the premium cabin is so low? Or that the route is in jeopardy? You
26 MAH4546 : Because the added revenue in Y and C will make up for it. And especially considering that F traffic as a whole is hurting, it might be one of the bet
27 Crosswinds21 : Except for space. That, IMO, is the big opportunity cost. You have to look at how much space a F seat takes up versus J or Y. By removing a row of F
28 SATexan : The DFW-ZRH flight performed extremely well during the heydays. This flight was very convenient to get to the Middle East and the Indian sub continen
29 AznMadSci : Other than LHR, HEL and AY would be the only viable strong OW hub. Don't think that would happen anytime soon. If OW courted 9W to join and they main
30 LAXdude1023 : Ive heard the exact opposite from more than one reliable source. That DFW-MAD is preforming very well. AA doesnt throw 777's on routes that arent pre
31 LipeGIG : Easy, the flight was IAH-GRU-GIG. IAH-Brazil cargo also goes mostly to Rio. Mark, considering: - DFW-GIG is 20% of each flight - Flight to Brazil was
32 LAXdude1023 : It could work, however AA will shoot for JFK-GIG first. Once thats established, I have no doubt they will try for DFW-GIG at somepoint down the line.
33 DFWEagle : I don't have an answer to your question, but here is a useless and interesting fact. DFW-GIG was the very first route AA ever flew to Latin America i
34 LipeGIG : Agree. But they lost their chance. JJ will upgrade JFK-GIG from 4x weekly to Daily in the end of March. I still believe DFW-GIG could work very well
35 Post contains images FXramper : I've mentioned this before on AA threads but DFW-OGG goes 11x week soon. DME? Just cause the plane is full doesn't mean they are making money. [Edited
36 MAH4546 : As has been mentioned before, AA's 763s were not properly equipped to fly to Russia. AA had to retrofit them with some equipment (I believe altimeter
37 FXramper : There were plenty of 763's that already had proper altimeters for DME. My uncle has been driving a jet for 32 years at AA and the information that wa
38 LAXdude1023 : AA started out with a 777 on ORD-DME and it was downgraded. AA started out with a 763 on DFW-MAD and it is being upgraded for the summer. BIG differe
39 MAH4546 : "Plenty" (which was not the case in the first place) is not all. Aircraft allocation to reserve specific 763s for DME would be a nightmare and create
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...
Air France Decreases Canada For Summer 2010 posted Tue Dec 1 2009 10:26:20 by Flyyul
AA Increases DFW-MKE Frequencies; Upgrades To CR7 posted Tue Nov 24 2009 09:18:42 by DFWEagle
DL 108 Weekly To AMS Summer 2010 posted Mon Nov 23 2009 00:51:07 by Hardiwv
AZ Summer 2010: MIA-MXP; LAX-FCO Return posted Wed Nov 11 2009 21:46:11 by MAH4546
DL Summer 2010 Int'l Schedule Released - Part II posted Tue Oct 27 2009 19:41:01 by LipeGIG
Alitalia, JV With AF-KLM & Delta By Summer 2010 posted Tue Oct 27 2009 11:10:29 by LIPZ
DL Summer 2010 77L Utilization posted Thu Oct 22 2009 09:02:03 by DocLightning
DL Summer 2010 International Schedule Released posted Tue Oct 20 2009 07:07:52 by Enilria
AA Sets Out New ORD Schedule For Summer 2010 posted Sun Oct 11 2009 14:06:44 by DFWEagle
Lufthansa's A380 - Really Summer 2010? posted Fri Oct 9 2009 12:18:27 by Richiemo