laca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3749 posts, RR: 2 Posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5416 times:
Hi All,
Avianca has decided to cut LAX once again after serving BOG-LAX-BOG for over two years now. Service was up to five (5) times a week at this time. AV has been flying the route almost exclusively with their 762ERs in which there are only two left and the others have been taken out of service. Link: http://airlineroute.net/2010/11/08/av-boglax-cxld/#more-26842
There was some talk about this in the Central American thread about AV discontinuing this route.
Firstly, I had been wondering about this as well since AV has been retiring their 762ERs over the past year now and with only two frames left, they really don't have anything to fly the route other than their disappearing 757 fleet and ultra-small 763ERs in which both have been used as subs since they came back to LAX.
Secondly, with the AV-TA link up or merger (I'm not sure what they are calling it these days), it has been mentioned in the Central American thread, AV will have TA start an additional LAX-SAL flight which will operate in the non-traditional morning, daylight hours vs 90% of their LAX operations have been redeyes. This new LAX-SAL will allow TA-AV to serve LAX-BOG with a direct, one stop daily flight.
I am disappointed AV is once again pulling out of LAX. They just couldn't get it to work. I do believe they may have kept the route going if they had sufficient 762ER frames to fly it (the same can be said if they were to use 752ERs). Otherwise, I don't see the nonstop coming back, unless AV-TA decide to place a 788 on the route once they begin to receive them.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22070 posts, RR: 51 Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5406 times:
Actually the route is being turned over to TACA which will operate a daily LAX-SAL-BOG service, and is expanding its presence with new morning departure(~7am) from LAX which itself if very good news imo.
I posted this info a few weeks back.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
tavong From Colombia, joined Jul 2001, 834 posts, RR: 5 Reply 2, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5177 times:
No 762, no BOG-LAX Route, i really doubt that the B752 can do the route. I really don´t think that AV is planning to retake BOG-LAX since the A332 are very cappable to do the route but the comments here says that AV can´t fill the B762, let alone an A332 or B787. I really would love to see AV doing the route, but it has better sense to do it from Central America.
Gus
SKBO
Colombian coffee, the best...take a cup and you will see how delicious it is.
laca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3749 posts, RR: 2 Reply 3, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 5067 times:
Quoting tavong (Reply 2): No 762, no BOG-LAX Route, i really doubt that the B752 can do the route. I really don´t think that AV is planning to retake BOG-LAX since the A332 are very cappable to do the route but the comments here says that AV can´t fill the B762, let alone an A332 or B787. I really would love to see AV doing the route, but it has better sense to do it from Central America.
Gus
SKBO
Unfortunately, you're wrong in regards to the 752. It has done the route more than a few times when the a/c was downgauged. There are no comments here that say, AV can't fill their 762ER on this route. What I have mentioned is AV is retiring the 762ERs from the fleet along with the 752s. I asked the question, is there a chance they will bring LAX back when they receive the 788? The 332 is too large of an a/c for the BOG-LAX-BOG market.
Is there a possibility LAN Colombia could surprise us and start BOG-LAX with their expansion in Colombia or could we see TA pick up some longer range a/c since they will be intergrating with AV?
tavong From Colombia, joined Jul 2001, 834 posts, RR: 5 Reply 4, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4683 times:
Quoting laca773 (Reply 3): Unfortunately, you're wrong in regards to the 752.
Nope, i´m not wrong, the B752 can do the route but would need to leaving behind cargo. That´s why the route is being made with the 762s (B76s can do the route and fill its belly with precious cargo), since Cargo is very important in these route AFAIK. It has been explained in this forum that the B762s are being sent more cause the cargo, than the plane carrying lots of Pax, so the 752 won´t have much sense since it will need to leave cargo behind. I suppose that the cargo will be sent via Tampa instead on AV´s planes.
Actually the max range of the B752 at sea level is 3900 miles and BOG-LAX is 3479, since the plane is heavily penalized it will need to leave behind a lot of cargo from BOG to make the route and that kills profitabily. Would be more wise to send PAX via SAL/SJO and cargo via Tampa. (I really don´t know if these are the plans or the BOG-LAX will be scrapped completely for cargo too).
Quoting laca773 (Reply 3): is there a chance they will bring LAX back when they receive the 788? The 332 is too large of an a/c for the BOG-LAX-BOG market.
Not a chance, the 788 and A332 have almost the same Pax capacity. The 787s will be used for European routes since this will be the core of AV intl expansion.
Quoting laca773 (Reply 3): s there a possibility LAN Colombia could surprise us and start BOG-LAX with their expansion in Colombia or could we see TA pick up some longer range a/c since they will be intergrating with AV?
A possiblity, yes, in short time, i don´t think so (they first need to consolidate intra-Colombian routes). In fact, there was a rumour that BOG-LAX would be handled by the A319s but the plans where scrapped and AV decided to make BOG-SAL-LAX, i really don´t think that AV will fly their own metal to LAX in a long time.
Gus
SKBO
[Edited 2010-11-09 08:18:38]
Colombian coffee, the best...take a cup and you will see how delicious it is.
laca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3749 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 4605 times:
Quoting tavong (Reply 4):
A possiblity, yes, in short time, i don´t think so (they first need to consolidate intra-Colombian routes). In fact, there was a rumour that BOG-LAX would be handled by the A319s but the plans where scrapped and AV decided to make BOG-SAL-LAX, i really don´t think that AV will fly their own metal to LAX in a long time.
Thanks for all the information, Gus. I learned something new today.
AA767400 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2271 posts, RR: 25 Reply 6, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 4500 times:
Quoting tavong (Reply 2): No 762, no BOG-LAX Route, i really doubt that the B752 can do the route.
Quoting tavong (Reply 4): Nope, i´m not wrong, the B752 can do the route but would need to leaving behind cargo.
O te peinas, o te haces rolos?
The route has been 757/762 for years, even before it was suspended the first time around. You first say that you doubt it can do it. Then you say it can with weight restrictions.
Fact is, it did make it many times before. Especially with AV's RR trent engines which work best at high altitudes. Yes it had weight restrictions, but only on certain days. All depended on the weather/load.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22070 posts, RR: 51 Reply 7, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 4449 times:
For the record, loadwise Avianca has averaged 146 passengers per flight for the first 9-months of 2010, and 5,637kgs of freight and mail.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
777jaah From Colombia, joined Jan 2006, 1401 posts, RR: 2 Reply 8, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 4445 times:
I flew this route thispast may on the 762. Y on the BOG-LAx and J onthe way back. Have to admitd that although the Y cabin was almost full, the J cabin really was in the 40s l/f.
About cargo....I don't remember but I think it was anetter Summa who once gave some info on how much are the loads, but they seemed to be far from impressive, as far as I thought. LAX has been a struggling station for AV in the past, and it seems to prove this way, unfortunately.
Wth this decision, probably the 767 fleet will be gone sooner than later from AV, I'll sure miss those birds.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1): Actually the route is being turned over to TACA which will operate a daily LAX-SAL-BOG service, and is expanding its presence with new morning departure(~7am) from LAX which itself if very good news imo.
Makes sense. I don't there's enoough premium pax to sustain the route, but a lot of VFR who seek low prices and don't mind the stop. If you ask me I rather go through SAL than ATL, MIA, etc, and take the risk of loosing my connection thanks tio the painful inmigration process in the US.
Cheers
777jaah
Next flights: AV BOG-ADZ-BOG, AV-UA BOG-IAD-ORD-IAD-BOG, BOG-FLL-BOG, LA BOG-MIA-BOG J
laca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3749 posts, RR: 2 Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4295 times:
Quoting AA767400 (Reply 6): Fact is, it did make it many times before. Especially with AV's RR trent engines which work best at high altitudes. Yes it had weight restrictions, but only on certain days. All depended on the weather/load.
That's what I remember as well. Before AV flew to LAX currently, their flight would go via MEX on occasion. A 757 was flown most of the time.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 7): For the record, loadwise Avianca has averaged 146 passengers per flight for the first 9-months of 2010, and 5,637kgs of freight and mail.
That's better than what I thought their load factors were. A family member of mine has flown it a couple of times. The first in the main cabin, which was wide open coming back and the second time in J. She said after having flown on their Airbus aircraft, she was disappointed how outdated the 762ERs were. I let her know the reason why they had not "updated" them but do agree a seven hour flight needs something with the modern comforts of the rest of the AV fleet.
Quoting 777jaah (Reply 8):
Makes sense. I don't there's enoough premium pax to sustain the route, but a lot of VFR who seek low prices and don't mind the stop. If you ask me I rather go through SAL than ATL, MIA, etc, and take the risk of loosing my connection thanks tio the painful inmigration process in the US.
I was under the assumption the flight would be a direct, one stop on TA but instead it will be TA LAX-SAL-LAX and AV BOG-SAL-BOG. You do make a good point about immigration and the chances of missing your connecting flight in ATL or MIA. Which is worse? Have you flown via IAH on UA (CO)?
Quoting 777jaah (Reply 8):
Wth this decision, probably the 767 fleet will be gone sooner than later from AV, I'll sure miss those birds.
I will miss these 762ERs myself. I found them to be very comfortable to fly on and a nice way to go on a longhaul flight, that otherwise might not exist if they didn't have these birds.
RCS763AV From Colombia, joined Jun 2004, 4283 posts, RR: 13 Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4181 times:
Quoting tavong (Reply 4): Not a chance, the 788 and A332 have almost the same Pax capacity. The 787s will be used for European routes since this will be the core of AV intl expansion.
You don't know that. They have 12 on order.
Quoting tavong (Reply 4): It has been explained in this forum that the B762s are being sent more cause the cargo, than the plane carrying lots of Pax,
Not true. The passenger load factors have been in the high 70s-low 80s for most of the time.
Quoting AA767400 (Reply 6): The route has been 757/762 for years, even before it was suspended the first time around. You first say that you doubt it can do it. Then you say it can with weight restrictions.
Still, AV is no longer operating the 757 and the plane can't make it from BOG without being weight restircted, which reduces profitability, if it was still in the fleet.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 7): For the record, loadwise Avianca has averaged 146 passengers per flight for the first 9-months of 2010, and 5,637kgs of freight and mail.
Indeed, 146 out of 178 seats is no bad load at all.
Truth is that this flight is being cut to save some money by just routing the pax via SAL. AV has to retire the 762s next year and the A330s are kinda big not to mention tight on schedule, the first consequence would have neem a frequency reduction, and serving the route 3x weekly while tying up aircraft that could run more profitable routes like EZE/GRU/JFK or Europe may not have been worth it. I'm AV's biggest critic for this move which I think is ridiculous as it leaves a large market open to competitors (SAL is kind of TA's obsession with it not really being a large market) but they can't keep two frames of one type just for one route. I'm sure that once more A330s come and the fleet shortage problem is resolved, LAX will be back on with some 4 weekly flights. I say H1 2012.
Summa767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2387 posts, RR: 7 Reply 11, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 3552 times:
Quoting RCS763AV (Reply 10): AV has to retire the 762s next year and the A330s are kinda big not to mention tight on schedule, the first consequence would have neem a frequency reduction
AV leaving LAX does have to do with the 767s going, but you will find that the A330s that replace them (I believe it will be 3 in 2011) will do more flight hours and not less.
Schedules can be arranged to squeeze a fligh to Europe in essentially the same block as one to LAX currently. So we will see that capacity shift; With the same number of widebodies, AV will have a more new frequencies to Europe. I guess 10 new ones are possible by the end of 2011, as well as completing daily A330 service to JFK and GRU. I also believe that to make for more efficient operations, we will see rotations in MAD for some flights (for instance BOG-CLO-MAD-MDE-BOG) hence saving a domestic leg, which would mean an A330 being available in BOG on those 2 days for an earlier departure to Europe (such as would be needed for an ALC-BCN).
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 7): For the record, loadwise Avianca has averaged 146 passengers per flight for the first 9-months of 2010, and 5,637kgs of freight and mail.
Thanks for this figues. An A330 would feel far too roomy for 146 pax.
Judging by the testimonies here, Business class does not do fantastically well on that flight anyway, and whilst cargo is significant at an average of 5.6 tonnes per flight, it is not exactly jaw dropping.
MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 15734 posts, RR: 48 Reply 12, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 3532 times:
Quoting RCS763AV (Reply 10): Truth is that this flight is being cut to save some money by just routing the pax via SAL.
West Coast - Latin America is going to be rough for just about anyone, especially an offshore carrier, since there is so little high yield traffic. The reason it's gone is probably because the BOGLAX fare is in the same ballpark as BOGMIA, but obviously much farther.
SJOtoLIR From Costa Rica, joined Jul 2007, 4088 posts, RR: 5 Reply 13, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3243 times:
This topic has been previously discussed in different editions from the Central American aviation thread: AV BOG-LAX would be dropped in favor of [AV BOG-SAL and then TA SAL-LAX].
AV BOG-SAL 7x weekly with 319 commenced on August 09th and it´s relatively a new route that deserves to be stimulated, based on its own status as an untapped market.
The alliance named AV/TA must provide easier connections between their mutual hubs: BOG-LIM, BOG-SJO and BOG-SAL is most likely the weakest service in terms of the demand of passengers, but it’s important for the future expansion plans taken by both airlines.
On the other hand, AV BOG-LAX 5x weekly has not lately driven stellar loads as posted in the fresh figures provided by the US DoT:
..Filter period..........Available seats..........Occupancy............Load factor
.January 2010................7912.......................4635........................58%
February 2010...............7188.......................2900........................40%
...March 2010.................7640.......................4046........................53%
.....April 2010..................7914.......................4252........................54%
Source: Research and innovative technology administration.
Bureau of Transportation Statistics.
AV BOG-SAL 7x weekly cannot be sustained by the origin-destination traffic exclusively and it must rely in connections through either San Salvador or Bogota, on the other side.
With that being said above, TA SAL-LAX is currently operating as 18x weekly and it’s combining their departures in the morning, afternoon and evening out of SAL. These schedule allocations match perfectly between themselves as shown:
AV 94..........BOG 11:55..........SAL 14:00.............Daily..............................319
AV 95..........SAL 14:55...........BOG 19:00............Daily..............................319
TA 529.........LAX 06:52...........SAL 13:47............Mo, Tu, Th, Fr...............319
TA 528.........SAL 15:05...........LAX 18:25............Mo, We, Th, Su.............319
This is an imperfect plan, because the non-stop AV BOG-LAX 5x weekly with 762 is being sacrificed over [AV BOG-SAL 7x weekly and then TA SAL-LAX 4x weekly]. In other words, the above combination is not available every day by now. The inbound passengers on AV BOG-SAL must wait more than six hours in San Salvador some days, prior to grab the red-eye flight named TA/LR 670 SAL-LAX 7x weekly with 321 which is departing at 19:30. Same on the opposite direction.
However, AV BOG-LAX 5x weekly will be axed on January 18th, and TA may expand the TA528 SAL-LAX and TA529 LAX-SAL on a daily basis and trying to offer a better service for those [Bogota-San Salvador] passengers who are utilizing the mentioned services.
Moreover, TA528 SAL-LAX and TA529 LAX-SAL shall bear the AV code next year, if my hypothesis has been managed correctly. I will put extreme attention on the progress of this plan.
RCS763AV From Colombia, joined Jun 2004, 4283 posts, RR: 13 Reply 14, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3214 times:
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 12): The reason it's gone is probably because the BOGLAX fare is in the same ballpark as BOGMIA, but obviously much farther.
Not really. BOG-South Florida fares have been dumpy for quite a while now, but I do see your point. The flight was big on Asia connections though, at least that's what AV execs said on interviews.
Quoting SJOtoLIR (Reply 13): On the other hand, AV BOG-LAX 5x weekly has not lately driven stellar loads as posted in the fresh figures provided by the US DoT:
Good, post loads from the weakest months of the year save january, which is still not as strong for US travel. Give me december and june-september loads and we'll see.
Quoting SJOtoLIR (Reply 13): The alliance named AV/TA must provide easier connections between their mutual hubs: BOG-LIM, BOG-SJO and BOG-SAL is most likely the weakest service in terms of the demand of passengers, but it’s important for the future expansion plans taken by both airlines.
Then fly two daily A320s and provide better connetions at each end, don't end AV service to a destination after huge investments were made two years ago, weakening the brand and leaving a large market unserved. It's not like they have made any efforts in integrating FF programmes or coordinating inflight service or a common branding like AF-KL have done. That would be a different story, but is seems to be taking them ages.
Quoting Summa767 (Reply 11):
AV leaving LAX does have to do with the 767s going, but you will find that the A330s that replace them (I believe it will be 3 in 2011) will do more flight hours and not less.
Schedules can be arranged to squeeze a fligh to Europe in essentially the same block as one to LAX currently. So we will see that capacity shift; With the same number of widebodies, AV will have a more new frequencies to Europe. I guess 10 new ones are possible by the end of 2011
I get your point. Indeed it will be a shift in capacity, but what I was trying to say is that regardless of how many frames come into the fleet, if BOG-LAX was flown with A330s there would have been a reduction in frequency on that route.
Quoting SJOtoLIR (Reply 13): This is an imperfect plan, because the non-stop AV BOG-LAX 5x weekly with 762 is being sacrificed over [AV BOG-SAL 7x weekly and then TA SAL-LAX 4x weekly]. In other words, the above combination is not available every day by now. The inbound passengers on AV BOG-SAL must wait more than six hours in San Salvador some days, prior to grab the red-eye flight named TA/LR 670 SAL-LAX 7x weekly with 321 which is departing at 19:30. Same on the opposite direction.
Great! CM, CO, AA and DL will now get all the passengers who won't have to wait for 6 hours at an airport which is nowhere near IAH, PTY or ATL in passenger comfort. I hope that TA expands the dailyght service to daily.
They should have waited three more months to retire the 67s and flown the thing with the A332s 3-4x a week. What a shame.
SJOtoLIR From Costa Rica, joined Jul 2007, 4088 posts, RR: 5 Reply 15, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3134 times:
Quoting RCS763AV (Reply 14): post loads from the weakest months of the year save january, which is still not as strong for US travel. Give me december and june-september loads and we'll see.
AV BOG-LAX and AV LAX-BOG:
.....Filter period...........Available seats..........Occupancy............Load factor
.....June 2009.....................7493.......................4305........................57%
......July 2009......................6128.......................4961........................81%
....August 2009...................6424.......................4840........................75%
September 2009................6378.......................4004........................63%
.December 2009................6910.......................4735........................69%
The same source: http://www.transtats.bts.gov/DL_Sele...asp?Table_ID=261&DB_Short_Name=Air
Loads are much better. However, they're not stellar throughout the year.
Maybe 1/3 of the revenue seats on AV BOG-LAX were empty during 2009.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22070 posts, RR: 51 Reply 16, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3026 times:
laca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3749 posts, RR: 2 Reply 17, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2976 times:
Quoting RCS763AV (Reply 14):
Great! CM, CO, AA and DL will now get all the passengers who won't have to wait for 6 hours at an airport which is nowhere near IAH, PTY or ATL in passenger comfort. I hope that TA expands the dailyght service to daily.
They should have waited three more months to retire the 67s and flown the thing with the A332s 3-4x a week. What a shame.
Thanks for your thoughts, RCS763AV. I appreciate it and it sounds like you know a great deal about this market and the culture that surrounds it.
If AV could offer good connections for flights to other South American destinations and promoted them more agressively, I think they would have a better shot of getting BOG-LAX-BOG to perform better. The 332s AV has definitely is a great a/c,but as you know, right now it's just too much.
SJOtoLIR From Costa Rica, joined Jul 2007, 4088 posts, RR: 5 Reply 18, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2883 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 16): The actual 2010 loads through September are posted in reply 7. If you want October also, I'll have that in two weeks.
It's better to analize the behavior of AV BOG-LAX during several months.
Anyways, the figures posted in reply 15 belonged to 2009.
The last available sources coming from the US DoT are from April 2010 at this time.
MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 15734 posts, RR: 48 Reply 19, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2811 times:
Quoting laca773 (Reply 17): If AV could offer good connections for flights to other South American destinations and promoted them more agressively, I think they would have a better shot of getting BOG-LAX-BOG to perform better.
AV has a lot of South American connecting traffic on this flight, particularly to LIM and UIO; the connections are fairly good
Summa767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2387 posts, RR: 7 Reply 20, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2789 times:
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 19): AV has a lot of South American connecting traffic on this flight, particularly to LIM and UIO; the connections are fairly good
But both LIm and UIO can be connected via SJO and SAL with TACA, thus the combined company sees sense in consolidating the coonections via SAL and SJO that are more efficient than through BOG in any case.
Back to the topic, the 752 can do the route but not with enough profitabily. That´s my point. The 752 are also leaving so AV will not have the metal to do the route (unless they want to put the A319s on it but those plans where scrapped has i said before).
Quoting RCS763AV (Reply 14): They should have waited three more months to retire the 67s and flown the thing with the A332s 3-4x a week. What a shame.
An A332 will not be a good 762 replacement if you don´t have pax or cargo to fill them, if LAX where THAT good route they would still be flying the with A332. The A332s have more use on Europe flights where they generate more money, a shame to see LAX scrapped, but at this time AV needs to think twice every move they do and i´m quite sure they found their best solution is to do the route this way.
The other question that puzzles me is, ¿why the route can´t be done via SJO?
Gus
SKBO
Colombian coffee, the best...take a cup and you will see how delicious it is.
SJOtoLIR From Costa Rica, joined Jul 2007, 4088 posts, RR: 5 Reply 22, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2670 times:
Quoting Summa767 (Reply 20): both LIM and UIO can be connected via SJO and SAL with TACA, thus the combined company sees sense in consolidating the coonections via SAL and SJO that are more efficient than through BOG in any case.
TA does not fly the SAL-UIO segment.
The only feasible chance is TA SAL-SJO and then TA/LR SJO-UIO.
However, TA SAL-GYE is available thrice a week.
.
Quoting tavong (Reply 21): ¿why the route can´t be done via SJO?
TA/LR SJO-LAX is 4x weekly whereas TA SAL-LAX is 18x weekly nowadays.
Moreover, TA/AV BOG-SJO is not properly timed with TA/LR SJO-LAX.
It's better the arrangement described before:
AV 94..........BOG 11:55..........SAL 14:00.............Daily..............................319
AV 95..........SAL 14:55...........BOG 19:00............Daily..............................319
TA 529.........LAX 06:52...........SAL 13:47............Mo, Tu, Th, Fr...............319
TA 528.........SAL 15:05...........LAX 18:25............Mo, We, Th, Su.............319
The disadvantage is that TA528/TA529 is not operating on a daily basis by now as explained before.
.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 7): Avianca has averaged 146 passengers per flight for the first 9-months of 2010
.
Quoting SJOtoLIR (Reply 13): ..Filter period..........Available seats..........Occupancy............Load factor
.January 2010................7912.......................4635........................58%
February 2010...............7188.......................2900........................40%
...March 2010.................7640.......................4046........................53%
.....April 2010..................7914.......................4252........................54%
Source: Research and innovative technology administration.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22070 posts, RR: 51 Reply 23, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2649 times:
Quoting SJOtoLIR (Reply 22): Both sources look like contradictory between themselves.
Why is contradictory?
You only see public DOT Jan-Apr numbers, and I can view full Jan-Sep traffic dataset.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
RCS763AV From Colombia, joined Jun 2004, 4283 posts, RR: 13 Reply 24, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2625 times:
Quoting tavong (Reply 21): An A332 will not be a good 762 replacement if you don´t have pax or cargo to fill them, if LAX where THAT good route they would still be flying the with A332. The A332s have more use on Europe flights where they generate more money, a shame to see LAX scrapped, but at this time AV needs to think twice every move they do and i´m quite sure they found their best solution is to do the route this way.
The A332 was a good 762 replacement for all they routes they replaced them in (Spain, New York, Sao Paulo). They could have flown the route with lesser frequency, the problem is the lack of aircraft. Yes, Europe makes more money, but I doubt that 10 A330-200 will be deployed, besides JFK and GRU/EZE, to Europe. London might be coming soon with some more Spain flights but that's it for the near term.
25 tavong: The A332 was a good replacement for all the routes made by the 762 except LAX. The yields doesn´t justify deploying and A332. Remember that the firs
26 laca773: It is a shame AV is getting rid of the 762ERs as it allows them to operate long, think routes such as LAX. The A332 is just too much plane compared t
27 SJOtoLIR: Let's analyze the numbers carefully again: AV LAX-BOG and back had 146 passengers during [January-September]. The AV's 762 provides 178 available sea
28 28L28L: Does anyone know when AV first began operations to Los Angeles? I've seen photos on this site of AV 707s at LAX in the 1970s, though they might have b
29 LAXintl: Here is the Jan-Sep 2010 data since you seem to not believe it. Total BOG-LAX pax: 27,011 / 185 flights Total LAX-BOG pax: 27,104 / 185 flights = 146
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3749 posts, 
From Colombia, joined Jul 2001, 834 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2387 posts, 
From Costa Rica, joined Jul 2007, 4088 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
