hatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1453 posts, RR: 15 Posted (2 years 3 months 16 hours ago) and read 5465 times:
Here they are. No real surprise. What many expected. Looks like no PDX-Bay Area though.
PDX-BUR (3 roundtrips)
PDX-ONT (3 roundtrips)
SEA-LGB (2 roundtrips increasing to 4 June 16)
SEA-SBA (1 roundtrip)
SEA-PDX (1 roundtrip for a repositioning of aircraft)
SEA-FAT (1 roundtrip, the other roundtrip will continue to be a Q400 and PDX-FAT will be Q400)
It was noted that the FAT frequency was to allow OO to route their aircraft through their maintenance base.
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2315 posts, RR: 7 Reply 1, posted (2 years 3 months 15 hours ago) and read 5409 times:
Thanks. Ah, my arm-chair route planner predictions were close. So presumably, they believe that Bay Area-PDX is a short enough flight to remain competitive on the Q400. Presumably a few AS 737s may creep onto SFO/OAK/SJC-PDX also.
A few key observations:
1) AS plans to keep LGB
2) AS plans to keep SBA
3) They apparently think they can keep Q400s on the longer LAX-LTO and LAX-LAP flights due to lack of competition (LAX-LAP is by far the longest QX Q400 flight, AFAIK, at almost 3 hours). I had wondered if LTO and LAP may also get the OO CR7s.
4) AS thinks they can get away with one Q400 in the fairly long SEA-FAT flight also.
5) Same comment for YEG. They believe they can use the Q400 on these longer flights.
6) No PSP. A CR7 is a good sized airplane for something like PDX-PSP, or SEA-PSP in the Summer (off-peak).
7) No new routes with the OO CR7s like SJC-TUS again, or LAX to other new Mexico destinations like Oaxaca that wouldn't warrant a 737.
wedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5534 posts, RR: 5 Reply 2, posted (2 years 3 months 15 hours ago) and read 5385 times:
I think OAK-PDX and SFO-PDX (except 1 mainline) are going all Q's. I'm not sure about SJC. With SJC-AUS being dropped, it wouldn't surprise me that the SJC-PDX goes all Q's.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22070 posts, RR: 51 Reply 3, posted (2 years 3 months 15 hours ago) and read 5386 times:
What happens to AS/QX staff at these airports?
Will handling (top or bottom) also shift to OO for these flights? OO obviously has a good sized footrprint with staff at the SoCal airports atleast and suspect could handle the additional flying for a fraction of the cost than standalone AS/QX staff.(for example at BUR OO handles UA).
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
hatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1453 posts, RR: 15 Reply 5, posted (2 years 3 months 15 hours ago) and read 5313 times:
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 1): 3) They apparently think they can keep Q400s on the longer LAX-LTO and LAX-LAP flights due to lack of competition (LAX-LAP is by far the longest QX Q400 flight, AFAIK, at almost 3 hours). I had wondered if LTO and LAP may also get the OO CR7s.
I suspect this may have something to do with Skywest possibly not having authority to fly to Mexico? It's not the easiest certification to get. It was a pain for QX to be able to fly the Q400 there.
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 1): 7) No new routes with the OO CR7s like SJC-TUS again, or LAX to other new Mexico destinations like Oaxaca that wouldn't warrant a 737.
I think we're far too early to try anything new. We have to make sure the operation with OO works first before venturing out.
hatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1453 posts, RR: 15 Reply 6, posted (2 years 3 months 15 hours ago) and read 5294 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 3): What happens to AS/QX staff at these airports?
Will handling (top or bottom) also shift to OO for these flights? OO obviously has a good sized footrprint with staff at the SoCal airports atleast and suspect could handle the additional flying for a fraction of the cost than standalone AS/QX staff.(for example at BUR OO handles UA).
QX will continue to do the handling for SEA, PDX, FAT and AS will do above wing in ONT/BUR. Contract ramp is already used in ONT/BUR. No decision yet on LGB or SBA though.
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2315 posts, RR: 7 Reply 7, posted (2 years 3 months 15 hours ago) and read 5254 times:
From a sentimental standpoint, I would have like to seen the Horizon brand remain, keep more of the smaller PNW cities like LMT and IDA, and keep the mixed fleet of CR7s and Q400s, rather than this OO stuff.
However, I understand this is a business and AS feels they are making the best business decisions. AS is obviously demonstrating they know what they are doing, given their recent profits and growth, and remaining successful as an independent airline.
The good news is that it's doesn't sound like they are preparing the airline to sell to DL or anything ugly like that. I'm sure they wouldn't be painting Chester on a bunch of Q400s if they weren't planning to stay independent.
So I suppose all these changes are good. Like I said, whether I like some of the changes from the standpoint of an aviation fan (and someone who flies AS/QX a lot), it appears that it is a very well run airline.
OH-LGA From Denmark, joined Oct 1999, 1428 posts, RR: 22 Reply 8, posted (2 years 3 months 15 hours ago) and read 5230 times:
Quoting hatbutton (Reply 5): I suspect this may have something to do with Skywest possibly not having authority to fly to Mexico? It's not the easiest certification to get. It was a pain for QX to be able to fly the Q400 there.
SkyWest currently operates SLC-GDL under the Delta Connection banner and has operated to other Mexican destinations previously, so SkyWest already has the necessary certifications for Mexico flying.
Head in the clouds... yet feet planted firmly on the ground.
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2315 posts, RR: 7 Reply 9, posted (2 years 3 months 15 hours ago) and read 5230 times:
Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 4): QX has flown Q's on the SEA-YEG route before.
Yes, I was aware of that. I was making the point that this is also a longer Q flight, as many people have expressed that the Q is not so comfortable for longer flights. But it doesn't have the competition with another certain all-737 operator like PDX-BUR has, or other markets where AS said they'd use the OO CR7s for "competitive reasons".
As stated above, SkyWest currently serves SLC-GDL and has done other routes from SLC before. So must be something different. Obviously a AS/QX decision.
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2315 posts, RR: 7 Reply 11, posted (2 years 3 months 15 hours ago) and read 5063 times:
Quoting as739x (Reply 10): I suspect that AS will stay clear of new Mexico destinations for a little while. There has been more withdraw over the last few years then additions.
Yeah, noted CUN; SFO-MZT; SFO-ZIH were cut. PDX-SJD and PDX-PVR were announced but never started.
However, SJC-SJD; SAN-PVR; SJC-GDL and SMF-GDL were started (or restarted in one case). LAX-GDL/MEX have frequency increases also. I'm surprised at no SEA-MEX after the revolving door of AM cut it. AS would be the best equipped to serve it given their presence in SEA.
Slightly off topic, but how is SJC-SJD performing? That one surprised me considering they cut it in 2005.
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2315 posts, RR: 7 Reply 13, posted (2 years 3 months 14 hours ago) and read 4954 times:
Quoting Airport (Reply 12): At least as of now, the schedule is still showing 2x 737s + 3 Q400s on PDX-SJC
My personal sense is that AS can get away with the Q400 on more moderate length competitive routes like SFO/OAK/SJC-PDX based on brand-loyalty. People will tolerate the Q on the moderate length flights to get their AS frequent flier miles, elite status, free beer, etc. However, as others have noted, there might be a limit to that when you start getting into longer routes in which the Q becomes much less comfortable than, say, a brown, orange and blue 737.
In the case of SEA-RNO, I personally sucked it up recently and did the Q400 (and paid the bag fee for skis since I'm not MVP for the first time in many years) based on both brand loyalty and the fact that QX's SEA-RNO non-stops have a far more convenient schedule than WN's one mid-day non-stop. Bag fee or not, I still have difficulty selecting someone other than AS/QX when I have the choice, based on years of good AS service that has earned my loyalty. I expect many others feel the same.
In the case of longer routes like SEA-FAT; SEA-YEG; LAX-LTO; LAX-LAP there is no competition and your choice is a longer flight on the Q, which some find less than ideal, or maybe a less comfortable bus ride or lenghty connection, etc. So most people will suck it up and take the Q400 and go non-stop and enjoy the free beer.
chrisair From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1774 posts, RR: 4 Reply 14, posted (2 years 3 months 14 hours ago) and read 4942 times:
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 1): 7) No new routes with the OO CR7s like SJC-TUS again, or LAX to other new Mexico destinations like Oaxaca that wouldn't warrant a 737.
Remember, Skywest is only getting the 5 remaining QX CR7s. They're not going to be able to add anything too drastic without adding planes.
SJC-PDX on a Q400 or a WN 73G? That's a no brainer for this MVPG.
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2315 posts, RR: 7 Reply 15, posted (2 years 3 months 14 hours ago) and read 4897 times:
Quoting chrisair (Reply 14): SJC-PDX on a Q400 or a WN 73G? That's a no brainer for this MVPG.
Agreed, that's what I was getting at in my previous post. Yeah, it's weird not being MVP or MVPG this year. Decided to take a year off of my normal extensive travel passion. The bag fees are what most anger me, although the generious First Class Upgrades, preboarding, dedicated phone line, etc are missed too.
I greatly appreciate that WN is a valued all-Boeing customer (as is AS), but I still couldn't bring myself to choose them over QX or AS, as you state. I been doing SEA-SJC at least twice a year since 1993 for family visits and have never missed AS, except for doing AA twice in 1999-2000.
Airport From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 1397 posts, RR: 9 Reply 17, posted (2 years 3 months 14 hours ago) and read 4779 times:
Quoting as739x (Reply 16): Yeah, I mean all the QX flights. Sorry I assumed you guys knew what I meant.
" All QX flights from SFO will be Q's as of March 1"
Ahh, gotcha, just wanted to make sure there wasn't a schedule change I missed. It'd be pretty disappointing to see the 737s taken off PDX-SFO.
Quoting chrisair (Reply 14): Remember, Skywest is only getting the 5 remaining QX CR7s. They're not going to be able to add anything too drastic without adding planes.
And as I understand they're already stretched very thin with aircraft, so I don't think it's likely we'll see any more than 5 for a while.
WhatUsaid From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 595 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (2 years 3 months 11 hours ago) and read 4522 times:
Where's the official announcement? The routes are not unexpected. AS has been playing around with schedules almost on a weekly basis and it was apparent that the schedules were being trimmed for what's a pretty small fleet. I'm sure that OO will look to expand this. At least I can avoid the Q on my FAT-SEA commutes for awhile longer.
hatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1453 posts, RR: 15 Reply 19, posted (2 years 3 months 10 hours ago) and read 4320 times:
Quoting WhatUsaid (Reply 18): Where's the official announcement? The routes are not unexpected. AS has been playing around with schedules almost on a weekly basis and it was apparent that the schedules were being trimmed for what's a pretty small fleet. I'm sure that OO will look to expand this. At least I can avoid the Q on my FAT-SEA commutes for awhile longer.
No official press release or anything. It's on the internal site. There may not be one unless it comes from Skywest since AS already said Skywest is taking on some CPA flying during the earnings release.
KWBL From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 438 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (2 years 3 months 9 hours ago) and read 4091 times:
What about the possibility of OO doing 30 seat flying in the Northwest. It seems they already have the United Express operation which offers limited connections - it seems a link with AS would provide much better connections. It would get AS back into OTH, LMT, PDT, SLE etc...and maybe offer more frequencies in other markets like LWS, YKM etc. I know OO has been phasing out the Embraers but the have been open to starting new markets with the EMs (like SLE).
n7371f From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1495 posts, RR: 12 Reply 24, posted (2 years 3 months 8 hours ago) and read 3931 times:
Quoting as739x (Reply 23): Not likely at all. The EMB's are running thin fleet wise for UAX.
They're actually in the slow process of being phased out.
25 AZNCSA4QF744ER: That is indeed correct! OO does the the necessary paperwork to operates the route. I would suspect OO will ground handles flights from SBA.
26 WhatUsaid: Schedules were posted on the Alaska media site; not in the CRS yet.
27 StuckInCA: I'm very glad, on a personal level, to see the SEA-SBA route maintained. We use it frequently and it seems pretty full and expensive pretty regularly.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1453 posts, 
From Denmark, joined Oct 1999, 1428 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
