Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA Assaults LAX  
User currently offlinergreenftm From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 299 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 22091 times:

I'm surprised no one else has brought this up - It appears AMR has launched an all out assault on LAX. I know a lot of these routes are probably driven to support the new Shanghai service, but still an impressive offering of new flights. Looking at these routes, I see them going into routes currently flown by F9, CO, UA, WN, US and DL.

LAX-Shanghai
LAX-LAS (+1 freq)
LAX-OKC
LAX-BOI
LAX-ELP
LAX-DEN (+ freq)
LAX-TUS
LAX-ABQ
LAX-SLC
LAX-SMF
LAX-IAH
LAX-PHX

81 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinesw733 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6306 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 22046 times:

Quoting rgreenftm (Thread starter):
, I see them going into routes currently flown by F9, CO, UA, WN, US and DL.

Maybe it's because I am biased, but I still am surprised they don't do, say, 1x daily MCI-LAX. They have a decent FF base in MCI. It wouldn't be to directly meet the PVG flight, but still...I can't imagine the OKC flight, for example, is to directly feed people going OKC-LAX-PVG.


User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7125 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 21959 times:

Quoting rgreenftm (Thread starter):
I'm surprised no one else has brought this up

I was brought up a while ago when AA announced they were opening up a hub at LAX.

Quoting rgreenftm (Thread starter):
I know a lot of these routes are probably driven to support the new Shanghai service

It will help the route but not exactly. AA has decided to open a hub there. Not just a focus city. So as long as flights start making money expect some more routes and frequencies. Of course there is not a ton or room for AA at LAX so if they do continue to expand it should be interesting.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineseatback From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 757 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 21949 times:

Quoting rgreenftm (Thread starter):
I'm surprised no one else has brought this up - It appears AMR has launched an all out assault on LAX. I know a lot of these routes are probably driven to support the new Shanghai service, but still an impressive offering of new flights. Looking at these routes, I see them going into routes currently flown by F9, CO, UA, WN, US and DL.

AA's LAX expansion has been discussed indepth since they announced several months ago. Old news by now.


User currently offlineDFWEagle From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1071 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 21864 times:

Quoting sw733 (Reply 1):
I can't imagine the OKC flight, for example, is to directly feed people going OKC-LAX-PVG.

The single daily OKC-LAX flight arrives after the flight to Shanghai has already departed so it's definitely not aimed at feeding that flight. The same is true in the other direction.



Ryan / HKG
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22741 posts, RR: 20
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 21645 times:

Quoting sw733 (Reply 1):
Maybe it's because I am biased, but I still am surprised they don't do, say, 1x daily MCI-LAX.

I'm not biased, and the lack of both MCI-LAX and MCI-MIA surprises me.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlinergreenftm From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 299 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 21571 times:

Quoting seatback (Reply 3):
AA's LAX expansion has been discussed indepth since they announced several months ago. Old news by now.

Agreed, LAX hub status/plans have been discussed, but last time I checked, airlines don't usually share route plans months in advanced.


User currently offlineDFWEagle From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1071 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 21439 times:

Quoting rgreenftm (Reply 6):
last time I checked, airlines don't usually share route plans months in advanced.

I'm not sure what you are getting at. Airlines do announce new routes months in advance because it takes that length of time to get advance bookings and market them etc. AA announced all this new service back in October, over five months ago now. Here's the thread from the time:

AA Expansion At LAX: 10 New Destinations (by DFWEagle Oct 20 2010 in Civil Aviation)

The flights actually begin operation today.



Ryan / HKG
User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25015 posts, RR: 85
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 21405 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 5):
I'm not biased, and the lack of both MCI-LAX and MCI-MIA surprises me.

By June there will be three airlines flying MCI-LAX for 6 x daily flights (weekdays). I'd be very surprised if the route can support more than that - or even if the route can support that.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22741 posts, RR: 20
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 21328 times:

Quoting mariner (Reply 8):
I'd be very surprised if the route can support more than that - or even if the route can support that.

I don't know that it can, but to me, both of those MCI routes are well overdue.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineseatback From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 757 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 21273 times:

I would say most of the new routes are heavily served, especially DEN, SLC, PHX, TUS, IAH, and SMF. Clearly AA is looking for people to connect, not necessarily O&D.

User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11466 posts, RR: 61
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 21189 times:

Quoting seatback (Reply 10):
I would say most of the new routes are heavily served, especially DEN, SLC, PHX, TUS, IAH, and SMF. Clearly AA is looking for people to connect, not necessarily O&D.

True to an extent.

AA is most definitely looking for relatively-higher-yielding connections moving from these markets to other destinations served over LAX by AA or its partners (and there are plenty of those flights to choose from), but I would think AA is also targeting - to some extent - the massive local base of AA frequent flyers and corporate contract flyers in the Los Angeles area. That is a powerful group to leverage, if possible.

Now, it of course remains to be seen if that is possible. Some of these markets I suspect will work, others not.

Denver is mainly just an upgrade of AA's longstanding service, and I expect it to survive - if perhaps go back down to 3x daily (but on 2-class CRJs).

Phoenix I also expect to survive simply because it is such a massive market that presently had no westbound oneworld connectivity.

Some markets like Sacramento and Tucson I would characterize as marginal - not hopeless, but not great, either. Tucson may work simply built on the back of AA's large corporate presence there and strength in the local business market.

Boise I think is a stretch mainly because of its stage length, even if the market has little competition, and Salt Lake City I think is a stretch precisely because of the competition from other bigger, stronger, more established airlines in the market (especially Delta).

Houston I could see going either way. I think AA is sufficiently strong at both ends to make flights work if timed well and properly supported, but I'm not sure if the CRJ is the right airplane. I could perhaps see that going from 3x CRJ to 2x MD80 (probably a ~9am and ~6pm IAH departure and ~1pm and ~7pm LAX departure) in the future.


User currently offlinepeanuts From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1438 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 21015 times:

AA, like DL and UA have no choice. Some LAX routes on these carriers will be miserable. Others will do just fine.
Don't look at LAX so much as "just" an AA "hub" expansion. Look at it more as an "Alliance expansion". LAX is key for the three major alliances. They each need to make a mark for their huge FF bases. DL is doing it, AA is doing it and UA is doing it, all for the sake of providing their alliances (OW, ST, Star) with a meaningful presence in LAX.

5-8 years from now, this will all make sense, trust me. Including the whole AS debate, for some... duck 

[Edited 2011-04-05 14:20:01]


Question Conventional Wisdom. While not all commonly held beliefs are wrong…all should be questioned.
User currently offlineDFWEagle From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1071 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 20954 times:

I'm surprised that AA did not announce LAX-SAT with the CR7, along with these new routes. They flew this for some years with M80s, and I think 3x daily with the 2-class CR7 would be more appropriate. In Texas, AA now serves DFW, AUS, IAH and ELP from Los Angeles, so San Antonio seems a bit of a gap. Perhaps it will be added in the future, provided these routes are not a complete disaster.


Ryan / HKG
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8293 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 20936 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

What took AA so Long ? Its NOT all becaus AA id flying to Shangahai today. Now if AA would fly LAX to Peking, that would be aweosme.

User currently offlineSurfandSnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2858 posts, RR: 30
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 20780 times:

Quoting rgreenftm (Thread starter):
I'm surprised no one else has brought this up

These routes were announced back in October 2010.

Quoting rgreenftm (Thread starter):
It appears AMR has launched an all out assault on LAX

An all out assault? I don't think chief competitors like UA or WN are all too worried that AA has suddenly decided to throw a few high cost RJs on a smattering of highly competitive short haul routes.

Quoting rgreenftm (Thread starter):
I know a lot of these routes are probably driven to support the new Shanghai service, but still an impressive offering of new flights.

I highly doubt AA is counting on markets like Tucson and El Paso to fill the planes to PVG. If anything this is to facilitate improved network connectivity (think PHX-LAX-OGG, IAH-LAX-SBA, SLC-LAX-SJD, etc.), improve AA's attractiveness to the local market (which does demand flights to these short haul destinations), and otherwise boost their presence and performance at what is now considered to be a key hub.

Quoting rgreenftm (Thread starter):
Looking at these routes, I see them going into routes currently flown by F9, CO, UA, WN, US and DL.

On every single one of these routes they will face at least two well-established competitors, except for LAX-BOI, where they will only have to contend with UAX (bear in mind that on the BOI end UA is very strong, whilst AA is virtually unknown). Even the notable addition of LAX-PVG will pit them against MU, long established on the route and a future SkyTeam member, and UA, which starts the route next month.

Quoting sw733 (Reply 1):
I still am surprised they don't do, say, 1x daily MCI-LAX. They have a decent FF base in MCI.

You are?!? If anything that little route is about to be *VERY* well served by three different carriers. AA would be wise to avoid that dogfight.

Quoting flymia (Reply 2):
AA announced they were opening up a hub at LAX.

They didn't formally announce that, though. It was more like they added a few mainline and regional flights and decided to rather subtly start calling what was already a major station a full-fledged "hub". There was much a.net debate on the matter back in the fall, since there was no official announcement along those lines.

Quoting flymia (Reply 2):
AA has decided to open a hub there. Not just a focus city.

Well, even before this point AA (mainline) was actually stronger at LAX than UA (mainline) was. UA has called LAX a hub for years now, whilst AA only started calling it that when they unveiled the new five cornerstone strategy. But bottom line, all along they were pretty close to having a LAX "hub" anyhow.

Quoting flymia (Reply 2):
So as long as flights start making money expect some more routes and frequencies.

I really don't think AA intends to make much money flying, oh I don't know, LAX-PHX against WN, US, UA, and DL. I think they hope to make more money from excited FFers in markets like Tucson and Albuquerque, not to mention Los Angeles itself, while boosting loads and revenue on other routes that can tap the regional feed - Hawaii, MCO, BOS, SJD, etc.

Quoting flymia (Reply 2):
Of course there is not a ton or room for AA at LAX so if they do continue to expand it should be interesting.

Well it sounds like they can expand the Eagle facility somewhat. T4 is quite full, but I believe I did hear that AA is going to get preferential gate use in the new TBIT. So perhaps they are planning to further develop the LAX hub as a transpacific gateway? Only time will tell...



Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25015 posts, RR: 85
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 20753 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 9):
I don't know that it can, but to me, both of those MCI routes are well overdue.

I would agree with MCI-MIA, but I'm scratching my head about MCI-LAX. For an airline that is presently "financially challenged" to add what would be, at the very best, a marginal route seems to me to be perverse.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineCoairman From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 117 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 20725 times:

I wonder if the new UA will add flights too in order to protect market share? Maybe not.


Patience Can Be A Virtue.
User currently offlinetravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3491 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 20651 times:

I think LAX-IAH has been screaming for competition. The route is dominated by UA/CO, and the only other competitor is WN to HOU. LA and Houston are the 2nd and 6th largest metros in the country. I think this route will support AA's CR7s, and I wouldn't be suprised to even see one or two flights upgauged to mainline.

User currently offlineSurfandSnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2858 posts, RR: 30
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 20574 times:

Quoting DFWEagle (Reply 13):
I'm surprised that AA did not announce LAX-SAT with the CR7, along with these new routes. They flew this for some years with M80s

Should these new Eagle routes hold their own, I would think LAX-SAT/COS/TUL could well be next. All three markets had mainline (MD-80) service fairly recently (within the past 10 years). On the other hand, a resumption of small intrastate markets like BFL, PSP, SBP, etc. is very unlikely IMO.



Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently offlineRising From United States of America, joined May 2010, 269 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 20371 times:

Quoting seatback (Reply 10):
I would say most of the new routes are heavily served, especially DEN, SLC, PHX, TUS, IAH, and SMF. Clearly AA is looking for people to connect, not necessarily O&D.
LA is number 2 in the nation in terms of O&D traffic. I think Origin and Destination traffic is certainly part of their game plan.

Metro Daily O&D total total O&D O&D % # of Airports
New York 127,801 51,883,694 23,131,981 44.60% 6 airports
Los Angeles 104,723 34,789,171 18,954,863 54.50% 4 airports
Chicago 86,821 39,281,585 15,714,601 40.00% 2 airports
Miami 79,636 31,262,044 14,414,116 46.10% 3 airports
Las Vegas 73,138 20,224,090 13,237,978 65.50%
San Francisco 68,838 22,139,378 12,459,678 56.30% 2 airports
Orlando 68,040 18,211,975 12,315,240 67.60% 2 airports
Dallas/Ft.Worth 59,577 31,149,065 10,783,437 34.60% 2 airports
Atlanta 56,645 43,008,154 10,252,745 23.80%
Phoenix 54,040 18,968,897 9,781,240 51.60%
Denver 53,747 24,337,554 9,728,207 40.00%
Washington 52,832 19,915,669 9,562,592 48.00% 2 airports


Source: http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/aviation/X-5...le_files/consumerairfarereport.htm

Quoting mariner (Reply 16):
For an airline that is presently "financially challenged" to add what would be, at the very best, a marginal route seems to me to be perverse

According to the federal government, from MCI-LAX, the route currently serves around 700 passengers per day, commands an average fare of $200 one-way, and Southwest currently dominates with 60% market share. It sounds like a weak pairing, but it is a premium route. Many other pairs only fetch around $120 each way, see only around 200-300 passengers, and no carrier has more than 30% share.

Source: http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/aviation/domfares/web20103.pdf

[Edited 2011-04-05 15:15:54]

[Edited 2011-04-05 15:17:43]


If it doesn't make sense, it's because it's not true.
User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25015 posts, RR: 85
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 20250 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Rising (Reply 20):
According to the federal government, from MCI-LAX, the route currently serves around 700 passengers per day, commands an average fare of $200 one-way, and Southwest currently dominates with 60% market share.

Presently (perhaps the basis of those numbers?) there are two airlines and 3 x daily non-stops. As of June there will be three airlines on the route with 6 x daily non-stops.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineTUSAA From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 236 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 19938 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 11):
Some markets like Sacramento and Tucson I would characterize as marginal - not hopeless, but not great, either. Tucson may work simply built on the back of AA's large corporate presence there and strength in the local business market.

TUS so far has the most current and advanced bookings of all the cities that got new LAX RJ service today. I pulled up the loads on the first TUS-LAX flight today and it was oversold. There were connections to TLV on LY, SCL on LA, NRT on JL, and PDX on AS, AA/AE conx to KOA,SBA,RNO,BOS,ORD and a few others.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11466 posts, RR: 61
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 19866 times:

Quoting TUSAA (Reply 22):
TUS so far has the most current and advanced bookings of all the cities that got new LAX RJ service today. I pulled up the loads on the first TUS-LAX flight today and it was oversold. There were connections to TLV on LY, SCL on LA, NRT on JL, and PDX on AS, AA/AE conx to KOA,SBA,RNO,BOS,ORD and a few others.

That is great to hear. I would love to see all of these markets succeed and thrive long-term, and I hope that Tucson does - I think the strong local AA corporate presence there (which I know I don't have to tell you about) might just help.


User currently offlinelaca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4002 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 19240 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting seatback (Reply 10):
I would say most of the new routes are heavily served, especially DEN, SLC, PHX, TUS, IAH, and SMF. Clearly AA is looking for people to connect, not necessarily O&D.

Why would AA drop mainline on LAX-DEN and downgauge it to a ERJ? This sounds like a very bad move considering all the competition in this market.

Quoting commavia (Reply 11):

Houston I could see going either way. I think AA is sufficiently strong at both ends to make flights work if timed well and properly supported, but I'm not sure if the CRJ is the right airplane. I could perhaps see that going from 3x CRJ to 2x MD80 (probably a ~9am and ~6pm IAH departure and ~1pm and ~7pm LAX departure) in the future.

A route like this for AA would be perfect for a E90/95 or a 73G. They would be able to offer a much more competitive and comfortable product vs using the CR7s which is an upgrade compared to the smaller ER4s. LAX-SAT would be another route were the E90/95 or 73Gs would work well. The pilots union needs to humble themselves and realize these 100 seat a/c fit a niche market and will keep them working.

Quoting TUSAA (Reply 22):

TUS so far has the most current and advanced bookings of all the cities that got new LAX RJ service today. I pulled up the loads on the first TUS-LAX flight today and it was oversold. There were connections to TLV on LY, SCL on LA, NRT on JL, and PDX on AS, AA/AE conx to KOA,SBA,RNO,BOS,ORD and a few others.

I can see some of the new LAX-TUS-LAX flights being upgauged to mainline service eventually. This is going to be a very successful market for AA since they have a large FF following there. On the other hand, the new PHX service, I don't see doing well.


25 commavia : Agreed 100% - these would be absolutely fantastic markets for a 90-seater. Alas, because of this ... ... I don't realistically see it happening anyti
26 Cubsrule : I think you missed my point before. Today, it would not be a good choice. Two years ago, it would have made much more sense (though they probably wou
27 okie : First of all you have to look at more than the OKC-LAX which I am sure AA did. Hub routing would be OKC-DFW-LAX, AA obviously feels they can pull eno
28 goblin211 : Not really surprising. If they announced a hub at lax recently then it should be expected. Besides, AA will still expand just like any other airline
29 MrSkyGuy : I, for one, hope that AA's growth at LAX continues as much via new destinations as it does layering existing ones. It gives us locals more options, al
30 laca773 : I agree with your observations of the market. TUS struggles a lot as fares are much higher for direct service anywhere of significant distance while
31 NorthstarBoy : Have they tried offering the pilots job guarantees? When you look at what UA did vis-a-vis the 737 retirements.......1400 mainline pilots out of work
32 Mir : That would probably mean flying the E-Jets at mainline. Certainly doable, but there would have to be a newer, lower, payscale for them in order (one
33 Cubsrule : It would be good for the company, the pilots and the industry. I'm not sure why APA won't have it.
34 delta2ual : I think you're confused. The routes were started yesterday, but as DFWEagle points out, they were announced MANY months ago!
35 Post contains images N737AA : Right on the money, hardly an assault with a few RJ's. It is a "Cornerstone" so yes it is a hub. Flew this route until the previous draw down, might
36 Post contains images KELPkid : ELP-LAX was a mainstay of AA back in the day. They dropped the route like a hot potato when WN started flying it in the late 70's/early 80's...of cou
37 AAtakeMeAway : Didn't MQ fly LAX to ELP (and ELP to DFW) a couple of years ago when they needed a "bridge" between the LAX and DFW hubs? If so, do we know why it was
38 Post contains images jetBlueE90 : Ha. why don't you post the pay rates AMMR wants and what the pilots want. Or any of the AMR lover/APA haters...... Something tells me you guys a talk
39 commavia : What AA effectively wants/needs on the 90-seaters is a B scale, which of course the APA will (stupidly) never agree to. Aggreeing to a contract that
40 Cubsrule : Since you so clearly know, why don't you enlighten us mere mortals?
41 mah4546 : There is also two new dailies to DFW and one new daily each to MCO, MIA and ORD. MIA-LAX is at an impressive eight daily, and has more capacity than
42 DFWEagle : DFW-LAX will be increased further for the peak summer season, reaching 20x daily flights. IINM, this will be the highest frequency route in AAs entire
43 SouthernDC9 : Did AA drop XNA-LAX? Any chance of that coming back?
44 commavia : Yes, several years back. I doubt it, personally. That is a really long, thin route for a regional jet, and while it does cater to an important corpor
45 Surfandsnow : Yes, that one was dropped 2 years ago. AA now only serves DFW, ORD, and LGA from XNA. At one point IIRC they served LAX, DFW, ORD, MIA, DCA, and LGA.
46 AADC10 : Most of the new routes match UA. The real reason for the routes is so the AA corporate sales team can say that they serve all of the same major desti
47 Cubsrule : . . . and STL.
48 Braniff727Ultra : First DL announces new service to SMF & now AA is adding service. This is great news! SMF will be a solid performer for them as the new terminal
49 mah4546 : AA announced service quite a bit before Delta. AeroMexico arrives in June. Not sure what more you expect, because Asia and Europe aren't happening.
50 B727LVR : The DFW-ROW-LAX route was dropped last August, now its just a DFW-ROW-DFW x3, one RON's in ROW to begin the route. The DFW-SAF-LAX has been changed s
51 N737AA : Yep it will surpass DFW-ORD's 19x and DFW-LGA's 15x....just wish we would boost DFW-MIA beyond the 9x/10x it has always been :-/, probably could supp
52 Post contains images laca773 : Thanks for explaining it a bit more, commavia. . This was announced a while back. There were some members looking for you when it was announced. Are
53 Mir : It takes two to tango, so we should also ask why AMR won't have it either. Unfortunately, there's a big lack of trust between the two sides, which is
54 Cubsrule : Absolutely, but I'm aware of no offer from APA. Am I misinformed?
55 jetBlueE90 : No it would be stupid to do a B scale. I bet anything APA would agree to E90/E95 rates in the same ball park as US/DL and B6. LOL you don't bend over
56 Mir : Not one that they've made public. Doesn't mean that it hasn't been discussed. Anyway, I'm not sure why it's APA's job to approach AMR about payscales
57 mah4546 : No need to get so rude. I was simply pointing something out that the original poster missed mentioning. And AA won't be the only airline on MIALAX co
58 Cubsrule : Absolutely agreed, but I think it would probably be a laughable exercise in futility. APA won't agree to long routes on existing airplanes - why woul
59 mah4546 : Such as LAXPVG, ORDPEK and ORDDEL?
60 Cubsrule : Pardon me - won't agree to long routes when there's someone else isn't about to start them. How is it rational to agree to ORD-China but not DFW-Chin
61 mah4546 : The DFWPEK issue was purely political and nothing short of that. They saw an opportunity to publicly state their cause and ran with it. It should not
62 Cubsrule : Then we agree. But then you say this: It seems to me like that might make APA more militantly political. We may have to agree to disagree on that poi
63 MiAAmi : Does anyone know how all the new flights are doing out of LAX? I have heard that LAX-PVG is going out pretty full.
64 Post contains links DFWEagle : At present, AA’s domestic schedule is not fully optimised for connections to the new Shanghai flight because of the last-minute schedule change due
65 D328 : How about the Bombardier C-Series for the smaller end of mainline, both 100 and 300?
66 Post contains images luckyone : Anybody else dying to say dAArtboard???
67 mah4546 : No, because therenis nothing dAArtboard about it. OKC was chosen because it has an extremely high concentration of loyal AAdvantage fliers, just like
68 UAL747 : Loyal AA'ers, but not necessarily to LAX. But regardless, Oklahoma has very strong ties to California. Particularly the areas in between LAX and SFO.
69 MileHighOffice : Houston is the 4th largest city in the US. Agree this route is going to be a UA monopoly from IAH Wow! That is huge. Is it going to be a squadron of
70 DFWEagle : There will be plenty of 757’s on the route; it will be 11x757, 5x738 and 4xM80 in the DFW-LAX direction. In the other direction, a 763 is also thro
71 jetBlueE90 : Is 13.5 hours again, 13.5 hours. APA rule is 14.30 hours per the 2003 CBA. IIRC its section 15. Only route APA has given the go ahead to is ORD-DEL.
72 luckyone : It was intended as a joke, hence the Tongue-incheek, but obviously it was a fail, lol.
73 mah4546 : APA has given the internal go ahead to others. The route it has said no to was DFWPEK. I don't know why this bothers you so much. You can't seem to m
74 N62NA : What's the difference now? UA isn't going to offer 3 class aircraft on LAX-EWR. AA offers up to 10 3 class 767s on the route each day. UA isn't going
75 MileHighOffice : That's a pretty solid air force. Must be a record for 757 sectors anywhere, ever? Nice to have the 767 on domestics. Wish AA had more between Califor
76 Post contains images jetBlueE90 : huh? You posted something that was wrong and I pointed out that LAX-PVG/ORD-PEK do not need the approval from the APA and that means its bothers me?
77 KELPkid : As I recall, they announced the service, and then promptly suspended it about a week before it was due to start up...instead, they ended up replacing
78 laca773 : How long will this last with fuel prices at the level they are now? What's the average load factor on LAX-DFW-LAX? That's so many flights.
79 PIEAvantiP180 : I book 10-20 flights a day at my work and recenly there are countles of times that i could not find many or any seats open on DFW to LAX flights. Lat
80 MileHighOffice : That's pretty impressive. And a lot of lift! LOL, maybe AA should put the A380 on the route! Seriously, if they can run 20 flights and fill them then
81 Post contains images N737AA : They run pretty full.....Tomorrows loads...
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...
AA 1132 LAX-MIA Divert To TUS Today? posted Mon Apr 19 2010 09:35:10 by crosswinds21
AA: New LAX-RNO ERJ Service posted Mon Feb 22 2010 10:51:30 by MAH4546
AA At LAX 1990 posted Thu Dec 31 2009 14:35:50 by Hondah35
AA EWR-LAX 762 Returning For This Month? posted Sun Mar 9 2008 17:05:24 by Tommy767
AA 1520 LAX-MIA 777 Diverted To IAH posted Thu Dec 27 2007 17:16:44 by Sflaflight
AA 136 LAX-LHR Dirverted To JFK July 12 posted Thu Jul 12 2007 13:15:55 by LTBEWR
AA 16 LAX-JFK Rego Information posted Fri Jun 1 2007 07:12:37 by Carfield
AA 169 LAX-NRT Question posted Wed Dec 6 2006 22:25:11 by BALAX
AA 738 LAX-IAD Taken Out Of Service (10/20/06) posted Tue Oct 24 2006 01:20:05 by Tommy767
AA 169 LAX-NRT Cxld 08/19/06? posted Sun Aug 20 2006 07:53:55 by BALAX