UA777lover From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 136 posts, RR: 0 Posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 13198 times:
Sad to United pulling out of Oakland. People I know used to love flying out of OAK, well, with only 1 destination and that being dbver it was only a manner of time. Sad to se how little United thinks of the huge east at paggener base. Time will tell to see if they come back. I hope they do
wedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5536 posts, RR: 5 Reply 1, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 13021 times:
Looking back to the late 1980's to the early 1990's, UA almost had a mini-hub at OAK, using most of the gates on the west side of Terminal 1, with flights to DEN, ORD, SEA, LAX, FAT, SNA and HNL. IAD didn't come into play until much later when B6 opened that flight.
Now, they've dwindled down to nothing. That's pretty sad!
fxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7029 posts, RR: 93 Reply 2, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 12599 times:
AWACSooner From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 1422 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 12534 times:
I have a feeling that OAK is gonna turn into another DAL or HOU...completely and utterly dominated by WN...not that that's a bad thing.
wedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5536 posts, RR: 5 Reply 6, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 12362 times:
Quoting AWACSooner (Reply 3): I have a feeling that OAK is gonna turn into another DAL or HOU...completely and utterly dominated by WN...not that that's a bad thing.
I think AS, HA, US and B6 will remain at OAK. NK will eventually build up OAK, giving some other airlines a run for their money. I have a feeling Volaris will go by the wayside like Taesa, Allegro Air and Azteca.
contrails15 From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1181 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 12312 times:
Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 6): I think AS, HA, US and B6 will remain at OAK. NK will eventually build up OAK, giving some other airlines a run for their money. I have a feeling Volaris will go by the wayside like Taesa, Allegro Air and Azteca.
You won't see B6 adding anymore out of OAK. With focus on SFO and LAX on the west coast, OAK is the IAD of the east now for B6.
zrs70 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 2872 posts, RR: 10 Reply 8, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 12312 times:
Will OAK still be an alternative for SFO for UA?
A couple of years ago, my UA ICN-SFO 747-400 had to land in OAK because SFO was closed due to fog. We sat on the ground in OAK for about 1/2 hour, then hopped over to SFO. That flight was about 12 minutes in the air.
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2315 posts, RR: 7 Reply 9, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 12208 times:
Quoting zrs70 (Reply 8): Will OAK still be an alternative for SFO for UA?
I think you mean an alternate airport for diversions. That's a good question. Depending on circumstances airlines use SMF, OAK, FAT or SJC as alternates. I didn't think SJC was used very much but about ten years ago I flew into SJC on AS during a huge windstorm in the Bay Area. Numerous UA 767s and 777, and one AC A320 (this was after AC dropped SJC) were on the ground; and departed for the 35 mile flight for SFO late in the evening. Domestic passenger were allowed to debark instead at SJC if they choose.
Can Tom at SJC or anyone else shed some more light on which airports are primarily designated as alternates for SFO?
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18908 posts, RR: 64 Reply 10, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 12190 times:
I remember when UA actually tried to make a stab at defending itself against WN at OAK, back in '91. They flew OAK-BUR something like a dozen times a day with mainline jets to save their presence there. It didn't work out—most of the tickets I bought were an unsustainable $29 each way—and now UA has finally succumbed to the lack of interest by passengers in using one of the Bay Area's most convenient airports. It's not like United didn't give them a chance!
Hopefully the new service on DL to LAX will be successful enough to encourage at least one major network carrier to remain at OAK along with US.
fxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7029 posts, RR: 93 Reply 11, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 12081 times:
Quoting AWACSooner (Reply 3): I have a feeling that OAK is gonna turn into another DAL or HOU...completely and utterly dominated by WN...not that that's a bad thing.
warden145 From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 428 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 11849 times:
Quoting AWACSooner (Reply 3): I have a feeling that OAK is gonna turn into another DAL or HOU...completely and utterly dominated by WN...not that that's a bad thing.
OAK's absolutely heading that way...I don't know where to find raw passenger data, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if WN handles over 50% of pax traffic out of OAK already, and it could well be higher.
Quoting BC77008 (Reply 4): And once WN decides to go international from OAK, we'll have UA threatening their employees at SFO with layoffs!
radicaldudejom From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 57 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 10878 times:
It will be interesting to see how traffic, both in passengers and airlines, at OAK is effected by the completion of the BART "extension" in the next few years. To me the biggest problem with OAK is driving there, like any airport, is usually a hassle and that bus from the Coliseum BART is sometimes just plain scary.
[Edited 2012-06-03 14:09:35]
Sometimes, your cards aren't worth a dime, if you don't lay them down.
warden145 From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 428 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 10809 times:
I still remember the "dark" days of '06 and '07 when OAK was a construction zone with a runway bolted to it and a terminal duct-taped together as an afterthought, so I will say that things have improved since then...but, my main problem with OAK is that I literally have to drive past SFO to get there. Unfortunately, the only nonstops to BUR from SFO are on UA/OO and cost an arm and a leg...
GentFromAlaska From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2077 posts, RR: 2 Reply 15, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 10729 times:
Quoting zrs70 (Reply 8): A couple of years ago, my UA ICN-SFO 747-400 had to land in OAK because SFO was closed due to fog. We sat on the ground in OAK for about 1/2 hour, then hopped over to SFO. That flight was about 12 minutes in the air.
Along the same lines UA shuttled me by vehicle once from SFO to OAK because flights out of SFO were on a long delay due to the marine layer of fog. It seems to me UA left the wrong airport as fog is a common occurrence at SFO.
Man can be taken from Alaska. Alaska can never be taken from the man.
macsog6 From Singapore, joined Jan 2010, 477 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 10045 times:
Quoting radicaldudejom (Reply 13): It will be interesting to see how traffic, both in passengers and airlines, at OAK is effected by the completion of the BART "extension" in the next few years. To me the biggest problem with OAK is driving there, like any airport, is usually a hassle and that bus from the Coliseum BART is sometimes just plain scary.
I have never been able to understand why OAK was by-passed when BART was being built as it is so close to the East Bay route. I fly into OAK quite a bit from RNO, but only when staying in the Bay area. Using OAK as a connector for an international flight out of SFO just really doesn't work as it just takes too long and, after dark, gets pretty scary as you said.
As far as UA shutting down in OAK, the port authority in Oakland did nothing to try and get them to stay just as they did not try anything with AA. OAK is busy with WN passenger flights and FedEx cargo flights and the powers at be seem to be quite happy with such situation. OAK is, from a weather perspective, a much better location, but few other carriers seem to want to go there.
Sixty Plus Years of Flying! "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things." - Saint Ex
DesertAir From Mexico, joined Jan 2006, 1389 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 8524 times:
While living in the East Bay for a number of years I flew United from Oakland to LAX and Chicago on a number of occasions. I recall when Shuttle by United served Oak. Did TED every have flights from OAk¿ I also flew AA to DFW a few times. These pull outs is testimony to the power of WN with frequent service, reasonable fares and not a bunch of fees. For a blast from the past, I recall when Martinair also had seasonable service to Oakland. A BART extention to OAK would generate traffic. The connector bus was always a hassle: slow and crowded. Waiting at night from the bus at the BART station was always interesting if not a bit scary.
slcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2456 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 8344 times:
I bet you Delta will keep OAK for a legacy carrier presence. OAK is like LGB they are airports they serve pretty much to get passengers away from WN or B6 and protect its SLC dominance. Typing in a random date in July i saw 2xCR2, 1xCr7, 1x319, and 1x320. We all know Delta did do an excellent job protecting the SLC hub from the interest WN once had for it but i think they want to keep the pressure on and OAK and LGB will remain with service for that reason alone. US with OAK I think is pretty much the same idea but a merger with AA might make them want more consolidation and closures?
HPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3665 posts, RR: 8 Reply 19, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 7958 times:
Quoting warden145 (Reply 12): OAK's absolutely heading that way...I don't know where to find raw passenger data, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if WN handles over 50% of pax traffic out of OAK already, and it could well be higher.
Probably well over 50%. A lot of the flights on the other airlines are on RJ equipment in any case, so WN probably beats them out on seats AND flights.
Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 18): US with OAK I think is pretty much the same idea but a merger with AA might make them want more consolidation and closures?
Neither US nor AA has a hub in the Bay Area and neither is particularly huge at SFO so I don't think there would be much benefit in consolidating that much. Unless, of course, they decide to retrench and turn SJC into the area's Oneworld focus city...throw in the AS codeshare and the old AA frequent flyer base and that could be interesting.
AirCalSNA From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 270 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 7939 times:
I flew out of OAK about a month ago and it looked like they have built piers to bring the BART tracks into the airport. No?
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18908 posts, RR: 64 Reply 21, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 7849 times:
Quoting macsog6 (Reply 16): I have never been able to understand why OAK was by-passed when BART was being built as it is so close to the East Bay route.
The BART District was formed in 1958 with the intention of moving commuters off the freeways. The first southern line opened in '74(?) and only went as far south as Fremont. OAK would have been a huge and unnecessary diversion.
HPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3665 posts, RR: 8 Reply 22, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 7772 times:
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 21): The BART District was formed in 1958 with the intention of moving commuters off the freeways. The first southern line opened in '74(?) and only went as far south as Fremont. OAK would have been a huge and unnecessary diversion.
I don't see what you mean as OAK is far north of Fremont.
AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18908 posts, RR: 64 Reply 23, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 7421 times:
Quoting HPRamper (Reply 22): I don't see what you mean as OAK is far north of Fremont.
Correct, on the way to downtown Oakland and San Francisco.
legacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 1844 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 6968 times:
They are not building BART into OAK. They are building a people mover system from the BART station to OAK. One more thing, you need to pay extra for that service. So, you will pay for your BART ride and then transfer to the people mover system. Waste of money, IMO.
At least at SFO, the BART trains actually go to the airport.
John@SFO
25 slcdeltarumd11: Sad to see UA leave OAK but i can easily see why. With a merger of AA and US i think they will want to close some stations. OAK might not be the best
26 nethkt: RIP OAK, so long. I don't think OAK is profitable for UA given that their hub SFO is located so closeby. I hope SJC stays though, I hope the number of
27 AirCalSNA: Good point. I also recently rode the people-mover system at SFO and found it to be really frequent and fast (and free).
28 AeroWesty: Hat tip to a poster on another board, for posterity's sake ... UA726, the final UA flight out of OAK to DEN (on a 757, even!) got diverted to Cheyenne
29 RWA380: I was living in San Francisco at this time frame, and used OAK as an easier way to get out of the bay area. I hated all the construction, and wished
30 legacyins: That's the point, you need to pay on top of the BART fare. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...i?f=/c/a/2009/12/10/MNOE1B2FAE.DTL
31 UA735WL: I fly quite frequently to the Bay Area from AUS, and have been noting OAK's decline (for lack of a better word) with legacy/full service carriers. Unt
32 AA767400: It could go either way. With lower cost structures, it might stick around. Stranger things have happened. As far as being a complicated merger, no do
33 radicaldudejom: The train to the airport is about half built. Most of the columns along the road have been built but the tracks have not been laid on top of them yet.
34 RWA380: At one time OAK also served as the "alternate" airport for the Bay Area by International carriers, MP comes to mind, and wasn't there going to be some
35 reality: You're forgetting that you pay a premium BART fare to go to SFO. For example, the one-way fare from Montgomery to SFO is $8.10. The fare from Montgom
36 toxtethogrady: Supposedly, OAK-DEN was running in excess of 80% load factors, yet UA says it is not a moneymaker. Were the fares really that low?
37 olddominion727: you are correct. and please don't forget the OAK-ONT, OAK-BUR flights on the 732's during the mid 80's. I had family down there. I only flew to BUR o
38 olddominion727: I was on an NWA flight about 5 years ago NRTSFO. It was still a 747 at the time and we diverted to SMF. I think it was because NWA didn't have the gro
39 Lono: I remember UA had a scheduled SFO - OAK flight back in the 70's /80's. It was a popular mileage building flight as I recall.
40 zrs70: I don't think UA had a milage program in the 70's!
41 Byrdluvs747: Correct. UA launched Mileage Plus less than one week after AA launched AAdvantage in May of 1981.
42 jamake1: Indeed. At the time, most airlines including UA offered a minimum of 500 miles per segment. UA operated ORD-OAK-SFO and DEN-OAK-SFO flights during th
43 RWA380: Refer to my reply number 29, yes fares from OAK were almost always cheaper, by half often times. When I lived in San Francisco, I'd almost always tak
44 CV880: Yes, and it's only $4.10 to Millbrae Station, across the 101 Freeway from SFO. This is the classic boondoggle of SF Politics. It cost an additional $
45 AeroWesty: Myself and hundreds of others used those flights to qualify for triple miles in 1988!
46 floorrunner: PE never flew to JFK. They flew to EWR.
47 ScottB: It already is and has been for several years. WN carried 73.6% of passengers at OAK from March 2011 through February 2012. At the traffic peak for OA
48 Lono: Didn't say they had mileage plan in the 70's..... Also the OAK-SFO flight was a good non-rev flight
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 136 posts, 
From Singapore, joined Jan 2010, 477 posts, 
From Mexico, joined Jan 2006, 1389 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
