Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA EWR-LAX/SFO Going To 14 Daily Each  
User currently offlinegoldenjet707 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 83 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 10 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 12465 times:

Per Airlinerroute UA is going to go from six daily EWR-LAX to 14 daily by summer 2013. Same goes for EWR-SFO.

89 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 12460 times:

That's they're answer VX entering EWR.

User currently onlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1718 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 12409 times:

Being discussed in conjunction with these 2 threads:

OAG Changes 12/21/2012:AA/BA/B6/DL/F9/NKUA/US (by enilria Dec 18 2012 in Civil Aviation)

EWR For Sale On Virgin America (by dwcontroller Dec 10 2012 in Civil Aviation)


User currently offlinegoldenjet707 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 12366 times:

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 2):

Me thinks it still qualifies for having it's own thread.


User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 12289 times:

Quoting goldenjet707 (Reply 3):

I agree, since it really focuses on what UA is doing in response to VX, and maybe overreacting a little bit? I mean I know that an airline wants to defend their turf, but they obviously have a reason for only flying 6 flights a day, and fleet planning obviously isn't an issue. I'm just curious as to what point at which it becomes worth it to bleed money on a route (or two) just to not have to coexist.


User currently onlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6660 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 12164 times:

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 4):
I agree, since it really focuses on what UA is doing in response to VX, and maybe overreacting a little bit?

UA has already done this on ORD-SFO when VX entered: they upped it to 14-16 times a day or something like that.

EWR-LAX/SFO does not need this kind of frequency -- especially with PS over at JFK. It will be interesting of what types of aircraft they will use. I'm sure elites will love this as even with the recent 757 and 767 adds on these routes it's almost impossible ot upgrade.



"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16883 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 11971 times:

While in the long run this move is meant to stiffle competition and keep EWR's fares the highest in the Nation, short term if you travel EWR-California this fantastic news. Lots of new options, and as mentioned more opportunities for upgrades which have historically been difficult on these routes even during the CO years. I've traveled JFK-SFO/LAX on UA P.S. a few times since the merger just because I couldn't get any rewards or upgrades on the flights from EWR to LAX/SFO.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9666 posts, RR: 52
Reply 7, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 11900 times:

Hourly service on 737s during peak times will provide options, although I can't imagine anyone demanding that much frequency on a 6 hour route. The flights every half hour EWR-LAX/SFO require 3-4 redeyes back for airplane repositioning which is excessive in my mind. 4 SFO-EWR redeyes is a waste of 737s.

That's a lot of capacity. If they had more PMCO 752s, they could beat VX with a better product, but the A319s and 738s won't compete up front with VX.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently onlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17079 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 11846 times:

Quoting goldenjet707 (Thread starter):
Per Airlinerroute UA is going to go from six daily EWR-LAX to 14 daily by summer 2013. Same goes for EWR-SFO.



Seriously, doubling the frequency/capacity just because VX enters with 3 daily flights? 14 daily flights to LAX sounds crazy.

The war is on...



Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1842 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days ago) and read 11762 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Welcome to the free market folks! VX has a better product IMO but folks may yet again opt for saving $3.00 r/t and fly UA   More folks I know though are willing to pay a bit more for better service. The airlines seem to be trying to capture that with "un-bundled" things such as better meal options, Y+ etc.

User currently offlineairzim From Zimbabwe, joined Jun 2001, 1215 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days ago) and read 11718 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 7):
The flights every half hour EWR-LAX/SFO require 3-4 redeyes back for airplane repositioning which is excessive in my mind.

Who says they're going back to EWR? You can send those 737's and A320's anywhere in the system from SFO. The beauty have having a hub at both ends.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16883 posts, RR: 51
Reply 11, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days ago) and read 11610 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 7):
That's a lot of capacity. If they had more PMCO 752s, they could beat VX with a better product,



I think eventually they will do this, I remember when CO replaced their A300s on EWR-LAX/SFO with 3x daily DC-10s from EWR to LAX and SFO with their new BusinessFirst cabins. If they can replace a couple more Trans-Atlantic 757 routes with 763s and replace the sCO BusinessFirst equipped 757s operating EWR-Florida with sUA 757s they might have enough to operate 9 daily each EWR-LAX and EWR-SFO. Also keep in mind UA's PS services are going to be reconfigured to look identical to sCO's 757s, only with a larger BusinessFirst cabin. They should mix in the JFK and EWR 757s, some sCO 757s operate from JFK and some sUA PS 757s operate from EWR.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6161 posts, RR: 24
Reply 12, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days ago) and read 11600 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 7):
If they had more PMCO 752s, they could beat VX with a better product

IF...But they don't have more

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 7):
The flights every half hour EWR-LAX/SFO require 3-4 redeyes back for airplane repositioning which is excessive in my mind.

Flight SFO-EWR are hourly till 5pm (example 6.10.13) and your correct, 4 red-eyes from SFO and 2 red-eyes from LAX.

Quoting B747forever (Reply 8):
Seriously, doubling the frequency/capacity just because VX enters with 3 daily flights? 14 daily flights to LAX sounds crazy.

It's a little of both. This is free market and a response to VX. However load to EWR from the West Coast hubs are really heavy as it is and a increase could have been warranted before VX decided to join the fray.



Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 9):
Welcome to the free market folks! VX has a better product IMO but folks may yet again opt for saving $3.00 r/t and fly UA  

Or heaven to bid cheaper tickets to travel to roughly 50 more destinations from LAX and SFO that VX doesn't offer!



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently onlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17079 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days ago) and read 11558 times:

Quoting as739x (Reply 12):
However load to EWR from the West Coast hubs are really heavy as it is and a increase could have been warranted before VX decided to join the fray.



Yes, but you normally do not increase the frequency from 6 daily to 14 daily flights at once.



Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently onlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6660 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days ago) and read 11560 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 7):
Hourly service on 737s during peak times will provide options, although I can't imagine anyone demanding that much frequency on a 6 hour route. The flights every half hour EWR-LAX/SFO require 3-4 redeyes back for airplane repositioning which is excessive in my mind. 4 SFO-EWR redeyes is a waste of 737s.

These are dummy schedules. UA will update them as the adjusted date gets closer. Doubt it will be 12x 737



"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6161 posts, RR: 24
Reply 15, posted (1 year 10 months 6 days ago) and read 11373 times:

Quoting B747forever (Reply 13):

When was the last time UA operated 6 daily SFO-EWR?? There are 9 scheduled tomorrow. Even 10 scheduled on X-mas day when there is a schedule reduction.

Actually summer schedule was roughly 10-12 last summer from SFO. Also, none of these new flights are wide-body's compared to last summer that has a few 767's. The actual seat increase this summer is not as high as one would believe.

Example June 6, 2013 SFO-EWR 10 x 737-800, 1 x 319, 5 x 320's
LAX-EWR 13 x 737-800, 1 x 757

There are not even any 739's mixed in here. So this is a pure frequency thing, which we all know is how US airlines operate.



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlineenilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7320 posts, RR: 14
Reply 16, posted (1 year 10 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 11307 times:

I'll say what I've said on the other threads. I've been watching the OAG for a very long time and I've never seen such a ridiculously large frequency increase in a market due to competitive incursion. There have been cases where DL/NW have retaliated on ancillary routes for new competitors, but I've never seen it this bad in the routes added. I have a few takeaways.

1) to spend this much money, UA must mint money on these routes
2) this will dramatically increase their cost by adding that many flights and probably lower their revenue due to matching VX. I would assume that means the route will now lose money.
3) to sabotage the profitability of their own route to run out a competitor and (I'm sure) reverse it all after VX is bloodied and gone is extremely anti-competitive
4) if the govt is going to allow us to only have 4 airlines in the USA, they can no longer allow this type of behavior. It's time for the govt to take a tougher stand.
5) before it was the equivalent of Kroger opening a new store across from the new Safeway market. This is the equivalent of opening new Krogers on all sides of the Safeway to block access to their parking lot. A couple of extra flights is rentable, a 75% frequency increase in markets already well-served is over the line.
6) given UA's childish punishment of Houston for supporting competition to them at HOU, this is unsurprising, but it is time to investigate UA for anticompetitive behavior. They are the largest airline after all.


User currently onlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17079 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (1 year 10 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 11305 times:

Quoting as739x (Reply 15):

I am talking about LAX-EWR which is different to SFO-EWR.



Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently offlineLHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1600 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (1 year 10 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 11238 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 14):
These are dummy schedules. UA will update them as the adjusted date gets closer. Doubt it will be 12x 737

I also wouldn't be surprised to see some eliminated/combined in addition to equipment swaps. I figure they will only end up flying 10-12x per day on any kind of consistent basis, especially if they upgauge more than a couple a day.


User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6161 posts, RR: 24
Reply 19, posted (1 year 10 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 11239 times:

Quoting B747forever (Reply 17):
I am talking about LAX-EWR which is different to SFO-EWR.

That being said. As I stated above, the overall increase is with smaller aircraft. So the seat increase is not as much as one would be led to believe.

And to respond to your Reply 13. When new competition comes into your market, yes you do increase like this normally.

As Enilria just posted, there are the reason. And UA and AA both did this against VX in both ORD and DFW markets. NW uses this method for years. This is normal to protect turf.



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently onlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6660 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (1 year 10 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 11183 times:

Quoting as739x (Reply 15):
When was the last time UA operated 6 daily SFO-EWR?? There are 9 scheduled tomorrow. Even 10 scheduled on X-mas day when there is a schedule reduction.

When CO and UA were merging in Summer 2011 legacy UA flew 4-5 daily on SFO-EWR whereas CO flew 4-6 daily. Since the merger they've had SFO-EWR on 9-10x a day.

Quoting as739x (Reply 15):
Example June 6, 2013 SFO-EWR 10 x 737-800, 1 x 319, 5 x 320's
LAX-EWR 13 x 737-800, 1 x 757

Again, you are looking too far in advance. These are dummy schedules.

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 18):
I also wouldn't be surprised to see some eliminated/combined in addition to equipment swaps. I figure they will only end up flying 10-12x per day on any kind of consistent basis, especially if they upgauge more than a couple a day.

Probably quite a bit of 319/320, 738, pre-merger UA 757, ex-CO 757, and 787 if I had to guess.



"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
User currently offlineLHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1600 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (1 year 10 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 11111 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 20):
Probably quite a bit of 319/320, 738, pre-merger UA 757, ex-CO 757, and 787 if I had to guess.

Oh no doubt! Probably a bit of everything at some point.


User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21544 posts, RR: 59
Reply 22, posted (1 year 10 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 11018 times:

This should open up a lot of award seats this summer. Usually, LAX-EWR is the sticky wicket when trying to get to the EU from LAX. With so many flights, it benefits the LAX FF base greatly. That's assuming the airline doesn't hoard the seats anyway and fly the planes at 60% LF...


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently onlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17079 posts, RR: 10
Reply 23, posted (1 year 10 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 10996 times:

Quoting as739x (Reply 19):
13. When new competition comes into your market, yes you do increase like this normally.



I know that it is normal for the established carrier to dump capacity, but this seems really excessive.



Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6161 posts, RR: 24
Reply 24, posted (1 year 10 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 10918 times:

Quoting B747forever (Reply 23):

I'll leave you to your opinion

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 20):
Again, you are looking too far in advance. These are dummy schedules.

Meaning they can add larger aircraft as need, meaning the increase incapacity is warranted.



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
25 B747forever : I would love to have an example of other city pairs that got that much frequency/capacity increase when an competitor entered the market, such as ORD
26 tommy767 : No, it's simply a placeholder until the date gets closer....it's common sense.
27 RDH3E : In VX's current state, I'd say it was probably extremely arrogant of them to try this. Unless they were naive enough to think this wouldn't happen, w
28 as739x : SFO-ORD when VX entered the markets 10 daily to 17 daily by UA 4/20/11: 06:00 SFO 12:10 ORD UA 664 United Airlines 763 00 4hrs 10mins 08:50 SFO 14:56
29 B747forever : That is also a very large increase, very much comparable to the current one. However, isnt UA back to about 12 daily flights after failing to drive a
30 as739x : 12/20/13 SFO-ORD 14 flights And yes VX has not pulled from the market or expanded in the market, but only they know what their numbers are on the rout
31 B747forever : Correct, but the point with flooding the market is to try to make the competitor to pull out of the route, which VX obviously didnt do at ORD. I am c
32 as739x : Exactly the point!!
33 B747forever : Good then. Will be interesting to see how long UA will keep the frequency at 14 daily flights to LAX. Such large capacity dump will also affect them
34 RDH3E : Well I think that's really a seasonal reduction, not really a draw down. Next summer is 16x for the day I checked.
35 DolphinAir747 : Strategy or not, I need to fly this route 5 times or so next year so this is great news!
36 as739x : Yep. winter schedule. I didn't look into next summers schedule. Thanks for looking that up!
37 DocLightning : And then people wonder why NYC airspace is so congested. Could it have to do with the fact that 50 aircraft fly NYC-SFO alone every day? Now add up al
38 B747forever : Really doesnt matter from where an aircraft comes from, be it 50 aircraft from LHR or PHL. If you want to manage the congestion, put a limit on the n
39 airzim : At that stage length its going to be harder to sustain. jetBlue has found similar issues with transcon flying, you need to drive good RASM to keep th
40 gigneil : It is not even REMOTELY the same thing. United is in no way preventing passengers from boarding a VX plane. No it isn't. Responding to competition is
41 Post contains links something : If passengers were smart, which they aren't, they would try to exclusively fly Virgin, thereby ruining UA strategy and making sure low fares and high
42 jfklganyc : Airspace wont be more crowded....EWR is slot controlled. Which, as I said in the other thread, really makes this adjustment STUPID, What are they cutt
43 Post contains images N62NA : I started off in the OAG thread on this by posting that this kind of frequency is insane. Yep, doesn't require this amount of frequency. LAX will be a
44 ikramerica : Well, as a UA customer, I've felt that EWR-LAX was underserved. UA was trying to push more international connections through IAD, ORD and IAH, making
45 something : Which is exactly why proving this is near impossible. In Germany, all gas station raise or lower their prices almost simultaneously - and they have y
46 N62NA : I don't think that's how the tax laws work - at least here in the USA. You take all your revenue, deduct all expenses, deduct any tax credits and tha
47 Post contains links STT757 : I've been on extremely long Trans-Cons, SEA-EWR, and I've been on surprising quick flights. For example today UA #1127 flew SFO-EWR in 4.16 hrs. http
48 Post contains links and images N62NA : You're being rather disingenuous - you know as well as I do that the 4 hour 16 minute flight you used as an example was due to very strong west to ea
49 STT757 : The 738 is fine, both upfront and in the back. I've done LAX, SFO, SEA, SAN and LAS on the 73NGs (738s, 737-900ERs) from EWR.[Edited 2012-12-19 16:23:
50 boilerla : So what are you saying? Eveyr transcon should be on a PS style product? The demand isn't there. Proof? No other airline has done it except for JFK. U
51 N62NA : Well, yeah, you've inadvertently said what all the EWR-lovers out there hate to hear: EWR can't support premium services, invariably the airlines wil
52 caljn : I can just see you sitting before your computer rubbing your hands together. Jeez, get over your obsession with EWR. Is it really that important that
53 N62NA : Dumb comment. If you want to attack me personally, go ahead, but please do it via the excellent messaging system they have here on a.net, and not in
54 panam330 : Until you factor in MileagePlus miles, which you obviously don't earn on VX. Many will put their money where their mouth is. But I'm willing to bet t
55 gigneil : Here's why they can't do it to EWR: Its a hub. They need butts in seats, to send aloft to their many further destinations. In order to do that, they n
56 klwright69 : This is US domestic flying. Nothing really qualifies as "luxurious." Besides I think the choice of aircraft is just temporary until the schedules are
57 tommy767 : Again, as I said if a placeholder in the UA schedule is titled "738" or "319" it's only temporary until the date getes closer. The type of aircraft w
58 STT757 : That's cheap, they wanted $17.95 for Wifi on my last PS JFK-SFO flight.
59 tommy767 : No, it's not. It's a rip off.
60 RDH3E : Let's put this all in context. $8 is a ripoff for: Letting you watch live television, keeping up with current events and ensuring you get to watch wh
61 tommy767 : It's a rip off because other airlines such as B6 and DL will give you satellite TV for free.
62 N62NA : Yep - but VX just needs to fill 8 F seats per flight. Shouldn't be that hard in an area of over 10 million people. Which leaves the entire NJ half of
63 boilerla : True, but VX is still losing money hand over fist. Unless they trim their premium product down or figure out how to make money with their premium pro
64 something : JetBlue is still better. They have free checked bags, free tv, more legroom, snacks and drinks, and one of the best websites in the industry. It feel
65 kgaiflyer : Last time I flew the route (December 1st) the dinner-hour Business-First 757 had been replaced with a 320. Btw, some Business-First 757s are now flyi
66 LHCVG : So do you find it more "loud and hip" than VS? I've never flown either so I can't compare, FWIW.
67 kgaiflyer : Very true. My BWI-SFO last Saturday was rated 6:09 (though we actually made it in 5:30). The week before, ORD-SNA took us 5 hours and change.
68 kgaiflyer : Very true. My BWI-SFO last Saturday was rated 6:09 (though we actually made it in 5:30). The week before, ORD-SNA took us 5 hours and change.
69 Post contains links Flytravel : One thing that I don't get is why VX focuses at LAX, and the approach of doing 3x LAX and 3x SFO. Why not just focus on one of the two with better fr
70 RDH3E : "All those Star Alliance Travelers", like who? They can get to the west coast non-stop from almost every *A hub in Europe. There is no need for them
71 dartland : The salient point here is that UA can afford to do this because of connecting power at EWR. The seat dumping will not deteriorate their yields nearly
72 Post contains links STT757 : How many channels on VX? UA it's over 95 + 8 pre recorded programing. VX http://virginamerica.com/vx/booking/satellite-tv UA http://www.united.com/CM
73 klwright69 : It's called making an illustration. How do you know what UA "needs" in any given market? You can't say UA doesn't need X number of flights in any giv
74 N62NA : This: Conflicts with this: I happen to agree with dartland on this one (above). A passenger in Europe can go to only two of the Star Alliance cities i
75 gigneil : Delta doesn't give you satellite TV for free. And what are they putting on EWR-LAX/SFO? That's what we're talking about. And VX is going directly out
76 tommy767 : Yes 18 free channels on dish equipped aircraft.
77 SHAQ : That's the joy of free-market. VX is very dumb by going head to head with UA in this route. The first error. Flying to LAX and SFO instead of choosing
78 Post contains images N62NA : A crummy 1x daily 738. Your comment about "what we're talking about" doesn't take into account.what we're talking about in this thread! [Edited 2012-
79 spiritair97 : I got it free when I flew them to the Bahamas over the summer on a 737-700.
80 gigneil : Yes it does. You were like OMG LOOK WHAT AA HAS ON JFK. Well, UA has a VERY competitive product on JFK as well. NS
81 dartland : On the 75E's which run these routes exclusively, it is an AVOD system with paid short and long programming. The only thing free are 2 channels of loo
82 N62NA : Yes, look at what AA (will soon have) along with what DL and UA have over at JFK flying to LAX/SFO. And the other half of the NY Metro Area (EWR) wil
83 spiritair97 : True, didn't think about what we were actually talking about! :p Silly me! Either way, I wish VX the best of luck....and they're gonna need it! I hav
84 B747forever : Also LX via ZRH to LAX.
85 Post contains images N62NA : Oh yeah, I keep forgetting about them! Still, though, I think my point is a good one.
86 B747forever : And then you have LAX-LHR on UA and NZ that connects to other star alliance members flights out of LHR.
87 Post contains images N62NA : Uh oh... My position is eroding! Just to restate my point, if you don't live close to LHR, ZRH, MUC or FRA and instead live closer to one of those sm
88 Post contains images B747forever : Oh one more, you could kind of count TK also as it captures some European traffic to LAX. Also remember, we are still only talking about star carrier
89 ikramerica : More true now that bmi is gone. But still from LAX last year my wife and I flew LAX LHR ZRH on UA/LX and returned VCE MUN LAX on LH. we did this to a
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...
UA Flight LAX-LHR Diverted To BOS-security 7/26 posted Tue Jul 26 2005 13:38:12 by LTBEWR
UA JFK-LAX/SFO Business Class? posted Thu Jan 15 2004 19:20:54 by Slcdeltarumd11
Air Malta Going To Paris Daily As Of Summer 2003 posted Tue Oct 8 2002 02:00:56 by BBADXB
How To Get UA Upgrade LAX-JFK Or EWR posted Wed Oct 6 2004 09:10:04 by Gkpetery
UA Ordered To Repay DEN Bonds, Not JFK,LAX,SFO posted Wed Mar 31 2004 01:32:15 by Alphascan
Lax Going To Be A UA Hub posted Tue Apr 27 1999 07:50:22 by Mikey
Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why? posted Tue Dec 11 2012 15:29:52 by g500
Will JetBlue A321 Have The Legs To Fly JFK-LAX/SFO posted Mon Sep 24 2012 17:50:54 by doulasc
Will AA's A321 Have The Legs To Fly JFK-LAX/SFO? posted Mon Sep 24 2012 12:53:35 by mozart
Garuda And China Airlines Codeshare To LAX & SFO posted Wed Aug 29 2012 08:13:23 by LAXintl