This was a popular route at one time. During the mid 80s, Eastern had a SAN-ONT-ATL flight
on a 757. About an hour after that flight landed in ONT from SAN, Delta stopped in ONT from
SAN with a 762. That flight also continued to ATL.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22077 posts, RR: 51 Reply 5, posted (4 months 9 hours ago) and read 5078 times:
Filling the flight is not the issue, DL always had decent loads, but instead its a matter of the revenue they can get.
As one can imagine ONT will not drive the same premiums one can generate over at LAX due to the nature of its traffic mix.
Btw - this is not the sole new(resumed) route at ONT this year. SWA brought ONT-RNO back two weeks ago.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Beardown91737 From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 215 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (4 months 7 hours ago) and read 4545 times:
Well for the few months it lasts, it will be a positive thing to be able to get to Europe, South America, and even Dubai, Lagos, and Johannesburg with just one connection. It also opens up over 100 destinations in the Eastern US which DL just can't service from SLC.
There still is one mainline SLC but I don't know if it is daily. It looks like there will be 2 mainline for summer/fall.
The WN service to RNO is also seasonal and ends mid-March.
KC135Hydraulics From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 165 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (4 months 5 hours ago) and read 4323 times:
Ontario really is an excellent alternative to LAX. I still don't understand why it has been dying. Also, ontario's parking lot situation is excellent. They also have a cell phone waiting lot!
kkephart13 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (4 months 5 hours ago) and read 4253 times:
Quoting KC135Hydraulics (Reply 16): Ontario really is an excellent alternative to LAX. I still don't understand why it has been dying. Also, ontario's parking lot situation is excellent. They also have a cell phone waiting lot!
Your right with the parking situation, but its killer expensive. The lots across the terminal are like 20+ a day...
EVERYTHING i type on here, is the opinion of ME and not of any airline/company.
Yes but long term parking is only $8/ day and it has a shuttle. Better still the wife drops me off and picks me up and that costs $0/day. Ontario simply rocks.
dtwlax From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 688 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (4 months 3 hours ago) and read 4056 times:
Quoting KC135Hydraulics (Reply 16): Ontario really is an excellent alternative to LAX. I still don't understand why it has been dying. Also, ontario's parking lot situation is excellent. They also have a cell phone waiting lot!
Excellent alternative for people from the Inland Empire. But with LAX and SNA, ONT cannot compete.
SurfandSnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2588 posts, RR: 31 Reply 21, posted (4 months 1 hour ago) and read 3843 times:
Wow, I guess DL's ATL-ONT route actually did go [summer] seasonal; rather than getting cut entirely. Hopefully the return of this, and WN's recent addition of seasonal ONT-RNO, are signs that things are starting to get better - or at the very least, not continuing to get worse - in the Inland Empire. In fact, this recent article indeed states that the area is slowly but steadily getting better after its calamitous economic decline from the housing crisis and recession:
ONT is a beautiful facility, and truly the only existing major commercial airport in Greater Los Angeles that can support much in the way of future growth. Whilst fellow secondary area airport BUR continues its precipitous decline, it seems ONT's fortunes have finally begun to improve. It doesn't seem like AS has any interest in offering ONT-Hawaii service, but I wonder if WN will consider it. I also wonder if Mexicans LCCs, particularly WN's transborder partner Y4, have looked at serving this airport, or if ULCCs like F9 and/or NK might be interested. Hopefully the worst is behind ONT and the future is bright: regardless of who manages/controls the airport!
Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
kkephart13 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (4 months 1 hour ago) and read 3800 times:
Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 21): Wow, I guess DL's ATL-ONT route actually did go [summer] seasonal; rather than getting cut entirely. Hopefully the return of this, and WN's recent addition of seasonal ONT-RNO, are signs that things are starting to get better - or at the very least, not continuing to get worse - in the Inland Empire. In fact, this recent article indeed states that the area is slowly but steadily getting better after its calamitous economic decline from the housing crisis and recession:
Your right. Hopefully they go from seasonal to year round service.
However wasnt there talk at one point that LAWA was going to consolidate everyone over to T-4 and close T-2??
EVERYTHING i type on here, is the opinion of ME and not of any airline/company.
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 23, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1924 times:
On a side note to this subject, I don't get why LAWA gets so much flak for ONT's performance. LAWA has invested millions upon millions and built a really lovely new terminal complex, in the hopes of driving traffic. During the heady 90s and early Aughts, ONT's traffic was doing great. The combination of the severe economic hit the Inland Empire has taken, along with the new realities for airlines in the last 12 years, means that ONT isn't going anywhere from where it is until the economic structure around it changes.
Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 4): This was a popular route at one time. During the mid 80s, Eastern had a SAN-ONT-ATL flight on a 757. About an hour after that flight landed in ONT from SAN, Delta stopped in ONT from
SAN with a 762. That flight also continued to ATL.
DL had 767s on ATL-ONT through into the middle of the last decade, at least. Indeed, they used to use the only jetway at ONT for it when the old terminals were still in use.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 5): As one can imagine ONT will not drive the same premiums one can generate over at LAX due to the nature of its traffic mix.
Absolutely. Its discount alternative pull from SAN, SNA and BUR, and local traffic that tends to be lower yield.
For you, perhaps. And it is a lovely airport, that LAWA built, though I miss the stained glass window from the old terminals.
For much of the area, ONT is as isolated or even more isolated than SNA - which is surrounded by wealthy people and a good number of businesses. Most of the higher yield traffic that look at alternatives to LAX will go to SNA, BUR or even SBA.
Not enough money in the area to drive yields. And its far.
Quoting dtwlax (Reply 20): Excellent alternative for people from the Inland Empire. But with LAX and SNA, ONT cannot compete.
Don't forget BUR, which is close to a lot of an area that would consider ONT an alternative to LAX. Far better yield mix at BUR.
Quoting kkephart13 (Reply 22): However wasnt there talk at one point that LAWA was going to consolidate everyone over to T-4 and close T-2??
That wouldn't make a ton of sense, as LAWA's master plan includes 2 additional terminals if ONT can ever get the traffic. Makes no sense to mothball a perfectly usable building.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
apodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 3642 posts, RR: 6 Reply 26, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1959 times:
Quoting mhkansan (Reply 17): Quoting MDW22L31C (Reply 15):
It would be great see UA re-start ONT-ORD.
I wonder if AA would consider it with the E175s? I believe AA used to do it with an 80 or perhaps a fokker.
Both AA and UA have operated the route in the past. Back in 1985 when I was just a kid we went from BOS-ONT on AA via ORD, and I remember getting stuck in ground traffic after landing in ORD. The taxi in was so bad we had to sprint from K to H to make our connection. We did luckily, but our bags didn't. I believe it was on an MD-80 back then. Can't remember if UA ran this with a 727 or a 737 though.
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2315 posts, RR: 7 Reply 27, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1830 times:
Quoting N1120A (Reply 25): Quoting psa1011 (Reply 24):
Any chance of AS starting ONT-HNL/OGG? DL could codeshare.
Why, when DL has LAX service?
So. DL has SEA-HNL service and so does AS. DL has (or did have) SFO-HNL but that didn't stop AS from adding OAK and SJC to Hawaii.
ONT is quite a bit away from LAX. Not everyone wants to drive and pay to park when there is an airport nearby. That area supports a large population base. I think AS could be successful with ONT-Hawaii.
Deltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8600 posts, RR: 8 Reply 28, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1589 times:
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 27): DL has (or did have) SFO-HNL but that didn't stop AS from adding OAK and SJC to Hawaii.
Delta still has 1 flight between SFO-HNL....think its a 752
"Oh look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky! Look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky!" LM 1922-2011 Go Dawgs! G.A.T.A.
Beardown91737 From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 215 posts, RR: 0 Reply 31, posted (3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1352 times:
Quoting apodino (Reply 26): Can't remember if UA ran this with a 727 or a 737 though.
ORD-ONT was 4x 733, or sometimes 3x 733 and 1x 722. I remember this being 5x a day in the mid 1990s (at a time when AA also flew 4-5x and WN 1x to MDW), but I can't find anything to back that up.
Quoting kkephart13 (Reply 22): However wasnt there talk at one point that LAWA was going to consolidate everyone over to T-4 and close T-2??
LAWA proposed this in 2009 or maybe early 2010, but the airlines did not want to because they thought that it would cost more to move out of T2 and then back in when the recession ended. Maybe they only thought the recession would last a few months. Additionally, there would have been UA, DL, and CO moving, and there wasn't ticket counter space in T4 for all of them to squeeze in with WN, US, and AA.
Quoting N1120A (Reply 23): LAWA's master plan includes 2 additional terminals
Those aren't on anyone's radar anymore.
Quoting N1120A (Reply 23): Don't forget BUR, which is close to a lot of an area that would consider ONT an alternative to LAX. Far better yield mix at BUR.
Deciding between BUR and ONT would depend on where you live or work. They are 50 miles apart. ONT is the busier airport so BUR offers little for anyone that lives closer to ONT, and passengers don't care about the yield.
RWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2167 posts, RR: 4 Reply 33, posted (3 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1189 times:
Quoting KC135Hydraulics (Reply 16): Ontario really is an excellent alternative to LAX. I still don't understand why it has been dying.
If there were numerous options from ONT, I think people would eventually use them again, but I think it's really a ketch 22.
Quoting psa1011 (Reply 24): Any chance of AS starting ONT-HNL/OGG? DL could codeshare
I think if AS had though it to be a viable market, they would be operating flights by now. I see ONT as a good option for G4 to HNL and/or OGG. It's too bad that ONT isn't really a viable alternate to the touristy area of Los Angeles, and is hard to market it as such. Otherwise I'd think high density charters from Europe and Asia with 2-3 x weekly schedule on 744's would work. If that was the case, I'd speculate we could have a ULCC with a decent-significant presence as well. It'll come back.
Next Flights: AS PDX-SEA-KOA on DH4/738 in F, HA KOA-OGG on 717 in Y, AS OGG-PDX on 738 in F
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22077 posts, RR: 51 Reply 34, posted (3 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1160 times:
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 27): ONT is quite a bit away from LAX. Not everyone wants to drive and pay to park when there is an airport nearby. That area supports a large population base. I think AS could be successful with ONT-Hawaii.
It been tried and failed about 6 times.
Way back early 1980s UA tried with its DC-8-70s.
Then in the 1990s ATA on L-1011s.
Then in 2003 Hawaiian tried ONT and only lasted 2-years.
Aloha also almost moved in, but instead settled on SNA and BUR.
And finally ATA tried it again with a daily 737 in cooperation with Southwest in 2006. That also only lasted 1-year
Considering all these were in better economically booming times for the inland empire, I'm sure things would be even worse today.
Quoting Beardown91737 (Reply 31): LAWA proposed this in 2009 or maybe early 2010, but the airlines did not want to because they thought that it would cost more to move out of T2 and then back in when the recession ended.
In response to way to reduce per passenger cost at ONT, LAWA proposed consolidating all operations under a single roof.
There would have been substantial savings (~20%) by using a single terminal. Everything from TSA cost, to utility charges would have seen reductions without using the second terminal.
At the time airlines came out against the proposal. In hindsight it would probably have been a good action as enplanement have continued to decline.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22077 posts, RR: 51 Reply 36, posted (3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 904 times:
ATA ran 738s. Even with the help of Southwest connections, and tour packages the route flopped for them in a year.
I would not underestimate the economic realities of the Inland Empire and its negative effects on disposable consumer spending for air travel. No need to AS to look there. If they want a SoCal airport to do Hawaii, the economics would be much more compelling at SNA or BUR.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 36): No need to AS to look there. If they want a SoCal airport to do Hawaii, the economics would be much more compelling at SNA or BUR.
Except the 737-800 couldn't do it economically from either field. Last time I took a 738 to Hawaii, we took a big long take off roll, at sea level and in 40 degree temps, the 738 needs a long run to get off the ground full with people, cargo & fuel.
Next Flights: AS PDX-SEA-KOA on DH4/738 in F, HA KOA-OGG on 717 in Y, AS OGG-PDX on 738 in F
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22077 posts, RR: 51 Reply 38, posted (3 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 639 times:
Quoting RWA380 (Reply 37): I thought it was on the DC-10's....
Quoting RWA380 (Reply 37): Except the 737-800 couldn't do it economically from either field. Last time I took a 738 to Hawaii, we took a big long take off roll, at sea level and in 40 degree temps, the 738 needs a long run to get off the ground full with people, cargo & fuel.
Who said -800?
If AS really wants a LA basin launch board such as SNA or BUR, they can invest in ETOPS the -700 fleet.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
BoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2315 posts, RR: 7 Reply 39, posted (3 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 617 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 38): Who said -800?
If AS really wants a LA basin launch board such as SNA or BUR, they can invest in ETOPS the -700 fleet.
They can, but apparently AS considered it and made a business decision not to do. I think SNA-Hawaii would be a good route for AS if they had the equipment for it.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 78 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31122 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1310 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
