Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA To Launch LAX-JFK Shuttle Service  
User currently offlineoc2dc From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 410 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 27463 times:

AA announced Wednesday that it will begin hourly service between LAX and JFK starting in early 2014. Currently AA has between 8 and 10 daily frequencies. Staring in early 2014 frequencies will be increased to the low teens.

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2013-...ourly-flights-on-new-york-la-route

Clearly with this new shuttle like service, AA wont be losing too much capacity by replacing the 762's with the A321 T's.

On a side note, the article mentions there are slot restrictions at JFK and says AA will need to eliminate certain flights to accommodate the new LAX-JFK frequency. I don't know how much truth there is to that statement. I'm pretty sure AA is sitting on plenty of slots for JFK expansion.

Also interesting to note, AA will board passengers on the A321T though the L2 door. I guess that puts that debate to rest.

[Edited 2013-05-01 21:51:09]


I'm not complaining, I'm critiquing...
97 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlineKD5MDK From United States of America, joined Mar 2013, 408 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 27367 times:

I'm pretty sure the JFK slot restrictions are for peak slots. Moving to a shuttle (and spreading flights across the day) wouldn't need many more if any peak slots.

User currently offlinemesaflyguy From United States of America, joined exactly 2 years ago today! , 3338 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 27287 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'm excited to see that they will use L2 to board. That is my favorite thing about the 757s!


\________(---)________/ :) World's most beautiful aircraft: 757-200, MD-88/90, E-190, A321
User currently offlineAmerican 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3996 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 27224 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting oc2dc (Thread starter):
Staring in early 2014 frequencies will be increased to the low teens.

That means at least two red eyes per night on the East bound direction, if not three.

Increasing frequency on the route not only gives additional flexibility to business travelers, it also gives the opportunity for leisure travelers to connect on all flights to Hawaii American has out of LAX.

I'm wondering if BOS-LAX will also see the A321 once the 757 is retired later this decade, I know SFO-JFK will.
MIA-LAX maybe, but I think that one will continue to see 763s and 772s.



Ben Soriano
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26150 posts, RR: 50
Reply 4, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 27219 times:

AA is indeed tight on JFK slots - hence the deal with JetBlue couple years back.

If they need to shed slots they still have quite a few AE flights which probably don't have much value, or some low hanging fruit with single frequency domestic flights to places like LAS, SEA, MCO, TPA, SAN which likely don't mean much in the bigger network picture.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently onlineMah4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33280 posts, RR: 71
Reply 5, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 26929 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
AA is indeed tight on JFK slots - hence the deal with JetBlue couple years back.

If they need to shed slots they still have quite a few AE flights which probably don't have much value, or some low hanging fruit with single frequency domestic flights to places like LAS, SEA, MCO, TPA, SAN which likely don't mean much in the bigger network picture.
AA is not tight on slots whatsoever. Slots are easy to get outside peak and those slots the it acquired from B6 are still being used on routes like MCO, ORF and LAS. It is essentially siting on a good number of prime slots, not used for prime purposes.

While I think that short-haul might go, especially as PHL becomes an AA hub, LAS, SAN and SEA aren't going anywhere, and absolutely mean much in the bigger network picture as important markets for AA to serve from NYC. SAN has a second frequency that seem to operate somewhat inconsistently. LAS is double daily, as is MCO and, effective June, TPA. They are also absolutely critical feeder markets for Europe flights.

[Edited 2013-05-01 22:50:34]


a.
User currently offlinecivetfive From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 127 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 26819 times:

Quoting American 767 (Reply 3):

They already run 2 redeyes on LAX-JFK, one at 9:30pm and another at 11:30pm.

What I'd personally like to see is the return of the 5th, and hopefully the introduction of a 6th, frequency on SFO-JFK. The options just feel very limited right now - only 1 eastbound flight arrives in time for dinner, 2 flights leave within 65 minutes after lunch, but arrive too late for dinner, and the 4th is a decent redeye. Westbound we have 2 morning flights, then nothing for 6+ hours, then a predinner flight.

Current Schedule - Eastbound
AA24 0700 1545
AA16 1255 2145
AA20 1400 2250
AA18 2240 0740 +1

Current Schedule - Westbound
AA59 0800 1130
AA179 0930 1255
AA85 1530 0705
AA177 1800 2140

I'd love to see a 0930 eastbound, and a 12pm westbound. With the 6th, I'd love a 1530 eastbound and a 2030 westbound - let me do drinks before heading to JFK!


User currently offlinetoobz From Finland, joined Jan 2010, 810 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 26028 times:

Hourly flights on a 5-6 hour transcon..? Hope they don't lose too much money.

User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7959 posts, RR: 19
Reply 8, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 25322 times:

Quoting toobz (Reply 7):
Hourly flights on a 5-6 hour transcon..? Hope they don't lose too much money.

That's what I'm thinking....doesn't sound like a good idea to me.



Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
User currently offlineUnited_fan From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 7540 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 25138 times:

Quoting oc2dc (Thread starter):
Also interesting to note, AA will board passengers on the A321T though the L2 door. I guess that puts that debate to rest.

This keeps the 'pee-ons' from oogling the 'stars' in F.



'Empathy was yesterday...Today, you're wasting my Mother-F'ing time' - Heat.
User currently offlineAAplat4life From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 199 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 24908 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 8):
Quoting toobz (Reply 7):Hourly flights on a 5-6 hour transcon..? Hope they don't lose too much money.
That's what I'm thinking....doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

This has been expected for some time now, but I still have reservations about it being profitable enough. Perhaps DL will add some more 767s on this route, and then will see how the market responds. The CASM advantage on the A321 is going to go away quickly with only 102 seats and the labor costs of more flights. I just cannot see US management sticking to this plan after the merger unless it is profitable.


User currently offlinefun2fly From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1090 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 24710 times:

Quoting United_fan (Reply 9):
This keeps the 'pee-ons' from oogling the 'stars' in F.

Right on.

AA is going to have a the best product on the route when you look at it = brand new A321's with hourly service. Bold move on their part to get agressive again in NY after being beat up by DL and UA for the past few years. While the frequency may drop a bit after the initial hoopla, if they end up w/ 10 per day that's quite a nice setup.


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8500 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 24664 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

AA has JFK to LAX flights about every 90 minutes, sometimes hourly. I doubt AA is going to call it a "shuttle" in the Boston to LGA type of shuttle.

User currently offlinetoobz From Finland, joined Jan 2010, 810 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 24578 times:

Uhh the best? You know DL has widebody with aisle access for every seat as well. Wouldn't say AA has the best. It's a great product as well

User currently offlineJBAirwaysFan From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1042 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 24324 times:

With multiple carriers on the JFK-LAX route (or NYC-LAX in general), how much more capacity can the market take? I know it's a very lucrative market with tons of demand, but every market has a limit. What is the limit on this one?


In Loving Memory of Casey Edward Falconer; May 16, 1992-May 9, 2012
User currently offlineFSDan From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 758 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 24197 times:

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 11):
if they end up w/ 10 per day that's quite a nice setup.

That's essentially the current setup... except today they are using widebodies with much more capacity.



SEA SFO SJC LAX ONT SAN DEN IAH DFW OMA FSD MSP MSN MKE ORD DTW CVG MEM JAN BHM RSW ATL CLT BWI PHL LGA JFK MEX LIM KEF
User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3626 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 24074 times:

First thoughts:

1. I knew they would use 2L for boarding. Small, narrow F section doesnt need a conga line

2. Shuttle is interesting choice of words seeing as they will now have The Shuttle at LGA from US

3. Shuttle is a word usually associated with high frequency, all coach with a decent product, short haull service. I hope they dont brand it as a shuttle and then try to sell lie flat seats...it is just counter intuitive from a marketing point of view. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't have used Shuttle in the press release at all.

4. Slots...they have plenty of them. No cuts needed. They are down to like 90 flights. At one time, they had well over 100.


User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined exactly 14 years ago today! , 6533 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 23919 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 16):
2. Shuttle is interesting choice of words seeing as they will now have The Shuttle at LGA from US

Back in the 60s and 70s, AA operated their own shuttle BOS-LGA-DCA which they called the Jet Express


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8037 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 23773 times:

Quoting JBAirwaysFan (Reply 14):
With multiple carriers on the JFK-LAX route (or NYC-LAX in general), how much more capacity can the market take? I know it's a very lucrative market with tons of demand, but every market has a limit. What is the limit on this one?

The demand historically has always been gigantic--especially once the movie industry started to become important in the second decade of the 20th Century. Even before the airlines became important, the major American railroads had a LOT of service between New York City and Los Angeles--note that New York Central's 20th Century Limited and Pennsylvania Railroad's Broadway Limited at times synced their schedules so passengers could easily transfer to Rock Island/Southern Pacific's Golden State Limited, Santa Fe's Super Chief or Union Pacific/Chicago & Northwestern's City of Los Angeles.

When AA introduced the DC-3, it didn't take long for AA to use it on the New York City to Los Angeles route--the plane could fly from New York City to Los Angeles in 17.5 hours (including refueling stops)--less than half the time the Super Chief train needed just to travel from Chicago to Los Angeles!   Small wonder just before the American entrance into World War II, both Boeing and Douglas were developing four-engined airliners that could fly between New York City and Los Angeles faster and requiring fewer fuel stops.

In my humble opinion, it was the burgeoning Los Angeles-New York City route that drove the development of the Douglas DC-6/7/8, the Lockheed Constellation, and the Boeing 707. The fact in 2013 you have multiple airlines flying many flights per day between LAX and JFK shows how strong this route is even now. AA's decision to increase the flight frequency between JFK and LAX--especially with the impending arrival of the A321 models--continues this trend.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11973 posts, RR: 62
Reply 19, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 23527 times:

Interesting - and to be expected.

Although this still portends a substantial reduction in capacity (particularly in Y) - which is obviously the point. I take his statement of frequency in the "low teens" to mean less than 15. So even assuming 14 flights per day - which I think is quiet plausible - you're still talking at least a 15% overall capacity reduction.

As for the frequencies themselves - I agree with others - AA shouldn't have too much trouble finding the JFK slots. Plus, while BusinessWeek might have called it an "hourly shuttle," schedule and time zone realities means that of course it will not be quite hourly throughout the day westbound, and certainly not eastbound. I could see:

From LAX: 0630 0730 0830 0930 1030 1130 1230 1330 1430 1530 1700 2100 2230 2355
From JFK: 0630 0730 0830 0930 1100 1200 1300 1400 1530 1630 1730 1830 2000 2130

I would also not be surprised to see JFK-SFO get 1-2 extra round-trip frequencies, too.

[Edited 2013-05-02 06:07:50]

User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5724 posts, RR: 24
Reply 20, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 23249 times:

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 18):
The demand historically has always been gigantic--especially once the movie industry started to become important in the second decade of the 20th Century. Even before the airlines became important, the major American railroads had a LOT of service between New York City and Los Angeles--note that New York Central's 20th Century Limited and Pennsylvania Railroad's Broadway Limited at times synced their schedules so passengers could easily transfer to Rock Island/Southern Pacific's Golden State Limited, Santa Fe's Super Chief or Union Pacific/Chicago & Northwestern's City of Los Angeles.

When AA introduced the DC-3, it didn't take long for AA to use it on the New York City to Los Angeles route--the plane could fly from New York City to Los Angeles in 17.5 hours (including refueling stops)--less than half the time the Super Chief train needed just to travel from Chicago to Los Angeles! Small wonder just before the American entrance into World War II, both Boeing and Douglas were developing four-engined airliners that could fly between New York City and Los Angeles faster and requiring fewer fuel stops.

In my humble opinion, it was the burgeoning Los Angeles-New York City route that drove the development of the Douglas DC-6/7/8, the Lockheed Constellation, and the Boeing 707. The fact in 2013 you have multiple airlines flying many flights per day between LAX and JFK shows how strong this route is even now. AA's decision to increase the flight frequency between JFK and LAX--especially with the impending arrival of the A321 models--continues this trend.

AA must know something us armchair CEO's dont...oh yeah, THEY have the gorilla's load of corporate contracts between both cities when it comes to travel...the guarantees must have already been in those corporate contracts to warrant the extra flights, which in my mind, are a good thing...I better hop on a 762 while I can! Oh, one question though...whats the capacity of AA's A321's vs the 762's?



Check out my blog at fl310travel.blogspot.com!
User currently offlineklwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 2100 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 22801 times:

Maybe they see the need to "keep up with the joneses" in terms of frequency (UA in EWR) also. I totally understand EWR and JFK transcon market dynamics are not the same. But there is now a real precedent for high frequency flights to LAX and SFO from the NYC area.

UA strangely uses RJ's to fly to IAD. Maybe they should dump those flights and add more transcon frequencies to up the ante.

It is strange to call it a "shuttle," I agree. Shuttle implies something like BOS-LGA, DFW/DAL-IAH, SFO-LAX.


User currently offline9w748capt From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 626 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 22767 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 8):
That's what I'm thinking....doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

Nothing AA does sounds like a good idea to you. Except maybe for PHX-NRT shuttles?


User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5724 posts, RR: 24
Reply 23, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 22605 times:

Quoting 9w748capt (Reply 22):
Nothing AA does sounds like a good idea to you. Except maybe for PHX-NRT shuttles?

To me...anything close to a shuttle on the AA system would be LAX-JFK, MIA/JFK-SJU, JFK-MIA...



Check out my blog at fl310travel.blogspot.com!
User currently offlineusairways85 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3473 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (1 year 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 22413 times:

So UA added flts on EWR-LAX/SFO for a total of ~14 flts/day on each just because VX came in and now AA is adding another 5 each. Year over Year this has to be a ton of additional capacity on NYC-LAX/SFO.

25 sw733 : I disagree completely. To me, shuttle service doesn't matter with length, but rather with frequency. Hourly service between Los Angeles and New York
26 American 767 : I'm wondering what is the survival chance of EWR-LAX for AA. I see it going seasonal. I don't see it going anymore than 1x daily year round unless th
27 divemaster08 : As much as it seems a lot, I doubt this is really a huge increase in seats available when they replace the B762 with the A321. I cant imagine there wi
28 Post contains images commavia : Yes - the best. Based on the pictures, the narrowbody cabin with that big a seat and a solid partition wall is going to give AA's F cabin on these pl
29 PHX787 : Now that's just silly....but JFK-PHX, should they decide to beef up PHX, does make some sense...but lets look below: JFK-MIA shuttles make the best s
30 Post contains images CODC10 : On limited frequencies. Further, DL has no plans to roll out 767 service to all LAX+SFO flights, so their best product will only be available a handf
31 commavia : True, although remember that while these A321s will have the same number of F seats as the 762s, they will also have 10 fewer C seats. So net-net, ea
32 klwright69 : If losing F were such a devastating blow to lose F, UA would keep F. So, maybe.
33 N62NA : LGA-MIA shuttles make more sense, at least to me.
34 Mah4546 : Who cares that AA is weak at Newark? It is very strong in Los Angeles, and it can easily - and does easily - support a daily Newark rotation that is
35 cgnnrw : What are the chances AA will finish building their T8 at JFK. If I'm not mistaken only half of the proposed terminal was completed. Maybe with these e
36 commavia : I suspect the changes are pretty high - not because of this, though. The gate space is already pretty tight in T8, particularly at peak times, but th
37 ckfred : If you think about it, AA has close to shuttle servie on LGA-ORD and DFW-ORD. Both routes have more than 15 weekday departures. AA also tried this on
38 WesternA318 : My thoughts exactly. What may seem weak on the one end most certainly does not mean the flight itself is weak from the LAX perspective. It is a money
39 AAIL86 : actually, JFK-DFW is only 1x and its pretty much used for TATL connections only. Most DFW-New York traffic is routed DFW-LGA, which is (~15x during t
40 klwright69 : I doubt the future of AA's LAX-EWR is in doubt. That is a sidebar topic. Just one flight a day is not a big deal really. It has a place in the route s
41 Post contains images IrishAyes : Brilliant. I loved this. You've earned that spot on my "Respected Members" list. NYC-based AA flyers are content having LGA and JFK. AA still flies 1
42 us330 : Which is why you don't run an airline. DFW and MIA are both within LGA's perimeter, and AA has de facto shuttle service between both cities to LGA ba
43 MaverickM11 : Hourly AA 321s with 3 classes, new PS on UA plus eleventy daily flights from EWR, B6 jumping in with a 321 and premium product, DL with additional cap
44 mia305 : A bit off topic but with the 321s comming on line would AA more frequency on the MIA/LAX route and maybe add a 4th flight on the MIA/SFO or is there s
45 JBAirwaysFan : It's no longer all coach. First class has been introduced to the shuttle products now so that they can rotate the shuttle fleet into the regular main
46 miaskies : DFW-JFK: token point? yes. One daily 738; obviously LGA is the focus for this market. MIA-JFK: 6x Daily Flights (alongside LGA's 10x Daily). I wouldn
47 ExL10Mktg : Here's the math: current midweek schedule 9 x 762 @ 10/30/128 = 90/270/1152 least case scenario 12 x 321 @ 10/20/102 = 120/240/1224 likely scenario 1
48 WesternA318 : But VX's product is not that bad really, and I enjoy it a lot, but I do love DL's improvements on the route.
49 oc2dc : Your math is incorrect. The A321T's will have a total of 102 seats, not 102 in Econ and 36 in MCE (Main Cabin Extra). The correct layout for the A321
50 SANFan : The SAN-JFK route does have me a bit concerned lately. Beginning sometime in March or early April, AA d/g'd our single JFK r/t to a 738 (from the 767
51 warreng24 : I suspect that 2L boarding will end pretty quickly once AA realizes how much engine cowling damage occurs from bad jet bridge driving...
52 Viscount724 : What's the problem on a route with heavy demand? Makes sense to offer easy-to-remember schedules. The equivalent route in Canada to LAX-JFK is YVR-YY
53 EricR : AA goes from 9 daily flights to 14 daily flights with a slight reduction in capacity. In essence, AA is transporting roughly the same capacity, but n
54 slcdeltarumd11 : Not sure but im thinking Delta and Jetblue are the real killers for them on SAN. Both look like 2x daily ish as strong competators. Delta is certainl
55 brilondon : There are already ten daily flights to the New York area from LAX so it is not that much of a stretch to think that they could increase the frequency
56 sydscott : Not forgetting that they'll also need to slot in additional 8 mainline flights a day once US Airways come in plus I also doubt they will leave DL as
57 commavia : Unit costs for labor, landing fees, etc. will go up - true. But on the flip side, these A321s will be substantially less maintenance-intensive, and m
58 superjeff : AA's 321's will have aisle access from all seats. Should be at least as good and arguably better than DL.
59 brilondon : Why should AA's product be better than that of DL's? Or a better question is how would you know if it is going to be better than DL's? I would wait t
60 questions : Plus, isn't AA's ground handling of premium passengers suppose to be better at LAX and JFK? I've always wondered why VX didn't introduce a transcon s
61 mesaflyguy : I wouldn't be worried based on the 767s, as those were just on the route because the cabin mods were being done in San Diego. The plane would arrive,
62 questions : There seems to be a lot of money in Orange Co, CA. Would SNA-JFK-SNA not be able to sustain a premium transcon product, especially if DL can offer it
63 SANFan : Valid points. Yes, there is good competition on the route (plus UA into EWR might be included by some) but in the past several years -- when that sam
64 slcdeltarumd11 : I think AA has tried 757 service on JFK-SNA in the past and DL tried 737-700 IIRC service recently. Both failed. On a flip side United does do excelle
65 sydscott : Wouldn't it be odd to leave Delta as the sole flier on a hub to hub route? Assuming both PHL and JFK retain their respective status in the combined c
66 LAXintl : TW had dropped it as part of its JFK downsizing. AA relaunched it in 2002 to drop it again in 2004. (for the record AA also tried SNA-JFK in the mid
67 questions : Wow. What are the limiting factors that seem to prevent the route from working?
68 commavia : Not really - DL may feel they need to fly it to link PHL into their Europe network. AA, on the other hand, won't have such a need since PHL already h
69 DolphinAir747 : It seems they're following UA's strategy from EWR...
70 jfklganyc : I am pretty sure TWA operated it when they merged. AA started service to LGB and ONT to counter B6...that didnt last long. B6 would make a good run w
71 United_fan : Not much differant than BUR.
72 Post contains links AeroWesty : In the combined AA/TWA timetable for July 1, 2001 on departedflights.com, it shows 3 AA 757 flights for LAX-EWR, no TWA flights. If TWA was operating
73 BigGSFO : I think the yields and trafficare there, it's just comes down to lack of frequency and the right aircraft. If you want that higher yielding business
74 WesternA318 : We did, I flew on that route in Dec '01...thats about as close to the actual "buyout" date that I remember.
75 FlyASAGuy2005 : I can see US/AA flying PHL-JFK if nothing else to rotate a/c around. It will soon be a hub to hub route.
76 Post contains links and images LAXintl : AA launched a rather significant but futile transcon push against JetBlue. There was also OAK flights(up to 3x daily) and PHX while SJC and LAX got e
77 EricR : From what I recall, AA launched PHX-JFK in the early 2000's in retaliation to HP not B6. AA launched route PHX-JFK in 2003 in response to HP launchin
78 WesternA318 : Oops, I meant Dec '00..my bad!
79 jfklganyc : I was referring to JFK-SNA, not LAX-EWR
80 Post contains links jfklganyc : So it was operating in Dec 2000... Here is the merger AA/TW timetable. No JFK-SNA. But it was not operating by July 2001 in the merged timetable. So
81 rlwynn : The BUR runway is over 1000 feet longer than SNA.
82 tommy767 : AA used to be strong at EWR back in the late 90s/early 2000s but like many once larger stations (BOS, RDU, IAD, MCO) they are now a shell of their fo
83 aajfksjubklyn : Congrats AA for taking back the service you put in place nearly 50 years ago! The Transcon flight. I know I welcome hourly service and look forward to
84 WesternA318 : Hear hear! I for one, cant wait to try the A321's...but Ive not been on the 762 transcon on AA, I have to get on that before this year gets out...
85 Viscount724 : AA had also previously operated PHX-JFK nonstop for many years, as far back as the 1960s through sometime in the mid to late 1980s. For most of that
86 timz : First scheduled PHX-IDL nonstop was an AA DC-7, in 1959.
87 questions : Will the FA's serving the new transcon F cabin receive a refresher training course?
88 lat41 : Anyone remember the Eastern Transcon of the 1980s? It was an early attempt at this concept.
89 N62NA : Yes! I flew EWR-MCI-LAX direct on the "brand new EA 757" aircraft back in July of 1986. I remember on the MCI-LAX segment the captain came on the PA
90 STT757 : EWR-SNA was one of the first routes CO launched with their new 757s in the Spring of 1994. It was originally a single daily 757 and then was upgraded
91 slcdeltarumd11 : You may see a 319, 320 or 738 fly on EWR-SNA its easy to land with little fuel left but they usually rotate back to IAH or SFO. SNA-EWR is usually al
92 STT757 : I've seen the A320s on the West Bounds too, but the 738s are doing both West and East bounds.
93 milesrich : There were three carriers on the NYC-LAX route before deregulation, and it was always competitive, but American is not hte powerhouse they once were.
94 WesternA318 : I agree with this. I see UA being the third wheel with AA's new fleet and with DL's upgrades.
95 Post contains images KGRB : I would like to know where the OP got that information from. I have seen a few examples of L2 boarding on the A321, but it's very rare. I know a lot
97 Post contains images rwy04lga : The seat looks bigger because the cabin is narrower. Kinda like the reason I prefer petite women, it makes 'things' at least look bigger! I flew on i
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 To Launch Twice Weekly LAX-SJU Nonstop Service posted Sat Dec 20 2003 03:14:35 by Jcs17
AA/Eagle Wanting To Launch LAX-RDM Flights posted Fri Mar 8 2013 17:46:45 by bigfoot0503
AA To Launch JFK-BNA posted Fri Nov 5 2010 11:21:42 by MAH4546
MAXjet To Launch LAX Service posted Thu May 3 2007 17:20:06 by Laxintl
AA To Resume Daily JFK-NRT, Introduce LAX-NRT posted Tue Aug 12 2003 04:22:01 by JAL777
AA To Launch DCA-LGA-BOS Shuttle posted Thu Jul 18 2002 20:27:47 by B747-437B
AA To Launch Service Between Dallas And Guatemala posted Tue Mar 5 2002 22:35:49 by Mah4546
Virgin America To Launch LAX-SJC posted Mon Feb 4 2013 05:13:50 by SocalApproach
AA To Upgrade LAX-LHR To 777-300 Jun 2013 posted Mon Jun 25 2012 08:08:16 by miaami
AA To Launch Miami-Seattle posted Sun Mar 11 2012 05:50:10 by MAH4546