UA747400
Topic Author
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 8:49 am

ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 9:03 am

Since ONT was modernized around 2000 the amount of traffic through the airport has seemed to decrease significantly. Why is this happening? It does have a large population around it. Since I live near it, I sometimes need to go to LAX just to get the LAX-PHL flight when there used to be a direct UA flight using a 727 during the '90's. It just doesn't seem as if the traffic is growing as it once was. Any help would be useful. Thanks

P.S. This is my first post on Airliners.net!
Ghandi- The best way to find yourself, is to lose yourself in the service of others
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5008
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 9:20 am

It was 'modernized' in 1998 with the opening of the new terminals. UA all but moved out of ONT when they shut down their shuttle operation, and the ORD flights in 2001, which hurt a lot of passengers. Many of those passengers now fly ONT-LAX instead to catch their ORD flights.

The amount of traffic has grown immensely over the years. Look at DL. When I started doing cargo, all they had was 1 757 per day to ATL. Then they added a second. Then they changed 1 757 to a 767-300. Then they added a second, and now a 3rd 767. UA is doing quite well with their TED flights, WN is growing steadily, HP is growing steadily, and even UPS has grown by leaps and bounds.

Occasionally, HP has a ONT-PHL direct flight every so often, so you could always do that. I believe CO has one occasionally as well.
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5272
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 10:26 am

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 1):
Look at DL. When I started doing cargo, all they had was 1 757 per day to ATL. Then they added a second. Then they changed 1 757 to a 767-300. Then they added a second, and now a 3rd 767.

But DL hasn't grown as much as you think. While ATL flights have grown, SLC and DFW have seen cuts.

Here's DL's ONT schedule in June 2001:

2x daily ONT-ATL (2x757) = 360 seats
2x daily ONT-DFW (1xMD90, 1x733) = 272 seats
3x daily ONT-SLC (2x727, 1xMD90) = 448
Total daily seats = 1,080

Here DL's ONT schedule in June 2005:
3x daily ONT-ATL (1x762, 1x757, 1x763) = 630 seats
0x daily ONT-DFW = 0 seats
6x daily ONT-SLC (1x733, 1xMD90, 4xCRJ) = 472 seats
Total daily seats = 1,102

That's a net gain of only 22 seats...plus you have one less hub to connect through. IIRC, DL had even more capacity on the ONT-SLC and ONT-DFW route in the late 90's.

On a side note, it looks like DL will be adding a fourth daily ONT-ATL flight starting in July.
 
September11
Posts: 3293
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:49 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 10:33 am

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 1):
Occasionally, HP has a ONT-PHL direct flight every so often

You mean US Airways?
Airliners.net of the Future
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5008
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 10:35 am

Compared to many other airports of the same size, the airport as a whole has grown immensely.

Quoting September11 (Reply 3):
You mean US Airways?

Perhaps now, but even then, would there be a nonstop to PHL from ONT? Probably not.

HP256 used to do it for the longest of time. It was the 12:30 departure.

[Edited 2005-06-01 03:37:54]
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
 
UA747400
Topic Author
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 8:49 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 10:59 am

When you look at these photos it makes it seem as if there is barley any traffic at all. Do these flights all leave at the same time or what?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kyle Matson - Rocky Mountain AvPhotos
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chris Sharps

Ghandi- The best way to find yourself, is to lose yourself in the service of others
 
travelin man
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:09 am

It wasn't necessarily built for current traffic, but was built with future traffic in mind. San Bernardino/Riverside is currently the fastest growing area in Southern California (and one of the fastest growing areas of the nation). It's a bit like buying your kid pants that are a couple of sizes too big. He'll grow into them. I have no doubt traffic will continue to increase at ONT.
 
adipasqu
Posts: 148
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 1:37 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:23 am

AFAIK, ONT is owned and operated by LA World Airports, who also own LAX. Before the expansion/renovation, ONT was purchased by LAWA as a diversionary airport, large enough for anything that flies into/out of LAX to land and take off there safely if (and when...I believe it's happened a handful of times since LAWA took over ONT) LAX is completely fogged in (i.e CLOSED). ONT is also the west coast air-base for UP, which uses 741F and 742F out of there for their pacific op's as well as runs to/from LEX, their main air-base. So, big jets do use the airport regularly, but the main reason for the expansion/upgrades was its alternate airport status for LAX.
707 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 741 742 752 753 762 763 764 D9S D10 319 320 321 M80 M82 M83 M87 M88 M90 SF3 ERJ CRJ
 
stirling
Posts: 3897
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 2:00 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:24 am

Look at this way....Ontario has room to grow into their airport...Not a bad position to be in. The current state of affairs will not last forever.

Quoting September11 (Reply 3):
Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 1):
Occasionally, HP has a ONT-PHL direct flight every so often

You mean US Airways?

Maybe he meant "DIRECT" as in via Phoenix.
Delete this User
 
TUNisia
Posts: 1515
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:24 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:25 am

It's rather surprising that most here don't know how important ONT is for UPS.
Someday the sun will shine down on me in some faraway place - Mahalia Jackson
 
YYZatcboy
Posts: 1003
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 2:15 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:26 am

Can it handle the 380 yet? Just curious.
DHC1/3/4 MD11/88 L1011 A319/20/21/30 B727 735/6/7/8/9 762/3 E175/90 CRJ/700/705 CC150. J/S DH8D 736/7/8
 
UA747400
Topic Author
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 8:49 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:29 am

Quoting Adipasqu (Reply 7):
which uses 741F and 742F out of there for their pacific op's as well as runs to/from LEX, their main air-base. So, big jets do use the airport regularly, but the main reason for the expansion/upgrades was its alternate airport status for LAX.

Yes, but when will United, Air France, or any one else send their 747's to ONT, when was the last time an actual passenger 747 landed at ONT?
Ghandi- The best way to find yourself, is to lose yourself in the service of others
 
flyboyaz
Posts: 2077
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 11:32 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:31 am

Quoting Stirling (Reply 8):
Maybe he meant "DIRECT" as in via Phoenix.

That's right...direct means one or more stops...nonstop is just that. Passengers get this confused ALL the time...they think direct means nonstop.
Catch a ride on a smile!
 
adipasqu
Posts: 148
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 1:37 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:35 am

Quoting UA747400 (Reply 11):
Yes, but when will United, Air France, or any one else send their 747's to ONT, when was the last time an actual passenger 747 landed at ONT?

Unless there is a ginormous population boom in San Bernadino County or LAX falls of the face of the earth when "The Big One" comes, never. However, flights get diverted there quite regularly, and I wouldn't be surprised if ONT has seen one or two pax 747's this year (most likely just tech stops or the like, but that counts, right???)
707 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 741 742 752 753 762 763 764 D9S D10 319 320 321 M80 M82 M83 M87 M88 M90 SF3 ERJ CRJ
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:39 am

Quoting UA747400 (Thread starter):
P.S. This is my first post on Airliners.net!

welcome to A.net.... Wink
"Up the Irons!"
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5008
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:55 am

The current terminals weren't designed to handle 747's. They can barely fit a 767-300. When UA brought a 747-400 in on the terminal's opening day, it went out 20 feet past the control boundary.

Unless LAWA goes with plan B and opens a south terminal, I highly doubt that a regularly scheduled passenger 747 will fly into ONT.

1500 local time is a dead time for the airport. It's a changing of the shifts. Terminal 2's airlines have flights every few hours or so -- except for the EMB-120's to LAX. Terminal 4 is ALWAYS busy, except at 1500, since Southwest focuses there.
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
 
sonic67
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 2:43 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 12:19 pm

I think Ontario is a great airport fly out of. Lines aren't long and you can fly to most places in the U.S..

[Edited 2005-06-01 05:30:15]
 
iowaman
Posts: 3874
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 2:29 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 12:25 pm

Quoting Stirling (Reply 8):
Look at this way....Ontario has room to grow into their airport...Not a bad position to be in. The current state of affairs will not last forever.

Exactly, much better then to be in SNA and BUR's shape. The airport is still fairly underutilitalized. Snap shot of today's arrivals:

Flights arriving in:
Ontario, CA
(ONT-Ontario International Airport)

San Francisco, CA 12 07:33 PM Arrived
Guadalajara Aeromexico 458 10:31 PM In Flight
Seattle, WA Alaska 474 09:10 AM Arrived
Seattle, WA Alaska 504 03:15 PM Arrived
Seattle, WA Alaska 448 11:27 PM Scheduled
Phoenix, AZ America West 646 08:42 AM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ America West 647 11:54 AM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ America West 638 02:27 PM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ America West 644 05:30 PM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ America West 639 08:17 PM In Flight
Dallas, TX American 2025 11:37 AM Arrived
Dallas, TX American 1649 01:11 PM Arrived
Dallas, TX American 1286 07:23 PM Arrived
Dallas, TX American 1027 09:36 PM In Flight
Dallas, TX American 1989 10:52 PM Scheduled
Burbank, CA Ameriflight 1942 05:33 AM Arrived
Tijuana Ameriflight 6631 05:56 PM Arrived
Bakersfield, CA Ameriflight 1947 06:46 PM Arrived
Visalia, CA Ameriflight 1945 06:47 PM Landed
Santa Barbara, CA Ameriflight 1929 06:53 PM Arrived
Lancaster, CA Ameriflight 1901 06:54 PM Landed
Palm Springs, CA Ameriflight 1953 06:59 PM Arrived
Long Beach, CA Ameriflight 1937 07:26 PM Arrived
San Diego, CA Ameriflight 1959 07:30 PM Arrived
Los Angeles, CA Bombardier Business Jet Solutions 249 05:24 AM Planned
Houston, TX Continental 1731 10:53 AM Arrived
Houston, TX Continental 150 06:47 PM Arrived
Houston, TX Continental 5221 10:25 PM In Flight
Goodyear, AZ Corporate Wings 815 02:21 PM Arrived
Atlanta, GA Delta Air Lines 275 11:30 AM Arrived
Salt Lake City, UT Delta Air Lines 873 11:54 AM Arrived
Salt Lake City, UT Delta Air Lines 720 07:23 PM Arrived
Atlanta, GA Delta Air Lines 1414 10:15 PM In Flight
Atlanta, GA Delta Air Lines 391 12:47 AM In Flight
Santa Barbara, CA Empire Airlines 693 06:39 PM Arrived
Dallas, TX Executive Jet Aviation 996 01:16 PM Arrived
Los Angeles, CA Federal Express 2816 07:27 PM Arrived
Portland, OR Horizon Air 2511 08:51 AM Arrived
Portland, OR Horizon Air 2459 02:21 PM Arrived
Portland, OR Horizon Air 2515 07:32 PM Arrived
Portland, OR Horizon Air 2517 08:00 PM Arrived
Portland, OR Horizon Air 2519 11:01 PM Scheduled
New York, NY Jetblue Airways 177 09:58 AM Arrived
New York, NY Jetblue Airways 89 12:39 AM In Flight
Las Vegas, NV Mesa Airlines 531 10:40 AM Arrived
Las Vegas, NV Mesa Airlines 533 05:55 PM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ Mesa Airlines 534 07:28 PM Arrived
Minneapolis, MN Northwest 1031 11:01 AM Arrived
Minneapolis, MN Northwest 1029 10:37 PM In Flight
Los Angeles, CA Sky West 6098 07:04 AM Arrived
Salt Lake City, UT Sky West 3947 08:58 AM Arrived
Los Angeles, CA Sky West 6099 09:02 AM Arrived
Los Angeles, CA Sky West 6100 11:15 AM Arrived
Los Angeles, CA Sky West 6101 01:39 PM Arrived
Salt Lake City, UT Sky West 3818 04:17 PM Arrived
Los Angeles, CA Sky West 6102 04:19 PM Arrived
Salt Lake City, UT Sky West 3813 05:28 PM Arrived
Los Angeles, CA Sky West 6103 06:49 PM Arrived
Los Angeles, CA Sky West 6104 08:26 PM In Flight
Salt Lake City, UT Sky West 3849 09:54 PM Planned
San Diego, CA Skyway Enterprises 1955 08:19 PM In Flight
Phoenix, AZ Southwest 1899 06:55 AM Arrived
Oakland, CA Southwest 1714 07:08 AM Arrived
Sacramento, CA Southwest 623 07:48 AM Arrived
San Jose, CA Southwest 825 07:48 AM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ Southwest 1082 07:59 AM Arrived
Las Vegas, NV Southwest 212 08:07 AM Arrived
Oakland, CA Southwest 2624 08:19 AM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ Southwest 2307 09:03 AM Arrived
Las Vegas, NV Southwest 319 09:14 AM Arrived
Sacramento, CA Southwest 1058 09:48 AM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ Southwest 1184 10:05 AM Arrived
San Jose, CA Southwest 526 10:33 AM Arrived
Las Vegas, NV Southwest 2073 10:38 AM Arrived
Oakland, CA Southwest 1717 10:51 AM Arrived
Sacramento, CA Southwest 698 10:53 AM Arrived
Oakland, CA Southwest 1007 10:58 AM Arrived
Oakland, CA Southwest 2731 12:08 PM Arrived
San Jose, CA Southwest 1877 12:21 PM Arrived
Sacramento, CA Southwest 1634 12:23 PM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ Southwest 501 12:24 PM Arrived
Las Vegas, NV Southwest 2198 01:09 PM Arrived
San Jose, CA Southwest 1902 01:43 PM Arrived
Oakland, CA Southwest 1719 01:55 PM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ Southwest 1865 01:57 PM Arrived
Sacramento, CA Southwest 1417 02:08 PM Arrived
Las Vegas, NV Southwest 2980 02:50 PM Arrived
Sacramento, CA Southwest 626 03:00 PM Arrived
Oakland, CA Southwest 1720 03:17 PM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ Southwest 1585 03:20 PM Arrived
San Jose, CA Southwest 1275 03:41 PM Arrived
Las Vegas, NV Southwest 1241 03:52 PM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ Southwest 2561 03:53 PM Arrived
Las Vegas, NV Southwest 2781 04:43 PM Arrived
Oakland, CA Southwest 309 04:47 PM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ Southwest 1118 04:53 PM Arrived
Sacramento, CA Southwest 2451 05:08 PM Arrived
San Jose, CA Southwest 2143 05:19 PM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ Southwest 394 05:32 PM Arrived
Sacramento, CA Southwest 248 05:38 PM Arrived
Phoenix, AZ Southwest 377 06:12 PM Arrived
Las Vegas, NV Southwest 2899 06:15 PM Arrived
Oakland, CA Southwest 425 06:23 PM Arrived
Sacramento, CA Southwest 963 07:08 PM Arrived
Nashville, TN Southwest 1382 07:12 PM Arrived
Oakland, CA Southwest 1493 07:16 PM Arrived
Sacramento, CA Southwest 2565 07:52 PM Arrived
San Jose, CA Southwest 2808 08:05 PM Arrived
Oakland, CA Southwest 1344 08:21 PM In Flight
Oakland, CA Southwest 763 09:03 PM In Flight
San Jose, CA Southwest 1772 09:20 PM Scheduled
Phoenix, AZ Southwest 2325 09:31 PM Scheduled
Las Vegas, NV Southwest 1356 09:50 PM Scheduled
Phoenix, AZ Southwest 2092 10:06 PM Scheduled
Oakland, CA Southwest 727 10:19 PM Scheduled
Sacramento, CA Southwest 541 10:35 PM Scheduled
San Jose, CA Southwest 451 10:46 PM Scheduled
Las Vegas, NV Southwest 360 11:00 PM Scheduled
Sacramento, CA Southwest 2083 11:15 PM Scheduled
Bakersfield, CA Union Flights 1147 06:36 PM Landed
Santa Maria, CA Union Flights 1143 06:40 PM Arrived
Santa Barbara, CA Union Flights 1133 06:45 PM Arrived
Denver, CO United 1437 10:48 AM Arrived
Denver, CO United 1439 12:48 PM Arrived
Denver, CO United 1441 08:07 PM Landed
Denver, CO United 1443 10:22 PM Scheduled
Louisville, KY United Parcel Service 6908 03:58 AM Arrived
Louisville, KY United Parcel Service 912 04:58 AM Arrived
Louisville, KY United Parcel Service 2910 08:03 AM Arrived
El Paso, TX United Parcel Service 914 08:16 AM Arrived
Seattle, WA United Parcel Service 8230 10:20 AM Arrived
Honolulu, HI United Parcel Service 2904 06:10 PM Arrived
Fresno, CA United Parcel Service 927 07:09 PM Arrived
Denver, CO United Parcel Service 9602 08:43 PM In Flight
Salt Lake City, UT United Parcel Service 833 09:14 PM In Flight
Sacramento, CA United Parcel Service 897 10:28 PM Planned
Seattle, WA United Parcel Service 983 10:40 PM Planned
Oakland, CA United Parcel Service 961 10:47 PM Planned
Denver, CO United Parcel Service 805 11:03 PM Planned
Phoenix, AZ United Parcel Service 849 11:07 PM Planned
Portland, OR United Parcel Service 971 11:09 PM Planned
Anchorage, AK United Parcel Service 6927 11:14 PM In Flight
Rockford, IL United Parcel Service 928 03:31 AM Planned
Santa Maria, CA Westair Industries 7683 06:03 PM Arrived
Santa Maria, CA Westair Industries 7682 06:11 PM Arrived
Bakersfield, CA Westair Industries 7653 06:20 PM Arrived
Inyokern, CA Westair Industries 7654 06:20 PM Landed
San Luis Obispo, CA Westair Industries 7694 06:26 PM Arrived
Victorville, CA Westair Industries 7666 06:41 PM Planned
Bakersfield, CA Westair Industries 7652 06:48 PM Arrived
San Luis Obispo, CA Westair Industries 7688 06:50 PM Arrived
El Centro, CA Westair Industries 7970 06:55 PM Arrived
Santa Maria, CA Westair Industries 7681 07:02 PM Arrived
Los Angeles, CA Westair Industries 7676 07:28 PM Arrived
 
UA747400
Topic Author
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 8:49 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 1:10 pm

When will the days of transcon flights come back to ONT? because it is a lot easier to go there than it is for LAX
Ghandi- The best way to find yourself, is to lose yourself in the service of others
 
pictues
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 11:41 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 1:30 pm

I belive Air Canada is thinking of flying to ONT from Canada in the furture when they get their new CRJ-705's and EMB-175/190's
 
FlyingTexan
Posts: 2998
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 8:30 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 1:38 pm

Quoting UA747400 (Thread starter):
ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Well, to people who use ONT, not too shabby of an operation…

Nonstop to Phoenix 15 times daily, Oakland a bakers dozen each working day, the other Bay Area airport a bunch of times (10ish), Arnold’s office another dozen times, some big city in the desert where they gamble a bunch of times, and that venerable non-stop to Nashville.

Of course those people could suffer cardiac arrest by not sitting in an assigned seat if they subscribe to a.net…
"Wouldn't your boss like to fly home nonstop at 4:30 on a Friday afternoon?" -Airline Exec to Congressional Staffer
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5008
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 1:40 pm

Quoting FlyingTexan (Reply 20):
Of course those people could suffer cardiac arrest by not sitting in an assigned seat if they subscribe to a.net

Why is that? When I jumpseat, I'm usually the last on the plane, and can still snag a window seat with a nice view.
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
 
UA747400
Topic Author
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 8:49 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 2:36 pm

Does Hawaiian still send there DC-10 to ONT?
Ghandi- The best way to find yourself, is to lose yourself in the service of others
 
socal
Posts: 464
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:20 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 3:29 pm

No, Hawaiian Airlines stopped flights over a year ago. I had a thread a few weeks ago suggesting Aloha Airlines should have service from ONT. With the smaller 737-700s it would work out well for them. Alot of people in the Inland Empire fly to Hawaii for the weekends. They battle the freeway traffic, sometimes over a 2hr drive to SNA or LAX.  Cool
I Love HNL.............
 
AADC10
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 7:40 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 3:56 pm

Quoting Travelin man (Reply 6):
It wasn't necessarily built for current traffic, but was built with future traffic in mind. San Bernardino/Riverside is currently the fastest growing area in Southern California (and one of the fastest growing areas of the nation).

It has little to do with the size of the surrounding population. The high revenue business travelers are concentrated on the west side of Los Angeles, not far from LAX. That is why there is a reluctance from airlines to fly there. Flights out of ONT are low yield.

However, it is the only viable airport in the Los Angeles area (even though it is 40 miles away) that has significant capacity to spare. BUR, SNA and LGB are capped. If an airline wanted to make Los Angeles a focus city, it will either have to wait for UA to die or go to ONT. The city of Ontario is actually fearful of overflow from other LA airports swamping them.

ONT is mostly a LCC airport, dominated by WN and B6.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 4:04 pm

Quoting YYZatcboy (Reply 10):
Can it handle the 380 yet? Just curious.

don't see why not. no bridges. lot's of room around jetways. maybe runways are too close to taxiways, but I doubt it.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 4:27 pm

Quoting Adipasqu (Reply 7):
Before the expansion/renovation, ONT was purchased by LAWA as a diversionary airport

Actually, the city of Los Angeles bought ONT as much more than just a diversionary airport. It has always been their intent to operate ONT as a reliever airport that happens to be able to land anything. BTW, ONT and not LAX was the only airport in the L.A. area to see Concorde

Quoting Adipasqu (Reply 7):
LAX is completely fogged in (i.e CLOSED).

Considering LAX has CAT IIIb ILS, it is pretty much impossible to sock the airport in.

Quoting Adipasqu (Reply 7):
as runs to/from LEX, their main air-base.

5X's (UPS) main air terminal is at SDF, not LEX

Quoting UA747400 (Reply 18):
When will the days of transcon flights come back to ONT

Well, given that ATL is almost transcon and JFK is transcon, what more do you want? BOS? Bangor?

Quoting UA747400 (Reply 18):
because it is a lot easier to go there than it is for LAX

For you, but not for everyone

Quoting UA747400 (Reply 22):
Does Hawaiian still send there DC-10 to ONT?

HA has not had DC-10s for several years now and no, ONT is no longer a HA destination

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 24):
ONT is mostly a LCC airport, dominated by WN and B6.

WN I agree with, but I don't think B6's 2 flights a day count as dominance
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 4979
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 9:35 pm

Quoting Pictues (Reply 19):
I belive Air Canada is thinking of flying to ONT from Canada in the furture when they get their new CRJ-705's and EMB-175/190's

Air Canada used to fly YYZ-ONT-YYZ daily with an A319. This service was cancelled with the downturn in demand in the last few years. I recently read that ONT, (along with SAN and SJC) will be new destinations for the EMB190, out of YYZ.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5008
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Wed Jun 01, 2005 10:11 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 25):
don't see why not. no bridges. lot's of room around jetways. maybe runways are too close to taxiways, but I doubt it.

Technically, there are bridges. There is a drainage channel that goes right under the center of the airport. Don't believe me? Go look on Google.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 26):
Considering LAX has CAT IIIb ILS, it is pretty much impossible to sock the airport in.

Considering that many aircraft, and many airlines are still only CAT II, or even CAT I, I do consider it possible.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 26):
WN I agree with, but I don't think B6's 2 flights a day count as dominance

Soutwest, yes. jetBlue, no. America West is more important to ONT at the moment, since it used to be a major player at ONT before the new terminals were put in.

[Edited 2005-06-01 15:14:39]
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
 
travelin man
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 1:00 am

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 24):
It has little to do with the size of the surrounding population. The high revenue business travelers are concentrated on the west side of Los Angeles, not far from LAX. That is why there is a reluctance from airlines to fly there. Flights out of ONT are low yield.

That's true, for now. For instance, in two weeks I fly to DEN out of ONT because it was $300 cheaper than BUR (Ted vs. UA Express).

However, you are discussing the current situation, and I was talking about the growth of the surrounding area. Not only will ONT relieve LAX, it will serve as a primary airport for a hugely growing Inland Empire population base.
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 1:47 am

We'll see if this question is asked again in about 10 years.

My hunch is the question will be... Why is ONT so busy.
 
AADC10
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 7:40 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 2:46 am

Quoting UA747400 (Reply 18):
When will the days of transcon flights come back to ONT?

Huh? What is B6's twice daily ONT-JFK? The transcons are already back.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 26):
Considering LAX has CAT IIIb ILS, it is pretty much impossible to sock the airport in.

LAX has been socked in on rare occasions and passengers have to make the rest of the journey by bus. ONT also serves as an alternative in an emergency such as closure due to a terrorist threat. I do not recall a lengthy weather closure recently, however.

Still, LAX is rapidly approaching capacity and the L.A. City Council does not have any interest in making more than limited improvements, so ONT is the only viable alternative. PMD is on life support for commerical service.
 
D950
Posts: 472
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:17 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 2:57 am

One of the reasons I stopped using ONT was that the rental car firms started adding a "surcharge" to the daily rental fee, no thanks.
Resting on your laurels is a synonym for flirting with disaster
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5008
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:49 am

Quoting D950 (Reply 32):
One of the reasons I stopped using ONT was that the rental car firms started adding a "surcharge" to the daily rental fee, no thanks.

This is LAWA's indirect way of telling you that it's cheaper to fly into and out of LAX.
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
 
laca773
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:10 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 9:07 am

What was the reason HA eliminated their HNL-ONT-HNL service?

How is AM doing at ONT?
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5008
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 9:49 am

Quoting LACA773 (Reply 34):
What was the reason HA eliminated their HNL-ONT-HNL service?

From what I understand, LAWA wanted to up the rates to some exorbatant amount, and HA couldn't afford it with the loads they had.
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
 
UA747400
Topic Author
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 8:49 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 10:34 am

It just seems that UA in particular has only TED which flies to DEN and LAS, plus the connection flight to LAX, however these are the only flights available from UA, or am I incorrect?
Ghandi- The best way to find yourself, is to lose yourself in the service of others
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5008
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 11:01 am

Quoting UA747400 (Reply 36):
It just seems that UA in particular has only TED which flies to DEN and LAS

Just DEN.

Plus 8 flights a day to LAX
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
 
ha763
Posts: 3168
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 5:36 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 11:02 am

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 35):
Quoting LACA773 (Reply 34):
What was the reason HA eliminated their HNL-ONT-HNL service?

From what I understand, LAWA wanted to up the rates to some exorbatant amount, and HA couldn't afford it with the loads they had.

Plain and simple, the loads were very low. HA went from daily service to 4x weekly. They even moved the LAS tag on from LAX to ONT, but still couldn't get the loads for ONT up.
 
prosa
Posts: 5389
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2001 3:24 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 12:15 pm

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 24):
It has little to do with the size of the surrounding population. The high revenue business travelers are concentrated on the west side of Los Angeles, not far from LAX. That is why there is a reluctance from airlines to fly there. Flights out of ONT are low yield.

Rather surprising ... on my one and only trip to the area a couple of years ago, I noticed a huge number of businesses in the ONT area. And it's certainly growing very rapidly.
"Let me think about it" = the coward's way of saying "no"
 
UA747400
Topic Author
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 8:49 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:04 pm

Yes, I understand that there are two daily JetBlue flights to NYC, but that is only one destination, what about places such as BOS, or PHL. Couldn't UA bring a 757 to do the job and have enough passengers to fly there?
Ghandi- The best way to find yourself, is to lose yourself in the service of others
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4602
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:31 pm

Will the Riverside Airport ever be expanded? From what I've read they have plenty of room for more traffic and tenants. Right now I understand it's mainly business travel, what is the main issue here? Are the NIMBYs powerful in this part of town?

It can't be runway length, SNA main runway is 5700x100 and after upcoming construction Riverside will be 6153x100, the secondary runway at Riverside is also longer than the secondary at SNA (albeit by only about 50 feet).
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11857
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 4:31 pm

Quoting UA747400 (Thread starter):

P.S. This is my first post on Airliners.net!

Welcome! It wasn't that long ago I started.

Quoting Travelin man (Reply 6):
It wasn't necessarily built for current traffic, but was built with future traffic in mind. San Bernardino/Riverside is currently the fastest growing area in Southern California (and one of the fastest growing areas of the nation). It's a bit like buying your kid pants that are a couple of sizes too big. He'll grow into them. I have no doubt traffic will continue to increase at ONT.

Good point Travelin man. The "rule of thumb" is that an airport should be built for the expected growth 15 years out! (Unless growth is predicted to be so fast that it makes sense to do a continuous "rolling" airport expansion.) LAX was expanded in the 1980's, so it should surprise no one the terminals et. al. cannot keep up.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 26):

Considering LAX has CAT IIIb ILS, it is pretty much impossible to sock the airport in.

I've never heard of LAX being shut down, even during the riots. Of course I'm talking about the time since I gained an aviation "Conscience", say circa 1980+. However, a reliever is required "just in case."

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 4:42 pm

Quoting YYZatcboy (Reply 10):
Can it handle the 380 yet? Just curious

You can easily land and take off the A380, and there is ramp space for it too. ONT will very likely see the aircraft over at the UPS ramp

Quoting UA747400 (Reply 40):
what about places such as BOS, or PHL. Couldn't UA bring a 757 to do the job and have enough passengers to fly there?

BOS and PHL already have tons of flights out of LAX and UA has a hub there. With easy connectivity from ONT through places like DEN and LAX, UA has no reason to do anything of the sort

Quoting UA747400 (Reply 40):
Yes, I understand that there are two daily JetBlue flights to NYC, but that is only one destination

Well, there are the flights to ATL, which is damn near transcon. BNA is not exactly a shorty either. Add to that Direct service to DCA, BWI and others and ONT is definately well covered
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
Coronado990
Posts: 1312
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:12 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Thu Jun 02, 2005 4:50 pm

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 41):
Will the Riverside Airport ever be expanded? From what I've read they have plenty of room for more traffic and tenants. Right now I understand it's mainly business travel, what is the main issue here? Are the NIMBYs powerful in this part of town?

It can't be runway length, SNA main runway is 5700x100 and after upcoming construction Riverside will be 6153x100, the secondary runway at Riverside is also longer than the secondary at SNA (albeit by only about 50 feet

Bonanza Air Lines flew F-27s into RAL back in the 1960s. However, I think you will see RIV (March) developed into a commercial airport before RAL, which is more of a G.A. airport.
Uncle SAN at your service!
 
Junction
Posts: 489
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 2:50 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Fri Jun 03, 2005 2:09 am

Quoting D950 (Reply 32):
One of the reasons I stopped using ONT was that the rental car firms started adding a "surcharge" to the daily rental fee, no thanks.

Bingo! I'm glad someone else noticed this. A lot of business travelers are undoubtedly taking note of this and just using LAX or SNA to be done with it. In addition to the crazy new "surcharge" there is now a very hefty drop off fee if you return your car to a different airport in Los Angeles area. No other airport in SoCal does this. It increases the price of the car rental about 300% per day compared to LAX, BUR, LGB and SNA!
Unfortunately, this is nothing airlines have control over, but I really think this may be affecting a lot of business travel usage at ONT.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Fri Jun 03, 2005 2:50 am

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 42):
However, a reliever is required "just in case."

Of course I realize that, but that was never ONT's primary purpose.

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 42):
LAX was expanded in the 1980's, so it should surprise no one the terminals et. al. cannot keep up.

I agree that LAX needs the West gates, more cargo facilities and a fifth runway down in the South complex (something Hahn wanted to part of), though LAX was still able to handle as many as 69 million passengers in one year in its current configuration (i.e. Terminal 1 plus the fully integrated terminal 2, anyone remember the bubbles?) and is way under that currently

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 42):
Welcome! It wasn't that long ago I started.

Yep, and we love you and your Carman Vortices Big grin
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
UA747400
Topic Author
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 8:49 am

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Fri Jun 03, 2005 8:15 am

Wasn't UA planning to fly direct to SFO from ONT, are they going to still go through with that?
Ghandi- The best way to find yourself, is to lose yourself in the service of others
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5008
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Fri Jun 03, 2005 8:18 am

Quoting UA747400 (Reply 47):
Wasn't UA planning to fly direct to SFO from ONT, are they going to still go through with that?

I haven't heard anything. As far as I know, it's just an idea by us on A.net.
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
 
User avatar
ramprat74
Posts: 1328
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 6:01 pm

RE: ONT: Why So Big For Such A Small Operation

Fri Jun 03, 2005 8:32 am

TED will have two nonstops starting in September. One 7am, and one 7pm.