D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sat Dec 31, 2005 1:49 pm

It has occurred to me lately that US has "acquired" a hub in Las Vegas, one of America's premiere international destinations. Is it time for US to leverage this with nonstops to Asia and Europe from LAS? Seriously, every time I go to Vegas, I see lots of visitors from abroad, ready to spend a lot of money. Would nonstops to Tokyo, Taipei, London, or Paris and the like be a good idea?
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sat Dec 31, 2005 1:59 pm

Nonstop LAS service hasn't always gone well for the companies providing it...

That being said, with the 350 coming along, who knows what they'll do.

N
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sat Dec 31, 2005 2:02 pm

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
Would nonstops to Tokyo, Taipei, London, or Paris and the like be a good idea?

*ANA flys charters (once in a blue moon) to Tokyo and Osaka with the 747-400
*Condor flys nonstop to Frankfurt with the 767-300
*Japan Air Lines is one stop to Narita with the 747-400
*Philippines is one stop to Manila with the A340-300
*My Travel flys nonstop to Manchester with the A330-200
*Virgin Atlantic flys nonstop to London with the 747-400

FYI:

*CityBird used to fly nonstop to Brussels with the 767-300 and MD-11
*Korean Airlines filed for Seoul to Las Vegas in 1997, and never inaugurated service.
*Northwest Airlines used to fly nonstop to Narita with the 747-200
*Singapore Airlines used to fly nonstop to Hong Kong with the 777-200

KAHALA777

[Edited 2005-12-31 06:03:13]
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sat Dec 31, 2005 2:38 pm

But no substantial non-stop service. I think US has a better shot than other players in the market because they will actually have a hub there, offering connections to the rest of the country.
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sat Dec 31, 2005 2:43 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 3):
But no substantial non-stop service.

Las Vegas is not a SFO, or LAX... But certainly its international presence is much greater than Minneapolis, St. Louis, Charlotte, Salt Lake, Denver, Portland, Baltimore, and Pittsburgh.

KAHALA777
 
FCYTravis
Posts: 1172
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 4:21 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sat Dec 31, 2005 2:44 pm

There's only one major bank at LAS, though, so they'd have to bring the international flights in and out with the red-eyes to have any sort of connections. The other problem is terminal space - rather, lack thereof. A and B are FULL UP during the night-flight bank.
USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
 
SHUPirate1
Posts: 3428
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 2:53 pm

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sat Dec 31, 2005 3:22 pm

Quoting FCYTravis (Reply 5):
The other problem is terminal space - rather, lack thereof. A and B are FULL UP during the night-flight bank

If I am not mistaken, wouldn't US Airways need to use the other terminal for these flights? I was under the (mistaken?) impression that the only FIS/customs facilities were in Terminal Two...
Burma's constitutional referendum options: A. Yes, B. Go to Insein Prison!
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sat Dec 31, 2005 3:28 pm

Quoting SHUPirate1 (Reply 6):
If I am not mistaken, wouldn't US Airways need to use the other terminal for these flights? I was under the (mistaken?) impression that the only FIS/customs facilities were in Terminal Two...

They are in the Charter/International Terminal, in addition does B or A gates have room for a A330?

KAHALA777
 
HPLASOps
Posts: 1767
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:13 pm

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sat Dec 31, 2005 3:34 pm

Quoting FCYTravis (Reply 5):
A and B are FULL UP during the night-flight bank.

Bingo! We've had to cut back on our schedule a bit because we don't have the gate space. We have a hard enough time begging for two gates a night from WN, and to throw in intl conx, we'd need to borrow 10 from them, not to mention the aircraft needed to supply these flights. Some MAJOR renovations would have to take place at McCarran if we want to be a significant intl destination.
"Just because I know how to get off a freeway doesn't mean I know how to get back on!" - Retard Joe
 
FCYTravis
Posts: 1172
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 4:21 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sat Dec 31, 2005 3:35 pm

I noticed the RDU red-eye went away  Sad
USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sat Dec 31, 2005 4:09 pm

Quoting HPLASOps (Reply 8):
Some MAJOR renovations would have to take place at McCarran if we want to be a significant intl destination.

is there anything physical that prevents these renovations/additions from occuring, or is it purely financial?
 
ScottB
Posts: 5446
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sat Dec 31, 2005 6:01 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 3):
I think US has a better shot than other players in the market because they will actually have a hub there, offering connections to the rest of the country.

The essential problem with this is the fact that LAS isn't well-located at all for connections to/from Europe; few people headed to any city east of the Rockies would be willing to backtrack from LAS unless the price were far under what every other carrier was offering. And you might as well send those passengers via PHL or CLT for the connections. It's not as poorly located for connections to and from Asia, but the lack of significant business ties between Las Vegas and Asia probably means they'd be almost wholly dependent on leisure traffic, which is often low-yielding.

Quoting HPLASOps (Reply 8):
and to throw in intl conx, we'd need to borrow 10 from them, not to mention the aircraft needed to supply these flights. Some MAJOR renovations would have to take place at McCarran if we want to be a significant intl destination.

As others have mentioned, the bigger issue is the CBP facilities being in Terminal 2. Not terribly convenient for connecting passengers and you'd probably end up towing aircraft around.

Also, US doesn't have the aircraft needed to undertake a significant international expansion out of LAS, and they need to get to the point of making profits consistently before going on a big aircraft-buying spree.
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sat Dec 31, 2005 6:11 pm

One of the biggest problems with international service into/out of LAS is there is no yield. LAS is a leisure destination and extremely price sensitive. There isn't much high yield traffic on the route (F/J) and the Y fares are subject to extreme discounting.

So, it really boils down to a business decision by the airline to use the asset there or deploy it on another route and make more of a profit. Remember full flights don't equate with profitability.
Fly fast, live slow
 
3201
Posts: 813
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2004 4:16 pm

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sat Dec 31, 2005 8:35 pm

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 2):
CityBird used to fly nonstop to Brussels with the 767-300 and MD-11

In Summer '98 they flew to LAS only once-a-week and it was BRU-LAS-OAK-BRU. I flew the BRU-LAS-OAK on OO-CTQ, and have vague memories of clearing customs, having some time to kill, going to the main terminal via some kind of shuttle bus(?) to make a Run For The Border, then heading back via bus just in time to re-board our flight with our burritos and meximelts. For the LAS-OAK segment only pax flying on to BRU had assigned seats, the BRU-LAS-OAK pax had to wait for the outbound BRU pax to board and then had open seating around them. (Nowadays we wouldn't be able to do that, of course, since we wouldn't be allowed past security at the main terminal.) Even got a Las Vegas entry stamp in our passports.
7 hours aint long-haul
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:14 am

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 12):
One of the biggest problems with international service into/out of LAS is there is no yield. LAS is a leisure destination and extremely price sensitive. There isn't much high yield traffic on the route (F/J) and the Y fares are subject to extreme discounting.

So lets get this straight Virgin Atlantic dropped Chicago and Toronto to focus on Las Vegas, a city with no yields? Check Again! Las Vegas, has overtaken both Orlando and Chicago to be come the conventon mecca in North America.

Las Vegas McCarren International Airport
________________________________________


53,000,000 Passengers a year use the Las Vegas Airport

10th Busiest Airport in the World
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%2...iest_airports_by_passenger_traffic

-The rank was above JFK, Hong Kong, Denver, Phoenix, Houston, Orlando, Newark, Toronto, San Francisco, Miami, Philadelphia, Singapore, Seattle, Detroit, Bangkok, Minneapolis, Madrid, Peking.

2006 Las Vegas International Flights
********************************

AeroMexico : Guadalajara, Mexico City, Monterrey
Air Canada : Calgary, Montréal, Toronto, Vancouver
Air Transat : Toronto
Alaska Airlines : Vancouver
America West : Cabo, Calgary, Edmonton, Puerto Vallarta, Toronto, Vancouver
Aviacsa : Guadalajara, Mexico City, Monterrey
Belair : Zurich
BMI : Manchester
Condor : Frankfurt
Harmony Airways : Vancouver
Japan Airlines : Tokyo/Narita
Mexicana : Guadalajara, Mexico City, San Jose del Cabo
MyTravel Airways : Glasgow and Manchester
Philippine Airlines : Manila, Vancouver
Skyservice : Toronto
Virgin Atlantic : London/Gatwick
WestJet : Calgary, Edmonton, Kelowna, Toronto, Winnipeg

Expansion Plans
****************

1/Consolidated rent-a-car center (estimated opening, mid-2006)
2/Baggage claim - Terminal One - new baggage claim devices (estimated 2007)
3/Terminal Three - a new terminal for scheduled carriers; a 'unit' terminal including bag claim, ticketing and parking facilities (estimated mid-2010)
4/Roadway system improvements - concurrent with development of Terminal Three
5/Aircraft apron reconstruction and Terminal One rehabilitation (ongoing)
6/D Gates NW wing - addition of nine gates to satellite concourse (estimated 2008)

KAHALA777
 
User avatar
United_fan
Posts: 6370
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 11:11 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:19 am

I don't think that NW to NRT with a 742 was non-stop. JL can't do it ,especially in the summer.
Champagne For My Real Friends,and Real Pain For My Sham Friends
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:22 am

Quoting United_fan (Reply 15):
I don't think that NW to NRT with a 742 was non-stop

It was nonstop!  Smile

Quoting United_fan (Reply 15):
JL can't do it ,especially in the summer.

They do it via Los Angeles with the 747-400


KAHALA777
 
User avatar
United_fan
Posts: 6370
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 11:11 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:30 am

Thanks,KAHALA. I remember seeing that bad boy in June 99 . I can't beleive that it could do it in the Summer when it's 110.I'm sure the throttles were up all the way! I've seen VS use alot of runway in the summer,too .
Champagne For My Real Friends,and Real Pain For My Sham Friends
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:34 am

Quoting United_Fan (Reply 17):
Thanks,KAHALA. I remember seeing that bad boy in June 99 . I can't beleive that it could do it in the Summer when it's 110.I'm sure the throttles were up all the way! I've seen VS use alot of runway in the summer,too

My ex girlfriends father was a NWA Mechanic at Las Vegas, at the time. He told us one day that one of the people servicing the upstairs lavatory screwed up, and the blue juice was flying down the stairs... Ah, the memories!

KAHALA777
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:36 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 14):
So lets get this straight Virgin Atlantic dropped Chicago and Toronto to focus on Las Vegas, a city with no yields? Check Again! Las Vegas, has overtaken both Orlando and Chicago to be come the conventon mecca in North America.

1) First of all, if you're going to Wikipedia, then you certainly know how to make me laugh. I certainly wouldn't call Wikipedia authorative at all!

2) I'll write this slowly for you to get it .....YES, NO YIELDS! As far as VS goes, after living in the UK, I can assure you they offer extremely inexpensive packages from the UK ex. LAS. So, yes no yields at all.

3) I'd check your list of airlines, because IIRC JAL and PR don't fly daily. In addition, you list several airlines that are primarily tour airlines, such as MYT, Condor, AirTransat. So, again, yes no yield.

4) VS didn't drop ORD and YUL for LAS. Check their schedules where they're flying now vs. then. You will see for yourself.

Think for a minute about what you're saying. If LAS was so good in terms of yield, then more international airlines (on the likes of BA/QF/SQ/LH) would fly there. Check the yields via Aviation Daily, you'll see for yourself, LAS isn't much different than HNL. It is an extremely price sensitive market that caters for volume.

[Edited 2005-12-31 18:37:50]
Fly fast, live slow
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:49 am

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 19):
YES, NO YIELDS! As far as VS goes, after living in the UK, I can assure you they offer extremely inexpensive packages from the UK ex. LAS. So, yes no yields at all.

So what do yields have to do with demand?

*Honolulu has low yields and is served by the likes of JAL, ANA, Korean, China Airlines, Qantas, and Air New Zealand.

*Papeete has low yields and is served by the likes of Air France, LAN, and Air New Zealand.

*Orlando has low yields and is served by the likes of British Airways and Virgin Atlantic.

*Nadi has low yields and is served by the likes of Korean Airlines and Air New Zealand.

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 19):
I'd check your list of airlines, because IIRC JAL and PR don't fly daily

So what, they serve it... There is a demand, like it or not!

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 19):
In addition, you list several airlines that are primarily tour airlines, such as MYT, Condor, AirTransat. So, again, yes no yield

So what... "Tour Airlines" as you call them make up for half of the passenger traffic in Birmingham, Manchester, and Gatwick... Like it or not, they are very high in demand to leisure markets.

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 19):
VS didn't drop ORD and YUL for LAS

It was called YYZ - Toronto

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 19):
If LAS was so good in terms of yield, then more international airlines (on the likes of BA/QF/SQ/LH) would fly there.

Singapore Airlines flew Las Vegas-Hong Kong-Singapore in the past, they were hit hard by SARS, 700am departure time, and the fact that Las Vegas went out full in Business and only a handful of seats in Economy. On the flip side Chicago-Amsterdam-Singapore was flown by Singapore Airlines and was pulled because there was lack of demand for Business, and more for Economy.


KAHALA777
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:49 am

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 19):
LAS isn't much different than HNL. It is an extremely price sensitive market that caters for volume.

But wouldn't that change if there were a big hub there?

With all the talk on this board about how DXB is going to become the busiest airport in the world, I'm a little surprised people can't see any success ex-LAS.
 
ManchesterMAN
Posts: 1040
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2003 10:57 pm

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:59 am

Quoting ScottB (Reply 11):
As others have mentioned, the bigger issue is the CBP facilities being in Terminal 2. Not terribly convenient for connecting passengers and you'd probably end up towing aircraft around.

This is not ideal but look at ORD - it somehow works there with arrivals at T5 and departures from T1 or T3 depending on whether you are UA or AA.

I think it is much too early for US to even consider operating transatlantic / transpacific flights from LAS but I do think it will happen, not on a grand scale but services to sun starved cities such as London, Manchester and Frankfurt which have a lot of tourist demand as well as plenty of business demand. Not to mention many will see LAS as a better connection point to LAX/SFO/SAN etc. than the east coast, especially premium pax who have to "suffer" a long trip in domestic first after the luxury of transatlantic business.
Flown: A300,A319,A320,A321,A330,A340.A380,717,727,737,747,757,767,777,DC9,DC10,MD11,MD80,F100,F50,ERJ,E190,CRJ,BAe146,Da
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:05 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 20):
So what do yields have to do with demand?

Duh!!!! I don't mind having this conversation, but you've got to be kidding on that one?

Yields and demand are simple economics.

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 20):
*Honolulu has low yields and is served by the likes of JAL, ANA, Korean, China Airlines, Qantas, and Air New Zealand

Not from those locations! HNL from the US, I agree but not international. Plus, I'd check your statement about low yields, perhaps as a domestic flight to MCO, I agree, but not international.

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 20):
So what... "Tour Airlines" as you call them make up for half of the passenger traffic in Birmingham, Manchester, and Gatwick... Like it or not, they are very high in demand to leisure markets

You're answering your own statement with this one. I agree, and as you said, LAS is a "leisure market". The "tour airlines" are able to have low fares because of the low cost structure they enjoy. This fact is going to depress yeilds even further.

I work for SQ, I know where they flew, however, you are making assumptions on why they pulled out. And in fact, they are wrong. SARS had a lot to do with it, but there were other problems. The timing of the flights was all wrong from a marketing perspective and that didn't help when SARS hit.

Your comments about BA/VS, they are willing to sacrifice yeilds to maintain market share, to a point. TPA has been a very good destination for BA, with fairly respectable yields. MCO again is a leisure destination and the aircraft BA flies reflects that.

I do know Toronto is YYZ, but it's 2am in Singapore right now....long day.

Quoting D L X (Reply 21):
But wouldn't that change if there were a big hub there?

With all the talk on this board about how DXB is going to become the busiest airport in the world, I'm a little surprised people can't see any success ex-LAS

To make a hub work you have to have enough of a encatchment area to sustain the hub on it's own. Then the fares will actually rise, since you'd have dominance in the hub. (In theory for hub and spoke). However, there really isn't a major international presence for business/first traffic out of LAS. If you were to hub there, you're going to try to get people out of LAX/SFO to backtrack and then fly out of LAS. Awful tough.
Fly fast, live slow
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:34 am

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 23):
To make a hub work you have to have enough of a encatchment area to sustain the hub on it's own. Then the fares will actually rise, since you'd have dominance in the hub. (In theory for hub and spoke). However, there really isn't a major international presence for business/first traffic out of LAS.

Well, if the hub works without international flights, why wouldn't it work with international flights? Those domestic and Mexican connections should only enhance the profitability of the flights. Seriously, DXB seems to be a worse position in terms of yields and O/D than LAS unless I'm missing something fundamental.

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 23):
If you were to hub there, you're going to try to get people out of LAX/SFO to backtrack and then fly out of LAS. Awful tough.

I don't think that's the case. Most of US's customers still live east of the Mississippi River in the US. Those people would not be concerned about the connection. Additionally, I don't think any hub that isn't LAX or SFO is concerned about getting traffic to Asia, just like PHL and BOS aren't concerned with getting any of the traffic from JFK. But LAS can certainly get the Asian traffic to FAT, SAN, PHX, DEN, and every city east of it, which is still more than 80% of the country's population.
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:42 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 25):
don't think that's the case. Most of US's customers still live east of the Mississippi River in the US.

Why should someone connect in LAS when they can go non-stop from the east coast? That's the dilemma US/HP faces. So, the only alternative is to try to get traffic from closer cities, ie., LAX/SFO. If I'm in Denver, why should I take US when I can take UA and most likely have a better connection with more beyond destinations. HP tried to have service to FUK and NGO and it bled them to death!

Quoting D L X (Reply 25):
Well, if the hub works without international flights, why wouldn't it work with international flights? Those domestic and Mexican connections should only enhance the profitability of the flights. Seriously, DXB seems to be a worse position in terms of yields and O/D than LAS unless I'm missing something fundamental.

I know Mexico is an "international" destination, but I'm talking about long haul destinations. To have an "international" operation isn't cheap. US/HP would go through money so fast it would scare you.

As far as DXB goes, there are so many things different between a hub there and one in LAS. The entire cost structure is different. Interestingly enough, SQ will soon have flights going to CAI, IST and Moscow from DXB.
Fly fast, live slow
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:46 am

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 23):
Not from those locations! HNL from the US, I agree but not international. Plus, I'd check your statement about low yields, perhaps as a domestic flight to MCO, I agree, but not international

From the sounds of it you seem to think that Las Vegas has no demand for anything but a few "Tour Airlines".... A word to the wise JAL pulled DFW, and kept Las Vegas, why is that? Philippine Airlines pulled Newark, and is in Las Vegas, why is that? Virgin Atlantic pulled Toronto and Chicago, and are in Las Vegas, why is that? Yield, or not, these airlines have a demand to serve Las Vegas. In addition try pricing a Vrigin Atlantic ticket from Las Vegas to London in the month of August in Upper Class, and Economy, tell us the price difference from this low yield market compared to Miami, or Washington D.C.

You seem to have ignored the fact that Honolulu is served from Asia and Australia by the likes of Hawaiian Airlines, Qantas, JAL, ANA, Korean, All Nippon, EVA Airways, Air New Zealand, Air Pacific, and Philippine Airlines. The fly there full of holiday seekers.... Plain and simple... Those holiday seekers fill the planes and bring in the money... Isnt that what business is all about???

If Orlando yields are so wonderful then why arent Condor, Japan Airlines and Philippine Airlines flying there? Perhaps, as you pointed out... DEMAND! Something that Las Vegas warrants and Orlando does not.

... The clock is ticking....

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 23):
Yields and demand are simple economics

Yet Virgin Atlantic, Japan Airlines, Philippine Airlines still see a need to serve Las Vegas, or did they miss your view of things?

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 23):
I do know Toronto is YYZ, but it's 2am in Singapore right now....long day

You quoted VS as having pulled the cork on YUL!... You were corrected and advised that it was YYZ, not YUL!

Quoting LegendDC9 (Reply 24):
I am sure you could have fit another "ex" in that sentence

ha ha....  Smile

KAHALA777
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 4:20 am

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 26):
Why should someone connect in LAS when they can go non-stop from the east coast?

Firstly, there is an awful lot of America east of the Mississippi that is not the "East Coast".
Next, the only Asian service east of the Mississippi is to ORD, BOS, IAD, JFK/EWR, ATL, DTW, and (technically) MSP. So, if you live in any but those 6 areas, you must connect to Asia. That is a pretty small piece of America, meaning an awful lot of that area has to connect. (Including some of America's largest cities! I.e. Philly, Miami, Cleveland, Baltimore, Pittsburgh etc.)LAS is just as good as anywhere else for these millions of mobile people.

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 26):
I know Mexico is an "international" destination, but I'm talking about long haul destinations.

Don't any Asians want to travel to Mexico? The US domestic and Mexican markets combined are the ones that I think would make Asian flights profitable. It would be just like Dubai: A city of entertainment and conventions with a growing amount of bona fide business offering a large amount of connections to points onward.
 
dartland
Posts: 514
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 5:09 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 4:21 am

LAS definitely has demand and hub potential for HP/US.

Why?
1) For east-bound travelers, they connect to the massive US eastern network. For west-bound travelers, they connect to HP's western network. No need to back-track.
2) Once they get int'l hub status, they will be able to compete with anyone as the major carrier at the airport with a combination of O&D and connecting passenger traffic, they don't need to rely on either exclusively.
3) Logistical issues don't matter. We're not talking about 2006, we're talking about in the next 5-10 years. If they want an int'l hub and can make money off of it, they will do whatever it takes to solve those issues.
4) Las Vegas is one of the fastest growing cities in the country. Same can be said about Phoenix and a lot of the other places HP serves in the southwest. This will drive increasing demand for LAS for O&D and as a southwest hub. This goes hand in hand in Las Vegas increasing as a convention destination -- also driving demand.
 
ATWZW170
Posts: 755
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 4:18 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 4:24 am

Could we see any HI service from LAS? I could see LON service, maybe even NRT service.....with Star Alliance helping to fill the planes.
Success is getting what you want...happiness is liking what you get
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 4:26 am

Quoting Dartland (Reply 29):
LAS definitely has demand and hub potential for HP/US.

The issue is for international operations that neither carrier has, not a domestic hub system.
Fly fast, live slow
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 4:30 am

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 31):
The issue is for international operations that neither carrier has, not a domestic hub system

Happy New Years!

America West flys international from Las Vegas daily.

KAHALA777
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 4:43 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 32):
America West flys international from Las Vegas daily



Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 26):
I know Mexico is an "international" destination, but I'm talking about long haul destinations. To have an "international" operation isn't cheap. US/HP would go through money so fast it would scare you.

Perhaps you'd want to re-read the posts.....it's 26 just in case you wanted to know....
Fly fast, live slow
 
ChiGB1973
Posts: 1394
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 6:39 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 4:57 am

Lots of charters and cheap seats. Save the money for the tables.

M
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 5:15 am

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 26):
HP tried to have service to FUK and NGO and it bled them to death!

Fukuoka was never served, America West Airlines filed the following when they wanted to serve Japan with the 747.

#1 Tokyo
#2 Osaka
#3 Fukuoka
#4 Nagoya
#5 Sapporo

They were offered #4 Nagoya, they took it and ran with it via Honolulu on ex KLM birds. The service was excellent, the loads and yield were nightmares.

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 26):
Why should someone connect in LAS when they can go non-stop from the east coast? That's the dilemma US/HP faces.

Oh yes Las Vegas should not have flight to Asia since Detroit, New York-JFK, Newark, Washington-IAD, and Atlanta have flights to Asia from the East Coast.  sarcastic 

Quoting D L X (Reply 28):
Don't any Asians want to travel to Mexico?

Yes via Los Angeles, San Francisco, Dallas, Houston, and Chicago. In addition JAL serves NRT-YVR-MEX via the 744. Malaysia used to serve LAX-MEX as well.

KAHALA77
 
isitsafenow
Posts: 3413
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2004 9:22 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 5:28 am

The NW flight from Narita to LAS was a 747-200 WITH a stop at LAX AND a change of equipment to an A 320 on to LAS.
There was a NS with Northwest for a short time but it was only a few months. NW condensed flights by doing the Narita-LAX-LAS thing.
Do you wish to argue with the OAG?
safe
If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 5:58 am

Quoting Isitsafenow (Reply 36):
The NW flight from Narita to LAS was a 747-200 WITH a stop at LAX AND a change of equipment to an A 320 on to LAS.

The stop came about a year or so after the nonstop service came into play.

Quoting Isitsafenow (Reply 36):
Do you wish to argue with the OAG?

No.... Bottom line is that it was served!

Quoting Isitsafenow (Reply 36):
There was a NS with Northwest for a short time but it was only a few months. NW condensed flights by doing the Narita-LAX-LAS thing

Incorrect NWA tried the DC-9, then the A320, then the 757, to feed the flight from Los Angeles. Only after operating the 747 nonstop for a year or so, on a 2 x weekly flight. At the time NWA had a LAS F/A base. If you recall NWA pulled around the time JAL entered!

KAHALA777
 
amhilde
Posts: 628
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2003 5:01 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 6:13 am

If they have these international flights from LAS, even in 5-10 years, then where do they have them park- at T2 with the rest of the international flights? LAS as an international connection point is not terribly friendly- from a ground perspective. I took VS out of there to LGW in May and the whole T2 thing seemed like an afterthought, 2-bit operation. First I had to FIND the shuttle bus to T2 from the main terminal and then stand in the sun waiting for the damn thing. They dump you off in front of the terminal which is somewhere in back by the food service operations in a building that feels half finished ( still some construction going on when I was there). I didnt see too many ticket counters at all and VS was jammed in a corner. Upstairs there is a mini-food court and one newsagents and some bathrooms and about 6 gates- thats about it. When I left on a Tuesday ( maybe a wednesday?) It was the VS flight and a Condor flight leaving. My flight wasnt full going out, and seemed to be full of leisure travellers ( not to mention that was one of the longest, slowest takeoffs Ive ever experienced).

Coming back I opted to sit upstairs and it was the start of school holidays so you KNOW most of those people were there on package tours since the plane was full to bursting ( i did however sit next to an actuary who was travelling for a convention in LAS). When we arrived we had to sit for a half hour waiting for someone to get out of our gate. Immigrations only had three lines open and it took 45 minutes for my luggage to turn up- and we were the only plane there. Going back to the main terminal I had to stand out in front of T2 in blowing dirt and wind ( and the sun) for at least 10 minutes waiting for that stupid shuttle bus to arrive, and then I had to hike all over T1 to get to WN to check in for my second flight back up to RNO. All I remember coming back was that LAS was a major pain in the ass- any other airport you dont have to do nearly as much tap-dancing to go between a domestic and international flight. Thank god i wasnt checking luggage because then I would have had to wait for WN to spit it out before I could go to T2 and vice versa.

I guess my point is that if anyone wants to start up some sort of significant service with connections that T2 would have to be expanded or made easier to work with the other parts of the airport. If one is making a connection on US and has to land at T2, well hell you could spend ages getting from T2 to the main terminal thru security, on to the little tram and then to your gate.

Another thing in regards to conventions. Sure, LAS gets a lot of the big international conventions, but conventions dont happen all the time and arent necessarily international in scope, outside of the few major major ones every year. International conventions also tend to move from location to location as a convenience to attendees. There isnt a constant steady stream of international business travellers for conventions in LAS because they arent consistent events. If that was the case then maybe MSY would have seen more international flights as they were one of the top convention locations in the US. Finally, correct me if Im wrong, but conventions always seem to be one of those business things where you send the subordinates in with a stand set-up and then the decision makers and those interested fly in and everything is rather relaxed ( I was at the big gambling industry one in LAS and spent the whole time playing new slot machines and electronic roulette and few people were in suits). The big guys dont stay long.

Asian gamblers may not materialize either- Singapore is going to open up, Macau is, Japan is still looking at it, and who knows in 5-10 years if many more will follow. LAS is a pretty long way from any major overseas markets and for a leisure traveller every hour in the air is one less hour on the beach (or in casino).
Hang on tightly, Let go lightly
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 6:20 am

Bottom Line is: Las Vegas does have proven Asian/European Long Haul Flights. However, US Airways is not planning a grand expansion to Asia anytime soon. If anything a Star Alliance partner may start Las Vegas from Asia or Europe, possibly South America.

KAHALA777
 
HPLASOps
Posts: 1767
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:13 pm

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 7:48 am

Quoting Amhilde (Reply 38):
guess my point is that if anyone wants to start up some sort of significant service with connections that T2 would have to be expanded or made easier to work with the other parts of the airport. If one is making a connection on US and has to land at T2, well hell you could spend ages getting from T2 to the main terminal thru security, on to the little tram and then to your gate.

This vaildates what I said earlier - if LAS wants to be an airport of significant intl operations, there would have to be MAJOR renovations. T2 is a joke, highly unorganized, total anarchy, and no relevant connection to the rest of the airport. I personally like the idea of tearing down T2, and the A/B concourses and just rebuliding a connected, intl capable terminal with capacity for 50-60 gates. Yes, that's a pipe dream that has no realistic method of actually getting completed (unless you built the section over the A gates first with the int'l facilites, then T2, then the B gates, but that's a thought).

Also, no one has brought up the impact intl heavies bring upon ramp traffic. We all know LAS has 4 runways which are only good for 2 at a time, plus heavies take longer taxies, use more taxi space, and cause more congestion. If we went from 30 intl flights a day to 60 to 70, you'd see overall taxi times increase, and subsequent whining from WN, and LAS's overall ability to function get tightened substantially.
"Just because I know how to get off a freeway doesn't mean I know how to get back on!" - Retard Joe
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 9:39 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 26):
You quoted VS as having pulled the cork on YUL!... You were corrected and advised that it was YYZ, not YUL!

You need to learn some manners. PhilSquares is one of the most respected users on this board, and you one of the least.

When you have close to 10,000 hours PIC on a 747, then we can revisit that.

N
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:06 am

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 40):
You need to learn some manners. PhilSquares is one of the most respected users on this board, and you one of the least.

When you have close to 10,000 hours PIC on a 747, then we can revisit that

Yawning....  Smile

Yet he stated that Virgin Atlantic flew to Montreal!  wink 

HAPPY NEW YEAR 2006


KAHALA777
 
stlgph
Posts: 8986
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:11 am

Quoting Isitsafenow (Reply 35):
The NW flight from Narita to LAS was a 747-200 WITH a stop at LAX AND a change of equipment to an A 320 on to LAS.

Do other flights work that way now into Las Vegas say...Northwest from Tokyo via Seattle, or United via San Francisco, etc.?
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:19 am

Per the SkyTeam July 2006 Schedule:

Tokyo to Las Vegas

330pm
Delta via Atlanta
777-200 to 767-400

350pm
Northwest via Los Angeles
747-200 to A319

350pm
Continental via Houston
777-200 to 737-800

355pm
Northwest via Detroit
747-400 to 757-200

420pm
Continental via Newark
777-200 to 757-200

KAHALA777
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:37 am

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 34):
Oh yes Las Vegas should not have flight to Asia since Detroit, New York-JFK, Newark, Washington-IAD, and Atlanta have flights to Asia from the East Coast.

No, that's not what I said at all. Please go back and read carefully what I said. Then we can continue this diatribe.

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 34):
Fukuoka was never served, America West Airlines filed the following when they wanted to serve Japan with the 747.

How do you think NW got the FUK route. DIP financing to HP

Quoting Kahala777 (Reply 41):
Yawning....

Yet he stated that Virgin Atlantic flew to Montreal!

I had already stated that was an error on my part. What would you me to do? Certainly you've never made any errors. As Istated, it was 2am in Singapore when I wrote that post. And it was a typo as far as the identifier of Toronto goes. As Steve Martin would sayeeeeexxxxxxxxxxccccccccccuuuuuusssssssseeeeeeeeee me!

I don't like how you take things that people write out of context. You have a habit of doing that and then just ignoring other parts of their post that prove you wrong. You have a happy New Year.
Fly fast, live slow
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:48 am

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 44):
How do you think NW got the FUK route. DIP financing to HP

NW got NGO!  wink 

America West *N E V E R* served Fukuoka!

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 25):
Why should someone connect in LAS when they can go non-stop from the east coast? That's the dilemma US/HP faces. So, the only alternative is to try to get traffic from closer cities, ie., LAX/SFO. If I'm in Denver, why should I take US when I can take UA and most likely have a better connection with more beyond destinations. HP tried to have service to FUK and NGO and it bled them to death!

Again, America West Airlines never served Fukuoka!

KAHALA777
 
isitsafenow
Posts: 3413
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2004 9:22 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:54 am

Cactus flew HNL-Nagoia. He was mistaken...no big deal
safe
If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
 
Kahala777
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 7:28 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:57 am

Quoting Isitsafenow (Reply 46):
Cactus flew HNL-Nagoia. He was mistaken...no big deal

N A G O Y A

 Smile


KAHALA777
 
isitsafenow
Posts: 3413
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2004 9:22 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 11:01 am

I knew I could count on you K-777.Good job.
Im going to a party now.
Happy new year to EVERYONE at airliners....back tomorrow

safe/michael
If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4595
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

RE: US And The LAS Hub: Ready To Go International?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 11:03 am

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 40):
You need to learn some manners. PhilSquares is one of the most respected users on this board, and you one of the least.

When you have close to 10,000 hours PIC on a 747, then we can revisit that.

Oh...geez. Must someone in the business for a long time be considered infallible? So he slipped on the YUL/YYZ thing...big deal. It's late like he said. But getting after Kahala for it is just as nitpicky. But please, service time shouldn't and doesn't equal credibility. I've run into plenty of pilots with a lot of service time who were absolute morons. Note that this was only to make a point. PhilSquares is not the subject of my rant.

Posters with a RR of 1 have the same rights on here as someone with an RR of 5 or 90 and their views are just as valuable. Everyone starts sometime.