FAQ

WHAT IS THIS REPORT?
This compares departures for sale THIS WEEK for the stated period versus what was for sale LAST WEEK...It does NOT compare to last year or now (UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED).

HOW DO I READ IT?
XXX-YYY DEC 4>5 JAN 4>5 ; means that the listed airline changed the frequency between the two airports to add from 4 to 5 roundtrips in December and January. No other months were changed. I only list one direction, although it is possible the listed change is only one way. It is too difficult to average the two directions. I assume the change is roundtrip and that is most often the case.

WHERE ARE SEATS SHOWN?
They aren't. This only shows departures.

HOW ARE THE DAILY DEPARTURES CALCULATED?
This report uses total operations for the month listed, divided over the days in the month.

WHAT ARE THE FRACTIONAL FLIGHTS?
Flights that do not operate every day of the month create fractional service. In most cases flights are rounded, but in the case of international service or markets with low frequency, fractions are shown. For example, if a flight operates 4 times in April it will show 4/30=0.133=0.1. Also , a flight that only operates once per week may vary between 0.1 and 0.2 because a weekday may repeat either 4 or 5 times depending on the month.

WHAT ABOUT CARRIERS THAT DON'T PUBLISH A SCHEDULE 9 MONTHS IN ADVANCE?
Most airlines publish schedules 11 months in advance. This report covers the next 9 months. That avoids seeing schedules as they are loaded. Several LCCs load their schedules less than 9 months into the future. I remove the schedule adds if I see them and show a year over year (YOY) comparison if I notice them.

THOSE FLIGHTS AREN'T DELTA, THEY ARE SKYWEST
This report only shows the marketing code. It is too complicated to show all the operators.

THE FREQUENCIES MAY HAVE CHANGED AS YOU SHOW, BUT THE SEATS DIDNT CHANGE BECAUSE OF EQUIPMENT SWAPS
That is a natural weakness of a frequency based report, but it provides something to discuss below.

THIS LOOKS LIKE AN ERROR?
The carriers file the schedules. They do make mistakes. Most of the mistakes I have seen are either related to code shares not being marked as "duplicates" or carriers filing flights with invalid data such as equipment codes that are not standard. This causes flights to not appear.

CHARTERS?
Lately charters have been showing up in the database. I have no idea if that will continue.

I marked some of the ones I thought were interesting with an "*".

*4O MIA-CUN APR 1.9>0 MAY 2>0 JUN 2>0 JUL 2>0 AUG 2>0 SEP 2>0 OCT 2>0

7H ANC-UNK MAR 0.2>1.2 APR 0>1.0 MAY 0>1.0 JUN 0>1.0 JUL 0>1.0 AUG 0>1.0 SEP 0>1.0 OCT 0>1.0

9X DFW-HOT MAR 2>4

AA DFW-CUU APR 1.1>2 MAY 1.9>2
AA MIA-BZE AUG 1.7>2 SEP 1.0>2 OCT 1.9>2
AA MIA-CHS APR 2>3 MAY 1.1>3

AC RDU-YYZ MAY 3>4 JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4 AUG 3>4 SEP 3>4 OCT 3>4

*AM DEN-MEX JUN 0>0.3 JUL 0>0.3 AUG 0>0.3 SEP 0>0.3 OCT 0>0.3
AM MCO-MEX SEP 3>2 OCT 3>2
AM SAT-MEX SEP 1.3>1.0 OCT 1.3>1.0
*AM SJC-GDL JUL 0>0.9 AUG 0>0.8 SEP 0>0.9 OCT 0>0.8

AZ LAX-FCO MAY 1.0>0.8
*AZ ORD-FCO MAY 0.7>0 OCT 0.6>0.0

B6 JFK-SJU MAY 6>5

BA JFK-ORY MAY 0.9>0.8

CM FLL-PTY JUN 0.6>0.9 JUL 0.5>1.0 AUG 0.6>0.8

D7 HNL-KIX JUL 0>0.6 AUG 0>0.5 SEP 0>0.6 OCT 0>0.5

DL ATL-BTV JUL 1.0>2.0 AUG 1.0>1.8
DL LGA-ILM JUN 0.6>0.1
*DL SLC-ASE JUL 0>1.0 AUG 0>1.0

F9 DEN-BZN MAY 0.4>0.2
F9 DEN-DFW MAY 2>1.2
F9 DEN-PHL MAY 1.0>2
F9 MCI-MCO APR 0.5>0.4

HU LAX-CKG APR 0>0.3 MAY 0>0.3 JUN 0>0.3 JUL 0>0.3 AUG 0>0.3 SEP 0>0.3 OCT 0>0.3
HU LAX-CTU MAR 0>0.2 APR 0>0.3 MAY 0>0.3 JUN 0>0.3 JUL 0>0.3 AUG 0>0.3 SEP 0>0.3 OCT 0>0.3

JL HNL-KIX APR 1.1>1.0

KX TPA-GCM JUN 0.7>1.0 JUL 0.7>1.0 AUG 0.7>1.0

OZ SEA-ICN SEP 0.8>1.0 OCT 0.7>1.0

*PY SFB-AUA APR 0>0.1 MAY 0>0.2 JUN 0>0.1 JUL 0>0.3 AUG 0>0.3 SEP 0>0.1 OCT 0>0.2
*PY SFB-GEO JUL 0>0.2 AUG 0>0.1 SEP 0>0.1

QF LAX-MEL APR 1.4>1.1

UA DEN-CPR MAY 4>5
UA EWR-BUF MAY 5>4
UA EWR-GSO MAY 4>3
UA EWR-GUA JUN 0.4>0.9 JUL 0.5>1.2 AUG 0.4>0.7
UA EWR-MSN JUN 1.2>2.0 JUL 1.0>2 AUG 1.0>2 SEP 1.0>2 OCT 1.0>2
UA IAD-LIS OCT 0.6>0.7
UA IAH-AUA APR 0.2>1.1 MAY 0.1>1.1 JUN 0.4>1.4 JUL 0.5>1.5 AUG 0.3>1.3 SEP 0.2>1.2 OCT 0.1>1.1
**UA IAH-CCS APR 1.0>0.1 MAY 1.0>0 JUN 1.0>0 JUL 1.0>0 AUG 1.0>0 SEP 1.0>0 OCT 1.0>0

VR PVD-RAI AUG 0.2>0.3 SEP 0.1>0.3 OCT 0.2>0.3

Y4 AUS-GDL APR 0.6>0.3 MAY 0.6>0.5
Y4 JFK-GDL APR 1.0>0.6
Y4 LAS-MEX MAR 1.3>1.1 APR 1.0>0.7
Y4 LAX-AGU MAR 0.6>0.4 APR 0.7>0.6
Y4 LAX-DGO MAR 0.3>0.2
Y4 LAX-GDL APR 4>3
Y4 LAX-MLM APR 1.0>0.9
Y4 LAX-QRO MAY 0>0.2
Y4 LAX-ZCL APR 0.8>0.7
Y4 MDW-QRO MAY 0>0.1
Y4 MDW-ZCL MAR 0.6>0.5
Y4 MIA-MEX MAR 1.0>0.9 APR 1.0>0.6
Y4 OAK-TIJ MAR 0.3>0.1
Y4 ONT-BJX MAY 0>0.2
Y4 ORD-GDL APR 1.0>0.5
Y4 ORD-MEX APR 1.6>1.2
Y4 ORD-MTY MAR 0.3>0.2 APR 0.4>0.3
Y4 PDX-GDL APR 0.4>0.6 MAY 0.5>0.6
Y4 PHX-CUL APR 0.4>0.3
Y4 SAT-GDL MAR 0.4>0.3 MAY 0.4>0.5
Y4 SFO-GDL APR 0.9>0.7
Y4 SFO-MEX APR 1.0>0.7

Does not appear DL flew SLC-ASE at least last Summer from my records.
Amazing how little F9 is now flying DFW-DEN.
IAH-CCS is the best example of an oil route turned awful...plus politics.
Surinam Airways to SFB?

enilria wrote:

AA MIA-CHS APR 2>3 MAY 1.1>3

If I'm reading correctly, it looks like the ultimate result is that the market goes from the current 2x daily E175 to 3x daily E145, for a net loss of 2 seats - better frequency with almost no change in overall capacity, but loss of F.

enilria wrote:

B6 JFK-SJU MAY 6>5

It seems like JetBlue has followed AA in de-emphasizing SJU big-time from its peak there several years ago. The state of the PR economy continues to struggle.

enilria wrote:

*DL SLC-ASE JUL 0>1.0 AUG 0>1.0

It's pretty impressive to see what has happened to the ASE market in the last few years. I know this is obviously oversimplifying, but from pretty much being the near-sovereign domain of United, it's as if AA and Delta suddenly discovered they also have CR7s capable of flying in and out of there. Both of those airlines now have quite the impressive operations (relatively speaking) into ASE in both the summer and winter - complimenting United, and of course also complimenting all three airlines' EGE schedules.

enilria wrote:

**UA IAH-CCS APR 1.0>0.1 MAY 1.0>0 JUN 1.0>0 JUL 1.0>0 AUG 1.0>0 SEP 1.0>0 OCT 1.0>0

That's incredible given the energy industry connections, but given what is going on with PDVSA and Venezuela in general, I suppose this shouldn't be that surprising. After United exits IAH-CCS, U.S. carrier service to Venezuela will be down to just 21 weekly flights, 95% from MIA - speaks volumes about what has happened to that country.

enilria wrote:

AC RDU-YYZ MAY 3>4 JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4 AUG 3>4 SEP 3>4 OCT 3>4

I'd vote to give up the additional frequency for a new destination

If I remember correctly, EWR-GUA hasn't seen this kind of flying in a while, especially not during the summer months.

enilria wrote:

Surinam Airways to SFB?

I don't think this is new service, just a resumption of a seasonal route

EDIT: Thanks for doing these posts each week, always interesting to read

Wow that is really too bad about UA in CCS. CO was in CCS for many, many years. I think it's less about the oil than it is about the situation in Venezuela. I don't have the data at my fingertips, but other airlines have given up on CCS as well. I hope the employees there can find other work. So sad really. A friend who is married to a Venezuelan woman says he won't even travel into CCS airport due to lack of safety. It's that bad folks. I was chatting with a friend in the country and he says the country is in a state of crisis. They probably could only take so much.

commavia wrote:

enilria wrote:

B6 JFK-SJU MAY 6>5

It seems like JetBlue has followed AA in de-emphasizing SJU big-time from its peak there several years ago. The state of the PR economy continues to struggle.

I have not really seen much impact on SJU traffic or revenue in non-ethnic/VFR markets, however.

commavia wrote:

enilria wrote:

*DL SLC-ASE JUL 0>1.0 AUG 0>1.0

It's pretty impressive to see what has happened to the ASE market in the last few years. I know this is obviously oversimplifying, but from pretty much being the near-sovereign domain of United, it's as if AA and Delta suddenly discovered they also have CR7s capable of flying in and out of there. Both of those airlines now have quite the impressive operations (relatively speaking) into ASE in both the summer and winter - complimenting United, and of course also complimenting all three airlines' EGE schedules.

Good point

commavia wrote:

enilria wrote:

**UA IAH-CCS APR 1.0>0.1 MAY 1.0>0 JUN 1.0>0 JUL 1.0>0 AUG 1.0>0 SEP 1.0>0 OCT 1.0>0

That's incredible given the energy industry connections, but given what is going on with PDVSA and Venezuela in general, I suppose this shouldn't be that surprising. After United exits IAH-CCS, U.S. carrier service to Venezuela will be down to just 21 weekly flights, 95% from MIA - speaks volumes about what has happened to that country.

I was shocked there's not enough business left to justify that route.

ERJ170 wrote:

I'd vote to give up the additional frequency for a new destination

YUL perhaps? Yeah, I agree.

Humberside wrote:

I don't think this is new service, just a resumption of a seasonal route

EDIT: Thanks for doing these posts each week, always interesting to read

Thanks

I looked and as of last week they had no schedule filed for SFB from anywhere for any date. I did not check last year, though.

Well. Didn't enliria publish one of these threads in the past few months indicating UA was going daily to CCS up from 4x a week?

enilria wrote:

Does not appear DL flew SLC-ASE at least last Summer from my records.
Amazing how little F9 is now flying DFW-DEN.
IAH-CCS is the best example of an oil route turned awful...plus politics.
Surinam Airways to SFB?

I'll tell you that IAH CCS being cut has little to do with oil and almost everything to do with politics and the terrible state Venezuela is in.

UA IAH-CCS has not been dropped. Equipment has changed to a 757 from a 738 and its now a day flight since around February 1st.

UA 1046 IAH - CCS (8:45-15:35)
UA 1045 CCS -IAH (16:50 - 19:38)

The flight is making great money and is usually sold out on most days, hence the equipment upgrade to 752

Edit: further booking shows that flight will be one stop and will stop in Aruba.

UA 1046 IAH - AUA (1:35 - no time given)
AUA - CCS (8:15 - 9:20)

On the return flight though, it flies directly back home. Maybe it's because they are still waiting on approval from the venezuelan government for future flights.

jayunited wrote:

There is more than enough business to justify the route the flight on most days goes out completely full. The problem UA is having like all airlines is being able to repatriate revenue sold in Venezuelan currency. So far there has been no internal announcement that this route is being canceled so this could just be a mistake but if it is true it is unfortunate for passengers because most of them will now have to go through MIA.

My thought as well - pretty incredible this route wouldn't work given that United has now, like AA and Delta, switched pretty much all revenue to USD-denominated currency. That said, I think we may have our answer:

AirplaneWizard wrote:

Edit: further booking shows that flight will be one stop and will stop in Aruba.

UA 1046 IAH - AUA (1:35 - no time given)
AUA - CCS (8:15 - 9:20)

On the return flight though, it flies directly back home. Maybe it's because they are still waiting on approval from the venezuelan government for future flights.

Very interesting.

Yes, it is true. Check the timetable at UA.com.
It stops in AUA.
Something was amiss.. Enliria himself posted that CCS was going daily up from 4x a week. He posted this in the same thread showing UA was dropping the 2nd planned LAX-LHR flight. They are not going daily then dropping entirely suddenly. I guess UA CCS personnel will still have jobs.

Just a random thought so I am editing. Maybe the crew will layover in AUA. Maybe this is part of the rationale??

The situation is very precarious in CCS. Someone here once said crews stay at beach resorts, not in city hotels in Caracas.

Between Energy (things like Citgo's headquarters in Houston) and the massive amount of Venezuelan immigration in Houston (second to SE Fla.; much going out west of town to Katy-zuela)and there is demand, even with the sorry state of some things in VZ right now.

Any changes should be related to politics/money transfer concerns, not demand.

SY has been flying to Sanford every summer for about 4-5 years now.

klwright69 wrote:

Yes, it is true. Check the timetable at UA.com.
It stops in AUA.
Something was amiss.. Enliria himself posted that CCS was going daily up from 4x a week. He posted this in the same thread showing UA was dropping the 2nd planned LAX-LHR flight. They are not going daily then dropping entirely suddenly. I guess UA CCS personnel will still have jobs.

Just a random thought so I am editing. Maybe the crew will layover in AUA. Maybe this is part of the rationale??

The situation is very precarious in CCS. Someone here once said crews stay at beach resorts, not in city hotels in Caracas.

I have no idea. I only know what they filed. I don't capture flights that don't touch the USA, so no idea on the AUA thing. That would be a super-weird tag, however. Also, very unusual to commingle a high yield business route and a leisure market on a tag.

AM SJC-GDL JUL 0>0.9 AUG 0>0.8 SEP 0>0.9 OCT 0>0.8

Wow, interesting. The international growth at SJC continues.

I can't find any press on this yet.

I think I can shed some light on this. The Pilots Union pushed the company to stop having crews layover in CCS for security reasons. The company agreed and decided to make the route a turn. Because the route is to long as a turn it needs to be flown with an IRO. The 737 does not have an approved rest facility as per FAR117, so the company had to switch to a 757 which does have an approved rest area. For what ever reason the company has decided to go back to the 737 for this route. The only way to make it work is to have the crew lay over in AUA on the way down. The timing on the way back works out so the aircraft can fly AUA -CCS - IAH without requiring an IRO. This is clearly not an optimal situation but given the current situation in CCS it's probably the best alternative. Further there are not a lot of better options for customers traveling from IAH or points west to CCS.

aileron1999 wrote:

I think I can shed some light on this. The Pilots Union pushed the company to stop having crews layover in CCS for security reasons. The company agreed and decided to make the route a turn. Because the route is to long as a turn it needs to be flown with an IRO. The 737 does not have an approved rest facility as per FAR117, so the company had to switch to a 757 which does have an approved rest area. For what ever reason the company has decided to go back to the 737 for this route. The only way to make it work is to have the crew lay over in AUA on the way down. The timing on the way back works out so the aircraft can fly AUA -CCS - IAH without requiring an IRO. This is clearly not an optimal situation but given the current situation in CCS it's probably the best alternative. Further there are not a lot of better options for customers traveling from IAH or points west to CCS.

This definitely puts it into perspective. Thanks for sharing.

enilria wrote:

*AM DEN-MEX JUN 0>0.3 JUL 0>0.3 AUG 0>0.3 SEP 0>0.3 OCT 0>0.3

Is this going to year round rather than seasonal now?

enilria wrote:

AZ LAX-FCO MAY 1.0>0.8
*AZ ORD-FCO MAY 0.7>0 OCT 0.6>0.0

So much for all that Alitalia talk about expanding TATL, although I am sure they will somehow say they wanted to run double daily from LAX but big bad AF and DL wouldn't let them.

Although this is merely cutting (or edging in the LAX case) the shoulder season, its worth noting how poorly SkyTeam does in Chicago. Routes only seem to work during a very high season or when there is strong demand from the non-Chicago end of the route.

klwright69 wrote:

Yes, it is true. Check the timetable at UA.com.
The situation is very precarious in CCS. Someone here once said crews stay at beach resorts, not in city hotels in Caracas.

Staying at beach resorts near the airport is not something new; it has been going on for quite some years now. It has been both a safety and proximity to the airport consideration. Very few airlines are still scheduling any lay overs there, mostly European ones. UA is now doing what AR did a few months ago: scheduling a stop en route where to change crews (BOG for AR, AUA for UA). Venezuela is a gunpowder keg waiting to blow up; airlines do not want any crews there if and when the situation becomes out of control.

MAH4546 wrote:

SY has been flying to Sanford every summer for about 4-5 years now.

This year it seems to be going SFB-AUA-PBM, as opposed to SFB-GEO-PBM according to Surinam website

I wonder if AZ considered going back to the late 70'S early 80'S and fly FCO-BOS-ORD-BOS-FCO? Not ideal but worked back then.

Regarding UA CCS.
Internally it was announced in early January the flight would be resked to avoid laying over crews in CCS. Even staying at an airport hotel has been problematic with food for crews and ability to change money.

LAXintl wrote:

Regarding UA CCS.
Internally it was announced in early January the flight would be resked to avoid laying over crews in CCS. Even staying at an airport hotel has been problematic with food for crews and ability to change money.

Seems like a solution so expensive that the route will soon be axed.

AirFiero wrote:

AM SJC-GDL JUL 0>0.9 AUG 0>0.8 SEP 0>0.9 OCT 0>0.8

Wow, interesting. The international growth at SJC continues.

I can't find any press on this yet.

They haven't formally announced it, but they requested approval for the flight back in June. SJC now has more international carriers than domestic. Never thought I'd ever see that day.

enilria wrote:

DL ATL-BTV JUL 1.0>2.0 AUG 1.0>1.8

I think this is the first summer for 2x daily. Joins the upcoming 2x daily BTV-CLT on AA.

I'm not sure where you guys are seeing that the IAHCCS flight is always full, maybe its just Feb and Mar, but I just checked loads and the highest for the next 3 weeks was 110 pax, sometimes its as low as 29 pax, so it may make money, but it sure doesn't appear to go out full

KLMatSJC wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

AM SJC-GDL JUL 0>0.9 AUG 0>0.8 SEP 0>0.9 OCT 0>0.8

Wow, interesting. The international growth at SJC continues.

I can't find any press on this yet.

They haven't formally announced it, but they requested approval for the flight back in June. SJC now has more international carriers than domestic. Never thought I'd ever see that day.

Won't this make SJC-GDL a bit saturated with AS, AM, and Y4? Can the route support all three carriers, or does AS plan to drop it?

Long term I expect Y4, NH, BA, and HU to stay in SJC. Not sure about LH, or CA.

enilria wrote:

LAXintl wrote:

Regarding UA CCS.
Internally it was announced in early January the flight would be resked to avoid laying over crews in CCS. Even staying at an airport hotel has been problematic with food for crews and ability to change money.

Seems like a solution so expensive that the route will soon be axed.

It would seem that way for 99% of markets, but IAH CCS is so premium heavy that they will still make a killing on it.

I doubt IAH-CCS would be axed. And UA had announced they were back up to daily. The late president Chavez had said that airlines dropping CCS would never be allowed back to Venezuela. Of course Maduro is cut from the same cloth. UA needs all the Latin American capitals in the fold.

It came to me immediately that the only reason for such a weird tag would be a more suitable crew layover.

AirplaneWizard wrote:

UA IAH-CCS has not been dropped. Equipment has changed to a 757 from a 738 and its now a day flight since around February 1st.

UA 1046 IAH - CCS (8:45-15:35)
UA 1045 CCS -IAH (16:50 - 19:38)

The flight is making great money and is usually sold out on most days, hence the equipment upgrade to 752

Edit: further booking shows that flight will be one stop and will stop in Aruba.

UA 1046 IAH - AUA (1:35 - no time given)
AUA - CCS (8:15 - 9:20)

On the return flight though, it flies directly back home. Maybe it's because they are still waiting on approval from the venezuelan government for future flights.

The stop in AUA is for crew change only. The new crew will take the aircraft AUA CCS IAH. Crews will no longer overnight in CCS due safety issues.

fry530 wrote:

enilria wrote:

*AM DEN-MEX JUN 0>0.3 JUL 0>0.3 AUG 0>0.3 SEP 0>0.3 OCT 0>0.3

Is this going to year round rather than seasonal now?

It appears that SAT-MEX is funding the 0.3 DEN year-round. SAT drops to daily simultaneously.

enilria wrote:

Amazing how little F9 is now flying DFW-DEN.

On the flip, it is servicing PHL-DEN at 2x this summer. That's a contrast to when the new F9 came to PHL, and was originally too cautious to launch PHL-DEN and chose not go any farther west than Central Time Zone cities for it's PHL customers, even the first summer of the PHL launch. (next F9 needs to overfly DEN and launch some PHL-LAS, PHX, SFO or LAX service).

DAL/DFW-DEN has more service from other carriers at high frequency, where F9 doesn't stand out, but it from PHL, AA just flies PHL-DEN at 2x in the same period, as AA is overflying other hubs so won't put too much frequency, similarly WN is just 2x in the same period, as well as UA.

BoeingGuy wrote:

KLMatSJC wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

Wow, interesting. The international growth at SJC continues.

I can't find any press on this yet.

They haven't formally announced it, but they requested approval for the flight back in June. SJC now has more international carriers than domestic. Never thought I'd ever see that day.

Won't this make SJC-GDL a bit saturated with AS, AM, and Y4? Can the route support all three carriers, or does AS plan to drop it?

Long term I expect Y4, NH, BA, and HU to stay in SJC. Not sure about LH, or CA.

I'm curious why most flights go to GDL. Is that a hub for AM and Y4? Why not nonstop to MEX?

phluser wrote:

On the flip, it is servicing PHL-DEN at 2x this summer. That's a contrast to when the new F9 came to PHL, and was originally too cautious to launch PHL-DEN and chose not go any farther west than Central Time Zone cities for it's PHL customers, even the first summer of the PHL launch. (next F9 needs to overfly DEN and launch some PHL-LAS, PHX, SFO or LAX service).

It will be interesting to watch what F9 does with PHL-DEN. I agree, a second daily flight is a departure from what they initially appeared to be doing and we will see if this flight survives beyond peak summer season but also if its survival is dependent on all westward connections.I too would be ecstatic to see those destinations west of DEN added if possible.

LAS - F9 has a large operation there and loads (don't know about yields) have been healthy on existing services in first half of '16 (NK at 85%, AA at 89%, and WN at 94%).
PHX - Loads (don't know about yields) have been extremely healthy at PHX for years and the market definitely has room for additional competition beyond AA and WN.
LAX - With just a once daily NK flight (no VX) flying against AA, additional competition on this route would be great.
SFO - Without VX service there is certainly room for a daily or less than daily flight. F9 is surprisingly not so small at SFO. Passenger numbers make me wonder if a higher proportion of pax fly this route with a connection compared to other transcon routes.

OslPhlWasChi wrote:

phluser wrote:

On the flip, it is servicing PHL-DEN at 2x this summer. That's a contrast to when the new F9 came to PHL, and was originally too cautious to launch PHL-DEN and chose not go any farther west than Central Time Zone cities for it's PHL customers, even the first summer of the PHL launch. (next F9 needs to overfly DEN and launch some PHL-LAS, PHX, SFO or LAX service).

It will be interesting to watch what F9 does with PHL-DEN. I agree, a second daily flight is a departure from what they initially appeared to be doing and we will see if this flight survives beyond peak summer season but also if its survival is dependent on all westward connections.I too would be ecstatic to see those destinations west of DEN added if possible.

LAS - F9 has a large operation there and loads (don't know about yields) have been healthy on existing services in first half of '16 (NK at 85%, AA at 89%, and WN at 94%).
PHX - Loads (don't know about yields) have been extremely healthy at PHX for years and the market definitely has room for additional competition beyond AA and WN.
LAX - With just a once daily NK flight (no VX) flying against AA, additional competition on this route would be great.
SFO - Without VX service there is certainly room for a daily or less than daily flight. F9 is surprisingly not so small at SFO. Passenger numbers make me wonder if a higher proportion of pax fly this route with a connection compared to other transcon routes.

On the PHL-DEN route I would guess this will be a summer seasonal add with some limited connections going west.

PHL to the west and back would most likely be late evening/red-eye returns due to the flight hours required. I wouldn't be surprised to see F9 add one of the above mentioned destinations later this spring. They only have one gate at SFO and LAX which limits their opportunities. PHX and LAS provide greater potential due to gate flexibility at those airports.

Frontier has reduced somewhat the ability to connect at DEN going west. Per previous reports and comments they have indicated they want P2P flying and their schedules now reflect that.

Frontier 14

AirFiero wrote:

I'm curious why most flights go to GDL. Is that a hub for AM and Y4? Why not nonstop to MEX?

Because that is where passengers want to go.

California has a huge population of migrants from Jalisco state and surrounding regions. Not so much from D.F.

aileron1999 wrote:

I think I can shed some light on this. The Pilots Union pushed the company to stop having crews layover in CCS for security reasons. The company agreed and decided to make the route a turn. Because the route is to long as a turn it needs to be flown with an IRO. The 737 does not have an approved rest facility as per FAR117, so the company had to switch to a 757 which does have an approved rest area. For what ever reason the company has decided to go back to the 737 for this route. The only way to make it work is to have the crew lay over in AUA on the way down. The timing on the way back works out so the aircraft can fly AUA -CCS - IAH without requiring an IRO. This is clearly not an optimal situation but given the current situation in CCS it's probably the best alternative. Further there are not a lot of better options for customers traveling from IAH or points west to CCS.

I have checked and this summer there is a weekly nonstop IAH-CCS flight on thursday.

LAXintl wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

I'm curious why most flights go to GDL. Is that a hub for AM and Y4? Why not nonstop to MEX?

Because that is where passengers want to go.

California has a huge population of migrants from Jalisco state and surrounding regions. Not so much from D.F.

What about vacation traffic? Or is that much of a majority of the traffic "VFR"?

AirFiero wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

KLMatSJC wrote:

They haven't formally announced it, but they requested approval for the flight back in June. SJC now has more international carriers than domestic. Never thought I'd ever see that day.

Won't this make SJC-GDL a bit saturated with AS, AM, and Y4? Can the route support all three carriers, or does AS plan to drop it?

Long term I expect Y4, NH, BA, and HU to stay in SJC. Not sure about LH, or CA.

I'm curious why most flights go to GDL. Is that a hub for AM and Y4? Why not nonstop to MEX?

GDL is the tech center of Mexico. It's an obvious connection with the tech centers, plus there's an added VFR aspect.

From the list it looks like a pretty light summer, as far as changes go.

DEN-DFW was once one of F9's top 3 or 4 grossing routes. Wasn't unusual to see 6, even 7 RT's a day.

n7371f wrote:

DEN-DFW was once one of F9's top 3 or 4 grossing routes. Wasn't unusual to see 6, even 7 RT's a day.

This is the end of the Wright Amendment at work. What route did Gary Kelly fly the first day of the full repeal? DAL-DEN.

http://www.dallasnews.com/business/airl ... love-field

enilria wrote:

D7 HNL-KIX JUL 0>0.6 AUG 0>0.5 SEP 0>0.6 OCT 0>0.5

AirAsia X's first foray into the U.S. market?

UA has probably taken everything into account and have decided that the stop in AUA is the most sensible solution to the matter. I wonder if CCS the most dangerous destination in the world right now, if that can be measured.

klwright69 wrote:

UA has probably taken everything into account and have decided that the stop in AUA is the most sensible solution to the matter. I wonder if CCS the most dangerous destination in the world right now, if that can be measured.

Caracas is the most dangerous city in the world. At the very least, its the city most likely to get murder worldwide.

B595 wrote:

enilria wrote:

DL ATL-BTV JUL 1.0>2.0 AUG 1.0>1.8

I think this is the first summer for 2x daily. Joins the upcoming 2x daily BTV-CLT on AA.

It's nice to see BTV bounce back a bit air service wise, been through a bit of a lull for a while now, since recession.

CLT going 2x daily, AA adding LGA, ATL going 2x daily. Losing G4 won't hurt to much.