Potential New AA routes from CLT

dfwjim1 · Tue Jan 16, 2018 8:13 pm

A little bit off topic but how about AA's One World Partner British Airways starting flights between LHR and CLT?

Super80Fan · Tue Jan 16, 2018 8:17 pm

I'm assuming it's because of cheap landing fees but I'm curious why AA tries to dump everyone in CLT instead of MIA, DFW, ORD, PHL, NYC etc.

2travel2know2 · Tue Jan 16, 2018 8:24 pm

If AA keeps (sort of keeps) seasonal DFW-PTY, perhaps there's a chance for CLT-PTY ?

TWFlyGuy · Tue Jan 16, 2018 8:42 pm

Super80Fan wrote:
I'm assuming it's because of cheap landing fees but I'm curious why AA tries to dump everyone in CLT instead of MIA, DFW, ORD, PHL, NYC etc.

There was a thread about this recently. CLT does indeed have very low operating costs. The cost per enplanement was, if I remember correctly, the lowest of all hub and by a fairly good margin. It also happens to be in a good location to carry a lot of connections.

Kadish · Tue Jan 16, 2018 9:37 pm

QuawerAir wrote:
In Europe, AA already serves DUB, LHR, FRA, MUC, MAD, BCN and FCO from CLT, but I could add more cities such as LIS, HEL, EDI or KEF.

Not all of them are year round. For instance MAD, which could go year round.

cheapgreek · Tue Jan 16, 2018 9:54 pm

[list=][/list]

usflyer msp wrote:
AA should not add any more flights at CLT until it clears up its airfield congestion issues. I am officially over the stupid taxi times in CLT. I have started praying that my flight arrives in B - that is the only way to avoid a 35-45 minute taxi in. I flew AA731 LHR-CLT today and we landed about 20 minutes late due to strong headwinds and then it took us another 36 minutes to taxi to D9 due to all the congestion.

I agree, my last 4-5 inbound flights took 15-20 minutes to reach the gate. CLT operationally was never meant to handle the number of flights assigned to it.

CLTflier · Tue Jan 16, 2018 10:41 pm

cheapgreek wrote:
[list=][/list]
usflyer msp wrote:
AA should not add any more flights at CLT until it clears up its airfield congestion issues. I am officially over the stupid taxi times in CLT. I have started praying that my flight arrives in B - that is the only way to avoid a 35-45 minute taxi in. I flew AA731 LHR-CLT today and we landed about 20 minutes late due to strong headwinds and then it took us another 36 minutes to taxi to D9 due to all the congestion.

I agree, my last 4-5 inbound flights took 15-20 minutes to reach the gate. CLT operationally was never meant to handle the number of flights assigned to it.

Luckily a ton of money is being pumped into CLT to accommodate current and future growth

ADrum23 · Tue Jan 16, 2018 11:46 pm

CLT would be better off diversifying its carrier options rather than continuing to put all its eggs in the AA basket.

CLTflier · Tue Jan 16, 2018 11:53 pm

ADrum23 wrote:
CLT would be better off diversifying its carrier options rather than continuing to put all its eggs in the AA basket.

No way, I live in CLT and fly often and want the most direct flights with the most frequencies possible. Having the AA fortress achieves this goal. Only non AA carriers I would actually want here are international carriers. Keep DL UA and WN to the bare bones, hubs only

usflyer msp · Tue Jan 16, 2018 11:58 pm

CLTflier wrote:
cheapgreek wrote:
[list=][/list]
usflyer msp wrote:
AA should not add any more flights at CLT until it clears up its airfield congestion issues. I am officially over the stupid taxi times in CLT. I have started praying that my flight arrives in B - that is the only way to avoid a 35-45 minute taxi in. I flew AA731 LHR-CLT today and we landed about 20 minutes late due to strong headwinds and then it took us another 36 minutes to taxi to D9 due to all the congestion.

I agree, my last 4-5 inbound flights took 15-20 minutes to reach the gate. CLT operationally was never meant to handle the number of flights assigned to it.

Luckily a ton of money is being pumped into CLT to accommodate current and future growth

Which is only going to make the airfield congestion worse.

Building another west-side runway while adding gates to Concourses C and E will only mean more planes taking waiting in conga lines to get to their gate on the other side of the airport.

CLT needs a tunnel or elevated taxiway over the parking ramps that will allow more than one way to access Concourses D and E.

Only then might some of the congestion might clear up...

NichCage · Wed Jan 17, 2018 12:06 am

CLT has had gains and losses from US and AA. US used to serve LGW, but now they have 14 weekly flights to LHR. Out of the four Europe routes that were launched and then cut (MAN, BRU, and LIS) BCN is still operated which is good. FRA was cut from 14 weekly to seven weekly (US also made PHL-FRA seasonal in the process). GRU and GIG were also cut as well.

In conclusion, LHR and BCN were added, while MAN, BRU, LIS, GRU, and GIG were cut. FRA was reduced but is still operated.

CLT is still an strong hub no doubt, but it's not the only one to get cuts. JFK has gotten a few cuts, as well as PHL receiving some cuts in service. But on the good side, PHL will be getting some extra Europe flights.

ADrum23 · Wed Jan 17, 2018 12:49 am

CLTflier wrote:
ADrum23 wrote:
CLT would be better off diversifying its carrier options rather than continuing to put all its eggs in the AA basket.

No way, I live in CLT and fly often and want the most direct flights with the most frequencies possible. Having the AA fortress achieves this goal. Only non AA carriers I would actually want here are international carriers. Keep DL UA and WN to the bare bones, hubs only

Fine, but if things ever go south at AA (or in the industry in general), you'll run the risk of ending up like CVG. I know Charlotte is much different than Cincinnati, but it nonetheless is extremely dangerous for an airport to have one airline controlling over 90% of the traffic.

CLTflier · Wed Jan 17, 2018 12:56 am

NichCage wrote:
CLT has had gains and losses from US and AA. US used to serve LGW, but now they have 14 weekly flights to LHR. Out of the four Europe routes that were launched and then cut (MAN, BRU, and LIS) BCN is still operated which is good. FRA was cut from 14 weekly to seven weekly (US also made PHL-FRA seasonal in the process). GRU and GIG were also cut as well.

In conclusion, LHR and BCN were added, while MAN, BRU, LIS, GRU, and GIG were cut. FRA was reduced but is still operated.

CLT is still an strong hub no doubt, but it's not the only one to get cuts. JFK has gotten a few cuts, as well as PHL receiving some cuts in service. But on the good side, PHL will be getting some extra Europe flights.

Excellent points. However it must be noted that the BRU LIS MAN and BCN routes were only started with excess equipment in order to appease government officials that CLT would not be dehubbed, they were never meant to stick around. Luckily BCN was profitable and is still operated today.!i could see MAN coming back too. It was sad to see GRU and GIG go but it made sense. Hopefully they come back some day. All in all I think CLT came out relatively unscathed from the merger, contrary to popular belief on this site

AVLAirlineFreq · Wed Jan 17, 2018 1:16 am

usflyer msp wrote:

Which is only going to make the airfield congestion worse.

Building another west-side runway while adding gates to Concourses C and E will only mean more planes taking waiting in conga lines to get to their gate on the other side of the airport.

CLT needs a tunnel or elevated taxiway over the parking ramps that will allow more than one way to access Concourses D and E.

Only then might some of the congestion might clear up...

The most commonly suggested idea on a.net is to close runway 5/23 and convert to a taxiway.

SESGDL · Wed Jan 17, 2018 1:25 am

ADrum23 wrote:
CLTflier wrote:
ADrum23 wrote:
CLT would be better off diversifying its carrier options rather than continuing to put all its eggs in the AA basket.

No way, I live in CLT and fly often and want the most direct flights with the most frequencies possible. Having the AA fortress achieves this goal. Only non AA carriers I would actually want here are international carriers. Keep DL UA and WN to the bare bones, hubs only

Fine, but if things ever go south at AA (or in the industry in general), you'll run the risk of ending up like CVG. I know Charlotte is much different than Cincinnati, but it nonetheless is extremely dangerous for an airport to have one airline controlling over 90% of the traffic.

Not going to happen. It’s an apples to oranges comparison. CLT is the only viable competitor to ATL with arguably the second best location to capture the massive volumes that the SE and Florida support. CVG offered nothing unique as well as high operating costs and a relatively stagnant economy. CLT isn’t going anywhere as a hub.

Jeremy

ADrum23 · Wed Jan 17, 2018 1:33 am

SESGDL wrote:
ADrum23 wrote:
CLTflier wrote:

No way, I live in CLT and fly often and want the most direct flights with the most frequencies possible. Having the AA fortress achieves this goal. Only non AA carriers I would actually want here are international carriers. Keep DL UA and WN to the bare bones, hubs only

Fine, but if things ever go south at AA (or in the industry in general), you'll run the risk of ending up like CVG. I know Charlotte is much different than Cincinnati, but it nonetheless is extremely dangerous for an airport to have one airline controlling over 90% of the traffic.

Not going to happen. It’s an apples to oranges comparison. CLT is the only viable competitor to ATL with arguably the second best location to capture the massive volumes that the SE and Florida support. CVG offered nothing unique as well as high operating costs and a relatively stagnant economy. CLT isn’t going anywhere as a hub.

Jeremy

I didn't say it was going to happen, but you simply never know and therefore, should be prepared for the all types of situations, including the unthinkable. Contrary to what Mr. Parker says, AA is going to experience turbulent times in the future and will lose money.

All I am saying is CLT should diversify it's carrier base a bit and allow some other airlines to bulk up in case things go bad with AA.

N628AU · Wed Jan 17, 2018 1:38 am

usflyer msp wrote:
CLTflier wrote:
cheapgreek wrote:
[list=][/list]

I agree, my last 4-5 inbound flights took 15-20 minutes to reach the gate. CLT operationally was never meant to handle the number of flights assigned to it.

Luckily a ton of money is being pumped into CLT to accommodate current and future growth

Which is only going to make the airfield congestion worse.

Building another west-side runway while adding gates to Concourses C and E will only mean more planes taking waiting in conga lines to get to their gate on the other side of the airport.

CLT needs a tunnel or elevated taxiway over the parking ramps that will allow more than one way to access Concourses D and E.

Only then might some of the congestion might clear up...

E Terminal expansion will mainly protect passengers from the elements that are having to walk onto the ramp now. C terminal expansion happens after the fourth parallel runway is complete and thet need to close 5/23 to make that happen. That runway space can be converted to taxiway space. Main terminal design is almost 40 years old and wasn’t planned for this many flights but there is a plan to fix it. Check out the master plan and it makes more sense.

http://www.cltairport.com/News/Pages/De ... jects.aspx

chepos · Wed Jan 17, 2018 2:31 am

ADrum23 wrote:
SESGDL wrote:
ADrum23 wrote:

Fine, but if things ever go south at AA (or in the industry in general), you'll run the risk of ending up like CVG. I know Charlotte is much different than Cincinnati, but it nonetheless is extremely dangerous for an airport to have one airline controlling over 90% of the traffic.

Not going to happen. It’s an apples to oranges comparison. CLT is the only viable competitor to ATL with arguably the second best location to capture the massive volumes that the SE and Florida support. CVG offered nothing unique as well as high operating costs and a relatively stagnant economy. CLT isn’t going anywhere as a hub.

Jeremy

I didn't say it was going to happen, but you simply never know and therefore, should be prepared for the all types of situations, including the unthinkable. Contrary to what Mr. Parker says, AA is going to experience turbulent times in the future and will lose money.

All I am saying is CLT should diversify it's carrier base a bit and allow some other airlines to bulk up in case things go bad with AA.

Who else would you say is eagerly waiting to set up a mega hub at CLT?

CIDFlyer · Wed Jan 17, 2018 2:49 am

osupoke07 wrote:
SumChristianus wrote:
CLTflier wrote:

OKC is already operated twice daily (1x CR9, 1x319) as is Tulsa (1x CR9, 1x738)

Wow, mainline on those. Is that a new addition, I hadn't realized that they even operated there from CLT? I assume its only since the US/AA merger.

TUL was added right after the merger, but it was just on regional jets. I'm surprised that it has mainline now. I guess they're trying to get more eastbound passengers from TUL to go through CLT rather than DFW.

TUL & OKC mainline additions are fairly recent. They have also done mainline additions to CLT from AUS and PNS and a few others. Some call it the "Atlantafication" of CLT (taking a page from the DL book and flying mainline to many smaller/mid sized cities at least once a day, generally first inbound flight from outstation and evening flight out from CLT)

CIDFlyer · Wed Jan 17, 2018 2:50 am

"SESGDL wrote:
ADrum23 wrote:

Fine, but if things ever go south at AA (or in the industry in general), you'll run the risk of ending up like CVG. I know Charlotte is much different than Cincinnati, but it nonetheless is extremely dangerous for an airport to have one airline controlling over 90% of the traffic.

Not going to happen. It’s an apples to oranges comparison. CLT is the only viable competitor to ATL with arguably the second best location to capture the massive volumes that the SE and Florida support. CVG offered nothing unique as well as high operating costs and a relatively stagnant economy. CLT isn’t going anywhere as a hub.

Jeremy

I didn't say it was going to happen, but you simply never know and therefore, should be prepared for the all types of situations, including the unthinkable. Contrary to what Mr. Parker says, AA is going to experience turbulent times in the future and will lose money.

All I am saying is CLT should diversify it's carrier base a bit and allow some other airlines to bulk up in case things go bad with AA.

Quoting Chepos

"Who else would you say is eagerly waiting to set up a mega hub at CLT?"

United for starters, they would love to have CLT, one of the reasons they tried for US years ago.

SumChristianus · Wed Jan 17, 2018 2:51 am

CIDFlyer wrote:
osupoke07 wrote:
SumChristianus wrote:

Wow, mainline on those. Is that a new addition, I hadn't realized that they even operated there from CLT? I assume its only since the US/AA merger.

TUL was added right after the merger, but it was just on regional jets. I'm surprised that it has mainline now. I guess they're trying to get more eastbound passengers from TUL to go through CLT rather than DFW.

TUL & OKC mainline additions are fairly recent. They have also done mainline additions to CLT from AUS and PNS and a few others. Some call it the "Atlantafication" of CLT (taking a page from the DL book and flying mainline to many smaller/mid sized cities at least once a day, generally first inbound flight from outstation and evening flight out from CLT)

I wish UA would do such Atlantafication...!

CIDFlyer · Wed Jan 17, 2018 2:59 am

BN727227Ultra wrote:
CLTflier wrote:
freakyrat wrote:
CLT-SBN on American Eagle

Could see that happening, along with FNT, TVC, MLI, RFD, and COU. Although these aren't the most exciting additions, they are needed to fill out the holes in the network

Columbia/Jefferson City? to Charlotte? I suppose...of course, I was surprised to check Flightaware and see DEN and two carriers to ORD.

COU has really taken off the past few years, AA is very strong there to DFW & ORD. CLT would add a flight in another direction to the southeast that has been missing since DL pulled out (over a spat when AA was recruited there), and given Mizzou's presence in the SEC conference it would seem like a logical add to me that they could gain one stop connections to many schools in the region

usflyer msp · Wed Jan 17, 2018 3:25 am

N628AU wrote:
usflyer msp wrote:
CLTflier wrote:

Luckily a ton of money is being pumped into CLT to accommodate current and future growth

Which is only going to make the airfield congestion worse.

Building another west-side runway while adding gates to Concourses C and E will only mean more planes taking waiting in conga lines to get to their gate on the other side of the airport.

CLT needs a tunnel or elevated taxiway over the parking ramps that will allow more than one way to access Concourses D and E.

Only then might some of the congestion might clear up...

E Terminal expansion will mainly protect passengers from the elements that are having to walk onto the ramp now. C terminal expansion happens after the fourth parallel runway is complete and thet need to close 5/23 to make that happen. That runway space can be converted to taxiway space. Main terminal design is almost 40 years old and wasn’t planned for this many flights but there is a plan to fix it. Check out the master plan and it makes more sense.

http://www.cltairport.com/News/Pages/De ... jects.aspx

To me, it looks like the concourse C expansion is going to go right through the middle of what is currently 5/23 so I am not quite sure how they are going to turn it into a taxiway or even if they did, how it would to help the congestion since traffic headed to E would still have to hit all the congestion at C, D and E to get to the gate.

tom02 · Wed Jan 17, 2018 3:32 am

CLTflier wrote:

Excellent points. However it must be noted that the BRU LIS MAN and BCN routes were only started with excess equipment in order to appease government officials that CLT would not be dehubbed, they were never meant to stick around. Luckily BCN was profitable and is still operated today.!i could see MAN coming back too. It was sad to see GRU and GIG go but it made sense. Hopefully they come back some day. All in all I think CLT came out relatively unscathed from the merger, contrary to popular belief on this site

Could see CLT-MAN coming back using a 763 instead of a332. The a332 was to much plane for the route at least at the time and probably still is. I also could see CLT-LGW coming back from BA but i think a third daily LHR flight from BA is more likely

The Midwest is definitely where AA will focus on expanding and some larger western cities such as ABQ

chepos · Wed Jan 17, 2018 3:37 am

tom02 wrote:
CLTflier wrote:

Excellent points. However it must be noted that the BRU LIS MAN and BCN routes were only started with excess equipment in order to appease government officials that CLT would not be dehubbed, they were never meant to stick around. Luckily BCN was profitable and is still operated today.!i could see MAN coming back too. It was sad to see GRU and GIG go but it made sense. Hopefully they come back some day. All in all I think CLT came out relatively unscathed from the merger, contrary to popular belief on this site

Could see CLT-MAN coming back using a 763 instead of a332. The a332 was to much plane for the route at least at the time and probably still is. I also could see CLT-LGW coming back from BA but i think a third daily LHR flight from BA is more likely

The Midwest is definitely where AA will focus on expanding and some larger western cities such as ABQ

CLT MAN was operated with a 757 in the summer of 2013.

etops1 · Wed Jan 17, 2018 3:41 am

How about CLT-ICT ?

BreezyIAH · Wed Jan 17, 2018 3:43 am

AVLAirlineFreq · Wed Jan 17, 2018 3:57 am

etops1 wrote:
How about CLT-ICT ?

That seems likely. Surprised it hasn't been added.

rj1385 · Wed Jan 17, 2018 5:01 am

Wishful thinking - it would be nice to see a few flights to SWF to compliment the few fligths to PHL.

tom02 · Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:06 am

chepos wrote:
tom02 wrote:
CLTflier wrote:

Excellent points. However it must be noted that the BRU LIS MAN and BCN routes were only started with excess equipment in order to appease government officials that CLT would not be dehubbed, they were never meant to stick around. Luckily BCN was profitable and is still operated today.!i could see MAN coming back too. It was sad to see GRU and GIG go but it made sense. Hopefully they come back some day. All in all I think CLT came out relatively unscathed from the merger, contrary to popular belief on this site

Could see CLT-MAN coming back using a 763 instead of a332. The a332 was to much plane for the route at least at the time and probably still is. I also could see CLT-LGW coming back from BA but i think a third daily LHR flight from BA is more likely

The Midwest is definitely where AA will focus on expanding and some larger western cities such as ABQ

CLT MAN was operated with a 757 in the summer of 2013.

Ah my bad I could have sworn at the time it was an a332 but its been 4 years since they operated it. I could still see it coming back on a 763 to pick up some of the slack since JFK-MAN is no more but only time will tell.

afcjets · Wed Jan 17, 2018 3:10 pm

BreezyIAH wrote:
SNA?

afcjets wrote:
SumChristianus wrote:
Is SNA served yet? If not I think it would be a possibility, assuming SNA's runway is long enough.

SNA is slot controlled so AA would have to reduce a frequency somewhere else. IIRC they have to submit how they plan to use their slots before the beginning of the year and they are not able to change them on a whim.

The runway is long enough. UA flies SNA-EWR and at one time AA flew SNA-JFK. US also flew SNA-PIT back when it was a hub with a 733. On hot days it could not carry a full load because of the runway length and noise abatement proceduers vs. that aircraft's performance. At times US also flew the route with a 757 where that was not an issue.

redwingspilot · Wed Jan 17, 2018 3:28 pm

CLTflier wrote:
freakyrat wrote:
CLT-SBN on American Eagle

Could see that happening, along with FNT, TVC, MLI, RFD, and COU. Although these aren't the most exciting additions, they are needed to fill out the holes in the network

I keep hoping to see DFW-FNT come back, it was cut back in 2008, so to see either CLT or DFW to FNT would be a welcome sight seeing how Southwest is pulling completely out of the airport.

estefanovich · Wed Jan 17, 2018 5:05 pm

CLTflier wrote:
mikejepp wrote:
Any chance of AA flights deeper into the Caribbean/Central/South America? Such as... BOG, GUA, KIN?

Probably not South America seeing as AA cut CLT-GRU and CLT-GIG right after AA and US merged. The carribean is always an option for growth out of CLT as AA can make some seasonal routes year round or run the Saturday only flights more often

US Airways flew for some time from CLT to GUA. That stopped in 2009. Now AA traffic to GUA is going through MIA mostly, and some through DFT.

usflyer msp · Wed Jan 17, 2018 5:47 pm

estefanovich wrote:
CLTflier wrote:
mikejepp wrote:
Any chance of AA flights deeper into the Caribbean/Central/South America? Such as... BOG, GUA, KIN?

Probably not South America seeing as AA cut CLT-GRU and CLT-GIG right after AA and US merged. The carribean is always an option for growth out of CLT as AA can make some seasonal routes year round or run the Saturday only flights more often

US Airways flew for some time from CLT to GUA. That stopped in 2009. Now AA traffic to GUA is going through MIA mostly, and some through DFT.

That was for adoption related traffic. Once the Guatemalan gov't stopped letting Americans adopt (ie purchase) Guatemalan babies that traffic dried up...

TWFlyGuy · Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:23 pm

CIDFlyer wrote:
"SESGDL wrote:
ADrum23 wrote:

Fine, but if things ever go south at AA (or in the industry in general), you'll run the risk of ending up like CVG. I know Charlotte is much different than Cincinnati, but it nonetheless is extremely dangerous for an airport to have one airline controlling over 90% of the traffic.

Not going to happen. It’s an apples to oranges comparison. CLT is the only viable competitor to ATL with arguably the second best location to capture the massive volumes that the SE and Florida support. CVG offered nothing unique as well as high operating costs and a relatively stagnant economy. CLT isn’t going anywhere as a hub.

Jeremy

I didn't say it was going to happen, but you simply never know and therefore, should be prepared for the all types of situations, including the unthinkable. Contrary to what Mr. Parker says, AA is going to experience turbulent times in the future and will lose money.

All I am saying is CLT should diversify it's carrier base a bit and allow some other airlines to bulk up in case things go bad with AA.

Quoting Chepos

"Who else would you say is eagerly waiting to set up a mega hub at CLT?"

United for starters, they would love to have CLT, one of the reasons they tried for US years ago.

And that is most likely the airport's plan should AA have any trouble. Work to lure UA from their IAD hub to CLT. As of now though, there isn't enough demand to support much more than the airport handles. Keep in mind that as much of a mega hub as this is, it's supported by a city of only 2.5 million meaning that they have to keep CPE very low to "force" AA, previously US, to push connecting traffic through here. This may be helping AA some in ORD, though we haven't seen it yet. If you'll recall, AA purchased TWA during a very poor operational time for ORD with the intent being to funnel connections through STL. A lot of NE-Midwest/West coast traffic can be as efficiently flown through CLT as it can ORD much as DL does through ATL. By doing that, AA can/should focus on local ORD traffic although I think they're going to be increasingly challenged by UA to do so. The leadership at UA is doing a much better job than almost any one I can think of since Steve Wolfe on getting the UA operation in better shape.

USAirALB · Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:50 pm

Back in the early 2000s, when US made a big push to increase their presence in the Caribbean, they attempted CLT-LRM/KIN, both of which were discontinued.

CLT-GUA was discontinued back in 2008 or so. I recall there were several issues at FIS in CLT regarding the flight as well. US also attempted CLT-PVR when they started SJD-SJD continues to this day but PVR was discontinued.

Internationally, I can't see anything else added except maybe a seasonal flight to YVR, and a resumption of MAN and GRU, should the Brazilian economy improve.

Domestically, I wouldn't be surprised to see CMI, COS, GRB, FNT, LAN, ICT, ISP, and SNA added. EGE and JAC could be added seasonally, again US used to do CLT-EGE with 752s years back.

IIRC, US tried very hard a couple of years before the merger to obtain slots for SNA-CLT/PHL. I believe SNA-CLT was to be a redeye flight, and SNA-PHL was to be an AM departure to hit the European bank ex PHL. Both were proposed to operate with 752s.

CLTflier · Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:21 am

USAirALB wrote:
Back in the early 2000s, when US made a big push to increase their presence in the Caribbean, they attempted CLT-LRM/KIN, both of which were discontinued.

CLT-GUA was discontinued back in 2008 or so. I recall there were several issues at FIS in CLT regarding the flight as well. US also attempted CLT-PVR when they started SJD-SJD continues to this day but PVR was discontinued.

Internationally, I can't see anything else added except maybe a seasonal flight to YVR, and a resumption of MAN and GRU, should the Brazilian economy improve.

Domestically, I wouldn't be surprised to see CMI, COS, GRB, FNT, LAN, ICT, ISP, and SNA added. EGE and JAC could be added seasonally, again US used to do CLT-EGE with 752s years back.

IIRC, US tried very hard a couple of years before the merger to obtain slots for SNA-CLT/PHL. I believe SNA-CLT was to be a redeye flight, and SNA-PHL was to be an AM departure to hit the European bank ex PHL. Both were proposed to operate with 752s.

I'm honestly shocked that CLT-ICT hasn't been added. ICT metro is slightly larger than DSM and 3 times as large as CID, which both have CLT service. CLT-ICT is less than 100 miles longer than CLT-DSM/CID. Why hasn't ICT been added it makes no sense ?

mikejepp · Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:16 am

What routes from CLT can we expect to be upgauged from all regional to having at least some mainline?

CLTflier · Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:35 am

mikejepp wrote:
What routes from CLT can we expect to be upgauged from all regional to having at least some mainline?

I'd suggest starting a new thread for this.
ROC will have 1 mainline in the summer. MHT has always had mainline on and off. As for current all-regional routes that could go mainline, Id guess CVG and CMH

chepos · Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:24 am

SRQ, I’d love to see mainline on that route. DAB as well, I know they have put mainline during the 500 but year round an A319 originator might work. Being a Riddle graduate DAB is close to my heart.

CIDFlyer · Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:21 pm

mikejepp wrote:
What routes from CLT can we expect to be upgauged from all regional to having at least some mainline?

Wouldnt surprise me to see OMA & DSM to have at least one flight upgraded to a mainline (likely A319).

I could also see VPS, SRQ, DAB, CMH, MSN, MKE, GRR, LIT, XNA as well, routes that currently see CR9 or E75. they could transition those planes to upgrade other destinations, like CID or FWA for example, that see all CR7 and perhaps upgrade one flight to E75 or CR9.

redwingspilot · Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:17 pm

Just announced:

Panama City, Florida (ECP), and South Bend, Indiana (SBN), both of which will be served from our CLT and DFW hubs.

CLTflier · Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:24 pm

redwingspilot wrote:
Just announced:

Panama City, Florida (ECP), and South Bend, Indiana (SBN), both of which will be served from our CLT and DFW hubs.

What a timely manner to announce both routes. The fact that both routes were mentioned on this thread proves the credibility of the contributors

TWFlyGuy · Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:35 pm

CLTflier wrote:
redwingspilot wrote:
Just announced:

Panama City, Florida (ECP), and South Bend, Indiana (SBN), both of which will be served from our CLT and DFW hubs.

What a timely manner to announce both routes. The fact that both routes were mentioned on this thread proves the credibility of the contributors

Even a broken clock is right twice a day!

SumChristianus · Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:33 pm

We'll see an EK DTW-DXB A380 shuttle announced tomorrow, right? Its been discussed here!
And DTW-SYD, DTW-DEL, DTW-BOM, DTW-CTU, DTW-ANC, DTW-TOL...
Wait, CLT was supposed to be dehubbed....because of lack of demand!
AS hub in Dayton, WN focus city in Lansing, GUM-NYC 777, Aeromexico to India, British Airways to SDF, MEM, Lufthansa to MKE, SAS to AUS,
Wait, ONT-Asia did happen, WN is going to Hawaii, some predictions have been very correct.

I like growth and make predictions too, pot callling the kettle black..., but SBN is a great addition for AA. ECP too, is that Panama City, FL?

Congratulations!

alasizon · Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:47 pm

Alias1024 wrote:
CLTflier wrote:
Is it possible for AA to launch routes to mid-sized western cities like COS or ABQ?

AA ran CLT-ABQ for a little while over the summer a couple years ago. Evening departure from CLT and a redeye on the return. I believe it was an A319. I don’t know if the results were poor or it was just some slack in the aircraft schedule at that time that allowed it but it did not come back this summer.

I question why AA thought that was a great idea to begin with. First, how many unique connections did CLT offer that weren’t already covered by DFW and ORD? Second, there isn’t a whole lot of O&D between the cities so connections become important. Who wants to fly a redeye just to connect, getting to your destination mid-day and utterly exhausted?

As I recall, CLT-ABQ was a US route, pre-merger and never lasted into actual AA marketing. Its long and thin and when combined with DFW & ORD, CLT offers very few connections that can't already be reached and likely those that are CLT unique probably don't have enough traffic to justify the 319.

CLTflier · Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:22 pm

SumChristianus wrote:
We'll see an EK DTW-DXB A380 shuttle announced tomorrow, right? Its been discussed here!
And DTW-SYD, DTW-DEL, DTW-BOM, DTW-CTU, DTW-ANC, DTW-TOL...
Wait, CLT was supposed to be dehubbed....because of lack of demand!
AS hub in Dayton, WN focus city in Lansing, GUM-NYC 777, Aeromexico to India, British Airways to SDF, MEM, Lufthansa to MKE, SAS to AUS,
Wait, ONT-Asia did happen, WN is going to Hawaii, some predictions have been very correct.

I like growth and make predictions too, pot callling the kettle black..., but SBN is a great addition for AA. ECP too, is that Panama City, FL?

Congratulations!

Haha this Made my day. While a lot of predictions on here are far-fetched, some do come true after all

CLTflier · Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:24 pm

SumChristianus wrote:
We'll see an EK DTW-DXB A380 shuttle announced tomorrow, right? Its been discussed here!
And DTW-SYD, DTW-DEL, DTW-BOM, DTW-CTU, DTW-ANC, DTW-TOL...
Wait, CLT was supposed to be dehubbed....because of lack of demand!
AS hub in Dayton, WN focus city in Lansing, GUM-NYC 777, Aeromexico to India, British Airways to SDF, MEM, Lufthansa to MKE, SAS to AUS,
Wait, ONT-Asia did happen, WN is going to Hawaii, some predictions have been very correct.

I like growth and make predictions too, pot callling the kettle black..., but SBN is a great addition for AA. ECP too, is that Panama City, FL?

Congratulations!

And yes ECP is indeed Panama City, FL

Freshside3 · Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:21 am

usflyer msp wrote:
Freshside3 wrote:
No real local market at all for CLT-MXP. Only way it would work, is to have it as a thru, or change-of-gauge, SFO-CLT-MXP, due to no Italy service from SFO on any carrier. Similarly for CLT-LIS, due to the general lack of Portugal flights from the large California markets(SFO/LAX/SAN).

CLT-MAN may work.......AA/UA/DL have eliminated a bunch of flights to the UK. Apparently they're all afraid of the fallout from the Brexit, which is understandable. But between them, they cut too much service to the various UK airports.

For smaller markets, I agree with whoever said COU. But perhaps something from RFD might work, too. For Caribbean, BGI would probably be the best choice.

CLT-BGI has been flown for over 10 years... .

Is it a non-daily and/or seasonal flight? Never seen it before on the departure screens whenever I'm in CLT.

Cunard · Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:54 am

Are you absolutely sure about CLT to BGI?

CLT to BGI with American isn't listed on their website and Wikipedia doesn't list it as a destination from CLT with American Airlines!

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net