I saw this thread title was posted in 2002 and it's time to consider it again.

Generally I'm not a big fan of these types of threads since I think the day of new cities getting hubs (as opposed to airlines fighting over existing ones like in BOS/SEA/LAX) is over, but I think AUS is inevitable as a hub.

-It's growing fast.
-It has the attention of airline planners.
-It's gaining intl service quickly.
-The geography is good for Latin connects.
-It's not dominated by one airline.
-It's got a nice yield mixture with high tech coupling with convention business, good weather, and leisure.

Possibilities:
B6: I used to think so, but it seems to me they have lost interest. They should probably close LGB and move the planes to AUS.
AS: Maybe, but also not showing much interest yet. Should probably close DAL and move the planes South.
DL: It's a possibility, but DL has only pursued mega-cities lately. Still, I can see them doing something like they do in CVG.
AA: Bad geography
UA: Bad Geography
WN: Anything is possible, but sits too close to DAL/HOU
F9: They are trying, but nothing they do is very permanent
NK: Possible
A new airline: This may be the best option and if you were going to start a new airline, this is probably the best place to base it

Is there gate space for an airline to start a hub? I know they’re extending the terminal, but how many gates will that add?

If I remember correctly, AUS is bursting at the seems with the current airline operations. Also, while not a hub, WN has a pretty sizeable operation here and could pretty easily and effectively compete against any airline trying to start a hub. I just don’t see it happening.

It is already a destination city for G4 and I could see them making it a base.

nws2002 wrote:

It is already a destination city for G4 and I could see them making it a base.

It is interesting that F9 just announced every market that G4 serves from AUS (obviously MCO for SFB, etc.). It will be interesting to see how they inevitably expand the south terminal that they use for F9 and G4 because at this rate its going to need it.

Norwegian America

dbo861 wrote:

Is there gate space for an airline to start a hub? I know they’re extending the terminal, but how many gates will that add?

If I remember correctly, AUS is bursting at the seems with the current airline operations. Also, while not a hub, WN has a pretty sizeable operation here and could pretty easily and effectively compete against any airline trying to start a hub. I just don’t see it happening.

They are building gates now or are soon.

Page 4
http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/defaul ... _Part1.pdf

william wrote:

The airport is gate constrained. Delta is rumored to take on 9 gates in the almost done extension. There are no gates, and even the South Terminal for low cost carriers is close to maxed out. AA and SWA are probably ticked DL got the new gates. I believe AA and SWA have about 10 gates themselves. UA has about 4 or 5.

If one wanted to start a hub, one couldn't because there are no gates available. About three years to build 20 stinger as laid out in the Masterplan.

3 years is nothing in terms of building a hub. It's not going to happen overnight.

I think at this time, start ups are what's going to drive AUS in the future. I don't think Delta would expand AUS into similar sized operations of SLC, LAX or SEA, but rather an RDU, MCO or CVG type operation. The addition of AMS and a few p2p markets would fit that criteria.

Start ups or small airlines are what I think are going to help drive AUS. AUS is becoming a very business friendly city, so having service to strongly tied cities would be a start. It could be a similar airline to OneJet do service from AUS to places like Denver, Phoenix, and Los Angeles. Flying something like the E135 then progressively expanding their network and increasing fleet size to eventually create an operation with 15 or so routes on used 737's in the medium term.

The airport is gate constrained. Delta is rumored to take on 9 gates in the almost done extension. There are no gates, and even the South Terminal for low cost carriers is close to maxed out. AA and SWA are probably ticked DL got the new gates. I believe AA and SWA have about 10 gates themselves. UA has about 4 or 5.

If one wanted to start a hub, one couldn't because there are no gates available. About three years to build 20 stinger as laid out in the Masterplan.

Here's my 2 cents (in bold):

Possibilities:
B6: I used to think so, but it seems to me they have lost interest. They should probably close LGB and move the planes to AUS.--> Looks that way. AUS though would make a lot of sense. A 6 gate AUS scissor hub would probably actually strengthen LGB for them at the same time. Now that WN have publicly stated they'll snap up any and all available LGB slots, I doubt B6 will give up on LGB
AS: Maybe, but also not showing much interest yet. Should probably close DAL and move the planes South. --> Probably should, but probably won't.
DL: It's a possibility, but DL has only pursued mega-cities lately. Still, I can see them doing something like they do in CVG. --> If DL were ever to announce AUS-AMS (or CDG), I think you'd see DL build up to the size of their RDU focus city.
AA: Bad geography --> Not a chance. Too close to DFW, but maybe they'll add a few key point-to-points over time. They used to operate the AUS-SJC nerd bird. They no doubt already put a few connects thru AUS, especially with the BA flight.
UA: Bad Geography --> Not a chance with IAH so close, and, CLE aside, they don't do focus cities
WN: Anything is possible, but sits too close to DAL/HOU --> AUS is already a focus city and I'd hazard a guess that 20% of their AUS traffic is connections already. WN will no doubt keep growing there gradually over time, but I don't think you'd ever see them build in into a DEN.
F9: They are trying, but nothing they do is very permanent --> F9 don't do hubs anymore.
NK: Possible ...but not on a hub scale like FLL or even DTW.
A new airline: This may be the best option and if you were going to start a new airline, this is probably the best place to base it --> Via Air! Looks like they're already gradually trying to build an AUS regional hub, flying to the places no one else wants to. Would love to see an outfit like Via build a Porter-style Q400 empire somewhere in the US...probably a US-turboprop-aversion pipe dream.

enilria wrote:

I saw this thread title was posted in 2002 and it's time to consider it again.

Generally I'm not a big fan of these types of threads since I think the day of new cities getting hubs (as opposed to airlines fighting over existing ones like in BOS/SEA/LAX) is over, but I think AUS is inevitable as a hub.

-It's growing fast.
-It has the attention of airline planners.
-It's gaining intl service quickly.
-The geography is good for Latin connects.
-It's not dominated by one airline.
-It's got a nice yield mixture with high tech coupling with convention business, good weather, and leisure.

Possibilities:
B6: I used to think so, but it seems to me they have lost interest. They should probably close LGB and move the planes to AUS.
AS: Maybe, but also not showing much interest yet. Should probably close DAL and move the planes South.
DL: It's a possibility, but DL has only pursued mega-cities lately. Still, I can see them doing something like they do in CVG.
AA: Bad geography
UA: Bad Geography
WN: Anything is possible, but sits too close to DAL/HOU
F9: They are trying, but nothing they do is very permanent
NK: Possible
A new airline: This may be the best option and if you were going to start a new airline, this is probably the best place to base it

I wouldn't characterize SEA as a mega city, especially not as it compares to the likes of NYC and LA. That being said, I certainly we'll see some growth from DL, at least to their largest markets and focus cities. I think these will be more opportunistic adds, however, and not anywhere near the kind of growth that would be needed to sustain a large hub operation. I think an operation from AUS to the following: ATL, MSP, DTW, SLC, NYC, LAX, SEA, RDU, LAS, MCO, BOS, BNA and maybe FLL, ORD, DCA and AMS or CDG would be more than sufficient for what the market needs.

Jeremy

TWA772LR wrote:

Norwegian America

Yes please!

Dominion301 wrote:

F9: They are trying, but nothing they do is very permanent --> F9 don't do hubs anymore.]

(a) DEN is a hub for Frontier.

(b) ORD? CVG? PHL? They as close to hubs as Frontier has ever come - apart, always, from DEN.

mariner

i’m voting delta because of how loose they use the “hub” terminology.
Also every major carrier in the United States(including AS) has some sort of focus city or hub in Texas....except Delta

Re Latin America, Austin may be well positioned geographically but that’s about it. There aren’t any significant business ties especially if compared to Dallas/Houston. Demographically, while the fastest growing big city in America, it still isn’t that big especially not in terms of supporting a Latam hub. I suspect Austin will remain an important spoke and possibly focus city for the foreseeable future. I don’t see it becoming a full fledged hub especially not to Latam.

Nobody with brains. (If the Norwegian guys really try EZE-Perth-Europe, they have self-identified as your promo target.)

Austin is growing nicely but it's not going to rival Houston or Dallas/Fort Worth in GDP or population. There's just so much ability to aggregate traffic from nearby population centers - the practical definition of an airline hub.

The story of CVG is instructive. Delta didn't need it once it had DTW, and both DTW and CVG see competitive effects of UA/AA/WN hubs at CHI.

The story of AA building hubs near simultaneously and BNA and RDU is instructive. They competed with each other; they got killed by ATL and CLT. What the ... was AA thinking.

NK and AS can't make a 60-100 flight mid-America hub work in the shadow of 600+ flight hubs at DFW and IAH.

Given the advantages of scale at hubs, and scale (in CASM) of larger aircraft, and fast-rising pilot wages it's probably easier to argue that the U.S. needs fewer hubs, not more.

loisencroach wrote:

nws2002 wrote:

It is already a destination city for G4 and I could see them making it a base.

It is interesting that F9 just announced every market that G4 serves from AUS (obviously MCO for SFB, etc.). It will be interesting to see how they inevitably expand the south terminal that they use for F9 and G4 because at this rate its going to need it.

They haven't added MEM/AUS last I looked and G4 fly's that.

Dominion301 wrote:

A new airline: This may be the best option and if you were going to start a new airline, this is probably the best place to base it --> Via Air! Looks like they're already gradually trying to build an AUS regional hub, flying to the places no one else wants to. Would love to see an outfit like Via build a Porter-style Q400 empire somewhere in the US...probably a US-turboprop-aversion pipe dream.

ViaAir seems to have designs on building something in AUS. But they don't seem to have their act together, either.

They still haven't started OKC-AUS, which was announced to start in January. Now starting, apparently, 22 April.

My money is on Delta making Austin a focus city with at least CDG as a TATL destination by them...maybe AMS on KLM metal.

Of all the above, B6 would have the most to gain from starting up a small connecting hub in AUS. LGB seems less important to them today than it was a few years ago. The leaves them with only BOS/JFK/FLL to route passengers through, and geographically, those aren't well positioned. Austin's problem is it's too far south to make a great mid-continent hub without the local O&D to support it. IAH only works because it lies in a metro of 6 million people and has strong business and ethnic ties to Europe and Latin America.
I will say, it's interesting that many Europeans I've met while travelling there will tell me they have visited Austin, but not Dallas or Houston. Austin's music scene seems to have a good international reputation.

allegiantflyer wrote:

i’m voting delta because of how loose they use the “hub” terminology.
Also every major carrier in the United States(including AS) has some sort of focus city or hub in Texas....except Delta

DL's operation in AUS is a good deal larger than AS's operation at DAL already

[email protected]: ATL, BOS, CVG, DTW, LAX, MSP, JFK, RDU, SLC, SEA
[email protected]: LAX, LGA, PDX, SAN, SFO, SJC, SEA, DCA

And DL @AUS uses larger aircraft, more times per day, than AS does @DAL.

'902

IAHWorldflyer wrote:

Of all the above, B6 would have the most to gain from starting up a small connecting hub in AUS. LGB seems less important to them today than it was a few years ago. The leaves them with only BOS/JFK/FLL to route passengers through, and geographically, those aren't well positioned. Austin's problem is it's too far south to make a great mid-continent hub without the local O&D to support it. IAH only works because it lies in a metro of 6 million people and has strong business and ethnic ties to Europe and Latin America.
I will say, it's interesting that many Europeans I've met while travelling there will tell me they have visited Austin, but not Dallas or Houston. Austin's music scene seems to have a good international reputation.

For an airline that has no mid-continent hub, Austin could prove to be a valuable hub operation. There are hubs in existence in smaller cities (DL @SLC for example). However, AUS would be competing for connecting traffic with basically every hub between the coasts, whereas SLC's only real intermountain-west competition is DEN and PHX. Like others have said, the O&D and business connectivity are growing in AUS, and would make for a good focus city. However, it seems that all airlines that currently serve AUS are also growing along with AUS's importance. Should one airline show up and attempt to make a grab for a larger market share, I suspect it would come (at least initially) with poor yields, and for that, you need to have deep pockets.

'902

I am agreeing with the AUS-AMS talk. Austin Texas will only continue to grow. I do see Delta service to the key business markets. Especially if the DL taking 9 gates rumor is true. Then imo you do see an 80+ flight Delta operation there. Because of process of elimination -- it won't be AA or UA, and AUS isn't necessarily exactly a WN style city - it is graduating out of that. Into a blue chip major corporate city. Delta can serve the needs that AUS will have, better than B6, WN or AS.

TWA902fly wrote:

allegiantflyer wrote:

i’m voting delta because of how loose they use the “hub” terminology.
Also every major carrier in the United States(including AS) has some sort of focus city or hub in Texas....except Delta

DL's operation in AUS is a good deal larger than AS's operation at DAL already

[email protected]: ATL, BOS, CVG, DTW, LAX, MSP, JFK, RDU, SLC, SEA
[email protected]: LAX, LGA, PDX, SAN, SFO, SJC, SEA, DCA

And DL @AUS uses larger aircraft, more times per day, than AS does @DAL.

'902

The question has to be asked though...

Any chance DL does intra-Texas flying from AUS? Possibly to markets like El Paso, Midland, Brownsville, etc. that would obviously be smaller aircraft, but could serve pax that would help the overall DL network, as well as accommodating O-D trips to and from the state capital?

Austin has virtually no business ties to Latin America outside Mexico. If all it took was good geography, AA would be doing more to Latin America from Charlotte.

Dallas and Houston have massive O&D and ethnic communities, Austin doesn’t.

I enjoy Austin, but I can’t imagine it’s worth more than a larger focus city.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

My money is on Delta making Austin a focus city with at least CDG as a TATL destination by them...maybe AMS on KLM metal.

Austin is not the kind of destination KLM would add! Why do people think it's as simple as KLM operating the flight instead of Delta - AUS would be a nearly all American demand destination from AMS. It only makes sense for Delta to operate the flight. The pattern is very clear: Air France and KLM operate large cities and tourist destinations, and some small SkyTeam hubs. Delta handles small SkyTeam hubs and other large cities. It only makes sense for Delta to operate the flight.

DL would be wise to put a CVG/RDU style focus city in AUS, but I don’t see anything more than that.

What defines a hub? American has nonstop flights to London and both American and Southwest frequently offer itineraries that connect thru Austin.

enilria wrote:

I think AUS is inevitable as a hub.

-It's growing fast.
-It has the attention of airline planners.
-It's gaining intl service quickly.
-The geography is good for Latin connects.
-It's not dominated by one airline.
-It's got a nice yield mixture with high tech coupling with convention business, good weather, and leisure.

I think the biggest problem with AUS becoming a hub for anyone is WN. They carry over a third of traffic at the airport, more than the next two carriers (AA & UA) combined. They serve all of the top ten markets (combining multiple airports in a metro region) by O&D non-stop. They're the leading carrier by market share in 7 of the top 10 and 17 of the top 25 O&D markets from AUS. I'm not sure any of the legacy carriers have the stomach for an extended market share battle on WN's home turf.

I suspect the ULCCs would be challenged to build a large hub due to their tendency to not fly business-friendly schedules as well as facilities limitations; the South Terminal isn't really suitable for more than about a half-dozen aircraft on the ground at a time. The ULCC/Basic Economy product doesn't seem to be terribly attractive to most business travelers.

ADrum23 wrote:

DL would be wise to put a CVG/RDU style focus city in AUS, but I don’t see anything more than that.

Just wondering why? WN is by far the largest carrier. When DL started building up RDU, it was because of the AA pull down and there was opportunities... that’s not the case with AUS. It has a huge lumbering beast already owning the market.. plus other big airlines already established.. RDu was not like that..

And an international flight does not make it a focus city.. or PIT would be one.. AMS would be another hub flight

Right now, AUS has hub and focus city flights and no non-hub flights.. once it gets flights to 6-7 non-hub flights.. we can start talking focus city but as of right now.. I think it’s far off...

No offense, I haven’t seen DL really go into WN strongholds and open focus cities or take over.. they find markets where there is no leader and opportunities.. and make a push.. like RDU and BOS.. and they have even slowed down in their hubs and focus cities and are doing more upguaging than expansions so they may be on a break for now..

enilria wrote:

I saw this thread title was posted in 2002 and it's time to consider it again.

Generally I'm not a big fan of these types of threads since I think the day of new cities getting hubs (as opposed to airlines fighting over existing ones like in BOS/SEA/LAX) is over, but I think AUS is inevitable as a hub.

-It's growing fast.
-It has the attention of airline planners.
-It's gaining intl service quickly.
-The geography is good for Latin connects.
-It's not dominated by one airline.
-It's got a nice yield mixture with high tech coupling with convention business, good weather, and leisure.

Possibilities:
B6: I used to think so, but it seems to me they have lost interest. They should probably close LGB and move the planes to AUS.
AS: Maybe, but also not showing much interest yet. Should probably close DAL and move the planes South.
DL: It's a possibility, but DL has only pursued mega-cities lately. Still, I can see them doing something like they do in CVG.
AA: Bad geography
UA: Bad Geography
WN: Anything is possible, but sits too close to DAL/HOU
F9: They are trying, but nothing they do is very permanent
NK: Possible
A new airline: This may be the best option and if you were going to start a new airline, this is probably the best place to base it

I think the strongest possibility here is Delta. With that being said, I'm not sure what happened to their supposed seasonal AUS-AMS route. I don't see it anywhere on the schedules.
I doubt a new airline will start anytime soon, although that would be pretty interesting to see.

I just found AUS-AMS non stop .. I guess they are running it a few days in March?


Flights


WED
14
MAR
AUS
6:43 PM
to
AMS
10:50 AM
Arrives Next Day
Flight Number
DL 156
Travel Time
10h 7m Nonstop
Main Cabin (B)
Changeable / Refundable
Change Flight

Delta Air Lines Baggage Information
opens in new windowfn

kavok wrote:

TWA902fly wrote:

allegiantflyer wrote:

i’m voting delta because of how loose they use the “hub” terminology.
Also every major carrier in the United States(including AS) has some sort of focus city or hub in Texas....except Delta

DL's operation in AUS is a good deal larger than AS's operation at DAL already

[email protected]: ATL, BOS, CVG, DTW, LAX, MSP, JFK, RDU, SLC, SEA
[email protected]: LAX, LGA, PDX, SAN, SFO, SJC, SEA, DCA

And DL @AUS uses larger aircraft, more times per day, than AS does @DAL.

'902

The question has to be asked though...

Any chance DL does intra-Texas flying from AUS? Possibly to markets like El Paso, Midland, Brownsville, etc. that would obviously be smaller aircraft, but could serve pax that would help the overall DL network, as well as accommodating O-D trips to and from the state capital?

You just described Southwest.

It’s funny how dismissive people in this thread are of Southwest.

RJNUT wrote:

I just found AUS-AMS non stop .. I guess they are running it a few days in March?


Flights


WED
14
MAR
AUS
6:43 PM
to
AMS
10:50 AM
Arrives Next Day
Flight Number
DL 156
Travel Time
10h 7m Nonstop
Main Cabin (B)
Changeable / Refundable
Change Flight

Delta Air Lines Baggage Information
opens in new windowfn

That could well be for the end of SXSW.

LOWS wrote:

RJNUT wrote:

I just found AUS-AMS non stop .. I guess they are running it a few days in March?


Flights


WED
14
MAR
AUS
6:43 PM
to
AMS
10:50 AM
Arrives Next Day
Flight Number
DL 156
Travel Time
10h 7m Nonstop
Main Cabin (B)
Changeable / Refundable
Change Flight

Delta Air Lines Baggage Information
opens in new windowfn

That could well be for the end of SXSW.

Thanks , you are probably right, just like in another thread, AF nonstop SAN-CDG late this coming fall for a conference.

This, in my opinion, was Jetblues biggest mistake.

You didn’t even need the main terminal. Say JetBlue goes to the city and says we want to build a 10 gate concourse for starters.

Dirt cheap, mid continent hub and airline and city grow together.

A stupid, missed opportunity 10 years ago. Perhaps the worst missed opportunity in B6s history.

It does seem like it's a fair time to bring back. AUS is growing, and is showing no signs of stopping. It has alot more to offer than any non hubbed city I think at this point.

Delta seems like it has a RDU type focus city going I am surprised they don't try to expand a little more. They have no hubs too close by it will hurt.

JetBlue overall shocks me they didn't increase AUS. They looked interested in the market but haven't done much. Their Network just crumbles when winter weather hits the Northeast and the hubs both go down at the same time. Another hub to move planes to or reroute some people would be at least good. JetBlue I think really blew AUS but it doesn't seem too late for them to get in there with a mini sized hub.

ERJ170 wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

DL would be wise to put a CVG/RDU style focus city in AUS, but I don’t see anything more than that.

Just wondering why? WN is by far the largest carrier. When DL started building up RDU, it was because of the AA pull down and there was opportunities... that’s not the case with AUS. It has a huge lumbering beast already owning the market.. plus other big airlines already established.. RDu was not like that..

And an international flight does not make it a focus city.. or PIT would be one.. AMS would be another hub flight

Right now, AUS has hub and focus city flights and no non-hub flights.. once it gets flights to 6-7 non-hub flights.. we can start talking focus city but as of right now.. I think it’s far off...

No offense, I haven’t seen DL really go into WN strongholds and open focus cities or take over.. they find markets where there is no leader and opportunities.. and make a push.. like RDU and BOS.. and they have even slowed down in their hubs and focus cities and are doing more upguaging than expansions so they may be on a break for now..

WN isn't as dominate as you may think at AUS. While they clearly have the majority, it is not insurmountable by any means (right now, that is). AUS is the smallest of their focus cities. Even so, DL doesn't even need to overtake WN, they just need to grow themselves into the second largest carrier (easily doable since UA and AA don't do p2p flying) and carve out a nice little niche. Start with the rumored year round AMS flight and then add some p2p flying. It won't happen overnight, but it is more doable than people think.

As I've said before, I find it hard to believe DL would be putting that nice of a skyclub in AUS if they weren't going to start p2p flying out of AUS, since they clearly have to the weakest presence (of the US3 and WN) in Texas at the moment. Not saying this will happen, but putting a focus city in AUS would be the icing on the cake for DL's network so to speak.

MIflyer12 wrote:

The story of AA building hubs near simultaneously and BNA and RDU is instructive. They competed with each other; they got killed by ATL and CLT. What the ... was AA thinking...

From a recent post:

afcjets wrote:

BNA and RDU had approximately zero overlap on AA. AA did not serve any destinations in the US outside the eastern time zone from RDU except for flights to their BNA, DFW, and ORD hubs. Outside of of FL, ATL and large NE cities, the only cities in common were DTW and CLE and just a very few small cities flow by AAE in the pre-RJ era. IIRC AA did not route connections from the NE to Florida and ATL via BNA, not sure about DTW and CLE.

dfdubflyer wrote:

I had lunch with Don Carty a few years ago around the time of the bankruptcy/merger and he told me he feels that shutting the Nashville hub was one of American's greatest mistakes and something he and Crandall very much regretted.

It won't happen. Austin won't ever be a true hub. Maybe more routes, but it's the same problem as SAT has. Too close to megahubs.

This again?

afcjets wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Nobody with brains...

The story of AA building hubs near simultaneously and BNA and RDU is instructive. They competed with each other; they got killed by ATL and CLT. What the ... was AA thinking...

From a recent post:

afcjets wrote:

BNA and RDU had approximately zero overlap on AA. AA did not serve any destinations in the US outside the eastern time zone from RDU except for flights to their BNA, DFW, and ORD hubs. Outside of of FL, ATL and large NE cities, the only cities in common were DTW and CLE and just a very few small cities flow by AAE in the pre-RJ era. IIRC AA did not route connections from the NE to Florida and ATL via BNA, not sure about DTW and CLE.

dfdubflyer wrote:

I had lunch with Don Carty a few years ago around the time of the bankruptcy/merger and he told me he feels that shutting the Nashville hub was one of American's greatest mistakes and something he and Crandall very much regretted.

Should have picked one or the other though. They would have been more successful if they had. Though since they've inherited CLT now, I think they've more than made up for it.

Wouldn't DL be a decent candidate for a hub in AUS? Or does SLC perform a similar purpose in the DL route network?

jfklganyc wrote:

This, in my opinion, was Jetblues biggest mistake.

You didn’t even need the main terminal. Say JetBlue goes to the city and says we want to build a 10 gate concourse for starters.

Dirt cheap, mid continent hub and airline and city grow together.

A stupid, missed opportunity 10 years ago. Perhaps the worst missed opportunity in B6s history.

Yeah, IMO JetBlue in particular, has made a lot of these types of mistakes...

DL could afford to expand some at AUS, but I don't think it will be a full hub for them. Something larger than they have at RDU, but smaller than SLC.

DariusBieber wrote:

It won't happen. Austin won't ever be a true hub. Maybe more routes, but it's the same problem as SAT has. Too close to megahubs.

I tend to agree. I think AUS will continue to grow and perhaps even become a focus city at some point. But I do not think we'll see AUS become a true hub, at least not within the next decade. If San Antonio were just a tad bit closer and the two metros had a joint airport (a la DFW, MSP, BWI, etc) I could possibly see the region gaining hub status but, for now, each city has a medium size airport and that seems to work just fine.

I think the hypothetically newly merged Frontier Spirit Airlines ( see post: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1388267) would find this an attractive location for their southern hub.

Noise wrote:

Wouldn't DL be a decent candidate for a hub in AUS? Or does SLC perform a similar purpose in the DL route network?

I'd say DL has most hub flows that AUS would provide covered other than Texas-originating/destined traffic to inside an area if one was to draw a rough ATL-MSP-SLC-LAX line, to markets that wouldn't involve too much backtrack. The problem is that there really aren't too many large markets in that area that don't already have a hub - basically ORD, IAH, DFW, DEN, PHX, plus a slew of mid-size cities. I would think DL could add some O&D flights out of AUS to cover the biggest O&D markets - but a new hub would be up against the megahubs at DFW and IAH, plus Southwest with its copious nonstops. Basically, DL would create minimal new traffic flows (especially high-yield traffic) for itself. Add to that the fact that AUS would be a weaker hub than DFW and IAH, plus that the southern midwest is dominated by UA/AA/WN (after DL dismantled the DFW hub) and their loyal customers, I'd say it'd be an uphill battle for a full-size hub, but maybe the right ingredients for an RDU/CVG sized operation.

'902

AUS and SAT will never be hubs, for one main reason that they're both outside of the perimeter of LGA which is the preferred airport in the Nation's largest market. DAL, DFW, HOU and IAH all have service to LGA. AUS and SAT do not because of the perimeter.

WaywardMemphian wrote:

loisencroach wrote:

nws2002 wrote:

It is already a destination city for G4 and I could see them making it a base.

It is interesting that F9 just announced every market that G4 serves from AUS (obviously MCO for SFB, etc.). It will be interesting to see how they inevitably expand the south terminal that they use for F9 and G4 because at this rate its going to need it.

They haven't added MEM/AUS last I looked and G4 fly's that.

Correct...my apologies - as well as AUS-PIT.