https://www.courant.com/news/connecticu ... story.html


Surprising to be honest. Always remember that flight being close to full or full, if not oversold. Wonder if this brings up WN trying PHX-BDL instead in the near future then? STL has been a success so far and is always full if not very close to it.

Thoughts?

It's all lesisure passengers, and there are so many places they can connect you thru instead. Look at ALB it had a successful flight to LAS for years, they replaced it with a DEN flight not because LAS didn't make money, but DEN connects you to Las perfectly and many more cities.

I recall when SW used to never drop routes. Times and markets are a changing.

Southwest is very stable on routes.

This is just the DEN effect.

The route was basically moved to Denver. Denver offers more connections, is shorter, and has more business demand. LAS is still a large connection city for southwest but it was more important before DEN was on the scene.

This has happened to other cities as well, nothing really bad here.

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:

This has happened to other cities as well, nothing really bad here.

See ABQ and SLC. Former WN connecting points, now....not so much.

OzarkD9S wrote:

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:

This has happened to other cities as well, nothing really bad here.

See ABQ and SLC. Former WN connecting points, now....not so much.

For ABQ, it's the double-whammy of DEN coming online and DAL opening up post Wright Amendment.

Its a shame to see BDL lose service to LAS. I know America West offered it in years past. I'm wondering if Spirit or Frontier will pick it up, even at 4 weekly or something like that.
With Sun Country in PVD, perhaps they will try BDL as well and serve LAS and MSP less than daily.

It blows my mind that WN can sustain BDL-STL but not BDL-LAS. is WN not competitive in the longer haul markets? They seem to have a limited long haul menu and their transcon fares are rarely ever competitive.

Curious when this dinosaur of an airline will join the 20th century and offer red-eyes which would drastically improve economics in a market like this.

Didn't UA not elect to continue their SFO-BDL service? I believe I read on here that Connecticut's economy is not doing very well...maybe this cut is indicative of an issue beyond just WN.

WN has also had trouble with longer flights out of PVD. MCI, DEN, LAS, & PHX all failed.

flyby519 wrote:

I wonder if B6 could make this work

I bet they could make it work with the A220. Otherwise this might be a could route for G4 to try also.

Now that there is no LAS-ALB, LAS-BDL, I believe one can not fly straight from LAS to any point east of BUF until BOS (except for NYC and PHL). It seems like a pretty big gap for Upstate New Yorkers and New Englanders!

BDL is the U.S. #53 airport in terms of domestic O&D. Why would people think this route could support a 143-passenger jet on BDL O&D? If WN couldn't make LAS work I don't think PHX would be any better year-round, although maybe there's some PHX seasonality that could work 3-4 months a year.

Well, LAS-ISP is pretty much out the window.

MIflyer12 wrote:

BDL is the U.S. #53 airport in terms of domestic O&D. Why would people think this route could support a 143-passenger jet on BDL O&D? If WN couldn't make LAS work I don't think PHX would be any better year-round, although maybe there's some PHX seasonality that could work 3-4 months a year.

There are a few destinations such as MSP, EWR, and PHL that currently have nonstop service to PHX on WN but not to LAS on WN.

While WN doesn't currently serve CVG nonstop from LAS, WN will resume seasonal CVG-PHX nonstop service on March 9th.

BDL might be able to support nonstop service to PHX on WN since (a) WN has nonstop service to PHX from a few destinations that don't have nonstop service to LAS on WN and (b) BDL is one of the top destinations traveled to from PHX that isn't currently served nonstop from PHX.

Southwest just doesn't need this route anymore. The traffic is better connected via demver, it just make sense. Bdl-las less than daily is probably perfect for sun country.

LAS is mostly leisure, and yields are low. WN doesn't get excited about low yields for flights over 2 hours. WN would rather let those passengers transfer.
Also, how many BDL passengers were transferring in LAS?

MIflyer12 wrote:

BDL is the U.S. #53 airport in terms of domestic O&D. Why would people think this route could support a 143-passenger jet on BDL O&D? If WN couldn't make LAS work I don't think PHX would be any better year-round, although maybe there's some PHX seasonality that could work 3-4 months a year.

LAS is a very O&D airport. PHX on the otherhand supports O&D traffic but also can support connections to Mexico, Hawaii, and other Southwestern destinations.

While BDL-LAS couldn't work, I could see BDL-PHX working, along with WN adding BDL-BNA and possibly AS adding BDL-SEA.

jagraham wrote:

LAS is mostly leisure, and yields are low. WN doesn't get excited about low yields for flights over 2 hours. WN would rather let those passengers transfer.
Also, how many BDL passengers were transferring in LAS?

Some, BDL-LAX has limited or no options, and WN also opens up BUR, ONT, etc

maps4ltd wrote:

Well, LAS-ISP is pretty much out the window.

F9 could probably make direct to LAS work from ISP. However, like Southwest’s decision, Denver would probably make more since due to the F9 night bank to the west and the red-eye/ returns to DEN.

RL757PVD wrote:

It blows my mind that WN can sustain BDL-STL but not BDL-LAS. is WN not competitive in the longer haul markets? They seem to have a limited long haul menu and their transcon fares are rarely ever competitive.

Curious when this dinosaur of an airline will join the 20th century and offer red-eyes which would drastically improve economics in a market like this.

They run BDL into STLs west coast bank. Might have also contributed to less of a need for BDL-LAS, besides what DEN offers now.

UpNAWAy wrote:

I recall when SW used to never drop routes.

When was that?

WN has always dropped/changed routes that didn't work.

What you're probably thinking, but misstating, is that WN used to not drop stations... which itself isn't accurate (SanFran1, Beaumont, Houston/Bush, etc) but *is* a reputation that they long enjoyed.

MIflyer12 wrote:

BDL is the U.S. #53 airport in terms of domestic O&D. Why would people think this route could support a 143-passenger jet on BDL O&D?

Because the route has been running since 2003.

Super80Fan wrote:

LAS is a very O&D airport. PHX on the otherhand supports O&D traffic but also can support connections to Mexico, Hawaii, and other Southwestern destinations.

While BDL-LAS couldn't work, I could see BDL-PHX working, along with WN adding BDL-BNA....

There was one flight a day to LAS, where connections could be made to any California city (on Southwest). If there were one BDL-PHX flight/day instead, then connections could be made to any California city, or LAS (on Southwest). It's a wash. WN used to fly BDL-BNA; it apparently didn't work.

I didn't see what time the LAS flight was scheduled for in the spring. If it was really early or really late, it may not have been the first choice. Just because it's nonstop doesn't mean that it's convenient. When BDL-DEN (daily) returns in March, it will be a 915am departure. In April, it moves to 440pm. Will that time change shift travelers to another airline or a 1-stop?

Allegiant,Frontier or Sun Country could easily fill the BDL-LAS void with a Thursday,Saturday,Monday summer schedule with a off season run Saturday only.
Spirit keeps growing LAS they could add a LAS-BDL Red eye. Run a Morning BDL-MCO turn then send the plane Westbound to LAS before returning on the red eye.
As for Western connections via LAS on WN I believe on average 75 out of 143/175 went on to California or PNW.

Rerouting passengers via DEN makes more since than LAS. In DEN it's a one concourse vs a unfriendly C and B split in LAS.

Flyguy

A BDL-OAK flight would be nice to have. If United doesn't continue SFO, it would give that bay area connection. Also, connections to Hawaii and such.

The ALB-LAS was supposed to have re-started on 3 Out 18. Did that ever happen? Is that also the date that WN ended BDL-LAS?

This screams NK !

Qantas59 wrote:

The ALB-LAS was supposed to have re-started on 3 Out 18. Did that ever happen? Is that also the date that WN ended BDL-LAS?

ALB-LAS didn't resume. BDL-LAS typically ended just after the holidays and resumed in March. Last year it ended in early November; I checked an old schedule dump and found it was never scheduled to resume (at least by April).

santi319 wrote:

This screams NK !

Just remember that Spirit isn't better then nothing....

MO11 wrote:

santi319 wrote:

This screams NK !

Just remember that Spirit isn't better then nothing....

Oh but it is for a lot of people. Hence why they keep growing, and they have a better ontime perfomance than the beloved WN so..

WN dropped IAD-LAS as well. I did it twice and it was packed in both directions. Not sure why.......

Despite obtaining a very capable and efficient fleet, WN has been shying away from longer flights unless there is a strategic competitive purpose, like hub-hub or hub to focus city. Pure speculation on my part, but WN has been requiring a very strong return on investment and I think the long flights cut into that, especially when competing with other airline's premium cabins. Unless WN finds fertile international markets to grow in, then they are going to have to eventually find a way to grow in small markets or fly longer flights more profitably to connect the dots more directly. IMHO, WN is missing the boat in not connecting the longer dots in their network because F9 , SY and NK are moving into that turf being left vacant by WN. Consider how most airlines are growing in BDL and PVD, while WN shrinks.