jplatts wrote:

MSPNWA wrote:

tphuang wrote:

I do wonder how long is AA going to be able to keep these JFK slots. I'm sure they can still sell those for value. The MAX grounding is just an excuse. There is no reason for them to keep some of these routes going if they schedule them and then cut them for many months.

It's a legit reason because of the MAX. It may be a convenient reason to trim the weakest flights when forced to cut capacity due to loss of aircraft, but something has to give when dozens of aircraft are out of service. Do you really expect them to cut at DFW, ORD, MIA, PHL, CLT, LAX, etc. instead?

I would to like to see someone try to force AA to give up JFK slots when the have the MAX reasoning to fall back on. Good luck with that one.

I agree with your point regarding AA not currently using some of its JFK slots as AA is facing a mainline narrowbody plane shortage due to both the retirement of its MD-80's and the 737 MAX not yet back in service.

What does the airport authority care about the Max grounding?

What do the concession owners care?

The taxi drivers?

The city that depends on visitors?

The Max and subsequent plane shortage is AAs problem...especially if there are airlines waiting for slots.

And how many AA Maxs landed at JFK prior to the grounding? Zero?

So what case is AA making to keep the slots?

“A plane that never saw JFK for our operation is now grounded. So we decided to take the planes from JFK to backfill at other hubs as they are more profitable for us. So...leave our slots vacant for us so we can come back one day...maybe.


Good luck with that...

This week’s update also means the AS SFO-RDU cancelled last week moved to SEA-RDU

Also also does UA still fly DEN-RAP? Interesting to see the ORD flight functionally go away

DEN1895 wrote:

LHUSA wrote:

UA DEN-HNL JUN 1.0>1.9[1.0] JUL 1.0>2[1.0]

Nice to see DEN-HNL twice daily. Is this a first?

I believe it is, this past summer was the first year of two 777s (HNL and OGG). They are still both showing in the schedule in addition to a new 757 on the HNL route earlier in the morning.

I believe this is a first for DEN-HNL 2 daily in the summer, however DEC 2018 last year for a couple weeks, there were 2 daily DEN-HNL flights also, one on a 777 and the other on a 757. This year in DEC, DEN-HNL is going 2 daily again for about 2 weeks, but this time with 2 777's on both flights just like they will be doing in Summer 2020.

It also looks like AA did some large block time increase with this schedule change. MSP-DFW is blocked for 2:33 currently; in Feb it goes up to 3:02. MSP-DFW has never had such a long block time.

Coming. Matter of more CS1's on property.

Sancho99504 wrote:

jplatts wrote:

enilria wrote:

AA DFW-SEA JAN 7>6[6]

Sancho99504 wrote:

Really surprised that AA is cutting so much from SEA. No more JFK, which during the busy season was 2-3 daily, PHX is going down to 2 daily, which was 6-7 not too long ago. PHL, has 3-4 daily during busy season. The only AA hub that doesn't see a reduction is CLT and LAX. Wonder if DL and AS will backfill some of this, especially MIA/FLL and PHX?

In addition to AA reducing frequencies on DFW-SEA, WN is also reducing DAL-SEA nonstop service from year-round to seasonal starting in January 2020.

DL re-adding DFW-SEA nonstop service is a possibility as DFW is one of the top destinations that DL doesn't currently serve nonstop from its SEA hub. Other individuals have also said in the Airliners.net forums that DL still has a FF base in the DFW area, even though DFW had been dehubbed by DL almost 15 years ago.

Was really surprised that SEA-TPA was added before DFW or IAH, especially since it wasn't on the radar. I think DFW may come soon now that Ed has finally decided to encroach on AA, friendship with Parker be damned.

TUS-SJC: Bad news for TUS which worked long and hard to get AS to start the route. But two factors led to it not working. 1) AS's schedule allowed few connections in SJC for the rest of the network esp Pac NW during the summer when the only AS TUS-SEA is 1pm. AS would offer a SJC connection with 3 hr + connection time; same with PDX. 2) Southwest entered the market.

SEA-PHX AA: Crazy they're going to just 2. But January is the weakest month for SEA. If it doesn't go back to 4 in Feb, then it's really nuts.

hpff wrote:

This week’s update also means the AS SFO-RDU cancelled last week moved to SEA-RDU

Also also does UA still fly DEN-RAP? Interesting to see the ORD flight functionally go away

Yes, UA still flies DEN-RAP. ORD drops during the off-season, but was upgauged to mainline this past summer, so it's not going anywhere...just a seasonal cut.

n7371f wrote:

TUS-SJC: Bad news for TUS which worked long and hard to get AS to start the route. But two factors led to it not working. 1) AS's schedule allowed few connections in SJC for the rest of the network esp Pac NW during the summer when the only AS TUS-SEA is 1pm. AS would offer a SJC connection with 3 hr + connection time; same with PDX. 2) Southwest entered the market.

SEA-PHX AA: Crazy they're going to just 2. But January is the weakest month for SEA. If it doesn't go back to 4 in Feb, then it's really nuts.

I wonder how long WN will be in the SJC-TUS market before it's gone completely?

n7371f wrote:

TUS-SJC: Bad news for TUS which worked long and hard to get AS to start the route. But two factors led to it not working. 1) AS's schedule allowed few connections in SJC for the rest of the network esp Pac NW during the summer when the only AS TUS-SEA is 1pm. AS would offer a SJC connection with 3 hr + connection time; same with PDX. 2) Southwest entered the market.

I also remember something about this r/t from SJC to TUS was added in order to get an EMJ down to mx in TUS, rather than just RONing the a/c in SJC. I thought that was a major reason for the route.
Perhaps for some reason that isn't as necessary anymore and if the flights underperformed, then it was dropped? Just a thought.

wedgetail737 wrote:

I wonder how long WN will be in the SJC-TUS market before it's gone completely?

I've wondered the same about several of the SAN routes that were recently cut, in my speculation, due to competition by WN; for example, SAN-OMA, SAN-ELP. So far, I've been pleased to see that those and other WN routes have remained, at least thru mid-April, 2020 -- their current sked limit. This despite AS dropping those particular routes in Nov and Jan respectively. This doesn't assure that the flights will remain forever but WN did not axe themimmediatelyas I feared they might.

IMO, both of AS's focus cities, SAN & SJC, also happen to be large WN stations so I'm feeling pretty confident that these now non-competitive routes will remain on the route map, unless they the loads and yields are totally awful (or the whole MAX thing continues way into 2020...)

And let's not forget, WN might now be able to fly travelers from TUS to Hawaii via SJC (depending on the skeds.)

bb

MLB is getting AA mainline again, so happy to see that again!

MSPNWA wrote:

tphuang wrote:

I do wonder how long is AA going to be able to keep these JFK slots. I'm sure they can still sell those for value. The MAX grounding is just an excuse. There is no reason for them to keep some of these routes going if they schedule them and then cut them for many months.

It's a legit reason because of the MAX. It may be a convenient reason to trim the weakest flights when forced to cut capacity due to loss of aircraft, but something has to give when dozens of aircraft are out of service. Do you really expect them to cut at DFW, ORD, MIA, PHL, CLT, LAX, etc. instead?

I would to like to see someone try to force AA to give up JFK slots when the have the MAX reasoning to fall back on. Good luck with that one.

Happy is the PANYNJ that gets to defend that case. The Port Authority has administrative rights to cancel AA's slots. AA sues to get them back. Lawyer observes to judge that AA has over 900 non-MAX mainline aircraft and about 500 Eagle aircraft that could be used on JFK routes. Motion to dismiss. Granted.

jasoncrh wrote:

A little random, but building on the F9 extension. Does anybody know if they will bring den-sdf back? They’re dropping it (seasonally?) in December and flying den-mco through this extension. This year they flew den-sdf every month. Is f9 exiting sdf entirely?

Hard to imagine they’re exiting SDF if they’re increasing frequency to MCO. The dropping of the DEN flight is odd, but there is more competition on that route (WN and UA), whereas their only competition to MCO is WN (I guess G4 to SFB could be considered as well)

need ISP-CLT, ISP-DCA!!!!!!!

Looks like at LGB WN Is sticking with adding additional service to LGB. By using the unused slots every 180 days out. LAS stays less than daily and the weekend DEN service.

Flyguy

https://www.skitaos.com/taos-air/faqs-tcs does confirm that Advanced Air will be the carrier. I'm curious where the frames are coming from. I can't see Key Lime or UJC parting with any of theirs.

Here is a job listing for Advanced Air hiring FO position for 328JET, confirming that this won't be a wet lease: https://jobs.jobvite.com/advanced-air/job/o2OSafwC

This is a pretty big operation to stand up in basically a month and a half.

DL CVG-YYZ gone for good?

What surprises me with AA at JFK is that they aren’t putting more capacity in the market to support BA/IB JV flying as well as the nonstops it still has to a number of destinations in Europe. Making someone fly over CLT or PHL to reach JFK for a nonstop to Europe will not bring more traffic to JFK. Seems like it would help to trim hub capacity in exchange for more nonstops, even if one daily, from more cities the east of Chicago. At some point, AA is going to run out of NYC-based travelers to help fund its Transatlantic flights due to frequent flyer fragmentation, and DL will be that much happier.

wedgetail737 wrote:

n7371f wrote:

TUS-SJC: Bad news for TUS which worked long and hard to get AS to start the route. But two factors led to it not working. 1) AS's schedule allowed few connections in SJC for the rest of the network esp Pac NW during the summer when the only AS TUS-SEA is 1pm. AS would offer a SJC connection with 3 hr + connection time; same with PDX. 2) Southwest entered the market.

SEA-PHX AA: Crazy they're going to just 2. But January is the weakest month for SEA. If it doesn't go back to 4 in Feb, then it's really nuts.

I wonder how long WN will be in the SJC-TUS market before it's gone completely?

Good question, although I can’t see why WN would go 2x daily just to chase AS off of a route then exit the route completely. Seems like a waste of resources just to give another airline a paper cut.

jfklganyc wrote:

The FAA and Port Authority need to step in and seize the excess slots from AA at JFK

This isn’t right any longer

Beyond the BS runway excuse

Other airlines want those slots and they are stifling competition

Just shed the slots, go down to 60 or so flights and call it a day

How about just getting rid of slots. That is the true stifling of competition

AirFiero wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

n7371f wrote:

TUS-SJC: Bad news for TUS which worked long and hard to get AS to start the route. But two factors led to it not working. 1) AS's schedule allowed few connections in SJC for the rest of the network esp Pac NW during the summer when the only AS TUS-SEA is 1pm. AS would offer a SJC connection with 3 hr + connection time; same with PDX. 2) Southwest entered the market.

SEA-PHX AA: Crazy they're going to just 2. But January is the weakest month for SEA. If it doesn't go back to 4 in Feb, then it's really nuts.

I wonder how long WN will be in the SJC-TUS market before it's gone completely?

Good question, although I can’t see why WN would go 2x daily just to chase AS off of a route then exit the route completely. Seems like a waste of resources just to give another airline a paper cut.

With the amount WN has bulked up SJC recently, I'm sure TUS-SJC can survive on a mix of O&D and connections. Especially if WN replicates the current schedule AS has on SJC-TUS (evening departure from SJC with an RON at TUS and an early morning return to SJC), which works really well for TUS-based travelers like me who regularly travel to the Bay Area for work. Anecdotally, I fly AS on TUS-SJC and SJC-TUS almost weekly right now, and it's always a full flight. Granted, I'm always flying out on a Monday morning and back on a Thursday or Friday afternoon, so I'm likely hitting the peak business travel demand windows...

kwp302 wrote:

jasoncrh wrote:

A little random, but building on the F9 extension. Does anybody know if they will bring den-sdf back? They’re dropping it (seasonally?) in December and flying den-mco through this extension. This year they flew den-sdf every month. Is f9 exiting sdf entirely?

Hard to imagine they’re exiting SDF if they’re increasing frequency to MCO. The dropping of the DEN flight is odd, but there is more competition on that route (WN and UA), whereas their only competition to MCO is WN (I guess G4 to SFB could be considered as well)

I also thought F9 would continue SDF-DEN this coming winter like last winter, as F9 has from time to time even used A321s on the route. But IIRC, F9 had seasonal SDF-DEN service in 2018, so my hunch (only a hunch) is that DEN will be back next spring.

Interestingly, even TYS had UA, F9 and G4 to Denver last summer; having the likes of Gatlinburg near Knoxville definitely does not hurt. Otherwise it's only UA (on Express EMB-145s that is) doing TYS-DEN during the colder months.

FSDan wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

I wonder how long WN will be in the SJC-TUS market before it's gone completely?

Good question, although I can’t see why WN would go 2x daily just to chase AS off of a route then exit the route completely. Seems like a waste of resources just to give another airline a paper cut.

With the amount WN has bulked up SJC recently, I'm sure TUS-SJC can survive on a mix of O&D and connections. Especially if WN replicates the current schedule AS has on SJC-TUS (evening departure from SJC with an RON at TUS and an early morning return to SJC), which works really well for TUS-based travelers like me who regularly travel to the Bay Area for work. Anecdotally, I fly AS on TUS-SJC and SJC-TUS almost weekly right now, and it's always a full flight. Granted, I'm always flying out on a Monday morning and back on a Thursday or Friday afternoon, so I'm likely hitting the peak business travel demand windows...

It makes me wonder why they dropped it? Low yields? How were the fares?

AirFiero wrote:

FSDan wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

Good question, although I can’t see why WN would go 2x daily just to chase AS off of a route then exit the route completely. Seems like a waste of resources just to give another airline a paper cut.

With the amount WN has bulked up SJC recently, I'm sure TUS-SJC can survive on a mix of O&D and connections. Especially if WN replicates the current schedule AS has on SJC-TUS (evening departure from SJC with an RON at TUS and an early morning return to SJC), which works really well for TUS-based travelers like me who regularly travel to the Bay Area for work. Anecdotally, I fly AS on TUS-SJC and SJC-TUS almost weekly right now, and it's always a full flight. Granted, I'm always flying out on a Monday morning and back on a Thursday or Friday afternoon, so I'm likely hitting the peak business travel demand windows...

It makes me wonder why they dropped it? Low yields? How were the fares?

The fares were up and down. I've seen as low as sub-$300 round trip and as high as $500+ round trip. No idea how the flight performs on a Tuesday or Wednesday (if it even operates on those days), on weekends, or in the opposite directions to what I fly on Mondays and Thursdays/Fridays...

SkyWest's TUS maintenance base works on the various CRJ-fleet primarily. I had not heard about the RON E7W as the precipice for the SJC-TUS add. It certainly didn't hurt OO to get their own hands on one of their planes every night.

SANFan wrote:

n7371f wrote:

TUS-SJC: Bad news for TUS which worked long and hard to get AS to start the route. But two factors led to it not working. 1) AS's schedule allowed few connections in SJC for the rest of the network esp Pac NW during the summer when the only AS TUS-SEA is 1pm. AS would offer a SJC connection with 3 hr + connection time; same with PDX. 2) Southwest entered the market.

I also remember something about this r/t from SJC to TUS was added in order to get an EMJ down to mx in TUS, rather than just RONing the a/c in SJC. I thought that was a major reason for the route.
Perhaps for some reason that isn't as necessary anymore and if the flights underperformed, then it was dropped? Just a thought.

wedgetail737 wrote:

I wonder how long WN will be in the SJC-TUS market before it's gone completely?

I've wondered the same about several of the SAN routes that were recently cut, in my speculation, due to competition by WN; for example, SAN-OMA, SAN-ELP. So far, I've been pleased to see that those and other WN routes have remained, at least thru mid-April, 2020 -- their current sked limit. This despite AS dropping those particular routes in Nov and Jan respectively. This doesn't assure that the flights will remain forever but WN did not axe themimmediatelyas I feared they might.

IMO, both of AS's focus cities, SAN & SJC, also happen to be large WN stations so I'm feeling pretty confident that these now non-competitive routes will remain on the route map, unless they the loads and yields are totally awful (or the whole MAX thing continues way into 2020...)

And let's not forget, WN might now be able to fly travelers from TUS to Hawaii via SJC (depending on the skeds.)

bb

MSPNWA wrote:

tphuang wrote:

I do wonder how long is AA going to be able to keep these JFK slots. I'm sure they can still sell those for value. The MAX grounding is just an excuse. There is no reason for them to keep some of these routes going if they schedule them and then cut them for many months.

It's a legit reason because of the MAX. It may be a convenient reason to trim the weakest flights when forced to cut capacity due to loss of aircraft, but something has to give when dozens of aircraft are out of service. Do you really expect them to cut at DFW, ORD, MIA, PHL, CLT, LAX, etc. instead?

I would to like to see someone try to force AA to give up JFK slots when the have the MAX reasoning to fall back on. Good luck with that one.

Show me a precedent in IATA slots worldwide where an airline was given a multi-month allowance to not use their slots because of something that was not an airport-wide issue like runway construction? I am unaware of that ever happening.

MIflyer12 wrote:

MSPNWA wrote:

tphuang wrote:

I do wonder how long is AA going to be able to keep these JFK slots. I'm sure they can still sell those for value. The MAX grounding is just an excuse. There is no reason for them to keep some of these routes going if they schedule them and then cut them for many months.

It's a legit reason because of the MAX. It may be a convenient reason to trim the weakest flights when forced to cut capacity due to loss of aircraft, but something has to give when dozens of aircraft are out of service. Do you really expect them to cut at DFW, ORD, MIA, PHL, CLT, LAX, etc. instead?

I would to like to see someone try to force AA to give up JFK slots when the have the MAX reasoning to fall back on. Good luck with that one.

Happy is the PANYNJ that gets to defend that case. The Port Authority has administrative rights to cancel AA's slots. AA sues to get them back. Lawyer observes to judge that AA has over 900 non-MAX mainline aircraft and about 500 Eagle aircraft that could be used on JFK routes. Motion to dismiss. Granted.

Exactly. AA's own commercial interests and fleeting decisions have nothing to do with the PANYNJ. AA chose the MAX and also chose where to cut. If the slots are truly use or lose, they'd have all right to ask for them to be returned.

Mind you, the Port Authority may choose to exercise leniency especially if other airlines show restraint in asking for the slots but that would be a courtesy entirely.