Nicknuzzii wrote:

LAXintl wrote:

Due to "changing competitive environment in LAX" (read AA), UA has cancelled closure of 787 base at LAX planned for October.
Will now keep albeit smaller base with 75 pilots open.

I believe it had 80 pilots before this? This is a very good sign though. Would be nice to see LAX-TLV down the road...

Had a lot more than that. It had 80 CAs alone.

CriticalPoint wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

LAXintl wrote:

Due to "changing competitive environment in LAX" (read AA), UA has cancelled closure of 787 base at LAX planned for October.
Will now keep albeit smaller base with 75 pilots open.

I believe it had 80 pilots before this? This is a very good sign though. Would be nice to see LAX-TLV down the road...

Had a lot more than that. It had 80 CAs alone.

There were 80 CA and 180 FO's affected when UA announced the closure of the 787 and 756 bases at LAX. I don't know what the split was between the two types.

United1 wrote:

CriticalPoint wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

I believe it had 80 pilots before this? This is a very good sign though. Would be nice to see LAX-TLV down the road...

Had a lot more than that. It had 80 CAs alone.

There were 80 CA and 180 FO's affected when UA announced the closure of the 787 and 756 bases at LAX. I don't know what the split was between the two types.

Since most UA pilots have seen this internal message I guess it is okay for me to comment on it. The other part of the letter that LAXintl left out did concern the 757 and 767 fleet types. What was said and I'll paraphrase was while the 757-200, and 757-300s remain active in the fleet their missions are evolving away from earlier expectations in May. The 767-300 is the only sub-fleet forecast to fly over the foreseeable future.

Like United1 stated I don't know the break down how many pilots based at LAX were 787 or 756, it is obvious the base will be smaller but we do know for sure is 75 787 pilots will remain based at LAX. Also this letter makes it seem like the some 757-2/3s will remain active but who knows for how long, while the 767-300s future seems to be secure for now.

United1 wrote:

CriticalPoint wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

I believe it had 80 pilots before this? This is a very good sign though. Would be nice to see LAX-TLV down the road...

Had a lot more than that. It had 80 CAs alone.

There were 80 CA and 180 FO's affected when UA announced the closure of the 787 and 756 bases at LAX. I don't know what the split was between the two types.

On the original displacement/ closure there were 80 Captains and 179 F/O’s on the 787 in LAX. The 756 had 85 Captains and 81 F/O’s. So now LAX 787 will have 25 Captains and 50 F/O’s. The 756 base remains closed.

Airbus A319 -111 2370 G-EZMK easyJet ferried 10jul20 BRS-QLA prior return to lessor (+ 2353 G-EZEY LPL-QLA) ex HB-JZM
Airbus A319 -111 2677 G-EZAA easyJet ferried 10jul20 SEN-QLA, for United Airlines as N5307U ex D-AVYU
Airbus A319 -111 4425 G-EZFZ easyJet ferried 03jul2 SEN-SOF prior return to lessor ex D-AVXL

https://www.skyliner-aviation.de/regdb.main?LC=nav4

jayunited wrote:

United1 wrote:

CriticalPoint wrote:

Had a lot more than that. It had 80 CAs alone.

There were 80 CA and 180 FO's affected when UA announced the closure of the 787 and 756 bases at LAX. I don't know what the split was between the two types.

Since most UA pilots have seen this internal message I guess it is okay for me to comment on it. The other part of the letter that LAXintl left out did concern the 757 and 767 fleet types. What was said and I'll paraphrase was while the 757-200, and 757-300s remain active in the fleet their missions are evolving away from earlier expectations in May. The 767-300 is the only sub-fleet forecast to fly over the foreseeable future.

Meaning the 757s are headed back to storage? As you know they’ve been flying a fair amount lately, certainly more so than the 0 we saw in May...

codc10 wrote:

jayunited wrote:

United1 wrote:

There were 80 CA and 180 FO's affected when UA announced the closure of the 787 and 756 bases at LAX. I don't know what the split was between the two types.

Since most UA pilots have seen this internal message I guess it is okay for me to comment on it. The other part of the letter that LAXintl left out did concern the 757 and 767 fleet types. What was said and I'll paraphrase was while the 757-200, and 757-300s remain active in the fleet their missions are evolving away from earlier expectations in May. The 767-300 is the only sub-fleet forecast to fly over the foreseeable future.

Meaning the 757s are headed back to storage? As you know they’ve been flying a fair amount lately, certainly more so than the 0 we saw in May...

The way that verbiage was written was weird in the update. I had to read a couple times but I think he meant to say in May we anticipated only the 767-300 flying in the immediate future but that has changed. The mission on the 757 is evolving.

What's the current status of UAL's 737-10 MAX order's / deliveries. Has the "-10" been even certified yet or is it pending?

jayunited wrote:

AA94 wrote:

The resumption of 1x weekly ORD-HKG passenger service really threw me for a loop. UA operates daily cargo flights on this route I don't understand why we need to operate 1x weekly passengers flights. And to be honest I don't see passenger service sticking around on this route once cargo rates drop. Before COVID hit EWR-HKG was in trouble and had been reduced to 3x weekly.

(bolding above is mine, to indicate the part I'm going to discuss)

My understanding about the freighter activity spike we've seen is due to the lack of passenger flights that would have been carrying cargo. e.g. Without daily SFO-HKG and EWR-HKG passenger flights, there was a bunch of air cargo capacity lacking, so the startup of new cargo-only flights was merely filling that lack.

So, "if the cargo rates drop" wouldn't it be because of passenger flights returning to carry their usual cargo load? It would seem like UA is calculating the odds and slowly increasing passenger capacity (e.g. 1x weekly ORD-HKG) to balance the return of passenger traffic vs need for cargo-only flights.

Of course, the HKG example gets totally blown out of the water with the recent crew issues of Covid testing in HKG, but substitute TLV or PVG for HKG and the strategy would be similar, no?

TheSpaceCadet wrote:

What's the current status of UAL's 737-10 MAX order's / deliveries. Has the "-10" been even certified yet or is it pending?

According to my notes/what I’ve heard, there’s currently one future UA 737MAX10 in final production, while there’s also another outside (the first ever 737MAX10, painted in Boeing colors). The 737MAX10 has not even had its first flight so it’s not certified.

UAX Update:

E175SC:
N610UX now flying with Skywest
Entire E175 Fleet is now back in Service

E170:
The following units returned back to flying: 633, 634, 642, 644, 648, 650, 651, 654, 656, 857, 863
Entire E170 Fleet is now back in Service

CR5:
The following units returned back to flying: 544, 545

E145:
N11551 exited Fleet, stored at IGM
N14558 exited Fleet, stored at IGM

Quick question regarding the closure of UA/UAX stations:

Given the surge in cases as of late, have there been any plans as to when closed stations may reopen? I’ve been hearing from some now-former UGE employees at AZO that it’ll be October before they come back, but I (unsurprisingly) haven’t found anything public.

TheSpaceCadet wrote:

What's the current status of UAL's 737-10 MAX order's / deliveries. Has the "-10" been even certified yet or is it pending?

Before the grounding and now COVID the first MAX10 was supposed to be delivered in March of 2021. Since the MAX10 has not even flown or been certified I think it is safe to assume that delivery will not take place in March of 2021. Also as a result of COVID UA now will only take delivery of 40 MAXs in 2021, I'm not sure how many of those will be MAX10s. As far as the remaining Max order I'm not sure if UA deferred the remaining frames or canceled the outstanding order outright.

jayunited wrote:

TheSpaceCadet wrote:

What's the current status of UAL's 737-10 MAX order's / deliveries. Has the "-10" been even certified yet or is it pending?

Before the grounding and now COVID the first MAX10 was supposed to be delivered in March of 2021. Since the MAX10 has not even flown or been certified I think it is safe to assume that delivery will not take place in March of 2021. Also as a result of COVID UA now will only take delivery of 40 MAXs in 2021, I'm not sure how many of those will be MAX10s. As far as the remaining Max order I'm not sure if UA deferred the remaining frames or canceled the outstanding order outright.

Or is it Boeing’s production that is dictating the number of deliveries?

The fleet changes, fleet status, and repaint status posts at the start of this thread have been updated.

There is also a post dedicated to keeping track of stored mainline aircraft.

✈️ atcsundevil

Also I've been told the cargo market to HKG sometimes is transit cargo to SE Asia (SGN, HAN, BKK, KUL, SIN, CGK, DPS) as its the cheapest route (HND/NRT, PVG, PEK, CAN, ICN, TPE) are more expensive).

There may be some public information put out about this in a few weeks, but internally I'm seeing UA is expecting (or being told) the FAA should be ready to re-certify the MAX sometime in October. United has received the latest training draft for the MAX but will not train pilots until they receive the final documents and the aircraft is re-certified. United is ferrying all 14 (delivered) MAX frames from GYR to MCO for upgrades and other maintenance related work after which they will be ferried back to GYR and placed back into storage. If the MAX is re-certified in October UA does not expect the MAX to return to revenue service until mid Q1 2021.

787-8 Polaris/PE:
N28912 sked to exit XMN 2699/16Jul with Polaris/PP
5th unit in 28J/21PE/36E+/158Y configuration

As UA (like the other US majors) have announced to shrink workforce and fleet due to Corona crisis I ask wether some frames (and which) out of their rather old 77A/77E fleet have already been permanently retired.

The only aircraft UA has semi-officially retired is the PW 757 subfleet. While lots of aircraft remain parked, no other frames have been retired.

If further retirements are officially announced, it would stand to reason the 777-As, the 767-400ERs, and half the 767-300ERs will be the first to be retired, along with the oldest 737-800s, and maybe some of the A320 and A319s. The 777-As are primarily used for West Coast-Hawaii, transcontinental, and a few hub to hub routes (all pre-COVID of course). The 767-400ERs (all 16) have not been refurbished to the new Polaris cabin. These birds were built and delivered to CO from 1999 to 2002. The non-refurbed 763s and likely a few of the Polaris'd ones could also go and some of the oldest 777-200s as well, perhaps those that have not been updated to the new cabin standard, which would result in some leaving from the legacy UA and CO fleets. UA has indicated the future of its long haul fleet will be focused around the 787. I could also see them put some of the 77W's in long term storage but not phase those out. The A319/A320 fleet largely dates back to a 1992 order, though some A319's were built and delivered in 2002-3 and a few more recently acquired from a Chinese airline. I'd also think half the 737-700 fleet, if not all of it, could also go.

na wrote:

As UA (like the other US majors) have announced to shrink workforce and fleet due to Corona crisis I ask wether some frames (and which) out of their rather old 77A/77E fleet have already been permanently retired.

Your question has been moved into the United Fleet discussion thread.

✈️ atcsundevil

I'm sure the 77Ws aren't going anywhere. Beast of an aircraft with range and lift. Newest non 787s in WB fleet.

If you are talking potential retirements, something to review:
Oldest aircraft are
763s and 320s built prior to 1995
Lots of units from 1995 to 1999 - WB 55, NB 144

Most discussed about leaving fleet
7 Non-Polaris 763s and entire fleet of Non-Polaris 764s
772A
752 PW fleet of 11
739A fleet of 12
Older Airbus and 737 aircraft

WB (Ranked by oldest first) - 787s and 77Ws should all be staying
763: 21 of 38 are 1995 or earlier build, only 8 newer than 2000, most have 2 versions of Polaris
772A: 13 of 21 are 1995/96 build, other 6 are 2000 build (could some be retired and replaced by 772ER units?)
772ER: PW: 19 are 1997/1999 build, rest are 2000-2002 build, Polaris complete except 1 domestic and 3 slated for domestic
772ER: GE: 14 of 22 are 1998/99, rest are 2 each 2000, 2002, 2007, 2010
764ER: might retire, different engines, none have Polaris, all 18 to 20 years old

NB (Ranked by oldest first) - 739ER/737MAX should all be staying
320: 21 of 97 are pre-1995 build, rest evenly spread from 1995 to 2002
752: PW engines is small fleet of 11, premium heavy/high ASM cost, 5 pre-1995 build, 6 1995-1999 build
752: RR in fleet of 40, 11 are 1994, all but last 3 are 1995-1999 build, international config
73G: all 40 are 1998/99 build - some might be needed for short field performance flights
738: 43 of 141 are 1998/99 build
319: 27 of 74 1997/99 build, newer units brought into fleet as used
739A: 12 non-ERs all 2001 build have been mentioned as possible fleet exits - performance limited, IAH sked not a real issue
753: all 21 units 2001 to 2004 build, some of last off the line (don't expect an exit unless 752RR fleet leaves, A321 to replace?)

787-8 Polaris/PE:
N26910 sked to exit XMN 2698/18Jul with Polaris/PP
6th unit in 28J/21PE/36E+/158Y configuration
Do not see another 788 heading to XMN at this time.

calpsafltskeds wrote:

787-8 Polaris/PE:
N26910 sked to exit XMN 2698/18Jul with Polaris/PP
6th unit in 28J/21PE/36E+/158Y configuration
Do not see another 788 heading to XMN at this time.

Yeah the reason those frames went through modification was because they were due for heavy maintenance and UA already had the ship sets in XMN, so it just made sense to do the modification at the same time.

Don't give up hope on UA finding the money to complete the modification on the remaining 788s. Just this week we learned construction will resume on UA's backup site in Arlington Heights, IL. All we know is UA found some money from somewhere and construction will resume later this month, UA expects to have the backup facility up and running by late Q1 or early Q2 2021 which will spell the end for our current backup facility in Elk Grove Village.

f further retirements are officially announced, it would stand to reason the 777-As, the 767-400ERs, and half the 767-300ERs will be the first to be retired, along with the oldest 737-800s, and maybe some of the A320 and A319s. The 777-As are primarily used for West Coast-Hawaii, transcontinental, and a few hub to hub routes (all pre-COVID of course). The 767-400ERs (all 16) have not been refurbished to the new Polaris cabin. These birds were built and delivered to CO from 1999 to 2002. The non-refurbed 763s and likely a few of the Polaris'd ones could also go and some of the oldest 777-200s as well, perhaps those that have not been updated to the new cabin standard, which would result in some leaving from the legacy UA and CO fleets. UA has indicated the future of its long haul fleet will be focused around the 787. I could also see them put some of the 77W's in long term storage but not phase those out. The A319/A320 fleet largely dates back to a 1992 order, though some A319's were built and delivered in 2002-3 and a few more recently acquired from a Chinese airline. I'd also think half the 737-700 fleet, if not all of it, could also go.

that's a lot of unnecessary guessing and speculation !

ALPA today passed the two LOAs which offer early outs for those approaching retirement age(62 and above) and a voluntary furlough/COLA for the rest to help reduce the number of pilots that would be forced into an involuntary furlough come Oct.1st.

Lets see how many take the offers to help mitigate the impact on rest of pilot group.

319:
N874UA, Ex China Southern B-6021 exited XMN Induction 2703/16Jul, enroute SFO via NRT & ANC

NoNonsense wrote:

f further retirements are officially announced, it would stand to reason the 777-As, the 767-400ERs, and half the 767-300ERs will be the first to be retired, along with the oldest 737-800s, and maybe some of the A320 and A319s.

Retiring a few of many types doesn't really get you much in structural cost savings. The big $ is in retiring sub-types, or full types: it simplifies frame scheduling, it eliminates parts inventory, it eliminates a pilot work group (think of inefficiencies from small groups across multiple bases). The 757, 753, 767 and 764 all have a common type rating.

Now, if you forecast that demand is going to be depressed for years and you've got a dozen 27-year-old A320s it's pragmatic to recognize they have little value to the carrier. Send them to retirement early.

I know it has been a while but a fleet update came out this week and not much has changed, the last update showed the PW 752s retired, the remainder of the fleet still shows active or stored no further decisions have been made on retirements.

The one change that caught my attention was the MAX 9 update. United already took delivery of 14 MAX 9 frames before the grounding, and according to the update Boeing has another 13 MAX 9 frames ready for delivery for a total of 27 MAX 9s. With United previously stating they will only take delivery of 40 MAXs in 2021, what wasn't clear in the latest fleet update is if the remaining 13 MAX frames will be the MAX 10 variant.

With the grounding and now COVID the fleet updates don't come as often as they use to (which is to be expected), but hopefully soon there will be some clarity as it pertains to the fleet.

Jay, surely no shock and fullly expected, but has the PW 752 fleet officially retired? Is the document internal or available publicly?

calpsafltskeds wrote:

Jay, surely no shock and fullly expected, but has the PW 752 fleet officially retired? Is the document internal or available publicly?

Internal only for now, I'm not sure why UA still has not publicly announced the retirement of the PW 752 fleet. This is the second fleet update that has come out showing this sub-fleet as retired.

jayunited wrote:

calpsafltskeds wrote:

Jay, surely no shock and fullly expected, but has the PW 752 fleet officially retired? Is the document internal or available publicly?

Internal only for now, I'm not sure why UA still has not publicly announced the retirement of the PW 752 fleet. This is the second fleet update that has come out showing this sub-fleet as retired.

United will release its second quarter 2020 results next Tuesday, so I’m guessing we’ll hear about retirements around then.

UAX Update:

CR5:
N503GJ parked at STL

CR2:
N909SW parked at TUS
N408AW returned to flying
N418AW returned to flying
N467AW returned to flying

N222UA is being pulled out of long term storage at ROW tonight (at least that is the plan), it is schedule to fly UA2719-18 ROW-IAD. I'm not exactly sure why UA is pulling this frame out of ROW, but keep in mind it was the first 77E to be reconfigured from the international IPTE layout, to domestic HD layout, with 32J and 330Y.

jayunited wrote:

N222UA is being pulled out of long term storage at ROW tonight (at least that is the plan), it is schedule to fly UA2719-18 ROW-IAD. I'm not exactly sure why UA is pulling this frame out of ROW, but keep in mind it was the first 77E to be reconfigured from the international IPTE layout, to domestic HD layout, with 32J and 330Y.

It just took off at 20:14:

https://www.flightradar24.com/UAL2719/24fa0237

Latest ex-CZ A319 delivery:

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n874ua

Latest ex-EZY A319 for UA, G-EZIW, ferried from LGW>SOF...will become N3303U:

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GEZIW

audidudi wrote:

Latest ex-EZY A319 for UA, G-EZIW, ferried from LGW>SOF...will become N3303U:

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GEZIW

Any info on if UA intends to proceed on this deal? Especially since these aircraft have CFM engines...

As feared, it was announced on Jul 20 that the start date of Oct. 15 for FMN-DEN has been pushed back til Spring 2021. This is very similar to the arrangement SkyWest has to bring United Express service back to SMX (Santa Maria, CA). That service was due to start in June but was also pushed back til Spring 2021.

DLASFlyer wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Are they banking on demand from gas exploration? (It can't be coal.) Are they excited just to burn money thru the allowed FAA guarantee/subsidy period? I understand people may be happy to save the 50-mile drive to DRO, but DRO-DEN is showing 8x on an October Tuesday. Frequency to a hub has a lot of value.

Pretty amazing UA can support 8x daily DEN-DRO but DL doesn’t even do 1x SLC-DRO.

It probably helps UA that DEN-DRO is over a six hour drive through the Rockies in ideal weather; add in winter and that number becomes much larger. Even without the geography and weather potential, six hours is a long drive to the capital city - I'm sure that helps drive some of the demand.

Delta also historically hasn't been huge in the Southern part of the Mountain time zone as well. DEN and PHX have had good service, but pre-COVID, COS was only 2x/day CRJ-200, ASE was a 1x/CR7, ELP has been on and off and TUS hasn't had a ton of service. There really hasn't been any other service into Colorado, New Mexico or Arizona from Delta for as long as I can remember.

AA has grown quite a bit in this space too with them getting the PHX hub from the US merger and DFW being a good hub for Eastern flow from the Colorado/Arizona/New Mexico markets.

I noticed a few different domestic/regional widebody flights outside of hub-hub runs like LAS etc. for September...how reliable is that schedule at this point? What are some regional widebody routes penciled in so far?

Alias1024 wrote:

deltairlines wrote:

DLASFlyer wrote:

Pretty amazing UA can support 8x daily DEN-DRO but DL doesn’t even do 1x SLC-DRO.

It probably helps UA that DEN-DRO is over a six hour drive through the Rockies in ideal weather; add in winter and that number becomes much larger. Even without the geography and weather potential, six hours is a long drive to the capital city - I'm sure that helps drive some of the demand.

Delta also historically hasn't been huge in the Southern part of the Mountain time zone as well. DEN and PHX have had good service, but pre-COVID, COS was only 2x/day CRJ-200, ASE was a 1x/CR7, ELP has been on and off and TUS hasn't had a ton of service. There really hasn't been any other service into Colorado, New Mexico or Arizona from Delta for as long as I can remember.

AA has grown quite a bit in this space too with them getting the PHX hub from the US merger and DFW being a good hub for Eastern flow from the Colorado/Arizona/New Mexico markets.

ABQ has been 3 daily to SLC previous summers. Before COVID this year’s summer schedule was x1 A319 and x2 E175. They also had planned x3 E175 to LAX, x3 A321 to ATL, and x1 A320 to MSP.

I didn't realize SLC was that low. I knew ATL in the past has been a mix of MD-90/A32x/757 at 3x/day, MSP was off and on and LAX was relatively new, but thought SLC was 5x/day for some reason.

My first time ever to ABQ happened to be on a DL 757 diverted on ATL-LAS. We had a sick FA but were able to get a local FA to work the ABQ-LAS leg and we were on the ground for less than an hour.

There are hardly in cultural ties or any major business ties connecting Utah and New Mexico.

Also I hope this route is a success and hopefully UA/OO look into adding more airports to DEN out west such as BTM, PVU, TWF, and LWS.

TWA902fly wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Are they banking on demand from gas exploration? (It can't be coal.) Are they excited just to burn money thru the allowed FAA guarantee/subsidy period? I understand people may be happy to save the 50-mile drive to DRO, but DRO-DEN is showing 8x on an October Tuesday. Frequency to a hub has a lot of value.

Also, yes that drive to DRO is a lure, which is about 70 minutes to DRO airport by the way, but we're really only talking about 1x CRJ-200 that is subsidized. The Farmington/Aztec/Bloomfield area does have its own decently-sized population, definitely no smaller than many other cities where SkyWest provides at-risk service.

One-a-day just doesn't compete well with 8 (or 7 or 6) a day. There's no choice of departure/arrival time. There's no fallback plan for weather. There's no fallback for IDB due to weight and balance (and DOT regs don't require compensation for IDB for weight and balance for aircraft with 60 or fewer seats). You give up a lot of hub connectivity with just 1x. DRO has two carriers so at least there's a little fare competition (and AA to DFW is another great hubbing option).

Why do people from northern Rhode Island drive to BOS (and put up with all the BS that is Logan) instead of flying from PVD? Non-stop destination count, frequency, and fare competition.

MIflyer12 wrote:

TWA902fly wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Are they banking on demand from gas exploration? (It can't be coal.) Are they excited just to burn money thru the allowed FAA guarantee/subsidy period? I understand people may be happy to save the 50-mile drive to DRO, but DRO-DEN is showing 8x on an October Tuesday. Frequency to a hub has a lot of value.

Also, yes that drive to DRO is a lure, which is about 70 minutes to DRO airport by the way, but we're really only talking about 1x CRJ-200 that is subsidized. The Farmington/Aztec/Bloomfield area does have its own decently-sized population, definitely no smaller than many other cities where SkyWest provides at-risk service.

One-a-day just doesn't compete well with 8 (or 7 or 6) a day. There's no choice of departure/arrival time. There's no fallback plan for weather. There's no fallback for IDB due to weight and balance (and DOT regs don't require compensation for IDB for weight and balance for aircraft with 60 or fewer seats). You give up a lot of hub connectivity with just 1x. DRO has two carriers so at least there's a little fare competition (and AA to DFW is another great hubbing option).

Why do people from northern Rhode Island drive to BOS (and put up with all the BS that is Logan) instead of flying from PVD? Non-stop destination count, frequency, and fare competition.

Granted. But of course, DRO is no BOS. Farmington folks who want to fly to PHX or DFW or who value the higher frequency at DRO are likely to drive there, but there should also be some real demand for the added convenience of local flights.

Traffic for Window Rock/Fort Defiance/St. Michaels (which includes Dine College, Navajo Nation government, and BIA facilities) will help supplement demand at Farmington. ABQ will still carry the lion's share of Window Rock traffic, I'm sure. But if you have to change planes anyway, the shorter distance, lower hassle, and lack of traffic makes Farmington a compelling alternative.

I believe I am correct when I say this, during the 1990s and early 2000s Midwest and Great Lakes ran their Beech 1900s back and forth between FMN and DEN three to four times a day. Granted the oil exploration business was hopping then, but the demand will be there if the flights are scheduled right.

Frontier 14

HNLSLCPDX wrote:

There are hardly in cultural ties or any major business ties connecting Utah and New Mexico.

Hardly any of the 70,000+ LDS members who live in NM have "cultural" ties to Utah? Or as Wikipedia says...

"Mormons first came to New Mexico in 1846. The LDS Church has traditionally had a strong presence in the Four Corners (Farmington) Region of New Mexico, settling the town of Kirtland and other surrounding areas."

Latest ex-EZY A319 for UA, G-EZAL, ferried from LGW>QLA today...will become N9312U.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GEZAL