Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
FSDan
Posts: 3338
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:25 pm

tphuang wrote:
enilria wrote:
FSDan wrote:

That makes the most sense of anything I've heard, although hopefully in a slightly shorter timeframe. In 5-10 years AA will have A321-200XLRs in the fleet and a bunch more 787s, which might make long haul routes possible out of JFK that AA hasn't found viable with 767s and 777s (think a return to DUB, FRA, ZRH, 2nd daily CDG, etc. to cater to business travelers). By then the terminal build-out with 5 additional widebody gates will also be complete, BA will have moved in, and the RJ gates will be gone. At that time I think AA will need to find places they can profitably send mainline equipment from JFK in order to continue using their slots and avoid having them go to a competitor like UA who could mess with their all-important JFK-LAX/SFO routes. Of course, if slots do go away, their strategy could change.

AA's slot portfolio in NYC is certainly not going to allow them to match DL or UA's network, but at the same time they do have ample slots to be able to fly a network that is really appealing to business travelers (especially when including BA, JL, and CX). Time will tell whether they're up to the challenge.

Great points with the fleet and terminal. But still not sure why not lease them to B6 for X years?


People have to stop acting like A321XLR will somehow give AA an edge in TATL again. At least B6 and UA will already be flying A321LR/XLR from NYC at that time and both carriers are a lot stronger than AA. What advantage will AA really have? AA right now is even cutting back on JFK-LAX. What ff is left when you ignore them for 5 to 10 years?

And I'd be shocked if UA isn't back in JFK in the next 5 years.

Their currents lot portfolio at JFK didn't allow them to succeed when they had more ff in NYC than DL. How is it going to change if they have much fewer ff in NYC than DL? They should work to preserve the performance of LGA, which was already estimated to be their least profitable hub.


I'm just going off statements by AA's VP of Network Planning... I believe he specifically mentioned New York when discussing some of the possibilities they see with the A321XLR. He's also reaffirmed AA's commitment to NYC (and particularly business travelers). Of course, he could just be saying that as they figure out what they really want to do, but for now that's the only indication we have from AA on what their plans are. Also, with 50 XLRs on order, what do you think are the chances that none of them fly TATL from JFK? I'd say very slim.

Finally, I feel it's very premature to declare B6's victory over AA in the transatlantic market. They may do very well, but we're still years away from being able to describe them as "a lot stronger than AA" in that arena. By AA's own admission, JFK TATL is very profitable for them now.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5296
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Tue Feb 25, 2020 5:42 pm

FSDan wrote:
tphuang wrote:
enilria wrote:
Great points with the fleet and terminal. But still not sure why not lease them to B6 for X years?


People have to stop acting like A321XLR will somehow give AA an edge in TATL again. At least B6 and UA will already be flying A321LR/XLR from NYC at that time and both carriers are a lot stronger than AA. What advantage will AA really have? AA right now is even cutting back on JFK-LAX. What ff is left when you ignore them for 5 to 10 years?

And I'd be shocked if UA isn't back in JFK in the next 5 years.

Their currents lot portfolio at JFK didn't allow them to succeed when they had more ff in NYC than DL. How is it going to change if they have much fewer ff in NYC than DL? They should work to preserve the performance of LGA, which was already estimated to be their least profitable hub.


I'm just going off statements by AA's VP of Network Planning... I believe he specifically mentioned New York when discussing some of the possibilities they see with the A321XLR. He's also reaffirmed AA's commitment to NYC (and particularly business travelers). Of course, he could just be saying that as they figure out what they really want to do, but for now that's the only indication we have from AA on what their plans are. Also, with 50 XLRs on order, what do you think are the chances that none of them fly TATL from JFK? I'd say very slim.

Finally, I feel it's very premature to declare B6's victory over AA in the transatlantic market. They may do very well, but we're still years away from being able to describe them as "a lot stronger than AA" in that arena. By AA's own admission, JFK TATL is very profitable for them now.


I'm talking about general performance/margin and such out of JFK. Never a good thing when a legacy carrier get lower yield than a LCC on so many routes. There is a reason why routes like SEA/SAN/LAS/MCO/SJU aren't operational anymore. All of which are really important JFK markets.

My point is that A321XLR is not a real advantage for AA if it's competitors are using it too. AA's TATL is profitable because most of that is JFK-LHR.
 
ryby92
Posts: 39
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2019 7:34 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Tue Feb 25, 2020 6:29 pm

tphuang wrote:
FSDan wrote:
tphuang wrote:

People have to stop acting like A321XLR will somehow give AA an edge in TATL again. At least B6 and UA will already be flying A321LR/XLR from NYC at that time and both carriers are a lot stronger than AA. What advantage will AA really have? AA right now is even cutting back on JFK-LAX. What ff is left when you ignore them for 5 to 10 years?

And I'd be shocked if UA isn't back in JFK in the next 5 years.

Their currents lot portfolio at JFK didn't allow them to succeed when they had more ff in NYC than DL. How is it going to change if they have much fewer ff in NYC than DL? They should work to preserve the performance of LGA, which was already estimated to be their least profitable hub.


I'm just going off statements by AA's VP of Network Planning... I believe he specifically mentioned New York when discussing some of the possibilities they see with the A321XLR. He's also reaffirmed AA's commitment to NYC (and particularly business travelers). Of course, he could just be saying that as they figure out what they really want to do, but for now that's the only indication we have from AA on what their plans are. Also, with 50 XLRs on order, what do you think are the chances that none of them fly TATL from JFK? I'd say very slim.

Finally, I feel it's very premature to declare B6's victory over AA in the transatlantic market. They may do very well, but we're still years away from being able to describe them as "a lot stronger than AA" in that arena. By AA's own admission, JFK TATL is very profitable for them now.


I'm talking about general performance/margin and such out of JFK. Never a good thing when a legacy carrier get lower yield than a LCC on so many routes. There is a reason why routes like SEA/SAN/LAS/MCO/SJU aren't operational anymore. All of which are really important JFK markets.

My point is that A321XLR is not a real advantage for AA if it's competitors are using it too. AA's TATL is profitable because most of that is JFK-LHR.


You and some here must be salivating waiting for AA to fail so B6 can sing with glee. The narrative is getting old and sooner or later you will need a new playbook. Thar might sound ludicrous now but you heard it here first.
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 10266
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Tue Feb 25, 2020 6:29 pm

tphuang wrote:
enilria wrote:
FSDan wrote:

That makes the most sense of anything I've heard, although hopefully in a slightly shorter timeframe. In 5-10 years AA will have A321-200XLRs in the fleet and a bunch more 787s, which might make long haul routes possible out of JFK that AA hasn't found viable with 767s and 777s (think a return to DUB, FRA, ZRH, 2nd daily CDG, etc. to cater to business travelers). By then the terminal build-out with 5 additional widebody gates will also be complete, BA will have moved in, and the RJ gates will be gone. At that time I think AA will need to find places they can profitably send mainline equipment from JFK in order to continue using their slots and avoid having them go to a competitor like UA who could mess with their all-important JFK-LAX/SFO routes. Of course, if slots do go away, their strategy could change.

AA's slot portfolio in NYC is certainly not going to allow them to match DL or UA's network, but at the same time they do have ample slots to be able to fly a network that is really appealing to business travelers (especially when including BA, JL, and CX). Time will tell whether they're up to the challenge.

Great points with the fleet and terminal. But still not sure why not lease them to B6 for X years?


People have to stop acting like A321XLR will somehow give AA an edge in TATL again. At least B6 and UA will already be flying A321LR/XLR from NYC at that time and both carriers are a lot stronger than AA. What advantage will AA really have? AA right now is even cutting back on JFK-LAX. What ff is left when you ignore them for 5 to 10 years?

And I'd be shocked if UA isn't back in JFK in the next 5 years.

Their currents lot portfolio at JFK didn't allow them to succeed when they had more ff in NYC than DL. How is it going to change if they have much fewer ff in NYC than DL? They should work to preserve the performance of LGA, which was already estimated to be their least profitable hub.

I wonder if B6 and UA rejected a 5 year slot lease? It would be really hard on B6 to grab that many slots from a fleet perspective. They would have to cut FLL or BOS and I'm sure that is not palatable. UA may not want AA holding the reins. NK or F9 would take the slots temporarily, but if they give those slots to either of them they are kinda poisoning the well fare-wise and the other carriers will probably retaliate.
 
capitalflyer
Posts: 629
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:43 am

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Tue Feb 25, 2020 6:41 pm

freakyrat wrote:
Planeboy17 wrote:
airtrantpa wrote:

im guessing the ORD-SBD flights coincide with Notre Dames football Schedule? just a guess

It’s not just SBN, ATW also increases to 10 flights a day, even into Nov. ATW is Air Wisconsin’S HQ and I believe a MX base as well. Doesn’t Skywest have a MX base in SBN? Maybe the increases are just a way to get more aircraft to the base? Still seems excessive even if that is part of the reason though, but some people at UA must think there’s a good reason to add these flights.


OO has a maintenance base at SBN that can work on all their CRJ 200/700 and 900 aircraft. The increase in SBN-ORD flights appear to begin in August and while most are operated by 50 seaters, Skywest is operating one flight with an E175. It also appears that the increase has nothing to do with Notre Dame Football. Enplanements were up 15% or so last year. UA hasn't officially released their schedule past August so I cannot comment on the return of the twice daily SBN-EWR flights that coincide with the Notre Dame Football season.

SBN-DEN with UA is a work in progress. With the Airport's Project Propel initiative, The addition of AA flights to CLT and DFW and rumored PHL which resulted in SBN topping FWA in enplanments and deplanments with a total count of over 800,000 passengers last year (A record year), I can see why UA would add some more flights. The airport also is working with UA for a flight to IAD that would replace the EWR east coast connections that resulted when UA shifted RJ connecting hubs.

On the Delta front I do not know yet if Delta will increase seats out of SBN in the ATL market. Possibly a morning CRJ900 or B717 aircraft to accommodate increased demand.

Both SBN and MYR are working with Allegiant for seasonal SBN MYR flights. Also the airport is working on seasonal SBN-CUN flights as they have the data to support those flights and US Customs is in place to handle them.


These are not football adds. Usually the added flights for football add fractionally to monthly frequency. Also, there is often one off flights to destinations near the visiting teams campus. There is more to these adds.

Actually, the ORD flights are indeed loaded. Departures from SBN are 5:25, 7:11, 8:21, 9:15, 10:10, 11:26, 12:41, 2:09, 4:45, and 6:15. There is just one RON from ORD arriving at SBN at 11:01pm. But that flight is operated by Trans States. And it appears the additional lift is being provided by Air Wisconsin. So unless Sky West has entered into an agreement to do maintenance for other airlines that isn't the reason.

I believe it is an increase in demand. CoachUSA recently ended its bus shuttle service to MDW and ORD from SBN which no doubt sucked folks off those flights to ORD. Now with no other option than driving, folks are choosing to make that short hop SBN-ORD. The airport authority expressed regret at losing the service, but in reality this is a great boost to air service.

I put my theory on SkyWest on the Indiana Airports Thread. That's a tease!!
 
FSDan
Posts: 3338
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Tue Feb 25, 2020 6:43 pm

tphuang wrote:
My point is that A321XLR is not a real advantage for AA if it's competitors are using it too.


I see where you're coming from, but I don't 100% agree. I think the big advantage of the XLR for AA will be that they can start to serve markets where they can't profitably fill a larger, more costly aircraft like a 777. That should apply regardless of whether competitors are flying the same aircraft. The XLR will provide a lower capacity, lower cost option that still offers a good product (assuming here that AA will configure them with a good product...).

Also, it seems quite possible that AA's competitors won't be flying XLRs to the same markets. B6's priority for the first few years of TATL flying will likely be to fill gaps that AA already has sufficiently covered: London, Paris, Dublin (once EI joins the AA-BA JV I assume the B6 codeshare might end), etc. UA will be using the XLRs to open thinner markets (e.g. a return to BFS, BRS, or HAM, new service to SVQ, CMN, etc.) that AA likely doesn't have on their short list to serve from NYC. I think the opportunity for AA will be to (re)start service to some of the major European business centers like FRA and ZRH that they haven't been able to fly profitably in the past due to having aircraft with inferior products (767) or that are too large (777).

Just to take a quick look at the banking/finance industry since that's such a major part of the NYC economy, AA + partners already offer very competitive schedules/products from NYC to many of the most important destinations: LHR, HKG, SFO, LAX, HND, BOS, ORD, GRU, etc. (and likely future SYD). Adding back the 2nd daily CDG flight along with FRA and ZRH, in my opinion, would only strengthen that offering and improve AA's FF loyalty.

Of course, it would help if AA made some improvements to customer service along the way... I'm hoping they'll reverse course sooner or later and make some tangible changes in that area.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
ckfred
Posts: 5188
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Tue Feb 25, 2020 6:46 pm

Back in the 1970s and early 1980s, my father-in-law used to fly to Duluth from Cleveland on NW for business, changing planes at ORD. Generally, the 727s flying between ORD and DLH were full. But, that was 40+ years ago.

It might be that DL has the bulk of traffic going in and out of Duluth, connecting at MSP. Couple that with perhaps a very low number of people in Chicagoland who need to fly to Duluth, and it doesn't make sense for AA to fly the route.

Between DLH and CRW, perhaps AA has determined that there are other cities that can support those frequencies.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5296
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Tue Feb 25, 2020 6:47 pm

enilria wrote:
tphuang wrote:
enilria wrote:
Great points with the fleet and terminal. But still not sure why not lease them to B6 for X years?


People have to stop acting like A321XLR will somehow give AA an edge in TATL again. At least B6 and UA will already be flying A321LR/XLR from NYC at that time and both carriers are a lot stronger than AA. What advantage will AA really have? AA right now is even cutting back on JFK-LAX. What ff is left when you ignore them for 5 to 10 years?

And I'd be shocked if UA isn't back in JFK in the next 5 years.

Their currents lot portfolio at JFK didn't allow them to succeed when they had more ff in NYC than DL. How is it going to change if they have much fewer ff in NYC than DL? They should work to preserve the performance of LGA, which was already estimated to be their least profitable hub.

I wonder if B6 and UA rejected a 5 year slot lease? It would be really hard on B6 to grab that many slots from a fleet perspective. They would have to cut FLL or BOS and I'm sure that is not palatable. UA may not want AA holding the reins. NK or F9 would take the slots temporarily, but if they give those slots to either of them they are kinda poisoning the well fare-wise and the other carriers will probably retaliate.


I think if AA is to lease the slots, it would be hard to have one party take them all unless that party is DL. Some of its partners might be interested in a few. AS might be interested. Although , it's actually flying fewer flights now out of JFK than 2 years ago. B6 could use more. But as we've seen now, they haven't even been utilizing the slots that they have. 30 slots is certainly too many for them to handle with the delivery issues they've been having.

One things for sure, DL and B6 would hate it if the ULCCs grab say 20 of these slots. That would poison the yields for sure.

At its current pace of expansion, NK imo will get bought by someone. Its stock has been hammered recently and the yield pressure it has put on larger airlines will force them to move sooner or later.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5296
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Tue Feb 25, 2020 6:59 pm

FSDan wrote:
tphuang wrote:
My point is that A321XLR is not a real advantage for AA if it's competitors are using it too.


I see where you're coming from, but I don't 100% agree. I think the big advantage of the XLR for AA will be that they can start to serve markets where they can't profitably fill a larger, more costly aircraft like a 777. That should apply regardless of whether competitors are flying the same aircraft. The XLR will provide a lower capacity, lower cost option that still offers a good product (assuming here that AA will configure them with a good product...).

Also, it seems quite possible that AA's competitors won't be flying XLRs to the same markets. B6's priority for the first few years of TATL flying will likely be to fill gaps that AA already has sufficiently covered: London, Paris, Dublin (once EI joins the AA-BA JV I assume the B6 codeshare might end), etc. UA will be using the XLRs to open thinner markets (e.g. a return to BFS, BRS, or HAM, new service to SVQ, CMN, etc.) that AA likely doesn't have on their short list to serve from NYC. I think the opportunity for AA will be to (re)start service to some of the major European business centers like FRA and ZRH that they haven't been able to fly profitably in the past due to having aircraft with inferior products (767) or that are too large (777).

I don't think you should make any presumptions on where UA or B6 might use their LR/XLR aircraft. I'm a firm believer that A321XLR will eventually replace not just 757/767s, but also A330/B787 in many markets since it will allow for higher frequency and year round service.

The problem for AA is that the ff base has dissipated. How are they getting that back with higher cost, fewer flight and less resource than DL?

Just to take a quick look at the banking/finance industry since that's such a major part of the NYC economy, AA + partners already offer very competitive schedules/products from NYC to many of the most important destinations: LHR, HKG, SFO, LAX, HND, BOS, ORD, GRU, etc. (and likely future SYD). Adding back the 2nd daily CDG flight along with FRA and ZRH, in my opinion, would only strengthen that offering and improve AA's FF loyalty.

Of course, it would help if AA made some improvements to customer service along the way... I'm hoping they'll reverse course sooner or later and make some tangible changes in that area.

Which is why they had plenty of strengths in NYC for all these years despite having fewer flights. The problem with losing ff base is that they don't just come back once you add the flights back. It takes a lot for high yielding ff to switch alliances due to the perks they get as elite along with all miles. It's often a multi-year process to switch. You can see them making those strategic adds in BOS right now to prevent a similar ff drop happening there. It's a lot easier to keep ff than getting them back.

As you probably noticed, I've been tracking JFK numbers going back a few years. The drop in AA's JFK number is very noticeable. That doesn't happen in a vacuum. There is a reason they no longer offer the most flights on JFK-LAX, which would've been unthinkable 4 or 5 years ago.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3338
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Tue Feb 25, 2020 7:12 pm

tphuang wrote:
I don't think you should make any presumptions on where UA or B6 might use their LR/XLR aircraft. I'm a firm believer that A321XLR will eventually replace not just 757/767s, but also A330/B787 in many markets since it will allow for higher frequency and year round service.


I don't see XLRs replacing A330s/787s on a large scale in constrained markets like NYC. If the airlines are OK with cutting back their domestic networks, sure, but that doesn't seem likely at the moment. UA has been increasing average gauge at EWR, not decreasing it.

tphuang wrote:
The problem with losing ff base is that they don't just come back once you add the flights back. It takes a lot for high yielding ff to switch alliances due to the perks they get as elite along with all miles. It's often a multi-year process to switch. You can see them making those strategic adds in BOS right now to prevent a similar ff drop happening there. It's a lot easier to keep ff than getting them back.


Agreed there. I think AA will have to make some sort of big marketing push and probably offer incentives to bring FFs back in NYC. However, I do think the build-out of T8 and co-location of BA will provide a potential opportunity for AA to announce a "reset" - that they're back as a serious competitor. Only time will tell.

tphuang wrote:
There is a reason they no longer offer the most flights on JFK-LAX, which would've been unthinkable 4 or 5 years ago.


FWIW, the furthest out schedules that AA has finalized (May) have them back up to 13 daily on JFK-LAX. I wouldn't be surprised if June follows once they finalize those schedules in a few weeks.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
alasizon
Posts: 2601
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Tue Feb 25, 2020 7:13 pm

capitalflyer wrote:
freakyrat wrote:
Planeboy17 wrote:
It’s not just SBN, ATW also increases to 10 flights a day, even into Nov. ATW is Air Wisconsin’S HQ and I believe a MX base as well. Doesn’t Skywest have a MX base in SBN? Maybe the increases are just a way to get more aircraft to the base? Still seems excessive even if that is part of the reason though, but some people at UA must think there’s a good reason to add these flights.


OO has a maintenance base at SBN that can work on all their CRJ 200/700 and 900 aircraft. The increase in SBN-ORD flights appear to begin in August and while most are operated by 50 seaters, Skywest is operating one flight with an E175. It also appears that the increase has nothing to do with Notre Dame Football. Enplanements were up 15% or so last year. UA hasn't officially released their schedule past August so I cannot comment on the return of the twice daily SBN-EWR flights that coincide with the Notre Dame Football season.


SBN-DEN with UA is a work in progress. With the Airport's Project Propel initiative, The addition of AA flights to CLT and DFW and rumored PHL which resulted in SBN topping FWA in enplanments and deplanments with a total count of over 800,000 passengers last year (A record year), I can see why UA would add some more flights. The airport also is working with UA for a flight to IAD that would replace the EWR east coast connections that resulted when UA shifted RJ connecting hubs.

On the Delta front I do not know yet if Delta will increase seats out of SBN in the ATL market. Possibly a morning CRJ900 or B717 aircraft to accommodate increased demand.

Both SBN and MYR are working with Allegiant for seasonal SBN MYR flights. Also the airport is working on seasonal SBN-CUN flights as they have the data to support those flights and US Customs is in place to handle them.


These are not football adds. Usually the added flights for football add fractionally to monthly frequency. Also, there is often one off flights to destinations near the visiting teams campus. There is more to these adds.

Actually, the ORD flights are indeed loaded. Departures from SBN are 5:25, 7:11, 8:21, 9:15, 10:10, 11:26, 12:41, 2:09, 4:45, and 6:15. There is just one RON from ORD arriving at SBN at 11:01pm. But that flight is operated by Trans States. And it appears the additional lift is being provided by Air Wisconsin. So unless Sky West has entered into an agreement to do maintenance for other airlines that isn't the reason.

I believe it is an increase in demand. CoachUSA recently ended its bus shuttle service to MDW and ORD from SBN which no doubt sucked folks off those flights to ORD. Now with no other option than driving, folks are choosing to make that short hop SBN-ORD. The airport authority expressed regret at losing the service, but in reality this is a great boost to air service.

I put my theory on SkyWest on the Indiana Airports Thread. That's a tease!!


Going from 5x to 10x is pretty radical, my guess is that this had to do with shifting flying around and they double filed some planned flights and they will end up dropping it back down to a more reasonable level next week (likely 5 or 6x)
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
capitalflyer
Posts: 629
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:43 am

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Tue Feb 25, 2020 7:41 pm

alasizon wrote:
capitalflyer wrote:
freakyrat wrote:

OO has a maintenance base at SBN that can work on all their CRJ 200/700 and 900 aircraft. The increase in SBN-ORD flights appear to begin in August and while most are operated by 50 seaters, Skywest is operating one flight with an E175. It also appears that the increase has nothing to do with Notre Dame Football. Enplanements were up 15% or so last year. UA hasn't officially released their schedule past August so I cannot comment on the return of the twice daily SBN-EWR flights that coincide with the Notre Dame Football season.


SBN-DEN with UA is a work in progress. With the Airport's Project Propel initiative, The addition of AA flights to CLT and DFW and rumored PHL which resulted in SBN topping FWA in enplanments and deplanments with a total count of over 800,000 passengers last year (A record year), I can see why UA would add some more flights. The airport also is working with UA for a flight to IAD that would replace the EWR east coast connections that resulted when UA shifted RJ connecting hubs.

On the Delta front I do not know yet if Delta will increase seats out of SBN in the ATL market. Possibly a morning CRJ900 or B717 aircraft to accommodate increased demand.

Both SBN and MYR are working with Allegiant for seasonal SBN MYR flights. Also the airport is working on seasonal SBN-CUN flights as they have the data to support those flights and US Customs is in place to handle them.


These are not football adds. Usually the added flights for football add fractionally to monthly frequency. Also, there is often one off flights to destinations near the visiting teams campus. There is more to these adds.

Actually, the ORD flights are indeed loaded. Departures from SBN are 5:25, 7:11, 8:21, 9:15, 10:10, 11:26, 12:41, 2:09, 4:45, and 6:15. There is just one RON from ORD arriving at SBN at 11:01pm. But that flight is operated by Trans States. And it appears the additional lift is being provided by Air Wisconsin. So unless Sky West has entered into an agreement to do maintenance for other airlines that isn't the reason.

I believe it is an increase in demand. CoachUSA recently ended its bus shuttle service to MDW and ORD from SBN which no doubt sucked folks off those flights to ORD. Now with no other option than driving, folks are choosing to make that short hop SBN-ORD. The airport authority expressed regret at losing the service, but in reality this is a great boost to air service.

I put my theory on SkyWest on the Indiana Airports Thread. That's a tease!!


Going from 5x to 10x is pretty radical, my guess is that this had to do with shifting flying around and they double filed some planned flights and they will end up dropping it back down to a more reasonable level next week (likely 5 or 6x)


No, I definitely think a good portion of the increase will stick. UA lost probably a couple plane loads of pax to Coach USA every day over the years. Now with 150 or so pax with no other option, you have got demand for at least three more flights. And organic demand has been increasing in SBN without the Coach USA closure. So again, 10x may not be far off from actual demand.
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 10266
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Tue Feb 25, 2020 8:02 pm

tphuang wrote:
enilria wrote:
tphuang wrote:

People have to stop acting like A321XLR will somehow give AA an edge in TATL again. At least B6 and UA will already be flying A321LR/XLR from NYC at that time and both carriers are a lot stronger than AA. What advantage will AA really have? AA right now is even cutting back on JFK-LAX. What ff is left when you ignore them for 5 to 10 years?

And I'd be shocked if UA isn't back in JFK in the next 5 years.

Their currents lot portfolio at JFK didn't allow them to succeed when they had more ff in NYC than DL. How is it going to change if they have much fewer ff in NYC than DL? They should work to preserve the performance of LGA, which was already estimated to be their least profitable hub.

I wonder if B6 and UA rejected a 5 year slot lease? It would be really hard on B6 to grab that many slots from a fleet perspective. They would have to cut FLL or BOS and I'm sure that is not palatable. UA may not want AA holding the reins. NK or F9 would take the slots temporarily, but if they give those slots to either of them they are kinda poisoning the well fare-wise and the other carriers will probably retaliate.


I think if AA is to lease the slots, it would be hard to have one party take them all unless that party is DL. Some of its partners might be interested in a few. AS might be interested. Although , it's actually flying fewer flights now out of JFK than 2 years ago. B6 could use more. But as we've seen now, they haven't even been utilizing the slots that they have. 30 slots is certainly too many for them to handle with the delivery issues they've been having.

One things for sure, DL and B6 would hate it if the ULCCs grab say 20 of these slots. That would poison the yields for sure.

At its current pace of expansion, NK imo will get bought by someone. Its stock has been hammered recently and the yield pressure it has put on larger airlines will force them to move sooner or later.

I wish you were wrong about NK, but I don't disagree. I think with LGA it would be hard for DL to take the slots in terms of DOJ.
 
WaywardMemphian
Posts: 1500
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 9:05 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Wed Feb 26, 2020 12:30 am

FSDan wrote:
WaywardMemphian wrote:
AA PHL-XNA MAY 0.9>0.0[0]
Wierd, cut May completely but still there in June and onward.


I wonder if there's a temporary shortage of a few lines of RJ flying at PHL during May... PHL-XNA/MLB are E75 markets, and PHL-CHA/SCE/ABE/AVP/ITH are all 50-seater markets that are showing capacity reductions for May only.


I think I know the reason. Scope issues due to the Max grounding.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/american- ... -drags-on/
 
sprxUSA
Posts: 419
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 5:17 am

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Wed Feb 26, 2020 1:24 am

ckfred wrote:
Back in the 1970s and early 1980s, my father-in-law used to fly to Duluth from Cleveland on NW for business, changing planes at ORD. Generally, the 727s flying between ORD and DLH were full. But, that was 40+ years ago.

It might be that DL has the bulk of traffic going in and out of Duluth, connecting at MSP. Couple that with perhaps a very low number of people in Chicagoland who need to fly to Duluth, and it doesn't make sense for AA to fly the route.

Between DLH and CRW, perhaps AA has determined that there are other cities that can support those frequencies.


NW didn't serve DLH until 1986 acquisition of Republic.
Gem State Airlines..."we have a gem of an airline"
 
alasizon
Posts: 2601
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Wed Feb 26, 2020 1:42 am

WaywardMemphian wrote:
FSDan wrote:
WaywardMemphian wrote:
AA PHL-XNA MAY 0.9>0.0[0]
Wierd, cut May completely but still there in June and onward.


I wonder if there's a temporary shortage of a few lines of RJ flying at PHL during May... PHL-XNA/MLB are E75 markets, and PHL-CHA/SCE/ABE/AVP/ITH are all 50-seater markets that are showing capacity reductions for May only.


I think I know the reason. Scope issues due to the Max grounding.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/american- ... -drags-on/


May would have nothing to do with that since the 15 month clause wouldn't kick in until June. Likewise, given the early retirements/temporary parking of RJs would be a 50-seater (or 44-seat ERD), cutting PHL-XNA/MLB doesn't match up there.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
capitalflyer
Posts: 629
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:43 am

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Wed Feb 26, 2020 3:28 pm

capitalflyer wrote:
alasizon wrote:
capitalflyer wrote:

These are not football adds. Usually the added flights for football add fractionally to monthly frequency. Also, there is often one off flights to destinations near the visiting teams campus. There is more to these adds.

Actually, the ORD flights are indeed loaded. Departures from SBN are 5:25, 7:11, 8:21, 9:15, 10:10, 11:26, 12:41, 2:09, 4:45, and 6:15. There is just one RON from ORD arriving at SBN at 11:01pm. But that flight is operated by Trans States. And it appears the additional lift is being provided by Air Wisconsin. So unless Sky West has entered into an agreement to do maintenance for other airlines that isn't the reason.

I believe it is an increase in demand. CoachUSA recently ended its bus shuttle service to MDW and ORD from SBN which no doubt sucked folks off those flights to ORD. Now with no other option than driving, folks are choosing to make that short hop SBN-ORD. The airport authority expressed regret at losing the service, but in reality this is a great boost to air service.

I put my theory on SkyWest on the Indiana Airports Thread. That's a tease!!


Going from 5x to 10x is pretty radical, my guess is that this had to do with shifting flying around and they double filed some planned flights and they will end up dropping it back down to a more reasonable level next week (likely 5 or 6x)


No, I definitely think a good portion of the increase will stick. UA lost probably a couple plane loads of pax to Coach USA every day over the years. Now with 150 or so pax with no other option, you have got demand for at least three more flights. And organic demand has been increasing in SBN without the Coach USA closure. So again, 10x may not be far off from actual demand.


I am doing a partial backtrack as new bus service to ORD and MDW was announced from SBN today. YOY there will still probably be an increase, but now I more definitely follow the line that while the 10x wasn't a misfile, it likely will get trimmed back to 6 or 7. During the past three months that there was no bus service pax may have tried flying from SBN for first time. If they like it, and UA can have a competitive fare, they may keep a good number of these people. But no doubt many will be on the bus to MDW and WN.
 
alasizon
Posts: 2601
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Wed Feb 26, 2020 5:29 pm

capitalflyer wrote:
capitalflyer wrote:
alasizon wrote:

Going from 5x to 10x is pretty radical, my guess is that this had to do with shifting flying around and they double filed some planned flights and they will end up dropping it back down to a more reasonable level next week (likely 5 or 6x)


No, I definitely think a good portion of the increase will stick. UA lost probably a couple plane loads of pax to Coach USA every day over the years. Now with 150 or so pax with no other option, you have got demand for at least three more flights. And organic demand has been increasing in SBN without the Coach USA closure. So again, 10x may not be far off from actual demand.


I am doing a partial backtrack as new bus service to ORD and MDW was announced from SBN today. YOY there will still probably be an increase, but now I more definitely follow the line that while the 10x wasn't a misfile, it likely will get trimmed back to 6 or 7. During the past three months that there was no bus service pax may have tried flying from SBN for first time. If they like it, and UA can have a competitive fare, they may keep a good number of these people. But no doubt many will be on the bus to MDW and WN.


I think that explained the initial planned 6x-7x but to go to 10x in my opinion had to have been a misfile. I can't think of another hub and spoke market that is at 10x daily RJs from a single carrier that isn't between two major cities (which SBN certainly does not qualify as).
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
HCLF
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 3:16 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Wed Feb 26, 2020 6:04 pm

knope2001 wrote:
Planeboy17 wrote:
It’s not just SBN, ATW also increases to 10 flights a day, even into Nov. ATW is Air Wisconsin’S HQ and I believe a MX base as well. Doesn’t Skywest have a MX base in SBN? Maybe the increases are just a way to get more aircraft to the base? Still seems excessive even if that is part of the reason though, but some people at UA must think there’s a good reason to add these flights.


ATW is indeed a MX base and their HQ. Air Wisconsin already has 4 overnight aircraft in ATW with the current schedule of six total daily Appleton departures -- 1 RON to DEN and 3 (of 5 total) ORD flights are RON as well. As they ramp up from 5x ORD to 10X ORD by fall they still have 4 RON in ATW. It looks like they RON 4 aircraft in all four MX bases -- ATW, CAE, DAY and MKE. Only CAE and MKE are also crew bases so running more turns through ATW doesn't rotate crews. The added turns during the day on ORD-ATW-ORD seem to be demand-based.


Possibly; but it's also possible that UA is trying to force AA back out of a market that UA once had to itself.
 
chicawgo
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:09 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Wed Feb 26, 2020 6:30 pm

HCLF wrote:
knope2001 wrote:
Planeboy17 wrote:
It’s not just SBN, ATW also increases to 10 flights a day, even into Nov. ATW is Air Wisconsin’S HQ and I believe a MX base as well. Doesn’t Skywest have a MX base in SBN? Maybe the increases are just a way to get more aircraft to the base? Still seems excessive even if that is part of the reason though, but some people at UA must think there’s a good reason to add these flights.


ATW is indeed a MX base and their HQ. Air Wisconsin already has 4 overnight aircraft in ATW with the current schedule of six total daily Appleton departures -- 1 RON to DEN and 3 (of 5 total) ORD flights are RON as well. As they ramp up from 5x ORD to 10X ORD by fall they still have 4 RON in ATW. It looks like they RON 4 aircraft in all four MX bases -- ATW, CAE, DAY and MKE. Only CAE and MKE are also crew bases so running more turns through ATW doesn't rotate crews. The added turns during the day on ORD-ATW-ORD seem to be demand-based.


Possibly; but it's also possible that UA is trying to force AA back out of a market that UA once had to itself.


No one has mentioned that the drastic increase also shows up on ORD-CID. It is quite difficult to believe ATW, SBN and CID jump to 10 without some sort of error. I guess we will see on Sunday.
 
freakyrat
Posts: 2043
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 1:04 pm

Re: OAG Changes 2/23/2020:AA Drops ORD-CRW/DLH,Adds Back JFK Flights;UA Drops JAN-ORD Again;UP Exits FLL-GGT

Sat Jul 11, 2020 6:14 pm

capitalflyer wrote:
alasizon wrote:
capitalflyer wrote:

These are not football adds. Usually the added flights for football add fractionally to monthly frequency. Also, there is often one off flights to destinations near the visiting teams campus. There is more to these adds.

Actually, the ORD flights are indeed loaded. Departures from SBN are 5:25, 7:11, 8:21, 9:15, 10:10, 11:26, 12:41, 2:09, 4:45, and 6:15. There is just one RON from ORD arriving at SBN at 11:01pm. But that flight is operated by Trans States. And it appears the additional lift is being provided by Air Wisconsin. So unless Sky West has entered into an agreement to do maintenance for other airlines that isn't the reason.

I believe it is an increase in demand. CoachUSA recently ended its bus shuttle service to MDW and ORD from SBN which no doubt sucked folks off those flights to ORD. Now with no other option than driving, folks are choosing to make that short hop SBN-ORD. The airport authority expressed regret at losing the service, but in reality this is a great boost to air service.

I put my theory on SkyWest on the Indiana Airports Thread. That's a tease!!


Going from 5x to 10x is pretty radical, my guess is that this had to do with shifting flying around and they double filed some planned flights and they will end up dropping it back down to a more reasonable level next week (likely 5 or 6x)


No, I definitely think a good portion of the increase will stick. UA lost probably a couple plane loads of pax to Coach USA every day over the years. Now with 150 or so pax with no other option, you have got demand for at least three more flights. And organic demand has been increasing in SBN without the Coach USA closure. So again, 10x may not be far off from actual demand.


United readjusted it to 9 daily flights. With only 3 busses a day to ORD, the temporary suspension of service to AZO and organic demand this is the right amount of service. One of the morning flights being an E175.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos