Airliners.net

It appears DAL has replaced their daily 737 with A-319.....and AA has daily A-319 DFW - EYW. What is up? And a related question: does the A-319 have a little better short field capability?

Delta’s retiring the 737-700 soon so it’s being replaced by the A319 on ATL-EYW.

A319s could always do the job. Retiring the 73Gs was worth it.

I literally had this exact same thought a few days ago. My immediate reaction was that EYW is A220 material.

I can see EYW getting a lot of A220 loving from DL and B6

Was it DL or Airtran that made EYW a captain-only airport? More to-the-point, do we know which carriers consider it to be so? Or do all the airlines flying 100+ seaters in there consider it to be captain-only?

Eagle (Vail) is another one where the larger aircraft are captain-only, and I've never flown into Tegucigalpa, but I assume that it is, too. I wonder what AA is going to do with Eagle now that that the 757s are being retired; they had a flight from JFK on a 757, and I doubt there are other aircraft of its size that could handle it. (Long live the 757!)

wjcandee wrote:

Was it DL or Airtran that made EYW a captain-only airport? More to-the-point, do we know which carriers consider it to be so? Or do all the airlines flying 100+ seaters in there consider it to be captain-only?

Eagle (Vail) is another one where the larger aircraft are captain-only, and I've never flown into Tegucigalpa, but I assume that it is, too. I wonder what AA is going to do with Eagle now that that the 757s are being retired; they had a flight from JFK on a 757, and I doubt there are other aircraft of its size that could handle it. (Long live the 757!)

All the mainline AA EGE flights in the schedule for this winter are (newer) 319s.

At UAL, EGE is special-qual, but I don’t think it’s Captain-only.

727glasair wrote:

It appears DAL has replaced their daily 737 with A-319.....and AA has daily A-319 DFW - EYW. What is up? And a related question: does the A-319 have a little better short field capability?

The 737-700 has better short field performance over all. The AA A319s have higher thrust than the DL A319s, but ATL is a relatively short flight so there shouldn't be too much of an issue.

codc10 wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

Was it DL or Airtran that made EYW a captain-only airport? More to-the-point, do we know which carriers consider it to be so? Or do all the airlines flying 100+ seaters in there consider it to be captain-only?

Eagle (Vail) is another one where the larger aircraft are captain-only, and I've never flown into Tegucigalpa, but I assume that it is, too. I wonder what AA is going to do with Eagle now that that the 757s are being retired; they had a flight from JFK on a 757, and I doubt there are other aircraft of its size that could handle it. (Long live the 757!)

All the mainline AA EGE flights in the schedule for this winter are (newer) 319s.

At UAL, EGE is special-qual, but I don’t think it’s Captain-only.

EGE isn’t Captain-only at AA or UA; it is special qual only, as you’ve mentioned. JAC, TGU, UIO, and a few others are the same. Can’t speak to EYW, as neither UA nor AA had mainline equipment in there when I scheduled pilots for either airline.

Lootess wrote:

A319s could always do the job. Retiring the 73Gs was worth it.

There's 'doing the job' and 'doing the job well.'

DL got the A319s from the NW transaction even before receiving its first 737-700. Why did it ever use 737-700s?

MIflyer12 wrote:

Lootess wrote:

A319s could always do the job. Retiring the 73Gs was worth it.

There's 'doing the job' and 'doing the job well.'

DL got the A319s from the NW transaction even before receiving its first 737-700. Why did it ever use 737-700s?

That's not true. They got the 737-700s in 2008, the merger was in 2010.

wjcandee wrote:

Was it DL or Airtran that made EYW a captain-only airport? More to-the-point, do we know which carriers consider it to be so? Or do all the airlines flying 100+ seaters in there consider it to be captain-only?

Eagle (Vail) is another one where the larger aircraft are captain-only, and I've never flown into Tegucigalpa, but I assume that it is, too. I wonder what AA is going to do with Eagle now that that the 757s are being retired; they had a flight from JFK on a 757, and I doubt there are other aircraft of its size that could handle it. (Long live the 757!)

At my airline, I know people who have had their first landing in the airplane be at EYW.

MIflyer12 wrote:

Lootess wrote:

A319s could always do the job. Retiring the 73Gs was worth it.

There's 'doing the job' and 'doing the job well.'

DL got the A319s from the NW transaction even before receiving its first 737-700. Why did it ever use 737-700s?

The first 73G arrived in August 2008, while the merger did not close until October 2008 and integration of fleets happened much later. Since the aircraft were already committed to prior to the merger, it simply made more sense to operate them on the intended specialized routes rather than try to resell them.

RyanairGuru wrote:

727glasair wrote:

It appears DAL has replaced their daily 737 with A-319.....and AA has daily A-319 DFW - EYW. What is up? And a related question: does the A-319 have a little better short field capability?

The 737-700 has better short field performance over all. The AA A319s have higher thrust than the DL A319s, but ATL is a relatively short flight so there shouldn't be too much of an issue.

Higher thrust does not necessarily mean shorter take-off run. Fixed derate equals lower Vmcg equals lower take-off V1. I’d bet those ATL departures were at derated thrust.

Lootess wrote:

A319s could always do the job. Retiring the 73Gs was worth it.

Exactly. And not like 10 niche 737-700s are going to do damage if they get pulled.

DaCubbyBearBar wrote:

I can see EYW getting a lot of A220 loving from DL and B6

Perhaps, but ATL is not an A220 base. At some point in the future I'm sure this will be true though.

Lootess wrote:

A319s could always do the job. Retiring the 73Gs was worth it.

I believe the recent runway extension helped for the A319. 277 feet isn’t much, but a 5% longer takeoff run will allow a higher payload and fewer blocked seats and less luggage left behind.

Last time I landed at EYW on a DL 737, the pilot warned us that there would be some hard brakes/rev-thrust on landing. I didn't find it to be any worse than a crew going off duty trying to catch that first high-speed TWY.

panam330 wrote:

codc10 wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

Was it DL or Airtran that made EYW a captain-only airport? More to-the-point, do we know which carriers consider it to be so? Or do all the airlines flying 100+ seaters in there consider it to be captain-only?

Eagle (Vail) is another one where the larger aircraft are captain-only, and I've never flown into Tegucigalpa, but I assume that it is, too. I wonder what AA is going to do with Eagle now that that the 757s are being retired; they had a flight from JFK on a 757, and I doubt there are other aircraft of its size that could handle it. (Long live the 757!)

All the mainline AA EGE flights in the schedule for this winter are (newer) 319s.

At UAL, EGE is special-qual, but I don’t think it’s Captain-only.

EGE isn’t Captain-only at AA or UA; it is special qual only, as you’ve mentioned. JAC, TGU, UIO, and a few others are the same. Can’t speak to EYW, as neither UA nor AA had mainline equipment in there when I scheduled pilots for either airline.

JAC is special qual? That's interesting... wouldn't have guessed. Always bumpy but otherwise, never really noticed anything special about it. You're just flying down the valley

wjcandee wrote:

Was it DL or Airtran that made EYW a captain-only airport? More to-the-point, do we know which carriers consider it to be so? Or do all the airlines flying 100+ seaters in there consider it to be captain-only?

Eagle (Vail) is another one where the larger aircraft are captain-only, and I've never flown into Tegucigalpa, but I assume that it is, too. I wonder what AA is going to do with Eagle now that that the 757s are being retired; they had a flight from JFK on a 757, and I doubt there are other aircraft of its size that could handle it. (Long live the 757!)

AA has A319's so that is probably what they will use to EGE, maybe at higher frequency during peak season. I believe UA has also used the 737-800SFP into EGE on longer flights and to DEN they can use the A320 since it requires so little fuel.

Same thing happened to JAC when UA retired most of the 757's. They downgauged it to A319 and 737-700 and it seems to work fine. At least with UA, the 757 was rarely full to JAC, so I suspect the same is true for AA 757's at EGE. You may also see fill-in frequencies on E-Jets (although I don't know if DFW will be seeing Eagle E-Jets any time soon).

In regards to Captain only landings what happens if the first officer has more experience in landing at that particular airport?

wjcandee wrote:

Was it DL or Airtran that made EYW a captain-only airport? More to-the-point, do we know which carriers consider it to be so? Or do all the airlines flying 100+ seaters in there consider it to be captain-only?

Eagle (Vail) is another one where the larger aircraft are captain-only, and I've never flown into Tegucigalpa, but I assume that it is, too. I wonder what AA is going to do with Eagle now that that the 757s are being retired; they had a flight from JFK on a 757, and I doubt there are other aircraft of its size that could handle it. (Long live the 757!)

I can confirm that EYW is a captain only airport for DL.

dfwjim1 wrote:

In regards to Captain only landings what happens if the first officer has more experience in landing at that particular airport?

Policy is Policy. I remember once I was a young FO based in a very wintery airport. Flew with a captain from another base who had been out for a while. Company manuals stipulated the winter conditions at specific airports were captain only landings, so despite the fact I had more winter recency than him (some airports were FO-allowable in winter) he had to do his first snowy landing in a long while at my home base, while I looked onwards. Ah, desk pilots sometimes have the best intentions...

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:

Lootess wrote:

A319s could always do the job. Retiring the 73Gs was worth it.

I believe the recent runway extension helped for the A319. 277 feet isn’t much, but a 5% longer takeoff run will allow a higher payload and fewer blocked seats and less luggage left behind.

It seems like that little runway extension may have made a huge difference for EYW. Lots more nonstop service to ORD and the Northeast (on E-Jets) than before. Did I recently hear that AA now intends to operate mainline DFW-EYW (also with the A319) twice daily? I definitely read that the EYW airport director anticipates having more seats on offer this fall vs. fall 2019.

Of course, I can't help but wonder if the slightly longer runway could get WN to give EYW another try - especially now that the carrier seems to have a renewed interest in ATL and finally seems to be okay with running seasonal stations. B6 will have lots of exciting opportunities with its new A220s, and a market like SNA could take precedence over one like EYW. What about NK and its A319s? NK will also be the first A319neo operator in the U.S., should its current A319s not be up to the job...

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:

Lootess wrote:

A319s could always do the job. Retiring the 73Gs was worth it.

I believe the recent runway extension helped for the A319. 277 feet isn’t much, but a 5% longer takeoff run will allow a higher payload and fewer blocked seats and less luggage left behind.

That's right, plus they added EMAS to each end of the runway after a Gulfstream 150 owned by NASCAR driver Jimmie Johnson had an overrun incident 9 years ago (Johnson was not on that ill-fated flight, but his team owner, Rick Hendrick was).

AA's 319's have been doing EYW-DFW with a full passenger load and (I think) no weight restrictions which is impressive considering its a 2.5+ hour flight, compared EYW-ATL being about an hour shorter. However its always the new AA deliveries from 2014-2015 with the sharklets and slightly uprated engines doing those flights rather than the ex-USAirways and American West aircraft, so not sure how DL's ex-NW 319's would compare but I assume its much less favorable. Also for AA, JAC/EGE/TGU are only on the newer, more capable sharklet-equipped 319's with the 757's being gone.
Previously EYW-DFW was on Envoy E175's which I believe were heavily weight-restricted on that run.

747fan wrote:

AA's 319's have been doing EYW-DFW with a full passenger load and (I think) no weight restrictions which is impressive considering its a 2.5+ hour flight, compared EYW-ATL being about an hour shorter. However its always the new AA deliveries from 2014-2015 with the sharklets and slightly uprated engines doing those flights rather than the ex-USAirways and American West aircraft, so not sure how DL's ex-NW 319's would compare but I assume its much less favorable. Also for AA, JAC/EGE/TGU are only on the newer, more capable sharklet-equipped 319's with the 757's being gone.
Previously EYW-DFW was on Envoy E175's which I believe were heavily weight-restricted on that run.

I've definitely seen some very ugly weight restrictions when the flight has been operated by Envoy. The Envoy 175s are definitely physically capable, but they're not extended overwater equipped (life jackets, etc.) from my understanding, so they have to stay closer to the coast, making it a much longer flight. I've heard from a few Envoy friends lately that they'll be getting at least a portion, if not all of their 175s equipped for EOW, so that should resolve that issue.

timf wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Lootess wrote:

A319s could always do the job. Retiring the 73Gs was worth it.

There's 'doing the job' and 'doing the job well.'

DL got the A319s from the NW transaction even before receiving its first 737-700. Why did it ever use 737-700s?

The first 73G arrived in August 2008, while the merger did not close until October 2008 and integration of fleets happened much later. Since the aircraft were already committed to prior to the merger, it simply made more sense to operate them on the intended specialized routes rather than try to resell them.

Yep, they were from the original PMDL 738 order when they sold off deliveries from during the bankruptcy. Delta eventually committed to buying the last 10 from that order and converted to 73Gs before the NW merger took place.

If we can play Monday morning quarterback now, Delta probably would have taken them as 738s, knowing they'd merge with NW, and end up keeping the A319s. But that would play into the DL/NW were planning the merger all along angle.

wjcandee wrote:

Was it DL or Airtran that made EYW a captain-only airport? More to-the-point, do we know which carriers consider it to be so? Or do all the airlines flying 100+ seaters in there consider it to be captain-only?

Eagle (Vail) is another one where the larger aircraft are captain-only, and I've never flown into Tegucigalpa, but I assume that it is, too. I wonder what AA is going to do with Eagle now that that the 757s are being retired; they had a flight from JFK on a 757, and I doubt there are other aircraft of its size that could handle it. (Long live the 757!)

EGE is NOT “Captain Only” at every carrier. Incorrect statement.

Captain only airports...can someone explain why? Why would an airline hire a pilot that they don't think is capable of performing at any airport? And look at the situation we are in right now. There are captains who will be demoted to first officer because of furloughs. So now they won't be qualified to land at certain airports just because they moved back to the right seat? Where is the logic in that?

It’s about assigning responsibility for managing risk, not capability or skill. The captain is the one responsible for the plane.

The runway at EYW is only 5,076 feet long. Would the BCS1 or BCS3 be capable of flying to JFK or EWR from EYW?

TTailedTiger wrote:

Captain only airports...can someone explain why? Why would an airline hire a pilot that they don't think is capable of performing at any airport? And look at the situation we are in right now. There are captains who will be demoted to first officer because of furloughs. So now they won't be qualified to land at certain airports just because they moved back to the right seat? Where is the logic in that?

Some airports are extremely challenging. While not in the USA, SDU has to be one example...as that at 4300 feet is the shortest runway for any 737 or A320 series plane can take off or land from (the largest plane that can service SDU is the A320neo; the A320ceo cannot go in or out of SDU). LCY also is challenging because of the steeper than usual glide scope. There was a thread on this 11 years ago: viewtopic.php?t=760991

I would think it could it pretty easily.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

The runway at EYW is only 5,076 feet long. Would the BCS1 or BCS3 be capable of flying to JFK or EWR from EYW?

TTailedTiger wrote:

Captain only airports...can someone explain why? Why would an airline hire a pilot that they don't think is capable of performing at any airport? And look at the situation we are in right now. There are captains who will be demoted to first officer because of furloughs. So now they won't be qualified to land at certain airports just because they moved back to the right seat? Where is the logic in that?

Some airports are extremely challenging. While not in the USA, SDU has to be one example...as that at 4300 feet is the shortest runway for any 737 or A320 series plane can take off or land from (the largest plane that can service SDU is the A320neo; the A320ceo cannot go in or out of SDU). LCY also is challenging because of the steeper than usual glide scope. There was a thread on this 11 years ago: viewtopic.php?t=760991

As mentioned above, other airlines allow their FO's to have the controls at EYW and so far haven't had any issues. I just can't fathom why Delta is behaving differently. I always thought their pilots were as good as the other airlines. If I were an FO at DL I certainly wouldn't want to bid a trip where I wasn't allowed to do any flying.

TTailedTiger wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

The runway at EYW is only 5,076 feet long. Would the BCS1 or BCS3 be capable of flying to JFK or EWR from EYW?

TTailedTiger wrote:

Captain only airports...can someone explain why? Why would an airline hire a pilot that they don't think is capable of performing at any airport? And look at the situation we are in right now. There are captains who will be demoted to first officer because of furloughs. So now they won't be qualified to land at certain airports just because they moved back to the right seat? Where is the logic in that?

Some airports are extremely challenging. While not in the USA, SDU has to be one example...as that at 4300 feet is the shortest runway for any 737 or A320 series plane can take off or land from (the largest plane that can service SDU is the A320neo; the A320ceo cannot go in or out of SDU). LCY also is challenging because of the steeper than usual glide scope. There was a thread on this 11 years ago: viewtopic.php?t=760991

As mentioned above, other airlines allow their FO's to have the controls at EYW and so far haven't had any issues. I just can't fathom why Delta is behaving differently. I always thought their pilots were as good as the other airlines. If I were an FO at DL I certainly wouldn't want to bid a trip where I wasn't allowed to do any flying.

It's whatever agreement the local FAA POI has with the airline, and what is published in its OpSpecs and FOM. Most airlines have a Captain only restriction at certain airports until the FO attains 100 hours in type.

UPS757Pilot wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

The runway at EYW is only 5,076 feet long. Would the BCS1 or BCS3 be capable of flying to JFK or EWR from EYW?



Some airports are extremely challenging. While not in the USA, SDU has to be one example...as that at 4300 feet is the shortest runway for any 737 or A320 series plane can take off or land from (the largest plane that can service SDU is the A320neo; the A320ceo cannot go in or out of SDU). LCY also is challenging because of the steeper than usual glide scope. There was a thread on this 11 years ago: viewtopic.php?t=760991

As mentioned above, other airlines allow their FO's to have the controls at EYW and so far haven't had any issues. I just can't fathom why Delta is behaving differently. I always thought their pilots were as good as the other airlines. If I were an FO at DL I certainly wouldn't want to bid a trip where I wasn't allowed to do any flying.

It's whatever agreement the local FAA POI has with the airline, and what is published in its OpSpecs and FOM. Most airlines have a Captain only restriction at certain airports until the FO attains 100 hours in type.

Thanks. And the 100 hours approach makes sense.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

The runway at EYW is only 5,076 feet long. Would the BCS1 or BCS3 be capable of flying to JFK or EWR from EYW?

TTailedTiger wrote:

Captain only airports...can someone explain why? Why would an airline hire a pilot that they don't think is capable of performing at any airport? And look at the situation we are in right now. There are captains who will be demoted to first officer because of furloughs. So now they won't be qualified to land at certain airports just because they moved back to the right seat? Where is the logic in that?

Some airports are extremely challenging. While not in the USA, SDU has to be one example...as that at 4300 feet is the shortest runway for any 737 or A320 series plane can take off or land from (the largest plane that can service SDU is the A320neo; the A320ceo cannot go in or out of SDU). LCY also is challenging because of the steeper than usual glide scope. There was a thread on this 11 years ago: viewtopic.php?t=760991

EYW has had a remarkable safety record over the years, with only two runway excursions, both non-fatal and by business jets. However, it has no precision ILS approach, just RNAV and NDB. As for the runway, it is just 100' feet wide, rather than the commercial airport standard of 150' wide, which probably makes crosswind landings interesting when the winds get gusty. I also imagine rain also makes for exciting landings on the short runway.

Performance-wise it appears that the A221 and A223 could handle EYW without great concern. I think either could manage EYW-JFK with a decent load.

The other reason certain operators may designate certain airports as Captain only is as basic as transfer of aircraft control. EYW is a short runway so in a reject situation on an FO takeoff there is a a need to establish positive transfer of control of the aircraft. Same with landing rollout after an FO landing. Normally it’s not a huge issue (or even an issue for that matter) but when runway is at a premium, removing the step of control transfer takes away a possible link in the error chain.

This is incorrect. DAL ordered and started to received the 73G with the high altitude options before the merger was announced.

MIflyer12 wrote:

Lootess wrote:

A319s could always do the job. Retiring the 73Gs was worth it.

There's 'doing the job' and 'doing the job well.'

DL got the A319s from the NW transaction even before receiving its first 737-700. Why did it ever use 737-700s?