wedgetail737 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

I can definitely see SAN being a significant connecting complex for AS, especially they have established themselves. I, myself, have used SAN from SEA to MCO. One key route that AS attempted to get was SAN-DCA during the last round of beyond-perimeter slots, but was denied. Some of ancillary routes that SAN recently got like SAN-GEG, SAN-BOI and SAN-MT, makes SAN more of game-player at SAN. I'm looking forward to see what else AS has for SAN...hopefully a lot more.

Keep in mind that delta is making a huge push into Seattle based on their recent pilot bid, including adding an a220 base there. As will have to again use all of it's resources to defend it's position there due to the gate allocation methodology there. And aside from that, they are making a huge push in lax as part of their aa partnership.

San isn't going to get their focus for a while.

Keep in mind that as will not be back to it's precovid mainline fleet size until 2023.

AA did mention that they will have all of their airplanes in service in May...obviously, not including those airplanes AA retired....which were a lot.

I thought DL was already planning on an A220 base at SEA prior to the pandemic.

But you might be right with AS and SAN...at least briefly. AS will still have a mind of its own...and I think SAN will expand some still.

I wonder if WN will come back and put up a fight against Alaska in San Diego they have been quiet lately there

Wneast wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

Keep in mind that delta is making a huge push into Seattle based on their recent pilot bid, including adding an a220 base there. As will have to again use all of it's resources to defend it's position there due to the gate allocation methodology there. And aside from that, they are making a huge push in lax as part of their aa partnership.

San isn't going to get their focus for a while.

Keep in mind that as will not be back to it's precovid mainline fleet size until 2023.

AA did mention that they will have all of their airplanes in service in May...obviously, not including those airplanes AA retired....which were a lot.

I thought DL was already planning on an A220 base at SEA prior to the pandemic.

But you might be right with AS and SAN...at least briefly. AS will still have a mind of its own...and I think SAN will expand some still.

I wonder if WN will come back and put up a fight against Alaska in San Diego they have been quiet lately there

Give them time...do they still have plenty of gate capacity at SAN?

wedgetail737 wrote:

Wneast wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

AA did mention that they will have all of their airplanes in service in May...obviously, not including those airplanes AA retired....which were a lot.

I thought DL was already planning on an A220 base at SEA prior to the pandemic.

But you might be right with AS and SAN...at least briefly. AS will still have a mind of its own...and I think SAN will expand some still.

I wonder if WN will come back and put up a fight against Alaska in San Diego they have been quiet lately there

Give them time...do they still have plenty of gate capacity at SAN?

I’m not sure about that maybe someone knows ?

Wneast wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

Wneast wrote:

I wonder if WN will come back and put up a fight against Alaska in San Diego they have been quiet lately there

Give them time...do they still have plenty of gate capacity at SAN?

I’m not sure about that maybe someone knows ?

Doesnt WN have T1 at SAN all to themselves?

AC4500 wrote:

Wneast wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

Give them time...do they still have plenty of gate capacity at SAN?

I’m not sure about that maybe someone knows ?

Doesnt WN have T1 at SAN all to themselves?

It looks like they only have eleven gates in terminal one but I’m sure if they wanted more they would give them more somehow

Wneast wrote:

AC4500 wrote:

Wneast wrote:

I’m not sure about that maybe someone knows ?

Doesnt WN have T1 at SAN all to themselves?

It looks like they only have eleven gates in terminal one but I’m sure if they wanted more they would give them more somehow

I don't want to get heavily off-subject here -- which is AS -- by detailing WN's position in SAN but currently, WN has all of T1E which can offer about 10 gates + they have access to overflow gates found in T1W, seems to be up to about 3 additional gates. So as of right now, WN would have the capability of offering easily 125-130 daily departures at SAN; of course they are not even close to that number of flights. In a year, who knows what WN might be doing in SAN but the trend these days is that WN has cut routes and flights and is losing market share almost monthly! The replacement for T1 is being planned and designed right now but again, who knows when -- read: in how many years -- it will open?

In T2E, AS currently has at least 9 gates with perhaps the potential of sharing some of their terminal-mate's (AA's) gates if and when more gate space is needed. I'm not sure what AS's daily gate usage average is but I'm guessing in SAN it might be about 8? So it seems to me that A could fairly easily operate over 70 daily departures at SAN with the facilities they have right now!

bb

wedgetail737 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

I can definitely see SAN being a significant connecting complex for AS, especially they have established themselves. I, myself, have used SAN from SEA to MCO. One key route that AS attempted to get was SAN-DCA during the last round of beyond-perimeter slots, but was denied. Some of ancillary routes that SAN recently got like SAN-GEG, SAN-BOI and SAN-MT, makes SAN more of game-player at SAN. I'm looking forward to see what else AS has for SAN...hopefully a lot more.

Keep in mind that delta is making a huge push into Seattle based on their recent pilot bid, including adding an a220 base there. As will have to again use all of it's resources to defend it's position there due to the gate allocation methodology there. And aside from that, they are making a huge push in lax as part of their aa partnership.

San isn't going to get their focus for a while.

Keep in mind that as will not be back to it's precovid mainline fleet size until 2023.

AA did mention that they will have all of their airplanes in service in May...obviously, not including those airplanes AA retired....which were a lot.

I thought DL was already planning on an A220 base at SEA prior to the pandemic.

But you might be right with AS and SAN...at least briefly. AS will still have a mind of its own...and I think SAN will expand some still.

I'm not sure why AA fleet size has anything to do with this. AS mainline fleet size is not going to be back to pre-COVID level until summer of 2023 due to all the Airbus retirements. At this point, it's quite clear AS's priorities are SEA followed by LAX. I don't know if DL was already planning an A220 base prior to pandemic, but they just had a really large pilot pilot (for those in UNA category) where SEA got a disproportionately large opening vs other bases. DL is fully committed to SEA. Which means AS cannot take its foot of the gas there.

SAN is going to have to wait for its turn if it wants to get bigger. And realistically speaking, there is no point to have hubs in both LAX and SAN. So, SAN will just be a focus city as it has always been. I don't think much will change vs pre-COVID other than a few more flights and some upgauging over time.

AC4500 wrote:

Wneast wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

Give them time...do they still have plenty of gate capacity at SAN?

I’m not sure about that maybe someone knows ?

Doesnt WN have T1 at SAN all to themselves?

WN had 13 1/2 gates total. 3 1/2 are on T1E.
Spirit,Allegiant and JetBlue also use T1E.
WN was using the Allegiant gate only for IROPS since they don't occupy the gate daily. AS also was using the gate to terminate and park overnight night aircraft since Allegiant also doesn't RON any aircraft at SAN.
But who knows now what's going on since the pandemic.

Flyguy

tphuang wrote:

AS mainline fleet size is not going to be back to pre-COVID level until summer of 2023 due to all the Airbus retirements. At this point, it's quite clear AS's priorities are SEA followed by LAX.

SAN is going to have to wait for its turn if it wants to get bigger. And realistically speaking, there is no point to have hubs in both LAX and SAN. So, SAN will just be a focus city as it has always been. I don't think much will change vs pre-COVID other than a few more flights and some upgauging over time.

We'll see.

Absolutely. And there's certainly no point in AS having hubs in say, both SEA and PDX... Oh wait. (And btw, SAN has not always been a focus city; the city became one relatively recently, along with SJC, as Alaska for some reason poured lots of resources into their ops at SDIA in the last few years.)

bb

SANFan wrote:

tphuang wrote:

AS mainline fleet size is not going to be back to pre-COVID level until summer of 2023 due to all the Airbus retirements. At this point, it's quite clear AS's priorities are SEA followed by LAX.

SAN is going to have to wait for its turn if it wants to get bigger. And realistically speaking, there is no point to have hubs in both LAX and SAN. So, SAN will just be a focus city as it has always been. I don't think much will change vs pre-COVID other than a few more flights and some upgauging over time.

We'll see.

Absolutely. And there's certainly no point in AS having hubs in say, both SEA and PDX... Oh wait. (And btw, SAN has not always been a focus city; the city became one relatively recently, along with SJC, as Alaska for some reason poured lots of resources into their ops at SDIA in the last few years.)

bb

Yeah...but SJC being a focus city for anyone has been kind of flighty (no pun intended). DL once announced SJC as a focus city and dropped that. Previous to that Frontier wanted to make SJC a bit of a focus city and that didn't pan out. AS has started, discontinued and restarted service at SJC many times.

I think SAN is a more "stable" focus city of AS. And incrementally, AS will probably continue to grow there.

I agree with the poster that it will take a while for AS (and AA) to get their fleets back to pre-pandemic levels. But I wonder if AS is slowing down the retirement of the Airbuses a bit as people get back to flying again.

SANFan wrote:

tphuang wrote:

AS mainline fleet size is not going to be back to pre-COVID level until summer of 2023 due to all the Airbus retirements. At this point, it's quite clear AS's priorities are SEA followed by LAX.

SAN is going to have to wait for its turn if it wants to get bigger. And realistically speaking, there is no point to have hubs in both LAX and SAN. So, SAN will just be a focus city as it has always been. I don't think much will change vs pre-COVID other than a few more flights and some upgauging over time.

We'll see.

Absolutely. And there's certainly no point in AS having hubs in say, both SEA and PDX... Oh wait. (And btw, SAN has not always been a focus city; the city became one relatively recently, along with SJC, as Alaska for some reason poured lots of resources into their ops at SDIA in the last few years.)

bb

The people in Oregon thread continues to complain about AS ignoring PDX. There is no scenario where SAN is more important to AS than SEA or LAX over the next 5 years. On top of that, AS simply doesn't have the same level of investment at SAN as it does at LAX.

32andBelow wrote:

I think AS will add flights with whatever route makes money. It’s not like you can fly from SAN to LAX to catch a flight. You have to go all the way to SEA. So it doesn’t make much sense to have SAN people rely on LAX.

It doesn't matter what SAN people want to do. It matters how many aircraft/pilot AS has and where its priorities are.

tphuang wrote:

SANFan wrote:

tphuang wrote:

AS mainline fleet size is not going to be back to pre-COVID level until summer of 2023 due to all the Airbus retirements. At this point, it's quite clear AS's priorities are SEA followed by LAX.

SAN is going to have to wait for its turn if it wants to get bigger. And realistically speaking, there is no point to have hubs in both LAX and SAN. So, SAN will just be a focus city as it has always been. I don't think much will change vs pre-COVID other than a few more flights and some upgauging over time.

We'll see.

Absolutely. And there's certainly no point in AS having hubs in say, both SEA and PDX... Oh wait. (And btw, SAN has not always been a focus city; the city became one relatively recently, along with SJC, as Alaska for some reason poured lots of resources into their ops at SDIA in the last few years.)

bb

The people in Oregon thread continues to complain about AS ignoring PDX. There is no scenario where SAN is more important to AS than SEA or LAX over the next 5 years. On top of that, AS simply doesn't have the same level of investment at SAN as it does at LAX.

32andBelow wrote:

I think AS will add flights with whatever route makes money. It’s not like you can fly from SAN to LAX to catch a flight. You have to go all the way to SEA. So it doesn’t make much sense to have SAN people rely on LAX.

It doesn't matter what SAN people want to do. It matters how many aircraft/pilot AS has and where its priorities are.

I'll agree to those points. At least AS has a terminal all to themselves (pretty much). It's just too bad that the AS and AA terminals are not right next to each other.

wedgetail737 wrote:

SANFan wrote:

SAN has not always been a focus city; the city became one relatively recently, along with SJC, as Alaska for some reason poured lots of resources into their ops at SDIA in the last few years.)

Yeah...but SJC being a focus city for anyone has been kind of flighty (no pun intended). DL once announced SJC as a focus city and dropped that. Previous to that Frontier wanted to make SJC a bit of a focus city and that didn't pan out. AS has started, discontinued and restarted service at SJC many times.

I think SAN is a more "stable" focus city of AS. And incrementally, AS will probably continue to grow there.

I agree. I was just stating that both SJC and SAN were categorized at focus cities at relatively the same time. (If I remember correctly, technically AS started calling SJC a focus city before they used the term for SAN.)

But things have evolved and I don't think AS has grown SJC lately to the same degree as SAN; both might still "officially" be focus cities in AS's eyes but I can't confirm that. Maybe AS feels SJC is now more competitive so they are backing off a bit, while in SAN, WN is receding somewhat so AS sees a good opportunity to take advantage and grow there. Or perhaps it's simply tied to the relative pax traffic at the 2 airports.

bb

SANFan wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

SANFan wrote:

SAN has not always been a focus city; the city became one relatively recently, along with SJC, as Alaska for some reason poured lots of resources into their ops at SDIA in the last few years.)

Yeah...but SJC being a focus city for anyone has been kind of flighty (no pun intended). DL once announced SJC as a focus city and dropped that. Previous to that Frontier wanted to make SJC a bit of a focus city and that didn't pan out. AS has started, discontinued and restarted service at SJC many times.

I think SAN is a more "stable" focus city of AS. And incrementally, AS will probably continue to grow there.

I agree. I was just stating that both SJC and SAN were categorized at focus cities at relatively the same time. (If I remember correctly, technically AS started calling SJC a focus city before they used the term for SAN.)

But things have evolved and I don't think AS has grown SJC lately to the same degree as SAN; both might still "officially" be focus cities in AS's eyes but I can't confirm that. Maybe AS feels SJC is now more competitive so they are backing off a bit, while in SAN, WN is receding somewhat so AS sees a good opportunity to take advantage and grow there. Or perhaps it's simply tied to the relative pax traffic at the 2 airports.

bb

IMO SAN is getting attention due to it being a hot (pun intended) leisure destination while SJC is getting a pullback, in part, due to its business-centric profile. Tech companies aren’t traveling much right now. I also think the competitive factors are at play, too.

jbs2886 wrote:

IMO SAN is getting attention due to it being a hot (pun intended) leisure destination while SJC is getting a pullback, in part, due to its business-centric profile. Tech companies aren’t traveling much right now. I also think the competitive factors are at play, too.

Definitely the case. Other airports who are more traditionally leisure-focused have come back significantly quicker than SJC has. Losing the business traffic has really hurt; especially for what was rather limited service to the east coast and especially international. Until tech workers start really traveling again for business, I wouldn't expect to see much service added. The few leisure destinations AS tried adding back mid-2020 haven't really panned out (yet) for the most part. PSP, MSO, RDM were all pushed back or canceled. Losing the huge conferences and conventions - WWDC, NVIDIA GTC, Fanime, etc. for the past two years hasn't helped, either.

hiflyeras wrote:

Western727 wrote:

Plus, from SEA there's a number of nonstops to multiple Hawaiian destinations, as well as Los Cabos, Acapculco, Puerto Vallarta, etc. The Caribbean means an automatic connection, which of course means more travel time. SJU on random dates in May would take as short as 8h 58m eastbound and 9h 58m westbound. I'll take Hawaii or Mexico over that any day, unless I had a specific reason for going to the Caribbean (e.g., a wedding or a deliberately-chosen SCUBA diving destination).

No one has flown from SEA to Acapulco for decades. AS did have a route that stopped in GDL on the way to ACA but that was last operated maybe 25 years ago.

I stand corrected. Thanks!

tphuang wrote:

I don't know if DL was already planning an A220 base prior to pandemic, but they just had a really large pilot pilot (for those in UNA category) where SEA got a disproportionately large opening vs other bases...

A SEA A220 base wasn't part of the base realignment 5/2020 where the 717 and MD88/MD90 retirements were worked in to the plan.

https://paxex.aero/delta-shifts-pilots-for-new-normal/

Of course, they can work 220s into the SEA schedules from other bases as they've been doing since summer 2019.

MIflyer12 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

I don't know if DL was already planning an A220 base prior to pandemic, but they just had a really large pilot pilot (for those in UNA category) where SEA got a disproportionately large opening vs other bases...

A SEA A220 base wasn't part of the base realignment 5/2020 where the 717 and MD88/MD90 retirements were worked in to the plan.

https://paxex.aero/delta-shifts-pilots-for-new-normal/

Of course, they can work 220s into the SEA schedules from other bases as they've been doing since summer 2019.

Right, I read on their pilot board that a new A220 SEA base will be part of their displacement bid that runs from today to the 15th.

AS is being relentless to B6. Going from 1x daily now on EWR-SEA to 3x next month.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

AS is being relentless to B6. Going from 1x daily now on EWR-SEA to 3x next month.

AS has gone to 3x daily EWR several times over the last few years, the frequency on that route they adjust a lot.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

AS is being relentless to B6. Going from 1x daily now on EWR-SEA to 3x next month.

Wow! It looks like the 3rd flight starts on June 3rd. Alaska's interim schedule is currently updated through June 16, which likely means that 3x daily on SEA-EWR is solidified (not subject to change, like the rest of their interim schedule is).

airlinepeanuts wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

AS is being relentless to B6. Going from 1x daily now on EWR-SEA to 3x next month.

AS has gone to 3x daily EWR several times over the last few years, the frequency on that route they adjust a lot.

Yeah, I seem to remember 3x daily in 2019. It's just surprising that they would bring it back up to pre-COVID capacity so soon.

AC4500 wrote:

It's just surprising that they would bring it back up to pre-COVID capacity so soon.

Americans are done with lockdowns.

AC4500 wrote:

airlinepeanuts wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

AS is being relentless to B6. Going from 1x daily now on EWR-SEA to 3x next month.

AS has gone to 3x daily EWR several times over the last few years, the frequency on that route they adjust a lot.

Yeah, I seem to remember 3x daily in 2019. It's just surprising that they would bring it back up to pre-COVID capacity so soon.

That’s what I’m trying to point out here

Nicknuzzii wrote:

AC4500 wrote:

airlinepeanuts wrote:

AS has gone to 3x daily EWR several times over the last few years, the frequency on that route they adjust a lot.

Yeah, I seem to remember 3x daily in 2019. It's just surprising that they would bring it back up to pre-COVID capacity so soon.

That’s what I’m trying to point out here

That might also be, in part, Alaska's response to B6 entering the SEA-EWR market.

The interim schedule has been updated to August 1st.

A bit of an interesting note here for those who may be interested in Alaska's flight schedule dynamics, it looks like they are now scheduling departure times down to the minute instead of every five minutes. For example, Alaska's SEA-ORD departure times from now to June 16 are:
7:00 AM
10:05 AM
12:40 PM
5:50 PM
11:55 PM

From June 17 onward, the departure times are:
8:14 AM
10:41 AM
12:42 PM
5:56 PM
11:56 PM

Does scheduling departure times like this improve their operational efficiency? It should also be noted that some high-frequency routes appear to be excluded from this scheduling method (some are SEA-ANC/PDX/SAN/SFO/SJC/GEG). Also, secondary hubs like PDX and SAN appear to be completely excluded from this scheduling method altogether, but that may be because Alaska doesn't use time banks in building their PDX and SAN schedules.

I can’t believe how small they are staying in NYC. Looks like they are really feeling the effects of B6.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

I can’t believe how small they are staying in NYC. Looks like they are really feeling the effects of B6.

With business travel still cratered, I don't think NYC is a market to throw a lot of resources at right now.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

I can’t believe how small they are staying in NYC. Looks like they are really feeling the effects of B6.

NYC remains a weak market. Nothing to do with JetBlue. Until very recently LAX’s largest transcon market became Miami. In fact I think Miami probably still might be.

In July, it looks like PDX-LAS and PDX-PHX are at just 2x daily and only 1x on Saturdays. Are they really struggling that much against WN and the ULCCs?

However, it looks like they are now finally going to fly PDX-SBP and SAN-SBP.

MAH4546 wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

I can’t believe how small they are staying in NYC. Looks like they are really feeling the effects of B6.

NYC remains a weak market. Nothing to do with JetBlue. Until very recently LAX’s largest transcon market became Miami. In fact I think Miami probably still might be.

Yet JetBlue is flying about as much capacity this May on peak days out of nyc airports as they did in 2019.

tphuang wrote:

MAH4546 wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

I can’t believe how small they are staying in NYC. Looks like they are really feeling the effects of B6.

NYC remains a weak market. Nothing to do with JetBlue. Until very recently LAX’s largest transcon market became Miami. In fact I think Miami probably still might be.

Yet JetBlue is flying about as much capacity this May on peak days out of nyc airports as they did in 2019.

Apples and oranges. JFK is one of JetBlue's largest hubs. Of course they're flying significant capacity from JFK.

AC4500 wrote:

In July, it looks like PDX-LAS and PDX-PHX are at just 2x daily and only 1x on Saturdays. Are they really struggling that much against WN and the ULCCs?

However, it looks like they are now finally going to fly PDX-SBP and SAN-SBP.

I'm a bit surprised about PDX-LAS, but PDX-PHX has historically dropped to 1x or 2x daily in summer months. I don't think the ULCC's have anything to do with it.

ASFlyer wrote:

tphuang wrote:

MAH4546 wrote:

NYC remains a weak market. Nothing to do with JetBlue. Until very recently LAX’s largest transcon market became Miami. In fact I think Miami probably still might be.

Yet JetBlue is flying about as much capacity this May on peak days out of nyc airports as they did in 2019.

Apples and oranges. JFK is one of JetBlue's largest hubs. Of course they're flying significant capacity from JFK.

Not really. The 2 airlines have taken different approach here. AS has decided to take A320 series out of its fleet and the incoming MAX will not fully replace them until 2023 in terms of active aircraft. So, it's not a surprise that some of the non-SEA mainline flight of long stage length will take a while to come back (if they ever do). B6 has decided to not retire any aircraft (including E90) during this time and continue to add fleet complexity with A321LR and A220.

AS has obviously taken a path that will allow it to save a lot of money over the next couple of years. It's 2021 CAPEX is minimal due to getting that sweet heart MAX deal. JetBlue's 2021 Q1 capex is outrageous ($295 million, even more than pre-COVID Q1s). The end result is that AS has been burning a lot less cash. B6 has been spending money like a drunken sailor in order to try to capture the upside of a recovery. We will find out in a few years whether or not B6's free spending market share battle approach will make up for the high cash burn they incurred during COVID time.

It must be said that AS could've taken an aggressive recovery approach too and kept A320 in service. It had a lot less debt than the Big 3.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

ASFlyer wrote:

tphuang wrote:

Yet JetBlue is flying about as much capacity this May on peak days out of nyc airports as they did in 2019.

Apples and oranges. JFK is one of JetBlue's largest hubs. Of course they're flying significant capacity from JFK.

And for EWR?

part of the general NYC market really. B6 has been a lot more aggressive about moving into new markets and expanding their presence in the NYC area. If all goes well for them, they'll be the one of the biggest, if not THE biggest airline out of the NYC area - including JFK, LGA and EWR. Nevertheless, they're rooted in NYC - as Tphuang mentioned, they've grown their fleet through Covid - those planes have to go somewhere. NYC is the most solid of their bases - EWR is a natural extension of that and they seem to be going for it in a big way.

tphuang wrote:

ASFlyer wrote:

tphuang wrote:

Yet JetBlue is flying about as much capacity this May on peak days out of nyc airports as they did in 2019.

Apples and oranges. JFK is one of JetBlue's largest hubs. Of course they're flying significant capacity from JFK.

Not really. The 2 airlines have taken different approach here. AS has decided to take A320 series out of its fleet and the incoming MAX will not fully replace them until 2023 in terms of active aircraft. So, it's not a surprise that some of the non-SEA mainline flight of long stage length will take a while to come back (if they ever do). B6 has decided to not retire any aircraft (including E90) during this time and continue to add fleet complexity with A321LR and A220.

AS has obviously taken a path that will allow it to save a lot of money over the next couple of years. It's 2021 CAPEX is minimal due to getting that sweet heart MAX deal. JetBlue's 2021 Q1 capex is outrageous ($295 million, even more than pre-COVID Q1s). The end result is that AS has been burning a lot less cash. B6 has been spending money like a drunken sailor in order to try to capture the upside of a recovery. We will find out in a few years whether or not B6's free spending market share battle approach will make up for the high cash burn they incurred during COVID time.

It must be said that AS could've taken an aggressive recovery approach too and kept A320 in service. It had a lot less debt than the Big 3.

I would agree that AS took the opportunity to shed the more expensive planes from it's fleet. JFK though is a no brainer for B6 though. Right now, they have an opportunity that they may not get again. Take a look at AS at SEA. May for AS in SEA is pretty much on par with May in 2019. They're doing the same thing B6 is doing from JFK - building it out while others (in SEA's case, others would be DL) aren't being as aggressive. DL hasn't trimmed SEA as much as other hubs but AS has definitely been more aggressive in maintaining and adding back flights at SEA than DL. We'll see what happens. AS has always been a conservative company that prefers to have a good cushion in the bank. They've been stepping outside of the box more but are quick to pull back if they don't see results.

tphuang wrote:

MAH4546 wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

I can’t believe how small they are staying in NYC. Looks like they are really feeling the effects of B6.

NYC remains a weak market. Nothing to do with JetBlue. Until very recently LAX’s largest transcon market became Miami. In fact I think Miami probably still might be.

Yet JetBlue is flying about as much capacity this May on peak days out of nyc airports as they did in 2019.

Ah, you of course qualified that with peak days since your statement otherwise isn’t true.

Until very recently JetBlue was flying more Miami-LA capacity than NYC- LA capacity. The market is depressed. NYC is JetBlue’s home and it’s being more aggressive in flying capacity, even if the planes are empty.

MAH4546 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

MAH4546 wrote:

NYC remains a weak market. Nothing to do with JetBlue. Until very recently LAX’s largest transcon market became Miami. In fact I think Miami probably still might be.

Yet JetBlue is flying about as much capacity this May on peak days out of nyc airports as they did in 2019.

Ah, you of course qualified that with peak days since your statement otherwise isn’t true.

Until very recently JetBlue was flying more Miami-LA capacity than NYC- LA capacity. The market is depressed. NYC is JetBlue’s home and it’s being more aggressive in flying capacity, even if the planes are empty.

Do you have any proof their flights out of NYC are more empty than system wide? Their no such evidence in T-100 number. They got 8 flights a day on NYC-LAX market and 6 to 7 flights a day on SoFla-LAX. And NYC-LAX will continue to increase in June/July.

They fly a little less on off peak days both pre and during COVID, but I've also measured the departure count peak days. They are doing 192 departures per day in May vs around 200 a day in 2019 May. And with their summer cut, they are doing about 250 departures in July as we speak vs around 215 in 2019 May.

So yes, if you want to make a play for NYC market, the demand is coming back pretty strongly for leisure market. The fact is AS is concentrated on SEA right now, which means its transcon business in other markets are going to take time to recover. And that could have implication on their gate resources in a place like EWR.

N421QX, the horizon heritage Q is headed to CYAM via KBIL for heavy maintenance. That means the OSU livery, Q440QX, should be returning. If it goes to KGEG for paint I wonder if it will get the modern look a la the UW plane.

Anyone have any idea when Alaska will be flying their new MAX again?

All four are scheduled on the 17th

ATSS wrote:

ATSS wrote:

All four are now scheduled on the 18th

Yes!! Looking forward to it. I still like the 321 a little better though.

Hoping AS does SEA-SGU.

alohashirts wrote:

Hoping AS does SEA-SGU.

SkyWest non-revs would certainly take advanrage. That doesn’t pay the bills though.

Alaska announces BUR-STS, more SNA/SAN-STS flights: https://newsroom.alaskaair.com/2021-04- ... oma-County

BUR-STS was announced by Avelo last week.

alohashirts wrote:

Hoping AS does SEA-SGU.

That seems a little optimistic since they don't even get SFO or LAX-SGU according to ITA Matrix schedules for August.

alohashirts wrote:

Hoping AS does SEA-SGU.

Does Skywest have a maintenance base in SGU by chance? Perhaps they can cycle planes that need checks?