Alaska adding flights on SEA-AUS from 3x to 4x daily and PDX-AUS from 1x to 2x daily this summer. Will be using E175s on the new added flights.

I don't believe there's *any* footage of aircraft taking off and landing at the old Robert Mueller? I see plenty of photos but the only video I see of an aircraft operating out of there is this one. An AA DC10 seen from above in a hot air balloon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dRnUM1HvM8

I remember a couple of times when I was young aircraft buzzing right over the highway... real low of course.

Even rarer, probably nobody has ever recorded a landing or takeoff from inside the aircraft?

CarlosSi wrote:

I don't believe there's *any* footage of aircraft taking off and landing at the old Robert Mueller? I see plenty of photos but the only video I see of an aircraft operating out of there is this one. An AA DC10 seen from above in a hot air balloon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dRnUM1HvM8

I remember a couple of times when I was young aircraft buzzing right over the highway... real low of course.

Even rarer, probably nobody has ever recorded a landing or takeoff from inside the aircraft?

Only one I've ever seen was on Mueller's last day with WN flying Lone Star One to the new AUS. Although that was news footage. I found that on YouTube.

https://youtu.be/xEkbO3BW0M0

WN732 wrote:

CarlosSi wrote:

I don't believe there's *any* footage of aircraft taking off and landing at the old Robert Mueller? I see plenty of photos but the only video I see of an aircraft operating out of there is this one. An AA DC10 seen from above in a hot air balloon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dRnUM1HvM8

I remember a couple of times when I was young aircraft buzzing right over the highway... real low of course.

Even rarer, probably nobody has ever recorded a landing or takeoff from inside the aircraft?

Only one I've ever seen was on Mueller's last day with WN flying Lone Star One to the new AUS. Although that was news footage. I found that on YouTube.

https://youtu.be/xEkbO3BW0M0

Thanks for this! I'd forgotten that WN had some seats facing each other.

I remain "bitter and angry" (not really, lol) that I missed the old AUS by one year. As well, I missed Kai Tak (HKG) by one year, instead landing at the boring-landing-approach Chek Lap Kok. And I missed Stapleton by literally 10 days, landing at DIA (DEN) when its runways were still (mostly) clean, with just a few dozen twin streaks of rubber!

Wacko55 wrote:

Alaska adding flights on SEA-AUS from 3x to 4x daily and PDX-AUS from 1x to 2x daily this summer. Will be using E175s on the new added flights.

Good. More eye candy for this GA pilot out of 50R (Lockhart). Flying above AUS's class charlie airspace has become a favorite pastime. Just a couple of weeks ago a pax of mine filmed a FedEx -10 on final to 18L. That was very cool to watch.

Western727 wrote:

Wacko55 wrote:

Alaska adding flights on SEA-AUS from 3x to 4x daily and PDX-AUS from 1x to 2x daily this summer. Will be using E175s on the new added flights.

Good. More eye candy for this GA pilot out of 50R (Lockhart). Flying above AUS's class charlie airspace has become a favorite pastime. Just a couple of weeks ago a pax of mine filmed a FedEx -10 on final to 18L. That was very cool to watch.

The views from the spotter park have been great since 18R is closed. The regular MD-10/11's have been a treat since they rarely ever made their way over there before.

Western727 wrote:

WN732 wrote:

CarlosSi wrote:

I don't believe there's *any* footage of aircraft taking off and landing at the old Robert Mueller? I see plenty of photos but the only video I see of an aircraft operating out of there is this one. An AA DC10 seen from above in a hot air balloon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dRnUM1HvM8

I remember a couple of times when I was young aircraft buzzing right over the highway... real low of course.

Even rarer, probably nobody has ever recorded a landing or takeoff from inside the aircraft?

Only one I've ever seen was on Mueller's last day with WN flying Lone Star One to the new AUS. Although that was news footage. I found that on YouTube.

https://youtu.be/xEkbO3BW0M0

Thanks for this! I'd forgotten that WN had some seats facing each other.

I remain "bitter and angry" (not really, lol) that I missed the old AUS by one year. As well, I missed Kai Tak (HKG) by one year, instead landing at the boring-landing-approach Chek Lap Kok. And I missed Stapleton by literally 10 days, landing at DIA (DEN) when its runways were still (mostly) clean, with just a few dozen twin streaks of rubber!

Heh, I missed it by.... 7 or 8. You were able to fly to Hong Kong but not out of Mueller sooner? A lot of oldies you can’t say you landed at.

I’ve flown above an MD10 as well. (Almost above the BA747 but it was farther out).

Six new non-stops on Southwest out of AUS

https://www.swamedia.com/releases/relea ... s-fly-free

SMF-AUS is a resumption but I believe all of the others are new. Does anyone have a peak daily flight count for WN at AUS?

Ah cool, there’s that Burbank route!

WN732 wrote:

SMF-AUS is a resumption but I believe all of the others are new. Does anyone have a peak daily flight count for WN at AUS?

SLC is also a resumption.

Still no SEA resumption!

Heh, I always tell my friends these additions are great, if only I can actually fly way more often and take advantage of those probably low fares as a result of the competition.

Good to be able to fly nonstop on southwest to almost anywhere from AUS. Reeeeally wish I can actually connect a lot of dots... I can only dream now.

CarlosSi wrote:

Still no SEA resumption!

Heh, I always tell my friends these additions are great, if only I can actually fly way more often and take advantage of those probably low fares as a result of the competition.

Good to be able to fly nonstop on southwest to almost anywhere from AUS. Reeeeally wish I can actually connect a lot of dots... I can only dream now.

What are some cities left for them to serve from AUS they don’t serve ?

Wneast wrote:

CarlosSi wrote:

Still no SEA resumption!

Heh, I always tell my friends these additions are great, if only I can actually fly way more often and take advantage of those probably low fares as a result of the competition.

Good to be able to fly nonstop on southwest to almost anywhere from AUS. Reeeeally wish I can actually connect a lot of dots... I can only dream now.

What are some cities left for them to serve from AUS they don’t serve ?

One city that comes to mind for me is MKE. They have a sizable Southwest presence as well. Would be a venture into Wisconsin, a state that hasn’t been touched by AUS in awhile. I think Frontier tried MKE in the past.

CarlosSi wrote:

I don't believe there's *any* footage of aircraft taking off and landing at the old Robert Mueller? I see plenty of photos but the only video I see of an aircraft operating out of there is this one. An AA DC10 seen from above in a hot air balloon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dRnUM1HvM8

I remember a couple of times when I was young aircraft buzzing right over the highway... real low of course.

Even rarer, probably nobody has ever recorded a landing or takeoff from inside the aircraft?

I don't remember that 13L runway being at Mueller, interesting. Seeing that DC-10 take the standard left turn after take off from Mueller brings back memories.

Wneast wrote:

CarlosSi wrote:

Still no SEA resumption!

Heh, I always tell my friends these additions are great, if only I can actually fly way more often and take advantage of those probably low fares as a result of the competition.

Good to be able to fly nonstop on southwest to almost anywhere from AUS. Reeeeally wish I can actually connect a lot of dots... I can only dream now.

What are some cities left for them to serve from AUS they don’t serve ?

NYC (since they closed Newark).

CarlosSi wrote:

Still no SEA resumption!

Heh, I always tell my friends these additions are great, if only I can actually fly way more often and take advantage of those probably low fares as a result of the competition.

Good to be able to fly nonstop on southwest to almost anywhere from AUS. Reeeeally wish I can actually connect a lot of dots... I can only dream now.

Totally with you on the dots. I'd love to see a SEA resumption myself.

masonh2479 wrote:

Wneast wrote:

CarlosSi wrote:

Still no SEA resumption!

Heh, I always tell my friends these additions are great, if only I can actually fly way more often and take advantage of those probably low fares as a result of the competition.

Good to be able to fly nonstop on southwest to almost anywhere from AUS. Reeeeally wish I can actually connect a lot of dots... I can only dream now.

What are some cities left for them to serve from AUS they don’t serve ?

One city that comes to mind for me is MKE. They have a sizable Southwest presence as well. Would be a venture into Wisconsin, a state that hasn’t been touched by AUS in awhile. I think Frontier tried MKE in the past.

MKE is right up there among the biggest cities without nonstop AUS flights.

Here are AUS markets averaging 500 to 35 daily passengers (both ways combined) for the full year 2019. Obviously the pandemic subsequently disrupted demand so take these with a grain of salt. Markets in bold white had regular nonstop services (not not necessarily year-round daily) during 2019. Markets in green were not served nonstop in 2019 and do not have service in 2021. CLE and ONT may belong on the green list as well, but I still left them as white because the stats here from 2019 were bolstered by nonstop flights then.


500 DTW
496 IAD
467 MSY
457 PDX
453 DCA
441 SLC
426 BNA
398 DFW
394 RDU
373 TPA
334 STL
321 ELP
319 CLT
297 SMF
297 IND
295 MIA
282 MCI
256 ABQ
246 CVQ
245 LGB
244 SNA
242 LGA ….... outside LGA perimeter
212 OAK
203 PIT
187 CLE ….... F9 but seeimgly not coming back
176 CMH
152 MKE
147 ONT ….... F9 but seeimgly not coming back
139 LBB
133 BDL
130 HOU
128 JAX
126 RIC
123 MEM
112 RNO
103 IAH
101 CHS
93 OMA
92 BHM
91 OKC
91 RSW
88 SDF
88 ORF
87 HRL
84 BUF
84 TUL
78 PVD
78 TUS
76 ALB
75 BOI …....New Alaska
75 DSM….... New Allegiant
71 AMA
71 MSN
71 GRR….... New Allegiant
69 LIT
69 GEG
66 GSP
61 GSO
60 BUR….... New Southwest
58 SYR
58 PNS….... New Spirit & Southwest
58 ROC
54 PWM
54 MAF
53 SAV
52 TYS …....New Allegiant
51 PBI
50 VPS….... New Allegiant
49 ECP ….... New Southwest
47 XNA …....New Allegiant
46 PSP
45 SBA
44 FAT
44 MHT
43 COS
40 CSG
39 MDT
39 SFB ….... New Allegiant
38 AVL …....New Allegiant
38 DAY
37 BZN …....New Allegiant
36 BTV
35 ILM

I went as far down as I did to point out how these stats are not necessarily telling of who gets flights and who does not. Certainly many of these new markets with comparably tiny historical traffic will only see seasonal flights a few times per week, and their markets will grow. But certainly several of the future AUS additions will come from higher on the list of unserved markets.

Most every market grows when flights are added to some extent and recovery of traffic leakage is a substantial part. Being only about 65 minutes (without traffic) from MKE to O'Hare leads to heavy leakage when MKE doesn't have reasonably competitive nonstop service. As an illustration Milwaukee-Houston and languished to the point where United had just two daily 50-seat ERJ's to IAH. In 2016 MKE-(IAH+HOU) was down to a mere 182 passengers per day on average. Enter a Southwest nonstop to HOU, then United upgrading to larger RJ and then adding a third flight, and Milwaukee-Houston grew about 91% by 2019 to 347/day. Some of that was fare stimulation but a great deal was retention of traffic which had been defecting for O'Hare. It would probably have continued to grow in 2020 as Southwest added a second nonstop to the schedule but the pandemic stopped that. It's by no means certain that a nonstop on AUS-MKE would similarly grow the market 9j1%, but there are almost certainly dozens of passengers using ORD who would pick MKE if flights existed.

It's such a strange environment these days it would hardly be a surprise for some of these larger unserved Austin markets to find the network carriers (including WN) coming in with point-to-point flights with the sort of frequencies, seasonality or even aircraft one would have never guessed a year ago.

knope2001 wrote:

masonh2479 wrote:

Wneast wrote:

What are some cities left for them to serve from AUS they don’t serve ?

One city that comes to mind for me is MKE. They have a sizable Southwest presence as well. Would be a venture into Wisconsin, a state that hasn’t been touched by AUS in awhile. I think Frontier tried MKE in the past.

MKE is right up there among the biggest cities without nonstop AUS flights.

Here are AUS markets averaging 500 to 35 daily passengers (both ways combined) for the full year 2019. Obviously the pandemic subsequently disrupted demand so take these with a grain of salt. Markets in bold white had regular nonstop services (not not necessarily year-round daily) during 2019. Markets in green were not served nonstop in 2019 and do not have service in 2021. CLE and ONT may belong on the green list as well, but I still left them as white because the stats here from 2019 were bolstered by nonstop flights then.


500 DTW
496 IAD
467 MSY
457 PDX
453 DCA
441 SLC
426 BNA
398 DFW
394 RDU
373 TPA
334 STL
321 ELP
319 CLT
297 SMF
297 IND
295 MIA
282 MCI
256 ABQ
246 CVQ
245 LGB
244 SNA
242 LGA ….... outside LGA perimeter
212 OAK
203 PIT
187 CLE ….... F9 but seeimgly not coming back
176 CMH
152 MKE
147 ONT ….... F9 but seeimgly not coming back
139 LBB
133 BDL
130 HOU
128 JAX
126 RIC
123 MEM
112 RNO
103 IAH
101 CHS
93 OMA
92 BHM
91 OKC
91 RSW
88 SDF
88 ORF
87 HRL
84 BUF
84 TUL
78 PVD
78 TUS
76 ALB
75 BOI …....New Alaska
75 DSM….... New Allegiant
71 AMA
71 MSN
71 GRR….... New Allegiant
69 LIT
69 GEG
66 GSP
61 GSO
60 BUR….... New Southwest
58 SYR
58 PNS….... New Spirit & Southwest
58 ROC
54 PWM
54 MAF
53 SAV
52 TYS …....New Allegiant
51 PBI
50 VPS….... New Allegiant
49 ECP ….... New Southwest
47 XNA …....New Allegiant
46 PSP
45 SBA
44 FAT
44 MHT
43 COS
40 CSG
39 MDT
39 SFB ….... New Allegiant
38 AVL …....New Allegiant
38 DAY
37 BZN …....New Allegiant
36 BTV
35 ILM

I went as far down as I did to point out how these stats are not necessarily telling of who gets flights and who does not. Certainly many of these new markets with comparably tiny historical traffic will only see seasonal flights a few times per week, and their markets will grow. But certainly several of the future AUS additions will come from higher on the list of unserved markets.

Most every market grows when flights are added to some extent and recovery of traffic leakage is a substantial part. Being only about 65 minutes (without traffic) from MKE to O'Hare leads to heavy leakage when MKE doesn't have reasonably competitive nonstop service. As an illustration Milwaukee-Houston and languished to the point where United had just two daily 50-seat ERJ's to IAH. In 2016 MKE-(IAH+HOU) was down to a mere 182 passengers per day on average. Enter a Southwest nonstop to HOU, then United upgrading to larger RJ and then adding a third flight, and Milwaukee-Houston grew about 91% by 2019 to 347/day. Some of that was fare stimulation but a great deal was retention of traffic which had been defecting for O'Hare. It would probably have continued to grow in 2020 as Southwest added a second nonstop to the schedule but the pandemic stopped that. It's by no means certain that a nonstop on AUS-MKE would similarly grow the market 9j1%, but there are almost certainly dozens of passengers using ORD who would pick MKE if flights existed.

It's such a strange environment these days it would hardly be a surprise for some of these larger unserved Austin markets to find the network carriers (including WN) coming in with point-to-point flights with the sort of frequencies, seasonality or even aircraft one would have never guessed a year ago.

I could see Geg for sure being added maybe by southwest but if not probably Alaska

A bunch of those cities including JAX, CMH, and MKE were served by frontier during the great “dartboard additions”, but as you can see now, only an infitessimal amount of routes made it (DEN and the usual MCO and LAS leisure markets). Spirit honestly took their lunch on a few routes like ATL and ORD.

I believe that was 2018 though.

Thanks for the detailed post knope! I agree that a lot of these markets will have a chance at getting filled given the times we are in.

knope2001 wrote:

masonh2479 wrote:

Wneast wrote:

What are some cities left for them to serve from AUS they don’t serve ?

One city that comes to mind for me is MKE. They have a sizable Southwest presence as well. Would be a venture into Wisconsin, a state that hasn’t been touched by AUS in awhile. I think Frontier tried MKE in the past.

MKE is right up there among the biggest cities without nonstop AUS flights.


I went as far down as I did to point out how these stats are not necessarily telling of who gets flights and who does not. Certainly many of these new markets with comparably tiny historical traffic will only see seasonal flights a few times per week, and their markets will grow. But certainly several of the future AUS additions will come from higher on the list of unserved markets.

Most every market grows when flights are added to some extent and recovery of traffic leakage is a substantial part. Being only about 65 minutes (without traffic) from MKE to O'Hare leads to heavy leakage when MKE doesn't have reasonably competitive nonstop service. As an illustration Milwaukee-Houston and languished to the point where United had just two daily 50-seat ERJ's to IAH. In 2016 MKE-(IAH+HOU) was down to a mere 182 passengers per day on average. Enter a Southwest nonstop to HOU, then United upgrading to larger RJ and then adding a third flight, and Milwaukee-Houston grew about 91% by 2019 to 347/day. Some of that was fare stimulation but a great deal was retention of traffic which had been defecting for O'Hare. It would probably have continued to grow in 2020 as Southwest added a second nonstop to the schedule but the pandemic stopped that. It's by no means certain that a nonstop on AUS-MKE would similarly grow the market 9j1%, but there are almost certainly dozens of passengers using ORD who would pick MKE if flights existed.

It's such a strange environment these days it would hardly be a surprise for some of these larger unserved Austin markets to find the network carriers (including WN) coming in with point-to-point flights with the sort of frequencies, seasonality or even aircraft one would have never guessed a year ago.

Thanks for the list and details @knope

WN has lots more potential to grow in AUS, especially to their strengths such as MKE as @wneast pointed out. I could also see WN adding CMH along with it. BHM/TUL/OKC/LIT/MEM could be others and in the WN's sweet spot from a length of haul perspective.

I give AA 12mo until they pull down their current AUS expansion.

Boiler905 wrote:

knope2001 wrote:

masonh2479 wrote:

One city that comes to mind for me is MKE. They have a sizable Southwest presence as well. Would be a venture into Wisconsin, a state that hasn’t been touched by AUS in awhile. I think Frontier tried MKE in the past.

MKE is right up there among the biggest cities without nonstop AUS flights.


I went as far down as I did to point out how these stats are not necessarily telling of who gets flights and who does not. Certainly many of these new markets with comparably tiny historical traffic will only see seasonal flights a few times per week, and their markets will grow. But certainly several of the future AUS additions will come from higher on the list of unserved markets.

Most every market grows when flights are added to some extent and recovery of traffic leakage is a substantial part. Being only about 65 minutes (without traffic) from MKE to O'Hare leads to heavy leakage when MKE doesn't have reasonably competitive nonstop service. As an illustration Milwaukee-Houston and languished to the point where United had just two daily 50-seat ERJ's to IAH. In 2016 MKE-(IAH+HOU) was down to a mere 182 passengers per day on average. Enter a Southwest nonstop to HOU, then United upgrading to larger RJ and then adding a third flight, and Milwaukee-Houston grew about 91% by 2019 to 347/day. Some of that was fare stimulation but a great deal was retention of traffic which had been defecting for O'Hare. It would probably have continued to grow in 2020 as Southwest added a second nonstop to the schedule but the pandemic stopped that. It's by no means certain that a nonstop on AUS-MKE would similarly grow the market 9j1%, but there are almost certainly dozens of passengers using ORD who would pick MKE if flights existed.

It's such a strange environment these days it would hardly be a surprise for some of these larger unserved Austin markets to find the network carriers (including WN) coming in with point-to-point flights with the sort of frequencies, seasonality or even aircraft one would have never guessed a year ago.

Thanks for the list and details @knope

WN has lots more potential to grow in AUS, especially to their strengths such as MKE as @wneast pointed out. I could also see WN adding CMH along with it. BHM/TUL/OKC/LIT/MEM could be others and in the WN's sweet spot from a length of haul perspective.

I give AA 12mo until they pull down their current AUS expansion.

Let’s be real are any airlines going to be able to compete with southwest and what they could offer there they could easily add many of those markets from Austin and other airlines would have to put a lot of money to compete in offering i think

Wneast wrote:

Boiler905 wrote:

knope2001 wrote:

MKE is right up there among the biggest cities without nonstop AUS flights.


I went as far down as I did to point out how these stats are not necessarily telling of who gets flights and who does not. Certainly many of these new markets with comparably tiny historical traffic will only see seasonal flights a few times per week, and their markets will grow. But certainly several of the future AUS additions will come from higher on the list of unserved markets.

Most every market grows when flights are added to some extent and recovery of traffic leakage is a substantial part. Being only about 65 minutes (without traffic) from MKE to O'Hare leads to heavy leakage when MKE doesn't have reasonably competitive nonstop service. As an illustration Milwaukee-Houston and languished to the point where United had just two daily 50-seat ERJ's to IAH. In 2016 MKE-(IAH+HOU) was down to a mere 182 passengers per day on average. Enter a Southwest nonstop to HOU, then United upgrading to larger RJ and then adding a third flight, and Milwaukee-Houston grew about 91% by 2019 to 347/day. Some of that was fare stimulation but a great deal was retention of traffic which had been defecting for O'Hare. It would probably have continued to grow in 2020 as Southwest added a second nonstop to the schedule but the pandemic stopped that. It's by no means certain that a nonstop on AUS-MKE would similarly grow the market 9j1%, but there are almost certainly dozens of passengers using ORD who would pick MKE if flights existed.

It's such a strange environment these days it would hardly be a surprise for some of these larger unserved Austin markets to find the network carriers (including WN) coming in with point-to-point flights with the sort of frequencies, seasonality or even aircraft one would have never guessed a year ago.

Thanks for the list and details @knope

WN has lots more potential to grow in AUS, especially to their strengths such as MKE as @wneast pointed out. I could also see WN adding CMH along with it. BHM/TUL/OKC/LIT/MEM could be others and in the WN's sweet spot from a length of haul perspective.

I give AA 12mo until they pull down their current AUS expansion.

Let’s be real are any airlines going to be able to compete with southwest and what they could offer there they could easily add many of those markets from Austin and other airlines would have to put a lot of money to compete in offering i think

I highly doubt it, Frontier tried and immediately pulled out of a lot of their Austin routes, Delta is all bark and no bite in terms of their “focus city”, and we’ll see how long AA lasts.

Wneast wrote:

I could see Geg for sure being added maybe by southwest but if not probably Alaska

Not a network carrier, but why not G4?

AVLAirlineFreq wrote:

Wneast wrote:

I could see Geg for sure being added maybe by southwest but if not probably Alaska

Not a network carrier, but why not G4?

I mean they could but Alaska added BOI that’s why I see them adding it and there a large carrier at GEG

masonh2479 wrote:

Wneast wrote:

Boiler905 wrote:

Thanks for the list and details @knope

WN has lots more potential to grow in AUS, especially to their strengths such as MKE as @wneast pointed out. I could also see WN adding CMH along with it. BHM/TUL/OKC/LIT/MEM could be others and in the WN's sweet spot from a length of haul perspective.

I give AA 12mo until they pull down their current AUS expansion.

Let’s be real are any airlines going to be able to compete with southwest and what they could offer there they could easily add many of those markets from Austin and other airlines would have to put a lot of money to compete in offering i think

I highly doubt it, Frontier tried and immediately pulled out of a lot of their Austin routes, Delta is all bark and no bite in terms of their “focus city”, and we’ll see how long AA lasts.

Can’t speak for the other cities, but at least at CMH there is a world of difference between F9 and WN. F9 is a latecomer that serves only 2 destinations (DEN/MCO) and has virtually no loyalty in town. It relies almost solely on web searches for vacation bargain fares and point of sale from those hubs.

WN, by contrast, serves 18 destinations (soon to be 19 with MYR), including two other Texas cities- and has a huge FF base in town. There would be no problem filling at least 1x daily 737 to AUS. Profitability is of course, a different matter but I think the route is just a matter of time.

CMHtraveler wrote:

masonh2479 wrote:

Wneast wrote:

Let’s be real are any airlines going to be able to compete with southwest and what they could offer there they could easily add many of those markets from Austin and other airlines would have to put a lot of money to compete in offering i think

I highly doubt it, Frontier tried and immediately pulled out of a lot of their Austin routes, Delta is all bark and no bite in terms of their “focus city”, and we’ll see how long AA lasts.

Can’t speak for the other cities, but at least at CMH there is a world of difference between F9 and WN. F9 is a latecomer that serves only 2 destinations (DEN/MCO) and has virtually no loyalty in town. It relies almost solely on web searches for vacation bargain fares and point of sale from those hubs.

WN, by contrast, serves 18 destinations (soon to be 19 with MYR), including two other Texas cities- and has a huge FF base in town. There would be no problem filling at least 1x daily 737 to AUS. Profitability is of course, a different matter but I think the route is just a matter of time.

Hmmm while I agree on the premise that AA has been trying to solidify more of a focus city than Delta, perhaps Delta is profiting better at AUS than its other competitors, despite having a smaller footprint than the now expanded AA?

AA is trying to sell itself here to flyers by trying to gain loyalties by offering more nonstop options, but perhaps Delta is more subtle and trying to gain loyalties by having a better, more reliable product and then offering it to all of its hubs in the US? One-stop with Delta, or nonstop with AA? That's for people to decide.

CMHtraveler wrote:

masonh2479 wrote:

Wneast wrote:

Let’s be real are any airlines going to be able to compete with southwest and what they could offer there they could easily add many of those markets from Austin and other airlines would have to put a lot of money to compete in offering i think

I highly doubt it, Frontier tried and immediately pulled out of a lot of their Austin routes, Delta is all bark and no bite in terms of their “focus city”, and we’ll see how long AA lasts.

Can’t speak for the other cities, but at least at CMH there is a world of difference between F9 and WN. F9 is a latecomer that serves only 2 destinations (DEN/MCO) and has virtually no loyalty in town. It relies almost solely on web searches for vacation bargain fares and point of sale from those hubs.

WN, by contrast, serves 18 destinations (soon to be 19 with MYR), including two other Texas cities- and has a huge FF base in town. There would be no problem filling at least 1x daily 737 to AUS. Profitability is of course, a different matter but I think the route is just a matter of time.

Agreed, we could very well see a nonstop by the end of the year if the domestic market really does boom like I think it will. I am not sure how many spare 737s Southwest has but they should have plenty to add all they want to this year. I am not certain about the 737MAX, I do now know how many they intend to introduce to service this year.

Considering AUS, I would say expansion is really limited on gates right now. Gate space just seems tight at AUS, even after COVID.

CarlosSi wrote:

CMHtraveler wrote:

masonh2479 wrote:

I highly doubt it, Frontier tried and immediately pulled out of a lot of their Austin routes, Delta is all bark and no bite in terms of their “focus city”, and we’ll see how long AA lasts.

Can’t speak for the other cities, but at least at CMH there is a world of difference between F9 and WN. F9 is a latecomer that serves only 2 destinations (DEN/MCO) and has virtually no loyalty in town. It relies almost solely on web searches for vacation bargain fares and point of sale from those hubs.

WN, by contrast, serves 18 destinations (soon to be 19 with MYR), including two other Texas cities- and has a huge FF base in town. There would be no problem filling at least 1x daily 737 to AUS. Profitability is of course, a different matter but I think the route is just a matter of time.

Hmmm while I agree on the premise that AA has been trying to solidify more of a focus city than Delta, perhaps Delta is profiting better at AUS than its other competitors, despite having a smaller footprint than the now expanded AA?

AA is trying to sell itself here to flyers by trying to gain loyalties by offering more nonstop options, but perhaps Delta is more subtle and trying to gain loyalties by having a better, more reliable product and then offering it to all of its hubs in the US? One-stop with Delta, or nonstop with AA? That's for people to decide.

That is a good point Carlos, I do think that AA’s aggression will pay off, but so will Delta’s strategy. Considering competitors to Southwest at Austin, I would say in the past Frontier was best set up to compete, but now AA is in line. I do not see AA ever beating or coming close to Southwest in Austin, but they are putting up more of a fight than Delta. This is also surrounding Delta’s continued claims that Austin is a focus city without any P2P to non hubs/focus cities. I would like Austin to work as a “focus city” for Delta but I really do se Delta as more of a hub and spoke airline company than focus city.

knope2001 wrote:

masonh2479 wrote:

Wneast wrote:

What are some cities left for them to serve from AUS they don’t serve ?

One city that comes to mind for me is MKE. They have a sizable Southwest presence as well. Would be a venture into Wisconsin, a state that hasn’t been touched by AUS in awhile. I think Frontier tried MKE in the past.

MKE is right up there among the biggest cities without nonstop AUS flights.

Here are AUS markets averaging 500 to 35 daily passengers (both ways combined) for the full year 2019.

[trimmed]

457 PDX

[trimmed]

Thanks for this, knope2001! I'm very curious about the 457 figure for PDX. I'm eager to see the SEA figure for comparison. Do you have that handy? Thanks in advance.

Wneast wrote:

AVLAirlineFreq wrote:

Wneast wrote:

I could see Geg for sure being added maybe by southwest but if not probably Alaska

Not a network carrier, but why not G4?

I mean they could but Alaska added BOI that’s why I see them adding it and there a large carrier at GEG

I don't see AUS-GEG happening. I grew up in SEA and grew up visiting family in and around Spokane. The city isn't up there in its offerings, generally only offering the nearby Coeur d'Alene across the state line in Idaho as a significant tourist attraction. Spokane's metro population is also relatively small at 573k, vs. 2.2m in Austin. Indeed Knope2001's list shows only 69 for GEG. Am I missing something?

CarlosSi wrote:

CMHtraveler wrote:

masonh2479 wrote:

I highly doubt it, Frontier tried and immediately pulled out of a lot of their Austin routes, Delta is all bark and no bite in terms of their “focus city”, and we’ll see how long AA lasts.

Can’t speak for the other cities, but at least at CMH there is a world of difference between F9 and WN. F9 is a latecomer that serves only 2 destinations (DEN/MCO) and has virtually no loyalty in town. It relies almost solely on web searches for vacation bargain fares and point of sale from those hubs.

WN, by contrast, serves 18 destinations (soon to be 19 with MYR), including two other Texas cities- and has a huge FF base in town. There would be no problem filling at least 1x daily 737 to AUS. Profitability is of course, a different matter but I think the route is just a matter of time.

Hmmm while I agree on the premise that AA has been trying to solidify more of a focus city than Delta, perhaps Delta is profiting better at AUS than its other competitors, despite having a smaller footprint than the now expanded AA?

AA is trying to sell itself here to flyers by trying to gain loyalties by offering more nonstop options, but perhaps Delta is more subtle and trying to gain loyalties by having a better, more reliable product and then offering it to all of its hubs in the US? One-stop with Delta, or nonstop with AA? That's for people to decide.

That is no strategy. The fact is, even without any expansion, AA had the lion’s share of business traffic at AUS. With AS entering the picture, that position just got solidified further. I honestly don’t see the need for AA to launch all these additional routes, and it wouldn’t matter whether the routes stay or not.

DL’s hubs are not where the traffic demand is to. Just offering connections is not the strategy to gain relevance in the market. If they want to be any more relevant in Austin, they are going to have to offer more relevant destinations there.

masonh2479 wrote:

CarlosSi wrote:

CMHtraveler wrote:

AA is trying to sell itself here to flyers by trying to gain loyalties by offering more nonstop options, but perhaps Delta is more subtle and trying to gain loyalties by having a better, more reliable product and then offering it to all of its hubs in the US? One-stop with Delta, or nonstop with AA? That's for people to decide.

That is a good point Carlos, I do think that AA’s aggression will pay off, but so will Delta’s strategy. Considering competitors to Southwest at Austin, I would say in the past Frontier was best set up to compete, but now AA is in line. I do not see AA ever beating or coming close to Southwest in Austin, but they are putting up more of a fight than Delta. This is also surrounding Delta’s continued claims that Austin is a focus city without any P2P to non hubs/focus cities. I would like Austin to work as a “focus city” for Delta but I really do se Delta as more of a hub and spoke airline company than focus city.[/quotE

American has a long history in Austin, as they pretty much overlapped the old Braniff route system (and Braniff was probably number one in the market in the 1970's and until they shut down. With that kind of history, and Austin being the state capital, I seriously doubt that American is going to roll over, especially for Delta. You are correct, Southwest is top dog in Austin, but they really can't match American in either network capability or being the first choice of most passengers desiring to fly on a Legacy carrier, IMHO. And Delta's inflight service, while typically consistent, doesn't seem to me to be anything that much nicer than anybody else's. The only thing I can tell is that they do have video monitors on most of their airplanes, while American and United are removing (or have removed) them. That's just not a big deal if you have your iPad (or similar) and can use the power outlets both American and United have added at most seats on most planes. Especially since the longest flights out of Austin (except Europe or Hawaii) are in the 2-3 hour range.

superjeff wrote:

masonh2479 wrote:

CarlosSi wrote:

That is a good point Carlos, I do think that AA’s aggression will pay off, but so will Delta’s strategy. Considering competitors to Southwest at Austin, I would say in the past Frontier was best set up to compete, but now AA is in line. I do not see AA ever beating or coming close to Southwest in Austin, but they are putting up more of a fight than Delta. This is also surrounding Delta’s continued claims that Austin is a focus city without any P2P to non hubs/focus cities. I would like Austin to work as a “focus city” for Delta but I really do se Delta as more of a hub and spoke airline company than focus city.[/quotE

American has a long history in Austin, as they pretty much overlapped the old Braniff route system (and Braniff was probably number one in the market in the 1970's and until they shut down. With that kind of history, and Austin being the state capital, I seriously doubt that American is going to roll over, especially for Delta. You are correct, Southwest is top dog in Austin, but they really can't match American in either network capability or being the first choice of most passengers desiring to fly on a Legacy carrier, IMHO. And Delta's inflight service, while typically consistent, doesn't seem to me to be anything that much nicer than anybody else's. The only thing I can tell is that they do have video monitors on most of their airplanes, while American and United are removing (or have removed) them. That's just not a big deal if you have your iPad (or similar) and can use the power outlets both American and United have added at most seats on most planes. Especially since the longest flights out of Austin (except Europe or Hawaii) are in the 2-3 hour range.

The 2-3 hour range isn't accurate for the longest (US mainland) flights out of Austin; BOS, PDX, SEA and NYC are all well over 4 hours to/from AUS westbound.

Western727 wrote:

knope2001 wrote:

masonh2479 wrote:

One city that comes to mind for me is MKE. They have a sizable Southwest presence as well. Would be a venture into Wisconsin, a state that hasn’t been touched by AUS in awhile. I think Frontier tried MKE in the past.

MKE is right up there among the biggest cities without nonstop AUS flights.

Here are AUS markets averaging 500 to 35 daily passengers (both ways combined) for the full year 2019.

[trimmed]

457 PDX

[trimmed]

Thanks for this, knope2001! I'm very curious about the 457 figure for PDX. I'm eager to see the SEA figure for comparison. Do you have that handy? Thanks in advance.

Glad I saved the whole sheet

1775 LAX
1534 DEN
1422 SFO
1300 JFK
1222 ORD
1069 LAS
1027 ATL
988 EWR
951 BOS
879 MCO
835 SEA
813 PHX
775 SAN
763 SJC
598 DAL
593 BWI
556 MSP
534 FLL
527 PHL
507 MDW

masonh2479 wrote:

Wneast wrote:

Boiler905 wrote:

Thanks for the list and details @knope

WN has lots more potential to grow in AUS, especially to their strengths such as MKE as @wneast pointed out. I could also see WN adding CMH along with it. BHM/TUL/OKC/LIT/MEM could be others and in the WN's sweet spot from a length of haul perspective.

I give AA 12mo until they pull down their current AUS expansion.

Let’s be real are any airlines going to be able to compete with southwest and what they could offer there they could easily add many of those markets from Austin and other airlines would have to put a lot of money to compete in offering i think

I highly doubt it, Frontier tried and immediately pulled out of a lot of their Austin routes, Delta is all bark and no bite in terms of their “focus city”, and we’ll see how long AA lasts.

Frontier's experience at AUS isn't especially meaningful given their track record of new city pairs not lasting long.

All 29 of these Frontier Austin markets from 2018 have subsequently been dropped.
Markets in green have someone else flying them nonstop now, white are currently unserved.
These are ranked by passengers per flight for trips operated in 2018.

Pax/fl ….. Seat/fl .... Load % … Market
159.0 ….. 180.3 ….. 88.2% ….. SAN
157.7 ….. 182.6 ….. 86.4% ….. PHL
157.6 ….. 182.9 ….. 86.1% ….. SEA
156.3 ….. 182.6 ….. 85.6% ….. DTW
155.7 ….. 182.6 ….. 85.3% ….. MSP
155.3 ….. 172.2 ….. 90.2% ….. ATL
151.2 ….. 183.6 ….. 82.4% ….. CLT
150.2 ….. 166.3 ….. 90.3% ….. IAD
147.5 ….. 182.0 ….. 81.0% ….. MKE
145.8 ….. 182.7 ….. 79.8% ….. JAX
145.3 ….. 182.2 ….. 79.8% ….. IND
145.2 ….. 177.1 ….. 82.0% ….. ONT
145.0 ….. 180.3 ….. 80.4% ….. MSY
144.3 ….. 183.1 ….. 78.8% ….. SNA
143.8 ….. 174.0 ….. 82.6% ….. SLC
142.5 ….. 182.6 ….. 78.0% ….. PDX
142.5 ….. 182.9 ….. 77.9% ….. BUF
141.7 ….. 182.2 ….. 77.8% ….. CVG
136.9 ….. 163.6 ….. 83.6% ….. SJC
136.9 ….. 176.1 ….. 77.7% ….. RDU
136.5 ….. 184.7 ….. 73.9% ….. SDF
132.5 ….. 182.5 ….. 72.6% ….. RNO
132.0 ….. 182.0 ….. 72.5% ….. CHS
128.0 ….. 182.4 ….. 70.2% ….. ABQ
126.9 ….. 151.2 ….. 84.0% ….. PHX
125.0 ….. 153.7 ….. 81.3% ….. CLE
123.7 ….. 152.3 ….. 81.2% ….. CMH
118.2 ….. 152.1 ….. 77.7% ….. OMA
115.6 ….. 180.9 ….. 63.9% ….. PVD

It's important to remember loads do not necessarily equal profits because there's no accounting for yield here. Take them with a grain of salt. But they do show that for the most part the traffic was there to be served. Now because these were all dumped one might think the markets were poor, However 18 were apparently good enough to now support service by somebody else. It wasn't necessarily the markets which were the problem.

To be fair nobody would think that (for example) Frontier dumping AUS-PHX means that there's not a substantial enough market between Austin and Phoenix to support air service. Of course it has service in spite of Frontier leaving. But many of these markets now have 2, 3,even 4 or more carriers serving them yet Frontier did not make a go of it. That suggests to me this big list of failed AUS markets for Frontier don't necessarily mean the quality of the markets were the primary the problem. Of course not every single one of these would be a certain winner if only somebody with better marketing, or more tenacity, or better yield management, etc. was to show up. But conversely it's just as misguided to say Frontier dumping a market like AUS-ONT means nobody else could possibly succeed there. The majority of Frontier's dropped markets have nonstop service, and many of those have more than one carrier.

knope2001 wrote:

masonh2479 wrote:

Wneast wrote:

Let’s be real are any airlines going to be able to compete with southwest and what they could offer there they could easily add many of those markets from Austin and other airlines would have to put a lot of money to compete in offering i think

I highly doubt it, Frontier tried and immediately pulled out of a lot of their Austin routes, Delta is all bark and no bite in terms of their “focus city”, and we’ll see how long AA lasts.

Frontier's experience at AUS isn't especially meaningful given their track record of new city pairs not lasting long.

All 29 of these Frontier Austin markets from 2018 have subsequently been dropped.
Markets in green have someone else flying them nonstop now, white are currently unserved.
These are ranked by passengers per flight for trips operated in 2018.

Pax/fl ….. Seat/fl .... Load % … Market
159.0 ….. 180.3 ….. 88.2% ….. SAN
157.7 ….. 182.6 ….. 86.4% ….. PHL
157.6 ….. 182.9 ….. 86.1% ….. SEA
156.3 ….. 182.6 ….. 85.6% ….. DTW
155.7 ….. 182.6 ….. 85.3% ….. MSP
155.3 ….. 172.2 ….. 90.2% ….. ATL
151.2 ….. 183.6 ….. 82.4% ….. CLT
150.2 ….. 166.3 ….. 90.3% ….. IAD
147.5 ….. 182.0 ….. 81.0% ….. MKE
145.8 ….. 182.7 ….. 79.8% ….. JAX
145.3 ….. 182.2 ….. 79.8% ….. IND
145.2 ….. 177.1 ….. 82.0% ….. ONT
145.0 ….. 180.3 ….. 80.4% ….. MSY
144.3 ….. 183.1 ….. 78.8% ….. SNA
143.8 ….. 174.0 ….. 82.6% ….. SLC
142.5 ….. 182.6 ….. 78.0% ….. PDX
142.5 ….. 182.9 ….. 77.9% ….. BUF
141.7 ….. 182.2 ….. 77.8% ….. CVG
136.9 ….. 163.6 ….. 83.6% ….. SJC
136.9 ….. 176.1 ….. 77.7% ….. RDU
136.5 ….. 184.7 ….. 73.9% ….. SDF
132.5 ….. 182.5 ….. 72.6% ….. RNO
132.0 ….. 182.0 ….. 72.5% ….. CHS
128.0 ….. 182.4 ….. 70.2% ….. ABQ
126.9 ….. 151.2 ….. 84.0% ….. PHX
125.0 ….. 153.7 ….. 81.3% ….. CLE
123.7 ….. 152.3 ….. 81.2% ….. CMH
118.2 ….. 152.1 ….. 77.7% ….. OMA
115.6 ….. 180.9 ….. 63.9% ….. PVD

It's important to remember loads do not necessarily equal profits because there's no accounting for yield here. Take them with a grain of salt. But they do show that for the most part the traffic was there to be served. Now because these were all dumped one might think the markets were poor, However 18 were apparently good enough to now support service by somebody else. It wasn't necessarily the markets which were the problem.

To be fair nobody would think that (for example) Frontier dumping AUS-PHX means that there's not a substantial enough market between Austin and Phoenix to support air service. Of course it has service in spite of Frontier leaving. But many of these markets now have 2, 3,even 4 or more carriers serving them yet Frontier did not make a go of it. That suggests to me this big list of failed AUS markets for Frontier don't necessarily mean the quality of the markets were the primary the problem. Of course not every single one of these would be a certain winner if only somebody with better marketing, or more tenacity, or better yield management, etc. was to show up. But conversely it's just as misguided to say Frontier dumping a market like AUS-ONT means nobody else could possibly succeed there. The majority of Frontier's dropped markets have nonstop service, and many of those have more than one carrier.

You are right in saying the routes were not the problem here but Frontier was. Back when all of these routes were in service I did think Frontier could try and battle Southwest out of first place. Of course now, absolutely not, Frontier is a shell of its former operation. Living around MKE I was upset when Frontier canned the MKE hub, happy when service to AUS showed up (it is where the family is) and then upset again when Frontier pulled out. Frontier has a history of disappointing that Southwest does not, hence why I really want Southwest to start AUS-MKE.

In short, I am glad Southwest is the main carrier in AUS, and also glad they are willing to fight to keep their place (please add MKE if your reading this Southwest) in a hot airport with limited gate space. I also agree with your point that just because Frontier left does not mean the route is not viable, I see Southwest as a contender for many. Final note, I really don’t like Frontier, RIP Midwest Airlines.

I appreciate your detailed posts, especially the data you include.

Good add......

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... 63196.html

"89 high-paid jobs"........wonder what high-paid consists of.

Wacko55 wrote:

Good add......

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... 63196.html

Not to be a Debbie downer, but G4 keep's adding bases all over the place. In the context of them, the designation is kind of meaningless at this point.

Boiler905 wrote:

WN has lots more potential to grow in AUS, especially to their strengths such as MKE as @wneast pointed out. I could also see WN adding CMH along with it. BHM/TUL/OKC/LIT/MEM could be others and in the WN's sweet spot from a length of haul perspective.

WN adding AUS-CLE nonstop service is a possibility with CLE being one of the top destinations that is no longer served nonstop from AUS. WN also already has a FF base in both the AUS and CLE markets to support AUS-CLE nonstop service on WN.

WN adding AUS-CVG nonstop service might be a possibility once demand recovers with F9 and DL no longer serving CVG nonstop from AUS and with AUS-CVG having had strong demand prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. WN might also be able to easily fill AUS-CVG nonstop flights once demand returns to pre-pandemic levels if AUS-CVG isn't re-added by DL or F9 with the amount of demand that was there between AUS and CVG prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Both WN and G4 have also added some nonstop routes out of CVG that haven't had any nonstop competition from F9, including CVG-BWI/MDW by WN and CVG-CHS/VPS/EYW/MYR/ORF/PVD/SAV by G4.

WN adding AUS-PIT nonstop service is also a possibility with PIT being one of the top destinations that WN doesn't currently serve nonstop from PIT, and WN has also recently added PIT-MYR/SRQ nonstop service.

I also agree that WN adding AUS-OKC nonstop service might be a possibility with the business ties that are there between the two cities with Round Rock-based Dell EMC having a campus in OKC.

Runway765 wrote:

Wacko55 wrote:

Good add......

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... 63196.html

Not to be a Debbie downer, but G4 keep's adding bases all over the place. In the context of them, the designation is kind of meaningless at this point.

Sorry you feel that way. From the article "The Las Vegas-based company will invest $75 million to establish the new base in Austin, creating at least 89 high-wage jobs and housing three Airbus A320 aircraft." Decent size investment I would say.

I already thought AUS was a base... probably a good add.

Wacko55 wrote:

Runway765 wrote:

Wacko55 wrote:

Good add......

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... 63196.html

Not to be a Debbie downer, but G4 keep's adding bases all over the place. In the context of them, the designation is kind of meaningless at this point.

Sorry you feel that way. From the article "The Las Vegas-based company will invest $75 million to establish the new base in Austin, creating at least 89 high-wage jobs and housing three Airbus A320 aircraft." Decent size investment I would say.

They've done similar things elsewhere, my point is it really isn't going to add much additional value long term. This isn't a knock against AUS FYI, I'd say this about anywhere they add.

If this were an airline like WN or NK, then I'd say it's a big deal.

Runway765 wrote:

Wacko55 wrote:

Runway765 wrote:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but G4 keep's adding bases all over the place. In the context of them, the designation is kind of meaningless at this point.

Sorry you feel that way. From the article "The Las Vegas-based company will invest $75 million to establish the new base in Austin, creating at least 89 high-wage jobs and housing three Airbus A320 aircraft." Decent size investment I would say.

They've done similar things elsewhere, my point is it really isn't going to add much additional value long term. This isn't a knock against AUS FYI, I'd say this about anywhere they add.

If this were an airline like WN or NK, then I'd say it's a big deal.

Could be a big deal to those of us in the industry looking to be based at home. From a service standpoint I can agree, though.

Regarding Allegiant I am quite glad they decided to part ways with their MD80s. Their safety record post retirement has been a lot better. I would have no problem getting on one of their Airbus aircraft. Also, any airline opening a base at Austin is better than ViaAir, they are not hard to beat though and got kicked out.

Longhornmaniac wrote:

Runway765 wrote:

Wacko55 wrote:

Sorry you feel that way. From the article "The Las Vegas-based company will invest $75 million to establish the new base in Austin, creating at least 89 high-wage jobs and housing three Airbus A320 aircraft." Decent size investment I would say.

They've done similar things elsewhere, my point is it really isn't going to add much additional value long term. This isn't a knock against AUS FYI, I'd say this about anywhere they add.

If this were an airline like WN or NK, then I'd say it's a big deal.

Could be a big deal to those of us in the industry looking to be based at home. From a service standpoint I can agree, though.

Actually for G4 adding a base is very important for adding new routes.

The way G4's model works, an airport can only get so big without a base, because in most cases planes don't RON at non-base stations.

You take away the new adds coming this summer and a large majority of all G4's current AUS routes are to stations that are a G4 base.

Once a base is added you could (and likely will) see AUS become a station with many more destinations (see CVG & BNA as examples)

Runway765 wrote:

Wacko55 wrote:

Runway765 wrote:

Not to be a Debbie downer, but G4 keep's adding bases all over the place. In the context of them, the designation is kind of meaningless at this point.

Sorry you feel that way. From the article "The Las Vegas-based company will invest $75 million to establish the new base in Austin, creating at least 89 high-wage jobs and housing three Airbus A320 aircraft." Decent size investment I would say.

They've done similar things elsewhere, my point is it really isn't going to add much additional value long term. This isn't a knock against AUS FYI, I'd say this about anywhere they add.

If this were an airline like WN or NK, then I'd say it's a big deal.

You're right. I did a quick review of their PR releases and the last time they announced a base was at BNA.

From the release "The Las Vegas-based company will invest $50 million to establish the new base, creating at least 66 new, high-wage jobs and housing two Airbus aircraft."

https://ir.allegiantair.com/news-releas ... ashville-0