ContinentalEWR wrote:

I also doubt DFW-HKG will return, but if AA were to resume HKG, that's the only place it would do it from.

One possible complication of DFW-HKG is the Russia situation. The westbound flight almost always was routed through Russian Airspace, and with that not an option for the foreseeable future, the flight would have to be routed down over the Aleutian Islands and Japan every day, and I will tell you that DFW-HKG pushed the boundaries of this when it operated even through Russia. That being said, if HKG were to ever return, I could see it on a 787-9 vs the 777-300 it had operated on. The other possibility is SEA-HKG. AA wants to establish something in SEA, especially with the AS codeshare and if there is any sort of HKG demand, this might be where it could be tried from.

However, I do not see HKG coming back anytime soon. All the AA computer infrastructure that was in HKG was relocated to DOH to support that service, and I heard the Station Manager relocated to the US during COVID.

apodino wrote:

The other possibility is SEA-HKG. AA wants to establish something in SEA, especially with the AS codeshare ...

This.

It would be interesting to see AA ramp up an Asia-Pacific offering ex-SEA - not only to HKG, but the likes of SYD, AKL, and more. Untapped opportunities.

apodino wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

I also doubt DFW-HKG will return, but if AA were to resume HKG, that's the only place it would do it from.

One possible complication of DFW-HKG is the Russia situation. The westbound flight almost always was routed through Russian Airspace, and with that not an option for the foreseeable future, the flight would have to be routed down over the Aleutian Islands and Japan every day, and I will tell you that DFW-HKG pushed the boundaries of this when it operated even through Russia. That being said, if HKG were to ever return, I could see it on a 787-9 vs the 777-300 it had operated on. The other possibility is SEA-HKG. AA wants to establish something in SEA, especially with the AS codeshare and if there is any sort of HKG demand, this might be where it could be tried from.

However, I do not see HKG coming back anytime soon. All the AA computer infrastructure that was in HKG was relocated to DOH to support that service, and I heard the Station Manager relocated to the US during COVID.

It's a shame. I used HKG as my non-rev transit point many many times. It was always tough to get on and usually by a thread.But it sure made Asian trips affordable.

AA not flying to Hong Kong is not the tragedy it seems. Hong Kong is(was) a great financial center and Asian metropolis, with the pandemic the Government in Peking placed many difficult measures in Hong Kong, making travel there nearly impossible.

AA has better places to use their 77W fleet and built their Asian route system to closer destinations. All the Chicago to Asia flights are history as are many DFW & LAX flights too. Even Tokyo is now only flown from DFW & LAX, how sad. AA has launched a couple interesting ultra long haul routes from JFK to India and Qatar, India though is not helped by Russian airspace being closed.

I would hope AA restores some frequencies to their Brazil and Argentine schedules. Sao Paulo & Buenos Aires are among two huge destinations on the AA schedule not flown at pre-pandemic levels. Sydney also deserves Daily flights.

jfk777 wrote:

I would hope AA restores some frequencies to their Brazil and Argentine schedules. Sao Paulo & Buenos Aires are among two huge destinations on the AA schedule not flown at pre-pandemic levels. Sydney also deserves Daily flights.

SYD flight front cabin is doing so well this coming winter season, I wonder if it will get upgrade to B77W for longer than the few weeks planned.

Yonderlust wrote:

It's a shame. I used HKG as my non-rev transit point many many times. It was always tough to get on and usually by a thread.But it sure made Asian trips affordable.

Hopefully TYO/DOH will open up more possibilities from 2023 and beyond!

Rookie87 wrote:

Brickell305 wrote:

reply1984 wrote:

North America-HKG traffic is not dominated by business travellers...Actually CX has captured a lot of VFR demand between North America and Hong Kong...

Most routes are dominated by VFR and/or tourism. A. Net’s hyper focus on business travel tends to come from the fact that it’s usually the most profitable demand for airlines and what makes many routes worthwhile for the airlines. However, there’s an obvious reason that there are usually 4-8x times as many seats in the back of the plane than there are in the front of the plane. A relevant question in the case of HKG is whether with reduced business travel, if it makes financial sense to serve places like JFK nonstop as even if you fill the back of the plane, it may not be worth serving such a long flight based on that. Repeat that with routes like AA’s LAX-HKG and DFW-HKG.

I do wonder though if the profitable business client is being replaced by high spend leisure travelers. Up front has been sold out on many routes I’ve been on domestic and international before upgrades can even go through. They may not be at the same frequency as business but I am wondering how that’s been looking on the sales side

The question though is if this is sustainable. For the better part of two years, consumers weren't spending their money on normal travel and eating out activities. Now that a lot of people have this surplus money (and airline/hotel points from their credit cards) in their wallets, a lot of people are wanting to splurge on that big first trip back now that the pandemic is over. At some point, I'd expect a normalization of consumer behavior - they'd rather take 2-3 vacations a year and not be dropping a lot of cash on business class travel for this, versus having the cash now from two years of not doing those types of activities.

planemanofnz wrote:

apodino wrote:

The other possibility is SEA-HKG. AA wants to establish something in SEA, especially with the AS codeshare ...

This.

It would be interesting to see AA ramp up an Asia-Pacific offering ex-SEA - not only to HKG, but the likes of SYD, AKL, and more. Untapped opportunities.

If CX restarts HKG-SEA, there's no reason for AA to fly it, and its unlikely AA will serve HKG from anything beyond DFW in the future, if at all. HKG service is not, as DL has proven long before the Chinese government began to strangle the city state and COVID19 did the rest, an essential spoke in a US network carrier's map. DL pulled out of HKG in October 2018.

I wanted to summarize the "pretty incredible" service of AA's unnamed "hublet" at AUS:

This map includes seasonal/temporary destinations not served this month:


And a table of service (with linked Google Sheet for better formatting) based on Friday, Sep 30th as a sample day) (Note many leisure destinations like SJD, EGE, etc. are seasonal weekend only)
Mainline Regional Partner Total
DFW 13 1 14
CLT 6 6
MIA 4 1 5
ORD 3 2 5
BOS 2 2 4
JFK 2 2 4
SEA 4 4
LAS 3 3
LAX 3 3
PHX 3 3
ELP 3 3
SAN 3 3
MCO 2 2
PHL 2 2
BNA 2 2
CVG 2 2
IND 2 2
MCI 2 2
MSY 2 2
RDU 2 2
STL 2 2
CUN 1 1
SJD 1 1
SJU 1 1
SNA 1 1
TPA 1 1
ABQ 1 1
JAX 1 1
OKC 1 1
PDX 1 1
RNO 1 1
TUL 1 1
LHR 1 1
BOI 1 1
BZN
SRQ
ASE
EGE
CZM
Total 48 26 14 88

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

American has 48 mainline and 26 regional (Eagle) flights of its own for a total of 74 daily departures from AUS on September 30th. With Alaska and JetBlue codeshares added in, this comes to 88, with quite respectable coverage of just about every major U.S. destination sans Washington D.C. (seasonal), Atlanta (too crowded maybe?), Detroit, Minneapolis, and Salt Lake City (a trend...).

What I'm interested in, however, are your thoughts on where/what American adds next.

Regional jet wise first because even with the pilot shortage it seems like AA has a never-ending source of regional jets for this AUS expansion:

Columbus, Pittsburgh, or Cleveland seem like the strongest possibilities in the Midwest given the current AA service to STL, IND, and CVG.

On the more maybe level, Milwaukee, Memphis, Norfolk, or Tuscon seem to have analogues in AA's ABQ, MCI, and ELP flights. Seasonal weekend flights to Jackson Hole seem possible given EGE (Steamboat Springs, CO) and ASE (Aspen). Maybe Charleston, SC?

Longer haul and mainline, maybe AA adds its own metal to SEA, SAN, and something SFO/bay area or weekend service to West Palm Beach. Maybe more full time service to Washington D.C. or Salt Lake City returning (had seasonal weekend service last Christmas I believe).

The most surprising thing about this AA operation, however, is that it exists in such a pilot and resource constrained environment as we have today ... and while I hope for it to thrive I still half wish it was Delta which had taken the initiative to build its first major Texas presence instead of AA solidifying its lead...

So I'm also wondering about the longer term viability of this operation, even with even more AUS growth. AA can't split its east-west traffic flows up too much, so AUS can't take away too much from DFW connecting flows and has to be mostly reliant on local traffic, but I find that it feels unsustainable routes like AUS-IND which didn't have service from anyone a few years ago but now has up to three carriers and four flights a day (or AUS-CVG similar) when it seems like more major routes around the country are at a weirdly low amount of capacity/frequency for AA like the ORD hub and its three banks.

So, what's next (if anything) for AA at AUS?

Is AA at AUS and AUS more generally a bubble about to burst?

Is AA growing at AUS merely by pulling resources from ORD, PHL, PHX (there was a recent discussion about AA early bank cuts on the PHX thread), etc.?

jfk777 wrote:

Even Tokyo is now only flown from DFW & LAX, how sad.

Have to remember the AA/JL joint venture for Tokyo flights. Japan Air has a robust network to the US and serves HNL, SEA, SFO, LAX, SAN, DFW, ORD, BOS, JFK, and IAD. AA serves Japan through all of these flights as well.

SumChristianus wrote:

I wanted to summarize the "pretty incredible" service of AA's unnamed "hublet" at AUS:


American has 48 mainline and 26 regional (Eagle) flights of its own for a total of 74 daily departures from AUS on September 30th. With Alaska and JetBlue codeshares added in, this comes to 88, with quite respectable coverage of just about every major U.S. destination sans Washington D.C. (seasonal), Atlanta (too crowded maybe?), Detroit, Minneapolis, and Salt Lake City (a trend...).

What I'm interested in, however, are your thoughts on where/what American adds next.

Regional jet wise first because even with the pilot shortage it seems like AA has a never-ending source of regional jets for this AUS expansion:

Columbus, Pittsburgh, or Cleveland seem like the strongest possibilities in the Midwest given the current AA service to STL, IND, and CVG.

On the more maybe level, Milwaukee, Memphis, Norfolk, or Tuscon seem to have analogues in AA's ABQ, MCI, and ELP flights. Seasonal weekend flights to Jackson Hole seem possible given EGE (Steamboat Springs, CO) and ASE (Aspen). Maybe Charleston, SC?

Longer haul and mainline, maybe AA adds its own metal to SEA, SAN, and something SFO/bay area or weekend service to West Palm Beach. Maybe more full time service to Washington D.C. or Salt Lake City returning (had seasonal weekend service last Christmas I believe).

The most surprising thing about this AA operation, however, is that it exists in such a pilot and resource constrained environment as we have today ... and while I hope for it to thrive I still half wish it was Delta which had taken the initiative to build its first major Texas presence instead of AA solidifying its lead...

So I'm also wondering about the longer term viability of this operation, even with even more AUS growth. AA can't split its east-west traffic flows up too much, so AUS can't take away too much from DFW connecting flows and has to be mostly reliant on local traffic, but I find that it feels unsustainable routes like AUS-IND which didn't have service from anyone a few years ago but now has up to three carriers and four flights a day (or AUS-CVG similar) when it seems like more major routes around the country are at a weirdly low amount of capacity/frequency for AA like the ORD hub and its three banks.

So, what's next (if anything) for AA at AUS?

Is AA at AUS and AUS more generally a bubble about to burst?

Is AA growing at AUS merely by pulling resources from ORD, PHL, PHX (there was a recent discussion about AA early bank cuts on the PHX thread), etc.?

I thought I read that AA was bailing on AUS-SJU? I'm also surprised that they're flying AUS-CVG and not CMH or CLE. As for DL, they had a huge Texas presence at one time but have left that to AA and beefed up ATL. I'm sure they'd like to make AUS a focus city but it seems like there may not be enough of that pie to go around for them also, with WN, AA and UA already heavily entrenched in Texas.

MLIAA wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

Even Tokyo is now only flown from DFW & LAX, how sad.

Have to remember the AA/JL joint venture for Tokyo flights. Japan Air has a robust network to the US and serves HNL, SEA, SFO, LAX, SAN, DFW, ORD, BOS, JFK, and IAD. AA serves Japan through all of these flights as well.

Right. And Japan has been largely closed / capped though that's on the cusp of being lifted.

AA previously few JFK-NRT, then switched that to JFK-HND, and dropped it, blaming the then not ideal time slots. AA also flew ORD-NRT and further back, SEA-NRT, which along with DFW-KIX, was dropped in January 2002. But AA doesn't really need to fly its own metal into Tokyo beyond what it already does.

Looks like MIA-GNV is dropped after DEC 15 2022

miaami wrote:

Looks like MIA-GNV is dropped after DEC 15 2022

It is not. It relies on UF traffic and won’t operate during UF winter break. Comes back January 10th for second semester,

MLIAA wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

Even Tokyo is now only flown from DFW & LAX, how sad.

Have to remember the AA/JL joint venture for Tokyo flights. Japan Air has a robust network to the US and serves HNL, SEA, SFO, LAX, SAN, DFW, ORD, BOS, JFK, and IAD. AA serves Japan through all of these flights as well.

I have a "pet peeve" about what you just said, yes JAL has a robust network to Japan but is that a reason AA should have just a minimum of flights ? By that reasoning because British Airways has a huge network to LHR AA should just operate from a minimum of US gateways like DFW, ORD and MIA and just hand the rest, including JFK, to BA.

The "robust" argument is for a very distant place like Australia or Qatar where their airline has a huge US network. Now that Boeing is delivering 787 again to AA maybe we can see restoration and expansion for the international network.

jfk777 wrote:

MLIAA wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

Even Tokyo is now only flown from DFW & LAX, how sad.

Have to remember the AA/JL joint venture for Tokyo flights. Japan Air has a robust network to the US and serves HNL, SEA, SFO, LAX, SAN, DFW, ORD, BOS, JFK, and IAD. AA serves Japan through all of these flights as well.

I have a "pet peeve" about what you just said, yes JAL has a robust network to Japan but is that a reason AA should have just a minimum of flights ? By that reasoning because British Airways has a huge network to LHR AA should just operate from a minimum of US gateways like DFW, ORD and MIA and just hand the rest, including JFK, to BA.

The "robust" argument is for a very distant place like Australia or Qatar where their airline has a huge US network. Now that Boeing is delivering 787 again to AA maybe we can see restoration and expansion for the international network.

But that’s exactly what’s happening. Upon a quick check, BA has a majority of the seats to MIA and JFK, and yes AA will fly to London from all their hubs.

Realistically, it doesn’t matter whose metal is flying the route, both BA and JL are joint-ventures for AA and they get half the revenue.

With AA’s shortage of widebody aircraft, it makes sense to offload these to JV partners so AA can fly to the likes of Brasil and non-LHR Europe.

jfk777 wrote:

MLIAA wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

Even Tokyo is now only flown from DFW & LAX, how sad.

Have to remember the AA/JL joint venture for Tokyo flights. Japan Air has a robust network to the US and serves HNL, SEA, SFO, LAX, SAN, DFW, ORD, BOS, JFK, and IAD. AA serves Japan through all of these flights as well.

I have a "pet peeve" about what you just said, yes JAL has a robust network to Japan but is that a reason AA should have just a minimum of flights ? By that reasoning because British Airways has a huge network to LHR AA should just operate from a minimum of US gateways like DFW, ORD and MIA and just hand the rest, including JFK, to BA.

The "robust" argument is for a very distant place like Australia or Qatar where their airline has a huge US network. Now that Boeing is delivering 787 again to AA maybe we can see restoration and expansion for the international network.

It is not as simple as that. AA has historically had a huge presence at LHR even before the BA partnership. UA had it too, and still has it. DL has only had a marginal presence at LHR and still does. AA never had a historical presence at TYO (and still doesn’t), and UA/DL’s presence is mainly the result of the acquisition of the PanAm/Northwest hubs. It helps that UA got a JV partner in TYO that helped cement its presence whereas DL’s presence in TYO has been ever-shrinking (and will undoubtedly even more with shifting to ICN). There is no magical way for AA to somehow start from zero and build up market share out of thin air (especially when the preferred HND airport is slot controlled). For AA to grow, someone else has to shrink and give up slots.

onwFan wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

MLIAA wrote:

Have to remember the AA/JL joint venture for Tokyo flights. Japan Air has a robust network to the US and serves HNL, SEA, SFO, LAX, SAN, DFW, ORD, BOS, JFK, and IAD. AA serves Japan through all of these flights as well.

I have a "pet peeve" about what you just said, yes JAL has a robust network to Japan but is that a reason AA should have just a minimum of flights ? By that reasoning because British Airways has a huge network to LHR AA should just operate from a minimum of US gateways like DFW, ORD and MIA and just hand the rest, including JFK, to BA.

The "robust" argument is for a very distant place like Australia or Qatar where their airline has a huge US network. Now that Boeing is delivering 787 again to AA maybe we can see restoration and expansion for the international network.

It is not as simple as that. AA has historically had a huge presence at LHR even before the BA partnership. UA had it too, and still has it. DL has only had a marginal presence at LHR and still does. AA never had a historical presence at TYO (and still doesn’t), and UA/DL’s presence is mainly the result of the acquisition of the PanAm/Northwest hubs. It helps that UA got a JV partner in TYO that helped cement its presence whereas DL’s presence in TYO has been ever-shrinking (and will undoubtedly even more with shifting to ICN). There is no magical way for AA to somehow start from zero and build up market share out of thin air (especially when the preferred HND airport is slot controlled). For AA to grow, someone else has to shrink and give up slots.

While Delta's footprint at LHR may be smaller than American's or United's, I would not call it marginal. 9/10 daily departures on its own metal and on top of that the flights operated by its associate Virgin give Delta a solid presence at LHR.

VFR and the potential for it is a quite fascinating topic. VFR depends solely on demographics and nothing more or less, but just because a city has a large ethnic community doesnt mean it generates a lot of traffic. Minneapolis/St. Paul has the largest Somali and Laotian communities in the US but MSP-VTE/MGQ dont even generate double digit PDEWs. On the other hand VFR traffic is huge in a market like LAX-ICN, SFO-China, NYC-India, etc. Because of that Im not trying to imply market size, but rather VFR potential.

Anyway, I thought Id look at the ethnic diversities for the AA hubs and it is a relatively good indicator of their VFR potential. The data is from data.census.gov and is from 2020. All immigrant communities over 20,000 in the specific metro areas are listed. Im only considering AA hubs.

New York City - 44 Countries (1st in US)
Dominican Republic: 636,253
China: 522,232
India: 357,012
Mexico: 265,044
Jamaica: 248,255
Ecuador: 239,909
Haiti: 160,525
Philippines: 145,434
Colombia: 178,839
Guyana: 169,406
Korea: 137,017
El Salvador: 133,718
Bangladesh: 106,009
Italy: 104,508
Peru: 104,182
Poland: 101,075
Trinidad and Tobago: 100,565
Guatemala: 85,578
Russia: 85,445
Ukraine: 84,442
Pakistan: 75,949
Honduras: 72,201
United Kingdom: 66,491
Cuba: 60,694
Brazil: 57,839
Egypt: 51,701
Nigeria: 45,673
Ghana: 44,130
Germany: 40,356
Portugal: 38,503
Israel: 34,690
Japan: 33,027
Uzbekistan: 30,764
Ireland: 30,641
Argentina: 28,407
Barbados: 27,504
Grenada: 27,317
Turkey: 27,412
France: 26,853
Albania: 26,201
Vietnam: 24,353
Venezuela: 22,830
Romania: 22,503
Spain: 21,749

Los Angeles - 20 Countries (2nd in US)
Mexico: 1,547,703
China: 358,193
Philippines: 297,191
El Salvador: 285,707
Vietnam: 251,499
Korea: 209,026
Guatemala: 185,803
Iran: 137,632
India: 95,957
Armenia: 69,157
Japan: 48,447
United Kingdom: 44,517
Honduras: 37,466
Peru: 32,308
Cambodia: 27,070
Thailand: 24,818
Russia: 24,368
Nicaragua: 23,726
Colombia: 22,902
Germany: 22,619

Miami/Fort Lauderdale - 18 Countries (3rd in the US)
Cuba: 797,501
Haiti: 226,300
Colombia: 183,971
Jamaica: 141,347
Venezuela: 137,417
Nicaragua: 86,740
Honduras: 69,943
Mexico: 69,470
Dominican Republic: 67,865
Peru: 61,272
Brazil: 59,979
Argentina: 43,080
Guatemala: 42,700
Ecuador: 30,261
El Salvador: 29,555
Trinidad and Tobago: 24,305
India: 22,556
China: 22,253

Chicago - 10 Countries (7th in US)
Mexico: 601,025
India: 146,171
Poland: 125,024
Philippines: 82,206
China: 74,986
Korea: 35,842
Pakistan: 29,125
Ukraine: 28,542
Guatemala: 22,818
Vietnam: 20,909

Dallas/Fort Worth - 9 Countries (8th in the US)
Mexico: 589,607
India: 129,370
Vietnam: 70,767
El Salvador: 62,169
China: 46,151
Philippines: 26,209
Nigeria: 26,145
Korea: 24,250
Honduras: 24,133

Philadelphia - 7 Countries
India: 84,338
China: 57,697
Mexico: 46,668
Dominican Republic: 32,013
Vietnam: 25,107
Korea: 23,241
Jamaica: 21,213

Phoenix - 4 Countries
Mexico: 343,807
India: 40,765
Philippines: 24,175
China: 23,500

Charlotte - 3 Countries
Mexico: 54,231
India: 32,704
Honduras: 21,171

Austin - 2 Countries
Mexico: 127,393
India: 33,464

I have to wonder if DFW-India would have happened if Covid never had...

dcajet wrote:

onwFan wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

I have a "pet peeve" about what you just said, yes JAL has a robust network to Japan but is that a reason AA should have just a minimum of flights ? By that reasoning because British Airways has a huge network to LHR AA should just operate from a minimum of US gateways like DFW, ORD and MIA and just hand the rest, including JFK, to BA.

The "robust" argument is for a very distant place like Australia or Qatar where their airline has a huge US network. Now that Boeing is delivering 787 again to AA maybe we can see restoration and expansion for the international network.

It is not as simple as that. AA has historically had a huge presence at LHR even before the BA partnership. UA had it too, and still has it. DL has only had a marginal presence at LHR and still does. AA never had a historical presence at TYO (and still doesn’t), and UA/DL’s presence is mainly the result of the acquisition of the PanAm/Northwest hubs. It helps that UA got a JV partner in TYO that helped cement its presence whereas DL’s presence in TYO has been ever-shrinking (and will undoubtedly even more with shifting to ICN). There is no magical way for AA to somehow start from zero and build up market share out of thin air (especially when the preferred HND airport is slot controlled). For AA to grow, someone else has to shrink and give up slots.

While Delta's footprint at LHR may be smaller than American's or United's, I would not call it marginal. 9/10 daily departures on its own metal and on top of that the flights operated by its associate Virgin give Delta a solid presence at LHR.

American and United's footprint at LHR are both a direct result of their respective acquisitions of the LHR slots from TWA (AA) and Pan Am (UA) in 1991 and have subsequently built out their networks there through a combination of slot acquisitions and trades. DL ended up a LHR once Bermuda II was scrapped in 2008 and the rest of the US airlines were granted access, resulting in DL and US + NW moving the bulk of their LGW operations to LHR. Prior to the VS tie up, DL's London presence was not large, and focused on ATL and CVG and following the merger with NW, MSP and DTW, with SLC added later. DL acquired UA's JFK-LHR slots (the one that remained, as UA had, by 2006 pulled JFK down to just one flight) in a separate transaction. DL isn't an also ran at LHR, but without VS, it would be.

ASFlyer wrote:

SumChristianus wrote:

I wanted to summarize the "pretty incredible" service of AA's unnamed "hublet" at AUS:


American has 48 mainline and 26 regional (Eagle) flights of its own for a total of 74 daily departures from AUS on September 30th. With Alaska and JetBlue codeshares added in, this comes to 88, with quite respectable coverage of just about every major U.S. destination sans Washington D.C. (seasonal), Atlanta (too crowded maybe?), Detroit, Minneapolis, and Salt Lake City (a trend...).

What I'm interested in, however, are your thoughts on where/what American adds next.

Regional jet wise first because even with the pilot shortage it seems like AA has a never-ending source of regional jets for this AUS expansion:

Columbus, Pittsburgh, or Cleveland seem like the strongest possibilities in the Midwest given the current AA service to STL, IND, and CVG.

On the more maybe level, Milwaukee, Memphis, Norfolk, or Tuscon seem to have analogues in AA's ABQ, MCI, and ELP flights. Seasonal weekend flights to Jackson Hole seem possible given EGE (Steamboat Springs, CO) and ASE (Aspen). Maybe Charleston, SC?

Longer haul and mainline, maybe AA adds its own metal to SEA, SAN, and something SFO/bay area or weekend service to West Palm Beach. Maybe more full time service to Washington D.C. or Salt Lake City returning (had seasonal weekend service last Christmas I believe).

The most surprising thing about this AA operation, however, is that it exists in such a pilot and resource constrained environment as we have today ... and while I hope for it to thrive I still half wish it was Delta which had taken the initiative to build its first major Texas presence instead of AA solidifying its lead...

So I'm also wondering about the longer term viability of this operation, even with even more AUS growth. AA can't split its east-west traffic flows up too much, so AUS can't take away too much from DFW connecting flows and has to be mostly reliant on local traffic, but I find that it feels unsustainable routes like AUS-IND which didn't have service from anyone a few years ago but now has up to three carriers and four flights a day (or AUS-CVG similar) when it seems like more major routes around the country are at a weirdly low amount of capacity/frequency for AA like the ORD hub and its three banks.

So, what's next (if anything) for AA at AUS?

Is AA at AUS and AUS more generally a bubble about to burst?

Is AA growing at AUS merely by pulling resources from ORD, PHL, PHX (there was a recent discussion about AA early bank cuts on the PHX thread), etc.?

I thought I read that AA was bailing on AUS-SJU? I'm also surprised that they're flying AUS-CVG and not CMH or CLE. As for DL, they had a huge Texas presence at one time but have left that to AA and beefed up ATL. I'm sure they'd like to make AUS a focus city but it seems like there may not be enough of that pie to go around for them also, with WN, AA and UA already heavily entrenched in Texas.

I'm pretty sure AA at AUS is pretty much maxed out. They've been at that 70-75 departure level since around this time in 2021. Could be a pilot/regional issue given the systemwide capacity hasn't grown much since 2021.

However, WN hasn't added much from AUS recently either, and even disregarding gate space yields are pretty terrible last time I looked.

dcajet wrote:

onwFan wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

I have a "pet peeve" about what you just said, yes JAL has a robust network to Japan but is that a reason AA should have just a minimum of flights ? By that reasoning because British Airways has a huge network to LHR AA should just operate from a minimum of US gateways like DFW, ORD and MIA and just hand the rest, including JFK, to BA.

The "robust" argument is for a very distant place like Australia or Qatar where their airline has a huge US network. Now that Boeing is delivering 787 again to AA maybe we can see restoration and expansion for the international network.

It is not as simple as that. AA has historically had a huge presence at LHR even before the BA partnership. UA had it too, and still has it. DL has only had a marginal presence at LHR and still does. AA never had a historical presence at TYO (and still doesn’t), and UA/DL’s presence is mainly the result of the acquisition of the PanAm/Northwest hubs. It helps that UA got a JV partner in TYO that helped cement its presence whereas DL’s presence in TYO has been ever-shrinking (and will undoubtedly even more with shifting to ICN). There is no magical way for AA to somehow start from zero and build up market share out of thin air (especially when the preferred HND airport is slot controlled). For AA to grow, someone else has to shrink and give up slots.

While Delta's footprint at LHR may be smaller than American's or United's, I would not call it marginal. 9/10 daily departures on its own metal and on top of that the flights operated by its associate Virgin give Delta a solid presence at LHR.

I think IIRC AA has 22 daily flights to London (BOS, JFK, PHL, RDU, CLT, MIA, ORD, DFW, PHX, and LAX). Big enough to have its own maintenance there there I believe.

washingtonflyer wrote:

dcajet wrote:

onwFan wrote:

It is not as simple as that. AA has historically had a huge presence at LHR even before the BA partnership. UA had it too, and still has it. DL has only had a marginal presence at LHR and still does. AA never had a historical presence at TYO (and still doesn’t), and UA/DL’s presence is mainly the result of the acquisition of the PanAm/Northwest hubs. It helps that UA got a JV partner in TYO that helped cement its presence whereas DL’s presence in TYO has been ever-shrinking (and will undoubtedly even more with shifting to ICN). There is no magical way for AA to somehow start from zero and build up market share out of thin air (especially when the preferred HND airport is slot controlled). For AA to grow, someone else has to shrink and give up slots.

While Delta's footprint at LHR may be smaller than American's or United's, I would not call it marginal. 9/10 daily departures on its own metal and on top of that the flights operated by its associate Virgin give Delta a solid presence at LHR.

I think IIRC AA has 22 daily flights to London (BOS, JFK, PHL, RDU, CLT, MIA, ORD, DFW, PHX, and LAX). Big enough to have its own maintenance there there I believe.

Yes, they have around 50 aircraft technicians based at LHR. Incidentally, they will be voting on a potential strike later this week over a pay dispute with the airline.

https://www.ttgmedia.com/news/news/heat ... 0September.

washingtonflyer wrote:

dcajet wrote:

onwFan wrote:

It is not as simple as that. AA has historically had a huge presence at LHR even before the BA partnership. UA had it too, and still has it. DL has only had a marginal presence at LHR and still does. AA never had a historical presence at TYO (and still doesn’t), and UA/DL’s presence is mainly the result of the acquisition of the PanAm/Northwest hubs. It helps that UA got a JV partner in TYO that helped cement its presence whereas DL’s presence in TYO has been ever-shrinking (and will undoubtedly even more with shifting to ICN). There is no magical way for AA to somehow start from zero and build up market share out of thin air (especially when the preferred HND airport is slot controlled). For AA to grow, someone else has to shrink and give up slots.

While Delta's footprint at LHR may be smaller than American's or United's, I would not call it marginal. 9/10 daily departures on its own metal and on top of that the flights operated by its associate Virgin give Delta a solid presence at LHR.

I think IIRC AA has 22 daily flights to London (BOS, JFK, PHL, RDU, CLT, MIA, ORD, DFW, PHX, and LAX). Big enough to have its own maintenance there there I believe.

If they truly needed one, they'd looked to have done so already, and it's possible space is an issue at LHR. SEA is also served from LHR, though the route was suspended in March, believe it is due to return. Guessing AA can get what it needs from BA for the 77W, 77E, and 787s used on LHR routes.

TWFlyGuy wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

washingtonflyer wrote:

I think IIRC AA has 22 daily flights to London (BOS, JFK, PHL, RDU, CLT, MIA, ORD, DFW, PHX, and LAX). Big enough to have its own maintenance there there I believe.

If they truly needed one, they'd looked to have done so already, and it's possible space is an issue at LHR. SEA is also served from LHR, though the route was suspended in March, believe it is due to return. Guessing AA can get what it needs from BA for the 77W, 77E, and 787s used on LHR routes.

They've had AA employed mechanics in LHR since they took the routes over from TWA. The initial crews were ex-TWA employees.

Got it. Wasn't aware. That is likely all they need.

With 20+ arrivals and with some aircraft sitting overnight (at least two are daylight departures from the USA), it definitely makes sense to have mechanics on hand. It'd be interesting to see all the aircraft pairings at LHR. Do the flights that depart the USA all turn directly around to the same originating city or, owing to the large number of flights, can AA mix the flights to better time the arrivals?

washingtonflyer wrote:

With 20+ arrivals and with some aircraft sitting overnight (at least two are daylight departures from the USA), it definitely makes sense to have mechanics on hand. It'd be interesting to see all the aircraft pairings at LHR. Do the flights that depart the USA all turn directly around to the same originating city or, owing to the large number of flights, can AA mix the flights to better time the arrivals?

Using Tuesday's LHR-USA flights as a sample, only two of the 22 AA flights return to the same city as the inbound; one each of JFK & DFW. You see a little bit of overlap with PHL/ORD & CLT/RDU, but other than that the majority seem pretty random.

washingtonflyer wrote:

With 20+ arrivals and with some aircraft sitting overnight (at least two are daylight departures from the USA), it definitely makes sense to have mechanics on hand. It'd be interesting to see all the aircraft pairings at LHR. Do the flights that depart the USA all turn directly around to the same originating city or, owing to the large number of flights, can AA mix the flights to better time the arrivals?

They mix the flights.

For example, as of tonight for 777s:

-AA730/CLT-LHR (N765AN) is scheduled to become AA173 LHR-RDU tomorrow morning.
-AA732/CLT-LHR (N757AN) is scheduled to become AA141 LHR-JFK tomorrow evening.
-AA194/PHX-LHR (N772AN) is scheduled to become AA733 LHR-CLT tomorrow afternoon.
-AA108/BOS-LHR (N770AN) is scheduled to become AA195 LHR-PHX tomorrow afternoon.
-AA174/RDU-LHR (N792AN) is scheduled to become AA731 LHR-CLT tomorrow morning.
-AA142/JFK-LHR Daylight (N752aN) is scheduled to become AA109 LHR-BOS tomorrow morning. As a RON, this turn seems pretty consistent.

787s tend to rotate between PHL and ORD, as those are the only two cities to see AA 787 service ex LHR.

For example:
-AA728/PHL-LHR (N836AA) this evening will become AA91 LHR-ORD tomorrow morning.

The only consistent 787 pattern I see is the plane that operates the ORD-LHR daylight flight and RONs at LHR...that plane always turns around and operates the early morning departure on LHR-ORD.

77Ws rotate between MIA/JFK/LAX.

steveAUS wrote:

washingtonflyer wrote:

With 20+ arrivals and with some aircraft sitting overnight (at least two are daylight departures from the USA), it definitely makes sense to have mechanics on hand. It'd be interesting to see all the aircraft pairings at LHR. Do the flights that depart the USA all turn directly around to the same originating city or, owing to the large number of flights, can AA mix the flights to better time the arrivals?

Using Tuesday's LHR-USA flights as a sample, only two of the 22 AA flights return to the same city as the inbound; one each of JFK & DFW. You see a little bit of overlap with PHL/ORD & CLT/RDU, but other than that the majority seem pretty random.

PHL/ORD make sense as both cities are exclusively 789. Its interesting to note that for the west coast cities, the LHR->PHX and one LHR->LAX departs LHR before a "paired" inbound would arrive - so clearly for those two cities, a plane is taken from somewhere else. The earliness of the PHX departure (930 am) would suggest that this might be the JFK-LHR daylight inbound which RONs in London and then flies onto PHX. Or the PHX flight is the return of the BOS-LHR flight.

AA will increase MIA-LIM to 3x daily effective 11/3/2022. I am wondering if they will add a JFK-LIM flight down the road.

USAirALB wrote:

washingtonflyer wrote:

With 20+ arrivals and with some aircraft sitting overnight (at least two are daylight departures from the USA), it definitely makes sense to have mechanics on hand. It'd be interesting to see all the aircraft pairings at LHR. Do the flights that depart the USA all turn directly around to the same originating city or, owing to the large number of flights, can AA mix the flights to better time the arrivals?

They mix the flights.

77Ws rotate between MIA/JFK/LAX.

What about DFW?

dcajet wrote:

USAirALB wrote:

washingtonflyer wrote:

With 20+ arrivals and with some aircraft sitting overnight (at least two are daylight departures from the USA), it definitely makes sense to have mechanics on hand. It'd be interesting to see all the aircraft pairings at LHR. Do the flights that depart the USA all turn directly around to the same originating city or, owing to the large number of flights, can AA mix the flights to better time the arrivals?

They mix the flights.

77Ws rotate between MIA/JFK/LAX.

What about DFW?

Yes! DFW too...I thought I had typed it out but I guess I didn't...long day.

Looks like AA has also dropped its plans to fly MIA-OCJ.

miaami wrote:

Looks like AA has also dropped its plans to fly MIA-OCJ.

They have not. The airport has not been certified for ERJ-175 operations in time so ticket sales are suspended as the certification process continues.

jfk777 wrote:

I would hope AA restores some frequencies to their Brazil and Argentine schedules. Sao Paulo & Buenos Aires are among two huge destinations on the AA schedule not flown at pre-pandemic levels. Sydney also deserves Daily flights.

Yes really hope LAX-GRU/EZE return.

LAX-EZE seems like a route that can sustain at least a daily 789. CA is home to the second most Argentines (45K), behind only FL (58K). There are close to 9M Spanish speakers in greater LA, more than Madrid. I would imagine LAX-EZE would also have high yields primarily due to the tech and unicorn ecosystem in BA who may need a direct connection to California. (Though not sure which of SFO and LAX is higher yielding from Argentina.)

I don’t know, is Argentina business that much more tied to Europe and Florida than California?

voxkel wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

I would hope AA restores some frequencies to their Brazil and Argentine schedules. Sao Paulo & Buenos Aires are among two huge destinations on the AA schedule not flown at pre-pandemic levels. Sydney also deserves Daily flights.

Yes really hope LAX-GRU/EZE return.

LAX-EZE seems like a route that can sustain at least a daily 789. CA is home to the second most Argentines (45K), behind only FL (58K). There are close to 9M Spanish speakers in greater LA, more than Madrid. I would imagine LAX-EZE would also have high yields primarily due to the tech and unicorn ecosystem in BA who may need a direct connection to California. (Though not sure which of SFO and LAX is higher yielding from Argentina.)

I don’t know, is Argentina business that much more tied to Europe and Florida than California?

The topic of nonstop service from California to EZE & GRU, and more specifically, on AA from LAX, has been covered at length on this same thread over the past few months. Quick answer: No, we won't see AA return on the shorth or medium term to these two routes, unless either Brazil or Argentina experience a remarkable economic boom, which does not see to be on the cards. If and then, GRU has better chances than EZE. The airline has been unequivocally clear about that. In the meantime and for the foreseeable future, connections at DFW (AA) or IAH (UA) are the best ways to reach California from both BA and SP.

SFO does not have enough daily demand to both cities to support a profitable daily service to either city; most of the Spanish speakers in California are from Mexico and Central America. We, Argentinians in California, represent less than 1% of those 9M. Certainly not enough to move any needle.

Midwestindy wrote:

ASFlyer wrote:

SumChristianus wrote:

I wanted to summarize the "pretty incredible" service of AA's unnamed "hublet" at AUS:


American has 48 mainline and 26 regional (Eagle) flights of its own for a total of 74 daily departures from AUS on September 30th. With Alaska and JetBlue codeshares added in, this comes to 88, with quite respectable coverage of just about every major U.S. destination sans Washington D.C. (seasonal), Atlanta (too crowded maybe?), Detroit, Minneapolis, and Salt Lake City (a trend...).

What I'm interested in, however, are your thoughts on where/what American adds next.

Regional jet wise first because even with the pilot shortage it seems like AA has a never-ending source of regional jets for this AUS expansion:

Columbus, Pittsburgh, or Cleveland seem like the strongest possibilities in the Midwest given the current AA service to STL, IND, and CVG.

On the more maybe level, Milwaukee, Memphis, Norfolk, or Tuscon seem to have analogues in AA's ABQ, MCI, and ELP flights. Seasonal weekend flights to Jackson Hole seem possible given EGE (Steamboat Springs, CO) and ASE (Aspen). Maybe Charleston, SC?

Longer haul and mainline, maybe AA adds its own metal to SEA, SAN, and something SFO/bay area or weekend service to West Palm Beach. Maybe more full time service to Washington D.C. or Salt Lake City returning (had seasonal weekend service last Christmas I believe).

The most surprising thing about this AA operation, however, is that it exists in such a pilot and resource constrained environment as we have today ... and while I hope for it to thrive I still half wish it was Delta which had taken the initiative to build its first major Texas presence instead of AA solidifying its lead...

So I'm also wondering about the longer term viability of this operation, even with even more AUS growth. AA can't split its east-west traffic flows up too much, so AUS can't take away too much from DFW connecting flows and has to be mostly reliant on local traffic, but I find that it feels unsustainable routes like AUS-IND which didn't have service from anyone a few years ago but now has up to three carriers and four flights a day (or AUS-CVG similar) when it seems like more major routes around the country are at a weirdly low amount of capacity/frequency for AA like the ORD hub and its three banks.

So, what's next (if anything) for AA at AUS?

Is AA at AUS and AUS more generally a bubble about to burst?

Is AA growing at AUS merely by pulling resources from ORD, PHL, PHX (there was a recent discussion about AA early bank cuts on the PHX thread), etc.?

I thought I read that AA was bailing on AUS-SJU? I'm also surprised that they're flying AUS-CVG and not CMH or CLE. As for DL, they had a huge Texas presence at one time but have left that to AA and beefed up ATL. I'm sure they'd like to make AUS a focus city but it seems like there may not be enough of that pie to go around for them also, with WN, AA and UA already heavily entrenched in Texas.

I'm pretty sure AA at AUS is pretty much maxed out. They've been at that 70-75 departure level since around this time in 2021. Could be a pilot/regional issue given the systemwide capacity hasn't grown much since 2021.

However, WN hasn't added much from AUS recently either, and even disregarding gate space yields are pretty terrible last time I looked.

AA adding AUS-MEM.

6x weekly RJ route

dcajet wrote:

voxkel wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

I would hope AA restores some frequencies to their Brazil and Argentine schedules. Sao Paulo & Buenos Aires are among two huge destinations on the AA schedule not flown at pre-pandemic levels. Sydney also deserves Daily flights.

Yes really hope LAX-GRU/EZE return.

LAX-EZE seems like a route that can sustain at least a daily 789. CA is home to the second most Argentines (45K), behind only FL (58K). There are close to 9M Spanish speakers in greater LA, more than Madrid. I would imagine LAX-EZE would also have high yields primarily due to the tech and unicorn ecosystem in BA who may need a direct connection to California. (Though not sure which of SFO and LAX is higher yielding from Argentina.)

I don’t know, is Argentina business that much more tied to Europe and Florida than California?

The topic of nonstop service from California to EZE & GRU, and more specifically, on AA from LAX, has been covered at length on this same thread over the past few months. Quick answer: No, we won't see AA return on the shorth or medium term to these two routes, unless either Brazil or Argentina experience a remarkable economic boom, which does not see to be on the cards. If and then, GRU has better chances than EZE. The airline has been unequivocally clear about that. In the meantime and for the foreseeable future, connections at DFW (AA) or IAH (UA) are the best ways to reach California from both BA and SP.

SFO does not have enough daily demand to both cities to support a profitable daily service to either city; most of the Spanish speakers in California are from Mexico and Central America. We, Argentinians in California, represent less than 1% of those 9M. Certainly not enough to move any needle.

And let's not forget that LATAM flies between LAX & both LIM & SCL. I'm thinking that's another reason AA can't make it work because those flights can I'm sure provide good connections to EZE, GRU and other places. At least before, LA was oneworld, so AA could glean some benefit (codesharing), but with LA having exited oneworld, they took their traffic with them. And from what's already been said many times, it doesn't appear there's enough of a market for any additional airlines, leaving LATAM a lucrative monopoly.

cathay747 wrote:

dcajet wrote:

voxkel wrote:

Yes really hope LAX-GRU/EZE return.

LAX-EZE seems like a route that can sustain at least a daily 789. CA is home to the second most Argentines (45K), behind only FL (58K). There are close to 9M Spanish speakers in greater LA, more than Madrid. I would imagine LAX-EZE would also have high yields primarily due to the tech and unicorn ecosystem in BA who may need a direct connection to California. (Though not sure which of SFO and LAX is higher yielding from Argentina.)

I don’t know, is Argentina business that much more tied to Europe and Florida than California?

The topic of nonstop service from California to EZE & GRU, and more specifically, on AA from LAX, has been covered at length on this same thread over the past few months. Quick answer: No, we won't see AA return on the shorth or medium term to these two routes, unless either Brazil or Argentina experience a remarkable economic boom, which does not see to be on the cards. If and then, GRU has better chances than EZE. The airline has been unequivocally clear about that. In the meantime and for the foreseeable future, connections at DFW (AA) or IAH (UA) are the best ways to reach California from both BA and SP.

SFO does not have enough daily demand to both cities to support a profitable daily service to either city; most of the Spanish speakers in California are from Mexico and Central America. We, Argentinians in California, represent less than 1% of those 9M. Certainly not enough to move any needle.

And let's not forget that LATAM flies between LAX & both LIM & SCL. I'm thinking that's another reason AA can't make it work because those flights can I'm sure provide good connections to EZE, GRU and other places. At least before, LA was oneworld, so AA could glean some benefit (codesharing), but with LA having exited oneworld, they took their traffic with them. And from what's already been said many times, it doesn't appear there's enough of a market for any additional airlines, leaving LATAM a lucrative monopoly.

Although LIM has a sizable demand to/from LAX (Peruvians make up the largest South American immigrant community in the LA Metro area), LATAM's flight from LIM & SCL are made possible to a large extent by connections from Argentina (AEP, COR, EZE, MDZ currently, ROS, TUC & SLA remain suspended) and Brazil (GIG, GRU and POA currently). LATAM (and previously LAN) took the franchise left vacant in the early 2000s by AR and RG and made it far larger and more successful.

voxkel wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

I would hope AA restores some frequencies to their Brazil and Argentine schedules. Sao Paulo & Buenos Aires are among two huge destinations on the AA schedule not flown at pre-pandemic levels. Sydney also deserves Daily flights.

Yes really hope LAX-GRU/EZE return.

LAX-EZE seems like a route that can sustain at least a daily 789. CA is home to the second most Argentines (45K), behind only FL (58K). There are close to 9M Spanish speakers in greater LA, more than Madrid. I would imagine LAX-EZE would also have high yields primarily due to the tech and unicorn ecosystem in BA who may need a direct connection to California. (Though not sure which of SFO and LAX is higher yielding from Argentina.)

I don’t know, is Argentina business that much more tied to Europe and Florida than California?

With the current state of the Argentine economy, and long haul reductions at LAX, this won't happen anytime soon. Argentina has stronger ties to Spain, Italy than the US as a whole.

MAH4546 wrote:

miaami wrote:

Looks like AA has also dropped its plans to fly MIA-OCJ.

They have not. The airport has not been certified for ERJ-175 operations in time so ticket sales are suspended as the certification process continues.

Which certification is pending?

alasizon wrote:

MAH4546 wrote:

miaami wrote:

Looks like AA has also dropped its plans to fly MIA-OCJ.

They have not. The airport has not been certified for ERJ-175 operations in time so ticket sales are suspended as the certification process continues.

Which certification is pending?

This somewhat explains the postponement: https://fl360aero.com/detail/why-did-american-airlines-postpone-it-s-ambitious-northern-jamaica-flight-plans-from-miami/1068

Sounds more like a navigational aid/safety infrastructure issue than an aircraft-specific certification, though the two go hand in hand in some ways.

ASFlyer wrote:

SumChristianus wrote:

I wanted to summarize the "pretty incredible" service of AA's unnamed "hublet" at AUS:


American has 48 mainline and 26 regional (Eagle) flights of its own for a total of 74 daily departures from AUS on September 30th. With Alaska and JetBlue codeshares added in, this comes to 88, with quite respectable coverage of just about every major U.S. destination sans Washington D.C. (seasonal), Atlanta (too crowded maybe?), Detroit, Minneapolis, and Salt Lake City (a trend...).

What I'm interested in, however, are your thoughts on where/what American adds next.

Regional jet wise first because even with the pilot shortage it seems like AA has a never-ending source of regional jets for this AUS expansion:

Columbus, Pittsburgh, or Cleveland seem like the strongest possibilities in the Midwest given the current AA service to STL, IND, and CVG.

On the more maybe level, Milwaukee, Memphis, Norfolk, or Tuscon seem to have analogues in AA's ABQ, MCI, and ELP flights. Seasonal weekend flights to Jackson Hole seem possible given EGE (Steamboat Springs, CO) and ASE (Aspen). Maybe Charleston, SC?

Longer haul and mainline, maybe AA adds its own metal to SEA, SAN, and something SFO/bay area or weekend service to West Palm Beach. Maybe more full time service to Washington D.C. or Salt Lake City returning (had seasonal weekend service last Christmas I believe).

The most surprising thing about this AA operation, however, is that it exists in such a pilot and resource constrained environment as we have today ... and while I hope for it to thrive I still half wish it was Delta which had taken the initiative to build its first major Texas presence instead of AA solidifying its lead...

So I'm also wondering about the longer term viability of this operation, even with even more AUS growth. AA can't split its east-west traffic flows up too much, so AUS can't take away too much from DFW connecting flows and has to be mostly reliant on local traffic, but I find that it feels unsustainable routes like AUS-IND which didn't have service from anyone a few years ago but now has up to three carriers and four flights a day (or AUS-CVG similar) when it seems like more major routes around the country are at a weirdly low amount of capacity/frequency for AA like the ORD hub and its three banks.

So, what's next (if anything) for AA at AUS?

Is AA at AUS and AUS more generally a bubble about to burst?

Is AA growing at AUS merely by pulling resources from ORD, PHL, PHX (there was a recent discussion about AA early bank cuts on the PHX thread), etc.?

I'm also surprised that they're flying AUS-CVG and not CMH or CLE.

WN beat them to AUS-CMH, daily service started in March.

Midwestindy wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

ASFlyer wrote:

I thought I read that AA was bailing on AUS-SJU? I'm also surprised that they're flying AUS-CVG and not CMH or CLE. As for DL, they had a huge Texas presence at one time but have left that to AA and beefed up ATL. I'm sure they'd like to make AUS a focus city but it seems like there may not be enough of that pie to go around for them also, with WN, AA and UA already heavily entrenched in Texas.

I'm pretty sure AA at AUS is pretty much maxed out. They've been at that 70-75 departure level since around this time in 2021. Could be a pilot/regional issue given the systemwide capacity hasn't grown much since 2021.

However, WN hasn't added much from AUS recently either, and even disregarding gate space yields are pretty terrible last time I looked.

AA adding AUS-MEM.

6x weekly RJ route

Also adding AUS-RSW and AUS=PSP as part of the new service to MEM.

Another executive change at American. Greg Schwendinger appointed president of AA cargo. He formerly worked at AA until 2020 in financial planning and analysis.

https://theloadstar.com/american-airlin ... president/

PI4EVR wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

I'm pretty sure AA at AUS is pretty much maxed out. They've been at that 70-75 departure level since around this time in 2021. Could be a pilot/regional issue given the systemwide capacity hasn't grown much since 2021.

However, WN hasn't added much from AUS recently either, and even disregarding gate space yields are pretty terrible last time I looked.

AA adding AUS-MEM.

6x weekly RJ route

Also adding AUS-RSW and AUS=PSP as part of the new service to MEM.

Seasonal, I assume. Less than daily?

AVLAirlineFreq wrote:

PI4EVR wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

AA adding AUS-MEM.

6x weekly RJ route

Also adding AUS-RSW and AUS=PSP as part of the new service to MEM.

Seasonal, I assume. Less than daily?

AUS-RSW/PSP isn't new. They are just extending the season.

Previously, the airline had planned to fly both routes on select days in November, December and January during peak holiday periods. Now, American will fly these routes on a daily basis between Jan. 10 and May 4, 2023.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/american- ... bean-cuts/

asuflyer wrote:

voxkel wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

I would hope AA restores some frequencies to their Brazil and Argentine schedules. Sao Paulo & Buenos Aires are among two huge destinations on the AA schedule not flown at pre-pandemic levels. Sydney also deserves Daily flights.

Yes really hope LAX-GRU/EZE return.

LAX-EZE seems like a route that can sustain at least a daily 789. CA is home to the second most Argentines (45K), behind only FL (58K). There are close to 9M Spanish speakers in greater LA, more than Madrid. I would imagine LAX-EZE would also have high yields primarily due to the tech and unicorn ecosystem in BA who may need a direct connection to California. (Though not sure which of SFO and LAX is higher yielding from Argentina.)

I don’t know, is Argentina business that much more tied to Europe and Florida than California?

With the current state of the Argentine economy, and long haul reductions at LAX, this won't happen anytime soon. Argentina has stronger ties to Spain, Italy than the US as a whole.

As a side note, and in spite of the high inflation, currently air travel is booming in Argentina, both domestically and internationally, CAPA had an interesting analysis about it (behind a pay wall): https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/ ... robust-621.

Re International travel, there is a record number of foreign arrivals attracted by the very favorable exchange rate. And, no surprises here, Argentinians continue to travel abroad, mainly to the US, Brazil, Europe and the Caribbean. AA is back to 3x d EZE-Miami flights for periods of the summer season.

Talkative Vasu Raja appeared at the Skift Forum yesterday.

Basically reemphasized the airline was seeing shifts in travel patterns as ever more companies have shifted work from anywhere models which are driving blended leisure and work trips. Traditional business-travel heavy markets like New York and San Francisco are lagging while a market like Bozeman, Montana is booming as customers seek outdoor oriented destinations for their combined leisure work trips.

He also reconfirmed that internationally AA would lean heavier on partners like BA, JAL and Qatar while AA focuses on its domestic system.

https://skift.com/2022/09/20/american-a ... ss-travel/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... les-growth