GSP psgr wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

theVagabond wrote:

The A330's are coming back!

AA uncancels the A350 order

Honestly, given Boeing’s unbelievable sustained levels of continuing incompetence, American would be wise to hedge their widebody fleet and not be entirely dependent on a single supplier. The 350 as a replacement for the 772 fleet would make sense.

One would think the A330-900 could be a good option too, given most of AA's long haul is to S America and Europe, well within its capabilities. I guess it just comes down to purchase price and operating costs...

mikejepp wrote:

GSP psgr wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

AA uncancels the A350 order

Honestly, given Boeing’s unbelievable sustained levels of continuing incompetence, American would be wise to hedge their widebody fleet and not be entirely dependent on a single supplier. The 350 as a replacement for the 772 fleet would make sense.

One would think the A330-900 could be a good option too, given most of AA's long haul is to S America and Europe, well within its capabilities. I guess it just comes down to purchase price and operating costs...

AA isn’t going to add an Airbus Widebody, they want fleet simplification.

Training, Simulators, spare parts etc are too costly for a handful of planes.

Swed3120 wrote:

MAH4546 wrote:

N62NA wrote:

You realize I "don't like to accept this fact..." Huh? Where are you getting THAT from?

Your statement that Miami to CDG "still operates" is misleading. It's not currently operating. I clarified it for you.

American continues to operate AA 62/63. It absolutely operates, you can literally go book the flight. Like many other key trans-Atlantic routes, AA is currently unable to service this year-round.

Let’s clear this once an for all.
Neither of AA62 or 63 currently operate. The last flight was on the 25th of march. The route will restart on the 28th of October.
On sale does not mean operating and operating doesn’t mean on sale.
The flight is not in the current schedule, therefore is not operating.

Exactly. It's common sense!

Boof02671 wrote:

mikejepp wrote:

GSP psgr wrote:

Honestly, given Boeing’s unbelievable sustained levels of continuing incompetence, American would be wise to hedge their widebody fleet and not be entirely dependent on a single supplier. The 350 as a replacement for the 772 fleet would make sense.

One would think the A330-900 could be a good option too, given most of AA's long haul is to S America and Europe, well within its capabilities. I guess it just comes down to purchase price and operating costs...

AA isn’t going to add an Airbus Widebody, they want fleet simplification.

Training, Simulators, spare parts etc are too costly for a handful of planes.

If American ordered 350s or 330neos on a one for one basis to replace the 772s, there would be 47 of them. That’s a plenty big enough fleet. Also, one has to get renewals to have a fleet. Boeing isn’t doing so hot in that department this year, or last year, or the year before that either.

GSP psgr wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

mikejepp wrote:

One would think the A330-900 could be a good option too, given most of AA's long haul is to S America and Europe, well within its capabilities. I guess it just comes down to purchase price and operating costs...

AA isn’t going to add an Airbus Widebody, they want fleet simplification.

Training, Simulators, spare parts etc are too costly for a handful of planes.

If American ordered 350s or 330neos on a one for one basis to replace the 772s, there would be 47 of them. That’s a plenty big enough fleet. Also, one has to get renewals to have a fleet. Boeing isn’t doing so hot in that department this year, or last year, or the year before that either.

More delays and quality control programs will give the US3, and more specifically American and United, a lot more leverage over Boeing to discount and discount deeply. American has made fleet simplification its focus, for now, but if the 787 program continues to experience delays, I can see AA turning back to Airbus and there too, they might get a discount, even if not as favorable as one from Boeing. A350s, A330NEOs are a long shot for AA but they are not entirely off the table if AA's growth plans continue to be hobbled by one supplier.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

GSP psgr wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

AA isn’t going to add an Airbus Widebody, they want fleet simplification.

Training, Simulators, spare parts etc are too costly for a handful of planes.

If American ordered 350s or 330neos on a one for one basis to replace the 772s, there would be 47 of them. That’s a plenty big enough fleet. Also, one has to get renewals to have a fleet. Boeing isn’t doing so hot in that department this year, or last of year, or the year before that either.

More delays and quality control programs will give the US3, and more specifically American and United, a lot more leverage over Boeing to discount and discount deeply. American has made fleet simplification its focus, for now, but if the 787 program continues to experience delays, I can see AA turning back to Airbus and there too, they might get a discount, even if not as favorable as one from Boeing. A350s, A330NEOs are a long shot for AA but they are not entirely off the table if AA's growth plans continue to be hobbled by one supplier.

United is keeping their 350 order on the books, either as insurance or for other reasons. It’s a nice sword to hold over Boeing’s head. United is a lot closer to Boeing than American is, so some sort of Airbus order wouldn’t shock me. American needs wide body capacity badly, and Boeing might only be able to deliver 3-4 frames this year for them. I think Airbus would be highly motivated to get AA frames ASAP if American wanted them.

GSP psgr wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

GSP psgr wrote:

If American ordered 350s or 330neos on a one for one basis to replace the 772s, there would be 47 of them. That’s a plenty big enough fleet. Also, one has to get renewals to have a fleet. Boeing isn’t doing so hot in that department this year, or last of year, or the year before that either.

More delays and quality control programs will give the US3, and more specifically American and United, a lot more leverage over Boeing to discount and discount deeply. American has made fleet simplification its focus, for now, but if the 787 program continues to experience delays, I can see AA turning back to Airbus and there too, they might get a discount, even if not as favorable as one from Boeing. A350s, A330NEOs are a long shot for AA but they are not entirely off the table if AA's growth plans continue to be hobbled by one supplier.

United is keeping their 350 order on the books, either as insurance or for other reasons. It’s a nice sword to hold over Boeing’s head. United is a lot closer to Boeing than American is, so some sort of Airbus order wouldn’t shock me. American needs wide body capacity badly, and Boeing might only be able to deliver 3-4 frames this year for them. I think Airbus would be highly motivated to get AA frames ASAP if American wanted them.

AA 788s have all been delivered and the last one delivered N883BM is on property at MIA. No more widebody aircraft are scheduled for delivery to AA this year. Boeing had many whitetail GE powered aircraft available recently and AA did not take any so I doubt they are as desperate as some allude to. The next widebody order from AA is the 77E replacement and could be a mix of 789 and 78J or strictly 78J.

JohanTally wrote:

GSP psgr wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

More delays and quality control programs will give the US3, and more specifically American and United, a lot more leverage over Boeing to discount and discount deeply. American has made fleet simplification its focus, for now, but if the 787 program continues to experience delays, I can see AA turning back to Airbus and there too, they might get a discount, even if not as favorable as one from Boeing. A350s, A330NEOs are a long shot for AA but they are not entirely off the table if AA's growth plans continue to be hobbled by one supplier.

United is keeping their 350 order on the books, either as insurance or for other reasons. It’s a nice sword to hold over Boeing’s head. United is a lot closer to Boeing than American is, so some sort of Airbus order wouldn’t shock me. American needs wide body capacity badly, and Boeing might only be able to deliver 3-4 frames this year for them. I think Airbus would be highly motivated to get AA frames ASAP if American wanted them.

AA 788s have all been delivered and the last one delivered N883BM is on property at MIA. No more widebody aircraft are scheduled for delivery to AA this year. Boeing had many whitetail GE powered aircraft available recently and AA did not take any so I doubt they are as desperate as some allude to. The next widebody order from AA is the 77E replacement and could be a mix of 789 and 78J or strictly 78J.

I think most on this Board would be shocked it the 78J didn't find its way to AA's Fleet at some point.

theVagabond wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

GSP psgr wrote:

United is keeping their 350 order on the books, either as insurance or for other reasons. It’s a nice sword to hold over Boeing’s head. United is a lot closer to Boeing than American is, so some sort of Airbus order wouldn’t shock me. American needs wide body capacity badly, and Boeing might only be able to deliver 3-4 frames this year for them. I think Airbus would be highly motivated to get AA frames ASAP if American wanted them.

AA 788s have all been delivered and the last one delivered N883BM is on property at MIA. No more widebody aircraft are scheduled for delivery to AA this year. Boeing had many whitetail GE powered aircraft available recently and AA did not take any so I doubt they are as desperate as some allude to. The next widebody order from AA is the 77E replacement and could be a mix of 789 and 78J or strictly 78J.

I think most on this Board would be shocked it the 78J didn't find its way to AA's Fleet at some point.

I can see the 78J replacing some 77W routes. The 77W are fairly young still so no reason to retire them. More like the 78J would give AA flexibility to use the 77W on cargo heavy routes.
AA only has one route that is over 8000 miles so no need for the 779. The high capacity of the 78J should be great for their network especially at JFK

PHLspecial wrote:

theVagabond wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

AA 788s have all been delivered and the last one delivered N883BM is on property at MIA. No more widebody aircraft are scheduled for delivery to AA this year. Boeing had many whitetail GE powered aircraft available recently and AA did not take any so I doubt they are as desperate as some allude to. The next widebody order from AA is the 77E replacement and could be a mix of 789 and 78J or strictly 78J.

I think most on this Board would be shocked it the 78J didn't find its way to AA's Fleet at some point.

I can see the 78J replacing some 77W routes. The 77W are fairly young still so no reason to retire them. More like the 78J would give AA flexibility to use the 77W on cargo heavy routes.
AA only has one route that is over 8000 miles so no need for the 779. The high capacity of the 78J should be great for their network especially at JFK

Is that route JFK-DEL? Now that the NEA is unwinding, those JFK long haul routes to both DOH and DEL could be in jeopardy.

JohanTally wrote:

GSP psgr wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

More delays and quality control programs will give the US3, and more specifically American and United, a lot more leverage over Boeing to discount and discount deeply. American has made fleet simplification its focus, for now, but if the 787 program continues to experience delays, I can see AA turning back to Airbus and there too, they might get a discount, even if not as favorable as one from Boeing. A350s, A330NEOs are a long shot for AA but they are not entirely off the table if AA's growth plans continue to be hobbled by one supplier.

United is keeping their 350 order on the books, either as insurance or for other reasons. It’s a nice sword to hold over Boeing’s head. United is a lot closer to Boeing than American is, so some sort of Airbus order wouldn’t shock me. American needs wide body capacity badly, and Boeing might only be able to deliver 3-4 frames this year for them. I think Airbus would be highly motivated to get AA frames ASAP if American wanted them.

AA 788s have all been delivered and the last one delivered N883BM is on property at MIA. No more widebody aircraft are scheduled for delivery to AA this year. Boeing had many whitetail GE powered aircraft available recently and AA did not take any so I doubt they are as desperate as some allude to. The next widebody order from AA is the 77E replacement and could be a mix of 789 and 78J or strictly 78J.

Deliveries of 787-9s are up next.

MLIAA wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

theVagabond wrote:

I think most on this Board would be shocked it the 78J didn't find its way to AA's Fleet at some point.

I can see the 78J replacing some 77W routes. The 77W are fairly young still so no reason to retire them. More like the 78J would give AA flexibility to use the 77W on cargo heavy routes.
AA only has one route that is over 8000 miles so no need for the 779. The high capacity of the 78J should be great for their network especially at JFK

Is that route JFK-DEL? Now that the NEA is unwinding, those JFK long haul routes to both DOH and DEL could be in jeopardy.

JFK-DOH isn't really dependent on the NEA. It is there due to QR being in OW. Some of the JFK long hauls though, like ATH, DEL, TLV could, theoretically be axed as the NEA winds down, but given the surging demand, these routes could probably stick around further. There have been some remarks in other forums, captured from AA that suggest AA's TATL network at JFK is profitable.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

GSP psgr wrote:

United is keeping their 350 order on the books, either as insurance or for other reasons. It’s a nice sword to hold over Boeing’s head. United is a lot closer to Boeing than American is, so some sort of Airbus order wouldn’t shock me. American needs wide body capacity badly, and Boeing might only be able to deliver 3-4 frames this year for them. I think Airbus would be highly motivated to get AA frames ASAP if American wanted them.

AA 788s have all been delivered and the last one delivered N883BM is on property at MIA. No more widebody aircraft are scheduled for delivery to AA this year. Boeing had many whitetail GE powered aircraft available recently and AA did not take any so I doubt they are as desperate as some allude to. The next widebody order from AA is the 77E replacement and could be a mix of 789 and 78J or strictly 78J.

Deliveries of 787-9s are up next.

Of course but the next widebody order placed will be aimed at replacing the 77E. My point was if AA desperately needed frames the opportunity was there by taking up NTUs. AA seems to be sticking to the fleet plan regarding widebodies.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

MLIAA wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

I can see the 78J replacing some 77W routes. The 77W are fairly young still so no reason to retire them. More like the 78J would give AA flexibility to use the 77W on cargo heavy routes.
AA only has one route that is over 8000 miles so no need for the 779. The high capacity of the 78J should be great for their network especially at JFK

Is that route JFK-DEL? Now that the NEA is unwinding, those JFK long haul routes to both DOH and DEL could be in jeopardy.

JFK-DOH isn't really dependent on the NEA. It is there due to QR being in OW. Some of the JFK long hauls though, like ATH, DEL, TLV could, theoretically be axed as the NEA winds down, but given the surging demand, these routes could probably stick around further. There have been some remarks in other forums, captured from AA that suggest AA's TATL network at JFK is profitable.

Could we see stuff like this shifting back to PHL? It has feed and can be built up as a true connecting hub, not to mention less competition.

mikejepp wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

MLIAA wrote:

Is that route JFK-DEL? Now that the NEA is unwinding, those JFK long haul routes to both DOH and DEL could be in jeopardy.

JFK-DOH isn't really dependent on the NEA. It is there due to QR being in OW. Some of the JFK long hauls though, like ATH, DEL, TLV could, theoretically be axed as the NEA winds down, but given the surging demand, these routes could probably stick around further. There have been some remarks in other forums, captured from AA that suggest AA's TATL network at JFK is profitable.

Could we see stuff like this shifting back to PHL? It has feed and can be built up as a true connecting hub, not to mention less competition.

O&D traffic from New York is far more lucrative than connecting traffic from, say, MEM or OMA that flows through PHL. There is good reason as to why TLV is served from JFK, not PHL.

SurfandSnow wrote:

mikejepp wrote:

Could we see stuff like this shifting back to PHL? It has feed and can be built up as a true connecting hub, not to mention less competition.

O&D traffic from New York is far more lucrative than connecting traffic from, say, MEM or OMA that flows through PHL. There is good reason as to why TLV is served from JFK, not PHL.

Sure, but that doesn't answer the question of routes shifting to PHL or back to JFK for that matter.
JFK can exist as an O&D hub while PHL will be the main TATL hub should AA want to continue on this path

PHLspecial wrote:

SurfandSnow wrote:

mikejepp wrote:

Could we see stuff like this shifting back to PHL? It has feed and can be built up as a true connecting hub, not to mention less competition.

O&D traffic from New York is far more lucrative than connecting traffic from, say, MEM or OMA that flows through PHL. There is good reason as to why TLV is served from JFK, not PHL.

Sure, but that doesn't answer the question of routes shifting to PHL or back to JFK for that matter.
JFK can exist as an O&D hub while PHL will be the main TATL hub should AA want to continue on this path

PHL is probably the worst hub though in every aspect except capacity.

Isn’t PHL more profitable than JFK, especially on long haul?

BarrenLucidity wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

SurfandSnow wrote:

O&D traffic from New York is far more lucrative than connecting traffic from, say, MEM or OMA that flows through PHL. There is good reason as to why TLV is served from JFK, not PHL.

Sure, but that doesn't answer the question of routes shifting to PHL or back to JFK for that matter.
JFK can exist as an O&D hub while PHL will be the main TATL hub should AA want to continue on this path

PHL is probably the worst hub though in every aspect except capacity.

Sure it maybe worse in appearance but it's a free fortress hub. It has 126 gates and no competition. Can't get better than than for an airline

mikejepp wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

MLIAA wrote:

Is that route JFK-DEL? Now that the NEA is unwinding, those JFK long haul routes to both DOH and DEL could be in jeopardy.

JFK-DOH isn't really dependent on the NEA. It is there due to QR being in OW. Some of the JFK long hauls though, like ATH, DEL, TLV could, theoretically be axed as the NEA winds down, but given the surging demand, these routes could probably stick around further. There have been some remarks in other forums, captured from AA that suggest AA's TATL network at JFK is profitable.

Could we see stuff like this shifting back to PHL? It has feed and can be built up as a true connecting hub, not to mention less competition.

As the NEA took shape, nothing shifted from PHL to JFK route wise. Planes, specifically E170s, did. To LGA too.

The last time AA "moved" a TATL route to PHL was in 2015, when it shifted JFK-ZRH to PHL.

TATL for AA out of JFK seems to do well, given the demand environment. My sense is that the 321XLR will help open more routes from both JFK and PHL.

MLIAA wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

theVagabond wrote:

I think most on this Board would be shocked it the 78J didn't find its way to AA's Fleet at some point.

I can see the 78J replacing some 77W routes. The 77W are fairly young still so no reason to retire them. More like the 78J would give AA flexibility to use the 77W on cargo heavy routes.
AA only has one route that is over 8000 miles so no need for the 779. The high capacity of the 78J should be great for their network especially at JFK

Is that route JFK-DEL? Now that the NEA is unwinding, those JFK long haul routes to both DOH and DEL could be in jeopardy.

Is there any data that suggests the DEL route is dependent on the NEA? Those flights are usually packed and even with the longer route, it seems to be doing quite well.

BarrenLucidity wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

SurfandSnow wrote:

O&D traffic from New York is far more lucrative than connecting traffic from, say, MEM or OMA that flows through PHL. There is good reason as to why TLV is served from JFK, not PHL.

Sure, but that doesn't answer the question of routes shifting to PHL or back to JFK for that matter.
JFK can exist as an O&D hub while PHL will be the main TATL hub should AA want to continue on this path

PHL is probably the worst hub though in every aspect except capacity.

PHL has capacity issues, too. Same configuration as EWR. Only difference is that they’re handling half the movements they did 15 years ago.

airboss787 wrote:

MLIAA wrote:

Is that route JFK-DEL? Now that the NEA is unwinding, those JFK long haul routes to both DOH and DEL could be in jeopardy.

Is there any data that suggests the DEL route is dependent on the NEA? Those flights are usually packed and even with the longer route, it seems to be doing quite well.

AA can likely make its TATL nonstop routes work out of JFK without the NEA as AA has O&D traffic and connecting feed from some markets that do not have B6 service to support AA TATL nonstops from JFK.

There are also some connecting opportunities available on the DOH end of JFK-DOH to support AA JFK-DOH nonstop service without the NEA.

AA has plans to grow CLT from the current ~600 daily departures to approaching 800 departures in 2027 when a 4th parallel runway opens.

Per COO David Seymour:
“When our Charlotte hub does really well, our system does really well,” Seymour said. “That’s why you see us double down here in Charlotte.”

https://airlineweekly.com/2023/06/ameri ... ew-runway/

LAXintl wrote:

AA has plans to grow CLT from the current ~600 daily departures to approaching 800 departures in 2027 when a 4th parallel runway opens.

Per COO David Seymour:
“When our Charlotte hub does really well, our system does really well,” Seymour said. “That’s why you see us double down here in Charlotte.”

https://airlineweekly.com/2023/06/ameri ... ew-runway/

Great, so more congestion waiting for a gate. I remember seeing some taxiway improvements coming, but the bottleneck between B and C still causes a lot of delays and not sure when/how that gets fixed?

theVagabond wrote:

LAXintl wrote:

AA has plans to grow CLT from the current ~600 daily departures to approaching 800 departures in 2027 when a 4th parallel runway opens.

Per COO David Seymour:
“When our Charlotte hub does really well, our system does really well,” Seymour said. “That’s why you see us double down here in Charlotte.”

https://airlineweekly.com/2023/06/ameri ... ew-runway/

Great, so more congestion waiting for a gate. I remember seeing some taxiway improvements coming, but the bottleneck between B and C still causes a lot of delays and not sure when/how that gets fixed?

The dual taxilane opening on E should hopefully help relieve some of the pressure overall as less aircraft are on the actual taxiways at any given time since there is more ramp space to work with.

alasizon wrote:

theVagabond wrote:

LAXintl wrote:

AA has plans to grow CLT from the current ~600 daily departures to approaching 800 departures in 2027 when a 4th parallel runway opens.

Per COO David Seymour:
“When our Charlotte hub does really well, our system does really well,” Seymour said. “That’s why you see us double down here in Charlotte.”

https://airlineweekly.com/2023/06/ameri ... ew-runway/

Great, so more congestion waiting for a gate. I remember seeing some taxiway improvements coming, but the bottleneck between B and C still causes a lot of delays and not sure when/how that gets fixed?

The dual taxilane opening on E should hopefully help relieve some of the pressure overall as less aircraft are on the actual taxiways at any given time since there is more ramp space to work with.

The south ramp expansion project is what will really relieve congestion but that's at least another 5 years away.

[quote="LAXintl"]AA has plans to grow CLT from the current ~600 daily departures to approaching 800 departures in 2027 when a 4th parallel runway opens.

Why does it take >3 years to build a runway?

Chapmads wrote:

LAXintl wrote:

AA has plans to grow CLT from the current ~600 daily departures to approaching 800 departures in 2027 when a 4th parallel runway opens.

Why does it take >3 years to build a runway?

It does seem like a long timeline for the project. They are relocating roads near the airport and this runway is sandwiched between 2 very busy runways which have taxiways through where this runway will be located. Also apparently they haven't secured all the federal funding but are hoping that during construction they will receive more so this might contribute to this projects 4 year duration.

BarrenLucidity wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

SurfandSnow wrote:

O&D traffic from New York is far more lucrative than connecting traffic from, say, MEM or OMA that flows through PHL. There is good reason as to why TLV is served from JFK, not PHL.

Sure, but that doesn't answer the question of routes shifting to PHL or back to JFK for that matter.
JFK can exist as an O&D hub while PHL will be the main TATL hub should AA want to continue on this path

PHL is probably the worst hub though in every aspect except capacity.

Other than lacking a proper (albeit long delayed) international first class lounge - why is it worse in every aspect? The B/C concourses have been upgraded, restaurants and amenities throughout. The airport is quite compact making 90% of AA connections pretty quick and painless. No need to jump on an absurdly over-engineered train to drive me to weird far out places. To me, MIA, DFW, and CLT all feel like over-crowded, sprawling zoos relative to PHL.

leader1 wrote:

BarrenLucidity wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

Sure, but that doesn't answer the question of routes shifting to PHL or back to JFK for that matter.
JFK can exist as an O&D hub while PHL will be the main TATL hub should AA want to continue on this path

PHL is probably the worst hub though in every aspect except capacity.

PHL has capacity issues, too. Same configuration as EWR. Only difference is that they’re handling half the movements they did 15 years ago.

I think PHL problems is the taxiway bottlenecks and the lack of dual lane taxiways. Maybe the only capacity issue I see is the lack of FIS gates and maybe short on widebody gates.

Multiple gauge changes on AA's deep Sóuth America network from the DFW and MIA hubs for the upcoming NW23/24 season.

* DFW - EZE
787-8 replaced by following aircraft, 1x d
29OCT23 – 20DEC23 787-9
21DEC23 – 13FEB24 777-200ER
From 14FEB24 787-9

* MIA - EZE
eff 29OCT23 Increase from 14 to 17 weekly (21 weekly from 22DEC23. Service on/after 09JAN24 will continue to be served 21x w)
eff 29OCT23 1 daily 777-300ER, 2 daily 787-8 (Previous: 1 daily 777-200ER, 2 daily 787-8)

* MIA - GIG
05DEC23 – 29FEB24 Increase from 7 to 10 weekly, 777-200ER (14 weekly from 21DEC23, 11 from 07JAN24, 10 from 15JAN24; AA985/988 787-8 replaces 777-200ER from 08JAN24)

* MIA - GRU
21DEC23 – 07JAN24 Planned 3rd daily with 787-8 removed

* MIA - SCL
777-200ER replaces 787-8 during following periods, 1 daily: 29OCT23 – 07JAN24, 15FEB24 – 04MAR24

https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/230612-aanw23inc

LondonFed wrote:

BarrenLucidity wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

Sure, but that doesn't answer the question of routes shifting to PHL or back to JFK for that matter.
JFK can exist as an O&D hub while PHL will be the main TATL hub should AA want to continue on this path

PHL is probably the worst hub though in every aspect except capacity.

Other than lacking a proper (albeit long delayed) international first class lounge - why is it worse in every aspect? The B/C concourses have been upgraded, restaurants and amenities throughout. The airport is quite compact making 90% of AA connections pretty quick and painless. No need to jump on an absurdly over-engineered train to drive me to weird far out places. To me, MIA, DFW, and CLT all feel like over-crowded, sprawling zoos relative to PHL.

Have you ever had to connect from a mainline gate to F? Its either a bus around the airport or a very long walk. The walks even from A gates to B or C can be very long as well. PHL is better than it was, but it is not any easier than CLT or DFW and with the Admirals Club situation and the lack of an Airtrain you could argue its worse.

PHLspecial wrote:

leader1 wrote:

BarrenLucidity wrote:

PHL is probably the worst hub though in every aspect except capacity.

PHL has capacity issues, too. Same configuration as EWR. Only difference is that they’re handling half the movements they did 15 years ago.

I think PHL problems is the taxiway bottlenecks and the lack of dual lane taxiways. Maybe the only capacity issue I see is the lack of FIS gates and maybe short on widebody gates.

Same layout as EWR. Problems start there. PHL is OK now because it’s handling half the movements as it did before. As soon as movements go up, problems will return.

brooklynchris13 wrote:

LondonFed wrote:

BarrenLucidity wrote:

PHL is probably the worst hub though in every aspect except capacity.

Other than lacking a proper (albeit long delayed) international first class lounge - why is it worse in every aspect? The B/C concourses have been upgraded, restaurants and amenities throughout. The airport is quite compact making 90% of AA connections pretty quick and painless. No need to jump on an absurdly over-engineered train to dr
ive me to weird far out places. To me, MIA, DFW, and CLT all feel like over-crowded, sprawling zoos relative to PHL.

Have you ever had to connect from a mainline gate to F? Its either a bus around the airport or a very long walk. The walks even from A gates to B or C can be very long as well. PHL is better than it was, but it is not any easier than CLT or DFW and with the Admirals Club situation and the lack of an Airtrain you could argue its worse.

Sure, Terminal F is a bit remote - but I wonder how much concern AA is paying to the plight of the connecting pax from Grand Rapids or Albany when it weighs its hub stature. I think F accounts for like 15% of the airport traffic. I've connected dozens of times at PHL and every time mainline to mainline through either A, B, C - maybe I'm just lucky. And those walks are typically less than 10 minutes and don't involve me escalator-ing up/down/ waiting for train/on train/ escalator-ing back up/down, etc.

Add in proximity - 15-20 minute car ride or 20minute train ride to Center City... look, I'm not saying PHL is a crown jewel of perfection, but "the worst hub in every aspect" is a bit of a hyperbolic stretch.

LondonFed wrote:

I think F accounts for like 15% of the airport traffic.

I would imagine it would be more.

Tons of routes that used to exclusively see (or were largely operated by) mainline or E-Jets, like ALB/BUF/BDL/PVD, are now only operated by Piedmont ERJs.

LondonFed wrote:

BarrenLucidity wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

Sure, but that doesn't answer the question of routes shifting to PHL or back to JFK for that matter.
JFK can exist as an O&D hub while PHL will be the main TATL hub should AA want to continue on this path

PHL is probably the worst hub though in every aspect except capacity.

Other than lacking a proper (albeit long delayed) international first class lounge - why is it worse in every aspect? The B/C concourses have been upgraded, restaurants and amenities throughout. The airport is quite compact making 90% of AA connections pretty quick and painless. No need to jump on an absurdly over-engineered train to drive me to weird far out places. To me, MIA, DFW, and CLT all feel like over-crowded, sprawling zoos relative to PHL.

Literally just transited via CLT to get back to PHL and zoo is 1000% the best way to describe that place. People were on top of each other, every food place had lines, bathrooms were packed to the gills. Was incredibly unpleasant.

aerace wrote:

LondonFed wrote:

BarrenLucidity wrote:

PHL is probably the worst hub though in every aspect except capacity.

Other than lacking a proper (albeit long delayed) international first class lounge - why is it worse in every aspect? The B/C concourses have been upgraded, restaurants and amenities throughout. The airport is quite compact making 90% of AA connections pretty quick and painless. No need to jump on an absurdly over-engineered train to drive me to weird far out places. To me, MIA, DFW, and CLT all feel like over-crowded, sprawling zoos relative to PHL.

Literally just transited via CLT to get back to PHL and zoo is 1000% the best way to describe that place. People were on top of each other, every food place had lines, bathrooms were packed to the gills. Was incredibly unpleasant.

American under-invests in the "franchise" element of its hubs and key markets, relative to its next 2 largest competitors. AA loves CLT because the costs are lower and it controls much of the traffic there. The airport was never designed to be a 600-800 a day operation and while improvements are continuously being made, it is a generally unpleasant place, with narrow concourses, low-quality food options, with a few exceptions and challenging to make connections given its layout. DFW's fundamental design is from the 1960s when the airport was conceived and 1970s when it was built. It too has its limitations, but with a captive market, AA doesn't seem to feel the need do to either of these airports, what DL does with its hubs or UA has been doing with DEN, EWR, etc...

American's balance sheet remains constrained by its huge debt, a necessary hangover from its resistance for Chapter 11 in the wake of 9/11 and the need to re-fleet in 2011 with a massive, 400 plane order. The airline is running a better operation nowadays, but it lags in the perception department. Flew BCN-JFK a week ago. Flight left early, arrived early, and was serviced on a well maintained 777 but the crew were indifferent, never made eye contact, made few announcements, and just did their jobs (well) but without going much beyond the scope. DL and UA create the illusion they provide a better passenger experience. Whether they actually do or not, is debatable.

USAirALB wrote:

LondonFed wrote:

I think F accounts for like 15% of the airport traffic.

I would imagine it would be more.

Tons of routes that used to exclusively see (or were largely operated by) mainline or E-Jets, like ALB/BUF/BDL/PVD, are now only operated by Piedmont ERJs.

It was like 18% a few years ago… and I think it’s been slightly scaled back in the last few. Anyways, it’s in the ball park. I’m being a bit glib - but a lot of the PHL complainers are people who are F connectors. If you live in Albany or Grand Rapids and expect a flawless, perfectly effective connecting experience for intercontinental and international flights then…………maybe don’t live in Albany or Grand Rapids. For the other 80% of us in civilization, the connecting experience at PHL is actually pretty chill relative to the other airports I mentioned imo

dcajet wrote:

https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/230612-aanw23inc

PHL-BCN/DUB/LIS year round service... Sounds great!!

LondonFed wrote:

USAirALB wrote:

LondonFed wrote:

I think F accounts for like 15% of the airport traffic.

I would imagine it would be more.

Tons of routes that used to exclusively see (or were largely operated by) mainline or E-Jets, like ALB/BUF/BDL/PVD, are now only operated by Piedmont ERJs.

It was like 18% a few years ago… and I think it’s been slightly scaled back in the last few. Anyways, it’s in the ball park. I’m being a bit glib - but a lot of the PHL complainers are people who are F connectors. If you live in Albany or Grand Rapids and expect a flawless, perfectly effective connecting experience for intercontinental and international flights then…………maybe don’t live in Albany or Grand Rapids. For the other 80% of us in civilization, the connecting experience at PHL is actually pretty chill relative to the other airports I mentioned imo

I don't find F to be particularly bad, so I am not complaining (I also would have no reason to connect via PHL) but I think you are discounting the fact that several medium and larger cities (I'm not sure why you keep bringing up ALB and GRR as if they are in the sticks) have been down-gauged to the point where there only service to PHL is on regional jets into/out of F.

For example, the only cities in the northeast that still have mainline or E-Jet service to PHL are BTV, PWM, and BOS (BTV and PWM are smaller than ALB/GRR, so again I am not sure why you are bringing them up).

dcajet wrote:

* MIA - GRU
21DEC23 – 07JAN24 Planned 3rd daily with 787-8 removed

I find it interesting that AA is cutting back MIA-GRU to just 2x d during one of the top travel demand times to deep South America.

LondonFed wrote:

USAirALB wrote:

LondonFed wrote:

I think F accounts for like 15% of the airport traffic.

I would imagine it would be more.

Tons of routes that used to exclusively see (or were largely operated by) mainline or E-Jets, like ALB/BUF/BDL/PVD, are now only operated by Piedmont ERJs.

It was like 18% a few years ago… and I think it’s been slightly scaled back in the last few. Anyways, it’s in the ball park. I’m being a bit glib - but a lot of the PHL complainers are people who are F connectors. If you live in Albany or Grand Rapids and expect a flawless, perfectly effective connecting experience for intercontinental and international flights then…………maybe don’t live in Albany or Grand Rapids. For the other 80% of us in civilization, the connecting experience at PHL is actually pretty chill relative to the other airports I mentioned imo

Destinations out of PHL “F” today:
- Toronto
- Montreal
- Milwaukee
- Savannah
- Harrisburg
- Columbus
- Greenville/Spartanburg
- Wilmington
- Myrtle Beach
- Greensboro
- New Orleans
- Knoxville
-Richmond
-Asheville
- Cincinnati
And others…

The idea that connections are not really using F or if they are its just small destinations is not indicated by the schedule or even my own experience. Especially now that CR9s are there, it is reaching capacity at certain gates/times and the bus ride is a pain. Especially on tight connections. CLT can and almost is its own special kind of hell, but at least there is no bus and the E gates are a little better than they were.

dcajet wrote:

dcajet wrote:

* MIA - GRU
21DEC23 – 07JAN24 Planned 3rd daily with 787-8 removed

I find it interesting that AA is cutting back MIA-GRU to just 2x d during one of the top travel demand times to deep South America.

Still 3X but the 3rd flight is now 777 instead of 787

The bus to go from F to A, B, C at PHL is not even a 5 minute ride. The walk to B and C is barely 10 minutes.

brooklynchris13 wrote:

LondonFed wrote:

USAirALB wrote:

I would imagine it would be more.

Tons of routes that used to exclusively see (or were largely operated by) mainline or E-Jets, like ALB/BUF/BDL/PVD, are now only operated by Piedmont ERJs.

It was like 18% a few years ago… and I think it’s been slightly scaled back in the last few. Anyways, it’s in the ball park. I’m being a bit glib - but a lot of the PHL complainers are people who are F connectors. If you live in Albany or Grand Rapids and expect a flawless, perfectly effective connecting experience for intercontinental and international flights then…………maybe don’t live in Albany or Grand Rapids. For the other 80% of us in civilization, the connecting experience at PHL is actually pretty chill relative to the other airports I mentioned imo

Destinations out of PHL “F” today:
- Toronto
- Montreal
- Milwaukee
- Savannah
- Harrisburg
- Columbus
- Greenville/Spartanburg
- Wilmington
- Myrtle Beach
- Greensboro
- New Orleans
- Knoxville
-Richmond
-Asheville
- Cincinnati
And others…

The idea that connections are not really using F or if they are its just small destinations is not indicated by the schedule or even my own experience. Especially now that CR9s are there, it is reaching capacity at certain gates/times and the bus ride is a pain. Especially on tight connections. CLT can and almost is its own special kind of hell, but at least there is no bus and the E gates are a little better than they were.

I've flown through PHL twice in the last year, using F and A-West both times. While it's certainly a more pleasing experience than CLT, coming back from South Africa via LHR last year, I did have to wait 20 minutes for the bus to show up to take me over to F. Immigration/Customs was also none too fast either. That said, it wasn't a mosh pit of humanity like CLT and I made my connection with ease. This winter, my Eagle flight arrived 20m late, but the bus was quick enough. The service at the Chic-fil-a was so slow I almost missed my connection and had to chug it down to A-West to make it before doors closed. All that said PHL-F is infinitely more chill than CLT-E. Would take it any day of the week over CLT-E in fact, even if it added another 30-45m of flying time. That said, at some point long term, AA is going to have to have a serious rethink about what they want to do with B, C, and F long term.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

...Flew BCN-JFK a week ago. Flight left early, arrived early, and was serviced on a well maintained 777 but the crew were indifferent, never made eye contact, made few announcements, and just did their jobs (well) but without going much beyond the scope...

I did this route May 4th; same experience - one FA really seem to enjoy chasing down people using the business lavs. Business was empty but for 1 woman; no upgrades from Premium with AS status.

GSP psgr wrote:

brooklynchris13 wrote:

LondonFed wrote:

It was like 18% a few years ago… and I think it’s been slightly scaled back in the last few. Anyways, it’s in the ball park. I’m being a bit glib - but a lot of the PHL complainers are people who are F connectors. If you live in Albany or Grand Rapids and expect a flawless, perfectly effective connecting experience for intercontinental and international flights then…………maybe don’t live in Albany or Grand Rapids. For the other 80% of us in civilization, the connecting experience at PHL is actually pretty chill relative to the other airports I mentioned imo

Destinations out of PHL “F” today:
- Toronto
- Montreal
- Milwaukee
- Savannah
- Harrisburg
- Columbus
- Greenville/Spartanburg
- Wilmington
- Myrtle Beach
- Greensboro
- New Orleans
- Knoxville
-Richmond
-Asheville
- Cincinnati
And others…

The idea that connections are not really using F or if they are its just small destinations is not indicated by the schedule or even my own experience. Especially now that CR9s are there, it is reaching capacity at certain gates/times and the bus ride is a pain. Especially on tight connections. CLT can and almost is its own special kind of hell, but at least there is no bus and the E gates are a little better than they were.

I've flown through PHL twice in the last year, using F and A-West both times. While it's certainly a more pleasing experience than CLT, coming back from South Africa via LHR last year, I did have to wait 20 minutes for the bus to show up to take me over to F. Immigration/Customs was also none too fast either. That said, it wasn't a mosh pit of humanity like CLT and I made my connection with ease. This winter, my Eagle flight arrived 20m late, but the bus was quick enough. The service at the Chic-fil-a was so slow I almost missed my connection and had to chug it down to A-West to make it before doors closed. All that said PHL-F is infinitely more chill than CLT-E. Would take it any day of the week over CLT-E in fact, even if it added another 30-45m of flying time. That said, at some point long term, AA is going to have to have a serious rethink about what they want to do with B, C, and F long term.

The airport already has long term potential plans to redesign/expand the airport with more gates which would included B C and F while keeping A-West as is

Major increase in service to the Caribbean and Mexico, including the introduction of CVG and BNA to CUN directs.
https://news.aa.com/news/news-details/2 ... fault.aspx

Shocked by the big bump to Charlotte. I was hoping some love for ORD/LAX would come along as well.