AA 773 & 787 Routes From Mia

mia305 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 6:20 am

With AA finally getting the 773 into the fleet and eventually the 787.
What are the possible routes they can start from Mia?

I know its been said on this site that Mia/Nrt was a possibility & that there
was a chance to start Mia/Jnb or Cpt.

How about Mia/Hnl?

kaitak · Thu Mar 07, 2013 6:26 am

I really can't see either MIA-NRT or MIA-HNL starting. In the former case, while it might be technically feasible, I'm not sure the traffic would be there to support it; AA would be as well off contunuing to route Florida bound/originating pax via DFW or ORD (or even JFK, but that's a bit out of the way).

As for MIA-HNL, both are effectively holiday destinations and I'm not sure if there's much in the way of cultural/business links between FL and HA; like NRT, it could also be much better served via DFW or ORD (or indeed LAX).

South Africa is probably a strong possibility, as are some points in Europe; however these could be served by 772s or 763s and if AA hasn't done so by now, maybe there isn't that much of a market.

BigGSFO · Thu Mar 07, 2013 6:32 am

MIA-NRT will happen either on JL or AA, with a 787 eventually. The traffic can support at least one flight to Asia. I wouldn't be surprised to see South Africa, Middle East as well. Also, the economics of the 787 might be a better fit for some current South America and European routes.

MIA-HNL? Nope.

mia305 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 6:40 am

Would the 787 be good on MIA-LPB or VVI currently used by a 757?
I forgot which one but one is 14,000 feet above sea level.

4engines4lnghll · Thu Mar 07, 2013 7:08 am

MIA-NRT and MIA-HNL will most likely never happen. MIA-HNL would fly straight over DFW so it just makes more sense to fly MIA-DFW and switch planes to HNL. If MIA-NRT some how does work out that's great, but that would be one long flight I would not want to go on.

mia305 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 7:22 am

I know that JL & AA have a good alliance going & it might be one or the other flying this route. I think MIA-NRT has the demand.
The flight time will be a little longer than NRT-JFK or HKG-JFK and they operate it successfully.

I know its two completely different routes. I was just comparing flight times.

keny156 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 3:29 pm

Quoting mia305 (Reply 3):

LPB is the highest airport served by AA. Flight 922 does MIA-LPB-VVI-MIA

Quoting mia305 (Reply 5):

AA doesnt operate NRT-JFK or HKG-JFK. They only operate HND-JFK.

I think MIA NRT will happen or ORD HKG at some point with the new American.

flymia · Thu Mar 07, 2013 3:37 pm

MIA-NRT will happen at some point whether it will be sucessful and stay who knows but when the 787s finally come in AA will try it at some point or maybe JAL will give it a shot.

I also thinks JNB will happen at some point but not sure what aircraft they would use.

I'm sure we will see the 787 on plenty of MIA routes especially when the 767s strart to retire. As for 773 routes I would expect a MIA-GRU and/or EZE flight to get one or both. Also would not be surprised to see MIA-LHR get it. What I am more excited about is having more 777s free which hopefully we can see some expansion with AA to Europe like MXP and maybe just maybe TLV.

mia305 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 4:40 pm

TLV would be nice. Would it be better served from JFK or MIA?

Would the 787 be a good replacement for the MIA-LPB-VVI-MIA route
when aa starts phasing them out. I know wear oxygen masks when they
land at LPB. Planes are restricted from flying there because of the altitude.
The 757 is only plane capable of making that route.

A388 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:22 pm

Quoting mia305 (Reply 8):
TLV would be nice. Would it be better served from JFK or MIA?

I would think it will be better served from JFK but who knows. LY used to fly to MIA as well so I'm guessing there is demand.

A388

mia305 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:34 pm

Didn't LY discontinue the route because of low demand?

Maybe AA can make it work. Has the demand increased in MIA
dice LY last served the route?

ripcordd · Thu Mar 07, 2013 6:10 pm

MIA-NRT will happen for sure huge connection to S/America to make 1 stop ......It will happen 1000% once the 787s start coming in...

A388 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 6:17 pm

Quoting mia305 (Reply 10):
Didn't LY discontinue the route because of low demand?

I know it was discontinued but don't know why it was discontinued. I think member mah4546 can fill us in here.

A388

jfk777 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 7:40 pm

787 will eventually operate the 767 flights to Rio and Santiago, Chile. Any 777 flight could be upgraded to 77W. We could see 2 777 daily to EZE one being a 772( with only J and Y) and the second a 77W( with First Class). Miami will eventually have its share of teh 77W and 787 AA bounty on the usual routes but we will at some point see an A350-900 from the Usair fleet, hey llent planes for Brazil.

MAH4546 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 7:53 pm

Quoting mia305 (Reply 10):
Didn't LY discontinue the route because of low demand?

High fuel prices. It was using an ancient, fuel guzzling 767-200ER. Demand between Miami and Israel is significant and healthy.

AAIL86 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:00 pm

Quoting mia305 (Thread starter):
How about Mia/Hnl?

MIA-HNL?

No. There is already one stop service to all the islands from DFW and LAX.

Quoting mia305 (Thread starter):
I know its been said on this site that Mia/Nrt

MIA-NRT?

Yes. If not with the 77W then at least the 787.

mia305 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:05 pm

I couldve sworn that LY used a 777 on the route before being discontinued

Why wouldnt MIA-HNL work isn't there enough demand from S. America and local demand.

AA787 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:13 pm

Quoting mia305 (Reply 16):
I couldve sworn that LY used a 777 on the route before being discontinued

Why wouldnt MIA-HNL work isn't there enough demand from S. America and local demand.

Nah, it was a 762.

I don't think there is any demand from SA to Hawaii. Hawaii is a leisure market and there are plenty that are much more accessible.

If someone really wants to go to Hawaii from South America they can do it through IAH or DFW.

airbazar · Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:26 pm

MIA-NRT has 77W written all over it, IMHO. Maybe a 787 to start but this route will grow to a 77W I think.

rotating14 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:30 pm

Quoting mia305 (Reply 16):

I couldve sworn that LY used a 777 on the route before being discontinued

Quoting AA787 (Reply 17):
Nah, it was a 762.

MIA305, your right. I've seen the LY's 772 on approach many a days. Granted they could have switched between the 762/3 but I know for sure they served it with 772's before the removal of the route.

https://www.airliners.net/photo/El-Al...d=ce517d62f1c8782f96707b877c2d2e0a

MIA-HLN is a no go. I dont see people leaving a tropical spot to travel ___ hours to fly to another more expensive destination (HLN). Even if it was connecting traffic from else where.

mia305 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:31 pm

Would it be possible for a 77W from MIA-Seoul or is that too far
that plane?

Would it be better served from JFK or LAX?

MAH4546 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:32 pm

Quoting rotating14 (Reply 19):
MIA305, your right. I've seen the LY's 772 on approach many a days. Granted they could have switched between the 762/3 but I know for sure they served it with 772's before the removal of the route.

It was a 772/744 mix when it was via Newark. Non-stop was always a 762.

mia305 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:43 pm

I knew I wasn't going crazy saying that. Besides JNB & CPT
what possible routes could they open to Africa from MIA?

flyvail · Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:44 pm

Love this thread. As a (semi-)recent transplant to the FL Keys, I am just starting to get more familiar with AA. Used to fly UA out of DEN almost exclusively.

New flights to Europe on new AA metal would be great.

Would there be any chance of MIA-SYD, MIA-AKL or even MIA-SIN?

LAXdude1023 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:49 pm

Quoting mia305 (Reply 16):
Why wouldnt MIA-HNL work isn't there enough demand from S. America and local demand.

The yields are garbage and the market isnt as large as you would think.

Quoting FlyVail (Reply 23):
Would there be any chance of MIA-SYD, MIA-AKL or even MIA-SIN?

Never in our lifetime.

Of all the routes talked about in this thread, MIA-NRT has the greatest chance. Its a perfect 787 route and should be marketed as a Florida-Japan nonstop flight. The target should not and would not be Latin America connections as all the big ones are already served via DFW or JFK. MIA-Asia is a market that could mature over time.

mia305 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:54 pm

Is Seoul a possibility or is that a stretch for both aircraft?

What's going to happen to the mia-lpb-vvi route. As far as I know only the
the 757 can do it. Will the 787 replace it?

[Edited 2013-03-07 12:59:40]

AA787 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 9:38 pm

Quoting mia305 (Reply 25):
Is Seoul a possibility or is that a stretch for both aircraft?

What's going to happen to the mia-lpb-vvi route. As far as I know only the
the 757 can do it. Will the 787 replace it?

Hey mia305, welcome to a.net. Love the enthusiasm! You seem to have posted the question about LPB/VVI several times in this thread. People have seen it, but it appears that nobody has an answer for you just yet. I can assure you that the folks at AA won't let a money making route disappear and will have some sort of plan for it.

There isn't a market for ICN the same way there is for NRT... mainly because NRT offers connections to the rest of Asia through AA's partner JAL.

Route development is an inherently geographic/ economic science. Instead of throwing darts at a map to pick new routes (even though sometimes it feels like airlines do just that), they focus on where different demographics are and where they want to be and how they can be flown through their route network optimally. With that in mind... it is important to think about what makes sense for AA and for the people it flies when proposing new route options as opposed to just naming far-flung locations just for the sake of argument.

As for my own 2 cents... I see these new routes coming to MIA on AA

COR (mentioned previously)
NAT
BEL
MXP
JNB
NRT
FOR
FCO
BER
FRA

mia305 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 9:59 pm

I see your point. That's some nice growth if and when it happens.
Would AA put the 77W on the Mia-Lax route. I know its a heavily
traveled route with high demand. I know for a time AA swapped it from a 763 to a 772.
I just never thought it would be good to sustain 2 daily 777's.

AA787 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 10:01 pm

Quoting mia305 (Reply 27):
I see your point. That's some nice growth if and when it happens.
Would AA put the 77W on the Mia-Lax route. I know its a heavily
traveled route with high demand. I know for a time AA swapped it from a 763 to a 772.
I just never thought it would be good to sustain 2 daily 777's.

Only as a way to move the aircraft around from hub to hub. AA won't waste valuable 77W flights on domestic routes when they can be flown internationally. That is why the schedules change on these routes so frequently... simply aircraft placement.

MAH4546 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 10:11 pm

Quoting mia305 (Reply 27):
just never thought it would be good to sustain 2 daily 777's.

It does sustain 2x daily 777s.

mastermis · Thu Mar 07, 2013 10:15 pm

A lot of people in the Cayman Islands would be thrilled if there was a MIA-JNB. Large South African population here and AA has 3x daily (2x in summer) to MIA.

roseflyer · Thu Mar 07, 2013 10:19 pm

There’s no question that MIA will get 77Ws and 787s in the long run, but expect them to show up on the same routes that we are very familiar with out of MIA.

I don’t think AA will start any new routes with the 77W. It has a slight range advantage over the 772ER, but barely any advantage in real world operations. The 77W was built because AA has some very high capacity routes. In particular LHR, GRU and EZE are very high capacity destinations in AA’s network. This is what the 77W is being purchased for. It’s got lower CASM than the 772, and will be a great fit for markets where AA has a large market share. With Brazil and LHR slot restricted, it makes the most sense to be deployed there. I say there is zero chance whatsoever of MIA getting any new destinations with the 77W that are not previously operated.

The 787-9 will bring some opportunity. It is a little smaller than the 772, so it may be a good airplane to operate on routes that don’t quite have enough capacity for a 777. I personally see the 787 being more useful in Asia for AA out of DFW, ORD, JFK, LAX and PHX. For MIA, outside of NRT, TLV & JNB, almost every international destination imaginable from MIA is within the 767’s range. If AA won’t try it on the 767, then they won’t on a 787. AA doesn’t operate to TLV from JFK which is a huge market, so I don’t see them launching from MIA. JFK-JNB is shorter than MIA-JNB, and again a larger market, so I’m not sure we’d see MIA-JNB. As for MIA-NRT, I think the chances are higher for JAL on the route since they are more interested in using their 787s to smaller US destinations than AA is on starting new international routes.

If AA was interested in HNL or any additional routes in Europe or South America, I would expect it to start with the 767.

[Edited 2013-03-07 14:20:33]

mia305 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 10:20 pm

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 29):

What I ment to say was I'm suprised that the demand is there
to sustain two 777's year round.

Sorry bout that

mia305 · Thu Mar 07, 2013 10:40 pm

Why didn't AA start the inaugural route with the 77W from MIA-GRU, instead
opting DFW. Isn't the demand higher from MIA than DFW?

mhkansan · Thu Mar 07, 2013 10:51 pm

Quoting mia305 (Reply 33):
Why didn't AA start the inaugural route with the 77W from MIA-GRU, instead
opting DFW. Isn't the demand higher from MIA than DFW?

Sure, but MIA has frequency where DFW has one and sometimes two daily flights. Also, easier to make the initial operating base for the 77W at DFW where they can have a spare 772 ready to go as it gets introduced into service.

MAH4546 · Fri Mar 08, 2013 12:01 am

Quoting mia305 (Reply 32):
Quoting mah4546 (Reply 29):

What I ment to say was I'm suprised that the demand is there
to sustain two 777's year round.

Why? Miami-Los Angeles is a huge local market. Every year over 1,000,000 local passengers fly between the two cities. And that doesn't even take into account the over 1,000,000 more that connect onwards. I believe it's the sixth largest market from Miami - after NYC, D.C., Atlanta, Chicago and Boston.

Quoting mia305 (Reply 33):
Why didn't AA start the inaugural route with the 77W from MIA-GRU, instead
opting DFW. Isn't the demand higher from MIA than DFW?

Because Dallas is the biggest crew base and allows the 77W to be familiarized with a large amount of pilots and FAs.

[Edited 2013-03-07 16:01:43]

[Edited 2013-03-07 16:02:09]

mia305 · Fri Mar 08, 2013 12:33 am

I didn't realize there was that much..... WOW!

With so much demand and if it were possible why would they
fly all widebodies on that route?

dcajet · Fri Mar 08, 2013 12:35 am

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 13):
We could see 2 777 daily to EZE one being a 772( with only J and Y) and the second a 77W( with First Class).

Well, but AA is already doing 3 daily MIA/EZE/MIA rotations. Why would they reduce capacity?

mia305 · Fri Mar 08, 2013 12:41 am

I believe they run 3 to 4 daily MIA-EZE-MIA. I might be wrong
on Sat they run a late morning early afternoon there.

Same for GRU. I could be wrong though

MAH4546 · Fri Mar 08, 2013 12:45 am

Quoting mia305 (Reply 38):
I believe they run 3 to 4 daily MIA-EZE-MIA. I might be wrong
on Sat they run a late morning early afternoon there.

Same for GRU. I could be wrong though

3x daily to EZE, 4x daily to GRU.

mia305 · Fri Mar 08, 2013 1:02 am

I couldve sworn that AA had an additional EZE flight on Sat.
I stand corrected.

BigGSFO · Fri Mar 08, 2013 1:23 am

What's the likelihood of MIAHEL now that AY is part of the TATL JV with BA and IB?

MAH4546 · Fri Mar 08, 2013 1:56 am

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 42):
What's the likelihood of MIAHEL now that AY is part of the TATL JV with BA and IB?

I think it's likely to come back on AA or AY in the mid-term future. Large local market and AY joining the JV adds a lot of synergy to help make up for the low yield.

AY clearly has some trans-Atlantic moves in the works, because if it didn't, it wouldn't be putting the cost and effort into joining the JBA. Miami is the next logical expansion past JFK and Chicago.

N62NA · Fri Mar 08, 2013 3:35 am

Quoting mia305 (Reply 27):
Would AA put the 77W on the Mia-Lax route. I know its a heavily
traveled route with high demand. I know for a time AA swapped it from a 763 to a 772.
I just never thought it would be good to sustain 2 daily 777's.

I'm still shocked that they are running two 772s on the route (quite pleased, but shocked that we've had 2 772s daily for so many months).

mia305 · Fri Mar 08, 2013 4:08 am

With the high demand from the local and connecting pax between MIA- LAX and if it were possible
why wouldn't AA put all widebodies on that route.

OB1504 · Fri Mar 08, 2013 4:41 am

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 14):
High fuel prices. It was using an ancient, fuel guzzling 767-200ER. Demand between Miami and Israel is significant and healthy.

When I first started working at MIA, I was surprised by the amount of passengers flying to MAD and BCN who were continuing on to TLV.

Quoting mia305 (Reply 47):
With the high demand from the local and connecting pax between MIA- LAX and if it were possible why wouldn't AA put all widebodies on that route.

Partially because frequency trumps capacity, though MIA-LAX does see its fair share of widebodies.

mia305 · Fri Mar 08, 2013 4:49 am

Well if AA gets their priorities straighten out with Israel maybe
MIA-TLV will come to fruition.

flymia · Fri Mar 08, 2013 5:05 am

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 31):
AA doesn’t operate to TLV from JFK which is a huge market, so I don’t see them launching from MIA. JFK-JNB is shorter than MIA-JNB, and again a larger market, so I’m not sure we’d see MIA-JNB. As for MIA-NRT

But other airlines already fly JFK-JNB and JFK-TLV. Both JNB and TLV are good size markets from MIA especially TLV. AA does not serve TLV at all right now due to some financial issues with TWA but now with US Airways with AA and US already does PHL-TLV I can see MIA-TLV at some point. As for Africa MIA is a great spot for AA to finally service Africa.

Quoting mia305 (Reply 41):
Would AA start MIA-AMS?

Don't think so. It is heavy tourist traffic and mostly from AMS. AA does not fly anywhere from AMS either making it less likely.

airbazar · Fri Mar 08, 2013 1:11 pm

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 24):
The target should not and would not be Latin America connections as all the big ones are already served via DFW or JFK.

But MIA has far more frequencies which if a huge attraction for high yield passengers and gives more flexibility for connections (or missed connections). S.Florida is also a large business center for Latin America with a lot of corporate HQ's and business travelers often combine a stop at multiple destinations.

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 31):
AA doesn’t operate to TLV from JFK which is a huge market, so I don’t see them launching from MIA. JFK-JNB is shorter than MIA-JNB, and again a larger market, so I’m not sure we’d see MIA-JNB.

I'm pretty sure AA will keep US's TLV destination. JFK is a bigger market but it also has more competition. Aren't the yields greater from MIA? That would be the biggest indication of the potential for JNB and TLV.

AA787 · Fri Mar 08, 2013 2:17 pm

Quoting mia305 (Reply 44):
With the high demand from the local and connecting pax between MIA- LAX and if it were possible
why wouldn't AA put all widebodies on that route.

Again... they use their widebodies on routes that REQUIRE widebodies (i.e. long haul international routes). The 777s on that route are there for the sake of moving aircraft around the network. AA prefers frequency on the route so rather than 5 777s they can fly 8 or 9 757s (making these numbers up).

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net