atct
Posts: 2472
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2001 6:42 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Mon Jan 12, 2015 5:13 am

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 18):
LA also gets a ton of tourists. For them, I cannot see ONT being an option at all. Its very far from anything a tourist would want to see in Southern California.

I've flown into ONT as a tourist 3 or 4 times. A really nice airport. That being said, I've flown into SNA once and LGB the most. That has to do with mostly jetBlue has great fares ANC-LGB. I do all I can to avoid LAX.
Trikes are for kids!
 
MesaFlyGuy
Posts: 3919
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:36 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Mon Jan 12, 2015 5:47 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 43):
IAH didn't have A320s or 757s. Indeed, I think IAH had the last of SA)">CO's MD80s and also received 737s.

SA)">AS was stated above, IAH did indeed have sUA 757s a few years ago.

Quoting LOWS (Reply 38):
I have yet to meet anyone who likes MESA.

By anyone, do you mean employees or just people in general? Because I've never had a problem with Mesa. I've flown around 15 sgments with them and have only once had a delay, and it was for weather. Crews are always nice and planes are consistently clean.
The views I express are my own and do not reflect the views and opinions of my company.
 
User avatar
LOWS
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:37 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Mon Jan 12, 2015 9:07 am

Quoting MesaFlyGuy (Reply 51):
Quoting LOWS (Reply 38):
I have yet to meet anyone who likes MESA.

By anyone, do you mean employees or just people in general? Because I've never had a problem with Mesa. I've flown around 15 sgments with them and have only once had a delay, and it was for weather. Crews are always nice and planes are consistently clean.

I meant the company and its leadership.
 
Beardown91737
Posts: 887
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 10:56 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Mon Jan 19, 2015 5:09 pm

More action in court. LAWA has been instructed to produce 399 documents which it was ordered to produce on Dec 16 but had claimed attorney-client privilege. One of the documents is a self-evaluation by the LAWA executive director.
http://www.dailybulletin.com/busines...o-399-documents-in-airport-lawsuit

The importance of the document turnover cannot be over-emphasized, since other CIty of Los Angeles departments have had controversy recently about accuracy of their informantion. LAPD is now the subject of scrutiny for a crime increase which may be the result of how arrests were previously classified. LA City Fire Dept was scrutinized in the media for accuracy of their claimed response times to medical emergencies.

Ontario has been told to justify withholding 294 documents.
http://www.pe.com/articles/angeles-756480-ontario-airport.html

Clearly, LAWA wants ONT to remain open, but only for the convenience of being able to tell LAX NIMBYs that they will work on pushing traffic to other airports. The costs of operation may be somewhat lower than LAX, but that is recent, and not terribly relevant. The costs are higher than BUR, SNA, LGB, and PSP. This is the product of running ONT with too many employees, who are paid on LAWA cost structure, and with too high of fixed costs for airlines.

Predictably, the excuse of economic despair in the local area has been brought up on this thread, but there are definitely large affluent areas less than 10-15 miles away.
135 hrs PIC (mostly PA-28) - not current. Landings at MDW, PIA, JAN.
 
commavia
Posts: 11489
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Mon Jan 19, 2015 5:34 pm

Quoting Beardown91737 (Reply 53):
The importance of the document turnover cannot be over-emphasized
Quoting Beardown91737 (Reply 53):
Clearly, LAWA wants ONT to remain open, but only for the convenience of being able to tell LAX NIMBYs that they will work on pushing traffic to other airports.
Quoting Beardown91737 (Reply 53):
The costs of operation may be somewhat lower than LAX, but that is recent, and not terribly relevant. The costs are higher than BUR, SNA, LGB, and PSP. This is the product of running ONT with too many employees, who are paid on LAWA cost structure, and with too high of fixed costs for airlines.
Quoting Beardown91737 (Reply 53):
Predictably, the excuse of economic despair in the local area has been brought up on this thread, but there are definitely large affluent areas less than 10-15 miles away.

So LAWA can turn over the documents, or simply give up on ONT altogether and let it go, and I still doubt it would make much of a difference to the endgame. ONT may well be suffering from LAWA's higher cost structure, and like many airports may well be paying the high price of overbuilding in the good years when consultants were pitching straight-line projections of growth into perpetuity, but ultimately I still contend that ONT's fortunes - like those of any other commercial airport - will rise and fall with the broader economics of the region it serves, and the broader economic and competitive conditions in the market writ large. And to be frank, the economics of the Inland Empire are still less-than-stellar, and the evolution in the airline industry that has so harshly "punished" ONT shows no sign of abating.

At this point, I personally think ONT's greatest opportunity to get some traffic volume moving and help with passenger and concession revenue, and overhead costs, is to try and attract one or multiple ULCCs like Spirit, Frontier, etc. I think ONT's history validates that it can attract meaningful O&D from outside the immediate Inland Empire area as long as it's priced accordingly (i.e., at a discount to LAX, etc.).
 
AAIL86
Posts: 452
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:00 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Mon Jan 19, 2015 6:45 pm

Quoting 29erUSA187 (Reply 1):

I dont know why its declining so fast, but it suprises me that AA still flies mainline and UA does not. AA is usually the stingiest with thier mainline equipment

Come to IAH ... UA's RJ heaven. My perspective (having flown both AA and UA a ton in the last 10 years) is that UA flies a lot more RJs to larger cities then AA does. Theres ton of MD-80 hate on here but I'd rather fly those any day then UA's ERJ-140s...
The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason - Benjamim Franklin
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4821
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:12 pm

Just to add to the thread, this article was posted yesterday by the LA Times about an audit by Ernst & Young:

Quote:
Ontario airport worth much less than L.A. is asking for, audit says

In Ontario's legal battle to gain control over LA/Ontario International Airport, a new audit contends that the sale price offered by Los Angeles is inflated by at least $181 million.

http://www.latimes.com/local/cityhal...-airport-audit-20150118-story.html
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
upwardfacing
Posts: 423
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 6:56 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:32 pm

I see the Los Angeles metropolitan area/Southern California as having an ill-planned airport system for such a huge, important market yet also a geographically expansive region.

How did regional planners decide to build an alternative airport for Los Angeles so far away from the city in the first place? The Inland Empire was a peripheral, less wealthy bedroom community region for Los Angeles even decades ago. Major businesses and tourist attractions were as far away then as they are now.

With so many constrained community airports, yet just one major airport with a comprehensive choice of flights, residents and visitors alike often have no compelling alternative to LAX. Which often means extra time travelling to and from the airport, plus longer processing times inside the airport itself.

Like New York, Los Angeles could easily have absorbed a second major international airport, if only planners had acted wisely. Instead of the four-way battle being waged by UA, AA, DL, and WN, at least one of the aforementioned airlines could have hubbed at a second airport.

What will the airlines do when, one day, LAX becomes too congested even for the airlines, let alone passengers? Would the region actually build rail connections outward to a place like ONT?
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 23634
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:36 pm

At the end of the day it comes down to what City of Ontario will pay LAWA to give up ONT.

LAWA had asked for $400mil cash plus assumption of related long term facility debt. Ontario offered $50mil cash, and now a week ago it was revealed auditors Ernst & Young came up with valuation of about $220mil.

So the question really is can Ontario afford to take over the airport ? LA City has repeatedly stated and even passed council resolution that states for the right compensation is would turn over the airport.

Just gaining control of the airport is not some magical cure. Ontario and San Bernardino County would need to come up with over $91mil annually to run the airport which currently (2013 number) only generated $64mil in revenues.
Unlike LAWA which can gain efficiency and savings from sharing overhead at its 3 airports, the standalone ONT airport would be 100% left to its own to fund itself.

Anyhow, imo the ONT problems have nothing to do with ownership. Instead its a symptom of the broader shifts in the US air market. Just look at BUR, an airport with strong demographics, and uber low cost, yet its traffic is at record 2 decade lows.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 23634
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:54 pm

Quoting upwardfacing (Reply 57):
How did regional planners decide to build an alternative airport for Los Angeles so far away from the city in the first place? The Inland Empire was a peripheral, less wealthy bedroom community region for Los Angeles even decades ago. Major businesses and tourist attractions were as far away then as they are now.

It might help if you understand that Los Angeles County for example is made up of 88 independent cities. Many of these cities have had airports since the early 1900s and many more built in support of WWII.

Ontario is not even in Los Angeles County but in San Bernardino County which also has several municipalities with airports.

Over time cities pursued their own interest and developed larger commercial airports like BUR, ONT, LGB, SNA etc.

ONT only came under LAWA management in the 1960s, and LAWA ownership in the 1980s as result of Ontario being unable to sustain it and FAA taking over the airport in basically in desperation turning to Los Angeles to operate it.

Quoting upwardfacing (Reply 57):
The Inland Empire was a peripheral, less wealthy bedroom community region for Los Angeles even decades ago. Major businesses and tourist attractions were as far away then as they are now.

True, but population and economic center of Los Angeles is shifting East, so the IE is well located for capture this.
Dont forget since 1980s the IE was one of California's fastest growing regions with year after year of positive news coming out of the region, so the idea to build new terminals at ONT was not very far fetched at the time.

Quoting upwardfacing (Reply 57):
I see the Los Angeles metropolitan area/Southern California as having an ill-planned airport system for such a huge, important market yet also a geographically expansive region.

We'll if planners had their way, the real 'Los Angeles International Airport' would now be up in the Mojave Desert in Palmdale.

Land was acquired for a mega 8-runway facility in the 1960s.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
laca773
Posts: 2080
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:10 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Tue Jan 20, 2015 1:11 am

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 17):
ONT is back on its feet. AFAIK the cuts have stopped, Y4 started service, and DL has shown a willingness to resume ATL-ONT (however briefly). If the local economy continues to improve as expected, maybe we could see new attempts at routes like ATL, HNL, JFK, ORD, SJD, etc. in the coming years.

When did ONT become "back on it's feet"?

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):

The title is pretty self explanitory. I know part of it was the decline the IE faced when the economy bottomed out, but service levels are at a low not seen in over two decades. In 2013, ONT did not even get four million passengers which I found pretty crazy.

Currently ONT is left with year round mainline service to the following destinations:

Southwest - MDW, DEN, LAS, OAK, PHX, SMF, and SJC.
American - DFW
Alaska - SEA

Sadly, right after the New Years Holiday rush, AS dowgauged SEA-ONT-SEA from 3x mainline to 2x daily CR7 service. I believe this is the first time AS has operated CR7s in this market versus when it downgauged the PDX market two or so years ago. I'm not sure if this is only for the short, and slow winter schedule and will be upgauged gradually after, or if it will remain. For this to have taken place, perhaps advance bookings must have been dismal, or the cost of operating @ ONT is not inline with AS' plans.

Sad what UA has done with the previous CO ONT-IAH. Seems similar to what has happened to exCO service @ SJC as well as DEN-SJC. For the most part, it has all become UAEx. Sad.
 
laca773
Posts: 2080
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:10 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Tue Jan 20, 2015 1:15 am

How is Volaris doing since they began service 2x a week GDL-ONT?
 
N1120A
Posts: 26493
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Tue Jan 20, 2015 2:41 am

Quoting Beardown91737 (Reply 53):
The importance of the document turnover cannot be over-emphasized, since other CIty of Los Angeles departments have had controversy recently about accuracy of their informantion. LAPD is now the subject of scrutiny for a crime increase which may be the result of how arrests were previously classified. LA City Fire Dept was scrutinized in the media for accuracy of their claimed response times to medical emergencies.

This is very standard litigation tactics. Further, LAWA is a very different agency from the agencies you mention.

Quoting Beardown91737 (Reply 53):
The costs are higher than BUR, SNA, LGB, and PSP. This is the product of running ONT with too many employees, who are paid on LAWA cost structure, and with too high of fixed costs for airlines.

They built a massive new set of terminals that were badly needed. That costs money. Look, I loved the stained glass window and the air stair boarding, but people wanted the new terminals and the old ones were bursting at the seams. New terminals cost money. BUR's terminal is old and dangerous, requiring an exception. SNA has actual yields. PSP too, and the traffic is highly seasonal. And LGB? Are you serious? Do you realize how different LGB is from everywhere else? Oh, and it pulls actual yields too.

Quoting Beardown91737 (Reply 53):
Predictably, the excuse of economic despair in the local area has been brought up on this thread, but there are definitely large affluent areas less than 10-15 miles away.

Oh please. Are Beverly Hills, Century City, Santa Monica, West Hollywood and Palos Verdes within 10-20 miles of ONT? Are Newport, Laguna and Costa Mesa? Does ONT draw from Woodland Hills, Encino, Sherman Oaks, Porter Ranch, Pasadena, South Pasadena and Ventura County? No. Upland isn't going to turn ONT into anything special.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 58):
Just look at BUR, an airport with strong demographics, and uber low cost, yet its traffic is at record 2 decade lows.

Yeah, though part of that is foolishness by the locals and the airlines alike.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 58):
Anyhow, imo the ONT problems have nothing to do with ownership.

Exactly. LAWA absolutely shoved ONT down people's throats for years.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
SurfandSnow
Posts: 1441
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 7:09 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Tue Jan 20, 2015 6:59 pm

Quoting Beardown91737 (Reply 53):
The costs are higher than BUR, SNA, LGB, and PSP

Locally controlled BUR and LGB have some of the lowest costs (and fares) in the entire country - yet they too are grappling with severe declines in air service. SNA would really be struggling if it wasn't for WN picking up the slack every single time someone else has cut service, and the increasing dominance of WN there may not be a great thing in the long run. Lest we not forget that WN took over BUR and ONT in similar fashion years ago; both airports ultimately ended up in big trouble when their primary carrier started cutting a lot of service. PSP is a highly seasonal operation, simply catering to its relatively small (but very well known) local market - not folks in the LA metropolitan area.

It is important to remember that airline service is not just reflective of costs, but also revenue. Airlines can and will put up with high costs if they are getting great yields. On the other hand, even the lowest costs cannot compensate for poor yields, and airlines will cut service accordingly. These days ONT's problem isn't costs - it's yields. How do the folks running ONT (be it LAWA or a local authority) convince B6 to resume ONT-JFK or UA to restore mainline service or WN to try ONT-SJD when nearby LAX offers these airlines even better revenue opportunities?

Quoting Beardown91737 (Reply 53):
Predictably, the excuse of economic despair in the local area has been brought up on this thread, but there are definitely large affluent areas less than 10-15 miles away.

There are some *very* wealthy neighborhoods in Rancho Cucamonga just a few miles north of ONT. But, are these folks frequently using ONT, or are they driving to LAX where they can enjoy a plethora of F and C options, lounges, and nonstop flights? Call me crazy, but I have a feeling the Haven View Estates crowd (or that Lake Arrowhead doctor, or that Claremont Colleges professor) is more likely to drive right past the local airport that generally requires a connection, RJ, or all-Y "cattle car" in order to take that nonstop legacy carrier flight to JFK, MIA, or ORD...

Quoting commavia (Reply 54):
ONT's fortunes - like those of any other commercial airport - will rise and fall with the broader economics of the region it serves, and the broader economic and competitive conditions in the market writ large. And to be frank, the economics of the Inland Empire are still less-than-stellar, and the evolution in the airline industry that has so harshly "punished" ONT shows no sign of abating.

  

Quoting commavia (Reply 54):
ONT's greatest opportunity to get some traffic volume moving and help with passenger and concession revenue, and overhead costs, is to try and attract one or multiple ULCCs like Spirit, Frontier, etc. I think ONT's history validates that it can attract meaningful O&D from outside the immediate Inland Empire area as long as it's priced accordingly (i.e., at a discount to LAX, etc.).

Agreed. However, even those airlines are focused on the primary airports these days. I think we could sooner see F9 completely pull out of SNA than add any service to ONT. Let's not forget how poorly G4 did at LGB either - and that airport is much closer to LA area tourist attractions than ONT.

Quoting upwardfacing (Reply 57):
I see the Los Angeles metropolitan area/Southern California as having an ill-planned airport system for such a huge, important market yet also a geographically expansive region.

Really? I actually think LA has one of the better airport systems for a major global city. LAX's terminal facilities may not have been designed with connections in mind, but at least you don't have to travel across town when connecting between international and domestic flights as is frequently the case when transiting through the likes of London, New York, Paris, São Paulo, Shanghai, or Tokyo.

Quoting upwardfacing (Reply 57):
How did regional planners decide to build an alternative airport for Los Angeles so far away from the city in the first place? The Inland Empire was a peripheral, less wealthy bedroom community region for Los Angeles even decades ago. Major businesses and tourist attractions were as far away then as they are now.

Regional planners envisioned an even more distant airport: the Palmdale Intercontinental Airport. Palmdale is an even more peripheral, less wealthy bedroom community region over 60 miles from downtown Los Angeles - almost twice as far from downtown LA as ONT. The Palmdale facility would have been about as far from Disneyland as SAN; in fact, traveling to Disneyland from Palmdale would mean a traverse of almost the entire Los Angeles metropolitan area (not an easy feat in a metropolis that is notorious for traffic). In bad traffic conditions, it could easily take 2 or more hours just to reach Hollywood or a beach from Palmdale.

Quoting upwardfacing (Reply 57):

With so many constrained community airports, yet just one major airport with a comprehensive choice of flights, residents and visitors alike often have no compelling alternative to LAX. Which often means extra time travelling to and from the airport, plus longer processing times inside the airport itself.

There are virtually no constraints at ONT, which has excellent terminal facilities, full international capabilities and two parallel runways longer than 10,000 ft. ONT is - from an operational perspective - a very compelling alternative to LAX. The problem is that people don't want to drive 1-2+ hours each way (depending on traffic) to use it, so airline service is pretty much limited to what the relatively poor local Inland Empire market can support.

SNA is in the heart of Orange County, about halfway between Disneyland and the beaches. In the past there were issues with the airport's name (nobody knew where "Santa Ana" or even "Orange County" was), but that is no longer an issue - thanks to a few popular TV shows, of course. SNA isn't just about tourists and reality TV stars going on vacation, though. There is a lot of inbound and outbound business travel too. Many offices are located in Irvine right off the 405, a stone's throw from SNA. SNA has excellent terminal facilities and gained full international capabilities a few years ago. SNA's noise mitigation procedures aren't a big issue for any current (let alone future) generation aircraft, and it really hasn't been a problem for any new entrants or expanding incumbents to get "slots" for years now. The only major constraint these days is that short 5,701 ft runway, though the airport's sea level elevation and generally mild, dry climate help mitigate this issue.

LGB is in the midst of a vast industrial, manufacturing and port area, not to mention densely populated suburbs. It is actually quite convenient for northern Orange County (including Disneyland and Huntington Beach) as well as downtown LA. LGB's primary runway is over 10,000 ft long (locally produced DC-10s and MD-11s all used it in the past), and the new terminal facilities are incredible. I'm sure nobody misses the old trailer park! Although there are only a few dozen daily slots available for regularly scheduled commercial flights, due to lack of demand it really hasn't ever been an issue for airlines to get slots. LGB may be getting FIS so that it too can host international flights.

BUR serves the San Fernando Valley (yes, *that* valley, whose stereotypical girl we all know). The airport is incredibly convenient for the film studios and many other famous LA attractions like downtown LA, Hollywood, Pasadena, Six Flags Magic Mountain, Universal Studios theme park, and the zoo. The problem is that people don't know where "Burbank" is, they don't realize how great this airport's location is. The only formal constraint at BUR is the terminal itself - local voters have attempted to thwart growth by forbidding terminal expansion or replacement. However, these days there is plenty of room in the terminal for new entrants or incumbent expansion. The practical constraints are a lack of FIS (BUR is a domestic-only facility) and the short 6,885 ft runway. Unlike SNA, the short runway issue is compounded by frequently hot temperatures and surrounding mountainous terrain.

The bottom line is that any airline wishing to serve Los Angeles has the option of at least 2 airports (LAX and ONT). SNA is also an option for pretty much any American, Canadian, or Mexican narrowbody operator, it might even be an option for a Central American airline like AV. LGB is domestic only (for now), and I believe at least a couple "mainline" slots are available should any U.S. carrier want them. BUR has plenty of room to accommodate any domestic airline with the ability and desire to fly there.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 58):
the ONT problems have nothing to do with ownership. Instead its a symptom of the broader shifts in the US air market. Just look at BUR, an airport with strong demographics, and uber low cost, yet its traffic is at record 2 decade lows.

  
Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
 
UA1K3MM
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 5:10 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Wed Jan 21, 2015 6:00 am

In the post UA merger era, my use of ONT vs LAX has switched from 90/10 ONT to the exact opposite. Why, cost and service . I've flown over 3 Million miles on UA with over 25 years using ONT as my home airport. So far I've booked 7 domestic flights in 2015 with LAX at 6 to 1 vs ONT. I check all three ONT, LAX and SNA, typically on transcon trips to the Washington DC region. Almost every flight has a $200+ premium to fly ONT on an RJ with limited number of flights and poor connection times. So instead, I drive right past ONT on the 10 Fwy headed to LAX for lower fares and more service options on mainline aircraft often non-stop. Two years ago UA flew 757s from ONT to DEN now they can hardly fill a CRJ-200. Very sad commentary indeed, until this changes I will continue my 78 mile commute to LAX, instead of using the best airport for convenience in Southern California -- ONT      
 
laca773
Posts: 2080
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:10 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Wed Jan 21, 2015 7:40 am

It's going to be very interesting to see what happens @ ONT over the next year or so.
Shocking to me, is AS downgauging SEA-ONT to CR7 service. Hopefully this will only be for the slow months of January and February.
Perhaps with the AA/US merger, we'll see AA add a flight to ORD (Wishful thinking? ).
Maybe DL will re-start exNW MSP-ONT with M90s, or reinstate ATL-ONT with a A319?
I think chances of UA having regular scheduled mainline service @ ONT is very remote at this stage.
Any chance Volaris will do well enough they will increase their GDL flight to a 5-7 a week A319?
 
777ord
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:04 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Thu Jan 22, 2015 4:56 am

as a person who is VERY familiar with ONT, its been on the decline for ever. where to begin: outrageous fees, isolation to "Hollywood", employment in the IE issues and so on. All things considered, its doing well.

Now that UA-ONT is on the chopping block for outsourcing, I expect it to fall further from the tree. Sadly, the airport charges too much for fees and the demand can't compensate for it.

For those who ahve yet to fly thru it, the amenities are few and far between, and the only saving graces are speed and ease of the checkpoints etc... Sometimes, when I was workin ONT, I would see more filming than passengers. How WN is able to keep it working is beyond me.

AA will continue to run the Super 80 for the forseeable future. What they will do when they become more exinct, I dont know
 
runningonempty
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 2:04 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Thu Jan 22, 2015 5:47 am

Let us not forget the genius that is the SBD (San Bernadino) Airport. If ULCCs have any chance, go there. Are they still even pursing service there? It's a glorious terminal with an erie quietness...

[Edited 2015-01-21 21:58:31]

[Edited 2015-01-21 21:58:56]
 
User avatar
malaysia
Posts: 2641
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 1999 3:26 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Thu Jan 22, 2015 6:37 pm

Quoting 777ord (Reply 66):
Now that UA-ONT is on the chopping block for outsourcing, I expect it to fall further from the tree. Sadly, the airport charges too much for fees and the demand can't compensate for it.

pull out like they did at OAK?
There Are Those Who Believe That There May Yet Be Other Airlines Who Even Now Fight To Survive Beyond The Heavens
 
afcjets
Posts: 2834
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 4:36 am

Heather Locklear brought back Dynasty and Melrose Place, so maybe a show about her as the head of ONT will bring the numbers back up. Oh wait, they tried that, even though it was filmed at ONT, the show was called "LAX" and it was cancelled after one brief season.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LAX_(TV_series)   

[Edited 2015-01-22 20:53:41]

[Edited 2015-01-22 20:54:51]
 
UA1K3MM
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 5:10 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 4:56 am

Great memories of when they were filming "LAX" @ ONT. Cast and crew had to go through the security checkpoint with the passengers in Terminal 2. One morning the two stars, Heather Locklear and Blair Underwood were in the line just ahead of me. I got Heather's autograph on a ticket stub, I still have the stub in my passport wallet. Filming was done then at Gate 204 instead of the east end gates 210 - 212 where most of the TV and commercial filming is done today. The ONT 727 (xUA) was being used as a background prop for interior and under the wing footage. It was fun to stand just outside the perimeter tape and watch the filming taking place. Those were great times at ONT.      
 
N1120A
Posts: 26493
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 5:06 am

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 63):
Unlike SNA, the short runway issue is compounded by frequently hot temperatures and surrounding mountainous terrain.

BUR doesn't have nearly the runway issues as SNA. SNA's runway is more than 1000' shorter. BUR had regular 762 operations from UA, DC8s from UPS and A300s and A310s from FX. Completely different animals.

Quoting 777ord (Reply 66):
AA will continue to run the Super 80 for the forseeable future. What they will do when they become more exinct, I dont know

A319
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
joeycapps
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:24 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 7:52 am

I started flying B6 to/from ONT from JFK in 2001, and I can say until my last flight (about a month before B6 shut down at ONT) the loads seemed good. I even remember a 2nd daily flight being added. I miss leaving ONT at midnight and getting to JFK just in time to get to work and not miss a beat.

Late last year, I flew AA from ONT-DFW and back, and I can also say the loads looked good. Business was full, and from what I saw of coach, I would guess 80% to DFW, and maybe 90% back.

ONT is, despite popular opinion, not in the greatest area. I'm sure there's lots of leisure pax who would fly out of ONT, but everyone I've talked to in the San Bernardino/Riverside/Southern LA area seem to say the same thing; the lack of service from ONT makes them second guess even looking for flights out of there. I remember flying the DL 757 to ATL, for a 6 hour layover to JFK, after B6 left. After that, I started flying out of LGB and LAX for the most part.

I have paperwork outlining the LAWA fee schedule, showing a $9/pax fee for any new carrier to ONT. Not sure if that is still implemented or not, but I can say that it is counterproductive to getting new service. Likewise, I've heard that the rent for concessions, etc, is extremely high, hence the higher prices to the consumer. Overall, I'd say that the operator of ONT, be it LAWA or the City of Ontario, has a lot of work cut out for them.

In other news, the guy in charged of SBD's "revamping" for pax service got arrested. Which leads me to another question; if ONT is struggling, why would ANYONE even think about trying to use SBD? Besides squandering taxpayer money on a cheaply updated pax terminal.
 
bjorn14
Posts: 3595
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 1:38 pm

Does ONT have any incentive programs for new and/or existing carriers to start new service?
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
continental004
Posts: 368
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 11:53 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 4:22 pm

I just posted this in more detail in another topic, but if HU is willing to serve SJC, I can definitely see them at ONT. Especially with the large Chinese population that lives closer to ONT than LAX.
 
Mainliner
Posts: 368
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:34 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 5:10 pm

Maybe a bit off topic, but how often are there film crews working at ONT? If you watch a TV commercial, music video, or a TV show with an airport scene, I'd say there's probably an 80-90% chance that it was filmed at ONT. You can easily tell from the appearance of the terminal, the 100-series gate numbers, the LAWA logo, the LAWA 727 in the background, etc. If one is in need of a more "retro" look, the old terminal is perfect for that as well and has been used in several movies.

It seems that there must be some type of filming activity going on at least every few months.
Every flight counts.
 
afcjets
Posts: 2834
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 5:22 pm

Eastern flew A300s into ONT IIRC, did other airlines fly widebodies there too?
 
Mainliner
Posts: 368
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:34 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 5:35 pm

Quoting AFCJETS (Reply 76):
Eastern flew A300s into ONT IIRC, did other airlines fly widebodies there too?

I believe DL operated ONT-ATL with a 762 for a while.
Every flight counts.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26493
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 7:01 pm

Quoting Mainliner (Reply 77):
I believe DL operated ONT-ATL with a 762 for a while.

For a long time. They even ran 767s to the only jetway in the old terminals, which was actually built for Western's DC10s.

Quoting AFCJETS (Reply 76):
Eastern flew A300s into ONT IIRC, did other airlines fly widebodies there too?

I flew a Meatball DC10-10 on ONT-DEN as a kid. HA flew DC10s and (I think) 767s there.

Of course, UPS has a constant stream of 747s there.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
san747
Posts: 4359
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:03 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 7:07 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 78):
For a long time. They even ran 767s to the only jetway in the old terminals, which was actually built for Western's DC10s.

There was a 767-300 on the ONT-ATL route as recently as 2004-5.
Scotty doesn't know...
 
N1120A
Posts: 26493
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 7:17 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 73):
Does ONT have any incentive programs for new and/or existing carriers to start new service?

Why would they? Its not a poorly served area, as SNA, PSP, BUR, LAX, LGB and even SAN all exist as alternatives.

Quoting san747 (Reply 79):
There was a 767-300 on the ONT-ATL route as recently as 2004-5.

Yeah, and maybe even more recently.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
bjorn14
Posts: 3595
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 10:22 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 80):
Why would they?

Hello. To get more service. Airports that are the only game in town do it so why not ONT? If everybody is boohooing the decline of service then they should do something. Especially to places not currently served.
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
timz
Posts: 6561
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 1999 7:43 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 10:27 pm

Quoting AFCJETS (Reply 76):
Eastern flew A300s into ONT IIRC

When?
 
777ord
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:04 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 11:03 pm

Quoting Mainliner (Reply 75):
Maybe a bit off topic, but how often are there film crews working at ONT? If you watch a TV commercial, music video, or a TV show with an airport scene, I'd say there's probably an 80-90% chance that it was filmed at ONT. You can easily tell from the appearance of the terminal, the 100-series gate numbers, the LAWA logo, the LAWA 727 in the background, etc. If one is in need of a more "retro" look, the old terminal is perfect for that as well and has been used in several movies.

Yes. at least once a week there is production occuring... My last 2 weeks working in ONT (nov'14) we had National rent a car, Chase Credit Card, and Delta film a commercial there.

Other very common users of ONT:

Southwest Airlines
Toyota
Expedia
National Rent-a-Car


Recent and popular movies/tv shows filmed:
NCIS LA
Dexter
Gone Girl
Hangover 2
Season 3 finale (or one before it) of Newsroom
Argo
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4821
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Fri Jan 23, 2015 11:39 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 73):
Does ONT have any incentive programs for new and/or existing carriers to start new service?

I don't know if there has been any change to this program, but LAWA put an incentive program in place in 2013.

Quote:
(Ontario, California - May 7, 2013) The Los Angeles Board of Airport Commissioners (BOAC) today approved an Air Carrier Incentive Program (ACIP) to encourage new air service or expansion of air service by existing passenger airlines to and from LA/Ontario International Airport (ONT).
.........
ACIP incentives provide a 100 percent waiver of terminal rentals, terminal use fees, and landing fees. The waivers may last up to one year for year-round service and one season for routes whose duration serve seasonal demand.
........
ONT’s ACIP will take effect July 1, 2013 and end June 30, 2015 unless extended by the Board.

http://www.lawa.org/newsContent.aspx?ID=1743
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 23634
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Sat Jan 24, 2015 12:57 am

Quoting joeycapps (Reply 72):
I have paperwork outlining the LAWA fee schedule, showing a $9/pax fee for any new carrier to ONT. Not sure if that is still implemented or not, but I can say that it is counterproductive to getting new service. Likewise, I've heard that the rent for concessions, etc, is extremely high, hence the higher prices to the consumer. Overall, I'd say that the operator of ONT, be it LAWA or the City of Ontario, has a lot of work cut out for them.

I posted details in Reply 48. Overall ONT comes middle of the pact for similarly sized airports. Not cheap, but not outrageous, and lower than other LAWA airport LAX.

Maybe important for people to remember, ONT is not a small boutique community airport. Its a large field with a whole other life as major freight facility with the UPS hub. Obviously there larger cost associated with maintaining a field the size and scope like ONT versus much smaller fields like BUR or SNA for example.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 73):
Does ONT have any incentive programs for new and/or existing carriers to start new service?

Yes it has a program, but interesting to note tenant carriers have largely objected to the airport providing fee waivers etc, as it ultimately comes out of their pockets, and they dont want to subsidize a competitor.

Quoting continental004 (Reply 74):
specially with the large Chinese population that lives closer to ONT than LAX.

HU is not coming to ONT. Look for them or a sister airlines at LAX later this year.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
afcjets
Posts: 2834
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Sat Jan 24, 2015 3:01 am

Quoting timz (Reply 82):
When?

They flew the A300 in there in the early to mid 1980s I thought. IIRC they flew to ATL but made a stop en-route but I can't remember where. Or it could have been nonstop.

[Edited 2015-01-23 19:02:18]
 
N1120A
Posts: 26493
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Sat Jan 24, 2015 3:12 am

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 81):
Hello. To get more service. Airports that are the only game in town do it so why not ONT? If everybody is boohooing the decline of service then they should do something. Especially to places not currently served.

Things work differently here.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
2travel2know2
Posts: 2785
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:01 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Sat Jan 24, 2015 3:10 pm

Perhaps if ONT had its own rail link to L.A. it attractiveness for new/improved service and potential passengers could greatly improve?
Here trying to compare L.A.'s ONT to London's STN and LTN.

Also, relocating ONT's F.I.S. to one of the main newer terminals might be a good sales point too.
I'm not on CM's payroll.
 
psa188
Posts: 661
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2000 11:02 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Sun Jan 25, 2015 3:32 am

Quoting TylerSmithSJC (Reply 27):
I don't know why people think all secondary airports are struggling. SJC must be really struggling if it has NH with a 788 to NRT

SJC is not struggling. They keep putting out press releases like this one SJC's%20Nov%202014%20Passenger%20Traffic%20Report.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.flysanjose.com/fl/about/n...20Passenger%20Traffic%20Report.pdf announcing passenger growth. SJC traffic is not at an all time peak, but it's coming back.
 
AirMatt
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 6:51 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Sun Jan 25, 2015 3:47 am

Quoting AFCJETS (Reply 76):

I flew a DC-10 on AA from DFW sometime in the 90's. I believe it only lasted for a few months.
 
continental004
Posts: 368
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 11:53 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Sun Jan 25, 2015 8:49 am

Quoting psa188 (Reply 89):

The sarcasm obviously wasn't detected there...
 
afcjets
Posts: 2834
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Sun Jan 25, 2015 9:02 am

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 88):
Perhaps if ONT had its own rail link to L.A. it attractiveness for new/improved service and potential passengers could greatly improve?

The Metro rail comes very close to ONT within a couple of miles, it is like a 5-10 min bus ride away, but I heard it is confusing. I cannot remember the name of the stop but to add to the confusion I believe the stop is both in a different city than ONT so named a different city too. All they need to do is change the Metro route maps to say XXX/Ontario Airport (Transfer).
 
continental004
Posts: 368
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 11:53 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Sun Jan 25, 2015 9:12 am

Quoting AFCJETS (Reply 92):

The MetroLINK (different from the LA Metro - but even locals confuse the two endlessly - welcome to LA lol) station is East Ontario, located in the city of Ontario on the south side of the airport. However, unless you have a taxi it is utterly useless for airport connections which are nonexistent by bus or otherwise from the train station. The only public transit connection to ONT from anywhere is a local bus line - Omnitrans 61 which stops on the north end of the airport close (but not that close) to the terminals.

There has been a proposal to extend the Metro Gold Line light rail out to ONT for years, but the funding is just not there as of now.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 23634
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Sun Jan 25, 2015 7:51 pm

Quoting continental004 (Reply 93):
There has been a proposal to extend the Metro Gold Line light rail out to ONT for years, but the funding is just not there as of now.

LA Metro is LA County. ONT is in San Bernardino County.

The farthest the Gold Line could go is the County border without support from SB.

This matter of fact was looked at last summer and the conclusion was the extension from Montclair or Claremont in LACo would cost about $950mil.
It turns out SB was even unwilling to fund the study that came up with that number and LA Co fully paid for it, while a subcommittee of the San Bernardino Associated Governments, placed a Gold Line extension low on their list fiscal priorities.

In other words, its not going to happen in the next decade or more.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
laca773
Posts: 2080
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:10 am

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Sun Jan 25, 2015 10:09 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 78):

For a long time. They even ran 767s to the only jetway in the old terminals, which was actually built for Western's DC10s.

They did. Actually, I believe they even had their own small terminal to theirselves for quite sometime.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26493
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Wed Feb 04, 2015 10:10 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 94):
The farthest the Gold Line could go is the County border without support from SB.

SANBAG has been luke warm to the idea of the ONT extension, but I believe Metro owns the ROW all the way up to Montclair, so there is nothing really stopping them from going there. That portion of the project is shovel ready, with advanced conceptual engineering already underway. The only real issue is funding.

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 88):
Perhaps if ONT had its own rail link to L.A. it attractiveness for new/improved service and potential passengers could greatly improve?
Here trying to compare L.A.'s ONT to London's STN and LTN.

Yes, a rail link would help, but only so much. Even the proposed Gold Line extension would be problematic, as the travel times would be a bit long. It would, however, probably attract some San Gabriel Valley traffic.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
bjorn14
Posts: 3595
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Wed Feb 04, 2015 12:21 pm

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 88):
Here trying to compare L.A.'s ONT to London's STN and LTN.

More like comparing ISP to NYC. It will be an 1-1.5 hr train ride into downtown LA
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
777ord
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:04 pm

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Wed Feb 04, 2015 5:12 pm

Sadly, expansion at ONT is going to be limited to the Mexican carriers. With Aeromexico and Volaris having a strong and full load factor presence. Except for AA and WN, they are the only carrier using Boeing/ Airbus aircraft.

UA is most likely going to outsource all of ONT based on my sources, but, nothing has been finalized.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos