Page 1 of 2

The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:04 pm
by LAXdude1023
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
Delta - SLC
US Airways - PHX
Volaris - GDL
AeroMexico - GDL

United got rid of all mainline flights to ONT. All flights to SFO, DEN, and IAH are opperated on RJs. It also appears as though Delta has pulled the seasonal ATL-ONT flight from GDS.

Granted I havent lived in the Los Angeles area in about 5 years now, but I used to like using ONT even if I had to make the drive because it was so much eaiser than LAX. I was my number two after SNA since I was left from work in Garden Grove many times.

Weve seen other airports bounce back since the depression, yet ONT keep declining. What would it take to get ONT back on its feet?

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:14 pm
by 29erUSA187
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

While ONT is losing pax, it has maintained a massive Cargo operation. Is there any chance of this growing larger?

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):
Southwest - MDW, DEN, LAS, OAK, PHX, SMF, and SJC.
American - DFW
Alaska - SEA
Delta - SLC
US Airways - PHX
Volaris - GDL
AeroMexico - GDL

This has to be one the highest % out of toal ops for almsot any airport!

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:18 pm
by mikesairways
I think part of the problem is now that you see JetBlue and Virgin America starting to go after the premium traveler, the big guys (AA, DL and UA) have had to put their focus at LAX to defend and maintain that. It's sad, but they only seem to go where the money is.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:24 pm
by commavia
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.

It seems AA has historically long been a very strong competitor at ONT - through ups and downs in the macro economy and AA's own finances, those multiple daily MD80s to DFW have remained relatively steady for a very, very long time. As a personal anecdote, I myself know several ONT-based flyers that live in Temecula, etc. who travel frequently back and forth to IAD, EWR, occasionally DFW, etc. and they only fly AA and have been AAdvantage members for decades.

Quoting 29erUSA187 (Reply 1):
AA is usually the stingiest with thier mainline equipment

I do not agree with that assessment. On the contrary, there are lots and lots of markets throughout the U.S. where AA retains a not-insignificant amount of mainline capacity and where competitors - especially United - have far less, if any.

Quoting mikesairways (Reply 2):
the big guys (AA, DL and UA) have had to put their focus at LAX to defend and maintain that. It's sad, but they only seem to go where the money is.

I agree that AA, Delta and United have all become relatively more concentrated (i.e., % of total LA basin capacity) at LAX in recent years as they "go where the money is," but I think that has less to do with fighting the growing presence of low-cost carriers (like JetBlue or Virgin) at LAX and more to do with the inescapable reality, validated again and again by market experience, that premium traffic demand in Southern California is concentrated at LAX - for better or worse.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:33 pm
by mikesairways
Quoting commavia (Reply 3):
I agree that AA, Delta and United have all become relatively more concentrated (i.e., % of total LA basin capacity) at LAX in recent years as they "go where the money is," but I think that has less to do with fighting the growing presence of low-cost carriers (like JetBlue or Virgin) at LAX and more to do with the inescapable reality, validated again and again by market experience, that premium traffic demand in Southern California is concentrated at LAX - for better or worse.

And to be honest the same can be said up SJC land as well - SFO will probably always have the nicer planes, premium routes and more destinations than us. As much as I want our little SJC to have the likes of BA, LH, etc here, we sadly will be always be in the shadows of SFO. I'm grateful we have ANA here at least - and from what I hear it's still going strong.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:34 pm
by Legend757
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):
Weve seen other airports bounce back since the depression, yet ONT keep declining. What would it take to get ONT back on its feet?
Quoting mikesairways (Reply 2):
I think part of the problem is now that you see JetBlue and Virgin America starting to go after the premium traveler, the big guys (AA, DL and UA) have had to put their focus at LAX to defend and maintain that. It's sad, but they only seem to go where the money is.

  

Many secondary airports seem to have lost their flavor for many airlines. Even G4's focus lately has been elsewhere with build ups in CVG, MSY, IND and PIT.

I think what keeps new entrants from considering ONT is the expense. IIRC, ONT is pricey for the airlines to operate out of.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:44 pm
by LAXintl
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):
Weve seen other airports bounce back since the depression, yet ONT keep declining.

How about decline of BUR, or decline at LGB? Or loss of airline services at one secondary airport after another in the U.S.?

Until recently when SNA traffic picked up, every LA basin airport sans LAX were experiencing declines.

Quoting Legend757 (Reply 5):
I think what keeps new entrants from considering ONT is the expense. IIRC, ONT is pricey for the airlines to operate out of.

Its cheaper than LAX.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:56 pm
by alasizon
Quoting Legend757 (Reply 5):
I think what keeps new entrants from considering ONT is the expense. IIRC, ONT is pricey for the airlines to operate out of.

Its pricey for passenger airlines due to the terminals that are far overbuilt.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 6):
Quoting Legend757 (Reply 5):
I think what keeps new entrants from considering ONT is the expense. IIRC, ONT is pricey for the airlines to operate out of.

Its cheaper than LAX.

It may be cheaper in terms of overhead, but the yields make a big difference.

From what I have seen, the loads to PHX are usually pretty good on US, usually about 60-90 bags inbound and about 50-75 outbound on a CR9. Mainline I would imagine still sees the value in it since only 2 frequencies are CR9s and only on certain days.

It suffers from being in the Inland Empire and the fact that the area is still relatively poor. Also, there are quite a few transplants to the IE that are from Mexico and as such travel to LAX for everywhere in Mexico and Central America other than GDL.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:42 pm
by ScottB
Quoting alasizon (Reply 7):
It may be cheaper in terms of overhead, but the yields make a big difference.

And you have just answered the question as to why service has declined at ONT -- yields are generally poor. That has been a problem since the Inland Empire economy basically imploded in the wake of the 2008 real estate collapse.

Quoting alasizon (Reply 7):
Its pricey for passenger airlines due to the terminals that are far overbuilt.

The terminals weren't overbuilt at the time they were constructed. Unfortunately, it's not possible to just unbuild the terminals and get the money back.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 6):
How about decline of BUR, or decline at LGB? Or loss of airline services at one secondary airport after another in the U.S.?

Until recently when SNA traffic picked up, every LA basin airport sans LAX were experiencing declines.

  

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

AA doesn't really have any hubs (well, didn't before the merger with US) which are close enough to serve economically with RJ's. DFW-ONT is a long, long way for an ERJ and that's a very high-cost aircraft for a yield-challenged market. Sure, they also had CR7's but they also had a lot of markets to cover with a small fleet and DFW-ONT would take up at least half a day for each round-trip. And it's dumb to fly people from ONT to LAX on RJ's, before anyone brings up the LAX hub.

Quoting commavia (Reply 3):
I think that has less to do with fighting the growing presence of low-cost carriers (like JetBlue or Virgin) at LAX and more to do with the inescapable reality, validated again and again by market experience, that premium traffic demand in Southern California is concentrated at LAX - for better or worse.

I think that's part of it -- but it's also the case that passengers will make trade-offs between price, schedule, and convenience. LAX basically beats every airport in the region for schedule and is virtually always price-competitive, so many will sacrifice convenience and drive to LAX for more frequent service or non-stops at a comparable price.

Something like 1x daily ATL-ONT is going to struggle if there are a dozen or more ATL-LAX flights -- unless the ATL-ONT flight is just far cheaper. But then why steal the traffic from yourself at a lower yield?

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:07 am
by LAXdude1023
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 6):
How about decline of BUR, or decline at LGB? Or loss of airline services at one secondary airport after another in the U.S.?

Im well aware ONT isnt the only secondary airport that has had difficulties. Many others seem to have rebounded while ONT has continued to decline. Not only is it declining, its peer airports (in terms of passenger count) would be something along the lines of OKC and BHM. That is something that takes me by surprise. Not only has ONT never recovered from the economic downtown, its continuing to decline.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 8):

AA doesn't really have any hubs (well, didn't before the merger with US) which are close enough to serve economically with RJ's. DFW-ONT is a long, long way for an ERJ and that's a very high-cost aircraft for a yield-challenged market. Sure, they also had CR7's but they also had a lot of markets to cover with a small fleet and DFW-ONT would take up at least half a day for each round-trip. And it's dumb to fly people from ONT to LAX on RJ's, before anyone brings up the LAX hub.

What is different about DFW-ONT vs. IAH/ATL-ONT is market size. Its well over twice the size of both and its a shorter distance. I dont think ONT is killing the yields to any destination, but I think that will keep DFW-ONT afloat.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:12 am
by dc10lover
Since i didn't know much about Ontario International Airport i went searching. Looks like there is a law suit over control of the airport. Then we have a so called "Judge" saying the law suit is "‘long, complicated’. It is not complicated. Give the airport back to the City of Ontario. Seems like people have a stake in LAX and would love to shut down Ontario Airport. (Force everyone to use LAX)

Just like airlines, airports do not like competition. People will travel to other cities / places to fly out for cheaper airfares. If the City of Ontario can regain the airport then i expect costs would come down and fares will be lower so more people will fly out of Ontario.

It will be interesting to find out about this so called "Judge's" ruling. (Just like Politicians - "Judges" are corrupt as well)

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:13 am
by ericm2031
ONT-DFW is not that long for an ERJ...look at all the RJs flying from the LA basin to Texas by AA and DL

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:24 am
by LAXdude1023
Quoting ericm2031 (Reply 11):
ONT-DFW is not that long for an ERJ...look at all the RJs flying from the LA basin to Texas by AA and DL

AA doesnt fly any RJs to Southern California from Texas. Not a single one.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:28 am
by LAXintl
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 9):
Im well aware ONT isnt the only secondary airport that has had difficulties. Many others seem to have rebounded while ONT has continued to decline. Not only is it declining, its peer airports (in terms of passenger count) would be something along the lines of OKC and BHM. That is something that takes me by surprise. Not only has ONT never recovered from the economic downtown, its continuing to decline.

BUR continues its decline as well...

Pax totals.

2007 - 5,921,336
2008 - 5,331,404
2009 - 4,588,433
2010 - 4,461,271
2011 - 4,301,568
2012 - 4,056,416
2013 - 3,844,092
2014 - 3.7 mil per media report

Thats a 40% decline, almost identical to ONT 44% during similar time frame.

ONT just gets undue attention due to bunch of loud local politicos. But the industry changes are far beyond unique to ONT.

Quoting DC10LOVER (Reply 10):
Give the airport back to the City of Ontario. Seems like people have a stake in LAX and would love to shut down Ontario Airport. (Force everyone to use LAX)

LA City has said it would sell the airport back for the right price - one that allows it recoup its multi-decade investments into the airport.
Remember LA City did not end up with ONT due to any shenanigans. The City of Ontario was broke and walked away from it 1960s. FAA brokered a deal where LA City would assume operations and later ownership of the airport in return for major upgrades (new runways, terminal etc).

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:30 am
by MAH4546
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 12):

Quoting ericm2031 (Reply 11):
ONT-DFW is not that long for an ERJ...look at all the RJs flying from the LA basin to Texas by AA and DL

AA doesnt fly any RJs to Southern California from Texas. Not a single one.

LAX-ELP/IAH/SAT and, starting in May, a 5th daily LAX-AUS frequency will be an RJ on top of the four mainline flights.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:31 am
by LAXdude1023
Quoting Mah4546 (Reply 14):
LAX-ELP/IAH/SAT and, starting in May, a 5th daily LAX-AUS frequency will be an RJ on top of the four mainline flights.

Youre right. I was thinking DFW not Texas in my head. Sorry about that.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:34 am
by DarkSnowyNight
Quoting DC10LOVER (Reply 10):
It is not complicated. Give the airport back to the City of Ontario. Seems like people have a stake in LAX and would love to shut down Ontario Airport. (Force everyone to use LAX)

The issue isn't that LAWA wants to keep ONT until the day before forever. It's that they can't get a reasonable offer from the Ontario or the IE cities.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:40 am
by SurfandSnow
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):
part of it was the decline the IE faced when the economy bottomed out

Part of it was the airport's high costs. Part of it was the U.S. airline industry's renewed focus on primary airports. ONT's primary tenant WN changed its entire network strategy from catering strictly to VFR and leisure travelers at secondary airports and medium-sized markets to serving business travelers at primary airports and virtually all of the nation's largest markets. WN aggressively expanded at the likes of BOS, BWI, DAL, DCA, DEN, HOU, LAX, LGA, MDW, MSP, SFO, etc. - largely at the expense of its alternate and smaller market stations like ABQ, BHM, BUR, ELP, ISP, MHT, ONT, ORF, PVD, SLC, etc.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):
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.

I would think ONT's worst days are behind them. The Inland Empire is currently the fastest-growing region in all of Southern California, and strong growth is forecast for the coming years. The economic growth is a lot more broad-based than it was in the past and includes notable gains of higher paying jobs. This should ultimately translate into increased demand for air service, though it may be worth noting that demographic challenges remain: local unemployment is higher than the state average and local wages are considerably lower than the California average.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...empire-economy-20141023-story.html

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):
Southwest - MDW, DEN, LAS, OAK, PHX, SMF, and SJC

Looks like those seasonal nonstop ONT-RNO flights didn't pan out, but maybe they could try ONT-SJD flights (with feed from NorCal and LAS, it might just work). Given UA's drastic reduction in capacity on the ONT-IAH route, maybe WN could add ONT-HOU service. However, with WN making an 8 figure investment in the renovation of LAX Terminal 1, growth at ONT (or BUR) is probably an afterthought.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):
United got rid of all mainline flights to ONT. All flights to SFO, DEN, and IAH are opperated on RJs.

This is UA we are talking about. I for one would be shocked if they still offered mainline service at ONT  !

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):
It also appears as though Delta has pulled the seasonal ATL-ONT flight from GDS.

Wasn't the "seasonal" ATL-ONT just a few flights around the Christmas/New Year holidays? If that service did well maybe they can convince DL to restore service throughout the busy summer travel period.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):
I used to like using ONT even if I had to make the drive because it was so much eaiser than LAX.

People love the convenience of the alternate airports, but the all-important business travelers prefer LAX (better schedules, larger aircraft, lounges, nonstop flights, etc.). Even BUR - within spitting distance of the studios and Hollywood Hills - struggles to attract the higher yielding types, while ONT is so far from most of the LA tourist attractions, businesses, and wealthy residents that it isn't even considered.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):
Weve seen other airports bounce back since the depression, yet ONT keep declining.

A lot of the secondary metropolitan airports are still struggling. In California alone you have BUR, LGB, OAK, and SJC in addition to ONT. The airlines - legacies, LCCs, and now even the ULCCs - are all focused on primary airports/markets. As LAX gains more competition (lower fares), nonstop flights and improved amenities, ONT becomes less attractive. PSP has gained LCC service, so folks in the Coachella Valley are less likely to use ONT as well.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):
What would it take to get ONT back on its feet?

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.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:47 am
by LAXdude1023
Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 17):
People love the convenience of the alternate airports, but the all-important business travelers prefer LAX (better schedules, larger aircraft, lounges, nonstop flights, etc.). Even BUR - within spitting distance of the studios and Hollywood Hills - struggles to attract the higher yielding types, while ONT is so far from most of the LA tourist attractions, businesses, and wealthy residents that it isn't even considered.

It depends on the type of traffic too.

I lived in LA for most of my adult life and even though LAX was far closer, I would go out to ONT to fly on many occasions. I could get off the plane, get my bag, and be out of the airport in 15 minutes. LAX offers a lot more options, but any time my final destination was just DFW or IAH, I would always use ONT or SNA. If I was flying internationally I would use LAX. But that is from a resident perspective.

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.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:59 am
by dumbell2424
Part of me feels like B6 will be returning sooner rather than later.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:16 am
by BigGSFO
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):
Alaska - SEA

Alaska also servies ONTPDX

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:52 am
by doug_or
Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 20):

Alaska also servies ONTPDX

With 2 daily SkyWest CR7s

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):
Currently ONT is left with year round mainline service to the following destinations:

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 2:35 am
by 2travel2know2
Quoting ScottB (Reply 8):
The terminals weren't overbuilt at the time they were constructed. Unfortunately, it's not possible to just unbuild the terminals and get the money back.

Any spare room available at any of ONT main 2 terminals to move Port-of-Entry over-there and close the international arrivals terminal?

As for international flights ONT only has GDL flights, how come no MEX or GUA or SAL service? Demographics are there to support those routes.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 2:38 am
by continental004
My family and I flew ONT-PHX last spring. We live only about 20-30 minutes away from ONT, and my father prefers to fly out of ONT when possible when traveling for business or otherwise because "it's an easy airport." However, all of us were astounded at how empty the airport was. After we landed back home from PHX on one of the last flights of the day, the airport was almost a ghost town.

Five years ago I flew ONT-IAH-LHR. Back then CO had 737s flying to and from ONT, compared to the RJs UA uses now. It was a great alternative to LAX because everything was smaller scale, and I paid ~$1200 USD for the flight bought only a few weeks before (this was 2010).

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 3:04 am
by LAXintl
Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 22):
Any spare room available at any of ONT main 2 terminals to move Port-of-Entry over-there and close the international arrivals terminal?

Room yes suppose so, but someone would have to fund the millions for build out a FIS facility.

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 22):
how come no MEX or GUA or SAL service? Demographics are there to support those routes.

TACA looked at ONT about 2-3 years ago but opted against it.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 3:51 am
by ldvaviation
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 13):
Thats a 40% decline, almost identical to
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 13):
LA City has said it would sell the airport back for the right price - one that allows it recoup its multi-decade investments into the airport.
Remember LA City did not end up with

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 5:03 pm
by SFOA380
Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 17):
In California alone you have BUR, LGB, OAK, and SJC in addition to ONT.

SJC and OAK are not struggling. They are not back to their historic highs, but their growth has been quite healthy the past couple of years.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 5:34 pm
by tylersmithsjc
Quoting SFOA380 (Reply 26):
SJC and OAK are not struggling. They are not back to their historic highs, but their growth has been quite healthy the past couple of years.

Exactly. 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 and OAK must be too with DY to ARN and OSL

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:23 pm
by ASAFA
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Thread starter):
Alaska - SEA

Alaska is no longer mainline to SEA. The two daily flights are both operated by Skywest CR7s.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:28 pm
by KC135Hydraulics
I just flew into Ontario two nights ago and the place was deserted. It's getting harder and harder for me to find good travel fares out of Ontario these days. I live in Menifee, which is about 40 minutes away from Ontario, and sadly I am starting to have to look at San Diego or LAX which are much farther away for competitive travel deals now. I am sad, Ontario has been my "home" airport for many years but it's clear to see it's dying every time I go there. So many deserted gates.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:40 pm
by ramprat74
They need to move all the airlines into Terminal 4. It's really sad what ONT has become. I think LAWA makes more money filming commercials at ONT then what the airlines bring in.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:46 pm
by N1120A
Quoting alasizon (Reply 7):
Its pricey for passenger airlines due to the terminals that are far overbuilt.


Those terminals were a very good idea in 1998. The airport was growing, the economy was great and the nature of airline service was quite different. The old terminals, which I grew up with and miss very much, were just too small to handle the necessary traffic.

Quoting DC10LOVER (Reply 10):
Since i didn't know much about Ontario International Airport i went searching. Looks like there is a law suit over control of the airport. Then we have a so called "Judge" saying the law suit is "‘long, complicated’. It is not complicated. Give the airport back to the City of Ontario. Seems like people have a stake in LAX and would love to shut down Ontario Airport. (Force everyone to use LAX)


Do you have any idea about the history? At all? The City of Ontario sold to the City of Los Angeles more than 50 years ago. Of course it is a long and complicated lawsuit.

As for LAWA wanting to shut down ONT, why on earth would they have spent MILLIONS to build new terminals, with space for more? Why would they have costs lower than LAX? Why would they have pushed ONT for YEARS, before it became obvious that it would always be what it is?

Quoting DC10LOVER (Reply 10):
It will be interesting to find out about this so called "Judge's" ruling. (Just like Politicians - "Judges" are corrupt as well)


Good to see you have so much respect for the law.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:56 pm
by bpat777
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 12):
AA doesnt fly any RJs to Southern California from Texas. Not a single one.

...I think AA flies CR9s between IAH and LAX 3x daily.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:59 pm
by N1120A
Quoting bpat777 (Reply 32):
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 12):
AA doesnt fly any RJs to Southern California from Texas. Not a single one.

...I think AA flies CR9s between IAH and LAX 3x daily.

2x today. Mesa CR9s.

BTW - AA employees absolutely HATE Mesa.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 9:45 pm
by sunnyflyer
Only 1 person mentioned the cargo operations at ONT,I recommend listening to the ATC traffic,the heavies are coming & going all night long until dawn,that has to account highly for it's importance to the IE, also no curfew.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 10:04 pm
by DeltaXNA
This is northern california, however starting this spring, I forget the exact date DFW-SJC will have one CR9 frequency along with 4 daily 738's.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 10:18 pm
by thekorean
Surprised more LCC are not serving LA area via here, I assume fees would be much lower than LAX.

The cost savings they can pass down to consumers might tempt passengers.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 10:22 pm
by mikesairways
Quoting DeltaXNA (Reply 35):
This is northern california, however starting this spring, I forget the exact date DFW-SJC will have one CR9 frequency along with 4 daily 738's.


I think it's right around March 1. There will be occasional 319's in the mix as well from what I've heard.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 10:26 pm
by LOWS
Quoting N1120A (Reply 33):
BTW - SA)">AA employees absolutely HATE Mesa.

I have yet to meet anyone who likes MESA.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:09 pm
by OzarkD9S
Quoting LOWS (Reply 38):


I have yet to meet anyone who likes MESA.

Mesa the company or the employees? I've flown Mesa 2-3 times against my better judgement, but the flights were on time and the flight crews were top notch.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:14 pm
by tommy767
Quoting commavia (Reply 3):

UA secretly pulled mainline to ONT after the merger. DEN & IAH had 320 and 757 service just a few years ago. This is what happens when you run short on mainline planes.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:30 pm
by commavia
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 40):
UA secretly pulled mainline

"Secretly?" Hmmm.

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 40):
DEN & IAH had 320 and 757 service just a few years ago. This is what happens when you run short on mainline planes.

As has been discussed, though, it's about more than just "run[ning] short on mainline planes" - the market is down pretty much across the board. As recently as 2004 Delta was flying multiple daily mainline jets to SLC and ATL (including a 767 to ATL), JetBlue had nonstops to JFK and Hawaiian flew a 767 to HNL.

The biggest issue is the market itself - for all the reasons already discussed, ranging from a poor macroeconomic environment in the region to the concentration of air service at LAX in search of higher yields.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2015 12:10 am
by LOWS
Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 39):
Mesa the company or the employees? I've flown Mesa 2-3 times against my better judgement, but the flights were on time and the flight crews were top notch.

The company.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2015 12:21 am
by N1120A
Quoting sunnyflyer (Reply 34):
also no curfew.

LAX doesn't have a curfew either.

Quoting thekorean (Reply 36):
Surprised more LCC are not serving LA area via here, I assume fees would be much lower than LAX.

Think again. Both are low.

Quoting thekorean (Reply 36):
The cost savings they can pass down to consumers might tempt passengers.

The cost savings aren't enough. In fact, they could get even cheaper costs at BUR, while getting much higher yield traffic and more cachement.

Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 39):
Mesa the company or the employees? I've flown Mesa 2-3 times against my better judgement, but the flights were on time and the flight crews were top notch.

The Mesa flight I flew yesterday was delayed thanks to Mesa pulling the plane from AA at PHX at the last minute and not sending a replacement, and not communicating what had happened to the AA staff. They were LIVID.

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 40):
UA secretly pulled mainline to ONT after the merger. DEN & IAH had 320 and 757 service just a few years ago. This is what happens when you run short on mainline planes.

IAH didn't have A320s or 757s. Indeed, I think IAH had the last of CO's MD80s and also received 737s.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2015 7:27 am
by barney captain
ONT has the worst concessions of any airport we serve - by far. IF they are open, they are ridiculously expensive. The Schlotzsky's, Round Table Pizza and the Mexican place will routinely be closed in the middle of the day for no apparent reason. The good news is, when Round Table IS open, they will sell you a single slice of pizza and a soda for $13.95. Exorbitant - even by airport standards.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:34 am
by tommy767
Quoting N1120A (Reply 43):

sUA flew 757 on ONT-IAH in 2012. Look it up.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:46 am
by slcdeltarumd11
Havn't fees at ONT gone up alot? I think that explains it, they ran service away by raising fees too much

When the economy really picks up and recovers out there, I bet we see some service come back.

I remember flying ont-CVG n/s an unthinkable link nowdays!

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2015 10:11 am
by asteriskceo
What's to be said about the LAWA "stranglehold?"

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2015 5:09 pm
by LAXintl
Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 46):
Havn't fees at ONT gone up alot? I think that explains it, they ran service away by raising fees too much

For last 2-years running, the cost at ONT have declined, and ONT enjoys lower operating fee structure than LAX.

Yes after 2007 with the economic spiral, cost per enplaned passenger rose (as it did across many of the nations airports with reduced enplanements), bringing ONT in the upper range of 'small/medium sized' facilities per FAA definition.
By 2011 cost plateaud putting ONT on par with places like LAS, PDX, SJC, MHT, SYR, etc but much lower than airport such as SMF, PIT, CLE, STL which are in the same FAA category.

RE: The Decline In Service At ONT

Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2015 7:33 pm
by asteriskceo
Funny coincidence—today, my local paper ran a pretty indepth 3 page story about the not-so-friendly relationship between LAWA and ONT. Wish they had posted the entire article online, but I did snap a shot of the frontpage:


http://imgur.com/cAvIItP