A Hub Once More

[SpinDoc]

The route authorties are granted from PHL, not PIT.

And it is not very cost effective to fly a 767 or a A330 from PIT to PHL and then there is security check issues to be completed.

[post="241769"][/post]​

If someone could prove that PIT is a less
cost effective hub than PHL, then they need
to post the facts. I'm sure they can't because
no amont of PHL O&D premium can match the
overall economics of PIT as a hub. It just
can't be done with all of the FUBAR that goes
on in PHL.

 

[700UW]

If PIT was more cost effective it would still be a hub, it is proven it costs more per passenger in PIT then PHL or CLT.

 

[TechBoy]

The route authorties are granted from PHL, not PIT.

[post="241769"][/post]​

Route authorities? Almost everything is open skies now, so there are virtually no restrictions on moving flights among cities. I'm amazed at how often airline employees still think of route authorities as something that is owned. Across the pond, only LHR has any real restrictions.

There are lots of other reasons to operate the flights from PHL instead of PIT -- the most important one being profit.

 

[700UW]

If you have not notice the open skies agreements have been declared void by the europeon union, and yes carriers still have to get route authorities before they are allowed to fly.

 

[tadjr]

There are lots of other reasons to operate the flights from PHL instead of PIT -- the most important one being profit.

[post="241804"][/post]​

Regarding PHL as hub status and O&D mecca. Just what kind of O&D traffic does PHL have on any of the following routes?
(Feb 15th skd)
PHL-AVP 7 flights
PHL-ABE 8 flights
PHL-SCE 7 flights
PHL-MDT 10 flights
PHL-BWI 8 flights

I realize some PHL- wherever is needed for Caribbean and International traffic connections, but the rest of them just seem to be clogging the system. If PHL were operationally impeccable, then I'd say have at it, but why are all these connections being run from PHL when we should be making it a better place for those O&D passengers we're trying to attract? Not only are we pissing them off beacuse of the delays and problems there, but rerouting connections (orig skd thru PHL) at the same time to other airlines/cities because of the backup caused by all these non O&D flights and related congestion problems. Thats where the real problem with the PHL plan lies.

 

[ClueByFour]

If PIT was more cost effective it would still be a hub, it is proven it costs more per passenger in PIT then PHL or CLT.

[post="241792"][/post]​

When the hub pullback was done (end of BK-1), PHL's cost per pax was higher.

It's probably not now (I've not looked lately) because those fixed costs are now spread out over far fewer departures (due to the US drawdown).

 

[ClueByFour]

Because the PHL Transatlantic is originating traffic, not connecting traffic. And PHL is still the #1 making city US flies out of.

[post="241742"][/post]​

With all due respect, you are nuts if you think a majority of PHL transatlantic traffic is O&D. AF, LH, and BA suck the O&D traffic to those destinations.

Sure, there is more O&D than PIT or CLT, but to suggest that it's huge O&D is crazy. The UA transatlantic operation out of JFK is O&D based. As is DLs. UA's operation ex-IAD is O&D based, as is the single RDU-LGW flight that AA runs. PHL is not.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Bob,

I won't go so far as to say a majority of the PHL international traffic is connecting - I just don't know and the BTS international data only contains emplaned passenger numbers on a flight, not the origin (or destination, if inbound from overseas) of the passengers.

But any flight attendent will tell you that most flights into PHL in the late afternoon/early evening have passengers connecting to the international flights.

If you do truly believe that nearly all the international traffic from our hubs is O&D, then perhaps we should add flights back to PIT and add more destinations to CLT. Here's the July passenger count for flights out of the hubs (that's the latest available from BTS):

CLT-LGW 5780
PHL-LGW 6165
PIT-LGW 4252

LGW-CLT 7610
LGW-PHL 7900
LGW-PIT 5500

CLT-FRA 6113
PHL-FRA 6588
PIT-FRA 6067

FRA-CLT 7566
FRA-PHL 7614
FRA-PIT 7691

As you can see, CLT pretty much holds it's own with service to LGW and FRA, while PIT does the same to FRA (actually better than PHL for the FRA to USA traffic).

Jim

 

[shaka]

As a passenger that has been flying US Air for the last 9 years, I will never conncect through Philly again. I love the airline and can not stand the PHL airport. Every single time I am routed through there I have been either delayed or my bags missing. If I can not be booked through Pit or CLT during my required times I go on another airline. I have been a gold member for all these years and I love getting my miles but I have been screwed one too many times going thru Philly.

 

[700UW]

New Routes Offer Daily Nonstop Flights to Anchorage, Alaska and Pittsburgh

PHOENIX, Jan. 24 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- America West Airlines (NYSE: AWA - News), the nation's second largest low-cost airline, announces that it will initiate new nonstop jet service between its Las Vegas hub and Anchorage, Alaska as well as Pittsburgh. With this new service, America West will operate 146 daily departures to 61 nonstop destinations from Las Vegas, more than any other carrier.

 

[USFlyer]

No longer will your negativity and wild unproven assertions go unchallenged here.

[post="241860"][/post]​

Thank you!

 

[BoeingBoy]

Heck guys, if there weren't wild accusations and unproven assertions this place would be pretty dull. Just look at Piney's comment:

"Figures I've seen don't support your argument."

That's an unproven assertion .....

Jim

 

[ClueByFour]

Provide figures please to back up your assertions. Figures I've seen don't support your argument. Of course I don't have my nose up Randy's Butt either so perhaps you'd care to enlighten us? No longer will your negativity and wild unproven assertions go unchallenged here.

[post="241860"][/post]​

Jim beat me to it.

Man, you have to take a pill. Again. Unfounded accusations of kissing the butt of a guy who runs a travel website pale in comparison to very publically documented cases of kissing the butts of managers who successfully ran an airline into the ground (twice)...

Much like others, I sense that when confronted with the ugly truth that may not match with one's agenda, you go for the credibility of the poster. In that light, I suggest something more substantial than "neener, neener, neener."

 

[ITRADE]

So, let me interject.

Provide the data.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Provide the data.

[post="241917"][/post]​

Not so easy, ITRADE. The BTS does not release the data that would prove or disprove whether the "majority" of international [passengers] at any domestic airport is local or connecting. To quote a footnote in the application for anti-trust immunity by NWA and KLM:

"As indicated in Order 99-11-20, we will provide confidentiality protection for these data, as we do for international O&D data submitted by U.S. airlines, and we will not disclose this information to any other airlines."

The only people that have access to the data (outside the government) work in CCY and it probably wouldn't be in their interests to divulge it.

However, Piney mentioned "the figures" he's seen - maybe he will provide that.

My anecodal evidence suggests that no hub has 100% O&D in the international markets - having passengers worry about making international connections on my flights to PHL is proof enough for me that PHL O&D provides something less than 100% of the passengers for the international flights. Where does the majority of the international traffic come from? I certainly don't know.

Jim