American Airlines plans to ‘rebank’ its Dallas/Fort Worth Airport hub this spring

[boston]

The ware and tear on fleet service in Miami is starting to show. International flights bags are now scanned inbound out bound, loss of equipment, shorten ground time. Increased assignments with that shorten ground time things are being forgotten, mistakes unfortunately are happening. However, supervisors are like flys...

This has lead to numerous air interupts, and aircraft damage. There is only so much a human can do safely.These things weren't happening like this before.
Google

 

[IORFA]

Sounds like they need to keep hiring.

 

[WorldTraveler]

sounds like the reasons that AA debanked its hubs to begin with under the previous administration have been proven to be right and that undoing that adds operational complexity - and delays - and increases staffing and equipment needs which was exactly what everyone else expected would happen.

 

[WeAAsles]

Sounds like they need to keep hiring.

They are. They have been hiring like crazy here in MIA. Newbies at every turn.

 

[jcw]

That's right no airline knows how to run a hub except one - DL

 

[Kev3188]

Yep, you guys should just pack it in now...

 

[WorldTraveler]

That's right no airline knows how to run a hub except one - DL

no missed that AA actually ran a pretty good hub at DFW and MIA before..... but Parker in his infinite wisdom decided that desert-sized ideas have to be imposed on AA.

and it will add costs and complexity and decreased reliability to AA's operation

that is guaranteed.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

That's right no airline knows how to run a hub except one - DL

 
You got it!
In case there are any doubts, see WT's posts lectures about DL's operational superiority on the - surprise! surprise! the WN board:
http://www.airlineforums.com/topic/58096-us-department-of-transportation-fines-southwest-16-million-for-violating-tarmac-delay-rule/?p=1145192
http://www.airlineforums.com/topic/58096-us-department-of-transportation-fines-southwest-16-million-for-violating-tarmac-delay-rule/?p=1145286
http://www.airlineforums.com/topic/58096-us-department-of-transportation-fines-southwest-16-million-for-violating-tarmac-delay-rule/?p=1145309

 

[WorldTraveler]

you could also look at DOT data that shows that AA's operational reliability at its hubs, esp. DFW, has been less than industry leading.

given that the complexity of the hub will increase dramatically and costs will be added at all of AA's hubs, it is more than early to argue that AA is making the right choice to rebank the operational hub.

btw, while you are looking at that DOT data, you will see that DL is running one of the most reliable airlines in the US, esp. for a large network carrier. at best, DL is beat in on-time and completions only by Hawaiian.

If DL had Hawaii weather in NYC, life would be so much easier.... I'm sure that would be true about AA at DFW and ORD as well.

 

[UPNAWAY]

Bottom line is the bottom line, if it doesn't imporve revenue, cost and operation performance we will unbank it, but so far most everytyhing this managment staff has done over ther last 15+ years has worked well. Lets look at  the numbers at years end WT and then you can come back and gloat.

 

[WorldTraveler]

the premise of banked hubs is that connectivity is increased.

however, it adds a lot of costs and increases operational complexity - which has been acknowledged here to include stresses on personnel and equipment - as well as the airport.

It might improve revenue - but DFW has worked very well as an unbanked hub. Given how massive AA's facilities are at DFW, I'm not sure that the same benefit can be derived from DFW as it could even at ORD or CLT. And given that so much of the MIA operation is int'l and dependent on the government to work smoothly, I am also far from sure that the benefit will be as quick in coming.

I'm not against banked hubs... but there is a size and complexity when they don't make as much sense. I have said nothing against AA rebanking ORD. My concerns are with DFW and MIA.

 

[commavia]

Scott Kirby (AA President), December 2013:
 

"Although the continuous hub or rolling hub did save on expenses, the lost revenue far outweighed the savings on costs."
 
"...You lose all that revenue, and it overwhelms the cost savings."

 
Marilyn DeVoe (AA VP-Miami), January 2015:
 

"In Miami, rebanking reduced a customer’s connect time by 20 minutes on average, but the person has 6 percent more connections to choose from..."

 
Isn't it amazing how the people actually running AA - you know, the ones with access to the actual data - swear up and down that repeaking the hubs (including DFW and MIA) makes financial sense, and yet Delta's #1 fan still knows better.
 
Fascinating ...

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

Given how massive AA's facilities are at DFW, I'm not sure that the same benefit can be derived from DFW as it could even at ORD or CLT.

 
Help me understand:  isn't DL's hub at ATL not only larger than AA at DFW but also banked?  So then why is re-banking an imminent disaster for AA at DFW?

 

[WorldTraveler]

ATL is not a banked hub for DL. It is an omnidirectional rolling hub. most markets have service on every bank and there are multiple markets which have hourly or more frequent service. Hourly service is indicative of a marketing driven approach to serving the local market, not a need to bank the hub in order to increase connectivity.

and Parker or Kirby may come to the conclusion that banking DFW will increase revenue relative to the increased costs looking at the data they have.

but given that former AA mgmt. came to just the opposite conclusion and all of the operational data indicates that DFW and MIA both operate far differently than any US hub, I have a feeling that Parker and Kirby will find out that their assumptions that they have used to argue that banking will work is insufficient for AA's DFW and MIA hubs.

at the very minimum, the increased costs will make AA less competitive carrying connecting traffic because of the increased costs relative to what AA used to have to run those two hubs (both of which compete with other carrier hubs) as well as the increased ground time and aircraft inefficiency.

so, if they and you want to argue that rebanking makes sense, don't let me stop you. It is AA's competitors, principally you know which hub that will benefit from AA's decision to rebank DFW and MIA.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

ATL is not a banked hub for DL. It is an omnidirectional rolling hub

and Parker or Kirby may come to the conclusion that banking DFW will increase revenue relative to the increased costs looking at the data they have.

 
Thanks for the clarification about ATL.  I thought it was a banked hub.
BTW:  can  you name 1 airline hub that isn't 'omnidirectional'?
 
I won't make predictions on how re-banked DFW will work operationally or financially.  But I think that by writing as you do above you're losing your own argument:  for the old AA it made sense to de-bank DFW, while at the same time acknowledging that for AA/US the data may indicate it is better to re-bank DFW.