OP
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
- Thread Starter
- #586
In less than 10 years, AA has gone from being the largest airline on the NYC side of NY to half the size of DL. Whatever you want to call it is fine, but AA is cancelling a new market about every month and its share continues to fall.
The codesharing that exists as part of the AS-DL relationship is part of a long-term contract that requires performance from both sides.
No one has yet to say why DL should allow AS out of any part of the contract when DL can and has proven its ability to grow despite what AS does.
The money that DL is spending to develop new routes from SEA across the Pacific goes a long ways toward what they would have to spend to build gates. DL made the decision a long time ago that they were building SEA; gates are just part of the process but the chances of DL deciding they aren't willing to pay the price any longer rank somewhere between a round trip ticket to fantasy land (and that is not a part of a Disney park) and hades.
DL's published schedule thru Sept. 2014 requires close to 20 gates to run efficiently. There are undoubtedly more flights they would like to add but DL is a lot closer to filling a 25-30 gate facility than you might think.
Interesting that you want to trot out the reliance on regional carriers now, E. but you do realize that DL is the most aggressive US carrier in reducing dependence on regional carriers and converting it to mainline service, don't you?
DL may be adding new regional carrier flights on the west coast but they are reducing overall RJ flying on the eastern part of its system. DL has a limit on the number of large RJs it can operate, is parking hundreds of small RJs, and is still growing on the west coast, so there will be a shift in the location of where RJs operate on DL's system but the overall trend is towards LESS, NOT MORE, RJ service on DL's network.
You also missed or don't want to acknowledge that DL announced 7 or 8 flights/day on large RJs between LAX-SEA after operating several mainline flights/day last year. Now, DL's schedule for this summer on the same route is for more mainline capacity than DL has operated in years - long before the SEA hub became an issue - and DL has reduced the number of large RJs.
That is exactly the principle that will play out across the western part of DL's system. Flights will begin or frequency will be added with large RJs only to be quickly upgraded to mainline flights where it can be. DL's LAX-SFO service is a very high candidate for becoming 717 service which frees up about 4-5 large RJs alone.
The large RJs are for growth routes to DL's network using two cabin aircraft. Many of those routes will become mainline aircraft - LAX-SEA, one of the largest large RJ markets - is already proving the principle.
Tell me what AA and UA's trend regarding regional carriers vs alliances vs. domestic partners is.
The codesharing that exists as part of the AS-DL relationship is part of a long-term contract that requires performance from both sides.
No one has yet to say why DL should allow AS out of any part of the contract when DL can and has proven its ability to grow despite what AS does.
The money that DL is spending to develop new routes from SEA across the Pacific goes a long ways toward what they would have to spend to build gates. DL made the decision a long time ago that they were building SEA; gates are just part of the process but the chances of DL deciding they aren't willing to pay the price any longer rank somewhere between a round trip ticket to fantasy land (and that is not a part of a Disney park) and hades.
DL's published schedule thru Sept. 2014 requires close to 20 gates to run efficiently. There are undoubtedly more flights they would like to add but DL is a lot closer to filling a 25-30 gate facility than you might think.
Interesting that you want to trot out the reliance on regional carriers now, E. but you do realize that DL is the most aggressive US carrier in reducing dependence on regional carriers and converting it to mainline service, don't you?
DL may be adding new regional carrier flights on the west coast but they are reducing overall RJ flying on the eastern part of its system. DL has a limit on the number of large RJs it can operate, is parking hundreds of small RJs, and is still growing on the west coast, so there will be a shift in the location of where RJs operate on DL's system but the overall trend is towards LESS, NOT MORE, RJ service on DL's network.
You also missed or don't want to acknowledge that DL announced 7 or 8 flights/day on large RJs between LAX-SEA after operating several mainline flights/day last year. Now, DL's schedule for this summer on the same route is for more mainline capacity than DL has operated in years - long before the SEA hub became an issue - and DL has reduced the number of large RJs.
That is exactly the principle that will play out across the western part of DL's system. Flights will begin or frequency will be added with large RJs only to be quickly upgraded to mainline flights where it can be. DL's LAX-SFO service is a very high candidate for becoming 717 service which frees up about 4-5 large RJs alone.
The large RJs are for growth routes to DL's network using two cabin aircraft. Many of those routes will become mainline aircraft - LAX-SEA, one of the largest large RJ markets - is already proving the principle.
Tell me what AA and UA's trend regarding regional carriers vs alliances vs. domestic partners is.
