I Don't Understand

[ISP]

So I keep hearing that with the new merged company, transcons will be reduced. Fine, I said, I will still be able to get to the west coast, won't I?

Now I see this, printed in the Charlotte Business Journal:

US Airways' routes between the East and West coasts will be cut in half after Arizona-based America West buys the carrier, airline executives have said. US Airways' hubs will no longer be used for connecting flights to the West Coast, executives said.

The airline (OTCBB:UAIRQ.OB) has more than 20 nonstop daily flights from Charlotte to six West Coast cities -- Denver, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Diego, San Francisco and Seattle.

What the hell does any of this mean? Project barbell will become project dumbell and nobody will be able to fly coast to coast? How do I get out there if there aren't any flights from CLT? PIT is being boarded up and I sure as hell ain't going though PHL!

Thoughts appreciated!

 

[deltawatch]

Maybe they will place flights from the top 20 east coast markets to PHX. LGA PHL DCA BWI CLT TPA MIA MCO ATL RDU CHS GSO ORF RIC SYR BUF PIT BDL PVD CLE CVG to PHX. And then have connections to big and small cities out west from PHX.

They could do the same thing coming east, fly from large cities out west into PHL offering connections to big and small east coast markets from there. LAX SFO SAN PHX LAS DEN SLC SEA POR etc. to PHL.

 

[bofie]

Maybe they will place flights from the top 20 east coast markets to PHX. LGA PHL DCA BWI CLT TPA MIA MCO ATL RDU CHS GSO ORF RIC SYR BUF PIT BDL PVD CLE CVG to PHX. And then have connections to big and small cities out west from PHX.

They could do the same thing coming east, fly from large cities out west into PHL offering connections to big and small east coast markets from there. LAX SFO SAN PHX LAS DEN SLC SEA POR etc. to PHL.

[post="275316"][/post]​

Horrible! I fly out of PHL and if I want a connecting flight I can use AA! If they stop most direct flights they'll lose a big edge on the competition in PHL and CLT.

 

[etops1]

if i heard correctly on the hp webcast they said that the transcon flying they were going to cut was the jfk-lax/sfo and bos-lax/sfo. because they were going to have the nonstops from phl,pit& clt to phx and vegas. so the people will connect from phx or las to the other western cities. you might see phl-lax/sea/sfo/san/ go away since you can now connect through phx and las to these cities. same goes for clt.

 

[JayBrian]

if i heard correctly on the hp webcast they said that the transcon flying they were going to cut was the jfk-lax/sfo and bos-lax/sfo. because they were going to have the nonstops from phl,pit& clt to phx and vegas. so the people will connect from phx or las to the other western cities. you might see phl-lax/sea/sfo/san/ go away since you can now connect through phx and las to these cities. same goes for clt.

[post="275345"][/post]​

So if I want to go from ORF-LAX for example I will have to double connect? ORF-PHL-PHX-LAX?

 

[700UW]

HP did say the current US hubs were going to have their transcons cut by 50%.

 

[etops1]

So if I want to go from ORF-LAX for example I will have to double connect? ORF-PHL-PHX-LAX?

[post="275348"][/post]​

i might be wrong they might just have fewer nonstops to the west coast from phl&clt than they do know. might go down to 2 day rather than four or five a day.

 

[BoeingBoy]

My understanding is the same as etops & 700.

HP will withdraw from the transcon market so nonstops from places like NYC to the west coast will be gone. Just my assumption, but this may have as much to do with using some of the 757's for Hawaii service as anything else.

US will still have transcon service from PHL/CLT (who knows what the future holds for PIT), just not as much. I assume etops is right - less frequency rather than fewer destinations.

My guess is we might see more service from other east coast cities (the focus cities especially) to PHX/LAS offering connections to west coast destinations.

Jim

 

[deltawatch]

My guess is we might see more service from other east coast cities (the focus cities especially) to PHX/LAS offering connections to west coast destinations.

Jim

[post="275353"][/post]​

That’s kind of what I was thinking, coordinate east-west flights using the PHL and PHX hubs. There’s something nice about your first segment being the longer one when connecting. Flights from the top 20 east coast business markets to PHX would be a hit when traveling to the left coast.

If you are going from ORF to LAX. You would go ORF-PHX-LAX or ORF-PHL-LAX would still work. Have a early morning ORF-PHX, a mid morning ORF-PHL a afternoon ORF-PHX, then a evening ORF-PHL. The main thing is for them to coordinate the hubs as quickly as possible so there’s no over lapping service or excess capacity. In the Piedmont, USAir merger it took forever to get rid of over lapping north south service.

I think CLT will be mostly north-south traffic, Caribbean, Mexico, Central and South America. I think the FLL idea is history.

 

[ZMAN777]

If you want to go transcon just jump on UAL! Afterall, it'll probably still be your codeshare buddy. From what I see at UAL on the passenger manifest there are already A LOT of US flyers that take UAL when traveling between the coasts. Plus, the connections are the best if you're going further into the Pacific. No brainer.

Cheers,
Z B)

 

[US1YFARE]

If you want to go transcon just jump on UAL!  Afterall, it'll probably still be your codeshare buddy.  From what I see at UAL on the passenger manifest there are already A LOT of US flyers that take UAL when traveling between the coasts.  Plus, the connections are the best if you're going further into the Pacific.  No brainer.

Cheers,
Z  B)

[post="275389"][/post]​

I'd rather be on US. Also, I can't upgrade on UAL. Although I usually buy an A fare to the west coast, sometimes I book less than a week in advance and buy the N fare to get the upgrade (more money than an A fare but really opens up the opportunities to ensure an upgrade).

That is really going to stink if they cut back the transcon service out of PHL by 50%. It is so easy to get to SAN and LAX and SFO and SEA. I wish they would add SJC and bring back SNA.

What is the reason for cutting back service--those flights are full. If they aren't making money on them, then why would you force people to connect? Isn't it more expensive for the airline, particularly when the fare will likely remain the same? Maybe the 50% reduction includes flights from PHL to PHX and LAS that are currently serviced by American West--get rid of those flights and keep the US schedule (aren't those considered transcon)?

I'll be glad when they get rid of the 75's to LAS--I'm sick of paying $800-plus and sitting in the back--can't even buy a F ticket most of the time because they are sold out.

By the way, someone should tell the Charlotte paper that DEN is not a transcon flight--that is why they don't always show the movie--now that is such a dumb rule--why wouldn't they want to make the $5 for some sales of headsets? And, why do some FA's show it anyway and others do not?

 

[PSA1979]

By the way, someone should tell the Charlotte paper that DEN is not a transcon flight--that is why they don't always show the movie--now that is such a dumb rule--why wouldn't they want to make the $5 for some sales of headsets? And, why do some FA's show it anyway and others do not?

[post="275450"][/post]​

Some f/a's show it because they feel sorry for the pax that have to sit for such a long time with nothing to do. The company has designated it and all the other east coast-Den flights non movie flights. The flight time on the return sometimes doesn't leave enough time for a movie, so to be consistant, they made them all non. Personally, if it makes $5 for the company, I don't see why we aren't supposed to. It's $5 more dollars they aren't trying to hammer me for!

 

[hp_fa]

Some f/a's show it because they feel sorry for the pax that have to sit for such a long time with nothing to do. The company has designated it and all the other east coast-Den flights non movie flights. The flight time on the return sometimes doesn't leave enough time for a movie, so to be consistant, they made them all non. Personally, if it makes $5 for the company, I don't see why we aren't supposed to. It's $5 more dollars they aren't trying to hammer me for!

[post="275486"][/post]​

You are forgetting that the licensing fees are charged according to planned usage and if the movie cannot be shown in the allotted block time the airline loses money. The airline accordingly does not include the eastbound flights in it's contract to show the movies and the company is in contractual violation of the licensing agreement when the movie is shown on a non-movie flight.

 

[PSA1979]

You are forgetting that the licensing fees are charged according to planned usage and if the movie cannot be shown in the allotted block time the airline loses money. The airline accordingly does not include the eastbound flights in it's contract to show the movies and the company is in contractual violation of the licensing agreement when the movie is shown on a non-movie flight.

[post="275551"][/post]​

Which is the reason I don't show the movies when I fly senior on those flights. But, some f/a's like I said feel sorry for the pax and show one. No matter how many times you try to explain the reason for not doing it, they still insist upon it. I have learned to become a good follower, when I am not leading the band! But an extra $5 could be the difference between showing a profit and being in the red sarcasim intended and free!

 

[nycbusdriver]

Which is the reason I don't show the movies when I fly senior on those flights. But, some f/a's like I said feel sorry for the pax and show one. No matter how many times you try to explain the reason for not doing it, they still insist upon it. I have learned to become a good follower, when I am not leading the band! But an extra $5 could be the difference between showing a profit and being in the red sarcasim intended and free!

[post="275560"][/post]​

Could there also be the motive that a movie rolling means less demand on the F/A staff? Of course, NO ONE HERE would hever have that motive.