PHL-JFK

[PHL]

On a recent flight from LAX-ORD-PHL, there were weather problems in ORD that were delaying my LAX-ORD segments to the point my connection would be missed and another not available for many hours due to full flights.

So I opted to route LAX-JFK (no extra fee/charge) and told the agent I would get home from there on my own. I could have rented a car, but I took Delta JFK-PHL an hour after arriving (company paid, so the $300 one way fare on a Dash-8 wasn't as hard to swallow).

It got me thinking that, with the intl. presence at JFK for AA, will they reinstate the PHL-JFK flights that used to run?

Delta does it because for feeder only to their Intl flights because nobody in their right mind would just fly PHL-JFK-PHL. If AA offered it, there would probably be a good amount of OW and AA passengers so it'd be nice to see it back.

 

[eolesen]

Delta's scheduling at JFK is hardly a model of efficiency worth following...

And no, I don't think it will come back. The difference in fuel cost for the Dash 8 and an ERJ makes it a no-brainer, especially with oil at $70/bbl.

 

[mga707]

Delta does it because for feeder only to their Intl flights because nobody in their right mind would just fly PHL-JFK-PHL.

I guess we were all nuts back in the '70s, since just for laughs I looked at a schedule from 30 years ago (that magical summer of '77! 😀) and saw that AA had a DC-10 on the PHL-JFK route back then, with 'just' a 707 on the return!

 

[StraaightTaalk]

I guess we were all nuts back in the '70s, since just for laughs I looked at a schedule from 30 years ago (that magical summer of '77! 😀) and saw that AA had a DC-10 on the PHL-JFK route back then, with 'just' a 707 on the return!

AA also had a DC-10 briefly on JFK-BDL, and for a while on LAX-PSP, aside from all the really short intra-texas routes out of DFW (SAT, AUS, IAH, ELP), and Midwest routes out of ORD (DTW, IND).

 

[StraaightTaalk]

Delta's scheduling at JFK is hardly a model of efficiency worth following...

And no, I don't think it will come back. The difference in fuel cost for the Dash 8 and an ERJ makes it a no-brainer, especially with oil at $70/bbl.

Every time I pass that terminal, it seems that it is surrounded EVERYWHERE by regionals. How is their operation going over there? The set-up is hardly optimal.

 

[FWAAA]

Every time I pass that terminal, it seems that it is surrounded EVERYWHERE by regionals. How is their operation going over there? The set-up is hardly optimal.

Other carriers followed JetBlue's growth, particularly Delta. During the past two years, it and its partners nearly doubled the number of daily flights at JFK to 382.

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/200...jfk-cover_N.htm

Delta and its partners now have 382 flights at JFK? Delta and jetBlew are the primary causes (IMO) of the F'd up mess that JFK has become the last 2-3 years. Even the McPaper might agree.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

If I remember correctly, JFK was a (almost) pure O+D station for domestic, and obviously International traffic.

For the Longest time, JFK never had any trips to ORD, and 1 lone flt. to DFW.

(HEY eolesen, "Hows THAT for a good Memory...Huh")


NH/BB's

 

[jersey777]

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/200...jfk-cover_N.htm

Delta and its partners now have 382 flights at JFK? Delta and jetBlew are the primary causes (IMO) of the F'd up mess that JFK has become the last 2-3 years. Even the McPaper might agree.

I completely agree. I have seen the delays rise the last few years. We used to never have to circle before landing at Kennedy and now it happens all the time. Just like Arpeys article says in American Way this month. Those regionals take up as much space as a 747. A blip is a blip.

 

[PHL]

The fault lies with the airlines that schedule more smaller planes instead of fewer larger ones. That's the very basic underlying logic, never mind the economics of those two differences.

It'll be many years before the FAA completes any modernization, including the PHL/NYC airspace redesign, so these problems will only continue to get worse unless the airline figure out what to do before the FAA does something (like slots).

As early as a few years ago, Delta ran a 767 PHL-JFK, but it was a single flight number that continued onto a European destination (NCE, I think).

 

[eolesen]

It's easy to blame the airline which schedules small planes, but JFK has been capacity constrained since the 70's during the early evening hours.

If you want to point fingers, the Port Authority is ultimately the one who decides whether or not to build new runways. IIRC, they own the land between Rockaway Blvd and Woodmere County Park (northeast of the 4's), and could have built two new runways in that area without encroaching on the wildlife swamp. Instead, they've expanded (and overbuilt) the terminal and cargo areas.

Clearly the PANYNJ is only concerned about landing fees and rent income. They could give a rat's arse about congestion.

 

[formeraa]

It's easy to blame the airline which schedules small planes, but JFK has been capacity constrained since the 70's during the early evening hours.

If you want to point fingers, the Port Authority is ultimately the one who decides whether or not to build new runways. IIRC, they own the land between Rockaway Blvd and Woodmere County Park (northeast of the 4's), and could have built two new runways in that area without encroaching on the wildlife swamp. Instead, they've expanded (and overbuilt) the terminal and cargo areas.

Clearly the PANYNJ is only concerned about landing fees and rent income. They could give a rat's arse about congestion.

In addition, there is the general problem of basing landing fees solely on the weight of the aircraft. If a blip is a blip, then landing fees should have a fixed component (no matter the size of the aircraft) plus a variable component based on weight.

Oh, wait, Massport tried to implement that type of fee structure years ago and general aviation interests took them to court! This also led to the proliferation of small aircraft. If Massport had been successful, airports across the country may have adopted this "fair" landing fee policy. Airlines wouldn't have rushed to smaller aircraft because it would have been cost prohibitive at larger airports.

 

[Dont call me Shirley]

I guess we were all nuts back in the '70s, since just for laughs I looked at a schedule from 30 years ago (that magical summer of '77! 😀) and saw that AA had a DC-10 on the PHL-JFK route back then, with 'just' a 707 on the return!

Those were the days, weren't they!


Hmm. PHL-JFK in 2007. Between two of the most delay prone airports in the U.S. I dunno, but the just in case, Amtrak's number is 800-USA-RAIL.

😀

 

[flyhigh]

Using more regionals vs. fewer mainline isn't simply an economics issue except for the fact that the mainline is too big. Delta has the biggest problem with this issue especially in CVG. After the CRJ they have M80 (much like AA but AA has their hubs in big cities). In CVG where there is a pretty limited market, it's profitable to run two 3/4 full RJs (each holding 37/38 pax) vs 75 people on an M80. The lack of a cost effective 100 seater is a huge problem in the industry.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

Using more regionals vs. fewer mainline isn't simply an economics issue except for the fact that the mainline is too big. Delta has the biggest problem with this issue especially in CVG. After the CRJ they have M80 (much like AA but AA has their hubs in big cities). In CVG where there is a pretty limited market, it's profitable to run two 3/4 full RJs (each holding 37/38 pax) vs 75 people on an M80. The lack of a cost effective 100 seater is a huge problem in the industry.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Excellant point....flyhigh($$$...100 seat a/c), which is why, AMR should buy a #### load of the new Embraers, for A/E(if they can get away with it, which I HOPE they CAN'T), or let Mainline fly them, on similiar routes like the Fokkers.
Last time I checked, AA had Carte Blanche with the Brazilian A/C maker.

NH/BB's

 

[eolesen]

Getting the E190 at mainline all depends on the pilot negotiations.

If the APA wants to fly the E190 at Jetblue's book rates (the only other "mainline" operator of the Embraer 170/190), perhaps it would work, but IIRC, those are at a steep discount to what the F100 rates were, and flying the 190 at F100 rates is a deal killer.

I don't see APA caving on scope and letting Eagle fly the 190, but that is the one thing management would probably agree as being worth offering more than just token pay increases (and would also put AMR more at parity with the other majors who had their scope clauses gutted in court).

After the recent regime change within APA, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for either to occur.