2 BWI-LAX nonstops beginning 9/15/02. Will US fight, or run?

http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/020507/200205070902000408_1.html

Or how about the STL-LAS nonstop directly competing with AA, a formidable foe. It's been interesting waiting to see if WN would take on more ops here at STL after the TWA purchase. I haven't noticed any big moves by WN, but I'm not sure how their gate capacity is over in the new East Terminal at Lambert.

If only US competed better on fares out of STL I would fly them more to take advantage of my gold status with them. But, sadly, they are basically rolled over on fares to just about anywhere interesting, choosing to build a rediculous schedule of high, restrictive fares.

Cross country on a 737. Yeah - sign me up.

In my view, this is the "nail in the coffin" for US at BWI. First, they cut many direct flights out of there, routing people thru hubs in PIT and PHL instead. They basically gave up on BWI as a mini-hub at that time. Second, they seem to have given up competing with SW on price for most remaining routes. Now, the move by SW to offer direct coast-coast service out of BWI. I don't see how US will compete with that on a long term basis since they can't possibly match the fares.

The new US strategy appears to be a take over of the Caribbean market. I thought AA was always strong in the Caribbean which would suggest to me that US's future is not with the OneWorld alliance.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PHL:
Cross country on a 737. Yeah - sign me up.</font>


Hey it seems to works for CO, so don't mock it. Of course, that's part of the reason why I fly NW more now....

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PHL:
Cross country on a 737. Yeah - sign me up.</font>

As opposed to a A-319.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by MileKing:
In my view, this is the "nail in the coffin" for US at BWI. </font>

A couple of thoughts on BWI. As much as I love(d) taking advantage of the SW effect and its low fares at BWI, the financial reality for US is that it was suicide to go head to head vs. SW at an airport that sits right in between its three main hubs. It's a waste of resources. While US is becoming a less convenient option (both financialy and schedule wise) for BWI based flyers, the move does make sense for US in the broad scheme of things since those assets are more profitable positioned elsewhere. I think US will keep its flights to/from the hubs and they will keep a couple of transcons out of BWI.


<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by MileKing:
The new US strategy appears to be a take over of the Caribbean market. I thought AA was always strong in the Caribbean which would suggest to me that US's future is not with the OneWorld alliance.</font>


Maybe, maybe not. If US were to join up with oneworld and AA in the near future, how brilliant would US's expansion to the Carribean look then given that AA and US would then 'control' the vast majority of traffic to and from the entire region???




[This message has been edited by geo1004 (edited 05-07-2002).]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ITRADE:
As opposed to a A-319.</font>

The A319 is a roomier plane all around. 7" in width for starters, which contributes to more comfortable seats. There's a definite difference sitting in one vs. the other.

A319 vs. 737 arguments aside, US Airways Airbus configuration (choice of seats and pitch of 32" vs. 31") in coach is very comfortable.

It's all about bladders. Not enough heads.

I agree with deelmakur- not enough restrooms.

My brother and I went from SFO-CLT in early Sep. last year and had two seats in the row directly across from that middle restroom in the A321. Once we hit cruising altitude, there was a stream (no pun intended) of people using that restroom. It didn't stop until we had to turn off electronic devices.

That said, I'd take an A319 over a 737 any day.

Back in Nov 2000, I failed to get a seat on US ( non rev) from MCO to LAX so I convinced my friend to buy the pass on WN. I will never take them on a flight of more than 2 hours again. We did MCO-MCI then MCI-LAX. Thank goodness I was able to get back on US.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by BWI2MCO97:
Back in Nov 2000, I failed to get a seat on US ( non rev) from MCO to LAX so I convinced my friend to buy the pass on WN. I will never take them on a flight of more than 2 hours again. We did MCO-MCI then MCI-LAX. Thank goodness I was able to get back on US.</font>


wow, you almost got to see what it was like to be a paying passenger!

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by A320 EOW:
Once we hit cruising altitude, there was a stream (no pun intended) of people using that restroom. It didn't stop until we had to turn off electronic devices.</font>


Thank goodness I was born with the self-powered version. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by duxfan:
2 BWI-LAX nonstops beginning 9/15/02. Will US fight, or run?
</font>

Probably run. The Harrisburg International Airport (MDT) has been running ads and billboards for years telling Central PA-based passengers that they should use Harrisburg instead of the cheap fares out of Baltimore BWI.

This past weekend for the first time I saw billboards on Interstate 83 from US encouraging Harrisburg as a departure point, instead of Baltimore.

For somebody who grew up in Baltimore and was a happy flier on Piedmont, US giving up on BWI is a shame, but probably necessary.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ITRADE:
As opposed to a A-319.</font>

Although roughly the same size, I find the A319 imminently more comfortable than a 737 ...

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ITRADE:
As opposed to a A-319.</font>

Actually, the US nonstops to LAX and SFO are on 757's, and the SEA nonstop is an A321.

Why is it called running away when it only makes sense to bail if routes are not profitable, your company is paying for excess gate space and facilities, and you are ultimately competing with yourself with other hubs located within a few hundred miles of each other? What did everyone think right after the merger in 1989 when US Air closed the PI hubs in DAY/IND/SYR ? I know there were still a few longhauls from IND to the west, but comparitively speaking the hit was probably as hard for those who relied on the service. I understand that the O/D traffic from the Balt/DC area is more important, but if the future of the company and my job depend on the reduction than I could only support it as such. Southwest, while the top player at BWI ( lowfare or not) still doesn't have the reach ( destinations) as the other majors. jmtcw

ps / I don't always nonrev. I have learned a lot here about earning miles and have paid for tickets never to get upgraded or any special treatment because I am an employee. I like to observe how I and others are being treated by airport customer service.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by BWI2MCO97:
ps / I don't always nonrev. I have learned a lot here about earning miles and have paid for tickets never to get upgraded or any special treatment because I am an employee. I like to observe how I and others are being treated by airport customer service.</font>

Wow! As if we weren't already impressed with your knowledge, desire to help and do the right thing...I wonder how many US sups and management can say the same...

Thanks again, BWI. We're not worthy.

There is no comparison between a 737 and an airbus 319. The seat room is much, much better on the 319 and the airbus engines are much quieter than the 737. Actually all airbus engines appear to be quieter than their Boeing counterparts.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by stimatr:
Actually all airbus engines appear to be quieter than their Boeing counterparts.</font>

There are no engines that are specific to Airbus or Boeing products. As a matter of fact, US's Airbus (319,320, 321) share the same engine type as the US 737 (737-300 and -400 series).

And every airline gets to choose how their aircraft are configured seat wise. US's single aisle Airbus have 32" between each seat row in coach whereas their 737's have 31" between each coach row... that's US's choice NOT Boeings or Airbus. On the Shuttle configuration Airbus 319 and 320, US has them configured with 34" between each row (all coach)... Again, US's choice, not Airbus...

And, back on topic: Today's Washington Post says that US will be dropping the BWI-LAX non-stop in the fall as part of a reallocation of resources and NOT as a response to Southwest. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif




[This message has been edited by geo1004 (edited 05-08-2002).]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by geo1004:
US will be dropping the BWI-LAX non-stop in the fall as part of a reallocation of resources and NOT as a response to Southwest. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif</font>

Good one! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by BWI2MCO97:
Why is it called running away when it only makes sense to bail if routes are not profitable, your company is paying for excess gate space and facilities, and you are ultimately competing with yourself with other hubs located within a few hundred miles of each other? What did everyone think right after the merger in 1989 when US Air closed the PI hubs in DAY/IND/SYR ? I know there were still a few longhauls from IND to the west, but comparitively speaking the hit was probably as hard for those who relied on the service. I understand that the O/D traffic from the Balt/DC area is more important, but if the future of the company and my job depend on the reduction than I could only support it as such. Southwest, while the top player at BWI ( lowfare or not) still doesn't have the reach ( destinations) as the other majors. jmtcw

ps / I don't always nonrev. I have learned a lot here about earning miles and have paid for tickets never to get upgraded or any special treatment because I am an employee. I like to observe how I and others are being treated by airport customer service.</font>

Two great points here. Thanks for bringing them up.

I don't assume in the business world that running = "a bad thing". I would think "trying to compete in a losing war" is "a bad thing". So good point that in this case, running is the best alternative if survival is the goal. Of course, running still has a negative connotation.

On nonrevs buying tickets - you'd be surprised how many employees buy instead of hoping for standby space. As we all know, planes are generally more full nowadays than a year ago with all of the route cuts. I have been on at least 5 flights in the past 6 months where I have seen groups or families of employees with purchased tickets getting on flights. Have also seen the unfortunate queues of nonrevs standing by for 3 or 4 flights a day trying to get on packed flights. I know someone with 40 years' seniority on US who had to wait a day and a half to go PIT-PHX.

This reminds me - I think there used to be a deal where employees could by 'confirmed space' tickets in advance for a % of the ticket cost - is this still available? If so, employees are nuts if they arent using this in the current climate.

If I remember correctly, the % off is still a standby ticket. It's something like 75% or 90% off the full fare, which isn't a great deal in most markets. Obviously employees wouldn't need a % off for standby, but employees family & friends might be the ones using it.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by BWI2MCO97:
I don't always nonrev. I have learned a lot here about earning miles and have paid for tickets never to get upgraded or any special treatment because I am an employee. I like to observe how I and others are being treated by airport customer service.</font>


Sorry if I sounded a bit gruff on that observation. I'm glad to see someone at any airline trying to see things thru the eyes of a fare paying passenger.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PHL:
Cross country on a 737. Yeah - sign me up.</font>

Still beats EWR-BRU on CO's friggin' 757.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by LGA:
Still beats EWR-BRU on CO's friggin' 757.</font>

Or EWR-OMA or EWR-OKC on an ERJ.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum20/HTML/005224.html

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by FOH:
Or EWR-OMA or EWR-OKC on an ERJ.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum20/HTML/005224.html</font>

Nothing like competing with an all-first class airline (Midwest Express) with a Regional Jet.

The real issue is that USAirways needs to get its costs under control and its management making rational decisions. Right now neither side is willing to give anything and the airline will head towards bankruptcy.

This means smaller planes on the regional routes. I know you all don't like this, but it is reality to save the airline

Some interesting facts and figures on the US exodus from BWI.

An excerpt From today's WSJ titled "The 'New Normal': Big Carriers Lose Market Share to Upstarts"

Baltimore is a prime example of market-share shift. US Airways Group Inc. has pulled down about 60% of its mainline and Metrojet flights there, dropping from 73 flights a day in July last year to 29 this month.

Is US Air ever going to get those flights back? Not likely. AirTran Holdings's Airtran Airways has jumped into US Air's markets in a big way, going from no flights in Baltimore last November to 21 today. Other carriers have, too, most notably Southwest Airlines, already the biggest carrier at Baltimore, which has continued to bulk up there, flying 138 trips a day out of Baltimore now, compared with 127 a day last summer.

"Airtran Airways saw an opportunity and took it," says Alfred Cardona, researcher and analyst for the Maryland Aviation Administration. "In the meanwhile, the other carriers filled in the gaps."

At the beginning of May last year, US Air flew seven Metrojet trips a day from Baltimore to Tampa, Fla., while Southwest had four daily flights. By November, Metrojet was down to three flights a day and Southwest still had its four. Now, Southwest flies to Tampa non-stop five times a day, Airtran offers two non-stops and US Air has pulled out of the market completely, except for connections.

Last week, Southwest said that for the first time, it will offer transcontinental non-stop service, beginning with Baltimore-Los Angeles. That's a major blow to incumbent transcontinental airlines. How long will it be before Southwest, with the lowest unit costs among the majors, drive US Air, which has the highest unit costs, off that route?

In all, Baltimore's passenger boardings in March are expected to be down less than 8% once numbers are officially published -- significantly less than the national average, even though its second-biggest carrier pulled out in a major way.

"I guess you could say we are ahead of the game," says Mr. Cardona.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by WebTraveler:
This means smaller planes on the regional routes. I know you all don't like this, but it is reality to save the airline</font>


I disagree. WN uses 737's on routes that other carriers would consider "regional". Until US gets costs and productivity in line, they can fly RJ's everywhere, and they won't make a dime. I'd even go so far as to say that RJ flying will make US even LESS productive, as the employee to customer ratio will likely go UP!

On the [off]topic of small planes on long routes, about about this item:
--
Starting June 17, Lufthansa is resuming nonstop flights between Dusseldorf and New York's Newark airport. The route will be served daily, except Tuesdays, under flight code LH 408/409 with a highly modern Boeing 737-700 operated by Swiss cooperation partner PrivatAir.

http://cms.lufthansa.com/de/dlh/en/nws/0,1774,0-0-422819,00.html

No thanks.

David

48 business class seats is it! I'd give it a try.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by IndyDavid:
Lufthansa is resuming nonstop flights between Dusseldorf and New York's Newark airport. The route will be served daily, except Tuesdays, under flight code LH 408/409 with a highly modern Boeing 737-700 operated by Swiss cooperation partner PrivatAir. </font>


David, you may want to reconsider...

The 737 that will operate this route is actually a Boeing Business Jet with 48 business class seats ONLY. No coach. All big comfy seats and good service. I'd take that any day of the week. Except Tuesdays when it doesn't fly. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

That'll teach me to post a link after reading only the first paragraph. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif

OK, so it sounds OK, but I'd still rather be in Envoy on a 330.

David

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by IndyDavid:
... but I'd still rather be in Envoy on a 330.</font>


Well yes. What a lovely place to be! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif