Xero

Hey Everyone,

I noticed that up to Aug 22, AA 1798 departs at 9:35 PM and arrives at 10:45 PM. However, starting Aug 23, it goes back to its old time, leaving at 7:45 PM and arrives at 9:00 PM.

Is AA going back to its old timing for this flight or does the schedule still need to be updated?

Thank you.

hillrider

Interesting. What you see is what it's loaded; that flight had been moved to a later departure to allow for inbound connections from PVG, but it does indeed appear that it was moved back as of 23AUG. Connections PVG-SFO via LAX will therefore no longer be available (without an overnight or an interline to UA) as of that date.

We can only speculate that they didn't like the advanced bookings on it at the new schedule, but let's wait for the official AmericanAirlines presence to shed some light on this. Oh, wait, never mind.

demkr

By now, enough SF flyers have probably decided that having to connect to LAX to go to Asia on AA vs. not having to connect on DL or UA is silly. Its particularly frustrating to have the 9:35 pm flight for folks not coming in from PVG, because there is/was a several hours gap between flights if there's a misconnect from another location.

What AA needs for LAX-SFO is another frequency, even if they can pull it off with a CRJ. It needs an earlier frequency into LAX (especially if they truly build the hub), and a 9 pm frequency, without sacrificing the evening departure. I never understood why AA has so few early morning flights compared to the other two.

The problem with LAX-SFO and SFO-LAX on AA is that misconnects are common, and I avoid this route when I can if I'm making an onward connection somewhere. AA uses the same planes with very short turnaround times for these stations. Thus, if there's an ATC delay (quite common in SF when it's foggy) in just one of the stations, the flights are delayed, sometimes significantly, all day--and an evening misconnect with this 9:35 pm flight would require a customer to wait quite a long time in LAX before getting to SFO.

hillrider

Yes, SFO is grossly overscheduled for real-life (as in the weather that the airport experiences more often than not) operations; I wish they stopped heavily discounting landing fees for small planes.I would never fly the CRJ (in any case, but especially on this route, which is chock-full of real-sized airplanes).I think they're starting to figure it out: they moved the first SFO-LAX flight from 0730 to 0655, but they still have a 2:20 hole until the next flight out (at 0915).

In any case as we know very well the current AA management is treating SFO as a spoke of no interest per se, so I'd expect this route to be scheduled mainly based on what makes sense for LAX flyers.

demkr

It's interesting to see how the 9pm departure is (seemingly) only lasting for a two month period. I don't have any reason to go to Shanghai but I will end up needing to overnight at LAX if I want to get to Hawaii in the morning.

I do think in terms of LAX, that large cities connecting to the hub should have early flights so that they can take a morning flight to their destination. With the earliest flight out of SFO still hovering around 7 am or later, it's impossible to get to many (hardly any) destinations before the evening hours.

Hopefully one day--they will worry about customers from places other than their hubs. But if they're going to stick to it, I would hope to see better scheduling from large cities to those hubs.

Xero

The reason I ask is because I want to fly HNL-LAX-SFO. I want to connect from LNY on a different airline. The timings would have been perfect for me. I would have connected from LNY in the morning, then connect to AA 162 HNL-LAX, then take the 9:35 PM flight to SFO. This would have allowed to avoid the red eye.

AA really needs to fix the timings, it's very hard to fly to and from HNL now with the nonstop gone.

demkr

No doubt--Most pax would choose to fly another airline vs. an overnight. Whoever's doing the scheduling is not doing a good job across the board.

zman

MAH has previously implied the late flight would be added permanently, so guess the schedule currently loaded is wrong.

AA and OW do not always do a good job with long haul (and International)connections.

demkr

It could be that they changed their mind though. I hope not. But I can see why other travelers may be angry if they misconnect and have to wait over 4 hours for the next flight up to SFO.

AAerSTL

AA will continue to make adjustments to the schedule as it sees fit. As our resident SFO posters have pointed out they believe AA doesn't care about this route maybe they are waiting for adjustments on other flights before fixing the schedule for LAX-SFO.

Just out of curiosity-is it really worthwhile taking AA via LAX to HNL when ample non-stop alternatives exist from SFO and other area airports? I admit I too stick to AA when it is less than the most convenient option. It seems to me with three other non-stop carriers (4 if you could the CO operated segment for UA) serving the route and multiple non-stop frequencies why stick to AA? I had to get to VA several weeks ago and while I could have taken AA to DCA via JFK, I ended up taking UA for the convenient non-stop option. Just a thought.

living near shamu

I would still take AA because I have status with them. At least I know that if something happens (delay, cancellation) thyll try to take care of me. In the other airlines, I'd prob just be another Y PAX.

Xero

That is why I try to take AA whenever I can, especially if there is a connection involved. I like having an AC to go into whenever I have problems such as a delay or cancellation. It's nice to go talk to someone who is friendly and wants to help you, rather than an overstressed GA who is overworked and has to quickly deal with many stressed passengers.