FANTASTIC news for this highly underserved city pair. Now double redeyes eastbound (9pm and 11pm).

Is it by adding more A321T planes, or by reducing JFKLAX?

Just to confuse things, they messed up the usual even/odd flight numbers on new flight 74 (which is westbound) and 75 (which is eastbound). :rolleyes:

There are some "interesting opportunities," shall we say, for some of these flights now.

The old schedule seems to come back on Oct. 5. Maybe a one-month experiment, or maybe they just haven't extended it yet?

Huge schedule change/load in progress this weekend-- especially flights ex- DFW/ORD/LAX. As is always the case (and more so with this kind of large set of changes,) won't see the final result until tomorrow-- many things may look wrong/confusing in the mean time.

And, yes, probably many AAdv award opportunities on the newly loaded flights!

That wasn't what I had in mind ;) although there are some upgrade opportunities and other attractive pricing opportunities.

They probably only updated the schedules up to Oct 5. Schedules typically are finalized 2-3 months out.

Another cool add is LAXSFO goes to 12x daily on most days.

The current equipment allocation schedule is up to 04OCT, so I presume it's the latter.

I have a very strong feeling that 05OCT is the tentative date when the US code will disappear from the schedule, so we will see some updates soon.

Hmmm...I think I like that 32B flight :cool:

What's the beef with an E75? I'll take an E75 (which all the Eagle flights on LAX-SFO are) over any mainline narrowbody any day. Unless you're referring to E75s operating out of the satellite terminal at LAX.

Doesn't "seem" -- is true. Stop rolling your eyes and instead open them and use them to read some of the posts from yield-chasers in this forum. Then compare to what's actually happened in the market: Mint is kicking AA's overcharging and underdelivering "premium" offering right in the pants domestically, and anybody who wants to can and is doing the same internationally.

The idea that AA is supposed to be a "premium" airline chasing "premium" passengers on "premium" routes, which again you'll be able to see if you use your eyes for reading instead of rolling, reminds me a lot of what Jeffy has been saying at UA. All we need now is to have someone start arguing to slash service everywhere else in the name of "capacity discipline" and we'll be UA.

Meanwhile, the idea that ordinary domestic airline service should involve all the stuff you're talking about is an idea that died by the 1970s. Every few years someone exhumes it, dumps a bunch of money into trying to reanimate its corpse and make it lurch around in zombie-like fashion, then realizes that it's still dead and gives up again. Let it rest in peace, please.

I completely agree with you here. AA has gone significantly downhill conveniently timed for B6 as they rolled out their Mint product in a similar timeframe. Mint dismantles AA's offering in pretty much any market. I only wish B6 would roll it out to more destinations. Hopefully the Aruba flights are a success for them. The reality is, there is no chance of AA ever being able to compete with B6's cost structure, and B6 knows this and is smartly taking advantage of the premium-transcon market by offering fares which AA, DL, and UA cannot match. Hopefully they can continue to make noise in this market and start to eat away at the legacies' prized possessions. The one issue with B6 is that they don't offer much to the customer looking for a J or F product outside this market. As EK and other international partners expand at JFK, that could help to feed B6 Mint flights as well.

Historically, there is truth to this. AA and UA carried the vast majority of premium transcon traffic for decades. NW, DL, US, and to some extent, CO were pretty much irrelevant in this market. B6 had no J product. VX didn't exist. So yes, AA and UA carried the large majority of premium domestic passengers for a long time. In today's world of total homogenization, there really is no tangible difference between AA, DL, and UA anymore.

This is complete nonsense and exemplifies the exact attitude which has caused us to have some of the worst air service in the world here in the US. Up until September of last year, this is exactly what service entailed on non-premium AA transcons. Still worlds behind the regional offerings found in Asia, the Middle East, and Mid-haul European markets, but much more acceptable than today. Mergers, lack of competition, and protectionism do not help the situation either.

Ha! Nicely put-- very sad but very true.

Hmm? All the flights are 32B.

LAX-FAT shows 1 of 4 frequencies converting to a Compass ERJ-175 in September's schedule.

If the route was under consideration for a cut I would think it would stay operated by OO CRJs instead of mixed equipment.

I do not see any equipment changes on LAX-SMF in September. Maybe they will start in October.

Four come top of mind.

1. Terrible on-time record. It's operated by Eagle, which has one of the worst on-time ratings of the industry, often dead last. Current Eagle flights on the route (roundtrip) average a dismal 5.5 DOT score, vs. 7.8 for AA mainline flights and 8.0 for VX
2. Operates from remote terminal at LAX.
3. Business class seat is very cramped, and literally has less pitch than your typical carrier's long-haul premium economy.
4. The small airplane gets tossed around much more during winter storms.

As far as RJs goes, there's much worse, but it's still an RJ operated by Eagle.

VX and UA mainline have 10 weekday (on Monday 07SEP, picked randomly) frequencies and WN 8. AA stays at 6 (and DL at its measly 1).