Before the merger, the PHL-TLV flight was one of the most profitable in US's system. I'd say its more likely this is a future A350 flight than a reconfigured 77D.

CARGO CARGO CARGO
"Considering" other routes to TLV, doesn't imply any intent to cancel PHL-TLV, which has long been one of US's most profitable routes. IMO, JFK centric AA has gone the way of the Dodo and MIA-TLV should have zero impact on PHL-TLV capacity considerations. Now if you can provide actual data that PHL-TLV "J" fares have been less than DL or LY JFK-TLV fares over the past 2 years, it might support your prediction.

American Airlines is a passenger airline, not a cargo airline. Cargo does not support passenger routes despite theories otherwise.

Considering US Airways' had a super cheap cost structure, it could easily make PHLTLV work. And it probably worked really well for them, even though US Airways has the lowest fares between the U.S. and Israel.

NYCTLV is a 1,000,000+ annual O&D market and MIA-TLV is 120,000 plus. It makes sense to send two planes there than PHL, where the local market is 30,000, but that's only because it was stimulated by a non-stop (before a non-stop it was less than 5,000).

I don't think PHLTLV has much future left, but that's just my opinion. We will certainly see more shaking up of routes between PHL and JFK next year, as we did this year.

AA is not going to fly an empty plane or sell dirt cheap tickets just for the cargo, but cargo can supplement passenger revenue, otherwise why is AA investing in it's cargo unit?

As with everything in the Pharma industry, Teva could be acquired in a few months and the entire suburban Philadelphia operation could be moved else where.

I like how market stimulation is twisted to be a bad thing. I venture to guess that the ME3 and Asian airlines now flying to BOS have stimulated the market a bit. There's no doubt JFK can command a premium over PHL, but it's not like US sold PHL-TLV Y fares for $5 and J fares for $10. Yes, AA's new cost structure will be a bit of a hit to the cheap structure US was used to. AA has the data so time will tell if much of the PHL-TLV passenger base can be better served via only MIA and JFK.

Yes, we probably will see some changes, but I'd hardly call the one route switch this year much of a shake up.

The question is how much catchment is there that can be served one-stop more efficiently via PHL than via JFK? Add up all the cities with service into PHL without service to JFK (plus the fact that PHL has no slots and PHL gates are not a limited resource that could be used for local NYC traffic, so all else being equal routing passengers over PHL likely costs less), and that may well be considerable. Obviously no nonstop premium, but it appears that PHL-JFK is the only non-NYC flight to TLV by a US carrier (and El Al adds only BOS and LAX for USA-TLV service), so that's a lot of cities that AA/US can probably serve best over PHL. But I don't know the numbers, and I do suspect that USA-TLV is more concentrated in NYC than pretty much any other USA-XXX market.

Of course, but cargo alone isn't going to make a route survive; if it would, AA would buy cargo planes and skip the self-loading cargo that takes up space.

You're right, that logic was twisted. But the point stands (assuming MAH4546's numbers are correct) that MIA-TLV without a nonstop is four times larger than PHL-TLV with the market stimulation of a nonstop.

Does anyone know when the LAX-SYD route will (1) begin and (2) become bookable?

PHL TLV 5771 mi
MIA TLV 6603 mi

800+ miles shorter OW might be enough to keep PHL over MIA.

The Dreamliner gets you places. Fly it @flyLAXairport to Shanghai beginning Oct. 5 & LAX to São Paulo from Nov. 5.

https://mobile.twitter.com/AmericanA...886016/photo/1

Neither surprise me. LAX-PVG has been begging for a Dreamliner, especially with Delta starting LAX-PVG a week from today. LAX-GRU was inevitably going to be downgraded. The 777 is just too big for the route.

it's a clear upgrade for me in J, which I prefer over F due to pricing and AA old F meh.

And it's really just a reduction in premium capacity. The Y count for the 787 is a few seats greater than the old 772 IIRC.

AA is not in the Cargo transporting business. Cargo is a positive supplement to passenger revenue and the PHL-TLV flight has significant pharmaceutical cargo contracts.

The thing that's twisted here is that the pre-mergerAA Fan boys cannot accept that PHL could retain the TLV flight on connecting traffic + Passenger/Cargo O&D, as a supplement to highly competitive TLV-JFK. Further, if MIA is such a gold mine for TLV flights, why hasn't EL AL resumed the service they canceled 6 years ago and re-established their now defunct code-share agreement with AA - instead they have chosen to code share with JB out of BOS.

I mean we're not talking CLT here, PHL has a Jewish population that is only exceeded by NYC, LAX, MIA, and SFO/ORD (both by small amounts). This debate can go on forever, but the telling will happen when JFK-TLV is added and (maybe) MIA-TLV ALONG with PHL-TLV by mid-late 2016. IMO, MIA-TLV year round is NOT anywhere near a certainty - if it happens at all.

TLV is not just for Jewish travellers either. You will find that Christians, particularly Evangelicals, also visit Israel. Many from cities which will never have a nonstop flight to TLV; and will need to connect somewhere en route.

It wouldn't shock me to see PHL-TLV be the among the first cross-fleeted routes, getting upgauged to a 772, based on the cargo and fairly strong premium demand (more than the 20 seats on the 332 can really handle) on the route.

There are also a good number of Israelis who do business, vacation in Central, South America. If flights are timed properly, MIA could become a desirable option for such connections. For MIA to work for LY, it would be necessary to work closely with AA to coordinate schedules.