stc

And I'm kind of doing the reverse. I could fly BOS-JFK-LHR or BOS-PHL-LHR on AA (since I want AA metal rather than BA metal out of Boston), and I am choosing to fly through PHL because it is a better airport for connections and on time. Admittedly this isn't going to AMS, put my point is that PHL has advantages and PHL is an important hub to AA. I don't see them dropping PHL-AMS any time soon.

bridge29

I agree. And it makes sense to route that connecting traffic through PHL as opposed to JFK, which is why it's cheaper. And then charge PHL hub-captives a premium to fly direct from PHL. The problem is PHL is right down the road from a competitive NYC market, which means that people not willing to pay the premium for PHL can fairly easily just use a NYC airport - which drives down load factors and O&D from PHL. Nevertheless, I don't see the PHL hub going anywhere.

Cltfc

I disagree, American wants to feed JFK, just look at the absurd connections offered via EWR, LGA and even Stewart Field in Newburgh with ground transportation needed to JFK from many cities with no direct flights to JFK. I saw one connection offered, from Phl to SWF to JFK to MXP, MXP to JFK to SWF to PHL, with a 6 hour connection time and 2 to 3 hour ground transporatation time. Obviously AA doesn't seem to think that a 6 hour connection with a two hour ground transportation time is a problem especially when JFK to Philadelphia can be done via ground transportation from 2 to 4 hours depending upon traffic

FlightNurse

Besides that you have/Had General Dynamics and IBM in TUS.

US @ DEN

With United starting SFO-SIN and SQ's intention to restart n/s LAX and NYC service when appropriate aircraft arrive, is there any room for AA to consider LAX to SIN? Would existing 788s make it or would 789s/359s have to be the aircraft?

It may impact Cathay and AA service to HKG, but why let Star Alliance have all of the n/s service?

beyondhere

I think they want to feed both JFK and PHL, thus why they keep BWI-JFK as well as BWI-PHL. Neither is for O&D so it's pure feeder activity going on. Arguably PHL has more feeder activity as it's a bigger hub, but for those long haul non domestic flights, it's select markets that help fill a flight.

PHL has flights to the alternate NYC airports (SWF, ISP, HPN), which is interesting feed.

I've wondered if AA benefits from keeping routes like ISP-PHL or not. On one hand, AA increases it's NYC exposure by being at ISP. On the other hand, a pax that opts for ISP-PHL-{any major market} isn't opting to support AA at LGA or JFK where AA is not the dominant carrier but it's competitive for AA. Someone opting for ISP-PHL-RDU is basically wasting time connecting at PHL when they could be taking the AA nonstop on LGA-RDU, even if the commute time to originate at LGA adds one hour.

Regarding HPN: considering that B6 flies HPN-FLL, why doesn't AA fly HPN-MIA? I think it'd be a popular route. It seems like AA isn't even challenging B6's lock on HPN-Florida.

FWAAA

The 787-8 could not fly LAX-SIN nonstop with a viable payload, so it would require the 787-9 or the A350.

I'm not convinced that UA's SIN nonstop will be wildly successful. Just because planes can fly a route nonstop doesn't mean there will be sufficient high-yield passenger traffic to make it work.

Even if UA's flight is successful, I don't think that AA is going to start LAX-SIN anytime soon. SIN O&D is not that substantial; ICN O&D is much larger, and I would expect AA to begin LAX-ICN before SIN.

Interesting questions. ISP is a great airport for Long Island residents and visitors, but even WN basically abandoned ISP once it got over its "primary airport phobia."

Years ago, when AA bought Business Express, it gained service between BOS and ISP.

MiamiAirport Formerly NY George

ISP is a great little airport. While it means connecting in PHL the parkways to LGA or JFK are nightmarish, particularly at certain times of the day. Of course, cheaper fares from LGA or JFK.

Longboater

LAX is the biggest North American market for Singapore. However, even with AA's recent expansion into the Far East, the lack of branding would put AA at a severe disadvantage if SIN was remotely considered. AA's planned high density configuration for the 787-9 could not make it to SIN and would even struggle on SIN-LAX. (Now, QF's rumoured low density, premium heavy 787-9 configuration might be able to make it, especially on SIN-LAX.)

Next year, AA will receive the 268 tonne MTOW A350-900, which, given a planned configuration of somewhere around 320 passengers, would give it a range of 7,600 nm, which is roughly the same distance between LAX and SIN. Airbus is planning on making/modifying the standard A350-900 to 280 tonnes, giving it an extra 500 nm in range. All A350-900s delivered after 2019 will have a MTOW of 280 tonnes. (This NOT the A350-900ULR. The ULR version will have extra fuel, giving it a range of over 9,000 NM. The 280 tonne MTOW A350-900 could not make it on EWR-SIN, even with a low density as SQ is proposing). Thus, sometime next decade, if AA elects to do so, they could modify their 22 A350-900s to the 280 tonne MTOW.

The 280 tonne MTOW A350-900, without cargo and blocking a varying number of seats throughout the year, COULD make LAX-SIN. With all this being said, I'd be stunned if AA were to announce LAX-SIN in the next 10-15 years. Yes, the often dismissed MIA-JNB has a much better chance than LAX-SIN. The A350-900/787-9 both have ridiculous fuel efficiencies and capabilities. With 22 of each coming into the fleet over the five years, AA's Pacific operations are finally going to become viable and continue to expand.

TWA884

What's the average daily number of O&D passengers between LAX and SIN?

JonNYC

Ouch

FWAAA

I don't have figures for LAXSIN O&D, but according to AA, in 2015, the total SIN O&D nationwide was 515 PDEW. HKG was 2.2 times the SIN O&D and ICN was just under 2.5 times the SIN O&D. PEK was 3 times SIN and both PVG and NRT were 4 times the SIN O&D.

One challenge with Singapore is the big, fairly high-quality state-owned carrier, SQ.

MAH4546

SINLAX is around 120 daily passengers each way. Larger than many long haul destinations that support LAX service including Guangzhou, Zurich, Cebu, Istanbul and Dublin.

Longboater

If I'm not mistaken its the largest market for SIN ex-North America. New York is second and the bay area is third.

DA201

788 can't make it. Neither could a 789. UA's 789 barely makes it and seats less people. Given that SFO is closer to SIN, a 359 would be needed.

AA has other priorities before SIN. Just looks at all of the Asia/Pacific cities UA served from SFO before SIN.