Yes, in all fairness to PHL, when they last had a major airside expansion they had no idea that one day in the future they would become the primary TATL hub of the largest airline in the world. PHL simply wasn't build with that in mind while JFK was designed and built (over the last 20 years) with the expectation they are or will be the largest international airport in the US. AA's T8 terminal was built with that in mind, terminal A at PHL wasn't.

Now, the operational difficulties - PHL eliminated two banks (from 8 to 6 IIRC) and that swelled up the remaining banks to some extent. Now keep in mind, other than the apron over at A, all mainline aprons only have single taxiway and with the larger departing banks departure taxi times have increased (went up from ~26 mins in 2016 to ~30 mins in 2017 for AA at PHL) and delays at PHL has increased YoY despite AA's recent aggressive D0 departure push and padding up some flights to improve that metric systemwide.

Because of some limitations with gates AA is forced to have a rather large 6-7 hour TATL bank that acts more like a rolling bank than a banked bank (at most hubs they try to have the international bank span 2-3 hours) which means having one large efficient connecting bank to the TATL departure bank is not feasible at PHL due to those limitations.

Taxiways between 27R/9L and the terminal is rather tight for an airport of PHL's size and the fact a good number of gates from the high A/B/C gates push back directly into taxiway J does add up to this issue. LAX has this problem and PHL is not as bad yet, but can become a more frequent issue down the road.

I am not saying I prefer JFK (I actually prefer PHL) or think this is a bad decision by AA - I am just saying PHL simply isn't on the same level infrastructure wise as JFK (or even the majority of the major TATL hubs) and there will be some pains in that regard. They will not be able to have a TATL hub in the magnitude of UA at EWR or DL at JFK at PHL and that is a bit of a shame IMHO for the largest airline in the world.

Not sure how the bank is 6-7 hours. I'm seeing the earliest departure this summer at 4:30p (ATH) and the last at 9:20p (SNN). Most airports with a comprehensive TATL schedule have similar times to PHL - DL at JFK is even worse with flights from 4:03pm (AMS) to 10:49pm (LIS). If you want to go by single-departure cities, change AMS to MXP (5:35pm).

I’m not sure I see the argument that PHL is overcapacity and JFK has room. PHL’s passenger numbers and movements are both below what they were when they peaked about ten years ago, and JFK is notoriously congested and delay prone. Additionally, AA has much more leverage at PHL, where they are the biggest player by a fair margin, versus JFK where they are a solid #3. Also, I think more OW carriers will eventually move into T8 at JFK, and a couple more gates may be needed when BA moves.

OP has a legitimate argument. Despite movements being significantly down, certain banks have presumably increased a bit and subsequently put stress on the airfield during those very busy times. Runway 9/27L is being (has been?) extended with associated taxiways and holding areas, but there still are some taxiway congestion spots.

There has been discussion about the OW moving to T8 for a few years. However, with Governor Cuomo's announcement that he will run for president, errrr, corrected, wants to redevelop JFK, those plans have to be on hold.

Sure, PHL expansion isn't unlimited, but I think it's very fair to say that AA has a lot more ability to grow TATL capacity and connecting feed at PHL than at JFK. So AA's JFK strategy is largely limited to markets that can support themselves with O&D on the JFK end and O&D plus any partner connections on the other end.

Agreed - I thought there weren't places to easily board an A330/763 off jetway without going a mile away from terminal A, but I bet that with some minor modifications, PHL could install 4 hard stands in front of the cargo building just West of A-West and use people movers in the summer, if push came to shove.

So many things wrong with this. UA gave up on JFK when they moved opps to EWR. They sold all of their slots and being JFK is congested they should not even be part of the move. Southwest is another one there is just no room for them. You expand T8 for all OW, rebuild 1 and keep the same tenets, you move B6 and Alaska to T7. Delta and ST can make due with 2 and 4 for now but they should combine them for a ST/Delta terminal. It may not be a huge shakeup but that frees up T5. All of this is under the assumption that BA wants to sell T7. Remember they own T7 and the NYPA cant make them move or sell. Personally I would love to see them combine 7/8 and create a massive OW hub where they can destress PHL a little. Looks like AA wont be going in that direction.

AS is already in T7. They're building a lounge there, too.

There's no way BA is going to want to dump $65 million into refurbishing T7 facilities and then have the Port Authority go "syke! We want you to give up that space 5 minutes after you built it because AA wants a superterminal."

All you JFK AA fans can rest assured that T7 isn't going anywhere for at least a few years (until BA has recouped their facilities investment).

Everything else you say makes sense, but using JFK to destress PHL?!

If AA can profitably strengthen their O&D traffic at JFK by adding/maintaining flights which rely partly on connections, great; that's a legitimate argument (and one that has been hashed out ad nauseum in this thread). But if the main goal is making connections better, JFK is just about the worst airport in the world to choose. Connecting traffic doesn't intrinsically care which hub they use, and AA can expand at PHL considerably more easily than they can at JFK (see the previous few posts). Of course, US/AA at PHL has had considerably better TATL connections than AA at JFK for many years, so any expansion there has a big head start over PHL.

These are good thoughts however, I think jetBlue is talking about a bigger need too. Maybe T7 gets demolished and T5 is expanded in that direction (and absorbs the other four you noted). A T1-3 mega-terminal would be good for the new international arrivals (not covered by T8 or T4.

PHL is HORRIBLE for incoming international connections - particularly with checked bags. Must allow AT LEAST 3 hours.
1. From my experience, it typically takes 45 mins - 1 hour for bags to show up on the carousel - even for Priority Bags - eliminating much of the benefits of Global Entry
2. Long walk, then long lines for domestic security, PreCheck is not always available in the evening
3. Airspace can become quite congested, not unusual to spend 15 - 45 minutes waiting for a landing slot - particularly when there is weather
If AA is seeking an alternative to JFK (and DFW, MIA) for international connections, particularly to the Caribbean, Mexico, Central and South America, my preference would be CLT over PHL.

OK, but do you have any reason to believe that CLT wouldn't have these issues (especially 1 and 2) if it had a bank of international arrivals anything like the size of the PHL bank? As for PreCheck not being available in the evening, it seems that working with TSA to make PreCheck available in the evening at PHL would be rather easier than moving the TATL hub to PHL.

And crowded airspace is a consequence of demand, which is desirable for an airline.

PHL is not an alternative to DFW and MIA for Caribbean and Latin America connections; AA is only talking about using PHL as a trans-Atlantic hub.

Gotta say, PHL has a shorter walk than I've been through arriving internationally at other airports, thinking specifically ORD and MIA. I've also never waited more than an hour for my bags for international.

Isn't Pre-Check always at A-West and C now?

I'd be interested to know where you think more than one widebody—let alone 15-16—is going park at CLT without blocking adjacent gates.

Kirby is at the helm now and has said (many times) that it was a mistake for UA to leave JFK. I doubt they would revert back to the schedule they previously had, but a handful of ORD/IAH/DEN flights are definitely not unrealistic should the terminal be open and available.

If you expand/rebuild, there are more gates available. Additionally, JFK's peak congestion is during international arrival/departure times. Since WN would operate domestic flights, most of there flights would be during off-peak times.

UA is spending millions of dollars refurbishing 763s it plans on retiring within 10 years. DL has spent boatloads of money at LGA over the past decade and the entire airport is now being rebuilt. Airlines sometimes spend millions of dollars for projects that don't last decades.

If the Port Authority presented this theoretical plan tomorrow, they would then spend a year or two filing permits and completing studies, then spend another few years expanding T8 before BA could actually move in. Realistically, the Port Authority would likely not do anything until LGA is wrapping up in 2021, because having major construction at 2/3 airports would be a nightmare. The work would likely be done in stages, not all at once like LGA, because of JFK's enormous size, and T1/the road network would likely be prioritized due to them being higher priorities, so that's another couple years. Then, T8 needs to be expanded so BA can move, which is another few years. BA wouldn't likely move for about 8-10 years.

Yes ment to state AS stays in T7. I know T7 isnt going anywhere, that was an opinion on my behalf. Even a secure connector between 7 and 8 would help OW out a lot. Also didnt delta just invest hundreds of million into LGA just to get rebuilt. Some long term projects dont have long term viability.

I guess you have to define "very expensive" because it certainly wouldn't be the first bridge over a highway. ;)

I think JetBlue became that airline a while ago

Maybe that's JetBlue. Delta has more JFK non-stop destinations, peak daily flights, domestic passengers and international passengers than does B6. Below is a link to the PANYNJ December '17 YTD traffic report.

http://www.panynj.gov/airports/pdf-t...K_DEC_2017.pdf

From today's Motley Fool:

American Airlines Scales Back Its Ambitions in New York

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/americ...154000244.html

Yeah you have a valid point there. Come to think of it, I've noticed that both the carriers (B6 especially) have been driving AA out of its previous northeast hubs. Remember the days when AA was the largest carrier at BOS? Now B6 is the big guy with DL also having a significant presence. Looks like the same thing is happening down in the Big Apple.

Does DL have appreciably more connecting traffic at JFK than B6? It wouldn’t shock me if DL has less O&D traffic than B6, at least to North America/Caribbean destinations. But which is bigger is beside the point: both are appreciably larger than AA, and I think it is fair to say that a lot of New Yorkers think of B6 before AA.

Well if you include connections onto partner airlines, I think B6 has more of an edge. Here in the Boston area, most people take JetBlue to JFK when they want to make international connections there. But of course, if you mean solely DL connections, then they are far more dominant without doubt. A large part of this can be attributed to the gulf carriers. I'm sure more pax than ever from EY and QR flights will be hopping on B6 connections once AA cuts codeshare ties with them.

Is it actually an advantage for AA O&D fliers based in New York if AA is third or fourth in the market? Emptier planes and shorter upgrade queues

Due mainly to a more limited AA schedule out of NYC, I’m gonna end March with about 10,000 EQM on Delta and 10,500 EQM on American. AA beats Delta in its total offering on the transcons, but for standard coach and F, Delta is very good. The main reason to fly AA over Delta from NYC is less competiton for upgrades and a better terminal experience at JFK. Obviously Delta is better out of LGA and has more frequency in general. Delta has more international frequencies in total, but AA still has BA, Oneworld and good connectivity to LatAM. Objectively, Delta is in a better position, but AA can work in certain situations (particularly if you are a transcon and OW flyer)

We're going through a similar transition. We'll be burning some Advantage miles on a trip to Europe in May. After that, we're shifting most our business over to Delta. Living in Manhattan, we are finding that given our flight patterns (we tend to fly to FRA or CDG internationally or down to Florida or SJU domestically) AA simply no longer works for us. We were willing to put up with a certain amount of expense and inconvenience internationally as long as AA worked for us domestically. These days, trying fo fly down to FLL or SJU on AA is more trouble (and expense) than it's worth. And the service in F on DL has been surprisingly good. It's a shame, because I grew up on AA. SJU's AC was almost a second home to my family for many years. Times change, I suppose, and we must all change with them.

I still view JFK as a connecting hub for International travel from DCA. When you do take off - the flight can be 35 minutes. I have not used PHL yet as a connecting hub. I am just more familiar with JFK and it has a Flagship lounge. I guess I should try PHL - but I have avoided it because up to now - it has the legacy USAir aircraft for international - 330's , the terrible 757, etc.

I prefer the 77W to London with its 52 J seats. IAD is the only option non-stop - but then it is BA with a bad J seat, and then you can't use eVIP's on BA.

Although I may just switch back to UA with all the direct flights from IAD.

The new CX nonstop from IAD-HKG is now a plus for OneWorld to Asia.

Last JFK-ZRH tonight
 

Well, tonight (March 24) also marks the last AA64 JFK-ZRH after 16 and a half years of continued nonstop service (AA actually started JFK-ZRH way back in the late 80s before suspending it in the late 90s, and then bringing it back in late 2001 when SR was in decline).
The aircraft will turn tomorrow in ZRH to resume the nonstop to PHL as AA93. Interestingly, the JFK-based crews will continue to work the PHL-ZRH flights until November 2018 when the LAA and LUS flight attendants are supposed to be integrated after which the PHL base will take over the flights.

I’ve been flying AA64/65 very frequently for the last 10 years or so, now bus8ness will go to star alliance ...

PHL has the Hi-J BA 744. Only 2 752 International flights remain (SNN and GLA). There will be 5 763's and the rest on 332/333 this summer. Of course no Flagship Lounge in PHL yet. But with only 3 DCA-PHL flights I've heard that they might not always connect well to international flights.

Aren't AMS and DUB still 757's?

AMS is currently a 763 but will switch back to a (LAA) 757 when DFW-AMS begins for the season on May 4. DUB is currently a 332.

Definitely not the case for PHL-AMS. Per EF and AA.com 757 service resumes on May 4, the day DFW-AMS starts for the season (with a 772). Overall this does represent a capacity increase to AMS for all seasons. Last year we had the lone 757 from PHL year-round and a 767 from DFW during the summer. This year, we get a 767 in the winter and a 772+757 combo in the summer.

Later this year NON-STOPs (64 and 65) between JFK and ZRH will no longer run. One alternate for NYC to ZRH is via PHL; depending on the day, the connection can be as little as 1 hour and as much as 8 hours; for the first connection if you miss the PHL-ZRH there is NO other option, for the 2nd connection...8 hrs in PHL:rolleyes:
On the NS flts JFK-ZRH many pax are making connections--hence a NS is one leg less. Another option is JFK-LHR-ZRH--LHR is not a "friendly" airport for connections.:p