May T-100s (onboard loads)
Aug 13, 2011 | 8:17 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,653
May T-100s (onboard loads)
Here are onboard loads for markets in the eastern division of the Frontier system, plus for select MKE competitors. Remember, as always, that onboard load is only half the picture when trying to guess relative finanical performance, as they say little if anything about traffic composition or fare.
Note that the problem of thru passengers is less than in many prior months because the MCI east-west hub (where the problem largely manifested itself) has been reworked with less thru-flight scheduling.
Markets primarily served with Airbus or EJet aircraft
95.3% MKE LAS
93.7% MCI BOS
93.2% MKE LAX
92.3% MKE SAN
90.3% MCI SEA
90.0% MKE DEN
89.9% MKE MCO
89.4% MCI SFO
88.9% MCI LAX
88.1% MKE DFW
88.1% OMA MCO
87.9% MKE SEA
87.9% OMA DCA
87.7% MKE SFO
84.0% MCI DCA
83.3% MKE LGA
82.8% MKE DCA
82.7% MKE PHX
82.0% MKE MSP
80.0% MKE BOS
78.0% OMA LAX
76.8% MCI MSY
76.5% MKE MCI
73.5% MKE PIE
72.4% MCI CMH ..79.4% one direction, 65.3% the other direction
72.0% MCI AUS ..81.5% one direction, 62.5% the other direction
70.9% MKE SAT
70.8% MCI LGA
70.7% MKE FLL
62.4% OMA SAN
Markets primarily served by RJs
89.9% MKE BDL
89.2% MKE BNA
85.9% MKE EWR
85.2% MKE PHL
84.8% MKE FNT
84.5% MKE OMA
84.3% MKE DSM
83.5% MKE CMH
82.1% MKE PIT
81.3% MKE IND
80.8% MKE RDU
80.4% MKE STL
80.4% MKE CLE
79.8% MKE GRR
79.3% MKE SDF
77.5% MKE MSN
69.8% MKE MBL
67.0% MKE DAY
65.0% MKE RHI
63.7% MKE GRB
62.8% MKE ATW
AirTran
90.7% MKE MSP
90.5% MKE MCO
89.3% MKE FLL
88.5% MKE LAX
88.4% MKE RSW
88.4% MKE SFO
87.9% MKE TPA
87.5% MKE LAS
87.1% MKE LGA
86.1% MKE PHX
85.3% MKE SEA
82.4% MKE DCA
79.5% MKE BOS
76.2% MKE ATL
73.3% MKE BWI
71.8% MKE MSY
71.6% MKE SRQ
68.5% MKE DEN
FL* operated by Skywest
78.1% MKE IND
75.8% MKE PIT
72.7% MKE OMA
70.7% MKE CAK
70.4% MKE DSM
60.1% MKE STL
Southwest
94.4% MKE LAS
89.4% MKE PHX
87.4% MKE MCO
79.0% MKE TPA
69.2% MKE BWI
61.8% MKE MCI
American
80.6% MKE DFW
Note that the problem of thru passengers is less than in many prior months because the MCI east-west hub (where the problem largely manifested itself) has been reworked with less thru-flight scheduling.
Markets primarily served with Airbus or EJet aircraft
95.3% MKE LAS
93.7% MCI BOS
93.2% MKE LAX
92.3% MKE SAN
90.3% MCI SEA
90.0% MKE DEN
89.9% MKE MCO
89.4% MCI SFO
88.9% MCI LAX
88.1% MKE DFW
88.1% OMA MCO
87.9% MKE SEA
87.9% OMA DCA
87.7% MKE SFO
84.0% MCI DCA
83.3% MKE LGA
82.8% MKE DCA
82.7% MKE PHX
82.0% MKE MSP
80.0% MKE BOS
78.0% OMA LAX
76.8% MCI MSY
76.5% MKE MCI
73.5% MKE PIE
72.4% MCI CMH ..79.4% one direction, 65.3% the other direction
72.0% MCI AUS ..81.5% one direction, 62.5% the other direction
70.9% MKE SAT
70.8% MCI LGA
70.7% MKE FLL
62.4% OMA SAN
Markets primarily served by RJs
89.9% MKE BDL
89.2% MKE BNA
85.9% MKE EWR
85.2% MKE PHL
84.8% MKE FNT
84.5% MKE OMA
84.3% MKE DSM
83.5% MKE CMH
82.1% MKE PIT
81.3% MKE IND
80.8% MKE RDU
80.4% MKE STL
80.4% MKE CLE
79.8% MKE GRR
79.3% MKE SDF
77.5% MKE MSN
69.8% MKE MBL
67.0% MKE DAY
65.0% MKE RHI
63.7% MKE GRB
62.8% MKE ATW
AirTran
90.7% MKE MSP
90.5% MKE MCO
89.3% MKE FLL
88.5% MKE LAX
88.4% MKE RSW
88.4% MKE SFO
87.9% MKE TPA
87.5% MKE LAS
87.1% MKE LGA
86.1% MKE PHX
85.3% MKE SEA
82.4% MKE DCA
79.5% MKE BOS
76.2% MKE ATL
73.3% MKE BWI
71.8% MKE MSY
71.6% MKE SRQ
68.5% MKE DEN
FL* operated by Skywest
78.1% MKE IND
75.8% MKE PIT
72.7% MKE OMA
70.7% MKE CAK
70.4% MKE DSM
60.1% MKE STL
Southwest
94.4% MKE LAS
89.4% MKE PHX
87.4% MKE MCO
79.0% MKE TPA
69.2% MKE BWI
61.8% MKE MCI
American
80.6% MKE DFW
Aug 13, 2011 | 8:23 pm
#2
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,653
A participant here sent me a PM asking how to get these numbers, but their profile is (apparently) not set up to receive PM's, so my direct reply was rejected. But I thought I might as well post it here for anyone else who might want to play with the stats.
This is where the domestic onboard load raw data is
http://www.transtats.bts.gov/DL_Sele...Short_Name=Air Carriers
Best bet is to pick a single state and month at a time, because the tables get very large if you don't narrow it down...often moer than the 65k or so records than older versions of Excel can handle. For each month, there's a separate entry for each city pair, each airline, and each operating airline. Simple math formulas in Excel come up with total load factor fairly easily.
This is where the domestic onboard load raw data is
http://www.transtats.bts.gov/DL_Sele...Short_Name=Air Carriers
Best bet is to pick a single state and month at a time, because the tables get very large if you don't narrow it down...often moer than the 65k or so records than older versions of Excel can handle. For each month, there's a separate entry for each city pair, each airline, and each operating airline. Simple math formulas in Excel come up with total load factor fairly easily.
Aug 14, 2011 | 2:44 pm
#3
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 7
One can see some of the rationale for many of the route cuts over the summer in these numbers. What I find obvious is the need for the ATW cut. With GRB and ATW both very close together and with both being at the bottom of the list, it is obvious something needed to be done. With even the EAS routes having higher LF, clearly GRB and ATW were/are having some challenges. However since they are so close together, by cutting either ATW or GRB likely half of the affected area could still use F9 by choosing the other nearby airport. Given that F9 has more invested in GRB with the seasonal DEN service, it becomes clear why ATW was cut.
Both ATW and GRB have a lot of competition for relatively small stations. With DL, UA and AA in each, there wasn't a lot of room for F9. How did these stations do historically for YX? Even if they did very well for the "home state" based YX, I think the branding change from YX to F9 is taking longer to be accepted by the flying public than many on these boards realize. From many perspectives to the typical Wisconsinite, F9 and YX are two completely different airlines. Different levels of service, different focuses (leisure vs business; LCC vs Premium). It takes more than just slapping a new name on the gate to entice people to try out the new guy in town. Realistically it has only been about a year since many aspects of the brand merge were put into place. And for these cities in particular it still isn't complete since the 135's still say Midwest Express on them. All this with the backdrop of well established competition from DL, UA and AA it is no wonder F9 has struggled with these two cities. I think the decision to drop one of the two was wise. Focus limited resources on one, while continuing to build the brand in the region. Who knows, someday after F9 is successful at GRB, ATW may again make sense.
Both ATW and GRB have a lot of competition for relatively small stations. With DL, UA and AA in each, there wasn't a lot of room for F9. How did these stations do historically for YX? Even if they did very well for the "home state" based YX, I think the branding change from YX to F9 is taking longer to be accepted by the flying public than many on these boards realize. From many perspectives to the typical Wisconsinite, F9 and YX are two completely different airlines. Different levels of service, different focuses (leisure vs business; LCC vs Premium). It takes more than just slapping a new name on the gate to entice people to try out the new guy in town. Realistically it has only been about a year since many aspects of the brand merge were put into place. And for these cities in particular it still isn't complete since the 135's still say Midwest Express on them. All this with the backdrop of well established competition from DL, UA and AA it is no wonder F9 has struggled with these two cities. I think the decision to drop one of the two was wise. Focus limited resources on one, while continuing to build the brand in the region. Who knows, someday after F9 is successful at GRB, ATW may again make sense.
Aug 14, 2011 | 6:19 pm
#4
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Colorado
Programs: Skymiles, Mileage Plus
Posts: 89
A participant here sent me a PM asking how to get these numbers, but their profile is (apparently) not set up to receive PM's, so my direct reply was rejected. But I thought I might as well post it here for anyone else who might want to play with the stats.
This is where the domestic onboard load raw data is
http://www.transtats.bts.gov/DL_Sele...Short_Name=Air Carriers
Best bet is to pick a single state and month at a time, because the tables get very large if you don't narrow it down...often moer than the 65k or so records than older versions of Excel can handle. For each month, there's a separate entry for each city pair, each airline, and each operating airline. Simple math formulas in Excel come up with total load factor fairly easily.
This is where the domestic onboard load raw data is
http://www.transtats.bts.gov/DL_Sele...Short_Name=Air Carriers
Best bet is to pick a single state and month at a time, because the tables get very large if you don't narrow it down...often moer than the 65k or so records than older versions of Excel can handle. For each month, there's a separate entry for each city pair, each airline, and each operating airline. Simple math formulas in Excel come up with total load factor fairly easily.
Charlie.