AA adds second daily LAX-LHR

[jcw]

Lets see DL couldn't make a route work and it's not a big deal

If AA did the same you would be on here trashing AA

Your so intellectually dishonest

 

[WorldTraveler]

I didn't say it was a big deal or not

I did say that AA is adding capacity in EDU and BHX that are pretty small markets and ones in which UA is the dominant carrier to the US.

you do realize you are a very easy debate partner because you don't even start with the basic facts that have been presented before jumping to conclusions.

 

[Kev3188]

Anyone in the know have an idea why the plane sits in BHX for almost 3 hours?

New York JFK – Birmingham NEW daily service from 07MAY15
AA130 JFK1900 – 0710+1BHX 757 D
AA131 BHX1000 – 1255JFK 757 D

New York JFK – Edinburgh NEW daily service from 07MAY15
AA278 JFK1910 – 0715+1EDI 757 D
AA279 EDI0915 – 1150JFK 757 D

 

[700UW]

Cleaning, catering, security check etc....

 

[robbedagain]

that'd be my guess too 700  

 

[Kev3188]

Valid points all...

I guess I shoulda been clearer; I'm curious why it's on the ground almost an hour longer than the EDI flight.

 

[700UW]

Slots?

 

[FWAAA]

Valid points all...

I guess I shoulda been clearer; I'm curious why it's on the ground almost an hour longer than the EDI flight.

That was clearly implied, given that you posted the EDI schedule for comparison.

My only guess (complete WAG) is that it's timed for a JFK arrival time that's a less-congested time of day. BHX probably isn't a very crowded airport, so there isn't the same need to rush on the ground.

 

[WorldTraveler]

There are very few arrivals from Europe before noon

AA doesnt have the connections to accommodate an earlier arrival

 

[FWAAA]

There are very few arrivals from Europe before noon

AA doesnt have the connections to accommodate an earlier arrival

Even if that's true, that offers no explanation to answer kev's question, and that's why the BHX flight sits so much longer on the ground at BHX compared to the EDI flight (which arrives JFK prior to noon).

 

[Hope777]

Maybe something to do with Crew Rest issues?

 

[MAH4546]

WT fails to use facts, as always.

AA is not adding capacity with the three new routes. They replace PHLEDI, 2nd PHLFRA and 2nd CLTFRA. That's a net reduction in seats

It's also upping JFKMAN to a 763 but canning CLTMAN.
So much for AA's post-BK arrogance.

 

[WorldTraveler]

nowhere did I see where AA is cutting anything in order to fund these routes.

feel free to show me where... and a.net is no more of a source than Wikipedia.

if true, and I don't know that it is, it just validates that AA IS dismantling former US hubs in favor of AA hubs... the only real question is why are the UK routes supposed to work from JFK when a lot of other routes haven't.

and before you say BA, perhaps. but the bigger question is why if those routes made sense before, they weren't flown before.

or is it really a question that the former US routes didn't work - as we said they wouldn't because of the end of Star - but these seemed like the next best alternatives to just sitting down airplanes?

but yes I will acknowledge if all of the routes you mention are being cut, then it is no net increase and may be a net reduction in seats.

 

[FWAAA]

and before you say BA, perhaps. but the bigger question is why if those routes made sense before, they weren't flown before.

Pre-bankruptcy AA didn't fly these routes as its labor costs were far too high compared to the low-wage competition like US (and, to a lesser extent, UA and DL). It was clear 15 years ago when AA unveiled the plans for JFK T-8 that AA would eventually expand at JFK. 2001 saw AA shrink substantially and the construction of T-8 forced AA to shrink at JFK during the construction. When T-8 was finally built, the low-wage competition slowed AA's expansion plans, quickly followed by the Great Recession of 2008. Now that AA has forced more efficient contracts on the employees, it's time to expand JFK international flying. From where will AA get the passengers? By taking them away from other airlines.

I agree that CLT and PHL will give up some international flying while JFK and MIA will see more (and I've posted the same since the US merger began to take shape), and so far, I've been proven right. And I agree that Parker's payments for labor peace will likely cause AA's labor costs to once again become problematic. Tne only saving grace is that US and its bargain-basement CLT and PHL international fare competition will have disappeared.

I don't know if the new JFK and MIA routes will succeed. For all we know, DL will mop the floor with new AA. I'm sure you'll be around every day or so to post just that.

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

, AA in its post BK and post merger arrogance can condemn other carriers for adding capacity into the market but then turns around and does the same thing to a far greater degree.the most accurate statement that has been made is that AA has too many planes and not enough places to profitably fly them so they are desperately trying to find new markets at the very time that Latin America, their historic cash cow, is being flushed down the toilet.

Prone to hyperbole