More AA gates coming in LAX
- Thread starter IORFA
- Start date
Kev3188
Veteran
+1
...and ideally, meaningful-and on topic- discussions will follow....
...and ideally, meaningful-and on topic- discussions will follow....
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #63
the meaningful discussion is that LAX can grow by moving as much activity to the TBIT.
Some people don't want to accept that LAWA can come up with arrangements with multiple carriers that accomplish the same goal while allowing all parties to win.
Some people don't want to accept that LAWA can come up with arrangements with multiple carriers that accomplish the same goal while allowing all parties to win.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #65
both of which are DL partners... so even if they don't move to TBIT, T2 could become a largely Skyteam int'l carrier terminal.
and all of this could take years to play out. AA can't fully realize its expansion until DL moves and DL's move is apparently dependent on some carriers moving out in order for T3 to be heavily rebuilt.
It could be a grand rearrangement of LAX in time but it will take time. and lots of money.
and all of this could take years to play out. AA can't fully realize its expansion until DL moves and DL's move is apparently dependent on some carriers moving out in order for T3 to be heavily rebuilt.
It could be a grand rearrangement of LAX in time but it will take time. and lots of money.
FrugalFlyerv2.0
Veteran
- Oct 29, 2003
- 2,931
- 3,341
topDawg said:
I forgot about WestJet.
I believe AF, KL, KE, SU and AZ are using TBIT.
If my math is correct, this remodel of T-4 will leave AA with 15 gates in T-4 plus five gates at TBIT plus four gates at T-6 and 10 (or is it 9?) gates at the Eagle Dump. That's exclusive or preferential use of 33 or 34 gates, which should enable AA to expand about as much as it wants without real estate being an issue.
To be sure, there may/will be other constricting factors that limit AA's growth, but gate space is unlikely to be among them. 33 gates should easily support 300+ daily departures, considering that AA's departures at LAX span from 0500 to approximately 0130, more than 20 hours.
The long-range plan has LAWA building some new aircraft maintenance hangars on the SW corner of the airfield, near the beach, IIRC.
To be sure, there may/will be other constricting factors that limit AA's growth, but gate space is unlikely to be among them. 33 gates should easily support 300+ daily departures, considering that AA's departures at LAX span from 0500 to approximately 0130, more than 20 hours.
The long-range plan has LAWA building some new aircraft maintenance hangars on the SW corner of the airfield, near the beach, IIRC.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #69
but you really don't know how all of the gate assignments will end up nor do any of us know what any of the other carriers at LAX will do.
It is very likely that AA will gain gates... but it is a long-term process and other carriers will be making movements as well.
Unlike slots, it is not certain who will hold what and how it might be used.
AA is growing... and that is good. Just recognize that LAX as an airport is in a growth mode in large part because the economics of growth make sense for multiple carriers. The remodeling of LAX' terminals is a process that will take time for it all to shake out. The final picture as well as what might take place during interim steps is far from known at this point.
It is very likely that AA will gain gates... but it is a long-term process and other carriers will be making movements as well.
Unlike slots, it is not certain who will hold what and how it might be used.
AA is growing... and that is good. Just recognize that LAX as an airport is in a growth mode in large part because the economics of growth make sense for multiple carriers. The remodeling of LAX' terminals is a process that will take time for it all to shake out. The final picture as well as what might take place during interim steps is far from known at this point.
NewHampshire Black Bears
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 10,154
- 681
WorldTraveler said:
WELL,.....there it is. "Top 5 carriers by seats/per day...is AA" (who continually Expands in LAX, while Del-DUH slowly RETREATS) !
Methinks this is very similiar to AA + DL in DFW(only difference is that Del-DUH's retreat from LAX is at a slower pace than at DFW)
AND I honestly DO NOT thinks it bodes well for Del-DUH (as it applies to sea, in this case) to have jettisoned AA so as not to be able to rebook on each other, AS's newest version of a international hook-up with Icelandic, AS's even closer ties with AA.
You've got a better chance of seeing JESUS, before Del-DUH EVER becomes the # 1 carrier out of SEA !
'Should' it ever become necessary for AS to defend it's true # 1 spot out of sea, and I Never see that happening, AA will gladly be there to lend AS....all the assistance it needs !
Del-DUH's sweet 'corn pone' southern charm doesn't seem to resonate well in the west coast, unless you're bound for HOT-LANTA, MINNY or DEE-troit !
NewHampshire Black Bears
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 10,154
- 681
OOOPS, sorry.
I forgot about SLC.
I forgot about SLC.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #72
your statement isn't even accurate based on facts for LAX alone.
Based on summer 2016 schedules - which are still being loaded, AA and DL are growing at LAX while UA and WN are offering less seats than for this past summer. There is no retreat from DL. There is a clear movement on DL's part to take UA's place as the #2 carrier at LAX.
And on the west coast as a whole, a statistic that matter if you want to include to talk about SEA, DL is the 2nd largest legacy carrier both in terms of seats and in terms of ASMs.
DL never said it intended to be the number 1 carrier at either LAX or SEA but it does intend to be a solidly competitive #2.
and LAWA is interested in seeing multiple carriers grow at LAX which is what their plans are all leading to. AA will grow but so will other carriers.
Based on summer 2016 schedules - which are still being loaded, AA and DL are growing at LAX while UA and WN are offering less seats than for this past summer. There is no retreat from DL. There is a clear movement on DL's part to take UA's place as the #2 carrier at LAX.
And on the west coast as a whole, a statistic that matter if you want to include to talk about SEA, DL is the 2nd largest legacy carrier both in terms of seats and in terms of ASMs.
DL never said it intended to be the number 1 carrier at either LAX or SEA but it does intend to be a solidly competitive #2.
and LAWA is interested in seeing multiple carriers grow at LAX which is what their plans are all leading to. AA will grow but so will other carriers.
FWAAA said:
Indeed. Pretty interesting to consider what AA could (would, will) do with >30 gates at LAX, particularly once - as appears may well be the case in a few years - most if not all of them are mainline-capable, and 4-5 are widebody-capable. As you say, 300 or more daily departures would seem entirely achievable, at least operationally. I think a big opportunity this would/will present is for AA to operate more peak-time mainline departures (an area in which AA is already a leader). Specifically, there are multiple U.S. markets - DTW, CLE, MSY, etc. - that I think could at least plausibly support nonstops to LAX on AA timed with the prime morning eastbound/evening westbound schedule, and having more gates capable of handling up to an A319/737, as opposed to an EMB175, should help with that. Beyond that, there are in general plenty of other domestic markets that seem plausible for AA to add at greater frequency - like SEA, PDX, COS, MCI, etc. And internationally, I continue to believe that places like PEK, ICN and maybe even HKG could happen at some point down the road - probably at least a few years off.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #74
I'm not sure whether you will agree, but no one is debating whether AA will grow at LAX or not.
The issue is whether AA can profitably fill all of those gates and whether other carriers will also grow or not; both of those possibilities raise the question of whether AA will gain a competitive advantage in the process.
The lease on the T6 gates are not long-term, IIRC, and the Eagle gates are not mainline compatible. AA doesn't now have multiple gates at its exclusive use in TBIT.
What we can see right now is that AA's share change since the merger is not any greater than other carriers even though AA has more gates.
AA might be able to add more flights with further gates but let's look at the regions where you think that could happen:
Asia. as has been noted over and over, AA is in the weakest position of the big 3 from the west coast to Asia. AA still has not announced LAX-HND even though DL ends service from SEA today. Even if AA adds LAX-HND and retains LAX-NRT, AA has gained no advantage because DL flies both already. DL and UA both fly LAX-PVG and have stronger partnerships with Chinese airlines that does translate into the ability to carry more and higher yielding passengers. DL and UA both have Korean partners; AA does not. The only partner advantage that AA has is HKG and yet CX hasn't shown that it is willing to increase its partnership and in fact ADDED capacity from the US to HKG when AA added its nonstop service from DFW to HKG.
SEA/PDX. Both are major LAX markets and also some of AS' top markets. If AA decides to add those markets, they will be doing exactly what DL did which is add capacity and suppress fares even as AS has added more capacity. AA and AS will not have a revenue sharing or joint venture arrangement and thus any moves by AA in those markets will come at the cost of AS.
Other airline hub and strength markets which you mentioned. AA can indeed add service but it has repeatedly been shown that there are other markets added that come in key AA strength markets and which likely have a far larger impact on AA than any potential advantage AA might gain at LAX. There is no way to downplay the effect of DL's growth in the MCO-Brazil market at a time when AA is watching its yields drop and its marketing people say that they are having to discount more and more in order to fill planes.
and finally, current reality is that other carriers are upgrading from large RJs to mainline in key markets like SFO and PDX meaning that they are growing capacity even without adding a single flight. Even without the increased gates that AA is gaining and has gained, AA's growth is not coming at a faster rate than for other carriers.
AA WILL grow. Other carriers will as well because that is good for LAX and LAWA.
The only question is how much of and what kind of advantage AA will gain and that will be determined first and foremost in the marketplace where there are clear market strengths and challenges for each of the big 3 carriers and where at LAX no carrier has gained an average fare advantage and share is closer between the big 3 than at any other major US airport.
The issue is whether AA can profitably fill all of those gates and whether other carriers will also grow or not; both of those possibilities raise the question of whether AA will gain a competitive advantage in the process.
The lease on the T6 gates are not long-term, IIRC, and the Eagle gates are not mainline compatible. AA doesn't now have multiple gates at its exclusive use in TBIT.
What we can see right now is that AA's share change since the merger is not any greater than other carriers even though AA has more gates.
AA might be able to add more flights with further gates but let's look at the regions where you think that could happen:
Asia. as has been noted over and over, AA is in the weakest position of the big 3 from the west coast to Asia. AA still has not announced LAX-HND even though DL ends service from SEA today. Even if AA adds LAX-HND and retains LAX-NRT, AA has gained no advantage because DL flies both already. DL and UA both fly LAX-PVG and have stronger partnerships with Chinese airlines that does translate into the ability to carry more and higher yielding passengers. DL and UA both have Korean partners; AA does not. The only partner advantage that AA has is HKG and yet CX hasn't shown that it is willing to increase its partnership and in fact ADDED capacity from the US to HKG when AA added its nonstop service from DFW to HKG.
SEA/PDX. Both are major LAX markets and also some of AS' top markets. If AA decides to add those markets, they will be doing exactly what DL did which is add capacity and suppress fares even as AS has added more capacity. AA and AS will not have a revenue sharing or joint venture arrangement and thus any moves by AA in those markets will come at the cost of AS.
Other airline hub and strength markets which you mentioned. AA can indeed add service but it has repeatedly been shown that there are other markets added that come in key AA strength markets and which likely have a far larger impact on AA than any potential advantage AA might gain at LAX. There is no way to downplay the effect of DL's growth in the MCO-Brazil market at a time when AA is watching its yields drop and its marketing people say that they are having to discount more and more in order to fill planes.
and finally, current reality is that other carriers are upgrading from large RJs to mainline in key markets like SFO and PDX meaning that they are growing capacity even without adding a single flight. Even without the increased gates that AA is gaining and has gained, AA's growth is not coming at a faster rate than for other carriers.
AA WILL grow. Other carriers will as well because that is good for LAX and LAWA.
The only question is how much of and what kind of advantage AA will gain and that will be determined first and foremost in the marketplace where there are clear market strengths and challenges for each of the big 3 carriers and where at LAX no carrier has gained an average fare advantage and share is closer between the big 3 than at any other major US airport.
Don't see any indication that the T6 gates are going anywhere anytime soon. Nobody said "exclusive use" of TBIT gates, although it appears AA has, indeed, secured "preferential" use of 4-5 of said gates. The Eagle gates are not "mainline compatible" for now but if they're hypothetically traded in for T5 gates - as I believe is being rumored/speculated here - they obviously would be.
Keep repeating the "weakest position of the big 3 from the west coast to Asia" line as long as it lasts. We've seen how similar categorical statements about AA's alleged perpetual, intractable weakness relative to competitors - at LAX, in Asia, and elsewhere - have panned out.
Actually, there is a way to downplay the "effect" of Delta's growth in the MCO-Brazil market - namely, it hasn't started yet, and even when it does, it comes at the expense of other Delta capacity from elsewhere in its U.S.-Brazil network and in any event is a veritable blip on the radar screen of the far larger and more important macroeconomic and competitive dynamics impacting U.S.-Brazil yields. Contrary to non-popular belief, the world doesn't revolve around Delta.
Reality.
Keep repeating the "weakest position of the big 3 from the west coast to Asia" line as long as it lasts. We've seen how similar categorical statements about AA's alleged perpetual, intractable weakness relative to competitors - at LAX, in Asia, and elsewhere - have panned out.
Actually, there is a way to downplay the "effect" of Delta's growth in the MCO-Brazil market - namely, it hasn't started yet, and even when it does, it comes at the expense of other Delta capacity from elsewhere in its U.S.-Brazil network and in any event is a veritable blip on the radar screen of the far larger and more important macroeconomic and competitive dynamics impacting U.S.-Brazil yields. Contrary to non-popular belief, the world doesn't revolve around Delta.
Reality.
