STL future
- Thread starter jj
- Start date
NewHampshire Black Bears
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 10,154
- 681
I don't think that anyone, ........knowledgeable of the "workings" of AA, be they employee or not, will be surprised if STL is reduced to a small focus city, or less.
Which is a damn shame but its the reality of $130-140 a barrel oil. I wish STL would have remained a true hub, and I wish my airport still had mainline service there. On the upside, I'm pretty sure that most of the mainline traffic at STL these days is O&D based which means that it could probably survive any AmericanConnection (TransAir?) cuts.
MCI transplant
Veteran
- Jun 4, 2003
- 5,311
- 584
- Banned
- #5
<_< ----- Hello Bears!------ Tell me. Why is it that whenever there's talk of a "reduction in force" the nAAtives start looking for exTWAers to through under the bus? :huh:----- This time I hear it might be a little different! Even painful for those who feel "untouchable"!------ As for STL, twaokc probably remembers STL at it's peck. He's right you know! STL is far from what it once was! ----- And Bears, you may be right also!------ Only time will tell!!!!
MCI,
I arrived in STL from OKC at 1230 noon and I could not believe it. There was only one mainline a/c in the gates, but there were several AX a/c floating around. D concouse jetways just sitting with various equipment sitting around them, but no a/c. It was a sickening sight to see. And before any of you say anything, I know AA dumped D concourse. A once proud airport to both Ozark and TWA, it took only AA to destroy it.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,959
- 9,374
No, Carl Icahn destroyed TWA as you knew it, and took the people of St. Louis along for the ride. He took your pensions, took the cash that should have gone for fleet renewal and capital investments, and kept it for his other ventures. Even after he exited the picture, he continued to rob TW via Karibu.
You can blame AA for giving up on STL in 2003, but that's like blaming DL for PA's demise --- there was too much irreversable damage already done by the time a rescue was attempted.
Did you non-rev into STL on AA flight benefits? If you did then you are a hypocrite for doing so while heaping scorn on AA. As far as scaling back STL, cry me a river; the same thing is happening to SJU and hundreds of nAAtives with much more seniority are going to be affected and this is just the beginning. I suppose you feel that AA should have kept STL at 400 mainline flights a day just because it was Ozark/TWA and instead de-hubbed ORD and DFW. The fact that STL got whacked first proves that it was not as valuable as you TWAers claimed it was. Got news for you, AA is in survival mode and with oil pushing $140 a barrel, AA will cut wherever it needs to in order to survive and they don't care if it affects TWAers or nAAtives.
They possibly could do that in addition to dehubbing STL. As former management, you should know that they will (or should) perform the appropriate economic analysis and implement the most favorable results. DFW is AA's hometown and it's largest hub. DFW facilities are better than STL and they have to pay for that new skytrain they build not too long ago. Another big difference between STL and DFW is that almost all of STL has 25-30+ years of seniority meaning that they are all top of scale. By dehubbing (and laying off) AA saves more money in terms of per person being laid off. Also, by dehubbing STL they can close the F/A and pilot bases which will save them even more cash.
jimntx
Veteran
Uh, STL was "de-hubbed" some time ago. F/A and pilot bases have nothing to do with whether or not a station is a hub. They have to do with the company economics of O&D flying. If a lot of flights begin or end in a station, there will be f/a and pilot bases there to reduce the number of hotel rooms needed for the night.
LAX is not a hub; BOS is not a hub; DCA is not a hub. SAN, ATL and either MKE or MPL (I don't remember) have satellite F/A bases because of the number of originating and ending flights in those stations. BTW, I asked one time why LAX was not designated as a hub since we have such a huge operations there. The answer I got was, "It just isn't."
NewHampshire Black Bears
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 10,154
- 681
jimntx,
Forgeting LAX for a second,.........my question would be............"Why isn't JFK a Hub" ?
Unless MIA finally surpassed Kennedy,...........JFK originated MORE widebody a/c than ANY station in the system,..............and OH by the way,........there's also LGA a mere 12 miles away, plus EWR.
IMHO it should be classified as a NYC Hub !!!
Forgeting LAX for a second,.........my question would be............"Why isn't JFK a Hub" ?
Unless MIA finally surpassed Kennedy,...........JFK originated MORE widebody a/c than ANY station in the system,..............and OH by the way,........there's also LGA a mere 12 miles away, plus EWR.
IMHO it should be classified as a NYC Hub !!!
As of now, STL is still considered a hub, albeit a small one. BOS, LAX, JFK are considered large focus cities with international flights. If they whack STL again it can either become like a DCA with bases or a DEN or SJU without bases. IMO, I think it will be the latter.Uh, STL was "de-hubbed" some time ago. F/A and pilot bases have nothing to do with whether or not a station is a hub. They have to do with the company economics of O&D flying. If a lot of flights begin or end in a station, there will be f/a and pilot bases there to reduce the number of hotel rooms needed for the night.
LAX is not a hub; BOS is not a hub; DCA is not a hub. SAN, ATL and either MKE or MPL (I don't remember) have satellite F/A bases because of the number of originating and ending flights in those stations. BTW, I asked one time why LAX was not designated as a hub since we have such a huge operations there. The answer I got was, "It just isn't."
