MrMarky
Advanced
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 10/18/2002 5:16:13 PM whlinder wrote:[BR][BR]If connectivity is an issue why did TWA win LAX slots originally?[BR][BR]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P]If you will recall, TWA had designated LAX as a focus city and tripled the number of flights they were operating there, providing additional connections. In addition, they had entered into an agreement with Eagle to provide them Trans World Connection feed from seven other California communities, such as Fresno, Monterey, Santa Barbara, etc. So TWA was able to make the case that they could provide connectivity, especially to underserved communities in California.[/P]
[P]As for the prohibition on a US/UA codeshare from DCA-SFO, I wouldn't think that would present much of a problem. UA pax would still retain FF benefits because of UA/US FF program reciprocity including miles counting toward elite status qualification. And US pax would now have one-stop connections throughout the West Coast and to the entire Pacific rim. Interlining should make that process just about as seamless as a code share.[/P]
[P][STRONG]CluebyFour--[/STRONG][/P]
[P]PSA used the old central terminal at SFO, which became the International terminal, which has now been replaced by the new International terminal. US uses gates in the South terminal which were originally used by Pan Am and some others. I would think with the cutbacks at United's SFO hub that UA would have sufficient gate space available for US to use at the North terminal where UA is located. Although I must say, US has several gates, maybe four or five if not more at SFO and it's always surpirising to me to see how many US aircraft are parked at SFO gates. There seems to usually be three to five US aircraft on the ground at any given time.[/P]
[P]Marky[/P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 10/18/2002 5:16:13 PM whlinder wrote:[BR][BR]If connectivity is an issue why did TWA win LAX slots originally?[BR][BR]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P]If you will recall, TWA had designated LAX as a focus city and tripled the number of flights they were operating there, providing additional connections. In addition, they had entered into an agreement with Eagle to provide them Trans World Connection feed from seven other California communities, such as Fresno, Monterey, Santa Barbara, etc. So TWA was able to make the case that they could provide connectivity, especially to underserved communities in California.[/P]
[P]As for the prohibition on a US/UA codeshare from DCA-SFO, I wouldn't think that would present much of a problem. UA pax would still retain FF benefits because of UA/US FF program reciprocity including miles counting toward elite status qualification. And US pax would now have one-stop connections throughout the West Coast and to the entire Pacific rim. Interlining should make that process just about as seamless as a code share.[/P]
[P][STRONG]CluebyFour--[/STRONG][/P]
[P]PSA used the old central terminal at SFO, which became the International terminal, which has now been replaced by the new International terminal. US uses gates in the South terminal which were originally used by Pan Am and some others. I would think with the cutbacks at United's SFO hub that UA would have sufficient gate space available for US to use at the North terminal where UA is located. Although I must say, US has several gates, maybe four or five if not more at SFO and it's always surpirising to me to see how many US aircraft are parked at SFO gates. There seems to usually be three to five US aircraft on the ground at any given time.[/P]
[P]Marky[/P]
