modernArt wrote:

Austin-Panama City n/s

Is that daily or Saturday-only? Either way, wow for ECP!

Based on these schedule adds, it's safe to say both PNS and ECP aren't going anywhere.

Likewise, I cannot see ICT, DSM or CRP going away at WN. As I recall from folks doing T100 pulls, both ICT and DSM have WN loads in the mid-80s consistently. For CRP, it's a legacy WN city in their heartland, unlike the inherited smaller Air Tran stations that are still open. Even if it's not the biggest money maker, I can't ever see CRP going away. Plus, while CRP pax loads are never great, doesn't CPR pull above its weight in terms of cargo?

Lots of stabs at AS especially with PDX-SFO which basically pumps capacity into a route that AS was trying to remove capacity from with the VX merger.

FLL-MCO is a bit odd. I get they want to feed the Caribbean operation, but 5x seems like too much capacity for just that.

AUS-ECP is Saturday only, but still an interesting add. Also, MDW-ECP appears new as a Saturday only add.

modernArt wrote:

Austin-Panama City n/s

This elicited a 'WOW' out of me. Then I realized I had the wrong Panama City.

shadez wrote:

FLL-MCO also returns as 5x daly!

Finally!!!!! This route makes me happy as it is an awesome one for personal trips, work trips, and making connections.

SANFan wrote:

So far, I see FIVE new routes out of SAN on this release: EWR, IND, SLC, BOI and GEG!

Surprised they didn't add PIT to SAN.

flyiguy wrote:

PIT: -1 BWI; +1 FLL, +1 ATL & +1 DEN

Disappointing that they didn't add more routes.

commavia wrote:

flyguychi wrote:

CAK and DAY closing with CVG Announcement:

"We are announcing today the closure of both Akron-Canton (CAK) and Dayton (DAY), the addition of a new Southwest City, Cincinnati (CVG), and the addition of new flights in Cleveland (CLE). The last day of service in CAK and DAY will be on June 3, 2017. The following day, on June 4, 2017, CVG will begin operating with flights to MDW and BWI. Additionally on June 4, 2017, CLE will launch three new flights with daily service between CLE and ATL, and additional frequency between CLE and STL."

Further reinforcing the general trend evident for years - Southwest's business model continues to evolve away from the smaller, less congested markets that Southwest historically entered and came to dominate, and towards larger, busier urban airports where they face far greater competition but also can attract higher yields to cover rising costs. Swapping CAK for CLE consolidates Southwest's presence in northern Ohio at the largest, busiest airport in the region that is closest to the largest population and business center in the region. Same for DAY vs CVG at the southern end of the state.

I think this highlights, yet again, the disparity in potential financially viable access to smaller markets from Southwest's 737-centric business model as compared to the network carriers, which can use smaller (and admittedly higher-unit-cost) aircraft to access some of these smaller markets. I continue to believe that, long-term, Southwest is going to have to find a way to address this disparity.

Southwest needs to deal with their costs if they want to do anything other than shuffle existing capacity around. A 737-centric model worked fine when their CASM was lower and the gap between them and the legacies was wider. Also, CAK and DAY were AirTran markets with the more-appropriately-sized 717 that WN's pilots wouldn't let them keep on the property. One more reason that consolidation should not have been allowed--AirTran was a viable low-fare carrier with a good product that could make slightly thinner markets work. I suspect dropping Dayton is simply profiteering--Dayton's MSA is 800,000, well within a range that should be able to support 5 dailies with another station down the road in Cincinnati.

WestJet had to get a smaller aircraft to keep growing in Canada. Southwest may need to do the same thing in the USA, especially if they're just going to tolerate high costs instead of dealing with them.

Jim

piedmontf284000 wrote:

I think that 19 daily departures to 9 cities is still pretty good considering that they are competing on four routes with NK and two with F9.

Considering that:
- WN has served DTW for over 30 years;
- DTW is one of WN's smallest stations;
- enplanements have been stagnant for over 20 years (in spite of the FL acquisition) and were previously higher in the early 1990s;
- the number of cities WN's subsequently added & how quickly they've grown

...then yes, most of us would agree 19 peak day flights is a disappointment; it's sad the local community hasn't supported WN.

Dominion301 wrote:

modernArt wrote:

Austin-Panama City n/s

Is that daily or Saturday-only? Either way, wow for ECP!

Based on these schedule adds, it's safe to say both PNS and ECP aren't going anywhere.

Likewise, I cannot see ICT, DSM or CRP going away at WN. As I recall from folks doing T100 pulls, both ICT and DSM have WN loads in the mid-80s consistently. For CRP, it's a legacy WN city in their heartland, unlike the inherited smaller Air Tran stations that are still open. Even if it's not the biggest money maker, I can't ever see CRP going away. Plus, while CRP pax loads are never great, doesn't CPR pull above its weight in terms of cargo?

My reading of the tea leaves...

If IND-MDW is actually gone (there seems to be some debate) and DAY is gone, this represents two of the routes from their recent attempt at "extreme shorthaul". Neither of these routes have had real load factor problems. Load factor is really the only visible measure of success in these types of markets as fare is tightly tied to local traffic, and there's very little local traffic in these extreme short-haul markets. The loads on DSM/GSP/GRR are decent since they moved to the short-haul plan. GSP and GRR have pretty much zero local traffic. The outlier here is FNT. It has both horrible loads and very little local traffic.

To be honest CAK is also an odd move on the surface since CAK had nothing to do with CVG. If you look at its performance when the ATL bank structure was eliminated, CAK-ATL went from one of the airline's best routes to one of its worst in a month. So, that's pretty clearly why it failed, plus I think there is pretty clearly a bias against anything AirTran which is how CRP survives with poorer numbers than many of the dropped AirTran stations.

just a quick breakdown of FLL...64 domestic flights (off of their peak from a few years ago, but great for the summer) plus 9 international, so 73 flights. They get SJU up to 3X daily...busiest departures in the 9am hour, no flights in the 1pm hour...

5X MCO as mentioned, 1X on the new INTL (BZE, CUN - where it replaces Volaris, MBJ)
Also BWI-NAS goes to SA/SU this summer

also no mention of FLL-GCM as a poster mentioned...

There's a lot more to look at in this schedule.

please delete...hit the wrong button

usairways85 wrote:

phluser wrote:

It also shows that PHL-FLL is staying the through summer. It must be with the help of new international connections at FLL.

Or just simply trying to retain South Florida market share against B6, NK and F9 at MIA. I doubt they have a tough time operating PHL-FLL in the winter but with the 3 other airlines operating year-round I would suspect it is a bit tougher.

Well WN made PHL-FLL seasonal, well before B6 NK and F9 all had interest in PHL-So. Florida. The timing of the restored flight looks similar to IAD-FLL (early morning out of PHL and IAD with late return out of FLL back up north), and might be relying on some connections out of FLL.

enilria wrote:

Dominion301 wrote:

modernArt wrote:

Austin-Panama City n/s

Is that daily or Saturday-only? Either way, wow for ECP!

Based on these schedule adds, it's safe to say both PNS and ECP aren't going anywhere.

Likewise, I cannot see ICT, DSM or CRP going away at WN. As I recall from folks doing T100 pulls, both ICT and DSM have WN loads in the mid-80s consistently. For CRP, it's a legacy WN city in their heartland, unlike the inherited smaller Air Tran stations that are still open. Even if it's not the biggest money maker, I can't ever see CRP going away. Plus, while CRP pax loads are never great, doesn't CPR pull above its weight in terms of cargo?

My reading of the tea leaves...

If IND-MDW is actually gone (there seems to be some debate) and DAY is gone, this represents two of the routes from their recent attempt at "extreme shorthaul". Neither of these routes have had real load factor problems. Load factor is really the only visible measure of success in these types of markets as fare is tightly tied to local traffic, and there's very little local traffic in these extreme short-haul markets. The loads on DSM/GSP/GRR are decent since they moved to the short-haul plan. GSP and GRR have pretty much zero local traffic. The outlier here is FNT. It has both horrible loads and very little local traffic.

To be honest CAK is also an odd move on the surface since CAK had nothing to do with CVG. If you look at its performance when the ATL bank structure was eliminated, CAK-ATL went from one of the airline's best routes to one of its worst in a month. So, that's pretty clearly why it failed, plus I think there is pretty clearly a bias against anything AirTran which is how CRP survives with poorer numbers than many of the dropped AirTran stations.

IND-MDW is not gone...


however, there is a quirk with the system and it lists the arrival into MDW as "next day"...that's a long flight!

SANFan wrote:

So far, I see FIVE new routes out of SAN on this release: EWR, IND, SLC, BOI and GEG!

Amazing! I'm pretty sure that's the most new flights/routes announced at any one time for SAN. Talk about California Luv!!!!

All new routes appear to be served once daily, and I haven't finished counting yet, but it looks like we will be at ~109 daily departures at Lindbergh Field -- that I know is a new high mark for us.

One other thing I notice: every one of these new routes is somehow related to fairly recent adds by AS or probably routes that AS was looking closely at IMHO. Interesting...

Very nice day for SAN, in what is shaping up to be a very good year!

bb

Also of note to you, it looks like STL-SAN is up to 2x daily. Morning and midday westbound, morning and evening eastbound.

enilria wrote:

Dominion301 wrote:

modernArt wrote:

Austin-Panama City n/s

Is that daily or Saturday-only? Either way, wow for ECP!

Based on these schedule adds, it's safe to say both PNS and ECP aren't going anywhere.

Likewise, I cannot see ICT, DSM or CRP going away at WN. As I recall from folks doing T100 pulls, both ICT and DSM have WN loads in the mid-80s consistently. For CRP, it's a legacy WN city in their heartland, unlike the inherited smaller Air Tran stations that are still open. Even if it's not the biggest money maker, I can't ever see CRP going away. Plus, while CRP pax loads are never great, doesn't CPR pull above its weight in terms of cargo?

My reading of the tea leaves...

If IND-MDW is actually gone (there seems to be some debate) and DAY is gone, this represents two of the routes from their recent attempt at "extreme shorthaul". Neither of these routes have had real load factor problems. Load factor is really the only visible measure of success in these types of markets as fare is tightly tied to local traffic, and there's very little local traffic in these extreme short-haul markets. The loads on DSM/GSP/GRR are decent since they moved to the short-haul plan. GSP and GRR have pretty much zero local traffic. The outlier here is FNT. It has both horrible loads and very little local traffic.

To be honest CAK is also an odd move on the surface since CAK had nothing to do with CVG. If you look at its performance when the ATL bank structure was eliminated, CAK-ATL went from one of the airline's best routes to one of its worst in a month. So, that's pretty clearly why it failed, plus I think there is pretty clearly a bias against anything AirTran which is how CRP survives with poorer numbers than many of the dropped AirTran stations.

Unlike CAK that was down to a single route and DAY, which only had MDW & a bit of Florida, all of DSM and ICT's routes are long enough that they'd attract a significant portion of O&D traffic. For GRR, even if non-O&D MDW were to go away, they'd still have DEN & BWI and Florida.

DCA-ROCguy wrote:

Southwest needs to deal with their costs if they want to do anything other than shuffle existing capacity around. A 737-centric model worked fine when their CASM was lower and the gap between them and the legacies was wider.

Agreed. Southwest clearly has to address its diminishing cost advantage versus its rivals - not only the legacy carriers (which are far stronger competitors than they used to be) but also now several very well-run, and well-capitalized, and often lower-cost, competitors like JetBlue, Alaska, Frontier, etc.

But I think the cost issues are, in addition to being demonstrably obvious and acknowledged by Southwest management, only part of the problem. I still come back to the issue of the fleet itself. Southwest's 737-only fleet has served the airline well for decades, and there's no question that overall it has been a massive success for the airline. But I question whether it is going to be sustainable for much longer. As has been discussed at length in multiple threads, Southwest has effectively no exhausted most of its organic growth opportunities in the domestic U.S. market, and while substantial market potential exists in the near-abroad (within range of a 737), the competition is intense, and Southwest is - in every case - quite late to the party. So setting aside any further consolidation, that leaves two options for additional organic growth beyond "[shuffling] existing capacity around" - either get a smaller plane capable of flying into smaller markets, or get a bigger plane capable of flying into further away markets. Both options are fraught with cost and risk for an airline like Southwest that has basically done one thing - exceptionally well - for nearly five decades. But to be honest, at some point in the not too distant future, I'm not sure if Southwest is going to have a choice.

DCA-ROCguy wrote:

WestJet had to get a smaller aircraft to keep growing in Canada. Southwest may need to do the same thing in the USA, especially if they're just going to tolerate high costs instead of dealing with them.

I think the comparison is apt. Probably to an even greater extent than Southwest, WestJet was faced with starting to bump up against some limits in terms of its ability to profitably organically expand with 737s. So what did WestJet do? It didn't "go small" or "go longhaul" - it did both.

piedmontf284000 wrote:

iFlyDTW wrote:

I'm actually very disappointed that DTW gets absolutely nothing during this whole schedule change, no reductions and no adds. I was really hoping for DTW to HOU at the very least.

flymco753 wrote:

Zip for DTW, doesn't surprise me considering that they haven't grown at DTW for a pretty long time.

I think that 19 daily departures to 9 cities is still pretty good considering that they are competing on four routes with NK and two with F9.

I am just thankful FNT has not been cut. They should really be a bit more creative in that market. I know a morning flight to MCO and a late evening return would work well for all the people heading to Disney as AirTran made that route work on a constant basis. Allegiant is not that great if your going to Disney as they fly to SFB from FNT.

Lots of cuts in PHX.

PHX is down 18 departures. No new or deleted destinations.

By my count, here are the reductions:

ABQ -1
MDW -1
CLE -1
DEN -2
DTW -1
ELP -1
HOU -1
LAS -2
LAX -1
MKE -1
OAK -1
ONT -1
SNA -1
MCO -1
SLC -1
SAN -1
STL -1

Blog post:

https://www.southwestaircommunity.com/t ... ba-p/50394

FlyPNS1 wrote:

FLL-MCO is a bit odd. I get they want to feed the Caribbean operation, but 5x seems like too much capacity for just that.

WN used to operate this route with about the same frequency up until oil spiked and the majority of the really short flights were dropped.

Vctony wrote:

Lots of cuts in PHX.

PHX is down 18 departures. No new or deleted destinations.

By my count, here are the reductions:

DTW -1

At least in July, WN is planning two peak day DTW/PHX flights, just as they did last year. One flight is being upgauged to the 738, so it's a capacity increase.

FlyPNS1 wrote:

FLL-MCO is a bit odd. I get they want to feed the Caribbean operation, but 5x seems like too much capacity for just that.

WN will probably get domestic connections on FLL-MCO as well, like NK. e.g. it was not uncommon for pax to fly PHL-TPA-FLL. Looking at the changes, PHL-TPA goes from 2x to 1x in the summer, while PHL-FLL is served year round at 1x. So, in similar fashion, replace TPA with MCO, and pax might be on a PHL-MCO-FLL itinery.

On PHL-FLL addition, it had poor LF's in the summer months when WN last operated it. But the connections to MCO and the Carribean might help this time around.

The odd carrier is F9 on PHL-MIA as it will have no connections (that I'm aware) as PHL-MIA-HAV isn't even sold on F9.. F9's MIA station has just HAV and DEN, where HAV-MIA-DEN is possible, but not HAV-MIA-PHL. PHL-So. Florida will be saturated in the summer months when O&D demand tapers off.

Wonder if JetBlue will retaliate by announcing FLL-BZE/GCM? One has to assume they eventually plan on connecting these cities to FLL. They may not want WN to get a head-start in these markets.

Also somewhat surprised FLL-Varadero remains 2x daily. Given the overcapacity to Cuba, I figured this would go down to 1x daily, especially since Varadero is a resort town and tourism to Cuba is still technically illegal for U.S. citizens.

SteveXC500 wrote:

MSP gets BNA! 1x daily

It's a nice schedule too with an evening northbound and morning southbound flights. Additionally, there are one stops (through MDW in both cases) opposite the nonstops with the same plethora of connecting options there have been for a while.

knope2001 wrote:

The other thing of note in MKE is the the 738 is all over the place with this schedule. Last summer there were five weekday 738's in the schedule but this summer there are 14, including the MKE flights to SEA, SFO, LAX and SAN. With the so many 738's in the schedule total MKE capacity appears pretty close to last summer in spite of the lost seasonal west coast boost.

As WN has received more 738s and gained more experience with them, they seem to be fuller and seem to be flying a more diverse set of routes. When the 738s first arrived, it was common to see 738 flights with 135 or 140 passengers. Now, that's much less common, and while there are plenty of 738s on "usual suspect" flights like MDW-DAL, they also show up on stuff like STL-DTW.

Cubsrule wrote:

SteveXC500 wrote:

MSP gets BNA! 1x daily

It's a nice schedule too with an evening northbound and morning southbound flights. Additionally, there are one stops (through MDW in both cases) opposite the nonstops with the same plethora of connecting options there have been for a while.

knope2001 wrote:

The other thing of note in MKE is the the 738 is all over the place with this schedule. Last summer there were five weekday 738's in the schedule but this summer there are 14, including the MKE flights to SEA, SFO, LAX and SAN. With the so many 738's in the schedule total MKE capacity appears pretty close to last summer in spite of the lost seasonal west coast boost.

As WN has received more 738s and gained more experience with them, they seem to be fuller and seem to be flying a more diverse set of routes. When the 738s first arrived, it was common to see 738 flights with 135 or 140 passengers. Now, that's much less common, and while there are plenty of 738s on "usual suspect" flights like MDW-DAL, they also show up on stuff like STL-DTW.

PHX - SDF is regularly scheduled with a 738. It wouldn't be the typical route I'd think of when I think of a 175 passenger aircraft.

Is OAK/SAN-EWR seasonal or year round? Blog post doesn't say seasonal, this does https://twitter.com/ghimlay/status/817047682363621376

Edit: Appears seasonal https://www.southwestaircommunity.com/h ... arkets.pdf

Cubsrule wrote:

SteveXC500 wrote:

MSP gets BNA! 1x daily

It's a nice schedule too with an evening northbound and morning southbound flights. Additionally, there are one stops (through MDW in both cases) opposite the nonstops with the same plethora of connecting options there have been for a while.

YAY! WN just made my day as MSP-BNA is my #1 route. I just booked the 4th of July for $185 RT...

flyiguy wrote:

PIT: -1 BWI; +1 FLL, +1 ATL & +1 DEN

PIT-BWI & ATL are unchanged. TPA -1. DEN & FLL +1, the usual seasonal changes.

https://www.southwestaircommunity.com/htcpi66732/attachments/htcpi66732/stories/46285/1/Summer2017SkedFreqs.pdf

flyiguy wrote:

PNS gains an MCI
ECP is 2 BNA, 1 HOU, 1 STL & 1 DAL
IAD loses LAS but gains FLL
MHT : 8 BWI, 3 MDW, 1 MCO & 1 TPA
FLL international is : 1 CUN, BZE, MBJ, NAS, & SNU ; 2 HAV & VRA

Looking at the schedules too, there's a lot of 5am-6am start departures and late termination arrivals...guess that's one way to get some extra flight time out of the day

FLY

Either WN or UA will be off of IAD-FLL within the next year or so. There is way, way too much capacity on this route now despite hubs on either end.

The guy misspelled "LaGuardia" in the paragraph on NYC - spelled it "LaGaurdia".

SteveXC500 wrote:

Blog post:

https://www.southwestaircommunity.com/t ... ba-p/50394

SteveXC500 wrote:

MSP gets BNA! 1x daily

A welcome add, but unfortunately the Texas hole remains. Would gladly trade it for DAL or HOU.

MSPNWA wrote:

SteveXC500 wrote:

MSP gets BNA! 1x daily

A welcome add, but unfortunately the Texas hole remains. Would gladly trade it for DAL or HOU.

And, BNA does not see a lot of fliers with WN originating in MSP. Quite a lot less than DAL or HOU.

Hopefully this is just the start of the big California push that has been talked about.

Return of SJC-RNO
Additions of OAK-EWR, SAN-BOI/EWR/GEG/IND/SLC, SFO-PDX
Discontinuation of LAX-LIR

No cuts at SMF and some added frequencies, so the market must be absorbing the recent additions there.

If the EWR additions to SAN/OAK work out, I could see them trying out SJC/SMF/SNA as well...maybe SFO/LAX at some point too.

Way awsome. Non - stop service between Spokane, Washington & San Diego, California. And does UA still use regional jets between SFO & PDX? UA needs to compete more.

dc10lover wrote:

Way awsome. Non - stop service between Spokane, Washington & San Diego, California. And does UA still use regional jets between SFO & PDX? UA needs to compete more.

They usually only have 1 or 2x RJ and the rest are mainline, today it is 1x CR7, 2x 738, 1x 739, 2x A319, 1x A320.

ericm2031 wrote:

Discontinuation of LAX-LIR

Didn't know about LIR till this. I said that schedule was a disaster. It had to connect to a lot of stuff to work and it didn't. They seem unaware of the basics.

MSPNWA wrote:

SteveXC500 wrote:

MSP gets BNA! 1x daily

A welcome add, but unfortunately the Texas hole remains. Would gladly trade it for DAL or HOU.

I'm waiting to see what happens at DAL with AS/VX. My hope is that if they move flights from DAL to DFW, then DL picks up the gates and does with they originally planned that DL would do the MSP-DAL run.

Hopefully, WN beats DL to the punch

Now that the dust has settled a bit, the excitement has ebbed somewhat, and Bill Owens has spoken (and produced his great schedule release recap), I'd like to share a few thoughts regarding SAN.

Of the 5 new routes added at SAN for the summer, only 2 are permanent (year-round): SLC & BOI. And that's great! That means EWR, IND & GEG are all seasonal (peak summer season only, or will they stay for a while beyond August 14?) I (naturally) disagree with the assignment of seasonal to all 3 routes and hope that WN will change their minds and, at some point, perhaps later this year, maybe in 2018, the flights will become permanent. We've been through this before, most recently with both STL & MKE, before WN made both routes daily and year-round.

The traffic figures in all of these markets (SAN-EWR/IND/GEG) are quite constant throughout the year -- there's no huge drop in the number of travelers in Q4 & Q1. Newark, already served by both UA & AS, is a permanent route with both of these existing cx; if WN wants to be competitive, one would expect to see them go year-round as well.

I have a strong feeling that AS has been also looking quite closely at both IND and GEG and I'm sure they would operate both routes year-round. IF Southwest does maintain their seasonality to both cities, it would seem like a golden opportunity for AAG to jump into both markets as soon as WN stops their flights. I would assume AS would use an EMJ on SAN-GEG and they should have absolutely no more trouble filling 76-seats on that route than they do on SAN-BOI.)

In addition to the 5 new routes, WN is also increasing frequency in a few markets, most of them seasonally I would imagine, having done so in the past. BWI, BNA and SEA will all see additional capacity but STL, going to daily-double service in June, is intriguing to me. This is a route that was just made permanent last fall, and a few months later, they feel a second daily flight is needed!? My question at this point is, will they stick with 2 flights year-round? (Or maybe they thought AS might jump into that market as well?)

WN will operate 109 daily (midweek) flights at SAN this summer. This matches the previous high count at SAN from April 2008, when WN only flew to 18 destinations from here. This summer, WN will fly to 30 unique airports! With 11 full time gates at Lindbergh, one has to wonder how many more flights might WN be able to squeeze out of T1E?

bb

ericm2031 wrote:

Hopefully this is just the start of the big California push that has been talked about.

Return of SJC-RNO
Additions of OAK-EWR, SAN-BOI/EWR/GEG/IND/SLC, SFO-PDX
Discontinuation of LAX-LIR

No cuts at SMF and some added frequencies, so the market must be absorbing the recent additions there.

If the EWR additions to SAN/OAK work out, I could see them trying out SJC/SMF/SNA as well...maybe SFO/LAX at some point too.

Overall, definitely seems like a preemptive shot across the bow at the newly-merged Alaska. It is clear that these two carriers will be actively and aggressively engaging with each other to strengthen their respective presences in California. That should be interesting to watch.

The reduction of 18 flights at PHX is a surprise but in actuality it may not be as deep as it appears as my guess is that 700's will be replaced by 800's.

Anyone else unable to access blog post?

ryanrap1 wrote:

Anyone else unable to access blog post?

Make sure you are going to the https://www.southwestaircommunity.com website and not the blogsouthwest.com website. I haven't gotten the old site to work for awhile, but never heard anything about that blog being shut down.

Vctony wrote:

Lots of cuts in PHX.

PHX is down 18 departures. No new or deleted destinations.

By my count, here are the reductions:

ABQ -1
MDW -1
CLE -1
DEN -2
DTW -1
ELP -1
HOU -1
LAS -2
LAX -1
MKE -1
OAK -1
ONT -1
SNA -1
MCO -1
SLC -1
SAN -1
STL -1

Are these actual cuts or reductions of seasonal increases? CLE for example increases to 2x in the Spring, but still shows 1x in the Summer and has been the last two.

dabpit wrote:

shadez wrote:

FLL-MCO also returns as 5x daly!

Finally!!!!! This route makes me happy as it is an awesome one for personal trips, work trips, and making connections.

That's a shocker


I also find it interesting they swapped one MSP-ATL to MSP-BNA while also reducing some other ATL. They lost a couple of more flights net, and really 3 as a "hub" since the increase to DEN is really to another WN "hub". It seems to me that ATL continues to be de-emphasized as a "hub" and is becoming more and more of a spoke with each passing day. I wonder when the water will finally equalize? What ATL will have at that point.

Earlier Southwest added PDX - ONT now PDX - SFO. Is Southest building up PDX?.

More Portland-Bay Area flights? We have 30+ now. No mention whether BWI goes year round?

Can someone post the PDF on here? I cant access the community website either.

SANFan wrote:

Now that the dust has settled a bit, the excitement has ebbed somewhat, and Bill Owens has spoken (and produced his great schedule release recap), I'd like to share a few thoughts regarding SAN.

Of the 5 new routes added at SAN for the summer, only 2 are permanent (year-round): SLC & BOI. And that's great! That means EWR, IND & GEG are all seasonal (peak summer season only, or will they stay for a while beyond August 14?) I (naturally) disagree with the assignment of seasonal to all 3 routes and hope that WN will change their minds and, at some point, perhaps later this year, maybe in 2018, the flights will become permanent. We've been through this before, most recently with both STL & MKE, before WN made both routes daily and year-round.

The traffic figures in all of these markets (SAN-EWR/IND/GEG) are quite constant throughout the year -- there's no huge drop in the number of travelers in Q4 & Q1. Newark, already served by both UA & AS, is a permanent route with both of these existing cx; if WN wants to be competitive, one would expect to see them go year-round as well.

I have a strong feeling that AS has been also looking quite closely at both IND and GEG and I'm sure they would operate both routes year-round. IF Southwest does maintain their seasonality to both cities, it would seem like a golden opportunity for AAG to jump into both markets as soon as WN stops their flights. I would assume AS would use an EMJ on SAN-GEG and they should have absolutely no more trouble filling 76-seats on that route than they do on SAN-BOI.)

In addition to the 5 new routes, WN is also increasing frequency in a few markets, most of them seasonally I would imagine, having done so in the past. BWI, BNA and SEA will all see additional capacity but STL, going to daily-double service in June, is intriguing to me. This is a route that was just made permanent last fall, and a few months later, they feel a second daily flight is needed!? My question at this point is, will they stick with 2 flights year-round? (Or maybe they thought AS might jump into that market as well?)

WN will operate 109 daily (midweek) flights at SAN this summer. This matches the previous high count at SAN from April 2008, when WN only flew to 18 destinations from here. This summer, WN will fly to 30 unique airports! With 11 full time gates at Lindbergh, one has to wonder how many more flights might WN be able to squeeze out of T1E?

bb

My understanding the 3 seasonal adds are temporary because of the 737-300 withdrawal in September. I think next year when they start back to a positive fleet growth you will see them return on a permanent basis.

As for gate issues at SAN short term work is planned to remove the blast wall and fence to make gate 1A 737-800 useable being towed in. This will allow WN to used 1A for longer turns. Throughout the day.

Flyguy

enilria wrote:

usflyguy wrote:

enilria wrote:

People constantly say my predictions are wrong, so I have to point out they are not. 2 for 2 today.

Congratulations, you are now like 6 for 30. Your predictions are about as accurate as wnflyguy's schedule predictions.

Your attitude is why I have to point out when I am right.

Perhaps you should take a glimpse at your own "attitude" in the mirror as a incessant harbinger of doom and gloom for WN and recognize why people react a certain way and kindly get over yourself. It didn't take a genius to put the pieces together that when CVG were to ever open, it would more than likely open at the demise of DAY and that CAK services would eventually shift to CLE.

enilria wrote:

ericm2031 wrote:

Discontinuation of LAX-LIR

Didn't know about LIR till this. I said that schedule was a disaster. It had to connect to a lot of stuff to work and it didn't. They seem unaware of the basics.

I wonder why you get "attitude" when you post things like this that prognosticate even more doom and gloom and "I'm so smart." Perhaps if you ever had anything but negative things to say you'd have more of a positive reaction.

enilria wrote:

dabpit wrote:

shadez wrote:

FLL-MCO also returns as 5x daly!

Finally!!!!! This route makes me happy as it is an awesome one for personal trips, work trips, and making connections.

That's a shocker


I also find it interesting they swapped one MSP-ATL to MSP-BNA while also reducing some other ATL. They lost a couple of more flights net, and really 3 as a "hub" since the increase to DEN is really to another WN "hub". It seems to me that ATL continues to be de-emphasized as a "hub" and is becoming more and more of a spoke with each passing day. I wonder when the water will finally equalize? What ATL will have at that point.

Indeed a "shocker", Eniliria transforming someone's excitement about a route into more doom and gloom in regards to a route irrelevant to what was posted.

All that being said, this is a pretty interesting schedule release. Very pleased to see the PNW getting some love along with SAN. Very interested to see how the GEG/BOI-SAN flights do this summer and indeed hope they make the leap from seasonal to regularly scheduled.

izbtmnhd wrote:

Any chance that WN will take UA head on and start CLE-DCA like they did from CAK?

AA joined UA on CLE-DCA in spring 2016, so...

For MDW there is a net gain of 20 flights for a total of 265 daily flights for summer 2017. Besides CVG being added to MDW, WN will be operating Sunday only service to SJU. Last time MDW-SJU was operated was about 12 years ago when ATA flew it. MDW-SJU starts June 4, 2017.