DL had an A321 at C50 tonight, which I believe is the debut of their 321 at CMH.

Briancw wrote:

john7165 wrote:

Sometimes I think the BOD of the CRAA talk just to hear themselves talk. They've been telling us about their quest for
TATL for decades with nothing to show for it. Wake me when you have an agreement and something to announce.

Agreed. The BA carrot has been dangled out there for years.

Right, but a specific mention of DL is new and, let's face it, it's not going to be a Skyteam partner like AF/KL like they seemed to hint was possible. It'll be DL to either AMS or CDG, as they allude to in the minutes, and probably on a 757.

Let's hope it happens.

A new delta schedule update came out, and it’s good news. A lot of the early morning flights got moved back most likely for connecting. Only flights east of CVG and Florida flights from my findings so far however. For example BWI got moved back from 7:45 to 9:15. MCO got moved back from 8:45 to 9:30. Starts in 2018.

Southwest is running a 738Max today MCO-CMH on WN 2561.

Cvgspotter15 wrote:

A new delta schedule update came out, and it’s good news. A lot of the early morning flights got moved back most likely for connecting. Only flights east of CVG and Florida flights from my findings so far however. For example BWI got moved back from 7:45 to 9:15. MCO got moved back from 8:45 to 9:30. Starts in 2018.

Yeah the hodgepodge focus city/hub schedule clearly wasn't working. Hopefully they decide not to cancel MEM after all.

Looks like OneJet is starting CMH-MKE. I presume this is the lackluster new service announcement that was discussed earlier.

CMHSRQ wrote:

Looks like OneJet is starting CMH-MKE. I presume this is the lackluster new service announcement that was discussed earlier.

Any info on the frequency?

CMHSRQ wrote:

Looks like OneJet is starting CMH-MKE. I presume this is the lackluster new service announcement that was discussed earlier.

Where did you see this? I'll take it. They're a fascinating little company and it makes sense, though WN picking up that route someday wouldn't surprise me either.

It looks like they are doing a 2x/day (M-F) CMH-MKE and MKE-OMA, interesting that its not touching PIT. Has anyone seen this announced outside of OAG data, I was kind of feeling like this was a misfile, given that they are supposed to be starting another 10 routes from PIT by the end of the year to get their subsidy (and its October)? Kind of odd they would start a non PIT route at this time.

Anyway, if its actually true, a nice add for CMH!

So new flights from CMH to MKE is the big announcement we have been waiting for?

papatango wrote:

So new flights from CMH to MKE is the big announcement we have been waiting for?

This was separate from rumored TATL and was the "underwhelming" announcement DeltaRules had mentioned.

Per the article, Columbus is in the running for a 3rd OneJet base. I'd take that.

Link: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/ne ... -john.html

Quick question: Where will OneJet operate from at CMH?

Briancw wrote:

papatango wrote:

So new flights from CMH to MKE is the big announcement we have been waiting for?

This was separate from rumored TATL and was the "underwhelming" announcement DeltaRules had mentioned.

Per the article, Columbus is in the running for a 3rd OneJet base. I'd take that.

Link: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/ne ... -john.html

Each plane seats 7 people. It seems like this is a niche airline aiming for high end business travelers. While they're welcome, One Jet doesn't begin to solve the somewhat woeful roster of non-stop destinations from CMH.

CMHMarc787 wrote:

Quick question: Where will OneJet operate from at CMH?

The article says C concourse.

john7165 wrote:

Briancw wrote:

papatango wrote:

So new flights from CMH to MKE is the big announcement we have been waiting for?

This was separate from rumored TATL and was the "underwhelming" announcement DeltaRules had mentioned.

Per the article, Columbus is in the running for a 3rd OneJet base. I'd take that.

Link: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/ne ... -john.html

Each plane seats 7 people. It seems like this is a niche airline aiming for high end business travelers. While they're welcome, One Jet doesn't begin to solve the somewhat woeful roster of non-stop destinations from CMH.

No, but a PIT-sized network could connect lots of dots in the neighborhood, some of which might otherwise never be served from CMH.

Most of their destinations are places the majors aren't going to serve from CMH ever again (or never did), save for BNA and maybe MKE. I wouldn't be surprised to see them try BDL given the insurance industry in both cities.

Cvgspotter15 wrote:

A new delta schedule update came out, and it’s good news. A lot of the early morning flights got moved back most likely for connecting. Only flights east of CVG and Florida flights from my findings so far however. For example BWI got moved back from 7:45 to 9:15. MCO got moved back from 8:45 to 9:30. Starts in 2018.

It is interesting they built up more of a banked structure in the morning, they have significantly debanked the schedule over the past few years. Here is the departure/arrival as scheduled for June 2018 (not 2108 ):



As recent as 2016, the schedule looked like the 7:00 and 9:00 departure banks during the whole day, with large departure banks at 12:00, 2:00, 4:00, 6:00 and 8:30. They have eliminated most of the late night departures as well. I know the AM bank is the largest for connections, mostly West Coast to East/Florida, and East Coast to Midwest. Seems like the evening times have fewer connections and some FA's don't even mention connections on some of the afternoon flights.

cvgComair wrote:

Cvgspotter15 wrote:

A new delta schedule update came out, and it’s good news. A lot of the early morning flights got moved back most likely for connecting. Only flights east of CVG and Florida flights from my findings so far however. For example BWI got moved back from 7:45 to 9:15. MCO got moved back from 8:45 to 9:30. Starts in 2018.

It is interesting they built up more of a banked structure in the morning, they have significantly debanked the schedule over the past few years. Here is the departure/arrival as scheduled for June 2018 (not 2108 ):



As recent as 2016, the schedule looked like the 7:00 and 9:00 departure banks during the whole day, with large departure banks at 12:00, 2:00, 4:00, 6:00 and 8:30. They have eliminated most of the late night departures as well. I know the AM bank is the largest for connections, mostly West Coast to East/Florida, and East Coast to Midwest. Seems like the evening times have fewer connections and some FA's don't even mention connections on some of the afternoon flights.

Fantastic chart as always! And wow! Definitely back to the buisness and west to east connection blocks.

john7165 wrote:

While they're welcome, One Jet doesn't begin to solve the somewhat woeful roster of non-stop destinations from CMH.

Define "woeful". If you take the Top 40 MSAs (and I'm using that as a simple metric of population) in the US, here's the list of the unserved from CMH:
13) ONT. Is there much East Coast service at all from ONT?
15) SEA. Agreed, but somebody out of DL/AS/F9/WN is going to try this at some point.
17) SAN. WN?
24) SAT. See ONT.
25) PDX. Bit of a longshot. Maybe AS someday if things work out for them if they come?
26) PIT. Ironically, the one airline which might try it at this point is OneJet.
27) SAC. See ONT.
28) CVG. See PIT.
30) MCI. Airlines have tried it and ended it. I've wondered if WN might try it someday.
32) CLE. See PIT.
34) IND. See PIT.
35) SJC. See ONT.
37) ORF. I've got nothing.
38) PVD. See PIT.

It's a chunk, but of those, you have SEA, SAN, MCI, and PDX which could conceivably see service from somebody, a handful of cities for which OneJet is the only airline which would conceivably add flights from CMH to in this era (and CLE, CVG, PIT, and IND are within a few hours' drive), and a bunch of California cities and ORF which make no sense at all.

SFO isn't included because, by definition, OAK is in its MSA, though it'd be nice to have SFO service and AS/VX would be the target with UA having evidently decided against nonstops in spite of adding service to two DL hubs, which I'll never understand.

It appears the June Delta CVG schedule image above is not showing up for everyone, here is a link to the file in google drive: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

cvgComair wrote:

It appears the June Delta CVG schedule image above is not showing up for everyone, here is a link to the file in google drive: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

Wow! I know that it's not much compared to what DL / OH had at the CVG hub back in the Nineties, but compared to what Delta & Delta Connection were flying into & out of CVG just a couple of years ago, it is impressive!

SkyVoice wrote:

cvgComair wrote:

It appears the June Delta CVG schedule image above is not showing up for everyone, here is a link to the file in google drive: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

Wow! I know that it's not much compared to what DL / OH had at the CVG hub back in the Nineties, but compared to what Delta & Delta Connection were flying into & out of CVG just a couple of years ago, it is impressive!

A couple years ago, there were 20 more daily flights.

A non-paid article is out about the Amazon office space at the Comair headquarters. It evens mentions how much Amazon is trying to cover their plans. It does mention they will reveal more plans in the coming months, it should be exciting to see how big/fast the operation will grow. Given the time that is has taken to plan building the facility and now they need office space at CVG, I am thinking this might be a little bigger than the 100 daily departures originally reported .
http://www.wcpo.com/news/insider/amazon ... cvg?page=2

Also interesting how invested Amazon is getting with their own deliveries, I think this shows how large the CVG operation could become if they are actually trying to rival UPS/FedEx.
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/05/ups-fed ... rvice.html

DHL has resumed CVG-CDG service with B744/748's, interesting they are operating the route on their own again when they are already sending cargo on DL's flight.

Here is the Q1 PDEW numbers for CVG: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

I am still unsure why MEM does not work for DL compared to other cities when MEM has more PDEW than DTW, XNA, MKE, and BNA, plus is even with MCI/BDL/STL. Like MKE, we need to get one of the Comair executives to help get OneJet to expand at CVG, I think they would be very successful on some of these markets like MEM/RIC/ORF/OMA/SYR/MSN/GRR, which DL dropped but still have reasonable PDEW for an 8 seat aircraft.

cvgComair wrote:

Here is the Q1 PDEW numbers for CVG: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

I know its been repeated multiple times, but DL is doing something wrong when then cannot make CVG-MEM (66 daily passengers) not work. MEM has more PDEW than DTW, XNA, MKE, and BNA, plus is even with MCI/BDL/STL. Like MKE, we need to get one of the Comair executives to help get OneJet to expand at CVG, I think they would be very successful on some of these markets like MEM/RIC/ORF/OMA/SYR/MSN/GRR, which DL dropped but still have reasonable PDEW.

CVG-MEM is 33 PDEW, the numbers need to be divided by 2

Delete

cvgComair wrote:

Here is the Q1 PDEW numbers for CVG: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

I am still unsure why MEM does not work for DL compared to other cities when MEM has more PDEW than DTW, XNA, MKE, and BNA, plus is even with MCI/BDL/STL. Like MKE, we need to get one of the Comair executives to help get OneJet to expand at CVG, I think they would be very successful on some of these markets like MEM/RIC/ORF/OMA/SYR/MSN/GRR, which DL dropped but still have reasonable PDEW for an 8 seat aircraft.

I'll update my spreadsheet tonight. It's better to do YOY comparisons when doing this as seasonal demand from one quarter to the next isn't good for comparison.

Midwestindy wrote:

cvgComair wrote:

Here is the Q1 PDEW numbers for CVG: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

I know its been repeated multiple times, but DL is doing something wrong when then cannot make CVG-MEM (66 daily passengers) not work. MEM has more PDEW than DTW, XNA, MKE, and BNA, plus is even with MCI/BDL/STL. Like MKE, we need to get one of the Comair executives to help get OneJet to expand at CVG, I think they would be very successful on some of these markets like MEM/RIC/ORF/OMA/SYR/MSN/GRR, which DL dropped but still have reasonable PDEW.

CVG-MEM is 33 PDEW, the numbers need to be divided by 2

That's not true. The numbers provided are PDEW. You do not need to divide anything.

Anything new on the rumored CMH international announcement?

AirportRival wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

cvgComair wrote:

Here is the Q1 PDEW numbers for CVG: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

I know its been repeated multiple times, but DL is doing something wrong when then cannot make CVG-MEM (66 daily passengers) not work. MEM has more PDEW than DTW, XNA, MKE, and BNA, plus is even with MCI/BDL/STL. Like MKE, we need to get one of the Comair executives to help get OneJet to expand at CVG, I think they would be very successful on some of these markets like MEM/RIC/ORF/OMA/SYR/MSN/GRR, which DL dropped but still have reasonable PDEW.

CVG-MEM is 33 PDEW, the numbers need to be divided by 2

That's not true. The numbers provided are PDEW. You do not need to divide anything.

The numbers specifically say "passengers each day" between two markets, not passengers each way. So from my understanding, the number is the combined total of both ways. Keep in mind, numbers to JFK, ORD, ATL, e.t.c will look lower than the number of frequencies due to the fact it is measuring O&D and not connecting pax. Also, keep in mind that it only includes rev pax.

delete

Midwestindy wrote:

AirportRival wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

CVG-MEM is 33 PDEW, the numbers need to be divided by 2

That's not true. The numbers provided are PDEW. You do not need to divide anything.

The numbers specifically say "passengers each day" between two markets, not passengers each way. So from my understanding, the number is the combined total of both ways. Keep in mind, numbers to JFK, ORD, ATL, e.t.c will look lower than the number of frequencies due to the fact it is measuring O&D and not connecting pax. Also, keep in mind that it only includes rev pax.

He already halved them in his chart

Jshank83 wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

AirportRival wrote:

That's not true. The numbers provided are PDEW. You do not need to divide anything.

The numbers specifically say "passengers each day" between two markets, not passengers each way. So from my understanding, the number is the combined total of both ways. Keep in mind, numbers to JFK, ORD, ATL, e.t.c will look lower than the number of frequencies due to the fact it is measuring O&D and not connecting pax. Also, keep in mind that it only includes rev pax.

He already halved them in his chart

Yes, my original comment was posted before that was done... I was responding to someone who had said the numbers shouldn't have been halved in the first place.

Midwestindy wrote:

AirportRival wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

CVG-MEM is 33 PDEW, the numbers need to be divided by 2

That's not true. The numbers provided are PDEW. You do not need to divide anything.

The numbers specifically say "passengers each day" between two markets, not passengers each way. So from my understanding, the number is the combined total of both ways. Keep in mind, numbers to JFK, ORD, ATL, e.t.c will look lower than the number of frequencies due to the fact it is measuring O&D and not connecting pax. Also, keep in mind that it only includes rev pax.

Where does it say that? Because the first paragraph of the report description says the following:
"Table 1 of this report continues to cover the 1,000 largest city-pair markets in the 48 contiguous states. For each of the 1,000 largest city-pair markets, Table 1 lists the number of one-way passenger trips per day, the nonstop distance, the average market fare, and identifies the airlines with the largest market share and the lowest average fare; market share and average fares are provided for both airlines. Average fares are average prices paid by all fare paying passengers. They therefore cover first class fares paid to carriers offering such service but does not cover free tickets, such as those awarded by carriers offering frequent flyer programs."

I even emailed Mark Raggio from the DOT to get clarification on this.

AirportRival wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

AirportRival wrote:

That's not true. The numbers provided are PDEW. You do not need to divide anything.

The numbers specifically say "passengers each day" between two markets, not passengers each way. So from my understanding, the number is the combined total of both ways. Keep in mind, numbers to JFK, ORD, ATL, e.t.c will look lower than the number of frequencies due to the fact it is measuring O&D and not connecting pax. Also, keep in mind that it only includes rev pax.

Where does it say that? Because the first paragraph of the report description says the following:
"Table 1 of this report continues to cover the 1,000 largest city-pair markets in the 48 contiguous states. For each of the 1,000 largest city-pair markets, Table 1 lists the number of one-way passenger trips per day, the nonstop distance, the average market fare, and identifies the airlines with the largest market share and the lowest average fare; market share and average fares are provided for both airlines. Average fares are average prices paid by all fare paying passengers. They therefore cover first class fares paid to carriers offering such service but does not cover free tickets, such as those awarded by carriers offering frequent flyer programs."

I even emailed Mark Raggio from the DOT to get clarification on this.

Reading through the table descriptions, AirportRival is right. Just looking at the data, it would not make any sense for the numbers to be both ways, as DL alone operates about 280 seats on CVG-ORD, they are not connecting passengers in ORD. There is no way UA and AA have 0 O&D passengers on CVG-ORD, therefore the 471 number seems about right.

cvgComair wrote:

AirportRival wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

The numbers specifically say "passengers each day" between two markets, not passengers each way. So from my understanding, the number is the combined total of both ways. Keep in mind, numbers to JFK, ORD, ATL, e.t.c will look lower than the number of frequencies due to the fact it is measuring O&D and not connecting pax. Also, keep in mind that it only includes rev pax.

Where does it say that? Because the first paragraph of the report description says the following:
"Table 1 of this report continues to cover the 1,000 largest city-pair markets in the 48 contiguous states. For each of the 1,000 largest city-pair markets, Table 1 lists the number of one-way passenger trips per day, the nonstop distance, the average market fare, and identifies the airlines with the largest market share and the lowest average fare; market share and average fares are provided for both airlines. Average fares are average prices paid by all fare paying passengers. They therefore cover first class fares paid to carriers offering such service but does not cover free tickets, such as those awarded by carriers offering frequent flyer programs."

I even emailed Mark Raggio from the DOT to get clarification on this.

Reading through the table descriptions, AirportRival is right. Just looking at the data, it would not make any sense for the numbers to be both ways, as DL alone operates about 280 seats on CVG-ORD, they are not connecting passengers in ORD. There is no way UA and AA have 0 O&D passengers on CVG-ORD, therefore the 471 number seems about right.

You seem very adamant about this for some reason.....lol, haha do you think I am just trying to make stuff up?

All I did was go to "For Technical Table Descriptions Click Here" on the Overview screen, it will then take you to an excel document that will explain what each box means
https://www.transportation.gov/office-p ... t-metadata

It specifically mentions:"Market Passenger Per Day" "All traffic traveling in both directions is added together" "The combination of City1 and City2 define the city pair market"

I've updated my table of CVG pax numbers. A lot more growing markets than shrinking. I was kind of surprised to see that the numbers to a few of the hubs went down while the numbers for non-hub cities went up with some of them being prety significant. Also very noticeable is the drop on CDG pax.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

Midwestindy wrote:

cvgComair wrote:

AirportRival wrote:

Where does it say that? Because the first paragraph of the report description says the following:
"Table 1 of this report continues to cover the 1,000 largest city-pair markets in the 48 contiguous states. For each of the 1,000 largest city-pair markets, Table 1 lists the number of one-way passenger trips per day, the nonstop distance, the average market fare, and identifies the airlines with the largest market share and the lowest average fare; market share and average fares are provided for both airlines. Average fares are average prices paid by all fare paying passengers. They therefore cover first class fares paid to carriers offering such service but does not cover free tickets, such as those awarded by carriers offering frequent flyer programs."

I even emailed Mark Raggio from the DOT to get clarification on this.

Reading through the table descriptions, AirportRival is right. Just looking at the data, it would not make any sense for the numbers to be both ways, as DL alone operates about 280 seats on CVG-ORD, they are not connecting passengers in ORD. There is no way UA and AA have 0 O&D passengers on CVG-ORD, therefore the 471 number seems about right.

You seem very adamant about this for some reason.....lol, haha do you think I am just trying to make stuff up?

All I did was go to "For Technical Table Descriptions Click Here" on the Overview screen, it will then take you to an excel document that will explain what each box means
https://www.transportation.gov/office-p ... t-metadata

It specifically mentions:"Market Passenger Per Day" "All traffic traveling in both directions is added together" "The combination of City1 and City2 define the city pair market"

I agree with Indy on this. The number they give you in the excel document is round trip. You have to halve it to have the one way number. So for example it give you 70 for CVG-STL. It needs to be 35 for the one way number.

Here is a discussion on it.

viewtopic.php?t=1352283

An an additional piece of support for "you have to divide by two": check out markets where there is no other service (including connections) except for the Allegiant nonstop, such as Cincinnati-Punta Gorda. Q 2017 shows 231/day between CVG and PGD, which is impossible on a less-than-daily Allegiant flight. if that's a one-way number. Divide by two and it makes logical sense.

A few other things to remember:

--These are derived from a 10% sample of all itineraries, so there will be some play and variation in the numbers based on the sample

--These are daily averages through the whole week. In business-heavier markets that means Sunday and especially Saturday with comparably few passengers and (often) fewer flights are averaged in.

Jshank83 wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

cvgComair wrote:

Reading through the table descriptions, AirportRival is right. Just looking at the data, it would not make any sense for the numbers to be both ways, as DL alone operates about 280 seats on CVG-ORD, they are not connecting passengers in ORD. There is no way UA and AA have 0 O&D passengers on CVG-ORD, therefore the 471 number seems about right.

You seem very adamant about this for some reason.....lol, haha do you think I am just trying to make stuff up?

All I did was go to "For Technical Table Descriptions Click Here" on the Overview screen, it will then take you to an excel document that will explain what each box means
https://www.transportation.gov/office-p ... t-metadata

It specifically mentions:"Market Passenger Per Day" "All traffic traveling in both directions is added together" "The combination of City1 and City2 define the city pair market"

I agree with Indy on this. The number they give you in the excel document is round trip. You have to halve it to have the one way number. So for example it give you 70 for CVG-STL. It needs to be 35 for the one way number.

Here is a discussion on it.

viewtopic.php?t=1352283

knope2001 wrote:

An an additional piece of support for "you have to divide by two": check out markets where there is no other service (including connections) except for the Allegiant nonstop, such as Cincinnati-Punta Gorda. Q 2017 shows 231/day between CVG and PGD, which is impossible on a less-than-daily Allegiant flight. if that's a one-way number. Divide by two and it makes logical sense.

A few other things to remember:

--These are derived from a 10% sample of all itineraries, so there will be some play and variation in the numbers based on the sample

--These are daily averages through the whole week. In business-heavier markets that means Sunday and especially Saturday with comparably few passengers and (often) fewer flights are averaged in.

Thanks for helping clarify

Guys, It clearly states in the description of the report "For each of the 1,000 largest city-pair markets, Table 1 lists the number of one-way passenger trips per day".

And as I said before, I emailed Mark Raggio and asked him this specific question and here is his response:
"Hi Chad –

Yes, in the introduction of the report – it states:

Table 1 of this report continues to cover the 1,000 largest city-pair markets in the 48 contiguous states. For each of the 1,000 largest city-pair markets, Table 1 lists the number of one-way passenger trips per day, the nonstop distance, the average market fare, and identifies the airlines with the largest market share and the lowest average fare; market share and average fares are provided for both airlines. Average fares are average prices paid by all fare paying passengers. They therefore cover first class fares paid to carriers offering such service but does not cover free tickets, such as those awarded by carriers offering frequent flyer programs.

The passengers are PDEW.

Cheers,

Mark"

If you still don't believe me then email Mark Raggio in the Office of Aviation Analysis yourself and ask him. His email is mark.raggio@dot.gov.

I agree that some of the numbers seem high but you guys can't really believe that all those numbers need to be divided in half to make sense. If that was the case then most of the markets wouldn't even come close to being able to sustain the service that they have.

MidwestIndy - Of course I seem adamant about this. I'm defending my argument just the same as you are. So since you know where to find the link of the MetaData description you should be able to find the link for the Report Description (it's directly below the MetaData link). Read through that and you'll soon see what I'm talking about. Do you think I'm just making this stuff up? If you get a reply from Mark and he says that the numbers do indeed need to be divided by 2 to get the PDEW then I'll concede that I was wrong.

AirportRival wrote:

Guys, It clearly states in the description of the report "For each of the 1,000 largest city-pair markets, Table 1 lists the number of one-way passenger trips per day".

Table 1 of this report continues to cover the 1,000 largest city-pair markets in the 48 contiguous states. For each of the 1,000 largest city-pair markets, Table 1 lists the number of one-way passenger trips per day,

We agree it is one way passengers each day. But it is one way in each direction together. If the number is 500 that means 500 people traveled between the city pairs each day. People traveled one way to those cities regardless of direction. So you divide the number in half to be the average of one way passengers, on each leg, for that day.

Otherwise they would have CVG-PHL and PHL-CVG listed. They don't. They just list each city pair once and all the passengers that travel between those two cities a day.

Any news on when the consolidated rental car facility at CVG may begin construction?

Jshank83 wrote:

AirportRival wrote:

Guys, It clearly states in the description of the report "For each of the 1,000 largest city-pair markets, Table 1 lists the number of one-way passenger trips per day".

Table 1 of this report continues to cover the 1,000 largest city-pair markets in the 48 contiguous states. For each of the 1,000 largest city-pair markets, Table 1 lists the number of one-way passenger trips per day,

We agree it is one way passengers each day. But it is one way in each direction together. If the number is 500 that means 500 people traveled between the city pairs each day. People traveled one way to those cities regardless of direction. So you divide the number in half to be the average of one way passengers, on each leg, for that day.

Otherwise they would have CVG-PHL and PHL-CVG listed. They don't. They just list each city pair once and all the passengers that travel between those two cities a day.

I'm sorry but that makes no sense. They don't need to list the city pairs for each direction as the data is for each market pair, not for each direction. That does not mean that they can not find the average PDEW for the market pair and have it listed as one.

For example, CVG-BOS is showing as 312 on the report. According to you guys that number needs to be divided by 2. That makes it 156. There is no way that only 156 people are traveling between CVG and BOS and vice versa. Delta wouldn't be flying 4 daily round trip flights if that were the case. That doesn't even account for the connecting pax on other airlines.

And if I'm not mistaken, domestic to international passengers will only show to their final domestic destination as they do not show on the international report. Example, someone flying CVG-BOS-CDG will not show as a CVG-CDG pax. They will show as a CVG-BOS pax on the domestic report and as a BOS-CDG pax on the international report. This would mean that according to your argument that there are only 156 passengers flying from CVG to BOS each day regardless of whether they are O&D or international. That simply would not be sustainable on 4 daily roundtrip flights.

As I've said before, I emailed the guy that should know what the numbers are and I got an answer. If you continue to disagree then by all means email him yourself and see if he tells you something else. If he does then I'll be open to your argument.

ADrum23 wrote:

Any news on when the consolidated rental car facility at CVG may begin construction?

I saw a drill at the area that the new CONRAC will be going in the other day. I think they were taking soil samples. I kind of remember hearing that construction will not start until next year but I'm not positive.

AirportRival wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

Any news on when the consolidated rental car facility at CVG may begin construction?

I saw a drill at the area that the new CONRAC will be going in the other day. I think they were taking soil samples. I kind of remember hearing that construction will not start until next year but I'm not positive.

Last I saw construction is planned after they finish the terminal modernization project. So likely mid-2018.

AirportRival wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

AirportRival wrote:

Guys, It clearly states in the description of the report "For each of the 1,000 largest city-pair markets, Table 1 lists the number of one-way passenger trips per day".

Table 1 of this report continues to cover the 1,000 largest city-pair markets in the 48 contiguous states. For each of the 1,000 largest city-pair markets, Table 1 lists the number of one-way passenger trips per day,

We agree it is one way passengers each day. But it is one way in each direction together. If the number is 500 that means 500 people traveled between the city pairs each day. People traveled one way to those cities regardless of direction. So you divide the number in half to be the average of one way passengers, on each leg, for that day.

Otherwise they would have CVG-PHL and PHL-CVG listed. They don't. They just list each city pair once and all the passengers that travel between those two cities a day.

I'm sorry but that makes no sense. They don't need to list the city pairs for each direction as the data is for each market pair, not for each direction. That does not mean that they can not find the average PDEW for the market pair and have it listed as one.

For example, CVG-BOS is showing as 312 on the report. According to you guys that number needs to be divided by 2. That makes it 156. There is no way that only 156 people are traveling between CVG and BOS and vice versa. Delta wouldn't be flying 4 daily round trip flights if that were the case. That doesn't even account for the connecting pax on other airlines.

And if I'm not mistaken, domestic to international passengers will only show to their final domestic destination as they do not show on the international report. Example, someone flying CVG-BOS-CDG will not show as a CVG-CDG pax. They will show as a CVG-BOS pax on the domestic report and as a BOS-CDG pax on the international report. This would mean that according to your argument that there are only 156 passengers flying from CVG to BOS each day regardless of whether they are O&D or international. That simply would not be sustainable on 4 daily roundtrip flights.

As I've said before, I emailed the guy that should know what the numbers are and I got an answer. If you continue to disagree then by all means email him yourself and see if he tells you something else. If he does then I'll be open to your argument.

It is clear that I am not going to convince you either way, so you can use whatever numbers you please it really doesn't matter that much to me.... Just know that almost everyone else will continue to divide by 2...

Midwestindy wrote:

AirportRival wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

We agree it is one way passengers each day. But it is one way in each direction together. If the number is 500 that means 500 people traveled between the city pairs each day. People traveled one way to those cities regardless of direction. So you divide the number in half to be the average of one way passengers, on each leg, for that day.

Otherwise they would have CVG-PHL and PHL-CVG listed. They don't. They just list each city pair once and all the passengers that travel between those two cities a day.

I'm sorry but that makes no sense. They don't need to list the city pairs for each direction as the data is for each market pair, not for each direction. That does not mean that they can not find the average PDEW for the market pair and have it listed as one.

For example, CVG-BOS is showing as 312 on the report. According to you guys that number needs to be divided by 2. That makes it 156. There is no way that only 156 people are traveling between CVG and BOS and vice versa. Delta wouldn't be flying 4 daily round trip flights if that were the case. That doesn't even account for the connecting pax on other airlines.

And if I'm not mistaken, domestic to international passengers will only show to their final domestic destination as they do not show on the international report. Example, someone flying CVG-BOS-CDG will not show as a CVG-CDG pax. They will show as a CVG-BOS pax on the domestic report and as a BOS-CDG pax on the international report. This would mean that according to your argument that there are only 156 passengers flying from CVG to BOS each day regardless of whether they are O&D or international. That simply would not be sustainable on 4 daily roundtrip flights.

As I've said before, I emailed the guy that should know what the numbers are and I got an answer. If you continue to disagree then by all means email him yourself and see if he tells you something else. If he does then I'll be open to your argument.

It is clear that I am not going to convince you either way, so you can use whatever numbers you please it really doesn't matter that much to me.... Just know that almost everyone else will continue to divide by 2...

You're right. You're not going to convince me just like I'm not going to convince you. You seem the type of person that always thinks people are arguing against you instead of you always arguing against them (i.e. you always think you're right). I've given you the source to either verify or disprove your method. If you choose not to use it is on you.

I could not care less how everybody else on here comes to their conclusions.

AirportRival wrote:

[You seem the type of person that always thinks people are arguing against you instead of you always arguing against them (i.e. you always think you're right). I've given you the source to either verify or disprove your method. If you choose not to use it is on you.

Really? Grow up.... that kind of talk shouldn't happen on here

https://www.transportation.gov/office-p ... t-metadata

AirportRival wrote:

You seem the type of person that always thinks people are arguing against you instead of you always arguing against them (i.e. you always think you're right). I've given you the source to either verify or disprove your method. If you choose not to use it is on you.

Rather ironical, given that you are the one in the wrong here.

papatango wrote:

Anything new on the rumored CMH international announcement?

I'm going to give it a week or two and reach out to my source. She got OneJet right so, between that and all the other smoke we've seen about AMS, I'm guessing we're just waiting to see the fire.