Airliners.net

American Airline's inaugural flights from DFW to Amsterdam and Rome are slated for today.

DFW-FCO
AA240 1:35 pm departure

and

DFW-AMS

AA220 3:25 pm departure

Hoping for the best as DFW desperately needs to expands it secondary Europe market.

I'll be on AA220 DFW-AMS today, can't wait. It's my first inaugural flight!

sw733 wrote:

I'll be on AA220 DFW-AMS today, can't wait. It's my first inaugural flight!

Do a Trip Report!

stevend08 wrote:

Hoping for the best as DFW desperately needs to expands it secondary Europe market.

At 63.6 million pax, AMS is Europe's busiest airport in movements (496.500) and 3rd busiest in passengers after LHR (75 Million) and CDG (65 Million).

In global airport passenger rankings DFW is #11 and AMS #12 of the world.

Hardly Europe's secondary market !

http://www.aci.aero/News/Releases/Most- ... ian-routes

stevend08 wrote:

Hoping for the best as DFW desperately needs to expands it secondary Europe market.

With ORD, JFK, & PHL all better suited to expand to the secondary EU market. And agree with the last post. AMS is hardly secondary.

Cool to see both of these new routes for AA at DFW.

Personally, I'll be interested to see if DFW-AMS makes it. There is clearly a local market - driven by energy industry and aerospace traffic, plus of course seasonal tourism demand. But the 767 isn't a particularly competitive product, especially in Y, and I can't help but think that AA's better long-term solution, if the carrier wants to increase capacity into AMS for the summer, is just to consolidate down to a single east coast hub with a larger aircraft (i.e., PHL-AMS on a 767 May-September and 757 October-April, or something similar).

As for DFW-FCO, I think this one was a higher probability of success. Italy is such a massive tourism draw during the summer that I don't think AA will have too much trouble filling a 777 for the peak months when demand spikes. It is highly seasonal but I hope it works out - awesome to see an AA nonstop from DFW to Italy for the first time. And, needless to say, if/when something happens to Alitalia, that can only help all the other operators in the U.S.-Italy market, including AA on DFW-FCO.

I'm sure FCO will be busy all the time (as most FCO flights are), whether it makes money or not (that is another story).

chepos wrote:

I'm sure FCO will be busy all the time (as most FCO flights are), whether it makes money or not (that is another story).

That's where the new, high-density 777 configuration will help. Italy in the summer is a high-density market - and I suspect that packing almost 300 seats into a 777 will work well for AA in markets just like DFW-FCO.

YAY!!!!!!

DFW-AMS on a 767...good luck! bad decision to launch a new and long sector on a 1980's plane. :/

commavia wrote:

(...)
But the 767 isn't a particularly competitive product, especially in Y, and I can't help but think that AA's better long-term solution, if the carrier wants to increase capacity into AMS for the summer, is just to consolidate down to a single east coast hub with a larger aircraft (i.e., PHL-AMS on a 767 May-September and 757 October-April, or something similar).

Dallas and Philadelphia have very different connectivity. United has four flights to Amsterdam per day. Anything is possible, but we should expect American can be successful with two.

incitatus wrote:

Dallas and Philadelphia have very different connectivity. United has four flights to Amsterdam per day. Anything is possible, but we should expect American can be successful with two.

Indeed they do, and that's my point - I personally think, given AA's structural disadvantage at AMS relative to Delta and United, and the nature of AA's network, the connectivity at PHL will ultimately prove more relevant and economical for AMS than DFW. Trust me - I'd love nothing more than to see DFW-AMS succeed for AA. But I remain skeptical, and I'll believe it when I see it. Until proven otherwise, my expectation remains that AA will - long-term - go back down to a single daily AMS flight, probably at AMS, with potentially an upgauge to a larger aircraft during the summer.

commavia wrote:

chepos wrote:

I'm sure FCO will be busy all the time (as most FCO flights are), whether it makes money or not (that is another story).

That's where the new, high-density 777 configuration will help. Italy in the summer is a high-density market - and I suspect that packing almost 300 seats into a 777 will work well for AA in markets just like DFW-FCO.

The problem is that the origin of 75+% of US-Italy traffic is east of DFW. No carrier has been able to make west-of-the-mississippi to Italy work. I wish AA the best however.

PRAirbus wrote:

DFW-AMS on a 767...good luck! bad decision to launch a new and long sector on a 1980's plane. :/

I'd argue it's an amazing product given that the seating is 2-3-2. It may lack state of the art IFE, which I enjoy, but I'm happy to load up my iPad with shows/movies for the 8 1/2 hour flight over. It's perfect fit when traveling with my wife.

The sector isn't THAT long. 8 1/2 hours or so, but by the time you subtract dinner at the beginning, that's 2-3 hours from take off until you can relax. Then the cabin starts to perk up about 1 1/2 hours prior to landing for breakfast, bathroom break, etc. So really, you're only talking about roughly 5 hours of downtime to relax, or about 2-3 movies.

Why someone would complain about a 767 ride in this day+age of sub-Economy 10Y 777s really stumps me!!

The A320 is a 1980s plane as well!

usflyer msp wrote:

The problem is that the origin of 75+% of US-Italy traffic is east of DFW. No carrier has been able to make west-of-the-mississippi to Italy work. I wish AA the best however.

Actually, Alitalia operates a seasonal daily 777 FCO-LAX. That said, point taken - the market is obviously concentrated in the eastern U.S. But even saying that, the minority of U.S.-Italy O&D west of DFW is still a lot of people every summer, and now, with the power of the biggest hub west of the Mississippi and an appropriately-configured aircraft, AA is probably very well-positioned to capture a greater share of that traffic than in the past. I'm hopeful about seasonal DFW-FCO.

FriscoHeavy wrote:

I'd argue it's an amazing product given that the seating is 2-3-2. It may lack state of the art IFE, which I enjoy, but I'm happy to load up my iPad with shows/movies for the 8 1/2 hour flight over. It's perfect fit when traveling with my wife.

I love the 767-s 2-3-2 as much as anyone, even if there isn't AVOD PTVs on AA's aircraft. But that said, I do think that will be a bit of an issue on a sector of this length in this day and age (along with, needless to say, AA's seemingly-intractable 767 reliability issues). Certainly DFW-AMS will skew seasonal and leisure, so maybe not, but we'll see.

Again, as much as I'd love to see this route succeed - I remain skeptical.

Î have never had a Problem with the 767 in the 50 or so trips across the Atlantic. And at least 15 times on a 767 from DFW.

commavia wrote:

incitatus wrote:

Dallas and Philadelphia have very different connectivity. United has four flights to Amsterdam per day. Anything is possible, but we should expect American can be successful with two.

Indeed they do, and that's my point - I personally think, given AA's structural disadvantage at AMS relative to Delta and United, and the nature of AA's network, the connectivity at PHL will ultimately prove more relevant and economical for AMS than DFW. Trust me - I'd love nothing more than to see DFW-AMS succeed for AA. But I remain skeptical, and I'll believe it when I see it. Until proven otherwise, my expectation remains that AA will - long-term - go back down to a single daily AMS flight, probably at AMS, with potentially an upgauge to a larger aircraft during the summer.

Im skeptical as well because, while DFW-Europe is a sizable market, DFW-AMS is surprisingly small. It wont be hard to get connections in high season, but if the market could have worked, I would have though KLM could have done it.

AMS is extremely energy in terms of filling J seats. Almost all of Texas-AMS is Houston based.

Hope those two would work! The problem with FCO is its very low-yielding, but with the packed 777 I think it can work.

Fingers crossed that both of these routes work out and maybe even extended for 2018! With these two routes, DFW has service to LHR, CDG, FRA, MAD, FCO, and AMS. Do you think DFW could support any other routes to Europe? The main one standing out to me is DUB with EI. Maybe BCN?

FCO is very seasonal and spikes quite a bit in the summer months. That said, AA has a ton of capacity to FCO, probably the most out of the big 3.

July:
PHL-333
CLT-333
DFW-772
JFK-772
ORD-772

DFWandOMA wrote:

Fingers crossed that both of these routes work out and maybe even extended for 2018! With these two routes, DFW has service to LHR, CDG, FRA, MAD, FCO, and AMS. Do you think DFW could support any other routes to Europe? The main one standing out to me is DUB with EI. Maybe BCN?

On a year round basis, what they have is about right. DFW-LHR/CDG/FRA are really the only ones that have the O&D for year round service though DFW-MAD works nicely due to ties with AA and IAG. If/when EI joins IAG, DFW-DUB should be doable year round as well. However I see no circumstance where DFW-AMS/FCO can work outside summer.

DFW-FCO is also going to be AA's longest flight over the Atlantic.

usairways85 wrote:

FCO is very seasonal and spikes quite a bit in the summer months. That said, AA has a ton of capacity to FCO, probably the most out of the big 3.

Indeed. FCO is highly seasonal but in the peak months, the volume is immense. It is notable that AA now has the largest brand presence of any U.S. carrier in FCO - during the summer peak. Obviously, though, when adding in Alitalia (at least for now), Delta is overall far ahead. I remember when AA inaugurated ORD-FCO in 2000 - I was on one of the first departures out of FCO during the first week of June. From a single daily 767, AA this summer will be up to five daily FCO departures - all but one on 777s or A330s. Perhaps depending on what happens with Alitalia, I would not be surprised to see AA return to year-round to FCO, even if it's just sub-daily from PHL. (AA is already nearly year-round now, with just a few weeks during the slowest January/February months without any flights.)

All that said, AA's growing presence in FCO is illustrative of AA's shifting approach to Europe over the last few decades, and especially after the USAirways merger. Compared with the 1990s, before the mass proliferation of antitrust-immunized JVs, AA's Europe network today skews (with the continued exception of the U.K. and PAR) much more heavily towards Southern Europe. And, by extension, as compared with the mid-2000s, when AA consciously shifted to a far less seasonally-adjusted schedule, AA's Europe network today skews much more seasonal, too. AA still maintains a very strong franchise, obviously, in the U.K. and PAR based on its historical presence in both markets. But beyond those two, AA today dedicates a significant amount of its overall European capacity to Spain and Italy.

Cool to see the growth. The DFW area is a boom town.

What is with all the Nay-Sayers and the 767? Have you ever flown on a 767? Is it bc the plane is "from the 1980s?" It is an overnight flight, so PTV or not you wont be watching it the whole time. What you will experience the whole time is 2-3-2 seating, can't beat it. According to A.net 2-4-2 seating always is better than the 3-3-3 or 3-4-3 of the dreaded 777/787. Why is 2-3-2 not desirable?

usairways85 wrote:

FCO is very seasonal and spikes quite a bit in the summer months. That said, AA has a ton of capacity to FCO, probably the most out of the big 3.

July:
PHL-333
CLT-333
DFW-772
JFK-772
ORD-772

And in the summer they pack them in, always full.

Why did KLM end DFW? I wonder why the route didn't work for them.

As a side note ORD BCN launches today (as well). To all those worried about the 1980's equipment and what not, this one is on 787 8.

commavia wrote:

I would not be surprised to see AA return to year-round to FCO

MIA with all its connections south of the US is really ideal for FCO from November through April. Romans love Miami, Florida & the Caribbean in the winter. Like @ MXP, AA could offer FCO to JFK / MIA with alternating schedules maintaining a 7 day operation.

PRAirbus wrote:

DFW-AMS on a 767...good luck! bad decision to launch a new and long sector on a plane that AA keeps 1980's amenities on :/

Fixed

airzona11 wrote:

Cool to see the growth. The DFW area is a boom town.

What is with all the Nay-Sayers and the 767? Have you ever flown on a 767? Is it bc the plane is "from the 1980s?" It is an overnight flight, so PTV or not you wont be watching it the whole time. What you will experience the whole time is 2-3-2 seating, can't beat it. According to A.net 2-4-2 seating always is better than the 3-3-3 or 3-4-3 of the dreaded 777/787. Why is 2-3-2 not desirable?

It's not the plane...I'll take a 76 over any other widebody internationally every day of the week! The problem is AA...they have, by far the crappiest international product on their 767's. I doubt they've refurbished those planes since before 9/11

airzona11 wrote:

Cool to see the growth. The DFW area is a boom town.

What is with all the Nay-Sayers and the 767? Have you ever flown on a 767? Is it bc the plane is "from the 1980s?" It is an overnight flight, so PTV or not you wont be watching it the whole time. What you will experience the whole time is 2-3-2 seating, can't beat it. According to A.net 2-4-2 seating always is better than the 3-3-3 or 3-4-3 of the dreaded 777/787. Why is 2-3-2 not desirable?

Totally agree. Next to the MCE section on the 77W, the 767 is by far the best ride on an AA widebody in steerage. Who cares about a TV? I can sleep or read a book for 8 hours.

I am curious to see how these flights will do up front. LCC has the pricing power and terrible enough product to keep costs and fares low so they'll be able to undercut everyone. Maybe AA will actually release some J awards on these routes! Hahahaha yeah right.

airzona11 wrote:

What is with all the Nay-Sayers and the 767? Have you ever flown on a 767? Is it bc the plane is "from the 1980s?" It is an overnight flight, so PTV or not you wont be watching it the whole time. What you will experience the whole time is 2-3-2 seating, can't beat it. According to A.net 2-4-2 seating always is better than the 3-3-3 or 3-4-3 of the dreaded 777/787. Why is 2-3-2 not desirable?

The issue isn't the plane itself. The 767 is a great plane, and again, I love 2-3-2 as much as everyone else. But long flights on AA's 767s - especially daytime westbounds from Europe back to the U.S. - are not as competitive a customer experience in 2017 as they should be given how AA has configured and updated the planes:

AWACSooner wrote:

It's not the plane...I'll take a 76 over any other widebody internationally every day of the week! The problem is AA...they have, by far the crappiest international product on their 767's. I doubt they've refurbished those planes since before 9/11

Actually, AA has refurbished the 767s multiple times since 9/11. Unfortunately, each time, AA has done the refurbishment cheaply, without investment the more significant amounts that would be required to more substantially update the interiors. AA's 767 J product today is quite competitive from a hard product standpoint, except for the fact that the seats still don't have true AVOD PTVs, but rather tablets. It just looks cheap. And in Y, it's still the ancient overhead bins and projector screens. That really looks cheap. And then again, of course, there's the 767's chronic reliability issues.

uberflieger wrote:

MIA with all its connections south of the US is really ideal for FCO from November through April. Romans love Miami, Florida & the Caribbean in the winter. Like @ MXP, AA could offer FCO to JFK / MIA with alternating schedules maintaining a 7 day operation.

I'd be skeptical of that. I don't think the market is sufficiently large nor premium to support MIA-FCO nonstop. Maybe, but I don't see it. MXP is the more important (and, I strongly suspect, higher-yielding) Italy market for MIA. FCO is best served from AA's other hubs - likely PHL, if any, year-round with all the rest operating April/May-September/October/November.

NichCage wrote:

Why did KLM end DFW? I wonder why the route didn't work for them.

KLM was seasonal too. Once ME3 settled in, KLM bowed out. Very unfortunate, it was a great alternative to CDG for my folks.

usairways85 wrote:

FCO is very seasonal and spikes quite a bit in the summer months. That said, AA has a ton of capacity to FCO, probably the most out of the big 3.

July:
PHL-333
CLT-333
DFW-772
JFK-772
ORD-772

Correct, big 3 in July:

AA- 310 flights- 87,023 seats- Destinations: CLT, DFW, JFK, ORD, PHL
DL- 248 flights- 69,750 seats- Destinations: ATL, DTW, JFK
UA- 186 flights- 48,360 seats- Destinations: EWR, IAD, ORD

NichCage wrote:

Why did KLM end DFW? I wonder why the route didn't work for them.

Because it was full of Indians going back to India and not higher yielding European traffic. They were basically competing with the ME3 at DFW.

As mentioned, higher yielding AMS bound traffic is typically limited to oil, shipping, and major financial centers. Plus, DFW-AMS is actually a very small market. Much smaller than DFW-FCO, DFW-DUB, and even DFW-BCN. Meanwhile IAH-AMS is a flying cash cow even in the worst of times. If youre KL, why stay in Dallas? Honestly, AF would have been a better choice. Yeah AA flies it but DFW-CDG is close to 80-90 PDEW. DFW-AMS isnt even 20 PDEW.

PRAirbus wrote:

DFW-AMS on a 767...good luck! bad decision to launch a new and long sector on a 1980's plane. :/

I would rather ride a 76 than about anything else.

The A320 and A330 are 1980's aircraft too.

PRAirbus wrote:

DFW-AMS on a 767...good luck! bad decision to launch a new and long sector on a 1980's plane.

I'll take a 767 anytime over a 777. Even if the 767 has old seats and no entertainment. For me 2-3-2 seating is always better than 2-5-2 or 3-4-3.

uberflieger wrote:

commavia wrote:

I would not be surprised to see AA return to year-round to FCO

MIA with all its connections south of the US is really ideal for FCO from November through April. Romans love Miami, Florida & the Caribbean in the winter. Like @ MXP, AA could offer FCO to JFK / MIA with alternating schedules maintaining a 7 day operation.

MIAFCO to compliment MIAMXP is a no brainer. Miami-Rome is a huge local market (the third largest between the U.S. and Italy after NYC-MIL/ROM), Alitalia is in trouble, and it could certainly use additional capacity.

I recently had the "pleasure" of an AA 763 JFK-ZRH. They made me pine for the days of the US 762s (and I never thought that would happen). 2-3-2 seating somehow made claustrophobic, sidewalls all scuffed up, original tiny overhead bins. Nope.

FriscoHeavy wrote:

PRAirbus wrote:

DFW-AMS on a 767...good luck! bad decision to launch a new and long sector on a 1980's plane. :/

I'd argue it's an amazing product given that the seating is 2-3-2. It may lack state of the art IFE, which I enjoy, but I'm happy to load up my iPad with shows/movies for the 8 1/2 hour flight over. It's perfect fit when traveling with my wife.

The sector isn't THAT long. 8 1/2 hours or so, but by the time you subtract dinner at the beginning, that's 2-3 hours from take off until you can relax. Then the cabin starts to perk up about 1 1/2 hours prior to landing for breakfast, bathroom break, etc. So really, you're only talking about roughly 5 hours of downtime to relax, or about 2-3 movies.

It's really subpar though for a longhaul transatlantic flight though in this day and age! Even lost cost Norwegian has AVOD. It's not too much to ask for, and regardless of what iPad owners may think, there's more non-owners than owners and we're not buying one just for flights...

To those not aware, the same crew and plane who flew the Pope from PHL back to Rome last year is flying the inaugural flight to Rome today!!

I suspect as DFW-FCO is the longest TATL flight operated by AA if it comes back for next summer, a 787-8/9 will replace the 772. It would be great if AA could operate DFW-FCO year round. The 787-8 could make it work, especially in the off season.

burnsie28 wrote:

usairways85 wrote:

FCO is very seasonal and spikes quite a bit in the summer months. That said, AA has a ton of capacity to FCO, probably the most out of the big 3.

July:
PHL-333
CLT-333
DFW-772
JFK-772
ORD-772

Correct, big 3 in July:

AA- 310 flights- 87,023 seats- Destinations: CLT, DFW, JFK, ORD, PHL
DL- 248 flights- 69,750 seats- Destinations: ATL, DTW, JFK
UA- 186 flights- 48,360 seats- Destinations: EWR, IAD, ORD

I have just tried to complete the North Atlantic <--> Rome market for July
it results as follows :

AC - 124 flights - 46,004 seats - Destinations : YUL, YYZ
TS - 100 flights - 32,790 seats - Destinations : YUL, YYZ
AZ (#) - 496 flights - 132,156 seats - Destinations : BOS, JFK, LAX, MIA, ORD, YYZ

(#) excluding MEX


Rank by destination (available seats)

New York (JFK+EWR) : 99,792 (AA, AZ, DL, UA)
Toronto : 62,402 (AC, AZ, TS)
Chicago : 50,468 (AA, AZ, UA)
Atlanta : 33,418 (DL)
Montreal : 32,264 (AC, TS)
Los Angeles : 18,166 (AZ)
Detroit : 18,166 (DL)
Philadelphia : 18,042 (AA)
Charlotte : 18,042 (AA)
Dallas/FW : 17,918 (AA)
Washington : 16,678 (UA)
Miami : 15,872 (AZ)
Boston : 15,872 (AZ)

LIPZ wrote:

burnsie28 wrote:

usairways85 wrote:

FCO is very seasonal and spikes quite a bit in the summer months. That said, AA has a ton of capacity to FCO, probably the most out of the big 3.

July:
PHL-333
CLT-333
DFW-772
JFK-772
ORD-772

Correct, big 3 in July:

AA- 310 flights- 87,023 seats- Destinations: CLT, DFW, JFK, ORD, PHL
DL- 248 flights- 69,750 seats- Destinations: ATL, DTW, JFK
UA- 186 flights- 48,360 seats- Destinations: EWR, IAD, ORD

I have just tried to complete the North Atlantic <--> Rome market for July
it results as follows :

AC - 124 flights - 46,004 seats - Destinations : YUL, YYZ
TS - 100 flights - 32,790 seats - Destinations : YUL, YYZ
AZ (#) - 496 flights - 132,156 seats - Destinations : BOS, JFK, LAX, MIA, ORD, YYZ

(#) excluding MEX


Rank by destination (available seats)

New York (JFK+EWR) : 99,792 (AA, AZ, DL, UA)
Toronto : 62,402 (AC, AZ, TS)
Chicago : 50,468 (AA, AZ, UA)
Atlanta : 33,418 (DL)
Montreal : 32,264 (AC, TS)
Los Angeles : 18,166 (AZ)
Detroit : 18,166 (DL)
Philadelphia : 18,042 (AA)
Charlotte : 18,042 (AA)
Dallas/FW : 17,918 (AA)
Washington : 16,678 (UA)
Miami : 15,872 (AZ)
Boston : 15,872 (AZ)

Thanks LIPZ,

this will be interesting to compare to for Jul '18 if AZ were to fold...

I wonder how the huge US-India market will be in 10-20 years.

I think it is big because 1st generation Indians miss their homeland and to visit their parents.

But as someone who grew up here and as an Indian American, I have no need to visit relatives I don't even know in India, and my family is all here in the US.

slowrambler wrote:

I recently had the "pleasure" of an AA 763 JFK-ZRH. They made me pine for the days of the US 762s (and I never thought that would happen). 2-3-2 seating somehow made claustrophobic, sidewalls all scuffed up, original tiny overhead bins. Nope.

I flew the 763 between MIA and FRA many times a couple of years ago. The Business Class hard product was far superior to the 772 and Lufthansa's A380 sliders at the time IF you got the scheduled flat seats. Unfortunately due to the poor reliability of the fleet an outdated configuration would often show up and delays and cancelations were not uncommon. The soft product though with the dessert cart remains my favorite. Then there's coach. I may be wrong, but I believe American is in a class all by itself with no individual monitors nor on-demand viewing and most importantly no universal power ports, not even in the refurbished frames Those BTW are very nice looking with new seat covers, carpeting, etc., LED overhead monitors and I disagree with you about 2-3-2, to me that's currently the best Economy seating to Europe

My friend at AA says DFW-FCO and ORD-BCN advanced bookings are strong and plan to be back next year!

I was very tempted to try LAX-DFW TO AMS but ended up taking the LHR option for swup cert to first class. I'd like to try it on my next trip if I take AA.

Flighty wrote:

Why someone would complain about a 767 ride in this day+age of sub-Economy 10Y 777s really stumps me!!

The A320 is a 1980s plane as well!

.