CMH got an extra flight to STL from WN. 3x daily Sun-Friday now.

Jshank83 wrote:

CMH got an extra flight to STL from WN. 3x daily Sun-Friday now.

In addition, it looks like CMH-OAK is gone completely - it's not even Sat. only. Doesn't bode well for it coming back at all, though I was under the impression it did well during the summer months (though, what route doesn't do well in the summer?).

flyCMH wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

CMH got an extra flight to STL from WN. 3x daily Sun-Friday now.

In addition, it looks like CMH-OAK is gone completely - it's not even Sat. only. Doesn't bode well for it coming back at all, though I was under the impression it did well during the summer months (though, what route doesn't do well in the summer?).

Says it is just seasonal.

https://www.southwestaircommunity.com/t ... ba-p/80549

To add to above I didn't realize CMH had put up 1.7 mil for the OAK flight. That seems like a lot. Sucks it isn't running all the time now.

http://www.dispatch.com/news/20180927/c ... rea-flight

Very disappointing that WN continues to cut it back. It sounds like it may reappear in the next extension as a summer seasonal route, but still. Maybe this is the incentive needed for UA to jump in on CMH-SFO?

boscmh wrote:

Very disappointing that WN continues to cut it back. It sounds like it may reappear in the next extension as a summer seasonal route, but still. Maybe this is the incentive needed for UA to jump in on CMH-SFO?

UA had added nonstop service to SFO from CVG and DTW last year, and I could see UA possibly adding CMH-SFO nonstop service since CMH is the located in largest U.S. metro area without nonstop service to SFO. UA would also be able to provide connecting opportunities to international destinations in Asia, Australia, and New Zealand from CMH through SFO if it added CMH-SFO nonstop service.

WN might possibly be able to connect passengers to CMH from HNL through OAK if WN adds a 7:00 AM departure to OAK from HNL and a 5:00 PM departure to CMH from OAK. However, a 5:00 PM departure to CMH from OAK would get into CMH at 12:30 AM Eastern Time.

Media has finally caught up with the DL/WW changes. Hopefully, they see the G4/F9 changes soon as well. Kind of annoying the airlines have been able to make these cuts largely unnoticed.

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/ ... m-cvg.html
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/ ... -from.html

cvgComair wrote:

Media has finally caught up with the DL/WW changes. Hopefully, they see the G4/F9 changes soon as well. Kind of annoying the airlines have been able to make these cuts largely unnoticed.

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/ ... m-cvg.html
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/ ... -from.html

I thought this was an interesting comment:
"Durrant is referring to the use of larger, mainline aircraft on many of Delta’s flights. While Delta still lists CVG as its smallest hub, it increasingly is not a place for passengers to connect through from other airports."

Midwestindy wrote:

cvgComair wrote:

Media has finally caught up with the DL/WW changes. Hopefully, they see the G4/F9 changes soon as well. Kind of annoying the airlines have been able to make these cuts largely unnoticed.

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/ ... m-cvg.html
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/ ... -from.html

I thought this was an interesting comment:
"Durrant is referring to the use of larger, mainline aircraft on many of Delta’s flights. While Delta still lists CVG as its smallest hub, it increasingly is not a place for passengers to connect through from other airports."

They are right about connecting pax dwindling, as recent as a few years ago it was around 30%. It dipped to 16% last year and is even lower this year. This isn't a bad thing overall, but is big reason they could keep some of these RJ routes full.

I don't think it would be unreasonable for CVG-DTW/MSP/BOS/LGA/JFK to be mostly mainline in a few years. I could also see CVG-DFW/IAH/AUS/EWR potentially taking some upgauges as well. They have been flirting with the CR7/9 on CVG-PHL/CLT/BWI/MCI/RDU/STL at various times of the year, so I think it is a matter of time until they switch over from the CRJ.

I believe that leaves only CVG-YYZ/ORD as the remaining routes on CRJs. I'd imagine they'd cut a daily frequency each and upguage before cutting either of these routes, but you never know. I feel like 3x and 1x CR9 would be able to work?

That would eliminate all the CRJs which I know the airport said DL was looking to do at CVG. The mainline upguages could also free up some a/c if they decide to try CVG-MSY/SAT/JAX again. Add in SAN this summer plus PDX/another TATL a few years down the line and I think DL would have a pretty solid operation to move forward with.

I think people around here forget that CVG has it pretty good. We're a smaller market than IND or BNA, yet have a lot more legacy service. I'm pretty happy with DL's operation, although I'd love to see MSY and RIC return.

cvgComair wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

cvgComair wrote:

Media has finally caught up with the DL/WW changes. Hopefully, they see the G4/F9 changes soon as well. Kind of annoying the airlines have been able to make these cuts largely unnoticed.

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/ ... m-cvg.html
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/ ... -from.html

I thought this was an interesting comment:
"Durrant is referring to the use of larger, mainline aircraft on many of Delta’s flights. While Delta still lists CVG as its smallest hub, it increasingly is not a place for passengers to connect through from other airports."

They are right about connecting pax dwindling, as recent as a few years ago it was around 30%. It dipped to 16% last year and is even lower this year. This isn't a bad thing overall, but is big reason they could keep some of these RJ routes full.

I don't think it would be unreasonable for CVG-DTW/MSP/BOS/LGA/JFK to be mostly mainline in a few years. I could also see CVG-DFW/IAH/AUS/EWR potentially taking some upgauges as well. They have been flirting with the CR7/9 on CVG-PHL/CLT/BWI/MCI/RDU/STL at various times of the year, so I think it is a matter of time until they switch over from the CRJ.

I believe that leaves only CVG-YYZ/ORD as the remaining routes on CRJs. I'd imagine they'd cut a daily frequency each and upguage before cutting either of these routes, but you never know. I feel like 3x and 1x CR9 would be able to work?

That would eliminate all the CRJs which I know the airport said DL was looking to do at CVG. The mainline upguages could also free up some a/c if they decide to try CVG-MSY/SAT/JAX again. Add in SAN this summer plus PDX/another TATL a few years down the line and I think DL would have a pretty solid operation to move forward with.

I could see CVG-MSP going mostly mainline, although they would need to upguage a ton of flights to make DTW/BOS/LGA/JFK mostly mainline.

CVG-ORD is a tough market, while it is an important business destination, it may be hard for DL to profitably upguage on that route

I do think there is potential for MSY/SAT/PDX/SAN but maybe not JAX

WWads wrote:

I think people around here forget that CVG has it pretty good. We're a smaller market than IND or BNA, yet have a lot more legacy service. I'm pretty happy with DL's operation, although I'd love to see MSY and RIC return.

CVG does not have more legacy service, unless you are referring to only DL.

WWads wrote:

I think people around here forget that CVG has it pretty good. We're a smaller market than IND or BNA, yet have a lot more legacy service. I'm pretty happy with DL's operation, although I'd love to see MSY and RIC return.

When you say that CVG is a smaller market than IND, and BNA what are you speaking, population or passenger numbers.

"Prepare for the Prime return" and "the forecast calls for noisy nights ahead" at ILN, as teased by a friend on Facebook who flies for ABX.

Is Amazon coming back to ILN?

I wonder if this is their solution to handling excess CVG capacity by putting some flights at ILN? They are doing that at ONT by putting some flow at RIV.

cvgComair wrote:

I wonder if this is their solution to handling excess CVG capacity by putting some flights at ILN? They are doing that at ONT by putting some flow at RIV.

This was my thought. They have maintenance facilities there anyway with AMES, which could be creatively used to rotate ABX/ATI planes in/out of maintenance (i.e., flow planes onto lines through ILN and back off again), not to mention a dormant sort facility which was the testbed for their (Amazon's) own operation which could be reactivated.

I noticed Delta has the A321 on CVG-LAS in the month of March '19. I don't remember seeing the 321 on a regular rotation in CVG before. Is this for the busy conference season in LAS? Regardless, love to see the continued upguaging if it sticks.

topguncnod wrote:

I noticed Delta has the A321 on CVG-LAS in the month of March '19. I don't remember seeing the 321 on a regular rotation in CVG before. Is this for the busy conference season in LAS? Regardless, love to see the continued upguaging if it sticks.

Only other time I have seen the A321 scheduled at CVG is to MCO during Dec/Jan. Perhaps they can't get a 739 into to CVG for the route? Seems odd given the 737 pilot base, but they have been putting some Airbus equipment out recently.

cvgComair wrote:

topguncnod wrote:

I noticed Delta has the A321 on CVG-LAS in the month of March '19. I don't remember seeing the 321 on a regular rotation in CVG before. Is this for the busy conference season in LAS? Regardless, love to see the continued upguaging if it sticks.

Only other time I have seen the A321 scheduled at CVG is to MCO during Dec/Jan. Perhaps they can't get a 739 into to CVG for the route? Seems odd given the 737 pilot base, but they have been putting some Airbus equipment out recently.

The A321 seats 19 additional passengers versus a 739. I'm curious if it's truly an upgrade to satisfy increased demand.

DHL is adding 400 more employees and spending $20 million on construction of new buildings. They are now at $359 million invested, 194 acres, 4600 employees, and 96 daily flights (I think this includes Amazon flights). Pretty impressive growth and the DHL Americas CEO says they plan on continuing to grow CVG.

Take it for what it's worth, but one rumor about ILN I've just picked up is that Amazon may move the whole shooting match back there, with one possible reason being delays at CVG. They'd have a ready to go to sort facility and an airport all to themselves.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk

Does anyone know what the load factors are like on AA and F9 DFW-CVG nonstop flights for April, May, or June 2018?

DeltaRules wrote:

Take it for what it's worth, but one rumor about ILN I've just picked up is that Amazon may move the whole shooting match back there, with one possible reason being delays at CVG. They'd have a ready to go to sort facility and an airport all to themselves.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk

I am very interested to know what is delaying things at CVG. I know they had some issues with environmental review, but the start of construction has always been early 2019. I wonder if they are now estimating a later date (I will try to find this out). If they are in fact moving it back, I would imagine more is at play.

IMO, it seems like the move would create more problems than it would solve. One issue with ILN is the population, as Amazon was saying they could have 15,000 employees at CVG, when Wilmington has a population of 12,000 total. Given that the ABX-Amazon relationship is very poor, that also seems like a big issue they would have to deal with. Then you have the 50 year lease on 1200 acres of land, which can't be cheap, and I highly doubt the airport will let that go. It will be interesting to see how this develops...

DeltaRules wrote:

Take it for what it's worth, but one rumor about ILN I've just picked up is that Amazon may move the whole shooting match back there, with one possible reason being delays at CVG. They'd have a ready to go to sort facility and an airport all to themselves.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk

So, I know ILN's back story and all, but come on Amazon... give LCK a close look!

The CRAA feels confident that it can replace the lost CMH-OAK n/s in the next year.

"We are keeping our chin up and are not overly concerned about this," said Dave Whitaker, chief commercial officer of the Columbus Regional Airport Authority. "I am confident that within the next year or so we will a have nonstop service to the Bay area."

Link: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/ne ... oesnt.html

Briancw wrote:

The CRAA feels confident that it can replace the lost CMH-OAK n/s in the next year.

"We are keeping our chin up and are not overly concerned about this," said Dave Whitaker, chief commercial officer of the Columbus Regional Airport Authority. "I am confident that within the next year or so we will a have nonstop service to the Bay area."

Link: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/ne ... oesnt.html

I could definitely see UA adding CMH-SFO nonstop service since CMH is located in one of the largest metro areas in the Midwest and since UA already serves SFO nonstop from ORD, CVG, CLE, DTW, IND, MCI, MSN, MSP, OMA, and STL in the Midwest.

Briancw wrote:

The CRAA feels confident that it can replace the lost CMH-OAK n/s in the next year.

"We are keeping our chin up and are not overly concerned about this," said Dave Whitaker, chief commercial officer of the Columbus Regional Airport Authority. "I am confident that within the next year or so we will a have nonstop service to the Bay area."

Link: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/ne ... oesnt.html

It's behind a paywall, so I can't see the whole thing but, go figure, one hole is filled and another is created, so the speculation game gets to start again!

Broken record time but, now that WN is gone and the market is untapped again, the obvious choices are UA and AS. Unlike SEA, where you could've made an argument where F9 or NK might have tried it, that doesn't seem to be an option here. It still blows my mind UA found it more worthwhile to go into contested markets (CVG, DTW especially with direct competition to SFO) than try CMH even before WN started OAK.

Maybe AS starts it if things go well with SEA? They might even be able to use CMH as a very indirect point to flow planes between SEA and SFO.

jplatts wrote:

Briancw wrote:

The CRAA feels confident that it can replace the lost CMH-OAK n/s in the next year.

"We are keeping our chin up and are not overly concerned about this," said Dave Whitaker, chief commercial officer of the Columbus Regional Airport Authority. "I am confident that within the next year or so we will a have nonstop service to the Bay area."

Link: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/ne ... oesnt.html

I could definitely see UA adding CMH-SFO nonstop service since CMH is located in one of the largest metro areas in the Midwest and since UA already serves SFO nonstop from ORD, CVG, CLE, DTW, IND, MCI, MSN, MSP, OMA, and STL in the Midwest.

Briancw wrote:

The CRAA feels confident that it can replace the lost CMH-OAK n/s in the next year.

"We are keeping our chin up and are not overly concerned about this," said Dave Whitaker, chief commercial officer of the Columbus Regional Airport Authority. "I am confident that within the next year or so we will a have nonstop service to the Bay area."

Link: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/ne ... oesnt.html

With UA's surging passenger numbers at CMH it would seem almost like a no-brainer for them to add SFO, especially with Alaska coming. They might add as a preemptive strike against Alaska building up here. (I have to say I think that might be behind some of AA adding the 2nd LAX flight and DL bringing SLC back).

To be honest, I never really understood how OAK on WN made much sense. 1) There is not a great deal of leisure traffic to that part of CA from CMH 2)there were not a ton of connection opportunities on WN not available at DEN, LAS, or PHX 3)for business travelers the long flight without upgrade opportunities and it not being a legacy carrier with a larger network to be a part of corporate contracts would discourage use.

I think it may of been a case of CRAA being desperate enough for west coast service that they went with WN even though long-term viability was not ideal and WN was happy to take the $$ they could from the guarantee and then move on down the road. It is very informative that we lost OAK but gained another STL-- a flight that is much more compatible with WN's bread and butter and viable for the CMH market. I am very interested to see what other markets (if any) they do start from here. Maybe LGA will finally happen? MSY daily? MKE? JAX? MCI? (Once the construction is complete). Beyond that, WN may be at the point of max'ing out CMH destinations and it will all be about capacity growth from here on.

brooklynchris13 wrote:

Briancw wrote:

The CRAA feels confident that it can replace the lost CMH-OAK n/s in the next year.

"We are keeping our chin up and are not overly concerned about this," said Dave Whitaker, chief commercial officer of the Columbus Regional Airport Authority. "I am confident that within the next year or so we will a have nonstop service to the Bay area."

Link: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/ne ... oesnt.html

With UA's surging passenger numbers at CMH it would seem almost like a no-brainer for them to add SFO, especially with Alaska coming. They might add as a preemptive strike against Alaska building up here. (I have to say I think that might be behind some of AA adding the 2nd LAX flight and DL bringing SLC back).

To be honest, I never really understood how OAK on WN made much sense. 1) There is not a great deal of leisure traffic to that part of CA from CMH 2)there were not a ton of connection opportunities on WN not available at DEN, LAS, or PHX 3)for business travelers the long flight without upgrade opportunities and it not being a legacy carrier with a larger network to be a part of corporate contracts would discourage use.

I think it may of been a case of CRAA being desperate enough for west coast service that they went with WN even though long-term viability was not ideal and WN was happy to take the $$ they could from the guarantee and then move on down the road. It is very informative that we lost OAK but gained another STL-- a flight that is much more compatible with WN's bread and butter and viable for the CMH market. I am very interested to see what other markets (if any) they do start from here. Maybe LGA will finally happen? MSY daily? MKE? JAX? MCI? (Once the construction is complete). Beyond that, WN may be at the point of max'ing out CMH destinations and it will all be about capacity growth from here on.

Good point on the big gains UA has made in terms of traffic. Maybe that plus incoming extra mainline metal will be the spark they need. You might be onto something with AA and DL throwing the block on AS, too; the second LAX was a surprise (especially since it was AA adding it) and initially felt like it was a Thanksgiving add, but then it was revealed it was permanent.

I think there's a short list of new destinations WN could add- LGA still seems possible, but that they passed when they had the slots they said they needed to add it was something. I agree with MKE and MCI and would maybe add a seasonal SAN as a contender, though that could also be ULCC fodder.

If UA is going to finally make the decision to do SFO, they had better make it soon. AS could easily add it shortly after starting SEA, especially if they have early success.

brooklynchris13 wrote:

I think it may of been a case of CRAA being desperate enough for west coast service that they went with WN even though long-term viability was not ideal and WN was happy to take the $$ they could from the guarantee and then move on down the road. It is very informative that we lost OAK but gained another STL-- a flight that is much more compatible with WN's bread and butter and viable for the CMH market. I am very interested to see what other markets (if any) they do start from here. Maybe LGA will finally happen? MSY daily? MKE? JAX? MCI? (Once the construction is complete). Beyond that, WN may be at the point of max'ing out CMH destinations and it will all be about capacity growth from here on.

WN could also possibly add CMH-LAX nonstop service with surrounding markets such as IND, CVG, DTW, CLE, and PIT already having nonstop service to LAX on a LCC on at least a seasonal basis and with LAX being one of the top domestic destinations that WN doesn't currently serve nonstop from CMH.

In addition to LAX, MKE, JAX, and MCI, WN could also add nonstop service to SAN and AUS out of CMH.

jplatts wrote:

Does anyone know what the load factors are like on AA and F9 DFW-CVG nonstop flights for April, May, or June 2018?

June '18

DL
CVG-DFW: 81%
DFW-CVG: 81%

AA
CVG-DFW: 91%
DFW-CVG: 89%

F9
CVG-DFW: 85%
DFW-CVG: 94%

NoTime wrote:

DeltaRules wrote:

Take it for what it's worth, but one rumor about ILN I've just picked up is that Amazon may move the whole shooting match back there, with one possible reason being delays at CVG. They'd have a ready to go to sort facility and an airport all to themselves.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk

So, I know ILN's back story and all, but come on Amazon... give LCK a close look!

I'd actually prefer it to go back to ILN if they are going to leave CVG. They need a shot in the arm after being kneecapped (twice).

One part of what I heard is that someone has left the electric on in one of the sort buildings at ILN and neither the county nor city have the money to do it.

jplatts wrote:

brooklynchris13 wrote:

I think it may of been a case of CRAA being desperate enough for west coast service that they went with WN even though long-term viability was not ideal and WN was happy to take the $$ they could from the guarantee and then move on down the road. It is very informative that we lost OAK but gained another STL-- a flight that is much more compatible with WN's bread and butter and viable for the CMH market. I am very interested to see what other markets (if any) they do start from here. Maybe LGA will finally happen? MSY daily? MKE? JAX? MCI? (Once the construction is complete). Beyond that, WN may be at the point of max'ing out CMH destinations and it will all be about capacity growth from here on.

WN could also possibly add CMH-LAX nonstop service with surrounding markets such as IND, CVG, DTW, CLE, and PIT already having nonstop service to LAX on a LCC on at least a seasonal basis and with LAX being one of the top domestic destinations that WN doesn't currently serve nonstop from CMH.

In addition to LAX, MKE, JAX, and MCI, WN could also add nonstop service to SAN and AUS out of CMH.

Although I think there MAY be a shot of a ULCC (NK or F9) adding CMH to LAX, I do not think it is likely. With DL and AA well established on the route, it would spur a blood bath and if WN is already pulling the subsidized route, it would not make much sense for them to start such a competitive subsidized route. I agree on AUS, not so much on the SAN route. As for SAN, SFO, and perhaps PDX service time will tell how that shakes out since we now have several possibilities and AS has not even started yet. Btw, has anyone figured out what gate AS will use? I do not think its going to be B36 with that gate already being shared X3. Maybe C47/C48?

brooklynchris13 wrote:

jplatts wrote:

brooklynchris13 wrote:

I think it may of been a case of CRAA being desperate enough for west coast service that they went with WN even though long-term viability was not ideal and WN was happy to take the $$ they could from the guarantee and then move on down the road. It is very informative that we lost OAK but gained another STL-- a flight that is much more compatible with WN's bread and butter and viable for the CMH market. I am very interested to see what other markets (if any) they do start from here. Maybe LGA will finally happen? MSY daily? MKE? JAX? MCI? (Once the construction is complete). Beyond that, WN may be at the point of max'ing out CMH destinations and it will all be about capacity growth from here on.

WN could also possibly add CMH-LAX nonstop service with surrounding markets such as IND, CVG, DTW, CLE, and PIT already having nonstop service to LAX on a LCC on at least a seasonal basis and with LAX being one of the top domestic destinations that WN doesn't currently serve nonstop from CMH.

In addition to LAX, MKE, JAX, and MCI, WN could also add nonstop service to SAN and AUS out of CMH.

Although I think there MAY be a shot of a ULCC (NK or F9) adding CMH to LAX, I do not think it is likely. With DL and AA well established on the route, it would spur a blood bath and if WN is already pulling the subsidized route, it would not make much sense for them to start such a competitive subsidized route. I agree on AUS, not so much on the SAN route. As for SAN, SFO, and perhaps PDX service time will tell how that shakes out since we now have several possibilities and AS has not even started yet. Btw, has anyone figured out what gate AS will use? I do not think its going to be B36 with that gate already being shared X3. Maybe C47/C48?

F9 is at C47 and had signage up the last time I was there- I'll look again when I'm there in a couple weeks. C48 is supposedly only marked for a 73G- could an A320 fit?

DeltaRules wrote:

"Prepare for the Prime return" and "the forecast calls for noisy nights ahead" at ILN, as teased by a friend on Facebook who flies for ABX.

Is Amazon coming back to ILN?

There is a rumor to that effect, but no confirmation. There is a strange bit of activity at F building (the old DHL sort facility) which is fueling this. There is also a rumor that new K loaders have also been ordered.

flyCMH wrote:

jplatts wrote:

Briancw wrote:

The CRAA feels confident that it can replace the lost CMH-OAK n/s in the next year.

"We are keeping our chin up and are not overly concerned about this," said Dave Whitaker, chief commercial officer of the Columbus Regional Airport Authority. "I am confident that within the next year or so we will a have nonstop service to the Bay area."

Link: https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/ne ... oesnt.html

I could definitely see UA adding CMH-SFO nonstop service since CMH is located in one of the largest metro areas in the Midwest and since UA already serves SFO nonstop from ORD, CVG, CLE, DTW, IND, MCI, MSN, MSP, OMA, and STL in the Midwest.

Looks like the CRAA js putting all their emphasis and energy on obtaining new west coast flights and have abandoned attempts to get TRANSATLANTIC service

UA has extended CVG-DEN at 2x/day mainline through the end of the schedule. Operated by A32S/B738 depending on the season. Makes me wonder if DL will go for another daily flight on the route. G4 has dropped to 2x/wk and F9 is down to 4x/wk, seems like the legacy carriers are wining this battle.

Very interesting article in the Dispatch this morning about delays in the new terminal project due to the lack of a passenger fee increase in the new FAA authorization bill. While on the surface it would be logical that this might have an impact, the numbers are where questions appear. Although this will be a $25 million hit or so to CRAA, the reality is that the terminal project will be in the range of $2B. $25M could be made up in a light fixture or tile design change. I am curious if this is not the start of an effort to find creative financing options or opportunities to help support new terminal construction. If the numbers continue to grow we could see CMH at Austin levels of max'ed out with 3-5 five years which not only would be annoying to deal with as a traveler, it might start impacting businesses as well. (related article this week on all the questions Amazon H2Q wanted asked and I can promise that reams of paper dealt with transportation issues in Greater Columbus, including the airport). Going to be interesting to see how this plays out..

https://www.dispatch.com/news/20181006/ ... e-increase

brooklynchris13 wrote:

Very interesting article in the Dispatch this morning about delays in the new terminal project due to the lack of a passenger fee increase in the new FAA authorization bill. While on the surface it would be logical that this might have an impact, the numbers are where questions appear. Although this will be a $25 million hit or so to CRAA, the reality is that the terminal project will be in the range of $2B. $25M could be made up in a light fixture or tile design change. I am curious if this is not the start of an effort to find creative financing options or opportunities to help support new terminal construction. If the numbers continue to grow we could see CMH at Austin levels of max'ed out with 3-5 five years which not only would be annoying to deal with as a traveler, it might start impacting businesses as well. (related article this week on all the questions Amazon H2Q wanted asked and I can promise that reams of paper dealt with transportation issues in Greater Columbus, including the airport). Going to be interesting to see how this plays out..

https://www.dispatch.com/news/20181006/ ... e-increase

They don't have much room to expand in the meantime. It almost makes you wonder what else they could do.

The only thing that comes to mind off the top of my head is build some sort of Island terminal on the remote stands near the fire station on the east side of the airport (across from B31-35) and convince someone to move there, but would that be setting money on fire to only use for 12 to 15 years?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk

Sitting on the DL CVG-DEN flight this morning and it’s completely full. I realize it’s the busiest travel day of the week but still great to see. Amazing to see this go from a CRJ9 up to an A320 and still fill up! Even with so much competition. Hopeful we continue to see more and more mainline success at CVG for DL

The mainline American CMH-CLT this morning was an A321. One-off or a sign of things to come?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk

topguncnod wrote:

Sitting on the DL CVG-DEN flight this morning and it’s completely full. I realize it’s the busiest travel day of the week but still great to see. Amazing to see this go from a CRJ9 up to an A320 and still fill up! Even with so much competition. Hopeful we continue to see more and more mainline success at CVG for DL

Keep in mind this is largely fueled by a drop in fares, if you look next week DL is selling one-way for $55 which is very very low for a flight of that distance. Upguaging is the only way to stay profitable at those price points

Midwestindy wrote:

topguncnod wrote:

Sitting on the DL CVG-DEN flight this morning and it’s completely full. I realize it’s the busiest travel day of the week but still great to see. Amazing to see this go from a CRJ9 up to an A320 and still fill up! Even with so much competition. Hopeful we continue to see more and more mainline success at CVG for DL

Keep in mind this is largely fueled by a drop in fares, if you look next week DL is selling one-way for $55 which is very very low for a flight of that distance. Upguaging is the only way to stay profitable at those price points

That said, I have been very surprised at how much capacity this route has absorbed. 5 years ago CVG-DEN was 3x daily all on RJs on DL and UA, now there's up to 6 flights a day on certain days almost all mainline.

DL DAY-DTW appears to be all-CR7 going into the Fall. If I were a passenger, I'd rather have the -700 on MSP, but any upgauging is good.

DAY is also repaving parts of their ramp: https://twitter.com/tslayb/status/1049084127088140288

DL has made lots of last minute upgrades for Oct/Nov/Dec at CVG. This should help recover some passenger growth lost due to F9/G4's reductions and cutting MKE/BNA/XNA.

cvgComair wrote:

DL has made lots of last minute upgrades for Oct/Nov/Dec at CVG. This should help recover some passenger growth lost due to F9/G4's reductions and cutting MKE/BNA/XNA.

What upgrades did they make?

Midwestindy wrote:

cvgComair wrote:

DL has made lots of last minute upgrades for Oct/Nov/Dec at CVG. This should help recover some passenger growth lost due to F9/G4's reductions and cutting MKE/BNA/XNA.

What upgrades did they make?

I’ve noticed that CVG-LAX is now operating on the 739 at least 1x per day.

topguncnod wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

cvgComair wrote:

DL has made lots of last minute upgrades for Oct/Nov/Dec at CVG. This should help recover some passenger growth lost due to F9/G4's reductions and cutting MKE/BNA/XNA.

What upgrades did they make?

I’ve noticed that CVG-LAX is now operating on the 739 at least 1x per day.

To be fair, CVG-LAX is also going from 38 departures in Dec '17 (B738) to 31 departures in Dec '18 (B738).

Midwestindy wrote:

topguncnod wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

What upgrades did they make?

I’ve noticed that CVG-LAX is now operating on the 739 at least 1x per day.

To be fair, CVG-LAX is also going from 38 departures in Dec '17 (B738) to 31 departures in Dec '18 (B738).

I'm still seeing 38 departures for Dec '18.

Mostly it is upguages within aircraft the types: 738-->739, CRJ-->CR9, M88-->M90. A few routes are also keeping more frequency into the holiday season compared to last year (though, some like YYZ are down YOY). I'll have to do a seat comparison YOY sometime.