FATFlyer
Posts: 4688
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Fri Oct 12, 2018 5:04 am

flyfresno wrote:
Not sure if either of you two commented on the master plan, but I sent a long email about how ridiculous I think it is that one of the master plan’s main goals is to not produce a “series of disjointed projects,” but then goes on to propose just that. No one is asking for SMF’s giant terminal, but the lower airside level is showing its age, and adding just two gates (phase 1) behind the current ticket counters is, IMHO, far too conservative, especially considering these numbers. Adding 4 (jetway) gates behind the ticket counters, 3 of which are int’l capable, should be in the works right now at a bare minimum.


I have not had this confirmed by anyone, but my guess is there were concerns (safety or security) about passenger access to the current FIS if a larger expansion was built all at once. A 3 or 4 gate expansion would put a construction zone completely between the arriving international aircraft ramp and the current FIS.

In the recommended plan I notice that there is a temporary vertical access from the proposed phase 1 new gates to the FIS. Then in the plan after the second phase gate expansion one of 1st phase gates is relocated slightly east and that temporary vertical access removed.

If they use the current recommended plan, my opinion is the phase 2 gate expansion should be larger instead of just adding 1 intl/domestic swing gate and more FIS space.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:01 am

FATFlyer wrote:
flyfresno wrote:
Not sure if either of you two commented on the master plan, but I sent a long email about how ridiculous I think it is that one of the master plan’s main goals is to not produce a “series of disjointed projects,” but then goes on to propose just that. No one is asking for SMF’s giant terminal, but the lower airside level is showing its age, and adding just two gates (phase 1) behind the current ticket counters is, IMHO, far too conservative, especially considering these numbers. Adding 4 (jetway) gates behind the ticket counters, 3 of which are int’l capable, should be in the works right now at a bare minimum.


I have not had this confirmed by anyone, but my guess is there were concerns (safety or security) about passenger access to the current FIS if a larger expansion was built all at once. A 3 or 4 gate expansion would put a construction zone completely between the arriving international aircraft ramp and the current FIS.

In the recommended plan I notice that there is a temporary vertical access from the proposed phase 1 new gates to the FIS. Then in the plan after the second phase gate expansion one of 1st phase gates is relocated slightly east and that temporary vertical access removed.

If they use the current recommended plan, my opinion is the phase 2 gate expansion should be larger instead of just adding 1 intl/domestic swing gate and more FIS space.


Phasing it would be fine, but according to their timeline, they want to wait a while, build 2 gates, and then leave it for years and years before adding anything else. Again, no one is asking for a huge new terminal with 30 gates, but when I see the modern and functional yet modest facilities that airports like Wichita and Bozeman have built, among others, I have to shake my head at how cheap Fresno is being...
 
amadorE175
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:25 pm

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Sat Oct 13, 2018 11:53 pm

It looks like they're planning airfield work along with the terminal work. I have no idea what their finances look like but I wonder if they're being cautious about taking out too much debt at one time to do both the airfield and terminal work. I suppose they could always surprise us and make moves to accelerate parts of the terminal project as needed.
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4688
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Sun Oct 14, 2018 1:26 am

In June, Standard and Poor's upgraded FAT's bond rating by 2 levels to A (from BBB+).
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Tue Oct 16, 2018 9:02 pm

amadorE175 wrote:
It looks like they're planning airfield work along with the terminal work. I have no idea what their finances look like but I wonder if they're being cautious about taking out too much debt at one time to do both the airfield and terminal work. I suppose they could always surprise us and make moves to accelerate parts of the terminal project as needed.


I believe most of the airfield work is paid for by an FAA grant, with minimal funding from the airport authority. Yes, FAT has done a great job with its credit and debt. The question is, is that conservative approach holding the airport back?
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Thu Nov 08, 2018 4:19 pm

whatusaid wrote:
flyfresno wrote:
Some seasonal adds and subtractions that have recently been announced:

1) AA will go to 3X per day to DFW (737-800) for about 3 weeks during the holidays, and will even run 4X to DFW on January 2nd (I think this will be the first time ever that AA has had a day with 4X to DFW from FAT). After the holidays, it appears they will not bring back the A319 to PHX they had run in the past, but will go back up to 5X to LAX.

2) While the airline's current schedule does not reflect this, an airport press release states that AS would operate 4X (E175) to SEA through the holiday season, in addition to the regularly scheduled 2X to PDX and 3X to SAN. PDX will stay at 2X and SAN at 3X through the winter, SEA will drop to 2X.

3) Seasonal increases to Mexico will happen just as they have in the past, with up to 4X per night to Mexico (3X to GDL and 1X to MLM on certain days).

4) DL will not add any capacity over the holidays, maintaining their current schedule, and UA will actually reduce their capacity during the holidays vs this month, with an A320 to SFO being downsized to a CRJ-200, an E-175 to LAX being downsized to a CRJ-200, and one CRJ-200 to LAX completely going away (a total loss of over 150 seats). DL was scheduled to go to all CR7s to SLC, but it appears that has been pushed back to March. UA will trim an additional 1-2 flights per day starting in January, dropping to as low as just 9 CRJ-200s on some days, a tremendous drop from summer.

Full release here: https://flyfresno.com/airport-and-airli ... ay-travel/


UA's 320 to SFO has been running 85% LF or better for months now. Most times I've been on it, it's been full. That said, the winter is tough on traffic and the cutback to SFO isn't limited to FAT, as they are pulling the 737's off SMF-SFO as well. Would appear they have sufficient RON space now at SFO? UA, though, is becoming less and less a factor as AA adds more capacity.


It would appear that mainline UA is gone from FAT for the foreseeable future. The morning flight to SFO has been removed and either replaced with a CRJ-200, or will just not operate on some days (no 6AM to SFO?!). Also, other than the occasional E-175 to LAX (and the current early flight to DEN, which is an E-175 but will be swapping back to a CRJ-200 soon), it appears that UA will have almost no first class out of FAT until the ORD flight returns next summer (it's still listed...hope it stays). I can't help but wonder whether any FFs will be leaving UA and swapping to AS or AA because of this change (both offer first class on every one of their flights out of FAT). LAX and SFO are both short flights, but there have been a lot of complaints about the lack of space in the CRJ-200s to DEN. In any case, after a huge push into FAT (and some other CA markets) a couple of years ago, it appears that UA has made a major correction back the other way. Also, UA is still using ground level boarding in FAT with that ridiculous ramp for many (but not all) of their flights...they will be the last carrier to board at ground level (aside from the occasional overflow when there are delayed flights) after AS's remodeled gate area opens (see below).

In other news, the remodel of gates 6 and 8 is nearly complete, and the jet bridge is being installed this week. Alaska recently added mainline from SMF-SAN; it will be interesting to see if they add anything more from FAT after this project is complete.
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4688
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Thu Nov 08, 2018 4:56 pm

FAT posted pictures yesterday of the gate 8 passenger bridge being installed.
http://twitter.com/FresnoAirport/status/1060336381233221632

While gate 8 has been assigned to AS brand flights for quite a while, airport staff have been careful not to say the bridge and gate remodel are for AS. Partially that is because all FAT gates are CUTE, but it does leave open the possibility of some gate swaps next year. For example, DL's 3X/day CRJ flights may not be the best daytime use of 11's physical space and bridge.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
whatusaid
Topic Author
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:11 pm

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:25 pm

FATFlyer wrote:
FAT posted pictures yesterday of the gate 8 passenger bridge being installed.
http://twitter.com/FresnoAirport/status/1060336381233221632

While gate 8 has been assigned to AS brand flights for quite a while, airport staff have been careful not to say the bridge and gate remodel are for AS. Partially that is because all FAT gates are CUTE, but it does leave open the possibility of some gate swaps next year. For example, DL's 3X/day CRJ flights may not be the best daytime use of 11's physical space and bridge.


Agree, DL needs to go to ground level - they seem to care less about FAT and play an insignificant role in this market.

Airport staff did tell the council that the project was for a "client". Given that they referenced Q's up to 321's, it is obviously AS related. But, this is too little, too late given the 15% growth in domestic traffic and the prospect for even greater traffic in 2019. If anything from this year, we've learned that when you add capacity that you also find sufficient traffic to fill the new flights, TSA backs up, short-term parking is packed, etc. Not certain their gate allocation based upon the WN and AC adds, plus added DL role in the master plan is really workable as-is. They're overly optimistic on scheduling that doesn't max out the gates.

I flew out to SAN last week in the evening and the scene reminded me of the crowds of the 6a rush or the GDL rush. The airport seems to be on the edge right now at peak hours and I wonder if they could even handle WN at any significant frequency?
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:51 pm

whatusaid wrote:
FATFlyer wrote:
FAT posted pictures yesterday of the gate 8 passenger bridge being installed.
http://twitter.com/FresnoAirport/status/1060336381233221632

While gate 8 has been assigned to AS brand flights for quite a while, airport staff have been careful not to say the bridge and gate remodel are for AS. Partially that is because all FAT gates are CUTE, but it does leave open the possibility of some gate swaps next year. For example, DL's 3X/day CRJ flights may not be the best daytime use of 11's physical space and bridge.


Agree, DL needs to go to ground level - they seem to care less about FAT and play an insignificant role in this market.

Airport staff did tell the council that the project was for a "client". Given that they referenced Q's up to 321's, it is obviously AS related. But, this is too little, too late given the 15% growth in domestic traffic and the prospect for even greater traffic in 2019. If anything from this year, we've learned that when you add capacity that you also find sufficient traffic to fill the new flights, TSA backs up, short-term parking is packed, etc. Not certain their gate allocation based upon the WN and AC adds, plus added DL role in the master plan is really workable as-is. They're overly optimistic on scheduling that doesn't max out the gates.

I flew out to SAN last week in the evening and the scene reminded me of the crowds of the 6a rush or the GDL rush. The airport seems to be on the edge right now at peak hours and I wonder if they could even handle WN at any significant frequency?


Based on their significant growth in almost every other CA city they serve (ONT-ATL, SJC-JFK/DTW, SMF-DTW, lots of new flights from LAX, just to name a few), I’m surprised DL isn’t trying to grow FAT. They have been basically flat for the last couple years. SEA seems like it would be a good add based on it being so high O&D, but nothing yet. Without a second market, they will never be a serious competitor for FAT based traffic.
 
dfwjim1
Posts: 1934
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:46 pm

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:16 pm

Fun to follow the progress of FAT as I lived in Fresno from 1979 thru 1984. Is Fresno still called "Fresburg"?
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:27 pm

dfwjim1 wrote:
Fun to follow the progress of FAT as I lived in Fresno from 1979 thru 1984. Is Fresno still called "Fresburg"?


Depends on how much you like living there...
 
WN732
Posts: 340
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:49 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:16 pm

flyfresno wrote:
dfwjim1 wrote:
Fun to follow the progress of FAT as I lived in Fresno from 1979 thru 1984. Is Fresno still called "Fresburg"?


Depends on how much you like living there...


I've not heard that one before. I've heard Fresneck, Fresnope, Fresweird, and a local company is called FresYes.
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4688
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Fri Nov 09, 2018 2:59 am

Just an update on FAT's summer passenger numbers:

June 2018 - Enplaned passengers up 19.19% vs. June 2017; Deplaned passengers up 20.06% vs. June 2017
July 2018 - Enplaned passengers up 26.10% vs. June 2017; Deplaned passengers up 27.46% vs. June 2017
August 2018 - Enplaned passengers up 18.93% vs. June 2017; Deplaned passengers up 18.59% vs June 2017

The fiscal year to date passenger count is running about 23% higher than the previous fiscal year.

Given this is becoming the comprehensive FAT thread, perhaps a thread title change is in order?
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Fri Nov 09, 2018 3:27 am

FATFlyer wrote:
Just an update on FAT's summer passenger numbers:

June 2018 - Enplaned passengers up 19.19% vs. June 2017; Deplaned passengers up 20.06% vs. June 2017
July 2018 - Enplaned passengers up 26.10% vs. June 2017; Deplaned passengers up 27.46% vs. June 2017
August 2018 - Enplaned passengers up 18.93% vs. June 2017; Deplaned passengers up 18.59% vs June 2017

The fiscal year to date passenger count is running about 23% higher than the previous fiscal year.

Given this is becoming the comprehensive FAT thread, perhaps a thread title change is in order?


Great numbers.

We could start a new thread next year...it seems that many airports have a new thread every year. Might I suggest “FAT roaring out the gate in 2019?” Of course, that’s only if the growth continues...
 
ericm2031
Posts: 913
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:46 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Fri Nov 09, 2018 5:10 am

DL seems to want to stay away from a fight over a lot of fairly large CA airports to SEA (FAT/LGB/BUR/ONT/OAK) or they just don't serve them at all (SBA/SBP/MRY)
 
williaminsd
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2018 3:52 pm

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Fri Nov 09, 2018 2:06 pm

flyfresno wrote:
FATFlyer wrote:
Just an update on FAT's summer passenger numbers:

June 2018 - Enplaned passengers up 19.19% vs. June 2017; Deplaned passengers up 20.06% vs. June 2017
July 2018 - Enplaned passengers up 26.10% vs. June 2017; Deplaned passengers up 27.46% vs. June 2017
August 2018 - Enplaned passengers up 18.93% vs. June 2017; Deplaned passengers up 18.59% vs June 2017

The fiscal year to date passenger count is running about 23% higher than the previous fiscal year.

Given this is becoming the comprehensive FAT thread, perhaps a thread title change is in order?


Great numbers.

We could start a new thread next year...it seems that many airports have a new thread every year. Might I suggest “FAT roaring out the gate in 2019?” Of course, that’s only if the growth continues...


I like it...

Really good to see Fresno just killing it. Always liked the airport, and the town.

That kind of growth is spectacular and takes awhile to absorb. I always chuckle when I think of support staff at airports when they are experiencing this kind of growth. You know, say the guy at the rental car counter has been there half-a-dozen years and is used to coasting a bit during certain periods throughout the day. Well, no more coasting with a 20% yoy! That guy is BEAT at the end of every shift now.

Takes awhile for everyone, including the airlines, to catch up as they try to squeeze-out every dollar with existing resources.

The winter cutbacks are disappointing, but I think that's just showing an abundance of caution before hitting the gas in 2019. Fresno's been a tough market, with a higher hill to climb. Airlines focused on other California airports in 2017-2018, but assuming sustained economic growth in 2019, next year will be the "Year of the FAT." (How's that for a thread?)
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4688
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Fri Nov 09, 2018 3:39 pm

FAT posted another picture of the new gate 8 bridge installation. Looks like the bridge and remodeled hold room will be ready for the Thanksgiving rush.
http://www.facebook.com/FresnoYosemiteInternational/photos/a.1403349433234044/2231940390374940/
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
smflyer
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 4:44 pm

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Fri Nov 09, 2018 7:21 pm

flyfresno wrote:
whatusaid wrote:
FATFlyer wrote:
FAT posted pictures yesterday of the gate 8 passenger bridge being installed.
http://twitter.com/FresnoAirport/status/1060336381233221632

While gate 8 has been assigned to AS brand flights for quite a while, airport staff have been careful not to say the bridge and gate remodel are for AS. Partially that is because all FAT gates are CUTE, but it does leave open the possibility of some gate swaps next year. For example, DL's 3X/day CRJ flights may not be the best daytime use of 11's physical space and bridge.


Agree, DL needs to go to ground level - they seem to care less about FAT and play an insignificant role in this market.

Airport staff did tell the council that the project was for a "client". Given that they referenced Q's up to 321's, it is obviously AS related. But, this is too little, too late given the 15% growth in domestic traffic and the prospect for even greater traffic in 2019. If anything from this year, we've learned that when you add capacity that you also find sufficient traffic to fill the new flights, TSA backs up, short-term parking is packed, etc. Not certain their gate allocation based upon the WN and AC adds, plus added DL role in the master plan is really workable as-is. They're overly optimistic on scheduling that doesn't max out the gates.

I flew out to SAN last week in the evening and the scene reminded me of the crowds of the 6a rush or the GDL rush. The airport seems to be on the edge right now at peak hours and I wonder if they could even handle WN at any significant frequency?


Based on their significant growth in almost every other CA city they serve (ONT-ATL, SJC-JFK/DTW, SMF-DTW, lots of new flights from LAX, just to name a few), I’m surprised DL isn’t trying to grow FAT. They have been basically flat for the last couple years. SEA seems like it would be a good add based on it being so high O&D, but nothing yet. Without a second market, they will never be a serious competitor for FAT based traffic.


Delta seems to chase yield over having presence at an airport. FAT probably doesn't have the same yield on flights as other airports so its better suited if they fly their aircraft on higher yielding routes. DL has 3 nearby hubs (SEA, LAX, SLC) served from SMF, yet both UA (SFO, LAX, DEN) and AA (PHX, LAX) have a significantly higher passenger counts at SMF. Their financials indicate that they are the most profitable of the legacy's and this focus towards yield rather than outright growth shows on their more conservative approach in opening up new routes.

Just look at the hub/focus cities DL has been expanding in the last several years: SEA, AUS, RDU, CVG. They all have burgeoning tech industries and rapidly growing economies that make those cities served have very nice yields.
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Fri Nov 09, 2018 9:13 pm

smflyer wrote:
flyfresno wrote:
whatusaid wrote:

Agree, DL needs to go to ground level - they seem to care less about FAT and play an insignificant role in this market.

Airport staff did tell the council that the project was for a "client". Given that they referenced Q's up to 321's, it is obviously AS related. But, this is too little, too late given the 15% growth in domestic traffic and the prospect for even greater traffic in 2019. If anything from this year, we've learned that when you add capacity that you also find sufficient traffic to fill the new flights, TSA backs up, short-term parking is packed, etc. Not certain their gate allocation based upon the WN and AC adds, plus added DL role in the master plan is really workable as-is. They're overly optimistic on scheduling that doesn't max out the gates.

I flew out to SAN last week in the evening and the scene reminded me of the crowds of the 6a rush or the GDL rush. The airport seems to be on the edge right now at peak hours and I wonder if they could even handle WN at any significant frequency?


Based on their significant growth in almost every other CA city they serve (ONT-ATL, SJC-JFK/DTW, SMF-DTW, lots of new flights from LAX, just to name a few), I’m surprised DL isn’t trying to grow FAT. They have been basically flat for the last couple years. SEA seems like it would be a good add based on it being so high O&D, but nothing yet. Without a second market, they will never be a serious competitor for FAT based traffic.


Delta seems to chase yield over having presence at an airport. FAT probably doesn't have the same yield on flights as other airports so its better suited if they fly their aircraft on higher yielding routes. DL has 3 nearby hubs (SEA, LAX, SLC) served from SMF, yet both UA (SFO, LAX, DEN) and AA (PHX, LAX) have a significantly higher passenger counts at SMF. Their financials indicate that they are the most profitable of the legacy's and this focus towards yield rather than outright growth shows on their more conservative approach in opening up new routes.

Just look at the hub/focus cities DL has been expanding in the last several years: SEA, AUS, RDU, CVG. They all have burgeoning tech industries and rapidly growing economies that make those cities served have very nice yields.


The yield part is certainly true, but DL has been steadily growing in SMF, is now the second largest carrier by weekly departing frequencies, and is getting close to overtaking UA for pax. They will soon have non-stops to 6 hubs, compared to just 4ish (5 if you count ORD, which has been off and on) for AA; they will be even with UA if they add JFK. While AA still enjoys a larger passenger presence, DL seems to be expanding the quickest of the 3 majors in SMF. Don’t write them off there...
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Sun Nov 11, 2018 10:49 pm

This has been posed on the OAG forum, but thought I would add it here:

UA has added mainline (A319) service from FAT-ORD starting in April.
AS has extended their second E175 flight from FAT-PDX, at least through early summer.

It's only 8 first seats, but after cutting most premium out, it looks like UA is adding some first class back to FAT.
AS continues its growth in FAT. Only a matter of time until we see mainline? What will be the first city? SAN or SEA?
My money would be on SAN, but it's close. The FAT-SAN-HNL rumor would be great.
 
User avatar
SANFan
Posts: 4728
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:10 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:16 pm

flyfresno wrote:
AS continues its growth in FAT. Only a matter of time until we see mainline? What will be the first city? SAN or SEA?

Or both? I could see a 'Bus doing SAN-FAT-SEA-FAT-SAN every day.

One other option for that first mainline AS flight... HNL?

On a related note, AS continues their heavy tweaking of SAN-FAT skeds, still verging on triple-daily year-round service. On the latest March 10 skeds, published today -- which I realize may not yet be finalized -- the earliest n/b flight in the market is 10:45am and that's only 3 days a week! (And the next flight is at 12:15pm, daily.) And there's fairly late timing on the evening r/t: 9:15pm n/b and the last s/b flight leaves FAT at 7:20pm.

Who knows, they may be giving frequent/business travelers the times they want. I always have the urge to spread flights out and offer early morning, mid-day and evening service in both directions. But sometimes that's not really best for a market, or even possible, due to gate or a/c availability.

bb.
 
bd777
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:32 pm

Interesting, it looks like (based on United.com) that FAT-ORD mainline only lasts for April, then in May it goes back to an OO E175. Possibly due to summer schedule coming in effect and the A319 is needed somewhere else?
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Mon Nov 12, 2018 12:02 am

bd777 wrote:
Interesting, it looks like (based on United.com) that FAT-ORD mainline only lasts for April, then in May it goes back to an OO E175. Possibly due to summer schedule coming in effect and the A319 is needed somewhere else?


Could still not be updated yet from last year...
 
whatusaid
Topic Author
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:11 pm

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Mon Nov 12, 2018 1:15 am

flyfresno wrote:
bd777 wrote:
Interesting, it looks like (based on United.com) that FAT-ORD mainline only lasts for April, then in May it goes back to an OO E175. Possibly due to summer schedule coming in effect and the A319 is needed somewhere else?


Could still not be updated yet from last year...


The 175 for June onward has been on United.com for some time now - my guess it's a placeholder. That UA brought back ORD and upgraded is welcome news from a carrier that seems to be intent on not providing any first class options in this market. Now, will they upgrade DEN?
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Mon Nov 12, 2018 1:59 pm

whatusaid wrote:
flyfresno wrote:
bd777 wrote:
Interesting, it looks like (based on United.com) that FAT-ORD mainline only lasts for April, then in May it goes back to an OO E175. Possibly due to summer schedule coming in effect and the A319 is needed somewhere else?


Could still not be updated yet from last year...


The 175 for June onward has been on United.com for some time now - my guess it's a placeholder. That UA brought back ORD and upgraded is welcome news from a carrier that seems to be intent on not providing any first class options in this market. Now, will they upgrade DEN?


It would make the most sense of their three other routes (who cares about first class on a flight to LAX or SFO?) However, they are also competing with F9 on that route, and although F9 is only 3X per week, they might be lowering the yields enough that premium does not pencil out. I will be curious to see how ORD develops in the next few years. Short of a major economic downturn, we might even see both UA and AA doing it soon (AA might have written off the E175 last summer as an experiment, but it must be taking notice of this).
 
whatusaid
Topic Author
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:11 pm

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Mon Nov 12, 2018 2:45 pm

flyfresno wrote:
whatusaid wrote:
flyfresno wrote:

Could still not be updated yet from last year...


The 175 for June onward has been on United.com for some time now - my guess it's a placeholder. That UA brought back ORD and upgraded is welcome news from a carrier that seems to be intent on not providing any first class options in this market. Now, will they upgrade DEN?


It would make the most sense of their three other routes (who cares about first class on a flight to LAX or SFO?) However, they are also competing with F9 on that route, and although F9 is only 3X per week, they might be lowering the yields enough that premium does not pencil out. I will be curious to see how ORD develops in the next few years. Short of a major economic downturn, we might even see both UA and AA doing it soon (AA might have written off the E175 last summer as an experiment, but it must be taking notice of this).



The summer UA schedule at it exists includes a 4th to DEN closer to 6pm and F9’s 7p departure that’s priced about $100 less than the other three UA flights. First sign that UA admits F9 is also on that route? Let’s see if F9 goes with a 3X 321 again or goes for 4X or more on 320’s.
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Mon Nov 12, 2018 3:00 pm

whatusaid wrote:
flyfresno wrote:
whatusaid wrote:

The 175 for June onward has been on United.com for some time now - my guess it's a placeholder. That UA brought back ORD and upgraded is welcome news from a carrier that seems to be intent on not providing any first class options in this market. Now, will they upgrade DEN?


It would make the most sense of their three other routes (who cares about first class on a flight to LAX or SFO?) However, they are also competing with F9 on that route, and although F9 is only 3X per week, they might be lowering the yields enough that premium does not pencil out. I will be curious to see how ORD develops in the next few years. Short of a major economic downturn, we might even see both UA and AA doing it soon (AA might have written off the E175 last summer as an experiment, but it must be taking notice of this).



The summer UA schedule at it exists includes a 4th to DEN closer to 6pm and F9’s 7p departure that’s priced about $100 less than the other three UA flights. First sign that UA admits F9 is also on that route? Let’s see if F9 goes with a 3X 321 again or goes for 4X or more on 320’s.


Never thought of it that way. I will say, I’m a bit surprised that this flight replaces the mid day: fewer connections, longer times between FAT-DEN nonstop flights in the middle of the day. HOWEVER, I’m holding out hope they could be opening a hole up for a mainline flight (would make sense as a turn out of DEN). Every other airport on the west coast that UA serves DEN from at least twice per day has a mid-day flight. Seems a bit odd that FAT has 4X with no mid day.
 
PSAatSAN4Ever
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2018 5:38 pm

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Mon Nov 12, 2018 3:48 pm

WN732 wrote:
flyfresno wrote:
dfwjim1 wrote:
Fun to follow the progress of FAT as I lived in Fresno from 1979 thru 1984. Is Fresno still called "Fresburg"?


Depends on how much you like living there...


I've not heard that one before. I've heard Fresneck, Fresnope, Fresweird, and a local company is called FresYes.


Growing up in the 1970's, it was always referred to as "Bakersfield Farther North". In at least as far as the airport is concerned, it most certainly is not.

Congratulations to the Fresno area for creating for yourself an identity and maintaining your connections to the outside world. You are proving your area is a place people want to go - granted, not really a tourist destination, but obviously there is enough business traffic to warrant "right-sizing" the flights you have, and constant analysis and experimentation in finding new flights.

Perhaps someone from your city can share a bit of the good fortune with your by-far-less-attractive-but-formerly-nearly-identail sister to the south, who struggles to maintain the barest minimum of service at all. An EAS grant is needed to re-open a flight that used to operate for more than 15 years, now in a smaller airplane, and its maximum capacity, BFL will have seven daily departures. FAT will have that in the first hour.

A bit rambly, I suppose, but it is to pose this question: Can gravity alone explain why BFL languishes and FAT flourishes? The proximity of BFL to BUR and LAX is always going to pull many customers away, but I am wondering if Fresno is doing something else as well to drive the demand that Bakersfield (most probably) isn't?
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Mon Nov 12, 2018 4:14 pm

PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:
WN732 wrote:
flyfresno wrote:

Depends on how much you like living there...


I've not heard that one before. I've heard Fresneck, Fresnope, Fresweird, and a local company is called FresYes.


Growing up in the 1970's, it was always referred to as "Bakersfield Farther North". In at least as far as the airport is concerned, it most certainly is not.

Congratulations to the Fresno area for creating for yourself an identity and maintaining your connections to the outside world. You are proving your area is a place people want to go - granted, not really a tourist destination, but obviously there is enough business traffic to warrant "right-sizing" the flights you have, and constant analysis and experimentation in finding new flights.

Perhaps someone from your city can share a bit of the good fortune with your by-far-less-attractive-but-formerly-nearly-identail sister to the south, who struggles to maintain the barest minimum of service at all. An EAS grant is needed to re-open a flight that used to operate for more than 15 years, now in a smaller airplane, and its maximum capacity, BFL will have seven daily departures. FAT will have that in the first hour.

A bit rambly, I suppose, but it is to pose this question: Can gravity alone explain why BFL languishes and FAT flourishes? The proximity of BFL to BUR and LAX is always going to pull many customers away, but I am wondering if Fresno is doing something else as well to drive the demand that Bakersfield (most probably) isn't?


1) I think Fresno’s growth has partially been at BFL’s expense, I’m sorry to say. Meadows Field’s continued lack of growth has definitely resulted from more and more leakage to the LA Basin and, to some extent now, Fresno. I almost always hear people talking about coming up from Bakersfield (and places in between) when I’m at FAT, and the traffic and parking situations are both better there than most SoCal airports (certainly LAX, although the connections and fares there blow FAT out of the water 99% of the time). I don’t see that changing unless Southwest suddenly decides to serve BFL. People from FAT increasingly have more choices and lower fares locally, as well as a longer drive to other airports (as traffic gets worse in the Bay and LA).
2) It wasn’t an EAS grant, but a small community grant, I believe.
3) I don’t think FAT is doing anything special, per se; it’s just benefiting from favorable circumstances. I see it almost as a mini SMF, just on a smaller scale: once either airport hit a particular point in service/fares, and the economy was strong, both started to take off. SMF just has 2.5X the catchment area population, plus some Bay suburbs, to work with. No one would have guessed this two years ago, but 2 million pax seems obtainable by 2020.
 
dfwjim1
Posts: 1934
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 8:46 pm

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Mon Nov 12, 2018 4:29 pm

As its name implies, Fresno-Yosemite also serves as a gateway to Yosemite National Park and even Sequioa National Park plus a few ski resorts whereas Bakersfield does not have those type of attractions in the nearby mountains so that might be another reason for FAT's growth.
 
User avatar
exFWAOONW
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:32 pm

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Mon Nov 12, 2018 4:41 pm

With all your talk of RJs, I take it they no longer fly the Brasilla to SFO? I enjoyed that little hop a few years ago.
Is just me, or is flying not as much fun anymore?
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Mon Nov 12, 2018 4:52 pm

exFWAOONW wrote:
With all your talk of RJs, I take it they no longer fly the Brasilla to SFO? I enjoyed that little hop a few years ago.


OO retired them. No more pax turboprops from FAT!
 
User avatar
exFWAOONW
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:32 pm

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Mon Nov 12, 2018 7:24 pm

I thought it was a nice ride. Oh well, get the shoe-horn out.
Is just me, or is flying not as much fun anymore?
 
whatusaid
Topic Author
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:11 pm

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Tue Nov 13, 2018 5:48 pm

F9 is staying 3X a week to Den, 321’s, through Summer. Going to midday. Good move. G4 is going to 12X week to LAS.
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:02 pm

whatusaid wrote:
F9 is staying 3X a week to Den, 321’s, through Summer. Going to midday. Good move. G4 is going to 12X week to LAS.


Not that F9 is a shining beacon of service or reliability, but was hoping to see F9 on LAS too...
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Tue Nov 13, 2018 10:21 pm

whatusaid wrote:
F9 is staying 3X a week to Den, 321’s, through Summer. Going to midday. Good move. G4 is going to 12X week to LAS.


Also, this is WAY better than SMF’s schedule, which is a 12:55AM departure for a 4:25AM arrival into DEN. Looks like LAS will also have a DEN “red eye.” What?!?!
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4688
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:19 am

FAT today put out a press release and social media coverage of the return of FAT-ORD in 2019. They are mentioning both the larger aircraft and earlier start date. So far, 2 TV stations and the Fresno Business Journal have run stories tonight about the flight.
http://flyfresno.com/united-airlines-to-return-nonstop-service-to-chicago-ohare-in-spring-2019/
http://www.facebook.com/FresnoYosemiteInternational/photos/a.1403349433234044/2234552826780363/?type=3&theater

I see in the Facebook comments that a poster is mentioning that currently FAT-ORD is cheaper than SFO-ORD.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
whatusaid
Topic Author
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:11 pm

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:17 am

Didn’t Kevin break this to the media and not UA? UA must be pocketing incentives?

What’s still to come in 2019? United, even with ORD is down close to 100 seats a day from last summer and that gap should be filled to keep this record growth going. Their DEN schedule is a joke.

AS has more schedule changes in their online reservation system than I’ve seen in a long time. Hard to tell if that summer schedule is a placeholder or not. I’d think there’s still an opportunity for an upgrade to SEA or a 4th RT.

I’ve given up on DL. Anyone for Sun Country to MSP?

My guess is the next move is either another upgrade from UA or something from AS. Don’t see any new routes or up gauge coming otherwise. Thoughts?
 
pdxav8r
Posts: 175
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 3:15 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:59 am

flyfresno wrote:
exFWAOONW wrote:
With all your talk of RJs, I take it they no longer fly the Brasilla to SFO? I enjoyed that little hop a few years ago.


OO retired them. No more pax turboprops from FAT!

Sadly, for me. Took the EMB-120 a bunch of times between PDX and SEA, and SFO and MRY. Flights were just plain fun. Over 1.5 hrs though...
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:04 pm

whatusaid wrote:
I’ve given up on DL. Anyone for Sun Country to MSP?

My guess is the next move is either another upgrade from UA or something from AS. Don’t see any new routes or up gauge coming otherwise. Thoughts?


With all of SY’s oddball routes, SBA and STS being the two most applicable examples, maybe, but SY seems to be changing their strategy too. How many people in the Twin Cities visit Yosemite and the Sierra every year?

I would add another AA upgrade to PHX or a new ORD flight to that list of guesses. Granted, AA is not growing in ORD as much as UA is, but they could add it as a defensive move to keep their FFs, of which there are a lot who use FAT.
 
flyfresno
Posts: 644
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: FAT Traffic Another Record in Q1

Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:18 pm

FATFlyer wrote:
I see in the Facebook comments that a poster is mentioning that currently FAT-ORD is cheaper than SFO-ORD.

The ORD flight is around $144OW/287RT on many Mo Tu We Th in April. Compare that to $321 RT out of SFO, and yeah, it appears to be.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos