Just saw this link stating AUS will officially become a focus city. Any speculation on new routes that could realistically be added from DL at AUS?

https://viewfromthewing.boardingarea.co ... mini-hub/#

if you bothered looking at the Austin thread, you'd see this is already widely discussed. In fact, that blog picked up on what that thread discussed.

Oops, I probably should have looked over in the AUS thread first. If mods want to delete this thread than go ahead.

There are quite a few people that don’t check the AUS thread and this is the first time hearing of it. I feel this deserves its own thread as opposed to changes to AUS normal operations.

It was a focus city already in every way except an official title. I don't see any routes coming because of a paper announcement.

jetskipper wrote:

There are quite a few people that don’t check the AUS thread and this is the first time hearing of it. I feel this deserves its own thread as opposed to changes to AUS normal operations.

For sure.

Technically, it hasn’t been officially announced by DL or AUS, but it’s the first semi official confirmation that DL will ramp up operations at AUS.

This focus city should be on the same level as CVG/RDU, with around 70-80 flights and TATL service to AMS. This would be the final piece to DL’s network and give them a truly unrivaled network.

MSPNWA wrote:

It was a focus city already in every way except an official title. I don't see any routes coming because of a paper announcement.

jetskipper wrote:

There are quite a few people that don’t check the AUS thread and this is the first time hearing of it. I feel this deserves its own thread as opposed to changes to AUS normal operations.

For sure.

No it wasn’t. They don’t currently fly any p2p routes out of AUS.

ADrum23 wrote:

MSPNWA wrote:

It was a focus city already in every way except an official title. I don't see any routes coming because of a paper announcement.

jetskipper wrote:

There are quite a few people that don’t check the AUS thread and this is the first time hearing of it. I feel this deserves its own thread as opposed to changes to AUS normal operations.

For sure.

No it wasn’t. They don’t currently fly any p2p routes out of AUS.

Just curious what the 10 destinations are that they serve nonstop from AUS? Are they all to hubs and focus cities?

PlanesNTrains wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

MSPNWA wrote:

It was a focus city already in every way except an official title. I don't see any routes coming because of a paper announcement.


For sure.

No it wasn’t. They don’t currently fly any p2p routes out of AUS.

Just curious what the 10 destinations are that they serve nonstop from AUS? Are they all to hubs and focus cities?

Yep, all are to their hubs/focus cities (ATL, DTW, MSP, SLC, LAX, SEA, JFK, CVG, RDU, BOS). This is in part because they only have 3 gates. They will have somewhere between 6-8 once the expansion is completed and will then be able to launch new p2p routes.

ADrum23 wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

No it wasn’t. They don’t currently fly any p2p routes out of AUS.

Just curious what the 10 destinations are that they serve nonstop from AUS? Are they all to hubs and focus cities?

Yep, all are to their hubs/focus cities (ATL, DTW, MSP, SLC, LAX, SEA, JFK, CVG, RDU, BOS). This is in part because they only have 3 gates. They will have somewhere between 6-8 once the expansion is completed and will then be able to launch new p2p routes.

I was surprised that they had as few of flights at AUS as they do. I actually thought it was already a focus city of sorts for them, but with these mega carriers just flying to their hubs and focus cities makes second tier markets seem like focus cities themselves.

Here is a map of the nonstop routes that could be served nonstop out of AUS by DL:

Of the routes you have, I would say include Florida, Maybe SAN & LAS; SJC or SFO is a wildcard.. maybe MCI? The others I would highly doubt

How about an a350 flight from PHX to AUS...

tphuang wrote:

if you bothered looking at the Austin thread, you'd see this is already widely discussed. In fact, that blog picked up on what that thread discussed.

What a jerk of a response. Surely it’s a nicer way to respond to people. Geez!

jplatts wrote:

Here is a map of the nonstop routes that could be served nonstop out of AUS by DL:

They won't start many if any intra-Texas routes. WN dropped all of their services to places like HRL, MAF, and cut ELP. There are cities not on this map that make more sense.

EvanWSFO wrote:

jplatts wrote:

Here is a map of the nonstop routes that could be served nonstop out of AUS by DL:

They won't start many if any intra-Texas routes. WN dropped all of their services to places like HRL, MAF, and cut ELP. There are cities not on this map that make more sense.

Huh WN flys HRL-AUS daily, as well as ELP 3x daily.

jplatts wrote:

Here is a map of the nonstop routes that could be served nonstop out of AUS by DL:

AUS-ORD....on DL........you can't be serious

ADrum23 wrote:

No it wasn’t. They don’t currently fly any p2p routes out of AUS.

Uh, CVG, RDU, BOS? We can debate the "hubness" of those destinations, but those are the routes what you would expect from a "focus city".

Atlwarrior wrote:

tphuang wrote:

if you bothered looking at the Austin thread, you'd see this is already widely discussed. In fact, that blog picked up on what that thread discussed.

What a jerk of a response. Surely it’s a nicer way to respond to people. Geez!

Agreed. It's typical of the decorum on social media. Everyone loves to be right, show how smart they are, etc. - while really, all they're showing is their lack of manners and civility.

jetskipper wrote:

There are quite a few people that don’t check the AUS thread and this is the first time hearing of it. I feel this deserves its own thread as opposed to changes to AUS normal operations.

I agree. Never heard of it (plus, it is AUS after all) It's like saying check the Siem Reap thread. (I'll laugh if there is one .

Even though I dislike DL, I think its a pretty big deal when a new Focus city rolls out and so deserves its own thread.

What exactly is required to make a city a Focus City for an airline and are the requirements for every airline different?

ERJ170 wrote:

Of the routes you have, I would say include Florida, Maybe SAN & LAS; SJC or SFO is a wildcard.. maybe MCI? The others I would highly doubt

If they want to capture tech traffic no way could they exclude SJC.

flyoregon wrote:

What exactly is required to make a city a Focus City for an airline and are the requirements for every airline different?

No "set requirements," but in general if an airline serves all its hubs, has multiple p2p routes, and possibly some connecting traffic the airport could be considered a focus city. But to be officially called a focus city it is up to the airline

AUS-AMS would be a logical addition, in the same way DL flies MCO-AMS. AMS has much better connectivity than LHR with continental Europe.

SFOA380 wrote:

ERJ170 wrote:

Of the routes you have, I would say include Florida, Maybe SAN & LAS; SJC or SFO is a wildcard.. maybe MCI? The others I would highly doubt

If they want to capture tech traffic no way could they exclude SJC.

WN and AS already fly SJC-AUS. That market can only support so many carriers and flights.

DL would be better to try some new markets like AUS-AMS and maybe even AUS-ICN. The latter is a huge stretch.

DL moves its A359 base to AUS, and DTW is toast.
AUS/SJC/SZX on A359... premium market, and beyond the twins of AS and WN. What could go wrong??

Considering DL doesn't operate LAX/RDU-ORD, I wouldn't expect AUS to get it before those...even SEA being a hub of DL's has only had the route for a year. I doubt they would have any space to add it until the gate expansion in ORD is complete.

malev2012 wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

jplatts wrote:

Here is a map of the nonstop routes that could be served nonstop out of AUS by DL:

They won't start many if any intra-Texas routes. WN dropped all of their services to places like HRL, MAF, and cut ELP. There are cities not on this map that make more sense.

Huh WN flys HRL-AUS daily, as well as ELP 3x daily.

I knew they had flown both in the past. HRL I think has been 1x daily forever. ELP used to be 5 nonstops. DL isn't going to put in anything less than a CR7 or 9 in this focus city. The pax numbers are simply not there for CRP, HRL, AMA, LBB, MAF. Dallas is unlikely as well.

flyoregon wrote:

What exactly is required to make a city a Focus City for an airline and are the requirements for every airline different?

There really aren't any. Consolidation has meant the big 4 can easily have 40-50 departures a day from an airport. IMO, "focus city" means a lot more to a.netters than the city and pax flying. Most would not have the slightest clue what a focus city is. All they want is a flight that is convenient and cheap.

BoeingGuy wrote:

SFOA380 wrote:

ERJ170 wrote:

Of the routes you have, I would say include Florida, Maybe SAN & LAS; SJC or SFO is a wildcard.. maybe MCI? The others I would highly doubt

If they want to capture tech traffic no way could they exclude SJC.

WN and AS already fly SJC-AUS. That market can only support so many carriers and flights.

DL would be better to try some new markets like AUS-AMS and maybe even AUS-ICN. The latter is a huge stretch.

Also remember, AA could not make this route work, despite the fact they both have been tech cities for years.

People are reading way to much into a job posting.

EvanWSFO wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

SFOA380 wrote:

If they want to capture tech traffic no way could they exclude SJC.

WN and AS already fly SJC-AUS. That market can only support so many carriers and flights.

DL would be better to try some new markets like AUS-AMS and maybe even AUS-ICN. The latter is a huge stretch.

Also remember, AA could not make this route work, despite the fact they both have been tech cities for years.

AA made the route work just fine. At one time they had 4x on the route including 757s. AA gutted their SJC operation so it was a victim of that. AS just brought it back. WN has flown it for several years. Neither airline is dumb. There must be a market for the route.

BoeingGuy wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

WN and AS already fly SJC-AUS. That market can only support so many carriers and flights.

DL would be better to try some new markets like AUS-AMS and maybe even AUS-ICN. The latter is a huge stretch.

Also remember, AA could not make this route work, despite the fact they both have been tech cities for years.

AA made the route work just fine. At one time they had 4x on the route including 757s. AA gutted their SJC operation so it was a victim of that. AS just brought it back. WN has flown it for several years. Neither airline is dumb. There must be a market for the route.

The tech traffic alone should have sustained the route for American It didn't really need 757s, but AA handed a lot of business to WN. There is definitely a route, but AA gave up too soon.

MAH4546 wrote:

People are reading way to much into a job posting.

Tell us more...no one has mentioned that yet

airportugal310 wrote:

Tell us more...no one has mentioned that yet

You might want to look at the original post a bit more closely.... considering that that's what all this speculation is based on.

I am pretty sure IND would get flight.

3 airlines are on IND-AUS but none of them are daily

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

LAX772LR wrote:

airportugal310 wrote:

Tell us more...no one has mentioned that yet

You might want to look at the original post a bit more closely.... considering that that's what all this speculation is based on.

Thanks...completely missed that one like an idiot!

DL just placed an order for 20 more CRJ 900, it's a possibility that these plus other equipment swaps on other routes in the system could be for AUS expansion. Or just like many already said it could mean nothing and the two are not related.

tphuang wrote:

if you bothered looking at the Austin thread, you'd see this is already widely discussed. In fact, that blog picked up on what that thread discussed.

‘If you bothered?’ Why should anyone ‘bother’ with an AUS-specific thread if they aren’t a fan-Boy of the place?

Atlwarrior wrote:

tphuang wrote:

if you bothered looking at the Austin thread, you'd see this is already widely discussed. In fact, that blog picked up on what that thread discussed.

What a jerk of a response. Surely it’s a nicer way to respond to people. Geez!

There has been no announcement of any kind by delta. Just a vague LinkedIn post that a fellow member found which got then picked up by blogosphere. If this was actually a delta announcement, then I agree it’s news.

But you guys are right, my post was rude.

This may be discussed ad nauseum in other places but what difference does it make what Delta calls Austin? Isn’t all that matters the number of flights? if Delta calls it a focus city does that open up new connecting possibilities that would otherwise not be bookable? Not trying to be flip i’m Honestly trying to understand. Is it simply a badge of honor for Austin?

jplatts wrote:

Here is a map of the nonstop routes that could be served nonstop out of AUS by DL:

I agree with some of the others that ORD and the intra-Texas routes may not be what DL has in mind. But, living in TPA, I would love to have the AUS-TPA route added to compete with WN.

ncflyer wrote:

This may be discussed ad nauseum in other places but what difference does it make what Delta calls Austin? Isn’t all that matters the number of flights? if Delta calls it a focus city does that open up new connecting possibilities that would otherwise not be bookable? Not trying to be flip i’m Honestly trying to understand. Is it simply a badge of honor for Austin?

Other than being an indication of future growth (and probably a TATL flight), it doesn't really matter. Its more to confirm the idea that DL would treat AUS like RDU (with a TATL flight and a few P2P routes). I think ending up like RDU would be a great situation for AUS and an AMS or CDG flight would probably work out very well.

MAH4546 wrote:

People are reading way to much into a job posting.

Agreed.

2 years ago Emirates hired a sales manager to cover the Carolinas. Just sayin...

AUS-MCO seems like a good candidate for CR9 service. It could start out like IND and be upgauged to an A319 or 717 as time goes on.

tphuang wrote:

if you bothered looking at the Austin thread, you'd see this is already widely discussed. In fact, that blog picked up on what that thread discussed.

I personally believe this specific topic deserves its own thread.
In fact, this is the first place I saw this news.
So thank you to the person who started this post

DL's after tech traffic (same as with some other recent expansion focus destinations like RDU and BOS). Given that, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see DL start AUS-SJC at some point in the near future. That could be a good E75 or CS100 route. They already serve the important markets of SEA, LAX, RDU, JFK, and BOS, although there could be an extra frequency or two added here and there. In the longer term I actually wouldn't be completely surprised to see 1-2x daily on AUS-ORD, although that wouldn't happen until DL has more gates at ORD, and I'd expect it to come after ORD-LAX and ORD-BOS. AUS-MCO and AUS-LAS are two leisure routes that could make sense for DL - they're strong in both MCO and LAS, and have them connected to most of their focus cities.

I wouldn't expect any intra-Texas expansion until much further down the road, if things go well for DL in the short term in AUS and if metro Austin continues to grow at a rapid rate.

On the international front, I wouldn't be surprised to see DL start Sat-only AUS-CUN and maybe AUS-AMS (good onward connections to UK, Northern Europe, and India). I'm not sure what the East Asia O&D is like for AUS, but perhaps if growth continues it would make sense for KE to come in with a 3-4x weekly 789 service.

jetpixx wrote:

Atlwarrior wrote:

tphuang wrote:

if you bothered looking at the Austin thread, you'd see this is already widely discussed. In fact, that blog picked up on what that thread discussed.

What a jerk of a response. Surely it’s a nicer way to respond to people. Geez!

Agreed. It's typical of the decorum on social media. Everyone loves to be right, show how smart they are, etc. - while really, all they're showing is their lack of manners and civility.

Agree 100%!

flybry wrote:

jetpixx wrote:

Atlwarrior wrote:

What a jerk of a response. Surely it’s a nicer way to respond to people. Geez!

Agreed. It's typical of the decorum on social media. Everyone loves to be right, show how smart they are, etc. - while really, all they're showing is their lack of manners and civility.

Agree 100%!

He must live a very sad and angry life to have that response on an Internet forum. Leave him be