Tulsa is no longer shown as a destination on the interactive route map.

looks like ABQ is our new hub city to get to SMF and ONT on one flight resp.

Only the morning flights stop in ABQ. The afternoon flights are non stop to SMF and ONT

That’s the problem... Got to many dang airline companies in the market... Like to have more presence at the airport but what help is this going to do...

Rage,

Not sure what your comments are directed at. This is a great opportunity for OKC to get nonstop markets when they normally wouldn't show up. Do we have too many airlines in the US? Not really. The biggest issue I see is the fact the major network airlines have really shunned some of the small cities from expanded cities, while it is up to the smaller airlines like Allegiant to fill in.

This is a great opportunity for OKC to get nonstop markets when they normally wouldn't show up.

I totally overlooked that... Yeah I was just not thinking that way but I get the point... Big airlines don't want to spend there time with smaller airports so this keeps us at check...

Express has plans for OKC and Tulsa..? Someone mentioned that Tulsa was off the destination map...

Tulsa is still there. They had shown a route between OKC and TUL, but removed it. They will still have service to the same group of cities as OKC. Personally, I wish airlines would get away from offering carbon copy operations at both airports...but whatever works. :)

I wish airlines would get away from offering carbon copy operations at both airports

Yeah you would think that they would have thought of that... Instead of offering the same routes at both airports- Change some up... I would mind driving to OKC to catch another route and vise verse with TUL...

That might occur at a later stage, but it's just that airlines that have hub ops will end up flying to the same destinations from two major in-state cities. That and the pax traffic/route demands are essentially the same for both airports. We don't have too many airlines, but we do have too many hubs. It's only in recent years we've seen a downsizing/elimination of hubs (PIT, STL, CMH, DFW (the DL/DL Conn hub) and so on) like it should've been. We still have too many hubs IMO but it's better now than it was before.

Why isn't this information on the WRWA's website yet? No press release, no update on non-stop cities, no update on airlines.

^Is it a surprise? lol The terminal map hasn't even been updated to show DL's newly opened gates. I don't know, they seem to be always behind in updating the website on these things for some reason. On the other hand, passenger totals have been released for '06. Traffic went up over 3.6 million-a new high total.

let's shoot for at least 4M this year. I've flown to OKC this year already and will again in April. Maybe one more time toward the end for the Centinnial (sp?)

So that would make 8 pax from my end.

San Antonio flights have been loaded. Two daily trips...

OKC Departures
810 AM - Flight 515
755PM - Flight 517

Inbounds not showing up

^So XE (code for Expressjet) will have a total of 10 daily departures from OKC. Nice.

11 new flights including Washington. Am I the only one that thinks that may be too many for OKC to support with them pretty much starting around the same time?

Don't get me wrong, I think it's great we're getting them. I just wouldn't be surprised if not all of them make it.

IAD will do well.
SMF and SAT worry me a bit.

there we go with the DaVinci code again...

SAT is a surprise considering UAX tried that and didnt do well. SMF is probably also an iffy destination from here, but we'll see, no one thought MSP flights would last more than a couple months at best, but that has been effectively shot down.

As for being worried about 11 new daily departures in a short time span-it's normal in up comnig markets. Besides, remember that this service is all going to be operated with RJ's, mostly 50 seats. It's not like someone's setting up a hub here and going all mainliners. Shouldn't be too hard to fill a couple RJ's daily if the maketing's done right. Also, as the Allegiant, DL Conn and many other examples have shown, use it or lose it. The LAX flight has done really well, which is why UAX has gone ahead with its decision to start the IAD flight. Considering it's one of the most requested for nonstops from OKC, shouldn't be a problem filling that flight at all.

SAT is a surprise considering UAX tried that and didnt do well. SMF is probably also an iffy destination from here, but we'll see, no one thought MSP flights would last more than a couple months at best, but that has been effectively shot down.

As for being worried about 11 new daily departures in a short time span-it's normal in up comnig markets. Besides, remember that this service is all going to be operated with RJ's, mostly 50 seats. It's not like someone's setting up a hub here and going all mainliners. Shouldn't be too hard to fill a couple RJ's daily if the maketing's done right. Also, as the Allegiant, DL Conn and many other examples have shown, use it or lose it. The LAX flight has done really well, which is why UAX has gone ahead with its decision to start the IAD flight. Considering it's one of the most requested for nonstops from OKC, shouldn't be a problem filling that flight at all.

I can't really disagree. I guess I was playing more of the devil's advocate position. First of all, I completely think the IAD flight will do fine as long as they don't overprice it. No reason to think they will, but I do remember when Continental initially started flights to Newark, prices were through the roof and we almost lost them until they lowered that fare.

With Express Jet, I think they'll have good loads. I also agree that San Antonio and Sacramento are the biggest question marks. Two flights to Albuquerque is also a question mark, although one of the flights continues to Ontario. San Antonio would be helped some if they let you book a flight to Corpus Christi.

Where I guess my "concern" is with some the of legacy carriers. If the demand isn't there to support enough of the seats available, we might lose some flights there or lose what few mainliners we have. Take your Minneapolis example. The Minneapolis flights have done well, and Detroit is doing okay. However, that came at the expense of Memphis. Before MSP and DTW were added, we had more flights to MEM and they were pretty much DC-9's. They all rely on connecting traffic.

It'll be interesting to see what happens for sure.

Seriously guys, if you don't want to use layman's terms on this stuff, could you just take it to PM's because the rest of us can't understand it.

At least please spell out the city names on the ones that aren't obvious.

SAT - San Antonio
SMF - Sacramento
IAD - Washington Dulles
MSP - Minneapolis/St. Paul
MEM - Memphis
DTW - Detroit

Frontier's A319 has been running for about a month now...definitely a great choice. Even better news is when the route will get one of the Embraer 170s with the new affliate (Republic) coming on board to operate Jet Express. Will be a HUGE improvement over the CRJs. Can't wait to get my first ride on one since the reviews are just amazing...at least the US Airways ones.

Looks like the 1st Embraer 170 flight will be on April 1 at 1:35 PM, replacing the current 4:15 PM flight. The second Embraer flight will be April 16 at 5:55 AM, replacing the current 6:00 AM. Hate to see the mainliner go, but the 170 will be great. I'm also not shocked that the Airbus is being yanked, as loads apparently haven't been good. Personally, I've been on the flight 3 times this year, and the best load I've seen was around 40-50 pax.

^The 319 was likely brought in only for the heavier loads during the winter/hoilday season. United will likely bring back the 319/320 mix again this summer though for the early morning departure to DEN.

^The 319 was likely brought in only for the heavier loads during the winter/hoilday season. United will likely bring back the 319/320 mix again this summer though for the early morning departure to DEN.

Maybe it's just me, and though I'm a big fan of the Boeings, it seems the A319s/A320s are a bit more comfortable. Granted, I'm not thin ;). 'Course compared to the little Embraers, anything is more comfortable!

Maybe it's just me, and though I'm a big fan of the Boeings, it seems the A319s/A320s are a bit more comfortable. Granted, I'm not thin ;). 'Course compared to the little Embraers, anything is more comfortable!

I have flown nearly every model aircraft in the sky. And, yes. Airbus is much more comfortable. Plus it is quiter and has a much nicer interior. I would rather fly them than Boeing. (except the 777)

I believe the cabin width is a couple inches great on the Airbii narrowbodies. Of course it all comes down to the airline and how they want to configure the things. To me the best coach product was the Mesaba Avros...those were nice. Most domestic first class products are about the same...I've done American and Delta and really saw no difference.

Of course...give me a Seven Two any day over this modern day garbage. ;)

^Not if you've flown Delta and Air France triples. The seat pitch is ridiculous (and I'm a short guy), and in Delta's Y class, the seats barely recline. I like the CRJ's seats better than that. I like both Boeing and Airbus pretty much equally though, and seating is down to the airlines like venture said.