Oklahoma Commercial Air Service Discussion 2012

[ljbab728]

3 hours 15 minutes doesn't strike me as unusually long for an OKC-DCA flight.

I think damonsmuz made the mistake that many make when looking at flight schedules. They forget to take different time zones into account. The departure and arrival times are always the local time at the arrival or departure airport.

[damonsmuz]

Not a mistake on the flight time. I've flown the OKC-BWI flight a few times and with "normal" tail winds, the flight was never longer than 2 hours and 25 mins (including taxi). If you check WN's website, they have OKC-BWI listed as a 2:45 min flight. Maybe WN is just padding the flight time which I know airlines usually do. Or I have just been blessed with really quick flights back east

[damonsmuz]

Venture: on the DCA-SAN route, I thought flights outside of the DCA "perimeter" rule needed approval. Making this flight in my eyes something interesting to see.

[brianinok]

http://newsok.com/february-departures-take-a-leap-at-will-rogers-world-airport-and-tulsa-international-airport/article/3659952

Looks like February departures were up 16%. Holy cow.

[ljbab728]

Not a mistake on the flight time. I've flown the OKC-BWI flight a few times and with "normal" tail winds, the flight was never longer than 2 hours and 25 mins (including taxi). If you check WN's website, they have OKC-BWI listed as a 2:45 min flight. Maybe WN is just padding the flight time which I know airlines usually do. Or I have just been blessed with really quick flights back east

Airlines typically pad the flight time. It has to include gate to gate and at many airports you can get behind a lot of planes waiting for takeoff or in some places have to wait for other traffic after landing before going to your arrival gate.

[damonsmuz]

Found this and thought some of you would enjoy: http://www.departedflights.com/oagintro.html

Old flight table... gotta click to find OKC. It seemed that Enid and Amarillo were well served at one point. DFW was not well served back in the 70s...and you can really see how the building of the new DIA and getting rid of Stapelton pushed airlines to Denver. A good case of " if you build it, they will come syndrome" that worked very well for Denver.

Also, the equipment used is fun to see.

[venture]

Venture: on the DCA-SAN route, I thought flights outside of the DCA "perimeter" rule needed approval. Making this flight in my eyes something interesting to see.

I'm thinking they have been able to rearrange a beyond perimeter flight to another market. I'll have to check

Found this and thought some of you would enjoy: http://www.departedflights.com/oagintro.html

Old flight table... gotta click to find OKC. It seemed that Enid and Amarillo were well served at one point. DFW was not well served back in the 70s...and you can really see how the building of the new DIA and getting rid of Stapelton pushed airlines to Denver. A good case of " if you build it, they will come syndrome" that worked very well for Denver.

Also, the equipment used is fun to see.

I really enjoy Departed Flights. The guy actually shut down and I was thinking of taking it over, if he was willing. I'm sitting on probably 400 timetables myself and would love to get them scanned and uploaded. Lot of them from the 50s/60s/etc. I always enjoy looking back and seeing what was offered before. My old hometown airport use to have United DC-8s to Chicago and Denver (and several other airlines), but today has only a half dozen American Eagle flights. Funny how some markets just really blossom or completely die away.

[Oil Capital]

Great resource, damonsmuz. Thanks for posting

[OUman]

http://newsok.com/february-departures-take-a-leap-at-will-rogers-world-airport-and-tulsa-international-airport/article/3659952

Looks like February departures were up 16%. Holy cow.

Good numbers, but by the airport's own admission, there were two back-to-back blizzards that time one year ago, there are three additional flights daily this year (new LAX and SFO service), several large events took place this Feb. (sporting events such as the Nadia Comaneci Invitational, conferences, etc.) all of which partially impacted numbers between Feb. 2011 and Feb. 2012.

Now if this were the case on a normal basis, that East Concourse would be already built.

By the way, the "if you build it they will come" deal is pretty much over. At least with the airline industry. In Denver's case, the city actually was in dire need of a new airport. Stapleton was riddled with problems, from intersecting runways to a bad airfield layout that effectively turned it into a single-runway airport during bad weather (3 out of the 4 runways had to be shut down).

Look at Mid-America airport near St. Louis. Two words-Ghost Town. It was built on the "if you build it they will come" moniker. Now it's just a waste of money. I seriously don't know why it's being kept. Another great example of failure of that philosophy-Montreal's Mirabel Airport. Now it's just used by Bombardier for aircraft manufacturing/testing, and a few flights by cargo carriers. It was intended to replace Dorval, which is a lot closer to the city.

On another note, since the late 90's/early 2000's, airlines have added extra time to their flight schedules to account for taxi/gate delays at both, origin and destination airports. That's why even though the flight itself may take 2:45, the actual flight time (gate-to-gate) maybe 3:20. Like AA's OKC-DFW flights-they only take around 40 min once airborne, but the entire flight time is listed as 1:05.

[ljbab728]

On another note, since the late 90's/early 2000's, airlines have added extra time to their flight schedules to account for taxi/gate delays at both, origin and destination airports. That's why even though the flight itself may take 2:45, the actual flight time (gate-to-gate) maybe 3:20. Like AA's OKC-DFW flights-they only take around 40 min once airborne, but the entire flight time is listed as 1:05.

That's exactly what I pointed out in my post number 111.

[damonsmuz]

Yes, I know the flight times are "padded". I was just referencing why OKC-DCA would be listed as 3:15 when OKC-BWI is listed as 2:45. Is BWI not padded enough or is DCA being padded too much? DCA and BWI only differ by a little bit in terms of operations. I believe DCA would have more, but not much more. But is it enough to account for 30 extra mins of pad?

[venture]

Yes, I know the flight times are "padded". I was just referencing why OKC-DCA would be listed as 3:15 when OKC-BWI is listed as 2:45. Is BWI not padded enough or is DCA being padded too much? DCA and BWI only differ by a little bit in terms of operations. I believe DCA would have more, but not much more. But is it enough to account for 30 extra mins of pad?

They'll probably fine tunes things if the award is given. Keeping in mind WN doesn't have any ops into DCA right now except under FL (AirTran). Inexperience with the market may be a reason to a pad a little or just expected delays on the ground could be playing into this too.

[OUman]

Another possible reason-probably because flying westbound generally involves going against headwinds. This is negligeble for flight times of an hour or less, but the more the distance increases, the greater the effect is going to be, especially for flights from the east coast. You'll find flight times varying by an hour or so for the coast-to-coast flights, BOS-LAX normally takes about an hour longer than LAX-BOS. Or DEN-JFK and JFK-DEN, same thing.

[ljbab728]

DCA and BWI only differ by a little bit in terms of operations. I believe DCA would have more, but not much more. But is it enough to account for 30 extra mins of pad?

BWI has 84 gates and DCA has 45. That can make a big difference in operation times with similar traffic.

[soonerliberal]

BWI has 84 gates and DCA has 45. That can make a big difference in operation times with similar traffic.

DCA also has the unique landing patterns because of its proximity to DC and it only has two working runways for commercial aviation. Generally, planes that are 737 or larger use one runway and commuter jets use the shorter runway.

[venture]

Quick update here. Pinnacle filed for Chapter 11 earlier this week and part of that is the removal of the Dash 8 Q400 fleet. They currently operate 3 of the daily flights to IAH from OKC. The plan appears to replace them with existing 50-seat ERJ 145s in the fleet and they are also bringing the ERJ 135s out of the desert as well. Won't see the new schedule for OKC-IAH for a few months, but generally it does look like OKC will see a net loss in seats available offered by United to Houston. We'll see if United, which I believe may own the aircraft and just lease them to Pinnacle, puts them with another operator and keeps them on the route.

[damonsmuz]

Weren't these Q400's originally owned by Colgan Air? From the outside looking in, it seems that using the 400s would be a good idea and using the 135's would be a waste when it comes to fuel efficiency. But, that's just my thought.

[OUman]

Yeah but Colgan became a subsidiary of Pinnacle. Btw looks like the Q400s won't be all gone until November:
http://atwonline.com/airline-finance...hapter-11-0402

The Saab 340Bs will be gone much sooner. But if Colgan isn't making money with Q400s it does need to do some restructuring.

[venture]

There was an article in Airways a month or two back that hinted that Pinnacle/Colgan's contract with United was at rates that were sustainable with current fuel prices. It was stated then that bankruptcy was a likely event in order to take care of this. So it probably has nothing to do with the Q400 itself, but the fact that they were tired in a capacity purchase agreement that forced them to sell 100% of inventory well below cost.

I do agree that swapping the Qs for the 135s would be horrible. Fares will have to be higher to offset fewer seats and higher fuel costs. The airlines are getting kicked in the face for dumping the more efficient props for the small jets. It is also costing many small/medium markets air service they've had for decades too. The other side to this is that aircraft makers have backed away from any new generation props. Saab is done making airplanes. Dornier is dead. Embraer is all jet now. Bombardier stopped making the Q200/300 and the Q400 is pretty pricey. Beechcraft stopped with the 1900, but will restart if they get a large order. ATR is still pumping out 42s and 72s, but that is about it.

[damonsmuz]

It's a shame to see the prop business fall the way it has because in all reality, the prop business should be booming now with the way gas prices are. Airlines have let public perception impact them way to much when it comes to prop. vs jet. Sadly, until an airline/s shows a huge amount of interest for prop planes again, the likelyhood of riding in one again will be hard to come by. I personally enjoy them. There are no replacements out there for props. Is Great Lakes and Horizon the only US airline still operating them? I flew on Skywest a few times in the 120 (which is like riding a hot rod). The fewer props left out there, the less likely we are to ever see towns like Woodward, Enid, Ponca City, etc see EAS service.

On a side note, I see Garden City, KS just started EAS service with AE. I wonder how many Panhandlers are going to Kansas to fly. Or even how many people in NW Oklahoma (Woodward) are willing to make that drive to fly out.

[damonsmuz]

Opps... I guess I should have added the USAirways regional airlines for those still using props.

[OUman]

ATR is actually actively looking at a larger turboprop again, as interest has gained quite a bit in a larger turboprop, especially with the higher jet fuel prices in the last few years. Indeed, ATR has been selling its ATR 42s and 72s quite a bit over the last few years, and has also gained large orders for the newest variant, the -600.

Source: http://www.ainonline.com/node/102795

A 90-seat turboprop done right would probably be a popular option I think.

[venture]

Yeah...ATR is the only one right now. I think a family of props with 46/70/90 seats would do very well. Bombardier had a good start, but they needed to standardize against the Q400.

[damonsmuz]

The ATR is a nice plane, sadly Delta Connection and American Eagle have dumped 'em all. I enjoyed driving to Lawton and seeing the ATR on final approach. Unfortunately, only 19 orders for the Q400 have been placed since last summer. And 2 of those orders were for Horizon. I don't know what it would take to make the prop "right". Lower maintenance costs?

The prop business should have "taken off" (no pun intended) about 7 years ago. Sadly, propplanes are getting dumped faster than purchased here in America.

[venture]

The problem is we have a bunch of MBAs who are nothing like their predecessors running the airlines now. If I had the money I would love to get my hands on a couple dozen 30-70 seat props and run a point-to-point system throughout the Midwest and Northeast. Much like the USAir, Allegheny, Air Wisky, etc. of old. The biggest obstacle right now is the initial acquisition costs for the new generation props like the Q400. The ATRs then to be a bit better in cost and I really like them. The only thing I'm not a fan of is the rear boarding door instead of through the front, but you can get creative with jetbridge layout to make sure there is properly utilized ramp space with multiple aircraft.