Air Service [Archive]

HOT ROD

03-20-2005, 05:33 PM

OUman

03-21-2005, 03:30 PM

I think our best chance for Nonstop from Seattle would be either Northwest or America West.

Northwest has a Gateway Hub in Seattle for International Flights, so a nonstop to seattle might be feasible for this reason. Memphis is the Central Hub and there really is NO west coast hub (besides Seattle's gateway). This is probably the BEST shot for OKC but we would have to get some Tokyo bound travelers (or Asia) to consistently fly.

America West due to it potentially becoming the central hub or minihub. Seattle is a stop on AW and most flights go thru Phoenix. Having an OKC flight or two from Seattle would cut down on the time it would take to get to the East Coast. I honestly think this is our best shot!

Other potentials: US Airways (already doing codeshare with United, and probably why OKC has the direct flight from Seattle), Continental (a big maybe here as Seattle is not a hub nor is OKC), American (very doubtful due to their heavy reliance on DFW and ORD grid system).

All other major airlines have hubs in the west between OKC and Seattle, so a nonstop would probably not occur. In fact, this is the reason OKC does not have many nonstops to the coasts. There are already hub airports for airlines inbetween (like Phoenix, Denver, Mem, Chicagos) before you get to the coast.

America West is a special case, because it actually would be more economical to have the flight go from SEA to OKC instead of SEA to PHX to OKC. I think this is why they are considering OKC as a potential expansion hub, our central location is hard to beat and our lack of coastal service actually creates a business case (and hence, financial opportunity) for them!

Ditto that for US AIR but 1) they are bankrupt so they will not expand and 2) they codeshare with United, which has an extensive E-W route structure already with West coast hub in SFO, Mountain hub at DEN, Central and main hub at ORD, and East Hub at DUL. In addition, United has Latin Gateway at MIA and a Pacific Gateway at LAX. Unless US Air picks it up, it is cheaper for them to codeshare with United's extensive network/and more economical for United to have them and use US Air's extensive East Coast shuttles, something United does not have.

Not to pick on you or anything, but thought I would make some comments. United doesn't have gateway operations at Miami Int'l. Some flights from Dulles Int'l and O'Hare on their way to destinations like Rio de Janeiro make a stop there before proceeding on to South American destinations. Same for the way back, although United does also have nonstops between the U.S. and South America.

Northwest does not operate a hub at the SeaTac airport. It has a smaller focus operation.

As for nonstop service between Oklahoma City and Seattle/Tacoma, there are several scenarios. Alaska Airlines now has a full maintainence center at Will Rogers, which is AAR Aircraft Services. If the demand is there, Alaska could convert a maintainence flight into a scheduled passenger flight between both areas. That would be just one daily nonstop roundtrip though. So if you want more frequency (two a day), then the RJ would do, which is why Horizon Air might start nonstops.

About service nonstop service between Oklahoma City and Seattle/Tacoma, I have noticed the increase in use of regional jets for non-hub flights, meaning that the commuter lines are using them for point-to-point flights, more like Southwest does and thus those flights bypass the hubs completely. So America West Express or any other commuter line could start such flights to/from Oklahoma City. So that could be a good possibility, given our metro population.

OUman

mranderson

03-21-2005, 03:59 PM

HOT ROD

03-21-2005, 04:43 PM

Not to pick on you or anything, but thought I would make some comments. United doesn't have gateway operations at Miami Int'l. Some flights from Dulles Int'l and O'Hare on their way to destinations like Rio de Janeiro make a stop there before proceeding on to South American destinations. Same for the way back, although United does also have nonstops between the U.S. and South America.

Northwest does not operate a hub at the SeaTac airport. It has a smaller focus operation.

As for nonstop service between Oklahoma City and Seattle/Tacoma, there are several scenarios. Alaska Airlines now has a full maintainence center at Will Rogers, which is AAR Aircraft Services. If the demand is there, Alaska could convert a maintainence flight into a scheduled passenger flight between both areas. That would be just one daily nonstop roundtrip though. So if you want more frequency (two a day), then the RJ would do, which is why Horizon Air might start nonstops.

About service nonstop service between Oklahoma City and Seattle/Tacoma, I have noticed the increase in use of regional jets for non-hub flights, meaning that the commuter lines are using them for point-to-point flights, more like Southwest does and thus those flights bypass the hubs completely. So America West Express or any other commuter line could start such flights to/from Oklahoma City. So that could be a good possibility, given our metro population.

OUman

United did operate a gateway out of MIA. They may not now, but I know at least before the bankruptcy they did and they still prominently list MIA on their South American route structure.

Northwest DOES!! operate a gateway out of SEA. I know, cause I live here. You seem to be aviation savvy, so you know that I !!never!! said Seattle has a Northwest HUB. I said Gateway (which is an international connection point) as we have NonStop flights to Tokyo and Taipei, I think SEA just got Osaka also and may be getting Shanghai.

<.>

I absolutely forgot about Alaska. It is headquartered and hubbed here in Seattle. And you are right, OKC is the maintenance base. I think you are correct, that Alaska or its partner Horizon (also hq and hubbed in SEA) could begin a SEA-OKC route if the demand is there. I think they should do it, since they need to service the planes anyways, why not offer some seats?

I would say, Alaska/Horizon probably represents our best chance for Nonstop SEA-OKC and PDX-OKC. Heck, they could also do LA-OKC as LA is a big op for them.

Probably, America West might be our second best chance but that is only if AW selects OKC as its central hub. We could easily get on the SEA, PDX, SFO, LAX to NYC, CHI, WAS, ATL, MIA routes and have coastal access we so desire! and need!

The other thing I wish, is that we had a small feeder airline serving OKC and surrounding small airports. We have lots of little airports in the state and region, why doesnt someone start a small airline which would feed a flight or two a day from these airports? You know, Enid, Ponca, Lawton, Mac, plus ICT, TUL, LIT, AMA, ABQ, LUB, so on... It would not have to be a huge number of flight operations and would not even have to be daily, but at least give people in smaller airports an option!

I can tell you that SEA does this and it is THE main reason why we have 26 Million PAX per year, when SEA arguably should have about 20M! Of course, OKC probably would not have that much growth but maybe OKC could grow from 3.5M to 7M with such an op. Seems pretty feasible to me, and is what GP should have done, start small first - grow your ridership (and dependence/market) then tackle the coasts.

OUman

03-23-2005, 11:03 AM

Yes. Alaska Airlines is a possibility and one the airport distrust should pursue. If for no other reason, to get better exposure to that part of the country.

If we get the America West hub, the airline will probably use 737's or A320's. Not regional jets. However, flights to Sea-Tac would almost be a sure bet. Along will all major cities served by AW.

737's and 320's are fine, but our passenger traffic is not supportive enough of justifying the use of these mainliners. Over 50% of the flights at WRA are operated w/ RJ's, the rest are mainliners. With RJ's, you can provide the option of atleast two flights a day when a mainliner would only provide for one, and atleast one a day when a mainliner just won't be feasible.

America West and America West Express will have to use a combination of mainliners and RJ's if they do go ahead w/ this, otherwise a hub won't be successful here.

OUman

mranderson

03-23-2005, 11:09 AM

737's and 320's are fine, but our passenger traffic is not supportive enough of justifying the use of these mainliners. Over 50% of the flights at WRA are operated w/ RJ's, the rest are mainliners. With RJ's, you can provide the option of atleast two flights a day when a mainliner would only provide for one, and atleast one a day when a mainliner just won't be feasible.

America West and America West Express will have to use a combination of mainliners and RJ's if they do go ahead w/ this, otherwise a hub won't be successful here.

OUman

Keep in mind, the traffic count will skyrocket with hub status,(300 flights a day) and the flight range will be from 160 miles to 3,000 miles (aprox). Therefore, with the number of people connecting through Will Rogers, larger aircraft will be justified.

Plus. A lot of people here have no experience with America West. I do. I use to fly them all the time in another state. All they own, other than the puddle jumpers and Dash 80's are 737, 757, A319 and A320's.

swake

03-23-2005, 01:43 PM

America West has 24 CRJ-900s and 18 CRJ-200s operated as AW Express, and regional jets are important at any hub as connectors to smaller airports.

OUman

03-23-2005, 10:00 PM

mranderson

03-23-2005, 10:20 PM

Patrick

03-23-2005, 10:38 PM

But hub or not, I really hope the east concourse is built. It doesn't make sense to not build it right now, especially as our pax count is approaching the 3.5 mil mark.

If they don't build the East Concourse, I really don't see what the point in "expanding" our airport was. Afterall, the "expansion" would become a misnomer. I suppose we've gotten a nice airport out of it.

HOT ROD

03-24-2005, 10:41 AM

Speaking of mainliners, I just found out that United will be operating possibly the first-ever scheduled 757-200 flight between OKC and DEN. This will be for only two months the way it looks right now on the schedules (May and June), so enjoy it while it lasts I guess.

But hub or not, I really hope the east concourse is built. It doesn't make sense to not build it right now, especially as our pax count is approaching the 3.5 mil mark.

OUman

I like the sound of THAT!!! 757 is one of my favourite planes (certainly my fav single aisle)!! Usually, if you get 757's, then you are a Big City (with lots business travelers). Too bad we (BOEING) pulled the plug on the program, but out 737-900 really canabalized the 757 market.

But it is very nice to hear United will run them. I wonder if this will be the direct flight from Seattle?

mranderson

03-24-2005, 10:56 AM

No. The 757 is to Denver.

UA flight 1231 departs Will Rogers 9:30 AM arrives Denver International 10:08 AM.

This information was taken from my daily fare search for my trip to Sacramento in May.

OUman

03-24-2005, 04:23 PM

If they don't build the East Concourse, I really don't see what the point in "expanding" our airport was. Afterall, the "expansion" would become a misnomer. I suppose we've gotten a nice airport out of it.

The expansion in that case would be the addition of a new concourse w/ larger concession space and holdrooms, and an expanded main terminal w/ the same, and a food court. And then all the landside additions.

But that only gives us 17 gates. W/ the eight-gate east concourse, it'll be 25. Let's hope they build it.

That being said, the terminal will look much much better than it did before (the west concourse is great).

The main terminal will have the same, lots of glass all around and better concessions and decor.

OUman

Karried

03-24-2005, 05:43 PM

It is so crucial to do this correctly, aesthetically speaking as well. The airport is the first thing people see when coming to OK - especially executives flying in to preview this area for future businesses.

OUman

03-25-2005, 10:26 AM

mranderson

03-25-2005, 10:34 AM

I remember reading somewhere in this forum that if Allegiant's load factor between Las Vegas and Oklahoma City is good, it'll consider service between Oklahoma City and Orlando.

It recently announced that Orlando Sanford Int'l Airport will be its focus airport. Let's hope it starts nonstops between that and Will Rogers! Load factors have been pretty good so far between OKC and LAS.

OUman

Of course, Trans Meridian had that route, but they pulled out without giving Oklahoma City a fair chance. Southwest also had a non stop to Orlando.

With all the people who like to visit that four fingered Mouse, we need a non stop to Central Florida.

xrayman

03-25-2005, 12:02 PM

Let's face it - Oklahoma City has never been a market that has successfully supported non-stop flights. Our demographics just cannot support that. The chamber crowd may not like to hear it - but they know it's true. They have talked many an airline over the years into giving them a try. They have all failed. Amazingly, according to this crowd, it's always the airlines fault. It will be a long time before OKC can support non-stop flights to points other than Dallas, KC, etc. It just is not going to happen. Airlines are not in the business of subsidizing non-performing routes.

mranderson

03-25-2005, 12:19 PM

Actually, this line that Oklahoma City can not support non stop flights is not true. This is a city with a metro population nearing 1.5 million people, and a service range of almost two million. This is one of the largest cities in the nation. Many cities smaller have numerous non stop flights and they thrive.

Plus, when Oklahoma City obtains hub status, we will have hundreds of percent increase in airline traffic, and direct flights will be even more scarce.

I really do not understand how anyone can justify the negitive comments that I hear all the time from people around this city, and quite frankly. I am tired of negitivity.

When someone from somewhere else hears nothing but negitive comments from someone who lives someplace about that place, just imagine what image it projects.

Think of it as you would a potentially fatal illness. If you had that illness, would you have a negitive attitude? Well, guess what. Oklahoma City has an illness. It is called negitive attitude. It could be fatal if not treated.

Think about it. And remember. You are an ambassador representing Oklahoma City. Not the opposite.

xrayman

03-25-2005, 12:41 PM

Being an ambassador doesn't mean pretending that something is true - when it is not. I don't quite understand the "believe and it will happen" line. Nor do I understand the "We can't talk about anything negative - others will hear!" Frankly, that's silly. We are what we are and all the "positive talk" will not change the facts. This is a great city, but it's nowhere near what some here would like it to be. There is no use in pretending otherwise. The NFL??? Please. Not for a long, long time. Our NFL team is down in Norman.

This meme about Oklahoma City being one the largest in the nation, etc. does no good except to create false expectations. Population alone does not tell the story. Demographics tell the story. Look at the median income. Look at the education demos. All of these things tell the story of a city. All of these things must change before Oklahoma City can compete with other cities for non-stop flights. It's not like there's not a history here, MrAnderson. There is! Several airlines have tried these routes out of Oklahoma City and the demand was just not there! What is it about that which is so hard to understand? Talking about that is not "negative" - it's about history, demographics, facts!

It does no good whatsoever to write on this forum how we need to build a football stadium, need non-stop flights, etc. when NONE of this can be supported! I remember a study in the eighties that showed Oklahoma City would get an NFL team far after cities of smaller size. Again, because of demographics. It's NOT just about population. That's really not that hard to understand - unless you just want to pretend otherwise. If that makes one feel better about living here ---- fantasize all you want! But, don't tell those of us who deal with current realities that we are being "negative." We can love our city without believing fantasies and we can love our city and still offer constructive criticism. In fact, to do otherwise, hurts the future progress of Oklahoma City!

The analogy with a fatal illness is so silly that to offer comment would deem it serious. BUT.... If I had a fatal illness, I would want a doctor to tell me what's wrong and what I need to do to get well. I certainly wouldn't want a doctor to tell me that all is well, everything is fine and I can just "think" the illness away. A positive attitude is necessary, but that is different from not being able to talk about the illness in realistic terms.

.

mranderson

03-25-2005, 01:17 PM

Midtowner

03-25-2005, 03:05 PM

"It does no good whatsoever to write on this forum how we need to build a football stadium, need non-stop flights, etc. when NONE of this can be supported! I remember a study in the eighties that showed Oklahoma City would get an NFL team far after cities of smaller size. Again, because of demographics."

OK. Then if you think you are so correct, then proove your case.

How's this:

Currently, we have no NFL team.

Currently, no one has ever expressed serious interest in an OKC NFL team. There was someone, a few years back who thought they could plop a stadium down in Stroud and have an OKC/Tulsa team, but that was over as quickly as it started.

I concur, we are going to have to bring more jobs to Oklahoma City (not call centers). We are going to have to have a LOT of them. Bring the jobs, bring the money, private enterprise will do its thang, and all your dreams will become realities, but not for a long, long time, and without a lot of investment.

These things you are talking about are not just around the corner, they're a long ways away.

And please, stop with this method:

OK. Then if you think you are so correct, then proove your case.
[/quote]

No, no, no... If you want to argue a point, have a discussion, whatever, you do not get to make statements like that. It is up to you, my sunshine pumping friend to prove that what you say is true. Here are some places you might look -- the Mayor's state of the city address, the Bricktown website, etc. Please make a case. Do not ask someone to do something that you are not willing to do yourself.

mranderson

03-25-2005, 03:14 PM

"Currently, we have no NFL team.

Currently, no one has ever expressed serious interest in an OKC NFL team. There was someone, a few years back who thought they could plop a stadium down in Stroud and have an OKC/Tulsa team, but that was over as quickly as it started."

Actually that is not entirely true. In 1968, the Buffalo Bills had chosen Oklahoma City as a relocation city. However, the city of Buffalo made a last second deal to keep the team.

When the then St. Louis Cardinals moved, they wanted to move to Oklahoma City. The University of Oklahoma would not allow the NFL to use the stadium. Had we built a dome, we would have had the NFL.

Yes. A bit off topic. However, in defense of another flimsy argument against progress. Now. We need to stay on topic.

xrayman

03-25-2005, 03:48 PM

"Currently, we have no NFL team. "

Actually that is not entirely true. In 1968, the Buffalo Bills had chosen Oklahoma City as a relocation city. However, the city of Buffalo made a last second deal to keep the team.

When the then St. Louis Cardinals moved, they wanted to move to Oklahoma City. The University of Oklahoma would not allow the NFL to use the stadium. Had we built a dome, we would have had the NFL.

Yes. A bit off topic. However, in defense of another flimsy argument against progress. Now. We need to stay on topic.

MrAnderson,

Who told you those stories? They are both, the Buffalo and St. Louis stories, not the slightest bit true. Neither one - at all. If you think for a second that the Cardinals would have chosen OKC (in 1988!) over Phoenix......look......Bill Bidwell never entertained the idea of moving the football Cardinals to Oklahoma City at all. Whoever told you that was spinning tall tales. As for Buffalo, in 1968 they were an AFC team with Jack Kemp as quarterback and were busy drafting O.J. Simpson as running back. They would have no more moved the Bills out of Buffalo for Oklahoma City than the Rams would have moved to Lawton. Seriously, who told you those stories? Off-topic? Yes, I suppose. But it seems that an NFL team for Oklahoma City seems to pop up in every other thread and it's downright silly.

.

OUman

03-25-2005, 09:05 PM

Granted, demographics do play a role in determining how much air service you get, but let's consider a few things.

How is it that a city like Little Rock can get a daily nonstop to Orlando? We do have a lot of leisure traffic going to Orlando as well.

When Great Plains launched nonstop service between Oklahoma City and all the other cities like Austin, Nashville, Albuquerque and Colorado Springs, load factors were doing pretty good, most flights were almost full almost all the time. So it does mean that if given a reasonably priced option, passengers using OKC will prefer to go nonstop than waste time by going through DFW or any other hub for that matter. It doesn't matter that these cities aren't major business centers in the eastern or western U.S, or that we're talking about 32-seat RJ's, the point is people were able to go nonstop where they wanted to go and w/o wasting an entire day flying. Too bad GP Airlines went into bankruptcy and liquidation.

When the expansion plan for the airport was announced, WRA's passenger traffic was appraching 3.5 million. It still hasn't gone above 3.5, but it has come close. Now the past year we had almost 3.4 mil, and if this year is just as good or better in traffic growth, it would make sense to go ahead and build the east concourse. The reason it was delayed was because of the drop in passenger numbers. WRA's fast regaining those passengers.

Then the airlines. When Reno Air went out of business and American bought it, it continued Reno's two daily nonstops between Las Vegas and Oklahoma City, then after six months, it dumped those. Why? No one has a clue, but American's lame excuse was the market wasn't supportive enough. Really. So I guess that's why Las Vegas was our sixth most popular destination and still is, and now we have two airlines (beginning in May, three airlines) providing service to that city. And all flights are doing pretty good.

Continental Express started nonstops between Oklahoma City and Newark, charging ridiculous fares and having somewhat bad flight times. Then Continental Express adjusted the flight times and reduced the roundtrip fare to make it reasonable, and the load factor went up from around 37% to over 60%, and the flights are doing pretty good now. Atleast that's the last I heard about them.

We should have atleast one daily departure to Orlando, I guess we're the only major city in the nation w/o nonstop service there. And it's not because of demographics, I know there are plenty of people who can afford to go to Orlando and would go on a reasonably-priced nonstop flight rather than having to connect at the Atlanta or Dallas airports.

So, the point of my rant is, if the airlines recognized this market a bit more, and our airport got its other concourse, we would definitely be able to support more nonstop flights than we have right now. Maybe not a hub, but flights to cities like Orlando and Los Angeles would definitely be welcome. And in this day of regional jets, it's definitely possible.

OUman

OUman

03-25-2005, 09:16 PM

Ahh, one more thing, sorry, but I had to include this. In the past five years or so, we have gained nonstops to Detroit, Newark, Minneapolis-St. Paul and Las Vegas. So Oklahoma City can support non-stop flights to destinations other than Dallas-Ft. Worth, Kansas City, Houston, etc.

OUman

HOT ROD

04-09-2005, 07:42 PM

Ahh, one more thing, sorry, but I had to include this. In the past five years or so, we have gained nonstops to Detroit, Newark, Minneapolis-St. Paul and Las Vegas.

So Oklahoma City can support non-stop flights to destinations other than Dallas-Ft. Worth, Kansas City, Houston, etc.

OUman

yes

HOT ROD

04-09-2005, 07:45 PM

One more thing that OKC MUST JUMP IN ON!!!!!

"State officials are bidding to bring an aircraft plant to either Oklahoma City or Tulsa."

http://www.kotv.com/main/home/stories.asp?whichpage=1&id=80853

OKC needs to land this plant, I think Wiley Post airport is the perfect location for it, as it would not interfere with the commercial traffic at the Internaitonal Airport plus it already has the FAA and runways.

Who cares if Airbus is a european consortium, we need hi quality hi paying jobs in this city!

What do you all think?

swake

04-10-2005, 12:15 PM

I think one of the requirements for the base is a deep water port. OKC does not have that, and Tulsa only kind of does.

HOT ROD

04-10-2005, 03:23 PM

Sure, so why not have both cities share.

Honestly, I dont really see the need for a deep water port. We at Boeing wanted that also, but it turns out we really are not going to use it in Everett. We are developing other technologies I can not really discuss with you at this time.

as it turns out, shipping by sea just takes too long, especially when you have partners and suppliers in every direction around the globe. OKC, dont be shy'd away from this because you dont have a deepwater port. Tulsa may have one, but that does not mean much anymore with the new technology for transport now days.

If it does become Airbus's build requirement, then share it with Tulsa - letting them handle logistics and transportation to OKC via rail or truck and OKC have the fab and final assembly. That is our current model for nearly every airplane program we have at Boeing, including the program that Tulsa just recently lost out on.

I think the best option could be for both to share. Why not have the whole state benefit? but OKC needs some more aviation. Tulsa has gotten the lions share of this for so long and now TUL is running out of facilities. This is why I recommend not locating it there or at Will Rogers but locate it at Wiley Post, our releaver airport.

But having Tulsa serve as the logistics point may prove very beneficial and cost efficient, following the models we currently use in the airplane business. Although a deep water port is not required or necessary anymore, they are useful to have around for emergencies or large batch orders (which we almost do not do anymore).

swake

04-10-2005, 06:52 PM

HOT ROD

04-10-2005, 10:13 PM

Exactly HOW is Tulsa running out of facilities for aerospace?

Bizjet is expanding, as is Boeing (now Onex) and there is a ton on land around TIA to build new plants, especially as more and more homes are taken for noise abatement.

Tulsa has the worker and knowledge base in this industry that OKC does not. And a port. Tulsa is a long shot, and OKC was never in the running. And this plane ever even being built is kind of a long shot.

Keep dreaming SWAKE! Im not in OKC so I am not intimidated by your small time tactics above. Plain and simple, neither city can really compete with the attitude demonstrated by you and most from your city. Just wait, and Wichita will get the plant (actually a better player than both OKC or Tulsa)!

You think Tulsa is all that, please... You need to wake up and smell the roses, it must make you feel good to say that OKC is a long shot - why then did you post you "fear" of OKC on the TulsaNow? Come out and say it, otherwise you need to stay on the sidelines.

I for one, do not play by your Okie-Dokie Tulsa games. All you guys on TulsaNow are just a bunch of hot air, little brats so to speak mad at the big brother who for so long had a self esteem problem.

Oh, and by the way, your statement above (Bizjet is expanding, as is Boeing (now Onex)) only proves my point about Tulsa running out of space at TUL. You can take that as an attack, but I was actually commenting positively about your small little so called airport. There IS a reason we (Boeing) sold Tulsa's facility, by the way!

You (Tulsa) will NEVER!!! compete with big boys like us, so go back to TulsaNow and sulk like everyone else there until you have something constructive to bring to this forum.

Continue the Renaissance Of Oklahoma City!

swake

04-11-2005, 09:00 AM

Ha ha,

Killing me, really

Wichita and Tulsa have much the same sized aerospace industry. OKC does not. Seattle/Tacoma is the biggest player in this field, but I really don't see Airbus going there, do you? Boeing in Tulsa/OKC was sold for the same reason Boeing in St Louis was sold (another big aerospace city) so that Boeing could inflict more price pressure and not have to cover pensions and fight unions.

Mobile is reportedly the leader here. Wichita has no port at all so Tulsa should be ahead of Wichita. OKC has no port and no aerospace industry to speak of outside of Tinker. I have no idea what kind of aerospace Moblie has, it might be much the same as OKC with Pensacola right next door. And again, I bet this plane is never built.

By the way, have you ever even been to Tulsa, or the airport here? Tulsa's little airport is the home of the largest aircraft maintence base in the nation. FYI.