Number of Airline Flights Have Been Cut 40%

Jay Honeck

Jay Honeck

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
11,571
Location
Ingleside, TX
Display Name
Display name:
Jay Honeck
Since 2007, airlines have cut the number of flights serving hubs like Cincinnati, Cleveland, Memphis, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis by a whopping 40%. Nationally and overall, the number of flights have been reduced 14%. (Source: The Week)

This impacts many things, from the local economies to airline pilot hirings, from ATC reductions to customer inconvenience during peak times.

Will it ever rebound? Is this the "new normal"?
 
Business down 36% here since then. Many to thank for this mess and it is not showing any signs of improvement here.
 
Rebound? Probably not. With the coalescing of airlines, there's no reason to operate redundant hubs. Watch for Denver to go next with Continental, I mean, United, pulls that down. Cleveland is a similarly redundant hub when United has one at ORD. Cinncinatti or Detroit had to go in the Delta system and frankly the Cinncinati hub was an armpit compared to Northwest's World Port in Detroit. St. Louis isn't ever coming back. TWA is gone, dead, stick a fork in it.

It would take more air travelers and some serious new entries into the business (really other than Jet Blue and SWA, there hasn't been any surviving new players).
 
flyingron said:
Rebound? Probably not. With the coalescing of airlines, there's no reason to operate redundant hubs. Watch for Denver to go next with Continental, I mean, United, pulls that down. Cleveland is a similarly redundant hub when United has one at ORD. Cinncinatti or Detroit had to go in the Delta system and frankly the Cinncinati hub was an armpit compared to Northwest's World Port in Detroit. St. Louis isn't ever coming back. TWA is gone, dead, stick a fork in it.

It would take more air travelers and some serious new entries into the business (really other than Jet Blue and SWA, there hasn't been any surviving new players).
Click to expand...

St. Louis' death is a mystery to me. On paper, it looks like the ideal hub for a national airline, given its central location.
 
I was reading an old newspaper article from 1958 last night, where government hearings were being held with the CAB to establish airline service to Oshkosh, Appleton, and Ashland, Wisconsin.

My, how times have changed.
 
Jay Honeck said:
I was reading an old newspaper article from 1958 last night, where government hearings were being held with the CAB to establish airline service to Oshkosh, Appleton, and Ashland, Wisconsin.

My, how times have changed.
Click to expand...
That's when airlines were regulated and the benefit the airlines could provide to small towns was considered. It wasn't just all about money.
 
And all of this wouldn't be so bad if there was reasonably priced commuter flights. $400 to fly 200 miles as the crow flies kinda eliminates that option unless it's for business.
 
Everskyward said:
That's when airlines were regulated and the benefit the airlines could provide to small towns was considered. It wasn't just all about money.
Click to expand...

and commercial air travel still had a bit of novelty.
 
AggieMike88 said:
and commercial air travel still had a bit of novelty.
Click to expand...
That had a lot to do with the cost. Airplanes are not cheap to operate. They really only become efficient economically when you fill them up, and it's hard to do that flying into small towns. A present-day example would be Kimberly's thread about chartering a jet. In that case the airplane doesn't move unless someone is paying expenses plus profit so the prices were much higher than airline prices..
 
flyingron said:
Rebound? Probably not. ....
It would take more air travelers and some serious new entries into the business (really other than Jet Blue and SWA, there hasn't been any surviving new players).
Click to expand...

And the TSA is helping assure only those who absolutely must fly are the only ones who will. I hate that agency and their incompetent thugs.
 
Well, there goes your pilot shortage. Load factor maximization and capacity constriction, along with scope relaxation (i.e. regionals can fly bigger airplanes = less mainline living wage jobs). That's the airline pilot labor model into the future. Sadly, chumps will continue to line up to get paid in sunsets and flight time and 3/4 of the year gone from home.

I'm so glad I only fly commercial twice a year. It's a mess of an experience. TSA and ONE pancake sweaty armpit due to no shoulder room are my most recurring nightmares as I approach holiday travel.
 
STL is dying because the city is dying. Besides, ORD is close by.

Reduced capacity is the only way to ensure the planes fly full. The days of half full planes flying around making a profit are gone. Having spare planes sitting around for recovery is gone too.

Airlines operate on razor thin margins now. Cost per seat mile is fractions below Revenue per seat mile. I think this is due to the new way seats are sold and it's a result of deregulation. After deregulation travel agents still sold most of the tickets. They sold them for enough money for the airline to make money and keep themselves (the travel agent) in business.

Now tickets are sold online. No middle man to steer people into expensive flights due to whatever incentive system airlines gave them. Now people buy their own tickets from a list of flights listed in cost order from cheapest to most expensive. Airlines have to compete for sales based on this list and if their flight isn't on the first page it might as well not exist. And they know just a few dollars can separate their flight from first page to page 3.

So, you get strategies to lower the ticket price as much as possible and make up revenue on the backside with things like baggage fees, no food, food for sale, ect.

Deregulation was the set up and the internet was the knockout.

Of course, the whole thing is good for the public in the form of cheap travel. Right up to the point where the public starts losing service due to lack of profitability going to certain destinations (rural). There was always the EAS to pick up the slack and ensure service...but right now the government is on hard times too and many red states have extreme pressure to limit government expense. Paying for people to fly on airplanes is an easy target to cut from a budget. Never mind the fact that if you don't the airlines will simply stop service. If they stop service then whatever city becomes an impossible place to do business and jobs leave. Jobs leave and the city has less revenue. Less revenue and the state loses money. It's a circular firing squad that the tea party doesn't understand.

Sorry for the political slant at the end there...but it is what it is.
 
Down 40% at some key hubs, and only down 14% overall?

Airlines are getting rid multiple hubs, and moving away from the hub and spoke system?
Changing to more direct flights to destinations people want?
And most of those flights are going full.

I travel about twice a year between LAS and New England. Boston is not always the best destination or best fare. Especially when you add up TSA lines, old terminals and the ride to the rental car. Then add airport fees that are added to the car rental to pay for that new convention center, and toll to get through the tunnel into town.

Non stop into Boston, or one stop into Providence. Nicer terminal, easier airport to get around and easy access to the interstate system. Either way it's the same time from landing to destination, Quincy.
 
Captain said:
It's a circular firing squad that the tea party doesn't understand.

Sorry for the political slant at the end there...but it is what it is.
Click to expand...

Huh?? Most Tea Partiers I know have a much better understanding of basic economics than my lib friends! They also pass a budget and live within it.

Now, back to our previously scheduled topic....
 
Jay Honeck said:
I was reading an old newspaper article from 1958 last night, where government hearings were being held with the CAB to establish airline service to Oshkosh, Appleton, and Ashland, Wisconsin.

My, how times have changed.
Click to expand...

That was the old regulated days, way before HUB AND SPOKE. Great if you lived near a major metropolitan area, someone worse if you weren't. A good percentage of my father's legal work was CAB route hearings.

Oshkosh still had scheduled air service within the time I have been attending Airventure.
 
LDJones said:
Huh?? Most Tea Partiers I know have a much better understanding of basic economics than my lib friends! They also pass a budget and live within it.

Now, back to our previously scheduled topic....
Click to expand...

My experiance is they want to simply cut budgets. I'd imagine most tea party supporters would be in favor of axing EAS. Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt it.

I'd go further and suppose some of the most vocal "close the GA airport" folks also wear triangle hats. Just a guess. I don't think they think through their cuts. You and I know GA airports generate revenue. Do they? Or do they just see the cost on a balance sheet?
 
Last edited:
Captain said:
Deregulation was the set up and the internet was the knockout.

Of course, the whole thing is good for the public in the form of cheap travel. Right up to the point where the public starts losing service due to lack of profitability going to certain destinations (rural). There was always the EAS to pick up the slack and ensure service...but right now the government is on hard times too and many red states have extreme pressure to limit government expense. Paying for people to fly on airplanes is an easy target to cut from a budget. Never mind the fact that if you don't the airlines will simply stop service. If they stop service then whatever city becomes an impossible place to do business and jobs leave. Jobs leave and the city has less revenue. Less revenue and the state loses money. It's a circular firing squad that the tea party doesn't understand.

Sorry for the political slant at the end there...but it is what it is.
Click to expand...

No need to apologize for your bashing of the tea party, it's all politics. Here's some real world for you. Back in the 'good ole days' of regulation, I recall clearly my first xmas in the armed forces. The base I was on wanted to go to a skeleton crew and encouraged everyone to go home for the holiday.

I shopped, and looked, and called and did the best I could with a travel agent, moving days around, and taking a two stop trip and the best I could do was $313 from BWI to LAX. I recall it clearly because I thought I did good job as others were paying more. I just checked the price today of the same flight and a one-stop flight can be had for $480. An increase in real world money of under $200. Comparably, a 1974 Pinto was about $2100, and a 2012 Focus modestly equipped is about $19,000.

Now let's look a big closer. I remember looking at my ticket stub back in 1974, and I got a printed receipt showing the ticket price was actually $298 and about $15 for taxes. That's basically a tax rate of 5% for commercial air travel. Now, look at the cost today, I'm paying 8.6% in taxes and fees for less service than I was getting 40 years ago!

So, I'm paying a lot more to the feds and a lot less to the airlines, I get the same trip without the cardboard meals, although I can buy a meal from them if I want one. I get crunched into the same seat I fit in 40 years ago, but now, I'm paying a fraction of what the price would be under regulation.

You want to go back to that so you can subsidize a flight from LAX to Palm Springs for $59? I think the rest of the planet would howl and scream if you tried it. Imagine raising ticket prices from the current $480 for that trip to the same ratio as the price of all other services from the mid 70s. I bet a price fo $2400 R/T would be about right. Think the flying public would sit still for that?

Sure, let's go back to regulation. In fact, let's double down and regulate the internet so that when you shop for flights, you are directed by the feds to the 'correct' fare structure for your income and lifestyle. Good plan mr lib.

I think the TEA party vs the lib argument is a good one. Bring on some more.
 
Captain said:
My experiance is they want to simply cut budgets. I'd imagine most tea party supporters would be in favor of axing EAS. Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt it.

I'd go further and suppose some of the most vocal "close the GA airport" folks also wear triangle hats. Just a guess. I don't think they think through their cuts. You and I know GA airports generate revenue. Do they? Or do they just see the cost on a balance sheet?
Click to expand...

Cutting seems to make sense when you're having to borrow .40 of every dollar you're spending...unless you think there's a bottomless well of resources you can tap with no negative consequences.

And I bet the bulk of the anti-airport crowd are actually on the lib side of the spectrum. It's the radical left the would prefer to see aviation grounded and have us return to the Dark Ages.
 
LDJones said:
Cutting seems to make sense when you're having to borrow .40 of every dollar you're spending...unless you think there's a bottomless well of resources you can tap with no negative consequences.
Click to expand...

Now stop that crazy talk. Haven't you heard that paying one's bills on time is on the outs in this country? Fiscal responsibility isn't cool. ;)

That said, I think we need to be careful about what we trim. I have no problem trimming redistribution programs that might preserve some jobs at the expense of many others.
 
docmirror said:
No need to apologize for your bashing of the tea party, it's all politics. Here's some real world for you. Back in the 'good ole days' of regulation, I recall clearly my first xmas in the armed forces. The base I was on wanted to go to a skeleton crew and encouraged everyone to go home for the holiday.

I shopped, and looked, and called and did the best I could with a travel agent, moving days around, and taking a two stop trip and the best I could do was $313 from BWI to LAX. I recall it clearly because I thought I did good job as others were paying more. I just checked the price today of the same flight and a one-stop flight can be had for $480. An increase in real world money of under $200. Comparably, a 1974 Pinto was about $2100, and a 2012 Focus modestly equipped is about $19,000.

Now let's look a big closer. I remember looking at my ticket stub back in 1974, and I got a printed receipt showing the ticket price was actually $298 and about $15 for taxes. That's basically a tax rate of 5% for commercial air travel. Now, look at the cost today, I'm paying 8.6% in taxes and fees for less service than I was getting 40 years ago!

So, I'm paying a lot more to the feds and a lot less to the airlines, I get the same trip without the cardboard meals, although I can buy a meal from them if I want one. I get crunched into the same seat I fit in 40 years ago, but now, I'm paying a fraction of what the price would be under regulation.

You want to go back to that so you can subsidize a flight from LAX to Palm Springs for $59? I think the rest of the planet would howl and scream if you tried it. Imagine raising ticket prices from the current $480 for that trip to the same ratio as the price of all other services from the mid 70s. I bet a price fo $2400 R/T would be about right. Think the flying public would sit still for that?

Sure, let's go back to regulation. In fact, let's double down and regulate the internet so that when you shop for flights, you are directed by the feds to the 'correct' fare structure for your income and lifestyle. Good plan mr lib.

I think the TEA party vs the lib argument is a good one. Bring on some more.
Click to expand...

Ya sure? I think ATC provides MORE service now than the 70's. You are mixing apples an oranges. You think ticket taxes pay for inflight meals?

There's your first error.

Look, this isn't about the tea party. Sorry I brought it up. I was simply giving reference to how we got here...full planes and reduced service. Wear your pointy hat if you must.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Since 2007, airlines have cut the number of flights serving hubs like Cincinnati, Cleveland, Memphis, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis by a whopping 40%. Nationally and overall, the number of flights have been reduced 14%. (Source: The Week)

This impacts many things, from the local economies to airline pilot hirings, from ATC reductions to customer inconvenience during peak times.

Will it ever rebound? Is this the "new normal"?
Click to expand...
Did someone forget what happened in 2007??? The real estate bubble finally burst and the economy tanked.....are we suprised that airlines slashed the number of flights when the demand dropped???

When will it come back???.....well, let's wait around and see how soon hyper-inflation kicks our butts. I think it is gonna be a while.
 
Yeah, we went through St. Louis.
Stopped at the arch for a look see - didn't bother taking the expensive elevator to the top since 600 feet seems miniscule after we had descended from 11,000 getting there (Creve Cour airport)
Anyway, as usual on the ground I cannot find my way out of anything (funny, I can fly all over the country and never get turned around) so I turned the wrong way leaving the arch and wound up going through the lesser side of town trying to get back to the airport. Needless to say the gang bangers on the street corners gave us plenty of looks. Broken cars in front yards. Blankets covering windows. The usual.
I'd say that st. louey is well on it's way to being another Flint or a Detroit. I'm not surprised to hear that STL is losing flights.
 
Captain said:
STL is dying because the city is dying. Besides, ORD is close by.

Reduced capacity is the only way to ensure the planes fly full. The days of half full planes flying around making a profit are gone. Having spare planes sitting around for recovery is gone too.

Airlines operate on razor thin margins now. Cost per seat mile is fractions below Revenue per seat mile. I think this is due to the new way seats are sold and it's a result of deregulation. After deregulation travel agents still sold most of the tickets. They sold them for enough money for the airline to make money and keep themselves (the travel agent) in business.

Now tickets are sold online. No middle man to steer people into expensive flights due to whatever incentive system airlines gave them. Now people buy their own tickets from a list of flights listed in cost order from cheapest to most expensive. Airlines have to compete for sales based on this list and if their flight isn't on the first page it might as well not exist. And they know just a few dollars can separate their flight from first page to page 3.

So, you get strategies to lower the ticket price as much as possible and make up revenue on the backside with things like baggage fees, no food, food for sale, ect.

Deregulation was the set up and the internet was the knockout.

Of course, the whole thing is good for the public in the form of cheap travel. Right up to the point where the public starts losing service due to lack of profitability going to certain destinations (rural). There was always the EAS to pick up the slack and ensure service...but right now the government is on hard times too and many red states have extreme pressure to limit government expense. Paying for people to fly on airplanes is an easy target to cut from a budget. Never mind the fact that if you don't the airlines will simply stop service. If they stop service then whatever city becomes an impossible place to do business and jobs leave. Jobs leave and the city has less revenue. Less revenue and the state loses money. It's a circular firing squad that the tea party doesn't understand.

Sorry for the political slant at the end there...but it is what it is.
Click to expand...

Southwest doesn't operate on "the list" and I've driven past the Memphis airport to get to Little Rock in order to fly with Southwest.... many times. Given the TSA, the absolutely horrible experiences I had with the airlines the past dozen or so times I've flown, I just don't fly anymore, I'll drive 18 hours before I'll deal with an airport and the airlines.
 
Air travel is taxed even higher than tobacco and alcohol. It is the most regulated de-regulated industry.
 
Captain said:
Ya sure? I think ATC provides MORE service now than the 70's. You are mixing apples an oranges. You think ticket taxes pay for inflight meals?

There's your first error.

Look, this isn't about the tea party. Sorry I brought it up. I was simply giving reference to how we got here...full planes and reduced service. Wear your pointy hat if you must.
Click to expand...

You would be WRONG. In the 70s, ATC provided a lot more to the airlines(and GA), including in some cases contact approaches. Although not ATC, you could also walk into a weather office on many large fields and get an in person weather brief from a meteorologist. Or, you could call and talk to an actual weather person, rather than someone who knows how to read a forecast.

I didn't say taxes paid for meals so you would be wrong again. I said I can buy one in the air if I want one.

The TEA party is your problem, not mine. This country will be brought to it's knees soon enough by not following some semblance of their plan for the national economy. It doesn't have to be a straight TEA party line, but the end is going to come. We can either make it hurt a little over a number of years, or we can make it hurt a lot, for about the same number of years. But - it is going to hurt, and it's going to hurt parasites more than producers.
 
docmirror said:
You would be WRONG...... Although not ATC, you could also walk into a weather office on many large fields and get an in person weather brief from a meteorologist. Or, you could call and talk to an actual weather person, rather than someone who knows how to read a forecast....

.
Click to expand...

Ahhh.. Those were the good ol days:yes:...

Services have gone DOWN,,, Taxes that pay for that service have gone UP.......

Less service for more money = Bigger Government..:yes::mad::mad::mad:
 
You control prices by controlling inventory.
 
Fearless Tower said:
You would be WRONG. EVERYONE is going to hurt.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...

You would be WRONG; I already said that, just a matter of degree. We are all going to hurt, but the parasites are going to hurt more. Same as all the prev downturns in history.
 
Well, they did implement RVSM effectively doubling the airspace from FL280 to FL410...the sweet spot for commercial air travel. They've also more than doubled the number of IAPs since the 70's.
 
There are also many more places which have reported weather even if it is a machine.
 
It's redundant, doesn't generate many passengers and the airport is horrible. Aside from that, it's a great place.

Jay Honeck said:
St. Louis' death is a mystery to me. On paper, it looks like the ideal hub for a national airline, given its central location.
Click to expand...
 
I think much of the growth in the St. Louis area has been out in the suburbs. I lived in what was then the far outskirts of civilization back around 1980. I went back to look around about five years ago and it was almost unrecognizable. What had been small towns were now big suburbs. I couldn't even find the way I used to drive to work on the backroads.
 
docmirror said:
I didn't say taxes paid for meals so you would be wrong again. I said I can buy one in the air if I want one.
Click to expand...

Unless you were on my flight from IAD to SEA yesterday afternoon. I asked for a buy on board meal, the FA acknowledged the request and I still didn't get it. Thank goodness he didn't get my credit card.
 
Jay Honeck said:
St. Louis' death is a mystery to me. On paper, it looks like the ideal hub for a national airline, given its central location.
Click to expand...

Same reason Kansas City didn't really work out for TWA - it's also equal DRIVING distance from everywhere too. I grew up there, we're mid-westerners and as such we're pretty frugal. If I can drive to Denver in 10.5 hours as long as gas isn't too expensive that's what we do.
 
Captain said:
My experiance is they want to simply cut budgets. I'd imagine most tea party supporters would be in favor of axing EAS. Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt it.

I'd go further and suppose some of the most vocal "close the GA airport" folks also wear triangle hats. Just a guess. I don't think they think through their cuts. You and I know GA airports generate revenue. Do they? Or do they just see the cost on a balance sheet?
Click to expand...

You really don't know what you are talking about.
 
The hyper-hassles of airline travel have caused many former pax to check their hole cards and start driving instead. SWA from DAL to AUS is only 45 minutes, but the door-to-door trip time is ~same as the ~three-hour drive.

Art VanDelay said:
Same reason Kansas City didn't really work out for TWA - it's also equal DRIVING distance from everywhere too. I grew up there, we're mid-westerners and as such we're pretty frugal. If I can drive to Denver in 10.5 hours as long as gas isn't too expensive that's what we do.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
The hyper-hassles of airline travel have caused many former pax to check their hole cards and start driving instead. SWA from DAL to AUS is only 45 minutes, but the door-to-door trip time is ~same as the ~three-hour drive.
Click to expand...

It surely can be.

I remember my last pre-9/11 airline flight - I got a call from a friend, had an extra ticket to a UT game, did I want to go (this, about 2 1/2 hours before kickoff)? Booked SWA on the website, hopped in the car and drove to Love (about 10 minutes from office) Through security and onto plane, which took off maybe 30 minutes after my friend had called.

He picks me up curbside at (then new) Austin Bergstrom International Airport, we drove to the game, sat down about 15 minutes before kickoff.

After game, I was dropped off curbside, walked onto the plane, and back home lickety-split, no muss, no fuss, no bother.

That was Saturday, 8 September, 2001. A lot changed the next week. :mad:

---

Edit:

Now that KEDC is up and running, I can save time flying GA to Austin again; great field, easy in and out, friendly folks, cheaper gas.
 
I do the same. My Austin-based clients keep their plane there, so it's an easy trip.

SCCutler said:
It surely can be.

I remember my last pre-9/11 airline flight - I got a call from a friend, had an extra ticket to a UT game, did I want to go (this, about 2 1/2 hours before kickoff)? Booked SWA on the website, hopped in the car and drove to Love (about 10 minutes from office) Through security and onto plane, which took off maybe 30 minutes after my friend had called.

He picks me up curbside at (then new) Austin Bergstrom International Airport, we drove to the game, sat down about 15 minutes before kickoff.

After game, I was dropped off curbside, walked onto the plane, and back home lickety-split, no muss, no fuss, no bother.

That was Saturday, 8 September, 2001. A lot changed the next week. :mad:

---

Edit:

Now that KEDC is up and running, I can save time flying GA to Austin again; great field, easy in and out, friendly folks, cheaper gas.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top