Originally Posted by ancman (Post 3947531)

That’s exactly what ATL does best.

Don’t get me wrong — I strongly believe that Delta needs to decrease its dependence on ATL. But when management last inherited a south central relief hub (MEM), they ran from it as fast as they could. I’d like to believe that they’ll see the light this time around. And yes, AUS is much stronger in terms of premium O/D traffic.

Originally Posted by Ripinpeace (Post 3947506)

Pilot bases are made from a network standpoint and must be financially justified. Domiciles are not section 6 fodder to be bargained for. Management teams don’t make them or take them away per the sake of the group - it’s an objective decision; albeit complex.

Austin, whether you like it or not, will ultimately play a much more critical role as a station than MCO/TPA in Delta’s network since it’s being developed organically as a true hub-and-spoke station. DL has a massive TX-sized network gap in the southwest with one of the nations all-time fastest growing cities/metros saturated with “premium-centric” travelers with droves of disposable income with no legacy carrier entrenched there ripe for the taking.

It doesn’t matter what any crew resource manager says because they are trained to not give you expectations. They said the same about BOS and not long after a BOS 330 with a 320 all but certain when the A-B connector is likely finished so Delta gets more real estate.

Delta is the only carrier to organically develop 2 hubs from the ground up in recent history: SEA and BOS. AUS has just started due to AA trying to play defense burning millions and violating scope to defend against DL’s TX-buildup. AUS will be #3 and Delta the first airline to cover every geographic region of the U.S. Crazy how that enrages the old heads who can’t get past historic DL practices, but management and their actions have made it clear AUS, RDU, intl. growth are the prime focuses right now.

Originally Posted by tennisguru (Post 3947511)

Not saying AUS will become a base, but there's a big difference between AUS and FL cities when it comes to connectivity. FL isn't a connecting point to anywhere other than maybe the Caribbean and maybe some SA. Most of our flights from MCO or TPA tend to go to other hubs or focus cities as more an origin/destination point. No one is connecting SLC-MCO-JFK. AUS on the other hand is being built to handle lots of connecting pax as well as O/D. Geographically it can connect a lot of the SE/FL to the western states.

Originally Posted by Ripinpeace (Post 3947506)

Pilot bases are made from a network standpoint and must be financially justified. Domiciles are not section 6 fodder to be bargained for. Management teams don’t make them or take them away per the sake of the group - it’s an objective decision; albeit complex.

Austin, whether you like it or not, will ultimately play a much more critical role as a station than MCO/TPA in Delta’s network since it’s being developed organically as a true hub-and-spoke station. DL has a massive TX-sized network gap in the southwest with one of the nations all-time fastest growing cities/metros saturated with “premium-centric” travelers with droves of disposable income with no legacy carrier entrenched there ripe for the taking.

It doesn’t matter what any crew resource manager says because they are trained to not give you expectations. They said the same about BOS and not long after a BOS 330 with a 320 all but certain when the A-B connector is likely finished so Delta gets more real estate.

Delta is the only carrier to organically develop 2 hubs from the ground up in recent history: SEA and BOS. AUS has just started due to AA trying to play defense burning millions and violating scope to defend against DL’s TX-buildup. AUS will be #3 and Delta the first airline to cover every geographic region of the U.S. Crazy how that enrages the old heads who can’t get past historic DL practices, but management and their actions have made it clear AUS, RDU, intl. growth are the prime focuses right now.

Originally Posted by CBreezy (Post 3947553)

Delta has been talking about opening a base in Austin since at least 2015.

Originally Posted by DWC CAP10 USAF (Post 3947428)

And in the rumor is true about getting A and B connected behind security, the 2nd part of the rumor is Delta getting a few gates on the B side.

Originally Posted by Ripinpeace (Post 3947509)

Delta will absolutely surpass BOS in daily flights in the 2030’s. Though, BOS will always be the TATL gateway and of critical importance for those operations in the NE - AUS will not. BOS is maxed out and the connector will allow for minimal growth, but still growth.

150 daily flights minimum is the benchmark before further growth takes place. WN is aiming for 200 post-terminal B assuming a 20-30 gate buildout when the full buildout is 40. Delta will have access to 29 gates if you add up the 15 preferred + 5 handstands + 6 intl. common use gates in Terminal A + 3 common use gates release by AA in Terminal A.

When the buildout to 40 occurs Delta will have access to even more in 2030’s. ABIA Master Plan includes Terminals C, D, E… 2040+.

Originally Posted by Ripinpeace (Post 3947506)

Delta is the only carrier to organically develop 2 hubs from the ground up in recent history: SEA and BOS. AUS has just started due to AA trying to play defense burning millions and violating scope to defend against DL’s TX-buildup. AUS will be #3 and Delta the first airline to cover every geographic region of the U.S. Crazy how that enrages the old heads who can’t get past historic DL practices, but management and their actions have made it clear AUS, RDU, intl. growth are the prime focuses right now.

Originally Posted by Speed Select (Post 3947394)

Only thing I’ll say counter to your [good] argument against indicators of an AUS pilot base is that the company is totally different today than a decade ago.