Posted by Seth on November 22, 2011 under frequent flyer, News, points | 
April 2012 is going to be a busy month for Star Alliance. That’s when Copa and Avianca-Taca are expected to become full members of the global alliance, culminating a process that has been ongoing for many months now. The official invitation to join was extended just earlier this month and it seems that the integration process will be completed incredibly quickly by global alliance standards. Normally the integration takes 12-18 months (or even longer if you’re Air India) but these carriers plan to do it much faster.
For Copa the process shouldn’t be too hard. They already use the same OnePass loyalty program as Continental and that will merge into the new MileagePlus program from United. There will still need to be bilateral agreements drawn up with the other alliance members and some adjustments on the inventory and computer systems side of things but they are pretty far ahead in the game.
For Avianca-Taca there is definitely some more work involved. Although the carrier has frequent flyer relationships with Star Alliance members United and Lufthansa there are still more steps required to get fully integrated. Still, Copa CEO Pedro Heilbronn confirmed that join date for both programs so it looks pretty good, at least for now.
One interesting bit about Copa joining the program is that, as of today, there are no long-haul flights into the Panama City hub from overseas. There are connection options from Dulles, O’Hare, Los Angeles, Houston and Newark, giving great integration to the United Airlines network, but not much beyond that. It will be interesting to see if joining into Star Alliance can bring some more long-haul traffic into that hub.
Related Posts:
Tags: Avianca, Chicago, Continental, Copa, frequent flyer, houston, Los Angeles, Lufthansa, Newark, Panama, points, Star Alliance, Taca, United, Washington DC
Posted by Seth on November 7, 2011 under Hotel, Internet, Trip Reports |
Yesterday morning I found myself in need of a hotel in or near Burbank, California. No big deal, right? I did my typical search across a few different sites (ended up booking via hotels.com because I was redeeming my Welcome Rewards points) and found a room at the Ramada by the airport that was the right price and got decent enough reviews (though mine won’t be so glowing, I expect). Once I had that as a basis for my price comparisons I did what I normally do next – check the page of the hotel operator to see if they’ve got a better deal or a best rate guarantee I can take advantage of. And that’s where they lost me.
Perhaps more appropriately I should say that Ramada lost Burbank. Typing Burbank, California into their search engine returned the following map results:
Apparently we’re moving Burbank 300 miles northwest this weekend. Go figure.
Not the first random hotel booking site that I’ve found cannot get geography and I got around it (searched for Los Angeles and scrolled up the map to Burbank) but pretty impressive that they can fail so badly.
Related Posts
Posted by Seth on August 21, 2011 under Flying, News |
United Airlines CEO Jeff Smisek has stated a few times that the company had some deficiencies in their in-flight product, bits that would be addressed as part of the merger process between United and Continental. The first of many bits detailed on that topic was the announcement that Economy Plus would be expanded to the Continental fleet starting in 2012. Other than that, however, not many specifics have been discussed. That changed today with the release of some upcoming changes that can be expected from the company to the tune of a $550MM investment.
Economy Plus Seating
While the Economy Plus efforts on the Continental fleet were initially expected to not be seen until 2012 the new release suggests that the conversion will be starting sooner. The company expects to see the E+seats on 38 Continental aircraft before the end of the year. Based on some information received from other sources it is quite possible that these first Economy Plus aircraft will be 757-300s or 737-800s. Those aircraft have been operating with temporary seats and without any in-flight entertainment systems for a while now due to issues with the Koito seats.
By the end of Q1 2012 the company expects to have 100 Continental aircraft equipped with Economy Plus seats. That number will include 29 Bombardier Q400 commuter turbo-prop aircraft which will be equipped with both a first class and economy plus section.
Flat-bed Seats
Already the leader in total flat-bed seating capacity to and from North America, United has committed to expanding their installation starting in Q3 2011. There are 26 Boeing 767s – 12 of the -400 variant form Continental and 14 of the -300 variant from United – which will be equipped with the new seats. The 12 -400s were previously announced while the 14 -300s have only been speculative recently. These aircraft are also going to be receiving winglets to improve their range and performance. This does mean the likely reduction of wide-body service in the form of 767s on domestic routes as the -300s being converted are the aircraft that service that function.
In addition to the 767s being converted the company has committed to installing flat beds in 12 more 777s by the end of the year. The United aircraft being converted will continue to be in a three-cabin configuration.
In-Flight Entertainment
The announcement also highlights updates to the IFE systems on the Boeing 747 aircraft. Rather than installing dedicated systems in the seats of the economy cabin United will instead offer a streaming media option for users with their own wireless devices. While the release suggests the decision is still out to bid the only current offering that is installed is that of gogo and the product they currently have in operation on American Airlines 767s running their premium transcon routes. There is no indication that they will be adding power outlets to the economy cabin on the 747s so hopefully your wireless media receiving device has a good battery.
The IFE systems will also be updated as part of the full-fleet renewal of the p.s. aircraft operating between New York City‘s JFK airport and Los Angeles and San Francisco. Those aircraft will receive the lie-flat Continental BusinessFirst seats as well as a full AVOD system and will maintain wifi service.
Not included in the announcement but referenced above, the company also expects to begin the deployment of the DirecTV systems on the few 737s that were delivered without it as well as the 757-300s that have not yet been converted later this year.
Channel 9
While this could arguably be included in the regular IFE section of the report but it is worth highlighting separately as it is a pretty cool feature and one that it unique to United. The company has committed to expanding the Channel 9 systems on all legacy Continental aircraft. Woohoo!
There are a number of other improvements being made as well, including upgrades to the overhead bins and a retrofit of the interiors of the United Airbus narrow-body aircraft. They also reaffirmed the commitment to add wifi to the legacy Continental aircraft that have DirecTV systems, pending the launch of the additional satellite by LiveTV to bring that service into operation.
Related Posts:
Posted by Seth on August 2, 2011 under Dining, Flying, Review, Trip Reports |
Los Angeles to Bangkok – non-stop on Thai Airways – seemed like a good idea at the time.Yes, the flight is blocked at just over 17 hours, making it one of the longest commercial flights in operation. But I’ve flown other very long flights previously, several times in coach, and I’ve survived all of them and even enjoyed some of them. Yes, I knew going in that the seats in use on the Airbus A340-500 are not the most comfortable. Still, business class for that long a journey should be pleasant enough, right? And, yes, it meant a 14 hour travel day just to get to the point where I could start the trip. But that was worth it for the joys of making the super long flight, putting the cool line on my flight history map, right?
Not really.
Boarding for the flight was conducted via one of the bus gates at LAX’s TBIT terminal. This is the first time I’ve ever had a departure from the terminal and I was rather surprised just how awful the experience was. Not nearly enough seats for the number of passengers boarding, overlapping announcements that confused pretty much everyone and nothing resembling proper amenities once you got out to the bus area. Pretty pathetic for a major international gateway. Still, I got on the bus and made the long ride out to the far stands where our aircraft was waiting, hoping things would be better once on board. After all, as I joked to a woman I was crammed against on the bus, "We’re flying business class; this is the closest we have to be to anyone for the next 18 hours."
Pre-flight included a glass of bubbly which was nice for keeping me awake and getting ready for the dinner service. And the dinner was pretty good food, though not the best I’ve had in the air by any stretch. There were a couple interesting quirks to the dinner service that made me wonder just how deep the budget cuts in catering were. The warm nuts, for example, were quite the pathetic presentation. Yes, I took this photo before eating any from the bowl.
The starter was a scallop, with a mango chutney of some sort. Not bad, but certainly a small portion and not particularly amazing either. Of course, I often find scallops to be that way when served out so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.
For the main course I chose a fish. Sure, I’ve seen Airplane about a few dozen times but it still seemed like the least offensive of the options available. Plus, I was asked to make my choices for all three meals before departure (not a fan of that at all) and it seemed like a decent way to approach the menu. It was not offensive but also not particularly amazing.
Cheese course, drinks, dessert, drinks and before I knew it 2am PDT had arrived and it was definitely time to stretch out the seat and see what I was in for as far as sleeping was concerned.
The seat was, as anticipated, mediocre. I knew going in that it would not be a fully flat bed. Still, it was supposed to be flat enough at an angle that I’d be able to get some sleep. Especially combined with the fact that I’d been up for so long once I finally got on board, sleeping should be easy. And it actually was, even though the seat didn’t even seem to be flat at an angle when fully extended. I slept pretty well for 7 or 8 hours after the dinner service. The problem was that there were still about 7 hours left in the flight and the seat was pretty bad for just sitting in. There is nothing quite so disappointing in flight as waking up after a long, restful sleep and realizing that there is still the equivalent of London to New York City or more left to fly.
And so, with about 7 hours to go in the trip I wandered back to the galley to find out when the next meal was. Only 90 minutes away. This is actually my largest gripe about the service on the flight: the timing and ordering of the meals was wacky. When I’m taking a long flight and adjusting to a new time zone I try to switch my body over as early in the trip as possible, making it so that I’m as close to the local time as I can be when I land. The schedule of meals on this flight worked quite a bit against that.
Sure, a dinner just after take-off makes sense. And having it as a three-meal flight is great. But the second meal, served approximately 11-12 hours into the flight and at approximately midnight local time in Bangkok was breakfast. It was a good breakfast, but having it at that time rather than having another lunch/dinner course a couple hours earlier makes no sense to me. I had the shrimp congee option:
The third meal, served only about 4 hours later and only an hour prior to the 6:30am local time arrival of the flight was another lunch course. Again, decent food (though the shrimps were not as good on this one as in the congee) but it was the wrong meal at that time of the flight.
The A345 does offer one of my favorite bits of airplane silliness: a window in the lav. I’m not quite sure why, but I crack up every time I see it.
Ultimately the flight got me there in relative comfort and without too much trouble along the way. But the timing of the meals meant that when I landed I had been up since midnight local time. This made it rather difficult to get through the day fully coherent (or as much as I ever am). Fortunately I had some good friends around on the ground who helped drive that and kept me entertained as we toured Bangkok. But it was one of those friends, over dinner, who shared the following observation of this incredibly long flight:
I’ve taken it several times in each of the three classes of service available. I’ve had incredibly mediocre flights in business, rather pleasant flights in premium economy and surprisingly enjoyable flights down the back. It isn’t that the economy service is better than business; it just does a better job of exceeding expectations.
At the end of the day I must agree. The flight in business class was fine but it certainly didn’t live up to any of the great expectations set by tales of great in-flight experiences from the Asian airlines. Not bad, really, but not up to the expectations. Should I need to get to Bangkok again from the east coast I’ll almost certainly favor the flights via Europe or the Middle East. Roughly the same travel time and arguably better timed in-flight services. Definitely better premium seats available.
Related Posts:
Posted by Seth on July 28, 2011 under All You Can Jet, AYCJ, News |
I was quite disappointed when JetBlue announced earlier this year that their wildly successful All You Can Jet program would not be returning this year. The company has apparently not left the "unlimited" flight coupon game completely, however. They announced today are offering BluePass, a three month unlimited flight ticket, with a few limitations.
Most significantly, the pass is targeted at residents of Boston or Long Beach. Each flight must be either to or from those airports, depending on which pass you purchase. Open jaw, circle trips and multi-destination trips are prohibited. This significantly limits the flexibility of the pass relative to the AYCJ passes of the past two years. That said, connecting itineraries are permitted so there are quite a number of interesting routes that can be flown with the unlimited pass.
There are "select" passes available to a limited number of destinations (13 ex-BOS, 9 ex-LGB) or a "full" pass that permits service to all airports in the route network from Boston. The price for the passes are $1299 for the LGB limited pass, $1499 for the BOS limited pass and $1999 for the BOS unlimited pass. Taxes for international destinations are extra.
The passes are valid for travel between August 22 and November 22, 2011. Limited destinations for LGB are: LAS, OAK, SFO, SMF, SLC, PDX, SEA, AUS and ORD. Limited destinations for BOS are: JFK, EWR, BWI, BUF, DCA, IAD, RIC, PIT, RDU, CLT, ORD, BDA, and JAX.
The limitations of only one trip per day and originating or terminating in Boston certainly make this deal a bit harder to call an immediate win given my base in New York City. Were I based in Boston the purchase would already be made. Still, it is quite tempting. I’ll mostly be spending the next few hours trying to figure out if the route map out of Boston is interesting enough and if connecting flights will be permissible such that I can get real value from the deal.
Hopefully they don’t sell out before I figure it out for myself.
Related Posts:
Posted by Seth on July 13, 2011 under Flying, News |
Gotta appreciate a sense of humor from an airline. Due to the closure of I-405 (a/k/a "The 405") in the Los Angeles area this weekend a massive carmageddon experience is being predicted. And JetBlue is having some fun with it. They’ve loaded a couple special flights into the system for this Saturday only between Long Beach and Burbank:
This is a pretty entertaining promo and were I in California this weekend I’d definitely be on it. Sadly, however, I do not think that I can swing the time for the transcons. But it is darn tempting, just to get the line on my map.
Yeah, I’ve got problems.
More details from JetBlue here: http://www2.jetblue.com/deals/overthe405/
Posted by Seth on June 15, 2011 under News |
Want access to the priority security lines at the airport without elite status or buying a first class ticket? Looks like it is time to start flying JetBlue. The carrier announced today the 15 airports at which their new "Even More Speed" program will be implemented, allowing customers access to the "priority" line that other carriers afford to elites or premium cabin customers. With JetBlue this perk will be an additional benefit of the Even More Legroom seats which are being rebranded as well as part of the move.
The initial airports for priority screening are:
Priority screening is also coming to Boston in the next 4-6 weeks as the reconfiguration of the checkpoint there is completed.
In addition to the priority screening access the company is changing the Even More Legroom moniker to Even More Space. The impetus for this change is the addition of early boarding for those customers, providing them the first chance to get at the overhead bins. The early boarding benefit isn’t particularly new but the branding is. Maybe they got a bulk discount on trademark registrations with "Even More" in the name.
Overall this is a nice addition to the offerings that JetBlue has. Combined with the previous indications that some sort of "elite" program (though they refuse to use that word) is coming and that some of these benefits are likely to carry over, it seems clear that JetBlue is working hard to woo the business traveler segment more than ever.
Related Posts:
Tags: Boston, Chicago, elite status, JetBlue, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, New York City, Newark, San Francisco, Seattle, TSA, Washington DC
Posted by Seth on May 20, 2011 under frequent flyer, points |
United Airlines has finally stepped up in the ever escalating battle over the San Francisco/Los Angeles-Chicago market, adding a targeted double EQM promotion for locals flying between those cities. The new promotion, however, has sufficient fine print that it isn’t nearly as good a deal as it could have been or that American Airlines is offering. The promotion is valid through the end of August 2011.
Like usual, United is only offering the bonus to itineraries ticketed after the bonus was announced (19 May 2011). This is unfortunate but given the goal of driving new revenue it is somewhat understandable. And the offer is targeted at Mileage Plus members living in California and Illinois only. Also restrictive but most promotions are more targeted than not these days so not particularly surprising. The other significant clause, however, is much more limiting:
Offer valid on nonstop flights between Chicago O’Hare (ORD) airport and Los Angeles (LAX) or San Francisco (SFO), on roundtrip itineraries for travel solely between Chicago O’Hare and Los Angeles (LAX) or San Francisco (SFO) and not on any connecting or additional city on the ticket.
That last bit is pretty severe. Historically this sort of promotion has been available so long as the passenger is flying between the cities mentioned, even if they continue onwards at one end or the other. By setting up the rules this way United is effectively increasing the costs of participating in the promotion. Hard to blame them for trying to be as specific as possible in rewarding targeted behavior, though it does mean that the promo is not nearly as useful for many folks.
Registration is required: http://united.com/offer/mpd771.
Posted by Seth on April 7, 2011 under News |
Yesterday had a bit of a buzz on the internet regarding a piece about airfare pricing from Nate Silver that was published on his NY Times politics blog. The post, filled with mathematical analysis, attempts to use statistics to determine which airports have unfairly high fares relative to others providing comparable service. And I’m sure the math involved is accurate. I have no doubt that someone as statistically gifted as Silver got the regression analysis correct when he ran the numbers. But the findings are still miserably flawed.
Why? Because several of the assumptions made simply do not apply to air travel.
Silver acknowledges that most the other folks who have tackled this topic have made specific flaws in their assumptions. He aims to correct these but instead makes some tragic assumptions of his own.
Let’s take a look at the factors he considers:
The first factor is the distance traveled — we use the distance from the origin airport to the destination as though it were a nonstop flight, whether or not there was a layover along the way….
The first factor cited – distance traveled – is probably one of the last things that actually comes into play when airlines are figuring domestic market pricing. Should they? I can see that argument being made, but it ignores the general concept of market pricing and supply/demand dictating the going rate for a ticket. If the airlines wanted to price everything based on distance they could, but they’d be leaving a lot of money on the table for the shorter flights and they’d never sell the longer ones. Even just using the average costs to operate a flight as a price basis you’d be looking at $600+ on average for a round-trip transcontinental flight. They seem to sell a lot better in the $300 range, at least in major markets.
Silver chose to ignore whether there is a connection or not. While that is reasonable for calculating the distance traveled, it ignores perhaps the single greatest factor that drives travel bookings for business travelers, the folks paying the higher fares: schedule. When you’re a business traveler hopping between cities and trying to get to that next appointment on time and then home as quickly as possible you pay more for a non-stop flight. Should you? Maybe, maybe not. But you do. This pricing function is probably more directly traceable in cargo numbers and there is a ton of data available on that, including in Greg Lindsey’s Aerotropolis, a pretty good read. But the same concept absolutely applies to passenger travel as well. There is a very real value in speed out in the real world; there apparently isn’t one in Silver’s.
Silver found that Newark was about 25% more expensive than JFK based on his data. And there is no doubt that is the case on some routes. But when you also consider that Newark has quite a few more domestic destinations available as a non-stop flight than JFK does that price premium isn’t nearly as surprising. After all, folks pay for speed.
Certainly demand factors into the pricing as well:
Second is a variable representing the demand for travel at both the origin and destination airports. Demand is assumed to be a function of the number of origin-and-departure passengers that an airport handled (not counting passengers who passed through the airport on a layover), but with a modification for average ticket prices. In other words, if the average fare at an airport was high, the model assumed that more people would have wanted to fly there but were deterred by the cost, and if the average fare was low, that some passengers would not have flown if the fares had not been such a bargain.
Indeed, one can expect that fares to smaller destinations will be higher. And they generally are. But assuming that more people really want to be traveling to smaller cities but choose not to because the airfare is too high misses the point. They are smaller cities with lower demand for travel because they have fewer businesses, fewer residents traveling (or being visited) and generally less volume. They aren’t seeing lower air traffic because they are too expensive, they are seeing lower traffic because they are small. Lowering fares may translate to a small increase in volume but it most certainly is not a linear path.
Moreover, the ability for a new entrant to operate in a market requires a certain base level of demand. No matter how cheap the fares, you aren’t going to survive long as a startup carrier if your hubs are in Columbus, Ohio and Greensboro, North Carolina, for example; just ask SkyBus. This means major metropolitan areas see the up-starts, and those up-starts bring lower fares because that’s how they attract customers. Their fares go up over time – JetBlue and Southwest have proven this – but that’s where it begins. And that explains a lot of the pricing trends that are seen today.
Finally, Silver looks at the most important factor, competition:
The regression analysis also accounts for three other factors that have significant effects on pricing. These are, respectively, the market share at the origin and destination airports held collectively by the five “legacy carriers” (United, American, Delta, Continental and US Air); the market share held by Southwest Airlines; and the market share held by the largest single carrier at that airport (for instance, Delta and its affiliates are responsible for about 66 percent of all traffic at Atlanta).
…
Passengers at Newark paid an average of 12 percent more than those at J.F.K. for their trips to Los Angeles, 49 percent more for those to Chicago, 65 percent more to Dallas, and 118 percent more to Washington, D.C.
Given those numbers, it is probably useful to take a look at the competition in those markets. There is zero competition between Newark and Washington, DC. National airport is only served by Continental and Dulles is served only by Continental and merger partner United Airlines. Plus, those routes are not generally reasonable to fly with a connection. The travel time is so short that when you add the connection it is silly to fly when total travel time is important, as it often is. The Dallas route sees a bit of competition from American Airlines, as does the Chicago route. Los Angeles has a tiny bit of competition but it also has the advantage of being a long enough trip that making the schlep over to JFK to save some money on airfare doesn’t actually completely ruin the speed=value margins. Ditto for connecting flights that add a smaller percentage of time to the travel experience.
Somewhat ironically based on the first factor Silver names, longer distances traveled can actually drive down prices as the impact of connections or less desirable departure or arrival airports is decreased as the total travel time increases.
It is actually surprising that Silver didn’t note the disparity on pricing in the Newark/JFK – Boston market. For quite some time now Continental has held a monopoly on that route. Similar to the DC runs, it rarely makes sense to connect for such a short trip and Continental exploited that price disparity. Right up until JetBlue announced their entry into the market. The fares dropped quite quickly at that point. Hardly a surprise, really. Competition, not the airport, drove the pricing.
Here’s a much more simple way to figure out if an airport is expensive or not:
- Is it a mostly leisure destination? If the answer is yes then it is almost certainly not going to be as expensive on average. Atlantic City, Las Vegas, Ft. Lauderdale, Orlando and most the rest of Florida all come to mind, and not surprisingly they’re all on Silver’s list of good value airports.
- Is it dominated (60%+) by a single carrier?
- If that carrier is United, Continental, US Airways, Delta, American or Southwest then odds are it will be a more expensive airport.
- If that carrier is AirTran, Spirit Air, JetBlue or Allegiant (and, to a lesser extent, Frontier) then odds are it will be a less expensive airport.
- Is it a particularly large metropolitan area? If not, fares are going to be higher because demand is lower.
Three easy questions that don’t take statistical regression or misguided assumptions. Silver actually gets some of these, particularly regarding the competition factor. But he also has a couple huge misses, especially around distance traveled and the price/demand curve.
It would also be interesting to compare the actual costs of travel versus just the base fare data. Spirit has a pretty incredible ancillary revenues per passenger – to the tune of an extra $35/head on average – so those "cheap" airports can come with significant surprises once the customer gets to the airport. Indeed, the airlines are quite keen to sell these ancillary bits to their customers and many are now stating explicitly that these fees are where their profits are. The airlines even want to control the way those fees are marketed to the customer by cutting the GDSes out of the pricing loop. Not a good deal for consumers.
Oh, and the suggestion he links to about searching for the best airfares on weekends is horribly wrong, too. Tuesday or Wednesday mid-afternoon is the time you’re most likely to find deals. On the weekends the airlines are raising fares and limiting the cheaper inventory in an effort to cash in on folks shopping for their vacations while their home with their family.
Silver should stick to baseball and politics, two things that he appears to understand a lot better than air travel.
Related Posts
Tags: AirTran, American Airlines, Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Continental, Delta, fees, Florida, Flying, Frontier, JetBlue, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Southwest Airline, Spirit Air, United, Washington DC
Posted by Seth on April 6, 2011 under frequent flyer, News, points |
American Airlines launched 10 new destinations from Los Angeles yesterday. The new routes, mostly served but their American Eagle regional subsidiary, are all offering double miles for travel until June 30, 2011.
The biggest addition of service is the non-stop flight from LAX to Shanghai, China. This flight represents the only non-stop service by a US-flagged carrier on the route. Passengers flying between LAX and Shanghai can receive up to triple miles for their travel between now and June 30, 2011. Business and First class fares will receive triple miles while economy fares will receive double miles. Registration is required for this promotion.
The other nine destinations being added place American into direct competition with a number of other carriers. Of the nine, all are currently served by at least one other carrier and most have two or three others, namely United Airlines and Southwest; US Airways serves a couple of the routes as well. The destinations are:
- Albuquerque, NM (ABQ)
- Boise, ID (BOI)
- El Paso, TX (ELP)
- Houston, TX (IAH)
- Oklahoma City, OK (OKC)
- Phoenix, AZ (PHX)
- Salt Lake City, UT (SLC)
- Sacramento, CA (SMF)
- Tucson, AZ (TUS)
All of these routes are eligible for double miles through the end of June. Similar to the Shanghai promotion, registration is required.
Challenging incumbent carriers by adding capacity as fuel prices are rising and the industry struggles to control seat inventory is an interesting move. Going head-to-head in markets that include three competitor hubs by offering regional jet service is even more interesting. Time will tell if American can come out of this experiment profitably or not.
Finally, oneworld partner Iberia is launching service between LAX and their hub in Madrid, Spain. AAdvantage members can earn double miles on this route as well. Register for this promotion here.
Lots of excitement at LAX of AAdvantage members. Here’s hoping the routes actually stick.
Tags: American Airlines, bonus, frequent flyer, houston, Iberia, Los Angeles, OneWorld, Phoenix, points, Southwest Airline, Spain, United, US Air
