01-20-2024, 04:06 PM
(01-20-2024, 07:17 AM)HiloJulie Wrote:(01-20-2024, 06:36 AM)kalianna Wrote: "do not desire to argue this point to the nats ass of ridiculous banter" Sorry, but you passed that point about five pages ago.
(01-20-2024, 07:01 AM)HereOnThePrimalEdge Wrote: Tom mentioned a couple pages back that airlines need support facilities. A plane can land on a runway anywhere if it’s long enough, and will if it’s an emergency. Otherwise an airline would prefer to land where they have a gate, ground crew, gate and desk crew, baggage if necessary, and food water drinks for the passengers. None of the major airlines have any of that in Hilo. They do on Maui and Oahu.
Which begs the question as to the real reason United dropped its Hilo/LAX service when you consider that those flights were 75% plus occupied on both legs and would have given United a quick option should a disturbance as happened at Kona occur.
But at any event, this thread has taught me that Hilo is just an itsy bitsy fish in a gigantic ocean!
Where does this 75% capacity figure come from? As a matter of fact, if this were indeed the case, it does not necessarily mean the route was profitable for them. Do you know if they had their own employees here or did they subcontract with Hawaiian? I never fly to LA.