Southwest Stakes Its Claim in San Diego With New Flights


If you live in San Diego, you are a happy camper right now. Alaska and Southwest both continue to aggressively add new flights as they look to get a leg up as the most important airline in the market. The opening of the new Terminal 1 has been an absolute boon for the constrained airport, and now Southwest has fired its latest volley in this battle.

Southwest extended its schedule from early Aug through the end of Sep last week. All of these new additions start Aug 4:

  • Portland (OR): 1x to 2x daily (Alaska has 5x daily)
  • Salt Lake City: 1x to 2x daily (Alaska has 3x daily, Delta has 5x daily)
  • Santa Barbara: new 1x daily (Alaska has 2x daily)
  • Seattle: 1x to 2x daily (Alaska has 10x daily, Delta has 5x daily)

I know what you’re thinking. This looks like a message toward Delta as well as Alaska, right? I don’t think so. Santa Barbara is new and overlapping Alaska’s recent additions. Those other three? Those are the only markets (save Fresno) where Southwest has at least 1x daily fewer flights than Alaska.

Combined with the non-San Diego additions where Southwest matched the recent Alaska Burbank – Honolulu flight and added Ontario – Honolulu — a market only Alaska/Hawaiian flies — this is clearly a move targeting Alaska’s efforts in the southern half of the state.

All of this looks like an airline setting boundaries. In the LA Basin, Southwest seems to be saying that even if Honolulu is a Hawaiian hub, Southwest owns the secondary airports surrounding LA. In San Diego, it’s somewhat more complex.

Alaska/Southwest San Diego Overlap Markets – Aug 2026

Maps generated by the Great Circle Mapper – copyright © Karl L. Swartz.

When we look at a map of overlapping markets above, we can see some trends. (And yes, I have left off both Anchorage, which is served only by Alaska, and the Hawaiian Islands where both fly to Honolulu and Kahului while Alaska alone flies to Līhuʻe and Kona.)

The two biggest overlap regions are intra-California (including Vegas and Phoenix, which behave the same) and mid- to large-markets in the Pacific Northwest. Sure, there are stragglers, but those are by far the two largest chunks. Southwest flies these with aircraft that have at least 143 seats while Alaska uses its 76-seat Embraer 175s. Alaska has a more premium-heavy configuration and can do more frequency in smaller markets. Southwest can keep its unit costs lower, but it has a more basic product. Both can work.

Where this gets interesting is when we look at where the airlines don’t overlap.

Alaska/Southwest San Diego Markets Without Overlap – Aug 2026

Maps generated by the Great Circle Mapper – copyright © Karl L. Swartz.

These airlines clearly have their own domains. For Southwest, it has staked its claim on east-west flying from the Rockies to, well, I dunno, call it the Rust Belt. This is a midcon strategy, and if we ignore serving different airports in Chicago, the only market Alaska serves that Southwest doesn’t is the newly-added Tulsa run.

As for Alaska, it has two areas of focus. It stretches into smaller north-south markets which it is uniquely positioned to do thanks to the those 76-seaters. It also presses mainline into service on transcon runs.

It seems that Southwest is setting boundaries based on the fleet it has, but that doesn’t stop the airline from firing some warning shots if boundaries are crossed. The Santa Barbara flight gives a sense of just how small a market can be before Southwest will step in. Alaska always runs the risk of having too much success in a market which results in Southwest stepping in. This already happened with Fresno this year, and next year Southwest is already going into Santa Rosa before the Santa Barbara flight starts.

Southwest also seems content competing with Alaska up and down the West Coast in larger markets, realizing it needs to up frequencies where it has too few in order to compete. Those just happen to be in Alaska’s biggest hubs (and Salt Lake). And it too sends the message loud and clear that Southwest isn’t afraid of Alaska even in hub-to-hub markets.

By next August, Southwest will have more than 1,000 monthly flights more from San Diego than any other California airport. And while San Diego keeps growing, others have shrunk.

Top 5 Southwest California Markets by Seats by Month

Data via Cirium

I struggled with a good way to display this chart, because I realize it is a jumbled mess. But these are the current top 5 markets for Southwest in California by seats. For years, LAX was the largest, but both Oakland and San Diego grew quickly, as did San Jose from a later starting point. Those five were all pretty close together going into the pandemic.

Coming out of the pandemic? Oakland was still number one, but San Diego and Oakland have gone in very different directions since then. If this schedule holds, Oakland will have less than 60 percent of the seats that San Diego has at the tail end of next summer. Even worse, it has dropped to fifth place in the state for the airline.

Meanwhile, Sacramento was down low throughout this entire time, but it has held up better than most of the rest. It’s now the second largest market in California for Southwest. LAX and San Jose both fell hard after the pandemic, though LAX fell hardest and earliest. Now, thanks to recent adds, LAX is back in a distant third place.

All this is to say that San Diego is by far the airline’s most important priority in the state. You might say the same for Alaska. And so, it’s time to fight.

Get Cranky in Your Inbox!

The airline industry moves fast. Sign up and get every Cranky post in your inbox for free.

Brett Avatar

60 responses to “Southwest Stakes Its Claim in San Diego With New Flights”

  1. banburyroad Avatar
    banburyroad

    I don’t understand the appeal of WN or what it’s purpose is other than to be a large domestic carrier. It’s size is likely what keeps it from being acquired but it would make more sense for WN to be folded into one of the US3 or broken up, with pieces going to DL, UA, and AA or AS.

    1. Mac Avatar
      Mac

      Point to point flying

    2. Jason Avatar
      Jason

      And the fact they had been the most successful and profitable domestic airline in the United States until the pandemic Covid.
      Southwest is no way out of the Game BJ & AW regardless of the Elliot situation are evolving WN much dated product back into a much more profitable Hybrid LCC model. They have added and addressed a plethora of much needed changes that will come to fruition next January. This will bring back leisure and business customers to the Airline.
      With the elimination of BFF they can now price point their fares to compete on all the levels against airlines like AlaskaAir. Especially since everyone now know bags still fly free as long as YOU bring them to the gate.

      1. CraigTPA Avatar
        CraigTPA

        The problem with the idea of trying to evolve Southwest into a “hybrid LCC model” is that Southwest is, in no way, shape, or form, a low-cost carrier anymore, other than the benefit of the single fleet type (which also limits opportunities) and the no-megahub route structure increasing efficiency somewhat.

        And while getting rid of free bags does improve the pricing situation, and assigned seating makes a difference to some passengers (fewer than you might think, though), the rest of the “Elliottflot” changes will not really make a difference to customers, and have actually undone decades of brand establishment, making Southwest into “just another airline” in most peoples’ eyes, and made many passengers (for example, cruise travelers who always check bags) go from routinely choosing Southwest to putting their business up for grabs.

        Don’t get me wrong, Southwest still has a lot of strengths, such as customer service reputation, but the changes are more negative than positive to many customers.

      2. Eric Morris Avatar
        Eric Morris

        Even my skis will fly free if I bring them to the gate? Sweet loophole!

      3. Jason Avatar
        Jason

        MCAS Miramar in the early 2000’s was slated to be turned into a Mixed use Military and New commercial airline Use “New SAN international Airport”. Unfortunately like El Toro up in Orange County. The Richie RICH La Jolla and Torrey Pines HUSH community successfully Lobbied against it even though Static noise abatement environmental impact test showed that the noise was 90% LESS than the military.
        The FEAR campaign that it’s gonna be turned into another LAX with flights landing 24hrs a day worked.
        The next proposed SAN expansion had them relocating the Marine Corps base to adjacent land Next to Miramar. SAN proposed to build another Runway from Rosecrans and Midway Dr intersection to the current Cargo Ramp.
        The 10yr Environmental Impact report due in 2027. But it’s already has had harsh pushback from the Rich people of Mission Bay/Pacific Beach and Coronado Island due to the proposed flight path for the new runway.
        That’s the biggest problem with America everyone wants a new airport but nobody wants it in their backyard. The new T1 at SAN has been a 30yr project than finally came to fruition.
        BUR another 30 plus years fight to build a new terminal.
        LGB was a 20 year flight to get a new terminal. Heck the HUSH crowd tried stopping the new T/C and Baggage Claim.

    3. G Avatar
      G

      Southwest won’t allow that to ever happen

    4. CraigTPA Avatar
      CraigTPA

      Why would it “make more sense” for it to disappear? The US domestic market is more than large enough to support a carrier that concentrates on domestic business. Not every airline has to fit into a neat little box like “network carrier” or “ULCC”.

    5. MRY-SMF Avatar
      MRY-SMF

      Yes, the ability to fly non-stop to a large number of destinations from mid-sized airports that are typically spoke stations for other airlines. For example, Southwest flies non-stop to 32 destinations from Sacramento. American, United, and Delta fly to hubs. I don’t see and of the legacy airlines flying SMF-EUG non-stop.

  2. Jason Avatar
    Jason

    A lot of buzz going around that Southwest is kicking the tires at both MRY & SBP to fill in the holes along central coast of California. They could easily do the Typical 2 SAN,2 LAS and 1 DEN from both markets.
    For all naysayers remember you said they would never fly to STS either.
    Both DL & WN are well below their requirements on their respective minimum supplemental slot and permanent slot utilization at LGB.
    I wouldn’t be shocked if we See AlaskaAir return to LGB with SEA,PDX and SFO while reducing LGB Hawaii down to just a single HNL flight using the OGG flight for a domestic run.

    1. Bill from DC Avatar
      Bill from DC

      I could certainly see Alaska adding hub service from LGB.

      1. CraigTPA Avatar
        CraigTPA

        Are there any slots available at LGB right now?

        And do they have E175s available? I can’t help but think that anything larger than an E175 would risk at least some cannabalization from LAX and/or SNA. They have a handful of 737-700s, but even those are a major jump from the E175s.

        1. Brett Avatar

          Craig – There are no slots available, but Southwest is seriously under-using its slots so Alaska could step in with temporary use of slots if it wanted.

          1. CraigTPA Avatar
            CraigTPA

            Thanks, Brett!

            I’m half-surprised Breeze hasn’t tried to do something there, surely Provo can support service to another Southland airport (heh…)

    2. EasyMoney Avatar
      EasyMoney

      I’m not sure how else to put this, and I have no evidence to back this up—but I suspect people regularly flying out of MRY are wealthier than the average Southwest passenger, travel more frequently, and prefer other airlines. Can’t see them making a big dent in that market

      Alaska has just 2 slots at LGB to begin with, Delta has 4, Southwest has 50. Not sure where Alaska would get more slots to run more routes, and I doubt they kill LGB-HNL in favor of LGB-SEA. Their best bet is if the airport authority relaxes the definition of a commuter flight from 75,000 lbs MTOW to 90–100,000 lbs, which would allow them to use E175s on the 25 open commuter slots.

      1. Jason Avatar
        Jason

        Delta is still holding on to 7 total slots but currently only uses 4.
        The Airport offered JSX all 25 commuter slots but wouldn’t allow them to operate from any FBO.
        All of WN underutilise Slot are the supplemental slots that can be easily reallocated by the city if not used.
        So AlaskaAir could easily submit an application for useage in 2026.
        For WN 2026 bookable schedules they are only using 37/40 daily slots on peak days.
        So anyone else could easily request the 10 unused Slot on a temporary basis at least for now until September 4 2026. If AlaskaAir does this it’s would be the same type of situation WN pulled on B6 when they made their push for more slots at LGB.
        In this Tit for Tat battle I’d wouldn’t be surprised if AS threw some Skywest/Horizon E175 into LGB.

        1. EasyMoney Avatar
          EasyMoney

          Interesting info, thanks. Doubt we see a strong push into LGB until AS gets more airframes, given that they can’t support hub expansion in SAN and PDX without drawing down SFO. But good to know that the avenues exist

  3. Angry Bob Crandall Avatar
    Angry Bob Crandall

    Since SAN has only 1 runway isn’t it close to being at capacity?

    1. Mr Eric Avatar
      Mr Eric

      Yes, I was going to say while the new terminal may offer some additional capacity, the airport is definitely limited due to the 1 runway and other restrictions such number of hours the airport is able to operate commercial flights.

    2. Brett Avatar

      Angry Bob – Yup. But previously the terminal was the barrier and now with more terminal space, the runway is again the limiting factor.

  4. Tim Dunn Avatar
    Tim Dunn

    SAN is an interesting case study because the airport is nearing runway capacity and there is a shootout for dominance that does not involve the big 3 as one of the players.
    neither AS or WN would like to be involved in this kind of battle right now with the former’s merger integration still underway and the latter trying to prove its “new” model works but SAN is so strategically important that both have to do it and will reap the rewards later.

    1. MarylandDavid Avatar
      MarylandDavid

      I find it interesting that SAN never moved out of essentially downtown and 10-15 miles into the far suburbs. I guess there was no decommissioned Air Force based that could’ve been converted. The land on which SAN sits surely would’ve been valuable to a developer. But alas, that ship has sailed and the same can be said for LAS.

      1. Bill from DC Avatar
        Bill from DC

        MCAS Miramar would have been perfect. Only about 15 miles from downtown and a terminal could have been built on the west side adjacent to the 805 and the 52.

  5. Bill from DC Avatar
    Bill from DC

    The WN rust belt destinations are interesting but are likely focused on bringing people to SAN moreso than serving SAN O&D passengers.

    For those living in SAN, the Alaska model of using smaller aircraft with more premium seating and higher frequencies is clearly the winner and gives Alaska a major advantage in the war for Sandy Eggo.

    However from looking at the maps (and Cranky cranks out some great maps), Alaska has some major gaps to fill, primarily in Texas where I was surprised to see they only serve AUS but not DFW, IAH or SAT. The nice thing for Alaska is that they could use either the 76 seaters or the 737s on these routes.

    Given where they don’t serve, Tulsa was an interesting if not unlikely addition and shows they are also looking for unique opportunities because that certainly seems like a typical WN route.

    Finally I remain shocked at the significantly reduced levels of service at Oakland that are continuing to move in the wrong direction.

    1. Kitsune4px Avatar
      Kitsune4px

      OAK is an interesting airport. I can understand why they wanted to push ahead with the renaming to try and be more of a draw for people either O/D in San Francisco or planning a visit. If you look at the Bay Area through the lens of household wealth, you’d see that SJC is better positioned to be a more convenient airport to a lot of those households. (Or at least SFO and/or SJC is more convenient) I think SJC’s problem is the curfew curtails it’s usefulness for transcons, which has hurt it at keeping critical mass.

      Long ago, (before time starts in Cranky’s graphs); I used to fly WN through OAK with some regularity; but that was because I was trying to get home to the PNW from SoCal, and WN didn’t do a lot of non-stops, instead having direct flights that stopped over in OAK, SJC, SMF before continuing North. AS used that to it’s advantage, I believe, offering non-stops that ultimately WN moved to match, which made OAK less of a “hub”.

      This actually gets at a interesting point that the guys maybe missed on the Airshow pod a few months ago when discussing AS strategy. Before the VX acquistions AS was more balanced across the 3 Bay Area airports. After VX SFO became the focus. Now AS is drawing down SFO to shift resources to SAN. They argued that it might be hard for AS to reenter SFO; I’d counter that perhaps the strategy going forward might be to beef up Bay Area flying via adds to SJC and/or OAK. There is an argument to be made that currently SFO is capturing an unnatural share of the local market and given the right options O/D folks would choose SJC/OAK. (I know I still shop SJC, but currently almost always pick an SFO flight because no price difference and better frequencies/timings).

      1. Curtis Avatar
        Curtis

        I am baffeled by what’s happening in Oakland and would love a Cranky deep dive, sponsorship or no…

        In the 90s and oughts SW was dominant but there were lots of other players, the big three all flew to their west coast hubs, JetBlue came in with transcons (since moved to SFO) and the big three retaliated with transcons of their own. Slowly the big three pulled out, the pandemic hastened things and now only a few DL flights to SLC remain.

        For a while it could be blamed on SW hegemony, but based on your charts that’s not so true any more. UA doesn’t want to mess with their SFO hub but wouldn’t a couple of DEN/IAH/ORD flights pull some pressure off SFO? I am mystified why AA doesn’t fly to PHX and DFW from OAK. And DL has tried ATL and LAX but then backed off. Only AS/HA is giving SW any kind of competition and that even seems less than it once was. What’s the problem? OAK is so much closer (by a nasty bridge) for so much of the bay area population. And it is so much more convenient. Yet it remains a SW fortress even as SW pulls back.

        1. CraigTPA Avatar
          CraigTPA

          I’d also love to see a deep dive into why both OAK and SJC seem to have problems that their rough LA-area counterparts don’t, other than SFO just having critical mass.

          For OAK, I think part of it is they lost a major advantage they had when BART was extended to SFO. The airport also has a (somewhat undeserved, at least from what I can tell) reputation for being unsafe to travel to and park at.

          The idea that no airline offers nonstop service from OAK to anywhere east of the Mississippi (other than WN to MDW), not even a single hub flight, kind of mystifies me. No UA connection, even to the DEN hub…UA manages to connect Bakersfield to DEN. And no service from Frontier either.

          1. Tim Avatar
            Tim

            They definitely were hurt when SFO got BART; I expected the OAK BART connection to really give a boost for the airport, but that came online just as uber/lyft were taking off, so it has never really met expectations or done anything to move any needle for the airport.

          2. SPMISCELL Avatar
            SPMISCELL

            I never really thought of SFO getting BART as a disadvantage to OAK insofar as I thought that OAK getting the rail to the BART line (Versus the earlier bus) would’ve been a big advantage. Admittedly, the SFO BART was live when I started flying, so I don’t know the before times.
            OAK (and SJC, to a lesser extent) really do seem to be great growth spots in boom times and absolute regional airfields during down times.
            My home airports used to be LAX, SAN, BWI, SEA and now BOS. Having family in East Bay, I would always try to get a OAK flight but it’s a lost cause now (looking at you B6, grr!), so I regret having to trek across the San Mateo Bridge every time. It really adds much more travel time and cost, especially when you pay more on bridge tolls than taxes on award tickets (alas, the latter is a privilege).
            Never really understood why AS didn’t build up in OAK anytime in the past decade but I guess it makes sense now- no one is trying to be dominant there, so leave it be until someone seems to come for the market…which will not be UA, AA, B6, NK, F9, or even DL…which leaves AS and… WN. Back to square one.

        2. tim Avatar
          tim

          The Southwest pullback is pretty recent, so it may take some time for other players to adjust and recognize opportunities. Alaska is finally going in on OAK-SAN; hopefully more will be coming. It hasn’t really been great for OAK to be dominated by Southwest to the extent that it scares off basically any competition.

        3. Brett Avatar

          Curtis – Oh don’t you worry, sponsorship means nothing here except that I do have better access to OAK mgmt than I might otherwise. I am also baffled at why this airport doesn’t work, but there are some really interesting theories out there that I’m trying to chase down a little more. It’s not just one thing, that much is clear. Once I have something more substantive, I’ll write it up.

          1. Tim Avatar
            Tim

            Some factors:

            1. Network effects at SFO
            2. Name recognition at SFO
            3. Tech companies at higher density on peninsula and in south bay
            4. City (and specifically the Hegenberger corridor) mostly in news for crime
            5. Single seat BART convenience to SFO, vs multiple transfers from many east bay locations
            6. Being a little too close to SFO to draw from a different market
            7. Inferior terminal facilities/amenities to SFO

            1. Curtis Avatar
              Curtis

              Thanks Cranky! I look forward to the writeup. I have no doubts as to your editorial independence.

              I think the SWA scare factor that tim mentions is not to be discounted. I know that during the oughts SWA played hardball with the Port (who owns OAK) and also sat on gates rather than let them go to competitors.

              I agree with all of TIm’s other points, at least in terms of perception.

              For #5, it’s kind of funny that SFO gets single seat ride credit when it’s only true for basically one SFO terminal (and one BART line) for the others you transfer to AirTrain. Also, BART takes a long Daly City detour on its way to SFO. From anywhere on the Richmond or Concord line to walking into either terminal at OAK is an hour faster than any terminal other than International at SFO, and still 45 minutes faster than the International terminal. The time comparison is better on the southern east bay BART lines, and OAK us even faster than SFO from downtown SF. Add SFO security times on that and it’s a huge advantage. Coming back the advantage isn’t as good because the BART headways aren’t great so you sometimes have to wait for your train.

              For #6 OAK did a very nice refresh with local (or psuedo-local) businesses in the past couple of years and the Escape lounge in T1 is pretty nice as well.

            2. Tim Avatar
              Tim

              @Curtis – No argument from me re the difference in convenience, I’m just repeating what I’ve heard some people (yellow line, east of hills) say. One seat to SFO. Of course after you step off that (long, slow) train, you have to get on another train, or probably walk 3x the distance you would have to at OAK to get to your gate.

              Yes OAK has made improvements to its terminal offerings but many people who last flew through in 2014 or 2019 have a memory of the rather dreary offerings then. It is much better now but that takes some time to seep into public consciousness.

            3. southbay flier Avatar
              southbay flier

              @Tim

              What is the yellow line? I didn’t realize that BART called its lines by its colors. They were always called by their termini.

            4. Tim Avatar
              Tim

              @southbay flier – Yellow line is Antioch (https://www.bart.gov/system-map). I’m not traditionally a color person when talking about BART lines but the system has made more of an effort in recent years to use the colors to identify lines.

            5. Mr. Eric Avatar
              Mr. Eric

              You also have to think back to the time the cuts took place….during the pandemic.

              The extended California shutdown meant airlines had to redeploy resources (flights) elsewhere where it made the most sense and money. Combine this with legit and well known safety concerns around the OAK airport area during the time, and WN moved a lot a way from OAK.

              Rinse and repeat for other carriers.

              Fast forward to today and those airline resources that used to be allocated to OAK have been redeployed elsewhere. Its not so easy to lure them back when now assets are deployed elsewhere.

              Hopefully a lesson learned for OAK going forward. Just like during the pandemic, politics will cloud their better judgement, but you can always hope.

        4. Kitsune4px Avatar
          Kitsune4px

          Curtis surprisingly it’s not so much closer in terms of drive time. As an example, I have a friend who lives in Livermore; he tells me that all three airports are about equal. I’d argue that OAK is only more convenient if you live in Danville or further North. In some place like Hayward it probably depends on the time of day whether SFO or OAK is more convenient. Fremont is almost always going to be faster to SJC or SFO (which might seem like a surprise). And OAK is definitely the least pleasant airport experience of the three.

          Finally, found an okay map of median household income here https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/2023/bay-area-income-shifts/ (beware paywall, but you can get a sense of the situation before the pop-up comes on). To the extent that the premium travelers are where the money is to be made today, you’ll see that OAK is the least well positioned to capture those travelers (if we assume household income and premium travel correlate well, which I am will to assume)

          1. Tim Avatar
            Tim

            The income situation as depicted on that map is not really very stark. The immediately-adjacent east Oakland neighborhoods are poor but the greater East Bay has a lot of wealth. SJC doesn’t look that different. The further away you get from OAK though, the more marginal the added distance to SFO is. If you’re coming from Walnut Creek or similar, it’s not so different. It’s hard for the airport to compete.

            1. Kitsune4px Avatar
              Kitsune4px

              My argument is perhaps subtle, but for many of the wealthier East Bay Area/Tri-Valley areas SJC and SFO are actually more convenient. It’s really just places along the Hwy 24 corridor, or coming down East Bayshore where OAK is the clearly more convenient answer and as you point out above, for those places the one hop BART ride is to SFO not OAK.

              I actually think the bigger failure to compete is SJC; from Palo Alto SJC/SFO is pretty much a push and Sunnyvale, Mountain View, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Gatos, etc all have SJC as an easier drive than SFO. My belief (colored by my personal experience of needing to do transcons) is that the SJC curfew makes it less attractive for East-West travel. You’d like to start leaving for the East coast maybe an hour earlier in the morning, and would like an hour or two at night for late arriving East coasts flights to come in.

          2. Curtis Avatar
            Curtis

            I agree on any drive that comes over any bridge except the Bay Bridge. The Bay Bridge is awful and getting worse every month. It can easily throw a 45 minute wait into your drive, even at odd times of day.

        5. Jason Avatar
          Jason

          Oakland Has a HUGE crime problem to and from the airport. Because of that people are opting to fly out of SFO,SJC,SMF and now STS to avoid it.
          Unfortunately Until The political parties do something about it OAK going to further decline in traffic.

          1. Tim Avatar
            Tim

            It is certainly a perception problem, but it is not something that 99.9% of travelers will experience. I have probably flown in or out of OAK a thousand times in my life and have never encountered any crime. It isn’t an issue that would ever cross my mind when considering where to fly. If you’re not regularly parking a car at businesses on Hegenberger, it’s a non-issue.

      2. EasyMoney Avatar
        EasyMoney

        I live in Oakland and flew out of OAK for the first time a few weeks ago (OAK-PDX on AS). I think you can’t overstate how dominant SFO is here, even in the East Bay. There are a lot of people who are used to flying internationally (VFR) and transcontinental (business). Coupled with the fact that the freeway connections make OAK and SFO almost equidistant for a lot of South Bay and Tri-Valley residents: people are just fine with driving to SFO for their flights. And domestic carriers are fine with that because they can feed international connections at SFO, so there’s no incentive to route traffic via OAK with significantly lower fares. As a result, no one adds flights or frequency to OAK unless it’s to bolster another hub (see Alaska SAN-OAK). So Southwest, Spirit, and Hawaiian are the major players, and while it’s nice enough, the airport has the perception of serving a lower income group than SFO/SJC. I don’t foresee this turning around unless Alaska and Southwest start getting their MAX 10s/7s, respectively, or United decides it’s fully penetrated the Bay Area market and can handle its own regional jet spill traffic at OAK

      3. southbay flier Avatar
        southbay flier

        The curfew should be less of a factor with the newer airplanes. The A220 and the I think the 737 Max and A320 Neo are exempt from the curfew. Delta will fly its first flight to SLC leaving before 6:30 AM and the return comes in after 11 PM on the 220.

  6. G Avatar
    G

    Southwest won’t allow that to ever happen

  7. Yr Avatar
    Yr

    SAN-SBA will be a bloodbath for both. When Alaska originally served it, they ran 1x E175 and IIRC the LFs were terrible. Now the market will have 2x E175s and Southwest’s 737

    1. James Avatar

      What CF & commenters always leave out is that Alaska can survive any blood bath if AS management choses to do so. Alaska controls the flying in the State of Alaska, where the state pay people who live in Alaska year round & to get anywhere they wants to fly (Hawaii for sunshine & Seattle for shopping, plays, concerts, dining & sports (Seattle Seahawks, biggest fan club is in Anchorage AK). WN, yes Texas does operate on depleted oil field revenue, but a Texan can drive his 4×4 Truck anywhere he wants to go.

  8. Lost Luggage Avatar
    Lost Luggage

    The mindset of any General is to “pick your battles wisely.”
    While backtracking at LAX due to insane competition on multiple fronts, the chances of success at SAN are much greater with one major competitor distracted via a recent merger.
    The assets available (a single jet type capable of both regional & transcontinental service) fit the campaign like a glove.
    The new WN premium & assigned seating scheme mimics the traditional trunk carriers.
    Looks like this battle plan has promise.

    1. CraigTPA Avatar
      CraigTPA

      That glove is too loose sometimes – E175 lets AS offer more frequencies in the smaller western markets, giving them an advantage with business travelers.

      And AS really hasn’t been that distracted by the HA merger, especially compared to the Virgin America experience, and the premium and assigned seating don’t just mimic the network three, they also mimic AS.

      I’m also not sure about WN entering SAN-BOS – while DL isn’t huge at SAN it isn’t irrelevant either, and business flyers from SAN end who fly to BOS regularly likely already have a preference for DL or AS.

      It’ll be a tough battle, but I don’t think WN can force AS to back down at SAN, especially with runway capacity still being a limiting factor.

      1. Lost Luggage Avatar
        Lost Luggage

        @ CraigTPA
        Southwest is already the largest at SAN. The additional flights are to cover its flanks as well head to head competition. The single runway acts as a de facto slot restriction. WN is fortifying its position.

        And, I should have been more clear about AS. In my view, AS achieved “traditional trunk status” when it purchased HA via wide bodies and foreign routes. Also, AS has lounges along the West Coast plus the Hawaiian lounges and will have one soon at SAN. In addition, AS has its own regional arm (Horizon) and membership in OneWorld which makes its FF program more valuable. AS has earned a seat at the table.

        It’s the same status that JetBlue is striving to achieve. It has nurtured its TALT service as time has passed and announced lounges for JFK & BOS with a wink for FLL; plus the implementation of Mini-Mint domestic 1st Class for 2026. All that is lacking is an alliance membership like Star (“cough” UA “cough”) which would enhance the value of TrueBlue. As for a regional arm, I felt B6 had an opportunity to pick the bones of Silver to fortify its Florida & Caribbean flank. But there is still hope.

        In the long run, WN will mimic all of the above to get its place at the table.

  9. Jack R Avatar
    Jack R

    Is it smart for SWA to get into a turf war when they’re unprofitable? Alaska has more than maxed out their gates at SAN, so there is no reason for SWA’s overreaction. SWA needs to focus on cutting unprofitable routes, not adding them.

  10. EasyMoney Avatar
    EasyMoney

    I think both carriers are okay with losing money in SAN, as there’s a foreseeable future where the airport becomes slot controlled (at least Level 2). In that case, serving many markets and frequencies there will have been a huge advantage.

    SAN also works for Alaska as a Hawaii connection point—most HNL routes are a couple hundred miles shorter via SAN than SEA, and Americans still reach for Hawaiian when planning Hawaii travel. Could allow them to match or undercut similar Southwest route pricing more easily

  11. southbay flier Avatar
    southbay flier

    Too bad they can’t build a second parallel runway in San Diego. It’s an interesting experience flying into that airport. It feels like it will be full again soon.

    I’m surprised that Delta has as many flights from San Diego to SeaTac as it does to SLC. I figured that most people who fly SAN-SLC are connecting.

  12. Steven Avatar
    Steven

    Would love to see a future Cranky post on the second busiest Single Runway airport RSW that is similarly undergoing a pretty large expansion effort (27 gates -> 39+). Probably not as sexy as the battle in SAN but the airport is likely to get International service (likely one daily to a EU a
    Hub per alliance) plus an expanded presence from SWA and/or Breeze.

    1. CraigTPA Avatar
      CraigTPA

      I’m not so sure about getting service to Europe from all three alliances out of RSW – Discover is able to support it in part because that part of the west coast of Florida is particularly popular with German tourists.

      I could see RSW getting OneWorld service on Iberia with the A321XLR, or less-than-daily on an A330 for connecting traffic over Madrid. Skyteam is more questionable – it took Tampa ages to get AMS on DL.

  13. Rich Roller Avatar
    Rich Roller

    SW/AS need to be “frienenemies” against Delta, together they can really be a pain point for them.. Im pretty competitive in nature and would love to see them bring it to one of Deltas hub, SLC, BOS and scare the piss out of them…

    1. CraigTPA Avatar
      CraigTPA

      Why would WN want to go to war against DL? Specifically at BOS, where they’d face not just DL but also B6? And SLC? Okay, throw resources at a city that’s already a DL fortress hub AND a relatively small O&D market AND where you’re already the #2 airline. That just doesn’t make sense. WN is just fine at SLC, and while I’m sure they’d like some rational growth at BOS it’s not a particularly high priority for them.

      And what could AS possibly bring to the table at BOS?

      If WN wanted to do anything along these lines (and that’s a big “if”, they have other priorities), it’d make more sense for them to want to help DL at SEA to force AS on defence there and draw their resources away from the battles in the rest of the West. But WN doesn’t really have any leverage to do anything along these lines.

      The only point of commonality between AS and WN is that they’re both waiting for Boeing to figure out how to build planes on time again.

  14. Rob Gehrke Avatar
    Rob Gehrke

    I’ve lived in San Diego since the 1980s. I’m very happy that finally the airport has been significantly upgraded. Too bad about having only one runway, however, there’s room for international growth with Copa flying direct to Panama, KLM direct to AMS Amsterdam, British to LHR London and both a flight to FRA Frankfurt and I believe one flight a week to ZRH Zurich. Of course we have both WN & AS to PVR Puerto Vallarta and Cabo San Lucas. With TIJ Tijuana so close to SAN San Diego, there is opportunity for growth there as well. With the international walking bridge it makes flying out of Tijuana so much more convenient.

Leave a Reply to southbay flier Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Cranky Flier