RJpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3603 times:
N766UA, I don't think there are any definite dates for future expansion. As their quick entry and departue from ATL shows, B6 is very flexible and won't stick with a moneylosing station just for the sake of it.
I agree with Frontiers4ever. The -190s will allow them to fly east and west from whatever new Midwest cities.
Note though that B6 really is missing a geographical section. Just look at their route map, there is a huge whole in the Midwest. We will see expansion here soon.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21482 posts, RR: 56
Reply 10, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3533 times:
They're going to have to get more room at JFK in the near future. Terminal 6 isn't that big, and I'm sure it's getting crowded. It's also the worst one at JFK in my opinion, and I'm glad they're going to replace it, but that won't be done for a few years. Or might we see another midwest focus city? Somehow I doubt it with ATA and Frontier in the area, but you never know....
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
Capt078 From United States of America, joined exactly 11 years ago today! , 421 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3451 times:
when jetblue announced the order for the 100 erj-190s, the airline stated that these planes were to be used to supplement the a320s, as well as expand service to the midwest and northeast from the jfk hub. among the list of cities that were mentioned were: chicago, grand rapids, milwaukee, cleveland, detroit, st. louis, memphis, nashville...
i unfortunately cannot find this press release (actually, it may have been a newspaper article and not a press release), but i do recall that the airline stated they were interested in these cities. obviously, no formal announcements have been made.
Ckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5164 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3311 times:
JetBlue would like to fly to ORD, but they want at least 4, if not 5 gates. ORD doesn't have that many open gates, unless United gives some back to the airport.
I just wonder if JetBlue would be getting into a market that is already saturated. AA and UA already fly hourly to LGA. UA and AA also fly to EWR and HPN. AA flies to SMR. UA flies to JFK. WN flies to ISP from MDW. ATA flies MDW to LGA, as well as AA. DL still has one ORD-JFK flight, connecting with its European departures and arrivals.
If an airline starts a new route, it wants to create traffic, and not merely take traffic from another carrier. It seems to me that there isn't a lot of traffic left to create. Supposedly, New York metro-Chicago metro is the most heavily travelled route in the world.
Considering that DL ran JetBlue out of ATL, I could see AA and UA trying to do the same at ORD. If JetBlue does start ORD-JFK, AA will also start service on that route, connecting with its European, Carribean, and Latin American departures and arrivals.
Akjetblue From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 790 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3107 times:
I know we were seriously looking at Chicago but like CKFRED said ORD doesn't have much for gates. As for the other midwest cities, once the 190s comeonline i think you'll start seeing a lot more point to point service and less of the hub and spoke.
OH, and NYCFUTUREPILOT: It's David Neeleman, not jeff