Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
MHT 2006 Any New Carriers Or Destinations  
User currently offlineGeorgiabill From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 580 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4279 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

With the recent announcement of Independence Air ending it's service from MHT in early January 2006 USAirways dropping nonstops to PIT from MHT and Delta dropping mainline service to ATL and CVG for additional crj flights(for a loss of daily seats) Yet the airport expects to had nearly 4.5 million passengers use it this year. I believe it projects to a 7.5% increase over 2004. Through september the airport had averaged a 10% growth,while october showed a .5 growth(source Manchester Union Leader) So my question is this in 2006 is there any possibilities of seeing WN adding nonstops from MHT to PIT adding non stop service to PHX or OAK from MHT? USAirways perhaps adding service to PHX( probably unlikely) or restoring their service to PIT? For new carriers I think Frontier adding non stops from MHT to DEN would be successful. Spirit following WN's lead bracket BOS offer service to FLL with connections to the Caribbean. Airtran bringing mainline service between MHT and ATL.

51 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTornado82 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4265 times:

With US, DL, and DH cutting back... how many open gates are there are up there now? Wasn't that a primary sticking point before? You guys have a beautiful airport up there.

User currently offlineGeorgiabill From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 580 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4262 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Definitely one with Independence air pulling out. I am not sure if Northwest still needs 2 gates. So possibility of 2 gates being available

User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4280 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4252 times:

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 1):
With US, DL, and DH cutting back... how many open gates are there are up there now? Wasn't that a primary sticking point before? You guys have a beautiful airport up there.

DL only has one gate as is, so with them still being up there with Connection that won't affect anything. Gate 10, which was United until last year when they moved and DH took over, will become vacant. With US still likely having signifcant ops to LGA, PHL, and CLT from MHT, I doubt they will give up any gates. In fact, they could launch LAS service to compete with WN, who already operates on the route, and since the airport has a 9250' runway, it can handle the cross countries with ease. So I only see one gate becoming vacant with all this


MHT has been trying to woo B6 for a while, and they lost to BOS when massport told them not to compete with WN. Now that they have the 190's, I wouldn't be surprised to see MHT with 190 service. F9 could serve the airport, and this would be premptive against WN. I doubt UA would fly to DEN. AirTran I don't think will move here and keep BOS going.

The most noteable carrier that doesn't serve MHT is AA. Until DL moves everything to RJ's, ever other legacy carrier has mainline service into MHT, but AA has no presence there whatsoever, even with RJ's. That being said, I doubt they would launch DFW service, because of the whole wright debacle, and they are trying to give the impression that service is being hurt, not helped by easing restrictions on DAL, even though you would think they would want to compete with WN possibly going to DAL in the future. The only place that they would logically serve would be ORD. The 737 would be perfect for this route, but 737's don't serve ORD for AA, and I think the MD-80s are too big for the route. This would mean either 70 seat RJ's or ERJs if they serve the route. The other issue is the BOS hub that AA has. They don't want to take business away from their BOS hub, so thats another issue at work here. At the same time, UA has a monopoly on the ORD-MHT route, and WN competes from MDW. And UA has first class with the mainline, plus they can run the explus planes which also have first class. Could AA do something to compete? Yes they will. Will they? I give it only a 30 percent chance.

The only other possiblity is that since Gate 10 is right next to all the Southwest Gates, WN could try to pick it up and expand even more in MHT. It could happen. Will it? I think MHT would like someone else to serve it, so I don't know if they will let WN take Gate 10. I give it only about a 15 percent chance of happening.


User currently offlineCadet57 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 9085 posts, RR: 30
Reply 4, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4233 times:

Is there even really a market for all this service in the first place? I really never knew MHT was really that popular as an airport.


Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4224 times:

Quoting Cadet57 (Reply 4):
Is there even really a market for all this service in the first place? I really never knew MHT was really that popular as an airport.

For some folks in the Metropolitan Boston area, it is a shorter drive time wise for them to use MHT than it is to use BOS, just as for some folks it's quicker for them to use PVD than BOS.


User currently offlineB752OS From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1322 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4199 times:

Quoting Srbmod (Reply 5):
For some folks in the Metropolitan Boston area, it is a shorter drive time wise for them to use MHT than it is to use BOS, just as for some folks it's quicker for them to use PVD than BOS.

It all depends on where you live. I grew up in Boston and moved a few years back and I always chose BOS over PVD. I lived about halfway between both and chose BOS for the simple fact that BOS offers much more service than PVD.


I wouldn't be upset if MHT does not see daily service additions to PIT, PHX, OAK and DEN. Those are some lofty goals for a small airport that is still growing. Every airport in the New England region (BOS, PVD and MHT) all should see growth for 2005.


User currently offlineGeorgiabill From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 580 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4107 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Yes there is room for a minimum of one daily round trip between MHT and Den if not twice daily. PHX and or OAK would work,if not OAK,LAX definitely would work for WN. The airport is growing. It will never be BOS nor is it intended to be. It serves as a viable alternative for domestic service. Ample parking easy access.

User currently offlineDartland From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 644 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4087 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

First of all, where is Chris? He's usually all over MHT and NH-related threads....
Must be offline for the holiday.

Second of all -- I don't see AA, given their BOS hub. WN will likely expand, and maybe B6 would enter to compete to Florida, which would be great, although I imagine that is more likely to happen later on given B6's aggresive growth plan as it is. I could see US/HP expand to LAS and PHX maybe also. MHT is an awesome airport -- nice long runway, nice-sized terminal that allows easy-in, easy-out, but has all the amentities of a major airport.

Note that the population in the Boston metro area is shifting northward, putting more people closer to the NH border and in NH -- so there will be a net-gain in residents of the greater Manchester area. MHT also draws from as far away as northern-NH (e.g. the White Mountains), and the Upper Valley (e.g. Hanover/Lebanon/White River Junction -- including my alma mater, Dartmouth).

So with a gain in population of the areas it serves and the general upward trend in tourists to New England looking to avoid the hassles of BOS, I agree that demand for MHT traffic is likely to go up, now it's up to the airlines to figure this out and take advantage of it!


User currently offlineJay767 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 223 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4070 times:

First off AA,forget it,second PHX is locked up for MHT in 2006 served by WN(just waiting for deliveries of more planes),F9 really depends on whether MHT can put a sweeter deal than PVD can put together,Airtran actively talking with Kevin Dillon and since DL pulled out all mainline service it looks better,US I doubt we will see PHX because WN will get to it much sooner,UA will never give us DEN,there was talk of DEN a couple years ago but nothing came out of it and UA has been downgrading aircraft size on ORD lately with the biggest being a 735 where we used to have 757's,A320's,a319's and 733's.
Spirit,Frontier,Airtran and Jetblue have all been very active in discussions with MHT,but I would only take Airtran as a very good bet,DL has left the MHT-ATL market wide open,no body wants to travel on those RJ's including myself,I would be glad to take an Airtran 717 because I travel the MHT-ATL-MCO route on DL a few times a year,I'll go back to DL when mainline comes back,and I think we will get DL mainline back on MHT-ATL in the spring.



User currently offlineB752OS From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1322 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 4023 times:

Quoting Dartland (Reply 8):
Note that the population in the Boston metro area is shifting northward, putting more people closer to the NH border and in NH -- so there will be a net-gain in residents of the greater Manchester area. MHT also draws from as far away as northern-NH (e.g. the White Mountains), and the Upper Valley (e.g. Hanover/Lebanon/White River Junction -- including my alma mater, Dartmouth).

So with a gain in population of the areas it serves and the general upward trend in tourists to New England looking to avoid the hassles of BOS, I agree that demand for MHT traffic is likely to go up, now it's up to the airlines to figure this out and take advantage of it!

See, I never bought into the idea of BOS being an airport with HUGE hassles. I have flown out of there atleast 25-30 times and have only been through a few problems.

As far as the Metro Boston population moving up north, its not as big as you make it seem, the bulk of the population of the metro area still is south and west of the city.


User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4280 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3996 times:

Quoting B752OS (Reply 10):
See, I never bought into the idea of BOS being an airport with HUGE hassles. I have flown out of there atleast 25-30 times and have only been through a few problems

Well before the Ted Williams tunnel was built, the only way in was the Callahan tunnel, and the only way out was the sumner tunnel, which often got so backed up traffic wise that State Police would often detour passenger vehicles leaving north on 1A, which was a major inconvenience. The Ted helps make getting to the airport easier, but parking is way too expensive compared to MHT or PVD. Also, because all the TSA checkpoints are overcrowded, security is a pain in the neck in the airport. Also, ever tried picking up someone at Terminal B or waited for a courtesy vehicle? Its terrible. All the vehicles fighting for the same piece of curb. That parking garage there needs to go, and they should build a central check in hall for all the airlines, which would allow one central TSA point for eveyone, but they won't do it. Also, if there is bad weather at BOS, you will get ground delay programs as well.

PVD and MHT don't have any of these problems, and you can get to just about anywhere from there as you can from BOS. You may have to connect, but it sure beats 3 hours in an RJ.


User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12565 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3984 times:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 11):
Well before the Ted Williams tunnel was built, the only way in was the Callahan tunnel, and the only way out was the sumner tunnel, which often got so backed up traffic wise that State Police would often detour passenger vehicles leaving north on 1A, which was a major inconvenience. The Ted helps make getting to the airport easier, but parking is way too expensive compared to MHT or PVD. Also, because all the TSA checkpoints are overcrowded, security is a pain in the neck in the airport. Also, ever tried picking up someone at Terminal B or waited for a courtesy vehicle? Its terrible. All the vehicles fighting for the same piece of curb. That parking garage there needs to go, and they should build a central check in hall for all the airlines, which would allow one central TSA point for eveyone, but they won't do it. Also, if there is bad weather at BOS, you will get ground delay programs as well.

I agree with everything you wrote, and lucky me also got to sit for four hours a few months ago due to the radar problems they had.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 11):
PVD and MHT don't have any of these problems, and you can get to just about anywhere from there as you can from BOS. You may have to connect, but it sure beats 3 hours in an RJ.

Connect? My favorite flight is the MHT-TPA non-stop on WN. On the other hand, when I needed to get to MSY, I thought I was on a bus - we made stops in Baltimore and Jacksonville.

I live 1/2 hour from MHT and about 1 hour to BOS. I'll only go to BOS when there's a particularly good routing. For instance, the last time I went into BOS was for B6 BOS-SJC nonstop. I have a strong preference for non-stops, I hate the idea of being stuck at a midpoint. After that, I shop based on cost. I tend to avoid flying the majors - I still resent the deep screwing they gave us when they were able to, not to mention some episodes of very poor service.

The only strong point of BOS is the presence of alternatives if you really have to get somewhere and your primary plans go south. That matters a lot to some people.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4118 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (8 years 9 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3962 times:

I'm here!

First off, everyone chimed in with very astute observations. I agree with pretty much all of them: WN expansion (yes); AA service (no); JetBlue (yes); Frontier (maybe).

MHT is a proven station. There is no airline executive that DOESN'T know about MHT. As for the 'legacy' carriers, they seem to be in a mode of retrenching...not growing. If AA had no desire to serve MHT when they were minting money back in the mid-to-late 1990s, they won't ever come. DL seems to be trying to force their customer base back to Logan in hopes of making that big new terminal work for them. United is curious...they'll run 757s through here and then, in the blink of an eye, move to 737-500s and RJs. I just don't get their scheduling philosophy. USAirways I see holding the status quo. Their merger with HP notwithstanding, I don't see new flights to new destinations.

The point about WN waiting for more aircraft before growing MHT is a very good one. We've been on the cusp of MHT-PHX service for a long while now, and I'm in the camp that says that it's 'all about the aircraft.' It'll come.

JetBlue, if we are to believe what Neeleman says, will be here at MHT. He has said as much. I don't believe it EVER was a choice between Boston and Manchester, but rather which city would come first. MHT has proven itself to be a distinct market, or else US/NW/DL/UA wouldn't be here. So Neeleman may be in the same camp as Southwest: waiting on new planes. I don't subscribe to the thesis that JetBlue is 'afraid' of WN and won't compete head-to-head with them. If Neeleman wants to grow his airline, he's going to (eventually) run into Southwest. And there is enough distinction between WN and B6 to allow Neeleman to win his loyalists in cities where the carriers go against each other.

In the end, the gate issue is particularly troubling early in the morning and late at night. Then, the gates are all full. But if a carrier can schedule around those hours and remote-park an aircraft for their overnight turns at MHT, then they can make it work. It is true that 'there are no gates' if you insist on having one early in the morning or late at night. If you don't need a gate at those peak times, you can make it work.

My final point--a rather sad one--is that I see MHT actually regressing in terms of passengers in 2006 versus 2005. How can we not? Planes are smaller, and there will be fewer flights. The only way we--at best--plateau in terms of traffic in 2006 versus 2005 is if we land a major new carrier. Even then, I'm not sure that'll be enough to keep MHT from showing negative growth 2006 v. 2005.

Chris


User currently offlineDartland From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 644 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (8 years 9 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3943 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Thanks Chris.

Quoting B752OS (Reply 10):
See, I never bought into the idea of BOS being an airport with HUGE hassles. I have flown out of there atleast 25-30 times and have only been through a few problems.

Agreed that BOS is one of the better major airports -- I live in Boston and find Logan amazingly convenient to the city (compared to NY, where I used to live, it's night and day!). The terminal structure is good and spread out -- no complaints really.

However, there are 2 hassles with BOS:
1) The trip from BOS north. If you live north of the city, or if you are going north of the city -- traffic can be horrendous. You literally have to plan the times you fly in and out around traffic, because it can mean a 40 min or a 2 hour trip to the airport. THAT is the hassle I'm referring to.
2) Ground hold delays. Almost everyday BOS has ground hold delays because they can't handle inbound traffic. Your liklihood of a non-weather delay is MUCH higher at BOS than MHT. And if weather turns for the worse, you can plan on a delay, whereas MHT can handle the traffic.

Also, while BOS is not bad as stated-- have you ever flown into or out of MHT? BOS may be a good airport, but MHT is like taking a train compared to flying out of BOS -- parking directly across from the terminal, small managegable gate area, limited taxiing -- it is one of the best airports I've ever flown into or out of as far as convenience goes, hands down.


User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4118 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (8 years 9 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3917 times:

Dartland, you are preaching to the choir about the appeal of MHT. Anyone who has experienced MHT says all that you did.

Airports are a mix of air-side and land-side operations. In my own view MHT has the air-side covered. I've literally watched a Southwest 737 land and pull to a stop at its gate...in 30 seconds. No word of a lie. Southwest wants fast turn times? That's why they're at Manchester. On the departure side, you're never in the midst of a long conga line of planes waiting to take off...even during the busy morning push.

The land-side also is appealing at MHT. A huge parking garage, affordable parking fees, and access roads that will do nothing but improve with projects now underway. The terminal is efficient and attractive and getting from check-in counter to gate isn't the ordeal it can be at Logan.

The increased use of RJs can do nothing but make things worse for Logan. Remember why widebody planes came into being in the first place: To ease congestion at major airports. Now, we've come full-circle. Widebody jets are in the desert; RJs are everywhere. How can that NOT cause more air-side complications at Logan (or any airport)?

The wildcard in all of this is Virgin America. Indeed, many are wondering what has become of this carrier. This is not the best of times to be starting an airline, and just raising capital is tough (would YOU throw money at a new fledgling carrier?). But when they do see the light of day, they might be a carrier to watch.

Overall, carriers waiting in the wings know what's going on here. AirTran, for example, surely must know that Delta has pulled seats at MHT in a major way. They must know that people think an RJ from MHT to ATL is a little too much of a concession, and wouldn't they like a 717 instead? Of course they would. So, I think we've yet to see moves like this fully play out, where a new carrier steps in and capitalizes on the weakened state of the majors (in this case, AirTran taking advantage of a weak Delta).

2006 will be interesting at MHT. The powers that be have temporarily shelved plans to expand the terminal here, owing to the increased use of RJs and what the competitive landscape will end up looking like. It makes no sense to add more mainline jetways and gates if the trend is away from mainline jets. Until that trend settles out, the smart thing to do is exactly what they're doing: nothing.

I also think a smart play would be a stand-alone gate at MHT for incoming transtlantic charters. In the same way that Sanford works for Orlando, Manchester can work for Boston. The landing fees are lower, the hassles fewer. Charter carriers gravitate to that, and I think if we had the infrastructure in place to support this kind of one-off 'occasional' business (e.g. MyTravel, Monarch, et al), we'd do well. Boston is certainly not as popular as Orlando in terms of European visitors, but our market is not far from the top. Take skiing: Given the exchange rate, a family in Europe can actually get more for their money by coming here to ski than 'by just going to Switzerland.' And, oh, by the way, did someone say shopping?? The Wrentham Outlet Mall welcomes large groups of women in late November/early December who come with empty luggage and just 'shop till they drop.' Everything is just so much more affordable here. So, there's a lot of appeal to tour/charter organizers in Europe in coming to Manchester. For a host of reasons, those charter carriers in Europe could easily sell full planes to MHT on an occasional basis. If it's marketed and sold properly by our own people, and marketed and sold properly overseas, there's no reason why charter 757s couldn't be full of European shoppers and skiiers between November and March. I have a hard time believing that all Europeans care about is Mickey Mouse.

Chris


User currently offlineTornado82 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (8 years 9 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3884 times:

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 15):
For a host of reasons, those charter carriers in Europe could easily sell full planes to MHT on an occasional basis. If it's marketed and sold properly by our own people, and marketed and sold properly overseas, there's no reason why charter 757s couldn't be full of European shoppers and skiiers between November and March

Especially if they just tell unsuspecting Europeans its a flight to Manchester, and don't specify NH vs UK.  Wink


User currently offline2travel2know From Panama, joined Apr 2005, 3580 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (8 years 9 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3865 times:

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 15):
I also think a smart play would be a stand-alone gate at MHT for incoming transtlantic charters. In the same way that Sanford works for Orlando, Manchester can work for Boston.

Does MHT have an international gate? I read somewhere about charters to AUA from MHT, but AUA has US Customs and Inmigration overthere.
It seems that PVD does have US Customs and Inmigraton within the terminal, I think MHT should too. Not only to attract those Ski Charters from Europe, but for charters to the Caribbean and Mexico.
However, even with US Federal Inspection Facilities, I see it very unlikely for a Latinamerican or European non-charter airline to fly into MHT; Just imagine Ryanair flying to MHT or PVD and to SWF...



I don't work for COPA Airlines!
User currently offlineUN_B732 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 4289 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (8 years 9 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3854 times:

MHT-JFK with the 190s (which is what I could see jetBlue doing with the 190s) is not competing with WN. Only the Florida routes would put him head-to-head, which I believe he will only do when he absolutely has to (within a few years) as he wants to stretch out the time before going head-to-head against WN.
Once he goes head-to-head against WN, the fun begins.

Speaking of that, are there any routes where two or more LCCs compete in the US? Come to think of it, I can't think of any offhand. Perhaps NK competes with WN & B6 in some Florida markets, but it's not very widespread.



What now?
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12565 posts, RR: 25
Reply 19, posted (8 years 9 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3829 times:

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 16):

Especially if they just tell unsuspecting Europeans its a flight to Manchester, and don't specify NH vs UK.

Or, they can do what Ryanair does, and book tickets to MHT as "Boston"!  Smile



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineJay767 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 223 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (8 years 9 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3824 times:

Quoting 2travel2know (Reply 17):
I see it very unlikely for a Latinamerican or European non-charter airline to fly into MHT; Just imagine Ryanair flying to MHT or PVD and to SWF...

You are right,but nobody said manchester would ever attract daily european service,read carefully,we are talking about sporadic charters from europe and latin america.And I have once seen a ryan international 757 do AUA-MHT last winter and used gate 10,but the flight never made a return the following week or ever for that fact.



User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8384 posts, RR: 10
Reply 21, posted (8 years 9 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3823 times:

Quoting Dartland (Reply 8):
Note that the population in the Boston metro area is shifting northward, putting more people closer to the NH border and in NH -- so there will be a net-gain in residents of the greater Manchester area. MHT also draws from as far away as northern-NH (e.g. the White Mountains), and the Upper Valley (e.g. Hanover/Lebanon/White River Junction -- including my alma mater, Dartmouth).

It's true that the BOS and MHT catchment area intersect somewhat however this large move of people north, is now over. In fact NH saw a decrease in population for the first time in a long time. This is because southern NH is now as expensive to live as many of Boston suburbs and NH also lost a lot of jobs over the last few years, mostly well paying high tech jobs.

Quoting B752OS (Reply 10):
See, I never bought into the idea of BOS being an airport with HUGE hassles. I have flown out of there atleast 25-30 times and have only been through a few problems.

It's not. It's mostly just a hype. I've been flying out of Boston for years without any problems. There were a couple of years during the renovation project when it was a bit of a hassle but today it's a really easy airport to use. The biggest problem I have with BOS is parking. It's way too expensive. There used to be a parking lot in S.Boston next to the court house at $7/day. I would hop on the T from there or take a cab to the airport, and that was great, even cheaper than MHT which is $8/day. But when the silver line went live, someone realized they could now charge as much as the airport lots so, no more cheap parking when flying out of Boston.

Ok, the traffic can be tough sometimes but the Spalding turnpike to MHT is no easy drive at rush hour either  Smile

I could be wrong about this but I think most of MHT traffic is leisure. That is why you see the legacy carriers drop service while the total number of passengers going through MHT is still going up. I believe SW and charter flights make up the bulk of the traffic from MHT and those numbers will continue to increase. People in southern NH have a lot of disposable income to spend on packaged vacations.


User currently offlineGeorgiabill From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 580 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 9 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3764 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I believe the most likely to occur in 2006. Airtran will enter the MHT market with their 717's with nonstop service to ATL 2 to 3x daily and perhaps another eastcoast market maybe CLT(1 flight daily) to give US a little competition. MHT will see WN add nonstop to PHX,maybe PIT with an outside possibility of LAX or OAK(just a gut feeling no info to back it up) Finally I think Frontier will return to New England with nonstop from both MHT and PVD to DEN, also NW returns yr nonstop MHT to MSP! If any of these occur I am going to try to get the Carnac segment on the tonight show LOL

User currently offlineDeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8902 posts, RR: 12
Reply 23, posted (8 years 9 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3738 times:

Here's what I'm seeing for MHT in 2006:

Delta - Delta has dipped quite a bit over the past year at MHT. The year started off with 4x CVG (2x M88/2x CRJ), 3x ATL (2x M88/1x CRJ) and 2x LGA (2x CRJ). CVG is down to 3x CR7, ATL is at 5x (3x CR7/2x CRJ). That's quite a big decrease. Overall, I see Delta bringing back the evening ATL arrival/morning ATL departure, as this flight would (a) most likely have the highest yields (due to the way the MHT market works, it's more of an outbound market than an inbound, which MCO would be an example of). Of course, this would quite possibly be facilitied by...

AirTran - I would not be shocked to see them at MHT. Gate 10 is vacant for whoever wants it effective Jan. 3 or so. Southwest doesn't need a fifth gate, US doesn't really need a 3rd gate, so it'll be whoever wants it can have it. I could see AirTran running 3x 717 to ATL and 1x 717 to MCO (Just cause it seems like many new FL stations have 2 destinations, and FL won't touch BWI-MHT with a 10 foot pole, as WN has that market owned). And if AirTran doesn't come, it will be...

JetBlue - they have new E-190s coming in, and they need to put them somewhere. NYC isn't highly served out of MHT (4x CO to EWR, 6x props to LGA on US), so having 3-4 E-190s on MHT-JFK should work. Also, I would expect to see a MHT-FLL route at least once a day, as this is an unserved market here, and would have an advantage over WN (who requires a stop in BWI, TPA or MCO to get down to FLL). This could come with FL if NW gives up a gate (since they'll be down to 4-5 daily flights, no real need for 2 gates).

American - still don't see them coming to MHT. They wouldn't be able to compete effectively against UA's 2 class offering to ORD plus WN to MDW, and DFW is too thin of a route potentially (it's a long route for an MD-80, toward the end of its range, so some headwinds on MHT-DFW could hurt loads/cargo).

United - I see maybe some more mainline coming back to ORD, plus maybe an odd CR7 to IAD. However, I don't see DEN...it's right at the edge of the range for an E-170, and out of the range for a CRJ-700 (at least based on DEN-RDU, which is 300 miles shorter)...meaning a 737-500 would have to be used, which I don't see unless ORD gets some upgrading beforehand. At this time, that would mean maybe Frontier with an A318, but I'm not convinced of this.

Continental - I expect the status quo. It's been pretty constant over the past 3 years.

US Airways - I expect some more mainline toward the end of the year. Once the HP/US merger gets further, some aircraft will be able to be reallocated to PHL-MHT, and quite possibly maybe an upgrade on CLT-MHT. No major changes to PIT/DCA/LGA.

Southwest - BNA is gone. Yet, I'm convinced that PHX will be added this year (either US or WN will take it). I'd expect maybe some tinkering with service throughout the year though...maybe adding a flight or two here and there...only new destination I could see is PHX though.

Air Canada - status quo...I'm just happy that we get service to YYZ, and I'm doubting we'll see Dash 8s to YYZ (although I'd love to see MHT-YUL come back).

Jeff


User currently offlineCentPIT From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 990 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (8 years 9 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3720 times:

I don't think we will see PIT-MHT return in the near future. I think Pittsburgh has a better chance of seeing the non-stop service return on WN. MHT from PIT probably isn't on the top of Southwest's list though either. I think the next destination from Pittsburgh for southwest will be FLL or LAX.


Pittsburgh International: US Airways---160 daily departures! (52 destinations)
25 ChrisNH : I'm actually encouraged about new airlines starting servicce at MHT. We talk about AirTran, Frontier, and JetBlue. A case can easily be made for all t
26 Tornado82 : Considering how they call MHT/PVD their Boston Gateways (which makes me laugh, but I digress) and how they seem hellbent on killing US on PIT-PHL...
27 Apodino : A bit off topic, but isn't the wrentham outlet mall substantially closer to PVD than either BOS or MHT? Its 30 miles south of Boston near 495, and no
28 Post contains images ChrisNH : Actually, I may be a bit premature on the CAT III designations for 6-24. I thought I heard something about this being in the works. 6-24, itself over
29 Post contains images CentPIT : Why is WN dropping MHT-BNA? I think WN will add PIT-PVD before PIT-MHT; if either ever occur. PIT-PVD is still run by US with 4 daily (3 CRJ and 1 E70
30 B752OS : No it isn't. The difference in distance between it and BOS and PVD is less than 10 miles. It's right off 495 exit 15. Besides, I would not exactly ca
31 Tornado82 : Feasible. Which one (MHT/PVD) is actually closer to the CBD of Boston? I will be surprised to see WN allow US to keep a high yield route like that (m
32 Post contains images Warreng24 : I believe that the UA ORD-MHT downgrades are due to the seasonals. They were still running 757's and 733's for the holiday's. The 757's are scheduled
33 Apodino : I think PVD is slightly closer, but the difference between the two is negligible. MHT is probably a slightly easier ride, because you don't have to d
34 Post contains images Airbazar : You can't possibly even begin to compare skiing in the Alps with skiing in New England. I go to Europe skiing almost every year. Even with the euro a
35 Dartland : It's not about the skiing, it's about the "New England Experience" Agreed you'll maybe get more tourists for fall foliage (which is unarguably the bes
36 Airbazar : So have I, but very few. I suspect skiing may have not been the main intent of the visit or they may even be expats. One thing that MHT and NH could
37 Tornado82 : But what was your fare? PIT-EWR is all RJ's too... over a dozen when you add up CO and US. The yield is in the fare.
38 RL757PVD : Im gonna disagree with most of you and say Airtran is far from likely in 2006. If the MHT-ATL market was so strong then DL wouldnt have downgraded li
39 Post contains images Jay767 : Oh and you know as fact,because you are dead wrong and didn't bother to find out that MHT-ATL loads were outstanding,around 90% full on those MD88's,
40 Cadet57 : This all being said, and im all for for NE airport growth, but is MHT even trying to lure all this new service? Chris i know you mentioned all that st
41 RL757PVD : I do not doubt flights were full...the passenger #'s proved that...However, MHT-ATL hasnt had strong O&D traffic #'s, which is the bread and butter. A
42 Jay767 : Your kidding right,because UA mainline and US mainline already serve MHT,it just sounds like you didn't think they were already there,I might have un
43 Cadet57 : i ment expansion, others spoke on expanding to MHT-DEN and increasing MHT-ORD with ua and some PIT and more PHL with US.
44 B752OS : Are you kidding me??? How old are you? Two? I am going to have agree with you on this one. There certainly are a slew of markets more deserving of se
45 Jay767 : I doubt that promoting anything new hampshire would be a sell,we are a small and quaint state,but I do believe cheaper landing fee's and the fact tha
46 Airbazar : You guys have nooo idea. All of my family and a great number of friends live in Europe. When they come to visit they can't get enought of NH's and Ma
47 Dartland : I think Airbazar is right on. And don't forget -- you don't even have to go all the way up to N. Conway -- you have the outlet mall in Tilton 30 min.
48 Apodino : Didn't pay a fare. I was in the Jumpseat.
49 PVD757 : BOS-Wrentham Village: 46 minutes, 39.7 miles PVD-Wrentham Village: 37 minutes, 31.17 miles DRIVING: PVD-BOS: 1 hour + 8 minutes (59.88 miles) MHT-BOS
50 B752OS : Thankyou for backing up my point.
51 Post contains images Tornado82 : That's cheating then That's pretty much a push... unless the peak traffic is significantly worse in one than the other.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
MHT New Airlines Or Destinations? posted Sun Apr 10 2005 16:56:42 by Georgiabill
Any New UA European Destinations For IAD? posted Thu Aug 24 2006 22:26:56 by Eastern023
Any New Carriers To ORD On The Horizon? posted Fri Dec 30 2005 19:09:01 by ORD747CLE
ATL - Any New Carriers On The Horizon posted Thu Dec 29 2005 16:14:40 by Globalflyer
Any New Carriers To MDW? posted Thu Oct 2 2003 06:15:30 by GalvanAir777
Any New Carriers For ATL? posted Mon Sep 22 2003 17:40:33 by Jmets18
Any New Carriers Looking To Open At SJC? posted Tue Jun 10 2003 07:53:45 by SJCguy
DFW's International Terminal D, Any New Carriers? posted Mon Nov 18 2002 21:45:08 by Ual747
Any News On New Carriers To JNB posted Sat May 27 2006 20:24:55 by SA744
Any New SQ Destinations? posted Thu May 18 2006 11:10:46 by SingaporeBoy