Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Could YNG-GYY Combine Resources To Get Airtran?  
User currently offlineYNGguins From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 513 posts, RR: 1
Posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3510 times:

Don't call me the crazy one because I did not think of this idea, Curry from GYY did.

Gary Newspaper Article:
http://www.post-trib.com/news/1452032,gairport.article

Quote:
"Say Youngstown (Ohio) wanted to fly to Atlanta, and so did we, and AirTran had one plane for four flights a day. We could set it up to where two flights would go to Gary and back, and two to Youngstown and back. We would each take on half of the mitigation, and AirTran would have the opportunity to see if the routes are good investments," he said.

SCASD Grant Money
GYY: $950,000 that expires in 09/2009
YNG: $575,000 that expires in 09/2010

My Thoughts
-I am well aware FL already serves CAK and PIT.
-Realize FL has plenty of data on the Youngstown market, since a large portion of the pax at CAK and YNG come from the Mahoning Valley.
-Could YNG still fight to get service with Airtran, or do you think FL would pass since it has a solid presence at CAK-PIT?

I am POSING the suggestion, not endorsing it!


I am PROUD to live in the greatest country on earth: The United States of America!
37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineUSPIT10L From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 3295 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3479 times:



Quoting YNGguins (Thread starter):

I understand that. FL also serves MDW very effectively. Of course, TOL just got a SCASD grant for flights to EWR with a startup called AzulAir, which may never get off the ground. I wish they would just discontinue these programs. They're such a waste of taxpayer dollars. If the market doesn't exist, there's a reason for it.



It's a Great Day for Hockey!
User currently offlineJA From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 579 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3410 times:

Why would an airline open a new station for passengers being served already at MDW/ORD?

Why would an airline open a new station for passengers being served already at CAK/PIT/CLE?

The simple answer is if they have no presence in the region already.

If you are an airport that is ignoring startups because they are "risky", then your life has gone from hard to impossible.

Now, let us analyze YNG:
-FL: CAK, PIT
-B6: PIT
-UA: CLE, PIT
-US: CLE, PIT
-AA: CLE, PIT
-DL: CLE, PIT
-WN: CLE, PIT
-CO: CLE

This leaves NK to be recruited. NK likes big, competitive airports because they can go in there and take people that ALREADY come to the airport. In the case of YNG, they are not going to fight G4 for their existing traffic and there is no other traffic to be diverted. So, they are out. All of the airlines that YNG is targeting already have a presence in the area.

Now, let's say you have an airport designated as the Chicago region's third airport, but you are also avoiding startups. You are actually in a worse position, as not only every domestic carrier is in the neighborhood, but a whole bunch of foreign ones are too:

GYY's non-startup options:
-FL: MDW
-B6: ORD
-UA: ORD
-US: ORD
-AA: ORD
-DL: MDW, ORD
-WN: MDW
-CO: ORD
-NK: ORD
-MX (INTL): ORD

In other words, GYY is COMPLETELY out of standard network options.

In this situation, an airport director has two options:
1) Bring in a startup and take the risk that they might fail.
2) Not use the grant and end up on the DOT's list of "wasted" grant opportunities.

In scenario 1, you don't have to take all the blame if something goes wrong. In scenario 2, you do. Since Chicago and Gary are both having extraordinary financial problems, it isn't a big deal to cut $3.1M out of your budget. That is the size of GYY's budget in 2009 and a big chunk comes from taxpayers. If this grant does not happen, GYY is in real trouble with regards to its credibility. YNG has G4 and that assures their existence (yes yes, I know that US isn't protecting HVN's life...point taken).

Now let us take a look at an airport that had a lot of startups pass through their doors: RFD. Like it or not, RFD competes with GYY for airlines. RFD brings startups to their airport to build up the market. They had over 200,000 passengers come through their airport last year. G4 is their biggest name now UA has left. Thomas Bona has shown the economic impact of bringing risky startups through your doors:

Source: http://blogs.e-rockford.com/thepasse...rt-subsidies-and-passenger-growth/

>>Here’s how much the airport has spent (or plans to spend) on air service development:


FY 2006:

Revenue guarantee - $1.74 million
MilesAhead program - $461,000
Advertising - $962,000
Other air service development costs -$256,000
TOTAL - $3.42 million

FY 2007:

Revenue guarantee - $1.64 million
MilesAhead program - $90,000
Advertising - $403,000
Other air service development costs - $342,000
TOTAL - $2.44 million

FY 2008

Revenue guarantee - $822,000
MilesAhead - $132,000
Advertising - $365,000
Other air service development costs - $190,000
TOTAL -$1.51 million

FY 2009 (estimated)

Revenue guarantee - $1.1 million
MilesAhead - $69,000
Advertising - $437,000
Other air service development costs - $194,000
TOTAL - $1.8 million

FY 2010 (budget)

Revenue guarantee - $0
MilesAhead - $150,000
Advertising - $457,000
Other air service development costs - $229,000
TOTAL - $836,000

You see that the amount spent on air service development has gone down, while passenger service has gone up (the exception being FY 2009, which had an unplanned bump up because of fuel prices on the Southern Skyways routes). This gives credence to reader Sally Hanks’ point of “priming the pump” - the airport has to pay more early to prove itself, and as it proves itself it becomes cheaper to attract service.

But before you say, “Oh, they threw $10 million away the past few years”, look at the income from passenger service over that time:

FY 2006:

Income from airlines and terminal services - $412,000
Passenger facility charge - $193,000
FAA formula grant (based on having more than 20,000 passengers) - At least $1 million
TOTAL - $1.61 million

FY 2007:

Income from airlines and terminal services - $495,000
Passenger facility charge - $262,000
FAA formula grant - At least $1 million
TOTAL - $1.76 million

FY 2008:

Income from airlines and terminal services - $599,000
Passenger facility charge - $402,000
FAA formula grant - $1.5 million
DOT grant for United subsidy (from 2006-7) - $1 million
TOTAL - $3.6 million

FY 2009 (estimate):

Income from airlines and terminal services - $494,000
Passenger facility charge - $401,000
FAA formula grant - $1.5 million
TOTAL - $2.4 million

FY 2010 (budget):

Income from airlines and terminal services - $566,000
Passenger facility charge - $420,000
FAA formula grant - $1.5 million
TOTAL - $2.49 million

So passenger service has brought in $12 million in direct revenue to the airport that wouldn’t be here without the post-2003 boost.And that doesn’t include millions in discretionary FAA money that comes here to improve the terminal and U.S. Customs facility, buy jet bridges, expand ramps … and eventually bring a parking deck here?

In fact, if RFD did nothing but maintain existing service, that $2.5 million in annual income budgeted for 2010 would still come in But what you’re seeing is, as time goes on, the outlay is outstripped by the income. And that doesn’t even quantify the economic impact of having a growing passenger service airport that bring people from outside of Rockford here.

So, yes, Mr Kent, the airport has paid airlines to come here and - to an extent - passengers to fly here. But enough of those routes stick around and enough of those passengers come back to offset those subsidies … and the subsidies are going down, while other numbers go up.<<


In other words, keeping the traffic up at your airport actually pays off because it attracts new players. RFD can walk an airline through the airport and say "Look at all these people". Meanwhile, some of the detractors abuse the Gary airport for being a pipe dream. Granted, startups are risky, but an airline catering at least tangentially to business traffic has not even been tried at GYY.

GYY needs direct service from A to B, not a connection to a hub. The DOT wants to see grants be successful and in order to do that, airports have to think like airlines to present the best package. The revenue guarantee is enough on its own to build a new market, so the concern about "financial stability" is a straw man. We have already seen that the DOT will allow changes to be made to a grant to secure a promising service (see TOL and Air Azul). YNG's grant is not enough to build that market on its own unless it cuts down the number of flights required in the grant.

Both of these airports are at a crossroads. The stakes are higher for GYY. GYY has the greatest potential of any airport to ever receive a SCASD grant in the history of the program. YNG has a greater disadvantage and failure would not have the kind of fallout it would at GYY.


User currently offlineChase From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1054 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3314 times:



Quoting JA (Reply 2):
In other words, GYY is COMPLETELY out of standard network options.

I like your post, but I'm not sure I understand why you seem to be postulating that there's no chance of a carrier who currently serves ORD and/or MDW considering additional service at GYY? The Chicago market is very spread out geographically. For someone in the NW Indiana suburbs (something like 600,000 people), GYY is a considerably shorter drive than either of the other two. I fully agree that therefore some airline adding GYY-XYZ would cannibalize their current traffic on MDW-XYZ or ORD-XYZ, but I don't see how that completly rules out moving a MDW/ORD-XYZ flight to a GYY-XYZ flight. Considered separately from the other part of Chicagoland, Northwest Indiana is about the same population as the PIA area, and the GYY-ORD distance is about the same as the PIA-BMI distance. It wouldn't make sense to have no service in PIA and make everyone there drive to BMI to fly anywhere...the only difference in the GYY case is that PIA and BMI are about the same size, whereas NW Indiana and the remainder of Chicagoland are certainly not.
I'm rambling...my point is, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, just curious to know why you think that nobody who serves MDW and/or ORD would consider also serving GYY...other than, well, historical evidence being on your side  Wink


User currently offlineJA From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 579 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3182 times:



Quoting Chase (Reply 3):
I'm rambling...my point is, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, just curious to know why you think that nobody who serves MDW and/or ORD would consider also serving GYY...other than, well, historical evidence being on your side

It could be the almost 300 nonstop markets available from ORD & MDW to points all over the world within 30 minutes of GYY. Right now, GYY is being marketed as a feeder market instead of a reliever O/D market. The goal should be point to point service.


User currently offlineYNGguins From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 513 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3101 times:

Perhaps someone can answer this....
1-Airtran currently serves CAK and PIT.
2-Data for Airtran tix sales shows strong sales from the Mahoning Valley.

So could they use that data and award YNG with just one flight perhaps. If they know there is a market there, do you think they'd consider flying one route with the SCASD?



I am PROUD to live in the greatest country on earth: The United States of America!
User currently offlineJA From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 579 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks ago) and read 3070 times:



Quoting YNGguins (Reply 5):
If they know there is a market there, do you think they'd consider flying one route with the SCASD?

Yes. I'm sure FL would consider one flight per day to YNG as long as they got the entire thing. That is the minimum to attract any useful amount of business traffic. At one flight a day, you're looking at $300K per month in operating costs. They would hang around long enough to make a go of the market.


User currently offlineYNGguins From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 513 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3020 times:

We shall see.. I would love to see flights like this offered.


I am PROUD to live in the greatest country on earth: The United States of America!
User currently offlineChase From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1054 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2988 times:



Quoting JA (Reply 4):
Right now, GYY is being marketed as a feeder market instead of a reliever O/D market

Ah, I see. I agree that not many people would fly, for instance, GYY-EWR-BOS when they could just fly ORD-BOS. Some would, though, since one-stops are generally cheaper. But, to continue with the same example, I think that lots of people would fly GYY-EWR over ORD-EWR...namely those who live closer to GYY than to ORD.


User currently offlineJA From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 579 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2968 times:



Quoting Chase (Reply 8):
I think that lots of people would fly GYY-EWR over ORD-EWR...namely those who live closer to GYY than to ORD.

A ton of people would. Anyone who doesn't like the congestion of ORD would consider it.


User currently offlineYNGguins From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 513 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2943 times:

Especially those in NW IN and extreme SE IL. The problem with GYY is how they call themselves Chicago's 3rd airport when they got no scheduled passenger flights. As far as I am concerned, the 3rd airport is Rockford. It may be much further away, but it gets a great draw from the NW suburbs of Chicago.


I am PROUD to live in the greatest country on earth: The United States of America!
User currently offlineEXAAUADL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2940 times:



Quoting YNGguins (Thread starter):

SCASD Grant Money
GYY: $950,000 that expires in 09/2009
YNG: $575,000 that expires in 09/2010

That is no where near enough money

Quoting YNGguins (Reply 5):
So could they use that data and award YNG with just one flight perhaps

I doubt Air Tran would serve YNG with only one daily flight. This isnt like Branson where it will no doubt be supported by the entertainment community


User currently offlineKcrwFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3847 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2922 times:



Quoting JA (Reply 6):
Yes. I'm sure FL would consider one flight per day to YNG as long as they got the entire thing. That is the minimum to attract any useful amount of business traffic. At one flight a day, you're looking at $300K per month in operating costs. They would hang around long enough to make a go of the market.

No way. CAK is a great station for them, and they hold their own in PIT as well. I doubt they have any interest in competing with themselves.

Quoting YNGguins (Reply 5):
Perhaps someone can answer this....
1-Airtran currently serves CAK and PIT.
2-Data for Airtran tix sales shows strong sales from the Mahoning Valley.

So could they use that data and award YNG with just one flight perhaps. If they know there is a market there, do you think they'd consider flying one route with the SCASD?

I dont believe so. Theres no real benefit to them flying to YNG to capture passengers that they're already capturing via CAK and PIT. They're killing 3 birds with 2 stones, and thats probably the way they like it.

Quoting JA (Reply 4):
Right now, GYY is being marketed as a feeder market instead of a reliever O/D market. The goal should be point to point service.

Well, theres more than one way to look at this. On one hand you could say that GYY is its own city and its local business community could step up and support a few RJ's into a hub somewhere...but given the nonstop opportunities at MDW and ORD I'm not sure how much time could actually be saved on the average business trip ( which is one of the main reasons the locals would use GYY).

On the other hand, GYY serves a healthy population; both of Gary and the Southern suburbs of Chicago. Vacation carriers usually tend to do well there, but those that served GYY all went by the wayside. I think that GYY would be a GREAT performer for G4. I know they serve SBN, but I truly believe that GYY could be one of their best stations if they give it a shot one day.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23306 posts, RR: 20
Reply 13, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2872 times:



Quoting KcrwFlyer (Reply 12):
On one hand you could say that GYY is its own city and its local business community could step up and support a few RJ's into a hub somewhere...but given the nonstop opportunities at MDW and ORD I'm not sure how much time could actually be saved on the average business trip ( which is one of the main reasons the locals would use GYY).

What about people east of GYY who are using SBN now? GYY is going to get some of that traffic, as there likely wouldn't be any time difference. I don't know how big that group is, however. FWIW, if I live, say, 15 minutes from GYY and an hour from ORD, connecting ex-GYY and taking a n/s ex-ORD are probably about equivalent time-wise.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineJA From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 579 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2831 times:



Quoting KcrwFlyer (Reply 12):
Well, theres more than one way to look at this. On one hand you could say that GYY is its own city and its local business community could step up and support a few RJ's into a hub somewhere...but given the nonstop opportunities at MDW and ORD I'm not sure how much time could actually be saved on the average business trip ( which is one of the main reasons the locals would use GYY).

Which is why GYY has to start out with strong point to point markets. The service level will be higher at ORD/MDW for some time. That higher service level and wider service span gives ORD/MDW a marked advantage, but service to a few big markets (particularly eastern markets) can save some time and hassle.

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 11):
That is no where near enough money

For one flight a day? SURE it is. If FL said we would do one flight a day, they would get the grant. For what they are proposing in both grants? GYY is enough, YNG is not. Remember UA flew RFD-DEN for a $1M subsidy and that was 2x daily.


User currently offlineKcrwFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3847 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2792 times:



Quoting JA (Reply 14):
For one flight a day? SURE it is. If FL said we would do one flight a day, they would get the grant. For what they are proposing in both grants? GYY is enough, YNG is not. Remember UA flew RFD-DEN for a $1M subsidy and that was 2x daily.

Was UA flying 717's? Probably not since they've never owned any.... UA flew that route with crj's in vastly different economic times.

1.5M wont bring FL anywhere. If it would, they would have tried alot more markets. GYY's grant might be enough for someone to try an RJ somewhere in these economic times. I'm not even sure YNG's would do that. Together, they'd make a pretty solid RJ subsidy, but not a FL incentive.


User currently offline0NEWAIR0 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 939 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2775 times:



Quoting JA (Reply 2):
Why would an airline open a new station for passengers being served already at MDW/ORD?

Why would an airline open a new station for passengers being served already at CAK/PIT/CLE?

The simple answer is if they have no presence in the region already.

I know what you are getting at but I believe you have simplified the situation too much. What your saying is that an airline shouldn't service BUF or SYR if they service ROC, or they shouldn't serve PVD if they service BOS, or , SRQ if they already have TPA, or, well you get my drift...


YNG TO....
PIT = 124 miles
CAK = 68 miles
CLE = 70 miles

GYY TO...
MDW = 42 miles
ORD = 25 miles



"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
User currently offlineChase From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1054 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2756 times:



Quoting 0NEWAIR0 (Reply 16):
GYY TO...
MDW = 42 miles
ORD = 25 miles

It's the other way around  Wink


User currently offlineJA From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 579 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2737 times:



Quoting 0NEWAIR0 (Reply 16):
I know what you are getting at but I believe you have simplified the situation too much. What your saying is that an airline shouldn't service BUF or SYR if they service ROC, or they shouldn't serve PVD if they service BOS, or , SRQ if they already have TPA, or, well you get my drift...

It depends on the size of the local market. Certainly Providence has a sizeable local market of its own. Rochester has a sizeable market of its own. Sarasota has somewhat of a local market. Youngstown has a population of 73,000 in-town and 570,000 in the metro area, of which only 25% is not within a one hour drive of another airport. In this case, 70 miles is not a hard drive. Gary as a town is much smaller, but has rail service to Chicago.


User currently offlineYNGguins From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 513 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2704 times:

YNG is not 124 miles to PIT. My drive to Pittsburgh is the shortest of the 3 airports. CLE being the longest.... At least from my location in the Mahoning Valley.

No clue where on earth you got that mile marker from?!?!
YNG-PIT: 72 Miles
YNG-CAK: 66 Miles
YNG-CLE: 69 Miles



I am PROUD to live in the greatest country on earth: The United States of America!
User currently offlineBuddys747 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 535 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2653 times:



Quoting KcrwFlyer (Reply 15):
1.5M wont bring FL anywhere. If it would, they would have tried alot more markets

MDT= $300,000 grant to help with start up costs.

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 11):
doubt Air Tran would serve YNG with only one daily flight. This isnt like Branson where it will no doubt be supported by the entertainment community

They could to start with one, again, look at MDT. However,

Quoting KcrwFlyer (Reply 12):
dont believe so. Theres no real benefit to them flying to YNG to capture passengers that they're already capturing via CAK and PIT. They're killing 3 birds with 2 stones, and thats probably the way they like it.

But you never know, many said MDT would never get FL either. All YNG can do is try.


User currently offlineKcrwFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3847 posts, RR: 7
Reply 21, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2633 times:



Quoting Buddys747 (Reply 20):
MDT= $300,000 grant to help with start up costs.

for a 1x, midday turn to MCO. Not 2x to ATL. I should have been more detailed in my post. 1.5M get you 4x on FL (which is what the combined grants would be seeking)

Quoting Buddys747 (Reply 20):
But you never know, many said MDT would never get FL either. All YNG can do is try.

The situation makes sense in MDT though. Large market, no risk involved, no competition (allegiant in YNG). YNG already has flights to SFB on G4, so MCO on FL is out of the question. ATL isn't really possible as is.

People that said MDT wouldn't get FL were justified in saying so because at the time they weren't doing any MCO-only markets, and MDT is pretty close to their operation in BWI.


User currently offlineYNGguins From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 513 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2500 times:

Do you think it would be wise for YNG to spend more money from their new SCASD on a new Allegiant Destination or should they preserve that money for a business carrier?

Article from the Youngstown Business Journal:

In his report Wednesday at the monthly meeting of the Western Reserve Port Authority, which overseas the airport’s operations, Bowser also informed the authority’s board that Allegiant Air continues to carry loads on its Youngstown flights of 95%, compared with the airline’s 90% average systemwide. The bottom line, he said, is “our numbers are where they need to be.” Scheduled flights will expand to four per week to accommodate Spring Break traffic in April and will be offered three days per week over the summer, with no break in service expected in the fall, he said.

The port authority’s chairman, John Masternick, said he has had discussions with Robert Ashcroft, an Allegiant vice president, regarding the possibility of converting a $570,000 Small Community Air Services Development grant the airport received to use to support a possible second destination the airline is considering for Youngstown.

The grant was awarded to help Youngstown attract a carrier connecting it to a hub airport. However, the state of the economy has dimmed prospects for landing such a service, and the grant will expire in 2011. The port authority would have to petition the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration for the change of use.

“If we don’t use it, we’re going to lose it anyways, so it would be best to use it“’ Masternick said.



I am PROUD to live in the greatest country on earth: The United States of America!
User currently offlineKcrwFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3847 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2490 times:



Quoting YNGguins (Reply 22):
Do you think it would be wise for YNG to spend more money from their new SCASD on a new Allegiant Destination or should they preserve that money for a business carrier?

G4 will grow anyway if you're doing well. Why pay for something you could just wait a little while for?

I say amend the grant to allow turboprops. That would give it a chance of being used.


User currently offlineJA From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 579 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (5 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2467 times:



Quoting YNGguins (Reply 22):
Do you think it would be wise for YNG to spend more money from their new SCASD on a new Allegiant Destination or should they preserve that money for a business carrier?

The DOT isn't going to let that happen. The whole point was to get business traffic into the airport. That would be too far off the ball to allow that to happen. They have received two conforming proposals that they refuse to consider further for non-technical reasons.

Quoting KcrwFlyer (Reply 23):
I say amend the grant to allow turboprops. That would give it a chance of being used.

Exactly. Turboprops and fewer frequencies. I'm sure the DOT would bite on both. THAT is the type of amending that makes sense.


25 Flyinryan99 : I am surprised they never included turboprops in it in the first place. I still don't see how they are unable to attract United Express to IAD on Saa
26 YNGguins : I definitely think the Airport would amend the grant if they were in talks with a particular carrier. What they need to do is be proactive and talk wi
27 KcrwFlyer : I'd go ahead and amend it asap. I'm sure with that grant money, Colgan would jump on YNG-IAD. I'd probably go directly to 9L to get them interested i
28 YNGguins : If the likes of Bradford and DuBois can support 9L with flights to IAD, Youngstown can as well. Least you think so..
29 Flyinryan99 : Ya know, they are all close enough, could tag them all together with creative scheduling if needed. But I would think YNG could support IAD nonstop.
30 FlyPNS1 : Bradford and DuBois are both heavily subsidized under the Essential Air Service Program. Bradford currently gets $1.2 million annually for those Colg
31 YNGguins : YNG has over 2-3 million in an hours drive to draw from. The only problem is that those 2-3 million are already served by CLE-CAK-PIT. But there is pl
32 JA : That is happening as we speak. The article reflects this. It's called fear. As the saying goes, scared money don't make money. I could give them two
33 Flyinryan99 : Can you give TOL two RJs to MDW? I would think the problem is interlining, I know WN doesn't interline (even though that thought may change with thei
34 Mkirch72 : G4 is the only airline that serves YNG and it's like 2x weekly. They've been there a couple of years now and if they haven't expanded service beyond S
35 FlyPNS1 : Option A) Pay outrageously high fares to fly on a turboprop (which a lot of people don't like) and have to connect through IAD to reach everything OR
36 YNGguins : They are going to 4x a week for a few weeks in April, then a permanent 3x a week beginning in June or so. So they are adding a 3rd flight a week from
37 JA : The only examples I knew of in the past was Great Lakes. Who else tried this? One does not necessarily have to book two tickets by themselves. The fe
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...
What Job Could I Expect To Get After Graduating? posted Fri Jan 6 2006 04:35:55 by Nycfuturepilot
Airtran Or Southwest To Get The MDW Gates posted Mon Dec 13 2004 22:36:42 by Quickmover
SU Il96s To Get PTVs? posted Sat Feb 21 2009 18:00:28 by Vasu
RFD To Get Two New Destinations posted Wed Feb 18 2009 13:49:46 by YNGguins
Amerijet To Get 5 767SF posted Wed Feb 18 2009 09:16:09 by LAXintl
United Finally Starts To Get A Clue posted Tue Feb 10 2009 17:50:42 by Uadc8contrail
All OZ's 777s To Get F Class? posted Thu Jan 29 2009 11:43:02 by The777Man
Commutair To Get Saab 340s (rumor) posted Wed Jan 14 2009 20:13:09 by SaabFA71
Southwest 737-300s To Get New Flight Deck (pic) posted Mon Dec 22 2008 12:24:26 by IAD787
AB Flight In 2005: Any Chance To Get Reg And Typ? posted Tue Dec 9 2008 05:08:03 by Tobias2702