Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Port Authority Approves WN Gate Lease At EWR  
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16872 posts, RR: 51
Posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5814 times:

The Port Authority today approved the leasing of three gates by UA to WN, the three gates are gates 10, 14 and 15 in the A-1 concourse of Terminal A. UA and CO will retain control of the other five gates in the A-1 concourse. The lease expires in 2018, WN will spend $2 Million to spruce up the gate areas and ticket counters.

http://www.panynj.gov/press-room/press-item.cfm?headLine_id=1361

WN begins EWR flights on March 27th with 8 daily flights, that expands to 18 by June 5th.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently onlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23022 posts, RR: 20
Reply 1, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5791 times:

Quoting STT757 (Thread starter):
The Port Authority today approved the leasing of three gates by UA to WN, the three gates are gates 10, 14 and 15 in the A-1 concourse of Terminal A.

Any word on why WN wanted 3? To me, that suggests a desire for more slots when/if they can get them.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16872 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5746 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 1):
Any word on why WN wanted 3? To me, that suggests a desire for more slots when/if they can get them

It's what they agreed to when they worked out the slot lease with UA, three makes sense considering how many destinations they will serve (six). Factoring the six destinations with the longer gate dwell times at EWR three is probably the minimum they could operate with to 18 daily flights amongst six destinations.

I know at some stations WN can get 10 daily flights from each gate, but not EWR with the delays. 6-7 flights for each gate is more realistic at EWR than 10.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinekl911 From Czech Republic, joined Jul 2003, 5141 posts, RR: 15
Reply 3, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5650 times:

Why do airlines in the US own/lease gates? Isnt that unefficient and old fashioned?

I think its better when a plane lands and gets to the first available gate like in AMS. With modern technology and screens the gate can have the colours and style of any airline. and when airline A leaves and B is coming in you change by the push of one button.


User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2412 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5626 times:

Southwest ticket counters are nearly complete next to the UA/AC desks in the center of Terminal A, behind a partition for the time being. Never thought I'd see the day!  

User currently onlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23022 posts, RR: 20
Reply 5, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5556 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 2):
I know at some stations WN can get 10 daily flights from each gate, but not EWR with the delays.

6 gates per day per gate? Really? If you use the gates from, say, 0700 to 2100 every day, that's more than 2 hours per flight. Even at EWR, that doesn't seem realistic.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlinemtnwest1979 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 2458 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5429 times:

Quoting kl911 (Reply 3):
I think its better when a plane lands and gets to the first available gate like in AMS. With modern technology and screens the gate can have the colours and style of any airline. and when airline A leaves and B is coming in you change by the push of one button.

That might be grat for upstairs, but if you are moving ground equipment all over the airport and so forth, you would have some gates with mutiple lines' equipment, then some with none, and so on. Don't know if I'm getting thought across, but I hope get my drift.



"If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
User currently offlineT5towbar From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 560 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5375 times:

I guess AC is staying at 11 & 12?
I knew that UA was giving up 14 & 15, but I should have known about 10.
That leaves 16, 17 & 18. How did they come up with the 5 gate figure? That's only 3 gates, unless AC moves to Terminal B.
I also thought that Gate 18 was a CUTE gate that B6 often uses for arrivals, and WestJet uses seasonally.

Also, we still don't know what kind of equipment will go to those gates post merger. UA has a mix of Airbus family a/c; 757's; and CR7's. Once we all tie up, who know's what's coming there, and to A2 also. Probably an all express operation? Only time will tell.
Can't wait to see those famous 30 min. turns that WN pulls off.

BTW: Last nite, I got to see the Airbus painted in new colors alongside with a 757 in new paint. Kinda weird seeing them side by side in our colors, but they looked really nice!



A comment from an Ex CON: Work Hard.....Fly Standby!
User currently offlineCO777DAL From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 616 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5246 times:

Quoting kl911 (Reply 3):

Why do airlines in the US own/lease gates? Isnt that unefficient and old fashioned?

I think its better when a plane lands and gets to the first available gate like in AMS. With modern technology and screens the gate can have the colours and style of any airline. and when airline A leaves and B is coming in you change by the push of one button.

I actually hate the CUTE system. I find the airports that use it are so drab and boring. I love to see the airlines decorate the terminals and gate area in their color. Love carpet, walls, podium, everything with airline logo and colors plastered across it. It gives the terminal a sense of ownership. I also like seeing the airlines logo on the gates over some bank or other random company. I love CO silver globe and glass ticket counters and and gate counters at IAH. Same with American colors and Eagle everywhere at DFW.



Worked Hard. Flew Right. Farewell, Continental. Thanks for the memories.
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16872 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5187 times:

Quoting T5towbar (Reply 7):
That leaves 16, 17 & 18. How did they come up with the 5 gate figure? That's only 3 gates, unless AC moves to Terminal B.

Your right, it's three gates.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3754 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5169 times:

Quoting kl911 (Reply 3):
I think its better when a plane lands and gets to the first available gate like in AMS. With modern technology and screens the gate can have the colours and style of any airline. and when airline A leaves and B is coming in you change by the push of one button.

Some airports in the US are CUTE. Most CUTE deployments in the US are at international terminals, like T5 at ORD and the LAX TBIT. A few smaller US airports with mostly or entirely domestic service are going CUTE: SFB is CUTE, FAT (I think) is CUTE, and FWA is planning to go CUTE by the end of the year.



"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3480 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 4684 times:

"Why do airlines in the US own/lease gates? Isnt that unefficient and old fashioned?

I think its better when a plane lands and gets to the first available gate like in AMS. With modern technology and screens the gate can have the colours and style of any airline. and when airline A leaves and B is coming in you change by the push of one button."


Because that would make so much sense. In the US, airlines like to put their little logo on the gate that they lease . . . it's so much more important than running an efficient, modern airport.


User currently offlineenilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7192 posts, RR: 13
Reply 12, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 4665 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 1):
Quoting STT757 (Thread starter):
The Port Authority today approved the leasing of three gates by UA to WN, the three gates are gates 10, 14 and 15 in the A-1 concourse of Terminal A.

Any word on why WN wanted 3? To me, that suggests a desire for more slots when/if they can get them.

The number of destinations is irrelevant to gates usage, but I'm sure WN has hopes of getting more slots and this was their only chance to get gates which are even harder so they got as many as they could.


User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6764 posts, RR: 32
Reply 13, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 4595 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 11):
Because that would make so much sense. In the US, airlines like to put their little logo on the gate that they lease . . . it's so much more important than running an efficient, modern airport.

There are efficiencies to be gained when an airline uses a specific gate (or set of gates) several times a day -- ground equipment like tugs and baggage carts can be positioned near where they are likely to be used, while airlines can customize gate areas (like the priority lanes on network carriers or Southwest's boarding group numbers).

It can also be advantageous for airports to enter into extended lease agreements with airlines for facilities; it's harder to issue bonds to pay for a new terminal or terminal expansion without some certainty that there will be airline customers for those newly constructed facilities.

And even for customers, it's good for there to be some consistency in airline locations, particularly at airports with multiple unit terminals. Connections at JFK, for example, would be a nightmare if airlines took whatever gate was available at whatever terminal. Or consider that you might check in for a JetBlue flight at Terminal 5 and end up departing from Terminal 2.


User currently offlinewnflyguy From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2011, 545 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 4484 times:

With EWR being a delayed prone airport this gives WN more felx when it comes to delayed ops.


my post are my opinion only and not those of southwest airlines and or airtran airlines.
User currently offlineblueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 4002 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 4362 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mtnwest1979 (Reply 6):
but if you are moving ground equipment all over the airport and so forth, you would have some gates with mutiple lines' equipment, then some with none

Just because an airport is CUTE doesn't mean an airline is going to find its flights "all over the airport." They usually stick to the same terminal, and often even to the same area of the terminal, exactly to avoid having to move equipment all over the airport.

There is generally less equipment to move around than you probably think however. Anywherthe other than hubs and busy stations, Asian and European airlines tend to outsource their ground and/or passenger handling, be it to the locally dominant airline or a dedicated handler. Very often, the airport or terminals are divided along invisible lines so that all (most) flights using a particular handler operate out of the same area, again to keep from having to move equipment all over the place.

CUTE doesn't prevent gate customization either. Sometimes it's wheeled away after a flight, sometimes the particular airline has enough traffic that the airport operator assigns the same gate all day, effectively making it their gate. I've seen Continental gates in Europe that didn't look that much different than the ones at EWR, customization wise, but once the flight was gone, the carpet was rolled up, the EliteAccess sign wheeled away and the banners removed, to be replaced by similar material from, say Etihad... No, they don't get to customize the podium itself, but is that really so important?

Quoting ScottB (Reply 13):
Connections at JFK, for example, would be a nightmare if airlines took whatever gate was available at whatever terminal

I can't think of a single CUTE airport where that scenario would be true, unless the carrier would be operating from several terminals due to its size (and in that case is no different than what AA does at DFW, CO at EWR, etc...).

[Edited 2011-02-25 08:55:03]


I've got $h*t to do
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13130 posts, RR: 100
Reply 16, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 4268 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting kl911 (Reply 3):
Why do airlines in the US own/lease gates? Isnt that unefficient and old fashioned?

At EWR it doesn't make as much sense as DEN, DFW, IAD, or LAX where the airline *paid* to construct the terminal. Why should the airport own what the airlines paid for? Where the city pays for the airport, go for efficiency.

At some other airports, the airline owns the terminal (or just the concourse) in order to better control the customer experience. At DEN, I like what UA has done on concourse B. Other airlines are regulated to A or C. But there is a reason B is the largest concourse, UA put the money into that concourse.

It makes less sense at EWR. For example, the ORD expansion has been blocked several times as UA and AA see no reason to pay for an expansion that would mostly benefit their competitors.

As for WN... It is quite the impact having them expand into EWR. WIth only 18 flights per day, the 738 should make its way there quick!

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineTOMMY767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 4268 times:

Does UA/CO really need to be in A-1 at all? I feel like they have more than a fair share of gates in A. It should be more like this (for streamlining purposes):

A-1: WN, B6, AC
A-2: UAEX
A-3: AA, US

But instead you have this confusing hodpodge of a gate operation where UAEX dominates A-2 along with 2 B6 gates, 4 odd ball UA gates in A-1 along with AC and soon WN. I just don't see why they make it easier for the carriers and customers alike and just keep carriers in ONE respective area.



"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently offlineAntoniemey From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1572 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2839 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 11):
efficient, modern airport.

Efficiency comes in many forms. Certainly in some ways a common use system for gates would be more efficient, but in a city where a single carrier is dominant, you basically get a situation rather similar to what most US airports are like by default simply because the dominant carrier needs a large number of gates together and consistently in the same area day after day.



Make something Idiot-proof, and the Universe will make a more inept idiot.
User currently offlineridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2789 times:

Quoting TOMMY767 (Reply 17):
Does UA/CO really need to be in A-1 at all? I feel like they have more than a fair share of gates in A. It should be more like this (for streamlining purposes):

Its called keeping your control on an airport.


User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4280 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2654 times:

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 15):

Just because an airport is CUTE doesn't mean an airline is going to find its flights "all over the airport." They usually stick to the same terminal, and often even to the same area of the terminal, exactly to avoid having to move equipment all over the airport.

  

Text book example of this is LAS. LAS has said that new terminals would have had to be built much earlier if they were not CUTE because they can use gate space more efficiently.

Quoting CO777DAL (Reply 8):

I actually hate the CUTE system. I find the airports that use it are so drab and boring. I love to see the airlines decorate the terminals and gate area in their color. Love carpet, walls, podium, everything with airline logo and colors plastered across it. It gives the terminal a sense of ownership. I also like seeing the airlines logo on the gates over some bank or other random company. I love CO silver globe and glass ticket counters and and gate counters at IAH. Same with American colors and Eagle everywhere at DFW.

In MCO and LAS, which are both CUTE airports in parts, the airlines logo actually is displayed on a computer monitor behind the podium. It actually is pretty good looking. As for carpeting and stuff like that, in most airports I have been to, none of this stuff is actually airline specific. In fact at ORD, the only thing that has the united logo are the podiums and flight monitors. Plus with the LOB situation, assume you had several diversions at one airport. If that airport was CUTE then you can have gate space for all of those flights regardless of airline a lot more easily. If its airline specific, then you are talking about limited gates for some carriers, which could result in fines and stuff for the three hour rule.

As for corporate sponsorship of the gates themselves (I.E. HSBC at all three NYC airports), it might be a bit cheesy, but if it brings the airport an extra source of revenue without landing fees or passing anything onto the airlines, I am all for it. The airlines need all the breaks they can get at this point.


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...
Any Updates On DL/NW Gate Situation At EWR? posted Mon Jun 22 2009 17:10:10 by Tommy767
CO Gate Shuffle At EWR? posted Mon Mar 3 2008 18:57:35 by Phatfarmlines
Terminal C Shuttle/Gate A28 At EWR posted Fri Feb 23 2007 01:06:47 by BOACVC10
Spotters Heads Up WN At EWR 2/2 posted Sun Feb 1 2009 08:50:12 by CanyonBlue17
US Losing Gate Space At DEN To WN posted Mon Oct 27 2008 16:47:02 by BP1
Port Authority Redevelopment Plan (EWR, JFK, LGA) posted Fri Jun 20 2008 18:02:41 by STT757
NY/NJ Port Authority Looks At SWF posted Thu Nov 16 2006 22:49:44 by PVDflier
Jetblue To Get 4th Gate At EWR! posted Fri Nov 11 2005 07:43:38 by Bigdrewfl
WN Needs More Gate Space At PIT? posted Sat Sep 10 2005 21:13:14 by PITA333
TZ At WN Gate posted Wed Jun 1 2005 22:47:32 by Phxplanes