Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
JFK Terminal Scenarios In A Hypo. AA-B6 Merger  
User currently offlinewashingtonian From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 6608 times:

I thought this warrants a separate thread. Since we all love these fantasy hypos on A.net, what happens at JFK if jetBlue and American merge? They both operate from new terminals--the two nicest at JFK in fact. Both are also half-built. The plan is for BA and other oneworld airlines to move into a newly expanded T8 at some point this decade. The plan at T5 is to build a new international wing along with an FIS over the land where T6 used to be (and possibly onto the land where T7 currently is).

If they merge, it would be silly to have an operation split over two terminals, even if they established a frequent airside bus shuttle. I suppose they could make this operation work: Make T5 the American domestic terminal, and T8 the American international terminal along with oneworld carriers. But this isn't ideal, especially if one of the goals of the merger is to build a large JFK hub to compete with United at Newark.

Here is another scenario: American can move into an expanded T5 if they expand T5 onto the land where T6 and T7 currently are. They would have to build a wing large enough to accomodate American's robust international operation. With a new wing, and T5's already-existing 18 or so domestic gates, this would be more than large enough to accomodate a merged AA-B6. British Airways and the rest of the oneworld carriers could then move into T8, which wouldn't even have to be expanded. T8 could even accomodate some airlines that will inevitably have to be displaced from T4 as Delta slowly takes it over. Terminal 8 really functions best as an international terminal anyway. The downside of this is that American and its oneworld partners would never have an under-one-roof operation....But no matter what, a merger is going to present complications at JFK. American would not want to give up T5, because another airline named Delta would probably love to move into it...

46 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3476 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 6551 times:

Actually, this merger already took place when TWA and AA merged 10 years ago.

TWA was in T5

AA was in 8/9

AA said that they were building a 1.1 billion dollar 57 gate terminal that would handle everything

Reality: 9/11, 36 gates later, what was left of the TWA operation was decimated and a competitor was gone.

If you want further episodes like this check out "AA buys Reno" or "AA buys Air Cal"

AA would buy B6 (if it could afford too) spend ~5 years trying to make an additional 160 JFK slots work and then completely decimate the operation.

They have a long history of doing just that.

T5 would be vacant or leased off to DL


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8372 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 6464 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Two other options would be for AA-JB to control all the terminals from T5-T8( T6 and T7 would be new) and build an airside tram system of some kind.

Another option could be for AA to give up T8 and build the T5 interntional wing all the way to the current BA T 7 site. IF need be they could build a satelite across the runway that is from T5-T7 with a tram under the runway where hangars are now located. With Delta taking up a huge chunk of T4 and no new T3 yet there needs to be space some internatioal flights, maybe T8 could take that role if AA merges with JB and builds a huge T5-7 building.


User currently offlineByrdluvs747 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2360 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 6276 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 2):
Two other options would be for AA-JB to control all the terminals from T5-T8( T6 and T7 would be new) and build an airside tram system of some kind.

I'm on record as having posted that BA should remain in T7 while being linked to T8 via a DFW-style skytrain. The remainder of T8 could be built to host other OW members and AA partners.

If a solid AA-B6 relationship is formed, then the train could be linked to T5. This would give OW-carriers control of 50% of JFK's gates.



The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
User currently offlinewashingtonian From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 6201 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 2):
Another option could be for AA to give up T8 and build the T5 interntional wing all the way to the current BA T 7 site
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 2):
With Delta taking up a huge chunk of T4 and no new T3 yet there needs to be space some internatioal flights, maybe T8 could take that role if AA merges with JB and builds a huge T5-7 building.

Did you read the original thread? That is exactly what i suggested...

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 3):
I'm on record as having posted that BA should remain in T7 while being linked to T8 via a DFW-style skytrain.
Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 3):
If a solid AA-B6 relationship is formed, then the train could be linked to T5. This would give OW-carriers control of 50% of JFK's gates.

Interesting idea....Not sure how viable it is physically/economically, but it would be a fantastic operation. American's international flights and OneWorld partner flights in T8, and American's domestic flights in T5. Best of both worlds. It would be the best operation at JFK.


User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5235 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 6135 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 1):
AA said that they were building a 1.1 billion dollar 57 gate terminal that would handle everything

Reality: 9/11, 36 gates later, what was left of the TWA operation was decimated and a competitor was gone.

If you want further episodes like this check out "AA buys Reno" or "AA buys Air Cal"

AA would buy B6 (if it could afford too) spend ~5 years trying to make an additional 160 JFK slots work and then completely decimate the operation.

They have a long history of doing just that.

I get so sick and tired of people saying that AA buys other airlines to close them down. Let's review things.

1. When AA first got rid of the SCJ hub (the former Air Cal operation), the entire airline industry was ailing in the early 90s. Add to the mix that Southwest decided to invade the West Coast. US basically closed the former PSA oparation. DL got rid of a lot of point-to-point flying from Western, leaving the SLC hub. What was left of the old Hughes Air West operation (bought by the original Republic) was dropped by NW. Only UA decided to stick it out against WN, which led to UA starting the Shuttle by United operation.

2. When AA bought QQ, the tech/dot.com sectors were going gangbusters. According to a friend of mine at AA, executives from companies that had just gone public were traveling on whims, booking first class tickets. When those two sectors collapsed, flying out of SJC dried up.

3. AA bought TWA, because of the miserable summer of 2000 at ORD. It was one of the stormiest summers that I remember, going back to the late 1960s. It seemed that every day, there were severe weather watches and warnings on The Weather Channel's crawler. UA's pilots refusing to work overtime made the situation at ORD that much worse.

AA decided that having another hub 300 miles away would allow passengers connecting at ORD to by-pass in the event of bad weather. Traffic that was O&D ORD could get rerouted via STL. Also, AA was supposed to swap the TWA 757s with UA for the US 757 fleet, as part of the US-UA merger. Then, AA was going to lease a number of F100s to DC Air, which was getting US slots at DCA, while keeping the TWA 717 fleet, while taking some of the options.

Between the US-UA deal getting nixed by the Feds and 9/11, the TWA purchase didn't work.

As for the TWA international operations, remember that a lot of the TWA route authority, especially to Europe, was rendered worthless by open skies agreements, especially the EU agreement.


User currently offlineincitatus From Brazil, joined Feb 2005, 4014 posts, RR: 13
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 6110 times:

In short: Tarmac over the Expressway, build a terminal that joins up T5 to T8.

Quoting washingtonian (Thread starter):
British Airways and the rest of the oneworld carriers could then move into T8,

The problem with this and other scenarios that leave T8 with international ops only is that not all existing T8 gates can pipe passengers into the FIS facility. Doing so would require extensive modification of the existing T8.

[Edited 2011-06-16 14:46:40]


Stop pop up ads
User currently offlineBOStonsox From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 1990 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5924 times:

I'm more concerned with BOS in this case, which would involve one of three things:

1. Massport connects both sides of Terminal B, giving AA/B6 the whole 35-gate terminal (there are 3 more separate from the others).

2. Massport finds a way to connect Terminals C and E, allowing domestic flights to use the 21-gate Terminal C and the international flights to use the 13-gate Terminal E (sharing with the other international carriers).

3. AA joins B6 in Terminal C, which is the easiest but also leaves them less gates.

The first two may require some construction.

Now for JFK, since that is what we are talking about:

BA's lease for Terminal 7 will expire in 2015, and management wants them to go to Terminal 8. Maybe CX, IB, and QF can go with them. Then it's a matter of finding the best way to get pax between the two.



2013 World Series Champions!
User currently offlinemah4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32781 posts, RR: 72
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5911 times:

The short term solution is to operate a shuttle bus between the two terminals at high frequency.

The long term solution is to build out Terminal 8, where the space does exist to build enough new gates to handle both combined operations.



a.
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8372 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5885 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting washingtonian (Reply 4):
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 2):
Another option could be for AA to give up T8 and build the T5 interntional wing all the way to the current BA T 7 site
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 2):
With Delta taking up a huge chunk of T4 and no new T3 yet there needs to be space some internatioal flights, maybe T8 could take that role if AA merges with JB and builds a huge T5-7 building.

Did you read the original thread? That is exactly what i suggested...

yes.


User currently offlineByrdluvs747 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2360 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5854 times:

Quoting washingtonian (Reply 4):
Interesting idea....Not sure how viable it is physically/economically,

I can't speak about the economic costs, but I see nothing that physically prevents a skytrain. A few have brought up the JFK expressway, yet the current landside airtrain has already been bridged over that road.

Quoting washingtonian (Reply 4):
but it would be a fantastic operation. American's international flights and OneWorld partner flights in T8, and American's domestic flights in T5. Best of both worlds. It would be the best operation at JFK.

Well with the terminals linked airside, there would be no need for AA to move domestic ops to T5. Also, with the rest of T8 built, AA and other OW airlines could operate out of T8 comfortably. T8 would be overkill for just intl flights.



The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3476 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 5604 times:

"I get so sick and tired of people saying that AA buys other airlines to close them down."

But that is exactly what they have done once, twice, and thrice!  


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8372 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5398 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 10):
Well with the terminals linked airside, there would be no need for AA to move domestic ops to T5. Also, with the rest of T8 built, AA and other OW airlines could operate out of T8 comfortably. T8 would be overkill for just intl flights

T8 would be overkill for domestic flights but if AA-JB did merge something quite special could happen. Imagine bulding out T8 to its original space housing all the BA, CX, OB and OW flights. AA could also have an F & J checkin area for its LAX & SFO flights too. IF T8 is "overkill" for international flights alone then AA needs to step up its international JFK schdeule, its New York where can't you fly internationally to ? I can think of all kinds of places to fly to for AA, China, Africa, India, the Middle East, and more of Asia. from JFK.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16866 posts, RR: 51
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 5315 times:

Build out T-8 at JFK to accommodate the combined carrier, and lease or sell T-5 to DL whom would then connect T-5 to T-4 for use as a domestic terminal replacement of T-2.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinejetlanta From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 3297 posts, RR: 35
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 5282 times:

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 8):
The short term solution is to operate a shuttle bus between the two terminals at high frequency.

The long term solution is to build out Terminal 8, where the space does exist to build enough new gates to handle both combined operations.

Of course, the real point here is that between the cost of truly consolidating ops at JFK and BOS, along with bringing B6 employees up to AA pay, more than negates any value in doing such a merger in the first place.

When are people going to realize that a couple hundred slots at JFK are not worth what it would cost AA? Making it even worse, most of B6's slots are outside the peak. B6 and DL haven't been able to make business markets inside the LGA perimeter work from JFK, AA certainly won't be able to. That means they'll end up doing exactly what B6 is doing...Florida and the Caribbean. Except that AA will be flying those markets at much higher costs.

And, of course, consolidating terminals at JFK will inevitably leave a large facility vacant. Just like when DL moved to Terminal A at BOS, it won't stay vacant for long. And there are plenty of slots available in the non-peak hours still.

It just doesn't make any sense. Lines on a map may look impressive, but there is little in the way of long-term economic value that AA could find from a B6 merger.


User currently offlinewashingtonian From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5011 times:

Quoting ckfred (Reply 5):
As for the TWA international operations, remember that a lot of the TWA route authority, especially to Europe, was rendered worthless by open skies agreements, especially the EU agreement.

The way I like to think about it is that American took over TWA's JFK international ops...They just didn't start flying a lot of the routes until 5-10 years later   When I see American flights to Rome and Milan and Barcelona and Madrid today, it's hard not to think of TWA  
Quoting incitatus (Reply 6):
The problem with this and other scenarios that leave T8 with international ops only is that not all existing T8 gates can pipe passengers into the FIS facility. Doing so would require extensive modification of the existing T8.

True. Do you have a breakdown as to how many gates are non-FIS? Regardless, they can still be used by airlines like US, Aer Lingus (with the new preclearance flights), airlines with long turns where the planes use hardstands.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 8):
The long term solution is to build out Terminal 8, where the space does exist to build enough new gates to handle both combined operations.

Except there is not enough room to accomodate both a merged jetBlue AND British Airways/OneWorld partners. It also doesn't make sense for jetBlue to give up T5 to one of it's competitors.

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 10):
Well with the terminals linked airside, there would be no need for AA to move domestic ops to T5. Also, with the rest of T8 built, AA and other OW airlines could operate out of T8 comfortably. T8 would be overkill for just intl flights.

With the terminals linked airside in a merger, the bulk of domestic ops would be from T5 off the bat. If you move LAX & SFO & MIA flights to T5, there isn't THAT much left in T8 (of domestic flights).

I don't think T8 will be overkill just for international flights if you consider that many international airlines are going to have to leave T4 in the coming years and T8 is probably the nicest international terminal at JFK.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 13):
Build out T-8 at JFK to accommodate the combined carrier, and lease or sell T-5 to DL whom would then connect T-5 to T-4 for use as a domestic terminal replacement of T-2.

As I said above, an expanded T8 can not accomodate both a merged jetBlue AND OneWorld carriers. Also why would AA ever give over T5 to Delta?! It would give Delta a fantastic operaton at JFK, something that at the moment they will forever lack!


User currently offlineDFWEagle From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1071 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4974 times:

Quoting washingtonian (Reply 15):
True. Do you have a breakdown as to how many gates are non-FIS?

Of the 27 mainline gates in T8, a total of 19 are connected to the FIS facility and the remaining 8 are domestic-only gates. Also, all 9 of the regional jet gates are domestic-only.



Ryan / HKG
User currently offlinemah4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32781 posts, RR: 72
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4969 times:

Quoting washingtonian (Reply 15):
Quoting mah4546 (Reply 8):
The long term solution is to build out Terminal 8, where the space does exist to build enough new gates to handle both combined operations.

Except there is not enough room to accomodate both a merged jetBlue AND British Airways/OneWorld partners. It also doesn't make sense for jetBlue to give up T5 to one of it's competitors.

Yes there is. There is room for adding about 30 more mainline gates. jetBlue has ~26 right now, not to mention T8 is underutilized as is, running well below it's capacity.



a.
User currently offlinewashingtonian From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4954 times:

Quoting DFWEagle (Reply 16):
Of the 27 mainline gates in T8, a total of 19 are connected to the FIS facility and the remaining 8 are domestic-only gates. Also, all 9 of the regional jet gates are domestic-only.

I haven't flown through there internationally. Are the gates from the midfield concourse connected to the FIS through an underground sterile passage?

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 17):
Yes there is. There is room for adding about 30 more mainline gates

You are dreaming. There is no way there is room for 30 more mainline gates at T8. And even if they somehow magically built 30 new gates at T8, this would just make up for the 26 gates lost at T5. It would still not be enough to accomodate British Airways (which could really use 5 or 6 dedicated gates) and the rest of the oneworld carriers. And it still does not deal with the problem of turning over the nicest domestic terminal at JFK right into the hands of their main competitor.


User currently offlinemmedford From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 561 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4923 times:

Honestly...is there a need for one of these threads every month?

At the moment; JFK works... AA maintains it's own operations at T8. British has their own rule over at T7...while leasing out gate space to other airlines.

Jetblue runs T5 and soon T5i will remove B6 operations from T4. Delta will continue building T4 and run a T2 & T4 show. International carriers have T1.

I'm really getting tired of seeing these threads...regarding moving the terminals at JFK...or even better closing all 3 airports and building 1 large one on Staten Island.



ILS = It'll Land Somewhere
User currently offlinemah4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32781 posts, RR: 72
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4918 times:

Quoting washingtonian (Reply 18):
You are dreaming. There is no way there is room for 30 more mainline gates at T8. And even if they somehow magically built 30 new gates at T8, this would just make up for the 26 gates lost at T5. It would still not be enough to accomodate British Airways (which could really use 5 or 6 dedicated gates) and the rest of the oneworld carriers. And it still does not deal with the problem of turning over the nicest domestic terminal at JFK right into the hands of their main competitor.

I'm not dreaming. The terminal is only half built to original plans. There is significant land to expand it.

Not to mention that you making the false assumption that both terminals are currently being fully utilized. But they aren't! Especially Terminal 8 - it is heavily underutilized, and the current gates alone could support significantly more operations.

T8 can be expanded to ~60 gates. A combined AA-B6-BA-IB operation is around ~270 flights. Out of Miami, AA-BA-IB operate ~315 daily flights from ~50 gates.

[Edited 2011-06-17 13:36:09]


a.
User currently offlinejpetekYXMD80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4389 posts, RR: 29
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4884 times:

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 17):

Yes there is. There is room for adding about 30 more mainline gates. jetBlue has ~26 right now, not to mention T8 is underutilized as is, running well below it's capacity.

30 more mainline gates?? Not a chance in hell.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 20):

I'm not dreaming. The terminal is only half built to original plans. There is significant land to expand it.

If you're not dreaming, you're just completely ignorant about this matter. It is well more than half built in terms of gates. You could get 8-10 additional mainline gates by completing the eastern concourse of the main building. There is no room for expansion of the midfield concourse.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 20):

T8 can be expanded to ~60 gates. A combined AA-B6-BA-IB operation is around ~270 flights. Out of Miami, AA-BA-IB operate ~315 daily flights from less than 50 gates.

You are being confused by the original plan of small RJ gates for eagle flanking the main terminal building. And now you're talking about fitting B6 AND BA/IB into a completed T8 with 8-10 more mainline gates? That's absurd, frankly.

You're right about under-utilization, but that gate number is way off and the only way that combined operation could be accommodated if something were built straddling the JFK expressway and replacing current T7.



The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
User currently offlinemah4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32781 posts, RR: 72
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4874 times:

Quoting jpetekYXMD80 (Reply 21):
Quoting mah4546 (Reply 20):

T8 can be expanded to ~60 gates. A combined AA-B6-BA-IB operation is around ~270 flights. Out of Miami, AA-BA-IB operate ~315 daily flights from less than 50 gates.

You are being confused by the original plan of small RJ gates for eagle flanking the main terminal building. And now you're talking about fitting B6 AND BA/IB into a completed T8 with 8-10 more mainline gates? That's absurd, frankly.

But how is that not relevant? It is entirely relevant - replace E-Jets with CR7s or ERJs (something any hypothetical B6/AA merger would likely do, as E Jets move to Dallas and Chicago), and done. A merged carrier isn't going to be flying E-Jets on JFK-BOS.

One gate can usually handle 7 to 10 daily operations (at JFK, it's unlikely that it will be more than 7). 42 mainline gates is still ~290 mainline flights, when in reality a combined operation would likely approach nowhere near that, if even it approaches 200.

[Edited 2011-06-17 13:56:41]


a.
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16866 posts, RR: 51
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4871 times:

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 20):
T8 can be expanded to ~60 gates.
Quoting mah4546 (Reply 20):
The terminal is only half built to original plans. There is significant land to expand it.
Quoting mah4546 (Reply 17):
Yes there is. There is room for adding about 30 more mainline gates. jetBlue has ~26 right now, not to mention T8 is underutilized as is, running well below it's capacity.

That's not completely accurate, they could build another 8 or so mainline gates. AA's terminal was originally going to have about 60 gates, of those 25 were for regional aircraft (ERJs and SF3s) at two concourses built close up to the roadway. They were never intended to handle mainline aircraft, or large regional jets which really didn't exist in 1999 when the plans were unveiled. Those gates were to handle AA's Eagle operation, which in 1999 included lots of SF3 flights and ERJs. AA was planning on building their domestic operation around the ERJ-135/140/145 at JFK. They canned most of those flights, and thus dropped plans to build those gates.

The area where those Regional gates were to be built could never handle mainline aircraft, there would not be enough room.

Here's a picture of the terminal as it was originally designed, note the regional concourses which were never built are depicted as closest to the roadway.



You would never be able to build a concourse capable of handling anything larger than a ERJ-145 where those concourses are depicted, there's not enough room between the roadway and the mainline concourse.

Compare that original plan to the terminal today, you can see besides the two regional concourses all they are missing gate wise is that one mainline concourse which could accommodate about eight widebody aircraft. Also the main terminal ticketing/hall is obviously only about half it's originally intended size. That can and should be expanded, however gate wise realistically they could fit about eight more mainline/widebody gates.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Christopher Liao




Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinemah4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32781 posts, RR: 72
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4860 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 23):
That's not completely accurate, they could build another 8 or so mainline gates. AA's terminal was originally going to have about 60 gates, of those 25 were for regional aircraft (ERJs and SF3s) at two concourses built close up to the roadway. They were never intended to handle mainline aircraft, or large regional jets which really didn't exist in 1999 when the plans were unveiled. Those gates were to handle AA's Eagle operation, which in 1999 included lots of SF3 flights and ERJs. AA was planning on building their domestic operation around the ERJ-135/140/145 at JFK. They canned most of those flights, and thus dropped plans to build those gates.

I realize that. It doesn't change anything though - under any hypothetical merger, it's extremely unlikely that AA is going to be operating E70s on regional flights when fully integrated. The combined operation can operate out of one T8, making the assumption that Eagle RJ flying sees a big rise, which would inevitably happen, both as a factor of keeping capacity tight and as a factor of better allocating the E-Jets to other places in the combined network where it makes more sense.



a.
25 jpetekYXMD80 : Yeah, the only way that would be possible would be to refit the gates on the south side of the main concourse to be only for A320 or smaller, then yo
26 jpetekYXMD80 : Also not to mention... at JFK there is a severe skew towards evening operations for European flights, not an even distribution of widebody activity th
27 STT757 : So your saying in a merger much of the B6 domestic flying at JFK would be turned over to Eagle ERJ-145s?..
28 Post contains images washingtonian : Sorry, you are wrong on this. There is land for about 8-12 more gates, which is why the plans have been for BA and some of the other oneworld carrier
29 mah4546 : It can be done. You are assuming that all the flying will remain on mainline jets. AA T8 has the expansion capacity to handle a combined operation of
30 jetlanta : So, once they've eliminated those redundancies, what do they really do with those slots? To my point earlier, isn't that the ultimate issue? JFK slot
31 peanuts : After reading this thread I'm only more convinced this AA/B6 "move" would be more a move out of desperation on AA's part. I don't think AA will go thi
32 washingtonian : Where exactly do you propose to add 10 mainline gates and ~15 RJ gates?! There is no room for that! Not to mention that, once again, this will not ac
33 IcelandairMSP : Look above. There is room for up to 10 mainline gates in the unbuilt eastern concourse. Eight if you want to be conservative and assume all would be
34 MAH4546 : You are joking, right? Did you not see the diagram that STT757 posted? It proves me right and proves you wrong.
35 washingtonian : Nope. You originally said: There is not. STT757 is correct. What exactly is the point of merging with B6 and replacing it all with RJ flying? I could
36 STT757 : If AA and B6 merge, or even if AA acquire part or all of B6 and operate them separately, I think B6's domestic operations should remain where they are
37 washingtonian : {Checkmark}
38 ckfred : You give the impression that AA simply buys an airline for the sole purpose of shutting down a competitor. In fact, AA buys an airline to broaden its
39 jfklganyc : "Not only that, but since Eagle's ~35-40 daily JFK flights currently use mainline gates, that frees up even more capacity at an already very underutil
40 washingtonian : Everything he said about T8 is a misrepresentation.
41 washingtonian : How convenient that you stop responding when everyone in this thread has proven you wrong.
42 aajfksjubklyn : How convenient that you stop responding when everyone in this thread has proven you wrong.[/quote] I had to do some reaserch into this: I just looked
43 jpetekYXMD80 : There is no way... unless you converted all widebody gates into narrowbody gates or something! Surely a cornerstone of this being plausible the avail
44 Post contains images Byrdluvs747 : Everyone is making the assumption that AA and B6 "have" to merge in the traditional sense in order to achieve cooperation when I believe the opposite
45 washingtonian : Ugh, where?! Please draw us all a diagram and show us how 26 mainline gates could be added! It looks to me like it is. I don't see how it could be le
46 jfk777 : T8 was built to be an intenational terminal and converting it to "domestic" use is wrong. It was designed for use of big airplanes with LONG turnarou
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...
AA/BA To Start JFK-LHR Shuttle In April posted Wed Oct 6 2010 14:27:28 by MAH4546
AA/B6 Status In SJU; AA Is Remodeling Gates! posted Sun Jul 25 2010 10:31:57 by PRAirbus
International Arrivals At B6's New JFK Terminal posted Mon Feb 4 2008 14:28:21 by Ezra
Any Updates On B6's New JFK Terminal? posted Tue Sep 11 2007 03:22:32 by JerseyGuy
AA JFK Terminal 8 Shutdown posted Tue May 8 2007 23:23:49 by Baron95
Any AA JFK Terminal Expansion News? posted Thu Apr 26 2007 03:23:21 by 28L28L
Terminal Ownership In JFK And LAX posted Fri Feb 23 2007 00:06:35 by Kaitak744
AA's JFK Terminal Progress posted Wed Feb 21 2007 06:02:44 by Willyj
2 Air Giants In Dogfight - AA Vs B6 - NYC posted Wed Feb 22 2006 03:44:43 by ChiGB1973
Why Was AA JFK Terminal Evacuated Today? posted Sat Aug 27 2005 21:22:27 by Xkorpyoh