Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BOS: Growth As International Gateway And B6 Hub  
User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 16949 times:

We have had quite a few Boston related threads lately ... related to growth of international traffic in Logan, growth of Jetblue as the dominant carrier at BOS, starting DTW right in time for the EK service, starting code-share with TK in view of their upcoming service, new Emirates service and their President's bold remarks, and new renovation/extension project for Terminal E. But all these discussions were quite scattered in nature, as you can see:

Aer Lingus From Boston Logan (by iyerhari Feb 8 2014 in Civil Aviation)

BOS Terminal E Renovation (by iyerhari Mar 4 2014 in Civil Aviation)

AA Ends Partnership With JetBlue (by AAplat4life Mar 10 2014 in Civil Aviation)

Emirates CEO: Boston Needs Bigger Plane (by chrisnh Mar 11 2014 in Civil Aviation)

JetBlue - Turkish Airlines Form Codeshare (by LAXintl Mar 12 2014 in Civil Aviation)

JetBlue Starts DTW On March 10, 2014 (by MesaFlyGuy Mar 10 2014 in Civil Aviation)

If we could consolidate the discussions - and talk about details of the extension project, the ongoing renovation of Terminal B and realignment of airline gates; as well as, how the growth of international carriers and B6 are leading to new services and code-shares as an international gateway (with the Terminal C-E connector), I thought, would be useful. Thanks!  

182 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 1, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 16838 times:

Quoting ASA (Thread starter):
We have had quite a few Boston related threads lately ... related to growth of international traffic in Logan, growth of Jetblue as the dominant carrier at BOS, starting DTW right in time for the EK service, starting code-share with TK in view of their upcoming service, new Emirates service and their President's bold remarks, and new renovation/extension project for Terminal E. But all these discussions were quite scattered in nature, as you can see:

When we talk about growth it's important that we present data. Massport.com has data going back to 1999. Pre-9/11 BOS peaked at 23.1M domestic and 4.5M international passengers. that was in the year 2000. It wasn't until 2010 that BOS was back to the pre-9/11 numbers for domestic passengers, hitting 23.7M, and only in 2013 did BOS equal the peak for international passengers at 4.5M.

So in my opinion, it hasn't been so much growth as it has been a recovery. It's easy to say B6 has been responsible for this growth, they certainly contributed to it, but for the most part they simply replaced other carriers and took their passengers. UA, AA, DL, all shrunk at one point or another in the last 13 years. In my opinion, it was WN coming to Boston in 2009? and DL exiting BK in 2007 that really kick-started BOS's recovery and growth.

Only time will tell whether these new international carriers will create growth or simply steal passengers from the incumbent international carriers. I think the latter is the more likely scenario because BOS is extremely constrained in terms of International gates. Now if Massport decides to build an extension to terminal E, we'll certainly see a big spike in international growth.

2013 was a stellar year for BOS, much like 2000. It has taken 13 long years and I can't wait to see what the next few years will bring us  


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8457 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 16787 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

JAL arrived a few years ago, Hainin Air has to. Emirates is coming in September. Boston is diversfying its European heavy international destination portfolio. Latin America is lacking, Copa from Panama has arrived. Boston to Sao Paulo would be a good as just about every hub east of the rockies has a nonstop to GRU.

User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 16700 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 2):

JAL arrived a few years ago, Hainin Air has to. Emirates is coming in September. Boston is diversfying its European heavy international destination portfolio. Latin America is lacking, Copa from Panama has arrived. Boston to Sao Paulo would be a good as just about every hub east of the rockies has a nonstop to GRU.

??!! too much Nyquil ??!! 

Emirates (DXB-BOS on 77L) started earlier this week (Mar 10)
Turkish (IST-BOS on 333) is starting May 10, daily from June
Hainan (PEK-BOS on 788)is starting 4w in late June ...

nonstop to GRU would be awesome ... but is the market big enough to sustain year-round profitably?


User currently offlineiyerhari From United States of America, joined Jun 2013, 95 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 16676 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 2):

Emirates is already operating now - the non-US carriers missed/neglected their chances and that's being capitalized by carriers who know where to find new business avenues in the already heated competition. I think they have an excellent chance to survive, sustain and preserve the momentum. Business opportunities are still excellent in Boston and with the opening of the new innovation district, it's going to further strengthen the already prospering LSHC market - not to mention the existing strengths in education, financial services, High-tech and tourism. All in all it's exciting time for Boston and correctly did the WSJ article state "Boston charm". I'm already looking to the next headline in the Globe or WSJ when the new flight to Milan would start and I think the headline should be "Fashion capital of the world connects with the education capital of the world". Maybe that time, the executives from AA, Delta, etc. can fly into BOS and take a refresher course at Harvard or MIT on how to decipher profitable route segments outside of their so-called hubs.  


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 16649 times:

I just don't think deep S.America will ever materialize. Just look at the distances that are in play. It's far more economic for airlines to hub somewhere in between. I think BOG-BOS with AV is far more likely than GRU-BOS.

User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6517 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 16615 times:

I don't believe is located geographically well enough to become a domestic hub for any airline. There are plenty of flights headed south and west out of Boston but very few opportunities for connections from the north or east to make it a 360 degree domestic hub

User currently offlineglobetrotter29 From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 35 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 16573 times:

Surprised MEX is unserved from BOS.

User currently offlineAADFWFlyer From United States of America, joined Dec 2013, 95 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 16548 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting airbazar (Reply 1):

For what it's worth - what is the combined market share of the combined AA/US to the new AA in BOS - with gates, flight arrivals/departures, etc - finding conflicting information as my numbers were based on just the AA retreat in Boston (thanks to Tom Horton), but now would like a picture of the new AA - and with the appreciation of the new AA management and their different approach to running an airline - ie: competing, and not retreating - looking forward to see the things that the new AA has on the table and horizon - and now being a bigger player in Boston, due to the AA/US combination. Thanks for any feedback - appreciate it!.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 16489 times:

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 6):
I don't believe is located geographically well enough to become a domestic hub for any airline. There are plenty of flights headed south and west out of Boston but very few opportunities for connections from the north or east to make it a 360 degree domestic hub

Certainly not a domestic hub but just about every flight entering or leaving the U.S. to/from the East overflies BOS. It can be an international hub as big as an airline or alliance wants to make it. Massport will bend over backwards to support growth. B6 wanted a terminal to themselves. Done. EK wanted a link to B6's terminal. Done. AA wanted more gates in terminal B. Done. WN wanted expanded gate space. Done.

Quoting AADFWFlyer (Reply 8):
For what it's worth - what is the combined market share of the combined AA/US to the new AA in BOS - with gates, flight arrivals/departures, etc

No idea but that doesn't change the international landscape at BOS. AA is simplynot interested in serving international destinations from BOS and that is true for just about every domestic airline which is why international routes from BOS are dominated by international carriers. It is mind bogling that so many international carriers find BOS to be a worthwhile investment but the U.S. carriers don't. I am surprised and even shocked that KLM has not yet taken over the AMS flights from DL. Personally I actually like it this way. Imagine being from Atlanta and all you see down there is Delta tails despite being the largest airport in the world in terms of passengers.


User currently offlineAADFWFlyer From United States of America, joined Dec 2013, 95 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 16464 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting airbazar (Reply 9):

Yea, wish that AA would fly more of their metal out of BOS like they used to - but know that the OW flights on Japan Airlines and British Airways cover some Intl locations.... thanks for the information.


User currently offlinevs11 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1111 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 16386 times:

Indeed, things are looking good for Boston and the area in general. The local economy is doing pretty well, and most importantly Boston is fixing one of its long-standing issues - costly housing. The last couple of years have seen many new projects (granted, high-end, but still) and more and more young people and families are moving into the city. So you do have the market for growth and as airbazar says the local authorities are very pro-growth oriented and cooperative with businesses. Also, Boston just got a new mayor who is moving on keeping bars open later so that would also help with Boston shaking the perception of being on the sleepy side.

I don't think US carriers have lost Boston off their radar. I believe many of them retreated from international markets because they could not have stayed competitive enough. Let's face it, flying old 757's and 767's across the Atlantic is never going to be a winner against VS, BA, AF, LH, EK, TK, etc. However, with the 787 and 350 things may change in a few years.

As to Central and South America, it is indeed strange that there are not many direct services in view of the pretty robust Latino population in the Boston area. I can only assume that AA is doing a good job connecting through Miami.


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4389 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 16355 times:

I am glad to see BOS becoming a larger international gateway. It is always nicer to avoid JFK when coming to America from Europe. Although Boston is the home to the Bosox, it is still a nice place to visit and stay the night on my way home.


Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlinea380787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2013, 990 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 16320 times:

Quoting vs11 (Reply 11):
Let's face it, flying old 757's and 767's across the Atlantic is never going to be a winner against VS, BA, AF, LH, EK, TK, etc. However, with the 787 and 350 things may change in a few years.

I don't know about DL or AA, but UA definitely has no appetite for BOS long haul

while BOS is one of the their largest domestic stations (outside of hubs), long-haul options for UA are pretty dead :

LHR : already has BA AA DL
CDG : AA and AF ... and AA can't even keep it year round
FRA : LH
MUC : LH
ZRH : LX

At *most* UA would do BOS-FRA, but so far UA hasn't shown any willingness to do NonHub-to-PartnerHub type routes.


User currently offlinechrisnh From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 16239 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 1):
So in my opinion, it hasn't been so much growth as it has been a recovery.

I agree. But still, Boston seems to be 'recovering' better than most, and the recovery is seeing a different 'mix.' We used to talk about 'legacy' carriers such as UA, AA, DL, NW (then), TWA (then) with a degree of 'reverence.' No more. Those 'legacy' carriers aren't revered any more than McDonald's is as a restaurant. They want to hang their hat on a few major gateways? Fine...we'll just get some new suppliers (B6) who are very happy to pick up where our own 'legacy' carriers leave off. Internationally, same thing. BA is very happy to provide the seats that AA abandoned, for example.

The financial abyss that our homegrown 'legacy' carriers found themselves in post-9/11 gave other airlines the ability to waltz into profitable cities (read: Boston) and establish themselves. Pre-9/11, an American Airlines would go into any airport and bash an interloper into submission. That was their violent MO, and it was well documented, too. But losing money as they were, none of them could 'fight' for stations that weren't named 'New York' or 'Miami' or 'Los Angeles.'
DL had to wave their own white flag with respect to Dallas; AA had to do it with Nashville. US with Pittsburgh. UA with Dulles & Cleveland. Etcetera Etcetera Etcetera

Now, Boston isn't JFK; never has been and never will be. Like I said in another thread: We get it. The mistaken psychology espoused by our domestic carriers is that Boston is 'close enough' to JFK and that fliers can go there to reach other places. But JetBlue didn't think so, and neither did Emirates. And Turkish. And Hainan. And maybe even Qatar. Etcetera Etcetera Etcetera.

The only problem I can see is that the BOS infrastructure (land-side, air-side) may be outpaced by the demand to fly here. Like someone said, Emirates may want to use a 773ER NOW, but the gate they have can't accept it without taking out neighboring gates. Stuff like that.


User currently offlinecloudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 846 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 16215 times:

Do we know how many passengers flying through Logan are flying from BOS and returning to BOS, and how many are flying from another destination and visiting Boston?

I think one driver for foreign airlines is not as an origin point but as a destination point. Which is one reason why domestic airlines aren't as interested in serving international destinations. For Americans, Boston isn't such a big tourist attraction, but for the international traveler, it is a lot more approachable than many other US destinations.

With the consolidation of airlines, I think new domestic markets will be opening up. It will be interesting to see what kind f partnerships are generated, I think this might be where BOS in the future will see growth - foreign non-alliance airlines partnering with some of the newer US domestic airlines, with Boston serving as a convenient connection point avoiding the cost and hassle of NYC.



"Six becoming three doesn't create more Americans that want to fly." -Adam Pilarski
User currently offlinevs11 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1111 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 16169 times:

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 14):
Those 'legacy' carriers aren't revered any more than McDonald's is as a restaurant.

I totally agree with you. The damage US carriers have done to themselves may well be beyond repair. Even DL decided to buy Virgin Atlantic rather than wait to establish itself on the TATL market. I like the aggressiveness of the AA rebranding effort but that will take some time to propagate to actual aircraft and services. UA seems the most hopeless right now.


User currently offlineflyby519 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1222 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 16079 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 12):

I am glad to see BOS becoming a larger international gateway. It is always nicer to avoid JFK when coming to America from Europe. Although Boston is the home to the Bosox, it is still a nice place to visit and stay the night on my way home.


I think this is important for Massport to remember as they grow their intl presence. I am worried that they will over-grow the amount of international traffic without changing the Customs facility. Boston can be a success if it remains more connection friendly and faster customs times than JFK.



These postings or comments are not a company-sponsored source of communication.
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 16018 times:

Quoting globetrotter29 (Reply 7):
Surprised MEX is unserved from BOS.

No market. It's hard enough to find a decent Mexican restaurant around here, let alone business ties  
The latino population around here is primarily from the Caribbean, Central America, and Brazil. Brazilian are the largest group of visitors from Latin America.

Quoting vs11 (Reply 11):
Indeed, things are looking good for Boston and the area in general. The local economy is doing pretty well, and most importantly Boston is fixing one of its long-standing issues - costly housing.

Housing is still costly. That's never going to change because there's no land to build new housing.

Quoting a380787 (Reply 13):
At *most* UA would do BOS-FRA, but so far UA hasn't shown any willingness to do NonHub-to-PartnerHub type routes.

UA has no interest in serving FRA because they have a JV with LH. The same reason why AA abandoned LHR.

Quoting cloudboy (Reply 15):
Do we know how many passengers flying through Logan are flying from BOS and returning to BOS, and how many are flying from another destination and visiting Boston?

I don't but we know that Boston originating traffic is the highest in the country, per capita. By that I mean that people from this area travel more often than anyone else in the country. So that in a way explains why a premdominantly O&D airport is doing so well.

Quoting cloudboy (Reply 15):
I think one driver for foreign airlines is not as an origin point but as a destination point. Which is one reason why domestic airlines aren't as interested in serving international destinations. For Americans, Boston isn't such a big tourist attraction, but for the international traveler, it is a lot more approachable than many other US destinations.

I would guess that Boston is not a huge tourist destination for either. It's however a global center of commerce and education and that's what drives a lot of air traffic here. This link has really good information. The ratio of leisure to business pax at BOS is only 2-to-1.
http://www.bostonusa.com/partner/press/statistics/
The Chinese are now the second largest group of visitors and the biggest spenders by a huge margin. Mind boggling stuff. And we don't even have a flight to China yet. This is a group that no doubt the likes of TK will capitalize on despite the long detour.


User currently offlinevs11 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1111 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 15944 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 18):
Housing is still costly. That's never going to change because there's no land to build new housing.

True, housing is still costly but South Boston and Seaport are areas that have seen lots of new residential projects. Several new projects in the margins of the South End too.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 18):
I don't but we know that Boston originating traffic is the highest in the country, per capita. By that I mean that people from this area travel more often than anyone else in the country. So that in a way explains why a premdominantly O&D airport is doing so well.

This is partly due to the army of consultants that fly out every Monday and come back Thursday but still good-yielding traffic.  


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 15840 times:

Quoting a380787 (Reply 13):
CDG : AA and AF ... and AA can't even keep it year round

DL does AMS and seasonal CDG as well.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 18):
No market.

There's a market (50-60 PDEW) and its probably has a fair share of business. Its just not big enough for a 2000 mile flight.
AM tried it and failed. MEX was no picnic for connections either. DL wouldn't hesitate to throw an E-175 on it if it were in range.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 21, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 15706 times:

Here's the Massport press release that actually states "renovation of gates to accommodate Airbus A-380 aircraft – the largest commercial aircraft flying which Massport expects to service in the near future."
http://massport.com/news-room/news/g...ns-international-flight-expansion/

Massport must be fairly confident that they will get FAA approval for regular A380 ops if they are going ahead with modifications to 2 gates at terminal E. Personally I think this upgrade is long overdue and would benefit all aircraft even if no A380 ever comes here. Current 747 operators especially will be thrilled to learn of this improvement.


User currently offlineiyerhari From United States of America, joined Jun 2013, 95 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 15643 times:

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 14):

  You're on the spot Chris. If domestic carriers considered BOS to be like some of the cities that lost their hub status such as PIT, CVG, MEM, and now CLE who are clamoring for additional support from others - then that won't happen with Boston as there will be smart carriers like B6 to capitalize for an excellent growth opportunity. The remaining US carriers will become like the run of the mill airlines who lost a good opportunity and now will lose all hopes to capitalize on that. But imagine the diversity at Logan to see every gate being occupied by a well-known fleet of well-respected and courteous international airlines supported by B6 true to the nature & spirit of the city that accords diversity and applauds performance than having to see a monolithic presence of a single dominant carrier dictating the likes of a city and airport.


User currently offlinequestions From Australia, joined Sep 2011, 843 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 15619 times:

When Delta built Terminal A did it envision BOS as an international gateway? Does Terminal A have the facilities to process international flights? With the UA/CO merger did Delta take back the gates it passed to CO?

User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6517 posts, RR: 9
Reply 24, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 15567 times:

Quoting questions (Reply 23):
Does Terminal A have the facilities to process international flights? With the UA/CO merger did Delta take back the gates it passed to CO?

Terminal A does not have customs but Delta has requested it from Massport with no luck.

Dl did get back the CO gates in Terminal A


User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 25, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 15926 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 20):
There's a market (50-60 PDEW) and its probably has a fair share of business. Its just not big enough for a 2000 mile flight. AM tried it and failed. MEX was no picnic for connections either. DL wouldn't hesitate to throw an E-175 on it if it were in range.

How about a JetBlue A320 ? ... pretty consistent with B6's southward / Caribbean strategy from BOS.
Hopefully as market stimulates, there will be decent traffic (and some connecting from New England).

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 24):
Terminal A does not have customs but Delta has requested it from Massport with no luck.

Dl did get back the CO gates in Terminal A

Now that Terminal E is filling up fast ... Massport may be amenable to Skyteam moving its operations to Terminal A completely and an FIS as part of that plan? I would say Terminal B makes more sense with new AA and UA together, but they have almost ZERO international flying from Logan (except BA's 4x LHR operation)

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 17):
think this is important for Massport to remember as they grow their intl presence. I am worried that they will over-grow the amount of international traffic without changing the Customs facility. Boston can be a success if it remains more connection friendly and faster customs times than JFK.

I think many of us worry the same (especially if you can remember the situation of the pre-renovation dump we had in Terminal E). That's why my above assertion hoping that Massport proactively thinks for an FIS in Terminal A.

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 6):

I don't believe is located geographically well enough to become a domestic hub for any airline. There are plenty of flights headed south and west out of Boston but very few opportunities for connections from the north or east to make it a 360 degree domestic hub

Agreed. Can't be a domestic hub ... but a huge focus city for Jetblue already, based on its O&D strength. Add to that, the international growth and code-share opportunities (EK, TK, and HU next) ... it could become a westward-domestic-eastward-international hub 


User currently offlinevs11 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1111 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 15812 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 25):
How about a JetBlue A320 ? ... pretty consistent with B6's southward / Caribbean strategy from BOS.
Hopefully as market stimulates, there will be decent traffic (and some connecting from New England).

That's a pretty good idea! B6 don't serve Mexico City from NYC either so they may consider opening both MEX-BOS/NYC.

Quoting ASA (Reply 25):
That's why my above assertion hoping that Massport proactively thinks for an FIS in Terminal A.

I am not sure it is up to Massport. Immigration and Customs officers are federal officers and on Uncle Sam's dime so there may be an entirely different set of things to deal with to get another FIS. However, Massport may have its own views too.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12173 posts, RR: 51
Reply 27, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 16182 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 25):
Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 20):There's a market (50-60 PDEW) and its probably has a fair share of business. Its just not big enough for a 2000 mile flight. AM tried it and failed. MEX was no picnic for connections either. DL wouldn't hesitate to throw an E-175 on it if it were in range.
How about a JetBlue A320 ?

BOS-MEX is just under 2000 nm, so an A-320 has the range. But MEX is a high/hot airport and I'm not sure the A-320 has enough performance to fly full pax loads and cargo MEX-BOS. An A-319 or B-737-700 can easily do that mission.


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 16108 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 25):
How about a JetBlue A320 ? ... pretty consistent with B6's southward / Caribbean strategy from BOS.
Hopefully as market stimulates, there will be decent traffic (and some connecting from New England).

Its almost twice the amount of seats and it would be tough to time it perfectly for international partners especially TK and EK due to their long times on the ground. MEX is also well connected 1-stop throughout almost the entire country. I don't think you would get the PIT RIC BUF passengers to connect through BOS to MEX.

Quoting ASA (Reply 25):
Agreed. Can't be a domestic hub ... but a huge focus city for Jetblue already, based on its O&D strength. Add to that, the international growth and code-share opportunities (EK, TK, and HU next) ... it could become a westward-domestic-eastward-international hub 

I think a good goal is that you get a 5-10% increase in overall load factor due to these connections.

Quoting ASA (Reply 25):
Massport may be amenable to Skyteam moving its operations to Terminal A completely and an FIS as part of that plan?

Its also up to the federal government with approving staffing and having two locations on site.

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 24):
Terminal A does not have customs but Delta has requested it from Massport with no luck.

Dl did get back the CO gates in Terminal A

There's been grumblings of Southwest going to those gates in A or just somewhere in A. They would need a sweet deal to move.


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 16134 times:

Quoting vs11 (Reply 26):
That's a pretty good idea! B6 don't serve Mexico City from NYC either so they may consider opening both MEX-BOS/NYC.

B6 cannot due to bilateral. They would be serving it right now if they could.

Only two airlines can serve MEX-US city pairs per bilateral. DL and UA own the rights (EWR counts as NYC under the bilateral). You can have three airlines on leisure routes i.e US, DL and B6 on BOS-CUN.


User currently offlinecessna53996 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 73 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 16043 times:

Right now WN has 5 gates in Terminal E at BOS. I think that if WN moved to A that they would want 5 gates at the least. They probably wouldn't want satellite gates on A because the E gates are close to the current checkpoint and they would want gates closer to the checkpoint. If they wanted to expand in A, would it be possible to demo that regional arm and add jetways connected to the terminal?
Big version: Width: 766 Height: 589 File size: 119kb


Also, can the current Southwest gates be used as international gates for Copa, and other narrowbody int'l operators into BOS? I'm sure B6 would use those gates for their int'l flights as well.

[Edited 2014-03-14 15:43:28]


Feeling a little blue in ORH, JetBlue.
User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3599 posts, RR: 6
Reply 31, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 16026 times:

I think you will see a topping out of B6 growth anywhere between 150 flights and 200 flights. That will happen in the next 5 years

I think you will see further rationalization of schedules from Legeacies that have merged. Which means the two combined airlines will have fewer flights together than if you had taken the two airlines' original schedule and merged them together.

I think you will continue to see slow but steady growth by international carriers.

I don't think BOS is A380 ready in terms of airfield. It could land on 33L-15R or 22L-4R, but I think taxiing that think around would have negative impacts on airfield traffic.

I think BOS will become slotted if B6 gets up to that 200 flight number. And that could have a negative impact on growth. EDCTs are starting to rear their ugly head in BOS, and rumor has it that the FAA is looking at the arrival rate.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 32, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 15930 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 25):
Now that Terminal E is filling up fast ... Massport may be amenable to Skyteam moving its operations to Terminal A completely and an FIS as part of that plan?

Pointless exercise unless DL shows them the money because terminal A doesn't have the necessary widebody gates. As it is today, when DL operates their departure only from terminal A with the A333, the adjacent gate has to be blocked off. And that's just 1 flight. There is no way you could park a DL A333, AF 744, and AZ A332 at terminal A at the same time. The same goes for terminal B and OneWorld or Star Alliance.

IMO Boston has a few short term alternatives for increasing throughput at terminal E. Here they are from cheapest to more expensive:
1 - Attract more Asian routes which typically operate mid-day. I think HKG and ICN would be viable.
2 - Add jetways to existing gates to speed up aircraft turnaround times and increase gate utilization.
3 - Expand terminal E towards the current remote stand area.


User currently offlineTim445 From United States of America, joined Mar 2014, 1 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 15704 times:

Gate E1A could possibly be turned into an international gate. I believe it was at one time shortly after construction of the original Volpe Terminal used for international arrivals.

Remember for quite a few years in the 1980s and 1990s both gate E2 and E3 were mostly used for domestic flights by Northwest. For many many years there was NOT a security checkpoint from the original NW ticketing area(where Southwest baggage claim is today behind the taxi stand) and thus NW passengers had to go up the escalator from Level 1 to 3 thru security than back downstairs to where the gates E1A to E1E are.(At this time their was still a Terminal D with its own security checkpoint). Thus the use of the E1 gates was highly undesirable to Northwest compared to the E2 and E3 gates. Massport was quite happy to take back the leases on E2 and E3. I believe both though are used for Aer Lingus pre clearance arrivals and most importantly were not given over to Southwest(Additionally a former international baggage claim 3 has now been coverted to domestic use).

I think the main issues with converting E1A to international use would be keeping access to the Air France lounge and the elevator linking the E1 gates to the E2-8 gates during CBP operations. I don't know what modifications Massport can do their in the bowels of Terminal E(The airline lounge situation in E is quite poor it really is the bowels).


User currently offlinealphaomega From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 581 posts, RR: 0
Reply 34, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 15483 times:

Quoting globetrotter29 (Reply 7):

Surprised MEX is unserved from BOS.

Aeromexico applied for landing rights at about the same time as Copa last year, both were denied. Copa changed their schedule and started operating in July, never heard anything further from AM.

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 14):
The only problem I can see is that the BOS infrastructure (land-side, air-side) may be outpaced by the demand to fly here. Like someone said, Emirates may want to use a 773ER NOW, but the gate they have can't accept it without taking out neighboring gates. Stuff like that.

They can use a 773 right now, and likely will shortly. It was the A380 which Sir Tim said they wanted to operate to BOS now, but can't.

Quoting Tim445 (Reply 33):

Gate E1A could possibly be turned into an international gate. I believe it was at one time shortly after construction of the original Volpe Terminal used for international arrivals.

Remember for quite a few years in the 1980s and 1990s both gate E2 and E3 were mostly used for domestic flights by Northwest. For many many years there was NOT a security checkpoint from the original NW ticketing area(where Southwest baggage claim is today behind the taxi stand) and thus NW passengers had to go up the escalator from Level 1 to 3 thru security than back downstairs to where the gates E1A to E1E are.(At this time their was still a Terminal D with its own security checkpoint). Thus the use of the E1 gates was highly undesirable to Northwest compared to the E2 and E3 gates. Massport was quite happy to take back the leases on E2 and E3. I believe both though are used for Aer Lingus pre clearance arrivals and most importantly were not given over to Southwest(Additionally a former international baggage claim 3 has now been coverted to domestic use).

I think the main issues with converting E1A to international use would be keeping access to the Air France lounge and the elevator linking the E1 gates to the E2-8 gates during CBP operations. I don't know what modifications Massport can do their in the bowels of Terminal E(The airline lounge situation in E is quite poor it really is the bowels).

All you have to do is put up a wall to separate the gates from the rest of the terminal and link into the immigration hallway. This is not a lost plan...


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12856 posts, RR: 25
Reply 35, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 15251 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 2):
Emirates

Cool. Right now the cheapest way to do BOS-CDG is to do BOS-IST-CDG using TK (cheaper than routing through Iceland or using AF!) but perhaps BOS-DXB-CDG using EK will end up being even cheaper!  
Quoting bobnwa (Reply 6):
I don't believe is located geographically well enough to become a domestic hub for any airline.

Wow, as others are saying, that just doesn't matter. All we see at hubs is prices skyrocket.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 9):
B6 wanted a terminal to themselves. Done. EK wanted a link to B6's terminal. Done. AA wanted more gates in terminal B. Done. WN wanted expanded gate space. Done.

This was mostly made possible by:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 1):
So in my opinion, it hasn't been so much growth as it has been a recovery. It's easy to say B6 has been responsible for this growth, they certainly contributed to it, but for the most part they simply replaced other carriers and took their passengers. UA, AA, DL, all shrunk at one point or another in the last 13 years. In my opinion, it was WN coming to Boston in 2009? and DL exiting BK in 2007 that really kick-started BOS's recovery and growth.

  

and:

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 14):
The financial abyss that our homegrown 'legacy' carriers found themselves in post-9/11 gave other airlines the ability to waltz into profitable cities (read: Boston) and establish themselves. Pre-9/11, an American Airlines would go into any airport and bash an interloper into submission. That was their violent MO, and it was well documented, too. But losing money as they were, none of them could 'fight' for stations that weren't named 'New York' or 'Miami' or 'Los Angeles.'
DL had to wave their own white flag with respect to Dallas; AA had to do it with Nashville. US with Pittsburgh. UA with Dulles & Cleveland. Etcetera Etcetera Etcetera

  

BOS has had no where to go but up. The holes that B6 and others have been filling is the craters left behind by the post-9/11 industry crash and waves of bankruptcy and consolidation that have followed.

If I may quibble with airbazar's comment I quoted above, it's not so much DL's recovery that is making things happen, what really made things happen was them pouring money into expanding Terminal A then dumping all the debts of such a risky investment (along with many others) onto their debters, one of which was/is Massport. The excess capacity they've created is what has allowed for all the moves/shifts spoken of above, not any great master plan from Massport.

I'm glad to see Massport has done its part spending the federal improvement funds that come right out of our ticket fares, as well as some nice deal making to bring in carriers, but the real question is how will they do now that the holes are largely filled and the slack has largely been reeled in.

For instance:

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 14):
The only problem I can see is that the BOS infrastructure (land-side, air-side) may be outpaced by the demand to fly here. Like someone said, Emirates may want to use a 773ER NOW, but the gate they have can't accept it without taking out neighboring gates. Stuff like that.

is a good example of things they need to be able to resolve, as is A380 preparation.

Personally I think Massport has a few years of fair weather sailing ahead that allows for increasing fares without stressing the system, given the economy is generally mending and not all of the industry consolidation has shaken through the system (in particular with respect to the regional airline up-gaging and the pilot shortage), but it will be very interesting to see how they handle themselves in the short to medium term.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 14997 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 35):
but perhaps BOS-DXB-CDG using EK will end up being even cheaper!

That's almost three times the flying. I'd consider it if saving $1000 USD. I'm not sure if I would even go through IST to get to Western Europe.

Regardless EK's booking engine will not let you do BOS-DXB-Western Europe except for some bizarre interlines to secondary destinations and it will not be cheaper. I searched ITA and got nothing as well.

You can do BOS--DXB-Eastern Europe and Russia though still not at low TK prices.

Quoting alphaomega (Reply 34):
Aeromexico applied for landing rights at about the same time as Copa last year, both were denied. Copa changed their schedule and started operating in July, never heard anything further from AM.

CBP denied the landing rights not Massport right?

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 31):
I think you will see a topping out of B6 growth anywhere between 150 flights and 200 flights.

I believe B6 has plans to top out at 150 and cannot do more unless they creep into E (with WN hypothetically in A). Also, you may need other airlines to cut flight which may not happen (unless VX ceases to exist)


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 37, posted (8 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 13820 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 35):
Personally I think Massport has a few years of fair weather sailing ahead that allows for increasing fares without stressing the system, given the economy is generally mending and not all of the industry consolidation has shaken through the system (in particular with respect to the regional airline up-gaging and the pilot shortage), but it will be very interesting to see how they handle themselves in the short to medium term.

I think the time to make serious modifications to BOS has passed, unfortunately. The kind of highly disruptive changes that BOS needs had to have been addresses during the down times. BOS needs a serious redesign but this is a huge project that will remind people of the Big Dig. For example, expanding the central garage was a mistake IMO. Instead Massport should have relocated at least one of the central garages to the same area where the new car rental facility now is located. This would have made room to build a huge new consolidated central terminal, and then one by one replace each of the terminals as piers off of the main terminal. Similar to the layout of AMS or FRA. I know that's a huge undertaking and probably more than we can afford but that's exactly what BOS needs for the next 50 years. Instead it looks like we're going to continue to patch it up to get by.

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 36):
That's almost three times the flying. I'd consider it if saving $1000 USD. I'm not sure if I would even go through IST to get to Western Europe.
IST is ok if your final destination is Central or Eastern Europe. In my case SZG is perfectly acceptable because the alternative is to do what we've been doing for years which is to fly into MUC and then drive for 2 hours. I would probably never use IST to get to France or the UK.

Quoting alphaomega (Reply 34):
They can use a 773 right now, and likely will shortly. It was the A380 which Sir Tim said they wanted to operate to BOS now, but can't.

I wouldn't be surprised if they can't, of if Massport is not prepared for it. Not because of the wingspan as Chris suggested, but because of its length. I don't know how many gates at terminal E can handle that plane. I'm guessing the same that handle the A346 which I believe are only 2. But besides that there could be remote stand limitations due to the length of the airplane. I hope not and that we'll see the 77W here soon.

[Edited 2014-03-15 06:27:27]

User currently offlinechrisnh From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 2
Reply 38, posted (8 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 13717 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 37):
we'll see the 77W here soon.

It sure will be something to crow about if we do. Both Seattle and Dallas came online for Emirates in Mar 2012. Seattle just upgraded to the 773ER; Dallas hasn't. So if Boston does it even within calendar 2014, that will get people to sit up and take notice...and probably no small amount of grumbling from Big D Little A Double L A-S. And that spells DALLAS.


User currently offlineN757ST From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 384 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (8 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13637 times:

What might be very interesting is what happens when Jetblue starts receiving A321NEOs....

User currently offlinejetbluefan1 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3012 posts, RR: 14
Reply 40, posted (8 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13649 times:

Quoting N757ST (Reply 39):
What might be very interesting is what happens when Jetblue starts receiving A321NEOs....

Can a 321NEO fly BOS-Western Europe or Northern South America? Hmmm...



Most people on a.net hate JetBlue. Get used to it.
User currently offlineN757ST From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 384 posts, RR: 0
Reply 41, posted (8 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 13659 times:

Quoting jetbluefan1 (Reply 40):
Can a 321NEO fly BOS-Western Europe or Northern South America? Hmmm...

It can definitely do western europe, hence why Aer Lingus bought theirs. A mint A321NEO might be a perfect BOS- Secondary Western Europe airport bird.

[Edited 2014-03-15 07:55:02]

User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (8 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 13558 times:

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 38):
Dallas hasn't. So if Boston does it even within calendar 2014, that will get people to sit up and take notice...and probably no small amount of grumbling from Big D Little A Double L A-S. And that spells DALLAS.

Looked at EK's DFW load factors 90% for the most part - I'm surprised they haven't bumped it... Maybe they are leery on the fact that QR and EY are coming and that they are AA partners.


User currently offlinealphaomega From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 581 posts, RR: 0
Reply 43, posted (8 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 13494 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 36):
Quoting alphaomega (Reply 34):
Aeromexico applied for landing rights at about the same time as Copa last year, both were denied. Copa changed their schedule and started operating in July, never heard anything further from AM.

CBP denied the landing rights not Massport right?

Massport won't deny anyone, as we've seen from the recent planned growth. The overnight hours are not favored by CBP, which is when they were looking to operate. Massport was actually working to get the funding/staffing for CBP overnight to help grow the market south of the border, including more from PTY.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 44, posted (8 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 13426 times:

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 38):
It sure will be something to crow about if we do. Both Seattle and Dallas came online for Emirates in Mar 2012. Seattle just upgraded to the 773ER; Dallas hasn't. So if Boston does it even within calendar 2014, that will get people to sit up and take notice...and probably no small amount of grumbling from Big D Little A Double L A-S. And that spells DALLAS.

I'm not sure it means anything to DFW. DFW is the end of the line for EK. Strictly O&D. Whereas BOS is a connecting airport, being fed by B6. There's a lot more growth potential at BOS than there is at DFW. DFW also gets a lot of Asia bound traffic over the Pacific and has a very strong home carrier. To get to India from DFW, it almost makes no difference whether you go East or West. EK is going head-to-head with the likes of AA and KE, on top of the Euro carriers and as well as a variety of 2-stop options. From BOS, EK's competition are the overpriced, over taxed, Euro carriers. It's a much easier market to penetrate, IMO.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11840 posts, RR: 62
Reply 45, posted (8 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 13445 times:

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 38):
So if Boston does it even within calendar 2014, that will get people to sit up and take notice...and probably no small amount of grumbling from Big D Little A Double L A-S. And that spells DALLAS.

Why would there be grumbling from "DALLAS?" Why would "DALLAS" care?

Quoting airbazar (Reply 44):
DFW is the end of the line for EK. Strictly O&D. Whereas BOS is a connecting airport, being fed by B6.

Not strictly O&D. Beyond the connectivity over DXB, AA also sends plenty of interline connections onto AA over DFW. Not a codeshare like B6, true, but definitely more than just O&D to be sure.


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 46, posted (8 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 13318 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 45):
Why would there be grumbling from "DALLAS?" Why would "DALLAS" care?

The city of Dallas wouldn't care - 95% of the population doesn't realize that the flight is flown with a 777-200LR. I would bet that half of the population doesn't even know that EK even exists.

DFW airport management may care (less landing revenues) but thats about it.


User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 47, posted (8 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 12944 times:

How do the advanced bookings on TK and HU look, any information?
When will HU have enough 788 to launch daily service on this route?

Looking at the strong EK bookings (guessing it is primarily India and Subcontinent bound traffic), how soon are QR or EY going to blink? Whoever is next - B6 is probably getting even more code-share partners (ala Alaska)  


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 48, posted (8 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 12709 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 47):
When will HU have enough 788 to launch daily service on this route?

Probably very soon - especially once whatever arrangement with B6 comes into play and they get all of their 787's. I wouldn't be surprised if HU axed ORD too since they seem to be lowering frequencies on the route.

However - I'm not sure if the Shanghai business traffic that originates in Greater Boston will take this flight. I have anecdotal evidence (my colleagues) that are hesitant to 1) take a Chinese carrier and 2) connect in PEK. Their preferred connecting airport in DTW.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16892 posts, RR: 51
Reply 49, posted (8 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 12659 times:

Quoting globetrotter29 (Reply 7):
Surprised MEX is unserved from BOS.

Don't know if the market can support this route.

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 24):
Dl did get back the CO gates in Terminal A

UA is still operating from Terminal A at BOS.

Quoting vs11 (Reply 26):
That's a pretty good idea! B6 don't serve Mexico City from NYC either so they may consider opening both MEX-BOS/NYC.

B6 and AA are prohibited from serving NYC-MEX, this is due to the US/Mexico agreement limiting each route to only two us carriers. UA and DL are the only US carriers allowed to operated NYC-MEX, DL got their JFK-MEX rights from Pan Am. UA got theirs from CO who got theirs from Eastern, CO and Eastern were both part of Texas Air and the parent company transfered the EA JFK-MEX route to CO to allow them to operate EWR-MEX.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 50, posted (8 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 12568 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 48):
However - I'm not sure if the Shanghai business traffic that originates in Greater Boston will take this flight. I have anecdotal evidence (my colleagues) that are hesitant to 1) take a Chinese carrier and 2) connect in PEK. Their preferred connecting airport in DTW.

very interesting ... this is new information. But given the high volume to Chinese visitors in the region, there must be enough flow from/to Beijing as well. Maybe someone else could start a PVG flight?  
Quoting STT757 (Reply 49):
B6 and AA are prohibited from serving NYC-MEX, this is due to the US/Mexico agreement limiting each route to only two us carriers. UA and DL are the only US carriers allowed to operated NYC-MEX, DL got their JFK-MEX rights from Pan Am. UA got theirs from CO who got theirs from Eastern, CO and Eastern were both part of Texas Air and the parent company transfered the EA JFK-MEX route to CO to allow them to operate EWR-MEX.

Thanks for the info again. So this effectively rules out B6 from MEX for a long time (unless the bilateral is amended). AM is the only hope ... maybe they have a 788 lying around for 7-8 hours?  

[Edited 2014-03-16 09:30:28]

User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 51, posted (8 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 12461 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 50):
So this effectively rules out B6 from MEX for a long time (unless the bilateral is amended).

Not for BOS (though unlikely) or MCO - they could apply for the rights and get it even if AA/US or DL has it. AM probably still has rights for BOS and currently serves MCO.

I'm not sure if B6 could start FLL either - DOT considers it part of overall Miami market. AA and AM serve MIA and NK serves Toluca.

Quoting ASA (Reply 50):
but given the high volume to Chinese visitors in the region, there must be enough flow from/to Beijing as well. Maybe someone else could start a PVG flight?  

I'm sure due to massive population and a yearning for seeing other parts of the USA, that there will be enough. I also see the average person using the flight to check off the Great Wall for his/her bucket list.

PVG - someone's bound to do it eventually.


User currently offlineBOStonsox From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 1993 posts, RR: 0
Reply 52, posted (8 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 12197 times:

I'm so glad to see so much going on at BOS. B6 may be a ways from going intercontinental, but it's attracting carriers who otherwise wouldn't think as much of us.

Quoting N757ST (Reply 41):
It can definitely do western europe, hence why Aer Lingus bought theirs. A mint A321NEO might be a perfect BOS- Secondary Western Europe airport bird.

It could be, but I read the reason they haven't gone TATL yet is because airfares are too low to stimulate right now. I could see a JV between B6 and EI to Ireland, as well as some routes like BOS-GLA, BOS-BRU, and BOS-MAN. It might be a pipe dream, but maybe they could do what Flyglobespan did with JFK-NOC-LPL and BOS-NOC-GLA?



2013 World Series Champions!
User currently offlineKD5MDK From United States of America, joined Mar 2013, 386 posts, RR: 0
Reply 53, posted (8 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 12051 times:

Mint seems like a very premium product to fly to secondary European cities. As a compelling alternative on BOS-LON or BOS-CDG? Maybe. Perhaps BOS-MAN?

User currently offlineIndianicWorld From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 3014 posts, RR: 0
Reply 54, posted (8 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 11982 times:

I find it amazing that so much attention suddenly gets placed on certain markets, after a relatively quiet period.

To now see the amount of capacity going in there is great to see.


User currently offlinechrisnh From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 2
Reply 55, posted (8 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 11925 times:

The catalysts that are drawing out these new international carriers were always in Boston: the universities, the financial companies, medicine and hospitals. These 'demographics' set Boston apart from other U.S. cities, and they've been in place forever.

Three things, in my view, made this renaissance happen within the past two years:
1.) Apathy by our own domestic 'major' carriers
2.) Feed provided by JetBlue
3.) Planes that can fly here and back profitably

I would say #3 is most important, followed by 1 and 2.

The A350 will only help, as it enters the fleet mix of carriers that are here now and those who might eventually be.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12856 posts, RR: 25
Reply 56, posted (8 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 11843 times:

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 52):
It could be, but I read the reason they haven't gone TATL yet is because airfares are too low to stimulate right now.

Interesting statement. As above I have been watching prices BOS-CDG and they don't seem low to me, so I'm wondering if you have some corroboration on your statement.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinealphaomega From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 581 posts, RR: 0
Reply 57, posted (8 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 11799 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 56):

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 52):
It could be, but I read the reason they haven't gone TATL yet is because airfares are too low to stimulate right now.

Interesting statement. As above I have been watching prices BOS-CDG and they don't seem low to me, so I'm wondering if you have some corroboration on your statement.

BOS is successful thanks to the premium market, not the low-cost leisure traveler. Even B6's fares are not cheap, same goes for SW, but they're PROFITABLE routes.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12856 posts, RR: 25
Reply 58, posted (8 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11720 times:

Quoting alphaomega (Reply 57):
BOS is successful thanks to the premium market, not the low-cost leisure traveler.

Ok, then I guess I don't understand what "airfares are too low to stimulate" means...



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinecloudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 846 posts, RR: 0
Reply 59, posted (8 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11720 times:

How important is Freight to BOS? Could they move the freight traffic to BED and use that area as additional room for a wide-body terminal?


"Six becoming three doesn't create more Americans that want to fly." -Adam Pilarski
User currently offlineAviationAddict From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 627 posts, RR: 0
Reply 60, posted (8 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11684 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cloudboy (Reply 59):
Could they move the freight traffic to BED and use that area as additional room for a wide-body terminal?

The runways at BED are probably too short to handle full scale cargo operations. Beyond that, if Massport was to propose this I suspect they'd ultimately have to move both FX and 5X as I doubt one airline would willingly move to BED while their direct competitor would remain at BOS.

Relocating the 5X ramp would give Massport options with a Terminal E extension though. I don't see a new terminal at the FX ramp ever happening though. It would have to be a satellite terminal which would make connections difficult.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12856 posts, RR: 25
Reply 61, posted (8 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11605 times:

Quoting cloudboy (Reply 59):
How important is Freight to BOS? Could they move the freight traffic to BED and use that area as additional room for a wide-body terminal?

I think KPSM is trying to attract freight but obviously too far from Boston to provide much relief for stuff needing to be in Boston or points south. However one can't complain about the runway being too short!  

KBED is probably would have too many NIMBY issues with it becoming a big freight hub.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinerosskin92 From United States of America, joined Dec 2013, 16 posts, RR: 0
Reply 62, posted (8 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11614 times:

Quoting vs11 (Reply 11):
Indeed, things are looking good for Boston and the area in general. The local economy is doing pretty well, and most importantly Boston is fixing one of its long-standing issues - costly housing. The last couple of years have seen many new projects (granted, high-end, but still) and more and more young people and families are moving into the city. So you do have the market for growth and as airbazar says the local authorities are very pro-growth oriented and cooperative with businesses. Also, Boston just got a new mayor who is moving on keeping bars open later so that would also help with Boston shaking the perception of being on the sleepy side.

This is only half of the issue. The other half is below.

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 14):
The only problem I can see is that the BOS infrastructure (land-side, air-side) may be outpaced by the demand to fly here. Like someone said, Emirates may want to use a 773ER NOW, but the gate they have can't accept it without taking out neighboring gates. Stuff like that.

This is a major issue with BOS. There is very little room for expansion, and they cannot take out gates to accomidate bigger airplanes. That would cause issues with slots and gate avaliability, which I heard is strained during the peak times of the day.

If MASSPORT put out expansion plans (even if they were contained in the present airport boundaries), East Boston would have a huge cow.

In the 80's, when they were planning the Big Dig, MASSDOT and MASSPORT had a plan to take out a 50 ft section of a park and ride for a new ramp to (or from) the Ted Williams. The business owner flipped, mobilized the residents under the guise of "airport expansion", and caused a huge planning and political headache for years.

What MASSPORT needs to do is to figure out how to retrofit the existing infrastructure. They are already doing this, but I wonder if Terminal A could take customs? That would remove the DL flights from E, freeing up gates and slots.

However, I (and we) don't have the concrete data about the usage and physical restraints. This is just what I think after studying things about the airport and the city.

Quoting ASA (Reply 47):
When will HU have enough 788 to launch daily service on this route?

Im not sure about BOS, but I am noticing HU is using their new 788 service to undercut flights to Asia, they were 400-500 dollars cheaper routinely for ORD-BKK r/t. Not sure if this is a coincidence or not. When EK comes here... who knows what will happen.

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 55):
The catalysts that are drawing out these new international carriers were always in Boston: the universities, the financial companies, medicine and hospitals. These 'demographics' set Boston apart from other U.S. cities, and they've been in place forever.

Eds and meds. Boston is becoming very wealthy and gentrified in an extremely fast rate. These are the people with the money to travel.... thus the growth.

Shocked me coming back after 9-10 years of being in Chicago to the city, and seeing how gentrified and modernized it is becoming. Its cool but disturbing at the same time. But that is where the money is so....


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 63, posted (8 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11581 times:

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 55):
The catalysts that are drawing out these new international carriers were always in Boston: the universities, the financial companies, medicine and hospitals. These 'demographics' set Boston apart from other U.S. cities, and they've been in place forever.

There's one thing that has changed that I consider significant and that is the shift in global economic forces. 10-15 years ago China, India, and the UAE were only emerging economies. Today they are full blown players.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 56):
Interesting statement. As above I have been watching prices BOS-CDG and they don't seem low to me, so I'm wondering if you have some corroboration on your statement.

You're looking at ticket price vs. air fare. Ticket prices are expensive because of all the taxes, fees, and surcharges added on. The air fare, is relatively cheap.


User currently onlinetlecam From United States of America, joined Jul 2013, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 64, posted (8 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 11531 times:

Quoting chrisnh (Reply 55):
Three things, in my view, made this renaissance happen within the past two years:
1.) Apathy by our own domestic 'major' carriers
2.) Feed provided by JetBlue
3.) Planes that can fly here and back profitably

I would say #3 is most important, followed by 1 and

I agree. Number 3 is also one reason why the US carriers haven't tried to fight the international battle much. DL makes LHR, AMS and CDG (Seasonally) work with 763/764 and 333/332's. LHR is currently a 763 (I was on Flight 186 last night in fact!) and last summer they upgauged to a 764 during the summer season. AMS is currently an A333 and when the second summer flight is added, it's usually an 332. CDG will be a 763 - wide body for the first time this summer.

Side note about gate space - I boarded the 763 at A19 last night. Previously, I had boarded down at A14/15/16. I didn't check to see if they had blocked off A18.

Another interesting anecdote - A colleague of mine and I both flew to London last night. He flew from CHicago, I from Boston. We booked the same day. He flew BA (on an AA codeshare ticket), and his J class ticket was about 4000; I flew DL and mine was 5000. When I booked 3 weeks ago, more than half the cabin was already full. There were 3 empty seats in J; I'm sure that some were upgrades.

I realize that one example isn't a pattern, but it seems like DL is able to command decent J-class fares on the route.



BOS || A:319,320,321, 332, 333, 346 || B:735, 737, 738, 739, 752, 753, 762, 763, 764, 772, 744: L1011, DC10
User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 65, posted (8 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 11395 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 63):
You're looking at ticket price vs. air fare. Ticket prices are expensive because of all the taxes, fees, and surcharges added on. The air fare, is relatively cheap.

The surcharge is supposedly "fuel related". I consider that part of the airfare since its going to the airline and part of their balance sheet.

Take 4/5-4/15 BOS-CDG round trip on AF with same price on DL/KL/AZ codes due to JV.

Total $1203.90

Air Fare: $554
YR Fuel Surcharge: $516.00
Government Fees (both France and US) = $133.90


$1070 is really the roundtrip fare.

The lowest fare that day is EI BOS-DUB-CDG-DUB-BOS=

Total=1105.37

Air Fare: $867.62
YQ Fuel Surcharge: 67.27
Fees: 170.48 (higher since you are going through Ireland)

934.38 is really the roundtrip fare.

The total airfares are in the 1400's for nonstop BOS-CDG this summer. Its higher for sure but I'm not sure if that is something B6 wants to become entangled in.

Quoting rosskin92 (Reply 62):
Im not sure about BOS, but I am noticing HU is using their new 788 service to undercut flights to Asia, they were 400-500 dollars cheaper routinely for ORD-BKK r/t. Not sure if this is a coincidence or not. When EK comes here... who knows what will happen.

I don't see any of the undercutting that TK has been doing in BOS. HU can be slightly cheaper or slightly more expensive for the non-stops (BOS-PEK) and BOS-PEK-SHA/BKK versus DL/UA and others.

Their business fares are typically cheaper for the route.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 66, posted (8 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 11363 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 65):
The surcharge is supposedly "fuel related". I consider that part of the airfare since its going to the airline and part of their balance sheet.

Right, and I agree and that's why I think fuel surcharges should be illegal. But that's a topic for an entirely different discussion. In reality, a fuel surcharge is not part of the fare, hence why it's called a surcharge. When people say air fares are cheaper today than they were 10 years ago, that's BS, because 10 years ago the price of fuel was included in the air fare. Today that's not the case.


User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 2
Reply 67, posted (8 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 11294 times:

Here's an interesting view of the route Emirates 237 is taking today. Notice how far north of Iceland he went.
Emirates 237-Dubai-Boston on March 17


User currently offlineBOStonsox From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 1993 posts, RR: 0
Reply 68, posted (8 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 11155 times:

Here's the article I referred to earlier:

http://blog.apex.aero/inflight-servi...ly-rule-transatlantic-lcc-service/



2013 World Series Champions!
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 69, posted (8 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 11130 times:

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 67):
Here's an interesting view of the route Emirates 237 is taking today. Notice how far north of Iceland he went.

As you may have noticed yesterday, the winds was pretty strong. They may have gone that far north to avoid that weather system across the Atlantic.


User currently onlinetlecam From United States of America, joined Jul 2013, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 70, posted (8 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 10529 times:

Article from the Boston Business journal on Hainan. Ticket sales seem to be good but. It spectacular. Hainan is going to daily service in August, primarily catering to students and their families.

http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/bl...lying-to-boston-from.html?page=all



BOS || A:319,320,321, 332, 333, 346 || B:735, 737, 738, 739, 752, 753, 762, 763, 764, 772, 744: L1011, DC10
User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 71, posted (8 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 10433 times:

That's great to hear - I'm very hopeful that this flight will not take very long to go daily year-round.

A friend of mine just returned from BOG via PTY on Copa. He says while the service isn't great (he compares to domestic legacy airlines) - the plane was quite full. On the other hand, he says Avianca Colombia was great (similar to Jetblue in terms of TV and snacks etc as he compared!) for flying within Colombia.

Another friend flies BOS-DXB-KUL tonight ... can't wait to fly EK from BOS myself! All of these flights had to go through a hub just a year ago ... this is great times for BOS 


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 72, posted (8 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 10346 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 71):
Another friend flies BOS-DXB-KUL tonight ... can't wait to fly EK from BOS myself! All of these flights had to go through a hub just a year ago ... this is great times for BOS

Until now it was really difficult to fly to SE Asia by flying East. The cozy relationship that the U.S. airlines had with their European JV counterparts prevented that. LH wouldn't dare selling a BOS-FRA-Asia ticket so they wouldn't upset UA. Likewise for AF/DL, or previously KL/NW. All East Coast-Asia traffic flowed over the Pacific even though going thru Europe was a lot shorter and required 1 less stop. But that nonesense ends now. I love it. No more connections in SFO/LAX/ORD. EK (and TK) will be crying all the way to the bank  


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 73, posted (8 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 10258 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 72):
LH wouldn't dare selling a BOS-FRA-Asia ticket so they wouldn't upset UA

SQ has been doing it for years with VS codeshare. I flew BOS-LHR-SIN-MDC on UA miles to boot.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 74, posted (8 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 10186 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 73):
SQ has been doing it for years with VS codeshare. I flew BOS-LHR-SIN-MDC on UA miles to boot.

So have I. Have done BOS-JFK-FRA-SIN a couple of times but you and I are the minority. You have to go out of your way to find those flights and they are typically more expensive than via the Pacific. The bottom line is if you go on Orbitz or any other booking site and enter BOS-SIN none of the cheaper options will be via Europe.


User currently offlinestratacruiser From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 106 posts, RR: 0
Reply 75, posted (8 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 10124 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 72):
Until now it was really difficult to fly to SE Asia by flying East. The cozy relationship that the U.S. airlines had with their European JV counterparts prevented that. LH wouldn't dare selling a BOS-FRA-Asia ticket so they wouldn't upset UA. Likewise for AF/DL, or previously KL/NW. All East Coast-Asia traffic flowed over the Pacific even though going thru Europe was a lot shorter and required 1 less stop.

I haven't found that to be the case, at least with Southeast Asia. Have used both LH and BA to reach BKK and SIN through Europe at fares competitive with trans-Pacific.


User currently onlinetlecam From United States of America, joined Jul 2013, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 76, posted (8 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 10130 times:

I'm going to have to book a trip to New Delhi from Boston for travel in the next 4-6 weeks (or however long it takes for my firm to process the visa). Needless to say, I'm going to try to arrange it to travel BOS-DXB-DEL.


BOS || A:319,320,321, 332, 333, 346 || B:735, 737, 738, 739, 752, 753, 762, 763, 764, 772, 744: L1011, DC10
User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 2
Reply 77, posted (8 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 10105 times:

I don't know if one has to do with the other, but Hainan reduced Chicago service at about the same time they upped Boston. In other words, Chicago's plane went to Boston. It stands to reason, as there are multiple options for Chicago folks but only Hainan for Boston. It will be interesting to see who else comes to Boston after Hainan does.

On another matter, Emirates has ten 777-200LRs and all but one have been through Boston except for lone holdout A6-EWC. The fleet comprises frames A6-EWA through -AWJ. As a matter of fact, A6-EWC has been a shy little bugger with respect to the U.S. Its last appearance on these shores was a March 9 circuit through Dallas. Since then, nada.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 78, posted (8 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 10075 times:

Quoting stratacruiser (Reply 75):
I haven't found that to be the case, at least with Southeast Asia. Have used both LH and BA to reach BKK and SIN through Europe at fares competitive with trans-Pacific.

Maybe they are reacting but I just did a search for a trip to SIN next month and the only Euro itineray was SQ at #9 on the list. Funny enought it's a BA codeshare instead of LH   Again, I'm not saying it doesn't exist. I'm just saying airlines appear to make very few seats available on those routes via Europe.


User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 79, posted (8 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 9968 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 78):
Maybe they are reacting but I just did a search for a trip to SIN next month and the only Euro itineray was SQ at #9 on the list. Funny enought it's a BA codeshare instead of LH   Again, I'm not saying it doesn't exist. I'm just saying airlines appear to make very few seats available on those routes via Europe.

last summer, I was travelling to BKK ... and I could not find a competitive fare via Europe. Eventually I merged it with another trip to Spain ... and flew BOS-MAD-DXB-BKK ... on Iberia and Emirates separate tickets. But if I look at the same route now in the summer ... EK and TK are leading, and BA, LX, LH are also offering some decent options!


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 80, posted (8 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 9643 times:

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 77):

I don't know if one has to do with the other, but Hainan reduced Chicago service at about the same time they upped Boston. In other words, Chicago's plane went to Boston. It stands to reason, as there are multiple options for Chicago folks but only Hainan for Boston. It will be interesting to see who else comes to Boston after Hainan does.

Checked the loads on aviationdb.net for ORD's first month and they were in the 90%'s though it was only 2x weekly at the time.


User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 81, posted (8 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 9498 times:

Efforts to bring MEX into the fold continues ...

Gov. Patrick meets with two airlines to bring direct flights to Boston from Mexico City
http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/bl...ts-with-two-airlines-to-bring.html


User currently onlinetlecam From United States of America, joined Jul 2013, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 82, posted (8 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 9416 times:

AeroMexico would be a nice feather in SkyTeam's cap in Boston. Could provide some pretty nice connecting possibilities through MEX.


BOS || A:319,320,321, 332, 333, 346 || B:735, 737, 738, 739, 752, 753, 762, 763, 764, 772, 744: L1011, DC10
User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6808 posts, RR: 32
Reply 83, posted (8 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 9401 times:

There's an article in the Glob today about UA's new facilities at BOS:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/.../tAcVdUSy8cANNgtcX9dM8I/story.html

Some highlights:

* UA moves in on April 30.
* UA will have 10 gates in Terminal B.
* B6 will take the UA gates in Terminal C (no surprise) while the Terminal A gates are under evaluation.
* The terminal will offer self-service ticketing/baggage-tagging machines and self-service boarding.
* The word "tarmac" makes its inevitable appearance.

I still think that Massport "encourages" WN to move to A to make room for B6 to expand into the E1 gates.


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 84, posted (8 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 9346 times:

Quoting ScottB (Reply 83):
There's an article in the Glob today about UA's new facilities at BOS:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/.../tAcVdUSy8cANNgtcX9dM8I/story.html

Some highlights:

* UA moves in on April 30.
* UA will have 10 gates in Terminal B.
* B6 will take the UA gates in Terminal C (no surprise) while the Terminal A gates are under evaluation.
* The terminal will offer self-service ticketing/baggage-tagging machines and self-service boarding.
* The word "tarmac" makes its inevitable appearance.

I still think that Massport "encourages" WN to move to A to make room for B6 to expand into the E1 gates.

Is 5 gates enough for WN?

I wonder if AS will wind up in B.

Quoting ASA (Reply 81):
Gov. Patrick meets with two airlines to bring direct flights to Boston from Mexico City
http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/bl...ts-with-two-airlines-to-bring.html

Interjet is interesting but their A320 is 150 passengers which may be too big even for 4 weekly. The SSJ can't make BOS-MEX unfortunately.


User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 2
Reply 85, posted (8 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9152 times:

Which Mexican carrier tried Boston and failed miserably at it in the 1990s...Mexicana?

User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 86, posted (8 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 8993 times:

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 85):

Which Mexican carrier tried Boston and failed miserably at it in the 1990s...Mexicana?

Aeromexico in mid 2000's


User currently onlinetlecam From United States of America, joined Jul 2013, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 87, posted (8 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 8954 times:

I've been watching the construction from the outside as I taxi on Delta. Looking forward to it being done. Hopefully there's a bit more gate space than the United gates in C. When those 757's to SFO board, you feel like you're in line at Disney World during April school vacation, especially when there are Denver and Chicago flights at the gates next to it.


BOS || A:319,320,321, 332, 333, 346 || B:735, 737, 738, 739, 752, 753, 762, 763, 764, 772, 744: L1011, DC10
User currently online727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 6564 posts, RR: 20
Reply 88, posted (8 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 8954 times:

Since we are talking about BOS...why did NW throw away their BOS hub/gateway?


Listen Betty, don't start up with your 'White Zone' s*** again.
User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6517 posts, RR: 9
Reply 89, posted (8 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8847 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 86):
Aeromexico in mid 2000's
Aeromexico also flew from BOS in the 70's but that also shut down


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 90, posted (8 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8845 times:

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 88):
Since we are talking about BOS...why did NW throw away their BOS hub/gateway?

I'm guessing longer range airplanes allowed them to setup a hub in a better place.

And speaking of BOS construction, I'm really looking forward to seeing what comes up next. BOS seems to always be starting a new project. Going back just a few years, we've had: terminal E renovation for WN, followed by terminal C renovations and improvements, followed by consolidated car rental facility, followed by terminal B renovation and improvements, followed by terminal E/C airside connector. It seems they are constantly doing something to make it better. I wonder what comes next.


User currently offlinedvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1746 posts, RR: 11
Reply 91, posted (8 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8833 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

They better enjoy that view from the United lounge, because the height of the new terminal addition blocks us plebes from using the terminal B garage for spotting.


From the Mind of Minolta
User currently onlinetlecam From United States of America, joined Jul 2013, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 92, posted (8 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8824 times:

I was looking at the google earth pictures of Terminal B and you can see the construction. At the southern end, you can see where the connector is.

Question for someone who would know (Chris, Adam?) - are the "new" United gates going to be smack in between the US and the AA gates? Or are US/AA consolidating to either Pier A or Pier B? I'm curious how the gate re-shuffle is going to work.



BOS || A:319,320,321, 332, 333, 346 || B:735, 737, 738, 739, 752, 753, 762, 763, 764, 772, 744: L1011, DC10
User currently offlineflyby519 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1222 posts, RR: 0
Reply 93, posted (8 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 8821 times:

Quoting tlecam (Reply 92):

I'm pretty sure the plan is for UA to be right in the middle of US and AA, which makes zero sense. I don't know what the longer term AA/US plans are for gate consolidation, but I would assume the current US space would be the preferred spot.



These postings or comments are not a company-sponsored source of communication.
User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 94, posted (8 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 8779 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 90):
And speaking of BOS construction, I'm really looking forward to seeing what comes up next. BOS seems to always be starting a new project. Going back just a few years, we've had: terminal E renovation for WN, followed by terminal C renovations and improvements, followed by consolidated car rental facility, followed by terminal B renovation and improvements, followed by terminal E/C airside connector. It seems they are constantly doing something to make it better. I wonder what comes next.

you are right - but unfortunately, sometimes it feels like we always some sort of construction going on - or that those never finishes! just like the many other projects around the Big Dig ... different projects, but still feels like the never ending construction!   

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 93):
I'm pretty sure the plan is for UA to be right in the middle of US and AA, which makes zero sense. I don't know what the longer term AA/US plans are for gate consolidation, but I would assume the current US space would be the preferred spot.

Well, that sounds just like Massachusetts to me ...   

Seriously, how does that make any sense. They are going through such a reshuffle - this would have been the time to put US/AA together and be done with it. Makes it efficient for them, for UA, for everyone else ... and hopefully more free gates for newcomers!


User currently offlinevs11 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1111 posts, RR: 0
Reply 95, posted (8 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 8791 times:

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 88):
Since we are talking about BOS...why did NW throw away their BOS hub/gateway?

From what I understand, there was a huge customs scam going on at NW in BOS, which got busted in the 70s or 80s (don't remember exactly), after which NW scaled back its international operations in Boston.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 96, posted (8 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8726 times:

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 93):

I'm pretty sure the plan is for UA to be right in the middle of US and AA, which makes zero sense. I don't know what the longer term AA/US plans are for gate consolidation, but I would assume the current US space would be the preferred spot.

It makes sense when you go back in time. AA and US were not one airline. The plan was to put all *A carriers next to eachother (UA, US, and AC) and the terminal extension was built to house UA and according to UA's needs. I have no doubt that down the road AA and US will be under one roof. In fact I've heard that after expected consolidation, all of AA/US will likely fit in all of the current US terminal, thus freeing up the current AA gates. AC will likely move to the other side to be near UA.


User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6808 posts, RR: 32
Reply 97, posted (8 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8736 times:

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 93):
I'm pretty sure the plan is for UA to be right in the middle of US and AA, which makes zero sense. I don't know what the longer term AA/US plans are for gate consolidation, but I would assume the current US space would be the preferred spot.

There's plenty of room in the current US area for AA and US to consolidate, especially if NK and PenAir were to be moved into the AA gates. US has 18 gates, which really should be plenty for the ~85 consolidated mainline and ~20 regional departures daily; 20 years ago, US had close to 200 departures from a smaller facility.

Quoting ASA (Reply 94):

Seriously, how does that make any sense. They are going through such a reshuffle - this would have been the time to put US/AA together and be done with it. Makes it efficient for them, for UA, for everyone else ... and hopefully more free gates for newcomers!

Maybe yes, maybe no. UA has had a split operation for several years which is undesirable, and delaying their move for AA's benefit doesn't gain them anything. Plus they'd likely need to do some significant remodeling in the AA gate areas.

But if AA moves into the US gates, ultimately neither UA nor AA will operate from the gates used by AA 11 and UA 175 on 9/11/2001 (B32 & C19).


User currently onlinetlecam From United States of America, joined Jul 2013, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 98, posted (8 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8709 times:

And according to an article in the Globe yesterday, United is investing a fair amount into their new combined facilities in Boston.


BOS || A:319,320,321, 332, 333, 346 || B:735, 737, 738, 739, 752, 753, 762, 763, 764, 772, 744: L1011, DC10
User currently offlinecessna53996 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 73 posts, RR: 0
Reply 99, posted (8 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8628 times:

Quoting ASA (Thread starter):
Quoting ScottB (Reply 97):
There's plenty of room in the current US area for AA and US to consolidate, especially if NK and PenAir were to be moved into the AA gates. US has 18 gates, which really should be plenty for the ~85 consolidated mainline and ~20 regional departures daily; 20 years ago, US had close to 200 departures from a smaller facility.

I think gate consolidation is inevitable here. I think that AA/US will combine ops on the current US side.

This gate movement could either bring WN to current UA Terminal A gates or gates B30-36 and revitalize that facility with the help of Massport. NK and Penair moving to the current AA side would make sense, too.

[Edited 2014-03-27 16:16:22]


Feeling a little blue in ORH, JetBlue.
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 100, posted (8 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8566 times:

Quoting cessna53996 (Reply 99):
This gate movement could either bring WN to current UA Terminal A gates or gates B30-36 and revitalize that facility with the help of Massport. NK and Penair moving to the current AA side would make sense, too.

All of the above would make sense but I had never thought about WN moving to terminal B but that makes a whole lot of sense to me. I don't see WN moving to terminal A. WN likes terminal E because of the separate security checkpoint it has all to itself. At terminal A they would have to share it with Delta which at rush hour can have long lines and affect WN's tight turnarounds. Terminal B with their own seperate security makes a lot more sense.


User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 2
Reply 101, posted (8 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8560 times:

I also believe the NW mess at Boston also included the murder of a woman whose body was found in the trunk of a burned-out car. Yeah. That happened.

User currently offlinecessna53996 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 73 posts, RR: 0
Reply 102, posted (8 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 8596 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 100):
All of the above would make sense but I had never thought about WN moving to terminal B but that makes a whole lot of sense to me. I don't see WN moving to terminal A. WN likes terminal E because of the separate security checkpoint it has all to itself. At terminal A they would have to share it with Delta which at rush hour can have long lines and affect WN's tight turnarounds. Terminal B with their own seperate security makes a lot more sense.

They'd have plenty of room for growth on that pier of B30-36 with 7 gates. I could see Massport putting in lots of money to modernize that part of B to make it more in line with WN's current facilities in E. It certainly would make more sense than A because that leaves them zero room for expansion.



Feeling a little blue in ORH, JetBlue.
User currently offlinedeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9672 posts, RR: 14
Reply 103, posted (8 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 8503 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 32):
As it is today, when DL operates their departure only from terminal A with the A333, the adjacent gate has to be blocked off. And that's just 1 flight.

quick note,

its not just a 333 flight. LHR is year round (1x 764)
and they add CDG and a 2nd AMS in the summer. (1x 763 1x 332)

but for the most part your right. Putting FIS in Terminal A for 2-5 flights would be stupid, and SkyTeam/VS wont fit.

and JFK is the gateway, had MASSport done it when Leo wanted maybe thing would be different but now they wont get much better than they have. At best, more flights/capacity to CDG, LHR and FCO on Delta is all that Boston will get.

and a key point you made, A just isn't set up for a bunch of TATL flights anyways. I have no idea why or how Leo thought his little pipe dream of a international hub at Boston would work with a terminal mostly set up for 757s. (this was well before 757s started hitting Europe hard from CO IIRC)



yep.
User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 104, posted (8 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 8339 times:

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 101):

It was a NW employee.

http://www.metro.us/boston/news/2012...raskiewiczs-killer-20-years-later/

I remember the billboard requesting information on Route 1 South in the late 90's and early 2000's


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 105, posted (8 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 8304 times:

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 103):
its not just a 333 flight. LHR is year round (1x 764)
and they add CDG and a 2nd AMS in the summer. (1x 763 1x 332)

Sorry, I worded it wrong. I didn't mean to say that DL had only 1 daily flight to Europe. What i meant to say was, those were the constraints that 1 single flight causes at terminal A therefore adding even more flights that what they already have today is unlikely. But to your point, do the 767's also require adjacent gate closures? I didn't think it did.


User currently onlinetlecam From United States of America, joined Jul 2013, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 106, posted (8 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 8312 times:

For at least some of the winter months, the LHR flight is on a 763 (I just flew this last week) and the adjacent gate was in use. I boarded at A19. A20 was in use. I can't remember whether A18 was in use or not.


BOS || A:319,320,321, 332, 333, 346 || B:735, 737, 738, 739, 752, 753, 762, 763, 764, 772, 744: L1011, DC10
User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 107, posted (8 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 8142 times:

If WN eventually leave for Terminal A (CO gates) or B (after AA/US consolidates) ...
I wonder what would be the best uses of those gates in Terminal E.

1. Can they be turned into FIS gates?
2. At least, can they be used for B6's Caribbean operations somehow?
3. Can these gates accommodate 757s ... for EI or FI aircraft, maybe?


User currently offlineflyby519 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1222 posts, RR: 0
Reply 108, posted (8 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 8133 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 107):

My bet is that B6 will eventually operate from those gates after the C-E connector is finished.



These postings or comments are not a company-sponsored source of communication.
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 109, posted (8 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 7975 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 107):
If WN eventually leave for Terminal A (CO gates) or B (after AA/US consolidates) ...
I wonder what would be the best uses of those gates in Terminal E.

1. Can they be turned into FIS gates?
2. At least, can they be used for B6's Caribbean operations somehow?
3. Can these gates accommodate 757s ... for EI or FI aircraft, maybe?

All of the above. It would be easy to convert those gates to international gates. They could be used for narrowbody international flights. Not just B6 but Copa and Porter also use terminal E. I think some of the gates can accomodate a 757. Isn't that a NW 757 at gate E1A, on this picture?

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Vasco Garcia



User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16892 posts, RR: 51
Reply 110, posted (8 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 7776 times:

Quoting ScottB (Reply 83):
There's an article in the Glob today about UA's new facilities at BOS:

Some photos, looks nice.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/...AcVdUSy8cANNgtcX9dM8I/picture.html



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4304 posts, RR: 6
Reply 111, posted (8 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 7734 times:

So April 30th is the day of the move? The article also says UA is getting 10 gates in the new facility. From the end of where US is now to the AA concourse is now, UA was building 8 new gates, so they would be adding gates B22-B29. If they are getting ten gates, where are the other 2 coming from? I doubt US will give up anything on there side, so I think it is possible that divesture may be B31-32 since B30 is being abandoned permanently. That would also leave the question of do AA and US consolidate at the same time, and will AC and NK be involved as well?

User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 112, posted (8 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7356 times:

More sneak peek of the under-construction United terminal ...

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2014/03/3...-at-logans-terminal-b-renovations/

Focus seems to be on design, color, "ambience", experience, etc etc ... I hope the consolidated gate operations are more efficient as well.  

Does UA serve any other city than its hubs at the moment (IAD, EWR, IAH, SFO, ORD, CLE, and DEN)? How many daily flights? And any plans to expand its operations?


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 113, posted (8 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7262 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 112):

Thanks for the video!

Add LAX to destinations though its a bit light compared to BOS-SFO.

I do not see any P2P routes except I do wonder if UA may look to sending 1-2 weekly flights to the Caribbean especially with US leaving *A. They must have spare planes sitting around on weekends.

B6 has BOS-AUA to themselves. Why not send an unused plane on it on a Saturday?

It would be great if UA used the JV with LH/LX to their advantage and tried a European route with a 757.


User currently offlinestratacruiser From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 106 posts, RR: 0
Reply 114, posted (8 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7236 times:

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 88):
Since we are talking about BOS...why did NW throw away their BOS hub/gateway?

1) Wrong size aircraft on the international side. At the height of the operation (about 1990) NW was sending a 742 to LGW and DC-10-40s to CDG, FRA, AMS and GLA. (SNN had already been dropped). If they had aquired 767s or reconfigured and ETOPs certified some 757s they might have made a go of it.

2) The non-hub connecting flights from places like MCO and TPA were once-daily, so didn't have much A/D business to support them.

3) They were successful in getting European route authority from their biggest hub at DTW, which syphoned traffic out of BOS.

4) Expansion of capacity on European carriers - especially BA - increased competition for locally originating traffic.

5) Their rapidly declining customer service meant they had to compete for business on price alone, which eroded profitability.

6) Issue #5, plus the successive rounds of cutbacks drove many local FFs (like me) to switch allegance to other carriers.

Dave


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 115, posted (8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7170 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 113):
It would be great if UA used the JV with LH/LX to their advantage and tried a European route with a 757.

BOS-LIS on a 757 would be fantastic. I know it's just wishful thinking becuase of all airlines, UA is the least likely to add new international routes from Boston.


User currently offlineHUYfan From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 1413 posts, RR: 3
Reply 116, posted (8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7152 times:

JetBlue mint 321neo to Manchester and Glasgow would surely be winners?

Kind regards

HUYfan


User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 117, posted (8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7144 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 115):
BOS-LIS on a 757 would be fantastic. I know it's just wishful thinking becuase of all airlines, UA is the least likely to add new international routes from Boston.

how about BOS-BRU ... this route has been lying empty since Sabena folded back in the days. Despite some rumors from SN Brussells and VG Airlines - nothing ever happened on this route. Is the demand sufficiently met through other carriers ... or is it the closeness to AMS and CDG via Thales hi-speed trains that affects this route?


User currently offlinestyles9002 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 532 posts, RR: 1
Reply 118, posted (8 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7025 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 117):
Despite some rumors from SN Brussells and VG Airlines - nothing ever happened on this route.
VG did operate BOS-BRU briefly in 2002 as 'Delsey Airlines'. They were handled by Icelandair in Terminal E.

VG also served JFK/LAX-BRU but none of their routes performed well and they went out of business sometime near the end of 2002.

[Edited 2014-03-31 11:51:56]


It is what it is.
User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 119, posted (8 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6874 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 117):
how about BOS-BRU ... this route has been lying empty since Sabena folded back in the days. Despite some rumors from SN Brussells and VG Airlines - nothing ever happened on this route. Is the demand sufficiently met through other carriers ... or is it the closeness to AMS and CDG via Thales hi-speed trains that affects this route?

UA could do that one too if it was their MO in the Joint Venture with their Star partners. Only 169 seats on a transatlantic 757 and the rest of the plane would be filled with connections made on Brussels Airlines. If BOS had more French speaking West African traffic it would really be a plausible route.

The high-speed train hurts leisure passenger amounts more than anything. There are probably people who want to go straight to BRU and will pay for it: the question is how many are there?

CPH is another Star hub that could be done with a UA 757. The problem is UA doesn't fly there right now and would have to open a new station for one flight to a big spoke.


User currently offlinejcarv From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 364 posts, RR: 0
Reply 120, posted (8 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6833 times:

Quoting apodino (Reply 111):
If they are getting ten gates, where are the other 2 coming from?

United will be getting Gates B20-21 also from US Airways.


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 121, posted (8 months 19 hours ago) and read 6608 times:

Cathay Pacific To Announce ZRH, BOS & MAN

ChrisNH what was your source for the original talk on CX?

If loaded soon then   


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 122, posted (8 months 18 hours ago) and read 6483 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 121):
Cathay Pacific To Announce ZRH, BOS & MAN

I've been on this site long enough to know not to trust aanything on April 1st.


User currently onlinetlecam From United States of America, joined Jul 2013, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 123, posted (8 months 18 hours ago) and read 6475 times:

Ha...we'll will see if it sticks.

will be interesting to see what flight times they would choose for Boston. Cathay operates all around the clock from JFK, including a 01:30 departure, a 10:00 departure and a 14:50 departure.

Either way, those are relatively un-congested times at Terminal E.



BOS || A:319,320,321, 332, 333, 346 || B:735, 737, 738, 739, 752, 753, 762, 763, 764, 772, 744: L1011, DC10
User currently offlinechrisnh From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 2
Reply 124, posted (8 months 18 hours ago) and read 6466 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 121):
ChrisNH what was your source for the original talk on CX?

Oh geez...is the blood on MY hands for this? LOL. I'll have to search through the forum to see what I said about this and when. The hits...they keep on a 'comin. Good to see.


User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 125, posted (8 months 13 hours ago) and read 6364 times:

When I was thinking of throwing in a April Fools thread this morning - I was thinking of announcing DOH and GRU ... HKG didn't even cross my mind! LOL

Cathay Pacific To Announce ZRH, BOS & MAN (by B742 Apr 1 2014 in Civil Aviation)

IF this is true - and not an April Fool's Joke like many of us are suspecting: This could be HUGE. A perfect addition of news bits for this thread ... growth of BOS as an international gateway! Although what surprises me is that, CX serves JFK 4 times DAILY ... so there are already many options to reach New England via air/car/rail within a few hours (given the transit options - one might not even save much time). SO ... the question remains ... is the BOS-HKG market big enough to sustain such an ULH? Or alternatively, is the south-east Asia (Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, Southern China, Indonesia, etc) market from BOS large enough to drive this flight?

JL NRT-BOS and HU PEK-BOS will probably be Japan and China centric traffic only. If CX materializes, One World will control a large chunk of Boston-Asia traffic. Time for Skyteam to make a move?  


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 126, posted (8 months 11 hours ago) and read 6300 times:

Personally I don't see CX announcing BOS without so much as a peep from either the Governor or the Mayor of Boston. That April Fool's joke would have been more believable if it didn't include BOS. Obviously the person who created it does not know anything about Boston/MA politics  

User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 127, posted (8 months 11 hours ago) and read 6391 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 126):

Article states: "Boston is also on its radar and is very likely to be launched in early 2015, Aspire Aviation‘s sources at Cathay Pacific said"

Its a strong rumor since "sources at Cathay Pacific" are mentioned and the title of the CX thread should probably note that.

Quoting ASA (Reply 125):
is the BOS-HKG market big enough to sustain such an ULH? Or alternatively, is the south-east Asia (Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, Southern China, Indonesia, etc) market from BOS large enough to drive this flight?

This could very well be a 4 weekly route instead of daily.


User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4304 posts, RR: 6
Reply 128, posted (8 months 11 hours ago) and read 6331 times:

Quoting jcarv (Reply 120):

That doesn't make sense though, After the required gate divestures, AA/US is slated to control 21 gates. Divesting 20-21 doesn't make sense if they are going to combine on that side, because they are going to end up with a split operation. This would only leave them with 19 gates, which is fewer than what Parker has said they will control after the divestures.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 129, posted (8 months 1 hour ago) and read 6179 times:

Quoting apodino (Reply 128):
That doesn't make sense though, After the required gate divestures, AA/US is slated to control 21 gates. Divesting 20-21 doesn't make sense if they are going to combine on that side, because they are going to end up with a split operation. This would only leave them with 19 gates, which is fewer than what Parker has said they will control after the divestures.

They will probably also get AC's gates, no? I can't imagine AC not moving to the UA side.

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 127):
Its a strong rumor since "sources at Cathay Pacific" are mentioned and the title of the CX thread should probably note that.

This strong rumor has been around for a while because HKG is BOS's largest unserved market in Asia. But CX has no equipment to serve this route unless you think the 77W is not too big. This would most likely be an A359 route and those only start arriving in 2016.


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 130, posted (8 months ago) and read 6173 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 129):
HKG is BOS's largest unserved market in Asia.

PVG and PEK (about to be served) have been bigger in recent years. ICN is very close too.

The biggest factor going against this route is that it overflies the largest Asian markets from BOS.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 129):
But CX has no equipment to serve this route unless you think the 77W is not too big

Their 4-class (first, biz, premium economy, economy) 77W's have 275 seats and have a lot of cargo room as well which may help. In comparison there typically at least 75 seats more on an EK 77W I don't think we know what the A359's will have.

If this rumor is true, maybe they start 4x weekly 77W (gets the massport incentives) and then move to route to daily upon receiving adequate numbers of A359 and the flight is successful.


User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 131, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5970 times:

Just drove by BOS Terminal E a few hours ago ... there were an EK 77L, an LH 744, and an LH 343 in the remote stands near the Delta hanger ... and one BA 744 and an EI 333 at the gates. Why where the LH aircraft at the remote stands, any idea? No other gate were occupied ... strangely (at about 5 pm)

User currently offlinejcarv From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 364 posts, RR: 0
Reply 132, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5935 times:

LH pilots are on a 3 day strike so those aircraft are here thru Friday night. That's not the norm.

User currently offlinechrisnh From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 2
Reply 133, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5931 times:

LH pilots are on strike. The planes are here; the people needed to drive them are not.

User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4304 posts, RR: 6
Reply 134, posted (7 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5667 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 129):

I included the existing AC gates in the 19 mentioned above since they already technically own those gates already and I fully expect AC to move. I stand by what I said.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 135, posted (7 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 5510 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 131):
Just drove by BOS Terminal E a few hours ago ... there were an EK 77L, an LH 744, and an LH 343 in the remote stands near the Delta hanger ... and one BA 744 and an EI 333 at the gates. Why where the LH aircraft at the remote stands, any idea? No other gate were occupied ... strangely (at about 5 pm)

Just came back from picking up someone at terminal E. What a zoo that place was around 6pm. I can only imagine what Immigration and customs was like. And neither of the LH flights operated today and we still have 2 more airlines to join the lineup. I don't envy the folks who will be working in the terminal this Summer   First time seeing the EK 77L. Great sight. Also seeing the 2 LH planes side by side really puts in perspective how big the remote parking area really is. I think we can fit an A380 there, easily    


User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 136, posted (7 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5295 times:

I noticed Emirates was heavily advertising its DXB-MXP-JFK route ... especially flying to Milan from New York part. How likely is that instead of upgauging the BOS route, EK will launch a DXB-MXP-BOS instead to shore ups its US-Milan portfolio? (and also fill the BOS-MXP gap, and introduce more seats to BOS-DXB)

Of course, the apparent success of the BOS route and the President's flamboyant comments brings it up so soon. But the BOS-MXP route has been underserved for a while, and there have been discussions here about a possible service on this route for some time.

So, can EK take advantage of this situation and launch a second frequency to BOS ... this way, they get the traffic on the BOS-MXP route as well as get the SouthAsia bound VFR traffic to fill the gaps to DXB. I realize it will introduce an extra stop on the route but for many South Asians from Boston, there were few one stops anyway, and a same-plane option on EK service is not a bad option compared to other carriers.

This will also allow EK to trump a potential AUH-MXP-BOS if the Etihad-Alitalia deal happens and EY chimes in!


User currently offlinechrisnh From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 2
Reply 137, posted (7 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 5241 times:

I think rather than 'instead of' we might be looking at 'in addition to.' A scenario I see is twin 777-300ERs...one going nonstop to Dubai and the other going via some other under-served European city (like you mention).

If Dallas can go from a 777L to an A380 at the snap of a finger, Boston can't be underestimated.


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 138, posted (7 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5204 times:

We don't really know how EK is doing on the JFK-MXP except for one item: The fares have plummeted.

Average fare for JFK-MXP for July is $1100. In comparison, JFK-FCO is $1600.

Quoting ASA (Reply 136):
But the BOS-MXP route has been underserved for a while

Well it was a AZ hub - more of the reason why it was served in the first place.

Quoting ASA (Reply 136):
This will also allow EK to trump a potential AUH-MXP-BOS if the Etihad-Alitalia deal happens and EY chimes in!

Unless they interline with Easy Jet (who is a Skywards partner) EK would be wise to consider BCN or ATH instead of MXP.
EY has the advantage with US-Europe since they have been creating a few puppets as of late.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 139, posted (7 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 5174 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 138):
Unless they interline with Easy Jet (who is a Skywards partner) EK would be wise to consider BCN or ATH instead of MXP.

ATH is a good idea but I think that if a stop is to be considered LIS has to be a top option. As it is, TP is the only European network carrier that has a code-share agreement with EK. EK could very easily extend their rumored 2nd daily LIS service to BOS and rely on TP to offer onward connections with TP for its BOS-LIS route. It's a win-win for both carriers. TP get's a much better partner on the LIS-BOS route (currently it's SATA), and EK gets a foot in on the TATL market. It's kind of a no-brainer if you ask me, IF an intermediate stop is to be considered. But I don't think EK is considering an intermediate stop.


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 140, posted (7 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 4915 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 139):
ATH is a good idea but I think that if a stop is to be considered LIS has to be a top option.
Quoting airbazar (Reply 139):
But I don't think EK is considering an intermediate stop.

If LIS was unserved I would agree. However I strongly agree that EK would not serve BOS 1-stop via Europe. They are now more concerned with making all USA-DXB A380 routes in my opinion.

However, I think EY is setting itself up to do Europe-USA (see below) and on the other hand, QR , in their typical fashion, never followed through with the proposed JFK-ATH-DOH.

BCN is the largest unserved European market from BOS but the data on that was before the Spanish economy really went down the drain.

If we see a ME3 carrier serve a transatlantic route from BOS, a strong candidate, and if you think of the logic - possibly the best candidate, would be EY and BOS-GVA-AUH. It has high yielding BOS-GVA traffic, does not depend as much on seasonality, up to 16 intra-Europe Connections with EY Regional, can be served by any widebody EY feels necessary, and finally can be filled with subcontinent/Africa/Mid-East traffic. The only issue is that EY Regional is all prop service.

EY currently serves GVA with a 231 seat A333 and it turns fairly quick in GVA (2 hours) so they would have to tinker the schedule or add a frequency etc.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 141, posted (7 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4850 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 140):
BCN is the largest unserved European market from BOS but the data on that was before the Spanish economy really went down the drain.

But to fly BOS-BCN you overfly the 2 largest markets in the Iberian peninsula: MAD and LIS. TP operates 5x daily to each BCN and MAD, along with 6 other destinations in Spain, making LIS the much more favorable connecting point, IMO. A route like BOS-LIS on EK with onwards code-share on TP would probably kill both the IB BOS-MAD and S4 BOS-LIS routes.

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 140):
If we see a ME3 carrier serve a transatlantic route from BOS, a strong candidate, and if you think of the logic - possibly the best candidate, would be EY and BOS-GVA-AUH.

That's a good one too but they still have to fill the back of the bus which might be difficult.


User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 142, posted (7 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4690 times:

For an ME3 carrier to launch a BOS TATL route - I guess it would make sense to check the possible unserved or underserved routes? If someone can pull up the PDEW for these routes - would be very helpful! Thanks in advance.

MAN - AA used to serve this route in their Boston glory days. With BA serving 4x daily, and DL and VS each daily, not sure if there is much need for additional frequencies to the northern part of England. But if there is a second city in Britain to be served nonstop from Boston - this must be it. Someone mentioned CX on a HKG-MAN-BOS route a few days ago - that would be 'out-of-the-box' for sure. How likely, I don't know  

BRU - Sabena was a regular feature in Boston before they folded. And then VG Airlines for a short duration. Nothing since then ... how high is the Boston and EU Capital traffic? Is it mostly business - or enough VFR as well? Who might want to run this ... I think AA or UA has more chances than ME3.

MXP - This route has been mentioned quite a few times, probably more so because AZ served when they had a hub in Milan. Great rote for a Northern Italy and Southern Switzerland traffic - but is it mostly seasonal? Could it be a AUH-MXP-BOS route (IFF EY takes a share in AZ) ... or DXB-MXP-BOS to shore up their Milan-USA market share.

BCN - known as the largest unserved European route. AA or IB could have launched along with their existing MAD route I guess. But Spanish economy is in the tank for a few years now ... US tourists love that, but is that enough? This could be interesting for QR ... now that OneWorld is becoming stronger in BOS?

GVA - this was just mentioned in the last post. But makes for an interesting point. How high is overall Boston-Swiss traffic ... and how much is being covered by LX? But GVA easily serves the French Alps areas too ... and summer traffic to/from Boston is quite high there, if I am correct. EY is the most likely if it ever happens, I agree.

LIS - This is another interesting route, but may be more for summer as the SATA traffic pattern shows. EK has become strong in LIS and is rumored to launch a second daily ... so extending it to BOS might work. But I guess the main question is how strong BOS has really been for them, and if they want a whole frequency for BOS only.

Come on ME3 - launch one of these atleast! 


[Edited 2014-04-05 17:13:02]

User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 143, posted (7 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4420 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 142):
If someone can pull up the PDEW for these routes - would be very helpful!

Here are some 2011 numbers - I also added CPH and ATH since they are both unserved and at the same traffic levels


BCN- 64 - Massport has a slide stating that Q3 2010 through Q22011 was 82

MXP - 59

ATH - 57 - Massport has a slide stating that Q3 2010 through Q22011 was 69

LIS - 47 - It is highly likely this number is much higher in recent years since SATA has increased service and marketing.

CPH - 47

MAN - 46 (was 57 in 2003 - seasonal AA BOS-MAN on a 757 with only coach for sale was started the following year for a bit)

BRU - 43

GVA - 41

Everything else unserved in Europe is under 40. BOS-IST for 2011 was 40 PDEW but is now served.

Quoting ASA (Reply 142):
BCN - known as the largest unserved European route. AA or IB could have launched along with their existing MAD route I guess. But Spanish economy is in the tank for a few years now ... US tourists love that, but is that enough? This could be interesting for QR ... now that OneWorld is becoming stronger in BOS?

Also Vueling (owned 97% by IAG) has its hub here. I doubt it is synced up with any other OneWorld members and they do a lot of nickel and diming ala Ryan Air and EasyJet. Thus the airline is not setup to take some feed from Transatlantic services. BA/IB could earn points on these flights with some trickery. If the airport wasn't infested with LCC's and ULCC's and IB had some sort of focus city there may have already been a flight at the least on AA.

Quoting ASA (Reply 142):
Come on ME3 - launch one of these atleast! 

Don't overlook Norwegian Air. BCN/CPH or even LGW-BOS could happen in the next couple of years unless they fall flat on their face with their first foray into Transatlantic services in to JFK/FLL/LAX.


User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 144, posted (7 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4109 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 143):
BCN- 64, MXP - 59, ATH - 57, LIS - 47, CPH - 47, MAN - 46, BRU - 43, GVA - 41

Many thanks for the numbers - it shows that there could be quite a few new routes to Europe with the right conditions. The traffic is there! Let us hope BCN, MXP materializes soon ... and ATH could be too (with help from ME3)

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 143):
Don't overlook Norwegian Air. BCN/CPH or even LGW-BOS could happen in the next couple of years unless they fall flat on their face with their first foray into Transatlantic services in to JFK/FLL/LAX.

That's interesting too ... the Red-White 788s would be a site to see!

Wasn't a WOW Air planning to launch BOS-KEF-LGW or something similar?


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 145, posted (7 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4044 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 143):
Here are some 2011 numbers - I also added CPH and ATH since they are both unserved and at the same traffic levels
BCN- 64
MXP - 59
ATH - 57
LIS - 47
CPH - 47
MAN - 46
BRU - 43
GVA - 41

Lets consider for a minute why EK could not make HAM-JFK work. The competition made it very difficult. And the competition is all the intermediary hubs and airlines based in those hubs. All of the above listed cities face exactly the same problem except for 2: CPH and LIS.


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 146, posted (7 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3974 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 145):
Lets consider for a minute why EK could not make HAM-JFK work. The competition made it very difficult. And the competition is all the intermediary hubs and airlines based in those hubs.

A very popular PMCO was already flying HAM-EWR and it was a smaller market back then. Those would be the main reasons. EK hadn't been at JFK that long and thought they could take PMCO on. The DXB hub wasn't as big as well at the time.

At least with JFK-MXP, part of your non-stop competition is AZ, which any ME3 airline should mop the floor with.

Quoting ASA (Reply 144):
Wasn't a WOW Air planning to launch BOS-KEF-LGW or something similar?

They did not get their preferred "slots" or landing times at KEF and scrapped it.


User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 784 posts, RR: 2
Reply 147, posted (7 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3897 times:

Not a whole lot ... but a regular non-stop to LIS nonetheless .... x5 until Oct 24.

SATA AIRLINES BEGINS NON-STOP SERVICE TO LISBON FROM BOSTON
http://www.travpr.com/pr-28728-sata-airlines-begins-nonstop.html

In addition to their daily PDL service, of course ...  


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 148, posted (7 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3864 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 147):
Not a whole lot ... but a regular non-stop to LIS nonetheless .... x5 until Oct 24.

goes up to Thursday/Friday Service in June through 1st week of September along with the weekly to TER as well.


User currently offlineBOStonsox From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 1993 posts, RR: 0
Reply 149, posted (7 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3862 times:

Quoting ASA (Reply 147):

Not a whole lot ... but a regular non-stop to LIS nonetheless .... x5 until Oct 24.

They do that every summer. It's too bad they can't make it work year-round, even if they had a partnership with TP.



2013 World Series Champions!
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 150, posted (7 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 3783 times:

Quoting BOStonsox (Reply 149):
They do that every summer. It's too bad they can't make it work year-round, even if they had a partnership with TP.

They have a partnership with TP but not other *A carriers. And their A310's can't fly non-stop westbound so no chance of getting higher yield passengers. BOS-LIS needs to be flown by TP, non-stop both ways to attract *A FF and higher yield passengers.


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 151, posted (7 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 3769 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 150):
And their A310's can't fly non-stop westbound so no chance of getting higher yield passengers.

Those A310-300's can easily make LIS-BOS. Max range is 9200km/5716 miles.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 152, posted (7 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3604 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 151):

Those A310-300's can easily make LIS-BOS. Max range is 9200km/5716 miles.

Max advertise still air range is useless. Technically I'm sure it could but SATA wouldn't make any money on it. At its peak the A310-300 flew all kinds of TATL routes thanks to it's ACT's. I would be surprised if in this day and age SATA is operating these aircraft with the aux fuel tanks. Then factor in their high density seating with old school heavy seats, full cargo because they still allow 2 free bags and then some, ETOPS fuel reserves, head winds and the occasional 35C temp at LIS and I suspect the route would be just borderline for these A310's. I have no doubt that the 1 weekly flight to LIS would be non-stop in both directions if the aircraft could make it in its current config. There is no shortage of demand to LIS and beyond in the Summer.


User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 153, posted (7 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3566 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 152):
I have no doubt that the 1 weekly flight to LIS would be non-stop in both directions if the aircraft could make it in its current config.

It is non-stop. Its blocked for 7hr 5min. BOS-MAD is blocked for 7hr 55 min.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8577 posts, RR: 10
Reply 154, posted (7 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3459 times:

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 153):
It is non-stop. Its blocked for 7hr 5min. BOS-MAD is blocked for 7hr 55 min.

That would be a step in the right direction although the above news only says non-stop BOS-LIS. We will have to wait and see however, wouldn't surprise me to see this route operated by an EuroAtlantic 763ER either way.