Is UX BOS-MAD coming back - hasn't been loaded for S18 yet?

Globe article on Norwegian - probably a shift to leisure destinations from PVD and only keep the business route destinations from Logan.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/tr ... story.html

Sorry I know this is related to Logan airport and content - last Thu my flight got re-routed to PVD as Logan was shutdown for sometime in the evening due to thunderstorms. This was also the first time I had visited the airport. Incidentally even PVD has a Brooks Brothers and other shopping experiences. I am not a big shopper and have rarely purchased anything besides food to-go but Logan in general seems extremely weak in comparison to many airports that are no way comparably busy than Logan. Although I would say Terminal A satellite has some shopping experience such as Johnston & Murphy (probably that is the only one I remember), C has some stuff too and probably E has an Armani (wow!). Anyone has any insights?

iyerhari wrote:

Sorry I know this is related to Logan airport and content - last Thu my flight got re-routed to PVD as Logan was shutdown for sometime in the evening due to thunderstorms. This was also the first time I had visited the airport. Incidentally even PVD has a Brooks Brothers and other shopping experiences. I am not a big shopper and have rarely purchased anything besides food to-go but Logan in general seems extremely weak in comparison to many airports that are no way comparably busy than Logan. Although I would say Terminal A satellite has some shopping experience such as Johnston & Murphy (probably that is the only one I remember), C has some stuff too and probably E has an Armani (wow!). Anyone has any insights?

The layout and space availability at Logan is primarily the problem, but I don't think what we have is any worse than ORD for example. If you are looking at a benchmark, I would look to Heathrow, they are the masters at utilizing the space for shopping with some pretty high end stores. Frankly at Logan, I think we are stuck with a boat load of news/candy shops that take up a lot of space that could be used for other stores (assuming those stores want to come of course, I am sure the rents are not cheap), hence the perceived weakness of the offering and I would have to agree, it's less than impressive. The number of restaurants is ok, although i am sure they are suitably packed at peak times, but i do think Massport could embark on a mission to bring some better shops in. L'Occitane and Vineyard Vines are not exactly world beaters and are about the best we have in there. If Massport are looking to grow their revenues (which they are), appealing to some differentiation in the shopping offerings would not be a bad thing. At least it would give you something to do while your flight to LGA is delayed 4 hours due to traffic restrictions in the NYC area or your DY flight to LGW is delayed because the inbound can't find a gate available.

https://centreforaviation.com/news/avia ... ft--713289

BOS-BOG has been "a resounding success" according to AV's CEO.

adamh8297 wrote:

https://centreforaviation.com/news/avianca-sees-niche-for-longer-haul-narrowbody-aircraft--713289

BOS-BOG has been "a resounding success" according to AV's CEO.

The good times keep rolling I guess. great to hear. With this news I wonder about the viability of a second South American flight - maybe one from LATAM? Brazil or Chile? Though probably theres no aircraft fit for a long thin route like those in their fleet.

Good news for airlines at BOS:

GE wants to get rid of corporate fleet.

https://finance.yahoo.com/m/70112353-e3 ... -shut.html

adamh8297 wrote:

Good news for airlines at BOS:

GE wants to get rid of corporate fleet.

https://finance.yahoo.com/m/70112353-e3 ... -shut.html

That may not mean what you think it does (airlines), many airports I work with have seen corporate flight departments go away or reduced in favor of charter tends to be more cost effective. If a company X averages between 1.5- 2.5 worth of aircraft needs per years that means they need to staff and maintain 3, wheras if they charter, the per hour costs may be more but the overall costs will be less because the use is perfectly aligned with demand. Same number of corporate operations and no shift to airline, just not physical flight department.

July massport numbers are finally out. Almost 3.7m through the door in July up 3.4% (notice this level of growth is starting to slow now that the international flights are bedding down. YTD just over 22m, which is up 6.3% and 1.3m over the prior year.
Highlights:
South America - 2nd month attracted 4,354 pax, but did not dampen demand from Central America with that region being up 24.1% month over month.
Caribbean up 21.3% and Asia 22% up as CX's daily starts to seriously kick in. Europe up a modest 4%, but the reality of EK dropping to 1x daily sets in with a 17.7% drop in pax vs last year. Canada hit 100K for the month, as the impact of transfers really pushes this number to heights not seen before, the Canadian Carriers must be loving life because they haven't had to push up actual capacity too much, but loads have increased. More money for those guys!
Over 750K pax from international, quite amazing shoehorned through E (although in reality it will be a bit lower, because of the departures and arrivals from other terminals, but still! 4.2m for the year thus far.
Domestic up a modest 2.6%, but still over 2.9m for the month and nearly 18m for the year
On course for a big number, but I suspect with the storms for the Carrbbean and Florida in August/September, that those numbers are going to take a bit of a beating. But we shall see. Sadly we won't know the true impacts of these until next year when the T-100's come out, but an impressive month again for Logan nonetheless.

http://massport.com/media/2563/0717-avs ... ummary.pdf

VS4ever wrote:

South America - 2nd month attracted 4,354 pax, but did not dampen demand from Central America with that region being up 24.1% month over month.
Caribbean up 21.3% and Asia 22% up as CX's daily starts to seriously kick in. Europe up a modest 4%, but the reality of EK dropping to 1x daily sets in with a 17.7% drop in pax vs last year.
Domestic up a modest 2.6%, but still over 2.9m for the month and nearly 18m for the year

http://massport.com/media/2563/0717-avs ... ummary.pdf

When Europe and Domestic are up single digits percentage wise those are big numbers to add to the total pax count.

AV was over 95% LF, Middle East Carriers over 91% LF, East Asia LF 85.6% assuming all 789 by HU.

VS4ever wrote:

iyerhari wrote:

Sorry I know this is related to Logan airport and content - last Thu my flight got re-routed to PVD as Logan was shutdown for sometime in the evening due to thunderstorms. This was also the first time I had visited the airport. Incidentally even PVD has a Brooks Brothers and other shopping experiences. I am not a big shopper and have rarely purchased anything besides food to-go but Logan in general seems extremely weak in comparison to many airports that are no way comparably busy than Logan. Although I would say Terminal A satellite has some shopping experience such as Johnston & Murphy (probably that is the only one I remember), C has some stuff too and probably E has an Armani (wow!). Anyone has any insights?

The layout and space availability at Logan is primarily the problem, but I don't think what we have is any worse than ORD for example. If you are looking at a benchmark, I would look to Heathrow, they are the masters at utilizing the space for shopping with some pretty high end stores. Frankly at Logan, I think we are stuck with a boat load of news/candy shops that take up a lot of space that could be used for other stores (assuming those stores want to come of course, I am sure the rents are not cheap), hence the perceived weakness of the offering and I would have to agree, it's less than impressive. The number of restaurants is ok, although i am sure they are suitably packed at peak times, but i do think Massport could embark on a mission to bring some better shops in. L'Occitane and Vineyard Vines are not exactly world beaters and are about the best we have in there. If Massport are looking to grow their revenues (which they are), appealing to some differentiation in the shopping offerings would not be a bad thing. At least it would give you something to do while your flight to LGA is delayed 4 hours due to traffic restrictions in the NYC area or your DY flight to LGW is delayed because the inbound can't find a gate available.

Very true, there is just no room to grow at BOS. With the addition to B where UA is, the renovation going on around B12, and the projects in E they are adding space but overall the airport has no room to grow. It isn't like ATL where you can add another concourse, in BOS it involves taking something else out.

Terminal B construction has started in full swing when I arrived in via DCA yesterday. The old US/AA shuttle counters located for shuttle flights are gone. They have started the seal components around that space and with a potential completion date of sometime Fall-2019, it surely maybe a good terminal when everything gets done. Did anyone notice the nice looking airline boards during arrivals for Terminal E? It really looks nice with electronic signage for depicting airlines.

Does that mean that SW wont move off A till fall 2019

Sorry I meant 2018 and mentioned 2019. It mentions end of 2018.

http://www.massport.com/massport/media/ ... nes-gates/

Now Massport has been good in getting construction projects getting them done ahead of schedule and there maybe risk reward benefits as an incentive so who knows it may get done sooner than end of 2018.

iyerhari wrote:

Sorry I know this is related to Logan airport and content - last Thu my flight got re-routed to PVD as Logan was shutdown for sometime in the evening due to thunderstorms. This was also the first time I had visited the airport. Incidentally even PVD has a Brooks Brothers and other shopping experiences. I am not a big shopper and have rarely purchased anything besides food to-go but Logan in general seems extremely weak in comparison to many airports that are no way comparably busy than Logan. Although I would say Terminal A satellite has some shopping experience such as Johnston & Murphy (probably that is the only one I remember), C has some stuff too and probably E has an Armani (wow!). Anyone has any insights?

One factor that I can think of is that major retail shops are really only relevant where there are large numbers of international passengers, either departing or connecting. This is why all the "good" stores at Logan are at terminal E. Terminal B has it because not long ago AA used to fly 2xLHR, CDG. SJU. I just don't see the need to have that kind of stuff in a terminal catering entirely to domestic passengers. I wouldn't be surprised to see these terminal B retail stores moving to terminal A when it's time to renew the leases. I find a lot more value in having good food options than good stores.
For example, I flew out of MHT last Friday night on a 7pm departure. Most stores were still open but all food outlets were already closed. I was planning to eat something before my flight and couldn't. I had to wait until I got to BWI to eat dinner.

Don't know how many of you are following the thread "DL new summer 2018 transatlantic flights", but DL is adding JFK-PDL for next Summer. I have no doubt that the flight will be a success however, does anyone think that limited gate availability at terminal E could have player a role in DL deciding to operate this flight from JFK instead of BOS?

airbazar wrote:

Don't know how many of you are following the thread "DL new summer 2018 transatlantic flights", but DL is adding JFK-PDL for next Summer. I have no doubt that the flight will be a success however, does anyone think that limited gate availability at terminal E could have player a role in DL deciding to operate this flight from JFK instead of BOS?

Maybe, maybe not. Either way Massport needs to get going on the expansion of Terminal E. It's Fall 2017 and they haven't even selected a final design and really started all of the approval processes. My guess is that the first phase won't be done until Summer 2021.

B752OS wrote:

airbazar wrote:

Don't know how many of you are following the thread "DL new summer 2018 transatlantic flights", but DL is adding JFK-PDL for next Summer. I have no doubt that the flight will be a success however, does anyone think that limited gate availability at terminal E could have player a role in DL deciding to operate this flight from JFK instead of BOS?

Maybe, maybe not. Either way Massport needs to get going on the expansion of Terminal E. It's Fall 2017 and they haven't even selected a final design and really started all of the approval processes. My guess is that the first phase won't be done until Summer 2021.

The issue with DL is not Terminal E, as they time their arrivals at a quiet time of the day (Noon-1pm), it's actually space on the departures side, that is at issue, because their bank of internationals leave around 7pm from Terminal A, so for anything bigger than a 321 there isn't much space going around to do that, given that S4 primarily use a 330 for that trip, means a WB and needs WB space, so logistically they would have to fly another one in from somewhere else and they couldn't really depart until 10pm. That's feasible, but again logistics may dictate it's better to run that flight from JFK. Not sure we need 2 carriers on BOS-PDL, because you also have TP going to LIS which will takes some of that PDL market direct to LIS rather than via PDL. (yes I know S4 had a limited direct service to LIS as well, but TP is daily)

As for the construction, the original intent was 2021 with a 17 start date, given we are closing in on 18, unless they can seriously speed up the work, we are looking at 2022 until that happens most likely. I totally agree however if they are to continue the growth they are looking for, they will need that expansion and soon.

VS4ever wrote:

B752OS wrote:

airbazar wrote:

Don't know how many of you are following the thread "DL new summer 2018 transatlantic flights", but DL is adding JFK-PDL for next Summer. I have no doubt that the flight will be a success however, does anyone think that limited gate availability at terminal E could have player a role in DL deciding to operate this flight from JFK instead of BOS?

Maybe, maybe not. Either way Massport needs to get going on the expansion of Terminal E. It's Fall 2017 and they haven't even selected a final design and really started all of the approval processes. My guess is that the first phase won't be done until Summer 2021.

The issue with DL is not Terminal E, as they time their arrivals at a quiet time of the day (Noon-1pm), it's actually space on the departures side, that is at issue, because their bank of internationals leave around 7pm from Terminal A, so for anything bigger than a 321 there isn't much space going around to do that, given that S4 primarily use a 330 for that trip, means a WB and needs WB space, so logistically they would have to fly another one in from somewhere else and they couldn't really depart until 10pm. That's feasible, but again logistics may dictate it's better to run that flight from JFK. Not sure we need 2 carriers on BOS-PDL, because you also have TP going to LIS which will takes some of that PDL market direct to LIS rather than via PDL. (yes I know S4 had a limited direct service to LIS as well, but TP is daily)

What about a daytime flight??? I personally think they wanted to try NYC-PDL.... a lot of potential there in my opinion. If anything they should have sent a 757 to BCN from BOS in this recent summer expansion.

DL should have done a summer seasonal Glasgow-Boston flight on a 757. I think that would do well. Hopefully they add it for the summer 2018 season.

VS4ever wrote:

The issue with DL is not Terminal E, as they time their arrivals at a quiet time of the day (Noon-1pm), it's actually space on the departures side, that is at issue, because their bank of internationals leave around 7pm from Terminal A, so for anything bigger than a 321 there isn't much space going around to do that, given that S4 primarily use a 330 for that trip, means a WB and needs WB space, so logistically they would have to fly another one in from somewhere else and they couldn't really depart until 10pm. That's feasible, but again logistics may dictate it's better to run that flight from JFK. Not sure we need 2 carriers on BOS-PDL, because you also have TP going to LIS which will takes some of that PDL market direct to LIS rather than via PDL. (yes I know S4 had a limited direct service to LIS as well, but TP is daily)

I agree, a noonish arrival wouldn't be a problem.
But for PDL they don't need anything bigger than an A321/752. Even an A320/B737 should make it. It's only 2,000nm. I'd be shocked if PDL does not become a DY route from PVD. A 7PM departure is way too early. The JFK schedule will be:
DL417 Dep: JFK at 8:30 p.m. Arr: PDL at 7:30 a.m. (next day)
DL217 Dep: PDL at 9:15 a.m. Arr: JFK at 10:30 a.m.
I also agree that from BOS, because of the strong O&D market this could be a morning departure with a late night return. That would actually be a better schedule for tourists visiting the Azores too.

VS4ever wrote:

B752OS wrote:

airbazar wrote:

Don't know how many of you are following the thread "DL new summer 2018 transatlantic flights", but DL is adding JFK-PDL for next Summer. I have no doubt that the flight will be a success however, does anyone think that limited gate availability at terminal E could have player a role in DL deciding to operate this flight from JFK instead of BOS?

Maybe, maybe not. Either way Massport needs to get going on the expansion of Terminal E. It's Fall 2017 and they haven't even selected a final design and really started all of the approval processes. My guess is that the first phase won't be done until Summer 2021.

The issue with DL is not Terminal E, as they time their arrivals at a quiet time of the day (Noon-1pm), it's actually space on the departures side, that is at issue, because their bank of internationals leave around 7pm from Terminal A, so for anything bigger than a 321 there isn't much space going around to do that, given that S4 primarily use a 330 for that trip, means a WB and needs WB space, so logistically they would have to fly another one in from somewhere else and they couldn't really depart until 10pm. That's feasible, but again logistics may dictate it's better to run that flight from JFK. Not sure we need 2 carriers on BOS-PDL, because you also have TP going to LIS which will takes some of that PDL market direct to LIS rather than via PDL. (yes I know S4 had a limited direct service to LIS as well, but TP is daily)

As for the construction, the original intent was 2021 with a 17 start date, given we are closing in on 18, unless they can seriously speed up the work, we are looking at 2022 until that happens most likely. I totally agree however if they are to continue the growth they are looking for, they will need that expansion and soon.

Totally spaced when thinking about the Terminal A situation and that being where DL flights depart from - a very valid point to bring up. While this is probably 5-6 years down the line (once Terminal E is finally done), does Massport focus on giving DL more space to expand their terminal? One of the ways they could take some pressure off of Terminal E (and even eventually allow B6 to take some E gates) is to expand the satellite in A and allow AF, AZ (if they're still around) and AM flights to arrive and depart from A. This of course would require a lot of shifting by Massport and who knows if they'd be wiling to even do it.

B752OS wrote:

Totally spaced when thinking about the Terminal A situation and that being where DL flights depart from - a very valid point to bring up. While this is probably 5-6 years down the line (once Terminal E is finally done), does Massport focus on giving DL more space to expand their terminal? One of the ways they could take some pressure off of Terminal E (and even eventually allow B6 to take some E gates) is to expand the satellite in A and allow AF, AZ (if they're still around) and AM flights to arrive and depart from A. This of course would require a lot of shifting by Massport and who knows if they'd be wiling to even do it.

Well don't forget in 2019 A18-A22 will return to DL usage when WN go to B. That gives them 5 additional gates to cover additional domestic usage, that might free up A13-A17 a bit more for widebody usage in the evening. DL's stated aim is to get to 150 a day on average, 21 gates available, which means 7 turns a day, not ridiculous by any means, so by utilizing the generally accepted WB gates A13-A17 in the evening, you would probably have to shift somewhere like 3 turns onto the A18-A22 gates, pushing them up to 10, which is about WN usage level.
Once that happens, could definitely seem some additional International options available for them. BCN has been mentioned, even PDL as discussed earlier. You could even have the AF/AM departures from there as you suggest.
Given DL is in the battle with B6, I can see them trying something like that to appeal to the frequent flyer guys and maybe persuade some back from B6 with these additional options, along with some more domestic i am sure.

Now for the expansion question, it basically comes down to, what does Massport do with the cargo terminal, as that is really the only space available to officially expand A. Looking at the overheads, i think Massport need to give up on the failed 14/32 experiment, they could remove the J pad, remove the building next to A13 and then flip the first round of cargo buildings around and behind the fedex buildings where the end of 14 currently is along with the pad. The only issue with this is whether that interferes with having buildings too close to the ends of 9 and 4L. Much to ponder, but I can't see it being any worse than the destruction they intend with the Terminal E expansion, they are certainly not afraid of moving buildings or demolishing them.
Interesting stuff but i suspect for the expansion we got to be looking at 2026 or beyond, given they would have to finish E first most likely from a funding/capital expenditure standpoint and so far nobody has seen any expectations for this to happen.

VS4ever wrote:

B752OS wrote:

Totally spaced when thinking about the Terminal A situation and that being where DL flights depart from - a very valid point to bring up. While this is probably 5-6 years down the line (once Terminal E is finally done), does Massport focus on giving DL more space to expand their terminal? One of the ways they could take some pressure off of Terminal E (and even eventually allow B6 to take some E gates) is to expand the satellite in A and allow AF, AZ (if they're still around) and AM flights to arrive and depart from A. This of course would require a lot of shifting by Massport and who knows if they'd be wiling to even do it.

Well don't forget in 2019 A18-A22 will return to DL usage when WN go to B. That gives them 5 additional gates to cover additional domestic usage, that might free up A13-A17 a bit more for widebody usage in the evening. DL's stated aim is to get to 150 a day on average, 21 gates available, which means 7 turns a day, not ridiculous by any means, so by utilizing the generally accepted WB gates A13-A17 in the evening, you would probably have to shift somewhere like 3 turns onto the A18-A22 gates, pushing them up to 10, which is about WN usage level.
Once that happens, could definitely seem some additional International options available for them. BCN has been mentioned, even PDL as discussed earlier. You could even have the AF/AM departures from there as you suggest.
Given DL is in the battle with B6, I can see them trying something like that to appeal to the frequent flyer guys and maybe persuade some back from B6 with these additional options, along with some more domestic i am sure.

Now for the expansion question, it basically comes down to, what does Massport do with the cargo terminal, as that is really the only space available to officially expand A. Looking at the overheads, i think Massport need to give up on the failed 14/32 experiment, they could remove the J pad, remove the building next to A13 and then flip the first round of cargo buildings around and behind the fedex buildings where the end of 14 currently is along with the pad. The only issue with this is whether that interferes with having buildings too close to the ends of 9 and 4L. Much to ponder, but I can't see it being any worse than the destruction they intend with the Terminal E expansion, they are certainly not afraid of moving buildings or demolishing them.
Interesting stuff but i suspect for the expansion we got to be looking at 2026 or beyond, given they would have to finish E first most likely from a funding/capital expenditure standpoint and so far nobody has seen any expectations for this to happen.

That seems to be the most logical plan. DL would definitely be a capital investor in such a plan considering what they're doing in other cities, especially if CBP is added as that will save a lot of resources from going down to Terminal E. Only challenge I would see is the ticket counter space if a bunch of airlines e.g. AF, AZ, VS, AM come over.

Massport and B6 submitted documents supporting BOS-HAV service with a lot of supporting letters from various groups. 183 is Massport and 186 is B6.

http://airlineinfo.com/ostpdf100/183.pdf
http://airlineinfo.com/ostpdf100/186.pdf

One thing they didn't mention were current traffic flows i.e. How many people are flying BOS-FLL/MIA/JFK/ATL-HAV.

AA has called B6 out on this in their letter but they haven't given any numbers either curiously so I'm wondering if there's been a bump in BOS O+D to Cuba with the increased service.

http://airlineinfo.com/ostpdf100/185.pdf

The biggest issue is the South cargo terminal. I know they plan on doing something with North cargo to expand as well, but that's a completely different situation.

Pretty much all the cargo that goes through Boston goes through South cargo. All the international cargo does, and as far as I know, the vast majority of domestic. Where do you put all that?

North cargo by comparison is relatively easier to displace/move, as there's really only a few UPS flights, and the one DHL aircraft that arrives early and leaves late.

How much of the airline belly cargo gets processed from the south cargo building, or is it all FedEx? If some of the airline belly cargo goes away, you risk losing a key source of revenue for some of these flights... I don't believe that there are enough facilities on the north side to handle everything.

Also keep in mind that $1 Billion+ in improvements (Thats what Terminal E expansion and Terminal development at air cargo will cost) will have a significant impact on the CPE. Lower costs compared to other gateways were a key factor for BOS growth. The more expensive BOS gets, the more service PVD will have.

From my experience, just about all airline belly cargo comes from the South terminal. Speaking of just the internationals, it definitely all comes from South.

South cargo is built to handle high volumes, with aircraft to truck transfers in mind. North cargo is basically a glorified hard stand, where the containers have to be loaded onto a truck, then driven out for processing.

I read some posts a month or so ago with some concerns AF was reducing BOS-CDG to 1x daily next year. Just did a random search next summer (July 13th) and the second daily AF is there. Using both a 77W and A332 plus DL's 76W. Glad to see AF holding strong in BOS.

clrd4t8koff wrote:

I read some posts a month or so ago with some concerns AF was reducing BOS-CDG to 1x daily next year. Just did a random search next summer (July 13th) and the second daily AF is there. Using both a 77W and A332 plus DL's 76W. Glad to see AF holding strong in BOS.

Great news! Appears the second departure (10:20pm) resumes June 18th and is not operated on Wednesdays.

clrd4t8koff wrote:

I read some posts a month or so ago with some concerns AF was reducing BOS-CDG to 1x daily next year. Just did a random search next summer (July 13th) and the second daily AF is there. Using both a 77W and A332 plus DL's 76W. Glad to see AF holding strong in BOS.

I think they are determined to battle it out. BOS-CDG is going to be super crowded next year with AF/DL/DY and the new upstart PF all on the route. Even without AA it's going to be a tough existence and I am sure AF/DL are going to want to defend this one as much as possible. Trying to find the best possible popcorn available for this one, going to need it me thinks.

DL/AF have an advantage for India and Africa connections compared to other carriers on that route. Quite understandably AA decided to focus on their fortress hub - PHL.

Was doing some dummy bookings on AA's site and looks like they're putting an A321T on one of the BOS-LAX flights. They're probably doing it just to use the plane since they're reducing JFK-LAX/SFO for the winter but still nice to see another carrier putting lie flats on transcons out of BOS

aaflyer777 wrote:

Was doing some dummy bookings on AA's site and looks like they're putting an A321T on one of the BOS-LAX flights. They're probably doing it just to use the plane since they're reducing JFK-LAX/SFO for the winter but still nice to see another carrier putting lie flats on transcons out of BOS

They use an A321T on BOS-JFK, correct? I always find that odd that they use a plane with the word transcon in its name on a route that is only about 30 minutes. It could certainly be used for longer routes that pax would benefit more from the flatbeds, etc... Though maybe it is on this route to appeal to F and J passengers connecting off of int'l JFK flights?

aaflyer777 wrote:

Was doing some dummy bookings on AA's site and looks like they're putting an A321T on one of the BOS-LAX flights. They're probably doing it just to use the plane since they're reducing JFK-LAX/SFO for the winter but still nice to see another carrier putting lie flats on transcons out of BOS

It's only operating for a short period, and it's being sold as 2-class, with the 10 F seats sold as F and the 20 J seats and 72 Y seats all sold as Y.

That said, I agree that it's nice to see AA dipping its toe into a more premium offering on this route, and I personally suspect that this reflects a broader, longer-term move on premium transcon offerings. Specifically, I do not believe that LAX-BOS requires a 3-class aircraft, but I do think that AA - like Delta and United - will probably do something bigger, in time, to react to the growth and success of Mint. I could certainly plausibly imagine AA arriving at a more competitive, premium offering - including improved wifi/IFE and lie-flat beds - for linking multiple markets on the east coast and multiple markets on the west coast outside of the existing A321T routes.

mikegigs wrote:

They use an A321T on BOS-JFK, correct? I always find that odd that they use a plane with the word transcon in its name on a route that is only about 30 minutes. It could certainly be used for longer routes that pax would benefit more from the flatbeds, etc... Though maybe it is on this route to appeal to F and J passengers connecting off of int'l JFK flights?

The A321T having made appearances on BOS-JFK over the last few years has more to do with aircraft utilization than anything else. BOS has historically been a significant contributor of feed onto JFK transcon and longhaul flights, but I suspect that has diminished steadily over the years as BOS' own transcon/longhaul portfolio has grown.

On the back of the July numbers from Massport, now the August numbers have been released
Highlights.
Total: 3,757,903 up 5.7% over Aug 16, YTD: 25,783,047 up 6.2% over Aug 16
International: 772,812 up 7.3% and just shy of 5m for the year with 5 months left to go.

Canada goes from strength to strength, up to 110K this month, an all time record beating... well last month..12.2% for the month, 18% for YTD
Caribbean up to 89K (23.3% up) and 834K for YTD (11.1% up), however with Irma and Maria, I think the next few months will struggle, especially as the biggest component of the Caribbean number is SJU.
Central America up 19.9% for the month and 25% YTD
Europe up 5.6% to 444K and 2.5m for the YTD (all time records)
Asia up 17.3% to nearly 49K
Middle East still seeing the loss of the EK 2nd daily, down 20% for the month and now down 5.5% on the YTD

Domestic up 5.3%, driven by a 3.5% increase in bigger stuff and a whopping 35% in Commuter, just missing the 3m barrier for the month by 27,000 folks.
If September 17-December 17 remains flat to last year that's another 12m, so we are looking at a Dec 17 number i suspect of 37.8-38.0, we will be up year on year I am sure, but Caribbean will take a hit because of Irma and Maria
.
http://massport.com/media/2561/0817-avs ... ummary.pdf

Now that AB is out, does anyone think we'll see EW return to BOS? From what I recall AB's loads were pretty decent and now that there's no competition I feel like EW could make CGN/DUS-BOS work at least seasonally.

aaflyer777 wrote:

Now that AB is out, does anyone think we'll see EW return to BOS? From what I recall AB's loads were pretty decent and now that there's no competition I feel like EW could make CGN/DUS-BOS work at least seasonally.

While I think it would awesome if they did, now that LH group is in control I think we'll see more of an immediate focus on BOS-FRA/MUC. If I recall those routes saw some dips in LF % while DUS-BOS was operating. I'm sure they'll want to get FRA & MUC back to its peak before opening back up DUS and bringing in EW. Just my two cents....

aaflyer777 wrote:

Now that AB is out, does anyone think we'll see EW return to BOS? From what I recall AB's loads were pretty decent and now that there's no competition I feel like EW could make CGN/DUS-BOS work at least seasonally.

Wouldn't surprise me. This was announced today,
http://newsroom.lufthansagroup.com/engl ... 50f2dc5550

clrd4t8koff wrote:

aaflyer777 wrote:

Now that AB is out, does anyone think we'll see EW return to BOS? From what I recall AB's loads were pretty decent and now that there's no competition I feel like EW could make CGN/DUS-BOS work at least seasonally.

While I think it would awesome if they did, now that LH group is in control I think we'll see more of an immediate focus on BOS-FRA/MUC. If I recall those routes saw some dips in LF % while DUS-BOS was operating. I'm sure they'll want to get FRA & MUC back to its peak before opening back up DUS and bringing in EW. Just my two cents....

That’s my thought as well. The EW flight was short lived from CGN and I agree DUS hurt the yields and saw the end to Condor at PVD as well. LH will want to get some money back and numbers up before they throw something else into the mixz AB didn’t do too badly in terms of numbers from DUS so down the road it might return but for now FRA/ MUC it is

VS4ever wrote:

clrd4t8koff wrote:

aaflyer777 wrote:

Now that AB is out, does anyone think we'll see EW return to BOS? From what I recall AB's loads were pretty decent and now that there's no competition I feel like EW could make CGN/DUS-BOS work at least seasonally.

While I think it would awesome if they did, now that LH group is in control I think we'll see more of an immediate focus on BOS-FRA/MUC. If I recall those routes saw some dips in LF % while DUS-BOS was operating. I'm sure they'll want to get FRA & MUC back to its peak before opening back up DUS and bringing in EW. Just my two cents....

That’s my thought as well. The EW flight was short lived from CGN and I agree DUS hurt the yields and saw the end to Condor at PVD as well. LH will want to get some money back and numbers up before they throw something else into the mixz AB didn’t do too badly in terms of numbers from DUS so down the road it might return but for now FRA/ MUC it is

I wonder what was the O+D/connection split on the BOS-DUS flight. Was there a market stimulated from this flight the past two years? That may flip the scales toward a Rhine-Ruhr flight returning to BOS.... though a B6 A321LR might be the perfect fit for a BOS-DUS route if you think about it.

airbazar wrote:

aaflyer777 wrote:

Now that AB is out, does anyone think we'll see EW return to BOS? From what I recall AB's loads were pretty decent and now that there's no competition I feel like EW could make CGN/DUS-BOS work at least seasonally.

Wouldn't surprise me. This was announced today,
http://newsroom.lufthansagroup.com/engl ... 50f2dc5550

Apples and oranges. NYC-Germany and South Florida-Germany dwarf Boston-Germany. Those markets are beyond huge, so it's no surprise LH is starting these routes with 6 week notice.

adamh8297 wrote:

I wonder what was the O+D/connection split on the BOS-DUS flight. Was there a market stimulated from this flight the past two years? That may flip the scales toward a Rhine-Ruhr flight returning to BOS.... though a B6 A321LR might be the perfect fit for a BOS-DUS route if you think about it.

Sadly no such stats are available, however I thought this analysis might be of use to folks. I pulled the AB stats since 2014 by route by airport so you can see the comparison, interesting that BOS did lag behind the others overall, so the chances that it might come back are possibly lower than we might think when it comes to priorities of replacement.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B61t8C ... sp=sharing

PS, I am trying to do this for every international airline that visits BOS. I've done about half of them right now. Sadly not DY or QR because DY is missing 3 months of data and I need to write to the DOT about that and QR is a basket case in terms of its seat reporting and aircraft for that matter. I'll send the link to the reports if anyone hasn't found them already. I'm in the middle of updating March right now.

I checked BOS vs. MSP and Logan is ahead of MSP almost every single month. If we do a comparatives for Jan through Aug in 2017. Logan is ahead of MSP by 2,145,834 pax which implies it is definitely on target to get ahead of MSP. At this rate, it is looking certain that Logan may either come closer to EWR and if we get ahead of EWR that would be WOW! EWR has reported statistics only until Apr-2017 but passenger numbers are ahead every month. Logan continues to climb and hopefully EK comes up with a 2nd flight or an A380 that will make the climb even more.

MSP BOS Difference
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan 2,599,643 2,603,998 4,355
Feb 2,522,324 2,369,960 (152,364)
Mar 1,679,638 3,076,023 1,396,385
Apr 2,994,527 3,000,000 5,473
May 3,100,577 3,465,345 364,768
Jun 3,380,861 3,552,952 172,091
Jul 3,535,418 3,683,573 148,155
Aug 3,550,932 3,757,903 206,971
23,363,920 25,509,754 2,145,834

iyerhari wrote:

Logan continues to climb and hopefully EK comes up with a 2nd flight or an A380 that will make the climb even more.

If you really want to see some passenger increases - you should pray DL resumes big markets such as BOS-CHI/WAS

3 daily A320's to Chicago gets you almost 100 more seats than an EK 77W with less seasonality in the traffic.

adamh8297 wrote:

iyerhari wrote:

Logan continues to climb and hopefully EK comes up with a 2nd flight or an A380 that will make the climb even more.

If you really want to see some passenger increases - you should pray DL resumes big markets such as BOS-CHI/WAS

3 daily A320's to Chicago gets you almost 100 more seats than an EK 77W with less seasonality in the traffic.

But that presumes three A320s get added between, say, BOS-ORD, and no one else shrinks seat counts in response. Whereas, a jump from 77W to A380 for Emirates is a guaranteed gain since it's a monopoly route. If Tim Clark is speaking truth about U.S. business bouncing back, then I think whatever he does will happen before three new A320s to ORD materialize.

I flew through Terminal A a lot this summer - granted it was peak travel season - but wow is that terminal packed in the mornings and evenings. I don't think Delta could schedule ORD or DC until it has more gate space.

I do not know and maybe I am wrong. I was at DCA last week. AA probably uses about 21 gates (max) and I know that B6 also has some gates in Terminal B. They fly to 90 destinations and based on a USA Today article that was published last year, they had 84,832 departures which implies approx. 232 departures per day. In retrospect, DL currently has 18 gates and approx. 115 max departures/day. All I am saying is probably AA operations at DCA are that efficient compared to DL that they can support almost 100+ departures with just 4 extra gates? So why wouldn't be able to add DCA, ORD, PHL etc. with the existing set of gates similar to what AA has at DCA?

chrisnh wrote:

adamh8297 wrote:

iyerhari wrote:

Logan continues to climb and hopefully EK comes up with a 2nd flight or an A380 that will make the climb even more.

If you really want to see some passenger increases - you should pray DL resumes big markets such as BOS-CHI/WAS

3 daily A320's to Chicago gets you almost 100 more seats than an EK 77W with less seasonality in the traffic.

But that presumes three A320s get added between, say, BOS-ORD, and no one else shrinks seat counts in response. Whereas, a jump from 77W to A380 for Emirates is a guaranteed gain since it's a monopoly route. If Tim Clark is speaking truth about U.S. business bouncing back, then I think whatever he does will happen before three new A320s to ORD materialize.

If anything I suspect capacity would actually increase in response. B6 currently runs an noncompetitive 3x on BOS-ORD, and is clearly wary of DL's recent build-up in BOS (see immediate response to BOS-PIT, SFO, BUF). I could see B6 going up to 5x (and perhaps sacrifice a frequency or 2 on ORD-JFK due to gate constraints).

The continued DL build-up at BOS only brings forward the date B6 reaches its 200 flight goal.

Also of note is B6 up-gauging 2 BOS-MCO flights to the 200-seat A321. I suspect we'll see more of the all-core A321 during peak periods too.

iyerhari wrote:

I do not know and maybe I am wrong. I was at DCA last week. AA probably uses about 21 gates (max) and I know that B6 also has some gates in Terminal B. They fly to 90 destinations and based on a USA Today article that was published last year, they had 84,832 departures which implies approx. 232 departures per day. In retrospect, DL currently has 18 gates and approx. 115 max departures/day. All I am saying is probably AA operations at DCA are that efficient compared to DL that they can support almost 100+ departures with just 4 extra gates? So why wouldn't be able to add DCA, ORD, PHL etc. with the existing set of gates similar to what AA has at DCA?

I think part of the problem is that DL has wide body flights in the evening and those planes block off a few gates at Terminal A which restricts the number of flights they can run in the evening. They might be able to add flights to DCA/ORD in the morning and afternoon but if they can't offer flights between 4-8PM then they won't be competitive against B6/AA.