nycfuturepilot
Posts: 773
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 2:50 am

Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 4:53 am

Jetblue seems to be adding a lot of flights out of JFK but I havent seen anything new out of LGB in quite some time. What are there plans there? Are they doing well out of LGB?

Also, when people mention the possible E-190 routes they all seem to focus on eastern cities but what possible destinations are there from LGB? Would the 190 be able to handle midwest-LGB service?
Father, Son, HOYA spirit
 
Cory6188
Posts: 2612
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 12:29 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 4:59 am

One of the problems is that LGB is slot restricted, so they are limited in the routes and flights that they can add there.
 
deltaflyertoo
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 3:18 pm

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 5:01 am

When is Jetblue going to bite the bullet and move to LAX!
 
DCA-ROCguy
Posts: 3894
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2000 5:03 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 5:03 am

Long Beach can't be getting near the revenue out of that airport that they did when McDonnell Douglas was going full tilt. Now that Boeing is down to 717's, one wonders if the cash potential of bigger JetBlue ops is going to overcome the city's idiotic NIMBY politics and lead to reduced or eliminated slot restrictions.

The impression that I have is that that unhinged LGB-area NIMBY's pretty much have the airport boxed in. But the only thing that often speaks louder to local governments than the NIMBY peanut gallery is cold hard cash, and LGB has the potential to rake in lots of it through jetBlue.

Jim
Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
 
mark777300
Posts: 377
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 3:30 pm

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 5:11 am

I seriously dobt that B6 will even consider LAX as an alternative. I would see them first out of ONT before anything. But it's been no secret that LGB does have numerous slot restrictions, and I'm not sure how the whole thing that involved AA going to court over their unused slots at LGB ended up. My personal opinion is that in due time, specifically when B6 begins to receive their new ERJs, you will see an increase in operations out of LGB, and I still feel that a new "focus city" will be created down in the southeast, probably FLL or MCO. We'll see what happens.
 
InnocuousFox
Posts: 2556
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2003 1:30 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 5:17 am

You could run the RJs all over the California/Vegas/Arizona area. It's not prime location for a connecting hub, but the commuter O&D would be nice.
Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
 
MidnightMike
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:07 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 5:26 am


There are no more open slots out of Long Beach, the only way that Jetblue can expand is if another airline gives up their slots.

There is a Long Beach Airport Advisory Meeting tonight at 1800-2000m to discuss Airport planning and other items.
NO URLS in signature
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 2747
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 5:35 am

What are the chances that Jetblue would manage to bypass LGB slot restirctions through using the EMB190?
Can the EMB-190 be classified as a RJ under LGB definitions?
I believe that LGB slot restrictions don't apply for RJ's. Is this correct?

Thanks,
PW100

[Edited 2004-05-20 22:41:45]
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
Guest

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 5:42 am

There is no exemption, there is a limit to all commercial flights. All slots are full.

http://www.lgb.org/content/noiseordinance.htm
 
MidnightMike
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:07 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 7:13 am

PW100

There are, I think 20-30 regional slots open at Long Beach, however, the EMB190 does not qualify as a regional jet, as per Long Beach, I forgot if it has to do with weight or number of seats.

NO URLS in signature
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4446
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 7:25 am

LGBs restrictions are based on weight. A regional slot is for aircraft operating at 75,000 pounds MTOW. Thats about the size of a CR7.

There are currently 25 Regional slots available at LGB, the maximum they have.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
InnocuousFox
Posts: 2556
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2003 1:30 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 8:57 am

Which really makes you 2nd guess the choice of LGB as a hub, doesn't it?
Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
 
scottysair
Posts: 6442
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:07 pm

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 9:01 am

Yes, it is! They doesn't need anything about with their slot restricted and why not need to make more commerical airlines into LGB either?
 
Cactus739
Posts: 2245
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2004 6:41 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 9:03 am

When I first read the question I was trying to figure out when jetBlue built up an LGA hub. Then I woke up and read it right....  Smile

Is Burbank or Ontario slot controlled as well?

You can't fix stupid.... - Ron White
 
scottysair
Posts: 6442
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:07 pm

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 10:22 am

No, they did not have any slot control in ONT & BUR either.
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 3652
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 10:34 am

When OAK finishes its expansion on T2, maybe B6 will open an alternate focus city there.
 
scottysair
Posts: 6442
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:07 pm

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 10:35 am

Well, I am sure about them with OAK and will finish with the new T2. I can't wait to see them.
 
IslipWN
Posts: 1082
Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 1:05 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 10:37 am

What ever happened to B6 coming to ISP? Are they?
 
scottysair
Posts: 6442
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:07 pm

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 10:40 am

Not yet to ISP flight either.
 
modesto2
Posts: 2671
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2000 3:44 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 10:52 am

What is OAK's T2 plan? B6 should seriously consider OAK as another focus city. It already operates to BOS, IAD, JFK and LGB. B6's operation at OAK is quite impressive, and I only see it expanding in the near future. It's nice to see OAK with good number of transcons.
 
jetbluefan1
Posts: 2869
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 8:39 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 11:15 am

LGB - IMO - will see more flights by JetBlue soon. The NIMBY's there really are strong, no doubting that, but as stated above, the airport lost a lot of traffic ever since the MD plant closed down. The 717 production line is almost dead, and therefore LGB is not making as much money as it can possibly make. Therefore, if they turn to JetBlue and give them - say - another 15 slots, LGB will make more money. And not only does this money benefit the airport, but also the library, where all the landing fines go (late arrivals, etc.).

If this does not happen, Neeleman said that their only alternative is to drop LAS, OAK, and SLC (he didn't exactly say SLC, but I'm assuming he's thinking it) and to use those slots for transcons - which are much more profitable. But think about it - JetBlue can do A LOT with those 8 slots at the airport.

As far as OAK, JetBlue already has a focus city there. I'm pretty sure they are 2nd in terms of volume - right behind WN. 7x JFK, 3x IAD, 5x LGB, 2x BOS. It's quite a sizeable number, and from what I can gather, the BOS flights are doing all right from OAK, so perhaps we will see additional frequency? I also see a 1x-2x FLL, 1x-2x MCO, and maybe if JetBlue opened their eyes - 2x MSY. I'm also sure as JetBlue adds cities, they'll put more flights to those destinations out of OAK.

IMO, the Bay Area is underserved. Sure, UA has a hub at SFO, but it's not huge or a mega-hub (I'm NOT saying that it's small). But there's still a few routes that are starving for LCC's, and that's where B6 & OAK come into play. The airline and the airport have a very tight relationship.

JetBluefan1
 
scottysair
Posts: 6442
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:07 pm

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 11:20 am

I can see about new service from OAK-MSY/MCO/FLL anytime soon with B6.
 
sllevin
Posts: 3312
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 1:57 pm

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 11:47 am

Mark my words  Smile

There will never be an expansion of slots for LGB. Yes, the city has lost money since McDD (now Boeing) is tapering off production. What jetBlue could bring to the area is trivial compared to that. If you argue finances, understand that the best and most valuable use of LGB to the city of Long Beach would be as a shopping center! However, the city is willing to forgo that revenue for the ability to have an airport. But they will never expand the airport.


Look for jetBlue to morph LGB into a pur destination point as they bring more cities online and offer 2x service from those cities into LGB. All the "local" routes will go away in the next year or so...

Steve
 
as739x
Posts: 5008
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 7:23 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

Scotty...easy there about Oakland. They have not even started it and its a long way from being done. They will continue to be pressed for space at OAKas well. I personally can not see over 25 flights being operated out of there till they can get 6-7 gates to their own.

ASSFO
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
 
User avatar
OzarkD9S
Posts: 4764
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 2:31 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 12:22 pm

Would it be possible for B6 to sue the city of Long Beach and force them to open up more slots?

*Slot restrictions at LGB are based on noise, not operational limits such as DCA and LGA. With a 10,0000 foot runway it could theoretically be as busy as Gatwick, tho the terminal is in no way capable of handling the volume.
*Slot restrictions are a barrier to free trade.
*The airport was there before most of the people living in the area were born.
*Maximizing the revenue potential of the airport would improve the entire region econmically.
*Today's airliners are categorically quieter than the aircraft that were operating when the limits were imposed.

Worth a shot, don't you think?

Coast to Coast and Border to Border, Ozark Flies YOUR Way!
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4446
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 12:38 pm

The slot issue at LGB is the third rail of politics in the city of Long Beach. Most local politicians won't touch the issue unless they never plan to run for office there. It seems to be one of those issues that defines a city hall and voters use to judge who to vote for.

Also, if I remember correctly, the slots at LGB aren't something they can just go and add more. The current ordinance is part of a Federal Court settlement and a Federal Act and therefore can't just be simply changed.

A little history might help, if I can say it all correctly. We are talking about over 20 years of noise fights at LGB. Someone correct me if I get anything wrong.

Long Beach first enacted a noise control ordinance in 1981. That ordinance limited the airport to 15 commercial flights a day. So the airlines as a group sued the city.
(for more info look for references on the Alaska Airlines et al vs. City of Long Beach case)

Following several court injunctions, the city created a task force and using the federal regulations in place at the time came up with a new noise ordinance in 1986 that allowed only 32 flights and also put in place noise limits.

The Court rejected this new ordinance also, and ordered the city to allow 41 flights a day. Long Beach appealed and finally lost in 1992.

In order to settle the court battles, the City and airlines began negotiations which ultimately lead to the current ordinance which limits LGB to 41 mainline and 25 regional slots. The ordinance includes the ability to increase the slots as long as noise levels don't exceed the cumulative level in the agreement. So quieter aircraft mean more slots. The Federal Court approved the settlement and ordinance in 1995.

The US Congress passed the Airport Noise and Capacity Act in 1990. That act basically places control of airport noise at the federal level. That prevents airports from putting in local controls over noise or access which would basically be interfering with interstate commerce.

As part of the vote deal to get the ANCA bill passed, airports that already had or were negotiating noise or access agreements with the airlines were exempted from Federal control and would be left with local control. This is where LGB and SNA get to have local slots. I've heard a few other airports such as TVL may also fall under this exemption but I've never looked into it.

The ANCA does allow for amendments to existing local controls under certain conditions. But in the case of Long Beach we are talking about a court settlement so it probably means all parties involved have to agree. Unless the other airlines see individual gain, they may prefer to not add slots that would benefit JetBlue.

"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18261
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 12:38 pm

Silevin:

I agree with you.

It doesn't matter how many arguments airline (or airplane) people put forward, the residents are determined that the area will not turn into another LAX.

Apart from the noise issue, they believe (and they may be right) that their property values would plummet. And since the city derives the majority of their revenue from property taxes, they're listening.

To an extent, I agree with them. That area has the closest (southern) beaches to LA, why spoil it?

If LA needs another airport, there's plenty of room at ONT, which would welcome any airline with open arms.

People can argue that ONT isn't as convenient, but a lot of folk said that about LGB when JetBlue started there.

cheers

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
aaway
Posts: 1239
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 2:07 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Fri May 21, 2004 11:49 pm

FATflyer,
Absolutely great summation of the LGB case history. The regulatory controls in place at LGB (and, for the matter, SNA) are considered to be "grandfathered" vis-a-vis the federal controls spelled out in ANCA.
This is another example of the difficulties of accomodating growth in the civil air transport sector in Southern California. Much of the additional capacity that could be provided by LGB, SNA and SAN is mitigated by artificial barriers at the local level. But I digress...
"The greatest mistake you can make in life is to continually be afraid you will make one." - Elbert Hubbard
 
MidnightMike
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:07 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sat May 22, 2004 12:01 am

FATFlyer

Can you send me an email
mpenguin1@yahoo.com

Mike

NO URLS in signature
 
UAMAYBACH1239
Posts: 213
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 12:46 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sat May 22, 2004 12:08 am

Jetblue has plans to expand out of LGB there are already plans to tear down
the Boeing buildings on the north side and either extend or add another runway. There will be an increase of slots also. Right now they are in the middle of building Jetblues Hub OPS. buildings on the southside, and expaded plans for more parking, and a hoge fuel farm. All should be done on the southside by XMAS. Long beach has expressed to Blue that they very much want their business.
a/c flown 737-222/322/522 757/747-1-2-4, 767-2-3, 777-2-3, A319-20, DC10-10-30, L1011-3-5, 727-222adv, MD85-90 flyourfri
 
Coronado990
Posts: 1312
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:12 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sat May 22, 2004 1:19 am

Well B6 ever get a gate at SAN for a focus city here and add non-stops to BOS, IAD, MCO & FLL? No slot restrictions here. Just a departure curfew between 11:30pm and 6:30am. Ain't no big thing. They can add all the flights they want.
Uncle SAN at your service!
 
MidnightMike
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:07 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sat May 22, 2004 1:29 am

UAMAYBACH1239

That tearing down of the Douglas/Boeing plants is for the Boeing Real Estate project, there are plans for Housing and a shopping complex. There are plans for an Airport renovation, but there are no plans for additional slots, Long Beach Airport is slot restrictive.
NO URLS in signature
 
SHUPirate1
Posts: 3428
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 2:53 pm

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sat May 22, 2004 1:36 am

The problem with LGB isn't capacity, it's those darned Nobody IMportant But Yourstruly's that refuse to allow additional slots at LGB...heck, LGB is A-380 ready already, but hell will freeze over and Greenland will melt at the same time before the NIMBY's allow the A-380 into LGB...
Burma's constitutional referendum options: A. Yes, B. Go to Insein Prison!
 
InnocuousFox
Posts: 2556
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2003 1:30 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sat May 22, 2004 1:42 am

"Nobody IMportant But Yourstruly's "

Uh... I thought it was "Not IN My Back Yard"?
Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
 
SHUPirate1
Posts: 3428
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 2:53 pm

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sat May 22, 2004 1:44 am

It is...I sometimes enjoy coming up with my own fitting acronyms, and both certainly work...  Big grin
Burma's constitutional referendum options: A. Yes, B. Go to Insein Prison!
 
ont 737
Posts: 606
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2001 10:19 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sat May 22, 2004 2:12 am

SHUPirate1 the irony in the LGB noise ordinance is that you *can* fly A380s into there. The way the ordinance is written there will be no less than 41 commercial jet (over 74,999 pounds WTOW) slots regardless of the noise that is produced from them. So you could fly 41 A320s or 41 A380s and there is nothing the NIMYs could do about it. If we really wanted to add more capacity at LGB, we could get a few widebodies (A330s, 767, A340s.. take your pick) and nearly double the number of seats going in and out. Are we going to do that.... no. However it would greatly increase the noise level at the airport but not be in violation.

Here is another inconsistency at good ole LGB. Last Fall when Alaska/Horizon and America West/Mesa were flying their CR7s into LGB the equipment was the same however the classification was not. HP was flying their's under the mainline slot category and AS was using a commuter slot. They are virtually the same aircraft; the only difference being HP's aircraft was rated as having a MTOW of 75,000 pounds and AS's aircraft was at a slim 74,999 pounds. The operational empty weight of a EMB 190 is 64,000 pounds. Does this mean as long at we list the MTOW at 74,999 pounds we can classify it as a commuter? (I was saying that to make a point, not to say that a EMB190 could fly with that light a load)

FYI, the projected MTOW for a EMB190 is 110,892 pounds vs our A320s at a crisp 169,745 pounds. That was just for general reference.
 
ScottB
Posts: 5456
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sat May 22, 2004 5:48 am

Unless jetBlue is paying some serious money to Boeing, I doubt that Boeing has any interest whatsoever in giving up valuable real estate at LGB to an airline that is not and likely will never be a customer. And please note the following from the LGB airport website: " The Boeing Realty Corporation is developing the new PacifiCenter on 230 acres of property formerly used to assemble airplanes no longer in production. PacifiCenter will be a business park attracting new technology companies and a minimum of 10,000 new jobs to Long Beach." But it simply does not matter either way; the LGB slot limitations will make it impossible for jetBlue to operate any sort of "hub" at LGB in the long term (and this is, by the way, the reason why WN never went into LGB).

FATflyer is absolutely right about airport noise being the third rail of Long Beach city politics; the residents living near the airport vote in sufficient numbers to make certain that their voices are always heard on this particular issue. Now, the noise ordinance does allow for an increase in slots *if* the airport comes in below the noise budget for a given plan year, but jetBlue's reliance on departures for the East Coast between 9 and 10 PM makes it unlikely that total measured noise will come in under budget (noise from departures/arrivals from 1900-2200 are counted threefold while after-curfew (2200) departures and arrivals are counted tenfold).

I think the city and airport department are very interested in working with jetBlue, but only up to the limits imposed by the noise ordinance. And they always have other tools at their disposal to limit airline operations should the noise ordinance ever be successfully challenged; for example, refusing to expand terminal facilities or permit construction of new facilities. Not to mention the environmental lawsuits that would likely be brought by the airport NIMBY's. BUT, jetBlue *knew* that expansion at LGB would be limited by available slots going in, so this consideration should clearly have been built into their plans.

The EMB190's won't be able to fly at LGB using commuter slots, so it's unlikely that you'll see them there in any big way. The ordinance defines the slots as specific to the aircraft's certificated MTOW; specifically, '"Commuter" and "commuter carrier" means a scheduled carrier, certificated under FAR Part 121 or 135, operating aircraft having a certificated maximum takeoff weight less than seventy-five thousand pounds and transporting passengers or cargo.'

Nothing is keeping jetBlue from expanding at ONT aside from the fact that it doesn't seem to be a big money-maker for them. They still operate only one daily departure, and one would imagine that adding more JFK-ONT flights would come before JFK-SAN, JFK-SJC, or JFK-SMF if they felt that it would be profitable. Getting into a fare war with WN on short-haul out of ONT (to OAK, SJC, SMF, LAS, PHX) would be stupid given that WN has lower per-trip costs and can better afford a protracted fare war.

The same is true for OAK, and moreover, the Terminal 2 expansion is being built for WN, which uses its gates even more heavily than B6 (with over 120 flights daily from 12 gates) -- though B6 might get gates freed up by WN in Terminal 1. BUR's terminal is full if memory serves correctly, and their NIMBY's aren't willing to allow terminal expansion.
 
MidnightMike
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:07 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sat May 22, 2004 6:49 am


Scott

Pretty good information in there, I heard from some of the Jetblue pilots that Airbus can a way to fix the "whistling" that you hear up descent, maybe that would calm down the locals. That Airbus at about 2100 can be pretty annoying to listen to, though, these people chose to live near an airport.

Scott, do you work in Long Beach?
mpenguin1@yahoo.com

NO URLS in signature
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 3652
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sat May 22, 2004 12:01 pm

I thought the construction company the Port of Oakland hired broke ground on the new T2 expansion a couple of months ago.

In any case, when the terminal expansion is complete, that will free up three to four gates in T1.

Perhaps we'll see new airlines arriving at OAK like Air Tran and Virgin US. Anything can happen between now and 2006.
 
iowa744fan
Posts: 906
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 1:31 pm

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sun May 23, 2004 6:27 am

"And not only does this money benefit the airport, but also the library, where all the landing fines go (late arrivals, etc.)."

Personally, I find this amusing, but at the same time like the idea. Maybe add the school system in there as well! Any idea if Santa Ana has something similar?  Smile

SHUPirate - I prefer your NIMBY definition more!  Smile
 
jmacias34
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 10:50 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sun May 23, 2004 7:40 am

IIRC jetBlue began a second daily ONT-JFK (daytime) in June 2001, it was axed shotly after 9-11.
 
jetbluefan1
Posts: 2869
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 8:39 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sun May 23, 2004 11:11 am

I believe they axed the second daily to ONT because they were adding a 3rd to LGB, and therefore were afraid that the passengers would overlap.

JetBluefan1
 
StarCruiser
Posts: 294
Joined: Fri May 07, 2004 12:12 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sun May 23, 2004 11:23 am

What I really find stupid is the NIMBYs forget in most cases airports were there before their homes were even built. It seems every time a city builds a new airport people rush in to build close to it, and then spend the rest of their lives complaining about noise. I have no sympathy for those people. I have just three words for them: DEAL WITH IT!
 
dbo861
Posts: 864
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 2:20 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sun May 23, 2004 11:43 am

Which airports in the US are slot protected?
 
nycfuturepilot
Posts: 773
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 2:50 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sun May 23, 2004 11:46 am

Starcruiser, I completely agree with you.
Father, Son, HOYA spirit
 
B6FA4ever
Posts: 748
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 6:49 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sun May 23, 2004 12:50 pm

man, i'm w/ you too starcruiser. i've mentioned the same thing in other posts regarding LGB's NIMBY's (as well as other airports like SAN as well). though if there HAS to be a curfew...at least SAN's is pretty reasonable. what is it, like 10:30 or 11:30pm till 6:30am (correct me if i'm wrong). to my knowledge SAN isn't slot restricted (and they have a curfew). why can't LGB be the same!?

now another question for those who know. is there any time length to the slot restrictions like how the New York airports are (2006 the slot restricitons are lifted and its a free-for-all from my understanding). or is LGB (also including SNA) is there slot restricitons an indefinate thing?

~B6FA4ever
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sun May 23, 2004 1:13 pm

Which airports in the US are slot protected?

LGB, LGA, DCA, and JFK.

ORD may also be receiving some restrictions now, I believe they forced UA and AA to cancel some scheduled flights.

N
 
scottysair
Posts: 6442
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:07 pm

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sun May 23, 2004 1:30 pm

Yes, there is make more slot restricted in LGA, DCA, JFK & LGB.
 
dbo861
Posts: 864
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 2:20 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sun May 23, 2004 1:48 pm

Scotty, sorry but I don't quite understand what you just said...
 
ScottB
Posts: 5456
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

RE: Jetblue's LGB Hub Plans

Sun May 23, 2004 1:51 pm

Mike-

Nope, I'm on the other side of the continent in Boston.

I'm sure all the people near LGB knew they were purchasing property near an airport, but it's also a fact that LGB historically saw relatively little scheduled service (when compared to, say, LAX or SNA) aside from a few busier periods here and there (was it Jet America that had its base at LGB?). Over the decades, much of the activity at LGB was related to the Douglas Aircraft (later MDD and Boeing, of course) facilities, and people didn't mind so much given the number of high-paying manufacturing and technical jobs that had been generated. People living near the airport have come to expect a limited amount of commercial service, and would prefer not to end up living to the next LAX (yes, that's an exaggeration).

As I said before, jetBlue was well aware of LGB's slot limitations when they entered the market and, in fact, took all the remaining slots in part to deter anyone else from coming into their new market.