Let me appeal to a few statements made since my last post.
First Off: To the comments regarding my taking this issue persnonally, I will not deny that I do. If you knew how intimatiely I know GPT
, my native area (the MS
coast) and its travel needs, then you would understand why I'm such a staunch suppoter. If those travel needs weren't there then I wouldn't aruguing for service, even if I'm looking further out into the future than others realize. So if other are guilty of commiting the crime of relaisim, then I must be guilty of the crime of optimism/considering the future.
MYSTirstar: So as not to offend you further (if I already have, and probaly did) in this post, and previous post regarding GPT
expansions/ predictions, you have oft reply in the stauts qou that people will keep treking to MSY
for air service. For several years now a primary tactic to keep pax in orginating in the GPT
MSA (Metropolitian Statstic Area) from seeping out to the Big Easy is advertising from a consumer standipoint the need to consider not just the ticket fare, but the cost of traveling, parking/coastliner, and the loss of airport improvment funds when traveling MSY
. We want Coast traveler's to know they've got an airport here to meet there travel needs, and as those change we are tring to met them.
Seating has been a sever issue in the past as demand has always been strong, now airlines are relaizing this and are in a position, or a good risk area to grow GPT
-XXX seats.This helps, but the growth continues, and airlines are in position w/ the hub/spoke structure to only provide so many seats unitl the need comes to for those airlines to expand to other hubs, and new carriers to emerege.
While you may choose to favor the status qou, and I have to respect that, I would also like rerspect from everyone for my views, even if the are optomistic/futuristic and not nessicarly based on current pax/airline trends.
Phatfarmliners: Yes, I as far as I know the subsidy payment for FL
is still in effect, deffiently for the TPA
flts. These 2 flts, at least, wouldn't happen with out it, because there gambling drvien. The ATL
flts are a different story, while they where orgionally part of the subizdised service (and may still be) enough time has passed for a good reputation of FL
service and fares to draw enough legit pax in to sustian service (in my opinion), though the airline may still be accepting payments.
BR715: The story behind AE
departure goes back to a time before the RJ
revolution. Ture the economics weren't there to sustian the BNA
hub and all flts to/fro where axed, leaving GPT
3 daily to DFW
with a stopover. The problem derived in the form of geography. The morning flt stoped over at BTR
and turned Northwest for DFW
. The other two dailies flew way the hell out to Lake Charles before turning North, this added more flt time in flying Halfway to Houtson on a West course before heading North to DFW
, the added time came from having to fly over more land, and was unpopular w/ pax. Had these flts all stoped at BTR
, or gone to Monroe or SHV
, then they may haved made out better.
You are probably right on Indyair not showing up at GPT
in the near furture. There a good candidate (in my eyes) but they need to build more connecting ops at IAD
before launching to markets more dependant on connections, such as GPT
. Even though a GPT
milks a lot of military/gov't pax to the DC area, there are problems in ramping non stop service to that area: primarly DCA
being slot controlled (and US current situation) writes off any chance of GPT
getting access there at present. IAD
is idealy situated, but a lot GPT
-DC area pax head to the area better served by DCA
, so they may choose to continue to connect there via other airlines, connections ops would have to improve on indy, leaving UAX as the only possible canadiate at the moment. BWI
is further out than IAD
, but as WN
has proven, people could very will drive the distance for LCC service (Given the highway robbery of the legacies who monopolize DCA
is really not on my futuristic radar for GPT
at the moment, so scratch that, that leaves FL
, but while a GPT
would be a great boon for pax to the DC area, theres still that nagging "need" of folks to want to go to DCA
. Also FL
offers few connections there, but hey, that is something that could happen, given the right marketing on both ends of the flt. BTW, I'm left a bit confused by your comments on FL
not filling the 717, I know this happens, but from trip reports I've gotten the ATL
segments have been very good, load wise. Is there some way you could provide me with more detialed information and where/who you got it from?
Phatfarmlines: If you knew the current space restrictions @ GPT
, you would realize that from a ops/marketing standpoint, that is a very legitmant problem
Commisiner Martin makes. If an airline is going to serve a airport, its got to have space to store ground and other staging equipment. Right know any airline wanting to operate Regional equipment to GPT
could get gate and counter space (though limited), however out back where the ground gear is stowed presents a problem. CO
takes a lot of room storing their GPUs for the 737 and ERJ in addition to a small army of baggage carts. NW
leaves a lot of there ramp gear out in the open ramp corners surrounding their jetway. Some of the more expensive, non water proff, stuff is stowed under a suspended part of the extra long jet way they use. There is a opening under FL
gate for their gear to be placed, and DL
/ASA is in the space next to them. With terminal expansion going on, some of this space is temporaily unaviable to any carrier, but thankfully, this is a short term thing, as that phase of construction raps up, more space for ground equipment will exist than before.
FlyPns1: Agian, I'm looking at the future/optomistic stand point. I am realistic in the sense that I'm not pushing for the carriers to start immidate service, that would be disasterous for airline and airport alike. I am stating/ asking which airlines may be a good fit down the road. Another point MSYtristar and yourself have made in the past to me is that GPT
yield factor is not high. While this is true, phrehaps you should look at your own PNS
and see the mainline strength their and that PNS
has a smaller population base, and large demand for tourist travel, much like GPT
, in addition you have a large military travel need with NAS PNS
, but GPT
outputs large military demand also. To further the likeness of our two repsective airports, there both geographically between two other commercial fields, with PNS
sanwhiched between VPS
which boarders GPT
and to the west we have MSY
. What I'm saying is to look as the size of PNS
compared to GPT
which has almost the same demographics mentioned above, would you not think both airports would about the same size seat wise, at present? You may also think that we have a bigger burden with MSY
being closer, that's true, but our Coast airport/gov't./and civic leaders have long been crusading to lessen that burden by keeping our pax flying from an airport thats meant for them and that they pay for, and while I don't know first hand, I would hope that those marketing tactic are taking a positive track, if just in a trinkle down method.
KCWRflyer: When I was your age, I was just as intesively involved with my airport officals, as you are now. Knowing what its like to agonize over new or needed service is nothing new for me, if I can offer any encouragement its to maintian strong ties with CWR personel and heavily encourage arilines to increase there presence there. With a small regional field of its size, if CRW
needs new seats, than they will come, most likely amid great fanfare. Remember, if CRW
didn't get the seats it was working for this time around, airlines are always looking for places to add flights, and they will come, even if not part of the airline reformation package, believe me, I know first hand what its like to be missed when a carrier announces several new markets/flts and your airport is not on the list, GPT
has been in that boat for a very long time.
At the very least,good luck and keep thinking positive!