hjulicher
Posts: 649
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 2:26 pm

Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 2:59 am

Can anyone explain why BOS - logan airport has never turned into a hub? It would seem sensible to me that a hub would sprout there since there is a respectable population base for the city, and it would be a good connecting point for flights to major US cities and europe? I know it's not ideally located, but it could connect NE cities? Is it because of the airport set up and layout? I know DL and AA have big bases there, but nothing to call it a real hub. Would it be sensible to set one up there? I just have no idea, and whenever I daydream about being a airline CEO and planner, I consider cities where I would have HUBS, and boston always comes to mind as being untapped and logical. Like wouldn't BOS, STL (relatively big city, losing HUB status), and some west coast city be perfect for an airline as HUB system? This is all hypothetical so I don't know... LOL.

Thanks
LH 442
 
Iloveboeing
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:02 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:02 am

I'm not sure if Boston would have all the space to become a large hub. The longest runway is only 10,000 feet, so it doesn't look like the A380 would be viable to operate there either.
 
airbazar
Posts: 6809
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:20 am

The primary reason why BOS can never be a hub is simple: geography.
BOS is too far up the northeast coast of the US to make it a viable connecting airport unless you're flying to/from Maine  Smile EWR is borderline acceptable as a hub as far as it's location and I have a feeling that if it was not for the huge catchment area that it serves, EWR would not be nearly the size that it is.

At best, BOS could be a much larger International gateway but there too it is limited because of the lack of customs and immigration facilities at the various terminals, forcing passengers to trek across the airport to connect to/from a domestic flight.
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:22 am

1. Space limitations at the airport.

2. Terminal design at Logan is not very "Hub" friendly.

3. Most importantly, geographic location.....located in the northeast corner of the US, Boston's location could not offer many connection possibilties....to use an extreme example, it would not make sense to fly passengers from Atlanta to Boston to Cleveland. Boston could work as a "tranastalantic gateway".....this was attempted over the years by airlines such as NW and BN with minimal success, Delta was also recently thinking about doing this at BOS, and then they remembered that they already had an international gateway at JFK.

4. That US has a large hub at nearby PHL, CO maintains a large hub/gateway at EWR, that UA already has a large hub at IAD and that DL is once again expanding its gateway at JFK does not help the case for an airline to create a hub at BOS.

5. BOS, like LAX, is one of those cities that will have many airlines with a large presence......AA, DL and US are major players at BOS, JetBlue certainly has had a lot of interest in BOS in recent years, and BOS does serve a good number of European carriers.
 
airwave
Posts: 1105
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 3:42 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:24 am

I think part of it because it is not central to the rest of the United States--whether geographically or demographically. NYC is only a few miles away (relatively speaking) and aside from having a larger population base, it has better geography and easier accessibility for the rest of the East Coast.

I used to wonder why BOS never became a great international gateway, but I went on over to the Great Circle Mapper and the difference from BOS-LHR and EWR-LHR is only 200 miles--not much.

Airwave  eyebrow 
When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:24 am

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 1):
The longest runway is only 10,000 feet, so it doesn't look like the A380 would be viable to operate there either.

744s operate in and out of BOS every day. An A380 would not have a problem

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 3):
That US has a large hub at nearby PHL

PHL is a lot less nearby to BOS than NYC is
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:33 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 5):

PHL is a lot less nearby to BOS than NYC is

I know where PHL, EWR, BOS and IAD are.......they are all within a few hundred miles of eachother on the eastern coast of the US.
 
YULWinterSkies
Posts: 1266
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 11:42 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:34 am

IIRC, both AA and NW have significant trans-atlantic operations out of BOS, so is BOS a real non-hub airport?

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 2):
EWR is borderline acceptable as a hub

Are you really talking about Newark, NJ ? If so, this is an airport located in the US # 1 urban area by population, economy and business traffic. I would qualify it as US's # 2 best location for an international hub after JFK instead. CO knows this, unlike NW, DL, US, UA who all do not have their # 1 hub near NYC and are all in some financial trouble...
When I doubt... go running!
 
commavia
Posts: 9651
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:38 am

As others have said, the reason that BOS has not developed into a real hub is mostly geography. Simply put, it is just too far north and east to really function as a good hub for anything except as a gateway to New England and perhaps Atlantic Canada. Other than that, it is just not well positioned to be a major hub. Now, as others have said, it can serve as a focus city for multiple carriers, as LAX does, and in the case of BOS, those carriers are AA, DL, US and B6. In addition, it can sustain substantial flights to Europe, mostly be AA, and also by a host of European carriers, because of where it is and how big an O&D market it is. However, even with Europe, BOS is constantly competing with New York (JFK and EWR) for flights to Europe, and 9 times out of 10, because New York is such an immense market, New York will win.
 
Cadet57
Posts: 7174
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 2:02 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:47 am

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 1):
The longest runway is only 10,000 feet, so it doesn't look like the A380 would be viable to operate there either.

Ya? So? whats the whale gotta do with BOS, the only chance they'd have of seeing it is if LH brought one in and thats rather unlikely as the largest BOS gets now is a 330/340... or a 744 in the summer... The A380 would not make or break BOS as a hub...

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 3):
Delta was also recently thinking about doing this at BOS, and then they remembered that they already had an international gateway at JFK.

LOL, that and Crapport, sry massport wont give them Cus/Ins facilities in terminal A.... morons...
Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
 
FURUREFA
Posts: 635
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 2:26 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:50 am

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 7):
IIRC, both AA and NW have significant trans-atlantic operations out of BOS, so is BOS a real non-hub airport?

Is 1 flight a day to AMS a significant trans-atlantic operation? I hope AA expands some more with it's 752s/763s into destinations such as FRA, MAD, FCO

Matt
 
B6FA4ever
Posts: 746
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 6:49 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 5:41 am

for me...SAN is the "West Coast BOS". same exact reasons why BOS is not a hub airport is just the same for SAN. Its (unfortunatly) geographically challenged. even though SAN is what, the 6th largest US city yet its own airport has less flights than other slightly smaller cities w/ big airport operations.

BOS would only be better as an int'l gateway but because of JFK/EWR...won't be as big a player in the transatlantic market. at least it has a very good O/D market!

~B6FA4ever
 
RobertS975
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 2:17 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:09 am

If you think about it, BOS has a fairly large trans-Atlantic route structure without being a hub.... it succeeds just on O/D alone.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 7:24 am

Quoting B6FA4ever (Reply 11):
SAN is the "West Coast BOS".

Except that San Diego has a bigger problem in that it's airport is woefully inadequate
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
supa7E7
Posts: 1360
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 2:05 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 8:59 am

(1) Fierce competition from all airlines. Yields at BOS are not super great.

(2) A reputation for corrupt local officials.

Even if no airlines make a true hub out of BOS, the major alliances battle it out there in grand style. BA/American, AF/DL, LH/US etc. BOS is a massive market and everybody wants a piece.
"Who's to say spaceships aren't fine art?" - Phil Lesh
 
B6FA4ever
Posts: 746
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 6:49 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 9:01 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 13):
Quoting B6FA4ever (Reply 11):
SAN is the "West Coast BOS".

Except that San Diego has a bigger problem in that it's airport is woefully inadequate

so sad...yet so true...
 
rwsea
Posts: 2422
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:23 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 9:07 am

Quoting B6FA4ever (Reply 11):
for me...SAN is the "West Coast BOS". same exact reasons why BOS is not a hub airport is just the same for SAN. Its (unfortunatly) geographically challenged. even though SAN is what, the 6th largest US city yet its own airport has less flights than other slightly smaller cities w/ big airport operations.

You can't just look at the city population - you have to look at the Metro area population. And in that sense, SAN is much smaller than other metro areas that lack a large hub, including LAX, BOS, and SEA. The mentioned airports all have strong carriers, but they aren't necessarily huge hubs. And these cities all have the same geography issues as SAN.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 3934
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 9:31 am

Reasons for BOS not being a hub:

1. Not a good location for a hub

2. Would be a good location for a transatlantic gateway hub but lives in the shadow of JFK and/or EWR

3. Major Players in BOS (AA, DL, B6, US) are also major players in the NYC area and are more focused on using their resources there:
-Larger Population
-Busiest Routes in the Country
-More money on business routes

PJ
 
UAL#1fan
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun May 27, 2001 12:32 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 10:22 am

Quoting B6FA4ever (Reply 11):
for me...SAN is the "West Coast BOS". same exact reasons why BOS is not a hub airport is just the same for SAN. Its (unfortunatly) geographically challenged. even though SAN is what, the 6th largest US city yet its own airport has less flights than other slightly smaller cities w/ big airport operations

I disagree. SEA is easily the West Coast BOS. Northwest and United have significant operations there, just like US, AA, and DL have in Boston -i.e., focus-city level, but not hub status. It's just too far to the northwest to serve as effectively as a good Pacific gateway like SFO and LAX do, plus LAX and SFO are located in much larger metropolitan areas.
United Air Lines -Mainliners Coast to Coast
 
B752OS
Posts: 592
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:05 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:23 pm

Quoting JFKLGANYC (Reply 17):
Reasons for BOS not being a hub:

1. Not a good location for a hub

2. Would be a good location for a transatlantic gateway hub but lives in the shadow of JFK and/or EWR

3. Major Players in BOS (AA, DL, B6, US) are also major players in the NYC area and are more focused on using their resources there:
-Larger Population
-Busiest Routes in the Country
-More money on business routes

It has been mentioned in here a few times about BOS going up against airports like PHL, EWR, and JFK for flights. I don't really think that is the case. As it has been stated, BOS is not in an ideal location geographically to sustain a domestic hub operation. Yes, it can work for flights to Maine and parts of Canada, but for 99% of the country. Add in the fact that BOS is does not have enough room to grow such that it could sustain a large increase in flights. I really don't think BOS is in the position where it wants to be a hub city for any airline wishing to use it as a gateway to Europe, nor do I think they are trying to pry flights away from NYC. PHL is a non-factor as the bulk of their system is in the east. It is pretty obvious that NYC is always going to be the gateway to Europe, so to say to try and compare the Boston market with that of NYC is crazy, everyone knows NYC hands down wins, nor do I believe Massport is under the assumption that airlines would want to seriously build up BOS in a manner that takes away from what the airlines down in NYC are doing.

For a non-hub city, BOS does have a large European flight network, non-stops to LHR, MAN(seasonal), CDG, SNN, AMS, FRA, MUC(seasonal), MXP, FCO(seasonal), ZRH, ARN, KEF and if you count PDL.


Even though there are not customs facilities in terminal B, I still believe AA could make flights to BRU and GLA work with 752s out of BOS.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:49 pm

Quoting UAL#1fan (Reply 18):
Northwest and United have significant operations there, just like US, AA, and DL have in Boston -i.e., focus-city level, but not hub status.

I disagree there. United has only a small handful of non-Brasilia, non-hub ops out of SEA (ANC, NRT and????). NW has their hubs (including NRT and AMS) HNL, OGG and???? BOS actually has significant P2P traffic from all three of the above mentioned carriers.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
zrs70
Posts: 3300
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2000 4:08 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 3:54 pm

Quoting Hjulicher (Thread starter):
Can anyone explain why BOS - logan airport has never turned into a hub?

The premise here in not accurate. BOS HAS been a hub for quite a few airlines. But a FAILED hub. NW had a hub there. DL tried to maintian a hub. EA had a hub. But for all the reasons mentioned above, they didn't wor.
17 year airliners.net vet! 2000-2016
 
airbazar
Posts: 6809
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Sun Apr 16, 2006 9:52 pm

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 7):
IIRC, both AA and NW have significant trans-atlantic operations out of BOS, so is BOS a real non-hub airport?

I wouldn't call 1 flight a day for NW, significant  Smile
Even AA only has what? 3 or 4 flights a day. However, BOS is a significant international gateway. With over 200,000 international passengers a month and more international carriers than ATL, as an example.

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 7):
Are you really talking about Newark, NJ ? If so, this is an airport located in the US # 1 urban area by population, economy and business traffic. I would qualify it as US's # 2 best location for an international hub after JFK instead. CO knows this, unlike NW, DL, US, UA who all do not have their # 1 hub near NYC and are all in some financial trouble...

Correct. Either I didn't make my comment clear, or you didn't understand it correctly. NY/NJ's geographic location, like Boston, is not the most ideal as a hub. Certainly not as good as ORD, or DEN. The one reason why EWR is so succesfull is because of the population and economy of the region, not geography.
 
B752OS
Posts: 592
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:05 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Mon Apr 17, 2006 6:00 am

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 22):
I wouldn't call 1 flight a day for NW, significant
Even AA only has what? 3 or 4 flights a day. However, BOS is a significant international gateway. With over 200,000 international passengers a month and more international carriers than ATL, as an example.

Of course, without connecting traffic and the Sky Team alliance, ATL would only have one, maybe 2 international carriers at best, and DL would not be able to fly even a quarter of the international destinations they fly, especially Europe and Asia.
 
Zone1
Posts: 894
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:47 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Mon Apr 17, 2006 9:43 am

Would people also say weather is another problem for BOS? It always seems when there is any sight of rain, delays go into the hours. In the winter, well need I say more?
/// U N I T E D
 
gunsontheroof
Posts: 3226
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:30 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Mon Apr 17, 2006 9:51 am

Quoting UAL#1fan (Reply 18):
I disagree. SEA is easily the West Coast BOS. Northwest and United have significant operations there, just like US, AA, and DL have in Boston -i.e., focus-city level, but not hub status. It's just too far to the northwest to serve as effectively as a good Pacific gateway like SFO and LAX do, plus LAX and SFO are located in much larger metropolitan areas.

SEA has one thing going for it that Boston doesn't...the State of Alaska. Hence, AS has their hub at SEA to connect Alaska with the rest of the country, and serve as the dominant carrier at SEA as well. As you mentioned, NW and UA have significant ops, but AS/QX easily dwarf both carriers at SEA, serving over half of the market together.

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 16):
And in that sense, SAN is much smaller than other metro areas that lack a large hub, including LAX, BOS, and SEA.

SEA might not be a fortress hub like ATL, MSP or DFW, but I think anyone who's seen the number of eskimo tails on the ground at SEA would be willing to call it a hub without a second thought.
 
tmarch291
Posts: 140
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 8:06 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Mon Apr 17, 2006 11:19 am

Location, Loacation, Location.

The most succesful hub airports in the USA are in the central part of the country. (Ex. ORD, STL during TWA, DFW and DEN) These airports allow people to go to another destination without going too far out of their way. Just imagine if someone had to do LAX-RDU and they had to transfer in BOS. It would waste about four hours, however if they did LAX-RDU and transfered in DFW, it would be much more direct and therefore, quicker.

[Edited 2006-04-17 04:20:20]
 
zrs70
Posts: 3300
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2000 4:08 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Mon Apr 17, 2006 11:32 am

I thnk that PIT is/ was the ideal physical location for a hub. Whether going from the northeast to the west or south, or from the south to the west, or from the midwest to the south, etc.... It really is not all that far of course for any direction.
17 year airliners.net vet! 2000-2016
 
mah584jr
Posts: 422
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:35 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Mon Apr 17, 2006 11:56 am

I've heard SEA and SAN for the West Coast, and I'm in no position to argue, as I have never been to either, but I think that MCO is most definitely the BOS of the Southeast. They have a lot of O&D traffic just as Boston does, and they certainly aren't a hub airport for any airline. However, MCO also is a completely situation than is BOS, so perhaps my point isn't that strong. However, it always seems to me like there are numerous airliners that serve MCO with over a dozen flights a day, but not hundreds. This is where I see the greatest similarity between BOS and MCO. Just an observation I guess.
 
CRGsFuture
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 12:04 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Mon Apr 17, 2006 12:11 pm

Besides the obvious facts as stated, I also think that New York and Philadelphia are more powerful business centers than Boston. Plus they have the Red Sox, something I think everyone wants to avoid seeing.

-JD
Flying you to your destination; your girlfriend to her dreams.
 
B752OS
Posts: 592
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:05 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Mon Apr 17, 2006 2:44 pm

Quoting CRGsFuture (Reply 29):
Besides the obvious facts as stated, I also think that New York and Philadelphia are more powerful business centers than Boston. Plus they have the Red Sox, something I think everyone wants to avoid seeing.

Are you kidding me??? That's funny because the Sox sell out every game! The Red Sox are a huge attraction, as is Fenway Park. The Red Sox either lead are in the top 3 in the league road attendance, i know they were number 1 back last season. Obviously NYC is the biggest business center in the world, but I think Boston might have a little edge over Philly, as Boston has the best business schools in the country and also has one of, if not the largest centers of companies for wealth management. A while ago, The Wall Street Journal broke down the 3 biggest financial cities in terms of banking and finance and the 3 were Boston, New York and Charlotte.

[Edited 2006-04-17 07:45:04]
 
hinckley
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:53 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Mon Apr 17, 2006 11:24 pm

Depending on who is calculating the ranking, Boston is the number two or three financial center in the US. NY is obviously number 1 and San Francisco and Boston vie for numbers 2 and 3. Charlotte is sometimes mentioned only because of BofA, the largest consumer bank, but still not a force in investment/commercial banking. Philadelphia is, with respect, a no-show in the business banking sector.

As for Fenway park, it is the smallest park in the major leagues, sells out every game, and is in the top three for attendance of all major league baseball parks. It's quite an institution not only in Boston, but for any die-hard baseball fan.

With all that, as everyone else has said, BOS will never be a major airline hub because of geography and it's proximity to the New York airports. However, it does mean that there is not one dominant carrier and that there is pretty good competition among the airlines.

[Edited 2006-04-17 16:27:13]
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Tue Apr 18, 2006 12:52 am

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 3):
DL is once again expanding its gateway at JFK

Don't forget AA expanding there either!!

Quoting Zrs70 (Reply 27):
I thnk that PIT is/ was the ideal physical location for a hub. Whether going from the northeast to the west or south, or from the south to the west, or from the midwest to the south, etc.... It really is not all that far of course for any direction.

I was about to post something regarding PIT; you are so right though. PIT is a terrific location for a hub; excellent connection to places like BOS, JFK, IAD, ORD, IND, etc... Eventually some airline is either going to move into PIT with the intention of opening up at least some small hub. For it to be nothing more than a focus city without any major scheduled international travel to Europe is just awful for the city.

It is trying to grow and eventually it CANNOT go without international travel!!! It used to be a great connecting center, now for people flying out west from the midwest, they have to connect through either PHL or CLT. For some bizarre reason, people seem to think that moving more business out of Pittsburgh and moving more old farts in will make it better... Guess again. Without business, the city will go under, and then we'll see what a black hole looks like on a map.

Black hole - noun; see Pittsburgh  sarcastic 

The way it looks, we now have a good mayor who just might prevent this from happening. The city is actually going to complete a fiscal year with money in the bank instead of in the read. People look to be moving back to the city, so hopefully this is the start of a turnaround. I would love to see for my hometown become a major business center like it should be. For a city of roughly 2.4 million people, it is sad to see it with virtually no business population compared to other cities its size...
Sorry for the tangent though, back to BOS
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
doninfc
Posts: 131
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 5:35 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:05 am

Look at a map and it will be obvious. As others have said, BOS is in the NE corner of the US, and is impractical for most domestic connections. It can and does provide a good deal of transatlantic connection opportunities. Even with non-hub status, it still has a large number of domestic flights due to high O&D.
 
User avatar
chrisnh
Posts: 3331
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 3:59 am

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:53 am

Quoting B6FA4ever (Reply 15):
(2) A reputation for corrupt local officials.

HEY! That's supposed to be MY line!!!

Chris in NH
 
airbazar
Posts: 6809
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:56 am

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 34):
Quoting B6FA4ever (Reply 15):
(2) A reputation for corrupt local officials.

HEY! That's supposed to be MY line!!!

Yeah, one booze cruise gone wrong and all of a suddent they're corrupt. They're Irish for chrisakes  laughing 
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:59 am

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 35):
Yeah, one booze cruise gone wrong and all of a suddent they're corrupt. They're Irish for chrisakes

Then pardon me while I do Riverdance, AYE LADS  bigthumbsup   hyper  drunk 
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
hjulicher
Posts: 649
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 2:26 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:05 am

If you're in the midwest, and you want to Fly west, isn't Cincinnati, Detroit, Chicago all viable places to connect to go west? Cleveland is only a 2.5 hours drive from Pittsburgh. I agree that Pittsburgh has a good location, but I wouldn't neccessarily call it a black hole. The part of the country is well represented, and really every airline doens't have a hub or focus city too far away from PIT. All within an 1hr flight.
LH 442
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:15 am

Quoting Hjulicher (Reply 37):
I agree that Pittsburgh has a good location, but I wouldn't neccessarily call it a black hole.

I was actually referring to the city's economy and not necessarily air service... If Pittsburgh was to go bankrupt, you know how the people "ran for their lives" to vacate the NYSE on October 29, 1929? (courtesy: a documentary on The Depression on the History Channel) You'll see the same thing in Pittsburgh on a much larger scale should the city go under. With Mayor Bob O'Connor, and with the job he appears to be doing as of late, that just might be avoided...
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
cltguy
Posts: 541
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:54 pm

RE: Boston As A Non HUB

Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:56 am

Quoting Tmarch291 (Reply 26):
however if they did LAX-RDU and transfered in DFW, it would be much more direct and therefore, quicker.

Or an even quicker RDU-LAX route would be to connect in CLT...well there goes your middle america hub theory.