B6ramprat
Topic Author
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 5:20 am

Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sat Jun 30, 2007 6:17 am

With all the problems with weather and ATC problems which seems to be more serious then ever before, do you see regulating the regional jet service out of the NYC three major airport to reduce volume? I went by terminal 2 and 3 at JFK the other day (ramp side). Something I've never done in my 5 years at JFK and could not believe the number of CRJ and Dash 8's. This goes for American Eagle as well with all there ERJ service. Now this isn't a hit to those companies. Of course Jetblue has contributed to the conjestion cause but my point to all of this is should Freedom Air, Comair and American Eagle be forced to upgrade to at least a 50 seat jet into these airports or maybe even higher. I heard a few months ago on the local news that the FAA or Port Aurthority was actually thinking about this. What are your thoughts on it?
Racecar spelled backwards spells Racecar
 
commavia
Posts: 10111
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sat Jun 30, 2007 6:39 am

Quoting B6ramprat (Thread starter):
With all the problems with weather and ATC problems which seems to be more serious then ever before, do you see regulating the regional jet service out of the NYC three major airport to reduce volume?

In my personal opinion, artificially constraining demand is bad policy long-term. The more prudent and fiscally responsible policy, in my view, would be to expand these airports to keep up with the growing demand -- stimulated by JetBlue's low fares, population growth, etc. If, throughout history, the solution to sustained economic growth was to artificially constrain it so as not to tax infrastructure, we would all probably still be living in rural farming villages growing our food. A bit of an exaggeration, I know, but I think it makes my point: at some point, you have to either harm your economy and arrest the free flow of commerce, or grow to match the changing demands of consumers. In other words, you can't just regulate air traffic forever. On second thought, you can, but it can cause serious harm to our economy.

Quoting B6ramprat (Thread starter):
This goes for American Eagle as well with all there ERJ service.

Eagle has really added not substantial service out of JFK in several years. CLE, BWI and YYZ got 1-2 ERJs each back in 2005-2006, and ORD got 2 ERJs last year. In the scheme of things, that's nothing. Beyond that, Eagle's JFK schedule has remained almost unchanged from 2003 -- 4x YUL, 4-5x DCA, 6x BOS, and 6x RDU.

Quoting B6ramprat (Thread starter):
Of course Jetblue has contributed to the conjestion cause but my point to all of this is should Freedom Air, Comair and American Eagle be forced to upgrade to at least a 50 seat jet into these airports or maybe even higher.

I think the two biggest culprits, at least in the case of JFK, have definitely been JetBlue and Delta/DCI. JetBlue keeps adding flights left and right (understandably, of course, as JFK is their home base and largest hub) and Delta's domestic buildup with mainline and DCI has added lots of RJ and Freedom-operated prop (soon to be gone, thankfully) departures.

Quoting B6ramprat (Thread starter):
I heard a few months ago on the local news that the FAA or Port Aurthority was actually thinking about this. What are your thoughts on it?

I suspect that is where we are ultimately headed: eventually, the FAA and the PANYNJ are going to have to address this problem, because 1-2 hr delays at peak times, even in clear skies, and 4-6 hr delays during OSO, is just not sustainable nor economically viable any longer. The airports in the northeast need expansion and they need it now, but of course, the government being what it is, their solution will likely ultimately be -- as you suggest -- regulating the traffic flow at these constrained airports.
 
adambrau
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:44 pm

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sat Jun 30, 2007 7:11 am

I remember reading somewhere that one of the ideas being floated was to restrict (or not allow) RJ's between a NYC airport and a carrier's respective hubs. So for UA, that would be no LGA/EWR/JFK - IAD RJ service and for AA no JFK-ORD. This does seem sensible in the hope that airlines are not penalized to continue to offer service to smaller cities that would otherwise not warrant it, yet at the same time alleviate some of the congestion by using bigger planes. It is not clear to me how such a policy would be devised or enforced, especially to carriers who's hubs are in NY themselves. I think the only thing that all sides agree to is that something needs to be done.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13809
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sat Jun 30, 2007 7:19 am

So B6 overloads the system and the answer is to punish the competition with regulation? At least you admit B6 contributed in passing, but then decide it's not their obligation to stop expanding and maybe open up a hub elsewhere, but other airlines should bite the bullet to make more room for B6 (and DL, who is now also expanding out of JFK).

I mean, why not get on B6's case for using a business model of nothing more than 150 seat jets into NYC when many of their routes would support larger planes profitably? That was B6's choice. Why not A321s for some routes? 3 A321s could take the place of 4 A320s on many routes. They followed the WN approach but did it from a few key airports (FLL, JFK, BOS) rather than the broader spiderweb approach that is WN.

Same goes for CO at EWR. They have overloaded that airport. But CO is already cutting back on RJ in favor of mainline, because flow at that airport has spilled over the top of the dam already. And they have jets of all sizes to try to match demand with supply both in size and frequency. B6 doesn't have the ability to do anything but increase frequency when a route grows. And in a market like NYC, why is that more responsible than flying RJs? Both clog the system. DL and AA put 757s and 767s on routes when they can support them. CO puts 752, 753 and 739s. But B6 can only either add an E190 or another A320.

One solution is to increase landing fees. Marginal services would be lost and some flights consolidated. B6 might even be forced to buy some A321s. And if certain small markets want to keep their non-stop lifeline link to NYC, then they can subsidize the airline serving that market to compensate for the increased fees. That way, they are transferring money into the PANYNJ to compensate for overloading the network with marginal flights.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
airlineecon
Posts: 102
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:22 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:31 am

This situation is a classic example of the "tragedy of the commons" whereby each airline has an incentive to do what is best for itself, but imposes a cost on everyone else--congestion and delays. Those costs are not internalized by each airline. The classic fix for this problem is to regulate the use of the common resources, take-off slots.

Other posts remark on some ways to regulate--limit RJ flights, increase landing fees, but of course there will be some inequities to the regulation. Jet Blue might get a good deal, while AA and small cities get a bad deal. But what is worse is to do nothing becuase there clearly is a bad problem.

I find it interesting that CO has been adjusting its ops at EWR becuase if congestion. This would be a case where CO essentially owns the commons and internalizes the congestion effects and takes suitable actions.

In the end it looks like they need a mega airport for New York.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13809
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:48 am

Quoting AirlineEcon (Reply 4):
In the end it looks like they need a mega airport for New York.

Well, the NYC metro area is not really growing in population, or at a lower rate than the rest of the country. It's the area around the metro area that is growing. Thus to keep loading flights into the metro airports seems like it adds motor and air traffic.

The move to Stewart/Newburg is a smart on. That region is actually growing. But of course everyone says "who wants to go there?" But if it's just O&D, sending people to and from Florida, it still takes congestion off. Same holds for an airport like Trenton. Just MCO and FLL and PBI and MIA flights would do a lot to pull congestion out of the big three airports. B6, to their credit, is doing as much direct Florida to Northeast as they can. No reason to connect at a hub when the only traffic is low yield traffic to florida.

As for regionals, there is no excuse for the multiple RJs on certain routes. But single RJ service is not unfair. Should new england not be connected to NYC because they can't support a 130 seat daily? I say that's unfair. That's about isolating people. But I also, as I wrote above, think B6 is a big culprit here. They are the only large carrier flying into the big three airports that doesn't have a 757 or above on some of it's routes. Everyone bitches about RJs at LGA, but most carriers that send RJs into LGA also fly 767s and 757s there. DL sends in multiple 763s, for example. So on average, a 763+RJ on two slots is no better or worse than B6 with 2xA320s on 2 slots at JFK. 300 seats is 300 seats...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5288
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sat Jun 30, 2007 9:26 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 5):
DL sends in multiple 763s, for example. So on average, a 763+RJ on two slots is no better or worse than B6 with 2xA320s on 2 slots at JFK. 300 seats is 300 seats...

That's true, except for the fact that DL doesn't have that kind of balance in it's departure mix at JFK. DL has around 25 widebody departures, 50 narrowbody and 125 RJ/prop departures. So if you were to calculate the average number of seats per departure, I think you'd find that DL is quite a bit lower than JetBlue.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 5):
That region is actually growing. But of course everyone says "who wants to go there?" But if it's just O&D, sending people to and from Florida, it still takes congestion off. Same holds for an airport like Trenton. Just MCO and FLL and PBI and MIA flights would do a lot to pull congestion out of the big three airports.

I agree that using some of these regional facilities will help a little. However, the amount of relief is pretty small and these flights still take up airspace in NYC which is part of the problem. Another idea is for the US gov't to really invest in high-speed rail along the NE corridor. That would provide relief on many of the short-haul routes. There's no reason to have 40xdaily flights on DCA-LGA.
 
isp
Posts: 94
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 2:40 pm

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sat Jun 30, 2007 12:00 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 5):
They are the only large carrier flying into the big three airports that doesn't have a 757 or above on some of it's routes.

US Airways does not fly 757's into any NYC airport.
 
Tornado82
Posts: 4662
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 10:19 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 1:08 am

The biggest problem-makers in NYC aren't the other hub airports feeding into it like the ORD-JFK talk here...

Look at the number of RJ's from RDU and CMH to NYC. It's the airports like that which are the biggest problem makers. When competing airlines are running 50 or less seat RJ's side by side into NYC all day long on insane frequencies... you've got a problem. It's bad enough when one airline is going 7x, but when 3 are you've got a mess.
 
WJ
Posts: 299
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:14 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 4:17 am

Quoting Commavia (Reply 1):
In my personal opinion, artificially constraining demand is bad policy long-term. The more prudent and fiscally responsible policy, in my view, would be to expand these airports to keep up with the growing demand

Ya, but in the short term that's not about to happen and even a decision now means something would happen 8-10 years away. The problem is that JFK has lifted all slot restrictions so anyone can fly in there whatever the hell they want, and everyone else be damned. IIRC this was the case at LGA a few years and every evening was an ATC nightmare. But in 2001 slot allocations went into effect and the place became much more manageable (no where near ideal, but better). The same needs to be done at JFK until any expansion projects take place. If DL as an example gets 150 daily slots, they will think twice about sending 2 dash-8's to IND at 4pm and 6pm and may want to send one 737 at 5pm. I agree that more runways and capacity is needed, but the problem is today, the solution needs to happen fast.
146,727,732,733,734,735,73G,738,739,742,743,744,752,753,762,763,764,772,300,310,319,320,321,330,343,DC9,D10,MD11,M80,E17
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13809
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 4:20 am

Quoting WJ (Reply 9):
If DL as an example gets 150 daily slots, they will think twice about sending 2 dash-8's to IND at 4pm and 6pm and may want to send one 737 at 5pm.

No, it would just be one MD80 at 6pm, so it doesn't help peak congestion...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
WJ
Posts: 299
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:14 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 4:27 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 10):
No, it would just be one MD80 at 6pm, so it doesn't help peak congestion...

What's your point? You limit departures, airlines consolidate departures, result = less departures. JFK evening peak starts earlier and earlier and by 5pm you are already looking at an hour takeoff wait. knock off smaller jets in favor of less frequent bigger jets, you will lose some flexibility but you increase reliability and you don't lose any capacity. If this exchange takes place with DL a dozen times, AA the same, US, UA, you can save up to an hour in departure waits. Its simple and its done in numerous airports around the world, so what's the big deal?
146,727,732,733,734,735,73G,738,739,742,743,744,752,753,762,763,764,772,300,310,319,320,321,330,343,DC9,D10,MD11,M80,E17
 
ANother
Posts: 1833
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 2:47 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 4:38 am

No, we need less Regulation not more. Almost all of the so-called problems would be sorted by getting rid of the existing regulations, in particular the 'perimiter rule' the limits flights to/from LGA to points in the east.

Get rid of the rule and you would immediatly see an increase in aircraft size, as everyone would be falling over themselves puttling on flights to the west coast and who knows, even long-haul international flights (with appropriate aircraft - but if you can have a B757 flying from BDL, why not LGA?)

Government regulation should be limited to safety and security. Nothing else, let the market decide.
 
EXAAUADL
Posts: 1740
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:48 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 4:41 am

Iagree that there are too many RJs are the NYC area airports. Politicians will never allow any type of regulation...what would get cut? Routes like BTR/JAN/BHM-LGA are too high profile...I would be in favor of a 70 seat minimum at LGA, that would still allow for CRJ-700s and EMB-170s but get rid of all the CRJ adn ERJs. I might allow props to still operate so that small communities in Upstate and New England would still have a air link.


One thing Port Authority could do is raise landing fees for RJs. Since LGA isnt a hub, conjestion pricing might work
 
WJ
Posts: 299
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:14 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 6:18 am

Quoting ANother (Reply 12):
No, we need less Regulation not more. Almost all of the so-called problems would be sorted by getting rid of the existing regulations, in particular the 'perimiter rule' the limits flights to/from LGA to points in the east.

Get rid of the rule and you would immediatly see an increase in aircraft size, as everyone would be falling over themselves puttling on flights to the west coast and who knows, even long-haul international flights (with appropriate aircraft - but if you can have a B757 flying from BDL, why not LGA?)

Which planet are you living on??? Your point makes no sense at all. Get rid of perimeter rule and see an increase in aircraft size? Where do you get that from? Most airport in the world have some type of restriction: Time of operation, size of aircraft, landing slots, gate availability, noise curfews and restrictions and so on. Its when there are no rules is when you get problems such as planes stuck on the runways for hours before getting a gate, takeoff waits of 4-5 hours and the rest of the much publicized misery associated with todays travel. Funny how all these recent event happened at JFK which has no such restriction. Would seem pretty reasonable to deduce that there is a problem at that airport, don't you think?
146,727,732,733,734,735,73G,738,739,742,743,744,752,753,762,763,764,772,300,310,319,320,321,330,343,DC9,D10,MD11,M80,E17
 
silentbob
Posts: 1541
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 1:26 pm

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 7:21 am

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 13):
I might allow props to still operate so that small communities in Upstate and New England would still have a air link

Let them stop at two of those airports on the way to JFK or LGA. Just because you want them to have a connection to New York, doesn't mean it has to be non-stop. Any route that can't support Q400 or CRJ700 with a one-stop setup, shouldn't get direct access to NYC.
 
N62NA
Posts: 4038
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 8:22 am

Quoting Silentbob (Reply 15):
Let them stop at two of those airports on the way to JFK or LGA. Just because you want them to have a connection to New York, doesn't mean it has to be non-stop. Any route that can't support Q400 or CRJ700 with a one-stop setup, shouldn't get direct access to NYC.

You know, that's an interesting point you bring up.

Back in pre-deregulation (1978 and earlier) days, airlines would do this quite a bit. Best example was NW and their use of the DC-10 on a run from MSP to SEA, stopping at several small city airports in Montana along the way.
 
Tornado82
Posts: 4662
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 10:19 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 9:13 am

Quoting WJ (Reply 9):
If DL as an example gets 150 daily slots, they will think twice about sending 2 dash-8's to IND at 4pm and 6pm and may want to send one 737 at 5pm.

Since when does Delta send dash 8's to Indy?
 
WJ
Posts: 299
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:14 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 9:27 am

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 17):
Since when does Delta send dash 8's to Indy?

i'm not sitting here with DL's schedule, I don't know where where they are sending their dash's from JFK to, they are going somewhere. It's what you would call an example...
146,727,732,733,734,735,73G,738,739,742,743,744,752,753,762,763,764,772,300,310,319,320,321,330,343,DC9,D10,MD11,M80,E17
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 10:28 am

Limiting the size of aircraft won't be good since that will eliminate service to smaller airports. Limiting the number of flights has the same effect. It ends service to smaller destinations.

My personal opinion is that frequency on routes needs to be limited. Bigger planes, and less flights are needed. Passengers don't necessarily want that, but it is good for them. It would have the same effect of banning cars and making everyone use buses. Its less convenient, but overall more people can travel in the same given space.

With my policy, an airline would have restricted capacity. No route should have more than 4 daily flights on any airline if the aircraft have a capacity less than 150 people. Planes under 100 seats should be limited to only 3 daily flights on a specific route. I would allow exceptions though. Airlines could pay double the landing fee to operate extra flights to popular destinations with smaller planes. This would give airlines incentives to operate to smaller destinations in the country since those flights would be cheaper to operate based on landing fees than those to popular destinations. That would stop airlines like American Eagle from operating a shuttle type service from LGA with planes that are small and just waste space at the airports.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
rjpieces
Posts: 6849
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:58 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 10:33 am

I don't think heavy regulation is needed...But surely there should be a cap on the number of RJs scheduled at JFK from 5-8PM....
"Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon"
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13809
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 11:53 am

Quoting WJ (Reply 11):
What's your point? You limit departures, airlines consolidate departures, result = less departures.

The new york airports get most congested at peak times. If you limit frequency, you will NOT cut flights at those peak times, you will just put larger planes at those same times.

Your example was a 4pm and 6pm flight. You won't magically make demand "average" to 5pm on this flight, as these 6-8pm flights are the "get home after business day" flights. So all it does is take away a flight from earlier in the day, make all those pax spend more time in NYC, and still have a 6pm flight.

LHR won't get magically decongested during peak times if you cut flights at 2pm and neither will the NYC airspace.

An RJ ban or restrictions would NOT cut congestion at peak times. It would only cut frequency at non-peak times, and even in NYC, there are those times.

The answer is as I've stated above: take leisure travel out of the big three airports when possible. It would help with road and air congestion. Business travelers want to fly into the main city. But leisure travelers would rather fly from airports close to home and not connect if possible. Flights to Florida from Trenton, Stewart, Albany, White Plains, etc. will help. And, lo and behold, airlines are adding these flights!

The other way to help with congestion is to rejigger the airspace. This is being done as we type.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
WJ
Posts: 299
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:14 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:44 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):
Your example was a 4pm and 6pm flight. You won't magically make demand "average" to 5pm on this flight, as these 6-8pm flights are the "get home after business day" flights. So all it does is take away a flight from earlier in the day, make all those pax spend more time in NYC, and still have a 6pm flight.

You are getting caught up on some random example details and missing my point. If you limit the number of flights an airport can accept during the day or during peak periods, airlines will consolidate service. Taking out a 2pm time slot is unnecessary so it wont be needed, but cut a 5-8 pm activity by 20% across the board and the airlines will be forced to rethink their schedule. Demand is a constant but the airports have to limit activity to what is actually available during certain periods or you will keep seeing these service nightmares around the NYC area. If that happens, the first ones to go would be the RJ's and alike.
146,727,732,733,734,735,73G,738,739,742,743,744,752,753,762,763,764,772,300,310,319,320,321,330,343,DC9,D10,MD11,M80,E17
 
Tornado82
Posts: 4662
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 10:19 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:50 pm

Quoting WJ (Reply 18):

i'm not sitting here with DL's schedule, I don't know where where they are sending their dash's from JFK to, they are going somewhere. It's what you would call an example...

They're going to places within a range that makes an RJ FAR too inefficient to run. CO is going to start running Q400's out of EWR to most of these same cities. Places like MHT and BDL were examples of the DL Dash 8s. Places where an RJ would get to the same (or lower) cruise altitude and gain next to nothing in block times because the flights are so short. Therefore there isn't a da*n thing wrong with those Dashes, they're taking the same airspace that the CRJ would on those short hops and are doing it in a much more fuel efficient way. On the other hand, a JFK to IND Dash 8 would be insanely (impossible due to weight restrictions?) long. Check a map for those distances, and compare them to the aforementioned cities that actually do receive Dashes from Delta.

Quoting WJ (Reply 22):
You are getting caught up on some random example details and missing my point.

Seems to be a theme with your posts in this thread.
 
westindian425
Posts: 729
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 7:46 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 1:34 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
Same goes for CO at EWR. They have overloaded that airport. But CO is already cutting back on RJ in favor of mainline, because flow at that airport has spilled over the top of the dam already. And they have jets of all sizes to try to match demand with supply both in size and frequency.

CO is actually replacing some of the Rj service with Dash 8's (operated by Colgan).
God did not create aircraft pilots to be on the ground
 
rjpieces
Posts: 6849
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:58 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 2:00 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):
And, lo and behold, airlines are adding these flights!

Yes, but they are not reducing flights at JFK/LGA/EWR while they add flights at other nearby airports.
"Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon"
 
HPAEAA
Posts: 882
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 7:24 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 3:58 pm

Quoting Commavia (Reply 1):
In my personal opinion, artificially constraining demand is bad policy long-term. The more prudent and fiscally responsible policy, in my view, would be to expand these airports to keep up with the growing demand -- stimulated by JetBlue's low fares, population growth, etc. If, throughout history, the solution to sustained economic growth was to artificially constrain it so as not to tax infrastructure, we would all probably still be living in rural farming villages growing our food. A bit of an exaggeration, I know, but I think it makes my point: at some point, you have to either harm your economy and arrest the free flow of commerce, or grow to match the changing demands of consumers. In other words, you can't just regulate air traffic forever. On second thought, you can, but it can cause serious harm to our economy.

Comvmavia, what demand constraints are you referring to?

Quoting Commavia (Reply 1):
Quoting B6ramprat (Thread starter):
This goes for American Eagle as well with all there ERJ service.

Eagle has really added not substantial service out of JFK in several years. CLE, BWI and YYZ got 1-2 ERJs each back in 2005-2006, and ORD got 2 ERJs last year. In the scheme of things, that's nothing. Beyond that, Eagle's JFK schedule has remained almost unchanged from 2003 -- 4x YUL, 4-5x DCA, 6x BOS, and 6x RDU.

Agreed, but at LGA they have a few more.......

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 6):
Another idea is for the US gov't to really invest in high-speed rail along the NE corridor. That would provide relief on many of the short-haul routes. There's no reason to have 40xdaily flights on DCA-LGA.

Acela, www.amtrak.com to make a reservation... it's actually one of the few places that Amtrak continually invests in to expand.. problem is, to maintain safety, it's quite expensive...

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 19):
Limiting the size of aircraft won't be good since that will eliminate service to smaller airports. Limiting the number of flights has the same effect. It ends service to smaller destinations.

no, I must admit, the one proposal before Port Authority was to require seat mins per gate at LGA...

OK, now that I'm done responding here's my idea....

There was an article out not too long ago... couldn't find the link, but the gist of it was that Airline delays cost the US economy Billions each year... i.e. loss of productivity, lost days, additional travel travel expenses (Hotel rooms, meals... ) NYC, being the largest market in the US, takes the majority of that for 2 reasons.. 1. The airspace is the most delayed in the world... 2. It's the largest market...

the proposal, Further reduce existing / introduce slot restrictions for all NYC Airports... (LGA, JFK, EWR)

By capping the number of flights several negative effects will occur...
1. Higher Fares (less supply and constant demand)
2. Less Markets served / Reduced frequency to existing markets

Points for consideration.
1. Despite higher fares, companies / Consumers will experience reduced ancillary costs of air travel.. i.e gain back the loss of productivity, added cost of meals and hotels.... consumers will experience the same...
2. By restricting the slots, airlines ultimately will allocate them to the most competitive markets.. as previously stated the 15 times a day that airlines fly to Columbus Ohio, or the nearly 20 times a day they fly to RDU, will be reduced, but over all it provides a more predictable schedule for travelers...
3. Airlines won't like this.. particularly if there are reduced slots vs. current levels at the major airports. Business won't like this because ultimately it equates to reduced frequency on the face of it... however they intimately will benefit... This places increased pressure from the financial capital of the world, airlines, and many other interest groups on Washington to upgrade an fix the ATC system...

How to determine slots...

Take the current takeoff and landings at each airport and calculate the current allocations..
i.e. JFK 0900 am hour...
B6 20 Percent
DL 20 percent
AA 15 percent..
............ (not factual, just an illustration)
and calculate the reduction needed to meet the realistic quota.. (Not Max takeoff per hour, but rather... say 70 percent of max takeoffs per hour (the actual percentage being a number calculated from the number of days that the ideal conditions exist... Figure it out later.. just think of idea of it)..

Let's just say that at the 0900 Hour at JFK there are 150 sked take offs and arrivals.. under the calculation above JFK's max per hour would be 120 (Again just pulling numbers from the air... ) that would be 80 percent of the current schedule.. how allocate the reductions based on current market share (in terms of takeoffs and landings) i.e. in the above ex for JFK, B6 would have to reduce the schedule by .04 percent, DL by .04 percent, and AA by .03..

By doing this Airlines are allowed to allocate resources effectively, and it allows them to run an ontime operations, which every exec agrees, helps the bottom line by creating a predictable operation...

The Key is that in all of this, the entity allocating and setting this up can just take into account a single airports capabilities but rather, the NYC airspace as a whole...

comments?
Why do I fly???
 
asuflyer05
Posts: 2058
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 8:53 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 4:43 pm

Why not just leave it unregulated and let the market determine the outcome?

Eventually passengers will get sick and tired of 2 hour GDPs and start choosing their flights based on where they connect. For example, I do not connect through SLC, DTW, MSP, or CLE during the winter. Why? Because I don't want to sit for an hour and a half waiting for deicing. In the summer time, I do not fly through IAH or ATL because of thunderstorms.
 
HPAEAA
Posts: 882
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 7:24 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 4:57 pm

Quoting Asuflyer05 (Reply 27):
Eventually passengers will get sick and tired of 2 hour GDPs and start choosing their flights based on where they connect. For example, I do not connect through SLC, DTW, MSP, or CLE during the winter. Why? Because I don't want to sit for an hour and a half waiting for deicing. In the summer time, I do not fly through IAH or ATL because of thunderstorms.

while some connect, I focus on nonstop, let's face it... I fly to CLE, CMH, and DFW alot.. it's all nonstop.. and the reality is if AA gives up a slot, DL, CO, US, etc.. line up to take it... it's the max under the current system.. bottom line, ppl are getting fed up with cancelation after cancelation... problem is, there's no alternative.. it's what everyone has to live with..
Why do I fly???
 
ANother
Posts: 1833
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 2:47 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 5:17 pm

Quoting WJ (Reply 14):
Which planet are you living on??? Your point makes no sense at all. Get rid of perimeter rule and see an increase in aircraft size? Where do you get that from? Most airport in the world have some type of restriction: Time of operation, size of aircraft, landing slots, gate availability, noise curfews and restrictions and so on. Its when there are no rules is when you get problems such as planes stuck on the runways for hours before getting a gate, takeoff waits of 4-5 hours and the rest of the much publicized misery associated with todays travel. Funny how all these recent event happened at JFK which has no such restriction. Would seem pretty reasonable to deduce that there is a problem at that airport, don't you think?

OK, I'll rephrase.

Keep maximum hourly slots
Keep buy-sell-lease rule
Give up perimiter rule.

US, for example, who have frequent flights to their neighbouring hubs would use some of those slots for new flights to points outside of the perminter - PHX / LAS for example. They won't put on a CRJ they will use an Airbus or Boeing.

US and others are feeding their e/coast hubs with small frequent services - and these flights are designed for connections, not so much for the local O&D markets.

The problem with Regulating 'efficient use' is that what is efficient for one, isn't efficient for another. Do we really want to replace 10 daily CRJs that suit customers schedules with 1 daily A380 operating at a time 90% of the passengers don't want? Same capacity but more 'efficient use of slots' for the airport maybe, but not for the airline or its customers.

Oh, and BTW - you don't need to be such a smart-ass, this forum is 'civil' aviation.
 
ADXMatt
Posts: 513
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:07 pm

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 6:54 pm

What needs to be fixed is the airspace/atc in the northeast.

We have an antiquated ATC radar system. We need congress to invest in the GPS system. Our airplanes are so much more capable then what our ATC system can do.

The NYC airports can NOT grow. There is no room. Unless they create more land where water currently is. This will not ultimately help if we don't fix out ATC system.

We also need to charge the corporate jets for taking away capacity. We are complaining about a 35 seat RJ or a Dash but what about the corporate jet with less then 10? Volume at TEB directly affect the capacity at EWR. There are also corp jets at LGA.

They need to be charged for using our airspace at peak demand times.

Islip (ISP) and SWF/Newburgh can also add frequencies but travelers like the convenience of LGA/JFK/EWR better. Look at WN they have multiple frequencies from ISP-MCO/FLL etc. It seems the more they add the more people go.Just by adding a frequency at the other airports doesn't meen reducing one from NYC.
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5288
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 10:17 pm

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 26):
Acela, www.amtrak.com to make a reservation... it's actually one of the few places that Amtrak continually invests in to expand.. problem is, to maintain safety, it's quite expensive...

Sorry, but Acela isn't real high-speed rail. It's faster than regular Amtrak, but it's still pretty slow. Most people in Europe and Asia would laugh at American's calling Acela "high-speed". Acela also has reliability problems and the schedule isn't frequent enough.

Quoting Asuflyer05 (Reply 27):
Why not just leave it unregulated and let the market determine the outcome?

Because then nothing will change. Keep in mind that a large number of people flying out of NYC are O+D traffic. They don't have any other options...unless you're going to tell a banker in Manhattan that they have to fly out of BDL.

The only way your suggestion would work is if one of the big airlines were to cut back flights, but I really don't see that happening in NYC. It's too lucrative of a market.
 
davescj
Posts: 1121
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 1:46 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Sun Jul 01, 2007 10:33 pm

I agree with many of the comments above -- and the fact that so many are repeated shows the need for a multi system solution. For what it is worth, I think we need desperately to up date ATC first. This is for two reasons: 1, safety and efficiency. Both of which are key concerns in moving planes around. 2, it will effect all flights nation wide. As we all know, delays at one airport will effect the whole system. Once ATC is more efficient, updated, better equiment, etc the public will be moved more quickly and with few delays generally.


The second part of this solution I think does need to include expansion of the airports. As pointed out above, it isn't a matter of filling in more of the bay or simply snapping one's fingers and creating a new airport. I think it is time to expand both JFK and LGA......of course, the costs will be HUGE due to property prices and all the other issues involved. If you don't think so, look at the cost of IAH expansion -- which I totally supported by the way. I think it was necessary and has helped the airport move more people effiecntly.

Third, I think a question about private aircraft needs to be raised. First, I am completely ignorant about pvt/biz jets coming into NYC airports. But, what #'s a day? If they were required to go to a different/biz/small jet only airport, would that make a difference to the # of takeoffs/landings?

Fourth, I what about voluntary cut backs of flights similar to what ORD did? (Though to be fair, the slot should not be "resold" either).

Just my 2 cents.

Dave
Can I have a mojito on this flight?
 
LawnDart
Posts: 862
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 11:33 pm

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Mon Jul 02, 2007 12:16 am

Quoting WJ (Reply 18):
i'm not sitting here with DL's schedule, I don't know where where they are sending their dash's from JFK to, they are going somewhere. It's what you would call an example...

You are sitting at a computer, so log on to delta.com and pull up their schedule.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):
An RJ ban or restrictions would NOT cut congestion at peak times. It would only cut frequency at non-peak times, and even in NYC, there are those times.

JFK was slot-controlled, but only during peak times (1500-2000?...something like that). Make the restrictions applicable during peak times, and you would cut congestion then.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):
The answer is as I've stated above: take leisure travel out of the big three airports when possible. It would help with road and air congestion. Business travelers want to fly into the main city.

Take the leisure traveller out of the equation, and the frequency of service for the business traveller gets reduced while the fare goes through the roof (more so then it does currently). Besides, how are you going to determine which passenger is leisure or which is business?

"Hi, I'd like to make a reservation for a trip to Council Bluffs."

"Is this business-related, or are you just going to visit Grandma?"

"Well, I'm just going to see my Grandma..."

"I'm sorry, I can't sell you a ticket out of LGA, but you can drive 80 miles up the road and fly out of Newburgh..."

"But, but...no one flies out of Newburgh!!!"
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13268
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Mon Jul 02, 2007 12:46 am

This was in Thursday's Star Ledger,

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/index....ews-11/1183006175249500.xml&coll=1

Quote:
Expecting a maddening summer of flight delays and short tempers, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is pushing federal aviation authorities and the airlines for more power to reduce the congestion of metropolitan-area skies.

The bistate agency has concluded that the best way to curtail massive traffic jams in the region's airspace is to use more large planes and reduce the growing number of smaller jets used for regional flights.



Quote:
"We'd like to have more passengers on less planes," said William DeCota, the Port Authority's aviation director.



Quote:
The Port Authority's analysis of local air traffic shows Newark Liberty International Airport and La Guardia Airport are operating far below the desired number of passengers per flight. Planes arriving and departing from Newark average 89 passengers, while the La Guardia average is 67. The average at John F. Kennedy International Airport is about 120.

The Port Authority would like to see an overall average of 120 passengers per plane for the three airports. Even JFK, DeCota says, can do better.

While commercial jets can seat as many as 400, the overall average can be dragged down dramatically by the regional jets, which contain as few as 35 seats per plane. Yet all planes take up essentially the same amount of airspace.



Quote:
Agency officials already have a formal proposal before the FAA seeking greater control at La Guardia, where the average passenger numbers are especially low.

The authority says it will offer incentives to airlines, such as better gate positions and possibly lower fees, to encourage the use of larger planes. The agency plans to seek similar power at Newark Liberty and JFK.



Quote:
Mary Clark, a spokeswoman for Continental Airlines, the largest carrier at Newark Liberty, said the carrier is prepared to listen to the Port Authority's arguments as long as smaller markets that rely on the regional jets are not hurt.

"Using aircraft that are the right size is one of our key priorities at Newark, and overall we have had a strategy of upgauging to carry more passengers in the same amount of airspace," said Clark.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
InTheSky74
Posts: 427
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 3:25 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Mon Jul 02, 2007 1:16 am

I think that all flights into/out of JFK/LGA/EWR should have a minimum of 70 or 90 seats to be able to operate. No more 35 and 50 passenger RJ's. Every time B6 adds a departure out of JFK, DL adds an RJ on the market to compete. It makes no sense. Yes, it's competition, but it's hurting EVERYONE.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13268
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Mon Jul 02, 2007 1:19 am

CO is replacing ERJs with Q-400s on routes of less than 500 miles from EWR, depending whether it's a ERJ-145 or an ERJ-135 it's an increase of 22-37 seats per flight.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Mon Jul 02, 2007 3:17 am

Quoting AirlineEcon (Reply 4):
n the end it looks like they need a mega airport for New York.

...which would be about the worst thing you can do in an O&D market of NYC's calibre--- witness LAX.

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 13):
Politicians will never allow any type of regulation...what would get cut? Routes like BTR/JAN/BHM-LGA are too high profile

both BTR-LGA and BTR-EWR have been cut
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
HPAEAA
Posts: 882
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 7:24 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Mon Jul 02, 2007 3:24 am

Quoting InTheSky74 (Reply 35):
I think that all flights into/out of JFK/LGA/EWR should have a minimum of 70 or 90 seats to be able to operate. No more 35 and 50 passenger RJ's. Every time B6 adds a departure out of JFK, DL adds an RJ on the market to compete. It makes no sense. Yes, it's competition, but it's hurting EVERYONE.

Let the carrier's decide what to fly in and out... just restrict the slots...
Why do I fly???
 
PGNCS
Posts: 2249
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:07 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Mon Jul 02, 2007 3:46 am

Quoting Commavia (Reply 1):
The more prudent and fiscally responsible policy, in my view, would be to expand these airports to keep up with the growing demand

Nice in an ideal world, but totally impossible in NYC due to physical and political constraints.

Quoting ANother (Reply 12):
No, we need less Regulation not more. Almost all of the so-called problems would be sorted by getting rid of the existing regulations, in particular the 'perimiter rule' the limits flights to/from LGA to points in the east.

Get rid of the rule and you would immediatly see an increase in aircraft size, as everyone would be falling over themselves puttling on flights to the west coast and who knows, even long-haul international flights (with appropriate aircraft - but if you can have a B757 flying from BDL, why not LGA?)

Government regulation should be limited to safety and security. Nothing else, let the market decide.

No, they would be falling all over themselves to add flights to the west IN ADDITION TO the existing schedule, making matters even worse.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):
The new york airports get most congested at peak times. If you limit frequency, you will NOT cut flights at those peak times, you will just put larger planes at those same times.

By definition limiting frequency reduces the number of flights.

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 26):
By capping the number of flights several negative effects will occur...
1. Higher Fares (less supply and constant demand)
2. Less Markets served / Reduced frequency to existing markets

Which is fine: airlines need to prioritize their services. There is no entitlement for any given city to have nonstop service to New York, though they all line up for slots when they become available. (And "become available" in this case has nothing to do with practical operational constraints, rather it is a political process.)

Quoting Asuflyer05 (Reply 27):
Why not just leave it unregulated and let the market determine the outcome?

Eventually passengers will get sick and tired of 2 hour GDPs and start choosing their flights based on where they connect. For example, I do not connect through SLC, DTW, MSP, or CLE during the winter. Why? Because I don't want to sit for an hour and a half waiting for deicing. In the summer time, I do not fly through IAH or ATL because of thunderstorms.

Because the issue isn't connecting passengers nearly as much as it is O&D passengers. If passengers are going TO NYC then they need to fly to NYC. International flights at JFK and EWR and JetBlue are the major sources of connections in NYC. We routinely see 2 hour delays waiting to take off at JFK (most of our International flights allow around 1:30 for taxi out time in the flight plan) and there is no shortage of passengers because in many cases it's the only practical way to get there.
 
N822ME
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 3:31 am

RE: Regulating Regional Service In EWR, LGA And JFK

Mon Jul 02, 2007 4:07 am

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 19):
With my policy, an airline would have restricted capacity. No route should have more than 4 daily flights on any airline if the aircraft have a capacity less than 150 people. Planes under 100 seats should be limited to only 3 daily flights on a specific route. I would allow exceptions though. Airlines could pay double the landing fee to operate extra flights to popular destinations with smaller planes. This would give airlines incentives to operate to smaller destinations in the country since those flights would be cheaper to operate based on landing fees than those to popular destinations. That would stop airlines like American Eagle from operating a shuttle type service from LGA with planes that are small and just waste space at the airports.

So Midwest Airlines should be banned from operating 88-seat Boeing 717s into LGA because it chooses to have 2 x 2 seating in the entire aircraft? Or should be limited to lesser frequency because of a product differentiation?

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos