Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
SQ22
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 2259
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:29 am

Boston Aviation - Part 11

Sat Sep 24, 2016 5:48 am

Please continue your discussion and to post your updates here.

Link to old thread:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=605739
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2593
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Sat Sep 24, 2016 5:59 am

Thank you Sq22 the old thread was beginning to feel like an old shoe at 690+ posts

Will be heading to BOS on Wednesday for a day trip to ORD... should be fun. Policy to take UA so a wander into Terminal B for a change.
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
User avatar
adamh8297
Posts: 3271
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Sat Sep 24, 2016 2:25 pm

clrd4t8koff wrote:
Yes, but look at the difference in services from BOS to LON vs CDG:

LON: has pretty much year round 4x BA, 1x VS, 1x DL for 6 dailies

CDG: In summer it's 2x AF, 1x DL, 1x AA.... however, in Winter more than 50% of that traffic is cut. AF drops to 1x daily, DL stays 1x daily and AA doesn't fly at all. On top of that DL's 1x daily drops from a 764/A333 to a 752 and AF uses a 772 (vs 77W & A332 in summer).

Does that say to you that CDG has traffic that's begging for another carrier? Even if it's only a summer flight, I'd be willing to bet if the demand was there AA would be using a 767 and not a 757. BOS-CDG is well covered as CDG (or Paris for that matter) doesn't have the demand from Boston that LON does.


Agree with you on this - DY wouldn't run BOS-CDG in winter especially since there would be zero connection opportunities.

However, this is the big ticket item: DY stimulates markets. People who were never going to Europe in the first are going to jump on $450-750 fares in a heartbeat. Their low fares are better than WW's as well.

Seats have gone up on BOS-CDG YOY in the past couple of years albeit with the notion this is a spoke to hub flight for DL/AF and DL is making a move in BOS as we all know. AA also feeds other airlines on BOS-CDG. Using VS4ever's site and the rolling 12 month seat capacity 4/2015 to 3/2016 versus 4/2014 to 3/2015 its 490K vs 400K total seats. If DY came in for 6 months at three weekly it will add 45K seats.

Concerning an AA 767 upgauge there are other factors especially fleet utilization: AA route planners (and concerning Transatlantic IAG and AY route planners) would prefer to use 767's or an A332 on other routes and not have widebodies dedicated to BOS especially just to squeeze in 40-50 extra seats for a seasonal route. The widebodies that tend to come into BOS are CLT/PHL based.
Airlines flown: A3, AA, AC, AF, AM, BA, B6, CA, CO, CX, DL, EA, EL, IB, LH, MI, MQ, NH, NW, NZ, OU, PE, QF, S4, SQ, TP, UA, US, VS, WE, WN
 
tjerome
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 3:03 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Sat Sep 24, 2016 4:28 pm

clrd4t8koff wrote:
Yes, but look at the difference in services from BOS to LON vs CDG:

LON: has pretty much year round 4x BA, 1x VS, 1x DL for 6 dailies

CDG: In summer it's 2x AF, 1x DL, 1x AA.... however, in Winter more than 50% of that traffic is cut. AF drops to 1x daily, DL stays 1x daily and AA doesn't fly at all. On top of that DL's 1x daily drops from a 764/A333 to a 752 and AF uses a 772 (vs 77W & A332 in summer).

Does that say to you that CDG has traffic that's begging for another carrier? Even if it's only a summer flight, I'd be willing to bet if the demand was there AA would be using a 767 and not a 757. BOS-CDG is well covered as CDG (or Paris for that matter) doesn't have the demand from Boston that LON does.


DL is putting a 763 on BOS-CDG this winter.

BOS-LHR is already no longer daily for DL since the summer schedule is over. VS will also not be daily in the winter but DL/VS combined will have at least 1 frequency per day in both directions.
 
clrd4t8koff
Posts: 1772
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 3:57 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Sun Sep 25, 2016 12:28 am

tjerome wrote:

DL is putting a 763 on BOS-CDG this winter.

BOS-LHR is already no longer daily for DL since the summer schedule is over. VS will also not be daily in the winter but DL/VS combined will have at least 1 frequency per day in both directions.


I'm curious where you're getting your info from. I just did a schedule search for all of next week and both airlines are daily to LHR. I also went through all of October and VS is daily BOS-LHR.

Perhaps you meant in Nov, Dec, Jan when they do have a few days where one of the two doesn't operate, which has been that way the last couple of years?
 
tjerome
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 3:03 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Sun Sep 25, 2016 3:11 pm

clrd4t8koff wrote:
tjerome wrote:

DL is putting a 763 on BOS-CDG this winter.

BOS-LHR is already no longer daily for DL since the summer schedule is over. VS will also not be daily in the winter but DL/VS combined will have at least 1 frequency per day in both directions.


I'm curious where you're getting your info from. I just did a schedule search for all of next week and both airlines are daily to LHR. I also went through all of October and VS is daily BOS-LHR.

Perhaps you meant in Nov, Dec, Jan when they do have a few days where one of the two doesn't operate, which has been that way the last couple of years?


Yes I did mean Nov-Feb, but also DL58 BOS-LHR did not operate on 9/13 and 9/19 (Tues/Mon respectively), with LHR-BOS not operating on the days after.
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2593
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Mon Sep 26, 2016 4:39 pm

VS cut back their flying in Nov and Feb (not seen Dec/Jan change) to less than daily

VS BOS-LHR NOV 1.0>0.8 FEB 1.0>0.9 (from August OAG report)


Massport August numbers are out:
I'll be putting the analysis up on the website tonight. However in the meantime, the high level.
Total Aug: 3,555,757 up 6.9% on 4.7% more flights
Int'l: 720,241 up 16% (nearly 100K just for the month) on 16.5% more flights
Dom: 2,825,138 up 4.9% on 1.9% more flights

YTD: 24,278.848 up 8.5% or nearly 2m on 2015 YTD
Int'l: 4,463,870 up 19% on 2015
Dom: 19,745,078 up 6.3% on 2015

Canada was a big mover up 32% for the month over Aug 15, Middle East was up 75%, Central America and Asia both up approx 17% year over year.
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
iyerhari
Posts: 1105
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 4:25 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Mon Sep 26, 2016 5:16 pm

New thread - Terminal E expansion has come with issues
http://www.eastietimes.com/2016/09/15/e ... expansion/

So, this expansion is not a done deal. On the same topic since we are on East Boston there was another thread regarding the Hyatt Harborside, wasn't this created by Dukakis to prevent Massport to make any further runway expansions?

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/boston-sub/ ... age=&desc=

I do not know much about Ed King as I wasn't there but I assume he was responsible for making many Logan expansions by invoking the wrath of neighboring residents.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10365
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Mon Sep 26, 2016 7:44 pm

iyerhari wrote:
New thread - Terminal E expansion has come with issues
http://www.eastietimes.com/2016/09/15/e ... expansion/
So, this expansion is not a done deal.

IIRC, 4(3?) of the gates had already been fully approved as part of the previous terminal E expansion, but Massport decided not to build them. I suspect the 7 proposed gates will be negotiated down to a number between 7 and 4. Either way I find it ironic that they are against the expansion on the basis of air quality when large widebody aircraft which are the most likely to benefit from the expansion are the least polluting aircraft.
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2593
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Mon Sep 26, 2016 8:10 pm

Norwegian upping capacity on OSL/CPH for S17

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... t-changes/
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
rsanzo
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:26 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Mon Sep 26, 2016 11:28 pm

Looking at BOS' impressive August numbers that Massport put out today, the possibility of Logan finishing 2016 with over 36 million pax becomes more likely!!!

-Couple of things to consider:
Logan at 24,278,848 pax 2016 YTD (8.5% YTD increase over 2015).... If BOS had the exact same passenger numbers from Sep, Oct, Nov and Dec 2015 for the remaining months of 2016; which would represent a 0% increase in month-over-month pax from 2015 to 2016 for each of the four remaining months of 2016, BOS would finish out 2016 with 35,343,279 pax.... Since it seems unlikely BOS won't not have any month-over-month increases from 2015 for Sep, Oct, Nov, and Dec, BOS will have to add 656,721 pax to 2015's numbers in the last four months of the year.

Having looked at the statistics, here is what is already known: For 2016, BOS has produced more than 6% MoM growth from 2015 for every month of the year so far, with the exception of April 2016 (5.4% MoM increase from Apr 2015). In 2015; Sep, Oct, Nov, and Dec had increases of 5.9%, 8.7%, 9.2% and 5.1% respectively, averaging an increase of 7.225% in pax for the final four months of 2015.

BOS will need to average a 5.95% increase in pax for each of the remaining months of 2016 in order to close out the year with 36 million pax. Looking at the new service and capacity upgrades BOS has already implemented in 2016, the new service/capacity increases still to come over the last 4 months of 2016, and taking into account the reductions in service BOS will experience throughout the rest of 2016 (cancelled Eurowings, loss of 2nd daily Emirates flight to DXB from Oct 1-Nov 15, TK down to 4x weekly for W2016/2017 from Oct 30 2016-Mar 25 2017, TAP down to 5x weekly for W2016/2017 effective Oct 30, etc); will BOS hit the 36 million pax level for 2016? If BOS hits 36 million, that will signify an increase from 2015 of 2,550,420; or over 7.6% increase from 2015. Is this milestone possible?

Also, what is the next big new service addition that BOS could get in 2017??? EY, AI, AV, JJ, BR, etc...
 
B752OS
Posts: 1316
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:05 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 3:20 am

rsanzo wrote:

Also, what is the next big new service addition that BOS could get in 2017??? EY, AI, AV, JJ, BR, etc...


I am going to guess the rapid growth we've seen at BOS over the last 3 years in terms of new service is going to slow down big time. You have to think Asia is already well covered between non-stops for NRT, PEK, PVG and HKG. EK trimming back service has to signal there is not a need for EY to enter the market. South America is the one region where things could heat up, and I use that term very lightly. Will AV use their BOG authority?
 
clrd4t8koff
Posts: 1772
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 3:57 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 11:53 am

B752OS wrote:
I am going to guess the rapid growth we've seen at BOS over the last 3 years in terms of new service is going to slow down big time.


More than likely we will see a slow down in new carriers announced. I'm really surprised F9 hasn't opened BOS.

However, with TK scaling back and Air Berlin in trouble (though appear to have found success in BOS), there may be room for a new European carrier if AB goes under. OS with a 767 and a similar schedule as their MIA operations (5x weekly) would be my guess. If we didn't have a recent announcement by DY to increase OSL & CPH next summer, and the current service by SAS, I'd even say perhaps AY could be a future contender. One World seems to be getting very serious about BOS with BA, IB, CX, AB, AA (seasonal CDG) international service.

B752OS wrote:
You have to think Asia is already well covered between non-stops for NRT, PEK, PVG and HKG.


Asia is very strong from BOS right now. It wouldn't surprise me if BOS did land one more Asian carrier. Lots of speculation that maybe KE to ICN will materialize.

B752OS wrote:
EK trimming back service has to signal there is not a need for EY to enter the market.


This is interesting statement. Out of 52 weeks in a year EK has trimmed their schedule by a whopping 6 of them to 1x daily, as they did with SEA as well. This doesn't exactly say that there's not a market for EY. Yes, QR reduced BOS this summer as they also did with MIA, IAH and PHL - so this also wasn't BOS specific. QR resumes daily services very soon.

B752OS wrote:
South America is the one region where things could heat up, and I use that term very lightly. Will AV use their BOG authority?


I definitely don't think South America will "heat up." Especially with the Brazilian economy where it is. Yes, AV has filed for BOG-BOS authority, but should this route ever happen I think it will be BOS only shot at a non-stop to South America until things turn around in Brazil.
 
User avatar
tlecam
Posts: 1511
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 12:15 pm

South America wil come in time, but it won't be until the economy there turns around. Eventually, at some point in the future, I do think we'll see flights to some of the major population centers ont he continent.

I agree that new carrier expansion will be moderated. Whether its AirBerlin or someone else, I do expect to see service to Berlin. Vienna is another possibility as well. The relative lack of direct flights by a US carrier to large foreign cities makes Boston attractive for hub flying for foreign airlines. For Asia, I would expect to see KE at some point, but that company is in trouble as well and they may not have the equipment available to fly BOS profitably. I do, however, expect to see a Hong Kong effect and I think that the large number of Skyteam business flyers who use Delta will use KE if it becomes available.
BOS-LGA-JFK | A:319/20/21, 332/3, 346 || B:717, 735, 737, 738, 739, 752, 753, 762, 763, 764, 787, 772, 744 || MD80, MD90
 
airbazar
Posts: 10365
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 1:04 pm

B752OS wrote:
I am going to guess the rapid growth we've seen at BOS over the last 3 years in terms of new service is going to slow down big time. You have to think Asia is already well covered between non-stops for NRT, PEK, PVG and HKG. EK trimming back service has to signal there is not a need for EY to enter the market. South America is the one region where things could heat up, and I use that term very lightly. Will AV use their BOG authority?


I agree with those who say things will slow down. In fact it wouldn't surprise me if we stagnate for a few years in terms of both passengers and routes. AV and KE are about the only medium term possibilities in my opinion but I don't feel particularly strong about either. The largest economy in Latin America is collapsing fast and the rest will feel a knock-on effect.

clrd4t8koff wrote:
Asia is very strong from BOS right now. It wouldn't surprise me if BOS did land one more Asian carrier. Lots of speculation that maybe KE to ICN will materialize.

I wouldn't call it strong because that would imply high yields, IMO. I'd say China has a lot of capacity, not Asia. However the fares are junk. I was just looking to take a quick trip to Beijing over Thanksgiving, and you can fly with AC via YYZ for $560, or non-stop with HU for about $700. Not even TATL prices are that cheap. Heck, for the week of Thanksgiving you probably can't fly to Florida for that little :)
 
clrd4t8koff
Posts: 1772
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 3:57 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:03 pm

airbazar wrote:
I wouldn't call it strong because that would imply high yields, IMO. I'd say China has a lot of capacity, not Asia. However the fares are junk. I was just looking to take a quick trip to Beijing over Thanksgiving, and you can fly with AC via YYZ for $560, or non-stop with HU for about $700. Not even TATL prices are that cheap. Heck, for the week of Thanksgiving you probably can't fly to Florida for that little :)


1). Just about anywhere international from the U.S. over Thanksgiving is going to be much cheaper than normal.

2). Those fares you're quoting aren't BOS specific. Heck, you can fly ORD-PEK over Thanksgiving For $471 r/t - https://www.google.com/flights/?f=0#sea ... 2016-11-25

Only the HU flights from BOS to PEK and PVG are pricing out less than $700.

Do a search for the non-stop JL to NRT or CX to HKG over Thanksgiving and you won't find anything near $500 r/t.

HKG - https://www.google.com/flights/?f=0#sea ... -11-28;s=0

NRT - https://www.google.com/flights/?f=0#sea ... -11-28;s=0

On top of that the fact we've seen both JL and HU upgauge to 789's and CX announce daily service for 2017 leads me to believe that yields in general are strong and the premium cabins are selling.
 
iyerhari
Posts: 1105
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 4:25 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:05 pm

Logically, wouldn't India seem more possible considering the tech industry and the constant flow of folks from India to Boston? Indian economy is also quite strong relative to others although the challenge would be which Indian carrier would be interested to make a trip? There was an interview with Thomas P Glynn and I am unable to find it and he said he felt India would be a sure shot route but challenge was carrier. Maybe DL?
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2593
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 3:59 pm

iyerhari wrote:
Logically, wouldn't India seem more possible considering the tech industry and the constant flow of folks from India to Boston? Indian economy is also quite strong relative to others although the challenge would be which Indian carrier would be interested to make a trip? There was an interview with Thomas P Glynn and I am unable to find it and he said he felt India would be a sure shot route but challenge was carrier. Maybe DL?


India is definitely a candidate, but given the connections on EK etc and how they couldn't make 2x daily work, is there enough of a market for both? Equipment and carrier is the key here, not sure DL is going to get into the Long Haul business out of BOS when it's winding back various places out of ATL over time. Although you have to counter that with them wanting to grow BOS as a "hub".

I think the next mover will be DY and maybe AV, DY have just increased CPH and OSL to a 789 and have stated intentions to fly to more places out of BOS, who knows they might be discussing that right now, but clearly them not getting D8 cleared is holding them back at least from ORK alone.

There are still small expansions coming (MT, CX) along with VS adding BOS-MAN next year. as have been noted along with some contractions as well at least in the winter period. Given the numbers flowing through DUB, and IAG wanting that to be a hub outside of LHR for them, I have to think someone new flying DUB-BOS is in order.

For those interested, new stats are up on the website for Massport August along with the aircraft mix stats at an overall level too. I'm continuing to put those in at an airline level, and they will be updated concurrently from next month's T-100, but I am still building the data needed at this point.

http://awhitelocks.wixsite.com/newenglandaero
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
georgiabill
Posts: 1276
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:53 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 4:24 pm

I personally would rather see LA fly BOS-LIM vs AV BOS-BOG. I prefer LA over AV no bad experiences, just a personal preferance. Lima is a great foodie town and a wonderful city to explore. If another airline chooses to fly to BOS from asia I think BR may try to make BOS-TPE work especially if KE does not announce BOS-ICN first. From europe I would like to see SN return on the BOS-BRU. I found Brussels to be a great city to visit and an airport easy to connect at. Other european airlines that may come someday LO BOS-WAW or OS BOS-VIE. As both serve a lot of the same routes it would be one or the other.
 
B752OS
Posts: 1316
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:05 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 4:40 pm

What is the current year round schedule to Asia? JL daily to NRT year round. CX 4 x weekly to HKG October to March, daily April to September, HU daily to PEK year round, HU 3 x weekly to PVG year round?
 
airbazar
Posts: 10365
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 4:41 pm

clrd4t8koff wrote:
1). Just about anywhere international from the U.S. over Thanksgiving is going to be much cheaper than normal.

Right but the point is how much cheaper it is than any other international destination. TP to Portugal is $1000 r/t over Thanksgiving.
But it's not just Thanksgiving. Over xmas you can buy right now for less than $900 on UA.

2). Those fares you're quoting aren't BOS specific. Heck, you can fly ORD-PEK over Thanksgiving For $471 r/t - https://www.google.com/flights/?f=0#sea ... 2016-11-25

Yes, the fares to China are junk because the market is saturated. BOS is no different.

Do a search for the non-stop JL to NRT or CX to HKG over Thanksgiving and you won't find anything near $500 r/t.

I did lookup Singapore and Hong Kong where I have friends. About $700 1-stop or $1000 non-stop. $500+ via IST :)
The Chinese carriers are putting too much downward pressure on TPAC fares. There's a reason why CX is hurting financially.

On top of that the fact we've seen both JL and HU upgauge to 789's and CX announce daily service for 2017 leads me to believe that yields in general are strong and the premium cabins are selling.

Maybe but that depends on what your definition of high yield is. Given CX's financial situation I wouldn't think their yields would be very high on most routes. As for JL, NRT has always been a strong performer, even before the route started. I can't argue with that. And part of the reason is their geographic location. Connecting in China is not very attractive for people traveling to/from Japan. But I still contend that BOS-Asia is not strong from a yield perspective. That could very well be what's keeping KE from returning.
 
User avatar
chrisnh
Posts: 4150
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 3:59 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 6:05 pm

It's interesting that a jump from 787-8 to 787-9 may or may not yield much in the way of a seat bump. I'll be on the BA 787-9 to LHR in a couple weeks and noticed it has only two more seats than the 787-8. But in the case of Norwegian, that difference is 50. Obviously, the front of the plane is where that disparity lies.
 
User avatar
adamh8297
Posts: 3271
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 6:17 pm

chrisnh wrote:
It's interesting that a jump from 787-8 to 787-9 may or may not yield much in the way of a seat bump. I'll be on the BA 787-9 to LHR in a couple weeks and noticed it has only two more seats than the 787-8. But in the case of Norwegian, that difference is 50. Obviously, the front of the plane is where that disparity lies.


I've heard the bump for HU is similar to DY - same amount of lie-flats on both 787-8 and 9.
Airlines flown: A3, AA, AC, AF, AM, BA, B6, CA, CO, CX, DL, EA, EL, IB, LH, MI, MQ, NH, NW, NZ, OU, PE, QF, S4, SQ, TP, UA, US, VS, WE, WN
 
clrd4t8koff
Posts: 1772
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 3:57 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 8:21 pm

VS4ever wrote:
India is definitely a candidate, but given the connections on EK etc and how they couldn't make 2x daily work, is there enough of a market for both? Equipment and carrier is the key here, not sure DL is going to get into the Long Haul business out of BOS when it's winding back various places out of ATL over time. Although you have to counter that with them wanting to grow BOS as a "hub".


This arguement again :? I really respect a lot of the info you bring to this forum, but how does trimming a schedule for 6-weeks (which they did with other U.S. markets also) state they can't make 2x daily work? Had they canceled the 2nd daily and only flew it for 2-3 months a year, then yes, it's a clear sign they couldn't make it work.

Also - because EK only operates IAD, ORD, DFW, IAH, SFO 1x daily does that mean that it's because they can't make those markets work? BOS has 2x daily 46 weeks a year, so something is working for BOS and there clearly is a strong market.

AI recently announced service to IAD, which already has TK, EK, QR and EY, all of which are daily. With TK reducing BOS and EY not at BOS (yet), AI or should look at this as a prime opportunity to seize the moment if they're ever going to. I wonder if 9W with an A330 via AMS would be a better option?
 
iyerhari
Posts: 1105
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 4:25 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 9:16 pm

Wasn't AI already serving Washington that was closed? If I remember, AI used to serve LAX that was closed I think in 2011. So technically they are only relaunching the service to IAD. At-least I have heard AI speak about BOS in Times of India readings but I have never heard 9W speaking anything about BOS. 9W currently does not fly direct to any US destinations - I suspect their first preference would be JFK or EWR.
 
rsanzo
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:26 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 9:46 pm

clrd4t8koff wrote:
B752OS wrote:
EK trimming back service has to signal there is not a need for EY to enter the market.


This is interesting statement. Out of 52 weeks in a year EK has trimmed their schedule by a whopping 6 of them to 1x daily, as they did with SEA as well. This doesn't exactly say that there's not a market for EY. Yes, QR reduced BOS this summer as they also did with MIA, IAH and PHL - so this also wasn't BOS specific. QR resumes daily services very soon.


Correct, well put @clrd4t8koff. EK is not cutting service due to poor loads or lack of operational success on BOS-DXB route. Temporary scale down in frequency for God knows why. I find it very difficult that EK would forfeit one of their daily flights permanently. EK has options when it comes to playing around with route capacity- swapping out one or both of the 777-300ERs for the 777-200LR. If EK swapped out both -300ERs for -200LRs, that would be a 25% reduction in capacity (352 total less seats, in both directions on both daily flights). It would make more sense for EK to play around with capacity before giving up on a frequency all together.

VS4ever wrote:
India is definitely a candidate, but given the connections on EK etc and how they couldn't make 2x daily work, is there enough of a market for both?


As touched on above.... The statement that ".....EK couldn't make 2x daily work...." is not true at all. EK is temporarily suspending one of their two daily flights from Oct 1-Nov 15, or 46 days to be exact. Routesonline refers to the EK schedule change as "seasonal frequency reduction" in the post, but this does not resemble a "seasonal frequency change" at all, given the incredibly short amount of time the change is in effect for. Surprising.... another post from routesonline that is not 100% accurate. If EK decides to extend their suspension through all of W2016/2017, then we can call it a seasonal frequency reduction. I think the cart is being put before the horse; until another statement from EK comes out confirming the extension of frequency reductions is presented, this is nothing more than a temporary frequency adjustment- airlines do this pretty frequently, especially on long-haul routes.

clrd4t8koff wrote:
However, with TK scaling back and Air Berlin in trouble (though appear to have found success in BOS), there may be room for a new European carrier if AB goes under. OS with a 767 and a similar schedule as their MIA operations (5x weekly) would be my guess. If we didn't have a recent announcement by DY to increase OSL & CPH next summer, and the current service by SAS, I'd even say perhaps AY could be a future contender. One World seems to be getting very serious about BOS with BA, IB, CX, AB, AA (seasonal CDG) international service.


Given everything that has been discussed here pertaining to the ME3 and other Middle East carriers; I think people need to take a step back and refocus their concentration on the big picture before jumping to hasty conclusions. A lot of variables are present that are causing these carriers to take a pause and reassess their strategies. In addition to all of the changes and schedule adjustments by the Gulf carriers, there are other things between the lines that, once realized and understood, help to create a clearer picture of the situation and at least explain why some of these changes are occurring. First, I think all the major ME players (TK, EK, EY and QR) are in the process of taking a pause for a few reasons. The biggest one is that the carriers need to give the international marketplace an opportunity for the true demand to catch up to the huge amounts of supply that have been added. Also, the carriers need to not continue focusing solely on adding new routes, but instead refocus more of their attention on developing and expanding capacity on the new routes they've added in order to make them more successful and self-sustainable (exactly what EY has been doing). EY is the only airline that has been doing this- by the end of 2016, they will have added only two routes: SAW and VCE. EY is working to consolidate their current routes, and also grow their footprint through acquisitions and forging interline agreements with airlines (AB, JU, AZ, 9W, VA). Another thing the major ME players are apparently starting to have difficulty coping with are their financials. Looking at TK's and EK's seasonal/temporary reductions (TK's reductions are caused by a confluence of factors, but yields are one of them); it appears these carriers are abruptly slowing down, reanalyzing the industry, and reshaping their strategies with respect to moving forward. I don't believe QR is at this point just yet, but I think given their recent explosion of growth, they are not far off from having to take a large-scale pause. If we look at EK's recent behavior, it seems evident they are considering a strategy realignment due to needing to improve their profits and operating revenues, as well as drive costs down. EK's realignment, I believe, started with their cancellation of their past Airbus A350 orders a while back- this marks EK's first major decision to start focusing less on rapid expansion. More recently, EK's addition of a 2-class A380 into their fleet is another feature they have implemented to improve their operating yields. Their decision a couple of weeks ago to start charging for seat selection on their flights is the most recent addition. EK recently flirted with the idea of adding premium economy to their flights, but ultimately decided this didn't align with their product philosophy. I think these are all reasons to substantiate the claim that everyone is stepping back and reassessing.

Certain things are evident though: TK's massive reductions are being fomented by terrorism, political instability in Turkey, and a recent downward trend in the Turkish economy. Also, Russia had suspended travel to Turkey following last year's incident where Turkey shot down a Russian warplane, and the massive drop-offs in passenger loads are just being realized and digested by the industry, and enough time has gone by for TK to analyze the statistical data and see the hard numbers on paper. It is worth mentioning that Russia is the largest contributor to the Turkish tourism industry and Russian tourists represent the largest number of foreign tourists that travel to Turkey. Luckily, tensions have started to cool and Russia has recently allowed direct transportation between the two countries to reopen. TK needs to allow time for some positive changes to take effect in order for their business plan to return to a growth model.

Over the summer months when QR scaled down their frequency on several routes (BOS went from 7x weekly to 6x weekly during S2016), this had nothing to do with poor performance or too much capacity to the ME. QR went on a blitz with adding new routes, as well as experienced some delivery delays from Airbus, and therefore, had to pull aircraft from existing routes in order to stick to their time frame for inaugurating the new routes. QR is now caught up with their deliveries and are finally starting to strike an equilibrium with aircraft availability and their newly added routes, as well as frequency/capacity expansion on existing routes, so we will see the reductions begin to go away (Oct 2 QR goes back to daily from BOS). It's also worth noting that another catalyst for QR's flurry of new route expansion is that just this year, the Qatari government struck an improved and renegotiated bilateral agreement with the Australian government allowing for increased flights, precipitating QR's decision to add new routes/expand service very quickly on QR's Oceana network. QR desperately needs to expand and develop its Oceana frequency/capacity/route offerings in order to improve feeds and better serve the European marketplace, where several travelers use the ME to connect to Australia and New Zealand. EY and EK's Oceana networks eclipse QR's, so QR has a lot of catching-up to do.

TK's huge seasonal capacity reductions present a unique opportunity for EY to get a foot into some new markets. It's not a slam dunk by any means, given that TK has a lot more flights to Africa, smaller ME destinations, as well as capture some connecting traffic from Europe to North America than AY does; however, it does create a small opening that EY could take advantage of in order to test out some markets they've considered serving in the US due to the overlap that EY and TK do have with one another. With all that said; however, I don't believe EY will capitalize on this opportunity given their current business strategy, and where their focus lies at the moment. Would be great to see them act on it, though!

VS4ever wrote:
iyerhari wrote:
Logically, wouldn't India seem more possible considering the tech industry and the constant flow of folks from India to Boston? Indian economy is also quite strong relative to others although the challenge would be which Indian carrier would be interested to make a trip? There was an interview with Thomas P Glynn and I am unable to find it and he said he felt India would be a sure shot route but challenge was carrier. Maybe DL?

Equipment and carrier is the key here, not sure DL is going to get into the Long Haul business out of BOS when it's winding back various places out of ATL over time. Although you have to counter that with them wanting to grow BOS as a "hub".


I agree, India is a huge, untapped market. DL definitely will not start a flight from BOS to India though, because that would require DL to pull one or two (depending on frequency) of their 777-200ER/LRs from current international flights, and they are just not going to do that- they only have 18 of them, and DL has them all tied up on TPAC flights, as well as on flights to Africa. Also, DL does not have a large enough network in place in BOS to potentially feed a flight to India with the necessary amount of transit traffic needed to fill the airplane. If DL were to start this flight, it would be virtually mostly O&D traffic on the flight from BOS-India; I suspect loads wouldn't be that good. If AI or 9W start the route, then transit traffic can reach BOS from several different cities throughout India, and passengers can go from BOS to multiple cities in India and beyond. I think AI will start a flight in the future, especially given that AI has identified BOS as a US point that it intends to serve.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 636842.cms

Now that AI is back to profitability, they are looking to bolster their long-haul network by adding new flights to US and Europe. SFO, DC, DFW, IAH and BOS are U.S. cities AI lists as a priority- they started SFO earlier this year, and D.C. is coming online in first half of 2017, so maybe we'll hear something later in 2017? It doesn't seem likely 9W will start a flight given that they dropped all their U.S. flights due to financial problems, which they have recently gotten passed and returned to profitability. My guess is that 9W has some priority cities it would like to first add to its U.S. portfolio before even thinking about BOS. One interesting thought though is that 9W start a service to BOS that stops in AUH, dropping off and picking up passengers, then continuing on to India- the service could be varied by AY/9W. Interesting, but just a thought.

airbazar wrote:

I agree with those who say things will slow down. In fact it wouldn't surprise me if we stagnate for a few years in terms of both passengers and routes. AV and KE are about the only medium term possibilities in my opinion but I don't feel particularly strong about either. The largest economy in Latin America is collapsing fast and the rest will feel a knock-on effect.


B752OS wrote:
You have to think Asia is already well covered between non-stops for NRT, PEK, PVG and HKG.


clrd4t8koff wrote:
Asia is very strong from BOS right now. It wouldn't surprise me if BOS did land one more Asian carrier. Lots of speculation that maybe KE to ICN will materialize.


I definitely think Asia still holds a lot of potential for BOS, given the success of the flights on all the carriers that serve BOS. The high load factors are a clear indication that more flights to Asia are coming. Based off of what I've read in aviation journals and reports, I think that BR is the next carrier to add service. In recent reports, BR identified BOS as one of a few destinations the carrier plans to add service to next. I am more doubtful that KE would add service, even though it makes sense given DL's size in BOS. KE has come out and said that it is specifically focused on improving its operational capabilities, and not considering TPAC expansion whatsoever.

http://centreforaviation.com/analysis/e ... air-258894
http://centreforaviation.com/analysis/a ... air-293746

clrd4t8koff wrote:
B752OS wrote:
South America is the one region where things could heat up, and I use that term very lightly. Will AV use their BOG authority?


I definitely don't think South America will "heat up." Especially with the Brazilian economy where it is. Yes, AV has filed for BOG-BOS authority, but should this route ever happen I think it will be BOS only shot at a non-stop to South America until things turn around in Brazil.


In the immediate future, South America is a market I would not expect a new service announcement from. With the exception of AV on BOG-BOS, no South American routes will open up to BOS. Airlines are clipping back capacity between the U.S. and South America given the economic/political turmoil on the continent. AV; however, I think will definitely add service once able to because 1) With respect to the majority of South American countries, Colombia has a very healthy and growing economy, and the country has a good, stable political system in place; and 2) AV can serve BOS with a single-aisle aircraft (A319) given the distance from BOG-BOS; so, not as much risk will be assumed given that a wide-body wouldn't be servicing the route. AV also has a pretty robust network, serving virtually every major city throughout Latin America. Given the geographic location of BOG, this route would bring some serious competition to CM.
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2593
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 10:49 pm

Ok guys I stand corrected. Yes a short term seasonal reduction a failure of strategy does not make. I wrote that post in a hurry and overstated the position and rsanzo is correct, if they extend it further then maybe there is a case for my position, but for now it's a wait and see. That said if bookings were strong for this part of the season they wouldn't have necessarily chopped the flight.
I await the next stretch with interest. Trust me I want EK 2x daily, and would love AI or 9W to join in, the more the merrier I'm just not yet convinced the market is there. I will be more than happily proven wrong and eat humble pie if it works. It would be a nice problem to have.
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
aaflyer777
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 11:16 pm

Slight change of topic but does anyone think F9 will resume service to BOS? New England seems to be a gaping hole in their network.
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2593
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Tue Sep 27, 2016 11:50 pm

aaflyer777 wrote:
Slight change of topic but does anyone think F9 will resume service to BOS? New England seems to be a gaping hole in their network.


Yeah clearly doesn't seem like a priority to them, maybe they can tread where WN and B6 won't go (PVD and MHT). If it's about BOS, where do they fit in terms of gate space? the only logical option right now is Terminal B I would guess. Given NK at least have some kind of presence here, i'm a little surprised they haven't re-dipped their toes in the water. So let's play route roulette, where do we think they would go if they returned to the area?
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
User avatar
adamh8297
Posts: 3271
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Wed Sep 28, 2016 12:40 am

The top 10 unserved markets from BOS based on 2011 O+D are:

ICN - KE/OZ hub
BCN - LCC infested and highly seasonal - perfect for a airline based in Norway.
YVR (this is probably #1 right now out of the top 10) - AC hub
MXP - LCC infested and honestly not the preferred airport for the metro area
ATH - highly seasonal and regional hub for narrow body operator A3
GUA - no hub - major VFR component
SJO - AV focus city
BOM - multi-airline hub
GRU - JJ hub + bad economy
DEL - multi-airline hub

We already talked most of these destinations (and some other ones with bigger hubs like AUH) to death but two of the above GUA +SJO have a few things in common: located in Central America, can be served by narrow-body, and cater to two important B6 customer bases: VFR and leisure.

Why not try a 4X GUA 3x SJO with one plane or even make it a 2-2-3 split with SAL. B6 hasn't been shy in starting some of these markets with less than daily service.
Airlines flown: A3, AA, AC, AF, AM, BA, B6, CA, CO, CX, DL, EA, EL, IB, LH, MI, MQ, NH, NW, NZ, OU, PE, QF, S4, SQ, TP, UA, US, VS, WE, WN
 
PVD757
Posts: 3299
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 8:23 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Wed Sep 28, 2016 2:13 am

The GUA traffic is largely driven from the PVD area but with no DFW, IAH, and MIA service, connecting options are limited.
 
rsanzo
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:26 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Wed Sep 28, 2016 2:17 am

VS4ever wrote:
Ok guys I stand corrected. Yes a short term seasonal reduction a failure of strategy does not make. I wrote that post in a hurry and overstated the position and rsanzo is correct, if they extend it further then maybe there is a case for my position, but for now it's a wait and see. That said if bookings were strong for this part of the season they wouldn't have necessarily chopped the flight.
I await the next stretch with interest. Trust me I want EK 2x daily, and would love AI or 9W to join in, the more the merrier I'm just not yet convinced the market is there. I will be more than happily proven wrong and eat humble pie if it works. It would be a nice problem to have.



With regard to all the questioning of whether or not demand is present, especially when people base their belief of whether or not a route/carrier should service a particular destination..... This is a very multidimensional topic, and people don't clearly consider all of the dimensions when coming to understand, appropriately, if a service could successfully be implemented. When it comes to the ME carriers, the demand is present in two different forms- kinetic and potential. Kinetic obviously pertains to the tangible, visible demand in a particular market. This is usually in the form of O&D passengers- so just looking at the actual traffic that will travel between the two points. Potential demand is the make-it-or-break-it component. In addition to looking at the potential transfer traffic that will utilize the flight, and traffic the carrier could steal from other airlines, to connect to points beyond, several other aspects are considered because they are potential components to grow demand where there currently is none. So looking at things such as: premium product offered by the carrier (premium traffic is a huge niche market), JVs/interline agreements with other carriers at either airport (this is a tremendous aspect that I feel people constantly overlook), carrier's pricing (we have seen DY CREATE demand in the market due to how they have approached the market and the way they have priced their flights), etc. So with all of that said, beyond the point to point O&D traffic, so many other features pertain to route success, whether it is already there or is created.

So looking at EY, for example, I believe much potential lies with Etihad servicing BOS. First, even though it is close to, Dubai, it is still a new market with no direct service. Second, the addition of another ME carrier between the Gulf and BOS will further drive down fares, which likely will result in the creation of new demand because more people will be able to afford travel. Third, EY has very robust offerings to Oceania and India; so therefore, you are providing additional choice to travelers looking to reach those markets. Fourth, EY's copious amount of acquisitions and interline agreements create so much potential for additional travelers on the route (i.e. codesharing with Alitalia, Air Berlin, Jet). The addition of a carrier like this could further stimulate the market and create further opportunity, for example, given AY's ownership in AZ, it could yield the opening of a new AY/AZ MXP-BOS route (if it's AY, it could be a fifth freedom opportunity much like EK has between MXP and JFK). Also, it would create an opportunity for 9W to codeshare on the flight and connect a ton of India traffic beyond AUH to a dozen destinations in India. Fifth, if EY were to create an interline agreement with airlines in BOS, such as B6, now BOS is able to feed passengers from over 140 flights a day onto the EY flight through BOS. Sixth, CBP pre-clearance facilities in AUH will be particularly appealing to travelers and could steal traffic from other carriers in the area/cause additional, new passengers to transit through the airport. Lastly, EY boasts a premium cabin that EK and QR struggle to compete with. This is a component that could cater to business customers, as well as create a strong customer loyalty base. Also worth noting... EY would be able to utilize the 787-9, which has significantly less capacity than the 777-300ER, and even the A350-900. A smaller long-range aircraft such as this affords EY the ability to test the route and develop it over time, while having to fill less seats starting out. I truly believe that as they get more 787-9s, and especially when they start receiving the A350, it's only a matter of time before service to BOS is announced.

With all that said, I think EY would definitely have success if they added Boston. While the points I hit on aren't make-it-or-break-it features on an individual basis, when you put them together and consider them in the context of all the aspects, I believe together, as a whole, it serves as the complete picture that needs to be looked at and analyzed when considering route viability.
 
styles9002
Posts: 258
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 8:21 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Wed Sep 28, 2016 2:32 am

[quote="adamh8297"]The top 10 unserved markets from BOS based on 2011 O+D are:]

Is 2011 data the most current available? If so, I don't know how relevant 2011 data is for trying to figure out where the next non-stop route will be for 2017. While I am sure some of it is still accurate, the massive growth BOS has experience since 2011 would cause me to use that 2011 data cautiously. The proliferation of new non-stops and resulting stimulation in those markets and beyond due to new connecting options that didn't exist before will likely result in 2015 & 2016 data so different from 2011 that it probably renders the 2011 of little use when trying to gauge the next step.

My amateur opinion was the KE was a logical candidate to resume BOS service but having read some of the feedback in this thread it appears that KE may not be as strong a candidate at the moment. Additionally, I had not really considered BR as an option but some of the comments here indicate they may be in play to commence service to Logan. If BR did launch service, that would be one long flight at over 7700 miles.

Summer seasonal service to BCN would likely be a DY route and I doubt anyone on here would be shocked if they did 3 or 4 times a week in S17.
It is what it is.
 
User avatar
adamh8297
Posts: 3271
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Wed Sep 28, 2016 12:03 pm

styles9002 wrote:
adamh8297 wrote:
The top 10 unserved markets from BOS based on 2011 O+D are:]

Is 2011 data the most current available? If so, I don't know how relevant 2011 data is for trying to figure out where the next non-stop route will be for 2017.


No but its the only free data available and it does give you something to work off of. 2011 was also a bad economic time for the US and a disastrous time for Japan due to Tsunami.

From numbers that have been leaked on line by anna.aero, routesonline, or the route shop, there has been some steady increases in YVR and BCN. What we don't know is how much BOM, DEL, BLR, etc. have stimulated by EK/QR.
Airlines flown: A3, AA, AC, AF, AM, BA, B6, CA, CO, CX, DL, EA, EL, IB, LH, MI, MQ, NH, NW, NZ, OU, PE, QF, S4, SQ, TP, UA, US, VS, WE, WN
 
aaflyer777
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Wed Sep 28, 2016 12:55 pm

I might be mistaken but wasn't Massport trying to convince DL to launch BOS-MXP? I know gates are a problem for them right now but maybe once the B renovations are done they could try it. There's also the chance AZ gives it a go, I remember reading something about them doing more long haul flying out of MXP.
 
rsanzo
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:26 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Wed Sep 28, 2016 4:55 pm

aaflyer777 wrote:
I might be mistaken but wasn't Massport trying to convince DL to launch BOS-MXP? I know gates are a problem for them right now but maybe once the B renovations are done they could try it. There's also the chance AZ gives it a go, I remember reading something about them doing more long haul flying out of MXP.


Massport has been working feverishly to court an airline to do MXP-BOS flights, but I don't recall them singling out a specific airline, I think they have been knocking on several carrier's doors about launching this route segment.

I will state though; however, while MXP is a massive, unserved market that BOS needs to obtain direct flights to, I have a reservation about DL launching the flight, and would be skeptical of its success.

--DL definitely has a decent footprint in BOS, but is still considered very small when you compare it to the likes of DL's larger hubs, or other airline hubs. Boston and Milan are irrefutably large international cities with huge business traveler markets, and the cities absolutely need a direct transportation connection, that would likely yield success; no doubt. However, I consider it very risky for DL to enter a TATL market that was an unserved market prior to the route launch. I think it would be smarter for an airline like DL to enter a market with good, verifiable statistics, that they know is successful due to already having service; such as Dublin, from Boston. MXP would be an uphill battle for DL based on a couple different aspects:

1)DL has a bit of an underwhelming base of operations in BOS. While DL does connect some important domestic markets to BOS, such as CMH, CVG, DTW, IND, LAX, MKE, MSP, MCO, RDU, RIC, SLC, SEA; and soon to BNA, and SFO; I think that at less than 90 flights a day, currently, DL's BOS operations fall a little short of being able to feed a flight to MXP. I believe that in order for DL to be able to affirm and secure its success, DL would need to connect BOS with some additional key markets, especially business ones, such as: ORD, DCA, LAS, DFW/DAL, IAH/HOU, PHL, PIT. None of these cities have direct links to MXP, and I believe travelers might consider avoiding the likes of JFK or EWR for BOS, especially if DL boosted its route offerings and frequencies from BOS.

2)If you consider the perspective of someone from Milan using a BOS flight on DL to connect to RDU or SFO or SEA, etc.; it is irrevocably inconvenient and rendered purely inefficient given that passengers would deplane at E, then have to venture all the way over to A, after going through immigration and customs. While it is likely and admittable that a transfer from E to A wouldn't turn everyone away, I believe it is not incorrect to project that that transfer would cause some people to consider other options when looking for carriers and cities to connect through. I must underscore though; however, that while a transfer from E to A at BOS is not nearly as abysmal as transferring at LHR, ATL, EWR, DFW, IAH, etc.; a transfer from int'l to domestic on DL at BOS pales in comparison to connecting through those other cities, and isn't very applicable since DL's BOS operations comes nothing close to hub operations at these other cities in terms of routes and frequencies. While transferring at ATL or DFW or LHR is a whole different animal, airport officials at those airports have worked to streamline the process as best they can, given that those airports handle 70-100+ million travelers a year. And for airports with north of 80 million pax, it is as hectic as one could expect, but acceptable for the most part. I'm not saying that their techniques of ushering transfers through are flawless, or that there are never waits or delays at immigration/customs at those larger airports, but I will say the process at BOS, an airport of roughly 36 million is pretty comparable to the process at ATL or LHR, due to operational failures by Massport and Terminal E/CBP limitations; and that is what MXP travelers won't put up with when transferring at BOS, especially given that BOS' DL route offerings and frequencies pale in comparison to DL's larger bases- crummy connecting options/waits/delays at BOS; and from that perspective, travelers from MXP won't consider a BOS transfer on DL to be deemed justifiable. For this to be worth it, DL would need to boost domestic operations at BOS, like they did at SEA, in order to give connecting international travelers enhanced connecting options.

Thinking about what makes the most sense for who should operate this route segment, I continue to come up with AZ/EY. This would be a power move for them, and a smarter one than having DL service the city pairs. With an Alitalia/Etihad flight from MXP-BOS, so many opportunities are created. First, the two carriers are pretty integrated given EY's large acquisition of AZ equity. This would allow either carrier to serve the route, or both of them to switch off. This link could continue on to AUH, providing travelers unfettered access to EY's and 9W's extensive flights to India. The logical thing would be for EY to serve this route under fifth freedom rights (although if it is also coded as an AZ flight it might not need to be), because EY has an interline agreement with B6, and effective Dec 2016, EY will have an interline agreement with DL. AZ only interlines with DL. So on the BOS end, you give travelers access to connections on DL and B6, and on the MXP/AUH side, you give travelers access to connections on AZ, EY and 9W. With that kind of feed and interline efficiency, EY could potentially cast its net over three huge markets from BOS: BOS-MXP, BOS-AUH (ME), BOS-India.
 
User avatar
chrisnh
Posts: 4150
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 3:59 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Wed Sep 28, 2016 7:17 pm

More on the NAI/BOS-Cork flights.

$69 one way, but they don't tell you how much it will cost to come home ;-)

http://www.eveningecho.ie/cork-news/nor ... k/2535816/
 
User avatar
adamh8297
Posts: 3271
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Wed Sep 28, 2016 7:31 pm

chrisnh wrote:
More on the NAI/BOS-Cork flights.

$69 one way, but they don't tell you how much it will cost to come home ;-)

http://www.eveningecho.ie/cork-news/nor ... k/2535816/


Typically its add $100 for the taxes on the return so my guess is there will be some roundtrip fares under $300 ... maybe just under $250 if we are lucky. This will be no checked bags and no seat selection of course

In comparison to other non-stops

Cheapest BOS-LGW roundtrip is $358.00
Cheapest BOS-OSL roundtrip is $351.20
Cheapest BOS-CPH roundtrip is $380.00
Airlines flown: A3, AA, AC, AF, AM, BA, B6, CA, CO, CX, DL, EA, EL, IB, LH, MI, MQ, NH, NW, NZ, OU, PE, QF, S4, SQ, TP, UA, US, VS, WE, WN
 
AviationAddict
Posts: 770
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 2:37 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:04 pm

Logan Airport Facebook page is reporting VX will begin operations from Terminal C effective tomorrow, Sept. 30th.

https://www.facebook.com/BostonLogan/?h ... ED&fref=nf
 
airbazar
Posts: 10365
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Thu Sep 29, 2016 4:25 pm

rsanzo wrote:
2)If you consider the perspective of someone from Milan using a BOS flight on DL to connect to RDU or SFO or SEA, etc.; it is irrevocably inconvenient and rendered purely inefficient given that passengers would deplane at E, then have to venture all the way over to A, after going through immigration and customs.While it is likely and admittable that a transfer from E to A wouldn't turn everyone away, I believe it is not incorrect to project that that transfer would cause some people to consider other options when looking for carriers and cities to connect through.

People from Europe don't mind walking or taking a bus. It's part of everyday life over there. It's Americans that would balk at the thought of taking 5 steps to go from one gate to another :) Now that I'm don insulting an entire country, the connection from E to A is one of the easiest if not the easiest at Logan. You have moving walkways all the way thru, and never have to step outside. Have you tried connecting at CDG/AMS from a Schengen flight to a U.S. flight? It's far worse than what you are suggesting at BOS and I'm not even counting with the possibility of being parked at a hard stand and having to take a bus which is a common at AMS, or the nightmare immigration lines at CDG which is the only airport I've ever been to where it is worse than BOS.
 
rsanzo
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:26 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Fri Sep 30, 2016 12:04 am

airbazar wrote:
People from Europe don't mind walking or taking a bus. It's part of everyday life over there. It's Americans that would balk at the thought of taking 5 steps to go from one gate to another :) Now that I'm don insulting an entire country, the connection from E to A is one of the easiest if not the easiest at Logan. You have moving walkways all the way thru, and never have to step outside. Have you tried connecting at CDG/AMS from a Schengen flight to a U.S. flight? It's far worse than what you are suggesting at BOS and I'm not even counting with the possibility of being parked at a hard stand and having to take a bus which is a common at AMS, or the nightmare immigration lines at CDG which is the only airport I've ever been to where it is worse than BOS.


So you completely failed to identify my main point based on your response, because you missed it entirely. I was not referring to the sheer distance and time the walk from E to A takes. In comparison to most major airports around the world, walking from E to A is nothing. What I was hitting on is that DL will not have overall success transferring passengers from Europe through BOS onto other domestic markets due to the lackluster immigration/customs process in Terminal E. In addition, several transatlantic flights that arrive in BOS during peak hours will sit on the tarmac waiting for a gate for long periods of time, sometimes hours. The long wait on the tarmac, and the three-ring circus inside E could take someone as much as three hours or more to finally walk out of E. I lived in Europe for three years and traveled the entire continent and made transatlantic trips to the U.S. 3-4 times a year, so I don't need to be told how airports in Europe run things as I have traveled through them all several times. For work, I travel extensively around the world to cities such as: London, Paris, Frankfurt, Madrid, Amsterdam, Brussels, Riyadh, Istanbul, Singapore, Manila, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Seoul, Delhi, Shanghai, Moscow, Sao Paulo, Sydney, Dubai, etc- Going to Dubai in a month for the 20th time probably. With all of the major airports around the world I frequently travel through, Boston is towards the top of the list (given their recent Terminal E woes) as one of the worst in terms of clearing customs and immigration. I went through IAH last week coming in from Paris on UA, and I went through customs in more than half the time it typically takes me in BOS. For BOS' size (35-36 million), Massport and CBP have done a terrible job with processing international arrivals. The truth is, I'd rather go through customs in CDG, DXB, BRU, or HKG because I will get through quicker than I will at BOS, given how things are currently being done.

So, with all that said, my point that I was making was that connecting passengers from Europe to other domestic destinations will start avoiding BOS like the plague, not because of having to walk from E to A, but instead because of the system/limitations currently in place for clearing immigration/customs.
 
mugsy519
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2016 12:22 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Fri Sep 30, 2016 1:28 am

3+ hours seems like a gross exaggeration to me. Maybe once in a while the entire arrival exp at terminal E will take that long but that is definitely not the norm. In my many experiences arriving at E I think 1:30 total time is the most I've had to deal with, even during the peak summer times.

Arrived off of Emirates last week around 3pm (yes I know it's Sept) and was actually surprised how much of a breeze immigration was. Although baggage could use some help!
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2593
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Fri Sep 30, 2016 2:57 am

want to know how long our friends in CBP actually take to clear people, we have the data right here, direct from the source, I will be setting up September numbers next week. They are not perfect because the data from CBP themselves is not perfect, but should give you an indication of how it gets. Below is the status for August and comparatives. But significant improvements have been made in 2016 over 2015 in terms of times.

http://awhitelocks.wixsite.com/newengla ... throughput

DL will not have a problem transferring its folks on it's incoming flights from CDG, AMS, LHR or DUB because they all land at between noon and 1pm, which is well before the evening crush of passengers, in fact by the time the DUB flight arrives, the earliest DL flight will be close to be leaving the stand in Terminal E. and should the flight be on time, the only other flight that gets close is the early afternoon BA flight. DL have been very savvy in their timings and frankly it works in their favor in my book, because it's nice to get back to BOS at that time and get home before the rush hour starts on 1A, 60 and 1 going out of city.

http://awhitelocks.wixsite.com/newenglandaero/terminale

I completely agree that right now at crush time it's ridiculous, but given the timing of the new DL flight, its customers will not have the same.
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
tjerome
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 3:03 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Fri Sep 30, 2016 3:13 am

DL connects plenty of people coming from AMS/CDG to LGA, RDU, and some of the other regional flights that all leave around 2pm.

As rumored DL is starting BOS-DUB next year.
 
styles9002
Posts: 258
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 8:21 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Fri Sep 30, 2016 3:16 am

[quote="VS4ever"]
DL will not have a problem transferring its folks on it's incoming flights from CDG, AMS, LHR or DUB because they all land at between noon and 1pm, which is well before the evening crush of passengers, in fact by the time the DUB flight arrives, the earliest DL flight will be close to be leaving the stand in Terminal E. and should the flight be on time, the only other flight that gets close is the early afternoon BA flight.

Why would DL's DUB arrival go into Terminal E? Surely it would just arrive at Terminal A since it will have been pre-cleared by US CBP in Dublin?
It is what it is.
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2593
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Fri Sep 30, 2016 3:22 am

styles9002 wrote:
VS4ever wrote:
DL will not have a problem transferring its folks on it's incoming flights from CDG, AMS, LHR or DUB because they all land at between noon and 1pm, which is well before the evening crush of passengers, in fact by the time the DUB flight arrives, the earliest DL flight will be close to be leaving the stand in Terminal E. and should the flight be on time, the only other flight that gets close is the early afternoon BA flight.

Why would DL's DUB arrival go into Terminal E? Surely it would just arrive at Terminal A since it will have been pre-cleared by US CBP in Dublin?


Actually as it's late and I've had 2 long days in a row, I had forgotten about that... which proves my point further that it will not be an issue for connecting :) whichever way it happens, but yes, as they have pre-clear Terminal A it would be.
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26558
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:42 am

rsanzo wrote:
aaflyer777 wrote:
I might be mistaken but wasn't Massport trying to convince DL to launch BOS-MXP? I know gates are a problem for them right now but maybe once the B renovations are done they could try it. There's also the chance AZ gives it a go, I remember reading something about them doing more long haul flying out of MXP.


Massport has been working feverishly to court an airline to do MXP-BOS flights, but I don't recall them singling out a specific airline, I think they have been knocking on several carrier's doors about launching this route segment.

I will state though; however, while MXP is a massive, unserved market that BOS needs to obtain direct flights to, I have a reservation about DL launching the flight, and would be skeptical of its success.

--DL definitely has a decent footprint in BOS, but is still considered very small when you compare it to the likes of DL's larger hubs, or other airline hubs. Boston and Milan are irrefutably large international cities with huge business traveler markets, and the cities absolutely need a direct transportation connection, that would likely yield success; no doubt. However, I consider it very risky for DL to enter a TATL market that was an unserved market prior to the route launch. I think it would be smarter for an airline like DL to enter a market with good, verifiable statistics, that they know is successful due to already having service; such as Dublin, from Boston. MXP would be an uphill battle for DL based on a couple different aspects:

1)DL has a bit of an underwhelming base of operations in BOS. While DL does connect some important domestic markets to BOS, such as CMH, CVG, DTW, IND, LAX, MKE, MSP, MCO, RDU, RIC, SLC, SEA; and soon to BNA, and SFO; I think that at less than 90 flights a day, currently, DL's BOS operations fall a little short of being able to feed a flight to MXP. I believe that in order for DL to be able to affirm and secure its success, DL would need to connect BOS with some additional key markets, especially business ones, such as: ORD, DCA, LAS, DFW/DAL, IAH/HOU, PHL, PIT. None of these cities have direct links to MXP, and I believe travelers might consider avoiding the likes of JFK or EWR for BOS, especially if DL boosted its route offerings and frequencies from BOS.

2)If you consider the perspective of someone from Milan using a BOS flight on DL to connect to RDU or SFO or SEA, etc.; it is irrevocably inconvenient and rendered purely inefficient given that passengers would deplane at E, then have to venture all the way over to A, after going through immigration and customs. While it is likely and admittable that a transfer from E to A wouldn't turn everyone away, I believe it is not incorrect to project that that transfer would cause some people to consider other options when looking for carriers and cities to connect through. I must underscore though; however, that while a transfer from E to A at BOS is not nearly as abysmal as transferring at LHR, ATL, EWR, DFW, IAH, etc.; a transfer from int'l to domestic on DL at BOS pales in comparison to connecting through those other cities, and isn't very applicable since DL's BOS operations comes nothing close to hub operations at these other cities in terms of routes and frequencies. While transferring at ATL or DFW or LHR is a whole different animal, airport officials at those airports have worked to streamline the process as best they can, given that those airports handle 70-100+ million travelers a year. And for airports with north of 80 million pax, it is as hectic as one could expect, but acceptable for the most part. I'm not saying that their techniques of ushering transfers through are flawless, or that there are never waits or delays at immigration/customs at those larger airports, but I will say the process at BOS, an airport of roughly 36 million is pretty comparable to the process at ATL or LHR, due to operational failures by Massport and Terminal E/CBP limitations; and that is what MXP travelers won't put up with when transferring at BOS, especially given that BOS' DL route offerings and frequencies pale in comparison to DL's larger bases- crummy connecting options/waits/delays at BOS; and from that perspective, travelers from MXP won't consider a BOS transfer on DL to be deemed justifiable. For this to be worth it, DL would need to boost domestic operations at BOS, like they did at SEA, in order to give connecting international travelers enhanced connecting options.

Thinking about what makes the most sense for who should operate this route segment, I continue to come up with AZ/EY. This would be a power move for them, and a smarter one than having DL service the city pairs. With an Alitalia/Etihad flight from MXP-BOS, so many opportunities are created. First, the two carriers are pretty integrated given EY's large acquisition of AZ equity. This would allow either carrier to serve the route, or both of them to switch off. This link could continue on to AUH, providing travelers unfettered access to EY's and 9W's extensive flights to India. The logical thing would be for EY to serve this route under fifth freedom rights (although if it is also coded as an AZ flight it might not need to be), because EY has an interline agreement with B6, and effective Dec 2016, EY will have an interline agreement with DL. AZ only interlines with DL. So on the BOS end, you give travelers access to connections on DL and B6, and on the MXP/AUH side, you give travelers access to connections on AZ, EY and 9W. With that kind of feed and interline efficiency, EY could potentially cast its net over three huge markets from BOS: BOS-MXP, BOS-AUH (ME), BOS-India.


Calling BOSMXP massive is itself a massive overstatement. The market is quite small (on most days it wouldn't fill a CRJ) hence its not served. And it's not just small from Boston, MXP is small from just about everywhere except NYC/LAX/MIA and has long struggled to support non-stop U.S. service that doesn't touch New York or Miami, two U.S. cities with easily the strongest business and cultural ties to Italy today. LAX, SFO, ORD, DTW, PHL, BOS and IAD all have lost Malpensa service.
a.
 
User avatar
adamh8297
Posts: 3271
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Fri Sep 30, 2016 10:55 am

MAH4546 wrote:
rsanzo wrote:
aaflyer777 wrote:
I might be mistaken but wasn't Massport trying to convince DL to launch BOS-MXP? I know gates are a problem for them right now but maybe once the B renovations are done they could try it. There's also the chance AZ gives it a go, I remember reading something about them doing more long haul flying out of MXP.


Massport has been working feverishly to court an airline to do MXP-BOS flights, but I don't recall them singling out a specific airline, I think they have been knocking on several carrier's doors about launching this route segment.

I will state though; however, while MXP is a massive, unserved market that BOS needs to obtain direct flights to, I have a reservation about DL launching the flight, and would be skeptical of its success.

--DL definitely has a decent footprint in BOS, but is still considered very small when you compare it to the likes of DL's larger hubs, or other airline hubs. Boston and Milan are irrefutably large international cities with huge business traveler markets, and the cities absolutely need a direct transportation connection, that would likely yield success; no doubt. However, I consider it very risky for DL to enter a TATL market that was an unserved market prior to the route launch. I think it would be smarter for an airline like DL to enter a market with good, verifiable statistics, that they know is successful due to already having service; such as Dublin, from Boston. MXP would be an uphill battle for DL based on a couple different aspects:

1)DL has a bit of an underwhelming base of operations in BOS. While DL does connect some important domestic markets to BOS, such as CMH, CVG, DTW, IND, LAX, MKE, MSP, MCO, RDU, RIC, SLC, SEA; and soon to BNA, and SFO; I think that at less than 90 flights a day, currently, DL's BOS operations fall a little short of being able to feed a flight to MXP. I believe that in order for DL to be able to affirm and secure its success, DL would need to connect BOS with some additional key markets, especially business ones, such as: ORD, DCA, LAS, DFW/DAL, IAH/HOU, PHL, PIT. None of these cities have direct links to MXP, and I believe travelers might consider avoiding the likes of JFK or EWR for BOS, especially if DL boosted its route offerings and frequencies from BOS.

2)If you consider the perspective of someone from Milan using a BOS flight on DL to connect to RDU or SFO or SEA, etc.; it is irrevocably inconvenient and rendered purely inefficient given that passengers would deplane at E, then have to venture all the way over to A, after going through immigration and customs. While it is likely and admittable that a transfer from E to A wouldn't turn everyone away, I believe it is not incorrect to project that that transfer would cause some people to consider other options when looking for carriers and cities to connect through. I must underscore though; however, that while a transfer from E to A at BOS is not nearly as abysmal as transferring at LHR, ATL, EWR, DFW, IAH, etc.; a transfer from int'l to domestic on DL at BOS pales in comparison to connecting through those other cities, and isn't very applicable since DL's BOS operations comes nothing close to hub operations at these other cities in terms of routes and frequencies. While transferring at ATL or DFW or LHR is a whole different animal, airport officials at those airports have worked to streamline the process as best they can, given that those airports handle 70-100+ million travelers a year. And for airports with north of 80 million pax, it is as hectic as one could expect, but acceptable for the most part. I'm not saying that their techniques of ushering transfers through are flawless, or that there are never waits or delays at immigration/customs at those larger airports, but I will say the process at BOS, an airport of roughly 36 million is pretty comparable to the process at ATL or LHR, due to operational failures by Massport and Terminal E/CBP limitations; and that is what MXP travelers won't put up with when transferring at BOS, especially given that BOS' DL route offerings and frequencies pale in comparison to DL's larger bases- crummy connecting options/waits/delays at BOS; and from that perspective, travelers from MXP won't consider a BOS transfer on DL to be deemed justifiable. For this to be worth it, DL would need to boost domestic operations at BOS, like they did at SEA, in order to give connecting international travelers enhanced connecting options.

Thinking about what makes the most sense for who should operate this route segment, I continue to come up with AZ/EY. This would be a power move for them, and a smarter one than having DL service the city pairs. With an Alitalia/Etihad flight from MXP-BOS, so many opportunities are created. First, the two carriers are pretty integrated given EY's large acquisition of AZ equity. This would allow either carrier to serve the route, or both of them to switch off. This link could continue on to AUH, providing travelers unfettered access to EY's and 9W's extensive flights to India. The logical thing would be for EY to serve this route under fifth freedom rights (although if it is also coded as an AZ flight it might not need to be), because EY has an interline agreement with B6, and effective Dec 2016, EY will have an interline agreement with DL. AZ only interlines with DL. So on the BOS end, you give travelers access to connections on DL and B6, and on the MXP/AUH side, you give travelers access to connections on AZ, EY and 9W. With that kind of feed and interline efficiency, EY could potentially cast its net over three huge markets from BOS: BOS-MXP, BOS-AUH (ME), BOS-India.


Calling BOSMXP massive is itself a massive overstatement. The market is quite small (on most days it wouldn't fill a CRJ) hence its not served. And it's not just small from Boston, MXP is small from just about everywhere except NYC/LAX/MIA and has long struggled to support non-stop U.S. service that doesn't touch New York or Miami, two U.S. cities with easily the strongest business and cultural ties to Italy today. LAX, SFO, ORD, DTW, PHL, BOS and IAD all have lost Malpensa service.



The MXP chatter comes from a request by a high ranking Italian-American politician in Massachusetts House of Representatives: Robert DeLeo. He's under the belief (or persuaded by his constituents) that Milan service is absolutely necessary without knowledge of the traffic numbers and current status of MXP (i.e not the preferred airport, no more AZ hub, LCC infested, US originating tourist traffic goes to FCO)

"International destinations from Logan have expanded from 26 in 2005 to 53 today, and Glynn said there is interest in adding flights to Brazil and India. The airport has received interest from low-cost carriers considering both international and domestic service in Boston, according to Massport. Glynn said Speaker Robert DeLeo has suggested adding service to Milan, Italy, and Senate President Stanley Rosenberg raised the idea of flights to Quebec City, Canada"

http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/news/ ... ing-spaces
Airlines flown: A3, AA, AC, AF, AM, BA, B6, CA, CO, CX, DL, EA, EL, IB, LH, MI, MQ, NH, NW, NZ, OU, PE, QF, S4, SQ, TP, UA, US, VS, WE, WN
 
georgiabill
Posts: 1276
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:53 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Sat Oct 01, 2016 4:20 pm

Wishing for non stop Athens from Boston. Wishful thinking I know. But 2 or 3 weekly seasonal might work. DY maybe!
 
User avatar
tlecam
Posts: 1511
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: Boston Aviation - Part 11

Sat Oct 01, 2016 4:27 pm

The addition of BOS-DUB makes me wonder about the timing of terminal moves. The DL flight leaves around 9 (similar timings to EI 138). That's at the end of the evening rush, so they should be ok for gate space, but it's cutting it tight as the LHR/AMS/CDG flights all leave between 7:30-8:30. That satellite terminal could get pretty crowded.
BOS-LGA-JFK | A:319/20/21, 332/3, 346 || B:717, 735, 737, 738, 739, 752, 753, 762, 763, 764, 787, 772, 744 || MD80, MD90

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