User avatar
janders
Moderator
Posts: 873
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:27 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Jan 19, 2018 5:22 pm

tphuang wrote:
Except that JetBlue has done a lot for this airport. Transforming it from a place where few carriers want to use to one where other carriers are also waiting for slots. They have also done a lot of charity work in the community. And all they get for it is a bunch of NIMBYs torpedoing their effort to do international flights by claiming that somehow flying to Mexico or Canada would be more noisy than flying to Austin or New York.
.


You make B6 sound like some saint. Reality is we dont know what LGB would be like without B6. For all we know WN would have long time ago moved in, or other airlines could have increased their own activities. And as far community events, well that is a standard SOP for companies like Southwest so its hardly a unique thing for B6.

B6 instead is not a saint, and clearly has continued to get under the skin of locals (including city hall) with their continued high jinks of slot sitting that effectively blocks other competitors and also their now ever more frequent curfew busting.
"We make war that we may live in peace." -- Aristotle
 
tphuang
Posts: 3218
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Jan 19, 2018 5:31 pm

janders wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Except that JetBlue has done a lot for this airport. Transforming it from a place where few carriers want to use to one where other carriers are also waiting for slots. They have also done a lot of charity work in the community. And all they get for it is a bunch of NIMBYs torpedoing their effort to do international flights by claiming that somehow flying to Mexico or Canada would be more noisy than flying to Austin or New York.
.


You make B6 sound like some saint. Reality is we dont know what LGB would be like without B6. For all we know WN would have long time ago moved in, or other airlines could have increased their own activities. And as far community events, well that is a standard SOP for companies like Southwest so its hardly a unique thing for B6.

B6 instead is not a saint, and clearly has continued to get under the skin of locals (including city hall) with their continued high jinks of slot sitting that effectively blocks other competitors and also their now ever more frequent curfew busting.


slot squating is a common tactic that every airline uses. There are plenty of secondary airports in California that WN has not made a big move into. Could WN have moved into LGB if B6 didn't? Of course, but there is also a good chance LGB would've stuck being irrelevant airport that no one cared one.

And as for getting under the skin of locals, I'm sure that some people are upset, but a lot of people have benefited from all the flights outside of California that B6 offers. Flights that WN is certainly not going to offer if it gets 30 slots.

Up to this point, B6 has barely scraped by at LGB offering pretty low fares because it has a very small west coast network. WN comes in with even lower fares, taking huge losses with the goal of pushing B6 out. Now if B6 does move out or just stop flying to LAS/SJC/OAK/SMF, what do you think is going to happen to those air fares? They are going to go to ONT/BUR level.
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1535
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:10 pm

joeycapps wrote:
WN holds the largest market share as far as I can tell, but that's neither here nor there, especially in the transcon market, where I'd have to make 2+ stops to get to NY.
That's not true.

tphuang wrote:
slot squating is a common tactic that every airline uses.
So that makes it ok? It certainly isn't helping the residents of Long Beach whose curfew B6 seems to be violating quite often.
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 793
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:30 pm

And guess what, if they change their schedule, they would loose even more money. They obviously don't think they'd be late this often, but it is what it is.


That is the choice that they’re left with. Change the schedule or don’t. Eat the fines or find a way not to. It’s their choice.

Except that JetBlue has done a lot for this airport. Transforming it from a place where few carriers want to use to one where other carriers are also waiting for slots.


I agree with you completely on this point. However, the rules are what the rules are. LGB either enforces the rules or there are none. It’s that simple. Again, knowing what the rules and fines are, JetBlue can either follow the rules or knowingly not follow the rules and be fined. It’s their choice.
 
tphuang
Posts: 3218
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:56 pm

Aptivaboy wrote:
And guess what, if they change their schedule, they would loose even more money. They obviously don't think they'd be late this often, but it is what it is.


That is the choice that they’re left with. Change the schedule or don’t. Eat the fines or find a way not to. It’s their choice.

Except that JetBlue has done a lot for this airport. Transforming it from a place where few carriers want to use to one where other carriers are also waiting for slots.


I agree with you completely on this point. However, the rules are what the rules are. LGB either enforces the rules or there are none. It’s that simple. Again, knowing what the rules and fines are, JetBlue can either follow the rules or knowingly not follow the rules and be fined. It’s their choice.


Ok I think we are in agreement here. I apologize for coming on strong earlier.
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 793
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Jan 19, 2018 7:25 pm

No worries. :)
 
catiii
Posts: 3154
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Jan 19, 2018 7:27 pm

airplaneboy wrote:
catiii wrote:
mercure1 wrote:
One would imagine JetBlue would do all it can to earn good reputation and win the hearts and minds of citizens and politicians at LGB since they desire to allow international flights and maybe also gain additional slots one day, but instead, now they bring more negative attention to themselves with such large increase in curfew violations. Not very good PR.


Hot take. JetBlue came in, invested in the airport, created jobs, and stimulated demand. If anything it's LGB killing the goose that laid a golden egg.


Market dynamics... JetBlue came to Long Beach at a time when few airlines had interest in serving the airport. During those years, there was also plenty of available terminal space at other LA area airports. By selecting LGB to be their primary west coast gateway, Jetblue benefited from having a larger presence and critical mass at one of 5 major LA area airports- which also helped boost its brand awareness in SoCal. It also helped them to keep other airlines from directly competing with them due to the limited available slots and gate space. Fast forward, and the travel slump that existed when B6 began flying from LGB no longer exists. A then very dominant intra-California Southwest, is more intra-California than ever before, and wants more slots at LGB. B6 is being fined for curfew violations like any other airline would be (just because they are the largest airline there doesn’t preclude them from abiding by the same laws). I don’t see how LGB is intentionally hurting JetBlue as you suggest. Both entities benefited from one another for years, but JetBlue didn’t generously give/do/sacrifice anything to “help” LGB. They benefited a lot from LGB as well, and from what others have mentioned in this thread it seems like JetBlue is having a difficult time operating profitably on select LGB routes at a time when other airlines are now showing interest in growing at LGB. If ain’t working, perhaps they’ll redeploy their resources where they will see a greater return. Unfortunately for JetBlue, they missed many opportunities to build a more significant west coast presence. Now perhaps they just need to focus on growing where they are strong: the northeast and Florida/Latin America.


The take to which I was referring was the notion that B6 somehow needs to "earn a good reputation" with LGB when B6 made LGB what it is today, and also has been a good corporate citizen.
 
CobaltScar
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 2:30 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Jan 19, 2018 7:55 pm

I keep going back and forth in my mind about LGB. Part of me wants scorched earth on them and the other part cherishes B6 having their own personal airport/space to operate from. I really like how they took over the MAT at LGA, I like how they own and are expanding t5, plan to take over the new terminal in MCO, etc. I hope they solve the issues with LGB.

Why on earth they don't deploy the e190s there I can't understand, especially since so much transcon flying has shifted to LAX anyways. They NEED the e190s in LGB, it would help so much competing with the SWA frequencies without bleeding money. Also easier to slot squat with them out there.
 
nine4nine
Posts: 499
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:44 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Jan 19, 2018 8:36 pm

tphuang wrote:
Aptivaboy wrote:

Being fined for regularly having late arriving flights is clearly already suboptimal. JetBlue has been aware of this issue for awhile, now, and it hasn't gone away. So, they can either suck it up, pay the fines and not complain, or they can reschedule to avoid the fines. It's a simple business decision - will you make more money with the fines, or without?


And guess what, if they change their schedule, they would loose even more money. They obviously don't think they'd be late this often, but it is what it is.

mercure1 wrote:
Seems like terrible decision to willingly operate late and absorb fines while totally ignoring local rules and disturbing a town.

No wonder why many hate the corporate world when one has such terrible example of corporate ignorance in pursuit of money regardless of the consequences and effects on communities.

In my opinion, the company needs to learn how to live and operate within the airport rules and make good with the city. Not so purposely violate long-established rules.


Except that JetBlue has done a lot for this airport. Transforming it from a place where few carriers want to use to one where other carriers are also waiting for slots. They have also done a lot of charity work in the community. And all they get for it is a bunch of NIMBYs torpedoing their effort to do international flights by claiming that somehow flying to Mexico or Canada would be more noisy than flying to Austin or New York.

Don't worry, Jetblue will be gone before long. And these transcon flights and flights to SEA/PDX/AUS/RNO will be long gone too. WN will raise their fares to ONT/BUR level and LGB will get their 30 daily flights to LAS/OAK/SJC/SMF. For anything more than an hour flight away, Long beach residents can do the 1.5 hour drive in traffic hour to LAX and deal with that madness.



You couldn’t have said any of this any better. In my honest opinion LGB should just pander to the residents who bought homes near the airport that has been there since the early days of air travel and just raze the place and put in some strip malls and condensed overpriced apartments and condomniums. Any airport that has so strict of regulations and guidelines is not worth it. B6 has done a lot for the community in forms of charity and really brought in the revenue to the city and the airfield. The city of Long Beach and the LGB airport and in much better state post 2000 than it was before. Downtown has become hip and not so much of a run down drug den for thugs and hobos and the airport is no longer a series of modular trailer terminals.

The airport should be razed or left to lame duck carriers who flop after months of operation something LGB seemed best at pre B6. Can you say WinAir, Presidential, Rich International, Carnival Airways and just about every other defunct start up or public charter carrier.
717 727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 742 748 752 753 762 763 772 773 DC9 MD80/88/90 DC10 319 320 321 332 333 CS100 CRJ200 Q400 E175 E190 ERJ145 EMB120
 
User avatar
Vio
Posts: 1553
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 5:23 am

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Sat Jan 20, 2018 5:58 am

fastmover wrote:
Vio wrote:
fastmover wrote:


I don’t think I have ever seen a more uninformed post in my life.


So let me get this straight. How is that uniformed? If a Truck driver or a Deliver Driver disobeys a traffic law, who gets the fine? The company or the driver? I think the same rules should apply to pilots.
I've had to land a few times past curfew because of weather delays. If this rule was in place and I knew that a $3,000 fine would await me, I'd have the best excuse to say "Nope, not gonna happen. I'm not doing this flight". So: A) I would not have been subjected to flying tired into my 14th hour and B) The residents didn't have to be disturbed at 2am.



Well first running around taking a pilots license away so easily is ridiculous.
Now if you can tell me which Federal Aviation Regulations those pilots are busting you might have a point.
(It’s an airport noise ordinance not an FAR it’s not able to be used to take a pilots license away)



I couldn't tell you a single F.A.R. I do not fly for a US carrier nor do I hold a FAA Pilot License.
Superior decisions reduce the need for superior skills.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Sat Jan 20, 2018 5:08 pm

CobaltScar wrote:

Why on earth they don't deploy the e190s there I can't understand, especially since so much transcon flying has shifted to LAX anyways. They NEED the e190s in LGB, it would help so much competing with the SWA frequencies without bleeding money. Also easier to slot squat with them out there.


They did have the E190 out at LGB between 2008-2010, but from stories, it was a logistical headache with maintaining and crewing them being isolated on the West Coast.
Its also likely the higher seat cost of the E190 made B6 even more financially in the red on many routes.

nine4nine wrote:
In my honest opinion LGB should just pander to the residents who bought homes near the airport that has been there since the early days of air travel and just raze the place and put in some strip malls and condensed overpriced apartments and condomniums. Any airport that has so strict of regulations and guidelines is not worth it. B6 has done a lot for the community in forms of charity and really brought in the revenue to the city and the airfield.


B6 well knew what the rules were when they showed up at LGB. If anything the airport is far more lenient to operate from than a place such as SNA.

Also having noise and curfews regulations is hardly an unusual thing, with 3 SoCal commercial airports - BUR, LGB and SNA all having such rules.
Operators either follow them, or face the consequences which may be financial, and public shaming.

And yes, maybe one day the airport will be razed. Certainly every community should be able to guide its land use and decide what is compatible with needs and desires of its residents. Be it an airport, power plants, strip clubs, or what not. Santa Monica well showed this was a feasible path.

nine4nine wrote:
The city of Long Beach and the LGB airport and in much better state post 2000 than it was before. Downtown has become hip and not so much of a run down drug den for thugs and hobos and the airport is no longer a series of modular trailer terminals.


Much good has happened in LB the last decade, but the airport is only a tiny slice. The economic revitalization and changes are far broader and are hardly reliant on an airport.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
fastmover
Posts: 419
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 5:37 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Sat Jan 20, 2018 6:53 pm

Vio wrote:
fastmover wrote:
Vio wrote:

So let me get this straight. How is that uniformed? If a Truck driver or a Deliver Driver disobeys a traffic law, who gets the fine? The company or the driver? I think the same rules should apply to pilots.
I've had to land a few times past curfew because of weather delays. If this rule was in place and I knew that a $3,000 fine would await me, I'd have the best excuse to say "Nope, not gonna happen. I'm not doing this flight". So: A) I would not have been subjected to flying tired into my 14th hour and B) The residents didn't have to be disturbed at 2am.



Well first running around taking a pilots license away so easily is ridiculous.
Now if you can tell me which Federal Aviation Regulations those pilots are busting you might have a point.
(It’s an airport noise ordinance not an FAR it’s not able to be used to take a pilots license away)



I couldn't tell you a single F.A.R. I do not fly for a US carrier nor do I hold a FAA Pilot License.


Which is why....not being rude.....I said your post was uninformed.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:33 pm

Proposed new fine structure for noise ordinance violations.

Could go to City Council for approval in March.


Image

As airport director explained:

Romo cited the substantial increase in late-night flight operations since 2015 as a reason for the fine amendments. He also noted that the 1995 penalty structure is outdated and considerably less than fees charged by nearby airports such as John Wayne.

“If we don’t do anything, […] we don’t expect to see any change in behavior, whether it’s JetBlue or any other carrier,” he said. “Because as long as they pay the small fines, they’ll operate as they’ve been operating.”
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
janders
Moderator
Posts: 873
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:27 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:29 pm

SNA curfew program works extremely well with virtually zero violations.

Today airlines simply ignore the LGB ordinance as it has no teeth, but start charging heavily they will have to abide.
"We make war that we may live in peace." -- Aristotle
 
Chemist
Posts: 575
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 4:46 am

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:37 pm

Honestly LGB has potential, but having flown out of there a few times - they charge more than BUR for parking (almost double), they have a very nice new terminal but then they are doing their best to drive airlines away. I say they should raze the place if that's all the interest they have in their airport.

Airplanes have never been quieter. The occasional late flight happens.
 
tphuang
Posts: 3218
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:57 pm

It seems like JetBlue has gotten on the waiting list for sna slots based on their recent annual report. There is some gate space at Burbank.

There is room at lax for additions given all the slacks in the t5 gates.

And up the road at sfo, it looks like as will consolidate in t2 at some point so JetBlue will be able to use all of gates 10, 11a, 11b and 12 along with slacks on other gates there.

So in both sfo and lax, they have room to expand to at least 30 flights but could be a lot more than that. Time to reduce presence at lgb and see how much they can add elsewhere in west coast.
 
ScottB
Posts: 6640
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu Feb 22, 2018 7:28 pm

Chemist wrote:
they have a very nice new terminal but then they are doing their best to drive airlines away. I say they should raze the place if that's all the interest they have in their airport.

Airplanes have never been quieter. The occasional late flight happens.


While there are no doubt Long Beach residents who would love to see the airport shut down, there is also a vast gulf between that and wanting the airport to be effectively closed for business late at night and early in the morning. As it stands, the existing penalties for noise violations aren't an effective deterrent to a specific operator which accounted for 94% (233 of 247) of the violations attributed to commercial airlines at LGB in the first eleven months of 2017; that carrier only operated 73% of commercial flights and carried 80% of passengers at LGB in the same period. 20 times a month isn't an "occasional late flight."

If you're scheduling a BOS-LGB flight with an arrival time of 2130, you are planning to bust the curfew on a regular basis. That flight is over 30 minutes late 22.6% of the time (B6's figures). B6's competitors have dealt with an even stricter curfew at SNA (you're diverting to another airport if you're late) for decades.
 
jetbluefan1
Posts: 3276
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 8:39 am

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu Feb 22, 2018 9:20 pm

I wonder how this will play out, given B6 plans to contest the fines for a (significant) portion of delayed flights due to "FAA actions".

http://www.ocbj.com/news/2018/feb/08/je ... ach-fines/

tphuang wrote:
It seems like JetBlue has gotten on the waiting list for sna slots based on their recent annual report. There is some gate space at Burbank.

There is room at lax for additions given all the slacks in the t5 gates.

And up the road at sfo, it looks like as will consolidate in t2 at some point so JetBlue will be able to use all of gates 10, 11a, 11b and 12 along with slacks on other gates there.

So in both sfo and lax, they have room to expand to at least 30 flights but could be a lot more than that. Time to reduce presence at lgb and see how much they can add elsewhere in west coast.


Very interesting re: SNA. The annual report also has this tidbit: "All six of our Focus Cities are in regions with a diverse mix of traffic and were profitable in 2017 ." So, LGB is profitable for B6 despite the recent ramp-up in capacity to fend off WN. Of course, this could all change if these fines actually get instated and enforced...

Slack at T5 gates at LAX? Since when? Haha....I was there last week and it was a total zoo, with 3 B6 flights boarding at the same time (along with multiple AA and NK flights). Maybe I read on a recent OAG update that NK is trimming some LAX flights, so perhaps that opens up some space.

Interesting comment on SFO gates. B6 runs 18 flights through those 2 gates and I'm sure they'd love more (especially in the international terminal, which is quite beautiful).

ScottB wrote:
Chemist wrote:
they have a very nice new terminal but then they are doing their best to drive airlines away. I say they should raze the place if that's all the interest they have in their airport.

Airplanes have never been quieter. The occasional late flight happens.


While there are no doubt Long Beach residents who would love to see the airport shut down, there is also a vast gulf between that and wanting the airport to be effectively closed for business late at night and early in the morning. As it stands, the existing penalties for noise violations aren't an effective deterrent to a specific operator which accounted for 94% (233 of 247) of the violations attributed to commercial airlines at LGB in the first eleven months of 2017; that carrier only operated 73% of commercial flights and carried 80% of passengers at LGB in the same period. 20 times a month isn't an "occasional late flight."

If you're scheduling a BOS-LGB flight with an arrival time of 2130, you are planning to bust the curfew on a regular basis. That flight is over 30 minutes late 22.6% of the time (B6's figures). B6's competitors have dealt with an even stricter curfew at SNA (you're diverting to another airport if you're late) for decades.


All good points. I suspect the late B6 flights are routinely coming from JFK and BOS, which tend to become more delay-prone as the day goes on. I'm also sure B6 is cycling planes through LGB and eventually back to the East Coast instead of having a dedicated sub-fleet for LGB, which only compounds issues when JFK has a ground delay program or BOS has a snow storm...
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu Feb 22, 2018 9:35 pm

SNA is indeed an excellent example of airline operations discipline and their compliance with the noise ordinance.

Compliance involves a mix of realistic scheduling and operational priority given to ensuring SNA flights operate on-time. If its clear they wont, then airlines either cancel or divert to other airports like SNA or ONT.
Its quite clear B6 has set itself up for repeated failure at LGB by scheduling so many flights within a short period of the curfew.

Regarding SNA, the manner slots allocations work, new entrants are allocated 3 slots effective January 1st, though a temporary mid-year allocation is possible if other existing carriers are underlying their allocations. I don't know what the waiting list looks like today, but as of November atleast there were no new air carrier entrants desiring slots.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
ScottB
Posts: 6640
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu Feb 22, 2018 10:01 pm

jetbluefan1 wrote:
I suspect the late B6 flights are routinely coming from JFK and BOS, which tend to become more delay-prone as the day goes on. I'm also sure B6 is cycling planes through LGB and eventually back to the East Coast instead of having a dedicated sub-fleet for LGB, which only compounds issues when JFK has a ground delay program or BOS has a snow storm...


I don't doubt that the late arrivals at LGB stem in large part from delays at JFK & BOS, but if that's the case, then they need to plan a more realistic schedule which doesn't rely on a delay-prone operation to produce an on-time (or near-on-time) departure. If you can't schedule the flight earlier in the evening, then you take an aircraft from another flight if the inbound aircraft is delayed or has a time-consuming maintenance issue. You schedule the flight as the beginning of a trip to make sure the crew isn't delayed.
 
StuckinCMHland
Posts: 210
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2015 10:59 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu Feb 22, 2018 10:10 pm

Chemist wrote:
Honestly LGB has potential, but having flown out of there a few times - they charge more than BUR for parking (almost double), they have a very nice new terminal but then they are doing their best to drive airlines away. I say they should raze the place if that's all the interest they have in their airport.

Airplanes have never been quieter. The occasional late flight happens.


Great post.

And with all due respect to others here who are hitting B6 about this mess, from what I see and read this is simply the City telling B6 to leave town. It's a nuisance fine to chase them out of town because a vocal group of people in Long Beach want their version of an unspoiled paradise and the convenience of 21st century life without have to deal with the reality that perfection might be spoiled once in a while.

WN is not flying cross country routes from the East Coast to LGB like B6 are they? No. The city can put up with that for a while, while they can stick it to B6.

I think is is quite likely once they run B6 out of town the city will find some way to run WN out of town and then they can close down the airport and make their city the unspoiled retreat they want it to be. Then if they need to go somewhere they can use their electric car or other conveyance that is not a polluting engine to go to LAX.
 
tphuang
Posts: 3218
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu Feb 22, 2018 11:13 pm

jetbluefan1 wrote:

Very interesting re: SNA. The annual report also has this tidbit: "All six of our Focus Cities are in regions with a diverse mix of traffic and were profitable in 2017 ." So, LGB is profitable for B6 despite the recent ramp-up in capacity to fend off WN. Of course, this could all change if these fines actually get instated and enforced...

Slack at T5 gates at LAX? Since when? Haha....I was there last week and it was a total zoo, with 3 B6 flights boarding at the same time (along with multiple AA and NK flights). Maybe I read on a recent OAG update that NK is trimming some LAX flights, so perhaps that opens up some space.

Interesting comment on SFO gates. B6 runs 18 flights through those 2 gates and I'm sure they'd love more (especially in the international terminal, which is quite beautiful).

I think they classify it as LA basin, so that would count LAX/LGB/BUR together, which I imagine has to be quite profitable.

As for T5 at LAX, a couple of things have happened. NK has cut down flights so it doesn't really use CUTE gates anymore. They are getting 2 new gates this summer I think (1 for AA and 1 CUTE). Since AA/NK use CUTE gates very infrequently, B6 will have 2 gates + sharing 5 CUTE gates with HA/G4/F9/SY, who do about 15 to 20 flights a day in total. B6 only does about 7 turns per day on its 2 gates. Yesterday for example, there B6/HA/G4/F9/SY only did 14 flights across 4 gates. I'd have to imagine there is room to grow there with 5 CUTE gates.

And for SFO, they seem to mostly use A10/11A/11B/12 with AS also doing about 5 daily flights there. Combined 11 occasionally gets used by international airline. But AS is going to consolidate at T2 at some point. So B6 will get 4 gates for most of the day plus occasionally use other A gates. Unless I'm missing somewhere here, they can easily schedule in 30+ flights with that.

It seems to me at least they have room to grow quite a bit, especially at SFO when AS consolidates.
 
User avatar
UPlog
Posts: 409
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:45 am

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Feb 23, 2018 5:20 am

B6 just runs a sloppy operation. If they wanted to abide by LGB curfew they would operate accordingly. Its not rocket science to schedule more realistically and have a more disciplined approach to compliance.

As a freight driver I have more than once either diverted to another airport or returned to my parking spot at origin knowing we would not make destination before curfew. I have a relative that flies for a major carrier into SNA and likewise they do all possible to ensure evening departures to SNA are given the absolute priority to depart the hub in timely manner.

At the end of the day shame on B6 for being such a poor neighbor in LGB. If the city doubles or triples the fines they deserve it as they brought it on by their own inaction.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu May 03, 2018 4:42 pm

JetBlue has decided to contest 16 of 58 post 11pm curfew violation fines dating back to Q2 2017.
Landings after 11 p.m. are automatically a violation, while landings between 10 and 11 p.m. can be exempt if there are extenuating circumstances.
JetBlue argues these 16 post 11 p.m. landigs were caused by “explicit air traffic control direction,” beyond its control.

Airport previously denied carriers argument, so now they are taking the appeal to full city council. Each violation is $6,000.

JetBlue fights fines over late landings at Long Beach Airport
https://www.presstelegram.com/2018/05/0 ... h-airport/

=
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
boxeebox
Posts: 43
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2017 10:01 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu May 03, 2018 4:48 pm

SFO GDP's along with GDP's or Ground Stops in/out of JFK BOS cause down-line flights to arrive late into LGB. They don't always have available aircraft swaps although they do their best.
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1535
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu May 03, 2018 5:11 pm

LAXintl wrote:
JetBlue has decided to contest 16 of 58 post 11pm curfew violation fines dating back to Q2 2017.
Landings after 11 p.m. are automatically a violation, while landings between 10 and 11 p.m. can be exempt if there are extenuating circumstances.
JetBlue argues these 16 post 11 p.m. landigs were caused by “explicit air traffic control direction,” beyond its control.

Airport previously denied carriers argument, so now they are taking the appeal to full city council. Each violation is $6,000.

JetBlue fights fines over late landings at Long Beach Airport
https://www.presstelegram.com/2018/05/0 ... h-airport/

=
If landings after 11 are automatically a violation, what are they arguing about? Then again, the article also says "Last week, JetBlue officials announced they were reducing flights from Long Beach to a maximum of 23 a day, down from 35 flight slots now... JetBlue will move most of those flights to Ontario International Airport.", so you have to question how much they got their facts straight.
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
User avatar
chrisnh
Posts: 4135
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 3:59 am

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu May 03, 2018 5:17 pm

The ‘noise’ (quotes added for emphasis) from B6 is dwarfed by the noise that came from this place during the MD heydays: many more planes and much louder ones, too.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Thu May 03, 2018 5:48 pm

chrisnh wrote:
The ‘noise’ (quotes added for emphasis) from B6 is dwarfed by the noise that came from this place during the MD heydays: many more planes and much louder ones, too.


That why there are many more air carrier slots today. Airport has a noise quota which means total cumulative noise is a measurement criteria. As planes get quieter, there is the opportunity for more total flights.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
cynlb
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 3:49 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:39 pm

 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Sat Jun 23, 2018 4:20 am

Considering LB staff recommended the council to reject the appeal it probably was going to be a waste of time to appear before them.

Ultimately best path for B6 to avoid fines is to simply operate within the airport rules and not make it a regular occurrence of busting curfew.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
bennett123
Posts: 8943
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Sat Jun 23, 2018 5:40 am

If the curfew at LGB frequently means diverting to SNA or ONT.
Why not close your flights LGB and move to SNA/ONT.
 
User avatar
janders
Moderator
Posts: 873
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:27 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Sat Jun 23, 2018 5:50 am

bennett123 wrote:
If the curfew at LGB frequently means diverting to SNA or ONT.
Why not close your flights LGB and move to SNA/ONT.


SNA would be closed also with its even stricter curfew.

Most B6 diverts when they happen end up at LAX.
"We make war that we may live in peace." -- Aristotle
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Sun Jun 24, 2018 4:34 am

atl100million wrote:
A $6000 fine per flight is the equivalent of dozens of average fares per flight even from JFK. If the flight is from other cities, the percentage of the flight's revenue going to fines is much higher

The alternative is to operate the flights on time - retime the departures and make the priority at all cost - and then divert them to another airport and bus the passengers if necessary.

B6 can't be making money at LGB with fines that high but they have no place else in the LA area to move their flights.

At least the Long Beach City library is getting some extra revenue


The LGA curfews are a bit arbitrary, but they do cause diversions to JFK on late-arriving aircraft.
$6,000 may seem like a lot to us, but in AMU’s, or Aviation Monetary Units, it is literally nothing. B6 has likely concluded that paying fines is, in the end, far cheaper than the cost of diverting to LAX, busing passengers, taking the customer service hits, burning a HOT crew to repo the airplane back to LGB the next morning plus aircraft expenses.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Wed Jun 27, 2018 1:24 am

B6 promises to be better neighbor.

JetBlue signs pledge to pay, reduce violations
https://www.presstelegram.com/2018/06/2 ... iolations/

=
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Wed Jun 27, 2018 2:39 am

LAXintl wrote:
B6 promises to be better neighbor.

JetBlue signs pledge to pay, reduce violations
https://www.presstelegram.com/2018/06/2 ... iolations/

=


I wonder if the reduced violations will be realized by reduced service levels?
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
janders
Moderator
Posts: 873
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:27 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Nov 16, 2018 2:34 pm

I see LB city council about to vote on new use it, or lose it rules for slot activity at the airport.

Airlines will be required to use slots 85% of the time in a calendar year, or atleast 60 percent in a calendar month.

JetBlue calls the policy ‘discriminatory’ :sarcastic: which is a bit odd as as event IATA best practices adopted by many airports require a 80% slot utilization within a schedule season.

https://lbpost.com/news/jetblue-says-pr ... iminatory/
"We make war that we may live in peace." -- Aristotle
 
jetbluefan1
Posts: 3276
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 8:39 am

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Nov 16, 2018 2:51 pm

janders wrote:
I see LB city council about to vote on new use it, or lose it rules for slot activity at the airport.

Airlines will be required to use slots 85% of the time in a calendar year, or atleast 60 percent in a calendar month.

JetBlue calls the policy ‘discriminatory’ :sarcastic: which is a bit odd as as event IATA best practices adopted by many airports require a 80% slot utilization within a schedule season.

https://lbpost.com/news/jetblue-says-pr ... iminatory/


This will only speed up B6's eventual exit from LGB (or, at the very least, its elimination of non-JFK/BOS flights until they gain access to SNA).

Do we know if B6 has officially returned its slots from its recent pruning, and if any other airline has stepped up to pick them up?

There really is no love lost between B6 and the LGB city council at this point. Time to move on.
 
wnflyguy
Posts: 1675
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:58 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Nov 16, 2018 3:48 pm

janders wrote:
I see LB city council about to vote on new use it, or lose it rules for slot activity at the airport.

Airlines will be required to use slots 85% of the time in a calendar year, or atleast 60 percent in a calendar month.

JetBlue calls the policy ‘discriminatory’ :sarcastic: which is a bit odd as as event IATA best practices adopted by many airports require a 80% slot utilization within a schedule season.

https://lbpost.com/news/jetblue-says-pr ... iminatory/


B6 reduction in service results in 13 unused slots.
They made LGB believe they were going to officially return the slots to the airport. But current Slot language doesn't require or have permanent timeframe on legal basis to return the unused slots.
WN has already agreed to use any and all available slots should they become permanent reallocated to WN. As of now WN is only willing to use and extend the temporarily 5 slots every 90 days. 3 LAS/2 xtra SMF.
LGB has no other move than legally change the LGB slot program.
The days of B6 sitting on slots is over. Once the Mid field terminal is finished at LAX B6 will temporally relocating the gates increase to 5 total gates. This will most likely start the next end of B6 and LGB.

Flyguy
Last edited by wnflyguy on Fri Nov 16, 2018 3:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
my post are my opinion only and not those of southwest airlines and or airtran airlines.
 
tphuang
Posts: 3218
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Nov 16, 2018 3:50 pm

wnflyguy wrote:
janders wrote:
I see LB city council about to vote on new use it, or lose it rules for slot activity at the airport.

Airlines will be required to use slots 85% of the time in a calendar year, or atleast 60 percent in a calendar month.

JetBlue calls the policy ‘discriminatory’ :sarcastic: which is a bit odd as as event IATA best practices adopted by many airports require a 80% slot utilization within a schedule season.

https://lbpost.com/news/jetblue-says-pr ... iminatory/


B6 reduction in service results in 13 unused slots.
They made LGB believe they were going to officially return the slots to the airport. But current Slot language doesn't require or have permanent timeframe on legal basis to return the unused slots.
WN has already agreed to use any and all available slots should they become permanent reallocate to WN. As of now WN only willing to used and extend the temporarily 5 slots every 90 days.
LGB has no other move than legally changing there slots program.
The days of B6 sitting on slots is over. Once the Mid terminal is finished at LAX B6 will temporally relocating the gates increase to 5 total. This will most likely start the next end of B6 and LGB.

Flyguy

If b6 can actually get 5 gates at lax, it will leave lgb on its own accord.
 
slcdeltarumd11
Posts: 4383
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 7:30 am

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Nov 16, 2018 5:09 pm

The city of Long Beach especially a few elected officials took B6 for granted. They had a you need us , more than we need you attitude on everything.

I do think southwest will fill any void left by JetBlue.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Nov 16, 2018 5:48 pm

Establishing proper slot usage requirements at LGB is quite appropriate and indeed an accepted industry practice.

Slot sitting with minimal use as B6 has continued to do at LGB is nothing more than gaming the system without clear intent to make use of valuable assets that others are willing to utilize instead.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
ScottB
Posts: 6640
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Nov 16, 2018 7:06 pm

wnflyguy wrote:
B6 reduction in service results in 13 unused slots.
They made LGB believe they were going to officially return the slots to the airport. But current Slot language doesn't require or have permanent timeframe on legal basis to return the unused slots.


I don't really get B6's strategy. They made a lot of noise about how not getting the FIS at LGB makes the focus city not work for them. The direct quote from the press release was, "advance our margin commitments in Long Beach where certain flying constraints have created challenges." That's entirely fair; they didn't receive the accommodation they needed so they chose to reduce the schedule to a level that works better for them as a private enterprise. But then why continue to antagonize the City and airport administration over noise violations and over slots they said they were giving up? Do they think they can sell the slots to someone? Good luck with that.

If you want to go back further, you have to wonder if Long Beach might have agreed to the FIS if B6 hadn't had a lengthy track record of busting the noise ordinance. In CY2016, they had 384 operations after 10 PM (the soft curfew) and 133 of those were after 11 PM (the harder curfew). Both were 82% of the airport's total for the year of each type. It doesn't seem like they were trying very hard to play nice with the City, and considering they had been operating at LGB for nearly a decade-and-a-half, one would imagine that they'd be cognizant of how very sensitive the community is to airport noise.

janders wrote:
JetBlue calls the policy ‘discriminatory’ :sarcastic: which is a bit odd


Well, considering they're the only carrier which has been slot-squatting, I suppose they might think a policy which attempts to curtail that practice is aimed at them. Then again, as you pointed out, the City's proposal is very much in line with other airports around the world having slot limitations.

jetbluefan1 wrote:
This will only speed up B6's eventual exit from LGB (or, at the very least, its elimination of non-JFK/BOS flights until they gain access to SNA).


They're not ever going to get enough slots at SNA to build up a regional presence.

tphuang wrote:
If b6 can actually get 5 gates at lax, it will leave lgb on its own accord.


Even with five gates it'd still be a challenge to be relevant at LAX. If they get stuck out at the midfield concourse, they'll struggle for O&D traffic in the short-haul markets.
 
nine4nine
Posts: 499
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:44 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Nov 16, 2018 9:58 pm

LAXintl wrote:
Establishing proper slot usage requirements at LGB is quite appropriate and indeed an accepted industry practice.

Slot sitting with minimal use as B6 has continued to do at LGB is nothing more than gaming the system without clear intent to make use of valuable assets that others are willing to utilize instead.



Oh yes. Because the other airlines have been foaming at the mouth and clamoring over eachother to grab any available LGB slots for years. NOT.

AS didn’t see these slots as valuable assets, neither did F9, NK, AA, DL, UA or anyone else for that matter. And I highly doubt WN will take all the remaining slots especially if there’s an B6 exit altogether,only to poach on a higher the yielding SNA and LAX ops. LGB is a turd. Always has always will. B6 will be the best thing that ever happened to that place and I’m sure when they are gone LGB will return to a regional destination only airport.
717 727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 742 748 752 753 762 763 772 773 DC9 MD80/88/90 DC10 319 320 321 332 333 CS100 CRJ200 Q400 E175 E190 ERJ145 EMB120
 
User avatar
EmattpoYou
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2018 9:19 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Nov 16, 2018 10:05 pm

I wonder why that is! I mean, it isnt like in the 1760's where Boston had a curfew at one time, but LAX has no problems with that, and I know that those two airports are managed by the same companies. I feel like, if jetBlue needs to fly in, for, say, an emergency, jetBlue will need to pay 6,000 dollars just for that? And if I am doing my normal business, I wouldnt want to have to pay way more than I need to. And also, flights in and out of there are BEAUTIFUL at night! Imagine not being able to see it. Yes, this is kind of crazy, but maybe LGB is starting to fall into debt. I also think about the economy. So, LGB falling into debt might be one reason. I personally dont know.
Where's the plane sauce?!?!
 
User avatar
janders
Moderator
Posts: 873
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:27 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Nov 16, 2018 11:00 pm

nine4nine wrote:

AS didn’t see these slots as valuable assets, neither did F9, NK, AA, DL, UA or anyone else for that matter. And I highly doubt WN will take all the remaining slots especially if there’s an B6 exit altogether,only to poach on a higher the yielding SNA and LAX ops. LGB is a turd. Always has always will. B6 will be the best thing that ever happened to that place and I’m sure when they are gone LGB will return to a regional destination only airport.


Well Delta certainly has been happy to pick up additional slots in recent years. There is also the new entrant Hawaiian that showed up as well.

WN to me is the natural for LGB being the biggest airline in the State with strong presence at all LA airports except LGB till now.
"We make war that we may live in peace." -- Aristotle
 
wnflyguy
Posts: 1675
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:58 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Fri Nov 16, 2018 11:37 pm

nine4nine wrote:
LAXintl wrote:
Establishing proper slot usage requirements at LGB is quite appropriate and indeed an accepted industry practice.

Slot sitting with minimal use as B6 has continued to do at LGB is nothing more than gaming the system without clear intent to make use of valuable assets that others are willing to utilize instead.



Oh yes. Because the other airlines have been foaming at the mouth and clamoring over eachother to grab any available LGB slots for years. NOT.

AS didn’t see these slots as valuable assets, neither did F9, NK, AA, DL, UA or anyone else for that matter. And I highly doubt WN will take all the remaining slots especially if there’s an B6 exit altogether,only to poach on a higher the yielding SNA and LAX ops. LGB is a turd. Always has always will. B6 will be the best thing that ever happened to that place and I’m sure when they are gone LGB will return to a regional destination only airport.


B6 fumbled around with LGB service for many years.
During those years WN successfully built up SNA Slots on the Backs is other airlines misfortunes Post 9/11 down economy.
But now other Airlines have the ability to gain excess capacity slots back in SNA.
WN sees an opportunity with the recent addition 9 of slots at LGB which it got 4 and along with 2 AA returned slots.
These Help back fill the loss of flights at SNA.
Now B6 is not using another 13 slots but unlike AA JetBlue unwillingness to return them legally back to the city for reallocation.
WN wants more slots so it making LGB finally force the issue.
If JetBlue were to completely abandon LGB in favor of a LAX build up WN,Spirit or Frontier would fill the void left behind.
WN was up to 72 flights at its Peak Schedule at SNA. LGB helps fill the capacity overflow from Orange Country. WN unlike JetBlue has a bigger network it can easily connect the dots with LGB.
LGB also has a nonRestrictive main Runway that makes it that much more lucrative for WN in the long run.
B6 had an opportunity in it's heyday at LGB.
Last ditch effort was international flying from LGB.
If B6 would have been successful buying Virgin America LGB would have been a SFO feeder spoke and majority of the flights moved to T3 at LAX.

Flyguy
my post are my opinion only and not those of southwest airlines and or airtran airlines.
 
tphuang
Posts: 3218
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Sat Nov 17, 2018 1:10 am

wnflyguy wrote:
nine4nine wrote:
LAXintl wrote:
Establishing proper slot usage requirements at LGB is quite appropriate and indeed an accepted industry practice.

Slot sitting with minimal use as B6 has continued to do at LGB is nothing more than gaming the system without clear intent to make use of valuable assets that others are willing to utilize instead.



Oh yes. Because the other airlines have been foaming at the mouth and clamoring over eachother to grab any available LGB slots for years. NOT.

AS didn’t see these slots as valuable assets, neither did F9, NK, AA, DL, UA or anyone else for that matter. And I highly doubt WN will take all the remaining slots especially if there’s an B6 exit altogether,only to poach on a higher the yielding SNA and LAX ops. LGB is a turd. Always has always will. B6 will be the best thing that ever happened to that place and I’m sure when they are gone LGB will return to a regional destination only airport.


B6 fumbled around with LGB service for many years.
During those years WN successfully built up SNA Slots on the Backs is other airlines misfortunes Post 9/11 down economy.
But now other Airlines have the ability to gain excess capacity slots back in SNA.
WN sees an opportunity with the recent addition 9 of slots at LGB which it got 4 and along with 2 AA returned slots.
These Help back fill the loss of flights at SNA.
Now B6 is not using another 13 slots but unlike AA JetBlue unwillingness to return them legally back to the city for reallocation.
WN wants more slots so it making LGB finally force the issue.
If JetBlue were to completely abandon LGB in favor of a LAX build up WN,Spirit or Frontier would fill the void left behind.
WN was up to 72 flights at its Peak Schedule at SNA. LGB helps fill the capacity overflow from Orange Country. WN unlike JetBlue has a bigger network it can easily connect the dots with LGB.
LGB also has a nonRestrictive main Runway that makes it that much more lucrative for WN in the long run.
B6 had an opportunity in it's heyday at LGB.
Last ditch effort was international flying from LGB.
If B6 would have been successful buying Virgin America LGB would have been a SFO feeder spoke and majority of the flights moved to T3 at LAX.

Flyguy


This is called a nasty divorce. B6 knows it's on it's way out, but it will drag things on and make WN loose as much money here as possible building up. The more WN looses on the west coast, the less it will be able to do on East Coast. You can just see that from their recent schedule extension. This is a tough business and B6 isn't going to play nice and just give back the slots if it doesn't have to. It costs B6 a lot less money to fight in the court rather than flying completely empty planes to northern California. Looking at the ugly yield numbers out of LGB in Q2, it's obvious to me WN will continue to take bath here as long as it has small limited slots to work with.

Whether or not that will change if it gets 30 or slots, I can't say. But let's not pretend LGB is SNA or even BUR. There is a reason that no one outside of WN has shown serious interests in these slots.

In the end, B6 has nobody else but itself to blame for this LGB mess. If it had made a commitment to LAX earlier, it wouldn't be operating with just 2 gates.
 
wnflyguy
Posts: 1675
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:58 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Sat Nov 17, 2018 1:48 am

WN reductions in FLL capacity and non stop destinations are due to the Runway closers/construction.
The FLL airport officials have already said they expect lengthy delays if airlines do not adjust Volume during the construction time frame.
As of now Spirit, Allegiant now WN have reduced some capacity and added it to other markets during the construction.
Once the Runway reopens I'm sure your will see all capacity return to WN's profitable FLL operation.
If you look at WN schedule they have more 800/8MAX aircraft vs 700's flying thru FLL during this time period. While the number of Nonstops destinations are temporary stopped the over all seat capacity is only slightly less than normal non construction capacity.

BOS is another story.
WN is strong on it's core markets.
But B6 has been doing a good job defending it's market share where WN dose not have the brand loyalty.


Flyguy
my post are my opinion only and not those of southwest airlines and or airtran airlines.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3929
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Sat Nov 17, 2018 2:20 am

tphuang wrote:
janders wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Except that JetBlue has done a lot for this airport. Transforming it from a place where few carriers want to use to one where other carriers are also waiting for slots. They have also done a lot of charity work in the community. And all they get for it is a bunch of NIMBYs torpedoing their effort to do international flights by claiming that somehow flying to Mexico or Canada would be more noisy than flying to Austin or New York.
.


You make B6 sound like some saint. Reality is we dont know what LGB would be like without B6. For all we know WN would have long time ago moved in, or other airlines could have increased their own activities. And as far community events, well that is a standard SOP for companies like Southwest so its hardly a unique thing for B6.

B6 instead is not a saint, and clearly has continued to get under the skin of locals (including city hall) with their continued high jinks of slot sitting that effectively blocks other competitors and also their now ever more frequent curfew busting.


slot squating is a common tactic that every airline uses. There are plenty of secondary airports in California that WN has not made a big move into. Could WN have moved into LGB if B6 didn't? Of course, but there is also

And as for getting under the skin of locals, I'm sure that some people are upset, but a lot of people have benefited from all the flights outside of California that B6 offers. Flights that WN is certainly not going to offer if it gets 30 slots.

Up to this point, B6 has barely scraped by at LGB offering pretty low fares because it has a very small west coast network. WN comes in with even lower fares, taking huge losses with the goal of pushing B6 out. Now if B6 does move out or just stop flying to LAS/SJC/OAK/SMF, what do you think is going to happen to those air fares? They are going to go to ONT/BUR level.

LGB is doing the same thing that MRY did with United, Air Cal, and PSA. Eventually? they darn near lost ALL of their service. for over a Year all because they thought they couldn't. Airline service is NOT a right but a privilege. If I cannot do business at your Location? Then somewhere ELSE will welcome me in Theirs..
 
tphuang
Posts: 3218
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: LGB doubles fines on JetBlue's late-night flight violations

Sat Nov 17, 2018 2:48 am

wnflyguy wrote:
WN reductions in FLL capacity and non stop destinations are due to the Runway closers/construction.
The FLL airport officials have already said they expect lengthy delays if airlines do not adjust Volume during the construction time frame.
As of now Spirit, Allegiant now WN have reduced some capacity and added it to other markets during the construction.
Once the Runway reopens I'm sure your will see all capacity return to WN's profitable FLL operation.
If you look at WN schedule they have more 800/8MAX aircraft vs 700's flying thru FLL during this time period. While the number of Nonstops destinations are temporary stopped the over all seat capacity is only slightly less than normal non construction capacity.

BOS is another story.
WN is strong on it's core markets.
But B6 has been doing a good job defending it's market share where WN dose not have the brand loyalty.


Flyguy

I'm not sure why this became about FLL/BOS.

I haven't seen any reductions from NK at FLL. In fact, they have added JAX and AUS in this past week. The reality is WN has already been chased out of EWR/IAD this year. The routes they've cut for the summer (outside of ISP) are all underperforming and in the case of BDL really underperforming. I don't think they are all coming back come November. They haven't been able to make Northeast market work at all. Based on the yields I've seen, WN is not running a profitable FLL operation at all.

As for WN being strong in its core markets out of BOS, do you realize B6 even has higher yield than WN on routes like BOS-BWI and BNA?

WN at this point seems to be focused on entering HI, bulking up west coast, building up mid-continent hub in STL/MCI and building up BNA. B6 has no reason to stick around in a west coast slugfest. But in short term, they are going to do their part to making WN experience more pain in their Cali operation. a 3% growth rate for WN when they have that many focus points is a great thing for B6.

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