Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
jspams20 wrote:Why don't they depart planes from 4L? Does it inhibits the ability to cross behind to 9 and 4R? I also noticed that they were landing flights on 4L (I saw a DL A321 and a B6 A320 landing while I was waiting for my UA flight to ORD.
jspams20 wrote:Why don't they depart planes from 4L? Does it inhibits the ability to cross behind to 9 and 4R? I also noticed that they were landing flights on 4L (I saw a DL A321 and a B6 A320 landing while I was waiting for my UA flight to ORD.
jworks158 wrote:So it looks like BOS will be tied for the first A220 Destination in the USA!
Delta announced today that the first A220 routes will be bookable starting tomorrow.
https://news.delta.com/delta-s-new-a220 ... uary-debut
Flights start January 31st 2019 From the LGA base to both BOS, and DFW!
PVDspotting wrote:jspams20 wrote:Why don't they depart planes from 4L? Does it inhibits the ability to cross behind to 9 and 4R? I also noticed that they were landing flights on 4L (I saw a DL A321 and a B6 A320 landing while I was waiting for my UA flight to ORD.
I've seen dash 8's and Cape Air's depart on 4L but not jets. In good weather 4L arrivals are commonly used by smaller planes, but I've seen 737 and A320s land as well. I believe 4L is a non precision approach.
jspams20 wrote:Why don't they depart planes from 4L? Does it inhibits the ability to cross behind to 9 and 4R? I also noticed that they were landing flights on 4L (I saw a DL A321 and a B6 A320 landing while I was waiting for my UA flight to ORD.
Takeoffs from Runway 4L shall be limited to aircraft with a takeoff noise emission
level of 73 dBA or less and landings on Runway 22R shall be limited to aircraft with a landing
specified noise emission level 78 dBA or less
Jouhou wrote:
Oh please tell me the airport workers are paid more than that, It's Boston!
Victorville wrote:They will only depart props from 4L, and will only land props on 22R. It is due to state regulation 740 CMR 24.05(10a)
specified noise emission level 78 dBA or less
FGITD wrote:Jouhou wrote:
Oh please tell me the airport workers are paid more than that, It's Boston!
most of the folks you see working the ramp or check in at terminal E fall in that range. Those directly employed by the airlines tend to be a little higher, depending on seniority of course.
Huge turnover problems. Ramp work can be very exerting, in all manner of weather, and a lot of them end up making less than the others bussing tables inside the terminal.
VS4ever wrote:https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GjTFllOr0asXLH5v5AupRCFnWokTT9af/view?usp=sharing
T-100 International for Boston, tried to post as image but would not allow. Data for April 18 only. Samples of results
The Good:
CX - 86%
Level - 91%
AF - 90%
DL - CDG - 87%
LH - FRA 86%
WW-91%
DI-88%
TP-88%
EK-86%
The Bad
HU-PVG 69%
DL-LHR 69%
VS-67%
LH-MUC 67%
EI-SNN 69%
The Ugly
SK-56%
QR-55%
jworks158 wrote:So it looks like BOS will be tied for the first A220 Destination in the USA!
Delta announced today that the first A220 routes will be bookable starting tomorrow.
https://news.delta.com/delta-s-new-a220 ... uary-debut
Flights start January 31st 2019 From the LGA base to both BOS, and DFW!
Dieuwer wrote:jworks158 wrote:So it looks like BOS will be tied for the first A220 Destination in the USA!
Delta announced today that the first A220 routes will be bookable starting tomorrow.
https://news.delta.com/delta-s-new-a220 ... uary-debut
Flights start January 31st 2019 From the LGA base to both BOS, and DFW!
I just read that the A220-300 has a 21% lower fuel burn than the B737-300. That's huge! Looks like Boeing needs to step up!
tlecam wrote:jworks158 wrote:So it looks like BOS will be tied for the first A220 Destination in the USA!
Delta announced today that the first A220 routes will be bookable starting tomorrow.
https://news.delta.com/delta-s-new-a220 ... uary-debut
Flights start January 31st 2019 From the LGA base to both BOS, and DFW!
I'm not surprised to see the c-series in Boston, but slightly surprised to see it so soon. Longer term, I suspect that it will be a frequent present on the route from BOS. Right size, right economics for many of the routes.
VS4ever wrote:The Bad
HU-PVG 69%
DL-LHR 69%
VS-67%
LH-MUC 67%
EI-SNN 69%
FGITD wrote:The British a380 has never towed off the gate. It sits at e12 all day. Even when it's a 744 operating it stays on the gate. The 380 is a complicated push/tow. Even BA still has it towed all the way to e9 before unhooking and starting it up.
AirFrance744 wrote:
As has been mentioned a few times before (even by BA pilots), maneuvering the A380 at BOS is tricky, especially at the E9-12 area.
I was on a BA A380 flight in early May 2017, and after pushback we waited for about 55 minutes before taxiing. The captain explained that the new A380 gates are positioned in such a way that were were "boxed in" by all the rest of international departures pushing back due to our size. We had to wait for all aircraft ahead of us to get out the way. We arrived at LHR 65 minutes late, and they mentioned that due to the delay, there were a number of tight connections being made and asked everyone to let those heading to the specified flights deplane first.
After that experience, I looked at the flight history and found that the A380 flight is not usually delayed, so I don't understand how we were "boxed in", but on other days they are not. The only explanation I can think of is IRROPS by a different international carrier causing an issue.
Has anyone heard about this being an issue, or was this just a fluke thing?
FGITD wrote:AirFrance744 wrote:
As has been mentioned a few times before (even by BA pilots), maneuvering the A380 at BOS is tricky, especially at the E9-12 area.
I was on a BA A380 flight in early May 2017, and after pushback we waited for about 55 minutes before taxiing. The captain explained that the new A380 gates are positioned in such a way that were were "boxed in" by all the rest of international departures pushing back due to our size. We had to wait for all aircraft ahead of us to get out the way. We arrived at LHR 65 minutes late, and they mentioned that due to the delay, there were a number of tight connections being made and asked everyone to let those heading to the specified flights deplane first.
After that experience, I looked at the flight history and found that the A380 flight is not usually delayed, so I don't understand how we were "boxed in", but on other days they are not. The only explanation I can think of is IRROPS by a different international carrier causing an issue.
Has anyone heard about this being an issue, or was this just a fluke thing?
It's a very careful matter of timing. May 2017 was very shortly after the 380 service started, and therefore things were more complex (read: careful) than they are now. Basically everyone in E stopped until the 380 was clear. Bit more relaxed these days.
To push the 380 from E12, you must push it out into North cargo, avoiding the EK 77w and the QR 350 that are usually parked off one, or both wings. Not too far back, else you'll hit the JAL 787, any of a number of JetBlue aircraft, or UPS. Oh, and there's a light pole out there as well. Not as often now, but previously you also had to push it far enough back so that the next BA arrival, a 744 could swing into the gate.
Also worth noting; the taxiway in front of E9-12 (Taxiway Lima, I think) does not run parallel as it goes by E12. It's making a wide right turn, while the aircraft must make a sharp left turn. Or if pushing back, you must push straight out, then slightly left, then straighten out again, while following the aforementioned right turn. It's like a shallow angle crescent maneuver, if viewed from above.
The reason for the wait is because it's a single passage taxi way into North cargo. And because of the clearance the a380 needs, pretty much anyone else pushing from gate E6-9 will block it.
I don't know for sure, but I'd guess that massport or atc opted to block in the a380 (who was then only delaying the next BA flight from accessing the gate the 380 just vacated) in favor of letting everyone else push/come in.
To simplify, you have BA 380 hold, causing a delay for the inbound BA, and in exchange you can have AF/LH/WW leave, and have DY/AZ/VS arrive at those newly vacant gates.
Apologies for rambling. I spent a lot of time studying how to operate out of those gates. Not quite just a push when ready and 90 degree turn, nose north or south.
33lspotter wrote:Saw that a DL 772ER (AMS-ATL) diverted earlier this afternoon, I'm guessing the reason was medical?
FGITD wrote:Apologies for rambling. I spent a lot of time studying how to operate out of those gates. Not quite just a push when ready and 90 degree turn, nose north or south.
Dieuwer wrote:I start to wonder if Logan needs a massive road overhaul in addition to the building of gates and new terminal space.
I was riding the bus from economy parking last Friday afternoon and the roads were a complete gridlock. Whoever decided that I-90 and 1A need to cross and interweave with airport roads was a complete idiot.
AirFrance744 wrote:FGITD wrote:Apologies for rambling. I spent a lot of time studying how to operate out of those gates. Not quite just a push when ready and 90 degree turn, nose north or south.
Don't apologize, that was a very interesting read! It explains a lot. It seems that the rest of the planned E gates would have the same issue as they are in a one-way in and out situation, or is the North cargo area opening up to allow for increased access to those gates?
aaflyer777 wrote:Dieuwer wrote:I start to wonder if Logan needs a massive road overhaul in addition to the building of gates and new terminal space.
I was riding the bus from economy parking last Friday afternoon and the roads were a complete gridlock. Whoever decided that I-90 and 1A need to cross and interweave with airport roads was a complete idiot.
Agreed, driving at Logan is a mess during rush hour. Took my bus 30 minutes to get from the blue line station to terminal C last week! I really wish there was a way to walk to the terminal, it'd probably be faster
AirFrance744 wrote:FGITD wrote:Apologies for rambling. I spent a lot of time studying how to operate out of those gates. Not quite just a push when ready and 90 degree turn, nose north or south.
Don't apologize, that was a very interesting read! It explains a lot. It seems that the rest of the planned E gates would have the same issue as they are in a one-way in and out situation, or is the North cargo area opening up to allow for increased access to those gates?
aaflyer777 wrote:Dieuwer wrote:I start to wonder if Logan needs a massive road overhaul in addition to the building of gates and new terminal space.
I was riding the bus from economy parking last Friday afternoon and the roads were a complete gridlock. Whoever decided that I-90 and 1A need to cross and interweave with airport roads was a complete idiot.
Agreed, driving at Logan is a mess during rush hour. Took my bus 30 minutes to get from the blue line station to terminal C last week! I really wish there was a way to walk to the terminal, it'd probably be faster
aaflyer777 wrote:Dieuwer wrote:I start to wonder if Logan needs a massive road overhaul in addition to the building of gates and new terminal space.
I was riding the bus from economy parking last Friday afternoon and the roads were a complete gridlock. Whoever decided that I-90 and 1A need to cross and interweave with airport roads was a complete idiot.
Agreed, driving at Logan is a mess during rush hour. Took my bus 30 minutes to get from the blue line station to terminal C last week! I really wish there was a way to walk to the terminal, it'd probably be faster
airbazar wrote:aaflyer777 wrote:Dieuwer wrote:I start to wonder if Logan needs a massive road overhaul in addition to the building of gates and new terminal space.
I was riding the bus from economy parking last Friday afternoon and the roads were a complete gridlock. Whoever decided that I-90 and 1A need to cross and interweave with airport roads was a complete idiot.
Agreed, driving at Logan is a mess during rush hour. Took my bus 30 minutes to get from the blue line station to terminal C last week! I really wish there was a way to walk to the terminal, it'd probably be faster
1A was there before Logan expanded into East Boston. Remember the Neptune Rd saga?
Two words: Ride-share. I bet half of those cars are Uber or Lyft. It has nothing to do with I-90/1A. You don't even get on 1A to go from the economy parking garage to the terminals. It's just the result of more cars driving to/from the terminals.
What ends up happening is that many cars trying to come into the terminals end up backing up into the airport roadways. Looks at terminal A or terminal C for example. There's no space at all for more than a hand-full of cars. Then to make matters even worse, Massport had the brilliant idea to ban cars from using the lanes closest to the terminal at terminal E, and in the evening with all the International traffic that causes a huge backup of cars waiting to get into the terminal E parking area. It's a complete mess.
seat24charlie wrote:It'd be nice if, like most modern airports, we had a reliable and efficient transit system to move people in and out of the airport. Instead we'll keep throwing more roads at the problem and wonder open-mouthed why we're still stuck in traffic.
Dieuwer wrote:Also, to go to the economy parking lot, you first have to exit I-90 and enter the airport road system, then exit the airport road system and merge on the I-90/1A connector with the other traffic, and thereafter immediately exit again.
jworks158 wrote:NBC Boston did a story today summarizing the construction projects going on at logan, included are some pictures of the terminal B expansion. Where it appears carpet is going in! https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/Lo ... 07251.html
He knows some challenges remain including traffic congestion outside the terminals as well as parking.
Glynn says airport officials are looking at adding a people mover and a parking reservation.
tysmith95 wrote:Lately the ride-share waiting lot has caused lots of traffic at the airport. The current lot is not large enough or well organized enough to handle the amount of traffic it has been getting.
The tunnels are also getting worse and worse. But that is harder to fix. Something to allow the Silver line to cut the line into the Ted Williams would be helpful though, along with something better at the Seaport.
tysmith95 wrote:Lately the ride-share waiting lot has caused lots of traffic at the airport. The current lot is not large enough or well organized enough to handle the amount of traffic it has been getting.
The tunnels are also getting worse and worse. But that is harder to fix. Something to allow the Silver line to cut the line into the Ted Williams would be helpful though, along with something better at the Seaport.
Victorville wrote:There also has to be a better use for the E lots than surface parking.
Ghim-Lay Yeo @ghimlay
.@Aeromexico will suspend service on several domestic and US routes as it faces net loss in 2018: Mexico City to Boston, Washington Dulles & Portland; Monterrey to Las Vegas, Tijuana, Merida & Veracruz; and Guadalajara to Cancun and San Jose, California
Kilgen wrote:Looks like AM is going to suspend service to BOS next year. From Twitter:Ghim-Lay Yeo @ghimlay
.@Aeromexico will suspend service on several domestic and US routes as it faces net loss in 2018: Mexico City to Boston, Washington Dulles & Portland; Monterrey to Las Vegas, Tijuana, Merida & Veracruz; and Guadalajara to Cancun and San Jose, California
https://twitter.com/ghimlay/status/1052574904527151104
Dieuwer wrote:BOS-MEX is a horrible red-eye on AM. Maybe that's one of the reasons why it doesn't work out.
adamh8297 wrote:Dieuwer wrote:BOS-MEX is a horrible red-eye on AM. Maybe that's one of the reasons why it doesn't work out.
They tweaked the schedule quite a bit in their second tour of duty and settled into the red eye from BOS.
It has to be one of their longest US-Mexico routes too. Its not a massive market either.
Chalk up a win for B6 though it might be a bit of a Pyrrhic victory.
Dieuwer wrote:BOS-MEX is a horrible red-eye on AM. Maybe that's one of the reasons why it doesn't work out.
VS4ever wrote:Agenda for the latest board meeting has been posted, normally nothing really exciting is on it... but tomorrow (agenda attached)
http://www.massport.com/media/2986/agen ... 8-2018.pdf
We get this..
https://www.massport.com/capitalprogram ... tation.pdf
What is "this" I hear you ask... It's the Auto People Mover project, they are requesting a partial budget of $15m, if the timings stay true, this is to determine the final selection and potentially move forward.
airbazar wrote:tysmith95 wrote:Lately the ride-share waiting lot has caused lots of traffic at the airport. The current lot is not large enough or well organized enough to handle the amount of traffic it has been getting.
The tunnels are also getting worse and worse. But that is harder to fix. Something to allow the Silver line to cut the line into the Ted Williams would be helpful though, along with something better at the Seaport.
Boston and Massport completely underestimated ride-share and they have nothing in place to handle the volume of cars that that business brings into Logan. That is the single biggest reason for the traffic congestion on the airport roadways. They created a huge taxi-pool parking area but no such thing exists for ride-share so those cars just circle around until they pickup a customer.
B752OS wrote:VS4ever wrote:Agenda for the latest board meeting has been posted, normally nothing really exciting is on it... but tomorrow (agenda attached)
http://www.massport.com/media/2986/agen ... 8-2018.pdf
We get this..
https://www.massport.com/capitalprogram ... tation.pdf
What is "this" I hear you ask... It's the Auto People Mover project, they are requesting a partial budget of $15m, if the timings stay true, this is to determine the final selection and potentially move forward.
What is the transportation center next to the car rental center?
NickolayAv wrote:Kilgen wrote:Looks like AM is going to suspend service to BOS next year. From Twitter:Ghim-Lay Yeo @ghimlay
.@Aeromexico will suspend service on several domestic and US routes as it faces net loss in 2018: Mexico City to Boston, Washington Dulles & Portland; Monterrey to Las Vegas, Tijuana, Merida & Veracruz; and Guadalajara to Cancun and San Jose, California
https://twitter.com/ghimlay/status/1052574904527151104
Major loss for DL, with B6 entering the market in a few weeks.