Please continue from last year's disccusion.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1382421

Happy New Year from New Zealand! I tried to quote from the previous thread but it appears shut off.

Interesting posts re: B6 & LHR. I think with the businsss contracts B6 have they need to launch LHR to compete with BA, DL & VS. The schedules posted earlier would be great and give them an edge over the other carriers for sure.

Re: EK. I do think a second flight would be worth their time, but they don’t have the right aircraft currently. Will be interesting to see what they do when they get 787-10’s. On a side note it’s amazing that Christchurch gets a daily EK A380 yet BOS can’t. I realize it’s a CHC-SYD-DXB route, but still impressive they get the 380 and not a 77W. I just went to Christchurch and was surprised at how small it was. I love New Zealand and Wellington remains my favorite of all the places I’ve been.

I could be way wrong, but I don't think the EK 787-10 can go all the way to Boston. It's more meant for shorter, high-density flights which is why BA will use it BOS-LHR.

chrisnh wrote:

I could be way wrong, but I don't think the EK 787-10 can go all the way to Boston. It's more meant for shorter, high-density flights which is why BA will use it BOS-LHR.

I thought the same thing myself, but looks like the 787-10 according to wikipedia can do 7,400mi non-stop:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_78 ... ner#787-10

DXB-BOS is 6,651mi:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_78 ... ner#787-10

While EK might have them earmarked for EU routes it looks like they could do BOS.

Lets repost in the new thread:

1) I don't get the obsession with LHR. I would be happy to fly Mint to/from LGW.
2) How about a daytime flight BOS-LHR 12:00-24:00, and a return to BOS 4:00-7:00 AM? Let's call it the "Late Night Party Flight".

Happy 2019! Lets do predictions and wishlist for routes to be announced (and possibly launched) for this new year!

Predictions

B6 BOS-IND
B6 BOS-CVG
B6 BOS-ANU (weekly)
DL BOS-SDF
WN BOS-SAT
AT BOS-CMN
CZ BOS-WUH-CAN

Wishlist
DL or B6 BOS-PVR/SJD - Heck even FI could do charters for Apple Vacations.
B6 BOS-SJO
B6 BOS-BZE
B6 BOS-BZN
ET BOS-ADD
OS BOS-VIE

I think EK has 35 777-8s (fly farther) and 115 777-9s (more people) on the order books.

Well JetBlue is obviously still pushing for Europe and LHR. Employee email said expect 321 decision this year (2019) but they also said to expect it this fall (2018). Looks like 2019 will have some major JetBlue decisions being made (slowly as always)

Dieuwer wrote:

Lets repost in the new thread:

1) I don't get the obsession with LHR. I would be happy to fly Mint to/from LGW.

I can see both sides of it. I’ve flown into Heathrow three times (TATL) and Gatwick once (Europe short haul) — one is a zoo (albeit the global home of my favorite BA 744s) and the other is much calmer. While Heathrow is in Greater London and Gatwick is in West Sussex, I’ve found that the Gatwick express is not bad, 40 mins to Victoria station, but the Heathrow Express is 15 mins to Paddington from T2/3. It’s my understanding that B6 would not go into T5 (and more likely into 2/3) so that “15 minutes” would be a selling point (for business travelers especially) vs. Gatwick, although I think UK Border Control queues will generally be faster at Gatwick and could make up the difference of the train rides. I think Gatwick would be just fine for Mint service, but I see the inclination towards Heathrow as it is a bit closer, however silly 15 vs. 40 mins is (particularly considering the aforementioned queues).

33lspotter wrote:

Dieuwer wrote:

Lets repost in the new thread:

1) I don't get the obsession with LHR. I would be happy to fly Mint to/from LGW.

I can see both sides of it. I’ve flown into Heathrow three times (TATL) and Gatwick once (Europe short haul) — one is a zoo (albeit the global home of my favorite BA 744s) and the other is much calmer. While Heathrow is in Greater London and Gatwick is in West Sussex, I’ve found that the Gatwick express is not bad, 40 mins to Victoria station, but the Heathrow Express is 15 mins to Paddington from T2/3. It’s my understanding that B6 would not go into T5 (and more likely into 2/3) so that “15 minutes” would be a selling point (for business travelers especially) vs. Gatwick, although I think UK Border Control queues will generally be faster at Gatwick and could make up the difference of the train rides. I think Gatwick would be just fine for Mint service, but I see the inclination towards Heathrow as it is a bit closer, however silly 15 vs. 40 mins is (particularly considering the aforementioned queues).

I'm no expert about LHR or London but I've spent a lot of time in London in my younger, misguided days
One has to consider many other things. Here are a few in no particular order:
a) Beyond LHR connection potential. There are far more options at LHR especially for those who are self-connecting which is becoming more common.
https://www.oag.com/blog/airline-passen ... connection
b) B6's partners can be found in both airports but predominantly at LHR (TP, EK, SQ, SA, being the main ones). T2 would make the most sense fo them, IMO.
c) Frequencies for business fliers. Even if B6 can only manage a single daily flight, if the flight gets cancelled there could be as many as half a dozen other flights departing to BOS for those pax who absolutely need to be in Boston that day. From LGW so far only 1 DY flight.
d) Final destination. Not everyone wants to go to central London.
e) Subway access. Price conscious customers take the subway especially if staying at a cheaper hotel somewhere between the airport and the city center. I've almost always taken the subway when in London and for that reason i like staying in the area between Hammersmith and Gloucester Road on the Piccadilly line. Yes it's a 1 hour subway ride but you can't beat the price.
f) An A321 with only 160ish seats needs to command higher fares. For whatever reason LHR commands higher fares.

LGW is London's second tier airport. Always has been. Most US majors only flew there in pre-deregulation days if they weren't permitted into LHR. Today, its TATL flights are served primarily by budget carriers and B6 has never positioned itself as one of those carriers. If B6 flies to London, it'll be to LHR.

Tangentially, I flew DL BOS-LHR Christmas night, returning New Years Eve Day. The outbound flight was 100% full and the return only had a small handful of open seats (including two in J). We arrived back in BOS around 11:40 am and the customs hall was literally empty. I was in an Uber at 12:05!

adamh8297 wrote:

Happy 2019! Lets do predictions and wishlist for routes to be announced (and possibly launched) for this new year!

Predictions

B6 BOS-IND
B6 BOS-CVG
B6 BOS-ANU (weekly)
DL BOS-SDF
WN BOS-SAT
AT BOS-CMN
CZ BOS-WUH-CAN

Wishlist
DL or B6 BOS-PVR/SJD - Heck even FI could do charters for Apple Vacations.
B6 BOS-SJO
B6 BOS-BZE
B6 BOS-BZN
ET BOS-ADD
OS BOS-VIE

Happy New Year to All!
I'll add a few more predictions (a lot of these are more wishlists):
DL or B6 BOS-MEM
I think we are going to see some more additions from DL (definitely not all of these, I'd be happy to see even some of these),
Domestic: BOS - SAN, DEN, DFW or IAH, STL
In Europe: BOS - ATH, KEF, BRU, TXL, ZRH, PRG, (Most of these are massive longshots)
WS BOS-YYC

2018 was a massive success for BOS, I think 2019 will be slightly more conservative in terms of growth (said that last year, turned out to be wrong), I hope to see some of the new routes that we are getting mature, so as not to lose them due to low load factors.
Also, congrats to BOS, on likely its first 40 mil pax year.

Is there any reason why US airlines are so reluctant to enter Canadian airports? I feel like there is a market for Jetblue to serve YYC or YVR. I think YVR is big enough for year round, while YYC would be a good summer seasonal.

YYC looks like a good spot for a B6 entry. Only one competitor on JFK, and no competitors for BOS.

This is probably more of a wish list than predictions:
B6 BOS-MKE
Additional LY frequencies to TLV
IG BOS-MXP
DL- any of the European destinations that PF announced but never actually operated

airbazar wrote:

33lspotter wrote:

Dieuwer wrote:

Lets repost in the new thread:

1) I don't get the obsession with LHR. I would be happy to fly Mint to/from LGW.

I can see both sides of it. I’ve flown into Heathrow three times (TATL) and Gatwick once (Europe short haul) — one is a zoo (albeit the global home of my favorite BA 744s) and the other is much calmer. While Heathrow is in Greater London and Gatwick is in West Sussex, I’ve found that the Gatwick express is not bad, 40 mins to Victoria station, but the Heathrow Express is 15 mins to Paddington from T2/3. It’s my understanding that B6 would not go into T5 (and more likely into 2/3) so that “15 minutes” would be a selling point (for business travelers especially) vs. Gatwick, although I think UK Border Control queues will generally be faster at Gatwick and could make up the difference of the train rides. I think Gatwick would be just fine for Mint service, but I see the inclination towards Heathrow as it is a bit closer, however silly 15 vs. 40 mins is (particularly considering the aforementioned queues).

I'm no expert about LHR or London but I've spent a lot of time in London in my younger, misguided days
One has to consider many other things. Here are a few in no particular order:
a) Beyond LHR connection potential. There are far more options at LHR especially for those who are self-connecting which is becoming more common.
https://www.oag.com/blog/airline-passen ... connection
b) B6's partners can be found in both airports but predominantly at LHR (TP, EK, SQ, SA, being the main ones).
c) Frequencies for business fliers. Even if B6 can only manage a single daily flight, if the flight gets cancelled there could be as many as half a dozen other flights departing to BOS for those pax who absolutely need to be in Boston that day. From LGW so far only 1 DY flight.
d) Final destination. Not everyone wants to go to central London.
e) Subway access. Price conscious customers take the subway especially if staying at a cheaper hotel somewhere between the airport and the city center. I've almost always taken the subway when in London and for that reason i like staying in the area between Hammersmith and Gloucester Road on the Piccadilly line. Yes it's a 1 hour subway ride but you can't beat the price.
f) An A321 with only 160ish seats needs to command higher fares. For whatever reason LHR commands higher fares.

ok, as the resident English transplant, what I will say is you all bring up some excellent points. Here's my take on it.

1. you first have to understand the dynamics between London's 4 airports, LTN, STN,LGW and LHR,
a) LHR is the premier gateway and as such despite the massive capacity going in there, commands the highest fares, it's the most well known and is utilized by business and vacation travelers alike, although the business side is huge, connections all over the world, it's where folks would like to be. It has a massive captive market from London to the Midlands, to the South and Southwest, access via M4, M40, M1, M25, it makes a whole lot of sense for B6 to want to be there, BUT, it's freaking expensive, from slots to landing fees. Piccadilly line access is great although very slow given the number of stops, however there's the Heathrow Express to Paddington and the new Elizabeth Line coming in late 19, that give speedier options to and across the city. Speaking from experience, LHR is ok to deal with, but frankly because i used to live around 100 miles North, it's actually better to connect via AMS or CDG, but if you are in London and the South, it's a great jumping off point to get almost anywhere in the world. It's BA's hub and is fiercely protected by them for good reason.

b) LGW, here's where I get frustrated with a lot of people. LGW has the potential, not to be LHR, it will NEVER be that, but I think a lot of folks underestimate the wealth in Surrey, Kent, SE London and Sussex, which could drive a decent flow of premium traffic, someone quoted DY as bad to be at LGW, I fundamentally disagree with that statement. LGW was exactly the correct place for their operation. LGW has historically been a vacation airport, if you spend time looking at the capacity annually going to Spain and the Mediterranean amongst others, it's quite staggering, and plenty of long haul vacation options on BA. EK run 380's in there amongst other long haul. Make no mistake, given the chance and the availability of slots, many airlines would switch in a heartbeat to LHR, will be very interesting how they ultimately manage the new runway and capacity afforded by that, once it finally gets built (which might be a long time), BUT... there are options here to find a niche, which is what DY have done and are probably some of their more profitable long haul routes. B6 with their 321's and Mint cabin would do just fine here in my opinion, would it match what they would get at LHR in terms of fares, nope, but the costs will definitely be a lot less. I think the decision here is probably closer than we think, despite the protestations being made in public.

c) STN and LTN - some have mentioned STN as an option, LTN is out of the question, that's a bucket and spade airport, without a lot of the facilities B6 would want and is too far out of London to make any sense. It's not an impressive airport by any respect, but it does what it does and millions go through it every year on their vacations. STN, ahhhh, STN, honestly being from North of London would be a great alternative for long haul for my family, as would BHX, but i digress. The original design really was to be a reliever for LHR, plenty of space for expansion, but... alas although it has grown massively, it never took off (pardon the pun) in the way it was intended. It became a ULCC airport for the most part, DY (had they built the partner relationships), could have settled in nicely here, but the premium garnered at LGW was probably better in the long run. B6 won't end up here, it was nice for PF to have a go, but in order to have success it's going to need a big name to go in there with some 321's, keep the capacity low and build up, That said, as much i would love for it to happen, i ultimately doubt it will.

in answer to some of the other points
a) LHR connections - I don't think folks flying on B6 are looking for connections beyond LHR, they would do that on BA, or VS or others, this is O&D driven with US POS and B6 trying to enhance their offering to their contract flyers. I agree about the self-connecting thing, it's becoming more common, not sure if this is going to tip the balance, YET (never say never)
b) B6 partners, yes they have options at both airports, it would tip to LHR on this front, but having EK at LGW for example would give them a leg up.
c) IRROPS is going to be a challenge at LHR or LGW for B6, agreed there are more direct options at LHR and a 2x daily would probably be ok in terms of coverage, however they may need to figure out a solution if an aircraft goes tech, maybe book someone via JFK etc. We shall see.
f) see above for why LHR commands fares, it's premium and slot restricted, once supply is limited, and demand increases, price goes up, general economic theory. LGW isn't quite at that point, but it's getting close.

adamh8297 wrote:

Happy 2019! Lets do predictions and wishlist for routes to be announced (and possibly launched) for this new year!

Predictions

B6 BOS-IND
B6 BOS-CVG
B6 BOS-ANU (weekly)
DL BOS-SDF
WN BOS-SAT
AT BOS-CMN
CZ BOS-WUH-CAN

Wishlist
DL or B6 BOS-PVR/SJD - Heck even FI could do charters for Apple Vacations.
B6 BOS-SJO
B6 BOS-BZE
B6 BOS-BZN
ET BOS-ADD
OS BOS-VIE

For whatever reason, considering WN still hasn't launched SAT and are probably counting on people making connections there, I think DL is more likely to pick up the route. I also have limited hopes for B6 launching much for new routes for us. They aren't in rapid expansion mode anymore.

Jouhou wrote:

I also have limited hopes for B6 launching much for new routes for us. They aren't in rapid expansion mode anymore.

True, however SY and AS will be vacating C40-C42 in September as part of the move round to B.. I suspect you will see something then, remember they are projecting to grow to 200 departures a day at somepoint. So growth is likely to happen and it won't be the E190 flying that does it because that's a 1-1 switch with the A220-300's coming in,

Its not possible that DL has brought catering in-house at Logan, is it? I noticed back in December that the catering trucks all said Delta on them rather than Gate Gourmet. I paid attention today while our flight was being catered (it was easy as it was during boarding and I was in row 1). The truck's legal line on the driver's door said "Delta Air Lines, Atlanta, GA" on it and the guy loading the carts had an ABM vest on. ABM is the airport staffing company that does wheelchairs, security, etc.

it seems bizarre in this day and age for airlines to run their own flight kitchens. As far as I know only the old Continental kitchens are still owned by an airline (in this case by United) and even then, only at the old CO hubs. Anyone have an idea?

N717TW wrote:

Its not possible that DL has brought catering in-house at Logan, is it? I noticed back in December that the catering trucks all said Delta on them rather than Gate Gourmet. I paid attention today while our flight was being catered (it was easy as it was during boarding and I was in row 1). The truck's legal line on the driver's door said "Delta Air Lines, Atlanta, GA" on it and the guy loading the carts had an ABM vest on. ABM is the airport staffing company that does wheelchairs, security, etc.

it seems bizarre in this day and age for airlines to run their own flight kitchens. As far as I know only the old Continental kitchens are still owned by an airline (in this case by United) and even then, only at the old CO hubs. Anyone have an idea?

ABM is Delta and JetBlue’s catering business partner in Boston.

DELTA777 wrote:

N717TW wrote:

Its not possible that DL has brought catering in-house at Logan, is it? I noticed back in December that the catering trucks all said Delta on them rather than Gate Gourmet. I paid attention today while our flight was being catered (it was easy as it was during boarding and I was in row 1). The truck's legal line on the driver's door said "Delta Air Lines, Atlanta, GA" on it and the guy loading the carts had an ABM vest on. ABM is the airport staffing company that does wheelchairs, security, etc.

it seems bizarre in this day and age for airlines to run their own flight kitchens. As far as I know only the old Continental kitchens are still owned by an airline (in this case by United) and even then, only at the old CO hubs. Anyone have an idea?

ABM is Delta and JetBlue’s catering business partner in Boston.

Yup and the switch over this summer was a total disaster. About 6ish years ago jetblue stopped doing its own catering. Big mistake.

I suppose in the end their biggest business contract will tell B6 where to go: LHR or LGW. Or maybe both!

I get the sense that ‘back-door-politics’ goes on in the airline industry. One could say that DL and B6 are in Worcester to curry favor with Massport. But over at LHR, would BA put the screws to B6, using their clout to make things ‘inconvenient’ for them in terms of timings and gates?

chrisnh wrote:

I get the sense that ‘back-door-politics’ goes on in the airline industry. One could say that DL and B6 are in Worcester to curry favor with Massport. But over at LHR, would BA put the screws to B6, using their clout to make things ‘inconvenient’ for them in terms of timings and gates?

Doubtful for 2 reasons.
1. Slots are slots, BA can’t just buy them, and they have a bunch spare already as a matter of course, if the timing is available, then they would get that slot,
The only way for BA to make it awkward is if B6 were trying to buy one of theirs.

2. B6 would likely use terminal 2 or more likely 3, which BA have little or no impact on because the vast majority of their flights go to 4 and 5, could they try and throw a bunch of flights on there to use spare slots and use up gates? Maybe but I doubt it

BA have big influence at LHR and LGW but because of the slotting situation and terminal set up, I am not sure it would actually do a whole heck of a lot.

fastmover wrote:

DELTA777 wrote:

N717TW wrote:

Its not possible that DL has brought catering in-house at Logan, is it? I noticed back in December that the catering trucks all said Delta on them rather than Gate Gourmet. I paid attention today while our flight was being catered (it was easy as it was during boarding and I was in row 1). The truck's legal line on the driver's door said "Delta Air Lines, Atlanta, GA" on it and the guy loading the carts had an ABM vest on. ABM is the airport staffing company that does wheelchairs, security, etc.

it seems bizarre in this day and age for airlines to run their own flight kitchens. As far as I know only the old Continental kitchens are still owned by an airline (in this case by United) and even then, only at the old CO hubs. Anyone have an idea?

ABM is Delta and JetBlue’s catering business partner in Boston.

Yup and the switch over this summer was a total disaster. About 6ish years ago jetblue stopped doing its own catering. Big mistake.

Does B6 also use ABM for their MINT service?

pitbosflyer wrote:

fastmover wrote:

DELTA777 wrote:

ABM is Delta and JetBlue’s catering business partner in Boston.

Yup and the switch over this summer was a total disaster. About 6ish years ago jetblue stopped doing its own catering. Big mistake.

Does B6 also use ABM for their MINT service?

Yes

clrd4t8koff wrote:

Happy New Year from New Zealand! I tried to quote from the previous thread but it appears shut off.

Interesting posts re: B6 & LHR. I think with the businsss contracts B6 have they need to launch LHR to compete with BA, DL & VS. The schedules posted earlier would be great and give them an edge over the other carriers for sure.

Re: EK. I do think a second flight would be worth their time, but they don’t have the right aircraft currently. Will be interesting to see what they do when they get 787-10’s. On a side note it’s amazing that Christchurch gets a daily EK A380 yet BOS can’t. I realize it’s a CHC-SYD-DXB route, but still impressive they get the 380 and not a 77W. I just went to Christchurch and was surprised at how small it was. I love New Zealand and Wellington remains my favorite of all the places I’ve been.

Isn't EK allowed to carry CHC-SYD-CHC pax? That may be on reason they get an A380.

Have you gone to Queenstown yet? That was my favorite place in New Zealand. Wellington was my second. It's sad that Christchurch has still not recovered from the two large earthquakes they were hit with.

VS4ever wrote:

Jouhou wrote:

I also have limited hopes for B6 launching much for new routes for us. They aren't in rapid expansion mode anymore.

True, however SY and AS will be vacating C40-C42 in September as part of the move round to B.. I suspect you will see something then, remember they are projecting to grow to 200 departures a day at somepoint. So growth is likely to happen and it won't be the E190 flying that does it because that's a 1-1 switch with the A220-300's coming in,

The Terminal B to C connector is due to start work this spring. I am going to guess C 40-42 will be out of commission while the expansion project is going on.

B752OS wrote:

clrd4t8koff wrote:

Happy New Year from New Zealand! I tried to quote from the previous thread but it appears shut off.

Interesting posts re: B6 & LHR. I think with the businsss contracts B6 have they need to launch LHR to compete with BA, DL & VS. The schedules posted earlier would be great and give them an edge over the other carriers for sure.

Re: EK. I do think a second flight would be worth their time, but they don’t have the right aircraft currently. Will be interesting to see what they do when they get 787-10’s. On a side note it’s amazing that Christchurch gets a daily EK A380 yet BOS can’t. I realize it’s a CHC-SYD-DXB route, but still impressive they get the 380 and not a 77W. I just went to Christchurch and was surprised at how small it was. I love New Zealand and Wellington remains my favorite of all the places I’ve been.

Isn't EK allowed to carry CHC-SYD-CHC pax? That may be on reason they get an A380.

Have you gone to Queenstown yet? That was my favorite place in New Zealand. Wellington was my second. It's sad that Christchurch has still not recovered from the two large earthquakes they were hit with.

Yes, EK does carry CHC-SYD-CHC passengers, which I didn't consider earlier. So that helps I'm sure, but between JQ, QF, VA, NZ and EK all flying CHC-SYD - it seems overserved for EK to pick up many local passengers only going to SYD to make it an A380.

Yes, we're in Queenstown currently and have been since 12/31. Beautiful spot indeed, but it's so crowded for the Christmas/New Year holiday. We knew it'd be busy, but underestimated just how busy it was going to be. We've still enjoyed it and have lucked out with the weather! We absolutely loved Wellington. Again, we got lucky with the weather there and it was stunning. Wellington has been our favorite so far and their airport is so cool. For anybody who's a Lord of the Rings fan a transit through WLG airport is a must. The gates and the character figurines throughout the airport are really cool and I'm not much into the movies but still enjoyed it.

It is a shame about the politics that are holding Christchurch back from rebuilding. We were wanting to love Christchurch and all the locals we spoke with all expressed the same frustration at how long it's taking to rebuild. For anyone who's not been to Christchurch and are looking to visit or have upcoming travel plans be prepared - the city still looks like the earthquake happened last year. Lots of buildings still standing and now vacated and covered in graffiti. Many open plots of land where buildings used to stand and are now dirt parking lots. It was wild, but apparently was a beautiful city pre-quakes. The people were incredibly kind and optimistic that their city will (hopefully) once again be back to its old vibrant self.

VS4ever wrote:

airbazar wrote:

33lspotter wrote:

in answer to some of the other points
a) LHR connections - I don't think folks flying on B6 are looking for connections beyond LHR, they would do that on BA, or VS or others, this is O&D driven with US POS and B6 trying to enhance their offering to their contract flyers. I agree about the self-connecting thing, it's becoming more common, not sure if this is going to tip the balance, YET (never say never)
b) B6 partners, yes they have options at both airports, it would tip to LHR on this front, but having EK at LGW for example would give them a leg up.

To add to these two points: one of the biggest B6 partners at LHR, SQ, would rather saw off their own feet than sell SIN-LHR-BOS tickets with jetBlue. They're begrudging enough with pricing as it is with VS. It's hard to see this being anything other than pure London O&D for jetBlue.

seat24charlie wrote:

VS4ever wrote:

airbazar wrote:

To add to these two points: one of the biggest B6 partners at LHR, SQ, would rather saw off their own feet than sell SIN-LHR-BOS tickets with jetBlue. They're begrudging enough with pricing as it is with VS. It's hard to see this being anything other than pure London O&D for jetBlue.

Sure O&D will be the main market as it is for every airline that serves LHR but the value of connections cannot be underestimated.
I don't think SQ and B6 have that much of a partnership so I wouldn't call SQ their biggest partner at LHR. The biggest are actually EI, EK, and TP. Code-share partnerships are all about cost for the parties involved. That is one reason why SQ codeshares with VS on BOS-LHR but not with LH on BOS-FRA. One of the reasons SQ doesn't code-share much with UA is because UA is not a cheap partner. SQ doesn't seem to have a problem with AS so why would they have a problem with B6? Only if B6 is too expensive for them. If B6 is cheaper than VS on BOS-LHR I can totally see them code-sharing.
The airline industry is not as ideological as people on a.net make it seem. Here's a good example:
AS which by many accounts is DL's enemy #1 is SQ's preferred partner on the West Coast, with code-shares on many AS routes out of LAX/SFO.
VS which is actually owned by DL, is SQ's preferred TATL partner with code-shares on just about every VS departure out of LHR.

seat24charlie wrote:

VS4ever wrote:

airbazar wrote:

To add to these two points: one of the biggest B6 partners at LHR, SQ, would rather saw off their own feet than sell SIN-LHR-BOS tickets with jetBlue. They're begrudging enough with pricing as it is with VS. It's hard to see this being anything other than pure London O&D for jetBlue.

I have trouble believing all of B6's partners will stay with them if they launch LHR service. The biggest benefit they get now is that B6 is feeding their JFK and BOS flights from the surrounding domestic destinations. They won't like the idea of having B6 instead shuttle them all the way to LHR and then connect.....undermining EK, SA, and TAP's current TATL flights out of JFK and BOS.

pitbosflyer wrote:

seat24charlie wrote:

VS4ever wrote:

To add to these two points: one of the biggest B6 partners at LHR, SQ, would rather saw off their own feet than sell SIN-LHR-BOS tickets with jetBlue. They're begrudging enough with pricing as it is with VS. It's hard to see this being anything other than pure London O&D for jetBlue.

I have trouble believing all of B6's partners will stay with them if they launch LHR service. The biggest benefit they get now is that B6 is feeding their JFK and BOS flights from the surrounding domestic destinations. They won't like the idea of having B6 instead shuttle them all the way to LHR and then connect.....undermining EK, SA, and TAP's current TATL flights out of JFK and BOS.

B6 having flights from LHR could help some of those carriers with IRROPS.

Example: Someone mis-connects on DEL-DXB-BOS and EK sends passenger on EK DXB-LHR and B6 LHR-BOS.

pitbosflyer wrote:

seat24charlie wrote:

VS4ever wrote:

To add to these two points: one of the biggest B6 partners at LHR, SQ, would rather saw off their own feet than sell SIN-LHR-BOS tickets with jetBlue. They're begrudging enough with pricing as it is with VS. It's hard to see this being anything other than pure London O&D for jetBlue.

I have trouble believing all of B6's partners will stay with them if they launch LHR service. The biggest benefit they get now is that B6 is feeding their JFK and BOS flights from the surrounding domestic destinations. They won't like the idea of having B6 instead shuttle them all the way to LHR and then connect.....undermining EK, SA, and TAP's current TATL flights out of JFK and BOS.

By that rationale TP should not have their code on UA's BOS-EWR or B6's BOS-JFK and should be removing their code from JFK/EWR/BOS-SFO/IAD/ORD when they start flying to those destinations next Summer
Having multiple routes to get from point A to point B is generally seen as a good thing by the airlines. We've always read that frequency is king. It's unlikely that TP would fly more than 1x daily between BOS and LIS. Having a code-share partner at LHR or AMS or CDG to offer an alternative to getting between BOS and LIS is not bad.
But I think that specific to BOS-LHR where the value of the partnership comes from is the fact that BOS-LHR is such a large and lucrative O&D market. TP/EK/etc putting a code on B6's flight would give them access to this market without actually having to fly it. And for B6, it would help share the cost of the operation and have access to a pool of customers that they wouldn't otherwise have.

Just got in BKK flying EK. First time in J. Service was excellent, limousine pick up a nice touch. Looked I got the new J seat. Plenty of space even though it has a 2-3-2 layout (I had a window seat). The following A380 was very ratty though. Didn't like it much, even with a private seat it felt much more cramped (I'm 6'2").
Neither plane was completely full. In fact, the lounge was rather quiet as well. So, I don't see the 2nd daily EK flight coming.

Well, the outbound might have been quietish, the inbound is oversold in J. I almost got a heart attack when the lady at check-in asked me if I wanted to volunteer to downgrade to Y in return for a free round trip ticket. Thanks, but no thanks.

Does EK routinely overbook J?

I just got back from a 14 day BOS-LHR-TLV-MAD-LHR trip on BA and Iberia, last night arriving on BA239. I was quite pleased with my progression through CBC. I used mobile passport and my time from my seat (which was premium economy) to post customs was 10-15 minutes.

Two caveats are that I did not check baggage, and I had to go through increased agricultural screening because I declared that I had been to a farm in Israel.

Interestingly I was able to get though passport control 2 minutes before my parents who have global entry!

Royal Air Maroc has applied with the DOT to serve CMN-BOS starting June, 2019.

https://airlineinfo.com/ostpdf103/328.pdf

On the South American front - I see two items that didn't find their way to the OAG thread or airlineroute.

BOS-GRU going to 5 weekly in April and staying that way at least until December 2019.
BOS-BOG is 6 weekly right now- Tuesday has been cut.

Looks like Frontier has decided to return to BOS! New flights to DEN, MCO, RDU, RNO (New Dest. for BOS).
Any guesses as to what terminal they will use?

I would guess B- the only one I can think of with any potential gate space.

NickolayAv wrote:

Looks like Frontier has decided to return to BOS! New flights to DEN, MCO, RDU, RNO (New Dest. for BOS).
Any guesses as to what terminal they will use?

Those are the cities that have bookable itineraries not nonstop. Those are all bookable with connections over RDU. I bet BOS-MCO will come along though as that is arguably undeserved (10-12x daily in the face of 6-7 daily at PVD,

Also, the BOS-RDU service is 4x weekly and only one flight each of those days (I think). Facing stiff competition from DL & B6, this will be interesting to watch because Frontier is never reluctant to pull the plug quickly on underperforming routes.

airbazar wrote:

seat24charlie wrote:

VS4ever wrote:

To add to these two points: one of the biggest B6 partners at LHR, SQ, would rather saw off their own feet than sell SIN-LHR-BOS tickets with jetBlue. They're begrudging enough with pricing as it is with VS. It's hard to see this being anything other than pure London O&D for jetBlue.

I don't think SQ and B6 have that much of a partnership so I wouldn't call SQ their biggest partner at LHR.

Fair points all around however I should clarify my original comment - worded it poorly. I meant that SQ is the jetBlue partner with one of the biggest LHR presences, rather than being jetBlue's biggest partner that serves LHR.

Kinda surprised F9 is coming back given they serve just about every other airport in New England, I wonder if PVD-RDU will stick around. I'd imagine they'll add MCO soon, CVG, AUS, and SAT also seem like good candidates for future adds.

aaflyer777 wrote:

Kinda surprised F9 is coming back given they serve just about every other airport in New England, I wonder if PVD-RDU will stick around. I'd imagine they'll add MCO soon, CVG, AUS, and SAT also seem like good candidates for future adds.

PVD-RDU ran 90% + on a 321 most of last season, they even fly it from PWM on a 320.

Most of the routes they added from AUS and SAT ended up as a flash in the pan and are now gone (only 10 of the 25 AUS routes survived)

I would put money on MCO, maybe CLT (for PVD, RDU and CLT have come as a pair the past two years, with the sum being a daily flight), maybe CVG and maybe TTN.

tlecam wrote:

I would guess B- the only one I can think of with any potential gate space.

Well here's the curious thing. I would 100% agree with you, however buried in the Massport transfer information, a suggestion that one of the C40-C42 gates is considered common use right now, but given B6 has made noise about having access to all the gates, I am still not yet convinced that is correct and will agree that B seems to be the most likely, especially with AS and SY reducing capacity (or the appearance of)

Yes - 2019 makes it tough to tell because we know there are a lot of gate re-assignments and it’s hard to see how it all pans out in the interim.

Timings for the F9 Service BOS-RDU

F91682 - RDU 0724 - BOS 0931 (1,3,5,6) 320
F91683 - BOS 1021 - RDU 1227 (1,3,5,6) 320

As noted in the F9 thread, if you look up BOS on F9's site , there are 3 additional options in there MCO, DEN and RNO, but as of yet, they are not bookable, so maybe more to come than a 4x weekly service to RDU... we shall see.

You really can't get to Reno from Raleigh using Frontier unless you put up with a stop in Denver, so maybe Boston-Reno will be non-stop.

VS4ever wrote:

Timings for the F9 Service BOS-RDU

F91682 - RDU 0724 - BOS 0931 (1,3,5,6) 320
F91683 - BOS 1021 - RDU 1227 (1,3,5,6) 320

As noted in the F9 thread, if you look up BOS on F9's site , there are 3 additional options in there MCO, DEN and RNO, but as of yet, they are not bookable, so maybe more to come than a 4x weekly service to RDU... we shall see.

I highly doubt that F9 would run only a 4x weekly service to such a major airport if it already bothered to add routes here. So I think we will see some more flights added for F9 from BOS.

So we have tons of domestic capacity additions leading to trashy fares, while TATL premium fares are still sky high. What gives?? Why are airlines not adding TATL premium capacity instead of trashing it out domestically?

Case in point:
Next Monday BOS-LAX, cheapest B6 Mint = $619. Cheapest J BOS-LHR = $6609 (DL).