Page 5 of 12

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2019 11:58 pm
by atcsundevil
BigPlaneGuy13 wrote:
This is really interesting. After looking over this, my question is: if this expansion were to ocurr, would there be a need to construct an additional runway? Potentially a 26/8 L and R? Seems like a lot of added capacity. How is this measured? Thanks!

The city has wanted a fourth runway for more than a decade. It's more than likely never going to happen, or at least not for a very, very long time. I doubt the circumstances have changed, but the issue before was primarily Honeywell. Honeywell has a 100 year lease on that property with no intention of leaving. I believe it would also require a realignment of the light rail, which was also seen as effectively a non-starter.

In any case, PHX doesn't need a fourth runway anytime soon, and that conversation is probably at least two decades away barring some sort of explosive growth. The runway usage isn't high enough to warrant a multi-billion dollar expense, because the return on investment would take decades. That federal funding is better spent on other airports with more dire needs for additional runway capacity. I think the best decision if/when the airport starts becoming capacity constrained is to begin offloading capacity onto IWA. After all, that's exactly what it exists for. IWA will be better positioned as a reliever airport whenever they manage to get their permanent terminal complex project moving, but the major infrastructure is already in place. Building a new, massively expensive runway at PHX is a bit of a waste when three perfectly serviceable 11,000ft. runways exist less than 20 miles away.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:15 am
by BA744PHX
atcsundevil wrote:
BigPlaneGuy13 wrote:
This is really interesting. After looking over this, my question is: if this expansion were to ocurr, would there be a need to construct an additional runway? Potentially a 26/8 L and R? Seems like a lot of added capacity. How is this measured? Thanks!

The city has wanted a fourth runway for more than a decade. It's more than likely never going to happen, or at least not for a very, very long time. I doubt the circumstances have changed, but the issue before was primarily Honeywell. Honeywell has a 100 year lease on that property with no intention of leaving. I believe it would also require a realignment of the light rail, which was also seen as effectively a non-starter.

In any case, PHX doesn't need a fourth runway anytime soon, and that conversation is probably at least two decades away barring some sort of explosive growth. The runway usage isn't high enough to warrant a multi-billion dollar expense, because the return on investment would take decades. That federal funding is better spent on other airports with more dire needs for additional runway capacity. I think the best decision if/when the airport starts becoming capacity constrained is to begin offloading capacity onto IWA. After all, that's exactly what it exists for. IWA will be better positioned as a reliever airport whenever they manage to get their permanent terminal complex project moving, but the major infrastructure is already in place. Building a new, massively expensive runway at PHX is a bit of a waste when three perfectly serviceable 11,000ft. runways exist less than 20 miles away.


Is the terminal expansion for AZA still happening? I think the airport could get me traction with a proper terminal and jetways. I have visited a few airports ATH, CTG where you have to offload/load onto stairways, and don't get me wrong its nice, but AZ summers are not ideal to continue this arrangement

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2019 11:41 am
by hz747300
travaz wrote:
I would think there would be some demand from Honeywell, Boeing, Intel and others in the valley. I don't know if it is enough but maybe 4X a week


I think there would be some military too. Fort Huachuca, A couple of Air Force Bases, and Yuma’s Naval Air Station (though the latter probably wouldn’t backtrack to PHX). 4x / week seems right.

But that quote on ICN-LAS, US$80-100m per year. Yikes! That’s a lot of revenue that has to be earned to support it.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2019 12:52 pm
by atcsundevil
BA744PHX wrote:
Is the terminal expansion for AZA still happening? I think the airport could get me traction with a proper terminal and jetways. I have visited a few airports ATH, CTG where you have to offload/load onto stairways, and don't get me wrong its nice, but AZ summers are not ideal to continue this arrangement

It was still in their master plan the last time I saw — I moved a few years ago, so I'm very much not in the loop anymore. Apparently Mesa is working on building a new control tower (which is desperately needed), but that's the only movement at present. I know they were hoping to have the new terminal built by now, but they're being prudent, so I give them credit. The airport needs at least one or two more stable tenants before building a permanent terminal complex on the north side of the field. That's been the threshold they've needed to meet since they came out with the master plan about a decade ago.

Things were on the right track when Spirit and Frontier started service (around 2013ish?), but obviously that was short lived, and that's clearly what they're concerned about. Given the way the airport has grown over the past ten years, I would anticipate something happening within the next ten years. They're just about maxed out in their current terminal, so with some assured stability from tenants, things should finally move forward.

I agree that the airport will gain more traction, particularly with legacies, if/when there's a new terminal complex. From what I understand, both United and Delta have expressed interest over the years (more than likely adding RJ service), but clearly something needs to be done to seal the deal.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2019 2:59 pm
by cathay747
alasizon wrote:
The existing three runways serve PHX well and unless they can figure out how to increase the departure rate/flow; adding an additional runway doesn't do much in the grand scheme of things. The problems that Sky Harbor sees are mostly departure based since 8/26 is used too little for departures from the north side even when arrival traffic is minimal and it would help boost the departure rate.


You've raised here an issue I've long wondered about. Why is this? I mean, I know it's an ATC issue, but it seems crazy to me the number of flights of "north-side-airlines" (AA in particular) that get routed over to 7L/25R for departures. You wind up with lots more cross-field traffic than need be, a longer queue than necessary, not to mention wasted time, fuel burn and emissions. Case in point (of an arrival though)...coming in on HA036 from HNL back in Dec. 2016...we're brought in on 25L! And given the shorter runway length and his touchdown point, we rolled ALL the way to the end, making for the maximum possible taxi to HA's old gate at T3N...time-wise as well as distance; between having to hold short of 25R for a departure b4 we could cross, then stopping a couple times due to flights coming out of T2 and the cross-field taxiway from the north side, it was on the order of around 10mins. or more. Crazy!

Perhaps ATCSUNDEVIL can shed some light on this? Why can't ATC maximize "north-side-airlines" using 8/26 more? For both arrivals and departures.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:37 pm
by atcsundevil
cathay747 wrote:
Perhaps ATCSUNDEVIL can shed some light on this? Why can't ATC maximize "north-side-airlines" using 8/26 more? For both arrivals and departures.

I'm not a tower guy, I actually work for a living (I'm kidding!), but it's an efficiency thing. I'll try to explain to the best of my ability/knowledge of tower things.

Thing 1: There are two "Local" positions, Local North (controls 8/26) and Local South (controls the 7s/25s). Local North has to APREQ all departures with Local South. They can't have simultaneous jet departures, so South has to make a gap for a North departure. It's not a big deal, but it's obviously easier when things don't need to be coordinated.

Thing 2: It doesn't particularly improve the departure rate, but it does drop the arrival rate. Phoenix is VFR for what, 364.5 days a year? Assuming the departures are properly sequenced by the ground controller — meaning each aircraft is on alternating departure procedures (first one turns south, second one turns north, etc.) — aircraft can be cleared for takeoff with virtually no delay. Visual separation on departure between like types (in this case, "large" weight category, which is about 98% of PHX ops) is 6,000 feet down the runway and airborne. The first aircraft can be cleared for takeoff, the second one told to line up and wait, and before he even gets in position, he can be cleared for takeoff. Rinse and repeat. Making gaps for north departures wouldn't make that any more efficient. Conversely, approach would have to build in more spacing on north arrivals to allow for departures in between, dropping the arrival rate. Since arrivals require more runway occupancy time (roughly 60 seconds each versus 50ish on visual departures), it's advantageous to give runway priority to arrivals.

Tl;dr - the current setup is the most efficient for a three parallel runway arrangement. It's rare to have a significant departure delay (>15 minutes) at PHX, and the only backups tend to occur during the morning push. So, it doesn't really warrant change. If anything, change would make things less efficient.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Sun Mar 10, 2019 4:33 am
by Vctony
atcsundevil wrote:
cathay747 wrote:
Perhaps ATCSUNDEVIL can shed some light on this? Why can't ATC maximize "north-side-airlines" using 8/26 more? For both arrivals and departures.

I'm not a tower guy, I actually work for a living (I'm kidding!), but it's an efficiency thing. I'll try to explain to the best of my ability/knowledge of tower things.

Thing 1: There are two "Local" positions, Local North (controls 8/26) and Local South (controls the 7s/25s). Local North has to APREQ all departures with Local South. They can't have simultaneous jet departures, so South has to make a gap for a North departure. It's not a big deal, but it's obviously easier when things don't need to be coordinated.

Thing 2: It doesn't particularly improve the departure rate, but it does drop the arrival rate. Phoenix is VFR for what, 364.5 days a year? Assuming the departures are properly sequenced by the ground controller — meaning each aircraft is on alternating departure procedures (first one turns south, second one turns north, etc.) — aircraft can be cleared for takeoff with virtually no delay. Visual separation on departure between like types (in this case, "large" weight category, which is about 98% of PHX ops) is 6,000 feet down the runway and airborne. The first aircraft can be cleared for takeoff, the second one told to line up and wait, and before he even gets in position, he can be cleared for takeoff. Rinse and repeat. Making gaps for north departures wouldn't make that any more efficient. Conversely, approach would have to build in more spacing on north arrivals to allow for departures in between, dropping the arrival rate. Since arrivals require more runway occupancy time (roughly 60 seconds each versus 50ish on visual departures), it's advantageous to give runway priority to arrivals.

Tl;dr - the current setup is the most efficient for a three parallel runway arrangement. It's rare to have a significant departure delay (>15 minutes) at PHX, and the only backups tend to occur during the morning push. So, it doesn't really warrant change. If anything, change would make things less efficient.


Thanks for the explanation. I also was curious why approximately 95% of departures are on 7L/25R. So, in essence having a virtually dedicated departure runway as well as 2 virtually dedicated arrival runways runs more efficiently.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Sun Mar 10, 2019 5:11 am
by INFINITI329
cathay747 wrote:
Case in point (of an arrival though)...coming in on HA036 from HNL back in Dec. 2016...we're brought in on 25L!


Even with the A330s, HA is still sent to 25L to land, while narrowbodies and rjs are given 25R.. not sure what Phoenix Approach's reasoning behind it.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Sun Mar 10, 2019 7:05 am
by chrisair
INFINITI329 wrote:
Even with the A330s, HA is still sent to 25L to land, while narrowbodies and rjs are given 25R.. not sure what Phoenix Approach's reasoning behind it.


It's probably dependent on arrivals sequencing and ground traffic. Since they're coming in from the west, they get the south side 95% of the time. Now that their gate is over there too, they'll probably be close to 100% arrivals in the south complex.

For what it's worth, the last few times I've been on the AA A330 to CLT, we've departed off 26. Makes for a real quick taxi!

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Sun Mar 10, 2019 1:43 pm
by cathay747
atcsundevil wrote:
cathay747 wrote:
Perhaps ATCSUNDEVIL can shed some light on this? Why can't ATC maximize "north-side-airlines" using 8/26 more? For both arrivals and departures.

I'm not a tower guy, I actually work for a living (I'm kidding!), but it's an efficiency thing. I'll try to explain to the best of my ability/knowledge of tower things.

Thing 1: There are two "Local" positions, Local North (controls 8/26) and Local South (controls the 7s/25s). Local North has to APREQ all departures with Local South. They can't have simultaneous jet departures, so South has to make a gap for a North departure. It's not a big deal, but it's obviously easier when things don't need to be coordinated.

Thing 2: It doesn't particularly improve the departure rate, but it does drop the arrival rate. Phoenix is VFR for what, 364.5 days a year? Assuming the departures are properly sequenced by the ground controller — meaning each aircraft is on alternating departure procedures (first one turns south, second one turns north, etc.) — aircraft can be cleared for takeoff with virtually no delay. Visual separation on departure between like types (in this case, "large" weight category, which is about 98% of PHX ops) is 6,000 feet down the runway and airborne. The first aircraft can be cleared for takeoff, the second one told to line up and wait, and before he even gets in position, he can be cleared for takeoff. Rinse and repeat. Making gaps for north departures wouldn't make that any more efficient. Conversely, approach would have to build in more spacing on north arrivals to allow for departures in between, dropping the arrival rate. Since arrivals require more runway occupancy time (roughly 60 seconds each versus 50ish on visual departures), it's advantageous to give runway priority to arrivals.

Tl;dr - the current setup is the most efficient for a three parallel runway arrangement. It's rare to have a significant departure delay (>15 minutes) at PHX, and the only backups tend to occur during the morning push. So, it doesn't really warrant change. If anything, change would make things less efficient.


Well that's an pretty damn good explanation! Thanks! I knew you'd be able to shed some light on this. Two follow-on questions if I may: why can't there be simultaneous jet departures, and what is APREQ? And quite true when you said "Rinse and repeat" LOL that's for sure, seen it/experienced it often enough...the 7L/25R departures are damn near like carrier ops! Just shoot 'em off, one right after another! But I didn't know about the separation requirement (pretty low), which explains it.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Sun Mar 10, 2019 1:49 pm
by cathay747
INFINITI329 wrote:
cathay747 wrote:
Case in point (of an arrival though)...coming in on HA036 from HNL back in Dec. 2016...we're brought in on 25L!


Even with the A330s, HA is still sent to 25L to land, while narrowbodies and rjs are given 25R.. not sure what Phoenix Approach's reasoning behind it.


I know, right? My logic would be you bring a widebody in on a longer runway. But at least now HA is on the new T3S pier, so they've got a much shorter taxi!

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Sun Mar 10, 2019 1:59 pm
by atcsundevil
cathay747 wrote:
Well that's an pretty damn good explanation! Thanks! I knew you'd be able to shed some light on this. Two follow-on questions if I may: why can't there be simultaneous jet departures, and what is APREQ? And quite true when you said "Rinse and repeat" LOL that's for sure, seen it/experienced it often enough...the 7L/25R departures are damn near like carrier ops! Just shoot 'em off, one right after another! But I didn't know about the separation requirement (pretty low), which explains it.

It used to be that all of the departure procedures were based off of PXR (Phoenix VORTAC), so regardless of which runway the aircraft departed, it flew the same procedure, and would have come in conflict had another aircraft departed at the same time. Sort of like three lanes merging into one. Apparently there are new departure procedures now that aren't based off of PXR, but my understanding is that the operations are effectively unchanged.

The reason for all of that goes back to a letter of agreement with the cities of Tempe and Phoenix. The LOA stipulates that no more than 50% of jet departures may depart eastbound over a monthly basis, and that no more than one jet departure can occur at a time when operating in an east flow. It's all for noise abatement. I honestly couldn't tell you what incentive Phoenix had to sign such a deal, because it's always seemed pretty stupid to me.

There are limited circumstances in which simultaneous departures occur, but one of the aircraft is usually a prop/turboprop. The procedure for those aircraft is to immediately turn north when departing 8/26 and immediately turn south when departing 7R/26L.

An APREQ is Approval Request. It's a term used to request something. Usually it's something nonstandard, but it's also used when utilizing someone else's airspace. In this case, Local North has to APREQ each departure with Local South, because Local South is responsible for control on all departures.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:32 am
by alasizon
atcsundevil wrote:
Assuming the departures are properly sequenced by the ground controller — meaning each aircraft is on alternating departure procedures (first one turns south, second one turns north, etc.) — aircraft can be cleared for takeoff with virtually no delay.


And here-in lays probably about half the issue with the big westbound departure groups when on east flow; you end up with about 8 or 9 northbound aircraft in a row. The eastbound departure groups seem to function better when it comes to ground delays than westbound.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:45 am
by atcsundevil
alasizon wrote:
atcsundevil wrote:
Assuming the departures are properly sequenced by the ground controller — meaning each aircraft is on alternating departure procedures (first one turns south, second one turns north, etc.) — aircraft can be cleared for takeoff with virtually no delay.


And here-in lays probably about half the issue with the big westbound departure groups when on east flow; you end up with about 8 or 9 northbound aircraft in a row. The eastbound departure groups seem to function better when it comes to ground delays than westbound.

Obviously there's only so much that can be done, but presumably some more variation on departure procedures would give a little more flexibility. Not much to sequence when everybody is on the same procedure.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:11 pm
by cathay747
atcsundevil wrote:
cathay747 wrote:
Well that's an pretty damn good explanation! Thanks! I knew you'd be able to shed some light on this. Two follow-on questions if I may: why can't there be simultaneous jet departures, and what is APREQ? And quite true when you said "Rinse and repeat" LOL that's for sure, seen it/experienced it often enough...the 7L/25R departures are damn near like carrier ops! Just shoot 'em off, one right after another! But I didn't know about the separation requirement (pretty low), which explains it.

It used to be that all of the departure procedures were based off of PXR (Phoenix VORTAC), so regardless of which runway the aircraft departed, it flew the same procedure, and would have come in conflict had another aircraft departed at the same time. Sort of like three lanes merging into one. Apparently there are new departure procedures now that aren't based off of PXR, but my understanding is that the operations are effectively unchanged.

The reason for all of that goes back to a letter of agreement with the cities of Tempe and Phoenix. The LOA stipulates that no more than 50% of jet departures may depart eastbound over a monthly basis, and that no more than one jet departure can occur at a time when operating in an east flow. It's all for noise abatement. I honestly couldn't tell you what incentive Phoenix had to sign such a deal, because it's always seemed pretty stupid to me.

There are limited circumstances in which simultaneous departures occur, but one of the aircraft is usually a prop/turboprop. The procedure for those aircraft is to immediately turn north when departing 8/26 and immediately turn south when departing 7R/26L.

An APREQ is Approval Request. It's a term used to request something. Usually it's something nonstandard, but it's also used when utilizing someone else's airspace. In this case, Local North has to APREQ each departure with Local South, because Local South is responsible for control on all departures.


Thanks for all this extra info and for helping educate me!! Later in the day after I posted my questions to you, I suddenly remembered that nifty little noise agreement between city of PHX and Tempe. What an idiotic agreement...stupid indeed...wonder if there's an expiration date?

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 2:05 pm
by atcsundevil
cathay747 wrote:
Thanks for all this extra info and for helping educate me!! Later in the day after I posted my questions to you, I suddenly remembered that nifty little noise agreement between city of PHX and Tempe. What an idiotic agreement...stupid indeed...wonder if there's an expiration date?

I don't think LOAs typically have expiration dates. I've never seen one anyway.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:02 pm
by MO11
It's actually an Intergovernmental Agreement between the Cities of Tempe and Phoenix, and yes, it goes forever.

https://www.tempe.gov/home/showdocument?id=1337

Departures are hindered on the west side by the 2017 court ruling that forced the FAA to quit the RNAV procedures.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:56 pm
by 4holer
MO11 wrote:
It's actually an Intergovernmental Agreement between the Cities of Tempe and Phoenix, and yes, it goes forever.

https://www.tempe.gov/home/showdocument?id=1337

Departures are hindered on the west side by the 2017 court ruling that forced the FAA to quit the RNAV procedures.


I do not speak legalese, but it looks like section 6.12 sets the term of the agreement to 50 years. That would put the end around 2044?

And it refers to "Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport" throughout. So I chuckle to wonder if a change of name to the airport would make the terms of the agreement void? (Not really serious, of course)

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 7:49 pm
by MO11
4holer wrote:

I do not speak legalese, but it looks like section 6.12 sets the term of the agreement to 50 years. That would put the end around 2044?

And it refers to "Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport" throughout. So I chuckle to wonder if a change of name to the airport would make the terms of the agreement void? (Not really serious, of course)


I didn't read that far down, but you're right - 50 years.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 9:16 pm
by Osubuckeyes
Maybe I missed it somewhere in the thread, but does anyone know the timeline on when T3N is supposed to open.... If I recall correctly wasn't it supposed to be a pretty quick turnaround like late 2019/early 2020?

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 9:46 pm
by MO11
[threeid][/threeid]
Osubuckeyes wrote:
Maybe I missed it somewhere in the thread, but does anyone know the timeline on when T3N is supposed to open.... If I recall correctly wasn't it supposed to be a pretty quick turnaround like late 2019/early 2020?


More like mid-2020.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 10:43 pm
by jplatts
While NK already serves ORD, DFW, and MSP nonstop from PHX, NK currently has a much smaller presence at PHX than at most of the other large markets that are already served by NK.

There are some more nonstop routes that could be added at PHX by NK such as PHX-ATL, PHX-AUS, PHX-BWI, PHX-DTW, PHX-FLL, PHX-IAH, PHX-LAS, and PHX-MCO.

Will NK add any new nonstop routes out of PHX, and which new nonstop routes is NK likely to add out of PHX?

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:02 pm
by BA744PHX
jplatts wrote:
While NK already serves ORD, DFW, and MSP nonstop from PHX, NK currently has a much smaller presence at PHX than at most of the other large markets that are already served by NK.

There are some more nonstop routes that could be added at PHX by NK such as PHX-ATL, PHX-AUS, PHX-BWI, PHX-DTW, PHX-FLL, PHX-IAH, PHX-LAS, and PHX-MCO.

Will NK add any new nonstop routes out of PHX, and which new nonstop routes is NK likely to add out of PHX?


NK previously served LAS & DEN, not sure why they pulled out

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:05 pm
by BA744PHX
Did anyone else this post in the Miami to Asia thread?

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1411001&start=100#p21174533

Interesting that Phoenix is #3 at 51 pax to Tokyo well ahead of Miami 32 pax and Philadelphia 26 pax.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:17 pm
by jplatts
BA744PHX wrote:
NK previously served LAS & DEN, not sure why they pulled out


While NK is unlikely to bring back PHX-DEN nonstop service, I could see NK bringing back PHX-LAS nonstop service at some point since NK is still expanding at LAS.

I think that NK will likely add PHX-BWI, PHX-DTW, PHX-FLL, and PHX-MCO nonstop service at some point since NK already serves BWI, DTW, FLL, and MCO nonstop from places further west. NK also already has nonstop service to at least one California destination from BWI, DTW, and FLL.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:23 pm
by Osubuckeyes
BA744PHX wrote:
jplatts wrote:
While NK already serves ORD, DFW, and MSP nonstop from PHX, NK currently has a much smaller presence at PHX than at most of the other large markets that are already served by NK.

There are some more nonstop routes that could be added at PHX by NK such as PHX-ATL, PHX-AUS, PHX-BWI, PHX-DTW, PHX-FLL, PHX-IAH, PHX-LAS, and PHX-MCO.

Will NK add any new nonstop routes out of PHX, and which new nonstop routes is NK likely to add out of PHX?


NK previously served LAS & DEN, not sure why they pulled out


I don't believe NK has ever served PHX-LAS, they did serve PHX-LAX 2x daily for a time. I'm pretty sure they served IAH at one point as well. They likely pulled out of DEN due to the very low fares in the market (and they still are) with WN/AA/UA/F9 all serving it as well.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:42 pm
by F9LASDEN
Osubuckeyes wrote:
BA744PHX wrote:
jplatts wrote:
While NK already serves ORD, DFW, and MSP nonstop from PHX, NK currently has a much smaller presence at PHX than at most of the other large markets that are already served by NK.

There are some more nonstop routes that could be added at PHX by NK such as PHX-ATL, PHX-AUS, PHX-BWI, PHX-DTW, PHX-FLL, PHX-IAH, PHX-LAS, and PHX-MCO.

Will NK add any new nonstop routes out of PHX, and which new nonstop routes is NK likely to add out of PHX?


NK previously served LAS & DEN, not sure why they pulled out


I don't believe NK has ever served PHX-LAS, they did serve PHX-LAX 2x daily for a time. I'm pretty sure they served IAH at one point as well. They likely pulled out of DEN due to the very low fares in the market (and they still are) with WN/AA/UA/F9 all serving it as well.


I don’t believe NK served LAS from Phoenix by way of Sky Harbor, but they did fly AZA-LAS at some point. Not sure when it ended, but it started Feb 9, 2012, and was 2x daily, according to anna.aero.

https://www.anna.aero/wp-content/upload ... 0312192337

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:53 am
by 910A
Any rumors which airline is providing the lift for the Mariners and A's to Japan, I would assume tomorrow.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:15 am
by alasizon
MO11 wrote:
[threeid][/threeid]
Osubuckeyes wrote:
Maybe I missed it somewhere in the thread, but does anyone know the timeline on when T3N is supposed to open.... If I recall correctly wasn't it supposed to be a pretty quick turnaround like late 2019/early 2020?


More like mid-2020.


It was supposed to be Feb 2020 originally but I know there was more contaminated soil than planned. Given the new ALP proposal that came out; it wouldn't surprise me to see a little extra work get done now in prep for the added T3N concourse that is targeted for 2022ish.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:19 am
by hz747300
BA744PHX wrote:
Did anyone else this post in the Miami to Asia thread?

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1411001&start=100#p21174533

Interesting that Phoenix is #3 at 51 pax to Tokyo well ahead of Miami 32 pax and Philadelphia 26 pax.


Has to be military, along with tech / auto, right?

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2019 8:35 pm
by BA744PHX
hz747300 wrote:
BA744PHX wrote:
Did anyone else this post in the Miami to Asia thread?

https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtop ... #p21174533

Interesting that Phoenix is #3 at 51 pax to Tokyo well ahead of Miami 32 pax and Philadelphia 26 pax.


Has to be military, along with tech / auto, right?


Does the military really have that amount of traffic? I personal doubt it, but who knows

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:09 pm
by alasizon
BA744PHX wrote:
Does the military really have that amount of traffic? I personal doubt it, but who knows


Majority of military traffic that passes through PHX to/from Asia are typically Marines going to/from Yuma from my observation.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:50 am
by 777PHX
The BA Landor retro livery 744 is due into Sky Harbor tommorrow.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:32 pm
by cathay747
777PHX wrote:
The BA Landor retro livery 744 is due into Sky Harbor tommorrow.


I never caught the reg. of the Landor 744, so I didn't realize they picked a low-J ship for it. Wish they'd done the BOAC livery on a low-J instead so we'd see that one here on occasion vs. Landor. Oh well.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:36 pm
by 4holer
910A wrote:
Any rumors which airline is providing the lift for the Mariners and A's to Japan, I would assume tomorrow.


Well FR24 currently shows 2 Atlas 744s inbound to PHX from IAH, so that'd be my guess...

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:04 pm
by 910A
4holer wrote:
910A wrote:
Any rumors which airline is providing the lift for the Mariners and A's to Japan, I would assume tomorrow.


Well FR24 currently shows 2 Atlas 744s inbound to PHX from IAH, so that'd be my guess...


Sounds right, thanks..

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:38 pm
by 777PHX
4holer wrote:
910A wrote:
Any rumors which airline is providing the lift for the Mariners and A's to Japan, I would assume tomorrow.


Well FR24 currently shows 2 Atlas 744s inbound to PHX from IAH, so that'd be my guess...


I saw one of them inbound to PHX this morning on my way to work.

cathay747 wrote:
I never caught the reg. of the Landor 744, so I didn't realize they picked a low-J ship for it. Wish they'd done the BOAC livery on a low-J instead so we'd see that one here on occasion vs. Landor. Oh well.


I didn't realize it either until someone pointed it out on Twitter. G-CIVB is being painted into the Negus livery as we speak, which is also a mid-J ship, so we should be seeing that one at some point too.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:32 pm
by treebeard787
Looks like AA subbed a 757 N200UU on AA636 PHX-TUS-PHX today, that should be a sporty take-off.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL ... /KPHX/KTUS

These are the Atlas Air baseball charters to Japan.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GTI ... /KPHX/RJTT
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GTI ... /KPHX/RJTT

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:46 pm
by ak
cathay747 wrote:
777PHX wrote:
The BA Landor retro livery 744 is due into Sky Harbor tommorrow.


I never caught the reg. of the Landor 744, so I didn't realize they picked a low-J ship for it. Wish they'd done the BOAC livery on a low-J instead so we'd see that one here on occasion vs. Landor. Oh well.



G-BNLY

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 5:55 pm
by BMIMSNPHX
There is also a Qatar (most likely Amiri) A340 next to the Atlas 744s.

Also, there is noticeably more private jet traffic this time of year. Makes sense with Spring Training and great weather!

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:53 pm
by cathay747
BA have just announced the config. for their new A350-1000's (along with unveiling new J-cabin and first 35J routes)...it will be J56/W56/Y219 (with no F as was previously known by some). As we were discussing last month what BA might possibly replace the 744 with here at PHX, it seems to me with that config., the 35J is a good contender along with the 772. About the same capacity of J and Y as the 744, and more W than the 772's which, given the ever-increasing popularity of W, might do well here.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 3:53 pm
by chrisair
Noticed a bunch of WN 7M8s sitting on the west side of the field by the "executive" terminal. Also saw a couple AA tails. Did they send the planes here too?

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:58 pm
by 777PHX
cathay747 wrote:
BA have just announced the config. for their new A350-1000's (along with unveiling new J-cabin and first 35J routes)...it will be J56/W56/Y219 (with no F as was previously known by some). As we were discussing last month what BA might possibly replace the 744 with here at PHX, it seems to me with that config., the 35J is a good contender along with the 772. About the same capacity of J and Y as the 744, and more W than the 772's which, given the ever-increasing popularity of W, might do well here.


I'd say either the A350 or the 77W. The 77W is a bit more premium percentage wise than the mid J 744 is, so the A350 might be the better option if they're omitting F. It seems like the 77E would be too small. Hopefully that's still a few years away, I'll miss the 747.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2019 12:50 pm
by cathay747
777PHX wrote:
I'll miss the 747.


Ditto. Very much. And not just here at PHX.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2019 10:26 pm
by alasizon
777PHX wrote:
cathay747 wrote:
BA have just announced the config. for their new A350-1000's (along with unveiling new J-cabin and first 35J routes)...it will be J56/W56/Y219 (with no F as was previously known by some). As we were discussing last month what BA might possibly replace the 744 with here at PHX, it seems to me with that config., the 35J is a good contender along with the 772. About the same capacity of J and Y as the 744, and more W than the 772's which, given the ever-increasing popularity of W, might do well here.


I'd say either the A350 or the 77W. The 77W is a bit more premium percentage wise than the mid J 744 is, so the A350 might be the better option if they're omitting F. It seems like the 77E would be too small. Hopefully that's still a few years away, I'll miss the 747.


The 350 might work but the main problem I see with it is that its also an increase in overall pax capacity and that could be a problem in the summer, where LF is usually nearing 100% plus cargo. Its not uncommon for the flight to be booked to 330 pax.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:41 pm
by cathay747
alasizon wrote:
777PHX wrote:
cathay747 wrote:
BA have just announced the config. for their new A350-1000's (along with unveiling new J-cabin and first 35J routes)...it will be J56/W56/Y219 (with no F as was previously known by some). As we were discussing last month what BA might possibly replace the 744 with here at PHX, it seems to me with that config., the 35J is a good contender along with the 772. About the same capacity of J and Y as the 744, and more W than the 772's which, given the ever-increasing popularity of W, might do well here.


I'd say either the A350 or the 77W. The 77W is a bit more premium percentage wise than the mid J 744 is, so the A350 might be the better option if they're omitting F. It seems like the 77E would be too small. Hopefully that's still a few years away, I'll miss the 747.


The 350 might work but the main problem I see with it is that its also an increase in overall pax capacity and that could be a problem in the summer, where LF is usually nearing 100% plus cargo. Its not uncommon for the flight to be booked to 330 pax.


It's actually less pax capacity...current 744 config. with low-J that we get here totals 345 (14F/52J/36W/243Y) while the 35J config. I quoted above totals 331. That being said, what I'm gleaning from your post is that you're thinking it could be a takeoff performance issue in summer? I can't speak to that, but one other item bolsters the possibility...in the latest Airline Business magazine, BA CEO Alex Cruz was interviewed and he quoted that the 744's currently fly to some destinations where they really don't have demand for F, and that the 35J will be an ideal replacement for them. Although why they then picked DXB as one of the first two routes for it baffles me, unless it's that EK eats BA's lunch in the F cabin on that route and BA has ceded the F-market to EK.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2019 7:02 pm
by alasizon
cathay747 wrote:
alasizon wrote:
777PHX wrote:

I'd say either the A350 or the 77W. The 77W is a bit more premium percentage wise than the mid J 744 is, so the A350 might be the better option if they're omitting F. It seems like the 77E would be too small. Hopefully that's still a few years away, I'll miss the 747.


The 350 might work but the main problem I see with it is that its also an increase in overall pax capacity and that could be a problem in the summer, where LF is usually nearing 100% plus cargo. Its not uncommon for the flight to be booked to 330 pax.


It's actually less pax capacity...current 744 config. with low-J that we get here totals 345 (14F/52J/36W/243Y) while the 35J config. I quoted above totals 331. That being said, what I'm gleaning from your post is that you're thinking it could be a takeoff performance issue in summer? I can't speak to that, but one other item bolsters the possibility...in the latest Airline Business magazine, BA CEO Alex Cruz was interviewed and he quoted that the 744's currently fly to some destinations where they really don't have demand for F, and that the 35J will be an ideal replacement for them. Although why they then picked DXB as one of the first two routes for it baffles me, unless it's that EK eats BA's lunch in the F cabin on that route and BA has ceded the F-market to EK.


I guess I should have specified; last summer they were using mostly mid-J for both of the flights which the 35J represents an increase in capacity over. You're right that in Fall/Winter it is less capacity.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Fri Mar 22, 2019 12:43 pm
by cathay747
alasizon wrote:
cathay747 wrote:
alasizon wrote:

The 350 might work but the main problem I see with it is that its also an increase in overall pax capacity and that could be a problem in the summer, where LF is usually nearing 100% plus cargo. Its not uncommon for the flight to be booked to 330 pax.


It's actually less pax capacity...current 744 config. with low-J that we get here totals 345 (14F/52J/36W/243Y) while the 35J config. I quoted above totals 331. That being said, what I'm gleaning from your post is that you're thinking it could be a takeoff performance issue in summer? I can't speak to that, but one other item bolsters the possibility...in the latest Airline Business magazine, BA CEO Alex Cruz was interviewed and he quoted that the 744's currently fly to some destinations where they really don't have demand for F, and that the 35J will be an ideal replacement for them. Although why they then picked DXB as one of the first two routes for it baffles me, unless it's that EK eats BA's lunch in the F cabin on that route and BA has ceded the F-market to EK.


I guess I should have specified; last summer they were using mostly mid-J for both of the flights which the 35J represents an increase in capacity over. You're right that in Fall/Winter it is less capacity.


Oh, I didn't know they'd done that, or that we ever got mid-J ships here (except for a last min. equip. swap). Have they always done this? Every time I've ever looked in FLIFO in Amadeus it always shows the 52J config.

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Fri Mar 22, 2019 12:59 pm
by aacun
treebeard787 wrote:
Looks like AA subbed a 757 N200UU on AA636 PHX-TUS-PHX today, that should be a sporty take-off.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL ... /KPHX/KTUS

These are the Atlas Air baseball charters to Japan.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GTI ... /KPHX/RJTT
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GTI ... /KPHX/RJTT



Funny. I was standing behind an Atlas Air crew yesterday at Narita while clearing security and they were doing a baseball charter. Lucky them they were going to ferry the aircraft back to the states .......

Re: Phoenix Aviation Thread - 2019

Posted: Fri Mar 22, 2019 5:09 pm
by 910A
aacun wrote:
treebeard787 wrote:
Looks like AA subbed a 757 N200UU on AA636 PHX-TUS-PHX today, that should be a sporty take-off.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL ... /KPHX/KTUS

These are the Atlas Air baseball charters to Japan.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GTI ... /KPHX/RJTT
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GTI ... /KPHX/RJTT



Funny. I was standing behind an Atlas Air crew yesterday at Narita while clearing security and they were doing a baseball charter. Lucky them they were going to ferry the aircraft back to the states .......

Both planes spent the week at NRT then they were ferried to HND and flew home to SEA and OAK..N322SG the bird that went to OAK just landed at Marana (MZJ) just after 10am today.