LAX772LR wrote:

What is that structure?

Its going to be the coffee breakfeast place pre security on checkin level... not sure what company though

Was originally going to be pulp n grind but they folded so not sure now

DJSNOLA wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

What is that structure?

Its going to be the coffee breakfeast place pre security on checkin level... not sure what company though

Was originally going to be pulp n grind but they folded so not sure now

It’s going to be a Peet’s Coffee.

SunsetLimited wrote:

DJSNOLA wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

What is that structure?

Its going to be the coffee breakfeast place pre security on checkin level... not sure what company though

Was originally going to be pulp n grind but they folded so not sure now

It’s going to be a Peet’s Coffee.

thanks i saw they added peets but didnt know where it was going!

Indirectly affected MSY because of the large number of 737MAX grounded - this is an incredible article on the MAX and quite a few things about foreign aviation sure to give you pause (it is quite long)

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/maga ... ashes.html

The airport posted July statistics. http://www.flymsy.com/Files/Press/Airli ... ly2019.pdf

The airport reported 1,084,743 passengers for the month. This represented an decrease of 2.9% over June 2019. The decrease was directly related to Hurricane Barry and airport operations essentially ceasing for two days (7/12 and 7/13). Year to date numbers are up 2.9% to 7,992,167 passengers. The airport was ranked as the 38th busiest in the nation through the first half of the year and fell between RDU and OAK.

With the airport experiencing a storm induced closure for two days, nearly all of the airlines saw a decrease in passenger numbers. DL remained basically flat and both NK and F9 managed to see growth.

These estimates take into account 2 cancelled AC flights, 2 cancelled BA flights, 1 cancelled CM flight. DE timed out well with the storm and had no cancelled flights.

Estimated international carrier load factor (July):

AC: 75.5% full outbound (MSY-YYZ) 1663 pax/2204 seats
80.3% full inbound (YYZ-MSY) 1769 pax/2204 seats
77.9% full combined 3432 pax/4408 seats

BA: 67.7% full outbound (MSY-LHR) 2899 pax/4280 seats
88.7% full inbound (LHR-MSY) 3798 pax/4280 seats
78.2% full combined 6697 pax/8560 seats

CM: 75.2% full outbound (MSY-PTY) 1585 pax/2108 seats
80.0% full inbound (PTY-MSY) 1686 pax/2108 seats
77.6% full combined 3271 pax/4216 seats

DE: 80.7% full outbound (MSY-FRA) 1851 pax/2295 seats
94.4% full inbound (FRA-MSY) 2166 pax/2295 seats
87.5% full combined 4017 pax/4590 seats

can someone explain to me why the ba outbound is so much different than the inbound? and for that matter all of the international ones are similar in that way?

well well this is interesting!

Very normal Summer pattern for TATL traffic. People fly out to the destination in June and fly back in July.

I'll be at Gretnafest then, but set it up to record.

I was told today at the airport that while airline staff hasn’t been told anything, the best estimate is that the North Terminal will open in December, for whatever that’s worth.

DJSNOLA wrote:

can someone explain to me why the ba outbound is so much different than the inbound? and for that matter all of the international ones are similar in that way?

easy ... because BA is not daily, someone choosing to fly out on a day they do not operate likely flies with AA via XXX back to wherever.

You also have travelers that might fly into New Orleans drive to XXX and fly back from that point - effectively doing an open jaw. With our visitors from the UK and Europe this can be common, as they wisht to 'see the South.

Also, longer stays in the summer could be someone flies in July and returns in August

So many factors, I think too much is put into this - until BA elects to go daily.

braniff2hav wrote:

You also have travelers that might fly into New Orleans drive to XXX and fly back from that point - effectively doing an open jaw. With our visitors from the UK and Europe this can be common, as they wisht to 'see the South.

Had some BA folks tell me that there's a lot of that going on, and that it can be either way.

Fair amount of people flying into MSY, driving the Gulf Coast, then flying out of TPA/MCO even ATL and IAH.

It was like that even before MSY got the flight, but its presence has made doing so all the more convenient.

braniff2hav wrote:

DJSNOLA wrote:

can someone explain to me why the ba outbound is so much different than the inbound? and for that matter all of the international ones are similar in that way?

easy ... because BA is not daily, someone choosing to fly out on a day they do not operate likely flies with AA via XXX back to wherever.

You also have travelers that might fly into New Orleans drive to XXX and fly back from that point - effectively doing an open jaw. With our visitors from the UK and Europe this can be common, as they wisht to 'see the South.

Also, longer stays in the summer could be someone flies in July and returns in August

So many factors, I think too much is put into this - until BA elects to go daily.

Just curious because the effect is the same for all international routes too.. not just BA.. but those issues make sense, also shows the ned for BA to go daily

DJSNOLA wrote:

braniff2hav wrote:

DJSNOLA wrote:

can someone explain to me why the ba outbound is so much different than the inbound? and for that matter all of the international ones are similar in that way?

easy ... because BA is not daily, someone choosing to fly out on a day they do not operate likely flies with AA via XXX back to wherever.

You also have travelers that might fly into New Orleans drive to XXX and fly back from that point - effectively doing an open jaw. With our visitors from the UK and Europe this can be common, as they wisht to 'see the South.

Also, longer stays in the summer could be someone flies in July and returns in August

So many factors, I think too much is put into this - until BA elects to go daily.

Just curious because the effect is the same for all international routes too.. not just BA.. but those issues make sense, also shows the ned for BA to go daily

I believe we may see some movement on BA shortly. With DL taking an interest in LATAM, AA is taking another hit. Where AA/BA/1world is having success like at MSY, it should be growing that. With DE at this point not returning, they should take advantage, go daily and promote like heck that BA can fly DE's FRA connecting pax to the same places if not more. I find BA not really promoting the route in a big way.

Let's see if DE uses the Oktoberfest timeframe to renew the route as they have in the past 2 years.

If DE doesn't, BA should announce daily ASAP. Ppl are already making travel plans for next summer.

Frankly, there is a reason DL is eating everybody's lunch now. BA/AA will increase BNA service just as DL makes it a focus city. You know it's only a matter of time before DL/AF/KL begin flying TATL out of BNA. Here BA/AA have a monopoly yet nothing.

SNN707 wrote:

Where AA/BA/1world is having success like at MSY, it should be growing that.

Most of us here have scratched our heads to the bone, as to why they haven't.... seeing as the route is well above its average yield curve (based on a non-official projection, posted some time back) for N.American routes.

Only conclusion that I can come to, is that they don't see it sustaining those yields with additional capacity; or at least to a sufficient point where it's worth using two more days' worth of a 787.

LAX772LR wrote:

SNN707 wrote:

Where AA/BA/1world is having success like at MSY, it should be growing that.

Most of us here have scratched our heads to the bone, as to why they haven't.... seeing as the route is well above its average yield curve (based on a non-official projection, posted some time back) for N.American routes.

Only conclusion that I can come to, is that they don't see it sustaining those yields with additional capacity; or at least to a sufficient point where it's worth using two more days' worth of a 787.

You have to wonder about a lot of stuff. Airlines are throwing so much capacity to AUS (and soon BNA). You have to wonder at least short term if that is sustainable. At least vs markets like MSY and MCI. AUS right now has more seats flying nonstop over the pond than those 2 markets combined.

I wonder how much influence AA has on BA's decision not to expand to daily. But then again, you know DL is still pushing a lot of MSY O&D pax thru their hubs. So why wouldn't DL try to start nonstop service as well? I think the demise of the TATL LCCs is bad for MSY. The US3 (and partners) are going to increase service again to fortress hubs and focus cities. So that 787/330 that could serve a smaller US market like MSY/MCI/IND, etc to a European hub, instead will be used to fly from a US fortress hub to a smaller Euro city (like Lyon, Budapest, Venice, Bergen, etc)

I also think modern search engines do us no favors. Non airline geeks dont know what we know. Ppl put in MSY-ZRH one stop and if DL comes in lower than BA, there's your sale, despite being able to fly from NOLA nonstop. Theyre just trading LHR for JFK as their connection. This is where marketing comes into play. For example, I don't think BA pushes their London free stopover feature locally as much as they should. Most ads in the past just say London.

Anyway, I think we're beating a dead horse here. I don't think BA will cut back either. All the airlines seem fine with the status quo, so there's that. We should be happy with more flights to ATL, JFK, DFW, etc to connect to Europe (shrugging shoulders)

SNN707 wrote:

You have to wonder about a lot of stuff. Airlines are throwing so much capacity to AUS (and soon BNA). You have to wonder at least short term if that is sustainable. At least vs markets like MSY and MCI. AUS right now has more seats flying nonstop over the pond than those 2 markets combined.

BNA only has BA to LHR at the moment, the only difference is it is daily on a 789 during the summer. We haven’t even gotten DE to FRA like AUS and MSY did after landing BA. There has been consistent rumors of DL/AF/KL to CDG or AMS, but that likely won’t happen until BNA’s Sky Club is expanded.

AUS is on a different level than BNA, MSY, RDU, etc, given it’s insane population growth, large catchment area and its massive and growing business market (particularly in the tech sector) which demands travel overseas. I’m not surprised at all they’ve landed what they have and I expect they’ll be the first mid-sized market East of the Rockies to land Asia.

Yes, it’s surprising MSY hasn’t seen daily BA service
at least during peak seasons, but I wouldn’t despair. MSY has a bright future and I could easily see a SkyTeam TATL flight in your future.

BNAMealer wrote:

SNN707 wrote:

You have to wonder about a lot of stuff. Airlines are throwing so much capacity to AUS (and soon BNA). You have to wonder at least short term if that is sustainable. At least vs markets like MSY and MCI. AUS right now has more seats flying nonstop over the pond than those 2 markets combined.

BNA only has BA to LHR at the moment, the only difference is it is daily on a 789 during the summer. We haven’t even gotten DE to FRA like AUS and MSY did after landing BA. There has been consistent rumors of DL/AF/KL to CDG or AMS, but that likely won’t happen until BNA’s Sky Club is expanded.

AUS is on a different level than BNA, MSY, RDU, etc, given it’s insane population growth, large catchment area and its massive and growing business market (particularly in the tech sector) which demands travel overseas. I’m not surprised at all they’ve landed what they have and I expect they’ll be the first mid-sized market East of the Rockies to land Asia.

Yes, it’s surprising MSY hasn’t seen daily BA service
at least during peak seasons, but I wouldn’t despair. MSY has a bright future and I could easily see a SkyTeam TATL flight in your future.

BNAMealer, thx for the comment. Not sure if you know that DE has not announced S20 for MSY -yet. The last 2 years DE has not announced til October, so we wait. We are pretty sure down here that DE will not go head to head with EW in ANC and PHX. That could mean MSY and possibly BNA. But the TC belly up probably will change everything as to DE's route structure.

As you know MSY is about to open the new airport terminal in a few weeks so maybe some announcements will come to tag along the media splash of that event.

DL down here has a lot of O&D for Europe, but its all mostly funnelled through ATL and JFK. We are not a DL focus city like BNA is becoming, so it will be interesting to see how soon before DL/Skyteam announces BNA. I doubt it will be AMS because of slot restrictions, but CDG is a real possibly most likely with DL metal. I think if DE renews it will be status quo, but we're hoping for AF/DL to CDG but who knows. As others have said, AF doesn't seem to do smaller markets.

What really interests me about BNA is the emerging battle between NK and WN. This is sort of happening here as NK's growth has been explosive at MSY.

BNAMealer wrote:

We haven’t even gotten DE to FRA like AUS and MSY did after landing BA.

Very slight technical correction:
DE actually announced MSY before BA, by almost a half year..... though BA started service a few weeks before DE.

SNN707 wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

SNN707 wrote:

You have to wonder about a lot of stuff. Airlines are throwing so much capacity to AUS (and soon BNA). You have to wonder at least short term if that is sustainable. At least vs markets like MSY and MCI. AUS right now has more seats flying nonstop over the pond than those 2 markets combined.

BNA only has BA to LHR at the moment, the only difference is it is daily on a 789 during the summer. We haven’t even gotten DE to FRA like AUS and MSY did after landing BA. There has been consistent rumors of DL/AF/KL to CDG or AMS, but that likely won’t happen until BNA’s Sky Club is expanded.

AUS is on a different level than BNA, MSY, RDU, etc, given it’s insane population growth, large catchment area and its massive and growing business market (particularly in the tech sector) which demands travel overseas. I’m not surprised at all they’ve landed what they have and I expect they’ll be the first mid-sized market East of the Rockies to land Asia.

Yes, it’s surprising MSY hasn’t seen daily BA service
at least during peak seasons, but I wouldn’t despair. MSY has a bright future and I could easily see a SkyTeam TATL flight in your future.

BNAMealer, thx for the comment. Not sure if you know that DE has not announced S20 for MSY -yet. The last 2 years DE has not announced til October, so we wait. We are pretty sure down here that DE will not go head to head with EW in ANC and PHX. That could mean MSY and possibly BNA. But the TC belly up probably will change everything as to DE's route structure.

As you know MSY is about to open the new airport terminal in a few weeks so maybe some announcements will come to tag along the media splash of that event.

DL down here has a lot of O&D for Europe, but its all mostly funnelled through ATL and JFK. We are not a DL focus city like BNA is becoming, so it will be interesting to see how soon before DL/Skyteam announces BNA. I doubt it will be AMS because of slot restrictions, but CDG is a real possibly most likely with DL metal. I think if DE renews it will be status quo, but we're hoping for AF/DL to CDG but who knows. As others have said, AF doesn't seem to do smaller markets.

What really interests me about BNA is the emerging battle between NK and WN. This is sort of happening here as NK's growth has been explosive at MSY.

Couple of things

1. DL's "focus city" at BNA is likely going to be focused on upgauging. The Sky Club at BNA is going to be more than quadrupled in size, but I don't expect to see any new cities other than TATL service, which reportedly DL is interested in doing BNA-CDG. Since the expanded Sky Club is scheduled to be ready in 2021, my guess is they'll announce it next year and start in 2021.

2. I doubt there will be a battle between NK and WN. WN is going to be upgrading BNA to a base soon and gradually turning it into a 200+ flight station over time. NK won't have the space to expand or compete frequency wise with WN at BNA, there are other markets where they could more effectively compete.

3. Just because MSY-Europe on DL mostly routes through ATL/JFK right now doesn't mean it can't land a CDG/AMS flight in the future. You could make the same argument about BNA, but again, they are reportedly interested in launching CDG.

4. The MSY new terminal looks awesome. I wish it would have been possible for BNA to go with a clean sheet design similar to it as opposed to expanding the current terminal.

LAX772LR wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

We haven’t even gotten DE to FRA like AUS and MSY did after landing BA.

Very slight technical correction:
DE actually announced MSY before BA, by almost a half year..... though BA started service a few weeks before DE.

You are correct. But my larger point still stands, AUS and MSY landed DE along with BA whereas BNA oddly did not. My guess is they maybe turned them down in favor of going after a DL/SkyTeam flight.

BNAMealer wrote:

My guess is they maybe turned them down in favor of going after a DL/SkyTeam flight.

Not sure who the "they" you're referring to is, so for clarity:
A US airport is not going to refuse service to a carrier that wants entrance, and almost any incentive offered by the airport or governing body has to be offered to all carriers of the type.

Now if private interests chose to pursue a full-service carrier (to the exclusion of a leisure provider like DE) with incentives beyond what would be offered by an airport/authority, then sure.




My guess is just that DE/DY didn't yet see BNA as strong enough to sustain dual service, save for a few weeks in the summer when the yields peak.

There's no real capacity difference between BA's 788s and 789s (2 seats total), but the premium mix is quite different. Perhaps they felt that with extra seats in the market, it wouldn't be worth it for either?

BNAMealer wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

We haven’t even gotten DE to FRA like AUS and MSY did after landing BA.

Very slight technical correction:
DE actually announced MSY before BA, by almost a half year..... though BA started service a few weeks before DE.

You are correct. But my larger point still stands, AUS and MSY landed DE along with BA whereas BNA oddly did not. My guess is they maybe turned them down in favor of going after a DL/SkyTeam flight.

A lot has to do with subsidies as well. I believe a route can be subsidized for 3 years to get it up and running. PIT is an example of swinging for the fences, even though it trails both BNA and MSY in total pax by quite a margin. It could be that BNA (and maybe MSY) held off this year with DE in order to sweeten the pot for a more traditional carrier.

Who really knows? Obviously these discussions are secretive. In aviation, we also have a "rising tide floats all ships situation". MSY is growing tremendously, but so are others. Obviously, BNA and AUS are on a different trajectory from everyone else for the looks of the next decade.

Don't know if you know this, but this Irish really like country music. I think the 321LR has the range to serve BNA, I wouldn't be surprised if EI would announce. IAG is trying to increase DUB as a hub, 2nd runway coming there, but terminal capacity is a concern. MSY, on the other hand, has to fill a widebody.

Keep us informed of any BNA TATL rumours, we are somewhat joined at the hip on this.

SNN707 wrote:

I believe a route can be subsidized for 3 years to get it up and running.

There's no time limit on subsidy, other than self-imposed.

BWI-LHR has been subsidized since the day it launched.

RDU-LGW/LHR had a revenue guarantee by Glaxo for more than a decade.

BNAMealer wrote:

I expect they’ll be the first mid-sized market East of the Rockies to land Asia.

Likewise, though it was funny when PIT tried to make that claim, after subsidizing a few scheduled charter flights to China.

SNN707 wrote:

I think the 321LR has the range to serve BNA, I wouldn't be surprised if EI would announce. IAG is trying to increase DUB as a hub, 2nd runway coming there, but terminal capacity is a concern. MSY, on the other hand, has to fill a widebody.

Not for long.

DUB-MSY is well within the range for the upcoming A321XLR.

LAX772LR wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

I expect they’ll be the first mid-sized market East of the Rockies to land Asia.

Likewise, though it was funny when PIT tried to make that claim, after subsidizing a few scheduled charter flights to China.

SNN707 wrote:

I think the 321LR has the range to serve BNA, I wouldn't be surprised if EI would announce. IAG is trying to increase DUB as a hub, 2nd runway coming there, but terminal capacity is a concern. MSY, on the other hand, has to fill a widebody.

Not for long.

DUB-MSY is well within the range for the upcoming A321XLR.

Thx for clarifying. I just checked the article and it said the "average subsidy" lasts 3 years. I presume that varies greatly by route.

Did not know the XLR can do DUB-MSY. I'm just not sure pax are ready for a 9 hour flight on a narrowbody. On the other hand, as long as the planes have a J product like the B6 Mint, and a PremEcon cabin, its quite bearable. The airlines are really not concerned about the seats behind those as they are simply commodities.

LAX772LR wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

My guess is they maybe turned them down in favor of going after a DL/SkyTeam flight.

Not sure who the "they" you're referring to is, so for clarity:
A US airport is not going to refuse service to a carrier that wants entrance, and almost any incentive offered by the airport or governing body has to be offered to all carriers of the type.

Now if private interests chose to pursue a full-service carrier (to the exclusion of a leisure provider like DE) with incentives beyond what would be offered by an airport/authority, then sure.

My guess is just that DE/DY didn't yet see BNA as strong enough to sustain dual service, save for a few weeks in the summer when the yields peak.

There's no real capacity difference between BA's 788s and 789s (2 seats total), but the premium mix is quite different. Perhaps they felt that with extra seats in the market, it wouldn't be worth it for either?

Rumor is BNA turned out FI and WW to help the BA flight, so it's not entirely out of the realm of possibility. I personally would never use DE, so whether they are in BNA or not is irrelevant to me.

You're right about the capacity, though I wonder if that is going to change once BA rolls out their new J product.

SNN707 wrote:

A lot has to do with subsidies as well. I believe a route can be subsidized for 3 years to get it up and running. PIT is an example of swinging for the fences, even though it trails both BNA and MSY in total pax by quite a margin. It could be that BNA (and maybe MSY) held off this year with DE in order to sweeten the pot for a more traditional carrier.

Who really knows? Obviously these discussions are secretive. In aviation, we also have a "rising tide floats all ships situation". MSY is growing tremendously, but so are others. Obviously, BNA and AUS are on a different trajectory from everyone else for the looks of the next decade.

Don't know if you know this, but this Irish really like country music. I think the 321LR has the range to serve BNA, I wouldn't be surprised if EI would announce. IAG is trying to increase DUB as a hub, 2nd runway coming there, but terminal capacity is a concern. MSY, on the other hand, has to fill a widebody.

Keep us informed of any BNA TATL rumours, we are somewhat joined at the hip on this.

I expect DL/SkyTeam will announce BNA-CDG or AMS next year with it being started in 2021 to coincide with the expanded Sky Club.

One thing going against BNA right now compared to its peers is our FIS facility is undersized/subpar and not capable of handling more than one widebody at a time. A new one that will double the capacity and be capable of handling multiple widebodies is in design and will begin construction next year, but it won't be ready until 2023. We could accommodate a Delta/SkyTeam TATL flight as it would likely leave earlier than BA, but that would have to be it until the new FIS opens.

I would be surprised if EI comes into any mid-sized market that has BA as there would be a lot of overlap.

Despite the New Orleans area not quite growing on the same level as Austin, Nashville, Raleigh-Durham, etc, you still has great service and the new facility will make it more attractive to carriers.

BNAMealer wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

BNAMealer wrote:

My guess is they maybe turned them down in favor of going after a DL/SkyTeam flight.

Not sure who the "they" you're referring to is, so for clarity:
A US airport is not going to refuse service to a carrier that wants entrance, and almost any incentive offered by the airport or governing body has to be offered to all carriers of the type.

Now if private interests chose to pursue a full-service carrier (to the exclusion of a leisure provider like DE) with incentives beyond what would be offered by an airport/authority, then sure.

My guess is just that DE/DY didn't yet see BNA as strong enough to sustain dual service, save for a few weeks in the summer when the yields peak.

There's no real capacity difference between BA's 788s and 789s (2 seats total), but the premium mix is quite different. Perhaps they felt that with extra seats in the market, it wouldn't be worth it for either?

Rumor is BNA turned out FI and WW to help the BA flight, so it's not entirely out of the realm of possibility. I personally would never use DE, so whether they are in BNA or not is irrelevant to me.

You're right about the capacity, though I wonder if that is going to change once BA rolls out their new J product.

SNN707 wrote:

A lot has to do with subsidies as well. I believe a route can be subsidized for 3 years to get it up and running. PIT is an example of swinging for the fences, even though it trails both BNA and MSY in total pax by quite a margin. It could be that BNA (and maybe MSY) held off this year with DE in order to sweeten the pot for a more traditional carrier.

Who really knows? Obviously these discussions are secretive. In aviation, we also have a "rising tide floats all ships situation". MSY is growing tremendously, but so are others. Obviously, BNA and AUS are on a different trajectory from everyone else for the looks of the next decade.

Don't know if you know this, but this Irish really like country music. I think the 321LR has the range to serve BNA, I wouldn't be surprised if EI would announce. IAG is trying to increase DUB as a hub, 2nd runway coming there, but terminal capacity is a concern. MSY, on the other hand, has to fill a widebody.

Keep us informed of any BNA TATL rumours, we are somewhat joined at the hip on this.

I expect DL/SkyTeam will announce BNA-CDG or AMS next year with it being started in 2021 to coincide with the expanded Sky Club.

One thing going against BNA right now compared to its peers is our FIS facility is undersized/subpar and not capable of handling more than one widebody at a time. A new one that will double the capacity and be capable of handling multiple widebodies is in design and will begin construction next year, but it won't be ready until 2023. We could accommodate a Delta/SkyTeam TATL flight as it would likely leave earlier than BA, but that would have to be it until the new FIS opens.

I would be surprised if EI comes into any mid-sized market that has BA as there would be a lot of overlap.

Despite the New Orleans area not quite growing on the same level as Austin, Nashville, Raleigh-Durham, etc, you still has great service and the new facility will make it more attractive to carriers.

Actually, I have seen nothing but good reviews of DE out of MSY. Y fares are very reasonable, their J hard product is not legacy carrier worthy, but for the same price as legacy PE, its a much better hard and soft product. You can also credit DE miles to AS (triple in J I believe)

Plus, at least pre-TC bankruptcy, DE provided good connections in FRA via LH. The planes are old but 767s have a very high % of aisle and window seats per all seats and you are always 1 seat from the aisle.

Haven't used DE yet because I have award miles to burn. And BA charges exorbitant fees out of the UK on award tickets. Frankly I wouldn't waste miles on the old BA J product anyway.

We flew DE in 2017. Great service overall and a complete steal for what you get. J class to FRA and Y on the way back. Opted to upgrade the entertainment and food options for a nominal fee. Seamless connection from FCO on LH as well. Would fly them again on our next trip to mainland Europe. I do hope they stick around.

SNN707 wrote:

I'm just not sure pax are ready for a 9 hour flight on a narrowbody.

They've had more than a half-century to get with it, considering that narrobodies used to do 9hr+ flights... and heck, 24hr+ milk runs... all the time.

LAX772LR wrote:

SNN707 wrote:

I'm just not sure pax are ready for a 9 hour flight on a narrowbody.

They've had more than a half-century to get with it, considering that narrobodies used to do 9hr+ flights... and heck, 24hr+ milk runs... all the time.

That is true. But for one big difference. Back then, Y was about 34in pitch min, and pax were generally more civil (no one flying in their bare feet).

But it's coming. The XLR will be a game changer in the TATL market east of the Mississippi. Boeing will have to decide on a 757 AND a 737 replacement. My guess is it will be a clone of the A320/321/XLR program but with greater efficiency. By then Airbus will have a huge lead which Boeing will have to chip away at. The 737 program is essentially over. They'll still sell the MAX at fire sale prices, but possibly Boeing will take them back as trade-ins when the 737 replacement arrives. The next 10 years are essentially about survival for Boeing, not necessarily profits. Boeing will still be around. Airbus having a short term monopoly will mean higher prices and shortage of new aircraft in the near term. Very interesting how this will play out.

Finally watched the Inside MSY segment. DOTD expects the entire I-10 and Loyola interchange project (ramps and diverging diamond) to be complete by November 2021. Basically 2 years after opening of the terminal according to head of DOTD. They are also going to make it a signature project, so it will be getting higher priority for completion.

TSA will start with 10 processing lanes and then expand to 16 lanes as equipment in the existing terminal is moved over.

They also showed a shot of the AT&T telecommunications vault. Lots of progress on that front. Looks like the unusually dry weather has really helped speed that along.

NolaMD88fan wrote:

Finally watched the Inside MSY segment. DOTD expects the entire I-10 and Loyola interchange project (ramps and diverging diamond) to be complete by November 2021. Basically 2 years after opening of the terminal according to head of DOTD. They are also going to make it a signature project, so it will be getting higher priority for completion.

TSA will start with 10 processing lanes and then expand to 16 lanes as equipment in the existing terminal is moved over.

They also showed a shot of the AT&T telecommunications vault. Lots of progress on that front. Looks like the unusually dry weather has really helped speed that along.

Passed by the site yesterday. Looks like they are getting the rebar set for the top of the vault pour. One interesting thing is that there are wooden piling poles laid down all along the length of Vets from the runway to Loyola. I presume they are for light poles in the neutral ground.

I'm guessing that the ramps will come first to unload traffic from the intersection before starting the DD portion underneath. If true, the ramps could be done potentially in a year.

SNN707 wrote:

NolaMD88fan wrote:

Finally watched the Inside MSY segment. DOTD expects the entire I-10 and Loyola interchange project (ramps and diverging diamond) to be complete by November 2021. Basically 2 years after opening of the terminal according to head of DOTD. They are also going to make it a signature project, so it will be getting higher priority for completion.

TSA will start with 10 processing lanes and then expand to 16 lanes as equipment in the existing terminal is moved over.

They also showed a shot of the AT&T telecommunications vault. Lots of progress on that front. Looks like the unusually dry weather has really helped speed that along.

Passed by the site yesterday. Looks like they are getting the rebar set for the top of the vault pour. One interesting thing is that there are wooden piling poles laid down all along the length of Vets from the runway to Loyola. I presume they are for light poles in the neutral ground.

I'm guessing that the ramps will come first to unload traffic from the intersection before starting the DD portion underneath. If true, the ramps could be done potentially in a year.

Seems logical.. but to make that date it would seem they would need tostart demo work on that hotel asap.. that takes a little while

Inside MSY Episode 102

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZFQ3ccARpQ

SNN707 wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

SNN707 wrote:

I'm just not sure pax are ready for a 9 hour flight on a narrowbody.

They've had more than a half-century to get with it, considering that narrobodies used to do 9hr+ flights... and heck, 24hr+ milk runs... all the time.

That is true. But for one big difference. Back then, Y was about 34in pitch min, and pax were generally more civil (no one flying in their bare feet).

But it's coming. The XLR will be a game changer in the TATL market east of the Mississippi. Boeing will have to decide on a 757 AND a 737 replacement. My guess is it will be a clone of the A320/321/XLR program but with greater efficiency. By then Airbus will have a huge lead which Boeing will have to chip away at. The 737 program is essentially over. They'll still sell the MAX at fire sale prices, but possibly Boeing will take them back as trade-ins when the 737 replacement arrives. The next 10 years are essentially about survival for Boeing, not necessarily profits. Boeing will still be around. Airbus having a short term monopoly will mean higher prices and shortage of new aircraft in the near term. Very interesting how this will play out.

Well it looks like Icelandair may have a free 752 and 763 a few days per week next summer. Certainly wouldn't match FRA, but decent connections for the leisure crowd if they should add MSY.

ATT Vault Box

Lots of additional sign trusses for the interstate airport signage arrived today to... so expect that to be installed in next week or so

Anyone else think the overheads on the arrivals/departures levels, seem too short?

They don't extend over the roadway, so can't really protect anyone from the rain; especially Louisiana-style, where it comes down sideways.... so I guess maybe it's just meant as a sunblock?

Basically from what I’ve seen, the passenger getting out of the vehicle might be protected... the driver, not so much.

LAX772LR wrote:

Anyone else think the overheads on the arrivals/departures levels, seem too short?

They don't extend over the roadway, so can't really protect anyone from the rain; especially Louisiana-style, where it comes down sideways.... so I guess maybe it's just meant as a sunblock?

its def not like current setup on the departures upper deck... drop offs on the lower level on the west side will be fine and the arrivals area seems ok.. but yeah i think we all spotted that since they started being built.. its basically reaches the curb which is a little odd since the car dropping off will be past the curb

DJSNOLA wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Anyone else think the overheads on the arrivals/departures levels, seem too short?

They don't extend over the roadway, so can't really protect anyone from the rain; especially Louisiana-style, where it comes down sideways.... so I guess maybe it's just meant as a sunblock?

its def not like current setup on the departures upper deck... drop offs on the lower level on the west side will be fine and the arrivals area seems ok.. but yeah i think we all spotted that since they started being built.. its basically reaches the curb which is a little odd since the car dropping off will be past the curb

They'll probably let cars drive over the curb during gullywashers, a la the neutral grounds in NOLA.

Seriously, once the aesthetic newness wears off, some kind of practical protective canopy will be built. Hopefully its not a hybrid monstrosity like on the ST arrivals ramp.

LAX772LR wrote:

Anyone else think the overheads on the arrivals/departures levels, seem too short?

They don't extend over the roadway, so can't really protect anyone from the rain; especially Louisiana-style, where it comes down sideways.... so I guess maybe it's just meant as a sunblock?

Not surprising since the original design omitted any kind of covering whatsoever and it had to be added later on. I think it's a beautiful concept, but I'd bet that they will be remedying the effects of the value engineered design for decades.

I mean its an inexcusable oversight in my mind and the additional canopies on the arrivals upperdeck do help but still you need to cover at least 15-20 feet of the road ... you wouldnt know it this last month but its obviously very rainy here, so i dont get that part.. if its storming im going to have someone drop me off on the lower deck then

UK CAA stats are out for August.

https://www.caa.co.uk/Data-and-analysis/UK-aviation-market/Airports/Datasets/UK-Airport-data/Airport-data-2019-08/

The MSY-LHR route had an estimated load factor of 73.0% in August. There were 6,248 pax flying on an estimated 8,560 offered seats. Last year, the load factor was 68.8% with 6,183 pax flying on an estimated 8,988 offered seats. Pax count increased by 1.1% year over year. The route dropped to the the bottom of the list through the first 8 months of the year as the Summer slow season took its normal toll. Load factor still exceeds 80% for the year, so the route is performing quite well overall. Heading into the busy Fall season, load factor will once again start increasing.

All seat estimations for MSY, BWI, PIT and CHS are based on 788 seat count. SJC and BNA are based on 789 seat count. MSY and BWI had three cancelled roundtrip flights, BNA had two cancelled roundtrip flights, and SJC and PIT had one cancelled roundtrip flight.

The following breaks down the numbers for each station that sees 788/789 flying exclusively.

Station........Aug Seats.......Aug Pax............Aug LF.......YTD Seats.......YTD Pax......YTD LF
BWI...............11,984............11,300..............94.3%........101,008............87,261.........86.4%
PIT..................6,848..............5,900..............86.2%..........36,380............29,833.........82.0%
SJC...............12,960............11,895..............91.8%........100,224............81,568.........81.4%
BNA..............12,528..............9,926..............79.2%..........83,176............67,623.........81.3%
CHS................3,852..............3,217..............83.5%..........17,976............14,609.........81.3%
MSY................8,560..............6,248..............73.0%..........72,332............58,037.........80.2%

Pics from spotter facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1160271 ... 282176079/

first time we have seen many photos of it at night .. sure is a beauty

One question.. are they putting ceiling paneling above the TSA area and the areas behind ticket counters or is that staying exposed?

Nothing really new here, but this confirms that MSY was the 38th busiest airport in the nation in 2018. MSY fell between OAK and RDU. Among FAA defined large and medium hub aiports, MSY was the 14th fastest growing airport in the country based on enplanements in 2018. Growth rate was between OMA and SAN.

The regional airports about an hour drive from MSY basically held their positions as well. BTR was ranked 142nd busiest, and it fell between PSC (Pasco, WA) and TLH. GPT was ranked 151st busiest, and it fell between FNT and AMA.

https://www.faa.gov/airports/planning_c ... ements.pdf

DJSNOLA wrote:

One question.. are they putting ceiling paneling above the TSA area and the areas behind ticket counters or is that staying exposed?

All of the renderings I've seen have those areas enclosed by ceiling tiles, but maybe that plan has changed.