ncflyer wrote:

Three flight on UA to LAX in the post hub era we hardly knew ya. Cut in June.

I read somewhere that this is just a temporary cut, perhaps due to the Max9 grounding? A random check in July and other dates show 3 daily flights.

https://www.united.com/web/en-us/apps/t ... ight=&FLN=

CLEguy wrote:

In enilria's weekly post here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1420873, he writes:

Why is this still loaded at all? They announced it wouldn't operate.
*FI CLE-KEF JUN 0.6>0.2[0.7]

CLE is also still listed as a destination on Icelandair's website: https://www.icelandair.com/flights/

Are they just that bad at IT, that they didn't update the website nor clear out the flight from the OAG? Strange.

I think even DFW is still on their route map too if I'm not mistaken.

My guess is UA will cut the third LAX flight one month at a time, and eventually the short summer period will be over. No end in sight to the Max groundings.

Something going on with the flight status and baggage claim monitors at Hopkins:

https://fox8.com/2019/04/22/i-team-offi ... -displays/

greenair727 wrote:

Something going on with the flight status and baggage claim monitors at Hopkins:

https://fox8.com/2019/04/22/i-team-offi ... -displays/

What a strange occurrence. Here's another article. Looks like it impacted airport email systems, too.

https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2019/04 ... rport.html

Not strange at all, they were hacked. Ransomeware has taken control and the airport clowns have no clue what to do.

chrisjake wrote:

Not strange at all, they were hacked. Ransomeware has taken control and the airport clowns have no clue what to do.

Do you know for a fact that's what happened or are you speculating?

That's what is being reported, and it makes complete sense. "Glitches" don't last for days, nor does the FBI get involved

https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2019/04 ... rport.html

https://www.wkyc.com/article/travel/the ... 998254723b

chrisjake wrote:

That's what is being reported, and it makes complete sense. "Glitches" don't last for days, nor does the FBI get involved

https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2019/04 ... rport.html

https://www.wkyc.com/article/travel/the ... 998254723b

Again, that is still speculation. You may very well be correct, but there has been no confirmation of what actually happened.

Can’t remember which news outlet, but one if then said the head of IT was interim, and not from the IT field. For what that’s worth.

Interesting that inquiries directed to city hall, does the airport not have a spokesperson?

Technically, you're right...no confirmation. But the FBI is involved and they didn't show up to swap out power supplies or video cards. This is pretty embarrassing, the city admins are trying their hardest not to let it get out. Its just a glitch.

chrisjake wrote:

Technically, you're right...no confirmation. But the FBI is involved and they didn't show up to swap out power supplies or video cards. This is pretty embarrassing, the city admins are trying their hardest not to let it get out. Its just a glitch.

Computer hacker introduced malware. https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2019 ... ipped.html

....and wants them to pay to release their system. The city admins are such morons, they should just pay the guy and be on their way. Would probably be much cheaper than the relatives....err, consultants they'll hire to do surveys on how to protect their computer network.

How can you say that chrisjake, we know nothing about the ransomware demands, the airports insurance, fBI recommendations, etc.

Why is the city speaking for the airport. The airport has no spokesperson? Kennedy?

Losing the flight boards is not a huge deal I wouldn’t think so many people can get flight info on their phones nowadays. But email— oy!

it's conjecture. Since the city, and therefore the airport, are run by ..... such fine gentlemen, my money says that there is a lot more to this than is getting out. Its not about what got infected, its the fact that it happened. Hell, for all we know its just the tip of the iceberg and the threat is a lot worse. Why is the city speaking for the airport? hmm......

just came out: https://www.wkyc.com/article/news/local ... b9a504895d

I can’t go along with the school of thought of blaming the victim for the crime. Some hacks that have hit the news have been blue chip companies with far more resources to defend against them. Facebook. Who knows what we don’t hear about. So my thoughts go out. Losing email alone would be paralyzing.

You do not negotiate with terrorists. Paying ransomware hackers just encourages ransomware attacks. You beat ransomware by reverting to a backup you know is clean. Unfortunately, it takes time as you have to examine the backup thoroughly to ensure the ransomware is not on the backup.

ncflyer wrote:

I can’t go along with the school of thought of blaming the victim for the crime. Some hacks that have hit the news have been blue chip companies with far more resources to defend against them. Facebook. Who knows what we don’t hear about. So my thoughts go out. Losing email alone would be paralyzing.

Agreed. I know the zeitgeist is to criticize the airport, the city, and its institutions first, but in this case, IMO, they’re doing the right thing. This type of thing happened in ATL last year and the feds got involved in that investigation, as they should have. Given that, and the fact CLE has gotten in trouble in the past for not notifying federal authorities with alacrity about security matters, calling in the FBI and being circumspect about particulars is the way to go.

On a different note - the red eye from LAX UA1786 happens to be N37267 the 1st United aircraft sporting the new livery. Enroute and due in to CLE at 6:10 am. Turning around doing CLE to LAX at 7:19 am

csizmpl wrote:

On a different note - the red eye from LAX UA1786 happens to be N37267 the 1st United aircraft sporting the new livery. Enroute and due in to CLE at 6:10 am. Turning around doing CLE to LAX at 7:19 am

As far as I know, these are the first 2 revenue flights for the aircraft with the new livery. Wonder why they picked this route to a non-hub.

CLEguy wrote:

csizmpl wrote:

On a different note - the red eye from LAX UA1786 happens to be N37267 the 1st United aircraft sporting the new livery. Enroute and due in to CLE at 6:10 am. Turning around doing CLE to LAX at 7:19 am

As far as I know, these are the first 2 revenue flights for the aircraft with the new livery. Wonder why they picked this route to a non-hub.

Clearly, this is a sign that UA is rebuilding its hub in Cleveland.

corn4ahead wrote:

CLEguy wrote:

csizmpl wrote:

On a different note - the red eye from LAX UA1786 happens to be N37267 the 1st United aircraft sporting the new livery. Enroute and due in to CLE at 6:10 am. Turning around doing CLE to LAX at 7:19 am

As far as I know, these are the first 2 revenue flights for the aircraft with the new livery. Wonder why they picked this route to a non-hub.

Clearly, this is a sign that UA is rebuilding its hub in Cleveland.

I wish a.net let me like or laugh at a post without the trouble of posting a whole new item. I was going to suggest UA scheduled it to CLE because they didn't want to risk screwing up a hub flight.

What to make of this? On Friday at 104pm Fox8 posts this:

"The City of Cleveland on Friday claimed that's not true, saying, "No hacking occurred and no ransom demands were made."

Here is their entire statement:

"On April 21, malware was discovered on several Cleveland Hopkins International Airport computing systems. As a result, the Flight Information Display, Baggage Information Display and email systems were impacted. These systems were not accessed by any unauthorized personnel (hacked) and there were no ransom demands....."

So the city is emphatically stating its not hacking and ransom. But was/is it? Is the airport now lying or realizing it wasn't and was too incompetent to know what's what?

Yet another example of why the city shouldn’t be running the airport. An airport should be able to stand alone and to speak for itself. Conversely the city has bigger problems to worry about.

^Hopkins usually does and has its own spokespeople.

corn4ahead wrote:

CLEguy wrote:

csizmpl wrote:

On a different note - the red eye from LAX UA1786 happens to be N37267 the 1st United aircraft sporting the new livery. Enroute and due in to CLE at 6:10 am. Turning around doing CLE to LAX at 7:19 am

As far as I know, these are the first 2 revenue flights for the aircraft with the new livery. Wonder why they picked this route to a non-hub.

Clearly, this is a sign that UA is rebuilding its hub in Cleveland.

Actually, it’s WN that’s building up in CLE. In 2017, WN surpassed UA as the dominant carrier. They have increased flights by 13 percent since then, making CLE a pretty decent operation for them. If Frontier did not come to CLE, it would probably be a focus city for them.

Right now, UA carries about 1.6 million pax per year, and WN carries 1.7 million per year.

That can’t include United express partners, and the comment on WN and focus city I don’t buy, not even close. WN votes again and again— before and during F9 presence— that CLE is a pretty trivial station, starting with no daily service to DAL and HOU, unlike CMH and PIT and IND. One could argue that a piece of WNs growth in CLE was shutting down CAK.

Furthermore why would WN even need a focus city in between MDW and BWI.

ncflyer wrote:

That can’t include United express partners, and the comment on WN and focus city I don’t buy, not even close. WN votes again and again— before and during F9 presence— that CLE is a pretty trivial station, starting with no daily service to DAL and HOU, unlike CMH and PIT and IND. One could argue that a piece of WNs growth in CLE was shutting down CAK.

Furthermore why would WN even need a focus city in between MDW and BWI.

The same reason DL allegedly building a focus city in BNA when it already has RDU, CVG, and obviously ATL.

Gulfstream500 wrote:

Actually, it’s WN that’s building up in CLE. In 2017, WN surpassed UA as the dominant carrier. They have increased flights by 13 percent since then, making CLE a pretty decent operation for them. If Frontier did not come to CLE, it would probably be a focus city for them.

Right now, UA carries about 1.6 million pax per year, and WN carries 1.7 million per year.

ncflyer wrote:

That can’t include United express partners, and the comment on WN and focus city I don’t buy, not even close. WN votes again and again— before and during F9 presence— that CLE is a pretty trivial station, starting with no daily service to DAL and HOU, unlike CMH and PIT and IND. One could argue that a piece of WNs growth in CLE was shutting down CAK.

Furthermore why would WN even need a focus city in between MDW and BWI.

ncflyer is right. Looking at Oct 2018 info:

WN is 17.3% of the market
UA Mainline is 18.4% and
UA Express is 8.4%

So in terms of public branding and ticket sales, UA, at over 25% of pax, is still the largest carrier at CLE.

greenair727 wrote:

Gulfstream500 wrote:

Actually, it’s WN that’s building up in CLE. In 2017, WN surpassed UA as the dominant carrier. They have increased flights by 13 percent since then, making CLE a pretty decent operation for them. If Frontier did not come to CLE, it would probably be a focus city for them.

Right now, UA carries about 1.6 million pax per year, and WN carries 1.7 million per year.

ncflyer wrote:

That can’t include United express partners, and the comment on WN and focus city I don’t buy, not even close. WN votes again and again— before and during F9 presence— that CLE is a pretty trivial station, starting with no daily service to DAL and HOU, unlike CMH and PIT and IND. One could argue that a piece of WNs growth in CLE was shutting down CAK.

Furthermore why would WN even need a focus city in between MDW and BWI.

ncflyer is right. Looking at Oct 2018 info:

WN is 17.3% of the market
UA Mainline is 18.4% and
UA Express is 8.4%

So in terms of public branding and ticket sales, UA, at over 25% of pax, is still the largest carrier at CLE.

Yes, however:

WN is currently the fastest-growing carrier at CLE. While UAX flights are technically part of the UA brand, they are not operated by UA or a UA subsidiary (until ExpressJet is officially a UA subsidiary).

If WN was about the “why should we have a focus city between x and y” then MKE and TPA would not be a thing with WN, as they are both close to MDW and MCO, respectively.

Gulfstream500 wrote:

greenair727 wrote:

Gulfstream500 wrote:

Actually, it’s WN that’s building up in CLE. In 2017, WN surpassed UA as the dominant carrier. They have increased flights by 13 percent since then, making CLE a pretty decent operation for them. If Frontier did not come to CLE, it would probably be a focus city for them.

Right now, UA carries about 1.6 million pax per year, and WN carries 1.7 million per year.

ncflyer wrote:

That can’t include United express partners, and the comment on WN and focus city I don’t buy, not even close. WN votes again and again— before and during F9 presence— that CLE is a pretty trivial station, starting with no daily service to DAL and HOU, unlike CMH and PIT and IND. One could argue that a piece of WNs growth in CLE was shutting down CAK.

Furthermore why would WN even need a focus city in between MDW and BWI.

ncflyer is right. Looking at Oct 2018 info:

WN is 17.3% of the market
UA Mainline is 18.4% and
UA Express is 8.4%

So in terms of public branding and ticket sales, UA, at over 25% of pax, is still the largest carrier at CLE.

Yes, however:

WN is currently the fastest-growing carrier at CLE. While UAX flights are technically part of the UA brand, they are not operated by UA or a UA subsidiary (until ExpressJet is officially a UA subsidiary).

If WN was about the “why should we have a focus city between x and y” then MKE and TPA would not be a thing with WN, as they are both close to MDW and MCO, respectively.

And it looks like UA's passenger numbers at CLE for the 1st quarter of 2019 are up by over 16% vs. 1Q 2018. That's pretty impressive growth for UA.

https://ohioaviation.weebly.com/news

I’m pretty sure it’s fairly new that UA is only mainline to Den. 3x winter 4x summer.

I'm encouraged by the revisit of the Aer Lingus folks and by the info that Eaton (the fifth largest US business in Ireland) is party to the discussions.

I've lost the refeence that EI was back for another talk (Scott Suttell in Crain's?), but this says Eaton was at the table:
https://ohioaviation.weebly.com/news/ae ... n-ireland'

Also encouraging: No WN cuts over the Max business.

Gulfstream500 wrote:

greenair727 wrote:

Gulfstream500 wrote:

Actually, it’s WN that’s building up in CLE. In 2017, WN surpassed UA as the dominant carrier. They have increased flights by 13 percent since then, making CLE a pretty decent operation for them. If Frontier did not come to CLE, it would probably be a focus city for them.

Right now, UA carries about 1.6 million pax per year, and WN carries 1.7 million per year.

ncflyer wrote:

That can’t include United express partners, and the comment on WN and focus city I don’t buy, not even close. WN votes again and again— before and during F9 presence— that CLE is a pretty trivial station, starting with no daily service to DAL and HOU, unlike CMH and PIT and IND. One could argue that a piece of WNs growth in CLE was shutting down CAK.

Furthermore why would WN even need a focus city in between MDW and BWI.

ncflyer is right. Looking at Oct 2018 info:

WN is 17.3% of the market
UA Mainline is 18.4% and
UA Express is 8.4%

So in terms of public branding and ticket sales, UA, at over 25% of pax, is still the largest carrier at CLE.

Yes, however:

WN is currently the fastest-growing carrier at CLE. While UAX flights are technically part of the UA brand, they are not operated by UA or a UA subsidiary (until ExpressJet is officially a UA subsidiary).

If WN was about the “why should we have a focus city between x and y” then MKE and TPA would not be a thing with WN, as they are both close to MDW and MCO, respectively.

Unless WN adds BDL, BOS, PVD, ALB & ROC CLE's location in the WN network does not allow any connectivity eastward or westward. BWI & MDW already connect these cities.

Hopkins control tower radar went out this morning at 6:00am. Was on a United flight to IAD and we had to wait on the runway hold area for 40 minutes along with other aircraft as no operations. Once started at 6:35am one aircraft was allowed every 4 min to take off.

^Is it back up now? Any relation to the down flight and baggage boards or just bad coincidence?

cartoon commentary on the matter:

https://www.cleveland.com/darcy/2019/04 ... rtoon.html

Displays are back up:

https://www.wkyc.com/article/news/local ... d026643c87

I was at CLE on Saturday for my flight to RDU on DL, and I saw that the recently-announced spa/salon will be located next to Gate C2:

https://mobile.twitter.com/goingplacesC ... 3378533376

The new pizza place (800 Degree Woodfired Pizza, I believe) is also going up between gates A1 and A3 where seating used to be. Should be complete in August along with the new Mexican place in the banjo.

^Thanks for the food/retail update! Also, glad to hear the displays are back up.

https://www.cleveland.com/business/2019 ... ights.html

Could also go on the Ohio forum. Article on proposed $15mm fund for aviation development in Ohio. Reporter raises a good question about process to allocate money within the state.

^I agree that how to divide the money internally is critical, otherwise, this being Ohio, the bulk of the money will go to boost Columbus air service, while Cleveland tax dollars pay for it. And this should be decided BEFORE its added to the budget. I'd rather have no Ohio fund than have one that uses Cleveland money to make CMH more competitive against Hopkins. If CMH lands LHR or AMS or the like before CLE, it makes it even harder to CLE to land such service. A possible equitable way to divide the money is to divide $15M according to the air service population of each major airport. And decide these counties up front. So CLE should be 4.5M or 5M people---not the 2.1M MSA number. Otherwise Columbus will argue before the state----and given who runs the state, will win--that it is bigger than Cleveland. Also, this method would still allow CAK or DAY to have a piece even though they are also within the air service population of CLE and CVG, respectively.

I agree Greenair. Personally I feel that using money for CAK or DAY to attract service that nearby airports already has is a waste— will only cannibalize. But there goes support from those legislators.

^I think TOL, CAK, DAY are okay for the statewide support. But the real issue is that the "State" will want to give ALL the money to Columbus. Cleveland already heavily subsidizes Columbus, but if they get a TATL before us, it will be devastating---and Clevelanders will be the fools who are paying for it.

Man bites police officer-another strange story from CLE:

https://www.cleveland.com/crime/2019/05 ... e-say.html

There was an off-the-wall comment on cleveland.com (of all places) suggesting that the airport parking lots use EZPass to collect the fees. This seems like a genuinely great idea - I know in DC the parking fees can cross the $100 line in less that a week and inevitably I'm in line behind someone who's trying to pay with quarters. Could this actually be done?

greenair727 wrote:

^I agree that how to divide the money internally is critical, otherwise, this being Ohio, the bulk of the money will go to boost Columbus air service, while Cleveland tax dollars pay for it. And this should be decided BEFORE its added to the budget. I'd rather have no Ohio fund than have one that uses Cleveland money to make CMH more competitive against Hopkins. If CMH lands LHR or AMS or the like before CLE, it makes it even harder to CLE to land such service. A possible equitable way to divide the money is to divide $15M according to the air service population of each major airport. And decide these counties up front. So CLE should be 4.5M or 5M people---not the 2.1M MSA number. Otherwise Columbus will argue before the state----and given who runs the state, will win--that it is bigger than Cleveland. Also, this method would still allow CAK or DAY to have a piece even though they are also within the air service population of CLE and CVG, respectively.

It should be divided up by the percentage of the states O/D air travel they provide. For instance if CLE provides the state with 33% of it's air travel then that should be the amount they get of the 15M.

Ohio would be best off dividing it evenly between Columbus and cleveland only and I’d restrict it to international (sorry Kentucky CVG). New subsidized service from let’s say CAK to DFW doesn’t really make the state better off— that exists in spades 45 minutes away. I know my thoughts are a political nonstarter. (As is probably the whole idea)

On the turnpike Massey I saw that, it was a clever idea. Did the poster say it was being done elsewhere? Those ez passes are universal in NY and Boston, inCleveland most people have no need. So if it’s goint to be tried somewhere I’d expect it elsewhere

ncflyer wrote:

On the turnpike Massey I saw that, it was a clever idea. Did the poster say it was being done elsewhere? Those ez passes are universal in NY and Boston, inCleveland most people have no need. So if it’s goint to be tried somewhere I’d expect it elsewhere

EZ pass at the airport might be an easy cheap way to get more of them out there, once the equipment is up it’s a pretty low cost to operate, the tags themselves are cheap to own, if your a frequent flyer it could be a win.

I know that at least LGA allows the use of EZPass for parking, and as mentioned, they're ubiquitous in Massachusetts (where at one point they were free for anybody who wanted one). I got mine in Virginia and have had it 10 years, still use it every once in awhile in rentals to save a few bucks.

This is way digression in nature but if good for CLE why not good for the McD drive through, etc etc? The question I’m trying to raise is what is the willingness of EZ pass to have their product used as currency/alternate credit card? If I had to guess that’s the barrier.