Thought it was time we could start an SNA related discussion thread.

Orange County had been weighing in on FAA mandated improvements to its general aviation facilities, and after several years, issued a proposal that involved re-doing roadways, tearing down & rebuilding most of the existing facilities and adding a general aviation terminal with its own FIS:

There’s a decades-long wait list for hangar space, some of the hangars can’t fit today’s wider-wingspan aircraft, and bigger planes are kept in an area with height restrictions while smaller single-engine piston aircraft (think Pipers and Cessnas) are in an unrestricted part of the airfield, Fourcher said. Not only that, but some of the hangars are in “a horrible state of disrepair” with peeling paint and holes in the roofs, said Scott Cutshall..
https://www.ocregister.com/2019/04/30/o ... ort-plans/

Additionally, the proposal would allow the number of general aviation flights to increase to 57 per day from 50 today.
https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pil ... story.html

But of course, ultimately Newport Beach won (again), and only the FAA mandated improvements to roadways and facilities will be made; in exchange, OC agreed to restrict the number of turboprop flights. Well, maybe, because NB made it clear they still haven't decided if they would sue to block the FAA mandated improvements...
https://www.ocregister.com/?returnUrl=h ... State=true

KSNA has a “Private Terminal”...2 as a matter of fact. Atlantic Aviation has been there for years. Why does the LA Times article not mention this? And only 50 GA flights per day? Have you been to SNA? Always very busy with biz jets, piston, helicopter traffic. It’s one of the busiest in this regard in the nation.

26point2 wrote:

KSNA has a “Private Terminal”...2 as a matter of fact. Atlantic Aviation has been there for years. Why does the LA Times article not mention this? And only 50 GA flights per day? Have you been to SNA? Always very busy with biz jets, piston, helicopter traffic. It’s one of the busiest in this regard in the nation.

Everyone's complaining that non airlines like JetSuiteX for example are by passing the Slot noise allocation causing more Jet noise over Orange Country.
Also these types of services are not restricted to the Local airport curfews.
In Attendants at the board meeting we're Airlines also saying Schedule service needs to fall under the allocation.
In addition The Airlines think if your flying a published schedule you should be required to use the TSA and follow all Airlines safety requirements.

Flyguy

Does the 50/57 limit include small piston aircraft ?

Aesma wrote:

Does the 50/57 limit include small piston aircraft ?

Whoops, I left out a sentence: the 50-flight limit applies to larger business jets. OC was proposing increasing the number of these flights, while sharply reducing the number of single engine flights to compensate. OC handles about 200K overall annual general aviation flights, and they were expecting that number to drop. Newport Beach hates business jets since GA is exempt from the curfew.

The business Jets NB hates probably belong to a number of NB residents. LOL

FF630 wrote:

The business Jets NB hates probably belong to a number of NB residents. LOL

Ironically, the OC Weekly investigated and concluded the same thing:

"Newport Beach vs. Newport Beach at John Wayne Airport"
https://ocweekly.com/newport-beach-vs-n ... e-airport/

- - -
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/governme ... ne-airport
Newport Beach's John Wayne Website. Of interest:

Q: What happened to the Old JWA Takeoff we’re so familiar with? A: The steeply angled takeoff followed by the power cutback was the only way an older-model plane, like the MD-80, could get out of JWA in the 1990s while keeping within the noise limits set by the 1985 Agreement. Today, the MD-80 is long gone from JWA fleets. With newer, lighter planes with quieter engines, some carriers can stay below the noise monitoring stations’ limits using a more subtle / less steep noise abatement takeoff (such as NADP-2).

And some background:
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm ... story.html

NB really, really hated the Southern California-produced MD-80...

Slightly off topic, but... It appears the only 757 pax service out of SNA these days is DL to ATL. Back in the day (late 90's) I think I did SNA-DEN, regardless it was a shorter flight that was maybe 50% full. Was a pretty fun takeoff.

There are some more nonstop routes that could be added out of SNA by AA, DL, WN, and NK if slot restrictions and limits on the total number of passengers per year are loosened at SNA, including the following:
AA - SNA-CLT, SNA-MIA, SNA-JFK, SNA-PHL
DL - SNA-BOS, SNA-CVG, SNA-JFK
WN - SNA-AUS, SNA-BWI, SNA-MDW, SNA-MCI, SNA-BNA, SNA-PDX, SNA-SLC, SNA-STL, SNA-SAT
NK - SNA-ORD, SNA-DFW, SNA-DTW, SNA-LAS

AA and WN will likely add nonstop service to additional destinations out of SNA if the slot restrictions at SNA and limits on the number of passengers per year at SNA are eliminated (or significantly loosened).

Will Congress and/or the California State Legislature enact legislation that would eliminate the slot restrictions and limits on the total number of passengers per year at SNA?

wnflyguy wrote:

26point2 wrote:

KSNA has a “Private Terminal”...2 as a matter of fact. Atlantic Aviation has been there for years. Why does the LA Times article not mention this? And only 50 GA flights per day? Have you been to SNA? Always very busy with biz jets, piston, helicopter traffic. It’s one of the busiest in this regard in the nation.

Everyone's complaining that non airlines like JetSuiteX for example are by passing the Slot noise allocation causing more Jet noise over Orange Country.
Also these types of services are not restricted to the Local airport curfews.
In Attendants at the board meeting we're Airlines also saying Schedule service needs to fall under the allocation.
In addition The Airlines think if your flying a published schedule you should be required to use the TSA and follow all Airlines safety requirements.

Flyguy

I'm not really sure what the airlines are upset about. If JSX is not using GA slots, they will be using airlines slots. They will get at minimal 3 slots as part of the regular allocation process. And maybe they will get even more than that overtime if they ask for more. As it stands, they are not taking up any slots that would go to regular airlines and are limited in how many pasengers that they can fly every year. It seems complaints just for the sake of limiting any additional competition.

I'm assuming "The Airlines" is codeword for WN, since they are the one affected by JSX competitoin.

tphuang wrote:

wnflyguy wrote:

26point2 wrote:

KSNA has a “Private Terminal”...2 as a matter of fact. Atlantic Aviation has been there for years. Why does the LA Times article not mention this? And only 50 GA flights per day? Have you been to SNA? Always very busy with biz jets, piston, helicopter traffic. It’s one of the busiest in this regard in the nation.

Everyone's complaining that non airlines like JetSuiteX for example are by passing the Slot noise allocation causing more Jet noise over Orange Country.
Also these types of services are not restricted to the Local airport curfews.
In Attendants at the board meeting we're Airlines also saying Schedule service needs to fall under the allocation.
In addition The Airlines think if your flying a published schedule you should be required to use the TSA and follow all Airlines safety requirements.

Flyguy

I'm not really sure what the airlines are upset about. If JSX is not using GA slots, they will be using airlines slots. They will get at minimal 3 slots as part of the regular allocation process. And maybe they will get even more than that overtime if they ask for more. As it stands, they are not taking up any slots that would go to regular airlines and are limited in how many pasengers that they can fly every year. It seems complaints just for the sake of limiting any additional competition.

I'm assuming "The Airlines" is codeword for WN, since they are the one affected by JSX competitoin.

JSX isn't using GA slots:

https://www.ocair.com/generalaviation/d ... ted%20(002).pdf

ARE SCHEDULED CHARTERS, LIKE JETSUITEX, CONSIDERED TO BE GENERAL AVIATION?
Operators that sell tickets to the general public and have a published schedule of two or more
flights per week during any consecutive three-week period are considered to be regularly
scheduled commercial carriers, not GA. JetSuiteX is categorized as a regularly scheduled
commercial carrier, and is subject to all of the restrictions for commercial carriers set forth in the
1985 Settlement Agreement and the Access Plan, including abiding by the commercial carrier
curfew, noise limits and Million Annual Passengers limitation.
Charter aircraft that operate “on-demand” fractional ownership aircraft requiring paid
membership and private jets not available to the general public are not considered to be regularly
scheduled commercial carriers.

n92r03 wrote:

Slightly off topic, but... It appears the only 757 pax service out of SNA these days is DL to ATL. Back in the day (late 90's) I think I did SNA-DEN, regardless it was a shorter flight that was maybe 50% full. Was a pretty fun takeoff.

DL operates the 757 to ATL (3x-4x daily) and DTW (1x daily).

Off the top of my head, in the past, the 757 has been operated to:
UA: ORD, DEN, SFO
DL: ATL, CVG, SLC, DFW, DTW
US: PIT, BWI
AA: ORD, DFW (and STL?)
TW: JFK, STL

compensateme wrote:

n92r03 wrote:

Slightly off topic, but... It appears the only 757 pax service out of SNA these days is DL to ATL. Back in the day (late 90's) I think I did SNA-DEN, regardless it was a shorter flight that was maybe 50% full. Was a pretty fun takeoff.

DL operates the 757 to ATL (3x-4x daily) and DTW (1x daily).

Off the top of my head, in the past, the 757 has been operated to:
UA: ORD, DEN, SFO
DL: ATL, CVG, SLC, DFW, DTW
US: PIT, BWI
AA: ORD, DFW (and STL?)
TW: JFK, STL

AA has used the 757 to SJC also. And yes, STL after the merger.

I’m not aware that US ever did BWI. PIT was a 733 and A319 for awhile.

Hopefully AC & WS can get SNA slots, WS can add YYC where AC can add YYZ and a 2nd YVR route.

BoeingGuy wrote:

AA has used the 757 to SJC also. And yes, STL after the merger.

I’m not aware that US ever did BWI. PIT was a 733 and A319 for awhile.

I stand corrected -- the flight to BWI was one-stop, same plane service via PIT.

YYZORD wrote:

Hopefully AC & WS can get SNA slots, WS can add YYC where AC can add YYZ and a 2nd YVR route.

AC and WS did get SNA slots. AC's YYZ-SNA service quickly failed, as did WS's YYC-SNA service (which quickly went seasonal - and was then cut altogether). If those services didn't work a few years ago, why would they suddenly work now?

jplatts wrote:

There are some more nonstop routes that could be added out of SNA by AA, DL, WN, and NK if slot restrictions and limits on the total number of passengers per year are loosened at SNA, including the following:
AA - SNA-CLT, SNA-MIA, SNA-JFK, SNA-PHL
DL - SNA-BOS, SNA-CVG, SNA-JFK
WN - SNA-AUS, SNA-BWI, SNA-MDW, SNA-MCI, SNA-BNA, SNA-PDX, SNA-SLC, SNA-STL, SNA-SAT
NK - SNA-ORD, SNA-DFW, SNA-DTW, SNA-LAS

AA and WN will likely add nonstop service to additional destinations out of SNA if the slot restrictions at SNA and limits on the number of passengers per year at SNA are eliminated (or significantly loosened).

Will Congress and/or the California State Legislature enact legislation that would eliminate the slot restrictions and limits on the total number of passengers per year at SNA?

The short answer is No. The settlement agreement, see link below, is grandfathered in under the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990. The agreement allows for some expansion of the passenger cap from it's current limit but not a lot.

https://www.ocair.com/communityrelation ... nt/default

The only hope for more service short term is for the airport board to change the definition of what a commuter plane is. It is currently set at 70 seats. All airlines except WN support the definition of a commuter plane being changed to a plane with 76 seats. That would open up a pool of unused slots and capacity that could be used by 76 seat E175s.

BoeingGuy wrote:

compensateme wrote:

n92r03 wrote:

Slightly off topic, but... It appears the only 757 pax service out of SNA these days is DL to ATL. Back in the day (late 90's) I think I did SNA-DEN, regardless it was a shorter flight that was maybe 50% full. Was a pretty fun takeoff.

DL operates the 757 to ATL (3x-4x daily) and DTW (1x daily).

Off the top of my head, in the past, the 757 has been operated to:
UA: ORD, DEN, SFO
DL: ATL, CVG, SLC, DFW, DTW
US: PIT, BWI
AA: ORD, DFW (and STL?)
TW: JFK, STL

AA has used the 757 to SJC also. And yes, STL after the merger.

I’m not aware that US ever did BWI. PIT was a 733 and A319 for awhile.

HP had 757's from PHX and LAS flying into SNA US had 737-500's then switched to 757's from PIT

compensateme wrote:

tphuang wrote:

wnflyguy wrote:

Everyone's complaining that non airlines like JetSuiteX for example are by passing the Slot noise allocation causing more Jet noise over Orange Country.
Also these types of services are not restricted to the Local airport curfews.
In Attendants at the board meeting we're Airlines also saying Schedule service needs to fall under the allocation.
In addition The Airlines think if your flying a published schedule you should be required to use the TSA and follow all Airlines safety requirements.

Flyguy

I'm not really sure what the airlines are upset about. If JSX is not using GA slots, they will be using airlines slots. They will get at minimal 3 slots as part of the regular allocation process. And maybe they will get even more than that overtime if they ask for more. As it stands, they are not taking up any slots that would go to regular airlines and are limited in how many pasengers that they can fly every year. It seems complaints just for the sake of limiting any additional competition.

I'm assuming "The Airlines" is codeword for WN, since they are the one affected by JSX competitoin.

JSX isn't using GA slots:

https://www.ocair.com/generalaviation/d ... ted%20(002).pdf

ARE SCHEDULED CHARTERS, LIKE JETSUITEX, CONSIDERED TO BE GENERAL AVIATION?
Operators that sell tickets to the general public and have a published schedule of two or more
flights per week during any consecutive three-week period are considered to be regularly
scheduled commercial carriers, not GA. JetSuiteX is categorized as a regularly scheduled
commercial carrier, and is subject to all of the restrictions for commercial carriers set forth in the
1985 Settlement Agreement and the Access Plan, including abiding by the commercial carrier
curfew, noise limits and Million Annual Passengers limitation.
Charter aircraft that operate “on-demand” fractional ownership aircraft requiring paid
membership and private jets not available to the general public are not considered to be regularly
scheduled commercial carriers.

so if they are subject to the same restrictions as other commercial carriers, then what is the problem?

MDW22L31C wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

compensateme wrote:

DL operates the 757 to ATL (3x-4x daily) and DTW (1x daily).

Off the top of my head, in the past, the 757 has been operated to:
UA: ORD, DEN, SFO
DL: ATL, CVG, SLC, DFW, DTW
US: PIT, BWI
AA: ORD, DFW (and STL?)
TW: JFK, STL

AA has used the 757 to SJC also. And yes, STL after the merger.

I’m not aware that US ever did BWI. PIT was a 733 and A319 for awhile.

HP had 757's from PHX and LAS flying into SNA US had 737-500's then switched to 757's from PIT

US later flew 737-300s and then A319s SNA-PIT later. US also briefly flew SNA-PHL with an A319.

gmcc wrote:

jplatts wrote:

There are some more nonstop routes that could be added out of SNA by AA, DL, WN, and NK if slot restrictions and limits on the total number of passengers per year are loosened at SNA, including the following:
AA - SNA-CLT, SNA-MIA, SNA-JFK, SNA-PHL
DL - SNA-BOS, SNA-CVG, SNA-JFK
WN - SNA-AUS, SNA-BWI, SNA-MDW, SNA-MCI, SNA-BNA, SNA-PDX, SNA-SLC, SNA-STL, SNA-SAT
NK - SNA-ORD, SNA-DFW, SNA-DTW, SNA-LAS

AA and WN will likely add nonstop service to additional destinations out of SNA if the slot restrictions at SNA and limits on the number of passengers per year at SNA are eliminated (or significantly loosened).

Will Congress and/or the California State Legislature enact legislation that would eliminate the slot restrictions and limits on the total number of passengers per year at SNA?

The short answer is No. The settlement agreement, see link below, is grandfathered in under the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990. The agreement allows for some expansion of the passenger cap from it's current limit but not a lot.

https://www.ocair.com/communityrelation ... nt/default

The only hope for more service short term is for the airport board to change the definition of what a commuter plane is. It is currently set at 70 seats. All airlines except WN support the definition of a commuter plane being changed to a plane with 76 seats. That would open up a pool of unused slots and capacity that could be used by 76 seat E175s.

I'd expect the local community to oppose such change as well. Newport Beach, Laguna Beach (especially South Laguna) and Laguna Niguel have been incredibly vocal about NextGen in recent years.

Plus, the area surrounding SNA is quickly changing. What was once largely flat industrial property in surrounding Irvine is quickly changing to high rise office and high rise residential.

AC back then didn't have so much international routes like they do now from YYZ. Also YYC had many European destinations added recently and the WS/DL JV should help this time.

SurfandSnow wrote:

YYZORD wrote:

Hopefully AC & WS can get SNA slots, WS can add YYC where AC can add YYZ and a 2nd YVR route.

AC and WS did get SNA slots. AC's YYZ-SNA service quickly failed, as did WS's YYC-SNA service (which quickly went seasonal - and was then cut altogether). If those services didn't work a few years ago, why would they suddenly work now?

YYZORD wrote:

AC back then didn't have so much international routes like they do now from YYZ. Also YYC had many European destinations added recently and the WS/DL JV should help this time.

SurfandSnow wrote:

YYZORD wrote:

Hopefully AC & WS can get SNA slots, WS can add YYC where AC can add YYZ and a 2nd YVR route.

AC and WS did get SNA slots. AC's YYZ-SNA service quickly failed, as did WS's YYC-SNA service (which quickly went seasonal - and was then cut altogether). If those services didn't work a few years ago, why would they suddenly work now?

Maybe SNA-YYZ would work with an A220. By example, AC has SJC-YYZ on the list of potential new A220 routes, and that has also previously been discontinued.

jplatts wrote:

There are some more nonstop routes that could be added out of SNA by AA, DL, WN, and NK if slot restrictions and limits on the total number of passengers per year are loosened at SNA, including the following:
AA - SNA-CLT, SNA-MIA, SNA-JFK, SNA-PHL
DL - SNA-BOS, SNA-CVG, SNA-JFK
WN - SNA-AUS, SNA-BWI, SNA-MDW, SNA-MCI, SNA-BNA, SNA-PDX, SNA-SLC, SNA-STL, SNA-SAT
NK - SNA-ORD, SNA-DFW, SNA-DTW, SNA-LAS

AA and WN will likely add nonstop service to additional destinations out of SNA if the slot restrictions at SNA and limits on the number of passengers per year at SNA are eliminated (or significantly loosened).

Will Congress and/or the California State Legislature enact legislation that would eliminate the slot restrictions and limits on the total number of passengers per year at SNA?

WN previously operated SNA- AUS/MDW/MCI/PDX/SEA/STL/SFO but dropped these routes when they lost seats/slots. This is also why they don’t operate 737-800 aircraft from SNA on a scheduled basis due to the loss of seat allocations.

I seem to recall flying NWA on a 757 to MSP in the 1980 but am not sure. I recall the HP 757 flights to Phoenix were Eticket rides.

There is a lot more going on behind the scenes that the general public doesn’t know. My flight school at sna operates 200 arrivals and departures per month on average. Backdoor deals have been in place for years. The votes you are witnessing now are just a formality despite what many groups tell you. General aviation such as piston planes will lose approximately 250 parking spots. Jays maintenance hangar will be demolished. Big money pushing out the little guys is basically what’s happening. When it’s all said and done, SNA will primarily be a 121 and 135 airport. They’re already making it harder and harder to do business at the airport for small GA. This transformation will be completed somewhere between 24-36 months from now.