ltbewr
Posts: 14330
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 12:13 am

EWR is the most expensive as to labor, support services, lease and related fees, landing, takeoff and parking fees and one of the most delay prone airports airlines operate in the USA. It is no wonder WN has withdrawn.
 
jplatts
Posts: 2786
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:02 am

In 2018, WN carried 2,756,364 passengers in and of LGA and 1,585,062 passengers in and out of EWR, coming out to a total of 4,341,426‬ passengers combined.

WN will be able to regain most of the capacity lost by pulling out of EWR by upgauging its nonstop routes out of LGA to the 737-800 and 737 MAX 8. Some of the passengers who currently travel to NYC from domestic outside of the LGA perimeter on WN will also choose to fly on UA, AA, DL, or B6 instead once WN discontinues service out of EWR.
 
rj1385
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:09 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:41 am

strfyr51 wrote:
bob75013 wrote:
Polot wrote:
The Max is being used as a scapegoat to lessen the blow and give hope that they will come back. If that plane was truly needed to keep the station open then EWR was barely hanging on to begin with. Southwest, like any airline, would shuffle to keep profitable routes/stations operating as robustly as possible.
In sp,

Correct. As evidenced by:

""The financial results at Newark have been below expectations, despite the efforts of our excellent Team at Newark," the statement from CEO and Chairman of the Board Gary Kelly said."

well? What did he expect? For WN to go there and everybody would just DROP who they were flying and flock to WN? n some cities? WN is Not a big deal and they'll have to earn their "Stripes" like everybody Else. Maybe they could have started at LGA or Westchester county. since they like off brand airports so much.


I never understood why Southwest decided to not keep Westchester in the airTran merger. Yes they would have had to deal with seat limits that are in place, but I don't think that would have been such an issue. The 717s were not kept but I believe Southwest could have gotten 737-700s in there to some key markets. jetBlue gets multiple A320s (5) and E190s (7) and Delta is sending 717s (2) from Atlanta daily.
 
barney captain
Posts: 2225
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:01 am

EWR closing is directly related to the Hawaii expansion. Everything out of EWR is 800 longhauls - the shortest flight is to MDW with most being transcons. Not the best use of ETOPS 800's to be sure. Closing EWR will allow the ETOPs ready 800's to transition over to the ETOPS mx program for use to and in HI. Currently we're only using about half of our 29 ETOPS 800's for Hawaii. That's about to change.
Southeast Of Disorder
 
ctrabs0114
Posts: 926
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:09 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:34 am

alpine1989 wrote:
Southwest has bet big on Hawaii. They've been unable to announce the second wave of Hawaii flights because of the aircraft shortage caused by the MAX grounding. Closing EWR to open SMF/SAN to Hawaii and opening new stations LIH and ITO makes sense given the continued uncertainty surrounding MAX return to service.

Let us not forget Southwest has previously retreated from some large markets/mega hubs in the including DEN, IAH and SFO. They don't serve DFW, MIA or ORD. I'd hardly say the sky is falling because EWR is being dropped in favor of a higher priority market.


This is not exactly the best comparison to make:

    In the case of DEN, WN returned to the market a few years after Denver International Airport opened and is now the number two carrier at an airport that's a UA hub.
    IAH was closed because of WN's substantial operations at HOU, so it's not like Houston is unserved by WN.
    While WN left, but subsequently returned to SFO, they have a crew base at OAK and a major presence at SJC, so it wasn't as though WN abandoned the Bay Area.

And I don't see why WN would need to serve DFW when they have a fortress hub at DAL, or ORD with the fortress hub at MDW. They don't need to serve MIA since they have a (relatively) significant operation at FLL (though, you could argue that TPA and MCO are stronger WN stations in Florida).

If WN had left both EWR and LGA, thus virtually abandoning the New York City market (I'm factoring in the ISP operation in this portion of the comment), I could see why people would be upset over the closing of EWR. I do wonder if this could be a precursor to WN getting a few more slots at LGA in the near future.
2019: DAL, MCI, PHX, LAS, DFW, SAT, ORD, SLC, SEA, DTW, PHL, MIA, LAX; B73G (WN x3), B738 (WN, AA, DL), A20N (NK), MD83 (AA), B788 (AA x2), CS1 (DL), B739 (DL), B712 (DL), B752 (AA), B763 (AA), B77W (AA), B789 (AA)
Next: TBA
 
ctrabs0114
Posts: 926
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:09 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:05 am

AviationKnurd wrote:
flyiguy wrote:
News is reporting that EWR will be closing as part of the WN network due to delays with the MAX.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/25/southwe ... nding.html

FLY


Yes, they are closing EWR, however to say it’s because of the the MAX is patently false and an assumption based little knowledge and high-level analysis. Shame on CNBC

One needs not to look any further than the slew of financial and operational constraints WN’s EWR operation places on them for which the reasons are seemingly endless:

-The need to allocate more block time to EWR flights in order to account for EWR’s proneness to ATC delays,
-The rather high CASM, relatively speaking, associated w/EWR,
-Opportunity cost of placing aircraft on EWR routes when they could be placed elsewhere and achieve much better operational efficiencies and more optimally utilized to generate better revenues
-The fact that WN can serve NYC from LGA and to a lessor extent, ISP (I mean UA abandoned JFK for EWR, while at a different scale, for many of the same reasons WN is leaving EWR, and I’d say that move was a good one for UA)
-WN’s presence in NYC is a token one to serve their customers based in other cities like MCI, MKE, STL, etc, NOT those in NYC

But no, news outlets like CNBC see the “sexy” headline of how the “MAX grounding is now causing airlines to close airports”, despite its GROSS INACCURACIES and run with it. So sad


This is the entire paragraph from WN's own Investor Relations statement from Gary Kelly which references the closing of their EWR station, to add some context behind the "WN leaving EWR because of 3M8 groundings" theory (of course, A.net being A.net, that might be wishful thinking):

"Based on the extensive delays in returning the MAX to service, we expect that annual 2019 ASMs will now decrease in the 1 to 2 percent range, year-over-year, compared with our original 2019 plan to grow capacity nearly 5 percent, year-over-year. As such, we are taking necessary steps to mitigate damages and optimize our aircraft and resources. We will cease operations at Newark Liberty International Airport and consolidate our New York City presence at New York LaGuardia Airport, effective November 3, 2019. The financial results at Newark have been below expectations, despite the efforts of our excellent Team at Newark. I am grateful to our wonderful Newark Employees, who are a top priority, and will be given an opportunity to relocate to another station in our system, including LaGuardia Airport, where we are experiencing strong Customer demand. As part of this move, we will offer options and flexibility for Customers to recover planned travel from other area airports."

Feel free to interpret this however you see fit, but, based on reading the entire paragraph, the 3M8 groundings could be seen as a ripple effect on EWR, but I interpret Kelly's remarks as to say that EWR was underperforming financially. Now, if you want to claim the 3M8 groundings reference was "an excuse" to drop EWR, that's your choice. But, from the sounds of it, EWR has been underperforming for quite some time and the ongoing 3M8 situation might have been the last straw on top of EWR's high operating costs and chronic delays as mentioned upthread.

The closure affects 125 employees (all but one corporate sales position assigned to ground ops) and (as noted earlier in this thread) drops 20 flights to 10 cities, per WN's EWR fact sheet.

As to your original point, I agree with you that media outlets in general tend to demonstrate an ignorance towards properly interpreting facts and/or statements for various reasons (generating clicks, pushing agendas, etc.). CNBC's reporting on the WN/EWR closing was more of an attempt at the former, in my personal opinion.
2019: DAL, MCI, PHX, LAS, DFW, SAT, ORD, SLC, SEA, DTW, PHL, MIA, LAX; B73G (WN x3), B738 (WN, AA, DL), A20N (NK), MD83 (AA), B788 (AA x2), CS1 (DL), B739 (DL), B712 (DL), B752 (AA), B763 (AA), B77W (AA), B789 (AA)
Next: TBA
 
ctrabs0114
Posts: 926
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:09 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:16 am

SteveXC500 wrote:
I fear this is what WN will eventually do in MSP. They don't grow any here at all. What I do not know is how profitable MSP is for WN.


It doesn't help WN that they're at the "kiddie table" at MSP (Terminal 2/Humphrey) with SY while all of the other carriers are at Terminal 1/Lindbergh (though, allegedly, all non SkyTeam carriers will eventually shifted to Humphrey if/when the Metro Airports Commission follows through on their 2035 Master Plan to rebuild the airport).
2019: DAL, MCI, PHX, LAS, DFW, SAT, ORD, SLC, SEA, DTW, PHL, MIA, LAX; B73G (WN x3), B738 (WN, AA, DL), A20N (NK), MD83 (AA), B788 (AA x2), CS1 (DL), B739 (DL), B712 (DL), B752 (AA), B763 (AA), B77W (AA), B789 (AA)
Next: TBA
 
raddek
Posts: 327
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 7:09 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:35 am

SteveXC500 wrote:
I fear this is what WN will eventually do in MSP. They don't grow any here at all. What I do not know is how profitable MSP is for WN.


If they start to downsize MSP, NK will pick up the slack. More and more places that WN can't make money, is where airlines like NK,F9,G4 Will thrive.
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 4158
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 10:40 am

ctrabs0114 wrote:
AviationKnurd wrote:
flyiguy wrote:
News is reporting that EWR will be closing as part of the WN network due to delays with the MAX.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/25/southwe ... nding.html

FLY


Yes, they are closing EWR, however to say it’s because of the the MAX is patently false and an assumption based little knowledge and high-level analysis. Shame on CNBC

One needs not to look any further than the slew of financial and operational constraints WN’s EWR operation places on them for which the reasons are seemingly endless:

-The need to allocate more block time to EWR flights in order to account for EWR’s proneness to ATC delays,
-The rather high CASM, relatively speaking, associated w/EWR,
-Opportunity cost of placing aircraft on EWR routes when they could be placed elsewhere and achieve much better operational efficiencies and more optimally utilized to generate better revenues
-The fact that WN can serve NYC from LGA and to a lessor extent, ISP (I mean UA abandoned JFK for EWR, while at a different scale, for many of the same reasons WN is leaving EWR, and I’d say that move was a good one for UA)
-WN’s presence in NYC is a token one to serve their customers based in other cities like MCI, MKE, STL, etc, NOT those in NYC

But no, news outlets like CNBC see the “sexy” headline of how the “MAX grounding is now causing airlines to close airports”, despite its GROSS INACCURACIES and run with it. So sad


This is the entire paragraph from WN's own Investor Relations statement from Gary Kelly which references the closing of their EWR station, to add some context behind the "WN leaving EWR because of 3M8 groundings" theory (of course, A.net being A.net, that might be wishful thinking):

"Based on the extensive delays in returning the MAX to service, we expect that annual 2019 ASMs will now decrease in the 1 to 2 percent range, year-over-year, compared with our original 2019 plan to grow capacity nearly 5 percent, year-over-year. As such, we are taking necessary steps to mitigate damages and optimize our aircraft and resources. We will cease operations at Newark Liberty International Airport and consolidate our New York City presence at New York LaGuardia Airport, effective November 3, 2019. The financial results at Newark have been below expectations, despite the efforts of our excellent Team at Newark. I am grateful to our wonderful Newark Employees, who are a top priority, and will be given an opportunity to relocate to another station in our system, including LaGuardia Airport, where we are experiencing strong Customer demand. As part of this move, we will offer options and flexibility for Customers to recover planned travel from other area airports."

Feel free to interpret this however you see fit, but, based on reading the entire paragraph, the 3M8 groundings could be seen as a ripple effect on EWR, but I interpret Kelly's remarks as to say that EWR was underperforming financially. Now, if you want to claim the 3M8 groundings reference was "an excuse" to drop EWR, that's your choice. But, from the sounds of it, EWR has been underperforming for quite some time and the ongoing 3M8 situation might have been the last straw on top of EWR's high operating costs and chronic delays as mentioned upthread.

The closure affects 125 employees (all but one corporate sales position assigned to ground ops) and (as noted earlier in this thread) drops 20 flights to 10 cities, per WN's EWR fact sheet.

As to your original point, I agree with you that media outlets in general tend to demonstrate an ignorance towards properly interpreting facts and/or statements for various reasons (generating clicks, pushing agendas, etc.). CNBC's reporting on the WN/EWR closing was more of an attempt at the former, in my personal opinion.


https://skift.com/2019/07/25/did-an-agg ... ewark-hub/

"Newark, any student of Southwest will quickly understand our approach here and this is a tactical decision forced by the MAX groundings and the painful cut of 8% of our capacity" CEO Gary Kelly said on the airline’s earnings call.

“We need the airplanes,” Kelly said. “We can’t afford in this highly competitive environment, where our capacity overall is cut, to have underperforming assets.”



Directly from his mouth, directly saying that the MAX groundings caused this decision. No need to pretend like MAX groundings had nothing to do with this.
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
USAirALB
Posts: 2024
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:46 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:56 am

Slightly random, but is it usual for WN stations of that size to have 100+ employees? That seems like a lot.
RJ85, F70, E135, E140, E145, E70, E75, E90, CR2, CR7, CR9, 717, 732, 733, 734, 735, 73G, 738, 739, 744, 752, 753, 762, 772, 77E, 77W, 789, 319, 320, 321, 332, 333, 343, 359, 388
 
twaconnie
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 3:18 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 12:27 pm

It's also rumored that the perimeter rule my be relaxed or eliminated after the airport is redone.This will no doubt help WN expand it's presence at LGA.
 
dcaviation
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2011 12:26 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 1:31 pm

alggag wrote:
I would have expected to see IAD or ISP close first.


Then you haven't flown from either stations. I'm yet to fly on WN flight out of IAD to West destinations that had 90% LF or less.
WN at ISP is the main airline. Virtually no competition. Also, I haven't flown to ISP on WN flight with LF under 80%. May - October BWI - ISP round trip is hard to find for under $500.
ISP and IAD are not going anywhere anytime soon.
 
greenair727
Posts: 1299
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 6:27 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 1:42 pm

STT757 wrote:
The LGA and DCA slots UA is using for flights to CLE which is no longer a hub and is relegated to 50 seat ERJ-145s.



You saying UA could/will upgauge these flights once they get the 737s from WN?
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 4158
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 2:20 pm

twaconnie wrote:
It's also rumored that the perimeter rule my be relaxed or eliminated after the airport is redone.This will no doubt help WN expand it's presence at LGA.


That's an ENORMOUS if

dcaviation wrote:
alggag wrote:
I would have expected to see IAD or ISP close first.


Then you haven't flown from either stations. I'm yet to fly on WN flight out of IAD to West destinations that had 90% LF or less.
WN at ISP is the main airline. Virtually no competition. Also, I haven't flown to ISP on WN flight with LF under 80%. May - October BWI - ISP round trip is hard to find for under $500.
ISP and IAD are not going anywhere anytime soon.


ISP isn't the star performer like people on here are making it out to be.

1. ISP's flights are heavily ISP point-of-sale, so cutting ISP will hardly hurt WN's network as a hole.
2. Load factors aren't stellar
Image
3. Fares aren't stellar (2018 Q2 --> 2019 Q1)
Image
Image
Status for 2019/2020: AAdvantage Platinum, Delta Gold, Southwest A-List
 
capitalflyer
Posts: 555
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:43 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 2:55 pm

Lot's of intriguing theories about what might be going on with WN vis a vis UA. UA flies 5x DCA-CLE. If UA wanted to cut CLE all together from DCA, that would be 5 slot pairs available for WN. 5x to BOS would be a nice opening salvo to join the BOS shuttle skirmish...

Or they could add IND, DTW, SDF, CLT (look out AA!), MSP (chall-ange DL!), PIT, or CLE.

Or more likely, none of this happens. UA gets some relief from the MAX debacle, WN goes on making money after prudent pruning move, and we are left to wonder what might have been. But saying nothing is going on is no fun.
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1538
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:11 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
twaconnie wrote:
It's also rumored that the perimeter rule my be relaxed or eliminated after the airport is redone.This will no doubt help WN expand it's presence at LGA.


That's an ENORMOUS if

dcaviation wrote:
alggag wrote:
I would have expected to see IAD or ISP close first.


Then you haven't flown from either stations. I'm yet to fly on WN flight out of IAD to West destinations that had 90% LF or less.
WN at ISP is the main airline. Virtually no competition. Also, I haven't flown to ISP on WN flight with LF under 80%. May - October BWI - ISP round trip is hard to find for under $500.
ISP and IAD are not going anywhere anytime soon.


ISP isn't the star performer like people on here are making it out to be.

1. ISP's flights are heavily ISP point-of-sale, so cutting ISP will hardly hurt WN's network as a hole.
2. Load factors aren't stellar
Image
3. Fares aren't stellar (2018 Q2 --> 2019 Q1)
Image
Image

How does that compare to a similar WN station or something like B6 at JFK?
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
blockski
Posts: 550
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:13 pm

capitalflyer wrote:
Lot's of intriguing theories about what might be going on with WN vis a vis UA. UA flies 5x DCA-CLE. If UA wanted to cut CLE all together from DCA, that would be 5 slot pairs available for WN. 5x to BOS would be a nice opening salvo to join the BOS shuttle skirmish...

Or they could add IND, DTW, SDF, CLT (look out AA!), MSP (chall-ange DL!), PIT, or CLE.

Or more likely, none of this happens. UA gets some relief from the MAX debacle, WN goes on making money after prudent pruning move, and we are left to wonder what might have been. But saying nothing is going on is no fun.


Why would Southwest have any DCA slots 'available' to them if United drops DCA-CLE? United controls those slots, they can do with them what they choose. If United drops DCA-CLE, they certainly aren't going to give their valuable DCA slots to a competitor.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 5475
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:19 pm

twaconnie wrote:
It's also rumored that the perimeter rule my be relaxed or eliminated after the airport is redone.This will no doubt help WN expand it's presence at LGA.



Dont expect it to happen. It imperils JFK and it imperils B6, which employs 1000 people at its HQ in Queens.

WN, on the other hand, has made virtually zero investment in NYC. Their Concourse B at LGA was the most disgusting gate area I have ever been in.

The perimeter rule is purely a political decision from the early 1980. The politics havent changed
 
tphuang
Posts: 3246
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:33 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
twaconnie wrote:
It's also rumored that the perimeter rule my be relaxed or eliminated after the airport is redone.This will no doubt help WN expand it's presence at LGA.


That's an ENORMOUS if

dcaviation wrote:
alggag wrote:
I would have expected to see IAD or ISP close first.


Then you haven't flown from either stations. I'm yet to fly on WN flight out of IAD to West destinations that had 90% LF or less.
WN at ISP is the main airline. Virtually no competition. Also, I haven't flown to ISP on WN flight with LF under 80%. May - October BWI - ISP round trip is hard to find for under $500.
ISP and IAD are not going anywhere anytime soon.


ISP isn't the star performer like people on here are making it out to be.

1. ISP's flights are heavily ISP point-of-sale, so cutting ISP will hardly hurt WN's network as a hole.
2. Load factors aren't stellar
Image
3. Fares aren't stellar (2018 Q2 --> 2019 Q1)
Image
Image

Exactly. As I said, isp routes are losing money. Bwi is mostly connection and the Florida routes are underperforming so much that they cut FLL for the summer.

I wouldn't be surprised to see them cut it down to just bwi.
 
WN732
Posts: 589
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:49 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:57 pm

jfklganyc wrote:
twaconnie wrote:
It's also rumored that the perimeter rule my be relaxed or eliminated after the airport is redone.This will no doubt help WN expand it's presence at LGA.



Dont expect it to happen. It imperils JFK and it imperils B6, which employs 1000 people at its HQ in Queens.

WN, on the other hand, has made virtually zero investment in NYC. Their Concourse B at LGA was the most disgusting gate area I have ever been in.

The perimeter rule is purely a political decision from the early 1980. The politics havent changed


Well you need to look at the owners of LGA rather than the tenant which has no control over the facilities. Besides, the new gates they have are fantastic.
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 4:18 pm

STT757 wrote:
enilria wrote:
Polot wrote:
The Max is being used as a scapegoat to lessen the blow and give hope that they will come back. If that plane was truly needed to keep the station open then EWR was barely hanging on to begin with. Southwest, like any airline, would shuffle to keep profitable routes/stations operating as robustly as possible.

Exactly. Ridiculous spin to blame the MAX. Also, are they not selling their gates there? If they are just abandoning them in return for nothing they are not that savvy. EWR is borderline slot restricted. Their position there has value.

Apart from all of that, I can’t believe they would just give up there. True, they have tried numerous routes, but to 50% give up on NYC is shocking.


They’re also giving up the ability to fly outer perimeter flights from NY like PHX, LAS, OAK etc..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

United is almost finished turning EWR into a fortress hub. WN has always had issues competing in the fortresses, and given WN’s much higher employee costs, recent NJ laws have no doubt increased that, as well. Without the scale the Max offered, I can see a good reason to leave.
 
User avatar
knope2001
Posts: 2937
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:54 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 4:28 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
So per WN's EWR Nov schedule for 2019 as of yesterday:
5x EWR-MDW
3x EWR-BNA
2x EWR-DEN
2x EWR-BWI
2x EWR-STL
2x EWR-AUS
1x EWR-OAK
1x EWR-SAN
1x EWR-PHX

Cuts off their ability to serve NYC from OAK, SAN, PHX


For what it's worth this nets to approximately 11 lines of flying. Maybe more like 12 in the real world when you consider sometimes flights need to run at times not 100% optimal for absolute maximum aircraft utilization.

So on the one hand it comes nowhere near replacing the initial MAX which were grounded, not to mention whatever new deliveries they may have figured into each new schedule release. But on the flipside if you imagine them wrestling with the November/December schedule and sweating where to cut to handle the MAX grounding, now they just got a dozen or so planes back. Just a matter of perspective.

As for is Newark being cut because of the MAX grounding it's both of the things opposing voices assert:

--Newark appears to have been a consistently weak performer for Southwest. The performance justifies / supports the cut.

--Were the MAX not grounded Newark would not be closing. They would continue to look for ways to improve Newark, decided the strategic importance of EWR was worth enduring the weakness, etc.

So in a way it's really both. Without the weak performance EWR wouldn't be getting this blow, but without the MAX grounding there's be no need for anybody to get this sort of blow. So look at the coin from either sided but it's the same coin.
 
Scarebus34
Posts: 381
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:54 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 4:30 pm

barney captain wrote:
EWR closing is directly related to the Hawaii expansion. Everything out of EWR is 800 longhauls - the shortest flight is to MDW with most being transcons. Not the best use of ETOPS 800's to be sure. Closing EWR will allow the ETOPs ready 800's to transition over to the ETOPS mx program for use to and in HI. Currently we're only using about half of our 29 ETOPS 800's for Hawaii. That's about to change.

This makes no sense. They don’t need to only send 800s into EWR much less ETOPS certified ones.
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 4:33 pm

SurfandSnow wrote:
I would be shocked, if not for a rumor thread on here (quite some time ago IIRC) that claimed WN was so fed up with EWR’s extremely high costs and chronic delays that the entire station may close. If WN didn’t see reason to stomach the high costs of MIA, EWR - which IINM has the highest facility costs of any airport in the entire United States - must have really been a challenge. Will be interesting to see if other carriers like AS, B6, F9, G4 and/or NK look to fill the void..

Let’s not forget that WN also has the highest personnel costs in the industry, as well. When combining all factors, such as facilities, IROP costs, some of the inane things the NJ government has done recently, like taxes, I can see them throwing in the towel against a United determined to turn EWR into NYC’s only real fortress, no matter the cost.
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 9626
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 4:46 pm

FlyingElvii wrote:
STT757 wrote:
enilria wrote:
Exactly. Ridiculous spin to blame the MAX. Also, are they not selling their gates there? If they are just abandoning them in return for nothing they are not that savvy. EWR is borderline slot restricted. Their position there has value.

Apart from all of that, I can’t believe they would just give up there. True, they have tried numerous routes, but to 50% give up on NYC is shocking.


They’re also giving up the ability to fly outer perimeter flights from NY like PHX, LAS, OAK etc..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

United is almost finished turning EWR into a fortress hub. WN has always had issues competing in the fortresses, and given WN’s much higher employee costs, recent NJ laws have no doubt increased that, as well. Without the scale the Max offered, I can see a good reason to leave.

It's been a fortress hub for a long time. This is another step toward a near total monopoly. Shame on the DOJ/DOT for considering NYC as a unit competitively. It is just an excuse to allow the death of competition.
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 4:46 pm

2travel2know2 wrote:
Does it mean the return of UA's EWR-HOU?
Lets face it, most likely lots of Mileage Plus Houstonians in and south of the loop would love to be able to fly out of HOU to NYC early morning without the need to drive all the way to IAH, same for the late evening HOU arrival near their homes. And for the NYC side, early morning EWR-HOU means earlier arrival if going to the loop or south Houston, early evening HOU-EWR = no need to endure that much traffic getting to IAH at those times when heading to NYC.

Easy to see them putting a 175 on that run, if they have the spare capacity, especially if they have crew bases on both ends, to account for the inevitable program delays. The 550’s coming could free up a couple of turns, easily.
 
User avatar
msp747
Posts: 418
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 6:42 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 4:49 pm

ctrabs0114 wrote:
SteveXC500 wrote:
I fear this is what WN will eventually do in MSP. They don't grow any here at all. What I do not know is how profitable MSP is for WN.


It doesn't help WN that they're at the "kiddie table" at MSP (Terminal 2/Humphrey) with SY while all of the other carriers are at Terminal 1/Lindbergh (though, allegedly, all non SkyTeam carriers will eventually shifted to Humphrey if/when the Metro Airports Commission follows through on their 2035 Master Plan to rebuild the airport).


Um... what? I know plenty of people in the Twin Cities that prefer using T2 (Humphrey) over T1. Why is it the "kiddie table" and Lindbergh so much better? Unless you are making connections, T2 is so much easier to deal with. What is WN missing out on by being where they are?
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 4:50 pm

stl07 wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
bob75013 wrote:
In sp,

Correct. As evidenced by:

""The financial results at Newark have been below expectations, despite the efforts of our excellent Team at Newark," the statement from CEO and Chairman of the Board Gary Kelly said."

well? What did he expect? For WN to go there and everybody would just DROP who they were flying and flock to WN? n some cities? WN is Not a big deal and they'll have to earn their "Stripes" like everybody Else. Maybe they could have started at LGA or Westchester county. since they like off brand airports so much.

Exactly, WN has been behaving like they are the old WN, aka F9 now. Everyone drops and runs to F9 nowadays because their flights are like 60 bucks, WN not so much. WN needs to understand and embrace that they are a full-service carrier and have to earn trust and build up their brand as they are on the same price level as AA, DL, and United and not the latest ULCC to fly to EWR

In many areas, WN now has the highest costs in the US industry. This is going to take a toll. The promised Max efficiencies were supposed to cover for a lot of that.
 
Scarebus34
Posts: 381
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:54 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 5:45 pm

FlyingElvii wrote:
2travel2know2 wrote:
Does it mean the return of UA's EWR-HOU?
Lets face it, most likely lots of Mileage Plus Houstonians in and south of the loop would love to be able to fly out of HOU to NYC early morning without the need to drive all the way to IAH, same for the late evening HOU arrival near their homes. And for the NYC side, early morning EWR-HOU means earlier arrival if going to the loop or south Houston, early evening HOU-EWR = no need to endure that much traffic getting to IAH at those times when heading to NYC.

Easy to see them putting a 175 on that run, if they have the spare capacity, especially if they have crew bases on both ends, to account for the inevitable program delays. The 550’s coming could free up a couple of turns, easily.

Well no, there is no crew base at HOU... IAH is a single base that doesn’t encompass HOU. Could that change? Sure, but unlikely.
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:03 pm

Scarebus34 wrote:
FlyingElvii wrote:
2travel2know2 wrote:
Does it mean the return of UA's EWR-HOU?
Lets face it, most likely lots of Mileage Plus Houstonians in and south of the loop would love to be able to fly out of HOU to NYC early morning without the need to drive all the way to IAH, same for the late evening HOU arrival near their homes. And for the NYC side, early morning EWR-HOU means earlier arrival if going to the loop or south Houston, early evening HOU-EWR = no need to endure that much traffic getting to IAH at those times when heading to NYC.

Easy to see them putting a 175 on that run, if they have the spare capacity, especially if they have crew bases on both ends, to account for the inevitable program delays. The 550’s coming could free up a couple of turns, easily.

Well no, there is no crew base at HOU... IAH is a single base that doesn’t encompass HOU. Could that change? Sure, but unlikely.

Staffing from IAH is just a short limo ride away.
 
jplatts
Posts: 2786
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:16 pm

blockski wrote:
Why would Southwest have any DCA slots 'available' to them if United drops DCA-CLE? United controls those slots, they can do with them what they choose. If United drops DCA-CLE, they certainly aren't going to give their valuable DCA slots to a competitor.


There are airlines other than WN such as DL or F9 who might seek to acquire the slots that UA currently uses on DCA-CLE if UA is seeking to give up slots at DCA to a competitor.

DL would be interested in any additional DCA slots that become available as DL has had to reduce frequencies on some of its existing nonstop routes out of DCA in order to accommodate DCA-BOS nonstop service.

While F9 currently only serves DEN nonstop from DCA, there are some destinations within the DCA perimeter such as ATL, ORD, CVG, MIA, or MCO that F9 could serve nonstop from DCA if F9 can acquire extra slots at DCA.

Out of DCA, UA currently has 15 daily nonstops to ORD (mainline + United Express), 8 daily nonstops to IAH (mainline + United Express), 8 daily nonstops to EWR (United Express), 5 daily nonstops to CLE (United Express), 1 daily nonstop to DEN (mainline), and 1 daily nonstop to SFO (mainline).

UA already has enough slots to cover nonstop service to its within-DCA perimeter hubs (ORD, IAH, and EWR) out of DCA, even if UA decides to give up slots that it currently uses on the DCA-CLE nonstop route. UA is also able to upgauge its DCA-ORD, DCA-IAH, and DCA-EWR nonstop flights to larger aircraft, even if UA did decide to give up slots that it currently uses on DCA-CLE. There are also some UA FF's in the DC market (including some who are closer to DCA) who are willing to fly out of IAD to within-DCA perimeter destinations.

I agree that UA would likely hold onto the slots that it currently uses on CLE-DCA nonstop service if UA drops CLE-DCA nonstop service, even though UA would have enough slots at DCA if UA decides to give up the slots that it currently uses on CLE-DCA nonstop service.
 
barney captain
Posts: 2225
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:18 pm

Scarebus34 wrote:
barney captain wrote:
EWR closing is directly related to the Hawaii expansion. Everything out of EWR is 800 longhauls - the shortest flight is to MDW with most being transcons. Not the best use of ETOPS 800's to be sure. Closing EWR will allow the ETOPs ready 800's to transition over to the ETOPS mx program for use to and in HI. Currently we're only using about half of our 29 ETOPS 800's for Hawaii. That's about to change.

This makes no sense. They don’t need to only send 800s into EWR much less ETOPS certified ones.


Of course they weren't all etops aircraft in EWR, but eliminating those 800 depended lines allows them to dedicate more 800's to HI. They will shift more 800's under the etops mx program.
Southeast Of Disorder
 
bob75013
Posts: 883
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:21 pm

FlyingElvii wrote:
stl07 wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
well? What did he expect? For WN to go there and everybody would just DROP who they were flying and flock to WN? n some cities? WN is Not a big deal and they'll have to earn their "Stripes" like everybody Else. Maybe they could have started at LGA or Westchester county. since they like off brand airports so much.

Exactly, WN has been behaving like they are the old WN, aka F9 now. Everyone drops and runs to F9 nowadays because their flights are like 60 bucks, WN not so much. WN needs to understand and embrace that they are a full-service carrier and have to earn trust and build up their brand as they are on the same price level as AA, DL, and United and not the latest ULCC to fly to EWR

In many areas, WN now has the highest costs in the US industry. This is going to take a toll. The promised Max efficiencies were supposed to cover for a lot of that.



Well, it's not yet doing so. Looks like WN is doing better than other direct competitiors.

Pre-Tax Income Non-GAAP adjusted excluding special items, and Margin:

WN: 968 (16.4%)
DL: 1,997 (16.0%)
AS: 362 (15.8%)
UA: 1,416 (12.4%)
B6: 238 (11.3%)
AA: 1,072 (9.0%)
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7325
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:37 pm

knope2001 wrote:
For what it's worth this nets to approximately 11 lines of flying. Maybe more like 12 in the real world when you consider sometimes flights need to run at times not 100% optimal for absolute maximum aircraft utilization.

So on the one hand it comes nowhere near replacing the initial MAX which were grounded, not to mention whatever new deliveries they may have figured into each new schedule release. But on the flipside if you imagine them wrestling with the November/December schedule and sweating where to cut to handle the MAX grounding, now they just got a dozen or so planes back. Just a matter of perspective.

As for is Newark being cut because of the MAX grounding it's both of the things opposing voices assert:

--Newark appears to have been a consistently weak performer for Southwest. The performance justifies / supports the cut.

--Were the MAX not grounded Newark would not be closing. They would continue to look for ways to improve Newark, decided the strategic importance of EWR was worth enduring the weakness, etc.

So in a way it's really both. Without the weak performance EWR wouldn't be getting this blow, but without the MAX grounding there's be no need for anybody to get this sort of blow. So look at the coin from either sided but it's the same coin.

That is a very good point. What makes it so remarkable is that in most cases when a station is not meeting expectations, they usually tweak, adjust, or pare down routes. Its very rare to see a 20 flight/day operation get cut to nothing literally overnight. That there is the MAX factor and the need to get airplanes to fund flying in better performing markets.

That is 11-12 planes that can now cover anywhere between 40-60 flights per day, depending on where they are deployed/stage lengths/ability to optimize utilization.
 
blockski
Posts: 550
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:49 pm

jplatts wrote:
blockski wrote:
Why would Southwest have any DCA slots 'available' to them if United drops DCA-CLE? United controls those slots, they can do with them what they choose. If United drops DCA-CLE, they certainly aren't going to give their valuable DCA slots to a competitor.


There are airlines other than WN such as DL or F9 who might seek to acquire the slots that UA currently uses on DCA-CLE if UA is seeking to give up slots at DCA to a competitor.

DL would be interested in any additional DCA slots that become available as DL has had to reduce frequencies on some of its existing nonstop routes out of DCA in order to accommodate DCA-BOS nonstop service.

While F9 currently only serves DEN nonstop from DCA, there are some destinations within the DCA perimeter such as ATL, ORD, CVG, MIA, or MCO that F9 could serve nonstop from DCA if F9 can acquire extra slots at DCA.

Out of DCA, UA currently has 15 daily nonstops to ORD (mainline + United Express), 8 daily nonstops to IAH (mainline + United Express), 8 daily nonstops to EWR (United Express), 5 daily nonstops to CLE (United Express), 1 daily nonstop to DEN (mainline), and 1 daily nonstop to SFO (mainline).

UA already has enough slots to cover nonstop service to its within-DCA perimeter hubs (ORD, IAH, and EWR) out of DCA, even if UA decides to give up slots that it currently uses on the DCA-CLE nonstop route. UA is also able to upgauge its DCA-ORD, DCA-IAH, and DCA-EWR nonstop flights to larger aircraft, even if UA did decide to give up slots that it currently uses on DCA-CLE. There are also some UA FF's in the DC market (including some who are closer to DCA) who are willing to fly out of IAD to within-DCA perimeter destinations.

I agree that UA would likely hold onto the slots that it currently uses on CLE-DCA nonstop service if UA drops CLE-DCA nonstop service, even though UA would have enough slots at DCA if UA decides to give up the slots that it currently uses on CLE-DCA nonstop service.


UA is not looking to give up those DCA slots.
 
tphuang
Posts: 3246
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:49 pm

bob75013 wrote:
FlyingElvii wrote:
stl07 wrote:
Exactly, WN has been behaving like they are the old WN, aka F9 now. Everyone drops and runs to F9 nowadays because their flights are like 60 bucks, WN not so much. WN needs to understand and embrace that they are a full-service carrier and have to earn trust and build up their brand as they are on the same price level as AA, DL, and United and not the latest ULCC to fly to EWR

In many areas, WN now has the highest costs in the US industry. This is going to take a toll. The promised Max efficiencies were supposed to cover for a lot of that.



Well, it's not yet doing so. Looks like WN is doing better than other direct competitiors.

Pre-Tax Income Non-GAAP adjusted excluding special items, and Margin:

WN: 968 (16.4%)
DL: 1,997 (16.0%)
AS: 362 (15.8%)
UA: 1,416 (12.4%)
B6: 238 (11.3%)
AA: 1,072 (9.0%)


yep, it's amazing people want to take shot at WN, yet they continue to do the best in the country even with something like MAX hampering their growth. And they don't have the same type of fortress hubs that legacies have. And they haven't been forced to join the Basic Economy like everyone else.
 
KlimaBXsst
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:14 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:50 pm

Spirit Airlines maybe.
Aesthetically the A 340 got it right!
 
Scarebus34
Posts: 381
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:54 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:55 pm

barney captain wrote:
Scarebus34 wrote:
barney captain wrote:
EWR closing is directly related to the Hawaii expansion. Everything out of EWR is 800 longhauls - the shortest flight is to MDW with most being transcons. Not the best use of ETOPS 800's to be sure. Closing EWR will allow the ETOPs ready 800's to transition over to the ETOPS mx program for use to and in HI. Currently we're only using about half of our 29 ETOPS 800's for Hawaii. That's about to change.

This makes no sense. They don’t need to only send 800s into EWR much less ETOPS certified ones.


Of course they weren't all etops aircraft in EWR, but eliminating those 800 depended lines allows them to dedicate more 800's to HI. They will shift more 800's under the etops mx program.

But that’s my point. They didn’t have to fly 800s in there, the 700 would be just fine. So this is really irrelevant in my opinion.
 
Scarebus34
Posts: 381
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:54 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:55 pm

FlyingElvii wrote:
Scarebus34 wrote:
FlyingElvii wrote:
Easy to see them putting a 175 on that run, if they have the spare capacity, especially if they have crew bases on both ends, to account for the inevitable program delays. The 550’s coming could free up a couple of turns, easily.

Well no, there is no crew base at HOU... IAH is a single base that doesn’t encompass HOU. Could that change? Sure, but unlikely.

Staffing from IAH is just a short limo ride away.

But it’s not a co-base, you can’t just make it one overnight.
 
KlimaBXsst
Posts: 373
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:14 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:56 pm

Or is Frontier Airlines less of a hassle for Southwest out LGA?
Aesthetically the A 340 got it right!
 
Aliqiout
Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 6:10 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:01 pm

AviationKnurd wrote:
stl07 wrote:



WN has to "earn trust and build up their brand as they are on the same price level as AA, DL, and United" ...wellllllll, no, not really. Have a look at airfare for TOMORROW, or heck, even next week, from say any large AA, DL, or UA hub on a route that WN also serves and let me know what you find!

Aviation Knurd

Tomorrow, a random check.
DEN-ABQ WN: $271, UA:$262, F9: $44
LAX-SFO: WN,AS,DL,UA all $184
CHI-BNA: WN,AA,UA all $355
ATL-FLL: DL: $152, WN $282
 
United1
Posts: 3870
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:20 pm

September11 wrote:
I thought EWR is building Terminal One (replacing Terminal A) for WN


Terminal One will house quite a number of airlines...UA was/is expected to be the largest tenant.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
WN732
Posts: 589
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:49 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:25 pm

Aliqiout wrote:
AviationKnurd wrote:
stl07 wrote:



WN has to "earn trust and build up their brand as they are on the same price level as AA, DL, and United" ...wellllllll, no, not really. Have a look at airfare for TOMORROW, or heck, even next week, from say any large AA, DL, or UA hub on a route that WN also serves and let me know what you find!

Aviation Knurd

Tomorrow, a random check.
DEN-ABQ WN: $271, UA:$262, F9: $44
LAX-SFO: WN,AS,DL,UA all $184
CHI-BNA: WN,AA,UA all $355
ATL-FLL: DL: $152, WN $282


First of all, it's tomorrow, on a very limited showing of routes. You're comparing Basic Economy fares, and not including the cost of luggage.
 
barney captain
Posts: 2225
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:42 pm

Scarebus34 wrote:
barney captain wrote:
Scarebus34 wrote:
This makes no sense. They don’t need to only send 800s into EWR much less ETOPS certified ones.


Of course they weren't all etops aircraft in EWR, but eliminating those 800 depended lines allows them to dedicate more 800's to HI. They will shift more 800's under the etops mx program.

But that’s my point. They didn’t have to fly 800s in there, the 700 would be just fine. So this is really irrelevant in my opinion.



Closing EWR frees up aircraft for use in other places. Lets say EWR was 100% 700's (it wasn't), those aircraft could replace (etops) 800's elsewhere in the system, allowing those aircraft to be used for the announced Hawaii expansion. Obviously the exact aircraft flying in and out EWR dont have to be etops 800's, you have to think in the macro.
Southeast Of Disorder
 
jplatts
Posts: 2786
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:43 pm

Aliqiout wrote:
Tomorrow, a random check.
ATL-FLL: DL: $152, WN $282


In addition to WN ATL-FLL, DL's ATL-FLL nonstop service is also in competition with B6 ATL-FLL, NK ATL-FLL, AA ATL-MIA, and F9 ATL-MIA nonstop service.
 
Aliqiout
Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 6:10 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:09 pm

WN732 wrote:
Aliqiout wrote:
AviationKnurd wrote:

Tomorrow, a random check.
DEN-ABQ WN: $271, UA:$262, F9: $44
LAX-SFO: WN,AS,DL,UA all $184
CHI-BNA: WN,AA,UA all $355
ATL-FLL: DL: $152, WN $282


First of all, it's tomorrow, on a very limited showing of routes. You're comparing Basic Economy fares, and not including the cost of luggage.

Tomorrow is exactly what he asked for.

What does luggage have to do with it?

I suppose it is not fair to use UA basic economy (no carry on), but the comparison shows that WN is in the same ball park as the legacies, even for last minute fares. Just from personal experience WN is even less competitive for tickets bought before the 14-21 day restrictions on many legacy fares kick in.
 
Aliqiout
Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 6:10 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:14 pm

jplatts wrote:
Aliqiout wrote:
Tomorrow, a random check.
ATL-FLL: DL: $152, WN $282


In addition to WN ATL-FLL, DL's ATL-FLL nonstop service is also in competition with B6 ATL-FLL, NK ATL-FLL, AA ATL-MIA, and F9 ATL-MIA nonstop service.

I am not sure how this is relevant, but NK is $160, B6 is $195, and AA is $234, all less than WN, even with a legacy bag fee.
 
ctrabs0114
Posts: 926
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:09 am

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:41 pm

msp747 wrote:
ctrabs0114 wrote:
SteveXC500 wrote:
I fear this is what WN will eventually do in MSP. They don't grow any here at all. What I do not know is how profitable MSP is for WN.


It doesn't help WN that they're at the "kiddie table" at MSP (Terminal 2/Humphrey) with SY while all of the other carriers are at Terminal 1/Lindbergh (though, allegedly, all non SkyTeam carriers will eventually shifted to Humphrey if/when the Metro Airports Commission follows through on their 2035 Master Plan to rebuild the airport).


Um... what? I know plenty of people in the Twin Cities that prefer using T2 (Humphrey) over T1. Why is it the "kiddie table" and Lindbergh so much better? Unless you are making connections, T2 is so much easier to deal with. What is WN missing out on by being where they are?


It just feels like two separate airports at MSP from my past experience flying into Humphrey Terminal. It’s kinda like DTW and the difference between McNamara and North terminals.
2019: DAL, MCI, PHX, LAS, DFW, SAT, ORD, SLC, SEA, DTW, PHL, MIA, LAX; B73G (WN x3), B738 (WN, AA, DL), A20N (NK), MD83 (AA), B788 (AA x2), CS1 (DL), B739 (DL), B712 (DL), B752 (AA), B763 (AA), B77W (AA), B789 (AA)
Next: TBA
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 10:28 pm

Scarebus34 wrote:
FlyingElvii wrote:
Scarebus34 wrote:
Well no, there is no crew base at HOU... IAH is a single base that doesn’t encompass HOU. Could that change? Sure, but unlikely.

Staffing from IAH is just a short limo ride away.

But it’s not a co-base, you can’t just make it one overnight.

Staff it from EWR, cover the inevitable IROPs with Hots and Reserves from IAH. Very easy to do, and not a big deal. Crewing it is easy, it’s freeing up a 175 to do it under current scope that’s hard. The coming 550’s may free up a line or two.
 
freakyrat
Posts: 1742
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 1:04 pm

Re: WN to close EWR

Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:28 pm

n471wn wrote:
freakyrat wrote:
sxf24 wrote:

Where has it been proven that the 19 73Gs UA is taking are coming from WN?


The posters are speculating. The rumor is those 19 planes are actually coming from China Sou

I am the poster who broke the news and I am not speculating. The 19 planes are coming from WN.


They are former Airtran birds that are being returned to the lessor by WN.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos