Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 40
 
Iggy500
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Sun Feb 09, 2020 5:30 pm

Dieuwer wrote:
Iggy500 wrote:
From OAG This Week:

enilria wrote:
B6 schedule extension. Note that partial months make it hard to interpret.
B6 ABQ-JFK SEP 0.3>1.0[0.8] OCT 0>0.8[0.9]
B6 ACK-BOS SEP 0.4>1.3[0.8]
B6 ACK-DCA SEP 0.1>0.4[0.3] OCT 0>0.3[0.1]
B6 ACK-HPN SEP 0.2>0.6[0.7]
B6 ACK-JFK SEP 1.1>3[2] OCT 0>0.7[0.8]
B6 ALB-FLL SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 ALB-MCO SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 ATL-BOS SEP 1.3>4[4] OCT 0>3[4]
B6 ATL-FLL SEP 0.5>2[2] OCT 0>1.5[2]
B6 ATL-JFK SEP 0.5>1.9[2] OCT 0>1.4[2]
B6 ATL-MCO SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 AUA-BOS SEP 0.4>1.6[1.4] OCT 0>1.3[1.6]
B6 AUA-FLL SEP 0.1>0.6[1.0] OCT 0>0.4[1.0]
B6 AUA-JFK JUL 2>3[2] AUG 2>3[2] SEP 0.6>1.6[1.7] OCT 0>1.0[1.9]
B6 AUS-BOS SEP 0.8>3[1.7] OCT 0>2[1.8]
B6 AUS-FLL SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 AUS-JFK SEP 0.5>2[1.9] OCT 0>2[1.8]
B6 AUS-LGB SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 AUS-MCO SEP 0.2>0.9[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 BDA-BOS SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.7[1.0]
B6 BDA-JFK SEP 0.5>1.3[2] OCT 0>0.7[1.3]
B6 BDL-FLL SEP 0.5>1.7[1.6] OCT 0>1.2[1.9]
B6 BDL-PBI SEP 0.3>1.0[1.4] OCT 0>0.8[1.4]
B6 BDL-RSW SEP 0>0.7[0.9] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 BDL-SJU SEP 0.8>1.9[1.1] OCT 0>1.3[1.0]
B6 BDL-TPA SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 BGI-JFK SEP 0.8>2.0[1.7] OCT 0>1.2[1.7]
B6 BNA-BOS SEP 0.5>2[3] OCT 0>2[3]
B6 BNA-FLL SEP 0.3>1.0[1.5] OCT 0>0.8[1.5]
B6 BNA-JFK SEP 0.5>2[0] OCT 0>1.5[0]
B6 BOG-FLL SEP 0.5>1.3[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 BOS-BUF SEP 0.8>3[4] OCT 0>2[4]
B6 BOS-BUR SEP 0.3>1.0[0.6] OCT 0>0.8[0.7]
B6 BOS-BWI SEP 1.3>5[5] OCT 0>4[5]
B6 BOS-CHS SEP 0.6>2[3] OCT 0>1.6[2]
B6 BOS-DCA SEP 4>16[13] OCT 0>12[13]
B6 BOS-DEN SEP 0.8>3[1.9] OCT 0>2[1.8]
B6 BOS-DFW SEP 0.5>3[1.9] OCT 0>2[1.8]
B6 BOS-EWR SEP 1.8>6[6] OCT 0>5[6]
B6 BOS-FLL SEP 1.1>5[5] OCT 0>4[6]
B6 BOS-IAH SEP 0.3>1.0[0] OCT 0>0.8[0.2]
B6 BOS-JAX SEP 0.5>1.9[3] OCT 0>1.4[3]
B6 BOS-JFK MAY 5>6[6] SEP 1.6>6[6] OCT 0>5[6]
B6 BOS-LAS SEP 1.1>4[4] OCT 0>3[4]
B6 BOS-LGA SEP 2>9[5] OCT 0>7[5]
B6 BOS-LGB SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 BOS-MBJ SEP 0.1>0.3[0.1] OCT 0>0.2[0.1]
B6 BOS-MCO SEP 1.6>6[6] OCT 0>6[7]
B6 BOS-MSP SEP 0.8>3[3] OCT 0>2[3]
B6 BOS-MSY SEP 0.3>1.7[1.9] OCT 0>1.7[2.0]
B6 BOS-ORD SEP 1.6>5[5] OCT 0>3[5]
B6 BOS-PAP SEP 0.2>0.4[0.3]
B6 BOS-PBI SEP 1.1>4[3] OCT 0>3[4]
B6 BOS-PDX SEP 0.5>1.3[1.1] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 BOS-PHL SEP 2>7[7] OCT 0>6[7]
B6 BOS-PHX SEP 0.5>1.9[1.0] OCT 0>1.4[1.0]
B6 BOS-PIT SEP 1.2>5[6] OCT 0>4[6]
B6 BOS-RDU SEP 1.6>6[6] OCT 0>4[6]
B6 BOS-RIC SEP 1.0>4[4] OCT 0>3[4]
B6 BOS-ROC SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 BOS-RSW SEP 0.7>3[3] OCT 0>2[3]
B6 BOS-SAV SEP 0.3>1.5[1.6] OCT 0>1.4[1.6]
B6 BOS-SDQ SEP 0.8>1.8[2] OCT 0>0.8[1.5]
B6 BOS-SEA SEP 0.8>3[1.9] OCT 0>1.5[1.9]
B6 BOS-SFO SEP 1.6>6[5] OCT 0>5[6]
B6 BOS-SJC SEP 0.5>1.2[0.8] OCT 0>0.8[0.7]
B6 BOS-SJU MAY 4>3.0[3.0] SEP 1.1>2.5[2.1] OCT 0>2.1[2.2]
B6 BOS-SMF SEP 0.3>0.7[0.1] OCT 0>0.5[0]
B6 BOS-SRQ SEP 0>0.7[0.9] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 BOS-STI SEP 0.5>1.3[1.2] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 BOS-SYR SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 BOS-TPA MAY 4>3[4] SEP 0.8>3[4] OCT 0>2[4]
B6 BQN-FLL SEP 0.3>0.7[0.6] OCT 0>0.5[0.6]
B6 BQN-JFK SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 BQN-MCO SEP 0.8>1.5[1.0] OCT 0>1.5[1.2]
B6 BTV-JFK SEP 0.8>3[3] OCT 0>2[3]
B6 BUF-FLL SEP 0.3>0.8[0.8] OCT 0>0.8[0.7]
B6 BUF-JFK SEP 1.3>5[6] OCT 0>4[6]
B6 BUF-LAX SEP 0.3>0.8[0.7] OCT 0>0.6[0.7]
B6 BUF-MCO SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 BUR-JFK SEP 0.5>1.9[1.6] OCT 0>1.4[1.5]
B6 CHS-FLL SEP 0.3>0.7[1.0] OCT 0>0.5[1.0]
B6 CHS-JFK SEP 0.5>2[2] OCT 0>1.5[2]
B6 CLE-FLL SEP 0.3>0.8[1.0] OCT 0>0.6[1.0]
B6 CTG-FLL SEP 0.3>0.7[0.6] OCT 0>0.5[0.6]
B6 CTG-JFK SEP 0.4>0.8[0.4] OCT 0>0.5[0.4]
B6 CUN-FLL SEP 0.8>1.5[1.1] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 CUN-JFK SEP 0.8>3[1.9] OCT 0>2[1.8]
B6 CUN-MCO SEP 0.5>1.8[1.0] OCT 0>1.5[1.0]
B6 CUR-JFK SEP 0.1>0.3[0.3] OCT 0>0.2[0.3]
B6 DCA-MCO SEP 1.1>4[4] OCT 0>3[4]
B6 DCA-PBI SEP 0.5>2[1.0] OCT 0>1.5[1.2]
B6 DCA-RSW SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.2]
B6 DCA-SJU SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 DEN-JFK SEP 0.5>2[1.2] OCT 0>1.5[1.0]
B6 EWR-FLL SEP 1.2>4[3] OCT 0>3[4]
B6 EWR-MCO SEP 1.6>5[6] OCT 0>4[6]
B6 EWR-PBI SEP 0.5>2[2] OCT 0>1.5[2]
B6 EWR-RSW SEP 0.3>1.0[1.9] OCT 0>0.8[2]
B6 EWR-SDQ SEP 0.5>1.3[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 EWR-SJU SEP 1.0>1.8[1.2] OCT 0>1.2[1.0]
B6 EWR-STI SEP 0.8>2[1.1] OCT 0>1.4[1.0]
B6 EWR-TPA SEP 0.5>2[2] OCT 0>1.5[2]
B6 FLL-GCM SEP 0.1>0.4[0.7] OCT 0>0.4[0.7]
B6 FLL-GYE SEP 0.3>1.0[0.8] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 FLL-HAV SEP 0.7>3[3] OCT 0>2[3]
B6 FLL-HPN SEP 0.5>1.8[1.9] OCT 0>1.4[1.9]
B6 FLL-KIN SEP 1.1>1.8[2] OCT 0>1.3[2]
B6 FLL-LAS SEP 0.3>1.7[1.0] OCT 0>1.5[1.1]
B6 FLL-LAX SEP 1.1>3[3] OCT 0>2[3]
B6 FLL-LGA SEP 0.5>2[5] OCT 0>1.5[4]
B6 FLL-LIM SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 FLL-MBJ SEP 0.8>2[1.1] OCT 0>1.5[1.1]
B6 FLL-MDE SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[0.9]
B6 FLL-MSY SEP 0.3>0.7[0.6] OCT 0>0.5[0.7]
B6 FLL-NAS SEP 1.1>3[4] OCT 0>2[4]
B6 FLL-ORD SEP 0.3>0.8[0.9] OCT 0>0.6[0.9]
B6 FLL-ORH SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 FLL-PAP SEP 0.8>2[2] OCT 0>0.8[2]
B6 FLL-PHL SEP 0.3>1.0[1.9] OCT 0>0.8[1.9]
B6 FLL-PHX SEP 0.3>0.8[1.0] OCT 0>0.6[1.0]
B6 FLL-PLS SEP 0.2>0.5[1.0] OCT 0>0.4[1.0]
B6 FLL-PUJ SEP 0.1>0.4[1.1] OCT 0>0.3[0.4]
B6 FLL-PVD SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 FLL-RDU SEP 0.5>1.6[1.8] OCT 0>1.2[1.7]
B6 FLL-RIC SEP 0.4>0.9[1.0] OCT 0>0.6[1.2]
B6 FLL-SDQ SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.2]
B6 FLL-SJO SEP 0.3>0.8[1.0] OCT 0>0.6[1.0]
B6 FLL-SJU SEP 1.5>4[5] OCT 0>3.1[5]
B6 FLL-SLC SEP 0.3>0.8[0.8] OCT 0>0.6[0.7]
B6 FLL-SWF SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 FLL-SXM SEP 0.1>0.4[1.0] OCT 0>0.4[1.0]
B6 FLL-UIO SEP 0.5>1.3[1.1] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 GEO-JFK SEP 0.3>1.0[0] OCT 0>0.8[0]
B6 GUA-JFK SEP 0.3>1.0[0] OCT 0>0.8[0]
B6 GYE-JFK SEP 0.3>1.0[0] OCT 0>0.8[0]
B6 HPN-MCO SEP 0.8>3[3] OCT 0>2[3]
B6 HPN-PBI SEP 0.8>3[3] OCT 0>2[4]
B6 HPN-RSW SEP 0.5>2[1.0] OCT 0>1.5[1.0]
B6 HPN-TPA SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 HYA-JFK SEP 0.3>0.6[0.1]
B6 IAH-JFK SEP 0.3>1.0[0] OCT 0>0.8[0.2]
B6 JAX-JFK SEP 0.8>3[3] OCT 0>2[3]
B6 JFK-KIN SEP 1.1>3[3] OCT 0>2[3]
B6 JFK-LAX MAY 10>11[11] SEP 3>12[11] OCT 0>9[11]
B6 JFK-LGB SEP 0.5>1.9[1.9] OCT 0>1.4[1.9]
B6 JFK-MBJ SEP 0.8>2[3] OCT 0>1.5[3]
B6 JFK-MSY SEP 0.5>2[3] OCT 0>1.5[3]
B6 JFK-MVY SEP 0.5>1.5[1.2] OCT 0>0.7[0.5]
B6 JFK-NAS SEP 0.5>1.3[1.2] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 JFK-ONT SEP 0.3>1.0[0.8] OCT 0>0.8[0.7]
B6 JFK-ORD SEP 0.5>1.9[2] OCT 0>1.4[2]
B6 JFK-ORH SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 JFK-PAP SEP 0.5>1.3[2] OCT 0>0.8[2]
B6 JFK-PHX SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 JFK-PLS SEP 0.3>0.8[0.8] OCT 0>0.8[0.9]
B6 JFK-POP SEP 0.5>1.3[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 JFK-POS SEP 0.5>1.3[1.1] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 JFK-PSE SEP 0.3>0.7[0.7] OCT 0>0.5[0.7]
B6 JFK-PUJ SEP 0.5>1.2[1.1] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 JFK-RDU SEP 0.5>2[3] OCT 0>1.5[3]
B6 JFK-ROC SEP 0.8>3[3] OCT 0>2[3]
B6 JFK-RSW SEP 0.8>2[2] OCT 0>1.5[2]
B6 JFK-SAN SEP 0.8>2[3] OCT 0>1.5[3]
B6 JFK-SAV SEP 0.5>2[2] OCT 0>1.5[2]
B6 JFK-SDQ SEP 1.9>5[6] OCT 0>3[4]
B6 JFK-SEA SEP 0.5>2[1.9] OCT 0>1.5[1.8]
B6 JFK-SFO SEP 1.6>7[6] OCT 0>5[6]
B6 JFK-SJO SEP 0.3>0.6[0] OCT 0>0.3[0]
B6 JFK-SJU SEP 1.9>6[5] OCT 0>3.9[4]
B6 JFK-SLC SEP 0.5>2[2] OCT 0>1.5[2]
B6 JFK-SMF SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 JFK-SRQ SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 JFK-STI SEP 1.9>6[6] OCT 0>4[5]
B6 JFK-SXM SEP 0.3>0.9[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 JFK-SYR SEP 0.5>2[2] OCT 0>1.5[2]
B6 JFK-TPA SEP 0.8>3[3] OCT 0>2[3]
B6 JFK-UVF SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 LAS-LGB SEP 0.5>2[3] OCT 0>1.5[3]
B6 LGA-MCO SEP 0.5>2[4] OCT 0>1.5[4]
B6 LGA-PBI SEP 0.5>2[3] OCT 0>1.5[3]
B6 LGB-PDX SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 LGB-RNO SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 LGB-SEA SEP 0.5>2[2] OCT 0>1.5[2]
B6 LGB-SFO SEP 0.5>2[1.4] OCT 0>1.5[2]
B6 LGB-SLC SEP 0.7>3[3] OCT 0>2[3]
B6 MBJ-MCO SEP 0.5>2[1.1] OCT 0>1.5[1.0]
B6 MCO-NAS SEP 0.3>0.7[0.7] OCT 0>0.5[0.9]
B6 MCO-ORH SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 MCO-PSE SEP 0.5>1.3[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 MCO-PVD SEP 0.3>1.0[1.7] OCT 0>0.8[1.9]
B6 MCO-RIC SEP 0.5>1.3[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.2]
B6 MCO-SDQ SEP 0.5>1.3[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 MCO-SJO SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 MCO-SJU SEP 1.9>5[6] OCT 0>3.1[6]
B6 MCO-SLC SEP 0.3>0.8[0.8] OCT 0>0.6[0.7]
B6 MCO-SWF SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 MCO-SYR SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.0]
B6 PBI-PVD SEP 0.3>1.0[0.8] OCT 0>0.8[0.9]
B6 SJU-TPA SEP 0.5>1.3[1.0] OCT 0>0.8[1.2]


Looks like B6 is going to take DL to task in ATL.


That's right, B6's BOS-ATL route is now on A320s only.
I believe that B6 will use the A220 for MCO-ATL once they start getting the aircraft.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5354
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Sun Feb 09, 2020 8:35 pm

alright, let's get an inventory of things looking at October.

BOS-ATL down to 4x daily, but all A320. Remember, they started off 5x A320 and then went to 2x A320 + 3x E90. I guess the cost is too high, so they are back to all A320s.
BOS-DFW is up to 3x daily on all A320s. This is probably their highest on this route so far.
No changes on BOS-DTW (which they had said will see increase this year)
No changes on BOS-PHL (another route they said will see increase this year)
BOS-CHS down to 2x daily, but all A320. Another case of upgauging here I guess which saw a good number of E90s last year.
No changes on BOS-ORD (another route they said will see increase this year)
No changes on BOS-CLT (another rouote they said will see increase this year)
BOS-CLE still at 4x daily, this despite went up to 5x daily before summer rush. I thought it would be back to that level post summer rush.
BOS-BNA back to 3x daily post summer rush.
BOS-LAX still at 5x daily on mint
BOS-SFO now at 7x daily! (but with 1 all-core A321 and 1 A320), more comments on this later.
BOS-BUF/PIT - are both back down to 3x and 5x daily. Looks like they added flights after DL entered the market, but after DL refused to leave no matter how much money they lost, B6 went back to their old schedule.
BOS-EWR back down to 7x daily. My guess is that with the need to use up more JFK slots, EWR growth is taking a hit.
BOS-SJU is up a little bit
BOS-SMF season is getting extended to October.
BOS-PDX season is 2x daily a little longer this year

JFK-LAX is up to 12x daily in Sep/Oct, all with mint
JFK-SFO up to 7x daily with 1 flight as all core A321
JFK-LAS continues to be 5x daily with 2 mint
JFK-SAN back down to 2x daily
JFK-DEN 2x extended longer
JFK-AUS up to 3x daily (all A320s)
JFK-ACK/HYA/MVY all had their season extend longer
JFK-PAP capacity continues to be down YoY. Probably the best way to maximize revenue with no competition.
JFK-MBJ down to 2x daily in Sep/Oct
JFK-ABQ upgauged to A321. Not sure when that happened.
JFK-SJU added a flight. Now 6x in Sep and 5x in Oct(4x A321)
JFK-FLL continues to be 8x and downgauged.
JFK-MCO contnues to be 9x with 6x A321.

Again, looks like they are really trying hard to use more slots at JFK. I'm assuming that means someone complained to Port Authority and those AA slots are going to get taken away. We will see what happens.

BOS growth seems to be stalling a little bit as a result of this. Based on the number upgauging all the way around, I think they have some spare E90 capacity available in Sep/Oct. I think they are going to announce a new domestic market at that time. That's my prediction. I also think there will be another JFK Latam market announced, but that won't come until Nov/Dec.

On the flip side, it seems like FLL is taking a serious hit. A lot of off peak cut in Sep/Oct. PHL is down to 1x daily. Not looking great. RIC is down to sub daily in Oct. FLL-LAX is down to 3x daily in Sep/Oct. NAS is down to 3x daily. This is all happening while NK is growing like mad in FLL/MCO.

As a whole, I don't think it's terrible strategy to focus on BOS/JFK, but FLL is clearly getting the short end in the past year. Last Q3 seems to have a profound on the JetBlue management regarding FLL. Even MCO and SJU seem to have more positive movement. I'm a little concerned on what their game plan is once they are ready to grow at FLL again.

Also, this adding non-mint flight to BOS/JFK-SFO to me seem to be utterly ridiculous. If they have all-core A321 they are leasing to supplement NEO delays, why are they not converting them all to mint configs? Why are they mix matching all-core into markets that should be all-premium. I get markets like BOS-SAN or FLL-SFO could be better served with non-mint flights, but JFK-SFO should not be one of these markets. If they want to build JFK and take some of the business AA is giving up, they need to put the best product in there. It just seems to be very confusing strategy since MSG left.
 
Bluewho
Posts: 168
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:58 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Sun Feb 09, 2020 9:53 pm

tphuang wrote:
alright, let's get an inventory of things looking at October.

BOS-ATL down to 4x daily, but all A320. Remember, they started off 5x A320 and then went to 2x A320 + 3x E90. I guess the cost is too high, so they are back to all A320s.
BOS-DFW is up to 3x daily on all A320s. This is probably their highest on this route so far.
No changes on BOS-DTW (which they had said will see increase this year)
No changes on BOS-PHL (another route they said will see increase this year)
BOS-CHS down to 2x daily, but all A320. Another case of upgauging here I guess which saw a good number of E90s last year.
No changes on BOS-ORD (another route they said will see increase this year)
No changes on BOS-CLT (another rouote they said will see increase this year)
BOS-CLE still at 4x daily, this despite went up to 5x daily before summer rush. I thought it would be back to that level post summer rush.
BOS-BNA back to 3x daily post summer rush.
BOS-LAX still at 5x daily on mint
BOS-SFO now at 7x daily! (but with 1 all-core A321 and 1 A320), more comments on this later.
BOS-BUF/PIT - are both back down to 3x and 5x daily. Looks like they added flights after DL entered the market, but after DL refused to leave no matter how much money they lost, B6 went back to their old schedule.
BOS-EWR back down to 7x daily. My guess is that with the need to use up more JFK slots, EWR growth is taking a hit.
BOS-SJU is up a little bit
BOS-SMF season is getting extended to October.
BOS-PDX season is 2x daily a little longer this year

JFK-LAX is up to 12x daily in Sep/Oct, all with mint
JFK-SFO up to 7x daily with 1 flight as all core A321
JFK-LAS continues to be 5x daily with 2 mint
JFK-SAN back down to 2x daily
JFK-DEN 2x extended longer
JFK-AUS up to 3x daily (all A320s)
JFK-ACK/HYA/MVY all had their season extend longer
JFK-PAP capacity continues to be down YoY. Probably the best way to maximize revenue with no competition.
JFK-MBJ down to 2x daily in Sep/Oct
JFK-ABQ upgauged to A321. Not sure when that happened.
JFK-SJU added a flight. Now 6x in Sep and 5x in Oct(4x A321)
JFK-FLL continues to be 8x and downgauged.
JFK-MCO contnues to be 9x with 6x A321.

Again, looks like they are really trying hard to use more slots at JFK. I'm assuming that means someone complained to Port Authority and those AA slots are going to get taken away. We will see what happens.

BOS growth seems to be stalling a little bit as a result of this. Based on the number upgauging all the way around, I think they have some spare E90 capacity available in Sep/Oct. I think they are going to announce a new domestic market at that time. That's my prediction. I also think there will be another JFK Latam market announced, but that won't come until Nov/Dec.

On the flip side, it seems like FLL is taking a serious hit. A lot of off peak cut in Sep/Oct. PHL is down to 1x daily. Not looking great. RIC is down to sub daily in Oct. FLL-LAX is down to 3x daily in Sep/Oct. NAS is down to 3x daily. This is all happening while NK is growing like mad in FLL/MCO.

As a whole, I don't think it's terrible strategy to focus on BOS/JFK, but FLL is clearly getting the short end in the past year. Last Q3 seems to have a profound on the JetBlue management regarding FLL. Even MCO and SJU seem to have more positive movement. I'm a little concerned on what their game plan is once they are ready to grow at FLL again.

Also, this adding non-mint flight to BOS/JFK-SFO to me seem to be utterly ridiculous. If they have all-core A321 they are leasing to supplement NEO delays, why are they not converting them all to mint configs? Why are they mix matching all-core into markets that should be all-premium. I get markets like BOS-SAN or FLL-SFO could be better served with non-mint flights, but JFK-SFO should not be one of these markets. If they want to build JFK and take some of the business AA is giving up, they need to put the best product in there. It just seems to be very confusing strategy since MSG left.



Wasn’t there a post about making FLL into a true connection hub. The big problem down there right now are gates. I wouldn’t worry about FLL that much yet.
 
RodFarva
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat May 26, 2018 6:06 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:02 pm

tphuang wrote:
If they have all-core A321 they are leasing to supplement NEO delays, why are they not converting them all to mint configs? Why are they mix matching all-core into markets that should be all-premium.


Those aircraft are going to fly in the interior they are delivered in initially. So no wifi, no tv's, no power, no extra legroom. They haven't said if they're going to take them down to 200 seats, but I believe these tails are configured ~220 seats.
 
DCA350
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 7:27 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 10, 2020 5:32 am

aemoreira1981 wrote:
maximairways wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
Pratt and Whitney recently announced a thrust bump on the PW1500G to introduce a 35,000-lb thrust variant, designed for hot and high airports. I have to wonder if JetBlue should consider having the last 13 A321neo (non-LR) with that engine, which would allow B6 to open up nonstops to UIO, BOG, and STT. (SNA could be intriguing, even though that runway is less than 5900 feet long and currently the main models serving it are the 73G and the 319.) This would give B6 with 4 A321neo subfleets: 46 PW1133G (non-LR), 13 PW1135G (non-LR), 13 LR, and 13 XLR.

If B6 can operate a 200-seat A321neo with the PW1135G into SNA (even if the last row has to be blocked for 194 seats sold) and everyone else is only flying A319s, 73Gs, and the B752 into SNA, on transcon flights. that would depress fares out of SNA flying east and also open up more routes.


It's PW1100G for the NEO. 1500G is the A220 engine.


I stand corrected.

Another thought is that a higher thrust A321neo could really let JetBlue challenge both Delta and Avianca on travel to and from Colombia...with higher-thrust engines that could allow MDE and CLO. I would suggest daily to MDE and 4x weekly to CLO from JFK on the higher-thrust A321neo (daily from FLL to both).

An intriguing option also for JetBlue could be seasonal service to Chinchero in Peru (when that airport opens next year), as part of a triangular route on certain days (FLL-CUZ-LIM-FLL) seasonally. The triangular routing would be necessary since Chinchero would be at 12,000 feet (that's the nearest airport to Machu Picchu), while still allowing this to be on the A320 (I'm also not sure that even a higher-thrust A321neo could make it to FLL). (American used to fly JFK-LIM-CUZ for one year in the 1990s on the B752.) This could be twice weekly FLL-CUZ-LIM-FLL and 5x weekly FLL-LIM. LIM would need to be re-timed a bit earlier.


I am a huge B6 fan and regularly travel to South America for work and leisure. Colombia is a favorite destination, and it is disheartening how far B6 has fallen behind Spirit in this space. Spirit flys to 7 cities in Colombia vs only 3 for B6 and MDE isn't even daily year round. B6 is missing a huge opportunity in Colombia.. it's a booming VFR and tourist market and many would pay a few extra dollars to fly B6 over Spirit.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3616
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 10, 2020 11:04 am

When did B6 announce it was leasing in ex-MT A321s? If they did, I expect them to be redone to the B6 standard as I could see B6 eventually buying those frames. Remember, some of the older A320s will need to be retired within the next 3-5 years as they will be around 90,000 to 100,000 hours.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5354
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 10, 2020 2:36 pm

Took a look at October totals from JFK. Looks like they are at around 160 flights on Fridays. Not bad. Definitely higher than last year (probably low 150s), but not as high as I thought it might be.

aemoreira1981 wrote:
When did B6 announce it was leasing in ex-MT A321s? If they did, I expect them to be redone to the B6 standard as I could see B6 eventually buying those frames. Remember, some of the older A320s will need to be retired within the next 3-5 years as they will be around 90,000 to 100,000 hours.


It got announced during the earnings call. I'm not sure how long this non-B6 standard period will last. I'm still convinced at least a couple of them will get converted to mint configuration. Otherwise, I really don't know where this additional mint flying is coming from (2 to 3 additional mint flight by 2nd half of this year). It seems kind of crazy for them to just put these into service without any interior work. Maybe they will start off in those less competitive VFR market where product doesn't matter as much.

DCA350 wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
maximairways wrote:

It's PW1100G for the NEO. 1500G is the A220 engine.


I stand corrected.

Another thought is that a higher thrust A321neo could really let JetBlue challenge both Delta and Avianca on travel to and from Colombia...with higher-thrust engines that could allow MDE and CLO. I would suggest daily to MDE and 4x weekly to CLO from JFK on the higher-thrust A321neo (daily from FLL to both).

An intriguing option also for JetBlue could be seasonal service to Chinchero in Peru (when that airport opens next year), as part of a triangular route on certain days (FLL-CUZ-LIM-FLL) seasonally. The triangular routing would be necessary since Chinchero would be at 12,000 feet (that's the nearest airport to Machu Picchu), while still allowing this to be on the A320 (I'm also not sure that even a higher-thrust A321neo could make it to FLL). (American used to fly JFK-LIM-CUZ for one year in the 1990s on the B752.) This could be twice weekly FLL-CUZ-LIM-FLL and 5x weekly FLL-LIM. LIM would need to be re-timed a bit earlier.


I am a huge B6 fan and regularly travel to South America for work and leisure. Colombia is a favorite destination, and it is disheartening how far B6 has fallen behind Spirit in this space. Spirit flys to 7 cities in Colombia vs only 3 for B6 and MDE isn't even daily year round. B6 is missing a huge opportunity in Colombia.. it's a booming VFR and tourist market and many would pay a few extra dollars to fly B6 over Spirit.


I think you are more likely to see JFK-MDE/BOG before additional Colombian cities from FLL. They are focused on strengthening JFK Latam operation right now, because it's a lot more profitable market.

Does high altitude really take off more than an hour of flight time? JFK-BOG is an hour shorter than GYE and they can easily make the later with A321NEO.

If not, I guess they will have to wait for a pip. That would also allow them to do JFK-LIM. At some point, the difference between A321NEO and A321LR will just be an extra ACF if I remember correctly.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3616
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:15 am

tphuang wrote:
Took a look at October totals from JFK. Looks like they are at around 160 flights on Fridays. Not bad. Definitely higher than last year (probably low 150s), but not as high as I thought it might be.

aemoreira1981 wrote:
When did B6 announce it was leasing in ex-MT A321s? If they did, I expect them to be redone to the B6 standard as I could see B6 eventually buying those frames. Remember, some of the older A320s will need to be retired within the next 3-5 years as they will be around 90,000 to 100,000 hours.


It got announced during the earnings call. I'm not sure how long this non-B6 standard period will last. I'm still convinced at least a couple of them will get converted to mint configuration. Otherwise, I really don't know where this additional mint flying is coming from (2 to 3 additional mint flight by 2nd half of this year). It seems kind of crazy for them to just put these into service without any interior work. Maybe they will start off in those less competitive VFR market where product doesn't matter as much.

DCA350 wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:

I stand corrected.

Another thought is that a higher thrust A321neo could really let JetBlue challenge both Delta and Avianca on travel to and from Colombia...with higher-thrust engines that could allow MDE and CLO. I would suggest daily to MDE and 4x weekly to CLO from JFK on the higher-thrust A321neo (daily from FLL to both).

An intriguing option also for JetBlue could be seasonal service to Chinchero in Peru (when that airport opens next year), as part of a triangular route on certain days (FLL-CUZ-LIM-FLL) seasonally. The triangular routing would be necessary since Chinchero would be at 12,000 feet (that's the nearest airport to Machu Picchu), while still allowing this to be on the A320 (I'm also not sure that even a higher-thrust A321neo could make it to FLL). (American used to fly JFK-LIM-CUZ for one year in the 1990s on the B752.) This could be twice weekly FLL-CUZ-LIM-FLL and 5x weekly FLL-LIM. LIM would need to be re-timed a bit earlier.


I am a huge B6 fan and regularly travel to South America for work and leisure. Colombia is a favorite destination, and it is disheartening how far B6 has fallen behind Spirit in this space. Spirit flys to 7 cities in Colombia vs only 3 for B6 and MDE isn't even daily year round. B6 is missing a huge opportunity in Colombia.. it's a booming VFR and tourist market and many would pay a few extra dollars to fly B6 over Spirit.


I think you are more likely to see JFK-MDE/BOG before additional Colombian cities from FLL. They are focused on strengthening JFK Latam operation right now, because it's a lot more profitable market.

Does high altitude really take off more than an hour of flight time? JFK-BOG is an hour shorter than GYE and they can easily make the later with A321NEO.

If not, I guess they will have to wait for a pip. That would also allow them to do JFK-LIM. At some point, the difference between A321NEO and A321LR will just be an extra ACF if I remember correctly.


The amount of runway needed is lengthened by the altitude. CTG, which B6 currently serves, is at sea level, as is GYE However:

BOG is 8400 feet AMSL
MDE is 7050 feet AMSL
CLO is 3200 feet AMSL

In Ecuador, while GYE is near sea level, UIO is at 7900 feet AMSL.

That is why for narrow-body services, AV cannot use the A321ceo to North America. Only the A319 or the A320neo has the engine capability to get off the runway with a reasonable payload at this time; Pratt and Whitney is thus introducing the PW1135G for hot and high. That's also why I suggest that B6 should defer the last 13 non-LR A321neos for the 35,000 lb-per-engine thrust. 46 A321-271NX, 13 A321-273NX (if that engine is code -73), 13 A321LR, and 13 A321XLR.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5354
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:48 am

aemoreira1981 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Took a look at October totals from JFK. Looks like they are at around 160 flights on Fridays. Not bad. Definitely higher than last year (probably low 150s), but not as high as I thought it might be.

aemoreira1981 wrote:
When did B6 announce it was leasing in ex-MT A321s? If they did, I expect them to be redone to the B6 standard as I could see B6 eventually buying those frames. Remember, some of the older A320s will need to be retired within the next 3-5 years as they will be around 90,000 to 100,000 hours.


It got announced during the earnings call. I'm not sure how long this non-B6 standard period will last. I'm still convinced at least a couple of them will get converted to mint configuration. Otherwise, I really don't know where this additional mint flying is coming from (2 to 3 additional mint flight by 2nd half of this year). It seems kind of crazy for them to just put these into service without any interior work. Maybe they will start off in those less competitive VFR market where product doesn't matter as much.

DCA350 wrote:

I am a huge B6 fan and regularly travel to South America for work and leisure. Colombia is a favorite destination, and it is disheartening how far B6 has fallen behind Spirit in this space. Spirit flys to 7 cities in Colombia vs only 3 for B6 and MDE isn't even daily year round. B6 is missing a huge opportunity in Colombia.. it's a booming VFR and tourist market and many would pay a few extra dollars to fly B6 over Spirit.


I think you are more likely to see JFK-MDE/BOG before additional Colombian cities from FLL. They are focused on strengthening JFK Latam operation right now, because it's a lot more profitable market.

Does high altitude really take off more than an hour of flight time? JFK-BOG is an hour shorter than GYE and they can easily make the later with A321NEO.

If not, I guess they will have to wait for a pip. That would also allow them to do JFK-LIM. At some point, the difference between A321NEO and A321LR will just be an extra ACF if I remember correctly.


The amount of runway needed is lengthened by the altitude. CTG, which B6 currently serves, is at sea level, as is GYE However:

BOG is 8400 feet AMSL
MDE is 7050 feet AMSL
CLO is 3200 feet AMSL

In Ecuador, while GYE is near sea level, UIO is at 7900 feet AMSL.

That is why for narrow-body services, AV cannot use the A321ceo to North America. Only the A319 or the A320neo has the engine capability to get off the runway with a reasonable payload at this time; Pratt and Whitney is thus introducing the PW1135G for hot and high. That's also why I suggest that B6 should defer the last 13 non-LR A321neos for the 35,000 lb-per-engine thrust. 46 A321-271NX, 13 A321-273NX (if that engine is code -73), 13 A321LR, and 13 A321XLR.

I guess that's the question. There is a penalty, but how much is the penalty? Clearly, a321ceo can't make it, but we will see if neo can. If not, this might also be an a220 route.
 
EADSYABSOB73857
Posts: 81
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2019 11:35 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:01 am

tphuang wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Took a look at October totals from JFK. Looks like they are at around 160 flights on Fridays. Not bad. Definitely higher than last year (probably low 150s), but not as high as I thought it might be.



It got announced during the earnings call. I'm not sure how long this non-B6 standard period will last. I'm still convinced at least a couple of them will get converted to mint configuration. Otherwise, I really don't know where this additional mint flying is coming from (2 to 3 additional mint flight by 2nd half of this year). It seems kind of crazy for them to just put these into service without any interior work. Maybe they will start off in those less competitive VFR market where product doesn't matter as much.



I think you are more likely to see JFK-MDE/BOG before additional Colombian cities from FLL. They are focused on strengthening JFK Latam operation right now, because it's a lot more profitable market.

Does high altitude really take off more than an hour of flight time? JFK-BOG is an hour shorter than GYE and they can easily make the later with A321NEO.

If not, I guess they will have to wait for a pip. That would also allow them to do JFK-LIM. At some point, the difference between A321NEO and A321LR will just be an extra ACF if I remember correctly.


The amount of runway needed is lengthened by the altitude. CTG, which B6 currently serves, is at sea level, as is GYE However:

BOG is 8400 feet AMSL
MDE is 7050 feet AMSL
CLO is 3200 feet AMSL

In Ecuador, while GYE is near sea level, UIO is at 7900 feet AMSL.

That is why for narrow-body services, AV cannot use the A321ceo to North America. Only the A319 or the A320neo has the engine capability to get off the runway with a reasonable payload at this time; Pratt and Whitney is thus introducing the PW1135G for hot and high. That's also why I suggest that B6 should defer the last 13 non-LR A321neos for the 35,000 lb-per-engine thrust. 46 A321-271NX, 13 A321-273NX (if that engine is code -73), 13 A321LR, and 13 A321XLR.

I guess that's the question. There is a penalty, but how much is the penalty? Clearly, a321ceo can't make it, but we will see if neo can. If not, this might also be an a220 route.


Do A321neos have the necessary specs to make the flights? As far as I know only A319s have the necessary range and MTOW for BOG-JFK/BOS flights. Can A321neos make the long flight to/from such a high elevation point?
 
CaptCoolHand
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2018 12:24 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:34 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
When did B6 announce it was leasing in ex-MT A321s? If they did, I expect them to be redone to the B6 standard as I could see B6 eventually buying those frames. Remember, some of the older A320s will need to be retired within the next 3-5 years as they will be around 90,000 to 100,000 hours.


It was announced a few weeks ago. They're going to fly them in the current config for "time". They'll basically be SJU based so no one misses out on TV or internet. That's what they're telling us down in MCO about it.
 
CobaltScar
Posts: 754
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 2:30 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:08 pm

CaptCoolHand wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
When did B6 announce it was leasing in ex-MT A321s? If they did, I expect them to be redone to the B6 standard as I could see B6 eventually buying those frames. Remember, some of the older A320s will need to be retired within the next 3-5 years as they will be around 90,000 to 100,000 hours.


It was announced a few weeks ago. They're going to fly them in the current config for "time". They'll basically be SJU based so no one misses out on TV or internet. That's what they're telling us down in MCO about it.



I can see them working on all the PR to MCO/FLL redeyes, but during the day people are going to be very disappointed to have no movies during the day. I wonder if they will remove the 20 extra seats, 5 FAs on that thing is going to be crowded.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5354
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:39 pm

The entire thing seems quite ridiculous. They'd be well served to keep these ex-MT A321s away from JFK/BOS.

Also news release on 20th anniversary for JetBlue.
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/ ... rd-Winning
Nothing new announced in there which I'm a little surprised by.
The only thing of note is that they anticipate announcing London plans later this year for 2021 launch.
 
727LOVER
Posts: 8633
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 12:22 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:44 pm

tphuang wrote:
The entire thing seems quite ridiculous. They'd be well served to keep these ex-MT A321s away from JFK/BOS.

Also news release on 20th anniversary for JetBlue.
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/ ... rd-Winning
Nothing new announced in there which I'm a little surprised by.
The only thing of note is that they anticipate announcing London plans later this year for 2021 launch.




No new plane?
"We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3616
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Tue Feb 11, 2020 5:27 pm

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:

The amount of runway needed is lengthened by the altitude. CTG, which B6 currently serves, is at sea level, as is GYE However:

BOG is 8400 feet AMSL
MDE is 7050 feet AMSL
CLO is 3200 feet AMSL

In Ecuador, while GYE is near sea level, UIO is at 7900 feet AMSL.

That is why for narrow-body services, AV cannot use the A321ceo to North America. Only the A319 or the A320neo has the engine capability to get off the runway with a reasonable payload at this time; Pratt and Whitney is thus introducing the PW1135G for hot and high. That's also why I suggest that B6 should defer the last 13 non-LR A321neos for the 35,000 lb-per-engine thrust. 46 A321-271NX, 13 A321-273NX (if that engine is code -73), 13 A321LR, and 13 A321XLR.

I guess that's the question. There is a penalty, but how much is the penalty? Clearly, a321ceo can't make it, but we will see if neo can. If not, this might also be an a220 route.


Do A321neos have the necessary specs to make the flights? As far as I know only A319s have the necessary range and MTOW for BOG-JFK/BOS flights. Can A321neos make the long flight to/from such a high elevation point?


The A320neo also has the necessary specs. This new PIP from Pratt and Whitney should enable that for the A321neo.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5354
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Feb 13, 2020 2:26 pm

Given today's news that AS is joining Oneworld along with deeper relationship with AA. I wonder if B6 should try to see if it can strike up deeper relationship with one of the legacies also. For me, UA and *A would be the most obvious partner here if they find anyone since there is minimal competition between UA/B6 commpared to AA/DL. They'd probably need to agree to stop expanding or even shrinking in EWR, but I would think that's a small price to pay to get benefits from possibly interlining with a legacy carrier. They already code share with quite a few *A airlines including two of their closer relationships with EI and TP.
 
canmau
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2018 11:53 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:04 pm

tphuang wrote:
Given today's news that AS is joining Oneworld along with deeper relationship with AA. I wonder if B6 should try to see if it can strike up deeper relationship with one of the legacies also. For me, UA and *A would be the most obvious partner here if they find anyone since there is minimal competition between UA/B6 commpared to AA/DL. They'd probably need to agree to stop expanding or even shrinking in EWR, but I would think that's a small price to pay to get benefits from possibly interlining with a legacy carrier. They already code share with quite a few *A airlines including two of their closer relationships with EI and TP.


I would love to see this!
 
StinkyPinky
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:03 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:48 pm

I'm disappointed with this AS/AA news as this makes any possibility of merging with Alaska nearly impossible. On the other hand, as this makes B6 even less relevant on the West Coast... I wonder if this backs B6 further into a corner and makes the possibility of being acquired by WN or UA even more likely or could this encourage B6 to join an alliance?

Poor JetBlue, missing out again, stagnating, growing weaker and losing ground, being attacked from both sides (legacies and ULCC).
 
CaptCoolHand
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2018 12:24 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Feb 13, 2020 7:32 pm

StinkyPinky wrote:
I'm disappointed with this AS/AA news as this makes any possibility of merging with Alaska nearly impossible. On the other hand, as this makes B6 even less relevant on the West Coast... I wonder if this backs B6 further into a corner and makes the possibility of being acquired by WN or UA even more likely or could this encourage B6 to join an alliance?

Poor JetBlue, missing out again, stagnating, growing weaker and losing ground, being attacked from both sides (legacies and ULCC).


Poor bluejet. Made 3/4Billion last year. Pays for new planes in cash... Likely will be bankrupt in a year.
 
flyby519
Posts: 1575
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:31 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Feb 13, 2020 7:53 pm

tphuang wrote:
Given today's news that AS is joining Oneworld along with deeper relationship with AA. I wonder if B6 should try to see if it can strike up deeper relationship with one of the legacies also. For me, UA and *A would be the most obvious partner here if they find anyone since there is minimal competition between UA/B6 commpared to AA/DL. They'd probably need to agree to stop expanding or even shrinking in EWR, but I would think that's a small price to pay to get benefits from possibly interlining with a legacy carrier. They already code share with quite a few *A airlines including two of their closer relationships with EI and TP.


Why not B6 join oneworld as well? Less and less overlap with AA in BOS/JFK. FLL would likely be excluded from code sharing similar to LAX with AA/AS.

Overall, I still don’t see the benefit for B6 to pigeonhole themselves into an alliance when they can currently work with anyone (ME3, DY, etc)
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26254
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Feb 13, 2020 7:56 pm

flyby519 wrote:
Why not B6 join oneworld as well? Less and less overlap with AA in BOS/JFK. FLL would likely be excluded from code sharing similar to LAX with AA/AS.


AS and AA codeshare from LAX. There is no exclusion.
a.
 
flyby519
Posts: 1575
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:31 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:01 pm

MAH4546 wrote:
flyby519 wrote:
Why not B6 join oneworld as well? Less and less overlap with AA in BOS/JFK. FLL would likely be excluded from code sharing similar to LAX with AA/AS.


AS and AA codeshare from LAX. There is no exclusion.


My bad, I thought there were restrictions from the AS/VX merger on code sharing with AA
 
User avatar
VS4ever
Posts: 2576
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:03 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:22 pm

flyby519 wrote:
MAH4546 wrote:
flyby519 wrote:
Why not B6 join oneworld as well? Less and less overlap with AA in BOS/JFK. FLL would likely be excluded from code sharing similar to LAX with AA/AS.


AS and AA codeshare from LAX. There is no exclusion.


My bad, I thought there were restrictions from the AS/VX merger on code sharing with AA


Wasn't this it?
https://saleslink.aa.com/en-US/document ... 6Feb17.pdf
That feeling when you sit at the end of a runway, brakes are released and the raw power takes over. Now that is a thing of beauty and it never gets old.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26254
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:23 pm

flyby519 wrote:
MAH4546 wrote:
flyby519 wrote:
Why not B6 join oneworld as well? Less and less overlap with AA in BOS/JFK. FLL would likely be excluded from code sharing similar to LAX with AA/AS.


AS and AA codeshare from LAX. There is no exclusion.


My bad, I thought there were restrictions from the AS/VX merger on code sharing with AA


There are voluntarily imposed restrictions (nothing legally stopping them), but they codeshare in certain markets.
a.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5354
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:26 pm

flyby519 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Given today's news that AS is joining Oneworld along with deeper relationship with AA. I wonder if B6 should try to see if it can strike up deeper relationship with one of the legacies also. For me, UA and *A would be the most obvious partner here if they find anyone since there is minimal competition between UA/B6 commpared to AA/DL. They'd probably need to agree to stop expanding or even shrinking in EWR, but I would think that's a small price to pay to get benefits from possibly interlining with a legacy carrier. They already code share with quite a few *A airlines including two of their closer relationships with EI and TP.


Why not B6 join oneworld as well? Less and less overlap with AA in BOS/JFK. FLL would likely be excluded from code sharing similar to LAX with AA/AS.

Overall, I still don’t see the benefit for B6 to pigeonhole themselves into an alliance when they can currently work with anyone (ME3, DY, etc)

I don't think AA works because AS is a much better fit for them. They are already strong in East Coast and PNW has always been their weakness. Partnering up with B6 would really give AA nothing new. *A + UA would have a legitimate argument in partnering with B6.
1) Zero to minimal presence from UA in B6's 3 most important focus cities
2) B6's presence in JFK/BOS/FLL has already "forced" numerous *A carriers to code share with them like EI/TP/Azul/SQ
3) Entrance into *A would not prevent B6 from continuing to partner with unaligned carriers to the best of my knowledge. B6 does nothing more than interline with most of them anyways.
4) while B6 is a large player in JFK, it's not a real threat to UA in getting the largest corporate clients and highest yielding ff in the NYC market. If anything, B6's presence at JFK holds back DL from complete dominance
5) B6's focus cities at FLL/MCO are better connection point to Latin America than IAH for UA's hubs at EWR/IAD. Also, FLL much larger market for *A's South American members than IAH.
6) They compete on very few large business market. Only on BOS-SFO/ORD are they the 2 of the largest players. In other markets, they are either not direct competitors like (NYC-LAX/SFO) or one of them is much smaller than the other one.

For B6, I could see them gain a lot from having UA partnership since a code share or interlining relationship would actually solve the 2 largest issues facing them in BOS
1) Small national/international network
2) IRROPs problems

Also B6's expansion in the Europe is mostly about Western Europe + British Isles and doesn't really threaten *A dominance in Central Europe. I'm sure if the condition for B6 to join *A and partnership is to not encroach into central Europe or expand at EWR, that would be small price to pay for what they could get. And maybe with AA partnering up with AS, it will now force UA to strengthen itself domestically. Clearly, B6 has something at JFK that could help *A, something at Florida that could help UA. And having another strong partner hub in the ultra competitive NorthEast would strengthen UA's position in winning over ff and corporate clients.

At this point, AA has in Northeast DCA/PHL/LGA/JFK hubs + BOS large station
DL has LGA/JFK/BOS hub
UA only has EWR/IAD
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1726
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:49 pm

flyby519 wrote:
MAH4546 wrote:
flyby519 wrote:
Why not B6 join oneworld as well? Less and less overlap with AA in BOS/JFK. FLL would likely be excluded from code sharing similar to LAX with AA/AS.


AS and AA codeshare from LAX. There is no exclusion.


My bad, I thought there were restrictions from the AS/VX merger on code sharing with AA

There are. Markets are listed in appendix A.
https://www.justice.gov/atr/case-docume ... 1/download
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 10284
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Fri Feb 14, 2020 1:47 am

tphuang wrote:
flyby519 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Given today's news that AS is joining Oneworld along with deeper relationship with AA. I wonder if B6 should try to see if it can strike up deeper relationship with one of the legacies also. For me, UA and *A would be the most obvious partner here if they find anyone since there is minimal competition between UA/B6 commpared to AA/DL. They'd probably need to agree to stop expanding or even shrinking in EWR, but I would think that's a small price to pay to get benefits from possibly interlining with a legacy carrier. They already code share with quite a few *A airlines including two of their closer relationships with EI and TP.


Why not B6 join oneworld as well? Less and less overlap with AA in BOS/JFK. FLL would likely be excluded from code sharing similar to LAX with AA/AS.

Overall, I still don’t see the benefit for B6 to pigeonhole themselves into an alliance when they can currently work with anyone (ME3, DY, etc)

I don't think AA works because AS is a much better fit for them. They are already strong in East Coast and PNW has always been their weakness. Partnering up with B6 would really give AA nothing new. *A + UA would have a legitimate argument in partnering with B6.
1) Zero to minimal presence from UA in B6's 3 most important focus cities
2) B6's presence in JFK/BOS/FLL has already "forced" numerous *A carriers to code share with them like EI/TP/Azul/SQ
3) Entrance into *A would not prevent B6 from continuing to partner with unaligned carriers to the best of my knowledge. B6 does nothing more than interline with most of them anyways.
4) while B6 is a large player in JFK, it's not a real threat to UA in getting the largest corporate clients and highest yielding ff in the NYC market. If anything, B6's presence at JFK holds back DL from complete dominance
5) B6's focus cities at FLL/MCO are better connection point to Latin America than IAH for UA's hubs at EWR/IAD. Also, FLL much larger market for *A's South American members than IAH.
6) They compete on very few large business market. Only on BOS-SFO/ORD are they the 2 of the largest players. In other markets, they are either not direct competitors like (NYC-LAX/SFO) or one of them is much smaller than the other one.

For B6, I could see them gain a lot from having UA partnership since a code share or interlining relationship would actually solve the 2 largest issues facing them in BOS
1) Small national/international network
2) IRROPs problems

Also B6's expansion in the Europe is mostly about Western Europe + British Isles and doesn't really threaten *A dominance in Central Europe. I'm sure if the condition for B6 to join *A and partnership is to not encroach into central Europe or expand at EWR, that would be small price to pay for what they could get. And maybe with AA partnering up with AS, it will now force UA to strengthen itself domestically. Clearly, B6 has something at JFK that could help *A, something at Florida that could help UA. And having another strong partner hub in the ultra competitive NorthEast would strengthen UA's position in winning over ff and corporate clients.

At this point, AA has in Northeast DCA/PHL/LGA/JFK hubs + BOS large station
DL has LGA/JFK/BOS hub
UA only has EWR/IAD

Here's my opinion on that:

Effect from B6 also going to OneWorld:

AA
Gives them a place to park JFK slots (presumably through a lease to B6)
Allows AA to retain their presence at JFK/NYC through code share
Completely screws DL because B6 becomes a much bigger challenge with those slots plus stronger Europe ties

B6
More slots at JFK
Elimination of weak sister AA flying junk routes at JFK losing money and polluting fares through desperation
Gets them instant sales advantage in Europe through IAG code share even if they are at STN or LGW
Hurts DL
Hurts UA
Keeps UA/NK from getting JFK slots as they are a big risk
Potentially eliminates Level (see BA)
B6 is already on Sabre. Easy to implement.
AS-B6 would likely code share through OW relationship. A likely precursor to a merger later.

BA/IAG
Massive feed increase at JFK
Replicates DL-VS barbell strategy in NYC-LON
Potentially allows IAG to shutdown Level which is likely losing money and let B6 essentially replace it without costing them anything and with BA code
Probably makes sure B6 won't be at LHR, might even mean B6 is at STN because STN with a BA code is likely better than LGW with no BA code.
B6 could also take over some of EI's DUB transatlantic expansion strategy which doesn't seem to be going that well.

DOJ
Hard to deny this deal when DL basically controls LGA + JFK Intl and UA owns EWR.
Given that a WN-B6 merger eliminates another carrier completely, this is probably a better outcome for competitive balance in NYC.
There would be code share carve outs like JFK-LAX, etc.

This seems like an obvious outcome if DOJ allows it. I think it strengthens everybody against DL without eliminating competition. If B6 or AS starts to try to get ATI JVs then I would turn against it.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5354
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:51 pm

Apparently, JetBlue trademarked "Mint Suite" and "Mint Studio"
https://travelupdate.com/jetblue-mint-s ... nt-studio/

Can't wait to see what this would actually look like.
 
Dieuwer
Posts: 2487
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Fri Feb 14, 2020 5:01 pm

tphuang wrote:
Apparently, JetBlue trademarked "Mint Suite" and "Mint Studio"
https://travelupdate.com/jetblue-mint-s ... nt-studio/

Can't wait to see what this would actually look like.


Maybe a 1-1 configuration on the A321-(X)LR?
 
tphuang
Posts: 5354
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:25 pm

From OAG
B6 BQN-JFK APR 2.0>1.1[1.0]
B6 EWR-SJU MAY 2.5>1.5[2.0]
B6 EWR-STI MAY 2>1.0[1.0]
B6 JFK-MBJ APR 2>3[2]
B6 JFK-MCO MAY 8>9[8]
B6 JFK-MSY MAY 2>3[4]
B6 JFK-TPA MAY 3>4[3]
B6 SJU-TPA APR 1.8>1.3[2.0] MAY 2.0>1.0[2.0]

Looks like continued shifting of flights to JFK to utilize more slots. I've also noticed that they retimed some VFR flights to actually use slots. Looks like they had a lot more slots that I had anticipated.
 
flyby519
Posts: 1575
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:31 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:31 pm

tphuang wrote:
From OAG
B6 BQN-JFK APR 2.0>1.1[1.0]
B6 EWR-SJU MAY 2.5>1.5[2.0]
B6 EWR-STI MAY 2>1.0[1.0]
B6 JFK-MBJ APR 2>3[2]
B6 JFK-MCO MAY 8>9[8]
B6 JFK-MSY MAY 2>3[4]
B6 JFK-TPA MAY 3>4[3]
B6 SJU-TPA APR 1.8>1.3[2.0] MAY 2.0>1.0[2.0]

Looks like continued shifting of flights to JFK to utilize more slots. I've also noticed that they retimed some VFR flights to actually use slots. Looks like they had a lot more slots that I had anticipated.


Any idea if DL is doing this same dance and utilizing more slots? Or are they at max usage already?
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1251
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:43 pm

When is the transatlantic service supposed to start? Will it only be to London or will other cities be included too?
 
tphuang
Posts: 5354
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:45 pm

flyby519 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
From OAG
B6 BQN-JFK APR 2.0>1.1[1.0]
B6 EWR-SJU MAY 2.5>1.5[2.0]
B6 EWR-STI MAY 2>1.0[1.0]
B6 JFK-MBJ APR 2>3[2]
B6 JFK-MCO MAY 8>9[8]
B6 JFK-MSY MAY 2>3[4]
B6 JFK-TPA MAY 3>4[3]
B6 SJU-TPA APR 1.8>1.3[2.0] MAY 2.0>1.0[2.0]

Looks like continued shifting of flights to JFK to utilize more slots. I've also noticed that they retimed some VFR flights to actually use slots. Looks like they had a lot more slots that I had anticipated.


Any idea if DL is doing this same dance and utilizing more slots? Or are they at max usage already?


I don't see anything to the same degree in terms of schedule changes. DL is probably utilizing mores slots. With these changes, JetBlue is at 180/181 for July/August, probably a little over 160 for Sep/Oct (affter labor day) and somewhere in between from late May to June. Early May they look to be 155 to 160 peak weekday. They should call AA about leasing some of the slots AA is not using.

Nicknuzzii wrote:
When is the transatlantic service supposed to start? Will it only be to London or will other cities be included too?

They kept is deliberately vague with 2021 with all the A321NEO delivery issues. i'm sure it will also include at least Dublin and Paris also.
 
Dieuwer
Posts: 2487
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:51 pm

What happened to "Connecting the Dots"? How about adding ANU, FDF, GND, PTP, etc. from BOS?
 
CaptCoolHand
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2018 12:24 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:41 pm

Dieuwer wrote:
What happened to "Connecting the Dots"? How about adding ANU, FDF, GND, PTP, etc. from BOS?


Part of the problem is airbus. The continue to fail on the delivery schedule. After this year we’ll be 10 321s short of what was expected.
 
Brickell305
Posts: 1055
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 2:07 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:54 pm

Dieuwer wrote:
What happened to "Connecting the Dots"? How about adding ANU, FDF, GND, PTP, etc. from BOS?

Good luck on filling any of those with the possible exception of ANU.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 6013
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:00 pm

Dieuwer wrote:
What happened to "Connecting the Dots"? How about adding ANU, FDF, GND, PTP, etc. from BOS?



The dots added have fierce competition and bleed a lot of money
 
Planeboy17
Posts: 441
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:18 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:03 pm

Just curious, has there been any definitive evidence that the Port Authority has ordered B6 to use more of their slots? IIRC this was mentioned somewhere up thread but I haven’t read of any substantiation. This just seems very strange that B6 would be sitting on slots since I’ve read they had no more slots available the last couple of summers.
 
Dieuwer
Posts: 2487
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:05 pm

Brickell305 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
What happened to "Connecting the Dots"? How about adding ANU, FDF, GND, PTP, etc. from BOS?

Good luck on filling any of those with the possible exception of ANU.


How so? I have friends (French) who love to go to Guadeloupe and Martinique.
Don't forget that Boston Metro is host to lots of foreigners with passports who live and work here.
 
flyby519
Posts: 1575
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:31 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:26 pm

Planeboy17 wrote:
Just curious, has there been any definitive evidence that the Port Authority has ordered B6 to use more of their slots? IIRC this was mentioned somewhere up thread but I haven’t read of any substantiation. This just seems very strange that B6 would be sitting on slots since I’ve read they had no more slots available the last couple of summers.


Not that I know of, but speculation might have some validity considering the current order for JFK slots is due to expire October 24, 2020. It will likely be replaced/extended by some new slot order. We should see some news in coming months

https://www.federalregister.gov/documen ... al-airport
 
Brickell305
Posts: 1055
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 2:07 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:41 pm

Dieuwer wrote:
Brickell305 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
What happened to "Connecting the Dots"? How about adding ANU, FDF, GND, PTP, etc. from BOS?

Good luck on filling any of those with the possible exception of ANU.


How so? I have friends (French) who love to go to Guadeloupe and Martinique.
Don't forget that Boston Metro is host to lots of foreigners with passports who live and work here.

That may be the case but the tourist market to all of those (again with the exception of ANU) is small especially so to PTP and FDF (which B6 doesn’t serve at all). UVF is a more developed and popular market than the four listed here and even that is only 2x weekly seasonal. If they can barely make it work to UVF, good luck with GND, PTP and FDF.
 
KlimaBXsst
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:14 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:42 pm

There was some rumor talk of JetBlue getting wide-bodies a while back.

If the A321 Mint was sufficient, why would JetBlue entertain the notion of another limited fleet type in addition to a sub-fleet of Mint?

This helps me believe there is a market for a new wide-body type, among the continued interest in wide-bodies by other airlines.
Aesthetically the A 340 got it right!
 
flyby519
Posts: 1575
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:31 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:45 pm

KlimaBXsst wrote:
There was some rumor talk of JetBlue getting wide-bodies a while back.

If the A321 Mint was sufficient, why would JetBlue entertain the notion of another limited fleet type in addition to a sub-fleet of Mint?

This helps me believe there is a market for a new wide-body type, among the continued interest in wide-bodies by other airlines.


General thinking is if Europe A321LR/XLR expansion goes well then after a few years B6 buys widebodies to make more efficient use of slots/gates in US and EU. 16x daily 321 flights for B6 from JFK-LON would be great but that frequency isn’t an option with a limited entry market on both ends.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5354
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:02 pm

a couple of more things from yesterday's update.

AV JFK-MDE SEP 1.0>0.8[1.0] OCT 1.0>0.6[1.0] NOV 1.0>0.6[1.0]

AV's going 4x weekly on this route in fall season.

I took another look at JFK-BOG/MDE recently since I've been looking up connection to deep south america and AV was always the cheapst in both Y/J

First, took a random search that leaves and returns early March (so 2 or 3 weeks out).
DL right now is pricing $380 R/T and AV is pricing $495 R/T
In business, AV is pricing just over $1000 R/t

If you look at some connection stuff, AV is at $800 to EZE from JFK via BOG in Y and about $1600 in J.
To GRU it's $735 in Y and $1900 in J. Considering they are offering angled lie flat, seems like the J cabin is having a real hard time selling out even at very low fares.

If you just take a look at Friday and come back next friday to BOG, it's $380 on DL right now and $445 on UA from EWR.

On GYE, B6 is now pricing at over $700 for same dates.

Looking further ahead, I see JFK-BOG at $530 in the future dates. Not sure if the Feb/March weakness is due to low demand or if it always get cheaper close-in. It seems to me that if $530 is the norm, B6 could try the route. It's certainly not a golden opportunity.

JFK-MDE on the other hand seems quite high fared in comparison. I see AV operating 4x weekly with 787 in April and charging $880 R/T. It seems like A220-300 would do really well on a route like this vs 787. A321NEO might be too much capacity. Without the connection traffic at BOG, AV is relying more on just O&D on this route, which makes it easier for another carrier to out compete them with the right aircraft.

Also, from WN's MAX cuts
WN BOS-BWI JUN 10>9[9] JUL 10>9[9]
WN BOS-DEN JUN 3>2[3] JUL 3>2[3] AUG 1.0>0.7[3]
*WN BOS-HOU JUN 1.1>0.5[1.0] JUL 1.1>0.3[1.0] AUG 0.4>0.2[1.1]
WN BOS-MDW JUL 5>4[5]
WN FLL-IND JUL 2.0>1.5[1.1]
WN FLL-MSY JUN 3>2[3] JUL 3>2.0[3] AUG 0.9>0.6[2.0]
*WN FLL-RDU JUN 1.0>0.4[1.1] JUL 1.0>0.3[1.1] AUG 0.3>0.1[1.0]
WN FLL-TPA JUL 4>3[4] AUG 1.4>1.1[4]

Not exactly a surprise WN struggles at BOS. But if they are willing to cut HOU to such a low capacity level, there is really not many routes they won't be willing to cut. Out of the routes WN does serve, I think BNA/BWI/DEN/MDW will always be around in a year round daily capacity. To me, it seems like they'd be willing to downsize everything else. If B6 wants to grab additional gate from B, it seems to me that pushing WN to cut back is one of the few obvious ways for them to get there. That would require obvious moves of adding BOS-STL/CMH and continuing to add capacity to ORD/DFW/IAH. As for FLL, I think the cuts here show the continued weakness WN is experiencing in the market. I'd be surprised if FLL-MCO/TPA survive for much longer now that AA/DL have added that much capacity out of MIA. RDU seems also a goner in the long term given the AA/DL additions. And without these feeds, a lot of WN's FLL Caribbean routes are just not going to work.

B6 have been quite the beneficiary of WN's MAX issues. On the other hand, NK seems to have also benefited quite a bit from this. And they are giving B6 a lot of problems at FLL.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5354
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:08 pm

CaptCoolHand wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
What happened to "Connecting the Dots"? How about adding ANU, FDF, GND, PTP, etc. from BOS?


Part of the problem is airbus. The continue to fail on the delivery schedule. After this year we’ll be 10 321s short of what was expected.


Yep, I get the impression a lot of their problems are due to NEO delays. Also, there seems to be more a lot more important dots for them to connect than more island routes.

Planeboy17 wrote:
Just curious, has there been any definitive evidence that the Port Authority has ordered B6 to use more of their slots? IIRC this was mentioned somewhere up thread but I haven’t read of any substantiation. This just seems very strange that B6 would be sitting on slots since I’ve read they had no more slots available the last couple of summers.

NK apparently filed a complaint about slot usage at JFK. I got a PM from someone who was pretty convinced that this was the case. I was surprised about the additional slots too. I guess they had been saving them all along. They certainly won't have trouble finding slots for TATL flying.
 
Dieuwer
Posts: 2487
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:14 pm

Another question mark is the late start of the seasonal BOS-PDX (double daily) It starts June 11th and runs until late October.
I would think that starting the Friday before Memorial Day would be better. And perhaps end earlier (late September). Or even better: make it year-round.
 
jbpdx
Posts: 866
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 6:37 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:16 pm

Dieuwer wrote:
Or even better: make it year-round.


Delta just might do that.
^
 
tphuang
Posts: 5354
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:24 pm

Dieuwer wrote:
Another question mark is the late start of the seasonal BOS-PDX (double daily) It starts June 11th and runs until late October.
I would think that starting the Friday before Memorial Day would be better. And perhaps end earlier (late September). Or even better: make it year-round.

I think you are going to see it extend longer next year and it will be year round in a couple of years.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26254
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:40 pm

Dieuwer wrote:
Brickell305 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
What happened to "Connecting the Dots"? How about adding ANU, FDF, GND, PTP, etc. from BOS?

Good luck on filling any of those with the possible exception of ANU.


How so? I have friends (French) who love to go to Guadeloupe and Martinique.
Don't forget that Boston Metro is host to lots of foreigners with passports who live and work here.


The market is beyond minuscule. One weekly A320 couldn’t even fill the entire weekly local market.
a.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3340
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:19 am

tphuang wrote:
Not exactly a surprise WN struggles at BOS. But if they are willing to cut HOU to such a low capacity level, there is really not many routes they won't be willing to cut. Out of the routes WN does serve, I think BNA/BWI/DEN/MDW will always be around in a year round daily capacity. To me, it seems like they'd be willing to downsize everything else.


I'd probably throw BOS-STL into the list of markets WN will stay strong on. They're flying that 5x daily this summer, which is higher frequency than all but BWI. STL has grown into a major 100+ daily departure connecting operation for WN, and I'm sure they do well with the business travelers on that end.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 40

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