Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
eagles94
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 11:51 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 7:46 pm

What a wonderful treat for the flight crews, all this hype, excitement and publicized build-up, and they finally see London trips popping up on their roster, just to end up in some horrific landfill near Crawley, or some wonderfully tacky, equally horrific part of Essex :?

Keep an eye on your handbags and purses :lol:
 
AC4500
Posts: 684
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:02 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:01 pm

tphuang wrote:
So you are agreeing that DY and BA's current schedule will not stick around for S21, but they will somehow still have the upper hand? Do you mean by the DY that just filed bankruptcy today and reduced their operation down to domestic only? If anything, JetBlue will probably have more success on JFK-LGW on a limited schedule than on JFK-LHR, since there is no competition.

Having more flights on larger planes just means you have to sell more seats. The beauty of A321LR is that it has comparable all-in CASM to A330 and B787 despite having much fewer seats.

The sooner people recognize this the better. Smaller planes that have similar CASM to larger planes will eventually drive the larger planes out of routes they formerly flourish in. That's what happened in domestic transcon market and west coast to Hawaii.

OK, fair enough.

For JetBlue's potential success or failure at Gatwick, I was more or less thinking long-term (beyond S21), and I was not aware that Norwegian recently filed for bankruptcy.

jfklganyc wrote:
Ill say it: DY wont be crossing the pond in 2021

Why are we pretending they will? Because they are pretending they will?

We know better

Of course they won't. But who knows how long they're going to keep their schedule open for bookings (although, since they just filed for bankruptcy, which I was previously not aware of, Norwegian's entire schedule may be wiped out very soon). My point was that the longer that Norwegian has their flights open for bookings at such low fares, the more pressure is on JetBlue to match their fares.

Of course this is all just hypothetical at this point, as JetBlue isn't going to start selling their London flights to passengers anytime soon, and by the time they do, Norwegian may not even exist anymore... :?
 
hbernal1
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2020 9:51 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:10 pm

I don't think all that much will happen in 2021 - so I'll give my combined 2021/22 predictions:

1. Northeast predictions: EWR likely to keep getting routes that do well from JFK. I expect EWR-BNA/MSY/RDU/SAV to all be feasible domestic adds. More Caribbean and leisure is also likely. BOS and JFK will be very slow to come back. From BDL, I can see a Caribbean destination or DCA being added.

2. West Coast: LAX will see very modest expansion before MSC opens. More of the long-and-thin adds are likely, with the likeliest markets being HPN/JAX/PIT/PVD. It's possible that PVR/SJD are added and served from LAX. More service added to LAS/SFO. SFO will get some interesting adds: I can see BUF happening since Schumer wants it, but I think seasonal PSP gets added. In 2022, SNA is added with the A220s coming online and will get BOS/EWR/JFK.

3. Florida: MCO will only be added from other cities where B6 is expanding (MCO-CHS/RDU, LAS possible but less likely). More Midwest to Florida flying happens, with RSW/TPA being the main targets for expansion. Out of FLL, B6 might try to get more West Coast flying to beef up connections to the Caribbean. More frequency on FLL-LAS/PHX/SAN/SEA/SFO and I think DEN can be added. Beyond that, only DFW/MSP make sense for domestic adds unless IND or STL are added (possible). PBI will also be heavily targeted for expansion (though I can't think of where else would be good from PBI off the top of my head).
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5106
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:20 pm

[quote="Nicknuzzii"]If I was JetBlue I would seriously consider postponing BOS while only launching JFK next year. BOS-STN is not going to work.[/quoteso]

So? Exactly HOW might you know it Won't work? Do you have Route Data to prove your point? I'd be you Don't as both LGW and STN were both pretty hot Charter markets out of JFK, along with CDG/Orly, MAD, and ATH Very few US Charter outfits if any could operate out of LHR. so LGW and STN was prety much IT chartering from the USA.
 
CobaltScar
Posts: 837
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 2:30 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:21 pm

Not a very exciting schedule, and to some ghetto destinations.
 
phllax
Posts: 690
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:53 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Wed Nov 18, 2020 9:18 pm

tphuang wrote:
It seems to me that Florida panhandles is one area that they have not tried at all. I took a look at PDEW data from 2019 Q3, it came out to about 240 a day between PNS/VPS/ECP and NYC with another 50 to TLH and some number to Mobile, AL. BOS demand is about 1/2 of NYC. There is no real competition to in this market. This seems to be one leisure market that could easily support year round A320 flight to NYC. Either JFK-ECP/VPS would work.

Delta does a good job of funneling all that via ATL. The real demand for those markets is the midwest and they are also summer beaches, not winter beaches like South Florida.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10427
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 9:18 pm

RodFarva wrote:
airbazar wrote:
JoseSalazar wrote:
I don’t think B6’s regular mint NEOs will be ETOPS according to a discussion I heard about it. So I think they would be limited to their LRs for these routes. That said I don’t think they will keep an LR just sitting idle as a spare full time. It’ll be interesting to see what they end up doing.

All A320 family aircraft are ETOPS 180 certified out of the factory. It's the airline itself that needs to add an ETOPS program and be certified for it in addition to the aircraft already being ETOPS certified.
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-r ... e-faa.html
I would be surprised if B6 only includes the LR's in their program. Nevertheless, you don't really need ETOPS to fly TATL. WOW operated many TATL routes and they were not ETOPS certified. ETOPS does help shorten the route.


This says they can be delivered from the factory ETOPS 180 equipped. That's a long ways away from every aircraft they build is properly equipped and delivered. I'm not an airbus know-all, but I would think that it's an option

It's not an option, it's an integral part of the aircraft certification process. Every Boeing aircraft since the 777 is too. Boeing pioneered ETOPS-180 at EIS with the 777. Until then there was only ETOPS-120 at EIS.
 
Dreamliner2020
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 10:36 am

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 9:23 pm

If we go with the assumption that “If the market was there, someone would already be operating it”, then there is no point in any airline offering any new route pair. Based on that assumption, all the profitable routes are already covered and there really are no new ventures to be had out there.

I don’t believe this to be the case.

Good on JetBlue.
 
timberwolf24
Posts: 543
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2001 8:38 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Wed Nov 18, 2020 9:32 pm

flymco753 wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
-More Florida to midwest
Would this include MCO or is this along lines of RSW &TPA? I've predicted MCO-CLE/DTW/ORD would eventually be added and with leisure travel having recovered much quicker, it makes sense to check these off the list now and build awareness for the full recovery. Similarly to why WN re-entered and extended MSP, DTW and entered SLC-MCO.


I don't think you will see B6 add MCO-ORD as I think WN will be adding ORD-MCO by next fall. I would not be surprised to see B6 dropping ORD-FLL/PBI.
Living in LA, ORD/MDW will always be home!
 
RvA
Posts: 519
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 12:37 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 10:10 pm

chonetsao wrote:
RvA wrote:
chonetsao wrote:

You really need to define where in London you are talking about. Using two landmarks and one district as example:

1, Big Ben
London Stanstead to Big Ben
Drive: 64 minutes and 39 miles
Public Transportation: 63 minutes

Heathrow Terminal 3 to Big Ben
Drive: 51 or 63 minutes in 17.3 - 19.7 miles
Public Transportation: 50 or 63 minutes (50 minutes with Heathrow Express and 63 with underground)

Heathrow Terminal 5 to Big Ben
Drive: 55 or 62 minutes
Public Transportation: 55 or 62 minutes (55 minutes with Heathrow Express and 62 with underground)

2, Tower of London
London Stanstead to Tower of London
Drive: 53 minutes and 36.5 miles
Public Transportation: 67 minutes

Heathrow Terminal 3 to Tower of London:
Drive: 64 minutes in 19.7 miles
Public Transportation: 72 minutes to 84 minutes (72 minutes with Heathrow Express and 84 minutes with underground)

Heathrow Terminal 5 to Tower of London
Drive: 65 or 81 minutes in 22.6 -30 miles
Public Transportation: 68 or 75 minutes (no difference whether you take Heathrow Express or not)

3, Canary Wharf, the London financial hub
London Stanstead to Canary Wharf:
Drive: 41 minutes in 34.4 miles
Public Transportation: 74 minutes

Heathrow Terminal 3 to Canary Wharf
Drive: 73 minutes in 22.5 miles
Public Transportation: 75 minutes

Heathrow Terminal 5 to Canary Wharf
Drive: 74 minutes in 25.3 miles
Public Transportation: 69 minutes or 79 minutes (69 minutes using Heathrow Express)

Above figure all from Google Maps direction as of today. Google estimate 7 minutes walk from London Heathrow Terminal 3 to the underground station thus times are similar or longer compare to Heathrow Terminal 5 when using public transportation.

Notice how similar the time spend to London Stanstead is marginally quicker to Tower of London region compare with Heathrow Terminal 5? And notice how much quicker it is to drive from Stanstead to Canary Wharf? I am not saying you are wrong. But I would like to present real figures to people interested to see in order to make their own decisions.


At what time of day is this? Also given people are unlikely to go from Canary Wharf (their place of work) or Big Ben (tourist attraction) to the airport for a morning transatlantic flight, not sure how much this matters?


To answer your question, it was taken around 9am. You are welcome to check other times. Even if you do not care about driving time, take a look at public transportation option, those duration time does not change as public transportation run on schedule.

People DO get to Canary Wharf to work after a morning transatlantic flight either by choice or design. Might be a minority but banking industry is known to be tough on working schedules. You get a meeting, you go for a meeting, no ifs no buts.

Big Ben and Tower of London are the two famous landmarks in London, one is considered as central of London (Westminster London), and one is considered in or near the City of London (please kindly research on the terms so that you could understand if you do not already). The purpose to use these two landmarks is to illustrate why Stanstead is not vastly in disadvantage in travelling time to London. As readers and you may appreciate London is huge, you need to define where in London (more precisely Greater London) in order to get a picture on how long the transportation needs. You can call Whitechapel in London, you can also call Wembley in London, it is very unfair to argue Heathrow is more convenient for London without agree on where you consider as your start point or region. If you mean Westminster as London, then fine, we use Big Ben as landmark. If you want to mean City of London as London, then Tower of London or London bridge is a good choice. But if you want to define Chelsea or Shepherds Bush as London, I am afraid that is in Greater London and should not be used as example.

It certainly matters in the sake of argument as people from different part find different airport more convenient. There is no point to make a statement that Heathrow is more convenient unless we establish a common ground that which part of London you want to define. As the travel time to 3 most well known London landmarks have shown, there is no definite answer on which airport is more convenient. Stanstead remains to be one of the top O&D airports in UK for a reason.


That last sentence has to do with it being a Ryanair stronghold.
I see what you are saying but I disagree with STN being on par with LHR in terms of convenience.
There is a reason LHR remains the most popular airport, and not just oneworld airlines who offer connections onto BA.
A number of airlines seek to serve other airports besides LHR to compliment their service, usually LGW and LCY are next in line, not STN, and there’s good reasons for it. Travel time to the city centre isn’t a good metric to use.
 
RvA
Posts: 519
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 12:37 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 10:14 pm

mattyfitzg wrote:
As mentioned above, Primera operated STN-BOS on A21N's, they always operated with high loads and had Premium seats block booked by a Cambridge based pharmaceutical company. Whether it was profitable or not is a different matter.

Primera, when they started, were completely unknown at both ends of the route.

JetBlue on the other hand, are obviously a household name at one end, and relatively unknown at the other end.


They have a better shot at making this work I believe. Though I bet their cost base won’t be as low as Primera’s was, but they have a network to help cover costs or even losses until either the route becomes profitable, or slots at LHR become available and they can switch and have meanwhile helped their brand recognition in southern England.
I hope they can make it work, I just have my doubts but then again there are so many other possibilities that it’s I think pretty hard to predict exactly what will happen. Good on them for giving this a go.
 
Dreamliner2020
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 10:36 am

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 10:14 pm

eagles94 wrote:
What a wonderful treat for the flight crews, all this hype, excitement and publicized build-up, and they finally see London trips popping up on their roster, just to end up in some horrific landfill near Crawley, or some wonderfully tacky, equally horrific part of Essex :?

Keep an eye on your handbags and purses :lol:


Have you seen some of the ‘delightful’ towns around LHR?

I reckon some of the US crew would have a nice time in say Bishops Stortford. Not tacky at all. Quintessentially English.
 
AC4500
Posts: 684
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:02 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 10:35 pm

Dreamliner2020 wrote:
If we go with the assumption that “If the market was there, someone would already be operating it”, then there is no point in any airline offering any new route pair. Based on that assumption, all the profitable routes are already covered and there really are no new ventures to be had out there.

I don’t believe this to be the case.

Good on JetBlue.

I believe other airlines have tried Stansted routes from the United States and have not been successful.
 
hbernal1
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2020 9:51 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Wed Nov 18, 2020 10:48 pm

Some of the routes announced in September are starting this week I believe. Or no?
 
Dreamliner2020
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 10:36 am

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 10:53 pm

AC4500 wrote:
Dreamliner2020 wrote:
If we go with the assumption that “If the market was there, someone would already be operating it”, then there is no point in any airline offering any new route pair. Based on that assumption, all the profitable routes are already covered and there really are no new ventures to be had out there.

I don’t believe this to be the case.

Good on JetBlue.

I believe other airlines have tried Stansted routes from the United States and have not been successful.


2007/8 AA operated JFK - STN daily, they were due to go double daily before they pulled it. And why did they pull the route? Because they succeeded. Both MaxJet and Eos had gone belly up. If AA weren’t worried that both of these new entrants were stealing their LHR customers, then why did they bother?

London has changed massively in the twelve or so years since. The diversity of routes that are offered from Stansted has increased in that time too. Stansted is the U.K’s fourth busiest airport after LHR/LGW/MAN. Not bad for an airport that many posters perceive as being ‘miles from anywhere’ or ‘difficult to get to’.
It is very conveniently located for the east and north east of London. Take that from someone who lives there. LHR from this side of town is a total ball ache to get to. I’d happily use a STN - East Coast service over any offering from LHR.

A lot of the views of STN on this forum are seriously outdated.
 
SoCalFlyer
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:16 am

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:23 pm

eagles94 wrote:
What a wonderful treat for the flight crews, all this hype, excitement and publicized build-up, and they finally see London trips popping up on their roster, just to end up in some horrific landfill near Crawley, or some wonderfully tacky, equally horrific part of Essex :?

Keep an eye on your handbags and purses :lol:


Our contracts have very specific language about where we must stay in cities. I wouldn’t worry too much about that ;)
 
User avatar
klm617
Posts: 5467
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:35 pm

Dreamliner2020 wrote:
If we go with the assumption that “If the market was there, someone would already be operating it”, then there is no point in any airline offering any new route pair. Based on that assumption, all the profitable routes are already covered and there really are no new ventures to be had out there.

I don’t believe this to be the case.

Good on JetBlue.



So much this
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5106
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:40 pm

airbazar wrote:
RodFarva wrote:
airbazar wrote:
All A320 family aircraft are ETOPS 180 certified out of the factory. It's the airline itself that needs to add an ETOPS program and be certified for it in addition to the aircraft already being ETOPS certified.
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-r ... e-faa.html
I would be surprised if B6 only includes the LR's in their program. Nevertheless, you don't really need ETOPS to fly TATL. WOW operated many TATL routes and they were not ETOPS certified. ETOPS does help shorten the route.


This says they can be delivered from the factory ETOPS 180 equipped. That's a long ways away from every aircraft they build is properly equipped and delivered. I'm not an airbus know-all, but I would think that it's an option

It's not an option, it's an integral part of the aircraft certification process. Every Boeing aircraft since the 777 is too. Boeing pioneered ETOPS-180 at EIS with the 777. Until then there was only ETOPS-120 at EIS.

ETOPS equipment is an option. It makes perfect sense for resale or releasing to take it on the initial build. However? There'a more than that to gain ETOPS certification and you can BET the FAA and EASA are all on top of it. Jet Blue May or May NOT come our of the chute with ETOPS 180 even if the airplanes can so it. The airline has to prove itself to even accomplish ETOPS certification and the Accomplishment itself is a Steep Climb. Not only in Procedures, Proving Runs, Operations, Dispatch, Maintenance, Diversions, but having certified people on Both Ends of the flights to get the airplanes turned and Back to the USA. It is getting easier nowadays as many EU certified Mechanics are also USA /certified A&P's as well. I worked like crazy to become EASA Certified and meet their certification testing though it was a lot of paperwork it wasn't any harder than being a US certified A&P though the record keeping was much more stringent than the USA as I had to prove I had the training and Experience on Every MODEL of airplane I wanted certification ON and For which meant I had to drag out training records for all the airplanes I had worked on and the Engines installed on them. Which is a feat that not many USA certified mechanics can even do. I just happened to be Anal about it. But I never knew it would do me any good even building a Library like that.. In the USA your License is a card in your pocket or wallet. In the EU it's a Binder. with every Aircraft and Engine spelled out.
Is it better? Probably not, But it's darn sure Detailed!
 
eagles94
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 11:51 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:59 pm

Dreamliner2020 wrote:
eagles94 wrote:
What a wonderful treat for the flight crews, all this hype, excitement and publicized build-up, and they finally see London trips popping up on their roster, just to end up in some horrific landfill near Crawley, or some wonderfully tacky, equally horrific part of Essex :?

Keep an eye on your handbags and purses :lol:


Have you seen some of the ‘delightful’ towns around LHR?

I reckon some of the US crew would have a nice time in say Bishops Stortford. Not tacky at all. Quintessentially English.


What are you on about, West London is marvelous ;) :duck:

But no really, as with most other U.S. carriers, im sure JetBlue crew will find themselves posted to a nice hotel in "Zone 1"
 
Brickell305
Posts: 1447
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 2:07 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 12:01 am

Dreamliner2020 wrote:
AC4500 wrote:
Dreamliner2020 wrote:
If we go with the assumption that “If the market was there, someone would already be operating it”, then there is no point in any airline offering any new route pair. Based on that assumption, all the profitable routes are already covered and there really are no new ventures to be had out there.

I don’t believe this to be the case.

Good on JetBlue.

I believe other airlines have tried Stansted routes from the United States and have not been successful.


2007/8 AA operated JFK - STN daily, they were due to go double daily before they pulled it. And why did they pull the route? Because they succeeded. Both MaxJet and Eos had gone belly up. If AA weren’t worried that both of these new entrants were stealing their LHR customers, then why did they bother?

London has changed massively in the twelve or so years since. The diversity of routes that are offered from Stansted has increased in that time too. Stansted is the U.K’s fourth busiest airport after LHR/LGW/MAN. Not bad for an airport that many posters perceive as being ‘miles from anywhere’ or ‘difficult to get to’.
It is very conveniently located for the east and north east of London. Take that from someone who lives there. LHR from this side of town is a total ball ache to get to. I’d happily use a STN - East Coast service over any offering from LHR.

A lot of the views of STN on this forum are seriously outdated.

And that being the case, what’s to stop AA/BA/DL/VS from doing that now and running the route just to get B6 off it? Especially as they are aware that B6 (currently) doesn’t have the slots to fly to another airport if STN proves to be unprofitable?

I don’t think it will come to this as I believe that route will be unprofitable on its own. However, why couldn’t they choose to do this if necessary? I doubt slots at STN would be difficult to acquire.
 
aftx91
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat May 09, 2020 12:11 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 12:11 am

Primera’s financial problems go way back, years before they attempted TRATL flying.
As people have already said, their loads were good, I saw first hand when I flew them a number of times going home to the U.S. where the flight was operating at capacity, and this was the case for all 3 U.S destinations.
Had Primera had the backing, money, and management that JetBlue have; we wouldn’t be referring to them in the past tense.
If a carrier unknown at both its origin and destination can still fill an aircraft to capacity, even with their pretty dire reputation, I don’t see why JetBlue can’t do the same. Remember that Primera also operated from BOS/EWR to Paris, but I have no idea how they performed there.
 
Dreamliner2020
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 10:36 am

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 12:12 am

Brickell305 wrote:
Dreamliner2020 wrote:
AC4500 wrote:
I believe other airlines have tried Stansted routes from the United States and have not been successful.


2007/8 AA operated JFK - STN daily, they were due to go double daily before they pulled it. And why did they pull the route? Because they succeeded. Both MaxJet and Eos had gone belly up. If AA weren’t worried that both of these new entrants were stealing their LHR customers, then why did they bother?

London has changed massively in the twelve or so years since. The diversity of routes that are offered from Stansted has increased in that time too. Stansted is the U.K’s fourth busiest airport after LHR/LGW/MAN. Not bad for an airport that many posters perceive as being ‘miles from anywhere’ or ‘difficult to get to’.
It is very conveniently located for the east and north east of London. Take that from someone who lives there. LHR from this side of town is a total ball ache to get to. I’d happily use a STN - East Coast service over any offering from LHR.

A lot of the views of STN on this forum are seriously outdated.

And that being the case, what’s to stop AA/BA/DL/VS from doing that now and running the route just to get B6 off it? Especially as they are aware that B6 (currently) doesn’t have the slots to fly to another airport if STN proves to be unprofitable?

I don’t think it will come to this as I believe that route will be unprofitable on its own. However, why couldn’t they choose to do this if necessary? I doubt slots at STN would be difficult to acquire.


I’ve not mentioned in my response that they couldn’t? But they could easily do the same at LGW. It did however prove that there was a market back then that were willing to use the service. Me being one of them. I was bumped off STN-JFK with AA with just a months notice, with no choice but to suffer the journey to LHR. Something us ‘Eastenders’ have always had to endure going longhaul.

If JetBlue go straight in with LHR service, they’ll also be fighting the fight against BA/AA/UA from day one. Good luck with that bloodbath post Covid! Maybe JetBlue have found a niche? I’m sure they know the demographic they are targeting and have done their homework. Whether it be seen as plan A or plan B.
 
User avatar
klm617
Posts: 5467
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 1:15 am

aftx91 wrote:
Primera’s financial problems go way back, years before they attempted TRATL flying.
As people have already said, their loads were good, I saw first hand when I flew them a number of times going home to the U.S. where the flight was operating at capacity, and this was the case for all 3 U.S destinations.
Had Primera had the backing, money, and management that JetBlue have; we wouldn’t be referring to them in the past tense.
If a carrier unknown at both its origin and destination can still fill an aircraft to capacity, even with their pretty dire reputation, I don’t see why JetBlue can’t do the same. Remember that Primera also operated from BOS/EWR to Paris, but I have no idea how they performed there.


Please just like WOW Air it was running an operation that was unsustainable. If it was making money it would still be around today. The only reason it was filling planes is because it was selling seats at less than cost. BOS-STN is a disaster waiting to happen with an already over crowed market as it is.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
Dreamliner2020
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 10:36 am

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 1:18 am

Imagine if back in the 80’s Mr Branson thought... “Nah... It’ll never work. If Freddie can’t make Gatwick work then there really is no point in trying”.

Imagine if back in the 90’s Stelios thought... “No way will anyone want to travel from Luton to Glasgow... The airport is only good for charter flights to Malaga or Cyprus... No one’s ever going to take Luton seriously as a scheduled airport”.

Imagine.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10427
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 1:20 am

strfyr51 wrote:
airbazar wrote:
RodFarva wrote:
This says they can be delivered from the factory ETOPS 180 equipped. That's a long ways away from every aircraft they build is properly equipped and delivered. I'm not an airbus know-all, but I would think that it's an option

It's not an option, it's an integral part of the aircraft certification process. Every Boeing aircraft since the 777 is too. Boeing pioneered ETOPS-180 at EIS with the 777. Until then there was only ETOPS-120 at EIS.

ETOPS equipment is an option. It makes perfect sense for resale or releasing to take it on the initial build. However? There'a more than that to gain ETOPS certification and you can BET the FAA and EASA are all on top of it. Jet Blue May or May NOT come our of the chute with ETOPS 180 even if the airplanes can so it. The airline has to prove itself to even accomplish ETOPS certification and the Accomplishment itself is a Steep Climb. Not only in Procedures, Proving Runs, Operations, Dispatch, Maintenance, Diversions, but having certified people on Both Ends of the flights to get the airplanes turned and Back to the USA.

I know all of that. The above statement is strictly about aircraft certification, not airline certification. If you read my entire post you'll see that I specifically pointed out that difference.
 
Brickell305
Posts: 1447
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 2:07 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 1:42 am

Dreamliner2020 wrote:
Brickell305 wrote:
Dreamliner2020 wrote:

2007/8 AA operated JFK - STN daily, they were due to go double daily before they pulled it. And why did they pull the route? Because they succeeded. Both MaxJet and Eos had gone belly up. If AA weren’t worried that both of these new entrants were stealing their LHR customers, then why did they bother?

London has changed massively in the twelve or so years since. The diversity of routes that are offered from Stansted has increased in that time too. Stansted is the U.K’s fourth busiest airport after LHR/LGW/MAN. Not bad for an airport that many posters perceive as being ‘miles from anywhere’ or ‘difficult to get to’.
It is very conveniently located for the east and north east of London. Take that from someone who lives there. LHR from this side of town is a total ball ache to get to. I’d happily use a STN - East Coast service over any offering from LHR.

A lot of the views of STN on this forum are seriously outdated.

And that being the case, what’s to stop AA/BA/DL/VS from doing that now and running the route just to get B6 off it? Especially as they are aware that B6 (currently) doesn’t have the slots to fly to another airport if STN proves to be unprofitable?

I don’t think it will come to this as I believe that route will be unprofitable on its own. However, why couldn’t they choose to do this if necessary? I doubt slots at STN would be difficult to acquire.


I’ve not mentioned in my response that they couldn’t? But they could easily do the same at LGW. It did however prove that there was a market back then that were willing to use the service. Me being one of them. I was bumped off STN-JFK with AA with just a months notice, with no choice but to suffer the journey to LHR. Something us ‘Eastenders’ have always had to endure going longhaul.

If JetBlue go straight in with LHR service, they’ll also be fighting the fight against BA/AA/UA from day one. Good luck with that bloodbath post Covid! Maybe JetBlue have found a niche? I’m sure they know the demographic they are targeting and have done their homework. Whether it be seen as plan A or plan B.

JetBlue applied for LHR and got 0 slots. They applied for LGW and got half the slots they requested and applied for STN and got all they applied for. B6 is aiming to go to LHR. They were unsuccessful for now. They also attempted to get twice as many LGW slots. They were unsuccessful for now. STN was not about finding a niche. It’s about making the best of the hand they were dealt.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6609
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Nov 19, 2020 3:06 am

phllax wrote:
tphuang wrote:
It seems to me that Florida panhandles is one area that they have not tried at all. I took a look at PDEW data from 2019 Q3, it came out to about 240 a day between PNS/VPS/ECP and NYC with another 50 to TLH and some number to Mobile, AL. BOS demand is about 1/2 of NYC. There is no real competition to in this market. This seems to be one leisure market that could easily support year round A320 flight to NYC. Either JFK-ECP/VPS would work.

Delta does a good job of funneling all that via ATL. The real demand for those markets is the midwest and they are also summer beaches, not winter beaches like South Florida.


I understand that DL gets a lot of the smaller Florida traffic through ATL and AA get them through CLT/DFW, but I do think there is still room for direct service from NYC. G4 has done a good job of getting people from midwest to the panhandle through rock bottom fares at sub-daily service. The average fare from NYC to these markets is really high. Without JetBlue, NYC-DAB has less demand last Q3 than both PNS and VPS. PNS even had more traffic than EYW. With direct flight + lower fares, the NYC to PNS/VPS/ECP market should be enough to support 1 or 2 flights a day. And they'd get some feed from Boston and other part of northeast. I don't think they need to offer service to all 3. If they even just try just PNS or ECP, they can pull traffic from the other 2 airports + either TLH or MOB. WN has managed to offer service to both airports.

Right now, they need to find any route that might have demand. The northern Florida airports have done relatively well compared to rest of the country. With more spoke being added to JFK network after the AA partnership finalizes, they should be able to capture more of the midwest to Florida market connecting through JFK.
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 5896
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 3:42 am

hiflyeras wrote:
Has any US airline ever been successful in operating to STN? No. This plan sounds like someone is putting the cart before the horse.


I agree, when B6 announced this, they were touting new enhanced mint product & a bent towards the business traveler. We even saw the tube patterns & the one for the Heathrow line. In all fairness B6 now has Covid to work into their plans & the demise of the business travelers. Either their pockets are not deep enough for LHR slots or the cost for return was not worth the acquisition cost.

A shame really for B6, with the new jets & the decision to venture into TATL traffic just before such a dramatic drop in traffic, a move that killed or helped kill, EA, NA or BN in a time with no Pandemics, B6 is following in their shoes to see what fortunes can be made, but leisure travel is a bit trickier, as we all know. I wish them the best, I would doubt much more in Europe will be too close out.
707 717 720 727-1/2 737-1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9 747-1/2/3/4 757-2/3 767-2/3/4 777-2/3 DC8 DC9 MD80/2/7/8 D10-1/3/4 M11 L10-1/2/5 A300/310/320
AA AC AQ AS BA BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HG HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN WP YS 8M
 
JoseSalazar
Posts: 553
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:18 am

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 4:13 am

airbazar wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
airbazar wrote:
It's not an option, it's an integral part of the aircraft certification process. Every Boeing aircraft since the 777 is too. Boeing pioneered ETOPS-180 at EIS with the 777. Until then there was only ETOPS-120 at EIS.

ETOPS equipment is an option. It makes perfect sense for resale or releasing to take it on the initial build. However? There'a more than that to gain ETOPS certification and you can BET the FAA and EASA are all on top of it. Jet Blue May or May NOT come our of the chute with ETOPS 180 even if the airplanes can so it. The airline has to prove itself to even accomplish ETOPS certification and the Accomplishment itself is a Steep Climb. Not only in Procedures, Proving Runs, Operations, Dispatch, Maintenance, Diversions, but having certified people on Both Ends of the flights to get the airplanes turned and Back to the USA.

I know all of that. The above statement is strictly about aircraft certification, not airline certification. If you read my entire post you'll see that I specifically pointed out that difference.

None of B6’s planes will be equipped or certified for etops besides the LR/XLR. If and when they decide to do hawaii with something besides their LR/XLR (which would be a waste of capability if they used an LR/XLR for hawaii but I digress), they will need to get an etops equipped/certified plane. But even their new NEOs (including their mint NEO coming soon) won’t be equipped or certified for ETOPS. They could retrofit them and put them in the etops program if they want at some point, but it sounds like the mod to retrofit to equip/certify etops isn’t cheap.
 
RvA
Posts: 519
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 12:37 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 7:12 am

Dreamliner2020 wrote:
Imagine if back in the 80’s Mr Branson thought... “Nah... It’ll never work. If Freddie can’t make Gatwick work then there really is no point in trying”.

Imagine if back in the 90’s Stelios thought... “No way will anyone want to travel from Luton to Glasgow... The airport is only good for charter flights to Malaga or Cyprus... No one’s ever going to take Luton seriously as a scheduled airport”.

Imagine.


Those were different times though. Virgin hasn’t exactly been the pinnacle of airline profitability, and easyJet works as they are cheap, and have a good cost base. Is JetBlue’s cost base good enough to sustain cheap fares, including at less than full loads?
We will find out I suppose. Very keen to see how they do. Hope they manage to make it profitable.
 
catiii
Posts: 3888
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 7:12 am

CobaltScar wrote:
Not a very exciting schedule, and to some ghetto destinations.


It’s not a very exciting schedule because a schedule hasn’t been published.
 
catiii
Posts: 3888
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 7:15 am

RWA380 wrote:
hiflyeras wrote:
Has any US airline ever been successful in operating to STN? No. This plan sounds like someone is putting the cart before the horse.


I agree, when B6 announced this, they were touting new enhanced mint product & a bent towards the business traveler. We even saw the tube patterns & the one for the Heathrow line. In all fairness B6 now has Covid to work into their plans & the demise of the business travelers. Either their pockets are not deep enough for LHR slots or the cost for return was not worth the acquisition cost.

A shame really for B6, with the new jets & the decision to venture into TATL traffic just before such a dramatic drop in traffic, a move that killed or helped kill, EA, NA or BN in a time with no Pandemics, B6 is following in their shoes to see what fortunes can be made, but leisure travel is a bit trickier, as we all know. I wish them the best, I would doubt much more in Europe will be too close out.


I’m sure your stockbroker has told you this, but all the public declarations have been that purchasing LHR slot pairs is simply too expensive and does not work in their business plan. That’s been an open and transparent statement from the start.

It’s going to be a J heavy cabin. Nothing has changed. The slot applications you’re all worked up over are the backup plans. The slot conference is this coming week at IATA. Let’s see what happens.
 
LAXLHR
Posts: 482
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 10:07 am

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 9:47 am

People need to stop being hung up on LHR as all or nothing.

LGW is great, and STN can work if the carrier/price is good.

- ALL 3 airports have their pros/cons on reaching them.

B6 will do well.
BA IB ET JM EA GK PA VS AA SN HP CO WN NW DL UA AC US LH LX OS JL QF QR WY MH CX U2 EK 9W UK TP VY VN LO OK OZ UL SQ LA KL

707 727 L10 732-NG 741 742 743 744 752 753 762 763 772 773 787 DC8 DC9 DC10 M80 M11 100 AB3 310 318 319 320 321 330s 340s 350 380
 
mattyfitzg
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2016 4:50 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 9:57 am

LAXLHR wrote:
People need to stop being hung up on LHR as all or nothing.



This.

In terms of getting to Central London, Heathrow & Gatwick are literally the same.
A quick look on tfl.gov.uk:
from Heathrow Terminal 2/3 to Westminster, total travel time is 59 minutes.
from Gatwick to Westminster, total travel time is 58 minutes.

from Heathrow Terminal 2/3 to Canary Wharf, total travel time is 1 hour 10 minutes
from Gatwick to Canary Wharf, total travel time is 1 hour 1 minute.

Add to that the walk from Terminal 2/3 to the tube station which is around 10 minutes by itself, and the walk from Gatwick South arrivals to the train station is only about 3 minutes, of course Gatwick North would take around 15 minutes, so assuming B6 uses Gatwick South, LGW winds up being the better option in this scenario.

I'd imagine the Business travellers that B6 are aiming for won't be taking public transport, so here are the driving times(in current traffic):
Heathrow to Westminster - 51 minutes
Heathrow to Canary Wharf - 1 hour 18 minutes

Gatwick to Westminster - 1 hour 13 minutes
Gatwick to Canary Wharf - 1 hour 2 minutes
Last edited by mattyfitzg on Thu Nov 19, 2020 10:02 am, edited 2 times in total.
 
BrianDromey
Posts: 3077
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:23 am

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 10:00 am

LAXLHR wrote:
People need to stop being hung up on LHR as all or nothing.

LGW is great, and STN can work if the carrier/price is good.

- ALL 3 airports have their pros/cons on reaching them.

B6 will do well.


For sure. Like any very large city some airports are easier to get to than others, depending on where you work and/or live. In truth there isn't much to pick between LHR/LGW/STN for the non-London based traveller getting to central zones. The difference is travellers based at the LON end, who will have very strong convenience-based preferences for some combination of LHR/LGW/LCY/STN/LTN/SEN. Frequent travellers, where their company is paying will have even stronger preferences for the shortest overall journey time. The leisure traveller based in Soth West London/Sussex/Surrey might be much more likely to book a night in the Radisson and use twilight check-out at STN than the weekly transatlantic commuter, but they will also be much more price sensitive.

In that context I think a very large business class cabin would be an issue for B6, but with good on-line connections at the BOS and NYC end even STN could work. Its basically a point-to-hub route, albeit an overseas one.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6609
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Nov 19, 2020 2:00 pm

https://simpleflying.com/jetblue-targets-italy/
saw this article with some interesting quotes from RH.
“London is the number one priority. That’s where the most demand is and that’s where the fares have been astronomically hiked for so long in business class. So we will focus on London, we will keep adding flights to London until we have had a permanent effect on bringing fares down significantly and creating excitement to fly again. But there are other markets in Europe.”
- So sounds like they will keep trying to add more flights to London as more LR come online. I assume the 6 they receive in 2021 and 2022 are all going into London market. It's hard for me to see them getting LHR slots for all these flights unless something dramatically changes.

“One of the advantages a US based carrier has is that there are a number of markets in Europe that work well in the summer, but they don’t necessarily work well in the winter. With an A321, whether it’s an LR or an XLR, what we can do is fly to Europe in the summer, and then we can point it south to the Caribbean or Latin America in the winter. So that allows that airplane to perform all year round.”
So here is the interesting part. We know that Rome, Athens, Madrid are all pretty large markets from US in summer time, but are quite barren in winter time. Maybe they can use those aircraft on routes like JFK-GIG/LIM during the other half of the year.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10427
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 2:26 pm

JoseSalazar wrote:
None of B6’s planes will be equipped or certified for etops besides the LR/XLR. If and when they decide to do hawaii with something besides their LR/XLR (which would be a waste of capability if they used an LR/XLR for hawaii but I digress), they will need to get an etops equipped/certified plane. But even their new NEOs (including their mint NEO coming soon) won’t be equipped or certified for ETOPS. They could retrofit them and put them in the etops program if they want at some point, but it sounds like the mod to retrofit to equip/certify etops isn’t cheap.

They already are but you'll never believe it so this will be my last post on this topic. I don't think understand the difference between aircraft certification and airline certification, or you misunderstanding my statement. An ETOPS certified airplane needs to be included in the airline's ETOPS program in order for it to "legally" fly ETOPS routes. What you have right now is an airline in B6 that does not yet have an established ETOPS program. Once that program is in place it will include a certain number of aircraft. It may only be the LR/XLR or there may be more. That is what we generally refer to "the aircraft is ETOPS certified" but it's kind of a mislabel because the aircraft itself was already certified by the manufacturer, it was just not part of the airline's ETOPS program.
 
CALMSP
Posts: 3671
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Thu Nov 19, 2020 2:28 pm

LAXLHR wrote:
People need to stop being hung up on LHR as all or nothing.

LGW is great, and STN can work if the carrier/price is good.

- ALL 3 airports have their pros/cons on reaching them.

B6 will do well.


so B6 should give up on trying to get LHR? Its clear that the B6 "people" know that LHR is the airport they want/need to fly into, otherwise LHR wouldn't have been choice #1.
 
jplatts
Posts: 4644
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Nov 19, 2020 4:02 pm

tphuang wrote:
I understand that DL gets a lot of the smaller Florida traffic through ATL and AA get them through CLT/DFW, but I do think there is still room for direct service from NYC. G4 has done a good job of getting people from midwest to the panhandle through rock bottom fares at sub-daily service. The average fare from NYC to these markets is really high. Without JetBlue, NYC-DAB has less demand last Q3 than both PNS and VPS. PNS even had more traffic than EYW. With direct flight + lower fares, the NYC to PNS/VPS/ECP market should be enough to support 1 or 2 flights a day. And they'd get some feed from Boston and other part of northeast. I don't think they need to offer service to all 3. If they even just try just PNS or ECP, they can pull traffic from the other 2 airports + either TLH or MOB. WN has managed to offer service to both airports.


G4 still has less-than-daily nonstop service to VPS from EWR, and there are some leisure travelers in both New Jersey and NYC who are willing to fly nonstop to VPS from EWR on G4. The fares of the G4 EWR-PVS nonstop flights are also likely cheaper than any connecting options to VPS from EWR or LGA on US3 carriers.

I agree that B6 adding JFK-ECP/PNS nonstop service are possibilities with B6 already serving other domestic leisure destinations nonstop from JFK and with ECP and PNS both currently lacking nonstop service from NYC.
 
User avatar
DLHAM
Posts: 643
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 1:10 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Thu Nov 19, 2020 9:48 pm

tphuang wrote:
“One of the advantages a US based carrier has is that there are a number of markets in Europe that work well in the summer, but they don’t necessarily work well in the winter. With an A321, whether it’s an LR or an XLR, what we can do is fly to Europe in the summer, and then we can point it south to the Caribbean or Latin America in the winter. So that allows that airplane to perform all year round.”
So here is the interesting part. We know that Rome, Athens, Madrid are all pretty large markets from US in summer time, but are quite barren in winter time. Maybe they can use those aircraft on routes like JFK-GIG/LIM during the other half of the year.


Pretty much all european markets are much weaker in winter from the US, especially in January and Feburary. In my opinion the A321 is THE gamechanger for many of the smaller markets as it should be possible to fly yearround and still make profits, which would be unthinkable with an aircraft like a 767 or even A330 etc.
My Instagram Account: Instagram
 
trueblew
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2018 10:16 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Fri Nov 20, 2020 12:17 am

airbazar wrote:
JoseSalazar wrote:
None of B6’s planes will be equipped or certified for etops besides the LR/XLR. If and when they decide to do hawaii with something besides their LR/XLR (which would be a waste of capability if they used an LR/XLR for hawaii but I digress), they will need to get an etops equipped/certified plane. But even their new NEOs (including their mint NEO coming soon) won’t be equipped or certified for ETOPS. They could retrofit them and put them in the etops program if they want at some point, but it sounds like the mod to retrofit to equip/certify etops isn’t cheap.

They already are but you'll never believe it so this will be my last post on this topic. I don't think understand the difference between aircraft certification and airline certification, or you misunderstanding my statement. An ETOPS certified airplane needs to be included in the airline's ETOPS program in order for it to "legally" fly ETOPS routes. What you have right now is an airline in B6 that does not yet have an established ETOPS program. Once that program is in place it will include a certain number of aircraft. It may only be the LR/XLR or there may be more. That is what we generally refer to "the aircraft is ETOPS certified" but it's kind of a mislabel because the aircraft itself was already certified by the manufacturer, it was just not part of the airline's ETOPS program.


Does the aircraft not require specific optional equipment in order to be approved for addition to the ETOPS list?
 
UPNYGuy
Posts: 344
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 4:14 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Fri Nov 20, 2020 12:44 am

Delete
 
Blerg
Posts: 4988
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Fri Nov 20, 2020 6:23 am

So how far into Europe can they realistically and economically operate the A321? Can it reach Paris and Amsterdam or are the British Isles as good as it gets?
 
JoseSalazar
Posts: 553
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:18 am

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Fri Nov 20, 2020 6:33 am

Blerg wrote:
So how far into Europe can they realistically and economically operate the A321? Can it reach Paris and Amsterdam or are the British Isles as good as it gets?

With only 138 seats, CDG and AMS shouldn’t be an issue from JFK/BOS with the XLR.
 
User avatar
ArcticSEA
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2020 8:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Fri Nov 20, 2020 8:02 am

Didn't B6 run LAS-MCO at one point? I know Delta did, maybe I am confusing the two.
Why has B6 ceded EYW to everyone else?
They should resume DAB.
PNW-based private pilot and engineer. #fatpnw
 
hbernal1
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2020 9:51 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Fri Nov 20, 2020 10:05 am

ArcticSEA wrote:
Didn't B6 run LAS-MCO at one point? I know Delta did, maybe I am confusing the two.
Why has B6 ceded EYW to everyone else?
They should resume DAB.


I don’t recall B6 flying LAS-MCO, I do remember LAS-SFO though. JetBlue should definitely add MCO-LAS/SAN. I wonder what the PDEW is on RDU-LAS/SAN/SFO, could be worth trying too. I agree about DAB as well, at least for seasonal service - it seemed to do reasonably well and leisure travel should come back quickly relative to international and business demand.
 
Boof02671
Posts: 2649
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:00 pm

airbazar wrote:
JoseSalazar wrote:
airbazar wrote:

The train from STN to London costs about same amount as from LHR and LGW. ,There really is no significant difference. LHR does have the Tube which is a few pounds cheaper but not by much. You can buy an advanced express train ticket STN-London for less than £10. A 1-way ride on the Tube from LHR is £6 and that's no express train.



They don't need an LR to be a spare. Any Mint configured A321 will do as the occasional sub, albeit with fewer Mint seats. Primera was running longer flights with their aircraft than BOS/JFK-LON.

I don’t think B6’s regular mint NEOs will be ETOPS according to a discussion I heard about it. So I think they would be limited to their LRs for these routes. That said I don’t think they will keep an LR just sitting idle as a spare full time. It’ll be interesting to see what they end up doing.

All A320 family aircraft are ETOPS 180 certified out of the factory. It's the airline itself that needs to add an ETOPS program and be certified for it in addition to the aircraft already being ETOPS certified.
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-r ... e-faa.html
I would be surprised if B6 only includes the LR's in their program. Nevertheless, you don't really need ETOPS to fly TATL. WOW operated many TATL routes and they were not ETOPS certified. ETOPS does help shorten the route.

That is not true. All planes are not ETOPS, they require some different components and JetBlue doesn’t have an ETOPS program nor maintain them to ETOPS standards.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 9850
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: JetBlue Secures Slots For BOS-STN, JFK-LGW

Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:09 pm

CALMSP wrote:
LAXLHR wrote:
People need to stop being hung up on LHR as all or nothing.

LGW is great, and STN can work if the carrier/price is good.

- ALL 3 airports have their pros/cons on reaching them.

B6 will do well.


so B6 should give up on trying to get LHR? Its clear that the B6 "people" know that LHR is the airport they want/need to fly into, otherwise LHR wouldn't have been choice #1.


B6 should have spent the $ to get LHR slots instead of half-vasting it with STN. News of LHR slot buys/leases is routinely reported on a.net. A carrier needs to fly where people want to fly, or suffer trash yields by cutting avg fares to convince them that XXX is (almost as) good. This is why WN is starting flying to ORD, IAH and MIA even though it has long had sizeable operations at nearby airports.
 
Brickell305
Posts: 1447
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 2:07 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:17 pm

DLHAM wrote:
tphuang wrote:
“One of the advantages a US based carrier has is that there are a number of markets in Europe that work well in the summer, but they don’t necessarily work well in the winter. With an A321, whether it’s an LR or an XLR, what we can do is fly to Europe in the summer, and then we can point it south to the Caribbean or Latin America in the winter. So that allows that airplane to perform all year round.”
So here is the interesting part. We know that Rome, Athens, Madrid are all pretty large markets from US in summer time, but are quite barren in winter time. Maybe they can use those aircraft on routes like JFK-GIG/LIM during the other half of the year.


Pretty much all european markets are much weaker in winter from the US, especially in January and Feburary. In my opinion the A321 is THE gamechanger for many of the smaller markets as it should be possible to fly yearround and still make profits, which would be unthinkable with an aircraft like a 767 or even A330 etc.

You may be right about it being possible but he (RH) is literally saying the opposite. They intend to do what every US based carrier that flies to Europe currently does and shift that capacity to warm weather destinations during winter. That aircraft does not seem to change what is a tried and tested strategy during the winter.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6609
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Network Thread - 2020

Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:22 pm

XLR with 138 seats should have pretty good range. XLR supposedly have 4700 nm in range using a more dense config. Given the northatlantic wind considerations, I'm just doing 4200 nm to be safe in terms of what they could fly out of BOS
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=BOS-FCO%3B ... =wls&DU=mi
It covers most of Europe from Boston and even ATH. And as we know for summer season routes, the NorthAtlantic wind isn't as much of a problem.

out of JFK
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=JFK-FCO%3B ... =wls&DU=mi
They could try most of Europe for summer time also. ATH might be too far.

The more interesting case is to south america from JFK which should have less of a penalty
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=JFK-GIG%3B ... =wls&DU=mi
They could theoretically reach the big 4 deep south American markets. Aside from GRU, they could operate the rest of them in winter time.

JetBlue needs to look harder at making JFK a major connection hub as they add more of these international flights and partner up with AA for even longer range international flights.

I don't recall B6 ever flying LAS-MCO. I think MCO is on hold for a while.

As for RDU, I think it really depends on how some of their recent adds perform. They deliberately avoided any of the DL routes. I think they would add RDU-TPA/MCO before transcon stuff. If they had more ambition there, certainly LAS/SAN/SFO would all be possible at some point. But at the moment, East Coast to Florida is likely where most of the demand is.

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