HVNandrew wrote:

airlineworker wrote:

CairnterriAIR wrote:

I have to agree here. Burbank has a similar runway, as does Key West...and both of those stations see long haul flights. I never could understand why they say a 737-700 can’t fly to at least an East Coast hub. If anything we are seeing that E175’s have no problem making it to Charlotte. While there may be a market...charge a decent fare and advertise it and people will fly from anywhere....the HVN terminal and infastructure is subpar.

This week the SCOTUS is to announce if they will here the states case regarding an appeal to overturn the 2nd appeal court case decision that struck down a state law limiting HVN's runway to 5600 feet. That limited 5600 foot runway is what caused UA after almost 5 years of HVN-ORD service to be halted. Too many weight restricted flights and one flight had to deny 40 passengers on a 737. Granted the terminal is spartan and small but it can handle more than the few flights per day and until service increases, it will have to do. Its been rumored that two airlines have been in talks with the airport apart from Allegiant that has publicly said pending the runway being longer, it will start N/S flights to Florida. AA is doing quite well but with only one major airline, it is losing out on frequent fliers from UA and DL. Gaining these two carriers with flights to ORD and DTW and or ATL would mark a new beginning for the airport. Shortly the displaced threshold on runway 20 will be moved back giving 5600 feet of runway in both directions. That threshold has been there since the early 1970's. I see the bulk of HVN's service will be with 65-90 seat RJ's. I am hoping for UA to start ORD service with the CRJ-550, it has the lowest runway requirements in the CRJ family.

I think there are two separate issues. The runway is a problem specifically for carriers that do not have equipment capable of serving HVN, in this case apparently G4. (Though I think the G4 service is far from a sure thing with a longer runway...it's very easy to hypothetically say you would do something if some critical dynamic were different when the odds of said dynamic actually changing anytime soon are slim.)

But the runway is not an issue for the carriers that do have proper equipment to serve HVN (and in AA's case, already do), but have decided not to do so. That's not a runway problem, that's a market problem. And again there's nothing to indicate that "AA is doing quite well". 2x daily service to PHL and 1x weekly service to CLT with no indications that there are plans for meaningful service increases doesn't scream high performance. In fact, the recent actual operations/changes would indicate the opposite of a well performing market: service to PHL cut to 1x a day at some points, stabilizing at 2x daily, with the latest OAG update showing AA extending the year over year cut to 2x daily service through May (down from 3x). And the 3x over the summer is capacity-neutral (going from 2x E75s to 3x CRJ).

There is a good market for air travel in the metro New Haven area, part of the problem I see is old habits die hard. Many flyers have been going up I-91 for years and change is hard for some people. The terminal being small may not allow other airlines that would need the same time slots for takeoffs and landing as does AA. The displaced threshold has still not been moved back and HVN still has the past to overcome. In the minds of many, HVN is the airport that only has Dash-8's and those were a bad experience that turned off some flyers. When looks at the close by population base around HVN, it is larger than BDL. I feel more service will come with either UA or DL this year. Much depends on the hub bank times that can work with AA's time slots. Burbank has a 6800 foot runway and Key West has no obstructions. I know HHH has weight restrictions on all AA flights to CLT on the E-175 and I read in the past that EYW also has a similar problem.
As far as Allegiant, they could run several weekly flights to Florida that would do very well. Many snow birds in the area. These flights are in the future as the runway issue is still in play. If it can be said Hartford has a good travel market, what make New Haven less of one?
I guess you see the glass as half empty whereas I see the glass as half full. I don't see the PHL flights going to the CRJ, when one looks many months ahead, the schedules show the CRJ as a place holder and as the time nears, the equipment is updated. The PHL and CLT flights I have been on had full and near full loads. 2018 totals topped 2017, 2019 totals topped 2018 by good margins, a good sign of growth.

airlineworker wrote:

There is a good market for air travel in the metro New Haven area, part of the problem I see is old habits die hard. Many flyers have been going up I-91 for years and change is hard for some people. The terminal being small may not allow other airlines that would need the same time slots for takeoffs and landing as does AA. The displaced threshold has still not been moved back and HVN still has the past to overcome. In the minds of many, HVN is the airport that only has Dash-8's and those were a bad experience that turned off some flyers. When looks at the close by population base around HVN, it is larger than BDL. I feel more service will come with either UA or DL this year. Much depends on the hub bank times that can work with AA's time slots. Burbank has a 6800 foot runway and Key West has no obstructions. I know HHH has weight restrictions on all AA flights to CLT on the E-175 and I read in the past that EYW also has a similar problem.
As far as Allegiant, they could run several weekly flights to Florida that would do very well. Many snow birds in the area. These flights are in the future as the runway issue is still in play. If it can be said Hartford has a good travel market, what make New Haven less of one?

I'm not saying there aren't a lot of people in the area, but it's not like those people don't have adequate air service; they're just being served by an airport a bit further away that has the infrastructure in place to act as relatively large airport offering a broad portfolio of flights serving an expansive geographic region, and that region includes greater New Haven.

Potential service adds from UA/DL don't have anything to do with AA's "time slots". There are no slots at HVN; carriers could add flights whenever they want. The terminal is dinky but it's not a shack; it could handle more than one regional aircraft departure at a time if needed. As I've said now several times, either UA or DL could come in tomorrow and add service to their eastern hubs with existing equipment and they aren't doing it. You keep bringing up the runway and stating that it is a hinderance to new service. I'll give you that for G4 (though as I said, I think them actually starting service or that such service "would do very well" is far from a sure thing). For UA/DL the runway should be a non-issue. Again, AA already uses E75s. DL could use E75s to DTW and UA to IAD, both shorter than HVN-CLT. They don't do it.

airlineworker wrote:

I guess you see the glass as half empty whereas I see the glass as half full. I don't see the PHL flights going to the CRJ, when one looks many months ahead, the schedules show the CRJ as a place holder and as the time nears, the equipment is updated. The PHL and CLT flights I have been on had full and near full loads. 2018 totals topped 2017, 2019 totals topped 2018 by good margins, a good sign of growth.

The PHL cuts were extended through May in the OAG update last week; the route goes back to 3x CRJ on June 4. I don't know whether that's a placeholder or not, but that is how the route is currently scheduled.

This isn't a glass half empty, glass half full situation. I'm stating the fact that there have been cuts in frequency to HVN which have been (recently) extended, and pointing out that given what is already being flown, other carriers could use the same aircraft currently being used at the airport to fly different routes of shorter lengths should they wish to do so, but have chosen not to.

HVNandrew wrote:

airlineworker wrote:

There is a good market for air travel in the metro New Haven area, part of the problem I see is old habits die hard. Many flyers have been going up I-91 for years and change is hard for some people. The terminal being small may not allow other airlines that would need the same time slots for takeoffs and landing as does AA. The displaced threshold has still not been moved back and HVN still has the past to overcome. In the minds of many, HVN is the airport that only has Dash-8's and those were a bad experience that turned off some flyers. When looks at the close by population base around HVN, it is larger than BDL. I feel more service will come with either UA or DL this year. Much depends on the hub bank times that can work with AA's time slots. Burbank has a 6800 foot runway and Key West has no obstructions. I know HHH has weight restrictions on all AA flights to CLT on the E-175 and I read in the past that EYW also has a similar problem.
As far as Allegiant, they could run several weekly flights to Florida that would do very well. Many snow birds in the area. These flights are in the future as the runway issue is still in play. If it can be said Hartford has a good travel market, what make New Haven less of one?

I'm not saying there aren't a lot of people in the area, but it's not like those people don't have adequate air service; they're just being served by an airport a bit further away that has the infrastructure in place to act as relatively large airport offering a broad portfolio of flights serving an expansive geographic region, and that region includes greater New Haven.

Potential service adds from UA/DL don't have anything to do with AA's "time slots". There are no slots at HVN; carriers could add flights whenever they want. The terminal is dinky but it's not a shack; it could handle more than one regional aircraft departure at a time if needed. As I've said now several times, either UA or DL could come in tomorrow and add service to their eastern hubs with existing equipment and they aren't doing it. You keep bringing up the runway and stating that it is a hinderance to new service. I'll give you that for G4 (though as I said, I think them actually starting service or that such service "would do very well" is far from a sure thing). For UA/DL the runway should be a non-issue. Again, AA already uses E75s. DL could use E75s to DTW and UA to IAD, both shorter than HVN-CLT. They don't do it.

airlineworker wrote:

I guess you see the glass as half empty whereas I see the glass as half full. I don't see the PHL flights going to the CRJ, when one looks many months ahead, the schedules show the CRJ as a place holder and as the time nears, the equipment is updated. The PHL and CLT flights I have been on had full and near full loads. 2018 totals topped 2017, 2019 totals topped 2018 by good margins, a good sign of growth.

The PHL cuts were extended through May in the OAG update last week; the route goes back to 3x CRJ on June 4. I don't know whether that's a placeholder or not, but that is how the route is currently scheduled.

This isn't a glass half empty, glass half full situation. I'm stating the fact that there have been cuts in frequency to HVN which have been (recently) extended, and pointing out that given what is already being flown, other carriers could use the same aircraft currently being used at the airport to fly different routes of shorter lengths should they wish to do so, but have chosen not to.

When I said slots, I was referring to the use of the one jetway and the times AA is presently using them. Other airlines would need to have flights that would permit the sharing of the jetway. BDL is more than a bit further away, being almost in Massachusetts it is a much longer trip compared to HVN. I could see Allegiant doing two SFB and one PIE flights per week with good response. Why UA and DL are holding back, I don't know, but UA to ORD would do well with the CRJ-550. Back in the 90's, UA ran four 737's to ORD and some of the ORD-HVN flights I was booked on were asking for volunteers to give up their seats due to being oversold. NW tried twice to start two daily flights to DTW. That was before the overruns were in place and many trees were since taken down. All I am trying to say, HVN can support more than the present service, I don't say it will be a large operation but flights to 3-5 hubs would meet the needs of a large percentage of the local population and reduce the dependence on BDL. Adding UA and or DL would make HVN more attractive to area travelers as one airline airports are limited in growth.

airlineworker wrote:

HVNandrew wrote:

airlineworker wrote:

There is a good market for air travel in the metro New Haven area, part of the problem I see is old habits die hard. Many flyers have been going up I-91 for years and change is hard for some people. The terminal being small may not allow other airlines that would need the same time slots for takeoffs and landing as does AA. The displaced threshold has still not been moved back and HVN still has the past to overcome. In the minds of many, HVN is the airport that only has Dash-8's and those were a bad experience that turned off some flyers. When looks at the close by population base around HVN, it is larger than BDL. I feel more service will come with either UA or DL this year. Much depends on the hub bank times that can work with AA's time slots. Burbank has a 6800 foot runway and Key West has no obstructions. I know HHH has weight restrictions on all AA flights to CLT on the E-175 and I read in the past that EYW also has a similar problem.
As far as Allegiant, they could run several weekly flights to Florida that would do very well. Many snow birds in the area. These flights are in the future as the runway issue is still in play. If it can be said Hartford has a good travel market, what make New Haven less of one?

I'm not saying there aren't a lot of people in the area, but it's not like those people don't have adequate air service; they're just being served by an airport a bit further away that has the infrastructure in place to act as relatively large airport offering a broad portfolio of flights serving an expansive geographic region, and that region includes greater New Haven.

Potential service adds from UA/DL don't have anything to do with AA's "time slots". There are no slots at HVN; carriers could add flights whenever they want. The terminal is dinky but it's not a shack; it could handle more than one regional aircraft departure at a time if needed. As I've said now several times, either UA or DL could come in tomorrow and add service to their eastern hubs with existing equipment and they aren't doing it. You keep bringing up the runway and stating that it is a hinderance to new service. I'll give you that for G4 (though as I said, I think them actually starting service or that such service "would do very well" is far from a sure thing). For UA/DL the runway should be a non-issue. Again, AA already uses E75s. DL could use E75s to DTW and UA to IAD, both shorter than HVN-CLT. They don't do it.

airlineworker wrote:

I guess you see the glass as half empty whereas I see the glass as half full. I don't see the PHL flights going to the CRJ, when one looks many months ahead, the schedules show the CRJ as a place holder and as the time nears, the equipment is updated. The PHL and CLT flights I have been on had full and near full loads. 2018 totals topped 2017, 2019 totals topped 2018 by good margins, a good sign of growth.

The PHL cuts were extended through May in the OAG update last week; the route goes back to 3x CRJ on June 4. I don't know whether that's a placeholder or not, but that is how the route is currently scheduled.

This isn't a glass half empty, glass half full situation. I'm stating the fact that there have been cuts in frequency to HVN which have been (recently) extended, and pointing out that given what is already being flown, other carriers could use the same aircraft currently being used at the airport to fly different routes of shorter lengths should they wish to do so, but have chosen not to.

When I said slots, I was referring to the use of the one jetway and the times AA is presently using them. Other airlines would need to have flights that would permit the sharing of the jetway. BDL is more than a bit further away, being almost in Massachusetts it is a much longer trip compared to HVN. I could see Allegiant doing two SFB and one PIE flights per week with good response. Why UA and DL are holding back, I don't know, but UA to ORD would do well with the CRJ-550. Back in the 90's, UA ran four 737's to ORD and some of the ORD-HVN flights I was booked on were asking for volunteers to give up their seats due to being oversold. NW tried twice to start two daily flights to DTW. That was before the overruns were in place and many trees were since taken down. All I am trying to say, HVN can support more than the present service, I don't say it will be a large operation but flights to 3-5 hubs would meet the needs of a large percentage of the local population and reduce the dependence on BDL. Adding UA and or DL would make HVN more attractive to area travelers as one airline airports are limited in growth.

I don't think the jetway would be that much of an issue; if it were occupied the other plane could use stairs. I believe there have been times over the last couple of years where there were two AA RJs on the ground at the same time (there are photos of it on this site at least).

I completely agree with you that the market is there to support a larger operation than what currently exits and that UA and/or DL adding service would make HVN a more attractive option for area travelers. I just don't necessarily see it happening, and I don't think it can be pinned on the runway. If I had to guess it's probably a combination of the costs of operating an additional station, that station taking traffic away from other stations (be it BDL, HPN, LGA, etc.) as opposed to generating "organic" growth, and not generating any kind of a premium over those other airports that would justify diverting the traffic and incurring the associated costs. While HVN's location can be seen as a strength in that it is surrounded by quite a large population, it is also a weakness because of all the other (larger) airports around it. If HVN were out somewhere by itself, a solid 2+ hours away from the airports mentioned, it would almost certainly have a much larger portfolio of service, even with the limited runway, facilities, etc.

HVNandrew wrote:

airlineworker wrote:

HVNandrew wrote:

I'm not saying there aren't a lot of people in the area, but it's not like those people don't have adequate air service; they're just being served by an airport a bit further away that has the infrastructure in place to act as relatively large airport offering a broad portfolio of flights serving an expansive geographic region, and that region includes greater New Haven.

Potential service adds from UA/DL don't have anything to do with AA's "time slots". There are no slots at HVN; carriers could add flights whenever they want. The terminal is dinky but it's not a shack; it could handle more than one regional aircraft departure at a time if needed. As I've said now several times, either UA or DL could come in tomorrow and add service to their eastern hubs with existing equipment and they aren't doing it. You keep bringing up the runway and stating that it is a hinderance to new service. I'll give you that for G4 (though as I said, I think them actually starting service or that such service "would do very well" is far from a sure thing). For UA/DL the runway should be a non-issue. Again, AA already uses E75s. DL could use E75s to DTW and UA to IAD, both shorter than HVN-CLT. They don't do it.


The PHL cuts were extended through May in the OAG update last week; the route goes back to 3x CRJ on June 4. I don't know whether that's a placeholder or not, but that is how the route is currently scheduled.

This isn't a glass half empty, glass half full situation. I'm stating the fact that there have been cuts in frequency to HVN which have been (recently) extended, and pointing out that given what is already being flown, other carriers could use the same aircraft currently being used at the airport to fly different routes of shorter lengths should they wish to do so, but have chosen not to.

When I said slots, I was referring to the use of the one jetway and the times AA is presently using them. Other airlines would need to have flights that would permit the sharing of the jetway. BDL is more than a bit further away, being almost in Massachusetts it is a much longer trip compared to HVN. I could see Allegiant doing two SFB and one PIE flights per week with good response. Why UA and DL are holding back, I don't know, but UA to ORD would do well with the CRJ-550. Back in the 90's, UA ran four 737's to ORD and some of the ORD-HVN flights I was booked on were asking for volunteers to give up their seats due to being oversold. NW tried twice to start two daily flights to DTW. That was before the overruns were in place and many trees were since taken down. All I am trying to say, HVN can support more than the present service, I don't say it will be a large operation but flights to 3-5 hubs would meet the needs of a large percentage of the local population and reduce the dependence on BDL. Adding UA and or DL would make HVN more attractive to area travelers as one airline airports are limited in growth.

I don't think the jetway would be that much of an issue; if it were occupied the other plane could use stairs. I believe there have been times over the last couple of years where there were two AA RJs on the ground at the same time (there are photos of it on this site at least).

I completely agree with you that the market is there to support a larger operation than what currently exits and that UA and/or DL adding service would make HVN a more attractive option for area travelers. I just don't necessarily see it happening, and I don't think it can be pinned on the runway. If I had to guess it's probably a combination of the costs of operating an additional station, that station taking traffic away from other stations (be it BDL, HPN, LGA, etc.) as opposed to generating "organic" growth, and not generating any kind of a premium over those other airports that would justify diverting the traffic and incurring the associated costs. While HVN's location can be seen as a strength in that it is surrounded by quite a large population, it is also a weakness because of all the other (larger) airports around it. If HVN were out somewhere by itself, a solid 2+ hours away from the airports mentioned, it would almost certainly have a much larger portfolio of service, even with the limited runway, facilities, etc.

This is the correct reason why HVN has such limited traffic. Too many larger airports within close proximity. Airports with much better infrastructure. The airport is also located in a city which is heavily served by rail. Trains that can easily take passengers to the New York airports cheaply and in under an hour. And in all honesty, BDL is not a terribly difficult drive from the HVN market. Even during rush hour it can be driven in about an hour. In fact the worst traffic is usually encountered IN New Haven at the junction of I-95 and I-91.

CairnterriAIR wrote:

HVNandrew wrote:

airlineworker wrote:

When I said slots, I was referring to the use of the one jetway and the times AA is presently using them. Other airlines would need to have flights that would permit the sharing of the jetway. BDL is more than a bit further away, being almost in Massachusetts it is a much longer trip compared to HVN. I could see Allegiant doing two SFB and one PIE flights per week with good response. Why UA and DL are holding back, I don't know, but UA to ORD would do well with the CRJ-550. Back in the 90's, UA ran four 737's to ORD and some of the ORD-HVN flights I was booked on were asking for volunteers to give up their seats due to being oversold. NW tried twice to start two daily flights to DTW. That was before the overruns were in place and many trees were since taken down. All I am trying to say, HVN can support more than the present service, I don't say it will be a large operation but flights to 3-5 hubs would meet the needs of a large percentage of the local population and reduce the dependence on BDL. Adding UA and or DL would make HVN more attractive to area travelers as one airline airports are limited in growth.

I don't think the jetway would be that much of an issue; if it were occupied the other plane could use stairs. I believe there have been times over the last couple of years where there were two AA RJs on the ground at the same time (there are photos of it on this site at least).

I completely agree with you that the market is there to support a larger operation than what currently exits and that UA and/or DL adding service would make HVN a more attractive option for area travelers. I just don't necessarily see it happening, and I don't think it can be pinned on the runway. If I had to guess it's probably a combination of the costs of operating an additional station, that station taking traffic away from other stations (be it BDL, HPN, LGA, etc.) as opposed to generating "organic" growth, and not generating any kind of a premium over those other airports that would justify diverting the traffic and incurring the associated costs. While HVN's location can be seen as a strength in that it is surrounded by quite a large population, it is also a weakness because of all the other (larger) airports around it. If HVN were out somewhere by itself, a solid 2+ hours away from the airports mentioned, it would almost certainly have a much larger portfolio of service, even with the limited runway, facilities, etc.

This is the correct reason why HVN has such limited traffic. Too many larger airports within close proximity. Airports with much better infrastructure. The airport is also located in a city which is heavily served by rail. Trains that can easily take passengers to the New York airports cheaply and in under an hour. And in all honesty, BDL is not a terribly difficult drive from the HVN market. Even during rush hour it can be driven in about an hour. In fact the worst traffic is usually encountered IN New Haven at the junction of I-95 and I-91.

Precisely, particularly the infrastructure part. The runway, while being too short, also lacks centerline and touchdown zone lights which are required for CAT II and III landing operations below 2,400 RVR. The current approach lighting system is also a limitation for such. That's a hard sell to the airlines that know if the weather goes south enough, you simply can't operate. Toss in the other infrastructure shortfalls and the airlines find serving nearby airports just makes more sense, unfortunately.

CairnterriAIR wrote:

HVNandrew wrote:

airlineworker wrote:

When I said slots, I was referring to the use of the one jetway and the times AA is presently using them. Other airlines would need to have flights that would permit the sharing of the jetway. BDL is more than a bit further away, being almost in Massachusetts it is a much longer trip compared to HVN. I could see Allegiant doing two SFB and one PIE flights per week with good response. Why UA and DL are holding back, I don't know, but UA to ORD would do well with the CRJ-550. Back in the 90's, UA ran four 737's to ORD and some of the ORD-HVN flights I was booked on were asking for volunteers to give up their seats due to being oversold. NW tried twice to start two daily flights to DTW. That was before the overruns were in place and many trees were since taken down. All I am trying to say, HVN can support more than the present service, I don't say it will be a large operation but flights to 3-5 hubs would meet the needs of a large percentage of the local population and reduce the dependence on BDL. Adding UA and or DL would make HVN more attractive to area travelers as one airline airports are limited in growth.

I don't think the jetway would be that much of an issue; if it were occupied the other plane could use stairs. I believe there have been times over the last couple of years where there were two AA RJs on the ground at the same time (there are photos of it on this site at least).

I completely agree with you that the market is there to support a larger operation than what currently exits and that UA and/or DL adding service would make HVN a more attractive option for area travelers. I just don't necessarily see it happening, and I don't think it can be pinned on the runway. If I had to guess it's probably a combination of the costs of operating an additional station, that station taking traffic away from other stations (be it BDL, HPN, LGA, etc.) as opposed to generating "organic" growth, and not generating any kind of a premium over those other airports that would justify diverting the traffic and incurring the associated costs. While HVN's location can be seen as a strength in that it is surrounded by quite a large population, it is also a weakness because of all the other (larger) airports around it. If HVN were out somewhere by itself, a solid 2+ hours away from the airports mentioned, it would almost certainly have a much larger portfolio of service, even with the limited runway, facilities, etc.

This is the correct reason why HVN has such limited traffic. Too many larger airports within close proximity. Airports with much better infrastructure. The airport is also located in a city which is heavily served by rail. Trains that can easily take passengers to the New York airports cheaply and in under an hour. And in all honesty, BDL is not a terribly difficult drive from the HVN market. Even during rush hour it can be driven in about an hour. In fact the worst traffic is usually encountered IN New Haven at the junction of I-95 and I-91.

Rail from New Haven to the new York airports is quite a trek, much more than one hour and dragging your bags on and off trains is a pain and I-95 is a parking lot at times. HVN is still viewed by many as the little airport that only has prop planes. Little by little that view is fading and once people fly HVN, its a pleasant experience and being dropped off or picked up does not work a hardship on the driver. Passenger numbers for the last two years have jumped considerably I could see AA, UA and DL offering service to several hub airports and that could go a long way of making travel easier for most flyers. I have used HVN for years and the closeness, no hassle and quick takeoffs have made the trip more enjoyable. When factors in the drive time to other airports, the hassle of checking in and getting to the gates, flying from HVN is refreshing. I have had some LGA flights that the captain would announce that we were number 16 for takeoff, kind of depressing and time consuming.
When I needed international flights, my choice was always JFK for non-stops, the best international airport on the east coast. It's only a matter of time before either UA and or DL commit to HVN. There is enough of a market to support flights to ORD, DTW, ATL and IAD or DCA.
PVD is 50 miles from BOS and yet PVD has a large selection of airlines and flights, so HVN should be able to offer more service. I still feel the terminal would be a limiting factor but adding a few more daily flights can work.

PVD - Data thru December (last of the big 3 to report)..

Source file: https://www.pvdairport.com/documents/pa ... er2019.pdf (month only, but I am not putting links to every month file!)

File Location: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1V10vY ... 8tUN1vCxs4

Month Dec-19

December numbers were actually pretty decent, however as a close out to the year, not a stellar year for them overall. After a rough Dec 18, Dec 19 bounced back quite nicely with numbers highest from 2015 apart from 2017. This despite the loss of D8.

Overall: 326,263 vs 310,308, up 5.1%
Outbound (Enplane): 164,846 vs 156,662 up 5.2%
Inbound (Deplane): 161,417 vs 153,646 up 5.1%

Figures below include regionals and mainline where appropriate and are listed in order of passenger counts and thus market share.

1. WN - 133,275 vs 127,509 up 4.5% overall, maintaining #1 share with 40.8% slightly down (0.3%) over the prior year and an increase of 5,766. Inbound was up 2,382, outbound up 3,384. Gap to #2 remained roughly the same at around 51 to 52K.

2. AA - 81,040 vs 76,346 up 6.1% overall, cementing position as #2, share is up 0.2% YOY , Outbound up 2,130. Inbound down 2,564 . Continued shift out of mainline (13.5% down), traded off by Envoy, PSA and to a slightly larger extent Republic.

3. DL - were rather close to losing the number 3 spot this year, but in the end won out by 2,700 odd pax at 32,788 vs 33,358 for a reduction of 570 or 1.7%, also lost a little bit of market share by 0.7% down to 10%. Outbound lost 335, Inbound lost 235, skywest grew significantly traded off by the loss of Trans States and mainline.

4. B6 - huge leap by B6 YOY, 22,012 up to 30,039 for 36.5% or 8,027. closing the gap from 11k down to 3K, and also jumping over UA after being #5 last year. Outbound up 4,504 (nearly 40%), Inbound up 3,523 or 32.8%, extremely good December for them on this basis. Losses elsewhere allowed B6's market share to increase by 2.1% to 9.2%.

5. UA - slipped back to 5th, not only as a result of B6's move, but their own numbers dropped by 2.8% 23,554 down to 22,908, a total of 651 drop. biggest drop was outbound by 453 or 3.7%. Market share also dropped from 7,6% to 7%

6. F9 - Big increase for F9 this month (25.2%) going from 16,662 to 20,861 and as a result they are starting to knock on the door of UA at #5, outbound up 2,258 or 26.9% inbound up 1,941 or 23.5%and overall a market share increase of 1% to 6.4%.

7. G4 - we are getting into the realms of small numbers at this point, G4 actually increased by 17.8% to 3,601and increased their share to 1.1% overall, this after a large dip in 2018 when only 3,057 made their trips.

Additional notes: No international numbers, and charters rolled in at 1,756 for the month.

Year 2019

Now the not so bright spots, overall 2019.

Overall: 3,989,925 vs 4,298,345 down 308,420 or 7.2%
Outbound (Enplane): 1,996,593 vs 2,147,977 down 151,384 or 7% (still higher than 2017 despite the reduction from 18 to 19)
Inbound (Deplane): 1,993,332 vs 2,150,368 down 157,036 or 7.3% (same as outbound, higher than 17, despite the YOY reduction this year)

Figures below include regionals and mainline where appropriate and are listed in order of passenger counts and thus market share.

1. WN - 1,489,207 vs 1,643,985 down 154,778 or 9.4% overall, still by far the market leader with 37.3%, but down almost 1% YOY. Inbound was down 9.7% or 79,626, outbound down 9.1% or 75,152 . Not much chance of WN losing their position, but it has closed by 32% YOY, it's still 442K, but Nov 18 was 642K....

2. AA - 1,046,819 vs 1,001,537 up 45,282 or 4.5%, increased their share to 26.2% from 23.3% this year as a result and reductions elsewhere. Inbound up 25,581 for 5.1%, outbound up 19,701 up 3.9%. Growth came from PSA and Envoy, with trade offs against Trans States, Mainline and Republic.

3. DL - Blue is coming, blue is coming, well not quite, but they have closed the gap significantly during 2019. DL have also increased but by a much smaller rate 460,242 vs 442,319 up 17,924 or 4.1%, share was also up by 1.2% to 11.5%, split 12,396 (5.8%) Outbound, 5,528 (2.4%) Inbound. Continued growth in mainline (13,497 or 3.9%) and Skywest, traded by reductions from Endeavor and Trans States.

4. B6 - Dec 18, B6 were 6th in the list, 12 months later they are 4th and albeit they won't be catching DL soon, they have closed the gap by some 56,000 YOY, but still have 146K to go. Back to their current position, 2019 saw an increase of 31.2% from 238,907 to 313,441 (74,534) the biggest increase of any of the main carriers at PVD both in % and volume terms. Outbound was up 38,843 or 32.8%, Inbound 35,691 or 29.6%, This increase allowed them to grow their market share from 5.6% to 7.9% during the year.

5. UA - continued in 5th spot with a 7.1% market share, which was the same as 2018, pax counts dropped 23,906 or 7.8% from 306,447 down to 282,441 , Outbound down 12,157 or 7.9%, Inbound down 11,749 or 7.7%. UA shifted their flying all over the place to be honest, Mainline dropped 89.7% down to virtually nothing, Republic dropped 70% and Trans States by 38.4%. That flying was primarily shifted to Commutair up 57.7% and Skywest up 41.4%

6. F9 - Not good at all for the PVD market, a single year drop of 42.7% or 161,925 making the volume drop even bigger than WN as a result it's share collapsed from 8.8% down to 5.5% total volume reduced from 379,401 to 217,476.

7. SY - new entrant into the market this year, grabbed 65,593 pax to take a 1.6% share of the market, 32,523 inbound and 33,070 outbound. No flights in December, so this is where they ended the year

8. G4 - last of the main airlines, with a 27.6% reduction from 69,496 to 50,322 (19,174) , Inbound down 9,477 or 27.3%, outbound down by 9,697 or 27.9%. You can never predict what they are going to do and their experiment into BOS may cause further strife, but neither do we know how long that will last. This will be one to watch in 2020 to see how committed they are to the market of PVD.

9. International - the pullouts of S4 and D8 dropped the international number by 156K and it doesn't look like D8 are returning anytime soon at least until the MAX issues are sorted out then we will see of course. With the moves by TP at BOS, one wonders whether S4 might consider coming back down to PVD, but for now the International market is dead out of PVD, very sad.

I will state however that the number for 19 is still 70K above the equivalent for 2017 and almost 400K above 2015 levels, so there has been growth, but YOY, sadly a drop.

So the total number dropped below 4m, which is a significant drop from 2018, but still better than 2015, 16 and 17, so the trend is still on the up, hopefully the correction from 19 is just that and PVD can hop back over 4m in 2020. There's still another 50K to lose from the international side and it remains to be seen whether F9's reductions are just a course correction and whether WN will ultimately stop the tide of their reductions, so there is definitely some risk, but can DL, AA, B6 and SY compensate enough for that? Sadly I don't have a crystal ball so will have to rely on the reports from PVD, but here's hoping..

Fingers crossed for a better 2020... Thanks for reading I'll be back once Jan is released and i've updated my files accordingly for the new year.

airlineworker wrote:

CairnterriAIR wrote:

HVNandrew wrote:

I don't think the jetway would be that much of an issue; if it were occupied the other plane could use stairs. I believe there have been times over the last couple of years where there were two AA RJs on the ground at the same time (there are photos of it on this site at least).

I completely agree with you that the market is there to support a larger operation than what currently exits and that UA and/or DL adding service would make HVN a more attractive option for area travelers. I just don't necessarily see it happening, and I don't think it can be pinned on the runway. If I had to guess it's probably a combination of the costs of operating an additional station, that station taking traffic away from other stations (be it BDL, HPN, LGA, etc.) as opposed to generating "organic" growth, and not generating any kind of a premium over those other airports that would justify diverting the traffic and incurring the associated costs. While HVN's location can be seen as a strength in that it is surrounded by quite a large population, it is also a weakness because of all the other (larger) airports around it. If HVN were out somewhere by itself, a solid 2+ hours away from the airports mentioned, it would almost certainly have a much larger portfolio of service, even with the limited runway, facilities, etc.

This is the correct reason why HVN has such limited traffic. Too many larger airports within close proximity. Airports with much better infrastructure. The airport is also located in a city which is heavily served by rail. Trains that can easily take passengers to the New York airports cheaply and in under an hour. And in all honesty, BDL is not a terribly difficult drive from the HVN market. Even during rush hour it can be driven in about an hour. In fact the worst traffic is usually encountered IN New Haven at the junction of I-95 and I-91.

Rail from New Haven to the new York airports is quite a trek, much more than one hour and dragging your bags on and off trains is a pain and I-95 is a parking lot at times. HVN is still viewed by many as the little airport that only has prop planes. Little by little that view is fading and once people fly HVN, its a pleasant experience and being dropped off or picked up does not work a hardship on the driver. Passenger numbers for the last two years have jumped considerably I could see AA, UA and DL offering service to several hub airports and that could go a long way of making travel easier for most flyers. I have used HVN for years and the closeness, no hassle and quick takeoffs have made the trip more enjoyable. When factors in the drive time to other airports, the hassle of checking in and getting to the gates, flying from HVN is refreshing. I have had some LGA flights that the captain would announce that we were number 16 for takeoff, kind of depressing and time consuming.
When I needed international flights, my choice was always JFK for non-stops, the best international airport on the east coast. It's only a matter of time before either UA and or DL commit to HVN. There is enough of a market to support flights to ORD, DTW, ATL and IAD or DCA.
PVD is 50 miles from BOS and yet PVD has a large selection of airlines and flights, so HVN should be able to offer more service. I still feel the terminal would be a limiting factor but adding a few more daily flights can work.

Yes, taking the train from the New Haven area to any of the NYC area airports is quite a slog. I've done it before but I avoid doing so if at all possible. It takes a long time, involves transfers to bus, taxi or subways, and is just not an easy trip. It is not a realistically viable option for most business travelers. Driving up to BDL is doable and much easier but not great either, especially around morning and afternoon rush hours around New Haven and Hartford.

Honestly, it doesn't help when the State of CT seems to do everything it can to push HVN down in support of BDL. HVN has bent over backwards to appease a lot of the NIMBY's including paying for sound insulation in the homes near the runway flight paths. Yes, the terminal is small but it works fine for now. If more service is secured, I could see them eventually building a new terminal on the other side of the airport that would be closer to the main access roads and away from the residential neighborhood where the current terminal is located. Yale, one of the largest employers in southern CT, has been a strong vocal supporter of the airport, for paving the runway overrun, and for expanded airport service. It would surely funnel more business travel through HVN if more service were offered. It's tough though when AA is the only option and there are so few flights currently offered.

Putting in a new jetway and the increased passenger traffic at HVN over the past couple of years is definitely encouraging. But, it seems like the next 12-24 months or so may be the make or break period for HVN to expand commercial service or possibly go the way of airports at New London and Bridgeport and eventually lose commercial service altogether, which would be a shame in my opinion.

VS4ever wrote:

PVD - Data thru December (last of the big 3 to report)..

Source file: https://www.pvdairport.com/documents/pa ... er2019.pdf (month only, but I am not putting links to every month file!)

File Location: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1V10vY ... 8tUN1vCxs4

Month Dec-19

December numbers were actually pretty decent, however as a close out to the year, not a stellar year for them overall. After a rough Dec 18, Dec 19 bounced back quite nicely with numbers highest from 2015 apart from 2017. This despite the loss of D8.

Overall: 326,263 vs 310,308, up 5.1%
Outbound (Enplane): 164,846 vs 156,662 up 5.2%
Inbound (Deplane): 161,417 vs 153,646 up 5.1%

Figures below include regionals and mainline where appropriate and are listed in order of passenger counts and thus market share.

1. WN - 133,275 vs 127,509 up 4.5% overall, maintaining #1 share with 40.8% slightly down (0.3%) over the prior year and an increase of 5,766. Inbound was up 2,382, outbound up 3,384. Gap to #2 remained roughly the same at around 51 to 52K.

2. AA - 81,040 vs 76,346 up 6.1% overall, cementing position as #2, share is up 0.2% YOY , Outbound up 2,130. Inbound down 2,564 . Continued shift out of mainline (13.5% down), traded off by Envoy, PSA and to a slightly larger extent Republic.

3. DL - were rather close to losing the number 3 spot this year, but in the end won out by 2,700 odd pax at 32,788 vs 33,358 for a reduction of 570 or 1.7%, also lost a little bit of market share by 0.7% down to 10%. Outbound lost 335, Inbound lost 235, skywest grew significantly traded off by the loss of Trans States and mainline.

4. B6 - huge leap by B6 YOY, 22,012 up to 30,039 for 36.5% or 8,027. closing the gap from 11k down to 3K, and also jumping over UA after being #5 last year. Outbound up 4,504 (nearly 40%), Inbound up 3,523 or 32.8%, extremely good December for them on this basis. Losses elsewhere allowed B6's market share to increase by 2.1% to 9.2%.

5. UA - slipped back to 5th, not only as a result of B6's move, but their own numbers dropped by 2.8% 23,554 down to 22,908, a total of 651 drop. biggest drop was outbound by 453 or 3.7%. Market share also dropped from 7,6% to 7%

6. F9 - Big increase for F9 this month (25.2%) going from 16,662 to 20,861 and as a result they are starting to knock on the door of UA at #5, outbound up 2,258 or 26.9% inbound up 1,941 or 23.5%and overall a market share increase of 1% to 6.4%.

7. G4 - we are getting into the realms of small numbers at this point, G4 actually increased by 17.8% to 3,601and increased their share to 1.1% overall, this after a large dip in 2018 when only 3,057 made their trips.

Additional notes: No international numbers, and charters rolled in at 1,756 for the month.

Year 2019

Now the not so bright spots, overall 2019.

Overall: 3,989,925 vs 4,298,345 down 308,420 or 7.2%
Outbound (Enplane): 1,996,593 vs 2,147,977 down 151,384 or 7% (still higher than 2017 despite the reduction from 18 to 19)
Inbound (Deplane): 1,993,332 vs 2,150,368 down 157,036 or 7.3% (same as outbound, higher than 17, despite the YOY reduction this year)

Figures below include regionals and mainline where appropriate and are listed in order of passenger counts and thus market share.

1. WN - 1,489,207 vs 1,643,985 down 154,778 or 9.4% overall, still by far the market leader with 37.3%, but down almost 1% YOY. Inbound was down 9.7% or 79,626, outbound down 9.1% or 75,152 . Not much chance of WN losing their position, but it has closed by 32% YOY, it's still 442K, but Nov 18 was 642K....

2. AA - 1,046,819 vs 1,001,537 up 45,282 or 4.5%, increased their share to 26.2% from 23.3% this year as a result and reductions elsewhere. Inbound up 25,581 for 5.1%, outbound up 19,701 up 3.9%. Growth came from PSA and Envoy, with trade offs against Trans States, Mainline and Republic.

3. DL - Blue is coming, blue is coming, well not quite, but they have closed the gap significantly during 2019. DL have also increased but by a much smaller rate 460,242 vs 442,319 up 17,924 or 4.1%, share was also up by 1.2% to 11.5%, split 12,396 (5.8%) Outbound, 5,528 (2.4%) Inbound. Continued growth in mainline (13,497 or 3.9%) and Skywest, traded by reductions from Endeavor and Trans States.

4. B6 - Dec 18, B6 were 6th in the list, 12 months later they are 4th and albeit they won't be catching DL soon, they have closed the gap by some 56,000 YOY, but still have 146K to go. Back to their current position, 2019 saw an increase of 31.2% from 238,907 to 313,441 (74,534) the biggest increase of any of the main carriers at PVD both in % and volume terms. Outbound was up 38,843 or 32.8%, Inbound 35,691 or 29.6%, This increase allowed them to grow their market share from 5.6% to 7.9% during the year.

5. UA - continued in 5th spot with a 7.1% market share, which was the same as 2018, pax counts dropped 23,906 or 7.8% from 306,447 down to 282,441 , Outbound down 12,157 or 7.9%, Inbound down 11,749 or 7.7%. UA shifted their flying all over the place to be honest, Mainline dropped 89.7% down to virtually nothing, Republic dropped 70% and Trans States by 38.4%. That flying was primarily shifted to Commutair up 57.7% and Skywest up 41.4%

6. F9 - Not good at all for the PVD market, a single year drop of 42.7% or 161,925 making the volume drop even bigger than WN as a result it's share collapsed from 8.8% down to 5.5% total volume reduced from 379,401 to 217,476.

7. SY - new entrant into the market this year, grabbed 65,593 pax to take a 1.6% share of the market, 32,523 inbound and 33,070 outbound. No flights in December, so this is where they ended the year

8. G4 - last of the main airlines, with a 27.6% reduction from 69,496 to 50,322 (19,174) , Inbound down 9,477 or 27.3%, outbound down by 9,697 or 27.9%. You can never predict what they are going to do and their experiment into BOS may cause further strife, but neither do we know how long that will last. This will be one to watch in 2020 to see how committed they are to the market of PVD.

9. International - the pullouts of S4 and D8 dropped the international number by 156K and it doesn't look like D8 are returning anytime soon at least until the MAX issues are sorted out then we will see of course. With the moves by TP at BOS, one wonders whether S4 might consider coming back down to PVD, but for now the International market is dead out of PVD, very sad.

I will state however that the number for 19 is still 70K above the equivalent for 2017 and almost 400K above 2015 levels, so there has been growth, but YOY, sadly a drop.

So the total number dropped below 4m, which is a significant drop from 2018, but still better than 2015, 16 and 17, so the trend is still on the up, hopefully the correction from 19 is just that and PVD can hop back over 4m in 2020. There's still another 50K to lose from the international side and it remains to be seen whether F9's reductions are just a course correction and whether WN will ultimately stop the tide of their reductions, so there is definitely some risk, but can DL, AA, B6 and SY compensate enough for that? Sadly I don't have a crystal ball so will have to rely on the reports from PVD, but here's hoping..

Fingers crossed for a better 2020... Thanks for reading I'll be back once Jan is released and i've updated my files accordingly for the new year.

Thanks for this!! Can you do this analysis for BOS in the Boston thread?

EADSYABSOB73857 wrote:

VS4ever wrote:

PVD - Data thru December (last of the big 3 to report)..

Source file: https://www.pvdairport.com/documents/pa ... er2019.pdf (month only, but I am not putting links to every month file!)

File Location: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1V10vY ... 8tUN1vCxs4

Month Dec-19

December numbers were actually pretty decent, however as a close out to the year, not a stellar year for them overall. After a rough Dec 18, Dec 19 bounced back quite nicely with numbers highest from 2015 apart from 2017. This despite the loss of D8.

Overall: 326,263 vs 310,308, up 5.1%
Outbound (Enplane): 164,846 vs 156,662 up 5.2%
Inbound (Deplane): 161,417 vs 153,646 up 5.1%

Figures below include regionals and mainline where appropriate and are listed in order of passenger counts and thus market share.

1. WN - 133,275 vs 127,509 up 4.5% overall, maintaining #1 share with 40.8% slightly down (0.3%) over the prior year and an increase of 5,766. Inbound was up 2,382, outbound up 3,384. Gap to #2 remained roughly the same at around 51 to 52K.

2. AA - 81,040 vs 76,346 up 6.1% overall, cementing position as #2, share is up 0.2% YOY , Outbound up 2,130. Inbound down 2,564 . Continued shift out of mainline (13.5% down), traded off by Envoy, PSA and to a slightly larger extent Republic.

3. DL - were rather close to losing the number 3 spot this year, but in the end won out by 2,700 odd pax at 32,788 vs 33,358 for a reduction of 570 or 1.7%, also lost a little bit of market share by 0.7% down to 10%. Outbound lost 335, Inbound lost 235, skywest grew significantly traded off by the loss of Trans States and mainline.

4. B6 - huge leap by B6 YOY, 22,012 up to 30,039 for 36.5% or 8,027. closing the gap from 11k down to 3K, and also jumping over UA after being #5 last year. Outbound up 4,504 (nearly 40%), Inbound up 3,523 or 32.8%, extremely good December for them on this basis. Losses elsewhere allowed B6's market share to increase by 2.1% to 9.2%.

5. UA - slipped back to 5th, not only as a result of B6's move, but their own numbers dropped by 2.8% 23,554 down to 22,908, a total of 651 drop. biggest drop was outbound by 453 or 3.7%. Market share also dropped from 7,6% to 7%

6. F9 - Big increase for F9 this month (25.2%) going from 16,662 to 20,861 and as a result they are starting to knock on the door of UA at #5, outbound up 2,258 or 26.9% inbound up 1,941 or 23.5%and overall a market share increase of 1% to 6.4%.

7. G4 - we are getting into the realms of small numbers at this point, G4 actually increased by 17.8% to 3,601and increased their share to 1.1% overall, this after a large dip in 2018 when only 3,057 made their trips.

Additional notes: No international numbers, and charters rolled in at 1,756 for the month.

Year 2019

Now the not so bright spots, overall 2019.

Overall: 3,989,925 vs 4,298,345 down 308,420 or 7.2%
Outbound (Enplane): 1,996,593 vs 2,147,977 down 151,384 or 7% (still higher than 2017 despite the reduction from 18 to 19)
Inbound (Deplane): 1,993,332 vs 2,150,368 down 157,036 or 7.3% (same as outbound, higher than 17, despite the YOY reduction this year)

Figures below include regionals and mainline where appropriate and are listed in order of passenger counts and thus market share.

1. WN - 1,489,207 vs 1,643,985 down 154,778 or 9.4% overall, still by far the market leader with 37.3%, but down almost 1% YOY. Inbound was down 9.7% or 79,626, outbound down 9.1% or 75,152 . Not much chance of WN losing their position, but it has closed by 32% YOY, it's still 442K, but Nov 18 was 642K....

2. AA - 1,046,819 vs 1,001,537 up 45,282 or 4.5%, increased their share to 26.2% from 23.3% this year as a result and reductions elsewhere. Inbound up 25,581 for 5.1%, outbound up 19,701 up 3.9%. Growth came from PSA and Envoy, with trade offs against Trans States, Mainline and Republic.

3. DL - Blue is coming, blue is coming, well not quite, but they have closed the gap significantly during 2019. DL have also increased but by a much smaller rate 460,242 vs 442,319 up 17,924 or 4.1%, share was also up by 1.2% to 11.5%, split 12,396 (5.8%) Outbound, 5,528 (2.4%) Inbound. Continued growth in mainline (13,497 or 3.9%) and Skywest, traded by reductions from Endeavor and Trans States.

4. B6 - Dec 18, B6 were 6th in the list, 12 months later they are 4th and albeit they won't be catching DL soon, they have closed the gap by some 56,000 YOY, but still have 146K to go. Back to their current position, 2019 saw an increase of 31.2% from 238,907 to 313,441 (74,534) the biggest increase of any of the main carriers at PVD both in % and volume terms. Outbound was up 38,843 or 32.8%, Inbound 35,691 or 29.6%, This increase allowed them to grow their market share from 5.6% to 7.9% during the year.

5. UA - continued in 5th spot with a 7.1% market share, which was the same as 2018, pax counts dropped 23,906 or 7.8% from 306,447 down to 282,441 , Outbound down 12,157 or 7.9%, Inbound down 11,749 or 7.7%. UA shifted their flying all over the place to be honest, Mainline dropped 89.7% down to virtually nothing, Republic dropped 70% and Trans States by 38.4%. That flying was primarily shifted to Commutair up 57.7% and Skywest up 41.4%

6. F9 - Not good at all for the PVD market, a single year drop of 42.7% or 161,925 making the volume drop even bigger than WN as a result it's share collapsed from 8.8% down to 5.5% total volume reduced from 379,401 to 217,476.

7. SY - new entrant into the market this year, grabbed 65,593 pax to take a 1.6% share of the market, 32,523 inbound and 33,070 outbound. No flights in December, so this is where they ended the year

8. G4 - last of the main airlines, with a 27.6% reduction from 69,496 to 50,322 (19,174) , Inbound down 9,477 or 27.3%, outbound down by 9,697 or 27.9%. You can never predict what they are going to do and their experiment into BOS may cause further strife, but neither do we know how long that will last. This will be one to watch in 2020 to see how committed they are to the market of PVD.

9. International - the pullouts of S4 and D8 dropped the international number by 156K and it doesn't look like D8 are returning anytime soon at least until the MAX issues are sorted out then we will see of course. With the moves by TP at BOS, one wonders whether S4 might consider coming back down to PVD, but for now the International market is dead out of PVD, very sad.

I will state however that the number for 19 is still 70K above the equivalent for 2017 and almost 400K above 2015 levels, so there has been growth, but YOY, sadly a drop.

So the total number dropped below 4m, which is a significant drop from 2018, but still better than 2015, 16 and 17, so the trend is still on the up, hopefully the correction from 19 is just that and PVD can hop back over 4m in 2020. There's still another 50K to lose from the international side and it remains to be seen whether F9's reductions are just a course correction and whether WN will ultimately stop the tide of their reductions, so there is definitely some risk, but can DL, AA, B6 and SY compensate enough for that? Sadly I don't have a crystal ball so will have to rely on the reports from PVD, but here's hoping..

Fingers crossed for a better 2020... Thanks for reading I'll be back once Jan is released and i've updated my files accordingly for the new year.

Thanks for this!! Can you do this analysis for BOS in the Boston thread?

i do have an equivalent ready to go, just haven't had a chance to write it all out yet, however Massport do not issue airline by airline numbers in the statistics they issue, so it would be at a regional category level rather than a market share ranking level. I will be able to do some of that next month when the Domestic T-100's are out, but won't be able to truly do an international one until June when they finally catch up to the end of year (6 month lag on those numbers I am afraid)

VS4ever wrote:

PVD - Data thru December (last of the big 3 to report)..

Source file: https://www.pvdairport.com/documents/pa ... er2019.pdf (month only, but I am not putting links to every month file!)

File Location: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1V10vY ... 8tUN1vCxs4

Month Dec-19

December numbers were actually pretty decent, however as a close out to the year, not a stellar year for them overall. After a rough Dec 18, Dec 19 bounced back quite nicely with numbers highest from 2015 apart from 2017. This despite the loss of D8.

Overall: 326,263 vs 310,308, up 5.1%
Outbound (Enplane): 164,846 vs 156,662 up 5.2%
Inbound (Deplane): 161,417 vs 153,646 up 5.1%

Figures below include regionals and mainline where appropriate and are listed in order of passenger counts and thus market share.

1. WN - 133,275 vs 127,509 up 4.5% overall, maintaining #1 share with 40.8% slightly down (0.3%) over the prior year and an increase of 5,766. Inbound was up 2,382, outbound up 3,384. Gap to #2 remained roughly the same at around 51 to 52K.

2. AA - 81,040 vs 76,346 up 6.1% overall, cementing position as #2, share is up 0.2% YOY , Outbound up 2,130. Inbound down 2,564 . Continued shift out of mainline (13.5% down), traded off by Envoy, PSA and to a slightly larger extent Republic.

3. DL - were rather close to losing the number 3 spot this year, but in the end won out by 2,700 odd pax at 32,788 vs 33,358 for a reduction of 570 or 1.7%, also lost a little bit of market share by 0.7% down to 10%. Outbound lost 335, Inbound lost 235, skywest grew significantly traded off by the loss of Trans States and mainline.

4. B6 - huge leap by B6 YOY, 22,012 up to 30,039 for 36.5% or 8,027. closing the gap from 11k down to 3K, and also jumping over UA after being #5 last year. Outbound up 4,504 (nearly 40%), Inbound up 3,523 or 32.8%, extremely good December for them on this basis. Losses elsewhere allowed B6's market share to increase by 2.1% to 9.2%.

5. UA - slipped back to 5th, not only as a result of B6's move, but their own numbers dropped by 2.8% 23,554 down to 22,908, a total of 651 drop. biggest drop was outbound by 453 or 3.7%. Market share also dropped from 7,6% to 7%

6. F9 - Big increase for F9 this month (25.2%) going from 16,662 to 20,861 and as a result they are starting to knock on the door of UA at #5, outbound up 2,258 or 26.9% inbound up 1,941 or 23.5%and overall a market share increase of 1% to 6.4%.

7. G4 - we are getting into the realms of small numbers at this point, G4 actually increased by 17.8% to 3,601and increased their share to 1.1% overall, this after a large dip in 2018 when only 3,057 made their trips.

Additional notes: No international numbers, and charters rolled in at 1,756 for the month.

Year 2019

Now the not so bright spots, overall 2019.

Overall: 3,989,925 vs 4,298,345 down 308,420 or 7.2%
Outbound (Enplane): 1,996,593 vs 2,147,977 down 151,384 or 7% (still higher than 2017 despite the reduction from 18 to 19)
Inbound (Deplane): 1,993,332 vs 2,150,368 down 157,036 or 7.3% (same as outbound, higher than 17, despite the YOY reduction this year)

Figures below include regionals and mainline where appropriate and are listed in order of passenger counts and thus market share.

1. WN - 1,489,207 vs 1,643,985 down 154,778 or 9.4% overall, still by far the market leader with 37.3%, but down almost 1% YOY. Inbound was down 9.7% or 79,626, outbound down 9.1% or 75,152 . Not much chance of WN losing their position, but it has closed by 32% YOY, it's still 442K, but Nov 18 was 642K....

2. AA - 1,046,819 vs 1,001,537 up 45,282 or 4.5%, increased their share to 26.2% from 23.3% this year as a result and reductions elsewhere. Inbound up 25,581 for 5.1%, outbound up 19,701 up 3.9%. Growth came from PSA and Envoy, with trade offs against Trans States, Mainline and Republic.

3. DL - Blue is coming, blue is coming, well not quite, but they have closed the gap significantly during 2019. DL have also increased but by a much smaller rate 460,242 vs 442,319 up 17,924 or 4.1%, share was also up by 1.2% to 11.5%, split 12,396 (5.8%) Outbound, 5,528 (2.4%) Inbound. Continued growth in mainline (13,497 or 3.9%) and Skywest, traded by reductions from Endeavor and Trans States.

4. B6 - Dec 18, B6 were 6th in the list, 12 months later they are 4th and albeit they won't be catching DL soon, they have closed the gap by some 56,000 YOY, but still have 146K to go. Back to their current position, 2019 saw an increase of 31.2% from 238,907 to 313,441 (74,534) the biggest increase of any of the main carriers at PVD both in % and volume terms. Outbound was up 38,843 or 32.8%, Inbound 35,691 or 29.6%, This increase allowed them to grow their market share from 5.6% to 7.9% during the year.

5. UA - continued in 5th spot with a 7.1% market share, which was the same as 2018, pax counts dropped 23,906 or 7.8% from 306,447 down to 282,441 , Outbound down 12,157 or 7.9%, Inbound down 11,749 or 7.7%. UA shifted their flying all over the place to be honest, Mainline dropped 89.7% down to virtually nothing, Republic dropped 70% and Trans States by 38.4%. That flying was primarily shifted to Commutair up 57.7% and Skywest up 41.4%

6. F9 - Not good at all for the PVD market, a single year drop of 42.7% or 161,925 making the volume drop even bigger than WN as a result it's share collapsed from 8.8% down to 5.5% total volume reduced from 379,401 to 217,476.

7. SY - new entrant into the market this year, grabbed 65,593 pax to take a 1.6% share of the market, 32,523 inbound and 33,070 outbound. No flights in December, so this is where they ended the year

8. G4 - last of the main airlines, with a 27.6% reduction from 69,496 to 50,322 (19,174) , Inbound down 9,477 or 27.3%, outbound down by 9,697 or 27.9%. You can never predict what they are going to do and their experiment into BOS may cause further strife, but neither do we know how long that will last. This will be one to watch in 2020 to see how committed they are to the market of PVD.

9. International - the pullouts of S4 and D8 dropped the international number by 156K and it doesn't look like D8 are returning anytime soon at least until the MAX issues are sorted out then we will see of course. With the moves by TP at BOS, one wonders whether S4 might consider coming back down to PVD, but for now the International market is dead out of PVD, very sad.

I will state however that the number for 19 is still 70K above the equivalent for 2017 and almost 400K above 2015 levels, so there has been growth, but YOY, sadly a drop.

So the total number dropped below 4m, which is a significant drop from 2018, but still better than 2015, 16 and 17, so the trend is still on the up, hopefully the correction from 19 is just that and PVD can hop back over 4m in 2020. There's still another 50K to lose from the international side and it remains to be seen whether F9's reductions are just a course correction and whether WN will ultimately stop the tide of their reductions, so there is definitely some risk, but can DL, AA, B6 and SY compensate enough for that? Sadly I don't have a crystal ball so will have to rely on the reports from PVD, but here's hoping..

Fingers crossed for a better 2020... Thanks for reading I'll be back once Jan is released and i've updated my files accordingly for the new year.

Thanks for this, VS. 2019 was a course correction for total PAX after 2018's multiple months of 20%+ growth. PVD's chance for growth in 2020 lies, I believe primarily, with the MAX getting back in the air. If it doesn't until the second half of the year, I don't see adds by AA and B6 making up for the subtractions from WN (just cut three flights peak summer due to MAX grounding), F9 (will be down to only 3x weekly MCO spring/summer), and SY (MSP only this year after MSP, BNA, LAS and MSY last year).

PVD's air service level is such that just a single daily addition or subtraction can have a decent impact on total PAX counts. I'd love to finally see AA pull the trigger on MIA and/or DFW, and DL pull the trigger on a fourth ATL frequency. I believe as of October of this year DL will have run the same 3x daily PVD-ATL schedule for 10 years...

Fingers crossed for Breeze. But any additions would help right now.

PVD523 wrote:

Thanks for this, VS. 2019 was a course correction for total PAX after 2018's multiple months of 20%+ growth. PVD's chance for growth in 2020 lies, I believe primarily, with the MAX getting back in the air. If it doesn't until the second half of the year, I don't see adds by AA and B6 making up for the subtractions from WN (just cut three flights peak summer due to MAX grounding), F9 (will be down to only 3x weekly MCO spring/summer), and SY (MSP only this year after MSP, BNA, LAS and MSY last year).

PVD's air service level is such that just a single daily addition or subtraction can have a decent impact on total PAX counts. I'd love to finally see AA pull the trigger on MIA and/or DFW, and DL pull the trigger on a fourth ATL frequency. I believe as of October of this year DL will have run the same 3x daily PVD-ATL schedule for 10 years...

Fingers crossed for Breeze. But any additions would help right now.

I agree that AA adding PVD-MIA and PVD-DFW are possibilities as MIA/FLL and DFW/DAL are two of the top markets that AA doesn't currently serve nonstop from PVD. AA adding PVD-LAX nonstop service might also be a possibility with AA having more market share at LAX than DL, UA, or WN and with LAX being one of the top destinations not currently served nonstop from PVD.

WN re-adding PVD-DEN and PVD-BNA nonstop service are possibilities once WN has more planes in its fleet with the lack of PVD-DEN and PVD-BNA nonstop service being two of the biggest holes out of PVD. WN re-adding these two routes should not be ruled out simply because WN serves DEN and BNA nonstop from BOS since (a) WN still serves BWI and MDW nonstop from both PVD and BOS, (b) there is enough demand for WN to re-add both PVD-DEN and PVD-BNA nonstop service, (c) there is a significant amount of passengers who connect to destinations west of the Rocky Mountains from PVD, and (d) WN has plans to significantly expand at both DEN and BNA.

DL adding PVD-MSP is a possibility with (a) DL having added other nonstop routes out of MSP in response to SY adds out of MSP, (b) MSP being a major hub for DL, and (c) MSP being one of the top destinations that DL doesn't currently serve nonstop from MSP.

DL adding PVD-LAX nonstop service is also a possibility with (a) LAX being one of the top destinations not currently served nonstop out of PVD on any airline, (b) DL being able to operate A220's on the PVD-LAX route, and (c) DL already operating a few domestic routes out of LAX such as LAX-CVG/DTW/MCI/MSP/TPA that aren't served nonstop out of LAX on AA or UA.

Tiny glimmers of hope for PVD in 2020:

It was posted that B6 might add a 2nd FLL in November.

B6 320’s going from 150 seats to 162.

DL M88 (149 seats) retirements hopefully provide M90 (157 seats) and 738 (160) on all ATL flights.

G4 has added a 3rd PGD for much of the year.

G4’s new MYR should do much better than the SAV service they had last year.

AA has added PVD capacity each month through their May schedule despite their MAX shortages.

UA seems to making an attempt to keep ORD flights all dual class outside of the 1st quarter.

The albatross continues to be the MAX and the impact it is having on WN, AA, and UA.

HVNwxROC wrote:

airlineworker wrote:

CairnterriAIR wrote:

This is the correct reason why HVN has such limited traffic. Too many larger airports within close proximity. Airports with much better infrastructure. The airport is also located in a city which is heavily served by rail. Trains that can easily take passengers to the New York airports cheaply and in under an hour. And in all honesty, BDL is not a terribly difficult drive from the HVN market. Even during rush hour it can be driven in about an hour. In fact the worst traffic is usually encountered IN New Haven at the junction of I-95 and I-91.

Rail from New Haven to the new York airports is quite a trek, much more than one hour and dragging your bags on and off trains is a pain and I-95 is a parking lot at times. HVN is still viewed by many as the little airport that only has prop planes. Little by little that view is fading and once people fly HVN, its a pleasant experience and being dropped off or picked up does not work a hardship on the driver. Passenger numbers for the last two years have jumped considerably I could see AA, UA and DL offering service to several hub airports and that could go a long way of making travel easier for most flyers. I have used HVN for years and the closeness, no hassle and quick takeoffs have made the trip more enjoyable. When factors in the drive time to other airports, the hassle of checking in and getting to the gates, flying from HVN is refreshing. I have had some LGA flights that the captain would announce that we were number 16 for takeoff, kind of depressing and time consuming.
When I needed international flights, my choice was always JFK for non-stops, the best international airport on the east coast. It's only a matter of time before either UA and or DL commit to HVN. There is enough of a market to support flights to ORD, DTW, ATL and IAD or DCA.
PVD is 50 miles from BOS and yet PVD has a large selection of airlines and flights, so HVN should be able to offer more service. I still feel the terminal would be a limiting factor but adding a few more daily flights can work.

Yes, taking the train from the New Haven area to any of the NYC area airports is quite a slog. I've done it before but I avoid doing so if at all possible. It takes a long time, involves transfers to bus, taxi or subways, and is just not an easy trip. It is not a realistically viable option for most business travelers. Driving up to BDL is doable and much easier but not great either, especially around morning and afternoon rush hours around New Haven and Hartford.

Honestly, it doesn't help when the State of CT seems to do everything it can to push HVN down in support of BDL. HVN has bent over backwards to appease a lot of the NIMBY's including paying for sound insulation in the homes near the runway flight paths. Yes, the terminal is small but it works fine for now. If more service is secured, I could see them eventually building a new terminal on the other side of the airport that would be closer to the main access roads and away from the residential neighborhood where the current terminal is located. Yale, one of the largest employers in southern CT, has been a strong vocal supporter of the airport, for paving the runway overrun, and for expanded airport service. It would surely funnel more business travel through HVN if more service were offered. It's tough though when AA is the only option and there are so few flights currently offered.

Putting in a new jetway and the increased passenger traffic at HVN over the past couple of years is definitely encouraging. But, it seems like the next 12-24 months or so may be the make or break period for HVN to expand commercial service or possibly go the way of airports at New London and Bridgeport and eventually lose commercial service altogether, which would be a shame in my opinion.

One more reason why UA and DL perhaps are waiting to start service is the SCASD airport award for 2020 that has not been announced yet. The application is for service to ORD and IAD or DCA. Runway 14-32 has been closed for years and some talk surfaced with 14-32 decommissioned, it would free up land for a new terminal and more parking. The last ten years saw much improvement regarding HVN, 1000 foot overruns at both ends, utility poles repositioned, many trees cut down and just recently one tree taken down that will allow landings on runway 20 to use the full 5600 feet and improve the takeoff numbers on runway 2. The advent of next gen RJ's such the E-170, E-175 and the CRJ-700 offer more possibilities that did not exist years back. There is no question there is a good market to support more service and New York and BDL are not as handy as some think. I have done all of them and HVN is much better in saving ground travel time and cost. New London and Bridgeport both have shorter runways that will not support jet service. I hope for AA to make the Saturday only CLT flight a daily one as loads have been good and considering Saturday is a slow travel day. I'm still positive that 2020 will yield more service.

This may be a bit "out there" but I'm wondering what effect this very mild New England winter will have on loads for F9 and G4 flights from New England to Florida.

Fex180 wrote:

This may be a bit "out there" but I'm wondering what effect this very mild New England winter will have on loads for F9 and G4 flights from New England to Florida.

Speaking for VT at least it might have been mild, but it's still winter and hugely different than in Florida, so I would think no reason not to head south if you're inclined to do that. I don't know how much tourism there is in the other direction, but I think the only major effect would be if it was a bad ski season, and I don't think that has been the case since the snowfall totals seem close to normal and the temps aren't anything that should cause bad conditions.

Whereas Florida has actually been on the cool-side! Even in Miami I needed a sweater to walk the dog the other morning... How many people really book a knee-jerk trip to Florida when it gets below zero though?

I don't think the severity of the winter plays any part for BTV or PBG.

The people who hate winter still want to get away to Florida and hate it. Most of the florida trips i feel like are booked far ahead too.

If any route suffered it would be like CLT/PHL/DCA/IAD-BTV where those weekend skiers saw a bad winter and headed to Colorado instead. Even that i bet is minimal.

CairnterriAIR wrote:

HVNandrew wrote:

airlineworker wrote:

This is the correct reason why HVN has such limited traffic. Too many larger airports within close proximity. Airports with much better infrastructure. The airport is also located in a city which is heavily served by rail. Trains that can easily take passengers to the New York airports cheaply and in under an hour. And in all honesty, BDL is not a terribly difficult drive from the HVN market. Even during rush hour it can be driven in about an hour. In fact the worst traffic is usually encountered IN New Haven at the junction of I-95 and I-91.

it's difficult to get from penn station to a JFK terminal in under an hour. how are you getting from new haven to JFK/EWR/LGA so quickly?

rnav2dlrey wrote:

CairnterriAIR wrote:

HVNandrew wrote:

it's difficult to get from penn station to a JFK terminal in under an hour. how are you getting from new haven to JFK/EWR/LGA so quickly?

Indeed getting to NYC from New Haven in under an hour is a challenge, but getting to BDL from New Haven in under an hour for the most part is no problem.

Couple of non-airline-related updates from PVD:

RWY 16-34 reconstruction project: 70% design for the project is due mid-March, with 95% design due mid-April. Trickiest part of the design will be the reconstruction of the intersection with RWY 5-23

Airport Master Plan update: presentation from the third technical advisory committee meeting can be found here - https://www.pvdairport.com/documents/pvdmptac3finalv1.pdf Airport layout plan is set for FAA review in the spring with hopeful approval by June.

airlineworker wrote:

...
One more reason why UA and DL perhaps are waiting to start service is the SCASD airport award for 2020 that has not been announced yet. The application is for service to ORD and IAD or DCA.
...

sbaflyer posted a link to the SCASD grant recipients over on the relevant thread. HVN did not get anything. Will there be new service anyway, or will everyone wait to see if some federal money comes Tweed's way next year?

Thread: viewtopic.php?t=1421963
DOT notice: https://www.regulations.gov/contentStre ... ntType=pdf

CairnterriAIR wrote:

HVNandrew wrote:

airlineworker wrote:

When I said slots, I was referring to the use of the one jetway and the times AA is presently using them. Other airlines would need to have flights that would permit the sharing of the jetway. BDL is more than a bit further away, being almost in Massachusetts it is a much longer trip compared to HVN. I could see Allegiant doing two SFB and one PIE flights per week with good response. Why UA and DL are holding back, I don't know, but UA to ORD would do well with the CRJ-550. Back in the 90's, UA ran four 737's to ORD and some of the ORD-HVN flights I was booked on were asking for volunteers to give up their seats due to being oversold. NW tried twice to start two daily flights to DTW. That was before the overruns were in place and many trees were since taken down. All I am trying to say, HVN can support more than the present service, I don't say it will be a large operation but flights to 3-5 hubs would meet the needs of a large percentage of the local population and reduce the dependence on BDL. Adding UA and or DL would make HVN more attractive to area travelers as one airline airports are limited in growth.

I don't think the jetway would be that much of an issue; if it were occupied the other plane could use stairs. I believe there have been times over the last couple of years where there were two AA RJs on the ground at the same time (there are photos of it on this site at least).

I completely agree with you that the market is there to support a larger operation than what currently exits and that UA and/or DL adding service would make HVN a more attractive option for area travelers. I just don't necessarily see it happening, and I don't think it can be pinned on the runway. If I had to guess it's probably a combination of the costs of operating an additional station, that station taking traffic away from other stations (be it BDL, HPN, LGA, etc.) as opposed to generating "organic" growth, and not generating any kind of a premium over those other airports that would justify diverting the traffic and incurring the associated costs. While HVN's location can be seen as a strength in that it is surrounded by quite a large population, it is also a weakness because of all the other (larger) airports around it. If HVN were out somewhere by itself, a solid 2+ hours away from the airports mentioned, it would almost certainly have a much larger portfolio of service, even with the limited runway, facilities, etc.

This is the correct reason why HVN has such limited traffic. Too many larger airports within close proximity. Airports with much better infrastructure. The airport is also located in a city which is heavily served by rail. Trains that can easily take passengers to the New York airports cheaply and in under an hour. And in all honesty, BDL is not a terribly difficult drive from the HVN market. Even during rush hour it can be driven in about an hour. In fact the worst traffic is usually encountered IN New Haven at the junction of I-95 and I-91.

Quote from HVN January board meeting, "Allegiant Airlines has expressed enthusiastic interest in operating out of Tweed. The airline participated in a call with the governor’s administration and are willing to begin service prior to the runway being lengthened." http://flytweed.com/files/Board_Minutes ... y_2020.pdf
Would have to be the A319. Sounds like HVN will grow in 2020.

We have discussed before, but I think now is the time WN maybe tries BTV.

And by now, I mean in the next 1-3 years. Looking at their new add of Steamboat, I think it bodes well for BTV down to road.

BTVB6Flyer wrote:

We have discussed before, but I think now is the time WN maybe tries BTV.

And by now, I mean in the next 1-3 years. Looking at their new add of Steamboat, I think it bodes well for BTV down to road.

With what routes and schedules, though? I'm not sure if the ski destination model would work for BTV like it does for HDN, and maybe the time for WN to come to BTV with their traditional model is long past, if there was ever a time at all.

mjgbtv wrote:

Fex180 wrote:

This may be a bit "out there" but I'm wondering what effect this very mild New England winter will have on loads for F9 and G4 flights from New England to Florida.

Then the situation might be evened back out by far less weather cancellations.

Some non-service BDL news, CAA is adding several new enticing concession options to both concourse's at BDL.

https://bradleyairport.com/2020/03/03/y ... in-2020-2/

Below is a breakdown of BDL-DUB load factor from January 2019 through August 2019.

Medium Hub Airport TATL

Month / LF% / Rank / # of Routes

1/2019- 59.10% 15/15
2/2019- 54.31% 11/13
3/2019- 81.06% 9/14
4/2019- 81.27% 6/18
5/2019- 85.53% 7/23
6/2019- 95.75% 1/24
7/2019- 90.82% 6/24
8/2019- 90.41% 2/24

Thanks goes out to NolaMD88fan for creating the spreadsheet and posting in the MSY thread.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... 1498708455

uconn99 wrote:

Below is a breakdown of BDL-DUB load factor from January 2019 through August 2019.

Medium Hub Airport TATL

Month / LF% / Rank / # of Routes

1/2019- 59.10% 15/15
2/2019- 54.31% 11/13
3/2019- 81.06% 9/14
4/2019- 81.27% 6/18
5/2019- 85.53% 7/23
6/2019- 95.75% 1/24
7/2019- 90.82% 6/24
8/2019- 90.41% 2/24

Thanks goes out to NolaMD88fan for creating the spreadsheet and posting in the MSY thread.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... 1498708455

While slow in the dead of winter, is it safe to say that the route is pretty much a solid performer?

OAG changes from Enilria (thank you sir), NK's NOV's are partial, so do not read anything into those. Quite a mixture, the question is, with the current state of things, how many of the increases are going to stick? we shall see

9X ACK-HYA APR 0>0.6[0] MAY 0>1.9[0] JUN 0>3[0] JUL 0>3[0] AUG 0>3[0] SEP 0>2[0] OCT 0>0.6[0]
9X ACK-OWD MAY 0>0.8[0] JUN 0>1.5[0] JUL 0>1.6[0.7] AUG 0>1.6[0.7] SEP 0>0.9[0.7]
9X ACK-PVD APR 0>0.3[0] MAY 0>0.9[0] JUN 0>1.6[0] JUL 0>1.5[0.9] AUG 0>1.6[1.0] OCT 0>0.3[0.5]

AA BDL-DFW JUN 2>1.1[1.1] JUL 2>1.0[0.9] AUG 2>1.5[1.3]
AA BDL-ORD JUN 4>5[5] JUL 4>5[4]
F9 BDL-DEN AUG 0.1>0.3[0.4] SEP 0>0.3[0.4] OCT 0>0.3[0.5]
F9 BDL-MCO AUG 0.2>0.5[0.7] SEP 0>0.4[0.5] OCT 0>0.4[0.5]
F9 BDL-RDU AUG 0.2>0.6[0.4] SEP 0>0.6[0.4] OCT 0>0.6[0.5]
NK BDL-FLL SEP 0.3>1.0[1.0] NOV 0>0.6[1.6]
NK BDL-MCO SEP 0.5>1.6[1.8] OCT 0>1.5[1.7] NOV 0>0.8[1.9]
NK BDL-MYR SEP 0.5>2[1.0] OCT 0>2[1.0] NOV 0>1.1[0.4]

AA BGR-CLT JUN 1.1>1.4[1.0] JUL 1.1>1.4[1.0]
AA BGR-LGA JUN 0.5>1.2[0.3]

UA BTV-IAD APR 3>2[4]

9X HYA-OWD APR 0>0.3[0] MAY 0>1.0[0] JUN 0>1.5[0] JUL 0>1.4[0] AUG 0>1.5[0] SEP 0>1.0[0] OCT 0>0.3[0]

UA EWR-PVD AUG 3>4[3] SEP 3>5[3] OCT 3>5[3] NOV 3>5[3] DEC 3>5[3]
F9 MCO-PVD AUG 0.1>0.3[0.8] SEP 0>0.3[0.6] OCT 0>0.3[0.5]

AA PHL-PWM JUN 6>5[4] JUL 6>5[4]
B6 JFK-PWM JUL 3>4[3] AUG 3>4[3]
DL DTW-PWM APR 3>2[3]
F9 DEN-PWM AUG 0.1>0.5[0.4] SEP 0>0.6[0.4] OCT 0>0.6[0.4]
F9 MCO-PWM AUG 0.1>0.4[0.4] OCT 0>0.4[0.5]
F9 PWM-RDU AUG 0.1>0.5[0.4] SEP 0>0.6[0.4] OCT 0>0.6[0.4]
UA EWR-PWM AUG 5>6[6] SEP 5>7[6] OCT 5>7[6] NOV 5>7[5] DEC 5>7[5]

mjgbtv wrote:

BTVB6Flyer wrote:

We have discussed before, but I think now is the time WN maybe tries BTV.

And by now, I mean in the next 1-3 years. Looking at their new add of Steamboat, I think it bodes well for BTV down to road.

With what routes and schedules, though? I'm not sure if the ski destination model would work for BTV like it does for HDN, and maybe the time for WN to come to BTV with their traditional model is long past, if there was ever a time at all.

They already approached BTV about flying couple years ago. They wanted the ability to do up to 7 flights a day. They wanted there own counter and gates. The airport director shot it down. Basically saying that it didn’t fit BTVS culture. He was afraid that WN would come in and other airlines would leave.
So everyone knows BTV airport directors are appointed by city mayor. They don’t have to have aviation background. The position pays about 110,000 a year. The airport needs to have a management company come and run the airport.
They refuse to rent space out to venders. When a bender asked about airport rental they charge crazy fees and make it uneconomical for any business (unless the one restaurant you are and investor in...oops cats out of the bag my director)

VS4ever wrote:

UA EWR-PVD AUG 3>4[3] SEP 3>5[3] OCT 3>5[3] NOV 3>5[3] DEC 3>5[3]

This is a complete surprise for me. I had to go back and check my records to find out how long ago it was that PVD-EWR was last at 5x daily and November 2008 was the answer I found, back in the days of the CO Q400s. Even though the route will be all E145s it's a very welcomed increase.

VS4ever wrote:

OAG changes from Enilria (thank you sir)
AA PHL-PWM JUN 6>5[4] JUL 6>5[4]
B6 JFK-PWM JUL 3>4[3] AUG 3>4[3]
DL DTW-PWM APR 3>2[3]
F9 DEN-PWM AUG 0.1>0.5[0.4] SEP 0>0.6[0.4] OCT 0>0.6[0.4]
F9 MCO-PWM AUG 0.1>0.4[0.4] OCT 0>0.4[0.5]
F9 PWM-RDU AUG 0.1>0.5[0.4] SEP 0>0.6[0.4] OCT 0>0.6[0.4]
UA EWR-PWM AUG 5>6[6] SEP 5>7[6] OCT 5>7[6] NOV 5>7[5] DEC 5>7[5]

Good to see that F9 is sticking with PWM-DEN in the face of UA's daily service. It's worth remembering that F9 has a monopoly on that route for May, September, October and part of November.

I'm always baffled that PWM-RDU does so well. It's one of those oddball "dartboard" routes that stuck. I wonder if DL or AA would ever hop into PWM-RDU service.

B6 upping JFK to 4x daily is also surprising, seeing as they had fairly lackluster loads last summer with 3x daily service. Maybe they have some unused slots at JFK?

Fex180 wrote:

VS4ever wrote:

OAG changes from Enilria (thank you sir)
AA PHL-PWM JUN 6>5[4] JUL 6>5[4]
B6 JFK-PWM JUL 3>4[3] AUG 3>4[3]
DL DTW-PWM APR 3>2[3]
F9 DEN-PWM AUG 0.1>0.5[0.4] SEP 0>0.6[0.4] OCT 0>0.6[0.4]
F9 MCO-PWM AUG 0.1>0.4[0.4] OCT 0>0.4[0.5]
F9 PWM-RDU AUG 0.1>0.5[0.4] SEP 0>0.6[0.4] OCT 0>0.6[0.4]
UA EWR-PWM AUG 5>6[6] SEP 5>7[6] OCT 5>7[6] NOV 5>7[5] DEC 5>7[5]

Good to see that F9 is sticking with PWM-DEN in the face of UA's daily service. It's worth remembering that F9 has a monopoly on that route for May, September, October and part of November.

I'm always baffled that PWM-RDU does so well. It's one of those oddball "dartboard" routes that stuck. I wonder if DL or AA would ever hop into PWM-RDU service.

B6 upping JFK to 4x daily is also surprising, seeing as they had fairly lackluster loads last summer with 3x daily service. Maybe they have some unused slots at JFK?

JetBlue did really well on JFK pwm this past summer. On par with ack and Hyannis. So easy place to use a slot.

Blueknows wrote:

mjgbtv wrote:

BTVB6Flyer wrote:

We have discussed before, but I think now is the time WN maybe tries BTV.

And by now, I mean in the next 1-3 years. Looking at their new add of Steamboat, I think it bodes well for BTV down to road.

With what routes and schedules, though? I'm not sure if the ski destination model would work for BTV like it does for HDN, and maybe the time for WN to come to BTV with their traditional model is long past, if there was ever a time at all.

They already approached BTV about flying couple years ago. They wanted the ability to do up to 7 flights a day. They wanted there own counter and gates. The airport director shot it down. Basically saying that it didn’t fit BTVS culture. He was afraid that WN would come in and other airlines would leave.
So everyone knows BTV airport directors are appointed by city mayor. They don’t have to have aviation background. The position pays about 110,000 a year. The airport needs to have a management company come and run the airport.
They refuse to rent space out to venders. When a bender asked about airport rental they charge crazy fees and make it uneconomical for any business (unless the one restaurant you are and investor in...oops cats out of the bag my director)

If I'm Southwest, I really would like to enter BTV and then say I'm the only LCC flying to all six New England states. As long as JetBlue ignores MHT (which they have done and will continue to do), it's an opening for WN.

The whole thing about the Airport Director shooing away WN because of a 'culture-mismatch' seems specious. An airport vacuuming up federal dollars cannot be that discriminatory.

ChrisNH38 wrote:

Blueknows wrote:

mjgbtv wrote:

With what routes and schedules, though? I'm not sure if the ski destination model would work for BTV like it does for HDN, and maybe the time for WN to come to BTV with their traditional model is long past, if there was ever a time at all.

They already approached BTV about flying couple years ago. They wanted the ability to do up to 7 flights a day. They wanted there own counter and gates. The airport director shot it down. Basically saying that it didn’t fit BTVS culture. He was afraid that WN would come in and other airlines would leave.
So everyone knows BTV airport directors are appointed by city mayor. They don’t have to have aviation background. The position pays about 110,000 a year. The airport needs to have a management company come and run the airport.
They refuse to rent space out to venders. When a bender asked about airport rental they charge crazy fees and make it uneconomical for any business (unless the one restaurant you are and investor in...oops cats out of the bag my director)

If I'm Southwest, I really would like to enter BTV and then say I'm the only LCC flying to all six New England states. As long as JetBlue ignores MHT (which they have done and will continue to do), it's an opening for WN.

The whole thing about the Airport Director shooing away WN because of a 'culture-mismatch' seems specious. An airport vacuuming up federal dollars cannot be that discriminatory.

WN at BTV is an issue of market size, not local politics. No way could WN fill 6-7 737/8's per day. At absolute most they could have a PWM /SYR level of service (3-4 daily departures) but WN also had a big fleet crunch right now. They won't be expanding to BTV unless the market demands it or they incorporate a smaller plane into their fleet

Fex180 wrote:

ChrisNH38 wrote:

Blueknows wrote:

They already approached BTV about flying couple years ago. They wanted the ability to do up to 7 flights a day. They wanted there own counter and gates. The airport director shot it down. Basically saying that it didn’t fit BTVS culture. He was afraid that WN would come in and other airlines would leave.
So everyone knows BTV airport directors are appointed by city mayor. They don’t have to have aviation background. The position pays about 110,000 a year. The airport needs to have a management company come and run the airport.
They refuse to rent space out to venders. When a bender asked about airport rental they charge crazy fees and make it uneconomical for any business (unless the one restaurant you are and investor in...oops cats out of the bag my director)

If I'm Southwest, I really would like to enter BTV and then say I'm the only LCC flying to all six New England states. As long as JetBlue ignores MHT (which they have done and will continue to do), it's an opening for WN.

The whole thing about the Airport Director shooing away WN because of a 'culture-mismatch' seems specious. An airport vacuuming up federal dollars cannot be that discriminatory.

WN at BTV is an issue of market size, not local politics. No way could WN fill 6-7 737/8's per day. At absolute most they could have a PWM /SYR level of service (3-4 daily departures) but WN also had a big fleet crunch right now. They won't be expanding to BTV unless the market demands it or they incorporate a smaller plane into their fleet

I feel like BTV has a good balance of carriers, decent choice of destinations and competitive fares right now. I don't see how WN coming in and taking 30%+ market share would be a good thing in the long run.

Any idea what happened here? Diversion to BWI? So many closer places and So near a hub.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL3291/history/20200319/1800Z/KORD/KMHT

SCOTUS will not hear Connecticut request to rehear Tweed airport runway case. https://www.nhregister.com/news/article ... 150764.php

airlineworker wrote:

SCOTUS will not hear Connecticut request to rehear Tweed airport runway case. https://www.nhregister.com/news/article ... 150764.php

This and the virus may severely hurt HVN moving forward.

More adjustments for the virus below:

BDL-

DL ATL-BDL APR 7>6[7]
DL BDL-CLE APR 0.9>0.0[0.9]
DL BDL-CVG APR 0.9>0.0[0.8]
DL BDL-DTW APR 5>4[4]
DL BDL-MSP APR 4>3[4]
DL BDL-RDU APR 0.9>0.0[0.9]
AA BDL-ORD APR 4>3[4] MAY 5>4[5]
EI BDL-DUB APR 1.0>0.5[0.9]
AC BDL-YUL APR 0.8>0[0.7]
AC BDL-YYZ APR 2.0>0[3]
B6 BDL-MCO APR 3>2[3]
B6 BDL-PBI APR 1.9>1.0[1.0]
B6 BDL-SJU APR 2.0>1.1[2.0]
NK BDL-FLL APR 1.7>1.2[2]
NK BDL-MCO APR 2>1.3[2] MAY 2>1.0[2]
NK BDL-MYR APR 1.3>1.8[0.6]
NK BDL-TPA APR 1.4>0.9[1.0]
UA BDL-IAH APR 1.0>0[1.0] MAY 1.0>0[1.0]

PVD-

AC PVD-YYZ MAY 0.2>0[0.2]
B6 FLL-PVD APR 1.0>0.7[1.0]
B6 MCO-PVD APR 2.0>1.0[2.0]
B6 PBI-PVD APR 1.0>0.7[1.0]
DL ATL-PVD APR 3>2[3]
WN BWI-PVD AUG 2>7[6] SEP 0>7[6] OCT 0>7[6]
WN DCA-PVD AUG 0.6>2[2] OCT 0>1.9[2]
WN MDW-PVD AUG 0.6>1.5[3] SEP 0>1.3[3] OCT 0>1.8[3]

PWM-

9K BOS-PWM APR 4>0[0] MAY 4>0[0]
DL JFK-PWM APR 3>2[3]
DL LGA-PWM APR 3>1.9[3]
AA LGA-PWM MAY 2>3[1.9]
DL DTW-PWM JUN 3>2[3] JUL 3>2.0[3]
WN BWI-PWM AUG 1.3>5[5] SEP 0>5[4] OCT 0>5[4]

BTV-

B6 BTV-JFK APR 3>2[3]
DL BTV-JFK APR 3>2[3]

MHT-

DL LGA-MHT APR 0.9>0.0[0.9]
DL ATL-MHT APR 1.0>0.0[1.0]
WN MCO-MHT AUG 0.5>1.3[1.2] SEP 0>1.2[0.5] OCT 0>1.6[1.9]
WN MDW-MHT AUG 0.6>1.5[3] SEP 0>1.1[3] OCT 0>1.2[3]
WN MHT-TPA OCT 0>0.8[1.0]

uconn99 wrote:

airlineworker wrote:

SCOTUS will not hear Connecticut request to rehear Tweed airport runway case. https://www.nhregister.com/news/article ... 150764.php

This and the virus may severely hurt HVN moving forward.

The virus is certainly hurting passenger numbers, not only for HVN, but also for BDL, some AA's A-319's BDL to PHL are showing less that 25 passengers and some flights have been cancelled. Most of BDL's flight numbers to PHL can be accommodated on RJ's, numbers for PVD are similar. Much depends on the covid-19 virus and how long it lasts. I don't see why you feel that the court victory will hurt HVN. The FAA would not fund the runway project until the court situation was settled and now the states court action against HVN is over. Its been a ten fight to upgrade the runway and now success is in sight. New Haven county and some fringe towns in other counties can make up a good demographic to draw from and support flights to 5 to 6 or so hub airports.

airlineworker wrote:

uconn99 wrote:

airlineworker wrote:

SCOTUS will not hear Connecticut request to rehear Tweed airport runway case. https://www.nhregister.com/news/article ... 150764.php

This and the virus may severely hurt HVN moving forward.

The virus is certainly hurting passenger numbers, not only for HVN, but also for BDL, some AA's A-319's BDL to PHL are showing less that 25 passengers and some flights have been cancelled. Most of BDL's flight numbers to PHL can be accommodated on RJ's, numbers for PVD are similar. Much depends on the covid-19 virus and how long it lasts. I don't see why you feel that the court victory will hurt HVN. The FAA would not fund the runway project until the court situation was settled and now the states court action against HVN is over. Its been a ten fight to upgrade the runway and now success is in sight. New Haven county and some fringe towns in other counties can make up a good demographic to draw from and support flights to 5 to 6 or so hub airports.

I misread the title, disregard my comment about the court case. Small regional airports like HVN will be hurt more than BDL or PVD. Depending on how long this downturn lasts, I could see AA ending CLT flights and going to 1-2 daily into PHL until things clear.

A small distraction from everything that's going on but PVD posted January passenger numbers: https://www.pvdairport.com/documents/passenger-numbers/2020/PassengerStatsJanuary2020.pdf

Combined numbers for AA, DL and UA: AA up 1% (69,962 vs 69,333), DL up 2.7% (30,803 vs 29,987) and UA up 8.7% (17,960 vs 16,518). Overall, total PAX count up 2.8% (275,632 vs 268,268). It's a bummer the positive numbers won't last long.

Other PVD updates:
The National Guard is working a Department of Health checkpoint at baggage claim, meeting with all arriving passengers, taking their info, and asking them to self quarantine. All shops and restaurants pre- and post-security are closed with the exception of a post-security travel mart and a Dunkin. The economy parking lot is closed, as are most floors of airport-operated parking garages. The airport was seeing about a 40-50% flight cancellation rate over the last two weeks. This should come down with the new reduced April flight schedules, but when most flights are departing with single digit passenger counts anyway, it really doesn't matter. All EWR flights are cancelled through mid-April. More changes ahead, I'm sure, so here's hoping for better days soon.

Just thinking, with all the airlines parking planes and the desert storage yards filling up, the airport authorities of PSM and BXM (Former Brunswick NAS) should get on board with promoting temporary aircraft storage. Especially at BXM. Huge apron that’s essentially empty, and an entire 9,000 foot runway not in use. Seems like easy quick cash. Probably won’t happen, but just an idea.

Great idea. When did Brunswick's runway grow an additional 1000 feet?

Portlander wrote:

Great idea. When did Brunswick's runway grow an additional 1000 feet?

It didn’t. I guess it’s 8,000? You get the idea, though.

Somebody suggested it wouldn’t be good because of the salt air, but SNN is also surrounded by sea nearby and they seem to be storing s lot of planes right now.

In non-Covid news, it looks like PWM had a record year in 2019, handling about 2.17 million pax.

It's a given that 2019 will be the Jetport's record year for the foreseeable future. Seeing as the summer tourist season will almost certainly be heavily impacted by Covid and the economic downturn... I wouldn't be surprised if most or all of the new summer additions to the PWM docket are canceled before they even begin.

The salt air would be a deterrent. I think your idea has merit due to Brunswick having twin 8000' runways, one is permanently closed which would be perfect for aircraft parking until late October. Fex180, I agree with your thoughts on PWM's summer flights and new service to MSP and DFW but the passenger counts will return once we eventually get back to normal. Hopefully the airport will continue to follow through with the 2 gate expansion, FIS addition and the first class lounge space.