Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13278
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun Apr 26, 2020 5:47 am

11C wrote:
DLASFlyer wrote:
enilria wrote:
This is the kind of BS that happens when the govt begins choosing which stations you must fly to. Hello 1977./


No one forced B6 to participate in CARES Act financing.


Since virtually all airlines have to participate to remain viable, your argument is not very compelling.

Says who?

They knew the stipulations, they chose to take the money. They could've tried to raise it on the oh-so-vaunted "market," but chose to take the faster and more expedient way of accepting public funds in exchange for a minimal guarantee.

Not sure to whom you believe this argument wouldn't be "compelling," but certainly not any court of repute; and quite frankly, that'd be the only one(s) who mattered.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 10254
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun Apr 26, 2020 11:38 am

NYCVIE wrote:
mxaxai wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
This is the kind of BS that happens when carriers take government money without thinking the law will, actually, apply to them. It's right in the text of the legislation:

But there's a difference between "don't cut certain essential routes!" and "add these routes between airports you never served before!". If we look at routes like SFO-SMF or MSY-IAH, UA would have been much better suited to serve these; SEA-PDX and SLC-BZN would be better served by DL or AS.


I don't see what the issue is? These are all airports B6 serves and these new routes are just tags to flights that originate from JFK or BOS. So they are keeping these stations open by tagging the flights. Rather than JFK-ABQ and JFK-DEN there's now JFK-DEN-ABQ. As someone mentioned upthread AS is doing the same.

The issue is that there won't be any passengers on these new routes. So, this is money being spent on no public benefit with the govt aid going to buy now cheap fuel to fly around empty on routes they never flew before. If you want another ridiculous loophole, the airlines got CARES money for payroll, but got a huge number of employees to take voluntary leave thus keeping the payroll support, but not paying it out to employees. Another highly questionable arrangement. I would rather the airlines have just gotten a check for paying employees, been forced to pay them with that money, and have the airlines decide what routes to fly. Instead what has happened instead is that we have turned the entire national airline industry into the same tricky scheduling shenanigans as the EAS program.
 
11C
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2019 2:25 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun Apr 26, 2020 1:13 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
11C wrote:
DLASFlyer wrote:

No one forced B6 to participate in CARES Act financing.


Since virtually all airlines have to participate to remain viable, your argument is not very compelling.

Says who?

They knew the stipulations, they chose to take the money. They could've tried to raise it on the oh-so-vaunted "market," but chose to take the faster and more expedient way of accepting public funds in exchange for a minimal guarantee.

Not sure to whom you believe this argument wouldn't be "compelling," but certainly not any court of repute; and quite frankly, that'd be the only one(s) who mattered.


They could have raised it in the market? Not very compelling again. United is giving that a try, essentially a Hail Mary. My point is the CARES act was designed to keep airlines afloat, and keep paychecks going to employees. Causing unreasonable cash burn doesn’t help the cause. We essentially have a government full of anti-government sycophants trying to manage a crisis. They suck at it, so far. Wow, what a surprise!
 
CRJ5000
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2019 3:06 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun Apr 26, 2020 1:41 pm

flyboy7974 wrote:
CRJ5000 wrote:
Good for B6 for trying to skirt the rather obnoxious requirements of government bailout money. As others have mentioned, AS did it as well.

From a little digging I see that F9 is doing MCO-SRQ and probably more.
NK has CLE-CMH, AVL-GSO, OAK-SMF, PIT-LBE, STT-STX, among others.
If you're going to have to fly segments with a couple passengers on board, you might as well make them cheap to operate.


Is there a publicized list of the NK tags like this JetBlue article?

Question for all, what’s B6 doing with their RNO service?


Here's an article with the best list I could find.

https://paxex.aero/2020/04/spirit-airli ... uirements/
 
umichman
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2019 2:42 am

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:34 pm

NWADTWE16 wrote:
ill never understand why, within the U.S. when a tag is added, people cant buy just the tag? How does that hurt anyone, it only helps and I for one have been asking for Intra-state Florida services to be expanded so we don't have to drive the killer roads forever. I would certainly book SRQ-MCO, I prefer it was RSW but all the same to me, and id like to see them add SRQ/RSW-FLL as well.


There's nothing preventing the airlines from having fare filings and selling the tag flights as standalone flights. AS has a number of tag flights now as well and has done just that. It takes time and effort to manage those fare filings for tag flights with pricing and bucket inventory, etc., so it may not always make sense. Fares are generally not constructed hop-by-hop. AS fares for SEA-CHS are not a combination of SEA-RDU and RDU-CHS fares, so managing RDU-CHS fares requires additional effort by AS.

https://www.google.com/flights?hl=en#fl ... 1;t:f;tt:o
https://www.google.com/flights?hl=en#fl ... 1;t:f;tt:o
https://www.google.com/flights?hl=en#fl ... 1;t:f;tt:o
https://www.google.com/flights?hl=en#fl ... 1;t:f;tt:o
https://www.google.com/flights?hl=en#fl ... 1;t:f;tt:o
 
evank516
Posts: 2138
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:39 pm

PSP is a head scratcher to me. It was never a year-round market for B6 so maybe the feds should let them suspend service there when the season was supposed to end? Other than that, I'm siding with the government on this one. You can't take money when these stipulations are in black and white and expect them to make an exception for you. If they do it for B6 then they have to do it for everyone and then the flying public loses.
 
NYCVIE
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 11:01 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun Apr 26, 2020 4:19 pm

enilria wrote:
NYCVIE wrote:
mxaxai wrote:
But there's a difference between "don't cut certain essential routes!" and "add these routes between airports you never served before!". If we look at routes like SFO-SMF or MSY-IAH, UA would have been much better suited to serve these; SEA-PDX and SLC-BZN would be better served by DL or AS.


I don't see what the issue is? These are all airports B6 serves and these new routes are just tags to flights that originate from JFK or BOS. So they are keeping these stations open by tagging the flights. Rather than JFK-ABQ and JFK-DEN there's now JFK-DEN-ABQ. As someone mentioned upthread AS is doing the same.

The issue is that there won't be any passengers on these new routes. So, this is money being spent on no public benefit with the govt aid going to buy now cheap fuel to fly around empty on routes they never flew before. If you want another ridiculous loophole, the airlines got CARES money for payroll, but got a huge number of employees to take voluntary leave thus keeping the payroll support, but not paying it out to employees. Another highly questionable arrangement. I would rather the airlines have just gotten a check for paying employees, been forced to pay them with that money, and have the airlines decide what routes to fly. Instead what has happened instead is that we have turned the entire national airline industry into the same tricky scheduling shenanigans as the EAS program.


You keep making it sound like the gov't is forcing B6 to add routes "they never flew before." It is B6's own choice to maintain the minimum connectivity by scheduling their flights this way. These are all stations they already serve. I understand your point, but the flip side of not mandating minimum connectivity is you would have B6 (and other carriers) pocket the money and serve literally a handful of routes. Then how would it look to the American public that they are bankrolling these airline bailouts when the airlines wouldn't even be flying. Why should Joe Schmo in Bozeman be on the hook for bailing the airlines out only for the airlines to all leave Bozeman once they receive the money?

The bailout cannot just be tied to payroll and employment because there are tens of millions of Americans that work in industries affected as well who are unemployed and won't receive similar protections. So in turn for BILLIONS in bailout money, yes they will need to maintain what I think is honestly generous minimum service. The majority of these B6 routes will be flown 3x a week.
 
flyboy7974
Posts: 1402
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2003 4:35 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun Apr 26, 2020 4:49 pm

CRJ5000 wrote:
flyboy7974 wrote:
CRJ5000 wrote:
Good for B6 for trying to skirt the rather obnoxious requirements of government bailout money. As others have mentioned, AS did it as well.

From a little digging I see that F9 is doing MCO-SRQ and probably more.
NK has CLE-CMH, AVL-GSO, OAK-SMF, PIT-LBE, STT-STX, among others.
If you're going to have to fly segments with a couple passengers on board, you might as well make them cheap to operate.


Is there a publicized list of the NK tags like this JetBlue article?

Question for all, what’s B6 doing with their RNO service?


Here's an article with the best list I could find.

https://paxex.aero/2020/04/spirit-airli ... uirements/


Thanks for sharing, only think I can’t find on the B6 side of things is what’s happening with RNO. It was on the list for suspension, was B6 granted this or will it become a tag on?
 
User avatar
enilria
Topic Author
Posts: 10254
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun Apr 26, 2020 6:47 pm

BooDog wrote:
I'm calling out the original poster for stirring crap up. If he posted the routes as listed in the article, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
As listed in article:
The following new routes will operate as direct flights:

Boston – Chicago – Minneapolis/St. Paul
Boston – Denver – Albuquerque
Boston – New Orleans – Houston
Boston – Las Vegas – San Diego
Boston – Seattle – Portland, OR
Long Beach – Palm Springs – New York/JFK
Long Beach – Salt Lake City – Bozeman
New York/JFK – Denver – Albuquerque
New York/JFK – New Orleans – Houston
New York/JFK – Las Vegas – San Diego
New York/JFK – Seattle – Portland, OR
New York/JFK – San Francisco – Sacramento
New York/JFK – Orlando – Sarasota

Instead of flying JFK to PDX and JFK to SEA, they are now flying JFK-PDX-SEA. That's it. No big deal. Original Poster makes it sound like these were just random flights added out of nowhere.

Obviously they are through flights, but that whole concept has been dead for over a decade except in EAS. Now the whole country is being operated like EAS.
 
Insertnamehere
Posts: 317
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 3:44 am

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun Apr 26, 2020 6:57 pm

mxaxai wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
This is the kind of BS that happens when carriers take government money without thinking the law will, actually, apply to them. It's right in the text of the legislation:

But there's a difference between "don't cut certain essential routes!" and "add these routes between airports you never served before!". If we look at routes like SFO-SMF or MSY-IAH, UA would have been much better suited to serve these; SEA-PDX and SLC-BZN would be better served by DL or AS.


It was the airline's decision to create those tag flights, the law said they couldn't cut service to any of their existing markets. It's the airlines who decided to fly tag flights to serve these markets instead of keeping the existing routes.
 
usflyer msp
Posts: 3796
Joined: Tue May 23, 2000 11:50 am

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun Apr 26, 2020 7:14 pm

flyboy7974 wrote:
CRJ5000 wrote:
flyboy7974 wrote:

Is there a publicized list of the NK tags like this JetBlue article?

Question for all, what’s B6 doing with their RNO service?


Here's an article with the best list I could find.

https://paxex.aero/2020/04/spirit-airli ... uirements/


Thanks for sharing, only think I can’t find on the B6 side of things is what’s happening with RNO. It was on the list for suspension, was B6 granted this or will it become a tag on?


RNO is maintaining 3x week to LGB.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13278
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun Apr 26, 2020 7:16 pm

11C wrote:
Not very compelling again.

You seemed to have missed the first two words in that previous response....
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
727LOVER
Posts: 8624
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 12:22 am

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun Apr 26, 2020 7:18 pm

727LOVER wrote:
bigb wrote:
Hence is why you won’t see a MCO-SRQ available online but If one was to book JFK-SRQ then your only option will be JFK-MCO-SRQ.


In the month of May, I do not see it.

Leave JFK 9:05am...arrive.
SRQ 11:55am

Leave SRQ 1:13pm...arrive JFK 4:00pm
[/quote]

UPDATE.....I see it for June..looks like JFK-MCO-SRQ-MCO-JFK
"We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
 
Lootess
Posts: 456
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 6:15 am

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Mon Apr 27, 2020 3:38 am

Personally I think carriers should be allowed to petition the DOT to drop CARES mandated routes if they can put together an argument that the market has "comparable service". You know they do this all the time in-reverse with limited slot rewards, trying to tell DOT that a carrier doesn't need the route authority because they have frequency and/or service from another hub, etc.
 
United1
Posts: 4164
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Mon Apr 27, 2020 4:35 am

Lootess wrote:
Personally I think carriers should be allowed to petition the DOT to drop CARES mandated routes if they can put together an argument that the market has "comparable service". You know they do this all the time in-reverse with limited slot rewards, trying to tell DOT that a carrier doesn't need the route authority because they have frequency and/or service from another hub, etc.


There are no CARES mandated routes per say rather they are CARES mandated cities. Any of the airlines can cut frequency and routes to any city they serve as long as they maintain at least five flights a week to that city (assuming daily service beforehand.) You will see this more on B6 and AS than on any of the legacies simply because their hubs are all on the coasts.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
usflyer msp
Posts: 3796
Joined: Tue May 23, 2000 11:50 am

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Mon Apr 27, 2020 4:37 am

Lootess wrote:
Personally I think carriers should be allowed to petition the DOT to drop CARES mandated routes if they can put together an argument that the market has "comparable service". You know they do this all the time in-reverse with limited slot rewards, trying to tell DOT that a carrier doesn't need the route authority because they have frequency and/or service from another hub, etc.


CARES does not mandate routes, it solely mandates destinations and flights per week. Carriers can serve the required destination whatever manner they want as long as the frequency requirement (1 or 3 flights per week) is met.
 
SELMER40
Posts: 231
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 9:07 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Mon Apr 27, 2020 1:06 pm

Lootess wrote:
Personally I think carriers should be allowed to petition the DOT to drop CARES mandated routes if they can put together an argument that the market has "comparable service". You know they do this all the time in-reverse with limited slot rewards, trying to tell DOT that a carrier doesn't need the route authority because they have frequency and/or service from another hub, etc.

They CAN. They DO. Some are successful. It is called an exemption to the order.
Teaching this old dog a new trick
 
usflyer msp
Posts: 3796
Joined: Tue May 23, 2000 11:50 am

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Mon Apr 27, 2020 11:21 pm

After reading DOT's rationale behind SY's CARES Act exemptions being approved, I'm now thinking that B6 and the other smaller carriers got shafted. B6/AS/NK/F9 should definitely appeal. The DOT is not being consistent about maintaining service to large airports.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... -0037-0098
 
joeblow10
Posts: 423
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:58 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:26 am

usflyer msp wrote:
After reading DOT's rationale behind SY's CARES Act exemptions being approved, I'm now thinking that B6 and the other smaller carriers got shafted. B6/AS/NK/F9 should definitely appeal. The DOT is not being consistent about maintaining service to large airports.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... -0037-0098


Agreed. No doubt SY is a “small carrier” but the double standard being applied to F9 and NK is a bit much... I can actually see the reasoning behind requiring service to small airports like AVL and XNA, but both applied for exemptions at larger airports too with ample service and got denied.

Can’t have a double standard in terms of enforcement, and yet it seems that’s what the DOT has done
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4989
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:44 am

bravotango75 wrote:
Mixed feelings on this. The idea of allowing the Government to dictate which routes a carrier to serve al la the CAB back in the day, not good. However, the agreement clearly states what will be expected of said carrier. And I believe that similar rules are being applied to other industries. Again, Government interference, if not complete control of a private company that is not good. When the dust settles, we shall see if "private industry" will have a future in the US.

I fail to see a problem here. Did they or did they NOT ask for and take money from the Govt? Well? This is how you pay the piper! Don't like it? Give it Back!







'
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 5957
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Tue Apr 28, 2020 2:03 am

strfyr51 wrote:
bravotango75 wrote:
Mixed feelings on this. The idea of allowing the Government to dictate which routes a carrier to serve al la the CAB back in the day, not good. However, the agreement clearly states what will be expected of said carrier. And I believe that similar rules are being applied to other industries. Again, Government interference, if not complete control of a private company that is not good. When the dust settles, we shall see if "private industry" will have a future in the US.

I fail to see a problem here. Did they or did they NOT ask for and take money from the Govt? Well? This is how you pay the piper! Don't like it? Give it Back!







'



100 percent spot on
 
CRJ5000
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2019 3:06 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Tue Apr 28, 2020 10:13 am

usflyer msp wrote:
After reading DOT's rationale behind SY's CARES Act exemptions being approved, I'm now thinking that B6 and the other smaller carriers got shafted. B6/AS/NK/F9 should definitely appeal. The DOT is not being consistent about maintaining service to large airports.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... -0037-0098


Ha, you called it. Looks like it pissed off at least NK, and I can only assume B6/F9/G4 are also considering appealing but I don't see their request yet.
NK almost immediately issued an appeal, and mentioned the Cape Air and Sun Country decision multiple times in that appeal. Looks like different cities requested this time.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... -0037-0100
 
User avatar
airportugal310
Posts: 3660
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 12:49 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:31 pm

CRJ5000 wrote:
usflyer msp wrote:
After reading DOT's rationale behind SY's CARES Act exemptions being approved, I'm now thinking that B6 and the other smaller carriers got shafted. B6/AS/NK/F9 should definitely appeal. The DOT is not being consistent about maintaining service to large airports.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... -0037-0098


Ha, you called it. Looks like it pissed off at least NK, and I can only assume B6/F9/G4 are also considering appealing but I don't see their request yet.
NK almost immediately issued an appeal, and mentioned the Cape Air and Sun Country decision multiple times in that appeal. Looks like different cities requested this time.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... -0037-0100


This line in the NK document..."Its survival through the pandemic is critical to meeting the needs of many travelers during the economic recovery."

Ya, well...isn't that everyone's end game? Some will survive, some won't. The one's that do will be there to meet the needs of the traveler...nothing special here
“They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash.”
 
lowfareair
Posts: 314
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:40 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:49 pm

enilria wrote:
BooDog wrote:
I'm calling out the original poster for stirring crap up. If he posted the routes as listed in the article, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
As listed in article:
The following new routes will operate as direct flights:

Boston – Chicago – Minneapolis/St. Paul
Boston – Denver – Albuquerque
Boston – New Orleans – Houston
Boston – Las Vegas – San Diego
Boston – Seattle – Portland, OR
Long Beach – Palm Springs – New York/JFK
Long Beach – Salt Lake City – Bozeman
New York/JFK – Denver – Albuquerque
New York/JFK – New Orleans – Houston
New York/JFK – Las Vegas – San Diego
New York/JFK – Seattle – Portland, OR
New York/JFK – San Francisco – Sacramento
New York/JFK – Orlando – Sarasota

Instead of flying JFK to PDX and JFK to SEA, they are now flying JFK-PDX-SEA. That's it. No big deal. Original Poster makes it sound like these were just random flights added out of nowhere.

Obviously they are through flights, but that whole concept has been dead for over a decade except in EAS. Now the whole country is being operated like EAS.


1) Your first post does not make that obvious unless someone clicks through and reads the article. You could have called it 'New B6 through-flight routes' or something similar

2) Considering the bailout provisions are to ensure we maintain Essential Air Service, it seems like that is a good analogy and helps justify why airlines are doing these tag flights.
 
Brickell305
Posts: 1021
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 2:07 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Tue Apr 28, 2020 5:37 pm

B6 isn't done. They are now petitioning to drop the following destinations:

ATL Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport
CLT Charlotte Douglas International Airport
ORD Chicago O’Hare International Airport
DFW Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport
DEN Denver International Airport
DTW Detroit Metro Airport
IAH George Bush Intercontinental Airport
LAS McCarran International Airport
MSP Minneapolis – St. Paul International Airport
BNA Nashville International Airport
PHL Philadelphia International Airport
PHX Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport
PDX Portland International Airport
SAN San Diego International Airport
SEA Seattle-Tacoma International Airport
TPA Tampa International Airport

https://paxex.aero/2020/04/jetblue-aims ... s-network/
 
usflyer msp
Posts: 3796
Joined: Tue May 23, 2000 11:50 am

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Tue Apr 28, 2020 6:24 pm

Brickell305 wrote:
B6 isn't done. They are now petitioning to drop the following destinations:

ATL Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport
CLT Charlotte Douglas International Airport
ORD Chicago O’Hare International Airport
DFW Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport
DEN Denver International Airport
DTW Detroit Metro Airport
IAH George Bush Intercontinental Airport
LAS McCarran International Airport
MSP Minneapolis – St. Paul International Airport
BNA Nashville International Airport
PHL Philadelphia International Airport
PHX Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport
PDX Portland International Airport
SAN San Diego International Airport
SEA Seattle-Tacoma International Airport
TPA Tampa International Airport

https://paxex.aero/2020/04/jetblue-aims ... s-network/


See, the DOT opened up a can of worms with those SY exemptions. Now the question is - once the smaller carriers are allowed to drop the "large hub airports", will those airports still have the magnitude of alternative service that was the basis for approving the exemptions? DOT should have just been consistent and said NO.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4989
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Tue Apr 28, 2020 6:32 pm

Brickell305 wrote:
B6 isn't done. They are now petitioning to drop the following destinations:

ATL Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport
CLT Charlotte Douglas International Airport
ORD Chicago O’Hare International Airport
DFW Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport
DEN Denver International Airport
DTW Detroit Metro Airport
IAH George Bush Intercontinental Airport
LAS McCarran International Airport
MSP Minneapolis – St. Paul International Airport
BNA Nashville International Airport
PHL Philadelphia International Airport
PHX Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport
PDX Portland International Airport
SAN San Diego International Airport
SEA Seattle-Tacoma International Airport
TPA Tampa International Airport

https://paxex.aero/2020/04/jetblue-aims ... s-network/

of course they can drop all those routes. All those cities are covered by the other major carriers DL,AA,UA,AS. like Blankets, B6 was only "Sopping Gravy" there anyway. None of those cities will Lose much.
 
nkops
Posts: 2236
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 10:09 am

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Tue Apr 28, 2020 6:37 pm

Allegiant has been running triangle flights for a while now.. today they did SFB-HTS-PBG-SFB... to me its a smart move by airlines to do this
Turn left heading 080 contact departure
 
Lootess
Posts: 456
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 6:15 am

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Tue Apr 28, 2020 10:15 pm

SELMER40 wrote:
Lootess wrote:
Personally I think carriers should be allowed to petition the DOT to drop CARES mandated routes if they can put together an argument that the market has "comparable service". You know they do this all the time in-reverse with limited slot rewards, trying to tell DOT that a carrier doesn't need the route authority because they have frequency and/or service from another hub, etc.

They CAN. They DO. Some are successful. It is called an exemption to the order.


More likely they will.

Today airlines asked DOT for leeway with flights, several exceptions for cities requested.

JetBlue wants to halt flights to airports in Chicago, Atlanta, Houston, Seattle, Las Vegas, Philadelphia, Dallas and Detroit through Sept. 30

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3565709-airlines-ask-dot-for-leeway-flights?utm_medium=email&utm_source=seeking_alpha&mail_subject=dal-airlines-ask-dot-for-leeway-with-flights&utm_campaign=rta-stock-news&utm_content=link-3
 
User avatar
Web500sjc
Posts: 859
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:23 am

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:30 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
Brickell305 wrote:
B6 isn't done. They are now petitioning to drop the following destinations:

ATL Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport
CLT Charlotte Douglas International Airport
ORD Chicago O’Hare International Airport
DFW Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport
DEN Denver International Airport
DTW Detroit Metro Airport
IAH George Bush Intercontinental Airport
LAS McCarran International Airport
MSP Minneapolis – St. Paul International Airport
BNA Nashville International Airport
PHL Philadelphia International Airport
PHX Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport
PDX Portland International Airport
SAN San Diego International Airport
SEA Seattle-Tacoma International Airport
TPA Tampa International Airport

https://paxex.aero/2020/04/jetblue-aims ... s-network/

of course they can drop all those routes. All those cities are covered by the other major carriers DL,AA,UA,AS. like Blankets, B6 was only "Sopping Gravy" there anyway. None of those cities will Lose much.


The question is, how many airlines can use the “other airline“ argument and when is it acceptable be not acceptable? If UA And AA want this suspend service to GRK (only UA and AA provide service to GRK), which one has to continue service, and which one gets to take a break?

The DOT should have used one consistent standard about how the funds are distributed and what the requirements are when you accept the funds. Service is required unless the local government has determined the airport shouldn’t be served.
 
11C
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2019 2:25 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:10 pm

[photoid][/photoid]
LAX772LR wrote:
11C wrote:
Not very compelling again.

You seemed to have missed the first two words in that previous response....


I didn’t, your arguments are not very compelling to the management teams at most of the airlines either, since most are now seeking exemptions. You may be able to find work in the present administration with your attitude, but the people currently getting things done (the trump administration, notwithstanding) probably wouldn’t care to work with the likes of you.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15100
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:43 pm

When more things open up it will be easier to judge the traffic needs. The route infrastructure needs to stay in place until then.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13278
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Wed Apr 29, 2020 5:01 pm

11C wrote:
11C wrote:
11C wrote:
is not very compelling.
Not very compelling again.
not very compelling

In addition to a diversity of diction shortcoming, it's rather questionable if you quite understand what it actually means to "compel" in an appellate situation, be it in the courts or in direct interaction with a government agency.


So here, let's review:
LAX772LR wrote:
Not sure to whom you believe this argument wouldn't be "compelling," but certainly not any court of repute; and quite frankly, that'd be the only one(s) who mattered.

Thus with that in mind, do know that the contention that "most are now seeking exemptions," doesn't mean squat in the face of an express condition.

You continually speak of "compelling," while seemingly unaware that a simple claim of hardship in itself isn't sufficient; they'll have to demonstrate that it's (1) undue, which would be quite difficult to do, since they knew the requirements going in and still elected to do so (have fun making a case for duress when you have billions of dollars of potential leverage, despite unfavorable terms); or (2) that it outbalances the needs of the communities whose interests the government is trying to protect in the first place (good luck on that one).

In summary: they can SEEK all they'd like; they'd arguably be in breach of fiduciary duty if they didn't at least try... but that doesn't automatically bode in their favor for GETTING what they seek.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
GSPSPOT
Posts: 2530
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 1:44 am

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Wed Apr 29, 2020 6:28 pm

I wish AS would throw MKE a tag. All they've done here is gradually reduce the a/c size (and cancel at the last minute a quite often based on what I hear). I see AS doing CMH-MSP (and then presumably on to SEA/PDX) now. Would be cool for MKE to be the "MSP" in a similar scenario
Great Lakes, great life.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8069
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Wed Apr 29, 2020 6:29 pm

Web500sjc wrote:
The question is, how many airlines can use the “other airline“ argument and when is it acceptable be not acceptable? If UA And AA want this suspend service to GRK (only UA and AA provide service to GRK), which one has to continue service, and which one gets to take a break?

The DOT should have used one consistent standard about how the funds are distributed and what the requirements are when you accept the funds. Service is required unless the local government has determined the airport shouldn’t be served.


Reasonableness is a subjective, but frequent, element of major American law. You just need to get over it. In its Notices of Action, the DOT is, by elements of settled administrative law, required to outline its reasoning for disposition this way or that way. So long as it isn't 'arbitrary and capricious,' carriers need to suck it up. It would be very, very rare for local airport authorities to argue that they aren't deserving of service. Congress knew what it was voting for: continued service to all domestic destinations by all carriers.

The DOT has given more flexibility from its first Show Cause order: fewer mandated frequencies, choice of applying Summer '19 or Winter '19 schedules, exempted some contra-seasonal requirements, given exemptions to some LCCs in very well served DOT Major Hub markets. That doesn't sound overly rigid, and certainly not arbitrary and capricious. The people complaining here really ought to study all of the Notices of Action in the docket. (They ought to read DL's argument 'Our employees will be safer operating fewer stations,' too, posted 4/28/20. Clever, maybe not in a good way.)

https://beta.regulations.gov/docket/DOT ... 7/document
 
11C
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2019 2:25 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Thu Apr 30, 2020 12:15 am

LAX772LR wrote:
11C wrote:
11C wrote:
Not very compelling again.
not very compelling

In addition to a diversity of diction shortcoming, it's rather questionable if you quite understand what it actually means to "compel" in an appellate situation, be it in the courts or in direct interaction with a government agency.


So here, let's review:
LAX772LR wrote:
Not sure to whom you believe this argument wouldn't be "compelling," but certainly not any court of repute; and quite frankly, that'd be the only one(s) who mattered.

Thus with that in mind, do know that the contention that "most are now seeking exemptions," doesn't mean squat in the face of an express condition.

You continually speak of "compelling," while seemingly unaware that a simple claim of hardship in itself isn't sufficient; they'll have to demonstrate that it's (1) undue, which would be quite difficult to do, since they knew the requirements going in and still elected to do so (have fun making a case for duress when you have billions of dollars of potential leverage, despite unfavorable terms); or (2) that it outbalances the needs of the communities whose interests the government is trying to protect in the first place (good luck on that one).

In summary: they can SEEK all they'd like; they'd arguably be in breach of fiduciary duty if they didn't at least try... but that doesn't automatically bode in their favor for GETTING what they seek.


All fascinating, and certainly distracts from the issue at hand. Bottom line: it’s dumb to compel airlines to burn cash flying airplanes when load factors are in the low teens. If you think it’s a good idea because the CARES act wording requires it, then so be it. Common sense doesn’t always prevail, I will grant you that.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13278
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Thu Apr 30, 2020 12:29 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
Reasonableness is a subjective, but frequent, element of major American law. You just need to get over it. In its Notices of Action, the DOT is, by elements of settled administrative law, required to outline its reasoning for disposition this way or that way. So long as it isn't 'arbitrary and capricious,' carriers need to suck it up. It would be very, very rare for local airport authorities to argue that they aren't deserving of service. Congress knew what it was voting for: continued service to all domestic destinations by all carriers.

:checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark:



11C wrote:
Bottom line: it’s dumb to compel airlines to burn cash flying airplanes when load factors are in the low teens. If you think it’s a good idea because the CARES act wording requires it, then so be it. Common sense doesn’t always prevail, I will grant you that.

You don't like this-- I get that, I really do. You are absolutely entitled to feel that it's a bad idea and/or precedent.
The problem there though, is you don't seem to understand that no entity has any reason whatsoever to give a steaming pile of dog crap as to how you feel about it.

.......why?

    Because this funding is not a right, it's a mutually-assented agreement. Which means that the only thing that's EVER going to ACTUALLY matter (no matter how many times you write some variant of the word "compelling") is compliance in law and/or equity. That's it.


Thus how I, or him, or her, or them, or (especially) you, feel about this, is holistically immaterial.

You speak to "common sense," yet such a basic concept continues to escape your comprehension.
So here it is, now front, outlined, and centered. Feel free to reference back.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
spinkid
Posts: 1894
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2001 5:59 am

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Thu Apr 30, 2020 3:32 am

flyboy7974 wrote:
CRJ5000 wrote:
Good for B6 for trying to skirt the rather obnoxious requirements of government bailout money. As others have mentioned, AS did it as well.

From a little digging I see that F9 is doing MCO-SRQ and probably more.
NK has CLE-CMH, AVL-GSO, OAK-SMF, PIT-LBE, STT-STX, among others.
If you're going to have to fly segments with a couple passengers on board, you might as well make them cheap to operate.


Is there a publicized list of the NK tags like this JetBlue article?

Question for all, what’s B6 doing with their RNO service?


Good question. I wouldn't be surprised to see something tagged on from LAS. Most likely once a week. I think they only served it 5 days a week so they are only required one flight. Schedules don't seem to be matching the new requirments as I understood them.

I tried a dummy booking JFK-RNO for June 15th with google flights. Their typical evening nonstop shows up, as well as a one stop through LGB and a fun looking jaunt that takes you JFK-PSP=LGB-RNO

Returns on the 21st show the overnight, and a 3pm departure connecting in LGB

I thought JFK-PSP was seasonal for B6, so I'm surprised its bookable in June. I thought they were able to get a waiver for summer seasonal stations.
 
bravotango75
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed May 22, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Thu Apr 30, 2020 11:47 pm

I live in BOS, I fly B6, I like(ed) B6.......B6 this is BS! You took my tax dollars and now you want to run off with it without holding up your end of the deal? I fly to some of these cities on a semi-regular basis and now you are wanting to leave me and others high-n-dry.

Brickell305 wrote:
B6 isn't done. They are now petitioning to drop the following destinations:

ATL Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport
CLT Charlotte Douglas International Airport
ORD Chicago O’Hare International Airport
DFW Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport
DEN Denver International Airport
DTW Detroit Metro Airport
IAH George Bush Intercontinental Airport
LAS McCarran International Airport
MSP Minneapolis – St. Paul International Airport
BNA Nashville International Airport
PHL Philadelphia International Airport
PHX Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport
PDX Portland International Airport
SAN San Diego International Airport
SEA Seattle-Tacoma International Airport
TPA Tampa International Airport

https://paxex.aero/2020/04/jetblue-aims ... s-network/
 
LCDFlight
Posts: 571
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 9:22 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Fri May 01, 2020 12:02 am

This is absurd.
 
AA94
Posts: 752
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:37 am

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Fri May 01, 2020 3:56 pm

bravotango75 wrote:
I live in BOS, I fly B6, I like(ed) B6.......B6 this is BS! You took my tax dollars and now you want to run off with it without holding up your end of the deal? I fly to some of these cities on a semi-regular basis and now you are wanting to leave me and others high-n-dry.


This is really the DOT's doing, they exempted SY from serving large hubs and now other airlines could come calling using similar logic. Plus, CARES grants really only cover a portion of airline payroll, which is in itself only a portion of total expense. Airlines will continue to do everything possible to reduce cost. Point being B6 is still holding up their end of the deal, it just so happens the deal that was made has more holes in it than swiss cheese.
 
Gulfstream500
Posts: 477
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2018 2:30 am

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Fri May 01, 2020 4:26 pm

JetBlue is definitely a leader in this, but I've also noticed some other interesting routes with Spirit:

Spirit: RIC-CRW, CLE-CMH, PIT-LBE, AVL-GSO, RDU-CLT, AUS-DFW

Bonus from UA:
ORD-RSW-EYW (5 hours on an RJ!)
So... when will the Northwest DC-9s be retired?
 
gsoflyer
Posts: 882
Joined: Sat May 12, 2001 12:31 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sat May 02, 2020 10:35 pm

From what I have seen it is MCO-CLT-RDU and RDU-CLT-MCO; Similar with GSO-AVL; MCO-GSO-AVL then AVL-GSO-MCO
 
SELMER40
Posts: 231
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 9:07 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun May 03, 2020 2:00 am

Brickell305 wrote:
B6 isn't done. They are now petitioning to drop the following destinations:

ATL Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport
CLT Charlotte Douglas International Airport
ORD Chicago O’Hare International Airport
DFW Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport
DEN Denver International Airport
DTW Detroit Metro Airport
IAH George Bush Intercontinental Airport
LAS McCarran International Airport
MSP Minneapolis – St. Paul International Airport
BNA Nashville International Airport
PHL Philadelphia International Airport
PHX Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport
PDX Portland International Airport
SAN San Diego International Airport
SEA Seattle-Tacoma International Airport
TPA Tampa International Airport

https://paxex.aero/2020/04/jetblue-aims ... s-network/

What if the DOT said to an airline requesting a city deletion- If you leave a city you can not return to it within 3 years.
Teaching this old dog a new trick
 
SunsetLimited
Posts: 901
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:20 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun May 03, 2020 2:12 am

$39 each way for MSY-IAH. At those prices, they might get a few folks.
Spread hope like fire.
 
alasizon
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun May 03, 2020 2:15 am

SELMER40 wrote:
What if the DOT said to an airline requesting a city deletion- If you leave a city you can not return to it within 3 years.


They have no standing to do so on domestic routes.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 5717
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun May 03, 2020 2:20 am

B6 is selling the leg PDX-SEA starting at $49, but even though it's a Mint configured A-321, B6 is not selling Mint on that leg.
707 717 720 727-1/2 737-1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9 747-1/2/3/4 757-2/3 767-2/3/4 777-2/3 DC8 DC9 MD80/2/7/8 D10-1/3/4 M11 L10-1/2/5 A300/310/320
AA AC AQ AS BA BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HG HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN WP YS 8M
 
11C
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2019 2:25 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Sun May 03, 2020 4:41 pm

bravotango75 wrote:
I live in BOS, I fly B6, I like(ed) B6.......B6 this is BS! You took my tax dollars and now you want to run off with it without holding up your end of the deal? I fly to some of these cities on a semi-regular basis and now you are wanting to leave me and others high-n-dry.

Brickell305 wrote:
B6 isn't done. They are now petitioning to drop the following destinations:

ATL Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport
CLT Charlotte Douglas International Airport
ORD Chicago O’Hare International Airport
DFW Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport
DEN Denver International Airport
DTW Detroit Metro Airport
IAH George Bush Intercontinental Airport
LAS McCarran International Airport
MSP Minneapolis – St. Paul International Airport
BNA Nashville International Airport
PHL Philadelphia International Airport
PHX Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport
PDX Portland International Airport
SAN San Diego International Airport
SEA Seattle-Tacoma International Airport
TPA Tampa International Airport

https://paxex.aero/2020/04/jetblue-aims ... s-network/

You, and the other 10 people?
 
11C
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2019 2:25 pm

Re: CARES Act Forces B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Tue May 05, 2020 2:35 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
Reasonableness is a subjective, but frequent, element of major American law. You just need to get over it. In its Notices of Action, the DOT is, by elements of settled administrative law, required to outline its reasoning for disposition this way or that way. So long as it isn't 'arbitrary and capricious,' carriers need to suck it up. It would be very, very rare for local airport authorities to argue that they aren't deserving of service. Congress knew what it was voting for: continued service to all domestic destinations by all carriers.

:checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark:



11C wrote:
Bottom line: it’s dumb to compel airlines to burn cash flying airplanes when load factors are in the low teens. If you think it’s a good idea because the CARES act wording requires it, then so be it. Common sense doesn’t always prevail, I will grant you that.

You don't like this-- I get that, I really do. You are absolutely entitled to feel that it's a bad idea and/or precedent.
The problem there though, is you don't seem to understand that no entity has any reason whatsoever to give a steaming pile of dog crap as to how you feel about it.

.......why?

    Because this funding is not a right, it's a mutually-assented agreement. Which means that the only thing that's EVER going to ACTUALLY matter (no matter how many times you write some variant of the word "compelling") is compliance in law and/or equity. That's it.


Thus how I, or him, or her, or them, or (especially) you, feel about this, is holistically immaterial.

You speak to "common sense," yet such a basic concept continues to escape your comprehension.
So here it is, now front, outlined, and centered. Feel free to reference back.


Looks like common sense prevailed, but I’m sure you have more to say, so knock yourself out...
 
joeblow10
Posts: 423
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:58 pm

Re: To be in Compliance with CARES Act B6 to Add Routes Like SFO-SMF,MCO-SRQ,MSY-IAH, SLC-BZN, etc

Tue May 05, 2020 2:46 pm

So the DOT approved all of the new exemption requests from B6?!? Wowza...

Will make things interesting as far as reworking the route map slightly. With stations like DEN, they added the tag on to ABQ

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

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

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

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

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

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

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

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos