April is just two months away, when are we going to get some specifics about who’s moving where at the new EWR Terminal A. In particular United, what routes are they going to offer?

STT757 wrote:

April is just two months away, when are we going to get some specifics about who’s moving where at the new EWR Terminal A. In particular United, what routes are they going to offer?

The question is how many gates is United really going to get in the new EWR Terminal A. According to an article it said 10, but said 12 and is expandable to 20 gates by 2023.

STT757 wrote:

April is just two months away, when are we going to get some specifics about who’s moving where at the new EWR Terminal A. In particular United, what routes are they going to offer?

United, American, Delta, Air Canada, and JetBlue.

I am led to believe AS will then be swapping gates with DL and end up sharing a concourse with NK in B.

STT757 wrote:

April is just two months away, when are we going to get some specifics about who’s moving where at the new EWR Terminal A. In particular United, what routes are they going to offer?

Two months????

ddaly241 wrote:

STT757 wrote:

April is just two months away, when are we going to get some specifics about who’s moving where at the new EWR Terminal A. In particular United, what routes are they going to offer?

The question is how many gates is United really going to get in the new EWR Terminal A. According to an article it said 10, but said 12 and is expandable to 20 gates by 2023.

I don’t think the 20 number is right, 10 sounds more realistic given there’s only going to be 33 gates to start and it has to fit AA, B6, DL, AC, UA and possibly AS. I know it’s expandable to up to 45 gates but I believe that is dependent on the construction of the new Terminal B.

STT757 wrote:

ddaly241 wrote:

STT757 wrote:

April is just two months away, when are we going to get some specifics about who’s moving where at the new EWR Terminal A. In particular United, what routes are they going to offer?

The question is how many gates is United really going to get in the new EWR Terminal A. According to an article it said 10, but said 12 and is expandable to 20 gates by 2023.

I don’t think the 20 number is right, 10 sounds more realistic given there’s only going to be 33 gates to start and it has to fit AA, B6, DL, AC, UA and possibly AS. I know it’s expandable to up to 45 gates but I believe that is dependent on the construction of the new Terminal B.

I think the numbers, from what I have seen so do not quote me on this, are something like;

AA - 5
AC - 2.5
B6 - 9.5
DL - 4.5
UA - 11.5

Does anyone think that ISP could benefit greatly if AA moved their Eagle flights there from PHL to CLT?

Well during the big press conference last summer on June 29 (at the hangar - when the large plane order was placed - along with the new interiors that they will be sporting), with Scott Kirby, UA was confirmed by the PA to get 12 gates, and a UA lounge at the new terminal.

MavyWavyATR wrote:

Does anyone think that ISP could benefit greatly if AA moved their Eagle flights there from PHL to CLT?

It'd be a very different profile, but I think the answer's no.

First of all, CLT is a lot further - it's 575 statute miles direct. For a route that's running with 145s currently, that's a pretty decent difference in crew utilization. Second, that's just a pretty long run to make 145 economics work these days. Would you rather see a CR7 with less frequency? Third, airlines tend to serve thin outstations from their closest hub. If the purpose is just to feed into/out of the network, it's generally better to have easy feed to a closer hub. CLT is the third-nearest AA hub (besides the NY area) to ISP, although one of those two has no 50-seaters now.

I flew into HPN last week for the first time in over a decade. The terminal is shameful! Grotesque carpeting, narrow corridors, harsh lighting...everything felt dilapidated and lowbrow. Ironic given where it's situated. I'm sure the NIMBY's don't care about the state of the cattle building, but groundlings like me do!

Whatever happened to the privatization effort?
Have there been any recent happenings?

Will EWR get a new Terminal B and Airtran as well? The current Airtrain is comical in its ridiculous smallness.

IADCA wrote:

MavyWavyATR wrote:

Does anyone think that ISP could benefit greatly if AA moved their Eagle flights there from PHL to CLT?

It'd be a very different profile, but I think the answer's no.

First of all, CLT is a lot further - it's 575 statute miles direct. For a route that's running with 145s currently, that's a pretty decent difference in crew utilization. Second, that's just a pretty long run to make 145 economics work these days. Would you rather see a CR7 with less frequency? Third, airlines tend to serve thin outstations from their closest hub. If the purpose is just to feed into/out of the network, it's generally better to have easy feed to a closer hub. CLT is the third-nearest AA hub (besides the NY area) to ISP, although one of those two has no 50-seaters now.

Wouldn't be it be better to have one flight to CLT for more connections? Especially the winter time?

caljn wrote:

Will EWR get a new Terminal B and Airtran as well? The current Airtrain is comical in its ridiculous smallness.

I think the plan for EWR is that the airport will get a new AirTrain by 2026 (which I’m kind of doubtful will happen by then), and then Terminal B will be replaced with a new terminal. I think there are plans to replace Terminal C in the relatively distant future as well.

PHLspecial wrote:

IADCA wrote:

MavyWavyATR wrote:

Does anyone think that ISP could benefit greatly if AA moved their Eagle flights there from PHL to CLT?

It'd be a very different profile, but I think the answer's no.

First of all, CLT is a lot further - it's 575 statute miles direct. For a route that's running with 145s currently, that's a pretty decent difference in crew utilization. Second, that's just a pretty long run to make 145 economics work these days. Would you rather see a CR7 with less frequency? Third, airlines tend to serve thin outstations from their closest hub. If the purpose is just to feed into/out of the network, it's generally better to have easy feed to a closer hub. CLT is the third-nearest AA hub (besides the NY area) to ISP, although one of those two has no 50-seaters now.

Wouldn't be it be better to have one flight to CLT for more connections? Especially the winter time?

What destinations does AA serve from CLT that it doesn't serve from PHL, and what's the traffic volume to those destinations from ISP?

It's not as if CLT has a vastly better weather profile than PHL. PHL isn't Sitka.

PHLspecial wrote:

IADCA wrote:

MavyWavyATR wrote:

Does anyone think that ISP could benefit greatly if AA moved their Eagle flights there from PHL to CLT?

It'd be a very different profile, but I think the answer's no.

First of all, CLT is a lot further - it's 575 statute miles direct. For a route that's running with 145s currently, that's a pretty decent difference in crew utilization. Second, that's just a pretty long run to make 145 economics work these days. Would you rather see a CR7 with less frequency? Third, airlines tend to serve thin outstations from their closest hub. If the purpose is just to feed into/out of the network, it's generally better to have easy feed to a closer hub. CLT is the third-nearest AA hub (besides the NY area) to ISP, although one of those two has no 50-seaters now.

Wouldn't be it be better to have one flight to CLT for more connections? Especially the winter time?

That question about the CR7 was a genuine one; I don't know what most people's answer would be.

Personally I prefer PHL to CLT (and when available, DCA to either), but that's partly because I'm just tired of interminable taxi delays at CLT that cause me to run to catch connections.

MIflyer12 wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

IADCA wrote:

It'd be a very different profile, but I think the answer's no.

First of all, CLT is a lot further - it's 575 statute miles direct. For a route that's running with 145s currently, that's a pretty decent difference in crew utilization. Second, that's just a pretty long run to make 145 economics work these days. Would you rather see a CR7 with less frequency? Third, airlines tend to serve thin outstations from their closest hub. If the purpose is just to feed into/out of the network, it's generally better to have easy feed to a closer hub. CLT is the third-nearest AA hub (besides the NY area) to ISP, although one of those two has no 50-seaters now.

Wouldn't be it be better to have one flight to CLT for more connections? Especially the winter time?

What destinations does AA serve from CLT that it doesn't serve from PHL, and what's the traffic volume to those destinations from ISP?

It's not as if CLT has a vastly better weather profile than PHL. PHL isn't Sitka.

That's asking someone to do a lot of homework for you that requires using a number of data sources. Anecdotally it's a fair number of destinations, but I don't know how much traffic. Primarily it'd be several dozen secondary destinations in the US South, Caribbean, and some even in the Midwest. But some of these aren't tiny places, and one is MEX. Now I'm guessing ISP-MEX is not exactly a hot ticket, but when you aggregate that with a bunch of secondary destinations across the US South, it could - could - make a difference. But the fact that the flight is where it is suggests that AA thinks that portfolio isn't enough to matter.

IADCA wrote:

MavyWavyATR wrote:

Does anyone think that ISP could benefit greatly if AA moved their Eagle flights there from PHL to CLT?

It'd be a very different profile, but I think the answer's no.

Not saying I agree necessarily re ISP but as a matter of comparison AA currently flies 4x CR7 HPN-CLT, 3x CR7 HPN-ORD, and 5x CR7 HPN-DCA.

Different markets for sure but it's quite a contrast.

LGA airport's new terminal B won prestigious 2021 Pris Versaille award for architecture and design. LGA has gone from worst to best taking its place among the finest airports.Last years winner was Beijing Daxing Int'l.

bval wrote:

IADCA wrote:

MavyWavyATR wrote:

Does anyone think that ISP could benefit greatly if AA moved their Eagle flights there from PHL to CLT?

It'd be a very different profile, but I think the answer's no.

Not saying I agree necessarily re ISP but as a matter of comparison AA currently flies 4x CR7 HPN-CLT, 3x CR7 HPN-ORD, and 5x CR7 HPN-DCA.

Different markets for sure but it's quite a contrast.

I'd like to see ISP-ORD happen. Once business travel rebounds, it's doable imo. 2-3x daily on RJ's.

Any idea what is going on with AA5152 CLT-HPN (https://www.flightradar24.com/JIA5152/2a68461d)

Looks like it circled around a few times (2 go-arounds? IDK) and is now, at the time of this post, east of Trenton and soon, if it keeps going south, will be east of Philadelphia.


EDIT: Now traveling south-west.
Now has an approximate landing time of ... was 11:40PM, now 12:01AM.
EDIT AGAIN: Looks like it's diverting to PHL. Wonder what the matter is.

Speaking of late flights, what caused jetBlue 1447 (HPN-TPA) to be so late last night? Heard it roar out of HPN around midnight.

BoeingG wrote:

I flew into HPN last week for the first time in over a decade. The terminal is shameful! Grotesque carpeting, narrow corridors, harsh lighting...everything felt dilapidated and lowbrow. Ironic given where it's situated. I'm sure the NIMBY's don't care about the state of the cattle building, but groundlings like me do!

Whatever happened to the privatization effort?
Have there been any recent happenings?

Ugh don't get me started on the politics of HPN... the daft people in my neighborhood acknowledge the overwhelming majority of traffic coming from private and corporate aircraft, but seem to hyper-focus the hell out of hindering efforts to make the passenger terminal at least comfortable, and have breathing room.

IADCA wrote:

MavyWavyATR wrote:

Does anyone think that ISP could benefit greatly if AA moved their Eagle flights there from PHL to CLT?

It'd be a very different profile, but I think the answer's no.

First of all, CLT is a lot further - it's 575 statute miles direct. For a route that's running with 145s currently, that's a pretty decent difference in crew utilization. Second, that's just a pretty long run to make 145 economics work these days. Would you rather see a CR7 with less frequency? Third, airlines tend to serve thin outstations from their closest hub. If the purpose is just to feed into/out of the network, it's generally better to have easy feed to a closer hub. CLT is the third-nearest AA hub (besides the NY area) to ISP, although one of those two has no 50-seaters now.

AA's HVN-CLT flights did very well and in July 2021, AA wanted to offer 2 HVN-CLT flights in place of the PHL flights. CLT offers many more connections than PHL.

airlineworker wrote:

IADCA wrote:

MavyWavyATR wrote:

Does anyone think that ISP could benefit greatly if AA moved their Eagle flights there from PHL to CLT?

It'd be a very different profile, but I think the answer's no.

First of all, CLT is a lot further - it's 575 statute miles direct. For a route that's running with 145s currently, that's a pretty decent difference in crew utilization. Second, that's just a pretty long run to make 145 economics work these days. Would you rather see a CR7 with less frequency? Third, airlines tend to serve thin outstations from their closest hub. If the purpose is just to feed into/out of the network, it's generally better to have easy feed to a closer hub. CLT is the third-nearest AA hub (besides the NY area) to ISP, although one of those two has no 50-seaters now.

AA's HVN-CLT flights did very well and in July 2021, AA wanted to offer 2 HVN-CLT flights in place of the PHL flights. CLT offers many more connections than PHL.

If they did so well, why did AA stop flying to HVN completely?

MaRoFu wrote:

caljn wrote:

Will EWR get a new Terminal B and Airtran as well? The current Airtrain is comical in its ridiculous smallness.

I think the plan for EWR is that the airport will get a new AirTrain by 2026 (which I’m kind of doubtful will happen by then), and then Terminal B will be replaced with a new terminal. I think there are plans to replace Terminal C in the relatively distant future as well.

The Port Authority just needs to select a contractor and begin construction. There are three bidders each with a different design. Some of the support beams for the new Airtrain are already under construction as part of the new Terminal A project.

The Port Authority is working with planning agencies to open up the Newark Airport rail link station to the community, incorporating the PATH extension.

https://www.roi-nj.com/2021/12/21/industry/opening-a-neighborhood-coalition-says-creating-access-to-airport-train-station-would-revitalize-newark-community/

Skywest/Delta 4169 (DTW - HPN) flew down past HPN, circled back north, and is diverting to Albany (https://www.flightradar24.com/SKW4169/2a6b312d) - is this snowstorm to blame? And could anything weather related LAST night be why AA 5152 (CLT - HPN) circled around a few times, and eventually diverted to PHL, not getting into HPN until 2:16 AM?

What’s the deal with the competition at EWR since F9 is going to leave? Is NK going to grow their presence there? Will B6 do the same with their growth? What about UA? What will competition look like after the EWR new terminal 1 is built?

ddaly241 wrote:

What’s the deal with the competition at EWR since F9 is going to leave? Is NK going to grow their presence there? Will B6 do the same with their growth? What about UA? What will competition look like after the EWR new terminal 1 is built?

Not sure, but I hope it means more F9 service from TTN.

ddaly241 wrote:

What’s the deal with the competition at EWR since F9 is going to leave? Is NK going to grow their presence there? Will B6 do the same with their growth? What about UA? What will competition look like after the EWR new terminal 1 is built?

Will cost at EWR come down? Because if they keep going up, the same factors that chased away F9 will eventually chase away NK also. There is a reason NK does not offer any international flights from EWR.

[threeid][/threeid]

tphuang wrote:

ddaly241 wrote:

What’s the deal with the competition at EWR since F9 is going to leave? Is NK going to grow their presence there? Will B6 do the same with their growth? What about UA? What will competition look like after the EWR new terminal 1 is built?

Will cost at EWR come down? Because if they keep going up, the same factors that chased away F9 will eventually chase away NK also. There is a reason NK does not offer any international flights from EWR.

Honestly, in my opinion, from what I’ve heard TTN are expanding their terminal so that means that F9 can grow their focus city there. NK is not going to have a lot of success in EWR and if they do get driven away, they can always move their slots to LGA or even some at ACY. UA which is a powerhouse at EWR are so strong there and even having the potential to pass 500+ daily flights at EWR. It can happen after the departure of F9 and if NK don’t do well. Yes B6 is also another competitor against UA, but UA no matter what will always win competition against any airline at EWR.

MIflyer12 wrote:

What destinations does AA serve from CLT that it doesn't serve from PHL, and what's the traffic volume to those destinations from ISP?

A ton of destinations, actually. Just in the Southern states, CLT has service to ELP, SAT, OKC, TUL, XNA, LIT, SHV, AEX, LFT, BTR, CHA, TYS, TRI, JAN, GPT, HSV, MGM, MOB, TLH, GNV, MLB, DAB, CSG, AGS, FLO, FAY, OAJ, EWN, PGV, HTS, and LYH, none of which have PHL service. To the destinations that do have PHL service, CLT sees way more frequency. Then in the Caribbean/Latin America there's FPO, MHH, ELH, GGT, CUR, POP, STX, ANU, SKB, GND, SJD, PVR, MEX, CZM, BZE, LIR, and SJO. Also much more transcon service than PHL on AA and more to the Midwest, although all those would entail more backtracking from ISP.

Individually none of those probably amount to any traffic of significance, but when you add everything together there could be a decent gain in connectivity.

STT757 wrote:

ddaly241 wrote:

What’s the deal with the competition at EWR since F9 is going to leave? Is NK going to grow their presence there? Will B6 do the same with their growth? What about UA? What will competition look like after the EWR new terminal 1 is built?

Not sure, but I hope it means more F9 service from TTN.

I believe TTN will grow with some destinations. However, I think the growth will come at SWF. Lots of opportunity there and within an hours reach of millions of people (North Jersey, Rockland County, Westchester)

travelsonic wrote:

BoeingG wrote:

I flew into HPN last week for the first time in over a decade. The terminal is shameful! Grotesque carpeting, narrow corridors, harsh lighting...everything felt dilapidated and lowbrow. Ironic given where it's situated. I'm sure the NIMBY's don't care about the state of the cattle building, but groundlings like me do!

Whatever happened to the privatization effort?
Have there been any recent happenings?

Ugh don't get me started on the politics of HPN... the daft people in my neighborhood acknowledge the overwhelming majority of traffic coming from private and corporate aircraft, but seem to hyper-focus the hell out of hindering efforts to make the passenger terminal at least comfortable, and have breathing room.

HPN reconfigured its apron and added two jetways in the past 4-5 years, to accomodate mainline aircraft. Has the common waiting area expanded with the addition of the jetways? Last time I was there in 2016, it was standing-room only.

how is Skycana doing JFK-SDQ/STI?

I don’t know about you all, but I thought of UA’s future international routes from EWR in the next 5-10 years since EWR is UA’s biggest international hub Note, before I share them out, some of these routes right now won’t be able to work due to government restrictions and so forth. Here’s what I said,

Europe

EWR-BFS
EWR-MAN
EWR-BHX
EWR-LYS
EWR-SVQ
EWR-HAM
EWR-STR
EWR-DUS
EWR-VIE
EWR-OTP
EWR-OSL
EWR-ARN
EWR-HEL
EWR-IEV
EWR-SVO
EWR-WAW
EWR-LPL
EWR-NCL
EWR-MRS
EWR-BRS
EWR-CWL

Middle East

EWR-IST
EWR-AMM
EWR-DIA
EWR-RUH
EWR-MCT

Africa including Northern Africa

EWR-CMN
EWR-ALG
EWR-CAI
EWR-LOS
EWR-ADD
EWR-ABJ

South Asia/ East Asia/ Southeast Asia

EWR-LHE
EWR-AMD
EWR-BLR
EWR-HYD
EWR-DAC
EWR-TPE
EWR-SGN
EWR-MNL
EWR-KUL
EWR-ICN
EWR-ITM
EWR-XIY

Oceania

EWR-SYD
EWR-AKL

South America

EWR-UIO
EWR-BAQ
EWR-MDE
EWR-GIG
EWR-BAI
EWR-SCL

(I would put CCS but due to the troubles in Venezuela l, it’s not worth taking the risk of flying there)

Canada/ Caribbean/ Central America including Mexico

EWR-MTY
EWR-GDL
EWR-KIN
EWR-RTB
EWR-YOW
EWR-YSJ
EWR-YEG
EWR-YQM
EWR-PAP

As a result, from my perspective, these routes can operate fairly well due to the populations in NYC and all over NJ.

phatfarmlines wrote:

travelsonic wrote:

BoeingG wrote:

I flew into HPN last week for the first time in over a decade. The terminal is shameful! Grotesque carpeting, narrow corridors, harsh lighting...everything felt dilapidated and lowbrow. Ironic given where it's situated. I'm sure the NIMBY's don't care about the state of the cattle building, but groundlings like me do!

Whatever happened to the privatization effort?
Have there been any recent happenings?

Ugh don't get me started on the politics of HPN... the daft people in my neighborhood acknowledge the overwhelming majority of traffic coming from private and corporate aircraft, but seem to hyper-focus the hell out of hindering efforts to make the passenger terminal at least comfortable, and have breathing room.

HPN reconfigured its apron and added two jetways in the past 4-5 years, to accomodate mainline aircraft.

After how many years of needing the changes though? That's the problem - the amount of teeth-pulling that seemed necessary to do that in the first place. (IIRC didn't those changes happen between 2014 and 2016?)

travelsonic wrote:

BoeingG wrote:

I flew into HPN last week for the first time in over a decade. The terminal is shameful! Grotesque carpeting, narrow corridors, harsh lighting...everything felt dilapidated and lowbrow. Ironic given where it's situated. I'm sure the NIMBY's don't care about the state of the cattle building, but groundlings like me do!

Whatever happened to the privatization effort?
Have there been any recent happenings?

Ugh don't get me started on the politics of HPN... the daft people in my neighborhood acknowledge the overwhelming majority of traffic coming from private and corporate aircraft, but seem to hyper-focus the hell out of hindering efforts to make the passenger terminal at least comfortable, and have breathing room.

I worked for the a company that was involved with the construction of the current terminal building. From the preliminary design phase the intent was to make sure it could not be expanded beyond its current footprint, which was the site of quonset huts from the days of the WWII. For example, HVAC equipment was intentionally placed on the main floor (as opposed to being in a basement) to eliminate the possibility of any walls being opened or moved to add gates. The county leadership and local residents were obsessed with keeping numbers and traffic low to avoid it becoming "LaGuardia North". If a determination is ever made to enlarge the terminal it'll probably require a complete demolition and rebuild.

LAXffDUB wrote:

travelsonic wrote:

BoeingG wrote:

I flew into HPN last week for the first time in over a decade. The terminal is shameful! Grotesque carpeting, narrow corridors, harsh lighting...everything felt dilapidated and lowbrow. Ironic given where it's situated. I'm sure the NIMBY's don't care about the state of the cattle building, but groundlings like me do!

Whatever happened to the privatization effort?
Have there been any recent happenings?

Ugh don't get me started on the politics of HPN... the daft people in my neighborhood acknowledge the overwhelming majority of traffic coming from private and corporate aircraft, but seem to hyper-focus the hell out of hindering efforts to make the passenger terminal at least comfortable, and have breathing room.

I worked for the a company that was involved with the construction of the current terminal building. From the preliminary design phase the intent was to make sure it could not be expanded beyond its current footprint, which was the site of quonset huts from the days of the WWII. For example, HVAC equipment was intentionally placed on the main floor (as opposed to being in a basement) to eliminate the possibility of any walls being opened or moved to add gates. The county leadership and local residents were obsessed with keeping numbers and traffic low to avoid it becoming "LaGuardia North". If a determination is ever made to enlarge the terminal it'll probably require a complete demolition and rebuild.

Man, that brings back (some) memories ... granted, I was only ... I think 5 1/2 when the Quonset hut(s?) came down, I do have brief but vivid memories of flying out of HPN when they were still in use though. As a wee little, little one, being carried off an American Fokker 100 as it snowed, and we walked to the car of a neighbor of ours who was picking us up. How I remember that, why I remember that ... I have no idea.

LAXffDUB wrote:

travelsonic wrote:

BoeingG wrote:

I flew into HPN last week for the first time in over a decade. The terminal is shameful! Grotesque carpeting, narrow corridors, harsh lighting...everything felt dilapidated and lowbrow. Ironic given where it's situated. I'm sure the NIMBY's don't care about the state of the cattle building, but groundlings like me do!

Whatever happened to the privatization effort?
Have there been any recent happenings?

Ugh don't get me started on the politics of HPN... the daft people in my neighborhood acknowledge the overwhelming majority of traffic coming from private and corporate aircraft, but seem to hyper-focus the hell out of hindering efforts to make the passenger terminal at least comfortable, and have breathing room.

I worked for the a company that was involved with the construction of the current terminal building. From the preliminary design phase the intent was to make sure it could not be expanded beyond its current footprint, which was the site of quonset huts from the days of the WWII. For example, HVAC equipment was intentionally placed on the main floor (as opposed to being in a basement) to eliminate the possibility of any walls being opened or moved to add gates. The county leadership and local residents were obsessed with keeping numbers and traffic low to avoid it becoming "LaGuardia North". If a determination is ever made to enlarge the terminal it'll probably require a complete demolition and rebuild.

INTERESTING. How unfortunate!

Question: what preceded the current structure?

ddaly241 wrote:

I don’t know about you all, but I thought of UA’s future international routes from EWR in the next 5-10 years since EWR is UA’s biggest international hub Note, before I share them out, some of these routes right now won’t be able to work due to government restrictions and so forth. Here’s what I said,


Oceania

EWR-SYD
EWR-AKL


As a result, from my perspective, these routes can operate fairly well due to the populations in NYC and all over NJ.

Is there any aircraft that can operate these nonstop? And at a profit?

I know it opened during the pandemic but if you haven’t gotten a chance to see the new LaGuardia terminal… It’s something not out of this country.

Reminds me of airport to see in Asia.

Absolutely spectacular on every level.

Nothing even close to it in the New York area

FSDan wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

What destinations does AA serve from CLT that it doesn't serve from PHL, and what's the traffic volume to those destinations from ISP?

A ton of destinations, actually. Just in the Southern states, CLT has service to ELP, SAT, OKC, TUL, XNA, LIT, SHV, AEX, LFT, BTR, CHA, TYS, TRI, JAN, GPT, HSV, MGM, MOB, TLH, GNV, MLB, DAB, CSG, AGS, FLO, FAY, OAJ, EWN, PGV, HTS, and LYH, none of which have PHL service. To the destinations that do have PHL service, CLT sees way more frequency. Then in the Caribbean/Latin America there's FPO, MHH, ELH, GGT, CUR, POP, STX, ANU, SKB, GND, SJD, PVR, MEX, CZM, BZE, LIR, and SJO. Also much more transcon service than PHL on AA and more to the Midwest, although all those would entail more backtracking from ISP.

Individually none of those probably amount to any traffic of significance, but when you add everything together there could be a decent gain in connectivity.

DAB is a seasonal destination from PHL.

jfklganyc wrote:

I know it opened during the pandemic but if you haven’t gotten a chance to see the new LaGuardia terminal… It’s something not out of this country.

Reminds me of airport to see in Asia.

Absolutely spectacular on every level.

Nothing even close to it in the New York area

Totally agree. I had to go to pick up something from the lost and found and decided to scope it out while waiting and was thoroughly impressed. It’s probably the nicest terminal I’ve seen, and most definitely the nicest terminal building in the country. And when you’re driving up, it makes the airport seem much bigger than it really is.

Parking there still sucks, though. Although the roadways have vastly improved.

BoeingG wrote:

LAXffDUB wrote:

travelsonic wrote:

Ugh don't get me started on the politics of HPN... the daft people in my neighborhood acknowledge the overwhelming majority of traffic coming from private and corporate aircraft, but seem to hyper-focus the hell out of hindering efforts to make the passenger terminal at least comfortable, and have breathing room.

I worked for the a company that was involved with the construction of the current terminal building. From the preliminary design phase the intent was to make sure it could not be expanded beyond its current footprint, which was the site of quonset huts from the days of the WWII. For example, HVAC equipment was intentionally placed on the main floor (as opposed to being in a basement) to eliminate the possibility of any walls being opened or moved to add gates. The county leadership and local residents were obsessed with keeping numbers and traffic low to avoid it becoming "LaGuardia North". If a determination is ever made to enlarge the terminal it'll probably require a complete demolition and rebuild.

INTERESTING. How unfortunate!

Question: what preceded the current structure?

WWII era Quonset hut (huts? I think it was just 1).

Looking at the Google Earth imagery, and the Westchester County Historical Aerial Photograph Collection (https://giswww.westchestergov.com/HistoricalAerial/), it is interesting seeing how far into the terminal's construction the Quonset hut, or parts of it at least, lasted... to me,. at least.

Any update on the slot divestitures required by the DOT for AA/B6 NEA approval? I believe they have 3 months after COVID slot waivers ended or 1 year after executing the agreement, whichever is earlier. Slot waivers ended at both DCA and JFK around October 31 if I recall, so is that still on track to begin around the end of this month?

I believe that is:
7 slot pairs at JFK (permanent divestitures)
6 slot pairs at DCA (temporary divestitures)

airliner371 wrote:

Any update on the slot divestitures required by the DOT for AA/B6 NEA approval? I believe they have 3 months after COVID slot waivers ended or 1 year after executing the agreement, whichever is earlier. Slot waivers ended at both DCA and JFK around October 31 if I recall, so is that still on track to begin around the end of this month?

I believe that is:
7 slot pairs at JFK (permanent divestitures)
6 slot pairs at DCA (temporary divestitures)

I wonder if the divestitures are stayed pending the DOJ suit.

Will the Port Authority provide pictures or video of the CTB Concourse D demolition?

IADCA wrote:

airlineworker wrote:

IADCA wrote:

It'd be a very different profile, but I think the answer's no.

First of all, CLT is a lot further - it's 575 statute miles direct. For a route that's running with 145s currently, that's a pretty decent difference in crew utilization. Second, that's just a pretty long run to make 145 economics work these days. Would you rather see a CR7 with less frequency? Third, airlines tend to serve thin outstations from their closest hub. If the purpose is just to feed into/out of the network, it's generally better to have easy feed to a closer hub. CLT is the third-nearest AA hub (besides the NY area) to ISP, although one of those two has no 50-seaters now.

AA's HVN-CLT flights did very well and in July 2021, AA wanted to offer 2 HVN-CLT flights in place of the PHL flights. CLT offers many more connections than PHL.

If they did so well, why did AA stop flying to HVN completely?

With the arrival of Avelo, several of AA's top connection destinations through C LT were about to have their tariff chopped to pieces. AA, who charged a premium to use HVN wanted nothing to do competing with a ULCC where they previously owned the show. Bye bye! That's my take.

ddaly241 wrote:

I don’t know about you all, but I thought of UA’s future international routes from EWR in the next 5-10 years since EWR is UA’s biggest international hub Note, before I share them out, some of these routes right now won’t be able to work due to government restrictions and so forth. Here’s what I said,

Europe

EWR-BFS
EWR-MAN
EWR-BHX
EWR-LYS
EWR-SVQ
EWR-HAM
EWR-STR
EWR-DUS
EWR-VIE
EWR-OTPs
EWR-OSL
EWR-ARN
EWR-HEL
EWR-IEV
EWR-SVO
EWR-WAW
EWR-LPL
EWR-NCL
EWR-MRS
EWR-BRS
EWR-CWL

Regarding Europe, especially with the XLR in mind, having a look at all those legacy Continental markets that United dropped over the years gives an Idea what the future brings.
Thinking about HAM, OSL, BHX, BRS, BFS, CPH plus a few additional ones like DUS (instead of CGN), GLA, LYS, MRS, SVQ, NCL and yearround ARN.

But they better hurry up (re)opening a few of those with 757s because when United gets their first A321XLR, which will be after the Summer Season of 2024, American will have received half+ of their entire XLR fleet already, even more by spring 2025. When United can start their XLR expansion to Europe American will be way ahead flying to many of these places, and at lots of these markets it will be very hard to establish a second daily yearround US flight.

Is there a blueprint floating around of what the new DL headhouse layout will look like at LGA? I found an article that mentions that DL, WS, and F9 will use the new facilities.

https://www.businessinsider.com/tour-of ... rminals-35

Anyone have any word on EWR terminal 1?