Welcome to the Washington State Aviation thread - 2023 edition.

Please continue to post your news and discussions below.

Link to the 2022 edition:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1468475

I saw on another website that Hainan Airlines will return to SEA on the SEA-PEK route starting next month.

wedgetail737 wrote:

I saw on another website that Hainan Airlines will return to SEA on the SEA-PEK route starting next month.

Can you share the source?

jbs2886 wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

I saw on another website that Hainan Airlines will return to SEA on the SEA-PEK route starting next month.

Can you share the source?

According to Flight Global, February 17th is the date:

https://www.flightglobal.com/networks/a ... 27.article

gunsontheroof wrote:

jbs2886 wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

I saw on another website that Hainan Airlines will return to SEA on the SEA-PEK route starting next month.

Can you share the source?

According to Flight Global, February 17th is the date:

https://www.flightglobal.com/networks/a ... 27.article

Thank you! You have to be a member to read it. I guess it can be verified my searching the route on Hainan's website.

The suspect in the UI murders was flown back to Pullman in a PC-12. One of the news reports said they made 2 fuel stops en route. I thought that plane had longer legs than that? Maybe extra strong headwinds?

BLI just posted on their FB page that the last Dash 8 flight on AS is scheduleed for today: https://www.facebook.com/BellinghamAirport . Is it really gonna more efficient for the short hops like SEA-BLI/PSC/YKM to use the 175s over the Q's? Gonna miss them flying over the house.

Yeastbeast wrote:

BLI just posted on their FB page that the last Dash 8 flight on AS is scheduleed for today: https://www.facebook.com/BellinghamAirport . Is it really gonna more efficient for the short hops like SEA-BLI/PSC/YKM to use the 175s over the Q's? Gonna miss them flying over the house.

First class to Yakima.
Looks like the last Dash 8 flight from SEA is at the end of January.
WN starts nonstop BLI-DEN on Saturdays this summer which I hope to try out.

DenverTed wrote:

Yeastbeast wrote:

BLI just posted on their FB page that the last Dash 8 flight on AS is scheduleed for today: https://www.facebook.com/BellinghamAirport . Is it really gonna more efficient for the short hops like SEA-BLI/PSC/YKM to use the 175s over the Q's? Gonna miss them flying over the house.

First class to Yakima.
Looks like the last Dash 8 flight from SEA is at the end of January.
WN starts nonstop BLI-DEN on Saturdays this summer which I hope to try out.

I believe FC to Yakima etc al. was one of the reasons AS put a minimum mileage requirement for FC access to the lounges. If they had not, the lounges would have probably gotten too busy.

gmcc wrote:

DenverTed wrote:

Yeastbeast wrote:

BLI just posted on their FB page that the last Dash 8 flight on AS is scheduleed for today: https://www.facebook.com/BellinghamAirport . Is it really gonna more efficient for the short hops like SEA-BLI/PSC/YKM to use the 175s over the Q's? Gonna miss them flying over the house.

First class to Yakima.
Looks like the last Dash 8 flight from SEA is at the end of January.
WN starts nonstop BLI-DEN on Saturdays this summer which I hope to try out.

I believe FC to Yakima etc al. was one of the reasons AS put a minimum mileage requirement for FC access to the lounges. If they had not, the lounges would have probably gotten too busy.

I'm sure the general passengers will appreciate the better comfort of the E-175's over the Q's, despite the fact that the flight is only 25 to 30 minutes. As a PNW Avgeek, I'll miss the Q's. But we still have Q's to both YVR and YYC out of SEA.

wedgetail737 wrote:

gmcc wrote:

DenverTed wrote:

First class to Yakima.
Looks like the last Dash 8 flight from SEA is at the end of January.
WN starts nonstop BLI-DEN on Saturdays this summer which I hope to try out.

I believe FC to Yakima etc al. was one of the reasons AS put a minimum mileage requirement for FC access to the lounges. If they had not, the lounges would have probably gotten too busy.

I'm sure the general passengers will appreciate the better comfort of the E-175's over the Q's, despite the fact that the flight is only 25 to 30 minutes. As a PNW Avgeek, I'll miss the Q's. But we still have Q's to both YVR and YYC out of SEA.

And the AS accounting team will appreciate removing the free spirits from the expense side of the ledger. I will miss the easy on easy off of the Qs. E-175 are good but I thoroughly dislike the 900s on the SEA-GEG segments, 35 minutes to get on and off for a 35 minute flight.

gmcc wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

gmcc wrote:

I believe FC to Yakima etc al. was one of the reasons AS put a minimum mileage requirement for FC access to the lounges. If they had not, the lounges would have probably gotten too busy.

I'm sure the general passengers will appreciate the better comfort of the E-175's over the Q's, despite the fact that the flight is only 25 to 30 minutes. As a PNW Avgeek, I'll miss the Q's. But we still have Q's to both YVR and YYC out of SEA.

And the AS accounting team will appreciate removing the free spirits from the expense side of the ledger. I will miss the easy on easy off of the Qs. E-175 are good but I thoroughly dislike the 900s on the SEA-GEG segments, 35 minutes to get on and off for a 35 minute flight.

True...especially when you had the choice of boarding forward or aft at some of the stations.

I'm moving from SEA to PSC in about 10 days and I am happy PSC has AS E175 service so I can get First Class on my PSC-SEA legs, as well as my onward segments.

As reported in Air Journal, SEA-PPT on Air Tahiti Nui has been extended for winter 23/24. 2x weekly, with same schedule as this winter. It seems the onward leg to CDG will be extended to the winter season as well (although this is not yet bookable). Full AS codeshare is in place on these flights.

https://www.air-journal.fr/2023-01-16-air-tahiti-nui-a-seattle-jusquen-mars-2024-5245717.html

Pretty impressive PAE-PHX/LAS is operating with a mixture of 739 and 7M9 twice a day the days they’re operating right now. That’s got to be a good sign they’re not using a smaller 320/737/738/175 for these flights right?

AA/AS need to expand their fares/codeshares to allow more connection options through PHX. They don’t sell a fair amount of itineraries… can’t get to ABQ/SAF, secondary TX cities, etc.

YamDreaming787 wrote:

Pretty impressive PAE-PHX/LAS is operating with a mixture of 739 and 7M9 twice a day the days they’re operating right now. That’s got to be a good sign they’re not using a smaller 320/737/738/175 for these flights right?

AA/AS need to expand their fares/codeshares to allow more connection options through PHX. They don’t sell a fair amount of itineraries… can’t get to ABQ/SAF, secondary TX cities, etc.

Yes, it is good. But, there aren't any A320s in the fleet.

YamDreaming787 wrote:

Pretty impressive PAE-PHX/LAS is operating with a mixture of 739 and 7M9 twice a day the days they’re operating right now. That’s got to be a good sign they’re not using a smaller 320/737/738/175 for these flights right?

AA/AS need to expand their fares/codeshares to allow more connection options through PHX. They don’t sell a fair amount of itineraries… can’t get to ABQ/SAF, secondary TX cities, etc.

There’s a reason that AS doesn’t have an A320 on those routes.

I agree with your comment. It’s difficult to connect at PHX, LAX, and SFO with partner airlines from PAE flights. AS seems to just be after O/D from PAE.

Interesting article today, apparently Yakima wants to be considered for Seattle's new airport. The infrastructure required to make it viable for the Puget Sound region would be immense. But not unexpected that it's the... err... politically red areas that want the business. Same reason I'd think Bremerton would push harder.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... w-airport/

TheZ wrote:

Interesting article today, apparently Yakima wants to be considered for Seattle's new airport. The infrastructure required to make it viable for the Puget Sound region would be immense. But not unexpected that it's the... err... politically red areas that want the business. Same reason I'd think Bremerton would push harder.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... w-airport/

Lol this isn’t even remotely Seattle. It talks about Yakima having a lot to offer and yet it only supports a single daily flight. I get geographies and demographics make it difficult to find the right spot around Seattle, but Yakima isn’t even in the region.

jbs2886 wrote:

TheZ wrote:

Interesting article today, apparently Yakima wants to be considered for Seattle's new airport. The infrastructure required to make it viable for the Puget Sound region would be immense. But not unexpected that it's the... err... politically red areas that want the business. Same reason I'd think Bremerton would push harder.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... w-airport/

Lol this isn’t even remotely Seattle. It talks about Yakima having a lot to offer and yet it only supports a single daily flight. I get geographies and demographics make it difficult to find the right spot around Seattle, but Yakima isn’t even in the region.

I agree that it sounds pretty absurd on its face. Given the amount of time required to have something of the scale the state wants though, a place that is willing to have it might offset some of the infrastructure challenges rather than being tied up in litigation for potentially decades. I still think west of the Sound is more feasible but who knows.

BangersAndMash wrote:

As reported in Air Journal, SEA-PPT on Air Tahiti Nui has been extended for winter 23/24. 2x weekly, with same schedule as this winter. It seems the onward leg to CDG will be extended to the winter season as well (although this is not yet bookable). Full AS codeshare is in place on these flights.

https://www.air-journal.fr/2023-01-16-air-tahiti-nui-a-seattle-jusquen-mars-2024-5245717.html

That's wonderful news for us AS FF folks!

wedgetail737 wrote:

BangersAndMash wrote:

As reported in Air Journal, SEA-PPT on Air Tahiti Nui has been extended for winter 23/24. 2x weekly, with same schedule as this winter. It seems the onward leg to CDG will be extended to the winter season as well (although this is not yet bookable). Full AS codeshare is in place on these flights.

https://www.air-journal.fr/2023-01-16-air-tahiti-nui-a-seattle-jusquen-mars-2024-5245717.html

That's wonderful news for us AS FF folks!

I wish they would add a couple of rotations on the SEA-CDG leg. The route should be able to support 4x weekly with AS feed alone. It would give a bit more robust schedule that's actually useful for folks in SEA.

TheZ wrote:

Interesting article today, apparently Yakima wants to be considered for Seattle's new airport. The infrastructure required to make it viable for the Puget Sound region would be immense. But not unexpected that it's the... err... politically red areas that want the business. Same reason I'd think Bremerton would push harder.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... w-airport/

Kitsap County and Bremerton are pretty Blue politically, but also pretty pro-development (and defense LOL) Joke sometimes is one more base and we would sink! I don't think that Bremerton would campaign for a regional airport, but they also would not oppose it.

Expanding Bellingham would make more sense compared with going out to Yakima.

CowAnon wrote:

Expanding Bellingham would make more sense compared with going out to Yakima.

Yakima is a nonstarter, it's even worse than the harebrained Moses Lake idea. The most direct highway to Yakima from the Sound is closed almost six months of the year, and so much extra traffic would be pushed onto I-90 which people just cannot keep from spinning out on with the slightest hint of snow. Snoqualmie Pass would be closed for accidents daily.

HPRamper wrote:

CowAnon wrote:

Expanding Bellingham would make more sense compared with going out to Yakima.

Yakima is a nonstarter, it's even worse than the harebrained Moses Lake idea. The most direct highway to Yakima from the Sound is closed almost six months of the year, and so much extra traffic would be pushed onto I-90 which people just cannot keep from spinning out on with the slightest hint of snow. Snoqualmie Pass would be closed for accidents daily.

I would contend that I-90 is the most direct route, not 410, but your point is correct.

Don’t forget that on Summer Sundays there can be as much as a two hour delay through Cle Elum. It can take 4+ to Seattle. That’s when I would take 410.

BLI would be better but isn’t it constrained by space? PAE is a better choice.

BoeingGuy wrote:

HPRamper wrote:

CowAnon wrote:

Expanding Bellingham would make more sense compared with going out to Yakima.

Yakima is a nonstarter, it's even worse than the harebrained Moses Lake idea. The most direct highway to Yakima from the Sound is closed almost six months of the year, and so much extra traffic would be pushed onto I-90 which people just cannot keep from spinning out on with the slightest hint of snow. Snoqualmie Pass would be closed for accidents daily.

I would contend that I-90 is the most direct route, not 410, but your point is correct.

Don’t forget that on Summer Sundays there can be as much as a two hour delay through Cle Elum. It can take 4+ to Seattle. That’s when I would take 410.

BLI would be better but isn’t it constrained by space? PAE is a better choice.

IIRC PAE is also space constrained

TheZ wrote:

Interesting article today, apparently Yakima wants to be considered for Seattle's new airport. The infrastructure required to make it viable for the Puget Sound region would be immense. But not unexpected that it's the... err... politically red areas that want the business. Same reason I'd think Bremerton would push harder.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... w-airport/

HPRamper wrote:

CowAnon wrote:

Expanding Bellingham would make more sense compared with going out to Yakima.

Yakima is a nonstarter, it's even worse than the harebrained Moses Lake idea. The most direct highway to Yakima from the Sound is closed almost six months of the year, and so much extra traffic would be pushed onto I-90 which people just cannot keep from spinning out on with the slightest hint of snow. Snoqualmie Pass would be closed for accidents daily.

Seattle to Yakima is roughly 2 hours and 15 minutes. At that rate, you might as well just drive down to PDX, which is 2 hours and 38 minutes (albeit, poor I-5 traffic would likely make it closer to 3 hours).

AC4500 wrote:

TheZ wrote:

Interesting article today, apparently Yakima wants to be considered for Seattle's new airport. The infrastructure required to make it viable for the Puget Sound region would be immense. But not unexpected that it's the... err... politically red areas that want the business. Same reason I'd think Bremerton would push harder.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... w-airport/

HPRamper wrote:

CowAnon wrote:

Expanding Bellingham would make more sense compared with going out to Yakima.

Yakima is a nonstarter, it's even worse than the harebrained Moses Lake idea. The most direct highway to Yakima from the Sound is closed almost six months of the year, and so much extra traffic would be pushed onto I-90 which people just cannot keep from spinning out on with the slightest hint of snow. Snoqualmie Pass would be closed for accidents daily.

Seattle to Yakima is roughly 2 hours and 15 minutes. At that rate, you might as well just drive down to PDX, which is 2 hours and 38 minutes (albeit, poor I-5 traffic would likely make it closer to 3 hours).

Yakima to Seattle is easily 4 hours on a Summer Sunday or if there is snow.

jbs2886 wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

HPRamper wrote:

Yakima is a nonstarter, it's even worse than the harebrained Moses Lake idea. The most direct highway to Yakima from the Sound is closed almost six months of the year, and so much extra traffic would be pushed onto I-90 which people just cannot keep from spinning out on with the slightest hint of snow. Snoqualmie Pass would be closed for accidents daily.

I would contend that I-90 is the most direct route, not 410, but your point is correct.

Don’t forget that on Summer Sundays there can be as much as a two hour delay through Cle Elum. It can take 4+ to Seattle. That’s when I would take 410.

BLI would be better but isn’t it constrained by space? PAE is a better choice.

IIRC PAE is also space constrained

Yes, it is space constrained. However, if there were sufficient political will (which I do not think there is), they could displace businesses and homes to the east and south of the current airport boundaries in order to expand the second runway and build a larger terminal. There would be significant cost to acquiring all those properties, but I think it would still be a minority of the total project costs. A couple roads would also need to be relocated, and a couple others would need significant capacity improvements.

Aside from the political will to exercise eminent domain on that scale and manage the Environmental Impact Statement through legal challenges that would arise from such a significant growth in a high density area, I think there's a strategic issue, too.

My opinion is the area south of Seattle would benefit from an alternative airport at least as much as the area north of Seattle. And PAE already presents an alternative, albeit a limited one, for passengers who live north of Seattle.

I'm anticipating the strategy will end up being to let PAE continue to grow its service gradually, but without a concerted effort to turn it into a major passenger airport, and to create a greenfield airport south of Seattle.

In fact, that is the state commission's current leaning
https://wsdot.wa.gov/sites/default/file ... er2022.pdf

The Commission’s recommendations include:
Add capacity to Paine Field according to its Airport Master Plan...and

Continue to develop greenfield site options with a two (2) runway configuration. The three greenfield sites requiring further analysis include:
- Pierce County East – located south of Puyallup, 4.5 miles east of JBLM, south of Graham
- Pierce County Central – located 2.25 miles south of JBLM, east of Roy and McKenna
- Thurston County Central – located east of Olympia

Ellensburg would make more sense than Yakima. Olympia makes the most sense in my brain. It’s frustrating to have Mcchord right there with plenty of space for this.

IMO, any airport on the east side of Cascades should never be considered an alternative to SEA.

Looks like PAE has lost GEG and BOI service. I don’t see it on the entire calendar anymore.

wedgetail737 wrote:

IMO, any airport on the east side of Cascades should never be considered an alternative to SEA.

You're absolutely right. I feel these "proposals" that keep popping up are little more than city/airport managers looking for any bit of media attention.

murchmo wrote:

Ellensburg would make more sense than Yakima. Olympia makes the most sense in my brain. It’s frustrating to have Mcchord right there with plenty of space for this.

I agree on the McChord comment. Why can't the USAF work something out with the commercial sector? There are lots of examples of Air Force bases sharing space with commercial ops.

YamDreaming787 wrote:

Looks like PAE has lost GEG and BOI service. I don’t see it on the entire calendar anymore.

Years in, and despite really trying, PAE seems to only be compatible with a certain set of markets. Both BOI and GEG have very large Seattle O&D numbers, in theory they should have been able to pull some to PAE. It is interesting that it continues not to work out with non-leisure destinations. Time will have to tell on ANC which is kind of both.

PAE to California+ seems like it is going to be a solid position going forward, especially with the mainline additions to the schedule. But what is left on the list... Hawaii service? Otherwise I am not sure many options are going to exist other than to continue to boost gauge or frequency on existing routes. It also will probably limit the number of additional entrants looking to come to PAE when the successful market scope is so limited.

I wonder how AS feels about PAE a few years in, just happy something is working or disappointed they can't get business/ connection travel to stick?

YamDreaming787 wrote:

Looks like PAE has lost GEG and BOI service. I don’t see it on the entire calendar anymore.

How many flights and what equipment is PAE looking at in the spring?

QXorVX wrote:

YamDreaming787 wrote:

Looks like PAE has lost GEG and BOI service. I don’t see it on the entire calendar anymore.

Years in, and despite really trying, PAE seems to only be compatible with a certain set of markets. Both BOI and GEG have very large Seattle O&D numbers, in theory they should have been able to pull some to PAE. It is interesting that it continues not to work out with non-leisure destinations. Time will have to tell on ANC which is kind of both.

PAE to California+ seems like it is going to be a solid position going forward, especially with the mainline additions to the schedule. But what is left on the list... Hawaii service? Otherwise I am not sure many options are going to exist other than to continue to boost gauge or frequency on existing routes. It also will probably limit the number of additional entrants looking to come to PAE when the successful market scope is so limited.

I wonder how AS feels about PAE a few years in, just happy something is working or disappointed they can't get business/ connection travel to stick?

I agree with your post, but to my knowledge there is no PAE mainline to California. It’s PHX and LAS.

Remember that PAE started shortly before the pandemic. It hasn’t had a fair shake.

One annoyance I have is that the LAX flight timing often doesn’t work for connections to QF, LA, AA, etc.

BoeingGuy wrote:

QXorVX wrote:

YamDreaming787 wrote:

Looks like PAE has lost GEG and BOI service. I don’t see it on the entire calendar anymore.

Years in, and despite really trying, PAE seems to only be compatible with a certain set of markets. Both BOI and GEG have very large Seattle O&D numbers, in theory they should have been able to pull some to PAE. It is interesting that it continues not to work out with non-leisure destinations. Time will have to tell on ANC which is kind of both.

PAE to California+ seems like it is going to be a solid position going forward, especially with the mainline additions to the schedule. But what is left on the list... Hawaii service? Otherwise I am not sure many options are going to exist other than to continue to boost gauge or frequency on existing routes. It also will probably limit the number of additional entrants looking to come to PAE when the successful market scope is so limited.

I wonder how AS feels about PAE a few years in, just happy something is working or disappointed they can't get business/ connection travel to stick?

I agree with your post, but to my knowledge there is no PAE mainline to California. It’s PHX and LAS.

Remember that PAE started shortly before the pandemic. It hasn’t had a fair shake.

One annoyance I have is that the LAX flight timing often doesn’t work for connections to QF, LA, AA, etc.

Sorry, "California+" referring to the general geographic area of the country.

Domestic traffic has mostly recovered, only now stifled by capacity constraints. As PAE capacity has been nothing but growth that is not a constraint here. I am not sure I would give the PAE market failures the excuse of the pandemic, they did so in their own right. I think connections clearly don't work at this point in the development of PAE. Nearly every connection market, regardless of schedule timing, has not been successful.

wedgetail737 wrote:

IMO, any airport on the east side of Cascades should never be considered an alternative to SEA.

Unless there is some sort of HSR plan to go along with getting people from the Seattle area across the Cascades quickly (under an hour), this is a complete non-starter. Laughable, even.

In the summer, you're looking at a four hour drive from door to door. In the winter, it could be two, or it could be impassable for a few days at a time as the passes get snowy. Banal.

QXorVX wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

QXorVX wrote:

Years in, and despite really trying, PAE seems to only be compatible with a certain set of markets. Both BOI and GEG have very large Seattle O&D numbers, in theory they should have been able to pull some to PAE. It is interesting that it continues not to work out with non-leisure destinations. Time will have to tell on ANC which is kind of both.

PAE to California+ seems like it is going to be a solid position going forward, especially with the mainline additions to the schedule. But what is left on the list... Hawaii service? Otherwise I am not sure many options are going to exist other than to continue to boost gauge or frequency on existing routes. It also will probably limit the number of additional entrants looking to come to PAE when the successful market scope is so limited.

I wonder how AS feels about PAE a few years in, just happy something is working or disappointed they can't get business/ connection travel to stick?

I agree with your post, but to my knowledge there is no PAE mainline to California. It’s PHX and LAS.

Remember that PAE started shortly before the pandemic. It hasn’t had a fair shake.

One annoyance I have is that the LAX flight timing often doesn’t work for connections to QF, LA, AA, etc.

Sorry, "California+" referring to the general geographic area of the country.

Domestic traffic has mostly recovered, only now stifled by capacity constraints. As PAE capacity has been nothing but growth that is not a constraint here. I am not sure I would give the PAE market failures the excuse of the pandemic, they did so in their own right. I think connections clearly don't work at this point in the development of PAE. Nearly every connection market, regardless of schedule timing, has not been successful.

Might be the right time for WN to start up 3x daily to DEN, with extensive connections onward.

DenverTed wrote:

QXorVX wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

I agree with your post, but to my knowledge there is no PAE mainline to California. It’s PHX and LAS.

Remember that PAE started shortly before the pandemic. It hasn’t had a fair shake.

One annoyance I have is that the LAX flight timing often doesn’t work for connections to QF, LA, AA, etc.

Sorry, "California+" referring to the general geographic area of the country.

Domestic traffic has mostly recovered, only now stifled by capacity constraints. As PAE capacity has been nothing but growth that is not a constraint here. I am not sure I would give the PAE market failures the excuse of the pandemic, they did so in their own right. I think connections clearly don't work at this point in the development of PAE. Nearly every connection market, regardless of schedule timing, has not been successful.

Might be the right time for WN to start up 3x daily to DEN, with extensive connections onward.

They've already dropped plans once. https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 010189002/

I just can't see WN putting up a big fight against AS and, to a lesser extent, DL. They've got other markets to focus on.

HPRamper wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

IMO, any airport on the east side of Cascades should never be considered an alternative to SEA.

You're absolutely right. I feel these "proposals" that keep popping up are little more than city/airport managers looking for any bit of media attention.

Thank you, both of you. There's no way anything east of the Cascades would work for western WA. As others have said, winters would be a huge problem. When these ideas come up I dismiss them quickly.

And...west of the Sound? I don't think that's a good idea, because the population there is fairly sparse, aside from Bremerton. Whatever location it is, it has to be near I-5, because that's where the population is.

jbs2886 wrote:

DenverTed wrote:

QXorVX wrote:

Sorry, "California+" referring to the general geographic area of the country.

Domestic traffic has mostly recovered, only now stifled by capacity constraints. As PAE capacity has been nothing but growth that is not a constraint here. I am not sure I would give the PAE market failures the excuse of the pandemic, they did so in their own right. I think connections clearly don't work at this point in the development of PAE. Nearly every connection market, regardless of schedule timing, has not been successful.

Might be the right time for WN to start up 3x daily to DEN, with extensive connections onward.

They've already dropped plans once. https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 010189002/

I just can't see WN putting up a big fight against AS and, to a lesser extent, DL. They've got other markets to focus on.

True. Maybe DL can start PAE-SLC and PAE-MSP. AS is constrained with no hubs to the east. If PAE can't hit critical mass, what's that say about a new airport in Pierce County being viable?

QXorVX wrote:

...But what is left on the list... Hawaii service?

ABQ waving furiously,

Most of the times the single mainline there/back from SEA is full. It would be a fair guess 1/3 of the pax are heading north of the Ship Canal bridge so a 175 to ABQ would do nice.

DenverTed wrote:

QXorVX wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

I agree with your post, but to my knowledge there is no PAE mainline to California. It’s PHX and LAS.

Remember that PAE started shortly before the pandemic. It hasn’t had a fair shake.

One annoyance I have is that the LAX flight timing often doesn’t work for connections to QF, LA, AA, etc.

Sorry, "California+" referring to the general geographic area of the country.

Domestic traffic has mostly recovered, only now stifled by capacity constraints. As PAE capacity has been nothing but growth that is not a constraint here. I am not sure I would give the PAE market failures the excuse of the pandemic, they did so in their own right. I think connections clearly don't work at this point in the development of PAE. Nearly every connection market, regardless of schedule timing, has not been successful.

Might be the right time for WN to start up 3x daily to DEN, with extensive connections onward.

WN is tarting a weekly DEN flight from BLI later this year, I'd like to see that 5-ish times a week.

Any update on the " DASH " flights from SEA to Port Angeles ?

Much fanfare last year about them buying old CAPE AIR 402's and ready to begin service ... yet silence since then

DenverTed wrote:

jbs2886 wrote:

DenverTed wrote:

Might be the right time for WN to start up 3x daily to DEN, with extensive connections onward.

They've already dropped plans once. https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 010189002/

I just can't see WN putting up a big fight against AS and, to a lesser extent, DL. They've got other markets to focus on.

True. Maybe DL can start PAE-SLC and PAE-MSP. AS is constrained with no hubs to the east. If PAE can't hit critical mass, what's that say about a new airport in Pierce County being viable?

AS could easily counter with PAE-ORD and/or DFW.

crjflyboy wrote:

Any update on the " DASH " flights from SEA to Port Angeles ?

Much fanfare last year about them buying old CAPE AIR 402's and ready to begin service ... yet silence since then

They have revived in the last few days, pending DOT approval.

https://flydashair.com/

Found two minor updates for SEA long-haul flights next summer:

-Finnair reverted their SEA-HEL flight back to an A330-300 from the initially planned A350, but it'll still operate with an extended March-October schedule compared to June-October last year.

-American's SEA-LHR flight is now scheduled to leave at 10:35 pm compared to ~6:45 pm before, resulting in a relatively long 6.5 hour sit on the ground for their 777 but also allowing for better spacing between flights compared to earlier when they were scheduled to leave within an hour of the later BA flight.