Which gates at T5 are a332 capable?

Terminals remain the same, but gates can change on a daily basis due to a variety of reasons. Xiamen Terminal 4 at JFK, Emirates Terminal B at EWR.

kennedyspotter wrote:

Which gates at T5 are a332 capable?

Already cleared or not? Aer Lingus tends to use Gate 12 or a gate near there, but it's pre-cleared. Hawaiian Airlines used to use a gate near there, but it now shares Gate 30 with TAP Portugal (which is not pre-cleared into JFK). Before Gate 30 was available in the evening, TAP pulled up to a hardstand and then airstairs and buses brought TAP passengers to immigration and customs at T5. I would say Gates 30, 29, and 28 can handle wide-bodies, but am only certain about Gate 30 on the north side.

Also of note, effective June 2017, PIA is giving up fifth freedom rights between Manchester Ringway and JFK. The Boeing 777-200LRs that fly this route can make it from Pakistan to New York nonstop (and do fly from Pakistan to Toronto nonstop)...might PK711 and PK721 become nonstops from Pakistan to New York, with all MAN service becoming terminator service? (Return flights to Pakistan are nonstop.) Or will the stop be moved to Shannon for preclearance there? (Kuwait uses Shannon for precelarance only---all return flights are nonstop.)

I miss the old IAB and the Sundrome.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

Very possible, they still got a piece of unused land left to extend it with. However it would mean the planes would fly lower over the residential areas on the approach or departure route. Long Island MacArthur currently has quite a short runway which limits operations from there, therefor it's not a serious alternative to the big New York airports. It's too short for TATL flights. A little more length would make a difference.

I am friendly with the new airport manager, as she came from FRG, where I am a trustee of the Republic Airport Historical Society. I am not aware of any plans to lengthen RY 24 but 33L is getting lengthened to about 7000 feet to my recollection. 6/24 is the same length (within a foot or two) of LGA's runways.

I will see what I can find out. I prefer to fly out of ISP whenever possible, but the AA buzz buckets are tiring.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

kennedyspotter wrote:

Which gates at T5 are a332 capable?

Already cleared or not? Aer Lingus tends to use Gate 12 or a gate near there, but it's pre-cleared. Hawaiian Airlines used to use a gate near there, but it now shares Gate 30 with TAP Portugal (which is not pre-cleared into JFK). Before Gate 30 was available in the evening, TAP pulled up to a hardstand and then airstairs and buses brought TAP passengers to immigration and customs at T5. I would say Gates 30, 29, and 28 can handle wide-bodies, but am only certain about Gate 30 on the north side.

Also of note, effective June 2017, PIA is giving up fifth freedom rights between Manchester Ringway and JFK. The Boeing 777-200LRs that fly this route can make it from Pakistan to New York nonstop (and do fly from Pakistan to Toronto nonstop)...might PK711 and PK721 become nonstops from Pakistan to New York, with all MAN service becoming terminator service? (Return flights to Pakistan are nonstop.) Or will the stop be moved to Shannon for preclearance there? (Kuwait uses Shannon for precelarance only---all return flights are nonstop.)

so if there is an a330 parked at a gate, can two a320 be parked on either side of it at t5? or does it have to be two e190/s due to the space?

kennedyspotter wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

kennedyspotter wrote:

Which gates at T5 are a332 capable?

so if there is an a330 parked at a gate, can two a320 be parked on either side of it at t5? or does it have to be two e190/s due to the space?

I flew out of T5 in December. I believe my B6 a321 was at gate 9 and the EI 333 was parked at gate 11. It definitely looked like gate 10 was blocked from use while the 333 was at the gate. However, I'm not sure whether gate 12 could be used while EI is using gate 11.

AC is moving their YOW-LGA flights to EWR effective 26 March:

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... arch-2017/

JAL will fly their B787-9 to JFK in May and July on certain dates:

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... ts-in-s17/

I was looking at Elite Airway's flight from MLB (Melbourne, FL) to ISP (Long Island MacArthur) for April and return in May however, Elite's website shows no availability (flights are only on Friday's and Monday's), every day is marked with an X (no flights available) from May onward. I would think they would have 6 months in advance availability posted. Anyone hear they that they might be pulling the flight? I flew them in October, they are a great little airline.

Regards,
KirkSeattle

United wants dual approaches at Newark to expand hub

United Airlines wants to move towards “dual approaches and departures” for aircraft at Newark Liberty International airport, something its president Scott Kirby says is needed to expand its hub there.

“The key we’re going to need to work on to really make the Newark hub structure work is to get to a world where we can have dual approaches and dual departures,” he says in a video message to employees of the Chicago-based carrier on 27 February.

Typical operations see one aircraft land and then one depart on runways 22L and 22R at Newark today. The airport can increase throughput slightly if it uses cross runway 11 for arrivals. Aircraft operations were limited to 81 per hour at Newark prior to the US Federal Aviation Administration's decision to remove slot restrictions in October 2016.

Dual approaches and departures at Newark would likely involve two aircraft arriving on 22L and 22R, followed by two aircraft departing on the same runways.
Kirby likens the sought dual “procedure” to operations at San Francisco International airport, which often uses two runways for approaches and two for departures.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/united-wants-dual-approaches-at-newark-to-expand-hub-434717/


Would this work? Inclement weather - which luckily never happens in NY (tongue in cheek . . . ) would bring chaos as the arrival rate will drop significantly.
Or is it anticipated that non-ILS precision approaches can be developed, eliminating weather dependencies?

PW100

Anyone else notice the Saudi Govt 747SP at JFK earlier this week? Arrived Sunday night around 10pm onto 31R. I was out walking my dog and noticed a noisy 747 with Saudi markings but didn't reocgnise it as an SP until I looked it up when I got home.

It left Monday night right around midnight from 13R and buzzed my house as it headed out over the Atlantic (I live a few miles east of JFK between the 31L and 31R approaches).

First time I've noticed an SP in my three years of living here.

This probably won’t work and for a variety of reasons. First of all, EWR only has one arrival path, which is from the West when going to the 4s/22s. In order to have dual stream arrivals, you need to have different paths which turn to final. SFO has this - 28R arrivals come in from the East and 28L arrivals turn to final from the West. Because EWR’s airspace is so constrained – hemmed in by TEB up North and LGA on the East – you don’t have the option of turning to final from the East.

Another issue, as I alluded to above, is TEB’s airspace directly to the North. 22R arrivals generally turn to final below TEB, which is about 12 miles North of EWR. To have dual stream ILS arrivals, you need to start the final about 15 miles from the runway. This is possible with the 4s as there are fewer restrictions and with SFO when landing on the 28s, but not at EWR on the 22s. While dual arrivals is possible on the 4s since the airspace is more open to the South, it certainly isn’t as open to the North. Actually, EWR has established procedures where they can have dual arrivals on the 4s, but they are staggered and not simultaneous. Furthermore, EWR has a fairly even stream of departures, so 4L arrivals might cause departure delays.

Regarding departures, you’d have to cross an active runway to get to the other one, particularly when you use the 4s. That would slow things down. I guess you could run 4L departures from taxiway V and get 4R departures to go around, sort of like how it’s done with 1R at SFO. But then you’d run into airspace issues. 4 departures have a tighter space to work with because of TEB and runways that close together (EWR’s runways are only 950 feet apart), need to head out in divergent directions of at least 15 degrees. SFO has the airspace for this, but EWR does not. It might be easier using 22s as most 22R departures start on taxiway W and there is less constraints with the airspace to the South.

Edit: Wanted to add that I am a first time poster!

PW100 wrote:

United wants dual approaches at Newark to expand hub

United Airlines wants to move towards “dual approaches and departures” for aircraft at Newark Liberty International airport, something its president Scott Kirby says is needed to expand its hub there.

“The key we’re going to need to work on to really make the Newark hub structure work is to get to a world where we can have dual approaches and dual departures,” he says in a video message to employees of the Chicago-based carrier on 27 February.

Typical operations see one aircraft land and then one depart on runways 22L and 22R at Newark today. The airport can increase throughput slightly if it uses cross runway 11 for arrivals. Aircraft operations were limited to 81 per hour at Newark prior to the US Federal Aviation Administration's decision to remove slot restrictions in October 2016.

Dual approaches and departures at Newark would likely involve two aircraft arriving on 22L and 22R, followed by two aircraft departing on the same runways.
Kirby likens the sought dual “procedure” to operations at San Francisco International airport, which often uses two runways for approaches and two for departures.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/united-wants-dual-approaches-at-newark-to-expand-hub-434717/


Would this work? Inclement weather - which luckily never happens in NY (tongue in cheek . . . ) would bring chaos as the arrival rate will drop significantly.
Or is it anticipated that non-ILS precision approaches can be developed, eliminating weather dependencies?

PW100

lesfalls wrote:

JAL will fly their B787-9 to JFK in May and July on certain dates:

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... ts-in-s17/

Nice. The accompanying text says it's replacing a 77W, but JL4 is a 788 flight. JL6 is the 77W which arrives in the morning.

Looks like American (Piedmont) will be changing out the Dash 8 for ERJ145s in early May at SWF. Wonder if they will move to a bridge gate from the current walking out on the tarmac to board.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

kennedyspotter wrote:

Which gates at T5 are a332 capable?

Already cleared or not? Aer Lingus tends to use Gate 12 or a gate near there, but it's pre-cleared. Hawaiian Airlines used to use a gate near there, but it now shares Gate 30 with TAP Portugal (which is not pre-cleared into JFK). Before Gate 30 was available in the evening, TAP pulled up to a hardstand and then airstairs and buses brought TAP passengers to immigration and customs at T5. I would say Gates 30, 29, and 28 can handle wide-bodies, but am only certain about Gate 30 on the north side.

Also of note, effective June 2017, PIA is giving up fifth freedom rights between Manchester Ringway and JFK. The Boeing 777-200LRs that fly this route can make it from Pakistan to New York nonstop (and do fly from Pakistan to Toronto nonstop)...might PK711 and PK721 become nonstops from Pakistan to New York, with all MAN service becoming terminator service? (Return flights to Pakistan are nonstop.) Or will the stop be moved to Shannon for preclearance there? (Kuwait uses Shannon for precelarance only---all return flights are nonstop.)

The PIA stop in the UK, is for purely security reasons I believe that the U.S. has imposed

Bricktop wrote:

lesfalls wrote:

JAL will fly their B787-9 to JFK in May and July on certain dates:

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... ts-in-s17/

Nice. The accompanying text says it's replacing a 77W, but JL4 is a 788 flight. JL6 is the 77W which arrives in the morning.

By the time that happens, each flight will be a 77W. JL6/5 is moving to Haneda starting in April, while JL4/3 remains from Narita. Given that JL's 789s have only 188 seats (the 788s have just 169), it's possible that the flight could change to a 787-9 permanently, since JL4/3 is parked overnight at JFK, on the ground for about 15 hours.

As for the PIA stop, why can't it move to SNN for security purposes?

LeaderOne wrote:

This probably won’t work and for a variety of reasons. First of all, EWR only has one arrival path, which is from the West when going to the 4s/22s. In order to have dual stream arrivals, you need to have different paths which turn to final. SFO has this - 28R arrivals come in from the East and 28L arrivals turn to final from the West. Because EWR’s airspace is so constrained – hemmed in by TEB up North and LGA on the East – you don’t have the option of turning to final from the East.

Another issue, as I alluded to above, is TEB’s airspace directly to the North. 22R arrivals generally turn to final below TEB, which is about 12 miles North of EWR. To have dual stream ILS arrivals, you need to start the final about 15 miles from the runway. This is possible with the 4s as there are fewer restrictions and with SFO when landing on the 28s, but not at EWR on the 22s. While dual arrivals is possible on the 4s since the airspace is more open to the South, it certainly isn’t as open to the North. Actually, EWR has established procedures where they can have dual arrivals on the 4s, but they are staggered and not simultaneous. Furthermore, EWR has a fairly even stream of departures, so 4L arrivals might cause departure delays.

Regarding departures, you’d have to cross an active runway to get to the other one, particularly when you use the 4s. That would slow things down. I guess you could run 4L departures from taxiway V and get 4R departures to go around, sort of like how it’s done with 1R at SFO. But then you’d run into airspace issues. 4 departures have a tighter space to work with because of TEB and runways that close together (EWR’s runways are only 950 feet apart), need to head out in divergent directions of at least 15 degrees. SFO has the airspace for this, but EWR does not. It might be easier using 22s as most 22R departures start on taxiway W and there is less constraints with the airspace to the South.

Edit: Wanted to add that I am a first time poster!

PW100 wrote:

United wants dual approaches at Newark to expand hub

United Airlines wants to move towards “dual approaches and departures” for aircraft at Newark Liberty International airport, something its president Scott Kirby says is needed to expand its hub there.

“The key we’re going to need to work on to really make the Newark hub structure work is to get to a world where we can have dual approaches and dual departures,” he says in a video message to employees of the Chicago-based carrier on 27 February.

Typical operations see one aircraft land and then one depart on runways 22L and 22R at Newark today. The airport can increase throughput slightly if it uses cross runway 11 for arrivals. Aircraft operations were limited to 81 per hour at Newark prior to the US Federal Aviation Administration's decision to remove slot restrictions in October 2016.

Dual approaches and departures at Newark would likely involve two aircraft arriving on 22L and 22R, followed by two aircraft departing on the same runways.
Kirby likens the sought dual “procedure” to operations at San Francisco International airport, which often uses two runways for approaches and two for departures.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/united-wants-dual-approaches-at-newark-to-expand-hub-434717/


Would this work? Inclement weather - which luckily never happens in NY (tongue in cheek . . . ) would bring chaos as the arrival rate will drop significantly.
Or is it anticipated that non-ILS precision approaches can be developed, eliminating weather dependencies?

PW100

The other reason why it might not work is because the runways are barely 950 feet apart, meaning that there will be wake turbulence problems, plus the fact that the east runway is right by the Turnpike (there is no taxiway to the east---there is a taxiway between the two runways. As for using Runway 11, that can only be done if winds are from the south-southeast. A Runway 22L/29 split has also been done occasionally if the winds are from the west-southwest and not terribly strong...often if a small plane is following a heavy, or vice versa.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

By the time that happens, each flight will be a 77W. JL6/5 is moving to Haneda starting in April, while JL4/3 remains from Narita. Given that JL's 789s have only 188 seats (the 788s have just 169), it's possible that the flight could change to a 787-9 permanently, since JL4/3 is parked overnight at JFK, on the ground for about 15 hours.

Thanks for this info.

rj1385 wrote:

Looks like American (Piedmont) will be changing out the Dash 8 for ERJ145s in early May at SWF. Wonder if they will move to a bridge gate from the current walking out on the tarmac to board.

That's good news, but I'm trying to find more information about it. When I tried to book some mock reservations in July/August, it still showed the DH-8.

SFO's runways are only 750 feet apart and they have dual departures off the 1s all the time. Also, EWR is approved for simultaneous departures, but the surrounding airspace doesn't allow for divergent headings.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Bricktop wrote:

lesfalls wrote:

JAL will fly their B787-9 to JFK in May and July on certain dates:

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... ts-in-s17/

Nice. The accompanying text says it's replacing a 77W, but JL4 is a 788 flight. JL6 is the 77W which arrives in the morning.

By the time that happens, each flight will be a 77W. JL6/5 is moving to Haneda starting in April, while JL4/3 remains from Narita. Given that JL's 789s have only 188 seats (the 788s have just 169), it's possible that the flight could change to a 787-9 permanently, since JL4/3 is parked overnight at JFK, on the ground for about 15 hours.

As for the PIA stop, why can't it move to SNN for security purposes?

LeaderOne wrote:

This probably won’t work and for a variety of reasons. First of all, EWR only has one arrival path, which is from the West when going to the 4s/22s. In order to have dual stream arrivals, you need to have different paths which turn to final. SFO has this - 28R arrivals come in from the East and 28L arrivals turn to final from the West. Because EWR’s airspace is so constrained – hemmed in by TEB up North and LGA on the East – you don’t have the option of turning to final from the East.

Another issue, as I alluded to above, is TEB’s airspace directly to the North. 22R arrivals generally turn to final below TEB, which is about 12 miles North of EWR. To have dual stream ILS arrivals, you need to start the final about 15 miles from the runway. This is possible with the 4s as there are fewer restrictions and with SFO when landing on the 28s, but not at EWR on the 22s. While dual arrivals is possible on the 4s since the airspace is more open to the South, it certainly isn’t as open to the North. Actually, EWR has established procedures where they can have dual arrivals on the 4s, but they are staggered and not simultaneous. Furthermore, EWR has a fairly even stream of departures, so 4L arrivals might cause departure delays.

Regarding departures, you’d have to cross an active runway to get to the other one, particularly when you use the 4s. That would slow things down. I guess you could run 4L departures from taxiway V and get 4R departures to go around, sort of like how it’s done with 1R at SFO. But then you’d run into airspace issues. 4 departures have a tighter space to work with because of TEB and runways that close together (EWR’s runways are only 950 feet apart), need to head out in divergent directions of at least 15 degrees. SFO has the airspace for this, but EWR does not. It might be easier using 22s as most 22R departures start on taxiway W and there is less constraints with the airspace to the South.

Edit: Wanted to add that I am a first time poster!

PW100 wrote:

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/united-wants-dual-approaches-at-newark-to-expand-hub-434717/


Would this work? Inclement weather - which luckily never happens in NY (tongue in cheek . . . ) would bring chaos as the arrival rate will drop significantly.
Or is it anticipated that non-ILS precision approaches can be developed, eliminating weather dependencies?

PW100

The other reason why it might not work is because the runways are barely 950 feet apart, meaning that there will be wake turbulence problems, plus the fact that the east runway is right by the Turnpike (there is no taxiway to the east---there is a taxiway between the two runways. As for using Runway 11, that can only be done if winds are from the south-southeast. A Runway 22L/29 split has also been done occasionally if the winds are from the west-southwest and not terribly strong...often if a small plane is following a heavy, or vice versa.

How much spare capacity does T4 at JFK have? The only gates DL doesn't have for exclusive use are really just the (small) A concourse and a few of the low-numbered B gates, which cover everyone else except for KL.

I'm kind of impressed they're able to fit as many carriers as they are in that terminal given how few common-use gates there are (I realize that many of the T4 airlines only have one or two flights a day, of course).

DaveFly wrote:

rj1385 wrote:

Looks like American (Piedmont) will be changing out the Dash 8 for ERJ145s in early May at SWF. Wonder if they will move to a bridge gate from the current walking out on the tarmac to board.

That's good news, but I'm trying to find more information about it. When I tried to book some mock reservations in July/August, it still showed the DH-8.

AA used a placeholder schedule for flights more than ~3 months out. So July/August schedule info likely is not final and will be updated.

Anyone know why the 13L arrivals at JFK are coming in on this pattern and not the usual hugging of Jamaica Bay with the tight turn on the end? I've been living here 3yrs and don't recall seeing aircraft flying this....great views for those on the port side of the aircraft!



QF11 has been sent for the tour of Long Island...

There is something going on at JFK right now. I'm not sure what the below message means.

John F Kennedy Intl is experiencing delays
inbound flights delayed at their origin an average of 1 hours 50 minutes due to runway in use

fbgdavidson wrote:

Anyone know why the 13L arrivals at JFK are coming in on this pattern and not the usual hugging of Jamaica Bay with the tight turn on the end? I've been living here 3yrs and don't recall seeing aircraft flying this....great views for those on the port side of the aircraft!



QF11 has been sent for the tour of Long Island...

Because the visual approach is not possible with low clouds. With 4R/22L closed, only the 13/31s are available unless JFK goes to a single runway operation.

southsidesilver wrote:

There is something going on at JFK right now. I'm not sure what the below message means.

John F Kennedy Intl is experiencing delays
inbound flights delayed at their origin an average of 1 hours 50 minutes due to runway in use

Flightaware is incorrect and they've been showing that 1 hour 50 minute delay figure for about a week. These glitches sometimes happen. The FAA's site shows that JFK has a GDP with delays of over 4 hours since they're using ILS 13L for approach, which drastically reduces the AAR.

Will jetBlue add nonstop service from JFK to DFW?

jetBlue has been at DFW for almost 5 years, but only has nonstops between DFW and BOS. There is so much demand for Dallas to NYC flights, and Alaska is planning on replacing Virgin America's DAL-LGA nonstops with DAL-LGA nonstop flights on Alaska's regional jets. If jetBlue adds nonstop flights between DFW and JFK, jetBlue can provide DFW-area passengers with connections to jetBlue destinations in Upstate New York and New England that are not served nonstop from either DFW or DAL. jetBlue might be able to fill in the void left by the reduction of capacity on Dallas-NYC flights when Alaska switches the DAL-LGA nonstops from VX to AS regional jets.

Southwest already does 4 nonstops between DAL and LGA, but Southwest does provide connections at DAL to destinations that it cannot serve nonstop from LGA. Southwest has much stronger name recognition than jetBlue does in Texas. On the other hand, jetBlue has strong brand recognition in the Northeast, has an established customer base in NYC, has codeshare agreements with European and Middle Eastern Airlines, and serves cities in the Northeast that Southwest Airlines does not serve.

Kennedy has 4 hour 26 min delays currently

http://www.fly.faa.gov/flyfaa/usmap.jsp

Much more accurate ATC EDCT Delay info

The weird pattern is the DREADED ILS 13L approach. Instantly puts 4 hour plus delays into JFK.

22L/4R is closed for construction. Through June

Any SE wind greater than or close to 10 knots requires 13L . Anything lower than 800 foot ceiling requires a switch to the ILS 13L.

JFK is currently down to 3/4 mile.

KJFK 280151Z 13006KT 3/4SM R04R/2400V3500FT BR OVC002 13/13 A2992 RMK AO2 SFC VIS 1 SLP130 T01330133

Normally would use 4L/R in this situation...but due to construction, they can not

jplatts wrote:

Will jetBlue add nonstop service from JFK to DFW?

jetBlue has been at DFW for almost 5 years, but only has nonstops between DFW and BOS. There is so much demand for Dallas to NYC flights, and Alaska is planning on replacing Virgin America's DAL-LGA nonstops with DAL-LGA nonstop flights on Alaska's regional jets. If jetBlue adds nonstop flights between DFW and JFK, jetBlue can provide DFW-area passengers with connections to jetBlue destinations in Upstate New York and New England that are not served nonstop from either DFW or DAL. jetBlue might be able to fill in the void left by the reduction of capacity on Dallas-NYC flights when Alaska switches the DAL-LGA nonstops from VX to AS regional jets.

Southwest already does 4 nonstops between DAL and LGA, but Southwest does provide connections at DAL to destinations that it cannot serve nonstop from LGA. Southwest has much stronger name recognition than jetBlue does in Texas. On the other hand, jetBlue has strong brand recognition in the Northeast, has an established customer base in NYC, has codeshare agreements with European and Middle Eastern Airlines, and serves cities in the Northeast that Southwest Airlines does not serve.

You are just full of very specific route questions and suggestions. You should just start an airline and operate all these routes you suggest, see how it goes. NYC-Dallas is well served from LaGuardia and not many people want to trek all the way to JFK to catch a flight to Dallas.

LOT Polish relaunches WAW-EWR today on a 788. Exciting to see them back!

And yet people trek all the way to JFK for a slew of in perimeter destinations

He has a point JFK-DFW is a huge hole in B6s network.

Considering DFW has been a disaster for B6, and they are flailing along with 2 flights a day to BOS, what do they have to lose by throwing 1 or 2 JFK and FLL in there?

Can't be much worse for them

For the Delta fans: DL goes 3x daily JFK-AMS temporarily

DL has been operating extra sectors on JFK-AMS-JFK for the last 3x days as KLM has canceled KL641/642 AMS-JFK-AMS for three consecutive days.
It seems KLM is short of crews and Delta has stepped in to help its Skyteam partner:

- 4:15PM JFK - AMS 6:00AM DL46 B763
- 5:35PM JFK - AMS 6:55AM DL9930 B764 - extra flight
- 8:20PM JFK - AMS 10:00AM DL48 A333

The extra flight is scheduled for five consecutive days.

This flight is DL's 20th departure to/from AMS each day it operates.

Latam will operate their A350 between GRU and JFK daily effective spetember 29th:

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... -sep-2017/

airliner371 wrote:

jplatts wrote:

Will jetBlue add nonstop service from JFK to DFW?

jetBlue has been at DFW for almost 5 years, but only has nonstops between DFW and BOS. There is so much demand for Dallas to NYC flights, and Alaska is planning on replacing Virgin America's DAL-LGA nonstops with DAL-LGA nonstop flights on Alaska's regional jets. If jetBlue adds nonstop flights between DFW and JFK, jetBlue can provide DFW-area passengers with connections to jetBlue destinations in Upstate New York and New England that are not served nonstop from either DFW or DAL. jetBlue might be able to fill in the void left by the reduction of capacity on Dallas-NYC flights when Alaska switches the DAL-LGA nonstops from VX to AS regional jets.

Southwest already does 4 nonstops between DAL and LGA, but Southwest does provide connections at DAL to destinations that it cannot serve nonstop from LGA. Southwest has much stronger name recognition than jetBlue does in Texas. On the other hand, jetBlue has strong brand recognition in the Northeast, has an established customer base in NYC, has codeshare agreements with European and Middle Eastern Airlines, and serves cities in the Northeast that Southwest Airlines does not serve.

You are just full of very specific route questions and suggestions. You should just start an airline and operate all these routes you suggest, see how it goes. NYC-Dallas is well served from LaGuardia and not many people want to trek all the way to JFK to catch a flight to Dallas.

There are plenty of people living closer to jfk than LGA. Just check how large long island and Brooklyn are. Any none business people can't care less whether they are flying out of LGA or jfk for a 4 hours flight. In fact, jfk might be better these days with all that crazy construction outside of LGA. If b6 can fly to ord and hou out of JFK, I don't see why they can't try DFW.

jfklganyc wrote:

And yet people trek all the way to JFK for a slew of in perimeter destinations

Indeed they do ... often at a material yield discount to LGA. AA and Delta make their DFW-JFK flights work because the yield mix is more favorable given all the connections at one or both ends. But in the local market, passengers - especially higher-yielding business customers - have long demonstrated a consistent, sustained preference for LGA and EWR. Thus why over 90% of all the flights in the market - operated by both network and low-cost airlines - are to one of those two airports and not JFK. Could JetBlue stimulate demand in the market with discounting? Sure, of course - lower the price enough, and you can fill up virtually any plane. But then of course that begs the obvious question - with analyst and investor attention more focused than ever on JetBlue's capacity growth and margins, is it "worth it" to price cheaply to stimulate demand in a market that is already so well-served (40 daily flights by six airlines this coming summer)?

tphuang wrote:

In fact, jfk might be better these days with all that crazy construction outside of LGA. If b6 can fly to ord and hou out of JFK, I don't see why they can't try DFW.

LGA-Dallas is hyper competitive at the moment with Southwest, Virgin and a little Spirit in the mix, and with AA, DL having to fare match. Perhaps B6 could add EWR-DFW instead, although B6 just wants to use EWR for the BOS service, and then leisure flights. Dallas has a massive population and is strong on business, but few will be keen to vacation in Dallas just like that. So the leisure passengers are likely just visiting friends/family but the market itself doesn't have the boost of leisure travel that say Orlando brings with something on par of Disney and Universal Studios.

HOU has WN but doesn't have the extra Virgin/Spirit in the mix. ORD is considerably shorter of a route, and the Chicago-NYC is much easier to do as a short trip like 3 days, and back. Most of the other in perimeter that JetBlue like RDU/CLT have no Southwest coverage from NYC, except a backtrack change of planes in ATL.

phluser wrote:

tphuang wrote:

In fact, jfk might be better these days with all that crazy construction outside of LGA. If b6 can fly to ord and hou out of JFK, I don't see why they can't try DFW.

LGA-Dallas is hyper competitive at the moment with Southwest, Virgin and a little Spirit in the mix, and with AA, DL having to fare match. Perhaps B6 could add EWR-DFW instead, although B6 just wants to use EWR for the BOS service, and then leisure flights. Dallas has a massive population and is strong on business, but few will be keen to vacation in Dallas just like that. So the leisure passengers are likely just visiting friends/family but the market itself doesn't have the boost of leisure travel that say Orlando brings with something on par of Disney and Universal Studios.

HOU has WN but doesn't have the extra Virgin/Spirit in the mix. ORD is considerably shorter of a route, and the Chicago-NYC is much easier to do as a short trip like 3 days, and back. Most of the other in perimeter that JetBlue like RDU/CLT have no Southwest coverage from NYC, except a backtrack change of planes in ATL.

Southwest had even considered adding DAL-EWR nonstop service 3 years ago, but ended up adding an extra nonstop from DAL to LGA instead.

phluser wrote:

tphuang wrote:

In fact, jfk might be better these days with all that crazy construction outside of LGA. If b6 can fly to ord and hou out of JFK, I don't see why they can't try DFW.

LGA-Dallas is hyper competitive at the moment with Southwest, Virgin and a little Spirit in the mix, and with AA, DL having to fare match. Perhaps B6 could add EWR-DFW instead, although B6 just wants to use EWR for the BOS service, and then leisure flights. Dallas has a massive population and is strong on business, but few will be keen to vacation in Dallas just like that. So the leisure passengers are likely just visiting friends/family but the market itself doesn't have the boost of leisure travel that say Orlando brings with something on par of Disney and Universal Studios.

HOU has WN but doesn't have the extra Virgin/Spirit in the mix. ORD is considerably shorter of a route, and the Chicago-NYC is much easier to do as a short trip like 3 days, and back. Most of the other in perimeter that JetBlue like RDU/CLT have no Southwest coverage from NYC, except a backtrack change of planes in ATL.

The ratio of JFK vs LGA flights to ord and DFW is not that different if you just look at non b6 flying. New York to Chicago is very competitive too.

there are plenty of business in new York metro area that are much closer to jfk airport including all of the long island. And looking up prices for flights from JFK to DFW vs LGA to DFW for the coming weeks, the jfk prices are actually higher. And for any non business travelers out of Manhattan, LGA and jfk is not a big difference. I have never heard anyone tell me they would not consider flying out of JFK because they would rather spend time at LGA. In the end of the day, if b6 doesn't try, they will not find out.

Welcome back LOT! We missed you! 22 years of service you gave us at EWR. Nice to see you again after a brief vacation!

tphuang wrote:

there are plenty of business in new York metro area that are much closer to jfk airport including all of the long island. And looking up prices for flights from JFK to DFW vs LGA to DFW for the coming weeks, the jfk prices are actually higher. And for any non business travelers out of Manhattan, LGA and jfk is not a big difference. I have never heard anyone tell me they would not consider flying out of JFK because they would rather spend time at LGA.

And yet, again, over 90% of the flights between DFW and NYC go to an airport other than JFK. That should say something. As said - there is no question that JetBlue could fill planes between JFK and DFW. The key question, though, is at what price? If JetBlue has to steeply discount to pull people off the 37 daily AA, Delta, Southwest, Spirit and United flights out of LGA and EWR, it may not be all that economically viable an exercise for JetBlue.

fbgdavidson wrote:

Anyone know why the 13L arrivals at JFK are coming in on this pattern and not the usual hugging of Jamaica Bay with the tight turn on the end? I've been living here 3yrs and don't recall seeing aircraft flying this....great views for those on the port side of the aircraft!



QF11 has been sent for the tour of Long Island...

Looks like the ILS approach to 13. It's rare because it messes big time with LGA, but usually only used when visibility is really bad.

jplatts wrote:

Southwest had even considered adding DAL-EWR nonstop service 3 years ago, but ended up adding an extra nonstop from DAL to LGA instead.

Once WN found out VX's plans, WN decided to boost DAL-LGA importance and frequency in lieu of servicing DAL-EWR. The wildcard going forward is if AS sticks with DAL-LGA/DCA. AS will give it a year, but if it's deleted, then B6 servicing JFK-DFW with a token or maybe 2x frequency is more viable. My hunch is AS' DAL-DCA will be more a struggle for AS but it might affect DAL-LGA if the two are to be paired together as a DAL strategy.

I don't think I see this one working out so well.

Stewart to get new "paper airline".
http://www.midhudsonnews.com/News/2017/ ... May17.html

rj1385 wrote:

I don't think I see this one working out so well.

Stewart to get new "paper airline".
http://www.midhudsonnews.com/News/2017/ ... May17.html

I don't know about that. Stewart is a cheap airport compared to JFK or Newark and slots are widely available, so they can fly across the pond for less money than others. In Europe they'll also be picking the cheaper airports. If it's just about getting across the Atlantic as cheap as possible it might just work.

Of course the article says nothing about their business model or planned aircraft type. Will they be a LCC or a legacy? Will they operate larger or smaller aircraft? We'll have to see about that.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

rj1385 wrote:

I don't think I see this one working out so well.

Stewart to get new "paper airline".
http://www.midhudsonnews.com/News/2017/ ... May17.html

I don't know about that. Stewart is a cheap airport compared to JFK or Newark and slots are widely available, so they can fly across the pond for less money than others. In Europe they'll also be picking the cheaper airports. If it's just about getting across the Atlantic as cheap as possible it might just work.

Of course the article says nothing about their business model or planned aircraft type. Will they be a LCC or a legacy? Will they operate larger or smaller aircraft? We'll have to see about that.

If you knew about the history of that airline, you'd know about that. It isn't going to work.

Terminal change at JFK: Aeromexico and Aeromexico Connect, effective May 1, moved to Terminal 4 and now use Delta Air Lines gates at T4 (Delta is also doing the ramp services for Aeromexico as well), making them the second airline to use what is otherwise exclusively Delta gates (the other being KLM).

Turkish Airlines is operating TAME's New York to Quito route through July. TC-LNB ferried from Istanbul to Quito earlier this week and began operating EQ550/1 this week.

https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news ... y-capacity

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Turkish Airlines is operating TAME's New York to Quito route through July. TC-LNB ferried from Istanbul to Quito earlier this week and began operating EQ550/1 this week.

https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news ... y-capacity

What happened to Tame's A330?

Are there plans to reconstruct runways 22L/4R and 13L/31R?