pdx wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

On the Frontier app there are no flights bookable from Portland after 1 November. The only destination is DEN and you cannot select a flight to book. Unless this is an oversight, I'd say PDX is being eliminated from the network. I can't imagine they'd maintain operations with one daily departure. Doubt they'll issue a press release saying they're leaving.

We're fine. You can book F9 now through 07APR to/from PDX, however only "Discount DEN" (club) fares are available. Their expansion announcement is crazy! I imagine a lot of their new flights won't be around 6 months from now. They're such a random airline. Anybody know if they're filling their flights to PHX and CLE?

I flew CLE-PDX back in May on F9. I was actually surprised that the 230 seat A321 only had about 5 empty seats. I know, sample size of 1, but it probably does well enough for them. This is the second summer they've flown it and Frontier is notorious for quickly dropping under performing routes so it can't be that bad. The Pacific Northwest is also a very popular summer vacation spot for people in NE Ohio. The question is whether it comes back next summer as it appears F9's strategy might be changing again with this massive expansion.

Last month's pax numbers for EUG: AS market share continues to shrink. As of June they are now #2 behind UA.
http://registerguard.com/rg/news/local/ ... s.html.csp

flyoregon wrote:

The question I'm about to pose may stem from a bit of bitterness or jealousy based on todays announcement of Thomas Cook starting MAN-SEA. Nevertheless, I'd like to know everyone's opinion: Is the Port of Portland doing enough to attract international service to PDX?

I'm torn. On the surface, PDX is nicely served internationally with 4 Euro destinations, 4 Mexico destinations, 3 Canadian destinations, and 1 Asian destination. On those routes, they are served by 5 foreign carriers. BUT, just like Seattle, albeit a smaller population, Portland is growing like crazy. It's a popular tourist destination with travelers coming from all over the world year-round...not just summer.

I think it would be different if FRA, KEF, and LHR were year-round. I also think my opinion would be different if we had more Asian service. It's not fair to compare Portland to Seattle or Vancouver. I get that. But when you look at the service from YVR to Asia, and SEA to Asia, surely Portland can support more than just a single flight to NRT.

So, with TCX flying MAN-SEA, once again Portland has been overlooked. Once again, we get the short stick and bursting at the seams, cramped, uncomfortable Sea-Tac gets more service. I never want to be Seattle, but I do wish the Portland identity was a little more independent. I'm very thankful for the service we have and it's great to see it mature in a healthy way.

So, with all of that said, is the Port doing enough? Being an outsider, it seems like they could be doing a little bit more on some levels.

I'd say Paris and Hong Kong and/or Seoul would round out intl for PDX. DL should do 4 days to LHR, 3 days to CDG. But they need it year round. As for Seattle, enjoy the mayhem. For the port, they don't seem to be as enthusiastic as their counterparts are in other cities.

TransWorldOne wrote:

Some of those "grandma's" provide pretty good service, don't they? I've taken this route many times and it always been fine. The A330's are quite comfortable, the entertainment and wifi are great, and the beverage carts come out several times. I know it's en vogue to complain about US Carriers but I think it's way overblown. I love having this flight out of PDX.

for the 1st comment. Yes, A330's is comfortable and apt for this sector. With more onward connections coming up from AMS to India, I guess I will use this route more than I thought I would a couple of years ago. I would really love a PDX-CDG-PDX connection, hopefully soon.

jbpdx wrote:

I'd say Paris and Hong Kong and/or Seoul would round out intl for PDX. DL should do 4 days to LHR, 3 days to CDG. But they need it year round. As for Seattle, enjoy the mayhem. For the port, they don't seem to be as enthusiastic as their counterparts are in other cities.

I agree with that. The people in Denver, San Jose, Seattle, Austin, and San Diego are doing laps around Portland folks it seems. Maybe I'm just a bit annoyed at the fact that we seem to be over looked.

My guess is that we do see CDG sooner rather than later on DY, MAYBE LGW...BIG maybe.

KEF goes year-round.

FRA goes year-round.

LHR goes year-round OR BA announces PDX-LHR and DL drops it.

NRT dropped by DL and moved to SEL on KE.

JAL starts NRT.

CX starts HKG.

flyoregon wrote:

I agree with that. The people in Denver, San Jose, Seattle, Austin, and San Diego are doing laps around Portland folks it seems. Maybe I'm just a bit annoyed at the fact that we seem to be over looked.

My guess is that we do see CDG sooner rather than later on DY, MAYBE LGW...BIG maybe.

KEF goes year-round.

FRA goes year-round.

LHR goes year-round OR BA announces PDX-LHR and DL drops it.

NRT dropped by DL and moved to SEL on KE.

JAL starts NRT.

CX starts HKG.

I would hardly say any of those cities are reasonable comparisons with the Portland metro area. San Jose is part of a much larger urban agglomeration and serves millions more people than PDX does. Also the economic juggernaut of Silicon Valley is literally right next door.
As far as reasonable apples to apples comparisons, Portland is served on par with, or even better than metro areas with populations within 400,000 of Portland's 2.4 million. Some noteable cities on that list: Sacramento; Cincinnati; Pittsburgh; and St Louis.
Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE to see more service at PDX. But I don't think the level of international service we see is below that of comparable metro areas. Of course Seattle is going to get more service than Portland, not only is the city considerably larger, it's also got a much larger economy, wealthier residents, and it's better known globally. Airlines are out to make money at the end of the day. I'm sure if PDX was some underserved treasure trove it would have been tapped a long time ago.
Honestly with as much as DY has been growing, I wouldn't be surprised to see an add from them within the next few years. They don't seem to be afraid of entering markets recently established by legacy carriers ala BA at AUS. I'm not as convinced that we'll see any new PAX service to Asia anytime soon. DL has kept NRT as a 763 for quite some time. IIRC it wasn't even daily a few winters back. Maybe this is just a shortcoming of DL as they sort out their Asia network after the acquisition of NW.

^^^^

ASIA:

PDX-NRT should switch to PDX-ICN, and I wouldn't be surprised if it happens as soon as 2018.
The Narita hub is dead for Delta, and their JV with Korean will route connections here.

This will actually be a big win for PDX (and might have me finally consider dropping AS MVPGold to go with Delta.... yikes).

I wouldn't be totally shocked if we got a direct China flight. PVG or PEK of course being the top guesses.
At the same time, if/when Delta moves off NRT.... I could also see JAL start PDX-NRT (with alaska feed now). Would make a lot of sense - and easier to justify than China to Portland.


Hong Kong.... never going to happen...

--
For the rest. KEF/FRA all seem targeted at tourists. I've used Icelandair a couple times, and it certainly seems to be budget travelers going to Europe.
Condor I'm finally taking in a month, but I suspect it's pretty similar.
Less than daily service is tough...

BUT, I do think PDX can support two daily, year round non stops to Europe.
CDG with Delta obviously a decent candidate, but I would prefer LHR goes year round.
Lots more of us have to actually go to London/UK for business than business in Paris.
So, LHR would be awesome.

Now, since Alaska isn't really friendly with American that much anyway...dream is British Airways starts PDX-LHR...
But if Delta keeps chugging along on all these routes, I do think more of us will switch to earning sky pesos just to take advantage of the international connects out of PDX they continue to offer.

flyoregon wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

I'd say Paris and Hong Kong and/or Seoul would round out intl for PDX. DL should do 4 days to LHR, 3 days to CDG. But they need it year round. As for Seattle, enjoy the mayhem. For the port, they don't seem to be as enthusiastic as their counterparts are in other cities.

I agree with that. The people in Denver, San Jose, Seattle, Austin, and San Diego are doing laps around Portland folks it seems. Maybe I'm just a bit annoyed at the fact that we seem to be over looked.

My guess is that we do see CDG sooner rather than later on DY, MAYBE LGW...BIG maybe.

KEF goes year-round.

FRA goes year-round.

LHR goes year-round OR BA announces PDX-LHR and DL drops it.

NRT dropped by DL and moved to SEL on KE.

JAL starts NRT.

CX starts HKG.

CX doesn't even fly to SEA, why on earth would they start PDX? I'd say that one is a stretch. Talk about a long and thin route. The others you mentioned are more realistic and I wouldn't be shocked to see them come to fruition. PDX is doing very well for a city its size when it comes to international service.

Lol....why do people keep on getting their feelings hurt when Seattle gets new service but pdx doesnt. If airlines could make money in pdx they'd be here. Seattle area population is nearly double that of Portland. The economy is booming in Seattle. Seattle is home to mega corporations such as microsoft, starbucks, and amazon, and multiple ports. Seattle also has cruise ship traffic, mount rainier, north cascades, the San Juan islands, U of W, boeing, military bases, the mariners and seahawks and everything else too. Seattle is a booming city. There's a lot of money in the Seattle area. Seattle is everything Portland is multiplied by 2 or 3.
Also, a few people in this forum like to talk about how terrible it is to connect at seatac. It's really not that bad, and in fact it is much easier to connect there compared to many other airports that are similar size.
I live in Portland and love it here. I never want to live anywhere else (well maybe Bend, OR). I use the airport all the time, and I love it. It's so convenient and well ran. Plus it has country cat and and stumptown. I'd say pdx is very well served for what it has to offer....a great food and beer scene, 2.5 million people in the metro, an awful homeless problem, the gorge, nike, and decent but growing economy. Portland/oregon also has a nice growing tourism scene, but again nothing compared to what Seattle and Washington in general has to offer. It'll attract more flights in time, but nothing compared to Seattle.
Also, some people on the forum about how many fliers pdx loses because they prefer to drive up to seatac for international flights instead of using pdx and having to connect. The amount of people who do this is very small and not nearly enough to make international flights feel the need to come to pdx.
Pdx is a wonderful airport though and it's great to see it slowly gaining some new international and domestic flights. Airlines will continue to grow at pdx when there's money to be made.
Unfortunately portland is stuck between San Francisco and Seattle, both of which have far greater economies and name recognition. Both San Francisco and Seattle airports are short flights and very easy to connect to all the international flights they have to offer.

jsta1981 wrote:

Lol....why do people keep on getting their feelings hurt when Seattle gets new service but pdx doesnt. If airlines could make money in pdx they'd be here. Seattle area population is nearly double that of Portland. The economy is booming in Seattle. Seattle is home to mega corporations such as microsoft, starbucks, and amazon, and multiple ports. Seattle also has cruise ship traffic, mount rainier, north cascades, the San Juan islands, U of W, boeing, military bases, the mariners and seahawks and everything else too. Seattle is a booming city. There's a lot of money in the Seattle area. Seattle is everything Portland is multiplied by 2 or 3.
Also, a few people in this forum like to talk about how terrible it is to connect at seatac. It's really not that bad, and in fact it is much easier to connect there compared to many other airports that are similar size.
I live in Portland and love it here. I never want to live anywhere else (well maybe Bend, OR). I use the airport all the time, and I love it. It's so convenient and well ran. Plus it has country cat and and stumptown. I'd say pdx is very well served for what it has to offer....a great food and beer scene, 2.5 million people in the metro, an awful homeless problem, the gorge, nike, and decent but growing economy. Portland/oregon also has a nice growing tourism scene, but again nothing compared to what Seattle and Washington in general has to offer. It'll attract more flights in time, but nothing compared to Seattle.
Also, some people on the forum about how many fliers pdx loses because they prefer to drive up to seatac for international flights instead of using pdx and having to connect. The amount of people who do this is very small and not nearly enough to make international flights feel the need to come to pdx.
Pdx is a wonderful airport though and it's great to see it slowly gaining some new international and domestic flights. Airlines will continue to grow at pdx when there's money to be made.
Unfortunately portland is stuck between San Francisco and Seattle, both of which have far greater economies and name recognition. Both San Francisco and Seattle airports are short flights and very easy to connect to all the international flights they have to offer.

Yes...here we are in little ol' Portland living in the dark, lifeless shadow cast by the huge megacities of Seattle to our north and San Francisco to our south. Maybe the successful city folk to the north or south will throw some scraps our way.

TransWorldOne wrote:

CX doesn't even fly to SEA, why on earth would they start PDX? I'd say that one is a stretch. Talk about a long and thin route. The others you mentioned are more realistic and I wouldn't be shocked to see them come to fruition. PDX is doing very well for a city its size when it comes to international service.

I only mention CX because of the cargo service we currently get and it's apparently doing well. I should have noted that I think CX is also a long-shot.

jsta1981 wrote:

Lol....why do people keep on getting their feelings hurt when Seattle gets new service but pdx doesnt. If airlines could make money in pdx they'd be here. Seattle area population is nearly double that of Portland. The economy is booming in Seattle. Seattle is home to mega corporations such as microsoft, starbucks, and amazon, and multiple ports. Seattle also has cruise ship traffic, mount rainier, north cascades, the San Juan islands, U of W, boeing, military bases, the mariners and seahawks and everything else too. Seattle is a booming city. There's a lot of money in the Seattle area. Seattle is everything Portland is multiplied by 2 or 3.
Also, a few people in this forum like to talk about how terrible it is to connect at seatac. It's really not that bad, and in fact it is much easier to connect there compared to many other airports that are similar size.
I live in Portland and love it here. I never want to live anywhere else (well maybe Bend, OR). I use the airport all the time, and I love it. It's so convenient and well ran. Plus it has country cat and and stumptown. I'd say pdx is very well served for what it has to offer....a great food and beer scene, 2.5 million people in the metro, an awful homeless problem, the gorge, nike, and decent but growing economy. Portland/oregon also has a nice growing tourism scene, but again nothing compared to what Seattle and Washington in general has to offer. It'll attract more flights in time, but nothing compared to Seattle.
Also, some people on the forum about how many fliers pdx loses because they prefer to drive up to seatac for international flights instead of using pdx and having to connect. The amount of people who do this is very small and not nearly enough to make international flights feel the need to come to pdx.
Pdx is a wonderful airport though and it's great to see it slowly gaining some new international and domestic flights. Airlines will continue to grow at pdx when there's money to be made.
Unfortunately portland is stuck between San Francisco and Seattle, both of which have far greater economies and name recognition. Both San Francisco and Seattle airports are short flights and very easy to connect to all the international flights they have to offer.

As for the "complaining", I get it that Seattle is bigger. I'm not suggesting Portland should be or will be SEA. But we do have the 18th largest CSA at 3.1 million. It's always more than just the immediate metro size. We have a very strong tourism scene in Portland and Oregon as a whole, and to say the tourism is "nothing compared to what Seattle and Washington in general has to offer" is based on what exactly?

I guess my annoyance is that Seattle will have a couple/several carriers on routes to to places like Tokyo, London, Frankfurt, Seoul, Beijing, Shanghai, etc. while we get seasonal LHR, FRA, KEF and the less than daily AMS and NRT in the winter.

As for airlines not feeling like they need to come to PDX based on the "small" amount of traffic that come up to Seattle isn't necessarily true because it was stated that Condor's decision to fly PDX-FRA was because of the amount of traffic from Portland going through Seattle.

My feelings aren't hurt, it's just annoying to always be that little town wedged between San Francisco and Seattle. It's cursed by geography, I understand that, but the constant overshadowing is getting old.

TransWorldOne wrote:

CX doesn't even fly to SEA, why on earth would they start PDX? I'd say that one is a stretch. Talk about a long and thin route. The others you mentioned are more realistic and I wouldn't be shocked to see them come to fruition. PDX is doing very well for a city its size when it comes to international service.

LH started FRA-PDX-FRA years before FRA-SEA-FRA. If I remember correctly, SEA was announced an year before the termination of PDX route. I am not saying CX would come to PDX for passenger flights but only to bring a point that it doesn't have be SEA first and PDX next even though that seems to be the case most of the times.

flyoregon wrote:

My feelings aren't hurt, it's just annoying to always be that little town wedged between San Francisco and Seattle. It's cursed by geography, I understand that, but the constant overshadowing is getting old.

Portland is growing extremely fast. It's a different place now than it was when I was a kid. And it's going to continue to grow. The growth is painfully obvious every weekday when area freeways halt with gridlock, that started being the norm on weekends too. The skyline is changing rapidly. Everywhere you look something is being built. All that change is a result of people moving here in droves. By 2020 there will be nearly 700,000 people in the city proper, almost 100,000 more than there were in 2010. Growth is happening throughout the entire region.
The airport is growing too. FRA KEF LHR and GDL in the last 2 years alone. Cc E is being extended, there are domestic adds, upgauges, frequency increases, a record passenger count year last year and likely another one this year. PDX is doing great and the area as a whole will continue to grow for the foreseeable future.

PDX757 wrote:

flyoregon wrote:

My feelings aren't hurt, it's just annoying to always be that little town wedged between San Francisco and Seattle. It's cursed by geography, I understand that, but the constant overshadowing is getting old.

Portland is growing extremely fast. It's a different place now than it was when I was a kid. And it's going to continue to grow. The growth is painfully obvious every weekday when area freeways halt with gridlock, that started being the norm on weekends too. The skyline is changing rapidly. Everywhere you look something is being built. All that change is a result of people moving here in droves. By 2020 there will be nearly 700,000 people in the city proper, almost 100,000 more than there were in 2010. Growth is happening throughout the entire region.
The airport is growing too. FRA KEF LHR and GDL in the last 2 years alone. Cc E is being extended, there are domestic adds, upgauges, frequency increases, a record passenger count year last year and likely another one this year. PDX is doing great and the area as a whole will continue to grow for the foreseeable future.

Since I've been flying out of PDX in the 70's it has changed 100%. It wasn't but a couple of decades ago, both PDX & SEA were served by the same aircraft by most airlines, making SEA-PDX-SEA one of, if not the ultimate tag route in the domestic 48. Routings like SEA-PDX-SJC-BUR & PDX-SEA-JFK were common on a huge variety of aircraft.

Now PDX has non-stops to all of the places you used to make a stop or a connection for at SEA. By shear size SEA will be the dominant regional airport, however several PNW cities are n/s only from PDX. For our size, there are many non-stop options & we have an awesome hometown carrier that has just made a huge investment with the Port of Portland to continue being the leader out of PDX.

LH did serve PDX before (only scheduled A-340 service to PDX) & did move it up the street to SEA for cargo reasons, even though PDX-FFRA performed well seasonally back then, it was dead in the winter. DE has found a strong German connection with PDX & their flights are filled with German business people who have come here on business (with Mercedes building sprinter vans here) there are growing business ties.

Those people are bringing their families to experience some of the most beautiful parts of our country. We are on the radar globally for micro-brews, foodies & a cannabis connoisseurs destination.

By 2020, Portland will have the hotel capacity to handle the big conventions & I bet we'll be booking them in with a world famous transit system as well. More destinations are coming, I hope we see PEK by 2020.

Cathay Pacific now flying 5 cargo 747s a week out of PDX.

flyoregon wrote:

TransWorldOne wrote:

CX doesn't even fly to SEA, why on earth would they start PDX? I'd say that one is a stretch. Talk about a long and thin route. The others you mentioned are more realistic and I wouldn't be shocked to see them come to fruition. PDX is doing very well for a city its size when it comes to international service.

I only mention CX because of the cargo service we currently get and it's apparently doing well. I should have noted that I think CX is also a long-shot.

jsta1981 wrote:

Lol....why do people keep on getting their feelings hurt when Seattle gets new service but pdx doesnt. If airlines could make money in pdx they'd be here. Seattle area population is nearly double that of Portland. The economy is booming in Seattle. Seattle is home to mega corporations such as microsoft, starbucks, and amazon, and multiple ports. Seattle also has cruise ship traffic, mount rainier, north cascades, the San Juan islands, U of W, boeing, military bases, the mariners and seahawks and everything else too. Seattle is a booming city. There's a lot of money in the Seattle area. Seattle is everything Portland is multiplied by 2 or 3.
Also, a few people in this forum like to talk about how terrible it is to connect at seatac. It's really not that bad, and in fact it is much easier to connect there compared to many other airports that are similar size.
I live in Portland and love it here. I never want to live anywhere else (well maybe Bend, OR). I use the airport all the time, and I love it. It's so convenient and well ran. Plus it has country cat and and stumptown. I'd say pdx is very well served for what it has to offer....a great food and beer scene, 2.5 million people in the metro, an awful homeless problem, the gorge, nike, and decent but growing economy. Portland/oregon also has a nice growing tourism scene, but again nothing compared to what Seattle and Washington in general has to offer. It'll attract more flights in time, but nothing compared to Seattle.
Also, some people on the forum about how many fliers pdx loses because they prefer to drive up to seatac for international flights instead of using pdx and having to connect. The amount of people who do this is very small and not nearly enough to make international flights feel the need to come to pdx.
Pdx is a wonderful airport though and it's great to see it slowly gaining some new international and domestic flights. Airlines will continue to grow at pdx when there's money to be made.
Unfortunately portland is stuck between San Francisco and Seattle, both of which have far greater economies and name recognition. Both San Francisco and Seattle airports are short flights and very easy to connect to all the international flights they have to offer.

As for the "complaining", I get it that Seattle is bigger. I'm not suggesting Portland should be or will be SEA. But we do have the 18th largest CSA at 3.1 million. It's always more than just the immediate metro size. We have a very strong tourism scene in Portland and Oregon as a whole, and to say the tourism is "nothing compared to what Seattle and Washington in general has to offer" is based on what exactly?

I guess my annoyance is that Seattle will have a couple/several carriers on routes to to places like Tokyo, London, Frankfurt, Seoul, Beijing, Shanghai, etc. while we get seasonal LHR, FRA, KEF and the less than daily AMS and NRT in the winter.

As for airlines not feeling like they need to come to PDX based on the "small" amount of traffic that come up to Seattle isn't necessarily true because it was stated that Condor's decision to fly PDX-FRA was because of the amount of traffic from Portland going through Seattle.

My feelings aren't hurt, it's just annoying to always be that little town wedged between San Francisco and Seattle. It's cursed by geography, I understand that, but the constant overshadowing is getting old.

Seattle has routes that PDX doesn't because there is money to be made on those routes. At the end of the day airlines are businesses and their goal is to make money. They are gonna choose to fly routes based on profitability not based on someone's feelings being hurt.

Seattle and San Francisco offer great easy connection opportunities to places all over the world.
I take advantage of them all the time. It's great to have such world class cities nearby.

And Yes Seattle and Washington offer way more tourism opportunities than Portland and oregon do. And again i live in Portland and love the city and state and everything it has to offer. Washington has 2 world famous national parks within 2 hours of Seattle and a 3rd which isn't world famous but should be but I'm glad it's not because I don't want more people visiting it (Olympic, Rainer, and north cascades). Seattle offers the San Juans, cruises to Alaska and Canada, outdoor rec up the wazoo, food beer and wine, the coast, lots of islands, Seahawks, mariners, aquariums and museums, the space needle, world class hiking, and much more.
Portland has access to some beautiful coastline, the gorge, great outdoor rec opportunities, food and beer, lots of homeless, a good wine scene, mount saint Helens, and mount hood which pales in comparison to washingtons mountains. So yes the washington and seattle tourism scene is much greater than the portland and oregon tourism scene.

PDX June 2017:
1,815,384 passengers
+6.6%
International +18.8%

Fiscal year ending June 2017:
18,836,929 passengers
+6.9%
International +15.7%

Calendar year 2017 should top 19 million.

RWA380 wrote:

DE has found a strong German connection with PDX & their flights are filled with German business people who have come here on business (with Mercedes building sprinter vans here) there are growing business ties.

With a seasonal, non-daily service, I'd be shocked if many frequent business travelers are choosing Condor. But there's no doubt that they're doing well with strong leisure travel demand from both Oregon and Germany (and elsewhere in Europe, as Condor offers some connections through FRA, and some transfer opportunities to for cities they don't serve).

Daimler (parent company of Mercedes) has it's North American HQ in Portland, which employs approximately 1,000 people. In addition, they still operate one former Freightliner truck factory in Portland, where between 500 and 800 people work building the Western Star Truck line of products. Sprinter vans are not assembled in Oregon.

It's likely the HQ function that drives significant business travel around the US and to Stuttgart where the company's world HQ is located.

jsta1981 wrote:

flyoregon wrote:

TransWorldOne wrote:

CX doesn't even fly to SEA, why on earth would they start PDX? I'd say that one is a stretch. Talk about a long and thin route. The others you mentioned are more realistic and I wouldn't be shocked to see them come to fruition. PDX is doing very well for a city its size when it comes to international service.

I only mention CX because of the cargo service we currently get and it's apparently doing well. I should have noted that I think CX is also a long-shot.

jsta1981 wrote:

Lol....why do people keep on getting their feelings hurt when Seattle gets new service but pdx doesnt. If airlines could make money in pdx they'd be here. Seattle area population is nearly double that of Portland. The economy is booming in Seattle. Seattle is home to mega corporations such as microsoft, starbucks, and amazon, and multiple ports. Seattle also has cruise ship traffic, mount rainier, north cascades, the San Juan islands, U of W, boeing, military bases, the mariners and seahawks and everything else too. Seattle is a booming city. There's a lot of money in the Seattle area. Seattle is everything Portland is multiplied by 2 or 3.
Also, a few people in this forum like to talk about how terrible it is to connect at seatac. It's really not that bad, and in fact it is much easier to connect there compared to many other airports that are similar size.
I live in Portland and love it here. I never want to live anywhere else (well maybe Bend, OR). I use the airport all the time, and I love it. It's so convenient and well ran. Plus it has country cat and and stumptown. I'd say pdx is very well served for what it has to offer....a great food and beer scene, 2.5 million people in the metro, an awful homeless problem, the gorge, nike, and decent but growing economy. Portland/oregon also has a nice growing tourism scene, but again nothing compared to what Seattle and Washington in general has to offer. It'll attract more flights in time, but nothing compared to Seattle.
Also, some people on the forum about how many fliers pdx loses because they prefer to drive up to seatac for international flights instead of using pdx and having to connect. The amount of people who do this is very small and not nearly enough to make international flights feel the need to come to pdx.
Pdx is a wonderful airport though and it's great to see it slowly gaining some new international and domestic flights. Airlines will continue to grow at pdx when there's money to be made.
Unfortunately portland is stuck between San Francisco and Seattle, both of which have far greater economies and name recognition. Both San Francisco and Seattle airports are short flights and very easy to connect to all the international flights they have to offer.

As for the "complaining", I get it that Seattle is bigger. I'm not suggesting Portland should be or will be SEA. But we do have the 18th largest CSA at 3.1 million. It's always more than just the immediate metro size. We have a very strong tourism scene in Portland and Oregon as a whole, and to say the tourism is "nothing compared to what Seattle and Washington in general has to offer" is based on what exactly?

I guess my annoyance is that Seattle will have a couple/several carriers on routes to to places like Tokyo, London, Frankfurt, Seoul, Beijing, Shanghai, etc. while we get seasonal LHR, FRA, KEF and the less than daily AMS and NRT in the winter.

As for airlines not feeling like they need to come to PDX based on the "small" amount of traffic that come up to Seattle isn't necessarily true because it was stated that Condor's decision to fly PDX-FRA was because of the amount of traffic from Portland going through Seattle.

My feelings aren't hurt, it's just annoying to always be that little town wedged between San Francisco and Seattle. It's cursed by geography, I understand that, but the constant overshadowing is getting old.

Seattle has routes that PDX doesn't because there is money to be made on those routes. At the end of the day airlines are businesses and their goal is to make money. They are gonna choose to fly routes based on profitability not based on someone's feelings being hurt.

Seattle and San Francisco offer great easy connection opportunities to places all over the world.
I take advantage of them all the time. It's great to have such world class cities nearby.

And Yes Seattle and Washington offer way more tourism opportunities than Portland and oregon do. And again i live in Portland and love the city and state and everything it has to offer. Washington has 2 world famous national parks within 2 hours of Seattle and a 3rd which isn't world famous but should be but I'm glad it's not because I don't want more people visiting it (Olympic, Rainer, and north cascades). Seattle offers the San Juans, cruises to Alaska and Canada, outdoor rec up the wazoo, food beer and wine, the coast, lots of islands, Seahawks, mariners, aquariums and museums, the space needle, world class hiking, and much more.
Portland has access to some beautiful coastline, the gorge, great outdoor rec opportunities, food and beer, lots of homeless, a good wine scene, mount saint Helens, and mount hood which pales in comparison to washingtons mountains. So yes the washington and seattle tourism scene is much greater than the portland and oregon tourism scene.

LOL at you listing "homeless" among Oregon features. Yes, Portland is becoming known for its homelessness in the same way that Seattle is known for the Space Needle or San Francisco for the Golden Gate Bridge, but that is an entirely different conversation. As far as air service goes, Portlanders are quite lucky to have what they've got. Within the next decade I could see one new Asian route (probably ICN or PEK) and one more Euro route (CDG). I can't imagine seeing much else in the foreseeable future but I would love to be wrong.

Announcing direct flights between Portland and Maui

Hawaiian Airlines is proud to expand our presence in the West Coast next year, starting with non-stop daily flights between Portland, Oregon and Kahului, Hawaii. Direct flights from Kahului to Portland begin on January 18, 2018. Direct flights from Portland to Kahului begin on January 19, 2018. Take advantage of our low introductory fare through July 31, 2017.


An email I just received from Hawaiian Airlines

CrisAA wrote:

Announcing direct flights between Portland and Maui

Hawaiian Airlines is proud to expand our presence in the West Coast next year, starting with non-stop daily flights between Portland, Oregon and Kahului, Hawaii. Direct flights from Kahului to Portland begin on January 18, 2018. Direct flights from Portland to Kahului begin on January 19, 2018. Take advantage of our low introductory fare through July 31, 2017.


An email I just received from Hawaiian Airlines

I knew one day they'd be back! AS had the market to themselves and fly sometimes 2x daily to OGG. What kinds of aircraft is it? A330, B767, or a new A321 (does it have the range)?

Edit: They're already available for booking. Daily A321 flight. It seems to arrive and depart at the exact same time as HNL. You'd think they'd space it apart by a half hour to an hour to reduce airport staffing (needing two ground/gate crews).

ooslc wrote:

CrisAA wrote:

Announcing direct flights between Portland and Maui

Hawaiian Airlines is proud to expand our presence in the West Coast next year, starting with non-stop daily flights between Portland, Oregon and Kahului, Hawaii. Direct flights from Kahului to Portland begin on January 18, 2018. Direct flights from Portland to Kahului begin on January 19, 2018. Take advantage of our low introductory fare through July 31, 2017.


An email I just received from Hawaiian Airlines

I knew one day they'd be back! AS had the market to themselves and fly sometimes 2x daily to OGG. What kinds of aircraft is it? A330, B767, or a new A321 (does it have the range)?

Edit: They're already available for booking. Daily A321 flight. It seems to arrive and depart at the exact same time as HNL. You'd think they'd space it apart by a half hour to an hour to reduce airport staffing (needing two ground/gate crews).

This and 2 other new A321 routes are listed at: https://www.hawaiianairlines.com/A321neo

jsta1981 wrote:

flyoregon wrote:

TransWorldOne wrote:

CX doesn't even fly to SEA, why on earth would they start PDX? I'd say that one is a stretch. Talk about a long and thin route. The others you mentioned are more realistic and I wouldn't be shocked to see them come to fruition. PDX is doing very well for a city its size when it comes to international service.

I only mention CX because of the cargo service we currently get and it's apparently doing well. I should have noted that I think CX is also a long-shot.

jsta1981 wrote:

Lol....why do people keep on getting their feelings hurt when Seattle gets new service but pdx doesnt. If airlines could make money in pdx they'd be here. Seattle area population is nearly double that of Portland. The economy is booming in Seattle. Seattle is home to mega corporations such as microsoft, starbucks, and amazon, and multiple ports. Seattle also has cruise ship traffic, mount rainier, north cascades, the San Juan islands, U of W, boeing, military bases, the mariners and seahawks and everything else too. Seattle is a booming city. There's a lot of money in the Seattle area. Seattle is everything Portland is multiplied by 2 or 3.
Also, a few people in this forum like to talk about how terrible it is to connect at seatac. It's really not that bad, and in fact it is much easier to connect there compared to many other airports that are similar size.
I live in Portland and love it here. I never want to live anywhere else (well maybe Bend, OR). I use the airport all the time, and I love it. It's so convenient and well ran. Plus it has country cat and and stumptown. I'd say pdx is very well served for what it has to offer....a great food and beer scene, 2.5 million people in the metro, an awful homeless problem, the gorge, nike, and decent but growing economy. Portland/oregon also has a nice growing tourism scene, but again nothing compared to what Seattle and Washington in general has to offer. It'll attract more flights in time, but nothing compared to Seattle.
Also, some people on the forum about how many fliers pdx loses because they prefer to drive up to seatac for international flights instead of using pdx and having to connect. The amount of people who do this is very small and not nearly enough to make international flights feel the need to come to pdx.
Pdx is a wonderful airport though and it's great to see it slowly gaining some new international and domestic flights. Airlines will continue to grow at pdx when there's money to be made.
Unfortunately portland is stuck between San Francisco and Seattle, both of which have far greater economies and name recognition. Both San Francisco and Seattle airports are short flights and very easy to connect to all the international flights they have to offer.

As for the "complaining", I get it that Seattle is bigger. I'm not suggesting Portland should be or will be SEA. But we do have the 18th largest CSA at 3.1 million. It's always more than just the immediate metro size. We have a very strong tourism scene in Portland and Oregon as a whole, and to say the tourism is "nothing compared to what Seattle and Washington in general has to offer" is based on what exactly?

I guess my annoyance is that Seattle will have a couple/several carriers on routes to to places like Tokyo, London, Frankfurt, Seoul, Beijing, Shanghai, etc. while we get seasonal LHR, FRA, KEF and the less than daily AMS and NRT in the winter.

As for airlines not feeling like they need to come to PDX based on the "small" amount of traffic that come up to Seattle isn't necessarily true because it was stated that Condor's decision to fly PDX-FRA was because of the amount of traffic from Portland going through Seattle.

My feelings aren't hurt, it's just annoying to always be that little town wedged between San Francisco and Seattle. It's cursed by geography, I understand that, but the constant overshadowing is getting old.

Seattle has routes that PDX doesn't because there is money to be made on those routes. At the end of the day airlines are businesses and their goal is to make money. They are gonna choose to fly routes based on profitability not based on someone's feelings being hurt.

Seattle and San Francisco offer great easy connection opportunities to places all over the world.
I take advantage of them all the time. It's great to have such world class cities nearby.

And Yes Seattle and Washington offer way more tourism opportunities than Portland and oregon do. And again i live in Portland and love the city and state and everything it has to offer. Washington has 2 world famous national parks within 2 hours of Seattle and a 3rd which isn't world famous but should be but I'm glad it's not because I don't want more people visiting it (Olympic, Rainer, and north cascades). Seattle offers the San Juans, cruises to Alaska and Canada, outdoor rec up the wazoo, food beer and wine, the coast, lots of islands, Seahawks, mariners, aquariums and museums, the space needle, world class hiking, and much more.
Portland has access to some beautiful coastline, the gorge, great outdoor rec opportunities, food and beer, lots of homeless, a good wine scene, mount saint Helens, and mount hood which pales in comparison to washingtons mountains. So yes the washington and seattle tourism scene is much greater than the portland and oregon tourism scene.

jsta1981:
I'm fairly certain that your point has been made. While you will likely have several users, particularly on the Oregon Aviation Thread who disagree with your opinions...that's perfectly fine. Nothing wrong with stating your opinion. But in this case you have clearly "overstated" yours. While it's nice to know that you live in Portland and can appreciate what the city does offer (and in your words...doesn't offer)...consider that you're trying to advance an opinion amongst fellow a-net users that may also reside in Portland or in Oregon and are well aware of how unique not only Portland is but also Seattle. When you get into comparing and stating what one city has and the other doesn't or what one city does and outperforms the other in...I'm afraid then you've lost your audience. Having lived in both Seattle and Portland I find that each are unique in their own special and robust way. I don't particularly find that making specific comparisons and "disparaging" one over the other for what they offer or don't offer has any merit.

So...now...can we get back to Oregon Aviation?

ooslc wrote:

CrisAA wrote:

Announcing direct flights between Portland and Maui

Hawaiian Airlines is proud to expand our presence in the West Coast next year, starting with non-stop daily flights between Portland, Oregon and Kahului, Hawaii. Direct flights from Kahului to Portland begin on January 18, 2018. Direct flights from Portland to Kahului begin on January 19, 2018. Take advantage of our low introductory fare through July 31, 2017.


An email I just received from Hawaiian Airlines

I knew one day they'd be back! AS had the market to themselves and fly sometimes 2x daily to OGG. What kinds of aircraft is it? A330, B767, or a new A321 (does it have the range)?

Edit: They're already available for booking. Daily A321 flight. It seems to arrive and depart at the exact same time as HNL. You'd think they'd space it apart by a half hour to an hour to reduce airport staffing (needing two ground/gate crews).

Indeed this is one of those routes HA has wanted to fly & has tried, but now they have the right aircraft for it. hey can now offer a year round schedule. AS often times has 2x daily PDX-OGG market all to themselves.

Even way back in 1980 my family flew on Evergreen International PDX-OGG & return exactly 2 weeks later on DC-8-50 aircraft. No inflight movie, the meal uneventful, but I still remember how full it was 100% & this was August. My folks got upgraded as the sticker chart they used for check in was not their own & EZ didn't have a row 13 that the map did. I think the market has been there, but the carriers were very HNL centric then.

Since the advent of outer island flying, Portlanders got their first scheduled direct OGG flight when UA started PDX-SEA-OGG on a 757 & it's been ripe since.

Looks like AS is getting some more competition to the islands. Any guesses on whether AS will maintain its service levels or cut back?

PDX757 wrote:

Looks like AS is getting some more competition to the islands. Any guesses on whether AS will maintain its service levels or cut back?

My guess is that AS will get a bit more seasonal on it's second daily, the late afternoon from PDX & redeye return I hope will see a seasonal reduction.

jplatts wrote:

Will Southwest Airlines further expand out of PDX by adding nonstop service out of PDX to Anchorage, Honolulu, Kahului, Boise, Salt Lake City, New Orleans, Nashville, Atlanta, Orlando, Tampa, and/or Ft. Lauderdale? Southwest Airlines has expanded out of PDX in the last 2 years with addition of nonstop service out of PDX to BUR, DAL, LAX, ONT, SFO, and STL.

Maybe Nashville.

jplatts wrote:

Will Southwest Airlines further expand out of PDX by adding nonstop service out of PDX to Anchorage, Honolulu, Kahului, Boise, Salt Lake City, New Orleans, Nashville, Atlanta, Orlando, Tampa, and/or Ft. Lauderdale? Southwest Airlines has expanded out of PDX in the last 2 years with addition of nonstop service out of PDX to BUR, DAL, LAX, ONT, SFO, and STL.

PDX-SLC would be a restart for WN. I used to fly WN on that route quite a bit when I was in school in SLC. They dropped it shortly after AS started the route.

I'm hopeful that AS can upgauge E175 routes into 737's and open up routes like PDX-DEN on the 175's.

kunta67 wrote:

I'm hopeful that AS can upgauge E175 routes into 737's and open up routes like PDX-DEN on the 175's.

With F9 exiting the PDX market in the coming months, I suspect that an AS PDX-DEN announcement is imminent.

jbpdx wrote:

Cathay Pacific now flying 5 cargo 747s a week out of PDX.

Good to see this flight is doing well. What will the the schedule look like now?

TransWorldOne wrote:

kunta67 wrote:

I'm hopeful that AS can upgauge E175 routes into 737's and open up routes like PDX-DEN on the 175's.

With F9 exiting the PDX market in the coming months, I suspect that an AS PDX-DEN announcement is imminent.

F9 is NOT exiting PDX. Flights are bookable through 07APR18. DEN may be too competitive for AS? Hope not though!

I was unaware until recently that the Eugene Airport had completed an expansion and rehab of their passenger terminal in early 2017. With the increased passenger numbers that the Eugene Airport has experienced it would appear that this expansion was quite timely and necessary. Perhaps EUG will break the one million mark for passengers in 2017?
https://www.eugene-or.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=2863

kon wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

Cathay Pacific now flying 5 cargo 747s a week out of PDX.

Good to see this flight is doing well. What will the the schedule look like now?

Looks like Thur, Sat, Sun, Mon 2x.

pdx wrote:

F9 is NOT exiting PDX. Flights are bookable through 07APR18. DEN may be too competitive for AS? Hope not though!

Frontier's new schedule/routes are still not loaded into FlightView, Skyscanner, Expedia etc. I asked the Port of Portland last Thursday whether Frontier was pulling out of Portland and I've gotten no response/denial. PDX-DEN flights are not bookable on Frontier's app after 1 Nov. So based on the OAG update showing only one remaining flight in November and zero flights PDX-DEN in December, I assume Frontier is vacating PDX.

jbpdx wrote:

pdx wrote:

F9 is NOT exiting PDX. Flights are bookable through 07APR18. DEN may be too competitive for AS? Hope not though!

Frontier's new schedule/routes are still not loaded into FlightView, Skyscanner, Expedia etc. I asked the Port of Portland last Thursday whether Frontier was pulling out of Portland and I've gotten no response/denial. PDX-DEN flights are not bookable on Frontier's app after 1 Nov. So based on the OAG update showing only one remaining flight in November and zero flights PDX-DEN in December, I assume Frontier is vacating PDX.

I don't know about the app, but you can book PDX flights on flyfrontier.com through 07APR, but you have to book the DENDEAL$ fare (DISCOUNT DEN club) after 01NOV. Other F9 destinations require you do the same...it's not just PDX. I don't know if they're forcing people to join DISCOUNT DEN for $49.99 per year or if their website has a glitch? That airline is a mess!

bigfoot0503 wrote:

I was unaware until recently that the Eugene Airport had completed an expansion and rehab of their passenger terminal in early 2017. With the increased passenger numbers that the Eugene Airport has experienced it would appear that this expansion was quite timely and necessary. Perhaps EUG will break the one million mark for passengers in 2017?
https://www.eugene-or.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=2863

They came very close in 2016 - something like 990K? It would be surprising to not break it in 2017. Naturally this is my pet topic since I live here.

The other big news has been that UA has switched to A320/737 on their SFO and DEN service, and since then they have officially been eating Alaska's lunch (see earlier post). Currently SJC is the only California city AS even serves from EUG - I hope, if their focus is on being #1 on the west coast, that they will add more QX service to the Bay or LA area, or start bringing in E175s on some legs, or both. UA's huge growth in pax numbers seems to show that the market is there.

F9 PDX-DEN is now showing up on FlightView after 1 Nov., but only one daily flight. If PDX-CLE is gone as some have said CLE-SEA is, I can't imagine the future stockholders will appreciate operating one daily flight in and out of PDX. That's got to be a money losing proposition.

metaldirtnskin wrote:

bigfoot0503 wrote:

I was unaware until recently that the Eugene Airport had completed an expansion and rehab of their passenger terminal in early 2017. With the increased passenger numbers that the Eugene Airport has experienced it would appear that this expansion was quite timely and necessary. Perhaps EUG will break the one million mark for passengers in 2017?
https://www.eugene-or.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=2863

They came very close in 2016 - something like 990K? It would be surprising to not break it in 2017. Naturally this is my pet topic since I live here.

The other big news has been that UA has switched to A320/737 on their SFO and DEN service, and since then they have officially been eating Alaska's lunch (see earlier post). Currently SJC is the only California city AS even serves from EUG - I hope, if their focus is on being #1 on the west coast, that they will add more QX service to the Bay or LA area, or start bringing in E175s on some legs, or both. UA's huge growth in pax numbers seems to show that the market is there.

Yes, based on the numbers thus far in 2017...it would be difficult to imagine that EUG wouldn't break the 1 million passenger mark.

I applaud United for the move towards more mainline aircraft on the SFO and DEN flights. Years ago other than the United Express service provided by Mesa at one point and West Air prior to that, the majority of United's flights in EUG were mainline. It's quite likely most passengers flying in and out of Eugene notice the different aircraft. With the introduction of larger aircraft the likely result will be increased passenger numbers for United, perhaps capturing those travelers who normally have a choice in their routing or in using a different airline. On the same note, ultimately will this move by United chip away at Alaska's market share percentage at EUG. With three cities served from EUG...one as you pointed out being a California market...is Alaska willing to lose a percentage of the airport passenger yield they have enjoyed for many years? I believe the last Bureau of Transportation Statistic for Eugene indicated that Alaska/Horizon had a 35% share of the market, (May 2016-April 2017).

The changes and recent expansion and rehab of the EUG passenger terminal looks really nice. I have yet to see it in person, hope to make it down during college football season and see the results first-hand.

bigfoot0503 wrote:

t's quite likely most passengers flying in and out of Eugene notice the different aircraft. With the introduction of larger aircraft the likely result will be increased passenger numbers for United, perhaps capturing those travelers who normally have a choice in their routing or in using a different airline. On the same note, ultimately will this move by United chip away at Alaska's market share percentage at EUG. With three cities served from EUG...one as you pointed out being a California market...is Alaska willing to lose a percentage of the airport passenger yield they have enjoyed for many years? I believe the last Bureau of Transportation Statistic for Eugene indicated that Alaska/Horizon had a 35% share of the market, (May 2016-April 2017).

If pax do notice and care about the type of aircraft used, whether it's a Q400 or a mainline jet, I would be surprised if AS had the available aircraft or even the interest to send them to EUG. They seem to have bigger fish to fry with the acquisition of VX. The flight from EUG-PDX/SEA is pretty short and connections are good. I could see AS adding LAX-EUG with a 175 to start.

PDX757 wrote:

bigfoot0503 wrote:

t's quite likely most passengers flying in and out of Eugene notice the different aircraft. With the introduction of larger aircraft the likely result will be increased passenger numbers for United, perhaps capturing those travelers who normally have a choice in their routing or in using a different airline. On the same note, ultimately will this move by United chip away at Alaska's market share percentage at EUG. With three cities served from EUG...one as you pointed out being a California market...is Alaska willing to lose a percentage of the airport passenger yield they have enjoyed for many years? I believe the last Bureau of Transportation Statistic for Eugene indicated that Alaska/Horizon had a 35% share of the market, (May 2016-April 2017).

If pax do notice and care about the type of aircraft used, whether it's a Q400 or a mainline jet, I would be surprised if AS had the available aircraft or even the interest to send them to EUG. They seem to have bigger fish to fry with the acquisition of VX. The flight from EUG-PDX/SEA is pretty short and connections are good. I could see AS adding LAX-EUG with a 175 to start.

I would agree regarding the PDX & SEA flights...however might they put a 175 on the EUG-SJC route?

bigfoot0503 wrote:

PDX757 wrote:

bigfoot0503 wrote:

t's quite likely most passengers flying in and out of Eugene notice the different aircraft. With the introduction of larger aircraft the likely result will be increased passenger numbers for United, perhaps capturing those travelers who normally have a choice in their routing or in using a different airline. On the same note, ultimately will this move by United chip away at Alaska's market share percentage at EUG. With three cities served from EUG...one as you pointed out being a California market...is Alaska willing to lose a percentage of the airport passenger yield they have enjoyed for many years? I believe the last Bureau of Transportation Statistic for Eugene indicated that Alaska/Horizon had a 35% share of the market, (May 2016-April 2017).

If pax do notice and care about the type of aircraft used, whether it's a Q400 or a mainline jet, I would be surprised if AS had the available aircraft or even the interest to send them to EUG. They seem to have bigger fish to fry with the acquisition of VX. The flight from EUG-PDX/SEA is pretty short and connections are good. I could see AS adding LAX-EUG with a 175 to start.

I would agree regarding the PDX & SEA flights...however might they put a 175 on the EUG-SJC route?

I'm curious as to what's going to happen with the expansion plans AAG has for QX since they seem to be having a hard time finding enough pilots. They may wind up with some 175s all dressed up with nowhere to go.

bigfoot0503 wrote:

I was unaware until recently that the Eugene Airport had completed an expansion and rehab of their passenger terminal in early 2017. With the increased passenger numbers that the Eugene Airport has experienced it would appear that this expansion was quite timely and necessary. Perhaps EUG will break the one million mark for passengers in 2017?
https://www.eugene-or.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=2863

Also Medford Airport said they will reach one million passengers in 2017. Airports add both departing and arriving passengers together.

bigfoot0503 wrote:

PDX757 wrote:

bigfoot0503 wrote:

t's quite likely most passengers flying in and out of Eugene notice the different aircraft. With the introduction of larger aircraft the likely result will be increased passenger numbers for United, perhaps capturing those travelers who normally have a choice in their routing or in using a different airline. On the same note, ultimately will this move by United chip away at Alaska's market share percentage at EUG. With three cities served from EUG...one as you pointed out being a California market...is Alaska willing to lose a percentage of the airport passenger yield they have enjoyed for many years? I believe the last Bureau of Transportation Statistic for Eugene indicated that Alaska/Horizon had a 35% share of the market, (May 2016-April 2017).

If pax do notice and care about the type of aircraft used, whether it's a Q400 or a mainline jet, I would be surprised if AS had the available aircraft or even the interest to send them to EUG. They seem to have bigger fish to fry with the acquisition of VX. The flight from EUG-PDX/SEA is pretty short and connections are good. I could see AS adding LAX-EUG with a 175 to start.

I would agree regarding the PDX & SEA flights...however might they put a 175 on the EUG-SJC route?

The drain from AS to UA has already begun (reposting the link from earlier in the thread - UA moved more people through EUG than AS in June): http://registerguard.com/rg/news/local/ ... s.html.csp

Anyhow... EUG-SJC seems like a candidate for a 175 if they want more of that sweet delicious Silicon Valley money. That or SEA, now that DL is competing on that route. Surely at least some pax will notice the difference between an RJ and the Q400 when the latter has no first class, no meal service, seats that don't recline, a slower cruise speed, no sink in the lavatory, no jetway, no roller bags in the bins........

Did a quick search and couldn't find anything, but it looks like a taxiway renovation on ALPHA is in progress at EUG? If so, are 34L/16R being used? I was only out there briefly and didn't see any arrivals/departures.

Thanks!

m0ssy wrote:

Did a quick search and couldn't find anything, but it looks like a taxiway renovation on ALPHA is in progress at EUG? If so, are 34L/16R being used? I was only out there briefly and didn't see any arrivals/departures.

Thanks!

Not sure about the runway usage question you posed. I do know that the rehab on taxiway Alpha was partially funded by the US DOT. I believe it was PDX & EUG as the only Oregon airports to receive the particular grant that is funding the EUG work. That rehab also falls right in-line with EUG airport's renovation of their terminal building.
https://www.eugene-or.gov/3644/Taxiway- ... on-Project

bigfoot0503 wrote:

m0ssy wrote:

Did a quick search and couldn't find anything, but it looks like a taxiway renovation on ALPHA is in progress at EUG? If so, are 34L/16R being used? I was only out there briefly and didn't see any arrivals/departures.

Thanks!

Not sure about the runway usage question you posed. I do know that the rehab on taxiway Alpha was partially funded by the US DOT. I believe it was PDX & EUG as the only Oregon airports to receive the particular grant that is funding the EUG work. That rehab also falls right in-line with EUG airport's renovation of their terminal building.
https://www.eugene-or.gov/3644/Taxiway- ... on-Project

Much appreciated. Embarrassed I didn't find that myself.

jbpdx wrote:

Delta is using 757s--exclusively some days--between Portland and Minneapolis this summer.

It appears the majority of the DL PDX-MSP flights this summer have been on B757 equipment. Two areas of note; the midday flight from MSP to PDX and return has been operating with a B757-300. For anyone who has flown on this aircraft or seen one...they are a unique looking "stretch" model of the B757. I particularly like the DL setup on the 757-300. I flew on one in January 2017 from ATL to PDX; the aircraft seems more spacious then other models, whether that is the case or just a perception I rather do enjoy seeing the 757-300 series in Portland. The other observation as to this summer's PDX flight schedule is that Delta has been operating one of their trans-con B757-200 models into PDX from JFK and return. From the schedule it would appear that the flight only uses the different model (75S) on Wednesdays (Delta flight 527 PDX-JFK). The flight operates as Delta 2919 JFK-PDX also on Wednesdays. These particular 757 models utilize a fully lie-flat seat in first class and were really promoted recently on DL routes out of BOS & JFK to the west coast, in particular, SEA, SFO & LAX. It's great that PDX has one of the trans-con 757's on this summer's flight schedule. Not sure if this will be a one time deal for this summer only or might we see a return next summer? The summer of 2016 had Delta flying a B767 between JFK-PDX and return...so I suppose time will tell what we might see in future scheduling.