I'm posting this because it's relevant to Portland as another market where Icelandair has made significant increases in service:
http://www.seattletimes.com/life/travel ... e-airport/

I've heard the same thing from other travelers using Icelandair as a transfer point to get to Europe. It sounds like the KEF is really struggling to meet the increased demands.

PDX March statistics have been posted. 7% increase for March 2017 vs March 2016. Quite impressive growth we are seeing. YTD we are up 5.2%.

https://popcdn.azureedge.net/pdfs/Mar2017webstats.pdf

Why is it growing so much, is it because the sheer amount of population growth in the area, evolving economy, etc?

flyboy80 wrote:

Why is it growing so much, is it because the sheer amount of population growth in the area, evolving economy, etc?

Yes to both of the reasons you mention. Also the growth in tourism has been very strong. It's now an $11B/yr industry in Oregon.

Updated images and information on the CC-E extension at PDX:

https://popcdn.azureedge.net/pdfs/PDXNe ... ancing.pdf

lhpdx wrote:

Updated images and information on the CC-E extension at PDX:

https://popcdn.azureedge.net/pdfs/PDXNe ... ancing.pdf

Even with some Q400 flying being replaced by E175, closing the A gates seems like it'd leave little room for the still substantial Q400 flying 3-5+ years from now. There are 12 gates now; surely they'll still need 6-10 in the future, while that image suggests there'll be two.

ucdtim17 wrote:

lhpdx wrote:

Updated images and information on the CC-E extension at PDX:

https://popcdn.azureedge.net/pdfs/PDXNe ... ancing.pdf

Even with some Q400 flying being replaced by E175, closing the A gates seems like it'd leave little room for the still substantial Q400 flying 3-5+ years from now. There are 12 gates now; surely they'll still need 6-10 in the future, while that image suggests there'll be two.

Hey lhpdx, thanks for posting this. I was wondering when we'd finally see something new. I gotta say, I kinda agree with ucdtim17's comment that it doesn't seem like they're leaving a lot of room for prop operations with this plan. I generally assume that PNW destinations are going to stay on the Q for the long term. I'm thinking of: SEA, GEG, BLI, YVR, PSC, EUG, RDM, BOI, MFR... Does seem a lot of flights for two ground gates. I think someone may have told me they could use the Qs at gates if necessary. I do know that PenAir operates out of the B gates currently. You walk down the jetway, then onto a ramp down to the tarmac. Kinda silly.

Airnerd wrote:

ucdtim17 wrote:

lhpdx wrote:

Updated images and information on the CC-E extension at PDX:

https://popcdn.azureedge.net/pdfs/PDXNe ... ancing.pdf

Even with some Q400 flying being replaced by E175, closing the A gates seems like it'd leave little room for the still substantial Q400 flying 3-5+ years from now. There are 12 gates now; surely they'll still need 6-10 in the future, while that image suggests there'll be two.

Hey lhpdx, thanks for posting this. I was wondering when we'd finally see something new. I gotta say, I kinda agree with ucdtim17's comment that it doesn't seem like they're leaving a lot of room for prop operations with this plan. I generally assume that PNW destinations are going to stay on the Q for the long term. I'm thinking of: SEA, GEG, BLI, YVR, PSC, EUG, RDM, BOI, MFR... Does seem a lot of flights for two ground gates. I think someone may have told me they could use the Qs at gates if necessary. I do know that PenAir operates out of the B gates currently. You walk down the jetway, then onto a ramp down to the tarmac. Kinda silly.

OAK has a ramp from the normal jetway as well. So that could work, but as QX is going to have a significant Q400/future turboprop operation at PDX for the foreseeable future, you'd think they'd design gates optimized for that.

I had never transferred between D/E to C in the past at PDX. Notice the new (had never noticed before) path from C to D/E near the Security area. Also, noticed that the exit point from C is closed near Security area and we have to go all the way the MAX gates to get to Baggage Claim. When did this change happen?

nmraja wrote:

I had never transferred between D/E to C in the past at PDX. Notice the new (had never noticed before) path from C to D/E near the Security area. Also, noticed that the exit point from C is closed near Security area and we have to go all the way the MAX gates to get to Baggage Claim. When did this change happen?

The connector between D and C was built maybe 10 years ago. It's a great help as you can get to the entire terminal within the secured area - excellent for transfers and excellent for choosing the shorter security line.

Also, you can exit from D/E or A/B/C. the exits now go directly to the ticketing area of the airport instead of into the mess of the security lines. It's working really well in my opinion. Here's a map with the two exits clearly shown: http://www.flypdx.com/PDX/TerminalMap. This change was just made in January 2017.

AA is adding a 2nd flight to CLT instead of starting MIA? JetBlue should get on FLL soon.

Airnerd wrote:

The connector between D and C was built maybe 10 years ago. It's a great help as you can get to the entire terminal within the secured area - excellent for transfers and excellent for choosing the shorter security line.

Also, you can exit from D/E or A/B/C. the exits now go directly to the ticketing area of the airport instead of into the mess of the security lines. It's working really well in my opinion. Here's a map with the two exits clearly shown: http://www.flypdx.com/PDX/TerminalMap. This change was just made in January 2017.

Thanks for the details.

Just an FYI:

AS is going 2x daily on PDX-BOS starting this fall.
AS will also upgrade PDX-AUS to mainline 737 aircraft this fall. That frees up an e175 for a new market perhaps. PDX-DEN anyone?

ANA787 wrote:

AS adds PDX-DAL

ANA787 wrote:

Just an FYI:

AS is going 2x daily on PDX-BOS starting this fall.
AS will also upgrade PDX-AUS to mainline 737 aircraft this fall. That frees up an e175 for a new market perhaps. PDX-DEN anyone?

I must admit in the past, AS use to really piss me off over and over again neglecting the Portland market, but as of late I have nothing but respect and love for this airline...Thank you AS for being a well run airline and for returning the love to Portland by adding all of this new service..................

jbpdx wrote:

AA is adding a 2nd flight to CLT instead of starting MIA? JetBlue should get on FLL soon.

Evidently AA connections in CLT to Europe and the east coast are where most PDX originations are going. Must not be enough SA connections. But you can get pretty much anywhere through CLT and DFW southward. But I feel ya, must just not be enough to go N/S to MIA. Still think, eventually AS or AA will pull the trigger. B6 to FLL, with the cruise traffic, plus to the Caribbean, you would think is smart, but the schedulers are smarter. If/when the traffic is there, it will come. Could be a cat/mouse thing, where B6 wants to start FLL, but thinks AS will immediately announce, and kill whatever profit remains.

I know I've said this at least five times, but these adds in capacity out of PDX are amazing to me. I know to some extent United has pulled back from recent years, but with all of the new markets, frequency increases, etc I'm really impressed. As said before most of this seems stimulated by the local Oregon economic environment and tourism. To an extent I know there are some connecting passengers intra-pacific northwest via AA/QX, but the consensus seems to be most of this new development is fueled nonetheless by Portland and the surround Oregon/Washington economies.

Does anyone know why the Southwest jet has been parked at Atlantic aviation for quite some time. There is no maintenance going on, is it a spare that perhaps they placed at PDX for the region. It's parked among the other aircraft, not like a typical charter.

PDXPOL wrote:

Does anyone know why the Southwest jet has been parked at Atlantic aviation for quite some time. There is no maintenance going on, is it a spare that perhaps they placed at PDX for the region. It's parked among the other aircraft, not like a typical charter.

https://airwaysmag.com/airchive/southwe ... eing-737-5

That plane has actually been sitting out there for a while..I think it might actually have a new owner since Southwest is getting rid of their 737-500's..................

PDXPOL wrote:

Does anyone know why the Southwest jet has been parked at Atlantic aviation for quite some time. There is no maintenance going on, is it a spare that perhaps they placed at PDX for the region. It's parked among the other aircraft, not like a typical charter.

If you notice, the "SOUTHWEST" on the tail has been removed.

pdxav8r wrote:

Evidently AA connections in CLT to Europe and the east coast are where most PDX originations are going. Must not be enough SA connections. But you can get pretty much anywhere through CLT and DFW southward. But I feel ya, must just not be enough to go N/S to MIA. Still think, eventually AS or AA will pull the trigger. B6 to FLL, with the cruise traffic, plus to the Caribbean, you would think is smart, but the schedulers are smarter. If/when the traffic is there, it will come. Could be a cat/mouse thing, where B6 wants to start FLL, but thinks AS will immediately announce, and kill whatever profit remains.

Lots of points there. I'm guessing the top destinations on AA to/from PDX thru CLT would be Florida/Caribbean. Portland is already overly dependent on Alaska and its prominence here does make other airlines hesitant. But PDX-MIA is an obvious AA route, PDX-FLL JetBlue. Alaska would have no onward traffic from South Florida as AA (Caribbean and South America) and B6 (Caribbean) both have. Making passengers going PDX-South Florida connect thru CLT (or DFW or ORD) is similar to the inconvenience that passengers experienced to/from Orlando (thru SLC or IAH or DEN or PHX or ATL or CLT) before Alaska finally added the nonstop.

PDX-South Florida has to be one of--if not the--top unserved domestic routes now. And Tampa is talking about wanting a nonstop to Portland. South Florida would surely happen before that.

I doubt many connect PDX to/from Europe thru CLT: e.g. PDX-LHR is (Great Circle) 4,914 mi n/s, 4,918 mi thru KEF on Icelandair, 6,274 thru CLT. Much quicker to go north than southeast to Europe from Portland.

flyoregon wrote:

PDXPOL wrote:

Does anyone know why the Southwest jet has been parked at Atlantic aviation for quite some time. There is no maintenance going on, is it a spare that perhaps they placed at PDX for the region. It's parked among the other aircraft, not like a typical charter.

If you notice, the "SOUTHWEST" on the tail has been removed.

Just found out that it is being sold to a charter company. Must be doing the transaction in Oregon to avoid taxes.

I traveled AMS-PDX segment at the end of December 2016 and it was a full flight on A330. Is the down gauge related to the LHR flight or possibly a new CDG flight coming up?

How do the Alaska flights to KOA and LIH do? Are they truly seasonal markets, or is that just the way it works out with AS schedules and for Portland?

nmraja wrote:

I traveled AMS-PDX segment at the end of December 2016 and it was a full flight on A330. Is the down gauge related to the LHR flight or possibly a new CDG flight coming up?

The LHR flight is only seasonal. Not sure if Delta has the capability from an equipment or slot standpoint to fly it year round? I've LHR is the largest European market from PDX, but without a lot of connections on either end I don't see how it would work in the slower season. As far as CDG I've wondered the same thing, but doesn't that only duplicate the connections already offered on KLM/ ST via AMS? The big question I have is NRT vs ICN with the new KE partnership. Obviously Delta customers traveling to China can easily connect in SEA, or depending on the destination, double-connect via SEA/ICN w/KE. I've heard rumors the PDX-NRT is not performing very well anymore, but I hardly know if its the truth.

flyoregon wrote:

How do the Alaska flights to KOA and LIH do? Are they truly seasonal markets, or is that just the way it works out with AS schedules and for Portland?

We fly either PDX-LIH or LIH-PDX yearly & the planes are 100% full & fares start $500.00+ r/t. With zero competition, they do well. I would like it if they kept them both yearly instead of seasonal, but we just go during the time that AS operates the n/s. I think summer they could do well with the flights.

I've noticed that there seems to be a number of KS ferries down to the Aurora airport. What's the reason for this? Maintenance?
Apologies if this has been asked before!

PDX757 wrote:

I've noticed that there seems to be a number of KS ferries down to the Aurora airport. What's the reason for this? Maintenance?
Apologies if this has been asked before!

Not sure, but damn they have a lot of cancellations. Have no idea either, if they are mostly mechanical issues or weather...they seem to have the highest percentages of cancellations of any airline at PDX. Are the Saab's that awful? For their low frequencies to minimal destinations, would suck to depend on them. Only a couple multiple frequencies in their schedule means you would most likely be spending 12-24 hours at PDX if you are transiting to a cancelled flight.

pdxav8r wrote:

Not sure, but damn they have a lot of cancellations. Have no idea either, if they are mostly mechanical issues or weather...they seem to have the highest percentages of cancellations of any airline at PDX. Are the Saab's that awful? For their low frequencies to minimal destinations, would suck to depend on them. Only a couple multiple frequencies in their schedule means you would most likely be spending 12-24 hours at PDX if you are transiting to a cancelled flight.

One would be better off renting a car and driving with that sort of delay.

I was told that KS had their maintenance at Aurora but was finding space at PDX; which was to improve things. Ferrying to UAO for simple parts that didn't have so much as closet space at PDX was nuts. But I haven't seen much improvement. It appeared they stepped up their game with the PDX-CEC flights, finally realizing they have an EAS obligation to complete those flights after an appalling few months. They dropped frequencies at LMT, ACV and RDD to improve performance, but they still seem to be having a hard time. CEC sees several tag-on trips (PDX-LMT-CEC, PDX-CEC-ACV, CEC-RDD-PDX, etc) to make up some gaps, but there are still to many outright cancellations. Add to that, they seem to have dropped out of live flight tracking on FlightAware and Flightradar24, so you have no idea if the plane is actually coming or not: KS does a terrible job of keeping up their Flifo in their website, so there is no telling whether one should trek out to the airport or not.
Trouble is the EAS contract at CEC is up for renewal. KS is reapplying and the better option if only they could make schedule. However Boutique is applying too, though their application offers a variety of CEC-PDX frequencies, or, CEC-OAK frequencies, or a combination of CEC-PDX/OAK frequencies; none of which will have interline capabilities, nor arrivals/departures in main terminals. Single-engine fleet: PC-12 or C208. Bad time for WhenAir to still have ongoing issues. I wrote and spoke in KS' favor two years ago, but I'm on the fence now. And still, I book my flights out of MFR, just to be sure.

Wingtips56 wrote:

I was told that KS had their maintenance at Aurora but was finding space at PDX; which was to improve things. Ferrying to UAO for simple parts that didn't have so much as closet space at PDX was nuts. But I haven't seen much improvement. It appeared they stepped up their game with the PDX-CEC flights, finally realizing they have an EAS obligation to complete those flights after an appalling few months. They dropped frequencies at LMT, ACV and RDD to improve performance, but they still seem to be having a hard time. CEC sees several tag-on trips (PDX-LMT-CEC, PDX-CEC-ACV, CEC-RDD-PDX, etc) to make up some gaps, but there are still to many outright cancellations. Add to that, they seem to have dropped out of live flight tracking on FlightAware and Flightradar24, so you have no idea if the plane is actually coming or not: KS does a terrible job of keeping up their Flifo in their website, so there is no telling whether one should trek out to the airport or not.
Trouble is the EAS contract at CEC is up for renewal. KS is reapplying and the better option if only they could make schedule. However Boutique is applying too, though their application offers a variety of CEC-PDX frequencies, or, CEC-OAK frequencies, or a combination of CEC-PDX/OAK frequencies; none of which will have interline capabilities, nor arrivals/departures in main terminals. Single-engine fleet: PC-12 or C208. Bad time for WhenAir to still have ongoing issues. I wrote and spoke in KS' favor two years ago, but I'm on the fence now. And still, I book my flights out of MFR, just to be sure.

They are there.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/NLA196

32andBelow wrote:

They are there.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/NLA196

Who is Neiltown Air? Are they subbing for KS?

Wingtips56 wrote:

However Boutique is applying too, though their application offers a variety of CEC-PDX frequencies, or, CEC-OAK frequencies, or a combination of CEC-PDX/OAK frequencies; none of which will have interline capabilities, nor arrivals/departures in main terminals.

I believe Boutique flies out of Terminal 1 at OAK for their Merced flights so I assume CEC would be the same

910A wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

They are there.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/NLA196

Who is Neiltown Air? Are they subbing for KS?

That's an additional, confusing item. Both PEN and NLA flights appear in the airport schedules. PEN now shows "Owner Unknown". NLA decodes as PenAir with Neiltown as the owner. But neither set of flights updates progress in FlightAware and Flightradar24. Some of the "NLA" flights show in Flightradar as blips with "No Call Sign" and incomplete progress info. No PEN flights nationwide are showing flight progress.

--
Anyway, ucdtim17, that info on OAK T1 is good to know. However, if they don't interline, you have to go out front to claim and recheck your bags; normal for WN connections, I suppose.

lhpdx wrote:

Updated images and information on the CC-E extension at PDX:

https://popcdn.azureedge.net/pdfs/PDXNe ... ancing.pdf

I feel the Port is wasting a lot of money by not going entirely to common use which allows for much better asset utilization. Airline specific gates only serve as barriers to entry for new airlines and don't serve the public good.

I am also disappointed that the Port didn't address the current solution for international arrivals. It is a pain as a passenger to have to collect your luggage and then take it with you on a bus. It would have made more sense to convert the current United gates to international and make the investments in moving the Federal customs and immigrate to that area. Domestic gates could have been added to D later on and more international gates could be added onto E where they are expanding now.

If both CUTE were enacted and the international gates were moved investment could have been limited and balancing can easily be done on a gate by gate basis. There are very few connecting passengers at PDX and those few that do wouldn't have to walk more than 10 minutes to get from gate to gate anyway.

PavlovsDog wrote:

lhpdx wrote:

Updated images and information on the CC-E extension at PDX:

https://popcdn.azureedge.net/pdfs/PDXNe ... ancing.pdf

I feel the Port is wasting a lot of money by not going entirely to common use which allows for much better asset utilization. Airline specific gates only serve as barriers to entry for new airlines and don't serve the public good.

I am also disappointed that the Port didn't address the current solution for international arrivals. It is a pain as a passenger to have to collect your luggage and then take it with you on a bus. It would have made more sense to convert the current United gates to international and make the investments in moving the Federal customs and immigrate to that area. Domestic gates could have been added to D later on and more international gates could be added onto E where they are expanding now.

If both CUTE were enacted and the international gates were moved investment could have been limited and balancing can easily be done on a gate by gate basis. There are very few connecting passengers at PDX and those few that do wouldn't have to walk more than 10 minutes to get from gate to gate anyway.

They didn't do that because it makes sense...the Port's a government entity.

Wingtips56 wrote:

910A wrote:

32andBelow wrote:

They are there.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/NLA196

Who is Neiltown Air? Are they subbing for KS?

That's an additional, confusing item. Both PEN and NLA flights appear in the airport schedules. PEN now shows "Owner Unknown". NLA decodes as PenAir with Neiltown as the owner. But neither set of flights updates progress in FlightAware and Flightradar24. Some of the "NLA" flights show in Flightradar as blips with "No Call Sign" and incomplete progress info. No PEN flights nationwide are showing flight progress.

--
Anyway, ucdtim17, that info on OAK T1 is good to know. However, if they don't interline, you have to go out front to claim and recheck your bags; normal for WN connections, I suppose.

PEN changed their FAA identifier to NLA. Anything else is an error from Flight aware or FR24 not updating their mapping/database.

32andBelow wrote:

Wingtips56 wrote:

910A wrote:

Who is Neiltown Air? Are they subbing for KS?

That's an additional, confusing item. Both PEN and NLA flights appear in the airport schedules. PEN now shows "Owner Unknown". NLA decodes as PenAir with Neiltown as the owner. But neither set of flights updates progress in FlightAware and Flightradar24. Some of the "NLA" flights show in Flightradar as blips with "No Call Sign" and incomplete progress info. No PEN flights nationwide are showing flight progress.

--
Anyway, ucdtim17, that info on OAK T1 is good to know. However, if they don't interline, you have to go out front to claim and recheck your bags; normal for WN connections, I suppose.

PEN changed their FAA identifier to NLA. Anything else is an error from Flight aware or FR24 not updating their mapping/database.

Thank you for that information..

Speaking of PenAir, The (CEC) Border Coast Regional Airport Authority renewed KS's EAS contract for another two years in the CEC-PDX market. I don't know if that needs to be blessed with DOT's holy water on a renewal (as with the original assignment) or if this is complete with the local authority.
Article: http://www.triplicate.com/news/5291367- ... ews-penair

PavlovsDog wrote:

lhpdx wrote:

Updated images and information on the CC-E extension at PDX:

https://popcdn.azureedge.net/pdfs/PDXNe ... ancing.pdf

I feel the Port is wasting a lot of money by not going entirely to common use which allows for much better asset utilization. Airline specific gates only serve as barriers to entry for new airlines and don't serve the public good.

I am also disappointed that the Port didn't address the current solution for international arrivals. It is a pain as a passenger to have to collect your luggage and then take it with you on a bus. It would have made more sense to convert the current United gates to international and make the investments in moving the Federal customs and immigrate to that area. Domestic gates could have been added to D later on and more international gates could be added onto E where they are expanding now.

If both CUTE were enacted and the international gates were moved investment could have been limited and balancing can easily be done on a gate by gate basis. There are very few connecting passengers at PDX and those few that do wouldn't have to walk more than 10 minutes to get from gate to gate anyway.

Since the largest planes serving PDX are typically the international flights, I think they want to keep them at the end of the D concourse. The bus is a little bit of a hassle, but I've never waited more than a couple of minutes for it.

Wingtips56 wrote:

Speaking of PenAir, The (CEC) Border Coast Regional Airport Authority renewed KS's EAS contract for another two years in the CEC-PDX market. I don't know if that needs to be blessed with DOT's holy water on a renewal (as with the original assignment) or if this is complete with the local authority.
Article: http://www.triplicate.com/news/5291367- ... ews-penair

The feds normally go with what the locals want.

Airnerd wrote:

PavlovsDog wrote:

lhpdx wrote:

Updated images and information on the CC-E extension at PDX:

https://popcdn.azureedge.net/pdfs/PDXNe ... ancing.pdf

I feel the Port is wasting a lot of money by not going entirely to common use which allows for much better asset utilization. Airline specific gates only serve as barriers to entry for new airlines and don't serve the public good.

I am also disappointed that the Port didn't address the current solution for international arrivals. It is a pain as a passenger to have to collect your luggage and then take it with you on a bus. It would have made more sense to convert the current United gates to international and make the investments in moving the Federal customs and immigrate to that area. Domestic gates could have been added to D later on and more international gates could be added onto E where they are expanding now.

If both CUTE were enacted and the international gates were moved investment could have been limited and balancing can easily be done on a gate by gate basis. There are very few connecting passengers at PDX and those few that do wouldn't have to walk more than 10 minutes to get from gate to gate anyway.

Since the largest planes serving PDX are typically the international flights, I think they want to keep them at the end of the D concourse. The bus is a little bit of a hassle, but I've never waited more than a couple of minutes for it.

Given the increasing numbers of elderly and obese travelers I feel the bus is also an HSE risk in addition to being an unnecessary inconvenience. If you're a business person with just a little luggage it is no big deal but it you have a lot of luggage it is a pain. I feel especially bad for those traveling with small children. There are way too many things to juggle.

The international arrivals area does not give a good first impression to Portland. Portland wants to the city that works and a place where good enough is not good enough. Portland (and PDX) should continue to strive to be better than others and not just settle for adequate.

[twoid][/twoid]

Wingtips56 wrote:

Speaking of PenAir, The (CEC) Border Coast Regional Airport Authority renewed KS's EAS contract for another two years in the CEC-PDX market. I don't know if that needs to be blessed with DOT's holy water on a renewal (as with the original assignment) or if this is complete with the local authority.
Article: http://www.triplicate.com/news/5291367- ... ews-penair

The DOT normally goes with community support but can override if they want. Recently a community in the mid west recommended a 7 million contract and the DOT went to the next bidder that had a more reasonable bid.

32andBelow wrote:

[twoid][/twoid]

Wingtips56 wrote:

Speaking of PenAir, The (CEC) Border Coast Regional Airport Authority renewed KS's EAS contract for another two years in the CEC-PDX market. I don't know if that needs to be blessed with DOT's holy water on a renewal (as with the original assignment) or if this is complete with the local authority.
Article: http://www.triplicate.com/news/5291367- ... ews-penair

The DOT normally goes with community support but can override if they want. Recently a community in the mid west recommended a 7 million contract and the DOT went to the next bidder that had a more reasonable bid.

I know. TSA went with the community decision for CEC two years ago without question, and I'm sure the rival bids being ridiculously high made it a no-brainer. (SeaPort wanted more than double what KS wanted, with just the C208 service.) What I don't/didn't know is if the community approval on a renewal is still subject to that DOT review and potential override, therefore still pending some sort of hearing and finalization, or if the community decision on renewing an existing service stands alone. Is it a done deal at this point?

Just out of curiosity, where does Boutique arrive/depart at PDX, should they have gotten the decision? If they aren't screened at PDT, then I can guess they at least don't arrive in the PDX concourse. I wonder if they would drop TSA screening at CEC. I'd hate for that to happen and then go through what LMT went through trying to get it re-established down the road. TSA went on hiatus at CEC in the time between when OO/UAx pulled out and KS came in, but it was known in advance that would be happening. (The TSA folks either took time off of pulled shifts down at ACV.) When OO dropped LMT, there was no replacement service on the horizon, so TSA picked up all their toys and called it quits there, resisting coming back when KS wanted to fly it.

Does Boutique interline with anybody?

Wingtips56 wrote:

Does Boutique interline with anybody?

http://tribwekchron.com/2016/03/imperia ... r-service/

Information provided in the article about EAS service in Imperial County from last year.

“Boutique Air’s proposal was supported by the County of Imperial Board of Supervisors; however, Boutique Air does not currently have interline agreements in place with larger air carriers at LAX and required the highest subsidy rate of the three proposals submitted for consideration, The Department of Transportation stated in its report.

On there website, it states that you have to collect your baggage and recheck it on the connecting airline..So I guessing the answer is No.

Thanks!

Boutique said they would try to be secured in their proposal for CEC. At the end of the day they have no codeshares and no I terlines. Any passenger would have to buy 2 tickets to connect. As much as the town says they need southbound service. 75 percent of the passengers are going places other than California.

PDX April 2017
+6.8% (1,507,465, 1,411,130)
YTD +5.6%
International: +24.2%
YTD +10.6%

jbpdx wrote:

PDX April 2017
+6.8% (1,507,465, 1,411,130)
YTD +5.6%
International: +24.2%
YTD +10.6%

Good stuff...maybe 19mm this year?

Been pretty dead around here as far as rumors or new service announcements...anybody hearing anything worth arguing about?