Airliners.net

airbazar wrote:

Stockpiling? SQ only has 7 or ders for the A359ULR. We know for a fact that LAX and NYC will take 5 of those which leaves maybe 2 more destinations at most. I'm not sure that BOS would be one. SFO would come first, for sure. I guess one could argue that the 777-9 is an ULH aircraft but it still doesn't have the range to fly SIN-U.S. non-stop.

39 Boeings ordered today. And I was not necessarily declaring that they'd try flying all that way non-stop, but rather via some intermediate European city like they did (AMS) when I flew them in 2001.

VS4ever wrote:

Domestically, B6 starts ATL and have already started LGA, however I don't know how much that will increase ridership vs a market shift, time will tell..

Missed this discussion on the increase in pax... I wonder if we tend to discount the impact of domestic routes on overall numbers.

With Delta adding 2x TPA-BOS and B6 adding 5x BOS-ATL that's 1000+ seats a day.. I did some rough math (75% of BOS-ATL and 88% of BOS-TPA due to start date) and if these routes average 80% LF you get about 450K passengers. And these connecting onto other flights (i.e BOS-DXB or BOS-AMS) also will be counted again.

There's been a lot of discussion in the past about opening a route to India from Boston. Could Singapore Airlines make a route such as Singapore-Bombay/Delhi-Boston work?

adamh8297 wrote:

VS4ever wrote:

Domestically, B6 starts ATL and have already started LGA, however I don't know how much that will increase ridership vs a market shift, time will tell..

Missed this discussion on the increase in pax... I wonder if we tend to discount the impact of domestic routes on overall numbers.

With Delta adding 2x TPA-BOS and B6 adding 5x BOS-ATL that's 1000+ seats a day.. I did some rough math (75% of BOS-ATL and 88% of BOS-TPA due to start date) and if these routes average 80% LF you get about 450K passengers. And these connecting onto other flights (i.e BOS-DXB or BOS-AMS) also will be counted again.

this is true, I will be interested to see if B6 can get 80% on BOS-ATL vs the mighty gorilla, but your point is well made. To hit 5% growth, BOS needs around 1.8m pax count additionally over 2016 (today's storms won't help them get there!). With 450K pax and say 20% connecting that's another 90K and that's probably on the conservative side. so that's potentially 500K+ right there. so I think 5% uplift is perfectly doable 8.5% would need over 3m and unless Europe kicks back up, i am not sure i can see that happening. But on this type of situation, I will happily be proven wrong.
Also can't forget CX going daily, that could bring another 200K to the party.
So 17 has a path, the question is how steep will it be.

talking of connecting opportunities, this little nutmeg crossed the airlineroute.net wire today. TAP increasing B6 codeshares with LGA and ATL specifically called out.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... s-in-1q17/

airbazar wrote:

chrisnh wrote:

With Singapore apparently planning to stockpile new ULH aircraft, can any of them reach Boston and would it make a smart route for them?

Stockpiling? SQ only has 7 orders for the A359ULR. We know for a fact that LAX and NYC will take 5 of those which leaves maybe 2 more destinations at most. I'm not sure that BOS would be one. SFO would come first, for sure. I guess one could argue that the 777-9 is an ULH aircraft but it still doesn't have the range to fly SIN-U.S. non-stop.

33lspotter wrote:

I would be curious to see what the PDEW counts are, as well as what destinations (from SIN) that BOS passengers would be going to that aren't already accessible through PVG/HKG/etc.

Once upon a time Indonesia had a significant contingent of students in the Boston area.

Isn't UA running a 789 on their SFO-SIN route? I thought I read on a thread months back that the 789 has the range to make SFO-SIN-SFO both ways with a full load of passengers, but a small hit to cargo capacity. Isn't the 777-9 supposed to have longer range than the 789?

One more pt. to be considered is how long TK may continue operations to BOS because of the prevailing situation in Turkey. Fairly sure that the situation must have messed up tourism numbers to Istanbul and other places. I assume most folks who use IST as connection travel to Middle Eastern nations (likes of Syria, Lebanon etc.) - I do not think many folks use IST to trek to India. So it's possible there maybe a possible drop there too - albeit for a temporary timeframe until the situation improves (hopefully).

adamh8297 wrote:

If you read EK's reponse to subsidy claims http://content.emirates.com/downloads/e ... e_Main.pdf

Reviewing MIDT data - EK claims to have stimulated ASEAN (Burma to Indonesia) from 47K to 60K- 28% increase in their first year of BOS-DXB. So by 2015 SE Asia was over 80 PDEW.

Thank you. That's excellent. The problem for SQ is, and this is just my guess, that traffic is predominantly Y traffic and their A350ULR's will have very few Y seats, if any.
No other airplane in SQ's fleet, current or on order, can fly SIN-BOS non-stop. So they would have to have an intermediate stop, making it noncompetitive against Middle Eastern and East Asian carriers.

B752OS wrote:

Isn't UA running a 789 on their SFO-SIN route? I thought I read on a thread months back that the 789 has the range to make SFO-SIN-SFO both ways with a full load of passengers, but a small hit to cargo capacity. Isn't the 777-9 supposed to have longer range than the 789?

Both the 789 and A350 in their current respective configs take a hit in the Winter. IIRC, UA blocks 2 rows of seats. And SFO-SIN is about 1.5hrs shorter than BOS-SIN. The 777-9 does not have longer range than the 789. I think you are thinking about the 777-8.

VS4ever wrote:

talking of connecting opportunities, this little nutmeg crossed the airlineroute.net wire today. TAP increasing B6 codeshares with LGA and ATL specifically called out.
http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... s-in-1q17/

TP just reported a ridiculous 27% passenger growth for January 2017 (compared to Jan 2016), and attributes a lot of that growth to the U.S. market where passenger volume increases 222% and LF was 86%. Did I mention this was for January? There are "news" that they are leasing 3 A333's for the Summer season so it wouldn't shock me one bit if they increase capacity in BOS to at least a daily A333, if not more frequencies.

Does anyone know what Boston's numbers are to Geneva? That might be a viable intermediate stop to Singapore.

Geneva Boston ~34,000 PAX per annum, not stimulated by any non-stop
Geneva Singapore ~40,000 PAX, no stimulation
Both very high yield

Any idea on how that compares to Houston-Manchester-Singapore, pre-stimulation?

BOS-SIN seems like quite the long route. I know up until SQ stopped flying it, SIN-EWR was the longest in the world (since surpassed, I think). Does anybody know how this route would fare among the world's longest?

airbazar wrote:

adamh8297 wrote:

If you read EK's reponse to subsidy claims http://content.emirates.com/downloads/e ... e_Main.pdf

Reviewing MIDT data - EK claims to have stimulated ASEAN (Burma to Indonesia) from 47K to 60K- 28% increase in their first year of BOS-DXB. So by 2015 SE Asia was over 80 PDEW.

Thank you. That's excellent. The problem for SQ is, and this is just my guess, that traffic is predominantly Y traffic and their A350ULR's will have very few Y seats, if any.

Are they really considering not putting any Y seats on their A350's? That would certainly be an interesting config!

mikegigs wrote:

BOS-SIN seems like quite the long route. I know up until SQ stopped flying it, SIN-EWR was the longest in the world (since surpassed, I think). Does anybody know how this route would fare among the world's longest?

It has not been surpassed. SIN-EWR is 9543sm great circle. On the days when AI flies their longer distance (but shorter time) flight from DEL to SFO, they fly about 9400sm. Longest regularly scheduled flight right now is DOH-AKL 9032sm great circle. SIN-BOS is 9405sm and would be longest flight in the world (after SIN-NYC) if launched. Don't see it happening honestly.

BOS to SIN to Australia could work. I'm sure there is a fairly significant origin and destination market for Australia to Boston and that could help fill a SIN non stop flight.

tysmith95 wrote:

BOS to SIN to Australia could work. I'm sure there is a fairly significant origin and destination market for Australia to Boston and that could help fill a SIN non stop flight.

Going BOS-SIN-SYD/BNE/MEL vs. BOS-LAX-SYD/BNE/MEL adds over 2,500 miles each way. Personally, I would not want to tack roughly 5,000 miles onto an already long journey. Plenty of connecting opportunities to Australia and New Zealand via DFW/IAH/SFO/LAX.

Would it be nice to have a non-stop to SIN? Sure. But I just don't see it happening any time soon, if ever.

B752OS wrote:

tysmith95 wrote:

BOS to SIN to Australia could work. I'm sure there is a fairly significant origin and destination market for Australia to Boston and that could help fill a SIN non stop flight.

Going BOS-SIN-SYD/BNE/MEL vs. BOS-LAX-SYD/BNE/MEL adds over 2,500 miles each way. Personally, I would not want to tack roughly 5,000 miles onto an already long journey. Plenty of connecting opportunities to Australia and New Zealand via DFW/IAH/SFO/LAX.

Would it be nice to have a non-stop to SIN? Sure. But I just don't see it happening any time soon, if ever.

You got me thinking with that... if we figure enough PDEW, could QF do what they do to JFK and link via LAX, kind of like you mention, but on their own metal. i guess it depends if they have enough to make it work.

In reality the chances of additional HKG and potentially ICN are much more likely than SIN and Australia bound routes.

330west wrote:

Does anyone know what Boston's numbers are to Geneva? That might be a viable intermediate stop to Singapore.

Would SQ be allowed to operate via GVA ? SQ and LX each have a daily flight out of ZRH, so I don't know if the bilateral agreement between Singapore and Switzerland allows more than one destination in each country. AFAIK Singapore has not more than one commercial airport (correct me if I'm wrong ) and I doubt Switzerland or rather LX would be willing to let SQ serve 2 Swiss airports without getting some other benefits.

adamh8297 wrote:

KSBOS wrote:

YVR is supposed to happen this year with Air Canada/Rouge presumably with 319/320 aircraft.

Is that a rumbling you've heard... sounds like it could be summer seasonal though winter may have a peak for BOS-originating traffic going to Whistler?

Actually I did a job shadow a few months ago and the route developer for Massport stated nonstop service to YVR was in the works with 2 carriers (WS/AC). It sounded like year round. Also heard of 737 WestJet service maybe seasonally maybe year round. I haven't heard anything else new yet.

I would be thrilled if a YVR flight returned. I remember on a couple of occasions having the fortune to catch that rare unicorn of 1990s Logan – the Canadian A320. After AC bought CP the route was in pretty short order reduced to Summer seasonal and then for only a few weeks during peak cruise season before being axed. With recent attention brought to large amount of traffic between the two cities, it's not surprising that either or both airlines are looking at it.

I think WS seems likeliest to start this route. For starters, while a YVR link would almost directly overfly YYZ and YYC, their #1 and #2 largest hubs, respectively, WS is less dogmatic than Air Canada about funnelling people through hubs, especially YYZ and flies a healthy number of point-to-point services within Canada. The loads on the existing YYZ services seems healthy enough to take the hit from the loss of YVR-bound pax. In Air Canada's column is the fact that they are a better known entity in Boston and with most transborder routes, the flight would fall under the AC-UA JV, allowing United to provide additional marketing tools to Mileage Plus members in New England.

LH423

adamh8297 wrote:

VS4ever wrote:

Domestically, B6 starts ATL and have already started LGA, however I don't know how much that will increase ridership vs a market shift, time will tell..

Missed this discussion on the increase in pax... I wonder if we tend to discount the impact of domestic routes on overall numbers.

With Delta adding 2x TPA-BOS and B6 adding 5x BOS-ATL that's 1000+ seats a day.. I did some rough math (75% of BOS-ATL and 88% of BOS-TPA due to start date) and if these routes average 80% LF you get about 450K passengers. And these connecting onto other flights (i.e BOS-DXB or BOS-AMS) also will be counted again.

This is not to mention delta's massive upgauge and frequency adds this summer. The real question is if the boston market will expand for these flights or if the market share will simply adjust instead. That said, there is a chance for massive growth this summer.

hynithuchi wrote:

330west wrote:

Does anyone know what Boston's numbers are to Geneva? That might be a viable intermediate stop to Singapore.

Would SQ be allowed to operate via GVA ? SQ and LX each have a daily flight out of ZRH, so I don't know if the bilateral agreement between Singapore and Switzerland allows more than one destination in each country. AFAIK Singapore has not more than one commercial airport (correct me if I'm wrong ) and I doubt Switzerland or rather LX would be willing to let SQ serve 2 Swiss airports without getting some other benefits.

Good point. I hadn't given much thought to what the bilateral would allow but rather simply what markets might work best for a one-stop routing.

Would it make sense for either AF or LH to knock off one of their daily flights and up gauge the single flight to a A380? Or are they both carrying too many passengers per day to accomplish that?

I think with AF it would be too much premium lift and not enough for LH.

hynithuchi wrote:

Would SQ be allowed to operate via GVA ?

I would think so. Switzerland is very liberal in these things. There's a long list of airlines that have flown and continue to fly 5th freedom routes from ZRH and GVA. Even SQ has done it in the past, back in the glory days of the 743/744. I think they had SIN-ZRH-AMS, SIN-ZRH-CPH, SIN-DXB-ZRH. I believe currently KU flies KWI-GVA-FRA and KE flies ICN-VIE-ZRH-ICN. So lots of examples.

chrisnh wrote:

Would it make sense for either AF or LH to knock off one of their daily flights and up gauge the single flight to a A380? Or are they both carrying too many passengers per day to accomplish that?

I think 330west has a point, CDG could overall easily collapse into a single daily run on a 388, but it would kill off a bunch of premium seats. AF is an interesting one, because there is also AA and DL on the route. YTD the market is at 473 PDEW, although a 12 month rolling pitches that closer to 515 if you include AA in the mix, if you do not you are looking at around 407 PDEW during that period. AF's 388's haul 516 in their config, so plenty of room, but the premium is the killer, AF have capacity for approx 80-120 per day with their current fleet mix DL is another 30. so 110-150 currently. AF's 388's have 80 business and 9 first. so a big drop in premium to move to that scenario, despite having the overall capacity to do so.


LH gets around 360 PDEW on FRA, and has approximately 130-140 premium seats available at 2x daily. their 388's have either 78 or 92, so again a big drop, however with them bringing the 359 in after March that will drop the premium seats by 30 on a single flight alone, then you are starting to get really close with the 388 numbers to turn it into a single 388 daily. Maybe the 359 introduction and resultant drop in capacity is moving towards having the single flight. But the question with both of these airlines is, will sending a 388 to BOS be worth it in the grand scheme of things, both airlines are struggling to see places to use them, to be honest it's very similar situation to that of EK, does it really make sense to bring 1 whalejet, when a double provides more options. BOS just doesn't have the frequency of a NYC to warrant the 388 on these routes and I am not sure it ever will, which is a shame.

These are just ramblings and i might be way off the mark, but the logic just seems to suggest unless the premium traffic is not as strong as we think/hope it is to warrant a switch,

Replying to the AF A380 talk...

This summer AF has 1x77W and 1XA332 and DL has 1X76W but there's the item no one has noticed yet - The AF and DL flights leave within minutes of each other so they are connecting to the same bank in CDG with the later AF flight connecting to another bank. Its metal neutral so you have to always factor in what DL is doing if AF were to make a decision on an upguage or dropping a flight for the whale

They could (if it works for DL) have the DL flight leave around 10-10:30PM to connect to the second CDG bank and have the whale come in for 7:15ish departure. As seen below it adds only 5 seats overall but loses 26 premium seats. Most of the seat class shift would be for the earlier bank. At the end of the day, DL and AF know more than we do about the loads splits between classes.



If DY were to come in on BOS-CDG - it would be interesting to see what the response would be if any. Do you have DL upgauge their flight or do you put an AF high density 77W or 772 in place of the A332.


Other topic - WS has an announcement at YUL this week. It appears to be expansion in Montreal and there's speculation on BOS-YUL on WS. Do they have gate space in A to run 3-5 flights a day on this route?

The LH 359 will be doing MUC, not FRA. And I think we can conclude that the backslide from 744 to A330 on the second FRA flight is testimony to weakness in the market...not that they planned to bring in the A380 to pair it with. The whole European market has been piecemealed out and fractured to such a degree that while the pie is the same psize, each player (because there are more of them) has less.

chrisnh wrote:

The LH 359 will be doing MUC, not FRA. And I think we can conclude that the backslide from 744 to A330 on the second FRA flight is testimony to weakness in the market...not that they planned to bring in the A380 to pair it with. The whole European market has been piecemealed out and fractured to such a degree that while the pie is the same psize, each player (because there are more of them) has less.

I completely agree that the market has been fractured by the additional entrants and routes and the likes of LH have taken the hit, however the overall pie has increased. 400K passengers in 2016 more than 2015 for Europe bound traffic and that's even with EK/QR and TK taking a bunch as part of the Middle East expansion, it's just that the map as you suggest looks a bit different to before.

For comparison, before the fracturing, say 2011 Europe did 2.9m, Middle East 0, Asia 0, Canada 570K
2016 ( 5 years later) Europe 3.4m, Middle East 656K, Asia 416K and Canada 878K.

The piece we will probably never know is, if the new routes had not come about, and let's focus on the Middle East piece here. would Europe have grown by over 1m passengers organically at 200K increase a year without that. that could be an interesting debate in itself.

I think yes. The Boston metro area has an economy that is robust and balanced, and was trending that way before all this new service came along. If there's a place we stole traffic from, it's JFK.

So today at WestJet, I have heard rumors that we will be getting new routes to BOS. From what I heard, it sounds like YUL-BOS is a likelihood since they have a huge announcement (I believe Monday). Also I have heard an extra flight to YHZ possibly or a new destination (YYC, YVR, YWG, YQB, YYT). I'm not sure if it will be Encore or Mainline but it would be nice to add a new city the list.

I don't know the frequency of the flights if it is YUL-BOS. I think it might be only 1x a day like the current YHZ flight.

Well folks here's the answer on YUL-BOS, 2x daily on a q400 starting mid-october. So the first announced route to have a primary impact in 2018 due to the late start in 17.

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

VS4ever wrote:

The piece we will probably never know is, if the new routes had not come about, and let's focus on the Middle East piece here. would Europe have grown by over 1m passengers organically at 200K increase a year without that. that could be an interesting debate in itself.

Yes it would. TATL from Boston has always been strong and save for the global recession years, has always had steady growth, typically at 3-5% year over year.
IMO, what we've seen in the last 2 years is the result of a combination of 2 main factors: relative economic stability on both sides of the Atlantic + general acceptance of no frills airline service over longer distances. That second factor has led not only to the entrance of LCC's like WOW and DY, but it has also allowed network carriers to cut costs and expand their customer demographics.

Wow - WS has expanded well and would now fly all the destinations that AC flies except YOW. I have also seen fares have come down and traveling to YVR on WS via YHZ. Let's hope they bring a nonstop direct to YYC or hopefully YQB (seasonal) in the short term.

Good to see WS expand. I like the Q400, but will we see a WS 737 in BOS ever?

clrd4t8koff wrote:

Good to see WS expand. I like the Q400, but will we see a WS 737 in BOS ever?

I would assume if they ever add YYC and/or YVR we will.

Looks like a plane slid off the runway at BED a short while ago, weather has been bad again....

Plane was a G280 on its way to Teterboro and rejected the takeoff.

http://www.fox25boston.com/news/planes- ... /493465033

Terminal C was evacuated do to high CO2 levels. Was posted on Logans Facebook page.

This new Manchester service coming up with Virgin...is it a sensible pathway for me to get to Glasgow via rail?

chrisnh wrote:

This new Manchester service coming up with Virgin...is it a sensible pathway for me to get to Glasgow via rail?

There is actually direct service from Manchester airport and plenty with 1 change (most likely Piccadilly).. It will take 3 1/2 to 4 hours with the stops, so the short answer is yes, it is. There is also a Flybe service from MAN to GLA as a connector and I believe VS codeshare on Flybe flights. so that might be an option too, it will take about an hour that way.

Either way is probably better than taking a car that's for sure, it's a quite a trek up the M6 and beyond into Scotland, that said, either rail or car, the scenery in the Lake District (as long as it's not pouring with rain and clouds) is absolutely beautiful, one of my favorite parts of the UK.

tomaheath wrote:

Terminal C was evacuated do to high CO2 levels. Was posted on Logans Facebook page.

Snow melting equipment caused the alarms.

VS4ever wrote:

chrisnh wrote:

This new Manchester service coming up with Virgin...is it a sensible pathway for me to get to Glasgow via rail?

There is actually direct service from Manchester airport and plenty with 1 change (most likely Piccadilly).. It will take 3 1/2 to 4 hours with the stops, so the short answer is yes, it is. There is also a Flybe service from MAN to GLA as a connector and I believe VS codeshare on Flybe flights. so that might be an option too, it will take about an hour that way.

Either way is probably better than taking a car that's for sure, it's a quite a trek up the M6 and beyond into Scotland, that said, either rail or car, the scenery in the Lake District (as long as it's not pouring with rain and clouds) is absolutely beautiful, one of my favorite parts of the UK.

Thanks! I drove with a work colleague once from Coventry UK up to Glasgow, where he lives. It was a lovely drive, which included a pass through infamous Lockerbie. A humorous anecdote: we are driving along and the weather is spectacular...not a cloud anywhere. I'm telling my colleague Kevin that it will be nice arriving in Glasgow under sunny skies. "Not a chance, Chris. It will be pouring once we get there." And wouldn't you know: The skies open up practically abeam of the 'Welcome to Glasgow' sign on the motorway.

chrisnh wrote:

VS4ever wrote:

chrisnh wrote:

This new Manchester service coming up with Virgin...is it a sensible pathway for me to get to Glasgow via rail?

There is actually direct service from Manchester airport and plenty with 1 change (most likely Piccadilly).. It will take 3 1/2 to 4 hours with the stops, so the short answer is yes, it is. There is also a Flybe service from MAN to GLA as a connector and I believe VS codeshare on Flybe flights. so that might be an option too, it will take about an hour that way.

Either way is probably better than taking a car that's for sure, it's a quite a trek up the M6 and beyond into Scotland, that said, either rail or car, the scenery in the Lake District (as long as it's not pouring with rain and clouds) is absolutely beautiful, one of my favorite parts of the UK.

Thanks! I drove with a work colleague once from Coventry UK up to Glasgow, where he lives. It was a lovely drive, which included a pass through infamous Lockerbie. A humorous anecdote: we are driving along and the weather is spectacular...not a cloud anywhere. I'm telling my colleague Kevin that it will be nice arriving in Glasgow under sunny skies. "Not a chance, Chris. It will be pouring once we get there." And wouldn't you know: The skies open up practically abeam of the 'Welcome to Glasgow' sign on the motorway.

Sounds about right and just to show what a small world this truly is. I grew up 10 miles about from Coventry
Hope it all works out. I firmly believe the train cuts through even better scenery than the road (although at times they run parallel)

VS4ever wrote:

chrisnh wrote:

VS4ever wrote:

There is actually direct service from Manchester airport and plenty with 1 change (most likely Piccadilly).. It will take 3 1/2 to 4 hours with the stops, so the short answer is yes, it is. There is also a Flybe service from MAN to GLA as a connector and I believe VS codeshare on Flybe flights. so that might be an option too, it will take about an hour that way.

Either way is probably better than taking a car that's for sure, it's a quite a trek up the M6 and beyond into Scotland, that said, either rail or car, the scenery in the Lake District (as long as it's not pouring with rain and clouds) is absolutely beautiful, one of my favorite parts of the UK.

Thanks! I drove with a work colleague once from Coventry UK up to Glasgow, where he lives. It was a lovely drive, which included a pass through infamous Lockerbie. A humorous anecdote: we are driving along and the weather is spectacular...not a cloud anywhere. I'm telling my colleague Kevin that it will be nice arriving in Glasgow under sunny skies. "Not a chance, Chris. It will be pouring once we get there." And wouldn't you know: The skies open up practically abeam of the 'Welcome to Glasgow' sign on the motorway.

Sounds about right and just to show what a small world this truly is. I grew up 10 miles about from Coventry
Hope it all works out. I firmly believe the train cuts through even better scenery than the road (although at times they run parallel)

I go there every year for an optics conference that is at the RICOH stadium where the Wasps (Rugby) play. It also is home to either jaguar or Land Rover (maybe both). The bombed cathedral from WWII still stands, as you know, which points out how young the USA really is!

E10/E12 are in regular use. E11's jetways are not usable yet. Just looks like the lounge area above the gatehouses is still under construction.

tjerome wrote:

E10/E12 are in regular use. E11's jetways are not usable yet. Just looks like the lounge area above the gatehouses is still under construction.

Did they take E11 back out of service then because that was the gate they used for the EK388 when it was here the other week? So the jetways are usable.

I believe E11 is out of service due to some sort of fault with the lower jet bridge. Basically....something broke. The bridges would still be under warranty I think, so I'm sure just a matter of time before it's back up and running

I have seen the BA 744 parked at E12 a few times – have they been using the two jetways or just one?

Also interesting: BA239/238 has been operated by 744s three times in the past five days. I've seen this happen before, but it's usually a one-off equipment substitution, so interesting that it's happened with some regularity as of late.

33lspotter wrote:

I have seen the BA 744 parked at E12 a few times – have they been using the two jetways or just one?

Also interesting: BA239/238 has been operated by 744s three times in the past five days. I've seen this happen before, but it's usually a one-off equipment substitution, so interesting that it's happened with some regularity as of late.

Due to the the space the lounge will occupy, I think E12 is unofficially BA's. Only one bridge on anything other than an A380 though. The angle/distance to attach the upper bridge to a main deck door would be too great.

FGITD wrote:

Due to the the space the lounge will occupy, I think E12 is unofficially BA's. Only one bridge on anything other than an A380 though. The angle/distance to attach the upper bridge to a main deck door would be too great.

I'm still staggered by the design of these new gates. This was a huge capital project and the added passenger space and new lounges are sorely needed. But those benefits are tangential. When the project was initially conceived, it was anticipated that BOS would see three daily A380s at best for the foreseeable future. So they built three upper jet bridges that could be utilized for a maximum of one rotation per day. I just can't understand how that design decision was made, and it only looks more foolish now that it appears BOS will get only one daily A380.

On a separate note, does anyone know whether the upper bridges can even be used for deplaning A380s? I'm wondering whether there is any way to deplane directly to the customs level. I'd hate to think the new upper bridges can't even be used for that purpose.

hinckley wrote:

I'm still staggered by the design of these new gates. This was a huge capital project and the added passenger space and new lounges are sorely needed. But those benefits are tangential. When the project was initially conceived, it was anticipated that BOS would see three daily A380s at best for the foreseeable future. So they built three upper jet bridges that could be utilized for a maximum of one rotation per day. I just can't understand how that design decision was made, and it only looks more foolish now that it appears BOS will get only one daily A380.

I'm shocked to say the least, too. It's unimaginable to me that Massport spent so much money on this and at the end, in the year 2017 we're still boarding 747's and 77W's from a single jetbridge. To add insult to injury, premium passengers now have to schlep downstairs with their carry-on's from the lounge in order to board a plane other than an A380. BA especially must be miffed because they have the F class cabin on the lower deck of their A380's. To me this just seems like a screw up of gigantic proportions, which is very unusual for Massport. IMO, they have had a very good record of managing Logan's infrastructure needs.