QXAS wrote:

717atOGG wrote:

frmrCapCadet wrote:

In the long haul, Everett will carry about 10% of the traffic of SeaTac. As such it will provide an important service and relief for an airport which has no room for much more expansion. Bremerton's airport probably has more empty space than any other in the region. While I cannot see it expanding, the region probably should be buying and reserving land around the airport. Just in case.

Probably not 10%. More like 2%. SEA has 45 million passengers a year, and we're talking about a terminal with 15 daily flights and ~500k passengers annually. Won't put a dent in SEA's traffic, it'll only siphon some passengers off living in or around Everett. I live near Bremerton's airport (PWT) and it's a pipe dream of mine to have Allegiant or Alaska/Horizon to serve the airport, but it'd require serious planning, advertising, and modification of the airport itself. One problem is population. Adding up the population of Kitsap County, you get about 265,000 people that would have driving to PWT more convenient. For a daily Q400, for example, you would have 152 seats to fill, which might be difficult, hence the need for advertising. The airport does have land around it, but it has a road nearby and very narrow taxiways, plus not much room to park a plane and build a terminal. It has a 6,000 foot runway which should be sufficient, but there looks to be room to extend it. There is a second runway that has been shut down and is used as a drag strip, which can be bought out, and probably should. Here's a picture of the runway and said obstacles around it:
Screenshot 2017-08-13 at 8.53.20 PM by coolian03, on Flickr
Overall, it's another solution, but it has more obstacles than PAE did and can only support 1 or 2 gates IMO, and looks to be ~10+ years away.

With I-5 so slow constantly it would likely be a better alternative for Jefferson, Mason, and Clallam county residents as well. An additional 160,000 people. I would love to see PWT get air service. How long of a flight assuming a Q400 and at what altitude would a flight from PWT to SEA be? From Bremerton travel time would be a difference of 1 hour from Winslow about 10 minutes. And from Kingston a difference of 25 minutes. (Times were calculated at 11:15 pm so no I-5 traffic by google maps and the WSF ferry schedule estimated crossing times). Jefferson and Clallam counties would have the same driving difference as Kingston. Well close enough for government work that is. I think it could work. Problem is infrastructure at PWT. Kitsap county is only growing.

wedgetail737 wrote:

What about Pierce County airport or set up JB Lewis-McChord like CHS where the USAF is on one side and a commercial airport on the other to serve the Tacoma/Olympia communities?

QXAS wrote:

717atOGG wrote:

frmrCapCadet wrote:

In the long haul, Everett will carry about 10% of the traffic of SeaTac. As such it will provide an important service and relief for an airport which has no room for much more expansion. Bremerton's airport probably has more empty space than any other in the region. While I cannot see it expanding, the region probably should be buying and reserving land around the airport. Just in case.

Probably not 10%. More like 2%. SEA has 45 million passengers a year, and we're talking about a terminal with 15 daily flights and ~500k passengers annually. Won't put a dent in SEA's traffic, it'll only siphon some passengers off living in or around Everett. I live near Bremerton's airport (PWT) and it's a pipe dream of mine to have Allegiant or Alaska/Horizon to serve the airport, but it'd require serious planning, advertising, and modification of the airport itself. One problem is population. Adding up the population of Kitsap County, you get about 265,000 people that would have driving to PWT more convenient. For a daily Q400, for example, you would have 152 seats to fill, which might be difficult, hence the need for advertising. The airport does have land around it, but it has a road nearby and very narrow taxiways, plus not much room to park a plane and build a terminal. It has a 6,000 foot runway which should be sufficient, but there looks to be room to extend it. There is a second runway that has been shut down and is used as a drag strip, which can be bought out, and probably should. Here's a picture of the runway and said obstacles around it:
Screenshot 2017-08-13 at 8.53.20 PM by coolian03, on Flickr
Overall, it's another solution, but it has more obstacles than PAE did and can only support 1 or 2 gates IMO, and looks to be ~10+ years away.

With I-5 so slow constantly it would likely be a better alternative for Jefferson, Mason, and Clallam county residents as well. An additional 160,000 people. I would love to see PWT get air service. How long of a flight assuming a Q400 and at what altitude would a flight from PWT to SEA be? From Bremerton travel time would be a difference of 1 hour from Winslow about 10 minutes. And from Kingston a difference of 25 minutes. (Times were calculated by google maps and the WSF ferry schedule estimated crossing times). Jefferson and Clallam counties would have the same driving difference as Kingston. Well close enough for government work that is. I think it could work. Problem is infrastructure at PWT. Kitsap county is only growing.

dc10lover wrote:

After the reshuffle at Sea - Tac, is there any way Southwest can gain more Gates for more flights?

dc10lover wrote:

After the reshuffle at Sea - Tac, is there any way Southwest can gain more Gates for more flights?

BA wrote:

dc10lover wrote:

After the reshuffle at Sea - Tac, is there any way Southwest can gain more Gates for more flights?

What reshuffle?

QXAS wrote:

BA wrote:

dc10lover wrote:

After the reshuffle at Sea - Tac, is there any way Southwest can gain more Gates for more flights?

What reshuffle?

When the N sat is completed and the new IAF is complete. It's possible that more airlines will move from A to D with AS consolidating at C and N. This would open up space for more Intl out of A. I don't see WN getting more gates as IMO their utilization isn't as high as AS and DL as it is and they're not expanding at SEA.

717atOGG wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

What about Pierce County airport or set up JB Lewis-McChord like CHS where the USAF is on one side and a commercial airport on the other to serve the Tacoma/Olympia communities?

JBLM has military housing surrounding it and isn't open to the public, so I'd rule that out. If it were public though, that would be a great option. Pierce County airport could happen, but it only has a 3,650 foot runway. So one is a no-go and one is iffy.

BA wrote:

QXAS wrote:

BA wrote:

What reshuffle?

When the N sat is completed and the new IAF is complete. It's possible that more airlines will move from A to D with AS consolidating at C and N. This would open up space for more Intl out of A. I don't see WN getting more gates as IMO their utilization isn't as high as AS and DL as it is and they're not expanding at SEA.

in
Ah ok, yeah that's going to be 4 years away since the North Satellite expansion and renovation doesn't complete until 2021.

wedgetail737 wrote:

Even when the expanded N-Concourse opens for business, there is no guarantee that AS will give up the four or five gates in the D-Concourse. The only thing I can really see moving is NK moving to the D-concourse and not having to move around during every flight. I can see SY and F9 moving D as well. But again, that will only happen if AS removes itself from D.

wedgetail737 wrote:

WN has slowly and consistently have been discontinuing flights at SEA. I don't think WN will go anywhere soon nor have a need for additional gates.

ANCsupercub wrote:

http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/cost-of-sea-tacs-two-big-expansion-projects-rises-17-percent/

Interesting article on the ballooning expansion costs related to the International Arrivals Facility and the North Satellite expansion.

BA wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

Even when the expanded N-Concourse opens for business, there is no guarantee that AS will give up the four or five gates in the D-Concourse. The only thing I can really see moving is NK moving to the D-concourse and not having to move around during every flight. I can see SY and F9 moving D as well. But again, that will only happen if AS removes itself from D.

I agree. Especially since it's only the addition of 8 gates ad in 4-5 years time, they're going to need more gates as they grow.

Honestly I think SEA needs to shift to more of a common use gate model as the standard. They're being forced into it now due to the gate shortages (as I mentioned earlier, I flew out on AA from the South Satellite last month), but even after the IAF and North Satellite are complete, there still will be a gate shortage.

wedgetail737 wrote:

WN has slowly and consistently have been discontinuing flights at SEA. I don't think WN will go anywhere soon nor have a need for additional gates.

They've discontinued but also have added, so I think they've mostly been flat (netted out). I agree that they don't need additional gates and I don't see them needing more in the future either.

wedgetail737 wrote:

BA wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

Even when the expanded N-Concourse opens for business, there is no guarantee that AS will give up the four or five gates in the D-Concourse. The only thing I can really see moving is NK moving to the D-concourse and not having to move around during every flight. I can see SY and F9 moving D as well. But again, that will only happen if AS removes itself from D.

I agree. Especially since it's only the addition of 8 gates ad in 4-5 years time, they're going to need more gates as they grow.

Honestly I think SEA needs to shift to more of a common use gate model as the standard. They're being forced into it now due to the gate shortages (as I mentioned earlier, I flew out on AA from the South Satellite last month), but even after the IAF and North Satellite are complete, there still will be a gate shortage.

wedgetail737 wrote:

WN has slowly and consistently have been discontinuing flights at SEA. I don't think WN will go anywhere soon nor have a need for additional gates.

They've discontinued but also have added, so I think they've mostly been flat (netted out). I agree that they don't need additional gates and I don't see them needing more in the future either.

I have arrived at the S and A concourses while flying AS, which is odd. But I don't think I've ever seen AA go to the S Concourse since they moved to D. Although I was surprised WN took up the one or two gates that VX had at Concourse B...instead of DL.

wedgetail737 wrote:

BA wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

Even when the expanded N-Concourse opens for business, there is no guarantee that AS will give up the four or five gates in the D-Concourse. The only thing I can really see moving is NK moving to the D-concourse and not having to move around during every flight. I can see SY and F9 moving D as well. But again, that will only happen if AS removes itself from D.

I agree. Especially since it's only the addition of 8 gates ad in 4-5 years time, they're going to need more gates as they grow.

Honestly I think SEA needs to shift to more of a common use gate model as the standard. They're being forced into it now due to the gate shortages (as I mentioned earlier, I flew out on AA from the South Satellite last month), but even after the IAF and North Satellite are complete, there still will be a gate shortage.

wedgetail737 wrote:

WN has slowly and consistently have been discontinuing flights at SEA. I don't think WN will go anywhere soon nor have a need for additional gates.

They've discontinued but also have added, so I think they've mostly been flat (netted out). I agree that they don't need additional gates and I don't see them needing more in the future either.

I have arrived at the S and A concourses while flying AS, which is odd. But I don't think I've ever seen AA go to the S Concourse since they moved to D. Although I was surprised WN took up the one or two gates that VX had at Concourse B...instead of DL.

n7371f wrote:

ANCsupercub wrote:

http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/cost-of-sea-tacs-two-big-expansion-projects-rises-17-percent/

Interesting article on the ballooning expansion costs related to the International Arrivals Facility and the North Satellite expansion.

Way to go Port! Only their fault dragging their feet.

717atOGG wrote:

Did WN take the gates over? I'm curious. I did see a VX A319 at B1 in December shortly before they moved to D, and then I saw a DL 757 at that gate three weeks ago, so one would guess that DL took the gates, although I may be wrong.

BA wrote:

717atOGG wrote:

Did WN take the gates over? I'm curious. I did see a VX A319 at B1 in December shortly before they moved to D, and then I saw a DL 757 at that gate three weeks ago, so one would guess that DL took the gates, although I may be wrong.

Are you sure these aren't common use gates? Concourse B has a number of gates that are common use and aren't leased to one specific airline.

717atOGG wrote:

frmrCapCadet wrote:

In the long haul, Everett will carry about 10% of the traffic of SeaTac. As such it will provide an important service and relief for an airport which has no room for much more expansion. Bremerton's airport probably has more empty space than any other in the region. While I cannot see it expanding, the region probably should be buying and reserving land around the airport. Just in case.

Probably not 10%. More like 2%. SEA has 45 million passengers a year, and we're talking about a terminal with 15 daily flights and ~500k passengers annually. Won't put a dent in SEA's traffic, it'll only siphon some passengers off living in or around Everett. I live near Bremerton's airport (PWT) and it's a pipe dream of mine to have Allegiant or Alaska/Horizon to serve the airport, but it'd require serious planning, advertising, and modification of the airport itself. One problem is population. Adding up the population of Kitsap County, you get about 265,000 people that would have driving to PWT more convenient. For a daily Q400, for example, you would have 152 seats to fill, which might be difficult, hence the need for advertising. The airport does have land around it, but it has a road nearby and very narrow taxiways, plus not much room to park a plane and build a terminal. It has a 6,000 foot runway which should be sufficient, but there looks to be room to extend it. There is a second runway that has been shut down and is used as a drag strip, which can be bought out, and probably should. Here's a picture of the runway and said obstacles around it:
Screenshot 2017-08-13 at 8.53.20 PM by coolian03, on Flickr
Overall, it's another solution, but it has more obstacles than PAE did and can only support 1 or 2 gates IMO, and looks to be ~10+ years away.

QXAS wrote:

With I-5 so slow constantly it would likely be a better alternative for Jefferson, Mason, and Clallam county residents as well. An additional 160,000 people. I would love to see PWT get air service. How long of a flight assuming a Q400 and at what altitude would a flight from PWT to SEA be? From Bremerton travel time would be a difference of 1 hour from Winslow about 10 minutes. And from Kingston a difference of 25 minutes. (Times were calculated by google maps and the WSF ferry schedule estimated crossing times). Jefferson and Clallam counties would have the same driving difference as Kingston. Well close enough for government work that is. I think it could work. Problem is infrastructure at PWT. Kitsap county is only growing.

iamlucky13 wrote:

n7371f wrote:

ANCsupercub wrote:

http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/cost-of-sea-tacs-two-big-expansion-projects-rises-17-percent/

Interesting article on the ballooning expansion costs related to the International Arrivals Facility and the North Satellite expansion.

Way to go Port! Only their fault dragging their feet.

There were a mix of factors listed in the article, including the contractor both underbidding and not factoring in some code requirements.

Odd that the contractor can say, "We bid lower than we should have and we ignored legally required things" and the Port responds with, "Alright then, here's some more money," instead of, "And we're supposed to reward you for your mistake?"

I'm assuming this was a typical fixed price design and build contract, not a cost-plus contract.

Scope changes were also factor, which would be on the Port.

There was no explanation given for how this grew from the original $344 million project to the $660 million budgeted before these latest changes.



In their latest status update 3 months ago, they claimed both the International Arrivals project and the north satellite upgrades were on-budget.

HPRamper wrote:

QXAS wrote:

With I-5 so slow constantly it would likely be a better alternative for Jefferson, Mason, and Clallam county residents as well. An additional 160,000 people. I would love to see PWT get air service. How long of a flight assuming a Q400 and at what altitude would a flight from PWT to SEA be? From Bremerton travel time would be a difference of 1 hour from Winslow about 10 minutes. And from Kingston a difference of 25 minutes. (Times were calculated by google maps and the WSF ferry schedule estimated crossing times). Jefferson and Clallam counties would have the same driving difference as Kingston. Well close enough for government work that is. I think it could work. Problem is infrastructure at PWT. Kitsap county is only growing.

I'd go even further and say that with the way traffic between Tacoma and Seattle is worsening, PWT would even be able to draw traffic from Tacoma and points south like Thurston County, especially with little details like cheaper/closer parking.

QXAS wrote:

HPRamper wrote:

QXAS wrote:

With I-5 so slow constantly it would likely be a better alternative for Jefferson, Mason, and Clallam county residents as well. An additional 160,000 people. I would love to see PWT get air service. How long of a flight assuming a Q400 and at what altitude would a flight from PWT to SEA be? From Bremerton travel time would be a difference of 1 hour from Winslow about 10 minutes. And from Kingston a difference of 25 minutes. (Times were calculated by google maps and the WSF ferry schedule estimated crossing times). Jefferson and Clallam counties would have the same driving difference as Kingston. Well close enough for government work that is. I think it could work. Problem is infrastructure at PWT. Kitsap county is only growing.

I'd go even further and say that with the way traffic between Tacoma and Seattle is worsening, PWT would even be able to draw traffic from Tacoma and points south like Thurston County, especially with little details like cheaper/closer parking.

I wasn't even considering that traffic. There would be a market if it were ever attempted. The key would be enough service to make it a viable alternative but not overcapacity. And of course PWT currently lacks infrastructure for a passenger terminal. With all the space they have out there though it wouldn't be hard. Heck if a ferry wasn't required I could see PWT being the site of an eventual SEA replacement because of all the room to grow.

BA wrote:

Model of the IAF. Looking at the model in detail, it appears gate A8 will be eliminated. Initially it looked like they were going to squeeze it in as a non-international gate, that could still be the case and it's just not reflected in the model, although gate A5 which will not be an international gate is reflected.

717atOGG wrote:

BA wrote:

Model of the IAF. Looking at the model in detail, it appears gate A8 will be eliminated. Initially it looked like they were going to squeeze it in as a non-international gate, that could still be the case and it's just not reflected in the model, although gate A5 which will not be an international gate is reflected.

Thanks for sharing. When I was at SEA two weeks ago I took a picture of that but didn't post it. With the expansion of wide-body capable gates from 12 to 20 I assume the gates are coming from Concourse A. That increases the odds of NK and SY moving elsewhere, as there may be less space to park at A with DL potentially expanding internationally out of SEA. On that note, HKG is going to a 772 starting next spring. I know nothing's finalized, but it's something to shut down the "SEA is a failing DL hub" people. Interesting that HKG has more capacity than NRT, ICN, PEK, or PVG from SEA.

717atOGG wrote:

When I was at SEA two weeks ago I took a picture of that but didn't post it.

BA wrote:

717atOGG wrote:

When I was at SEA two weeks ago I took a picture of that but didn't post it.

Where is this model? I'm flying out next week so I'll try to check it out.

717atOGG wrote:

BA wrote:

717atOGG wrote:

When I was at SEA two weeks ago I took a picture of that but didn't post it.

Where is this model? I'm flying out next week so I'll try to check it out.

Near baggage claim 1, below the giant plane that's to the left of the ticket counters for the foreign airlines.

BA wrote:

717atOGG wrote:

BA wrote:

Model of the IAF. Looking at the model in detail, it appears gate A8 will be eliminated. Initially it looked like they were going to squeeze it in as a non-international gate, that could still be the case and it's just not reflected in the model, although gate A5 which will not be an international gate is reflected.

Thanks for sharing. When I was at SEA two weeks ago I took a picture of that but didn't post it. With the expansion of wide-body capable gates from 12 to 20 I assume the gates are coming from Concourse A. That increases the odds of NK and SY moving elsewhere, as there may be less space to park at A with DL potentially expanding internationally out of SEA. On that note, HKG is going to a 772 starting next spring. I know nothing's finalized, but it's something to shut down the "SEA is a failing DL hub" people. Interesting that HKG has more capacity than NRT, ICN, PEK, or PVG from SEA.

Yep, the additions are from Concourse A. They will still however handle domestic flights, so really they're just going to become dual purpose (domestic and international) gates, which is how the South Satellite is used currently too.

When Concourse A was built in 2004, it should have been built as an international concourse to begin with. Oh well, better late than never...

dc10lover wrote:

Success: Just this Summer United started service between San Francisco & Spokane and using Embraer 175's. Now they are using the 737 - 900.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL1737

BA wrote:

With regards to SEA-PDX traffic, WSDOT released the new Point Defiance bypass Amtrak Cascades schedule which adds 2 additional Seattle - Portland trips, one early morning and one late evening trip designed for business travelers to be able to do same day trips. There will be a total of 6 round trips between Seattle and Portland, in addition to the daily Coast Starlight long distance train to/from Los Angeles (though it's 40 minute slower than the Cascades runs). Start date for the new schedule hasn't been finalized, but supposedly will be sometime in December as they finish up the new Tacoma station and trestle project.

http://www.king5.com/traffic/traffic-ne ... /464422190

Travel times are reduced to 3 hours 20 minutes on all six trains, that's only 5 minutes slower than the scheduled travel time for BoltBus. Keeping in mind while BoltBus makes no stops, the Amtrak Cascades makes 6 stops on the way (Tukwila, Tacoma, Olympia/Lacey, Centralia, Longview/Kelso, and Vancouver WA), so that 5 minute extra travel time is a small price to pay for the added flexibility over BoltBus through 6 intermediate stops. If the train were to make no stops like BoltBus, it would be faster than BoltBus by I estimate a good 20 minutes if not more.

Hopefully they're able to keep to the 88% on time reliability that BNSF is guaranteeing, as poor on-time performance is the main problem the existing service suffers from and will deter business travelers which need dependable schedules. We shall see...

With regards to air travel, won't make make much of a difference, but it'll be interesting to see if same day business travelers, that normally would fly on Horizon, would now consider taking the train. Or if it will be mainly travelers that travel by bus or car that choose to take the train instead.

Here's the schedule:
https://www.scribd.com/document/3564656 ... d-Schedule

It allows a 9 hour stay in Portland or Seattle, should be good for business travelers.

From an airport connectivity standpoint, Tukwila Station is only 5 miles from Sea-Tac Airport, so transfers to/from Amtrak Cascades and the airport are only a 10 minute cab/Uber/Lyft ride or 20 minute bus/light-rail ride. For those that live along points between Seattle and Portland, it's a decently convenient option to use to fly out of Sea-Tac.

dc10lover wrote:

I would LOVE to see Spokane have more non - stops to more Cities. Maybe bring back non - stop to Atlanta via Delta. What about service to Vancouver, BC on Air Canada for International Flights as an alternative to Seattle. I guess this has not affected demand on Alaska on their Seattle / Portland routes?

717atOGG wrote:

dc10lover wrote:

Success: Just this Summer United started service between San Francisco & Spokane and using Embraer 175's. Now they are using the 737 - 900.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL1737

Not surprised. Seemed like a hole in GEG's network for a long time. Perhaps also a preemptive strike against AS, who might add GEG-SFO...???

Wingtips56 wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

I believe 5 or 6 years ago, Allegiant kicked the tires on PWT. Driving through the area, it certainly feels pretty rural and not really central to most of the population. Were QX to fly in there, I'd imagine PDX would be the logical connection point, but really it probably would have to be something like Penair or the like.

That's a "no" on PenAir. They filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy and are done in the PNW with the exception of the PDX-CEC route pending finding a new carrier to take the EAS contract for CEC. Max 90 days. They already closed ACV, RDD, LMT and OTH with only 3 days notice.

There isn't anyone else on this side of the U.S. with a Saab-like capacity, so PWT is unlikely. Maybe 8-seat Boutique.

wedgetail737 wrote:

Wingtips56 wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

I believe 5 or 6 years ago, Allegiant kicked the tires on PWT. Driving through the area, it certainly feels pretty rural and not really central to most of the population. Were QX to fly in there, I'd imagine PDX would be the logical connection point, but really it probably would have to be something like Penair or the like.

That's a "no" on PenAir. They filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy and are done in the PNW with the exception of the PDX-CEC route pending finding a new carrier to take the EAS contract for CEC. Max 90 days. They already closed ACV, RDD, LMT and OTH with only 3 days notice.

There isn't anyone else on this side of the U.S. with a Saab-like capacity, so PWT is unlikely. Maybe 8-seat Boutique.

The only sizeable commuters left, really...are Key Lime out of Colorado with the Dornier jets or even more remotely, Contour out of BNA. I guess Silver could do it, but they're not doing too well either.

717atOGG wrote:

For 2017 through the end of June, SEA hit 22,154,850 passengers. That's more than SEA had the entire year of 1994! Looks like SEA is on track for 46 or 47 million pax by year's end! It's exciting to see continued growth here, and I hope that the CUTE system will allow for more growth at non-peak times. If anyone has the statistics so far for GEG, BLI, or PSC, I'd be happy to see them.