Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
SQ22 wrote:Please continue your discussion and to post your updates here.
Link to previous thread:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1356677
NolaMD88fan wrote:Some shots of the DL 744 that arrived today to take the Clemson football team to GSP. This plane will be heading out the desert very soon.
NolaMD88fan wrote:Latest construction aerial of the new terminal posted. Most of the roof is on now. Structural steel going up quickly on concourse A. Parking garage looks nearly complete. Lots of progress in December.
DJSNOLA wrote:whats the planned turnover date for concessions and retail space to the tenants to being their build out?
NolaMD88fan wrote:DJSNOLA wrote:whats the planned turnover date for concessions and retail space to the tenants to being their build out?
Not sure of that, but would assume sometime in the Fall. It would need to be enough time to get staff hired and trained after the build out is complete.
LAX772LR wrote:NolaMD88fan wrote:DJSNOLA wrote:whats the planned turnover date for concessions and retail space to the tenants to being their build out?
Not sure of that, but would assume sometime in the Fall. It would need to be enough time to get staff hired and trained after the build out is complete.
Though, IINM, won't several venders not *be* going to the new terminal, because their handling organization didn't win the concessions contracts?
SunsetLimited wrote:Very happy/content with LHR and FRA service.
KEF is a great connecting hub for for Midwest markets that can be reached with narrow bodies.
I'd rather see the airport continue to pursue MEX and perhaps another Central American destination. COPA has been killing it, lately. Full, full, full.
msycajun wrote:While I do agree that there are still some major North American routes to pursue, particularly PDX, MEX, SAP, and YUL, I don't think that's a good reason to not pursue European growth as well. I would disagree that we have "enough" service to Europe because now almost all of our peer airports will have about as much service to Europe as MSY and most of them have far less European traffic. AUS and PIT seem to be doing fine with three carriers to Europe. It seems to be a typically New Orleans attitude to rest on one's laurels after a big achievement like BA and watch other cities pass us by.
Certainly BA and DE is preferable to an Icelandic carrier, but there should still be room for growth without harming the existing carriers. There is no lower cost option during our peak months of October, November, April and most of May - definitely room for stimulation there. I like Condor and hope they can expand, but their flights don't show up on a lot of booking engines for whatever reason. I think the 2 weekly frequency is pretty limiting as well - the Icelandic carriers are all doing 3-5 weekly to most of their markets. Maybe MT adding MAN would be a nice compromise to grow without diluting traffic too much.
SunsetLimited wrote:DL: 3x LGA and 3x JFK
B6: 2-3X JFK depending on the month
UA: 3-4X EWR depending on the month
NK: 1X EWR
So at its peak, MSY-NYC sees 14 daily departures. Largest a/c is B6 A321 (seasonally). UA runs the gauntlet, every type of 737 and Airbus, varies by day of the week. Seasonally they run E-jets on one of the flights...again it varies by specific day. NK is a daily 319. DL, again, eqpt varies seasonally, sometimes all 6 flights are mainline, sometimes only 2 are. Right now a 739 has been doing one of the JFK-MSY-JFK turns.
Considering the number of connecting passengers flying AA between MSY and NYC, the volume is there. It's just a question of if they want to overfly three of their hubs along the way. PHL, for example, is seeing increased service this year with larger aircraft and CLT will be seeing 738's soon.
SunsetLimited wrote:Have you taken a look at the economies of AUS and PIT? They might be peer airports, but they are anything but peer cities. Both of those places have a lot of demand for business travel. Most of MSY travel is leisure-based. Now, is our economy diversifying and improving? Yes, of course. The BA flights especially will allow us to increase the region's business ties to Europe. But that takes times. I want to see LHR and FRA mature and grow before another Euro carrier comes to town.
DE could have added a third weekly frequency this year if they were super successful - instead, PIT got it. AUS, too, or am I thinking of someplace else? Those are markets that likely have more OUTBOUND demand to Europe due to a larger and more affluent regional population to draw from. Not a knock on MSY or a typical "New Orleans attitude". I'm proud of the success we've had, I'm proud of the city, but we're still growing the nonstop Europe segment, and before a third carrier comes in, regardless of who it is, I want to see us make sure what we have already sticks around and grows. That's all.
Balloonchaser wrote:Does anyone know how Frontier is doing on the ISP-MSY Route? Could we see it being upgraded to a A320 in the future?
OzarkD9S wrote:So will the new terminal have enough gates to start or is expansion in the cards?
msycajun wrote:While I do agree that there are still some major North American routes to pursue, particularly PDX, MEX, SAP, and YUL, I don't think that's a good reason to not pursue European growth as well.
msycajun wrote:AUS and PIT seem to be doing fine with three carriers to Europe.
LAX772LR wrote:Second, one thing that we still have yet to see, is a European carrier connect to the cruise market here.
BA doesn't. DE doesn't seem to either.
It's worth noting that FI doesn't fly to MIA nor FLL. Granted, it has service to MCO (Port Canaveral) and TPA; but that leaves a fair opportunity for MSY service to capitalize on its Eastern/Western Caribbean cruises, if FI could be convinced to use it for a Gulf cruise base.
Just a thought. I wonder if anyone's pursuing it?
NolaMD88fan wrote:The DOTD has three alternatives for the I-10 interchange redesign. The final design (Diverging Diamond with flyover ramps for New Orleans inbound/outbound traffic) is the one I like the best. It would require the least amount of land procurement which should save on cost. I've seen these interchanges in action, and they can move an amazing amount of traffic.
http://wwwapps.dotd.la.gov/administrati ... e_Show.pdf
NolaMD88fan wrote:WOW and FI can fly narrowbody aircraft to those markets, but a widebody aircraft is required to fly here.
LAX772LR wrote:NolaMD88fan wrote:WOW and FI can fly narrowbody aircraft to those markets, but a widebody aircraft is required to fly here.
No it isn't.
FI already does KEF-DFW, which is longer than MSY, with a 752 and no blocked seats.
LAX772LR wrote:As for KEF, two points:
First off, all of this expansion is incredible!!
For those who might not be familiar, it's not a physically large airport by any stretch of the imagination.
MSY's new northside terminal dwarfs it by a factor of three, in terms of gates, and probably even more in terms of overall area.
There are expansion plans (as you can see in the pic), but it's still tough to imagine where all these new pax are going to fit!
Second, one thing that we still have yet to see, is a European carrier connect to the cruise market here.
BA doesn't. DE doesn't seem to either.
It's worth noting that FI doesn't fly to MIA nor FLL. Granted, it has service to MCO (Port Canaveral) and TPA; but that leaves a fair opportunity for MSY service to capitalize on its Eastern/Western Caribbean cruises, if FI could be convinced to use it for a Gulf cruise base.
Just a thought. I wonder if anyone's pursuing it?
SunsetLimited wrote:If the numbers work, I'm sure we'll get a third Euro carrier eventually.
Until then, I would much rather see, by a wide margin, service to MEX and another Canadian destination.
william wrote:Not go off subject, but this is the fast growing WOW hub in Iceland?
LAX772LR wrote:william wrote:Not go off subject, but this is the fast growing WOW hub in Iceland?
Yup.
People have this impression that KEF is some kind of mini-DXB.... but the entirety of that airport is like 12 gates and 7million annual pax.
It's not a large airport by any means; and it won't be, even when all phases of its current expansion plan are in place. It's a tiny airport that (impressively) punches way above its weight.
DJSNOLA wrote:i would love to see a wow flight added from here.
DJSNOLA wrote:What do people think the chances of a Montreal flight would be? Always seemed like a place NOLA should have stronger ties with?
NolaMD88fan wrote:DJSNOLA wrote:What do people think the chances of a Montreal flight would be? Always seemed like a place NOLA should have stronger ties with?
I think the odds are pretty decent. In 2016 MSY-YUL had 32 PDEW. It was the 4th largest unserved market at YUL. HNL, SAN, and SEA were the unserved markets ahead of us
NolaMD88fan wrote:Statistics Canada. http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a03?la ... 9,401-0040
DJSNOLA wrote:thats interesting to note.. I would think either a seasonal flight or twice weekly would help increase the the total a bit too... whats the PDEW to Vancouver from nola?
LAX772LR wrote:DJSNOLA wrote:thats interesting to note.. I would think either a seasonal flight or twice weekly would help increase the the total a bit too... whats the PDEW to Vancouver from nola?
I do wonder if they're concerned about what yields would look like:
YUL-MSY's PDEW has grown nearly 50% over the last decade... yet instead of adding a seasonal or x-weekly YUL, they instead added a second YYZ.
Considering that YUL is also a hub, covering most of the major Canadian and European cnnx that YYZ does and even some unique ones, I'm guessing that yield concern has to be their reason. Especially with the insane prices that they charge to YYZ, relative to the competition.
NolaMD88fan wrote:October Domestic and July International Load Factors.
On the domestic side, the overall October load factor was 83.4%, and the year to date load factor was 81.3%. WN's MSY-LAX route had the highest load factor at 93%, and the lowest load factor was on G4's MSY-LCK route at 63.2%. F9 started service to AUS, SAT, PVD, and ISP. AUS and SAT did well with 84.1% and 75.8% load factors. PVD and ISP saw poorer loads of 64.9% and 63.7% in October.
International data is for July. The overall international load factor in July was 83.9%, and year to date was 80.7%. BA had a load factor of 76.9%, DE was at 77.7%, and CM was at 90.1%.
(Domestic)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19PfjR6hYCFDPcv6qhpAqs8JpN3_RRF85c2xiYRv3g98/edit?usp=sharing
(International)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yepoGdibyiVsViWrjIcouvFnmdUNzhYuBiOo9bBPV8Y/edit?usp=sharing