Cush
Posts: 449
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:42 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Nov 28, 2018 9:16 pm

PITingres wrote:
PITexpress wrote:
I'm not advocating for DE to charge rock bottom prices, but I'd like to be able to get to/from Europe for under $1000 in the summer, and less during the remainder of the year, which is what they offer.


That would be fine with me as well. BA looks to be loaded for $1400 r/t, which isn't as high as I expected from them, but is still $500 more than I'd like to pay and $600 or so more than Wow were charging.


Yikes! That is the reason why I have not flown on BA in almost 20 years. The last time I stepped onto a BA plane was when they still flew PIT-LGW last time on the 767.

If the product and service on board BA deserved the 1400 r/t, then i understand, but the product that BA provides is extremely sub-par compared to other trans-atlantic airlines.

I will continue to connect through EWR/IAD on UA in lieu of that non-stop option.
Fly me to the moon let me play among the stars.
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Wed Nov 28, 2018 10:15 pm

klm617 wrote:
My question would by why would EI expect PIT to work for them when over night they lost two of their European carriers. It seems the goal of the airport right now should be to get an initiative behind the two carriers it has now BA and DE to make sure that they can hold onto those flights. Any flights that the airport now would pay incentives too would be pretty much wasted money as PIT can not hang onto year round service or TATL flights outside of the summer season.

You'd have to ask EI that. When the rumors were flying from several sources EI would have been the 5th airline at the time to announce or serve PIT-Europe. Now that they would be the third I can easily see them add PIT in their next round of expansion, especially if BA and DE don't add some frequency.

I think you are being a bit overly dramatic with "over night they lost two of their European carriers.". The issue with WW seems to be internal and not reflective of all the markets they dropped. Furthermore I'm not sure why you say "PIT can not hang on to year round service ...." Before DL's PIT-CDG run three other airlines have served PIT-Europe year-round since 1980, be it nonstop, one stop, hub carrier, or non-hub carrier, and even non-hub non-alliance carrier (which happened to be BA).



dabpit wrote:
There was an article in the Orlando Sentinel about VIA Air and in the article, it mentioned that Pittsburgh and Birmingham, AL will be two of their new cities with 10 others to be named in early 2019.
https://www.orlandosentinel.com/busines ... story.html

It would be great to get some of those holes filled left by OneJet.
FLYi
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2406
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 3:07 am

Cush wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
or better yet, let the market prove itself to attract new service WITHOUT tax dollars.


Yea..... That was the ACAA mentality for years before C.C. arrived and look at how much good it did the airport with declining passenger numbers and flights year over year (rolling eyes)...

There were a lot of factors that contributed to PIT's situation post-dehubbing. Many other hard-hit airports have somehow found a way to increase pax/flights/competition without multi-million dollar revenue guarantees. It's not black and white here...PIT has greased the skids on getting the international service they've always wanted, if the market is there it should now be able to demonstrate itself.

PITexpress wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Let the existing routes mature and prove themselves without subsidies first before doling out more tax dollars...or better yet, let the market prove itself to attract new service WITHOUT tax dollars.


Want to reiterate that the tax dollars weren't used for these subsidies. It's gambling revenues and other funds. If someone wants to post a source, feel freel.

Regardless, they're still public monies that could have gone to schools, roads, public transit, etc. I can understand the argument for using some public dollars to incentivize flights, but the fact that they're public dollars should never be casually brushed aside.

tphuang wrote:
ncflyer wrote:
Thought it was an excellent article. PIT spent $3mm to undermine Delta, an outstanding airline. Where is the return on that? Government shouldn’t be picking winners and losers.

they got the golden prize of BA flight to LHR, by far the largest TATL market out of PIT rather than a market that's completely dependent on connections.

So then the, what, $5-8 million they spent on the DL flight was just a total waste? They've spent in reality ~$10 million to finally get that golden prize? I mean the BA flight is definitely a solid win for PIT and congrats to them for it, but the point that they shouldn't be picking winners and losers is not a completely invalid one.
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 3:58 am

flyguy89 wrote:
PITexpress wrote:
Want to reiterate that the tax dollars weren't used for these subsidies. It's gambling revenues and other funds. If someone wants to post a source, feel freel.

Regardless, they're still public monies that could have gone to schools, roads, public transit, etc. I can understand the argument for using some public dollars to incentivize flights, but the fact that they're public dollars should never be casually brushed aside.

They are not public dollars. To say that they are public dollars because that casino revenue could be used for roads or schools is such a red herring. That's like saying the funds in your savings account are public funds because your taxes could increase to pay for roads or schools.


flyguy89 wrote:
So then the, what, $5-8 million they spent on the DL flight was just a total waste? They've spent in reality ~$10 million to finally get that golden prize? I mean the BA flight is definitely a solid win for PIT and congrats to them for it, but the point that they shouldn't be picking winners and losers is not a completely invalid one.

Of course the DL flight was not a waste. It provided an invaluable service to the region for 10 years.
FLYi
 
axiom
Posts: 776
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2015 10:39 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 5:14 am

flyPIT wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
PITexpress wrote:
Want to reiterate that the tax dollars weren't used for these subsidies. It's gambling revenues and other funds. If someone wants to post a source, feel freel.

Regardless, they're still public monies that could have gone to schools, roads, public transit, etc. I can understand the argument for using some public dollars to incentivize flights, but the fact that they're public dollars should never be casually brushed aside.

They are not public dollars. To say that they are public dollars because that casino revenue could be used for roads or schools is such a red herring. That's like saying the funds in your savings account are public funds because your taxes could increase to pay for roads or schools.


flyguy89 wrote:
So then the, what, $5-8 million they spent on the DL flight was just a total waste? They've spent in reality ~$10 million to finally get that golden prize? I mean the BA flight is definitely a solid win for PIT and congrats to them for it, but the point that they shouldn't be picking winners and losers is not a completely invalid one.

Of course the DL flight was not a waste. It provided an invaluable service to the region for 10 years.


Private revenue appropriated by the state for public spending? It's a tax. Period.
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 5:21 am

axiom wrote:
Private revenue appropriated by the state for public spending? It's a tax. Period.

Taxes are not optional. The decision to gamble is optional.
FLYi
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2406
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 5:47 am

flyPIT wrote:
axiom wrote:
Private revenue appropriated by the state for public spending? It's a tax. Period.

Taxes are not optional. The decision to gamble is optional.

The decision to buy a candy bar is optional. That doesn't make the sales tax you pay on it not a tax. In any case, it's money collected by the government aka the people aka the public meant to be spent accordingly.
 
axiom
Posts: 776
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2015 10:39 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 10:21 am

flyguy89 wrote:
flyPIT wrote:
axiom wrote:
Private revenue appropriated by the state for public spending? It's a tax. Period.

Taxes are not optional. The decision to gamble is optional.

The decision to buy a candy bar is optional. That doesn't make the sales tax you pay on it not a tax. In any case, it's money collected by the government aka the people aka the public meant to be spent accordingly.


Exactly. This is really straightforward.

It does a disservice to the debate when we deny basic facts. The question of how to leverage public resources and communal wealth, both of which are scarce, to achieve economic outcomes is one of the most important we can have. Call a spade a spade so that we can reflect on what is working and what is not.
 
User avatar
Runway28L
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:35 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 12:18 pm

dabpit wrote:
There was an article in the Orlando Sentinel about VIA Air and in the article, it mentioned that Pittsburgh and Birmingham, AL will be two of their new cities with 10 others to be named in early 2019.
https://www.orlandosentinel.com/busines ... story.html

Ah yes... the same airline CLT just kicked out because they were behind on payments, in addition to grounding aircraft, cutting flights, and laying off employees. Who does that sound a lot like? :scratchchin:


https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news ... 120-issues
http://www.newsandsentinel.com/news/loc ... f-flights/
Greetings from KPIT! Check out my photos here: http://www.airliners.net/search?user=45 ... teAccepted
 
User avatar
ConcourseZ
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:07 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 1:59 pm

On this thread, AirBerlin2017 and MidwestIndy have WW load factors for PIT
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1409381

USAToday article on WW cuts
https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 141935002/
 
PITexpress
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 3:59 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 3:38 pm

From the other thread, looks like the Iceland Air deal for Wow is off...
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... er-454008/
 
IndyHoosier
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 3:35 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 5:42 pm

axiom wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
flyPIT wrote:
Taxes are not optional. The decision to gamble is optional.

The decision to buy a candy bar is optional. That doesn't make the sales tax you pay on it not a tax. In any case, it's money collected by the government aka the people aka the public meant to be spent accordingly.


Exactly. This is really straightforward.

It does a disservice to the debate when we deny basic facts. The question of how to leverage public resources and communal wealth, both of which are scarce, to achieve economic outcomes is one of the most important we can have. Call a spade a spade so that we can reflect on what is working and what is not.


Agreed 100%
 
kavok
Posts: 445
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:01 pm

flyPIT wrote:
ncflyer wrote:
Thought it was an excellent article. PIT spent $3mm to undermine Delta, an outstanding airline. Where is the return on that? Government shouldn’t be picking winners and losers.

The return is year round service to a more desirable location.


Leave the year-round-service out of the subsidy justification.

PIT also had DL TATL year round service when DL was receiving the subsidy. There is no guarantee that when the subsidy ends, that BA won’t also make the flight seasonal. One could very easily argue that if provided a subsidy, DL would have flown PIT-CDG year round again too... and arguably the amount needed for that subsidy would have been less than what BA is receiving.

If you want to argue that BA/LHR is a more desirable location, then yes the numbers agree with that argument. If anything, that is what the subsidy is achieving. But the year round service argument doesn’t hold weight, until if and when BA decides to fly in the winter (post subsidy).
 
PITexpress
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 3:59 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:47 pm

kavok wrote:
If you want to argue that BA/LHR is a more desirable location, then yes the numbers agree with that argument. If anything, that is what the subsidy is achieving. But the year round service argument doesn’t hold weight, until if and when BA decides to fly in the winter (post subsidy).


Agreed. The two can't be compared unless you look at service with a subsidy and service without a subsidy.
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:52 pm

kavok wrote:
Leave the year-round-service out of the subsidy justification.

PIT also had DL TATL year round service when DL was receiving the subsidy. There is no guarantee that when the subsidy ends, that BA won’t also make the flight seasonal. One could very easily argue that if provided a subsidy, DL would have flown PIT-CDG year round again too... and arguably the amount needed for that subsidy would have been less than what BA is receiving.

If you want to argue that BA/LHR is a more desirable location, then yes the numbers agree with that argument. If anything, that is what the subsidy is achieving. But the year round service argument doesn’t hold weight, until if and when BA decides to fly in the winter (post subsidy).


I never suggested the subsidy is the determining factor in BA's service being seasonal or year round. What I am suggesting, is that the BA service would be year round post subsidy... because it is BA. They don't do seasonal service on trans-Atlantic business routes. All of their recent additions support that, in addition to a previous 15 year run of serving PIT year round. Based on BA's track record I am confident in saying that if BA serves PIT after the subsidy it will be year round; and I see no reason why they won't serve PIT post subsidy.
FLYi
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 7:53 pm

PIT was named as one of 10 airports that could capitalize on the surging e-commerce boom by SupplyChainDive - IF there is proper investment.

"Opportunity ahead for alternative airports

In the face of terminal (excuse the pun), unresolvable congestion at legacy leading air cargo airports and permanent surging inbound and outbound flow, carriers and their customers will have to establish operations at alternative airports. Centers not thought of as leading air cargo facilities today that choose to invest strategically in building capacity inside and outside airport boundaries can create tremendous opportunities to attract surging demand in the future.

Among characteristics that can attract this business are:

Runway lengths suitable for 747s and 767s
Extensive on-apron handling facilities with room to expand
Extensive availability of developable land for large logistics facilities within minutes of the airport
Sufficiently low passenger volumes to ensure truck corridors can remain generally uncongested
Short and predictable drayage distances
Proximity to major freeway infrastructure
Adequate and sustainable labor supply, including during peak seasons
Generally moderate weather conditions, especially around peak periods to ensure low probability of weather disruptions to operations

Many of the prime (pun apology) candidates to become air cargo hubs of the future are among those where Amazon has established Amazon Air hubs. Similarly, UPS and FedEx have also invested in building capacity near a number of these potential major multi-service hubs. Cushman & Wakefield projects the following airports are among those well-suited to capitalize on this global cargo boom, provided authorities take proper action today to invest in required infrastructure:

Columbus (CMH)
Chicago - Rockford (RFD)
Indianapolis (IND)
Pittsburgh (PIT)
Huntsville (HSV)
Cincinnati (CVG)
Salt Lake City (SLC)
Mesa (AZA)
Norton Air Force Base, San Bernardino (SBD)
March Air Reserve Base, Riverside (RIV)
Kansas City (MCI)
Greenville/Spartanburg (GSP)"

https://www.supplychaindive.com/news/air-cargo-boom-real-estate-implications/542344/

Bold emphasis is mine. A lot of what was said agrees with the QR Cargo blog I linked the other day. But as this article states, the planning and investment needs to be at the forefront if PIT is to get a piece of this pie. To me it seems PIT has been severely lacking here. It's still frustrating to look at what could have been (see reply # 1671). So to tie this in to Qatar Airways... when they first arrived they couldn't use Cargo A (the one building they did build over there). So they had to use a de-ice pad until improvements were made at Cargo 3. Lets look at those improvements.

They had to extend taxiway A. My first thought was why? Why not just use the taxi lane on the ramp to reach their parking spot? A look at Google Earth answers that. There is no way a B777 could taxi past the parked UPS MD-11, so they had to extend taxiway A. But how they did it seems so odd:

Image

Instead of extending taxiway A in a logical manner westbound as a northern parallel taxiway to 10L/28R, with a connector to the west side of the cargo 3 ramp, allowing for easy expansion of more cargo buildings westward they just had the taxiway go straight into QR's parking stand. This is more what it should have looked like:

Image

So why did they do it like they did? The only thing I can think of is cost. But what about when the day comes they need to expand again? Is it going to cost more in the future than it would have because of how they did it this time?

It just seems air cargo has always been an after thought here going back decades, with only piecemeal improvements like we see here. Pittsburgh was once a manufacturing powerhouse but even in those days air cargo at PIT was paltry. It's pretty envious to look at what LCK and IND have done with air cargo and logistics. I don't just mean the FedEx hub (at IND), but the entire logistics industry they build around the airport to support services such as Cargolux. Without the need to pay them $1.5 million over a year. Perhaps PIT should learn from them and plan a bit better in this area instead of writing a cheesy public letter to the CEO of one of the world's largest logistics companies for not placing HQ2 in Pittsburgh.
FLYi
 
Jshank83
Posts: 2162
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 7:59 pm

In this article about WOW it says "Yesterday, Qatar Airways ended cargo flights that cost the authority $1.58 million in subsidies."

Did they end or is that a mistake?

Also, this quote doesn't make any sense. Not sure what the other 3 airports have to do with PIT keeping or losing WOW.

Fitzgerald adds he is confident the Iceland-based WOW will stay in Pittsburgh because St. Louis, Cleveland and Cincinnati have already lost WOW flights.

https://kdkaradio.radio.com/articles/di ... al-airport
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 8:34 pm

Jshank83 wrote:
In this article about WOW it says "Yesterday, Qatar Airways ended cargo flights that cost the authority $1.58 million in subsidies."

Did they end or is that a mistake?

Also, this quote doesn't make any sense. Not sure what the other 3 airports have to do with PIT keeping or losing WOW.

Fitzgerald adds he is confident the Iceland-based WOW will stay in Pittsburgh because St. Louis, Cleveland and Cincinnati have already lost WOW flights.

https://kdkaradio.radio.com/articles/di ... al-airport


If you listen to the first 4 minutes of the audio file contained in your link you can gain some context as to his remarks about STL/CLE/CVG.

What I got out of it is WW started PIT before those others, and unlike the others WOW Air has not (yet) publicly stated PIT is axed, even though it is no longer bookable past Jan as they rework there schedules.

I think the QR thing was a mistake; perhaps what they meant was the subsidy just ended (flights continue).
FLYi
 
Jshank83
Posts: 2162
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 9:04 pm

flyPIT wrote:

I think the QR thing was a mistake; perhaps what they meant was the subsidy just ended (flights continue).


Okay, thanks. I didn't think they had ended.
 
User avatar
ConcourseZ
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:07 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Thu Nov 29, 2018 11:36 pm

Jshank83 wrote:
flyPIT wrote:

I think the QR thing was a mistake; perhaps what they meant was the subsidy just ended (flights continue).


Okay, thanks. I didn't think they had ended.

Qatar had stated a few days ago they see expansion opportunities at PIT
https://blueskypit.com/2018/11/26/pit-c ... long-haul/
 
Flaps
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2000 1:11 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:40 am

Regarding the QR ramp expansion, I can add a little insight.

it was a compromise solution due to a combination of cost and operability. There is a large hill immediately west of the QR/Cargo 3 ramp. Some day when that area west of the QR ramp is finally developed, that hill will be removed. That expansion is on paper but will not be done on speculation due in part to the cost of removing that hill. There is not enough room to taxi a 777 on the ramp behind UPS to exit the ramp via A1. With the hill in place to the west of the ramp, pushing straight back off of the ramp to an extended taxiway as mentioned above would require about twice as much pavement as the current angled expansion of A. The current setup was designed to allow pushback tail west to the southwest corner of the ramp then a pull forward out onto A for engine start. This was to avoid engine start immediately in front of that hill. The concern was that breakaway thrust would send dirt and debris up over the crest of the hill toward Dick's and in addition that brisk westerly winds would then send that debris back over the aircraft creating a FOD issue.
The angled taxiway solves both the issue of getting past UPS and avoiding the FOD fear while simultaneously being considerably less expensive than the other option.
In a perfect world, taxiway A would be extended due west with a 90 degree access to Cargo 3 as indicated above. Eventually that will likely happen. Given the enormous amount of investment already going into the QR project it was a reasonable design compromise. Even as it is, its a pretty tight maneuver getting off that ramp.
 
User avatar
Runway28L
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:35 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri Nov 30, 2018 1:22 am

ORD-PIT-LUX-DOH is still in Qatar Cargo's schedule which goes out to 3/30/19. I have zero clue as to why the PG and KDKA radio are saying the flights are immediately terminated. Clearly, it looks like they are wrong. :?

http://www.qrcargo.com/docs/01.Winter%2 ... 202019.pdf

Looks like the PIT outbound will even stop in LGG a few times.
Greetings from KPIT! Check out my photos here: http://www.airliners.net/search?user=45 ... teAccepted
 
User avatar
ConcourseZ
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:07 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri Nov 30, 2018 1:36 am

Regarding the previous posts about developing PIT as an alternative cargo destination, would this be the development which would keep all four runways active?
 
JamesRenard
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2018 9:16 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:26 am

From the other thread, WOW might be saved by Indigo Partners.

https://markets.businessinsider.com/new ... 1027768928
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri Nov 30, 2018 3:08 am

Flaps wrote:
Regarding the QR ramp expansion, I can add a little insight.

it was a compromise solution due to a combination of cost and operability. There is a large hill immediately west of the QR/Cargo 3 ramp. Some day when that area west of the QR ramp is finally developed, that hill will be removed. That expansion is on paper but will not be done on speculation due in part to the cost of removing that hill. There is not enough room to taxi a 777 on the ramp behind UPS to exit the ramp via A1. With the hill in place to the west of the ramp, pushing straight back off of the ramp to an extended taxiway as mentioned above would require about twice as much pavement as the current angled expansion of A. The current setup was designed to allow pushback tail west to the southwest corner of the ramp then a pull forward out onto A for engine start. This was to avoid engine start immediately in front of that hill. The concern was that breakaway thrust would send dirt and debris up over the crest of the hill toward Dick's and in addition that brisk westerly winds would then send that debris back over the aircraft creating a FOD issue.
The angled taxiway solves both the issue of getting past UPS and avoiding the FOD fear while simultaneously being considerably less expensive than the other option.
In a perfect world, taxiway A would be extended due west with a 90 degree access to Cargo 3 as indicated above. Eventually that will likely happen. Given the enormous amount of investment already going into the QR project it was a reasonable design compromise. Even as it is, its a pretty tight maneuver getting off that ramp.


So the oddball alignment of the "A" extension comes down to cost, just like I thought. Thanks for the confirmation.

Its a shame they did not reconstruct a proper ramp for Cargo A, and then they go ahead and use it for non-aviation purposes. If it was available for what it was intended for then it could have saved the $7-8 million that was spent on this project for QR. Then to redo this taxiway extension in the future will again cost more than necessary.

I suppose they could just extend the ramp of Cargo 3 all the way south to where the originally planned taxiway "A" was to be, essentially making the originally planned "A" a taxilane on the ramp. This way the "A" dogleg extension would not go to waste as it would form part of an extended ramp. This has the added benefit of making all of Cargo 3 compatible for Group V (B777) and VI aircraft (B748f). I don't see why QR Cargo could not serve ORD with the B-748f in the future; in that case we would see that aircraft as well assuming we are still served as all at that point.

Not expanding to the west on speculation makes sense if removing the hill is going to increase the cost. However, there is still the PIT Int'l Logistics Centre on the other side of that hill with pad ready sites ready to build on. Perhaps the ACAA should put up a spec building there if they are going to be serious about developing a logistics industry. It took IND and LCK decades to get where they are.

I had heard the reason UPS did not take the entire Cargo 3 is because the lease rates at PIT are the highest in their entire global system. I find that hard to believe.... but then look at the landing fees they charge signatory cargo airlines:
http://www.flypittsburgh.com/getattachment/Doing-Business/Fees-Rates-and-Charges-11-20-2018.pdf.aspx?lang=en-US
Page 2

The cargo carriers already pay more in landing fees than their passenger counterparts due to the use of larger aircraft. Then the ACAA charges more per 1,000 pounds on top of it?!?! That's ridiculous considering PIT's high fees are due to the terminal construction which has nothing to do with the cargo carriers.
FLYi
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri Nov 30, 2018 3:11 am

Maybe there is a glimmer of hope for WOW Air at PIT:

"The Pittsburgh route, which is year-round, has been suspended starting Jan. 12. Wow spokeswoman Anna Romano said the airline has not canceled the Pittsburgh route. But the fleet reduction forced some “necessary restructuring.”"
https://www.cleveland.com/travel/2018/11/icelandair-calls-off-purchase-of-wow-air-pittsburgh-flight-in-jeopardy.html
FLYi
 
Gsasala
Posts: 47
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2018 6:04 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri Nov 30, 2018 3:32 am

I've always wondered why Columbus and Cincinnati have such big cargo operations and Pittsburgh have such a basic cargo lineup. I heard someone say that Columbus is in a better spot but I don't think so, Columbus is only 150 mi from Pittsburgh so it's not location and it's not size since Pittsburgh is a lot bigger than Columbus.
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri Nov 30, 2018 4:37 am

Gsasala wrote:
I've always wondered why Columbus and Cincinnati have such big cargo operations and Pittsburgh have such a basic cargo lineup. I heard someone say that Columbus is in a better spot but I don't think so, Columbus is only 150 mi from Pittsburgh so it's not location and it's not size since Pittsburgh is a lot bigger than Columbus.

Actually location is better in those cities as they are closer to the geographic center of the overall US population. That's why SDF, CVG, and IND are all hubs for the integrators. Having said that, Pittsburgh is hardly in a bad location being situated between the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and Midwest. Half way between NYC and Chicago; Toronto and Atlanta.

Another reason those cities have much more advanced logistics operations beyond being hubs for the integrators is their vastly superior highway system. With interstates radiating out in all directions, being 4 lanes each way, and having a proper beltway it makes those cities so much more attractive than Pittsburgh to freight forwarders and airlines who depend on road feeder services. When Emirates and Cathay Pacific land at LCK much of their freight is trucked elsewhere.
FLYi
 
User avatar
dabpit
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 10:19 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:44 pm

JamesRenard wrote:
From the other thread, WOW might be saved by Indigo Partners.

https://markets.businessinsider.com/new ... 1027768928

Awesome move by Indigo Partners. Maybe we will see a tie-up between WOW and WIZZ and even Frontier similar to the Frontier/Volaris tie-up? Glad to see WOW getting a lifeline and hopefully they can prosper under Franke.
Carpe Diem
 
AaronPGH
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 9:13 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri Nov 30, 2018 3:10 pm

WW's behavior in adding and deleting destinations at whim certainly fits in with F9. Definitely great news though. Not going to lie, I am kinda loving this Icelandic drama rollercoaster.
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri Nov 30, 2018 4:11 pm

Atlas Air operated BWI-PIT-CLT with one of their passenger 763s:
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GTI8226/history/20181130/1040Z/KBWI/KPIT
FLYi
 
User avatar
Runway28L
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:35 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:30 pm

This sketch also shows the original layout planned for the cargo complex.

Image
Greetings from KPIT! Check out my photos here: http://www.airliners.net/search?user=45 ... teAccepted
 
JamesRenard
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2018 9:16 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sat Dec 01, 2018 5:21 am

F9's booking window on Google Flights has been extended to Aug 11th:
  • MCO and SAN have no further flights beyond Jan 4th.
  • PBI has no service past Apr 27th.
  • DEN does continue, and increases from 2x to 3x weekly from May.
 
ctrabs0114
Posts: 507
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:09 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sat Dec 01, 2018 2:41 pm

Gsasala wrote:
I've always wondered why Columbus and Cincinnati have such big cargo operations and Pittsburgh have such a basic cargo lineup. I heard someone say that Columbus is in a better spot but I don't think so, Columbus is only 150 mi from Pittsburgh so it's not location and it's not size since Pittsburgh is a lot bigger than Columbus.


CMH has better interstate access via I-70 from the east-west and I-71 from the north-south. You also have I-75 an hour to the west and I-77 about an hour to the east. Also, most cargo ops serving Columbus are out of LCK, if I'm not mistaken, so it's not as though cargo and passenger flights intermingle much at LCK/CMH as they do at PIT.
2018: BWI, PIT, MDW, MCI, STL, DAL, ATL, BNA
 
RichardWelling
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 2:45 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sat Dec 01, 2018 11:47 pm

flyPIT wrote:
Gsasala wrote:
I've always wondered why Columbus and Cincinnati have such big cargo operations and Pittsburgh have such a basic cargo lineup. I heard someone say that Columbus is in a better spot but I don't think so, Columbus is only 150 mi from Pittsburgh so it's not location and it's not size since Pittsburgh is a lot bigger than Columbus.

Actually location is better in those cities as they are closer to the geographic center of the overall US population. That's why SDF, CVG, and IND are all hubs for the integrators. Having said that, Pittsburgh is hardly in a bad location being situated between the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and Midwest. Half way between NYC and Chicago; Toronto and Atlanta.

Another reason those cities have much more advanced logistics operations beyond being hubs for the integrators is their vastly superior highway system. With interstates radiating out in all directions, being 4 lanes each way, and having a proper beltway it makes those cities so much more attractive than Pittsburgh to freight forwarders and airlines who depend on road feeder services. When Emirates and Cathay Pacific land at LCK much of their freight is trucked elsewhere.


Its also due in part of the limited brands, Nike, Victoria Secret having set up shop in CMH and LCK.
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 12:19 am

RichardWelling wrote:
Its also due in part of the limited brands, Nike, Victoria Secret having set up shop in CMH and LCK.

Absolutely. So one must ask why did all those retailers set up their logistics operation in Columbus? It probably comes down to the same reasons... location, infrastructure already in place, developable parcels, lower taxes, etc.

Some might remember several years ago Pittsburgh based American Eagle Outfitters was responsible for 1-3x weekly 747F charters for several months from Asia because they had a large distribution center in the North Hills. That facility has since been relocated elsewhere.
FLYi
 
User avatar
ConcourseZ
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:07 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 3:12 pm

flyPIT wrote:
RichardWelling wrote:
Its also due in part of the limited brands, Nike, Victoria Secret having set up shop in CMH and LCK.

Absolutely. So one must ask why did all those retailers set up their logistics operation in Columbus? It probably comes down to the same reasons... location, infrastructure already in place, developable parcels, lower taxes, etc.

Some might remember several years ago Pittsburgh based American Eagle Outfitters was responsible for 1-3x weekly 747F charters for several months from Asia because they had a large distribution center in the North Hills. That facility has since been relocated elsewhere.

AE moved the distribution center to Hazel Twp, PA, south of Wilkes Barre and not near anything. I-81 runs through the town with I-80 nearby and no beltway.
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 3:28 pm

ConcourseZ wrote:
AE moved the distribution center to Hazel Twp, PA, south of Wilkes Barre and not near anything. I-81 runs through the town with I-80 nearby and no beltway.
Not near anything? Other than NYC and Philly, both of which are under 2 hours away. No need for a beltway around a town of 10,000 but distribution centers are popping up all over that area as well as the Lehigh Valley.

Hazleton was even the site of a proposed privately owned cargo only airport:
https://www.aviationpros.com/news/10392819/cargo-only-airport-proposed-for-eastern-pa
Last edited by flyPIT on Sun Dec 02, 2018 3:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
FLYi
 
User avatar
ConcourseZ
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:07 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 3:34 pm

flyPIT wrote:
ConcourseZ wrote:
AE moved the distribution center to Hazel Twp, PA, south of Wilkes Barre and not near anything. I-81 runs through the town with I-80 nearby and no beltway.
Not near anything? Other than NYC and Philly, both of which are under 2 hours away. No need for a beltway around a town of 10,000 but distribution centers are popping up all over that area as well as the Lehigh Valley.

Not near anything. What airport are they using?
 
User avatar
ConcourseZ
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:07 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 3:36 pm

AA1623 (B763) from MIA diverted to PIT from PHL.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL1623
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 3:39 pm

ConcourseZ wrote:
flyPIT wrote:
ConcourseZ wrote:
AE moved the distribution center to Hazel Twp, PA, south of Wilkes Barre and not near anything. I-81 runs through the town with I-80 nearby and no beltway.
Not near anything? Other than NYC and Philly, both of which are under 2 hours away. No need for a beltway around a town of 10,000 but distribution centers are popping up all over that area as well as the Lehigh Valley.

Not near anything. What airport are they using?

I'm not sure they are using any airport for their stuff right now? If so, as stated NYC and PHL are only a couple hours away. It is common to truck air cargo several hours.
FLYi
 
 
ctrabs0114
Posts: 507
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:09 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 3:57 pm

flyPIT wrote:


The 744 appears to be the reposition flight from BWI to PIT ahead of the LA Chargers' charter flight from Pittsburgh.

The 763 might have been a charter related to Pitt's appearance in the ACC title game (probably the band and/or VIPs/donors, since the team flew back overnight on LL621 (Miami Air)). That 763, N662GT, flew PIT-CLT as 5Y8226 on Friday.
Last edited by ctrabs0114 on Sun Dec 02, 2018 4:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
2018: BWI, PIT, MDW, MCI, STL, DAL, ATL, BNA
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 4:03 pm

ctrabs0114 wrote:
flyPIT wrote:


I wonder if the 744 was the Chargers' charter flight into Pittsburgh.


I believe so. It came in from LAX a couple days ago so now its back to take them back to LA.

What about the 763 to and from CLT? PITT Football played Cemson yesterday so that was probably them but why not use GSP? If it is indeed PITT its pretty funny they have a larger charter than the Steelers.
FLYi
 
ctrabs0114
Posts: 507
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:09 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 4:08 pm

flyPIT wrote:
ctrabs0114 wrote:
flyPIT wrote:


I wonder if the 744 was the Chargers' charter flight into Pittsburgh.


I believe so. It came in from LAX a couple days ago so now its back to take them back to LA.

What about the 763 to and from CLT? PITT Football played Cemson yesterday so that was probably them but why not use GSP? If it is indeed PITT its pretty funny they have a larger charter than the Steelers.


Pitt's ACC championship game vs. Clemson was at Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte, hence the flight to CLT and not GSP.
2018: BWI, PIT, MDW, MCI, STL, DAL, ATL, BNA
 
User avatar
Runway28L
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:35 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 4:20 pm

DL1831 (BWI-MSP) also diverted to PIT this morning due to a tech issue. B752 rescue plane ferried in to pick up the passengers.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/DL1831

C-17 02-1101 from the 911th AW is currently doing pattern work here this morning.
Greetings from KPIT! Check out my photos here: http://www.airliners.net/search?user=45 ... teAccepted
 
User avatar
flyPIT
Posts: 1226
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:21 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 4:30 pm

Some Boutique Air news:
-They applied for an EAS contract from Watertown, NY with 3 proposals, one of which included a daily flight to PIT. Even if they are not awarded this it's nice to see them actively trying to expand their presence here.
-They already interline with United and will start an agreement with American this month, and will start taks with Delta.
-They are considering the Piaggio Avanti twin turboprop although it's not much of a capacity increase over the PC-12.
http://northcountrynow.com/news/boutique-air-president-tells-massena-board-they-have-restructured-management-fix-service-issues

Image
FLYi
 
Friarboy
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 12:46 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 02, 2018 10:35 pm

flyPIT wrote:
ctrabs0114 wrote:
flyPIT wrote:


I wonder if the 744 was the Chargers' charter flight into Pittsburgh.


I believe so. It came in from LAX a couple days ago so now its back to take them back to LA.

What about the 763 to and from CLT? PITT Football played Cemson yesterday so that was probably them but why not use GSP? If it is indeed PITT its pretty funny they have a larger charter than the Steelers.


Pitt's roster shows 112 players. NFL teams are limited to 53. Thus they need a larger aircraft.

Also the game was at Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte.
 
User avatar
Runway28L
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:35 pm

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Mon Dec 03, 2018 12:01 am

Changes for PIT in this week's OAG:

F9 DEN-PIT MAY 0>0.4[0.5] JUL 0>0.4[0.5]
UA DEN-PIT MAY 2>3[1.8]
UA EWR-PIT MAY 9>8[7]

So F9 remains 3x weekly to DEN for the summer, UA starts the 3rd daily DEN flight a month earlier than originally planned, and EWR picks up an additional frequency in May '19 vs May '18.
Greetings from KPIT! Check out my photos here: http://www.airliners.net/search?user=45 ... teAccepted
 
flightsimer
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:34 am

Re: PIT Update Discussion Thread - 2018

Mon Dec 03, 2018 4:36 am

The Atlas 747 is indeed the Chargers charter. A friend of mine brought it in.
Commercial / Airline Pilot

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos