The only other airline offered a lit sign next to British Airways was United.

Today, there is a giant Alaska logo in its place. Looks sexy.

I would paste photo but not sure how.

Would love to see a photo of this!

I'm sorry, but I don't understand the topic! What does this mean? Not at all clear to me

sassiciai wrote:

I'm sorry, but I don't understand the topic! What does this mean? Not at all clear to me

This was the exterior of T7 some years ago; Alaska signage is now in United's place:

T7 is the BA terminal.

There are several airlines in the terminal, but the large name atop the building is BA.

When UA was in the terminal, they had 6 gates. They also got their own sign, I guess, due to the amount of space they leased.

No other airline before or since had their own sign on T7...until Alaska.

There have been several posts on a.net about Alaska’s commitment or lack there of to transcons.

The new lounge, Coupled with an obvious long-term lease says a lot

jfklganyc wrote:

The only other airline offered a lit sign next to British Airways was United.

Today, there is a giant Alaska logo in its place. Looks sexy.

I would paste photo but not sure how.

The usual format is [img]URL[/img]

How much progress have they made on the renovation at T7?

airliner371 wrote:

How much progress have they made on the renovation at T7?

Every few hundred million that they spend, makes it look like they've spent hardly anything. Time to bulldoze and rebuild or strip it down to the studs for a proper reno. BA and others could use T8 in the meantime.

airliner371 wrote:

How much progress have they made on the renovation at T7?

Having just flown out of T7 on Virgin America to LAX last week it seems like a lot of work is being done as a lot of sections were boarded up. Post security definitely needs some TLC, I have flown out of every other terminal at JFK, T7 was by far the most lackluster.

With that being said I'd be very interested to see the Alaska sign because it wasn't there just last week or at least I didn't notice it. Virgin America service was very nice transcon, I hope Alaska is able to continue that.

NameOmitted wrote:

For reference (I had not known, so assume others may not know either) Alaska apparently has gates 1-12.

Are those like alternating numbers? Like 6 gates total?

For reference (I had not known, so assume others may not know either) Alaska apparently has gates 1-12.

I had no idea that Alaska has such a large presence there, is any of that they do useful for BA connections, or since they to transcontinental flights, is it generally assumed Europeans world fly to a Pacific gateway before getting on ALK metal?

NameOmitted wrote:

I had no idea that Alaska has such a large presence there, is any of that they do useful for BA connections, or since they to transcontinental flights, is it generally assumed Europeans world fly to a Pacific gateway before getting on ALK metal?

Virigin America is Alaska now...

With the purchase of Virgin America, Alaska has non-stop flights from JFK to LAX, SFO, SEA, PDX, LAS and PSP (seasonal),

You never know, SANFan....I heard there's some new routes coming. Hope you get in on the action!

I wonder if this signifies the end of Alaska's remodeling of their operation in the terminal?

If so, maybe we'll see a new destination announced from JFK soon? I would guess it would be a transcon, prolly to a city in CA... Hmmmm, let me think now....

bb

I wonder if they'll start swapping some of those daytime slots to their SEA/PDX flights.

NameOmitted wrote:

For reference (I had not known, so assume others may not know either) Alaska apparently has gates 1-12.

There are only twelve gates at T7 - I think all of them are common usage.

hiflyeras wrote:

You never know, SANFan....I heard there's some new routes coming. Hope you get in on the action!

So have I hiflyer'. In fact, I've heard multiple suggestions from reliable sources over the last year or so that JFK-SAN is pretty close to the top of The List! And I keep wondering about the future of the LAS-JFK flight once Virgin is gone?

AS could actually begin SAN-JFK tomorrow if they wanted -- we have plenty of RONs at SDIA every night that could fly a red-eye to JFK and return the following morning, much like the SEA and PDX (and LAS) flights do now. And avoiding the need for slots. (Assuming there's gate space in the early morning for another AS departure.)

I'm staying tuned!

bb

Wow, and how many years ago did United leave JFK?

cschleic wrote:

Wow, and how many years ago did United leave JFK?

United left in October 2015 by which time they were only operating their ps services to SFO and LAX:

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/ ... -yorks-jfk

hiflyeras wrote:

With the purchase of Virgin America, Alaska has non-stop flights from JFK to LAX, SFO, SEA, PDX, LAS and PSP (seasonal),

I’d say that SAN is the only glaring hole. Perhaps SJC as well. PSP seems like a stretch for AS to retain. What about DAL?

I just want a precheck line in T7.

32andBelow wrote:

I wonder if they'll start swapping some of those daytime slots to their SEA/PDX flights.

I doubt it. The JFK flights from Virgin were likely some of their only profitable flights. Alaska probably won't touch those at all.

jfklganyc wrote:

The only other airline offered a lit sign next to British Airways was United.

Today, there is a giant Alaska logo in its place. Looks sexy.

I would paste photo but not sure how.

Let’s see it!!

eta unknown wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

T7 is the BA terminal.
There are several airlines in the terminal, but the large name atop the building is BA.
When UA was in the terminal, they had 6 gates. They also got their own sign, I guess, due to the amount of space they leased.
No other airline before or since had their own sign on T7...until Alaska.

When originally opened in early 70's, the outside signage was British Airways and Air Canada... can be a googled image search.

It was originally the BOAC Terminal (BOAC merged with BEA in 1974 to become BA):

Feroze wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

T7 is the BA terminal.
There are several airlines in the terminal, but the large name atop the building is BA.
When UA was in the terminal, they had 6 gates. They also got their own sign, I guess, due to the amount of space they leased.
No other airline before or since had their own sign on T7...until Alaska.

When originally opened in early 70's, the outside signage was British Airways and Air Canada... can be a googled image search.

It was originally the BOAC Terminal (BOAC merged with BEA in 1974 to become BA):

Amazing how much it has changed.

And still no photo!

What is surprising is that Terminal 7 has survived the transformation from BOAC to BA, for many years they only had 3 747 daily to LHR today they have 7 or 8 all in the evening, except 1 morning daylight flight to LHR. Though many other airlines have used T7 the mix has changed over the years. Recently many have been OW partners but Qantas and Cathay moved to AA T8.

In 1970 Terminal 7 was a great asset for BOAC but times have and BA's terminal has not, why not ? BA needs to be bold and make a deal with the PANYNJ to be anchor of a new terminal for itself and alliance partners or move to an expanded AA T8. Its time to address the next 50 years of BA operations at JFK with a building worthy of such an airline and its most important destination.

BA is investing US$65mil into renovating T7
https://www.britishairways.com/en-us/in ... fk-changes

AS is opening their new 'Alaska Lounge' at JFK this month
http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/ ... ounge-jfk/

Feroze wrote:

NameOmitted wrote:

For reference (I had not known, so assume others may not know either) Alaska apparently has gates 1-12.

There are only twelve gates at T7 - I think all of them are common usage.

Thank you. I suppose we just met three limitations of someone from Anchorage trying to make sense of JFK.

hiflyeras wrote:

AS is opening their new 'Alaska Lounge' at JFK this month
http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/ ... ounge-jfk/

So perhaps this DOES signal the end of AS's work on T7?

Next step then perhaps a new route from Kennedy???!

bb

It sure did look good back in the day with a United Tulip.

eta unknown wrote:

Good find with the BOAC photo! I know there's a plaque inside the building saying the Queen opened the building - and yes,the plaque says BOAC/Air Canada.

Thank you!

The Air Canada signage is also just visible on the very right hand side of the facade.....

UA444 wrote:

It sure did look good back in the day with a United Tulip.

How about this one?!

Any pictures of the sign yet?

eta unknown wrote:

Good find with the BOAC photo! I know there's a plaque inside the building saying the Queen opened the building - and yes,the plaque says BOAC/Air Canada.

I know that plaque as well. For the longest time it was hidden after a lobby renovation. Don't know if it has since been re-exposed.

"What is surprising is that Terminal 7 has survived the transformation from BOAC to BA, for many years they only had 3 747 daily to LHR today they have 7 or 8 all in the evening, except 1 morning daylight flight to LHR. Though many other airlines have used T7 the mix has changed over the years."
No the BA flights were always more than that. In the 70's you had the 707/VC10 (BA 178), 2 Concordes (BA 2 & 4), 2 747's (BA 174 & 176)to LHR + MAN sometimes. There was also all the 3rd party handling work: TAP, South African, Nigeria, Air Jamaica, BWIA

In addition, by the 80's MAN (BA 182?) had become daily. Not sure about the equipment but I think it started using L1011s before switching to 767s. Around that time they also had daily service to LGW (BA 172) eventually using DC10s from their absorption of British Caledonian. Then there was also the short-lived daily BHX service. I can't remember when that was other than it was done with 757s. I want to say there was a daily service to Scotland for a short while too. T7 was quite busy just with BA's operations and diverse fleet!

No one has managed to snap a photo of this yet?

The moment you've all been waiting for is here!

I asked jfklganyc to email me his photo, so I could post it.


gif upload site

Honestly I think it looks a little off-centered. But its great to see it up there.

Oooh, I just saw the little swooshes in the upper left corner of the top of the building facade... nice touch.

Heres a picture from today! Rainy here in NY

Heres a second picture from today - April 3 2018

Awesome!!! Thank you all!

PlanesNTrains wrote:

hiflyeras wrote:

With the purchase of Virgin America, Alaska has non-stop flights from JFK to LAX, SFO, SEA, PDX, LAS and PSP (seasonal),

I’d say that SAN is the only glaring hole. Perhaps SJC as well. PSP seems like a stretch for AS to retain. What about DAL?

In the event this happens, would AS drop SAN-EWR for SAN-JFK, or does anyone think they could both coexist? I think it’s possible

LAXffDUB wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

Good find with the BOAC photo! I know there's a plaque inside the building saying the Queen opened the building - and yes,the plaque says BOAC/Air Canada.

I know that plaque as well. For the longest time it was hidden after a lobby renovation. Don't know if it has since been re-exposed.

"What is surprising is that Terminal 7 has survived the transformation from BOAC to BA, for many years they only had 3 747 daily to LHR today they have 7 or 8 all in the evening, except 1 morning daylight flight to LHR. Though many other airlines have used T7 the mix has changed over the years."
No the BA flights were always more than that. In the 70's you had the 707/VC10 (BA 178), 2 Concordes (BA 2 & 4), 2 747's (BA 174 & 176)to LHR + MAN sometimes. There was also all the 3rd party handling work: TAP, South African, Nigeria, Air Jamaica, BWIA

In addition, by the 80's MAN (BA 182?) had become daily. Not sure about the equipment but I think it started using L1011s before switching to 767s. Around that time they also had daily service to LGW (BA 172) eventually using DC10s from their absorption of British Caledonian. Then there was also the short-lived daily BHX service. I can't remember when that was other than it was done with 757s. I want to say there was a daily service to Scotland for a short while too. T7 was quite busy just with BA's operations and diverse fleet!

The mid-1990s were certainly a bit of a heyday for variety. For example, Summer 1996:

• BA001/BA002 SSC LHR-JFK
• BA003/BA004 SSC LHR-JFK (Didn't operate in August)
• BA112/BA113 763 LHR-JFK (01/06-26/10)
• BA116/BA117 747 LHR-JFK
• BA172/BA173 D10 LGW-JFK (31/03-30/06)
• BA172/BA173 763 LGW-JFK (01/07-26/10)
• BA174/BA175 747 LHR-JFK
• BA176/BA177 744 LHR-JFK
• BA178/BA179 747 LHR-JFK
• BA182/BA183 763 MAN-JFK
• BA186/BA187 757 BHX-JFK
• BA204/BA205 757 GLA-JFK-BOS (X26 31/03-31/05, X2 01/06-26/10)

So in June there were twelve BA arrivals/departures (including the BOS tag) with six different aircraft types. Only the newly introduced 777 was missing from the longhaul line-up at that time.

The Winter 1996-97 timetable saw JFK-YYZ introduced as a tag on the BHX-JFK flight, and BA was able to utilise fifth freedom rights (it was shown in the timetables as BA1174/BA1175 for JFK-YYZ but was BA186/BA187 throughout).

allegiantflyer wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

hiflyeras wrote:

With the purchase of Virgin America, Alaska has non-stop flights from JFK to LAX, SFO, SEA, PDX, LAS and PSP (seasonal),

I’d say that SAN is the only glaring hole. Perhaps SJC as well. PSP seems like a stretch for AS to retain. What about DAL?

In the event this happens, would AS drop SAN-EWR for SAN-JFK, or does anyone think they could both coexist? I think it’s possible

The lack of nonstop service to JFK from DAL on AS is not a huge hole since WN and AS both have multiple daily nonstops to LGA from DAL. However, I could see B6 possibly adding nonstop service to DFW from JFK since B6 does not have nonstop service to DFW or DAL from any of the NYC area airports, since there is a lot of demand to NYC from both DFW and DAL, since the DFW Metroplex is the largest market in the U.S. that B6 does not serve nonstop from JFK, since there are some NYC-area travelers who prefer to fly on B6 over AS or WN, and since B6 prefers to use JFK for new nonstop routes out of NYC (even to destinations within the LGA perimeter). B6 also has more than enough room at DFW to add JFK-DFW nonstop service, whereas AS does not have enough room at DAL to add JFK-DAL nonstop service with AS already fully utilizing both of its gates at DAL and with WN and DL fully utilizing the other 18 gates at DAL. B6 adding JFK-DFW nonstop service is more likely than AS adding JFK-DAL nonstop service.

I could see AS possibly adding JFK-SAN nonstop service since WN does not serve JFK and since SAN is beyond the LGA perimeter. I also agree that AS could possibly add JFK-SJC nonstop service since there are some former VX customers in Silicon Valley who might be willing to fly to JFK from SJC on AS if AS adds SJC-JFK nonstop service.

If AS does add JFK-SAN nonstop service, AS might still keep SAN-EWR nonstop service. I think that both SAN-JFK and SAN-EWR nonstop service could exist on AS, and AS (or VX) does serve SEA, PDX, SFO, and LAX nonstop from both JFK and EWR.

allegiantflyer wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

hiflyeras wrote:

With the purchase of Virgin America, Alaska has non-stop flights from JFK to LAX, SFO, SEA, PDX, LAS and PSP (seasonal),

I’d say that SAN is the only glaring hole. Perhaps SJC as well. PSP seems like a stretch for AS to retain. What about DAL?

In the event this happens, would AS drop SAN-EWR for SAN-JFK, or does anyone think they could both coexist? I think it’s possible

Just remember - you asked.

Given the importance SAN has in the AS network, I would imagine that SANEWR and SANJFK (when it comes, because odds are it will) can definitely coexist.

Is it just me or is it cool as hell to see a NYC terminal with British Airways and Alaska on the frontal facade? Both ANC and LHR are roughly the same distance (give or take 100 miles). Any other terminal in the world have two so different carries on the building itself?

Those curved lines above and to the left of the title, do you suppose they are the outline of a green and blue swish that will act as a counterbalance to BA's ribbon on the other side of the façade?

And OzarkD9S? Yeah, it's pretty cool.