Hi everyone, happy easter all.

I was wondering if someone can give us some clues in terms of comparision between the Airport costs for Norwegian for desserving JFK / StewarT or Boston / Providence?

Both routes at not flew with the sames aircrafts but can someone light to see if there's a real difference for Norwegian to fly to those secondaries airports?

Also, does Norwegian get some state/public money or equivalent from Stewart or Providence?

Thanks for your feedbacks.

While I don't know specifics, BOS Terminal E costs (already significantly higher than PVD) will be jumping 72% in the next 5 years which will surely help PVD's international cost comparison

Indeed the benefits of smaller secondary airports is that they're much cheaper than the large major airports when it comes to landing and handling costs. This is specially true in Europe where airlines like Ryanair and Wizzair fly into a lot of secondary airports and generally avoid the big expensive ones. Passengers that fly these airlines don't mind a bit of inconvenience if it saves them money.

Also small airports are more flexible when it comes to scheduling, they got availability the whole day long. On a major airport you're lucky if you can get slots at all even if they're at a time that isn't perfect. Smaller airports often aren't slot controlled and even if they are, slots are mostly widely available. You can arrive and depart at a time that suits you.

I know that for the New York area Newark isn't slot controlled but it's known to be the most expensive airport in the whole USA in terms of landing and handling costs. Airlines are in no position to negotiate about this, the airport can charge anything they want. If the airline finds it too much they can leave, there are plenty of other airlines willing to take it. On Stewart on the other hand Norwegian has a strong negotiation position, for this airport it's either Norwegian or nothing. If Norwegian leaves they don't have any income, so they're willing to do quite something to keep Norwegian there.

Flying in to and out of a secondary airport can often be a lovely stress free experience. It depends on the airport. Trip reports for Norwegian flights to these airports seem to indicate that most people using these flights are happy with the airports.

I wonder when DY will start flying 787s to SWF, I think the demand is there and it is cheaper than JFK or EWR. But DY is a strange airline sometimes...

PatrickZ80 wrote:

On Stewart on the other hand Norwegian has a strong negotiation position, for this airport it's either Norwegian or nothing. If Norwegian leaves they don't have any income, so they're willing to do quite something to keep Norwegian there.

Norwegian doesn't quite have the negotiation leverage you think in the case of SWF. The Port Authority of NY & NJ, which operates EWR, JFK, and LGA (as well as TEB), also operates SWF. The Port Authority would like to see SWF develop as an alternative to the Big 3 NYC airports to help alleviate congestion, but they're not exactly in a position of desperation.

ScottB wrote:

PatrickZ80 wrote:

On Stewart on the other hand Norwegian has a strong negotiation position, for this airport it's either Norwegian or nothing. If Norwegian leaves they don't have any income, so they're willing to do quite something to keep Norwegian there.

Norwegian doesn't quite have the negotiation leverage you think in the case of SWF. The Port Authority of NY & NJ, which operates EWR, JFK, and LGA (as well as TEB), also operates SWF. The Port Authority would like to see SWF develop as an alternative to the Big 3 NYC airports to help alleviate congestion, but they're not exactly in a position of desperation.

The idea of SWF being NYC's 4th airport was floated around 20 years ago. It never took hold. I would like to see Norwegian in a couple of years and see if they are still flying some of these oddball routes to smaller cities. My guess is they won't.

EvanWSFO wrote:

ScottB wrote:

PatrickZ80 wrote:

On Stewart on the other hand Norwegian has a strong negotiation position, for this airport it's either Norwegian or nothing. If Norwegian leaves they don't have any income, so they're willing to do quite something to keep Norwegian there.

Norwegian doesn't quite have the negotiation leverage you think in the case of SWF. The Port Authority of NY & NJ, which operates EWR, JFK, and LGA (as well as TEB), also operates SWF. The Port Authority would like to see SWF develop as an alternative to the Big 3 NYC airports to help alleviate congestion, but they're not exactly in a position of desperation.

The idea of SWF being NYC's 4th airport was floated around 20 years ago. It never took hold. I would like to see Norwegian in a couple of years and see if they are still flying some of these oddball routes to smaller cities. My guess is they won't.

Don’t even have to look that far back. Port Authority has been actively trying to make it New York’s 4th airport for the last 10 years. They even renamed it “New York Stewart” last month. Norwegian is the first airline willing to play ball with them

Maybe you think $3 a seat will change anybody's mind.

'The Port Authority will pay up to $3 per departing seat offered by airlines on new nonstop routes, with the total benefit not to exceed $250,000 for international routes and $150,000 for domestic routes in the first full year of nonstop service.'

http://www.panynj.gov/swf/incentive.html

PatrickZ80 wrote:

Indeed the benefits of smaller secondary airports is that they're much cheaper than the large major airports when it comes to landing and handling costs. This is specially true in Europe where airlines like Ryanair and Wizzair fly into a lot of secondary airports and generally avoid the big expensive ones. Passengers that fly these airlines don't mind a bit of inconvenience if it saves them money.

Also small airports are more flexible when it comes to scheduling, they got availability the whole day long. On a major airport you're lucky if you can get slots at all even if they're at a time that isn't perfect. Smaller airports often aren't slot controlled and even if they are, slots are mostly widely available. You can arrive and depart at a time that suits you.

I know that for the New York area Newark isn't slot controlled but it's known to be the most expensive airport in the whole USA in terms of landing and handling costs. Airlines are in no position to negotiate about this, the airport can charge anything they want. If the airline finds it too much they can leave, there are plenty of other airlines willing to take it. On Stewart on the other hand Norwegian has a strong negotiation position, for this airport it's either Norwegian or nothing. If Norwegian leaves they don't have any income, so they're willing to do quite something to keep Norwegian there.

The problem with LCC's and secondary airports in the US is that their lower airport costs are usually more than offset by the lower RASM traffic they attract...

Stewart, NYC 4th Airport??? Good luck with that one. I don't see that happening,

I'm not sure if we will ever see 787's on Norwegian coming to SWF. The runway can handle it. The terminal would be pretty crowded, and i'm not sure if they jetbridges are capable, but they could always bus to a remote stand. Its possible, but its a lot of seats to fill. I think you'd see their current schedule go to daily offerings before they bring in a larger A/C.

Anyone who lives north of NYC, such as Westchester County or Fairfield County, CT SWF is amazingly appealing in terms of traffic compared to LGA and (shudder) JFK. You will suffer on the Van Wyck every time.

I'm sorry. I didn't answer the original question. There certainly are lots of benefits to the customer so I hope it keeps working for them!

spinkid wrote:

Anyone who lives north of NYC, such as Westchester County or Fairfield County, CT SWF is amazingly appealing in terms of traffic compared to LGA and (shudder) JFK. You will suffer on the Van Wyck every time.

Traffic to LGA from Westchester used to be pretty awful going over the Whitestone or Triboro Bridges, but with EZ Pass, the bridge traffic really isn't as bad as it used to be outside of rush hour. Plus going over the Whitestone lets you avoid some of the traffic to/from Manhattan on the Grand Central Parkway.

But the big issue for SWF vis a vis Westchester is that it's still very far away from most of the population in the county, which is overwhelmingly in its southern third. The drive over the Tappan Zee Bridge is no treat, either. Either way you're dealing with a crappy bridge (and 684 to 84 through Putnam & Dutchess is a long detour) so LGA ends up being a better option.

For most of Fairfield, apart from Danbury and the towns around it, getting to SWF is a pain in the butt. 84 is usually an easy drive to SWF, but getting to 84 from southern Fairfield (where the vast majority of the population lies, just as with Westchester) is difficult with both Routes 7 and 25 being 2-lane roads for most of their length. So you drive down to Port Chester and then the hour-plus out to SWF, or just keep going another half hour to LGA.

Really, SWF has a decent catchment of its own with Orange, Dutchess, Ulster, Putnam, and far northern Rockland (as well as Westchester) Counties all adding up to around a million in population. But they're in NYC's air service shadow, and it becomes very difficult to compete with the schedule & price options at the NYC airports.

Ok. Candid question as I'm not from the US. Why then Norwegian didn't flew the 737s to Westchester Airport instead of Steward, as Westchester seems to be closer to NYC than Stewart?

A380MSN004 wrote:

Ok. Candid question as I'm not from the US. Why then Norwegian didn't flew the 737s to Westchester Airport instead of Steward, as Westchester seems to be closer to NYC than Stewart?

1. Terrible transit access (the public transit route there has very limited hours to the point where nearby SUNY Purchase has its own shuttle service)
2. Immigration and customs facilities would have to be built.
3. Short runway with no room to expand (about 6500 feet; SWF’s main runway is 11,800 feet long and can handle an A380 and one diverted there in January).
4. Maximum of four gates can be used at any one time.

A380MSN004 wrote:

Ok. Candid question as I'm not from the US. Why then Norwegian didn't flew the 737s to Westchester Airport instead of Steward, as Westchester seems to be closer to NYC than Stewart?

Because Westchester is a domestic airport only and doesn't have any facilities for international traffic. There's no immigration or customs. However, with preclearance they would be able to use it but that would limit their airport choice at the European end of the line. Plus of course Westchester has a relatively short runway so the plane might be weight-restricted.

usflyer msp wrote:

The problem with LCC's and secondary airports in the US is that their lower airport costs are usually more than offset by the lower RASM traffic they attract...

Maybe I'm thinking the European way, but I seriously doubt that. Of course, for secondary airports, passengers don't come naturally. You have to do something to attract them, like having good ground connections. An airport without ground connections won't work, that's why each and every single secondary airport in Europe has ground connections. Bus services between the airport and the city are pretty essential and Norwegian made sure such bus services existed at Stewart.

Also, people go where the flights are. If there are no flights, it's only logical that there are no passengers either. Therefor as an airport you got to make sure to have flights. If there's flights and the passengers have a way to get to the airport, they'll come.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

A380MSN004 wrote:

Ok. Candid question as I'm not from the US. Why then Norwegian didn't flew the 737s to Westchester Airport instead of Steward, as Westchester seems to be closer to NYC than Stewart?

1. Terrible transit access (the public transit route there has very limited hours to the point where nearby SUNY Purchase has its own shuttle service)
2. Immigration and customs facilities would have to be built.
3. Short runway with no room to expand (about 6500 feet; SWF’s main runway is 11,800 feet long and can handle an A380 and one diverted there in January).
4. Maximum of four gates can be used at any one time.

Thanks for feedback. As i'm European, this is very helpful and interesting for me.

Another candid question, what about ISP / Mc Arthur Airport?
It's closer to Manhattan. There's couple of jetbridges.

Why airlines sur as Aer Lingus / Norwzgian etc prefers Stewart compared to Long Island?

Also, is this Long Island well located regarding catching area?

Many thankks

A380MSN004 wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

A380MSN004 wrote:

Ok. Candid question as I'm not from the US. Why then Norwegian didn't flew the 737s to Westchester Airport instead of Steward, as Westchester seems to be closer to NYC than Stewart?

1. Terrible transit access (the public transit route there has very limited hours to the point where nearby SUNY Purchase has its own shuttle service)
2. Immigration and customs facilities would have to be built.
3. Short runway with no room to expand (about 6500 feet; SWF’s main runway is 11,800 feet long and can handle an A380 and one diverted there in January).
4. Maximum of four gates can be used at any one time.

Thanks for feedback. As i'm European, this is very helpful and interesting for me.

Another candid question, what about ISP / Mc Arthur Airport?
It's closer to Manhattan. There's couple of jetbridges.

Why airlines sur as Aer Lingus / Norwzgian etc prefers Stewart compared to Long Island?

Also, is this Long Island well located regarding catching area?

Many thankks

Slight correction on my earlier post: DUB and SNN are pre-cleared there. EI has a partnership with B6 at BOS and JFK and thus uses their gates and services. As for why not ISP...runway length is likely an issue constrained by development. Stewart is a joint civil-military airport. Long Island has JFK as its catchment. Southwest drew down from ISP once it got the former ATA slots at LGA and slots from the CO/UA divestiture at EWR and moved most flights to NYC and Newark.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

A380MSN004 wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

1. Terrible transit access (the public transit route there has very limited hours to the point where nearby SUNY Purchase has its own shuttle service)
2. Immigration and customs facilities would have to be built.
3. Short runway with no room to expand (about 6500 feet; SWF’s main runway is 11,800 feet long and can handle an A380 and one diverted there in January).
4. Maximum of four gates can be used at any one time.

Thanks for feedback. As i'm European, this is very helpful and interesting for me.

Another candid question, what about ISP / Mc Arthur Airport?
It's closer to Manhattan. There's couple of jetbridges.

Why airlines sur as Aer Lingus / Norwzgian etc prefers Stewart compared to Long Island?

Also, is this Long Island well located regarding catching area?

Many thankks

Slight correction on my earlier post: DUB and SNN are pre-cleared there. EI has a partnership with B6 at BOS and JFK and thus uses their gates and services. As for why not ISP...runway length is likely an issue constrained by development. Stewart is a joint civil-military airport. Long Island has JFK as its catchment. Southwest drew down from ISP once it got the former ATA slots at LGA and slots from the CO/UA divestiture at EWR and moved most flights to NYC and Newark.

Very interesting, thanks

As ISP is not operated by Port Authority but by the city of Islip, conditions must be interesting?

In terms of road connections, bus, rails. What airport has the best assets : Stewart? Westchester? Long Island?

A380MSN004 wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

A380MSN004 wrote:

Thanks for feedback. As i'm European, this is very helpful and interesting for me.

Another candid question, what about ISP / Mc Arthur Airport?
It's closer to Manhattan. There's couple of jetbridges.

Why airlines sur as Aer Lingus / Norwzgian etc prefers Stewart compared to Long Island?

Also, is this Long Island well located regarding catching area?

Many thankks

Slight correction on my earlier post: DUB and SNN are pre-cleared there. EI has a partnership with B6 at BOS and JFK and thus uses their gates and services. As for why not ISP...runway length is likely an issue constrained by development. Stewart is a joint civil-military airport. Long Island has JFK as its catchment. Southwest drew down from ISP once it got the former ATA slots at LGA and slots from the CO/UA divestiture at EWR and moved most flights to NYC and Newark.

Very interesting, thanks

As ISP is not operated by Port Authority but by the city of Islip, conditions must be interesting?

In terms of road connections, bus, rails. What airport has the best assets : Stewart? Westchester? Long Island?

Probably Stewart as it’s right off two interstate highways.

MIflyer12 wrote:

Maybe you think $3 a seat will change anybody's mind.

'The Port Authority will pay up to $3 per departing seat offered by airlines on new nonstop routes, with the total benefit not to exceed $250,000 for international routes and $150,000 for domestic routes in the first full year of nonstop service.'

http://www.panynj.gov/swf/incentive.html

That's the rack rate before additional negotiation over new routes, more traffic, international service. I bet they got a very good deal indeed, especially given how under-served SWF is and how it is keen to grow.

Pe@rson wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Maybe you think $3 a seat will change anybody's mind.

'The Port Authority will pay up to $3 per departing seat offered by airlines on new nonstop routes, with the total benefit not to exceed $250,000 for international routes and $150,000 for domestic routes in the first full year of nonstop service.'

http://www.panynj.gov/swf/incentive.html

That's the rack rate before additional negotiation over new routes, more traffic, international service. I bet they got a very good deal indeed, especially given how under-served SWF is and how it is keen to grow.

It does not work like that in the US. Since airports are public entities, all the carriers have to given the same deal and it has to be done transparently...

No back room deals are allowed...

Who says it's a back room deal? If they're open about the discounts they're giving Norwegian and are willing to give those same discounts to other airlines, I don't see the problem. But even without any additional discount and just the regular fees Stewart remains a cheap airport, far cheaper than JFK or Newark for example. Those airports both charge much higher fees.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

Who says it's a back room deal? If they're open about the discounts they're giving Norwegian and are willing to give those same discounts to other airlines, I don't see the problem. But even without any additional discount and just the regular fees Stewart remains a cheap airport, far cheaper than JFK or Newark for example. Those airports both charge much higher fees.

I've briefly checked the fees of SWF and EWR, there's a ratio of 1 to 10. So yes it makes sense even if the plateform is far away from Manhattan.

I've recently red an article about the new agressive rates of the "biz" class of WOW http://www.businessinsider.fr/us/wow-air-low-cost-airline-new-business-class-seat-cheap-tickets-2018-4

I'm curious to have biz travelers feedbacks. Would they prefer Biz Seats from main airports (JFK LGW for instance) with a connection at KEF

Or

Would they prefer go with a cool Biz Seat (Mint type for instance) on a Single Aisle but with a Direct flight from secondary airports (SWF LTN for instance) ?

PatrickZ80 wrote:

Who says it's a back room deal? If they're open about the discounts they're giving Norwegian and are willing to give those same discounts to other airlines, I don't see the problem. But even without any additional discount and just the regular fees Stewart remains a cheap airport, far cheaper than JFK or Newark for example. Those airports both charge much higher fees.

I was responding to the poster implying that DY has a better deal than the Airport's published rates imply.

Anyway, I still don't see the big deal about Stewart's lower fees. If SWF is $30 per passenger cheaper than JFK but you have to discount $400 per passenger to get someone to consider flying from there are you really winning?

aemoreira1981 wrote:

A380MSN004 wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Slight correction on my earlier post: DUB and SNN are pre-cleared there. EI has a partnership with B6 at BOS and JFK and thus uses their gates and services. As for why not ISP...runway length is likely an issue constrained by development. Stewart is a joint civil-military airport. Long Island has JFK as its catchment. Southwest drew down from ISP once it got the former ATA slots at LGA and slots from the CO/UA divestiture at EWR and moved most flights to NYC and Newark.

Very interesting, thanks

As ISP is not operated by Port Authority but by the city of Islip, conditions must be interesting?

In terms of road connections, bus, rails. What airport has the best assets : Stewart? Westchester? Long Island?

Probably Stewart as it’s right off two interstate highways.

Its also not as Isolated as ISP. ISP will only draw from Long Island and the Eastern Areas of NYC like Brooklyn and Queens, but Queens is home to JFK and LGA.

SWF offers bus service to NYC, but the airport can be accessed by most of CT, Upstate NY, and parts of PA and NJ quite easily.

Lets add a very simple stat to this discussion.

Overall Load Factor June 2017-October 2017 for all D8 flights from PVD/SWF/BDL - 68%

I think they can get more revenue from BOS and JFK/EWR

Also PVD has no weekend rail service AND Boston's fractured commuter rail system (Having North and South Station) doesn't help.

adamh8297 wrote:

Lets add a very simple stat to this discussion.

Overall Load Factor June 2017-October 2017 for all D8 flights from PVD/SWF/BDL - 68%

That's pretty low, but it's a first year operation.

Let's compare them with 2018 later this year.

A380MSN004 wrote:

adamh8297 wrote:

Lets add a very simple stat to this discussion.

Overall Load Factor June 2017-October 2017 for all D8 flights from PVD/SWF/BDL - 68%

That's pretty low, but it's a first year operation.

Let's compare them with 2018 later this year.

I"m sure November and February are a total disaster. Cutting BDL and anything BGO should help.

A380MSN004 wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

A380MSN004 wrote:

Ok. Candid question as I'm not from the US. Why then Norwegian didn't flew the 737s to Westchester Airport instead of Steward, as Westchester seems to be closer to NYC than Stewart?

1. Terrible transit access (the public transit route there has very limited hours to the point where nearby SUNY Purchase has its own shuttle service)
2. Immigration and customs facilities would have to be built.
3. Short runway with no room to expand (about 6500 feet; SWF’s main runway is 11,800 feet long and can handle an A380 and one diverted there in January).
4. Maximum of four gates can be used at any one time.

Thanks for feedback. As i'm European, this is very helpful and interesting for me.

Another candid question, what about ISP / Mc Arthur Airport?
It's closer to Manhattan. There's couple of jetbridges.

Why airlines sur as Aer Lingus / Norwzgian etc prefers Stewart compared to Long Island?

Also, is this Long Island well located regarding catching area?

Many thankks

Aer Lingus do not fly to SWF, they fly to JFK, EWR, BDL, and BOS

adamh8297 wrote:

Lets add a very simple stat to this discussion.

Overall Load Factor June 2017-October 2017 for all D8 flights from PVD/SWF/BDL - 68%

I think they can get more revenue from BOS and JFK/EWR

Also PVD has no weekend rail service AND Boston's fractured commuter rail system (Having North and South Station) doesn't help.

I don't agree, I don't think they can get more revenue from Boston or New York JFK / Newark. It doesn't match with the "passengers go where the flights are" statement.

If you're in the center of New York, you're in the catchment area of several airports. Those are of course JFK and Newark, but the catchment area of Stewart also extends into New York City due to the bus service between the airport and the city. So if you're looking for a flight all of those airports are options. It doesn't matter from what airport the flight goes as long as you're within the catchment area.

The only thing you'd cause by moving those flights to JFK or Newark is that they'd become more expensive and therefor less attractive. This might reduce the load factors even further. Also you face the problem that these airports are a lot busier. For example JFK is slot controlled which means you can't just fly into there at the time you want to. You have to get slots which are not easy to get and certainly not at the time you want to have your flights. You might have to shift your flights to less favourable times of the day which will also reduce the load factors. At Newark there are often heavy delays because there are far more flights than there is capacity, plus Newark is the most expensive airport in the whole USA. As a LCC you want to stay away from those costs.

Same thing is true for Boston since the catchment area for Providence airport extends into Boston. When you're in Boston, Providence is certainly a viable option and a true competitor to Boston airport. It might be a bit further away, but it's also much cheaper. That little bit of inconvenience translates itself into a lower fare.

Then what needs to happen to increase the load factors on these flights? Well, the problem certainly isn't in America. The problem is in Europe since all European airports that have these flights are basically dead ends. They're no hubs for Norwegian, there are no feeder flights further into Europe. If Norwegian would consolidate all European airports that currently got flights to Providence and Stewart to one hub and funnel all of the demand from Europe through that one hub, they can cut costs (one full plane instead of two half-full planes) and increase demand by adding more connections into Europe.

You got Primera dumping even lower fares in Boston and New York.

Norwegain needs to get away from the fill in planes and not grow 787 routes tull they ensure they are on 787s, one of the primary complaints is seating snafus because of this.

If I use them and have to sit in Rome for a couple of extra days, I have a great boss and will enjoy the bonus but others aren't so lucky.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

I don't agree, I don't think they can get more revenue from Boston or New York JFK / Newark. It doesn't match with the "passengers go where the flights are" statement.

If you're in the center of New York, you're in the catchment area of several airports. Those are of course JFK and Newark, but the catchment area of Stewart also extends into New York City due to the bus service between the airport and the city. So if you're looking for a flight all of those airports are options. It doesn't matter from what airport the flight goes as long as you're within the catchment area.

I completely disagree with you on this. This is an overly simplistic view of "catchment area" just because one lives within the "catchment area" does not mean all airports are equal. Catchment areas overlap but it absolutely does matter which airport the flight is leaving from. If I lived in Midtown Manhattan, the only reason I am going endure a 90 minute bus ride to SWF to fly is if the flight is significantly cheaper - think hundreds of dollars not tens of dollars - much more than the difference between JFK's and SWF's CPE.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

Same thing is true for Boston since the catchment area for Providence airport extends into Boston. When you're in Boston, Providence is certainly a viable option and a true competitor to Boston airport.

Again, I disagree with this. There is some overlap between the catchment areas but no one in Jamaica Plain or Newton is looking for flights from PVD unless they are super cheap. Thanks to all the competition, TATL flights from BOS are so inexpensive that there is no need for BOS residents to consider PVD.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

It might be a bit further away, but it's also much cheaper. That little bit of inconvenience translates itself into a lower fare.

I think that is a big assumption. PVD is cheaper than BOS for the AIRLINE not for the passenger. BOS has such high levels of competition that is going to be hard for PVD carriers to significantly undercut BOS fares and be profitable. As I have said before, secondary and tertiary airports have low costs but in long haul this is more that offset by the lack of premium traffic and significantly lower fares needed to attract traffic away from the primary airports...

Interesting discussion. I am currently working some of these calculations on my current trip.

I am in Northern Ireland due to a family emergency. Had to buy a ticket from Central Texas to Ireland in under 24 hours, not sure of my return. Bought a one way on Kayak, for Aer Lingus, operated out of Austin by British airways connecting through LRH to DUB. While there were cheaper offerings through Kiwi and other flight packagers using Norwegian through PVD and WOW through god knows where, this was not a trip I wanted to experiment on.

My airport choices were Waco, Killeen, DFW and Aus. Waco - Free parking, $100s more expensive because it goes through DFW. Kileen - Routing with Delta - was never a good fair for this choice. I really did not look at either for this trip. DFW - More expensive flights than Austin and higher parking fees. So Austin it was. Which was also my choice for my two prior planned Irish trips.

My point is that more than fare cost goes into the calculation of where to fly from. If I am flying to an AA Destination, and will be gone for a week, Waco is many times the better choice than DFW because while I will pay more for the airfare, that can be off set by the free parking, hassle free security and avoiding metroplex traffic. How much is parking at Stewart? How much do you want to avoid city traffic?

Now I have a little more time to plan my return trip, and Kiwi is stringing together a Norwegian flight Belfast to PVD with a Frontier flight to AUS for half the price of an Aer Lingus itinerary from DUB to AUS through either JFK or ORD. I am tempted just to try it out. I also toyed wit the idea of going through KEF just to be able to say I have been to Iceland, but that would be 2 stops.

SWF has another big subsidiary from the base for the NY Air National Guard. It is far enough away from the more immediate NYC metro airports so fewer traffic delays. There is room to grow for terminals and other facilities. If you visit the site, you can see the foundations and former US Air Base buildings there. SWF started as private GA airport in the early 1930's, then during the depression sold to the local town then taken over by the US Army to train cadets at West Point, about 15 miles away, in flying, then an Air Force Base until the 1970's and a NY ANG base since then.
SWF is good for those low cost carriers due to low fees (for now), few air traffic delays and good ground access (2 interstate highways, I-84 and NY Thruway).

They save money.

Lower fees, can probably say employees less or get much better ones for the same price (newburgh is WAY WAY cheaper than Queens for rent and everything) less delays which cost money, faster turn around. Norweigan can save alot and for long trips people are willing to travel. For the less frequent passenger the stress is so much less parking is so easy, walk to plane, way cheaper, hotels in the area are cheaper if bad weather, shorter security lines. It's a very low stress experience just a little driving but with a family in a mini van the stress you save at a small airport makes up for a little drive.

FrmrKSEngr wrote:

Interesting discussion. I am currently working some of these calculations on my current trip.

I am in Northern Ireland due to a family emergency. Had to buy a ticket from Central Texas to Ireland in under 24 hours, not sure of my return. Bought a one way on Kayak, for Aer Lingus, operated out of Austin by British airways connecting through LRH to DUB. While there were cheaper offerings through Kiwi and other flight packagers using Norwegian through PVD and WOW through god knows where, this was not a trip I wanted to experiment on.

My airport choices were Waco, Killeen, DFW and Aus. Waco - Free parking, $100s more expensive because it goes through DFW. Kileen - Routing with Delta - was never a good fair for this choice. I really did not look at either for this trip. DFW - More expensive flights than Austin and higher parking fees. So Austin it was. Which was also my choice for my two prior planned Irish trips.

My point is that more than fare cost goes into the calculation of where to fly from. If I am flying to an AA Destination, and will be gone for a week, Waco is many times the better choice than DFW because while I will pay more for the airfare, that can be off set by the free parking, hassle free security and avoiding metroplex traffic. How much is parking at Stewart? How much do you want to avoid city traffic?

Now I have a little more time to plan my return trip, and Kiwi is stringing together a Norwegian flight Belfast to PVD with a Frontier flight to AUS for half the price of an Aer Lingus itinerary from DUB to AUS through either JFK or ORD. I am tempted just to try it out. I also toyed wit the idea of going through KEF just to be able to say I have been to Iceland, but that would be 2 stops.

The connection will be super easy. The BFS flight lands at 5:20pm and the AUS flight around 9pm. You’ll be through customs and back into the gate area in no time since its one terminal. If you’re checking luggage, the Frontier desk is steps away from the security checkpoint. A few people I know who work at PVD have told me more and more passengers are making these connections so you may not be the only one foing this.

PVD757 wrote:

FrmrKSEngr wrote:

Now I have a little more time to plan my return trip, and Kiwi is stringing together a Norwegian flight Belfast to PVD with a Frontier flight to AUS for half the price of an Aer Lingus itinerary from DUB to AUS through either JFK or ORD. I am tempted just to try it out. I also toyed wit the idea of going through KEF just to be able to say I have been to Iceland, but that would be 2 stops.

The connection will be super easy. The BFS flight lands at 5:20pm and the AUS flight around 9pm. You’ll be through customs and back into the gate area in no time since its one terminal. If you’re checking luggage, the Frontier desk is steps away from the security checkpoint. A few people I know who work at PVD have told me more and more passengers are making these connections so you may not be the only one foing this.

PVD757 - Thanks for the feedback. I will take it into consideration.

ltbewr wrote:

SWF has another big subsidiary from the base for the NY Air National Guard. It is far enough away from the more immediate NYC metro airports so fewer traffic delays. There is room to grow for terminals and other facilities. If you visit the site, you can see the foundations and former US Air Base buildings there. SWF started as private GA airport in the early 1930's, then during the depression sold to the local town then taken over by the US Army to train cadets at West Point, about 15 miles away, in flying, then an Air Force Base until the 1970's and a NY ANG base since then.
SWF is good for those low cost carriers due to low fees (for now), few air traffic delays and good ground access (2 interstate highways, I-84 and NY Thruway).

SWF is indeed an ANG base, in particular a cargo one ( ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stewart_A ... Guard_Base ). I lived in the area during Desert Storm and there were convoys parked on the NY Thruway all queued up for eventual boarding on a C-5A off to the big sandpit. Looks like the home unit has transitioned to C-17s since.

FrmrKSEngr wrote:

Now I have a little more time to plan my return trip, and Kiwi is stringing together a Norwegian flight Belfast to PVD with a Frontier flight to AUS for half the price of an Aer Lingus itinerary from DUB to AUS through either JFK or ORD. I am tempted just to try it out. I also toyed wit the idea of going through KEF just to be able to say I have been to Iceland, but that would be 2 stops.

May I suggest you first check the price of both flights directly at the airlines and add them up and then compare that to what Kiwi charges for it. I bet it's cheaper to book directly at the airlines, this can easily save you a nice amount of money.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

FrmrKSEngr wrote:

Now I have a little more time to plan my return trip, and Kiwi is stringing together a Norwegian flight Belfast to PVD with a Frontier flight to AUS for half the price of an Aer Lingus itinerary from DUB to AUS through either JFK or ORD. I am tempted just to try it out. I also toyed wit the idea of going through KEF just to be able to say I have been to Iceland, but that would be 2 stops.

May I suggest you first check the price of both flights directly at the airlines and add them up and then compare that to what Kiwi charges for it. I bet it's cheaper to book directly at the airlines, this can easily save you a nice amount of money.

Thanks, that is usually the way I work it. Kayak for a ranging shot, then got to the Airline site to verify prices. Generally prefer booking through the Airline to avoid any problems later. Kiwi's guarantee is that they will complete your trip or refund the interrupted portion. Small comfort when stranded in who knows where.

adamh8297 wrote:

Lets add a very simple stat to this discussion.

Overall Load Factor June 2017-October 2017 for all D8 flights from PVD/SWF/BDL - 68%

I think they can get more revenue from BOS and JFK/EWR

Also PVD has no weekend rail service AND Boston's fractured commuter rail system (Having North and South Station) doesn't help.

More stats for those interested.
Load factors :
- 2017 SWF DUB 83%
- 2017 SWF EDI 76%
- 2017 SWF BFS 66%

- 2017 PVD DUB 68%
- 2017 PVD EDI 60%
- 2017 PVD BFS 46%

PVD stats will be skewed downward due to runway construction last summer.

In general,for this type of service SWF will likely do better because they are "New York", and despite what you read in the BOS threads, Boston is not a large city with a metro area 1/5 the size of New York.

The problem and the challenge is that PVD's real advantage comes when in 5 years BOS terminal E costs will be 72% higher than they are now. Right now some can make the cost up in fare, but for the smaller international carriers, that squeeze is coming, we just have to wait it out.

A380MSN004 wrote:

adamh8297 wrote:

Lets add a very simple stat to this discussion.

Overall Load Factor June 2017-October 2017 for all D8 flights from PVD/SWF/BDL - 68%

I think they can get more revenue from BOS and JFK/EWR

Also PVD has no weekend rail service AND Boston's fractured commuter rail system (Having North and South Station) doesn't help.

More stats for those interested.
Load factors :
- 2017 SWF DUB 83%
- 2017 SWF EDI 76%
- 2017 SWF BFS 66%

- 2017 PVD DUB 68%
- 2017 PVD EDI 60%
- 2017 PVD BFS 46%

What about SWF-BGO and SWF-SNN?

lesfalls wrote:

A380MSN004 wrote:

adamh8297 wrote:

Lets add a very simple stat to this discussion.

Overall Load Factor June 2017-October 2017 for all D8 flights from PVD/SWF/BDL - 68%

I think they can get more revenue from BOS and JFK/EWR

Also PVD has no weekend rail service AND Boston's fractured commuter rail system (Having North and South Station) doesn't help.

More stats for those interested.
Load factors :
- 2017 SWF DUB 83%
- 2017 SWF EDI 76%
- 2017 SWF BFS 66%

- 2017 PVD DUB 68%
- 2017 PVD EDI 60%
- 2017 PVD BFS 46%

What about SWF-BGO and SWF-SNN?

SWF BGO 64%
SWF BG 68%

RL757PVD wrote:

In general,for this type of service SWF will likely do better because they are "New York", and despite what you read in the BOS threads, Boston is not a large city with a metro area 1/5 the size of New York.

The problem and the challenge is that PVD's real advantage comes when in 5 years BOS terminal E costs will be 72% higher than they are now. Right now some can make the cost up in fare, but for the smaller international carriers, that squeeze is coming, we just have to wait it out.

I don't think anyone believes BOS is at all comparable to New York City or major cities like that.

Also, where does the 72% come from exactly? I've got no doubt the costs will go up, as you can't build a massive expansion without some increase. But what's the source?

FGITD wrote:

RL757PVD wrote:

In general,for this type of service SWF will likely do better because they are "New York", and despite what you read in the BOS threads, Boston is not a large city with a metro area 1/5 the size of New York.

The problem and the challenge is that PVD's real advantage comes when in 5 years BOS terminal E costs will be 72% higher than they are now. Right now some can make the cost up in fare, but for the smaller international carriers, that squeeze is coming, we just have to wait it out.

I don't think anyone believes BOS is at all comparable to New York City or major cities like that.

Also, where does the 72% come from exactly? I've got no doubt the costs will go up, as you can't build a massive expansion without some increase. But what's the source?

The massport board meeting presentations, it was the January or February one that had it. Terminal E costs will increase 72% in the next 5 years.

RL757PVD wrote:

I don't think anyone believes BOS is at all comparable to New York City or major cities like that.

Also, where does the 72% come from exactly? I've got no doubt the costs will go up, as you can't build a massive expansion without some increase. But what's the source?

The massport board meeting presentations, it was the January or February one that had it. Terminal E costs will increase 72% in the next 5 years.[/quote]

thank you, it was indeed February. I think it's worth noting however that while the prices will go up, it's not an arbitrary money grab. A big, brand new terminal expansion Is being built, and the airlines will benefit Greatly from that.

I live very close to SWF. From my own experience, as well as talking to friends and neighbors, Norwegian is actually creating demand that might not have existed. For example, I hadn’t ever thought of Ireland as a holiday destination, but I’m taking advantage of the Norwegian fares and SWF convenience for a Fall holiday with my grown children. I know many people who are doing the same. I try to use SWF whenever possible, but other than nonstop service to Florida, they all involve a hub transfer, and I’ve been burned a few times by DL/AA regionals. Beyond SWF, my first choice is Newark, trying to avoid JFK entirely, and I won’t even consider LGA anymore. White Plains can be an option, but you have the same regional/hub issues as SWF.