What do you think?

ISP is hurt by geography being on an island - the catchment area is narrower compared to STN. Also two airports (LGA + JFK) are in between it and Manhattan. You don't travel past another airport going to Central London from STN.

Isn't that what Stewart in Newburgh kind of tries to be, with all those cheap Norwegian flights?

Not with the current transportation links, no. Islip is pretty far out into Long Island, the LIRR is virtually unreliable, traffic is a nightmare on I-495 (LIE) and I just cannot see ISP becoming a major airport with hundreds of flights per day. The airport shares JFK's airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is.

ISP serves Long Island and that will not change.

Cointrin330 wrote:

Not with the current transportation links, no. Islip is pretty far out into Long Island, the LIRR is virtually unreliable, traffic is a nightmare on I-495 (LIE) and I just cannot see ISP becoming a major airport with hundreds of flights per day. The airport shares JFK's airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is.

ISP serves Long Island and that will not change.

Newark is pretty far out..., traffic is a nightmare. The airport shares JFK, EWR and LGA airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is.
Stansted is pretty far out..., traffic is a nightmare. The airport shares LHR, LGW and LTN airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is, but it has another airports STN and SEN.

I just can see ISP becoming a major airport with hundreds of flights per day, because LIRR is getting better and NYC has huge potential.


ISP serves NYC and that will not change.

adamh8297 wrote:

ISP is hurt by geography being on an island - the catchment area is narrower compared to STN. Also two airports (LGA + JFK) are in between it and Manhattan. You don't travel past another airport going to Central London from STN.

STN is hurt by geography being out of London - the catchment area of ISP is narrower compared to STN and that is extremely important since it has more than enough airspace over both side of island.
Also two airports (LGA + JFK) are in between it and Manhattan and they are full and expensive including EWR.
You don't travel past another airport going to Central London from STN because nobody really cares, what really is important is lower cost of air fares.

Nobody from CT or NJ are going to drive past NYC to go to ISP. And if you live in the city why would you go to ISP when transportation to the NY3 is far simpler? It’s really only good for those who live on Long Island.

GalebG4 wrote:

adamh8297 wrote:

ISP is hurt by geography being on an island - the catchment area is narrower compared to STN. Also two airports (LGA + JFK) are in between it and Manhattan. You don't travel past another airport going to Central London from STN.

STN is hurt by geography being out of London - the catchment area of ISP is narrower compared to STN and that is extremely important since it has more than enough airspace over both side of island.
Also two airports (LGA + JFK) are in between it and Manhattan and they are full and expensive including EWR.
You don't travel past another airport going to Central London from STN because nobody really cares, what really is important is lower cost of air fares.

But there's a lot of people that STN works for 7.5 million +.

All three airports NYC have dirt cheap advance coach fares.

I'm from BOS and have cheap bus access but here's a hypothetical situation: I live in ATL and need to visit relatives in the NYC area. I'd only consider ISP if they lived in Long Island and really close to ISP.

If I'm visiting LON I would consider all three airports. I've looked at Stansted Express and I find it to not be a horrible option to get to Central London. I would use it to save money or fly preferred carrier. I would use STN if B6 chooses to fly there.

GalebG4 wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

Not with the current transportation links, no. Islip is pretty far out into Long Island, the LIRR is virtually unreliable, traffic is a nightmare on I-495 (LIE) and I just cannot see ISP becoming a major airport with hundreds of flights per day. The airport shares JFK's airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is.

ISP serves Long Island and that will not change.

Newark is pretty far out..., traffic is a nightmare. The airport shares JFK, EWR and LGA airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is.
Stansted is pretty far out..., traffic is a nightmare. The airport shares LHR, LGW and LTN airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is, but it has another airports STN and SEN.

I just can see ISP becoming a major airport with hundreds of flights per day, because LIRR is getting better and NYC has huge potential.


ISP serves NYC and that will not change.

Where do folks come up with such statements? Newark (EWR) is NOT "...pretty far out" from NYC -- you can literally see the skyline right across the river! if I have a flight in the day time, I find it way easier to just take the PATH or NJ Transit into NJ and be on my way.

Regarding traffic...I mean... the New York City Metro/Tri-State area is the most populous metro in the USA and Canada so most places in the area have bad traffic.

Stop trying to make Islip happen...It's not going to happen -- the only time New Yorkers ever gave the *slightest* thought to ISP was when Southwest flew only into that airport and they were looking for super low fares to fly. Heck, I'd confidently wager that most NYCers have no idea that ISP even exists! Let's break it down like this: Manhattanites see everyone else as "bridge-and-tunnel" people. Outer borough folks literally see the border of Queens and Nassau County as an ersatz "line of demarcation" -- i.e. there is very little reason to go into Long Island. Oh, and on that same note, even though Brooklyn and Queens are (geographically) on Long Island, when people from there say "Long Island" they're literally referring to Nassau and Suffolk Counties (just like "upstate" is everywhere north of The Bronx).

EWR is closer to nearly all of Manhattan than JFK is. Not pretty far out. Average drive times to EWR are all shorter than JFK. Look it up on Google. ISP is way isolated from most of the metro area. SWF has a much better chance of growing into low fare center.

The #3, #5 and #6 carriers for NYC are LCCs serving JFK/EWR/LGA. I don't perceive a lack of access to be a problem. If you want to expand capacity look a legacy carrier median gauge. Stansted (and Luton) got a future because LHR and LGW have been crippled by runway constraints for decades. NYC doesn't need a Stansted.

ISP the next Stansted... Nah, Southend would be a more apt comparison. IMHO

Even if they had a terminal by the railway station Ronkonkoma-Penn is 82 mins, Stansted to Liverpool St is 50 mins.

Also away from London, Stansted is the most convenient airport for Cambridge and Norwich. I'm not completely sure about the eastern end of Long Island, but my understanding is that it's primarily somewhere people from the New York area go for holidays.

Didn't WN try to build ISP into their New York gateway back in the late 90s/2000s? Even as a WN fan I could not justify flying them into ISP when there were cheap fares to EWR/LGA/JFK even back in those days.

jetblueguy22 wrote:

Nobody from CT or NJ are going to drive past NYC to go to ISP. And if you live in the city why would you go to ISP when transportation to the NY3 is far simpler? It’s really only good for those who live on Long Island.

Why would you go to Long Island MacArthur when transportation to the three New York airports is far simpler? Primary reason: money. If the fares are significantly lower, this will motivate people to give up the convenience of the primary airports.

At Stansted the fares are significantly lower than at Heathrow, so that's one reason for Londoners to go to Stansted even though Heathrow is closer.

As someone has already mentioned, Stewart is also in a position to become the low-cost airport for New York just like Stansted is for London. But why can't they both be low-cost airports? After all London also has Luton which is in a similar position as Stansted. Looking at the runway length and the possibility to expand, I'd say Stewart is most comparable to Stansted and Long Island to Luton.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

At Stansted the fares are significantly lower than at Heathrow, so that's one reason for Londoners to go to Stansted even though Heathrow is closer.

That’s not the reason.

senatorflyer wrote:

That’s not the reason.

For you it might not be, but for a lot of people it is. How else would you explain the high traffic numbers at Stansted, which is basically in the middle of nowhere. At least Long Island MacArthur is located in the suburbs of New York, in a residential area. Stansted is far outside the city in the countryside and still a very busy airport.

Also, about a year ago I was in Pisa and while I was waiting for my flight there were two flights leaving for London at basically the same time (10 minutes in between I believe). One was British Airways to Heathrow, the other was Ryanair to Stansted. British Airways only had a hand full of people on board, Ryanair was packed. Every last seat was occupied. This indicates people prefer lower fares even if it means using an out of the way airport.

Stansted is not in the ‘middle of nowhere’ !
If you live in East London there are regular coaches that run 24 hours plus the train link. Also coaches and rail links from Central London.
If you want to drive its right next to a motorway.. so its very well connected to London. . it takes about an hour to get into central London.
All the London airports are well connected to public transport..

The the only times I have been to New York - JFK & LGA - I have used taxiis as couldn’t figure out the public transport..

PatrickZ80 wrote:

senatorflyer wrote:

That’s not the reason.

For you it might not be, but for a lot of people it is. How else would you explain the high traffic numbers at Stansted, which is basically in the middle of nowhere. At least Long Island MacArthur is located in the suburbs of New York, in a residential area. Stansted is far outside the city in the countryside and still a very busy airport.

Also, about a year ago I was in Pisa and while I was waiting for my flight there were two flights leaving for London at basically the same time (10 minutes in between I believe). One was British Airways to Heathrow, the other was Ryanair to Stansted. British Airways only had a hand full of people on board, Ryanair was packed. Every last seat was occupied. This indicates people prefer lower fares even if it means using an out of the way airport.

Stansted is not really in the middle of nowhere. It predominantly serves Essex, the Cambridge area and parts of North/North East/East London. Stansted is a pain to get to from anywhere else in London. Also the train tickets are the most expensive out of all airports and that doesn’t factor in the tube ride to the station.

I am sure there are exceptions to the rule but Londoners will book their short haul flights based on the closest airport to them. No one from south London will book a flight from Stansted if you have Gatwick around the corner or the other way around.

For tourists visiting, they usually don’t know any better and book whatever flight is the cheapest.

GalebG4 wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

Not with the current transportation links, no. Islip is pretty far out into Long Island, the LIRR is virtually unreliable, traffic is a nightmare on I-495 (LIE) and I just cannot see ISP becoming a major airport with hundreds of flights per day. The airport shares JFK's airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is.

ISP serves Long Island and that will not change.

Newark is pretty far out..., traffic is a nightmare. The airport shares JFK, EWR and LGA airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is.
Stansted is pretty far out..., traffic is a nightmare. The airport shares LHR, LGW and LTN airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is, but it has another airports STN and SEN.

I just can see ISP becoming a major airport with hundreds of flights per day, because LIRR is getting better and NYC has huge potential.


ISP serves NYC and that will not change.

If LIRR were improved, how long would it take to reach Penn Station?

Also from the passenger terminal, how to reach Ronkonkoma train station?

GalebG4 wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

Not with the current transportation links, no. Islip is pretty far out into Long Island, the LIRR is virtually unreliable, traffic is a nightmare on I-495 (LIE) and I just cannot see ISP becoming a major airport with hundreds of flights per day. The airport shares JFK's airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is.

ISP serves Long Island and that will not change.

Newark is pretty far out..., traffic is a nightmare. The airport shares JFK, EWR and LGA airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is.
Stansted is pretty far out..., traffic is a nightmare. The airport shares LHR, LGW and LTN airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is, but it has another airports STN and SEN.

I just can see ISP becoming a major airport with hundreds of flights per day, because LIRR is getting better and NYC has huge potential.


ISP serves NYC and that will not change.

You have no idea what you're talking about. ISP does not serve NYC, really. I mean, anyone in NYC can take a flight out of ISP, but why bother with EWR, JFK, and LGA a lot more accessible. EWR is NOT pretty far out. ISP will not now or ever become a major airport with hundreds of flights per day. And the LIRR being fixed? Good luck with that.

A380MSN004 wrote:

GalebG4 wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

Not with the current transportation links, no. Islip is pretty far out into Long Island, the LIRR is virtually unreliable, traffic is a nightmare on I-495 (LIE) and I just cannot see ISP becoming a major airport with hundreds of flights per day. The airport shares JFK's airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is.

ISP serves Long Island and that will not change.

Newark is pretty far out..., traffic is a nightmare. The airport shares JFK, EWR and LGA airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is.
Stansted is pretty far out..., traffic is a nightmare. The airport shares LHR, LGW and LTN airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is, but it has another airports STN and SEN.

I just can see ISP becoming a major airport with hundreds of flights per day, because LIRR is getting better and NYC has huge potential.


ISP serves NYC and that will not change.

If LIRR were improved, how long would it take to reach Penn Station?

Also from the passenger terminal, how to reach Ronkonkoma train station?

1. LIRR can be improved by less stations, 3min per station by 5 stations and you will get LIRR similar to Stansted Express.
2. Simply by making station inside of the termnal like Stansted airport.

GalebG4 wrote:

A380MSN004 wrote:

GalebG4 wrote:

Newark is pretty far out..., traffic is a nightmare. The airport shares JFK, EWR and LGA airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is.
Stansted is pretty far out..., traffic is a nightmare. The airport shares LHR, LGW and LTN airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is, but it has another airports STN and SEN.

I just can see ISP becoming a major airport with hundreds of flights per day, because LIRR is getting better and NYC has huge potential.


ISP serves NYC and that will not change.

If LIRR were improved, how long would it take to reach Penn Station?

Also from the passenger terminal, how to reach Ronkonkoma train station?

1. LIRR can be improved by less stations, 3min per station by 5 stations and you will get LIRR similar to Stansted Express.

2. Simply by making station inside of the termnal like Stansted airport.

And who is going to pay for that? Again, you're out of your depth here and have no idea what you're talking about.

Cointrin330 wrote:

GalebG4 wrote:

A380MSN004 wrote:

If LIRR were improved, how long would it take to reach Penn Station?

Also from the passenger terminal, how to reach Ronkonkoma train station?

1. LIRR can be improved by less stations, 3min per station by 5 stations and you will get LIRR similar to Stansted Express.

2. Simply by making station inside of the termnal like Stansted airport.

And who is going to pay for that? Again, you're out of your depth here and have no idea what you're talking about.

What about concession?

Never thu tried to lengthen the runway in the 1980’s and the local community cried bloody murder. By the 2000’s most of the airlines left and for awhile there was only South West. The locals will oppose any attempt to increase traffic. The Dc-9 and 727 noise scared the community indefinitely. Even though today the jets are much quieter.

“1. LIRR can be improved by less stations, 3min per station by 5 stations and you will get LIRR similar to Stansted Express.”

LIRR’s primary purpose Is commuter rail line for the people living on Long Island. The disruption to the schedule to clear the tracks for express trains from ISP to NYC would be prohibitive. 360,000 people use the LIRR every day. Could the LIRR do it? Sure, but at what cost and for how big of a benefit.

Hey! Long time listener, first time caller

Ok - Could it be done? Yes. Will it? Likely not.

Transportation - ok, the LIRR certainly can handle the load, at least in a few years when the third track in Nassau is finished. The Rokonkoma line just got a second track. It was 1 track for a good portion, until now. Running expresses would be no issue - they run Ronkonkoma trains express from Hicksville as it is. Sub one hour timings have been done in the past. The Long Island Expressway is near the airport, too.

There are a few million living on LI. Granted, Suffolk's not as packed out there, but there's a market.

Big issues? Runways are short. And, the neighbors will likely fight it.

I've always thought it'd make a good replacement for LGA, but it's not a flashy project, so the politicians aren't on board...

SWF? No. Long trip from midtown, no rail connection, no prospects of one (the closest line is slow, diesel, doesn't even go into NYC, and has virtually no service now.

I think ISP as the next regional's a good idea. Trouble is, nobody in power seems to

nasadowsk wrote:

Hey! Long time listener, first time caller

Ok - Could it be done? Yes. Will it? Likely not.

Transportation - ok, the LIRR certainly can handle the load, at least in a few years when the third track in Nassau is finished. The Rokonkoma line just got a second track. It was 1 track for a good portion, until now. Running expresses would be no issue - they run Ronkonkoma trains express from Hicksville as it is. Sub one hour timings have been done in the past. The Long Island Expressway is near the airport, too.

There are a few million living on LI. Granted, Suffolk's not as packed out there, but there's a market.

Big issues? Runways are short. And, the neighbors will likely fight it.

I've always thought it'd make a good replacement for LGA, but it's not a flashy project, so the politicians aren't on board...

SWF? No. Long trip from midtown, no rail connection, no prospects of one (the closest line is slow, diesel, doesn't even go into NYC, and has virtually no service now.

I think ISP as the next regional's a good idea. Trouble is, nobody in power seems to

Thank you on your answer!
100% agree with you!

Stansted has become a biz jet airport although it also has commercial why would anyone want to go all the way to Long Island when you can go out of TEB or MMU on a biz jet.

We already have a “Stansted of New York”. That is called New York Stewart Airport, aka SWF.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

senatorflyer wrote:

That’s not the reason.

For you it might not be, but for a lot of people it is. How else would you explain the high traffic numbers at Stansted, which is basically in the middle of nowhere. At least Long Island MacArthur is located in the suburbs of New York, in a residential area. Stansted is far outside the city in the countryside and still a very busy airport.

Also, about a year ago I was in Pisa and while I was waiting for my flight there were two flights leaving for London at basically the same time (10 minutes in between I believe). One was British Airways to Heathrow, the other was Ryanair to Stansted. British Airways only had a hand full of people on board, Ryanair was packed. Every last seat was occupied. This indicates people prefer lower fares even if it means using an out of the way airport.

Stansted's geography also gives it an advantage. It is the #1 choice for pretty much all of East Anglia and NE London. EK's new route is evidence of that, these people choose STN over LHR or LGW as they are on the opposite side of London. An airport cannot survive simply on low fares - A combination of catchment and reasonable fares is needed.

B1168 wrote:

We already have a “Stansted of New York”. That is called New York Stewart Airport, aka SWF.

True, but given that Stansted handles far more passengers than Stewart, there's a lot of growth potential at Stewart. If only there would be an airline to see it and make full use of it.

Let's face it, Stansted is big because of Ryanair. They're by far the largest airline at Stansted. Now if only the USA had a Ryanair-like airline...

PatrickZ80 wrote:

B1168 wrote:

We already have a “Stansted of New York”. That is called New York Stewart Airport, aka SWF.

True, but given that Stansted handles far more passengers than Stewart, there's a lot of growth potential at Stewart. If only there would be an airline to see it and make full use of it.

Let's face it, Stansted is big because of Ryanair. They're by far the largest airline at Stansted. Now if only the USA had a Ryanair-like airline...

Not until those taxes go away, I guess.
Also, the lack of rail link is a substantial issue for Stewart, for Stansted does have rail service. Based on my quick search, they probably don’t have greyhound buses either, making commute horrible. That will limit its growth a lot.

B1168 wrote:

Not until those taxes go away, I guess.
Also, the lack of rail link is a substantial issue for Stewart, for Stansted does have rail service. Based on my quick search, they probably don’t have greyhound buses either, making commute horrible. That will limit its growth a lot.

Stansted does indeed have rail service, however a lot of people go there by bus as this is cheaper than by train. There are various bus services competing with each other with cheap rides between Stansted and central London.

A bus service is easy to set up at Stewart, it doesn't cost much. In fact they already got one, the Stewart Airport Express on CoachUSA that was set up to meet the Norwegian flights. But since it can be booked separately it can be used for other flights as well. If others move in as well, they can compete with each other which will lead to lower prices.

One of the bus services at Stansted is EasyBus, from the same parent company as EasyJet. This doesn't mean this bus service is limited to EasyJet passengers only, anyone can use it. I've heard of several people flying Ryanair to Stansted and then taking EasyBus further into London.

And about those taxes, they can always be negotiated about the way Ryanair does. They simply say, if you want us to serve that airport and earn some taxes, this is how much we pay (and then they mention about 20% of the regular tax). Say no and we stay away, then you earn nothing. Say yes and you at least earn something. Anything is better than nothing.

GalebG4 wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

Not with the current transportation links, no. Islip is pretty far out into Long Island, the LIRR is virtually unreliable, traffic is a nightmare on I-495 (LIE) and I just cannot see ISP becoming a major airport with hundreds of flights per day. The airport shares JFK's airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is.

ISP serves Long Island and that will not change.

Newark is pretty far out..., traffic is a nightmare. The airport shares JFK, EWR and LGA airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is.
Stansted is pretty far out..., traffic is a nightmare. The airport shares LHR, LGW and LTN airspace and the region's airspace is clogged as it is, but it has another airports STN and SEN.

I just can see ISP becoming a major airport with hundreds of flights per day, because LIRR is getting better and NYC has huge potential.


ISP serves NYC and that will not change.

If you think EWR is “pretty far out” and “traffic is a nightmare” then you clearly don’t know what you’re talking about. Putting aside the fact that it is geographically closer to Manhattan then JFK, it’s also far easier to get into the City via the Holland than getting into the city via, say, the Van Wyck is.

The only thing EWR is “pretty far out” from is Philly...

PatrickZ80 wrote:

B1168 wrote:

Not until those taxes go away, I guess.
Also, the lack of rail link is a substantial issue for Stewart, for Stansted does have rail service. Based on my quick search, they probably don’t have greyhound buses either, making commute horrible. That will limit its growth a lot.

Stansted does indeed have rail service, however a lot of people go there by bus as this is cheaper than by train. There are various bus services competing with each other with cheap rides between Stansted and central London.

A bus service is easy to set up at Stewart, it doesn't cost much. In fact they already got one, the Stewart Airport Express on CoachUSA that was set up to meet the Norwegian flights. But since it can be booked separately it can be used for other flights as well. If others move in as well, they can compete with each other which will lead to lower prices.

One of the bus services at Stansted is EasyBus, from the same parent company as EasyJet. This doesn't mean this bus service is limited to EasyJet passengers only, anyone can use it. I've heard of several people flying Ryanair to Stansted and then taking EasyBus further into London.

And about those taxes, they can always be negotiated about the way Ryanair does. They simply say, if you want us to serve that airport and earn some taxes, this is how much we pay (and then they mention about 20% of the regular tax). Say no and we stay away, then you earn nothing. Say yes and you at least earn something. Anything is better than nothing.

Commuting is important for LCC flyers will be more reluctant to pay parking fees, so knowing the availability of buses is very nice.
Introducing LCC into SWF sounds legit, for LGA is limited by perimeter rule, EWR is basically(not entirely) UA-only, and JFK, well, is somewhat international oriented. If some LCCs like Moxy can take advantage of small equipment (I.e. A220) to offer a coverage of continental US and W.Europe, that would be perfect. I can already imagine how they bank their flights connecting passengers from 2nd tier European destinations to across the US.

To be frank, I'm not sure how long WN will stick it out at ISP. From my recent analysis, FLL/MCO/PBI all loose money out of ISP. They've even cut FLL for the summer/fall. I don't think it will take much for WN to leave the ISP to Florida market completely. Hard for WN to compete when JFK is right down the road. My guess is that down the road, WN's service just will be BWI and BNA.

What ISP needs to do is offer a lot of incentive (or get Schumer) to lure B6 into offering some flights out of ISP to BOS/FLL/MCO/PBI. Other than that, I guess F9 could expand there.

GalebG4 wrote:

nasadowsk wrote:

Hey! Long time listener, first time caller

Ok - Could it be done? Yes. Will it? Likely not.

Transportation - ok, the LIRR certainly can handle the load, at least in a few years when the third track in Nassau is finished. The Rokonkoma line just got a second track. It was 1 track for a good portion, until now. Running expresses would be no issue - they run Ronkonkoma trains express from Hicksville as it is. Sub one hour timings have been done in the past. The Long Island Expressway is near the airport, too.

There are a few million living on LI. Granted, Suffolk's not as packed out there, but there's a market.

Big issues? Runways are short. And, the neighbors will likely fight it.

I've always thought it'd make a good replacement for LGA, but it's not a flashy project, so the politicians aren't on board...

SWF? No. Long trip from midtown, no rail connection, no prospects of one (the closest line is slow, diesel, doesn't even go into NYC, and has virtually no service now.

I think ISP as the next regional's a good idea. Trouble is, nobody in power seems to

Thank you on your answer!
100% agree with you!

You might as well give it up. ISP will never be more than it is right now. If anything, less. WN can utilized those a/c on other routes.

adamh8297 wrote:

ISP is hurt by geography being on an island - the catchment area is narrower compared to STN. Also two airports (LGA + JFK) are in between it and Manhattan. You don't travel past another airport going to Central London from STN.

I think ISP could a good alternative to LGA, JFK, EWR.
SWF, HPN, ISP are outside city of nyc. i think SWF is the furthest and the most inconvenient and public transportation pretty bad to that airport. HPN is a slightly more closer but a 20min ride from the metronorth. I think the metro north runs pretty smooth there and there is just there just needs to be a shuttle bus to take you to the airport.

ISP is 50miles east of nyc and very close to the long island rail road. Like a 5 min drive to the airport. Butt i think that Ronkonkoma line is congested so depending when you take the train the experiences might vary.

I am not sure of isp capabilities as an airport but i think to much flights to that airport would conflict with JFK arrivals and departures. The same with HPN LGA and EWR might a traffic conflict

adamh8297 wrote:

ISP is hurt by geography being on an island - the catchment area is narrower compared to STN. Also two airports (LGA + JFK) are in between it and Manhattan. You don't travel past another airport going to Central London from STN.

I think ISP could a good alternative to LGA, JFK, EWR.
SWF, HPN, ISP are outside city of nyc. i think SWF is the furthest and the most inconvenient and public transportation pretty bad to that airport. HPN is a slightly more closer but a 20min ride from the metronorth. I think the metro north runs pretty smooth there and there is just there just needs to be a shuttle bus to take you to the airport.

ISP is 50miles east of nyc and very close to the long island rail road. Like a 5 min drive to the airport. Butt i think that Ronkonkoma line is congested so depending when you take the train the experiences might vary.

I am not sure of isp capabilities as an airport but i think to much flights to that airport would conflict with JFK arrivals and departures. The same with HPN LGA and EWR might a traffic conflict

Lets think hypothetically,
ISP gets an spur off LIRR Rokonkoma-line direct to the terminal,
LIRR offers 4-6 express trains per day to/from NYC Penn Station or Grand Central Station (with a stop somewhere in Queens/Brooklyn, service open to Suffolk county commuters too),
ISP terminal gets a Port-of-entry facility with access to 1-2 gates within the existing terminal,
ISP takes advantage of how far it's located from JFK and LGA and makes sure new and current operators know what that means when it comes to air traffic control.
ISP becomes more appealing for new airline service.

STN Express is scheduled between 45-50 mins from Liverpool Street, not 1hr 4 mins (presumably Google Maps was factoring in the time until the next departure, i.e. you just missed one as they go every 15 mins).

Just saying...

[*]

yuomi wrote:

STN Express is scheduled between 45-50 mins from Liverpool Street, not 1hr 4 mins (presumably Google Maps was factoring in the time until the next departure, i.e. you just missed one as they go every 15 mins).

Just saying...

You are right, but 1h and 22min to Ronkonkoma and most probably under 1h(50min) if LIRR(Islip Express) would only stop at 4 stations instead of 12 stations. Just remember rail track is being refurbished and speed limit is 80mph not 40mph anymore.

GalebG4 wrote:

[*]

yuomi wrote:

STN Express is scheduled between 45-50 mins from Liverpool Street, not 1hr 4 mins (presumably Google Maps was factoring in the time until the next departure, i.e. you just missed one as they go every 15 mins).

Just saying...

You are right, but 1h and 22min to Ronkonkoma and most probably under 1h(50min) if LIRR(Islip Express) would only stop at 4 stations instead of 12 stations. Just remember rail track is being refurbished and speed limit is 80mph not 40mph anymore.

This is so cute, but you're completely ignoring the sentiments of New Yorkers....

I would love to think so, and I do believe it could support more flights. However, I don't think it can reliably get the Manhattan business traveler, but it should do ok with those business on the middle of Long Island.

The main issue with ISP is the major airlines don’t want to dilute their hubs at JFK and LGA. Fares from ISP on a real airline (which excludes F9) are usually considerably higher than from NYC airports. If you want to fly AA you have to go to PHL which is not a desirable connecting point anymore.
Southwest only came to ISP because they wanted a metro NY destination and at the time no slots were available at LGA. It was a placeholder until they could get to LGA and once they did, ISP became much less important to them.
With regard to JetBlue there is no valid economic reason for them to serve ISP because it would take traffic away from JFK. Unfortunately with higher fares and lower frequencies ISP is not a good bet. And this from someone who used to fly out of ISP every single week and connect in PHL to avoid JFK and LGA...and who advocated to get DL back and get AA to expand out here...

The reason STN has so many low-cost flights is because of high costs and limited expansion room at LHR and LGW. People will endure the longer distance to STN to get cheap fares. However, EWR and LGA are close to New York City and have a wide range of LCC/ULCC competition available (recall the FAA removed slot restrictions at EWR in 2016 to allow more competition, now EWR has NK and G4 flights, LGA has had F9 and NK for a while, etc.). Why would anyone trek to ISP when the close-in airport has cheap fights available?

GalebG4 wrote:

[*]

yuomi wrote:

STN Express is scheduled between 45-50 mins from Liverpool Street, not 1hr 4 mins (presumably Google Maps was factoring in the time until the next departure, i.e. you just missed one as they go every 15 mins).

Just saying...

You are right, but 1h and 22min to Ronkonkoma and most probably under 1h(50min) if LIRR(Islip Express) would only stop at 4 stations instead of 12 stations. Just remember rail track is being refurbished and speed limit is 80mph not 40mph anymore.

You clearly are not from New York and have very little understanding of the LIRR. It is the busiest commuter rail network in the country and only has 3 main lines through Suffolk and Nassau Counties. It is bursting at the seams as it is and can barely keep up with its ridership and schedules now. They just finished adding a second track on the Ronkonkoma line, and will be adding a third track on the Main Line from Hicksville, true, but this will not increase capacity as much as you think it will because the entire point of the second and third tracks is to reaccomodate current capacity in a more efficient manner, while adding service to Grand Central, which will not allow an express train "of 4 stops" just to serve ISP. And lets not forget the true problem with the LIRR's troubles, which is the bottleneck at the Harold interlocking and the East River tubes, which LIRR doesn't control. The East River Tubes are owned, operated, and maintained by Amtrak, which any New Yorker will tell you, has done an abysmal job at keeping those tunnels running. And when there is a problem (which happens sometimes multiple times in a single week), the LIRR is the first casualty, with numerous trains canceled, and hundreds of thousands of passengers packed on to later trains standing room only. Can you imagine adding even more tourists on those trains with luggage? To go all the way out to ISP? Forget about it.

The entire purpose of the LIRR is to shuttle 350,000 Long Islanders a day into and out of the city for work, not to get some tourists who couldn't be bothered to book a ticket for an additional $40 to JFK or EWR.

I grew up down the road from ISP and have a soft spot for it, but its just completely unrealistic to think it will be anything more than it is now anytime soon.

kipfilet wrote:

Isn't that what Stewart in Newburgh kind of tries to be, with all those cheap Norwegian flights?

ISP is too small with too many vocal neighbors.

SWF is used to getting screaming C-5s and C-17s so expansion is far more feasible.

Problem is, whatever you gain on the air fare you probably lose on ground transportation.

Newburgh actually is way out there, when it comes to public transportation.

Revelation wrote:

kipfilet wrote:

Isn't that what Stewart in Newburgh kind of tries to be, with all those cheap Norwegian flights?

ISP is too small with too many vocal neighbors.

SWF is used to getting screaming C-5s and C-17s so expansion is far more feasible.

Problem is, whatever you gain on the air fare you probably lose on ground transportation.

Newburgh actually is way out there, when it comes to public transportation.

True that public transportation is an issue right now, but the free market does wonders: there are specialized bus lines traveling from NYC to SWF that are synced with the Norwegian flight times, $20 each way, comparable to airport trains in Europe:
https://web.coachusa.com/info/shortline ... s.asp?nt=1