If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
New KBED-KTTN flights hit the runway
John S wrote:
As somebody who has flown that route many times since 1999, I must disagree.**First,*ORH*has*a*much*smaller*populatio n*base*than MetroWest*and greater Boston that Hanscom is situated in.**ORH*is*also not*terribly*far from Windsor Locks,CT which has discount airline service and is popular. Second, while EWR and PHL of course have many more flights, that is not the market that this route is serving.**This route*is*serving*people*from*North of Philadelphia and South Jersey area that want to get to Boston and visa versa.**Third,*Hanscom*can*be a*MUCH*better*way*of*reaching*most*of*the Boston area than General Logan Airport, except the North Shore.**There*are no parking hassles.* There*are*no*tunnel*hassles.**There*are*no*big*dig hassles.**There*are no*closed*lanes.**There*is*almost*never*dead*stopp ed traffic.**There is*no*grid*lock*almost*all*of*the*time,*which*is*t he opposite situation getting from BOS to downtown.**There*are*no*$5*tolls just to get to Weston.**Now*if*your*final*destination*is*Boston*o r*Chelsea, then you may be better off with putting up with Logan's infamous delays and detours.**And*parking*is*(for*the*moment)*free*at* Hanscom.* Even*if*they charged you eight bucks a day, it would still be a tremendous value of BOS.**(Shh!!* First, enough people have to use the old Hanscom Field for it to be a success. 2nd, I still wonder just how many folks who will travel from the Trenton Area to the same area won't drive. It's about a five to six hour drive depending upon how one drives, and most folks won't get in a plane to travel that far. Add in the drive to the airport, the having to arrive before the flight and then the wait for the luggage, not much time would be saved. The need for a ride or a car at both ends doesn't help much either. Adding in how limited the population is around Trenton, I just don't see this as a viable route. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
New KBED-KTTN flights hit the runway
Art Clemons wrote: John S wrote: As somebody who has flown that route many times since 1999, I must disagree. First, ORH has a much smaller population base than MetroWest and greater Boston that Hanscom is situated in. ORH is also not terribly far from Windsor Locks,CT which has discount airline service and is popular. Second, while EWR and PHL of course have many more flights, that is not the market that this route is serving. This route is serving people from North of Philadelphia and South Jersey area that want to get to Boston and visa versa. Third, Hanscom can be a MUCH better way of reaching most of the Boston area than General Logan Airport, except the North Shore. There are no parking hassles. There are no tunnel hassles. There are no big dig hassles. There are no closed lanes. There is almost never dead stopped traffic. There is no grid lock almost all of the time, which is the opposite situation getting from BOS to downtown. There are no $5 tolls just to get to Weston. Now if your final destination is Boston or Chelsea, then you may be better off with putting up with Logan's infamous delays and detours. And parking is (for the moment) free at Hanscom. Even if they charged you eight bucks a day, it would still be a tremendous value of BOS. (Shh!! First, enough people have to use the old Hanscom Field for it to be a success. Old Hanscom Field? Is there a new Hanscom Field that we're not aware of? If the route wasn't a "success" surely the airline serving it would have cut service years ago. Rather they have said that they are profitable now, but want to focus their resources on Pittsburgh instead, and another airline has decided to take over on the same route. 2nd, I still wonder just how many folks who will travel from the Trenton Area to the same area won't drive. Clearly the people that take the planes. It's about a five to six hour drive depending upon how one drives, and most folks won't get in a plane to travel that far. You may be surprised to learn about such popular airline flights as the LGA-BOS, DCA-LGA, etc. Add in the drive to the airport, the having to arrive before the flight and then the wait for the luggage, not much time would be saved. The need for a ride or a car at both ends doesn't help much either. Adding in how limited the population is around Trenton, I just don't see this as a viable route. I'm curious what you would consider a viable route. The TTN-BED flights that I've been on in the past 5 years have been consistently nearly full. Loads have only decreased more recently when air travel in general slowed down and as the routes became affliliated with US Airways, which also raised the fares substantially. I think the timing of the new airline is good. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
New KBED-KTTN flights hit the runway
Ron Newman wrote: Is there any place to rent a car at Hanscom? If not, I don't see how this service can be useful. The only public transportation to Hanscom is the #76 bus which doesn't exactly appeal to business travelers. Just the same car rentals that have always been at BED, Avis and Hertz. I don't see how the new airline will be any less useful than the one that has been providing the same service. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
New KBED-KTTN flights hit the runway
John S wrote:
Old Hanscom Field? Is there a new Hanscom Field that we're not aware of?**If the route wasn't a "success" surely the airline serving it would have cut service years ago.**Rather*they*have*said*that*they*are profitable*now,*but want to focus their resources on Pittsburgh instead, and another airline has decided to take over on the same route. Few airlines give up profitable routes without government intervention. When a route gets dumped, it's usually because the perceived return on another is greater. I call it old Hanscom Field in part because I remember military planes flying in and out constantly, that's an old field. 2nd, I still wonder just how many folks who will travel from the Trenton Area to the same area won't drive. Clearly the people that take the planes. Sure and some folks take the discount buses from Boston's Chinatown to NYC's Chinatown and then public transit to Trenton. Amtrak is also another option for folks traveling from Trenton to Boston or Boston to Trenton. I'ld still bet that most traffic between the capitol cities of the two states is by car. It's about a five to six hour drive depending upon how one drives, and most folks won't get in a plane to travel that far. You may be surprised to learn about such popular airline flights as the LGA-BOS, DCA-LGA, etc. Yes, but they're serving a large population base on both ends with more folks likely to travel, yet once again, I'ld bet that most traffic between those routes is by car. Add in the drive to the airport, the having to arrive before the flight and then the wait for the luggage, not much time would be saved.**The*need*for*a*ride*or*a*car*at*both ends doesn't help much either.**Adding*in*how*limited*the*population is around Trenton, I just don't see this as a viable route. I'm curious what you would consider a viable route.**The*TTN-BED flights that I've been on in the past 5 years have been consistently nearly full. Loads have only decreased more recently when air travel in general slowed down and as the routes became affliliated with US Airways, which also raised the fares substantially.**I*think*the timing*of*the*new*airline*is*good. I used to fly to Midway Airport (Chicago) regularly from Philly, the airliner was packed, yet the airline was losing money on the flights. Viable routes have to not only attract sufficient passengers but sufficient passengers willing to pay a fare high enough to produce a profit for the airline to be viable. Either not enough passengers or not enough revenue from the passengers makes a route not viable from my perspective. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
New KBED-KTTN flights hit the runway
John S wrote:
Dpending on who they really plan on serving, the impending PHL-MHT service from Southwest (4 r/t's daily starting in July) could impact that - at as low as $29 each way. Good point, although this route is still a hassle free alternative. Sure PHL is usually a piece of cake compared to BOS, but is still more of a pain for those who can get to TTN easier (plus easy parking). MHT is a very low hassle airport compared to most, but MHT is still a good long freeway hike from Metrowest ....and at rush hour...forget it. I agree.. Bedford still works better for the Lexington/Bedford/Waltham/etc crowd but the Chelmsford/Lowell/Nashua NH crowd would go to MHT. +----/|-------------------------------------+-------------------+ | | | \ | | / | \ | | ( ) http://www.wildwizards.net \ ICQ# 8976662 | +--`--' ----------------------------------------+---------------+ |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
New KBED-KTTN flights hit the runway
"Sean" wrote:
Funny you say that... I seem to recall the ads I've been watching (on Boston and Philly stations) show PVD-PHL beginning before PHL-MHT - and Green isn't all that bad of a drive to Metrowest. It's true. PVD is in the first batch of cities Southwest will serve from PHL. MHT is in the 2nd batch in July. +----/|-------------------------------------+-------------------+ | | | \ | | / | \ | | ( ) http://www.wildwizards.net \ ICQ# 8976662 | +--`--' ----------------------------------------+---------------+ |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
New KBED-KTTN flights hit the runway
Art Clemons wrote: John S wrote: Old Hanscom Field? Is there a new Hanscom Field that we're not aware of? If the route wasn't a "success" surely the airline serving it would have cut service years ago. Rather they have said that they are profitable now, but want to focus their resources on Pittsburgh instead, and another airline has decided to take over on the same route. Few airlines give up profitable routes without government intervention. When a route gets dumped, it's usually because the perceived return on another is greater. And no doubt that SA has a higher perceived return by taking over the United Express business that just became available for them. But the fact that ANOTHER airline is moving in for the same route speaks for itself. I call it old Hanscom Field in part because I remember military planes flying in and out constantly, that's an old field. It's not as old as General Eddie Logan's field though. 2nd, I still wonder just how many folks who will travel from the Trenton Area to the same area won't drive. Clearly the people that take the planes. Sure and some folks take the discount buses from Boston's Chinatown to NYC's Chinatown and then public transit to Trenton. Amtrak is also another option for folks traveling from Trenton to Boston or Boston to Trenton. I'ld still bet that most traffic between the capitol cities of the two states is by car. Perhaps it is, but that doesn't affect the route, only the passengers who fly affect the route. Most traffic between UK and US is via airplane, yet the cruise ships that also serve the route don't do so to lose money. It's about a five to six hour drive depending upon how one drives, and most folks won't get in a plane to travel that far. You may be surprised to learn about such popular airline flights as the LGA-BOS, DCA-LGA, etc. Yes, but they're serving a large population base on both ends with more folks likely to travel, yet once again, I'ld bet that most traffic between those routes is by car. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but that isn't relevant. What IS relevant are how many people willing to fly on the route. Add in the drive to the airport, the having to arrive before the flight and then the wait for the luggage, not much time would be saved. The need for a ride or a car at both ends doesn't help much either. Adding in how limited the population is around Trenton, I just don't see this as a viable route. I'm curious what you would consider a viable route. The TTN-BED flights that I've been on in the past 5 years have been consistently nearly full. Loads have only decreased more recently when air travel in general slowed down and as the routes became affliliated with US Airways, which also raised the fares substantially. I think the timing of the new airline is good. I used to fly to Midway Airport (Chicago) regularly from Philly, the airliner was packed, yet the airline was losing money on the flights. Viable routes have to not only attract sufficient passengers but sufficient passengers willing to pay a fare high enough to produce a profit for the airline to be viable. Either not enough passengers or not enough revenue from the passengers makes a route not viable from my perspective. That's true and no doubt this route is viable, as SA has served it, shifting away only when they decided to focus on a massive expansion in Pittsburgh and also for the United Express business that ACA is leaving. As far as I know, SA has just indefinitely postponed its exit from the market as well, previously it was supposed to be early April. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
UAL to revive KSMF-KIAD flights | nobody | Air travel | 1 | March 19th, 2004 08:21 PM |
Several BA and AF flights cancelled again | Sjoerd | Air travel | 40 | February 7th, 2004 10:40 PM |
Plane slides off runway in SYR | Alec D. Plotkin | Air travel | 2 | January 14th, 2004 03:11 AM |
JBU to cut back KFLL service if new runway isn't built | A Guy Called Tyketto | Air travel | 0 | October 14th, 2003 02:53 AM |
KSMF looks west for new runway | A Guy Called Tyketto | Air travel | 0 | September 26th, 2003 05:47 AM |