Logan Airport Flights and Airlines Discussion

[adamh8297]

Norse Atlantic has loaded Boston - London Gatwick starting 9/2/23.

5 weekly. No flights on Tuesday and Sunday.

I could not find a press release yet. It was reported on the airliners Boston thread.

 

[Equilibria]

Norse Atlantic has loaded Boston - London Gatwick starting 9/2/23.

5 weekly. No flights on Tuesday and Sunday.

I could not find a press release yet. It was reported on the airliners Boston thread.

Going directly up against JetBlue? Bold.

 

[mass88]

Geez, Boston to London is a very crowded market. JetBlue, United, Delta, American, British Airways (EDIT - forgot them for some reason), Virgin Atlantic and now Norse.

I follow this account on Twitter and they tweeted this a little while ago. Norse is adding LGW service to Boston, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington - Dulles. Boston, San Francisco and Washington - Dulles are new destinations for them.

 

[cubbe8]

Geez, Boston to London is a very crowded market. JetBlue, United, Delta, American, Virgin Atlantic and now Norse.

Also BA

 

[mass88]

Also BA

Thanks for the reminder, I forgot them for some reason.

All Norse needs is Las Vegas and Chicago and they will hit all of the main leisure US destinations from England.

 

[RandomWalk]

Isn’t Norse the successor in spirit to Norwegian Long Haul?

 

[Brattle Loop]

Isn’t Norse the successor in spirit to Norwegian Long Haul?

Yup. Pretty sure most if not all of their fleet is ex-Norwegian Dreamliners. So, literally the same planes flying the same routes in some cases. Only they painted them blue this time instead of red.

 

[737900er]

Going directly up against JetBlue? Bold.

Even operating only 5x/week they'll still have 50% more seats than JetBlue.

 

[dshoost88]

Even operating only 5x/week they'll still have 50% more seats than JetBlue.

Yeah... but it's Gatwick. At least JetBlue goes to LHR as well.

 

[mass88]

JetBlue has slightly better seat pitch on their A321s used to Heathrow and Gatwick than Norse's 789s, for those that pay attention to this sort of thing. Then there are those that don't like the idea of taking a single aisle plane over the Atlantic. It will be interesting to see how both price their fares.

 

[GW2500]

Count me as one who doesn't want a single isle for long haul. I think over time and airport congestion, widebodies will be more favorable. Assuming Norse can fill its seats, you'd think it would have to cheaper price. I also most likely worked on Norse's 87's so I'm hoping they do good! The 789 has better cabin pressure/humidity and bigger wings made of Carbon Fiber which absorbs turbulence better. It was built for oceanic flights and single isles are stretching their original intent. But either way its a win for Boston crossing the pond!

 

[Equilibria]

Count me as one who doesn't want a single isle for long haul. I think over time and airport congestion, widebodies will be more favorable. Assuming Norse can fill its seats, you'd think it would have to cheaper price. I also most likely worked on Norse's 87's so I'm hoping they do good! The 789 has better cabin pressure/humidity and bigger wings made of Carbon Fiber which absorbs turbulence better. It was built for oceanic flights and single isles are stretching their original intent. But either way its a win for Boston crossing the pond!

Gatwick isn't any more long-haul from Boston than San Diego is.

 

[737900er]

Count me as one who doesn't want a single isle for long haul. I think over time and airport congestion, widebodies will be more favorable. Assuming Norse can fill its seats, you'd think it would have to cheaper price. I also most likely worked on Norse's 87's so I'm hoping they do good! The 789 has better cabin pressure/humidity and bigger wings made of Carbon Fiber which absorbs turbulence better. It was built for oceanic flights and single isles are stretching their original intent. But either way its a win for Boston crossing the pond!

All the times I've done transatlantic in the back of narrowbody (Boston to AMS, CDG, LHR, LIS, SNN, etc.) it hasn't really bothered me any more than a 9-abreast 787 or a 10-abreast 777 or a narrowbody transcon.

 

[mass88]

Look at transcon flights in the US for longer single aisle flights. There are periods of time (namely in winter) where a flight like BOS-LAX, which should take about 6 hours on average, gets stretched to more than 7 hours due to headwinds. A hop to London in a single aisle is not that much different.

 

[GW2500]

London is about 700 miles more than San Diego, but I get your point. Some people don't mind single isles for long haul, and that's fine. Really it comes down to seat pitch, and that's up to the airline. But I do think one day an airline will market that fact. That widebodies feel more spacious and do handle turbulence better. It will sew a seed in a bunch of people's heads.

 

[tysmith95]

JetBlue has slightly better seat pitch on their A321s used to Heathrow and Gatwick than Norse's 789s, for those that pay attention to this sort of thing. Then there are those that don't like the idea of taking a single aisle plane over the Atlantic. It will be interesting to see how both price their fares.

The new NEOs are a nice ride. I don't get the anti single isle folks. I'd rather take the A321neo with an inch wider seats than a cramped 9 abreast 787.

 

[BosDevelop]

Strange to me that Norse is not starting Logan flights until the busy summer travel season is pretty much over.

 

[adamh8297]

Count me as one who doesn't want a single isle for long haul. I think over time and airport congestion, widebodies will be more favorable. Assuming Norse can fill its seats, you'd think it would have to cheaper price. I also most likely worked on Norse's 87's so I'm hoping they do good! The 789 has better cabin pressure/humidity and bigger wings made of Carbon Fiber which absorbs turbulence better. It was built for oceanic flights and single isles are stretching their original intent. But either way its a win for Boston crossing the pond!

I flew Denver-Kona which is a longer flight than Boston-London on 757. It was not a big deal.

I did compare some pricing. On the surface Norse looks a lot cheaper but its 45 each way for carry on.

I priced 10/4-10/9/23 for the holiday weekend:

Norse was $578 including carry-on fees. I could not avoid going without carry-on.
JetBlue was 736.95 with Blue Basic
JetBlue Heathrow flight was $786 with Blue Basic Note: Transatlantic flights with Blue Basic allow free carry-on.
Delta/Virgin is $561 for basic fare (does not earn miles, no carry on fee, and you get meals)
American/British Airways is $562 for basic (earns miles, no carry on fee, and you get meals)
United was $731 for basic (earn miles, no carry on fee since it is Transatlantic, not clear if you get meals)

American/British Airways seems to be the best deal to me.

 

[shockingboston]

I fly between Omaha and Boston frequently (at least I used to), and it appears Delta added direct flights between Boston and Omaha. I have never been more excited for a flight. Hopefully this is real. This cuts travel time from 7+ hrs to 3.5 hrs. Bonus - get to avoid O'Hare.

 

[737900er]

I fly between Omaha and Boston frequently (at least I used to), and it appears Delta added direct flights between Boston and Omaha. I have never been more excited for a flight. Hopefully this is real. This cuts travel time from 7+ hrs to 3.5 hrs. Bonus - get to avoid O'Hare.

Do you have a source on that? I have looked in all the usual places and can't find anything.

Edit: Looks like it's only operating 5/5 and 5/7 for the Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting.