Logan Airport Flights and Airlines Discussion

stellarfun said:
BA planning on late-night scheduled departure, or delayed departures?
http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/n...airways-wants-to-expand-its-lounge-hours.html
Click to expand...

One would think not - even JFK's latest BA departure is at 10:55pm

However a 1am ish departure gets you to Heathrow around 12:30pm.

Would connect to over 30 BA destinations and within 90-180 min layover. Checked Thursdays schedule here: http://www.flightstats.com/go/FlightStatus/flightStatusByAirport.do

Maybe they got the slot back and this is their plan.
 
Isn't there a ban on late night and early morning landings/take offs, other than emergencies, at Logan in deference to the surrounding neighborhoods?
 
atlantaden said:
Isn't there a ban on late night and early morning landings/take offs, other than emergencies, at Logan in deference to the surrounding neighborhoods?
Click to expand...
https://www.massport.com/environment/environmental-reporting/noise-abatement/

Massport only ever banned late nights by Stage 2 aircraft (which became a more comprehensive Ban of Stage 2s. The FAA banned the last stage 2s at the end of 2015)

The policy linked above says Stage 3 & 4 can operate 24 hrs. Most of these international planes are Stage 4 {or on the quiet end of Stage 3} anyway. {Most of the "limit" on late light flying had been that there had been no passenger demand to come/go in the wee hours }
 
Last edited:
atlantaden said:
Isn't there a ban on late night and early morning landings/take offs, other than emergencies, at Logan in deference to the surrounding neighborhoods?
Click to expand...

Hong Kong flight departs at 1:30am (Summer) and 2:30 am (Winter)
 
adamh8297 said:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/today...us-flights-jfk-boston-bwi-caribbean/29261013/

We have our new carrier and its strange to say the least: European airline serving Euro-centric Caribbean destinations.

Norweigian will serve Boston on Thursdays and Sundays to Guadeloupe, and Wednesdays and Sundays to Martinique.
Click to expand...

Wow. I just looked at the fares on their site (these flights are already bookable) and it's under $180 r/t to Martinique in January. I'm taking a tropical winter vacation next winter, I guess.
 
Lrfox said:
Wow. I just looked at the fares on their site (these flights are already bookable) and it's under $180 r/t to Martinique in January. I'm taking a tropical winter vacation next winter, I guess.
Click to expand...

Flex + for 24 each way gets you 1bag and seat selection.. ULCC has come to Boston-Caribbean flights.
 
From forbes.com article on the Norwegian flights:

" (CEO) Kjos said he is impressed by Boston and envisions Norwegian trans-Atlantic service. “We would like more flights into Boston and that is more than likely next summer with a 787 serving them,” he said. “I like everything about Boston. It has very close ties to Europe. A lot of English people and Norwegians migrated there. It’s more or less a European city, and it’s one of the most important places in the U.S.”"

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tedreed...-caribbean-from-u-s-and-eyes-boston-europe/3/

BOS is also on SAS short-list as well. The battle for Scandinavia-Boston may be coming soon. Link is in Danish http://www.check-in.dk/sas-har-indkredset-nye-langrutedestinationer#.VY16mBtVhBe
 
This is feeling an awful lot like an air-travel bubble: when it becomes hard to name an airline that isn't adding Boston service.

Low fuel costs, decent economy, B787/A350/A380-style per-seat efficiency, & little bit of customs pre-clearance, make it a perfect time to add service, but at some point (3 years? Next big crisis?) some of these carriers will tire of the losses and get shaken or chased out.
 
Arlington said:
This is feeling an awful lot like an air-travel bubble: when it becomes hard to name an airline that isn't adding Boston service.

Low fuel costs, decent economy, B787/A350/A380-style per-seat efficiency, & little bit of customs pre-clearance, make it a perfect time to add service, but at some point (3 years? Next big crisis?) some of these carriers will tire of the losses and get shaken or chased out.
Click to expand...

And Logan remains a really crappy connecting hub for international arrivals, except for the few with pre-clearance.
 
JeffDowntown said:
And Logan remains a really crappy connecting hub for international arrivals, except for the few with pre-clearance.
Click to expand...

Less so when the C/E connector opens. E-A and E-B is easy enough on the inbound side, since you're leaving security anyway and the connectors and signage are fairly obvious and sophisticated.

Sure, it's a bubble. Logan won't keep all of these carriers. It will keep many of them, though. Also, commercial aviation is a business with cycles. Logan's service pattern is completely different now than in 2005, and that was completely different than 1995. Arguing that we shouldn't be excited for the recognition and economic boost because "at some point it might disappear" isn't all that strong.
 
kmp1284 said:
I think it was only a few years ago that BOS-LHR was over a million. Guess no one will be eager to pick up that available slot.
Click to expand...

KMP -- remember that these numbers say nothing about the origin airport of the traveler only the airport most immediately involved
[prime example Iceland -- essentially the entire country has flow to/from BOS in one year]

LHR used to be the major gateway to not just London but much of Europe and beyond

Today much of the world is much more directly or 1 stop connected than it was when a handful of major airports were connected and everything else went through them

This also explains the decline in Madrid -- few were really flying with an ultimate origin / destination of Spain -- Iberia just was a convenient connector

Coincidentally MIT has just released a study on global air connectivity
http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2015/one-stop-flights-global-connectivity-0624
New model calculates how air transport connects the world
Study finds one-stop flights are a big contributor to global connectivity.

Jennifer Chu | MIT News Office
June 24, 2015

Every time you’ve seen a plane take off or land at a hub airport, you’ve seen the world growing more connected, according to a new model developed by researchers at MIT.
In a study published in the journal Transportation Research Part E, the MIT team outlines a model that determines the degree to which regions around the world are connected via air transportation.
Click to expand...
 
Arlington said:
This is feeling an awful lot like an air-travel bubble: when it becomes hard to name an airline that isn't adding Boston service.

Low fuel costs, decent economy, B787/A350/A380-style per-seat efficiency, & little bit of customs pre-clearance, make it a perfect time to add service, but at some point (3 years? Next big crisis?) some of these carriers will tire of the losses and get shaken or chased out.
Click to expand...

One of the main reasons Boeing and Airbus developed the 787 and 350 is to allow airlines to fly routes that were not possible before. Boston to Asia is a prime example. There was always a sizable market, just airlines lacked the correct plane for the market. Granted Cathay is sending the 77W, but JAL and Hainan with the 787 got the ball rolling.

I am cautiously optimistic Boston will be able to hang onto all of the new service that has come online.
 
whighlander said:
KMP -- remember that these numbers say nothing about the origin airport of the traveler only the airport most immediately involved
[prime example Iceland -- essentially the entire country has flow to/from BOS in one year]
Click to expand...

No shit. Thanks gramps, Ph.D.
 
mass88 said:
One of the main reasons Boeing and Airbus developed the 787 and 350 is to allow airlines to fly routes that were not possible before. Boston to Asia is a prime example. There was always a sizable market, just airlines lacked the correct plane for the market. Granted Cathay is sending the 77W, but JAL and Hainan with the 787 got the ball rolling.

I am cautiously optimistic Boston will be able to hang onto all of the new service that has come online.
Click to expand...

Mass -- exactly -- the 787 in particular with the on-going development of improved engines and the introduction of satellite-based flight routing -- allowing normal operating range in excess of 9,000 nautical miles*1 will enable carriers in the next few years to fly non-stop from Logan to nearly all destinations of interest [except Australia & New Zealand]

*1 up from the existing 787-8 @ 7,850nm and the just flying 787-9 @ 8,000–8,500 nmi
 
JeffDowntown said:
And Logan remains a really crappy connecting hub for international arrivals, except for the few with pre-clearance.
Click to expand...

Not any less convenient than flying UA into EWR, exiting in Terminal B FIS and having to get oneself to Terminal A (United Express) or Terminal C (United m/l and some Express).

Same deal at LAX with international carriers primarily operating from TBIT and major US carriers all along the south side of the airport.

Similar deal at ORD with AA/UA making the trek to T3/T1 respectively only its on an APM rather than shuttle bus.

For a local pax with Global Entry I can be from my seat on the plane to my ride home in less than 10 minutes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top