Logan Airport Flights and Airlines Discussion

mass88 said:
Spirit Airlines is adjusting their network ex-Boston. They're adding twice daily service to Newark beginning May 8th. I think they used to run this route a few years ago.
Click to expand...

Maybe call this a crazy transit pitch, but I hope the NE Corridor gets to the point sooner rather than later where we can talk about banning flights between BOS-NYC/PHL (as well as WAS-NYC/PHL). It's ridiculous the amount of emissions and air congestion that result from these short-haul routes, and there are plenty of alternatives to route connecting traffic. I do think BOS-WAS is far enough to warrant flights, but cities on the NEC within say 300 miles of each other should not have air connections.
 
lexicon506 said:
Maybe call this a crazy transit pitch, but I hope the NE Corridor gets to the point sooner rather than later where we can talk about banning flights between BOS-NYC/PHL (as well as WAS-NYC/PHL). It's ridiculous the amount of emissions and air congestion that result from these short-haul routes, and there are plenty of alternatives to route connecting traffic. I do think BOS-WAS is far enough to warrant flights, but cities on the NEC within say 300 miles of each other should not have air connections.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Every commercial flight from BOS-NYC/PHL/WAS is the result of a policy failure.
 
Or a connecting flight from someone traveling to India or Sub-Saharan Africa via the NYC airports.

I generally agree, but the trains aren't nearly good enough and Logan isn't quite robust enough to cover everything. Maybe direct shuttles could be in the cross-hairs, but a lot of those short flights are for positioning.
 
El Al is going to increase its service from Tel Aviv to 4 weekly covering a period of a little bit over 4 months.

1709560790649.png
 
JetBlue has formally terminated its merger agreement with Spirit.

Speaking of Spirit, they will be adding BWI to its route map from Boston beginning with daily flights on May 8.


simpleflying.com

Spirit Airlines To Add 4 New Routes From Baltimore

The four new routes, including two transcontinental services, will begin in May.
simpleflying.com simpleflying.com
 
lexicon506 said:
Maybe call this a crazy transit pitch, but I hope the NE Corridor gets to the point sooner rather than later where we can talk about banning flights between BOS-NYC/PHL (as well as WAS-NYC/PHL). It's ridiculous the amount of emissions and air congestion that result from these short-haul routes, and there are plenty of alternatives to route connecting traffic. I do think BOS-WAS is far enough to warrant flights, but cities on the NEC within say 300 miles of each other should not have air connections.
Click to expand...

lexicon506 said:
Maybe call this a crazy transit pitch, but I hope the NE Corridor gets to the point sooner rather than later where we can talk about banning flights between BOS-NYC/PHL (as well as WAS-NYC/PHL). It's ridiculous the amount of emissions and air congestion that result from these short-haul routes, and there are plenty of alternatives to route connecting traffic. I do think BOS-WAS is far enough to warrant flights, but cities on the NEC within say 300 miles of each other should not have air connections.
Click to expand...
Many people often take international flights out of JFK or EWR for routes that Logan does not service. That Boston New York route is important. It is not the way it once was with shuttles. Those days are over and the train more efficient if you want to take your chances with Amtrak.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FK4
Randy N. Craven-Krawtch said:
Many people often take international flights out of JFK or EWR for routes that Logan does not service. That Boston New York route is important. It is not the way it once was with shuttles. Those days are over and the train more efficient if you want to take your chances with Amtrak.
Click to expand...
Agree with that logic, and as such the schedule should be pared down to ~5 flights a day instead of the current 20-40 that are in service.
 
Randy N. Craven-Krawtch said:
Many people often take international flights out of JFK or EWR for routes that Logan does not service. That Boston New York route is important. It is not the way it once was with shuttles. Those days are over and the train more efficient if you want to take your chances with Amtrak.
Click to expand...

Sorry I don't buy that. Maybe that was the case once, but search for a flight from Boston to anywhere in the world.. Nairobi, Bangalore, Rio, Taipei. The vast majority of connections run through Europe, the Middle East, East Asia, and other major US airports like ATL, SFO, ORD, MIA. Sure, taking NY area airports out of the equation cuts down on some options but they are almost never among the best options anyway.

And if you really want that NY-originating flight, get on a damn train to NY! We have to make SOME sacrifices if we want to save this planet, and this one is low-hanging fruit.
 
lexicon506 said:
Sorry I don't buy that. Maybe that was the case once, but search for a flight from Boston to anywhere in the world.. Nairobi, Bangalore, Rio, Taipei. The vast majority of connections run through Europe, the Middle East, East Asia, and other major US airports like ATL, SFO, ORD, MIA. Sure, taking NY area airports out of the equation cuts down on some options but they are almost never among the best options anyway.

And if you really want that NY-originating flight, get on a damn train to NY! We have to make SOME sacrifices if we want to save this planet, and this one is low-hanging fruit.
Click to expand...
I doubt that you have actually made the train connection to JFK from Boston with international luggage (I have and I have one recommendation -- don't).

Until we make the train-air connection a rational connection (think TGV to CDG in France) don't expect people to be willing to give up the connecting flight. If you want to fight climate change then get people to build the alternate travel infrastructure we need. Other countries have demonstrated it can be done.
 
JeffDowntown said:
I doubt that you have actually made the train connection to JFK from Boston with international luggage (I have and I have one recommendation -- don't).

Until we make the train-air connection a rational connection (think TGV to CDG in France) don't expect people to be willing to give up the connecting flight. If you want to fight climate change then get people to build the alternate travel infrastructure we need. Other countries have demonstrated it can be done.
Click to expand...

A. Yes. I've traveled with international luggage (moving luggage, not just a fun trip) from both Boston to NY and from DC to NY.

B. NY connections from Boston are largely irrelevant. Today, there are countless ways to re-route those connections causing minimal inconvenience to travellers.

C. 1000% agree with you on the urgency of investing in US rail infrastructure. But if we always wait for conditions to be perfect before acting we might as well give up now.
 
lexicon506 said:
Sorry I don't buy that. Maybe that was the case once, but search for a flight from Boston to anywhere in the world.. Nairobi, Bangalore, Rio, Taipei. The vast majority of connections run through Europe, the Middle East, East Asia, and other major US airports like ATL, SFO, ORD, MIA. Sure, taking NY area airports out of the equation cuts down on some options but they are almost never among the best options anyway.

And if you really want that NY-originating flight, get on a damn train to NY! We have to make SOME sacrifices if we want to save this planet, and this one is low-hanging fruit.
Click to expand...
There are reasons why one must travel on a flight originating in New York. The train is not ideal to transfer on with luggage and would cost a person many extra costs. If feeder flights to New York were not necessary, they would have been discontinued long ago.
 
Randy N. Craven-Krawtch said:
There are reasons why one must travel on a flight originating in New York. The train is not ideal to transfer on with luggage and would cost a person many extra costs. If feeder flights to New York were not necessary, they would have been discontinued long ago.
Click to expand...
This is not something where you can just "let the free market work it out" - see France's outright ban on routes < 2.5hrs by train. But the unfortunate reality is that the Acela isn't quite fast enough to capture full market share of the route (some business/leisure travelers still prefer the flight), and the NEC probably doesn't have much excess capacity, nor does Amtrak have enough rolling stock to double/triple the number of trains, given the current state of the infrastructure. If the Acela/Regional had its own separated ROW from commuter rail traffic and legitimate ability to average >100mph, there's enough demand to probably support 4TPH to replace all the flights.
 
People coming from smaller cities in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic to Boston are being missed here. As are those who live in metro areas that are not a part of Boston's metro area, Providence chief among them. If you live in Charleston, WV and want to fly to Boston, stopping in LGA/JFK/EWR/PHL makes perfect sense. If you live in Providence and want to fly to Roanke, VA, connecting in LGA/JFK/EWR/PHL makes perfect sense.

While I agree that there should be true high speed rail connecting Boston-NY-PHL-DC, there is still a need for air service to/from LGA/JFK/EWR/PHL to BOS, MHT and PVD.
 
WarpedReality said:
EWR has a rail station to facilitate connections between intercontinental flights and NE corridor trains.
Click to expand...
Kind of.

If you travel on Acela, you need to change at Penn for Regional or NJ Transit service to get to EWR (IIRC).

This is what I was highlighting with the French TGV example. The long-distance TGV trains stop at a station directly under Terminal 2 at CDG. The transfer is an escalator ride. That is how you convince people to use the train to reach their international flight.
 
Effective April 18, Level is increasing its service to Barcelona from 4 times per week to 5 times per Week. As of June 1, its service to Barcelona will increase from 5 times per week to daily service lasting until September 24. It should then decrease down to 4-5 times per week for the rest of the fall and then 3-4 times per week for the winter 24/25 season.
 
lexicon506 said:
Maybe call this a crazy transit pitch, but I hope the NE Corridor gets to the point sooner rather than later where we can talk about banning flights between BOS-NYC/PHL (as well as WAS-NYC/PHL). It's ridiculous the amount of emissions and air congestion that result from these short-haul routes, and there are plenty of alternatives to route connecting traffic. I do think BOS-WAS is far enough to warrant flights, but cities on the NEC within say 300 miles of each other should not have air connections.
Click to expand...

If they haven’t done this in the most environmentally conscious countries in Europe, there’s no way in hell it’s happening in the United States, especially with such horrid rail infrastructure. This is the kind of unrealistic and sanctimonious piety that puts moderates off with the issues of climate change and the environment.
 
mass88 said:
People coming from smaller cities in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic to Boston are being missed here. As are those who live in metro areas that are not a part of Boston's metro area, Providence chief among them. If you live in Charleston, WV and want to fly to Boston, stopping in LGA/JFK/EWR/PHL makes perfect sense. If you live in Providence and want to fly to Roanke, VA, connecting in LGA/JFK/EWR/PHL makes perfect sense.

While I agree that there should be true high speed rail connecting Boston-NY-PHL-DC, there is still a need for air service to/from LGA/JFK/EWR/PHL to BOS, MHT and PVD.
Click to expand...

Thank you for making a great counterpoint, although the reality is the market to/from these small cities is tiny. Your example of Charleston, WV doesn't even have service to LGA/JFK/EWR/PHL, so clearly those folks are being accommodated just fine through other connections. The handful of people traveling PVD-ROA could be connected via DC.

But yes, I'm sure some there are some city pairs that would be harmed by a theoretical 300mi NE Corridor (to clarify, NEC is between Boston and DC) flight ban. Does that justify over 50 daily flights between BOS and LGA/JFK/EWR? People will use the connection if it's there and it makes the airlines money. That doesn't mean it's necessary.

Anyway, I'll stop derailing the thread. Sorry! Interesting policy discussion nonetheless.
 
lexicon506 said:
Sorry I don't buy that. Maybe that was the case once, but search for a flight from Boston to anywhere in the world.. Nairobi, Bangalore, Rio, Taipei. The vast majority of connections run through Europe, the Middle East, East Asia, and other major US airports like ATL, SFO, ORD, MIA. Sure, taking NY area airports out of the equation cuts down on some options but they are almost never among the best options anyway.

And if you really want that NY-originating flight, get on a damn train to NY! We have to make SOME sacrifices if we want to save this planet, and this one is low-hanging fruit.
Click to expand...

For many Caribbean Routes and some Deep South American routes you may save travel time going through EWR or JFK. Going through MIA or ATL can add more travel time in the air. I usually want to avoid NYC airports but may consider it for Caribbean 1-stop itineraries.

Example 1: St. Kitts

www.gcmap.com

A map from the Great Circle Mapper

A map from the Great Circle Mapper
www.gcmap.com www.gcmap.com

Example 2: Buenos Aires not as much of time savings and there are international options to allow for an easier return home (clearing customs in Logan and not having to stress about clearing and making a connection).

www.gcmap.com

A map from the Great Circle Mapper

A map from the Great Circle Mapper
www.gcmap.com www.gcmap.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top