2007 PHL Int'l Departures

[john john]

Now is the time to plan for more mainline aircraft WHEN or IF LCC gets them. Terminal A in PHL was (largest airbus order) Wolf’s baby, (didn’t we sue the contactor) and pissing off the city and airport of PHL along with others was every senior management that has come and gone since 1980’s.Senior management makes the mess with airport facility/short staffing/equipment and the frontline employees kept the airline running GOOD GOD IS THIS A BROKEN RECORD!

 

[PHL]

Couldn't the 757 and 767 intl. departures use some of the gates at the end of B/C?

Air France used to arrive to A-East and then get tugged over to E for the departure for the very same reason - not enough gate space in A-East for all the intl. departures. Now they use A again, which will work nicely for their connecting traffic to DL once they relocate.

 

[zethya]

Couldn't the 757 and 767 intl. departures use some of the gates at the end of B/C?

Air France used to arrive to A-East and then get tugged over to E for the departure for the very same reason - not enough gate space in A-East for all the intl. departures. Now they use A again, which will work nicely for their connecting traffic to DL once they relocate.

I believe the reason AF got tugged to E was because at the time their service agreement was with Delta, which serviced all departures from E, not because A-East wasn't available for a 2 hour period.

 

[flyJOE]

Couldn't the 757 and 767 intl. departures use some of the gates at the end of B/C?

They could, but the goal likely is to keep all of the local int'l pax in the A side of town. I remember when the 767s were going to CDG & FRA out at C27, C30, C31 gates in the mid 90s before the TA growth. Once the check-in moved over to A, the TA flights never went back.

 

[ClueByFour]

Take it to the bank: PHL will build whatever US is willing to bring cash to the table for. CCY burned way too many bridges with state and local politicos in BK the first time to have them risk get burned again.

Want more gates? Bring cash.

 

[zethya]

Take it to the bank: PHL will build whatever US is willing to bring cash to the table for. CCY burned way too many bridges with state and local politicos in BK the first time to have them risk get burned again.

Want more gates? Bring cash.

Truer words have never been spoken. WN has even taken the rare initiative (for them) of actually paying for the complete redesign and development of a new combined security screening area for D&E.

 

[jerseyfinn]

A-west is a lovely, modern facility. Every time that my wife and I fly TA we marvel at how clean, spacious, and functional the entire terminal is. In short, we don't believe that we're in PHL. USA's best lounge sits right in the center of the A-west terminal -- no coincidence there! I would hope that US fights hard to keep a good face on their TA side of operations. Flying back from Europe, your transistion is equally smooth. Even baggage most usually works efficiently on the A-west side.

If you want to rub mud in the pax's face, then turn left past TSA and venture over to A-east where you will promptly feel like you're in... ahh... Philly! :down:

I'd like US to keep all of the TA stock flying from A-west as this is the face you want your TA pax to see and experience. Hopefully US works out the politics in this difficult city. Mr. Parker does need to have his act together if he ever intends to get PHL right.

Sleaze doesn't begin to describe PHL politics, but politics is indeed a fact of live anywhere in this world. The key to PHL is cash for the politicos, booze for the goons, and Eagles tix to stun all of them. Hollering "yo Adrian" will also sometimes confuse them.

Barry

(bear in mind that I live near this city of brotherly love)

 

[AstroLounge]

jerseyfinn you said it like it is. Terminal Awest is one of the finest in the country (and that is where ALL the TransAtlantic needs to STAY). The rest of that dump looks like Lebanon after the latest Israeli airraid (too bad they didn't extend the mission). Anyone that can say Phillie "isn't that bad" has either very LOW standards or have become too jaded to expect Better. I say roll in the bulldozers and start over!

 

[Travelpro72]

Money, money, money. The only thing folks who support PHL can argue is how much money it brings into US and the need to filter passengers through it. NOBODY can put a price on how much it costs US to run PHL. Boeingboy stated it best. There is new management and new folks in Pittsburgh. Work something new out and relieve PHL of the job it can't do. At least shift SOME of it. It will all balance out. Piney said there are answers that just need to be found. I think they would sooner find a cure for cancer before they found a way to fix PHL Int'l. There isn't enough money for all those grand plans for expansion and terminals like ATL. Get over it and work on the business that we are able to handle not force there. Again, NOBODY that supports can quite come up with how much money it costs US to run a hub as big as we do there. CLT has nowhere near the O&D or population yet we keep a hub there. As nice an airport as it is, there isn't much there. Trust me a 3 hour sit there is like torture. A PRIME airport intended for CONNECTIONS is sitting ready and waiting. OBVIOUSLY other airlines are finding business there. Go figure. Give it all away why don't we.

 

[700UW]

PHL makes it's money on O&D traffic, the European Flights especially all the cargo they carry across the pond.

The best way to fix PHL was to buy the land where the old Westinghouse Factory and expand.

 

[aredeeyou22]

Money, money, money. The only thing folks who support PHL can argue is how much money it brings into US and the need to filter passengers through it. NOBODY can put a price on how much it costs US to run PHL. Boeingboy stated it best. There is new management and new folks in Pittsburgh. Work something new out and relieve PHL of the job it can't do. At least shift SOME of it. It will all balance out. Piney said there are answers that just need to be found. I think they would sooner find a cure for cancer before they found a way to fix PHL Int'l. There isn't enough money for all those grand plans for expansion and terminals like ATL. Get over it and work on the business that we are able to handle not force there. Again, NOBODY that supports can quite come up with how much money it costs US to run a hub as big as we do there. CLT has nowhere near the O&D or population yet we keep a hub there. As nice an airport as it is, there isn't much there. Trust me a 3 hour sit there is like torture. A PRIME airport intended for CONNECTIONS is sitting ready and waiting. OBVIOUSLY other airlines are finding business there. Go figure. Give it all away why don't we.

If we were simply looking for an airport for "connections," why woud we choose PIT? Wouldn't we want something more centrally located in the USA, especially with our new found presence in the West? I am thinking Kansas part of the country, and I am sure we could get it at a much better cost than PIT!

I agree PHL is overcrowded and many times unworkable, but, unfortunately, it is where the $$$ is, plain and simple. That is why it is so saturated, be it good or bad. As sad as it is for some, it's time to let the "PIT" thing rest.

Just out of curiousity, how much service has Southwest added at PIT since the original push? Is the operation comparable to the size of their operation at PHL?

 

[SoftLanding]

According to Parker, who said this at last Wed. CLT pilot meeting, the reason there has not been new destinations announced is because PHL airport is not cooperating with gates on A (Int'l) concourse. His discription of the issues included the fact that old US Air leadership pissed off a whole boatload of folks all around the system as we went in and out of bankruptcy. PHL went out and got Southwest to come in with promises of plenty of gates as US Airways died off. We're still here and not giving up gates, so now the masterminds are trying to move Delta off their concourse and over to A, thus freeing more gates for Southwest. Why they would want a few more domestic flights from SW vs. new international cities has everyone stumped. I can only wonder.......

Parker talks and talks; we're still in some form of contract neg, no?!

Must be a good time to talk about adding overseas service...

We're parking B757 in 2007! I do realize some of our B757 can be taken off dom service and put into overseas service after spending some $$$.

If one listens to the chatter from management during conf calls, expansion does not seem to be on the agenda...

Just wondering how long before management will start complaining about yields being too low across the Atlantic; one look at CAL and Delta's oncoming Atlantic expansion ought to raise an eyebrow or two...


SoftLanding

 

[zethya]

If we were simply looking for an airport for "connections," why woud we choose PIT? Wouldn't we want something more centrally located in the USA, especially with our new found presence in the West? I am thinking Kansas part of the country, and I am sure we could get it at a much better cost than PIT!

I agree PHL is overcrowded and many times unworkable, but, unfortunately, it is where the $$$ is, plain and simple. That is why it is so saturated, be it good or bad. As sad as it is for some, it's time to let the "PIT" thing rest.

Just out of curiousity, how much service has Southwest added at PIT since the original push? Is the operation comparable to the size of their operation at PHL?

Southwest has increased service minimally at PIT since it's start. Don't know the reason. WN has stated that if gates were available, or when they become avaiiable, they want to increase the # of flights out of PHL to over 100/day. For the period 7/2005 through 6/2006, the number of Southwest enplaned from PIT was .979M and from PHL 3.1M.

My .2 on PHL. If you read the many, many posts on the many airline forums, the comments/complaints are really no different than most every other Hub. Many FFlyers hate their Hub for the delays, congestion, weather, etc., but if you ask if they would rather have it closed and connect through another city, rather than have worldwide access at their doorstep, they fall back into the good soldier posture. I'm not really certain how many people realize who would pay for a new airport. The answer is the passenger and the airlines. That is why PIT landing fees are so high - even today, because there is still a huge debt. The other point (as someone made earlier) was that PHL was burned by US during bankruptcy and then there is the history of how PIT was so unceremoniously de-hubbed. USAirways is really still an unknown to the city as far as viability is concerned, so why should they invest $1+B on the basis of such short term experience? Also, if you examine the current state of the industry, what would happen if for example US and UA merged. It's very possible the PHL activity would be downgraded drastically in favor of IAD and so forth with other potential US mergers. Even though Parker and the US analysts have stated many times that PHL is the "crown jewel" /"premier" hub for the airline, I'm not certain they have shown much initiative to improve the facilities therein. My opinion is that US wants to be an LCC as far as spending is concerned, but also wants to be a global player in the industry. It really needs to decide which one it wants to be and go from there.

 

[ClueByFour]

Even though Parker and the US analysts have stated many times that PHL is the "crown jewel" /"premier" hub for the airline, I'm not certain they have shown much initiative to improve the facilities therein. My opinion is that US wants to be an LCC as far as spending is concerned, but also wants to be a global player in the industry. It really needs to decide which one it wants to be and go from there.

And in the case of PHL, because of what happened at both ends of the state in BK, neither the state nor the locals are going to fund it. Nor should they. As I alluded to earlier, I'm sure LCC can have whatever facilities it wants at PHL. Cash and carry, that is.

I mean really: can one honestly expect any municipality in PA (or the state itself) to ever float debt on US' behalf? I don't think so.

 

[aredeeyou22]

Southwest has increased service minimally at PIT since it's start. Don't know the reason. WN has stated that if gates were available, or when they become avaiiable, they want to increase the # of flights out of PHL to over 100/day. For the period 7/2005 through 6/2006, the number of Southwest enplaned from PIT was .979M and from PHL 3.1M.

My .2 on PHL. If you read the many, many posts on the many airline forums, the comments/complaints are really no different than most every other Hub. Many FFlyers hate their Hub for the delays, congestion, weather, etc., but if you ask if they would rather have it closed and connect through another city, rather than have worldwide access at their doorstep, they fall back into the good soldier posture. I'm not really certain how many people realize who would pay for a new airport. The answer is the passenger and the airlines. That is why PIT landing fees are so high - even today, because there is still a huge debt. The other point (as someone made earlier) was that PHL was burned by US during bankruptcy and then there is the history of how PIT was so unceremoniously de-hubbed. USAirways is really still an unknown to the city as far as viability is concerned, so why should they invest $1+B on the basis of such short term experience? Also, if you examine the current state of the industry, what would happen if for example US and UA merged. It's very possible the PHL activity would be downgraded drastically in favor of IAD and so forth with other potential US mergers. Even though Parker and the US analysts have stated many times that PHL is the "crown jewel" /"premier" hub for the airline, I'm not certain they have shown much initiative to improve the facilities therein. My opinion is that US wants to be an LCC as far as spending is concerned, but also wants to be a global player in the industry. It really needs to decide which one it wants to be and go from there.

So WN has only increased service "minimally" in PIT, whereas they can't add flights fast enough at PHL. Is that correct? Strange, there are plenty of gates available at PIT, no?....

I agree with what you said, zethya, especially the part about the LCC spending/ global playing antics of USAirways. Our niche seems to be in between the two extremes. What does that mean? I have no idea, but I believe the plan includes PHL in a big way going forward. We have to figure out a way to make that work.