PHL Gates

[ALCARLOS]

Did US Airways get the additional gates in the Philadelphia A concorse they had been asking for?

 

[az_wild727]

Did US Airways get the additional gates in the Philadelphia A concorse they had been asking for?

I spoke to Kirby recently and he told me they are still speaking to the city about it.

 

[Dog Wonder]

No gates, no new service.

 

[Travelpro72]

I think that if the money and people were there the company would start the flights regardless. As cheap as they are they would shuttle your a$$es over to the remote parking on one of those little white people mover things in PHL. They obviously don't care about comfort only profit so why wouldn't they?

 

[US1YFARE]

I think that if the money and people were there the company would start the flights regardless.

You got it. I wouldn't doubt if you see some of those other "new" international destinations (no folks, I'm not talking about service to Canada--I'm talking about the "real" international service offered out East) dropped because they didn't do as well as expected. If the $$$ was there, they'd jump on it faster than the boarding process on the last leg of a 4-day.

 

[nycbusdriver]

No gates, no new service.

Well, not quite.

No gates, no new USAirways service.

The PHL Airport is in the difficult position of deciding if they want to live up to their "commitment" to SWA (and added service from SWA) and give them more gates, or add the high-profile European destinations that USAirways is promising, the result of which precludes SWA getting new gates any time soon.

My guess is that Doogie will be given some kind of incentive to further inconvenience his customers by accepting "remote parking" for the new international service and using the mothballed "mobile lounges" to run pax to/from the terminal. That way, SWA can have their entire concourse, Delta can make the move to A West, and the USAirways customers will get left holding the bag with inferior service at PHL (of course, I didn't think service could get any more inferior in PHL, but if it means more $$$ in Doogie and Co.'s pocket, it will happen.)

 

[AstroLounge]

Even IF remote gates were used (like they do in Europe) it is all a matter of having a well run operation of PTVs (Personal Transport Movers) or buses that do not inconvenience the pax and crew. PHL has a difficult time running an operation with a terminal INTACT and ATTACHED whether this use of hardstand aircraft parking IS feasible would require an enormous increase in Manpower, Complete Dedication and NO EXCUSES....pretty Tall Order.

 

[BuffaloJoe]

Why can't US use some of the B-C Gates for some internation departures? Put a few 757's and 767's there.
Move some E170's to F.

Philadelphia ought to invest in a monorail type of service connecting all the terminals so that would eliviate those long walks or buses. It just sucks that PHL will react when an improvement becomes obsolete.

If DL moves to A, where does NW end up, if they are gonna give WN the entire E gates? Would they give them WN's D gates?

 

[88 B.T.D.]

Customs issues.

 

[Weight&Balance]

Well, not quite.

No gates, no new USAirways service.

The PHL Airport is in the difficult position of deciding if they want to live up to their "commitment" to SWA (and added service from SWA) and give them more gates, or add the high-profile European destinations that USAirways is promising, the result of which precludes SWA getting new gates any time soon.

My guess is that Doogie will be given some kind of incentive to further inconvenience his customers by accepting "remote parking" for the new international service and using the mothballed "mobile lounges" to run pax to/from the terminal. That way, SWA can have their entire concourse, Delta can make the move to A West, and the USAirways customers will get left holding the bag with inferior service at PHL (of course, I didn't think service could get any more inferior in PHL, but if it means more $$$ in Doogie and Co.'s pocket, it will happen.)

Exactly what remote parking are you talking about? Deicing area is a no no. The old overseas terminsl is slated for demolition. RW 17-35 expansion is soon to start. Why take the gate space away from US and give it to the flying cattle car company. Doug should tell John Street to take SWA ram it sideways. Those rattle trap PTV's are not an option when it comes to connecting pax trying to deplane and what about offloading the bags and cargo?

 

[WestCoastGuy]

PHL always has been, and always will be, a nasty place. Passengers hate it, employees hate it, but the company loves it. It's all about the money. The best thing that could possibly happen, would be the Federal Govt to declare the place condemmed and unfit for human habitation and turn it over to Waste Management Co. It would make a wonderful dump ground.

 

[ClueByFour]

As little as 3 or 4 years ago, before A-West, US used the people movers for international and widebody flights. I know, I was on them.

Also--what customs issues arise from using B/C for departing flights? That somebody would have to walk over to B/C to do the "nab the guy taking currency out of the country" shuffle?

US made it's deal in two bankruptcies, and the city cut a deal with LUV. I'd suggest that if US wants more gates, it can bring cash and the airport will build them.

 

[Whatnow?]

No gates, no new service.

Here's an idea.....free up 2-3 gates on A-West by putting LGW/FRA back in PIT and CDG back in CLT. If the city of PHL would rather have nonstop service to PVD, BNA, MHT, and MDW on SWA instead of more NONSTOPS to Europe on US, put the the flights where they would appreciate them!

 

[zethya]

PHL always has been, and always will be, a nasty place. Passengers hate it, employees hate it, but the company loves it. It's all about the money. The best thing that could possibly happen, would be the Federal Govt to declare the place condemmed and unfit for human habitation and turn it over to Waste Management Co. It would make a wonderful dump ground.

GIVE IT A REST RESIDENT PHL BASHER. This thread is discussing International - Terminal A. There are very few international terminals in U.S. airports that are as efficient and physically appealing as A-West in PHL. I can be as much of a generalist as you and state without proof, that More passengers and employees LOVE PHL than hate it. I have personally never read or heard anything but very positive comments regarding PHL from arriving international passengers. Fortunately your baseless opinion is constrained to the bounds of this Forum - where it's quality is best suited.

 

[zethya]

Here's an idea.....free up 2-3 gates on A-West by putting LGW/FRA back in PIT and CDG back in CLT...

Although not a bad personally driven idea. The ? has to be, where would PIT find the daily passenger loads to support 2-333s, or even 2-767s? CLT to CDG is less of a ? because of it's connection potential, but still a big concern - even though Parker is considering it seasonally. Annual PHL International O&D is 4.1M. CLT is 1.9M - most of which is Caribbean services. PIT is 181K. If you were running US, where would you feel most secure in making $ on TA services? I think PIT will probably get a 757 LGW flight when the 330-200s start deliveries in 2009, or possibly even earlier if US and DL merge - although the future status of CVG would likely determine that.