Old AmrapinVA

A light rail line to CVG is already part of the OKI Regional Plan, and the Brent Spence reconstruction will preserve a light rail right-of-way through the cut-in-the-hill. There's a reason cities build rail lines to airports: Because it works and it makes the city more attractive as a travel destination. Two of NYC's three major airports have rail connections; LaGuardia has bus service but no rail. Guess which airports are easiest to get to, even if the physical distance is greater? A few cities with airport-rail connections: Cleveland - RTA Red Line Portland, OR - MAX Light Rail Chicago O'Hare - CTA Blue Line Chicago Midway - CTA Orange Line JFK - MTA subway and Long Island Rail Road (via AirTrain connection) Newark - NJ Transit Commuter Rail (via AirTrain monorail) Philadelphia - SEPTA Commuter Rail Washington National - Metro subway Boston Logan - MBTA Blue Line Washington Dulles - Metro subway (under construction) Denver - RTD Light Rail (proposed) I'm probably missing a few more, and those are just American cities. (In developed countries overseas, building a rail line to the airport is simply a given and not even a matter of debate.) Point is, every single one of those airports likely had bus service before they built the rail link, but they knew the rail link was crucial for making the airport competitive. Maybe we keep saying it because it's true. Hell, I'm the biggest mass transit advocate you'll find, but I'll go several blocks out of my way to take the train instead of a bus. I can't even remember the last time I rode a bus in NYC. Current construction of the 'Silver Line' is only to Reston, VA. There still aren't enough funds to build out to Dulles yet. So it's more 'proposed' than 'under construction' at this point. Just FYI.

Well Ken, then I misjudged you on this and that's my bad. You and I are not far apart at all in thoughts of a future transportation system. I also think you can weave seabound vessels into one seamless system for cargo and even passenger service. It would be nice one day to have these different transportation modes act in conjunction and not with leaders that act as enemies claiming their own "turf" and trying to steal pax and cargo from one another. It's extremely counterproductive, especially with the energy issues on the horizon. It would be very cool to me if one day a person and his/her luggage could fly from L.A. to Cincy, take a high-speed train to Cleveland and then take a ferry across Lake Erie to Port Stanley, Ontario all on one fare and using one ticket. They're getting closer to this ideal to that in Europe and Japan, be the U.S. and Canada are light-years away from achieving this.

Yet the IATA story about losses this year is posted here. This year, most of the losses will have nothing to do with fuel. So is it long term or short term? Not disagreeing with you about the fuel issue, BTW, it'll come to a head. I'm not opposed to your thoughts on the matter of transportation, but I've always thought aviation and rails should work in tandem, much like they do in Japan and Europe. For some reason, that gets a cold reception on these boards.

Ken, Oil prices aren't driving the losses currently. Lack of business is. You can believe what you want about when peak oil hits, the airlines are not leading this downturn, not by a long shot.

Really? Back to this again? The orginal point of this thread was how oil prices last summer were causing airlines so much hardship that they'd never survive. That somehow $147/barrel was a "real" price that would never cascade down to errr....$35/barrel ever again. Hmmm. Now, because SOME airlines are being squeezed by the worst recession since the early 80's (Kudos to the folks on the recession thread for getting it right!) we're back to saying the industry is dead and doing Monday morning quarterbacking? Hmmm. Interesting.

The Port Authority actions seem to be in line with maintaining passenger service. They've practically accepted every handout the Federal Government could provide to them in terms of starting new passenger service from TOL. A few years back they wanted to use Federal Dollars to start up TOL-NYC service. Then there's this campaign: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,10356.0.html Their website sure isn't focusing on the "cargo only" idea that's being implied on this thread: http://www.toledoexpress.com/ And honsetly, if they really weren't interested in having passenger service...why even bother with JetAmerica? TOL management dropped the ball on this one. I have to believe that when AirTran was expanding their operations in the Midwest back around 2000, they were interested in serving Toledo either in tandem with Flint or as their station for "Metro Detroit". And while it's true that Flint's pax flight operations have leveled off over the last few years....they're much higher than Toledo's now. Toledo is a large cargo hub, no doubt, but it's basically one carrier away from becoming Wilmington. Even its relevance has declined a bit: it used to be a top 20 cargo hub ten years ago in terms of tonnage moved, last year it was #50. I'm sure the Port Authority wants to maintain pax service at TOL for revenue balance in case the cargo ops "go south".

I think Lansing was chosen for several reasons: Lansing had funds readily available for an entrant like JetAmerica. Lansing is terribly underserved for their catchment area, and has seen several carriers pull out of the market in recent months. Lansing's more centralized location will help it pull potential customers from more of the state than Flint could. Lansing has no low fare service by any airline. Flint already has low fare service via AirTran to Atlanta and Orlando, as well as weekend service to Tampa and Ft. Myers. It certainly WAS, back in the early 2000s. Actually, both FNT and CAK mirrored each other for several years as AirTran came in and stimulated both markets to the point that both were ranked among the fastest growing airports in the nation. As far as I know, FNT no longer ranks as one the fastest growing airports as air travel all around has softened and Flint has lost some service, including mainline jets to DTW, point-to-point service by Northwest to Florida, as well as Delta service to CVG. As long as Delta competes directly along any routes tied to LAN, I have little faith that JetAmerica will come out a winner there. The only other low cost carrier of recent memory who tried Lansing was Indy Air. NW put direct competition on that route...and soon Indy yanked it. Not surprisingly, after Indy left Lansing...so was the direct NW Lansing-Dulles service. There's a reason that Toledo and Lansing had almost non-existent commercial passenger service even before the economy slipped: Poor airport management. Maybe JetAmerica can make it work, we'll have to see.

To be 100% fair: It's shameful that Cambodians need to apologize for their actions when the French should take full responsibility for what happened in SE Asia in the mid-to-late 20th century. It's no coincidence that Thailand, that managed to steer clear of French ownership, is now light years ahead economically and socially than its formerly colonized neighbors, even with their current political turmoil. The French turned Cambodian on Cambodian just like they turned Vietmanese on Vietnamese and then joined the underinformed world at the time in blaming the Soviets, Chinese and Americans for "creating" that mess. I bet there isn't a history book in Paris that teaches the true history of French ownership in SE Asia. Germany's history littered with colonized occupations. If we consider what happened in the Phillipines as "genocide", then one should look at how Germany treated native peoples in their occupied territories in Africa. Hopefully you already know, it's not pretty, at all. Do the German history books own up to these "sins"? Or do things only matter when they happen on the mother continent?

^^ Ohiostadiums.net? Couldn't they afford tazairways, tazair or something outside of "ohiostadiums.com"? It still feels very "virtual airline" like. Although at least they're listing company policies now so maybe they're just super cheap. I wish nothing but good luck to them (CO tried CLE-ISP a few years back with an ERJ but had little success, but those ops were done to stave of a threat that SW would expand to new destinations at CLE.). An ERJ to Islip still isn't really gonna be the engine to pull pax numbers up from Delta's continual drawdown of their CVG ops. Every bit helps I suppose, but this isn't exactly an announcement like a Southwest or Jetblue is coming to town.

What is considered "Chicago", "New York City" and "Washington, DC"? For "Chicago" is it O'Hare or Midway? For "NYC" is it LaGuardia, Kennedy, Newark, White Plains, Stewart-Newburgh or Islip? For "DC" is it National, Dulles, or Baltimore-Washington? Seems kinda vague. Actually it seems really vague!

^^ The 15-20 percent decline had more to do with Skybus folding than the national economy. I don't get why they didn't mention that in the release.

^^ Whether you guys wanna believe MTS or not on the other thread, he is right. Delta is pulling down the CVG hub. The only other hub that have seen the size of operational reductions of the scope of CVG's since 2001 is PIT. Pittsburgh's traffic is so weak now (9 million pax annually) it's a "focus city" in name only. Northern Kentucky needs to get serious about attracting other carriers and attracting local folks to fly out CVG. If Delta were to leave altoghther and it's a real possibility after this merger is complete..the hole left would be hard to fill quickly. The fact that Delta has to charge such high fares for locals to keep CVG profitable certainly isn't a bonus for an low cost carrier to move in with a large operation. The fact the Delta has halved the opearation at CVG and yet no other carrier is interested in at least exploring the possibility of CVG is disconcerting at best. Runway length, or approach conditions don't matter if the carriers bottom line is going to be in the red to opeate from there no matter how it's spun.

Powerful stuff, KJP. Awesome work.

Akron-Canton airport tries to add flights to Washington D.C. By Betty Lin-Fisher Beacon Journal business writer POSTED: 11:12 a.m. EDT, Oct 13, 2008 Akron-Canton Airport is in the running for its first, nonstop flight to Washington, D.C. Airport and regional officials have been trying to obtain a nonstop Washington flight for more than a decade, said Kristie Van Auken, senior vice president and chief marketing and communications officer for the airport. ‘‘We have really never been this close,’’ said Van Auken. Landing and takeoff slots at Ronald Reagan National Airport are restricted by the U.S. government and rarely open, said Van Auken. The slots will be awarded by mid to late November with service to start hopefully within 60 days from that time, said Van Auken. Full story at http://www.ohio.com/news/break_news/30890979.html

Oh, OK. I'll take that woe. I don't like to put "on-time" stats over safety.

Ironically, Ken, this actually means that operational demand is high in the New York airspace. So I'm not quite sure how it's a "woe". It means demand is still high for arrivals into JFK.

I just saw your post, AmrapinVA. I'm not trying to imply anything about "tricks" with the Japanese aviation system. I made a simple statement and asked a straightforward question in the hope of receiving constructive feedback and information to help clarify things. So they pay "a bit more" in Japan. How much more? If they are doing better than US airlines, I'm just trying to understand the reasons as to why. I don't think you can blame the consumer. If people aren't willing to pay the price, then the supply has to shrink accordingly. That's how the marketplace works. I think my answer was pretty straightforward...but if you want to know prices of some domestic/international routing, I'm more than happy to provide them. My conversion from Yen:Dollar will be 100:1 it's pretty close to that these days. These are average fares, there are many larger discounts available (just like the U.S.): Tokyo - Osaka/Kobe: $190 one-way on a legacy, $100 one-way on a discount carrier. Tokyo - Fukuoka: $310 legacy, $210 discount. Tokyo - Sapporo: $300 legacy, $190 discount. Osaka - Sapporo: $380 legacy. Osaka - Fukuoka: $210 legacy. Now mind you, Japan has one helluva extensive high-speed rail system. In fact Honshu and Hokkaido are now connected by tunnels, so you can take a train from Fukuoka to Sapporo if you wish now. Even so, this multi-modal transportation system hasn't worked against the airlines in terms of service and price as some have contended here as a forecast for the future of U.S. Aviation. You don't see mass abandonment of their airports. You don't see "only the rich" flying. In fact Narita and Haneda are expanding, Osaka has recently opened a new international airport, and Sapporo opened their new international airport only a few years back. As for international....JAL/ANA charge from as little as $1000 one-way from North America-Japan-SE Asia. Mind you, unrestricted First Class tickets can go as high as $12K one way and demand is increasing (dare I say boom) for these fares as most European and American carriers continue to cut service in all classes. So, when I look this concrete example, I have to take the naysayers with a grain (actually a pound) of salt. A profitable multi-modal transportation system is not out of the reach of the U.S. Basically, airlines in the U.S. need to stop being knee-jerk and play the game of being an international version of Southwest. It's not working and they are getting stomped. Again, the story is being reported wrong. BTW, the consumer drives any market. The U.S. consumer has said it will take price over any other deciding factor in order to fly (including safety). It will cost the U.S carriers in the long run if they continue to cater to this demand even with oil prices at $75/barrel.

Funny thing is the experts in the article article mostly say oil will settle between $80-$90/barrel. Yet the headline implies something different. Then again, it's all about advertising hits. Truth? Eh. Ken, I wasn't picking on ya, I just wanted to quote the article.

WE already have non stop flights to Seattle (I can't remember if its year round or seasonal but I've been on it) Portland? Who knows, Airline revenue mgmt is a strange beast. It must be seasonal. One of my friends is going to a wedding there in October and couldn't get a direct flight. Seattle was year-round, but they are dropping it for this winter. As for Portland, not only dosen't Cleveland have service, but Delta is pulling it out of Cincinnati as well this fall. So only Detroit, regionally, will have direct service to PDX. I guess yields are fairly low. San Diego never does seem to do well either from the Great Lakes area either.

First, ANA is not just making money, they're setting records for profitiablilty. So is Qatar, Singapore and Emirates. Second, JAL is the largest international carrier in Japan and is actually recovering from finanical losses in mid-decade. Let me repeat that, they're making money in an environment where Jet fuel 4x what it was just 3 years ago. They were losing money at $50/barrel, and made it at $90/barrel. There are no tricks to the Japanese aviation system as I think Gildone is trying to imply. They have low cost carriers like AirDo and Skymark that are Japanese equivalents of SW. They pay the rising costs of Jetfuel. Their passengers do pay a bit more, only because, even at 106:1, the yen is no bargain against the dollar and the level of service is far higher than most US mainline carriers. To be honest, Japan airlines are at distinct disadvantage to American carriers due to the long term domestic economic stagflation, the issues of the population plateau and the level of competition from different modes of transportation. Simply put...in Asia...people will pay more if they get a high level of service. In the US, most people flying today are wanting a higher level of service and then expect something for next to nothing. Look at Skybus. Ten dollar seats to St. Augustine. Give me a break. So the US airlines are screwed by the consumer for the most part. Again it's service and efficency that offsets the fuel factor that makes this aviation market hum. Hell, even in the American environment, at $100/barrel, many US legacy carriers posted an operational profit. So it's no impossible, and the airlines are far from dead. Most of the airlines that have crashed had insanely stupid ideas (Skybus, Zoom), or were to small to compete against the big boys (MaxJet, EOS). Contraction happens all the time in the newspaper industry, yet never gets reported like it's the end of the world. I wonder why? :D Anyway, until American consumers get it, they'll be looking at carriers posting in the red and they'll be focusing about the wrong things thanks to "big media".

KJP, I wan't trying to start a thread on warming on here. Mucho Apologizo.

Sure KJP, but oil was already much more expensive in Japan prior to the meteroic increases in prices and are still very high even with the favorable exchange rate (which has slipped back about 15 percent since May) by US Standards. If I am to assume the implications in the articles/op-ed's posted on here by the New Republic and USA Today, very few people should be flying in Japan and flying should be unaffordable to general public. That simply isn't the case. As for Jet A taxes, the airlines don't get free ride. Japan has seen a strong economic downturn due to fuel increases which is tied to a decline in demand in worldwide exports from there. This isn't really news only reported in Japan, CNBC and the like have been reporting on this malaize as long as the US economic downturn. In fact...they're sliping back into stagflation.

United to furlough 1,550 flight attendants MINNEAPOLIS - United Airlines said on Wednesday it will furlough 1,550 flight attendants as it reduces its flying this fall. The furloughs work out to roughly 10 percent of United's cabin workers. United is seeking 7,000 job reductions companywide by the end of 2009, said spokesman Jeff Kovick. United has previously announced plans to cut as many as 1,600 managers and 5,500 front-line workers, and to furlough 950 pilots. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_travel/20080828/ap_tr_ge/travel_brief_united_flight_attendants

Peak oil is a physical reality that needs to be dealt with and will be a problem for worldwide economics in the short and long term. Climate change was here before humans arrived and will be here after we leave. So i'd say peak oil will drive the world to alternatives.