More on My Little Airport

I talked about my little airport a bit last week, but, I'm going to talk about it more!

Yesterday, T.F. Green in Rhode Island announced a new Frequent Parker Program. It's pretty simple - get one free day after ten days of parking.

So why would an airport want to do this? It's pretty simple - encourage on-airport parking. Free stuff is always appealing. Plus, since travelers will be able to use their membership card to enter and exit garages - that makes travel easier. Which all builds to the main objective - make people park on-airport instead of off-airport. That fits into T.F. Green's strategy of building up more air service. To build more air service you need to lower your airline costs. You can lower airline costs by using other revenues - like parking - to cover them.

Also, you get to track the behavior of your most frequent customers - which is very powerful.

You can learn more here.

Airports as Transit Hubs

This week, Roger Yu had an article in USA Today that gave an overview of airports with transit links.

Of course, I was happy with the article because it have a huge shoutout to my home airport - TF Green in Rhode Island. The intermodal station - now officially known as Interlink - has been talked about for years. In fact, I think it was supposed to be done when I was twelve at one point.

I turn twenty on Monday.

But the new facility will bring Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority trains to the airport, providing service to Providence and Boston. Unfortunately, one of the big justification of the project (in my humble opinion) - Southwest not wanting to serve Boston Logan - is now gone. But the airport does hope the rail station enhances its image as a Boston alternative, especially to international carriers. The facility will also house new rental car space and a bus stop.

But enough about my little airport (that I love dearly).

The article focuses on transit links to airports. Which I've come to support more as I've been living in Washington for two months now. For example - a cab to Dulles could easily run me $70. I can get to National in less time for less than $5 riding the subway. (Dulles will have rail access in a couple of years, though.)

Or take Boston. It has two mass transit lines, subway and buss rapid transit, constantly running through. Philadelphia has pretty good service from the terminal to Center City via SEPTA.

I like transit for a few reasons. First, it's cheap compared to a taxi or a car rental. Second, I'm not a huge fan of driving in unfamiliar places so good mass transit aovids that. Third, it cuts down on airport traffic. Finally, while this isn't a huge thing for me, it is supposedly better for the environment.

So let's hope the transit experiment at Providence goes. I have my concerns - mainly related to frequency. Having only a few trains per day makes for inconvenience. It's nice having a subway at National, for example, because a train is coming every few minutes. But I would like to see more airports embrace mass transit for sure.

What are your thoughts?

LAX Observation Deck Re-Opens

If you're an airplane spotter like myself - here's some good news! (For once.)

I say that because spotting has been a tough hobby to have during the past nine years or so. Ever since September 11th, spotters have been looked at with additional scrutiny. People at airports with long lenses can certainly look suspicious to those who aren't really aware of the hobby.

Of course, I find it a bit ironic that spotters are sometimes seen as a security risk, since legend has it the spotting hobby really got going during World War II. With limited radar coverage, sometimes spotters were the best way to track the positions of spotters. But I digress.

Security concerns have made spotting harder. But at most airports it's still possible - though some areas might be off limits. Encounters with law enforcement are not all that uncommon. (These are generally pretty mundane - just be cooperative and you'll be fine.)

But to get to my point - for the first time since September 11, the roof of the Theme Building at Los Angeles International Airport is now open to the public for spotting. Unfortunately, the viewing area is only open from 8 am to 5 pm on weekends. But still, this is progress for those of us who love to just relax and watch airplanes. It's how many people I know developed an interest in aviation during childhood.

Anyway, I'm just happy we're seeing some progress at LAX. How is the spotting at your airport?

(Hat tip to my friend Chris for finding this story.)

One-Third of the US Fleet Now Has Wi-Fi

I've written about in-flight Wi-Fi plenty of times before, but this PC Magazine article got me thinking about it again. According to them, about a third of the US fleet is now equipped with Wi-Fi.

That's pretty impressive for something that's only about two years old, methinks.

For full-fleet installs, however - there's a ways to go. It's only still AirTran and Virgin America. But Delta is getting close to having the mainline domestic fleet done. American is slowly making progress. United only has Wi-Fi on its p.s. flights but says it is considering more. Frontier will have the E-Jet fleet done soon. Alaska will have its entire fleet done by the end of the year. Southwest is now moving along with Row 44 and should be done by the end of 2012. US Airways has the entire A321 fleet equipped.

What I'm getting at is that Wi-Fi has become big. But I wonder how many people actually use it? Gogo has remained mum on the topic. Does it actually influence someone's purchase decision? If an airline is behind will that eventually have a negative effect on their bottom line?

Have you used in-flight Wi-Fi? How often do you plan to use it?

In Defense of Fees

I honestly did not think I would write those words.

But anyway - there was a hearing here in DC yesterday about ancillary revenue. Of course, Spirit Airlines was a big topic of discussion because they're the closest thing we have to Ryanair here in the States. As a result, they charge for nearly anything. What's caused particular attention in the press is the airline's decision to begin charging up to $45 for a carry-on bag. But other airlines have been raked through the coals as well.

I'll be honest - I'm not the biggest fan of paying extra for things. I'm pretty sure everyone else would agree they prefer free things as well. But I just don't like the way some fees are being portrayed in the media. For example, this Good Morning America video piece tries to portray an upgrade fee as a big surprise. Um, why? Were you expecting to go to the ticket counter, and get an upgrade to first class no questions asked?

Now I'm not saying fees are popular - but airlines should have a choice as to what they want to charge. Likewise we as the consumer have the ultimate power. Don't want to pay for bags? Well, look at Southwest or JetBlue, for example. And while others might criticize Spirit in the press for fees, other travelers might still like them. For example, a friend of mine and his girlfriend are going on vacation on Spirit soon. They knew about all the fees, but even after that they still came out ahead compared to other airlines. So what's exactly the big deal here?

So here's my main point - yes, fees are annoying. But they've become and important source of revenue for the airlines. And often despite what consumers say, most booking decisions are made based on price and schedule, not fees.

I agree with members of Congress who feel that airlines can be more transparent about fees, though. And I think some carriers are getting better about it, but unfortunately they still have a ways to go. If you want to compare carriers, I'd highly recommend this handy chart of all the domestic fees from the folks at FareCompare.

Some Lawmakers Interested in National’s Perimeter Rule

Watching debates about Washington's National airport is always fun, simply because it's the airport that many members of Congress prefer to use. Every now and then, a debate flares up over the 1,250-mile perimeter rule that prevents longer flights out of the airport, and according to this Washington Post article, that's starting to happen again.

First, a bit of background here on the article, as I think it misses a few key points. While it initially mentions that the purpose of the rule is to reduce noise and pollution, the big reason this rule was put in place was to essentially force people to use the then-new Dulles further out from the city. The same thing happened with LaGuardia and JFK in New York. Personally, I don't think Dulles needs the help anymore. The airport is well-established, and yes, United might lose some domestic traffic here but the airport will in no way lose its status as Washington's major international airport if more long-haul flights out of National are allowed.

Also, the article mentions that for the first time, there can be flights to Los Angeles, Salt Lake City, and Phoenix. This is not true. There are currently some flights that are exempt from the perimeter rule (more political compromise). Alaksa Airlines flies to Los Angeles and Seattle. Frontier Airlines flies to Denver, as does United. Delta flies to Salt Lake City, and US Airways flies to Phoenix.

One only needs to look at these flights when it comes to concerns about increased noise and larger aircraft at the airport. The current flights are operated with Airbus A319s and A320s, Boeing 737-800s, and Boeing 757-200s. All of these aircraft are already used for flights within the perimeter. Plus, since National is slot controlled, if an airline wants to start a new flight it will have to cut an existing one.

Basically, I'm supportive of any moves that will expand National's reach. I'm living in DC this summer for an internship. It costs me less than $5 to get to National on the subway. Roundtrip cab fare to Dulles can easily run someone $150 from downtown DC.

You can read more here.

The Bay Runway at JFK is Complete

One word: Yay!

The Bay Runway (13R/31L) at JFK in New York that was closed in March has now reopened. This was a big deal because the runway is the airport's busiest. To help out, the largest carriers decided to fly reduced schedules until yesterday. So now, things can return to normal.

Improvements include the runway being widened by 200 feet to better accommodate the A380 superjumbo. Some new taxiways have been added that should get landing airplanes off the runway faster and hopefully improve on-time performance.

But we're not out of the woods yet - the Bay Runway and another intersecting runway will be closed for a couple of weeks in the end of September to complete the project. But this was clearly the worst part of the job, and it was done on time. Nice.

More at NYCAviation.

Some Pictures of Lufthansa’s Renovated Business Lounge

Lufthansa announced earlier this week that it has completed renovations of its 15,000 square foot business lounge in Terminal B of Frankfurt. Of course you have all the usual lounge amenities that have received a refresh. But the big thing, I think is the new "JetFriends" area made specifically for children is a great idea for traveling families. The new area boasts activities for children of all ages, from drawing tables for toddlers to gaming areas for older children.

I think this is a great idea - business lounges generally aren't that kid friendly, so this is nice.

Here are some shots - thanks to Lufthansa for passing them along!