In the Trenches: Incorporating Exercise Into the Workday – Intuit Small Business Blog
Finding the best way to get exercise in is probably one of the hardest things to do.
JetBlue Airways eyes future growth of Long Beach Airport operations – Long Beach Press-Telegram
I was asked to comment for an in-depth look at what JetBlue wants to do in Long Beach with international flying and smaller airplanes. I imagine it’ll be a long road to make this happen, but it seems like a good plan to me.
(Visited 1,300 times, 1 visits today)
Long Beach better be careful if they start catering to much to jetBlue. Haven’t they ever heard the expression ‘don’t put all your eggs in one basket’
Well, right now they have very few eggs in their commuter airline basket.
And nobody else is dying for LGB slots…. They’re less desirable than the current 0-dark-hundred HND slots. And who can blame them with the terrible fares B6 is getting?
CF – How do the slots work at LGB? Does the airline basically say Slot 1 was taken by flight 345 on every Sunday, Monday, Friday and Saturday of the month? I’m just curious if there is room for interpretation for others to come in and argue that they’re not using the slots..
Nick – I’m not sure if they have to actually sketch out which flights use which slots or not, but they could if they had to. There isn’t any doubt that they’re using their slots according to the rules. (Besides, I don’t know who would challenge them anyway.)
There are plenty of ‘commuter slots’ available at LGB – which is define ad 75,000 lbs or less. The CRJ-700 is the perfect airplane for these slots. In fact, SkyWest lists UA Express at 75,000lbs (UAX does not serve LGB). However, SkyWest’s CRJ-700s for AS and DL are listed at 74,999lbs. This was done to qualify for LGB’s commuter slots. The CRJ-700 has proven a viable aircraft on longer routes (such as DFW-LAX, BFL-IAH United Express) and a hit with frequent fliers because of the first class section.
I realize the ordinance was created in an era when no one ever thought about 50-70 passenger jets. I do believe the ordinance was done based on knowing noise of jets would be reduced over time. There is a provision in the current noise ordinance, once an ‘average noise level’ is met, additional slots could be issued – those would be slots of 75,000lbs or more.
I’m also skeptical about Customs at the airport. The airport has been trying to get Customs for years. Although, there was a Customs facility in the 60’s, there hasn’t been anything since. And to have Jet Blue pay for the facility (if it does work out), is not the answer either. That would give them too much power and and unwillingness to let other carriers use the facilities – look at what they have done with the slots!
Re: LGB
Back in 2003 when AA and AS sued the City for the B6 slot allocation, the FAA in their response said:
“At some point in the future, however, the FAA may be presented with complaint from a third party under 14 C.F.R Part 16, or may have reason to review a compliance standpoint on its own initiative. The FAA thus reserves the right to review the consistency of Chapter 16.43 with Federal Law in the future” and
“In other words, the FAA would not revisit the settlement terms, but the current finding that the settlement is a reasonable action under 16.43 would not prevent an analysis of whether the provisions of 16.43 themselves meet Federal access requirements, if that issue were to be raised”.
Seeing as how the FAA has left open the possibility of a review of 16.43, is the airport setting itself up for a challenge to 16.43, with the amazing new terminal and (if it goes forward) a FIS/CBP?
Can someone explain to me what 14 CFR 16 says, and by what the FAA means by “access requirements”?
Carl – Here’s 14 CFR 16:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2011-title14-vol1/xml/CFR-2011-title14-vol1-part16.xml