Jerseyguy

Its 4 years away (5-6 the way Mercer County does things), but Trenton will be getting a brand new terminal complex. Estimated cost of the complex is $50 million. TTN is currently talking with company "Urban Engineers" of Cherry Hill. They have said that funding will come from PFCs and parking fees but I have to think that there will be a rent increase for F9 as well. PFC max is possibily going to $8-$8.50 each way but thats just $4 more Frontier loses in the price of the ticket (PFCs must be included in the advertised price).

Just wondering how this effects F9s plans at Trenton even though yes, it is a ways off

http://www.towntopics.com/wordpress/...ercer-airport/

EricR111

The question is not really the fees that F9 would have to pay. The question is what type of competition would come in, assuming that this is bigger than the present two-gate, cramped terminal.

Even if it is just a 4-gate terminal, you could handle 24-28 flights/day. With F9 changing its strategy to focus on Philadelphia, the real question is who, OTHER THAN F9, will fill the gates?

Unless F9 can be committed to focus solely on TTN, they are going to have to find other carriers. And for F9 and everybody else, the short runways are a problem. I believe the present A319s (non-NEO) are limited to 1000 nm (1,150 miles). That eliminates a lot of potential vacation oriented destinations - in the Caribbean (except for Nassau), as well as LAS, LAX, and SFO.

TTN would have to convince legacy carriers to get their regional affiliates to fly to hubs -- DL to get regionals to DTW and ATL, and AA/UA to ORD.

One other possibility would be AC to YYZ - not because so many of us New Jerseyans are itching to visit Toronto (besides the CN Tower and the Hockey Hall of Fame, what do you do there, anyway?), but with the cheap Canadian dollar, you could sell connections via YYZ to Asia - and given the large and growing Chinese, Korean and Filipino communities in NJ (India would not work, as it is quicker and cheaper to go via Europe), Toronto could serve as a hub for flights to Asian destinations.

rsteinmetz70112

I had heard that there was some ongoing effort on clearing some obstruction which would help the runway situation, or am I thinking of something else?

Jerseyguy

There is a runway obstruction study going on. According to a 2015 PFC application there are several projects related to obstructions and clearing the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ)

http://www.state.nj.us/counties/merc...ettn150615.pdf

Also DL has plans to purchase the CS100 from Bombardier, at full MTOW it only requires 3,999ft of runway and claims to have a 3100nm range so it should be able to handle the 2200nmi out to the West coast or down to anything in the carribean. Actually it should even be able to do it off of the smallest runway at TTN which is 4800ft.

EricR111

Even if fuel remains cheap, I just don't see Delta using a 110 seat plane like the CS100 for 2,000+ mile flights, say from TTN to LAS or LAX.

The economics of these smaller planes just don't favor it.

A CS 300, which is comparable to an A 319 in terms of seating, might make economic sense if fuel costs stay low. It should be able to do 2,000+ miles off the main runway.

In the end, however, I suspect any DL flights would be using regionals to their hubs. And since AA and UA have hubs nearby, they would not fly to TTN and take business away from their hubs.

davywavy

I think if Delta ever did return to TTN it would be in a very limited way, as it was last time, in 2006:

http://news.delta.com/delta-continue...nta-and-boston

"Delta Continues Mid-Atlantic Growth with New Service Between Trenton, N.J., Atlanta and Boston"

It can only be a guess and it depends on what Frontier does, but maybe - maybe - Allegiant might decide to give Frontier a hard time at TTN.

Jerseyguy

Thats fair enough, I would accept that. It would be nice to have TTN-ATL or TTN-DTW.

I recall the DL experiment in 2006, DL felt like they could charge a big premium for that. If they come back, lets hope they learned. With regard to Allegiant, that wouldn't be much help, unless they wanted to bring one of their 757s to TTN. Would also probably add MYR seasonally.

Jerseyguy

I was just looking at the link about DLs TTN service in 2006 and I noticed a couple of things.

1. Only 1 flight to Atlanta for connections to other cities
2. The return flight from Atlanta left at 135pm, which limits connections from the West coast Early morning flights would have been needed
LAX 530am
LAS 6am
PHX 6am
SFO/SEA not available.
DFW 945am
DEN 8am
STL 938am
OKC 720AM (3HR LAYOVER)
SLC 7AM

And for those east coast cities that did have a convenient connection, you would need to be able to take 1 or maybe 2 flights if you didn't want a lengthy connection which limit your options and possibly raise the fare. So the service wasn't well thought out to begin with.

EricR111

Since the economics of regional jets favor shorter flights, if DL were to return, I would assume flights would go to DTW rather than ATL.

beyondhere

The problem is PHL being so close.

Delta would rather hold the frequency advantage on PHL-DTW and PHL-ATL over AA, and WN and the ULCCs, than siphon planes and customers into and out of TTN or even ACY. Probably the same can be said with Delta at EWR over UA on EWR-DTW and EWR-ATL.

AFAIK, Delta is the largest carrier on PHL-ATL and PHL-DTW. It was AA and not DL that was aggressively fare matching NK and F9 on PHL-ATL, Likely, more PHL based pax connect through ATL than ATL based pax that connect through PHL, leaving AA for example, to need to rely more on O&D. AA also overflies it's CLT hub on domestic connections, and thus just has markets like ISP and secondary European cities where PHL has something unique for connections. Thus when F9 and NK load such cheap fares on PHL-ATL/DTW and target O&D, it's AA that has most to lose. WN seems to have some staying power on PHL-ATL after it absorbed the AirTran route, but at the same time, it cut PHL-HOU and routed a lot of Texas bound itineiries into that PHL-ATL flight.

Maybe AA would consider TTN-CLT as CLT competition isn't as multi-carrier, aside from F9's less than daily. However, AA has many other strategic things it can be involved in, as it anyways has grip on PHL and the PHL market. If AA could strike a deal with F9 or VX for it's LGA slots, perhaps giving up EWR slots, AA might counter some off balancing of EWR slots by taking a small position into TTN with TTN-CLT.

Jerseyguy

I don't know but if TTN wants a second carrier (except Allegiant) they will need to have a modern facility that has adequate space for them. They will need to balance this new facility with low landing and rent fees. I'm pretty sure there will be an increase in parking fees but I also believe that they would likely put in a parking garage, so perhaps they could leave a lower priced option with a walkable but uncovered parking lot. Perhaps $12 in the Garage $8 on the lot.

N830MH

That's too early!! They don't like to wake up early morning. I think they have to get a better schedule. They can leave from TTN at 10am or 12pm and there will be no guarantee to arrived into TTN at 6pm or 7pm instead of early morning hours. They will be so extremely tired.

Jerseyguy

Was out at TTN today and I saw a surprise visitor


Eastern has plans to start commerical service sometime in 2017 and will focus on the Caribbean and Latin America, perhaps they will start TTN-MIA-Carribean as an LCC.

deemkaa

Frontier applies For Cuba Flights
http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/ne...a-nonstop.html

traveller001

As most LCCs start they will likely focus on O&D to/from Florida.

They will be flying charters for awhile before selling their own stuff.