zrs70

Imagine if JetBlue initiated transatlantic service from LGA. Now that will be groundbreaking!

Mind you, pre-clearance from the other side of the pond is an issue, and there are currently only a handful of airports with that option. And yes, there is that perimeter rule ...

cmd320

In addition to the perimeter rule killing this, could an A321LR actually make it off the ground at LGA with enough fuel to get to London?

Often1

No.

It would be a trip to the middle of the North Atlantic.

Also makes zero sense for B6 of all carriers, given that it has a hub at JFK.

Repooc17

Newark could be a possibility.

GW McLintock

I agree. If London actually works out, I wouldn't be surprised to see them add EWR in addition to JFK and BOS, given the recent growth. If NYS was willing to subsidize it, I could even see BUF getting a shot (though that would require setting up a caterer in BUF).

-J.

tphuang

Slots is always going to be an issue to London. After BOS-LHR and JFK-LGW, EWR-LGW is the next one that would imo work pretty well. No one serves EWR-LGW, but i think there could be quite a market there. One that they could serve with LR. Another one they could try is BDL-LGW to cement their northeast loyalty. Once they get low density XLR, they could try FLL-LHR if they can get remedial slot for that. Down the line, they can aim for LAX-LHR/LGW if LAX expansion is going well and they have an aircraft that can go that far.

GW McLintock

BDL is a bit of a stretch, I would put the chances of that as the same as BUF. Unlikely, but would make some sense and be kind of cool to see. I almost wonder if we will see SWF since they did have TATL service at one point.

-J.

hi55us

SWF - you mean "New York International Airport" lol

I really don't see secondary airports like SWF and PVD being worth it for TATL service. I would rather B6 tackle NYC-LON the same way they tackled JFK-SFO/LAX. Go after the legacies that are charging $3k RT for J on JFK-LHR and offer more amenities. You don't see B6 flying SWF-LAX and PVD-SFO. You see them operating JFK-LAX and BOS-SFO.

Another strategy that I think could be great would be stealing an idea from WN - through service from LAX-LHR without having to deplane at JFK. This would be great from both an operations perspective and from a customer experience. As B6's network continues to grow, Jet Blue is going to have to think more about connections, even as they remain adamant in being a point to point airline.

dtremit

Unless that subsidy includes money to buy slots in London, I think it's unlikely. B6 already connects a ton of BUF traffic in BOS very successfully, including to international flights on partners.

dtremit

The problem here is it only works in one direction. You can fly LAX-JFK-LHR without passengers deplaning, but not LHR-JFK-LAX.

(Technically they could probably do a one stop without having through passengers clear customs, but it wouldn't allow them to take on any passengers at JFK, which kind of defeats the purpose.)

tphuang

How does that work exactly. One time I flew CX on SIN->BKK-HKG. I'm pretty sure I was the only one who did not deplane on that flight at BKK because I was continuing to HKG. Everyone else from SIN deplaned at BKK and a whole bunch of additional passengers boarded at BKK. How would that differ here?

Not that I wish B6 will try this in real life. If they want to try LAX-LHR, they should either wait for another range extension on A321 in a few years time which would give the 500 to 600 nm additional needed for that flight or if they dip their toe in a new aircraft. If things go well in this initial effort, I don't see why they couldn't add a longer ranged aircraft. They'd need that if they ever want to try something like JFK-NRT or LAX-AKL

cmd320

SIN-BKK-HKG is two international legs (all passengers will have to clear immigration at their point of arrival) whereas LHR-JFK-LAX is one international and one domestic. Once the aircraft arrived in JFK, passengers traveling only on JFK-LAX could not mix with passengers originating in LHR because those passengers would have not cleared immigration into the US yet. If they did, upon arrival at LAX everyone would have to clear immigration which doesn’t make sense for the domestic passengers.

Now if LHR ever gets a preclearance facility, this could become possible.

diburning

If/when they're able to get more slots somewhere in the London area, they could presumably copy the BA1 model with the A220 except without an all-business config since it probably has the range. NYC to LON, and then on the return flight, stop in Dublin/Shannon for preclearance and fuel.

N830MH

That is correct. They still served LTN-DUB-JFK and return nonstop flight back to LTN. All-business class configuration.

zrs70

i believe BA was LCY-SNN-JFK.