New Micro-Airline that will "fly just below the TSA’s radar"
Jun 29, 2011, 8:17 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: DTW
Programs: DL DM/1MM, Marriott Lifetime Platinum
Posts: 199
New Micro-Airline that will "fly just below the TSA’s radar"
http://blogs.forbes.com/edzitron/2011/06/29/planered/
As long as they keep the prices reasonable and the TSA doesn't have an instant change of heart, hire 100k more TSOs, and screen every flight with any passengers, this may actually have a chance. ^
PlaneRed Website
PlaneRed is an all-you-can-eat flight subscription launching around September 1st 2011 that will fly just below the TSA’s radar – using 9-person planes to dodge under their screening of any plane carrying over 10 passengers. The subscriptions will work as such – passengers will pay around $150 a month for access to a booking system much like a city bus, able to book on popular routes on the east coast, serving Atlantic City, New York, Philadelphia, Washington D.C.. They hope to expand quickly to Boston, and then open up new runs in Texas, California, and the Midwest. Eyerly sees it as a ‘win-win’ for customers – 14-passenger planes organized in a luxury set-up to make the journey just a little bit more pleasant.
PlaneRed Website
Last edited by essxjay; Jun 29, 2011 at 3:24 pm Reason: clarifies title
Jun 29, 2011, 10:36 am
#2
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 360
http://blogs.forbes.com/edzitron/2011/06/29/planered/
As long as they keep the prices reasonable and the TSA doesn't have an instant change of heart, hire 100k more TSOs, and screen every flight with any passengers, this may actually have a chance. ^
PlaneRed Website
As long as they keep the prices reasonable and the TSA doesn't have an instant change of heart, hire 100k more TSOs, and screen every flight with any passengers, this may actually have a chance. ^
PlaneRed Website
Jun 29, 2011, 12:27 pm
#5
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 549
However as one person proved, it is possible to not be screened if all you want to do is leave the airport.
Jun 29, 2011, 12:34 pm
#6
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,004
Jun 29, 2011, 12:45 pm
#7
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,388
At one time DFW had 4-5 gates at one end of one of the terminals with no security for small passenger planes. I went through there on the way to Ft. Smith one time.
Jun 29, 2011, 12:54 pm
#8
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,004
Our airport commercial terminal building has one screened gate, one un-screened gate, and next door GA, where a different outlook prevails.
Jun 29, 2011, 1:36 pm
#10
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 549
Screening is for people who want to enter the so-called sterile area (which is in no way sterile), not for people who have no intention or desire at all to enter the sterile area.
If you can use that when coming in off an international flight, clearing customs and only wanting to leave the airport, why not on one of these 9-seaters?
Jun 29, 2011, 1:52 pm
#11
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 198
They won't be able to fly into DCA unless their planes are under 12,500 lbs, correct?
I'm guessing that NYC-PHL-ACY will be their initial route. I'm not going to assume that the TSA will approve an airline to operate through DCA with the intention of usurping their authority and waving it in their face.
I'm guessing that NYC-PHL-ACY will be their initial route. I'm not going to assume that the TSA will approve an airline to operate through DCA with the intention of usurping their authority and waving it in their face.
Jun 29, 2011, 1:55 pm
#12
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: boca raton, florida
Posts: 621
Since there 22,000 public/private airports in this country why would this FAR 135 operation choose to operate in the sterile area of 490 airports? In fact there are 5200 public use airports alone, why bother with ANY of the 490 airports that have a TSA mandated sterile area?
Jun 29, 2011, 2:15 pm
#13
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: here and there
Programs: EB*G, UA ex1K
Posts: 570
Since there 22,000 public/private airports in this country why would this FAR 135 operation choose to operate in the sterile area of 490 airports? In fact there are 5200 public use airports alone, why bother with ANY of the 490 airports that have a TSA mandated sterile area?
Or maybe they want to be Ryanair
sending you to small, cheap airports 100 km from the place they claim to be flying to.
Jun 29, 2011, 2:24 pm
#14
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,388
Even if they're under 12.5 they'll still have big hurdles and screening at DCA. For that reason, I'd think the choice would be another airport in the area - such as Manassas (which has a terminal building), Leesburg, Gaithersburg, Frederick, Stafford (needs a terminal, may prompt the construction of same), and maybe IAD or BWI. Leesburg and Gaithersburg are convenient to higher income/business areas, Manassas is ready-to-go, and Stafford would beat the (traffic-ridden) drive to the airport.
Jun 29, 2011, 2:28 pm
#15
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: boca raton, florida
Posts: 621
Because they have to go where (lots of) passengers want to go? And that's mostly into downtown metro areas. There are public use airports that might be viable: BED is a good substitute for BOS, especially if your destination is in the N or W suburbs. But I think NYC is harder - it's hard to think of ISP as viable for NYC, for example.
Or maybe they want to be Ryanair sending you to small, cheap airports 100 km from the place they claim to be flying to.
Or maybe they want to be Ryanair
sending you to small, cheap airports 100 km from the place they claim to be flying to.