4th DC Area Airport

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BWI is a great airport.

Best thing about BWI is how crazy cheap long-term parking is. You can park for 2 weeks and still save money over an Uber or taxi.

+1 I'm the "hate IAD" poster. I much prefer BWI but since it's small, and not a hub, the destinations aren't that varied. But, I much prefer flying out of BWI to LHR than IAD. Better flight times, too.

Okay. It's fine if you want to style yourself as a "BWI booster," but please. Get real. BWI has one daily flight offered by BA four times a week that is heavily subsidized by the State of Maryland. IAD has multiple flights each day offered by BA, United, and Virgin Atlantic. To suggest that BWI has better flight times is complete BS.

DP. What does your point have to do with PPs? Does a subsidy somehow make it less convenient? Why are you so angry at BWI?

NP. What a strange response. Who's angry? I happen to agree with the PP's point, which was clearly saying that it's ridiculous to suggest that BWI is somehow competitive or even preferable to Dulles when it comes to international service.

Both airports serve their purpose in the region.

If you live closer to BWI than Dulles, it’s preferable for flying international. Yes, Dulles has more flights bit Bwi has easier parking, quick access to terminals and the whole thing is recently renovated with decent places to get something to eat. Perhaps we should just campaign for more international flights to bwi.

I would champion that. We went BWI to LHR this past summer. pretty easy. Few years ago we did IAD to BWI, and it was awful.

You can get a flight from IAD to BWI???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BWI is a great airport.

Best thing about BWI is how crazy cheap long-term parking is. You can park for 2 weeks and still save money over an Uber or taxi.

+1 I'm the "hate IAD" poster. I much prefer BWI but since it's small, and not a hub, the destinations aren't that varied. But, I much prefer flying out of BWI to LHR than IAD. Better flight times, too.

Okay. It's fine if you want to style yourself as a "BWI booster," but please. Get real. BWI has one daily flight offered by BA four times a week that is heavily subsidized by the State of Maryland. IAD has multiple flights each day offered by BA, United, and Virgin Atlantic. To suggest that BWI has better flight times is complete BS.

DP. What does your point have to do with PPs? Does a subsidy somehow make it less convenient? Why are you so angry at BWI?

NP. What a strange response. Who's angry? I happen to agree with the PP's point, which was clearly saying that it's ridiculous to suggest that BWI is somehow competitive or even preferable to Dulles when it comes to international service.

Both airports serve their purpose in the region.

If you live closer to BWI than Dulles, it’s preferable for flying international. Yes, Dulles has more flights bit Bwi has easier parking, quick access to terminals and the whole thing is recently renovated with decent places to get something to eat. Perhaps we should just campaign for more international flights to bwi.

I would champion that. We went BWI to LHR this past summer. pretty easy. Few years ago we did IAD to BWI, and it was awful.

For better or fit worse, BWI has established its business model around low-cost and ultra low-cost carriers. This is great for budget-minded passengers who prefer to fly on Southwest or Spirit. It’s terrible for business travelers or premium passengers, who find an airport with limited service on legacy carriers and a relative dearth of other amenities like lounges.

As for international travel, Dulles is the established base in the region for international carriers. That’s not going to change. The best BWI can hope for are new start-up low-cost international carriers like PLAY entering the market. Or, Maryland can start throwing more money to legacy international carriers like British Airways to establish a few flights each week, but that’s not sustainable in the long-term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BWI is a great airport.

Best thing about BWI is how crazy cheap long-term parking is. You can park for 2 weeks and still save money over an Uber or taxi.

+1 I'm the "hate IAD" poster. I much prefer BWI but since it's small, and not a hub, the destinations aren't that varied. But, I much prefer flying out of BWI to LHR than IAD. Better flight times, too.

Okay. It's fine if you want to style yourself as a "BWI booster," but please. Get real. BWI has one daily flight offered by BA four times a week that is heavily subsidized by the State of Maryland. IAD has multiple flights each day offered by BA, United, and Virgin Atlantic. To suggest that BWI has better flight times is complete BS.

DP. What does your point have to do with PPs? Does a subsidy somehow make it less convenient? Why are you so angry at BWI?

NP. What a strange response. Who's angry? I happen to agree with the PP's point, which was clearly saying that it's ridiculous to suggest that BWI is somehow competitive or even preferable to Dulles when it comes to international service.

Both airports serve their purpose in the region.

If you live closer to BWI than Dulles, it’s preferable for flying international. Yes, Dulles has more flights bit Bwi has easier parking, quick access to terminals and the whole thing is recently renovated with decent places to get something to eat. Perhaps we should just campaign for more international flights to bwi.

I would champion that. We went BWI to LHR this past summer. pretty easy. Few years ago we did IAD to BWI, and it was awful.

For better or fit worse, BWI has established its business model around low-cost and ultra low-cost carriers. This is great for budget-minded passengers who prefer to fly on Southwest or Spirit. It’s terrible for business travelers or premium passengers, who find an airport with limited service on legacy carriers and a relative dearth of other amenities like lounges.

As for international travel, Dulles is the established base in the region for international carriers. That’s not going to change. The best BWI can hope for are new start-up low-cost international carriers like PLAY entering the market. Or, Maryland can start throwing more money to legacy international carriers like British Airways to establish a few flights each week, but that’s not sustainable in the long-term.

The existing BWI-LHR flight on BA is the result of a revenue guarantee from state of MD.

[Anonymous]

BWI flyers can continue to connect in Newark or JFK or Atlanta for international. There is very little to no corporate demand in the immediate Baltimore market for international let alone high yield domestic. But it is certainly possible a low cost international could break in a few routes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really wish we could take the train to more places. For instance, my family would like to go to NYC, Boston, Philly, or south to places like Charleston, New Orleans. Driving is a problem because parking is problematic in big cities. For my family though, trains are usually 2-3x the price of plane tickets and take a lot longer.

We like IAD a lot. Direct flights to nearly everywhere we want to go! But IAD also doesn't have any low cost flights like DCA and BWI have. Every time I price out flights, DCA and BWI are cheaper.

+1

I was hoping to take the train recently and it was MORE expensive than flying.

Trains are both more expansive and heavily subsidized. Perhaps it’s more expensive because it’s subsidized. No thanks.

AIRPORTS ARE HEAVILY SUBSIDIZED.

If airlines had to pay for the airport, the air traffic controllers and the security, NONE OF THEM WOULD BE MAKING A PROFIT.

Let’s see, which entity can go bankrupt? (A) airline or (B) Amtrak?

Which entity can go bankrupt? If airlines had to build the airports, pay for the air traffic controllers and the security they would all be bankrupt cause NONE of them would make a profit.
Trust me, if the airlines could make a profit with paying for any of them, congress would not foot the bill on any of items I mentioned.

And yes Amtrak is subsidized.

What really should happen is Airlines should embraced trains and the government should give them contracts to operate the trains. Let the government pay for the infrastructure. Let the airlines pay for the actual train and train maintenance and let them operate the day to day ticketing, etc. of trains.
Airlines should think of themselves as passenger transportation companies rather than just airlines. BTW I'm surprised none of them ever considered buying a "greyhound" type company.

You seem to be having a meltdown over Amtrak which is really bizarre and fun at the same time.

It’s hilarious though how you have no clue about how airports operate. Here’s a tip: WMAA is not subsidized. WMAA OPEX is supported through landing fees and other operating revenues like commercial rents. WMAA CAPEX is funded by bonds that are repaid through passenger surcharges on tickets.

Amtrak on the other hand received $2 billion per year in Federal operating subsidies. That doesn’t even include capital projects which can be funded through direct appropriations. The average Amtrak fare receives a Federal subsidy of $124.

We need a national rail service. It is the most sustainable way of traveling. Imagine how much worse the highways would be if there were no Amtrak on the east coast. Amtrak, like the Postal Service and the US Military, are government services. They don't need to turn a profit because we as taxpayers understand their societal value, even if they lose money.

To be clear, the Northeast Corridor (DC to Boston) is a money-maker for Amtrak. It's the rest of the system that's subsidized by Congress. So for the other posters comparing the whole of Amtrak to DC-area airports, that's not really a useful comparison. The money-losing part of Amtrak is a lot more analogous to some podunk airport in fly-over country that couldn't possibly operate without government subsidies, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, by the way.

[Anonymous]

Put it in SE DC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:BWI flyers can continue to connect in Newark or JFK or Atlanta for international. There is very little to no corporate demand in the immediate Baltimore market for international let alone high yield domestic. But it is certainly possible a low cost international could break in a few routes.

No need. The best international travel fares around are the seasonal direct flights from BWI to Frankfurt on Condor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BWI flyers can continue to connect in Newark or JFK or Atlanta for international. There is very little to no corporate demand in the immediate Baltimore market for international let alone high yield domestic. But it is certainly possible a low cost international could break in a few routes.

No need. The best international travel fares around are the seasonal direct flights from BWI to Frankfurt on Condor.

Uh, you're kidding, right?

Condor only flies out of BWI between May and September, and many of the tickets its sells through interline agreements involve more than 1 stop. To suggest this seasonal service somehow negates the need to utilize established international hubs like Newark, JFK, Atlanta, or Dulles is absurd.

[Anonymous]

Dulles should be torn down, it serves no purpose at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BWI is a great airport.

Best thing about BWI is how crazy cheap long-term parking is. You can park for 2 weeks and still save money over an Uber or taxi.

+1 I'm the "hate IAD" poster. I much prefer BWI but since it's small, and not a hub, the destinations aren't that varied. But, I much prefer flying out of BWI to LHR than IAD. Better flight times, too.

Okay. It's fine if you want to style yourself as a "BWI booster," but please. Get real. BWI has one daily flight offered by BA four times a week that is heavily subsidized by the State of Maryland. IAD has multiple flights each day offered by BA, United, and Virgin Atlantic. To suggest that BWI has better flight times is complete BS.

DP. What does your point have to do with PPs? Does a subsidy somehow make it less convenient? Why are you so angry at BWI?

NP. What a strange response. Who's angry? I happen to agree with the PP's point, which was clearly saying that it's ridiculous to suggest that BWI is somehow competitive or even preferable to Dulles when it comes to international service.

Both airports serve their purpose in the region.

If you live closer to BWI than Dulles, it’s preferable for flying international. Yes, Dulles has more flights bit Bwi has easier parking, quick access to terminals and the whole thing is recently renovated with decent places to get something to eat. Perhaps we should just campaign for more international flights to bwi.

I would champion that. We went BWI to LHR this past summer. pretty easy. Few years ago we did IAD to BWI, and it was awful.

You can get a flight from IAD to BWI???

I assume that's a typo, but I did once fly BWI to PHL for a connection -- probably would have been faster if the plane had literally driven up I-95, accounting for TSA, delays, boarding, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Put it in SE DC

The racist chucklef*ks never disappoint.