Monday Insight – July 19, 2021

“Soft Boycott” –

Is Boeing’s China Market Effectively Shut Off?

Last week China Eastern Airlines ordered ten more A320s from Airbus. Other China-related entities ordered an additional four. This has been the trend for the last 18 months. Airbus is now the preferred source of narrow-body airliners in China.

Boeing, very obviously, is out. Ordering new American flying machines is not welcome in China, anymore.

Regarding the latest China Eastern order, they also have 14 737Max-8s still on the ground, and they indicate 39 more Max airliners from pre-2018 orders, but no deliveries since the grounding.

When it comes to single-aisle airliners, the carriers in China (which are controlled by the Chinese government) have relied almost 100% on Airbus over the last year.

There is a message here that’s more obvious than a double-cheese Whopper at a vegan dinner party. But how come U.S. analysts have missed it?

 It’s 100% Political. The red flag here is that China is the only major government that has not re-certified the Max for operations, and as close as public information can reveal, there have been no new orders from Chinese airlines for additional 737s. Lion Air of Indonesia also has kept their Max fleet grounded, but possibly for financial reasons. They had several airliners re-popped (repossessed) last week.

It is getting clear that Boeing may be experiencing a “soft boycott” from the thugs running China. Nothing in writing. No comments at blow-hard Party meetings, or pedantic speeches as the thug Chinese president reviews military hardware in Beijing, all intended to attack the USA. It’s just silence.

Earth To Financial Industry. What’s amazing is that none of the financial institutions that supposedly cover Boeing have tumbled to this situation. The #1 (or close to it) market has put the k-bosh on Boeing, and nobody on, in, or hovering around Wall Street has made a peep. Maybe it’s to not upset the stock-price apple cart. Maybe it’s because a lot of these people don’t have a clue.

It appears that this could be a hit of nearly 400 Max aircraft for Boeing, including those on, or potentially on, the books, and those sitting collecting dust on hardstands across the Middle Kingdom.

Who Cares If They Boycott Boeing? Let’s Keep Buying Chinese Stuff, Anyway. More disturbing is that the politicians now sitting in Washington apparently are completely confused about China-U.S. relations, and have zero backbone in regard to standing up to the criminals in Beijing.

Our #1 exporter to China – Boeing – is boycotted, but it’s full speed ahead to rely on goods made by CCP-controlled Chinese companies. The same CCP that’s committing genocide, locking up dissidents and just generally trying to outdo Nazi Germany.

We’ve already seen zero action even when it is beyond obvious that the CCP engendered the Covid pandemic. Now, it is more than clear that when it comes to U.S. – China trade relations, it’s the people on the other side of the Pacific that are in control.

In this latest example, American jobs and the American economy are at risk.

Let’s Do A Betting Pool. This cannot be intentionally ignored for much longer. Maybe we should start a bet on when the usual suspects in the mystical world of finance will take public notice, like latter-day Captain Louie Renaults. They will be, well, so shocked! shocked!

Point: in the dungeons-and-dragons world of finance and stock plays, it is hard to believe that this is a mystery to Wall Street.

But perhaps they aren’t ready to recognize the obvious, just yet. For whatever reasons.

____________

In The Latest Aviation Unscripted…

Last week, the Aviation Unscripted video reviewed the latest Airports:USA® enplanement forecast.

Growth, But… The year 2021 is still projected to clock in with 670 – 675 million airport enplanements. But there are a lot of unknown economic and airline industry strings attached that we won’t know about for several weeks.

It is uncertain if the leisure demand will be as strong after Labor Day, and whether there will be any real uptick in international travel.

Again, addressing the issue of business travel, the indications increasingly are that the transfer of portions of such demand to video and alternative channels was a dynamic already in progress before the CCP inflicted Covid on the world. It just accelerated the process.

Log on for some data supporting that contention.

The Growth Patterns Will Reflect A New Post CCP-Covid Economy. In addition, the video discusses how the return of air travel demand will be highly regional, with one part of the nation expected to see 30% growth by 2025, compared to 2019. On the other end of the chart, one very populous region will actually see a decline compared to pre-Covid traffic levels.

We want to thank our viewers and subscribers who are joining Aviation Unscripted from a variety of global portals.

Log on by clicking here.  And check out our entire library… hard facts, direct delivery.

___________

Monday Insight – July 12, 2021

Actually, The Business Travel Decline Isn’t All CCP-Covid Related…

Return of Business Travel Demand?

It Was Declining Before The CCP Created This Pandemic

Far be it from us to in anyway to give a break to the criminal thugs running China, who are 100% responsible for the global pandemic. (Gotta problem with that? Contact us for facts that some folks in the media are too timid – or corrupt – to discuss.)

But a lot of the hoopla about how business travel will or will not recover to pre-CCP-Covid levels is way off the mark… and it needs to be recognized that the application air travel as a communication channel has changed. As a result, in some applications, the process of air travel is woefully obsolete in regard to exchanging data, concepts and ideas – i.e., many of the reasons people used air travel.

Air Is No Longer Universally As Efficient As Other Channels. We cover this in the latest Aviation Unscripted video. There are two core reasons people use air travel. One is for leisure – to get to the mountains or beach or cruise ship.

The other is for communication. I.e., the need to exchange ideas with others. This includes both business travel and – missed in most analyses – personal travel that does not directly relate to simply going to the beach or fishing or whatever. Personal travel to events that have no alternative communication options – the wedding, the meeting with attorneys, the graduation, the periodic visit to family.

It doesn’t take more savvy than knowing how to spell “zoom” to understand that today a lot of the air travel necessary in the past is now totally non-competitive with other emerging channels of communication. When a video meeting can accomplish the same results as an on-site interaction, it’s pretty clear that it’s enormously more cost-effective, and in some cases more results-effective.

The Trend Has Been Growing For A Decade. But this is NOT the result of the criminal actions of the CCP in inflicting a pandemic on the globe… this dynamic – the replacement of air travel with more effective means of business communication – was in progress long before most people in the USA had ever heard of Wuhan.

We took a gander at the changes in traffic in what can be described as predominantly business markets – particularly short-haul markets – in the ten years between 2000 and 2019. Earth to analysts – the decline in use of air travel for business communication purposes has been in full atrophy mode in many markets for years.

Let’s look at a couple typical markets…

In these six markets, travel has declined over 30% in the last ten years. To be clear, there are some exceptions, but these are typical of the changes in air transportation as a communications channel in short-haul markets.

It gets more apparent when we look at some once-vibrant secondary commuter markets in the Northeast. We looked at 2019 reported O&D and compared it to estimated traffic levels in 1980, based on known airline schedules in each market. (Back then, what were then independent commuter airlines in markets like these sometimes really didn’t care much about reporting on the 298-C schedule. The feds had no real concern about enforcement.)

These were, back then, markets that filled a clear communication need. People did need to get to ISP from ALB, such as government officials between the state capital and county offices in Suffolk and Nassau. There was a community of interest between Presque Isle that was met by nonstop flights to and from Boston.

It’s gone, and all the king’s horses and all the king’s consultants won’t bring it back.

The point of this is to recognize that air travel is, again, a communication modality that competes with other emerging ways business interacts.

Bottom line: A lot of business travel was declining and being supplanted by superior and more cost-effective ways of communication long before the CCP-pandemic, which has just accelerated and illuminated the process.

This is a critical new dynamic for communities reviewing their air service access programs. Independent commuter airlines operating their own “turf” are long gone. The need to exchange papers at a one-on-one meeting is no longer the only way of communicating. The name of the future game in most cases is access to and from the rest of the globe.

Whole New Air Access & Communication Planning Is Needed. At Boyd Group International, we’ve built our business on recognizing tough emerging challenges.

In 1980, for example, an independent commuter airline could operate at Presque Isle and connect to over half a dozen interline carriers at Boston. That system is gone. Combined with the increasing inefficiency of a lot of short-haul air travel, that presents challenges to markets such as PQI that yet another leakage study will do not much more than contribute to the local landfill.

New communications modalities are now in place, and it’s critical that regional and rural communities – as well some not-so-rural places – look to innovation, not attempts to recreate past air systems that today simply do not fill a material consumer demand.

If your community is looking to address the future, write ours down, or send us an email.

We’re into the future… not trying to recreate the past.
____________

Finally…

Log on the last week’s Aviation Unscripted video to get a wider perspective of how we’re entering uncharted and very bumpy territory in the next 12 months. Click here.

And, do log on this Thursday… we’re planning another Vox Deorum session on Unscripted.

This week it well be with Boom Technologies – and we’re discussing the new Overture supersonic airliner that’s already been ordered by United and Japan Airlines.

This will be a game changer. Join us this Thursday!

____________________

 

 

 

Monday Insight – July 5, 2021

Observing the U.S. Independence
Holiday Week-end…

Monday Insight To Return 12 July.

In The Meantime…

Check out the latest Aviation Unscripted video… we cover three emerging areas industry planners need to consider – now.

  • Boeing is facing a closed China market – and the folks in Washington are doing nothing…
  • The criminals in China who brought us the CCP-Covid pandemic may be at it again…
  • We’re just starting the 20th anniversary of 9/11… and no, we are not safer. And yes, terrorist attacks are still being perpetrated.  Just without any explosives – yet.

The Monday Insight will be back next week. To view the Unscripted video – click here.

____________

June 28, 2021 Insight

Okay, Time For Some Hard Answers

9-11 Uncovering The Truth… 20 Years Later

Entering into the 20th year since the 9-11 attack, it is a lead pipe cinch that we’re in for some really veneer journalism, marking the event.

If They Tell The Real Facts, They Won’t Get Access To The Homeland Security Honchos. By and large, a number of the usual suspects in the media (and certainly not all) have not only completely bought into the lore that the USA has taken bold action against aviation terrorism, but some are rabid advocates and defenders of the TSA/DHS mess that’s evolved over the last two decades.

They are not journalists. They’re toady apologists.

A couple years ago, we got a call from one of the prime network “correspondents” who are often mannequined in front of the camera, trying to pose as intelligent life forms. He asked for comments regarding the “progress” made by the TSA.

When advised that virtually nothing proactively had been done to set up anticipative security, this clown came unglued – angrily denouncing any such statements, because – get this – he had personally spoken to the Secretary of Homeland Security, and, therefore, had all the facts. Therefore, any information to the contrary had been “debunked.”  We’re talking loud-voice defensiveness – from one of that network’s supposedly top reporters.

The guy is direct competition for what’s hanging on the rack at Men’s Wearhouse.

Get Ready For Some Great Fictional Performances. Unfortunately, we can still expect a rash of oh-so-sincere interviews with current and former vapor-suits at the TSA or Homeland Security. There’s been a parade of them over the last 20 years, almost all incompetent political appointees.

Naturally, watch for the B-roll walk-and-talk chit-chat between the “award-winning” stars of TV news magazines and a motley collection of ex-TSA/DHS notables – mostly telling us to the eager nods of the interviewer that because of their innovative and aggressive planning, there have been no major terrorist attacks (which is a lie), and the system has made us safe (which is another lie.)

Truth and honest journalism need not apply. A few of these guys in the fourth estate would make Pravda in its Soviet heyday very proud.

An Important Source of 9-11 Truth. One imperative for anyone in aviation who seeks the truth about 9-11, not the saccharine goo put out by DHS and gobbled up by much of the media, is to get a copy of Fortress of Deceit – The Story of a 9-11 Whistleblower. It’s the story of Bogdan Dzakovic – one of the FAA Special Agents who was at the forefront of attempting to get through the political corruption that led to the tragedy. We’ll be discussing his role below. The Amazon link is at the end of this Insight.

Got The Answers? In last week’s Monday Insight, we posed questions regarding some of the circumstances surrounding the 9-11 attack and the Keystone Kops official responses. Here are the answers.

Question One: When were the first warnings by security experts of the potential of not only the imminent potential for hijackings, but multiple hijackings, due to sloppy aviation security?

Answer: In the first week of May, 2001, the Fox affiliate accomplished an investigative report on the sloppy and dangerous aviation security at Boston Logan. The results were, frankly, shocking, and it can still be viewed via YouTube.

The day after the report, retired FAA Special Agent Brian Sullivan wrote to Senator John Kerry’s office, specifically warning of Logan’s security shortcomings, and noting that the threat of multiple hijackings was very real…

“Think what the result would be of a coordinated attack which took down several domestic flights on the same day. The problem is, with our current screening system, this is more than possible. Given time, considering current threats, It is almost likely. We don’t have to wait for a tragedy to occur to act.”

 

This was four months before the terrorists did just that. Kerry’s office did nothing. Later, Mr. Sullivan called FAA Administrator Jan Garvey’s Hotline with the details. Zero substantive response.

A copy of the Fox tape was given directly to FAA Administrator Jane Garvey’s office. She cannot deny that at least her people had knowledge of what it represented. Yet, it was blissfully ignored.

Question Two: When was the first time one of the hijackers was reportedly seen taking pictures of security at Boston Logan Airport?

Answer: It is believed that Mohammad Atta was seen taking pictures of security checkpoints on May 11, coincidentally just days after the Fox report. In any case, the hijackers apparently planned carefully months in advance, including taking test flights. They had no real intelligent or professional competition from the folks at the top of the FAA.

Mr. Sullivan speaks the truth: it can be argued that Al Qaeda was paying more attention to Logan’s airport security vulnerabilities than the FAA and the Airport itself.

Question Three: After being briefed on the major failures at U.S. airports prior to 9-11 by security experts, what actions did Senator John McCain’s office immediately take?

Answer: Worse than nothing. They sneered at the facts.

Frustrated by the total lack of interest on the part of the FAA hierarchy, contact was made by current and past FAA Special Agents directly with key congress members, who, as it turned out could not have cared less.

Mr. Steve Elson, a recently retired Special FAA Agent and Red Team member, and Mr. Bogdan Dzakovic, a current FAA Red Team member at the time, extensively outlined the security shortfalls to a staffer in McCain’s office, who appeared to take copious notes.

When they were done, she looked up and responded, “Interesting, but what do you expect us to do about it.?” She was probably writing up her grocery list. Point: McCain’s office did not care.

These gentlemen also approached Senator John Kerry’s office, and were ultimately blown off with the excuse, “You’re not constituents!” At least this demonstrated that Republicans and Democrats can agree on some things. Kerry, like McCain, simply did not care, either.

The fact was that for these political luminaries to take any action would mean pointing fingers at other colleagues inside the Marble Playpen, a.k.a. congress and administrations on both sides of the aisle. That’s not in the rulebook, at least not in that fraternity.

Question Four: In the aftermath of the worst national security failure since Pearl Harbor, name the three senior federal security officials who were reprimanded for professional malfeasance.

Answer: You can’t.

That’s because no federal staff in charge of the weak security before 9-11 were given any negative scrutiny at all. Much to the contrary.

The dust had barely settled on the Twin Towers before President George W. Bush was quoted as thanking DOT Secretary Norman Mineta and his staff for their fine work. (The DOT’s FAA was responsible for the aviation security that allowed 9-11 to take place.)

Plus, when the TSA was created, many of the security people at the FAA got promotions into it. This simply contaminated the new bureaucracy with the incompetent intellectual FAA sludge that allowed 9-11 to happen. As far as aviation security goes, the TSA is the FAA’s demon spawn.

Question Five: In the immediate aftermath of the attack, what was done with the FAA security team which accurately identified and warned about systemic security weaknesses with the approach used at Boston and other airports?

Answer: In a normal, rational and honest world, this Red Team approach would have been expanded immediately.

Nope, the program was immediately disbanded. While Steve Elson and Brian Sullivan were already retired and were beyond the revengeful reach of the embarrassed hacks at the FAA and the Bush Administration, Mr. Dzakovic, however, was still an employee, and was subsequently and suitably career-harassed for the troublesome whistle-blower he was.

In the aftermath of the 9-11 attacks, the Bush administration stood by like nebbish deer in the headlights. They made no efforts to reward, protect or even recognize these heroes. But Bush did reward with promotions many of the FAA incompetents that were responsible for not addressing bad security. Says volumes.

Question Six: Where did the top official responsible for aviation security at the time of the 9-11 attack ultimately end up, career-wise?

Of the four airliners hijacked, two were United Airlines flights, with loss of all lives, as well as those killed by the plane that was flown into the World Trade Center.

The political appointee Administrator in charge of the FAA – and hence, responsible for the incompetent security in place that allowed 9-11 – later took a number of marquee jobs, and then landed the big one. Chairman of the Board at, yes, United Airlines. One senior official (now gone) at the airline lauded her as the type of management the airline needed. You can’t make this type of melodrama up.

Funny, unions at United vowed “they’d never forget” the tragedy of 9-11. Guess they got distracted. Never heard a peep.

Question Seven: Have there been other successful terrorist attacks on the USA since 9-11?

Answer: Yes.

Terrorist attacks are events that threaten or destroy our way of life. Security is more than stopping bombs on airplanes. Take a gander at what’s happening in cyber space.

In 2021, a successful terrorist computer hacking attack was made on Colonial Pipeline, which materially shutdown the flow fuel to the East Coast.

The Department of Homeland Security, apparently, has no concern or contingency planning beyond trying to stop pointy objects getting on airplanes. The rest of the USA and its infrastructure is wide open. Our electrical grids. Our pipelines. Our road system comprised of rickety interstate highway bridges.

You can take it to ‘Vegas and make book on it: the Department of Homeland security doesn’t have so much as crib sheet in regard to anticipating these types of vulnerabilities, let alone have any contingency or event-remediation planning.

Even at the top of the Washington slag heap, there is no concern. After the Colonial Pipeline attack, a smarmy Biden administration hack, when asked about the event actually snickered and recommended consumers buy electric cars.

Watch for more terrorist hacking events. There have been others. They hit at the core of our societal foundation.

Question Eight: The FAA security inspectors who warned about sloppy pre-9-11 security testified to and were interviewed by the 9-11 Commission. Into which section of the final report were their observations included?

Answer: Don’t bother to look. The testimony of these experts, which illuminated the core of the pre-9-11 malfeasance by the leadership of the FAA, not to mention the almost criminal behavior on the part of other senior officials and politicians, was reduced to just one very short footnote on page 451 of this magnum opus of political slime.

The entire 9-11 Commission itself was an exercise in political corruption, intentionally making sure nobody was held responsible. In that, it was a huge success.

A Warning: We Are Still Vulnerable. Here’s a warning from Brian Sullivan, the retired FAA Special Agent who was involved in trying to get the clowns in the FAA and congress to understand the threat before the tragedy on that Tuesday morning.

“Twenty years ago this June we had a chance to prevent the 9/11 hijackings, but no one was listening. Are they listening now?”

That is, unfortunately, an open question.

More To Come. Over the next few months, we intend to do a number of Aviation Unscripted videos, interviewing some of these people who attempted to get the Bush administration and the Washington hackocracy to take action.

The 9-11 Failures Have NOT Been Addressed. Much to the contrary, and we still have players out there that are targeting the USA. We urge you to order or download Fortress of Deceit. It will put in context the truth about 9-11. Yup, cockpit doors are strengthened and we can’t bring more than 3 Oz of Grecian Formula in our luggage, anymore.  That isn’t anticipative security, and the same failures that were in place 20 years ago continue. A click here will bring you to the order page for Fortress of Deceit on Amazon. Hit it.

In the meantime, we suggest being very cautious in believing what some in the media will be spouting on this 20th anniversary. There will be some honest stories, but it’s likely many will be suck-up journalism. And run for cover when any of them spout that these allegations have been “debunked.”

All that word means is that it’s not politically acceptable to question the all-knowing media.

___________________

Monday Insight – June 28, 2021

Okay, Time For Some Hard Answers

9-11 Uncovering The Truth… 20 Years Later

Entering into the 20th year since the 9-11 attack, it is a lead pipe cinch that we’re in for some really veneer journalism, marking the event.

If They Tell The Real Facts, They Won’t Get Access To The Homeland Security Honchos. By and large, a number of the usual suspects in the media (and certainly not all) have not only completely bought into the lore that the USA has taken bold action against aviation terrorism, but some are rabid advocates and defenders of the TSA/DHS mess that’s evolved over the last two decades.

They are not journalists. They’re toady apologists.

A couple years ago, we got a call from one of the prime network “correspondents” who are often mannequined in front of the camera, trying to pose as intelligent life forms. He asked for comments regarding the “progress” made by the TSA.

When advised that virtually nothing proactively had been done to set up anticipative security, this clown came unglued – angrily denouncing any such statements, because – get this – he had personally spoken to the Secretary of Homeland Security, and, therefore, had all the facts. Therefore, any information to the contrary had been “debunked.”  We’re talking loud-voice defensiveness – from one of that network’s supposedly top reporters.

The guy is direct competition for what’s hanging on the rack at Men’s Wearhouse.

Get Ready For Some Great Fictional Performances. Unfortunately, we can still expect a rash of oh-so-sincere interviews with current and former vapor-suits at the TSA or Homeland Security. There’s been a parade of them over the last 20 years, almost all incompetent political appointees.

Naturally, watch for the B-roll walk-and-talk chit-chat between the “award-winning” stars of TV news magazines and a motley collection of ex-TSA/DHS notables – mostly telling us to the eager nods of the interviewer that because of their innovative and aggressive planning, there have been no major terrorist attacks (which is a lie), and the system has made us safe (which is another lie.)

Truth and honest journalism need not apply. A few of these guys in the fourth estate would make Pravda in its Soviet heyday very proud.

An Important Source of 9-11 Truth. One imperative for anyone in aviation who seeks the truth about 9-11, not the saccharine goo put out by DHS and gobbled up by much of the media, is to get a copy of Fortress of Deceit – The Story of a 9-11 Whistleblower. It’s the story of Bogdan Dzakovic – one of the FAA Special Agents who was at the forefront of attempting to get through the political corruption that led to the tragedy. We’ll be discussing his role below. The Amazon link is at the end of this Insight.

Got The Answers? In last week’s Monday Insight, we posed questions regarding some of the circumstances surrounding the 9-11 attack and the Keystone Kops official responses. Here are the answers.

Question One: When were the first warnings by security experts of the potential of not only the imminent potential for hijackings, but multiple hijackings, due to sloppy aviation security?

Answer: In the first week of May, 2001, the Fox affiliate accomplished an investigative report on the sloppy and dangerous aviation security at Boston Logan. The results were, frankly, shocking, and it can still be viewed via YouTube.

The day after the report, retired FAA Special Agent Brian Sullivan wrote to Senator John Kerry’s office, specifically warning of Logan’s security shortcomings, and noting that the threat of multiple hijackings was very real…

“Think what the result would be of a coordinated attack which took down several domestic flights on the same day. The problem is, with our current screening system, this is more than possible. Given time, considering current threats, It is almost likely. We don’t have to wait for a tragedy to occur to act.”

 

This was four months before the terrorists did just that. Kerry’s office did nothing. Later, Mr. Sullivan called FAA Administrator Jan Garvey’s Hotline with the details. Zero substantive response.

A copy of the Fox tape was given directly to FAA Administrator Jane Garvey’s office. She cannot deny that at least her people had knowledge of what it represented. Yet, it was blissfully ignored.

Question Two: When was the first time one of the hijackers was reportedly seen taking pictures of security at Boston Logan Airport?

Answer: It is believed that Mohammad Atta was seen taking pictures of security checkpoints on May 11, coincidentally just days after the Fox report. In any case, the hijackers apparently planned carefully months in advance, including taking test flights. They had no real intelligent or professional competition from the folks at the top of the FAA.

Mr. Sullivan speaks the truth: it can be argued that Al Qaeda was paying more attention to Logan’s airport security vulnerabilities than the FAA and the Airport itself.

Question Three: After being briefed on the major failures at U.S. airports prior to 9-11 by security experts, what actions did Senator John McCain’s office immediately take?

Answer: Worse than nothing. They sneered at the facts.

Frustrated by the total lack of interest on the part of the FAA hierarchy, contact was made by current and past FAA Special Agents directly with key congress members, who, as it turned out could not have cared less.

Mr. Steve Elson, a recently retired Special FAA Agent and Red Team member, and Mr. Bogdan Dzakovic, a current FAA Red Team member at the time, extensively outlined the security shortfalls to a staffer in McCain’s office, who appeared to take copious notes.

When they were done, she looked up and responded, “Interesting, but what do you expect us to do about it.?” She was probably writing up her grocery list. Point: McCain’s office did not care.

These gentlemen also approached Senator John Kerry’s office, and were ultimately blown off with the excuse, “You’re not constituents!” At least this demonstrated that Republicans and Democrats can agree on some things. Kerry, like McCain, simply did not care, either.

The fact was that for these political luminaries to take any action would mean pointing fingers at other colleagues inside the Marble Playpen, a.k.a. congress and administrations on both sides of the aisle. That’s not in the rulebook, at least not in that fraternity.

Question Four: In the aftermath of the worst national security failure since Pearl Harbor, name the three senior federal security officials who were reprimanded for professional malfeasance.

Answer: You can’t.

That’s because no federal staff in charge of the weak security before 9-11 were given any negative scrutiny at all. Much to the contrary.

The dust had barely settled on the Twin Towers before President George W. Bush was quoted as thanking DOT Secretary Norman Mineta and his staff for their fine work. (The DOT’s FAA was responsible for the aviation security that allowed 9-11 to take place.)

Plus, when the TSA was created, many of the security people at the FAA got promotions into it. This simply contaminated the new bureaucracy with the incompetent intellectual FAA sludge that allowed 9-11 to happen. As far as aviation security goes, the TSA is the FAA’s demon spawn.

Question Five: In the immediate aftermath of the attack, what was done with the FAA security team which accurately identified and warned about systemic security weaknesses with the approach used at Boston and other airports?

Answer: In a normal, rational and honest world, this Red Team approach would have been expanded immediately.

Nope, the program was immediately disbanded. While Steve Elson and Brian Sullivan were already retired and were beyond the revengeful reach of the embarrassed hacks at the FAA and the Bush Administration, Mr. Dzakovic, however, was still an employee, and was subsequently and suitably career-harassed for the troublesome whistle-blower he was.

In the aftermath of the 9-11 attacks, the Bush administration stood by like nebbish deer in the headlights. They made no efforts to reward, protect or even recognize these heroes. But Bush did reward with promotions many of the FAA incompetents that were responsible for not addressing bad security. Says volumes.

Question Six: Where did the top official responsible for aviation security at the time of the 9-11 attack ultimately end up, career-wise?

Of the four airliners hijacked, two were United Airlines flights, with loss of all lives, as well as those killed by the plane that was flown into the World Trade Center.

The political appointee Administrator in charge of the FAA – and hence, responsible for the incompetent security in place that allowed 9-11 – later took a number of marquee jobs, and then landed the big one. Chairman of the Board at, yes, United Airlines. One senior official (now gone) at the airline lauded her as the type of management the airline needed. You can’t make this type of melodrama up.

Funny, unions at United vowed “they’d never forget” the tragedy of 9-11. Guess they got distracted. Never heard a peep.

Question Seven: Have there been other successful terrorist attacks on the USA since 9-11?

Answer: Yes.

Terrorist attacks are events that threaten or destroy our way of life. Security is more than stopping bombs on airplanes. Take a gander at what’s happening in cyber space.

In 2021, a successful terrorist computer hacking attack was made on Colonial Pipeline, which materially shutdown the flow fuel to the East Coast.

The Department of Homeland Security, apparently, has no concern or contingency planning beyond trying to stop pointy objects getting on airplanes. The rest of the USA and its infrastructure is wide open. Our electrical grids. Our pipelines. Our road system comprised of rickety interstate highway bridges.

You can take it to ‘Vegas and make book on it: the Department of Homeland security doesn’t have so much as crib sheet in regard to anticipating these types of vulnerabilities, let alone have any contingency or event-remediation planning.

Even at the top of the Washington slag heap, there is no concern. After the Colonial Pipeline attack, a smarmy Biden administration hack, when asked about the event actually snickered and recommended consumers buy electric cars.

Watch for more terrorist hacking events. There have been others. They hit at the core of our societal foundation.

Question Eight: The FAA security inspectors who warned about sloppy pre-9-11 security testified to and were interviewed by the 9-11 Commission. Into which section of the final report were their observations included?

Answer: Don’t bother to look. The testimony of these experts, which illuminated the core of the pre-9-11 malfeasance by the leadership of the FAA, not to mention the almost criminal behavior on the part of other senior officials and politicians, was reduced to just one very short footnote on page 451 of this magnum opus of political slime.

The entire 9-11 Commission itself was an exercise in political corruption, intentionally making sure nobody was held responsible. In that, it was a huge success.

A Warning: We Are Still Vulnerable. Here’s a warning from Brian Sullivan, the retired FAA Special Agent who was involved in trying to get the clowns in the FAA and congress to understand the threat before the tragedy on that Tuesday morning.

“Twenty years ago this June we had a chance to prevent the 9/11 hijackings, but no one was listening. Are they listening now?”

That is, unfortunately, an open question.

More To Come. Over the next few months, we intend to do a number of Aviation Unscripted videos, interviewing some of these people who attempted to get the Bush administration and the Washington hackocracy to take action.

The 9-11 Failures Have NOT Been Addressed. Much to the contrary, and we still have players out there that are targeting the USA. We urge you to order or download Fortress of Deceit. It will put in context the truth about 9-11. Yup, cockpit doors are strengthened and we can’t bring more than 3 Oz of Grecian Formula in our luggage, anymore.  That isn’t anticipative security, and the same failures that were in place 20 years ago continue. A click here will bring you to the order page for Fortress of Deceit on Amazon. Hit it.

In the meantime, we suggest being very cautious in believing what some in the media will be spouting on this 20th anniversary. There will be some honest stories, but it’s likely many will be suck-up journalism. And run for cover when any of them spout that these allegations have been “debunked.”

All that word means is that it’s not politically acceptable to question the all-knowing media.

___________________

 

Monday Insight – June 21, 2021

Twenty Years Later…

The 9-11 Awareness Q&A – Can You Answer it?

Anybody remember the story of the radar operator in Hawaii on December 7, 1941?

He identified unknown inbound aircraft, and reported it to his superiors, who, despite knowing the nation was at high alert regarding a possible Japanese attack, blew it off.

The rest is history. People have naturally lamented regarding “if only” these people had acted responsibly.

Exactly – exactly – the same situation took place in the 9-11 attack.

The disturbing difference is that the nation had months – not minutes – to take action. Attempt after attempt was made to get through to the arrogant hierarchy in the government, and nothing was done. Instead of some sleepy officer that failed, in this case it’s a whole herd of high-level politicians and bureaucrats who are responsible.

Facts… Not Media Swooning. In the next couple weeks, we’re going to cover – simply and directly – the real story of 9-11. We’ll review how the first real radar blips of an actual attack were more than four months before the Twin Towers came down.

We’ll be discussing the event with the heroes who actually put their careers at risk to get through to the phalanx of arrogant officials and politicians, only to be blown off. One senator’s office wasn’t interested and told them “you’re not a constituent.”

Test Your 9-11 Knowledge. Let’s do a quick Q&A.

Can you answer this 9-11 fact quiz? If you can, send us an email by clicking here and let us know.

Question One: When were the first warnings by FAA security experts of the potential of not only the imminent potential for hijackings, but multiple hijackings, due to sloppy aviation security?

Question Two: When was the first time one of the hijackers was reportedly seen taking pictures of security at Boston Logan Airport?

Question Three: After being briefed on the major failures at U.S. airports prior to 9-11 by security experts, what actions did Senator McCain’s office immediately take?

Question Four: In the aftermath of the worst national security failure since Pearl Harbor, name the three senior federal security officials who were reprimanded for professional malfeasance.

Question Five: In the immediate aftermath of the attack, what was done with the FAA security team which accurately identified and warned about security lapses at Boston and other airports?

Question Six: Where did the top aviation security official at the time of the 9-11 attack ultimately end up, career-wise?

Question Seven: Have there been other successful terrorist attacks on the USA since 9-11?

Question Eight: The FAA security inspectors who warned about sloppy pre-9-11 security testified to the 9-11 Commission. Into which section of the final report were their observations included?

Know The Answers? Great, click here and tell us. After you calm down a bit.

The point is that these types of questions won’t likely be raised in the coming months, as “award-winning” journalists do sugar-coated sycophant B-roll walk-and-talk interviews with senior politicians and bureaucrats.

We will be back next week with the actual answers.

After we calm down a bit.

 

Monday Insight – June 14, 2021

Traffic Levels Are Returning –
The Traffic Mix Is Not

We’ve looked at what airlines are doing in regard to schedule capacity in the current quarter. The unknown is what level red pen action might be expected in the fourth quarter.

We looked at this briefly in last week’s Touch & Go newsletter to our clients. Using schedule data from our friends at Cirium, there were two take-aways:

First, the business travel hit was far more damaging to large metro airports. Not a great revelation, as this is where the majority of such traffic is generated.

We simply compared the three NYC metro airports with three regional airports, in regard to the level of 2019 service that was offered in the same months of 2021.

From a percentage view, there was far more cutting at the large airports. Some of this is due to reduction in flow traffic, particularly international traffic. Therefore, it would be natural for these larger airports to see bigger chunks of capacity slashed than at smaller airports with low international demand, and effectively zero connecting flows.

The second take-away is the uncertainty of the 4Q capacity. As of today, there are more seats schedule at the sample small airports than in 2019, and capacity equal to or above in the three large airports reviewed.

Standby… if these 4Q capacity data are left in place, it would indicate that booking levels are more robust that in 2019, which would mean that the pandemic is over for airline passenger volume. This would seem unlikely.

For example, take a gander at LGA. In August, there will be 67% of 2019 capacity. That jumps to 101% in September. It’s a big maybe.

The next four weeks should give some indications – more cutting in 4Q or is the traffic demand back to pre-CCP-Covid.

____________

Just In Passing…

Electric Feeder Fleets –
One Huge Potential Benefit Not Obvious

The strategy of American and United to engage fleets of all-electric, short-range aircraft to feed major airports from surrounding areas represents a major shift in the structure of the air transportation system. A very positive one.

New Industry. New Jobs. Small airports in metro areas could see enormous economic impact. While the reduction in ground traffic to and from large airports won’t pull a lot of cars off the road, the program will make air travel in these congested areas materially more efficient. The reduction in processing times at the large airport could be material in terms of customer convenience. And a lot more.

There are lots of hurdles – the issue of air traffic control. The thorny issue of who will operate the machines. The unknown whether the costs will be consumer-accepted. But any new concept comes with these types of challenges. They are workable.

New Demand Generates New Technology. But there is one hurdle that must be carefully watched as this new transportation structure is developed. And that’s the technology and supply-chain vulnerability for the batteries to run these aircraft. New and very different production systems will need to be developed, and these are likely part of the intended new aircraft programs.

Yes, electric aircraft are zero-emission machines. In operation. But production of batteries delivering that power today is far from environmentally-positive. The current lithium/cobalt technology has enormous issues in this regard. Plus, very troubling social issues, based on where these components are sourced.

In addition, the traditional sources and production flows of current battery technology are in danger of being overwhelmed by demand, and will be increasingly attacked for the issues noted above.

We covered this in a recent Aviation Unscripted video. Battery technology as it stands today cannot be described as “sustainable.” Enormous potential, but a lot of work needs to be done to get production environmentally and socially acceptable. Click here to take a look –no  holds barred.

From that perspective, this intended new air transportation concept could actually come with another huge benefit: the research and development of new environmentally-positive electric storage technologies.

Solutions can be found when there is a consumer demand. The electric aircraft feeder concept is exactly such a catalyst.

_____________________

 

Monday Insight – June 7, 2021

United’s SST Order: No, It’s Not Concorde Phase II

Almost on que, right after last week’s Monday Insight regarding how the failure of the Aerion business jet project was not an indicator of supersonic demise, United announced an order for up to 50 Boom airliners.

That made us feel pretty good.

Forecasting Means Running Counter To The Consensus. We would point out that Boyd Group International was the only aviation consulting and research firm to have projected a positive market potential for the Boom Overture airliner.

Back in 2015-2016, when presented with the concept, and after exploring the foundational assumptions, it was clear that this was not another excursion into fantasy, but one that made core market sense. In particular, Boom was aimed at an airplane that would improve the time-efficiency of air travel.

This intrinsically involved the need for flight speed exceeding that of sound as one of the design imperatives.

Unlike the Concorde, Aerion, and other projects, the goal was not to simply build a flying machine that could pop through the sound barrier.

It was also a concept that was to rely on ambient technology… including powerplants.

Boom? In Our Fraternity? There were some raised eyebrows back in 2016 when we included Boom along with Airbus, Boeing, Embraer, Bombardier and Mitsubishi in the global airliner manufacturer segments of the International Aviation Forecast Summit.  Boom who? Was the question. Most people had not heard of the company. They have now.

Asking Hard Questions Is Not Negativity. But Don’t Start With Trendy Answers. There still is a lot of skepticism regarding the Boom Overture. That is understandable… it’s five years away, and a lot can happen in the air transportation industry. Those kinds of concerns are positive and natural to explore.

But the one thing that gets really old is the oh-so-confident comparisons to the Concorde. Other than being supersonic, the Concorde has no commonality with the Boom project. None. Not in regard to technology. Not in regard to market mission. Not in regard to the air transportation system it will operate within. Not in regard to airline economics.

Not in regard to anything.

It is flat-out ridiculous to compare an airliner that rolled out of the hangar in 1967 with one that will be flying in 2026.

Yes, lots challenges ahead for Boom. But in the meantime, the interest from United and Japan Airlines will have other carriers looking.

Nobody anymore is asking, Boom who?

At BGI we are proud to have been associated with this breakthrough aviation leader.

______________________

This Week’s Aviation Unscripted

A Review: The CCP-Pandemic Damage To U.S. Airports & Aviation

It’s a hoot watching some sectors of the media desperately scrambling to find the rewind button.

Back in August, an Aviation Unscripted video covered the background of how the criminals running China colluded to cover-up the corona virus epidemic in Wuhan. The evidence and events were as obvious as a Big Mac at a vegan wedding.

We reviewed the major damage that the CCP-Wuhan pandemic had inflicted on U.S. airports. We recommended that airports and communities start taking stock, and consider options to go after the estimated $150 billion in Chinese investment in the U.S. And do keep in mind that if it’s a Chinese company, the CCP – the political party running China and which caused this disaster – is involved. These businesses are fair game.

But most of the media simply declared that such data were “debunked.” They issued clear directions: This virus simply came from a pangolin or another infected creature in a wet market. No evidence of any hanky-panky on the part of the low lifes running China.

Oops. Maybe There’s More. Let’s get politically-incorrect, but functionally accurate: some major news outlets went to great lengths to twist the facts, or just ignore them, and instruct we, the Great Unwashed out in TV land, to take their word for it. No, little people, it didn’t come from Wuhan, not really. No, you peons, the WHO and the CCP didn’t dither, cover-up and allow the epidemic to expand. Don’t dare look stupid to imply that our reporting is bogus.

One supposed “news magazine” went to lengths to interview a noted virologist, who categorically denied the Wuhan Institute of Virology could have had anything to do with the pandemic. What the award-winning interviewer left out was that the guy was running an organization that was actually funding and working with the Institute. Just a little conflict of interest.

Holy Lab Leak, Batman… now it seems that the evidence has come over the transom that the CCP and the WHO, and yes, some of the talking heads in the media, were flat out lying. More and more evidence, and more and more “experts” backtracking what they told us last year with total confidence.

Now with renewed calls for demanding recompense from the CCP, it would be appropriate to once again review the background and facts regarding how this pandemic was allowed to financially torpedo airlines and airports across the USA.

There is no doubt that the CCP is not only criminally responsible for this pandemic, but financially liable. U.S. communities need to go for their financial throats.

Log on to Aviation Unscripted this Thursday, June 10. We’ll be rerunning the August video, containing a lot of now un-debunked facts.

Another reason to question a lot of what some corners of the media are spouting.
______________________

 

CCP-Covid Traffic Challenge- LAX, SFO, SEA

Now that the usual suspects in the media can no longer gloss over the overwhelming evidence that the CCP – the un-elected criminals running China – were indeed responsible for the Covid pandemic – both the start and the cover-up – there could be some very fundamental additional changes the air relationship between China and the USA.

As a major researcher of Chinese aviation, we’ll be following this in the weeks ahead. We already know that the 8+ million China-USA O&D seen in 2019 will be more like 1 million in the next three years – a hit for US carriers, but more for Chinese airlines that had over 65% of the traffic.

Airports in line of fire for further enplanement adjustments: LAX, SFO, SEA, all former gateways for Chinese air carriers.
_______

Monday Insight – May 31, 2021

Supersonic Realities –
Confusing Mach With The Clock

R.I.P. – Aerion, a company once allied with Boeing to build a supersonic business jet, has gone 86. Out of capital.

Lots of fanfare surrounded this project. It’s failure now logically brings to the forum the question whether it’s economically possible to produce supersonic flying machines.

The answer is a definite “yes.” And a definite “no.”

Reason: whether an airplane can create a sonic boom is a complete non sequitur. Speed, per se, isn’t the basic criterion. Time is.

To Start: Concorde Is Not A Part of The Discussion. Since the demise of the Concorde (or just “of Concorde,” as they say in the Mother Country) there have been any number of proposed platforms intended to be supersonic airliners, or in the case of Aerion, supersonic business jets.

First, we need to forget the Concorde – it rolled out of the hanger 54 years ago, when a color TV was a prestige item, an IBM Selectric was an office staple, and ads for Virginia Slims told us they were latest things to suck on to abuse our lungs.

Concorde represents ancient technology produced long ago in an aviation galaxy far, far away. We need to talk about the concept of supersonic air transportation in the future environment.

The Only Criteria: Clock Time, Not Travel Time. Anybody want to opine on why there supposedly is a market for machines that can burn a Mach hole in the sky? The typical answer is “to get there faster.”

Hit the buzzer. Wrong answer.

The only absolute criteria – for a supersonic anything is to improve time-efficiency. That’s total time-efficiency, not just whether the plane flies faster. That means the time gained by popping past Mach 1 has to be material, valuable, and useable. What a lot of folks miss – ignore, actually – is that humans – and businesses – operate according to what time it is, like day or night.

Let’s look at this.

In 1989, Boyd Group International was engaged by an aircraft manufacturer to study the feasibility of an envisioned 150-seat, all business class supersonic airliner with the design route criteria being San Francisco – Shanghai, 6,151 miles, nonstop.

The research found that all the parts and factors were already available. The powerplants – military grade – already existed. The design and materials for the proposed airliner were on the shelf, and not out of reach.

The research indicated that the envisioned platform was entirely technically possible, although price per unit would send any airline CEO to guzzle down the nearest bottle of Pepto-Bismol.

The real cost issue we discovered was that the airliner absolutely had to be capable of close to 2.0 Mach or higher. That meant the need to burn a lot more go-juice, a.k.a., jet-A. Any less and the thing would fail to meet the foundational criteria: saving time. No functional working time is saved if the airplane had to depart in the middle of the night or arrive at 3AM. It’s that day and night thing that humans operate in. Mach 2 and above had to be the capability.

The Aerion project – an 8-12 seat business jet at 1.4 Mach – had just this problem to face over the Atlantic. It wasn’t fast enough to provide the occupants with more usable time at both ends of the flight. That’s aside from the plane’s price being just short of the annual budget of a small Midwest city. Time is money… but maybe not that much money. Over $120 million per copy, and the only commercial application was executive travel. Not a big sector to start with. Flexjet ordered 20, but the phones at Aerion didn’t overheat with a lot more orders.

Point: the need for speed is not the issue. It’s the need for increased time-efficiency. The 2.0 Mach Concorde delivered it, although in just about every other aspect, the airplane earned itself a chapter in a book called “Great Planning Disasters.” (True.) Ego, hubris, and political arrogance were the main drivers of the Concorde project. And the taxpayers in France and England got the bill.

But Supersonic Is Still Coming. What’s left in the stable of future supersonic planning is the Overture – a 75-85 seat airliner being developed by Boom Technologies of Denver. The key issue here is that the airplane was not envisioned to be a supersonic machine, per se, as an objective. That capability was necessary to accomplish the design criteria… to increase passengers’ time-efficiency. Hence a near 2.0 Mach planned cruise speed. In addition, all of the technology is already in place – there is innovation, but Buck Rogers is not on the team.

A Market Value. A Market Need. But In A Changing Air Transportation System. As with any major project, cost of development and market cost of the Overture will affect ultimate demand. BGI’s original forecast for Boom in 2016 was for over 3,000 units over a ten-year period, based on the assumptions provided regarding operational costs on both segment and per-seat criteria.

To be clear, there have been material changes in all aspects of the international travel market, and we have not done an update. However, we believe that, as currently postured, the Overture has a strong operational role. It is a fact that leisure international traffic has declined, as has business-related demand.

However, BGI global forecasts indicate that, contrary to the U.S. domestic marketplace, the return of leisure travelers in international markets will be a lot slower than business-generated demand.

Trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific business travel will be there. Leisure international traffic will be sluggish for the same reason that domestic leisure was until recently a giant blob of deferred demand: nobody can predict what local authorities may do as they chase their tails trying do address the CCP-Covid situation. Taking the family to see the Colosseum could result in some nasty surprises. China-U.S. leisure travel – as we’ve alone pointed out – is dead. Business travel – especially such that increases productive time – is less vulnerable.

Take it to the bank – supersonic travel is still on the horizon.

_________________

Announcing!

A New Sponsor, and Vox Deorum Join Us At Aviation Unscripted

Some important changes happening at our video channel, Aviation Unscripted.

First, we’re honored to announce Ontario International Airport as an official sponsor of the channel. ONT has been at the forefront of taking aggressive new directions as a result of the effects of the CCP-Covid pandemic.

This ties in well with our approach at Aviation Unscripted, which is to question ambient thinking and the understanding that “being up to date” simply means being behind the future. No airport, business or individual can achieve excellence by running with the pack.

Second, we’re introducing a new feature to Aviation Unscripted. From time to time, we will be reaching out to innovative aviation leaders, to discuss how they are addressing the evolution of the industry. No, not panel exploration of what to do, but they will be telling us how they are dealing with key issues.

Very tongue-in-cheek, we’re calling it Vox Deorum – voice of the gods. We think there is a place for a medium where these voices can pass on their wisdom and experiences.

The first Vox Deorum video at Aviation Unscripted is now on-line.

We thought it might be appropriate to hear from our first sponsor, Ontario International Airport. So we asked Mark Thorpe, CEO to tell us how he views changes and opportunities in the post-pandemic environments.

Log on… Mark brings up some interesting concepts that are pertinent and thought-provoking to airports elsewhere in the nation. What’s happening in the Los Angeles Basin may be the template for other multi-airport regions, such as increased balkanization of traffic between airports, more need for focus on airport costs (the Frontier deletion of LAX flights being one example) and more.

Part Two of the Vox Deorum with Mark will be on-line this Thursday, June 3, at Aviation Unscripted. Get prepared. We’ll be talking about new approaches airports can take to reduce costs, while increasing marketing flexibility. Plan on just a touch of heresy from traditional thinking.

A Growing Channel of Perspectives. We want to thank the folks who are accessing Aviation Unscripted, both directly at Rumble.com and other access channels. As we’ve mentioned in the past, we have pulled our videos from the former channel at Youtube. We have left one video that bluntly explains the reasons. We prefer truth.

Click here to log on to the channel – feel free to explore. You’ll note that we aren’t reticent to barbecue sacred cow beliefs. While there, we’d be appreciative if you hit the subscribe button, too!
__________________

Monday Insight – May 24, 2021

Breeze – Brazen Airline Planning Heresy

Last month, we put on line an edition of Aviation Unscripted that outlined how many traditional air service planning metrics have not just changed, but are completely gone.

The video quickly outlines how many core metrics, economics, airline strategies, and consumer trends that were the bedrock of air transportation are no longer in play.

Along these lines, get ready for some fun media action this week. Start-up Breeze Airways has announced several of its initial routes. They validate the fact that in regard to applications of air travel as a communication modality, it’s a new day. A new day that won’t fit into the traditional assumptions of air transportation planning.

Some new Breeze routes are to Tampa, where traffic stimulation is always in play. But the majority are between cities that on the surface – and based on existing data – have traffic demand roughly equivalent to the capacity of a Ford Econovan.

Absolute Heretical Craziness. And certainly there will be the media gurus who will consult the oracles of raw and unrefined data, a.k.a. the DOT O&D tables. They will read the passenger numbers registered in these city pairs during the robust, pre-CCP Covid year of 2019, and will conclude that David Neeleman and his entire Breeze team have donned Star Trek uniforms and are begging Scotty to beam them up from reality.

Plan on hearing stuff like, “Charleston, SC to Akron/Canton? Lunacy! There are barely ten – total – people going between these cities each day.” Columbus – Hartford/Springfield has less than 22 passengers reported as going each way, each day. “That’s about a 30% load factor on a single Breeze E-190, and there are three other airlines – big guys, including Southwest – offering competing, albeit connecting, service. This is nuts.”

We could go on. There’s amusement in these lightweights.

And we’re not referencing the folks at Breeze. It’s the media types who don’t have a clue regarding either the evolving air service market, new generation airliner platforms, or even how to read DOT data, let alone understanding what those numbers represent.

At Boyd Group International, we’ve been advising our clients to tumble to the fact that many of the traditional planning assumptions are gone. Many of the traditional drivers of air travel are gone, too. Breeze is a clear example. There will be more.

DOT O&D Data Is Not The Same As “Demand”. Here’s a message regarding DOT O&D data. These tables are indicative (and often in error) of the consumers who use air transportation between specific points, based on the characteristics of the air service options between those cities. And that is determined by several factors. In the markets chosen by Breeze, these entail the ease or lack of same of the flight options, the transit time (including connections) and, importantly, the cost.

If any of those change, it will affect the number of consumers choosing to travel.

Breeze is fixin’ to send a lightning bolt or two into the moribund demand factors in a whole passel of new nonstop markets.

In a number of the markets that Breeze is planning, the convenience of using air travel today is just a shade ahead of a wagon train. And in most cases the fares are stratospheric.

Now, Getting To The Bar Mitzvah Is Possible. There’s no question that nonstop Breeze flights in these markets will tend to stimulate some business traffic. But the real play will be in opening city pairs where personal travel – a deep subset, perhaps, of what is lumped together as “leisure” traffic – will be able to use air transportation where until now there were few market-viable options.

Yes, BDL and PIT are very nice places, but regardless of the fare, nonstop flights on Breeze are not going to turn the route into a major vacation option.

The real market for Breeze will be consumers in these cities who will find attending that the wedding in Akron/Canton is no longer out of financial reach. Or heading to a graduation or Grandma’s birthday in Louisville. Or just to visit relatives in Norfolk when before now, it was too time consuming and too damaging to the bank account to even consider. The true demand is not yet known, because the levels of air access were an obstacle course in time-consuming schedules, high fares, and massive inconvenience.

It’s Being Partially Tried By Other Carriers, Too. We covered this in a recent Aviation Unscripted video. American is adding Dayton – Orlando, where there is only O&D traffic, and no AA flow connections. United is planning a spread of O&D nonstops between Portland, Maine and places like Milwaukee and Columbus. The fact is that the true demand these nonstop flights will develop is unknown because until now the hassle of existing air transportation precluded it. The difference with the Breeze strategy is adding in low fares, which changes the equation from the approach at AA and UA. Big time.

New Generation Airliner Platforms Make This Possible. Now, this does not mean the end of the hub-and-spoke system, as some mushroom-basement academics will likely announce. It simply means that there are additional places where new-generation, multi-mission airliners (like, say, the 80 A220s that Breeze has on order) can generate net new revenues. True, network carriers can do this with current fleets of CRJs or ERJs, but that tends to make the pricing component more difficult.

New Consumer Stratas, Too. As we’ve covered via video at Aviation Unscripted, there are now four consumer air travel sectors. Business, Vacation/Leisure, Personal, and Impulse.

Breeze covers all of these, but the biggest one is personal travel. The operating costs of the A220 will be a major factor in making these new markets possible. If you’ve not seen it, click on the icon or click here.

Rational Growth Plan. As of now, Breeze has a fleet plan for a lot of iron… nine E-190s now in-fleet and an order for 80 A-220-300s, the latter of which are the most mission-flexible in the sky.

Of interest is that the initial plan for Breeze is not to blot out the sun with new A220s. The plan appears to be two units added by the end of 2021, and only 11 more coming from the factory in 2022. Apparently another 17 the year after, plus it’s likely the initial 9 E-190/195s will be phased out.

Yes, It Can Work. Naturally, it is possible, and maybe likely, that some of the market choices won’t work out. But with a rational fleet strategy such as this, the program is clearly well planned.

Bank on it: it will succeed.

Planning For The New Future? We’re Ready. Boyd Group International is at the cutting edge of the new trends that will be creating the new post CCP-Covid air transportation system.

We focus on tomorrow – so for air access planning and futurist traffic demand and trend forecasts, give us a call.

________________________