# Alaska Airlines will start passenger flights from Everett’s Paine Fiel



## CHamilton (May 17, 2017)

Alaska Airlines will start passenger flights from Everett’s Paine Field
http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/alaska-airlines-will-start-passenger-flights-from-everetts-paine-field/


----------



## BCL (May 17, 2017)

I drove by there on my last trip to the area. I was thinking about going on a tour of the Boeing Everett facility, but didn't have enough time and just wanted a look at the vicinity.

That area is packed with planes being prepped for delivery or undergoing testing at the Boeing Everett factory.


----------



## railiner (May 17, 2017)

Great news!

I know my cousin's in Camano Island and Snohomish will appreciate that new service...

I was just in the former this past weekend to visit...

I arrived late Friday evening, and returned early on Sunday morning, so did not encounter much traffic on I-5 from and to Sea-Tac, but have in the past...


----------



## CHamilton (May 18, 2017)

> But some residents are trying to stop commercial airlines from coming to Paine Field. Right now the airport is used primarily as test grounds for Boeing. That's the way Mukilteo Mayor Jennifer Gregerson wants to keep it.
> 
> Gregerson: "We think that the best use of Paine Field is really to support the aerospace industry. And Boeing itself having access to an airport where they can do their testing and provide those great family-wage jobs, that's always been a priority for our community."
> 
> The city of Mukilteo and a community group have filed an appeal of the plans for commercial travel. They say more environmental review needs to happen. The state Supreme Court will decide this summer whether to hear the argument.



http://kuow.org/post/alaska-airlines-will-fly-paine-field-local-mayor-says-its-too-soon


----------



## railiner (May 18, 2017)

Alway's "NIMBY's" to thwart progress....

*

I didn't know Bellingham already had commercial service...


----------



## XHRTSP (May 19, 2017)

I'm curious to see how they'll integrate with Link when it makes its way up there. Assuming the state and feds don't put a stop to ST3.


----------



## Texan Eagle (May 19, 2017)

railiner said:


> Alway's "NIMBY's" to thwart progress....


You would think Paine Field, of all places, which already sees truckloads of Boeing planes flying in and out for testing and delivery would have been beyond NIMBYism by now, but turns out there are always more...


----------



## XHRTSP (May 20, 2017)

Texan Eagle said:


> You would think Paine Field, of all places, which already sees truckloads of Boeing planes flying in and out for testing and delivery would have been beyond NIMBYism by now, but turns out there are always more...


I bet most of them couldn't distinguish between a 737 and 767, even with the paint job giving them a clue.


----------



## ehbowen (May 20, 2017)

I think just about anyone in my generation could pick out a 727 at first glance, although they're becoming rare these days. In my mind they were to the jet era what the DC-3 was to air transport in general, the plane that really brought it home. With that built-in APU and airstair and those wonderful triple - slotted flaps it could operate in and out of secondary airports with very little ground support.

As an unabashed railfan I regret its impact on private passenger railroading, but I have to admire it as very nearly the exemplar of a perfect design. I worked at and learned to fly at Hobby Airport in the late '90s and I had plenty of opportunities to see 727s close up and far away from every conceivable angle. There's not a bad line anywhere on the airframe. It's almost as good as a pretty girl...and it ages better than most of them do to boot!


----------



## railiner (May 20, 2017)

I liked the 727's, too...but I believe the 737 has far surpassed them as the "DC-3" of the jet age, both in number built, and longevity...although it is hard to relate the first 737 "Baby Boeing's", with the newest generation 737 Max...

The seven-three's could be conceivably be in service for an aggregate century!


----------



## ehbowen (May 20, 2017)

No doubt that the 737 is a great design and has certainly earned its keep...but the 727 is the one which to most of the country was the face of the jet era when that era was opening. Besides, I like its proportions better, especially the -200 series. Not that the 737 is ugly...Boeing is very good about putting a pretty face on its (jet!) products.

The DC-3 certainly opened the air age, but I question if its (unquestionably impressive) numbers and subsequent longevity would have been quite so great were it not for WWII. Of course, that's like asking what would live on planet Earth if the dinosaurs had never died....


----------



## railiner (May 21, 2017)

Good points, but speaking of faces...the 707, 720, 727, and 737 pretty much were identical in that respect...


----------



## fairviewroad (May 22, 2017)

railiner said:


> I didn't know Bellingham already had commercial service...


Bellingham has had commercial airline service for decades. It has really expanded in the past decade, with flights being marketed to the 2 million Canadians living in the Greater Vancouver metro area, some of whom are happy to cross the border to save $$ on flights to Hawaii, Vegas, etc.

Of course, those people aren't likely to drive all the way to Everett (what would be the point?). So this is really about serving the northern Seattle metro area with O/D flights to key destinations. I'm thinking PDX, SFO, LAX for starters, perhaps LAS and HNL. Maybe GEG (Spokane).


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 22, 2017)

railiner said:


> Alway's "NIMBY's" to thwart progress....


 Does a few regional flights from an airfield 99.99% of Americans will never search for (let alone fly from) really represent much in the way of actual progress? Seems like a rather minor "win" to me.



Texan Eagle said:


> You would think Paine Field, of all places, which already sees truckloads of Boeing planes flying in and out for testing and delivery would have been beyond NIMBYism by now, but turns out there are always more...


I live near a medium sized airport and everything is fine right now, in fact it's been perfectly fine for many years. However, if they unilaterally started adding more and more flights with new approach vectors and departure paths it could seriously screw up my sleep schedule, which in turn could screw up my job, which you had better believe is every bit as important to me as your job is to you. This isn't a critical strategic gateway like LAX or JFK so maybe we pick our battles and let the NIMBY's have this one.



XHRTSP said:


> I bet most of them couldn't distinguish between a 737 and 767, even with the paint job giving them a clue.


And that would be relevant to their complaint how, exactly? Smaller aircraft can still be loud as hell. B731/732's and MD80/90's for instance. Not to mention that this is the sort of seemingly change for which slippery slope was coined.


----------



## XHRTSP (May 24, 2017)

Devil's Advocate said:


> And that would be relevant to their complaint how, exactly?


Just me calling them morons.


> Smaller aircraft can still be loud as hell. B731/732's and MD80/90's for instance. Not to mention that this is the sort of seemingly change for which slippery slope was coined.


Should I not be allowed to my Piper up there for transition work? Every extra bit of noise is a slippery slope...


> However, if they unilaterally started adding more and more flights with new approach vectors and departure paths it could seriously screw up my sleep schedule, which in turn could screw up my job, which you had better believe is every bit as important to me as your job is to you.


I live under the FAFs for the 16s at SEATAC, so cry me a river. You don't like airplanes, go live somewhere else.


----------



## railiner (May 25, 2017)

I suppose he lived there long before they built that noisy airport nearby...


----------



## fairviewroad (May 26, 2017)

Devil's Advocate said:


> Does a few regional flights from an airfield 99.99% of Americans will never search for (let alone fly from) really represent much in the way of actual progress? Seems like a rather minor "win" to me.


I suspect PAE will be folded into the SEA airport code for "all area airports" in the same way that LGB/BUR/SNA are included in LAX searches, and ISP/HPN are included in NYC searches, etc. (This varies by booking engine, of course.) The larger point is that the target audience for these flights will most certainly know how to search for them, and unsuspecting folks may be pleasantly surprised to find it as an option when they type in Seattle. (Or rudely surprised, if they book it by accident.)



Devil's Advocate said:


> this is the sort of seemingly change for which slippery slope was coined.


In that part of the country, "slippery slope" most definitely refers to the bluffs on the Amtrak route between Seattle and Everett.


----------



## CHamilton (May 26, 2017)

fairviewroad said:


> Devil's Advocate said:
> 
> 
> > this is the sort of seemingly change for which slippery slope was coined.
> ...


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 26, 2017)

XHRTSP said:


> Devil's Advocate said:
> 
> 
> > However, if they unilaterally started adding more and more flights with new approach vectors and departure paths it could seriously screw up my sleep schedule, which in turn could screw up my job, which you had better believe is every bit as important to me as your job is to you.
> ...


If everyone went and lived somewhere else there would be no reason to have an airport here.



railiner said:


> I suppose he lived there long before they built that noisy airport nearby...


 If we take the "who was there first" point to its logical conclusion NIMBY's might be able to shut down virtually any airport simply by soliciting some farmers coop or Indian tribe to make a complaint on their behalf. If the airport has a tolerable level of noise when you move there, and makes an intolerable change to the amount of noise decades later, is that not something worthy of being challenged?



fairviewroad said:


> I suspect PAE will be folded into the SEA airport code for "all area airports" in the same way that LGB/BUR/SNA are included in LAX searches, and ISP/HPN are included in NYC searches, etc. (This varies by booking engine, of course.) The larger point is that the target audience for these flights will most certainly know how to search for them, and unsuspecting folks may be pleasantly surprised to find it as an option when they type in Seattle. (Or rudely surprised, if they book it by accident.)


Are we seriously comparing Seattle with New York and Los Angeles? SEA already refers to Seattle-Tacoma International specifically and changing a major airport code for everyone just to rope in Paine Field for a tiny minority of travelers makes no sense whatsoever.


----------



## fairviewroad (May 26, 2017)

Devil's Advocate said:


> Are we seriously comparing Seattle with New York and Los Angeles? SEA already refers to Seattle-Tacoma International specifically and changing a major airport code for everyone just to rope in Paine Field for a tiny minority of travelers makes no sense whatsoever.


No, I don't think the airport code for Sea-Tac should be changed. I didn't word it very well.

I meant something more along the lines of how, on Expedia (for example), if you type in LAX into the search field you get a drop-down menu that includes the other three airports. If you type in DFW you get a drop-down menu that includes both DFW and DAL. Type in IAH and get a drop-down that includes HOU. Type in FLL and you get a drop-down that includes MIA and PBI. If you start typing the word Chicago, you get a drop-down for ORD, MDW and even RFD.

That's sort of the scenario I'm thinking of. Type in Seattle or SEA and you get a drop-down that includes PAE. That will get it on the radar.

Also, Alaska Airlines is very visible in Seattle from a marketing standpoint. They'll have no trouble getting the word out about their new service.


----------



## railiner (May 26, 2017)

Devil's Advocate said:


> XHRTSP said:
> 
> 
> > Devil said:
> ...


You do have somewhat of a valid point...if a drastic change occurred in the noise/activity level of a nearby airport.

On the other hand, if you knowingly moved in near an existing airport, you should have been cognizant of the strong possibility that over time, the level of traffic, be it air or highway, would increase with growth and development.

Personal note...I live just three miles from LGA, under the "Expressway Approach" to Runway 31. Even though there is a vast increase in air traffic since we moved in back in the 50's, the sound level is much quieter now, thanks to modern high bypass fanjets, compared to the window-rattling turbojets of yesteryear.

Having air-conditioning, with windows shut helps too...


----------



## fairviewroad (May 30, 2017)

By the way, a fun fact is that if scheduled flights are offered at Paine Field, it will give Seattle the unusual distinction of having _five_ airports with scheduled commercial airline service in its metro area. Or at least, five places where you can catch a scheduled (not charter) commercial airline flight, assuming no other changes in the meantime.

1. Seattle-Tacoma International: obviously the "big one" and the only one (for now) with traditional mainline service

2. King County International/Boeing Field: Better known for its role with the Boeing Corporation, this airport offers has scheduled Cessna Grand Caravan flights on Kenmore Air to a few land-based airports in the San Juan Islands. Boeing Field has had scheduled airline service from other airlines in the past, including most recently with the now-defunct SeaPort Airlines, but for a variety of reasons it never stuck.

3. South Lake Union: This is a float-plane terminal that's very close to downtown Seattle and tourist attractions. Kenmore Air has numerous flights from here to the San Juans as well as international flights to Victoria, British Columbia.

4. Lake Washington: This float-plane terminal is at the far northern end of Lake Washington, in the town of Kenmore (from which Kenmore Air got its name). From here, Kenmore operates scheduled service to "Inside Passage" locations in British Columbia. While Kenmore is a small town, the location is closer to downtown Seattle than Everett, so it certainly counts as a Seattle-area "airport."

5. Paine Field in Everett: TBD

Obviously, airports number 2, 3 and 4 offer niche service only. Still, it's pretty amazing that there are four, and possibly soon-to-be five, places to catch a scheduled airline flight in the Seattle area. Not many cities can make that claim.


----------



## Palmetto (May 30, 2017)

Of those five, I've heard of one: SEA-TAC. I'm going to look into Kenmore Air, though.


----------



## ehbowen (May 30, 2017)

Palmetto said:


> Of those five, I've heard of one: SEA-TAC. I'm going to look into Kenmore Air, though.


I was considering it for our Railfan Madness Part II trip last year based upon the enthusiastic recommendation of a tour agency...until I read the fine print in their baggage policy. The three of us were on a two-week trip...the excess baggage fees would have been more than our tickets!

Looks like it still might be a good choice for a day trip, however.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 30, 2017)

ehbowen said:


> The three of us were on a two-week trip...the excess baggage fees would have been more than our tickets!


That seems to be how most airlines operate these days. Cheap seats, relative to inflation anyway, but every little finger they (or anyone) lifts can incur a substantial surcharge. Add more than a couple "upgrades" to a cheap ticket and you could be paying through the nose for the privilege. That being said, if the aircraft in question is substantially smaller than a B731 or A319 they may have a legitimate reason for being wary of carrying too much luggage.


----------



## ehbowen (May 30, 2017)

The airplane, If I Remember Correctly, was a single-engine Cessna Caravan with floats. Legitimate reason, IMO...but not enough to warrant paying the freight when the high-speed Clipper ferry was also an option.


----------



## CHamilton (Jan 22, 2019)

Federal shutdown delays start of airline service in Everett


https://www.heraldnet.com/news/federal-shutdown-delays-start-of-airline-service-in-everett/


----------



## CHamilton (Feb 21, 2019)

FAA approves start of commercial flights at Paine Field

Passenger flights from Everett’s Paine Field have been approved by the Federal Aviation Administration. Alaska Airlines will begin service on March 4, with United Airlines starting on March 31.

https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/everett/faa-approves-start-of-commercial-flights-at-paine-field/281-7f803c30-d095-4511-8fe9-a730ea094d0a


----------



## CHamilton (Feb 27, 2019)

Time-lapse of Paine Field passenger terminal construction

https://vimeo.com/320315454

https://player.vimeo.com/video/320315454?app_id=122963


----------



## CHamilton (Mar 7, 2019)

Why the New Paine Field Airport Is a Passenger’s Dream

https://thepointsguy.com/news/why-new-paine-field-airport-is-a-passengers-dream/


----------



## fairviewroad (Mar 7, 2019)

My favorite clip from opening day:  (the bottom one...)


----------



## Seaboard92 (Mar 8, 2019)

Apparently we are making champagne bottles out of Type II glass.


----------

