Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Local airport

August 27, 2013

For the past couple weeks, you have had articles about building a new expensive airport terminal. We don't need a new terminal if 88 % of locals fly out of other nearby airports....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Aug-27-13 5:50 PM

LoL Nobud... understood! LoL

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-27-13 5:38 PM

Capricorn, I see what you mean. But, I don't fly for business, usually, I fly for vacation. I can see why the companies would save a buck. You are already being paid, you are already being paid for or have a company vehicle. I get it. But, when vacationing my wife does the planning. Europe and the Caribbean are not destinations from Harrisburg, she said. After nearly 30 years I do as I am told. Much easier that way!

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-27-13 4:14 PM

The addition is to accommodate increased traffic from DHS, FEMA , and national guard in the coming year.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-27-13 2:32 PM

Nobud, I think it all depends where you are flying to. Have you checked the prices out of Harrisburg? I used to have to travel a lot on business and many times it was a lot cheaper flying out of Harrisburg which of course is much closer than Philly and their long term parking is cheap and convenient. Trust me, the company I worked for always looked for the cheapest route including mileage and expenses and they often sent me to Harrisburg.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-27-13 1:14 PM

Nobud74, we have found that to be true, also.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-27-13 10:45 AM

Enigma, I agree and that was my question. Do they have a contract in place that expands service with an additional airline and or flights? If not, and they are hoping once the terminal is built they will get one, then it is a very risky investment. They have mentioned no such contract.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-27-13 9:16 AM

Another example of a letter written by someone who doesn't understand how things work. One of the reasons prices to fly into or out of Williamsport is the limited service. If you want to increase the service you need better facilities. I certainly hope that the authority is not building this on speculation and that they have agreements with other airlines to provide service before spending the money, but they haven't said. If it works the way it should, we will get more service at lower prices and a nicer terminal. Done properly, it will be a good investment. I just hope we have people in place to do it properly.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-27-13 8:28 AM

The cost to fly from here to anywhere is higher because of an additional leg in the flight. If you drive to Philly to fly and save $300 you will not actually save that money. You must figure in your parking, the incovenience, how tired you will be and the safety issues of driving like that and 300 miles or more at 55 cents a mile or whatever the IRS allows for mileage. These will be your true costs. So, it really is no more expensive and much safer to fly from IPT. After several trips I came to this conclusion last summer.

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-27-13 7:12 AM

Williamsport is a subsidized airport. When those subsidies ended, USAir service ended.

If the Airport Authority has an agreement with another airline to service Williamsport, should a new terminal be built, then, I can understand this push.

If they do not have such an agreement, then this is a ludicrous waste of money.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-27-13 7:01 AM

Francine, I thought that deregulation in the 1970s ended the government's ability to tell carriers (trains, planes, busses) what destinations must be serviced. But, I do think that the terminal rebuild is an example of public money being used to benefit a few private entities who should be very capable of paying their own way.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-27-13 6:19 AM

Capricorn1, Correct, get the contracts first. This will turn into another local boondoggle, remember the hockey fiasco. Just like the Murtha airport, it will be a parasite on the local economy requiring infusions of taxpayer monies over an extended period. 150 million of taxpayer dollars over a 10 year period to Murtha's name-bearing testament to wasteful government spending of the taxpayers monies. It's bad enough the government wasted the $150 million, but taxpayers continue to subsidize this airport to the tune of $100 per ticket plus additional subsidies just to keep the place running. There are 3 flights a day into and out of Murtha all to DC. So Lycoming county leadership, let's build our own testament to wasteful government spending and stupidity.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-27-13 4:37 AM

While I think an operating airport is an important tool to have when trying to attract industry, I think they are putting the cart before the horse regarding this new terminal. They have an operating terminal already and until they have contracts in place with additional airlines and flights, it will look no more appealing to future industry. Land the contracts then build the terminal.

11 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-27-13 4:25 AM

I doubt it will shut down due to being unprofitable heck the USPS is still in business in the red for years

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-27-13 1:45 AM

I agree tear it down and nobody would care.

6 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 14 of 14 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web