You can add BWI and PHL to that list. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael A. Burris" <yul@prodigy.net> To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 8:20 PM Subject: Re: Speaking of Montreal... / PTV > AIRLINE: > > PTV's then are still used at many airports. I recall > them at Mirabel, IAD and JFK, given my experience some > years ago. > > Mike Burris > Cambridge, Mass > > > --- Antoin Daltun <adaltun@eircom.net> wrote: > > I was on an international airlines' committee which > > tried to influence the > > project. > > > > We all said repeatedly that it wasn't wanted and we > > didn't need and we > > didn't want PTVs. > > In fact, most of us wanted to go to Toronto, but > > some bilaterals required > > Montreal. > > > > We said that if we have to pay for Mirabel, then > > Ste-Scholastique, some > > airlines will be forced out of Montreal altogether. > > > > I was with Aer Lingus, which did leave though that > > was more related to the > > arrival of the B747 as the only aircraft which had a > > realistic break-even > > load factor with the then seasonality and fares mix, > > and it was realistic > > only on Boston and JFK. > > > > The bilateral still requires Shannon-Montreal, while > > the main traffic flow > > would be Dublin-Toronto. Since 2002, Air Canada > > operate > > Toronto-Shannon-Dublin seasonally with B767s on a > > waiver basis. Previously, > > the traffic went mostly on charters and via London, > > England. > > > > Antoin Daltun > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Mike Gammon" <jmgammon@sympatico.ca> > > For international > > > arrivals, YMX is/was far more efficient than YUL. > > Hopefully the new > > > terminal building additions for YUL, which > > apparently include new arrivals > > > area for int'l and cross-border, will improve > > things. > > > > > > Mike Gammon > > > >