Alaska Airlines takes next step for flights at Paine Field
EVERETT, Wash. -- Alaska Airlines has taken the next step to operate flights out of Everett's Paine Field in the future, the company announced Thursday.
As required by its application to the FAA, the airline is providing the agency with a proposed schedule over the next five years that could include more then two-dozen round-trip jet flights a week.
But Alaska said it's happy where they are now and the application was to protect itself should other airlines begin operations out of Paine Field in the future.
"We continue to believe that our flights at Sea-Tac Airport and in Bellingham best serve the Puget Sound region's needs for affordable air travel, particularly in light of the significant investments both airports have made recently to improve their facilities," Andrew Harrison, Alaska Airlines' vice president of planning and revenue management, said in a press release. "That said, if one or more other airlines begin operations at Paine Field, we would commence service alongside these carriers. Submitting a schedule with the FAA along with a request for authorization to serve Paine is a necessary step in the process."
The airline proposed 14 total weekly flights using 737s to destinations in Las Vegas and Hawaii and 21 round trip flights to Portland using Bombardier Q400 turboprops in the first year. By the fifth year, it would expand to 49 weekly flights that would add Los Angeles, Phoenix and San Diego as destinations.
Alaska told the FAA the proposed schedules could change based on other factors, including competition, economy and customer needs.
Right now, Paine Field currently has no adequate passenger terminal, which would need to be built before operations by any airline could begin.
For More Information:
Full details of Alaska's proposed Paine Field schedule.
As required by its application to the FAA, the airline is providing the agency with a proposed schedule over the next five years that could include more then two-dozen round-trip jet flights a week.
But Alaska said it's happy where they are now and the application was to protect itself should other airlines begin operations out of Paine Field in the future.
"We continue to believe that our flights at Sea-Tac Airport and in Bellingham best serve the Puget Sound region's needs for affordable air travel, particularly in light of the significant investments both airports have made recently to improve their facilities," Andrew Harrison, Alaska Airlines' vice president of planning and revenue management, said in a press release. "That said, if one or more other airlines begin operations at Paine Field, we would commence service alongside these carriers. Submitting a schedule with the FAA along with a request for authorization to serve Paine is a necessary step in the process."
The airline proposed 14 total weekly flights using 737s to destinations in Las Vegas and Hawaii and 21 round trip flights to Portland using Bombardier Q400 turboprops in the first year. By the fifth year, it would expand to 49 weekly flights that would add Los Angeles, Phoenix and San Diego as destinations.
Alaska told the FAA the proposed schedules could change based on other factors, including competition, economy and customer needs.
Right now, Paine Field currently has no adequate passenger terminal, which would need to be built before operations by any airline could begin.
For More Information:
Full details of Alaska's proposed Paine Field schedule.
All you NIMBY-haters....Based on your logic, the 14,000 residents who sent in concerns about coal trains should shut up since they moved into a neighborhood with train tracks. What if the city decided to make the street in front of your house a primary truck route through the city? Would you complain or would you shut up since you knew there was a road in front of your house when you moved in?
I chose my living arrangements with the possible future expansions of the roads, nearby industries and other pre-existing conditions.Â
Â
Just because you dont THINK about where you buy does NOT entitle you to whine, moan and complain later when the existing things expanded. In PNW (and indeed most) land use planning....train tracks were there first, they can and will grow their businesses, airports usually predate the homes around them as they were built in rural areas and the sprawl has swallowed them up. Same with shooting ranges, drag strips (the housing RIGHT BEHIND the pits at ex-SIR was built and sold in the off season - the developers split when the season opened.), gravel pits and lumber mills.
Â
Its the buyers CHOICE to purchase there. In doing so they accept the possible growth of the industry nearby. So build a bridge and get over it already.
Some people want the benefits of regional growth without the actual growth. Can't have one without the other. If you moved near an airfield don't start saying you never imagined it could change into an airport.Â
And the NIMBY whining will commence in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.....
Does anyone know have they set up for overnight parking and if so were
@Mike There is actually a lot of open land over here, they are currently already building and setting up for everything. (not parking yet of course) but there will be plenty of room for it. I think this is a great idea and I would fly out of there a lot.
 @ajohnsoccer21 If there starting to put in parking it's a dun deal Perry Mason couldn't stop it.
@Mike Im not sure if you have been up there or seen any of the construction they have been doing, but it looks like its gonna happen either way...  :)
I'm not against this in any way, and I'm a pilot who flies out of Paine. I'm just curious since I'm not sure I've seen, but has Boeing weighed in on this proposal? I'm just curious since they frequently do ramp tests on planes such as high speed taxiing and other things that require use of 16R/34L (the big runway). The number of flights initially announced wouldn't seem to interfere with operations, but I'd hate to see Boeing be given another reason to shift production elsewhere.
As it should. The region has a large enough population to warrant multiple airports -Seatac, Paine Field, and Bellingham.Â
That is going to be nice to be able to fly out of Paine Field to go to Eastern Washington
Bombardiers (you're complaining about prop planes?) and 737's? Why back in my day, growing up under the North Runway at Sea-Tac, the 707's and DC-10's shook your house and rattled your teeth. The new planes are magnitudes quieter. Those were manly noises, not like today's effete aircraft.
Just waiting for NIMBY's in Mukilteo and Edmonds to try and block it again. And these are the same NIMBY's that complain in the same breath about the hassle of driving down to SeaTac!
 @AWH1974 I live in Mukilteo just past the end of Runway 34 just across from Muk Speedway.  Planes fly over my house many times a day as we are literally lined up with the runway.  The Dreamlifter does indeed shake the house.  I think it's pretty awesome, but I am a plane junkie.  I think it would be quite handy to have flights out of there.  If you dont like the noise of planes, how about not living next to an airport. Â
 @AWH1974 It's hard to please everyone, but if they choose to live near an airport, then they can always move (preferably back to California). And I never understand the Edmonds people. It's too far south of the field to really be affected by anything...I've flown the approach, and I've watched the jets, and I'm sorry, but your neighbor's kids put out more noise than a jet flying overhead and I'm surprised that they're not on the news trying to round up all the kids and put them in internment camps for being too loud.
 @AWH1974 Edmonds is just along for the ride
there goes the free parking
Vegas, Hawaii... not bad... and Portland service via the turbo props... (what about Spokane? )
awesome. Â suck it, "Harbour Pointe"
 @unobtanium Nice golf course though.Â