In recent years, we’ve seen JetBlue expand with transatlantic flying, though the airline has seemingly had mixed luck with this, with several routes being pulled after a season or two, or being reduced from year-round to seasonal. The airline has now announced plans to add two new transatlantic routes in 2026, both of which are new destinations for the airline.
JetBlue expands summer transatlantic flying from Boston
JetBlue has revealed that it plans to add two new summer seasonal long haul routes from Boston Logan (BOS) as of the summer 2026 season, to Barcelona (BCN) and Milan (MXP). The flights will both operate nonstop seasonally, with the Barcelona service launching on April 16, and the Milan service launching on May 11.
The flights are expected to go on sale as of Thursday, November 20, 2025, so the schedules for the flights will be revealed then. The airline claims that these routes “further solidify the airline’s role as Boston’s leading leisure airline, bringing customers in New England to top vacation destinations in the U.S., the Caribbean, Latin America, Canada and Europe.”
Here’s how JetBlue CEO Joanna Geraghty describes this new service:
“As we expand our New England footprint with new service from Boston to Barcelona and Milan, we’re bringing more travelers the elevated service that has redefined transatlantic air travel, including our award-winning Mint premium experience Customers flying to Europe with JetBlue enjoy the kind of thoughtful design, privacy, and hospitality they simply won’t find with legacy carriers, and we’re proud to continue delivering incredible value and style on both sides of the Atlantic.”
JetBlue will serve nine European destinations from Boston
With these latest route additions, JetBlue will serve a total of a nine European destinations out of Boston next summer. These include Amsterdam (AMS), Barcelona (BCN), Dublin (DUB), Edinburgh (EDI), London Gatwick (LGW), London Heathrow (LHR), Madrid (MAD), Milan (MXP), and Paris (CDG).
That’s quite an impressive network, and it’s interesting (but not surprising) that JetBlue has had more luck out of Boston than out of New York (JFK), given the competitive landscape.
In Boston, JetBlue mainly faces competition from Delta, which is of course a tough competitor. JetBlue has the same network to Europe out of Boston as Delta does, except it doesn’t fly to Athens (ATH), Lisbon (LIS), or Rome (FCO). I imagine Athens and Rome are both not served due to aircraft range issues, while it’s interesting that JetBlue hasn’t attempted Lisbon flights.
I mean, these new routes should do okay for JetBlue. There’s a ton of transatlantic demand in summer to Italy and Spain, so JetBlue should have no issues filling these planes. The question is just what kind of yields the airline can get, given the general yield disadvantage it has compared to Delta, plus the challenging economics of flying narrow body planes in long haul markets.
JetBlue loses money, so I suppose it’s not a question of whether the flights will be profitable, but rather, if they’ll be less unprofitable than other routes.
Bottom line
JetBlue has announced two new transatlantic routes for the summer of 2026, as the airline will fly from Boston to both Barcelona and Milan. These are two new cities for JetBlue, and it reflects JetBlue’s continued transatlantic growth in Boston over New York.
JetBlue will be competing with Delta in these markets, so obviously that’s tough competition. But at least it’s less competition than in New York.
What do you make of JetBlue’s new transatlantic routes?
Absolutely horrendous idea. I bet JetBlue threw their toys out of the pram yet again to get permissions to fly to Barcelona and Milan like they did everywhere else.
So sick of seppos casting their privilege, entitlement, and audacity more and more.
That flight is to accommodate country bumpkins trying to go out of their comfort zone.
Alaska Air and United are waiting for the price to drop on Air Masshole. Tic toc tic toc
As a someone that's not hub-captive and lives in Barcelona half time, this would be great. Except...looking at fares for Mint, they're generally not competitive unless you absolutely don't want to connect anywhere and value the time. And since I'd need to get to BOS first anyway, connections aren't a huge deal. Aside from competing with DL on that route, whose D1 fares are usually insane, I don't see this being a winning proposition except...
As a someone that's not hub-captive and lives in Barcelona half time, this would be great. Except...looking at fares for Mint, they're generally not competitive unless you absolutely don't want to connect anywhere and value the time. And since I'd need to get to BOS first anyway, connections aren't a huge deal. Aside from competing with DL on that route, whose D1 fares are usually insane, I don't see this being a winning proposition except for theoretically limited O/D travel between the city pairs. Does BOS and the surrounds really have enough need to make this viable?
I just flew JetBlue Boston to Paris earlier this week and I was kind of shocked at how GREAT the flight was. Prepared for the worst after the long government shutdown in fact it was really great up front in the EvenMore rows ... the food was shockingly good ... and the flight attendants were incredibly efficient, kind, and gracious. Overall it was one of the best flights I had this year. For a six-hour...
I just flew JetBlue Boston to Paris earlier this week and I was kind of shocked at how GREAT the flight was. Prepared for the worst after the long government shutdown in fact it was really great up front in the EvenMore rows ... the food was shockingly good ... and the flight attendants were incredibly efficient, kind, and gracious. Overall it was one of the best flights I had this year. For a six-hour flight on an A321neo honestly I was very impressed and I'm not easy to impress. So I can see how this might be a good market for them to increase transatlantic offerings.
Thanks for the honest feedback. Come back and see us again soon.
-B6 employee
"JetBlue loses money, so I suppose it’s not a question of whether the flights will be profitable, but rather, if they’ll be less unprofitable than other routes."
Ben, Hell of a way to run a railroad!
Routes that nobody asked for, by a dying airline....
Can't wait 'til someone buys JetBlue and fixes their mess. Flew them last week and was beyond underwhelmed with their service and operational performance (which wasn't shutdown related. It was uninspired gate agent related).
B6 is trying desperately to keep the business running waiting for a savior to come along.
Problem is that B6 is surviving on borrowed money which makes it harder and harder for anyone to justify buying them.
Just as we are seeing with NK, it requires a trip or 2 through chapter 11; unlike the round of legacy bankruptcies where LCCs made some gains, the legacies are now gaining far more than the LCCs or...
B6 is trying desperately to keep the business running waiting for a savior to come along.
Problem is that B6 is surviving on borrowed money which makes it harder and harder for anyone to justify buying them.
Just as we are seeing with NK, it requires a trip or 2 through chapter 11; unlike the round of legacy bankruptcies where LCCs made some gains, the legacies are now gaining far more than the LCCs or ULCCs ever gained from the legacies.
More than half of the capacity in the US industry is operated by airlines = including AA and WN - that are not long-term financially sustainable. There will be capacity and carriers that will fail.
This is a good move by Jetblue! They are using Boston as a connection point.
It’s also worth noting that flights out of Boston are shorter and therefore cheaper to operate out of JFK. For example, the BOS to AMS is 45 minutes shorter than JFK, this means cheaper fuel cost and labor. So if Jetblue fills the plane with thr same revenue, they have lower fixed costs. All while Boston airport is not perfect, it has less congestion than JFK
My biggest issue with B6 TALT is the lack of connections.
Most of the B6 TALT customers are from the immediate BOS & NYC area or have frequent service to these east coast cities. For the rest of us, we're out of luck!!
Wish they had this for the Winter Olympics. Would've been sweet. I guess I'll continue to suffer in the Soho lounge.
I hadn't even considered that but that's actually kind of smart. I'm sure they have spare mint aircraft capacity in the winter. I guess it's just a question whether there'd be enough demand to make the route work between when the Olympics end and when the summer season starts and if not how much of a pain it would be to start service for the Olympics, suspend it for a month and a half or so, and then pick it up again in April.
I'm surprised B6 isn't trying to make inroads into South America. They can reach pretty deep into the continent from JFK, and even further from FLL. Less competition than to Europe as well.
They talked about this on conference calls. There are tall cranes off the end of the runway in FLL so to meet the derange requirements they would be weight restricted in the 321LR/XLR. They need widebodies, but aren’t willing to take that risk.
People talk so much about narrow body aircraft on international I don't care if it's the flight length of BOS to Milan and it's a Mint seat. Jetblue offers better catering and hard product than the legacies I would agree with that.
I doubt B6's viability on these route additions, but it will almost certainly make DL's 4-weekly BOS-MXP into a money loser as well which might be their intention.
B6's A321LR will have 24 Mint vs DL's 29 J on the A330-900 - however, it will only have to fill ~140 seats whereas DL will have to fill ~280 seats - TATL weakness has been noted to be concentrated in the Y cabin which DL has...
I doubt B6's viability on these route additions, but it will almost certainly make DL's 4-weekly BOS-MXP into a money loser as well which might be their intention.
B6's A321LR will have 24 Mint vs DL's 29 J on the A330-900 - however, it will only have to fill ~140 seats whereas DL will have to fill ~280 seats - TATL weakness has been noted to be concentrated in the Y cabin which DL has a ton of seats to fill.
Not to mention Simple Flying mentioned that BOS-MXP had a PDEW of ~70 in 2024 prior to DL's launch of the route at an avg. fare of ~$660. There will now be ~1900 weekly seats for a route with O&D demand of 500. Both will rely heavily on connections, but the A321LR will have a much lower overall operating cost than DL's A330. It's hard to see how DL doesn't lose a healthy chunk of change on BOS-MXP with these market dynamics.
Now is it wise for an airline that is losing money like B6 to cut its nose to spite a stronger competitor DL? Probably not, but its not like B6 has a choice.
Very insightful comment!
B6 does have a choice. Several. This is a desperate attempt to make a splash. Meanwhile they not interested in trying to fly more than a few places in USA.
Eddy gets it.
Jeremy, as usual, misses the point by a country mile in his incessant attempts to frame DL as the loser.
1. It is precisely because DL has far more seats competing w/ B6 that B6 stands no chance of getting any fare better than what DL is willing to sell. DL is offering all of its seats on fewer flights which means lower cost per seat mile -precisely the argument...
Eddy gets it.
Jeremy, as usual, misses the point by a country mile in his incessant attempts to frame DL as the loser.
1. It is precisely because DL has far more seats competing w/ B6 that B6 stands no chance of getting any fare better than what DL is willing to sell. DL is offering all of its seats on fewer flights which means lower cost per seat mile -precisely the argument as to why narrowbody TATL operations don't work if you have a player or two that is willing to serve the market on widebodies, even via connections.
2. Supported by the comment above, DL does a far better job of operating its TATL operations as a hub - and DL serves MXP from multiple gateways.
3. B6 lost the BOS market the same way AA did in ORD -taking its foot off the gas pedal and left an opening for a stronger competitor. B6' future in BOS or anywhere else won't be decided by a few summer seasonal markets. B6 positions itself as a premium leisure carrier while DL (and AA and UA) are full service global carriers. We have yet to see evidence supporting - and a whole lot of evidence against - the notion that any carrier can be something less than a larger carrier. The big 3 all offer premium leisure services on top of premium business cabins and deep discounted economy fares.
But since you brought up winning and losing, how about you regale us w/ tales about why UA can't make it work in ARN - and all of Scandinavia for that matter - plus Dakar.
It is beyond hilarious that DL pushed UA out of Scandinavia and Senegal not just without JVs for those markets but using their pitiful 767-300ERs in both markets.
and that 3rd EWR-TLV flight is off the table too.
Looks to me that UA's vaunted Polaris seats didn't do the trick.
As I said years ago, UA's growth would come to a screeching halt as soon as the market stopped absorbing all of the capacity that UA is trying to throw at it. when your RASM decline was the worst in the industry in the 3rd quarter and your capacity growth was one of the most aggressive, the cuts were bound to happen.
and DL is still starting LAX-HKG and -ORD with even more LAX int'l coming. Looks like someone's growth plan is sputtering while the other guy's is full steam ahead.
What is all that useless conjecture about UA - the discussion is about B6 adding BOS-BCN and BOS-MXP in retaliation vs DL. DL's LFs this year as per DOT intl data YTD (until July):
May: BOS-MXP: 75%; BOS-BCN: 75%
June: BOS-MXP: 84%; BOS-BCN: 85%
July: BOS-MXP: 79%; BOS-BCN: 79%
BOS-MXP has averaged ~79% while BOS-BCN is ~80%. While DL has done an admirable job at building BOS, gate space is limited at the...
What is all that useless conjecture about UA - the discussion is about B6 adding BOS-BCN and BOS-MXP in retaliation vs DL. DL's LFs this year as per DOT intl data YTD (until July):
May: BOS-MXP: 75%; BOS-BCN: 75%
June: BOS-MXP: 84%; BOS-BCN: 85%
July: BOS-MXP: 79%; BOS-BCN: 79%
BOS-MXP has averaged ~79% while BOS-BCN is ~80%. While DL has done an admirable job at building BOS, gate space is limited at the airport with DL basically almost capped. While DL has a strong presence, it is nowhere close to a dominant position with ~20-25% share like B6 at BOS.
DL can offer the higher gauge at 281 seats, but the lower marginal cost per seat does not mean much if you cannot fill the seats. DL’s LFs above on BOS-MXP is w/o competition while BOS-BCN is vs only LEVEL (LCC). Despite this, DL has only filled ~80% of its seats on both.
DL will pull a higher fare than B6 as it does almost everywhere - however, it also has a much higher cost basis than B6, and a wide body will cost more to operate than a A321LR. You’re also neglecting to mention that DL has cut frequencies on JFK-MXP, JFK-BCN, and ATL-BCN in 2026 to make for its frequency increases on SEA and BOS-BCN (DL capacity to BCN is flat while MXP is slightly down in 2026 vs 2025).
I am saying B6 will almost certainly lose money. But, they will also hurt DL for those reasons. BOS-MXP is not a high yield market - the avg. fare was $660 in 2024 which is much lower yield than JFK-SFO and JFK-LAX stage-length adjusted.
B6 has its own long-term financial concerns, but there’s a reason why they chose these destinations. DL also chose BOS-MAD for a reason. They’re spiting each other for growth - long term this is a battle DL is far better positioned for as it has other strong hubs to mitigate iffier routes while B6 hasn’t turned a profit since 2019.
again, you are desperate to paint DL as the loser - when it is clear that DL has built its presence at BOS while B6 has been sleeping.
Widebodies are simply more cost-efficient per seat than narrowbodies. And DL does have the financial strength to absorb slightly lower
performance if that actually happens - load factors don't prove it.
The very same saturation in the TATL market that you acknowledge - and which sent...
again, you are desperate to paint DL as the loser - when it is clear that DL has built its presence at BOS while B6 has been sleeping.
Widebodies are simply more cost-efficient per seat than narrowbodies. And DL does have the financial strength to absorb slightly lower
performance if that actually happens - load factors don't prove it.
The very same saturation in the TATL market that you acknowledge - and which sent UA's RASM down the most among US airlines - is what will make it that much harder for B6 and AS to break into the TATL market.
It is laughable how you manage to use a datapoint to prove one point and become so ignorant as to what it means in yet another.
DL is shifting its European capacity between hubs; it is precisely because DL can move its capacity around between hubs that make it that much more likely that AS and B6 are the ones that will come up short.
Massport is working on a bridge to join A and B terminals - and with it, DL will potentially gain access to many more gates, so no, DL is not capped in the number of flights it can operate. It is precisely because AA and even UA underutilize their gates that DL has a shot at gaining more space.
You are delusional and ignorant of the history of the industry for the past five years if you even begin to think that B6 won't come out of this much more badly bruised than they already are.
and the pinnacle of today's news is that, as much as you want to bob and deflect, it is beyond hilarious that DL ran UA out of ARN and DSS using 767-300ERs and no JVs.
UA walked away not just from a single city but the entirety of Scandinavia.
And UA folded in Senegal in just a year - a market DL has flown for, what, two decades?
just wait til DEL, HKG, SIN, MNL and MEL all come online.
As hard as it is for you to accept, it is and has been far easier for DL to move into other carriers' markets - AS, B6 and UA - than the other way around.
Continuing to spout nonsense. DL, like the other US airlines, found TATL to be a weak performer this year with Q3 the laggard. This is true across the board for the US3 with the exception of AA who had solid TATL results in Q1 and Q2 albeit from a much bigger base.
DL did not chase UA out of either ARN or DSS any more than UA chased DL out of GVA or the Star...
Continuing to spout nonsense. DL, like the other US airlines, found TATL to be a weak performer this year with Q3 the laggard. This is true across the board for the US3 with the exception of AA who had solid TATL results in Q1 and Q2 albeit from a much bigger base.
DL did not chase UA out of either ARN or DSS any more than UA chased DL out of GVA or the Star Alliance JV chased DL out of STR let alone individual routes like JFK-BRU and JFK-MUC. DL operates all of 1 seasonal route to ARL from JFK - are we really acting like they're some dominant presence at that airport? Do you want to bet that UA doesn't return service to ARL once the XLRs come into the fleet in 2 years? Put your money where your mouth is.
DL is basically having no net TATL growth to Europe in 2026. UA will be similar, while AA will have quite meaningful TATL growth in 2026 (more capacity growth than DL + UA combined) which is driven by falling behind post-COVID. AA will have to start reducing the gap if they wish to remain competitive.
At BOS the Terminal A-B connector has no gates promised to any carrier and will not open until 2028 at the earliest. As of today, DL has access to 21 gates which it is almost fully utilizing. B6 (due to higher gauge), AA, UA, and other players will be able to disproportionately add capacity at BOS that DL will be unable to match unless it decides to upgauge. We will see what happens. The reality is, even today B6 has more gates at BOS than DL which has only 3 more gates than AA.
At SEA the picture is different since the datapoints for which we have data, the domestic network, has DL's overall yield at ~0.13 with a yield advantage for its network less than its cost advantage vs AS strongly indicating that at least domestically AS is more profitable than DL at SEA. It has also been shown repeatedly that the lowest yielding domestic hub for a US3 is DL at SEA. Unlike B6, AS is a profitable airline and holds dominant market share (>50%) at SEA. Given they are more profitable domestically (and bigger than DL in short-haul intl to Canada and Mexico), they can afford to battle with DL and add long-haul routes and pressure their intl network.
DL has done a great job getting to its current position and has amazing fortress hubs to rely upon, but it can (and has) made wrong decisions as has every other airline. Your claim "As hard as it is for you to accept, it is and has been far easier for DL to move into other carriers' markets - AS, B6 and UA - than the other way around" is complete nonsense and imagination on your part. DL has not successfully moved into any major UA markets and shifted that tide, while AS remains 2.5x bigger than DL at SEA (and more profitable domestically). It was DL that chose to de-prioritize BOS until it finally woke up post-bankruptcy and realized it had the resources to be much more competitive today. Peak the mid 2000's - DL was the largest airline at BOS with ~16% domestic share in 2006 yet dropped to #5 with ~11% share by 2013. It's back to #2 domestically again which is exactly where it should have always been given its infra (2nd most gates).
the hypocrisy is that you thnk that DL and UA will be hurt by a weak TATL market but B6 will push its way into the markets it is entering and do better than it has with other directly competitive markets w/ DL.
B6 has not made a whole lot of financial progress even as it has tried to grow its international network, most of which is still heavily seasonal - reflective of B6...
the hypocrisy is that you thnk that DL and UA will be hurt by a weak TATL market but B6 will push its way into the markets it is entering and do better than it has with other directly competitive markets w/ DL.
B6 has not made a whole lot of financial progress even as it has tried to grow its international network, most of which is still heavily seasonal - reflective of B6 being a leisure airline.
and, yes, it is precisely the same market strength that DL has in Scandinavia and Senegal that helped push UA out of those markets. To somehow believe that was the case with GVA - a far smaller market than Scandinavia - but doesn't apply where UA has pulled back. UA is not exempt from the same market strength and weakness dynamics as every other airline; given that UA has dumped so much capacity in the market which is not producing good revenue, they have much less ability to tolerate poor performing markets.
get back w/ us re: BOS gates but DL has by far the highest utilization; people have said for years that DL would be out of gate space at BOS but DL has still kept growing.
You are delusional if you can't see that DL has grown its presence in other airline strength markets better than any other airline. DL has overtaken B6 in BOS, DL is still a solid #2 in the local market at SEA - largely gained at UA and WN's expense in the local market, DL has overtaken AA in the local LAX market and will overtake UA in the LAX local international market. and DL has handedly overtaken UA in the NYC domestic market and is a whole lot closer to UA in the NYC LOCAL international market - and will be at parity or better when DL restarts NYC-Asia which will happen in the next 3 years.
Just like Scott Kirby, you are teflon coated in your inability to admit reality if it requires admitting that UA is not the largest and someone else is.
They talked about this on conference calls. There are tall cranes off the end of the runway in FLL so to meet the derange requirements they would be weight restricted in the 321LR/XLR. They need widebodies, but aren’t willing to take that risk.
I love the extra European routes. This helps me avoid Delta. JetBlue FAs are so friendly that it will make the six hours go by fast.
Air Masshole extends its evil grip across more of Europe. Destroy B6. Destroy it now.
JetBlue have actually threatened to sue Lisbon Airport authorities due to the fact they can’t get the slots they *want*. You can see the slots that WestJet got at the airport and understand why JetBlue doesn’t want those slot options.
no Open Skies agreement guarantees slots at times that airlines WANT. LIS does have slots available - just not at good TATL times.
WestJet just announced service to LIS from eastern Canada that arrives LIS about 11.30 at night and leaves at 6 am or so.
It is one thing to deny foreign airlines slots and keep adding flights on local/EU airlines - but that is not happening. LIS has no slots at prime time for anyone.
While DL may be covering the whole network, at least I don't believe there are also European carriers on these new routes (unlike most of the other B6 transatlantic routes).
Even considering LIS is complicated with TAP - who in certain ways operates like a low cost carrier. It would be difficult to compete (let alone undercut) TAPs pricing but you also have a hard time arguing premium when DL is sitting right there
We are sick and tired of airlines adding narrow body flights across the Atlantic.
What difference does it make to the customer?
As one of those customers it makes a difference to me. I am not doing it. A narrow body from DCA to West Coast is barely tolerable with not being able to stretch legs, the constant parade of people going to the bathroom. Horrible!
People get up to use the lavs on narrowbodies and widebodies, and you can stand up to stretch your legs on either type of plane.
Additionally, a narrowbody will usually give you a more direct route to your destination, instead of being funneled through an alliance hub in Europe, feeling like a zombie at the layover point, and then taking another flight to your destination.
I would much rather take a nonstop on a narrowbody...
People get up to use the lavs on narrowbodies and widebodies, and you can stand up to stretch your legs on either type of plane.
Additionally, a narrowbody will usually give you a more direct route to your destination, instead of being funneled through an alliance hub in Europe, feeling like a zombie at the layover point, and then taking another flight to your destination.
I would much rather take a nonstop on a narrowbody to my destination instead of a widebody to LHR/AMS/CDG/FRA and then making a connection there.
The good thing is that nobody will be forced to take the routing they don't want. Anybody who prefers extra connections and longer travel times will be welcome to do that instead.
No, “we” are not. You are. You can only speak for yourself.
Sure, I prefer wide bodies. But if single aisle means more frequencies and more gateways, I welcome it.
FWIW: I’m about to board a 321XLR. Originally ticketed on a 772, but switched for the schedule that worked better for me.
your assessment of profitability is correct. B6 is just moving airplanes around hoping to generate a profit; given that many in the industry say that there is overcapacity to Europe, it might not be a slam dunk that B6 can make these routes work = but they have no choice but to keep trying.
you almost have to think that DL saw this route announcement coming before they announced expanded service to BCN and MXP....
your assessment of profitability is correct. B6 is just moving airplanes around hoping to generate a profit; given that many in the industry say that there is overcapacity to Europe, it might not be a slam dunk that B6 can make these routes work = but they have no choice but to keep trying.
you almost have to think that DL saw this route announcement coming before they announced expanded service to BCN and MXP.
LIS has significant slot availability issues which explains why B6 is not pushing into that market.
and DL is restarting BOS-TLV so there are 4 international markets that DL serves which B6 does not and likely will not serve.
As I responded elsewhere on here, B6 does have a choice. Several. And US based flights to Western/Northern Europe are oversaturated, so not much (reliable) profit there anyway.
Jet blue is clueless. And nice “reciprocal” partnership with United. JB really loves screwing over its loyal customers.