SAN ANTONIO | City and Metro Transportation Thread

[JACKinBeantown]

I'm an idiot. I just realized, maxus, that your map is urban area as opposed to SA city limits. Nicely done!

[ILUVSAT]

Does anyone here have a contact at SAT? I am wondering what they're doing to secure our first long haul route. AUS just got another one this week - a seasonal N/S to Frankfurt on Condor. And I know they are working very hard on getting a N/S to Asia.

I know, I know, I know!!! This is not a SAT vs. AUS board. However, it is frustrating how far behind we are and I fear that if they get more, those airlines will no longer look at SAT as an option for expansion (since, as the crow flies, we are only 67 miles SW of AUS).

Just wondering...

[waynechef]

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

Does anyone here have a contact at SAT? I am wondering what they're doing to secure our first long haul route. AUS just got another one this week - a seasonal N/S to Frankfurt on Condor. And I know they are working very hard on getting a N/S to Asia.

I know, I know, I know!!! This is not a SAT vs. AUS board. However, it is frustrating how far behind we are and I fear that if they get more, those airlines will no longer look at SAT as an option for expansion (since, as the crow flies, we are only 67 miles SW of AUS).

Just wondering...

There are 2 huge problems facing SAT with long haul service. 1st and foremost, SAT doesn't have a runway long enough to handle aircraft to make the trek. SAT's runways are 8500 ft long. From where SAT is located, they need to be 10,000 ft or longer to entertain the possibility of overseas service. The second problem is the lack of demand for overseas travelers. Austin has twice the amount of travelers flying overseas on a daily basis than San Antonio does. It is an economic decision made by the airlines. British Airlines took a chance on Austin, and it has worked well for both entities. Austin is supplying both high volume of premium passengers and large freight amounts in the plane. Hence British is changing to a larger plane, as it becomes available in their fleet as they take delivery of their 787-900's, and that will change to 777's seasonally. Condor has taken the hint that Austin is a place where people are willing to vacation. San Antonio right down the road doesn't hurt their chances of being successful. In review of the demographics of travelers using both airports, I don't see demand for SAT to add any new service anywhere for a while. This obviously includes trans-Atlantic service, even if SAT had a runway that could accommodate aircraft with the legs to do so.

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by waynechef

There are 2 huge problems facing SAT with long haul service. 1st and foremost, SAT doesn't have a runway long enough to handle aircraft to make the trek. SAT's runways are 8500 ft long. From where SAT is located, they need to be 10,000 ft or longer to entertain the possibility of overseas service. The second problem is the lack of demand for overseas travelers. Austin has twice the amount of travelers flying overseas on a daily basis than San Antonio does. It is an economic decision made by the airlines. British Airlines took a chance on Austin, and it has worked well for both entities. Austin is supplying both high volume of premium passengers and large freight amounts in the plane. Hence British is changing to a larger plane, as it becomes available in their fleet as they take delivery of their 787-900's, and that will change to 777's seasonally. Condor has taken the hint that Austin is a place where people are willing to vacation. San Antonio right down the road doesn't hurt their chances of being successful. In review of the demographics of travelers using both airports, I don't see demand for SAT to add any new service anywhere for a while. This obviously includes trans-Atlantic service, even if SAT had a runway that could accommodate aircraft with the legs to do so.

Thank you for your insight, WAYNECHEF! If I am not mistaken, the British service changes to a B772ER, on a daily basis, beginning October 25th of this year (not seasonal). There was rumor that the current daily service would change from the B788 to the B789 until Oct. 25th. However, I have not heard anything to confirm that report.

[Schertz1]

San Antonio International is fully capable of handling a long haul 787. This is based on MTOW and elevation. The requirement for SAT based on elevation is 8500’.

My opinion – and it is mine - on the addition of international flights, even seasonal ones, to SAT is the airports leadership will have to change. They lack vision and initiative. Someone has to be first and they have not aggressively pursued anyone outside of Mexico. Mexico is low hanging fruit and the flights there are certainly nothing to brag on. They should be a given for a city with strong cultural ties to Mexico, like San Antonio. However, airport management is still bragging on international passenger increases. All this while domestic traffic declines or stagnates and they probably couldn’t care less about it.

Bergstrom International Airport and Austin present a market area within a 2 hour drive of the airport to new destinations. At least this was the case for Regan National and it probably hasn’t changed. Unless San Antonio makes some major marketing and management changes don’t expect any international flights outside of the Americas.

[Paul in S.A TX]

Originally Posted by waynechef

There are 2 huge problems facing SAT with long haul service. 1st and foremost, SAT doesn't have a runway long enough to handle aircraft to make the trek. SAT's runways are 8500 ft long. From where SAT is located, they need to be 10,000 ft or longer to entertain the possibility of overseas service. The second problem is the lack of demand for overseas travelers. Austin has twice the amount of travelers flying overseas on a daily basis than San Antonio does. It is an economic decision made by the airlines. British Airlines took a chance on Austin, and it has worked well for both entities. Austin is supplying both high volume of premium passengers and large freight amounts in the plane. Hence British is changing to a larger plane, as it becomes available in their fleet as they take delivery of their 787-900's, and that will change to 777's seasonally. Condor has taken the hint that Austin is a place where people are willing to vacation. San Antonio right down the road doesn't hurt their chances of being successful. In review of the demographics of travelers using both airports, I don't see demand for SAT to add any new service anywhere for a while. This obviously includes trans-Atlantic service, even if SAT had a runway that could accommodate aircraft with the legs to do so.

Do you have links that shows Austin has twice the demand for international travel? I find that hard to believe that it has twice the amount. San Antonio does have more international travelers overall than, Austin, plus San Antonio has a large military presence that brings people here from all over the world. And i know travel between Mexico and SAT has the highest percentage for international travel but it would be the same for Austin and probably the two hubs as well since Mexico is right next door. I don't see why having more international flights is such a big deal anyway when you have two major hubs just minutes away by air.

[texboy]

Originally Posted by Schertz1

San Antonio International is fully capable of handling a long haul 787. This is based on MTOW and elevation. The requirement for SAT based on elevation is 8500’.

My opinion – and it is mine - on the addition of international flights, even seasonal ones, to SAT is the airports leadership will have to change. They lack vision and initiative. Someone has to be first and they have not aggressively pursued anyone outside of Mexico. Mexico is low hanging fruit and the flights there are certainly nothing to brag on. They should be a given for a city with strong cultural ties to Mexico, like San Antonio. However, airport management is still bragging on international passenger increases. All this while domestic traffic declines or stagnates and they probably couldn’t care less about it.

Bergstrom International Airport and Austin present a market area within a 2 hour drive of the airport to new destinations. At least this was the case for Regan National and it probably hasn’t changed. Unless San Antonio makes some major marketing and management changes don’t expect any international flights outside of the Americas.

For anyone saying SAT can't handle long haul wide body planes... please go take a look at flightaware.com photos. Type in SAT and you'll notice that both Korean and Air France have landed fully loaded wide bodies (747 and 777 respectively) at SAT... both diversions from IAH due to weather.

[waynechef]

Originally Posted by texboy

For anyone saying SAT can't handle long haul wide body planes... please go take a look at flightaware.com photos. Type in SAT and you'll notice that both Korean and Air France have landed fully loaded wide bodies (747 and 777 respectively) at SAT... both diversions from IAH due to weather.

Not fully loaded. The majority of the fuel was spent getting to Texas from overseas. Fuel weighs a lot. Also, I will try and find the links for from the department of transportation that breaks down passenger service, both international and domestic.

[waynechef]

Originally Posted by waynechef

Not fully loaded. The majority of the fuel was spent getting to Texas from overseas. Fuel weighs a lot. Also, I will try and find the links for from the department of transportation that breaks down passenger service, both international and domestic.

http://www.transtats.bts.gov/Data_Elements.aspx?Data=1

This DOT site has a ton of information. It can take a while to navigate, but it has a wealth of statistics from passenger count broken down from airlines to destinations to load factors, etc...

[waynechef]

Originally Posted by Schertz1

San Antonio International is fully capable of handling a long haul 787. This is based on MTOW and elevation. The requirement for SAT based on elevation is 8500’.

My opinion – and it is mine - on the addition of international flights, even seasonal ones, to SAT is the airports leadership will have to change. They lack vision and initiative. Someone has to be first and they have not aggressively pursued anyone outside of Mexico. Mexico is low hanging fruit and the flights there are certainly nothing to brag on. They should be a given for a city with strong cultural ties to Mexico, like San Antonio. However, airport management is still bragging on international passenger increases. All this while domestic traffic declines or stagnates and they probably couldn’t care less about it.

Bergstrom International Airport and Austin present a market area within a 2 hour drive of the airport to new destinations. At least this was the case for Regan National and it probably hasn’t changed. Unless San Antonio makes some major marketing and management changes don’t expect any international flights outside of the Americas.

Some information concerning the requirements of both a 787 and 747:

http://planes.findthebest.com/l/293/...7-8-Dreamliner

"A required take-off field length of 10,300 ft is one of the very longest of any...

http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/com...s/7474sec3.pdf

The runway take off length requirements start on page 14.

[waynechef]

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

Thank you for your insight, WAYNECHEF! If I am not mistaken, the British service changes to a B772ER, on a daily basis, beginning October 25th of this year (not seasonal). There was rumor that the current daily service would change from the B788 to the B789 until Oct. 25th. However, I have not heard anything to confirm that report.

Thank you for the clarification. I hope it sticks, and based on performance, i think it will.

[waynechef]

Originally Posted by Paul in S.A TX

Do you have links that shows Austin has twice the demand for international travel? I find that hard to believe that it has twice the amount. San Antonio does have more international travelers overall than, Austin, plus San Antonio has a large military presence that brings people here from all over the world. And i know travel between Mexico and SAT has the highest percentage for international travel but it would be the same for Austin and probably the two hubs as well since Mexico is right next door. I don't see why having more international flights is such a big deal anyway when you have two major hubs just minutes away by air.

I should clarify about international service. What I should have stated should have been to Europe. That is a big distinction. Austin has about twice the amount of travelers going to Europe and about one and a half times the travelers going to Canada on a yearly basis. Sorry for my mistake.

[Paul in S.A TX]

Where did you find this info that shows Austin having twice as many travelers to Europe than San Antonio? I would like to see it. I wonder why Austin has more airport passengers than S.A, S.A 's airport draws people from throughout South Texas and the markets of the Rio grande valley, corpus, Laredo while Austin has a smaller regional population to draw from, DFW & love field would probably draw more people from the Waco vicinity and smaller cities in that area.

[waynechef]

Originally Posted by Paul in S.A TX

Where did you find this info that shows Austin having twice as many travelers to Europe than San Antonio? I wonder why Austin has more airport passengers than S.A, S.A 's airport draws people from throughout South Texas and the markets of the Rio grande valley, corpus, Laredo while Austin has a smaller regional population to draw from, DFW & love field would probably draw more people from the Waco vicinity and smaller cities in that area.

http://www.transtats.bts.gov/Data_Elements.aspx?Data=1
Here is the link, feel free to explore.

[Schertz1]

Here are two links. One generic showing basic requirements and another showing alt., MTOW, and takeoff/landing requirements.

http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/com.../acaps/787.pdf

http://aircyber.weebly.com/aircraft-...uirements.html

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by Paul in S.A TX

Where did you find this info that shows Austin having twice as many travelers to Europe than San Antonio? I would like to see it. I wonder why Austin has more airport passengers than S.A, S.A 's airport draws people from throughout South Texas and the markets of the Rio grande valley, corpus, Laredo while Austin has a smaller regional population to draw from, DFW & love field would probably draw more people from the Waco vicinity and smaller cities in that area.

Paul,

My comment was not meant to engage is a city vs. city war. What it was meant to do it incite some intelligent conversation on how SAT can cultivate and maintain transoceanic routes.

Yes, runway length is a challenge. I believe 12R/30L may be able to be extended by ~500'-1000' (pushing 281 underground) and, possibly, 4/22 could be extended by ~2000' feet (by the use of eminent domain and having Wurzbach tunnel underneath the extended runway). Possibly...

[Spoiler]

Or SA could relocate the airport, and develop the existing airport for high density residential.

[GoldenBoot]

Interesting - But, I think you were at least halfway kidding... In any case, finding a way to extend one or two of the current runways would be far less expensive than constructing an entirely new airport (even if longer runways existed at said new site).

[Spoiler]

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot

Interesting - But, I think you were at least halfway kidding... In any case, finding a way to extend one or two of the current runways would be far less expensive than constructing an entirely new airport (even if longer runways existed at said new site).

Yeah, I don't really care about how long a runway we need for big planes because runway length isn't the key to getting more flights to San Antonio. The key is to improve San Antonio to the point that people around the world want to buy a plane ticket that will take them here.

You get what you pay for. If you are willing to invest in a redevelopment of the existing site for some of the projected million people maybe moving to SA in the next 25 years to live (because the location is in the heart of the Northside instead of new development on the fringes, contributing to extremely inefficient sprawl), then the cost of constructing a new airport somewhere East of downtown could be realized by the increase in long term tax revenue.

It's past time for San Antonio to think big. Current development trends remain extremely unsustainable, and all the recent development around downtown is a drop in the bucket. What good is a AAA bond rating if SA isn't willing to take out some big loans to pay for some serious investments? Examples: buying rail right-of-way in the city (and constructing diversion rail lines outside of town) to build rail transit; infrastructure investment in new population-dense nodes across the metro area to make rail transit more efficient and attractive; removal of the inner ring of highway around downtown to repair the urban fabric and create space for lots of people to live there.

I'm not pretending that all of this wouldn't be incredibly expensive, but SA has developed cheaply and thoughtlessly for decades now, and it has resulted in a crappy city that is practically impossible to live in without a car, and with large sections of town that have no amenities, unless you count drive-thru fast food and dollar stores as amenities. It's not sustainable, and it doesn't help generate wealth. Things really need to change in a serious way, and the key is development.

[Fireoutofclay]

No author listed
www.woai.com
Posted Monday, July 20th 2015 @ 1pm

http://www.woai.com/articles/woai-lo...roup-13775810/

Expect the Lone Star Rail District's effort to build a commuter rail line up Interstate 35 between San Antonio and Austin to pick up steam in September, as the Districts makes a formal request to San Antonio City Council for funding to help get the long planned project up and running, News Radio 1200 WOAI has learned.