HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1541  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2014, 12:04 AM
GoldenBoot's Avatar
GoldenBoot GoldenBoot is offline
Member since 2001
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speculator View Post
Outside of more Mexico, Canada, Hawaii, Caribbean, if it happens, it will be ICN or NRT, with an outside chance at PVG. It will also likely be a carrier flying 787 assuming the 787-8 has the range.
Yes, the Dreamliner has the range to make it to ICN, NRT and/or PVG.

In fact, based on a 8,000nm range, a B788 or B789 could make it to: SYD, MEL, JNB, DEL, all of South America, etc. from AUS. Pretty much the entire world except for the locations in and around the Indian Ocean basin (including most of Indonesia and western Australia).

Furthermore, the forthcoming A350 (and its variants) will have comparable ranges...



Carriers with equipment delivered or on order (pertinent to this conversation - Asian & European routes):
B788 - All Nippon, American, British, China Southern, Delta, Hainan, Japan, Qatar, & United
B789 - Air China, Air France, All Nippon, American, British, Etihad, Japan, Korean, United, & Virgin Atlantic
B787-10 - British, Etihad, Singapore, & United
A358 - Asiana & Hawaiian
A359 - Aer Lingus, Air Asia X, Air China, Air France, Asiana, Cathay Pacific, China Airlines, Delta, Etihad, Japan, Lufthansa, Qatar, Singapore, & US Airways
A350-10 - Asiana, British, Cathay Pacific, Etihad, Japan, Qatar, & United

*NOTE: To reiterate, these are not the only airlines which possess or have these equipment variants on order. Also, any Central or South American carrier was ignored at this time.
__________________
Austin (City): 885,400 +12.02% - '10-'13 | Austin MSA (5 counties): 1,883,051 +9.72% - '10-'13
San Antonio (City): 1,409,019 +6.15% - '10-'13 | San Antonio MSA (8 counties): 2,277,550 +6.30% - '10-'13
AUS-SAT "CSA" (13 counties): 4,160,601 +7.82% - '10-'13 | *SRC: US Census*

Last edited by GoldenBoot; Dec 17, 2014 at 3:01 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1542  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2014, 3:48 PM
Speculator Speculator is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBoot View Post
Yes, the Dreamliner has the range to make it to ICN, NRT and/or PVG.

In fact, based on a 8,000nm range, a B788 or B789 could make it to: SYD, MEL, JNB, DEL, all of South America, etc. from AUS. Pretty much the entire world except for the locations in and around the Indian Ocean basin (including most of Indonesia and western Australia).

Furthermore, the forthcoming A350 (and its variants) will have comparable ranges...



Carriers with equipment delivered or on order (pertinent to this conversation - Asian & European routes):
B788 - All Nippon, American, British, China Southern, Delta, Hainan, Japan, Qatar, & United
B789 - Air China, Air France, All Nippon, American, British, Etihad, Japan, Korean, United, & Virgin Atlantic
B787-10 - British, Etihad, Singapore, & United
A358 - Asiana & Hawaiian
A359 - Aer Lingus, Air Asia X, Air China, Air France, Asiana, Cathay Pacific, China Airlines, Delta, Etihad, Japan, Lufthansa, Qatar, Singapore, & US Airways
A350-10 - Asiana, British, Cathay Pacific, Etihad, Japan, Qatar, & United

*NOTE: To reiterate, these are not the only airlines which possess or have these equipment variants on order. Also, any Central or South American carrier was ignored at this time.
It will be a long time before a 350 or 787-10 comes into Austin. Both are too large anyway, the 787-9 may be too. I realize BA may upgauge but that's logistics more than anything, not related to capacity. The flight will likely be a 787-8 which indeed can make Narita. Australasia is iffy. The QR 380 out of DFW often stops to fuel when heading west due to high winds.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1543  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2014, 4:40 PM
lzppjb's Avatar
lzppjb lzppjb is offline
7th Gen Central Texan
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 1,279
With the US opening up diplomatic talks with Cuba again, maybe we can get a direct connect to Havana.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...0JV1H520141217
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1544  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2014, 6:44 PM
sammyk sammyk is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by lzppjb View Post
With the US opening up diplomatic talks with Cuba again, maybe we can get a direct connect to Havana.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...0JV1H520141217
Not that it would happen, but it would be cool to see an Il-96 at AUS.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1545  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2014, 6:52 PM
LoneStarMike's Avatar
LoneStarMike LoneStarMike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 1,648
Southwest adds nonstops to Orange County, St. Louis
Claudia Grisales
Austin American-Statesman
December 17, 2014


Quote:
In a move that says the airline signals its continued investment in Austin, Southwest Airlines said Wednesday it will launch new, daily nonstop service to Orange County and St. Louis in June 2015.

The Dallas-based airline also said it will bring back its seasonal nonstop service to Portland and Cabo San Lucas also in June.
I like the statement from the senior director of network planning and performance for Southwest.

Quote:
When we think about what’s next, we have more opportunity for more to come.”
Edited to add: it looks like Austin-Denver will see an additional daily flight for a total of 5

Southwest to Operate More Daily Flights Than Any Other Airline!
By: Bill Owen

Last edited by LoneStarMike; Dec 17, 2014 at 7:59 PM. Reason: added additonal info
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1546  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2014, 6:58 PM
GoldenBoot's Avatar
GoldenBoot GoldenBoot is offline
Member since 2001
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speculator View Post
...Both are too large anyway, the 787-9 may be too. I realize BA may upgauge but that's logistics more than anything, not related to capacity. The flight will likely be a 787-8 which indeed can make Narita. Australasia is iffy. The QR 380 out of DFW often stops to fuel when heading west due to high winds.
It's not about size...but, stamina.


Incorrect Assumption #1: Both the A350-10 and B787-10 are within the size parameters which would allow for operations at ABIA (especially when the new international gates are configured).

These largest variants of their respective family of aircraft and are about the same wing span and length of a B744 (~60/64m by ~70/74m).

Incorrect Assumption #2: QANTAS used to have to refuel in Brisbane when utilizing their B744ER westbound from DFW. The A388 can make it the entire way to Sydney without the need for refueling (under normal circumstances).
__________________
Austin (City): 885,400 +12.02% - '10-'13 | Austin MSA (5 counties): 1,883,051 +9.72% - '10-'13
San Antonio (City): 1,409,019 +6.15% - '10-'13 | San Antonio MSA (8 counties): 2,277,550 +6.30% - '10-'13
AUS-SAT "CSA" (13 counties): 4,160,601 +7.82% - '10-'13 | *SRC: US Census*
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1547  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2014, 7:13 PM
LoneStarMike's Avatar
LoneStarMike LoneStarMike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 1,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBoot View Post
Incorrect Assumption #1: Both the A350-10 and B787-10 are within the size parameters which would allow for operations at ABIA (especially when the new international gates are configured).
Maybe I misinterpreted what Speculator was trying to say, but I took it to mean both aircraft have too many seats. A350-10 seats 369 in a normal 2-class configuration (155 more seats than what the British Airways flight is configured for now), and the B787-10 seats 323 (109 more seats than BA's flight to LHR.)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1548  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2014, 10:09 PM
Speculator Speculator is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneStarMike View Post
Maybe I misinterpreted what Speculator was trying to say, but I took it to mean both aircraft have too many seats. A350-10 seats 369 in a normal 2-class configuration (155 more seats than what the British Airways flight is configured for now), and the B787-10 seats 323 (109 more seats than BA's flight to LHR.)
LoneStar, that's it. Too many seats for Austin to be viable for 350 or 787-10.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1549  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2014, 10:10 PM
Speculator Speculator is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBoot View Post
It's not about size...but, stamina.


Incorrect Assumption #1: Both the A350-10 and B787-10 are within the size parameters which would allow for operations at ABIA (especially when the new international gates are configured).

These largest variants of their respective family of aircraft and are about the same wing span and length of a B744 (~60/64m by ~70/74m).

Incorrect Assumption #2: QANTAS used to have to refuel in Brisbane when utilizing their B744ER westbound from DFW. The A388 can make it the entire way to Sydney without the need for refueling (under normal circumstances).
I guess I am just incorrect in my area of expertise...but, for what it's worth, the Qantas 380 does have to stop to refuel when winds are too strong.

EDIT: You are correct though, it is and will be very rare for the 380 to have to do that. The 744 stopped in fiji a couple of times I think?

Last edited by Speculator; Dec 17, 2014 at 11:30 PM. Reason: clarity
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1550  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2014, 3:07 AM
GoldenBoot's Avatar
GoldenBoot GoldenBoot is offline
Member since 2001
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speculator View Post
LoneStar, that's it. Too many seats for Austin to be viable for 350 or 787-10.
I am in complete agreement that these two aircraft variants are "too big" when pertaining to passenger load availability. I apologize for misunderstanding Speculator's original comment.

However, as already mentioned, larger equipment may be used on the LHR route due to logistical (i.e., cargo) demands rather than passenger growth. We will begin to see if there is any passenger growth on this route later this spring when the first Y-O-Y numbers become available.
__________________
Austin (City): 885,400 +12.02% - '10-'13 | Austin MSA (5 counties): 1,883,051 +9.72% - '10-'13
San Antonio (City): 1,409,019 +6.15% - '10-'13 | San Antonio MSA (8 counties): 2,277,550 +6.30% - '10-'13
AUS-SAT "CSA" (13 counties): 4,160,601 +7.82% - '10-'13 | *SRC: US Census*
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1551  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2014, 4:06 PM
airwx airwx is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 49
Looks like Gensler is going to be designing the east terminal expansion

Designer named for ABIA expansion
Quote:
Gensler has been hired by city officials to design the Austin-Bergstrom International Airport east terminal gate expansion, the architectural firm announced Wednesday.

The new terminal will increase the space inside the airport by 23 percent, or 70,000 square feet.
http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/ne...expansion.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1552  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2014, 4:36 PM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Forum Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: AUSTIN
Posts: 37,226
Yay! It'll be 400 feet tall then.
__________________
I like the Raleighs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1553  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2014, 4:50 PM
airwx airwx is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 49
The Vancouver Harbor Flight Center does have a control tower 465' above the ground. It sits on a 30 story building.

There's a picture of it and more information in this article: Inside The World’s Highest ATC Tower: Vancouver YHC
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1554  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2014, 5:40 PM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Forum Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: AUSTIN
Posts: 37,226
My comment was more of an observation of Gensler's penchant for 400 footers lately, but touché.

And yeah, that is a unique one. That must be an interesting space up there.
__________________
I like the Raleighs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1555  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2014, 6:45 PM
GoldenBoot's Avatar
GoldenBoot GoldenBoot is offline
Member since 2001
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
Yay! It'll be 400 feet tall then.
...And boxy!
__________________
Austin (City): 885,400 +12.02% - '10-'13 | Austin MSA (5 counties): 1,883,051 +9.72% - '10-'13
San Antonio (City): 1,409,019 +6.15% - '10-'13 | San Antonio MSA (8 counties): 2,277,550 +6.30% - '10-'13
AUS-SAT "CSA" (13 counties): 4,160,601 +7.82% - '10-'13 | *SRC: US Census*
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1556  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2014, 1:24 AM
airwx airwx is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
My comment was more of an observation of Gensler's penchant for 400 footers lately, but touché.

And yeah, that is a unique one. That must be an interesting space up there.
Yeah, I knew what you meant. I had been reading about ATC towers recently and thought of that one when I saw your comment. Like you said it's unique. Not many places where you can get away with combining a highrise with an airport facility
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1557  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2014, 3:55 PM
Hill Country's Avatar
Hill Country Hill Country is offline
Registered Offender
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: North of San Antonio
Posts: 2,265
A new site plan filing for the ABIA Pet Hotel:

https://www.austintexas.gov/devrevie...erRSN=11267425
__________________
Check out Austin on Urban Planet:
http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/in...um/215-austin/
It's not all crickets, well, mostly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1558  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2014, 7:59 PM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Forum Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: AUSTIN
Posts: 37,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by airwx View Post
Yeah, I knew what you meant. I had been reading about ATC towers recently and thought of that one when I saw your comment. Like you said it's unique. Not many places where you can get away with combining a highrise with an airport facility
That's cool. I've long been a geek for control towers.
__________________
I like the Raleighs
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:31 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.