HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #181  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2008, 6:16 PM
Jdawgboy's Avatar
Jdawgboy Jdawgboy is online now
Representing the ATX!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,738
I can't wait till we hear about the expansion of the main terminal. With Austin becomming a connecter hub, it will be needed very shortly.
__________________
"GOOD TIMES!!!" Jerri Blank (Strangers With Candy)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #182  
Old Posted Apr 20, 2008, 4:56 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Meh
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Austin <------------> Birmingham?
Posts: 57,327
From the Austin American-Statesman
http://www.statesman.com/business/co...20aerobus.html

VIVA AEROBUS COMES TO AUSTIN
Discount Mexican airline hopes its no-frills formula flies in Austin

By Jeremy Schwartz

INTERNATIONAL STAFF

Sunday, April 20, 2008

MONTERREY, Nuevo Len, Mexico — Viva Aerobus' Monterrey terminal has a decidedly warehouse feel: Traditional ticket counters are nowhere to be found, exposed piping crawls along the cavernous ceiling, and some passengers in a waiting area short on seating lean against the wall before their flights.

The bare-bones surroundings reflect the airline's no-frills philosophy, which it is bringing to Austin on May 1, along with inexpensive tickets for daily flights to Cancún and Monterrey.

The airline already has made headlines by advertising $9.99 tickets from Austin to Cancún and Monterrey (the seats were quickly snatched up, but with taxes and fees the total round-trip cost was closer to $130).

Along with cheap seats come a number of trade-offs: no 1-800 telephone number, no free pretzels, no jetway bridges and what some might consider extreme luggage restrictions.

The Mexican discounter, which began operating in 2006, modeled itself on Ryanair, the Irish discount airline that has helped transform Europe's travel industry. Viva Aerobus is co-owned by the Ryan family and the Mexican bus company IAMSA.

Austin marks Viva Aerobus' entry into the U.S. market. Airline executives say they were drawn by local officials' willingness to convert an old National Guard warehouse at Austin-Bergstrom International Airport into a terminal similar to the airline's base in Monterrey.

"As in Monterrey, Austin got the concept," said Shane Nolan, a senior consultant for Viva Aerobus. "You don't need a marble palace to go through to get to your flight."

Nolan said Austin, which now has just one regular international flight, an Aeroméxico daily to Mexico City, offered better opportunity than cities such as Houston or San Antonio, which already have several routes to Mexico.

The company likes the potential customer base of Central Texas's growing Hispanic population, but it is also betting that its low fares will entice folks outside the Austin area to make the drive to the airport to catch a flight.

Travelers are already jumping at the opportunity for a cheap flight from Austin to Cancún's powdery white sand beaches. Viva Aerobus will fly 148-seat Boeing 737-300 airliners in and out of Austin.

According to the airline, about half of the seats on summer flights to Cancún have been sold, including all the specially priced $9.99 tickets. A midweek July round-trip ticket cost $262 on a recent Internet fare search.

Demand has been so robust for the flights to Cancún that Viva Aerobus is considering Austin flights to other Mexican resort destinations.

Monterrey flights have been less popular, spurring the airline to offer so-called free flights, in which passengers pay only for taxes and fees ($117 round trip). "We want to encourage people to sample the city," Nolan said.

The airline is also hoping to entice northern Mexicans who like to shop in the United States to use the flight. Viva Aerobus advertising teams have already descended on the outlet malls in San Marcos, hoping to persuade Mexican shoppers to fly instead of drive for their shopping binges.

One of the basic premises behind Viva Aerobus is getting people who normally take the bus to try flying.

First-time fliers make up an important segment of the company's growth, officials said. More than 1.3 million passengers flew the airline in 2007 and the company expects more than 2.4 million in 2008. The airline plans to increase its fleet of six airplanes to 11 by the end of the year.

Despite the airline's rosy outlook, it hasn't had a trouble-free road in Mexico.

Mexico's consumer watchdog agency publicly chastised the company for misleading advertising for "1 peso" flights that actually cost much more with taxes and fees included. Passengers have complained on Internet message boards of last-minute scheduling changes.

Nolan said such changes have become increasingly rare and were the result of servicing the company's small fleet, resulting in the need to adjust schedules when planes weren't ready in time.

But for many Mexican passengers, the airline has offered new opportunities.

Romulo Hernandez Diaz said Viva Aerobus' low fares convinced him to take his family on a vacation to Cancún, the first time the family has flown for holiday.

Hernandez scored round-trip tickets for about $60, including taxes and fees, from Monterrey. The plane tickets, Hernandez said, were cheaper than the bus ride from his native San Luis Potosí to Monterrey, which were about $75 round trip.

"My brother told us about the promotion so we decided to come here on vacation," Hernandez said. "It's not a luxury flight, but it's not too bad."

To offer such low prices, Viva Aerobus takes the low-cost methods of discounters like Southwest Airlines to another level. On a recent Sunday evening in Monterrey, many passengers in line clutched their wallets, preparing to pay for excess luggage. Viva Aerobus allows one checked bag up to 55 pounds. Extra bags cost another $10.

Like Southwest, Viva Aerobus has no assigned seating, but for a little less than $4 passengers can buy priority seating, allowing them to board first. Families with young children also get to board early.

With no jetways, passengers walk onto the tarmac and take stairs up to the plane's door.

Viva Aerobus squeezes the most out of its planes, aiming for turnaround times of about 25 minutes, compared to the 45 minutes or an hour that most airlines spend at the gate. The result is that the carrier's planes can fly eight to 10 routes a day. Another result, some passengers complain, is that the planes aren't as clean as those flown by other airlines.

Once in the air, passengers must pay if they get hungry or thirsty. Sodas and bags of peanuts cost a dollar, prepackaged sandwiches cost $2.50, and a beer is $2.50.

But most passengers are willing to forgo the comparative luxuries of larger airlines in exchange for cheaper tickets.

"Paying for a Coke isn't a big deal, and besides, most airlines have terrible food anyways," said Monica Arsuaga, a Monterrey merchant. "The ticket is much cheaper than anything else out there. Before, the airlines would abuse us; they would charge $400 for a round-trip ticket."

Budget airlines began flying in Mexico in 2005 and have since helped to bring down prices in what was once a closed market dominated by two formerly state-owned airlines, Aeroméxico and Mexicana.

Fueled by discount carriers such as Volaris and Interjet, Mexico's airline industry grew 24 percent in 2007.

But the future of ultra-no-frills airlines may be more tenuous in the United States.

Earlier this month, Skybus, a Columbus, Ohio-based airline that also made headlines for its $10 tickets, folded after just 10 months in operation. The airline blamed rising fuel costs and a slowing economy for its demise.

A more hopeful sign for Viva Aerobus is Las Vegas-based Allegiant Airlines, whose investors include the family behind Ryanair. That discounter reported a first-quarter passenger surge of 57 percent.

Tim Sieber, vice president of the Boyd Group, an aviation consulting firm, said the prospects should be good for a low-fare airline along the U.S.-Mexico border, given the ties between south-central Texas and Mexico. Much as low fare airlines cut into Greyhound's business in the U.S., he said, a low-fare cross-border flight has the potential to tap the market served by buses in the borderlands.

And with the weakening dollar turning many tourists off of Europe, Mexico will continue to be a strong pull for American vacationers.

"I think there will be traffic both ways," Sieber said. "I think it's a market that has potential. It will take the right carrier to execute it."
__________________
Conform or be cast out.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #183  
Old Posted Apr 21, 2008, 4:07 PM
ATXboom ATXboom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,821
http://austin.bizjournals.com/austin/stories/2008/04/21/story9.html

Friday, April 18, 2008
Stop-and-go traffic? Not so much in the skies over ABIA
Austin Business Journal - by Kate Harrington Staff Writer

Central Texas economic development leaders may worry that, on the ground, Austin's transportation snarls are stifling the area's growth, but in the skies it's a different story.

Twelve new nonstop flights started in 2007 and 13 more are slated to begin in May or are already running as of early 2008 out of Austin-Bergstrom International Airport. Central Texas could be in a position to reap economic windfalls such as company relocations from the new accessibility, industry experts say.

"There's no question that a new nonstop service route can contribute economic value easily in the millions of dollars, from many standpoints," says Kevin Schorr, managing director of TranSystems, a Kansas City-based transportation consulting firm that has worked with Austin's airport for several years. "There are many companies that will evaluate nonstop service when they're willing to relocate. Austin has been one of the most successful airports in the country [at getting nonstop routes]."

Austin is by no means typical, Schorr says, in the number of nonstop routes it has relative to the city's size. Usually cities similar in size to Austin with a comparable number of nonstop routes are home to airline hubs -- like Memphis, Tenn., or Cincinnati, he says.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #184  
Old Posted Apr 21, 2008, 11:43 PM
Jdawgboy's Avatar
Jdawgboy Jdawgboy is online now
Representing the ATX!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,738
This just shows how well ABIA is positioned not only locally but regionally. With Jet Blue creating a connector-hub here and news of expansion announcments to come later this year, ABIA will definatly become the main airport in Central and South Texas.
__________________
"GOOD TIMES!!!" Jerri Blank (Strangers With Candy)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #185  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2008, 4:03 PM
ATXboom ATXboom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,821
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/04/27/0427airport.html

Virgin America, for example, says it has had Austin on its possibilities list for at least a year.


AUSTIN BERGSTROM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

Austin airport now a hot spot on airlines' radar
Carriers adding more nonstop, international flights have made city more of a travel hub.
By Lori Hawkins

AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF


Sunday, April 27, 2008

The joke among Austin business travelers used to be that if you died and went to heaven, you'd have to go through Houston or Dallas to get there.

"Layovers were a fact of life," said Sam Decker, a veteran marketing executive who has been racking up frequent-flier miles out of Austin since 1999. "You could expect to spend a couple hours waiting to change planes and hoping hail or rain at DFW wouldn't wreck your schedule."

Today, "nonstop" is the new word in Austin's travel vocabulary. Driven by record-breaking passenger traffic, Austin-Bergstrom International Airport is flying high: Nine nonstop destinations are being added this year — including eight in the next two weeks — and two new international carriers have arrived.

The expansion is raising the city's profile as a travel center and making it a likely choice for more services, said Kevin Schorr, managing director of TranSystems Corp., a Kansas City, Mo.-based transportation consulting firm.

"Austin is on the map of the blue-chip carriers because it's got the perfect ingredients: a growing business community, a public university and one of the wealthiest populations in Texas," Schorr said. "The airlines are doing more in Austin right now than in other cities because it's got the travelers."

Passenger traffic at Austin-Bergstrom, which opened nine years ago, has risen 33 percent since 2003, hitting 8.9 million travelers last year. In contrast, traffic at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport rose less than 12 percent in that time, and San Antonio's rose 22 percent. More Austin travelers means more money: Parking, the airport's top revenue source, produced $24.8 million last year, up almost 15 percent from the year before, as more travelers filled the 10,000 spots.

Airport Fast Park, an off-site lot on Texas 71, added 600 spots last year because of rising business. Met Center, a sprawling business park west of the airport is adding a seventh hotel — and a Starbucks — for business travelers.

But the new flights were hard-won and could be hard to hold on to in a year of turmoil for the airline industry.

Aviation experts warn that growth in the airline industry could be headed for a severe slowdown as record-high fuel prices and other factors curb demand. Several small carriers have folded in recent months. Delta Air Lines and Northwest Airlines are trying to merge, and all carriers are raising fares and watching routes closely as jet fuel prices soar.

Airlines used to give new routes like those in Austin a year to prove themselves, but now it's just weeks or months, said Jim Smith, director of aviation at Austin-Bergstrom.

"If we don't use them, we lose them," Smith said. "If the seats out of Austin aren't full, they'll just pull that plane and put it somewhere they can make money."

Among those placing big bets on Austin is discount carrier JetBlue Airways Corp., which arrived two years ago with nonstop service to Boston and New York.

Starting Thursday, it will triple its offerings from Austin with nonstop service to San Francisco; Long Beach, Calif.; and Fort Lauderdale and Orlando, Fla.

JetBlue CEO David Barger says the airline chose Austin as its first Texas market because of its high-tech base, the music industry and the region's 100,000-plus college students, and because it's the state capital. JetBlue also made Austin its connection point for Florida travelers heading to the West Coast.

"Austin's got everything we look for in a city: It's young, educated and has the means to travel. And it's an ideal bridge for us to connect the East Coast and the West Coast," Barger said.

JetBlue's push into Austin is a challenge to Southwest Airlines Co., which is Austin-Bergstrom's largest carrier, with a third of all passenger traffic.

Southwest has added more nonstops of its own, including Philadelphia in March. In the next two weeks, it will add nonstop service from Austin to Denver; Oakland, Calif.; and Fort Lauderdale. Also this week, AirCanada will begin a nonstop flight to Toronto, and new Mexican-based discounter VivaAerobus will start no-frills, nonstop service to Cancún and Monterrey.

In addition to making life easier for fliers, the new service fuels the region's economic development efforts. When city officials can point to a map dotted with nonstop flights from the region, it makes recruiting companies easier.

"The question at the top of the list is always how easy it will be to get customers and employees in and out of Austin," said David Porter, vice president of economic development at the Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce. "Any time you have to stop and change planes, those are dollar bills. Time is money."

In 1991, as Austin's transformation from a university and state government town to a high-tech center was getting under way, travelers could fly nonstop to just four cities outside the state: Atlanta, Chicago, Denver and Phoenix.

The following year, after heavy lobbying by Austin and Silicon Valley tech executives, American Airlines launched the first nonstop flight between Austin and San Jose, Calif. The success of the "Nerd Bird," as it came to be known, opened the door to more nonstops, and service expanded steadily.

Today, Austin-Bergstrom has nonstop flights to 44 cities outside of Texas. San Antonio's airport has 37.

Winning new flights and attracting new carriers is a highly competitive game, said Smith, the aviation director.

The Austin airport beat out San Antonio and Houston to draw VivaAerobus, which will operate out of a new bare-bones terminal in a converted National Guard building.

The airport is hoping to lure more budget airlines to the terminal.

Virgin America, for example, says it has had Austin on its possibilities list for at least a year. VivaAerobus chose Austin as its first U.S. city for service, citing the new low-cost terminal and Austin's location, which it says will draw passengers from across the state.

Helping Austin's sales pitch is the airport's robust passenger traffic, which jumped 7 percent in February, compared with a year earlier. Those are the kinds of numbers that airlines want to see, but, Smith said, next year could look very different for travelers.

"It's a safe bet that everybody who's here today and the routes here today won't be here tomorrow," Smith said. "That's why we've got to stay flexible and continually market ourselves."

Expanding Austin-Bergstrom is also on the mind of aviation officials, who say more room will be needed to keep adding new service.

"All of our existing gates are leased; all of our counters are taken. So we're talking about expansion," Smith said. "But even if we started today, it would take five years to make it happen."

Decker, who now travels several times a month as chief marketing officer at Austin startup BazaarVoice Inc., said he's just hoping that the current flights survive the airline turmoil.

"The nonstops add a few hours to my day that I can be working instead of getting on and off planes," he said. "When you travel 40 percent of the time, getting directly from Point A to Point B improves your whole quality of life."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #186  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2008, 4:28 AM
Mikey711MN's Avatar
Mikey711MN Mikey711MN is offline
I am so smart, S-M-R-T!
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Moved south to Austin, TX
Posts: 646
With JetBlue's entry into the SFO-AUS market, I don't think AUS is on Virgin America's radar for the moment.

Anyway, in other news, according to this a.net thread, American is pulling out of the DAL (Love Field)-AUS market, which has been severely under-performing.

As noted in the thread, this should give AA some flexibility in gate use in AUS that may, IMHO, create the opportunity for the long-awaited AUS-MIA route. If anything, they can stop having to use Gate 25, which is a haul from their operations closer to the middle of the terminal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #187  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 8:26 AM
IndyTypeGuy IndyTypeGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 34
The new Northwest Airlines service from Austin to Indianapolis starts this Friday. So far sales look really good. This was a good move by NW to start this route back up. I would like to see it upgraded to a CRJ 900 flight instead of the 200 series which to me is an extremely uncomfortable jet. Plus the 900 series also offers first class seating. I won't get my hopes up too much since they've been running IND-RDU/BDL/BOS/MCI, etc on the 200 series for a few years with no upgrades.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #188  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2008, 11:37 AM
LoneStarMike's Avatar
LoneStarMike LoneStarMike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikey711MN View Post

Anyway, in other news, according to this a.net thread, American is pulling out of the DAL (Love Field)-AUS market, which has been severely under-performing.

As noted in the thread, this should give AA some flexibility in gate use in AUS that may, IMHO, create the opportunity for the long-awaited AUS-MIA route.
No signs of MIA service yet, but I did happen to notice on KXAN's website in a story about this that American was adding an additional frequency to DFW beginning Septmber 3. Apparently that's a good thing as someone in the a.net thread mentioned that AA's current flights to DFW go out pretty full.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikey711MN View Post
If anything, they can stop having to use Gate 25, which is a haul from their operations closer to the middle of the terminal.
I'm wondering if AA doesn't fully utilize that gate (or not at all) if ABIA can force them to share with other airlines. I'm sure jetBlue would put it to use. A follow-up article about their new planned service to San Francisco, Long Beach, Orlando and Fort Lauderdale mentioned that jetBlue wanted to serve additional cities from AUS and Washington Dulles (IAD) was specifically mentioned.

I'm assuming that the gate leases for signatory carriers at ABIA are preferential use with gate sharing provisions - meaning the gates are leased to a specific airline but if they're not fully utilized the airport can force the airline to share. The 2002 Competition Plan mentions Frontier (which was using Gate 4 at the time) was sharing the gate with Delta.

I wish ABIA would post a current competition plan as this would address these and other issues. As a matter of fact, I thought they were required by the FAA to post one every year. But the latest competition plan on the airport's website is for 2002. Back then there were 4 vacant gates. Now there are none.

Also - I was thinking when the city gets around to adding gates off the end of the East Concourse - won't some current gates (Gates 1, 2 and/or 3) have to be out out of commission while the construction is underway?

Edited to add: I looked at the 2000 competition plan and it mentioned that 22 of the 24 upper level gates were preferentially leased. It also said that if any airline had a gate utilization of less than 4 departures per gate, the airport could make them either share the gate with another airline or make them consolidate their operations into fewer gates opening up gate(s) for other carriers. This supposedly was part of the Airport Use Agreement signed by the signatory carriers on May 1, 1999 shortly before the airport opened.

However it also mentions that the May 1, 1999 Airport Use Agreement expired on September 30, 2003. I would hope that the current use agreement requires the signatory carriers to have a higher gate utilization - something like 6 departures per day.

Last edited by LoneStarMike; Apr 30, 2008 at 12:18 PM. Reason: found additional info
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #189  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2008, 2:02 PM
Mikey711MN's Avatar
Mikey711MN Mikey711MN is offline
I am so smart, S-M-R-T!
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Moved south to Austin, TX
Posts: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneStarMike View Post
Apparently that's a good thing as someone in the a.net thread mentioned that AA's current flights to DFW go out pretty full.
Hell yes they do! Frankly, my preference for airlines--or, more specifically, my aversion in using AA via DFW--relies prinicipally on how full DFW loads are and subsequently how many Elites there are and my trip last week confirmed both.

Per your comment over on a.net, I would guess that we'll see another MD-80 on the route unless, say, a 737 needs to be repositioned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneStarMike View Post
I'm wondering if AA doesn't fully utilize that gate (or not at all) if ABIA can force them to share with other airlines. I'm sure jetBlue would put it to use. A follow-up article about their new planned service to San Francisco, Long Beach, Orlando and Fort Lauderdale mentioned that jetBlue wanted to serve additional cities from AUS and Washington Dulles (IAD) was specifically mentioned.
In the meantime, do you know if JetBlue is going to try to run all of this new service out of their single gate? Methinks that'll turn into a disaster since I've anecdotally noted how routinely late some of their JFK runs become throughout the day that could really throw their operation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneStarMike View Post
I'm assuming that the gate leases for signatory carriers at ABIA are preferential use with gate sharing provisions - meaning the gates are leased to a specific airline but if they're not fully utilized the airport can force the airline to share. The 2002 Competition Plan mentions Frontier (which was using Gate 4 at the time) was sharing the gate with Delta.
That was true, and remains true with F9 sharing a gate with YX Connect on the other end now IIRC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneStarMike View Post
I wish ABIA would post a current competition plan as this would address these and other issues. As a matter of fact, I thought they were required by the FAA to post one every year. But the latest competition plan on the airport's website is for 2002. Back then there were 4 vacant gates. Now there are none.
And that is what I believe is the root of the issue. The eastern extension should've broken ground a year ago; I don't believe they've even selected a designer much less bid out the construction contracts yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneStarMike View Post
Also - I was thinking when the city gets around to adding gates off the end of the East Concourse - won't some current gates (Gates 1, 2 and/or 3) have to be out out of commission while the construction is underway?
Funny you mention that. Every time I've flown NW--and once on AeroMexico--where I'm hanging around Gates 2 & 3, my engineering mind wanders around how exactly they'll do that. Surely the jet bridges can be moved off the east wall and reattached to the south wall/IAB hallway and north wall for each, respectively. And given that Gates 1 & 4 primarily accommodate RJ's, they could restripe the parking positions of each to orient the Gate 2 & 3 parking positions in a more N-S orientation. IMHO, that'll allow enough access for constructing the extension.

Personally, I think bigger issues will be had when constructing the eastern extension of the ticketing hall and adding a new security entrance symmetrically with that on the west end. I would guess that this would add some construction traffic issues on the bottom level.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneStarMike View Post
Edited to add: I looked at the 2000 competition plan and it mentioned that 22 of the 24 upper level gates were preferentially leased. It also said that if any airline had a gate utilization of less than 4 departures per gate, the airport could make them either share the gate with another airline or make them consolidate their operations into fewer gates opening up gate(s) for other carriers. This supposedly was part of the Airport Use Agreement signed by the signatory carriers on May 1, 1999 shortly before the airport opened.

However it also mentions that the May 1, 1999 Airport Use Agreement expired on September 30, 2003. I would hope that the current use agreement requires the signatory carriers to have a higher gate utilization - something like 6 departures per day.
Interesting. Good information. Frankly, as of 9/03, I don't see any of the signatory carriers looking to "squat" their gates given the economics of a recovering airline industry at the time, so I'm not sure what reason, if any, there'd be for someone to have not re-signed that Agreement.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #190  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2008, 2:25 PM
LoneStarMike's Avatar
LoneStarMike LoneStarMike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikey711MN View Post

In the meantime, do you know if JetBlue is going to try to run all of this new service out of their single gate? Methinks that'll turn into a disaster since I've anecdotally noted how routinely late some of their JFK runs become throughout the day that could really throw their operation.
As far as I know, that's the plan. I posted this over at a.net but it bears repeating here.

Even if the current use agreement still has the 4 departures per gate requirement, there's a couple of gates that aren't used that much.

Gates 1 and 4: When Expressjet started service last year they had 18 daily departures and mainly used Gate 4 but they also used Gate 1 (ground floor commuter gate.) Now they're down (or will be soon) to - I think -7 departures per day, so that's only 3.5 per gate. I wish the airport would ask them to consolidate their operations at Gate 1, which would free up Gate 4 for someone else.

Gate 2 - That's the international gate, but it can also be used for domestic flights as well. I believe it's currently only used once per day for AeroMexico's service to Mexico City. Plus, AeroMexico's current schedule has that gate in use in the early to mid-afternoon. Gate 2 is otherwise unoccupied during the peak morning and late afternoon hours. It has also been used in the past for the summer Funjet charters to Mexico, but it's my understanding that those flights will now operate out of the new Low Cost Terminal. There's absolutely no reason other airlines shouldn't be allowed to use Gate 2.

From reading past threads at airliners.net, it's my understanding that American, United and jetBlue all would like to have additional gate space. Based on that, here would be my idea on how the airport could make this happen.

Require Expressjet to move it's remaining flights to Gate 1. That would free up Gate 4.

Allow jetBlue to move from Gate 19 to Gate 4. They could operate their current (as of May 1) 8 daily departures from there and add additional service out of Gate 2 when it was not in use by AeroMexico. It would also help alleviate the problem of a JFK flight being late which would throw off their operations. That would also greatly help the concessions in the East Concourse. That part of the airport isn't nearly as crowded as the Central Terminal and West Concourse due to fewer flights per gate on (mostly) smaller aircraft.

American could then give up Gate 25 and take back Gate 19 - thus giving them 5 contiguous gates. As mentioned earlier, the elimination of the 8 flights to DAL gives them extra space, so they probably wouldn't need a sixth gate.

United (which uses Gates 21 and 23) could get some breathing room by also using Gate 25 and it could possibly be shared with one or more other carriers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikey711MN View Post
Frankly, as of 9/03, I don't see any of the signatory carriers looking to "squat" their gates given the economics of a recovering airline industry at the time, so I'm not sure what reason, if any, there'd be for someone to have not re-signed that Agreement.
I don't doubt that most/all of the airlines signed new use agreements, but my question is whether or not the new (current) use agreement requires a higher gate utilization than the previous one. Also, the first use agreement was for a period of time that was slightly over 5 years. If the subsequent use agreement (which would have gone into effect October 1, 2003) was also a five-year agreement then it would be up for renewal sometime this fall.

Considering the shape the economy is in and the fact that many airlines are reducing capacity, AUS is genuinely blessed to be getting all the new service that's beginning this month and we're blessed that we continue to enjoy healthy year-over-year passenger increases.

I would hope that if there is additional demand from new/existing carriers for additional gate space that the airport would do everything in its' power to make that happen.

Last edited by LoneStarMike; Apr 30, 2008 at 2:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #191  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2008, 3:49 PM
Mikey711MN's Avatar
Mikey711MN Mikey711MN is offline
I am so smart, S-M-R-T!
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Moved south to Austin, TX
Posts: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneStarMike View Post
Require Expressjet to move it's remaining flights to Gate 1. That would free up Gate 4.

Allow jetBlue to move from Gate 19 to Gate 4. They could operate their current (as of May 1) 8 daily departures from there and add additional service out of Gate 2 when it was not in use by AeroMexico. It would also help alleviate the problem of a JFK flight being late which would throw off their operations. That would also greatly help the concessions in the East Concourse. That part of the airport isn't nearly as crowded as the Central Terminal and West Concourse due to fewer flights per gate on (mostly) smaller aircraft.

American could then give up Gate 25 and take back Gate 19 - thus giving them 5 contiguous gates. As mentioned earlier, the elimination of the 8 flights to DAL gives them extra space, so they probably wouldn't need a sixth gate.

United (which uses Gates 21 and 23) could get some breathing room by also using Gate 25 and it could possibly be shared with one or more other carriers.
That's a great plan and makes the most sense to me!

Frankly, IMHO, the ExpressJet situation will probably take care of itself, particularly if they accept the SkyWest deal who would probably choose to close down the independent ops and redeploy those jets to contract service. That is, again, just speculation on my part. In that case, a new DL/NW could scoot down to use Gates 3-5 or 4-6 (more likely) contiguously.

As a sidenote, I know that NW occasionally uses Gate 2, particularly for their nightly arrivals from DTW, MSP, and MEM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #192  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2008, 6:32 PM
texboy texboy is online now
constructor extrodinaire!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jdawgboy View Post
This just shows how well ABIA is positioned not only locally but regionally. With Jet Blue creating a connector-hub here and news of expansion announcments to come later this year, ABIA will definatly become the main airport in Central and South Texas.
San Antonio will ALWAYS have a major airport. With the expansion going on at SAT.... I wouldn't discount SA out of getting even more nonstops.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #193  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2008, 8:58 PM
Jdawgboy's Avatar
Jdawgboy Jdawgboy is online now
Representing the ATX!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,738
First of all nobody said anything about San Antonio, I sure didn't so I dont know why you lashed out all of a sudden about that comment. I didn't say SAT wasn't a major airport, it is. What Im saying is right now ABIA is getting the most non-stop flights. Although depending on the economy that could change. But when the truth be told, ABIA is ahead of SAT in non-stop flights. Once expansion gets going ABIA will continue to increase flights and ammount of people flying through. Im sorry if that offended you but hey this is what the numbers show now and honestly that means more people will be willing to drive long distances to ABIA to take advantage of what we have, wich in turn makes ABIA the choice airport for Central and yes even south Texas to fly from...

This thread is not about San Antonio's airport, its about Austin's airport. So lets get back to news affecting AUSTINS AIRPORT...
__________________
"GOOD TIMES!!!" Jerri Blank (Strangers With Candy)

Last edited by Jdawgboy; Apr 30, 2008 at 9:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #194  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2008, 9:29 PM
GoldenBoot's Avatar
GoldenBoot GoldenBoot is online now
Member since 2001
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 3,261
Boys...Neither ABIA nor SAIA are "major" airports (i.e., "large hubs"). It will be many, many years before they will be officially considered "major" airports. According to the Department of Transportation's National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) classification of airports, they both are considered "medium hubs," and would roughly have to double their enplanements to qualify for "large hub" status.

And with the way things are going for the airlines today, most experts are in agreement that further expansion of routes may not be seen until at least 2009.
__________________
AUSTIN (City): 974,447 +1.30% - '20-'22 | AUSTIN MSA (5 counties): 2,473,275 +8.32% - '20-'23
SAN ANTONIO (City): 1,472,909 +2.69% - '20-'22 | SAN ANTONIO MSA (8 counties): 2,703,999 +5.70% - '20-'23
AUS-SAT REGION (MSAs/13 counties): 5,177,274 +6.94% - '20-'23 | *SRC: US Census*
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #195  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2008, 11:52 PM
ATXboom ATXboom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,821
^^^ GB,

I may be mistaken but I thought both were considered "small" commercial airports by FAA standards.

Once total passenger count surpasses 10M then they go to "medium" status...

...could be wrong but I though I read that some time ago.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #196  
Old Posted May 1, 2008, 4:40 AM
texboy texboy is online now
constructor extrodinaire!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by texboy View Post
San Antonio will ALWAYS have a major airport. With the expansion going on at SAT.... I wouldn't discount SA out of getting even more nonstops.
I don't know but I didn't think I was sounding like I was "lashing out"....just merely making a statement. I LIVE in Austin and like this city....I love how it seems like everytime I mention SA on anything about it being a great city....some Austinite has to come back at me like I'm "lashing" out. And you did mention SOUTH Texas which is where San Antonio is which is where my comment stemmed from. Good for ABIA for getting more non stops....Itll be interesting to see how long they last though considering the economy. My guess on the first ones to go would be the florida and mexico flights....just a guess though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #197  
Old Posted May 1, 2008, 4:03 PM
potts potts is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 52
As a San Antonian myself, I must say that I am a bit dissapointed that San Antonio hasn't recieved as significant as an increase in service as AUS. JetBlue, who has been rumored to come to SAT for the last copule years, hasn't even given us a nonstop to JFK. Meanwhile, they've got a focus city going on in AUS. I'm especially surprised that VivoAerobus didn't come to SAT, given SAT's close Mexico ties and much higher hispanic population than AUS. I suppose one also has to realize that AUS has a much higher median household income and, of course, that impressive shiny new terminal building doesn't necessarily repel airlines.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #198  
Old Posted May 1, 2008, 5:46 PM
texboy texboy is online now
constructor extrodinaire!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,616
Well Im sure SA's two new concourses and continued business growth will attract more airlines in the coming year. San Antonio imo is primed for a boom once the economy begins to pick up....with the cheapest housing in the state (among the 4 major metros) and tons of young people coming out of the several uni's in the area....there would be no reason to go anywhere else.

But Austin currently is the best option with the new terminal and higher pay for sure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #199  
Old Posted May 1, 2008, 6:48 PM
M1EK's Avatar
M1EK M1EK is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,194
San Antonio's cheap sprawl housing is a liability, not an asset, when gas keeps getting more and more expensive...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #200  
Old Posted May 1, 2008, 7:01 PM
Jdawgboy's Avatar
Jdawgboy Jdawgboy is online now
Representing the ATX!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,738
So today is the day that the South Terminal opened up. Several of the news stations talked about it lastnight and this morning.

Here is a Link to KVUE.com with video about the opening of the South Terminal this morning...

http://www.kvue.com/news/local/stori....ba35c117.html

It also mentions why Austin was chosen out of a host of other cities....
__________________
"GOOD TIMES!!!" Jerri Blank (Strangers With Candy)

Last edited by Jdawgboy; May 1, 2008 at 7:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

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



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:39 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.