Major airport statistics

[mhays]

Originally Posted by Yuri

And why companies don't eye those like St. Louis with lots of idle capacity and I assume more competitive fees as those airports are probably eager to attract flights?

The airlines have found that hubs are better financially. And they only need a few hubs per airline. Some cities lose out.

I wonder if fees are really lower in STL. They might not need as many huge projects (and may have paid off the last ones) but an oversized airport can cost a lot to maintain on a per-passenger basis. If someone added 100 flights a day that equation could be far better, but the first 10 flights might not do much.

I can imagine it becoming a hub again. Just need a major airline to decide it needs another hub, and decide STL is the right place.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by mhays

The airlines have found that hubs are better financially. And they only need a few hubs per airline. Some cities lose out.

I wonder if fees are really lower in STL. They might not need as many huge projects (and may have paid off the last ones) but an oversized airport can cost a lot to maintain on a per-passenger basis. If someone added 100 flights a day that equation could be far better, but the first 10 flights might not do much.

I can imagine it becoming a hub again. Just need a major airline to decide it needs another hub, and decide STL is the right place.

Avelo has been building a western hub (Hollywood Burbank) and an eastern hub (Tweed New Haven), but it doesn't have an airport to connect them. STL would make a good candidate.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by craigs

Although Sacramento's passenger count has grown with the regional population, it still serves relatively few international destinations so many just drive to SFO.

Similar distance and exact same dynamic for Milwaukee and its relative closeness to ORD, with only a short drive down I-94 to access one of the best connected airports around.

Milwaukee being second to last on ChiSox's ranking was no surprise to me.

Well, maybe mildly surprised that it wasn't dead last on that metric.

[ChiSoxRox]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Similar distance and exact same dynamic for Milwaukee and its relative closeness to ORD, with only a short drive down I-94 to access one of the best connected airports around.

Milwaukee being second to last on ChiSox's ranking was no surprise to me.

Well, maybe mildly surprised that it wasn't dead last on that metric.

MKE had the fewest boardings by a wide margin of any 2M+ PSA. However Cleveland's CSA has Pacman swallowed the northeast quadrant of Ohio, so the ratio came out a bit smaller for CLE/CAK.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by ChiSoxRox

MKE had the fewest boardings by a wide margin of any 2M+ PSA. However Cleveland's CSA has Pacman swallowed the northeast quadrant of Ohio, so the ratio came out a bit smaller for CLE/CAK.

But Milwaukee bleeds a ton of passenger traffic to ORD.

Where is Cleveland losing passengers to? Detroit?

[edale]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

But Milwaukee bleeds a ton of passenger traffic to ORD.

Where is Cleveland losing passengers to? Detroit?

What makes you think Cleveland is losing passengers to anywhere? ~5 million enplanements for a metro (csa) of about 3 million that isn't a significant tourist destination and doesn't have much in the way of connecting flights seems about right. Also, it's not surprising to see Ohio's 3Cs, Pittsburgh, and Indy toward the bottom of the passenger traffic lists. They're among the most centrally located cities in the country, and there are many destinations within driving distance. Someone in Cleveland can drive to something like 7 large metro areas within a 5 hour drive. Contrast that to someone in, say, Portland who really only has Seattle as a major metro within an easy drive. Obviously you're going to have less O&D air travel in cities that are more centrally located to other cities.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by edale

What makes you think Cleveland is losing passengers to anywhere?cities.

I'm just curious how Cleveland's average boardings can be even lower than Milwaukee's when Milwaukee loses hundreds of thousands (millions?) of boardings to nearby ORD.

The Cleveland market doesn't really have a nearby mega-airport (except possibly Detroit???) sucking passenger traffic away from it like Milwaukee does, so what gives?

[mhays]

Are flights expensive in Cleveland? That might discourage a lot of optional travel.

I can believe a lot of people driving to Detroit for flights.

Having other cities within a day or weekend drive is probably big. But remote cities can also have a lot to do in easy range, even if that's mountains or tulip fields in the PNW if you're sick of the other two big cities.

Flights are also driven by corporate presence and residents with a lot of spending money. Cleveland might get less help from either group.

O&D numbers appear to be all over the map on a per-capita basis. Denver is particularly odd, with huge domestic O&D (not connecting) numbers despite not being a Vegas or Orlando. Flying then getting a rental car or bus to ski three hours away is one factor. Being a multi-hub is another, with more destinations and lower fares. This covers it well.

[edale]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

I'm just curious how Cleveland's average boardings can be even lower than Milwaukee's when Milwaukee loses hundreds of thousands (millions?) of boardings to nearby ORD.

The Cleveland market doesn't really have a nearby mega-airport (except possibly Detroit???) sucking passenger traffic away from it like Milwaukee does, so what gives?

Per the numbers posted on the previous page, Cleveland has about 2 million more enplanements each year than Milwaukee. The average is brought down by using a metro area of 3.6 million, which includes basically all of NE Ohio. It's possible that some people who live in the western fringes of this area, say around Sandusky, would drive to Detroit for flights, and people on the SE fringe (Youngstown) would go to Pittsburgh for flights. But I think proximity to other places is probably the best explanation. Cleveland is a closer drive to more cities than Milwaukee.

[iheartthed]

I'm pretty skeptical that a lot of people are driving from Cleveland to Detroit for flights. Delta has four flights per day between Cleveland and Detroit, which would negate the benefit (both cost and time) of driving all the way to Detroit for most people.

[Emprise du Lion]

Originally Posted by mhays

As much as airlines like hubs, if capacity was a huge issue in the current four, other hubs or mini-hubs would develop. Milwaukee, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and Indianapolis seem to have easy paths to expanded terminals if needed, some more than others. And some aren't using the terminals they have.

St. Louis got FAA approval to basically gut our entire airport last year. They're still in the planning stages, but from the news articles I've seen, the only part that will remain original are the arches over the entry to Terminal 1. Everything else is going to be rebuilt into a larger, single terminal airport.

This is in large part because Southwest is now the primary airline driver at the airport, and their needs are beyond Terminal 2's current capabilities. They've actually been slowly expanding into the closed / blocked off gates that used to connect Terminals 1 & 2 during TWA's heyday. The trouble is those gates are far away from the entryway in Terminal 2, and they lack current concessions, and they most certainly are showing their age since they're decades old. You still can't walk between the two terminals as well, even with this expansion.

[westak]

Cleveland is thrown off by the methodology used. Not that it would be hitting out of the park, but if the methodology used Cleveland's MSA instead of CSA and just Hopkins emplanements, its number would be 2.34.

Adding (CAK) plus Akron-Canton's population(This still does not encompass the whole CSA) it drops to 1.61.

From personal experience, I, my family, and many friends will drive to just about anywhere within 8-10 hours, which includes nearly half the country's population, even for weekend trips. I have also known people who will drive to catch flights in Detroit, Columbus, or Pittsburgh. For me, Detroit probably wouldn't be worth the ROI, but PIT or CMH are only 1.5 to 1.75 hours drives, which may be worth it depending on the cost difference.

[mhays]

That makes sense for STL. It must be really inconvenient to have two terminals, and T1 seems to be very lightly used. (But why can't you walk? There seems to be a concourse all the way.)

[mhays]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I'm pretty skeptical that a lot of people are driving from Cleveland to Detroit for flights. Delta has four flights per day between Cleveland and Detroit, which would negate the benefit (both cost and time) of driving all the way to Detroit for most people.

Many people, sure. But 90 miles to Detroit isn't far. And people in Lorain or Sandusky are closer than that.

Also I did a test. Round trip flights to LA next Tuesday start at $300 from Cleveland and $200 from Detroit. Cleveland-Spokane (through any hub) is about $640 vs. $540 for Detroit-Spokane. Round trips Cleveland to Detroit start at $460.

There seems to be a clear cost benefit to going through Detroit, particularly with multiple people. (Gas and wear on the car could negate that, but people don't think that way.)

Airline tickets seem really expensive in Cleveland. That's definitely a major factor in the low numbers.

[ChiSoxRox]

I used PSAs (CSAs take precedence unless the metro is a stand alone MSA) for two main reasons in the original thread:

1) A broader definition is closer to the regional draw these airports would have.

2) MSA splits result in some oddities like ONT apart from the rest of SoCal and BWI split from DCA/IAD.

Cleveland's CSA does ensnare a large swath of Ohio -- but the main cause for its low number is probably the lack of a hub/tourism traffic combined with the central location. Chicago, the North Woods, Appalachian hiking, and the East Coast are all in driving distance.

In short, blame:

[westak]

Originally Posted by mhays

Many people, sure. But 90 miles to Detroit isn't far. And people in Lorain or Sandusky are closer than that.

I agree with you but it's 90 miles as the Crow flies. Over 150 miles driving.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by westak

I agree with you but it's 90 miles as the Crow flies. Over 150 miles driving.

Yeah, I was thinking that 90 mile figure had to be wrong.

Driving distance from downtown Cleveland to DTW is 154 miles.

That's quite a bit further than downtown Milwaukee to ORD at only 78 miles. As it's 100% interstate, if traffic is flowing and you speed a little bit, that's under an hour driving time.

[Emprise du Lion]

Originally Posted by mhays

That makes sense for STL. It must be really inconvenient to have two terminals, and T1 seems to be very lightly used. (But why can't you walk? There seems to be a concourse all the way.)

Back in the day you could walk from T1 to T2 and back again, but as the airline traffic dried up in the early to mid-00s, those connecting concourses and gates were blocked off. Some of them are seeing the light of day again thanks to Southwest's growing need for gates in St. Louis, but it's not to the point of being able to fully reconnect T1 and T2.

Rebuilding the airport is a good way for STL to appease Southwest and its continued growth, in addition to continuing to try and lure other airlines here. If Southwest had use of T1 before all of this happened, we probably would be hearing about a remodel rather than a complete teardown like we are now. T1 has more gates and baggage claims, but Southwest is stuck in T2 with two measly baggage claims.

[mhays]

Ok, 150 vs. 90 is a substantial difference. But I bet a lot of people still drive it, particularly given the cost difference.

As for STL's connector, it must have had sizeable costs and operational issues to keep the walkway open. It's just really inconvenient, especially since it appears to have been inside security. Do they at least have a free shuttle every five minutes?

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by mhays

Many people, sure. But 90 miles to Detroit isn't far. And people in Lorain or Sandusky are closer than that.

Also I did a test. Round trip flights to LA next Tuesday start at $300 from Cleveland and $200 from Detroit. Cleveland-Spokane (through any hub) is about $640 vs. $540 for Detroit-Spokane. Round trips Cleveland to Detroit start at $460.

There seems to be a clear cost benefit to going through Detroit, particularly with multiple people. (Gas and wear on the car could negate that, but people don't think that way.)

Airline tickets seem really expensive in Cleveland. That's definitely a major factor in the low numbers.

How the hell is it 460 bucks from Cleveland to Detroit rt? Thats insane