HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Feb 1, 2021, 4:18 PM
cole world11 cole world11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: MSP
Posts: 122
Regarding the Cancun flight on Sun Country - didn't we already have seasonal service on United and Southwest? I'm assuming they've been suspended (correct me if necessary) per the pandemic but am wondering if they will be back to compete with Sun Country.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2021, 6:40 AM
AI0120 AI0120 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 78
https://blog.wandr.me/2021/02/americ...campaign=27481

Probably doesn't mean much, but found an article that says JetBlue considers San Antonio to be on its "shortlist" for expansion.

"Laurence also suggested that the NEA would allow the pair to “work together to have additional relevance in some of the more business-oriented markets in the Midwest, for example, that we have not been able to break into historically.” While he did not name specific cities in the earnings call an internal memo to crewmembers suggests that San Antonio, Kansas City, St. Louis, and Milwaukee are among the markets on the shortlist for the next few years."

Also found it amusing in their picture, the article considers San Antonio to be a Midwest city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2021, 5:36 PM
FightOn! FightOn! is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 24
They might be talking about taking over AA's JFK-SAT flight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AI0120 View Post
https://blog.wandr.me/2021/02/americ...campaign=27481

Probably doesn't mean much, but found an article that says JetBlue considers San Antonio to be on its "shortlist" for expansion.

"Laurence also suggested that the NEA would allow the pair to “work together to have additional relevance in some of the more business-oriented markets in the Midwest, for example, that we have not been able to break into historically.” While he did not name specific cities in the earnings call an internal memo to crewmembers suggests that San Antonio, Kansas City, St. Louis, and Milwaukee are among the markets on the shortlist for the next few years."

Also found it amusing in their picture, the article considers San Antonio to be a Midwest city.

Last edited by FightOn!; Mar 31, 2022 at 3:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2021, 3:26 PM
babysal's Avatar
babysal babysal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 189
Massive remake in the works for San Antonio International Airport, including new Term

Massive remake in the works for San Antonio International Airport, including new Terminal A

Randy Diamond, Staff writer
SA Express News

San Antonio International Airport could be in for a mammoth makeover that would include demolishing and replacing Terminal A — which is as cramped as it is nondescript — and building a third terminal.

Airport officials’ emerging plan also is expected to call for the renovation of Terminal B within the next two decades.

The potential price tag for a redone Terminal A and a new Terminal C: about $2 billion, which would make the airport’s redevelopment one of the biggest capital projects in the city’s history.

“We have ambitious plans and want to move as quickly as possible to build new terminals,” said John Dickson, chairman of the mayor-appointed Airport System Development Committee.

Airport officials presented the proposed redesign at community meetings this week. Though still a work in progress, the plan represents the most detailed picture to date of what the second-tier airport could look like in the near future.

Aviation Director Jesus Saenz Jr. is expected to discuss the proposals with the City Council on March 3.

The airport committee, which began its work in 2018, is looking to finish the plan by late summer or early fall and then present it to the council for approval.

It’s unclear how long it would take to build the new terminals, but Dickson — tapped by Mayor Ron Nirenberg three years ago to lead the committee — said he hoped they’d be finished in less than five years.

Airport officials and consultants crafting the plan have yet to detail the costs or how to pay for the redevelopment. But consultants say replacing Terminal A would easily cost $1 billion and that building a third terminal would add another $1 billion.

Financing for the project likely would come from a combination of sources, such as bond issues, passenger fees, federal grants and contributions from airlines.

While COVID-19 has cut passenger traffic at San Antonio International to about a third of 2019 levels, airline analysts expect the travel industry to bounce back by 2024.

“We have an opportunity to design the first post-COVID terminals, with more open space and more customer-centric dining facilities interspersed between gates,” said Dickson, co-owner of the cybersecurity firm Denim Group.

That would be a stark contrast to the current Terminal A.

The nearly 40-year-old facility is “functionally obsolete,” John van Woensel, lead consultant for the airport plan, said at meetings this week. The terminal’s narrow corridors don’t meet the standards of today’s passengers, and the terminal is marred by inadequate baggage claim areas and restrooms and by an aging electrical system, he said.

Before the pandemic slashed the number of passengers, if two planes arrived at once, baggage claim would be jam-packed for half an hour or more.

“It’s not an acceptable level of service,” said van Woensel, a vice president at WSP USA, a New York consulting firm.

At their widest, the terminal’s corridors are 71 feet across, well below the modern standard of 110 feet for domestic gates and 140 feet for international gates.

Terminal A has 16 gates, and Terminal B — opened in late 2010 — has an additional eight.

Terminal B likely would need renovations by 2040, officials said. The strategic plan encompasses the next two decades.

The new Terminal C would include 12 to 15 gates, addressing an expected shortage of 12 gates by 2040, based on an estimated increase of planes arriving and departing. Airport officials say their growth projection was based on 2019 levels.

They are currently studying the pandemic’s effect on airport operations to determine whether to adjust the estimated number of gates the facility will need.

One thing appears certain: The facilities would be built with a San Antonio flavor. A common complaint — among passengers and city officials — is that the terminals are bland.

Nirenberg has called the facilities antiseptic, saying the two existing terminals were built in an era of government penny-pinching.

At this week’s community meetings, Saenz said design principles for the new facilities will reflect San Antonio’s culture.

“It’s related to our commitment to bringing more of a sense of place to our terminals,” he said.

Design consultants at the meetings said the new terminals would incorporate local art and history.

They also would incorporate more food options, which travelers filling out surveys at San Antonio International said they wanted.

“Concessions, especially food, were really on people’s mind,” van Woensel said. “More options, bigger restaurants, more fast-casual.”

The surveys also revealed that travelers were peeved that Terminals A and B aren’t connected beyond security checkpoints, limiting food and other concession choices.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2021, 9:08 PM
ILUVSAT's Avatar
ILUVSAT ILUVSAT is offline
May the Schwartz be w/ U!
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Nomadic
Posts: 1,731
I'm curious of how this will look with the new, post-COVID passenger projections. The FAA will not approve anything based solely on pre-COVID analytics.

What is described above is what it might look like using pre-COVID numbers.

Either way...progress!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2021, 4:50 PM
ahealy's Avatar
ahealy ahealy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Antonio / Austin
Posts: 2,564
Change is a cooooming!! That's so awesome maybe keep your ears peeled for an int'l EU flight sometime down the line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2021, 3:14 PM
texboy texboy is offline
constructor extrodinaire!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,615
Finally the right people are talking serious about this. I fly into terminal A at least a few times a year and its insane how crowded that corridor gets. Way too cramped.

My guess would be that terminal C will get built first, west of the existing B, then A will be demolished and rebuilt. 38-40 total gates will take this airport well into the future.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2021, 5:14 PM
babysal's Avatar
babysal babysal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 189
City Council Discussing Airport Master Plan today

I love alternative 3

[IMG][/IMG]






Last edited by babysal; Mar 3, 2021 at 9:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2021, 5:26 PM
Tornado Tornado is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 416
alternative 3 is the best option of those presented seeing as it gets rid of the waste that was terminal B. Sure looks like Terminal A would stay the same width which would be unfortunate seeing as how tight it currently is.

I know it's probably not needed but a new control tower would be great
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2021, 7:24 PM
texboy texboy is offline
constructor extrodinaire!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,615
Alternative 3, hands down. I'm assuming once complete, Concourse C and Concourse B/Terminal would take the majority of flights, and A would be used as somewhat of reliever space while at the same time being upgraded.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2021, 7:29 PM
ILUVSAT's Avatar
ILUVSAT ILUVSAT is offline
May the Schwartz be w/ U!
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Nomadic
Posts: 1,731
I agree. Concept #3 is the best (with the central processor area). I do think they need to plan for the 32 narrow body + 3 wide body gate concept and not the 37 narrow body gates. Trans-oceanic flights are not going to be possible with the current runway lengths, however.

With regard to a new tower...yeah, you're right. It's not needed and it will not be approved by the FAA. Austin played with the idea with their approved plan and the FAA vetoed any idea of a new ATC Tower (and they knew that going in).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2021, 7:39 PM
Tornado Tornado is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 416
What would be reasoning for denying a new tower if taxpayers were willing to foot the bill? Seems rather draconian of the FAA
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2021, 10:34 PM
Dan In Real Life's Avatar
Dan In Real Life Dan In Real Life is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Lost in Texas
Posts: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by babysal View Post
I love alternative 3
Would you be able to post the link for the overall proposal? I'm having a hard time finding it.
__________________
The further society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it. - George Orwell
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2021, 11:49 PM
ahealy's Avatar
ahealy ahealy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Antonio / Austin
Posts: 2,564
OMFG. #3 #3 #3 #3 ALLLL THE WAY!!!

Y'all, it's slowly beginning to happen
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2021, 2:04 AM
Tornado Tornado is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 416
What is the reasoning for not extending runway 22 further? It appears they have a good amount of land to work with
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2021, 4:52 PM
satx23 satx23 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 39
There is a conflict with Randolph's arrival/departure path north of SAT.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LehmjPupYFA

It's discussed about 24 min mark in the youtube video
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2021, 6:22 PM
Tornado Tornado is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 416
Quote:
Originally Posted by satx23 View Post
There is a conflict with Randolph's arrival/departure path north of SAT.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LehmjPupYFA

It's discussed about 24 min mark in the youtube video
Thanks for the link!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2021, 7:36 PM
ILUVSAT's Avatar
ILUVSAT ILUVSAT is offline
May the Schwartz be w/ U!
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Nomadic
Posts: 1,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tornado View Post
What would be reasoning for denying a new tower if taxpayers were willing to foot the bill? Seems rather draconian of the FAA

In simple terms, the FAA reviews and formally approves the following from an airport master plan: forecasts, Selection of critical aircraft and the ALP (airport layout plan). The ALP includes ATC infrastructure. If a new tower is not required, the FAA will more than likely not approve this portion of the plan.

A substantial portion of a master plan's implementation will require a governmental grant to complete (Airport Improvement Plan Grant-AIP). Without the FAA's full approval, the organization attempting to implement a master plan will not qualify to receive federal money - thus, killing most major redevelopment projects as written.

It's not really "draconian." It's the FAA trying not to have airports over build or build unnecessary items/infrastructure. Just wish the rest of the federal government would be a little more frugal with our money!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2021, 10:14 PM
texboy texboy is offline
constructor extrodinaire!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILUVSAT View Post
It's not really "draconian." It's the FAA trying not to have airports over build or build unnecessary items/infrastructure. Just wish the rest of the federal government would be a little more frugal with our money!

Here.Here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2021, 10:33 PM
Tornado Tornado is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 416
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILUVSAT View Post
In simple terms, the FAA reviews and formally approves the following from an airport master plan: forecasts, Selection of critical aircraft and the ALP (airport layout plan). The ALP includes ATC infrastructure. If a new tower is not required, the FAA will more than likely not approve this portion of the plan.

A substantial portion of a master plan's implementation will require a governmental grant to complete (Airport Improvement Plan Grant-AIP). Without the FAA's full approval, the organization attempting to implement a master plan will not qualify to receive federal money - thus, killing most major redevelopment projects as written.

It's not really "draconian." It's the FAA trying not to have airports over build or build unnecessary items/infrastructure. Just wish the rest of the federal government would be a little more frugal with our money!
Good insight, thanks!
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 > San Antonio
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:17 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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