Ramprat74 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1457 posts, RR: 2 Posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4131 times:
After looking at this picture. I think the city of San Diego should some how asked the Government to move the Marine Corp recruit depot to a different location. The Military owns too much prime real estate in San Diego. There is plenty of room at MCAS Miramar for the recruit depot.
If the terminal was on the northside of the field. People on I-5 would have easier access to the terminal. Why is there so much concrete in the upper right of the picture? Was that where the Convair plant was?
Amwest25 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3944 times:
I dont forsee the military ever giving up any of the current air bases within the next 15 years. It is my opinion that SAN will not be moving anytime soon, maybe 25 to 30 years at best. But thats just my opinion. They have been talking for years but never once come up with a solution and frankly it really is too late as there is no acceptable area of land except for MCAS Miramar and I just dont see that base being closed, Camp pendleton is too far, Riverside County is too far, Imperial County is too far away from San Diego.
Trvlr From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4430 posts, RR: 23 Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3900 times:
I think the Regional Airport Authority is somewhere in the process of developing a terminal on the north side of SAN. It will occupy the former site of the Convair facility (now just a bunch of parking lots), and will house Southwest Airlines, and possibly other LCC's such as Frontier and jetBlue. Not sure if the project is on track, or caught up in the recent transfer of airport ownership from the Port Commission to the new Authority.
A new airport for San Diego is a very lengthy, gruesome topic. I'll leave that for later.
BoingGoingGone From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3842 times:
1. Miramar is on the "BRAC" list, as it every other base in San Diego. To save it, Miramar may be interested in Joint Use. If Miramar cannot sufficiently justify why it should remain open it will be closed.
2. Several other sites are being looked at, save the "floating concept" which proved to be an environmental nightmare. Great for a small fighter base, not so great to have a solid floating platform 15,000 feet long and 8,000 feet wide on the open ocean.
3. The "North Terminal Concept" Trvlr is talking about is not in the works. It's one option the airport will look at should a new airport not be approved by the voters in 2006. The ideal situation is indeed to move Southwest and other LCC's who don't have code share arangements to a North Terminal. This would be a 12-18 gate facility. It's easier to isolate them then the rest of the carriers. However, for this to move ahead, MCRD needs to give up land to support a North Taxiway. Without a "full length" north taxiway, the "North Terminal Concept" is dead. In addition, MCRD in exchange for the land wanted a 12' sound attenuation wall along side the taxiway. It's unknown how this would affect the ILS and the safety of the airfield.
4. If the airport gets "all" of MCRD, then there is a final option. Move all the terminals to the MCRD property thus improving road access and terminal space. Install a new runway just north of the current runway angles two more degree's North "Open-V" to create a new departure surface running 11/29. Differential GPS would allow instrument approaches for equiped aircraft on runway 27, something not possible now.
Begin aquisition of all land surrounding adjacent the airport and demolish all buildings to improve airfield safety. The current runway will always serve as the primary runway. Due to terrain and buildings, the 11/29 runway is basically a one-way runway. 29 for departures and 11 for ILS arrivals. An 11 departure route puts you right at downtown and a 29 arrival creates a 5,000 foot displaced thresold on an 10,500 foot runway. San Diego rarely needs arrivals over the ocean, the only reason 9 is ever used is for Santa Ana wind conditions (10-15 days per year) and Instrument Landings (30-60 days/year - morning only - Marine Layer fog). A 27 ILS is impossible with current ILS equipment. DGPS eliminates "head to head" operations during inclimate weather making the airport more efficient.
After build out:
a. Limit service to commerical aircraft only. This can only be done after the max buildout of the facility because doing so strips an airport of it's Federal Funding.
b. Once operations level and then maximize, slot allocation.
LMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3801 times:
Miramar should have been closed when the Navy moved out. However the government in it's infinite wisdom decided to close MCAS El Toro and MCAS Tustin and move the Marines to take their place. Miramar would have made an excellent international airport.
Even if the Marines were to vacate MCRD you would still have a hard time fitting a runway in it's place. With hills and the I-5 on one side it would be a very tight squeeze.
BoingGoingGone From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3786 times:
On Miramar: The reason they didn't get it was because the Port District, who controlled the study funding, was to lose control of the airport to the county if the move were made. The study was flawed. Wonder why????
On MCRD: If you get all of MCRD, you can get a 10,500' runway in there. The terrain on a 29 departure is better. Arriving 29 is a whole different mess. They'd never use it. All 11/29 would be for is to suppliment 9/27 thus adding about a 30% capacity increase.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16316 posts, RR: 52 Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3756 times:
I think the best and even easiest solution for both San Diego and the Marine Corps is a straight up swap, the Marines take over Lindbergh field and San Diego takes over Miramar.
The Marines do not need more than one runway, and Lindbergh is the perfect size for a military field. It's adjacent to the Marine Corps recruit depot and very close to North Island and San Diego Naval Station, also the Marines would not fly as many flights on a daily basis out of Lindbergh as the airport already supports so there would be some noise relief for locals.
The approach to the airport is perfect. The departure path is not so perfect. Because of urban congestion at University City and La Jolla off the west end of the runway, military aircraft must make a sharp 50 degree turn off the runway to avoid housing developments, shopping centers, hospitals and UCSD. A new runway would have to be built further east towards Interstate 15 for departures so commercial aircraft can make this turn a little safer. Forget landing towards the east during Santa Ana winds because of noise complaints.
Trvlr From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4430 posts, RR: 23 Reply 13, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3556 times:
As long as we're entertaining the idea of an airport at Miramar, forgetting the obvious obstacles in the way of actually moving the airport there in the first place:
Coronado990 brings up an interesting point. However, I think the problem could be solved relatively easily if the main Runway 6L/24R is extended in the direction Interstate 15. This new section would be a displaced threshold similar to that at SAN, which is a whopping 1810 feet. (This section of runway in SAN maximises the amount of space aircraft can use on takeoff while at the same time giving arriving aircraft ample space to land). With the new section of the runway in place, departing aircraft would have a much longer runway to use on takeoff (and consequently more time to turn away from La Jolla), and arriving aircraft could avoid coming too close to Interstate 15 by using the existing markings on 6L/24R.
Coronado990 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1590 posts, RR: 2 Reply 14, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3523 times:
I would rather entertain the idea of keeping Lindbergh Field and John Wayne airports the way they are (much like MDW, DCA & LGA) and building a new large international airport right in the middle of both counties off Interstate-5 at Stuart Mesa 5 miles north of Oceanside (the site of the Oceanside VOR) where two parallel runways almost a mile apart can be built in a 6/24 heading. Arrivals would be over the southern portion of Pendleton (where no military maneuvers take place) and departures would be over the ocean.
This could be the SD North County replacement of Palomar Airport which would revert back to being a G.A airport, what it was designed for. It would also be a Southern California airport in the form of international flights and cargo, something SAN & SNA cannot do.
Instead of building a new terminal on the north side of Lindbergh Field, build an Express Train station at the site complete with with long term parking. Current rail lines would run adjacent to both airports and can continue onward to a similar sites with parking at El Toro and Anaheim in Orange County.
It would also benefit the Marines who can now deploy troops off of the new 12,000 foot runway. They would have their own terminal and cargo area separate from the mid-field terminals.
Bicoastal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3473 times:
I believe the current San Diego airport master plan envisions only building a new terminal for Southwest Airlines on the north side on Pacific Highway where the current Jimsair is/was. Southwest has very little interline baggage transfers and the airline generates a lot of traffic on Harbor Drive. Moving Southwest will greatly lessen traffic and people congestion in the Harbor Drive/East Terminal area.
We've discussed this before, but San Diego can't even fill/make a profit on a daily BA flight to London. Sure, for airline enthusiasts a new airport would be fun, but San Diego isn't a good hub location and it doesn't generate enough cargo and profitable passenger traffic (high yield, not tourists) to fill regular flights over the Pacific or the Atlantic. Airport passenger growth projections have been highly inflated in San Diego by proponents of a new airport. But even with its single runway, it has plenty of capacity left and San Diego County is almost built out now. Urban and suburban sprawl has pretty much gobbled up the developable land. And it's too expensive to live here so not too many large new businesses are locating here.
The previous round of base closings pretty much consolidated west coast operations in San Diego and Bremerton, Washington. I can't see the Base Closure Commission giving up land in areas where they previously consolidated operations. The only facility at risk is MCRD, a recruit training facility, so the airport may get some more usable land there, but not enough for a runway....a north side taxiway, but not a runway.
Coronado990 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1590 posts, RR: 2 Reply 16, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3447 times:
Southwest is very happy at the East Terminal. Rent is cheap. I understand they do not want to pay the higher rent at the new terminal proposed on the old Convair site.
There are still 8 gates that can be opened up at the newer West terminal. Once that is up and running, I can see WN being the only tenant at the East Terminal. If a new airport does open up, I bet WN will want to stay at Lindbergh Field compared to moving to a new more expensive airport.
Trvlr From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4430 posts, RR: 23 Reply 18, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3364 times:
I believe that will happen sometime in the future. Most likely, the current T2 West design will be mirrored for another 8 gates, and then some time after that (we're talking many years, here), the current design will be replicated at the edge of airport property. With or without a North Terminal, this development would free up T1 for renovation.
I'm pretty sure the second runway option in the Master Plan has carried over to the Authority's ownership of the airport. The MCRD has already agreed to give the airport extra space for a north taxiway, which is near to the construction phase. Environmental reviews have been completed, deal with the marines/DoD is close, etc.
We all know what everyone thinks about airport site selection. Right now the process is pretty much in the doldrums. Much will be clearer in 2005, when the BRAC makes its final decision, and the economic picture is different.
Amwest25 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3332 times:
"1. Miramar is on the "BRAC" list, as it every other base in San Diego. To save it, Miramar may be interested in Joint Use. If Miramar cannot sufficiently justify why it should remain open it will be closed."
It may be on the list but they wont close it. I would put money on it that no San Diego bases will be shut. (except maybe MCRD) but Miramar, North Island and Camp Pendleton in my opinion will remain open. But its just my opinion,.
Bicoastal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3265 times:
Another bit of Real-Politik....the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee is a San Diego area congressman (Duncan Hunter) and another member of the powerful Appropriations Defense Subcommittee, Randy "Duke" Cunningham, is also a San Diego area congressman. Both have already said, in effect, that they oppose conversion of Miramar to commercial uses.
BoingGoingGone From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3188 times:
Another bit of Real-Politik....The Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee is a San Diego area congressman (Duncan Hunter) and another member of the powerful Appropriations Defense Subcommittee, Randy "Duke" Cunningham, is also a San Diego area congressman. Both have already said, in effect, that they oppose conversion of Miramar to commercial uses.
Both have proved themselves to be complete jackholes in this process... Cunningham calling airport staff "stupid", saying the airport should extend a runway south into the bay and Hunter proposing high speed rail to Imperial for an airport. Neither offering a viable solution.
There are still 8 gates that can be opened up at the newer West terminal. Once that is up and running, I can see WN being the only tenant at the East Terminal.
Huh? What 8 gates? Yes they can expand T2W, but at quite a cost. There is an environmental impact problem west of T2W...
The MCRD has already agreed to give the airport extra space for a north taxiway, which is near to the construction phase.
With the transition to SDCRAA, these negotiations were halted. This issue hasn't been talked about for nearly 2 years.
The approach to the airport is perfect. The departure path is not so perfect. Because of urban congestion at University City and La Jolla off the west end of the runway, military aircraft must make a sharp 50 degree turn off the runway to avoid housing developments, shopping centers, hospitals and UCSD.
If Miramar were to be used, a single runway would be built south of the current runways and further east to ensure the 65dB footprint is east of I-805. It's alignment would set to minimize impact to the UTC area. Terminals would be built North of this, then a second runway would replace the existing runways.
It may be on the list but they wont close it. I would put money on it that no San Diego bases will be shut. (except maybe MCRD) but Miramar, North Island and Camp Pendleton in my opinion will remain open. But its just my opinion.
It doesn't have to close. A joint-use facility allowing the airport to take-over the airfield would save the government nearly $160 million a year in maintenance costs (Miramars has only one runway that is in good enough condition to be used for commercial service). Furthermore, while Miramar contributes $1 billion a year to the local economy, something the Marine's like to brag about, a commercial airport on that site would contribute $6.5 Billion to the economy over it's current $3.5 billion at the present location. 75% of all freight is driven to LAX due to SAN's lack of cargo handing capacity. 800 passengers per day fly commuters to LAX to connect on flights that could originate in San Diego.
The simple fact of the matter is that the Military owns and operates 51% of the land in San Diego County. 51%. Miramar consists of 20,000 acres. The airport requires about 3,500 acres. Time to share folks. Other bases do it.
To give you an idea as to what the county thinks. No one gives a crap. In 1994, County Wide vote approved a measure to move to Miramar should it become available by a 70/30 margin. Of course, this was just tossed on to the ballot and the City and County didn't have the Authority to actually build something had it become available. No one even flinched to oppose the measure.
Bicoastal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 23, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3110 times:
" 800 passengers per day fly commuters to LAX to connect on flights that could originate in San Diego."
What makes you think the airlines want to lose this feeder traffic for flights leaving from LAX? Hubs need markets like San Diego to fill their larger (or more frequently scheduled) planes. 800 people scattered over a number of different flights to multiple destinations does not mean San Diego can support originating traffic to where these people are flying. They may add up to as little as 1 or 50 on a connecting flight but don't warrant daily service from San Diego.
As for cargo...so what if some goes to LAX? Much of San Diego's cargo goes out in the belly of existing commercial flights. If they have to truck the rest, so be it.
San Diego's economy will do just fine without the questionable $3.5 billion that a new airport might bring. (I'd like to see a truly independent economic study/forecast. The airport boosters at SANDAG and the Airport Authority can't be trusted,) The cost of living, lack of developable land, lack of water, etc. will limit San Diego's growth and attractiveness to business expansion and relocation. The existing airport has plenty of capacity.