Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Sacramento As A Long-haul International Port?  
User currently offlineFLY777UAL From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4512 posts, RR: 3
Posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4218 times:

Stick with me on this one...

I was looking over the master plan for Sacramento International (along with the SacBee and a few other sources) and started to think about a few things:


  • SMF handled nearly 10 million passengers last year, 95% of which are pure O&D.
  • SMF/MHR handled 129,071 tons of freight in a 12 month period 2003-2004
  • Sacramento is the state capitol
  • Sacramento is a major distribution center, poised at the 5 and 80 interchange
  • Sacramento is home to over 17,000 high-tech jobs, mainly Intel and HP (NEC finished a $1.5 billion expansion of its chip manufacturing plant)
  • Sacramento's six counties which make up the metro area already have well over two million residents (Lincoln was the second-fastest growing city in the state in 2004)
  • Sacramento is trying to bill itself as the gateway to Napa and Lake Tahoe
  • Japan represents California's second largest export country after Mexico and accounted for $14.6 billion in exports, year 2001. Computer and electronic parts bring in $5.5 billion, and Japan is also the second largest importer of California agricultural products at nearly $1 billion
  • UK/Germany/Netherlands/France accounted for $16.8 billion in exports, year 2001

For years now, the airport authority has been saying that Sacramento can sustain flights to Europe, but has not yet made mention to Asia. Despite the proximity (or lack thereof) to non-stop flights ex-SFO, and a sufficiently large catchment area, could SMF potentially sustain 5x weekly or even daily flights to both NRT and LGW/FRA? I'm not asking if BA, LH, or JL would ever consider flights, but rather could SMF fill a 767/787-sized aircraft to these destinations? Perhaps as a tag-on from SAN, even (SAN-SMF-NRT/LGW/FRA)?

On a side note, the master plan is very interesting, especially the replacement plans for Terminal B. Seems as if they want to move to a "big-airport" feel with APM's (automated people movers), dual-level roadways, and a satellite terminal.

F L Y 7 7 7 U A L

[Edited 2005-06-08 09:25:13]

59 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineNYCFlyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1388 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4174 times:

Interesting thought. I didn't realize what a booming place SMF was. My only thoughts would be the lack of connecting opportunities in SMF, and also the proximity to SFO.

However, BWI maintains a handful of int'l flights, despite its proximity to IAD and to a lesser extent, PHL. I'm not sure about how similar in distance SMF is from SFO compared to BWI and IAD, but maybe a comparable BWI-type niche can be found.

Is there a big population in the northeast Bay Area, for whom driving to SMF might be equally convenient (or even marginally less convenient) than driving to SFO?


User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26140 posts, RR: 50
Reply 2, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4162 times:

While Sacramento will have a nice modern facility, this does nothing to overcome the areas relative lack of traffic.

There are other metro areas in the state including San Diego(2.9 million) and the Inland Empire(3.7 million) which have even larger populations however short of a few flights to Mexico do not have true international service.

Each one of these areas suffer the fate of being too close to a larger urban area. San Diego and the Inland Empire are simply too close to Los Angeles, while Sacramento is to close too the Bay Area.

At the moment neither international flights from Asia nor Europe are fragmented enough to lead service to what basically are secondary markets.

The only upswing I could see in the Sacramento area is for cargo flights. Mather Field could at some point could develop into a Northern California sorting hub for one of the express cargo airlines. In addition SMF or MHR might be an attractive option for some foreign cargo airlines that face operational/facility limitations at SFO/OAK.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineCarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2977 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4134 times:

Some good points but the current air carrier airport, SMF would need a much longer runway if long-range int'l flights are to become reality. 8,000ft, appropriate for N.American flying, is woefully inadequate and due to hot summers it probably needs at least a 14,000 ft.

User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26795 posts, RR: 75
Reply 4, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4118 times:

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 3):
it probably needs at least a 14,000 ft.

You can count on 2 hands the number of civil airports that have 14,000 foot runways, and they don't include places like DFW, LAX, PHX, SFO, IAD and LHR. They would definately not need that kind of length

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 3):
8,000ft, appropriate for N.American flying,

8,000 feet is enough for a 763ER to make it to europe non-stop. Not that it is going to happen, SMF just does not have the traffic or population to support it



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21582 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4115 times:

Sacramento is the gateway to Yosemite (along with Fresno) and Tahoe, and Europeans appreciate our national park systems more than American's often do. And of course, as was stated, it's just as close to Napa as SFO or OAK are, driving wise.

Distance between BWI and IAD is about the same as SMF and OAK. SFO is further due to having to cross that pesky Bay.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25690 posts, RR: 85
Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4108 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It raises the whole problem of the "North Bay" - and beyond.

Once you cross the Golden Gate, there is no major international airport until Portland.

Once you cross the Golden Gate, there is no major domestic airport until...

For the several millions who live in northern California, there is no easily accessible airport with halfway decent service to anywhere, until you get up to the far north, Eureka or Redding.

Except, perhaps, SMF. And even that is not hugely accessible from, say, Santa Rosa. It is somewhat more accesible than trying to get to SFO (or even Oakland), on a foggy day.

It used to take me a minimum of two hours from just outside Santa Rosa to SFO, on a good day with no traffic. On foggy days, or days with bad traffic on the Golden Gate, it took me up to four hours or more.

Oakland, with no Golden Gate or drive through San Francisco, still had its own problems of accessibility.

But to get international service, or just Mexico/Canada, or even simply domestic service, we had no other choices - except, for brave hearts, SMF.

SMF, generally, was about two hours, but it isn't the best road. It's a pain in the butt, winding through Napa - beautiful, great food, but useless if you're in a hurry to get to the airport.

There is Santa Rosa Airport (STS) but that has a 5000' runway and no commercial service.

I'm not suggesting that every small city in the US should have its own international airport, but Northern California is a lot of land.

And given that the 101 - north Marin through Santa Rosa/Headsburg - is a huge growth area, one day someone will have to come to terms with an airport.

STS isnt it. I guess it will have to become SMF.

Because eventually, the 101 south will grind almost to a standstill.

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineAeronuts From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 114 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4068 times:

Couple of points,

One, while SMF may have access to Napa and Yosemite and is the state capitol. But let's face it, compare to SF and LA, it's boring. The majority of the tourist is interested in the Golden Gate, the Fisherman's Warf, etc... and the closest airport - SFO.

Two, even if JAL decided for what ever reason to fly from NRT to SMF, wouldn't they have to take move that plane off another destination, like to say LAX! Yes, those pesky international agreements does get in the way.


User currently offlineChristao17 From Thailand, joined Apr 2005, 942 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4049 times:

I'm wondering if SMF-Asia or SMF-Europe wouldn't work better for planes like the 787? Long, thin routes that really don't work as well with higher capacity jets. Just a thought.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 4):
Quoting Carpethead (Reply 3):
it probably needs at least a 14,000 ft.

You can count on 2 hands the number of civil airports that have 14,000 foot runways, and they don't include places like DFW, LAX, PHX, SFO, IAD and LHR. They would definately not need that kind of length

True, 14k would be a bit more than necessary but an extension to at least 10k feet might be a good idea. Same way that SJC extended its runways over the years so AA's SJC-NRT service didn't have to make that silly tech stop in OAK. "Well, folks, we've just reached our cruise altitude of 3,000 feet and will begin our descent into Oakland... then we'll REALLY be ready to go!"



Keeping the "civil" in civil aviation...
User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3991 times:

Unless terminal B is reconfigured/rebuilt, considering SMF as a long haul international port is absurd.

It was a lousy airport when I lived in Sacramento, and it hasn't gotten much better since then. While Terminal A is an improvement, terminal B is a dump. No room at check-in, among the worst configuration for TSA inspection, and cramped gate waiting areas. Top it off with the rudest, surliest TSA inspectors I've ever encountered, and it makes for a miserable airport experience. I've often wondered if OAK and SMF are in some kind of weird competition to see which facility can underperform the other.

As far as Sacramento being the gateway to Yosemite, according to Yahoo maps, the distance from OAK and SMF to Yosemite is almost the same.


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8034 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3957 times:

You can forget about SMF being a major long-haul international airport for one reason: the runways are too short to handle larger planes. Even the upcoming 787-8 would have to fly cargo/pax restricted for this reason.

Now, the 757-200, that's a different story. Because the 752 is a bit overpowered for its size, you could fly from SMF all the way out to many Caribbean destinations even on a full load on Sacramento's hot summer days.


User currently offlineDeltaSFO From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2488 posts, RR: 22
Reply 11, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3895 times:

Cities shouldn't be able to so easily waste taxpayer dollars on ego projects like a big airport for a midsize, secondary city in California.

SFO's International Terminal is another good example of this... They will never actually be able to use the terminal to its full capacity because at this point, the runway reconfiguration project--which was the most politically sensitive part of the airport master plan--is dead. Talk about the carriage coming before the horse.

Sacramento is about 90 miles from San Francisco. Well within the catchment area for longhaul flights. I wouldn't look for any international expansion other than more MX service.



It's a new day. Every moment matters. Now, more than ever.
User currently offlineBlatantEcho From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1922 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3871 times:

build a damn rail link to the bay area and let me avoid the delays at SFO, and the crappy terminals of OAK.

I'm from the North Bay, and driving to Sacto is a pain, but so is SFO/OAK and SMF has MUCH nicer airport.



They're not handing trophies out today
User currently offlineJerplane From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 31 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3865 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 4):
SMF just does not have the traffic or population to support it

Doesn't Sacramento have a bigger population than Atlanta or Charlotte.


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 14, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3838 times:

Quoting Aeronuts (Reply 7):
The majority of the tourist is interested in the Golden Gate, the Fisherman's Warf,

yah..until I moved a couple of weeks ago to Milpitas (SJC area), I lived a couple of blocks away from the wharf.....BIG tourist spot...

Quoting DeltaSFO (Reply 11):
SFO's International Terminal is another good example of this... They will never actually be able to use the terminal to its full capacity because at this point, the runway reconfiguration project--which was the most politically sensitive part of the airport master plan--is dead. Talk about the carriage coming before the horse.

hey..it looks great from the inside though...its actually quite large  bigthumbsup 

Quoting Mariner (Reply 6):
Once you cross the Golden Gate, there is no major international airport until Portland.

Once you cross the Golden Gate, there is no major domestic airport until...

For the several millions who live in northern California, there is no easily accessible airport with halfway decent service to anywhere, until you get up to the far north, Eureka or Redding.

Mariner, you have some valid points, but for the most part, there isn't a large enough population in the northern california region for people who want to travel internationally.....

most people I know who want to travel internationally have come to accept that either they will have to go to SFO, or in the worst case scenerio, take a flight from SMF to some other large city..there are enough large carriers which fly to SMF for that particular purpose...I just don't see a large international carrier (or even a domestic carrier such as UA) coming to SMF to offer any majour international service anytime soon (besides Mexicana Airlines)...



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineNYCFlyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1388 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3823 times:

Quoting Jerplane (Reply 13):
Doesn't Sacramento have a bigger population than Atlanta or Charlotte.

well maybe the city proper, but by metro area, ATL at least, blows SMF out of the water. CLT is still a good bit bigger, I'm pretty sure (but too lazy to actually look it up right now).

the big difference is that ATL and CLT are the only airports of any size for a long way (in CLT's case, GSP and GSO are too small to consider)


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21582 posts, RR: 59
Reply 16, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3796 times:

Quoting Aeronuts (Reply 7):
One, while SMF may have access to Napa and Yosemite and is the state capitol. But let's face it, compare to SF and LA, it's boring. The majority of the tourist is interested in the Golden Gate, the Fisherman's Warf, etc... and the closest airport - SFO.

true, depending on the tourist. but again, at least in summer, Yosemite is full of Euro tourists. I used to date a girl who lived on a town outside of the park (north of Fresno) and have a bit more experience with this than some. Most Euros think most American's are spoiled for not visiting the great national parks we have, and I'd have to agree.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineCaptnChaos From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 10 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3783 times:

I just got back to MD from apartment shopping in the Sac area, and let me tell you, it is huge. I agree that expanded int'l service today wouldn't really be marketable, but the future is what holds promise. I think expanding now to be ready for the future economic growth is the best idea, rather than not building at all and SMF being caught with it's pants at it's ankles, so to speak. Redding and cities to the north are growing, but more importantly the property values are skyrocketing as people move from the south to the north to escape the crowd. I don't foresee the international service loads demanding 747's or 777's, but the narrow-body int'l service market looks like it would certainly be there. Plus, since I'm moving, Terminal B sucks, and it would be neat to have a cool new airport to spot at and fly into, but that's just selfish.

User currently offlineMarkATL From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 540 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3758 times:

Any new international flights from SMF would basically just bleed off SFO traffic. Why would an airline want to increase fixed costs (by opening a new station or int'l ops) to serve the same number of passengers.

The other problem is SMF is out in the middle of nowhere, and for someone from the western 'burbs like West Sac, Davis and Fairfield, SFO just isn't enough more of a hassle to drive demand. Not to mention the one stop connections via ATL, ORD, DFW, MSP, JFK, EWR, etc.

Even though Sacramento is growing it just isn't big 'nuff yet to support new international operations.



"...left my home in Georgia, 'n headed for the "Frisco" Bay...
User currently offlineFLY777UAL From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4512 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3738 times:

The entire Master Plan is very interesting to read, and I highly encourage a quick glance, but for those who have commented about the runways and terminals, I think these two links might be worth a view:

Page 29 of the terminal alternatives shows the suggested (and probable) alternative for Terminal B's replacement.

Page 42 of the Airfield Alternatives discusses the selected "preferred airfield alternative". Page 44 shows the diagram of the revised plan for this alternative. Interestingly enough, of the five plans which were selected to continue on to level two consideration, one common element was the lengthening of the Eastern runway from 8,600' to 11,000'. Also worth noting, the Western runway will be moved 1,200' outboard.

F L Y 7 7 7 U A L


User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5844 posts, RR: 28
Reply 20, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3728 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 16):
Yosemite is full of Euro tourists

Not as much anymore. The park has seen a drop of 25% in visitors from its peak 7 or 8 years ago. I've been told much of that drop has been in international visitors.

Locally the current belief is that the drop is a combination of publicity about overcrowding and closed gates which ruined plans for some visitors in past years (no longer an issue but still believed); a been there done that attitude; higher gate fees; and an overall reduction due to 9/11 travel fears.



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently offlineDCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4528 posts, RR: 34
Reply 21, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3706 times:

From the Census Bureau: MSA populations (2002 figures, most recent)

Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, CA 1,930,000
Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC/SC 1,410,000
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 4,529,000

Jim



Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25690 posts, RR: 85
Reply 22, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3657 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 14):
.I just don't see a large international carrier (or even a domestic carrier such as UA) coming to SMF to offer any majour international service anytime soon (besides Mexicana Airlines)...

I don't think it is going to happen next week, either. Or even next year. It may never happen.

But eventually something has to give.

Maybe it will be a rail system through Sonoma and Marin Counties to SFO or OAK, but you still have the problem, to greater or lesser degrees, of getting across the Bay.

And the Bay ain't going away. Whereas people are moving to Marin/Sonoma - and north - if only because it is one of the few parts of California that has (a) reasonable rain, at least in winter and (b) vaguely affordable housing, although that is changing - fast.

The growth in Santa Rosa, for example, has been exponential. It is no longer a just dormitory suburb for SF - it has its own dormitory suburbs.

As I say, I have no idea if SMF is the answer, and even that would need some changes to the road access.

However, it would not surprise me to see at least one (US) carrier start service to Mexico from SMF.

The long term - who knows? But there is a problem.

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineStirling From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, RR: 21
Reply 23, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3631 times:

I will not single out any of the specific negative comments posted here about Sacramento; to each his own. It's obvious some of you haven't taken the time in getting to know the place, or are unable to see past your inherent prejudices.

From my position as "A glass half-full" kinda guy, Sacramento is great town, grossly under-rated. I will not bore you with the breadth it's fine attributes making the region infinitely more livable than the coastal regions of the state.

I will share one thing with you however, if it were not for my business taking me more to Fresno more lately, I would have already relocated to the Sacramento Area.
(My Current Location: Cheap Wine Capital of The USA/Modesto)

As for Sacramento not having the draws that other locations in California claim...all I can say is that the Sacramento C&VB have dropped the ball.

"Fisherman's Wharf", who cares? Sacramento is ideally suited between the Pacific and the Sierra with maybe the best weather in the continental US.
OK, So it's foggy in winter, at least we're not shoveling ten feet of snow, or sliding around on streets of ice.

Now, to the airport.
The Central Valley is the fastest growing region in the country according to the Great Valley Center (regional thinktank).
Sacramento must plan for their imminent position as Northern California's largest and most influential region.
The Bay Area will always be the Bay Area...but it's got nowhere else to go; unless they start filling in the San Francisco Bay.

Give them credit, they are thinking about the future, something, which in cash-strapped California, is sometimes a remarkably hard thing to find.



Delete this User
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 24, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3623 times:

Quoting Mariner (Reply 22):
I don't think it is going to happen next week, either. Or even next year. It may never happen.

But eventually something has to give.

...like the A380, it I think it is well ahead of its time......possibly in 15-20 years...but nothing right now....

as I stated before, a one-stopper to another large city will be sufficient for a loooooong time.....there are enough choices via LCC's and Legacies w/codeshare for pax to make it to their destination(s)

better to spend the money on something else...such as infrastructure, or better yet...education and energy



"Up the Irons!"
25 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : ...sit back and and ponder as to how dumb this statement really reads. um, hate to break this to ya, but Europe and Asia already have service to seco
26 Stirling : European Secondary Exhibit A: Portland. PDX for one. European Tertiary Exhbit B: Providence. PVD. (Are the Azores Europe?) Asian Secondary Exhibit C:
27 Mariner : Sorry, I don't understand the "but nothing right now" comment. I assume that it is - in some mysterious way - another knock of the A380, because I se
28 Halls120 : My negative comments about Sacramento relate only to the airport. I lived in the Curtis Park neighborhood for three years, and loved it. The airport,
29 Markatl : That's a pretty bold statement about a what most would consider a fairly mundane city. It's not a bad place, but it ain't nothing special. Without th
30 Jacobin777 : there wasn't too much to look into it.....my only reference to the A380 is because I feel market conditions do not warrant a large plane such as that
31 Stirling : Certainly. But only half. Sure the old terminal is obsolete by today's standards, but since I can only worry about so much in this life, I choose to
32 Mariner : Sorry, I still don't understand what that has to do with SMF - now or at any time in my lifetime. Especially since the consensus is that - presently
33 MarkATL : Actually I was the one in the service. The look on my former hippie parents face when I enlisted is still a cherished memory (I was 17 and actually g
34 AADC10 : SMF as an international gateway is a delusion of grandeur. There are major hubs with limited international service, such as DFW, IAH, DEN and MSP. It
35 Jacobin777 : it seems as if i'm making the same statements (in a different way)...nothing more, nothing less.......... expanding SMF and having The Leviathan is(w
36 Mariner : I'm not going to bite. It's such a pointless debate. Why not look to the bright future? cheers mariner
37 Post contains images Jacobin777 : Funny ( coincidentally), I was going to mention the same thing when I saw your response on the thread heading.... at least we agree on something..
38 Post contains images Mariner : Sorry. Totally lost. No idea what that means. cheers mariner
39 Christao17 : Are you KIDDING? Has Sacto's weather changed since I lived there? It was about two degrees cooler than Hades during the Summer! San Diego would beat
40 UPS757 : IMO, Mather (MHR) will see widebody international freighter flights long before SMF has long-haul international passenger flights. Goods from Asia wil
41 C172 : No one has mentioned the KSMF has maintained daily 767-300 flights to Honolulu (Hawaiian). Those passengers previously had to drive to the bay area ai
42 LPLAspotter : The Azores is as much europe as Hawaii is a state. The only flag you see flying here is the Portuguese one, the local government flag, and the flag o
43 N1120A : A MAJOR Tourist destination, that also gets Europe service. Also, while it is low yield for domestic US flights, LAS is a HIGH yield destination for
44 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Uh, no it isn't: BWI is a coterminal within the WAS metro area. ...SQ might disagree No, he's not-- they do have (sparse) nonstop service to the Azor
45 Post contains images September11 : Photos of SMF airport Looks very small to me .... plenty of space to expand, indeed.[Edited 2005-06-09 21:42:39]
46 N276AASTT : Sure Sacramento is the government seat for California, doesn't mean that it can support international service to Japan or London. Austin is the capita
47 Stirling : No I am not kidding. As I prefaced my original comments, TO EACH HIS OWN. I Prefer Sacramento, over any place I lived, and I have lived in many place
48 Johnboy : I have to say that I like Sacramento more and more, each time I go there (I live in Contra Costa County, California). Beautiful rivers and trees, and
49 Post contains images LPLAspotter : Yes this is true. However, the Providence service was a charter with SATA Air Acores or North American depending on the contract. Lately SATA has bee
50 C172 : Everyone needs to realize that those of us supporting SMF longhaul service are not expecting a British Airways 777-200 to pull up to Sacramento in a m
51 Stirling : Which is too bad. The San Joaquin Valley of Central California has a VERY strong Portuguese heritage: specifically, from the Azores. This legacy exte
52 Travelin man : I'm glad you said "maybe", because that implies maybe NOT. Blistering in the summer and cold, foggy, and rainy in the Winter? That does not imply "be
53 FLY777UAL : I believe SAN has many more operational factors which play into the lack of non-stop intercontinental service, specifically (as pointed out here) Poin
54 Travelin man : As far as I know, BA's 747s and 777s were not weight-restricted, nor are HA's 767-300s, and other various heavies that use and have used SAN. I do not
55 N1120A : Either way, they are subsidized
56 Post contains images Kahala777 : SAN suffers from a very strong stigma, as does FLL. Both are commerce centers in the shadow of much larger and established international gateways ass
57 Kahala777 : You mean an airline like Jet Blue, Hawaiian Airlines, Aloha Airlines, or Mexicana that have expanded to Sacramento at the expense of the Bay Area? Hu
58 Thomasphoto60 : Let's not forget China Airlines, Caymen, Grupo Taca or Aviasca. Perhaps we are no JFK, LAX, MIA, SFO or ORD, but we will get there eventually. Thomas
59 JpetekYXMD80 : Of course the HUB airline has international service. He said major HUB cities.... So with NWA out there is their partner KLM which is codeshare mostl
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Rumor Of Long-Haul International Service At TIJ posted Thu Nov 17 2005 20:22:54 by DCAYOW
Long Haul Out Of Short ´port posted Mon Jul 28 2003 21:17:58 by FLY777UAL
LH 747-8I As Long As The 747-8F? posted Wed Dec 13 2006 19:26:32 by MD 11
Oman Air Eye Long-haul With Used 763/764 Or 330 posted Tue Dec 12 2006 07:13:00 by Jimyvr
Austrian: None Of Long-haul Routes Are Profitable posted Tue Dec 12 2006 07:07:21 by Jimyvr
Does SAS Offer Wireless On All Long Haul? posted Fri Dec 1 2006 22:54:24 by Vio
BA 767s Long Haul posted Fri Dec 1 2006 14:32:54 by Albird87
Air Asia Plans To Fly Long Haul! posted Tue Nov 28 2006 07:47:06 by CoolSkyGuy
Virgin Blue Long Haul Decision This Month posted Tue Nov 28 2006 04:22:59 by PanAm_DC10
China Airlines To Place Long-haul Order In 07H1 posted Fri Nov 24 2006 22:16:01 by Jimyvr