Slider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6816 posts, RR: 34
Reply 3, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2227 times:
I can tell you that this is a BRILLIANT idea!!
Long overdue, especially in the case of MKE, which has been run by Milwaukee County for years. As in everything government touches, there is a bureaucracy beyond belief.
I think this will get traction since the Milw. Public Museum, also County owned and once one of the finest museums of its type anywhere, was run into the ground, bankrupted and is an example of government run amok.
I think uniting many of the WI airports, getting them out of county/municipal control, would also help stimulate the markets in the state, particularly in central/north central WI.
ATWZW170 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 904 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2207 times:
I don't think this is that bad of an idea. I also think it would be a good idea to have one airport between ATW/GRB. Look at all the seats being sold in the two markets....make them one and next thing you know we can support mainline service...and yes I know NW sends in a few mainline flights...but UA could send in a 737, DL, YX, and others might upgrade flights.
Success is getting what you want...happiness is liking what you get
Boeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2118 times:
Quoting Vivavegas (Reply 5): Will never happen, the surrounding counties and other state airports do not want to play second fiddle to the "Big City" airport. Whether this is true or not, the preception will always be there.
I think you're missing the point of what is proposed here. This is a proposed consolidation of resources to better balance cost sharing for each region of the state. If all airports within the region are operated by the same agency, then revenue can be shifted from the large airport to smaller airports for improvements otherwise not affordable by the smaller airport. It's hardly a "second fiddle" issue.
Boeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2100 times:
Going forward on the issue.... It is not intended that airports within a region compete with eachother, but that they should compliment eachother. Competition of airports has -NEVER- been the intent, only competition of airlines. Some people are still incapable of grasping this simple concept. Wisconsin obviously gets it and so does the FAA.
DCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4506 posts, RR: 33
Reply 8, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2078 times:
As an undergraduate public administration major, I learned all about the ideas that "regionalizing" government," and "urban planning," would supposedly lead to better local government. It was not clear to me then, and is not clear now, that either regional/ authority or municipal operation of public facilities is necessarily superior to the other. Each state or local area needs to make its own decisions, based upon what works for them.
IMO, it's up to each of these areas to decide how to run their airports. I've been to the Oshkosh-Appleton-Green Bay corridor and wondered why they bother with three air-carrier sized airports. The patterns have shifted; in the '70s GRB and OSH had air service and ATW didn't; now it's GRB and ATW, and Wittman Field is out in the cold.
If people in Brown County are happy with GRB, people in Winnebago County are happy with OSH, and folks in Outagamie County are happy with ATW, that's up to them. From a purely operational-expense standpoint, it would probably make sense to consolidate all air and cargo service at ATW.
ATW isn't even 40 minutes from Green Bay in good traffic, and Oshkosh is probably about 30 minutes. And a bigger traffic base might have better chance of drawing more air service The region's population of around a half-million is in the ballpark for supporting an LCC. I don't have time to look up figures but can't imagine that the MLI or Bloomington/ Normal catchment areas, which support AirTran, are much bigger than the Fox River valley.
But Brown County just built new concourses at GRB, and even ATW's recently-expanded terminal would strain to take all of its passengers. There would be millions of dollars in cost, and the lost investment at GRB, involved with an ATW consolidation. I don't think you'd be able to sell closing the local airport to folks in Green Bay, esp. since their airport is still supporting mainline service. And AirTran could probably enter ATW or GRB if they wanted to, whether anything was changed at the three airports or not.
I haven't looked into the finances of the three airports; if all are in the black, and have good prospects of staying in the black, it's not clear to me that people there would want to change. I suspect that if ATW were on the NE side of Appleton--maybe 7-10 miles closer to Green Bay--it might be an easier sell. But it isn't, and GRB is probably 12-15 minutes from downtown Green Bay.
At ROC, we set up a county airport authority and transferred direct control from the county to the authority, in order to issue bonds at most reasonable cost for the 1989-1992 expansion. It worked well for us. But it's up to folks in Wisconsin communities to decide which model works best for them.
Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)