Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SoCA Airports To Be Slot Controlled In The Future?  
User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 9
Posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 5277 times:

I have been reading with great apprehension how despite increases in growth, most of the airports in Southern California are doing everything they can to limit growth.

http://www.laxmasterplan.org

Quote:
Gate Space to Accommodate Approximately 78.9 Million Annual Passengers (MAP). Gate space is reconfigured to accommodate larger gates for current and next-generation aircraft associated with international and long haul domestic travel. The number of aircraft gates will decrease from the existing 163 to 153 to place practical constraints on numbers of operations and passengers handled and limit the throughput of LAX to approximately 78.9 MAP.

Burbank, Orange County, and Long Beach are ready to tear down the airports at a moment's notice - at least the NIMBY neighbors are.

San Diego and its battles with Miramar are finally coming to fruition.

I am beginning to forsee the day when virtually every airport in Southern California becomes slot-restricted due to short-sightedness and cow-towing to neighbors. The airlines, I'm sure, would LOVE this boondoggle - limited capacity means they can charge whatever they want - and our children and grandchildren will be left holding the bag.

Any thoughts?


Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24325 posts, RR: 47
Reply 1, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 5243 times:

From what I understand for quite some time now it is illegal for airport to establish their own slot restrictions simply wishing reduce overall flight activity (LGB and SNA are grandfathered in) if they still wish to continue receiving federal funding. Slots restrictions can only be implemented on the Federal level to manage flight activity in excess of airport runway capacity (ORD, LGA, JFK in the afternoon)

Airports however can place restrictions on overall passenger volume, aircraft size, curfew hours as they wish.

As such I dont expect to see any of the LA airports to become Federally slot restricted as they all operate significantly under runway capacity.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineANother From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 5219 times:

Quoting PanAm747 (Thread starter):
The airlines, I'm sure, would LOVE this boondoggle - limited capacity means they can charge whatever they want - and our children and grandchildren will be left holding the bag.

Actually, I think you will find that airlines do not want (more) airports to become slot controlled. Scheduling is a nightmare to begin with and to need to deal with more and more airports where slot (pairs) need to be managed is not the way the industry wants to go.


User currently offlineCarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2910 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 5122 times:

Quoting PanAm747 (Thread starter):
Burbank, Orange County, and Long Beach are ready to tear down the airports at a moment's notice - at least the NIMBY neighbors are.

Why not bulldoze the NIMBY's houses?  Wink


User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 5071 times:

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 1):
Airports however can place restrictions on overall passenger volume, aircraft size, curfew hours as they wish.

Only LAX can do so because LAWA also operates ONT. A single airport operator cannot impose such restrictions unless they have a noise variance.

SoCal airports slot controlled? No. Traffic jams... Yes. At the rate SAN is going Lindbergh be the 737RS/787-3/8 capital of the world if they can find space for about 40 787-3/8 gates and 24 737RS gates. That's all the gates that place can handle.

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 3):
Why not bulldoze the NIMBY's houses?

Easier said then done. While at SAN 10 years ago we pondered this option. Suddenly homes became "historical".

[Edited 2006-06-16 09:20:42]

User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 5008 times:

I sent this in to the Union-Tribune today. Whether it gets published or not, we'll see. I should have sent on behalf of all the a.netters...

Here it is:

Quote:
To the editors of the Union-Tribune:

As a proud San Diegan, I will be the first to loudly proclaim, "I LOVE LINDBERGH!!" I love watching planes floating over the city from Balboa Park and downtown, I love the convenience of a downtown airport, and I love that it is a simple, easy-to-use, friendly airport.

That being said, I wish to address a few things that have been said about its future and the possibility of Miramar becoming our next airport.

One of the saddest statements being tossed around concerns the use of LAX, and how that should be our fallback position. Recently, the cities of Los Angeles, El Segundo, & Hawthorne all signed an agreement regarding LAX's future. From the website www.laxmasterplan.org, I quote:

Gate Space to Accommodate Approximately 78.9 Million Annual Passengers (MAP). Gate space is reconfigured to accommodate larger gates for current and next-generation aircraft associated with international and long haul domestic travel. The number of aircraft gates will decrease from the existing 163 to 153 to place practical constraints on numbers of operations and passengers handled and limit the throughput of LAX to approximately 78.9 MAP.

In other words, LAX will be REDUCING capacity once it reaches 78,900,000 annual passengers. Some projections place the demand in upcoming years of up to 120 MAP. Where will they go? Burbank? Orange County? Long Beach?

No - all three of those airports are closed in and face neighbors determined to not just slow their growth, but close them down outright. Burbank airport cannot make one change to the airport at all - it is the law. Even the federally mandated luggage inspections have to take place outside, as the law prohibits even the slightest modification to any portion of the airport.

Orange County has one of the shortest runways for commercial operation in the United States, barely half as long as Lindbergh Field's, at 5700 feet in length. This airport is closed completely from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM - and unlike Lindbergh, no landings are permitted. Newport Beach, the community at the end of the runway, would just as soon the airport be closed completely.

Long Beach airport is slot-restricted. That means only a certain number of landings and take-offs per day are permitted, regardless of the size of the aircraft.

For other commercial service, there are only two airports in the Los Angeles area - Ontario, and to a lesser extent, Palm Springs. Ontario has the capacity to grow, but it is located quite a distance east of the metro Los Angeles area, as well as being quite far north of the San Diego area.

If we assume LAX (and other airports in Southern California) to be our fallback position if and when Lindbergh becomes too small, then there will be a most unpleasant surprise when these other airports say, "Sorry - we're already full. Go back where you came from and use your own airport".

With that being said, some have suggested, "well, we'll just tell the airlines to start flying bigger planes here!!"

The fact is that the airlines would LOVE for our airports to become slot-restricted. When you limit the number of take-offs and landings, you limit the number of seats that can be sold. As demand increases but supply stays static, the cost for each seat will start to rise. Airlines will make more money off of each flight, because they know that there is no alternative for the customer, nor do they have to worry about competition, because with slot-controls, no one else can enter.

Some airlines only fly one type of plane. Southwest Airlines, that champion of low-fares, only flies 737's of various types. Their business model stresses simplicity, and they will NOT be buying a different type of airplane with larger capacity simply because certain customers want them to. In fact, the trend with most airlines in this country is to offer more frequencies with smaller planes to give travellers more choices.

I would love to see Lindbergh able to handle our air traffic needs forever. But I don't see how that can happen. I wish I had a simple solution that would make everyone happy, but that kind of panacea is a fable even the Grimm Brothers wouldn't try. What is needed is a calm discussion of ALL the facts and some hard choices for the future, both of which do not seem to be happening.

Maybe calmer heads will prevail, maybe not.

Thank you for letting me express my opinion.



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineGmcc From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 190 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4985 times:

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 5):
Orange County has one of the shortest runways for commercial operation in the United States, barely half as long as Lindbergh Field's, at 5700 feet in length. This airport is closed completely from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM

Actually SNA is closed for departures from 10 pm to 7 am and closed to arrivals from 11 pm to 7 am Mon thru Sat. Sunday departures are 8 am to 10pm and Sunday 8 am to 11 pm. See link

http://www.ocair.com/generalaviation/ganoise.htm


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21416 posts, RR: 60
Reply 7, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4977 times:

And the 7am curfew creates quite a race and traffic jam to get out first, as so many carriers have 6:55 departures.

If the local residents were asking for a loud alarm clock, they got one. 10 jets taking off in a row at 7AM from an otherwise quiet airport...



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
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...
PHL To ANC On US In The Future? posted Mon May 29 2006 05:58:39 by Jdwfloyd
Which A/c To Asia For NW In The Future? posted Tue Aug 17 2004 00:41:03 by NW747400
Will Everything Be An RJ In The Future? posted Tue Dec 23 2003 03:38:32 by Airtahitinui
Where To See EK's 773 In The Future? posted Tue May 14 2002 00:38:38 by Godbless
Will There Be A Shortage Of Pilots In The Future? posted Sat Apr 22 2006 09:15:07 by A319XFW
Charter Flights To Libya In The Future? posted Sun Jul 24 2005 00:09:45 by Orion737
NYC To YEG Anywhere In The Future? posted Sat Apr 30 2005 19:17:14 by RAMPRAT980
Any AA 777's To STL In The Future? posted Wed Mar 27 2002 03:13:59 by Boeing nut
What Airline(s) Do You Want To Fly In The Future? posted Fri Nov 16 2001 00:50:07 by DeltaRules
US/DL Merger: Remember This In The Future posted Thu Nov 16 2006 20:35:10 by Wingspan