FATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5743 posts, RR: 16 Posted (7 years 5 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2168 times:
Bakersfield's planned remodel of its old passenger terminal into an internatinal arrivals building has hit another problem. Flights are now pushed back to mid-2007.
Originally the MX flights were to start the same day as the Mexicana flights at FAT, April of this year. FAT chose to install a modular building to use as a FIS while BFL was going to use their old terminal.
Then BFL announced that MX would be delayed until Nov 2006 due to problems with remodeling the old building. I think it was a problem lining up materials like steel girders for an addition that was to be made.
Today's Bakersfield newspaper reports that it now looks like it could be spring of next year before the work is complete. The problem now cited is that contractors are busy with other projects.
PanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 9 Reply 3, posted (7 years 5 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2125 times:
I am very sorry to hear that Bakersfield International Airport is delayed.
However, I'm not surprised.
From the nasty comments I heard at the new terminal's open house last November, most people couldn't care less if MX or any other "foreign" airline (re: Third World) flies into Bakersfield. It doesn't matter how much money it will bring into the community, what matters is appearances. It's not flights to Cancun or Puerto Vallarta - it's not designed for the "Mexican" community, so it's not a high priority.
Sad to say, but it's true.
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
But they don't realize the flights need to start where the demand is, then allow the airline to build in the market.
Now that Mexicana is seeing success at FAT they are talking about additional flights not only to GDL, MEX, etc. but also about doing FAT to PVR, CUN, etc. I will not be surprised to see Fresno to the resort cities added in the next couple of years.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
Latinplane From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2666 posts, RR: 14 Reply 6, posted (7 years 5 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2097 times:
Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 3): From the nasty comments I heard at the new terminal's open house last November, most people couldn't care less if MX or any other "foreign" airline (re: Third World) flies into Bakersfield. It doesn't matter how much money it will bring into the community, what matters is appearances.
Yes, Pan Am747, you've already told your story many times. It has nothing to do with whatever hearsay you heard. The issue here is that you have an airport that has to spend lots of money upgrading the old terminal when you have already invested lots of money in a brand new terminal that is located about half-mile away on the other side of the airport. I guess nobody really thought it was factual that BFL would one day turn into an international airport, and the new terminal was never designed to accommodate custom facilities. I guess it would have been much cheaper if the new terminal had been designed with this in mind. It doesn't make much sense to have two terminals operating for such a small airport. BFL is going to look like La Guardia with the old terminal resembling Delta Air Lines Shuttle Marine Air Terminal. It's going to be pretty cool for Mexicana to have a dedicated terminal too itself. Can't wait to take pictures of that!
FATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5743 posts, RR: 16 Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1982 times:
Kern County extended the construction deadlines for the FIS to see if they could get any contractors. They will open bids the end of the week so we should know more in the next few days.
According to the article in today's paper below they are now shooting for a March 2007 opening of the FIS and Mexicana flights.
But note in the article that the BFL airport director is warning that things are getting a little strained with MX due to the delays. He warns they may decide to go elsewhere if the start of service keeps getting delayed.
Latinplane From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2666 posts, RR: 14 Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1908 times:
Quoting Ghost77 (Reply 8): Hmm.. hopefully MX stays!!!! BFL airport director should try to speed the things up!!!
Trust me, they'll fly into BFL sooner or later. The demand is there. It is so there that they are filling their FAT-GDL flight up to the brim. Mexicana's officials are just putting pressure on the issue for the proper authorities to move faster. I'm sure BFL's airport director is looking at FAT's success and pulling all the strings he needs in order to emulate its competitor and not lag behind. His career is at stake here - its going to look really nice on his resume when it says "Brought international service to Bakersfield airport which produced a 25% increase in passenger traffic and revenues."
TAN FLYR From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1882 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1821 times:
If they have the equipment for the flight, why not add a second FAT flight and provide a shuttle service from BFL to FAT. Or make a second flight a GDL-FAT-BFL routing with all customs/ Immigration/APHIS work done at FAT. Then make the hop to BFL. ( UA used to have such tags in the 70's and early 80's)
Ghost77 From Mexico, joined Mar 2000, 5175 posts, RR: 52 Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1768 times:
Quoting TAN FLYR (Reply 11): Or make a second flight a GDL-FAT-BFL routing with all customs/ Immigration/APHIS work done at FAT. Then make the hop to BFL. ( UA used to have such tags in the 70's and early 80's)
Could the DOT allowed this? I don't think it could be done so easy...
Ricardo Morales - flyAPM - ¡No es que maneje rapido, solo estoy volando lento!