SOUTHPACIFIC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1882 times:
OK, I know that this topic has been discussed before, but I think we should have a good discussion on it.
It's no surprise that San Diego needs a new airport. Everbody knows that. SAN is way over capacity right now, yet with San Diego being as conservative as it is, nothing is being done.
Remember when UPS was going to make the nearby Brown Field a cargo hub? That would have worked wonders! but San Diegan NIMBYS opposed it, and the plan dropped dead.
I have a few ideas for San Diego I'd like to talk about, maybe someone here has some too?
Since the general population in San Diego is concerned about environmental issues surrounding the development of a new airport, the entire future of aviation in SAN may have to stay with Lindbergh. In this case, work would have to be done to Lindbergh Fld. One idea would be to connect the main terminal with the commuter terminal. Simply build on to the terminal area. Construct more gates between the two, and use whatever available immdiate space possible. However, this would decrease ramp space and therefore congest the airport even more. But, this would have to be the case in a last-resort decision such as this.
this is probably the most unlikely to happen, but here goes. Develop Brown Field against the public's wishes. I know, it's a tyrannic thing to do, but when you're city's economy is in jeopardy, what can you do? Brown has an 8,000 foot runway, with only one obstruction, a hill, a rather big hill. And it ain't moving. But I'm sure that aircraft operations could compensate for that. The terminal at Brown is small from what I hear, but could be expanded. In fact, I know a way that this could work. negotiate with the public and apply noise restrictions to Brown Field, so people don't get all mad over the noise, and also empose environmental restrictions, making only the newest aircraft able to fly into Brown. Personally, I hate to have to condemn the old jets like that, but you know how people complain.
Develop Gillespie Field. The runways are about 5,000 feet long, so could accomodate lighter jets like 737s, maybe all the way up to 757s. This would greatly ease the congestion at SAN. Gillespie is in El Cajon, in the suburbs of San Diego. I never passed through El Cajon on my last trip to San Diego, but by my map it looks like there's a bit of open space to expand, and there shouldn't be so much resedential complaints either. What Gillespie is to San is like what Ontario is to L.A., with the exeption of all the traffic ONT has.
I consider this the best plan.
Maybe San Diego just won't be able to develop an existing airport, and have to find a new site for a brand new facility. The only area I can think of is way to the north of San Diego. Maybe somewhere out along Escondido Freeway. OR, to the west of San Diego, i the desert. Again, last resort.
Anyone else have any ideas or comments?
I mean somethings gotta be done soon. What do you think?
Thomacf From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 541 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1791 times:
I remember reading an article about how they wanted to use the U.S. side of Tiajuana airport. I guess that they could build a terminal on the U.S. side and still use the runways in Mexico. As long as the planes parked on the U.S. side, there would be no problem with customs. This had to be approved by Mexico but it sounded like a good idea. I never heard anything else about it.
Bigleaf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1787 times:
The biggest mistake made was when San Diego didn't attempt to scoop up Miramar Air Station (formerly Navy "Top Gun" - now Marine). Great location, centrally located in San Diego County, ample space etc. Throwing money at Lindberg Field is a waste of taxpayers dollars.
Purdue Arrow From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1574 posts, RR: 8 Reply 3, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1768 times:
As a San Diegan, this is an issue I take great interest in. The expansion of Gillespie would not work very well in my opinion. I have flown there before, and it doesn't really have the space to accomodate airline operations. It's surrounded by hills, and doesn't have any place to put a terminal of any reasonable size. Further, it is completly surrounded by residential areas - my sister lives about a block from it. The area is completely developed - residential land, offices, strip malls and the like. Also, Gillespie (SEE) is MUCH hotter than "San Diego", as Lindbergh Field is right on the water, where the sea breezes keep the temperature down... that's why San Diego's temperature is in the 70s year round in the news. If you go inland to SEE, you have mountains blocking the sea breezes, as well as being in desert. The temperatures out there are regularly in the 100s in the summer. While this doesn't pose a problem at airports with massive runways like DFW, it could be a sticking point with only 5000'.
Bigleaf - While Miramar might have been a good location for a commercial airport, we didn't really have a choice in the matter. When San Diegans voted against maked Miramar a civil airport, the proposition was really only asking if we should make it the civil airport if the Marines chose not to use it. Thus, since the Marines came in to Miramar, we didn't have the option of making it a commercial airport. It was federal land, and the federal government never gave it up. Even if we did have the option, Miramar is not perfect. Because of its elevation and location, Miramar is often fogged in on days when the rest of San Diego is clear as can be - it gets more fog than the rest of the metropolitan area. I do agree, howver, that throwing money at Lindberg is something of a waste. Even as the expand the ground side and add gates, they aren't really doing anything to increase capacity - one runway can only handle so many movements. The big plan now is to add a second parallel taxiway, so that planes coming off of the runway and those taxiing out don't interfere with each other.
SOUTHPACIFIC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1754 times:
Thanks for that info, Purdue Arrow. So, with some things elminated, it looks like San Diego has three options, they could expand Brown Field, which has ample room, they could use Tijuana Int'l, or they could build a brand new airport.
OK, so let's discuss Brown Field. It has one 8,000 foot runway, and one 3,000 foot runway. It's about 7 miles from the coast. You can get to the airport by exiting the 805 at Otay Mesa Rd, which by my map narrows from a four-land divided road to a two way two lane road. This makes the airport much less accessible than Lindbergh, but that can be fixed.
The airport itself has moderate room for expansion. There's a problem with the western departure because that darn mountain is in the way, but any good pilot can get around that. No problems with the eastern departure, it takes yu right oer Imperial Beach.
The terminal needs to be expanded greatly, and Jet A fuel facilities need to be added. Taxiways need to be widened. ATC is OK, I don't know if there's a departure frquency, I'd guess the airport is tower-controlled only.
There is a VOR station at Brown, giving the field an advantage. There is ATIS service at 132.35. No ILS for any runway.
The airport is about 9-12 miles from downtown, therefore lessening it's commercial traffic potential, but not by much. I imagine that Brown could accomodate at full potential 2/3 of San Diego's current traffic. Allowing mroe airlines to move into Lindbergh Fld.
The only thing standing in the way of developing Brown is the citizens of San Diego and the costs to expand the airport.
I don't see any place at all where SAN could build a new airport. All the land is gobbled up. So if they want to build a new facility, here's what they'll have to do:
Build it offshore. Yep. Take Meigs Field in Chicago. They dredged land up from the bottom of Lake Michigan and build more land onto the shore for the airport. SAN coud so the same thing, expand the shoreline and build an offshore airport. In fact, they don't have to dredge the seafloor, there's so mcuh contruction going on in San Diego all the time that they could simply take all the gravel and dirt dug up for new buildings to the shoreline and dump it, adding to the shoreline.
Tijuana? Yeah, they could use it for a while, and at the moment this seems the most likely to happen. They park the planes on the North Side, no problem, except one. The north side can only accomodate so much traffic before planes are forced to park on the south side.
USAFHummer From United States of America, joined May 2000, 10685 posts, RR: 53 Reply 5, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1753 times:
San Diego residents probably aren't going to want to expand those airports as Lindbergh Field is practically in downtown San Diego and very easy to access, those other airports are 20-30 mins. away. Taking over Miramar would have been the best plan I think, but the Marines beat the city to the punch. Also, Lindbergh has a 9,500 ft. runway, longer than any of the others.
I go to SAN once every 3 years (93, 96, and 99) and it is a traffic nightmare, isn't there wide open space due east of the city?
Or, if they have to build a new airport, they should place it far away, halfway between Los Angeles and San Diego, and this could help relieve traffic at LAX as well as SAN.
P.S. Purdue Arrow, did you hear anything on the news about a US A319 that had an engine on fire after departure from SAN in late August, Ihave been trying to find out more info on this for a while, I had a family member on that flight.
Chief A.net college football stadium self-pic guru
SOUTHPACIFIC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1739 times:
Someone mentioned that a new airport should be built in between SAN and LAX. that's a very good idea, but I think the airport is already there, just not being used. What I am talkign about is El Toro. The Air Force just closed it, and people are trying to decide whether they want to build homes over it or make it a new airport. I hope they make it an airport!!
Think about it, two runways at 10,000 feet long, tow at 8,000, and one at 4,000. It's right near the coast and just east of John Wayne airport. It's a perfect reliever for LAX. It wouldn't get much traffic from SAN though, or none at all.
I took the Amtrak from San to Anaheim when I was in Southcal this summer. It was night, but from what I saw out the window, it looks like there's alot of mountains between San Diego and Anaheim. If this is the case, a large facility between is impossible and impractical. It looks like all that San can hope for is resident cooperation. That's all.
SANman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1740 times:
This is my first msg, but i'm very interested in the SAN situation, seeing that i live in san diego.
brown field- the problem with using brown field is that there are current plans to use it as a only cargo airport. as far as i've heard, the plan hasn't been completely killed, the SD council is just waiting for an FAA and EIR report on the project
el toro- it won't be built into a commercial airport. there's too much opposition to it, and it doesn't sound like a good idea, especially if they want to keep SNA open.
lets face it, the relief san diego can get is either they build a north of the border terminal at tiajuana, or they build a completely new airport. the only open places an airport can be built are owned by the government. here's some places i think an airport can be built: miramar, pendelton, and coronado air station.
coronado will probably never happen, because of too many NIMBY complaints. so that leaves miramar and pendelton.
there was a proposal to build an airport on miramar property, but east of I-15. i think it's a good idea, because according to this plan, not that many people will be affected by aircraft noise, and it'll also be near highway 52. the only problem is that you have a lot of dirt to move, because it's rather hilly over there.
pendelton would also be a good place to build an airport, because it's also between LA and san diego, so it can help relieve traffic in the LA area as well. i don't see any problem with building an airport there, except the fact that you need the land in the first place.
btw, have any of you heard any news of BA upgrading the current SAN-PHX-LGW 744 flight to a nonstop SAN-LGW 777 flight?
AAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3434 posts, RR: 49 Reply 10, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1727 times:
>When San Diegans voted against maked Miramar a civil airport,
>the proposition was really only asking if we should make it the
>civil airport if the Marines chose not to use it.
The referendum was essentially an opinion poll taken _after_ USMC was assigned to transfer to NKX.
>Thus, since the Marines came in to Miramar,
No, they were assigned to move to NKX prior to the referendum. The opportunity to aquire NKX was already gone.
>...we didn't have the option of making it a commercial airport.
>It was federal land, and the federal government never gave it up.
No, it is city owned land leased to the federal government for $1.00 per year on a renewable basis at the federal government's option. When BRAC selected NAS Miramar for closure, they opened the window of opportunity for the city to reclaim the land for city use (all sorts of conditions required, but making it a civil airport would have met all the conditions). The city government never filed that claim and the following year the re-evaluation by BRAC closed Tustin and El Toro moving their assets to Camp Pendleton and NKX. Had the city of San Diego claimed it wanted to use NKX for civil airport, the USMC would not have had the option of moving to NKX.
>...Miramar is not perfect. Because of its elevation and location,
>Miramar is often fogged in on days when the rest of San Diego
>is clear as can be - it gets more fog than the rest of the
While true, Miramar also has the open space that permits CATIII (near zero visibility) operations. While Miramar is able to operate in fog, Lindbergh is regularly closed due to the same low clouds (CAT-I landings only). Additionally, the fog "burns off" quickly at NKX while it remains "low clouds" throughout the majority of San Diego County.
For those thinking about creating an airfield between San Diego and Los Angeles, there is no level (or near level) unused land between the two. Additionally, El Toro is already being touted in Orange County as both additional airport or replacement for SNA. But that's their political problem. San Diego residents have been watching their politicians duck & weave for 30+ years on replacing Lindbergh Field and have no interest in what Orange County residents do with their politicians.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
UA757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 13 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1699 times:
I would like to see a new airport at Brown Field, Since I live In Imperial Beach which will be in the flight path of departing a/c. But there are many people opposing it, Thinking it will lower property values because of the noise over the neighborhood. Hope something works out before we are in trouble.
SOUTHPACIFIC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1684 times:
I'm glad you like the offshore airport idea! But it really wouldn't cost much mroe than building an airport on land.
OK, take Meigs Field again. They had to pay the enourmous expense of dredging the lake bottom up to form new land. You don't have that problem in my idea. You San Diego residents know for a fact that everwhere you look in San Diego there's some new building going up. someone's always digging. So why not use this mass contruction at advantage. Basically, every bit of gravel and dirt that is dug up for building foundations can be shipped by truck to the shoreline location, and dumped. Build an offshore concrete barrier to hold all the debris, and generally contain the airport, much as Osaka did. The only problem is that Osaka's airport is in a sheltered bay, and doesn't have to deal with ocean swells, tsunamis, etc. So SAN's new airport would have to have a high retaining wall facing oceanward, strong enough to resist ocean swells and light tsunamis.
Looking at my map again, it looks like the best place to put an offshore airport is just off the peninsual of land between Imperial Beach and Coronado NAS.
Here, you have access to the Strand highway. You're just across San Diego Bay from downtown, all you have to do is drive across the bay bridge to enter the heart of the town.
Another plus, you are away from the famous beaches, so you are not disrupting any people at all.
The US Navy Amphibious Base is located on the Strand, and no one seems to oppose it's being there, so why not a new international airport? It'd be economical, well placed, protected, and unbothersome. How can you lower the property value of the surrounding military land? You can't. No worries there!!
I hope someone of power in San Diego gets this same idea and pursues it, it's the best option!!!
SANman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1645 times:
well, why don't they just create a rail line from downtown S.D. to this offshore airport? it would help draw traffic off of the Coranado Bridge and it would help keep cars off Silver Strand Highway, which by the way, wouldn't be able to handle the traffic created by the new airport.
AAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3434 posts, RR: 49 Reply 20, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1644 times:
>OK, take Meigs Field again. They had to pay the enourmous
>expense of dredging the lake bottom up to form new land.
>You don't have that problem in my idea.
No, you have an airport that will be 25 times LARGER than Meigs Field!
>You San Diego residents know for a fact that everwhere you
>look in San Diego there's some new building going up. someone's always
>digging. So why not use this mass contruction at advantage.
Because it is already being used elsewhere to create level, usable land.
>Basically, every bit of gravel and dirt that is dug up for building
>foundations can be shipped by truck to the shoreline location,
>and dumped. Build an offshore concrete barrier to hold all the debris,
>and generally contain the airport, much as Osaka did.
So you're saying: create a man-made island. Problem with that is that tourism is San Diego's #1 economy and the San Diego beaches & weather are the #1 reason for tourist to visit San Diego. Creating an off-shore island with an airport destroys the #1 reason behind the #1 economic engine that creates the need for increased air travel capacity in the first place.
>The only problem is that Osaka's airport is in a sheltered bay,
>and doesn't have to deal with ocean swells, tsunamis, etc. So SAN's
>new airport would have to have a high retaining wall facing oceanward,
>strong enough to resist ocean swells and light tsunamis.
If it is off-shore, a retaining wall needs to surround the entire island. High enough to protect from winter storm swells means 20-30 feet above sea level minimum. Not a pretty sight if you're a tourist seeking sun, sand and ocean view.
Looking at my map again, it looks like the best place to put an offshore
>airport is just off the peninsual of land between Imperial Beach
>and Coronado NAS.
Some of the highest paying tourist spots in the county.
>Here, you have access to the Strand highway. You're just across
>San Diego Bay from downtown, all you have to do is drive across
>the bay bridge to enter the heart of the town.
Coronado residents have been trying to reduce traffic from the bridge since it was built. Currently I plan an additional 20 minutes for traffic if one of my technicians has a call on the island. It really is bad and there is no place to put a "by-pass" or freeway to get to your theoretical island airport.
>Another plus, you are away from the famous beaches, so you
>are not disrupting any people at all.
From the more famous beaches... that is true. But lots of $$$ folks live on Coronado, visit Coronado, stay on Coronado. Additionally, any construction that far south will impact local ocean currents creating even greater contamination from TJ's untreated sewage runoffs.
>The US Navy Amphibious Base is located on the Strand,
>and no one seems to oppose it's being there, so why not
>a new international airport?
NAB Coronado has no aircraft facilities, no seagoing ship facilities, no heavy training facilities. Essentially nothing that generates noise, obstructs views, or creates large volume of automobile traffic. It does have a relatively large number of athletic SEALS.
>It'd be economical,
Most expensive option studied.
Flight paths would interfer with TJ, NAS North Island, NAF Imperial and westerly departures from Brown. Ocean routes south from San Diego would be extended a minimum of 20 nautical miles. Haven't even discussed effects on fishing industry, whales, or a host of other environmental issues brought up when the idea was originally studied.
Totally unprotected location from winter storms (they come from south-southwest).
Reread the above. Are you sure?
>How can you lower the property value of the surrounding
>military land? You can't. No worries there!!
The majority of the land is not military owned. A friend of mine owns a small lot 3 blocks from the beach (Gordon Bethune is a neighbor). Barely large enough to hold his small house. He says he lives in the "slums" because his property is only worth $1.5 Million.
No worries? Think again. Maps do not begin to explain the problems facing San Diego's future airport needs. The problem is that San Diego "leaders" haven't been able to make an airport decision for the more than 25 years they've been "studying" the issue. :-(
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
Greeneyes53787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 844 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1640 times:
No, no, no, people.
My idea is to put it straight out from where the runway is now. I don't mean to extend the runway or the port, but to head out that way for the new airport.
Coronado is totally in the wrong direction, busy and assigned to weekend shopping and the like. But to put the port at a place not used now would separate the tourist attractions from the place they come and go. These two need to stay separate.
Further, I guess I didn't read all the posts here. I thought this way my idea.
AAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3434 posts, RR: 49 Reply 22, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1636 times:
>to put the port at a place not used now would
>separate the tourist attractions from the place they
>come and go. These two need to stay separate.
Correct. Now look at a map of San Diego's coastline and point out a place, any place that is not in use today. Sorry, but the only "unused" coastline is off Coronado or Camp Pendleton. Coronado has been discussed here and USMC isn't going to permit any activity that interfers with one of the last remaining places they can practice amphib. landings (think: "national defense").
>I thought this way my idea.
Off-shore airport has been studied in San Diego for more than 25 years. It remains the most expensive and least feasible concept proposed.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
Greeneyes53787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 844 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1628 times:
Dir sir, I didn't mean to say that no person ever thought of this idea before. I just thought I came up with this idea on this forum. I yield to whoever mentioned it first. Further, I don't care. Now to the map, I see only the San Clemente Islands between the coast (straight out from the runway) and the open sea.
Since I don't live in that part of the country now I cannot run over to Gibbs, rent a C-172 and have a look for myself. But it looks to me like a good place to build an airport--or an airport extention.
Who owns what and why is someone else's expertise.
My expectation is that no matter who has dibs of that area the city will grow to be one of the largest cities in the world. The needs of the many will outweigh the needs of the few, no matter who they are. Therefore if SAN needs to build a bridge to San Clemente Island #1, extract the goats there and set up a link to the rest of the world right there--they will.......
Hawaiian717 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3151 posts, RR: 8 Reply 24, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1623 times:
San Clemente Island is nowhere near San Diego. It is part of the Channel Islands that are off the coast of California's Orange County north to Santa Barabara County. Besides, the islands are all National Park areas.
go! is no Aloha. Mesa, go! home.
25 AAR90: >Therefore if SAN needs to build a bridge to San Clemente Island #1, >extract the goats there and set up a link to the rest of the world >right there-
26 SANman: Again, I'll reiterate that Miramar, Pendelton, and NAS Coronado are the most likely canidates for a new airport. Tijuana would only offer some relief.
27 Trvlr: DAMN! I can't believe I missed this topic. I still think Miramar is the best location for an airport, although Tijuana is currently the easier option.