ERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6626 posts, RR: 19 Posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1324 times:
Hey ya'll..
I was just thinking here and I thought I would propose it to the group to see what you all think.
Would it be a good idea or a bad idea for an airport to construct a "townhouse hangers" for airlines to use on a month-to-month basis? Meaning, let's say an airport built a hanger for their site that had 5 bays, each seperated from the other by a wall.. much like townhouses. And then, they could rent each bay out to airlines on a month-to-month basis. That way, airlines would have a place to do any maintenance, cleaning, overnight parking, or whatever they have to in an enclosed place. And since it's only month-to-month, there is no huge overhead or large lease. And if they don't need it, they don't have to use it.
I know this may be somewhat expensive for the airport, but it does seem like a good technique for airport to use.
I was thinking for aircraft up to 757 range (unless the airport gets lots of larger aircraft, then they could go appropriately). I am also thinking this is for non-hub airports (no ORD, CLT, JFK, MIA, DEN, etc), but probably for large, mid, and focus city airports.
ERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6626 posts, RR: 19 Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1270 times:
Dang.. is that the only answer you can give? a smart remark? of course I meant hangars.. but it's an easy oversight. Good Lawd.
Crjonbeez From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 317 posts, RR: 4 Reply 4, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1174 times:
hangar rental isn't cheap. a month to month basis would be much more expensive than signing a long term lease in that case. SBN was used as a MX base for Chicago Express and their S340s. when ATA sold the saabs, chicago express disappeared and we've been stuck trying to find new hangar tenants that can take advantage of a building that large ever since. it's probably about 140x200.
PlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11139 posts, RR: 63 Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1170 times:
The used to do something similar at my home airport. There was one hanger, and the two airlines would share use of it for overnight maintenance and also for checks. One airline went under though which put an end to it!
Cruiser From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 998 posts, RR: 8 Reply 6, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1159 times:
At YYZ, I understand that the GTAA has its own hanger and then rents each bay out on an as-needed basis. For example, the Concorde stayed the night in there the last time it was in.
James
Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"
Futurecaptain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1136 times:
You mention non-hub airports.
Assuming NO airlines have maintanance facilities at said airport, where do the mechaniics come from? Does the airport hire mechanics on the hope the hangar will be filled? Also what a/c types will the mechanics be trained on, assuming several different types visit the airport daily?
ERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6626 posts, RR: 19 Reply 8, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1131 times:
I can only speak for RDU which doesn't have maintenance hangers. I have personally seen Delta, Southwest, US Airways, and jetBlue aircraft being worked on. WN and US have some sort of small maintenance "shack"..
other than that, I don't know. But I just thought it would be an intriguing amenity for airports to offer.. I would assume that the airline would supplier their own equipment and personnel if all the airport was supplying was the hangar.
Ilikeyyc From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1373 posts, RR: 22 Reply 9, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1092 times:
Hangars with multiple bays for aircraft as large as the 757 are very expensive to build. I can't imagine a rational investor putting up that kind of money in hopes of finding some "month to month" tennants, especially at a non-hub airport. That kind of facility needs a long term contract from a tennant before any groundbreaking is done in order to guaruntee a retun on the investment.
DavestanKSAN From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 1678 posts, RR: 15 Reply 10, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1063 times:
Pretty cool idea. It would make most sense in cold weathered cities for the RONs. At non-hub airports (at least here in SAN) mx work (depending on the severity of the issue) is either done at the gate (ops permitting) or at a remote stand. Same thing with the RONs. They are either cleaned at the gate and left there, towed to a remote stand and cleaned there, or cleaned and then towed to a remote stand. Or sometimes halfway cleaned at the gate, then towed, and then when you have a chance you go finish cleaning it. haha.
Your idea would make things more organized. I'm not sure if it's too practical or cost efficient, but good thinking regardless.
Dave
[Edited 2006-10-15 07:02:53]
Yesterday we've sinned, today we move towards God. Touch the sky....love and respect...Safe Star!
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6626 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 3694 posts, 
From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11139 posts, 
From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 998 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
