KFLLCFII From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3324 posts, RR: 29
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3564 times:
Hmm, could this mean the FAA would rather utilize all current available resources (ie 13/31) more effectively because it's already in place, rather than press through an ongoing battle with the county and community for a third major runway that wouldn't necessarily be needed if intersecting-runway operations could sufficiently do the job?
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
Hiflyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2181 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 3542 times:
Ok folks...time to stop smelling the FAA exhaust. FLL is a major home to three growing carriers...JetBlue, Southwest, and Spirit. FLL is also the far cheaper choice for carrier expenses compared to MIA just to their south and PBI to their north. Carriers are coming to FLL...not going away! FLL is the center of growth for South Florida with schools so overcrowded that they seriously talk of high schools with populations of 3000 and more. Use of 13/33 is not a magic pill because it crosses 9L/27R...it helps but not by much. Expansion of 9R/27L is needed yesterday.
Sinlock From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1656 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3451 times:
Quoting KFLLCFII (Reply 2): rather than press through an ongoing battle with the county and community for a third major runway that wouldn't necessarily
One small point, FLL after the new 9R/27L is built will only have 2 runways. 13/31 will be closed due to it not being compatable with grade (slope) of the eastern end of 9R/27L. The land short term would be used as a taxiway and long term re developed into two new North/South taxiways.