Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Caracas Airport Svcs To Get Expropriated (II Part)  
User currently offline797 From Venezuela, joined Aug 2005, 1894 posts, RR: 27
Posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2218 times:

Hey guys,

As recent news have developed, I decided to start a new thread on the topic due to all the deviated comments posted in the previous discussion.

Yesterday I had the opportunity to watch a TV program famous for its interviews. This time, it was to the governor Diosdado Cabello, the one who proclaimed the expropriation movement towards Caracas' second airport.

I was expecting to see an aggressive man defending the 'revolution' and harassing the high-middle class, as it usually happens. But no, I saw a very calmed person trying to expose his ideas and defending the movement with property. Logically, the expropriation topic was deeply discussed and my eyes got to widen a lot, in comparison to what I felt before.

Anyhow, to the topic... Mr. Diosdado said three important things that clear everything up (I wrote it paraphrasing what he said):


  • The expropriation is an idea based on a positive fact. SVCS is a strategic point for the government and it needs customs, which is something that has been missing for many years now. Caracas cannot depend on CCS, for obvious reasons. The mission of this idea is to relief CCS' traffic and have a new gateway from the capital city without having to travel so far.

  • The project won't let anyone loose their job. What we're looking for is expand the services to/from this airport and enhance travel possibilities in the area. The expropriation is fully operational. All the hangars are and will remain private owned and we will BUY some of them to modify the arrivals area. The owners of these hangars will receive either a payment or a re-build in a near-by location within the airport.

  • We will modify the airport's infrastructure so it can handle heavier aircraft and more passengers throughout the terminal. All this project is to benefit the whole area, making it a public patrimony


----------------

So, let speculation begin. I believed to what he said. If we go deep and analyze the whole situation, it is not viable for them to expropriate the whole airport. Many of them have huge aircraft parked there and they have to fly internationally most of the time, having to make a stop at an international airport.

They need the private sector to move freely so they can add something to the economy. Chavez knows that and he cannot bury himself with silly things. I do agree that in their 'plans' they need to control certain areas so they're not vulnerable to oposition threads, like the one that happened in 2001.

Either way, it sucks. I do not trust them, but after all it seems logic to me.

What do you all think?

Saludos desde CCS,

Enrique


Flying isn't dangerous. Crashing is what's dangerous!
6 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLatinplane From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2724 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2192 times:

I think it's important for CCS to have a secondary airport that can be used as a reliever airport to handle domestic airline service.

Let's remember how bad it was during the floods of 99, when Maiquetia became inaccessible and Caracas was pretty much cut from the outside world. Then again last year when the highway linking Maiquetia was closed Charallave became an emergency reliever to domestic services for a while until the situation improved on the highway linking La Guaira and CCS.

When the facilities at the airport are expanded, will it allow for the use of large aircraft like 737s and DC-9s? It would be interesting if Conviasa is given the job of developing Charavalle's potential as a the alternative to Caracas.

 Smile LatinPlane


User currently offlineChiguire From Venezuela, joined Sep 2004, 2005 posts, RR: 16
Reply 2, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2168 times:

Quoting 797 (Thread starter):
I do agree that in their 'plans' they need to control certain areas so they're not vulnerable to oposition threads, like the one that happened in 2001.

And this is the ONLY reason they did it. All other attempts to explain it are just excuses to calm the people.
IF they want a better and larger airport with a "more reliable" location, so why don't they build a completely new mega-airport south of the city and build a high-speed train to access it ?


User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9377 posts, RR: 29
Reply 3, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2127 times:

Quoting 797 (Thread starter):

They need the private sector to move freely so they can add something to the economy. Chavez knows that and he cannot bury himself with silly things. I do agree that in their 'plans' they need to control certain areas so they're not vulnerable to oposition threads, like the one that happened in 2001.

They will not make better airports for the people, or even better airports to serve the economy and they don't need the private sector either. Don't try to explain with reason whatever this kind of people does. I do not want to get this off topic or even political, but the only reason behind the actions of heads of state that are no longer under the control of the people is to stay in power. Whatever that takes. Very simple.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offline797 From Venezuela, joined Aug 2005, 1894 posts, RR: 27
Reply 4, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2100 times:

Quoting Latinplane (Reply 1):
When the facilities at the airport are expanded, will it allow for the use of large aircraft like 737s and DC-9s?

No. Runway lenght is too short and location is not proper to handle these type of aircraft, since the airport is on top of a flattened mountain. I read somewhere that the runway is not designed to allow big jets to land there, so I don't think its safe to throw in there any 737s and DC9s.

However, if they get to expand the terminal, I see a good potential for short flights, such as VLN, BLA and PMV and Avior, Santa Barbara and Conviasa could take their props without many problems. And, if they open customs, then AUA would be pretty good too. It's all a matter of time and belief.

Quoting Chiguire (Reply 2):
why don't they build a completely new mega-airport south of the city and build a high-speed train to access it ?

Haha, welcome to South America my friend! That would be a dream come true!



Flying isn't dangerous. Crashing is what's dangerous!
User currently offlineB757200 From Spain, joined Sep 2004, 184 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2070 times:

Quoting 797 (Reply 4):
No. Runway lenght is too short and location is not proper to handle these type of aircraft, since the airport is on top of a flattened mountain. I read somewhere that the runway is not designed to allow big jets to land there, so I don't think its safe to throw in there any 737s and DC9s.

Exactly. Remember that runways also have weight restrictions. If possible, it wouldn't be as simple as stretching runway 10/28 (it's only 6562' long). They would have to accomodate it to handle heavier aircraft. I'm no expert on airport engineering but, correct me if I'm wrong, I guess that would mean a total remake of the current runway.


User currently offline797 From Venezuela, joined Aug 2005, 1894 posts, RR: 27
Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2005 times:

Quoting B757200 (Reply 5):
I guess that would mean a total remake of the current runway.

That's right. The airport was built to perfectly fit on top of the mountain. It cannot be enhanced just because there's no space at all. On the right of the runway 10/28 they have the control tower and the former customs. On the left, there's the Cafeteria, Terminal and Hangars which occupy most of the space.

The only logic movement I see possible is to take out some hangars near the tarmac and terminal area just to accomodate some more props. Also, making the terminal bigger and with more facilities would come handy.



Flying isn't dangerous. Crashing is what's dangerous!
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...
How Early Is Early To Get To The Airport? posted Tue Oct 10 2006 16:47:52 by B777A340Fan
Best Way To Get To Philadelphia Airport From NYC posted Wed Dec 21 2005 19:50:29 by AT
YVR: 1st Airport In World To Get New Radar System posted Wed Jul 27 2005 03:50:56 by DFORCE1
St. Helena To Get First Airport posted Tue Mar 15 2005 22:14:07 by FlyBeQ400
Ghana To Get 2nd International Airport posted Tue Mar 8 2005 09:01:26 by Soups
Kerala, India To Get Another Airport posted Thu Nov 25 2004 13:01:52 by GKirk
Armstrong Airport To Get New N.Y., Philly Flights posted Sat Mar 27 2004 03:45:11 by Cmckeithen
YUL First Canadian Airport To Get The A380! posted Thu Oct 9 2003 05:45:41 by Thenoflyzone
Tioman To Get New Airport posted Sat Aug 16 2003 20:02:40 by Mas a330
Quickest Canadian Airport To Get Out Of? posted Sat Jul 26 2003 08:53:58 by Fly_yhm