Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Re: FIS At Regional Airports To Relieve Congestion  
User currently offlineSurfrider1978 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 292 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2655 times:

How slim are the chances that smaller regional metro airports install a FIS to relieve congestion at majors. For instance in the L.A. area having a customs/immigration at BUR and SNA, they could relieve LAX of quite a few flights and gate space. Im sure both airports could handle a few flights to and from Canada and Mexico.

49 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMOBflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1209 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2642 times:

Well, looks like GYY should be getting FIS soon because of the new Mexico flights. RFD has had it for years they just have occasional charters to CUN.

User currently offlineDesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7801 posts, RR: 16
Reply 2, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2637 times:

First almost all (or is it all) US bound flights from Canada pre-clear, so no added benefit to building FIS at regional airports there. If any US or Canadian airline wanted to fly transboarder they can do so presently. Secondly the total volume of flights, while sizeable wouldn't put much of a dent in the passenger or movement numbers at a big airport like LAX where domestic flights still make up the lion's share of flights.


Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
User currently offlineSurfrider1978 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 292 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2624 times:



Quoting DesertJets (Reply 2):
First almost all (or is it all) US bound flights from Canada pre-clear, so no added benefit to building FIS at regional airports there

Apparently AS tried this on SNA-YVR, and the day they innaguarated it, for some reason they found out they couldn't do it.


User currently offlinePVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3418 posts, RR: 16
Reply 4, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2616 times:

PVD has one. It is even part of the main terminal complex (gate 8). PVD is already a port of entry (versus being a user fee airport for entry) as well. It is very user friendly and has all the current CBP processing capabilities - just needs more flights besides the summer A310 to the Azores and the occassional Caribbean charters!!

User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4302 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2612 times:



Quoting Surfrider1978 (Thread starter):
How slim are the chances that smaller regional metro airports install a FIS to relieve congestion at majors. For instance in the L.A. area having a customs/immigration at BUR and SNA, they could relieve LAX of quite a few flights and gate space. Im sure both airports could handle a few flights to and from Canada and Mexico.

ONT already has one.

Another regional airport that has one is BDL, which was in place long ago, and now actually sees service with the NW AMS flight. A number of other ones have them separate from the terminal complex. Noteably MKE, and DAB.


User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5842 posts, RR: 28
Reply 6, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2603 times:



Quoting DesertJets (Reply 2):
First almost all (or is it all) US bound flights from Canada pre-clear, so no added benefit to building FIS at regional airports there. If any US or Canadian airline wanted to fly transboarder they can do so presently.



Quoting Surfrider1978 (Reply 3):
Apparently AS tried this on SNA-YVR, and the day they innaguarated it, for some reason they found out they couldn't do it.

There must be customs available at the US destination airport even if the flight was prescreened. One reason is to take care of situations discovered after the flight departs for the US.



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently offlineSurfrider1978 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 292 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2592 times:



Quoting Apodino (Reply 5):

ONT already has one.

ONT is part of LAWA, but honestly who really wants to fly there? BUR is 10 miles north of Downtown LA, and all the attractions in town, SNA is 30 miles south of Downtown LA. Traffic between those airports is nothing compared to making the drive to/from ONT. Making the drive non-rush hour from LA to ONT can be 45 min to and hour, rush hour 11/2 hours to 2 hours. Service has been tried at ONT, but the results sucked. ONT is good only for it's own proximity, but way out of the way for a mojority of the LA basin.


User currently offlineSurfrider1978 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 292 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2580 times:

It would be smart to open one in BUR. With the massive hispanic population in the San Fernando Valley and surrounding areas, MX and AM or even TACA could allocate some flights from here and make a killing. I don't know how the numbers are for mexican carriers at BFL and FAT, but I have heard they are doing great.

User currently offlineCadet57 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 9085 posts, RR: 30
Reply 9, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2569 times:



Quoting Apodino (Reply 5):
Another regional airport that has one is BDL, which was in place long ago, and now actually sees service with the NW AMS flight

It also was used for USA3000 flights to CUN and charters.



Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5842 posts, RR: 28
Reply 10, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2545 times:



Quoting Surfrider1978 (Reply 8):
I don't know how the numbers are for mexican carriers at BFL and FAT, but I have heard they are doing great.

FAT has done very well, seeing the Mexicana flights to GDL grow since they started in April 2006. The flights originally operated as an A318 5 days a week. MX increased capacity quickly to an A319. The route is now daily service on an A320.

BFL has done well but not great. The route is currently an A319 4 times a week after starting in March 2007 as 3 times a week.



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently offlineSurfrider1978 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 292 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2536 times:



Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 6):
There must be customs available at the US destination airport even if the flight was prescreened. One reason is to take care of situations discovered after the flight departs for the US.

How difficult is it to set up or build a small customs area at one of these airports.

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 10):
FAT has done very well

What is the size capacity of FAT 's customs area?


User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5842 posts, RR: 28
Reply 12, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2478 times:



Quoting Surfrider1978 (Reply 11):
How difficult is it to set up or build a small customs area at one of these airports.

The federal government is fairly strict about the design.

Quoting Surfrider1978 (Reply 11):
What is the size capacity of FAT 's customs area?

Fresno's FIS is about 11,000 sq ft and connects directly into the terminal lobby. The FIS was built using modular construction design.

Although the Fresno FIS currently serves only the FAT-GDL flight, the city is attempting to attract flights to another Mexico destination. The preference of airport staff is to add service to one of the resort areas (SJD, PVR, CUN).

BFL's is a little smaller at 10,000 sq ft. It was built using traditional techniques as an addition to the old terminal which now serves only international flights.



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently onlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23197 posts, RR: 20
Reply 13, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2442 times:

MDW has a very nice FIS facility; TZ has used it since it opened (along with F9 and some others). Yet, we haven't seen an explosion of (successful) international service at MDW. There is some market for MDW-Mexico, but very little else. Frankly, the handful of Mexico flights that these secondary airports can support (and with the right carrier, places like DAL and HOU could probably also support some limited Mexico service) isn't large enough to appreciably relieve congestion, and there are few secondary airports that could support more than the odd Mexico flight. I might argue that there are other valid reasons for secondary airports to have FIS, but I don't see congestion relief as a justification.


I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineSurfrider1978 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 292 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2419 times:



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 13):
I don't see congestion relief as a justification

Just alleviating a handful of flights that have high freqencies and splitting them between airports could free up gate space that could be used to offer more cities and airlines from the majors. I know that if LAX were to free up about 10-15 daily int'l flights to secondaries, international carriers, even domestic can take advantage of the hours those gates are taken, or have new airline service. Because UA does not run the schedule it once did at LAX, they gave up gates at Terminal 7 which allowed VX and B6 to take advantage of that. So it does work, althogh that was a different case.


User currently offlineSurfrider1978 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 292 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2418 times:



Quoting Surfrider1978 (Reply 14):
Terminal 7

Type-O... Terminal 8


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26010 posts, RR: 50
Reply 16, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2382 times:



Quoting Surfrider1978 (Thread starter):
For instance in the L.A. area having a customs/immigration at BUR and SNA, they could relieve LAX of quite a few flights and gate space. Im sure both airports could handle a few flights to and from Canada and Mexico.

BUR has an absolute 0% chance of ever getting FIS as such construction would be viewed as expansion which is expressly forbidden except with by an impossible 2/3 public vote in favor of such.

SNA back to about 2000 did toy with FIS area in its future terminal remodel plans, however the approved concept to provide for 6 more gates and a terminal C does not make provisions for FIS.

Quoting Surfrider1978 (Reply 11):

How difficult is it to set up or build a small customs area at one of these airports

Besides building them, one of the big issues is getting the US government to agree and staff the facility. Usually one of the test for such new points of entry is community benefits in the sense the public benefits by new international service that is currently lacking in the geographic area. This is one way how FAT were able receive international flying.

This argument cant be made for BUR and barely for SNA, as the LA metro area is very well served by LAX, and if anything is where CBP could increase staffing directly at LAX, not further divide staffing across the customs district.

Quoting Surfrider1978 (Reply 14):
Because UA does not run the schedule it once did at LAX, they gave up gates at Terminal 7 which allowed VX and B6 to take advantage of that



Quoting Surfrider1978 (Reply 15):
Type-O... Terminal 8

First it was T-6, and United did not 'give up anything'. The 3 gates that VX and now B6 will occupy were LAWA general use gates not under specific shareholder leases to United.
Anyhow its likely VX will be moving out soon and the gates in question would be available to United to use if it wished along with any other carrier in the terminal.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently onlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23197 posts, RR: 20
Reply 17, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2349 times:



Quoting Surfrider1978 (Reply 14):
Just alleviating a handful of flights that have high freqencies and splitting them between airports could free up gate space that could be used to offer more cities and airlines from the majors. I know that if LAX were to free up about 10-15 daily int'l flights to secondaries, international carriers, even domestic can take advantage of the hours those gates are taken, or have new airline service.

10-15 daily international flights makes what, maybe 3 gates? If gate space is the issue, I'll agree that 3 gates are 3 gates, but if it's airfield capacity that is the problem, 1 flight per hour (on average) isn't going to make a huge difference.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 16):
Anyhow its likely VX will be moving out soon and the gates in question would be available to United to use if it wished along with any other carrier in the terminal.

To where would VX move?



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineAnalog From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2346 times:



Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 6):
There must be customs available at the US destination airport even if the flight was prescreened. One reason is to take care of situations discovered after the flight departs for the US.

You mean to catch items that customs missed? Or is it to apply duty to things purchased on the aircraft?


User currently onlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26702 posts, RR: 75
Reply 19, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2342 times:



Quoting DesertJets (Reply 2):
First almost all (or is it all) US bound flights from Canada pre-clear, so no added benefit to building FIS at regional airports there.

Incorrect, for reasons already stated. The airport has to have a fully capable FIS, even if it is only large enough to regularly handle business jets, in order to accept even pre-cleared flights.

Quoting Apodino (Reply 5):

ONT already has one.

ONT has had one for years.

Quoting Surfrider1978 (Reply 8):
It would be smart to open one in BUR

Never, ever going to happen. They wouldn't even allow BUR to build a new terminal to be compliant with FAA rules that it is blatantly in violation of, even though Lockheed was offering the land up for free. Aside from that, it would be impractical.

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 12):

Quoting Surfrider1978 (Reply 11):
How difficult is it to set up or build a small customs area at one of these airports.

The federal government is fairly strict about the design.

Not to mention needing a plan of how to get Customs people there if needed.

Quoting Surfrider1978 (Reply 15):
Quoting Surfrider1978 (Reply 14):
Terminal 7

Type-O... Terminal 8

Incorrect

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 17):

To where would VX move?

Probably T2 to be with the Mother Ship.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26010 posts, RR: 50
Reply 20, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2338 times:



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 17):
To where would VX move?

Negotiating for up to 6 gates on the Eastside of T-3.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineDeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8911 posts, RR: 12
Reply 21, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2333 times:



Quoting Analog (Reply 18):
You mean to catch items that customs missed? Or is it to apply duty to things purchased on the aircraft?

It's as a backup just in case for some reason customs pre-clearence could not be performed outside the country.


User currently onlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26702 posts, RR: 75
Reply 22, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2329 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 20):

Negotiating for up to 6 gates on the Eastside of T-3.

Oh wow, are they crazy or something? Perhaps this is the pro-active tenant LAWA has been looking for over there and the one AS has been looking to piggyback on  Wink



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineAnalog From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 1900 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2328 times:



Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 21):
It's as a backup just in case for some reason customs pre-clearence could not be performed outside the country.

What if customs in the US is closed for some reason? Same situation (only one layer of customs).

In any case, you could divert to another airport if pre-clearance customs was closed (just like what would probably happen if customs was closed on arrival for a flight from somewhere w/o pre-clearance).


User currently onlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23197 posts, RR: 20
Reply 24, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2314 times:



Quoting N1120A (Reply 19):
The airport has to have a fully capable FIS, even if it is only large enough to regularly handle business jets, in order to accept even pre-cleared flights.

Quite true, but it's important to remember how little infrastructure this actually entails. If CBP can be persuaded to staff it, a suitable 'facility' could probably be built for less than $10,000.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
25 FATFlyer : Actually you are off, CBP is very demanding in its requirements which adds to the costs. FAT built its new FIS in 2006. Using modular construction (i
26 LACA773 : Like LAXINTL said, it will never happen @ BUR. They can't even get the people who live in the city of BUR to pass a proposition for them to modernize
27 Cubsrule : I was talking about facility requirements to accept pre-cleared flights... such a facility can EASILY be built for $10,000.
28 FATFlyer : I think it would be more, $10,000 doesn't go very far. SMX in 2006 built a general aviation customs facility which means it only handles a few passen
29 Cubsrule : They don't. I assure you, the requirements are EXTREMELY minimal.
30 Analog : I'm still wondering why anything is required at all. Why is this an issue with precleared flights any more than it is with domestic flights? Couldn't
31 FATFlyer : I did say IF they required it. But extremely minimal meaning everything I mentioned except the large arrival area? The rest is still over $10,000 in
32 Analog : If they buy it before clearing immigration & customs, that's not a problem. If you can buy things after immigration & customs, require that those be
33 N1120A : It doesn't matter if it is closed, so long as there is a way to process in an emergency. Well, it is theoretically limitless, because there is a lot
34 FATFlyer : And what if they bought it outside the airport and put it in their bag. "look honey isn't that interesting fruit, lets take it home and show it off".
35 Analog : That's like saying "What if customs misses a bag of contraband fruit?" from a normal arrival (w/o pre-screening). Either way It means customs failed
36 Cubsrule : There are airports where FIS barely has more than that; PWK is one in my neck of the woods.
37 LAXintl : Chicago Executive PWK is like hundreds of small private airplane GA airports across the country that is a US Customs user fee airport offering limited
38 Cubsrule : Correct, but again, we're talking about what's needed for preclearence, which is the availability of Customs. Nothing more. SNA, for example, isn't e
39 LAXintl : SNA does not have anything hence inability to handle Canada precleared flights. For SNA to handle precleared flights USCBP advised it back in 2000 th
40 Cubsrule : That's interesting in light of the fact that many airports which handle precleared flights certainly do not have full FIS facilities (e.g. LGA).
41 LAXintl : I'm sure LGA has back up plans to be able to segregate hold all the passengers in a portion of the terminal for reclearance if needed, I know some air
42 Cubsrule : Yes, almost certainly. But I don't understand why that wasn't acceptable at SNA if it is (apparently) acceptable at LGA.
43 N1120A : SNA has absolutely nothing for customs facilities as it is, no matter how small.
44 Cubsrule : I don't think LGA has facilities, either. It's a Customs Landing Rights airport (does that imply something about the level of facilities?), but there
45 N1120A : So is LAX. So is ORD. Nor is one (or five actually) marked on the LAX diagram. Yes they do. They are just very small.
46 Post contains links Cubsrule : ...they're at the terminal. Generally, when they are somewhere besides the terminal, they are marked on the diagram. Here are a couple of examples: h
47 Surfrider1978 : So can that be replicated at SNA or similar sized airport?
48 LACA773 : SNA doesn't allow international arrivals. ONT already has it and is ready to be expanded. They have a lot of room to expand there.
49 FATFlyer : Thanks for the additional info. I knew that they needed some facility for backing up commercial flights but wasn't aware of the contingency plans use
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...
GRR Looking At Passenger Leakage To Other Airports posted Thu Sep 6 2007 03:15:03 by KarlB737
BAA To Improve Security At UK Airports posted Wed Mar 28 2007 08:27:30 by ANother
Shoe Scanner's To Be Installed At 4 Major Airports posted Sat Jan 6 2007 15:22:08 by Funflyer
Is There A Fee At Airports To Land And Takeoff posted Thu Nov 2 2006 01:04:55 by Fll2993
Feds To Cut Screeners At Some Airports posted Thu Jul 28 2005 22:27:52 by KarlB737
Monarch To Launch Services From Regional Airports posted Wed Jul 20 2005 10:04:00 by Gilesdavies
Airports To Allow Two Tries At Detectors posted Thu Jan 15 2004 21:35:56 by InnocuousFox
Visitors To Be Shut Out At Australian Airports posted Wed Sep 17 2003 06:06:02 by Gerry
Like To See This At International Airports? posted Fri Jul 4 2003 12:14:12 by PerthGloryFan
Bad Times To Avoid At Certain Airports posted Thu Feb 6 2003 05:34:22 by Danialanwar
Feds To Cut Screeners At Some Airports posted Thu Jul 28 2005 22:27:52 by KarlB737
Monarch To Launch Services From Regional Airports posted Wed Jul 20 2005 10:04:00 by Gilesdavies
Airports To Allow Two Tries At Detectors posted Thu Jan 15 2004 21:35:56 by InnocuousFox
Visitors To Be Shut Out At Australian Airports posted Wed Sep 17 2003 06:06:02 by Gerry
Like To See This At International Airports? posted Fri Jul 4 2003 12:14:12 by PerthGloryFan
Bad Times To Avoid At Certain Airports posted Thu Feb 6 2003 05:34:22 by Danialanwar
Visitors To Be Shut Out At Australian Airports posted Wed Sep 17 2003 06:06:02 by Gerry
Like To See This At International Airports? posted Fri Jul 4 2003 12:14:12 by PerthGloryFan
Bad Times To Avoid At Certain Airports posted Thu Feb 6 2003 05:34:22 by Danialanwar
Is There A Fee At Airports To Land And Takeoff posted Thu Nov 2 2006 01:04:55 by Fll2993
Feds To Cut Screeners At Some Airports posted Thu Jul 28 2005 22:27:52 by KarlB737
Monarch To Launch Services From Regional Airports posted Wed Jul 20 2005 10:04:00 by Gilesdavies
Airports To Allow Two Tries At Detectors posted Thu Jan 15 2004 21:35:56 by InnocuousFox