Buzz100ca From United States of America, joined May 2007, 89 posts, RR: 2 Posted (5 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4943 times:
"The Sacramento County Airport System has been issued a “Finding of No Significant Impact” and “Record of Decision” for the proposed new terminal at Sacramento International Airport...
...Construction is expected to start this fall. The estimated cost for the full project, which will include a hotel, is $1.27 billion. The new 674,000 square-foot terminal will have 23 gates and include the international arrivals facility, which is now in a separate building."
Jetboy319 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 270 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (5 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4904 times:
While Terminal B is certainly old, a brand new terminal just doesn't seem necessary right now. Much of it sits empty for most of the day aside from early morning/late nights when some airlines need to park aircraft remotely. Considering the uncertainty of the current climate in the airline industry, this seems like a very risky move.... my 2 cents.
SMF711 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 22 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (5 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4691 times:
The rumor is that all the airlines in current Terminal A & B will move into this new terminal, except for Southwest. If you've ever flown out of their side if the A Terminal you will see that they can easily use more space for existing flights and expansion. So, if completed the terminal airline layout will be:
Terminal B (new):
Virgin America (maybe in the future)
That doesn't seem too far fetched as the airlines soon to be in the new Terminal B will have come from using 19 gates, moving into a terminal that has 23 gates, that's only four more gates between all those airlines. Maybe some one will expand a little bit.
SANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 4960 posts, RR: 15 Reply 7, posted (5 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4667 times:
Wow! Regardless of what figures are used (a net gain of 4 or 9 gates?) this sure seems like a huge amount of over-kill and a bundle of money for a medium-sized airport in a medium-sized market. I see aspects of DEN and of MCO which each serve, what, 30+ Million pax/year, being integrated into a 23-gate terminal as the major part of an airport that handles about 10M pax/year...
I have no idea where the money is coming from for this project; if local or state taxpayers are involved, I would love to know how they feel about the price tag. I also wonder if the airport user fees would increase significantly in order to pay off the costs, resulting in some airlines not only NOT expanding, but actually reducing service (as we have seen happen at other airports with WN at least.)
PanAm330 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2647 posts, RR: 10 Reply 8, posted (5 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4641 times:
It looks gorgeous! At first glance, the landside terminal looked a bit like SFO, until it was seen in greater detail. It'll certainly be nice to have a shiny new terminal at SMF, but seriously is a $1.3B terminal needed? They could build something functional with the same amount of gates for half of that. Just look at B6's new, larger T5 at JFK. What's the price tag on that? Somewhere around $700m IIRC. I'm thinking that would be a heck of a lot more reasonable.
Wedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5734 posts, RR: 5 Reply 9, posted (5 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4599 times:
Airport terminals have to be upgraded eventually. I think it's better to expand the terminals now (being proactive) rather than wait until you don't have enough room for new airline service (being reactive).
RW717 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 285 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (5 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 4508 times:
There was an airport meeting yesterday where the airport authority wants to basically double all of the fees for the airlines because they are afraid of losing revenue from airlines going under. From what I understand it got VERY heated between the airport and WN.
Reno Air - The Biggest Little Airline in the World
Yflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 887 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (5 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4451 times:
My understanding is that the people mover is what added a lot to the cost. The problem is that the current terminal needs to remian open while the new terminal is under construction, and the best way to do that is to seperate the landside and airside terminals with the people mover in between.
Qqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2221 posts, RR: 14 Reply 13, posted (5 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4423 times:
Don't forget this new terminal includes a hotel. That hotel will add a fair amount to the price tag and make up a good chunk of that $1.3B. If the airport will own the space the hotel will occupy, they'll make good money on the lease. If the hotel operator owns the space, then the total price tag isn't just the airport's. Terminal B is long overdue for a makeover/redo, and delaying will only cost the airport more in the long run.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
Norcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1401 posts, RR: 12 Reply 14, posted (5 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4361 times:
Am I dreaming or was there supposed to be a new runway built in SMF to handle Europe flights? Any chances of SMF seeing International flights (other than Mexico) in the next decade if ever? I am tired of flying the little props to SFO everytime I gotta leave te country.
SMF711 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 22 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (5 years 7 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 4081 times:
You would think that with the 787 some form of International Service would be possible. US airlines link smaller cities in Europe with the large hubs, is it possible that European airlines would link smaller/mid-sized US Cities with their large hubs?
DesertAir From Mexico, joined Jan 2006, 1424 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (5 years 7 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4060 times:
I fly into SMF often and spend a lot of time in A. It is always a pleasant experience. The few times I have flown AA or UA, I found the experience in their terminals to be cramped with inadequate services beyond the gate. A new terminal like A will be a great addition. Since many of the airlines only have a few flights a day, the new terminal will serve the currernt needs and provide gates for hopeful future expansion. A light rail line through Lodi, Stockton, Modesto...would cut traffic on the 5 and 99.
Yflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 887 posts, RR: 1 Reply 23, posted (5 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 3967 times:
In the opening shot, is that a light rail train I see pulling up to the terminal? I wonder if that means there are plans to extend light rail to the airport, or if that was just speculation on the part of the artist.