Airbusluver From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 155 posts, RR: 0 Posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 2061 times:
What airport do you think would be a good base for a new entrant in the US. Here are my ideas:
Portland, OR (PDX) High traffic, not dominated, and a nice airport
Austin, TX (AUS) High yielding traffic, not dominated, and also a nice airport.
San Francisco (OAK or SFO) Low fare airline to compete against United to the East Coast.
These are just a few of my thoughts. How about yours?
ScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6489 posts, RR: 33
Reply 3, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 1955 times:
Portland: Delta couldn't make it work as a hub, so they're scaling back. Significant competition from Alaska, United, and Southwest means this airport is already well-served for a city of Portland's size.
Austin: High fare levels, but only on longer-haul flights. Difficult to compete on the short-haul flights because of Southwest, and you need those to help build your long-haul traffic. Nice airport but only one open gate right now unless you can convince the City of Austin to build new gates for you.
San Francisco: Airfield capacity is a BIG problem when the weather is bad. The airport gives priority to long-haul international flights, then long-haul domestic flights, then short-haul flights. Weather-related operational problems for a new airline would be ruinous.
Oakland: Better weather conditions, but severely limited terminal capacity until the terminals are redeveloped; they already handle nearly 200 daily jet departures from approximately 20 gates. A longer-term problem is competing with WN should they ever start trans-con service at OAK.
Long Beach: Only 27 departure slots left, and jetBlue has rights to them for two years. Even without that, you're stuck once you hit 27 daily departures. Plus the terminal is more appropriate to the 1940's than the 21st century.
Cba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4530 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 1937 times:
ONT would be the best airport to start a hub on the west coast. It is only 40-50 miles East of LAX. It was just renovated, and is very modern looking. It has a lot of available slots for a new airline to use, and can accomodate a 747.
Srbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 1913 times:
Have to agree on MSY. There are enough gates sitting there unused to start up a decent sized hub operation. No airline really has a domination there, Delta flies to ATL and DFW from there, Southwest flies to DAL and LAS from there, and AA, UAL, and US have small presence in MSY. AirTran flies about a half dozen flights to ATL a day from there also. Someone tried in the 80s to start an airline out of MSY but couldn't finance to profitablity. Some other airports that would be good hubs are: Mid-America Airport in IL, they only have four gates presently, but would be a good place to start an RJ based airline out of; COS, close enough from Denver to attract pax, but far enough away to keep prices low; HOU (Hobby), as attractive as DAL (Dallas-Love Field) when it comes to proximity to downtown, plus the oil industry and shipping industries in the area; XNA (Fayetteville, AR), still a smaller airport, but would be a good location for a Midwestern regional airline to have a hub; DSM, Access Air tried but failed out of here, but the is an ideal location in the middle of the country; and lastly, ABQ, great weather year round, and is far enough away from PHX to not be affected by AWA.
ScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6489 posts, RR: 33
Reply 9, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week ago) and read 1899 times:
MSY: The yields are terrible because (1) Southwest has 50 daily flights and (2) most traffic is for leisure and conventions. Moreover, the two main runways cross, so you run into a congestion problem trying to run a hub operation.
BLV: (Mid-America) Too far from the majority of the population in the St. Louis area, which is predominantly on the Missouri side of the river. With Southwest keeping fares down in STL (with 80+ daily flights), there's little motivation to travel the extra half hour.
COS: Learn from history. Western Pacific failed. The population base isn't large enough in the Colorado Springs area, and the presence of Frontier at DEN (with lower fares than UA) limits the amount of traffic you can draw from Denver today.
HOU: You'd have to be insane to start an airline at an airport which is dominated by Southwest with 150 daily flights, and which also competes with Continental's largest hub 30 miles away. Watch the red ink flow. Same for DAL - Southwest will kill you on the short-haul or AA will kill you on the long haul.
ABQ: Another airport dominated by Southwest; moreover, the high-fare traffic you need to support a hub is limited.
GSO: 50 miles from RDU and Midway's hub without quite as favorable demographics as RDU. (And look at Midway's current financial condition). Also in the shadow of CLT, ATL, IAD, BWI. Failed hub for Continental Lite.
XNA: Even smaller than Little Rock or Jackson.
DSM: Also too small (smaller than OMA).
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32001 posts, RR: 72
Reply 10, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week ago) and read 1891 times:
N863DA, inner city population means nothing. Jacksonville has 750,000 residents in an area of 650 square miles. Miami has 360,000 residents in an area of 36 square miles. Orlando has 1.5M residents plus the tourist traffic. Miami has 3.9M residents plus the tourist traffic and two major airprots. Tampa Bay has 2.4M residents. The Jax metro is 1.1M, less than even Grand Rapids and Raleigh-Durham. Don't get me wrong, nothing wrong with JAX, but too small for anything major. Tourist cities aside, the smallest you can get for strong operations is about Charlotte (1.6M), with some exceptions (MEM and RDU). Too support a lot on the O&D side, you can't go much smaller than Seattle (3.1M).
DeltaAir From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1094 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week ago) and read 1885 times:
Central-South Florida needs a new airline or airport. Tampa is nearly out of room to expand, unless they go into the ocean. Orlando is now maxed with the addition of the new airside. Miami is in bad shape and always has been from a design stand point. The plans to build something new in the Everglades was cancelled due to concerns from a nature standpoint, so plans are to move it north, somewhere into Polk County to supplement Tampa, Orlando, and the surrounding area. My guess is that with all the businesses coming to the I-4 corridor, this would be a gold mine.
TWAneedsNOhelp From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week ago) and read 1880 times:
I agree with ScottB in all of his assesments. GSO failed for CO Lite and Eastwind.
I do like JAX though, although DL dominates that airport through ATL, but I think it could support nonstop flights bypassing ATL. Nothing too ambitious though.
I like ONT too, hugely growing area.
FLL, the countries fastest growing airport has tons of open new gates after completing the new Terminal 1. Yes, Metrojet, JetBlue, Southwest, Midway, Delta Express, Spirit, and Airtran keep fares low, but I think yet another well run low fare carrier would work, perhaps even with service to the Carribean and Trans-Atlantic service over the summer.
America West From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (12 years 9 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1870 times:
CMH would be a nice place. Its a nice airport about 18 miles from downtown Columbus. There is a brand new terminal that will be built that will be fully developed to 34 gates as demand dictates, and also a concouse expansion on the way. As well as a new runway, a new control tower, and another taxiway bridge over Sawyer Rd. The current runways can be used by all types of commercial aircraft.
Highflyer16 From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 117 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (12 years 9 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1836 times:
Don't count out MCI in Kansas City! Of course another startup airline, Vanguard, is already trying to make a go of it there.
Kansas City has been underserverd for years, partly due to the fact that it's airport was designed in the 60s at a time when most airlines flew pretty much point to point. Instead of having concourses, the airport consists of three circular terminals that you can drive right up to, and planes board right behind the ticket counter. It's nice for O&D traffic because you walk only 50 feet from curbside to plane, but it can only be used by a small airline for making connections, otherwise gates are simply too far apart.
But they could accomodate about ten smaller airlines, and that may well be the only way that Kansas City ever gets any decent amount of air traffic. Another thing, I would be willing to bet that if that airline grew, Kansas City would accomodate them with their own concourse in order to keep their business.
R.I.P TWA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (12 years 9 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1807 times:
Have to agree on IND. 3 runways 11,200ft/10,000ft/7,600ft. 33 gates, and only 18 airlines with only 12 majors, and (according to their website) only 45 non-stops(avg.). Southwest is the only problem as they actually have a IND-LAX non-stop, and a number of others. But, a small start-up might be able to find a niche (e.g. non-stops to FL cities.)