Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
New Airport For Mexico City?  
User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2740 posts, RR: 1
Posted (3 years 9 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6253 times:

Is it time for a new airport in Mexico City?

It is highly unlikely that a new international airport will be built in Mexico's federal district (DF) before 2016, according to Jose Luis Guerrero, CFO of local airport operator OMA

http://www.bnamericas.com/story.jsp?...=5&noticia=534095&idioma=I&source=

So I guess we'll have to wait a few years. But in the meantime, has any area of land been picked out? Are there any initial designs prepared? Is there anything that's already been sort of determined, or will this be from scratch?

MEX currently has 2 runways, both near 13,000 feet in length. It's longest nonstop route I believe is FRA, at about 5940 miles. MEX is the epitome of 'hot and high' and the current situation does not allow any extension of the runways.

Would a new airport with say 16,000-17,000 feet runways (ala DEN) help in making nonstops to NRT and other places a reality with a new airport?

I've been to Mexico City once many years ago, lovely city, and know very little of the geography other than the touristy stuff and a few cantinas. Where would this new airport be built. And again, would it have to be far from the city center (again, ala DEN) because this is where some open land would be available.

As per Wiki (I know, I know, not the best source) analyst say that MEX should be handling about 40M passenger per year, not the 25M or so it currently has. So it would seem that a new airport would be a good idea here and much needed, as opposed to building a white elephant.

I love new airports. Anyone with more info or comment please chime in. I don't find too much on the web other than that in Spanish, and well....

Current Mexico City Benito Juárez International Airport (IATA: MEX, ICAO: MMMX)


photo courtesy of Wiki Commons

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinenetjetsintl From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 9 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 6031 times:

Mexico City and its surroundings have a pretty high elevation. Non-stop to the Far East and/or Middle East will be a hard thing to negotiate no matter what airplane we're talking about. If the likes of Emirates, Qatar or any Asian airline ever fly to there, it will be with a stop somehwere (alas JAL, AM), which its probably a discouraging factor....

However Mexico city should build be a new airport to afford its airlines the neccesary room to expand. My opinion, don't put any more money into MEX, don't try to develop TLC, start construction of a new MEX airport. Easier said than done given the political climate in Mexico.


User currently offlinewingedtaurus From Mexico, joined Mar 2007, 117 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 9 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5975 times:

I though the longest flight was NRT-MEX at 7004 mi. You are right a bigger airport is needed, nothing concrete since 2002. I guess with the arrival of the Boeing 787-8 AM could start longer routes like FCO or ICN. BTW AM is resuming YUL and adding frequencies to EZE, are they adding frequencies to SCL as well?

User currently onlineDualQual From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 753 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (3 years 9 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5966 times:

Quoting point2point (Thread starter):
Would a new airport with say 16,000-17,000 feet runways (ala DEN) help in making nonstops to NRT and other places a reality with a new airport?

Maybe, maybe not. You are still going to have mountains to get around and the airplane still will be weight limited at least to get off the ground by max tire speed. High and hot kills that type of performance limitation.


User currently online2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2562 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (3 years 9 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5857 times:

A high-speed rail connection could make PBC Puebla, México City new airport.   
Doing something with CVJ Cuernavaca, other than improving the terminal so to allow regional flights, is out of the question.
TLC Toluca, has no room to expand and its altitude isn't suitable for real long-haul routes.



I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlineSurfandSnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2844 posts, RR: 30
Reply 5, posted (3 years 9 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5854 times:

Surely MEX isn't too crowded now that MX is out of the picture??


Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently offlineAMX748 From Mexico, joined Jan 2008, 54 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 9 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5815 times:

There are few caveats regarding operation of aircraft in MEX

Although it's a high altitude airport, in the warmest months, which usually are from February thru May, the temperatures after sunset decrease rapidly and at 2200 local time a typical 60° Farenheit (16° Celsius) could allow longer flights. At dawn the temperatures are even cooler. The rest of the year in night time hours they remain in low 50's, with dawn temperatures nearly freezing or below freezing point frequently from October to January . Indeed, there are limitations, and I don't know if a 18,000 ft long runway could help. As mentioned above, if a 747 needs a 170 KIAS to climb safely out of MEX, that means a true speed of nearly 200 knots, which is in the limit or above the limit where a tire can suffer damage due to extreme friction.

Some routes I think have not been operated yet, more by lack of interest, profitability, very low passengers, etc rather than technical limitations.

With a B 772 LR a non stop from MEX to PVG could be done. The same for a MEX-DXB (with limitations departing from MEX)

About the terrain to build the new airport, that is not a problem, there are enough land 5 NM to the Northeast where two pairs of rws to allow simultaneous takeoffs and landings with a CAT3 ILS could be made (without invading farmers land) if the runways have a 01-19 or 02-20 aligning. But, at this point, it comes to my mind that the opposition in 2002 actually was a circus mounted by the federal goverment to avoid the 4 billion investment if that money could be better in the pockets of some politicians. Many has been discussed everywhere about the strange business that some relatives to people in high spheres of the govmt, people who made billions of pesos and 6 years before had only a several millions. Political issues are a major concern and will be a key factor in the decision of whether or not to build a new MEX airport.

One more thing. Even the A343 of IB which departs at noon doesn't have any problem with mountains. There are a procedure to turn and avoid the high mountains tio the southwest, but to the northeast the peaks only are 2,000 to 4,000 ft higher than the basin in which the valley of Mexico is located, and the A343 at 11 NM from its takeoff usually passes 3,000 ft or higher, with 8 NM to reach the first mounts just 2,000 ft higher than the basin. In a 01-19 or 02-20 configuration, no important tarrain is located 18 NM to the south and more than 40 NM to the north. We are not Kathmandu

[Edited 2010-10-22 10:44:27]

User currently offlinewingedtaurus From Mexico, joined Mar 2007, 117 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 9 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5771 times:

Very helpful thx AMX748. I know I read this somewhere but on the MEX-TIJ-NRT is the stop really technical and necessary or is it just cargo and passengers?

User currently offlineAMX748 From Mexico, joined Jan 2008, 54 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 9 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5741 times:

Quoting wingedtaurus (Reply 7):
Very helpful thx AMX748. I know I read this somewhere but on the MEX-TIJ-NRT is the stop really technical and necessary or is it just cargo and passengers?

TIJ is both a technical and passengers stop. In fact, those who love flying in a widebody prefer to fly to TIJ in the 777 if they have the chance. I know that many chinese, japanese, korean, etc. people living in the neighborhoods of SAN crose the border to take the AMX flights to NRT and PVG


User currently onlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6128 posts, RR: 30
Reply 9, posted (3 years 9 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5605 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting point2point (Thread starter):
Would a new airport with say 16,000-17,000 feet runways (ala DEN) help in making nonstops to NRT and other places a reality with a new airport?

For reasons explained above, the solution is more complex than simply adding longer runways.

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 4):
Toluca, has no room to expand and its altitude isn't suitable for real long-haul routes.

Exactly. Plus, it is shrouded in fog a significant number of days in the year to have made the installation of CAT III systems a necessity, making Toluca and SCL the only two airports in LATAM certified for such operations. Toluca is not an option.

Now that MX is gone, the global recession and the current slow down of the world economy, or at least of Mexico´s main trading partners, the need for a new airport is not so pressing as it was in the early 2000´s.



MGGS
User currently onlinehloutweg From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 213 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 9 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 5352 times:

Quoting AR385 (Reply 9):
Now that MX is gone, the global recession and the current slow down of the world economy, or at least of Mexico´s main trading partners, the need for a new airport is not so pressing as it was in the early 2000´s.

I got no numbers but, is it possible that the passenger count planned for MEX has remained without increment or has even decreased as to forgo the need to get a new airport now?

We have other airlines filling the capacity lost, passenger numbers are growing worldwide, Aeromexico and other airlines have ambitious expansion plans. Granted that T2 has helped with estimated demand since 2000, but I read somewhere that T2 is also at peak use.

I believe these renaissance in MEX's replacement plans has to do with the urgency of finding a solution. I'm inclined to believe it will end up in Tizayuca, although the "Ciudad Futura" plan is a very attractive proposition, at least from an urban planning point of view.



In Varietate Concordia
User currently offlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7561 posts, RR: 43
Reply 11, posted (3 years 9 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5299 times:

Quoting wingedtaurus (Reply 2):
AM is resuming YUL and adding frequencies to EZE, are they adding frequencies to SCL as well?

Correct about YUL and EZE. Sadly, it seems SCL is going to remain 3x weekly for the time being. Btw, AM's MEX-SCL-MEX are now all-nocturnal flights, right?

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 5):
Surely MEX isn't too crowded now that MX is out of the picture??

I agree. Maybe I am mistaken but I get the impression that until AM, the U.S. carriers flying to MEX and Interjet add substantially more flights, MEX does not seem to be anywhere close to saturation.

Quoting AMX748 (Reply 6):
With a B 772 LR a non stop from MEX to PVG could be done. The same for a MEX-DXB (with limitations departing from MEX)

Or an A345? Would a four-engined plane be better suited for ops out of MEX? I remember that before AM chose the 777, Airbus sent a team to promote the A340-300E, -500 and -600 to AM, and their main argument was the superior performance of the quads vs. the 77E out of MEX.

Quoting AMX748 (Reply 6):
dawn temperatures nearly freezing or below freezing point frequently from October to January

Lol. Really? I would not say it is that bad. December, January and early February sure are cold. At dawn it gets down to 4 or 5 Celsius... with some days at or below 0, but definitely not everyday. October and November are not that bad.

Quoting hloutweg (Reply 10):
Granted that T2 has helped with estimated demand since 2000, but I read somewhere that T2 is also at peak use.

Is it? Wow. It is busy, yes, and I suppose it will get busier if AF decides to move to T2 and AM gets more widebodies. Plus, DL is also launching MSP-MEX daily and MEM-MEX once weekly, so that will strain T2 more. I suppose, however, that CO is moving back to T1 soon as part of its merger with UA, isn't it?



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently onlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6128 posts, RR: 30
Reply 12, posted (3 years 9 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5294 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting hloutweg (Reply 10):
I got no numbers but, is it possible that the passenger count planned for MEX has remained without increment or has even decreased as to forgo the need to get a new airport now?

We have other airlines filling the capacity lost, passenger numbers are growing worldwide, Aeromexico and other airlines have ambitious expansion plans. Granted that T2 has helped with estimated demand since 2000, but I read somewhere that T2 is also at peak use.

I have no numbers, but:

1) Fares have gone up, on average, 40% since MX died. This means that for all the apparent growth in the other airlines´capacity, MX´s void is not even coming close to being filled.

2) Vendors in T1 estimate their market shrinking by as much as 90% due to MX´s death.

3) While AM is attempting to grow and fill MX´s void, it will not be able to find the aircraft it needs as fast as it needs them.

4) Given the downgrade of Mexico by the FAA, I do not believe any Mexican airline can fill MX´s void in the Mexico-US market anytime soon. Maybe this might change in December, maybe not.

5) The Mexican economy is slowing down. More importantly, the American economy is slowing down. In both countries, the economic growth forecasts and most of their leading indicators are being revised downward.

6) Many of Europe´s economies are not in a very good position either and their prospects not very bright. Specifically, Spain, the UK, and France which alongside Germany, are Mexico´s most important European trading partners.

7) Important economic think tanks are have started talking about another dip in the worldwide economic cycle, maybe even deep enough to be called a recession.

Given all of the above, I do not thik that the need for a new airport is urgent in MEX for the next few years. In any case, it is definitely not as urgent as it was in the early 2000´s



MGGS
User currently offlineDesertAir From Mexico, joined Jan 2006, 1457 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 9 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 5056 times:

Quoting AR385 (Reply 12):
Fares have gone up, on average, 40% since MX died.

A couple of weeks ago there were major complaints in Tijuana about AM raising their fares. To calm the waters, MX instituted a fare sale.

The questionregarding a new airport for Mexico City is where. Last summer I flew to Mexico City from Tijuana on Volaris to Toluca and took their bus to the Santa Fe area of Mexico City, about 40 minutes. Maybe increased service to Toluca and Puebla may be a partial solution. Getting to the Mexico City airport can be a trying experience becuae of traffic. The Metro does not allow bags which increases congestion.
The few times I have flown through Mexico City I was greatly impressed by how organized the operation was given the limited space.


User currently offlinepzurita1 From Greenland, joined Sep 2002, 1392 posts, RR: 14
Reply 14, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4960 times:

Quoting AR385 (Reply 12):
2) Vendors in T1 estimate their market shrinking by as much as 90% due to MX´s death.

I find their claim to be a little bit unrealistic. T1 lost in September "only" 30% of the pax that used it in August (before MX demise).



Next flight: IAH-DBX-MRU-ANT
User currently onlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6128 posts, RR: 30
Reply 15, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4892 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting pzurita1 (Reply 14):
I find their claim to be a little bit unrealistic. T1 lost in September "only" 30% of the pax that used it in August (before MX demise).

Agreed. I do not doubt they are probably exaggerating. However, I quoted the figures in the press. In any case, the passengers that stopped using T1 due to MX disappearing, probably have different purchasing power than the ones using Interjet, Volaris, or and specially Viva Aerobús. So, while lower than 90%, the figure is probably above 30%.



MGGS
User currently offlinekdonohue From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 373 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4748 times:

If you're interested I wrote an article on MEX for Airways magazine, which you can view at http://www.kendonohue.com/portfolio.html Just scroll down to the May 2010 article - Latin America's busiest airport needs new home

User currently offlineskyone From Mexico, joined Feb 2001, 423 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4582 times:

Quoting point2point (Thread starter):
that MEX should be handling about 40M passenger per year, not the 25M or so it currently has. So it would seem that a new airport would be a good idea here and much needed, as opposed to building a white elephant.
Quoting netjetsintl (Reply 1):
However Mexico city should build be a new airport to afford its airlines the neccesary room to expand.

hey people, have you been to MEX airport lately. I just flew from T1 on friday, and I am in CUN at the moment, waiting to fly back to MEX. Let me just tell you that T1 is a ghost terminal all day. With MX backruptcy, the hole terminal is up for grab. The other airlines, the ones created to fly from TLC, have started flights from MEX and are transfering capacity, leaving TLC as another empty terminal for commercial aviation.

So, with Mexican Aviation being in CAT 2, MX in backruptcy and grounded and the LCCs trying desperately to get planes to start service (also AM wants to get planes desperately), one can tell that it will take time, a lot of time to regain the capacity that MEX airport use to have. With two terminals (MEX and TLC) with tons of free slots (I do not know if TLC uses them, LOL) forget about a NEW airport for the next 10 years. The new airport will be near CUN and might be called RMA (as for Riviera Maya Airport,   )

[Edited 2010-10-24 21:46:01]

User currently offlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7561 posts, RR: 43
Reply 18, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4565 times:

Yes, T1 is really sad. I used it for a flight to LAX with AS a month and a half ago and it was so empty! I could use the AA or MX lounge with my Priority Pass and decided to use the MX lounge. It was completely empty too. I guess the only reason it is still open is to service Priority Pass members and the business class passengers of other carriers that have an agreement to use that lounge.

I guess T1 only looks more or less busy at the time of arrival and departure of the European widebodies.

Speaking of terminals and new flights, anybody knows if AR is going to use T2 when they start flying to Mexico in December? If they are going to join SkyTeam, they probably have plans to codeshare with AM, in which case T2 makes more sense. On the other hand, I am sure MEX officials will try to get them to use T1.



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlineskyone From Mexico, joined Feb 2001, 423 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4551 times:

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 18):
Speaking of terminals and new flights, anybody knows if AR is going to use T2 when they start flying to Mexico in December?

They just decided they will start until march, probably because they do not have an aircraft for the route.

http://www.fsmex.com/foros/showthread.php?t=41851


User currently offlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7561 posts, RR: 43
Reply 20, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4530 times:

Quoting skyone (Reply 19):
They just decided they will start until march, probably because they do not have an aircraft for the route.

Ok, thanks for the info. Is the plan to use A340s? And anybody knows if they will use T2 in March?

On a related subject, if AR cannot do nocturnal schedules both ways, I would think that it would be smarter to do EZE-MEX during daylight, and MEX-EZE during night time, and not the other way around, but hey, that's just me.



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently onlinehloutweg From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 213 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4494 times:

Quoting AR385 (Reply 12):

It actually sounds like you do have some numbers, and they do provide a valuable backup to your position.

And it also sounds like MEX is better off downsizing than planning growth. Perhaps with the sale of some assets they're can pay for the unfortunate future that's coming over the following years.

Does anybody here think the opposite regarding this view of MEX's near future. I wouldn't suggest the government and/or private investors to build a white elephant just for the beauty and modernity of it's architecture; or even its functionality; I'm looking at the case that would justify a new airport.



In Varietate Concordia
User currently offliner2rho From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2571 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4401 times:

A quick look at MEX shows that Mexico City will undoubtedly need a new airport - we can argue about when, but not if. It is clear that MEX has expanded to the maximum extent possible - any growth beyond that would require a new airport. The debate on current MEX limitations should not only be centered around terminal capacity, but also runway capacity, which given its two dependent close parallels is likely a major limitation.

The demise of MX has obviously bought time, but eventually that capacity will be filled by other airlines. Since airports typically need a long time to plan and build, might as well start planning now so that you're ready when the time comes.

Furthermore, I don't know how accurate the info on wikipedia is, but it states that according to "international standards" of runway and terminal usage, whatever those are, the airport is sized for 18 million pax. It handled 24 million in 2009.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8189 posts, RR: 10
Reply 23, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4354 times:

Quoting AMX748 (Reply 6):
One more thing. Even the A343 of IB which departs at noon doesn't have any problem with mountains.

The A343 is a quad and a quad, even the old A343 will almost always have better hot and high performance than a twin. The only existing twin with better hot and high performance than the A343 is the 77L, which is exactly why airlines like IB and SA which operate predominantly to/from hot and high airports have a long haul fleet of A343/A346's.

Quoting AR385 (Reply 9):
Now that MX is gone, the global recession and the current slow down of the world economy, or at least of Mexico´s main trading partners, the need for a new airport is not so pressing as it was in the early 2000´s.

Now IS the time. If you want until there is demand, you're 10 years too late.


User currently offlineskyone From Mexico, joined Feb 2001, 423 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4263 times:

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 20):
Ok, thanks for the info. Is the plan to use A340s? And anybody knows if they will use T2 in March?

On a related subject, if AR cannot do nocturnal schedules both ways, I would think that it would be smarter to do EZE-MEX during daylight, and MEX-EZE during night time, and not the other way around, but hey, that's just me.

Will use A340s to fly the route and they are doing the opposite in terms of schedule. Red Eye from Argentina to Mexico and early morning from Mexico to Argentina

http://aerolinearosario.blogspot.com...olinea-argentina-regresara-la.html


User currently offlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7561 posts, RR: 43
Reply 25, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4195 times:

Quoting skyone (Reply 24):
Red Eye from Argentina to Mexico and early morning from Mexico to Argentina

Yes, I know. I think it would be smarter to do it the other way around. But oh well.

Since we are on this subject, Recalde mentioned that the goal is to make MEX daily a few months after launch.



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
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...
New Airport For Mexico City Cancelled posted Fri Aug 2 2002 16:38:38 by Republic
Green Light For A New Airport At Mexico City posted Wed May 23 2007 18:08:21 by Anthsaun
New International Airport For Mexico City posted Fri Sep 10 1999 04:27:14 by LeoDF
New Airport For Dublin? posted Wed May 6 2009 13:28:20 by Aidanoc5793
New Airport For The Mayan Riviera (CUN Area)! posted Sat Jun 3 2006 07:31:21 by SFOMEX
On The News: New Airport For NYC? posted Tue Feb 14 2006 08:36:12 by Rampart
New Airport For PFN Update posted Tue Oct 11 2005 23:33:25 by KarlB737
A New Airport For Prague? posted Mon Jul 25 2005 18:56:16 by TANS
New Airport For New Orleans MSY? posted Wed May 18 2005 15:07:47 by Squirrel83
New Airport For Warsaw posted Fri Feb 11 2005 08:31:43 by PolAir