Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
MSP Expansion/2020 Plan, Future Of A/B Concourses  
User currently offlineZMP0PSA From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 29 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2246 times:

In the past two months or so there has been increased conversation about expanding and renovating MSP, somewhat in line with the oringinal 20/20 plans from NW. Just a few of the major points are:

Expand and remodel councourse G, with a new international facility and tram.
Expanding T2 (HHH) to 18 gates.
Move all non Sky Team member to T2.
Remodel concourse E.

There have been MAC commissioners and government officials voicing concerns that the plans are too ambitious and are relying on Delta maintaining and/or growing their hub status. I'm interested to hear some of your opinions.

I believe Delta will maintain its high margin hub at MSP, but I don't see them expanding anytime soon. As much as I'd like to see expansion, I have to admit it seems pretty ambitious.

With the draw down of 50 seat flying, what are the options for the small RJ gates on concourses A and B? Many of them can only handle CR2's and previously Saabs, correct? The A and B councourses are relatively new and very nice in my opinion, but it seems they were designed to cater too much for small RJs. Could they reduce the number of gates, and park larger RJ's diagonally to make them fit? Also, it still seems interesting that ZK operates out of the E concourse. They do practically only feed DL, right? If Delta really wanted more gates, could they not lease the gates ZK operates out of, and in return give ZK gates on the A or B concourses?


ZMP0PSA

12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8544 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2250 times:

A ridiculous plan with no justification. MSP traffic has fallen slightly since early-2000s peak. The present facility totally satisfies traffic needs and is convenient. Piling on costs while throwing up structural barriers to competition strikes me as totally wrong headed and insane. It would raise eyebrows of both the DOJ and the local market.

User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7577 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2252 times:

Quoting ZMP0PSA (Thread starter):

With the draw down of 50 seat flying, what are the options for the small RJ gates on concourses A and B?

I hope they primarily focus on refurbishing these gates. Especially with the props being retired as well, these gates need to be refurbished so they can handle ERJs and CR9s in a better manner.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23022 posts, RR: 20
Reply 3, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2252 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2):
I hope they primarily focus on refurbishing these gates. Especially with the props being retired as well, these gates need to be refurbished so they can handle ERJs and CR9s in a better manner.

Particularly on B, many of the hold rooms are too small for even 50 seaters. A gut job that leads to fewer parking spaces but more space per gate may be in order, but I doubt there will be much appetite for that in a relatively new facility like Concourse B.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineaf773atmsp From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2688 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2251 times:

I assume if all non Sky Team airlines move to Terminal 2, ZK would stay at Terminal 1?


It ain't no normal MD80 its a Super 80!
User currently onlineiowaman From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4403 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2251 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

DL traffic is down at MSP since the merger. Terminal 2 has significantly increased traffic, largely due to WN (I believe Terminal 2 is handling around double the passengers in 2008 or so). I highly doubt a need 18 gates though, unless some of the larger carriers like AA UA and US are moved to Terminal 2, but why do this when trafifc is down where those airlines are currently located? Anyway I could see another couple gates onto Humphrey if WN continues to grow in MSP but I don't expect anything drastic.


Next flights: WN DSM-LAS-PHX, US PHX-SJD.
User currently offlinekatanapilot From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 170 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2251 times:

i definitely see the need for some modernizing and renovations. the whole airport just screams 1990's. from a function perspective, i really enjoy MSP. i fly in and out very frequently and rarely wait for anything!

User currently offlineamccann From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 175 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2251 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 3):
Particularly on B, many of the hold rooms are too small for even 50 seaters. A gut job that leads to fewer parking spaces but more space per gate may be in order,

It will be interesting to see how these gates are handled. Even many of the hold rooms for the A gates are too small for the 50 seat jets. Last time I flew out of an A gate (I believe A12 or A13) I remember counting 30 some seats in the hold room for a CRJ200.

Quoting katanapilot (Reply 6):
the whole airport just screams 1990's

I don't know if the whole airport screams 1990s. I particularly enjoy the high number C gates and the low number A gates. I feel like those are very modern and very functional. However the G gates do seem very dated.



What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineusflyer msp From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2124 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2251 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 1):
A ridiculous plan with no justification. MSP traffic has fallen slightly since early-2000s peak. The present facility totally satisfies traffic needs and is convenient. Piling on costs while throwing up structural barriers to competition strikes me as totally wrong headed and insane. It would raise eyebrows of both the DOJ and the local market.

I agree that the much of the plan is not needed at this point. However, I fail to see how it throws up structural barriers to competition, especially to the point of DOJ intervention. Do you care to explain further?


User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3754 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2252 times:

Quoting amccann (Reply 7):
However the G gates do seem very dated.

DL is in the process of renovations to Concourse G, particularly in the food/beverage offerings.



"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
User currently offlineMSPNWA From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1947 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2251 times:

Quoting ZMP0PSA (Thread starter):

Expand and remodel councourse G, with a new international facility and tram.
Expanding T2 (HHH) to 18 gates.
Move all non Sky Team member to T2.
Remodel concourse E.

-Concourse G is by far my least favorite. I would be in favor of a significant renovation along those lines to make it more passenger-friendly and aesthetically pleasing.

-I think eventually the Humphrey Terminal (never going to say T2) will need more gates, but I think that's a long ways off. The current expansion of a second security checkpoint should hold things over for now.

-Totally not in favor of it. Delta and SkyTeam will never need more than their current capacity. I like Humphrey, but there so much more to do in Lindbergh. You would have to expand Humphrey. Costs would go up overall. Shops in Lindbergh would lose revenue. Etc. No one is happy in this scenario. Use what we have now.

-I don't know why E is singled out. I guess I've never noticed it being significantly worse than the other concourses.


To me the biggest consequence of airline trends has been the large influx of RJs. Now the A, B, and C concourses are jammed. It creates congestion around the gates and more connections with long walks. But I don't see an easy way out of that problem. Maybe the up coming reduction in 50-seaters will help, hopefully without reducing total passengers through MSP.


User currently offlineTVNWZ From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 2389 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2251 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 1):
It would raise eyebrows of both the DOJ

The only remote way eyebrows would be raised is when DOJ employees fly into/through MSP and their trip is either better or worse.


User currently offlinemsp747 From United States of America, joined May 2010, 323 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2252 times:

MSP's international terminal is severely lacking when compared to other hubs. It is too small to handle the current international flights, which leaves no room for adding additional flights. So while the airport doesn't need an entirely new concourse, like the proposed H concourse in the 20/20 plan, future improvements need to be discussed.

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...
Future Of American Eagle/American Connection posted Sat Sep 15 2012 18:32:52 by doulasc
Future Of RJ Industry posted Sun Aug 26 2012 08:06:46 by leonardoq
The Future Of EWR-MYR posted Sat Aug 4 2012 20:48:29 by spiritair97
The Future Of Aegean posted Tue Jul 31 2012 12:14:32 by callsignpa
The Future Of AB? posted Sun Jul 22 2012 18:57:55 by miaintl
Future Of Two Ex-PAA 747s, Incl. PGE Testbed? posted Sun Jul 15 2012 18:49:41 by fanofjets
Future Of MSY posted Thu Jul 12 2012 14:41:34 by coffeepilot
NextGen & Future Of Air Traffic Controllers posted Thu Jul 5 2012 13:40:04 by cal764
Future Of Delta Connection? posted Sat Jun 30 2012 21:41:44 by crj200faguy
Future Of Toledo Express Airport posted Mon Jun 25 2012 14:29:56 by doulasc