So one thing we know FOR SURE is going to happen (I forgot where it was told). UA is going to move everything over to E and take over 2 of DL's former gates, thus vacating C9 & C11. The question then becomes does AA take over those 2 gates and vacate the 2 gates in D? or do they move over to D and take over say D54 & D55, thus giving WN/FL sole control over C?
any ideas or inside info?
crAAzy From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 680 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (7 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3157 times:
There hasn't been any official word and there likely won't be until after the merger is approved. However, the currently line of thinking is that the most logical is for AA will move over to D and take over at least D54 and D55 leaving WN with all of the C concourse.
mke717spotter From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2380 posts, RR: 5 Reply 2, posted (7 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2822 times:
Quoting crAAzy (Reply 1): However, the currently line of thinking is that the most logical is for AA will move over to D and take over at least D54 and D55 leaving WN with all of the C concourse.
I think this will most likely happen too, though at current flight levels I'm not sure WN is even close to needing the entire concourse to themselves.
On another note, a bit of surprising news came out today that DL won't be renewing the naming rights deal for downtown convention center. I think its kind of strange that they bothered with getting it for less than a year.
"In our dialogue with them, it became apparent that the powers that be at Delta don't feel Milwaukee is a significant part of their marketing strategy," said Franklyn Gimbel, chairman of the Wisconsin Center District board. "It's nothing we did or didn't do.
"They were blunt honest. They said, 'We're going to concentrate our naming rights dollars in cities where we have substantially more traffic.' "
Southwest Airlines is the dominant airline at Mitchell Airport, with 52% of the market. Delta is second, with 25% of the market.
In September 2012, Delta announced it had assumed a one-year agreement with the Wisconsin Center District for the naming rights to the Delta Center. The airline had assumed the last year of the contract, at a cost of $500,000, with Frontier Airlines through June 30.
"We have enjoyed the relationship with the convention center, and Milwaukee continues to be an important market in the Delta network," said Chris Kelly Singley, a Delta spokeswoman. "However, in 2013 our marketing efforts will focus on our hub markets."
Will you watch the Cleveland Browns and the Detroit Lions on Sunday? Only if coach Eric Mangini resigned after a loss.
FWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3538 posts, RR: 2 Reply 9, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2331 times:
Quoting airliner371 (Reply 8): I don't think it matters what would help US but rather WN. MKE probably will do anything to please WN including giving them exclusive rights to C.
D doesn't have the space to support AA/US, DL, and F9 unless F9 goes to a single-gate operation at MKE. But that could very well happen, as F9 has basically shrunk down to DEN and seasonal CUN from MKE.
As for E, are there enough gates left over in E after the UA consolidation for a merged AA/US?
And I'm sure WN would "luv" 4 or 5 more gates on C, but the question is: Would WN use them?
Anything's possible at this point at MKE.
I don't work for FWA, their tenants, or their ad agency. But I still love FWA.
knope2001 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2661 posts, RR: 30 Reply 10, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2252 times:
Frontier only uses D39 and D41, and only needs a single gate.
In addition to those two gates, Frontier also controls and pays rent on these gates but does not use them:
D27/28/29/54/55 (ground boarding gates)
D30/34/36/38/42 (gate podiums removed or decommissioned)
D51/53 (gate podiums not removed or decommissioned)
E64/65/66/67/68/69 (obtained in a swap from Delta)
There are no available gates on D unless Frontier gives up some of their gates or, as they did with Delta, swaps gates. Although one would logically expect Frontier to be eager to have someone come along and sublease from them, it doesn't appear they are pushing for that. Perhaps there's some reason that's not apparent, like it would break a tenant of an agreement Midwest signed years back and they'd have to pay back a tax break or something like that. Only speculation on my part, of course, but it could answer why Frontier continues to pay rent on all that spaced and has done nothing to reduce their cost burden.
Without Frontier dealing, there are not too many options. Notice that United's consolidate on E was with Continental's two rotunda gates and with a 3rd formerly-vacant gate on the stem of E. It would have been a lot more convenient for them to have three adjacent gates on the rotunda, but Frontier controls the other six on E (from the DL swap) and so United's gate 3 is down the way a bit. Unless Frontier plays ball...
E has 1 vacant gate (60) so there's no room for anyone else to move there.
D is where US is, but there are no vacant gates for AA to potentially join them.
C is where AA is, and the two former UA gates are empty and across the way from the AA gates.
That does not ensure AA/US will consolidate in C, because there could always be a swap *if* Frontier is willing to play ball like they did with Delta.
Also, talk of E closing was somewhat premature. Although the airport agrees and understands that mothballing E would save some money, there's no particular plan to force United elsewhere and close E. They did make an exception with some help for Delta's move but In general they prefer to let the airlines work among themselves when it comes to gates.
YXwatcherMKE From United States of America, joined May 2007, 890 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2160 times:
Well I just check the official MKE website and it indeed states that UA & AC have moved everything to E-61-62 and 63. Since UA have gone to using just 3 Gates it will be interesting how they will RON 5 A/C each night. I know from the past early morning visits I have made to MKE it was three a/c on C and 2 on E. As the current schedule goes UA have the following departures before any arrivals.
05:00 - ORD @E62
05:40 - IAH @E61
05:52 - ORD @E62
0600 - CLE @E61
06:00 - EWR @E63
I think it is a smart move for UA to move to E Concourse It gives them all sorts of room for when ORD is closed and they divert to MKE and they can bring in almost any flight they want. The only down side of it is, the FIS gate is on the other side of the airport and a independent building & only able to service one A/C at a time. My wish is that some day they move the FIS service to one of the main concourses or connect the I.A.B. with a connector bridge and maybe one more gate. So what do you think of this idea?
As to the AA/US gate move I would hope they move to D Concourse. US just moved to the D Concourse and I think it would work better for them over at D as stated above better vendors on D versus C that was one of the reason US moved to D in the first place. Leave C to WN and a to Gate C17 it is in a real bad location after the hammer head was built and really not that usable, it could be used in a pinch but I would not.
[Edited 2013-05-02 20:27:43]
I miss the 60's & 70's when you felt like a guest on the plane not cattle like today
knope2001 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2661 posts, RR: 30 Reply 12, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1991 times:
Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 11): Well I just check the official MKE website and it indeed states that UA & AC have moved everything to E-61-62 and 63. Since UA have gone to using just 3 Gates it will be interesting how they will RON 5 A/C each night. I know from the past early morning visits I have made to MKE it was three a/c on C and 2 on E. As the current schedule goes UA have the following departures before any arrivals.
05:00 - ORD @E62
05:40 - IAH @E61
05:52 - ORD @E62
0600 - CLE @E61
06:00 - EWR @E63
Looks like they'll need to tow regularly. Not too uncommon -- Delta towed two planes each monring before the move and still tows one as they have 8 RON's but only seven spots served by six jetways. Others tow or have towed in the past. The danger, of course, is when there are delays, and that's especially true when your total gate holdings is small. if IAH delays much for any reason, there's noplace for the CLE flight to depart from without taking a serious delay.
davescj From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 2290 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1966 times:
Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 11): The only down side of it is, the FIS gate is on the other side of the airport and a independent building & only able to service one A/C at a time.
Would this also depend on the airport of origin? I'm thinking like YYZ or DUB where you go through US Customs/immigration before leaving. In those cases, could the aircraft not simply go to a domestic gate?
If that is correct, those flights could go to MKE in a diversion if ORD if merely "slowed down" and pax bussed to ORD.
Quoting knope2001 (Reply 12): Not too uncommon -- Delta towed two planes each monring before the move and still tows one as they have 8 RON's but only seven spots served by six jetways.
I was thinking the same. Frontier has a hanger in MKE as does DL. Could those spaces be rented out? Or are the still used for MX?
HermansCVR580 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 496 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (7 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1814 times:
Don't think Delta has a hangar in MKE. Frontier did not sure if it is being used though. Cessna is moving into the old Skyway hangar. Skywest is using one of the old 440th hangars and Air Wisconsin is where they have always been since opening the hangar in MKE.
The right decision at the wrong time, is still a wrong decision. "Hal Carr"
yx302 From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 113 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (7 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1711 times:
Last I heard was a bid went out for two more gates to be installed on D, between 52-56 and 51-53. Also D30 was changed from a pedestal bridge to an apron driving bridge. I would bet that in time D34,36 and 38 also get changed to an apron bridge. D can obviously hold more aircraft than its being used for. I still remember when the D27-29 ramp used to also have bridges. Both Ex Midwest hangars are still occupied by Frontier and Republic. West hangar still contains the heavy MTC line until it gets all sorted out. The East hangar is now a storage facility for Republic. At times you do see other airlines using them, I'm sure the space isn't free though. I have not heard of Cessna moving to the old Skyway hangar, but I'm sure its an improvement . It was a new facility that was used for a short time and pretty much sat vacant after that.
KGRB From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 650 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (7 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1568 times:
Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 7): In fact, MKE-ORD/DEN are some of the OO at-risk CR2 routes.
Really? I never knew that. It's sad to see UA's decline in some of these heritage midwest markets. UA used to run mainline to MKE, DTW, MSN - all Express markets now. Does MSP even get any mainline United anymore? It seems like it's all S5 E170s now. At least AA still runs mainline to these markets (except MSN).
Sorry for the off topic rant!
Now in ATW, proudly working for Delta Connection & United Express
JBo From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 2296 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1541 times:
Quoting knope2001 (Reply 10): Perhaps there's some reason that's not apparent, like it would break a tenant of an agreement Midwest signed years back and they'd have to pay back a tax break or something like that. Only speculation on my part, of course, but it could answer why Frontier continues to pay rent on all that spaced and has done nothing to reduce their cost burden
Something like that wouldn't surprise me if F9/RAH are still hanging onto a bunch of gates that they aren't using; it has to be some sort of stipulation or condition in their lease agreement that prevents them from offloading the gates. It could also be something so simple as having to wait for the lease contract to expire because the penalties of terminating the agreement early would be more costly than letting the leases sit.
I would think, though, that if MKE wants to make a move towards closing down E in order to save on building operating costs, that they would work something out with F9/RAH to renegotiate their leases and open up space in D. For as much open space as there is in MKE, it can certainly be utilized more efficiently than it currently is.
I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day.
FWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3538 posts, RR: 2 Reply 18, posted (7 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1477 times:
Quoting KGRB (Reply 16): It's sad to see UA's decline in some of these heritage midwest markets. UA used to run mainline to MKE, DTW, MSN - all Express markets now.
Same here in FWA. We haven't seen a new UA city (excluding CO's two attempts at CLE from FWA - first XE, then C5) since 1980. In those 33 years, FWA has seen two terminal expansions and renovations (with planning as I speak for a third), the end of mainline service (though I do think FWA is a prime candidate for the DL 717 or A319 and AA A319), five (and soon six) mergers of airlines serving the airport (RC/NW, PI/US, AA/TW, DL/NW, UA/CO, and soon AA/US), the launch of Eagle to DFW (2000) and the relaunch of NW/DL to MSP (2008), G4 entering the market (now at 4 cities), three ad agencies advertising the airport (and they only started ads in 1998), and competition from at least four shuttle services to other airports (only one, the Hoosier Shuttle to IND, survives). Elsewhere in Fort Wayne, we've seen I-469 built (which can get you to FWA), Airport Expressway built (again, it can get you to FWA), and US 24 to TOL become a four-lane divided highway (which could have been a bad thing for FWA if TOL was thriving today like it was 12 years ago).
FWA has had a long history with UA, which they started serving shortly after the move of commercial service from SMD to FWA. UA sent DC-3s, Convair-Liners, DC-6s, Viscounts, Caravelles (the first pure-jet to serve FWA, beating DL DC-9s by a few months), 727-200s and 737-200s, and even DC-8 freighters. After the discontinuation of FWA-SBN-DEN around 1981 or so, Air Whisky took over for UA with ORD flights, initially as an interline with UA and then United Express when that started. ZW and later United Feeder Service also had their ATP MX base at FWA until 1999, when the ATPs were retired. After the ATP phaseout and the MX base closing (S5 and later 9E eventually reused that hangar), DH and ZW (yup, the return of Air Whisky) CR2s came in on FWA-ORD. Then when DH and ZW left the United Express system (in the case of DH, with disastrous results), OO and YV became the United Express carriers on FWA-ORD. After YV pulled the plug on CR2 flying for UA, FWA became a OO at-risk CR2 city (at the same time as ORD/DEN-MKE and ORD-CWA, and several SFO routes; the list has grown considerably since). Around the same time, OO outsourced FWA ground to OH (later Regional Elite and DGS).
However, there are rumors as I speak of another UA hub from FWA, as the airport is doing quite well as a whole right now. I won't delve into too much detail, but I will say that there are two hub options (only one will probably be chosen), neither is DEN or CLE, and that either hub would be a great complement to the ORD service. To date, UA (not counting CO) is the only airline currently serving FWA that hasn't taken advantage of FWA's incentive package - and I hope that they finally do.
I don't work for FWA, their tenants, or their ad agency. But I still love FWA.