User avatar
ramprat74
Posts: 1328
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 6:01 pm

New Terminal In SAN

Sat Feb 28, 2004 3:29 pm

After looking at this picture. I think the city of San Diego should some how asked the Government to move the Marine Corp recruit depot to a different location. The Military owns too much prime real estate in San Diego. There is plenty of room at MCAS Miramar for the recruit depot.

If the terminal was on the northside of the field. People on I-5 would have easier access to the terminal. Why is there so much concrete in the upper right of the picture? Was that where the Convair plant was?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Denis Roschlau

 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sat Feb 28, 2004 4:04 pm

I think a greater concern would be an additional runway, not a new terminal.
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sat Feb 28, 2004 4:26 pm

How about try reading up first....

http://www.san.org/fact_sheet_authority.asp

Forget MCRD... Try Miramar... Likely Joint Use

[Edited 2004-02-28 08:30:36]
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sat Feb 28, 2004 5:14 pm

I dont forsee the military ever giving up any of the current air bases within the next 15 years. It is my opinion that SAN will not be moving anytime soon, maybe 25 to 30 years at best. But thats just my opinion. They have been talking for years but never once come up with a solution and frankly it really is too late as there is no acceptable area of land except for MCAS Miramar and I just dont see that base being closed, Camp pendleton is too far, Riverside County is too far, Imperial County is too far away from San Diego.

SAN is not operated by the City of San Diego.
 
Trvlr
Posts: 4251
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2000 9:58 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sat Feb 28, 2004 6:52 pm

I think the Regional Airport Authority is somewhere in the process of developing a terminal on the north side of SAN. It will occupy the former site of the Convair facility (now just a bunch of parking lots), and will house Southwest Airlines, and possibly other LCC's such as Frontier and jetBlue. Not sure if the project is on track, or caught up in the recent transfer of airport ownership from the Port Commission to the new Authority.

A new airport for San Diego is a very lengthy, gruesome topic. I'll leave that for later.

Aaron G.
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sat Feb 28, 2004 10:50 pm

Current Update:

1. Miramar is on the "BRAC" list, as it every other base in San Diego. To save it, Miramar may be interested in Joint Use. If Miramar cannot sufficiently justify why it should remain open it will be closed.

2. Several other sites are being looked at, save the "floating concept" which proved to be an environmental nightmare. Great for a small fighter base, not so great to have a solid floating platform 15,000 feet long and 8,000 feet wide on the open ocean.

3. The "North Terminal Concept" Trvlr is talking about is not in the works. It's one option the airport will look at should a new airport not be approved by the voters in 2006. The ideal situation is indeed to move Southwest and other LCC's who don't have code share arangements to a North Terminal. This would be a 12-18 gate facility. It's easier to isolate them then the rest of the carriers. However, for this to move ahead, MCRD needs to give up land to support a North Taxiway. Without a "full length" north taxiway, the "North Terminal Concept" is dead. In addition, MCRD in exchange for the land wanted a 12' sound attenuation wall along side the taxiway. It's unknown how this would affect the ILS and the safety of the airfield.

4. If the airport gets "all" of MCRD, then there is a final option. Move all the terminals to the MCRD property thus improving road access and terminal space. Install a new runway just north of the current runway angles two more degree's North "Open-V" to create a new departure surface running 11/29. Differential GPS would allow instrument approaches for equiped aircraft on runway 27, something not possible now.

Begin aquisition of all land surrounding adjacent the airport and demolish all buildings to improve airfield safety. The current runway will always serve as the primary runway. Due to terrain and buildings, the 11/29 runway is basically a one-way runway. 29 for departures and 11 for ILS arrivals. An 11 departure route puts you right at downtown and a 29 arrival creates a 5,000 foot displaced thresold on an 10,500 foot runway. San Diego rarely needs arrivals over the ocean, the only reason 9 is ever used is for Santa Ana wind conditions (10-15 days per year) and Instrument Landings (30-60 days/year - morning only - Marine Layer fog). A 27 ILS is impossible with current ILS equipment. DGPS eliminates "head to head" operations during inclimate weather making the airport more efficient.

After build out:

a. Limit service to commerical aircraft only. This can only be done after the max buildout of the facility because doing so strips an airport of it's Federal Funding.

b. Once operations level and then maximize, slot allocation.

[Edited 2004-02-28 15:10:13]

[Edited 2004-02-28 15:22:29]
 
LMP737
Posts: 4859
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sat Feb 28, 2004 11:39 pm

Miramar should have been closed when the Navy moved out. However the government in it's infinite wisdom decided to close MCAS El Toro and MCAS Tustin and move the Marines to take their place. Miramar would have made an excellent international airport.

Even if the Marines were to vacate MCRD you would still have a hard time fitting a runway in it's place. With hills and the I-5 on one side it would be a very tight squeeze.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sat Feb 28, 2004 11:46 pm

On Miramar: The reason they didn't get it was because the Port District, who controlled the study funding, was to lose control of the airport to the county if the move were made. The study was flawed. Wonder why????

On MCRD: If you get all of MCRD, you can get a 10,500' runway in there. The terrain on a 29 departure is better. Arriving 29 is a whole different mess. They'd never use it. All 11/29 would be for is to suppliment 9/27 thus adding about a 30% capacity increase.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13223
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sun Feb 29, 2004 12:33 am

I think the best and even easiest solution for both San Diego and the Marine Corps is a straight up swap, the Marines take over Lindbergh field and San Diego takes over Miramar.

The Marines do not need more than one runway, and Lindbergh is the perfect size for a military field. It's adjacent to the Marine Corps recruit depot and very close to North Island and San Diego Naval Station, also the Marines would not fly as many flights on a daily basis out of Lindbergh as the airport already supports so there would be some noise relief for locals.

Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sun Feb 29, 2004 1:54 am

...course, the noise from the movements that do remain would be significantly more intense than the current airliner movements.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
User avatar
ramprat74
Posts: 1328
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 6:01 pm

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sun Feb 29, 2004 5:30 am

Does anybody have a overview of Miramar? How many runways does it have?
 
LMP737
Posts: 4859
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sun Feb 29, 2004 7:35 am

Miramar has three runways. Two parallel and one the intersects them at a 45 degree angle.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
Coronado990
Posts: 1312
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:12 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sun Feb 29, 2004 7:35 am

Miramar has two runways, one 12,000 feet in length and the parallel runway is 8,000 feet in length. The southern part of the airport is the location of the current city dump.

Here are two overviews...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Serge P. Walczak
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © AirNikon



The approach to the airport is perfect. The departure path is not so perfect. Because of urban congestion at University City and La Jolla off the west end of the runway, military aircraft must make a sharp 50 degree turn off the runway to avoid housing developments, shopping centers, hospitals and UCSD. A new runway would have to be built further east towards Interstate 15 for departures so commercial aircraft can make this turn a little safer. Forget landing towards the east during Santa Ana winds because of noise complaints.
Uncle SAN at your service!
 
Trvlr
Posts: 4251
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2000 9:58 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sun Feb 29, 2004 8:24 am

As long as we're entertaining the idea of an airport at Miramar, forgetting the obvious obstacles in the way of actually moving the airport there in the first place:

Coronado990 brings up an interesting point. However, I think the problem could be solved relatively easily if the main Runway 6L/24R is extended in the direction Interstate 15. This new section would be a displaced threshold similar to that at SAN, which is a whopping 1810 feet. (This section of runway in SAN maximises the amount of space aircraft can use on takeoff while at the same time giving arriving aircraft ample space to land). With the new section of the runway in place, departing aircraft would have a much longer runway to use on takeoff (and consequently more time to turn away from La Jolla), and arriving aircraft could avoid coming too close to Interstate 15 by using the existing markings on 6L/24R.

Aaron G.
 
Coronado990
Posts: 1312
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:12 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sun Feb 29, 2004 8:58 am

I would rather entertain the idea of keeping Lindbergh Field and John Wayne airports the way they are (much like MDW, DCA & LGA) and building a new large international airport right in the middle of both counties off Interstate-5 at Stuart Mesa 5 miles north of Oceanside (the site of the Oceanside VOR) where two parallel runways almost a mile apart can be built in a 6/24 heading. Arrivals would be over the southern portion of Pendleton (where no military maneuvers take place) and departures would be over the ocean.

This could be the SD North County replacement of Palomar Airport which would revert back to being a G.A airport, what it was designed for. It would also be a Southern California airport in the form of international flights and cargo, something SAN & SNA cannot do.

Instead of building a new terminal on the north side of Lindbergh Field, build an Express Train station at the site complete with with long term parking. Current rail lines would run adjacent to both airports and can continue onward to a similar sites with parking at El Toro and Anaheim in Orange County.

It would also benefit the Marines who can now deploy troops off of the new 12,000 foot runway. They would have their own terminal and cargo area separate from the mid-field terminals.
Uncle SAN at your service!
 
Bicoastal
Posts: 2446
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 1999 5:56 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sun Feb 29, 2004 10:56 am

I believe the current San Diego airport master plan envisions only building a new terminal for Southwest Airlines on the north side on Pacific Highway where the current Jimsair is/was. Southwest has very little interline baggage transfers and the airline generates a lot of traffic on Harbor Drive. Moving Southwest will greatly lessen traffic and people congestion in the Harbor Drive/East Terminal area.

We've discussed this before, but San Diego can't even fill/make a profit on a daily BA flight to London. Sure, for airline enthusiasts a new airport would be fun, but San Diego isn't a good hub location and it doesn't generate enough cargo and profitable passenger traffic (high yield, not tourists) to fill regular flights over the Pacific or the Atlantic. Airport passenger growth projections have been highly inflated in San Diego by proponents of a new airport. But even with its single runway, it has plenty of capacity left and San Diego County is almost built out now. Urban and suburban sprawl has pretty much gobbled up the developable land. And it's too expensive to live here so not too many large new businesses are locating here.

The previous round of base closings pretty much consolidated west coast operations in San Diego and Bremerton, Washington. I can't see the Base Closure Commission giving up land in areas where they previously consolidated operations. The only facility at risk is MCRD, a recruit training facility, so the airport may get some more usable land there, but not enough for a runway....a north side taxiway, but not a runway.
Airliners.net has many forums. It has spell check and search functions. Use them before posting!
 
Coronado990
Posts: 1312
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:12 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sun Feb 29, 2004 11:56 am

Southwest is very happy at the East Terminal. Rent is cheap. I understand they do not want to pay the higher rent at the new terminal proposed on the old Convair site.

There are still 8 gates that can be opened up at the newer West terminal. Once that is up and running, I can see WN being the only tenant at the East Terminal. If a new airport does open up, I bet WN will want to stay at Lindbergh Field compared to moving to a new more expensive airport.
Uncle SAN at your service!
 
User avatar
ramprat74
Posts: 1328
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 6:01 pm

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sun Feb 29, 2004 1:08 pm

So they could put 8 more gates on the westside of the west terminal?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Glen Reid

 
Trvlr
Posts: 4251
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2000 9:58 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sun Feb 29, 2004 3:07 pm

Ramprat74:

I believe that will happen sometime in the future. Most likely, the current T2 West design will be mirrored for another 8 gates, and then some time after that (we're talking many years, here), the current design will be replicated at the edge of airport property. With or without a North Terminal, this development would free up T1 for renovation.

Bicoastal:
I'm pretty sure the second runway option in the Master Plan has carried over to the Authority's ownership of the airport. The MCRD has already agreed to give the airport extra space for a north taxiway, which is near to the construction phase. Environmental reviews have been completed, deal with the marines/DoD is close, etc.

We all know what everyone thinks about airport site selection. Right now the process is pretty much in the doldrums. Much will be clearer in 2005, when the BRAC makes its final decision, and the economic picture is different.

Aaron G.
 
rotor1
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:57 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sun Feb 29, 2004 3:19 pm

Anyone who thinks we need a new airport... come to San Diego and sit somewhere you can see arrivals and departures. Within a few hours, you'll understand why we're just fine with one runway.

-Mike
The best aviation photo I've ever taken was rejected by Airliners.net
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Sun Feb 29, 2004 3:38 pm

"1. Miramar is on the "BRAC" list, as it every other base in San Diego. To save it, Miramar may be interested in Joint Use. If Miramar cannot sufficiently justify why it should remain open it will be closed."

It may be on the list but they wont close it. I would put money on it that no San Diego bases will be shut. (except maybe MCRD) but Miramar, North Island and Camp Pendleton in my opinion will remain open. But its just my opinion,.
 
Bicoastal
Posts: 2446
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 1999 5:56 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:28 am

Another bit of Real-Politik....the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee is a San Diego area congressman (Duncan Hunter) and another member of the powerful Appropriations Defense Subcommittee, Randy "Duke" Cunningham, is also a San Diego area congressman. Both have already said, in effect, that they oppose conversion of Miramar to commercial uses.
Airliners.net has many forums. It has spell check and search functions. Use them before posting!
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Mon Mar 01, 2004 11:01 pm

Another bit of Real-Politik....The Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee is a San Diego area congressman (Duncan Hunter) and another member of the powerful Appropriations Defense Subcommittee, Randy "Duke" Cunningham, is also a San Diego area congressman. Both have already said, in effect, that they oppose conversion of Miramar to commercial uses.

Both have proved themselves to be complete jackholes in this process... Cunningham calling airport staff "stupid", saying the airport should extend a runway south into the bay and Hunter proposing high speed rail to Imperial for an airport. Neither offering a viable solution.

There are still 8 gates that can be opened up at the newer West terminal. Once that is up and running, I can see WN being the only tenant at the East Terminal.

Huh? What 8 gates? Yes they can expand T2W, but at quite a cost. There is an environmental impact problem west of T2W...

The MCRD has already agreed to give the airport extra space for a north taxiway, which is near to the construction phase.

With the transition to SDCRAA, these negotiations were halted. This issue hasn't been talked about for nearly 2 years.

The approach to the airport is perfect. The departure path is not so perfect. Because of urban congestion at University City and La Jolla off the west end of the runway, military aircraft must make a sharp 50 degree turn off the runway to avoid housing developments, shopping centers, hospitals and UCSD.

If Miramar were to be used, a single runway would be built south of the current runways and further east to ensure the 65dB footprint is east of I-805. It's alignment would set to minimize impact to the UTC area. Terminals would be built North of this, then a second runway would replace the existing runways.

It may be on the list but they wont close it. I would put money on it that no San Diego bases will be shut. (except maybe MCRD) but Miramar, North Island and Camp Pendleton in my opinion will remain open. But its just my opinion.

It doesn't have to close. A joint-use facility allowing the airport to take-over the airfield would save the government nearly $160 million a year in maintenance costs (Miramars has only one runway that is in good enough condition to be used for commercial service). Furthermore, while Miramar contributes $1 billion a year to the local economy, something the Marine's like to brag about, a commercial airport on that site would contribute $6.5 Billion to the economy over it's current $3.5 billion at the present location. 75% of all freight is driven to LAX due to SAN's lack of cargo handing capacity. 800 passengers per day fly commuters to LAX to connect on flights that could originate in San Diego.

The simple fact of the matter is that the Military owns and operates 51% of the land in San Diego County. 51%. Miramar consists of 20,000 acres. The airport requires about 3,500 acres. Time to share folks. Other bases do it.

To give you an idea as to what the county thinks. No one gives a crap. In 1994, County Wide vote approved a measure to move to Miramar should it become available by a 70/30 margin. Of course, this was just tossed on to the ballot and the City and County didn't have the Authority to actually build something had it become available. No one even flinched to oppose the measure.



 
Bicoastal
Posts: 2446
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 1999 5:56 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Tue Mar 02, 2004 4:18 am

" 800 passengers per day fly commuters to LAX to connect on flights that could originate in San Diego."

What makes you think the airlines want to lose this feeder traffic for flights leaving from LAX? Hubs need markets like San Diego to fill their larger (or more frequently scheduled) planes. 800 people scattered over a number of different flights to multiple destinations does not mean San Diego can support originating traffic to where these people are flying. They may add up to as little as 1 or 50 on a connecting flight but don't warrant daily service from San Diego.

As for cargo...so what if some goes to LAX? Much of San Diego's cargo goes out in the belly of existing commercial flights. If they have to truck the rest, so be it.

San Diego's economy will do just fine without the questionable $3.5 billion that a new airport might bring. (I'd like to see a truly independent economic study/forecast. The airport boosters at SANDAG and the Airport Authority can't be trusted,) The cost of living, lack of developable land, lack of water, etc. will limit San Diego's growth and attractiveness to business expansion and relocation. The existing airport has plenty of capacity.

Airliners.net has many forums. It has spell check and search functions. Use them before posting!
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Tue Mar 02, 2004 5:32 am

I think you under-estimate the new Authority and San Diego's air transportation needs. Significantly under-estimate it.

Sufficient capacity??? You must be kidding.
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Tue Mar 02, 2004 5:48 am

"Sufficient capacity??? You must be kidding"

In all honesty if SAN was really at or near capacity dont you think that there would be significant delays at our one runway little airport? The delays are not there the only time SAN has a large number of flights lined up is between about 6:30am and 8am, the rest of the day the departure lines are minimal or non-existent.

I used to work ops for HP and the dispatchers estimated the taxi to take off time for our flights at less then 10 minutes. The majority of the flights were airborne within 5 minutes of taxi.

Cargo is shipped to LAX but SAN wasting billions on a airport in Miaramar does not mean added cargo or flights will depart from San Diego. We are simply too close to LAX to ever have a large international or domestic presense and San Diego is mostly leisure travel so its not exactly high yeild either.

So what if the military owns 51% of the land in San Diego. We are a military town and all the military combined is much more valuble to the economy then 1 airport would be.
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Tue Mar 02, 2004 6:05 am

It's not about international capacity. It's about Domestic capacity. Average aircraft capacity had helped keep pace with 3% annual pax growth, however, that is quickly coming to an end. You can only go so big on aircraft before you inevitably add flights. It's also about peak hour capacity, not just the airport's capacity. While San Diego is not delay prone today, by 2010 the average delay will grow to 10 minutes and 17 by 2020.

This isn't about today's capacity. It's about 2020, 2030 and beyond. You vote in 2006, then you get sued by Bruce Henderson just because, then you start building in about 2012 to 2016.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Tue Mar 02, 2004 2:27 pm

Southwest has very little interline baggage transfers.

WN does NOT, I repeat, Does not interline per HERB himself.

The previous round of base closings pretty much consolidated west coast operations in San Diego and Bremerton, Washington.

Ummmm Bremerton PSNS is still open currently and will never close. Way off the topic though.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
User avatar
ramprat74
Posts: 1328
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 6:01 pm

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Tue Mar 02, 2004 2:37 pm

He said the west coast Navy bases are consolidated in San Diego and Seatttle area. He didn't say they closed Bremerton.
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Tue Mar 02, 2004 5:16 pm

"You vote in 2006, then you get sued by Bruce Henderson just because, then you start building in about 2012 to 2016."

I will vote huge NO!
 
Bicoastal
Posts: 2446
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 1999 5:56 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 2:35 am

I used to think Bruce Henderson (for you non-San Diegans...he's a San Diego self appointed government watchdog) was a bozo until he proved right on the Charger ticket guarantee which is costing the City of San Diego taxpayers millions of dollars to pay for empty seats at the stadium.

I have yet to see a truly independent San Diego airport study. Previous ones have been written by airport boosters and are very highly suspect. I've read the many airport studies and all have been inaccurate as far as their estimates of growth are concerned. Miramar isn't going to happen. NIMBYs (Not In My Back Yard), environmentalists, taxpayers and other reasons, including military priorities will never be overcome. Making Lindberg (San Diego International) even more efficient is the only answer. (Except in sex, bigger is not always better) It has plenty of capacity and airlines will need to schedule in the many off peak times when the airport is quiet. I, personally, think we should be working more closely with the operators of Rodriguez in Tijuana as a future supplement but not replacement for Lindberg.

Amwest25....good to see there are more people who refuse to believe the Chamber of Commerce propaganda on San Diego's "need" for a new airport. I've added you to my Respected Users list.
Airliners.net has many forums. It has spell check and search functions. Use them before posting!
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 4:00 am

On the ticket guarantee....

Everyone is quick to blame the Chargers, however, it goes like this.... City: "We want a superbowl". Chargers: "Great!". City: "We need to add seats to reach 70,000 capacity". Chargers: "Uh...We can't sell that many seats every week for a game". Padres Chime In: "neither can we". City: "Well, the Padres don't have to deal with a sell out policy, but we'll guarantee the seats the Chargers don't sell". Chargers: "Okay, go ahead then". Bruce Henderson: "It's the Chargers who are to blame!". Padres eventually get a new stadium now turning out to be a cash cow and a rejuvenator in Downtown".

On City studies for the airport.... I've seen them all and if you were to go by their studies, we should have built a new airport by now. I will grant you, their studies have been significantly flawed. I had to laugh at a couple of them. That's what happens when non-aviation people do an airport study. However, the new Authority is charged with looking at the 2020-2030 time frame. Furthermore, they have hired some of the best project managers and forecasters I've ever seen. Although previous studies failed to recognize the potential increase in aircraft capacity, the newest study does not. Conservatively, the airport will peak in 2017. Best stretch of the numbers, the airport runs out of capacity in 2023. However, the Authority considers these numbers fluid and is constantly re-evaluating them rather than skewing them to meet their needs.

Everyone I have talked to says San Diego can work where it is, but in order for that to happen, massive construction will be required. Terminals, Runways and Taxiways. Add to that, slot allocation and discontinuance of GA flights. This results in the loss of Federal Funding for the airport to support major capital improvement projects.

The runway is probably the biggest concern. The runway is 30 years old. It is asphalt over concrete and it's built on dredge from the bay. Take a look at the road in front of your house. Think how it would look structure wise after 30 years if all you could do was overlay it. You get pop-ups and sink holes because of the surface below. These results reflect the failure of the concrete underneath it and the continual soil erosion. Its' a landfill, simple as that. It is also beginning to slope at the Northeast end. It's pretty obvious. I saw this during a ride along with a friend of mine who is one of the airport managers a little over a year ago. That's just the tip of the ice berg. Like a least tern (endangered species) nesting site in the taxiway ovals which prevents the creation of a better taxilane and hold area for 27. The demand for international service to the Philippines 3 days a week remains un-met for the 1,100 some odd passengers a week who fly to LAX and connect to other carriers(although the 7E7 will take care of this need due to it's projected airfield performance and range). The biggest problem is and always will be it's infrastructure.

We all have our opinions on this matter. I'm of the opinion that with a new runway to replace 9/27, kick out of GA, slot allocation when the time comes the acquisition of MCRD and installation of the open-v runway, San Diego will be fine. The problem is, you can't just close an airport for a month to install a new concrete runway, which is what the airport needs... and that is a very big problem. You might be able to get away with head to head operations on a new runway for a month, but the airlines would likely have a fit over the delays that would mount, that and the 10-15 knot tailwinds the pilots would incur.
 
Coronado990
Posts: 1312
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:12 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 5:01 am

Palomar Airport (CLD) is the one that needs to be replaced as a commercial airport and not Lindbergh Field. Carlsbad-Palomar can go back to being a G.A. airport much like MYR. The population of SD North County is about 1M and is one third of the metro area with potential to grow even more. That is about 5M pax a year that migrate to either Lindbergh Field, John Wayne or LAX not counting the few that currently use CLD today (less than 1M I am sure).

That right there is a good base for a fledging modern airport in the north part of the county (Oceanside-Pendleton) with service to most of the major hubs across the USA. With longer runways then at SAN or SNA, it could serve as the regions cargo and international airport. With a catchment area of nearly 6M (between both SD and Orange Counties), major international airlines such as BA, LH, AF and JL would certainly take this airport much more seriously than Lindbergh Field. Orange County passengers would have the option of either LAX or Oceanside-Pendleton...both airports being, for the most part, equidistant. Orange County passengers were already using the SAN-LHR service when it existed.

Instead of trucking cargo goods from San Diego 120 miles north to LAX thru congestion, it would certainly be a much shorter 35 mile trip to Oceanside and saving the ware and tear of LA's freeway system. Orange County cargo forwarders would have the option of both LAX and Oceanside.

When Lindbergh Field is fogged in, diversions do not have to go to LAX and be bussed 120 miles south down because San Diego County will now have a good long CAT III runway at its disposal.

This airport can grow slowly starting with one 12,000 ft runway but having room to expand to another 9000 ft parallel situated almost a mile apart later on. There will be room for a large cargo complex plus a ramp for the Marine Corp to use for supplies and troop deployment. Then build a modest passenger terminal right off I-5 (complete with train station) with room to expand into a major mid-field complex as popularity grows.

Lindbergh Field (SAN), in the mean time, can cater to domestic flying including LCCs, commuters, charters (for near by cruise ships) and business jets, however, no-one should be forced to move from there. They will just not be able to grow there. Any future growth will happen at the new airport with some airlines perhaps combining SAN & SNA flights at the new Oceanside-Pendleton facility.

An important factor is security. The approach path would be in the southern portion of Camp Pendleton and I doubt any terrorists would want to hang out around there to try to "take down a plane". The departure path would be right over the ocean. No houses in sight! No NIMBY's!!!

All in all, I would rather convince the US Government this will work compared to the NIMBY's that will try and stop any public site including Miramar, which should become a place for affordable housing and a nice large park should it become abandoned.

Uncle SAN at your service!
 
Coronado990
Posts: 1312
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:12 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 5:52 am

Opps! Typo. "MYF" not "MYR". MYF = Montgomery Field Embarrassment
Uncle SAN at your service!
 
Marcus
Posts: 1666
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2001 5:08 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 7:27 am

I, personally, think we should be working more closely with the operators of Rodriguez in Tijuana as a future supplement but not replacement for Lindberg.
*******************

I don't think that will happen anytime soon, a little over 10 years ago when the "binational" (yeah right!) airport proposal was gathering steam and was the novelty in the region, it was the NIMBY's that put the final nail in the coffin, back then the area was undeveloped.......now you have housing developments, schools, warehouses, industrial parks and shopping centers in the area of the proposed airport, the land is gone and the NIMBY issue now would be stronger than before.
Kids!....we are going to the happiest place on earth...TIJUANA! signed: Krusty the Clown
 
Bicoastal
Posts: 2446
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 1999 5:56 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 7:38 am

Marcus....actually the NIMBYs in South Bay defeated a proposal for a new airport entirely on the US side of the border. It had nothing to do with Rodriguez which is on the Mexican side. Building on the US side is problematic because of the Otay Mountains. On the Mexican side there is a break/valley in the Otay mountain range which allows for a nice landing/glide path for approach to/departure from Rodriguez.
Airliners.net has many forums. It has spell check and search functions. Use them before posting!
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 7:38 am

Re Marcus...

He's dead on. That idea was dead in the water on September 12, 2001.
 
Marcus
Posts: 1666
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2001 5:08 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 8:04 am

I agree with you both......I think I did not make my point very clear......but I think the idea was dead on the water from a lot more time before 9/11......the are has been in a heavy urban development stage for well over 5 years
Kids!....we are going to the happiest place on earth...TIJUANA! signed: Krusty the Clown
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 8:05 am

People just need to realize there is no feasible site for a new airport. People that live in Miramar wont allow it and it and I can guarantee lawsuit after lawsuit. San Diego simply waited too long and now they need to figure out how to do with what we have.

 
Coronado990
Posts: 1312
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:12 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 8:50 am

I, personally, think we should be working more closely with the operators of Rodriguez in Tijuana as a future supplement but not replacement for Lindbergh.

It would just be nice to have a covered bridge/walkway from the TIJ terminal across the street and the border to a separate check-in/baggage claim/customs facility (along with long term parking) on the U.S side of the fence.

But the taxi drivers in Mexico at the San Ysidro crossing would have a fit. Something like 1.5M U.S passengers a year (would like to get the exact figure some day) use the TIJ airport and a lot of them take the taxi from the border.

However, if a streamlined terminal existed on both sides of the border, it could only help in TIJ being able to attract more flights.
Uncle SAN at your service!
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 10:30 am

Coronado... Give up on the transborder. It ain't happening. North Island with a tunnel is more probable.

Amwest... There is a Campo site, but it would require installation of high speed monorail or maglev to get there. The ticket counters would remain at Lindbergh. Trip time is about 15 minutes at 200 MPH+ to the site. Gates would be at the site with the runways and a consolidated/shared ticket counter. Just one out there option that has been kicked around. It's a greenfield site, flat and minimal terrain.

Bicoastal... NIMBY's defeated expansion of Brown Field, not a transborder facility.



[Edited 2004-03-03 02:34:59]
 
Coronado990
Posts: 1312
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:12 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 11:06 am

BoeingGoingGone:

I am in favor of a pedestrian border crossing at the Rodriguez Airport to make TIJ easier and friendlier for U.S. passengers to use. It was not intended to be a solution to replace Lindbergh Field. No new runways, taxiways or aprons. Just a building and a parking lot smaller than the local Wal-Mart.

If San Diegans could easily drive up to TIJ and catch a flight, I'm willing to bet there would be more flights to domestic Mexico resorts such as SJD, PVR, ZIH and CUN. This, I would think, would help out the TIJ airport and the Tijuana economy more than us, which was the idea in the long run (except for the taxi problem...they might have less work).
Uncle SAN at your service!
 
Bicoastal
Posts: 2446
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 1999 5:56 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 11:17 am

BoeingGoingGone...NIMBY's defeated both the Brown Field expansion and the "Transborder" airport proposal advocated a few years back by then city councilman Ron Roberts. I think is was around 1991 or so and actually had the runways crossing the border. In the Transborder case, Mexican opposition helped kill it, too. Though my San Diego home isn't in the South Bay, I agreed with the NIMBYs in their opposition. The only viable idea down there is the one Coronado990 describes.
Airliners.net has many forums. It has spell check and search functions. Use them before posting!
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 2:33 pm

You people are killing me with this transborder thing. It was only an idea, never a proposal.

You will never, ever, ever, ever see a transborder airport.

Got it???
 
Bicoastal
Posts: 2446
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 1999 5:56 am

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 10:20 pm

BoeingGoeingGone.....do some research in the early 90s. The Transborder Airport was a proposal....diagrams, studies, etc. Ron Roberts travelled to Mexico City and Washington pushing it. More than an idea. As I was opposed to it, I agree we'll never see it. It required the Mexicans to demolish Rodriguez and realign their runways. Los Americanos son locos.

As I said, the only viable option to supplement Lindbergh is, as Coronado990 describes, a building on the border with a bridge to the existing Rodriguez airport.

P.S. "Got it???"" Let's be respectful here. No need to be arrogant about it.
Airliners.net has many forums. It has spell check and search functions. Use them before posting!
 
Guest

RE: New Terminal In SAN

Wed Mar 03, 2004 11:26 pm

Bicoastal...

Maybe in Ron Roberts head, but no where else. The County nor City has had the authority to do a study on the matter.

[Edited 2004-03-03 15:39:38]

Who is online