BAKJet
Topic Author
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 8:58 pm

Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Fri Nov 09, 2007 12:01 am

Why is it that most of the major (and non-major) North and South American carriers choose MCO yet most of the lo cost European carriers choose SFB. I'm guessing it has something to do with fees, but if SFB has low fees why aren't all the carriers at MCO moving over to SFB.  bigmouth 
 
Rookinla
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 9:57 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Fri Nov 09, 2007 12:12 am

Okay so let's look at a couple issues as to why this is the case....
1. MCO carries over 35 Million passengers per year. The airport is huge, has many amenities that SFB doesn't have...Check out SFB's website and look at the terminal and the amenities. They are good for "no frills" passengers, which are generally what SFB attracts...not world-class like MCO.
2. SFB just doesn't have the ability to serve a much larger number of passengers like MCO sees.
3. Look at a map and see the location of the two airports. MCO is a reasonably close drive to Disney. SFB is...in Sanford...nowhere close to Disney...big difference here. When I lived in Orlando, I never even gave SFB a thought. MCO was too convenient.
4. The major carriers, both domestic and international, want good facilities. Carriers like BA, LH, etc would not give SFB a thought. It's just not what they want to offer their customers. Aeropostal tried the switch to SFB and it did not work at all. FI doesn't really care...it's all about operating costs for them.
5. MCO doesn't currently have any South American carriers. Not to say that they haven't in the past...RG, TR, VP, LN, VH, AR, EU, etc. Closest now is CM.
 
pilotboi
Posts: 711
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:16 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Fri Nov 09, 2007 12:47 am

What he said.

I think to sum it all up, MCO is a hub-like city, where-as SFB is a smaller airport (in comparison). It's just the purpose of the airports.
 
2travel2know
Posts: 2236
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 7:05 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Fri Nov 09, 2007 2:19 am

What I've heard from CM about SFB is that even SFB is cheaper to operate in and in SFB arriving passengers don't have to reclaim their baggage twice (imagine that for a 4 children family) or walk long distances inside the airport plus most of CM passengers at MCO aren't connecting, the distance to/from the major attractions (=driving time to/fr hotels) doesn't make it that appealing.
I don't work for COPA Airlines!
 
teneriffe77
Posts: 300
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:00 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Fri Nov 09, 2007 2:28 am

I've flown into MCO plenty of times and I prefer that to SFB becuase it's closer to the major attractions and if I want to go straight to the Cocoa Beach area, the Beeline Expressway (or whatever they call it now) runs across the northern border of the airport and I can just hop on that and be on the coast within 2 hours. Also for those not interested in planes MCO has plenty of things to keep them busy. BTW why doesn't the INTL concourse at SFB (the older part fo the terminal) have any wondows?
 
sacamojus
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 1:24 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Fri Nov 09, 2007 4:59 am

Quoting BAKJet (Thread starter):
I'm guessing it has something to do with fees, but if SFB has low fees why aren't all the carriers at MCO moving over to SFB

I asked the same question months ago and still have not recieved a concrete answer. Everybody says that it is the driving distance to the attraction which I think is crap considering that G4 operates a big hub out of SFB as a vacation airline. Personally, I think that the driving distance to the heart of Orlando from either MCO or SFB is a pain on I-4. It must be the faciliies that MCO offers, but then why doesn't B6, FL, or WN move atleast some operations over to SFB because of the lower fees?
 
Rookinla
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 9:57 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Fri Nov 09, 2007 5:58 am

Quoting Sacamojus (Reply 5):
I asked the same question months ago and still have not recieved a concrete answer.

I think that my response in this thread is a concrete answer...and extremely factual and accurate. I'm not sure what more you are looking for.


Quoting Sacamojus (Reply 5):
Everybody says that it is the driving distance to the attraction which I think is crap considering that G4 operates a big hub out of SFB as a vacation airline.

It is partly because of distance. If you were a tourist would you rather fly into a world-class airport(which MCO clearly is) that is 10 miles away or a small niche facility 30 miles away and sometimes a bear of a drive. Also G4's SFB operation is more a focus, IMHO. Most of their routes are not even daily...and definitely not a big hub.

Quoting Sacamojus (Reply 5):
Personally, I think that the driving distance to the heart of Orlando from either MCO or SFB is a pain on I-4.

The majority of passengers are not going to the "Heart of Orlando"...which I'm assuming you mean is Downtown. They are going to WDW, Universal, etc. Why would you want to subject yourself to a 30 mile trek for no reason in that kind of traffic?


Quoting Sacamojus (Reply 5):
It must be the faciliies that MCO offers

 checkmark 
One of the reasons I listed above.

Quoting Sacamojus (Reply 5):
but then why doesn't B6, FL, or WN move atleast some operations over to SFB because of the lower fees?

Why would any of these airlines want to move a portion of their flights to SFB? Splitting operations between two airports would render some of their flights unprofitable and raise costs unnecessarily. If any of these airlines were to shift their flights to SFB, I think you would see their loads drop as passengers would usually opt for the closest and better airport. Then...lower costs mean nothing if butts aren't in the seats.
 
deltairlines
Posts: 6877
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 4:47 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Fri Nov 09, 2007 6:16 am

From MCO, I can make it onto Disney property within 20 minutes. Really, I've landed at MCO and was at Epcot 50 minutes later - including getting to my hotel to drop off my stuff. At that point from SFB, I could easily be in downtown Orlando sitting on I-4. Much more convinient, much better ground transportation options (more cabs, lower fares to Disney, etc.).
 
bananaboy
Posts: 1473
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 6:58 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:29 pm

When the UK charters pulled out of MCO, they justified the move because of the "double-bag claim" system. Also, AFAIR SFB was able to provide on-site car rental access (with their affiliated rental companies) where many at MCO required a bus ride. Given that the vast majority of ex-UK customers would be taking a rental car, this would affect a large percentage of their customers.


Not that I totally bought it.. MCO is indeed world-class. I guess they were just going for the lower airport fees no doubt charged by SFB. I don't care about the hire car / double claim system, I just don't believe that it will be more convenient to have to (stay awake) and drive for an hour or so from SFB.


Mark
All my life, I've been kissing, your top lip 'cause your bottom one's missing
 
cloudboy
Posts: 989
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2004 12:38 pm

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Sat Nov 10, 2007 4:30 pm

Disney, and in fact most of the tourist attractions, are not actually located in Orlando but in the towns/cities south of Orlando. The same goes for a lot of the tourist accommodations. Sanford is located well north of Orlando, and so while it is close to Orlando itself, it is far from the rest.

Ultimately the European charters can get away with it because 1) many European tourists aren't particularly aware of spatial relationship - nor of the relative scale - or Central Florida and 2) most Europeans have a lot more time to spend on their vacation, so spending more time getting to and from the airport doesn't seem like such a big deal to them. So if it is cheaper and doesn't affect them much, then why bother to fly into MCO?
"Six becoming three doesn't create more Americans that want to fly." -Adam Pilarski
 
Bongodog1964
Posts: 3127
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:29 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Sat Nov 10, 2007 4:41 pm

One reason for the European charter operators using SFB is that their customers are conditioned to long transfers to their resort from the airport. Thus they can get away with using the cheapest airport. In many cases a holiday booked via a European operator includes transfers from the airport to the resort, and return. Thus the distances don't really register, as they are sitting on a bus, and have no real concept of dostances,; some probably don't even know of the existence of MCO

Finally I have noticed that most of the car hire companys are now onsite at MCO, or at least the ones I have used are.
 
BAKJet
Topic Author
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 8:58 pm

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Sat Nov 10, 2007 4:44 pm

[/quote]

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 10):
Finally I have noticed that most of the car hire companys are now onsite at MCO, or at least the ones I have used are.

Most rental car companies that advertise as airport are now usually at the airport (at least in the US)
 
sacamojus
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 1:24 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Sat Nov 10, 2007 6:37 pm

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 10):
One reason for the European charter operators using SFB is that their customers are conditioned to long transfers to their resort from the airport. Thus they can get away with using the cheapest airport. In many cases a holiday booked via a European operator includes transfers from the airport to the resort, and return. Thus the distances don't really register, as they are sitting on a bus, and have no real concept of dostances,; some probably don't even know of the existence of MCO


I could see how this would work for international services, but G4 has made SFB successful despite the distances. MCO to Disney can be quite a pain if you take the Beeline to I-4; from the Seaworld exit to Lake Buena Vista there is typically stopping traffic. From SFB you can take 417 all the way around, which is what I do, and save you 15 minutes and a more comfortable drive than going straight down I-4. Personally, I think if you can get cheap tickets to fly to Disney, you don't care which airport it is (which is why G4 does so well). Why wouldn't some LCC's move over to SFB? Is it not that much cheaper? Didn't some of the legacy carriers in the past serve SFB?
 
sevenheavy
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:30 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:04 pm

Quoting Sacamojus (Reply 12):
I could see how this would work for international services, but G4 has made SFB successful despite the distances. MCO to Disney can be quite a pain if you take the Beeline to I-4; from the Seaworld exit to Lake Buena Vista there is typically stopping traffic. From SFB you can take 417 all the way around, which is what I do, and save you 15 minutes and a more comfortable drive than going straight down I-4. Personally, I think if you can get cheap tickets to fly to Disney, you don't care which airport it is (which is why G4 does so well). Why wouldn't some LCC's move over to SFB? Is it not that much cheaper? Didn't some of the legacy carriers in the past serve SFB?

The fact remains that pound for pound SFB is three times the distance from where 95% of arriving passengers want to be. Sure the beeline could be busier on one given day than the 417 or I4 from SFB, but the next day it will be the other way around. Don't forget you can also take the south exit from MCO and pick up the 417 that way - I have never yet seen traffic and you get right onto both Osceola or I-Drive. MCO is probably the most efficient and pleasant large US airport I have used - maybe if SFB was up against say ORD or JFK with their weather/ATC delays things would be slightly different.

Airlines today are more cost-sensitive than ever. I bet most of the majors have at one time or another conducted a detailed cost/benefit analysis of the advantages of using SFB vs MCO for at least some of their services (or even additional flights from major hubs). The bottom line is, None moved. That says it all - despite the obvious savings, the potential loss of customer base/yield/revenue etc. far offset the savings in gate leases/landing fees and so on.

SFB has been successful in finding a niche serving the european charters and an ultra low cost vacation oriented scheduled/charter hybrid airline. I can't see that changing anytime soon.

Regards
So long 701, it was nice knowing you.
 
alphaomega
Posts: 265
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 1:26 pm

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:06 pm

Quoting Bananaboy (Reply 8):
When the UK charters pulled out of MCO, they justified the move because of the "double-bag claim" system.

Now if you are willing to carry your bags through the terminal you are not required to double check them. I went though MCO on Virgin a few weeks ago and I was at my rental car 45min after landing. SFB really needs to improve their facilities to compete with MCO - Virgin was making a serious consideration to move from MCO to SFB, and after SFB enlarged their ramp area as part of a plan to expand the original terminal building, Virgin decided to stay at MCO.
 
Bongodog1964
Posts: 3127
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:29 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Sat Nov 10, 2007 8:18 pm

Quoting Bananaboy (Reply 8):
When the UK charters pulled out of MCO, they justified the move because of the "double-bag claim" system

I've only once found the "double bag claim" to be a problem. Every time I've used it, there's been no wait to place my bags on the belt at the satellite, and the bags have dropped off the conveyor into the central baggage reclaim by the time I've got there. The one problem time, was when we were told the wrong carousel by the staff at the satellite.
 
Rookinla
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 9:57 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Sun Nov 11, 2007 2:51 am

Quoting Sacamojus (Reply 12):
Didn't some of the legacy carriers in the past serve SFB?

Nope...Can't remember a single one.
 
Rookinla
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 9:57 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:02 am

Quoting Sacamojus (Reply 12):
Personally, I think if you can get cheap tickets to fly to Disney, you don't care which airport it is

Generally speaking, I have to say that I never have problems finding reasonably priced (and sometimes dirt-cheap flights) into MCO. I have to say that I am glad that SFB exists...It serves a different customer than MCO. It helps the local economy tick but...it will not be taking MCO's domestic carriers away anytime soon. Ditto that for non-discount international carriers. SFB isn't even on the radar of international legacy carriers...MCO is. I am glad that there are some that swear by SFB...I think it's great. But just remember that Disney and MCO are huge economic engines for the area...not SFB. Just the facts.
 
rdwootty
Posts: 689
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 4:28 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Sun Nov 11, 2007 7:00 am

As a UK travel agent and having been to both airports I prefer SFB.This s for 2 main reasons. The staff at SFB are more pleasant than MCO . I suspect that is because the clients are on holiday and relaxed and this mood helps in both directions.In addition there is a very easy start to the "flydrive" holiday.Just think about the journey from MCO to I27 villa and then the relaxed start from SFB to get you into the routine of driving on the wrong side of the road in an automatic car.It all helps with the holiday feeling and I also cannot understand the reasoning behind the double bag handling policy at MCO.Is it just a union thing? At LGW they use the same people movers and you can even take your baggage trolley onto the train.At MCO you cannot even take your own bag!Who wants to wait after a long flight for your bags to travel from another terminal.
 
sevenheavy
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:30 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:59 am

Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 18):
I also cannot understand the reasoning behind the double bag handling policy at MCO.Is it just a union thing? At LGW they use the same people movers and you can even take your baggage trolley onto the train.At MCO you cannot even take your own bag!Who wants to wait after a long flight for your bags to travel from another terminal.

Its nothing to do with unions. MCO is a great airport but it is poorly designed for international flights. Domestic flights just use the main baggage carousels in the central terminal area. There was no way to attach a customs facility to this area so the international immigration/baggge claim/customs area is in the satellites. The double drop was required because passengers had to pass through the unsegregated terminal (they mix with departing passengers which is considered unsecure) therefore bags were "redelivered" to the central baggage area for you.

For a while now there has been a dedicated path for international arrivals which is staffed by TSA agents. Once that was in place there was no real requirement for the double drop - its probably partly for passenger convenience and to avoid slower passenger flow and congestion on the trains.

Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 18):
In addition there is a very easy start to the "flydrive" holiday.Just think about the journey from MCO to I27 villa and then the relaxed start from SFB to get you into the routine of driving on the wrong side of the road in an automatic car.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here? SFB undoubtedly has a great "regional airport" layout which makes leaving the airport much easier than most large U.S. hubs. However, MCO has all the rental car firms on site - you literally walk across the road from baggage claim to get to your car. The exit roads are all clearly signed and the roads easy to navigate. After a 9 hour flight surely a 30 minute drive is better than a 60 minute drive?

Regards
So long 701, it was nice knowing you.
 
cloudboy
Posts: 989
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2004 12:38 pm

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:37 pm

On a slight tangent, what exactly is the logic behind keeping the passengers separated? They have already gone through security when they boarded the plane, didn't they?
"Six becoming three doesn't create more Americans that want to fly." -Adam Pilarski
 
Boeing74741R
Posts: 792
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:44 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:45 pm

MCO is popular with the majors/legacies because it is close to the main attractions of Orlando (i.e. what a lot of the passengers that use MCO go through for) such as Disney, Universal, I-Drive etc and with excellent road connections to the rest of the state. Also having used MCO three times (with VS) it is an excellent airport and is probably one of the best airports I have ever used.

The problem with SFB is that (on a good day) it is an extra 30-45mins drive to get to the main attractions of Orlando, and this obviously takes longer when I-4s at gridlock. See it from a family's perspective...they've just landed into SFB from the UK (ok MAN) on a Travel City Direct 747 after 9 hours in the air, everybody's tired, hot and bothered and all they want to do is to simply get to Disney/Universal/timeshare resort/hotel/wherever they are staying and start their holiday, and not use the extra time to get used to driving on the wrong side of the road in an automatic car then get stuck in a traffic jam. (SevenHeavy I agree with you fully about a 30mins drive vs a 60mins drive).

Also despite the lower fees charged to airlines SFB isn't really suitable for the amount of passengers that go through the airport per annum and if it was to cater for more flights they would have to expand the terminal facilities. Cloudboy is right because (unless you're my aunty/uncle/cousins) charter carriers can get away flying into SFB because your average customer on those sort of flights (no offence) are oblivious to the fact that BA and VS serve MCO which is a heck of a lot closer to Orlando's attractions than SFB. Having said that a lot of these passengers are on fly-drive holidays and not on coach transfers (as is the norm in Europe).

I would expect future LCC long-haul start-ups (like Ryanair's proposed long-haul airline) to pick SFB over MCO, but when it comes to airlines who want to please their customers the most (airport facilities, convenience etc) and if they're looking to fly an A380 somewhere MCO is the sensible option.

[Edited 2007-11-11 14:48:06]
 
Clipper136
Posts: 219
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:07 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Mon Nov 12, 2007 1:48 am

Quoting Cloudboy (Reply 20):
They have already gone through security when they boarded the plane, didn't they?

Technically yes.....but they have not gone thru TSA, as the other passenger in the sterile gate areas have. TSA did have a requirement to have the international passengers re-screened after customs before entering the sterile areas. The segregation of the passengers alleviates the re-screening.
You can't beat the Experience.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24724
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Mon Nov 12, 2007 1:52 am

Quoting BAKJet (Thread starter):
Why is it that most of the major (and non-major) North and South American carriers choose MCO

A South American airline hasn't flown to Orlando since 2002.
a.
 
trintocan
Posts: 2728
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2000 6:02 pm

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Mon Nov 12, 2007 2:18 am

Isn't the fact that SFB is British owned contributing to the propensity of UK charter operators to fly there? It is owned by the same company that operate BFS and CWL.

TrinToCan.
Hop to it, fly for life!
 
Boeing74741R
Posts: 792
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:44 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Mon Nov 12, 2007 10:56 am

Quoting Trintocan (Reply 24):
Isn't the fact that SFB is British owned contributing to the propensity of UK charter operators to fly there?

I'm not sure that would play a part in attracting UK charter carriers. It's more down to the fees that SFB charge.
 
TPAnx
Posts: 1007
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 4:53 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Mon Nov 12, 2007 1:06 pm

Quoting Teneriffe77 (Reply 4):
the Beeline Expressway (or whatever they call it now

It's the "Beachline"...an effort to lure tourists to the sub-par Atlantic beaches..rather than the award winning
Gulf coast beaches...  Smile
TPAnx
I read the news today..oh boy
 
teneriffe77
Posts: 300
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:00 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Mon Nov 12, 2007 2:59 pm

Thanks for the clarification but i don't think the Atlantic beaches are sub-par. Ive vacationed on both coasts and I've found the beaches to equally as good. Returning to the topic one of the things I like about MCO is the B-52 that's on display. It's not poften that you gett he chance to walk around and touch a cold war-era bomber. Plus you can take a look at some of the action while doing so and once in while you'll see something interesting parked on MCO's west side.
 
MCO2BRS
Posts: 364
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 7:30 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Mon Nov 12, 2007 3:30 pm

The last time I went through SFB, which admittedly was a number of years ago, it took me an hour and a half to clear immigration. I also picked up some family from the airport recently, and it took them the same amount of time also. What we have to remember here is what I refer to as the 'RyanAir effect' most Europeans that travel charter/budget airlines want to pay the absolute lowest price available, and if that means flying into SFB instead of MCO, then so be it. They are used to arriving into airports that are 30+miles outside of where they intend to be. (A prime example of this is FR to BTS which is marketed as VIE... even though it's in a different country) . The most recent carrier to make the switch to SFB was FI last year.

As for the domestic market, I would imagine that to a degree both would be euqal. If you are in a city that has service to both MCO and SFB and you are going to be staying say Lake Mary or Altamonte... then SFB is the obvious choice.
 
sevenheavy
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:30 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Mon Nov 12, 2007 3:54 pm

It's inevitable that people will have had good and bad experiences at both airports. That aside, as far as I can see the airports simply don't compete with each other on most levels so the comparism is largely pointless. Both are very good at serving their own specific markets. SFB is almost 100% leisure orientated, with the remainding passengers being residents of areas north of Orlando who by chance need to get to a destination that G4 serves.

MCO is, and will continue to be, the major airport serving all of the legacy, mainline LCC's and scheduled international services. It is more convenient for vacationers, is not overcrowded (with room to expand) and offers a far broader appeal to the majority of central Florida residents.

Regards
So long 701, it was nice knowing you.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19287
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:13 am

Quoting Cloudboy (Reply 9):
Ultimately the European charters can get away with it because 1) many European tourists aren't particularly aware of spatial relationship - nor of the relative scale - or Central Florida and 2) most Europeans have a lot more time to spend on their vacation, so spending more time getting to and from the airport doesn't seem like such a big deal to them. So if it is cheaper and doesn't affect them much, then why bother to fly into MCO?

Europeans are also very familiar with flying on carriers like Ryanair that mainly serve secondary airports, often many miles from the cities they purport to serve, e.g. Beauvais for Paris, Charleroi for Brussels, Hahn for Frankfurt etc., where the surface portion of the trip often takes much longer than the flight.
 
CIDFlyer
Posts: 1901
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 7:19 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:19 am

I flew into SFB this summer, and although I wasn't going to Disney I was driving to Lake Wales (MCO would have been much closer) but I didn't think the drive around Orlando was that bad (I took the toll road). I enjoyed the Florida scenery and the fact my flight was non stop on G4 (versus connecting in ORD or ATL). Also SFB was a nice manageable size, easy to check in, quick security line, etc.
 
FLALEFTY
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:33 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:24 am

Living in the area, I'll add this.

MCO has kept growing, reaching capacity and expanding more over the last 30 years. However, as hard as it to believe, MCO is running out of room for any more significant growth. It is being hemmed in by residential and commercial development on all sides. They have all the runways (4) they will ever be allowed to build. No new access roads are planned. And available land is limited for reasonable terminal expansion due to a large portion of the remaining airport property being jurisdictional wetlands.

There are over 1,000,000 people living within a 30-minute drive of SFB (Daytona Beach to Downtown Orlando). Furthermore, that market area is still growing rapidly, especially in the southwest Volusia County market (Deltona, Debary, Orange City). Seminole County and the City of Sanford have been putting money into SFB in anticipation that MCO and DAB will not be able to meet this growing market's future needs.
 
Clipper136
Posts: 219
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:07 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:47 am

Quoting FLALEFTY (Reply 32):
And available land is limited for reasonable terminal expansion due to a large portion of the remaining airport property being jurisdictional wetlands.

Not True.

The airport has over 22 sq mi of land, of which only half is developed, and only a small pockets are wetlands. If you are familiar with MCOs layout, those can be worked around.

The current terminal can handle 40 million pax (2007 should see approx 36 million)
Future terminals, of which 6 are planned (2 traditional and 4 airside terminals) will allow the airport to accommodate up to another 40 million pax.

True, the current terminal is nearing capacity, and true they will most likely not build another runway, but the runways and airspace are no where near capacity. The current runway layout is very efficient. The airport sits between 2 major expressways, neither of which are close to capacity.

MCO has a LOT of room to grow.
You can't beat the Experience.
 
CitrusCritter
Posts: 770
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 10:36 am

RE: Orlando-MCO Vs SFB

Tue Nov 13, 2007 3:10 am



Quoting Sacamojus (Reply 12):
G4 has made SFB successful despite the distances

G4's only competition, generally speaking, is an expensive RJ flight on a legacy. They do not compete with any LFC on a route to SFB.

Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 18):
The staff at SFB are more pleasant than MCO .

Hardly. And less efficient too. I have little regard for MCO's TSA staff, and even less for SFB's, who took three times as long as they should have to clear the last line I was in there. I will gladly take MCO over SFB any day.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos