Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

greenair727 · Sun Aug 11, 2019 5:13 am

CleSyrRoc wrote:
If growth at Hopkins continues, It will be interesting to see if speculation on the possibility of re-opening concourse D becomes more legitimate.

In other news, new video on youtube (not my own) that appears to show 6L-24R has re-opened. In the video, there are also departures off of 6L-24R, which might indicate 6R-24L has closed for some construction. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-svS-rH7phY

Also great footage of a 787-10 diversion into CLE.

Thanks for the link and RWY update. Where was that video shot from?

CLEguy · Sun Aug 11, 2019 12:33 pm

HPAEAA wrote:
Gulfstream500 wrote:
There's a massive shortage of gates at CLE, so once UA's lease on concourse D is up, I think that it will be dedicated to WN's operations (especially given that the concourse can handle all of the Boeing 737s and nothing larger).

Had UA given up concourse D from the start (before all of the ULCCs came in), WN probably would have set up an operation in CLE, similar to what they have in MKE, resulting in them carrying 1/3 of the CLE passengers instead of 1/5 of the passengers. We'll just have to see what happens after UA is forced to stop hoarding gates to keep fares high.

Are they short gates? I thought A Concourse was pretty much all common use at this point.

Regarding D- I though that the reason UAL kept it on the lease was driven by the fact that they’re still paying off the construction debt - if they were to Give it up, the city would have to assume responsibility for it thus increasing overall expenses.

Most of A is common use, with certain airlines using specific gates first, then overflowing to the unassigned ones: Spirit (A2), Allegiant (A3), Frontier (A8, A10). I have not seen A1 or A6 used at all lately and A4 is gone. So that leaves A5, A7, A9, A11, A12, A14, all of which are used by a variety of carriers, including DL. A9, A11, A12, A14 can also be used for international arrivals. On B, Delta and Southwest share B3, in addition to their dedicated gates. On C, American uses most of the common use gates at the lower end of the concourse, with jetBlue using C4. UA and AC use all the rest. At times, particularly with RON's, virtually every gate is in use. I don't foresee any of the major airlines moving to BKL, but you never know. All this will have to be addressed in the upcoming airport master plan.

corn4ahead · Sun Aug 11, 2019 1:07 pm

Yes, 6L/24R is open. They were initially planning to open 6L/24R and subsequently close the other parallel. That plan is on hold until Spring 2020 most likely. That being said, 6R/24L is still closing on an almost daily basis for a few hours to catch up on maintenance that was put off when the other runway was closed.

Also, all the turn offs from 6L/24R have been renamed expect for N and P. And the entire West side of the airfield has renamed taxiways as well.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

VetteDude · Sun Aug 11, 2019 1:57 pm

Gulfstream500 wrote:
greenair727 wrote:
^WN needs more space. DL needs more space. Other than a full re-do of Concourse D, would it make sense for either WN or DL to move to BKL? Either airline would have almost the entire terminal, with the exception of Utlimate Air. When WN first came to Cleveland, they were initially planning to go to Burke and not Hopkins.

Neither airline will move to Lakefront. WN has already made efforts to consolidate to CLE by cutting CAK, and DL simply does not use secondary airports in primary destinations. Not to mention that there probably is no TSA at BKL...

There's a massive shortage of gates at CLE, so once UA's lease on concourse D is up, I think that it will be dedicated to WN's operations (especially given that the concourse can handle all of the Boeing 737s and nothing larger).

Had UA given up concourse D from the start (before all of the ULCCs came in), WN probably would have set up an operation in CLE, similar to what they have in MKE, resulting in them carrying 1/3 of the CLE passengers instead of 1/5 of the passengers. We'll just have to see what happens after UA is forced to stop hoarding gates to keep fares high.

I don't think anyone predicted that just a few years after the dehubbing, that even with UA giving up half of Concourse C to American that we would have a gate shortage. Everyone, and I mean everyone, on this website predicted that CLE would be the next stagnant former hub. I hate giving them too much credit because they add and drop things so frequently, but Frontier really stuck their neck out with CLE and it helped spark a nice rejuvenation in O&D.

I really like WN, and I hate Concourse B, so the thought of D being a WN exclusive concourse is really appealing to me. They've had to do something about the back side with the prop hard stands though. I do think we will see D in use again someday, it would be impossibly stupid to let it rot away for eternity, and I don't think we have the political willpower to build a new terminal or to move rental cars back on site (even if the stupid CLE.com commenters would love D to be bulldozed for just that purpose).

VetteDude · Sun Aug 11, 2019 2:00 pm

corn4ahead wrote:
Yes, 6L/24R is open. They were initially planning to open 6L/24R and subsequently close the other parallel. That plan is on hold until Spring 2020 most likely. That being said, 6R/24L is still closing on an almost daily basis for a few hours to catch up on maintenance that was put off when the other runway was closed.

Also, all the turn offs from 6L/24R have been renamed expect for N and P. And the entire West side of the airfield has renamed taxiways as well.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for the update. Why will 6R/24L be closing in Spring 2020 - same turn off reconfig as 6L/24R? Also the maintenance comment intrigues me - what do they do for the few hours a day it's closed?

In other news, in the weekly OAG report it looks like SFO is still 1x daily. Is this because of the MAX? Speaking of the MAX, I was scheduled to fly CLE->MDW->ONT the week of the Max grounding with the MDW->ONT segment switching from a Max to a 738 at the last minute, and the scene at MDW was unreal with Maxes stuffed everywhere they could (before they shipped them to the desert for long term storage)

Gulfstream500 · Sun Aug 11, 2019 3:02 pm

VetteDude wrote:
Gulfstream500 wrote:
greenair727 wrote:
^WN needs more space. DL needs more space. Other than a full re-do of Concourse D, would it make sense for either WN or DL to move to BKL? Either airline would have almost the entire terminal, with the exception of Utlimate Air. When WN first came to Cleveland, they were initially planning to go to Burke and not Hopkins.

Neither airline will move to Lakefront. WN has already made efforts to consolidate to CLE by cutting CAK, and DL simply does not use secondary airports in primary destinations. Not to mention that there probably is no TSA at BKL...

There's a massive shortage of gates at CLE, so once UA's lease on concourse D is up, I think that it will be dedicated to WN's operations (especially given that the concourse can handle all of the Boeing 737s and nothing larger).

Had UA given up concourse D from the start (before all of the ULCCs came in), WN probably would have set up an operation in CLE, similar to what they have in MKE, resulting in them carrying 1/3 of the CLE passengers instead of 1/5 of the passengers. We'll just have to see what happens after UA is forced to stop hoarding gates to keep fares high.

I don't think anyone predicted that just a few years after the dehubbing, that even with UA giving up half of Concourse C to American that we would have a gate shortage. Everyone, and I mean everyone, on this website predicted that CLE would be the next stagnant former hub. I hate giving them too much credit because they add and drop things so frequently, but Frontier really stuck their neck out with CLE and it helped spark a nice rejuvenation in O&D.

I really like WN, and I hate Concourse B, so the thought of D being a WN exclusive concourse is really appealing to me. They've had to do something about the back side with the prop hard stands though. I do think we will see D in use again someday, it would be impossibly stupid to let it rot away for eternity, and I don't think we have the political willpower to build a new terminal or to move rental cars back on site (even if the stupid CLE.com commenters would love D to be bulldozed for just that purpose).

If WN moved into concourse D, I feel that they would probably overtake UA as the dominant carrier in CLE, possibly allowing some connecting passengers here and there.

ncflyer · Sun Aug 11, 2019 4:03 pm

Imagine you’re a station manager in CLE. Why would you ever want to move to D? At least not without significant investment in a tunnel, which CLE was already cheap about the first time around, now it’d be a heck of a lot more. D is a white elephant. Designed for connections of small planes.

And come on WN expanding? Can they make it any clearer that CLE is a nothing station, smaller than PIT CMH IND by a bunch? They aren’t exactly cramming in utilization on their existing gates. RON is the only constrained time.

CLEguy · Sun Aug 11, 2019 4:09 pm

corn4ahead wrote:
Yes, 6L/24R is open. They were initially planning to open 6L/24R and subsequently close the other parallel. That plan is on hold until Spring 2020 most likely. That being said, 6R/24L is still closing on an almost daily basis for a few hours to catch up on maintenance that was put off when the other runway was closed.

Also, all the turn offs from 6L/24R have been renamed expect for N and P. And the entire West side of the airfield has renamed taxiways as well.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here's a look at the current runway configuration: https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/1908/0008 ... ddest=(CLE)

corn4ahead · Sun Aug 11, 2019 4:32 pm

CLEguy wrote:
corn4ahead wrote:
Yes, 6L/24R is open. They were initially planning to open 6L/24R and subsequently close the other parallel. That plan is on hold until Spring 2020 most likely. That being said, 6R/24L is still closing on an almost daily basis for a few hours to catch up on maintenance that was put off when the other runway was closed.

Also, all the turn offs from 6L/24R have been renamed expect for N and P. And the entire West side of the airfield has renamed taxiways as well.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here's a look at the current runway configuration: https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/1908/0008 ... ddest=(CLE)

Not entirely updated. The new taxiways are labeled and the signage is up but none of the paperwork (AFD, manuals, etc) won't be updated until September. There are NOTAMs published regarding the changes.

knope2001 · Sun Aug 11, 2019 5:28 pm

joeman wrote:
CLEguy wrote:
greenair727 wrote:
Would like to see them back at BKL. And this way, it would be a different product in a way compared to what WN is offering. Their historic BKL service was BKL-Detroit-MKE, but BKL-MKE and a BKL-Detroit would be great to see. I think they served DET over DTW, but not sure.

Did Midwest Express ever fly to/from BKL? I don't remember that. The original Midway did fly BKL-MDW before switching service to CLE (due to operational concerns with poor visibility before BKL had an ILS).

I believe greenair727 is right...a regional partner with Beechcrraft 1900?... for a while as opposed to their CLE ops, don't know the time frame

Yup -- when Midwest Express and Northwest called a truce (and linked frequent flyer programs) in Milwaukee in about 1992, Northwest dumped most of their MKE mini-hub flying and Midwest duped their MKE-DTW DC9's. Midwest's regional partner at the time Skyway operated by Mesa decided to add MKE-DET on B1900-C immediately after Midwest Express dropped MKE-DTW DC9s. They ran it is MKE-DET-BKL with business-friendly schedules but it didn't do well -- I don't think it lasted 6 months if I recall correctly. Midwest Express itself started MKE-CLE with DC9's a few years later.

Gulfstream500 · Sun Aug 11, 2019 7:05 pm

ncflyer wrote:
Imagine you’re a station manager in CLE. Why would you ever want to move to D? At least not without msignificant investment in a tunnel, which CLE was already cheap about the first time around, now it’d be a heck of a lot more. D is a white elephant. Designed for connections of small planes.

And come on WN expanding? Can they make it any clearer that CLE is a nothing station, smaller than PIT CMH IND by a bunch? They aren’t exactly cramming in utilization on their existing gates. RON is the only constrained time.

Easy - because it would be cheaper to have gates in concourse D. The entire reason that WN is not as big in CLE is because CLE was the last of the major hubs to be dehubbed. The only other dehubbed airport (that isn't still a focus city) that does not have WN as their dominant carrier or with significant operations is MEM, which is simply due to the lack of O&D traffic there.

Trk1 · Sun Aug 11, 2019 7:11 pm

D can easily tale larger aircraft

masseybrown · Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:27 pm

ncflyer wrote:
Imagine you’re a station manager in CLE. Why would you ever want to move to D? At least not without significant investment in a tunnel, which CLE was already cheap about the first time around, now it’d be a heck of a lot more. D is a white elephant.

Much as I loved CO, I think you have to blame CO for Concourse D's inadequacies. While you're at it you can also blame CO for C's incomplete banjo and lack of moving walkways. Both jobs were built (and then modified during construction, in the case of C) to their specs.

The cheapest gate add might be to bring B1 back to life; I'm pretty sure you could get 65-passenger RJs in there without a lot of work.

corn4ahead · Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:54 pm

Gulfstream500 wrote:
ncflyer wrote:
Imagine you’re a station manager in CLE. Why would you ever want to move to D? At least not without msignificant investment in a tunnel, which CLE was already cheap about the first time around, now it’d be a heck of a lot more. D is a white elephant. Designed for connections of small planes.

And come on WN expanding? Can they make it any clearer that CLE is a nothing station, smaller than PIT CMH IND by a bunch? They aren’t exactly cramming in utilization on their existing gates. RON is the only constrained time.

Easy - because it would be cheaper to have gates in concourse D. The entire reason that WN is not as big in CLE is because CLE was the last of the major hubs to be dehubbed. The only other dehubbed airport (that isn't still a focus city) that does not have WN as their dominant carrier or with significant operations is MEM, which is simply due to the lack of O&D traffic there.

Is nobody thinking of the additional cost the airport would have to take on to reopen D? Maintenance, janitorial, concessions, etc.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

greenair727 · Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:47 pm

"Is nobody thinking of the additional cost the airport would have to take on to reopen D? Maintenance, janitorial, concessions, etc." all that would be covered by the rent.

But WN may truly have a better option moving to BKL than to Concourse 'D' and the costs to get up and running would be lower and they'd have almost the full airport to themselves and landing fees are substantially lower at Burke than at Hopkins.

swacle · Sun Aug 11, 2019 11:48 pm

masseybrown wrote:
ncflyer wrote:
Imagine you’re a station manager in CLE. Why would you ever want to move to D? At least not without significant investment in a tunnel, which CLE was already cheap about the first time around, now it’d be a heck of a lot more. D is a white elephant.

Much as I loved CO, I think you have to blame CO for Concourse D's inadequacies. While you're at it you can also blame CO for C's incomplete banjo and lack of moving walkways. Both jobs were built (and then modified during construction, in the case of C) to their specs.

The cheapest gate add might be to bring B1 back to life; I'm pretty sure you could get 65-passenger RJs in there without a lot of work.

B1 is all city offices now, it would be pretty tough to resurrect it as a passenger gate.

ncflyer · Mon Aug 12, 2019 12:21 am

Gulfstream500 wrote:
The entire reason that WN is not as big in CLE is because CLE was the last of the major hubs to be dehubbed. The only other dehubbed airport (that isn't still a focus city) that does not have WN as their dominant carrier or with significant operations is MEM, which is simply due to the lack of O&D traffic there.

Your evidence for that is what exactly? You furnish an example of correlation but not causation, unless you are privy to route planning discussion at WN. I don't buy it at all. The pattern I would observe is that CLE is boxed in by BWI/BNA/and MDW on all sides, and further, despite ample gate capacity today, CLE doesn't have daily WN service to DAL/HOU/LAS/or ANYWHERE in FL, unlike other larger cities surrounding CLE, just not a big station for WN never has been never will be. If anything, the pattern I would observe (and my example too is correlation but not causation) is that F9 was crazy aggressive in moving in after UA, followed pretty shortly by NK, and that shut the door on WN's willingness to open up some FL routes and to build their presence here. FL is really, really key to building loyalty, I think that's why UA keeps MCO, RSW, and FLL. WN has Florida service from other nearby cities. . .

And Southwest is not serving Burke, with all due respect to many of you I enjoy chatting with, that is simply not going to happen-- is this really meant to be a serious trial balloon on here? People complain about parking at Hopkins-- how the heck could Burke support 20-25 737s a day, plus rental car capacity, plus car drop off space, plus renovations for TSA/concessions and so forth (I've not been to Burke in a while but I can't imagine it can accommodate 6-7,000 arriving/departing pax per day in any of those dimensions I mention). I'll give you this, BKL certainly has takeoff and landing capacity, the place is a ghost town. Before BKL opens up to that operation there'd need to be all sorts of feasibility and ground transportation studies.

avtcle · Mon Aug 12, 2019 2:29 am

Frontier just updated their schedule ending both CLE-RDU & CLE-MSP one month earlier than previously scheduled (now October, instead of November). I wonder if they are pulling the plug on these routes, or perhaps just shifting aircraft for the loads of new fall routes starting in October, including from Cleveland to Miami and Fort Lauderdale. Thoughts?

EDIT: After further examination, it appears the Frontier is also making the same cut on the same routes in Cincinnati as well, which makes me think that this is simply early season end — not a route cut.

stl07 · Mon Aug 12, 2019 2:50 am

avtcle wrote:
Frontier just updated their schedule ending both CLE-RDU & CLE-MSP one month earlier than previously scheduled (now October, instead of November). I wonder if they are pulling the plug on these routes, or perhaps just shifting aircraft for the loads of new fall routes starting in October, including from Cleveland to Miami and Fort Lauderdale. Thoughts?

EDIT: After further examination, it appears the Frontier is also making the same cut on the same routes in Cincinnati as well, which makes me think that this is simply early season end — not a route cut.

Don't try to rationalize F9 route scheduling, they don't follow any "seasonality" or other traditional airline reasoning. Take each route change/schedule expansion for what it is and don't try to connect it to a bigger picture with F9 as there isn't one

avtcle · Mon Aug 12, 2019 3:01 am

UA2561, a Boeing 767-400 inbound to Cleveland tomorrow from Greenville-Spartanburg @ 4:10 PM

Robert1010 · Mon Aug 12, 2019 12:21 pm

avtcle wrote:
UA2561, a Boeing 767-400 inbound to Cleveland tomorrow from Greenville-Spartanburg @ 4:10 PM

Guessing it’s coming to CLE to pick up the Browns , they have week long camp in IND !

avtcle · Mon Aug 12, 2019 4:29 pm

Domestic Load factors through 2019-04 are out and here they are:
Keep in mind that April is a very odd month for Florida travel. There was A LOT of capacity from a lot of airlines heading to Florida in April as the spring break demand wore off.

Frontier Airlines:
CLE-SRQ: 80% (Allegiant entered the market this month)
CLE-MCO: 82%
CLE-RSW: 81%
CLE-TPA: 93%
CLE-PBI: 67%
CLE-DEN: 86%
CLE-AUS: 57% (Only one flight departed this month! Don't be alarmed!)
CLE-SFO: 54% (Only one flight departed this month! Don't be alarmed!)
CLE-SAN: 84%
CLE-PHX: 80%
CLE-LAS: 90%

Allegiant Airlines:
CLE-SRQ: 86%
CLE-JAX: 76%
CLE-SAV: 77%
CLE-PGD: 78%
CLE-PIE: 81%
CLE-SFB: 78%

Spirit Airlines:
CLE-MCO: 93%
CLE-TPA: 76%
CLE-RSW: 62%
CLE-MYR: 70%
CLE-LAX: 80%
CLE-LAS: 94%
CLE-MSY: 73%
CLE-FLL: 79%
CLE-ATL: 75%

Southwest Airlines:
CLE-MCO: 94%
CLE-TPA: 80%
CLE-RSW: 90%
CLE-ATL: 73%
CLE-DEN: 91%
CLE-MKE: 65%
CLE-LAS: 91%
CLE-PHX: 93%
CLE-BWI: 73%
CLE-MDW: 75%
CLE-STL: 84%
CLE-BNA: 81%

Delta Airlines:
CLE-BOS: 82%
CLE-JFK: 76%
CLE-LGA: 78%
CLE-ATL: 86%
CLE-SLC: 91%
CLE-MSP: 81%
CLE-RDU: 65%
CLE-BDL: 66%

American Airlines:
CLE-LGA: 68%
CLE-DCA: 75%
CLE-JFK: 67%
CLE-DFW: 81%
CLE-PHL: 68%
CLE-CLT: 86%
CLE-MIA: 89%

United Airlines:
CLE-LGA: 76%
CLE-EWR: 81%
CLE-MCO: 91%
CLE-IAD: 84%
CLE-DEN: 86%
CLE-RSW: 74%
CLE-SFO: 77%
CLE-TPA: 82%
CLE-ORD: 84%
CLE-FLL: 81%
CLE-LAX: 89%
CLE-IAH: 80%
CLE-DCA: 77%

JetBlue Airways:
CLE-FLL: 84%
CLE-BOS: 82%

International Load Factors through 2019-01:

Frontier Airlines:
CLE-PUJ: 74%
CLE-CUN: 62%

United Airlines:
CLE-CUN: 81%

Air Canada Express:
CLE-YYZ: 55%

flight152 · Mon Aug 12, 2019 4:58 pm

Trk1 wrote:
D can easily tale larger aircraft

Easy by what measure? The gates are way too close together to take anything but RJ’s. So you’re only going to use half of them ?

Trk1 · Mon Aug 12, 2019 5:26 pm

The C terminal was designed for easy conversion. United has a lease for more than 10 more years so the whole point is mute. Cleveland does not have a gate shortage. More overnights gates are not needed as they can be parked remotely and then moved. What people are seeing is in the A.M. hours gates are common use goes are being used as it is easier parking at a gate than towing but under no conditions is Hopkins short of gates. The utilization rates are actually quite low for most of the day. Stop in after 9AM and show me a gate shortage. The common side of C and most of A are empty. Even the B gates have hours of little usage most of the day after 9AM

flight152 · Mon Aug 12, 2019 5:42 pm

Trk1 wrote:
The C terminal was designed for easy conversion. United has a lease for more than 10 more years so the whole point is mute. Cleveland does not have a gate shortage. More overnights gates are not needed as they can be parked remotely and then moved. What people are seeing is in the A.M. hours gates are common use goes are being used as it is easier parking at a gate than towing but under no conditions is Hopkins short of gates. The utilization rates are actually quite low for most of the day. Stop in after 9AM and show me a gate shortage. The common side of C and most of A are empty. Even the B gates have hours of little usage most of the day after 9AM

The point is moot, not mute.

swacle · Mon Aug 12, 2019 5:54 pm

flight152 wrote:
Trk1 wrote:
D can easily tale larger aircraft

Easy by what measure? The gates are way too close together to take anything but RJ’s. So you’re only going to use half of them ?

That's exactly what you do and exactly how it was designed. That's why the gates are in groups of two instead of spread out. If 737/A320 ever use D you remove every other gate and the fingers are removed and replaced with 6 jet bridges for 12 total "mainline" gates. That was the original design intent and that is what you would do to convert to mainline use.

avtcle · Mon Aug 12, 2019 6:00 pm

It’s really not so much the gates as it is the facility itself. It was never designed to handle the amount of O&D traffic that it is today. The reason the airport is looking to give the D Concourse a new life is to decongest other parts of the airport which won’t only extend the life of the facility, but will allow more room for improvements and renovations. With Cleveland’s current size, shutting down part of the airport for a renovation really isn’t an option, however if they were to open a new Concourse, they’d have plenty of space to divert existing traffic because Concourses A & B will need to be renovated sooner than later. Passenger numbers only continue to grow here, so Hopkins can either sit around until they start to run out of room or they can look ahead to the future and be prepared.

And it’s true to most airports Cleveland’s size that late morning and early afternoon aren’t very busy times, however the early morning and evening hours at Hopkins are a ZOO. After walking through these Concourses at 6 AM on a Monday it’s clear why Cleveland needs more room. It’s not for the planes, it’s for the passengers.

Trk1 · Mon Aug 12, 2019 6:31 pm

What official has indicated they are looking to give D a new life

avtcle · Mon Aug 12, 2019 7:31 pm

Trk1 wrote:
What official has indicated they are looking to give D a new life

https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2018/03 ... utType=amp

SgtBarone · Mon Aug 12, 2019 7:55 pm

Thanks for posting the April numbers, avt. Good to see BOS absorbing DLs new 3x daily CR9s without much of a hit to load factors across the carriers.

ncflyer · Mon Aug 12, 2019 9:19 pm

That article on D is informative and was published in March ‘18. Quote from Kennedy is we hope to hire master facility plan vendor by the end of the year meaning 2018 of course. From my reading of the press, council’s approved the spending but a vendor hasn’t been selected. Anyone know anything differently than that?

ncflyer · Tue Aug 13, 2019 11:35 am

NPR WCPN 90.3FM sound of ideas program 9am this morning 8/13 is on Burke. Wish I could listen live and even call in but I will have to settle for listening to delayed on the podcast. Glad it’s being discussed.

Robert1010 · Tue Aug 13, 2019 12:45 pm

As much as I would like to see the lakefront developed , let’s face it , we’re not Toronto or Chicago , to think all this retail and residential living is gonna happen here is a crap shoot, it takes CLE officials 10yrs to build a 25 story building , plus i’d hate to lose the airshow , they need to worry about Hopkins and the D terminal!

greenair727 · Tue Aug 13, 2019 2:26 pm

ncflyer wrote:
NPR WCPN 90.3FM sound of ideas program 9am this morning 8/13 is on Burke. Wish I could listen live and even call in but I will have to settle for listening to delayed on the podcast. Glad it’s being discussed.

I would have called in to add balance to the conversation which I'm sure was heavily anti-Burke with people saying "we don't need 3 airports in the County" as if CGF is a comparable facility to Burke.... In general, all these recent anti-Burke discussions are not "hey we have a need to close Burke"; but instead its "Let's close Burke because we don't understand it and then lets figure out what to do with the land." Pretty annoying.

ncflyer · Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:50 pm

I listened the podcast was certainly pro- shut-it-down but it was more about urban planning than airport intricacies. The guest, Steve Litt of the PD, says it’s be a very pricey project because of the cost to connect a future park with Neighborhoods on the south of the freeway.

Nothing will happen during Jackson administration that’s for sure. Pro Burke people aren’t winning the PR war, to the extent it matters for the next mayor they need to get on these shows.

CLEguy · Tue Aug 13, 2019 11:32 pm

ncflyer wrote:
I listened the podcast was certainly pro- shut-it-down but it was more about urban planning than airport intricacies. The guest, Steve Litt of the PD, says it’s be a very pricey project because of the cost to connect a future park with Neighborhoods on the south of the freeway.

Nothing will happen during Jackson administration that’s for sure. Pro Burke people aren’t winning the PR war, to the extent it matters for the next mayor they need to get on these shows.

Here's the article referenced in the broadcast. https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2019/08 ... -litt.html

A key quote from that article: "But the city and Northeast Ohio presently lack the political will and regional partnerships needed to tackle such a big issue."

Although, I'm an enthusiastic airport lover, I'm ambivalent about the future of BKL. We certainly do not need the capacity of BKL at all, and I doubt regular airline service will return to any great extent. Sports teams and executives can use CLE; corporations and flying schools can use CGF, and CAK can be the official reliever airport for CLE.

We also don't need additional residential space unless/until the population of Cleveland actually starts growing again. A park at that location would be very uncomfortable during several months of the year. I just don't see a need for more recreation or park space either. Maybe the status quo is best until there is truly a vision, plan and financing for a change.

VetteDude · Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:47 am

I am of the opinion that any lake front redevelopment project that doesnt include relocating 90 to south of it's current location and removed dead mans curve would be a waste of time. I'm afraid BKL would close and we would be left with some half baked garbage park that nobody goes to instead of a vibrant lakefront that would only be possible by moving the freeway and developing an east side lakefront neighborhood. But this city cant even get the Nucleus built, the first modern building idea in decades and in a prime development location, so BKL is sticking around for the long haul.

pontiac51 · Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:41 am

VetteDude wrote:
I am of the opinion that any lake front redevelopment project that doesnt include relocating 90 to south of it's current location and removed dead mans curve would be a waste of time. I'm afraid BKL would close and we would be left with some half baked garbage park that nobody goes to instead of a vibrant lakefront that would only be possible by moving the freeway and developing an east side lakefront neighborhood. But this city cant even get the Nucleus built, the first modern building idea in decades and in a prime development location, so BKL is sticking around for the long haul.

First of all, BKL isn’t going anywhere for the foreseeable future and moving Interstate 90 from a cost standpoint is one of the dumbest ideas I’ve heard in a long time. Second of all, it’s not the city’s responsibility to get Nucleus built. I’m pretty sure that when the developer get the finances together, ground will be broken.

VetteDude · Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:30 pm

pontiac51 wrote:
VetteDude wrote:
I am of the opinion that any lake front redevelopment project that doesnt include relocating 90 to south of it's current location and removed dead mans curve would be a waste of time. I'm afraid BKL would close and we would be left with some half baked garbage park that nobody goes to instead of a vibrant lakefront that would only be possible by moving the freeway and developing an east side lakefront neighborhood. But this city cant even get the Nucleus built, the first modern building idea in decades and in a prime development location, so BKL is sticking around for the long haul.

First of all, BKL isn’t going anywhere for the foreseeable future and moving Interstate 90 from a cost standpoint is one of the dumbest ideas I’ve heard in a long time. Second of all, it’s not the city’s responsibility to get Nucleus built. I’m pretty sure that when the developer get the finances together, ground will be broken.

I'm sorry, the adults in the room were having a civil conversation about hypothetical scenarios that will never happen, but nevertheless are being discussed casually amongst people that live in the area. In addition, ODOT actually does have a plan to redevelop the entire innerbelt. In fact, the 2 new bridges were just the 1st phase of that. One of the eventual projects is to redevelop dead mans curve and fix the mess of entrance/exit ramps in the core of the innerbelt. So actually, it's not a stretch to suggest an extension of that project to free up some nice lake front property.

masseybrown · Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:44 pm

Norwegian's departure from Irish markets should make Aer Lingus more confident about expanding TATL. Here's hoping ...

Jshank83 · Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:52 pm

masseybrown wrote:
Norwegian's departure from Irish markets should make Aer Lingus more confident about expanding TATL. Here's hoping ...

But now will they backfill the ones Norwegian left first?

pontiac51 · Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:01 pm

VetteDude wrote:
pontiac51 wrote:
VetteDude wrote:
I am of the opinion that any lake front redevelopment project that doesnt include relocating 90 to south of it's current location and removed dead mans curve would be a waste of time. I'm afraid BKL would close and we would be left with some half baked garbage park that nobody goes to instead of a vibrant lakefront that would only be possible by moving the freeway and developing an east side lakefront neighborhood. But this city cant even get the Nucleus built, the first modern building idea in decades and in a prime development location, so BKL is sticking around for the long haul.

First of all, BKL isn’t going anywhere for the foreseeable future and moving Interstate 90 from a cost standpoint is one of the dumbest ideas I’ve heard in a long time. Second of all, it’s not the city’s responsibility to get Nucleus built. I’m pretty sure that when the developer get the finances together, ground will be broken.

I'm sorry, the adults in the room were having a civil conversation about hypothetical scenarios that will never happen, but nevertheless are being discussed casually amongst people that live in the area. In addition, ODOT actually does have a plan to redevelop the entire innerbelt. In fact, the 2 new bridges were just the 1st phase of that. One of the eventual projects is to redevelop dead mans curve and fix the mess of entrance/exit ramps in the core of the innerbelt. So actually, it's not a stretch to suggest an extension of that project to free up some nice lake front property.

Well you’re right about one thing; it’s VERY hypothetical!!

Robert1010 · Wed Aug 14, 2019 4:44 pm

Jshank83 wrote:
masseybrown wrote:
Norwegian's departure from Irish markets should make Aer Lingus more confident about expanding TATL. Here's hoping ...

But now will they backfill the ones Norwegian left first?

I don’t see EI pulling right into PVD let alone SWF!

avtcle · Wed Aug 14, 2019 5:05 pm

Interesting little development...

Cleveland Hopkins’ website just added Delta as a seasonal carrier to Cancun. Do they know something we don’t?

https://www.clevelandairport.com/cancun

Robert1010 · Wed Aug 14, 2019 5:43 pm

avtcle wrote:
Interesting little development...

Cleveland Hopkins’ website just added Delta as a seasonal carrier to Cancun. Do they know something we don’t?

https://www.clevelandairport.com/cancun

Would not surprise me , they already do a bunch of CUN routes out of all the other nearby cities IND,PIT,CMH

avtcle · Wed Aug 14, 2019 5:48 pm

Robert1010 wrote:
avtcle wrote:
Interesting little development...

Cleveland Hopkins’ website just added Delta as a seasonal carrier to Cancun. Do they know something we don’t?

https://www.clevelandairport.com/cancun

Would not surprise me , they already do a bunch of CUN routes out of all the other nearby cities IND,PIT,CMH

Leads me to believe United is dropping this route.

Robert1010 · Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:14 pm

I like Delta’s slight aggression in CLE, been hearing more commercials and noticed slight up gauges in metal , mostly 712s&E170s , maybe they’ll further push UA out and take over some more Florida routes

fun2fly · Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:25 pm

avtcle wrote:
Interesting little development...

Cleveland Hopkins’ website just added Delta as a seasonal carrier to Cancun. Do they know something we don’t?

https://www.clevelandairport.com/cancun

Don't see it now...oops?

avtcle · Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:07 am

Either someone added it prematurely or someone screwed up.

masseybrown · Thu Aug 15, 2019 4:54 pm

WN schedule extension is a net zero through Marhc 6. CLE loses once a week to DAL and gains once a week fo FLL.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net