Boiler905 wrote:

CLE doesn't need 58 flipping gates any more than EK needed 100 A380s. Good grief.

It doesn't now, but just might at PAL 5. If that level is not reached, then this final buildout won't occur.

It's not just CLE - all these airports that are planning on expanding must think that carbon issues are just going to go away. (DEN and ORD here's looking at you) If climate change does get worse, what are all these extra planes going to burn? This industry is counting on a miracle in chemistry to go beyond 2030.

AA1751 MIA-CLE on the way today operating with a Boeing 737 MAX-8. Now I can finally say with confidence that this will be the first American 737 MAX at CLE.

Boiler905 wrote:

CLE doesn't need 58 flipping gates any more than EK needed 100 A380s. Good grief.

CLE could certainly use 58 gates once the city gets back in growth mode, which its on the cusp of it hasn't started already.

Citrus1492 wrote:

greenair727 wrote:

Why would Breeze choose CAK over CLE? They will certainly get more pax at CLE---and yes, more competition, but just select routes not well served out of CLE, like MSY, MIA, PBI....

The CPE at CAK isnt the robbery it is at CLE. Also, parking at CAK is less costly and rarely full.
The only airport better than CAK would have been MFD. Its an hour drive from CLE, CAK, and CMH. With low fares and free parking MFD would be a smashing success for any LCC.

Clevelanders don't even want to drive to Akron, they certainly won't drive to Mansfield. Airlines are willing to pay a higher CPE at CLE over CAK, because CLE is where the demand is. I get that Neeleman is trying to get subsidizes/guarantees or whatever by flying out of CAK, but that's pretty disappointing--not strategic--of him. He'd be creating a REAL new product if he was serving new markets (like CLE-PVD, MSY, SAN)--where he could still get that Ohio guarantee and serve a bigger market. CAK-Florida is just a copy a duplication of routes already served out of Hopkins, so he offers the market nothing new.

greenair727 wrote:

Boiler905 wrote:

CLE doesn't need 58 flipping gates any more than EK needed 100 A380s. Good grief.

CLE could certainly use 58 gates once the city gets back in growth mode, which its on the cusp of it hasn't started already.

Pre-Covid Cleveland needed around 35 gates. Maybe 40 to pad things out for a few decades

greenair727 wrote:

Citrus1492 wrote:

greenair727 wrote:

Why would Breeze choose CAK over CLE? They will certainly get more pax at CLE---and yes, more competition, but just select routes not well served out of CLE, like MSY, MIA, PBI....

The CPE at CAK isnt the robbery it is at CLE. Also, parking at CAK is less costly and rarely full.
The only airport better than CAK would have been MFD. Its an hour drive from CLE, CAK, and CMH. With low fares and free parking MFD would be a smashing success for any LCC.

Clevelanders don't even want to drive to Akron, they certainly won't drive to Mansfield. Airlines are willing to pay a higher CPE at CLE over CAK, because CLE is where the demand is. I get that Neeleman is trying to get subsidizes/guarantees or whatever by flying out of CAK, but that's pretty disappointing--not strategic--of him. He'd be creating a REAL new product if he was serving new markets (like CLE-PVD, MSY, SAN)--where he could still get that Ohio guarantee and serve a bigger market. CAK-Florida is just a copy a duplication of routes already served out of Hopkins, so he offers the market nothing new.

Er, the drive from Cleveland to Mansfield is the same as CLE to CAK.

According to Google maps its 80.3 miles from downtown Cleveland to MFD, 49.4 miles to CAK.

Yeah, that's a bit of a stretch to say the drive from Cleveland to MFD and CAK is the same. While the drive to MFD might be straight highway driving, CAK is a far better option for Cleveland's Eastern and Southern suburbs.

I don't quite understand the desire to plop an airport in the middle of nowhere and expect it to draw from multiple large population centers with the expectation that by doing so, the airport would be able to attract more service than in individual large cities. There is a diminishing return, especially in the case of Ohio cities. All of them are large enough to support air service from multiple airlines to a variety of cities. The concept throughout the 90s of driving 1.5-2.5 hrs to save hundreds of dollars on airfare is gone with the proliferation of low cost airlines in just about every airport in the country. Now, it's important to serve your population base as conveniently as possible. Many people, me included, would not and do not consider flight options outside of my intended destination as the cost in both time and money outweigh any savings in airfare. I think that's a big reason you see airlines like Spirit maintaining service in cities within close proximity, like CLE, CAK, PIT, and LBE.

greenair727 wrote:

Citrus1492 wrote:

greenair727 wrote:

Why would Breeze choose CAK over CLE? They will certainly get more pax at CLE---and yes, more competition, but just select routes not well served out of CLE, like MSY, MIA, PBI....

The CPE at CAK isnt the robbery it is at CLE. Also, parking at CAK is less costly and rarely full.
The only airport better than CAK would have been MFD. Its an hour drive from CLE, CAK, and CMH. With low fares and free parking MFD would be a smashing success for any LCC.

Clevelanders don't even want to drive to Akron, they certainly won't drive to Mansfield. Airlines are willing to pay a higher CPE at CLE over CAK, because CLE is where the demand is. I get that Neeleman is trying to get subsidizes/guarantees or whatever by flying out of CAK, but that's pretty disappointing--not strategic--of him. He'd be creating a REAL new product if he was serving new markets (like CLE-PVD, MSY, SAN)--where he could still get that Ohio guarantee and serve a bigger market. CAK-Florida is just a copy a duplication of routes already served out of Hopkins, so he offers the market nothing new.

If the product is good I’d drive to Akron...but it needs to be good. Just water and Wifi alone will not make the product better unless the price is that much better. I’m excited for Breeze and hope they succeed but I also will readily acknowledge that I’d need a significant incentive to drive to Akron for a 90 minute flight, even if that 90 minute flight were on one of the ULCCs. Mansfield? Forget it.

Actually MFD is a airport with a big, long runway because of the Department of Defense per Wikipedia -

"The airport is home to the Mansfield Lahm Air National Guard Base and the 179th Airlift Wing (179 AW), an Ohio Air National Guard unit operationally-gained by the Air Mobility Command (AMC). The unit has about 1000 personnel, of which about 300 are full-time Active Guard and Reserve (AGR) and Air Reserve Technician (ART) personnel and the remaining 760 are traditional part-time air national guardsmen. The wing has been active at Mansfield Lahm since its establishment in 1948

Toledo and Youngstown similarly have long runways due to Air National Guard use.

This is the Cleveland Airport thread. I am a big Cleveland airport booster. Anything that takes away from traffic buildup and improvements to the airport I am against. That said I hope this Breeze service is a big failure. I want a big strong airport not several bus terminals types that bleed each other dry.

I don't quite understand the Breeze route-map. CAK, PIT and CMH to several of the same vacation destinations sounds like Vacation Express, or Vision Airlines to me. The rest looks like when ExpressJet went out on their own, but hey, Neelman has a proven track record so I'll wait and see what happens. I could see Breeze going the way of Frontier and moving from CAK to CLE, but then I think about the cost of flying into Hopkins and I'm not so sure.

Again, I think the days of CAK siphoning a significant portion of CLE traffic away are done. I don't think Breeze is going to cause Clevelanders to head to CAK in droves. It's now a case of CAK being another option for the region as a whole, specifically those in southern and easternmost sections of NEO, as well as a bellwether of what the region can support. Allegiant entered CAK only to consolidate in CLE. Spirit came into CAK but continues to grow at a healthy pace in CLE. Breeze might very well determine they can do something similar, they are just starting. Traffic at CLE was at the strongest it had been pre-pandemic and is bouncing back stronger than many of its peers. I think we'll continue to see the airport flourish as the region, state, and country continue to recover.

Going to a city with a State guarantee of break even or better is actually a sound financial move. 6 flights a week is a lot like Vacation Express. Maybe it keeps CLE from doing anything financially unsound as the threat of airlines moving south will always be on their radar. (I'm back to the Hilton Hotel/Medical Mart decision, building 6L/24R at 10000' w/overruns for flights to Asia and buying the IX Center for a third parallel runway for Continental kind of mistakes)

MohawkWeekend wrote:

ncflyer wrote:

Robert1010 yes the plan as I remember was to move FIS to the new B, and renovating B was in one of the earlier phases-- you can see it in the PAL 2 drawing posted by flyPIT. Fixing the international situation was very much one of the aims of the plan. .
Mohawk-- no, you'll note the PAL 2 drawing does not show any parked plane indicators around D-- that means teh building is standing but not in use. By PAL 5 it's gone. I watched the entire presentation and the plan is to sink zero dollars and zero sense in to D other than wrecking it down. From the criterial they used on the various plans, you could tell they weighted pretty heavily passnenger walking distance. In addition to the cost of repurposing D, that one weighed heavily investing in using D.

I'm still struggling with the cost to repurpose D - so you have to pour some more concrete, add some Jetways and readjust the boarding areas. How expensive could that be? Unlike the other concourses, D has no interior walls(right?). Yeah it's a long walk from the existing terminal but what if they built a small terminal in front of it. Plenty of US airports have separate terminals with a means to get from one to another. Ohare comes to mind. Lets say D was Delta's Terminal. How many passengers would need to get from D to the main terminal? When I landed on a United flight, I didn't stroll to the other end of A.

Heck - cut a deal with United make D their own concourse - think of the high end concierge service their own terminal could offer. They are paying for it anyhow.

Why are so many a.net users fascinated with Concourse D? It was a nice terminal that served its need, but let’s be rational. It’s a 21yo cheaply constructed facility. It’s nearing the end of its useful life, which means soon it will require new guts (new roof, HAVC, etc.). The gates will have to be reconfigured for mainline aircraft, which will likely lead to the modular interior being largely replaced. Ultimately, it’s more cost effective to tear it down and rebuild it.

CLE debt is already too high. If they spend $750 million on Phase 1, debt would then be around $1.25 billion. CPE would have to double to cover that. IMO they need a quick addition that frees up space in the terminal. Small terminal addition, redo the bathrooms, make the walkway to Concourse A 3 times as wide for TSA. Move the rental cars back, build a new garage. And your good until the debt is down.

Unless that steel and concrete is bad, it will have to be cheaper than building new. How come they can repurpose the Terminal Tower, the Ameritrust Tower and 55 Public Sq instead of building new? They are planning on rebuilding parts of the main terminal which are 40 years older than Concourse D.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

CLE debt is already too high. If they spend $750 million on Phase 1, debt would then be around $1.25 billion. CPE would have to double to cover that. IMO they need a quick addition that frees up space in the terminal. Small terminal addition, redo the bathrooms, make the walkway to Concourse A 3 times as wide for TSA. Move the rental cars back, build a new garage. And your good until the debt is down.

Unless that steel and concrete is bad, it will have to be cheaper than building new. How come they can repurpose the Terminal Tower, the Ameritrust Tower and 55 Public Sq instead of building new? They are planning on rebuilding parts of the main terminal which are 40 years older than Concourse D.

It depends on the scope of the project and what’s being replaced, but it’s often cheaper to tear down and rebuild than it is to renovate. That’s especially true of buildings that were cheaply constructed, and Concourse D is a great example.

Perhaps they need to come up with a Plan B. What if Phase 1 has overruns due to the increase in material costs in the last 6 months? As it is $750 million is a chunk of change when you already have $500 million in debt (unless the Feds Infrastructure Bill pays for it).

IMO there should have be some plan for a much smaller program of improvements i.e. a way forward if the grand plan is not economically feasible and just sits on the shelf.

I thought the plan was pretty smart in that it can be phased depending on pax levels. Concourse B is just a joke so smart place to begin. The bathrooms are undersized so that’s nothing a renovation can fix, they’ve been remodeled many times and they still are worse than a neighborhood movie theater. Others on here will know the financial situation of CLE better than me but on the call they seemed to say much debt will be retired in the next few years. But regardless getting federal infrastructure money would be a real help.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

Perhaps they need to come up with a Plan B. What if Phase 1 has overruns due to the increase in material costs in the last 6 months? As it is $750 million is a chunk of change when you already have $500 million in debt (unless the Feds Infrastructure Bill pays for it).

IMO there should have be some plan for a much smaller program of improvements i.e. a way forward if the grand plan is not economically feasible and just sits on the shelf.

I think we need to let the plan play out. Nothing has been approved, let alone architectural/engineering plans developed. It is very unlikely any developments will actually start before 2026 or so, per Director Kennedy, so short-term concerns about construction materials shortages probably will not be relevant then. Now a long-term infrastructure bill might come into play if it is spread out over several years. The airport's current debt should be gone by 2031, if I recall correctly, so taking on new debt a few years before this in the mid-2020's should be feasible. There already is a 20% contingency built into the cost estimates for this plan, as well. I'm not in the construction business, but this seems quite reasonable.

This entire process seems much more realistic than the previous few plans I've seen, in terms of phasing, when to pull the triggers for development, customer-service focused infrastructure plans, and realistic forecasts of traffic based on CLE being an origin and destination airport now (predicting measured and moderate growth).

chrisjake wrote:

I don't quite understand the Breeze route-map. CAK, PIT and CMH to several of the same vacation destinations sounds like Vacation Express, or Vision Airlines to me. The rest looks like when ExpressJet went out on their own, but hey, Neelman has a proven track record so I'll wait and see what happens. I could see Breeze going the way of Frontier and moving from CAK to CLE, but then I think about the cost of flying into Hopkins and I'm not so sure.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

According to the Cleveland.com article -

"Breeze is receiving financial support for the new routes from the new Air Service Restoration program offered through JobsOhio, the state’s economic development arm. According to JobsOhio spokesman Matt Englehart, the incentive is a revenue guarantee, not a grant or loan. The carrier will receive assistance if the route doesn’t generate certain agreed-upon revenue dollars."

It seems like incentives played a major role in where Breeze added service based on the reports from PIT, CHS, e.t.c.

In my eyes it makes sense that Breeze went to CAK, as it would not be good practice for CLE to provide financial incentives to Breeze to essentially undercut the existing service from CLE on already thin routes.

That being said, I think it is interesting that the Jobsohio revenue guarantee is going to leisure routes, and routes that are already served from CAK and/or CLE.

CLEguy wrote:

I wonder when the replacement club for the closed Airspace Lounge, supposedly a Priority Pass lounge, will finally open. It was supposed to open last summer, but plans were impacted by the pandemic.

I guess I'll answer my own question. Looks like The Club CLE, a Priority Pass lounge, will open "later this year." From the news release:

"The Club CLE, with its open ambiance, natural lighting and views over the busy airfield, has been designed by award-winning Texas-based architects Ibanez Shaw. It will offer The Club’s signature designated zones to ‘Rest, Relax, and Replenish’, providing a high-end airport experience for the modern traveler."

https://www.airportdimensions.com/en/ne ... ge-network

Here's an image of the "replenish" zone at CLE:

Citrus1492 wrote:

greenair727 wrote:

Citrus1492 wrote:

The CPE at CAK isnt the robbery it is at CLE. Also, parking at CAK is less costly and rarely full.
The only airport better than CAK would have been MFD. Its an hour drive from CLE, CAK, and CMH. With low fares and free parking MFD would be a smashing success for any LCC.

Clevelanders don't even want to drive to Akron, they certainly won't drive to Mansfield. Airlines are willing to pay a higher CPE at CLE over CAK, because CLE is where the demand is. I get that Neeleman is trying to get subsidizes/guarantees or whatever by flying out of CAK, but that's pretty disappointing--not strategic--of him. He'd be creating a REAL new product if he was serving new markets (like CLE-PVD, MSY, SAN)--where he could still get that Ohio guarantee and serve a bigger market. CAK-Florida is just a copy a duplication of routes already served out of Hopkins, so he offers the market nothing new.

Er, the drive from Cleveland to Mansfield is the same as CLE to CAK.

LOL, What?! It's 30 miles farther to MFD than CAK, you goose. It's literally nowhere close.

Midwestindy wrote:

It seems like incentives played a major role in where Breeze added service based on the reports from PIT, CHS, e.t.c.

I haven’t seen one report from PIT on what they offered, if anything.

flyPIT wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

It seems like incentives played a major role in where Breeze added service based on the reports from PIT, CHS, e.t.c.

I haven’t seen one report from PIT on what they offered, if anything.

"As it has done with other new airlines in the past, the authority will be paying Breeze incentives to launch service from Pittsburgh, although Ms. Cassotis would not detail them, saying the agreement with the carrier had yet to be signed."

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/trans ... 2105210108

If I were the other carriers, I'd be P*****. Service from LBE or YNG maybe but not CAK or PIT.

Sorry that these articles might be behind a paywall:

$2 billion plan to rebuild Cleveland Hopkins airport: Will it happen? And should it? https://www.cleveland.com/travel/2021/0 ... 7-headline

Crain's editorial: Thinking big on the lakefront and at the airport. https://www.crainscleveland.com/editori ... 4-headline

The Crain's article basically says time for Cleveland to think big. Most of the article is on the new lakefront plan but the airport plan does get an overall endorsement.

The PD article was by Susan Glasser and was very fair and informative. The new head of the Greater Cleveland Partnership gives the project a big endorsement, that's huge. The article says CLE leaders wish is far and away more service to more places, and that a new building won't help with that. However the current building is described as dated, overcrowded, and a lousy impression on visitors, that if the city isn't showing a willingness to work on the airport what message does that send to carriers. Will the passenger counts of the future warrant such an investment, that's the question. Spirit is quoted as hesitant but willing to keep the dialogue going, UA is described as supportive. In fact it sounds like UA wants to repurpose D, but the article positions it as a big stretch to do so.

ncflyer wrote:

UA is described as supportive. In fact it sounds like UA wants to repurpose D, but the article positions it as a big stretch to do so.

Of course UA wants to demolish/repurpose D; it gets them out of $1 million/month payment on an empty building if it's done before their lease runs out in 2027. If I were CLE management, I'd start demo a week after UA hands back the keys. Meanwhile, what could CLE get out of UA as a price for early lease termination? How about a 50% payment reduction in exchange for a guarantee of 3 years non-stop service to a dozen domestic points and a couple of international ones PLUS hiring another 1K people for the mx hangars?

masseybrown wrote:

ncflyer wrote:

UA is described as supportive. In fact it sounds like UA wants to repurpose D, but the article positions it as a big stretch to do so.

Of course UA wants to demolish/repurpose D; it gets them out of $1 million/month payment on an empty building if it's done before their lease runs out in 2027. If I were CLE management, I'd start demo a week after UA hands back the keys. Meanwhile, what could CLE get out of UA as a price for early lease termination? How about a 50% payment reduction in exchange for a guarantee of 3 years non-stop service to a dozen domestic points and a couple of international ones PLUS hiring another 1K people for the mx hangars?

I like the thinking. Perhaps, this and throw in a few other things from civic organizations, and get LHR. Even if you get domestic only, a deal is there to be made. If CLE, the civic organizations and jobsohio are all serious, now is the time to at least line up the deal within the next few years.

masseybrown wrote:

ncflyer wrote:

UA is described as supportive. In fact it sounds like UA wants to repurpose D, but the article positions it as a big stretch to do so.

Of course UA wants to demolish/repurpose D; it gets them out of $1 million/month payment on an empty building if it's done before their lease runs out in 2027. If I were CLE management, I'd start demo a week after UA hands back the keys. Meanwhile, what could CLE get out of UA as a price for early lease termination? How about a 50% payment reduction in exchange for a guarantee of 3 years non-stop service to a dozen domestic points and a couple of international ones PLUS hiring another 1K people for the mx hangars?

I realize you are joking, but any form of service guarantees tied to changes in lease would almost certainly run afoul of FAA regs which requires airports which receive FAA funds and choose to offer service incentives, do so on a non-discriminatory basis. At any rate, it sounds like it will be a few years before they start the work which makes it pointless to let UA out of its lease early.

And since UA wants to repurpose D even after the debt is retired according to the PD article their motivation must be: they think it’s a more economical alternative overall. What else could it be?

As I mentioned on an earlier post the plan seems to weigh very heavily pax walking distance which UA might not care about as much.

Spirit extended their schedule From November through Feb. Looks like a continuing strong schedule for CLE:

CLE-ATL: 2x daily
CLE-MCO: 2x daily
CLE-FLL: 2x daily
CLE-TPA: 1x daily
CLE-RSW: 1x daily
CLE-LAS: 1x daily
CLE-LAX: 1x daily
CLE-CUN: 4x weekly
CLE-MSY: 3x weekly

11 average daily departures

Next extension we should find out the fate of BOS/DFW. Hoping those will return next spring/summer. EWR I’m still assuming is just gone for good, but we never got any word on that.

Well I'm glad United and I think alike! There is nothing wrong with D and I still stand by it HAS to be cheaper to update than build a new concourse. Like I've said before - DTW and ORD show that separate terminals can work. At least we'd have one modern terminal and the crowding would be eliminated in the existing terminal. Widen the walk way to Concourse A by 3 times to allow for better TSA checking. Convert the old Admirals Club to bathrooms. Put in some more windows. Get rid of all the vendor kiosks in the walkways. Move back the rental cars after you tear down the Sheraton, build a 2 story (cheap) parking garage where the torn down garage was, add 15 feet to the back of the other bathrooms to make them larger. And cover the drop off areas so people don't get rained on. Done.

Oh and get rid of the traffic light at the entrance.

avtcle wrote:

Next extension we should find out the fate of BOS/DFW. Hoping those will return next spring/summer. EWR I’m still assuming is just gone for good, but we never got any word on that.

WN re-adding CLE-DAL nonstop service is a possibility if NK permanently cuts CLE-DFW nonstop service.

WN also has more room at DAL than it did prior to the COVID-19 pandemic with WN currently only scheduled to operate 177 daily departures in June 2021 compared to the 195 daily departures that WN was operating out of DAL prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

CLE also had stronger demand to the DFW/DAL market prior to the COVID-19 pandemic than most of the other markets that WN doesn't serve nonstop from DAL.

WN would also probably be able to get more connecting traffic on CLE-DAL nonstop flights if it re-adds CLE-DAL nonstop service with AUS and SAN no longer having any nonstop service from CLE.

avtcle wrote:

Spirit extended their schedule From November through Feb. Looks like a continuing strong schedule for CLE:

CLE-ATL: 2x daily
CLE-MCO: 2x daily
CLE-FLL: 2x daily
CLE-TPA: 1x daily
CLE-RSW: 1x daily
CLE-LAS: 1x daily
CLE-LAX: 1x daily
CLE-CUN: 4x weekly
CLE-MSY: 3x weekly

11 average daily departures

Next extension we should find out the fate of BOS/DFW. Hoping those will return next spring/summer. EWR I’m still assuming is just gone for good, but we never got any word on that.

I’m assuming EWR is gone for good too but they did just bring back EWR-PBI.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

Well I'm glad United and I think alike! There is nothing wrong with D and I still stand by it HAS to be cheaper to update than build a new concourse. Like I've said before - DTW and ORD show that separate terminals can work. At least we'd have one modern terminal and the crowding would be eliminated in the existing terminal. Widen the walk way to Concourse A by 3 times to allow for better TSA checking. Convert the old Admirals Club to bathrooms. Put in some more windows. Get rid of all the vendor kiosks in the walkways. Move back the rental cars after you tear down the Sheraton, build a 2 story (cheap) parking garage where the torn down garage was, add 15 feet to the back of the other bathrooms to make them larger. And cover the drop off areas so people don't get rained on. Done.

Oh and get rid of the traffic light at the entrance.

It's still lipstick on a pig, in my opinion. Your plan does not address fundamental problems with the roadway system and parking as business recovers and starts to grown again, overcrowded ticketing level, grossly inadequate TSA checkpoints (a little widening of the North checkpoint will not double TSA capacity as is needed today, not at PAL 5), and the horrible FIS. Why continue putting band-aids on what will be a 70-year-old terminal (in parts) by the time any modernization/expansion even starts? Makes little sense to me.

Well to start - I'm offering my plan to the airport for free! According to the info I've read, the new plan doesn't kick off to 2026. How many plans have we seen sit of the shelf in NE Ohio and are never implemented? BTW is the price in 2026 dollars? Recall that PIT gets revenue from oil/gas wells on the property. That helps with paying for their expansion. The airlines are not happy with the cost of MCI's. IMO a Plan that would have reused D would have allowed a more incremental and cost effective beginning of the rebuild. I agree it's not a attractive as the Plan but it would be more incremental from a cost standpoint.

Lets say United gets the new terminal (like DTW and ORD but small) All those cars now stop there to drop off and then pick up passengers. It will have it's own TSA line. United's happy they are out of the old terminal, have a more high end entrance appropriate for a major airline and maybe they'll work with with the City.

Now the other carriers can spread out and have bigger counters for their ops. For the LCC's, the much larger Concourse A hallway takes even more pressure off of the 2 other existing TSA operations.

The other stuff I mentioned (bathrooms and vendor kiosks which remind me a a cheap mall or flea market) are easy implements. Then start the rebuild of the main terminal and the other 3 concourses. Oh and sell the IX Center and the existing rental facility and use that money to help fund this thing.

MohawkWeekend, my fear is that someone in City Hall will read your posts, sense a genius and frugal solution to future terminal improvements, and in-so doing further the dubious reputation that was once Cleveland. Repurposing the American Airlines Admirals Club into restrooms? That is reminiscent when Mohawk Airlines turned their tired DC-3s into Gaslight flights.

I saw some of that streaming news conference and came away hopeful that initial portions of the expansion plan will be implemented in the coming years. For me the conference seemed interminable. My takeaway was that councilwoman Jenny Spencer had a sterling knowledge of parliamentary procedure, while airport director Robert Kennedy had the patience of Job for not going insane at the millionth query over the fate of Concourse D.

Those DC-3's were a fantastic marketing move by a company who didn't have a any money - making lemonaid out of lemons! How did people ever drive home from the airport?

I too hope for an all new terminal and concourses. The problem is they sold their soul to CO to build that runway and buy the IX Center for that 3rd runway. It's taken years to pay it off. I hope the Fed's will help. If they can give billions to NYC for subway tunnels, why not airports? Certainly the State should pay for any road improvements. I sense that we need to get United behind any plan to upgrade especially if they really would like to use D.

The County is in the same shape and can't take on any new debt after financing the Medical Mart and Hilton Hotel. Thats why the Hasslem's are needed for the Lakefront. How long have we waited for that to be done?

Mohawk how much would you be willing to spend on your Getting started plan, knowing it would be temporary?

Hate to say it but I don’t think either facility you mention would fetch much in a sale, I pull let’s say $10mm-$15mm order of magnitude. The Ford plant just sold for $31mm a pile of beans in my book. So much to the rumors that Rivian or VW was interested in the two empty Ford plants in cuyahoga county.

How big would a terminal for 6 to 8 gates need to be? Assuming D would be part of the new design, say $100 million for the facility and road ways. The garage and tearing down the Sheraton are all part of the their Plan too. Widening the walkway to A maybe $25 million. It's been a long time since I worked in construction supervision.

Moving SWA to now open C concourse would allow them to tear down the end of B and make a round building similar to AA's Charlotte terminal with a Custom facility beneath it. There is a lot of space there for such a building. Build a new B along the side of the existing B to tie into the circle at the end.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

How big would a terminal for 6 to 8 gates need to be? Assuming D would be part of the new design, say $100 million for the facility and road ways. The garage and tearing down the Sheraton are all part of the their Plan too. Widening the walkway to A maybe $25 million. It's been a long time since I worked in construction supervision.

Moving SWA to now open C concourse would allow them to tear down the end of B and make a round building similar to AA's Charlotte terminal with a Custom facility beneath it. There is a lot of space there for such a building. Build a new B along the side of the existing B to tie into the circle at the end.

They said it would cost $82 million for a new Concourse E, versus $120 million for a renovated Concourse D (I assume this cost includes some sort of better connection to the main terminal rather than the tunnel). They do not want 2 head houses with duplicative services (as you suggested). Time will tell what actually happens.

CLEguy I definitely remember in the presentation they mentioned improving the connectivity to D would be necessary if they kept D so I assume a new terminal connection was in the numbers. Although not mentioned, one would have to assume new direct connectivity from the main terminal to D would be necessary if there was ever an extensive renovation or rebuild of C in a "keep D" option.

ncflyer wrote:

CLEguy I definitely remember in the presentation they mentioned improving the connectivity to D would be necessary if they kept D so I assume a new terminal connection was in the numbers. Although not mentioned, one would have to assume new direct connectivity from the main terminal to D would be necessary if there was ever an extensive renovation or rebuild of C in a "keep D" option.

Maybe my final comment on all of this, what Mohawk is proposing is essentially Terminal Family 1 or 3 (if you build a new unit terminal connecting to D. I remember them saying that ultimately, the cost of Plan 2 (with 71% new construction) was actually estimated to cost less for the initial stages than Plan 1 while ultimately creating a more compact, centralized terminal with shorter walking distances, a more efficient gate layout, and the ability to have a more aesthetically pleasing facility with more opportunities for amenities and architectural features that will be a much more welcoming front door to Cleveland. I think Plan 2 makes a lot of sense and hope it can eventually be financed and built.

How much would it cost to build a moving walkway (like we used to have in the garages) from the main terminal to the new terminal. Why does it have to be more than that? Heck Tampa and Orlando have trams. Whose going to use it out side of airport employees, police and TSA?

Can you imagine the mess that rebuilding the main terminal will be while it's still in operation? I only flew thru LGA at the beginning of it's reconstruction. I recall humping my bag a mile to get to the cab stand thru an outdoor covered walkway. Building all kinds of temporary structures to facilitate continued use while still in service is not only difficult but expensive. And you end up tearing the temporary stuff up.

Have United build a Taj Mahl for their customers who are business people. ULCC passengers just want more space in the terminal, faster security, bigger, cleaner bathrooms and close in parking. And cheap.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

Well I'm glad United and I think alike! There is nothing wrong with D and I still stand by it HAS to be cheaper to update than build a new concourse. Like I've said before - DTW and ORD show that separate terminals can work. At least we'd have one modern terminal and the crowding would be eliminated in the existing terminal. Widen the walk way to Concourse A by 3 times to allow for better TSA checking. Convert the old Admirals Club to bathrooms. Put in some more windows. Get rid of all the vendor kiosks in the walkways. Move back the rental cars after you tear down the Sheraton, build a 2 story (cheap) parking garage where the torn down garage was, add 15 feet to the back of the other bathrooms to make them larger. And cover the drop off areas so people don't get rained on. Done.

Oh and get rid of the traffic light at the entrance.

Treat that like a stop sign, proceed after stop if clear.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

According to Google maps its 80.3 miles from downtown Cleveland to MFD, 49.4 miles to CAK.

Insignificant at 80mph on 71 south.

Citrus1492 wrote:

MohawkWeekend wrote:

According to Google maps its 80.3 miles from downtown Cleveland to MFD, 49.4 miles to CAK.

Insignificant at 80mph on 71 south.

Lmao. Isn’t fine with paying to park at CLE but is fine getting a speeding ticket on the way to MFD. No airline is going to “print money” at MFD, give it up.