VS will utilise the new A330-900's on TPA....

https://onemileatatime.com/news/virgin- ... eat-suite/

deltadudejg wrote:

FlyerTalkUserNa wrote:

deltadudejg wrote:

My info is from an internal email. I would truthfully prefer to see the 787-9.

Flight is loaded with the A330! Seat map showing the old configuration, but so is the BOS-LHR route so still possible it gets the new config.

Had high hopes with VS releasing their 339 on Tuesday and their official release of the TPA flight today, though it's been in since Monday, that we would be one of the first places to see the 339. Still, only 10 333s on the lot and their delivery schedule is relatively short with the 339s.

Not sure if the seat maps have been updated but OMAAT says TPA-LHR is going to be operated by the A339. Huge win for business class customers to London.

RobertS975 wrote:

This is a very interesting video impeded in this article explaining and demonstrating the first phase of the improvements planned over the next several years at RSW. The article mentions that "VIP lounges" are planned. Could a Delta Sky Club be in the works? Or would this be a third party lounge like Priority Club?


The article (which may be behind a paywall):
https://www.naplesnews.com/story/money/ ... -NLETTER65


The video:
https://youtu.be/IdW1VWRhszc

I would expect one of the third-party lounges at RSW. The Club, Escape, Plaza Premium, etc. Presumably enough of the RSW clientele carries the premium credit cards that offer access, and that would likely present a better value proposition than an airline-specific club.

TPA Airside D getting closer: https://www.bizjournals.com/tampabay/ne ... ce=twitter

FlyerTalkUserNa wrote:

TPA Airside D getting closer: https://www.bizjournals.com/tampabay/ne ... ce=twitter

Can't wait to see some legit renderings of it, in detail. 16 gates, most being INTL capable will be a big addition for TPA. Will be fun to see the Airside swaps the airlines make. And if Airside F keeps its INTL, could see someone like F9 or Breeze expand nicely out of F.

This can't start though until UPS is moved over to their new cargo terminal by FedEx, which hasn't even started yet and I think is slated to be finished by late 2024l last I saw. And then I'm assuming Amazon will finally fully move over to LAL.

It is strange that TPA is not looking at extending the 8,300' RWY 1R/19L. It is pretty marginal for long-haul ops and even for "albatrosses" like the B737-900ER, some of which are flying full loads to SEA & LAX.

FLALEFTY wrote:

PennPal wrote:

This sharp looking 757 has been parked at a remote stand at RSW all week. Does anyone have any insight as to why it is there??
https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/ ... llc/rz42ve

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/VPBBE

It appears that this plane has been at RSW for over a month. With its last owner, GainJet Aviation (of Greece), it had a 68-seat VIP interior. The new owner, Freedom II LLC appears to be a dummy company. I checked the Florida government's SunBiz.org site and it listed the LLC as being applied for, but not established.

Used to fly with American Trans Air

FLALEFTY wrote:

It is strange that TPA is not looking at extending the 8,300' RWY 1R/19L. It is pretty marginal for long-haul ops and even for "albatrosses" like the B737-900ER, some of which are flying full loads to SEA & LAX.

The politically connected Westshore neighborhoods would fight that plan to the death.

FLALEFTY wrote:

It is strange that TPA is not looking at extending the 8,300' RWY 1R/19L. It is pretty marginal for long-haul ops and even for "albatrosses" like the B737-900ER, some of which are flying full loads to SEA & LAX.

It seems to work just fine when 1L/19R closes for maintenance for periods of time. I think that’s on the lower end of needs at the airport.

TVNWZ wrote:

FLALEFTY wrote:

It is strange that TPA is not looking at extending the 8,300' RWY 1R/19L. It is pretty marginal for long-haul ops and even for "albatrosses" like the B737-900ER, some of which are flying full loads to SEA & LAX.

The politically connected Westshore neighborhoods would fight that plan to the death.

Too true. The Westshore crowd lights up TPA's phone system every time they do 19L departures, or 1R arrivals.

Not optimistic of the timeframe of the new Airside D as there’s no evidence whatsoever at the current future site of the new UPS complex that any construction is about to begin anytime soon. TPA is in a bit of a rock and hard place with commencing the construction of it not to mention the numerous aircraft stands it will lose when construction begins where will airlines park the excess planes then?

GVIIO wrote:

Not optimistic of the timeframe of the new Airside D as there’s no evidence whatsoever at the current future site of the new UPS complex that any construction is about to begin anytime soon. TPA is in a bit of a rock and hard place with commencing the construction of it not to mention the numerous aircraft stands it will lose when construction begins where will airlines park the excess planes then?

According to this, UPS is slated to finish construction 3/31/24: https://www.tampaairport.com/sites/defa ... dlesex.pdf

So more or less that's when UPS and the hardstands will free up to start full on Airside D construction.

3.5 years to build D puts them into 2027, so I guess we shall see.

And someone or somewhere mentioned a new hardstand North of Airside C and/or South of Airside F or maybe both down the road, but I have not seen any plans for either spot.

phatfarmlines wrote:

FlyerTalkUserNa wrote:

TPA Airside D getting closer: https://www.bizjournals.com/tampabay/ne ... ce=twitter

BTVB6Flyer wrote:

Can't wait to see some legit renderings of it, in detail. 16 gates, most being INTL capable will be a big addition for TPA. Will be fun to see the Airside swaps the airlines make. And if Airside F keeps its INTL, could see someone like F9 or Breeze expand nicely out of F.

This can't start though until UPS is moved over to their new cargo terminal by FedEx, which hasn't even started yet and I think is slated to be finished by late 2024l last I saw. And then I'm assuming Amazon will finally fully move over to LAL.

One of the earlier 2010's master plan had a complete rebuild of Airside F which restores the 15-gate configuration and integrates the automated in-line baggage building.

I could see HCAA pursuing this path especially if all 16 gates at future Airside D have FIS access.

I believe we discussed thus, but an interim plan HCAA also has for Airside F is to add FIS gates to Airside F. HCAA could head down this path especially since new Airside D was pushed. Gates F78 and F79 become reconfigured so F79 gets FIS access. Gates F84 and F86 would have their holdrooms expanded and also have access to FIS.

Though I still would like to see HCAA maximize all potential boarding gate space for the southern complex and resurrect Airside B.

So TPA already has infrastructure to eliminate the need for the baggage facilities at F and B? Or you’re saying an integrated facility would need to be built?

I wonder if AA would expand service into F once D is completed. That opens up a lot of gates, even without the return of 76 and 77. Or maybe another airline would want the lower number F gates and AA would shift to the other side. Their club is closer to those gates, after all.

Also, I’m with you on the rebuild of B. It wouldn’t be a large airside by any means. It would probably get a moving walkway instead of a tram since the pier is so short. But that’s their last option to add gates without constructing the north landside/airside facility.

BTVB6Flyer wrote:

FlyerTalkUserNa wrote:

TPA Airside D getting closer: https://www.bizjournals.com/tampabay/ne ... ce=twitter

Can't wait to see some legit renderings of it, in detail. 16 gates, most being INTL capable will be a big addition for TPA. Will be fun to see the Airside swaps the airlines make. And if Airside F keeps its INTL, could see someone like F9 or Breeze expand nicely out of F.

This can't start though until UPS is moved over to their new cargo terminal by FedEx, which hasn't even started yet and I think is slated to be finished by late 2024l last I saw. And then I'm assuming Amazon will finally fully move over to LAL.

GVIIO wrote:

Not optimistic of the timeframe of the new Airside D as there’s no evidence whatsoever at the current future site of the new UPS complex that any construction is about to begin anytime soon. TPA is in a bit of a rock and hard place with commencing the construction of it not to mention the numerous aircraft stands it will lose when construction begins where will airlines park the excess planes then?

The construction for the UPS facility officially started this past week. They are clearing the land of the trees while simultaneously moving a fuel line that runs somewhere under or near TWY J East of RWY 1R.

As for the Amazon move to Lakeland, LAL was finishing constructing 3 or 4 additional parking positions for 767s during Sun N Fun. Also to supplement additional aircraft parking a new hardstand is coming down the pipleline to be built just North of TWY A, West of the actual bridge itself. There is a small stub that sticks out off that taxiway, that's what it's for.

FLALEFTY wrote:

It is strange that TPA is not looking at extending the 8,300' RWY 1R/19L. It is pretty marginal for long-haul ops and even for "albatrosses" like the B737-900ER, some of which are flying full loads to SEA & LAX.

The runway has noise abatement for any jet departures to the South and arrivals from the South. There are a few other reasons not to extend 1R. Though the idea of building a parallel West of 1L is still happening.

phatfarmlines wrote:

IAmGaroott wrote:

So TPA already has infrastructure to eliminate the need for the baggage facilities at F and B? Or you’re saying an integrated facility would need to be built?

I wonder if AA would expand service into F once D is completed. That opens up a lot of gates, even without the return of 76 and 77. Or maybe another airline would want the lower number F gates and AA would shift to the other side. Their club is closer to those gates, after all.

Also, I’m with you on the rebuild of B. It wouldn’t be a large airside by any means. It would probably get a moving walkway instead of a tram since the pier is so short. But that’s their last option to add gates without constructing the north landside/airside facility.

HCAA could add a bag sort facility underneath Airside A. From the master plans I've seen, there's significant unused space underneath the airside which would have been reserved for F.I.S. facilities.

The proposal HCAA had for Airside F would be a completely new airside, so the bag sort building would be integrated.

I was thinking a theoretical Airside B would likely need 1 tram per track instead of the current two given the size of the airside, or maybe TPA could add a "flex" option where a 2nd tram could be added post-haste if multiple arrivals occur at the same time to clear any backlogs at the tram station. The moving sidewalks, while likely cheaper and more practical, would significantly move away from the architecture of the airside concept.

deltadudejg wrote:

FLALEFTY wrote:
It is strange that TPA is not looking at extending the 8,300' RWY 1R/19L. It is pretty marginal for long-haul ops and even for "albatrosses" like the B737-900ER, some of which are flying full loads to SEA & LAX.


The runway has noise abatement for any jet departures to the South and arrivals from the South. There are a few other reasons not to extend 1R. Though the idea of building a parallel West of 1L is still happening.

I could see a displaced threshold extending all the way to Hillsborough Avenue to allow for heavier takeoffs. Landings would still need to be displaced unless eminent domain is used to kick out all of the businesses north of 19L.

Airside F is getting on a bit in age, even with the recent renovations. I remember seeing people smoke inside there while sitting at a bank of pay phones. I suppose AA would take up temporary residence in D while F was rebuilt.

I wonder if all of Silver Airways, and smaller operations like Avelo and Sun Country would move to a rebuilt B. Moving Silver would add space for one to two more jet bridges at A.

Do we know if the new west runway would be the same length as 1L/19R?

Was watching Steve Markovich's latest TPA video today, and you could see the dirt being moved for the UPS facility.

Also does anyone know why UA not really use their newest hanger at TPA. Most of their jets can be seen in the PEMCO hangers, while the UA hanger is empty.

^^

The way HCAA is going all in on this eVTOL/Air Taxi stuff, I could definitely see them looking at Airside B space for that. And in theory would also be right next to tramway or potential other Bay Area mass transit. Other spot for those would be near rental car facility I guess, re; being close to future mass transit.

I too have thought of future Airside B as a Silver Airways/prop/commuter terminal. Maybe JSX or Southern Express comes back and coupled into B and with eVTOL that's a pretty sizable operation. Maybe even have FIS for say BahamasAir or something to Cuba etc.

Or have it be Silver and Avelo and Sun Country and Alaska, but counter point to that is who wants to operate restaurants etc. with such limited flights/demand etc.

phatfarmlines wrote:

IAmGaroott wrote:

Airside F is getting on a bit in age, even with the recent renovations. I remember seeing people smoke inside there while sitting at a bank of pay phones. I suppose AA would take up temporary residence in D while F was rebuilt.

As of this year, Airside F outlasted all of the other former airsides in age, passing former Airside D's record at age 34, upon the latter's closure in 2005.

IAmGaroott wrote:

I wonder if all of Silver Airways, and smaller operations like Avelo and Sun Country would move to a rebuilt B. Moving Silver would add space for one to two more jet bridges at A.

The theoretical facility could be built without jetways, and the airport could bill it as a ULCC alternative. 3M using the facility makes alot of sense, and frees up gate A1 for mainline service. Others on this site have also mentioned possibly using it as a future eVTOL/air taxi space.

IAmGaroott wrote:

Do we know if the new west runway would be the same length as 1L/19R?

The schematics have it as a similar length, though if it will be used as a landing runway, it could be shorter to save money.

It’s safe to assume we won’t see any further plans until ground has broken on D. I’m curious what TPAs priority will be moving forward: Constructing a sorting facility for A and rebuilding B, replacing F, the new runway, or their dire need for a new ATC tower.

BVTB6Flyer wrote:

The way HCAA is going all in on this eVTOL/Air Taxi stuff, I could definitely see them looking at Airside B space for that. And in theory would also be right next to tramway or potential other Bay Area mass transit. Other spot for those would be near rental car facility I guess, re; being close to future mass transit.

I too have thought of future Airside B as a Silver Airways/prop/commuter terminal. Maybe JSX or Southern Express comes back and coupled into B and with eVTOL that's a pretty sizable operation. Maybe even have FIS for say BahamasAir or something to Cuba etc.

Or have it be Silver and Avelo and Sun Country and Alaska, but counter point to that is who wants to operate restaurants etc. with such limited flights/demand etc.

The schematics have it as a similar length, though if it will be used as a landing runway, it could be shorter to save money.[/quote]
There’s a lot of fascinating potential here if the VTOL/air taxi thing takes place. Especially with the transit center connection. Either way, B offers valuable real estate for flights. If I were a gambler, I’d put money on something happening there sooner or later.

phatfarmlines wrote:

IAmGaroott wrote:

So TPA already has infrastructure to eliminate the need for the baggage facilities at F and B? Or you’re saying an integrated facility would need to be built?

I wonder if AA would expand service into F once D is completed. That opens up a lot of gates, even without the return of 76 and 77. Or maybe another airline would want the lower number F gates and AA would shift to the other side. Their club is closer to those gates, after all.

Also, I’m with you on the rebuild of B. It wouldn’t be a large airside by any means. It would probably get a moving walkway instead of a tram since the pier is so short. But that’s their last option to add gates without constructing the north landside/airside facility.

HCAA could add a bag sort facility underneath Airside A. From the master plans I've seen, there's significant unused space underneath the airside which would have been reserved for F.I.S. facilities.

The proposal HCAA had for Airside F would be a completely new airside, so the bag sort building would be integrated.

I was thinking a theoretical Airside B would likely need 1 tram per track instead of the current two given the size of the airside, or maybe TPA could add a "flex" option where a 2nd tram could be added post-haste if multiple arrivals occur at the same time to clear any backlogs at the tram station. The moving sidewalks, while likely cheaper and more practical, would significantly move away from the architecture of the airside concept.

deltadudejg wrote:

FLALEFTY wrote:
It is strange that TPA is not looking at extending the 8,300' RWY 1R/19L. It is pretty marginal for long-haul ops and even for "albatrosses" like the B737-900ER, some of which are flying full loads to SEA & LAX.


The runway has noise abatement for any jet departures to the South and arrivals from the South. There are a few other reasons not to extend 1R. Though the idea of building a parallel West of 1L is still happening.

I could see a displaced threshold extending all the way to Hillsborough Avenue to allow for heavier takeoffs. Landings would still need to be displaced unless eminent domain is used to kick out all of the businesses north of 19L.

I'd have to take a look at the old Master Plan, it is currently being redone. The first floor of Airside A is almost completely taken up. I also think it would be way too costly to retrofit a system now.

IAmGaroott wrote:

phatfarmlines wrote:

IAmGaroott wrote:

So TPA already has infrastructure to eliminate the need for the baggage facilities at F and B? Or you’re saying an integrated facility would need to be built?

I wonder if AA would expand service into F once D is completed. That opens up a lot of gates, even without the return of 76 and 77. Or maybe another airline would want the lower number F gates and AA would shift to the other side. Their club is closer to those gates, after all.

Also, I’m with you on the rebuild of B. It wouldn’t be a large airside by any means. It would probably get a moving walkway instead of a tram since the pier is so short. But that’s their last option to add gates without constructing the north landside/airside facility.

HCAA could add a bag sort facility underneath Airside A. From the master plans I've seen, there's significant unused space underneath the airside which would have been reserved for F.I.S. facilities.

The proposal HCAA had for Airside F would be a completely new airside, so the bag sort building would be integrated.

I was thinking a theoretical Airside B would likely need 1 tram per track instead of the current two given the size of the airside, or maybe TPA could add a "flex" option where a 2nd tram could be added post-haste if multiple arrivals occur at the same time to clear any backlogs at the tram station. The moving sidewalks, while likely cheaper and more practical, would significantly move away from the architecture of the airside concept.

deltadudejg wrote:

FLALEFTY wrote:
It is strange that TPA is not looking at extending the 8,300' RWY 1R/19L. It is pretty marginal for long-haul ops and even for "albatrosses" like the B737-900ER, some of which are flying full loads to SEA & LAX.


The runway has noise abatement for any jet departures to the South and arrivals from the South. There are a few other reasons not to extend 1R. Though the idea of building a parallel West of 1L is still happening.

I could see a displaced threshold extending all the way to Hillsborough Avenue to allow for heavier takeoffs. Landings would still need to be displaced unless eminent domain is used to kick out all of the businesses north of 19L.

Airside F is getting on a bit in age, even with the recent renovations. I remember seeing people smoke inside there while sitting at a bank of pay phones. I suppose AA would take up temporary residence in D while F was rebuilt.

I wonder if all of Silver Airways, and smaller operations like Avelo and Sun Country would move to a rebuilt B. Moving Silver would add space for one to two more jet bridges at A.

Do we know if the new west runway would be the same length as 1L/19R?

The A-side is getting a larger TSA queuing area that will take up some space around Gate A1.

BTVB6Flyer wrote:

Was watching Steve Markovich's latest TPA video today, and you could see the dirt being moved for the UPS facility.

Also does anyone know why UA not really use their newest hanger at TPA. Most of their jets can be seen in the PEMCO hangers, while the UA hanger is empty.

The United Hangar is filled overnights, they tow aircraft over at sundown and bring them back in the morning. They do mostly line maintenance there. The PEMCO hangars handle interior retrofits, wifi and PTV upgrades and the heavier checks on the 737 line for United.

I cannot find any information as to the status of the new TRACON and Tower at RSW. We were down there last week and it appeared there were some cars in the parking lot and the flags were flying so it may be open, if not is the date to open been set yet?

Was also good to see the progress on Concourse C construction compared to last month as I didn't remember seeing the hallway constructed along the west side of the concourse immediately after security as being there in July.

Looks like RSW will indeed be a base for Avelo soon.

Currently hiring FA's

IAHFLYR wrote:

I cannot find any information as to the status of the new TRACON and Tower at RSW. We were down there last week and it appeared there were some cars in the parking lot and the flags were flying so it may be open, if not is the date to open been set yet?

Was also good to see the progress on Concourse C construction compared to last month as I didn't remember seeing the hallway constructed along the west side of the concourse immediately after security as being there in July.

Check their monthly project report on flylcpa.com
Looks like they’re shooting for construction completion by the end of the month. Then the FAA comes in and does their thing. My guess is late September, early October for opening.

krsw757 wrote:

Looks like they’re shooting for construction completion by the end of the month. Then the FAA comes in and does their thing. My guess is late September, early October for opening.

Thanks for the link. As for the new Tower/TRACON, I was involved in opening the new Tower at IAH back in 1997 and believe me once the FAA has their hands on it.....oh dear!! IIRC there was making sure all the equipment was functioning as it should even though it was already checked prior to the FAA accepting it, then training actually in the tower though we didn't drag the TRACON along with it so that may add more time as well to train in the actual facility. My guess would be if the FAA accepts it in August it won't officially open for business till maybe right before Thanksgiving which would be an interesting time to do such a move. Sure hope it gets open before then and when the "snowbirds arrive"!

Oh believe me I know, my timeline was more less wishful thinking. We’ve been working on CPDLC at my facility since 2018. Obviously Covid was a factor, but I’d say we’re still at least 2 years away.

TPA's route page notes that recently 'cut' TPA-TUL and TPA-OKC resume in 2023. I wonder if these are seasonal?

https://tampaairport.com/south-nonstop-destinations

BTVB6Flyer wrote:

TPA's route page notes that recently 'cut' TPA-TUL and TPA-OKC resume in 2023. I wonder if these are seasonal?

https://tampaairport.com/south-nonstop-destinations

I’ll assume they are summer seasonal.

Spirit and Frontier, normally the winter sees a few new TPA routes from both along with many resumptions… not the case this year at all.

Cuts:
Frontier - BMI, GRB, MKE, RDU, DFW (after Nov), SYR, ALB, PVD, CMH, LGA and PWM.

Spirit - MHT, CAK, STL, MCI, SDF and BNA.

It’s really a shame. Frontier did add DTW and we’re still not sure if MBJ (ending next week) and CUN will be extended into the winter.

phatfarmlines wrote:

FLYKTPA wrote:

Cuts:
Frontier - BMI, GRB, MKE, RDU, DFW (after Nov), SYR, ALB, PVD, CMH, LGA and PWM.

So much for the F9 TPA base then?

I still do think F9 can take the place at TPA of what NK was offering once B6/NK are combined.

Yeah Frontier really took an axe to a bunch of routes from TPA, but also across the network. I wonder how pilot shortage is affecting some of this. Almost all of those you would think would do fine in winter.

Hopefully Avelo and Breeze capitalize on some of this. Also a shame F9 couldn't get PUJ or SDQ a go, the MBJ and CUN flights seem to be doing okay PAX number wise from the TPA monthly stats.

I’d say the Frontier TPA FA/Pilot base will be fine.

This is classic Frontier. They are extremely willing to move capacity around if they think an aircraft can make more money flying something else. They have zero attachment to any routes in the network for the most part. Of course TPA has some solid Frontier routes that’ll likely always be around such as DEN, CLE, PHL etc but besides that, they don’t mind cutting and moving capacity around where they see fit. It’s too bad, as they flew TPA - PVD, SYR etc for a few years. Hopefully they return eventually. RSW is experiencing similar cuts this winter from Spirit and Frontier.

The Dominican Republic’s version of the DOT recently reported that Frontier updated their application for TPA - SDQ/PUJ. Supposedly an early November launch. Will be interesting to see what happens.

What’s wild is over the past year, five operators have applied for TPA - Dominican Republic:

Frontier - SDQ/PUJ
AraJet - SDQ
Air Century (Charter) - SDQ
Sky High Aviation - SDQ/PUJ/POP
RedAir - SDQ

When the market has always been unserved imo. Good shot at getting at least one to do it!

BTVB6Flyer wrote:

Was watching Steve Markovich's latest TPA video today, and you could see the dirt being moved for the UPS facility.

Also does anyone know why UA not really use their newest hanger at TPA. Most of their jets can be seen in the PEMCO hangers, while the UA hanger is empty.

PEMCO does heavy maintenance and major mods on UA narrowbodies; a few 737s are there right now. UA TPAMX is a line maintenance facility, so most work is carried out during RONs, but there are times that UA jets (737/A320) are in the hangar.

IAmGaroott wrote:

phatfarmlines wrote:

IAmGaroott wrote:

Airside F is getting on a bit in age, even with the recent renovations. I remember seeing people smoke inside there while sitting at a bank of pay phones. I suppose AA would take up temporary residence in D while F was rebuilt.

As of this year, Airside F outlasted all of the other former airsides in age, passing former Airside D's record at age 34, upon the latter's closure in 2005.

IAmGaroott wrote:

I wonder if all of Silver Airways, and smaller operations like Avelo and Sun Country would move to a rebuilt B. Moving Silver would add space for one to two more jet bridges at A.

The theoretical facility could be built without jetways, and the airport could bill it as a ULCC alternative. 3M using the facility makes alot of sense, and frees up gate A1 for mainline service. Others on this site have also mentioned possibly using it as a future eVTOL/air taxi space.

IAmGaroott wrote:

Do we know if the new west runway would be the same length as 1L/19R?

The schematics have it as a similar length, though if it will be used as a landing runway, it could be shorter to save money.

It’s safe to assume we won’t see any further plans until ground has broken on D. I’m curious what TPAs priority will be moving forward: Constructing a sorting facility for A and rebuilding B, replacing F, the new runway, or their dire need for a new ATC tower.

BVTB6Flyer wrote:

The way HCAA is going all in on this eVTOL/Air Taxi stuff, I could definitely see them looking at Airside B space for that. And in theory would also be right next to tramway or potential other Bay Area mass transit. Other spot for those would be near rental car facility I guess, re; being close to future mass transit.

I too have thought of future Airside B as a Silver Airways/prop/commuter terminal. Maybe JSX or Southern Express comes back and coupled into B and with eVTOL that's a pretty sizable operation. Maybe even have FIS for say BahamasAir or something to Cuba etc.

Or have it be Silver and Avelo and Sun Country and Alaska, but counter point to that is who wants to operate restaurants etc. with such limited flights/demand etc.

The schematics have it as a similar length, though if it will be used as a landing runway, it could be shorter to save money.
There’s a lot of fascinating potential here if the VTOL/air taxi thing takes place. Especially with the transit center connection. Either way, B offers valuable real estate for flights. If I were a gambler, I’d put money on something happening there sooner or later.

To add to your trains of thought - I think that the costs of construction and upgrades/costs needed in order to construct/upgrade/expand ATC at TPA {at least much further than it is now, into a brand new form} prohibit it from being a short-term goal, and/or costly enough to almost have to partner with the Federal Government to assist with costs, operations and future secured funding/work/contracted rule. Taking a look at the most recent, and broad-reaching Bipartisan Infrastrastructure Law:

https://www.faa.gov/bil/airport-terminals "The first $1B funds more than 90 projects at airports across the country. These projects improve airport terminals in communities of all sizes. These grants can fund projects that will improve airfield safety through terminal relocation, replace aging facilities, increase capacity, encourage competition, improve energy efficiency (including LEED accreditation standards) and increase or improve access to passengers with disabilities and historically disadvantaged populations. Projects that relocate, reconstruct, repair or improve an airport-owned air traffic control tower are also eligible.

...and via the interactive map (of which "New Tower" has its own tab) shows that only two projects have been completed (being PIA and AVL). Of note was that both received approximately the same reasoning and the same funding.

https://www.faa.gov/bil/airport-terminals General Wayne A. Downing Peoria International Airport, PIA {Illinois, Peoria} - $15,000,000

...and while I can't copy/paste the reasoning provided, the link does a great job of explaining how/where funds were spent and the case of their needs. Of note, from a macro perspective:

https://www.faa.gov/bil/airport-terminals Distribution of funds: Large hub airports will receive up to 55 percent of the total funding; medium hub airports will receive up to 15 percent of the total funding; and small hub airports will receive up to 20 percent of the total funding. At least 10 percent of the total funding will go to non-hub and non-primary airports.

...and with $5 Billion USD over 5 years, TPA has 4 other years to see a potential application approved. So far, MCO (having received $50 Million), SRQ {$10 Million} and GNV ($1,677,250) have already seen some of their projects funded, though none have received approval (or, as far as I am aware, have applied for an ATC tower). So the federal funding mechanism is there, so are local success stories (of gaining the funding), and so is the need. Here's to hoping that TPA gets it all, and better!

codc10 wrote:

BTVB6Flyer wrote:

Was watching Steve Markovich's latest TPA video today, and you could see the dirt being moved for the UPS facility.

Also does anyone know why UA not really use their newest hanger at TPA. Most of their jets can be seen in the PEMCO hangers, while the UA hanger is empty.

PEMCO does heavy maintenance and major mods on UA narrowbodies; a few 737s are there right now. UA TPAMX is a line maintenance facility, so most work is carried out during RONs, but there are times that UA jets (737/A320) are in the hangar.

Ahh thanks for that, good to know

The AraJet to PIE doesn't make much sense to me, would have thought most of the demand to SDQ would be on the Tampa side.

Also F9 is launching STL, begins 11/16. Will see if they have better luck then NK on it.

Third time Frontier will be on TPA-STL in the past decade. Seems like Frontier cutting something doesn’t always mean it’s gone forever.

That’s how it went with TPA - SJU, PWM, CMH, RDU etc. All cut just to return a year or two later.

EuroWings Discover now flying an A330-900 between FRA and RSW.

I think you mean A350-900, operated by Finnair

TPG is reporting Avelo will open a new crew base at RSW this fall.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/avelo-air ... crew-base/

IAHFLYR wrote:

TPG is reporting Avelo will open a new crew base at RSW this fall.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/avelo-air ... crew-base/

What gates will Avelo be using at RSW? It's not like RSW has an abundance of unused / little used gates at RSW- especially during peak season.

Southwest weekend spring resumptions:
RSW/TPA-CLE
RSW/TPA-CVG
TPA-DTW
RSW/TPA-GRR
TPA-IAH
TPA-MEM
TPA-SYR
TPA-SLC
RSW/TPA-MSP


https://wieck-swa-production.s3-us-west ... 71dd7292e8

tjwgrr wrote:

IAHFLYR wrote:

TPG is reporting Avelo will open a new crew base at RSW this fall.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/avelo-air ... crew-base/

What gates will Avelo be using at RSW? It's not like RSW has an abundance of unused / little used gates at RSW- especially during peak season.

They bounce around terminal B wherever there’s a free one, looks like B9 is mostly used, but they’ve also been at 1 and 3 too. Going to be an interesting winter season this year for sure with a packed house.

krsw757 wrote:

They bounce around terminal B wherever there’s a free one, looks like B9 is mostly used, but they’ve also been at 1 and 3 too. Going to be an interesting winter season this year for sure with a packed house.

Oh for sure, glad I'll be in and out in early December then not till March so I will miss a good portion of it and try to avoid Spring Training as well.

IAHFLYR wrote:

krsw757 wrote:

They bounce around terminal B wherever there’s a free one, looks like B9 is mostly used, but they’ve also been at 1 and 3 too. Going to be an interesting winter season this year for sure with a packed house.

Oh for sure, glad I'll be in and out in early December then not till March so I will miss a good portion of it and try to avoid Spring Training as well.

It's a 1-plane base plus 1 or 2 flights from HVN, so no more than 4 daily flights for now. At most they'll need 1 gate...maybe a 2nd for IRROPS from HVN