I think UA put the lounge their for their purposes and for Star Alliance partners. I just wonder what partner, besides AC, was interested in serving the airport.

But I also wonder if the clubs at RDU are not too small. Seems like other airports are getting grandiose but RdU appears to be constrained due to their space limitations. I wish they had thought bigger in their plans and planned the international gates were at C1, C3, D1, and D3.. with the lounges on the airside.. but I digress…

Anywho, any idea when the hangars are gonna be built? And if any of them are for.. commercial vs private use?

ERJ170 wrote:

I think UA put the lounge their for their purposes and for Star Alliance partners. I just wonder what partner, besides AC, was interested in serving the airport.

Airlines don't just go through the expense of building clubs at outstations "just in case" an alliance partner would potentially fly to XYZ city in the future and help operate the lounge...especially in a smaller outstation like RDU. If that was the case, UA will surely be opening a club in STL to support the new LH flight starting in the coming weeks.

In reality, lounge planning doesn't work like that and the revenue that UA would get from a hypothetical long-haul flight at RDU wouldn't make opening a lounge *just* for that flight worth the monetary investment.

Look at CLT...it has the exact same number of UA flights per day as RDU, and it also has long-haul service on LH, yet *A has no lounge in CLT. In fact, J pax on CLT-MUC are given a sad voucher to use at terminal concessions to "make up" for the lack of lounge access at CLT.

Instead, UA likely saw they had a large percentage of UC members traveling through RDU that made the investment worthwhile, and/or they had a corporate partner in the region who's contract was dependent on lounge access.

airbazar wrote:

USAirALB wrote:

It may not be slot controlled but it only has 2 gates for international flights which are used by AA IIRC, when not used for an international flight. So when the gate is available may not always fit with the schedule for an international operation. I'm not saying that RDU-PEK even has a snowball chance in hell of happening, just pointing out that there are other limitations.

I think there’s 3-4 gates (maybe only two widebody gates), but regardless they could easily expand it if the need arrives. Asian flights usually operate in the morning-lunchtime window anyway so they wouldn’t interfere with the afternoon LHR/CDG flights.

That being said all this talk about RDU-Asia or RDU-SA is laughable in the current environment.

It looks like Air Canada is temporarily upgauging YUL service to a CR9 starting July 1st. I wonder if this actually has to do with higher demand or if it's shifting 50-seat capacity elsewhere.

RDUDDJI wrote:

airbazar wrote:

USAirALB wrote:

That being said all this talk about RDU-Asia or RDU-SA is laughable in the current environment.

I used to be on the PEK/Asia bandwagon happening eventually, but it will be well over a decade, if not longer before RDU ever sees service to Asia. We should be incredibly thankful for what services we have/are getting transitioning out of Covid in addition to being realistic with what's to come.

While I think PAX service to Asia, South America, etc. is not going to happen for at least a decade, if then...

However, I think perhaps a cargo flight to Asia might be possible if the new Vietnamese car company VinFast gets rooted in NC and has some modicum of success. Maybe.

According to today's paper, they are now going to make the new 5L/23R 10,639ft. It was requested by AS for fully loaded pax/cargo 739 RDU-SEA flights. I found that interesting. I knew that stage length was a stretch, but didn't realize it was that marginal.

Fair use excerpt:

Alaska Airlines, which operates daily flights between RDU and Seattle, sought a longer runway to allow it to carry more passengers, cargo and fuel to the West Coast on its fleet of Boeing 737-900s. The FAA cited information provided by the airline in authorizing the extra 639 feet, according to RDU.

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local ... 01877.html

RDUDDJI wrote:

According to today's paper, they are now going to make the new 5L/23R 10,639ft. It was requested by AS for fully loaded pax/cargo 739 RDU-SEA flights. I found that interesting. I knew that stage length was a stretch, but didn't realize it was that marginal.

Fair use excerpt:

Alaska Airlines, which operates daily flights between RDU and Seattle, sought a longer runway to allow it to carry more passengers, cargo and fuel to the West Coast on its fleet of Boeing 737-900s. The FAA cited information provided by the airline in authorizing the extra 639 feet, according to RDU.

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local ... 01877.html

What equipment does DL use on the route?

AVLAirlineFreq wrote:

RDUDDJI wrote:

According to today's paper, they are now going to make the new 5L/23R 10,639ft. It was requested by AS for fully loaded pax/cargo 739 RDU-SEA flights. I found that interesting. I knew that stage length was a stretch, but didn't realize it was that marginal.

Fair use excerpt:

Alaska Airlines, which operates daily flights between RDU and Seattle, sought a longer runway to allow it to carry more passengers, cargo and fuel to the West Coast on its fleet of Boeing 737-900s. The FAA cited information provided by the airline in authorizing the extra 639 feet, according to RDU.

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local ... 01877.html

What equipment does DL use on the route?

Typically a 738 in the summer, 319 in the winter.

The contract for the runway was already awarded. I wonder if this means they will get started this summer?

https://www.aviationpros.com/aoa/runway ... nt-program

Parking up to $25 per day.

https://www.cbs17.com/news/local-news/w ... -25-a-day/

jbwhite99 wrote:

Parking up to $25 per day.

https://www.cbs17.com/news/local-news/w ... -25-a-day/

Those costs are a bit crazy. Uber/Family ride is my go to for anything over 3-4 days. However with the demand being seen at the airport it may be a shrewd move to make some money off of weekend/business travelers.

casinterest wrote:

jbwhite99 wrote:

Parking up to $25 per day.

https://www.cbs17.com/news/local-news/w ... -25-a-day/

Those costs are a bit crazy. Uber/Family ride is my go to for anything over 3-4 days. However with the demand being seen at the airport it may be a shrewd move to make some money off of weekend/business travelers.

For the outbound passenger mix at RDU I think it's about right. BNA, which is pretty close to a peer market on the outbound side, is $26 for the terminal garages.

Some good restarts and new flights coming up in the next few days. Traffic numbers are looking great. Both Montreal and alone returns within the next 2 weeks.

Would be nice if DL moved up their CDG flight but I guess AA will grab as much of that traffic as they can through LHR. Anyway, seeing a robust lineup of destinations will be nice. 5 international routes running at once is great for RDU.
Mbutnyeah, parking at $25/day is kinda steep. And considering they are not interested in a rail linkup… the Metro at DCA is just way too convenient..

Bentheswim11 wrote:

jbwhite99 wrote:

https://wraltechwire.com/2022/02/17/rdu-says-traffic-up-112-in-january/

RDU traffic in January 2022 was up 112% vs traffic in January 2021.

And in regards to the runway, I thought they had asked for 11,500 and they were offered 10,000 feet.

They did. Due to Covid and the unlikely chances either airport would need to accommodate a flight to Asia within the next decade, they chose to limit it to 10,000 feet but still allow for the runways to be extended when needed.

Flights to Asia never stood a chance, even before COVID. RDU's China push was never going to materialize. Chinese service to large North American hub markets has historically struggled, and the Chinese market lacks the type of network connectivity that U.S. hubs have. To think that a carrier would opt for a medium hub market with limited network connectivity for Asian service is preposterous. I think some in the community looked around their own neighborhoods in Cary, saw a decent population of Asian residents and corporate interests and thought "clearly we can support a flight to China!". China service was going to be dependent upon some supporting leisure grab from the Chinese point of origin. Other than tours of Duke, there's not much here to appeal to Chinese tourists. Unless those Chinese E2B workers flew back to China every few weeks, there just wasn't going to be enough traffic to support such service.

To my above point, RDU's traffic to Chinese markets is also spread among several cities. There isn't a single hub city such as Beijing that alone accounts for enough O&D traffic to support service. As I mentioned, Chinese carriers don't have the type of system that can absorb and spread pax from a hub like in the U.S., and Chinese travelers are accustomed to buying legs as separate itineraries. Chinese travelers are also price sensitive, and will assume a tremendous amount of staging inconvenience for a lower fare.

Do yourself a favor and abandon all hope for RDU non-stop to Asia.

Avelo kicked off it's first flights from RDU to HVN today

https://www.cbs17.com/news/new-airline- ... ut-of-rdu/

In a joint statement, Avelo Chairman and CEO Andrew Levy said, “RDU — it’s time to say hello to Avelo. We are excited to start our nonstop service from RDU to Connecticut. With our low fares and HVN’s unmatched convenience, Avelo makes getting to the Connecticut region easier and more affordable than ever. We know not only is this a great gateway to the New York area but offers easy travel between two great educational regions of the country.”

Avelo will fly its new route five days a week on a 147-seat Boeing Next-Generation 737-700 aircraft and expand to six days a week in mid-June.

I have to wonder how long Avelo will last, but it is good to see a new route out there.

ERJ170 wrote:

Some good restarts and new flights coming up in the next few days. Traffic numbers are looking great. Both Montreal and alone returns within the next 2 weeks.

Would be nice if DL moved up their CDG flight but I guess AA will grab as much of that traffic as they can through LHR. Anyway, seeing a robust lineup of destinations will be nice. 5 international routes running at once is great for RDU.
Mbutnyeah, parking at $25/day is kinda steep. And considering they are not interested in a rail linkup… the Metro at DCA is just way too convenient..

Great to see RDU getting its long haul intercontinental flights back with some notable additions as well.

Don't think AA is taking much RDU traffic through LHR to get to CDG. There are about 8 or 9 flights a day between LHR and CDG across AF and BA, which isn't much, and AA will probably just send the CDG bound traffic via PHL, JFK or other hub to CDG on its own metal. I wonder how the AA flight will do past the summer, when the healthy amount of leisure traffic subsides and unclear whether the corporate traffic that the AA service between RDU and LHR was built around and caters to, will be back meaningfully. The route does carry a lot of cargo too, so there is that.

AA operated a RDUCLT flight today (AA2688) with a 777-200. That would’ve been fun!

Looks like it came in to RDU from CLT on another yesterday as AA1894. That’s a heckuva an up gauge from an A321! I’d be interested to know the story behind it.

RDUDDJI wrote:

AA operated a RDUCLT flight today (AA2688) with a 777-200. That would’ve been fun!

Looks like it came in to RDU from CLT on another yesterday as AA1894. That’s a heckuva an up gauge from an A321! I’d be interested to know the story behind it.

Ground handlers being retrained before AA service to London resumes next week.

Rafale9312 wrote:

RDUDDJI wrote:

AA operated a RDUCLT flight today (AA2688) with a 777-200. That would’ve been fun!

Looks like it came in to RDU from CLT on another yesterday as AA1894. That’s a heckuva an up gauge from an A321! I’d be interested to know the story behind it.

Ground handlers being retrained before AA service to London resumes next week.

Makes sense, I know both RDU and CLT have seen a ton of diversions in the last day and a half (due to TS). Thought it might be related to that, although I'd imagine most peeps would drive or Amtrak it between the two cites (~3 hrs).

So now that Avelo and Icelandair has joined the RDU family, who would be next? Would love to see a small turboprop airline start a hub let here.. running flights to VA, SC, TN, KY, GA, intraNC flights..but other thoughts?

Looks like RDU-HOU is about to be resumed by Southwest starting 9/11, which means the entire full-time network pre-COVID has been restored by them.

DL needs a little bit more filling out to fully restore their focus city here, though. Resuming daily nonstops to CVG/CMH/IND/BWI/CLE/BDL are the remaining spots to fill back in post-COVID. RDU-AMS, in the event of DL getting an A321XLR, would also be a nice addition considering that there are a lot of connecting opportunities available on KLM that you can't get from AF.

hockyluv21 wrote:

Looks like RDU-HOU is about to be resumed by Southwest starting 9/11, which means the entire full-time network pre-COVID has been restored by them.

WN had operated RDU-MCI/MSY nonstop service in 2019, but hasn't yet re-added RDU-MCI/MSY nonstop service back to its flight schedules.

RDU-HOU is also scheduled to return on a Sunday-only basis starting on 9/11/2022 through 10/23/2022, even though WN had operated RDU-HOU nonstop service on a daily basis prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

On other commentary here, RDU-Asia is, shall we say, unrealistic for this decade, and due to the shorter distance and existing infrastructure, any potential Asian flight would probably be to one of NRT/HND/ICN and then timed for Chinese connections. Raleigh IS a fast-growing area with a lot of Asian ties, especially to China, but China's obviously a bit of a mess right now and it'll take a while for them to recover. Considering the shorter distance involved, if the Asian economy comes back, AUS-NRT/HND/ICN will probably come true before RDU-NRT/HND/ICN in the grand scheme of things. The one international route that I could see in the not-too-distant future, though, is RDU-MEX or RDU-GDL.

hockyluv21 wrote:

On other commentary here, RDU-Asia is, shall we say, unrealistic for this decade, and due to the shorter distance and existing infrastructure, any potential Asian flight would probably be to one of NRT/HND/ICN and then timed for Chinese connections. Raleigh IS a fast-growing area with a lot of Asian ties, especially to China, but China's obviously a bit of a mess right now and it'll take a while for them to recover. Considering the shorter distance involved, if the Asian economy comes back, AUS-NRT/HND/ICN will probably come true before RDU-NRT/HND/ICN in the grand scheme of things. The one international route that I could see in the not-too-distant future, though, is RDU-MEX or RDU-GDL.

I will say this. RDU-Asia already has a subsidy/guarantee in place for the flight. And discussions were already in the works for the service. I won’t say it will start immediately, but the framework is already set up.

And although AUS is getting loads of love, it still needs to see how sustainable it is. I’m not trying to rain on anyones parade, but I would say AUS might be overserved at the moment.

hockyluv21 wrote:

DL needs a little bit more filling out to fully restore their focus city here, though. Resuming daily nonstops to CVG/CMH/IND/BWI/CLE/BDL are the remaining spots to fill back in post-COVID.

Given the current mess at DL and at the regionals, I think it's going to be a while.

ERJ170 wrote:

hockyluv21 wrote:

On other commentary here, RDU-Asia is, shall we say, unrealistic for this decade, and due to the shorter distance and existing infrastructure, any potential Asian flight would probably be to one of NRT/HND/ICN and then timed for Chinese connections. Raleigh IS a fast-growing area with a lot of Asian ties, especially to China, but China's obviously a bit of a mess right now and it'll take a while for them to recover. Considering the shorter distance involved, if the Asian economy comes back, AUS-NRT/HND/ICN will probably come true before RDU-NRT/HND/ICN in the grand scheme of things. The one international route that I could see in the not-too-distant future, though, is RDU-MEX or RDU-GDL.

I will say this. RDU-Asia already has a subsidy/guarantee in place for the flight. And discussions were already in the works for the service. I won’t say it will start immediately, but the framework is already set up.

And although AUS is getting loads of love, it still needs to see how sustainable it is. I’m not trying to rain on anyones parade, but I would say AUS might be overserved at the moment.

Well AUS is definitely not overserved… Its the opposite of that. RDU is growing but not like AUS. I don’t expect an Asia flight for the next 15-20 years. RDU doesn’t need an Asia flight just like how IND doesn’t need the NRT flight. Neither cities will get them.

Well, the business community have pulled together the funds for an Asia flight guarantee. That’s all I know. Whether it needs one or not, if an airline wants the guarantee or not is the ultimate reality.

I have no crystal ball to say when or if, but the option is there. Or it was there as recent as 2020

I was in RDU last weekend and saw tons of regional jets and lots of guppies. Can't say I saw any WB's. Means airport and city have a while to go.

SLCaviation wrote:

ERJ170 wrote:

hockyluv21 wrote:

On other commentary here, RDU-Asia is, shall we say, unrealistic for this decade, and due to the shorter distance and existing infrastructure, any potential Asian flight would probably be to one of NRT/HND/ICN and then timed for Chinese connections. Raleigh IS a fast-growing area with a lot of Asian ties, especially to China, but China's obviously a bit of a mess right now and it'll take a while for them to recover. Considering the shorter distance involved, if the Asian economy comes back, AUS-NRT/HND/ICN will probably come true before RDU-NRT/HND/ICN in the grand scheme of things. The one international route that I could see in the not-too-distant future, though, is RDU-MEX or RDU-GDL.

I will say this. RDU-Asia already has a subsidy/guarantee in place for the flight. And discussions were already in the works for the service. I won’t say it will start immediately, but the framework is already set up.

And although AUS is getting loads of love, it still needs to see how sustainable it is. I’m not trying to rain on anyones parade, but I would say AUS might be overserved at the moment.

Well AUS is definitely not overserved… Its the opposite of that. RDU is growing but not like AUS. I don’t expect an Asia flight for the next 15-20 years. RDU doesn’t need an Asia flight just like how IND doesn’t need the NRT flight. Neither cities will get them.

ERJ170 wrote:

Well, the business community have pulled together the funds for an Asia flight guarantee. That’s all I know. Whether it needs one or not, if an airline wants the guarantee or not is the ultimate reality.

I have no crystal ball to say when or if, but the option is there. Or it was there as recent as 2020

Let's put aside the business case for RDU-Asia for a second:

RDU has been very vocal that they specifically want a RDU-China flight. Problem is, no airline can add US-China flights, regardless of whether it is ORD-China or RDU-China. There are a limited number of slots for US-China, and all have been allocated.
https://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/ne ... china.html

Even if new ones were to miraculously appear, and an airline was convinced to try out a RDU-China route, the DOT would still need to permit it.

The DOT wouldn't permit it and would require that the slot be used on another route, given RDU-China isn't going to be the best use of a China slot.

Regardless, new US-Asia routes are a non-starter at this point, doesn't matter if its AUS, SLC, DEN, or wherever, US-Asia traffic is still down 90%+. (China is down 98%)

SLCaviation wrote:

Well AUS is definitely not overserved… Its the opposite of that.

No, AUS is definitely over served.

The last month of load factor data showed AUS had the 2nd lowest Load factor out of any station in G4's system, and ranked in the bottom 3rd percentile for B6, NK, UA, DL, and AA in terms of Load Factor.

Yields are horrible at the moment through AUS relative to the system.

ERJ170 wrote:

RDU-Asia already has a subsidy/guarantee in place for the flight. And discussions were already in the works for the service. I won’t say it will start immediately, but the framework is already set up.

And although AUS is getting loads of love, it still needs to see how sustainable it is. I’m not trying to rain on anyones parade, but I would say AUS might be overserved at the moment.

RDU-Asia has been discussed on this forum almost as much as the discussion about whether Boeing could restart 757 production. Neither are happening.

While I don't disagree that AUS is possibly over served (even if they aren't over served they do have a yield issue at present), I find it a tad bit amusing that you would call AUS over served while also at the same time advocating/speculating for far-fetched RDU routes that would quickly make RDU over served (EYW, AS RDU-SAN/PDX, UA/*A long-haul flights, small turboprop-type airline starting up service within the Carolinas and the Southeast, etc.).

Murdoughnut said it best regarding the prospects of RDU-Asia service:

Murdoughnut wrote:

Flights to Asia never stood a chance, even before COVID. RDU's China push was never going to materialize. Chinese service to large North American hub markets has historically struggled, and the Chinese market lacks the type of network connectivity that U.S. hubs have. To think that a carrier would opt for a medium hub market with limited network connectivity for Asian service is preposterous. I think some in the community looked around their own neighborhoods in Cary, saw a decent population of Asian residents and corporate interests and thought "clearly we can support a flight to China!". China service was going to be dependent upon some supporting leisure grab from the Chinese point of origin. Other than tours of Duke, there's not much here to appeal to Chinese tourists. Unless those Chinese E2B workers flew back to China every few weeks, there just wasn't going to be enough traffic to support such service.

To my above point, RDU's traffic to Chinese markets is also spread among several cities. There isn't a single hub city such as Beijing that alone accounts for enough O&D traffic to support service. As I mentioned, Chinese carriers don't have the type of system that can absorb and spread pax from a hub like in the U.S., and Chinese travelers are accustomed to buying legs as separate itineraries. Chinese travelers are also price sensitive, and will assume a tremendous amount of staging inconvenience for a lower fare.

Do yourself a favor and abandon all hope for RDU non-stop to Asia.

USAirALB wrote:

ERJ170 wrote:

Murdoughnut said it best regarding the prospects of RDU-Asia service:

Murdoughnut wrote:

Flights to Asia never stood a chance, even before COVID. RDU's China push was never going to materialize. Chinese service to large North American hub markets has historically struggled, and the Chinese market lacks the type of network connectivity that U.S. hubs have. To think that a carrier would opt for a medium hub market with limited network connectivity for Asian service is preposterous. I think some in the community looked around their own neighborhoods in Cary, saw a decent population of Asian residents and corporate interests and thought "clearly we can support a flight to China!". China service was going to be dependent upon some supporting leisure grab from the Chinese point of origin. Other than tours of Duke, there's not much here to appeal to Chinese tourists. Unless those Chinese E2B workers flew back to China every few weeks, there just wasn't going to be enough traffic to support such service.

To my above point, RDU's traffic to Chinese markets is also spread among several cities. There isn't a single hub city such as Beijing that alone accounts for enough O&D traffic to support service. As I mentioned, Chinese carriers don't have the type of system that can absorb and spread pax from a hub like in the U.S., and Chinese travelers are accustomed to buying legs as separate itineraries. Chinese travelers are also price sensitive, and will assume a tremendous amount of staging inconvenience for a lower fare.

Do yourself a favor and abandon all hope for RDU non-stop to Asia.

There's a reason why RDU had been pursuing RDU-China, though, and that's because Lenovo really wants it as part of their US headquarters over here. For this reason, the traffic that we're talking about here may actually be of the high-yield, will-pay-for-convenience variety, similar to Glaxo and RDU-LHR, and not the price-sensitive VFR types that Murdoughnut was talking about. I agree, though, that it's a pipe dream among groups here at the moment that likely isn't realistic for another 15-20 years. And again, NRT or ICN makes way more sense than Beijing in terms of the current US-Asia blueprint, but certainly not before MIA, PHL, or AUS get their Asian services!

RDU just got back LON service, still awaiting the return of CDG service, and REK service is seasonal and weekly… so no. Asia service is NOT in the immediate future.

But what I’m saying is, if I was an airline and I was choosing between a flight O&D vs a flight with a guarantee, I would go for the guarantee and see how it pans out during that guarantee timeframe.

But I do NOT own an airline and I do not work in the airline industry so I am far from the expert. But I also don’t see it as a pipe dream that will not come true, as others say. But that’s just me.
And that’s all I got to say about that:

But onward to others things since this horse has been beat thoroughly… is the terminal expansion of 1 concurrent or consecutive of the terminal 2 activities?

Ohhhh.. one more question. The RDU/LHR flight restarted today. There was a dedicated RDU FA crew base. Is it still there are they now CLT (or other hub) based?

Cannot believe daily PHX-RDU is gone.

ERJ170 wrote:

Ohhhh.. one more question. The RDU/LHR flight restarted today. There was a dedicated RDU FA crew base. Is it still there are they now CLT (or other hub) based?

The base closed in 2020, with the base being transitioned into a CLT-satellite base. Former RDU-based crews can still start/end their trips in RDU, but the management/back of house base support no longer exists in RDU and is operated out of CLT.

remymartin11 wrote:

Cannot believe daily PHX-RDU is gone.

It was mostly low-yielding, and overflew CLT/ORD/DFW.

USAirALB wrote:

ERJ170 wrote:

Ohhhh.. one more question. The RDU/LHR flight restarted today. There was a dedicated RDU FA crew base. Is it still there are they now CLT (or other hub) based?

The base closed in 2020, with the base being transitioned into a CLT-satellite base. Former RDU-based crews can still start/end their trips in RDU, but the management/back of house base support no longer exists in RDU and is operated out of CLT.

remymartin11 wrote:

Cannot believe daily PHX-RDU is gone.

It was mostly low-yielding, and overflew CLT/ORD/DFW.

It restarts in September

Dupe

Thing is, RDU-PHX is mostly O&D leisure with some connections, and Phoenix is ridiculously, ridiculously hot in the summer. Not a shock that there's a seasonal pulldown until the real tourism season.

SLCaviation wrote:

ERJ170 wrote:

hockyluv21 wrote:

On other commentary here, RDU-Asia is, shall we say, unrealistic for this decade, and due to the shorter distance and existing infrastructure, any potential Asian flight would probably be to one of NRT/HND/ICN and then timed for Chinese connections. Raleigh IS a fast-growing area with a lot of Asian ties, especially to China, but China's obviously a bit of a mess right now and it'll take a while for them to recover. Considering the shorter distance involved, if the Asian economy comes back, AUS-NRT/HND/ICN will probably come true before RDU-NRT/HND/ICN in the grand scheme of things. The one international route that I could see in the not-too-distant future, though, is RDU-MEX or RDU-GDL.

I will say this. RDU-Asia already has a subsidy/guarantee in place for the flight. And discussions were already in the works for the service. I won’t say it will start immediately, but the framework is already set up.

And although AUS is getting loads of love, it still needs to see how sustainable it is. I’m not trying to rain on anyones parade, but I would say AUS might be overserved at the moment.

Well AUS is definitely not overserved… Its the opposite of that. RDU is growing but not like AUS. I don’t expect an Asia flight for the next 15-20 years. RDU doesn’t need an Asia flight just like how IND doesn’t need the NRT flight. Neither cities will get them.

Oh no our terminal can't handle the amount of pax we get at AUS. It's definitely not overserved, we are just maxed out.

Murdoughnut wrote:

Bentheswim11 wrote:

jbwhite99 wrote:

https://wraltechwire.com/2022/02/17/rdu-says-traffic-up-112-in-january/

RDU traffic in January 2022 was up 112% vs traffic in January 2021.

And in regards to the runway, I thought they had asked for 11,500 and they were offered 10,000 feet.

They did. Due to Covid and the unlikely chances either airport would need to accommodate a flight to Asia within the next decade, they chose to limit it to 10,000 feet but still allow for the runways to be extended when needed.

Flights to Asia never stood a chance, even before COVID. RDU's China push was never going to materialize. Chinese service to large North American hub markets has historically struggled, and the Chinese market lacks the type of network connectivity that U.S. hubs have. To think that a carrier would opt for a medium hub market with limited network connectivity for Asian service is preposterous. I think some in the community looked around their own neighborhoods in Cary, saw a decent population of Asian residents and corporate interests and thought "clearly we can support a flight to China!". China service was going to be dependent upon some supporting leisure grab from the Chinese point of origin. Other than tours of Duke, there's not much here to appeal to Chinese tourists. Unless those Chinese E2B workers flew back to China every few weeks, there just wasn't going to be enough traffic to support such service.

To my above point, RDU's traffic to Chinese markets is also spread among several cities. There isn't a single hub city such as Beijing that alone accounts for enough O&D traffic to support service. As I mentioned, Chinese carriers don't have the type of system that can absorb and spread pax from a hub like in the U.S., and Chinese travelers are accustomed to buying legs as separate itineraries. Chinese travelers are also price sensitive, and will assume a tremendous amount of staging inconvenience for a lower fare.

Do yourself a favor and abandon all hope for RDU non-stop to Asia.

This couldn’t be further from the truth though. The truth is, more than 2,500 people move from China to Raleigh each year, roughly the same from India. RDU’s traffic to China in 2018 was roughly 53,000 O&D per year, which was 18th top US market to China at the time with the 10th largest growth rate in demand at 10.2% over 5 years. This is even ahead of Minneapolis, which has 2 flights to Asia. RDU has the demand, and the business demand for it has grown a lot more since with expansions and addition of hubs for several large companies with major presence in Asia. How many cities have a big base in operations for Lenovo, Apple, Google, IBM, VinFast, FujiFilm… nobody else.

SLCaviation wrote:

ERJ170 wrote:

hockyluv21 wrote:

On other commentary here, RDU-Asia is, shall we say, unrealistic for this decade, and due to the shorter distance and existing infrastructure, any potential Asian flight would probably be to one of NRT/HND/ICN and then timed for Chinese connections. Raleigh IS a fast-growing area with a lot of Asian ties, especially to China, but China's obviously a bit of a mess right now and it'll take a while for them to recover. Considering the shorter distance involved, if the Asian economy comes back, AUS-NRT/HND/ICN will probably come true before RDU-NRT/HND/ICN in the grand scheme of things. The one international route that I could see in the not-too-distant future, though, is RDU-MEX or RDU-GDL.

I wouldn’t say RDU “doesn’t need” this flight. The traffic and cargo are actually pretty high, roughly 360,000 in 2014. In 2018, RDU-China was 53,000 PAX per year, 18th best in the US and 10.2% growth rate over 5 years. Portland now has service to Tokyo and Seoul, in addition to Iceland, Amsterdam, London and Frankfurt, while carrying only 4M more people total in 2019. This may seem a lot, but just diving the pax in 2019 carried total by each flight (definitely not accurate) would put 3.2M passengers on each flight. Doing this at RDU (I’ll use 2019 numbers but include KEF), that’s nearly 4.7M passengers on each flight. Again, not even remotely accurate but the distribution is far different, while Portland has virtually no business links to Asia, at least nothing equivalent to the RDU region.

WN732 wrote:

SLCaviation wrote:

ERJ170 wrote:

I will say this. RDU-Asia already has a subsidy/guarantee in place for the flight. And discussions were already in the works for the service. I won’t say it will start immediately, but the framework is already set up.

And although AUS is getting loads of love, it still needs to see how sustainable it is. I’m not trying to rain on anyones parade, but I would say AUS might be overserved at the moment.

Well AUS is definitely not overserved… Its the opposite of that. RDU is growing but not like AUS. I don’t expect an Asia flight for the next 15-20 years. RDU doesn’t need an Asia flight just like how IND doesn’t need the NRT flight. Neither cities will get them.

Oh no our terminal can't handle the amount of pax we get at AUS. It's definitely not overserved, we are just maxed out.

I pretty much calculated it, and RDU was roughly 400,000 passengers short of the physical capacity. With gates A1-A4 opening up, this should allow roughly 16M total passengers/year.

Bentheswim11 wrote:

SLCaviation wrote:

ERJ170 wrote:

I wouldn’t say RDU “doesn’t need” this flight. The traffic and cargo are actually pretty high, roughly 360,000 in 2014. In 2018, RDU-China was 53,000 PAX per year, 18th best in the US and 10.2% growth rate over 5 years. Portland now has service to Tokyo and Seoul, in addition to Iceland, Amsterdam, London and Frankfurt, while carrying only 4M more people total in 2019. This may seem a lot, but just diving the pax in 2019 carried total by each flight (definitely not accurate) would put 3.2M passengers on each flight. Doing this at RDU (I’ll use 2019 numbers but include KEF), that’s nearly 4.7M passengers on each flight. Again, not even remotely accurate but the distribution is far different, while Portland has virtually no business links to Asia, at least nothing equivalent to the RDU region.

The Portland area has extensive corporate links to Asia--at a minimum as strong as the RDU region.

Bentheswim11 wrote:

Murdoughnut wrote:

Bentheswim11 wrote:

They did. Due to Covid and the unlikely chances either airport would need to accommodate a flight to Asia within the next decade, they chose to limit it to 10,000 feet but still allow for the runways to be extended when needed.

Flights to Asia never stood a chance, even before COVID. RDU's China push was never going to materialize. Chinese service to large North American hub markets has historically struggled, and the Chinese market lacks the type of network connectivity that U.S. hubs have. To think that a carrier would opt for a medium hub market with limited network connectivity for Asian service is preposterous. I think some in the community looked around their own neighborhoods in Cary, saw a decent population of Asian residents and corporate interests and thought "clearly we can support a flight to China!". China service was going to be dependent upon some supporting leisure grab from the Chinese point of origin. Other than tours of Duke, there's not much here to appeal to Chinese tourists. Unless those Chinese E2B workers flew back to China every few weeks, there just wasn't going to be enough traffic to support such service.

To my above point, RDU's traffic to Chinese markets is also spread among several cities. There isn't a single hub city such as Beijing that alone accounts for enough O&D traffic to support service. As I mentioned, Chinese carriers don't have the type of system that can absorb and spread pax from a hub like in the U.S., and Chinese travelers are accustomed to buying legs as separate itineraries. Chinese travelers are also price sensitive, and will assume a tremendous amount of staging inconvenience for a lower fare.

Do yourself a favor and abandon all hope for RDU non-stop to Asia.

This couldn’t be further from the truth though. The truth is, more than 2,500 people move from China to Raleigh each year, roughly the same from India. RDU’s traffic to China in 2018 was roughly 53,000 O&D per year, which was 18th top US market to China at the time with the 10th largest growth rate in demand at 10.2% over 5 years. This is even ahead of Minneapolis, which has 2 flights to Asia. RDU has the demand, and the business demand for it has grown a lot more since with expansions and addition of hubs for several large companies with major presence in Asia. How many cities have a big base in operations for Lenovo, Apple, Google, IBM, VinFast, FujiFilm… nobody else.

It is pretty close to the truth.

Comparing the Triangle to Minneapolis for the purposes of Asia service is like comparing Tulsa to Los Angeles. The Twin Cities has a metro population that is nearly twice the size of the Triangle, not to mention that MSP is an actual, connecting hub for an US network carrier...RDU is not. The MSP-ICN flight is essentially a hub-to-hub flight thanks to DL's JV ATI with KE. The Twin Cities has a significantly larger Asian population than the Triangle, and the Twin Cities has the second largest concentration of Overseas Chinese university students in the country.

Unsure what Apple, Google, and IBM having ops in the Triangle have to do with RDU-China nonstop flight. Google/Alphabet has a token presence in China, and at last count I think they had less than 1000 employees in the country itself. IBM has centers all over the world, and not all of them have flights to China.

By your logic, my hometown of Albany is home to an IBM Global Research Center (that serves as the companies co-HQ of research along with a site in Westchester County), is the HQ for GlobalFoundries and is home to several Fabs within a 50 miles radius of ALB, the HQ for Curia (co-HQ with Raleigh, but ALB is home to the company's R&D and testing), in addition to hosting RPI and SUNY Poly. I guess ALB should start shopping around for a nonstop flight to Asia, too?

Even if RDU were a major connecting hub for a US network carrier, it's highly unlikely it would even have nonstop flights to China then, thanks to the reasons Murdoughnut laid out.

RDU should try to get CDG back to daily service before they even think about China. Much like the Boom Overture, RDU-China flights will likely never fly.

AVLAirlineFreq wrote:

Bentheswim11 wrote:

SLCaviation wrote:

I wouldn’t say RDU “doesn’t need” this flight. The traffic and cargo are actually pretty high, roughly 360,000 in 2014. In 2018, RDU-China was 53,000 PAX per year, 18th best in the US and 10.2% growth rate over 5 years. Portland now has service to Tokyo and Seoul, in addition to Iceland, Amsterdam, London and Frankfurt, while carrying only 4M more people total in 2019. This may seem a lot, but just diving the pax in 2019 carried total by each flight (definitely not accurate) would put 3.2M passengers on each flight. Doing this at RDU (I’ll use 2019 numbers but include KEF), that’s nearly 4.7M passengers on each flight. Again, not even remotely accurate but the distribution is far different, while Portland has virtually no business links to Asia, at least nothing equivalent to the RDU region.

The Portland area has extensive corporate links to Asia--at a minimum as strong as the RDU region.

If not stronger.

Bentheswim11 wrote:

SLCaviation wrote:

ERJ170 wrote:

I wouldn’t say RDU “doesn’t need” this flight. The traffic and cargo are actually pretty high, roughly 360,000 in 2014. In 2018, RDU-China was 53,000 PAX per year, 18th best in the US and 10.2% growth rate over 5 years. Portland now has service to Tokyo and Seoul, in addition to Iceland, Amsterdam, London and Frankfurt, while carrying only 4M more people total in 2019. This may seem a lot, but just diving the pax in 2019 carried total by each flight (definitely not accurate) would put 3.2M passengers on each flight. Doing this at RDU (I’ll use 2019 numbers but include KEF), that’s nearly 4.7M passengers on each flight. Again, not even remotely accurate but the distribution is far different, while Portland has virtually no business links to Asia, at least nothing equivalent to the RDU region.

PDX and RDU aren't really comparable.

1) PDX has had Asia service beginning all the way back in the 1980s, and PDX-Japan is over 170 PDEW by itself.
2) PDX has a much larger Asian-American population than RDU.
3) PDX-Asia doesn't overfly basically any hubs, RDU-Asia overflies basically every US hub
4) PDX has higher China O&D than RDU, along with higher South Korean and Japanese O&D.

Bentheswim11 wrote:

This couldn’t be further from the truth though. The truth is, more than 2,500 people move from China to Raleigh each year, roughly the same from India. RDU’s traffic to China in 2018 was roughly 53,000 O&D per year, which was 18th top US market to China at the time with the 10th largest growth rate in demand at 10.2% over 5 years. This is even ahead of Minneapolis, which has 2 flights to Asia. RDU has the demand, and the business demand for it has grown a lot more since with expansions and addition of hubs for several large companies with major presence in Asia. How many cities have a big base in operations for Lenovo, Apple, Google, IBM, VinFast, FujiFilm… nobody else.

How many people are these companies sending to Asia per day from RDU though?

Certainly nothing to the level that Nike does, given they are HQ'd near PDX and have so most of their supply chain in Asia.

Regardless, there are not slots for RDU-China or RDU-Japan available, and its unlikely any will materialize in the near future. So none of this matters anyway.

hockyluv21 wrote:

Looks like RDU-HOU is about to be resumed by Southwest starting 9/11, which means the entire full-time network pre-COVID has been restored by them.

DL needs a little bit more filling out to fully restore their focus city here, though. Resuming daily nonstops to CVG/CMH/IND/BWI/CLE/BDL are the remaining spots to fill back in post-COVID. RDU-AMS, in the event of DL getting an A321XLR, would also be a nice addition considering that there are a lot of connecting opportunities available on KLM that you can't get from AF.

Is AMS too far for the A321XR? 4.7K vs. 5.1K + reserves?

Midwestindy wrote:

PDX and RDU aren't really comparable.

1) PDX has had Asia service beginning all the way back in the 1980s, and PDX-Japan is over 170 PDEW by itself.
2) PDX has a much larger Asian-American population than RDU.
3) PDX-Asia doesn't overfly basically any hubs, RDU-Asia overflies basically every US hub
4) PDX has higher China O&D than RDU, along with higher South Korean and Japanese O&D.

Regardless, there are not slots for RDU-China or RDU-Japan available, and its unlikely any will materialize in the near future. So none of this matters anyway.

The comparable for RDU-Asia is more RDU-LHR in the early days of the flight, when it was The Glaxo Shuttle, or DTW-NGO, aka. The Toyota Shuttle, rather than one particular city like PDX or AUS. Most of the daily Chinese demand to RDU is actually coming from one company: Lenovo. They're the company that's been advocating for a more convenient link to their USHQ in Morrisville. RDU-NRT or RDU-PEK would essentially act as "The Lenovo Shuttle" as the city's Asian population continues to grow at the quick pace that it is.

Is it possible to walk from the terminal building to the observation park?

Regards

From Cape Town

SimpleMan wrote:

Is AMS too far for the A321XR? 4.7K vs. 5.1K + reserves?

No, I don't think so. RDU-CDG used to be a 757 in the early days of the flight, and the XLR has longer range than that aircraft did.

snecma wrote:

Is it possible to walk from the terminal building to the observation park?

Regards

From Cape Town

No, it's not. You have to take a short drive to the General Aviation area in order to get to the deck.