RDU is currently the right size in terms of carriers, flights and destinations. It has a few international flights, but needs no more. Asia and South America will not happen. CLT, ATL, IAD are too close. Just not needed.

Bentheswim11 wrote:

USAirALB wrote:

As I posted in the RDU Aviation thread the other day, the reality is that the Triangle region is simply a tertiary region that only has a little over two million people. It's great that the region is growing. The level of development occurring throughout the Triangle is fantastic for the region, and the state of North Carolina. Development, however, does not change the fact that the Triangle simply does not have the demand necessary to warrant international long-haul traffic.

By your metric, Nashville warrants a nonstop flight to TYO because of Nissan, Charlotte warrants a nonstop flight to ARN because of Electrolux, etc. Just because companies are opening up offices in the region (as was mentioned above with Apple, Fujifilm, etc.) does not automatically point to the demand and/or need for a long-haul flight. Such demand/need only occurs from decades upon decades of economically-induced linkages between two geographic regions.

RDU-South America is laughable. The Baltimore-Washington CSA (third largest CSA in the country, third highest CSA by real GDP, wealthiest) barely supports two daily flights to South America. RDU-Asia is even more laughable.

Frankly, Raleigh is extremely well-served for a metro area of its size. There are CSAs that are significantly larger (see CLE, CMH, IND, MCI, SAT, PIT, SMF) that would be thrilled to enjoy the level of international service RDU currently has.

If RDU is so "deserving" of international service, why isn't DL bringing back their CDG nonstop until this August (almost at the conclusion of the busy Summer travel season)?

Some of it truly isn’t laughable. And the market size is much different than you actually claim it is. Sure the immediate market size is 2 million but a 90-minute radius would count 6.5 million people. South America isn’t too laughable when you consider it’s mainly leisure and only needs to operate on a single isle aircraft. I’m not saying Nashville or Charlotte want flights for those specific reasons but you know it’s something the airports still strive to have. And the big reason Delta isn’t bringing back the route until August is because that’s just how Delta is running right now. Their flights to London from Boston, Detroit and Seattle aren’t even scheduled to resume until this summer either. And sure those cities would love the network but they don’t have a comparable market. Most of these airports listed have previously had flights to Europe, and they failed. British airways will finally be resuming the service to Pittsburgh but its clear the market isn’t as strong as it needs to be, meanwhile, we have that. Raleigh was ranked the 25th richest us city in 2018 and is one of the few cities to grow as much as it has, only behind Austin which will have roughly 25 international departures per day. This is the type of network I’m talking about. I’m not talking about flights to every single European airport, but, they still fly to some 14 destinations internationally, while Raleigh only has half that despite having less competition from other airports

Couple of things:

1) RDU-South America is truly laughable. You mention that South America is "mainly leisure" and only needs a single aisle (aisle not isle) aircraft. I'm not sure what your definition of South America is, but the furthest you will get into South America on a narrow-body aircraft would be LIM. No narrow-body aircraft in any airline's fleet today can serve EZE/GRU/SCL/GIG from Raleigh. Furthermore, South America isn't "mainly leisure". EZE/GRU/SCL/GIG have a strong business base, along with a mixture of VFR and premium leisure, none of which the Triangle has. Close-in South American routes, like BOG, need a VFR component to work. Guess which metro area in NC has the largest Colombian population...it's not the Triangle but Charlotte.

2) Unsure where you are getting your information from, as BOS-LHR on DL resumes tomorrow, 16 Jan. SEA-LHR resumes 26 Mar. DTW-LHR is currently operating. DL has the capability to restart RDU-CDG tomorrow, but yet they are waiting until August...because the market isn't there at present.

3) Unsure what you are trying to posit by saying "British airways will finally be resuming the service to Pittsburgh but its clear the market isn’t as strong as it needs to be, meanwhile, we have that". No, RDU doesn't have that. RDU-LHR is currently not operational. If RDU had the market, AA would be flying RDU-LHR at present. RDU-LHR resumes 5 April. BA service to PIT resumes 3 June. The less than two month difference is moot because neither routes are operational right now.

4) You can't compare Raleigh to Austin, unfortunately. Raleigh has virtually no leisure component, as Austin has. Austin also has a much larger corporate sector.

As FGITD said a couple of posts above, using the logic that you are presenting, SJC should be the busiest airport in the world.

DLHAM wrote:

Flights to LHR, CDG and KEF is more than many larger cities in Europe can offer to North America.

That's not a fair comparison. Europe is a lot more dense and it has a rail network the U.S. can't match. What that means is I don't really need to fly BRU-BOS when I can just as easily get on a train to AMS or CDG and fly from there. By contrast if I live in Raleigh I'm stuck driving close to 3 hours to CLT or 5 hours to IAD.

410W24 wrote:

RDU is currently the right size in terms of carriers, flights and destinations. It has a few international flights, but needs no more. Asia and South America will not happen. CLT, ATL, IAD are too close. Just not needed.

I disagree. I absolutely think a 789 to DXB would be successful once this Pandemic craziness starts to subside. I suspect that a NB route to Spain, Italy or Germany would also work, even if seasonal only.
South America I just don't see it. Seasonal to Central America and Caribbean, maybe.

Bentheswim11 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Bentheswim11 wrote:

Some of it truly isn’t laughable. And the market size is much different than you actually claim it is. Sure the immediate market size is 2 million but a 90-minute radius would count 6.5 million people. South America isn’t too laughable when you consider it’s mainly leisure and only needs to operate on a single isle aircraft. I’m not saying Nashville or Charlotte want flights for those specific reasons but you know it’s something the airports still strive to have. And the big reason Delta isn’t bringing back the route until August is because that’s just how Delta is running right now. Their flights to London from Boston, Detroit and Seattle aren’t even scheduled to resume until this summer either. And sure those cities would love the network but they don’t have a comparable market. Most of these airports listed have previously had flights to Europe, and they failed. British airways will finally be resuming the service to Pittsburgh but its clear the market isn’t as strong as it needs to be, meanwhile, we have that. Raleigh was ranked the 25th richest us city in 2018 and is one of the few cities to grow as much as it has, only behind Austin which will have roughly 25 international departures per day. This is the type of network I’m talking about. I’m not talking about flights to every single European airport, but, they still fly to some 14 destinations internationally, while Raleigh only has half that despite having less competition from other airports

A couple of things.

1) The population within a 100 mile radius of RDU is about 2.8 million. That is all that is relevant here. RDU has several midsized and large airports within a couple of hours. Nobody is going to drive from the Charlotte metro area to fly out of RDU. You would probably get some bleed from Greensboro and Fayetteville but not from that far. RDU is not DEN or SLC where they are the only options for hundreds of miles.

2) RDU doesnt have the O&D for Asia or South America. Because there is no hub at RDU, the O&D has to make up for it. That works fine for a place like LHR but not for NRT or GRU.

3) RDU is not Austin. If we look at O&D demand, its exploding in ways that its contemporaries (Nashville, Raleigh, Charlotte, etc.) havent been able to match in speed. Its a combo of crazy fast growth, a growing tourism industry, and all the tech giants moving there.

4) A lot of what drives international travel is ethnic travel. RDU doesnt have a substantial amount of that.

I like Raleigh. My cousin lives there and loves it. Im not saying some additions wont be forthcoming but you can count out South America and Asia. Whatever adds do take place will probably tied to the Triangle.

I’d say the O&D is still pretty high. In 2018, to China alone it still ranked 18th best in the county at 58,000 pax per year, which would go up knowing it would take most of RDU’s Asian traffic and help with connections.

On average, every year, 2,350 people move from China to Raleigh and 2,700 move from India to Raleigh, so there’s that change to consider too.

Unfortunately China being RDU's largest TPAC market is a huge downside.

Remember, China and the US don't have an "open skies" agreement. So airlines are restricted in the # of US-China flights that can operate, not to mention in the past few years (especially during COVID) China has been very aggressive in limiting flights to the US.

SJC (Silicon Valley) is the smallest US market that has been tried from China, and even that was cancelled in 2018 or 2019 IIRC.

If RDU's largest TPAC market was Japan or South Korea it would be a different story.

Good points on China.

Midwestindy wrote:

Bentheswim11 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

A couple of things.

1) The population within a 100 mile radius of RDU is about 2.8 million. That is all that is relevant here. RDU has several midsized and large airports within a couple of hours. Nobody is going to drive from the Charlotte metro area to fly out of RDU. You would probably get some bleed from Greensboro and Fayetteville but not from that far. RDU is not DEN or SLC where they are the only options for hundreds of miles.

2) RDU doesnt have the O&D for Asia or South America. Because there is no hub at RDU, the O&D has to make up for it. That works fine for a place like LHR but not for NRT or GRU.

3) RDU is not Austin. If we look at O&D demand, its exploding in ways that its contemporaries (Nashville, Raleigh, Charlotte, etc.) havent been able to match in speed. Its a combo of crazy fast growth, a growing tourism industry, and all the tech giants moving there.

4) A lot of what drives international travel is ethnic travel. RDU doesnt have a substantial amount of that.

I like Raleigh. My cousin lives there and loves it. Im not saying some additions wont be forthcoming but you can count out South America and Asia. Whatever adds do take place will probably tied to the Triangle.

I’d say the O&D is still pretty high. In 2018, to China alone it still ranked 18th best in the county at 58,000 pax per year, which would go up knowing it would take most of RDU’s Asian traffic and help with connections.

On average, every year, 2,350 people move from China to Raleigh and 2,700 move from India to Raleigh, so there’s that change to consider too.

Unfortunately China being RDU's largest TPAC market is a huge downside.

Remember, China and the US don't have an "open skies" agreement. So airlines are restricted in the # of US-China flights that can operate, not to mention in the past few years (especially during COVID) China has been very aggressive in limiting flights to the US.

SJC (Silicon Valley) is the smallest US market that has been tried from China, and even that was cancelled in 2018 or 2019 IIRC.

If RDU's largest TPAC market was Japan or South Korea it would be a different story.

Correct. In these secondary markets demand pattern may be more important than absolute market size to East Asia writ large. Places like BNA and IND, which are both pretty Japan-centric, may be in a better spot than RDU (lots of demand to China) or AUS (lots of demand to Taiwan, though Korea demand is growing and that helps).

airbazar wrote:

410W24 wrote:

RDU is currently the right size in terms of carriers, flights and destinations. It has a few international flights, but needs no more. Asia and South America will not happen. CLT, ATL, IAD are too close. Just not needed.

I disagree. I absolutely think a 789 to DXB would be successful once this Pandemic craziness starts to subside. I suspect that a NB route to Spain, Italy or Germany would also work, even if seasonal only.
South America I just don't see it. Seasonal to Central America and Caribbean, maybe.

Agreed that a small aircraft to DXB isn’t a crazy idea given the India demand. The trouble is EK’s large average gauge.

[quote="airbazar"][quote="DLHAM"]Flights to LHR, CDG and KEF is more than many larger cities in Europe can offer to North America.[/quote]
That's not a fair comparison. Europe is a lot more dense and it has a rail network the U.S. can't match. What that means is I don't really need to fly BRU-BOS when I can just as easily get on a train to AMS or CDG and fly from there. By contrast if I live in Raleigh I'm stuck driving close to 3 hours to CLT or 5 hours to IAD.
[/quote]
*** I have no Idea why quoting does not work properly. Maybe I need to go to bed ... ***

Depends on where you live, of course in that dense populated area around BeNeLux, Western Germany and Northeastern France you are never very far from a big Airport/Hub.
But there are large Cities like my Hometown Hamburg which are nowhere near a big Hub. Few people would drive 6 hours to Frankfurt or 5-6 hours to Amsterdam to Catch a flight from there. So they fly and connect, same what people from RDU can do, fly via IAD or any other Hub.
But this does not mean that there is no demand for more direct flights. I just wanted to say that there are Cities like Hamburg (1,8 Million Population, 10 Million in catchment and wealthy Population) that currently have no flight to North America at all. Everyone has to connect, drive far or stay at Home. Compared to this in RDU things look pretty good with three Euro-Destinations. We for example would be very pleased with flights to New York and Atlanta or Chicago, the demand is there.

But the A321XLR will help, I am very sure, on both sides of the Atlantic. Does AA still operate a small Hub at RDU? I could see them fly to a few destinations other than London and Paris with the XLR (maybe DUB, EDI, LIS, MAD), some on a seasonal basis, some yearround.

DLHAM wrote:

Does AA still operate a small Hub at RDU? I could see them fly to a few destinations other than London and Paris with the XLR (maybe DUB, EDI, LIS, MAD), some on a seasonal basis, some yearround.

The hub closed in the 1990s, however some regional flights continued into 2008 or so.

AA doesn't even serve EDI/LIS from Charlotte...no way would they work ex RDU.

I do potentially see EI starting DUB-RDU on a seasonal basis with an A321, although I am not sure it's relevancy now that EI is part of the transatlantic JV given that AA already is on RDU-LHR. DUB adds nothing from a connection standpoint and the PDEW on RDU-DUB is quite low.

USAirALB wrote:

DLHAM wrote:

Does AA still operate a small Hub at RDU? I could see them fly to a few destinations other than London and Paris with the XLR (maybe DUB, EDI, LIS, MAD), some on a seasonal basis, some yearround.

The hub closed in the 1990s, however some regional flights continued into 2008 or so.

AA doesn't even serve EDI/LIS from Charlotte...no way would they work ex RDU.

I do potentially see EI starting DUB-RDU on a seasonal basis with an A321, although I am not sure it's relevancy now that EI is part of the transatlantic JV given that AA already is on RDU-LHR. DUB adds nothing from a connection standpoint and the PDEW on RDU-DUB is quite low.

U.S. demand to LIS is exceptionally regional: NYC, BOS (or PVD, for carriers that don't want to try BOS). MAD sees regional demand, too. EDI is a non-starter from much of the U.S., certainly tertiary intl airports like RDU. DUB might have a little O&D (U.S. tech firms love their tax avoidance) but offers no meaningful incremental connections vs. LHR.

The AA 321XLR could probably assure RDU-LHR operates 5x weekly in winter.

MIflyer12 wrote:

USAirALB wrote:

DLHAM wrote:

Does AA still operate a small Hub at RDU? I could see them fly to a few destinations other than London and Paris with the XLR (maybe DUB, EDI, LIS, MAD), some on a seasonal basis, some yearround.

The hub closed in the 1990s, however some regional flights continued into 2008 or so.

AA doesn't even serve EDI/LIS from Charlotte...no way would they work ex RDU.

I do potentially see EI starting DUB-RDU on a seasonal basis with an A321, although I am not sure it's relevancy now that EI is part of the transatlantic JV given that AA already is on RDU-LHR. DUB adds nothing from a connection standpoint and the PDEW on RDU-DUB is quite low.

U.S. demand to LIS is exceptionally regional: NYC, BOS (or PVD, for carriers that don't want to try BOS). MAD sees regional demand, too. EDI is a non-starter from much of the U.S., certainly tertiary intl airports like RDU. DUB might have a little O&D (U.S. tech firms love their tax avoidance) but offers no meaningful incremental connections vs. LHR.

The AA 321XLR could probably assure RDU-LHR operates 5x weekly in winter.

I'm aware of all of that...hence why I said "AA doesn't even serve EDI/LIS from Charlotte...no way would they work ex RDU" responding to the poster who suggested RDU-DUB/EDI/LIS/MAD.

I'm not sure why the RDU-LHR segment would downgauge all the way down from a 772 to a A321XLR. IIRC, its been a 772 year-round going back to when AA received 777s in the late 1990s, except for a period when the flight was a 763 around 2008-2012.

I believe the 772 used for RDU-LHR is rotated through LHR rather than being based at RDU. If they were to downgauge the flight to an A321XLR, they would have to base an A321XLR at RDU or downgauge another LHR segment to the A321, which I view as unlikely. A downgauge to a 787 would be more likely IMO.

atcsundevil wrote:

The parallel runways were built too close together to practically permit simultaneous approaches, so without that ability, they can't handle the arrival rate a hub requires.

Is this still the case? I was in Cary this morning and saw an E175 and 737 on a parallel approach. I've always heard that parallel landings were an issue at RDU, but the two planes today didn't seem to have distancing issues at all.

USAirALB wrote:

responding to the poster who suggested RDU-DUB/EDI/LIS/MAD.

That was no suggestion, just what I could imagine. But without any Hub operation its not that easy, then I only see Madrid feeding into Iberias Hub.

Midwestindy wrote:

Bentheswim11 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

A couple of things.

1) The population within a 100 mile radius of RDU is about 2.8 million. That is all that is relevant here. RDU has several midsized and large airports within a couple of hours. Nobody is going to drive from the Charlotte metro area to fly out of RDU. You would probably get some bleed from Greensboro and Fayetteville but not from that far. RDU is not DEN or SLC where they are the only options for hundreds of miles.

2) RDU doesnt have the O&D for Asia or South America. Because there is no hub at RDU, the O&D has to make up for it. That works fine for a place like LHR but not for NRT or GRU.

3) RDU is not Austin. If we look at O&D demand, its exploding in ways that its contemporaries (Nashville, Raleigh, Charlotte, etc.) havent been able to match in speed. Its a combo of crazy fast growth, a growing tourism industry, and all the tech giants moving there.

4) A lot of what drives international travel is ethnic travel. RDU doesnt have a substantial amount of that.

I like Raleigh. My cousin lives there and loves it. Im not saying some additions wont be forthcoming but you can count out South America and Asia. Whatever adds do take place will probably tied to the Triangle.

I’d say the O&D is still pretty high. In 2018, to China alone it still ranked 18th best in the county at 58,000 pax per year, which would go up knowing it would take most of RDU’s Asian traffic and help with connections.

On average, every year, 2,350 people move from China to Raleigh and 2,700 move from India to Raleigh, so there’s that change to consider too.

Unfortunately China being RDU's largest TPAC market is a huge downside.

Remember, China and the US don't have an "open skies" agreement. So airlines are restricted in the # of US-China flights that can operate, not to mention in the past few years (especially during COVID) China has been very aggressive in limiting flights to the US.

SJC (Silicon Valley) is the smallest US market that has been tried from China, and even that was cancelled in 2018 or 2019 IIRC.

If RDU's largest TPAC market was Japan or South Korea it would be a different story.

Fortunately, it’s not just China. They now have high demand to India and Tokyo has been the airport’s 3rd busiest destination in Asia behind Beijing and Shanghai. Tokyo would be a great place for both leisure and business. It’s also got 2 large hub airlines there passengers could more easily connect at rather than connecting to JFK or SFO where that list is limited and you still need to connect to your final destination.

410W24 wrote:

RDU is currently the right size in terms of carriers, flights and destinations. It has a few international flights, but needs no more. Asia and South America will not happen. CLT, ATL, IAD are too close. Just not needed.

IAD and ATL are each a 6 hour drive and flights are no less expensive than those to JFK. CLT on the other hand, wouldn’t make sense to have some flights over RDU. For example, going to Asia would make no sense for CLT when RDU sees 100,000 more people per year going to Asia.

CLT having more daily flights to Germany makes sense because of the automotive industry in nearby Columbia and Charleston. RDU-AMS would make more sense than CLT though because SkyTeam, leisure, cargo and some corporate alliances.

Bentheswim11 wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Bentheswim11 wrote:

I’d say the O&D is still pretty high. In 2018, to China alone it still ranked 18th best in the county at 58,000 pax per year, which would go up knowing it would take most of RDU’s Asian traffic and help with connections.

On average, every year, 2,350 people move from China to Raleigh and 2,700 move from India to Raleigh, so there’s that change to consider too.

Unfortunately China being RDU's largest TPAC market is a huge downside.

Remember, China and the US don't have an "open skies" agreement. So airlines are restricted in the # of US-China flights that can operate, not to mention in the past few years (especially during COVID) China has been very aggressive in limiting flights to the US.

SJC (Silicon Valley) is the smallest US market that has been tried from China, and even that was cancelled in 2018 or 2019 IIRC.

If RDU's largest TPAC market was Japan or South Korea it would be a different story.

Fortunately, it’s not just China. They now have high demand to India and Tokyo has been the airport’s 3rd busiest destination in Asia behind Beijing and Shanghai. Tokyo would be a great place for both leisure and business. It’s also got 2 large hub airlines there passengers could more easily connect at rather than connecting to JFK or SFO where that list is limited and you still need to connect to your final destination.

Anyone who is suggesting that RDU will somehow get nonstop flights to East Asia in a post-pandemic world simply does not understand the realities of today.

Virtually every relevant destination in East Asia can be accessed easily today from RDU by connecting over SFO/LAX/SEA/NYC/YYZ/WAS.

DLHAM wrote:

Compared to this in RDU things look pretty good with three Euro-Destinations. We for example would be very pleased with flights to New York and Atlanta or Chicago, the demand is there.

That's just perspective You can get to just about anywhere in the World from HAM with only 1 connection whereas from RDU that is not true.
Just by looking at HAM's wikipedia page Hamburg has a ton more international service than RDU will ever have in our lifetimes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburg_A ... stinations
Even something relatively important which many of my co-workers in Raleigh have to do on a regular basis, RDU-BLR requires 2 stops or an overnight connection.

airbazar wrote:

DLHAM wrote:

Compared to this in RDU things look pretty good with three Euro-Destinations. We for example would be very pleased with flights to New York and Atlanta or Chicago, the demand is there.

That's just perspective You can get to just about anywhere in the World from HAM with only 1 connection whereas from RDU that is not true.
Just by looking at HAM's wikipedia page Hamburg has a ton more international service than RDU will ever have in our lifetimes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburg_A ... stinations
Even something relatively important which many of my co-workers in Raleigh have to do on a regular basis, RDU-BLR requires 2 stops or an overnight connection.

And when I say international, it’s not just transoceanic. Hamburg can get 1 stop service to Mexico, no reason why it should be 1 stop from Raleigh/Durham either knowing it’s much closer and how much of a connection point, and destination Mexico is

Now that CM recently started ATL, I wonder if CM would venture in other destinations in South USA.
There used to be a time (pre 2000) when there was a sizeable (mostly Panama Canal military related with minor VFR) traffic between North Carolina and Panama. That's not the case anymore.
RDU is no hub, so a PTY-RDU wouldn't be able to depend on connecting traffic @ RDU only on what CM would get thru PTY.
The scenario would be like PTY-MSY but RDU has no the leisure component MSY (or even CHS) has.
If RDU wants CM, it'll have to make it clear why would't it be better for CM to fly to RDU instead of CLT.

Bentheswim11 wrote:

airbazar wrote:

DLHAM wrote:

Compared to this in RDU things look pretty good with three Euro-Destinations. We for example would be very pleased with flights to New York and Atlanta or Chicago, the demand is there.

That's just perspective You can get to just about anywhere in the World from HAM with only 1 connection whereas from RDU that is not true.
Just by looking at HAM's wikipedia page Hamburg has a ton more international service than RDU will ever have in our lifetimes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburg_A ... stinations
Even something relatively important which many of my co-workers in Raleigh have to do on a regular basis, RDU-BLR requires 2 stops or an overnight connection.

And when I say international, it’s not just transoceanic. Hamburg can get 1 stop service to Mexico, no reason why it should be 1 stop from Raleigh/Durham either knowing it’s much closer and how much of a connection point, and destination Mexico is

Please review the logic you are attempting to use. It doesn't make any sense and it does not reflect the way route planning works.

By your logic, RDU can get one-stop service to AKL, no reason why it should be one-stop from PDX either given that PDX is a connecting point and is closer to AKL than RDU is. If RDU can get one-stop service to AMM, no reason why it should be one-stop from BOS either that it's closer and a connecting point.

USAirALB wrote:

Bentheswim11 wrote:

airbazar wrote:

That's just perspective You can get to just about anywhere in the World from HAM with only 1 connection whereas from RDU that is not true.
Just by looking at HAM's wikipedia page Hamburg has a ton more international service than RDU will ever have in our lifetimes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburg_A ... stinations
Even something relatively important which many of my co-workers in Raleigh have to do on a regular basis, RDU-BLR requires 2 stops or an overnight connection.

And when I say international, it’s not just transoceanic. Hamburg can get 1 stop service to Mexico, no reason why it should be 1 stop from Raleigh/Durham either knowing it’s much closer and how much of a connection point, and destination Mexico is

Please review the logic you are attempting to use. It doesn't make any sense and it does not reflect the way route planning works.

By your logic, RDU can get one-stop service to AKL, no reason why it should be one-stop from PDX either given that PDX is a connecting point and is closer to AKL than RDU is. If RDU can get one-stop service to AMM, no reason why it should be one-stop from BOS either that it's closer and a connecting point.

When there is the traffic (which there is in the case of MEX & PDX), there’s no reason why it should require the same number of stops as an airport halfway around the world that may only see 1/3 of that number

I find it interesting someone at RDU thinks they lack international flights. There are bigger airports than RDU that have less than them. I think they have a pretty good amount for the size.

My home airport is bigger and I’d trade it’s international flight lineup for RDUs in a heartbeat.

Jshank83 wrote:

I find it interesting someone at RDU thinks they lack international flights. There are bigger airports than RDU that have less than them. I think they have a pretty good amount for the size.

My home airport is bigger and I’d trade it’s international flight lineup for RDUs in a heartbeat.

Yeah, no need for new stuff for a while.

airbazar wrote:

That's just perspective You can get to just about anywhere in the World from HAM with only 1 connection whereas from RDU that is not true.
Just by looking at HAM's wikipedia page Hamburg has a ton more international service than RDU will ever have in our lifetimes.

Well you have to fly only 15-60 minutes depending on the direction and already the flight becomes international.This is why there are so many "international" flights.
There are tons of Destinations that can only be reached with two stops, for example any US City that lacks Nonstop Service to Europe. In the other direction thanks to Emirates, THY and hopefully soon Qatar things look a bit better.

But after flying from RDU to LHR you can get literally anywhere in Europe with one Stop.

Bentheswim11 wrote:

And when I say international, it’s not just transoceanic. Hamburg can get 1 stop service to Mexico, no reason why it should be 1 stop from Raleigh/Durham either knowing it’s much closer and how much of a connection point, and destination Mexico is

Sorry, not trying to be rude, but are you aware of what you are actually saying or have any knowledge of how airlines work? Hamburg is several thousand miles from Mexico so of course it will have 1 stop flights because the market isn't large enough for a non-stop (and unlikely to ever be), yet you are saying RDU should be non-stop just because it is considerably closer. Like wise, you think China, India and Tokyo should have non-stop flights from RDU......why would any airline fly those when it is so simple to connect using any major hub?

Bentheswim11 wrote:

When there is the traffic (which there is in the case of MEX & PDX), there’s no reason why it should require the same number of stops as an airport halfway around the world that may only see 1/3 of that number

It is pretty obvious that every airline disagrees with you regarding the amount of traffic, so am curious why/how you insist there is and they don't see it.

Bentheswim11 wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Bentheswim11 wrote:

I’d say the O&D is still pretty high. In 2018, to China alone it still ranked 18th best in the county at 58,000 pax per year, which would go up knowing it would take most of RDU’s Asian traffic and help with connections.

On average, every year, 2,350 people move from China to Raleigh and 2,700 move from India to Raleigh, so there’s that change to consider too.

Unfortunately China being RDU's largest TPAC market is a huge downside.

Remember, China and the US don't have an "open skies" agreement. So airlines are restricted in the # of US-China flights that can operate, not to mention in the past few years (especially during COVID) China has been very aggressive in limiting flights to the US.

SJC (Silicon Valley) is the smallest US market that has been tried from China, and even that was cancelled in 2018 or 2019 IIRC.

If RDU's largest TPAC market was Japan or South Korea it would be a different story.

Fortunately, it’s not just China. They now have high demand to India and Tokyo has been the airport’s 3rd busiest destination in Asia behind Beijing and Shanghai. Tokyo would be a great place for both leisure and business. It’s also got 2 large hub airlines there passengers could more easily connect at rather than connecting to JFK or SFO where that list is limited and you still need to connect to your final destination.

India is pretty irrelevant to this, flying TPAC to India adds 1k-2k+ miles to your already long journey. This isn't including the likely double connect that would be required, since India doesn't have n/s service between many Chinese/Japanese markets.

With regards to Tokyo, as I pointed out up thread, RDU isn't even top 10 in terms of unserved US tokyo markets, I think I saw a little over 10 PDEW to NRT+HND last time I looked.

It really doesn't make much sense for an airline to invest in RDU-ICN/Tokyo with such little O&D, when they can invest in other markets with larger O&D demand. A market like CMH-Tokyo has 3-4x the O&D demand of RDU(not including for the potential of stimulation), and has major corporate ties with Honda having 15k+ employees nearby.

UA at SFO has service to AKL, CTU, HKG, HND, ICN, KIX, MEL, NRT, PEK, PVG, SIN, SYD, & TPE, or if you want secondary destinations, you can fly through LAX to BNE, CAN, XMN.(or SZX/TAO when they resume) So I wouldn't say the list of destinations is limited.

RDU is a growing STEM center with a "lower" cost of living than many other US cities.

However, pandemic season isn't quite the fortuitous time to start new 2x/3x-a week services to international airports, particularly without subsidies headed RDU's way.

DLHAM wrote:

airbazar wrote:

That's just perspective You can get to just about anywhere in the World from HAM with only 1 connection whereas from RDU that is not true.
Just by looking at HAM's wikipedia page Hamburg has a ton more international service than RDU will ever have in our lifetimes.

Well you have to fly only 15-60 minutes depending on the direction and already the flight becomes international.This is why there are so many "international" flights.
There are tons of Destinations that can only be reached with two stops, for example any US City that lacks Nonstop Service to Europe. In the other direction thanks to Emirates, THY and hopefully soon Qatar things look a bit better.

But after flying from RDU to LHR you can get literally anywhere in Europe with one Stop.

I’m not talking about just Europe though. I’m also talking within North America. RDU really wants, and can support flights to MEX but have been unable to secure flights.

Bentheswim11 wrote:

DLHAM wrote:

airbazar wrote:

That's just perspective You can get to just about anywhere in the World from HAM with only 1 connection whereas from RDU that is not true.
Just by looking at HAM's wikipedia page Hamburg has a ton more international service than RDU will ever have in our lifetimes.

Well you have to fly only 15-60 minutes depending on the direction and already the flight becomes international.This is why there are so many "international" flights.
There are tons of Destinations that can only be reached with two stops, for example any US City that lacks Nonstop Service to Europe. In the other direction thanks to Emirates, THY and hopefully soon Qatar things look a bit better.

But after flying from RDU to LHR you can get literally anywhere in Europe with one Stop.

I’m not talking about just Europe though. I’m also talking within North America. RDU really wants, and can support flights to MEX but have been unable to secure flights.

Which means the market can’t support it. If you have to beg an airline to fly a route, it’s not sustainable.

Bentheswim11 wrote:

DLHAM wrote:

airbazar wrote:

That's just perspective You can get to just about anywhere in the World from HAM with only 1 connection whereas from RDU that is not true.
Just by looking at HAM's wikipedia page Hamburg has a ton more international service than RDU will ever have in our lifetimes.

Well you have to fly only 15-60 minutes depending on the direction and already the flight becomes international.This is why there are so many "international" flights.
There are tons of Destinations that can only be reached with two stops, for example any US City that lacks Nonstop Service to Europe. In the other direction thanks to Emirates, THY and hopefully soon Qatar things look a bit better.

But after flying from RDU to LHR you can get literally anywhere in Europe with one Stop.

I’m not talking about just Europe though. I’m also talking within North America. RDU really wants, and can support flights to MEX but have been unable to secure flights.

What evidence is there that RDU can support MEX? Even BOS, a much larger and more dynamic market that supports CM, doesn't have service to MEX.

This thread is devoid of realistic opinions, on both sides tbh. RDU is a unique airport, a unique metro, and comparing it to other cities in the USA doesn't make a lot of sense. As even the detractors have stated, many "larger" metros would swap the international portfolio RDU offers with theirs in heartbeat. That tells me that trying to predict what will or what will not be sustainable there is not so simple. Pure speculation is all anyone can offer. If we go by the "If market X could support flights to market Y, there would be an airline on it" philosophy, no new routes would ever be announced. It's a weak POV. Likewise, claiming any city other than those with large South American populations (hint, RDU does not have this) should have n/s options to South America is probably also kind of silly.

As far as speculation goes: more one-stop options to south asia is where I'd see more potential for additional international routes out of RDU, within the next 10-20 years. All it takes is a drive around Morrisville (town with majority south asian population with median income of 100K+) to see it is booming. I personally know many in this demo. These folks go back to India on a yearly basis, many in the triangle on work visas, earn good salaries, eventually hoping to get US citizenship. One stop options through CDG/LHR is usually cost prohibitive for them, cheaper to drive (4-5 hrs! Yuck) to IAD, though it makes for a rough itinerary.

But nothing is happening till 2023/2024 when if we are lucky, COVID is no longer a pandemic.

Cubsrule wrote:

What evidence is there that RDU can support MEX? Even BOS, a much larger and more dynamic market that supports CM, doesn't have service to MEX.

Not all major US markets can support flights to MEX, even those which might have descent Mexican-American demographics.
But many of those markets do support flights to one or several major Mexican leisure destinations and/or a Mexican hub.
BOS supports CM to PTY not because the number of Panamanians in that part of New England, one of the reasons passengers fly CM to South America is because with one-stop they also might reach airports not served by UA, AA or DL.
RDU getting a non-stop to GRU or EZE or even BOG In the very near future, is close to a pipe-dream, however, CM PTY-RDU seems the most likely Central/South America RDU could realistically wish for, other than non-stop to LIR Costa Rica with DL, AA, F9, B6 or NK.
This because LIR (and somewhat SJO too) are leisure oriented destinations suitable for one/twice/thrice weekly service from many US markets.
Those are the same type of destination as MBJ, PUJ, SXM, AUA, CUN, NAS in the Caribbean.

Cubsrule wrote:

Bentheswim11 wrote:

DLHAM wrote:

Well you have to fly only 15-60 minutes depending on the direction and already the flight becomes international.This is why there are so many "international" flights.
There are tons of Destinations that can only be reached with two stops, for example any US City that lacks Nonstop Service to Europe. In the other direction thanks to Emirates, THY and hopefully soon Qatar things look a bit better.

But after flying from RDU to LHR you can get literally anywhere in Europe with one Stop.

I’m not talking about just Europe though. I’m also talking within North America. RDU really wants, and can support flights to MEX but have been unable to secure flights.

What evidence is there that RDU can support MEX? Even BOS, a much larger and more dynamic market that supports CM, doesn't have service to MEX.

Regarding CM serving PTY-BOS, they offer a lot of one-stop options for Boston area travelers. For example, the Boston area has a very large Brazilian population and CM flies to something like 9, or 10 cities in Brazil, whereas AM only serves 2 or 3.

It’s kind of impossible to gauge just what the demand is now. Covid has done serious damage to both Intl travel and business travel. That being said, LHR and CDG will both come back. I could see another European destination in the near future. South America and Asia are laughable in the next 5-10 years. I’d like to see MEX, and some more Caribbean, but again, we’ll have to see what a post pandemic world looks like.

TWFlyGuy wrote:

RDU has more int'l service that many larger cities. It's a metro population of ~2M. Still behind CLT, KC, STL and many others. Yes they have some corporate presence but just not enough to justify. The ORY service was partly aided by the fact that AA was the #1 carrier to Paris at the time until AF pushed the French government to force everyone to CDG disadvantaging AA. It was initially served by a 762...essentially a 752 capacity wise (minus cargo). I had heard as well that what made the ORY do well early on was a cargo contract to carry horse meat which did not renew at a certain point causing a revenue shortfall on the route. Recall also that the initial LHR service was a 763 with a crazy F guarantee (very unusual). It took some time for that route to organically grow.

Population alone doesn’t dictate demand. RDU’s population has a significantly higher disposable income and educational attainment level than most comparably sized metros. The Universities and research done in the area also drive a lot of travel demand.

Actually the initial LON flights were LGW on a 762. LHR has been a 772 for most of its life. It was scheduled to go to a 773 until Covid hit.

atcsundevil wrote:

The parallel runways were built too close together to practically permit simultaneous approaches, so without that ability, they can't handle the arrival rate a hub requires. The flows and airspace structure also can't handle a significant increase in traffic because it simply isn't built for it, and given that it's squeezed between CLT and the DC metros, it would be very difficult to restructure the airspace to cope with a significant demand increase on the ARTCC side, and it would require the airspace being upgraded from a Class Charlie to a Class Bravo on the approach side. I don't think a Bravo upgrade has been done in about three decades, and the associated legal battles with airspace restructuring take many, many years to navigate.

My understanding is that 5L/23R is planned to be moved further to the NW to support expansion of T2. Not sure if that would give it enough separation from the other side to allow simult IMC, but the reality is, RDU doesn’t need that. I don’t think anyone is thinking it’s going to become a large hub.

Interesting. I didn’t realize there hadn’t been a class B upgrade in three decades.

USAirALB wrote:

I'm not sure why the RDU-LHR segment would downgauge all the way down from a 772 to a A321XLR. IIRC, its been a 772 year-round going back to when AA received 777s in the late 1990s, except for a period when the flight was a 763 around 2008-2012.

I believe the 772 used for RDU-LHR is rotated through LHR rather than being based at RDU. If they were to downgauge the flight to an A321XLR, they would have to base an A321XLR at RDU or downgauge another LHR segment to the A321, which I view as unlikely. A downgauge to a 787 would be more likely IMO.

Well I guess you could always rotate the A321XLR in from a domestic segment, say on a redeye routing (JFK-LAX-RDU-LHR-RDU-LAX-JFK) without having to base it at RDU.

That being said, I agree that, especially once the pandemic conditions have blown over (if we're lucky that could be this year as the omicron variant and vaccination rates in the west are taking us closer to the endemic phase at a fast pace), there probably won't be a need to downgrade this flight all the way from a daily 772 (or even a 77W which had been planned for 2020 pre-covid) to an A321 just to maintain 5x weekly flights in winter.

B752OS wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

Bentheswim11 wrote:

I’m not talking about just Europe though. I’m also talking within North America. RDU really wants, and can support flights to MEX but have been unable to secure flights.

What evidence is there that RDU can support MEX? Even BOS, a much larger and more dynamic market that supports CM, doesn't have service to MEX.

Regarding CM serving PTY-BOS, they offer a lot of one-stop options for Boston area travelers. For example, the Boston area has a very large Brazilian population and CM flies to something like 9, or 10 cities in Brazil, whereas AM only serves 2 or 3.

I'd actually put CM to RDU in the "not totally crazy" bucket. I'm not saying it'll happen in the next year or the next five years but it probably makes more sense than MEX or a nonstop to South America. Because Panama City is almost straight south of Raleigh-Durham, RDU-PTY is only a couple of hundred miles longer than RDU-MEX.

CM to RDU could happen, probably after another TATL link. The area would need to continue growing in wealth (more important than population for these kinds of routes). It is positioned to do just that: mild weather, southern charm, mixed government (a moderate blue governor/red legislature). Being the capitol of NC really helps Raleigh keep some pace with Charlotte, AA hub notwithstanding.

All in all - I'd give it 5 years and the same discussions we're having now about Austin, we'll be having about Raleigh/Durham.

RDUDDJI wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

The parallel runways were built too close together to practically permit simultaneous approaches, so without that ability, they can't handle the arrival rate a hub requires. The flows and airspace structure also can't handle a significant increase in traffic because it simply isn't built for it, and given that it's squeezed between CLT and the DC metros, it would be very difficult to restructure the airspace to cope with a significant demand increase on the ARTCC side, and it would require the airspace being upgraded from a Class Charlie to a Class Bravo on the approach side. I don't think a Bravo upgrade has been done in about three decades, and the associated legal battles with airspace restructuring take many, many years to navigate.

My understanding is that 5L/23R is planned to be moved further to the NW to support expansion of T2. Not sure if that would give it enough separation from the other side to allow simult IMC, but the reality is, RDU doesn’t need that. I don’t think anyone is thinking it’s going to become a large hub.

Interesting. I didn’t realize there hadn’t been a class B upgrade in three decades.

The reasoning isn’t that it’s just to allow simultaneous takeoffs and terminal expansion. They need a new runway. Current runway was constructed in the 1980s and due to the regions fluctuating climate, it causes it to age quicker and the runway needs to be shut down for 2 weeks at a time every few months to keep up maintenance. The airport doesn’t necessarily need to be a large hub for this but many airlines are putting large numbers of destinations and frequencies into RDU like Delta and American who have comparable networks of 60-65 departures per day (will increase as flights resume)

stlgph wrote:

All in all - I'd give it 5 years and the same discussions we're having now about Austin, we'll be having about Raleigh/Durham.

Nah. Austin is on a whole different level than Raleigh/Durham. Way faster growing with both business and tourism demand, and combined with nearby San Antonio, it forms a defacto mega-region with over 5 million people.

Might want to check on the particulars of all that first.

stlgph wrote:

Might want to check on the particulars of all that first.

On what evidence will Raleigh/Durham be the next Austin?

stlgph wrote:

Might want to check on the particulars of all that first.

They are 2 different things. Austin is way bigger. Its not the same.

Runway765 wrote:

stlgph wrote:

All in all - I'd give it 5 years and the same discussions we're having now about Austin, we'll be having about Raleigh/Durham.

Nah. Austin is on a whole different level than Raleigh/Durham. Way faster growing with both business and tourism demand, and combined with nearby San Antonio, it forms a defacto mega-region with over 5 million people.

I wouldn’t necessarily say “way faster” considering Raleigh was the second fastest growing US city behind Austin from. 2010-2020. Both cities seeing growth in both sides (Raleigh was the 25th richest us city in 2018, Austin failed to make the list). In terms of a 90-minute drive radius (similar to that of Austin and San Antonio), Raleigh serves 6.5 Million people. Raleigh/Durham also seeing growth from Apple (3,000 employees), Clorox (1,500 employees), Fujifilm (1,000 employees), Google (2,000 employees), IBM (25,000 employees), etc. And prior to the pandemic, the airports were within 2 million passengers of each other so it makes no sense why Austin would have 4x the number of international destinations as Raleigh/Durham considering Raleigh has a higher expenditure market.

mgoose2 wrote:

CM to RDU could happen, probably after another TATL link. The area would need to continue growing in wealth (more important than population for these kinds of routes). It is positioned to do just that: mild weather, southern charm, mixed government (a moderate blue governor/red legislature). Being the capitol of NC really helps Raleigh keep some pace with Charlotte, AA hub notwithstanding.

A city being a state capital (capital is the city, capitol is the building where government meets) does actually very little for air service development, sans for maybe flights to WAS if the capital city is in a politically strategic state.

For a hypothetical route like RDU-PTY on CM to be successful, I would say wealth is actually irrelevant. CM would be more concerned about capturing potential VFR traffic, rather than the wealth of the Triangle.

Bentheswim11 wrote:

Runway765 wrote:

stlgph wrote:

All in all - I'd give it 5 years and the same discussions we're having now about Austin, we'll be having about Raleigh/Durham.

Nah. Austin is on a whole different level than Raleigh/Durham. Way faster growing with both business and tourism demand, and combined with nearby San Antonio, it forms a defacto mega-region with over 5 million people.

I wouldn’t necessarily say “way faster” considering Raleigh was the second fastest growing US city behind Austin from. 2010-2020. Both cities seeing growth in both sides (Raleigh was the 25th richest us city in 2018, Austin failed to make the list). In terms of a 90-minute drive radius (similar to that of Austin and San Antonio), Raleigh serves 6.5 Million people. Raleigh/Durham also seeing growth from Apple (3,000 employees), Clorox (1,500 employees), Fujifilm (1,000 employees), Google (2,000 employees), IBM (25,000 employees), etc. And prior to the pandemic, the airports were within 2 million passengers of each other so it makes no sense why Austin would have 4x the number of international destinations as Raleigh/Durham considering Raleigh has a higher expenditure market.

You are ignoring the fact that Austin has a thriving tourist sector that Raleigh overall lacks. Raleigh's tourism sector generated $1.7 Billion in 2020...Austin's tourism spending was more than double that. Even if Raleigh were to continue to grow and eventually outgrow Austin demographically speaking, Austin has a such a well established tourism scene (SXSW, ACL, etc) that I would say does more than corporate growth to market Austin internationally at this point.

Case in point...the Globalization and World Cities Research Network (GaWC) is a think tank that researches globalization. Every few years or so they examine and rank cities around the world based on their importance to the global economy. There are ten rankings; Alpha ++, Alpha +, Alpha, Alpha-, Beta+, Beta, Beta-, Gamma+, Gamma, and Gamma-. Austin is ranked Beta -. Charlotte is ranked Gamma +. Raleigh? It isn't even ranked...but rather classified as a "high sufficiency" city.

When comparing wealth between cities within the US...city propers are pointless considering in most regions, wealth is situated outside the city lines in the suburbs. You need to be looking at metro areas. Raleigh is not a wealthier metro area than Austin. If you look at Per Capita income alone, Austin has a higher Per Capita Income than Raleigh as of 2019.

If you look at Per Capita Personal Income (known as PCPI, provides a more inclusive/real-world look at income versus PCI), Austin is the 35th wealthiest metro area, and Raleigh is 62nd as of 2020. If you adjust PCPI for the purchase-power of the dollar in that particular area, Austin shoots up to 15th highest, while Raleigh is 42nd.