Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:28 am

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 49):
It says fog is not an issue on slide 19.

In their view. They carry the comment in their technical papers "many pilots land in 0-0 weather". Many? Less than 3% of all flights operate in CAT III conditions. Worldwide.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 49):
Earthquake/tsunamis issues dismissed in slide 29.

In Theory.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 49):
Slides 32-40 provides access propositions.

In their view (again a theory).

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 49):
Slides 41-44 answers questions relating to environmental issues.

They "suppose" this to be the case.

They have an understanding of their concept on what they beleive can and cannot be done with semi-submersibles. They have no understanding of the technical requirements of airports nor do they demonstrate a single ounce of the cost model understanding. Airports are not government handout projects in the US. They are public/private partnerships between the operator (usually a government agency) and the airlines that will use the facility.

The floaters are full of crap. The cost model alone is completely out of financial tolerance.

[Edited 2007-01-17 01:42:12]
 
san747
Posts: 4361
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:03 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:30 am

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 46):
Not In My Back Yard.

Or my airspace.

Or anywhere near me.

Ahh, NIBMYs... The eternal enemy of the aviation enthusiast/air traveller.
Scotty doesn't know...
 
SANMAN66
Posts: 979
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:37 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:40 am

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 8):
Even clear out at sea like that, it will still be opposed by the NIMBY's.

Yes! there will be some idiots claiming that the aircraft noise disturbs the whales!
 banghead 
PSA Gives you a lift!
 
rampart
Posts: 1800
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:16 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 35):
Okay.

1. How do you control pitch, roll and yaw? (which will certainly occur) This would handle 500,000 lb aircraft, not a lightweight fighter.
2. How would you deal with the Marine layer that hangs out 3 miles off the coast about 40% of the time in San Diego that would require CAT III landings? Less than 40% of all aircraft and less than 10% of all crews are CAT III qualified. There isn't an airport on the planet with this level of CAT III requirements.
3. For $20 Billion, you could build it in the desert (or campo for $17 Billion) and the technology to make this scenario happen is proven.
4. Perspective: You're talking about a platform on the open ocean in the middle of a whale migration route that is a mile wide and two miles long three miles to ten miles off the coast, not in a sheltered bay.

On the multi - heading question:

Charts are published. How to you publish the approach chart for an airport that is constantly moving and has a continuously variable field altitude?

Others addressed your questions -- good questions, I might add -- as well as I can. The jury is out. You seem like you are convinced that it is a bad idea, so we won't confuse the issue with further studies. Still others are intrigued by the possibility, and want to see more. As I said, you have very reasonable concerns, but I don't think we should dismiss it yet.

Quoting San747 (Reply 51):
Ahh, NIBMYs... The eternal enemy of the aviation enthusiast/air traveller.



Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 52):
Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 8):
Even clear out at sea like that, it will still be opposed by the NIMBY's.

Yes! there will be some idiots claiming that the aircraft noise disturbs the whales!

Did you know that there are A.net members who are also strong environmentalists and NIMBYs?  Smile

-Rampart
 
SANMAN66
Posts: 979
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:37 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:26 am

Quoting Rampart (Reply 53):
Did you know that there are A.net members who are also strong environmentalists and NIMBYs?

OOPS! sorry!
 Smile
PSA Gives you a lift!
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 24964
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:43 am

Dont worry..

San Diego's next airport is =====> LAX.

As is, I've read LA area airports handle something like 30% of San Diego's air transportation needs, so why not pile on the rest?

We dont have enough of our own problems, and it seems people want LAX to be the answer for the entire Southern California region which due to urban sprawl will soon link up with San Diego one of these years anyhow.

 banghead 
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
Coronado990
Posts: 1531
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:12 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:29 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 55):
Dont worry..

San Diego's next airport is =====> LAX.

As is, I've read LA area airports handle something like 30% of San Diego's air transportation needs, so why not pile on the rest?

We dont have enough of our own problems, and it seems people want LAX to be the answer for the entire Southern California region which due to urban sprawl will soon link up with San Diego one of these years anyhow.

But L.A. loves having all those choices. BA will have 3 flights to LHR this summer so we are kind of forced in using LAX as international airlines do not like splitting their operations one hundred miles apart. One of those flights is ours so enjoy.

I was wondering, is there an actual law written that says people in large cities cannot drive to smaller cities for a flight. Can it only the other way around? I mean, what if Icelandair, for example, served Southern California thru SAN instead of LAX. Would someone in LAX refuse to go to SAN to utilize FI to KEF or beyond because San Diego is a smaller city? And if so, is this a worldwide thing or just an L.A. thing? Again, just wondering.
SFO=NoCal LAX=SoCal SAN=LoCal
 
rampart
Posts: 1800
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:42 am

Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 54):
OOPS! sorry!

No prob! Like a geologist-church minister I once met, it is possible to coexist.

Really, one of the best ways to appreciate the environment is from a plane.

-Rampart
 
PanAm747
Topic Author
Posts: 4711
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 4:46 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:50 am

Quote:
I was wondering, is there an actual law written that says people in large cities cannot drive to smaller cities for a flight. Can it only the other way around? I mean, what if Icelandair, for example, served Southern California thru SAN instead of LAX. Would someone in LAX refuse to go to SAN to utilize FI to KEF or beyond because San Diego is a smaller city? And if so, is this a worldwide thing or just an L.A. thing?

There is no law except the law of economics. Airlines fly where people want to go.

Icelandair could fly to SAN, but how much of a market is there? And weight restrictions? Runway length? Gates? Counter space? Would it be worth the investment?

The answer usually is LAX, as that is a metro area that can support such flights.
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:00 am

Yes it is technically do able, and is fun to think about, but it would be a big waste of money. Makes much more economic sense to put a new airport at March AFB, or Palm Springs --- both which are about 85 miles (as the airplane flys) from SD. California will eventually need High Speed Rail anyway so airports out in the middle of nowhere could be connected to HSR that could also have dull use, and HSR would remove quite a bit of N/S air traffic from Califronia, and provide better service to places like Fresno, and Bakersfield.

San Diego is a little far North for Hurricanes, but they do get the edges of those storms ---- and when I was in the Navy we would dry dock even the largest ships to paint, remove rust, scrape barnacles etc, the Sea is very corrosive and I could imagine in 20 years that airport would need to be dry docked  rotfl 
 
TEBGuy
Posts: 237
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 6:26 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:17 am

wow... i cant believe no one has brought this up yet: How are you going to get fuel out there to refuel aircraft? Major airports have it piped in, no? Ghe environmentalists will be up in arms over any pipeline serving such a floating airport.
Remember, taking off is optional, landing is mandatory.
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:34 am

Quoting TEBguy (Reply 60):
wow... i cant believe no one has brought this up yet: How are you going to get fuel out there to refuel aircraft? Major airports have it piped in, no? Ghe environmentalists will be up in arms over any pipeline serving such a floating airport.



I imagine they would use fuel barges. But, I seem to remember being on a biz trip to SD a couple of years ago and watching the local news and the locals were complaining about some fuel barge. I remember laughing, because it really wasn't that large, I think quite a bit smaller than what would be required for and airport. Oh, yes San Diego does have earthquake faults, and I'm pretty sure it was hit by a hurricane like 100 years ago, so the environmentalist would have a field day complaining about an off shore airfield. Maybe they should just put tail hooks on 737's and move one of the Navy Aircraft carriers out there. Might need new catapults too!
 
mpdpilot
Posts: 807
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 6:44 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:44 am

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 61):
Oh, yes San Diego does have earthquake faults, and I'm pretty sure it was hit by a hurricane like 100 years ago, so the environmentalist would have a field day complaining about an off shore airfield.

If you think about it as far as earthquakes go the airport would be better than on land. the airport would be unharmed out there. Even a Tsunami wouldn't don anything to a floating island 10mi out. arguably it would be safer in that sense.
One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:07 pm

Quoting Rampart (Reply 53):
Others addressed your questions -- good questions, I might add -- as well as I can. The jury is out. You seem like you are convinced that it is a bad idea, so we won't confuse the issue with further studies. Still others are intrigued by the possibility, and want to see more. As I said, you have very reasonable concerns, but I don't think we should dismiss it yet.

The jury is not out. The semi-submersible concept is for an open bay or calm water area for a structure of this magnitude. This is not the case off the coast of California. As I said, it also ignores the economic realities of airport construction and the technical limitations of existing and planned navigation systems. I don't care how intriguing it is.

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 61):
Oh, yes San Diego does have earthquake faults, and I'm pretty sure it was hit by a hurricane like 100 years ago, so the environmentalist would have a field day complaining about an off shore airfield.

One runs right smack up against Lindberghs runway:

http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/rghm/ap...download/gis_download_sandiego.htm

[Edited 2007-01-19 06:16:35]
 
rampart
Posts: 1800
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:06 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 63):
Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 61):
Oh, yes San Diego does have earthquake faults, and I'm pretty sure it was hit by a hurricane like 100 years ago, so the environmentalist would have a field day complaining about an off shore airfield.

One runs right smack up against Lindberghs runway:

http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/rghm/ap...o.htm

Most places on earth have faults. Not all are active. (One traverses Manhattan, for instance. Do you ever hear about it? Hardly ever.) Do we need to consider them? Yes. Are all of them major threats? No. An offshore airport for San Diego would have much less risk than the current LAX or BUR or a proposed Palmdale International, if that ever happened.

Instead, look at this regional map of earth quake risk:
http://www.hewett.norfolk.sch.uk/curric/newgeog/NAmerica/Calif_e3.gif
Also try this one:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/hazmaps/NEW-siteindex.php
you can choose the interactive map and zoom into Southern California.

The greater earthquake risk is north, toward LA, and in eastern San Diego County into the Imperial Valley. San Diego City and immediate offshore is actually one of the "safest" areas in all of Southern California when it comes to seismic risk.

And yes, there is also a risk of storms, tropical (less so) or otherwise (more common). Anything on the coast experiences the same thing, but a sheltered bay or gulf (like in Japan) would be better off than the open ocean.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 63):
The jury is not out.

You must be an engineer, all super-practical and everything. People like you questioned the practicality of aircraft carriers in the 1920s, of runway piers in the 1950s. They would have scoffed at the reef runway at Honolulu, or the amazing runway structure at Funchal
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Miguel Nobrega - Madeira Spotters

(Madeira, talk about an earthquake and tsunami hazard!) Maybe an offshore airport will work, maybe not, but someone has to dream it up and work out the difficulties. Often the largest difficulty of all is convincing the unconvincable.

-Rampart
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sat Jan 20, 2007 6:05 am

Quoting Rampart (Reply 64):
Most places on earth have faults. Not all are active. (One traverses Manhattan, for instance. Do you ever hear about it? Hardly ever.) Do we need to consider them? Yes. Are all of them major threats? No. An offshore airport for San Diego would have much less risk than the current LAX or BUR or a proposed Palmdale International, if that ever happened.



I only mentioned the earthquake faults because someone had posted that San Diego does not have an earthquake problem. San Diego has had earthquakes in the past, and and will have more in the future. I did not mean it as an argument for or against any particular Airport site.

Quoting Rampart (Reply 64):
Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 63):
The jury is not out.

You must be an engineer, all super-practical and everything. People like you questioned the practicality of aircraft carriers in the 1920s, of runway piers in the 1950s. They would have scoffed at the reef runway at Honolulu, or the amazing runway structure at Funchal

View Large View Medium

I'm an engineer too, and I go along with Boeing7e7 on this, the jury is not out. Sure you can build an offshore airport, but its is not a cost effective solution. Airport runways are typically 2 miles long. Way too expensive, way too much upkeep, and way too impractical. Something they teach us in engineering school, cost must be considered. HSR will be built in California, and as a by product it will pass by several airport locations that are way more cost effective than an offshore airport, and will remove air traffic from the skies, as well as provide fast transit for remote villages like Bakersfield and Fresno.
 
PanAm747
Topic Author
Posts: 4711
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 4:46 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sat Jan 20, 2007 6:20 am

Quote:
as well as provide fast transit for remote villages like Bakersfield and Fresno.

  

As someone who grew up in the central valley (Bakersfield, specifically), there were times when it FELT like a remote village...

I'm not sure if that's the case now...

Parangaricutirimicuaro, Michoacan, MX, is a remote village.

[Edited 2007-01-19 22:21:13]
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
 
SANMAN66
Posts: 979
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:37 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:22 am

Quoting Rampart (Reply 64):
(Madeira, talk about an earthquake and tsunami hazard!) Maybe an offshore

That runway/bridge at Madeira is remarkable.Does anyone know if it's strong and long enough to support a fully loaded 747,or an A380?
PSA Gives you a lift!
 
galapagapop
Posts: 864
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 2:15 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sat Jan 20, 2007 12:20 pm

Quoting Bicoastal (Reply 29):
Overwhelmingly rejected in a county-wide vote of the people. Most, including myself, like our Lindbergh Field. We have no desire for a hub or large airport in San Diego and want most of the people and businesses who have moved here during the past 30 years (the point at which San Diego started to deteriorate in my mind) to pick up and leave.

Overwhelmingly chose to be short sighted and with their heads stuck up their arses.

SAN needs to change. It's not about how nice it is now, just try and say that in 5 years when SAN starts breaking at the seams, then what? Another 10 years of debate? Use your brian and think further than the next election cycle, maybe then San Diego could start being seen as the large metropolis that it actually is.

Just wait till LAX gets capped. Only then will you San Diegites see the need? Or will it just have to be with BRAC when they finally admit Miramar is going to be closed, even then you guys will be too busy to notice the thousands of homes that would go in it's place, because as we know tract housing is really beneficial to the economy and infrastructure, when SAN would be an economical drain.
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sat Jan 20, 2007 12:41 pm

Quoting Rampart (Reply 64):
You must be an engineer, all super-practical and everything. People like you questioned the practicality of aircraft carriers in the 1920s, of runway piers in the 1950s. They would have scoffed at the reef runway at Honolulu, or the amazing runway structure at Funchal

Your comparing practical solutions to an impractical solution. People like you ignore the realities of airport design, construction and finance. I already identified scenarios where a semi-submersible would be practical. You chose to ignore it. A protected bay is pratical, the open sea is not. No one has ever proposed such use, nor have they ever considered it practical. The intent was always for use in protected bodies of water.

Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 67):
That runway/bridge at Madeira is remarkable.Does anyone know if it's strong and long enough to support a fully loaded 747,or an A380?

It cannot support 747/A380's.
 
san747
Posts: 4361
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:03 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:49 pm

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 69):
It cannot support 747/A380's.

Actually, I believe one time, they brought in an Air Atlanta 747-200 to test out the new runway structure:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tony Silva - Madeira Spotters



Plus they get plenty of A330s and 777s...

Quoting Galapagapop (Reply 68):
Just wait till LAX gets capped. Only then will you San Diegites see the need?

No, they won't even then. Honestly, it's times like these when I think we should place less priority on public opinion, because as you see by the November results, the public doesn't really think or make decisions in your best interests.

I know what I just said will draw flak, but this whole situation is beyond ridiculous at this point... We should be talking about the breaking ground ceremony of Miramar's new passenger terminal right now, not a bunch of propositions that have no real chance of actually happening.

NIMBYs just bring out this amazing fury into my heart, because I know their materialistic desire to keep their property values at ridiculously exorbitant prices is just going to screw everyone over... Oh well. I spot at SAN, so from that standpoint, bring on the widebodies into the slot-controlled airport!! (sarcasm)
Scotty doesn't know...
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:47 pm

Quoting San747 (Reply 70):
Actually, I believe one time, they brought in an Air Atlanta 747-200 to test out the new runway structure:



Quoting San747 (Reply 70):
Plus they get plenty of A330s and 777s...

Big difference between a 747-200 and existing 747-400's (747-8 to come) and A380's. Its designed for 750k, which is normally a base runway weight design.

Quoting San747 (Reply 70):
Oh well. I spot at SAN, so from that standpoint, bring on the widebodies into the slot-controlled airport!! (sarcasm)

Didn't you hear? All the majors are going to buy 787-3's to serve all the hubs from SAN. Southwest is thinking about a few used 757's. SkyWest and Eagle are buying up used DC-10's for the SAN-LAX run. It'll be heavy heaven!

[Edited 2007-01-20 14:54:02]
 
SANMAN66
Posts: 979
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:37 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:34 pm

The individuals wanting the airlines to simply fly widebodies to SAN need to take just a few minutes from saying no to every airport proposal and at least try and learn something: The major airlines that still have widebodies (such as United,American,Delta,etc). are assigning them to int'l routes,or parking them in the desert, (Ah, there's those elusive int'l flights again!)It is truly disturbing to continually run across people who choose to be ignorant! As much as I hate to say it, San Diegans shouldn't get too comfortable about the DL 767 that flies the SAN-ATL route because that 767 could be reassigned to an international route and replaced with maybe a 757 or 737,which would only leave Hawaiian using a 767.

Quoting San747 (Reply 70):
bring on the widebodies into the slot-controlled airport!! (sarcasm)
PSA Gives you a lift!
 
hiflyer
Posts: 1274
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:38 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sun Jan 21, 2007 12:05 am

Filling in the southern part of the bay for a new airport would probably be the only viable alternative to Miramar. You do not want to go south of the border as cross border traffic jams are horrendous. You can't go farther east as the tree huggers will stop you. Even a fill in the south bay proposal may lose due to the seaweed lovers.

It is about as difficult to put in a new airport in populated areas of California as it is to put in a nuclear power plant. Another poster is correct re widebodies are going intl and cities like SAN will see more and more narrowbody aircraft...the problem is 'more and more'...and one runway saturation.

If the citizens insist on keeping Lindberg then the airport needs to be turned around with an entirely new terminal structure on the north side of the runway and a second parallel runway built where the terminals and hangers are now. As with most dual complexes arrival aircraft would use the southernmost runway with departures on the one closest to the terminal.
 
SANMAN66
Posts: 979
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:37 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:21 am

SAN,during the mid 80's,when it truly WAS a widebody heaven!


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Frank C. Duarte Jr.


It must have been a nightmare having two 747s cross the active runway just to take off!

[Edited 2007-01-20 23:22:54]
PSA Gives you a lift!
 
User avatar
SANFan
Posts: 5488
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:10 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:15 pm

I have been trying to find the thread of a day or 2 ago about LGA planning on trying to force cx to add wide-bodies there in order to cut congestion. Does anyone remember it?

I say, as soon as that strategy works there, then, sure, SAN can work that angle too! (And I'm sure the airlines will be just as amenable to it here as there...  Wink )

By the way, I found some neat stuff about the currently planned Lindbergh expansion (of T2 West); it's more detailed than I've seen before. It's at:
http://www.san.org/documents/airport...y_committee/July06/AMP_program.pdf

And an "Update" to the above including the rest of the Field's improvements at:
http://www.san.org/documents/airport...ry_committee/July06/AMP_Update.pdf

These, in addition to the EIR that's being readied (or perhaps has even been filed already), are all getting me thinking that maybe some progress is being made to at least get us viability for a few more years at SAN.  hyper 

I do kind of laugh however at the assumptions (last July) that 10 more gates will take care of business thru 2015. Unless things really slow down around here, we needed 10 more gates YESTERDAY! I guess we in San Diego have to take anything we can squeeze from the rocks and be happy to have it, right...?  crossfingers 

bb
 
SANMAN66
Posts: 979
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:37 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:19 am

Everything looks good on paper.The question is are they going to expand Lindbergh? Or are they going to sit around for the next several years talking about it and do more studies?Don't get me wrong,but the Lindbergh master plan
looks good,I especially like the moving sidewalks and the parking structure proposed for T2.That only leaves the biggest problem.More gates mean more
planes and more planes mean a second runway. How will they address the bottleneck of planes lining up for takeoff on RWY.27? That's like ignoring the need to build a new freeway to alleviate heavy traffic on an existing two lane highway.
PSA Gives you a lift!
 
san747
Posts: 4361
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:03 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:24 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 71):
Big difference between a 747-200 and existing 747-400's (747-8 to come) and A380's. Its designed for 750k, which is normally a base runway weight design.

Don't worry, I wasn't disagreeing with you, I just was noting that it has happened before.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 71):
Didn't you hear? All the majors are going to buy 787-3's to serve all the hubs from SAN. Southwest is thinking about a few used 757's. SkyWest and Eagle are buying up used DC-10's for the SAN-LAX run. It'll be heavy heaven!



Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 72):
The individuals wanting the airlines to simply fly widebodies to SAN need to take just a few minutes from saying no to every airport proposal and at least try and learn something:

Believe me, I don't want SAN to get widebody flights just because. I want it to get the widebody flights it can support, and if it ends up that even with a new airport, it still just gets DL and HA 767s, so be it.

Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 76):
That's like ignoring the need to build a new freeway to alleviate heavy traffic on an existing two lane highway.

Bad analogy for California, because we don't build freeways or expand roads where they need to be. Look at southwestern Riverside County. Winchester Road (Route 79), the main thoroughfare between Temecula and Hemet/San Jacinto (a total of 160,000 people), is a 2-lane road!!!

That's just one example, I could give you a billion more...
Scotty doesn't know...
 
SANMAN66
Posts: 979
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:37 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Mon Jan 22, 2007 6:30 am

Quoting San747 (Reply 77):
I want it to get the widebody flights it can support, and if it ends up that even with a new airport, it still just gets DL and HA 767s, so be it.

I agree with you on that one.
PSA Gives you a lift!
 
SANMAN66
Posts: 979
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:37 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Mon Jan 22, 2007 7:02 am

I posted in a different thread that there could have been competing airport proposals going on at the same time, Miramar Vs. TwinPorts,(at the border).Maybe a fully expanded Lindbergh could have been added to the ballot
(to see how Point Loma votes),a tiebreaker of sorts.If the majority of votes decided on fully expanding Lindbergh,so be it. At least one of the airport proposals could have had gotten some political clout behind it.(Third time is a charm)!
PSA Gives you a lift!
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:40 am

Quoting Hiflyer (Reply 73):
Filling in the southern part of the bay for a new airport would probably be the only viable alternative to Miramar.

Not possible. It's a protected environment.

Quoting Hiflyer (Reply 73):
If the citizens insist on keeping Lindberg then the airport needs to be turned around with an entirely new terminal structure on the north side of the runway and a second parallel runway built where the terminals and hangers are now. As with most dual complexes arrival aircraft would use the southernmost runway with departures on the one closest to the terminal.

Not possible either. Terrain, terrain, and terrain. If they were to build Lindbergh Field using today's obstruction clearance standards, the runway would be a scant 4,700' long. A runway south of the existing runway faces even steeper terrain west of the airport. On the North side is MCRD and over 70% of it is on the national historical register and cannot be razed.

People need to quit talking about what can be done to Lindbergh. Every alternative for it has been evaluated, ad nausium. It simply doesn't work.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 75):
I have been trying to find the thread of a day or 2 ago about LGA planning on trying to force cx to add wide-bodies there in order to cut congestion. Does anyone remember it?

That's a different issue. La Guardia's goal is to reach 120 seats per departure up from it's present 90 seats per departure. SAN is at 123 seats per departure, third in the US only to JFK and ATL. But hey, SAN just needs bigger planes and all the woes will go away. Not...

[Edited 2007-01-22 01:44:42]
 
PanAm747
Topic Author
Posts: 4711
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 4:46 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Mon Jan 22, 2007 12:41 pm

Quote:
If the citizens insist on keeping Lindberg then the airport needs to be turned around with an entirely new terminal structure on the north side of the runway and a second parallel runway built where the terminals and hangers are now.

Actually, that was proposed - it would necessitate not only removing virtually all of the Midway area up to the San Diego River, but the new runway (at minimuym distance from the current 9/27) would not be able to be used for landings due to terrain.

Additionally, large portions of Point Loma and Ocean Beach would have to be dug up and carted away to clear the terrain.

Quote:
SAN just needs bigger planes and all the woes will go away. Not...

 rotfl 

Can you believe some NIMBY's in San Diego think they can do this? I mean, come on - 777's and 747's have to taxi down the active runway and do a 180, as they are too wide to use the taxiway. And bigger jets? Tell that to the airlines...they would probably LOVE a higher demand for seats. I mean, come on - are you going to tell Delta they HAVE to fly 767's all the time because we want more seats? Heck, they'll be more than happy to make sure that every seat sells for a premium on 757's and 737's. And has someone told Southwest they have to fly larger planes?
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:00 am

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 81):
And has someone told Southwest they have to fly larger planes?

An economics professor did say just that.... LOL!!!!!!!
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sat Jan 27, 2007 6:27 pm

Check out this piece of crap idea from a developer and a politician:

Move the Terminals to Pacific Highway....

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070126/news_lz1e26peace.html

Lets think about this for a split second:

64 gates, road access, parking, rental cars and a rail station on less than 100 acres?

Assuming it "could" be done (forget that it's physically impossible when you consider an 18 gate terminal proposed for Southwest a few years ago took up 80% of that 100 acres):

Land Aquisition and mitigation, about $1 billion.
Gates at $25 million a piece, $1.6 billion.
Airfield improvements and MCRD aquisition, another $1 Billion.
Historical structure preservation, another half billion.
Roadway access and improvements, another $1 billion.

$5 billion spent and no capacity gain. Yeah, that makes sense...

They suggest leveling the south side and making it a park, including Harbor Drive. So where's GA and cargo?

Talk about developer rape.

[Edited 2007-01-27 10:31:43]
 
PanAm747
Topic Author
Posts: 4711
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 4:46 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sun Jan 28, 2007 2:32 am

Quote:
Talk about developer rape.

And how about the Navy terminal complex design? Or the 301 University project? The list of projects benefitting only a developer at the expense of taxpayers is endless.

In a city as corrupted as San Diego, which can't even get an AUDIT done independently on time or on budget, developer rape is virtually assured.

I hate to speak so ill of my city that I love so much, but there is no desire to change for the better nor any real hope of some long-term strategy to deal with any of our problems, from the airport to corruption to urban sprawl. There seems to be only a nostalgia for the good ol' days when the military ran the town and only certain people were allowed to live here. It has poisoned the atmosphere to an extent that I don't know how recovery is possible.

Quote:
Land Aquisition and mitigation, about $1 billion.
Gates at $25 million a piece, $1.6 billion.
Airfield improvements and MCRD aquisition, another $1 Billion.
Historical structure preservation, another half billion.
Roadway access and improvements, another $1 billion.

$5 billion spent and no capacity gain.

Screwing the taxpayers: $5 billion dollars.

Laughing all the way to the bank over their utter impotence and short-sidedness? Priceless.
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
 
User avatar
Coronado990
Posts: 1531
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:12 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sun Jan 28, 2007 3:50 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 83):
64 gates, road access, parking, rental cars and a rail station on less than 100 acres?

The use of MCRD and land between Pacific Highway and I-5 would have to be utilized to get that many gates on the north side along with parking and rail stations. Without MCRD, you could maybe squeeze in 32 gates...creatively. Anyway, it's all moot because I do not think Mission Hills would want that type of activity right at the bottom of their neighborhood to begin with. The prevailing winds blows jet fuel right into those neighborhoods the way things are now with at least a mile separation from terminal and houses. Also, engine noise would be more noticeable for them so they better be prepared for a NIMBY battle on that one.

Now, a downsized Lindbergh Field with a regional international airport somewhere else such as Pendleton/Oceanside would work making Lindbergh Field more like Aeroparque Jorge Newbury (AEP) in Buenos Aires. May I suggest grass between the runways...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Joaquin Iocca - Argentina SpottingTeam



Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 84):
There seems to be only a nostalgia for the good ol' days when the military ran the town and only certain people were allowed to live here.

My family has been here since 1890. What certain people are you referring to?
SFO=NoCal LAX=SoCal SAN=LoCal
 
User avatar
SANFan
Posts: 5488
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:10 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:27 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 83):
Move the Terminals to Pacific Highway....
...$5 billion spent and no capacity gain. Yeah, that makes sense...

They keep crawling out of the woodwork, don't they?

In some other SAN-related information, I just noticed that the 2006 Lindbergh numbers came out this week. Bottom line: total pax traffic was 17,481,942, up .6%. Not exactly what it has been the last couple of years but still increasing. (Note: a bit over 6M of those pax flew WN; I always find their numbers very impressive, in SAN as well as most other cities they serve.)

If you want to see the data yourselves, here's the link:
http://www.san.org/documents/statistics/2006/Dec_06.pdf

bb
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8139
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sun Jan 28, 2007 3:00 pm

What I find amusing is that Popular Science talked about the very idea of a floating airport out at sea back in the early 1970's!

With today's modern construction technology, we could build such an airport right now. Indeed, we could construct a large airport built on a gigantic floating platform far faster than an airport built on a shoreline, mostly because we avoid the expensive and very time-consuming process of building up landfill for the airport itself.
 
User avatar
hawaiian717
Posts: 3497
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:46 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sun Jan 28, 2007 3:10 pm

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 81):
I mean, come on - 777's and 747's have to taxi down the active runway and do a 180, as they are too wide to use the taxiway.

That's not how I remember it when BA was here. I believe they had to cross the runway at one point (B4 perhaps?) to taxiway C, then back across (at D?) to B to get from the terminal to runway 27. And even if the 747 had issues, I can't see the 777 having the same; FedEx's DC-10s take C from their ramp to 27.

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 87):
Indeed, we could construct a large airport built on a gigantic floating platform far faster than an airport built on a shoreline, mostly because we avoid the expensive and very time-consuming process of building up landfill for the airport itself.

In deep water open ocean?
 
RichPhitzwell
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:19 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sun Jan 28, 2007 3:12 pm

Dont know if this is true, but I have been told that MCRD can not be located due to the historical significance of the site...

Paternally I believe the buildings would need to be relocated, but the site could be reasonably altered.

Anybody truly know the answer? And this is not an endorsement from the Rich...
Nonav.com kinda like Whiners except the lights are on and the pimps been paid
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Sun Jan 28, 2007 8:34 pm

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 87):
What I find amusing is that Popular Science talked about the very idea of a floating airport out at sea back in the early 1970's!

With today's modern construction technology, we could build such an airport right now. Indeed, we could construct a large airport built on a gigantic floating platform far faster than an airport built on a shoreline, mostly because we avoid the expensive and very time-consuming process of building up landfill for the airport itself.

Popular Science also talked about flying cars in everyones driveways by the 80's. That happened. Next.

Quoting RichPhitzwell (Reply 89):
Dont know if this is true, but I have been told that MCRD can not be located due to the historical significance of the site...

Everything that surrounds the parade grounds (big asphalt slab with "H" buildings just south if you google the image), and everything North and West of that area is on the historical register and stays put.

[Edited 2007-01-28 12:38:02]
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8139
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Mon Jan 29, 2007 1:38 am

Quoting Hawaiian717 (Reply 88):
In deep water open ocean?

Obviously not practical.  Smile

What I am thinking is more like a big floating platform anchored in relatively shallow water (maybe 30 meters depth at most). Such an installation could have drastically reduced the cost of KIX or the current HKG airports, since we avoid the enormous cost and time wasted to building up landfill.
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Mon Jan 29, 2007 4:56 am

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 91):
What I am thinking is more like a big floating platform anchored in relatively shallow water (maybe 30 meters depth at most). Such an installation could have drastically reduced the cost of KIX or the current HKG airports, since we avoid the enormous cost and time wasted to building up landfill.

San Diego is not Hong Kong and doesn't need a HKG sized airport. To do the equivalent thing that was done in HK would be to destroy Shelter Island, and Harbor Island and destroy Point Loma. Use the Dirt from Point Loma to fill in and build the airport right there at a cost of about $30 Billion dollars. Its not going to happen. HSR is begining to look much more sensible if this is all that San Diego can come up with.
 
User avatar
Coronado990
Posts: 1531
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:12 am

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Mon Jan 29, 2007 5:46 am

Come on Oceanside, I pulling for ya. A new Charger Stadium and a new Intercontinental Airport would raise your statues from "redneck capital" of California to a World-Class city. Make it happen and it will put you on the map. Take advantage of your central location in being able to draw from north and south. Seize the opportunity, Oceanside, and you will soar!!!
SFO=NoCal LAX=SoCal SAN=LoCal
 
SANMAN66
Posts: 979
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:37 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Mon Jan 29, 2007 3:11 pm

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 92):
San Diego is not Hong Kong and doesn't need a HKG sized airport.

That is exactly correct.If Lindbergh didn't have the terrain issues concerning Point Loma,the space for a second runway,and just a little bit more gate space, then it could expanded to the size befitting San Diego,and accomodate
the increase in capacity when the time comes. It's true,we don't need an airport the size of DFW,DIA,ATL,or even HKG,mainly because San Diego will never become a hub,due to the geographical location.But we do need a better airport.
PSA Gives you a lift!
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Tue Jan 30, 2007 2:15 am

Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 94):
That is exactly correct.If Lindbergh didn't have the terrain issues concerning Point Loma,the space for a second runway,and just a little bit more gate space, then it could expanded to the size befitting San Diego,and accomodate
the increase in capacity when the time comes. It's true,we don't need an airport the size of DFW,DIA,ATL,or even HKG,mainly because San Diego will never become a hub,due to the geographical location.But we do need a better airport.

It's a bit more complicated than that. You need 2,500' of separation to offset wake turbulence in VFR, IFR runway separation for all aircraft (heavy or non-heavy) is 4,300', 3,000 in with some exceptions but it's a massive waste of space between the runways (See SEATAC). Close parallels only net you about 35 million annual pax, about 20% more than a single runway can net you. At 2,500' you add another 1,000 for taxiways then you have the landside terminals etc... so from a land use perspective 4,300' allows you to build terminals between the runways and handle simultanious IFR ops for all aircraft (including narrowbodies) and double Lindberghs capacity which would be enough. Close parallels only work if the airport is in addition to Lindbergh where the close parallel airport is the primary airport supporting 35 million and Lindbergh supports about 48 gates, or about 20 milllion pax. Lindbergh as a stand alone single runway would only support about 26 million with 64 gates due to it's curfew and it's west coast location that limits hub connection opportunities east of Denver.
 
SANMAN66
Posts: 979
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:37 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Tue Jan 30, 2007 8:49 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 95):
(See SEATAC).

Thanks for clearing this up with me Boeing 7E7. I was thinking more along the lines of SEA-TAC, with the close parallel runways.So the runway separation at
SEA is only 2,500 feet? I had always wondered why in most of the SAN airport
proposals, they insisted on having terminals between two runways.(standard airport design).I have seen at airports with close parallel runways widebodies
simultaneously landing on them,(SEA-TAC),and I do believe SFO does it too.
In the Miramar proposal the plan was to have terminals south of the existing runways and another runway built further south. I had wondered why they couldn't simply use the existing parallel runways,but now I understand better.
Two simultaneous landings at SFO, below.(Those airliners sure look close!)
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Ben Wang



[Edited 2007-01-30 00:50:46]

[Edited 2007-01-30 00:54:21]

[Edited 2007-01-30 00:56:35]

[Edited 2007-01-30 00:58:21]
PSA Gives you a lift!
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Another Off-Shore SD Airport Proposal

Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:18 am

Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 96):
So the runway separation at
SEA is only 2,500 feet?

The existing is 800 or so and the new runway is 3000' from the runway closest to the terminals. There's a ton of empty space as a result that could have been better utilized.

Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 96):
In the Miramar proposal the plan was to have terminals south of the existing runways and another runway built further south.

That was for Joint Use only. Under non-military ops, the airport would use the two new runways. During fighter ops, the airport would use the existing miramar runways (daytime ops in VFR when Flighter training doesn't take place). Fighters were to use the furthest south runway.

In theory, absent the military you could build the terminals south of the existing runways then later add two additional close parallels for an LAX configuration. There's a ton of land there. Not that that kind of capacity is needed, but then again, in 1928 people thought one runway was enough for SAN.

Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 96):
I have seen at airports with close parallel runways widebodies
simultaneously landing on them,(SEA-TAC),and I do believe SFO does it too.

What you're seeing is an offset approach. The smaller leads the heavy and is on a different glidepath to avoid the wake turbulence. In VFR you get about 72 ops an hour, but drop to about 54 in IFR with close parallels. A single runway is 58 and 48. So separation of 4,300 nets you 116 and 96 vs. 72 and 54 for the same level of investment in pavement over roughly the same airport footprint. The far runways are just a better use of real estate and airspace.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos