FlyPeoria
Posts: 447
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 7:30 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 5:54 pm

A lot of small airports come to mind.

Champaign-Urbana, Illinois's University of Illinois - Willard Airport (CMI) present terminal opened in October 1989. At that time, TWA and USAir still provided mainline jet service to St. Louis and Dayton, respectively, while frequent commuter flights were available to MDW (ML), ORD (AA & UA), IND (US) and STL (TW). Now it serves just one airline - American Eagle. On weekdays, there are 6 departures to ORD and 1 to DFW.

[Edited 2014-07-23 11:29:38]
 
citationjet
Posts: 2518
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 2:26 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 6:03 pm

Quoting bingo1 (Thread starter):
I'm thinking more of airports that were built on a dream

I am thinking that the new Berlin airport is drastically overbuilt for the trafffic it is currently experiencing.      
Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
 
sfjeff
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:54 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 6:47 pm

Quoting burnsie28 (Reply 22):
I would argue that from what it was to what it is today its a success. Before it only had DL and NW (maybe AA to MIA) and the largest plane that could get in there was a CRJ-200.

If you are referring to PFN, Southern Airways flew DC-9s in there for many years. Also, National Airlines was flying there in 1974, according to a timetable on departedflights.com. I don't know what they were flying, but my guess is 727s.
Jeff in Málaga
 
martinair50
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu May 19, 2011 3:22 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 6:58 pm

I was in BCN once and a very big part of the beautiful new terminal was not used.
 
azstar
Posts: 444
Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 5:25 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 7:05 pm

TUS (Tucson) is a good example. The lobby area has been 50% occupied for decades with large, vacant ticket counters from one end to the other. Once US/AA combine, it will seem even emptier.
 
User avatar
United787
Posts: 2882
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 7:09 pm

Quoting FlyPeoria (Reply 50):
Champaign-Urbana, Illinois's University of Illinois - Willard Airport (CMI) present terminal opened in October 1989. At that time, TWA and USAir still provided mainline jet service to St. Louis and Dayton, respectively, while frequent commuter flights were available to MDW (ML), ORD (AA & UA), IND (US) and STL (TW). Now it serves just one airline - American Eagle. On weekdays, there are 6 departures to ORD and 1 to DFW.

CMI came to my mind too. Not sure what happened there because when I was in school at U of I 1990-1994, I was always impressed, brand new terminal better than most large cities and lots of activity.
 
lhpdx
Posts: 901
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 5:36 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 7:12 pm

PDX is a good example..You could probably fit all operations in 2 of the 4 concourses( C and D)........
 
stlgph
Posts: 10998
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 7:17 pm

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 8):
CVG, MKE, and CLE all fall into this as airports that were hubs and then lost service.
Quoting burnsie28 (Reply 22):
I would argue a little bit on this one. While planning was done well before NW built a large focus city there, before DL dropped IND, NW had almost all of the A gates and was quite busy.

agreed. Indianapolis wasn't overbuilt - just a victim of rapid changes in the industry.


was Fayetteville XNA overbuilt? any thoughts?
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
AUSisAWESOME
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 6:11 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 7:29 pm

Quoting stlgph (Reply 57):
was Fayetteville XNA overbuilt? any thoughts?

XNA may be a little big for now, however with the expansion Northwest Arkansas is experiencing it should be a perfect fit not long from now. XNA contains the old terminal, which contains roughly 5-6 gates that only G4 uses, but its merely a trailer. The new terminal is used by all other carriers and is a perfect size, with I believe has 9 gates.
Upcoming flights: XNA-ATL-ZRH/DL ZRH-LHR LGW-DBV/BA DBV-ZRH/OU XNA-DFW-YYZ/AA TUL-HOU-BZE/WN
 
AADC10
Posts: 1511
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 7:40 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 8:02 pm

Quoting gabrielchew (Reply 17):
Zhuhai (ZUH) airport in China was (IMO) massively oversized for the operations, especially as it isn't a hub. I believe there were 24 gates over two piers. When I flew out ZUH-PEK in 2008, there were only 24 scheduled flights a day, so every flight could have it's own gate! An entire pier was mothballed, and the remaining pier very empty. It was, however, a lovely airport to use, with shops and restaurants that passengers actually wanted, rather than overpriced fashion wear.

I think the govt missed the ball on this one, seeing as they built ZUH so far from Zhuhai city without a rail connection, and with Shenzhen Airport (which is far bigger) being the same distance from Zhuhai in the other direction.

I flew out of there in the late 90s and it was not much busier then, although I am sure 2008 was an exceptionally weak year, as it was in aviation worldwide. It is a good place for the Zhuhai air show since it is otherwise underutilized and it has long been considered a white elephant.

SZX is still much further from Zhuhai than ZUH. It is actually much closer to take the ferry to HKG. Back when I went there, the rail line stopped at Guangzhou but I believe it goes through now, so it might be easier to get to CAN for domestic flights. The closest airport to Zhuhai of course is across the border at MFM.
 
stlgph
Posts: 10998
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 8:07 pm

How about MacArthur/Long Island? ISP
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
SpaceshipDC10
Posts: 6494
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 8:14 pm

Quoting flyiguy (Reply 7):

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 4):

RDU was a HUB for Midway airlines if I recall

FLY

And before that, last century, it used to be a hub for AA.
 
User avatar
vatveng
Posts: 1239
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 11:49 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 8:32 pm

Quoting knope2001 (Reply 40):
Worth noting (and this is from a US perspective) industry changes have left the majority of airports looking overbuilt on the airside to some extent. As airlines consolidate they need fewer gates and vacant real estate once used by NW, CO etc. now looks abandoned.

ORF fits this situation perfectly. They have been hit hard by mergers: only UA and DL remain in concourse B, with 8 empty gates. Concourse A is smaller and there are only 3 empty gates. US and AA have already consolidated on A, and WN is down to 2 gates and provides a fraction of their pre-merger service.

In the middle of all the merger madness, they expanded the security checkpoint on B. Given the number of pax going through there, it feels ridiculously huge.
 
FWAERJ
Posts: 2751
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2006 1:23 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 8:37 pm

I'll add EVV to the list. A huge terminal built in 1990 that was served by US, UA, AA, and DL, among others. And it went downhill from there.

Today, EVV only sees DL (ATL, DTW) and AA (DFW, ORD, and soon CLT). No G4 (as we know on a.net, EVV's previous president blew their chance to bring them to EVV), no Star Alliance carrier, no MSP.
B721/722/731/732/733/735/73G/738/739/742/752/753/762/763, A300/319/320, DC-9/10, MD-82/83/88/90, ERJ-140/145, CRJ-200/700, Q200, SF340, AS350
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 1879
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:08 pm

Quoting BN727227Ultra (Reply 31):

LNK; only volume is for Cornhusker football team charters

Really? Lincoln? Talk about "gate envy". LNK has a whopping 4 jetbridges and two outside boarding doors. Back in the 80's LNK had United, Midway, Frontier, Mississippi Valley and Air Wisc. and most of the parking spots were taken. With ORD or Stapleton delays, the parking spots were very necessary. I would hardly consider that over-built.
 
Western727
Posts: 1665
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:38 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:15 pm

Quoting lhpdx (Reply 56):
PDX is a good example..You could probably fit all operations in 2 of the 4 concourses( C and D)........

Like to know a little bit more about this one. Naturally, the DL hub was a big factor, but were there others, as well? I've not been to PDX in a few years, hence the question.
Jack @ AUS
 
sfjeff
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:54 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:22 pm

Quoting stlgph (Reply 57):
was Fayetteville XNA overbuilt? any thoughts?

I don't think so. The new concourse A has 11 gates of which 8 are used, according to the airport's web site. Concourse B, which is lower level, is used only be Allegiant. I believe that the plan is for B to be replaced at some point with a new concourse similar to A. The original Concourse A had only two jetways when it opened, both for American Eagle. Then Northwest added a jetway when they moved from FYV. The location of the original NW gate is no longer a gate. All the other airlines used lower level boarding on Concourse B, which was improved somewhat when the tunnel-like addition was added so that at least the passengers had protection most of the way to their planes. Allegiant would probably be happy if they would tear down Concourse B and just leave the departure lounge, which is on the lower level of the main part of the terminal. Still, I don't think XNA is overbuilt. Concourse B may be practically unused, but it's also claustrophobic and obsolete and is just a placeholder for future expansion. However, I suppose Allegiant uses it because it is cheaper. Surely they could move to Concourse A if they wanted to.
Jeff in Málaga
 
ridgid727
Posts: 1081
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 1:58 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:26 pm

ELP has 5 or 6 extra gates, and the airport is sometimes so quiet with non activity it would make a good library.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 3983
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:35 pm

Quoting AUSisAwesome (Reply 58):
XNA may be a little big for now, however with the expansion Northwest Arkansas is experiencing it should be a perfect fit not long from now. XNA contains the old terminal, which contains roughly 5-6 gates that only G4 uses, but its merely a trailer. The new terminal is used by all other carriers and is a perfect size, with I believe has 9 gates.

I looked on Google Earth, it looks like a second runway is under construction? Is that really needed? How often do they need to have airplanes taking off on one runway and landing on another?
Lighten up while you still can, don't even try to understand, just find a place to make your stand and take it easy
 
User avatar
RedTailDTW
Posts: 604
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:08 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:37 pm

I would say TUS (Tucson) could go either way. Back in the early/mid 2000's, TUS had AA, AM, AS, CO, DL, F9, HP/US, JR, NW, UA, WN as well as JetBlue and ExpressJet for a short while. All but 4 gates or so were used and the only counter space not used was between the gap between the Southwest and American counters.

By the time the renovations were complete, there were still plenty of airlines with operations. TUS just fell victim to airline consolidation and the economy afterward. They are now down to just AA, AS, DL, UA, US (soon to be AA) and WN.


- Mason
Airlines Flown: AA, B6, CO, HP, MQ, NW, RP, UA, US, WN, YX / Aircraft Flown: 737-200/300/700/800, 757-200/300, 777-200, A319/A320/A321, DC-9-30/50, DC-10-40, ERJ 140/145, E170, MD80/83/90
 
iFlyLOTs
Posts: 493
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 6:45 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:40 pm

Quoting FlyPeoria (Reply 50):
Champaign-Urbana, Illinois's University of Illinois - Willard Airport (CMI)

I was thinking the same thing, as well as BMI, and partly PIA just because they are all so close to each other and competing for basically the same traffic.
"...stay hungry, stay foolish" -Steve Jobs
 
runningonempty
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 2:04 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:41 pm

I think I can second with ISP being kinda a compete waste of infrastructure. Also probably borderline PNS and BKG, well that's a whole other story.
 
User avatar
kann123air
Posts: 1604
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:35 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:45 pm

Quoting jetmatt777 (Reply 68):
I looked on Google Earth, it looks like a second runway is under construction? Is that really needed? How often do they need to have airplanes taking off on one runway and landing on another?

I think the runway is already completed.

Quoting AUSisAwesome (Reply 58):
XNA may be a little big for now, however with the expansion Northwest Arkansas is experiencing it should be a perfect fit not long from now. XNA contains the old terminal, which contains roughly 5-6 gates that only G4 uses, but its merely a trailer. The new terminal is used by all other carriers and is a perfect size, with I believe has 9 gates.

Agreed. XNA is a perfect size. Should be no bigger, or no smaller.
Going for great
 
PITrules
Posts: 2109
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 11:27 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:57 pm

You could add ABE, SRQ, LBB and ITO to the list.
FLYi
 
SurfandSnow
Posts: 1469
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 7:09 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:59 pm

ITO has long been the poster child of an overbuilt non-hub airport. During the regulation era, airlines were forced to serve what was then Hawaii's secondary overseas gateway at ITO along with HNL, much like the historic aviation policy of Ireland and SNN. The ITO terminal was built in the 70s with two major interisland carriers and several major overseas carriers in mind, many of latter operating 747s and other widebody aircraft on their Hawaiian routes. ITO's terminal opened in the late 70s, able to accommodate as many as 10 747s, right around the time of deregulation. No longer forced to serve ITO by the government, it didn't take long for the overseas carriers to pull out; UA was the last one to do so - in late 1986. Mainland and foreign airlines were much more interested in not just HNL, but also OGG, KOA, and LIH, all of which gained their first overseas flights in the mid-80s whilst ITO was in decline. For almost 20 years ITO had a terminal designed with widebody overseas traffic in mind but serving nothing more interisland flights on narrowbodies and puddlejumpers. Nonstop mainland-ITO service is once again offered, but only on narrowbody aircraft. Today, ITO's terminal serves just 2 airlines - HA, with 717 service to its HNL and OGG hubs, and UA, with a less than daily LAX service on 738s. It is unlikely that any new or additional services will be added anytime soon, meaning the airport will still be drastically underutilized for the foreseeable future.
Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
 
flyiguy
Posts: 983
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 2:21 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:59 pm

Quoting PITrules (Reply 73):

I believe SRQ was percent size until WN packed up the FL shop there. B6 is trying to back fill but don't know if it will get the the size that FL was pre merger.

FLY
The opinions I post are of mine and mine alone, not of the airline I work for.
 
sfjeff
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:54 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:59 pm

Quoting jetmatt777 (Reply 68):
I looked on Google Earth, it looks like a second runway is under construction? Is that really needed? How often do they need to have airplanes taking off on one runway and landing on another?

The second runway (17/35) at XNA was built because the original runway (16/34) needed to be completely rebuilt. Here is a link about why this was necessary: http://www.airportimprovement.com/content/story.php?article=00361. I don't know what the current status is, but the Google Earth image from March 19, 2014 shows 16/34 closed.

[Edited 2014-07-23 15:01:30]
Jeff in Málaga
 
CPHGuard
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 8:58 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Wed Jul 23, 2014 10:52 pm

Quoting TheSonntag (Reply 19):
Ciudad Real airport is another candidate

CQM takes the 1st prize in my book.

Construction cost of 1.1 bn EUR, built to handle the A380, equipped with one of the longest runways in Europe (13.123 ft) and capable of 10 mio passengers annualy.
They built a 980 ft. bridge to the station, but unfortunately they forgot to actually build the station.

I don't think the airport ever handled more than 2 flights per day, until it closed Down in 2011, just two years after the grand opening....
 
penguins
Posts: 429
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 9:52 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 1:55 am

Quoting SFJEFF (Reply 52):
If you are referring to PFN, Southern Airways flew DC-9s in there for many years. Also, National Airlines was flying there in 1974, according to a timetable on departedflights.com. I don't know what they were flying, but my guess is 727s.

PFN had DL 732s and MD88s from ATL up until 98.
 
777STL
Posts: 2770
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:22 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 2:08 am

Quoting bingo1 (Thread starter):
BLV When flights at STL were reduced and a new runway opened, BLV became slightly redundant. Can anyone tell me what the yearly capacity of the airport is. I believe its best year so far is in the neighborhood of 30k pax.

BLV may be unnecessary, but it's not overbuilt for what it is. The terminal building is quite small and it technically shares its runway with Scott AFB via a mile long taxiway.
PHX based
 
Indy
Posts: 4846
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:37 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 2:10 am

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 3):
IND? Always seems so dead and there empty gates i think?

IND has a considerable number of jets parked overnight. If you fly in late at night or out early in the morning you will see every gate used and there will still be jets remote parked due to a lack of space. I think part of the problem is that IND management is largely unskilled and just cannot seem to land new service. It was a miracle IND got SFO service. Kind of a shame when you consider the size of the SFO market and the fact that it is a hub/gateway for UA. Until that terminal is paid off the only way to bring down the cost per passenger is to serve more passengers. Everything IND management seems to do is a swing and a miss. I think their focus is badly misplaced. They are too concerned with someone opening a long term parking lot and too concerned with developing non aviation business. I just don't see it as a very good use of resources.

Quoting burnsie28 (Reply 22):
NW had almost all of the A gates and was quite busy.

Actually NW had all of the A gates. They were so busy that 4 of the gates had to service two planes each. I assume of course you mean at the old terminal. It wouldn't surprise me if Delta is using 14-15 gates on the "A" side every morning. Unfortunately after the morning rush it gets quiet. So much wasted opportunity.
Indy = Indianapolis and not Independence Air
 
StuckInCA
Posts: 1657
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 12:55 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 2:18 am

Quoting chicawgo (Reply 42):
I know this isn't scientific at all (so don't jump down my throat) but it is fun to look on Google Earth at gate utilization. And there probably is some truth to comparing via this method.

Just a quick look at SMF shows 6/31 jetways being used (3/19 at new terminal).

ONT shows 1/26! No plane at the West terminal.

IND is 13/40... Busy compared to SMF and ONT!

I only had to look for a minute to see that SMF moved more passengers than IND last year (20% more). You mention that your method wasn't scientific but I'd argue it's worse than that. I think the people mover at SMF wasn't necessary but I don't think it's overbuilt otherwise unless the economy there stays terrible for 30 years.
 
JHwk
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:11 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 2:27 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 47):
Now, if ground transportation to ONT were to be improved, I'd bet it wouldn't be so overbuilt...

You have Metrolink not far away, flexible freeway access, and Foothill Transit. It really is pretty accessible if you live in the Inland Empire. What it seems to lack is publicity... and flights.
 
captainstorck
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 1:40 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 2:29 am

Quoting washingtonflyer (Reply 20):
I will throw DAY in there for consideration

DAY was built up when it was a hub for legacy Piedmont. The old terminal has been demolished and the airport is pretty right-sized at this point.

Quoting jetmatt777 (Reply 68):
I looked on Google Earth, it looks like a second runway is under construction? Is that really needed? How often do they need to have airplanes taking off on one runway and landing on another?

The second runway at XNA is a temporary from what I understand. They wanted more weight capacity on the original runway and, rather than closing the airport down for a year or two to rebuild, they built another runway to use while the old one was rebuilt. (Why not just build a higher capacity runway where the temp is and turn the old one into a taxiway or something, you've got me...)
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 2:42 am

T2 at PRG which opened in 2006 and handles all Schengen flights seems much too big, especially the check-in area where roughly half the floor space is completely empty. It's almost big enough to play football. PRG is one my favourite airports in Europe, probably because it never seems crowded or congested.

The surplus check-in area space in T2 I'm referring to is visible in the foreground of this photo:



With a high percentage of passengers now checking in online and some carriers even permitting passengers to print their own baggage tags, then using baggage drop-off counters at the airport, many airports will probably discover they don't need all the space used for traditional check-in facilities and will be redesigning the surplus space to generate some revenue (food service, retail etc.)

[Edited 2014-07-23 19:48:50]
 
User avatar
jsnww81
Posts: 2523
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 3:29 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:39 am

Quoting AviationAware (Reply 18):
HAJ airport in Germany is also vastly oversized and operating at a fraction of capacity.

I visited HAJ last winter in the middle of the day and it was almost eerie how empty it felt, even with one terminal closed for renovations. There was almost nobody in the check-in halls and only one aircraft (a Germanwings A319) on the ground. I was surprised, as I'd always assumed Hannover was a fairly busy airport.

Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 74):
ITO has long been the poster child of an overbuilt non-hub airport.

Very true. ITO has an entire ticket lobby and baggage claim hall that aren't being used, and only two or three jetways ever see service. It's a shame, as it's a nice little facility. I do remember seeing a mid-1980s photo of ITO during some kind of HNL diversion event where every jetway was occupied by a widebody - United, Western, Pan Am, Qantas. It looked just like the terminal was probably intended to look when it was built!

OGG feels rather underutilized in the airside gate areas - the two northernmost gate lobbies rarely (if ever) see flights, and often they don't even turn the lights on down there. The landside ticketing and baggage claim halls are often exceptionally crowded, however.

Just about any mid-size terminal in the US comes to mind - most were built large enough to offer gates for six or seven legacy carriers and are now handling half that amount. ONT, ABQ, JAX, SDF, MHT, COS and PDX all come to mind.
 
User avatar
BN727227Ultra
Posts: 636
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 7:15 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:51 am

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 64):
Really? Lincoln? Talk about "gate envy". LNK has a whopping 4 jetbridges and two outside boarding doors. Back in the 80's LNK had United, Midway, Frontier, Mississippi Valley and Air Wisc. and most of the parking spots were taken. With ORD or Stapleton delays, the parking spots were very necessary. I would hardly consider that over-built.

I did go through some websites and drove down memory lane, and looked at an aerial view that showed none of those four gates being used   I do drive past LNK often and have never seen any traffic except for the odd KC-135.

I did note that DL is coming back next month for seasonal service to ATL. I'm glad to see it.
 
User avatar
BN727227Ultra
Posts: 636
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 7:15 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:53 am

Quoting Surfandsnow (Reply 74):
ITO has long been the poster child of an overbuilt non-hub airport.

Can't believe I forgot about ITO. Good call.
 
spyglass
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 3:17 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:19 am

MCI, probably the best designed terminal complex "pre checkpoint" and busy, with a BN hub and AA, CO, EA, FL, NC, OZ, TW ......but now only about 60% of the gates being used. OKC rebuilt their terminal about 10yrs ago with 16 gates, now have 4 empty gates (plus 1 the city keeps for emergency use), and the illustrious city planners want to expand to20 gates. I guess they labor under the illusion that B6 or maybe Virgin might come in.....fat chance. But it seems important to "look bigtime". even when not so. It's only $.

I also remember right after deregulation that AA set up hubs at SJC, BNA and RDU....ACY itself is in big trouble, as the casinos are folding.
I remember when......a plane trip was a big deal.
 
AirFiero
Posts: 1400
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:43 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 5:12 am

Quoting spyglass (Reply 88):
I also remember right after deregulation that AA set up hubs at SJC, BNA and RDU....ACY itself is in big trouble, as the casinos are folding.

Since the new terminal at SJC opened, I seem to remember reading that the extension off terminal A that AA originally built has gone mostly dark.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 14964
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 5:21 am

Quoting PITrules (Reply 73):

ITO and SRQ were my top two. Both may have made sense during regulation but still likely only needed 1/2 the gates. Back when SRQ was far busier, they used all the gates because they existed, but could have gotten by with 1/2. Now it looks like 1/2 the main terminal is boarded up, at least that's what it looked like last night when I arrived.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
ua900
Posts: 1530
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 7:14 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:04 am

There's always KSF, RLG, TAT, LCJ in Europe.
2018: AMS | ARN | CDG | DEN | DFW | EWR | FRA | GUM | HAM | HKG | HNL | IAH | LAX | MIA | MUC | ORD | RSW | SAL | SFO | SIN | TLV | TXL | VIE | ZRH
 
vfw614
Posts: 3801
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 12:34 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 8:23 am

In Germany, an airport that comes to mind is FMO which was expanded a decade ago and now is massively oversized for the traffic it receives.

In the UK, my first thought was CWL.

In Poland, POZ is rather big for the amount of traffic it has.

In Japan I would nominate KIX.
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 1879
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:55 pm

Quoting BN727227Ultra (Reply 86):
I did go through some websites and drove down memory lane, and looked at an aerial view that showed none of those four gates being used   I do drive past LNK often and have never seen any traffic except for the odd KC-135.

Lincoln, like many other cities its size that have to compete in the shadow of neighboring, larger airports have suffered with reduced service and smaller planes. When the LCCs come in to the larger cities with their initial low fares, the secondary airports can't compete. Lincoln, and communities west of LNK drive the extra 100 miles to OMA for slightly better fares and many more flight options.

Before the RJ craze, LNK had just as many mainline flights to DEN and ORD as they have RJ flights now. Times change. I seriously expect to see UA start LNK-IAH service or AA LNK-DFW. Lincoln, at pop. 250,000 and the amount of sports traffic the University generates should easily warrant air service to the south. DEN being the closest airport to the west is 400 miles and there are a lot of wealthy ag-business people between the two.
 
ouboy79
Posts: 4115
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2001 1:48 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 1:03 pm

Quoting spyglass (Reply 88):
OKC rebuilt their terminal about 10yrs ago with 16 gates, now have 4 empty gates (plus 1 the city keeps for emergency use), and the illustrious city planners want to expand to20 gates. I guess they labor under the illusion that B6 or maybe Virgin might come in.....fat chance. But it seems important to "look bigtime". even when not so. It's only $.

Last count I think only 2 are officially unleased right now. Gate 1 will never be leased out by the city. American now has 3 gates, United is controlling 4 at last count. Sure utilization on some are low, but if they are leased out then they are considered taken.

The big thing you are leaving out of your comments regarding the east concourse expansion (which is initially just 4 gates) is that it also adds in an FIS area. Something sorely missing from OKC to bring flights to Mexico back.

So I wouldn't consider OKC in the overbuilt group. Every airport is going to need a couple gates free for any potential additions. It isn't like they built a 30 gate terminal in hopes of landing a ton of new service, they simply increased it by a couple over the previous number and are adding on gradually.
 
r2rho
Posts: 3096
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:13 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 2:07 pm

Quoting martinair50 (Reply 53):
I was in BCN once and a very big part of the beautiful new terminal was not used.

BCN is not overbuilt, it just has room for growth. If you look at the spectacular development of BCN the past 5-6 years despite the deep Spanish crisis, that extra space will come in very handy as soon as the economy recovers.
But anyway, this thread is about non-hubs, and BCN is Vueling's hub.
 
User avatar
ramprat74
Posts: 1355
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 6:01 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 2:45 pm

AVP terminal is way too big for the area traffic.
 
FlyPeoria
Posts: 447
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 7:30 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:04 pm

Quoting iFlyLOTs (Reply 70):
Quoting FlyPeoria (Reply 50):
Champaign-Urbana, Illinois's University of Illinois - Willard Airport (CMI)

I was thinking the same thing, as well as BMI, and partly PIA just because they are all so close to each other and competing for basically the same traffic.

I almost mentioned BMI (Bloomington, Ill for those not familiar) but when their current terminal opened in November 2001, it was absolutely necessary. It replaced a terminal only 30 years old that was bursting at the seams. But the new terminal was built with the expectation it would become the primary commercial airport for all of Central Illinois. That didn't happen.

Only last year, IIRC, BMI replaced two of three jetways and added three more for a total of six (five 2nd level). The pier-like concourse has nine gates (five 2nd level, four ground-level), which seems excessive since it handles only 11-14 weekday departures (G4, 2-weekly to SFB; AA, 3 to ORD and 2 to DFW; DL, 3 to ATL, 2 to DTW and 1 to MSP; F9, 4-weekly to DEN and 4-weekly to MCO). Service is being reduced further as DL is dropping 1 DTW roundtrip and F9 is going seaonal.

PIA's new (2011) has plenty of space - only 7 of 12 gates in use; 3 are ground-level, other 2 have no jetways - but is getting busier with likely 600K pax in 2014.

[Edited 2014-07-24 08:06:27]

[Edited 2014-07-24 08:08:12]

[Edited 2014-07-24 08:08:53]

[Edited 2014-07-24 08:10:02]

[Edited 2014-07-24 08:28:32]
 
chicawgo
Posts: 397
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:09 pm

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:42 pm

Quoting StuckInCA (Reply 81):
I only had to look for a minute to see that SMF moved more passengers than IND last year (20% more). You mention that your method wasn't scientific but I'd argue it's worse than that. I think the people mover at SMF wasn't necessary but I don't think it's overbuilt otherwise unless the economy there stays terrible for 30 years.

Passenger count has nothing to do with being overbuilt. We're talking about gate utilization. SMF is almost all mainline. IND is majority regional. So the "pax per flight" average is significantly lower at IND. That means SMF needs less gates than IND. Additionally, my comment about IND blowing SMF and ONT away was a joke based on the unscientific nature of looking on Google Earth. However, while there certainly is plenty of data to disprove the Google Earth test, your post does not.

Interestingly, I looked at the YTD movements for Air Carriers only:

IND: 40,583
SMF: 32,050

SMF is almost exactly 20% less than IND. So SMF doesn't need nearly as many gates as IND.
 
Koosi
Posts: 105
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 12:57 am

RE: Non Hub Airports That Were Overbuilt

Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:53 pm

Quoting ua900 (Reply 91):
There's always KSF, RLG, TAT, LCJ in Europe.

In what way is TAT overbuilt?

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 84):
T2 at PRG which opened in 2006 and handles all Schengen flights seems much too big, especially the check-in area where roughly half the floor space is completely empty. It's almost big enough to play football. PRG is one my favourite airports in Europe, probably because it never seems crowded or congested.

Agreed, the landside part of T2 is pretty big. But it was built with future expansion in mind: http://www.prg.aero/en/prague-airpor...rport-safety/zajimavosti/?detail=1

Quoting imant (Reply 27):
BUD - Budapest Ferihegy has always been oversized and with the collapse of Malev Hungarian Airlines it has totally lost it's hub function.

I flew out of BUD (T2) back in 2010 and it didn't seem oversized at all, quite the contrary actually, especially landside and at security. It may be different now that Malév is gone but then again LCCs have since moved to T2.

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