Future Of AA In ATL?

miaami · Tue Apr 21, 2015 12:08 am

Is AA maxed out with available gate space in ATL? I heard the new ATL-LAX flights are doing very well, would it be possible to add any additional flights from ATL ?

afcjets · Tue Apr 21, 2015 12:14 am

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 49):
It's not that simple. Only specific gates on A can park 767s. at the end of the day, because of how the gates are configured you will end up blocking an adjacent gate by doing what you are proposing. Take it from people that have actually worked the ramp in ATL

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 47):
I don't know if they've ever done that since the 717s are on B and C but in theory you could. It would probably block the gate next to those though. Since they're set up small-767-767-small.

This is all hypothetical because the point is Delta has no shortage of widebody and more specifically 777 capable gates (even if they were to give up the two roomiest ones on T) and no reason to park a 777 on A.

Still, I don't understand why blocking a gate would be necessary. Wouldn't a 717-777-717-small lineup be the same if not easier than small-767-767-small? What gate is being blocked in this scenario?

northwestEWR · Tue Apr 21, 2015 12:22 am

Quoting n126DL (Reply 48):
Just for fun, sometimes I walk from F to T on a layover for the exercise

Whenever I'm at the airport, I usually end up walking or taking the train from T/A/B down to E for lunch. It takes me about 20 minutes to make the roundtrip, more than half of that is standing in line waiting for food.

ATL is made out to be far worse than it actually is. T or A down to E/F is 5-7 minutes tops using the train.

ThomasMTroxell · Tue Apr 21, 2015 1:41 am

Quoting n126DL (Reply 48):

Yes. So you have the PlaneTrain on the lower level and then the second level has that long corridor split between the sterile E-F connector and non-sterile international arrivals walkway to the FIS.

N126DL · Tue Apr 21, 2015 2:32 am

Quoting ThomasMTroxell (Reply 53):
Yes. So you have the PlaneTrain on the lower level and then the second level has that long corridor split between the sterile E-F connector and non-sterile international arrivals walkway to the FIS.

Having not ever flown internationally from ATL, I ask in ignorance....is the FIS in E or F? Or both? Trying to wrap my brain around the need for the underground walkway.

1337Delta764 · Tue Apr 21, 2015 2:35 am

Note that the ATL master plan has plans for three additional international concourses (G, H, and I), with Concourse E being converted to domestic use. Maybe if it becomes a reality AA could move to Concourse E, which is a much nicer concourse than D.

N1120A · Tue Apr 21, 2015 3:21 am

Quoting par13del (Reply 17):
...because consolidation and the resulting savings was one of the benefits of the merger.

At the cost of losing prime space - not a chance.

AST1Driver · Tue Apr 21, 2015 4:02 am

So the answer to my original question is that no one knows yet. I never intended this to turn into a AA vs DL thread. (Should have known better.)

There has been a lot of discussion about DL giving up space on T. We all know that will never happen without the city of Atlanta forcing the issue.

As far as Delta's wide-body gates, there are currently 14 outside of the international gates... 2 on T (1&2) and 12 on A(2,6,10,11,12,16,18,19,21,24,25,&26). No wide-bodys on B for at least 10 years. Only T2 can handle any thing larger than a 764. This is very rare since F concourse opened. It usually involves a charter flight. When this happens T1 is shut down. The problem with putting the A330, 777, and 747 on A&T has more to do with the width of the ramp between the concourses than the gate space. The wing spans for these aircraft will not allow them to pass other planes in the ramp, virtually shutting down all other movements until they are clear. When ATL was built the requirement was for L1011s to be able to pass.

phatfarmlines · Tue Apr 21, 2015 4:06 am

Quoting n126dl (Reply 54):
Having not ever flown internationally from ATL, I ask in ignorance....is the FIS in E or F? Or both? Trying to wrap my brain around the need for the underground walkway.

Both. Connecting passengers must clear customs & immigration & claim baggage in Concourse E, while those terminating in ATL must clear customs & immigration & blaim baggage separately in Concourse F. If you arrive in Concourse E and are terminating in ATL, you are to walk to Concourse F in a sterile tunnel, though it does have moving sidewalks. I don't know of any airport in the world that has this cluster of a setup.

northwestEWR · Tue Apr 21, 2015 4:08 am

Quoting AST1Driver (Reply 57):
As far as Delta's wide-body gates, there are currently 14 outside of the international gates... 2 on T (1&2) and 12 on A(2,6,10,11,12,16,18,19,21,24,25,&26). No wide-bodys on B for at least 10 years. Only T2 can handle any thing larger than a 764. This is very rare since F concourse opened. It usually involves a charter flight. When this happens T1 is shut down. The problem with putting the A330, 777, and 747 on A&T has more to do with the width of the ramp between the concourses than the gate space. The wing spans for these aircraft will not allow them to pass other planes in the ramp, virtually shutting down all other movements until they are clear. When ATL was built the requirement was for L1011s to be able to pass.

Are you sure? I could swear I saw us park a domestic 763 on B17 or B19 a few weeks ago during IROPS.

FlyASAGuy2005 · Tue Apr 21, 2015 4:08 am

Quoting AST1Driver (Reply 57):

T5 was wide body capable, has that changed? Additionally, since the gate shuffle between 2009 and 2011 I don't think there are that many widebody gates on A anymore.

AST1Driver · Tue Apr 21, 2015 4:27 am

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 60):
T5 was wide body capable, has that changed?

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 59):
I could swear I saw us park a domestic 763 on B17 or B19 a few weeks ago during IROPS.

Delta has realigned all of its domestic gates over the last few years. T concourse was all wide-body capable until T-6 was reopened. The largest aircraft for B is the 753. C concourse has been converted from RJs to mainline handling anything smaller than a 757. D north is still all RJs. D south, Delta has the 4 former NW gates and is taking over 8 to 10 gates vacated by CO and WN.

s4popo · Tue Apr 21, 2015 2:21 pm

I don't think any airline will vacate T willingly. This may come down to lease contracts, and how much each airline is willing to pay once the current contracts expire.

georgiabill · Tue Apr 21, 2015 2:30 pm

Having a brain fart. How many widebody gates did EA have at ATL? At one time they had alot of widebody flights from ATL.

jc2354 · Tue Apr 21, 2015 5:31 pm

Could AA park 2 RJ's at the same gate on T? As these gates are prime realty, do the gates have any type of usage limitation, e.g., they have to be used so many hours a day?

afcjets · Tue Apr 21, 2015 6:14 pm

Quoting AST1Driver (Reply 57):
The problem with putting the A330, 777, and 747 on A&T has more to do with the width of the ramp between the concourses than the gate space.

That really surprises me. I have always thought the parallel concourses in ATL were quite far apart. Also, when ATL was first planned in the early 1970s, both EA (though briefly) and DL had 747s in their fleet. Even had they not it seems unfathomable to me when designing the world's first or second busiest airport, they would not have made it 747 friendly. I also thought 747s operated from T concourse from day one in 1980 or soon after from some European carrier, and it surprises me they would have been restricted to an end gate and runways on either the north side only or south side only without having to taxi all the way around the airfield.

[Edited 2015-04-21 11:25:03]

bigb · Tue Apr 21, 2015 6:53 pm

Quoting afcjets (Reply 65):
That really surprises me. I have always thought the parallel concourses in ATL were quite far apart. Also, when ATL was first planned in the early 1970s, both EA (though briefly) and DL had 747s in their fleet. Even had they not it seems unfathomable to me when designing the world's first or second busiest airport, they would not have made it 747 friendly. I also thought 747s operated from T concourse from day one in 1980 or soon after from some European carrier, and it surprises me they would have been restricted to an end gate and runways on either the north side only or south side only without having to taxi all the way around the airfield.

The central terminals where not built unitl the early 80s, well past DL having 747s. EA 747s were used mainly out of MIA.

afcjets · Tue Apr 21, 2015 7:06 pm

Quoting bigb (Reply 66):
The central terminals where not built unitl the early 80s, well past DL having 747s. EA 747s were used mainly out of MIA.

The current North/South terminal concourses T and A-D opened in 1980 after several years of construction and they first started planning for it as early as 1967.

deltal1011man · Tue Apr 21, 2015 8:19 pm

Quoting afcjets (Reply 46):
The point is if Delta were to vacate T, their Hartsfield operation would pretty much be the same as it is today. Post merger AA operations at ATL with operations halfway split between T and D will be very different than legacy AA all at T today.

Two things about this
Delta doesn't care to make AA's life easier just cause. No airline does.
And because of the flights that generally use T with Delta, no operations would be different.

and a little point also, You keep saying Delta can use F for these flights, and even if you take away the extra costs, you still have to take into account that there isn't a way to make that work as far as bags go with out making it a complete cluster when IROPS happen.

Quoting afcjets (Reply 46):

Delta was still the dominant carrier back then and Delta pays for space too. Concourse T was still prime real estate then as it is now. In some ways it was more valuable back then, because today Delta has concourse F too which is just like T in that it is attached to the terminal and does not have to be accessed by the underground transportation mall.

Delta doesn't "have" F. F, like E, is all cute and Delta only has preferential rights on 6 of the 12 gates.

Quoting afcjets (Reply 65):

That really surprises me. I have always thought the parallel concourses in ATL were quite far apart. Also, when ATL was first planned in the early 1970s, both EA (though briefly) and DL had 747s in their fleet. Even had they not it seems unfathomable to me when designing the world's first or second busiest airport, they would not have made it 747 friendly. I also thought 747s operated from T concourse from day one in 1980 or soon after from some European carrier, and it surprises me they would have been restricted to an end gate and runways on either the north side only or south side only without having to taxi all the way around the airfield.

You did see a 747 on T because T where FIS was till they built E.

Polot · Tue Apr 21, 2015 8:31 pm

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 68):
Delta doesn't care to make AA's life easier just cause. No airline does.
And because of the flights that generally use T with Delta, no operations would be different.

Its an odd argument to make that can easily be turned around. If post merger AA would just abandon T and consolidate into D it would be no different than legacy US's operations all at D today. Who cares what paint is on the side of the plane, why is legacy AA's operations more important than legacy US's? And in that case you would make 2 airlines happy (DL and UA) versus just one (AA). So maybe, because airlines should accommodate each other just because, that is what AA should do: act as a nice corporate citizen. I'm sure DL would even be willing to give up some of their D gates for AA.

afcjets · Tue Apr 21, 2015 8:45 pm

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 68):
Delta doesn't care to make AA's life easier just cause. No airline does.

Quoting Polot (Reply 69):
So maybe, because airlines should accommodate each other just because, that is what AA should do: act as a nice corporate citizen.

Quoting afcjets (Reply 41):
I said from the beginning Delta would not voluntarily relinquish T gates

Quoting AST1Driver (Reply 57):
There has been a lot of discussion about DL giving up space on T. We all know that will never happen without the city of Atlanta forcing the issue.

bigb · Tue Apr 21, 2015 9:04 pm

Quoting Polot (Reply 69):
Its an odd argument to make that can easily be turned around. If post merger AA would just abandon T and consolidate into D it would be no different than legacy US's operations all at D today. Who cares what paint is on the side of the plane, why is legacy AA's operations more important than legacy US's? And in that case you would make 2 airlines happy (DL and UA) versus just one (AA). So maybe, because airlines should accommodate each other just because, that is what AA should do: act as a nice corporate citizen. I'm sure DL would even be willing to give up some of their D gates for AA.

Which would probably be the easiest thing to do.

deltal1011man · Tue Apr 21, 2015 10:55 pm

Quoting afcjets (Reply 70):

I understand you are saying Delta isn't giving up the space

but the idea that they "should" or the city should force them too is a joke. If Anything the City should force UA and AA to go to D and allow the airline that pays the bills the best gates

afcjets · Tue Apr 21, 2015 11:29 pm

Is there any other example in the US where a non-hub airline (post-merger) has a split operation where domestic mainline flights are not operating out of at least two adjacent concourses? The closest example I can think of was when AA operated out of LAX Terminals 3 and 4 which is split by TBIT.

bigb · Tue Apr 21, 2015 11:46 pm

Quoting afcjets (Reply 73):

Is there any other example in the US where a non-hub airline (post-merger) has a split operation where domestic mainline flights are not operating out of at least two adjacent concourses? The closest example I can think of was when AA operated out of LAX Terminals 3 and 4 which is split by TBIT.

AA at LAX with Terminal 4 and now 6. UA did so in Boston until they paid the money to consolidate into a single facility. AA also is running split ops at SFO at the moment also with US in terminal 1 and AA in Terminal 2.

ordbosewr · Wed Apr 22, 2015 12:39 am

Quoting bigb (Reply 74):
UA did so in Boston until they paid the money to consolidate into a single facility.

Actually, the new space was paid for by Massport, since Massport wanted to get UA out of Terminal C to give that space to the current sweetheart at BOS (ie B6).
So United, was perfectly happy running a split operation and getting Massport to pony up alot of money to build out a new section before they moved. The new UA operation at BOS is very nice.
Besides, the location of BOS does not lend it to any connections at all. So UA knew they could run split ops for a long time at little to no impact to the operations.

deltal1011man · Wed Apr 22, 2015 1:54 am

Quoting bigb (Reply 74):

AA at LAX with Terminal 4 and now 6. UA did so in Boston until they paid the money to consolidate into a single facility. AA also is running split ops at SFO at the moment also with US in terminal 1 and AA in Terminal 2.

I mean, in Boston AA is split in half by United in B.

bpat777 · Wed Apr 22, 2015 2:27 am

I don't understand the big deal regaring split operations. Especially at an airport like ATL where any connecting passengers wouldn't have to clear security again or take a long walk (ATL Airport Train) .

OB1504 · Wed Apr 22, 2015 6:18 am

Quoting afcjets (Reply 51):
Still, I don't understand why blocking a gate would be necessary. Wouldn't a 717-777-717-small lineup be the same if not easier than small-767-767-small? What gate is being blocked in this scenario?

If you have a 777 using two 767-size gates, one of the 767 gates is the one being blocked because it cannot be used by another aircraft.

You'd also have to restripe the gate area and remeasure everything to make sure the jet bridges and other equipment can operate unimpeded when merging a gate like this. It's probably not worth it when there are plenty of other widebody gates available without the hassle of closing down an adjacent gate.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 76):
I mean, in Boston AA is split in half by United in B.

I was "pleasantly" surprised to discover this a few months ago with a 40-minute US/AA connection.

superjeff · Wed Apr 22, 2015 11:51 pm

Quoting Polot (Reply 69):
I'm sure DL would even be willing to give up some of their D gates for AA.

Of course they would. But AA has a much nicer setup in T, and D is an absolute disaster, unless they make major improvements, not the least of which would be widening the terminal and adding an Admiral's Club (they had one previously, but it wasn't too nice).

AA won't move to D without some strong benefit - it is a long ride on the train from the terminal, through most of Delta's territory.

wn676 · Thu Apr 23, 2015 1:15 am

Quoting afcjets (Reply 51):
Still, I don't understand why blocking a gate would be necessary. Wouldn't a 717-777-717-small lineup be the same if not easier than small-767-767-small? What gate is being blocked in this scenario?

In theory it's possible to gate a 777-32S/737 or 767-767 in the same space but it would require two alternate J-lines. Also, take existing conditions into consideration; things like jetbridge swing/slope limitations and fuel pit locations will limit your gating options, and to modify or replace those items is considerably more expensive than restriping. If the alternate gating scenario is not a common occurrence, it's probably better to leave as is and take the hit closing off adjacent gates when the need arises.

N1120A · Thu Apr 23, 2015 1:19 am

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 76):
I mean, in Boston AA is split in half by United in B.

Sure, but they can connect air side.

deltal1011man · Thu Apr 23, 2015 1:30 am

Quoting wn676 (Reply 80):
In theory it's possible to gate a 777-32S/737 or 767-767 in the same space but it would require two alternate J-lines. Also, take existing conditions into consideration; things like jetbridge swing/slope limitations and fuel pit locations will limit your gating options, and to modify or replace those items is considerably more expensive than restriping. If the alternate gating scenario is not a common occurrence, it's probably better to leave as is and take the hit closing off adjacent gates when the need arises.

This is why Delta doesn't put 777s into A.
Its not as simple as just parking one at a 767 gate and putting a 717 or even a CR7/CR9 next to it.

afcjets · Thu Apr 23, 2015 1:39 am

Quoting OB1504 (Reply 78):
If you have a 777 using two 767-size gates, one of the 767 gates is the one being blocked because it cannot be used by another aircraft.

The 777 would only be using one 767 gate, not two, and it would have a 717 on each side. The current lineup Delta uses sometimes in concourse A is small-767-767-small, which is four aircraft at four gates, same as a 717-777-717-small lineup. I was responding to an initial claim that the 777 wingspan is too great for concourse A, not how the stripes are drawn or whether or not it make sense, because again there is no need to do this with the large number of widebody and 777 capable gates Delta has at ATL. The two 767's have combined wingspan of 312 feet, while the 777 and 717 have a combined wingspan of 305 feet. A 777 fits at concourse A with a 717 on each side, with slightly more room to spare than two 767s do next to each other with a 717 on each side.

Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

RE: Future Of AA In ATL?

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net