HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > San Antonio

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1261  
Old Posted Oct 5, 2018, 2:19 PM
texboy texboy is offline
constructor extrodinaire!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by texastarkus View Post
We blew that a few years back when the Air Force closed Kelly. Long runway to get to London, Frankfort or Asia from here. Plenty of space for a large terminal and lots of parking. What gets me laughing is a few months ago someone suggested we re-visit a regional airport in the New Braunfels area for both the Hill Country and South Texas. There is no way in Hades that they would close a perfectly good airport and move 80 miles south when we are willing to drive up there and use theirs. AAAAAARRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
At the end of the day, I'm in favor of keeping the airport where it is currently. The strategic advantage of having an airport so close to downtown cannot be understated. And there is opportunity to lengthen runway 4/22 to the necessary 10,000 ft for long haul service and even add a parallel runway adjacent to 21R/30L (which is in the current master plan). IMO, SAT should keep the airport, build it to the max that the land available will allow, then when comes time in the distant future, they create a new airport as a secondary for low cost carriers. Atlanta is currently considering doing something similar. Just eyeballing, the existing airport could potentially be expanded to around 75 total gates (Current total is 24). At current, I don't foresee SA getting lucky enough to be a hub airport, but if need be, that gate count could help an airline make SAT a small hub or focus city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1262  
Old Posted Oct 5, 2018, 4:10 PM
Keep-SA-Lame's Avatar
Keep-SA-Lame Keep-SA-Lame is offline
COGSADCAJA- Publicist
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 720
Quote:
Originally Posted by texboy View Post
At the end of the day, I'm in favor of keeping the airport where it is currently. The strategic advantage of having an airport so close to downtown cannot be understated. And there is opportunity to lengthen runway 4/22 to the necessary 10,000 ft for long haul service and even add a parallel runway adjacent to 21R/30L (which is in the current master plan). IMO, SAT should keep the airport, build it to the max that the land available will allow, then when comes time in the distant future, they create a new airport as a secondary for low cost carriers. Atlanta is currently considering doing something similar. Just eyeballing, the existing airport could potentially be expanded to around 75 total gates (Current total is 24). At current, I don't foresee SA getting lucky enough to be a hub airport, but if need be, that gate count could help an airline make SAT a small hub or focus city.
Yeah I really don't understand the argument for building a new airport. There's plenty of space at SAT currently for a couple new terminals and runways. There's many airports that are physically much smaller than SAT but are much much busier. And like you said, the central location is a big advantage.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1263  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 11:17 PM
SAhometown SAhometown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 44
Smile Airport to stay put

I believe this would make the most sense for our thriving city!

https://therivardreport.com/study-ex...g-san-antonio/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1264  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2018, 11:50 PM
cole world11 cole world11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SAT
Posts: 100
Agreed x 100. There's plenty of room for terminal expansion and there are ways to extend runway 4/22. The article even mentioned rerouting a nearby creek. As long as demand continues growing, the flights will come!

Now can Delta give us their flight to Seattle now?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1265  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2018, 12:53 PM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Er uh...
Posts: 7,042
Someone with aviation experience commented that newer long-haul airplanes don't need as long a runway as before. I imagine that trend will continue as airplane design advances. So it seems the location may be fine even in the long term. Hope so... it's a good location. The demand for flights just needs to rise in order to get those direct flights.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1266  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2018, 3:06 PM
UltraDanPrime's Avatar
UltraDanPrime UltraDanPrime is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 105
I remember hearing something along those lines also. It only makes sense as technology advances, runways wont need to be as long.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1267  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2018, 8:51 PM
ILUVSAT's Avatar
ILUVSAT ILUVSAT is offline
May the Schwartz be w/ U!
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: S.A. | Nashville
Posts: 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown View Post
Someone with aviation experience commented that newer long-haul airplanes don't need as long a runway as before.
Not necessarily the case. Newer, long-haul jetliners are more fuel efficient. However, they still fall under the rules of aerodynamics. Even for newer (long-haul) aircraft, a runway of about 9,000'-10,000' is the bare minimum required for fully-loaded TATL/TPAC flights.

One or both of SAT's runways will have to be lengthened to support commercial TATL/TPAC flights.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1268  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2018, 9:43 PM
texboy texboy is offline
constructor extrodinaire!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,322
Either way, the mentioning of runway work is encouraging, and the fact they want to keep the airport in its current location. Also, full disclosure, I work for the contractor that ran this study, just up in Denver.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1269  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2018, 12:15 AM
SAhometown SAhometown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 44
Airport Plan

Everyone here is an interesting preliminary study presented to city council earlier today.

https://3snpdc2ba9m5uwuk62n8cs84-wpe...10.24.2018.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1270  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2018, 12:52 PM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Er uh...
Posts: 7,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAhometown View Post
Everyone here is an interesting preliminary study presented to city council earlier today.

https://3snpdc2ba9m5uwuk62n8cs84-wpe...10.24.2018.pdf
Thanks. Interesting. I'm not an airport expert, but the one thing I question is the potential closing of the east runway. It seems like it would make sense to keep it for at least two reasons: normal optional use of another runway, and the need for a different approach under certain wind conditions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1271  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2018, 3:53 PM
texboy texboy is offline
constructor extrodinaire!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown View Post
Thanks. Interesting. I'm not an airport expert, but the one thing I question is the potential closing of the east runway. It seems like it would make sense to keep it for at least two reasons: normal optional use of another runway, and the need for a different approach under certain wind conditions.
The mid field terminal option is interesting and something that I never considered. This would lay the runways out similar to Bergstrom and would necessitate the need to close the crosswind runway. I'm not sure how access would be gained to the mid field option, but that would be cool if SAT explored that option further. The independent parallel runway IMO is the only way to go, dependent parallels cannot land aircraft at the same time, only in succession I believe. This was one of the main issues with Denver Stapleton.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1272  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2018, 10:06 PM
SAhometown SAhometown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 44
Streak at 27 months!!

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1273  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2018, 10:15 PM
texboy texboy is offline
constructor extrodinaire!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAhometown View Post
Fantastic! Up over 700,000 passengers from this time last year! If the airport just adds a little less than 300,000 additional passengers through the next 3 months, its assured that SAT will reach that 10mil mark. I don't see that NOT happening at this point.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1274  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2018, 12:20 AM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Er uh...
Posts: 7,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by texboy View Post
Fantastic! Up over 700,000 passengers from this time last year! If the airport just adds a little less than 300,000 additional passengers through the next 3 months, its assured that SAT will reach that 10mil mark. I don't see that NOT happening at this point.
I'll be one of them... coming and going. (So I guess I'll be two of them.)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1275  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2018, 3:14 AM
Restless One Restless One is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown View Post
I'll be one of them... coming and going. (So I guess I'll be two of them.)
The duality of man, here on our little forum.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1276  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2018, 3:26 PM
ILUVSAT's Avatar
ILUVSAT ILUVSAT is offline
May the Schwartz be w/ U!
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: S.A. | Nashville
Posts: 669
If the year-to-date growth of 10.7% over 2017 (through September of 2018) is maintained...then SAT should come in at just a very tiny hair under 10 million.

Either way, this is outstanding growth!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1277  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2018, 4:06 AM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Er uh...
Posts: 7,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Restless One View Post
The duality of man, here on our little forum.
(like button)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1278  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2018, 9:43 PM
ILUVSAT's Avatar
ILUVSAT ILUVSAT is offline
May the Schwartz be w/ U!
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: S.A. | Nashville
Posts: 669
Apologies if there us one currently under development...but, is SAT still running under the 2050 master plan approved in 2011?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1279  
Old Posted Yesterday, 11:03 PM
Runner Runner is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 54
Spirit just announced they're starting service to Austin in 2019 what about us? We really need to step up our game.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1280  
Old Posted Today, 12:04 AM
PDD's Avatar
PDD PDD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Runner View Post
Spirit just announced they're starting service to Austin in 2019 what about us? We really need to step up our game.
SA needs to step its game up but you have to remember this is Spirit Airlines. Awful customer service and fees up the wazoo.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > San Antonio
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:46 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.