SAN ANTONIO | City and Metro Transportation Thread
 

Since the groundbreaking for Terminal B is tomorrow, I think its time we got a thread dedicated to SAIA.

http://www.ksat.com/news/16624328/detail.html

If you follow the link, theres also a kind of neat video of the two new terminals


New Airport Terminal Construction Slated To Begin


SAN ANTONIO -- Nearly 30 years since the San Antonio International Airport opened its latest terminal, construction workers are expected to break ground Tuesday on its newest.

With final funding approval coming from City Council last week, construction will begin to replace the original airport terminal, which has been active since World War II.

"We've got a lot of years out of it," airport spokesman David Hebert said. "It's been a great building, but it's definitely time to move on."

The first terminal is scheduled to open in 2010 to swap out the current Terminal Two that is expected to provide the same number of gates, but extra amenities for travelers. Terminal C is expected to open by 2012 and would add an expected 11 gates.

"We're still seeing more passengers than ever before," Hebert said. "Let's get two new terminals online, let's get a two-tiered roadway servicing all the terminals and let's get a long-term parking garage."

The additional gates are expected to be enough for at least 15 years, Hebert said, but if demand continues to grow, airport officials already have preliminary plans for Terminal D.

Good news. Bring on terminal D.

What would the total number of gates be after A-C are completed?

Well groundbreaking officially happened today!!!

http://www.ksat.com/travelgetaways/16633624/detail.html

I use the airport a decent amount of times per year and I am excited to see Terminal 2's days numbered. I had some friends fly in thru American Airlines once and their first impression of the airport wasn't so good but I was like Terminal 1 is nice. haha can't wait to see the finished product.

I think the Airport needs a name. "San Antonio International" is pretty boring.

Took this pic with my phone so it' not that great. Enlarged it a bit.

http://i28.tinypic.com/35hlkwk.jpg

I like it as is. At least you know where you are when you get there. If we ever have multiple airports, then we can distigiush them with names. Until then, I can do without the Cisneros/Jones/Hardberger International Airport...

Sky harbour/Will Rogers/ OR Tambo... Eh.

How about named after San Antonio River architect Robert Hugman. Robert Hugman San Antonio INT'L airport. Since the Riverwalk has played a major role in the progress of San Antonio.

The first time my now wife/then girlfriend flew into SAT from Kansas City was about a year ago at night, and after she spent a few days in the city I took her back to the airport during the day. Her plane was taking off out of terminal 2, and when I stopped the car at the drop off point, she looked around kind of confused and said "where's the terminal?" and I said, "that's the terminal", and she goes "that's it??" She seemed to think that I had somehow tricked her by driving to Mexico and dumping her off at an airport in some little dusty border town :P

In any case, I'm glad SA will finally have 2 modern terminals. I'd expect outsiders' opinions of the city to suddenly undergo a sea-change sometime in 2010 ;)

Yea terminal 2 certainly does nothing for the cities image as a modern forward thinking city, its been the workhorse of the airport and it shows badly. Im really keeping my fingers crossed that they do the full 11 gates at terminal C. Itd be great if a discount carrier could start a mini hub at SAIA or even use C as a strictly international terminal.

I think the HEB/at&t/Mother's window tint san antonio international airport has a nice ring to it.

Just please, please, please don't call it the "Howard E. Butt San Antonio Int'l Airport"! I've still never gotten over the fact that the public library in Kerrville is called "Butt-Holdsworth Memorial Library".

With Austin close by, I doubt SA gets a second airport in our lifetime. As for a name, you could always put San Antonio in the front.

San Antonio already has two airports. They are currently renovating and expanding Stinson Field.

:haha: :haha: :haha:

"fly into mothers airport and saaaaaaave!!"

Just imagine if it was the Butt airport though. Pilots would be talking about "flying into Butt". :D

"The Butt Terminal" :no:

Sounds like great news on this airport renovation/expansion, it's long overdue. On the Butt airport thing....anything Butt that!! :haha:

Will it be a full blown airport like SA? I think not.

I am not quite sure what a full blown airport is, but Stinson Municipal Airport does have a long range plan to expand with SAT and the South side of San Antonio.

Stinson will function as a reliever airport, which I'd assume entails terminal improvements (which are in the pipeline iirc) and lengthening the runways, which I'm not sure about. But its pretty safe to say it will never become SA's version of Hobby or Love Field.

An example of a full-blown airport would be SAT. Flights cross country and international. I doubt Stinson would become that, especially when SAT is more than enough for SA's metro for now.

Or worse... could be a pilot of a cargo plane flying out with a load of primates... (technically plausible, with the hospitals/medical research in SA!)

I would Love it if someone could drive by and snaps some shots of this!

^^ I'll be flying into SAT on United tomorrow and will have my camera with me. If I get the chance (and if there is something worth seeing) I'll take some photos and post them here.

Actually Stinsons runways are too short for anything bigger than very small private jets to use. There need to extend the runway somewhere between 300-400' to land medium to large sized private jets. Some land has recently been given to the city but there are a lot of environmental issues as well as rerouting roads, etc. They are trying to get it done. They are under pressure from corporations like Toyota who could benefit from using the airport to fly in and out of.

The commuter rail line will more than likely be re-routed slightly for this purpose, I'm sure

I doubt stinson will be a commercial airport anytime soon, even with the terminal expansion.

I drove down from Austin and picked up passengers from Terminal 2 and brought them back to the airport this past week.

What an aweful experience!

They can't replace that terminal fast enough!

Its called construction....when has it ever been easy....get over it.

Speaking of the airport...

Has anything been done to Terminal 1?

Last time I flew into SAT was in 2002 when I was flying from Harlingen to Los Angeles. The terminal seemed small and outdated (colors, glass, etc) and reminded me of the Golden Girls house.

Terminal 1 isn't that bad. Sure, it isn't huge or flashy, but its efficiently designed and has a respectable amount of retail and food options. If anything, terminal 2 makes it look worse by forcing people to judge it as the "modern" terminal. Having the new terminals will make terminal 1 look better, imo.

Not that it really has anything to do with anything, but when I was a real little kid, I always got the ceiling of terminal 1 confused with the arch at the entrance to SeaWorld. I'm pretty sure the first time my family flew out of terminal 1, I asked my mom if we were at SeaWorld :P

terminal one is fine. since 2002 they've remodeled the inside, so it's pretty nice.

I flew out of SAT this morning; terminal one is nice enough, minus the gate area restrooms. They were not much better than a public park restroom, complete with funky oder, dirty walls, and broken locks.

Sad. :(

SAT's April 2008 passenger traffic
 

Just a heads up - SAT has now posted their traffic statistics for April, 2008 here.

The text of the release is as follows:

The actual report goes into more detail and shows passenger counts broken down by airline, etc.

Passenger statistics for January, February and March 2008 can be found here

I flew out of SAT yesterday and took a few pictures of the new terminal construction. They have completely rerouted the road in front of terminal two and set up a makeshift drop-off/pickup point that will serve the airport until construction is finished. The new setup, although temporary, is absolutely terrible. It looks cheap and traffic is a nightmare. Hopefully another change is planned before Thanksgiving and Christmas traffic hits. Of course, this is all growing pains - the new terminal will be a great addition to the airport.

Although terminal 2 is a mess, I found all the terminal 1 improvements to be quite nice. I haven't flown through that terminal in a while and it was nice to see the finished product. Also, as of this week SAT now offers free Wifi. I think Sacramento is the only other airport to do the same.

Anyway, here are the pics, taken from the upper level of terminal 1:

1. The torn up road and the new drop-off/pickup setup I mentioned. Notice the terrible traffic at 2pm on a Monday. The traffic was backed all the way past terminal 1:
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u...n/DSC_0076.jpg

2. Demolishing part of the old terminal 2, and beginning work on the two level road that will eventually connect with the road in front of terminal 1:
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u...n/DSC_0075.jpg

3. Beginning work on the new terminal:
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u...n/DSC_0074.jpg

4.
http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u...n/DSC_0073.jpg

Thanks for the pics, schizzo. My wife and I are flying into SAT next weekend, and it was good to get a heads-up on the traffic congestion.

Its going to be so nice once that new terminal (and the two-level roadway) is opened! Finally an SA native won't have to make any apologies for his airport :yes:

As a native San Antonian, I have to concede that SAT after expansion will be far superior to what we had previously. Having said that, I could also add that I left San Antonio at the age of 17 when I enlisted, and did not return to permanently reside until I retired from government service at 55. During that time, I lived in six states and two foreign countries. I had a chance to see a few airports, both in the U.S. and abroad.

I have mentioned in other forums that I am somewhat dismayed that the new, completed airport will have no freeway egress ramp. In other words, you will not be able to depart the airport via the new, two-level terminal roadway and smoothly transition onto either U.S. 281 or I-410. It is fine that those leaving the central business district via 281 North can transition into the airport terminal areas on a completed off-ramp. But how can it be that an airport in a FAIRLY large metro area, (I use the term cautiously), adjacent to TWO heavily-trafficked freeways, could end up being served by only ONE lousy freeway ramp?

I corresponded to the TXHighwayMan on this point, and he confirmed that there will be no egress ramp from SAT. He stated that there "will be a study" to determine if an egress ramp is really necessary. I could hardly believe it when I read it. Try leaving SAT and getting on 281 North. You have a minimum of about three traffic signals to negotiate, and during rush hour it can take twenty minutes or longer. I regard this as a major deficiency that should have been taken into consideration as part of the airport expansion and planned for. By the time the "study" is finished, the situation (already bad) will have probably evolved into another one of our traffic "laughing stocks".

I can understand that frustration, and agree that a flyover/direct connect exit makes just as much sense as the existing entrance ramp. However, its in this case that the location of the airport gives SA one of its few advantages when it comes to air travel. In cities like Denver and Houston, it doesn't matter that freeway access is direct; you're still going to end up driving a good 30-45 minutes to get to downtown, even on a good day. In SA, yeah you have to go through a few lights (including the ridiculously long lights at Airport Blvd and 410), but once you get past those, you're home free, as there are ramps going to freeways in every direction that are in close proximity, and you are no farther than 5-8 minutes from most of SA's population and business hubs (downtown, Med Center, Stone Oak, etc). I think this is one case where SAT's convenient location minimizes the inconvenience of not having an egress ramp.

Construction update:
http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/6246/d762ir4.jpg

I concede those points as valid; I guess my concern originates from imagining what that scene might be like in the next ten years or so, expecially if Terminal Three buiilds out to its max # of gates and our metro area growth remains steady.

Airport garage opens ahead of schedule, under budget
 

Airport’s parking garage debuts ahead of schedule, under budget
Friday, August 8, 2008
San Antonio Business Journal - by Tamarind Phinisee

It's not everyday you see projects finished ahead of schedule and under budget. Great news for San Antonio International Airport.

I'll be glad to see visible progress made on the new terminal and roadway. The utilities relocation seemed to take two or three years and was hell. Kinda disheartening to have gone through all that thinking it was a significant part of the expansion only to realize this summer they hadn't even broke ground on the terminal expansion yet. But the quick work on the easy job of building the pre-cast garage is somewhat hopeful. Normally the rule of government funded construction its to take the expected construction time, double it and then add 120 days. So this is good news.

Mexican low-cost airline interested in SAT
 

Just saw this regarding Interjet, a Mexican low-fare carrier. Near the bottom of the story it noted:

http://www.anna.aero/wp-content/uplo...t-take-off.jpg

above image from www.anna.aero

Toluca is near Mexico City.

FINALLY! I knew this was going to happen eventually with Austin getting Aerobus. This market needs this and sounds like it will finally get it!

Woohoo! Toluca!


So SAT international destinations now include

Mexico City
Monterrey
San Luis Potosi
Toluca

Let's not go gettin all giddy and start makin' gate space for 'em just yet.

Article says they 'want to' start service.

And that's if the other route (Houston-Toluca) gets regulatory approval. Then they can pursue a SAT-Toluca route. I would imagine there's some paperwork involved in that route as well. Will they come here eventually? Hope so. But it's premature to say Toluca is a new international destination from SAT. Cause it's not.

Not meaning to go off on ya, but this is a pet peeve of mine (in addition to tools on the internets who like to make up cool-sounding knock-off names for urban neighborhoods/developments that exist only on paper). Follow this process; you skimmed the clip of the article and missed the detail where it said they wanted to come here after and if they get the fed's approval on their Houston route. You subsequently post that we now have a new international destination (which we don't). Others see your post and believe it is true. Two months from now I'm having dinner with friends and they start talking about how cheap the new service to Toluca is and that we should all take a trip. I chime in that said direct service does not exist. They disagree and claim it's a fact because their ex girlfriend's brother offices with a guy who's father-in-law read about it online so it has to be true. Then I'm the a$$hole of the night for starting an argument and bringing everybody down, when all I was trying to do was avoid a fruitless two-hour impromptu vacation planning discussion on a trip we won't take because the inexpensive airline doesn't even serve SA.

It's the same issue seen elsewhere here. Speculation enthusiasm somehow morphs into fact, causes confusion, then arguments ensue. It culminates with somebody making a post about the speculated project's viability in San Antonio anyway, then one of us gets all defensive of San Antonio and makes a derogatory post about that posters 'attacks' on San Antonio, and that poster responds by saying people who post in SA threads are too defensive and claims to speak for all of the other registered posters are allegedly in agreement that we're just not mature in SA threads. The whole ugliness ends with 8 pages of posts comparing census bureau data going back to 1983 on who's MSA is growing faster then some other MSA, with someone usually claiming the data is not correct cause it's off by 0.0031% and Junction/Utopia/Karnes City should/should not have been included. The entirety of it all could be avoided by people not posting speculation or hearsay as fact.

Glad to see this project underway. To be honest my entire time living in SA I never flew to/from the old terminal, so i don't really know what it looked like on the inside. But it was obviously dated and had outlived its life in a post 9/11 airline industry where terminals need more room for security and there's a heavy empahsis on retail as an economic generator.

Can't wait to see the fiinished product.

I've used terminal 2 the past couple of times I've flown to/from SA, but I had previously never been in there, not that I could remember anyway. To be honest, its really not as horrible as I had heard, but on the other hand it isn't much better than "adequate". And for folks who are used to that being their first glimpse of SA, I really wouldn't be surprised if the new terminal changes a lot of their basic perceptions about SA all by itself.

I do agree that Toluca is not yet a destination for San Antonio, but IMO I think it's a very real possibility and I think you may see it happening sooner rather than later.

The article I posted above is a little misleading (to me anyway) because it makes it sound like Interjet has only applied for two routes (Ontario-Toluca and Houston-Toluca) Having read the article, it left me with the impression that once those routes had been approved, then and only then would Interjet go back and apply for San Antonio-Toluca, Houston-Guadalajara and Houston-Monterey flights.

Having done a little more research, that is not the case.

Interjet has applied for all 5 routes (including San Antonio-Toluca) in their initial filing with the Department of Transportation. The filing was done on June 17.

link to DOT filing

Link to exhibits concerning the DOT filing

(After going to the above links, you can click on the icon to the left of "Views" to view the actual document.)

Fast forward to August 7, 2008. The DOT has given it's tentative approval for Interjet to start these routes.

Link

The only thing I'm not clear on is when the final approval would take place. If you read the DOT's response it notes

7. Our action with respect to this foreign air carrier permit should, unless disapproved by the President of the United States under §41307 of Title 49 of the U.S. Code, become effective on the 61st day after its submission for §41307 review, or upon the date of receipt of advice from the President or his designee under Executive Order 12597 and implementing regulations that he or she does not intend to disapprove this portion of the Department’s decision under that section, whichever occurs earlier.

It notes that other parties have until August 28, 2008 to file comments and/or objections. If there are no objections received by August 28, I believe that is when DOT would submit the application for §41307 review and if approved, it would be effective 61 days after that date, which would be around the end of October.

Although Interjet and Viva Aerobus are both ultra-low cost carriers, Interjet's been around a little bit longer. They started operations in December 2005, while Viva Aerobus started operations in November of 2006.

From a customer service standpoint, Interjet appears to be head and shoulders above Viva Aerobus.

Just one example is the fleets used by each carrier.

Viva Aerobus currently has 9 737-300's that have an average age of 21.6 years

Viva Aerobus fleet information

After going to the above link, you see delivery dates from 2006 to 2008, but those are the dates the planes were delivered to Viva Aerobus. If you click on each of the 9 registration numbers you can see when the planes was actually manufactured. They were all built between 1985 and 1988 and most of them came to Viva Aerobus from US Airways.

Compare that to Interjet's fleet They have 13 Airbus A320 jets with an average age of 4.7 years. The oldest one was built in 1999. Six others were built in 2000. These 7 planes were previously owned by other airlines. Of the remaining six aircraft, four were built in 2007, and the last two were built in 2008.

Back in 2005, Interjet signed an agreement with Airbus with 10 firm orders and 10 more options. The first of the firm orders were to be delivered in the second quarter of 2007. These are the six newer aircraft built in 2007 and 2008 and four more remain to be delivered.

Although this promotional video is in Spanish, part of it shows the interiors of Interjet's planes. Looks pretty nice to me.

Another tidbit - Interjet mainly flies out of Toluca, which I believe is about 50 miles from Mexico City. But recently (as in the last two weeks) I've read articles that they now have the right to fly out of Mexico City. Here's one of them.

Interjet Buys Rights To Use Mexico City Airport - Chairman

It will be interesting to see how all this works out - even more so considering that Southwest has said in recent articles that they are looking for a Mexican codeshare partner.

We need a direct flight to Guadalajara, I was there two weeks ago and there were plenty of people connecting to GDL in Monterrey, hopefully InterJet will apply for a flight route.