AUSTIN | ABIA Updates

[GoldenBoot]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Is it based more off of the cost of executing the future phases or is it more about growth dictating when and how expansion occurs?

The master plan and preferred layout have taken both potential cost of development and passenger growth into account.

The initiation of each phase of the master plan is dictated by number of passengers.

However, a 5-gate expansion to the west side is not in the master plan.

[Jdawgboy]

I also just thought of something. What if there's more going on than what we are seeing and hearing about?

I mean consider some of the recent gossip and chatter leaving out the KE rumor and focusing more on the south terminal and now a possible west expansion right after the east. We've got hint that Allegiant and Frontier want to expand here but just how many more flights are they wanting to add?

We've seen some more route announcements which isn't so suprising but with the summer ahead and going by the past few years, we tend to see announcements come out in the September - October time frame as well. Question is how many more and by which carrier?

Pretty sudden that the port is now considering adding more gates even before the ribbon is cut for the east terminal expansion. It may be nothing more than airport and city officials getting serious about keeping ahead of the growth but there must be a lot of indicators beyond current trends that are pointing for the need to expand and expand quickly.

We've touched on this topic not too long ago but could there be a hub of some sort on the horizon? If so what carrier might be interested in having a hub (secondary not a main hub) or at the very least a "focus" port.

I've stated before that I like Austin as a very strong O&D airport rather than a hub and It's unlikely that there would be a main hub unless a new airline is created here but it's not out of realm of possibility that one or two carriers may be looking at Austin as a secondary hub.

This is just my brain going off into what if but it does make you think considering this news about the south Terminal and now a possible west gate expansion. They must be expecting the port shoot up to 20 million passengers per year fairly quickly.

[DoubleC]

GRAH my phone for the second time glitched me into another page, causing me to lose my post >.

A westward expansion would make the terminal asymmetric once the easy expansion completes.

The master plan determined a south terminal is the best solution for a number of reasons, but it seems slapping more gates as necessary is a better move. Another band-aid solution. Typical of Austin city-planners. (Well then again, that doesn't mean a south terminal would never happen. It doesn't seem like a practical solution, is what I'm saying).

If ATC can operate like Heathrow, we wouldn't need a third runway, and I doubt we'll have as many passengers as Heathrow anytime soon. Our ATC isn't Heathrow's ATC though.

[San Diego-Honolulu]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

I also just thought of something. What if there's more going on than what we are seeing and hearing about?

I mean consider some of the recent gossip and chatter leaving out the KE rumor and focusing more on the south terminal and now a possible west expansion right after the east. We've got hint that Allegiant and Frontier want to expand here but just how many more flights are they wanting to add?

We've seen some more route announcements which isn't so suprising but with the summer ahead and going by the past few years, we tend to see announcements come out in the September - October time frame as well. Question is how many more and by which carrier?

Pretty sudden that the port is now considering adding more gates even before the ribbon is cut for the east terminal expansion. It may be nothing more than airport and city officials getting serious about keeping ahead of the growth but there must be a lot of indicators beyond current trends that are pointing for the need to expand and expand quickly.

We've touched on this topic not too long ago but could there be a hub of some sort on the horizon? If so what carrier might be interested in having a hub (secondary not a main hub) or at the very least a "focus" port.

I've stated before that I like Austin as a very strong O&D airport rather than a hub and It's unlikely that there would be a main hub unless a new airline is created here but it's not out of realm of possibility that one or two carriers may be looking at Austin as a secondary hub.

This is just my brain going off into what if but it does make you think considering this news about the south Terminal and now a possible west gate expansion. They must be expecting the port shoot up to 20 million passengers per year fairly quickly.

I have thought the same thing about an airline coming in and expanding to make ABIA a focus city/secondary hub. If it does happen, I think either Alaska Airlines or JetBlue will be the airline. Alaska Airlines, from what I have heard is looking to expand more not just from its main hub in Seattle but to its other focus cities and perhaps even more further east. You're already starting to see it with their expansion in Portland, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, and Los Angeles. Even though it's a Portland expansion, Alaska just announced yesterday that they are adding a Portland to Austin flight. They already have two daily flights to Seattle to go along with that. Not many cities east of Salt Lake City can say they have service on Alaska to two or more of Alaska's hubs/focus cities other than Boston, Baltimore-Washington, Chicago, Orlando, and Dallas. I also think Alaska is looking to expand further out of their west coast comfort zone and I think with that the battle with Delta is making Alaska look into expanding further east. Alaska very well could look into adding nonstop flights out of ABIA to maybe Salt Lake City, Los Angeles, San Diego and maybe even a a couple other cities such as New York, Orlando, and San Jose. Austin is very similar in demographics and city styles to Portland and Seattle, which are Alaska's two largest hubs. So it would not surprise me at all if they think that they could catch the same type of passengers out of Austin in order to make a focus city at ABIA.

Austin is a growing city and at this point any airline that is willing to expand into ABIA and make it a focus city or secondary hub will have success if they market themselves right. Yes you will always have the loyal flyers on Southwest, American, and United with them having such strong hubs in Dallas and Houston, but the title to being the true number one airline in Austin is really up for grabs. And again it would not surprise me to see Alaska come in and build up ABIA similar to how they built up Salt Lake City International Airport out of nowhere in a matter of less than two years.

As far as Korean Air coming to ABIA, I don't see it happening. I think seeing Japan Airlines in Austin before Korean Air is more likely, especially since Japan Airlines has close ties to American similar to how British Airways has close ties to American.

Also expanding the concourse more west makes sense too because you will lose one of the two international gates during construction if you expand further east, and right now, the airport needs those two gates badly.

I actually think the airport shouldn't even bother expanding east on the concourse. But they should focus on maybe expanding by five to eight gates to the west then focus on building an entirely new satellite concourse directly south of the current concourse instead of just adding on while in reality they are going to need a new concourse anyways.

[LoneStarMike]

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot

I'm all for more expansion at ABIA. But, dear God, please tell me the powers that be at ABIA are not going to piecemeal our airport together because it's the "cheaper" option?!?

[SNIP]

They need to stop being pansies and not be afraid of thinking big and for the long-term. Execute the plan already in place as defined by the master plan.

The problem is that when you "think big" you incur "big costs" that have to be paid for by the airlines, concessions, and FBO's in the form of higher landing fees and higher rents, and that are paid for by passengers in the form of higher parking fees.

That is what happened in Sacramento when they built Terminal B.

The Little Airport That Could
SMF navigates a nose dive
November 1, 2012

Airport operators largely achieved that solid credit score by installing new revenue structures before the expansion started, including raising airport parking fees. Passengers still also pay a $4.50 ticket surcharge that has been in effect since 1993 and helps pay off Terminal A, which opened in 1998. The airport also charges fees on car rentals.

But the biggest fee increase has been directed at the lease rates paid by the airlines. The cost per enplanement is projected to be between $18 and $19 in fiscal 2012/2013, up from $6 per passenger prior to 2008.

The airlines bemoaned the move and still contend that Sacramento’s high costs are a burden. It costs “significantly less” money to serve passengers in San Francisco and Oakland, says Kevin Costello, a spokesman for JetBlue.

“The reality is that [Sacramento has] a big annual debt service to overcome,” he says. “It makes it sort of difficult for an airline to continue to be profitable when costs continue to go up.”

By comparison, the cost per enplanement for AUS is $8.86.

Sacramento had at least 3 years when their passenger counts were over 10 million. The peak occurred in 2008 when they had 10.7 million passengers, Last year, they had a total of 8,971,526 passengers, and they're a bigger metro than we are by about 250k. Part of the drop is likely because of economic conditions, but costs to the airlines have played a part, too.

I don't want to see that happen here.

I also think it's a dangerous assumption to assume that we will continue to grow at our current rate. Back in the spring of 2008, we had had 50 consecutive months of growth. Viva Aerobus had recently started, JetBlue doubled their amount of daily departures from 4 to 8, Southwest added some new flights, Northwest added a nonstop to Indianapolis, etc. There were some in this forum that assumed we'd hit the 10 million mark by 2009 or 2010 at the latest. (We didn't hit that milestone until 2013.) There was talk in 2008 of starting the east concourse expansion.

What happened, though, was in the Fall, airlines started cutting flights, and at the same time we had the Wall Street bailout. I think we managed to eke out a small gain from 2007, but in 2009 & 2010 our traffic was below what it was in 2008. It took us a couple of years to catch back up to 2008 levels.

Reopening the South Terminal will take some of the pressure off. And even though the South Terminal only has parking positions for three aircraft, I remember when it was opened by GECAS, there was an option to expand that to eight.

ABIA has to do a balancing act - planning for growth, while keeping our costs to the airlines low.

[Austin1971]

[q

[ATCZERO]

Originally Posted by DoubleC

GRAH my phone for the second time glitched me into another page, causing me to lose my post >.

A westward expansion would make the terminal asymmetric once the easy expansion completes.

The master plan determined a south terminal is the best solution for a number of reasons, but it seems slapping more gates as necessary is a better move. Another band-aid solution. Typical of Austin city-planners. (Well then again, that doesn't mean a south terminal would never happen. It doesn't seem like a practical solution, is what I'm saying).

If ATC can operate like Heathrow, we wouldn't need a third runway, and I doubt we'll have as many passengers as Heathrow anytime soon. Our ATC isn't Heathrow's ATC though.

AUS ATC has to handle a wide mix of traffic from the common C172 skyhawk to F16s and everything in between. I don't think Heathrow has that mix.

I think the port would be crazy to expand the west side of the terminal because there's just not enough room. If they use that temporary south terminal for Frontier and Allegiant, that could work for a few years until we start bursting at the seams again.

[ATXboom]

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot

I'm all for more expansion at ABIA. But, dear God, please tell me the powers that be at ABIA are not going to piecemeal our airport together because it's the "cheaper" option?!?

I thought they they supposed to follow the master plan. If not, why did they spend the time and money in creating one?

Piecemealing small, disorganized, unthoughtful, 5-gate expansions together is no way to intelligently expand a great airport. It's not sustainable. One will always be behind the curve.

They need to stop being pansies and not be afraid of thinking big and for the long-term. Execute the plan already in place as defined by the master plan.

Sorry for my rant. I'm very much in favor of a west side infill project to match the new east side. However, adding 5 or so gates to the west side seems crazy. The airport must find a way to execute the master plan already in place.

This is Austin's curse. Thinking and acting like a Podunk town rather than a big city. It's not good. Dissapointing to hear.

[Austin1971]

[q

[ATCZERO]

Originally Posted by Austin1971

In my humble opinion y'all do a great job......Especially during F1!

Thanks! F1 is an anomaly though. Most of the positions in the tower are manned with TWO controllers. The first F1 was the busiest so far.

[Jdawgboy]

Well something interesting came out today that would have a direct affect on the airport if it happens and that's the massive 160 acre water park with a wave pool that will span 9 football fields in length. The official announcement comes out on Thursday. It's location is likely just east of the airport.

If this proposed park attraction gets built and with the Circuit of the Americas in close proximity, then ABIA is finding itself in a very strategic place that will be surrounded by multiple major attractions within the city and without.

[LoneStarMike]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

We've got hint that Allegiant and Frontier want to expand here but just how many more flights are they wanting to add?

I can't speak for Frontier, but Allegiant makes money flying people from mostly smaller cities (and some bigger cities) to vacation destinations like Las Vegas, Orlando, San Diego, Fort Lauderdale, San Francisco, New Orleans, etc. They also make money selling those passengers vacation packages.

It made sense when they added a flight from here to Las Vegas, and then to Sanford, FL (Orlando area.) Those are vacation destinations that people want to go to. But Cincinnati? I wondered if the AUS-CVG flights were started not as a way for us to visit Cincinnati, but as a way for Cincinnati to visit us.

If you go to Allegiant Air's interactive route map, the non-vacation destination/spoke cities are shown in blue and the vacation destination/focus cities are shown in orange.

Austin used to be a blue dot on their route map. Now we're orange.



And when you go to the static route map page

It lists the main vacation destination cities under the map. We're at the top of the list.


AUSTIN, TX
FORT LAUDERDALE, FL
HONOLULU, HI
JACKSONVILLE, FL
LAS VEGAS, NV
LOS ANGELES, CA
MYRTLE BEACH, SC
NEW ORLEANS, LA
OAKLAND / SAN FRANCISCO, CA
ORLANDO / SANFORD, FL
PALM SPRINGS, CA
PHOENIX / MESA,
PUNTA GORDA / FORT MYERS, FL
SAN DIEGO, CA
SAVANNAH, GA / HILTON HEAD, SC
TAMPA BAY, FL

Also, many of the airports that Allegiant flies to are target markets for our incentive program, including Mesa, AZ (Phoenix area); West Palm Beach, FL; Punta Gorda, FL (Fort Myers area); Jacksonville, FL; and St. Petersburg, FL (Tampa area.) Sanford, FL (Orlando area) was also on the list but Allegiant serves that destination now, so they must have gotten incentives for that.

Those are just the vacation destination/focus cities Allegiant serves. Some of their non vacation/spoke cities are also on our target market list including Columbus, OH; Indianapolis, IN; Pittsburgh, PA; and Raleigh-Durham, NC.

To qualify for the incentives in these domestic markets, Allegiant would only have to operate 8 roundtrips a month or about twice a week.

Just some food for thought.

[The ATX]

Originally Posted by LoneStarMike

It lists the main vacation destination cities under the map. We're at the top of the list.


AUSTIN, TX
FORT LAUDERDALE, FL
HONOLULU, HI
JACKSONVILLE, FL
LAS VEGAS, NV
LOS ANGELES, CA
MYRTLE BEACH, SC
NEW ORLEANS, LA
OAKLAND / SAN FRANCISCO, CA
ORLANDO / SANFORD, FL
PALM SPRINGS, CA
PHOENIX / MESA,
PUNTA GORDA / FORT MYERS, FL
SAN DIEGO, CA
SAVANNAH, GA / HILTON HEAD, SC
TAMPA BAY, FL

We're at the top of the list because it's alphabetical. But maybe you knew that.

[LoneStarMike]

LOL Yes I knew that. My point was they only list the "popular" cities. They don't list the wallflower cities like Stockton, CA or Owensboro, KY. The fact that we're on the list at all must mean we're "popular."

[LoneStarMike]

Remember last spring, when we saw those beautiful glass jetways on a truck in Del Valle and got all excited?

Originally Posted by sammyk

Is ABIA getting new jetways? Just saw one on a truck at the Del Valle Grocery/Exxon on 71. Not really anyone else who'd be a customer for that around here.

It was one of the nicer glass ones too.

We finally figured out they were going to Wichita. Well, today they made their debut.

VIDEO: First flight arriving at Eisenhower National Airport

They really do look nice.

[Jdawgboy]

It's cool that Allegiant has made Austin a focus destination, the only one in Texas mind you. Going by some of what the other focus cities have as far as routes, it's safe to assume that we could see at least three more added routes.

It will be interesting to hear more details about the south terminal. One question I have is will there be any upgrades to the existing structure?

[austlar1]

http://www.airlinequality.com/Forum/allegiant.htm

[the Genral]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

It's cool that Allegiant has made Austin a focus destination, the only one in Texas mind you. Going by some of what the other focus cities have as far as routes, it's safe to assume that we could see at least three more added routes.

It will be interesting to hear more details about the south terminal. One question I have is will there be any upgrades to the existing structure?

I hope so. It's still a renovated hanger with aluminum siding. From the pictures I've seen, it has drop ceilings and fluorescent lighting. It could double as an DMV. Truly a low cost airline terminal. For first time travelers to Austin, I can't imagine them getting a good first impression of ABIA even if they saved a little money to get here, they may expect more from Austin.

[DoubleC]

Originally Posted by the Genral

I hope so. It's still a renovated hanger with aluminum siding. From the pictures I've seen, it has drop ceilings and fluorescent lighting. It could double as an DMV. Truly a low cost airline terminal. For first time travelers to Austin, I can't imagine them getting a good first impression of ABIA even if they saved a little money to get here, they may expect more from Austin. As the saying goes, the South Terminal will probably always be the lipstick on the pig.

My thoughts exactly on first-impressions. The south terminal is only a building and nothing more unlike the Barbara Jordan Terminal. Fortunately they'll probably scrap that ugly green building and build a real terminal in the future.

[GoldenBoot]

Originally Posted by DoubleC

My thoughts exactly on first-impressions. The south terminal is only a building and nothing more unlike the Barbara Jordan Terminal. Fortunately they'll probably scrap that ugly green building and build a real terminal in the future.

If built, the new "South Terminal" will be constructed a bit further south.