AUSTIN | ABIA Updates

[Jdawgboy]

Seems like Allegiant is on its way to creating a sort of hub here. Interesting that they will be flying Albuquerque to Las Vegas which is their main hub and also a flight here. Not sure what the demand for flights between Albuquerque and Austin is?

Allegiant claims their service is direct route and no transfers. If that's the case then focus cities are meant to be the destination end point for all Allegiant routes to that specific destination. Interesting concept but it still creates a mini hub however you want to look at it.

Lets not forget there's apparently some transferring going on, at least by one quasi celebrity recently arrested for aggressive behavior who was transferring from a Delta flight from Los Angeles to British Airways.

I asked this before but I guess nobody has an answer but I wonder what the percentage of people flying from here to London are people transferring from other inbound flights?

[GoldenBoot]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

Seems like Allegiant is on its way to creating a sort of hub here. Interesting that they will be flying Albuquerque to Las Vegas which is their main hub and also a flight here. Not sure what the demand for flights between Albuquerque and Austin is?

Allegiant claims their service is direct route and no transfers. If that's the case then focus cities are meant to be the destination end point for all Allegiant routes to that specific destination. Interesting concept but it still creates a mini hub however you want to look at it.

Lets not forget there's apparently some transferring going on, at least by one quasi celebrity recently arrested for aggressive behavior who was transferring from a Delta flight from Los Angeles to British Airways.

I asked this before but I guess nobody has an answer but I wonder what the percentage of people flying from here to London are people transferring from other inbound flights?

There is actually a fair amount of people who fly the AUS-ABQ route. When you think about ABQs growing tech industry, Santa Fe and the (ski) resorts in the area. Plus, ABQ is a good landing spot to reach some of the sites in southern Colorado.

[Digatisdi]

Originally Posted by hereinaustin

I think you've made a good point: it's difficult to accurately predict the future. We may be looking at some sort of global recession over the next two years which could change a lot of things. As I implied earlier, there are probably things we can do to make our airport more efficient like Dallas Love, which is on track for over 15M with just 20 gates, despite a far crappier passenger pick-up/drop-off than us. It's really not time to panic yet.

I think the biggest issue is ground traffic coordination. I feel like that's where most of the congestion comes from and I'd be interested in hearing perspective on that from someone on staff, ATC specifically.

I really want to wait until the 2016 numbers come out to really make a final decision on if I feel like the airport should push for further expansion before 2020. If we have another year with double-digit percentage increase, I'll be really concerned.

I think if it comes to it, theoretically hardstands could be used, but US airports with jet-bridges seem to be allergic to their use for scheduled commercial aviation

[paul78701]

Originally Posted by Austin1971

http://www.constructionequipmentguid...xpansion/27877

“In keeping with the recommendations in both the 2003 and 2008 master plan and master plan phasing projects,” he added, “respectively, the new terminal space will be added to the eastern end of the existing terminal facility with completion anticipated in 2018. This $240 million expansion will 'balance' the terminal and provide much needed space for the expanding passenger and aircraft operational numbers.”

When completed, the east terminal gate expansion will add 70,000 sq. ft. (6,502 sq m) — a 23 percent increase — of new hold room space, concessions, restroom facilities, and concourse circulation space. This expansion should serve the terminal through the year 2025.

I'm surprised that this expansion is set to finish in 2018, but will only provide enough additional capacity to last until 2025. It seems that they will have to start planning the next expansion project right after this one completes.

[the Genral]

I was looking at both expansion options above and I think I see a further expansion dilemma, beyond the present expansion. The current expansion is a very modest 7 or 8 gates. By the city's estimate, right or wrong, that should be enough until 2025. The plans for the following expansion adds significantly more gates and a new runway. The 3rd runway makes sense, but why would we need triple the amount of gates the next go around compared to the current puny few, unless they figure in 9 years the growth figures are going to triple. My point is, current expansions plans are moderate because it basically finishes out the terminal. The future expansion is so grandiose, it can't be justified by current growth numbers even beyond 2025. There aren't any smaller scale expansion plans at this time outside of the South Terminal. It appears like we'll have to grow big enough to fill those big shoes, however long it takes before the next expansion is considered, unless they can redesign a much smaller expansion to justify the need. The dilema, how and where can they add less gates then the lofty albeit 2003 plans? Under those plans, we would go from capacity to overbuilt. So why not just go for overbuilt now? Because they want to finish the current terminal first, then hope traffic growth will justify adding 20 to 30 gates on the next expansion. My logic on this is dizzying if not anywhere near accurate.

[Digatisdi]

Are they still considering that top-left? I could've sworn they selected the similar one with a full separate terminal further south with an underground connection as the preferred option. Both of the plans there concern me because of how much they'd inhibit traffic between the east and west parts of the terminal. I get that it's probably logically smarter to not build a new terminal because it's cheaper to operate one, but I have little reason to believe that we couldn't sustain it.

Passenger drop-off and pick-up is already congested, and this would only add to it.

With both plans they could be built in phases, but both of them sacrifice an awful lot of space during construction.

[ATCZERO]

Originally Posted by Digatisdi

I think the biggest issue is ground traffic coordination. I feel like that's where most of the congestion comes from and I'd be interested in hearing perspective on that from someone on staff, ATC specifically.

Ground traffic will be challenging at times. The closures of G1, G2 and G3 can be worked around without too much trouble. There will be some waiting for gates since we'll be doing a one in one out type operation at times. The real issue will be when they have to close taxiways R and C on the west side of the ramp. I'm not sure how they're going to handle that one yet. We use 17R and L most of the time and we're sure as hell not going to be back taxiing on 17R at Golf because it's just too far.

If anything, 17L will be the primary departure runway and most of the arrival traffic will be pushed to 17R. Another option I heard rumors of was that the airport would build a short little taxiway around the construction to keep 17R usable for departures.

[Austin1971]

[q

[427MM]

It is not Staff's wishes to list 2025 as the year we hit 15M passengers--the FAA limits their expected growth rate to 2.8% annually despite the fact that we hit 6-7% consistently and will likely continue to do so in the near future.

Staff's expected date for hitting 15M passengers is 2020 which is why they plan to have the master plan ready to go once the current expansion is complete so that they may embark on the next phase of expansion. Unfortunately, this handicaps us when going for grants/funding at the federal level and hurts us from planning correctly, but I believe that they are doing the best they can.

[Speculator]

Originally Posted by the Genral

I was looking at both expansion options above and I think I see a further expansion dilemma, beyond the present expansion. The current expansion is a very modest 7 or 8 gates. By the city's estimate, right or wrong, that should be enough until 2025. The plans for the following expansion adds significantly more gates and a new runway. The 3rd runway makes sense, but why would we need triple the amount of gates the next go around compared to the current puny few, unless they figure in 9 years the growth figures are going to triple. My point is, current expansions plans are moderate because it basically finishes out the terminal. The future expansion is so grandiose, it can't be justified by current growth numbers even beyond 2025. There aren't any smaller scale expansion plans at this time outside of the South Terminal. It appears like we'll have to grow big enough to fill those big shoes, however long it takes before the next expansion is considered, unless they can redesign a much smaller expansion to justify the need. The dilema, how and where can they add less gates then the lofty albeit 2003 plans? Under those plans, we would go from capacity to overbuilt. So why not just go for overbuilt now? Because they want to finish the current terminal first, then hope traffic growth will justify adding 20 to 30 gates on the next expansion. My logic on this is dizzying if not anywhere near accurate.

Not sure that Austin is close to needing another runway unless there is a crosswinds issue with the current north/south layout.

[the Genral]

But there is or was one planned as seen in the diagram running parallel to the longer west runway. I don't see room for a diagonal or east west runway, but a 3rd runway was included to reduce takeoff wait times, but is too close to allow for simultaneous use with the west runway unlike the east one.

[ATCZERO]

Originally Posted by the Genral

But there is or was one planned as seen in the diagram running parallel to the longer west runway. I don't see room for a diagonal or east west runway, but a 3rd runway was included to reduce takeoff wait times, but is too close to allow for simultaneous use with the west runway unlike the east one.

We would use the "17C" runway simultaneously with 17R. 17R would be an arrival only runway except when aircraft need it for weight reasons. 17C would be a departure only runway (but can be used for arrivals under certain circumstances). 17L would stay the same, departures and arrivals mixed.

[KevinFromTexas]

For the looky loos.

https://www.facebook.com/abia/?fref=nf

Air Force One, carrying President Obama, is scheduled to land at Austin-Bergstrom this Friday at about 1:10 p.m. Just before arrival, an airfield freeze of about 20 minutes will take place at the airport. During that time there will not be any aircraft movement of any kind, including take offs and landings, or human movement, including loading or unloading of bags and refueling. The freeze will be lifted and normal operations will continue shortly after the President and his motorcade have left airport property.
The same freeze will take place in the opposite order for the President's departure, scheduled for 8 p.m. So for those flying in or out of the airport between about 1-1:30 p.m. or about 7:30-8 p.m. on Fri. March 11, anticipate minor delays. Roadways leading to and from the airport may also be temporarily closed around these times to allow for motorcade access. Plan ahead & give yourself extra time.

https://www.facebook.com/abia/photos...type=3&theater

[ATCZERO]

I looked into the traffic count but unfortunately it doesn't break it down by group (carrier vs GA vs military). Looks like we will just have to wait till the end of the month.

[Tyrone Shoes]

Stolen from Airliners.net

Volaris Applies For Austin And Milwaukee

Mexican LCC has applied with DOT today for authority to commence service

to Austin Texas and Milwaukee Wisconsin.

Carrier says it initially seeks to connect AUS and MKE with Guadalajara Mexico.


No schedule or start up date provided

Related they also applied today to add Durango from LAX.


http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo....main/6654283/

[DoubleC]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Shoes

Stolen from Airliners.net

Volaris Applies For Austin And Milwaukee

Mexican LCC has applied with DOT today for authority to commence service

to Austin Texas and Milwaukee Wisconsin.

Carrier says it initially seeks to connect AUS and MKE with Guadalajara Mexico.


No schedule or start up date provided

Related they also applied today to add Durango from LAX.


http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo....main/6654283/

Now that's an odd choice; all of our non-vacation nonstops to Mexico have always been to Monterrey and Mexico City before they get cut. Maybe we've been doing it wrong the whole time and Guadalajara is the best Mexican city for Austin in terms of flights ? Or maybe it'll be over within a few months... you can't go wrong with a flight to the capital.

To be fair, Aeromar didn't really have a lot of recognition like Aeromexico and "was aimed for the business traveler". We haven't had a major Mexican carrier here since they left years ago. Maybe this flight will be here to stay considering our many successes in the past few years?

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by DoubleC

Now that's an odd choice; all of our non-vacation nonstops to Mexico have always been to Monterrey and Mexico City before they get cut. Maybe we've been doing it wrong the whole time and Guadalajara is the best Mexican city for Austin in terms of flights ? Or maybe it'll be over within a few months... you can't go wrong with a flight to the capital.

To be fair, Aeromar didn't really have a lot of recognition like Aeromexico and "was aimed for the business traveler". We haven't had a major Mexican carrier here since they left years ago. Maybe this flight will be here to stay considering our many successes in the past few years?

I've only skimmed through their wikipidea which may or may not be accurate but Volaris has a codeshare with Southwest and Condor.

[Austin1971]

[q

[Digatisdi]

February numbers released

Interesting notes:

Southwest Airlines up 23%, American Airlines up 36%, Frontier Airlines up 38%, Alaska Airlines up 43%, British Airways up 14%, Allegiant Air up 61%

Total for February was up 12%

Also the person who writes these has issues spelling "totalled"

[Digatisdi]

As for Volaris, I honestly believe that the issue with Aeromar was that pretty much nobody had heard of it. I know that I didn't know what it was until they started serving AUS. People know Volaris, it's the 2nd largest airline by marketshare in Mexico, only after Aeroméxico. I feel like Guadalajara is a good choice, especially with companies like Freescale Semiconductor, IBM, Intel, and Oracle having offices in both our cities. It's also a pretty nice tourist destination, so I've heard. I think that if fares are anything like they are to SAT, which I was able to see at around $205 USD (after taxes and fees), this could be a fairly successful route.