what airports lie about delays to get more expansion?

Bradley W

Bradley W

Ejection Handle Pulled
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
55
Display Name
Display name:
American459
Is IND lying for the FedEX expansion?
 
Could you provide a little more info, a link, something?
 
Expanding airport facilities is a complex and time consuming process -- at least the airfield expansions and other ones funded by federal dollars. The airport has to generate a demand capacity analysis that must then be approved by FAA. Then the project has to be put on the Airport Layout Plan, which also must be approved by FAA. Then there is the National Environmental Policy Act compliance, which also includes public involvement and must be approved by FAA. Only then can it go into design.

If the project is locally funded, the process is easier with respect to justification, but there are still hoops to jump through.

All told, almost any expansion is a 4-5 year process. So you have to anticipate demand rather than waiting for it.

Not sure what "lying" you're referring to, but if you provide details I can perhaps help unravel it.
 
Passenger numbers always seem to be too high. At BWI and TPA my longer security wait was less than 5 minutes. The airport must find fake people somewhere to request" another runway" or more gates"
 
All I can say is every small airport I've been based at (a bunch) has lied (significantly) about how many operations/day they have.
 
timwinters said:
All I can say is every small airport I've been based at (a bunch) has lied (significantly) about how many operations/day they have.
Click to expand...
Airports in the NPIAS have to give annual operations estimates to FAA in order to establish funding priorities. Towered fields keep counts. Untowered fields ... fish tales.
 
Bradley W said:
Passenger numbers always seem to be too high. At BWI and TPA my longer security wait was less than 5 minutes. The airport must find fake people somewhere to request" another runway" or more gates"
Click to expand...
At BWI and TPA, these will be real counts from entities other than the airport. Sorry.

The gate and terminal sizing metrics include things like average day in the peak month, and average hour in the peak month. Runways are based on demand capacity analyses for ops.
 
Bradley W said:
Passenger numbers always seem to be too high. At BWI and TPA my longer security wait was less than 5 minutes. The airport must find fake people somewhere to request" another runway" or more gates"
Click to expand...

TSA security lines have more to do with airport management and space then numbers of passengers. Many years ago my cousin who works for TSA, said BWI was laughed at because they hired Walt Disney for line management. Disney line experts came in, and per the rumor at the time the wait time was cut in half. Everything from bin sizes, to the extra little bins for forgotten keys in pockets was added because of the consulting engagement. Now these changes have been roled out across all of TSA.

Tim
 
tspear said:
TSA security lines have more to do with airport management and space then numbers of passengers. Many years ago my cousin who works for TSA, said BWI was laughed at because they hired Walt Disney for line management. Disney line experts came in, and per the rumor at the time the wait time was cut in half. Everything from bin sizes, to the extra little bins for forgotten keys in pockets was added because of the consulting engagement. Now these changes have been roled out across all of TSA.

Tim
Click to expand...
The other dynamic -- particularly true at BWI -- is that TSA's continual evolution of equipment and strategies has left airports scrambling to adapt to their changing requirements. And terminal buildings have inherent constraints in geometry.

I assure you the Disney story is apocryphal. Yes, Disney uses sophisticated modeling software, but it would not work in an airport any more than a fast car could outrun a boat on the water. They are simply different animals. Designing a passenger terminal at a big airport costs millions. Having the right tools is essential. The designers won't do it Mickey Mouse.
 
Ken Ibold said:
I assure you the Disney story is apocryphal. Yes, Disney uses sophisticated modeling software, but it would not work in an airport any more than a fast car could outrun a boat on the water. They are simply different animals. Designing a passenger terminal at a big airport costs millions. Having the right tools is essential. The designers won't do it Mickey Mouse.
Click to expand...

DIA’s first baggage system indicates some level of Mickey Mouse was involved... ;):D
 
BWI is a an entirely different orbit of awful when it comes to TSA. Just a reflection of the workforce they have to draw from.
 
SkyDog58 said:
Is this in real life or some airport simulator game?
Click to expand...
!!e!U-BwBmM~$(KGrHqF,!icE0G-0(WbYBNP3715oDw~~_62.JPG
 
Clark1961 said:
DIA’s first baggage system indicates some level of Mickey Mouse was involved... ;):D
Click to expand...

I was on one of the first flights through DIA when it opened. I still have a bag that was lost in that labyrinth.
 
You'd have a scoop if there wasn't some form of "lying" (or misleading) with stats, IRT airports. School systems use student counts that are computed using methods that return the largest body count, for example, which is often 10% or greater than the ground truth. . .The unemployment rate most quoted is "true", but excludes a hefty chunk of people who'd like to work but have given up on finding a job. There is another, obscure rate that includes 'em, but it doesn't get much air time. There are "Lies, damned lies, and statistics".
 
ATL does not need so many runways with many regional airports nearby with long enough runways for commerical aircraft. It's like the ISP problem. People forget it's there because most people assume they have to go to New York, , "the big city ." As Trump said during the election new airport buildings is for social status and not for the flow of people.
 
Sundancer said:
The unemployment rate most quoted is "true", but excludes a hefty chunk of people who'd like to work but have given up on finding a job. There is another, obscure rate that includes 'em, but it doesn't get much air time. There are "Lies, damned lies, and statistics".
Click to expand...

The unemployment rate also includes a number of people who diligently report to the labor office as 'seeking work' but have no interest in finding a job until a month after their current UI runs out.
 
Graueradler said:
Not when I ran it.
Click to expand...

Okay Bobby, I stand corrected! ;)

You had so much traffic you didn't need to exaggerate. And it's ikely that Daniel Field at Augusta did also. Lots of those sleepy little airports I used to frequent though...
 
Bradley W said:
ATL does not need so many runways with many regional airports nearby with long enough runways for commerical aircraft. It's like the ISP problem. People forget it's there because most people assume they have to go to New York, , "the big city ." As Trump said during the election new airport buildings is for social status and not for the flow of people.
Click to expand...

ATL has all those runways because it's a big hub for Delta, and the way hub and spoke systems work. It's also the busiest airport in the world. There are 5 parallel runways. The north runways (2) have aircraft landing on one and departing on the other, same deal on the south runways. The 5th runway at the southern edge of ATL is used for TO and landing. They move a lot of planes there efficiently for the most part. I was based there for 24 years.

As far as nearby airports you would run into noise problems and traffic pattern problems that would interfere with ATL. Not as easy a solution as you think when you take into consideration the arrival and departure procedures and routes for ATL (SIDs, STARs).
 
Bradley W said:
ATL does not need so many runways with many regional airports nearby with long enough runways for commerical aircraft. It's like the ISP problem. People forget it's there because most people assume they have to go to New York, , "the big city ." As Trump said during the election new airport buildings is for social status and not for the flow of people.
Click to expand...

Are you just trolling or dumb? They absolutely need 5 runways, and the proposed 6th would help out as well...
 
SkyDog58 said:
28R/10L. Current 28/10 becomes 28L/10R



Between 28/10 & 27L/9R.
Click to expand...

Whew. Not a lot of room there. Do you have a source for that? Not questioning you, I'm just curious.

When they built 10/28 it was originally going to be a 5000' runway, We were operating EMB120s, ATR72s, and I guess the powers figured they'd put us down there. Then we started getting jets, first 5 BAE-146s, then the CRJs started arriving. Hey ATL, who is gonna use a 5000' runway? So, they changed the length to what it is now, smart move. And the dirt they brought in was rumored to be the most expensive in the world!

edit: found this article
http://www.myajc.com/business/airpo...-expands-limited-land/3rZq38rMsMF9YyKcnb9ogN/
 
Last edited:
Did ATL lie for this new expansion?
 
mscard88 said:
So, they changed the length to what it is now, smart move. And the dirt they brought in was rumored to be the most expensive in the world!
Click to expand...

I thought the most expensive dirt was the one used for the new SeaTac runway .
 
It's hard to think of a situation where airport expansion does not harm the environment under the environmental policy ACT.
 
They need to make airports like golf courses and take the environment into the equation. Maybe have a bird sanctuary at one end of the field. Allow wild horses to graze on the airfield. Could even allow hunting during special events.
 
Bradley W said:
It's hard to think of a situation where airport expansion does not harm the environment under the environmental policy ACT.
Click to expand...
Actually, it's very easy to identify airport expansions that do not have significant impact. Virtually every airfield project includes an Environmental Assessment. The projects are designed to mitigate whatever impacts they produce.
 
My take on the original posters question is at smaller airports where there is no one counting traffic. Let's take FCI for example, they show 169 operations per day that is 7 per hour over 24 hours, let's take a realistic approach that at night time 10 pm to 6 am, flying drops off even farther, so divide the 169 by 16 hours works out to 10 operations per hour, which is one every 6 minutes.....I have sat out there on beautiful no wind clear and a million, perfect temperature days on a weekend and didn't see an airplane take off and depart for 45 minutes. That means that it is even busier on other times.....IF you believe the original statistic of 169 which I believe is grossly inflated. This same airport is in the midst of an expansion to add 500 to 1000 feet at a cost of $15 million? Ridiculous amount of money to attract what? I am thinking all of the modern biz jets don't need that length or if they do go over to RIC. Simple cost/benefit analysis. They won't every get enough G6's in there to justify the cost. Never, ever, never. But hey the FAA(federal government) is paying for 90% of it, why the hell not? Reason we are $20 trillion in debt, spending money stupidly on projects that have no return. So YES they lie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top