[Willy702]

Originally Posted by lvoc

That is the domed stadium...which we do need. For the same reason we need McCarran...it feeds the factory that drives the local economy.

Yeah they don't listen to such common sense. If some Vegas residents could have their way they would demand roads stop getting built since you know they already got what they need.

[lvoc]

Originally Posted by Willy702

Yeah they don't listen to such common sense. If some Vegas residents could have their way they would demand roads stop getting built since you know they already got what they need.

Probably some truth...but shutting down McCarran is vastly dumber than stopping road costruction. Don't we all understand that we live cheap because the visitors pay much of the bill?

[Willy702]

Originally Posted by lvoc

Probably some truth...but shutting down McCarran is vastly dumber than stopping road costruction. Don't we all understand that we live cheap because the visitors pay much of the bill?

I'm totally with you. Just poking fun at the short sightedness of so many Vegas residents. A big reason why I got myself transferred out of Vegas.

[Bruff]

Originally Posted by lvoc

Now there is a really stupid idea. Well up into the brain dead class. Of all the things Las Vegas does not need to do closing McCarran has got to be number one by miles.
Even if we open an outlying Airport as McCarran reaches capacity we still need to keep the key flights to the inner airport.
This is so dumb it is really difficult to believe that any can be believe that such a stupid move makes any sense.
The issue is to integrate the airport further into the city and the strip. Get people through it and to their room in half an hour.
And, if and when we do get an outlying airport, we fly the people to McCarran to get them into the system.
And there are hundreds of acres to be developed before it would make any sense to think about McCarran...north strip will take care of the next 25 years.

LVOC
Why don't you re-think and rephrase your post so that it actually makes sense - especially to the brain-dead like me.
And if you insist on still using cheap shots like 'brain dead' or 'so dumb it is really difficult...", support it with actual facts and/reasoning.
Be polite and professional. I'll respond in kind.

[lvoc]

Originally Posted by Bruff

LVOC
Why don't you re-think and rephrase your post so that it actually makes sense - especially to the brain-dead like me.
And if you insist on still using cheap shots like 'brain dead' or 'so dumb it is really difficult...", support it with actual facts and/reasoning.
Be polite and professional. I'll respond in kind.

Idiot propositions do not deserve significant response. If you really want to write a well thought out paper on the closure of McCarran I would be quite willing to consider and respond to it.

But blatant nonsense got the proper response.

[BBMW]

There is a reason it might happen. Right now there is plenty of land available for casino development (or redevelopment in the case of some of the moldy oldies.) When that finally gets soaked up, everyone will notice that it's the airport that brings the south end of the strip to a grinding halt. They'll then notice that moving the airport would open up a couple of miles of strip frontage for development. At that point the wheels will start turning.

But that's a boom or two away yet.

Originally Posted by lvoc

Now there is a really stupid idea. Well up into the brain dead class. Of all the things Las Vegas does not need to do closing McCarran has got to be number one by miles.

Even if we open an outlying Airport as McCarran reaches capacity we still need to keep the key flights to the inner airport.

This is so dumb it is really difficult to believe that any can be believe that such a stupid move makes any sense.

The issue is to integrate the airport further into the city and the strip. Get people through it and to their room in half an hour.

And, if and when we do get an outlying airport, we fly the people to McCarran to get them into the system.

And there are hundreds of acres to be developed before it would make any sense to think about McCarran...north strip will take care of the next 25 years.

[lvoc]

Originally Posted by BBMW

There is a reason it might happen. Right now there is plenty of land available for casino development (or redevelopment in the case of some of the moldy oldies.) When that finally gets soaked up, everyone will notice that it's the airport that brings the south end of the strip to a grinding halt. They'll then notice that moving the airport would open up a couple of miles of strip frontage for development. At that point the wheels will start turning.

But that's a boom or two away yet.

Much easier to move north and west and east then to chase McCarran. Quadruple the size of the strip at relatively low cost. That takes care of the next 50 or 100 years...then we see.

I do think though we should change the name to Las Vegas International Airport. Branding should be as complete as possible.

[basnobua]

Terminal 3 cost $2.4B and hasn't even been open for 4 years...

I've also never seen anything suggesting the Ivanpah airport would supplant McCarran, but rather be used to increase capacity.

[Bruff]

Originally Posted by ScoopLV

Nothing will happen until plane crashes. Only then will Las Vegans realize that there's a reason why most decent cities keep their airport in the hinterlands. This city isn't smart enough to act proactively.
And don't get me wrong -- I love the fact I can be at the airport from my front door in 15 minutes, and at the gate in 25. (I have a TSA "get out of lines" card.) But all it takes is one major malfunction.

Scoop.
Good post about other cities keeping their airports in the hinterland. It's called 'graveyard mentality'. What do you think the question everyone will be asking the morning after the night before (when the 747 took out the domed stadium - or anything else)? Right: What were they thinking?!

Recall last week when the RTC - which is desperate to push through their airport wham-bam-tra connector - took a gaggle of people anxious to get their name on a brass plaque on that trip to Denver to see what they've done? Denver light-rail approach a model for Las Vegas transit | Las Vegas Review-Journal
What was missing from all the news coverage was the fact that DIA used to called Stapleton and was located in exactly the same proximity to that Denver as McCarran is now to Vegas. Denver saw the light before the light was 50,000 from gallons of Jet-A going up in one of its neighborhoods.

As for getting from your front door to your gate, the new technology will bring a new term: 'distance insensitive'. Basically this means that everything will relate to time, not distance. If you could move at 180 mph (3 miles a minute), the 30 miles from the from the Ivanpah site could be covered in 10 minutes. You would still have 5 minutes to turn yourself in the next $900,000 winner.

[Bruff]

Originally Posted by basnobua

Terminal 3 cost $2.4B and hasn't even been open for 4 years...
I've also never seen anything suggesting the Ivanpah airport would supplant McCarran, but rather be used to increase capacity.

You're right, Basnobua. The Ivanpah site wasn't purchased to replace McCarran, but rather, as you put it, to increase capacity at McCarran. Which means they still don't get it. Pride goeth before the crash.