U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Nevada > Las Vegas
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-08-2017, 05:23 AM
 
9,068 posts, read 9,225,623 times
Reputation: 4665

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericaWestCMH View Post
As noted in previous posts, almost all commercial operations at LAS are mainline aircraft. Vegas is second in seats per flight behind only JFK (thanks to their hundreds of international widebodies). The big planes are already here.
https://lasvegassun.com/news/2016/de...y-the-numbers/
Peak capacity numbers are very political. The number 55 million passengers is oft repeated for Las Vegas. The number 26 million is often repeated for San Diego.


ATADS operating numbers for the two airports (in thousands)
YEAR SAN LAS
1990 212.6 399.8
1991 206.5 398.2
1992 214.0 411.6
1993 208.5 457.2
1994 221.0 495.9
1995 245.3 503.7
1996 224.5 476.5
1997 224.5 473.3
1998 223.3 470.7
1999 222.4 542.9
2000 207.9 521.3
2001 206.8 499.0
2002 206.6 498.0
2003 204.7 510.8
2004 215.2 574.4
2005 229.2 614.3
2006 230.8 619.5
2007 237.6 619.3
2008 228.2 578.9
2009 199.6 511.1
2010 190.1 505.6
2011 185.1 531.5
2012 187.3 528.0
2013 188.0 520.4
2014 191.8 522.1
2015 193.7 524.9
2016 196.9 535.7

Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericaWestCMH View Post
2017 will break 2006's record in terms of passengers, but with around 50,000 fewer aircraft movements.
As 2016 was 83,734 fewer operations than 2006, I would call 50,000 a conservative estimate.

SDCRAA has stated a number of times that San Diego will begin constrained operations at 260,000 operations and 300,000 operations will be gridlock. Operations reached a peak in 1995 before the 19 seat turboprops were retired on SAN-LAX route. The vote to approve pushing the US Senate to force the military to share Miramar for a new airport was in November 2006.

The dramatic drop in operations from 2007 to 2009 at both LAS and SAN was partly because of a nationwide trend as many airlines retired a lot of smaller planes quickly because of the recession. It was more pronounced at these airports because SAN quickly got rid of the last of it's turboprops, and retired it's smallest regional jets. SAN also terminated nearly all local operations. LAS also had a drop in passengers more severe than the nationwide turndown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-08-2017, 07:53 AM
 
9,068 posts, read 9,225,623 times
Reputation: 4665
One question I don't understand is will voter input be a factor in the decision to start work on Ivanpah?

In San Diego a committee was created on 1 January 2003 to review all of the options for a new airport. There job was to select an option and put it up for a county wide vote. The committee rejected floating airports, urban airports and eventually a desert airport. They finally chose as their option a plan where the military would voluntarily give up 3000 acres of land on Miramar, move some air operations to Pendleton and two freeways would be relocated.

The military pointed out that a civilian government could not tell them what to do with their land. They agreed that they couldn't order them to share the land, but the argument was that a positive vote would put political pressure on congress.

The voters roundly rejected the proposal as an affront to the military.

I believe in Texas that the FAA recommended that Austin and San Antonio build a single airport for both cities. Voters rejected the argument. Now Austin Bergstrom International Airport, Austin, TX (AUS) and San Antonio Intl, San Antonio, TX (SAT) airports are 70.9 air miles apart. Together SAT and AUS carry slightly fewer passengers than SAN.

The idea of Southern California Southern Nevada mega-airport combined with a high speed rail network has been proposed. The airport would presumably be near Barstow and could replace LAS, SNA, LGB, SAN, BUR, PSP and LAX

In Las Vegas there doesn't seem to be any law that requires voter input about Ivanpah.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2017, 04:43 PM
 
Location: Houston
105 posts, read 88,492 times
Reputation: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by PacoMartin View Post
https://lasvegassun.com/news/2016/de...y-the-numbers/
Peak capacity numbers are very political. The number 55 million passengers is oft repeated for Las Vegas. The number 26 million is often repeated for San Diego.


ATADS operating numbers for the two airports (in thousands)
YEAR SAN LAS
1990 212.6 399.8
1991 206.5 398.2
1992 214.0 411.6
1993 208.5 457.2
1994 221.0 495.9
1995 245.3 503.7
1996 224.5 476.5
1997 224.5 473.3
1998 223.3 470.7
1999 222.4 542.9
2000 207.9 521.3
2001 206.8 499.0
2002 206.6 498.0
2003 204.7 510.8
2004 215.2 574.4
2005 229.2 614.3
2006 230.8 619.5
2007 237.6 619.3
2008 228.2 578.9
2009 199.6 511.1
2010 190.1 505.6
2011 185.1 531.5
2012 187.3 528.0
2013 188.0 520.4
2014 191.8 522.1
2015 193.7 524.9
2016 196.9 535.7


As 2016 was 83,734 fewer operations than 2006, I would call 50,000 a conservative estimate.

SDCRAA has stated a number of times that San Diego will begin constrained operations at 260,000 operations and 300,000 operations will be gridlock. Operations reached a peak in 1995 before the 19 seat turboprops were retired on SAN-LAX route. The vote to approve pushing the US Senate to force the military to share Miramar for a new airport was in November 2006.

The dramatic drop in operations from 2007 to 2009 at both LAS and SAN was partly because of a nationwide trend as many airlines retired a lot of smaller planes quickly because of the recession. It was more pronounced at these airports because SAN quickly got rid of the last of it's turboprops, and retired it's smallest regional jets. SAN also terminated nearly all local operations. LAS also had a drop in passengers more severe than the nationwide turndown.
Ok, you got me on the ops numbers.

Vegas lost the America West/Us Airways hub in 2008, combined with the recession.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2017, 09:58 PM
 
9,068 posts, read 9,225,623 times
Reputation: 4665
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericaWestCMH View Post
Ok, you got me on the ops numbers. Vegas lost the America West/Us Airways hub in 2008, combined with the recession.
The number of operations in the entire nation went down from 2007 to 2009
-14.1% nationwide all airports
-16.0% San Diego Airport
-17.5% Las Vegas Airport

SAN went from 237,600 to 199,60 operations from 2007 to 2009. The last time it had been down below 200K was 1987 when passengers were under 10 million.

Year - Operations in thousands at SAN in the late 1980s
1984 151.5 7.2 million passengers
1985 162.4
1986 170.1
1987 198.2 9.8 million passengers
1988 204.6
1989 207.4

So the drop in operations at SAN and LAS have to be seen in a larger picture where airlines retired many of the smaller jets, a lot of turboprops were abandoned, and general aviation went down.

The SAN airport still invested or will invest about $3.5 billion in new terminals (as did Vegas). In San Diego one of the terminals opened in 1963 when passengers passed 1 million for the first time. The air passengers passed 20 million in 2015.

But the level of hysteria that SDCRAA tried to create 11 years ago in San Diego was intense to support the new airport. Without a new airport the county could lose as much as $93 billion in potential regional GDP by 2030 (headlines). Constrained operations would begin when the runway was trying to support 260,000 operations which was supposed to happen as early as 2015.

But there is no particular reason to think that San Diego will ever outgrow the single runway. Planes will simply get bigger and bigger at the same rate as the growth in passengers.

Last edited by PacoMartin; 11-09-2017 at 10:48 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2017, 05:42 AM
 
9,068 posts, read 9,225,623 times
Reputation: 4665
I did talk to some of the aviation experts at San Diego in 2003. They would say that Southwest had between 122 and 143 seats in their planes from 1971-2003 and could not be expected to change their business plans. Airlines only increased in capacity by an average of roughly 1 seat every two years. Loading factors higher than 77% were nearly impossible. The airlines found the 35 seat aircraft the optimal size to fly the 109 miles to LAX. General aviation needed to land in San Diego. In short it was absolutely impossible to increased average carrying capacity much higher than the forecast 100 passengers per operation in the year 2030.

After the county vote rejected the new airport in 2006, operations grew for one more year, and then they plummeted. It is important to note that Southwest Airline only adopted the larger jet in 2011 (175 seats) and even today the larger B737 is still only 20% of Southwest operations at Lindbergh Field.

So far from operating at the forecast constrained levels, operations at San Diego are still equal to levels in the late 1980's (under 200,000 per year).

LAX, MIA and JFK are unusual in that the percentage of flights on widebody aircraft are very high because of they are our primary long range international gateways. But they also attract a lot of regional aircraft because there are so many feeder airports within 700 miles.

But JFK (with 25% widebody flights ) has the highest number of passengers per operation in the USA. LAS is ranked #2 behind JFK. Mostly because there are few regional aircraft, load factors are very high. High capacity single aisle jets are favored domestically, and double aisle jets for international flights.

Since so much traffic to LAS comes from southern California, a high speed train may help, but as it is unlikely to go to Anaheim, a train to Victorville will probably not change air travel significantly.

It is possible that McCarran could change it's landing fees to encourage larger planes. Boeing is planning for a new airplane in 2025 (informally called the 797) which may bring wide body flights back to domestic operations. Vegas is a likely place to use these new aircraft.

In any case the trigger defined as 49.5 million passengers is likely to be reached within one or two years.

Last edited by PacoMartin; 11-10-2017 at 05:55 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2018, 04:33 PM
 
9,068 posts, read 9,225,623 times
Reputation: 4665
McCarran International Airport welcomed 48.5 million arriving and departing passengers last year, making 2017 the busiest year in the airport's nearly 70-year history. For a seventh consecutive year the commercial airport serving Southern Nevada posted a year-over-year increase with the 2017 total marking

So it will almost certainly break 49.5 million passengers in 2018, which was supposed to be the trigger for starting work on Ivanpah.

But operations are still far below their 2006 peak.

Aircraft Operations at LAS airport
1999 542,922
2000 521,300
2001 498,970
2002 498,037
2003 510,814
2004 574,355
2005 614,312
2006 619,474
2007 619,287
2008 578,946
2009 511,063
2010 505,604
2011 531,538
2012 528,004
2013 520,386
2014 522,067
2015 524,878
2016 535,740
2017 542,994
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2018, 04:41 PM
 
10,717 posts, read 3,748,229 times
Reputation: 4696
Appears to me they can get to 60 million with out trouble....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2018, 01:09 AM
 
9,068 posts, read 9,225,623 times
Reputation: 4665
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch View Post
Appears to me they can get to 60 million with out trouble....
The trigger was supposed to be McCarran reaching 90% (49.5 million passengers) of its projected capacity of 55 million.

Now an airport doesn't break down going from 55 to 60 million passengers. There may be some delays or there will be some slot restrictions.

DIA finally replaced Stapleton on February 28, 1995, 16 months behind schedule and at a cost of $4.8 billion, nearly $2 billion over budget. Why would Ivanpah be any different?

McCarran International Airport welcomed
45.3 million 2015
47.4 million 2016
48.5 million 2017

Even if passenger count reaches 50 million this year, I don't actually expect them to start work. But a decision may have to made before long.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2018, 02:52 PM
 
2,132 posts, read 2,189,936 times
Reputation: 1299
I'd rather NAFB be moved to Creech and use Nellis as an international terminal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2018, 04:28 PM
 
3,562 posts, read 1,820,371 times
Reputation: 3848
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddrhazy View Post
I'd rather NAFB be moved to Creech and use Nellis as an international terminal.
How much would it cost and how long would it take to remediate the hazard waste sites at Nellis before the state would even consider taking it over?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Nevada > Las Vegas
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top