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 11-01-2017, 06:01 PM
 
372 posts, read 239,585 times
Reputation: 86

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch View Post
McCarran is convenient (and) most tourists don't have any problems.
It will be the same with the New Mac, only better.

@The impact may be small...but you will not really find out until you build it and they don't come. [/quote]

You're saying that the downtown location (distance) of LAS has a lot to do with tourism and that if you stick the new airport 10 or 15 minutes away, it's doomed. I say that folks want to transition between airliner and resort (or home) as quickly and seamlessly as possible. With a new beginning, they'll get it a lot faster and more convenient than they're getting it now.

@You aware of anyone who has replicated the Shanghai Maglev? Been around a while now and I don't know of one. [/quote]

You're not looking. There are several in operation and more than a dozen in development, some even here (US). The Shanghai Malev runs at 270 mph. If built here, the ride would be about 10 minutes long. Hardly enough tie to settle into your seat.

@I think you are also a little shy on the run to Ivanpah. More like 30 miles. [/quote]

Hardly matters. I suspect that the terminal would be closer to Jean, which is 13 miles closer to LV. But no matter, you'd get there fast. By Maglev, like I say, 10 minutes; by car 15.

@If it was going to happen I would think a Maglev with a view of the city would be just the thing. You could even feature it as a wonder of Las Vegas.[/quote]

Finally(!), we agree on something. In fact, on my last trip to China, I visited Shanghai specifically to ride its Maglev. Incredible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-01-2017, 06:47 PM
 
10,693 posts, read 3,738,322 times
Reputation: 4683
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruff View Post
It will be the same with the New Mac, only better.

@The impact may be small...but you will not really find out until you build it and they don't come.
You're saying that the downtown location (distance) of LAS has a lot to do with tourism and that if you stick the new airport 10 or 15 minutes away, it's doomed. I say that folks want to transition between airliner and resort (or home) as quickly and seamlessly as possible. With a new beginning, they'll get it a lot faster and more convenient than they're getting it now.
Where did I say doomed? Kindly refrain from putting words in my mouth. What I said was much simpler. You spend something near 20 billion dollars and it may make your business worse. Will it crash LV? Of course not. Could it be an economic disaster? Sure. But it could cause big problem and then provide a big boost as the area catches on. The problem is that it has parameters that are probably impossible to evaluate until after completion. That makes the commitment difficult. In fact no way until they see a clear need to off load McCarran.
Quote:
@You aware of anyone who has replicated the Shanghai Maglev? Been around a while now and I don't know of one.
You're not looking. There are several in operation and more than a dozen in development, some even here (US). The Shanghai Malev runs at 270 mph. If built here, the ride would be about 10 minutes long. Hardly enough tie to settle into your seat.
Actually one significant system and some toys. It screams of a wonderful solution looking for the problem it solves. It can be belt, as Shanghai proves, but it is not clear that it will be a big success anytime soon. You would have to be a little nuts to bet on it for Ivanpah at this point. Maybe in ten years or so.
Quote:
@I think you are also a little shy on the run to Ivanpah. More like 30 miles.
Hardly matters. I suspect that the terminal would be closer to Jean, which is 13 miles closer to LV. But no matter, you'd get there fast. By Maglev, like I say, 10 minutes; by car 15.
I would still suggest the maglev is very unlikely for some years.

Quote:
@If it was going to happen I would think a Maglev with a view of the city would be just the thing. You could even feature it as a wonder of Las Vegas.

Finally(!), we agree on something. In fact, on my last trip to China, I visited Shanghai specifically to ride its Maglev. Incredible.
If you go maglev you would have to feature it. But you won't go maglev anytime soon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2017, 07:10 PM
 
372 posts, read 239,585 times
Reputation: 86
[quote=BBMW;50001031]If single 10-20 gate terminals are coming in at $2.5 billion, $7.5 billion isn't getting you an entire from scratch major international airport.

DIA cost $7.5 (in today's dollars) and last year handled 58 million pax. That's good enough for me.

@ McCarran has four runways in two parallel close set groups. It also has 110 gates. What's your design for the new airport?

Replicating DIA, which has 6 runways and a world-class terminal, seems fine to me.

@ Keep in mind, the justification for Ivanpah was the McCarran is going to reach capacity. So it really can't be justified as an equal replacement, it has to be bigger.

They bought and paid for the site is more than twice the size of McCarran - plus there are another 17,000 acres on option.

@Anyone but Bruff see this as coming in less than $15 billion, maybe more like 20.

Heck, you're the expert. Let's add another $10 billion and make it 30.

@ I'm saying that if anyone wanted to do major resort development, there's not only land available for it, it's almost begging for it.

That depends on where it is. Not on the north end of the Strip, but the south end, different story.

@No one needs the land that McCarran sits on for new resort development (or anything else, really.)

Disagree. Right now there's only two major resorts south of the Excalibur and Tropicana, and land on the east side of LVB with its ugly and noisy airport dropback is asking $10M an acre. My guess is that if McCarran were gone, there'd be a mad scramble thereabouts and all that brown we now see in aerial maps in the southwest quadrant would magically turn green. As would a 5-mile swath on either side of 1-15 all the way to Primm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2017, 09:12 PM
 
372 posts, read 239,585 times
Reputation: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch View Post
Could (moving LAS to Ivanpah) be an economic disaster? Sure.
How so? Please show me a single airport that, moved outside the city and its predecessor shut down, was an economic disaster. It's never happened.

@ (On maglev): Actually (only) one significant system and some toys. It screams of a wonderful solution looking for the problem it solves.

Apparently the Japanese, like the Chinese, Americans, Germans and a raft of thers, think it will solve some problems. https://www.thenational.ae/business/...trains-1.86709

@It can be belt, as Shanghai proves, but it is not clear that it will be a big success anytime soon. You would have to be a little nuts to bet on it for Ivanpah at this point. Maybe in ten years or so.

Okay, have it your way. No Maglev.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2017, 11:12 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas
1,827 posts, read 1,262,611 times
Reputation: 1410
Bruff, are you arguing with yourself?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2017, 04:23 AM
 
9,064 posts, read 9,217,240 times
Reputation: 4665
There are arguably seven airports in the USA where the old airport was basically left operating while a new and bigger airport was built.

DAL (8800'), HOU(7600'), MDW (6500') all three have over 90% of passengers carried on Southwest planes. The other four are DCA(7169'), LGA(7000'), BUR (6900') and SNA(5700').

These airports have in common short runways, which makes them less of a threat to the newer airports. If you leave McCarran open (or partly open) then there will be no way to get any airline to voluntarily move to Ivanpah while some competition remains at McCarran.

IMHO Ivanpah will not open in my lifetime. It will be interesting to see what happens when the supposed trigger of 49.5 million air passengers is switched next year.

Los Angeles World Airports gave up control of both Palmdale Regional Airport and Ontario Airport, so they are now committed to work with LAX. Previously these two airports were supposed to be backups to LAX.

The larger question of how USA reacts to a mega airport being built in Mexico city with a multi billion dollar terminal and up to 6 long runways will be interesting.
Most Americans will not see the mega airports in Dubai, but they will chalk it up to having a lot of desert. But if Mexico City builds an airport of that size in the middle of one of the largest urban areas in Latin America there will be more calls for a national airport for the USA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2017, 04:09 PM
 
372 posts, read 239,585 times
Reputation: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmegaSupreme View Post
Bruff, are you arguing with yourself?
Not at all. I'm having a discourse with Luddites who, regardless of facts, dangers, and opportunities, are determined to keep the albatross known as McCarran on our backs forever.
Which side are you on?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2017, 04:16 PM
 
372 posts, read 239,585 times
Reputation: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmegaSupreme View Post
Bruff, are you arguing with yourself?
Not at all. I'm having a discourse with Luddites who, regardless of facts, dangers, and opportunities, are determined to keep the albatross known as McCarran on our backs forever.
Which side are you on?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2017, 10:47 PM
 
9,952 posts, read 8,438,330 times
Reputation: 5826
I don't think the US has any need to react to the the new Mexico City Airport. I think the concept of a national airport, for a nation big enough to require significant internal air travel.

In point of fact the direction that the airline industry is going is away from the hub and spoke model that your concept of the "national airport" suggest, to a more direct flight based model. This can be show by the success of the Boeing 787 vs the failure of the Airbus A380.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PacoMartin View Post

The larger question of how USA reacts to a mega airport being built in Mexico city with a multi billion dollar terminal and up to 6 long runways will be interesting.
Most Americans will not see the mega airports in Dubai, but they will chalk it up to having a lot of desert. But if Mexico City builds an airport of that size in the middle of one of the largest urban areas in Latin America there will be more calls for a national airport for the USA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2017, 02:21 AM
 
9,064 posts, read 9,217,240 times
Reputation: 4665
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBMW View Post
In point of fact the direction that the airline industry is going is away from the hub and spoke model that your concept of the "national airport" suggest, to a more direct flight based model. This can be show by the success of the Boeing 787 vs the failure of the Airbus A380.
There is a general statistical trend towards more concentration in the industry. The larger airports are growing faster than the industry as a whole. The failure of the A380 and the pursuit of more point to point travel with the Dreamliner are not indicators of the broader trend. I know that writers would like you to believe otherwise.

In 2001, Atlanta was 5.64% of nation's total boardings while in 2016 Atlanta moved up to 6.09% of total boardings .

To use a larger estimate than just one hub, consider the FAA concept of a "large hub". The FAA simply defines a "large hub" as an airport that has 1% or more of the nation's boarding totals.

Over a 15 year period the collection of "large hubs" has lost a net one airport, but gained over 3% in passengers.

2001 69.33% of nation's air traffic at 31 large hubs with 457,147,860 enplanements
2016 72.55% of nation's air traffic at 30 large hubs with 601,677,831 enplanements

A total of 28 large hubs are the same in both the 2001 and 2016 list with very small changes in the makeup of the list.
On the 2001 list CVG, PIT, STL are no longer on 2016 list to be replaced with DCA and PDX.

So we see a trend towards more passengers (by percents) in fewer airports, not the other way around.

==============
But the concept of a sense of awe and amazement at the point of arrival into a great city is an ancient one. It was seen in Union Station in NYC when people came by train, and it was part of the original design of airports.

You don't see it as much in the USA or in even in Europe. It's a big part of the design ethic in Asia or in Middle East but those airports are not readily seen by Americans. A Mexico City airport that is more magnificent than any in the USA will get people's attention.

But the price of building the new airport is massive for a country like Mexico. It would be massive for the USA. I am not totally convinced that they can pull it off without a revolution.

Our three main gateways to the country, JFK, LAX, and MIA are struggling under the load. But so are Frankfurt Airport, Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport , and London Heathrow Airport.

Last edited by PacoMartin; 11-03-2017 at 02:30 AM..
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