November 2006 airport vote to move to Miramar (Los Angeles, San Diego: 2013, university)

[cruitr]

Well researched PacoMan. But don't you think that voting on the Miramar option without Federal Gov't approval was pretty much useless? Were we hoping the Feds would just give us Miramar if we asked?

Taking over Miramar or North Island will never happen. We are stuck with a one-runway Lindbergh Field. And with all the current construction going around Lindbergh Field, we are stuck with Lindbergh Field for the foreseeable future.

And here's a tivial question for you. St Louis, New York, and San Diego all claim associations to Charles Lindbergh. What's the San Diego connection to Charles Lindbergh?

[Pilot1]

Originally Posted by cruitr

And here's a tivial question for you. St Louis, New York, and San Diego all claim associations to Charles Lindbergh. What's the San Diego connection to Charles Lindbergh?

Ryan Aircraft, the manufacturer of his famous plane the Spirit if St. Louis was built there. If memory serves he had a hand in the design/production in San Diego.

[cruitr]

Ding ding ding... we have a winner. San Diego built the Lindbergh plane, St Louis paid for the plane, and the plane took off out of New York.

I was really pissed off when SD city gov't white-washed the Charles Lindbergh mural off of the wall of the cummuter terminal a few years ago. I don't even have a decent picture of the mural.

[PacoMartin]

Originally Posted by cruitr

Well researched PacoMan. But don't you think that voting on the Miramar option without Federal Gov't approval was pretty much useless? Were we hoping the Feds would just give us Miramar if we asked?

Absolutely. Gatwick airport in London is also a single runway airport that flew 43 million air passengers in 2016. Contrary to what many people think, they don't double San Diego's passenger load by using night flights. Gatwick has more widebody aircraft than San Diego, but not enough so that makes up the huge difference in passengers.

I was a very strong advocate of the position that the airlines would begin flying larger airplanes with more passengers per plane. The airlines started flying larger planes only two years after the vote.

Year Psgrs/flight
2002 90
2003 88
2004 91
2005 92
2006 92
2007 91
2008 93
2009 98
2010 104
2011 106
2012 107
2013 108
2014 111
2015 118
2016 120

But dealing with the increased number of people means new terminals, and more off-airport check in. Very few people transfer planes at San Diego, so it doesn't have to be built out like LAX

I simply don't understand how they could build underground subways in London in 1860's, and it is impossible to build a 2 mile partly underground subway from Union Station near downtown to the airport terminal. You could have passenger check in as part of the underground facility, and tie it in to Amtrak, Coaster, and SDTrolley so that more people arrive at the airport via public transportation.

Whatever that 2 mile underground subway costs, it has to be a whole heck of a lot cheaper than the $10 billion to build a shared Miramar airport, which was never going to be approved by the military anyway.

Are you familiar with the cable pulled Mandalay Bay Tram (2,749-foot-long) opened on April 9, 1999 in Las Vegas? The train cars are firmly attached to a haul rope and run on pneumatic tires to ensure extremely quiet operation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandalay_Bay_Tram

You should know that technology has been developed since 1999 so that pulling a tram for 2 miles is feasible. The company that built the tram in Las Vegas also built the 3.2 mil Coliseum–Oakland International Airport line which began operation on November 22, 2014. The average speed is 24 mph and top speed is 30 mph. Transit time in San Diego would be under 5 minutes.

Most recent month where BTS had statistics for SAN Airport
% of flights - number of seats (empty seats)

1.5% 252 (24) widebody
82.1% 157 (28) narrowbody
14.8% 72 (17) regional jets
1.6% other jets (cargo and private)
100.0% 143 (26)

[RosieSD]

Originally Posted by cruitr

Ding ding ding... we have a winner. San Diego built the Lindbergh plane, St Louis paid for the plane, and the plane took off out of New York.

I was really pissed off when SD city gov't white-washed the Charles Lindbergh mural off of the wall of the cummuter terminal a few years ago. I don't even have a decent picture of the mural.

Just take a drive up to Ramona. That's where they moved the mural. You can't miss it on Main Street.

Charles Lindbergh Mural Relocated to Ramona - NBC 7 San Diego

I do agree that it should have remained at the airport, but at least it didn't end up on a scrap heap somewhere.

[cruitr]

Originally Posted by RosieSD

Just take a drive up to Ramona. That's where they moved the mural. You can't miss it on Main Street.

Charles Lindbergh Mural Relocated to Ramona - NBC 7 San Diego

I do agree that it should have remained at the airport, but at least it didn't end up on a scrap heap somewhere.

Thanks RosieSD. I don't make it up to Ramona very often but at least they saved the Lindbergh mural. Maybe they should rename the Ramona airport to Lindbergh Field.

[PacoMartin]

I did find the presentation by San Diego Airport Authority from June 7, 2004. They said the analysis was conducted by SH&E (one of the most prestigious companies in the world) and reviewed by 11 different government agencies

SH&E Was Asked to Prepare Aviation Demand Forecasts to Estimate When San Diego International Airport (SDIA) Will Reach Its Runway Capacity Limits

Here are the numbers SH&E used in their analysis
Average
year - passengers -load% - seats
2002 87 72.9% 120
2010 95 75.7% 125
2020 98 76.8% 128
2030 100 76.9% 130

Findings and conclusions

1. Passenger Airlines are the Principal Driver of Total Aircraft Operations at SDIA
2. Passenger Traffic at SDIA is Forecast to Grow from 15.3 Million Passengers in 2003 to Between 27 and 33 Million in 2030
3. Historically, Increases in Aircraft Size and Load Factors at SDIA Permitted Strong Passenger Growth Without a Commensurate Increase in the Number of Aircraft Operations
4. However, High Current Load Factors and Aircraft Fleet Trends Indicate that, Over the Forecast Period, SDIA Aircraft Operations Will Grow at Rates that Approach the Underlying Rate of Passenger Growth
5. As a Result, SDIA Aircraft Operations are Forecast to Increase From Approximately 200,000 Flights in 2003 up to Between 303,000 and 365,000 Flights in 2030 (Unconstrained)
6. While SDIA Can Accommodate Current Flight Activity, the Single Runway Has Insufficient Capacity to Handle the Forecast Growth in Aircraft Operations
7. Runway Capacity will Begin to Constrain Growth at 260,000 Operations—Approximately 30% Above Current Levels—Occurring Between 2015 and 2022
8. At 300,000 Annual Operations—Occurring Between 2021 and 2030—Runway Congestion will Eliminate Further Growth
9. Investments in the SDIA Gate and Taxiway Systems (Additional Gates and Taxiway Improvements) Will be Required to Reach these Levels
10. If Additional Runway Capacity is Not Provided, San Diego Will Experience a Cumulative Loss of At Least 5 Million Passengers (Low Growth Scenario) and As Many As 31 Million Passengers (High Growth Scenario) Over the Forecast Period

=================================
The FAA BTS stats calculate to 90 seats per flight in 2002, but that is probably because SH&E counted in military flights.

But according to BTS these were the actual numbers. In reality the airlines responded to the economic crash of 2008 by flying much bigger planes with higher load factors.

Year Psgrs/flight
2002 90
2003 88
2004 91
2005 92
2006 92
2007 91
2008 93
2009 98
2010 104
2011 106
2012 107
2013 108
2014 111
2015 118
2016 120

Bottom line is that the forecast was predicting 100 passengers per plane in 2030, and the airport passed 100 passenger per plane by 2010.

[PacoMartin]

Perhaps I can simplify the comment

In 2004 they forecast said Passenger Traffic at SDIA is Forecast to Grow from 15.3 Million Passengers in 2003 to Between 27 and 33 Million in 2030.

That is a growth rate of between 2.13% and 2.89% per year. In reality it was less, but they couldn't have forecast the recession.

But the forecast said that passengers per plane would increase by 0.50% (from 87 passengers in 2002 to 100 passengers in 2030).

So of course, the runway is overtaxed. In reality the growth in passengers per plane for 14 years topped 2%.

[sdurbanite]

Interesting conversation. Can't believe the vote was 10 years ago. As PacoMartiin said earlier, it's unbelievable that the trolley doesn't service the airport from downtown.

[PacoMartin]

Originally Posted by sdurbanite

Interesting conversation. Can't believe the vote was 10 years ago. As PacoMartiin said earlier, it's unbelievable that the trolley doesn't service the airport from downtown.

Actually a trolley car is 81.4 ft by 8.7 ft by 12.3 ft and weights 96,500 lbs empty. It has a maximum operational speed 55 mph with Service acceleration and deceleration 3.0 mph/sec and a passenger capacity 60 seats.

It's too much to go to the 2 miles from Union Station to the airport. I was thinking of an cable pulled Automated Guideway Transit system like the Oakland airport or Mandalay Bay or MGM center tram in Las Vegas (all three built by same company in Germany).

https://www.dcc.at/files/sites/defau...ence_sheet.pdf