U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Diego
 [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 11-08-2019, 07:01 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
3,192 posts, read 1,914,284 times
Reputation: 5637

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sassberto View Post
Other than the tourism industry I don't see who benefits. SD is not a business hub type of city.
Exactly. Besides that, I’ve never heard a tourist complain about getting a flight here, and my business is filled with them. Usually what I hear is how beautiful it was flying in, how convenient it’s location is, and that their’s is a nightmare to deal with and/or in BFE.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-08-2019, 09:36 PM
 
332 posts, read 320,954 times
Reputation: 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger09 View Post
Single runway, available land, terrain. Pretty much built out.
So I get that we're a single runway, but I was hoping for a more specific answer. Like perhaps the planes land every 2 minutes (I just made that number up) and they can't be closer in time than that? but if that's the case then couldn't capacity be expanded by using larger airplanes?

Or perhaps autopilot technology will allow airplanes to land right after each other with a smaller time gap than currently allowed.

Or maybe the limit is available gates at the terminals and the passenger loading time for airplanes?

Basically 15 years is a long time in technology terms and I'm wondering what's going come down the pipe that might increase capacity (that wasn't accounted for in the forecast). Maybe self driving cars will kill off short-distance flights (e.g. san to Las Vegas) freeing up capacity.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2019, 11:40 PM
 
40 posts, read 13,273 times
Reputation: 65
I thought one of the ideas was a joint use at Miramar with civilian terminal on the south side. There are joint use at Hickam AB - Honolulu HI, Rhine-Main AB - Frankfort GE, Charleston AFB - Charleston SC and a few others
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2019, 01:21 AM
 
Location: Coastal San Diego
5,022 posts, read 6,997,572 times
Reputation: 4034
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little_D View Post
I thought one of the ideas was a joint use at Miramar with civilian terminal on the south side. There are joint use at Hickam AB - Honolulu HI, Rhine-Main AB - Frankfort GE, Charleston AFB - Charleston SC and a few others
Yes, I do recall people talking about sharing Miramar in 2006. But the inter-mixing of commercial traffic with military fighters in the the same airspace is problematic. Not everyone is playing by the same flight rules.

As a former air-traffic-controller in the Air Force, I used to have a ring around my truck license plate that said "I tell fighter pilots where to go." The truth is, no one tells fighter pilots where to go. I help them take-off and I help them land. Other than the basics, fighter pilots are a wild 'yee-haw' bunch.

We commonly had fighter pilots 'buzz the tower' where I worked. They told none of us when they were going to play 'pilot cowboy.' That would never work with a commercial runway less than a mile away. A couple of near-misses and the whole place would get shut down.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2019, 09:34 PM
 
18,174 posts, read 14,753,526 times
Reputation: 9312
Quote:
Originally Posted by snpdragr View Post
So I get that we're a single runway, but I was hoping for a more specific answer. Like perhaps the planes land every 2 minutes (I just made that number up) and they can't be closer in time than that? but if that's the case then couldn't capacity be expanded by using larger airplanes?

Or perhaps autopilot technology will allow airplanes to land right after each other with a smaller time gap than currently allowed.

Or maybe the limit is available gates at the terminals and the passenger loading time for airplanes?

Basically 15 years is a long time in technology terms and I'm wondering what's going come down the pipe that might increase capacity (that wasn't accounted for in the forecast). Maybe self driving cars will kill off short-distance flights (e.g. san to Las Vegas) freeing up capacity.
Actually there is a time between landings that is mandatory as each plane creates turbulence when it lands or takes off and the next plane needs to be able to avoid that,


Length Take Offs

Minimum time separation for arriving aircraft not radar-separated is 2 minutes for a MEDIUM aircraft behind a HEAVY aircraft and 3 minutes for a LIGHT aircraft behind a HEAVY or MEDIUM aircraft.



https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/...bulence_Hazard
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2019, 09:50 AM
 
3,011 posts, read 4,720,946 times
Reputation: 2572
Quote:
Originally Posted by snpdragr View Post
So I get that we're a single runway, but I was hoping for a more specific answer. Like perhaps the planes land every 2 minutes (I just made that number up) and they can't be closer in time than that? but if that's the case then couldn't capacity be expanded by using larger airplanes?

Or perhaps autopilot technology will allow airplanes to land right after each other with a smaller time gap than currently allowed.

Or maybe the limit is available gates at the terminals and the passenger loading time for airplanes?

Basically 15 years is a long time in technology terms and I'm wondering what's going come down the pipe that might increase capacity (that wasn't accounted for in the forecast). Maybe self driving cars will kill off short-distance flights (e.g. san to Las Vegas) freeing up capacity.
I agree with you completely. There are additional possibilities for expanding capacity even with one runway. Not indefinitely, of course, as even an airport with two runways will have some sort of eventual capacity limit. As it is, San Diego Airport has continued to expand the number of gates at its Terminals and will have a massive reconstruction of terminal One in the near future.

The sheer convenience and location of Lindbergh Field (which technically is no longer called Lindbergh Field but San Diego International) are unmatched anywhere. For that reason alone, it is likely to stay there for a long time. Using Miramar will be difficult, because you'll come up against so much neighborhood opposition because of noise and lack of infrastructure to handle the traffic that it will be an enormous uphill battle.

Given the current state of technology, what most larger Metro areas do to accommodate more travelers is to have multiple airports. Los Angeles has LAX, Burbank, and Ontario; the Bay area has SFO, Oakland, and San Jose; New York has LaGuardia, Kennedy, and Newark; and for example in Seattle, a second airport was recently added north of the city. With that in mind, even if we were to have another airport, it would be unlikely that the current airport would relocate but rather operate in a secondary capacity.

That being said, we do have multiple airports in San Diego. Most notably, Tijuana International Airport recently underwent an enormous renovation and offers many low priced nonstops to Central America and even to China. That is an ideal location for future expansion to more International destinations, without having to overcome the massive hurdles of building something in San Diego proper. We also have the smaller airport up in Carlsbad, which does fly small commercial Jets around the West, and which has pondered expansion. For North county residents, that could be an amazing gateway to the West Coast and desert Southwest, taking pressure off of San Diego International.

On a smaller scale, even airfields like Montgomery field could expand its Small Business Jet operations, along the lines of what Buchanan field in Concord, in the Bay area, has done by offering flights to Burbank, which then is a hub that goes to Phoenix or Vegas. Certainly small jet nonstops to popular destinations like Vegas would be very feasible from a small airport like that, and it would be quite attractive to pay a little more for significantly faster screenings and boarding.

So from what I've read, diversification of airports and the markets they serve is a big step towards maintaining the capacity at San Diego International.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2019, 04:13 PM
 
889 posts, read 631,164 times
Reputation: 1669
Quote:
Originally Posted by tstieber View Post
I agree with you completely. There are additional possibilities for expanding capacity even with one runway. Not indefinitely, of course, as even an airport with two runways will have some sort of eventual capacity limit. As it is, San Diego Airport has continued to expand the number of gates at its Terminals and will have a massive reconstruction of terminal One in the near future.

The sheer convenience and location of Lindbergh Field (which technically is no longer called Lindbergh Field but San Diego International) are unmatched anywhere. For that reason alone, it is likely to stay there for a long time. Using Miramar will be difficult, because you'll come up against so much neighborhood opposition because of noise and lack of infrastructure to handle the traffic that it will be an enormous uphill battle.

Given the current state of technology, what most larger Metro areas do to accommodate more travelers is to have multiple airports. Los Angeles has LAX, Burbank, and Ontario; the Bay area has SFO, Oakland, and San Jose; New York has LaGuardia, Kennedy, and Newark; and for example in Seattle, a second airport was recently added north of the city. With that in mind, even if we were to have another airport, it would be unlikely that the current airport would relocate but rather operate in a secondary capacity.

That being said, we do have multiple airports in San Diego. Most notably, Tijuana International Airport recently underwent an enormous renovation and offers many low priced nonstops to Central America and even to China. That is an ideal location for future expansion to more International destinations, without having to overcome the massive hurdles of building something in San Diego proper. We also have the smaller airport up in Carlsbad, which does fly small commercial Jets around the West, and which has pondered expansion. For North county residents, that could be an amazing gateway to the West Coast and desert Southwest, taking pressure off of San Diego International.

On a smaller scale, even airfields like Montgomery field could expand its Small Business Jet operations, along the lines of what Buchanan field in Concord, in the Bay area, has done by offering flights to Burbank, which then is a hub that goes to Phoenix or Vegas. Certainly small jet nonstops to popular destinations like Vegas would be very feasible from a small airport like that, and it would be quite attractive to pay a little more for significantly faster screenings and boarding.

So from what I've read, diversification of airports and the markets they serve is a big step towards maintaining the capacity at San Diego International.
Good post, tsbieber.

Getting back to the OP's question, certainly the strong military support in SD likely created push back on the Miramar option. But I think there was a strong element of the airport relocation supporters cooking the numbers. The relocation supporters assumed that the airport would max out about 28 million passengers per year, IIRC. This was based on two assumptions that were demonstrably false. One, that the timing of take-offs/landings throughout the day would not change, and two, that the mix of aircraft flying in and out of SAN would not change. It was predicted (and experience has shown) that the airlines will fly larger planes to SAN and that they will fly at different times.

SAN currently serves 24M passengers per year and we're no where near the limit. In fact, over the last few years, the number of passengers has increased whilst the number of operations has decreased. Hard to tell what the ultimate capacity is for SAN. That said, ground operations and the number of gates needs to increase.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2019, 05:42 PM
 
4,280 posts, read 3,425,338 times
Reputation: 10242
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA View Post
Actually there is a time between landings that is mandatory as each plane creates turbulence when it lands or takes off and the next plane needs to be able to avoid that,


Length Take Offs

Minimum time separation for arriving aircraft not radar-separated is 2 minutes for a MEDIUM aircraft behind a HEAVY aircraft and 3 minutes for a LIGHT aircraft behind a HEAVY or MEDIUM aircraft.



https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/...bulence_Hazard
Yep.. Remember when Maverick and Goose flew through another jet's jetwash?

Goose died.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2019, 06:09 AM
 
Location: Coastal San Diego
5,022 posts, read 6,997,572 times
Reputation: 4034
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axxlrod View Post
Yep.. Remember when Maverick and Goose flew through another jet's jetwash?
Goose died.
Top Gun. What a movie. I sure hope Top Gun 2 is just as good.

Here's the 2019 Top Gun party on the USS Midway:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5WV...ezgaBR86GW%3A6
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2019, 07:42 AM
 
111 posts, read 59,445 times
Reputation: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA View Post
Actually there is a time between landings that is mandatory as each plane creates turbulence when it lands or takes off and the next plane needs to be able to avoid that,


Length Take Offs

Minimum time separation for arriving aircraft not radar-separated is 2 minutes for a MEDIUM aircraft behind a HEAVY aircraft and 3 minutes for a LIGHT aircraft behind a HEAVY or MEDIUM aircraft.



https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/...bulence_Hazard
San Diego would be radar separated. If wake turbulence isn’t an issue, the separation in 100 seconds between arrivals. If wake turbulence is an issue, then it’s 120.
Rate this post positively 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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 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 > California > San Diego

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top