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.
Hartsfield doesnt need a 6th runway, Delta can solve this congestion problem overnight by using bigger planes to reduce congestion. Do you really need a 150 seat 737 or md88 every hour on the hour to some cities when they could a 260 seat 767-300 every 1.5 to 2 hrs instead. It might be a tad less convient for fliers with less flights to choose from, but you can get the same capacity with bigger planes and get less congestion.
It isn't quite that simple though, especially at a hub airport.
Delta, or any other airline, will pick the size and type of the airplane on a wide variety of factors including: frequency, consumer demand, distance of flight, fuel efficiency, need from other connecting flights, among other things.
Some planes are more fuel efficient (per passenger) on short hauls, while others are more fuel efficient on medium and long hauls. (Larger planes will burn more fuel per passenger getting up in the air, but might burn less fuel per passenger cruising long distances. A shorter flight means less cruising time and more climbing/landing time)
The other issue is frequent business travelers between big cities are really picky on when they can get a flight in or out. I'm a frequent flier with both Delta and the Star Alliance, but I don't always maintain airline loyalty if another airline can give me a more preferable flight option. In fact, that is partly why I have status on multiple airlines.
But even besides that, for Delta it is their hub....especially to frequently traveled destinations they need to keep a wide array of time options open to people on flights that only come in 2 or 3 times a day. In other words say someone is flying from Toledo to Miami. They could lower the number of flights to Miami, but they might lose people on the inbound Toledo flight that won't wait on a 2 hour connection (or a 4 hour connection if something goes wrong), but they will wait on a 1 hour or less connection (2 if there is a problem). Although someone with a layover from say Toledo to Augusta ... well they might end up with a longer layover, because neither city will have a wide variety of flights.
You will even see some MD-88 flights go half filled at the end of the day, but they are needed to maintain business from other connecting locations. That come in at spread out times.
But as a city/region one of our biggest selling points at attracting top paying jobs that brings money into the area over just about any other city is our wide variety of fairly cheap and fast traveling options. The quicker we can get someone to and from somewhere... the more time they can spend with their family and enjoy a higher quality of life here.
The last issue to always keep in mind that is often brought up in the articles improvements this large really do take 10-20 years, so we have to plan for the amount of air traffic not now... but in 20 years.
That's a good way of looking at things, but I think Atlanta has an exceptional argument that can be made about the impact of our airport. Our city essentially wouldn't exist in anything resembling its modern form if it didn't have a top airport: the status of Atlanta's airport in the 70's and 80's is really what propelled us above other cities in the south. The airport is our biggest asset, and, well, you've always gotta look out for your bread and butter first and foremost.
I'm not sure that should earn the airport a carte blanche, but we definitely need to take all necessary measures to keep it cutting-edge.
Since you are always so in-the-know about these sorts of things, what sort of transport are they planning to get between north gates and south gates? I would assume just an extension of the skytrain or something, but I've heard people talk about another MARTA station too. Extending both seems rather extravagant.
Well they never released many details except for concept ideas. In fact I have seen 3 or 4 different drawing versions of the southgate complex that are different from each other.
What I always heard was they would extend the people mover offering secured side service and would install a baggage transport system. They could attempt to engineer secured and unsecured terminal to terminal service on the same pathway with different passenger cars stopping at different stops. It might require a few security hoops and potentially extra security staffing though. (This is what I wish they would do for those of us arriving in Atlanta as our final destination on an international flight... use the same people mover system, but build two unique stations that only open up to an "unsecured train" that wouldn't stop at the concourses, but just travel through).
One thing I have noticed is since the recession and spending more money on the international terminal they have quietly removed information on and been saying less about the South Gate complex.
I'll try to find and send any of the conceptual images I can find still floating around out there.
Ok, I have only been able to find two... partly because I saved them on my computer a long time ago. I know there were others thought, including one with a round south terminal/gate building.
In the first there is the following:
-South terminal
-Marta extension
-automated people mover
-south parking
This plan requires buying private land that is on the west end between runways 4 and 5 along I-85.
The second is the following:
-Two concourses similar to what is built now
-No south terminal, but an expanded central terminal
-secured side automated people mover
-expansion lot for long-term parking
This plan prevents costly expenses, like expanding MARTA, buying that land previously mentioned. It leaves room for more gates in the long-run, but would increase congestion at an even larger central terminal.
Neither involve planning of a 6th runway and both ideas would conflict with placing a 6th runway between runways 4 and 5 that some people are starting to talk about. I don't like that idea as I don't see the purpose of a 6th runway without the additional gates. They could put a few in, but not as many. I think the problem here is Delta and Airtran don't care about expanded gates, which might increase their competition in Atlanta from other air carriers, but they do want another runway to cut down on wait times during peak periods.
I haven't seen any information about a 6th runway south of the fifth.
Looking at google aerial maps obstacles to overcome would include the following:
-Dealing with an old landfill, which has to be environmentally monitored and potenntially dug up and resealed if it ever contaminates groundwater nearby
-acquisition of several hundred million $s in property (if not billion)
-potential need to rebuild part of I-285
Although, one thing to note... the current fifth runway is shorter and is used mainly for landings. A runway for the larger planes to take off would need to be longer than the current 5th runway. A sixth runway doesn't have to take a east-west alignment -IF- it is only used for take offs. Planes can always taxi around runway 5 and take off on a new runway in a southeast direction, which might make land acquisition cheaper. However, this would prevent the runway being used for landings along side the existing 5. Look at this map: Atlanta, ga - Google Maps and it might be evident why I mention this point.
DFW has an arrangement similar to this, however I think they are more designed to accommodate landings with crosswinds. Atlanta doesn't seem to have a problem with that.
Other ideas to consider:
-Potential for a long narrow concourse running east-west between runway 4 and apotential runway 6 north of runway 5
-Potential for new terminal/gates and cargo facilities south of 285/runway 5
Of course alot of this doesn't have any documents and are largely just my initial thoughts.
I think it is a good idea, but that airport is small and developed around. It will never be a second airport for Atlanta... just a local commuter airport....as this investment group plans... 10 gates, accommodates up to a 737 and only up to 4 commercial flights/hour. It could feasibly expand bigger than this, but there are still some limits.
Kimbro, The renderings of the Gwinnett County airport looks just like John Wayne Airport in Orange County.
John Wayne is so convenient that i can get to the gate 45 min before my flight and I can easily make all my flights. LAX is a pain especially if you are renting a car. Takes about 45 min just waiting for the shuttle taking you to the car rental station. It sucks.... which is why I don't fly into LAX.
LAX is like Hartsfield... where i envision Briscoe becoming like the John Wayne Airport. I think that the quality of life for the Northern Atlanta residents would jump for easy domestic flights out for pleasure, vacation, and business.
It is interesting to note that Atlanta is the only major city in the United States that doesn't have a secondary commercial airport. I hope that they move on this quickly.
BRISCOE IS NOT HARTSFIELD-JACKSON
A Complimentary Alternative
Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport is the busiest airport in the world and accounts for over $24 billion in economic impact per year and is responsible (both directly and indirectly) for over 400,000 jobs. With 90 million passengers traveling through Hartsfield last year and an expected 121 million by the year 2015 the airports growth will bring important economic development to the state. It would be hard to dispute the significance that Hartsfield-Jackson has had and will continue to have on the strength of the City of Atlanta, the metropolitan region and the State of Georgia as a whole.
However, the impact on the community is not all upside. In this case, because of the airport's design as well as its projected growth will come increased frustration with traffic and travel times in the air and on the ground. Some current travel statistics for Hartsfield-Jackson are as follows:
Average time from parking one's car to arriving at the departure gate is 45 minutes
Average time from landing to arriving at one's car is 35 minutes
Average time from when a plane leaves the gate to takeoff is 20 minutes.
It is important to understand that the majority of travelers that utilize Hartsfield-Jackson never leave the terminal. They are connecting from one city to another. In fact over 87% of travelers live in other cities. The airport was designed to serve connecting traffic efficiently. But with a focus on connecting traffic, Hartsfield-Jackson has become large and cumbersome. The size of the airport means the distances between one's car and the gate, from the gate to baggage claim, and from the terminal to the rental car facilities are considerable. The fact that Hartsfield-Jackson is a connecting hub has the advantage of providing Atlanta with more flights to more destinations than would otherwise be possible; however for the passenger originating or visiting Atlanta the size and scale of the connecting facility is often overwhelming.
Hartsfield-Jackson's main customers are not the residents of metro Atlanta, nor are they people who are visiting Atlanta. In industry terms, Hartsfield-Jackson is not principally an Origin and Destination ("O and D") airport. An O&D airport is designed primarily for people originating or terminating their travel in the local metro area. Therein represents one of the main opportunities in privatizing Gwinnett County Airport at Briscoe Field and redeveloping the site. Due to Gwinnett County's strategic location near the heart of metro Atlanta and close to where most residents and businesses are located as well as high quality highway access, it is a prime candidate for an airport which would be designed for the local community and its visitors. It is interesting to note that Atlanta is the only major city in the United States that doesn't have a secondary commercial airport.
By no means is this airport intended to ever be a "second" Hartsfield-Jackson in any way shape or form. For example, on average during a normal business day Hartsfield-Jackson accommodates 150 flights per hour. It is envisioned that Gwinnett County Airport would handle approximately four commercial flights per hour. Currently, the airport averages between 10 - 15 general aviation (private) flights per hour. Hartsfield-Jackson has 196 gates and it is envisioned that Gwinnett County Airport would have ten.
The primary reason to develop this airport is for the citizens who live and work in metro Atlanta. Click here to find a series of frequently asked questions and answers which will give further insight about the partnership for progress that we are proposing to the citizens of Gwinnett County
How can I get involved in helping to bring this great opportunity to Gwinnett?
The best way to help is by contacting your district's County Commissioner whose phone or email address is listed below.
County Commission Chairman:
Chairman Charlotte Nash
Phone: 770.822.7010 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 770.822.7010 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
Email: Charlotte.Nash@gwinnettcounty.com
District 1: Commissioner Shirley Lasseter
Phone: 770.822.7001 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 770.822.7001 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
Email: Shirley.Lasseter@gwinnettcounty.com
District 2: Commissioner Lynette Howard
Phone: 770.822.7002 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 770.822.7002 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
Email: Lynette.Howard@gwinnettcounty.com
District 3: Commissioner Mike Beaudreau
Phone: 770.822.7003 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 770.822.7003 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
Email: Mike.Beaudreau@gwinnettcounty.com
District 4: Commissioner John Heard
Phone: 770.822.7004 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 770.822.7004 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
Email: John.Heard@gwinnettcounty.com
With more than 38,000 people in the County that are currently unemployed, what jobs and economic impact will be created for the community from the privatization of the airport?
ECONOMIC IMPACT: It is estimated that once the airport is complete and operational it will account for approximately $1.25 billion in annual economic impact.
JOBS: The redevelopment will generate new jobs immediately through construction and other services. Over the course of the next 10 years Propeller estimates that a total of 20,000 (direct and indirect) jobs will be generated in the immediate area as a result of the Briscoe Field airport revitalization.
ENTREPRENURIAL OPPORTUNITIES: The economic impact to the local area and specifically to Gwinnett County is considerable, and will benefit a number of businesses in the community like:
Airlines
Rental car companies
Hotels
Restaurants
Real estate sales & rentals
Retail stores
Transportation services (bus, taxi and limousine services)
Highway improvements (State and local funds)
Automobile sales
Service businesses in general
That's a lot to digest. I mean, realistically, I'd prefer to have both expanded gates, a 6th runway, and good transit connections down there. It's hard to have an opinion without knowing exactly what's being proposed and some potential price tags for various options.
Regarding a 6th runway:
I don't know a huge amount about airport operations, but I've heard a big problem with our current takeoff patterns is that we have to accommodate all sizes of aircraft on our two (primarily) takeoff runways. This can lead to 747s sitting and waiting behind corporate jets and commuters. I would imagine that different takeoff speeds could be an issue here (747s take off a lot faster) which could exacerbate the issue, but I'm not sure about that.
So basically my idea is this:
- A takeoff runway that can only accommodate smaller aircraft (737 or A300 and below)
- A runway that might have to be coordinated with (ie play second fiddle to) a general runway that handles larger aircraft
- Try to minimize new structures, road relocations, land acquisitions, etc
Here's the alignment I would push for, again not having any expertise in this area:
Having crossing runways isn't ideal, but it happens all over the place. And the potential benefits are large: you could basically have all of these oddball aircraft (and a handful of 737s) lined up north of the runway, wait for the fifth to clear, and then allow a takeoff. It's not ideal operationally, but you wouldn't have to mess with 285 anymore, nor would you need to take over residential areas in any major volume (business properties are often more amenable to being taken for the right $$$).
I could see an argument for aiming the alignment slightly more southwards as well--winds, as well as the fact that the airport owns the existing borrow site (I think).
The major problem with any 6th runway south of the 5th is earthwork: elevations in that area are close to 100' below the runway surface, so a ridiculous amount of fill is required. I don't know the technical limitations inherent to building on a landfill site, but to my understanding the landfills aren't even above the elevation of the runways so maybe it's not such a big deal to just build on top of them.
Regarding a MARTA extension:
I'm not sure I think it's worth it unless something else is master planned. College Park is currently one of the busiest stations on the whole network, mainly due to its function as a park & ride for Clayton/Fayette folks, as well as being the ending point for many bus routes in South Fulton. The problem with CP MARTA station is that coming from 75 south (which is the major commuter corridor on the southside) you have to go around the entire airport to get to the station. It's about 6 extra driving miles each way, and I'm sure that tips the scale against MARTA for many drivers.
If you could have an extra MARTA extension beyond the south gates with a park/ride terminal at 285, it would shorten a hell of a lot of bus routes and make the system a ton more usable for southside commuters. And then you could try to redevelop some of the parking lots at the CP station and make money there (for example, there's a Hotel Indigo that's going in next to the station right now). That all might make it worth it: for those who don't know the connector going into downtown from the south is horrible just about every morning; way worse than congestion going into Midtown and Downtown from the north. Of course, Clayton would probably have to approve the tax for this.
That looks good, but few item of a tech point,
The touch down point Can not be on the I285 bridge.
Landing/Take off would cause problem on all the other 4 (Old) runways when its in use. The approach takeoff and go around patterns will go over all 4 runway zones.
If the runway is Take off only it could work (to the SouthEast) ...
Yeah, I was thinking just takeoff unless you are under strange circumstances or something. I'm not sure what level of flexibility airport planners assume when creating a runway. I imagine that full takeoff/landing in either direction is desired, but often a runway operates a certain way the majority of the time (such as our 5th runway being used primarily for landings coming from the east). I've taken off on the 5th runway exactly once in my life.
It would have to be bumped down a touch south
-They are required to fence off a blast area at the ends of the runway and we wouldn't want that to intersect with runway 5.
-To add more fun to the situation... see that nice looking grassy area right off Forrest Pkwy that you are going over for about 2000 feet? That is the old landfill
-It would also be cool if they moved riverdale rd and made a taxiway around runway 5 if they ever make south gates
mrpanda makes some great points. HJIA is really not optimally situated for local travelers.
However, if there's another passenger airport on the northside that will encourage/accelerate the shift of the city to the north. That's not necessarily a bad thing but it ought to be taken into account. It sort of makes sense since that is obviously where the bulk of Atlanta's growth has taken place.
Also, a new airport on the northside might encourage more buy-in for transit in the suburban counties, since residents would want efficient ways to get there.
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.
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.
