Charlotte-Douglas Airport (CLT) Expansion

[ChessieCat]

44 minutes ago, LKN704 said:

The 4th parallel runway was never going to be built to specifically accommodate the A380. 

The 4th parallel runway is being built to enable aircraft to reach Asia and the Middle East at MTOW, which most aircraft are unable to do at this point from CLT’s existing runways. 

That said, I still question the need for it TBH. The 787 can easily reach Japan at MTOW from 18C/36C. A 787 to Japan is the closest chance CLT has to an Asian flight. 

CLT will never have a 77W/779 flight to HKG/DEL or anywhere like that. 

Sad about the A380 though. I understand the reasoning behind the cancellation, but from a passenger perspective it is one of my favorite aircraft. Very quiet and smooth in flight. 

I don't understand why CLT didn't build the newest runway 18R/36L to 12,000 feet when they completed it earlier this decade.  Wallace Neel road can easily be re-routed in a straight line further south to make it happen.

If CLT is targeting cargo traffic, then 18L/36R can be expanded to 11,000 too.  I've seen 747 cargo jets and AF1 take off from this runway with no problem. 

[xapostrophe]

20 hours ago, ChessieCat said:

I don't understand why CLT didn't build the newest runway 18R/36L to 12,000 feet when they completed it earlier this decade.  Wallace Neel road can easily be re-routed in a straight line further south to make it happen.

If CLT is targeting cargo traffic, then 18L/36R can be expanded to 11,000 too.  I've seen 747 cargo jets and AF1 take off from this runway with no problem. 

Because that would be a long unnecessary taxi for departures.

 

Separately, the 4th parallel went only help with departures but should help the flow of arrivals as well.

 

 

 

[NcSc74]

Flew in to Charlotte for the first time last night while connecting to Newark.  The new terminal is great.  Loved the lighting and there werent many rocking chairs open.  People love them.  Overheard passengers talking about them before landing.  Someone in marketing should take note of the legendary rocking chairs.  Also the airport feels just right.  I did see many people making a mad connecting flight dash.  I do wish there was a simple tram to connect the terminals.  Even if they run on batteries and solar, something.....Finally,  the airport area needs some kind of urbanity to it.  A few mid rise office's, hotels and things.  I kept looking out of the windows expecting to see something other than trees.  Not complaing just an observation; I need that city feel.  Oh the skyline views on approach and taking off were awesome.  Impressed the Oklahoma City folks.  But, I need more skyline porn...strecth that skyline.

[ChessieCat]

On 2/15/2019 at 7:22 AM, xapostrophe said:

Because that would be a long unnecessary taxi for departures.

 

 

 

 

 

???? Doesn't mean that all of the runway must be used for departures.

The Bay runway at JFK is 14,511 feet long but departures are limited to the roughly 12,000 feet that does not cross two active perendicular runways at the eastern end.  

I once took off on a regional jet that was allowed to begin it's roll at roughly the 8,000 feet mark.  Years later it was a 777W heavy that started at the 12,000 feet mark.  The same rules could apply to CLT.   

 

[xapostrophe]

2 hours ago, ChessieCat said:

???? Doesn't mean that all of the runway must be used for departures.

The Bay runway at JFK is 14,511 feet long but departures are limited to the roughly 12,000 feet that does not cross two active perendicular runways at the eastern end.  

I once took off on a regional jet that was allowed to begin it's roll at roughly the 8,000 feet mark.  Years later it was a 777W heavy that started at the 12,000 feet mark.  The same rules could apply to CLT.   

 

The suggestion was to have departures taxi about 3 miles to 36L or 18R.  It already takes 20 minutes or more to taxi in from that runway.  It would be long and unnecessary to taxi like that.

The other suggestion was to not build another runway.  This doesn't make sense because Charlotte is already very busy on the 3 it normally uses, with continued growth.   We need the new pavement.

[TCLT]

14 hours ago, xapostrophe said:

The suggestion was to have departures taxi about 3 miles to 36L or 18R.  It already takes 20 minutes or more to taxi in from that runway.  It would be long and unnecessary to taxi like that.

The other suggestion was to not build another runway.  This doesn't make sense because Charlotte is already very busy on the 3 it normally uses, with continued growth.   We need the new pavement.

Adding the 4th parallel will allow 05/23 to be decommissioned. That'll open the space for the planned expansion of concourses B and C. It will also allow reconfiguring taxiways which should greatly improve taxi times, especially to/from concourse E. Lots of benefit to the 4th parallel beyond just making flights to Asia possible.

[ChessieCat]

21 hours ago, TCLT said:

Adding the 4th parallel will allow 05/23 to be decommissioned. That'll open the space for the planned expansion of concourses B and C. It will also allow reconfiguring taxiways which should greatly improve taxi times, especially to/from concourse E. Lots of benefit to the 4th parallel beyond just making flights to Asia possible.

In order for a 4th runway to be built, it appears that West Blvd will have to be removed and Piper Ln will have to be extended to Billy Graham.  Thankfully there is empty land to do this.  Piper/Byrum will get widened and become the new West Blvd.  

This will all cost billions...

[csweet]

18 minutes ago, ChessieCat said:

In order for a 4th runway to be built, it appears that West Blvd will have to be removed and Piper Ln will have to be extended to Billy Graham.  Thankfully there is empty land to do this.  Piper/Byrum will get widened and become the new West Blvd.  

This will all cost billions...

According to the website, roughly $422 million. Where did you get the billions from?

[TCLT]

42 minutes ago, ChessieCat said:

In order for a 4th runway to be built, it appears that West Blvd will have to be removed and Piper Ln will have to be extended to Billy Graham.  Thankfully there is empty land to do this.  Piper/Byrum will get widened and become the new West Blvd.  

This will all cost billions...

It's a big expensive project for sure, but not quite that bad. The project is estimated at $422 million, which includes the road realignments.  Douglas Drive replaces West Blvd as NC160 and the primary corridor south of the airport per the development plan. Cost overruns are a given but we're not talking about billions of dollars. And even if it were the airport provides a $16.2 billion and growing economic impact for the region annually and the connectivity it provides is a draw for business. Airport expansion is good for Charlotte.

[ChessieCat]

56 minutes ago, csweet said:

According to the website, roughly $422 million. Where did you get the billions from?

I was referring to all the capital projects at CLT.  

20 minutes ago, TCLT said:

It's a big expensive project for sure, but not quite that bad. The project is estimated at $422 million, which includes the road realignments.  Douglas Drive replaces West Blvd as NC160 and the primary corridor south of the airport per the development plan. Cost overruns are a given but we're not talking about billions of dollars. And even if it were the airport provides a $16.2 billion and growing economic impact for the region annually and the connectivity it provides is a draw for business. Airport expansion is good for Charlotte.

IMHO $422 million is a big underestimate.  Anyone who drives along Old Dowd Road and Overlook Drive can notice the uneven terrain smack dab where the new runway is going to be built.  The NS terminal is in the middle of a gulley which will complicate construction.   

I'm not against the new runway, it's just the possibility of the westernmost runway 36L/18R becoming obsolete along the same lines of St Louis runway 11/29 which only handles 12% of traffic.  Sure, it'll be used for landings during the peak rush when all four runways are needed but outside of that? Who knows.

[csweet]

12 minutes ago, ChessieCat said:

I was referring to all the capital projects at CLT.  

IMHO $422 million is a big underestimate.  Anyone who drives along Old Dowd Road and Overlook Drive can notice the uneven terrain smack dab where the new runway is going to be built.  The NS terminal is in the middle of a gulley which will complicate construction.   

I'm not against the new runway, it's just the possibility of the westernmost runway 36L/18R becoming obsolete along the same lines of St Louis runway 11/29 which only handles 12% of traffic.  Sure, it'll be used for landings during the peak rush when all four runways are needed but outside of that? Who knows.

Thanks for the explanation. With the new runway, a taxiway looping around both ends of the 4th parallel will allow for traffic to continue on 36L without disrupting takeoff/ landing on new 4th. Also, couldn't this new parallel allow for cargo growth along its taxiways? 

[TCLT]

33 minutes ago, ChessieCat said:

I was referring to all the capital projects at CLT.  

IMHO $422 million is a big underestimate.  Anyone who drives along Old Dowd Road and Overlook Drive can notice the uneven terrain smack dab where the new runway is going to be built.  The NS terminal is in the middle of a gulley which will complicate construction.   

I'm not against the new runway, it's just the possibility of the westernmost runway 36L/18R becoming obsolete along the same lines of St Louis runway 11/29 which only handles 12% of traffic.  Sure, it'll be used for landings during the peak rush when all four runways are needed but outside of that? Who knows.

That makes sense and I definitely agree the $422 million is probably way underestimated. You may be right about the west runway, but CLT isn't STL luckily. AA alone is going to be up to about 700 peak daily flight by next year and the airport plan calls for significantly more (30-40) gates to be added over the next decade or so.  That would be another 200-300 flights. And AA runs a banked schedule which means there are multiple peaks throughout the day. So I don't think any of the runways will go unused.

It also probably makes more sense to build the 4th runway as the longest runway rather than extend an existing runway. It'll enable the potential long haul flights and prepare for more expected future growth while not losing use of any existing runways for any length of time.

[CLT704]

I think it makes more sense to build the fourth runway east of 18L/36R (close to Billy Graham Parkway) so the traffic is distributed more evenly with 2 runways either side of the terminal complex. 

The masterplan recommends both a new runway between 18R/36L and 18C/36C, plus another one east of 18L/36R.

[ChessieCat]

1 hour ago, CLT704 said:

I think it makes more sense to build the fourth runway east of 18L/36R (close to Billy Graham Parkway) so the traffic is distributed more evenly with 2 runways either side of the terminal complex. 

The masterplan recommends both a new runway between 18R/36L and 18C/36C, plus another one east of 18L/36R.

The airport website refers only to 1 new runway between 18R/36L and 18C/36C.  IMHO I also prefer the 4th runway to be built east of 18L/36R to even things out but is there enough space to build it without having to relocate Billy Graham 10 feet to the east?  

We know the museum will be demolished.  What about the Nat'l Guard hangar and Jackson homes?

You can bet the neighborhoods north of the airport (Toddville, Paw Creek) will fight hard against the noise from two runways instead of the current one.

If this easternmost runway is built, West Blvd will get moved south and merged with Byrum/Piper roads. Could 18L/36R and 18C/36C then get extended to 12,000 feet?

Edited February 19, 2019 by ChessieCat

[CLT704]

Masterplan shows 2 new runways and, based on that diagram, Billy Graham doesn't have to be moved.

Edited February 19, 2019 by CLT704

[ChessieCat]

22 minutes ago, CLT704 said:

Masterplan shows 2 new runways and, based on that diagram, Billy Graham doesn't have to be moved.

I like Alternative 3 the most but relocate West Blvd further south and extend 18L/36R and 18C/36C to 12,000 feet. Granted, I am also partial to retaining the Overlook   

Major airports like LAX and DTW do just fine with four parrallel runways.  If we reach ATL aircraft movements they can build the 5th center-west runway one day.

[TCLT]

2 hours ago, CLT704 said:

I think it makes more sense to build the fourth runway east of 18L/36R (close to Billy Graham Parkway) so the traffic is distributed more evenly with 2 runways either side of the terminal complex. 

The masterplan recommends both a new runway between 18R/36L and 18C/36C, plus another one east of 18L/36R.

Closing 05/23 and reconfiguring the taxiways should hopefully help reduce the traffic jams from everything heading to the west side of the terminal. And if everything gets built as planned, moving the regional flights to the satellite concourse and expanding A North will help the balance.

33 minutes ago, ChessieCat said:

I like Alternative 3 the most but relocate West Blvd further south and extend 18L/36R and 18C/36C to 12,000 feet. Granted, I am also partial to retaining the Overlook   

Major airports like LAX and DTW do just fine with four parrallel runways.  If we reach ATL aircraft movements they can build the 5th center-west runway one day.

The eastern additional runway requires the demolition of a lot of existing infrastructure and private residences. Would take a lot longer and would be more expensive to get done than putting the fourth runway in the middle of the airport property in mostly empty space.

And I hope the overlook gets retained in some form. It's such a great amenity. I thought someone from the airport at some point said they planned to relocate it after the 4th runway was built, but I can't find anything about that.

[Skyybutter]

On 2/15/2019 at 11:27 AM, NcSc74 said:

Flew in to Charlotte for the first time ....Finally,  the airport area needs some kind of urbanity to it.  A few mid rise office's, hotels and things.  I kept looking out of the windows expecting to see something other than trees.  Not complaing just an observation; I need that city feel.  

Southern cities pride themselves on their tree canopies. Raleigh is often referred to as "The city of Oaks". However Charlotte is the actual city of oaks.  But considering most cities in the south have billions of Oak trees...whats one to do right. Having said that. Charlotte wants the big city conveniences, without being toooo big city. One day there may be a hotel within walking distance from the terminal and yes, even a mid-rise or two. But we love our trees more at the moment. If you landed due North at the airport you might have noticed a cluster of 4-6 story office buildings. Thats the closest office space to the Airport. The trees in the office park might have camouflaged them come to think of it.

[CLT2014]

I believe FAA lowered height restrictions for new buildings within 10,000 feet of a runway to 160 feet. That would peak above the trees, but be hard to see from ground level if trees were in your view. Unless you clear cut the trees everywhere around the airport, buildings will largely be hidden in the trees. 

[KJHburg]

American Airlines press release about things happening at the CLT hub.

http://news.aa.com/news/news-details/2019/American-Airlines-Prepares-for-a-Big-Summer-in-Charlotte/default.aspx

[CLT2014]

Bahahaha. Wow. They are gonna do their best to run Spirit Airlines off their new routes.

"American is adding two new daily flights from Charlotte to Baltimore (BWI), two to Fort Lauderdale, Florida (FLL), one to Orlando, Florida (MCO), and one to Newark, New Jersey (EWR), providing more service on those routes than any other airline. "

Here are some of the new B Concourse Admirals Club pics from the article:

.

Edited February 20, 2019 by CLT2014

[HopHead]

Looks like they are also adding an 8th daily non-stop to LAX from CLT as well. Didn't see that previously. 

1 hour ago, KJHburg said:

American Airlines press release about things happening at the CLT hub.

http://news.aa.com/news/news-details/2019/American-Airlines-Prepares-for-a-Big-Summer-in-Charlotte/default.aspx

Edited February 20, 2019 by HopHead

[LKN704]

This is extremely aggressive IMO. I thought AA had said they wouldn't be expanding in CLT or adding flights until they obtained new gates in A? The PR says that they are planning 700 flights/day by the end of 2019. The Business Journal article highlights new international routes. I wonder if AA is planning on launching additional routes, or if they are simply talking about MUC/SDQ/GDL.

A couple of points:

-How is NK different than F9? AA didn't do a big song and dance when F9 started CLT-MCO/TPA. 

-IMO the additions on CLT-LAX/ORD are to try to keep NK off those routes, which is a shame because it would be nice to have competition on transcontinental routes from CLT. 8 flights a day to LAX is insane.  The schedules aren't out yet but I am willing to bet the new LAX flights will be operated on either 7M8 () or an L-AA A32B due to the emphasis on the high-speed Wi-Fi. 

[CLT2014]

I think the difference is AA feels Spirit's operating model is more threatening. They tend to build up a decent size operation where they can compete for customer loyalty. Spirit is now at 21 destinations at AA's DFW hub for example... I think this time at CLT they don't want to let Spirit get that big. 

Frontier on the other hand starts and drops route every couple months. They'll throw some darts and see what sticks, but they rarely commit to daily flights, they usually operate a weird times, and they rarely stick on a route through "slow seasons." 

Edited February 20, 2019 by CLT2014

[TCLT]

6 minutes ago, LKN704 said:

 The schedules aren't out yet but I am willing to bet the new LAX flights will be operated on either 7M8 () or an L-AA A32B due to the emphasis on the high-speed Wi-Fi.

All aircraft will have satellite wifi installed by this summer, so that's not gonna be an aircraft type indication. The 7M8 fleet is still small and focused on MIA and unlikely to be used for CLT flying anytime soon. I'd expect more of the same LUS A321 on CLT-LAX.