Bradley International Airport

[CTnative4444]

Are there any renderings of the new rental car facility out there on the web....

[The Voice of Reason]

Not seen any

but now I am googling

 

 

http://www.masslive.com/business-news/index.ssf/2014/02/bradley_airport_officials_see_plans_for.html

 

The demolition will make space for the new ground transportation center, which will have a rental car facility, about 800 public parking spaces — to augment the existing garage’s 3,500 spaces — and a transit center with curbside services for limousines, taxis, and buses and a passenger area and amenities.

Shuttle buses would continue to go to and from nearby hotels, valet parking facilities, and outside parking lots. They also will go to and from the Windsor Locks train stop, Bruno said.

 

 

that article outlines the other stuff too

 

Edited July 21, 2014 by The Voice of Reason

[CTnative4444]

Thanks for the info Voice, gave me some of the info I wanted to know....now to just pray they release those designs to the public soon! Second thing....is there any room for growth advancement with the present Terminal A? We could extend the "new"ish tier out to add 2-3 more gates....along with the original A out for another 2....or no?

[The Voice of Reason]

from what I have read, the issue is not just the number of gates.

 

Terminal A is a great terminal for regional jets but it has limitations for larger jets.

 

part of the reason the Terminal B is good for the airport is that is will be capable of handling larger planes more easily such as A 330 B747 and A380 etc.

 

these bigger jets require different sized areas to turn around and taller concourses etc.

 

I dont pretend to know the difference, but since I was on an A330 from Amsterdam to Boston last week, it was obvious to me that I was another 10-15 feet off the ground from when I fly outta BDL

 

 

Terminal B will also house a proper customs area and likely a Lounge in an effort to help attract and support International business travel.

 

as an FYI... while checking an extra bag the Delta/KLM lady said that the US flights are ALWAYS packed so we would want to get right to the gate. 

 

I am wondering why Delta/KLM dont just throw nice 767 at BDL   help with the bookings

[CTnative4444]

What you said about Terminal A is true....it does seem that the terminal is made for regional jets, but it can also fit aircraft as large as B767-300 series. From my glance at the formal design plans of the new Terminal B it will have two slots for aircraft as large as 777-200ER or A330-300 (which is a tad bit longer than a 200 series). 

To give you some math about your height difference....when you get on an A320 the bottom of the cabin door is about 11' 5" from the ground and the plane needs a minimum of 75 feet pavement width for a 180 degree turn....compared to a A330, which has a height of 15' feet and requires a minimum of 146 feet for a 180 degree turn.

There are also standards for the distance the nose of a plane will be from the terminal, parking bay lengths, and apron widths based on the planes size....A,B,C,or D. For example, any plane that is 155' or less (Gate type A) has a normal distance from the terminal of 30 ft and needs a taxi-line OFA width of 162 ft, while a plane that is 232 ft or greater (Gate type D) has a distance of 15 ft and requires a taxi-line OFA of 276'.

As for taller terminals, yes and no. I have been to airports where they merely raise the height of the gate with a built in jack, however, newer terminals or ones that have gone through considerable renovation do tend to be a bit taller. An example of a taller terminal is in Frankfurt....Terminal 2.

This brings me to an idea I had. Yes, Terminal B needs to go, however, I think they should first look into building east of Terminal A. The rental car services will be leaving their locations to the east, which takes care of that hurtle....then move the existing air freight hangars/buildings and BAM!....build a people mover from where southwest desks are to the east and then have a pier at the same angle as the "new" pier....you could build a terminal that fits a total of 19 B737's with the capability to fit 6 B777's leaving space for 9 B737's....(I got bored one day and designed it in my office)

I don't see the Delta thing happening anytime soon. I AM waiting to see if Bradley is one of the chosen destinations by RyanAtlantic....one can hope!

[The Voice of Reason]

I dont see Ryan atlantic happening.  we depend so heavily on corporate travel here in HFD, so any trans atlantic would need to be on one of the big alliances if you ask me.

 

As a UTC employee I would not even be allowed to book Ryan Air as its not designated a preferred carrier

 

our 25000 CT employees and countless visitors figure heavily into BDL usage.
 

 

also... Awesome info man, you clearly know a ton about the industry.

 

post that design will ya I am not quite seeing it looking at google maps

[CTnative4444]

I will have to spruce it up a bit before I post it online....in the mean time....if you go to Google maps....it would be to the southeast of the existing terminal A. Budget rental car and such would be gone....and the USPS and the building there on the tarmac would be gone as well. It makes more sense to do this because instead of building an entire new terminal building....you get the same amount of new gates out of a single new pier....

[The Voice of Reason]

OK, so essentially you build down to the S E 

 

The only concern there is thats in direct line with runway 19 is it not?

  Id expect that to be an issue

 

 

 

also.... sad news

 

http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/20140723/NEWS01/140729976

 

The Los Angeles flights were operating at about 80 percent capacity, Wallace said, but American wasn't getting a high enough yield per seat to make the flight economical.

 

 

My wonderment here is as to how you lose money at 80% full.   the 737-800 is a 150 seat plane  BTW

 

they should be able to sustain that flight and that seems appropriate demand.   they must not be getting enough business class bookings I suppose.

The AA and US merger must be a major cause also.

 

this 80% number I truly hope could bring in another major airline with maybe some different equipment to make it profitable and something that can grow over time.

 

I know that many business travelers just as well get their driver to bring them to NY or Boston because they end up on better equipment.

again I will cite my recent trip to Europe.

Out of JFK they put you on a 767 and its just an older tired plane and not nearly as nice as the brand spanking new A-330 out of Boston.

 

When you are spending several hours on a plane and likely sleeping, the equipment goes a LONG way.

 

I do not know what the ideal plane for this flight would be but I am assuming that efficiency is an important factor when margins are limited with low Business class bookings.

 

Also Id then assume that comfort has to play a little larger of a role.

 

while many of the smaller jets have the range, I am not sure the customers whant to sit on a cramped plane for a 6 hour plus flight

[CTnative4444]

I have some words for American that would get me banned from this site....so, because I would like to continue viewing these posts I will remain silent.

 

However, I will say that American should just call it like it is and say that the route didn't make them as much money as another possible route can....80% and not high yields....FIDDLE STICKS!!!!

What ever happened to the easy "attach" button....how the heck do you load an image on this!

Edited July 23, 2014 by CTnative4444

[The Voice of Reason]

WORD!!

 

The 737-800 has a Maximum Range of 3,115 nautical miles

 

The flight itself is 2522 Miles

 

 

And google told me that this may have been just a crappy plane to use.

 

 

http://planes.findthebest.com/compare/231-269/Airbus-A321-vs-Boeing-737-800

 

anyways, yeah it seems like this flight could easily be profitable to an airline and at 80% likely was for AA, they are just rationalizing their routes post merger.

 

I think that this flight has very good potential in general and dont see why another airline wouldnt pick it up...

 

*AHEM*   Jet Blue!

 

Jet Blue uses A321 For trans continental.

So the above link is a reasonable compare.

http://www.jetblue.com/travel/planes/

they are rolling out some nice cabins too.  If anyone can make a profit here its Jet Blue

 

Also

 

they added a second daily flight to San Jose recently and did so very quietly.

Jet Blue is doing quite well out of BDL

 

I wonder if adding LA would help their network?

I mean seriously they have no flights to the West coast out of any of the BDL connections.

So this means that LAX to BDL could link to Puerto Rico and Florida and Washington DC etc.

[CTnative4444]

JetBlue to LAX sounds nice, but you're not making me a believer....lol 

 

 

I would love to have Phoenix on Southwest, SFO on United, and LAX on Delta.

[The Voice of Reason]

Delta LAX was pretty populay IIRC before fuel price spikes killed it

 

 

Why would United go to SFO?

[CTnative4444]

Delta LAX was pretty populay IIRC before fuel price spikes killed it

 

 

Why would United go to SFO?

Because United used to have non-stop to SFO from Bradley on an A319....before 9/11

[CTnative4444]

Another thing I failed to respond to earlier was my design got rid of Runway 19....with the exception of the occasional small prop plane it isn't really used. Also had  12,000 FT parallel runway to 6/24 with a 4,000 ft spread (required by FAA) to the northwest. Route 20 would have to be partially altered because a small part of the new runway would pass over route 20....pretty ambitious stuff over here. 

[The Voice of Reason]

Never be appologetic for ambition

 

that plan makes some sense, but Ill say we dont likely have the demand for any new airstrips and likely never will.  especially another 12000 footer

 

If I remember right, 24 is ne of the larger runways in America because it was for miliraty use and is exceptionally wide and long.   this makes it capable of handling any sized plane and is why it gets so many diversions including 747 777 A380  (I think it even handled the concord no?)

 

Back to more of the reality stuff.

the rental car garage I think is going to be a big game changer at the airport.

I personally live when airports have this setup.  Boston, and ATL are two that come to mind.   they are extremely easy to navigate when on business travel and make for a much quicker transition on the road. 

 

Once we organize the rental companies I think that leaves considerable room to improve transit options.   With the NH-H-S rail coming online in 2016-17  there will be an opportunioty to continue airport improvements.

 

it just seems as through the airport has some pretty good strategic planning going on right now. 

 

it has not yet resulted in much new in terms of flights or traffic, but you never know.

 

 

Back to routes... Again I see Delta to LAX as a winner with AA proving demand at 80% Delta would likely do better as they are a more popular choice in Hartford.

Also the old Delta to LAX was popular and is missed by business travelers heading to Asia

 

SFO I am still not sold on.   United has not grown at BDL at all so I see SFO as a stretch even if they used to operate it.

 

 

 

another thought I had was back to Jet Blue

they are entering into partnerships these days and one of those partners is Iceland Air

Iceland air could easily open an international out of BDL that would serve prettymuch anywhere in Europe.

 

http://www.icelandair.us/information/travel-guide/routemap/

 

 

Im not certain this would be embraced by business travelers however it could serve both companies relatively well.

Not saying its ideal but its actually possible as both airlines are expanding

[CTnative4444]

Never be appologetic for ambition

 

that plan makes some sense, but Ill say we dont likely have the demand for any new airstrips and likely never will.  especially another 12000 footer

 

If I remember right, 24 is ne of the larger runways in America because it was for miliraty use and is exceptionally wide and long.   this makes it capable of handling any sized plane and is why it gets so many diversions including 747 777 A380  (I think it even handled the concord no?)

 

Back to more of the reality stuff.

the rental car garage I think is going to be a big game changer at the airport.

I personally live when airports have this setup.  Boston, and ATL are two that come to mind.   they are extremely easy to navigate when on business travel and make for a much quicker transition on the road. 

 

Once we organize the rental companies I think that leaves considerable room to improve transit options.   With the NH-H-S rail coming online in 2016-17  there will be an opportunioty to continue airport improvements.

 

it just seems as through the airport has some pretty good strategic planning going on right now. 

 

it has not yet resulted in much new in terms of flights or traffic, but you never know.

 

 

Back to routes... Again I see Delta to LAX as a winner with AA proving demand at 80% Delta would likely do better as they are a more popular choice in Hartford.

Also the old Delta to LAX was popular and is missed by business travelers heading to Asia

 

SFO I am still not sold on.   United has not grown at BDL at all so I see SFO as a stretch even if they used to operate it.

 

 

 

another thought I had was back to Jet Blue

they are entering into partnerships these days and one of those partners is Iceland Air

Iceland air could easily open an international out of BDL that would serve prettymuch anywhere in Europe.

 

http://www.icelandair.us/information/travel-guide/routemap/

 

 

Im not certain this would be embraced by business travelers however it could serve both companies relatively well.

Not saying its ideal but its actually possible as both airlines are expanding

 

1) The current Master Plan for Bradley involves a parallel runway by 2024. It would discontinue the use of 1/19 and 15/33....

 

2) 6/24 is mos def not one of the longest runways in the country. It is only 9,510 ft long with an 986 ft safety zone on the north end. There are at least 50 airports with runways 10,000 ft or greater in America alone. It is, however, on par to be considered wide. It is 200 feet wide while standard is 150.

 

I think my mind will be on hold with the SFO thing until United can prove itself with Houston....maybe put Denver back on there....slowly work West.

 

Icelandair....just don't see it. It would be a welcomed change if it could work, but they don't strike me as a business traveling airline. Could be wrong.

[The Voice of Reason]

I must have been thinking about the wiide part.  I just know I read something about it being kinda special because its size

 

regarding the paralless atrip, I dont see anything about that anywhere.   I do see 19 closing and being turned into a taxiway though.

 

do you have a source?

[CTnative4444]

The head of the new board was quoted as it being a part of the eventual Master Plan for 2024, however, I neglected to mention that he had said it was dependent on traffic increasing to a point that would warrant a new runway. He also said, however, that it was favored regardless because many airports are heading away from the crisscross runway scheme and inside have the parallel to allow dual takeoff/landings.

[The Voice of Reason]

interesting.

 

If you look at the masterplan from 2009 it is not mentioned there and there is a facility master plan that shows the termination of runway 19

 

but that doesnt show a paralless runway either.

 

I agree that parallell is a good thing for space and such but I dont see how its possible unless they adjust the plans for terminal A to provide additional room.

 

I really did enjoy looking at the new layout plan though.  Putting the new cargo terminal where they did makes good sense and I think would help spur that additional development they wanted near by.

 

also seeing the additional parking garage in front of Term A was cool but it doesnt account for the new plan of adding a rotary and such.   so its clearly conceptual.

[CTnative4444]

So, with the recent announcement of Condor starting flights from PVD to FRA....how badly do we think this will hurt our chances for Trans Atlantic service returning to BDL?

[The Voice of Reason]

dont think there is any actual effect.  There is almost no customer overlap.

[The Voice of Reason]

on the CAA website I saw that they are negotiating with a Dairyqueen/Orange julius to be located in Terminal A

 

Also negotiations are on with TAC air and a division of theirs called Keystone

 

Keystone does charter flights and are negotiation for a hanger.. who knows what that is.

 

Also.... Houston flights started today...

 

Lets hope we hear about a replacement for that LA flight soon and maybe some other decent news

 

 

[The Voice of Reason]

http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/20141112/NEWS01/141119959

 

Aer Lingus

 

 

Yes please

 

 

 

here are their code shares

 

http://www.aerlingus.com/help/help/aerlinguspartnerships/

 

 

They partner with both United and Jet Blue

 

this could really help our continued jet blue growth

 

 

United flies to Cleveland, Newark, Washington DC Dulles, Houston and Chicago O hare

 

Jet Blue does

Orlando, San Juan, West Palm, Ft Lauderdale, Ft Myers, Tampa and Washington DC Regan airport

 

 

no real overlap except DC  and that gives a total of 11 cities that could potentially feed this route!!

 

thats fantastic!

 

[HartfordTycoon]

Would be awesome if we land that Aer Lingus flight. Fingers crossed!

 

Terminal B is about to be demolished, finally. Says new terminal B expected to begin construction in 2018.

 

http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/20141114/NEWS01/141119947/1002

[CTnative4444]

It's great to see the board from the airport really going out there and tackling this one, however, I think if Aer Lingus went through with this idea it would be 2-3 weekly.

 

BECAUSE....I don't see them using an A330 daily to Hartford.

 

1.) That's 267 people per flight, which is a sizable boost from a 757(flown to Amsterdam).

2.) Since airlines make money off of business class fares, and the aircraft mentioned above is the only one they have with dual-class cabins.

3.) They already have A330 service to both New York and Boston.