Metro Orlando Airport News

[spenser1058]

Latest update on the OIA expansion including Jet Blue anchoring the South terminal:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/tourism/os-orlando-airport-jet-blue-20180516-story,amp.html

From the Sentinel

[Camillo Sitte]

5 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

Latest update on the OIA expansion including Jet Blue anchoring the South terminal:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/tourism/os-orlando-airport-jet-blue-20180516-story,amp.html

From the Sentinel

Jesus is that awful. 

That would have been twenty years out of date twenty years ago.

Looks like a super-sized version of a Federal Marshal Service prisoner transfer terminal.

Edited May 17, 2018 by Camillo Sitte

[jrs2]

MIA's AA Terminal is really nice; the silver one; it's the one where the Lufthansa A380 docks.

I can't believe the airside "arms" have no skylights especially after the oldest Airsides, 1 & 3, were retrofitted with skylights within the past 5 years.

They added 3 of those double gantry gates to increase it's initial phase to 19 gates.  If you look at the design, I think they did that for symmetry purposes and to split passengers a bit more to the "left" vs the "right" when facing the airsides from the landside terminal.

I'm surprised that they haven't finished Airside 2 yet; that they haven't built out the third "spur" like the other three airsides have.

Edited May 17, 2018 by jrs2

[bqknight]

I think the inside needs more decor, that's all. It's awfully bare - however - I'm sure that will change once advertisers and JetBlue move in. 

[HankStrong]

10 minutes ago, bqknight said:

I think the inside needs more decor, that's all. It's awfully bare - however - I'm sure that will change once advertisers and JetBlue move in. 

Brawndo!  It's got electrolytes!

[bqknight]

25 minutes ago, HankStrong said:

Brawndo!  It's got electrolytes!

I'm in the ad business. 

[codypet]

1 hour ago, jrs2 said:

I'm surprised that they haven't finished Airside 2 yet; that they haven't built out the third "spur" like the other three airsides have.

 

 

[jrs2]

2 hours ago, codypet said:

 

 

that would explain why Airside 4 has it's own tower.

[spenser1058]

3 minutes ago, jrs2 said:

that would explain why Airside 4 has it's own tower.

Will that be where Rapunzel lives?

 

[Camillo Sitte]

1 hour ago, jrs2 said:

that would explain why Airside 4 has it's own tower.

That's not why.

The tower at Airside 4 is a ramp tower.

Ramp towers  assign gates, authorize pushback [but not generally permission to taxi], direct marshallers, etc. for aircraft and resources in and around that individual terminal and are generally only used for busier, more congested terminals or concourses, regardless of the line-of-sight of an airport's primary control tower. The controllers in ramp towers are often either outsourced or employees of that terminal's primary airline.

Airside 4 was conceived of and built as primarily a Delta terminal and the people in the ramp tower, originally, were Delta employees.

The two original airsides didn't need ramp towers as there just wasn't enough activity or congestion to warrant them at the time.

Also, the new control tower can see every corner of the airport as it is developed thus far.

Edited May 17, 2018 by Camillo Sitte

[jrs2]

20 minutes ago, Camillo Sitte said:

That's not why.

The tower at Airside 4 is a ramp tower.

Ramp towers  assign gates, authorize pushback [but not generally permission to taxi], direct marshallers, etc. for aircraft and resources in and around that individual terminal and are generally only used for busier, more congested terminals or concourses, regardless of the line-of-sight of an airport's primary control tower. The controllers in ramp towers are often either outsourced or employees of that terminal's primary airline.

Airside 4 was conceived of and built as primarily a Delta terminal and the people in the ramp tower, originally, were Delta employees.

The two original airsides didn't need ramp towers as there just wasn't enough activity or congestion to warrant them at the time.

Also, the new control tower can see every corner of the airport as it is developed thus far.

So why not complete Airside 2?

[Camillo Sitte]

47 minutes ago, jrs2 said:

So why not complete Airside 2?

Because WN doesn't feel they need the additional gates/don't want to incur the additional costs?

If WN went to GOAA and said they need ten more gates yesterday and were willing to pay their assessment for them you'd see cranes at Airside 2 next week.

If you have the most recent update for google.earth you will see a JJ 777, a DL A330, and a DL A319 parked at the northeastern end of Airside 2 while they overnight or are AOG, as if there were a  pier there.  Those planes need the same permissions to park, push, and be marshalled by tugs as any other aircraft. Moreover, if there was a line-of-sight issue, then why is the northwest  pier of Airside 1 still operating at full tilt?  They are both more-or-less equidistant from the tower's line-of-sight. Any issues for an Airside 2/Pier B would be the same for Airside 1/Pier B.

Edited May 17, 2018 by Camillo Sitte

[jrs2]

1 hour ago, Camillo Sitte said:

Because WN doesn't feel they need the additional gates/don't want to incur the additional costs?

If WN went to GOAA and said they need ten more gates yesterday and were willing to pay their assessment for them you'd see cranes at Airside 2 next week.

If you have the most recent update for google.earth you will see a JJ 777, a DL A330, and a DL A319 parked at the northeastern end of Airside 2 while they overnight or are AOG, as if there were a  pier there.  Those planes need the same permissions to park, push, and be marshalled by tugs as any other aircraft. Moreover, if there was a line-of-sight issue, then why is the northwest  pier of Airside 1 still operating at full tilt?  They are both more-or-less equidistant from the tower's line-of-sight. Any issues for an Airside 2/Pier B would be the same for Airside 1/Pier B.

Ok, so I had to Google "WN."

So, why is the 777 et al parked over there, and what does that have to do with the need (or not need) for Pier B to be built out?  They placed landscaping within the footprint of a potential Pier B on day one, but their stated reason for doing it was bogus.

But that does make sense; leave it up to the actual airlines to request more gates and pay towards them.

[Camillo Sitte]

5 hours ago, jrs2 said:

So, why is the 777 et al parked over there, and what does that have to do with the need (or not need) for Pier B to be built out?  

 

As I said, they are either overnighting or are AOG - probably overnighting - and there just isn't enough ramp space at Airside 4. Same reason you will often see an FI 757 parked overnight where the old passenger terminal used to be.

 

Edited May 18, 2018 by Camillo Sitte

[jrs2]

11 hours ago, Camillo Sitte said:

As I said, they are either overnighting or are AOG - probably overnighting - and there just isn't enough ramp space at Airside 4. Same reason you will often see an FI 757 parked overnight where the old passenger terminal used to be.

 

what is the point you are making about these planes parking there?  Is it that there is a need for more gates and/or plane parking?

[spenser1058]

Can I use my E-pass for plane parking?

[jrs2]

6 minutes ago, spenser1058 said:

Can I use my E-pass for plane parking?

yes, but just emagine what the gate fee would be that they would debit from your account...it would be a down payment!

[Camillo Sitte]

18 minutes ago, jrs2 said:

what is the point you are making about these planes parking there?  

I thought I was answering two questions you asked me.

First, that if construction of an airside 2/pier B was being prevented because of line-of-sight issues with the control tower, then airlines wouldn't be allowed to park there.

Second, if, for example, the TAM 777 arrives in Orlando at 5PM but the return flight isn't until the next day or the aircraft is AOG, they will tow the plane to a remote parking area [like the ersatz airside 2/pier B area] because there aren't enough airside 4 international gates  to just let it sit empty at one for ~24 hours.

Edited May 18, 2018 by Camillo Sitte

[codypet]

18 hours ago, Camillo Sitte said:

Moreover, if there was a line-of-sight issue, then why is the northwest  pier of Airside 1 still operating at full tilt?  They are both more-or-less equidistant from the tower's line-of-sight. Any issues for an Airside 2/Pier B would be the same for Airside 1/Pier B.

I'm just giving you the information that was given to me by the engineers at the airport at the time.   I don't have any insight other than that.

[Camillo Sitte]

1 hour ago, codypet said:

I'm just giving you the information that was given to me by the engineers at the airport at the time.   I don't have any insight other than that.

Oh, I don't doubt that someone told you that, just that it's apocryphal, as to your source's source that is.

And even if we say, for the sake of argument, that there were some line-of-sight issues with the old, shorter control tower, and if the ramp tower at airside 4 was built to mitigate those issues, then they could just add a similar ramp tower to airside 3 while they were building out a pier B, right?

And if that isn't enough  here is a view of airside 2 taken from the terminal top parking, in which you can see the entirety of airside 2, along with a half a dozen planes, parked as if there was a pier B.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 18, 2018 by Camillo Sitte

[codypet]

Understood, but I feel like of all departments was going to have accurate information about the layout of the airport, it'd be the engineering dept.

At the time of airside 4 being built, the old tower was there.  As I understand it airside 2 with 3 wings had been planned since the 90's but its design was revised when the new tower started being planned.  The lack of additional tower as I understand it was do to coordination issues already being experienced with Airside 4 and not wanting to repeat that same mistake with the new airside.

You can actually see one of the planes hiding behind the trees in your photo and if that plane was butted up against the fully built out terminal, I can totally understand a sight line issue.

[sunshine]

Does anybody know what they are building at the executive aiport with a few walls supported by beams?

 

 

[spenser1058]

12 minutes ago, sunshine said:

Does anybody know what they are building at the executive aiport with a few walls supported by beams?

 

 

Is it this new terminal proposed last May or something else? I haven't been there in ages.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/classified/realestate/os-cfb-real-estate-orlando-airport-20170522-story,amp.html

From the Sentinel

[codypet]

27 minutes ago, spenser1058 said:

Is it this new terminal proposed last May or something else? I haven't been there in ages.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/classified/realestate/os-cfb-real-estate-orlando-airport-20170522-story,amp.html

From the Sentinel

I believe so.  If you drive down Livingston toward the airport it towers over the road and provides an interesting focal point as you go east from Fern Creek.

[jrs2]

4 hours ago, Camillo Sitte said:

I thought I was answering two questions you asked me.

First, that if construction of an airside 2/pier B was being prevented because of line-of-sight issues with the control tower, then airlines wouldn't be allowed to park there.

Second, if, for example, the TAM 777 arrives in Orlando at 5PM but the return flight isn't until the next day or the aircraft is AOG, they will tow the plane to a remote parking area [like the ersatz airside 2/pier B area] because there aren't enough airside 4 international gates  to just let it sit empty at one for ~24 hours.

Got it.  It was my question but it wasn't a question on a point that I made; I was just replying to them about the sight lines of the FAA tower.