Jump to content

Metro Orlando Airport News


bic

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, smileguy said:

Is this an APM for just the South terminal, or would we finally have something to connect gates behind security? I understand Orlando is primarily an origin/destination airport, but I can't help but think we don't have more connecting flights because it's such a damn hassle to get from one gate to another.  

Interesting on that closer image of the expanded phas one, they all look like double jetway gates that can handle A380's. 

As far as the APM for the south terminal, it appears to be on similar to the one in DFW. It will be on the roof/elevated, it will be sterile (behind security), and circle around the eventual entire built out south terminal one East and West sides. 

Unfortunately, for the 1970s designed airsides on the north end......... I just do not see how you can link those all with the south terminal in a sterile fashion. I think it would be cost prohibitive. You would need to make it elevated and have stations on each airside roof while avoiding the tarmac where plans taxi to gates. The other option, which would be even move money would have it subterranean. 

What I can see down the road in 30 years is that when the South terminal is completely built out, they slowly raze the North terminal airsides and create brand new modern terminals in place. Of course I can be completely off and they decide to build a terminal E and F along Heintzelman Blvd while becoming the world's largest airport in the process LOL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


15 hours ago, Camillo Sitte said:

After EK announced last year that they were canceling a ~40 plane order, Airbus officially announced in February that the A380 line would be closed down completely no later than early 2021 after the last already-paid-for order is fulfilled.

 

18 hours ago, Camillo Sitte said:

No one [though actually lots of people] predicted that Airbus would abandon the A380 as quickly as they did.

The "abandonment" is simply them running out of orders. Again, if you called them up to order 50 I'm sure they'd "un-abondon" the project.

23 minutes ago, shardoon said:

Interesting on that closer image of the expanded phas one, they all look like double jetway gates that can handle A380's. 

They may just be tall jetway areas before the actual bridge. I've been to a number of airports where they're large like that but don't neccassarly handle A380s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, shardoon said:

Interesting on that closer image of the expanded phas one, they all look like double jetway gates that can handle A380's. 

As far as the APM for the south terminal, it appears to be on similar to the one in DFW. It will be on the roof/elevated, it will be sterile (behind security), and circle around the eventual entire built out south terminal one East and West sides. 

Unfortunately, for the 1970s designed airsides on the north end......... I just do not see how you can link those all with the south terminal in a sterile fashion. I think it would be cost prohibitive. You would need to make it elevated and have stations on each airside roof while avoiding the tarmac where plans taxi to gates. The other option, which would be even move money would have it subterranean. 

What I can see down the road in 30 years is that when the South terminal is completely built out, they slowly raze the North terminal airsides and create brand new modern terminals in place. Of course I can be completely off and they decide to build a terminal E and F along Heintzelman Blvd while becoming the world's largest airport in the process LOL. 

More likely (in the 30 year range) is a combo where they build new terminals to handle whatever new tech exists by then and flatten the original terminals for whatever tech exists then.

It might be the same tech (really air travel from 30 years ago is about the same as now for the most part if not, thanks to losing the Concorde, a bit worse except from green perspective) in 30 years, but I really think that something is about to give at least in automation.

Edited by HankStrong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve always wondered what would have happened if EPCOT had gone forward and the new airport had been built by Disney (that, btw, is one reason why it took so many years for MCO to ditch its old Quonset hut).

Had the major commercial airport gone to the Mouse House, it might have left Herndon free to continue serving smaller jets.

Of course, once the opportunity to take over McCoy AFB came along (and with Disney’s complete change of direction on the Florida project), everything changed.

Ahhhh, what might have been...

 

Edited by spenser1058
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, shardoon said:

Interesting on that closer image of the expanded phas one, they all look like double jetway gates that can handle A380's. 

Any jetbridge that can be raised high enough to service a 747 can service an A380, however inefficient that may be. What makes an A380 gate an A380 gate is a third, elevated jetbridge to service the upper deck and enough space allocated on the apron to safely fit the A380's 260' wingspan.

Emirates_A380_A6-EOM_at_MCO-Orlando_Inte 

Those double jetbridge gates you see in your phase II rendering aren't for the A380, they are for the flexibility to be able use both jetbridges to speed up loading and unloading for the 787, A330/340, A350, 777, and 747 when needed and to then be able to use as two separate gates for smaller aircraft the rest of the time. The two-story enclosed protrusions that connect the jetbridges to the terminal are for sterile security and contain a two-way ramp system so that the same jetbridge can load international and domestic passengers for departure from the upper level of the terminal and then, with the closing of a door, be used to unload international passengers directly into the lower level for customs and immigration.

An A380 specific gate has all of that but also has a third, elevated jetbridge  in order to service the upper deck of the A380. The phase I and II renderings show only three A380 specific gates in the original phase I, all at the three points of the triangle of the phase I terminal's central atrium. The expanded phase I/phase II renderings add no additional A380 gates. And again, I have no idea if those three original phase I A380 gates will actually be built.

Edited to add:

Now that I look more closely at that newer phase I/II rendering, you can see that the A380 gate that had been in the lower left corner of the central atrium triangle has already been eliminated.

Edited by Camillo Sitte
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what is the deal with phase 2? I have heard some on here mention that they will state immediately after phase 1. However, others have blended it with the expanded phase 1 and actually refer to the expanded phase 1 as phase 2? I was under the impression that the expanded phase 1 is being build with the original phase 1, and phase 2 is a completely different entity. 

10 minutes ago, Camillo Sitte said:

Any jetbridge that can be raised high enough to service a 747 can service an A380, however inefficient that may be. What makes an A380 gate an A380 gate is a third, elevated jetbridge to service the upper deck and enough space allocated on the apron to safely fit the A380's 260' wingspan.

Emirates_A380_A6-EOM_at_MCO-Orlando_Inte 

Those double jetbridge gates you see in your phase II rendering aren't for the A380, they are for the flexibility to be able use both jetbridges to speed up loading and loading for the 787, A330/340, A350, 777, and 747 when needed and to then be able to use as two separate gates for smaller aircraft the rest of the time. The two-story enclosed protrusions that connect the jetbridges to the terminal are for sterile security and contain a two-way ramp system so that the same jetbridge can load international and domestic passengers for departure from the upper level of the terminal and then, with the closing of a door, be used to unload international passengers directly into the lower level for customs and immigration.

An A380 specific gate has all of that but also has a third, elevated jetbridge  in order to service the upper deck of the A380. The phase I and II renderings show only 3 A380 specific gates in the original phase I, all at the three points of the triangle of phase I terminal central atrium. The expanded phase I/phase II renderings add no additional A380 gates. And again, no idea if those three original phase I A380 gates will actually be built.

That makes sense and clears up my confusion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, shardoon said:

What I can see down the road in 30 years is that when the South terminal is completely built out, they slowly raze the North terminal airsides and create brand new modern terminals in place. 

I was told this was the plan, but was also told it wouldn't happen in my lifetime.  I'm in my mid-30's so that should give you an idea of when they're thinking this will happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, codypet said:

I was told this was the plan, but was also told it wouldn't happen in my lifetime.  I'm in my mid-30's so that should give you an idea of when they're thinking this will happen.

I think 30 years for a full build out of the South Terminal, then after that, the full planning will take place for either a terminal E/F on Heitzelman BLVD or a complete replacement of the north terminal airsides. Kind of similar to what Detroit did. They can very easily connect the East airsides together and the West airsides together.  Have a long airside spanning the entire length of the expanded apron on each side, with flareouts on the sides. Gates on both sides of each airside. Restructure the APM to each airside to dramatically increase capacity into one APM on East and West. 

I would love for options to connect North and South terminal sterile areas, just do not know how. Detroit does fine keeping them separate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Connecting the old terminal sterile areas to the new terminal is really not needed. The only reason one needs complete sterile connection is when people have lots of connecting flights, which usually happens with a hub. Southwest is perfectly fine owning their entire airside and has no problems with connecting flights. Jetblue is grooming Orlando to be a major hub and will promptly be moving out of the old airside into terminal C. Since terminal C and D alone, when built out, will be the size of a mega airport in itself (even while ignoring the North Terminal), there will be no need to connect sterile areas of the North Terminal to the South. Detroit does this very well with the major Delta Hub in the McNamara Terminal along with other international flights will sticking most of the other airlines in their new North Terminal. There is only bus connection between the two. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, shardoon said:

Connecting the old terminal sterile areas to the new terminal is really not needed. The only reason one needs complete sterile connection is when people have lots of connecting flights, which usually happens with a hub. Southwest is perfectly fine owning their entire airside and has no problems with connecting flights. Jetblue is grooming Orlando to be a major hub and will promptly be moving out of the old airside into terminal C. Since terminal C and D alone, when built out, will be the size of a mega airport in itself (even while ignoring the North Terminal), there will be no need to connect sterile areas of the North Terminal to the South. Detroit does this very well with the major Delta Hub in the McNamara Terminal along with other international flights will sticking most of the other airlines in their new North Terminal. There is only bus connection between the two. 

Exactly. MCO isn't a big hub for AA/DL/UA. As long as Jetblue and Southwest occupy a single area there's no need to connect everything.

I don't see there being a major investment being made for the very small group of people connecting from AA to B6 or any some other airline combination.

Even at JFK I don't know that there's a way to go from Terminal 1 to Terminal 5 without going through security in the middle even through B6 is partnered with a lot of international airlines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, shardoon said:

So what is the deal with phase 2? I have heard some on here mention that they will state immediately after phase 1. However, others have blended it with the expanded phase 1 and actually refer to the expanded phase 1 as phase 2? I was under the impression that the expanded phase 1 is being build with the original phase 1, and phase 2 is a completely different entity. 

That makes sense and clears up my confusion. 

the expanded phase I is phase I, i.e., the 19 gates.  I don't know about them starting the other "arm" right after phase I is completed.  I haven't read anything about it yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sethM said:

Exactly. MCO isn't a big hub for AA/DL/UA. As long as Jetblue and Southwest occupy a single area there's no need to connect everything.

I don't see there being a major investment being made for the very small group of people connecting from AA to B6 or any some other airline combination.

Even at JFK I don't know that there's a way to go from Terminal 1 to Terminal 5 without going through security in the middle even through B6 is partnered with a lot of international airlines.

Will this always be the case though for MCO?  As ridership increases, both domestic and international, wouldn't more connections be needed? 

I agree though, I've never "connected" through Orlando -- it has always been the origin or destination of my travel.  I still find the design of the airport a bit perplexing.  Despite having more land for use than most major cities, MCO has managed to design an airport that causes major bottlenecks at the security gates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, prahaboheme said:

Will this always be the case though for MCO?  As ridership increases, both domestic and international, wouldn't more connections be needed? 

I agree though, I've never "connected" through Orlando -- it has always been the origin or destination of my travel.  I still find the design of the airport a bit perplexing.  Despite having more land for use than most major cities, MCO has managed to design an airport that causes major bottlenecks at the security gates.

Like @shardoon was saying, B6 has MCO as a focus city and we're the hub for a lot of their flights to the Caribbean and Latin America. We make a good hub for these destinations because of our location just like MIA is for AA.

The legacy carriers already have big hubs, but for the newer airlines we may be in the running.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, prahaboheme said:

Will this always be the case though for MCO?  As ridership increases, both domestic and international, wouldn't more connections be needed? 

I agree though, I've never "connected" through Orlando -- it has always been the origin or destination of my travel.  I still find the design of the airport a bit perplexing.  Despite having more land for use than most major cities, MCO has managed to design an airport that causes major bottlenecks at the security gates.

Back when OIAs master plan was designed, it was in the 1970s. Nobody imagined in their wildest dreams that we would have to handle 50+ million passengers a year at any point......ever back then. In fact, the design was pretty cutting edge and has consistently been ranked as an awesome airport to travel through...bottle neck and all. Times have changed and terminal C and D are being designed for volume and dare I say designed how a true major airline hub would be designed. The beauty with OIA is the land. In 50 years, if they needed to expand again, they can choose to demolish the North terminal or simple continue building a brand new terminal E and F on the Eastside between the runways. The only airport with space like that in the US is Denver. Every other major mega airport is built out and has to subtract to add, ie Miami, LAX, LGA, JFK, EWR, ORD etc etc

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, OIA was designed to handle passenger service well into the future and to that point, it has successfully done so.  That doesn't mean it doesn't have some flaws and/or some design choices such as the security lines (as mentioned above) have become outdated over time.  I would be interested in seeing proposals for how that bottleneck could be remedied with an update, if possible at all.

Edited by prahaboheme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As President Trump is wont to do, he recently got his facts incorrect in asserting that “some say it (Miami) is the biggest airport in the world”.

It, of course, is not. OIA currently is the largest in Florida by passenger count and is the nation’s third largest in physical size (after DEN and DFW).

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-largest-airports-in-the-united-states.html

https://twitter.com/cillizzacnn/status/1186331473114210305?s=21

From World Atlas And CNN

I guess we need to get The Donald to build a Trump Resort in Orlando so he’ll stretch the truth about us instead of Miami!

Edited by spenser1058
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, shardoon said:

Maybe being closed for Dorian played a role?

Probably so, Dorian had tons of airtime on TV before it was ever close to FL so you have to imagine there were loads of tourists and business travelers cancelling their plans and staying home. I actually flew in that Monday afternoon before Dorian and MCO was a ghost town. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.