Jump to content

GSP International


gvillenative

Recommended Posts


I think a direct flight to Germany right now will be difficult.   Due to distance it has to be a widebody jet, likely either A330 or 787.  I just don't see GSP being able to fill those size planes on a regular basis without any connecting traffic.   Longer term, something like a A321ULR or 797 makes this much more interesting.   I would love to be proven wrong on the first point though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see a once weekly being feasible. If we were talking about once daily, I can see your point. But there is a demand there. How great the demand? Can’t answer that. There is a flight that does kind of a Munich-Atl, Atl-GSP/GSP-Atl, Atl-Munich leg. Don’t know why I know this flight DAL131. So there is at least some traffic between GSP and Munich. That flight is on a 767. It’s what Dave Edwards called in the recent interview a “less than daily flight”. Am I saying it will be a huge success, no I’m not. Just saying that there is some justification for looking at a Munich flight. Now adding Lufthansa just for that flight would be a stretch. I can see Delta adding it, seeing as how they already operate that flight, just in a different form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much infrastructure would have to be added to GSP to handle the receiving of international travelers? I would assume that this would have been phased in the previous master planning of the campus just in case, but I wonder how well the current setup lends itself to conducting such needs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GvilleSC said:

How much infrastructure would have to be added to GSP to handle the receiving of international travelers? I would assume that this would have been phased in the previous master planning of the campus just in case, but I wonder how well the current setup lends itself to conducting such needs. 

Isn't it already there? For international charters?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, GvilleSC said:

How much infrastructure would have to be added to GSP to handle the receiving of international travelers? I would assume that this would have been phased in the previous master planning of the campus just in case, but I wonder how well the current setup lends itself to conducting such needs. 

From GSP’s website: 

“The airport has international status because it houses two Federal Inspection Stations (FIS) consisting of Customs, Immigration, and Agriculture. 250 international passengers per hour can be cleared through Customs at GSP.”

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, gman430 said:

From GSP’s website: 

“The airport has international status because it houses two Federal Inspection Stations (FIS) consisting of Customs, Immigration, and Agriculture. 250 international passengers per hour can be cleared through Customs at GSP.”

Cool. Thanks for pointing that out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve always known GSP had the two customs stations. What I never thought of was does that just mean 2 lanes? Or two stations with multiple lanes. Because if they were to get international flights with just 2 lanes at customs then it’s going to take for ever to clear a flight coming in from Germany or elsewhere for that matter.  Either way, the planes it would take to make that flight seat over 200 people. Putting it right at or over capacity in just one flight. 

If they were to get those flights, it would be nice to see them do it on a 787 as a nod to the state of South Carolina. Kinda like what British Airways did for their flights they are starting from Charleston to London-Heathrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Westend11 said:

Just give us the Boston direct! 

THIS!!! I went to Boston in late June last year. Would have been nice not having to connect through Atlanta. 

2 hours ago, gvillenative said:

I’ve always known GSP had the two customs stations. What I never thought of was does that just mean 2 lanes? Or two stations with multiple lanes. Because if they were to get international flights with just 2 lanes at customs then it’s going to take for ever to clear a flight coming in from Germany or elsewhere for that matter.  Either way, the planes it would take to make that flight seat over 200 people. Putting it right at or over capacity in just one flight. 

If they were to get those flights, it would be nice to see them do it on a 787 as a nod to the state of South Carolina. Kinda like what British Airways did for their flights they are starting from Charleston to London-Heathrow.

I’m sure GSP and FAA would pay to have it expanded if needed due to economic development reasons. The area counties and state would probably be involved with funding too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether it’s Delta or another airline like United or Lufthansa even. I can see it work with the frequency in which they spoke of. What I can’t see, however, is the logic of avoiding GSP to save money, of which, you will spend some or a lot of driving to Atlanta or Charlotte. I will save the hassle and go ahead and pay what would eventually wind up being not much higher, after you factor in added expenses traveling to Atl or Clt to fly. Unless you live close there is not an argument in the world that would make me say that they are “close” or even the popular argument “too close for xyz flight to work.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, gvillenative said:

Whether it’s Delta or another airline like United or Lufthansa even. I can see it work with the frequency in which they spoke of. What I can’t see, however, is the logic of avoiding GSP to save money, of which, you will spend some or a lot of driving to Atlanta or Charlotte. I will save the hassle and go ahead and pay what would eventually wind up being not much higher, after you factor in added expenses traveling to Atl or Clt to fly. Unless you live close there is not an argument in the world that would make me say that they are “close” or even the popular argument “too close for xyz flight to work.”

It’s just $25 more in gas to Charlotte, round trip.  Plus GSP-CLT, flying, is often about the same time as driving.

Plus Charlotte has:

1. Lots more frequencies.

2. Bigger planes, which are less likely to be delayed.

3. An Admirals Club (I know Greenville now has a lounge, which is probably nicer, but I already have an Admirals Club membership and the agents there are very helpful for flight changes/issues).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather originate a flight out of GSP. As matter of fact I've vowed to not drive to Atlanta to fly again. Last year was a nightmare. By the time we'd payed for everything, dealt with the hassle‚ along with the time spent driving; we may as well have flew out of GSP. Didn't save any money or time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Near term, the best thing that could happen for international/Europe connectivity is getting Delta to add service to JFK.  This is the last missing hub link out of GSP, now that American has added Miami, and United has added Denver.  

Edited by chuckyvt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, chuckyvt said:

Near term, the best thing that could happen for international/Europe connectivity is getting Delta to add service to JFK.  This is the last missing hub link out of GSP, now that American has added Miami, and United has added Denver.  

I thought we had long had a route to JFK, that should be a no brainer.

For hubs, how about Boston, MSP, LAX, and SEA? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, distortedlogic said:

I thought we had long had a route to JFK, that should be a no brainer.

For hubs, how about Boston, MSP, LAX, and SEA? 

Boston;  Not really a hub, but more of a focus city, but for sure seems like it would be viable.  Have to imagine GSP officials have been talking to Jet Blue about it. 

MSP: Good one, forgot about that.  

LAX and SEA:  I think this one is going to be tough in the near term to justify the operating cost of routes that length.  Either GSP traffic would have to get significantly larger (Raleigh Durham type level),  or Boeing build a plant in the upstate (like Charleston).  Continue growth plus lower cost next gen jets probably make this more interesting longer term.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, gman430 said:

Thanks for the link, a lot of good info in a short article. So right now they are aggressively pursuing routes (at least a couple times per week)  to Boston, JFK, Minneapolis, Phoenix, Toronto, Cancun, and maybe Germany; not bad. 

Also first mention I've seen of January's numbers; up 16.8% (or about 25k) over last year's to about 180k. Looks like 2.5 MM is a good bet this year, and maybe even a run at 2.6 if any more new routes are announced. Could we hit 3MM for 2021?

Frontier will add flights if they do well, and I'd still like to see SW add a couple more back, or even Allegiant. 

Edited by distortedlogic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“In early to mid-December, Air Canada informed us that they are not starting any transborder routes in 2019. Later this month, Mr. Scott Carr and Mr. Tom Tyra will be meeting with Porter Airlines, a Canadian carrier, which flies out of Billy Bishop Airport. Porter provides non-stop service to Toronto, and beyond service into Canada. Additionally, they will be meeting with Sun Country Airlines, a charter operator in Minneapolis.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Air Traffic Control Tower:
“Mr. Edwards, Mr. Howell and others of the team will be attending and participating in the AFTIL study (new tower location study) in New Jersey at the end of the month. GSP Airport participated in this study in 2011 at our cost because we were trying to get the FAA to relocate, rather than renovate, the current tower. Though the District pulled out of the project because the FAA couldn’t find the funding to build the new tower at that time, they have initiated this new project on their own. We should have direction on the construction of a new tower by the end of year. It typically takes 5-7 years before a tower is built.”

 

—————————————————————

 

ITEM DESCRIPTION - New Business Item C. Approval of Final Rankings for Structural Pre-Cast Design Build Provider


BACKGROUND
The design of the third parking garage at Greenville-Spartanburg International Airport is currently underway. During early design, it was determined to be in the District’s best interest to utilize a pre-cast concrete structure for this project. Staff prepared a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) and a Request for Proposals (RFP) for structural pre-cast concrete design build services. Two (2) Submittals of Qualifications (SOQs) were received for pre-cast design build on the December 21, 2019 due date.
Structural pre-cast concrete providers submitting SOQs were (listed alphabetically):
Metromont, Inc. Tindall Corporation


After reviewing each firms’ qualifications, pre-proposal meetings were held individually with each firm. Priced proposals were received from Tindall and Metromont on March 7, 2019. Staff and representatives from LS3P have reviewed the priced proposals from each firm and evaluated them per the RFP requirements.


ISSUES
In accordance with administrative policy, Staff conducted the RFQ/RFP solicitation process and is making a recommendation of final rankings to the Commission. The Commission has final approval of the rankings.

The recommended final ranking for architectural/engineering services is:
1. Metromont, Inc.
2. Tindall Corporation


Upon approval of the final rankings, Staff will attempt to negotiate an agreement with the highest ranked company. In the event an agreement cannot be reached with the highest ranked company, Staff will formally terminate the negotiations and proceed to negotiate with the next highest ranked company.


ALTERNATIVES
No alternatives are recommended at this time.


FISCAL IMPACT
Approval of the final ranking itself does not have a direct fiscal impact. Once the structural pre-cast concrete provider is under contract, the selected company will provide design and engineering services in coordination with the parking garage design team. The pre-cast provider will be compensated for their design services per the agreement. The current approved design phase budget is $5,000,000. Current design phase contract values total $ 3,193,302. The project will be brought back to the Commission for an update and approval prior to moving to the construction phase.


RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is respectfully requested that the Airport Commission resolve to (1) approve the final rankings for Structural Pre-Cast Design Build Provider as presented above; (2) authorize Staff to negotiate and finalize agreements with the highest ranked company (if an acceptable agreement cannot be reached with the highest ranked company, negotiations will be formally terminated and will then proceed with the next ranked company); and (3) authorize the President/CEO to execute all necessary documents.

 

Edited by gman430
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.