Pit could get more international service, I think San palo on tam is possible to connect pit with south america.

flyPIT wrote:

LBE's runway will be closed for about a week in Sept. It wasn't clear to me if Spirit's LBE flights will transfer to PIT or if PIT's existing schedule will absorb LBE's passengers.

Also, its nice to see they are now "contemplating" a terminal expansion as opposed to going ahead with it. Simply not needed; Spirit has reached stagnation there and is slowly reducing frequency.
http://triblive.com/local/westmoreland/12597995-74/arnold-palmer-regional-airport-to-get-scaled-back-apron-rehab

Spirit will be offering twice daily on PIT-MCO on certain days in September (9/14-9/18). This happens to fall around a weekend, but the following weekend it is back to 1x daily, so maybe an increase that is happening because LBE-MCO isn't flown. I haven't checked the other markets.

Atleast Spirit's LBE operation is looker brighter than it's CAK operation. It was noted on the CLE forum that only CAK-MCO at once daily is offered by the end of the April, but the other routes are not for sale. Atleast LBE is still showing FLL and MYR service as sold as well in addition to MCO then. Moreso with CAK, but I wonder how NK can keep a tiny operation when it has the critical mass now at a not too far primary airport.

phluser wrote:

Spirit will be offering twice daily on PIT-MCO on certain days in September (9/14-9/18). This happens to fall around a weekend, but the following weekend it is back to 1x daily, so maybe an increase that is happening because LBE-MCO isn't flown. I haven't checked the other markets.

Those dates match up with the runway closure (Sept 12-20), thanks for checking. PIT-MYR is also double daily Sept 14-18 and PIT-FLL is double daily Sept 17.

phluser wrote:

Atleast Spirit's LBE operation is looker brighter than it's CAK operation. It was noted on the CLE forum that only CAK-MCO at once daily is offered by the end of the April, but the other routes are not for sale. Atleast LBE is still showing FLL and MYR service as sold as well in addition to MCO then

In addition to those three there is also seasonal LBE-TPA/RSW which will be returning this winter so yes LBE maintains a nice little network.

fsafsx wrote:

Pit could get more international service, I think San palo on tam is possible to connect pit with south america.

LATAM will not fly to PIT and GRU will not be a nonstop destination.

dabpit wrote:

fsafsx wrote:

Pit could get more international service, I think San palo on tam is possible to connect pit with south america.

LATAM will not fly to PIT and GRU will not be a nonstop destination.

I'd wager if PIT gets any service south of Mexico it will be on Copa Airlines. They fly to every major destination in Central/South America. Conceivably they could get Avianca service to Bogota sometime in the distant future, but that seems unlikely unless PIT gets to 10m+ pax annually.

Possibly they could get a 1x weekly leisure service to Costa Rica.

PITflier wrote:

I'd wager if PIT gets any service south of Mexico it will be on Copa Airlines. They fly to every major destination in Central/South America. Conceivably they could get Avianca service to Bogota sometime in the distant future, but that seems unlikely unless PIT gets to 10m+ pax annually.

Possibly they could get a 1x weekly leisure service to Costa Rica.

I'm not so sure about BOG, and I'd say BOG is a definite no if COPA adds PTY which seems to be the rumor posted a few weeks ago.

I agree with everything else though, and there are some options for very limited vacation charters to places such as SJO, PVR and SJD. STL and even MCI IIRC had success with Mexican Pacific coast destinations in the past. I've opined before that the success of any COPA service would hinge on getting Apple Vacations and Vacation Express on board.

flyPIT wrote:

I'm not so sure about BOG, and I'd say BOG is a definite no if COPA adds PTY which seems to be the rumor posted a few weeks ago.

I agree with everything else though, and there are some options for very limited vacation charters to places such as SJO, PVR and SJD. STL and even MCI IIRC had success with Mexican Pacific coast destinations in the past. I've opined before that the success of any COPA service would hinge on getting Apple Vacations and Vacation Express on board.

Agreed about no BOG if we get service to PTY. Only downside to CM is they use only 737s. Short length flights that isn't a problem of course, but PTY-SCL or EZE is roughly the same distance at PIT-ANC. That'd be rough in a 737.

PITflier wrote:

Only downside to CM is they use only 737s. Short length flights that isn't a problem of course, but PTY-SCL or EZE is roughly the same distance at PIT-ANC. That'd be rough in a 737.

They also have the E190s which have the same seat pitch as their 737s but are an inch wider. PIT-PTY is 1900nm and the range for the E190 is 2200 nm so it would be the perfect plane for PIT even though it might get tight on range when an alternate is required (which is always when operating under Flag ops).

737 interior is no different than a 757 comfort wise. I ride ORD-ANC all the time, its not that bad.

BAW flying 787s to BNA. PIT could use a few 787 routes. I was disappointed when DL cancelled the order. https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 548723001/

flyPIT wrote:

LBE maintains a nice little network.

CAK has a little leisure network this winter as well, but then it's showing just one flight by the end of April. By next Summer, if LBE has more NK service than what NK offers at CAK, I'd be surprised, but maybe the highway traffic situations in the PIT/LBE market benefits LBE in way, more than with CAK/CLE; CLE is just easy enough to get to for CAK residents. Aside from the limited services at LBE and YNG, CAK is likely the nearest alternate airport for getting into Pittsburgh. I've noticed low one-way car rentals out of CAK (and usable to PIT or CLE) and have noticed greyhound buses from Pittsburgh to Akron and then Uber is also doable. One might venture to CAK if the fare was a lot less. I have noticed DFW-CAK fares on AA at $162 where at PIT or CLE it's higher (albeit nonstop), but Spirit tends to be even cheaper than going with AA.

At PIT, I personally dislike the 8-10 mile drive from on 376 where the hotels and Mall at Robinson is located to where the PIT airport actually is located, with that section of the road undergoing construction. But I try to use a hotel shuttle anyways. Once I'm in PIT, I find the airport easy to use though. I really like the Rite Aid inside the terminal as well. Where else can one get a less than $1 bottled water at an airport of all places. I just hope some customer doesn't buy 30 things in a shopping cart at the Rite Aid, and I'm behind that person, LOL.

I was also looking at NK's schedule and DFW-PIT and DFW-CLE become suspended for seasonal, but IAH-PIT continues through the Winter. I wonder if it's strategic (maybe NK thinks UA doesn't have enough capacity) or just a random effect of scheduling that some routes continue, but it dedicates more aircraft for North-Florida service. I'd think Dallas would be a bigger draw over Houston, but they are both large cities.

phluser wrote:

I'd think Dallas would be a bigger draw over Houston, but they are both large cities.

Energy industry, that's the difference between the two as far as PIT is concerned. Prior to that sector cooling off UA ran its 5 PIT-IAH flights with all mainline and all 739s and 757s on peak days. Perhaps that is what NK is looking at. Seems like the energy industry is slowly picking up steam again around Pittsburgh with rig counts on the rise and the Shell plant construction about to enter full swing.

I'd love to see the UA 757s back. What were those peak years? Like 2011-2014? I must not have been flying UA heavily yet at that point, otherwise I'd be trying to route through there intentionally.

AaronPGH wrote:

I'd love to see the UA 757s back. What were those peak years? Like 2011-2014?

That sounds about right. It was discussed in the PIT threads back then if you really want to search for an exact time period.

Never saw 757s on PITIAH. I worked the CO/UA counter for almost that entire time. We had about two or three mainlines and the rest was either E145s or CR7s.

Now it's all 175s or CR7s.

Certain days of the week it was all mainline during the peek, including 757s. Up to 4x daily with 739s as well.

I can't wait for the energy industry to bounce back; it will put a nice jump to PIT's pax counts.

Remember well the large amounts of IAH priority bags, particularly on the 739.

Were the 757s during a holiday period? You couldn't park a 757 on D77 or D79, the old CO gates.

USPIT10L wrote:

Were the 757s during a holiday period? You couldn't park a 757 on D77 or D79, the old CO gates.

Could have been but I'm inclined to think it was for a longer period than just the holidays. Summer peak travel season perhaps. When I get more time I can look into this more but like I said it was discussed in the PIT threads at the time.

IIRC it was flown by post merger United so most likely used the C gates. I believe ORD was involved in the aircraft routing; ORD-PIT-IAH or vice versa.

But why can't a 757 park at D77 or D79? I don't see any difference between those gates and those in A and B which regularly handled several 757s at a time. The wingspan is only 8 feet greater than a 737. Incidentally after the midfield terminal was completed Continental operated PIT-EWR 4x daily with A300s for a brief time.

Lines weren't long enough. It would block the roadway.

You do realize DL routinely operates 757s to that same concourse? The apron roadway is the same distance from the gates around the entire complex except for the end of C.

When the roadway does get blocked its nothing a few cones can't fix:
https://www.facebook.com/PITairport/photos/a.217272548932.163505.67764833932/10154450379733933/?type=3&theater

MY 2009 PIT gallery has quite a few UA 757's in it.

http://www.tarmacphotos.com/KPIT-2009/

flyPIT wrote:

USPIT10L wrote:

Were the 757s during a holiday period? You couldn't park a 757 on D77 or D79, the old CO gates.

Could have been but I'm inclined to think it was for a longer period than just the holidays. Summer peak travel season perhaps. When I get more time I can look into this more but like I said it was discussed in the PIT threads at the time.

IIRC it was flown by post merger United so most likely used the C gates. I believe ORD was involved in the aircraft routing; ORD-PIT-IAH or vice versa.

But why can't a 757 park at D77 or D79? I don't see any difference between those gates and those in A and B which regularly handled several 757s at a time. The wingspan is only 8 feet greater than a 737. Incidentally after the midfield terminal was completed Continental operated PIT-EWR 4x daily with A300s for a brief time.

I'll double check tonight but I dont think that you can fit a 757 wingspan on either 77 or 79 due to the roadway running between them. A 752 will fit on any of the C gates lengthwise and span wise but not a 753 as the fuselage extends into the roadway on the odd side. First odd side C gate that can take a 753 is 57. Im not sure off the top of my head about the even side but its probably the same/similar.

Having a look at Google Earth, specifically the archives, the D77 lines have been reshaped at least 3 times since 2010. One iteration had a box large (small) enough to only fit an ERJ. Another had two regional spots. The current one does look a bit confined for a mainline aircraft, but it seems that is because they added some sort of vehicular cul-de-sac in that corner. Current imagery shows a fuel truck there. The road in question that runs between the gates has also been altered. Sometime between 7/10 and 8/12 it gained a slight dog leg which cut in to the D79 space. I also seem to recall 2 ERJs parked at D77 wingtip to wingtip on a regular basis at one point. The 7/10 image shows a little second line without a wing box toward the airside core that would have accommodated this.

Point being, these lines are easily changed, they are not brick walls, and are not absolute limits to aircraft when wing walkers are used for taxi in and push back and cones are used while parked as already illustrated in the KLM photo linked above.

flyPIT wrote:

Having a look at Google Earth, specifically the archives, the D77 lines have been reshaped at least 3 times since 2010. One iteration had a box large (small) enough to only fit an ERJ. Another had two regional spots. The current one does look a bit confined for a mainline aircraft, but it seems that is because they added some sort of vehicular cul-de-sac in that corner. Current imagery shows a fuel truck there. The road in question that runs between the gates has also been altered. Sometime between 7/10 and 8/12 it gained a slight dog leg which cut in to the D79 space. I also seem to recall 2 ERJs parked at D77 wingtip to wingtip on a regular basis at one point. The 7/10 image shows a little second line without a wing box toward the airside core that would have accommodated this.

Point being, these lines are easily changed, they are not brick walls, and are not absolute limits to aircraft when wing walkers are used for taxi in and push back and cones are used while parked as already illustrated in the KLM photo linked above.

Most of the time a repaint will allow just what you state. In the case of 77/79 though you really can't go any bigger span wise. A 320's wingtip is currently right on the line parked at either gate. Anything larger than a 321 would require traffic on that road to pass under the wings. In order to accomodate something larger than a 321, 77 would have to be restriped about 10-15 ft furhter south. That then would impinge on access to 52. If you look at those same google images you will see that on the opposite side of D the two gates straddling the roadway are farther apart than 77/79. That allows DL to put two 757's there. It isn't a huge difference but its just enough.

flyPIT wrote:

But why can't a 757 park at D77 or D79? I don't see any difference between those gates and those in A and B which regularly handled several 757s at a time. The wingspan is only 8 feet greater than a 737. Incidentally after the midfield terminal was completed Continental operated PIT-EWR 4x daily with A300s for a brief time.

http://www.departedflights.com/PIT91p7.html

According to this timetable from October 1991 Delta was flying a 757 on PIT-YYZ and PIT-ATL. They bought out the route from Eastern after they went belly up. This was before Midfield opened however.

Other little neat tidbits from that timetable, USAir was flying 1x daily 767 PIT-MIA, PIT-BWI and PIT-LAX. They also had 2x daily PIT-DSM, PIT-OMA, PIT-SMH and PIT-SAT which I wasn't aware were ever operated. They also had 5x daily PIT-YHM and PIT-YXU. This was before Pan Am went under, there's 3x daily PIT-JFK on ATRs.

Fast forward to 1995 after Midfield opened and there are even more flights on Delta on 757s. 4x daily PIT-ATL and, even crazier 3x 757 and 1x 727 PIT-YYZ.

http://www.departedflights.com/PIT95p7.html

I don't know the exact year but I know at some point in the mid-late 1990s they operated PIT-CVG with a 757.

flyPIT wrote:

Point being, these lines are easily changed, they are not brick walls, and are not absolute limits to aircraft when wing walkers are used for taxi in and push back and cones are used while parked as already illustrated in the KLM photo linked above.

I might just just be mis-forgetting, but I swear once when I was at the airport right after they reopened the ends of A and B I saw that gate A14 could handle a widebody. Can anyone confirm this? Just looking at google maps you can see that there are definitely more aircraft type positions on the paint lines than the gates on either side.

Flaps wrote:

In order to accomodate something larger than a 321, 77 would have to be restriped about 10-15 ft furhter south. That then would impinge on access to 52.

Ya I dunno. Looks like it would only impinge on that cul-de-sac thing. Could 77 and 52 push back at the same time? No, but who cares as long as they can both be occupied at the same time. Incidentally C52 has been used by widebodies with no affect on D at all. So here we have a 767 at C52 and an ATR at the secondary D77 spot I mentioned previously. The main D77 gate and jetway aren't even in the pictutre...


Similar scenario, if you go to the other side of the airside core and look at C51 in the current satellite photo, there are actually two parking positions there. One was for a mainline aircraft and the smaller one for Air Canada (and Atlantic Coast/United Express before that). All while B26 was open for business. Notice how the road through there curves much more than the side at issue? Flexibility. B26 incidentally handled USAir 767 departures to FRA for a while too. It would arrive at C, then they would tow it over to B for departure presumably because it was in a more convenient location for USAir connections.

Flaps wrote:

If you look at those same google images you will see that on the opposite side of D the two gates straddling the roadway are farther apart than 77/79. That allows DL to put two 757's there. It isn't a huge difference but its just enough.

Precisely my point. Is there a difference between the physical geometry of the ramp and/or concourse from one side to the other? I don't think so; it comes down to the geometry of the painted road, aircraft stand, and again that cul-de-sac thingy.

PITflier wrote:

http://www.departedflights.com/PIT91p7.html

According to this timetable from October 1991 Delta was flying a 757 on PIT-YYZ and PIT-ATL. They bought out the route from Eastern after they went belly up. This was before Midfield opened however.

Other little neat tidbits from that timetable, USAir was flying 1x daily 767 PIT-MIA, PIT-BWI and PIT-LAX. They also had 2x daily PIT-DSM, PIT-OMA, PIT-SMH and PIT-SAT which I wasn't aware were ever operated. They also had 5x daily PIT-YHM and PIT-YXU. This was before Pan Am went under, there's 3x daily PIT-JFK on ATRs.

Fast forward to 1995 after Midfield opened and there are even more flights on Delta on 757s. 4x daily PIT-ATL and, even crazier 3x 757 and 1x 727 PIT-YYZ.

http://www.departedflights.com/PIT95p7.html

I don't know the exact year but I know at some point in the mid-late 1990s they operated PIT-CVG with a 757.

Yep great memories. Prior to Open Skies with Canada, PIT had it great. 3x daily to YYZ with Eastern 727s/757s plus 3x daily with Nordair 737s. After mergers, bankruptcies and acquisitions it was 3x daily with Delta 757s and 3x daily Canadian Int'l 737s (which they began to replace with Canadian Partner ATRs and Jetstreams but at a higher frequency - at least 5x daily). This was all because USAir did not have rights for nonstop service from PIT, nor did Eastern and Delta from ATL (they had to stop at PIT at the time). Compare that to what we have today :/






Re Pan Am, sad state their last few months at PIT had dwindled to ATRs:

Took my second J1 flight yesterday, PIT-BNA. It was actually cheaper than the WN nonstop (which is good news for the Southwest service, I was starting to get nervous).

My flight only had one open seat, and the return from Nashville went out full. Looked like most of the other afternoon outbounds were performing similarly well. Friday afternoons are probably peak operating for them, but I still think it is a good sign.

They still don't have everything smoothed out in terms of the customer experience, but it is a really enjoyable and different way to fly. I hope they can keep refining the model.

I really wanted to fly J1 to RIC next month, but the flights for both days are totally full... There goes my chance!

I don't know what is worse... Photobucket allowing third party hosting for about 20 minutes then pulling the plug as some sort of tease or the inability to edit posts on A.net after 30 minutes.

tooluther wrote:

Took my second J1 flight yesterday, PIT-BNA. It was actually cheaper than the WN nonstop (which is good news for the Southwest service, I was starting to get nervous).

My flight only had one open seat, and the return from Nashville went out full. Looked like most of the other afternoon outbounds were performing similarly well. Friday afternoons are probably peak operating for them, but I still think it is a good sign.

They still don't have everything smoothed out in terms of the customer experience, but it is a really enjoyable and different way to fly. I hope they can keep refining the model.

Why get nervous about WN service to BNA? Loads not good?

Nice to see OneJet doing well, they should be due to announce a couple more routes here soon. I just wish they used larger aircraft.

tooluther wrote:

Took my second J1 flight yesterday, PIT-BNA. It was actually cheaper than the WN nonstop (which is good news for the Southwest service, I was starting to get nervous).

My flight only had one open seat, and the return from Nashville went out full. Looked like most of the other afternoon outbounds were performing similarly well. Friday afternoons are probably peak operating for them, but I still think it is a good sign.

They still don't have everything smoothed out in terms of the customer experience, but it is a really enjoyable and different way to fly. I hope they can keep refining the model.

WN adding a second flight to BNA.

ConcourseZ wrote:

WN adding a second flight to BNA.

As of now only for a few weeks.

Just got around to reading the Irish Aviation threads. Aer Lingus 4x weekly (to start with) with 757s seems to be the consensus over there. If true I imagine it would be announced fairly soon.

flyPIT wrote:

Just got around to reading the Irish Aviation threads. Aer Lingus 4x weekly (to start with) with 757s seems to be the consensus over there. If true I imagine it would be announced fairly soon.

My "theory" is that if this happens, it will be Norwegian (PIT-DUB or SNN) non-stop, not EI. DY now has DOT-EU Authority to fly non-stop from the U.S. to Europe.

acentauri wrote:

My "theory" is that if this happens, it will be Norwegian (PIT-DUB or SNN) non-stop, not EI. DY now has DOT-EU Authority to fly non-stop from the U.S. to Europe.

The information about EI and PIT was pretty specific in that thread (the previous Irish thread, not the current one).

As for DY that would be a great option but I'd prefer to see them to LGW.

flyPIT wrote:

The information about EI and PIT was pretty specific in that thread (the previous Irish thread, not the current one).

Really hoping EI rejoins OW before then, I have -a lot- of AA miles to use up. Business on the inaugural would be nice to that end.

How many deice pads does this place need?
"*Pittsburgh International Airport in Pittsburgh, PA, $ 12.3 million* grant funds will be used to construct a deicing pad on the airport."
http://newsroomamerica.com/story/656872.html

Maybe they mean "reconstruct" a deice pad; those from the old USAir operation are looking pretty ratty.

flyPIT wrote:

How many deice pads does this place need?
"*Pittsburgh International Airport in Pittsburgh, PA, $ 12.3 million* grant funds will be used to construct a deicing pad on the airport."
http://newsroomamerica.com/story/656872.html

Maybe they mean "reconstruct" a deice pad; those from the old USAir operation are looking pretty ratty.

Deicing in PIT last winter with the two pads wasn't a real issue , no real problems using just Charlie and Sierra pads, but Echo (the old USAir pad) is a broken mess, definitely needs to be rebuilt.

EI have updated their schedules for next summer, with the A330 taking over DUB-IAD from the 757 (a new A333 will be delivered in December),there's a Boeing sitting in Dublin 7 days a week with nothing to do. Consensus seems to be it will be doing either YUL or PIT.

Also on EI's schedule, a Privilege aircraft is showing as being leased for next summer. EI have used leased 767s from Omni in recent years to operate SNN-BOS, thus freeing up another 757 to serve DUB. Watch this space...

flyPIT wrote:

Just got around to reading the Irish Aviation threads. Aer Lingus 4x weekly (to start with) with 757s seems to be the consensus over there. If true I imagine it would be announced fairly soon.

EI normally announce new trans Atlantic routes in October, so depends on your definition of soon, but fingers crossed.

Excuse me, but i don't see the demand from PIT-DUB. Am i missing something? PIT-FRA makes sense, and PIT-KEF also makes sense for the budget minded traveler, but PIT-DUB?

Cush wrote:

Excuse me, but i don't see the demand from PIT-DUB. Am i missing something? PIT-FRA makes sense, and PIT-KEF also makes sense for the budget minded traveler, but PIT-DUB?

Well Pittsburgh is hugely Irish, it's the region's second largest ethnicity behind German. I've been to Ireland 5 times over the years myself so I pray the route works out. I know various members of my extended family have made trips there as well.

Plus being able to go through customs in Dublin would be a huge plus, I'd fly Aer Lingus just for that.

PITflier wrote:

Well Pittsburgh is hugely Irish, it's the region's second largest ethnicity behind German. I've been to Ireland 5 times over the years myself so I pray the route works out. I know various members of my extended family have made trips there as well.

Plus being able to go through customs in Dublin would be a huge plus, I'd fly Aer Lingus just for that.

I understand, as about 1/2 my friends are Irish with well paying jobs, but out of 20'ish people, only 1 has ever been to Ireland, and the others have no desire to visit.

I wouldn't put too much hope into the whole "it's hugely Irish" thing, because it will most likely "hugely fail"... I hope they have a game plan or reason for service to DUB instead of LGW or somewhere else...

Reconfiguring PIT decision getting closer. http://www.post-gazette.com/business/de ... 1708180107

I would love to see PIT-DUB for purely selfish reasons. EI have some useful connections out of DUB that are either a PITA or $$$ on other carriers / routes; HAM, for instance.

Cush wrote:

Excuse me, but i don't see the demand from PIT-DUB. Am i missing something? PIT-FRA makes sense, and PIT-KEF also makes sense for the budget minded traveler, but PIT-DUB?

Cush wrote:

I wouldn't put too much hope into the whole "it's hugely Irish" thing, because it will most likely "hugely fail"... I hope they have a game plan or reason for service to DUB instead of LGW or somewhere else...

That's a lot of doom and gloom and I'm not sure what EI has to do with PIT-LGW other than offering connections. DUB is a bigger market than KEF, and look how well the KEF flight seems to be doing. Like WOW Air to KEF, Aer Lingus would offer onward connections and stimulate the local market significantly. In addition, its not like the airplane will only go one way. There has been a tremendous amount of positive press about Pittsburgh in the Irish media lately as was discussed a couple weeks ago.

The one thing I'm not sure about is the typical fares that Aer Lingus offers. Probably not dirt cheap like Condor or WOW but better than the Delta raping to Paris. That would play a factor in how much the local market is stimulated and how many people make the drive to PIT from elsewhere.

ConcourseZ wrote:

Reconfiguring PIT decision getting closer. http://www.post-gazette.com/business/de ... 1708180107

I can't wait to see more details. Its interesting they mention runway reconfiguration possibilities; I wonder why that would be.

ConcourseZ wrote:

Reconfiguring PIT decision getting closer. http://www.post-gazette.com/business/de ... 1708180107

Im still trying to figure out how in the county's creative book keeping they figure that they are saving money by investing yet more new money in more new stuff without ever fixing the old stuff. A few things that come to mind:

- Air condtioning air side
- A functional baggage system for the 12 carriers that aren't AA
- A PA systerm that works at every gate
- Moving sidewalks and escalators that function more than 60% of the time
- Jetbridges that don't require thrice weekly service visits to keep them in rig
- A ramp striping contractor that actually measures the lines before painting. Some of the lines (stop bars) in C are more than 10 feet off
- Roofs and jetways that don't leak every time it rains for more than 3 minutes.

I could go on and on but whats the point. The current ACAA administrators are great marketers. They are doing a fabulous job with what they were brought here to do which is sell the airport. On the other other hand they are doing a terrible job at keeping the existing plant running. In essence they are are doing a fabulous job of selling what amounts to a sows ear gussied up with some Rite Aid discount lipstick applied.

They need every dime that are about to get from having the debt paid off and the gas drilling to catch up on the 20 years of deferrred maintnenance on the existing facility. The last thing they need is to spend that money moving soemthing that they already have. The roadway re-alignments alone would cost more than any potential savings from a smaller/less complicated faclity.

Flaps wrote:

ConcourseZ wrote:

Reconfiguring PIT decision getting closer. http://www.post-gazette.com/business/de ... 1708180107

Im still trying to figure out how in the county's creative book keeping they figure that they are saving money by investing yet more new money in more new stuff without ever fixing the old stuff. A few things that come to mind:

- Air condtioning air side
- A functional baggage system for the 12 carriers that aren't AA
- A PA systerm that works at every gate
- Moving sidewalks and escalators that function more than 60% of the time
- Jetbridges that don't require thrice weekly service visits to keep them in rig
- A ramp striping contractor that actually measures the lines before painting. Some of the lines (stop bars) in C are more than 10 feet off
- Roofs and jetways that don't leak every time it rains for more than 3 minutes.

I could go on and on but whats the point. The current ACAA administrators are great marketers. They are doing a fabulous job with what they were brought here to do which is sell the airport. On the other other hand they are doing a terrible job at keeping the existing plant running. In essence they are are doing a fabulous job of selling what amounts to a sows ear gussied up with some Rite Aid discount lipstick applied.

They need every dime that are about to get from having the debt paid off and the gas drilling to catch up on the 20 years of deferrred maintnenance on the existing facility. The last thing they need is to spend that money moving soemthing that they already have. The roadway re-alignments alone would cost more than any potential savings from a smaller/less complicated faclity.

The one item that doesn't make sense is the comment about the airport was designed for hub traffic. For the gates, this is true but the terminal was designed for O&D traffic. Connecting passengers rarely need the terminal, with the exception of some international flights but that was a small percentage compared to the O&D traffic using the terminal. Tearing that down and reconfiguring roads seems like a bad option. Maybe closing off a portion and using it for another purpose would be more prudent. Realigning the gates is another matter. May not have to tear down any gate areas but could reconfigure one wing for another, revenue-generating purpose. If the demand comes in the future, that space can be reconfigured for flights again. My assessment.