PHLspecial wrote:

axiom wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

Why CLT > PHL?
Philly population is 1.5 mill, Charlotte is 0.84 mill. PHL would certainly have higher O&D numbers.

City population figures tell us abolsutrly nothing about the viability of a market. Start with the region and the demographic composition. (Even without data, I am inclined to follow your hunch...)

PHL 6.3% Asian Americans, CLT 5.0% Asian Americans. What's the point of arguing I guess anyone from the Philly area can drive to New York or DC area. At this point CLT has a better chance this Philly.
Though for CLT growth I would think CLT to KEF would be in the cards or CLT to SNN. I'm shocked that ATH is not at CLT yet.

It needs to go further than that. The Charlotte Metro Area has about 89,000 Asians. The Philly Metro Area has about 389,000. These are both smaller than other AA hubs like DFW, ORD, and LAX.

TWFlyGuy wrote:

BWIAirport wrote:

csweet wrote:

This image shows the masterplan for the 4th parallel. I believe it will also be used during peak morning/afternoon.

Interesting. I was not aware CLT needed this.

Well, if you look at the picture, the blue parts of the terminal are new gates. If you add all those gates, they need more runway capacity. I imagine that the incremental cost of adding length to ensure you can market TPAC capable isn't much so if you're building a runway might as well make it the most appealing. Apparently, all the added gates will get CLT to the gate capacity of ATL today in a 10 year span.

Also worth noting that if those concourse additions are made (in blue), runway 5/23 will (finally) have to close and be converted into a taxiway, hopefully eliminating the bottleneck that now exists there.

User001 wrote:

Skyblue39 wrote:

Are you blind or just stupid? Where did I say that the SNN-US market is the largest?

And are you this abrasive in real life or does internet anonymity make you feel braver, in that you can talk to strangers in such a s**ty way? Big man indeed aren’t you?!

Every single thread on here again hijacked by MAN Fanboys trying to justify why MAN should get sevice from any airport that is highlighted. Look, let me paint this for you in the simplest possible terms for the avoidance of doubt:

The irony of calling me blind and stupid is unbounding here. Where is ‘every single thread’ hijacked? Can see quite a lot of threads, in fact, pretty much 99.9% of them without a MAN mention. Funny that. In other words, Exaggerate much? Also, I have not said MAN should get a service, I’m arguing on the point originally made that SNN was more viable than MAN. Again, before calling people ‘blind and stupid’ how about checking your own posts are watertight, as I’ve seen Swiss cheese with less holes than your abrasive, rude and neanderthalific ‘chest beating’ posts.

Why would AA suddenly start focusing (as you put it earlier) on MAN when they have scaled back at MAN in recent times? You have a year round to PHL - whoopie do. That is fantastic. But I stand by my comments that US based airlines are not interested in Manchester.

We will see. Let me put this in its most simplest form for you. Why not just focus on your beloved little Dublin and I’ll focus on MAN. If MAN and it’s posters irk you so, then just ignore them, skip past MAN posts and carry on. I certainly do for the majority of yours! Good day, big brave man.

Little Dublin? Again I think you are quite deluded here.
Last time I checked, Dublin has service already to Charlotte and is the 14th busiest airport in Europe..... MAN on the other hand? Well....

I see 3 categories:

1) European discount carriers using single aisle aircraft: Norwegian, Air Lingus, any of the Iceland carriers.

2) a ME or Asian carrier for traffic to India and east Asia. Emirates makes most sense to me: could generate a lot of traffic to India, Australia, east Asia and Africa.

3) a OneWorld airline adding a flight from Europe to bypass LHR. Level may add a flight from Barcelona?

sharktail wrote:

I see 3 categories:

1) European discount carriers using single aisle aircraft: Norwegian, Air Lingus, any of the Iceland carriers.

2) a ME or Asian carrier for traffic to India and east Asia. Emirates makes most sense to me: could generate a lot of traffic to India, Australia, east Asia and Africa.

3) a OneWorld airline adding a flight from Europe to bypass LHR. Level may add a flight from Barcelona?

AA already flies CLT-BCN in the summer.

TWFlyGuy wrote:

Well, if you look at the picture, the blue parts of the terminal are new gates. If you add all those gates, they need more runway capacity.

You can also see where concourse C expansion overlaps runway 5/23 which will permanently close. The master plan also calls for a fifth parallel runway beside 18L/36R.

afcjets wrote:

TWFlyGuy wrote:

Well, if you look at the picture, the blue parts of the terminal are new gates. If you add all those gates, they need more runway capacity.

You can also see where concourse C expansion overlaps runway 5/23 which will permanently close. The master plan also calls for a fifth parallel runway beside 18L/36R.

Where did you see plans for a 5th parallel runway? The latest plans I see on the CLT airport website show a 12K' runway to be built between the existing Runways 18R/36L and 18C/36C

BA0197 wrote:

Why is everyone so sure BA is going to come to CLT? AA already covers the route, and there are no signs that it needs specifically more CLT capacity to LHR.

^ This.

Why would BA "waste" a slot and aircraft on a high-transfer route that an immunized j/v partner (1) already covers and (2) could easily upgauge; when they can instead use it to open new markets and gain new traffic flows?

In the best of times, perhaps... but why would they want to do it during this RR fiasco that has their fleet so stretched that they're using QR aircraft to help other ends meet?

LAX772LR wrote:

BA0197 wrote:

Why is everyone so sure BA is going to come to CLT? AA already covers the route, and there are no signs that it needs specifically more CLT capacity to LHR.

^ This.

Why would BA "waste" a slot and aircraft on a high-transfer route that an immunized j/v partner (1) already covers and (2) could easily upgauge; when they can instead use it to open new markets and gain new traffic flows?

In the best of times, perhaps... but why would they want to do it during this RR fiasco that has their fleet so stretched that they're using QR aircraft to help other ends meet?

BA and AA will be announcing some more route swapping soon. First swap was BA taking an MIALHR frequency. More coming, including AA taking PHX supposedly.

User001 wrote:

csweet wrote:

SNN has much more traffic in the Northeast, compared to MAN where you can fly to ATL,MCO, etc.

No it doesn’t?!

SNN has:
4 weekly PVD B737
13 weekly JFK B757
5 weekly SWF B737
7 weekly PHL B757
7 weekly EWR B757
7 weekly BOS B757
86 flights per week
15,186 Seats per week (assuming Norwegian goes as 189 pax with no blocked seats)

Then SNN has ORD in the US too.

MAN has
8 weekly JFK A330
7 weekly JFK B744
7 weekly EWR B757
3 weekly BOS A330
7 weekly PHL A330
64 flights per week
1520 Seats per week

Then MAN has ORD/IAH/MCO/SFB/LAS/LAX/SFO/SEA/ATL in the US too.

So where is this ‘much more traffic’ as I don’t see it?

You are proving my point with statistics. SNN serves the northeast as MAN is present in the southeast already. That is the gap I was discussing, thank you for the facts!

pipeafcr wrote:

Hopefully AA will diversify it's LatAm network by adding BOG, EZE, GRU and SCL from CLT. Not a fan of MIA and DFW getting all the South America fun

GRU and GIG performed horribly--they are much better served from JFK and MIA where most of the demand is.

EI and FI are possibilities. CLT is in the sweet spot for FI in terms of being able to do a turn and still make it back to Iceland in time for the morning bank to Europe.

BA is only happening if AA and BA decide to rejigger some frequencies to better match capacity offerings to demand.

csweet wrote:

User001 wrote:

csweet wrote:

SNN has much more traffic in the Northeast, compared to MAN where you can fly to ATL,MCO, etc.

No it doesn’t?!

SNN has:
4 weekly PVD B737
13 weekly JFK B757
5 weekly SWF B737
7 weekly PHL B757
7 weekly EWR B757
7 weekly BOS B757
86 flights per week
15,186 Seats per week (assuming Norwegian goes as 189 pax with no blocked seats)

Then SNN has ORD in the US too.

MAN has
8 weekly JFK A330
7 weekly JFK B744
7 weekly EWR B757
3 weekly BOS A330
7 weekly PHL A330
64 flights per week
15280 Seats per week

Then MAN has ORD/IAH/MCO/SFB/LAS/LAX/SFO/SEA/ATL in the US too.

So where is this ‘much more traffic’ as I don’t see it?

You are proving my point with statistics. SNN serves the northeast as MAN is present in the southeast already. That is the gap I was discussing, thank you for the facts!

But SNN has a smaller seat count so doesn’t prove your point at all (granted there are only 100 seats in it, but, non the less refutes the claim that SNN-Northeast is ‘much bigger’ than MAN-Northeast. It may have 2 more routes over MAN but overall MAN has more traffic.

MAH4546 wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

BA0197 wrote:

Why is everyone so sure BA is going to come to CLT? AA already covers the route, and there are no signs that it needs specifically more CLT capacity to LHR.

^ This.

Why would BA "waste" a slot and aircraft on a high-transfer route that an immunized j/v partner (1) already covers and (2) could easily upgauge; when they can instead use it to open new markets and gain new traffic flows?

In the best of times, perhaps... but why would they want to do it during this RR fiasco that has their fleet so stretched that they're using QR aircraft to help other ends meet?

BA and AA will be announcing some more route swapping soon. First swap was BA taking an MIALHR frequency. More coming, including AA taking PHX supposedly.

AA taking PHX would be interesting since they have no widebody capacity there now. That doesn't make it impossible but creates added strain on fleet and crew scheduling. I wouldn't be surprised if AA & BA were to swap the RDU flight for that same reason.

PHX has and does get 330 service and the 757s to HI will have to be replaced too.

Boof02671 wrote:

PHX has and does get 330 service and the 757s to HI will have to be replaced too.

Is the 330 based there or is it making a turn from CLT/PHL? To have one there for a LHR trip would be a bit more complicating than one making a turn from CLT/PHL.

TWFlyGuy wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

PHX has and does get 330 service and the 757s to HI will have to be replaced too.

Is the 330 based there or is it making a turn from CLT/PHL? To have one there for a LHR trip would be a bit more complicating than one making a turn from CLT/PHL.

It's making a turn, you are absolutely right about the complications, why not just route pax through CLT /PHL instead of basing a 330 in PHX?

A DUB/MAN pissing match on a CLT thread. If that isnt random...

Moose135 wrote:

727LOVER wrote:

Speaking of LH...is the Lufthansa Lady still there?

Everyday...

Who is she?

Edit: oh found her on YouTube already .

PHLspecial wrote:

axiom wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

Why CLT > PHL?
Philly population is 1.5 mill, Charlotte is 0.84 mill. PHL would certainly have higher O&D numbers.

City population figures tell us abolsutrly nothing about the viability of a market. Start with the region and the demographic composition. (Even without data, I am inclined to follow your hunch...)

PHL 6.3% Asian Americans, CLT 5.0% Asian Americans. What's the point of arguing I guess anyone from the Philly area can drive to New York or DC area. At this point CLT has a better chance this Philly.
Though for CLT growth I would think CLT to KEF would be in the cards or CLT to SNN. I'm shocked that ATH is not at CLT yet.

Access to NYC airports and low fares there have been what has kept PHL from an Asia flight for so long. Philly has a huge Asian population and there are packed buses that run to EWR and JFK from Chinatown daily. Nevertheless, I would expect that to change in the next few years and I'm certain PHL will land an Asia flight.

Back to CLT, the PHL-ATH flight is low-yielding and highly seasonal. It's starting to recover, but was really struggling a few years ago and load factors took a major hit as well. The Chicago area has a large Greek population and I would expect to see ORD-ATH before CLT.

bridge29 wrote:

PHLspecial wrote:

axiom wrote:

City population figures tell us abolsutrly nothing about the viability of a market. Start with the region and the demographic composition. (Even without data, I am inclined to follow your hunch...)

PHL 6.3% Asian Americans, CLT 5.0% Asian Americans. What's the point of arguing I guess anyone from the Philly area can drive to New York or DC area. At this point CLT has a better chance this Philly.
Though for CLT growth I would think CLT to KEF would be in the cards or CLT to SNN. I'm shocked that ATH is not at CLT yet.

Access to NYC airports and low fares there have been what has kept PHL from an Asia flight for so long. Philly has a huge Asian population and there are packed buses that run to EWR and JFK from Chinatown daily. Nevertheless, I would expect that to change in the next few years and I'm certain PHL will land an Asia flight.

Back to CLT, the PHL-ATH flight is low-yielding and highly seasonal. It's starting to recover, but was really struggling a few years ago and load factors took a major hit as well. The Chicago area has a large Greek population and I would expect to see ORD-ATH before CLT.

I agree that CLT is probably not ready for an ATH flight. ATH is a tough market. ORD would be interesting. CLT is probably at the max of what it can support as it is. If AA decided to move 763's here until they retire maybe there's 1-2 more markets that could do ok with the smaller aircraft but for now the 330 is probably too big for many other cities. Maybe IAG will add a Level flight to BCN in the off season for AA's flight to capture some additional European share but that's about all I can imagine for now.

csweet wrote:

TWFlyGuy wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

PHX has and does get 330 service and the 757s to HI will have to be replaced too.

Is the 330 based there or is it making a turn from CLT/PHL? To have one there for a LHR trip would be a bit more complicating than one making a turn from CLT/PHL.

It's making a turn, you are absolutely right about the complications, why not just route pax through CLT /PHL instead of basing a 330 in PHX?

No it’s not. AA ran a 330 from ORD-DUB before and ORD doesn’t have a 330 crew base.

Just like RDU doesn’t have a 777 base.

BWIAirport wrote:

727LOVER wrote:

Isn't CLT building a new runway SPECIFICALLY for TPAC flights?. Granted, cargo is more likely.

Could you go into more detail about this TPAC-only runway? It seems like a massive waste of money for a runway that will only see, optimistically, 2 takeoffs and landings per day. They already have a 9,000 and 10,000 foot runway, which should be perfectly fine. Maybe extend 18R/36L 1500 feet if you really need to.

It is not a TPAC only runway. CLT needs a 4th parallel, and they're making it longer than the existing ones to increase the airport's capabilities.

Perhaps we could see EK. I know everyone thinks QR would be the first ME airline to the airport but QR and AA don’t get along so maybe EK will pounce. When you look at the biggest MSAs that EK doesn’t serve, CLT comes 11th, which is not ideal but makes it possible.

soflaflyer wrote:

afcjets wrote:

TWFlyGuy wrote:

Well, if you look at the picture, the blue parts of the terminal are new gates. If you add all those gates, they need more runway capacity.

You can also see where concourse C expansion overlaps runway 5/23 which will permanently close. The master plan also calls for a fifth parallel runway beside 18L/36R.

Where did you see plans for a 5th parallel runway? The latest plans I see on the CLT airport website show a 12K' runway to be built between the existing Runways 18R/36L and 18C/36C

I apologize for the delay in responding. I saw it a couple of years ago online and I can't find anything now. It also showed for an eventual complete rebuild and relocation of all the concourses to be linear parallel satellites like the current ATL terminal’s original design. The main terminal would be where it is now and the concourses would run east west and be on both sides of 5/23 which of course will be gone. IIRC this was for beyond 2030.

afcjets wrote:

soflaflyer wrote:

afcjets wrote:

You can also see where concourse C expansion overlaps runway 5/23 which will permanently close. The master plan also calls for a fifth parallel runway beside 18L/36R.

Where did you see plans for a 5th parallel runway? The latest plans I see on the CLT airport website show a 12K' runway to be built between the existing Runways 18R/36L and 18C/36C

I apologize for the delay in responding. I saw it a couple of years ago online and I can't find anything now. It also showed for an eventual complete rebuild and relocation of all the concourses to be linear parallel satellites like the current ATL terminal’s original design. The main terminal would be where it is now and the concourses would run east west and be on both sides of 5/23 which of course will be gone. IIRC this was for beyond 2030.

Wonder if maybe that was an option that was considered at one time? They are going to soon begin to widen (FINALLY!) and extend both B & C. I would think if multiple parallel terminals was the plan, each modification would be moving in that direction. Brings to mind, what can CLT do once A, B, & C are fully built out and at capacity? I could see D becoming a replica of A or maybe push the hangar and cargo further south and build midfield terminal(s) perpendicular to B & C (a la ATL)? I would think the topic has been at least discussed.

CLT - LHR BA
CLT - FRA LH/AA
CLT - NRT JL/AA
CLT - PEK AA/CZ
CLT - GRU/GIG LATAM/AA
CLT - HKG CX/AA

LH658 wrote:

CLT - LHR BA
CLT - FRA LH/AA
CLT - NRT JL/AA
CLT - PEK AA/CZ
CLT - GRU/GIG LATAM/AA
CLT - HKG CX/AA

LHR: most likely, especially if AA does rumored PHX-LHR
FRA: possibly
NRT: not in the foreseeable future
PEK: not in the next 10 years
GRU / GIG: only if MIA goes away
HKG: not realistic

I love the CLT folks and your passion for your airport but almost none of these routes are realistic.

CLT to Asia is laughable. ATL is 2.5x the size and barely has Asia service (and much of that is due to ATL's unusually large Korean community)

The best CLT can can hope for is MAD going year round and maybe BOG/LIM since they can be done by narrowbodies. Of course, CLT-MEX struggles outside of peak periods so I'm not even sure any Latin America expansion is realistic.

I hate that Uflyer beat me to it, bc I wanted to be the one to scold everyone and rain on the parade. But just forget it guys, CLT to Asia just isn’t happening. Forget it.
Middle East/India...are you kidding? Not happening.
Europe: Anything can happen with the IAG JV stuff going forward with metal swaps and the airlines working as one.

A large number of reasons why these fantasy routes won’t happen, but even if they could, there isn’t anywhere to put them on the airport.

What about LGW-CLT on BA (a Gatter's based 777)?

The relative lower costs of LGW based aircraft, crew and airport operations - with a decent base of connectivity, and add to that a JV-TATL hub (with famously low costs for an East Coast airport) and a decent backbone of connectivity to the network.

What do you guys use as a resource for checking past routes? I believe that previously US flew the CLT-LGW routes (on the A330). I could see it working, especially at a less than daily capacity.

It would be a decent connectivity point to establish against a growing competitor at the airport, and further indemnify their position. What better a market for said competitor to stay away from (with AA on the other side), and not as high yields as other markets to serve. Additionally, this would be a decent costing enough approach to create a 'back-bone' for the TATL lower-costing market.

soflaflyer wrote:

afcjets wrote:

soflaflyer wrote:

Where did you see plans for a 5th parallel runway? The latest plans I see on the CLT airport website show a 12K' runway to be built between the existing Runways 18R/36L and 18C/36C

I apologize for the delay in responding. I saw it a couple of years ago online and I can't find anything now. It also showed for an eventual complete rebuild and relocation of all the concourses to be linear parallel satellites like the current ATL terminal’s original design. The main terminal would be where it is now and the concourses would run east west and be on both sides of 5/23 which of course will be gone. IIRC this was for beyond 2030.

Wonder if maybe that was an option that was considered at one time? They are going to soon begin to widen (FINALLY!) and extend both B & C. I would think if multiple parallel terminals was the plan, each modification would be moving in that direction. Brings to mind, what can CLT do once A, B, & C are fully built out and at capacity? I could see D becoming a replica of A or maybe push the hangar and cargo further south and build midfield terminal(s) perpendicular to B & C (a la ATL)? I would think the topic has been at least discussed.

Here is the satellite terminal you were discussing, along with the 5th parallel. Doesn't seem too unrealistic!

That also appears to eliminate the hell that is Concourse E.

The only asia service that I can see on AA is going to be CLT-NRT to create a connection base to OW carrier JL. I would be willing to bet that you will see MIA-NRT or PHL-NRT before you see CLT-NRT.

That plan above does indeed eliminate Concourse E, and it also eliminates a large portion of Concourse D. In that plan, a portion of Concourse C become international gates and are connected to an expanded FIS. The hammerhead concourse would replace Concourse E and would house all American Eagle flights.

I agree CLT-Asia is unlikely, but I will say that the Charlotte metro population is basically where ATL's was when they first recieved nonstop service to NRT in the 1990s.

Charlotte's metro population is somewhat disproportionate to other larger cities because CLT has several other decently sized metro areas in a close vicinity. For example, the ATL CSA includes Athens which is located about 75 miles away from ATL. CLT has three different metro areas located around 75 miles from the city: the Columbia metro (around 850,000), the Greenville/Spartanburg metro (1.1 million), and the Piedmont Triad (1.6 million). Each of those metro areas have a decent airport that is pretty well served, and its relatively common for Charlotteans to drive to one of these airports in search of a cheaper flight.


My parents live in the Northern Suburbs of Charlotte and they frequently fly out of GSO, simply because once you factor in Charlotte traffic on I-77, it almost takes the same amount of time to drive to CLT, and the airfares out of GSO are usually less expensive.

USAirALB wrote:

That plan above does indeed eliminate Concourse E, and it also eliminates a large portion of Concourse D. In that plan, a portion of Concourse C become international gates and are connected to an expanded FIS. The hammerhead concourse would replace Concourse E and would house all American Eagle flights.

I agree CLT-Asia is unlikely, but I will say that the Charlotte metro population is basically where ATL's was when they first recieved nonstop service to NRT in the 1990s.

Charlotte's metro population is somewhat disproportionate to other larger cities because CLT has several other decently sized metro areas in a close vicinity. For example, the ATL CSA includes Athens which is located about 75 miles away from ATL. CLT has three different metro areas located around 75 miles from the city: the Columbia metro (around 850,000), the Greenville/Spartanburg metro (1.1 million), and the Piedmont Triad (1.6 million). Each of those metro areas have a decent airport that is pretty well served, and its relatively common for Charlotteans to drive to one of these airports in search of a cheaper flight.


My parents live in the Northern Suburbs of Charlotte and they frequently fly out of GSO, simply because once you factor in Charlotte traffic on I-77, it almost takes the same amount of time to drive to CLT, and the airfares out of GSO are usually less expensive.

I wonder if that plan is much further out given the investments Destination CLT is making in D&E concourses. A 5th runway is likely not needed for a while either.

Very good points about the proximity to GSO, GSP, CAE and while a bit further, Asheville has also gained service reducing the need to drive to CLT for non-stop service to major metro areas.

TWFlyGuy wrote:

USAirALB wrote:

That plan above does indeed eliminate Concourse E, and it also eliminates a large portion of Concourse D. In that plan, a portion of Concourse C become international gates and are connected to an expanded FIS. The hammerhead concourse would replace Concourse E and would house all American Eagle flights.

I agree CLT-Asia is unlikely, but I will say that the Charlotte metro population is basically where ATL's was when they first recieved nonstop service to NRT in the 1990s.

Charlotte's metro population is somewhat disproportionate to other larger cities because CLT has several other decently sized metro areas in a close vicinity. For example, the ATL CSA includes Athens which is located about 75 miles away from ATL. CLT has three different metro areas located around 75 miles from the city: the Columbia metro (around 850,000), the Greenville/Spartanburg metro (1.1 million), and the Piedmont Triad (1.6 million). Each of those metro areas have a decent airport that is pretty well served, and its relatively common for Charlotteans to drive to one of these airports in search of a cheaper flight.


My parents live in the Northern Suburbs of Charlotte and they frequently fly out of GSO, simply because once you factor in Charlotte traffic on I-77, it almost takes the same amount of time to drive to CLT, and the airfares out of GSO are usually less expensive.

I wonder if that plan is much further out given the investments Destination CLT is making in D&E concourses. A 5th runway is likely not needed for a while either.

Very good points about the proximity to GSO, GSP, CAE and while a bit further, Asheville has also gained service reducing the need to drive to CLT for non-stop service to major metro areas.

The current Destination CLT plan stretches through 2015 I believe, so the hammerhead concourse and elimination of E is a topic past the next decade. Cities left out from that list are RDU, AVL , and cheap flights from JQF with Allegiant.

TWFlyGuy wrote:

Very good points about the proximity to GSO, GSP, CAE and while a bit further, Asheville has also gained service reducing the need to drive to CLT for non-stop service to major metro areas.

TBH, I've even been guilty of driving to ATL and RDU just for a better deal.

This past April I had to go to YVR to visit a friend and DL offered me a deal on RDU-SEA-YVR-SEA-RDU that was almost $175 less than what I could have found from CLT. Likewise, two weeks ago, I drove to ATL because of the lack of award availability from CLT.

PHLspecial wrote:

Ziyulu wrote:

AA should do CLT to PEK. Replace its ORD flight.

Why CLT > PHL?
Philly population is 1.5 mill, Charlotte is 0.84 mill. PHL would certainly have higher O&D numbers.

Just remember, when talking airports, metro population matters, not the city population. If that were the case, the city of DFW Airport, TX is the most overserved place in history, with a population of 0. The available market for PHL is much larger, roughly 6.5 MM to 2MM, and the neighboring metros are NYC and Waltimore, whereas CLT's are.... the Triad and Columbia.. That's a helluva difference.

usflyer msp wrote:

I love the CLT folks and your passion for your airport but almost none of these routes are realistic.

CLT to Asia is laughable. ATL is 2.5x the size and barely has Asia service (and much of that is due to ATL's unusually large Korean community)

The best CLT can can hope for is MAD going year round and maybe BOG/LIM since they can be done by narrowbodies. Of course, CLT-MEX struggles outside of peak periods so I'm not even sure any Latin America expansion is realistic.

I'm all for boosterism, but this is pretty much on point. Maybe a MAD/BCN extension to year-round, and a TATLCC.

CLT's biggest problem from an international point of view, especially Oneworld's, is its mid-Atlantic location. Its direct competitors for that area are ATL and RDU, which is murderous in an area such as that. If you're Oneworld, what does CLT offer that PHL or MIA don't already do better - especially considering the population base within 100 miles of PHL, MIA's practical hegemony over Florida and the Caribbean, and the extant international connections for both?

AA's interest in Charlotte is as a domestic hub - that's why they want 4-5 runways, because that means movements are the most important metric for traffic purposes.

If I was in charge, I'd do the following instead....

By the time this buildout occurs, those B and C concourses are going to be 50+ years old. And probably meant to last another 30+. Instead of continuing to use them and extending them.... replace them with another midfield concourse. Make the terminal concourse all widebody / intl capable.

Also, a northern end-around taxiway would do wonders for cross field taxi constraints. Thats needed today...

Well, CLT-MUC on AA...interesting to say the least. I can't imagine this is a two carrier route.

US drove LH out of CLT before on the FRA route.

Boof02671 wrote:

US drove LH out of CLT before on the FRA route.

However, the Lufthansa flight is always busy. It goes out with a good load and, from what I understand, a good mix of O/D and connections, many of which continue on to the Subcontinent. I think that LH will continue to offer one flight to CLT, at least until an ME3 carrier comes along to take those connections away.