SgtBarone
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2017 6:20 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 11, 2019 8:40 pm

greenair727 wrote:
ncflyer wrote:
It’s really a wonder to me why CLE doesn’t use every single communication to the public to remind them that a master facility plan is coming. I’m really glad they are doing it (finally!) with this news item— it should have been done in every single release about the $4 fee. The time to get public support behind an improved terminal is now.


Why do you place so much emphasis on the master plan? 1. It is required by FAA to complete---it doesn't mean the city will do ANYTHING in the plan except have it. Look how much has been done from the last master plan. 2. If its done in 2021-2022, that means implementation is 2022-2032 or so---but again NOTHING has to be done. So the master plan is meaningless for the current situation. If the city wanted to fix the issue, they could do so today; if they were genuine about the master plan, that means they would address the problem in 2024or 2025 which is wait too long to fix a very simple issue that very airport in the country has already done.

The last master plan was almost entirely based on CLE being a UA hub. Why would you expect anything from it to be implemented? It’s practically worthless now, and became worthless almost immediately after it was released when UA pulled the plug. A new plan, which will be geared toward CLE’s new emphasis on O&D traffic, can give the city proper guidance on what exactly needs to be built/fixed.
AGP ATL BCN BNA BOS CLE CLT DCA DEN FLG FLL FRA IAD IAH JAX LAX LGB MAD MCI MDW MKE MUC PHX RDU RSW SEA SJU SLC SNA TPA
 
ncflyer
Posts: 969
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 7:03 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 11, 2019 9:57 pm

Right on SgtBarone. The time to think big is with the upcoming master facility plan. And the time to let the public know what’s coming is today and tomorrow and the next day and the next day and the next day and so forth.

With hindsight, with the loss of the hub, it’s perhaps a bit of good luck that the last plan was incremental.

Judging by yesterday’s article on cleveland.com and a new one today on Crain’s the airport is catching on to the need for setting the public’s expectation, so I’m encouraged. The master plan is finally getting little tickler mentions in the articles.
 
ncflyer
Posts: 969
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 7:03 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 11, 2019 10:02 pm

Behind a paywall but here’s the Crains article.
https://www.crainscleveland.com/governm ... rop-policy

What stands out is that evidently Jackson Made the call and city council members are upset they weren’t informed until they read about it on cleveland.com.
 
ncflyer
Posts: 969
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 7:03 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 11, 2019 10:26 pm

https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2019/02 ... uncil.html

New PD article much more informative. Sounds like the shuttles— including offsite parking and hotels— will soon be dropping off at the terminal again until a ground transportation center is built. As you’ll see in the article, the all powerful CLeveland Clinic has spoken.
 
Robert1010
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2016 4:23 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:18 pm

Looks like G4 just announced CLE-BNA !
 
corn4ahead
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 2:29 am

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:28 pm

Robert1010 wrote:
Looks like G4 just announced CLE-BNA !


Meh, a new city would be nice. But an add is an add I guess.
 
Geowizical
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 10:49 am

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:35 pm

Cleveland.com article: https://www.cleveland.com/business/2019 ... ville.html

Nice to have another option to a city served by a single airline
CAK CLE CMH DTW LHR MCO ORD PHX RSW SFO YYZ ZRH
 
SgtBarone
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2017 6:20 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:56 pm

Nice seasonal add. Part of a 19 route announcement from this morning.
AGP ATL BCN BNA BOS CLE CLT DCA DEN FLG FLL FRA IAD IAH JAX LAX LGB MAD MCI MDW MKE MUC PHX RDU RSW SEA SJU SLC SNA TPA
 
highflier92660
Posts: 665
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 2:16 am

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:35 pm

ncflyer wrote:
Because every time the airport misses a chance to communicate to the citizens of NEO that Hopkins is in desperate need of a major overhaul (not another incremental project like the RNC project or a $3mm ground transportation center) to solve its myriad facility problems it is a lost opportunity. The last master facility plan only had design enhancements for the UA hub, and much/most of it was never implemented. IF I thought a KSU school of architecture design competition would get that discussion going amongst the community I’d be all for that too, but right now the master facility plan seems to be the best hope. Whatever it takes. Enough with the tweaks. Best I could tell from reading it, MCI used their master facility plan to accomplish what CLE needs to do— set the groundwork for change— which they are about to accomplish


Somewhere in the great hereafter, the late Joe Morbito who established Kent State University's School of Architecture probably agrees whole heartedly with your proposal. If there are enough like-minded airport advocates like you ncflyer, critical mass will be reached and a major overhaul of Cleveland Hopkins can go forward. As for Joseph F. Mobito, outside of his classroom at Taylor Hall he was not an Eero Saarinen. His crowning achievement was a Sparkle Market located near the university.
 
Robert1010
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2016 4:23 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 2:28 am

Anyone know about the AC Rogue 763 that came from ROC?
 
swacle
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 1:41 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 6:39 pm

Robert1010 wrote:
Anyone know about the AC Rogue 763 that came from ROC?


Did it actually land here? No record of it landing in ROC or departing CLE and it sure ain't on the ground here anywhere. Flightaware glitch? Maybe it picked up a reroute around weather?
Aircraft Flown: SF3 DH8 DH4 328 ERJ CRJ CR7 CR9 E70 E75 D9S M80 712 72S 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 739ER 752 318 319 32
 
Robert1010
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2016 4:23 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 6:55 pm

swacle wrote:
Robert1010 wrote:
Anyone know about the AC Rogue 763 that came from ROC?


Did it actually land here? No record of it landing in ROC or departing CLE and it sure ain't on the ground here anywhere. Flightaware glitch? Maybe it picked up a reroute around weather?

Probably right , was just going by this !



https://flightaware.com/live/flight/ROU ... /KROC/KCLE
 
swacle
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 1:41 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 8:03 pm

Robert1010 wrote:
swacle wrote:
Robert1010 wrote:
Anyone know about the AC Rogue 763 that came from ROC?


Did it actually land here? No record of it landing in ROC or departing CLE and it sure ain't on the ground here anywhere. Flightaware glitch? Maybe it picked up a reroute around weather?

Probably right , was just going by this !



https://flightaware.com/live/flight/ROU ... /KROC/KCLE


I saw that too, didnt see a departure so I was hoping it was still sitting on A but no luck.
Aircraft Flown: SF3 DH8 DH4 328 ERJ CRJ CR7 CR9 E70 E75 D9S M80 712 72S 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 739ER 752 318 319 32
 
User avatar
CLEguy
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 10:49 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Fri Feb 15, 2019 3:02 am

I heard Allegiant is resuming several routes to/from CLE that were suspended due to aircraft shortages, likely caused by the retirement of their MD-80s. Returning this week are JAX and SAV. Later this month PGD, PIE, SFB return.
 
User avatar
CLEguy
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 10:49 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:50 am

Looks like BKL operations declined 10.5% in 2018. CLE and CGF could certainly absorb the traffic. I have mixed feelings about closing BKL. Certainly it sits on prime real estate, although there is some talk that it might be difficult to build on. There are really no viable development plans for such a large swath of land; there is just no demand for such land in a stagnant/shrinking city like Cleveland. I could see it initially turned into a large park, but it certainly wouldn't be a very welcoming place for many months of the year. Not sure what the best solution might be.

https://www.clevescene.com/scene-and-he ... ao_WJZP6MU
 
ncflyer
Posts: 969
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 7:03 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 1:22 am

Everything the MetroParks touches turns to gold! Edgewater is brilliant.

Some of the stats in that article are mind blowing. 100,000 total movements in 2000, 34,000 in 2018? General aviation from 52,000 to 14,000 in that period? 38 take offs and landings a day. It’ll be even worse in a full year without LEBron.
 
greenair727
Posts: 1122
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 6:27 am

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:40 am

^Careful. That author is biased and out to close Burke. He has written other factually incorrect articles about Burke in the past that support his desire to close BKL. He reports the general aviation number ONLY. Yes, that has declined. But air taxi operations are up 25% in the years he uses for comparison: 2000 and 2018. And a single plane of up to 60 pax is certainly more pax than a 1-4 people in a general aviation aircraft. BKL had 8,876 air taxi operations in 2000 and had 11,095 in 2018. For context, it had 10,559 in 2016 and 9,983 in 2017, so over the past few years, the number is INCREASING. He also states that CGF could handle all of BKL's traffic, which, of course, is not possible given the short runway at the County. I'm surprised Scene ran such poor reporting.
 
fun2fly
Posts: 1396
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:44 am

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:44 am

Some things we know:

1) A good piece of BKL is able to be built on. See the existing terminal, corporate hangar, high school and past proposals (museum, outlet mall) that tell you there is land available. The rest could be a park (see #2).
2) As ncflyer states, give it to the Metro parks. They do turn things into Gold. Edgewater is the perfect example.
3) The city is broke, needs more police and the schools are terrible. Why not take the people and costs of running BKL to a better use?
4) A combo of CGF and CLE could easily handle this volume and lower the operating costs of both of those facilities making the region more competitive, spur growth and building most likely.

What we suspect:
1) BKL costs the city $ and is not a profit center.
2) CLE city does not want to lose the airshow.
3) No one in CLE ever saw what Mayor Daley did in Chicago. It CLE could get 1/8th of that development on it's lakefront, it would be a huge win.

The one thing the scene writer does point out properly, it would take 10 years and it will take different leadership with vision. And that my friends, is not a CLE strong suit. If you need full evidence of that, take a look at the "bridge connecting downtown to the lakefront" that's been on the drawing board for 10 years. If we can't build a pedestrian bridge that is mostly accepted as a good civic idea for the region, how in the world would CLE pull of a strategic, controversial plan to close BKL? The current mayor will undoubtedly pass this hot potato to another regime.
 
VetteDude
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 4:13 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 1:25 pm

fun2fly wrote:
Some things we know:

1) A good piece of BKL is able to be built on. See the existing terminal, corporate hangar, high school and past proposals (museum, outlet mall) that tell you there is land available. The rest could be a park (see #2).
2) As ncflyer states, give it to the Metro parks. They do turn things into Gold. Edgewater is the perfect example.
3) The city is broke, needs more police and the schools are terrible. Why not take the people and costs of running BKL to a better use?
4) A combo of CGF and CLE could easily handle this volume and lower the operating costs of both of those facilities making the region more competitive, spur growth and building most likely.

What we suspect:
1) BKL costs the city $ and is not a profit center.
2) CLE city does not want to lose the airshow.
3) No one in CLE ever saw what Mayor Daley did in Chicago. It CLE could get 1/8th of that development on it's lakefront, it would be a huge win.

The one thing the scene writer does point out properly, it would take 10 years and it will take different leadership with vision. And that my friends, is not a CLE strong suit. If you need full evidence of that, take a look at the "bridge connecting downtown to the lakefront" that's been on the drawing board for 10 years. If we can't build a pedestrian bridge that is mostly accepted as a good civic idea for the region, how in the world would CLE pull of a strategic, controversial plan to close BKL? The current mayor will undoubtedly pass this hot potato to another regime.


The city being broke and needing more police has nothing to do with Burke. In fact, the City just raised its income tax within the past 2 years, in order to better fund police and schools. They always want more, more, more, yet nothing changes when they get more.

Also, Burke is not some prime lakefront property. It's decently far from the core of downtown, and developing that land would take a lot more work than just closing the airport and slapping up some apartments on it. We are talking billions of dollars of infrastructure improvements and related developments to spread downtown over to that area. Not feasible in a city as poorly run as Cleveland. Let's finish the innerbelt project first - that's supposed to wrap up in what, 2035? In fact, that's so poorly managed that I doubt most people even know there is an innerbelt project.
 
Trk1
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:37 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:03 pm

Time to close Burke--use proceeds to fix Hopkins
 
fun2fly
Posts: 1396
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:44 am

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:25 pm

Trk1 wrote:
Time to close Burke--use proceeds to fix Hopkins



Maybe that's what the master plan will recommend? That would be a novel finding.
 
ncflyer
Posts: 969
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 7:03 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:40 pm

What I want more than anything is for the city/airport to be more forthcoming on the pros and cons of closing it. If they are lobbied heavily by the Clinic, let's say for organ transplant and patient transportation, be transparent, the public might find that compelling.

VetteDude, good point on the development costs, but a lakefront park of some kind, while not free, would be a heck of a lot cheaper than putting buildings, water lines, etc. on the property, no? Too bad CLE doesn't have the growth of a Denver, I've read they did a great job redeveloping Stapleton (if memory serves the company formerly known as Forest City played a big part in that).

All, in terms of the financial comments-- if I'm not mistaken, the airports have to stand alone financially. The city can't use airport proceeds to fund schools and police, nor can city taxes be used to fund the airport. I believe this is an FAA requirement of some kind, to prevent airports from being neglected and milked as cash cows. So if Burke is a financial drain, and it were to close, this would benefit Hopkins, which could use it. . . . .
 
masseybrown
Posts: 5243
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:40 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:02 pm

I’m not against Burke development, but I am against doing it now. First, it doesn't lose much money (less than $2 million?). Next, there are acres of property that can be more easily developed at much lower cost to the city all over town. Third, the FAA gets a big payoff if BKL closes. Fourth, the city would be giving it away today AND it would require a big infrastructure investment to lure a developer. MUCH better for the city to wait,let demand build, and Sell for lot more in maybe ten years.

Off topic, you can’t really call the city stagnant any more. Growth over the last two years has been just short of booming. It would not be surprising to see population growth for the MSA when the 2018 numbers come out next July. Industrial properties are being built ON SPEC this year - I can’t remember when that happened last. These are the best of times, not that you will ever hear it from the press or Jackson City Hall.
 
fun2fly
Posts: 1396
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:44 am

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:36 pm

masseybrown wrote:
Off topic, you can’t really call the city stagnant any more. Growth over the last two years has been just short of booming. It would not be surprising to see population growth for the MSA when the 2018 numbers come out next July. Industrial properties are being built ON SPEC this year - I can’t remember when that happened last. These are the best of times, not that you will ever hear it from the press or Jackson City Hall.


I agree with that wholeheartedly. Very few industrial/WH buildings in Cuyahoga greater than 100k sq. ft. available. Downtown building will be robust for at least 2 or 3 years as Playhouse Square, Metro Hospital, May Co, Q renovation, etc. lead the way. Enjoy it while it's here.

Here's another (far fetched) nugget that would significantly impact air travel: The NOACA is a regional planing group who has commissioned a study on the feasibility of a Hyperloop from Cleveland, OH to Chicago, IL in 30 minutes!!!

http://www.noaca.org/index.aspx?page=7596
 
User avatar
CLEguy
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 10:49 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:59 am

greenair727 wrote:
^Careful. That author is biased and out to close Burke. He has written other factually incorrect articles about Burke in the past that support his desire to close BKL. He reports the general aviation number ONLY. Yes, that has declined. But air taxi operations are up 25% in the years he uses for comparison: 2000 and 2018. And a single plane of up to 60 pax is certainly more pax than a 1-4 people in a general aviation aircraft. BKL had 8,876 air taxi operations in 2000 and had 11,095 in 2018. For context, it had 10,559 in 2016 and 9,983 in 2017, so over the past few years, the number is INCREASING. He also states that CGF could handle all of BKL's traffic, which, of course, is not possible given the short runway at the County. I'm surprised Scene ran such poor reporting.


The author may be biased, but I took a look at FAA air traffic statistics for NE Ohio's major airports. If you look at total operations, BKL certainly has seen a decline in movements. In fact, since 2000, they have declined by 36.1%. Surprisingly, during that same period, CLE has declined by 34.8% and CGF by 50.9%, while CAK is down by "only" 19.8%. This shows that the region has an abundance of airspace and airport capacity. Even if BKL were to close, most traffic could easily be accommodated by the other airports, with larger jets going to CLE or CAK, and smaller aircraft going to CGF.

Here's my spreadsheet, if you are interested in the details: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing
 
greenair727
Posts: 1122
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 6:27 am

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 1:44 am

^You are oversimplifying. Its not an arithmetic problem: Past: 100+40+30+25=195----but now 70+30+20+10=130====so since 195 is bigger than 130, you can close an airport. If someone is paying, say $5000 to fly from LGA /TET to BKL do you really think they would fly to CAK then spend more time in a car on I-77 to Downtown Cleveland than they did from NYC to CLE? The capacity at each airport is not equally tradable between airports. All the equipment at BKL cannot land at CGF and CAK is too far. If someone wanted to go to CAK or YNG, they would have flown there in the first place. Yes, it is true that CLE could--at current levels---handle all BKL traffic, but that's wishing ill on the region that we won't grow in population or economy AND that that is recognizing that CLE is a very different place with different demand than BKL.
 
ncflyer
Posts: 969
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 7:03 pm

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:55 am

Greenair I think your point would be more convincing if the traffic drop wasn’t so stark. No private business would lose that much demand and keep its capacity the same. The airfield capacity at Hopkins is greatly improved since 2000 to boot.
 
greenair727
Posts: 1122
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 6:27 am

Re: Cleveland Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:58 am

^But BKL is growing. Maybe not general aviation, but in passenger traffic, it is. As I said a few posts above:

"BKL had 8,876 air taxi operations in 2000 and had 11,095 in 2018. For context, it had 10,559 in 2016 and 9,983 in 2017, so over the past few years, the number is INCREASING."

Air taxis is any aircraft up to 60 pax---so all the Ultimate Air shuttles should be classified here.

"No private business would lose that much demand and keep its capacity the same." By that logic, we should have CAK closed, which costs more to operate than BKL and as CLE could certainly handle all that traffic.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 24Whiskey, 3AWM, 717atOGG, a/c dxer, a320fan, A330freak, Aab498, aerokiwi, airplaneboy, airportugal310, AndyEastMids, Arion640, Arniepie, ATA L1011, Aviation737, BaconButty, Baidu [Spider], baje427, bbcolo22, BH, bluestreak, bmibaby737, BoeingGuy, BojamDelta, Brandon757, bryanSE785, BTVB6Flyer, CALMSP, candidgoat, cbphoto, chidino, cokepopper, cop6369, CRJ200flyer, csavel, cylw, czpdx, dakota558, DarkKnight5, dash500, DC2002, dcajet, dfwjim1, DiamondFlyer, Dominion301, dopplerd, DrRumack, dtw9, Dupli, eamondzhang, edu2703, eidvm, ericloewe, evomutant, Exyxy, F9LASDEN, FA9295, Finn350, flightwriter, FlyingElvii, FLYKTPA, FX1816, GFB, haydenschool, hummingbird, IceAir778, Iemand91, ilovepabst, intothinair, intrepidflyer, Jack, JacksonAviation, JAmie2k9, JesseCasserly, jetblueguy22, Jetty, jgcotter, joeljack, jonnyclam123, jwvw89, kabq737, Kilopond, kyrone, lavalampluva, leader1, log0008, LUKAS10, maddogjt8d, MARSHAL1, masse1982, mattlino, mbmbos, MedFlyerArg85, mikezc128, mjzair, moyangmm, MrBretz, mugler, N383SW, NameOmitted, Newbiepilot, normie999, notconcerned, Pampot70, Pcoder, PG777, piciuuu, PJ01, PlaneBoo, PlanesNTrains, prebennorholm, propjock04, psimpson, reccephantoms, res77W, RmTrice, RollerRB211, RWRCAS, sabby, sandyb123, Scarebus34, Scorpio, shaneam12, Silver1SWA, Spacepope, SRQKEF, Stabilator, Stitch, SuseJ772, SWAFA27, THS214, timberwolf24, TNST3B, UARNO88, UppinhereP, USAirKid, usctrojan18, veeseeten, vigiliant, WeatherPilot, yeginleduc, YVRing and 856 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos