The tower of doom... I mean the new control tower

Update on the new FAA tower:  "Construction of the 324-foot tall tower started in 2011 and current projections call for it to be completed in 2015." It was originally scheduled to be complete in 2014, though that is not mentioned in the article.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/07/new_air_traffic_control_tower.html

Wow only 4 years.  You would think they are putting a revolving restaurant on top!  And $69 million--what a bargain!  I would think for that price we could build a 10 story building on the airport property, rent out the bottom 9 stories and give the top to the FAA!

$100 million in bonds? What in the world have they got planned?

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2013/09062013/index.php

 

City Planning Commission

Agenda for September 6, 2013

 

Ordinance No. 1113-13(Ward 3/Councilmember Cimperman and Ward 18/Councilmember Sweeney): Authorizing the issuance and sale by the city of airport system revenue bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) to pay costs of improving the airport system; authorizing supplemental indentures and other agreements related to the bonds; and authorizing and approving related matters.

^How much of that will be the new garage? 

 

 

EDIT: I guess parking is $24MM

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/05/cleveland_to_raze_long-term_ga.html

$100 million in bonds? What in the world have they got planned?

 

I truly hope its the new immigration facilities and not more runway SHORTENING projects. Little Austin, TX (with an air market much smaller than CLE's) just got a daily nonstop to London on BA, to begin this Spring (and supposedly without subsidies). They just finished new FIS (immigration) facilities at their airport. We need this a new FIS desperately....like NOW, or we will continue to lose out.

$100 million in bonds? What in the world have they got planned?

 

I truly hope its the new immigration facilities and not more runway SHORTENING projects. Little Austin, TX (with an air market much smaller than CLE's) just got a daily nonstop to London on BA, to begin this Spring (and supposedly without subsidies). They just finished new FIS (immigration) facilities at their airport. We need this a new FIS desperately....like NOW, or we will continue to lose out.

 

Apples to oranges.  Austin is also the state capitol of one of our largest states.  And I'm sure there's lots of oil business happening too.

 

A FIS would be easy with all the open space at Hopkins.  I'd rather they focus on the core business.

 

Now how about that $100 million control tower?

Austin is also the state capitol of one of our largest states.

 

So what? Since when does being a state capital matter? By that logic Albany (yes 2 hrs to NYC, but Austin is 2 hrs to Houston) should have direct flights to Europe.

 

I'd rather they focus on the core business.

 

If its not facilitating air service, just what is the core business of Hopkins?

Austin is also the state capitol of one of our largest states.

 

So what? Since when does being a state capital matter? By that logic Albany (yes 2 hrs to NYC, but Austin is 2 hrs to Houston) should have direct flights to Europe.

 

I'd rather they focus on the core business.

 

If its not facilitating air service, just what is the core business of Hopkins?

 

Exactly.  Hopkins core business is facilitating air service between CLE and as many points as possible.  While no subsidies have been stated, I've heard that local businesses have ponied up to guranty a certain amount of premium setas similar to AA's RDU-LHR service.  Also, While not direct subsidies, AUS could be giving AA some discount on airport fees associated with the service. 

Austin is also the state capitol of one of our largest states.

 

So what? Since when does being a state capital matter? By that logic Albany (yes 2 hrs to NYC, but Austin is 2 hrs to Houston) should have direct flights to Europe.

 

I'd rather they focus on the core business.

 

If its not facilitating air service, just what is the core business of Hopkins?

 

I don't think you're comparing fairly.  While Albany is the NY state capitol, everything is done in the defacto capitol (of the world) New York City.

 

I'm just theorizing that as the capitol of the 2nd most populous state in the USA, with an economy rooted in the oil business, that perhaps Austin is a desirable business destination for European travelers? 

 

 

Austin is also the state capitol of one of our largest states.

 

So what? Since when does being a state capital matter? By that logic Albany (yes 2 hrs to NYC, but Austin is 2 hrs to Houston) should have direct flights to Europe.

 

I'd rather they focus on the core business.

 

If its not facilitating air service, just what is the core business of Hopkins?

 

Exactly.  Hopkins core business is facilitating air service between CLE and as many points as possible.  While no subsidies have been stated, I've heard that local businesses have ponied up to guranty a certain amount of premium setas similar to AA's RDU-LHR service.  Also, While not direct subsidies, AUS could be giving AA some discount on airport fees associated with the service. 

 

But you have stated on this very forum many times that 70% of CLE's business is O&D.  If the CLE business community doesn't support it, then why waste time and resources on something that is just a marketing gimmick?

 

Right now I feel CLE is threatened by ORD just to the west, and we should continue to build on the O&D business that makes the United "hub" profitable.  If a flight to Europe made sense they would be doing it (and I would be a customer, by the way). 

$100 million in bonds? What in the world have they got planned?

 

I truly hope its the new immigration facilities and not more runway SHORTENING projects. Little Austin, TX (with an air market much smaller than CLE's) just got a daily nonstop to London on BA, to begin this Spring (and supposedly without subsidies). They just finished new FIS (immigration) facilities at their airport. We need this a new FIS desperately....like NOW, or we will continue to lose out.

 

Apples to oranges.  Austin is also the state capitol of one of our largest states.  And I'm sure there's lots of oil business happening too.

 

A FIS would be easy with all the open space at Hopkins.  I'd rather they focus on the core business.

 

Now how about that $100 million control tower?

 

 

Assuming you're talking about biggest in population, Ohio is one of our largest states as well. #ijs

$100 million in bonds? What in the world have they got planned?

 

I truly hope its the new immigration facilities and not more runway SHORTENING projects. Little Austin, TX (with an air market much smaller than CLE's) just got a daily nonstop to London on BA, to begin this Spring (and supposedly without subsidies). They just finished new FIS (immigration) facilities at their airport. We need this a new FIS desperately....like NOW, or we will continue to lose out.

 

Apples to oranges.  Austin is also the state capitol of one of our largest states.  And I'm sure there's lots of oil business happening too. 

 

A FIS would be easy with all the open space at Hopkins.  I'd rather they focus on the core business.

 

Now how about that $100 million control tower?

 

 

Assuming you're talking about biggest in population, Ohio is one of our largest states as well. #ijs

 

But in terms of international trade, Texas DWARFS Ohio. 

 

Look folks, I'm not trying to bash Ohio or Cleveland here.  I'm just trying to rationalize and speculate why Austin may have a non-stop to LHR.  I suspect there's oil in dem hills.

 

Looking at the latest census figures on exports, I suppose I may be on to something.  Ohio is ranked 9th on the list of exports, despite being 7th in population.    Year to date figure for Ohio is $29 billion vs Texas at $158 billion.  I'm sure BP could fill quite a few premium seats in trying to deal with regulators in Texas.

 

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/state/origin_movement/index.html

Austin is also the state capitol of one of our largest states.

 

So what? Since when does being a state capital matter? By that logic Albany (yes 2 hrs to NYC, but Austin is 2 hrs to Houston) should have direct flights to Europe.

 

I'd rather they focus on the core business.

 

If its not facilitating air service, just what is the core business of Hopkins?

 

Exactly.  Hopkins core business is facilitating air service between CLE and as many points as possible.  While no subsidies have been stated, I've heard that local businesses have ponied up to guranty a certain amount of premium setas similar to AA's RDU-LHR service.  Also, While not direct subsidies, AUS could be giving AA some discount on airport fees associated with the service. 

 

But you have stated on this very forum many times that 70% of CLE's business is O&D.  If the CLE business community doesn't support it, then why waste time and resources on something that is just a marketing gimmick?

 

Right now I feel CLE is threatened by ORD just to the west, and we should continue to build on the O&D business that makes the United "hub" profitable.  If a flight to Europe made sense they would be doing it (and I would be a customer, by the way). 

 

And I agree with you.  In fact the AUS-LHR service will be all O&D as AA does not offer connectivty thru AUS..  You are also right about the business community supporting the service.  As I said upthread, I've heard that the AUS business interests have essentially guaranteed a certain level of premium seats.  and the aiport itself could also sweeten the pot by alleviating the landing fees for this particular rout - and that's a nice chunk of change.  I've always been dismayed by the fact that Cleveland's business community never rallied behinf CAL's LGW service and later LHR service or that the city didn't waive certain fees for this service.

But in terms of international trade, Texas DWARFS Ohio.

 

Its called Mexico.

 

I'm sure BP could fill quite a few premium seats in trying to deal with regulators in Texas.

 

The 'oil city' in Texas is Houston, not Austin. Houston already has good service to the UK/Europe.

 

I would say Cleveland is a far better candidate for LHR service than is Austin. Austin just did a much better job of selling itself and organizing its business community to commit to seats, and CLE has been doing an absolutely lousy job selling itself for international service and getting business guarantees. After UA, BA was the likely carrier to target for CLE-LHR service. But BA goes for Austin instead? Ricky Smith & Co may be good at physical changes like the airmall or tearing down a garage, but they are doing a lousy job developing new international routes here. 

But in terms of international trade, Texas DWARFS Ohio.

 

Its called Mexico.

 

I'm sure BP could fill quite a few premium seats in trying to deal with regulators in Texas.

 

The 'oil city' in Texas is Houston, not Austin. Houston already has good service to the UK/Europe.

 

I would say Cleveland is a far better candidate for LHR service than is Austin. Austin just did a much better job of selling itself and organizing its business community to commit to seats, and CLE has been doing an absolutely lousy job selling itself for international service and getting business guarantees. After UA, BA was the likely carrier to target for CLE-LHR service. But BA goes for Austin instead? Ricky Smith & Co may be good at physical changes like the airmall or tearing down a garage, but they are doing a lousy job developing new international routes here. 

 

You're right about Houston being the oil city.  But in terms of regulators and bureaucrats, they are in Austin.  I'm I'm sure plenty of European oil folks have meetings about drilling platforms, licensing, shipbuilding permits, etc. right in Austin.

 

Then there's music--Austin has made itself into a hipster destination with little competition thanks to SXSW.   

 

Agree with you on Ricky Smith.  I wish they could also keep the toilet's functioning and clean, but that is an entirely different problem!

NEO (around 16th in population) - frustratingly - remains the biggest market in the country without a non-stop to Europe. Not something to be proud of... and something the business leaders/city have to start focusing on correcting.

 

The cities adjacent to NEO in population include DEN, MSP and SEA - all with good or great connections to Europe and Asia.

 

From my unscientific review, STL and SAC are the other top 25 markets without a non-stop to Europe.. . STL used to have non-stops on TWA (I took several) and Sacramento, with proximity to SFO - would seem less in a position to get or need one... PDX, CVG, PIT are all in the 23-26 range and all have one non-stop, it appears (we know CVG used to have many more) and CLT - right there in size with them - has an inordinate # of them. (The one that bugs more than any other is the Delta service to CDG from PIT...  That PIT trumps CLE - with a non-hub airline, no less- while UAL ignores the market - is of special irritation...)

 

Above 30th in market size - AUS, RDU and SLC all have a flight - and Las Vegas is unique...

 

 

 

 

^You have to look at location to.

 

Charlotte gets a lot because of its location. Basically on the eastern seaboard, which gives it an advantage on European bound flights and far enough south that gives it a good location for flights to South America.

 

While NEO is fairly large in population doesn't the determination on if a city will have have flights to a certain place ultimately come down to how profitable an airline thinks the service will be and what kind of facilities the origination airport has?

 

Remember Hopkins has inadequate customs facilities, the gates are too close for some of the larger wide bodied jets and I think the runways are too short for larger jets to take off without burning extra fuel. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I realize it's not all about population... there are many factors... and CLE airport is lacking in many of those you mention. However, CLE (the airport) and CLE (the area) need to figure out how to at least make the necessary changes to get in a position for the airport to attract the kinds of amenities (non-stops to Europe, adequate customs facilities) that cities of Cleveland's size, hub status and relative national importance (whether this is year 1913 or 2013) deserve.

 

If the airport can turn wasted space into the fairly-enticing retail and restaurant options it now has - then there's got to be a way, for instance, to tweak a few close-in C concourse gates into an areas capable of handing UNITED international flights... Even two or three gates - built out to the east, etc... could offer more seating, allow larger planes (and let's remember that many US-Europe flights are now routinely on 757s, etc... - not jumbos..) and could be attached to a C customs facility that feeds directly into baggage claim... Just because we have a narrow, dated C concourse, doesn't mean there isn't a way to renovate a small portion of it into more of what's needed...

 

If IND and SLC and others can build whole new terminals - without the flights that CLE has now- then why can't CLE figure out a way to do a more minor "international gateway" makeover... as noted above.

 

 

^I agree a renovation to make the concourses more modern and less dull and gray, runway extensions and a small international concourse with wider gates seem like they would be relatively inexpensive and doable upgrades. Maybe they are looking to see what United is going to do?

Well you can argue to eternity s to who should do what first - united or the city - but here are some things to consider in no particular order:

 

United has a superfortress hub at EWR.  Not only United, but many of its alliance partners serve EWR as well.  Same with IAD.  Same with ORD, tho most TATL pax use the two former.  United as EWR is a big economy of scale.  About 50% of any plane on any airline TATL is O&D.  That's a big revenue generator.  Also, slots to LHR cost alot money.  A flight fronm CLE to LHR might make money, but a flight fom EWR will make more.  It's easier to ferry connecting pax 450 miles to EWR or 300 miles to IAD and connect, especially if most of these pax are in the cheap seats.  And for the previous reasons, UAL didn't funnel connections thru CLE for TATL when the service was available.

 

While I've never been to the United lounge in CLE, my guess is that it lacks to sophistication that the one in EWR or IAD to say nothing of the lounges of its alliance partners - Lufthansa comes to mind or Singapore.  If you are paying 20 g's for first class, you expect the associated amenities both on the ground and in the air.  First class on a 757 does not equal first on a 767 or 777.  I think that when CLE had TATL alot of premium pax made connections rather than use the narrow body non-stop which also begs the question if the CLE business community ever embraced the service.  BAck in 2001 when UAL flew CLE-LGW, it asked the business community to step up or else they would reduce the service to seasonal.  They were met with silence.

 

FIS facility - need I say more.

 

The lack of partnership between UAL and the City.  At a time when EWR and IAD were being upgraded (CLE too). Rather than working with UAL, the City raised landing fees.  The extension of RWY 24L/5R to 11,500 ft never took place.

 

The AUS service to LHR will probably be 100% O&D.  One reason it may work is because AA and BA are in the same alliance.  But the service will succeed not because of AUS being the state capital or having a music scene - as i read upthread - but because the local business interests have stepped up the make the service work - much Like RDU.

 

If CLE wants to be a world class airport and attract like service, it had better male the necessary upgrades and the powers that be had better step up and make the service work.

Well you can argue to eternity s to who should do what first - united or the city - but here are some things to consider in no particular order:

 

United has a superfortress hub at EWR.  Not only United, but many of its alliance partners serve EWR as well.  Same with IAD.  Same with ORD, tho most TATL pax use the two former.  United as EWR is a big economy of scale.  About 50% of any plane on any airline TATL is O&D.  That's a big revenue generator.  Also, slots to LHR cost alot money.  A flight fronm CLE to LHR might make money, but a flight fom EWR will make more.  It's easier to ferry connecting pax 450 miles to EWR or 300 miles to IAD and connect, especially if most of these pax are in the cheap seats.  And for the previous reasons, UAL didn't funnel connections thru CLE for TATL when the service was available.

 

While I've never been to the United lounge in CLE, my guess is that it lacks to sophistication that the one in EWR or IAD to say nothing of the lounges of its alliance partners - Lufthansa comes to mind or Singapore.  If you are paying 20 g's for first class, you expect the associated amenities both on the ground and in the air.  First class on a 757 does not equal first on a 767 or 777.  I think that when CLE had TATL alot of premium pax made connections rather than use the narrow body non-stop which also begs the question if the CLE business community ever embraced the service.  BAck in 2001 when UAL flew CLE-LGW, it asked the business community to step up or else they would reduce the service to seasonal.  They were met with silence.

 

FIS facility - need I say more.

 

The lack of partnership between UAL and the City.  At a time when EWR and IAD were being upgraded (CLE too). Rather than working with UAL, the City raised landing fees.  The extension of RWY 24L/5R to 11,500 ft never took place.

 

The AUS service to LHR will probably be 100% O&D.  One reason it may work is because AA and BA are in the same alliance.  But the service will succeed not because of AUS being the state capital or having a music scene - as i read upthread - but because the local business interests have stepped up the make the service work - much Like RDU.

 

If CLE wants to be a world class airport and attract like service, it had better male the necessary upgrades and the powers that be had better step up and make the service work.

 

All very good points MD88.

 

BTW--the UAL lounge at CLE is really no better/worse than EWR, just a lot smaller.

I would have thought with Eaton's purchase of Cooper Industries last year that there would have been a push for a non-stop to Dublin.  They are technically headquartered there, although their real headquarters likely remain here, and I'm sure that Cooper has a good deal of mfg plants in that area.  Maybe Eaton is finally pushing this and making things happen?  The press release stated it should close around this time last year, but having been through a merger it usually takes an extra year or two before all the ripples have reached the shore.

I'd imagine the Cleveland business community has a diverse set of European destinations that they fly to. Having just one Heathrow flight might "look great" and be great PR, but if you're a business traveler heading to Paris or Frankfurt it does you no good. What's the benefit of choosing a 757 at only one time of day from CLE and then connect in Europe (assuming there's a good selection of flights on your carrier's alliance)? One could just as easily ferry over to EWR and have a plethora of options.

 

It's rather easy traveling trans Atlantic from Cleveland. You've got a multitude of one connection options that get you pretty much anywhere. Adding one trans Atlantic flight is only good for those who want to end up at the new flight's destination at the time the airline chooses. If you're going anywhere else, taking that flight doesn't seem too attractive. Don't forget that a faster than connecting option exists by driving 2 hrs to Detroit and taking one of their dozens of international nonstops to Asia, Europe, and South America. I've done this with ease on multiple occasions.

 

There are a handful of cities that have their sole trans Atlantic flight, and it likely works for them because their business market supports that city. The problem with CLE is finding the city and aircraft that the business community will support. You'll have the group that wants Rome, the group for London, Paris, Dublin, Frankfurt, and so forth. If their city isn't selected,  they won't bother with the flight.

I'm sure many of us have flown CLE-EWR. And I'm sure many of us have heard/seen the many international travelers aboard. Lots of families from all over the world -- but none seemed to be from predominantly one nation/region that I could tell from clothes, languages, accents, etc. However my last seemed to be filled with Irish business travelers bound to meet with Eaton execs and I sat next to a lady from the UK who was in town to do business with Eaton.

This debate regarding international flights to/from CLE to me brought out interesting points about our facilities.  I think PIT and Cincy have maintained a small number of international flights because of their more modern facilities.  Their business communities and populations are about the same as NEO.  These are airports that have lost their hubs and many flights, but they also offer more modern facilities than Hopkins can provide.  With that said I'm less concerned about us getting one flight to Europe as I am the condition of our facilities.  With so many major airports nearby CLE we're in competition for flights and services, and CLE is probably the airport with the oldest passenger facilities of similar size within several hundred miles.  Upgrades have been made over the years to the terminal, but at the end of the day we have a very old passenger facilities(except concourse d) that to me feels like it's nearing the end of its functional life. 

 

With that said what needs to happen to get a new terminal built?  If Indy can get this done I am sure we can make the case to the federal govt that our aging facilities need replaced and not continual band-aids.  I know this would be extremely difficult with such a tight footprint at Hopkins, to say nothing of costs, but I just don't see how the current terminal can continue on for another 20, 30, 40 years or more.  Knowing that a new terminal will take at least 10 years to plan and several more for construction, my thought is this is a serious discussion that needs to begin now to begin now.

But then you run into the issue of the downsizing of the airline industry. Does building a billion dollar terminal make financial sense when there's a possibility it won't even be needed. Look at Pittsburgh, St Louis and Cincinnati.

But then you run into the issue of the downsizing of the airline industry. Does building a billion dollar terminal make financial sense when there's a possibility it won't even be needed. Look at Pittsburgh, St Louis and Cincinnati.

 

I know, and that why I wonder if its at least worth a study.  Certainly they built to a capacity that no longer exists, but my understanding is the new terminal at Indy is right-sized for their current level of air service, with room to expand if ever needed.  I wonder if we can build in the same fashion.  A new terminal may even be smaller than the current one, but designed more efficiently and with modern amenities.

But then you run into the issue of the downsizing of the airline industry. Does building a billion dollar terminal make financial sense when there's a possibility it won't even be needed. Look at Pittsburgh, St Louis and Cincinnati.

 

I know, and that why I wonder if its at least worth a study.  Certainly they built to a capacity that no longer exists, but my understanding is the new terminal at Indy is right-sized for their current level of air service, with room to expand if ever needed.  I wonder if we can build in the same fashion.  A new terminal may even be smaller than the current one, but designed more efficiently and with modern amenities.

 

But CVG is still a hub.  According to DAL it's profitable and for now it's place seems secure.  Same with CLE.  As I've written a number of times, if CLE was unprofitable for CAL, CAl had plenty of opportunities to de-hub.  If, at the time of the merger, it was unprofitable, UAL would NOT have entered into an Agreement with the State of Ohio.  Despite the possibility that CLE or any City could be de-hubbed, at some point you have to step up and make the improvements.  Because if you don't, there are others who will.

Despite the possibility that CLE or any City could be de-hubbed, at some point you have to step up and make the improvements.  Because if you don't, there are others who will.

 

My point exactly.  CLE is surrounded by airports that have made larger terminal investments within the past 2 decades than we have, a fact that shows to both airlines and the traveling public.  Sadly I don't think a meaningful large scale redevelopment or replacement of our passenger facilities is even being discussed, which I think is a mistake moving forward.  I was surprised to read above that our gates and jetways are too close together to even accommodate larger planes for long haul flights.  That's just not acceptable for a city like Cleveland in the global economy.  I appreciate the improvements they've made to the existing facility, but at this point I think we've taken the current terminal as far as we can with updates without a major rebuild or complete replacement, and that's just to maintain adequate facilities for not only airlines but for the traveling public.

Anybody have a clue how you can keep Hopkins functional while building or seriously re-building the terminal/concourses into a more modern, more accommodating airport?

 

In PIT, IND and others - they've kept the old terminals running, while they built new, midfield terminals... and then switched off. A midfield terminal isn't possible with the lack of space between runways - and with the Hopkins footprint so small, there appears to be little/land to south (IX), west (NASA), east (237/factories) or north (480)..

 

Add to that the fact that abandoning newly-enough-built D concourse - and its connection with C- isn't likely - and you basically would have to rehab C by adding length - or at least width - and tweaking other aspects - while keeping everything running.

 

How can they expand?

Anybody have a clue how you can keep Hopkins functional while building or seriously re-building the terminal/concourses into a more modern, more accommodating airport?

 

In PIT, IND and others - they've kept the old terminals running, while they built new, midfield terminals... and then switched off. A midfield terminal isn't possible with the lack of space between runways - and with the Hopkins footprint so small, there appears to be little/land to south (IX), west (NASA), east (237/factories) or north (480)..

 

Add to that the fact that abandoning newly-enough-built D concourse - and its connection with C- isn't likely - and you basically would have to rehab C by adding length - or at least width - and tweaking other aspects - while keeping everything running.

 

How can they expand?

(tho

That's actually fairly easy.  Say you want to demolish Concourse A and rebuild it.  The airlines that use A could either lease space on other Concourses and double up with those airlines for a while; or, park their planes remotely on and bus pax to the planes (this is more common than you think). 

 

Concourses A and B plus the main terminal were all gutted and remodeled back in the late '70's without interruption of service.

 

BY THE WAY....

 

there's one more aspect to consider here:  How many of CLE's biz community have fractional ownership of long range biz-jets?  First class can be really expensive.  If you have 3 or 4 pax it can be cheaper to fly them in a biz jet.  And no TSA, baggage restrictions, a schedule set by the customer, choice of airports.....Fractional ownership may be a big competitor especially since there is a global provider based right in CLE and is about to get bigger.

I would hope Delta's CVG hub is profitable, with the second-highest airfares among the top 100 airports! Only Anchorage has higher average fares.

 

Even with the consolidations of airlines, routes and flights since 2007, air travel will continue. And that means having the safest, most comfortable and accessible airport for CLE. Maybe we don't need as much terminal or tarmac space as we did before? Maybe that will give us the freedom to build a new terminal next to the existing one, or to ultimately eliminate at three of the concourses for one super-concourse connected at one end to the tunnel to Concourse D?

With regards to hubs and such, here are some numbers to put things into perspective (based off Bureau of Transportation Statistics)

 

2012 stats:

 

CLE: 8.4 million passengers (HUB for United)

CVG: 5.6 million passengers (HUB for Delta)

CMH: 6.1 million passengers (not a hub)

CAK: 1.8 million passengers (not a hub)

DAY: 2.6 million passengers (not a hub)

 

Columbus isn't even a hub, but has more passengers than the Delta hub at CVG. Obviously, there's pull from CVG to Dayton and Louisville, but it puts things into perspective. Likewise CLE has some pull to Akron/Canton.

 

Austin, TX had 9.1 million passengers last year and it's not a hub. That shows you how there's a significant demand for air travel there despite the immediate metro area being smaller than the Cleveland MSA. The Austin airport is also only 75 miles from San Antonio's airport, which carried 7.6 million passengers last year (also not a hub). So, it's a bit easier to see how Austin is supporting this trans Atlantic flight. There's a huge growing economy there, with higher air travel demand, and it's super close to another rather large metro.

 

To put the CLE hub into perspective for other similarly sized metros (for the most part non touristy places):

 

2012 stats:

 

CLE: 8.4 million (Cleveland - hub for United)

 

IND: 7.0 million (Indianapolis - not a hub)

PIT: 7.6 million (Pittsburgh - not a hub)

SMF: 8.6 million (Sacramento - not a hub)

MCI: 9.5 million (Kansas City - not a hub)

STL: 12.2 million (St. Louis - not a hub - Southwest Focus City)

CLT: 37.2 million (Charlotte - hub for US Airways)

 

When you look at those numbers, it puts into perspective how small the hub is in Cleveland. With so much of it dependent on origin and destination traffic, if CLE was ever dehubbed, you wouldn't see a catastrophic drop in passenger levels like CVG or Memphis or Pittsburgh. Even Buffalo (non hub), with roughly half the population of the Cleveland area, had 5.1 million passengers last year. There's not much left that United could cut at CLE, without some other carrier coming in and adding capacity elsewhere. Of course, that might come at the expense of some destination eliminations in favor of larger aircraft to hubs (which tend to be the more popular destinations anyway).

 

With that said, CLE really needs to get its act together to build a new terminal/concourse. The new floors are kind of a joke. I happened to be at the airport for a flight one day when they were unveiling the new B concourse's floors. The mayor was there with a TV crew and dozens of staffers. They lifted off a sheet to show off the new floor. Everyone cheered. It was pathetic. Now, a few months later, you can't even tell those floors are new, they don't even look special.

 

It would be nice if they just started new with one large long concourse and keep a moving underground walkway to D. I could see something where they tear down A and start new. Then tear down B and extend A over some more. Then they could build to the immediate west of C, still allowing use of all the southern and eastern C gates. So once completed you'd have one large arc shaped concourse starting from the end of A now to the large circular end of C with a walkway under to D. I'm sure something like this would take several years, but considering there are plenty of gates at CLE, it could be done in stages. Otherwise, there's no other available space to just build new and transfer all operations on a set day to a midfield terminal like so many other cities have done.

 

 

EDIT: Sorry! Those numbers above are domestic flights. I forgot to add the int'l flights. For the Ohio airports, those passenger counts aren't terribly higher. You can tack on about 225k a year for CLE (regional jet flights to Montreal/Toronto and tourist Caribbean flights), 210K a year for CVG (half of those are to Paris), and 30k a year for CMH (a flight to Toronto).

 

Not surprising on Austin or Columbus.  As I tried to point up-thread, anytime you have a government center their is built-in traffic.  Corporate money going to visit government people and government people spending taxpayer money on airfares.  Win/win!

well, CLT is USAir's mega hub so that number is not surprising.  Yes, CMH has more pax than CVG but the yields from CMH are not high.  America West found that out.  Similarly for AUS, IND, DAY, etc.  Did CLE and CVG numbers include connecting pax?

 

Incidentally, CLE's O&D is now approx. 80% meaning approx 7.0MM of the 8.4MM were local and the remaining connecting.  This seems about right.

Cleveland Hopkins airport wins United's on-time STAR Award for 5th straight month

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Cleveland Hopkins International Airport may be the smallest of United Airlines' eight U.S. hubs, but it is trouncing its bigger and busier siblings for getting early-morning flights out on time.

 

For the fifth straight month, Cleveland's flight operations team beat its peers at Washington Dulles, San Francisco, Newark and other airports for getting United's first flights of the day on their way as scheduled.

 

"CLE" is inscribed on United's traveling STAR (Start The Airline Right) trophy on six of the 10 spots since November 2012, more than any other airport.

 

"The performance here is without a doubt the best, day in and day out, of all the hubs," said Charles Duncan, United's vice president at Chicago O'Hare International Airport, during a recent visit to Cleveland Hopkins.

"On every measure we look at, Cleveland is the best. Coming from O'Hare, we look on with envy."

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2013/09/cleveland_hopkins_airport_wins_uniteds_on-time_star_award_for_5th_straight_month.html

 

"On every measure we look at, Cleveland is the best. Coming from O'Hare, we look on with envy."

 

 

UNDERSTATEMENT of the year!  O'Hare is a disaster after the slightest little raindrop or wind gust!

Thought you'd enjoy this view of Hopkins' ticketing lobby in 1957 courtesy of a tweet by‏ @GoingPlacesCLE......

 

 

Cleveland Hopkins ‏@GoingPlacesCLE 9m

THROWBACK THURSDAY: Ticketing lobby 1957 #ThrowbackThursday pic.twitter.com/2QHxJZ75SH

^Great image!

If you could see a little farther down in that 1957 image, you would have seen ticketing desks for Allegheny Airlines, Mohawk Airlines, and Eastern Airlines

Actually, this is pretty much how it looked until the mid 70's.

I think one think that any discussion of number of passengers, routes, flights, etc needs to take into consideration is the impact that the advancement of affordable technology is having on how businesses do business. Five years ago I had preferred status on two carriers. Now, if I fly twice a quarter I am surprised. Meetings are teleconferences, presentations are via web, and home offices are the norm. Not that any of that is new. What is new is the number of businesses embracing that model because the cost of such technologies continues to decrease as does the need for businesses to fly people.

I hadn't paid attention much on recent flights--is that a SURFACE LOT going where the long term garage used to be? 

I hadn't paid attention much on recent flights--is that a SURFACE LOT going where the long term garage used to be?

 

Yep.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/05/cleveland_to_raze_long-term_ga.html

 

The second phase includes razing the long-term garage. A 1,000-space surface lot will be added when the long-term garage is torn down, and it will be built where the garage stood. The garage is expected to begin to be torn down in late June or early July. The new lot should be in place by Thanksgiving. The phase also includes updating the signs around the airport.

Cleveland Airport Mounts Rock Music Photo Exhibit

 

Visitors flying to Cleveland will be reminded right away that it's the home of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum.

 

Cleveland Hopkins International Airport has mounted a five-month exhibit of the rock music industry photographs taken during the 40-year career of Janet Macoska (mah-KAH'-skah).

 

Her works have been displayed at the rock hall and are a permanent fixture at the National Portrait Gallery in London and at Hard Rock Cafe restaurants and casinos around the world.

 

The rock hall presented a retrospective of her work in 2003 and 2004 and it has since been displayed in Dallas, Orlando and Toronto.

 

The airport exhibit will be on display in the public art gallery at the entrance to Concourse A until Feb. 28.

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/cleveland-airport-mounts-rock-music-photo-exhibit-20418789

So depending on who you are... this is either MAJOR news or ridiculous news BUT CLE will be getting TWO new Starbucks in the airport  :clap:

United is starting a daily nonstop to Charleston, SC in early March 2014.

Also, found liquor license last week for Sammy's Beach Bar (Sammy Hagar rum restaurant) - which is scheduled for concourse A also - just like one of the Starbucks.

"@FlyFrontier: Good news keeps coming! Today we are adding 3 new routes: Trenton-Cleveland on 2/13, Trenton-Indy on 4/29, & Trenton-Nashville on 4/30"