Great Article

[Rico]

Man, you people love missing the point...

That being that EWR was a disaster until CAL moved in, and took a chance on it, and now it is very profitable for them.

The article made a big deal about runway constraints, and terminal facilites, of which EWR and PHL share many of the same issues.

But I am sorry if I got in the way of the love affair some of you have for the PIT airport.

 

[mweiss]

EWR wasn't a disaster because of runway constraints, or even terminal facilities.

CO didn't "move in." They had EWR from the time they acquired PE back in the Lorenzo days. However, since the company was based in Houston and the legacy management was Houston/Denver biased at the time, EWR was left to languish. It wasn't until Bethune took a hard look at the company's assets that CO started to take EWR seriously.

OTOH, PHL is a disaster as a hub because of runway constraints and terminal facilities. Suffice it to say that US would be far, far better off with EWR than with PHL.

 

[Rico]

PHL is a disaster as a hub because of runway constraints and terminal facilities.

What you said makes no sense, they have the same runway configuration. EWR has a little more ramp space, and parallel taxiways on the terminal side. Other than that, same deal.

The airport was underutilized until CAL ramped up ("moved in")perations there, and the terminals were a worse mess than PHL's until CAL and the Port Authority invested into them, and the airport was the last of the three in NYC that people would use, depite the fact that JFK was so far and hard to reach for so many.

Of couse U would be better off with a EWR hub than PHL, as today it is considered a great asset for CAL.

THE POINT is that despite what some mega-biased PIT reporter has to say, there is money to be made in PHL, but only if done right. It depends upon U doing what CAL did, and focusing upon whatever is necessary to make PHL run well. PitBull was right, it is a "make or break" thing for this company.

THE OTHER POINT is that U management would do well to study CAL's EWR example, and what AAL is doing in DFW and DAL in ATL. And most importantly, what SWA is doing in PHL to make their own operation work... Anything the company can do to mazimize what can be a profitable operation for U in PHL is key to our future.

 

[mweiss]

What you said makes no sense, they have the same runway configuration.

Except that they don't. They may be laid out similarly, but they're not the same.

First of all, EWR's 11/29 crosses the 4/22s at their thresholds. PHL's 17/35 crosses 9L/27R much further in than that. This changes the relative traffic patterns of the two.

Secondly, 11/29 is long enough to handle any RJ. 17/35 is not.

EWR has a little more ramp space, and parallel taxiways on the terminal side. Other than that, same deal.

You make it sound like those are insignificant differences.

THE POINT is that despite what some mega-biased PIT reporter has to say, there is money to be made in PHL, but only if done right.

There is also money to be made in PIT, but only if done right. Want proof? Take a look at what WN does there this year.

THE OTHER POINT is that U management would do well to study CAL's EWR example, and what AAL is doing in DFW and DAL in ATL.

[post="244793"][/post]​

Agreed. PHL can be made to work if it is rolled. It's still far from ideal, but far better than running PHL as a banked hub.