George Bush Intercontinental Airport (IAH)

[ToryGattis]

I think it's a cool idea, but United is in Chicago for more than just lease and tax incentive reasons. It gives them an edge being the "hometown airline" vs. American at O' Hare, where they both have major hubs. That's pretty valuable marketing, and it's why American's position keeps eroding there. United dominates IAH, so they wouldn't get much benefit as the hometown airline of Houston, which they sort of get by default anyway (and the Southwest competition is pretty much the same in both cities with Midway and Hobby).

If somehow through this bankruptcy American shuts down its Chicago hub (and I can't imagine it), then we might have more of a shot, but at that point United would expand O'Hare dramatically to take advantage of the American hub shutdown, and O'Hare would pass IAH to be their biggest hub (by far), so then you'd have to ask why they'd move their HQ from their largest hub to what would then be their 2nd largest hub?

[Houston19514]

I think it's a cool idea, but United is in Chicago for more than just lease and tax incentive reasons. It gives them an edge being the "hometown airline" vs. American at O' Hare, where they both have major hubs. That's pretty valuable marketing, and it's why American's position keeps eroding there. United dominates IAH, so they wouldn't get much benefit as the hometown airline of Houston, which they sort of get by default anyway (and the Southwest competition is pretty much the same in both cities with Midway and Hobby).

If somehow through this bankruptcy American shuts down its Chicago hub (and I can't imagine it), then we might have more of a shot, but at that point United would expand O'Hare dramatically to take advantage of the American hub shutdown, and O'Hare would pass IAH to be their biggest hub (by far), so then you'd have to ask why they'd move their HQ from their largest hub to what would then be their 2nd largest hub?

I'm not buying that there is that much benefit to being the "hometown airline" in the sense of having HQ in downtown Chicago. They could still market themselves as the hometown airline, just as Continental has done for years in the New York City market.

Any possible benefit pales in comparison to the negatives of adopting Chicago as the HQ. Major companies all over Illinois are trying or at least threatening to get out of Illinois and only staying in exchange for major state tax breaks at the very time the brain trust at United voluntarily chose Chicago as HQ without even getting anything from the state for it.

Putting the HQ in Chicago was a major screwup. I hope eventually they will correct that and move the HQ back to Houston. Unfortunately, by the time that might happen, much of the damage will have been done to the company and will be irreversible. Do any frequent fliers disagree that Continental service has gone downhill since the merger?

(and as you said in your last line, why would they not have their HQ at their largest hub? (Houston)

[ToryGattis]

United voluntarily chose Chicago as HQ without even getting anything from the state for it.

Cleverly, I believe both the City of Chicago and the State of Illinois had incentives in place with United for both the executive HQ and the operational HQ before the merger, and United would have lost those incentives if they moved either HQ out of Chicago. Chicago simply out-played Houston by locking United in before the merger. We could have done the same for CO, but we didn't. When I heard of the merger I hoped Houston could at least hold on to the operational HQ, but Chicago was smart enough to lock that in too before the merger announcement, knowing that was the bulk of the HQ jobs (as opposed to the executives). Houston has been luckier with companies like Exxon, where they keep a tiny HQ in DFW but the bulk of employees here.

I've heard the service has gone downhill, but I don't know how much that's related to the HQ decision.

[Houston19514]

Cleverly, I believe both the City of Chicago and the State of Illinois had incentives in place with United for both the executive HQ and the operational HQ before the merger, and United would have lost those incentives if they moved either HQ out of Chicago. Chicago simply out-played Houston by locking United in before the merger. We could have done the same for CO, but we didn't. When I heard of the merger I hoped Houston could at least hold on to the operational HQ, but Chicago was smart enough to lock that in too before the merger announcement, knowing that was the bulk of the HQ jobs (as opposed to the executives). Houston has been luckier with companies like Exxon, where they keep a tiny HQ in DFW but the bulk of employees here.

I've heard the service has gone downhill, but I don't know how much that's related to the HQ decision.

Yes, they had some incentives in place pre-merger to get them to move to downtown Chicago. While big money to you and me, it was pretty inconsequential when charting the long-term health of the company. Just the higher taxes and costs of doing business in Chicago more than offset any savings they would have given up by moving the HQ.

I believe the service going downhill in great part flows fom the HQ decision and overall handling of the merger. Put yourself in the place of a line employee working for an airline (Continental) that is widely acknowledged to have better service and a better operation than its "merger of equals" partner. Then you watch things unfold and everything you see makes it look not so much like a merger of equals but a whole lot like an acquisition of Continental by United.

The name of the new airline, the HQ of the new airline, all United. The bulk of management layoffs come from Continental's ranks, not United's. If one was trying to find a way to destroy the morale of the Continental employees, it would be hard to come up with a better plan. They should have adopted the United name and put the HQ and Operations center in Houston, thus strongly sending the signal to all employees that going forward, this company will be operated like Continental, NOT like United. Instead, they sent exactly the opposite message, not just to employees, but also to their customers and investors. Brain dead.

Edited December 22, 2011 by Houston19514

[editor]

Got this in the e-mail today:

-----------------

IAH Welcomes Cathay Pacific Airways Boeing 747-8 Freighter to Houston

HOUSTON, December 22– The newest addition to the Cathay Pacific Airways fleet – the Boeing 747-8 Freighter - marked a significant milestone as it touched down at George Bush Intercontinental Airport (IAH) in Houston this week. The airline’s first ever Boeing 747-8F aircraft landing in Texas will be a repeat performance as it is a dedicated aircraft on the cargo route network.

“I am thrilled to welcome Cathay Pacific’s 747-8F to Houston and the timely addition in the airline’s fleet signifies the importance and increasing volume of trade between Houston and Hong Kong,” said Mario C. Diaz, Director of the Houston Airport System. "Houston continues to be a vital international cargo hub in the global network thanks to the strength of the Texas economy as we connect local companies providing goods and services in the energy, medical and manufacturing sectors to emerging and expanding markets globally."

One of the keys to Houston’s success is its strategic geographical location in the Americas with excellent reach to Latin America and major markets in the United States, with 29 percent of all freight from Houston destined for Asia with a trade value of $3.5 billion annually. As the year draws to a close, the Houston Airport System expects it will set a new record for air cargo as Bush Intercontinental Airport is expected to handle more air cargo in 2011 than it has in any year since the airport opened in 1969.

The inaugural freighter flight carried oil and gas machinery and equipment from Houston in addition to commodities from across South America, including cherries from Santiago and flowers from Colombia that will be distributed across Asia.

“With its first-class operating economics, the Dash 8 freighters will help us provide even better value and service to our customers,” said Fred Ruggiero, Cathay Pacific’s vice president cargo Americas. “Four Dash 8 freighters have already joined the fleet and we will continue to take delivery in the coming year, demonstrating our commitment to the freighter market as it becomes the backbone of our cargo operations to and from North America.” he added.

Cathay Pacific is the first Asia Pacific airline to take delivery of the 747-8 Freighter, which features double-digit improvements in fuel burn and lower emissions and is 30 percent quieter than the 747-400 Freighter. Furthermore, the aircraft can hold 16 percent more revenue-generating cargo volume, which allows it to hold seven additional pallets of cargo. The upgrade will ensure that IAH will continue growing as a connection point and will allow Houston firms to thrive as they move goods overseas.

With the addition of the Boeing 747-8F aircraft, Cathay Pacific will operate a fleet of 21 wide-body freighters serving more than 40 destinations.

[new major on the block]

If I'm not mistaken I saw this plane today when I came back from my lunch break taxing by the cargo terminal about to leave.

[ricco67]

Here is a picture of some interesting demolition that I happen to catch. Made for an attention getting view, I had to circle around to get my camera ready.

[Houston19514]

Great pic Ricco!

[Pleak]

Cool pics.

Here are some neat details about the banjos being demolished.

Facts about this project:

• Bridge is 280 feet in length, 18 feet in width and 16 feet tall

• Structure was originally built in 1968

• The connector weighs about 1.7 million pounds

• Crews will cut the concrete structure and remove it in sections.

http://www.fly2houston.com/0/3919291/0/83280D83283/

[Pleak]

Houston Airports System has started including a monthly update on construction projects at the airports.

http://www.fly2houston.com/0/3919863/0/83280D83283/

There is a link to a .pdf at the bottom. It's has some pretty nice pics and timelines and some cool embedded videos of the IAH Terminal B construction.

[mfastx]

Very cool indeed. Love seeing the modernization of our infrastructure!

[Talbot]

Cool, thanks for sharing!

[gto250us]

Is United following through on their threat to cut back on the construction because they did not get their way with the Hobby International expansion issue? Or was that just a bunch of hot air and sour grapes?

[mfastx]

Is United following through on their threat to cut back on the construction because they did not get their way with the Hobby International expansion issue? Or was that just a bunch of hot air and sour grapes?

Don't think they're cutting back on construction, but they are definitely killing a lot of flights.

But those flights would have probably been killed anyways; United is just using Southwest as an excuse.

[Houston19514]

Is United following through on their threat to cut back on the construction because they did not get their way with the Hobby International expansion issue? Or was that just a bunch of hot air and sour grapes?

I don't think anything has been cut back, YET. The project has always been planned to be done in three phases, with phases 2 & 3 to be done not currently on a firm schedule. Phases 2 & 3 will only be done when traffic warrants.

[Houston19514]

I was just looking over the August Airport System traffic statistics

For the first 8 months of 2012, the numbers and percentages are:

Total traffic: 27,248,289, up a scant 0.11% from 2011.

Domestic: 21,191,871, down a scant 0.2% from 2011.

International: 6,124,882, up 1.1% from 2011.

The international traffic is broken down as follows:

Middle East: 4.1% of the international traffic. 251,844, down 8.3% from 2011.

Mexico: 33.2% of the international traffic. 2,033,291, down 4.4% from 2011.

Central/South America: 30.7% of the international traffic. 1,931,991, up 2.8% from 2011.

Europe: 16.6% of the international traffic. 1,017,658, no change from 2011.

Asia/Africa/Australia: 4.3% of the international traffic. 265,347, up 37% from 2011.

Canada: 10.2% of the international traffic. 624,751, up 10.5% from 2011.

[Sellanious Caesar]

From now to 2020, how much traffic increase should we be expecting at IAH?

It's no secret that either this year or the next Beijing will surpass Atlanta as the world's busiest airport but how's the future look for IAH? Are we going to start closing the gap between us and O'Hare/LAX or will it just remain the same?

[kylejack]

"None, because Southwest is going to steal all our international business and we're going to lay off a bunch of employees. :( "

-Continental

[Andrew Broadfoot]

"None, because Southwest is going to steal all our international business and we're going to lay off a bunch of employees. :( "

-Continental

Perhaps the earth is flat?

[Rail]

PEK isn't going to pass ATL within the next two years. Growth at PEK has slowed considerably with the Chinese economy.

[Specwriter]

I've heard no more talk lately about a third airport west of the city. Has anyone else heard anything? I was at IAH just last week for an international flight. The place is pretty empty at 4:30am (my departure) and at midnight (my return) but I can see how it would have trouble handling even a moderate increase in traffic. The whole complex just doesn't seem to be laid out efficiently.

I do most of my air travel inside the U.S. and almost all of that on Southwest. Hobby is much closer to my home and office anyway. If (when) Southwest begins international flights HOU will really get crowded.

[urban909]

I've heard no more talk lately about a third airport west of the city. Has anyone else heard anything?

With the amount of investments being made (i.e. Terminal B south redo), and ample land to expand at IAH, I doubt this will come to fruition anytime soon. As far as the international terminal goes, isn't there supposed to be a pier expansion with an additional 6 gates? It's listed on the capital improvements page as an active project.

I haven't been through Terminal D in awhile, but I think one of the biggest improvements they can do (if they hadn't already) is add an extra elevator or two in the waiting area.

Edited October 30, 2012 by urban909

[JLWM8609]

I've heard no more talk lately about a third airport west of the city. Has anyone else heard anything?

Are you referring to this airport?

http://www.houstonexecutiveairport.com/

[ToryGattis]

I've heard no more talk lately about a third airport west of the city. Has anyone else heard anything? I was at IAH just last week for an international flight. The place is pretty empty at 4:30am (my departure) and at midnight (my return) but I can see how it would have trouble handling even a moderate increase in traffic. The whole complex just doesn't seem to be laid out efficiently.

I do most of my air travel inside the U.S. and almost all of that on Southwest. Hobby is much closer to my home and office anyway. If (when) Southwest begins international flights HOU will really get crowded.

I believe the westside plan was killed a while back. Houston is fine for capacity for the foreseeable future. IAH actually has room for more runways, and the terminals can always be expanded. Yes, they are adding another pier to Terminal D (intl). IAH is also a big enough hub with enough destinations that a lot of our capacity growth may just be up-gauging existing flights to larger planes rather than a lot of new flights/destinations - so it will be more about handling people and parking than flights.

Consider that IAH has as many runways as Atlanta (5), the busiest airport in the world with 2x+ our annual passengers - so we can certainly grow IAH a long, long time within its existing footprint. Hobby is a little more gate constrained, but I think it should be able to handle any growth SWA or anybody else wants to throw at it for the next couple of decades, at least. Consider that San Diego is the 2nd-busiest single-runway airport in the world and handles 550 arrivals and departures/day. Hobby is about half that with 3 runways (albeit crossing ones, which is more limiting) - so it has room to grow capacity.

Edited October 30, 2012 by ToryGattis

[Andrew Broadfoot]

I agree both airports have the ability to add capacity for the foreseeable future. Down at HOU I would be interested in seeing if they could some how have two 7,600ft 12's where they can launch and receive simultaneously. Albeit, most airlines like to land 04 for that easy off to the terminal.

[ToryGattis]

I agree both airports have the ability to add capacity for the foreseeable future. Down at HOU I would be interested in seeing if they could some how have two 7,600ft 12's where they can launch and receive simultaneously. Albeit, most airlines like to land 04 for that easy off to the terminal.

12L and R look too close together for that, but I'm wondering if they could use 12R for landing and extend 17 south for southbound takeoffs, with the planes starting south of the 12R intersection so the routes don't cross?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cb/KHOU_airport_diagram.pdf

[Houston19514]

I believe Tory is correct about the Westside airport having been killed.

In addition to the number of runways at IAH as stated by Tory, IAH is one of the few airports n in the US that can handle 3 simultaneous landings/arrival streams in low visibility (IFR) conditions (Atlanta cannot). Further, there are plans to add 2 additional runways at IAH (I think they have started the land acquisition and environmental recipient for the first of those.)

[Andrew Broadfoot]

12L and R look too close together for that, but I'm wondering if they could use 12R for landing and extend 17 south for southbound takeoffs, with the planes starting south of the 12R intersection so the routes don't cross?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cb/KHOU_airport_diagram.pdf

A while back the city took the Larson hangar back to presumably level it for additional safety area by 12r but I agree, they would need to reconstruct both runways with adequate separation but wouldn't work unless they we're able to buy some adjacent property up and possibly move a road or two. They had also proposed adding an additional 1000ft to 17/35 but who knows. Every once and a while WN will take 17/35 but only if the wind is out of the north and at a good clip. CO used to use it to land and takeoff their 735's now and then for mx. Edited October 31, 2012 by Andrew Broadfoot

[SkylineView]

There is a comprehensive report available on the future of IAH, with plans for additional runways, and a complete re-organization of the terminals. The report is a few years old, but provides all the forward estimates and build out materials your heart could desire. Obviously, the down-turn has had an impact, so if you want to be conservative, just add five years to any projection.

(One link... http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/_GeneralPlan/cohPlans.html)

[ToryGattis]

There is a comprehensive report available on the future of IAH, with plans for additional runways, and a complete re-organization of the terminals. The report is a few years old, but provides all the forward estimates and build out materials your heart could desire. Obviously, the down-turn has had an impact, so if you want to be conservative, just add five years to any projection.

(One link... http://www.houstontx...n/cohPlans.html)

I asked them about that IAH terminal reorg at a recent HGAC event, and he said they've (wisely) scrapped that plan. Not only was it potentially astronomically expensive, unneeded, and would create massive parking jams with a single pickup and dropoff point (my main concern), but he said it would be almost impossible to do while keeping the airport actually running. They now see incremental terminal improvements and expansions for the foreseeable future.

The Hobby plan is way out of date now (2003!), and does not include the new international terminal.

http://www.fly2houston.com/about-master-plans