Capital projects

Status
Not open for further replies.

AirplaneFan

Advanced
Aug 20, 2002
174
0
Any thoughts on AA''s capital projects all around the country. At JFK, they are planning/building a 55-gate terminal .... does it handle RJ''s? Are projects being put on hold or scaled back?
 
Aug 19, 2002
1,062
737
The JFK
www.usaviation.com
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]
[P]Any thoughts on AA's capital projects all around the country. At JFK, they are planning/building a 55-gate terminal .... does it handle RJ's Are projects being put on hold or scaled back?[/P]
[P]----------------[/P]
[P][FONT size=1]Construction on the new terminal at Kennedy continues at a rapid pace, the first of the jet bridges on the Rock have been installed.The Rock is the term guys are using for the midfield section of the terminal.[/FONT][/P]
[P][FONT size=1]Out of the 56 gates, 20 of them are RJ compatible[/FONT][/P][/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]
 

JFK777

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
694
0
Just went to the miami airport where AA's super terminal is taking shape. AT JFK everything has been postponed for 35 years, bad economic times or not, that construction project needs to be finished as originally intended. At lax T4 should help too.
 
Aug 19, 2002
1,062
737
The JFK
www.usaviation.com
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 10/26/2002 8:24:27 PM JFK777 wrote:
[P]Just went to the miami airport where AA's super terminal is taking shape.  AT JFK everything has been postponed for 35 years, bad economic times or not, that construction project needs to be finished as originally intended.  At lax T4 should help too.  [/P]
[P]----------------[/P]
[P][FONT size=3]Postponed for 35 years? I think you mean 3-5 years and that is also incorrect also.[/FONT][/P]
[P][FONT size=3]If the work was postponed there wouldn't be scores of hard hats there every morning, nor would the equpiment companies leave those large cranes in place sitting idle for that length of time.[/FONT][/P]
[P][FONT size=3]Take it from me, I get to work at O Dark Thirty (Vacation Relief is Evil!) and there are NO outward signs to back up your claims that work has been postponed at JFK.[/FONT][/P]
[P][FONT size=3]Weekday mornings that job site is still quite busy with non stop convoys of contractor vehicles being escorted in and out with deliveries and hard hats swarming over it like ants at a picnic.[/FONT][/P]
[P][FONT size=3]As I mentioned in the post above, the first of the new jet bridges has been hung and there are half a dozen more adjacent to the Eagle ramp that are waiting to go up, and probably will be by the end of the week.[/FONT][/P]
[P][FONT size=3]Sharp looking bridges too, big blue Eagle on both sides.[/FONT][/P][/BLOCKQUOTE]
 
B

bagsmasher

Guest
I could be wrong, but I'll bet he meant that the facilities are so old, that the current project needs finished as soon as possible. I just hope it gets finished before we go out of business. Maybe JetBlue can take it over after that.
 

FlyAA777

Member
Aug 23, 2002
26
0
The project has not slowed down. In fact, it has been sped up. In operations, this is known as Crashing the project. It actually worked out cheaper to finish the work six months or so earlier than planned due to the construction overhead. In no way has this project slowed down, nor will it.
 

JFK777

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
694
0
Dear JFK Fleetservice,

I was referring to all new terminal construction at JFK. AA terminals are old, from the 1960's with upgrades , of course. I was speaking of all JFK. From 1970, when PAN AM and TWA built there terminals for 747's until terminal 1 in 1998, there was no all new terminal at JFK. As you know the old IAB was replaced by termial 4 and AA is replacing terminals 8 & 9 with an all new masterpiece of a terminal. Delta was going to replace the old Pan Am building they occupy, but I don't know the post 9/11 status of the building. UA was going to move to new part of what is now the TWA building, the face( the historic part is going to be preserved) and a new building built behind it.
JFK needs and is finally getting the upgrades is deserved years ago.
 

Winglet

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,377
15
www.usaviation.com
Those construction projects were already funded by bonds before the economic downturn. In a lot of ways, it makes sense to finish them. When the economy picks up again and the airlines get busy, American will be well positioned with new efficient terminals.
 

BeenThere

Member
Aug 26, 2002
89
0
I thought JFK's new AA terminal is 59 gates! Also, the entire project has been pushed back about 18 months. Some of the operation was to be moved to the the outer facility, Concourse C in Feb 03.The plan was to build a rampside elevated brige to get to this building because the tunnel would not be completed as well as the Main lobby. The logistics of moving people and baggage was quite expensive. AA determined that by just waiting till Jul 04, they could save $170 million dollars. Then the tunnel will be ready as will be the main lobby.
 

WingNaPrayer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,742
0
EYW
Visit site
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/27/2002 6:36:53 PM Winglet wrote:

Those construction projects were already funded by bonds before the economic downturn. In a lot of ways, it makes sense to finish them. When the economy picks up again and the airlines get busy, American will be well positioned with new efficient terminals.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Unfortunately, chances are somewhere between slim and none that such a thing will happen. They economy may pick up again (as soon as republicans are tossed out of the white house on their collective asses) but the airlines are never going to get as busy as they were in the latter half of the 1990s.

Rumor has it that some of the airlines are even now re-assessing the damages they did to themselves when they gave travel agents nationwide the finger, not to mention the droves of agencies that shoved the airline's reservation systems down their throats and headed out onto the free internet with cheap PCs where cruises, tours, hotels, rental cars and rail, not to mention international air carriers are still paying top comissions and faring much better than the airlines ever will again.

Meanwhile, the losses keep piling up and a good portion of those losses are due to the unwarranted snubbing of the very industry that built each and every airline - the travel agents, and what made it all even more of a slap in the face was that it only affected U.S. travel agents, the rest of the world's travel agents are still enjoying their commissions.

There is no reason to pursue any further construction projects because the industry is quite probably never going to need them again. With PAVs (personal air vehicles) a scant 20 years away or perhaps less, the air travel industry is going to end up seeing itself needing nothing more than props and the need for hubs will be a thing of the past.
 

Connected1

Senior
Aug 20, 2002
332
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/24/2002 11:57:51 PM AirplaneFan wrote:

Any thoughts on AA's capital projects all around the country. At JFK, they are planning/building a 55-gate terminal .... does it handle RJ's? Are projects being put on hold or scaled back?
----------------
[/blockquote]
Back to the topic at hand...

The bond-funded projects across the system continue as planned. This shouldn't be seen by anyone as recklessly spending money, however. The bonds that we sell have covenants that limit the scope of work that can be done with the money. In JFK's case, we can use the bond money to build a new terminal - not refurbish our existing terminal, nor fund our ongoing operations to avoid bankruptcy. Our choice is simple - build a new terminal or delay the project and let the money rot. A new terminal can't hurt us, so the decision is easy.

The projects there were to be funded by AA's own equity are the ones getting yanked or reduced. So, despite the number of projects you see happening across the system, you can rest assured that AA is saving every dime possible right now.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/28/2002 10:20:03 AM WingNaPrayer wrote:
Unfortunately, chances are somewhere between slim and none that such a thing will happen. They economy may pick up again (as soon as republicans are tossed out of the white house on their collective asses) but the airlines are never going to get as busy as they were in the latter half of the 1990s.
[/blockquote]

Oh, I don't know about that. People in the US like to spend money instead of save it for a rainy day, and I suspect that as the economy improves, traffic will be back. Yields and revenue are probably another story, though.

[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/28/2002 10:20:03 AM WingNaPrayer wrote:
There is no reason to pursue any further construction projects because the industry is quite probably never going to need them again. With PAVs (personal air vehicles) a scant 20 years away or perhaps less, the air travel industry is going to end up seeing itself needing nothing more than props and the need for hubs will be a thing of the past.

----------------
[/blockquote]

That's what people said 30 years ago... It also overlooks history. People said that air travel would eliminate the railroads and bus travel. Long-haul rail travel is pretty much dead, but intercity bus travel is still alive and well, as is short-haul rail.

In fact, if Greyhound were ranked like an airline, they'd be a major right. Around 8B RPMs and $1B in revenue annually. And, ridership continues to grow...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.