Design a Better Airport

[whighlander]

Expanding TF Green or Manchester and running some sort of transportation between them would be a simpler solution than expanding Hanscom (not to mention building an entirely new airport in the middle of the harbor). The distances between either are closer (~1 hr) than between Heathrow/Gatwick (~2hrs), so it's not an entirely unworkable solution.

Uground -- the Greater Boston Region which encompasses Eastern MA, RI and southern NH has its 3 airports and they are ideally situated -- car-less connectivity between them could be improved though it is already not bad:
1) TF Green to/from Logan -- will soon be under 2 hours via CR to Green & SilverLine to Logan
2) Manchester to/from Logan -- less than 2 hours (ideally) via the shuttle to/from Anderson in Woburn and then the Logan Express Bus -- somewhat longer taking CR from Anderson and then Orange to Blue to Airport Station and shuttle to terminal

If there is a need for another airport its in Northeast corner of the region -- right where Pease is located -- non-car access could be accommodated by providing a Porthsmouth stop on the Downeaster / Haverhill CR

Logan should be the hub airport for international flights, long haul domestic and high value air freight with a smattering of the shorter flights to accommodate the people living / working close in

Hanscom and Worcester should be high value general aviation with some limited air freight and some very limited commuter flights to near by destinations

 

[underground]

Why are you addressing that to me? I said what you said, except the times are shorter than you're estimating (take a look at gmaps).

 

[whighlander]

Why are you addressing that to me? I said what you said, except the times are shorter than you're estimating (take a look at gmaps).

Uground -- you are right it should have gone up the chain to the person to whom your reply was directed

But as to the estimated times -- to get a realistic estimate as to "how close you can cut it" in changing flights at different airports -- you've got to include the worst-case cycle waiting time -- not the expected value

Thus if the schedule says that you will arrive at 10:15 and the next departure is 10:30 followed by the one at 11:00 -- you would expect a 15 minute wait for the next departure -- but for planning purposes you had better assume you will miss 10:30 and hence the next segment will begin at 11:00

The more segments are involved the greater the probability of missing at least one optimum connection -- that's why I used the conservative numbers in my estimates -- of course everything might click and you'd then have time for a beer and a newspaper

 

[tocoto]

The biggest problem with the 3 airport system around Boston is that Logan runways are a bit too short. The easiest solution would be to increase 33L and 4R to >11,000 feet. Use existing land or else build a causeway.

 

[Digital_Islandboy]

The biggest problem with the 3 airport system around Boston is that Logan runways are a bit too short. The easiest solution would be to increase 33L and 4R to >11,000 feet. Use existing land or else build a causeway.

Thought: Would the long time shellfish harvesting community that work along the mud flats approve?


This link will give you some idea of what the other 'beasts' in the business are working with.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest_runways

If Boston were going to do this, I'd suggest a land reclamation now out to say another mile (5000 feet) to allow for feature expansion and move some of the buried shellfish, clams, shrimp etc. out to the new shoreline so they can begin to populate. It could give shellfish stocks about 5 solid years or so to begin to get used to that new habitat.

 

[choo]

With new, efficient planes able to economically connect Boston to Asia, the Middle East and any other city doing significant business with Boston in the world, is this really worth it?
We already have 747s that fly to Europe, hopefully we can accommodate A380s doing the same.

The real question is, what is the marginal opportunity opened up by this giant investment? Would it just be more seats to the same destinations? or Would you really all of the sudden see 747s and A380s flying to Seoul, Beijing, Shanghai, Dubai, Moscow, Rio, Sao Paolo, and Cape Town? Could Boston really support and attract all that additional capacity and destinations with direct point to point service?

 

[omaja]

^ The short answer: no. The Boston market will have to grow significantly to see non-stop service to all of those destinations with the exceptions of Seoul and Dubai, with or without the 787.

 

[BostonUrbEx]

The future is VTOL. We must build a launching pad.

 

[whighlander]

Thought: Would the long time shellfish harvesting community that work along the mud flats approve?


This link will give you some idea of what the other 'beasts' in the business are working with.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest_runways

If Boston were going to do this, I'd suggest a land reclamation now out to say another mile (5000 feet) to allow for feature expansion and move some of the buried shellfish, clams, shrimp etc. out to the new shoreline so they can begin to populate. It could give shellfish stocks about 5 solid years or so to begin to get used to that new habitat.

DigIs -- i think two 11,000 foot runways (1 operating at a time depending on winds) (4R/22L, 15R/33L) is sufficient to handle the rare biggest heavies taking off -- this could be done in the same way as one of the the safety extension is being done by building piers -- which just might improve the shelfish environment?

from the Globe story
http://articles.boston.com/2011-08-22/news/29915532_1_runway-safety-longest-runway-eelgrass

The undertaking, paid for mostly by federal grants and scheduled to be completed in 2013, will extend the existing runway [33L] safety area 400 feet on a hulking pier upheld by more than 300 concrete pylons that are being bored into the seabed.