Jump to content
zaceman

Cleveland Hopkins International Airport

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said:

IMO, there are a several major challenges at CLE that precede the cost of terminal development:

1. Poor city ownership/management  - Yes, fixing this could  help begin to solve the other local issues you mentioned below.

2. Landlocked - IMO, this is part of the whole development thing. Around 2000 the city purchased land to extend runways. They could purchase land again to extend the airport assuming they got appropriate clearance for municipalities and authorities involved. With the former Ford acreage possibly coming back online as an electrical component factory, adding runway infrastructure to expand the airport and allow for a large scale Air Freight operation may make sense. 

3. Proximity to international hubs -  Will the increase in smaller commercial jets that can reach international destinations make International routes more feasible from CLE?

4. Local unwillingness to subsidize international routes - Agree, though it will be interesting to see what comes out of the talks the County and Sherwin-Williams will have as part of their new HQ. It was mentioned part of the incentives was to work on subsidizing International Routes. But once you get the routes will be airport have the infrastructure to handle them?

4. UAL control - When does their lease run out on Concourse D?

 

We've seen it time and time again. The City is incompetent when it comes to using its owned assets to help drive economic development (Hopkins/Burke Airports, Westside Market, etc.); the exception could be Public Square. Unless the County or State step in to assist, it flounders. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As mentioned, there are a lot of issues beyond developing new terminal facilities:

1. The City needs to privatize the airports, turn them over to the County or form a Public Airport Authority to manage them.

2. The City purchased land to the northeast and west for its last runway expansion, but within the city limits.  It needs land to the southwest and east, and that poses major domain challenges.

3. My understanding is that Airbus is introducing single-aisle long distance aircraft (A320XLR), but airlines won't operate them if their unprofitable. Can CLE fill premium and first class on those flights?  Can another WOW or Icelandair be successful operating deeply discounted international flights?

4. I thought SW-County negotiations were for improved air service out of CLE, which may or may not include subsidized international flights. Let's hope so.

5. It's unfortunate, but Concourse D and the signs prohibiting access on Concourse C are eyesores. As long as UAL can minimize competitor expansion and is adding millions annually to impoverished City coffers, there's no incentive for the City nor UAL to change the status quo.

6. If international service ramps up, the current archaic C&I/Security issues must be resolved.

Edited by Frmr CLEder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4.  The international service via WOW and Icelandair were subsidized.  It is unfortunate both airlines had issues that resulted in the cancellation of their service at CLE.  I am not sure if Continental's short lived international flights to London and Paris were subsidized.  

5. Concourse D lease run until 2029.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, skiwest said:

4.  The international service via WOW and Icelandair were subsidized.  It is unfortunate both airlines had issues that resulted in the cancellation of their service at CLE.  I am not sure if Continental's short lived international flights to London and Paris were subsidized.  

5. Concourse D lease run until 2029.

 

It would be great if the city could start planning for a new terminal that could incorporate Concourse D since it is still new, will be relatively unused and is offset some from the rest of the airport. Even if they decide to build just one long Terminal Concourse complex like Detroit. They could then just increase capacity by lengthening Concourse D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A new master plan for CLE is being worked on and will be completed next year.  It will be interesting to see if it incorporates Concourse D.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mov2Ohio said:

 

It would be great if the city could start planning for a new terminal that could incorporate Concourse D since it is still new, will be relatively unused and is offset some from the rest of the airport. Even if they decide to build just one long Terminal Concourse complex like Detroit. They could then just increase capacity by lengthening Concourse D.

It's a shame because Concourse D is the newest, most modern, open and airy of all of the concourses. Seeing it mothballed is such a shame.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Frmr CLEder said:

As mentioned, there are a lot of issues beyond developing new terminal facilities:

1. The City needs to privatize the airports, turn them over to the County or form a Public Airport Authority to manage them.

 

 

1. The City needs to privatize the airports... -- yes, let's turn re-investment in airside and terminal facilities into corporate profits instead for certain shareholders. 

2. ...turn them over to the County -- because the County has far more experience than the city in running a commercial airport---plus, why not rob the city of one its last final assets and give it to suburban control? Furthermore, the county is not corrupt AND incompetent.

3. ...form a Public Airport Authority....with the city in control, so whats the difference?

 

Instead of running from problems, we should FIX them.  Lots of crime in an area?  Just put everyone in prison or on 24/7 surveillance instead of improving education and social and after-school opportunities.  The problem is not that the city controls the airports--that's true in lots of cities--its the current leadership of the city.  Why change a structure AND hurt the city ("turn them over to the County") when you can just elect competent leadership every four years?  Why try to hurt the city instead, while pretending to help it?

  • Like 2
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Pugu said:

 

1. The City needs to privatize the airports... -- yes, let's turn re-investment in airside and terminal facilities into corporate profits instead for certain shareholders. 

2. ...turn them over to the County -- because the County has far more experience than the city in running a commercial airport---plus, why not rob the city of one its last final assets and give it to suburban control? Furthermore, the county is not corrupt AND incompetent.

3. ...form a Public Airport Authority....with the city in control, so whats the difference?

 

Instead of running from problems, we should FIX them.  Lots of crime in an area?  Just put everyone in prison or on 24/7 surveillance instead of improving education and social and after-school opportunities.  The problem is not that the city controls the airports--that's true in lots of cities--its the current leadership of the city.  Why change a structure AND hurt the city ("turn them over to the County") when you can just elect competent leadership every four years?  Why try to hurt the city instead, while pretending to help it?

 

100% agreed. I'm always mystified why the "run it like business" crowd always forgets to mention that most businesses fail.

 

Gee willikers, if it were that easy we could just have no government at all. 

 

 

Edited by Clefan98
  • Like 2
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

 

100% agreed. I'm always mystified why the "run it like business" crowd always forgets to mention that most businesses fail.

 

Gee willikers, if it were that easy we could just have no government at all. 

 

 

Well running it like a government has had mediocre to lackluster results over the last 30 years or more, so I would say some change is needed.

 

But anyway, my question was why is it so much more expensive to build what is essentially the same structure as a shopping mall? It must be the airport specific infrastructure, security, conveyors, controls, technology etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Well running it like a government has had mediocre to lackluster results over the last 30 years or more, so I would say some change is needed."

 

Words like mediocre and lackluster are putting it mildly; it's been disastrous. CLE was rated as the second worst medium-sized airport.

 

If the problem is (are) the administration (s), do something about it!

 

Meanwhile everyone on UO complains about the poor non-stop air service and lack of international flights. In case it's not readily apparent, continued support of the status quo will provide the same disastrous outcomes.

Edited by Frmr CLEder
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Clefan98 said:

 

100% agreed. I'm always mystified why the "run it like business" crowd always forgets to mention that most businesses fail.

 

Gee willikers, if it were that easy we could just have no government at all. 

 

 

Yeah, I get particularly annoyed when people think giving the airport to Cuyahoga County is some kind of magical and ideal solution even though the county has absolutely no experience AND has demonstrated itself to be both inept and corrupt, not to mention that doing so would be a very bad deal for the city. Yet people like to say it all the time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Pugu said:

 

Yeah, I get particularly annoyed when people think giving the airport to Cuyahoga County is some kind of magical and ideal solution even though the county has absolutely no experience AND has demonstrated itself to be both inept and corrupt, not to mention that doing so would be a very bad deal for the city. Yet people like to say it all the time.


I’d rather see it run like a municipal school district. A sort of autonomous entity within the city’s purview... but not really

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, YABO713 said:


I’d rather see it run like a municipal school district. A sort of autonomous entity within the city’s purview... but not really


I know it’s been said before...but I think turning Hopkins over to the Port of Cleveland to run would be the best thing to do. Like @YABO713 said...still government owned, but run by a board of directors appointed by the city and county.

 

I’m hoping the master plan mothballs existing everything and completely rebuilds the airport. After being in some of the newer airports in the US...it would be a tremendous shame to try and reuse anything here. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, YABO713 said:


I’d rather see it run like a municipal school district. A sort of autonomous entity within the city’s purview... but not really

Clearly, local government has been, and continues to be incompetent and inept when it comes to the management of CLE and BKL. While both are City assets, neither has realized their potential as an economic engine for the benefit of the city nor region.

 

If there's no change, you will continue to get what you have always gotten and what you continue to get.

Edited by Frmr CLEder
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Enginerd said:


I know it’s been said before...but I think turning Hopkins over to the Port of Cleveland to run would be the best thing to do. Like @YABO713 said...still government owned, but run by a board of directors appointed by the city and county.

 

I’m hoping the master plan mothballs existing everything and completely rebuilds the airport. After being in some of the newer airports in the US...it would be a tremendous shame to try and reuse anything here. 

 

I understand this desire, but I can't reconcile it with the cost.  I travel a lot and all I want out of an airport is plentiful seating, plentiful power outlets, clean bathrooms, and easy transportation options.  Hopkins is not that bad in my opinion and spending billions to get a marginal increase in comfort and passenger experience just doesn't seem worth it to me.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hootenany said:

 

I understand this desire, but I can't reconcile it with the cost.  I travel a lot and all I want out of an airport is plentiful seating, plentiful power outlets, clean bathrooms, and easy transportation options.  Hopkins is not that bad in my opinion and spending billions to get a marginal increase in comfort and passenger experience just doesn't seem worth it to me.


I understand the sentiment, but I wouldn’t say Hopkins has any of the things you’ve listed.
 

I am not pushing for the City to build the Taj Mahal of airports...but at the same time I think it’s okay to ask for an airport that the City and region’s residents are proud to have.

 

Someone can correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe all of the building costs would come from the grants, bonds, the airlines, landing fees and maybe passenger fees.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Enginerd said:


I understand the sentiment, but I wouldn’t say Hopkins has any of the things you’ve listed.
 

 

 

Yes it does. The airport is mostly fine. Get a few more direct flights, fix the rental car situation and move on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am hearing that United is further reducing its footprint at Hopkins. CLE will no longer be a base for regional jets.  Sounded like they won't originate or terminate (stay parked overnight) at CLE anymore and a reduction of ground crew hours. 

Edited by STRIVE2THRIVE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I understand the sentiment, but I wouldn’t say Hopkins has any of the things you’ve listed.
 

I am not pushing for the City to build the Taj Mahal."

 

Agreed. Whether for the NEO community or its visitors, CLE represents the city's front door.

 

Unfortunately, with dated and vacated concourses, antiquated C&I and limited direct flights, it doesn't provide the best first impression and maybe the City, the County and the citizenry are ok with that.

Edited by Frmr CLEder
  • Like 1
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said:

"I understand the sentiment, but I wouldn’t say Hopkins has any of the things you’ve listed.
 

I am not pushing for the City to build the Taj Mahal."

 

Agreed. Whether for the NEO community or its visitors, CLE represents the city's front door.

 

Unfortunately, with dated and vacated concourses, antiquated C&I and limited direct flights, it doesn't provide the best first impression and maybe the City, the County and the citizenry are ok with that.

 

I rarely have trouble finding direct flights to most of America when traveling out of Cleveland. I also get thru security in 20min or less 90% of the time. I don't care about anything else. I take the rapid, so neither parking nor rental cars are a big deal to me. I do recognize the current rental car situation isn't optimal.

 

Given the recent growth in passenger numbers and improvements on the J.D. Power customer service rankings, I'd say most travelers are in the same boat as I. The airport isn't as awful as you and a few others make it out to be.

Edited by Clefan98
  • Like 5
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hootenany said:

 

I understand this desire, but I can't reconcile it with the cost.  I travel a lot and all I want out of an airport is plentiful seating, plentiful power outlets, clean bathrooms, and easy transportation options.  Hopkins is not that bad in my opinion and spending billions to get a marginal increase in comfort and passenger experience just doesn't seem worth it to me.

Mostly agree. Hopkins is fine for a low-key second tier airport....but I'd like to see the cost-benefit of how investment could propel the economy for Northeast Ohio. 

 

Perhaps when the Sherwin Williams' issues are publicized that would give us all a better understanding of whether future expenditures are "reasonable." 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Enginerd said:

I’m hoping the master plan mothballs existing everything and completely rebuilds the airport. After being in some of the newer airports in the US...it would be a tremendous shame to try and reuse anything here. 

 

3 hours ago, Hootenany said:

I understand this desire, but I can't reconcile it with the cost.  I travel a lot and all I want out of an airport is plentiful seating, plentiful power outlets, clean bathrooms, and easy transportation options.  Hopkins is not that bad in my opinion and spending billions to get a marginal increase in comfort and passenger experience just doesn't seem worth it to me.

 

Here's my wish list for the new Hopkins Master Plan, based on fundamentally keeping the existing terminal:

- Construct new, additional arrival / departure terminal (including new baggage claim) between C and D, at the south / far end.

- Continue also using existing arrival terminal - I think it is pretty nice since the renovation

- Gut renovation of existing baggage claim

- Full renovation / replacement of security, also add new security in new terminal section.

- Redo D terminal so that at least one side can handle 737 / A320 sized jets (my understanding is that it currently cannot).  Realistically it probably needs to be both sides, with the trend away from regional jets.

- Complete rebuild of Concourse B, it is a dump.  Adding a nice, large, perpendicular gate area hall at the end would be good, similar to what they have in MKE's Southwest concourse.

- Widen and renovate Concourse C.  I think the main path with the long skylight is nice. Imagine if the current seating areas (runway side) were replaced with a parallel path of moving walkways (like in DTW), and then new seating areas, restrooms, and restaurants were built where the jetbridges currently are.  (The side with Great Lakes and Symon's could probably stay as it is.)

- I never go in Concourse A, I assume it also needs a lot of work or a complete rebuild.  Most important thing here is brand new, proper, modern customs & immigration.

- Extend the garage / orange lot walkway all the way across the orange lot and over the highway to a new Amtrak / commuter rail station

- New airport hotel and new, additional parking garage in the current location of the orange lot, also connected to the terminal per the above walkway, per @KJP renderings which have been posted a few times.

- More passenger protected area on walkway through existing garage. (Like the passenger bridges along Boston Logan's main garage.)

- New American Express Centurian lounge (or similar) near the current eating area.

 

Advantages to keeping current terminal and location:

- Costs less, probably much less, than brand new terminal

- Existing parking garage is fine, no need to rebuild

- RTA connection. Obviously it is primarily used by airport workers now, but if RTA properly supports ToD at stations the ridership could dramatically improve.

- The current main restaurant area is also quite reasonable for an airport this size.

 

And long term, as @MyTwoSense also suggested, bury 480 and Brookpark north of the airport, extend the main runway over them to the northeast, and therefore make it easier to support long distance service. 

 

Edited by Boomerang_Brian
added security renovation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

 

I rarely have trouble finding direct flights to most of America when traveling out of Cleveland. I also get thru security in 20min or less 90% of the time. I don't care about anything else. I take the rapid, so neither parking nor rental cars are a big deal to me.

The Rapid getting in and out of CLE is so great. 

 

 

Edited by surfohio
  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

 

 

Here's my wish list, based on fundamentally keeping the existing terminal:

- Construct new, additional arrival / departure terminal (including new baggage claim) between C and D, at the south / far end.

- Continue also using existing arrival terminal - I think it is pretty nice since the renovation

- Gut renovation of existing baggage claim

- Redo D terminal so that at least one side can handle 737 / A320 sized jets (my understanding is that it currently cannot).  Realistically it probably needs to be both sides, with the trend away from regional jets.

- Complete rebuild of Concourse B, it is a dump.  Adding a nice, large, perpendicular gate area hall at the end would be good, similar to what they have in MKE's Southwest concourse.

- Widen and renovate Concourse C.  I think the main path with the long skylight is nice. Imagine if the current seating areas (runway side) were replaced with a parallel path of moving walkways (like in DTW), and then new seating areas, restrooms, and restaurants were built where the jetbridges currently are.  (The side with Great Lakes and Symon's could probably stay as it is.)

- I never go in Concourse A, I assume it also needs a lot of work or a complete rebuild.  Most important thing here is brand new, proper, modern customs & immigration.

- Extend the garage / orange lot walkway all the way across the orange lot and over the highway to a new Amtrak / commuter rail station

- New airport hotel and new, additional parking garage in the current location of the orange lot, also connected to the terminal per the above walkway, per @KJP renderings which have been posted a few times.

- More passenger protected area on walkway through existing garage. (Like the passenger bridges along Boston Logan's main garage.)

- New American Express Centurian lounge (or similar) near the current eating area.

 

Advantages to keeping current terminal and location:

- Costs less, probably much less, than brand new terminal

- Existing parking garage is fine, no need to rebuild

- RTA connection. Obviously it is primarily used by airport workers now, but if RTA properly supports ToD at stations the ridership could dramatically improve.

- The current main restaurant area is also quite reasonable for an airport this size.

 

And long term, as @MyTwoSense also suggested, bury 480 and Brookpark north of the airport, extend the main runway over them to the northeast, and therefore make it easier to support long distance service. 

 

The only thing I would to this is move a rental car facility into the ground-floor of the existing short-term garage.   They could still use off-site location for budget rental firms and support for the terminal location.   

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, surfohio said:

The Rapid out of CLE is so great. 

 

 

 

Not so funny story. My gf and I took the w65th rapid last Friday morning to catch a flight to NYC for the weekend. My sister (who lives on w117th about .5mi north of the rapid station) opted for an uber that never showed due to winter weather/traffic on 90. Well, long story short - she didn't get to enjoy NYC last weekend.

ALWAYS TAKE THE RAPID, KIDS!

Edited by Clefan98
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

 

 

Here's my wish list, based on fundamentally keeping the existing terminal:

- Construct new, additional arrival / departure terminal (including new baggage claim) between C and D, at the south / far end.

- Continue also using existing arrival terminal - I think it is pretty nice since the renovation

- Gut renovation of existing baggage claim

- Full renovation / replacement of security, also add new security in new terminal section.

- Redo D terminal so that at least one side can handle 737 / A320 sized jets (my understanding is that it currently cannot).  Realistically it probably needs to be both sides, with the trend away from regional jets.

- Complete rebuild of Concourse B, it is a dump.  Adding a nice, large, perpendicular gate area hall at the end would be good, similar to what they have in MKE's Southwest concourse.

- Widen and renovate Concourse C.  I think the main path with the long skylight is nice. Imagine if the current seating areas (runway side) were replaced with a parallel path of moving walkways (like in DTW), and then new seating areas, restrooms, and restaurants were built where the jetbridges currently are.  (The side with Great Lakes and Symon's could probably stay as it is.)

- I never go in Concourse A, I assume it also needs a lot of work or a complete rebuild.  Most important thing here is brand new, proper, modern customs & immigration.

- Extend the garage / orange lot walkway all the way across the orange lot and over the highway to a new Amtrak / commuter rail station

- New airport hotel and new, additional parking garage in the current location of the orange lot, also connected to the terminal per the above walkway, per @KJP renderings which have been posted a few times.

- More passenger protected area on walkway through existing garage. (Like the passenger bridges along Boston Logan's main garage.)

- New American Express Centurian lounge (or similar) near the current eating area.

 

Advantages to keeping current terminal and location:

- Costs less, probably much less, than brand new terminal

- Existing parking garage is fine, no need to rebuild

- RTA connection. Obviously it is primarily used by airport workers now, but if RTA properly supports ToD at stations the ridership could dramatically improve.

- The current main restaurant area is also quite reasonable for an airport this size.

 

And long term, as @MyTwoSense also suggested, bury 480 and Brookpark north of the airport, extend the main runway over them to the northeast, and therefore make it easier to support long distance service. 

 

This sounds like a reasonable renovation plan.  Expanding the terminal to the south might spread out the congestion on the upper and lower roadways a bit and maybe even allow the shuttles to return.  I assume Concourse D would be directly connected to the expanded terminal rather than only via the tunnel to/from Concourse C.  Burying I-480 and Brookpark Road sounds nice, but it would be a costly undertaking which may not be justifiable for the limited amount of long distance service we can realistically expect at CLE.      

Edited by skiwest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, surfohio said:

The Rapid getting in and out of CLE is so great. 

 

 

I absolutely must agree.This is CLE's single greatest asset.

 

What is being done to market this asset? 

 

There are many busier and much larger airports that would love to have such an asset; some are spending billions of dollars to develop rail service. CLE has had it for decades.

 

How is CLE getting the most out of its Rapid asset?

Edited by Frmr CLEder
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said:

I absolutely must agree.This is CLE's single greatest asset.

 

Just as a point of reference, last night it cost me $20 to take Lyft home from SAN airport - a 6 mile trip. Public transportation would've cost $6 and would've taken ONE HOUR AND FORTY-FIVE MINUTES. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"I rarely have trouble finding direct flights to most of America when traveling out of Cleveland."

- Except for the airline hubs, including the 25 largest cities, you cannot get to most of America non-stop from Cleveland.

 

2 hours ago, Clefan98 said:

I do recognize the current rental car situation isn't optimal.

- Off-site rental cars are a nuisance, but appear to be pretty much the norm these days.

 

"improvements on the J.D. Power customer service rankings,"

- Any improvement is considerable when you're next to last. The only airport that was worse was LGA; that's not a notable position to be in.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said:

 Off-site rental cars are a nuisance, but appear to be pretty much the norm these days.

 

Not necessarily in airports the size of CLE.   And even in bigger airports, the transit time and connection is more direct than the roundabout trip on crap roads that the CLE buses have to make.  

 

To make the airport more competitive, there should be a state of the art rental car facility in the bottom floor(s) of the short term garage.   A new long term garage on the orange lot should be built for additional capacity for long/short term.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frmr CLEder said:

 

"I rarely have trouble finding direct flights to most of America when traveling out of Cleveland."

- Except for the airline hubs, including the 25 largest cities, you cannot get to most of America non-stop from Cleveland.

 

- Off-site rental cars are a nuisance, but appear to be pretty much the norm these days.

 

"improvements on the J.D. Power customer service rankings,"

- Any improvement is considerable when you're next to last. The only airport that was worse was LGA; that's not a notable position to be in.

 

Let it go, boomer. I stand by my original comments about Hopkins. It's a fine airport that's getting better each year. The numbers prove it.

  • Poison 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Clefan98 said:

 

Let it go, boomer. I stand by my original comments about Hopkins. It's a fine airport that's getting better each year. The numbers prove it.

No problem Milli!

 

If you guys are satisfied with mediocrity at best, so be it!

 

According to Ted Carter: local hurdles included "inferior air service to key markets," taxes and talent.

Edited by Frmr CLEder
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Clefan98 said:

 

Let it go, boomer. I stand by my original comments about Hopkins. It's a fine airport that's getting better each year. The numbers prove it.

The question though is, is it being leveraged to the max to increase not just the ease of travel, but also regional economic development? 

 

If you look at it like most look at the Greyhound Station then yes. But if you look at it and think about all the economic advantages having a better facility could bring, if done smartly, then no.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said:

Finally someone with some forethought recognizes the lost opportunities.


What lost opportunities are you referring to? 
 

It hasn't hindered Cleveland's recent ability to attract major national events, jobs and visitors to the city and region. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Clefan98 said:


What lost opportunities are you referring to? 
 

It hasn't hindered Cleveland's recent ability to attract major national events, jobs and visitors to the city and region. 

The opportunities refer to those lost over the last 40 years, or whenever Cleveland last had an airport competitive with the biggest business markets in the nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Mov2Ohio said:

The opportunities refer to those lost over the last 40 years, or whenever Cleveland last had an airport competitive with the biggest business markets in the nation.


Nice non answer

Edited by Clefan98
  • Poison 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Cleveland-Akron-Canton media market is/was the 15th largest in the country. Maybe it's 17th now.

 

Please show me in this list of airports where Cleveland ranks. Feel free to add in CAK to bump up the numbers, too......

 

https://www.faa.gov/airports/planning_capacity/passenger_allcargo_stats/passenger/media/cy18-commercial-service-enplanements.pdf

  • Like 3

"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frmr CLEder said:

No problem Milli!

 

If you guys are satisfied with mediocrity at best, so be it!

 

According to Ted Carter: local hurdles included "inferior air service to key markets," taxes and talent.

It sounds like the definition of mediocrity is subjective.  To you, mediocrity seems to be dated facilities and caring what people think about CLE when they get here.

 

 

to me, mediocrity is long lines, crappy and overwhelmed customer service and having to carve out an additional hour of my day with my family to get to my gate. And all the delays and runway lines

 

major hubs have advantages but I can leave shaker hts 75 minutes before wheels up and not waste a minute of my day

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...