Jump to content

T.F. Green Airport Developments

Frankie811

By Frankie811
in Rhode Island

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 690
  • Created
  • Last Reply
markOne Whistle-Stop

markOne

Posted
Posted

overall, this should be good in that it will cost less to build, effect less homes, and hopefully takes less time from start to finish (land acquisition is less) while still being able to provide a runway that serve the majority of airlines that would ever consider going nonstop to the west coast. All the while lessening the impact to Warwick and the anti-expansion folks.

How will this effect T.F. Green's attractiveness to international carriers like Ryanair?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
runawayjim Metropolis

runawayjim

Posted
Posted

How will this effect T.F. Green's attractiveness to international carriers like Ryanair?

that's my main concern. we're only talking a 605' difference here. with the lengths we're talking, that should be negligible.

however, i'm guessing that if we get the 8700' runway and the west coast flights really take off and green becomes a popular airport, i'm sure there will be another proposal to increase the length, and maybe the warwick residents will smarten up and vote avedesian out of office by then. :whistling:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RLucas83 Whistle-Stop

RLucas83

Posted
Posted

How will this effect T.F. Green's attractiveness to international carriers like Ryanair?

Winds going TO europe are favorable thanks to the jetstream, meaning that going overseas, is the equivelent of going to the west coast. Western europe is probably within reach now, on a select number of aircraft. Id venture to say the best we can currently do would be a 757 to Paris or Amsterdam or a 767 to London...under MOST conditions!.....T

he 787 should be able to out perform those. The longer runway would allow more aircraft to perform this task, and to places in Germany and perhaps Italy, though those are more of a 20-year term rather than an immediate concern, but still should be planned for.

PVD will not be adversely affecting in the long run, as long as the runway is longer than 8,500 ft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cotuit Megalopolis

Cotuit

Posted
Posted

Isn't Ryanair's proposal based on current runway conditions? There are no concrete plans to expand the runway (no timetable for completion), and even if there were it would take time to condemn the homes and build the runway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
runawayjim Metropolis

runawayjim

Posted
Posted

Isn't Ryanair's proposal based on current runway conditions? There are no concrete plans to expand the runway (no timetable for completion), and even if there were it would take time to condemn the homes and build the runway.

i think it is based on the current runway. i was just thinking for future growth beyond ryanair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RLucas83 Whistle-Stop

RLucas83

Posted
Posted

Isn't Ryanair's proposal based on current runway conditions? There are no concrete plans to expand the runway (no timetable for completion), and even if there were it would take time to condemn the homes and build the runway.

There is no way to tell for sure right now, because their plans are so vague. Virgin America also mentioned PVD as a future possible destination, but i believe their Airbus 319/320 cannot make it to San Francisco from the existing runway.

These airlines are looking solely at the market, airport infrastructure is usually the last time that comes up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
webbage Hamlet

webbage

Posted
Posted

Isn't Ryanair's proposal based on current runway conditions? There are no concrete plans to expand the runway (no timetable for completion), and even if there were it would take time to condemn the homes and build the runway.

Ryanair's international venture is just purely on paper right now, I'm sure they haven't investigated every single factor.

But Rick is right, the winds are in our favor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lone Ranger Burg

Lone Ranger

Posted
Posted

Fascinating insert in the paper version of today's PBN heralding Warwick as "the city on the move" and urging people to visit the city's website and "move to Warwick" (note the URL when you click the link). The insert featured on its cover, among other things, a picture of a plane in flight and (strangely) an Acela express train.

And if you visit the website, you'll see a few introductory paragraphs: this is the same material that was featured on the insert's inside front cover.

Following that was a letter from the mayor talking up the city's business climate and overall quality of life. The mayor openly boasted about the city's suburban feel as a point positive, as directly opposed to that of an urban center. I found that to be unusual, inasmuch as he also boasted about the city's plans to boost green development in the future. Contradict yourself much, mayah?

Notably, the mayor failed to mention the airport, a fact I noted with cynical glee. Of course, the airport appeared prominently in several other places in the pamphlet, as it does at the city's website.

I didn't have the time to examine all the material in the insert. I'll have to buy my own copy for that, I guess. :rolleyes:

I'll let you know more when I have more to tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
runawayjim Metropolis

runawayjim

Posted
Posted

Fascinating insert in the paper version of today's PBN heralding Warwick as "the city on the move" and urging people to visit the city's website and "move to Warwick" (note the URL when you click the link).

interestingly enough (and i didn't even bother reading anything on the website... but the banner at the top has pics that are in rotation. there are 3 pics... the airport (which the mayor hates), some laboratory image, and... get this... a picture of 95 surrounded by trees. so it's somewhere south of warwick or at least south of exit 12. i found that funny and odd. come to warwick, we have a highway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
runawayjim Metropolis

runawayjim

Posted
Posted

Here, here! as the British would say.

It is somewaht at weird the way a suburb and its leaders want to claim it is their airport but ignore that fact that it serves th Providence Metro - and beyond - that they are simply a part of.

The RIAC and the Governor, and really Cicilline need to act to end theis silliness - it is embarrassingly "small town" mentality.

i think warwick isn't overly happy that they don't have a ton of say in the airport because it's a state airport. if need be, i think the state can just tell warwick that it's taking the homes by eminent domain and not give warwick any say. that's not how it should be done, but i'm pretty sure it can be done if necessary.

i also think the governor helps with the "small town" mentality and cicilline is fighting an uphill battle with that. warwick wants itself to be this small suburb and wants the airport all to itself, but the problem is, the airport is called providence airport for a reason. that reason being that it serves the metro, not just warwick. avedesian also seems perfectly happy with the status quo and not getting anymore economic development in warwick, which the longer runways would bring. sure, it'd take some homes, but the good it'd bring would be far greater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cotuit Megalopolis

Cotuit

Posted
Posted

Cicilline isn't going to say anything to get the people in the state's second largest city mad at him ahead of the 2010 elections. Cicilline and Avedisian are both hoping to see the bulldozers roll before 2010 so that they can both blame Carcieri when the sh*t hits the fan. If Avedesian runs for/gets elected Governor (or Senator, or Rep) he knows he's going to have to change his tune on this. I wouldn't be surprised to see Carcieri work to get this going so that he can shift the blame away from Avedisian (even though I don't think they like each other much) and give his party a leg up in 2010.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
runawayjim Metropolis

runawayjim

Posted
Posted

Cicilline isn't going to say anything to get the people in the state's second largest city mad at him ahead of the 2010 elections. Cicilline and Avedisian are both hoping to see the bulldozers roll before 2010 so that they can both blame Carcieri when the sh*t hits the fan. If Avedesian runs for/gets elected Governor (or Senator, or Rep) he knows he's going to have to change his tune on this. I wouldn't be surprised to see Carcieri work to get this going so that he can shift the blame away from Avedisian (even though I don't think they like each other much) and give his party a leg up in 2010.

man i hate politics... and god help us of avedesian gets elected governor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mod134 Whistle-Stop

mod134

Posted
Posted

I agree. Governor Avedesian makes me cringe at the notion of former Senator Chaffee making a run in 2010 as well.

The airport needs to grow. What land gets taken and is best to limit the homes, businesses, environmental/wetlands protection, etc. Thats all well and good. However, prolonging the inevitable here is costing the state $ here. Logan and Manchester airports aren't going anywhere. We either keep pace or try and beat the airports in the market where we can, or we are left to limit an important economic engine by not keeping up with demand.

People know the airport is there when they decide where to love or build their business/home, so I don't have as much sympathy for that. For those who will have an expanded airport in their backyard, I empathize with that. Regardless, the politicians need to get to work on this important issue for their "employers" and to those whom they are accountable for: Rhode Islanders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
misterchlo Unincorporated Area

misterchlo

Posted
Posted

Here, here! as the British would say.

It is somewaht at weird the way a suburb and its leaders want to claim it is their airport but ignore that fact that it serves th Providence Metro - and beyond - that they are simply a part of.

The Warwick mayor sounds like a ridiculous small town mayor when he tries to make claim that you have landed in Warwick (don't believe this Providence airport nonsense!). How many airports are actually outside of the city limits of the city at the center of the metro they serve? Cincinnati's airport is not even in Ohio, its in Kentucky. Warwick is a large sleepy suburb that wouldn't exist if Providence hadn't created the wealth that created those suburbs. He wants to claim it and at the same time stifle its growth ??!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CtownMikey Burg

CtownMikey

Posted
Posted

And my original reason for posting here:

http://www.pbn.com/stories/25791.html

Peter Pan is adding trips to TF Green from downtown. But who the hell in their right mind would pay $22 for that 10 minute round trip?! I could get a cab or have any friend at nearly any time of the day drive me for much less..

A cab ride from downtown to my house (right off of exit 16 or take rt 10 to the reservoir exit) is 25 bucks if ur an okay tipper.

I'm guessing to the airport with no traffic is about 40 at least.

and this is one way.. not a round trip :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
runawayjim Metropolis

runawayjim

Posted
Posted

$22 round trip on a bus that goes direct (so long as it's frequent enough or timed with the flight times) is a pretty good deal. cabs from providence to the airport or vice versa are at least $20 one way.

however, i think RIPTA has an airport express bus from KP... that's $1.50 one way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.