Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think I'd rather have direct flights to BWI over IAD, but I can understand IAD for international flights.
For a non-stop flight from CAE to BWI to happen, it would have to be someone like Southwest offering it (obvious choice since BWI is one of their hubs) or maybe Spirit?
Because if you look at all of the Delta, United, and American flights from BWI, they all go to those airline's respective hubs; so the odds of them offering a CAE-BWI flight, would be not very high.
United still offers good connectivity out of CAE via ORD and IAD. I wish they’d add EWR, but that’s unlikely at the moment. Between IAD and ORD, however, you can have one-stop connections to effectively anywhere United flies via CAE.
I'm a big proponent for EWR coming to CAE. Not only for international flights (I've found great prices in the past with EWR to ATH) but the amount of students from New Jersey that are enrolled at the University of South Carolina.
I found some demographics of the breakdown of students by state and New Jersey is ranked just behind North Carolina at #3. I'm not sure about the numerical value (270) but I even remember my dad who is class of '80 telling me about the abundance of NJ students at USC. So it's easy income for United if they offer this for the beginning of semesters, Thanksgiving and Christmas break.
I flew through Houston IAH recently (from BWI not CAE). It is a really nice airport, at least the terminal that I was in. I was on my way out to Colorado and had to opt to fly via Chicago or Houston.. I chose Houston because I didnt trust weather around Chicago.
I wonder how much demand there is for flying into Houston on United unless it is to connect to go further west.. Chicago seems more likely a better connection for Columbia and IAD as you indicated. I wished there were a direct flight from BWI to CAE.. but with direct flights to IAD, DCA and PHL I guess that area is fully covered. Plus, SWA would be the main airline to do that and we have already been down that road with them when they chose Greenville and Charleston smh
I agree, IAH was really nice from what I remember. For now CAE is holding pretty steady with the fallout of the pandemic but hopefully in the next 2 years or so we can see some flights like these start to happen.
On a slightly off topic note... I have noticed that CLT and BWI seem identical in their basic layout especially how their main concourse is laid out with a food court right behind the security counter and the ABCDE Concourses radiating out. CLT though has been upgraded and expanded with the remote runway, all the work around Concourse E and the new A wing compared to that BWI with the exception being the SWA concourse A. Traffic wise CLT seems way busier than BWI. I try to avoid SWA and use American followed by Delta when flying down to CAE from BWI and their footprint at BWI is really small with only a few gates.. Southwest and Spirt dominate the Airport.
At any rate, I did know if anyone new the history of both airports and why they seem very similar.. Maybe because they both were hubs for US Airways at one time and then they consolidated in CLT when they merged with American?
Traffic wise CLT seems way busier than BWI. I try to avoid SWA and use American followed by Delta when flying down to CAE from BWI and their footprint at BWI is really small with only a few gates.. Southwest and Spirt dominate the Airport.
The easiest explanation for why CLT is busier than BWI, is that for the Baltimore/DC/NOVA metroplex you have 3 airports (BWI, DCA, IAD) spread across the area to choose from, so none of them will ever be as large (traffic-wise) as CLT, but if you combine all three, then yes, they will service more passengers as compared to CLT.
As for the layout, I feel, at least in the US for the major airports/hubs, you either have the horseshoe/semi-circle layout (i.e. CLT, BWI, MSP, LAX, MIA, SFO) or the linear layout (i.e. ATL, DEN, SLC, IAD, DTW). Yes, there are some "hybrids" that combine both types of layouts as well (i.e. ORD).
The easiest explanation for why CLT is busier than BWI, is that for the Baltimore/DC/NOVA metroplex you have 3 airports (BWI, DCA, IAD) spread across the area to choose from, so none of them will ever be as large (traffic-wise) as CLT, but if you combine all three, then yes, they will service more passengers as compared to CLT.
BWI is Baltimore's primary airport and it also serves as a third airport for DC, so it would seem intuitive on the basis of population alone that BWI would be at least as busy as CLT which serviced 24M passengers in 2021. BWI was the busiest of three DC/Baltimore-area airports last year with 13.2M passengers compared to 11.9M for Dulles and 11.6M for Reagan. However, there are two factors that Charlotte has going for it that explains why it's busier than BWI: it's American's second-largest hub and it's much more of an important business center than Baltimore with quite a bit more corporate headquarters and critical corporate functions. Charlotte is also surrounded by several smaller but sizable cities that also heavily utilize CLT.
BWI is Baltimore's primary airport and it also serves as a third airport for DC, so it would seem intuitive on the basis of population alone that BWI would be at least as busy as CLT which serviced 24M passengers in 2021. BWI was the busiest of three DC/Baltimore-area airports last year with 13.2M passengers compared to 11.9M for Dulles and 11.6M for Reagan. However, there are two factors that Charlotte has going for it that explains why it's busier than BWI: it's American's second-largest hub and it's much more of an important business center than Baltimore with quite a bit more corporate headquarters and critical corporate functions. Charlotte is also surrounded by several smaller but sizable cities that also heavily utilize CLT.
I actually agree with Joe Taylor on this one. The decision here is "expand the pie" by increasing business visitors for conferences vs. "optimize what's there" by making infrastructural fixes that haven't happened (Cola Canal, Finlay Park, burying power lines, etc.). I buy that Columbia is missing out on conventions, but the convention center's annual loss is staggering and it's not clear that there's a plan to reduce it or get into the black without very optimistic growth.
Columbia could definitely use more tourism/convention money, but the convention center is not the only way to do that. Making Columbia a more attractive city would seem to be the better investment for attracting more tourism, residents, and business, which the city needs more than the other two.
I actually agree with Joe Taylor on this one. The decision here is "expand the pie" by increasing business visitors for conferences vs. "optimize what's there" by making infrastructural fixes that haven't happened (Cola Canal, Finlay Park, burying power lines, etc.). I buy that Columbia is missing out on conventions, but the convention center's annual loss is staggering and it's not clear that there's a plan to reduce it or get into the black without very optimistic growth.
Columbia could definitely use more tourism/convention money, but the convention center is not the only way to do that. Making Columbia a more attractive city would seem to be the better investment for attracting more tourism, residents, and business, which the city needs more than the other two.
I think you meant to reply to another thread. But after reading what Joe Taylor said, I see where he’s coming from and it’s hard to disagree. The thing is though, this opportunity with the convention center is fleeting. IF we were to pass up on the convention center would there be a push to get the aforementioned things done that Taylor mentioned? I would hate to turn down the convention center overhaul just to poke around for another several years till there’s any tangible movement on beautifying the city.
I think you meant to reply to another thread. But after reading what Joe Taylor said, I see where he’s coming from and it’s hard to disagree. The thing is though, this opportunity with the convention center is fleeting. IF we were to pass up on the convention center would there be a push to get the aforementioned things done that Taylor mentioned? I would hate to turn down the convention center overhaul just to poke around for another several years till there’s any tangible movement on beautifying the city.
Yeah Taylor makes a lot of sense. The City (and many Cities) seem to put money in big projects and "game changers" rather than making improvements to several projects or several areas to "expand the pie" as smithgn says.. Its great that both Taylor and Finley spent money their own money to fund a study to discuss the problem/challenges .. now the City needs to take that and try to come up with some solutions and create a plan on how to fund and get them done.. I know that the hard part...
I think you meant to reply to another thread. But after reading what Joe Taylor said, I see where he’s coming from and it’s hard to disagree. The thing is though, this opportunity with the convention center is fleeting. IF we were to pass up on the convention center would there be a push to get the aforementioned things done that Taylor mentioned? I would hate to turn down the convention center overhaul just to poke around for another several years till there’s any tangible movement on beautifying the city.
Exactly. You don't even see this kind of thing in larger cities with what Ben Arnold is proposing.
Convention centers EVERYWHERE lose money and this is well-known so that's no shocking revelation courtesy of Joe Taylor.
I think the approach we need to take is unfolding in front of us.
The generation old inconvenience (to put it mildly) with the RR tracks through the city is a main priority by state lawmakers according to a P & C article. A portion from the COVID funds will be used to fix this.
The river cleanup is a "go", just awaiting permits.
The rest of Assembly street will be beautified like it is in front of the coliseum.
Lastly, give the convention center the OK and transform an already nice area into a real gem. If what Mutiny said is true (that projects like this aren't common even in big cities), then I say lets seize the opportunity. Some of the maintenance fixes that Joe Taylor alludes to are being done while other plans (like Finlay park) have been scrutinized and have received interest. Remember Whitewater?
As I said, some stuff directly or indirectly is already happening that Taylor talks about. Thing is, if we nix the idea Ben Arnold has offered, I'm not confident all of the other things Taylor speaks of will get the green light any time soon. It will be more deliberation and squabbling. I say go for Hughes plan.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
