[Cold Warrior]

the immediate vicinity aside from the strip itself is almost solely commercial development

Most of which is for McCarran.

[BBMW]

The answer is that no new major from scratch international airport has been built in the US since DEN. There are new terminals and airfield expansions. Look at those to extrapolate costs

Originally Posted by equid0x

I don't know either, but I don't specifically keep track of these things.

Terminal 3 at McCarren cost $2.5 billion. That was for 14 gates. In NYC, Were spending $3.6 billion to replace the central terminal at LGA. So how much would it cost to build an entire new airport with at least, if not more capacity then McCarren, including the need for a high speed transit link into Vegas, from the ground up. $10 billion wouldn't do it $20 billion might.

While I can agree that new construction projects are coming in much higher than they used to, where are we getting the 10-20X claim? I would point out that Ivanpah has already been started.

Yes, exactly, those who are in a position to formally propose, and have the power to push such a project. Governors, senators, congresscritters, maybe senior state legislators, and given the realities of LV / NV politics, maybe county commissioners. Senior Bureaucrats working for the applicable transportation agencies might have some real influence in speaking on such a project.

Random web forum posters? Not so much.

I don't know about you, but I'm guessing Bruff has an axe to grind with the airport. Maybe his house is under the flight path, and he doesn't like the noise (or some similar little peccadillo.) So he comes here to vent (and, truth be told, that's one of the major purposes of web forums.) But some how he want to push that it's fait accompli that McCarren is going to be moved and replaced, when, in reality, the opposite is vastly more likely

Well, what makes anyone specifically credentialed to comment on the idea other than those that are actually working on it? I didn't say they were talking about it, but I think they should be. After all, my tax dollars pay the taxes here, in Las Vegas, and I DO think that I have a say in what happens with my money.

[Bruff]

@What jurisdiction in the US has built an airport of this scale in the US since DEN? I don't know of any.

That's because, when it comes to thinking big, we're in the backwaters. Think 'Dubai' (or, for that matter, just about any other part of the globe). But like I said, Vegas is good at re-inventing itself, the conversion of the Rivera into the Convention center a good example.
Converting the albatross on our collective back called McCarran is even better.

@A from scratch major international airport is going to be (expensive). Especially since it hadn't been started yet.

Actually, it started a decade ago when the site was purchased. As for the expense, do you think it would cost anywhere near the many billions we'll get from selling off the existing site? Think of the many more billions that will go into greening that 30-mile long corridor that is now scrub desert.

@Every once in a while Bruff pops in here and brings up the McCarren replacement idea. This has gone on for a couple of years now.

First, this was not my thread, but second, I thank whoever started it. It's important that it be kept in the public eye.

@In all that time I've never heard of anyone in any position to get a project like this started float the idea. I haven't even heard that anyone is talking about firing up the Ivanpah secondary airport project.

And we (all of us, especially those of us with ears and lungs) are the losers for it. Sad.
The day after the Big Bang, you'll hear a lot about it.

[Bruff]

Originally Posted by robr2

Denver was $4.8 billion 20 years ago. Believe the poster - it'll cost $10 billion at a minimum to buy something new for LAS.

Even though Stapleton has been replaced with housing, the return from selling off the land was significant. The diff with 'here' is that the land is as prime as it can get, and with the noise and pollution gone, everything will appreciate that much more. There is no 'lose' in this scenario.

[Bruff]

Originally Posted by BBMW

I don't know about you, but I'm guessing Bruff has an axe to grind with the airport. Maybe his house is under the flight path, and he doesn't like the noise (or some similar little peccadillo.) So he comes here to vent. But some how he want to push that it's fait accompli that McCarren is going to be moved and replaced, when, in reality, the opposite is vastly more likely

Actually, I know Bruff pretty well. He's a commercial pilot with several thousand hours logged, so he does know a little bit about airplanes and airports. Yes, he doesn't like noise and his other 'peccadillos' include pollution (removing it) and economic development (starting it). With respect to the latter, as was the case with Denver, he is convinced that this Valley will be significantly rewarded with relocating McCarran.
As for LAS being removed and replaced, his fondest dream. What's yours?

[BBMW]

If you're a pilot, and have a problem with LAS, LGA must have you horrified.

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by BBMW

If you're a pilot, and have a problem with LAS, LGA must have you horrified.

I have actually landed a couple of times at LGA. On the GA approach there used to be a building that had wheel tracks on it. It did look like it but I think just a coincidence. I have flown out of it a few dozen times going to East Hampton or Montauk though only twice have I landed there myself. Practically we used to run out the Island a ways to avoid the mess near in.

LAS is a piece of cake pretty much. Never landed there flying myself though I have done NLV a couple of times. I have however flown the jump seat on our corporate jet a few times into and out of LAS.

As I have said LAS is an intimate part of the Strip. Contiguous to it and highly integrated. Grab your bag and you can be set in your hotel or the exhibit you are headed for in less than a half hour. If you have a pickup 15 minutes. No place else like it.

The thought that the land would be very valuable is pretty much nonsense. You could start on any major easterly street and use it to extend the strip...and the land would be cheap. It is getting the Casino zoning that will cost. And I expect you will find that LAS is tied up for use as an airport for 50 years or more if you look at the deals with the Feds. I would also note that Clark County controls large areas of the high noise impact zones and restricts both the type of use allowed and the construction requirements.

[PacoMartin]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

And I expect you will find that LAS is tied up for use as an airport for 50 years or more if you look at the deals with the Feds.

On the last month for which data is available (April 2017) you find that 36% of the flights (30.3% of passengers) are less than 500 miles. In every city that builds an airport, there is always a movement to keep the older airport open for regional jets.

Miles
197 Ontario, CA
223 Burbank, CA
226 Santa Ana, CA
231 Long Beach, CA
236 Los Angeles, CA
255 Phoenix, AZ
258 San Diego, CA
345 Reno, NV
365 Tucson, AZ
368 Salt Lake City, UT
386 San Jose, CA
397 Sacramento, CA
407 Oakland, CA
414 San Francisco, CA
486 Albuquerque, NM

[Cold Warrior]

Actually, it started a decade ago when the site was purchased.

I predict the next decade will see as much progress as the last.

[PacoMartin]

In the history of building new airports, there is always a movement to keep the old airport open. I am talking about Tampa, Austin, San Antonio, Denver, Montreal, Washington DC, Dallas, Hong Kong, Shanghai and Istanbul. The old airport is always nearer the important population or business centers.

In Montreal and Washington DC they built new airports and kept the old one open. Some kind of restriction is placed on the old airport. In Washington DC their is a perimeter restriction of 1500 miles plus no international flights other than Canada on National, while Dulles has unrestricted range. In Dallas they kept DAL open under severe restrictions when they opened DFW.

In discussions of building a new San Diego Airport, many people wanted to keep the old airport open for flights of 500 miles or less.

In San Diego roughly 1/3 of the flights are to five nearby destinations.
447 miles San Francisco, CA
417 miles San Jose, CA
304 miles Phoenix, AZ
258 miles Las Vegas, NV
109 miles Los Angeles, CA

From Las Vegas roughly 1/3 of the flights are to twelve nearby destinations.
236 Los Angeles, CA
414 San Francisco, CA
255 Phoenix, AZ
258 San Diego, CA
368 Salt Lake City, UT
223 Burbank, CA
407 Oakland, CA
386 San Jose, CA
345 Reno, NV
226 Santa Ana, CA
231 Long Beach, CA
397 Sacramento, CA

At the very least in Las Vegas there will be a movement to keep the East-West runways and Terminal #3 open as the land is not as valuable as the land along the strip. Plus it is directly served by Terminal 3 which opened on June 27, 2012. The project was announced in January 2001 when the land for Ivanpah was bought and it cost $2.4 billion to build.

The other option is simply to ignore the predictions that the airport will become overcrowded at 55 million passengers, and to delay any decision until it reached 75 million or some higher number.