Originally Posted by
emma dog
I guess my first question is how much ATL cares about being #1 in movements. Also, I think we’re making a mistake and blending the passenger experience with growth and volume. How many connecting passenger select their tickets based on connection location? Of those passengers, how many are selecting based on airport amenities versus other factors such ease of navigation, delay reputation, overall trip time (is it out of the way?), etc. Meaning, if I was flying ROC-TPA, I doubt I’d select LGA (or DCA) as a connection despite the pretty terminals because NYC connections are frequently a mess versus selecting CLT, IAD, or ATL.
Bottom line, we’re the 1% of travelers here. Most passengers have a drastically different decision tree.
Oh and ATL movements. Future growth is going to dependent on replacing the WN hub flights. I don’t see that happening.
These are all valid points. But I do think ATL cares somewhat about being number 1 because airport movements generate revenue for the airport as do destinations served and how well connected the airport is. The aforementioned brings in more pax and thus more revenue. My point is that air traffic is forecast to continue to grow in the US. ATL, DFW and ORD are the top three largest hubs. 2/3 are expanding their passenger terminals to continue to accommodate growth while ATL is largely stagnant. The current setup suffices for today, but it won’t be too long before concourses A and B feel like D used to; some my say we are already there. DL’s approach has been to up gauge in lieu of adding more flights. Its more efficient but for an airport to effectively support growth, it needs more terminal capacity and more flight movements. ATL can accept more movements without being crippled and I believe a 6th runway is being studied. But I do believe the current terminal infrastructure, designed for far fewer pax than it currently sees will need some relief going into the future.