Any plans to rebuild the UA concourse (C and D gates & UX terminal) at IAD / Dulles?
Jul 15, 2013, 8:39 am
#16
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,565
Not to go off onto too much of a tangent, but I doubt that. With US exiting *A, IAD is UA's hub for the southeast--EWR and IAH are just too far out of the way to make them viable alternatives for connecting traffic. And there's too much business in the area who won't accept connecting to EWR on a puddle jumper beholden to WX irrops to go TATL. For that matter, the fact that they actually have room to grow at IAD whereas at EWR they don't (due to ATC) pretty much assures IAD of remaining a hub for the foreesable future.
Jul 15, 2013, 8:48 am
#17
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Programs: UA 1K 1MM, AA, DL
Posts: 7,418
Not to go off onto too much of a tangent, but I doubt that. With US exiting *A, IAD is UA's hub for the southeast--EWR and IAH are just too far out of the way to make them viable alternatives for connecting traffic. And there's too much business in the area who won't accept connecting to EWR on a puddle jumper beholden to WX irrops to go TATL. For that matter, the fact that they actually have room to grow at IAD whereas at EWR they don't (due to ATC) pretty much assures IAD of remaining a hub for the foreesable future.
As it is right now, IAD probably needs to remain an international hub for UA because of the substantial international traffic. Neither AA nor DL flies anything close to the same flights, and the rest are national carriers that fly only a few routes to their home country. I can't imagine UA would cede the opportunity to continue flying those flights.
Jul 15, 2013, 9:41 am
#19
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NYC, SLC, LAX
Programs: AA EXP, UA Plat
Posts: 3,951
There is no way UA is going to de-hub IAD anytime in at least the next decade, absent something that (a) destroys IAD or (b) significantly removes restrictions from, and increases the size of, DCA.
Jul 15, 2013, 9:44 am
#20
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: DCA, IAD (not BWI if I can help it)
Programs: UA 1MM 1K, Marriott Gold, Hyatt Explorist, status-free on AA, AS, B6, DL, WN, Amtrak, etc.
Posts: 1,481
The DC travel forum has a thread on the subject.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/washi...airport-2.html
Suffice to say, a new C/D terminal is a mere gleam in the eye. There's no funding for it right now, and just general concept plans, nothing specific.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/washi...airport-2.html
Suffice to say, a new C/D terminal is a mere gleam in the eye. There's no funding for it right now, and just general concept plans, nothing specific.
And that's the issue--MWAA needs to cobble together funding and so does UA. My guess would be that MWAA is nearing a position to make that call, now that it knows pretty much what the rest of Metro to IAD will cost. I'd like to think UA can start to look intently at its checkbook too, considering the money it's put into IAH and is putting towards new airplanes. But what do I know?
Jul 15, 2013, 10:04 am
#21
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 4,508
I travel out of IAD on a weekly basis and I've had to deal with UA's significant cut-back of flights and capacity both domestic & international. They haven't "moved" traffic-they've simply eliminated it. Transcons that were wide-body are now A319s and B737s. Several former non-stops now require connections in ORD or IAH. RJs proliferate. The time-is-money crowd strongly prefers DCA. And I don't think the current UA management has any special interest or affection for IAD. Slow death by a thousand cuts. Yea, Hahaha-joke's on us.
Jul 15, 2013, 10:12 am
#22
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 286
Also discussed in http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...ility-iad.html.
My opinion remains what I said there:
My opinion remains what I said there:
While I have no love for the C/D terminal, primarily due to the long walks and shuttling (train or bus) involved, it still serves my basic needs of a terminal - a place I walk through to get to the plane. I'll survive if it's not an architectural monument, art museum, or gourmet restaurant.
If a new terminal dropped out of the sky, I'd rejoice. But if it's United's funding choice between a new IAD and say, more/better planes with more routes, times, and upgrade chances, is anyone voting for a better IAD?
If a new terminal dropped out of the sky, I'd rejoice. But if it's United's funding choice between a new IAD and say, more/better planes with more routes, times, and upgrade chances, is anyone voting for a better IAD?
Jul 15, 2013, 12:19 pm
#24
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco/Tel Aviv/YYZ
Programs: CO 1K-MM
Posts: 10,762
a few thoughts:
1) UA isn't closing CLE anytime soon, despite the constant rhetoric, CLE is a very profitable operation for them. There's no downside to having a 'hub' unless you're losing money on the flying. They do get a lot of upside, with the corporate contracts and hub pricing.
2) IAD has been 'right' sized to the CO mentality. CO doesn't run widebodies domestically. so all those flights are gone, and would've been either way. When it was UA, IAD was a highly lopsided operation, it was either RJs or widebodies, with a low % of narrowbodies relative to the other hubs.
1) UA isn't closing CLE anytime soon, despite the constant rhetoric, CLE is a very profitable operation for them. There's no downside to having a 'hub' unless you're losing money on the flying. They do get a lot of upside, with the corporate contracts and hub pricing.
2) IAD has been 'right' sized to the CO mentality. CO doesn't run widebodies domestically. so all those flights are gone, and would've been either way. When it was UA, IAD was a highly lopsided operation, it was either RJs or widebodies, with a low % of narrowbodies relative to the other hubs.
Jul 15, 2013, 12:39 pm
#25
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 4,508
a few thoughts:
1) UA isn't closing CLE anytime soon, despite the constant rhetoric, CLE is a very profitable operation for them. There's no downside to having a 'hub' unless you're losing money on the flying. They do get a lot of upside, with the corporate contracts and hub pricing.
2) IAD has been 'right' sized to the CO mentality. CO doesn't run widebodies domestically. so all those flights are gone, and would've been either way. When it was UA, IAD was a highly lopsided operation, it was either RJs or widebodies, with a low % of narrowbodies relative to the other hubs.
1) UA isn't closing CLE anytime soon, despite the constant rhetoric, CLE is a very profitable operation for them. There's no downside to having a 'hub' unless you're losing money on the flying. They do get a lot of upside, with the corporate contracts and hub pricing.
2) IAD has been 'right' sized to the CO mentality. CO doesn't run widebodies domestically. so all those flights are gone, and would've been either way. When it was UA, IAD was a highly lopsided operation, it was either RJs or widebodies, with a low % of narrowbodies relative to the other hubs.
Jul 15, 2013, 12:41 pm
#26
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Programs: UA 1K 1MM, AA, DL
Posts: 7,418
I wouldn't go that far. The renderings of a lovely new C/D concourse that taunt you when you exit the Aerotrain come, AFAICT, from the design MWAA hired Kohn Pedersen Fox to draw up. That's not enough detail to hand to a contractor, but at a minimum it ought to serve as a starting point for whatever "value engineering" you need before tackling the money situation.
I doubt there's significant debate on what facilities are needed and the general overall footprint (although perhaps they would make it extendable, or build only one wing at first).
It's a money issue, and despite it hanging out there for years there hasn't been any open talk of moving past the general concept/wish.
Jul 15, 2013, 12:54 pm
#27
Join Date: May 2001
Location: IAD
Posts: 6,148
That new midfield terminal has been "planned" for 15+ years.
It may take a tornado or something that knocks down the temporary (<snicker>) C/D terminals to get a new one built.
UA is building a new maintenance hangar at IAD though, so there is some sort of capital investment in the airport.
It may take a tornado or something that knocks down the temporary (<snicker>) C/D terminals to get a new one built.
UA is building a new maintenance hangar at IAD though, so there is some sort of capital investment in the airport.
Jul 15, 2013, 12:58 pm
#28
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 24
The contract has now been awarded for the last phase of this project. Delivery in summer 2018. It has already reached Reston. Next...
Jul 15, 2013, 1:36 pm
#30
Join Date: May 2007
Location: variously: PVG, SFO, LHR
Programs: AA ExPlat, UA 1MM Gold, Hyatt Glob, Marriott Plat, IHG Plat, HH Gold
Posts: 1,678
The terminals were meant to be temporary when they were build in 1982.
The question has always been about money. Building a new set of terminals is likely to cost billions, which means all IAD-based fliers will be paying higher fares to pay it off for many, many years once it happens.
, the operation is a shadow of its former self.
If that's a "shadow of its former self" I'd hate to see what you'd call it if they made real cuts
