David as list manager says: > Read it and weep: > > http://startribune.com/st/qview.cgi?template=metro_a_cache&slug=ober21 There are some immediately obvious flaws in Congressman Oberstar's remarks about Minneapolis-St. Paul International being usable for another 30 years. These pop right out at me: Strib Article: "To squeeze more capacity out of the airport, he said, air traffic control must be improved. It also may be necessary to move cargo operations to other airports. He suggested Duluth, in his Eighth Congressional District, and St. Cloud. "It would free up capacity, particularly nighttime capacity at MSP," he said, referring to the international airport." [TB] First the airport operates at no where near its nighttime capacity and probably never will. Second cargo is flown to the Twin Cities because its time critical, otherwise it would go by much cheaper truck or rail. Anyone sending air cargo wants it in the Twin Cities, not in Duluth for a truck ride down, a truck ride that takes 2 hours on a good day. Can you hear anyone asking for AM delivery FedEx being told that noon is the best they can get? Strib Article: "Oberstar also said that slower, regional aircraft may have to be relocated to smaller airports in the region and connected to the international airport by high-speed rail" [TB] If you accept that you can convenience people to take regional aircraft to Rochester or wherever so they can get on a train to go to the real airport to fly to a destination and then do the same thing on return, you need to ask how much the rail system is going to cost, how much are the improvements to the outlying airport going to cost, how much ongoing improvements to MSP will cost and how all that compares with building a new facility. We know it costs us something over half a billion (with a "B") to build an 11 mile light rail line, the rail line alone could come near the cost of a new airport. In the Strib article "Northwest Airlines officials have said the idea is flawed because passengers would not want to make an extra trip to another airport." That seems like a no-brainer. The 2 track study that Ted Mondale and others killed was based on MSP capacity through 2010. The legislation that killed it sends any new terminal building and certain other expansion at MSP back to the legislature. We've spent nearly as much adding to MSP as it would have cost to build a new airport (well we've spent a ton of money and you really need to include the sound insulation program in the costs). Why do we continue to put money into this facility when we know that its approaching the end of its life. Having become a regular at the new Denver airport since the first of January, I find it amazing how efficient and well laid out it is. The constraints of being surrounded don't exist. The revenue from airport fees will finance the facility, we're not giving it to the airlines. Terrell Brown Loring Park [EMAIL PROTECTED] __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices! http://auctions.yahoo.com/ _______________________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
