Talk:San Diego International Airport
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Southern California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Southern California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Aviation, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles related to aviation. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | ||||||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (comments) |
||||||||
|
|||||||||
Contents |
[edit] Sources for relocation proposal content
- Press release from Congressman Bob Filner, September 25, 2003
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ca51_filner/20030925airport.html
- "Filner keeps Imperial County on list of possible airport sites: Desert location still a long shot"
Jeff Ristine, San Diego Union Tribune, May 3, 2005.
- Float Incorporated: Floating Ocean Real Estate
http://www.floatinc.com/Floatport.html
Tobycat 20:29, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
Wasn't there also a proposal at one point to make Mirimar a dual-purpose airport?
Also, someone should add some text discussing the fact that the landing approach to SAN is one of the most challenging because of the rather steep glideslope, built-up downtown, and relatively short runways.
Nsayer 22:30, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
There was a proposal in the early 1980s to have a joint use airport with Tijuana, Mexico. The proposed project was dubbed "Twin-Ports." There would have been an airport built along the border connected by taxiways to Tijuana's existing General Abelardo L. Rodríguez International Airport. The proposal was given some serious consideration, however due to the problems with illegal human and drug trafficking through the border, the idea was scrapped.
I understood Gatwick (UK) to be the world's busiest single-runway airport.
Gatwick has two runways:
http://gc.kls2.com/airport/LGW
Location City: London, Surrey, England, United Kingdom Name: Gatwick ICAO / IATA: EGKK / LGW
Details Type: Airport (Aerodrome, Airfield) Latitude: 51°08'53"N (51.148056) Longitude: 0°11'25"W (-0.190278) Datum: WGS 1984 Elevation: 202 ft (62 m) Timezone: UTC+0 (DST+1) Runways: 2 Longest: 10364 × 148 ft (3159 × 45 m) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.3.201.43 (talk • contribs) 09:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC-8)
[edit] Message to IP address 71.136.142.2
This message is for the poster with IP address 71.136.142.2. Please adhere to Wikipedia's NPOV policies with respect to your edits about Miramar dual use. Also keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a place for future speculation and opinion, and it is certainly not a place to further agendas. That said, please restrict your additions to this section to facts. Thank you.
--IRelayer 19:51, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Storage Area Network is 10**6 times more important
SAN technology is used in millions of offices and companies AROUND THE WORLD! The obscure aviators-only code of a second-tier US domestic airport does not hold a candle to it in importance. SAN should point to Storage Area network, because this is en.wikipedia.org, not us.wikipedia.org! 195.70.32.136 17:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- SAN is not an "obscure, aviators-only code" - frequent travelers around the world know and use three-letter IATA airport codes to refer to cities and airports. A Google search for SAN reveals that San Diego International Airport is the first search result. Primary topic disambiguation is clearly called for in this case. FCYTravis 23:03, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Neutrality of "Relocation proposals" section
The "Relocation proposals" section of this article, in particular the first paragraph, seems rather biased towards making a pro-new airport argument. Sources for various claims such as capacity need to be cited, and I'm not sure how "To claim otherwise is absurd" can pass for non-neutral. Tagged for POV check. -- Hawaiian717 18:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, you are right. It was atrocious. I removed the worst of the opinionated language and authoritative predictions of the future. The section now needs references. I removed the POV tag and replaced with with an "unreferenced" tag. Hopefully you will agree this is a step in the right direction. I'll try to help with the references when I have more time. Johntex\talk 02:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- It looks much better, thanks. I'll also look and try to dig up some references. -- Hawaiian717 04:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Capacity References:
http://www.san.org/documents/planning/airport_planning/SDBoard_Meeting_FINAL_060704v6.pps
http://www.san.org/documents/planning/airport_planning/SAN_Aviation_Activity_Forecasts_June_04.pdf
Full Relocation Study Data:
http://www.san.org/airport_authority/archives/index.asp
Reference Floating Airport: There is no proof of such "public" interest, only that of a handful of nut jobs who offer no proof that the concept would work and are now trying to push the idea. It was fully rejected by the Airport Authroity on merits so unless they plan on building it themselves, it's not happening as the Airport Authrity is the controlling agency. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.3.201.43 (talk • contribs) 10:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC-8)
