Don't forget to ask a city who needs to fill empty gates like Nashville/STL for tax breaks and other incentives to hub there. They need to fill those holes and create jobs plus increase fare competition for their citizens etc. Could mean big savings that a start-up really needs to get going. There's and old saying. If you want to take alot of money and turn it into a little money, start an airline.

 

Well AA is kinda the monster at DFW, but DFW does have lots of empty gates AND they'll give you free rent for a year! Thats because Delta de-hubbed there. I'd also say BNA or MCI are good ones. SAT or AUS might be ok, because SAT especially is one the biggest cities in the nation without a hub. SAN being the only other. San Antonio is bigger than Dallas now actually with just over 1 million. But with Houston and Dallas not far, it may be hard to do this. I'm just biased cause I'm a Texan.

 

That's so stupid. Why don't you just drive to OAK and fly out to Vegas. There are plenty of flights out of there, and you'll save money rather than flying out of SFO. Do you ever read on the airliners.net forum about how KSAN is so pressed for space? It's a tiny airport, they only have one runway and gate space is very tight and demanding over there. SAN would be an absolute mess if they got a hub there. Until they find another area for an airport in San Diego, there will never be a hub over there. I don't get your logic. There are plenty of flights from SEA-OAK and then you can just continue onto SAN. OAK is only an hour and a half from Sacramento, that's not that bad of a drive. My two votes for new hubs are STL and ABQ. STL because of what others say, TWA moving out makes it very dead and it is a very underserved market, ABQ because it is growing very rapidly and there are plenty of job opportunities sprouting up out there, I think it was the number one place to start a business in Forbes Magazine, and there are a lot of big names sprouting there, Eclipse Jet being a notable one. Southwest does have a nice operation going there, but ABQ is a huge airport and it has plenty of room for expansion.

 

MCI had Vangard Airlines and it fizzled. AUS.... too small of a market, plus too close to DFW and IAH/HOB. I'd go with DFW. (Biased too. Born and raised in FTW).

 

Remember a small airport called Stapelton. Downtown Denver. So pressed for space. It's a tiny airport, they only had two runways and gate space is very tight and demanding overthere.....
And two airlines were hubbed there (United and Continental). Continetal moved out. DIA was built (one of the nicest airports in the country). And Frontier moved in. And how are they going?? GREAT!
San Diego is HUGE. It is the best vacation spot on the west coast (and that's saying a lot, being you have all of Socal, Santa Barbara, Monterey, San Francisco, Napa, Tahoe, Truckee........). It is a huge city. And people who live there have a lot more $$$$$ than St. Louis.

No, you are stupid, because I would have to pay money to fly OAK-LAS, where as SFO-PSP-LAS is FREE!!! Dumb@$$.

 

What about the fact that SAN is in the southwest corner of the country? It's not really along the path to any other cities. Would it be convenient for connecting pax? I like STL because of the brand new rwy, empty gate space, and the lack of flights that go there now. And it's also near the middle of the country, which is good for coast-to-coast or north-to-south connections. BTW, I'm originally from STL so I may be biased as well.

 

Alaska has a hub in Seattle. American has a hub in Miami. American, JetBlue, Delta, and Continental have hubs in New York/Newark. United has a hub in LAX.

These are not that "strategically located" for connecting flights, but they do work. I see your principle, but I think there are a lot more important things to base your airlines hub city on than geography alone. It would make for great connections to Mexico.

 

You don't get it man. Denver was a much different situation I suggest you do some research and get your facts straight about how difficult it is to get a big airport in San Diego, and one rwy is a lot different than two rwys man. The fact that you think San Diego is the best vacation spot in the west coast is entirely an opinion, I think San Diego is overcrowded, over rated, and tiresome, there's plenty of better smaller getaways i think in Cali. And wow people have more money there than they do in St. Louis big fn deal, it still changes nothing in the fact that KSAN cannot support a hub with it's size and the enormous amount of traffic flying along Southern Cali. Back to Denver, great DIA came around, big and nice airport, modernized, but it's almost an inconvenience for many people because it's so freakin far from the city itself. Could you imagine building a new San Diego airport that far away from the city. Think about how bad traffic is there and it would be hell for many folks trying to get home. You need to think about the big picture before you go mouthing off and comparing something completely different, Denver is a totally different situation than San Diego, sorry man a hub in KSAN is not going to happen.
Ok if I remember correctly you said SFO-LAX-DEN-PSP-LAS that you had on your original post and you never said it was FREE regardless, most people aren't willing to fly around all day backtracking just to get to Vegas from the Bay area I don't know how you got free airfare but good for you, i hoped you enjoyed sitting in airports all day.

 

Alaska Seattle hub is for connecting the states with the state of Alaska.
American in Miami is for all the South America/caribbean routes they run. Have you been to Miami? I think everyone there is from S. America/Carib. JFK/EWR hubs are to connect the states to the European routes. Would take more gas to fly nonstop from st louis to London as opposed to JFK and london. Also, the population density in the Northeast corridor of the US is really packed. United in LAX is big there because they run a lot of Asian/pacific routes, here again, makes sense to have a hub closest to that part of the country.

 

I would vote for STL becuase of the vacant space there, formerly used by TWA, and the fact that the most populated 2/3 of the country is a short flight or drive away. Of course, the eastern part of the US is also home to some fierce airline competition.

Does anyone remember Western Pacific Airlines? They had a hub in COS, during their brief existence. With DIA such a long drive from some parts of Denver, it actually made sense to fly out of COS sometimes. Now that the suburban sprawl on the front range has nearly completely linked all of the cities, it might be time to take a look at that idea again.