[quote=poorgradstudent][quote=kev374]I am reading in a lot of places that Atlanta has the top shot at this now just because of it’s geographic location, Amazon wants to have a HQ closer to the East coast, it’s the biggest airline hub in the country, serves as a terminus for a lot of road traffic, has a huge amount of tech talent, strong economy, good universities and schools, relatively affordable housing (at least for now), relatively good weather, in addition Georgia is giving $1 billion in incentives etc.[/quote]
Atlanta minimally is a finalist.[/quote]
The problem with Atlanta is that there is too much traffic. It might look good at first blush, but I you try flying though Atlanta, you find the problem with too much traffic. Per 2015 Census, the following are cities with more than 1 million; New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, San Jose. Looking at being located more central to US (and Mexico), that brings it down to Houston, San Antonio, Dallas. Dallas is #4 of top busiest airports. If you factor busiest by cargo, it is Memphis International, followed by Anchorage – Dallas is #9 and Atlanta does not even appear.
Atlanta has 5 runways (1 longer than 12,000ft, 4 at 9,000ft +), Dallas Ft Worth has 7 runways (4 at 13,000ft +, 2 at 9000ft+ and 1 at 8000ft+). Cargo planes tend to need longer runways. Atlanta’s runways all go east-west, Dallas Ft Worth has 5 east-west runs and 2 diagonal. Winds don’t always blow east/west.
I would hazard by looking at the specs that Dallas, Ft Worth is a likely choice.
When I add in freight rail lines – Atlanta even looks worse. Atlanta is served by 2 major class 1 railroads (CSX, Norfolk Southern – both east coast rails), Dallas, Ft Worth is served by 3 major class 1 railroads (Union Pacific, BNSF, Kansas City Southern – mostly central to west coast, Kansas City runs into Central Mexico) – some of what you get from Amazon has to be shipped ground.
