AARoads Forum

What are the best airports that many of you experienced in your travels from the ground to the friendly skies?

I have to Atlantic City, NJ as it is so small you have hardly any TSA wait and the gates are very close to the ticketing and baggage area.

When it comes to people moving over long distances on the grounds, I have to say Atlanta with its plane train that links the concourses.

Quote from: roadman65 on September 30, 2012, 10:30:09 AM
What are the best airports that many of you experienced in your travels from the ground to the friendly skies?

I have to Atlantic City, NJ as it is so small you have hardly any TSA wait and the gates are very close to the ticketing and baggage area.

When it comes to people moving over long distances on the grounds, I have to say Atlanta with its plane train that links the concourses.

Washington Dulles International and Thurgood Marshall Baltimore-Washington International (which I have frequently used) both pretty good. 

Contrary to "what everyone knows," I think London Heathrow is pretty good in spite of very heavy air traffic.

Same with LAX.

I avoid Washington National (DCA) as much as possible.

Airports that I passionately dislike are the three major airports run by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (JFK, EWR and LGA).

I live where you have to connect, flying a "little plane" to a bigger place to get on a real plane to go where you really want to go.  In the "through" catagory:

ATL -  Really its huge, but well laid out and easy to understand.  Good bars and restaurants.
DTW - Also well laid out and easy to understand.  Not crowded, but the main terminal has to be the longest in the country, very long walk from one end to the other.
CLT - Small plane terminal is a very long walk from the rest of the airport, and has several sets of wheelchair/stroller unfriedly steps.  Also the little planes have to taxi a very long way to get over to the runways.
DCA - USAirways (Unfortunatly Still Alegheny) uses DCA as a place to connect.  It was not designed for that, and, while a great airport for DC, is awful for connections.
PHL - Treetops also use PHL for connections, particularly international to try to compete with Delta, United and American 's better gateways in NYC and IAD.  Not designed for that, and over-crowded.
ORD - Too big and illogically laid out.  Don't like it.  Grossly over-priced food.

Those are the main airports to connect through around here. 

As far as a destination airport, you cannot beat LAS or MCO.  Especially LAS.  Tourist friendly, well laid out, and near where you really want to be.

Favorites for layovers:
ATL - Best restaurant/bar selection hands-down. Not easy for tight connections however and plan on a good hike between your gate and the Plane Train connecting the concourses. Bonus: Sweetwater Brewery restaurant at B10.
DTW - Simple layout, not too crowded, spotlessly clean. Plus, the Delta SkyClubs have self serve bars.
SLC - Easy connections, rarely any weather problems, fantastic scenery

Least favorite layover airports:
ORD - I've never had a flight leave here on time, and the AA side of the airport is dank and dirty.
LGA - Worst airport in the country. It's inexcusable that the primary domestic airport for one our country's premier cities often requires taking dirty buses out to the plane.
MSP - No matter how many times I fly through here, I always struggle to find my way around.

As for using an airport for O/D flights, I'm going to rule out small airports like MLB, ROC, BTV, etc. They all provide similar experiences. For the big airports, I'd say my favorites are:
SAN - Short lines, nice Sky Club, and a Karl Strauss brewery kiosk. What can I say, I like my beer.  <sarcasm>And I love the easy access to/from the 5!</sarcasm>
DCA - Direct subway access makes this one a winner. Plus the views from the concourses and SkyClub are fantastic.
DEN - Creepy Nazi zombie paintings? Multiple microbrewery restaurants? What's not to like?
DFW - Gate to street in 50 feet
IND - Short lines, gorgeous new facility

Least favorite O/D airports that I haven't mentioned yet:
LAX - Worst TSA lines in the country. The off-site rental cars aren't just off-site, they're in the ghetto
LGA - Mentioned it again because I hate it that much
IAD - I still have nightmares about those "mobile lounges"

In addition to MLB, my other home airport is MCO. It's well laid out and they tend to do a good job with all of the tourist traffic. The sheer number of tourists though makes it obnoxious enough to not be on my favorites list. Although since they installed a TSA PreCheck lane I've been much happier about it.

Quote from: realjd on September 30, 2012, 02:32:34 PMORD - I've never had a flight leave here on time, and the AA side of the airport is dank and dirty.

Agreed--if Chicago were not on the great-circle route between London and Wichita, I would avoid it.

QuoteLGA - Worst airport in the country. It's inexcusable that the primary domestic airport for one our country's premier cities often requires taking dirty buses out to the plane.

I think airside buses, mobile lounges, etc. should be banned.

QuoteMSP - No matter how many times I fly through here, I always struggle to find my way around.

I used it once as a connecting airport between London and Wichita, and rather liked the experience, partly because my layover was long enough for me to take the light rail line in and photograph the newly reconstructed I-35W bridge.  But I do remember having to walk what felt like three sides of a square in order to get from the departures area to the gate for my onward flight to Wichita.

QuoteLAX - Worst TSA lines in the country. The off-site rental cars aren't just off-site, they're in the ghetto

To add to that:

*  Hard floors (adds greatly to foot strain when walking long distances and also to visual noise)

*  Corridor congestion

*  A pier layout and a dearth of windows showing the airfield, which gives the interior a very claustrophobic feel

I would like to add Houston- Hobby as a good airport.  Not a 24 hour airport, though, but street to gate is not that far of a walk.  The only hitch is you must fly Southwest or Airtran to use this facility as the rest must use the Bush Intercontinental Airport located miles north of Houston.  This one is not as far from Houston itself and is convenient via I-45 between the two places.

Quote from: J N Winkler on September 30, 2012, 02:48:18 PM
Agreed--if Chicago were not on the great-circle route between London and Wichita, I would avoid it.

This is probably the points whore in me talking, but my first thought is that connecting through ATL or MIA or someplace off of the great circle route would yield more frequent flyer miles...

DTW should similarly be on or near the great circle route between Wichita and London and is much more pleasant of a connection, and immigration is much nicer.

Quote
I think airside buses, mobile lounges, etc. should be banned.

Banned may be a bit strong. ATL has an E-concourse bus gate that's only used due to overcrowding when the weather is bad. When it comes down to it, I'd rather take a bus from a remote stand than be stuck waiting for a gate. The problem is that LGA uses buses as standard procedure. I expect that at third world airports, not a world-class city like New York.

Quote
To add to that:

*  Hard floors (adds greatly to foot strain when walking long distances and also to visual noise)

*  Corridor congestion

*  A pier layout and a dearth of windows showing the airfield, which gives the interior a very claustrophobic feel

My other big complaint about LAX is the lack of airside connections. Changing concourses almost always means exiting the sterile area, walking, then reclearing security. That's unacceptable in my book.

Chicago O'Hare gets it share of criticism, but as someone who has used ORD at least 40 times since the 1960s, and as recently as 2011, I think it does an excellent job, given the heavy usage (#2 or #3 in the nation every year) with the largest aircraft including heavily loaded domestic and international (many modern A/C can and do make Japan and Europe non-stop to/from ORD) range flights.

Ground transportation, ORD has good freeway access and has a CTA rapid rail transit line connecting the downtown and the rest of the system.  Inside the airport is a rail people mover connection to the 4 terminals.

A $10 billion expansion project is underway now.

There's only a few airports I use regularly these days:

BOI has a beautiful new terminal and is all around awesome to fly out of.
DEN is kind of a pain in the ass to get to and it's a haul from the door to the gate, but parking is really cheap. Very nice to connect in.
SLC is nice to connect in too- very manageable for a hub.
PHX is fine depending on the terminal. Terminals 2 and 3 suck donkey balls. Terminal 4 is nice. The main issue with Phoenix is that to get between terminals, you have to leave security and go back in- the main time this is a problem is if you're switching airlines on a United/US Air codeshare. All the other typical codeshares are in the same terminal, I think.
SEA is pretty boring. Parking is a pain.
TUS is kind of dumpy for a small airport.

I don't know that I've really flown out of any other airports in the last five or so years. I've connected in SFO, SMF, and LAS, and landed in OAK, but all were un-noteworthy experiences.

For me,

My favorite local airport is Midway (MDW).  Easy to navigate, and has my favorite airline (SWA).  The food selections are a bit overpriced, but that's common anywhere in $hicago, whether in the airports or the Loop.

O'Hare (ORD) isn't bad, and is a lot better than some of the airports I can name.

Sky Harbor (PHX) is a pretty decent airport, but the Burger King on the north side of Terminal 4 sucks.  Sloppy, slow, and just plain stupid staff.

McCarron (LAS) is a mixed bag.  The main SWA area is clean, but the older parts of the terminal are filthy.

Los Angeles Int'l (LAX) is, by far and away, the worst airport I've been to.  The connections between terminals could be improved (bridges or tunnels like O'Hare would be nice).  The food selections suck, and the TSA folks were the least friendly of any I've seen.

General Mitchell (MKE) is a nice airport.  Clean, neat, friendly (even the TSA staff), and decent food selections.  Plus, the parking price is reasonable.

Meadows Field (BFD), Bakersfield looks like a decent tiny airport.  Didn't get to see much as I landed well after much had closed.

Bob Hope (BUR), Burbank is a nice small airport, but could use some more food selections.  The outdoor baggage pickup caught me as strange.

Washington National isn't bad, but it's been a long time since I went there (1994).

Tampa Int'l is a decent airport, IMHO.  It was clean and neat, and the food selections were decent.

Honolulu Int'l (HNL) is a decent airport, IMHO as well.  Not as much on food, but they were friendly enough upon both entry and exit.

A good start would be airports where I can avoid posing nude for or being sexually assaulted by TSA agents. Beyong that I like MSP a lot, since I always fly out of Terminal 2. I agree Terminal 1 is a mess, it's been growing slowly since WWII, there was a late 1980s proposal to scrap it and build a new airport in Rosemount, then to just rebuild the terminal elsewhere on the current property, but nothing came of them, instead they built a new runway, remodeled and expanded the parking and Terminal 1, and leveled and rebuilt Terminal 2.

Everyone tells horror stories of JFK, but I didn't find it that bad. Had a bad experience renting from Thrifty there though.

IAD has a unique terminal but I didn't like having to take a lounge to get to my gate.

MCO I found particulary attractive. I always rent from Dollar and they were onsite, but a lot of places are a bus ride away

MDW makes me nervous flying too with short runways and building near them, and the TSA agents are sometimes unfriendly, but it's small and clean.

RDU was just OK, and you had to take a bus to the rental cars.

DIA I really liked with the unique terminal and the trains

LAS you step right off the plane and there's slots, and was the only placed that demanded to see my luggage claim slips.

ORF was dated and not on a freeway and laid out funny, but the rental cars were very close and TSA was friendly.

ORD I wasn't to impressed with

SEA appared really dumpy.

Quote from: Beltway on September 30, 2012, 04:59:34 PM
Chicago O'Hare gets it share of criticism, but as someone who has used ORD at least 40 times since the 1960s, and as recently as 2011, I think it does an excellent job, given the heavy usage (#2 or #3 in the nation every year) with the largest aircraft including heavily loaded domestic and international (many modern A/C can and do make Japan and Europe non-stop to/from ORD) range flights.

Ground transportation, ORD has good freeway access and has a CTA rapid rail transit line connecting the downtown and the rest of the system.  Inside the airport is a rail people mover connection to the 4 terminals.

A $10 billion expansion project is underway now.

Yet somehow ATL can be the busiest airport in the world, with non-stop flights to 5 continents, yet still maintain better performance numbers than ORD. As dark and nasty as the AA part of ORD is, the real problem is performance. I grudgingly connect through there several times a year and have NEVER had a flight leave within an hour of the scheduled departure. I'm at ATL probably 50 times a year and rarely have significant delays like that.

A terminal expansion, regardless of cost, won't fix ORD's problems. The issue is that they're trying to run a busy multinational hub with minimal runway capacity. ATL can run up to 5 runways at a time; ORD is limited to 2. Unless that expansion includes additional runway capacity, it will continue to be a nightmare.

I'm flying USAir through CLT tomorrow. CLT isn't a bad airport, but I'm in the middle of a string of bad luck where USAir cancels my flight leaving me stranded in CLT. I'm only flying them because they're running sales on tickets to FL and my $600-ish ticket on USAir would be well over $1k on Delta next week.

Direct rail access is ORD's one redeeming factor. MDW is a much nicer airport but is a pain in the ass to get to.

Quote from: J N Winkler on September 30, 2012, 02:48:18 PM
I think airside buses, mobile lounges, etc. should be banned.

I disagree. They are an integral part of London Heathrow's (LHR) design (and for the most part, seem to work pretty well).

Washington Dulles (IAD) is getting rid of most of them, replacing them with a very expensive underground train system (not to be confused with Dulles Rail (also very expensive)).

But even when the train system is fully phased-in, international arriving passengers will still ride those mobile lounges from the gate to the immigration and customs area to get through U.S. immigration, claim their bags, then go through U.S. Customs.

^^ That's what the modernization program at O'Hare is to fix.  Right now, they have unusable runways as they cross each other.  When finished, there will be multiple parallel runways: http://www.oharenoise.org/OMP.htm  The orange lines on the map are to be built, the blue is existing, and the yellow is finished.

Quote from: realjd on September 30, 2012, 06:01:03 PM
Yet somehow ATL can be the busiest airport in the world, with non-stop flights to 5 continents, yet still maintain better performance numbers than ORD. As dark and nasty as the AA part of ORD is, the real problem is performance. I grudgingly connect through there several times a year and have NEVER had a flight leave within an hour of the scheduled departure. I'm at ATL probably 50 times a year and rarely have significant delays like that.

A terminal expansion, regardless of cost, won't fix ORD's problems. The issue is that they're trying to run a busy multinational hub with minimal runway capacity. ATL can run up to 5 runways at a time; ORD is limited to 2. Unless that expansion includes additional runway capacity, it will continue to be a nightmare.

Does ORD have a NIMBY problem that's blocking any consideration of expanded runway capacity?

Quote from: Brandon on September 30, 2012, 06:15:50 PM
^^ That's what the modernization program at O'Hare is to fix.  Right now, they have unusable runways as they cross each other.  When finished, there will be multiple parallel runways: http://www.oharenoise.org/OMP.htm  The orange lines on the map are to be built, the blue is existing, and the yellow is finished.

Excellent! That's going to help significantly. Although I don't often fly AA or UA, I may give ORD another shot once the runways are completed. I will also give ORD credit for having toilets with the crazy automatic seat covers that I haven't seen anywhere else.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on September 30, 2012, 06:16:03 PM

Quote from: realjd on September 30, 2012, 06:01:03 PM
Yet somehow ATL can be the busiest airport in the world, with non-stop flights to 5 continents, yet still maintain better performance numbers than ORD. As dark and nasty as the AA part of ORD is, the real problem is performance. I grudgingly connect through there several times a year and have NEVER had a flight leave within an hour of the scheduled departure. I'm at ATL probably 50 times a year and rarely have significant delays like that.

A terminal expansion, regardless of cost, won't fix ORD's problems. The issue is that they're trying to run a busy multinational hub with minimal runway capacity. ATL can run up to 5 runways at a time; ORD is limited to 2. Unless that expansion includes additional runway capacity, it will continue to be a nightmare.

Does ORD have a NIMBY problem that's blocking any consideration of expanded runway capacity?

It's called Elk Grove Village and Bensenville.

Quote from: realjd on September 30, 2012, 04:35:00 PMThis is probably the points whore in me talking, but my first thought is that connecting through ATL or MIA or someplace off of the great circle route would yield more frequent flyer miles...

I haven't actually signed up for a frequent-flyer program.  Perhaps I should have, but I have tended to feel I fly infrequently enough (just two or three air journeys a year) that there would be a real risk of frequent-flyer miles expiring before I could redeem them.

I tend to start with the cheapest ticket for a London-Wichita itinerary and go a bit higher as needed to get just one connection and the shortest overall journey on each leg.  I have connected through ATL, MSP, IAH, and DFW in addition to ORD, but I don't think I have ever been offered a connection through DTW.

Quote

QuoteI think airside buses, mobile lounges, etc. should be banned.

Banned may be a bit strong. ATL has an E-concourse bus gate that's only used due to overcrowding when the weather is bad. When it comes down to it, I'd rather take a bus from a remote stand than be stuck waiting for a gate. The problem is that LGA uses buses as standard procedure. I expect that at third world airports, not a world-class city like New York.

I wouldn't object to a fleet of airside buses being kept on hand for emergencies, but it should never be the default method of ferrying passengers to the plane.  I firmly believe that passenger transfers between the aircraft and the terminal building should be routinely handled by jetbridge, with each jetbridge connecting to the aircraft and the terminal building at only one point each (to prevent passengers from getting confused and boarding the wrong plane).

QuoteMy other big complaint about LAX is the lack of airside connections. Changing concourses almost always means exiting the sterile area, walking, then reclearing security. That's unacceptable in my book.

Agreed.  I believe that airport authorities should be penalized for the following:

*  Requiring reclearance of security for terminal transfers (except for international arrivals)

*  Operating security checkpoints near the gate, or at any other location, that has the effect of preventing passengers from taking bottles of water onto the plane that they have refilled themselves with tap water after clearing the empty bottles through a primary security inspection

*  Routine usage of airside buses, mobile lounges, foot journeys across the terminal apron, etc. to transfer passengers between the aircraft and the terminal

Penalties should be imposed in the absence of a remediation plan with definite time commitments and should include the possibility of complete denial of air traffic service even for airports in the 60-million-and-above PATM class.

Quote from: realjd on September 30, 2012, 06:01:03 PMYet somehow ATL can be the busiest airport in the world, with non-stop flights to 5 continents, yet still maintain better performance numbers than ORD. As dark and nasty as the AA part of ORD is, the real problem is performance. I grudgingly connect through there several times a year and have NEVER had a flight leave within an hour of the scheduled departure. I'm at ATL probably 50 times a year and rarely have significant delays like that.

I haven't had that particular problem at ORD.  My own experience is that while punctuality is poor, my flights leave ORD on time about half the time.  My real problem with ORD is that in winter, even a moderate snowstorm will result in more than three-quarters of flights (including ones to Wichita) being cancelled, which means I have to rebook, find someplace to sleep, and try again in the morning.  This has happened to me twice in ten years.  The first time the airline sprung for the hotel, but by the second time a few years later, the airlines had done away with that perk, and I had to pay $90 ("distressed passenger rate") at a hotel near the airport.  Having to pay is bad enough, but there is essentially no transport between airport and hotel other than the hotel shuttle, and watching for the hotel shuttle--operating on a frequency of maybe one journey every two hours--is a bit like looking through the wrong end of a telescope.

When the O'Hare modernization program was still in the EIS phase, I remember seeing a display in the airport saying that the increase in runway capacity would cut weather-related delays by more than 80%.  I hope that really does happen.  I think the real reason ORD effectively closes in snowstorms is usually not that the runways have too much snow/ice cover to handle planes, but rather that throughput goes way down, which means that arriving planes have to be given priority so that they don't burn all the way through their fuel reserves in mid-air.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on September 30, 2012, 06:14:33 PM

Quote from: J N Winkler on September 30, 2012, 02:48:18 PMI think airside buses, mobile lounges, etc. should be banned.

I disagree. They are an integral part of London Heathrow's (LHR) design (and for the most part, seem to work pretty well).

I don't understand how you can say that:  all five Heathrow terminals have piers and jetbridges.  Usually transfers between aircraft and terminal are handled by jetbridge; the one occasion my plane had to park at a stand and my fellow passengers and I had to wait for airside buses was many years ago.

QuoteWashington Dulles (IAD) is getting rid of most of them, replacing them with a very expensive underground train system (not to be confused with Dulles Rail (also very expensive)).

Fantastic.  This replaces one mistake with another.  Why don't they stick with the basics and build piers and jetbridges?

Quote from: Brandon on September 30, 2012, 06:31:02 PM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on September 30, 2012, 06:16:03 PM

Quote from: realjd on September 30, 2012, 06:01:03 PM
Yet somehow ATL can be the busiest airport in the world, with non-stop flights to 5 continents, yet still maintain better performance numbers than ORD. As dark and nasty as the AA part of ORD is, the real problem is performance. I grudgingly connect through there several times a year and have NEVER had a flight leave within an hour of the scheduled departure. I'm at ATL probably 50 times a year and rarely have significant delays like that.

A terminal expansion, regardless of cost, won't fix ORD's problems. The issue is that they're trying to run a busy multinational hub with minimal runway capacity. ATL can run up to 5 runways at a time; ORD is limited to 2. Unless that expansion includes additional runway capacity, it will continue to be a nightmare.

Does ORD have a NIMBY problem that's blocking any consideration of expanded runway capacity?

It's called Elk Grove Village and Bensenville.

A town or two in the way didn't stop St. Louis

Quote from: J N Winkler on September 30, 2012, 07:38:59 PM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on September 30, 2012, 06:14:33 PM

Quote from: J N Winkler on September 30, 2012, 02:48:18 PMI think airside buses, mobile lounges, etc. should be banned.

I disagree. They are an integral part of London Heathrow's (LHR) design (and for the most part, seem to work pretty well).

I don't understand how you can say that:  all five Heathrow terminals have piers and jetbridges.  Usually transfers between aircraft and terminal are handled by jetbridge; the one occasion my plane had to park at a stand and my fellow passengers and I had to wait for airside buses was many years ago.

Sometimes (sometimes) they don't have enough jetways/jetbridges to handle all the flights.  But I was thinking about the airside connections between terminals, which LHR accomplishes with buses.

Quote from: J N Winkler on September 30, 2012, 07:38:59 PM

QuoteWashington Dulles (IAD) is getting rid of most of them, replacing them with a very expensive underground train system (not to be confused with Dulles Rail (also very expensive)).

Fantastic.  This replaces one mistake with another.  Why don't they stick with the basics and build piers and jetbridges?

Because the architect of the airport,  Eero Saarinen, did not want any aircraft near the main terminal building. His intent was that they be parked a considerable distance away at midfield terminal buildings.  To change that now would require approval of a lot of people, including the federal National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts.

QuoteBecause the architect of the airport,  Eero Saarinen, did not want any aircraft near the main terminal building.

Reason #5,672 why I don't understand architects

I've never had problems getting in, out, and through O'Hare in a timely fashion.  In fact, I flew out of O'Hare in December 2001 (just over three months after 9/11), and people were recommending getting to the airport 3½ hours in advance due to heightened security.  It only took me 30 minutes to get from the front door to my seat.  On that trip, it took at least as long to get through Wichita's airport (only 2 lines through security, if both are open).

Atlanta's is HUGE.  If you're connecting there to an international flight, be prepared for a very long trek from one concourse to the other.

Memphis takes the cake for shoddiest I've seen.  I've known more than once person who missed a flight because they couldn't hear the announcement of a gate change.  There's just a general feeling there that they just don't quite know how to run an airport.  I don't know....

I'd say my favorite airport by far, though, is Kansas City.  It feels very relaxed, things aren't too far spread apart, it's just nice all around.

Quote from: corco on September 30, 2012, 11:57:18 PM

QuoteBecause the architect of the airport,  Eero Saarinen, did not want any aircraft near the main terminal building.

Reason #5,672 why I don't understand architects

Keep in mind that Saarinen designed Dulles expressly for jet-powered passenger aircraft (like the DC-8 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_DC-8) and the 707 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_707)), which were very new and very noisy back in the late 1950's.

As I understand it, that is why he did not want the aircraft near the main terminal building, but put the stands for them rather far away (where the mid-field terminals are located today). Note that Saarinen died before Dulles opened, so he never saw the airport in operation.

Quote from: corco on September 30, 2012, 11:57:18 PM

QuoteBecause the architect of the airport,  Eero Saarinen, did not want any aircraft near the main terminal building.

Reason #5,672 why I don't understand architects

Architects and engineering are mutually exclusive.

Ever see highway design plans drawn by an architect?  Back when I worked in road design, we got some good horse laughs when we were given some to review.

Quote from: kphoger on October 01, 2012, 09:02:55 AM
I've never had problems getting in, out, and through O'Hare in a timely fashion.  In fact, I flew out of O'Hare in December 2001 (just over three months after 9/11), and people were recommending getting to the airport 3½ hours in advance due to heightened security.  It only took me 30 minutes to get from the front door to my seat.  On that trip, it took at least as long to get through Wichita's airport (only 2 lines through security, if both are open).

Atlanta's is HUGE.  If you're connecting there to an international flight, be prepared for a very long trek from one concourse to the other.

Memphis takes the cake for shoddiest I've seen.  I've known more than once person who missed a flight because they couldn't hear the announcement of a gate change.  There's just a general feeling there that they just don't quite know how to run an airport.  I don't know....

I'd say my favorite airport by far, though, is Kansas City.  It feels very relaxed, things aren't too far spread apart, it's just nice all around.

But MEM has Interstate BBQ. If I'm traveling around lunchtime, I'll sometimes route myself there just for that. Fantastic food.

Quote from: J N Winkler on September 30, 2012, 07:38:59 PM
I haven't had that particular problem at ORD.  My own experience is that while punctuality is poor, my flights leave ORD on time about half the time.  My real problem with ORD is that in winter, even a moderate snowstorm will result in more than three-quarters of flights (including ones to Wichita) being cancelled, which means I have to rebook, find someplace to sleep, and try again in the morning.  This has happened to me twice in ten years.

In the early 2000s, I once flew out of O'Hare the morning after 10 inches of snow fell.  Not only were the roads mostly clear getting to the airport (Chicagoland does a great job at snow plowing), but my flight (to either KC or Wichita, I forget) left on time.  We took off on hard-packed snow, with views of them melting snow by fire through the windows, no problem at all.  I've never been delayed by more than 45 minutes at O'Hare, out of probably a dozen trips I can remember.  I actually don't remember being cancelled or delayed by more than 45 minutes anywhere, ever.  Amtrak is a different story, but that's for another thread.

I actually prefer Midway, although they seem to keep rearranging things over the years and I sometimes get disoriented.  I like the smaller feel of it, and it brings back childhood memories.  It's also quite a cultural experience to get there by bus rather than the L:  when I lived in the area, I usually came down Cicero from the green line, which required a transfer somewhere between Cermak and Ogden.  The Cicero Metra station is also a fun cultural experience.  Of course, so is the Bellwood station after dark (connecting from O'Hare by Pace bus).

Quote from: Beltway on October 01, 2012, 09:27:43 AM

Quote from: corco on September 30, 2012, 11:57:18 PM

QuoteBecause the architect of the airport,  Eero Saarinen, did not want any aircraft near the main terminal building.

Reason #5,672 why I don't understand architects

Architects and engineering are mutually exclusive.

Ever see highway design plans drawn by an architect?  Back when I worked in road design, we got some good horse laughs when we were given some to review.

Though architects designed the overwater portion of the Øresund Fixed-Link crossing, and the Millau Viaduct. 

And while architects did not (as best as I can tell) design the Woodrow Wilson, Golden Gate, Brooklyn and George Washington Bridges, the engineers that did design them came up with handsome and long-lasting structures.  Engineers are capable of designing attractive bridges.

Quote from: kphoger on October 01, 2012, 01:13:47 PMIn the early 2000s, I once flew out of O'Hare the morning after 10 inches of snow fell.  Not only were the roads mostly clear getting to the airport (Chicagoland does a great job at snow plowing), but my flight (to either KC or Wichita, I forget) left on time.  We took off on hard-packed snow, with views of them melting snow by fire through the windows, no problem at all.  I've never been delayed by more than 45 minutes at O'Hare, out of probably a dozen trips I can remember.  I actually don't remember being cancelled or delayed by more than 45 minutes anywhere, ever.

I have never had a problem leaving O'Hare in the morning.  The two occasions my onward flights to Wichita were cancelled were both in the evening.  If my theory is correct and O'Hare cancels outbound flights in heavy snowstorms in order to release runway capacity for inbound flights, then cancellations are more likely later in the day after incoming flights have had a chance to stack up.

And I have been delayed for much longer than 45 minutes at ORD.  Last January I had to fly back to London, and opted for a mixed AA/BA itinerary (AA Wichita-Chicago, BA Chicago-London) instead of straight AA all the way--cattle class is much nicer on the "world's favourite airline" than on AA.  The BA flight left three hours late, because the preceding flight in the opposite direction had arrived late, and since BA apparently does not have backup flight crews in Chicago, my flight needed to be held up so the crew could get their required rest.  (Note that I am not complaining about this particular instance of tardiness.  Nobody had told me that I needed to catch the BA flight from the international terminal at ORD rather than the AA terminal, and this information is neither posted on the departure displays at ORD nor readily known to gate desk agents.  As a result, I had to be specially escorted through security when I transferred between terminals and still arrived at the correct BA gate at the international terminal more than an hour after the originally scheduled departure time, so I would have missed the flight if it had been punctual.  Plus my checked luggage arrived in London a day after I did . . .)

I am not sure how many times I have connected through ORD, but I am pretty sure it has been more than a dozen (one or two return journeys every year for about ten years with ORD as the usual connecting airport).  I estimate that I have been personally responsible for about 40 PATMs at ORD over the past decade, though I don't think any of those have involved purely domestic itineraries.

I agree that flight delays are much more rare earlier in the day. This is primarily because the low number of night flights gives the system a chance to "reset". The first flight out of an airport in the morning isn't waiting for an arriving aircraft.

Airlines schedule flights into and out of hubs in banks. A bunch of planes land, passengers have an hour-ish to transfer, then a bunch of planes leave. All it takes is one bank of flights to have delays at one hub to cause ripple effects across the whole system. Note that the banking is more apparent at less busy hubs like SLC than at super-busy ones like ATL and the airport can go from extremely crowded to a ghost town very quickly when a bank of flights leaves.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 01, 2012, 01:27:20 PM

Quote from: Beltway on October 01, 2012, 09:27:43 AM

Quote from: corco on September 30, 2012, 11:57:18 PM

QuoteBecause the architect of the airport,  Eero Saarinen, did not want any aircraft near the main terminal building.

Reason #5,672 why I don't understand architects

Architects and engineering are mutually exclusive.

Ever see highway design plans drawn by an architect?  Back when I worked in road design, we got some good horse laughs when we were given some to review.

Though architects designed the overwater portion of the Øresund Fixed-Link crossing, and the Millau Viaduct. 

Well, no, they can provide the architectural scheme, but the structural design would be done by civil engineers.

Quote from: corco on September 30, 2012, 11:57:18 PM

QuoteBecause the architect of the airport,  Eero Saarinen, did not want any aircraft near the main terminal building.

Reason #5,672 why I don't understand architects

I'll give the original Dulles scheme some credit, though.  The mobile lounges are basically a huge triple-wide transit bus, that can quickly board and de-board about 100 people and their luggage.  With sufficient frequency of service between landside and airside terminals, they can approximate what a people mover rail system can do.

Quote from: Beltway on October 01, 2012, 04:14:56 PM

Quote from: corco on September 30, 2012, 11:57:18 PM

QuoteBecause the architect of the airport,  Eero Saarinen, did not want any aircraft near the main terminal building.

Reason #5,672 why I don't understand architects

I'll give the original Dulles scheme some credit, though.  The mobile lounges are basically a huge triple-wide transit bus, that can quickly board and de-board about 100 people and their luggage.  With sufficient frequency of service between landside and airside terminals, they can approximate what a people mover rail system can do.

Do you recall the mobile lounges at Dulles when they had their original GM/Detroit Diesel (very loud) two-stroke Diesel engines (which have since been replaced, I believe by lower-emission powerplants from Cummins).

Have you been on the (relatively new) rail line (called AeroTrain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AeroTrain_%28Washington_Dulles_International_Airport%29)) between the TSA checkpoint in the main terminal and (some of) the Dulles midfield terminals?  According to the Wikipedia article hyperlinked in the previous sentence, the train system cost about $1.4 billion (but that cost apparently includes the new TSA screening area).

Quote from: realjd on October 01, 2012, 03:58:33 PM
I agree that flight delays are much more rare earlier in the day. This is primarily because the low number of night flights gives the system a chance to "reset". The first flight out of an airport in the morning isn't waiting for an arriving aircraft.

This may well explain the difference in our experiences.  I almost always plan morning flights–especially when I was living in the Chicago area.  I also never plan a connection that has less than a one-hour gap, preferably 1½ hours.

For the naughty list I should mention that, at least here in Wichita, Atlanta is notorious for losing your luggage.  You can go to Wichita's airport in the late afternoon, when flights are landing, and overhear conversations about lost luggage.  They almost all end the same way:  "Did you fly through Atlanta?  Well, there's your problem!"

Quote from: corco on September 30, 2012, 11:57:18 PM

QuoteBecause the architect of the airport,  Eero Saarinen, did not want any aircraft near the main terminal building.

Reason #5,672 why I don't understand architects

I can't understand why he made the main terminal  look so ugly?  I have to say, for real, it is a piece of art.  Building jetways and concourses will not change the facade of the front of the main terminal, though. I do not see the red tape in undergoing an above ground building between landside and airsides because of this.

Dulles annoyed me.  Maybe I wasn't giving it a fair shake because I had been diverted.  But there was a little snow on the ground, the bus to the main terminal took 25 minutes to arrive and when it finally got moving it crawled along slower than a walking pace.

My favorite was Kansas City, MCI.  Quick to disembark, the luggage already waiting at the claim, cheap and plentiful parking.  This is what an airport would be like in heaven.  Too bad I have little reason to visit Kansas City anymore.

All right I just read the main reasoning behind mobile lounges.  This modern airport was built before or about the time Jetways became popular.  It was when ramps (stairs mounted on a pick up truck) were used for loading and unloading taking the passengers outside in all weather conditions.   This was to allow passengers to be inside, even if it was a moving bus, and transport to the plane the passengers through a covered dock facility.  Even on the terminal end it used covered dock ports, so no one had to experience rain, snow, sleet, cold, hot, etc when they flew.

However, the Aerotrain is still not that great as it has its stations at the end of the concourses with one station being 500 feet away from the actual building and connected via underground tunnel.  If a passenger has to depart of arrive from a gate at the far end of the facility, a long walk is evident.  Considering some concourses are almost 4,000 feet making them longer than a small runway, it will be a long walk just to get around.  Due to the age of the type of building even an in concourse people mover would be nearly impossible to build. 

Even at Terminal 1  at ORD the maximum length of the terminal is 1600 feet, so goes to show how long the midway concourses really are and that making it hard for connections just as DFW has with its long gate corridors running parallel with the main airport driveway.

The only way to fix Dulles really would to have different terminals with concourse attached to each one instead of one large terminal and midway ramp facility as is now.  That might require the demolition of the whole airport to be rebuilt destroying the current main terminal architect.

I'll have to give a plug for YHZ — Halifax International. Small (3.5 million/year) but easy to navigate. Good service to the US with non-stops to JFK, EWR, LGA, PHL, ORD plus ATL, DCA & DTW in the summer. Halifax has pre-clearance so you go through US Customs and Border Protection in Halifax before you even leave then arrive at a domestic gate in the States. Just walk of the plane and you're on your way.....no further formalities.

Year "˜round non-stop service to London Heathrow and also Frankfurt and Reykjavik in the summer plus numerous Florida and Caribbean destinations in the winter. 


http://www.hiaa.com/

Quote from: kkt on October 01, 2012, 07:07:45 PM
My favorite was Kansas City, MCI.  Quick to disembark, the luggage already waiting at the claim, cheap and plentiful parking.  This is what an airport would be like in heaven.  Too bad I have little reason to visit Kansas City anymore.

MCI is among my least favorite airports.  Its big problem (at least in April 2008, last I was there) is that there's no central location for TSA screening, and there have to be separate screening areas for each gate or two.  That means no post-security restaurants and other services.

Long Beach (LGB) in March 2011 was my most unpleasant airport experience, though.  TSA apparently had no hand-held magnetic wands available for secondary screening of people with small items that set off the main metal detectors (like in my case, the metal buckles on my suspenders that held up my pants once I took off my belt).  So secondary screening means a full pat-down search, and a lot of people were going through that, including (apparently) a lot of women wearing underwire bras.  That was the closest I've ever come to a screener "touching my junk".  The terminal design is generally rather primitive, and it would not break my heart if JetBlue were to switch to a more modern airport like Orange County/John Wayne (SNA). 

Some of Alaska's smaller airports with jet service (like Yakutat and Gustavus) have no post-security waiting areas.  You get screened as you board the plane, in a small room between the pre-security waiting area and the tarmac.  Of course, many really small airports in western Alaska, served only by small planes, have no TSA screening at all (OTOH, they sometimes have no terminal buildings or other facilities, just a gravel airstrip and a windsock).

Quote from: kphoger on October 01, 2012, 05:22:52 PM
For the naughty list I should mention that, at least here in Wichita, Atlanta is notorious for losing your luggage.  You can go to Wichita's airport in the late afternoon, when flights are landing, and overhear conversations about lost luggage.  They almost all end the same way:  "Did you fly through Atlanta?  Well, there's your problem!"

Wonder if it's as bad as New York's JFK, where young Mafia thugs like John Gotti got their start stealing luggage? I had bags go missing going through JFK more than once (and never returned), which is why I am never going to use that airport again.

Quote from: ghYHZ on October 02, 2012, 06:23:04 AM
I'll have to give a plug for YHZ — Halifax International. Small (3.5 million/year) but easy to navigate. Good service to the US with non-stops to JFK, EWR, LGA, PHL, ORD plus ATL, DCA & DTW in the summer. Halifax has pre-clearance so you go through US Customs and Border Protection in Halifax before you even leave then arrive at a domestic gate in the States. Just walk of the plane and you're on your way.....no further formalities.

I have done U.S. pre-clearance at Pearson in Toronto, which worked pretty well.

Probably works even better in Halifax.

Quote from: ghYHZ on October 02, 2012, 06:23:04 AM
Year "˜round non-stop service to London Heathrow and also Frankfurt and Reykjavik in the summer plus numerous Florida and Caribbean destinations in the winter. 


http://www.hiaa.com/

Aside from Gander, this is very close (in relative terms) to Iceland and England, isn't it?

Quote from: oscar on October 02, 2012, 08:15:43 AM
Of course, many really small airports in western Alaska, served only by small planes, have no TSA screening at all (OTOH, they sometimes have no terminal buildings or other facilities, just a gravel airstrip and a windsock).

At Goose Bay Labrador (a former USAF Base) if going south on the jet, it's the same security procedures you would find at any major airport. But if you're heading north.....no screening......just walk out to the aircraft with your pilot! Guess they figure there's not much you can do on a 19 passenger Twin Otter!

I had to go to a First Nation community for work a couple of years ago and this is the route we took......five stops along the coast in 2 1\2 hours. At the little airports the locals would drive right out to the plane in their ATVs to pick up a parcel or meet a passenger! It was one of my most interesting trips ever. Trip report here with photos: 


http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/trip_reports/read.main/180211/?threadid=180211&searchid=180211&s=natuashish#ID180211


(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-jOMb-hb2L_8/TOmTQC_EooI/AAAAAAAAG1Y/tuUOrI3ihNs/s640/DSC06082.JPG)     

Any airport that the TSA isn't in

Quote from: roadman65 on October 01, 2012, 06:46:46 PM

Quote from: corco on September 30, 2012, 11:57:18 PM

QuoteBecause the architect of the airport,  Eero Saarinen, did not want any aircraft near the main terminal building.

Reason #5,672 why I don't understand architects

I can't understand why he made the main terminal  look so ugly?  I have to say, for real, it is a piece of art.

A lot of folks seem to regard it as an attractive structure (I do, but I am biased, since I am 3/4 Finnish).

Quote from: roadman65 on October 01, 2012, 06:46:46 PM
Building jetways and concourses will not change the facade of the front of the main terminal, though. I do not see the red tape in undergoing an above ground building between landside and airsides because of this.

Small aircraft (some commuter-type planes) have had gates off of the main terminal building, but for most flights, patrons have to take the train or a mobile lounge to get to their flight.

It was always intended that the large jets would be parked well away from the terminal, and that's still the way it is (and probably always will be, given that it would take a huge amount of money to change that now, and MWAA just built that expensive Aero-Train system (which may be expanded in the future) to get people out to the aircraft).

Quote from: ghYHZ on October 02, 2012, 09:47:49 AM

Quote from: oscar on October 02, 2012, 08:15:43 AM
Of course, many really small airports in western Alaska, served only by small planes, have no TSA screening at all (OTOH, they sometimes have no terminal buildings or other facilities, just a gravel airstrip and a windsock).

At Goose Bay Labrador (a former USAF Base) if going south on the jet, it's the same security procedures you would find at any major airport. But if you're heading north.....no screening......just walk out to the aircraft with your pilot! Guess they figure there's not much you can do on a 19 passenger Twin Otter!

I would love to drive to Goose Bay via the Trans-Labrador Highway.  Sounds like a superb roadgeeking adventure, right up there with the Dalton Highway in Alaska.

Quote from: ghYHZ on October 02, 2012, 09:47:49 AM
I had to go to a First Nation community for work a couple of years ago and this is the route we took......five stops along the coast in 2 1\2 hours. At the little airports the locals would drive right out to the plane in their ATVs to pick up a parcel or meet a passenger! It was one of my most interesting trips ever.

Same in the largely Native villages of western Alaska.  Indeed, on the circuitous route for my 2009 trip from Chignik to King Salmon, at every stop there were people at the airport parked next to the runway, just to coo over a newborn child being flown for routine post-natal checkups to the only hospital in southwestern Alaska.  The mother had relatives scattered all over the Alaska Peninsula, and it sounds like they all got to see her baby boy.

Those who've watched the just-concluded "Flying Wild Alaska" TV series will appreciate how different air travel is in western Alaska, including the blessed absence (except for some flights to Anchorage) of TSA screening. 

Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 02, 2012, 09:47:17 AM
I have done U.S. pre-clearance at Pearson in Toronto, which worked pretty well.

Probably works even better in Halifax.

I did it in Edmonton and it was very smooth ... but I was made unhappy by the fact that I had to have a TSA-style shoes-off inspection, all because I was flying towards the US.

since when is Canada no longer a sovereign nation that can say "no, that's fucking dumb" to inane US requests?

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 02, 2012, 12:31:05 PM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 02, 2012, 09:47:17 AM
I have done U.S. pre-clearance at Pearson in Toronto, which worked pretty well.

Probably works even better in Halifax.

I did it in Edmonton and it was very smooth ... but I was made unhappy by the fact that I had to have a TSA-style shoes-off inspection, all because I was flying towards the US.

since when is Canada no longer a sovereign nation that can say "no, that's fucking dumb" to inane US requests?

Since 9/11, I've just started wearing sandals to the airport–flip-flops if the weather is halfway decent.  In colder months, this just means I have to wear socks with my sandals.  I haven't yet tried flinging them off and leaving them where they lie; something tells me that would be considered rude.

On my two family trips to France, Paris de Gaulle is the best one and Paris Orly comes in second. Denver International is the 3rd best I been into (only 5 of them in America) and the least liked is LAX when the airport was in need of remodeling and renovation in the 2000's. Ontario Airport is owned by LAX, a smaller nicer looking and less crowded facility and I don't have issues with Palm Springs' own airport.

Quote from: oscar on October 02, 2012, 08:15:43 AM

Quote from: kkt on October 01, 2012, 07:07:45 PM
My favorite was Kansas City, MCI.  Quick to disembark, the luggage already waiting at the claim, cheap and plentiful parking.  This is what an airport would be like in heaven.  Too bad I have little reason to visit Kansas City anymore.

MCI is among my least favorite airports.  Its big problem (at least in April 2008, last I was there) is that there's no central location for TSA screening, and there have to be separate screening areas for each gate or two.  That means no post-security restaurants and other services.

Come to think of it, my MCI experiences were pre-9/11, so the security screening was less of an annoyance.

Quote from: kkt on October 02, 2012, 06:37:20 PM

Quote from: oscar on October 02, 2012, 08:15:43 AM

Quote from: kkt on October 01, 2012, 07:07:45 PM
My favorite was Kansas City, MCI.  Quick to disembark, the luggage already waiting at the claim, cheap and plentiful parking.  This is what an airport would be like in heaven.  Too bad I have little reason to visit Kansas City anymore.

MCI is among my least favorite airports.  Its big problem (at least in April 2008, last I was there) is that there's no central location for TSA screening, and there have to be separate screening areas for each gate or two.  That means no post-security restaurants and other services.

Come to think of it, my MCI experiences were pre-9/11, so the security screening was less of an annoyance.

While it is a minor inconvenience, it's one I can easily live with.  I just get my bite to eat ahead of time.  If for some reason I need to leave again, there are typically no more than three or four people in front of me in line, since the screening is only for that waiting area.  It's quite the opposite here in Wichita, where there are only two (or three, I can't quite remember) lines.  First thing in the morning, when all the first flights of the day are leaving at once, the lobby turns into a giant sea of people waiting to go through screening.

ATL (Atlanta)
- Lots of food choices, sometimes very fair prices
- Plenty of little places for a quick bite or some other newsstand item (although not as fairly priced).
- Generally well-laid out for connections, although if you're coming off a regional jet onto a larger jet...give yourself at least 45-60 minutes for a connection.
- Charging ports galore (if you chose Delta).
- Lots of stuff happening on the tarmac...Non-stop action.
- Lots of people milling about, actually becomes very quiet around 8:30-9:00pm
- You might feel like a number. Or as if you don't even exist.
- Narrow hallways...not for claustrophobic people (especially Concourse D).
- TSA is not really the nightmare it's made out to be, usually well-staffed.
- Sometimes, it's the closest thing to Mos Eisley, but only if you really let your imagination get the better of you.

DTW (Detroit)
* I usually get a lot of first-class upgrades into/out of DTW from FLL, so I'm partial.
- Clean as a hospital. Shiny as a new car. Wide as the Panama Canal.
- Great food choices (Fudruckers, National Coney Island, Popeyes, a few others), prices are not too bad.
- Long walks coupled with a slow tram...but you can't possibly get lost here despite its size.
- Funky underground pathway (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3T3KVBYV40) between Concourse A and the B/C complex. Worth the trip.
- Rental cars are a PITA to get to.

CLT (Charlotte)
- Finally have more moving walkways operational
- A really nice open-air feeling to the food court. Piano player tinkling at times.
- No tram between Concourse E and A. Give yourself an 1:00+ on connections involving commuter jets or props.
- US Airways hub...we don't smile much. In fact, we don't even care, but we'll get you there.
- Free Wi-Fi

ORD (Chicago O'Hare)
- Not enough seating at most gates: Somehow, 20 seats for an aircraft that seats at least 120 people means some people don't math correctly.
- Security has long lines for American Airlines terminals, surprisingly light lines for others I've experienced.
- Wallet-raping prices at most concessions.

CLE (Cleveland)
- Decent security lines. You can see exactly what you can't bring in your carry-ons, framed in glass.
- Few concessions in some termini. B is where it's at.
- Rental car shuttles are plentiful. No waiting.
- Restrooms are tiny and cramped.

IAH (Houston Intercontinental)
- Medium-sized walks.
- Food choices aplenty unless you're at...
- ...Gate B84: An embarrassing shambles of a place to wait for a flight, especially one representing United's hub. It resembles an old bus terminal. Essentially open to the elements. Confusing boarding structure. Too many PA announcements going on in something the size of a high school gymnasium. Smells like one, too.
- Some odd 1960's architecture.
- Connected here many times, never went through security or rental cars.

MEM (Memphis)
- Under construction...really quiet now.
- Give yourself an hour between flights, if leaving a commuter jet. If your boarding a commuter jet, expect to wait an extra hour or two.
- Okay food choices. Not many for the CRJ area (A1-10?).
- Cosy, low ceilings. Okay when it's quiet.
- Never had a security issue here, but some people claim TSA is not so nice. So I can't say I agree.
- New rental area under construction...present bus ride second only to BWI's Mille Miglia.

MSP (Minneapolis)
- Security from rental garage is awesomely short.
- Lots of shops, which must be great for people who carry otherwise empty suitcases.
- Connecting flights are an evil joke. Give yourself over an hour.
- Clean, bright, but it helps to be Usain Bolt if you're getting around. Baggage carousel will have stopped rotating by the time you get to it.
- If you can get around this airport, inside and out, you deserve a medal.

MCI (Kansas City)
- Weird rental car complex. Seems like a Department of Defense bunker.
- Gas station on rental car lots' premises...makes refilling on the company's dime a breeze.
- Security lines (as discussed) are shared by every gate or two. Usually just a single snack bar, but ample seating. It's like having a dozen regional airports attached to each other.

FLL (Fort Lauderdale)
- No connections between terminals. It's rare you'd ever catch a connecting flight of any sort here, unless flying from the Bahamas.
- Few food choices, except for Terminal 3. Terminal 1 isn't too bad, T2 (Delta/Air Canada) has a Miami Subs and a Duncan Donuts.
- Not enough on-site parking.
- Close to actual beaches and resorts, unlike MIA.
- Old carpeting in Terminals 2 and 3. Kind of used to it by now.
- Security is a tight bottleneck (which leads out the door) in Terminal 3; lines bad all over on Sundays and Monday mornings during Spring Break/Christmas.
- Not much seating in Concourse F.
- Free Wi-Fi.
- Slowest baggage handlers in the business, will put multiple flights' suitcases on same carousel and leave others adjacent to it unused. Stupid design of carousels ought not to include 90-degree turns and tight hairpins, which means bystanders need to intervene to allow for actual flow. Not the way I want to end my flight home...so I roll-aboard whenever possible!

GSO (Greensboro/Triad)
- Never a traffic jam.
- Huge airport for relatively few flights. If you can't find a seat at the gate, you might be the size of an aircraft carrier.
- Security is a breeze...compared to RDU's gauntlet.

XNA (Northwest Arkansas)
- The nicest darn regional airport, period. Wal-Mart paid for it, after all.
- Located in the boonies.
- Actual food and drink choices for an essentially small airport.
- Should have been named NWA (Straight outta Bentonville?)

CAE (Columbia, SC)
- This is a change of pace from boring airport design; landscaping, verandas, rocking chairs. Airy, vaulted ceilings, fountains, and not too busy. This is why some small airports rule.

LAX (El Segundo)
- Security isn't too bad for a large airport.
- Rental car facilities seem to not give a crap. Bus drivers don't, either.
- Need a line of credit to buy anything in the shops. (Except See's Candy.)
- Baggage claim seems to be run by people who sleep between unloading.
- People-watching kind of like ATL, I suppose.

Quote from: formulanone on October 02, 2012, 07:29:19 PM

* I usually get a lot of first-class upgrades into/out of DTW from FLL, so I'm partial.

for free?  if so: how?

Gold Medallion status; usually a 75-85% full flight.

Quote from: formulanone on October 02, 2012, 08:05:38 PM
Gold Medallion status; usually a 75-85% full flight.

gotcha.  I haven't talked my way into a first-class upgrade since 2005 (and that was a 1/3 full hop from San Jose to Seattle).

I did manage to get a business class seat flying from Houston to Frankfurt just by asking for a window seat.  International flights still treat their customers well.  mmm... free booze!  :sombrero:

MSP Termina 1 used to be a lot worse. The two original concourses were what are now known as the E and the F concourses. Then they built the long ones that wrap around the parking garage, C and G. The skyway connecting C and G and the security checkpoint from the parking/rental garage to teh Skyway was added later. Also, originally the security checkpoints were at the entrances to the concourses, one for F&G and one for C&E. So if you were connecting from the end of C to the end of G, you had an incredible hike and had to leave the secured area.

Terminal 2 security and the gates are on the second level, ticketing and baggage are on the ground. But entering on the 2nd level skyway from the parking ramp or LRT station you have to go down and then back up, even if you have a pre-printed boarding pass.

Quote from: formulanone on October 02, 2012, 08:05:38 PM
Gold Medallion status; usually a 75-85% full flight.

If I ever encounter you at ATL, I expect you kneel and kiss my Platinum Medallion card. Just look for J/DOT on the GIDS display and you'll find me in the nearest SkyClub.  :sombrero:

Have your upgrade rates gone down over the past few years? Mine were becoming abysmal until I hit Platinum last year.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 02, 2012, 08:23:21 PM

Quote from: formulanone on October 02, 2012, 08:05:38 PM
Gold Medallion status; usually a 75-85% full flight.

gotcha.  I haven't talked my way into a first-class upgrade since 2005 (and that was a 1/3 full hop from San Jose to Seattle).

I did manage to get a business class seat flying from Houston to Frankfurt just by asking for a window seat.  International flights still treat their customers well.  mmm... free booze!  :sombrero:

Since free upgrades became a common perk for frequent flyers, there are often more status flyers than first class seats. I've been on flights where I was number 100-something on the priority list with only 5 seats available. Airlines have thus become very rigid with their upgrade policies and talking your way into an upgrade is extraordinarily rare anymore.

Quote from: realjd on October 02, 2012, 08:52:08 PM
If I ever encounter you at ATL, I expect you kneel and kiss my Platinum Medallion card. Just look for J/DOT on the GIDS display and you'll find me in the nearest SkyClub.  :sombrero:

Can't really justify the cost of the SkyClub thing...I don't get much time in between connections anymore. On the way home, I'll hit up those little stands, get a sandwich, granola bar, and a water, and use my Have One On Us (HOON US?) coupon for a Canadian Club on the rocks.

I made Gold on my last flight home in 2011, approaching Platinum (about 28 segments to go), but it's going to be a close call for a status upgrade for 2013. I usually creatively choose airports that involve an extra long trip (go county and airport collecting!) to keep with Delta, but my company chooses the cheapest fares , so about 25%, I'm on another airline which varies. I might get United one way, and USAir on the way back, for example. 

Quote
Have your upgrade rates gone down over the past few years? Mine were becoming abysmal until I hit Platinum last year.

If it's a lightly-traveled spoke route, usually one with an MD-88/90, then I usually get an upgrade. The few times that I fly on Saturdays or Sundays are guarantees for upgrades at this point. But hub-to-hub travel (ATL to MEM/MSP/LAX)...forget it.

So If J/Lin is ahead of you, then he was heavily-delayed due to IROPS.

Sky Priority is my favorite perk of all: Those potentially hour-long TSA lines at home are now 5-15 minutes.

Quote from: realjd on October 02, 2012, 08:52:08 PM

Quote from: formulanone on October 02, 2012, 08:05:38 PM
Gold Medallion status; usually a 75-85% full flight.

If I ever encounter you at ATL, I expect you kneel and kiss my Platinum Medallion card. Just look for J/DOT on the GIDS display and you'll find me in the nearest SkyClub.  :sombrero:

to show how little I know about airlines, I cannot even name which has their perks club called Medallion.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 02, 2012, 09:23:07 PM

Quote from: realjd on October 02, 2012, 08:52:08 PM

Quote from: formulanone on October 02, 2012, 08:05:38 PM
Gold Medallion status; usually a 75-85% full flight.

If I ever encounter you at ATL, I expect you kneel and kiss my Platinum Medallion card. Just look for J/DOT on the GIDS display and you'll find me in the nearest SkyClub.  :sombrero:

to show how little I know about airlines, I cannot even name which has their perks club called Medallion.

To show how little I know, I didn't even know they had actual cards.

Delta. They have four tiers, and then Million-Mile status positioned somewhere in there for people have flown with them back when they used pteranodons. The award was actually a little metal medallion about the size of a quarter. Now, it's a plastic tag. I think Diamond Medallion is actually an aluminum card.

I couldn't really name any of the other "awards", but I know the Frequent Flyer program names (thanks to a flooded e-mail account just for the hotel, airline, rental, and restaurant offers).

^^^
SkyClub is good for the free booze and the free wifi. Plus, one of my home airports is MCO so it's a nice escape from the tourists.

SkyPriority is great (and the HOOU coupons with my boarding passes), although I get TSA PreCheck privelages at most large airports now since I'm a member of Global Entry. No line, metal detectors, shoes on, laptops and liquids stay in my bag, it's great. Well worth the $100 for GE. Plus when I get back to the US on international flights I don't have to talk to CBP.

I was forced to fly USAir this week due to cost. MLB only has DL with MD88/DC9 and 757 service while US has CRJ200 service. We joke that MLB-CLT is probably the most elite heavy route in the US system; too bad they're all Delta elites! The 8:30 AM US flight is primarily filled with DL Platinum and Diamond folks who couldn't get onto the 7AM ATL flight.

Quote from: kphoger on October 02, 2012, 09:27:04 PM

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 02, 2012, 09:23:07 PM

Quote from: realjd on October 02, 2012, 08:52:08 PM

Quote from: formulanone on October 02, 2012, 08:05:38 PM
Gold Medallion status; usually a 75-85% full flight.

If I ever encounter you at ATL, I expect you kneel and kiss my Platinum Medallion card. Just look for J/DOT on the GIDS display and you'll find me in the nearest SkyClub.  :sombrero:

to show how little I know about airlines, I cannot even name which has their perks club called Medallion.

To show how little I know, I didn't even know they had actual cards.

How else are we supposed to feel superior about the fact that our jobs require us to be on the road marginally more often than someone else's job? I just wish I traveled enough for Diamond status; their cards are made of metal! Don't you feel inferior now?

Quote from: realjd on October 02, 2012, 09:38:52 PM
I just wish I traveled enough for Diamond status; their cards are made of metal! Don't you feel inferior now?

I have metal status. Guess what my card is made of :bigass:

Quote from: NE2 on October 02, 2012, 10:43:29 PM

I have metal status. Guess what my card is made of :bigass:

I have poo status.  About 30 minutes before I need to present my credentials for boarding, I drink an entire bottle of laxative.

Quote from: NE2 on October 02, 2012, 10:43:29 PM
I have metal status. Guess what my card is made of :bigass:

I implicitly disagree with your status.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 02, 2012, 11:00:35 PMAbout 30 minutes before I need to present my credentials for boarding, I drink an entire bottle of laxative.

You just really like the forum.

Did I mention I love flying out of Newark? I've never had problems with lines or waits, and there are nice amenities, at least in Terminal C. It's also convenient to get to, off of rail and bus.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 02, 2012, 12:31:05 PM
I did it in Edmonton and it was very smooth ... but I was made unhappy by the fact that I had to have a TSA-style shoes-off inspection, all because I was flying towards the US.

since when is Canada no longer a sovereign nation that can say "no, that's fucking dumb" to inane US requests?

I'm just waiting for them to require that also on all flights from the Maritimes to Central Canada (Halifax, Moncton, Saint John, Fredericton, Charlottetown to Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto)

Even though these are domestic flights........they are in US airspace over Maine for nearly 200 miles and under the control of "Boston Center"  

Quote from: formulanone on October 03, 2012, 12:11:43 AM

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 02, 2012, 11:00:35 PMAbout 30 minutes before I need to present my credentials for boarding, I drink an entire bottle of laxative.

You just really like the forum.

I had wondered how long it would take for someone to crack the upper bound of the "Interstate" category, and then for someone else to notice...

Quote from: Steve on October 03, 2012, 01:30:27 AM
Did I mention I love flying out of Newark? I've never had problems with lines or waits, and there are nice amenities, at least in Terminal C. It's also convenient to get to, off of rail and bus.

I have come through Newark to or from overseas a few times.  Immigration and customs move at a snail's pace and the staff was nasty and rude. 

Like JFK and LGA, Newark is now on my personal "no fly" list.

Quote from: Scott5114 on October 03, 2012, 01:59:27 AM

Quote from: formulanone on October 03, 2012, 12:11:43 AM

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 02, 2012, 11:00:35 PMAbout 30 minutes before I need to present my credentials for boarding, I drink an entire bottle of laxative.

You just really like the forum.

I had wondered how long it would take for someone to crack the upper bound of the "Interstate" category, and then for someone else to notice...

damn it.  I had been hoping post 10000 would be about poo.  alas, it was not.

Quote from: Steve on October 03, 2012, 01:30:27 AM
Did I mention I love flying out of Newark? I've never had problems with lines or waits, and there are nice amenities, at least in Terminal C. It's also convenient to get to, off of rail and bus.

Terminal C was the last of the 3 modern airport terminals funded by Continental Airlines, now part of United.  It is the best of the 3, as it is layed out just right with the gates all in a row down a nice long concourse.  Terminals A & B have three small satelites, though easy to walk to, still the layout only allows for one at gate food facility and cramped conditions.  If you need a cab at Terminal A, good luck as it is entirely within the City of Elizabeth, so Newark cab companies cannot go there at all.  There is not much of taxi service in Elizabeth, so you have more problems there.  Take the monorail to the other terminals and you will be much better. Now you can take NJ Transit  to there as for years you had to use Airlink from Penn Station, that was an express bus that needed to travel on NJ 21 and US 1 & 9 to shuttle you. Too bad PATH does not have an extension to there as you would have a one seat ride to Downtown Manhattan and the new WTC.

Why do city limits matter to private cab companies? Operating permits? Could a business not get permits in both cities?

Quote from: Scott5114 on October 06, 2012, 01:30:44 PM
Why do city limits matter to private cab companies? Operating permits? Could a business not get permits in both cities?

Cab permitting in some areas (such as Illinois) is done on a local basis.  Chicago, for example, sells medallions like New York.  If you (your company, IIRC) don't have a medallion, you can't service O'Hare or Midway.

Quote from: formulanone on October 02, 2012, 07:29:19 PM
ORD (Chicago O'Hare)
- Not enough seating at most gates: Somehow, 20 seats for an aircraft that seats at least 120 people means some people don't math correctly.
- Security has long lines for American Airlines terminals, surprisingly light lines for others I've experienced.
- Wallet-raping prices at most concessions.

Fairly standard at any Chicago venue.  McCormick Place, Navy Pier, et.al. are likewise.  It's not just the airports.  I've learned not to buy anything if I can help it within Chicago city limits or Rosemont village limits.

Quote from: Scott5114 on October 06, 2012, 01:30:44 PM
Why do city limits matter to private cab companies? Operating permits? Could a business not get permits in both cities?

I do not know, but years ago the Star Ledger (New Jersey or North Jerseys main newspaper) had an article on this, and it stated how much harder it was to get a taxi in Terminal A at Newark Airport then it was at the other two terminals because it was across the city line and cabs are not allowed to do that for some reason.  I am not familiar with how the jurisdictions work with cab companies, but they do unless maybe things changed.  I have not lived in NJ since 1990 so in 22 years it no longer keeps me in touch with things there.

Quote from: roadman65 on October 06, 2012, 07:24:07 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on October 06, 2012, 01:30:44 PM
Why do city limits matter to private cab companies? Operating permits? Could a business not get permits in both cities?

I do not know, but years ago the Star Ledger (New Jersey or North Jerseys main newspaper) had an article on this, and it stated how much harder it was to get a taxi in Terminal A at Newark Airport then it was at the other two terminals because it was across the city line and cabs are not allowed to do that for some reason.  I am not familiar with how the jurisdictions work with cab companies, but they do unless maybe things changed.  I have not lived in NJ since 1990 so in 22 years it no longer keeps me in touch with things there.

It's absolutely true. Newark cabs cannot get you at Terminal A. You basically have to call a cab company to come get you from there. I think it's ridiculous that the two cities couldn't have worked out some arrangement with their borders, but I'm sure Elizabeth is getting a pretty good amount of taxes.

Taxis are very tightly regulated and a huge tax cash cow, in most big cities, and especially in the NYC metro.  According to the internet Elizabeth has only 80 cab medalions, while Newark has about 600.  The other issue if you are going to Manhattan, IIRC, is that if you fly into one of the two NY airports, the cab can drop you off and then try to get another fare downtown, but a NJ cab is not allowed to do that, they have to "deadhead" back to NJ, so they can charge you for that.

Other weird ones I have seen are in Cincy, where all the cabs have both an Ohio and a Kentucky plate, as they cannot go into Kentucky without paying Kentucky taxes as well (the airport is in Kentucky).  Las Vegas has two types of cabs, with the lesser version (called a "red a** cab" in the local lingo) unable to pick people up at either the airport or the Strip, but charging its mostly local clientele a far lower rate.  IIRC, DC used to have the world's most confusing cabs, with three cab lines at DCA, as different cabs had different permits for drop offs in DC, MD or VA (thus a complex combination of cabs with permits from different combinations of the three jurisdictions, both with and without airport permits as well).  They used to not have meters, but an impossible to understand "rate card" but they did away with that, although IAD still has a no-meter flat rate (which is less than the meter would be).

Quote from: SP Cook on October 07, 2012, 08:26:33 AM
Taxis are very tightly regulated and a huge tax cash cow, in most big cities, and especially in the NYC metro.  According to the internet Elizabeth has only 80 cab medalions, while Newark has about 600.  The other issue if you are going to Manhattan, IIRC, is that if you fly into one of the two NY airports, the cab can drop you off and then try to get another fare downtown, but a NJ cab is not allowed to do that, they have to "deadhead" back to NJ, so they can charge you for that.

Other weird ones I have seen are in Cincy, where all the cabs have both an Ohio and a Kentucky plate, as they cannot go into Kentucky without paying Kentucky taxes as well (the airport is in Kentucky).  Las Vegas has two types of cabs, with the lesser version (called a "red a** cab" in the local lingo) unable to pick people up at either the airport or the Strip, but charging its mostly local clientele a far lower rate.  IIRC, DC used to have the world's most confusing cabs, with three cab lines at DCA, as different cabs had different permits for drop offs in DC, MD or VA (thus a complex combination of cabs with permits from different combinations of the three jurisdictions, both with and without airport permits as well).  They used to not have meters, but an impossible to understand "rate card" but they did away with that, although IAD still has a no-meter flat rate (which is less than the meter would be).

D.C. cabs are now all metered.

But what all of the cries out for is an end to economic regulation of the taxicab industry. 

No state, county or municipal government should be in the business of allowing (or not allowing) someone to be in the taxicab business, nor to tell the owner or operator of a cab how much to charge.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 07, 2012, 05:52:09 PMBut what all of the cries out for is an end to economic regulation of the taxicab industry.

No state, county or municipal government should be in the business of allowing (or not allowing) someone to be in the taxicab business, nor to tell the owner or operator of a cab how much to charge.

I don't think this localized disparity in cab availability is an argument against economic regulation of the taxi industry.  Rather, it is an argument against using a medallion system as an instrument of political patronage, which is what it has become in northern New Jersey.

Aside from the need for safety regulation, which necessitates official oversight of the taxi industry in any case, the taxi companies have to be able to collect enough in fares to keep their vehicles clean and in good repair while paying their drivers at minimum a reasonable wage (preferably enough to attract safe drivers).  Communities do have an interest in there being adequate availability of cabs at major traffic generators such as airports.  In principle, and in the absence of real-world problems such as significant barriers to entry in the taxi industry, both aims can be achieved through appropriate tailoring of safety regulation.  However, I suspect medallion systems have developed partly to relieve taxi licensing authorities of the added overhead associated with using safety inspections to exercise control over the quality dimensions of taxi service.  Sometimes it is much cheaper to achieve an aim by indirection.

Quote from: J N Winkler on October 07, 2012, 08:40:33 PM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 07, 2012, 05:52:09 PMBut what all of the cries out for is an end to economic regulation of the taxicab industry.

No state, county or municipal government should be in the business of allowing (or not allowing) someone to be in the taxicab business, nor to tell the owner or operator of a cab how much to charge.

I don't think this localized disparity in cab availability is an argument against economic regulation of the taxi industry.  Rather, it is an argument against using a medallion system as an instrument of political patronage, which is what it has become in northern New Jersey.

There is no rational reason to have a medallion system anywhere.  It is an unjustified intrusion into the market for transportation services. 

Quote from: J N Winkler on October 07, 2012, 08:40:33 PM
Aside from the need for safety regulation, which necessitates official oversight of the taxi industry in any case, the taxi companies have to be able to collect enough in fares to keep their vehicles clean and in good repair while paying their drivers at minimum a reasonable wage (preferably enough to attract safe drivers).  Communities do have an interest in there being adequate availability of cabs at major traffic generators such as airports.  In principle, and in the absence of real-world problems such as significant barriers to entry in the taxi industry, both aims can be achieved through appropriate tailoring of safety regulation.  However, I suspect medallion systems have developed partly to relieve taxi licensing authorities of the added overhead associated with using safety inspections to exercise control over the quality dimensions of taxi service.  Sometimes it is much cheaper to achieve an aim by indirection.

I have no problem with non-economic regulation of taxicabs, for example to:

- make sure drivers are qualified to drive a taxi, not an illegal alien and not someone that has been convicted of violent crime(s);
- make sure vehicles are in a good state of repair (including brakes, tires, steering and emission control systems);
- make sure that drivers and vehicles are properly insured;
- make sure that vehicles have appropriate anti-robbery systems installed (such as video cameras and GPS-enabled robbery alarm systems);
- make sure appropriate taxes have been paid;
- make sure that taxi meters are honestly calibrated (without dictating what the fares should be);
- make sure that taxi service is available to the public 24 hours per day, 7 days per week; and
- make sure that drivers do not exceed a certain number of hours behind the wheel (perhaps like the federal hours-of-service rules for commercial vehicle drivers).

As libertarian as I am about economics, I understand that price regulation is an important consumer regulation.

In an airport scenario, I can make an informed decision to either take a taxi, which will be $X, or (depending on the airport) an air traveler specific shared van or bus for a little less, a "car service" or limo which will be a little to a lot more (and generally involve no cab line), and, in some places, the city's regular communal transit for a highly subsidized token amount.  I have been in cab lines for up to 30 minutes.  I don't see how that could work if every passenger had to haggle with the driver over price.

While I despise communal transit generally, the value to the business traveler of flying into DCA and getting downtown on the subway and back for less than $4 round trip cannot be beat.

Quote from: SP Cook on October 08, 2012, 07:32:40 AM
As libertarian as I am about economics, I understand that price regulation is an important consumer regulation.

It's really about disclosure of those prices, so a consumer can make a rational decision.

Quote from: SP Cook on October 08, 2012, 07:32:40 AM
In an airport scenario, I can make an informed decision to either take a taxi, which will be $X, or (depending on the airport) an air traveler specific shared van or bus for a little less, a "car service" or limo which will be a little to a lot more (and generally involve no cab line), and, in some places, the city's regular communal transit for a highly subsidized token amount.  I have been in cab lines for up to 30 minutes.  I don't see how that could work if every passenger had to haggle with the driver over price.

Agreed.  The key to competitive taxi rates is to mandate that every taxicab display a (permanent) "price to compare" on the outside of the vehicle.  That "price to compare" should be the cost for a uniform trip of an arbitrary length (maybe 5 miles).

Quote from: SP Cook on October 08, 2012, 07:32:40 AM
While I despise communal transit generally, the value to the business traveler of flying into DCA and getting downtown on the subway and back for less than $4 round trip cannot be beat.

Agreed. 

There are many things that the designers of the Washington Metrorail system did wrong (and initially, the rail stop at DCA was in an inconvenient location, but the location now is excellent). 

Compare and contrast with LGA in New York City (no direct access to the subways, absolutely inexcusable) and LAX (Green Line (east-west light rail that runs mostly on the median of I-105)), with the Aviation stop sited intentionally far from the LAX terminals (you cannot walk to get there, some sort of a shuttle bus runs sometimes between the LAX terminals and the Aviation stop. 

Baltimore's BWI has a light rail station at one end of its terminal building complex, but I don't think it gets all that much use from arriving or departing passengers.  It also has a MARC commuter and Amtrak station, but again, I don't think airport users bother with it (a bus runs from the terminals to the train station).

The Metrorail line to Dulles will be open (supposedly) by 2016, but it will be a long walk from the terminal building to the train platform, which was moved to "save money" (it was originally to have been built under the front of the main  terminal building).  And it's going to be a long, long ride from there to downtown D.C.

London Heathrow has decent access to the Piccadilly line (Tube) from its terminals, and a dedicated express train to downtown London (Paddington Station).  London Gatwick has direct regional rail service to downtown as well (Victoria Station). Stockholm Arlanda has a great express train (privately build and privately owned) that runs from the airport to downtown Stockholm at high speed (this is what the Dulles Line should have been).

Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 08, 2012, 09:59:32 AM
The Metrorail line to Dulles will be open (supposedly) by 2016, but it will be a long walk from the terminal building to the train platform, which was moved to "save money" (it was originally to have been built under the front of the main  terminal building).  And it's going to be a long, long ride from there to downtown D.C.

When traveling, I've never really been bothered by a long rail trip from the airport to the city center.  I'm just always happy to have a rail link at all, and airports are often far from the city center anyway.  I also just assume that the rail link will be a long walk from the terminals; in fact, I would only be pleasantly surprised if it weren't.

Quote from: kphoger on October 08, 2012, 11:25:24 AM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 08, 2012, 09:59:32 AM
The Metrorail line to Dulles will be open (supposedly) by 2016, but it will be a long walk from the terminal building to the train platform, which was moved to "save money" (it was originally to have been built under the front of the main  terminal building).  And it's going to be a long, long ride from there to downtown D.C.

When traveling, I've never really been bothered by a long rail trip from the airport to the city center.  I'm just always happy to have a rail link at all, and airports are often far from the city center anyway.  I also just assume that the rail link will be a long walk from the terminals; in fact, I would only be pleasantly surprised if it weren't.

The new Washington Metrorail Silver Line (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Line_%28WMATA%29) will be 17 (that's right, 17) stops from the first stop in downtown D.C.  That is going to make for a very long trip from Dulles if your destination is anywhere in D.C. (even worse if you are trying to reach one of the Metro stations in Maryland).

The rail station will be built on the other side of the "daily" (expensive) lot (north side of Saarinen Circle (Google Maps here (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=saarinen+circle,+dulles+va&hl=en&hnear=Saarinen+Cir,+Sterling,+Loudoun,+Virginia+20166&gl=us&t=h&z=16)) - (the lot is also totally free parking for Members of Congress and their families (very wrong), Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court (I'm O.K. with that), and diplomats (I'm also O.K. with that)).  Most of the underground walkway (runs north-south from the main terminal building) was built some years ago, so parking lot patrons don't have to walk across a pretty big lot in the cold or heat, and will also serve Silver Line riders.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 08, 2012, 12:20:36 PM
The new Washington Metrorail Silver Line (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Line_%28WMATA%29) will be 17 (that's right, 17) stops from the first stop in downtown D.C.  That is going to make for a very long trip from Dulles if your destination is anywhere in D.C. (even worse if you are trying to reach one of the Metro stations in Maryland).

O'Hare is 16 stops from the first downtown Blue Line stop (Clark/Lake), so that doesn't really seem out of the ordinary to me.

Quote from: kphoger on October 09, 2012, 08:32:07 AM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 08, 2012, 12:20:36 PM
The new Washington Metrorail Silver Line (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Line_%28WMATA%29) will be 17 (that's right, 17) stops from the first stop in downtown D.C.  That is going to make for a very long trip from Dulles if your destination is anywhere in D.C. (even worse if you are trying to reach one of the Metro stations in Maryland).

O'Hare is 16 stops from the first downtown Blue Line stop (Clark/Lake), so that doesn't really seem out of the ordinary to me.

Never ridden a train from O'Hare (I have changed planes there several times, but never gone to Chicago itself by way of flying). 

One of the axioms of transportation planning (and especially transit planning) is the notion that trips should be separated by trip length.  Hence there are local, limited-stop and express buses (outside of New York City, this is rare for rail transit).   But it is one reason why having the El serve (relatively) short trips while using the Metra commuter rail lines to serve longer trips. 

Dulles is a long way from downtown D.C., and would be much better-served by an express train line to the city, with only one or two stops along the way (maybe at Tysons Corner and someplace in Arlington County).  But there's this notion that Dulles needed the same type of transit that close-in National (DCA) enjoys, something I have always disagreed with.

London Heathrow is 18 stops from Green Park Station along the Picadilly line. It takes just under an hour. There's also an expensive express train to Paddington Station that costs around £30 round trip and takes around 15 minutes. Having done both, I prefer the express train but it seems like there are always more people on the much less expensive but slow Underground train.

I think offering both is a great for transit users. I have the option to pay for fast service while also having the option to get there affordablly if needed.

Quote from: realjd on October 09, 2012, 10:30:32 AM
London Heathrow is 18 stops from Green Park Station along the Picadilly line. It takes just under an hour. There's also an expensive express train to Paddington Station that costs around £30 round trip and takes around 15 minutes. Having done both, I prefer the express train but it seems like there are always more people on the much less expensive but slow Underground train.

I think offering both is a great for transit users. I have the option to pay for fast service while also having the option to get there affordablly if needed.

I strongly agree. 

I have not ridden that part of the Picadilly Line (I've ridden the other end, to Cockfosters while on a transit sightseeing trip), but the travel time makes intuitive sense, given the number of stops (stops really slow any form of transit down). The train to Paddington is similar in price to the Arlanda Express train in Stockholm. 

Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 09, 2012, 10:44:04 AM
Cockfosters

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ8Nazp-vzA22uHlBwP_V3qqYK0QgI_5JtRP3vgQl-759s3OeLf)

eh, it's probably pronounced something nowhere near as giggle-inducing, like "Coffs" or "Darby".

Quote from: realjd on October 09, 2012, 10:30:32 AMLondon Heathrow is 18 stops from Green Park Station along the Picadilly line. It takes just under an hour. There's also an expensive express train to Paddington Station that costs around £30 round trip and takes around 15 minutes. Having done both, I prefer the express train but it seems like there are always more people on the much less expensive but slow Underground train.

Yesterday at 5:15, I couldn't get on a Heathrow train at Acton Town (a lot of these would have been Hounslowites/Ealingites, but a lot had luggage) - literally no more room. That is common, though this one was totally rammed - in fact it's common to have difficulties in the off-peak (mid-afternoon, late evening). Two minutes later a train fresh from the depot pulled into the station, also heading for Heathrow - those who couldn't get on the previous train filled most seats. Only having about 12tph to Heathrow doesn't help.

QuoteI think offering both is a great for transit users. I have the option to pay for fast service while also having the option to get there affordablly if needed.

There's also a mid-range 'Connect' service that has two stops taking the route of the fast trains.
At the moment you can pay through the nose to get the arse end of zone 1 quickly (for a lot of major destinations, it will be slower than the slow option), a middling amount to get to the arse end of zone 1 reasonably quickly (they market that one for local traffic though) or a small amount to get to some of the best stops in zone 1 directly at the cost of time and comfort.

They plan, in 5 to 6 years time, to open Crossrail and abolish the Heathrow Express - I believe BAA's contribution to the cost includes giving the tunnel they built from Hayes and Harlington (that the Express and Connect use) for £1, which will reduce the fares significantly as it would be zone 1-6, rather than a special fare. As Crossrail will, while adding stops to Heathrow-Paddington journeys, extend those journeys through many well-sited stations (Bond Street, Tottenham Court Road, Farringdon, Liverpool Street, Whitechapel (which is better sited than Paddington, even if not well-sited), Canary Wharf...), it means it's a far better option and everyone except the hotels at Paddington (which isn't really walkable for tourists to visit London, unlike a wide selection of Piccadilly line stops) wins. The Piccadilly will cease to be crush-loaded, while Crossrail becomes very full around the Ealing/Acton area instead (partially transfer of Heathrow traffic, partially due to people in the middle of the two lines heading north to Crossrail, not south to the Piccadilly as they do now, due to the better journey times that comes from not terminating at Paddington).

Heathrow's rail links to outside London leave a lot to be desired (they scrapped the link to Staines and beyond, due to level crossing issues, but the Slough and beyond link is gaining momentum), the air space is crowded, the runways very tight timings (so plane misses the slot=longer wait), the terminals are crowded, especially the central ones. Road access is poor compared to other developed world equivalents (and passenger drop offs near the terminals have gone, thanks to the Glasgow Airport terrorist attack) - you will navigate either stop lights, roundabouts, or both before reaching the car park. Still, at least the journey time from gate to baggage claim isn't 15 minutes, like I've experienced (walking fast) at Stansted - it was like 400m with no walkways - fine as a 20-something able-bodied person, poor for everyone else. They don't even have an excuse that justifies the poor airport design!

That said, these plans (http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/publications/bigger%20and%20quieter.pdf) to move it 2miles west and make it bigger (4 runways, large new terminal), will go a long way at making the Heathrow experience for most people a lot better, including those who just have to live near it (unless you live in Poyle, Datchet, Eton or Windsor, that is...)

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 09, 2012, 11:35:27 AMeh, it's probably pronounced something nowhere near as giggle-inducing, like "Coffs" or "Darby".

Nope - it's pronounced "Cockfosters".(just listen for the first 10-15 seconds)

Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 09, 2012, 11:35:27 AM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on October 09, 2012, 10:44:04 AM
Cockfosters

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ8Nazp-vzA22uHlBwP_V3qqYK0QgI_5JtRP3vgQl-759s3OeLf)

eh, it's probably pronounced something nowhere near as giggle-inducing, like "Coffs" or "Darby".

One of my favorite things about the Underground is the announcements that would be nonsense in any other context, like "this is the Picadilly line train with service to Cockfosters. Alight here for the Bakerloo line". It's much more colorful than American subways.

And yes, Cockfosters. Heh. We also ate at Ye Olde Cock Tavern last time I was there.

I might be biased, but I really like the design of SFO. Very short walk from curbside to the security gates, parking is convenient, short walk between terminals, corridors are wide, and the airport is only 10-15 minutes from downtown.

MSP, on the other hand, has become a total disaster. The corridors are crowded with low ceilings, the security area is a mess, and the distance to some of the gates is enormous. (Its funny how they have a 'train' to the rental car area even though it's the same distance as many of the gates.) And the whole arrangement with Humphrey Terminal #2 is bizarre.

Quote from: flowmotion on October 12, 2012, 08:45:00 PM
And the whole arrangement with Humphrey Terminal #2 is bizarre.

it's worse than bizarre when you have to clear customs and catch a connection between the two terminals.

 I was browsing google maps and did a virtual tour of EWR (Newark- Liberty) and noticed they moved their arrivals roadway to the ground level.  According to wikipedia, the Port Authority added more Departure counters and moved the old Arrivals Hall to a new facility where the former parking garage was located beneath the front of the terminal, while the old Hall is a second Departure level to allow for the expansion.

I have not been in there in quite a few years, but I imagine that may make things somewhat easier.  Using the garage, considering the Osama Bin Laden made it where we cannot have them underneath the terminals anymore, is a great idea.  I did hear, that Terminal A will build a structure just like Terminal C and most other airports directly accross the street from the terminals. 

Also, does anyone know the type of term used for the three Newark Teminals design?  Unlike, most buildings that have cross beams to support its ceilings, the terminals here have strategically placed collums that support the part of the roof that is above them with four extensions that split from the top of the collum itself.  The roofs are inverted toward the structural support with a drain pipe inside the collum to allow for drainage.   Each part of the ceilings are the same square dimmensions except for three segments located over the escalator areas adjacent to the satelites that house the gates.

This airport looks a lot like Dulles, but not quite, but except for the design the same as IAD being modern.

Best airport to get to downtown from? BOS! :)

You have to take a shuttle bus from your terminal to the subway station, but the buses run seemingly every minute so it's no big deal, and then the first downtown station is only 2 stops later.

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on October 22, 2012, 10:21:52 PM
Best airport to get to downtown from? BOS! :)

You have to take a shuttle bus from your terminal to the subway station, but the buses run seemingly every minute so it's no big deal, and then the first downtown station is only 2 stops later.

National Airport (DCA) in Arlington, Virginia is pretty good when it comes to "getting downtown" by transit, but unless your destination is close-by [the airport] Crystal City, Pentagon City or the Pentagon itself, it sounds like Boston beats the Washington Metro in that regard (it's still a pretty short trip from DCA to destinations in downtown D.C. by Metro).

Admittedly the line that serves the airport ends 4 stops later in dowtown, so if you're going any farther you need to transfer to another line, but you never have to do more than a 2-seat ride, since the only other line that doesn't interchange with the Blue Line is the Red Line, but the Silver Line BRT which does interchange with the Red Line also serves the airport and actually runs direct-to-terminal.

It's pretty damn handy, but most cities don't have the luxury of having an airport as large as BOS right next to downtown due to geographical limitations.

Some of my fave airports:

Akron-Canton (OH) Airport:  Pretty much overhauled/expanded in the last 10 years, it's not that bad of a walk from gate to parking lot or car rental.  For those looking to go to Cleveland, or pretty much anywhere else in NE Ohio, CAK is the airport to go to.  (Also check out the goodies at Harry London Chocolate Factory, perfectly situated between the airport and I-77). 

Denver International Airport:  Despite the airport being out in the boonies in relation with a lot of the Denver Metro area, they have a pretty good dedicated freeway (Pena Boulevard) connecting I-70/I-225 and E-470, and a pretty good terminal/shuttle system.


Cleveland Hopkins Airport, despite the upgrades over the last dozen years or so, is still far from user-friendly.  If you are at the airport to pick up or drop off passengers, there is not much indoor waiting space nor concessions outside of the security zones (which used to be in each terminal).  Renting a car, you almost need a GPS to find your way to the freeways as there is no real easy connecting road from the Rental Car Center to the main area freeways (I-71 & I-480).  And the RTA Rapid Transit Red Line connecting the airport to downtown only runs every 30 minutes.  CAK is your better bet.

Quote from: thenetwork on October 23, 2012, 12:24:38 AM
Denver International Airport:  Despite the airport being out in the boonies in relation with a lot of the Denver Metro area, they have a pretty good dedicated freeway (Pena Boulevard) connecting I-70/I-225 and E-470, and a pretty good terminal/shuttle system.

Don't forget the paintings of Nazi zombies killing children!

Quote
Cleveland Hopkins Airport, despite the upgrades over the last dozen years or so, is still far from user-friendly.  If you are at the airport to pick up or drop off passengers, there is not much indoor waiting space nor concessions outside of the security zones (which used to be in each terminal).  Renting a car, you almost need a GPS to find your way to the freeways as there is no real easy connecting road from the Rental Car Center to the main area freeways (I-71 & I-480).  And the RTA Rapid Transit Red Line connecting the airport to downtown only runs every 30 minutes.  CAK is your better bet.

Back when CLE was a Continental hub, I spent many evenings there cursing the fact that almost all of the concessions closed at 8.

What's bizarre about two terminals at MSP?

There is a proposal that would greatly expand Terminal 2 and add the kind of amenites Terminal 1 has; under that proposal Terminal 1 would be for exclusive use of Delta and it's partners and all the other airlines would be moved to Terminal 2. (Still miss the names Lindbergh and Humphrey which were stripped from the freeway signs).

Quote from: Mdcastle on October 23, 2012, 04:05:37 PM
What's bizarre about two terminals at MSP?

The connection between them is slow and poorly designed. Terminal 2 also has its own set of parking ramps, rental car facilities, etc.

It was probably OK when Humphrey was the "charter terminal", but the conspiracy theory is Northwest/Delta wanted to 'exile' the low cost carriers (SWA) over there.

The Humphrey and Lindbergh buildings also have an LRT line connecting them so inter-terminal transit shouldn't be that hard. :poke: :coffee:

Delta is still very vocal about it's desire to exile everyone else to Humphrey. The other airlines are for the most part keeping quiet because they have exlusive terminals at their own hubs. Humphrey turned out to be the discount terminal more by chance, since Sun Country was already there when it switched from being a charter operator to a discount carrier, and because the terminal was just expanded that's where gates were available when SWA wanted in and SC had established it as the de facto discount terminal.

Apparently the FHWA is responsible for the disappearance of the Humphrey and Lindbergh names. When they redid the signs to add which airlines served which terminal spelling out the names was too much text on the signs.

Actually, transferring was easier before light rail. Instead of a shuttle bus that takes you from the front of one terminal to the other you have to take a tram to the LRT station, ride LRT, walk through a long parking garage with a number of level changes in the whole process.

Quote from: flowmotion on November 24, 2012, 01:28:48 AM

Quote from: Mdcastle on October 23, 2012, 04:05:37 PM
What's bizarre about two terminals at MSP?

The connection between them is slow and poorly designed. Terminal 2 also has its own set of parking ramps, rental car facilities, etc.

It was probably OK when Humphrey was the "charter terminal", but the conspiracy theory is Northwest/Delta wanted to 'exile' the low cost carriers (SWA) over there.

But honestly, how many people connect to LCCs like SWA at MSP? I'll bet I could count on one hand the number of passengers changing from DL to a LCC at MSP. That kind of routing just doesn't happen.

It likely would occur to international travelers, due to cabotage rules, and/or customs.

Also I could see business travelers taking Southwest to MSP and then having to go over to Terminal 1 for a regional flight to Bemidji or where ever.

Quote from: flowmotion on October 12, 2012, 08:45:00 PM
I might be biased, but I really like the design of SFO. Very short walk from curbside to the security gates, parking is convenient, short walk between terminals, corridors are wide, and the airport is only 10-15 minutes from downtown.

I do like the design also. I worked at Orlando International (MCO) and it was a pain to use the shuttle to get to the gate areas, after you'd get held up in the TSA line by flight crews or regular passengers utilizing the employee lane.

What I don't understand about SFO is confusion on how to get to the International Terminal.

Quote from: flowmotion on November 27, 2012, 11:19:44 PM
Also I could see business travelers taking Southwest to MSP and then having to go over to Terminal 1 for a regional flight to Bemidji or where ever.

None of us business travelers would put up with an itinerary like that, and the travel agencies wouldn't ever book it. Southwest doesn't codeshare with Delta so it would have to be booked as two separate tickets, luggage couldn't be checked through, etc. We also tend to be less cost conscious than a leisure traveler so we are usually less inclined to go to great lengths to save a couple hundred dollars by constructing convoluted itineraries like that.

...a quick check shows Delta (a hub at MSP) does indeed go to Bemidji. CRJ200 Time!

If anything, Southwest Airlines wouldn't provide service to an airport like that, because they're not in the regional airline service, to my knowledge.

As a data point I looked up what tickets cost from Minneapolis to Bemidji, and from Chicago to Bemidji. It's like 15 bucks more to go all the way from Chicago as opposed to Minneapolis, so even if you bought a "wanna-get-away" fare it makes no sense financially as well as no sense logistically.

As far as international travelers, there is a customs point at Humphrey for any airline that wants to use it (only IcelandAir does). I think you'd find similar fare structure where it's cheaper just to go wherever you're going on a legacy airline rather than transfer.

(I am kind of disappointed SWA is ditching their AirTran 717s rather than continuing to serve smaller markets. It would be nice to fly into Asheville, although Greenville, SC isn't that hard of a drive and the two times I've been there I've actually flown into Nashville and Raleigh in order to cover more territory. Delta wants over $600 for a ticket there, no free bags included)

Quote from: Mdcastle on November 29, 2012, 03:47:31 PM
(I am kind of disappointed SWA is ditching their AirTran 707s rather than continuing to serve smaller markets. It would be nice to fly into Asheville, although Greenville, SC isn't that hard of a drive and the two times I've been there I've actually flown into Nashville and Raleigh in order to cover more territory. Delta wants over $600 for a ticket there, no free bags included)

Yeah, but SWA understandably wants an all-737 fleet, so it can train pilots, stock parts, and develop maintenance expertise for just one line of similar planes.  It could use its smaller 737s to serve smaller markets, probably more efficiently than with 717s that are better-sized for those markets but, as original McDonnell-Douglas planes, probably have little in common with the 737s.

Too bad that the AirTran 717s seem to be all headed for Delta, with none finding a good home in Hawaiian Airlines' all-717 interisland fleet.

I figured that SWA would have kept the smaller 717s for those routes that don't require 150 passengers (I think about 110 fit on board), but I've also heard that they're ditching some of those less-profitable routes, so it makes sense.

Delta manages to maintain a rather active fleet of older machinery...

The 717's aren't going to Hawaii because it isn't exactly trivial getting a short range jet like a 717 to a locale like Hawaii, the most remote air destination in the world. Google it. They usually have to fill the passenger compartment with giant fuel tanks, ETOPS waivers, etc.

Delta is using the 717's to replace the ancient DC9's they inherited from NWA, and they're phasing out most CRJ2 flights in favor of larger RJs (CRJ9 and E175 mostly) and 717's.

SWA wants to maintain an all 737 fleet. It makes maintenance and scheduling significantly cheaper. And a 737 is a pretty small plane so I don't expect SWA to reduce service to that many smaller stations.

Quote from: realjd on November 29, 2012, 02:17:41 PM
None of us business travelers would put up with an itinerary like that, and the travel agencies wouldn't ever book it. Southwest doesn't codeshare with Delta so it would have to be booked as two separate tickets, luggage couldn't be checked through, etc. We also tend to be less cost conscious than a leisure traveler so we are usually less inclined to go to great lengths to save a couple hundred dollars by constructing convoluted itineraries like that.

Bemidji was a contrived example. But, unfortunately, I have worked for businesses that would book a flight like this to save a few hundred bucks. In the old Denver airport, I once ran from one side to another to barely make a transfer connection. (After that, I insisted on non-stops.)

Outside of the MSP area, nobody understands the vast division between terminals 1 & 2. I'm certain it must have bitten a few travelers, as it's just a lousy setup.

Quote from: florida on November 28, 2012, 09:34:38 PM
What I don't understand about SFO is confusion on how to get to the International Terminal.

Never heard about anyone confused by this.  :confused: Other than some domestic airlines using the International terminal, it seems to be very well signed.

Quote from: formulanone on November 29, 2012, 05:16:22 PM
I figured that SWA would have kept the smaller 717s for those routes that don't require 150 passengers (I think about 110 fit on board), but I've also heard that they're ditching some of those less-profitable routes, so it makes sense.

Yep, after buying out AirTran they started ditching some routes. The only times I've ever flown have been between PHF (Newport News/Williamsburg Int'l) and BOS, which AirTran operated with 717s and then Southwest ditched about a year ago. It really came as a surprise to me considering the flights were the only nonstop flights between Hampton Roads (none at ORF) and Boston and usually sold out, but I guess with them charging as low as $49 for the flight even sold out it can't have made very much money.

I just traveled recently through Houston Hobby and I thought it was convenient.  The terminal is small and not far to the gates from the street.  Also, nicely located to I-45 for easy access.  The only downside is the terminal closes overnight and the airlines are limited.   However, for the SWA and Airtran, it is a very great thing as they dominate the facility.

Here is the list of shortcuts MSP has in Lindburgh*cough*Terminal 1:
* Moving walkways in both wings (A/B/C and H) and in a corridor/bridge connecting them midway down Concourse C right by the A/B split.
* A tram that runs along C to A/B from the main terminal hub that's within security.

I don't know about Humphrey*cough*Terminal 2 though - and you have to exit the secure zone to get to it.

The People Mover in Chicago also is outside the security zone. I'd just hot foot it between the United and American hubs if connecting that way, but you have to exit the zone to get to the International terminal.

My favorites are:4
Origin/Destination
* Milwaukee (Mitchell - MKE) - Cheap to fly out of there now (Frontier's my preferred but they don't go everywhere).  I drive 3 hours to get there though.
* Madison (MSN) - Small airport serves most of the major airlines, less drive but cost more due to puddle jumpers (a.k.a regional airlines).  Only Delta flys directly there last time I checked.
* Fargo, Missoula, Spokane, Philly - basically any airport where the rental car desks are right in the terminal.  Seems all of the larger airports are joining the off-site rental car center bandwagon - especially those in California (SAC, SFO, OAK, LAX(?)), PHX, LAS.  Hell Detroit has its desks at terminal as does MSP (Lindburgh - Sorry Huey).  where you leave security, go to the counter, pick up the key and walk out to your car (DTW and MSP would fail here due to shuttles). The Rental car center at PHX made car rates skyrocket.  Granted it's a nice building (all the cars are in a parking garage).

The best connecting airport I'd say would have to be MSP or DEN.  Forget ORD!  My experience - especially with American - was not fun.