SHUPirate1 From United States, joined Sep 2003, 3477 posts, RR: 24 Reply 2, posted (4 years 6 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1730 times:
Speedbird-Nobody is using the TWA International Terminal right now, it is closed...the Domestic Terminal is used entirely by JetBlue...plans are for T-5 (the TWAIT) to be reconstructed, as it is currently inadequate for use, and for JetBlue to move in there when it becomes logisically viable...BTW, any word who will move into T-6 (the current B6 terminal) once JetBlue moves into the rebuilt T-5?
Burma's constitutional referendum options: A. Yes, B. Go to Insein Prison!
RJpieces From United States, joined Nov 2003, 6863 posts, RR: 47 Reply 5, posted (4 years 6 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1681 times:
All wrong!
JetBlue/PA is building a terminal around the TWA terminal. The concourses have already been knocked down, the terminal CAN'T BE DESTROYED because it is a landmark.
"Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon"
FoxBravo From United States, joined Nov 2003, 2448 posts, RR: 4 Reply 7, posted (4 years 6 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1602 times:
The latest (and final, I believe) plan is for JetBlue to use the original T5 for automated check-in kiosks only. Passengers will then pass through the preserved "tubes" into the new terminal, which will form a semicircle around the old building.
As for the current T6, I believe it will be torn down to make room for part of the new JetBlue terminal.
SHUPirate1 From United States, joined Sep 2003, 3477 posts, RR: 24 Reply 8, posted (4 years 6 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1593 times:
No...AA does not use the TWA terminal...T-8 and T-9 have been AA buildings for about as long as I remember (and I live 15 minutes from JFK)...TWA's buildings were totally at the opposite end of the airport from American's
Burma's constitutional referendum options: A. Yes, B. Go to Insein Prison!
FoxBravo From United States, joined Nov 2003, 2448 posts, RR: 4 Reply 9, posted (4 years 6 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1583 times:
Thrust--no, AA uses only T8 and T9 (soon to be one big AA terminal). They had no need for TWA's space in T5, since they had room at T8/9 for what was left of TWA's JFK operation.
Akjetblue From United States, joined Dec 2003, 790 posts, RR: 5 Reply 10, posted (4 years 6 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1515 times:
Even most of the crewmembers here at jetBlue know little about whats actually going to be done with T-5. as it is right now, the rummors are that the historic parts of T-5 will remain in tact and be used for electronic check in, and the "tubes" will remain. The concources have NOT been knocked down (iwas there last week) but there is rumor that they will be reconstructed. aparently there are a number of things holding all the plans back. One is handicap access. the other main one is historic preservation society. I'm right along with them in not wanting to destroy such a beautiful building, but the building needs soooo much work - as TWA failed to gain a profit, they had no money to upkeep the building. It's apparently very run down. as for terminal 6, once the operation is moved into terminal 5, terminal 6 will be "redone" whatever that means, and then once completed jetBlue is planning on using both terminal 5 AND 6.
JetBlue seems to want to "please everyone" as much as possible so whatever the outcome, restassured that i'm sure everyone will be happy.
FoxBravo From United States, joined Nov 2003, 2448 posts, RR: 4 Reply 12, posted (4 years 6 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1406 times:
Jeff, the main part of the TWA terminal (a.k.a. T5) has already been designated a historic landmark for quite some time, and therefore can't be torn down or modified significantly. The only question was whether it would be used as a museum or convention center, or maintained for airline use. Some people felt strongly that it should still be used as an airline terminal, but the facilities are so small and outdated that it is woefully inadequate for a modern operation of any size, especially with today's security requirements. The latest plan (see my earlier post) seems like a good compromise--it will be used by an airline (JetBlue), but as part of a much larger terminal.
B6FA4ever From United States, joined Aug 2003, 768 posts, RR: 9 Reply 13, posted (4 years 6 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1357 times:
i thought the tubes were one of the problems for the renovation of T-5...in regards to handicap access and related issues. whatever the outcome, i'm sure its gonna be an awsome looking terminal!
IMisspiedmont From United States, joined May 2001, 5481 posts, RR: 40 Reply 14, posted (4 years 6 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1237 times:
For me there is a lot of heartbreak looking at the pictures posted by Jaspike, especially the first. That is the first thing I ever saw at JFK, although the picture would have been loaded with 1964 cars.
I can't explain further though those younger members will understand in 20 or 30 years.
Though my eyes could see I still was a blind man, though my mind could think I still was a madman
STT757 From United States, joined Mar 2000, 9546 posts, RR: 37 Reply 15, posted (4 years 6 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1172 times:
Argh!..
This topic comes up way too much, I wish it were permanetly archived someplace where folks can be directed. I've posted these pictures about 20 times!..
Ok here goes..
Back around 2000 the Port Authority developed a plan to replace T-6 with a new terminal and to incorporate the historic T-5 into the design, the design called for the tearing down of T-6 and part (concourses) of T-5. A new terminal would then be built "behind" T-5 and connected via either the "tubes" or something else, the core of T-5 would cease all "airline" functions as it is not designed to handle today's security needs. It would be a airline club area with maybe some shops etc and some E-ticket kiosks, however check-in, baggage claim, security check points, curbside drop off would be at the "new" terminal.
The terminal was "originally" envisioned as a 40 gate terminal which would house B6, TWA, HP and UAL. However the plan was shelved because of UAL's financial problems which led them to pull down alot of JFK service, also TWA's sale to AA.
AA never wanted anything to do with TWA's Terminals..
So all that was left was Jetblue, and the Port Authority was not about to invest hundreds of Millions into a new terminal for a "start-up".
However 4 years later with Jetblue's success established the Port Authority has "re-visited" the earlier plan, this time reducing the size to 23 gates. The Port Authority has agreed to help B6 build the new terminal, however Jetblue needs to establish some private financing for their share which they are working on.
Flyguyclt From United States, joined Aug 2005, 537 posts, RR: 18 Reply 17, posted (4 years 6 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 990 times:
Anybody have the ability to change the first pic? I think it would be hysterical if you could change the airplane at the terminal to an NWA DC9 just as joke.
STT757 From United States, joined Mar 2000, 9546 posts, RR: 37 Reply 21, posted (4 years 6 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 676 times:
"Though the terminal could in no way support the artists renderings as shown, the drawings are indeed awesome. Gorgeous if I may go so far.
Just add the check in area at the end of the arms and it might well work."
If you look at the rendering you will notice the roadways lead to the Terminal in the back, there's only a small parking lot in front of T-5.
The rendering does not depict any "real" airline service for T-5, it's merely a structure connected to the actual terminal where Check in, security, baggage claim, gates are located.
"makes much more sense to live in the present tense"
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Jan 2004, 427 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2008, 0 posts, 
From Spain, joined Oct 2001, 460 posts, 
From Canada, joined Sep 2003, 536 posts,