Kaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2258 posts, RR: 3 Posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3891 times:
This is what I think JFK should look like. T4's departure hall and gate areas would be expanded by 10 gates as shown. Then, T1's airlines would move in to T4. DL would then build the new T1/T2 and use it for all their flights. This would provide for 30 heavy gates for DL. Not to mention that when people drive in to JFK, Delta's sign and Delta's terminal will be the first thing they see, adding to some good advertisement. http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b154/Kaitak744/JFKT1T2.jpg
(the yellow lines are the apron taxiways)
(T1's existing check in area is sort of blended into the new check in area)
Jetlanta From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 3035 posts, RR: 36 Reply 4, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3803 times:
Actually, its not too far off from one of the designs that Delta looked at pre 9/11. One thing to keep in mind is that, no matter what they do, it is going to be VERY expensive. I think you will see something that produces more "touch points" (gates) with less interior square footage than your proposal. All that space is expensive. I suspect you will see something very practical as a final design. Nice job though!
WorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3745 times:
I think you are about right that DL needs about 10 new widebody international gates. That is not terribly expensive. The expensive part is rehabilitating the existing facility and that is where I don't think you will see a complete rebuild.
My gut says that they will add new gates and rehabilitate what they have to the greatest extent possible without a complete rebuild.
I think you could see the inside dropoff portion of the terminal be filled in... you don't get any new gates out of it but there is enough room to build a good check-in area... the problem being that it is so far from the front of the building. it also is not ideal to have the Business Elite and standard check-in areas so far apart.
It might be more realistic for the extension be added to terminal 4 and then DL's check-in shifted to terminal 1 and terminals 2 and 3 are just used as concourses with an underground train connecting all three behind the security checkpoint....perhaps with segregated cars for cleared and un-cleared international arrivals so that all international arrivals were handled in terminal 1 with planes parked on dedicated international arrival gates on all 3 terminals.
JetBlueNYFL From United States of America, joined May 2006, 274 posts, RR: 3 Reply 7, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3688 times:
Good idea, however a few things to consider...
1. JFK is already a mess with so much construction
2. How much would this cost? For an airline operating under bankruptcy protection, isn't there a great deal of debt to pay off first? What are the chances of Delta receiving some funding for this?
3. I 100% agree that new gates are needed for international flights; however, wouldn't it be wise to start by imporving loads on domestic flights and greatly reduce/eliminate the "puddle jumpers"?? It makes no sense that people connecting in JFK to overseas flights are first flying on a weight-restricted airplane to get to JFK.
Jetlanta From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 3035 posts, RR: 36 Reply 8, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3650 times:
Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 5): I tried that. I couldn't get it into 2 separate concourses. It is at a very weird angle, and there is not enough space near the top of the terminal.
You'd be shocked at some of the configurations they considered. It is a very tricky space. Some of the ideas involved tearing down T3 and connecting T2 and T4. Delta was going to take most of T4 in the process.
Jrlander From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 1104 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3592 times:
Not a bad idea!
I've wondered how they could use the property better. I do have to say I like the idea of using the old Pan Am building- maybe as a stand alone landside area, connected to a concourse by an underground walkway.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16559 posts, RR: 52 Reply 10, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3559 times:
Looks like something I've proposed a couple of times in various DL posts, again the only thing holding DL back is the how to pay for a new terminal. DL is in bankruptcy and when they exit splurging on a new JFK terminal is not as high a priority as fleet replacement (IMO), I don't think DL can do both right away post bankruptcy.
The Port Authority and fiance groups are going to be hesitant about putting out the money for a new project considering how the AA JFK project burned some folks and how DL's BOS terminal is now half empty. DL's lease rejections and other problems at airports like LAX and MCO is another thing that does not look good to people who would actually put up the $1.5 Billion (or so) needed to build something substantial at JFK.
DL's original plan from 2000 to expand the West concourse of T-4 makes sense, DL takes over the expanded West concourse of T-4 and the airlines who currently use that concourse would move to an expanded East concourse of T-4. T-4 is too quiet during the day, they need more consistent passenger flows throughout the day to help the fledgling vendors.
One problem they have to address though is the security screenings during the peak early evening departures especially during the summer, I was shocked back in May or June of this year when I saw that the security line for the East concourse and the security line for the West concourse at T-4 nearly met in the middle of the retail concourse near where the old Crispy Cream used to be located. I could not believe what I was seeing, the two lines nearly met!
I don't know how this would help DL, but the Port Authority should jump in to save the AA terminal project. It's a joke that they (AA) are going to leave it so half ass and call it complete, what needs to be done is to have the Port Authority complete the project and move BA, NH, CX, IB, FI, QF to the complete AA terminal. UAL and US move to T-4.
DL could then move their International arrivals/depatures to T-7, and DL could use T-6 for Regional Jets or domestic departures.
T-7 is a vast improvement over T-3, and T-6 is an improvement over T-2.
There's alot of possibilites that would help everyone at JFK, DL getting financing to build a $1 Billion Dollar terminal to replace their current digs I think is wishful thinking. I think they have to piggyback onto some other project like moving BA to T8/9 and taking over T-7.
JetBlueAtJFK From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1687 posts, RR: 3 Reply 11, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3503 times:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 10): DL could then move their International arrivals/depatures to T-7, and DL could use T-6 for Regional Jets or domestic departures.
T-7 is a vast improvement over T-3, and T-6 is an improvement over T-2.
Nice try but B6 isn't going anywhere anytime soon so don't get your hopes up.
They should do this:
-Expand T4's East Concourse to house all of T4's operaters.
-Take the west concourse and push all the international flights over there.
-Get rid of T3, not the Worldport just the gates behind it. Then just update T2 a little bit by making it a little more spacious and maybe spreading the walls a little bit outwards.
-Connect the Worldport to T4 west and T2 and it can be a large lounge, meeting hall, and have a central check in as well as offices. Check in will also be in T2 and T4 though. Then they can create hardstands where T3's Gates where.
-They could also maintain the gates in the Worldport already.
The plan is a cheap alternative to solve some problems now and segregate International and Domestic flights so gates in T2 can be closer together to accomodate smaller planes and maybe squeeze in an extra 4 gates or so. So with T2 and its reconfiguration of gates it could have about 14 Gates in it, then their would be 8 gates at the Worldport (the 6 existing and 2 more where the old gate area started) then the 10 Gates in T4 West. So it would bring the Gate total to 32 Gates at JFK. With 14 being Domestic, 10 being Int'l and the 8 at the Worldport being whatever needed (If they put customs their or not). That is up from the current 26 Gates. So they get 6 more Gates plus they can fit probably about 10 or so hardstand gates where the T3 Gates where. So about 42 gates total and 10 of them don't require anything more than a bus to drive people out from wherever it will leave from (T2,Worldport, or T4 West)
PanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 9 Reply 12, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3486 times:
What needs to happen is for JFK to have new terminals built at new locations on the airport grounds, and then tear down the former terminals (but saving the historic TWA Saarinen terminal as a museum).
The old design for O&D passengers before tight security, massive increases in numbers of pax, and Jet Blue and Delta's operations have made a great airport burst at the seams. The new realities of TSA and ever increasing numbers of people passing through the airport make me think that instead of figuring out how to maintain the old, a whole redesign should be taking place from the ground up.
Now, before I get , don't ask me how or where. Will it happen? I think there's probably a better chance of seeing the Dixie Chicks perform at the next Bush family BBQ...
Best of luck to JFK!!
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
Fewsolarge From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 409 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3455 times:
I would encourage the Port Authority to start moving in the direction of a coherent terminal complex. They should establish a pattern, and little by little, they can replace current terminals with missing pieces of the new master plan. For example, here are a few steps they could take to address Delta's needs at a modest cost, freeing up another large chunk of space for redevelopment:
Kaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2258 posts, RR: 3 Reply 14, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3413 times:
Well, a few things:
1. In the plan Fewsolarge presents, it puts gates over the area the airport uses to keep airport vehicles, snowplows, ect. Sure they can put that some place else, but putting them there makes it convenient as it is in the center of the airport. Hence, I kept the vehicles area in my plan as is.
2. I have never been to T4. How crowded is the check-in area? If Delta were to move in, the main check in area would have to be expanded far more than what I put in the plan. Its a good idea, but I don't think it would be convenient for some passengers as T4 and T1/2/3 are on separate roads.
3. I see most people like to keep the old world port saucer. Well, that can be done. In my plan, the saucer is on top of the gate concourse.
4. Instead of putting delta in T4, won't it be easier to put Delta in T1 and put LH, AF, AZ, KL, and ect in T4? I honestly don't know if that is really technically possible, but from an organization sense, its alot better. (Delta is all next to each other and centralised.
MPDPilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 977 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3282 times:
I have one piece of constructive critism. the triangle wastes fair amount of space. airside, especially at an airport like JFK the terminals need to take up only the space necessary and having a huge terminal like shown would be way more space than needed. even the current T3 uses way more space airside than it should. but I am glad someone is thinking about it because I think that the US as a whole is falling way behind the rest of the world in quality of our facilities and the more traffic increases the harder it is going to be to rebuild the airports.
P.S. there needs to be a completely new terminal no remodel, yes it is expensive but some one needs to bite the bullet either now or later and later it is going to be even more expensive.
One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
Fewsolarge From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 409 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 3217 times:
I really like your idea, and you did a great job on the image. I've thought for years, though, that JFK's multiple terminal system is its downfall. There's a lot of history there, but I believe efficiency trumps nostalgia when it comes to airport master plans.
But if no radical rethinking of the whole core is going to happen, your plan could serve Delta well. But like for AA at T8, it sure would be a beeyotch to construct around the active terminals!
As for my plan and the limitations of the T4 checkin area, I agree that that would be a concern.