Ikarus From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 3524 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1084 times:
What do you have against glass and concrete? Look at London Stansted: That is exactly what a well-designed airport should look like (from the inside). Personally, I prefer functionality to unnecessary gimmicks in an airport. And I really really like light inside an airport terminal (Look at the Heathrow Terminal 2 Check-In area to find an example of ugliness: Low ceiling, little light)
Dustweek From Japan, joined Aug 1999, 77 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1067 times:
Those are beautiful buildings.
But most people don't want their airports to look like city halls (Sochi Airport) or Southern California golf resorts (Santa Barbara).
I think airports should look like airports...
My favorite "beauty" is KIX (Kansai, in Osaka Japan).
It looks like a wing and "feels" like an airport.
For me, an airport that looks like a bus terminal is the worst design. An airport should look like a temple to modern technology, not a functional transit facility (although it should BE a functional transit facility).
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7693 posts, RR: 5 Reply 4, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1045 times:
If you want beautiful airport terminals, SFO's new International Terminal, HKG's Chep Lap Kok airport, Osaka's Kansai International, and the soon-to-open Inchon International Airport near Seoul are all stunning airports in terms of architecture.
Tim From Australia, joined Jun 2000, 698 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1037 times:
When I visited Hongkongs Chep Lap Kok Airport in March 99 I was amazed by the great feeling of 'space' you get inside the terminal. With the bright lighting it creates a very comfortable and quiet atmosphere.
CLK gets my vote. It is a remarkable example of great architechture and design
Brissie_lions From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1034 times:
I have everything against concrete and glass when there is a much more asthetic designs available. Sochi Airport is very indicative of Russian architecture from the period. Santa Barbara is what architecture in the region looks like.
My post isn't at all on functionality, is it on architectural grandeur. I don't see why an airport should be a 'temple to modern technology'. There is nothing stopping an airport from being functional and modern, but there is also no reason why an airport can't be designed to reflect on that city/country.
Soekarno-Hatta Airport in Jakarta is a modern facility, but yet it's design is based upon traditional Indonesian architecture
Seoul's Kimpo Airport, whilst modern in design, still keeps a Korean feel with it's design
And from memory, Albuquerque Airport is designed in the architecture that is "unique" to New Mexico and Phoenix
Ikarus From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 3524 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1018 times:
I don't want to annoy anyone with this, but I cannot help getting the feeling that building airports to "local" architectural styles is like building a tourist attraction, or an indian reservation selling the local culture -i.e. a fake copy of something remarkable. An airport is an airport. Local architecture is local architecture.
I still prefer concrete and glass in an airport to a Disneyland version of what the local history looks like. Just my opinion on the matter.
That said, those pictures look interesting, even if I still prefer light-filled glassy and white airports.
Brissie_lions From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 984 times:
As far as airports being tourist attractions, to some extent they are. You need only look at such airports as Changi, Hong Kong, etc, to see what they offer to tourists.
But as for an airport being built in local architectural style, I think it is very important, especially in those country's which do have a distinct style, as a person's first impression of that country is more often than not, the airport (not including if you flew on the country's national airline). For example, when you land at Soekarno-Hatta or Ngurah Rai (Denpasar), you know you are in Indonesia, because of the airport architecture. When you land at Kimpo, you know you are in Korea, because of the style. It is a pity that the "modern" look these days is very plain and boring. An example of this is Kansai. It is all concrete, glass, etc. Traditional Japanese architecture is in such a style that light is a major factor in the design.
That is pretty much where I am coming from anyway.
VirginA340 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 986 times:
My favs are Terminal 4 at LHR, Stansted, T1 at JFK, as well as the soon to be built international and AA terminal also at JFK complete with Air Train that will connect with all terminals an the Howard Beach Subway station. As well as Terminal C at EWR and The Marine terminal at LGA.
Ilyag From Israel, joined Jan 2001, 110 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 977 times:
For me this is mostly a question of taste, and it is very hard to match tastes of different people.
I, personally, liked JFK Terminal 5 (TWA, I'm so sorry for them). It has a very unique architecture, although it was built back in sixties. When you arrive and get out of the jetway, you continue along glass corridor whith a view to your plane. It was a very spectacular view, as I remember it when I arrived there on TW884 (747-100) from TLV.
Rominato From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 268 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 956 times:
Glad you mentioned Santa Barbara. I love going to that airport. I actually try my best to go through there in stead of BUR or LAX if at all practical. It's nice because it's not that it's gimmicky, but that terminal has been there forever, it seems, and it's a way of stepping into the past. It's still perfectly functional, and frankly, I think it's a lot of fun to actually walk out on the tarmac and up the stairs to the plane. It harkens back to a time when travelling by air was a grand affair.
If you get the chance, fly through Santa Barbara. It's great!
TWAneedsNOhelp From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 955 times:
Great pic of PUJ! There was a fairly lengthy article in this past Sunday's New York Times Travel section about how hot Punta Cana is. (Made me happy, TW is a player in this market!) Anyway, they had a photo of this small airport and described it briefly, the rooks is made of cana leaves and periodically they all blow away and need replacing. The airport is without walls and completely open, but service (getting bags after a trip) is very lazy.
Another interesting airport is Gaza International Airport in the Gaza Strip. Gaza is the main hub for Palestinian Airlines and brand new. However, it's distinctive architechture reflects ancient and traditional Arab and Muslim designs.
TWA's Terminal 5 of course is a stark sweeping remnant of when air travel was glamorous. Hopefully when that terminal is rehabilitated and annexed to a new Terminal 6, JetBlue Airways will take better care of it than TW did.
Blink182 From Azerbaijan, joined Oct 1999, 5430 posts, RR: 19 Reply 21, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 872 times:
If you want "open" terminals, go to modern Asian airports! My vote goes to Vancouver International terminal. No one could blend modern archeteture with ancient architecture together better than them. On your way to customs. Also, it is like a mini museum, a fascinating terminal indeed. I won't tell because you should see it for your self.
Give me a break, I created this username when I was a kid...
Slawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3799 posts, RR: 10 Reply 22, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 866 times:
I have an example of one, but I can't find the picture right now....it is the Lviv International airport in Western Ukraine. It looks very much like the first picture in the first post but a bit bigger...It has been amazingly restored, some modern additions have been made inside, but from the outside it looks like an old train station.
"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
N960AS From Switzerland, joined Apr 2000, 466 posts, RR: 8 Reply 24, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 836 times:
I have to agree with JFK T5. The terminal is so cool and still looks modern, even if it was built in the '60's. It doesn't cater to jets too well and TW hasn't taken the best care of it but it is still a great terminal. Walking to the satelites in that 'tube' if you will is really a neat experience. The lobby is soaring and has good views too. The terminal is one of Saarinen's masterpieces and is perserved as a monument (landmark?) so it will always be there.
25 Vngd4me: I am suprized that no one has even mentioned Denver (DEN- Jeppesen Terminal). It is a really cool airport that blends in with its mountain surrounding