Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Swiss To Return To Terminal 4 In NY  
User currently offlineNyswiss From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 38 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3675 times:

Travel Inside reports, that Swiss will return to Terminal 4 @ JFK. They will build a new Senator and Gold Lounge as well. This is very welcome news after the nightmare delays at the Lufthansa terminal. I also heard that de-icing is very difficult at Terminal 1 given the limited space

32 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5564 posts, RR: 37
Reply 1, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3663 times:

Does LH also go to T4? If not this seem very strange and implausible. As they are now one airline with two brands LH wants to join the LH/LX services at all airport around the world.

User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11116 posts, RR: 62
Reply 2, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3662 times:

Makes sense. JFK is at capacity, and well over it - in every sense of the word. Terminal 1 is among the worst in the airport - way too many flights using way too few gates, especially during the evening rush when you've got Air France, Lufthansa and SWISS, among others, all trying to load huge widebodies going overseas

Moving to T4 is a smart move.

[Edited 2007-11-20 06:41:29]

User currently offlineJFK787NYC From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 812 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3633 times:

Whats the difference for Swiss its not like they have any connecting travel further at JFK. In JFK it's always the last destination and people who are connecting need to change terminals anyway.

User currently offlineZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5564 posts, RR: 37
Reply 4, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3622 times:



Quoting Commavia (Reply 2):
Makes sense. JFK is at capacity, and well over it - in every sense of the word. Terminal 1 is among the worst in the airport - way too many flights using way too few gates, especially during the evening rush when you've got Air France, Lufthansa and SWISS, among others, all trying to load huge widebodies going overseas

Moving to T4 is a smart move.

From this point of view, I agree. T4 is much better. But still I am wondering (see what I have written above). Probably at JFK it does not matter to have to different terminals (LH/LX) because LX has enough own flights (three daily).


User currently offlineIliriBDL From Germany, joined May 2007, 1205 posts, RR: 14
Reply 5, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3622 times:

True, a lot of passengers travel furthermore in the continental U.S. and most of them will have to change terminals.


delta.com
User currently offline747fan From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1184 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3609 times:



Quoting Commavia (Reply 2):
Terminal 1 is among the worst in the airport - way too many flights using way too few gates, especially during the evening rush when you've got Air France, Lufthansa and SWISS, among others, all trying to load huge widebodies going overseas

Yes, it does get overcrowded during the evening rush when there are too many flights for that relatively small terminal (I think only 11 gates) to handle, but I definitely wouldn't call it one of JFK's worst. Other than the fact that it gets too crowded, its a very nice, relatively new (about 8 or 9 years old), easy to navigate terminal with a nice check-in hall. However, it does lack a bit in terms of concessions and shopping.
But the worst a JFK? No... that goes to both of DL's terminals - Terminal 2 and Terminal 3, which took the crown from AA's Terminal 8.


User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11116 posts, RR: 62
Reply 7, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3602 times:



Quoting ZRH (Reply 4):
But still I am wondering (see what I have written above). Probably at JFK it does not matter to have to different terminals (LH/LX) because LX has enough own flights (three daily).

Almost certainly not, Lufthansa will most likely stay in Terminal 1, as they are part owners of the terminal along with Air France, Korean and JAL. While it would certainly be more efficient to have Lufthansa and SWISS in the same place, to co-locate facilities and share things like lounges, staff, etc., it's just not feasible given the extreme constraints currently placed on Terminal 1.


User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11116 posts, RR: 62
Reply 8, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3596 times:



Quoting 747fan (Reply 6):
but I definitely wouldn't call it one of JFK's worst. Other than the fact that it gets too crowded, its a very nice, relatively new (about 8 or 9 years old), easy to navigate terminal with a nice check-in hall.

I was referring specifically to capacity and gate space.

I know T1 is nice - I wasn't commenting on the aesthetics or quality of T1 - yes, it certainly is light years ahead of T2/T3, and T6, too. It's still woefully overcrowded and overutilized, though.

Quoting 747fan (Reply 6):
But the worst a JFK? No... that goes to both of DL's terminals - Terminal 2 and Terminal 3, which took the crown from AA's Terminal 8.

No argument here. AA's former terminal was a total third world experience, while Delta's T2/T3 complex is also something right out of the 1972 Soviet Union (ironic, since I believe that's about the last time the terminal had any major work done). AA's new terminal is now the airport's largest and nicest, JetBlue's new T5/T6 complex opens next year, and Delta will likely be working on T2/T3 in the near future.


User currently offlineZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5564 posts, RR: 37
Reply 9, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3581 times:

Quoting Commavia (Reply 7):
Almost certainly not, Lufthansa will most likely stay in Terminal 1, as they are part owners of the terminal along with Air France, Korean and JAL.

This is really a strange ownership throughout all alliances. It would be better when AF could join DL, JL go to AA and LH/LX stay together.

[Edited 2007-11-20 07:04:56]

User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11116 posts, RR: 62
Reply 10, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3566 times:



Quoting ZRH (Reply 9):
This is really a strange ownership through all alliances. It would be better when AF could join DL, JL go to AA and LH/LX stay together.

In an ideal world, terminals would be grouped by alliance, but economic and practical realities typically make that impossible.

In the case of JFK/Terminal 1, the partnership/ownership structure arrangement that produced the new terminal that opened in 1998 predated alliances, and was in the works long before Star or any other global alliance came on the scene.

In this case, three (relatively) large foreign airlines - Air France, JAL, Korean and Lufthansa - wanted to have a nice, gleaming terminal to use at JFK, which for all of them (especially for AF and LH) is one of their, if not their single most important international markets worldwide. It's a high-visibility market, and their interests and objectives were similar: a nice, new and (then, not now) spacious and uncrowded terminal to give them room to grow and breathe at this major gateway to the U.S. They also wanted control, which joint ownership gave all of them.

Now, today, in 2007, there are obvious difficulties - from a purely alliance standpoint - with the terminal. JAL is now a oneworld member, Korean and Air France are in SkyTeam while their major U.S. partner Delta is next door in T2/T3, and Lufthansa is in Star and its partners are largely spread all over the airport (lots in T4, United in T7, etc.).


User currently offlineAF022 From France, joined Dec 2003, 2135 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3530 times:

To me T4 is much worse than T1 in terms of crowding. In T1 security is BEFORE the shops, so that everyone goes past security after checking in. This gets everyone near the gates. In T4, security is AFTER the shops, so passengers linger until the last minute and then everyone tries to get through security at the same time. I have experienced far more delay problems at T4 than at T1, although I have heard the management is much better at T4.

User currently offlineJfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8089 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3520 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Terminal 1 was the first new thing since 1970 at JFK. THE IAB was still there as were AA's T8 & T9. TWA was still at T5 with T6 and T7 also in there present state. T6, BA's has been the most up to date with BA's Terrcaes lounges but also crowded since Cathay, Qantas and Iberia moved in back in 2000. T4 is a huge improvement over the IAB but still has the IAB passenger mix with all the smaller international airlines from distant countries housing there. The other JFK terminal have greater control over who they handle since they have anchor tennants and are privately owned.

User currently offlineCRGsFuture From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 536 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3520 times:

But Commavia to me, an international carrier's objective in NYC is a strictly O&D market. One that is built for leisure, business, and the VFR crowd. To me its the only city where you can get away with out connecting to an alliance carrier because of the sheer size of the place.

Now as for the airlines at T1, you have
Air France
Lufthansa
Korean
JAL
Alitalia
Maxjet
Turkish
Olympic
Air China
China Airlines
Aeromexico
Aeroflot
and
Swiss.

All of them operate a 76 or bigger meaning capacity and gate size is small.



Flying you to your destination; your girlfriend to her dreams.
User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11116 posts, RR: 62
Reply 14, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3473 times:



Quoting CRGsFuture (Reply 13):
But Commavia to me, an international carrier's objective in NYC is a strictly O&D market. One that is built for leisure, business, and the VFR crowd. To me its the only city where you can get away with out connecting to an alliance carrier because of the sheer size of the place.

JFK is one of the busiest and most important international connecting points on the planet. For a substantial portion of the traffic that flows across the Atlantic between the U.S. and Europe, JFK is the connecting point. Now, certainly, the fact that it also serves the largest O&D air market in the U.S., and perhaps the world, also doesn't hurt. But, without question, connections are still a vital segment of the business that JFK does, regardless of airline, or alliance.

Speaking solely about T1, and not even discussing other airlines at other terminals, the airlines in Terminal 1 probably bring in at least 5,000-10,000 passengers each week that go on to onward connecting flights with their alliance and non-alliance (codeshare/interline) partners.

In that type of environment - as in any major connecting hub anywhere in the world - co-locating airlines to smooth and ease connections for passengers is an extremely attractive and logical objective, if feasible. In the case of certain airports, though, that are so big and have reached such massive critical mass - like JFK, LAX, LHR, etc. - it's just not always possible.


User currently offlineAlitaliaMD11 From Spain, joined Dec 2003, 4068 posts, RR: 14
Reply 15, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3385 times:

I flew Swiss from Terminal 1 last Thursday night and the terminal was operating at the most crowded that I've seen it. It seemed like there was going to be a collision on the taxiway because multiple aircraft had pushed back into a very limited amount of space. Swiss also causes some congestion because of their 2 aircraft for the later evening flight to ZRH and the flight to GVA have to park on remote stands next to Royal Air Maroc and the Aeromexico 737 flight which boards via the I Love New York passenger loaders.

I don't understand why they moved to Terminal 1 in the first place. They don't have any association at the terminal with Lufthansa except that they share a lounge. I was very surprised to see that Swiss check in was next to Austrian and not with Lufthansa.


Big version: Width: 800 Height: 535 File size: 113kb



No Vueling No Party
User currently offlineJfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8089 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3367 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

One problem with JFK is it has good ONEWIORLD terminals with BA at T7 and AA at T8. SKYTEAM with Terminal 1 with Korean Air and Air France being anchors plus Delta's Terminal 2 +3 but no Star terminal since UA's JFK operation is now a transcon one out of BA's Terminal 7. STAR's Lufthansa is at Terminal 1 and SWISS and Singapore are at T4 spread out like visiting teams at a poor international competition. I just can't find a solution for STAR under one roof at JFK.

User currently offlineAlitaliaMD11 From Spain, joined Dec 2003, 4068 posts, RR: 14
Reply 17, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3284 times:



Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 16):
One problem with JFK is it has good ONEWIORLD terminals with BA at T7 and AA at T8. SKYTEAM with Terminal 1 with Korean Air and Air France being anchors plus Delta's Terminal 2 +3 but no Star terminal since UA's JFK operation is now a transcon one out of BA's Terminal 7. STAR's Lufthansa is at Terminal 1 and SWISS and Singapore are at T4 spread out like visiting teams at a poor international competition. I just can't find a solution for STAR under one roof at JFK.

Your statement is a little off. Oneworld is spread through Terminal 4, Terminal 1, Terminal 7, and Terminal 8. Star Alliance is spread out through Terminal 4, Terminal 7, and Terminal 1. While Skyteam is spread through Terminal 1, Terminal 2, Terminal 3, and Terminal 4.

Oneworld:

American = Terminal 8
British Airways = Terminal 7
Cathay Pacific = Terminal 7
Finnair = Terminal 8
Iberia = Terminal 7
LAN = Terminal 4
Malev = Terminal 4
Qantas = Terminal 7
Royal Jordanian = Terminal 4

Star Alliance:

Air Canada = Terminal 7
Lufthansa = Terminal 1
Thai = Terminal 4
United = Terminal 7
ANA = Terminal 7
Singapore Airlines = Terminal 4
US Airways = Terminal 7
Asiana Airlines = Terminal 4
South African = Terminal 4
Austrian = Terminal 1
Swiss = Terminal 1
LOT = Terminal 4

Skyteam:

Aeroflot = Terminal 1
Aeromexico = Terminal 1
Air France = Terminal 1
KLM = Terminal 4
Alitalia = Terminal 1
Continental Airlines = Terminal 4
CSA = Terminal 4
Delta = Terminal 1/Terminal 2
Korean Air = Terminal 1
Northwest = Terminal 4

So it seems like Oneworld has a pretty decent operation at Terminal 7 and Terminal 4 while Terminal 8 is not their stronghold. Star Alliance has a pretty strong presence at Terminal 7 and Terminal 4 while Terminal 1 is the weaker. Skyteam obviously has a very stronghold over Terminal 1.

I'm surprised Air France and KLM haven't moved to consolidate their operations into one terminal. I'm sure they are still at Terminal 4 to keep connections with Northwest.



No Vueling No Party
User currently offlinePanamair From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4792 posts, RR: 25
Reply 18, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3259 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting AF022 (Reply 11):
To me T4 is much worse than T1 in terms of crowding. In T1 security is BEFORE the shops, so that everyone goes past security after checking in. This gets everyone near the gates. In T4, security is AFTER the shops, so passengers linger until the last minute and then everyone tries to get through security at the same time. I have experienced far more delay problems at T4 than at T1, although I have heard the management is much better at T4.

A lot of the crowding of T1 we're talking about relates to the ramp space rather than the interior (although security lines for T1 at peak times can be quite out of control as well). T4 has a much more spacious ramp and better access to taxiways. T4 is surrounded by an unused T5 on one side, and T3 on the other. The space between T4 and T3 is quite large and allows for two lanes (i.e., two aircraft can taxi in/out between T3/T4 simultaneously). T1 however is hemmed in by a very narrow ramp between T1 and T2 (only one aircraft movement allowed at one time) as well as no real tarmac space to park too many planes that have a few hours in transit. These factors have been causing significant delays not only in T1 operations, but also the side of T2 that shares a ramp with T1.


User currently offlineLHBSL From Switzerland, joined Mar 2007, 89 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3152 times:

LH will stay in Terminal 1. That's for shure; they need the space in 2009 for the A380. There are AFAIK only two stands on T1 which are capable to take an A380.
Regards


User currently offlineLXA340 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2006, 2117 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3121 times:



Quoting AlitaliaMD11 (Reply 15):
I flew Swiss from Terminal 1 last Thursday night and the terminal was operating at the most crowded that I've seen it. It seemed like there was going to be a collision on the taxiway because multiple aircraft had pushed back into a very limited amount of space. Swiss also causes some congestion because of their 2 aircraft for the later evening flight to ZRH and the flight to GVA have to park on remote stands next to Royal Air Maroc and the Aeromexico 737 flight which boards via the I Love New York passenger loaders.

I don't understand why they moved to Terminal 1 in the first place. They don't have any association at the terminal with Lufthansa except that they share a lounge. I was very surprised to see that Swiss check in was next to Austrian and not with Lufthansa.

There was already an accident involving an LX aircraft earlier this year where the plane was ramed into something when it got pushed back and it was out of service for repairs for 4 hours or even longer. This terminal is really over crowded!!! Yeah

Yeah I also didn't get it when I used T1 the first time this year and LX check in was done by the same LX staff as before in T4 only lounge is operated by LH so the amount of costs that are saved really couldn't be that much in the first place so the move was unnecesary from day 1.

I hope the new LX lounge will be at least as nice as the old one they had in T4 and also that they will offer food, internet etc. Also what will be with FTL passengers?


User currently offlineThirteenRight From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3111 times:



Quoting CRGsFuture (Reply 13):
Now as for the airlines at T1, you have
Air France
Lufthansa
Korean
JAL
Alitalia
Maxjet
Turkish
Olympic
Air China
China Airlines
Aeromexico
Aeroflot
and
Swiss.

Actually, MAXjet moved to T4 in August. Cayman Airways however uses T1.


User currently offlineLXA340 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2006, 2117 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3084 times:



Quoting ThirteenRight (Reply 21):
Actually, MAXjet moved to T4 in August. Cayman Airways however uses T1.

Isn't T4 also getting crowded slowly?


User currently offlineAlitaliaMD11 From Spain, joined Dec 2003, 4068 posts, RR: 14
Reply 23, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3048 times:



Quoting LXA340 (Reply 22):
Isn't T4 also getting crowded slowly?

It certainly is however departure and arrival times are more spread out for the terminal and there are a lot of remote stands for the terminal.



No Vueling No Party
User currently offlineJfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8089 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2980 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting AlitaliaMD11 (Reply 17):
Your statement is a little off. Oneworld is spread through Terminal 4, Terminal 1, Terminal 7, and Terminal 8. Star Alliance is spread out through Terminal 4, Terminal 7, and Terminal 1. While Skyteam is spread through Terminal 1, Terminal 2, Terminal 3, and Terminal 4.

Oneworld:

American = Terminal 8
British Airways = Terminal 7
Cathay Pacific = Terminal 7
Finnair = Terminal 8
Iberia = Terminal 7
LAN = Terminal 4
Malev = Terminal 4
Qantas = Terminal 7
Royal Jordanian = Terminal 4

Star Alliance:

Air Canada = Terminal 7
Lufthansa = Terminal 1
Thai = Terminal 4
United = Terminal 7
ANA = Terminal 7
Singapore Airlines = Terminal 4
US Airways = Terminal 7
Asiana Airlines = Terminal 4
South African = Terminal 4
Austrian = Terminal 1
Swiss = Terminal 1
LOT = Terminal 4

Skyteam:

Aeroflot = Terminal 1
Aeromexico = Terminal 1
Air France = Terminal 1
KLM = Terminal 4
Alitalia = Terminal 1
Continental Airlines = Terminal 4
CSA = Terminal 4
Delta = Terminal 1/Terminal 2
Korean Air = Terminal 1
Northwest = Terminal 4

Terminal 4 is the COMMON terminal when no other is available as the IAB was before. So it would stand to reason that airlines from all alliances would us it.


25 Post contains links LX64A332 : Below is the official press release from LX.... http://www.swiss.com/web/EN/about_sw...ss_releases/Pages/pr_20071119.aspx Cheers, LX64A332
26 Mir : AF and KL have no problem being in different terminals (also 1 and 4 respectively) at JFK, so I don't think it would be a big deal for LH and LX. -Mi
27 SandroZRH : I don't think so either. Actually I think it will be a lot more convenient for LX passengers, especially with the new lounge they'll build.
28 LXA340 : Definetly, when LX was at T4 everything was very smoothly and there were never big lines for check in or security. Also the lounge was great but LX i
29 SwissA330 : Finally! This is very good news...
30 Jsposaune : Add Austrian and Royal Air Maroc to that list, at least as of when I was there in August. Also, as was mentioned earlier, Cayman Airlines has replace
31 Wj : So everyone is cheering their return to T-4, the question is, why did they waste the money in moving???? It's not that T-1 was wide open when they mov
32 LXA340 : hmmmm I gues Lufthansa can be blamed for that. Othwerwise I don't see any reason why LX would've moved in the first place from T4. From day 1 tat LX
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Great Article About TW's JFK Terminal In NY Times posted Thu Oct 2 2003 16:04:01 by TWFirst
Finally Official: DL Move To Terminal A In PHL posted Wed Nov 7 2007 13:52:26 by RafflesKing
Way From Terminal 1 To Terminal 3 In LHR posted Thu Mar 29 2007 15:41:42 by Columba
AA Moves To Terminal 2 IN NRT posted Tue Jan 16 2007 21:12:10 by BALAX
JetBlue To Have Aircraft MX Done In NY posted Mon Dec 11 2006 21:03:44 by JetBluefan1
Intrepid Museum In NY To Close For 2 Years posted Fri Jul 7 2006 01:20:37 by JFKLGANYC
DTW To Open North Terminal In 2008 posted Wed Sep 8 2004 15:27:03 by Dtwclipper
US-Airways Moved To Terminal 1 In FRA? posted Wed Nov 5 2003 16:43:28 by Delta777Jet
Swiss Diverts To Offload Pap Then Goes Tech In MLA posted Sat Oct 26 2002 17:50:22 by LMML 14/32
SIA/Star A. In Talks To Lease SYD Terminal Space posted Mon Jul 22 2002 08:41:14 by Singapore_Air