Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Update: MIA New AA North Terminal  
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4430 posts, RR: 6
Posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4848 times:

Now it appears it won't be done until 2011.... and will cost almost 3 billion dollars. For that money, it better be the best terminal on the face of the earth!

http://www.miamiherald.com/business/story/533752.html

31 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineB752OS From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1322 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4834 times:

Quoting N62NA (Thread starter):
Now it appears it won't be done until 2011.... and will cost almost 3 billion dollars. For that money, it better be the best terminal on the face of the earth!

http://www.miamiherald.com/business/....html

Wow, talk about very poor project management. The fact that the cost of the north terminal alone has risen over $1.8 Billion is nuts. I can see inflation playing a rolse here, but to more than double is crazy. When was this project originally projected to be competed? Hopefully this won't have too much of an adverse affect on the airlines.

[Edited 2008-05-15 06:20:11]

User currently offlineElmoTheHobo From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1536 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4777 times:

American messed this up early on, but the cost going through the roof is out of their (AA and the airport authority's) control. Oil prices tripling over a two year period, the price of copper and steel going through the roof are huge price pressures on any construction project today, the North Terminal is no exception

User currently offlineAAJFKSJUBKLYN From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 901 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4759 times:



Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 2):
American messed this up early on, but the cost going through the roof is out of their (AA and the airport authority's) control. Oil prices tripling over a two year period, the price of copper and steel going through the roof are huge price pressures on any construction project today, the North Terminal is no exception

That debacle known as MIA, is not the fault of AA, beleive me. The airport wanted full control and HAD not a single clue what to do with contracts once they received them. Its standard protocol from Miami- Dade.....Not AA...trust me on that one. We love to hate AA, but in this case the people of South Florida and those that pay the fees for using MIA, have NO ONE TO BLAME but Miami-Dade..........


User currently offlineHiflyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2167 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4749 times:

As far as I can recall...AA started this before the County started the South Terminal project....and AA ran it into the ground until a couple years ago when the County refused to give them even more money and then took over the failed project. South Terminal has been open for months now....and now they say 3 more years for North? Most airports can level an existing structure and build new in less time.......especially if they do not have to redo the ramps and fuels.

User currently offlineAlbird87 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4732 times:

Wow this terminal should be great but thats a hefty price!

Just out of interest. what is the status right now? I know concoruse A is closed but the last couple of times i have been there i havent seen much of the new north serction being built to connect the new D to A!
Have they stopped working?


User currently offlineAAJFKSJUBKLYN From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 901 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4718 times:

You are correct, but construction involves an owner, architect and contractor. AA acted as contractor and hired subcontractors and prime contractors, and relied on the corruption of MIA-Dade as the provider. The triangle can't work when the County is sticking it's nose into awarding contracts to corrupt agencies as was known to happen at MIA..back when it all began.

For the record, AA pretty much started MIA before their JFK project and the JFK project is done, except for the demolition of T8 which is nearly complete. AA has one one of the best Corporate Real Estate (planning, construction etc) out there.
Trust me as I work in Construction, when an owner sticks their nose into everything, you have nothing but a mess...Welcome to Miami...


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32624 posts, RR: 72
Reply 7, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4623 times:



Quoting AAJFKSJUBKLYN (Reply 6):
For the record, AA pretty much started MIA before their JFK project and the JFK project is done, except for the demolition of T8 which is nearly complete.

For the record, AA pretty much started the MIA North Terminal about five years before MIA started the MIA South Terminal, and the South Terminal is open and pretty much complete.



a.
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4430 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4515 times:



Quoting Hiflyer (Reply 4):
..AA started this before the County started the South Terminal project....and AA ran it into the ground until a couple years ago when the County refused to give them even more money and then took over the failed project.

That is correct.

Anyone remember Angela Gittens? She was the MIA airport manager who valiantly fought to get this whole mess under control... and the Miami-Dade Commision fired her!


User currently offlineCrAAzy From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 773 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4338 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting AAJFKSJUBKLYN (Reply 6):

For the record, AA pretty much started MIA before their JFK project and the JFK project is done, except for the demolition of T8 which is nearly complete. AA has one one of the best Corporate Real Estate (planning, construction etc) out there.

One footnote - the JFK project is only a fraction of what it was originally supposed to be .... a real shame.

Having said that, I'm not at all trying to suggest that the MIA project was anything other than a cluster **** or run anywhere near as well as JFK.


User currently offlineDoug From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 853 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4207 times:

I remember anxiously reading a Miami Herald article in 1990 right when American started to take over Easterns old routes and plans called for a rectangle shaped 40 gate terminal cost 500 million to be completed around 1995 or 1996 my how time flies.I remember the article said AA plans to have 300 daily flights(by 1995) and Pan Am 175 daily flights.For what its worth the terminal will be simply dynamic once completed.

User currently offlinePanAm330 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2671 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4175 times:



Quoting Doug (Reply 10):
For what its worth the terminal will be simply dynamic once completed.

Well, it better be worth $2.853B! Are there any renderings of the project?


User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5647 posts, RR: 24
Reply 12, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4164 times:



Quoting CrAAzy (Reply 9):
One footnote - the JFK project is only a fraction of what it was originally supposed to be .... a real shame.

For some reason, AA doesnt or did not have such a clear purpose for JFK as it does MIA. Does anyone else notice this?



Next trip: SLC-LAX-JFK-LAX-SLC on AA, gotta say goodbye to my beloved 762!
User currently offlineAAflyguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 358 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 4141 times:

Angela Gittens! She has gone on to much bigger and better things than Miami-Dade. She was with the firm HNTB until about a month ago and now is the Director General of Airports Council International - World in Geneva, a global organization representing over 1,800 airports. It's pretty much the pinnacle position that airport managers can aspire to. I'm sure she is much better off than she would have been if still in MIA. Probably saying good riddance, and go to hell, all the way from Switzerland! LOL The great thing here is that they didn't ruin her future by firing her. Her star rose only higher. Seems there are some major issues down in MIA, and that they aren't getting any better even nearly 3-years after showing her the door. I suspect she was not the primary problem. It existed before she arrived, and it existed after she departed.

I remember the last time I flew through MIA about 2-years ago. While taxiing by the north side, it looked like a war zone, or a project that was simply forgotten and was left exposed for all to see. Just a jumbled mess and it probably doesn't look much different today. That airport is a bitch with all of those corridors skirting along the edge of what will eventually become the finished Concourse A in 2011. I'll never forget those walks through that jogging, zig-zagging, up and down seemingly mile long hallway. So sad. I did see the South Concourse when passing by MIA last Nov on whatever that highway is that forms the south border. It looked very nice! How do you have that on one side and a total embarassment on the other?


User currently offlineAAJFKSJUBKLYN From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 901 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4021 times:



Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 12):
For some reason, AA doesnt or did not have such a clear purpose for JFK as it does MIA. Does anyone else notice this?

Its not half what it was supposed to be-its clear purpose @ JFK is to do what exactly what it is supposed to, host TRANSCONS, Be a strong Internation Gateway (Europe and Carribean). They cut out 15% of the project, which included approx. 10 gates removed, and picture an airplane with a wing-tip missing-thats what the Terminal appears like in plan as built. If fully built it would be a full-wingspan. I know, I did the estimate for the PANYNY, and remember this happening all immediately after 9/11. The building is ready for the next phase, so if AA ever decides to build it, it can be connected quite easily. But quite honestly, it's BIG enough to support its current schedule and operations functions. AA currently is demolishing the old terminal 8, I passed by it last night and it looks like a scary movie...The stained glass is GONE completely and so are any indications that it was the American AIrlines Terminal. Now only if AA would spruce up their planes to match the world class terminal they just might have a better airline......


User currently offlineAAJFKSJUBKLYN From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 901 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 4004 times:

The missing pieces (Items not currently scheduled to be built) of AA @ JFK. The triangle piece is the missing check-in area, and the rectangle are the gates that were omitted from the project, Terminal 8 is immediately to the right where the triangle and rectangle are. Thats is currently 60% gone as of last night.
Big version: Width: 1106 Height: 602 File size: 1952kb
AA JFK MIssing pieces


User currently offlineAAL0616 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 272 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 3979 times:

There is enough blame or fault on all sides regarding the North Terminal saga at MIA. It is depressing to feel as though this was perhaps to be expected and is par for the course in Miami-Dade county.

Hurricane Andrew exposed the dirty secret that building codes were relaxed by the 1970s and 80s versus what they had been prior. hence, concrete block structures with proper roof attachments withstood that storm as they had others before and since. The "trophy homes" and other less elaborate structures built after the codes were relaxed or contractors cheated were blown away.

I mention this comparison because of the incompetence and corruption that is pervasive in our local politics and business and has been evident in the various airport projects. There are many more tales from the dark underbrush of bids, deals, cronyism, etc. that permeates Miami-Dade. Not unlike the patronage that was a cornerstone of life in cities like Boston and Chicago during the 20th century, in Miami-Dade, the concept allows the opportunity for growth and prosperity for a unified and assertive ethnic group. One hundred years ago in big American cities these were Irish, Italian and others. In politics as well as trades (especially construction), the gains made as these groups hung together to overcome all challenges are well known and documented. Corruption occurred along the way as the groups made progress.

There are similarities but differences with this ethnic patronage history in South Florida to be sure, but unfortunately the bad has indeed come along with the good. The Miami skyline that is beginning to resemble Hong Kong, the financial progress, banking centers, international status, tourism, etc. would probably not be as huge without the influx of talent and motivation that migrated into South Florida since 1961. The best testament to the failure and incompetence of the Soviet-style dictatorship of Castro, Inc. in Cuba is that Havana should be what Miami now is in terms of an international business hub and leisure destination. The comparison is stark.

However, along with the growth opportunity has sadly come more than our share of thieves and dopes that have produced blatant sink holes such as the North Terminal project, and the culprits are not at all confined to our own local contractors and politicians. A certain air carrier based in Texas shares at least as much of the blame.

Hopefully, from all this mess will emerge a beautiful terminal in spite of the delays and mistakes.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16828 posts, RR: 51
Reply 17, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 3979 times:



Quoting AAJFKSJUBKLYN (Reply 6):
For the record, AA pretty much started MIA before their JFK project and the JFK project is done, except for the demolition of T8 which is nearly complete.



Quoting AAJFKSJUBKLYN (Reply 14):
They cut out 15% of the project, which included approx. 10 gates removed, and picture an airplane with a wing-tip missing-thats what the Terminal appears like in plan as built. If fully built it would be a full-wingspan. I know, I did the estimate for the PANYNY, and remember this happening all immediately after 9/11.

For the record AA's JFK terminal project is much smaller than it's original scope, when complete it will have 39 gates which is 16-17 gates fewer than originally intended. It also has to be stated that AA's JFK Terminal project and CO's Global Gateway expansion at EWR were both approved at the same Port Authority Board meeting, construction on both projects started at the same time yet CO's Global Gateway project was completed in 2002. The scope of CO's Global Gateway project was much larger and more expensive ($1.3 Billion for CO's EWR project, $1.1 Billion for AA's JFK), CO added nearly a Million Square feet to Terminal C (including a new 19 gate FIS capable concourse) two new widebody hangars, two rebuilt narrowbody hangars, new automated aircraft parts warehouse, new engine build up shop, ground equipment maintenance facility etc..

The CO project was running about 3 months ahead of schedule (as per CO press release), when 9/11 occurred it delayed construction as contractors were required to go through more rigorous background checks.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineAAJFKSJUBKLYN From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 901 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3924 times:



Quoting STT757 (Reply 17):
The CO project was running about 3 months ahead of schedule (as per CO press release), when 9/11 occurred it delayed construction as contractors were required to go through more rigorous background checks.

For the record there are 33 built and active gates at AA JFK-in use today and tomorrow. So if 39 was what was planned...that would leave 6 unbuilt (thats a small unbuilt percentage)???? Whats with the CO comparison? The new CO terminal is an architecural disaster, ugly, mass space, no thought. Its like comparing a shopping mall to the Petronas Towers.

This is EXACTLY what delayed AA at JFK, and as well substantial remediation efforts needed (more then was planned), clean-up of contaminated soil, then 9/11, then a reduced scope of project which required redesign, then a completely new design for security to accomodate post 9/11 security measures. On top of that AA, decided to then slow construction to save on cash flow. All WISE decisions, and coincidently worth the wait.

The picture I posted shows exactly what gates were not built, as well as check-in area deleted. If you look at the current built vs. what is in pink (pink is what is deleted), it may seem like a lot was not built, and that was not the case.


User currently offlineAAJFKSJUBKLYN From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 901 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3912 times:

Forgot to mention that I included Eagle gates in the calculations. In case I have a rebuttal explaining that there are 27 gates... 3 Additonal gates will bring it to 30 mainline once T8 is gone completely.

User currently offlineCrAAzy From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 773 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3861 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AAJFKSJUBKLYN (Reply 18):
The picture I posted shows exactly what gates were not built, as well as check-in area deleted. If you look at the current built vs. what is in pink (pink is what is deleted), it may seem like a lot was not built, and that was not the case.


Wasn't there supposed to be another set of parallel terminal off the check-in area on that housed only eagle flights on both sides too?

http://www.airport-technology.com/projects/jfk/jfk11.html

http://www.airport-technology.com/projects/jfk/

[Edited 2008-05-16 07:55:59]

User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16828 posts, RR: 51
Reply 21, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3848 times:



Quoting AAJFKSJUBKLYN (Reply 18):
For the record there are 33 built and active gates at AA JFK-in use today and tomorrow. So if 39 was what was planned...that would leave 6 unbuilt (thats a small unbuilt percentage)????

55 was the plan, 39 will ultimatelty be built.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16828 posts, RR: 51
Reply 22, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3842 times:



Quoting AAJFKSJUBKLYN (Reply 15):
The missing pieces (Items not currently scheduled to be built) of AA @ JFK. The triangle piece is the missing check-in area, and the rectangle are the gates that were omitted from the project, Terminal 8 is immediately to the right where the triangle and rectangle are. Thats is currently 60% gone as of last night.


AA JFK MIssing pieces

It's a little more than that which will not be built:




Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineAAJFKSJUBKLYN From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 901 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3801 times:

I assume you are referring the the eagle gates at the forefront. They were removed eons ago...before a shovel hit the ground. It was actually removed in schematic design (which is sometime in 1998)...and AA continued with marketing plans (plans you see). Instead of updating them, they put those up on the walls thinking everyone wouldn't notice..nice ha. The post 9/11 changes are as I posted.

User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16828 posts, RR: 51
Reply 24, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3752 times:



Quoting AAJFKSJUBKLYN (Reply 23):
They were removed eons ago...before a shovel hit the ground. It was actually removed in schematic design (which is sometime in 1998)...and AA continued with marketing plans (plans you see). Instead of updating them, they put those up on the walls thinking everyone wouldn't notice..nice ha. The post 9/11 changes are as I posted.

No , they were removed around 2002/2003.

AA has made several changes (for the worse) since the projects inception.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
25 RICARIZA : That is one question I have always had. Wasn´t terminal A upgraded a few years back? Why is it being renovated again? I never got that, could someone
26 Sflaflight : I don't think it's being renovated. It is closed to allow for the faster building of the TrAAm system inside the terminal. They might touch up while
27 MAH4546 : It will be renovated. There will be extensive remodeling in Concourse A. If they are going to close it, they might as well renovate. Most of it won't
28 Sflaflight : OK, thanks for the correction, MAH! I guess I didn't realize it as little will be noticeable. I do remember some saying that A would leak under heavy
29 RICARIZA : Thank you... now I understand...!! . .
30 AAL0616 : I might have been the guilty party ... the agents were always armed and ready with buckets during afternoon t-storms at "A." More than once I have be
31 Sflaflight : actually AAL0616, you weren't the only one - many have said that!! I just wish I was there. Everytime I was in A it was beautiful. I just wish I had
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...
MIA To Downsize New North Terminal? posted Wed Jul 12 2006 19:23:12 by Db777
MIA's North Terminal - New Contractor Coming? posted Thu Jun 9 2005 20:13:38 by DB777
Look At MIA's New North Terminal Project posted Wed Jun 30 2004 17:50:41 by MAH4546
MIA New South Terminal posted Mon Dec 31 2007 20:58:09 by Halls120
MIA North Terminal posted Sun Dec 23 2007 07:25:21 by AAL0616
Any New Updates On The North Terminal At DTW? posted Fri Nov 16 2007 12:03:57 by JetBlueGuy2006
Pictures From Inside MIA's New South Terminal posted Mon Aug 27 2007 14:40:21 by N62NA
Add Another $1 Billion For MIA's North Terminal posted Tue Nov 21 2006 16:12:43 by N62NA
MIA May Close 'A' To Speed Up North Terminal Project posted Thu Aug 10 2006 17:30:36 by DB777
New Pics Of DTW North Terminal posted Thu May 25 2006 13:35:04 by Dtwclipper