Luv2cattlecall From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1650 posts, RR: 2 Posted (3 years 10 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 13238 times:
Dulles airport finally flipped the switch on the AeroTrain, which should replace some of the "Mobile Lounge" vehicles they've had since the 1960's. They'll have about 30 trains, with an estimated maximum transit time of 5 minutes (including waiting up to 2 minutes for the next train) - versus the up to 30 minutes the old system can take end-to-end.
The one thing that stuck out to me is the cost: Over $1.5 Billion - at $4.50/pax (Their PFC, it would take over 40 years to pay for itself! Any ideas as to why the system cost over $500 million/mile?
United787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2519 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (3 years 10 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 13081 times:
Congrats to IAD!
3rd Parallel Runway (4th in total)
Concourse B Expansion
International Arrivals Expansion
Metrorail coming in 2016...
Now all they need is a new Concourse C for UA...
"Bennett said it is too soon to say when a new concourse could open. Airport officials are beginning talks with United Airlines, the dominant carrier at Dulles, and other airlines that lease space there about funding the project."
Good sign but I have a feeling that UA isn't going to commit to something like this until profits are solid...
I think IAD could end up being quite the powerhouse hub for UA once all of these projects are done!
I heard a figure of something like 10 years of design + 8 years of digging. So that's "only" $83M/year. 18 years of labor has got to cost a ton, plus you have the cost of the digging machines, the train cars, etc. And, of course, it's in DC of all places
DeltaFFinDFW From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1402 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (3 years 10 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 12692 times:
"Orlando and Dallas airports added train stations at their rental car offices, but Dulles officials said the rental car business at the Northern Virginia airport isn't robust enough to warrant that kind of access."
I know that DFW does not have access to the rental car facility, since the train is inside security and only runs around the semi-circular terminals. And the last time I checked, MCO's rental car facilities were located in the parking garages - a two minute walk from baggage claim and no where near the trains.
United787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2519 posts, RR: 2 Reply 4, posted (3 years 10 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 12555 times:
The ATS train at ORD goes right over the rental car facilities but does not stop, never could figure out why they wouldn't add a stop for the rentals. For that matter, if it went a little further, it could stop at some of the Rosemont hotels or even do a big loop in Rosemont and hit all of the hotels, two Metra stations and the convention center!
148 million for design.
1,043 million for construction.
"The total design and construction cost for the AeroTrain, including the stations, tunnels,
maintenance and control facility, vehicles, guideway and power systems is $1.3 billion.
Of that total, the program cost of the APM system elements such as the vehicles, train
control, guideway surface, guidance and power rails, traction power systems, central
control facilities (a primary and alternate control room), 128 station platform doors, and
fit-out of the maintenance and control facility is $193 million, or 16 percent. The fixed
facility costs are by far the greater costs of the overall AeroTrain program."
It was both cut-and-cover AND tunnels. They did have to go through solid rock too.
Hiflyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2133 posts, RR: 4 Reply 7, posted (3 years 10 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 12413 times:
Couple notes...been riding it for a few days...employees had access...minimal seats...mostly standees....bright interior...nicely designed stations....it is great for B..drops right at it. C is a 100 yd walk back for now as it drops at where the new concourse will go...plan an extra 5 minutes for that. D is still the lounges. Headway during testing was about 2-3 minutes. I know the lounges were old..sucked a lot of diesel...pain to fix but they gave a great view of an operating airport and scenery....
DenverDanny From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 248 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (3 years 10 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 12410 times:
I always enjoyed the mobile lounges as kid traveling to visit to my grandma. Something different. However, the last time I was out there about 10 years ago, it seemed to take forever for the lounge to come to the concourse to pick people up.
Iadbudd From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 102 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (3 years 10 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 11599 times:
It was not publicly announced until Jan 25, a day before. They privately had been planning on the 26th since the new year but since the testing took 5 months longer than anticipated they waited until the employees and final testing were done on Sunday. Nice system but you still have to ride a Mobile Lounge to the D terminal and all arriving International flights. Lots of escalators and elevators. People who need an elevator have to ride 8 of them in order to get between terminal A and C.
UA772IAD From Australia, joined Jul 2004, 1694 posts, RR: 3 Reply 12, posted (3 years 10 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 10398 times:
Quoting Iadbudd (Reply 10): Nice system but you still have to ride a Mobile Lounge to the D terminal and all arriving International flights. Lots of escalators and elevators. People who need an elevator have to ride 8 of them in order to get between terminal A and C.
Good point. International arrivals and the midfield terminal will still utilize mobile lounges. This will probably confuse many travellers at first.
Iadbudd From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 102 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 8490 times:
Due to the money situation with UA and MWAA plans for the Aerotrain to serve International arriving flights have been put on the back of the shelf a while back. As well as the new C/D terminal. That is why the new train station for the C is in the future location and passengers have to walk back through a short underground walkway into the current "Temporary" C terminal. This makes the transit time for connecting UA pax between C and A longer than the previous Mobile Lounge service between the two. Especially factoring in the eight escalators and one moving walkway.
FlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6302 posts, RR: 25 Reply 18, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 8147 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 17): I'm not sure about the cost/benefit calculus of the train.
In the near-term, you are probably right as the cost/benefit numbers probably aren't too great. Long-term though, the train makes more sense as IAD grows.
Imagine if an airport like ATL had to use people movers...what a mess it would be. IAD is certainly no where near ATL in traffic volume, but in time IAD will grow and the people movers would become increasingly problematic. ATC already hates the people movers and there have been plenty of close calls between planes and people movers.
I'm sure that if the MWAA folks had a crystal ball and could have seen the traffic fall related to 9/11 and the more recent economic slump, they might have held off on the train a little longer. But in the big picture, if IAD is to become a larger hub it needs the facilities in place to do so. They've now got the train, the new runway and a lot of other secondary items complete. The last big item of course is the mid-field terminal, but that will obviously have to wait a while.
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7719 posts, RR: 17 Reply 19, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 8136 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 17):
I'm not sure about the cost/benefit calculus of the train.
The new security checkpoint was sorely needed, and I won't go on record criticizing it, but the mobile lounges worked/work well enough.
Like the above poster long term I believe it will more than pay for itself. If the project was delayed another 5, 10, 15 years it would have costed significantly more to do. Not to mention the cost of maintaining aging mobile lounges, paying the drivers, and all those little buggers running all over the airport.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
Macsog6 From Singapore, joined Jan 2010, 498 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 8055 times:
A company for whom I once worked leased property from the MWAA. In a casual conversation with one of MWAA's long serving employees, she mentioned to me that the "mobile lounges" were sized for capacity at the estimated load of an aircraft arrving at IAD, i.e. one lounge per arriving aircraft. Having ridden the lounges numerous times when they were quite packed with only a fraction of the load off a wide-body, I wondered who had not factored in the wide-body era in the mobile lounge design.
Does any other airport in the world use them or are they an orphan, rather like SFO's BART?
Sixty Plus Years of Flying! "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things." - Saint Ex
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7719 posts, RR: 17 Reply 22, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 8055 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 20): There are good reasons to favor the train, but unless you can show that costs would have increased faster than MWAA's money would have grown had they invested it, this isn't one of them.
As the MWAA is a public agency they can't really invest their money in the same way a private entity can. For something like an airport developing your facilities -- infrastructure is a better word in this case -- is the investment.
Ultimately the aerotrain makes sense because:
1. The long-term serviceability of the mobile lounges has to be suspect. Both in terms of maintaining them and keeping a staff of drivers.
2. Having an efficient way of getting people between terminals is something a world class airport has -- the people mover is not seen in the same light. If the aerotrain improves the passenger experience and more people choose to fly out of Dulles then MWAA wins in that regard.
3. Dulles will continue to grow and to some extent the aerotrain is a bit of future proofing.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
FlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6302 posts, RR: 25 Reply 23, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 8017 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 20): I guess my question is how far in advance we need to look - and whether that's a reasonable distance. Certainly, for most of the day, the people movers run around pretty empty.
For the purposes of planning, most airports have to look ahead up to 20 years, because of how long it can take to fund and actually build any major project. When a lot of the initial work on the Aerotrain was done in the 90's, traffic projections for IAD in 2010 put it well ahead of where we are now. Had those projections come true, the people movers would be really strained by now.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21821 posts, RR: 19 Reply 24, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 8008 times:
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 23): When a lot of the initial work on the Aerotrain was done in the 90's, traffic projections for IAD in 2010 put it well ahead of where we are now. Had those projections come true, the people movers would be really strained by now.
What did they look like?
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
25 FlyPNS1: Forecasting done back in 2000 had IAD somewhere between 32-35 million annual passengers for 2010. There was some reasoning behind this projection as