Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
When Will Terminals At JFK Be Renumbered?  
User currently offlineB6A322 From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 291 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 6392 times:

Granted more than a few people would be confused, but with the rather large changes that are currently in the works at JFK to the terminal layout, one can't help but wonder, when will the numbers be changed? Delta and Jetblue's projects will leave the total number of physical buildings at 6, and from the looks of it, that number will probably continue to decrease over the next number of years.

So, when is a renumeration due? Or will the airlines fight to keep the current number as part of their brand (such as all of jetblue's t5 branding).


The content I post is solely my own opinion. It is not an official statement by/of/for nor representative of any company
26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8371 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 6159 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Why would terminals need to be re-numbered ? The terminal 3 Delta sight will get a new building eventually, it maybe in 2030 but don't believe its going to be empty forever. The terminal 6 sight will get a new building too, as a T 5 international, standalone terminal or a combo with T7. Leave the umbers alone, cofusion would occur if Terminal 4 became T3 and AA would another number.

User currently offlinedbo861 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 887 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 6009 times:

The terminals at PHX were never renumbered. Why should JFK?

User currently offlineplateman From United States of America, joined May 2007, 923 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5999 times:

Quoting B6A322 (Thread starter):
one can't help but wonder, when will the numbers be changed?

Actually, I have never wondered this. If if ain't broke, don't fix it. I know if I'm flying AA, go to T8, JetBlue, T5, etc.

Many other airports closed termainsl and concourses and haven't renumbered, so why would JFK?



"Explore. Dream. Discover." -Mark Twain
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16865 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5945 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 1):
Why would terminals need to be re-numbered ? The terminal 3 Delta sight will get a new building eventually, it maybe in 2030 but don't believe its going to be empty forever. The terminal 6 sight will get a new building too, as a T 5 international, standalone terminal or a combo with T7. Leave the umbers alone, cofusion would occur if Terminal 4 became T3 and AA would another number.

The T-6 site is not getting a new terminal, it's being developed into an expansion of T-5 as well as new hard stand parking. Similarly I don't foresee T-3 being replaced, for now it's going to be hardstand parking. If anything I could see a satellite concourse for T-1 on part of the T-2 and T-3 sites, but the T-2/T-3 sites are just too small for any new terminal development.

The only area I can see future terminal developments would be on the current T-7 site, that could expand somewhat on the former T-6 area not taken up by T-5I.

The future down the road may look like this:

T-1 (including a satellite concourse), T-2 (current T-4), T-3 (current T-5), T-4 (currently T-7), T-5 (Current T-8.

The Port Authority, TSA etc.. want fewer larger terminals. It's a logistical nightmare with so many terminals.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3472 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5873 times:

STT is correct.

The original JFK 2000 plan (scrapped due to economic realities and lack of foresight in the PA) called for one single terminal at JFK with satellites.

Much more efficient and standardized.

Why are B6 and AA passengers arriving in beautiful state-of-the-art facilities while DL pax arrive in a hell hole? If you look at an airport like CLT of ATL or MCO, you don't see this kind of disparity.

In airports like that, the airport agency oversees a masterplan which the airlines buy into with their input. In NYC, it is the complete opposite...

Take the current B6 T5i debacle:
Ground Breaking still hasn't occrred because B6 can't come to a rental agreement with the PA. It's almost as if the 2 entities (which should be working together) and actually working against each other.

The result is a hodge podge of terminals in various states of disrepair throughout 3 airports.



That said, the future JFK will likely have an expanded T1, a further expanded T4, an expanded T5, and expanded T8. 4 terminals.

The T7 spot is a wildcard. The current terminal is in good working order, albeit a bit crowded when 12 widebodies park there in the evening. The terminal has a life left in it


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16865 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 5687 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 5):
The original JFK 2000 plan (scrapped due to economic realities and lack of foresight in the PA) called for one single terminal at JFK with satellites.



I remember well, the news was all over the underground baggage tunnels that were being built but never actually connected to anything.

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 5):
Much more efficient and standardized.



Absolutely agree, a single (or two) central terminal with several large satellites connecting to the main terminal via trams ala MCO or TPA (albeit bigger). This would have been much more efficient in terms of Port Authority police, TSA, Customs & Border Patrol staffing. Also instead of the small automated Airtrain making the loop around all the terminals they could have instead built a heavy rail LIRR capable connection right into the single terminal out to the LIRR main at Jamaica. The central terminal could have also boasted a hotel, ala MCO, incorporated into the facility. The problem with all these separate terminals is not only the staffing and overall inefficiencies, but the airlines and private operators are maintaining their facilities to differing levels. Creating a hodge podge of modern and inadequate facilities.

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 5):
That said, the future JFK will likely have an expanded T1, a further expanded T4, an expanded T5, and expanded T8. 4 terminals.



I agree, I think though T-7 will be redeveloped at some point and as for a wild card I would throw in the possibility of a very basic charter facility somewhere else at the airport similar to the former Tower Air set up. Something "off the grid" so to speak, no Airtrain, not in the central terminal area.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinerichierich From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4260 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 5631 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 5):
Ground Breaking still hasn't occrred because B6 can't come to a rental agreement with the PA. It's almost as if the 2 entities (which should be working together) and actually working against each other.

Does anybody actually work with the PANYNJ? It is my understanding that they basically define the word bureaucracy!

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 5):
The T7 spot is a wildcard. The current terminal is in good working order, albeit a bit crowded when 12 widebodies park there in the evening. The terminal has a life left in it

And T7's geography almost ensures it will never merge with Terminal 8, except via a walkway over the JFK Expressway perhaps. As it is, they are using part of the old T6 site to hard stand T7 aircraft. I find T7 to be an emotionless, uninspiring terminal, and if it wasn't for the flair of 'Britishness' about it, it would have even less going for it. The arrivals hallway into US immigrations is not a very pleasant welcome into the USA, in my opinon. (Not to be outdone, Delta's T3 arrival facilities have to be the worst in the nation...I like the architecture of the old Pan Am terminal but this is not a part of the experience that anybody talks about positively!)

Back to T7, I wonder how the terminal landscape will change if AA should merge post-bankruptcy? One can only guess whether or not AA will maintain a large or small presence at JFK - but I could see BA moving over to the under-utilized T8 within the next 5 years. Then all bets are off for T7. Not sure if the Port would re-develop the existing terminal or just go with a simple new terminal built from the ground up.



None shall pass!!!!
User currently offlinecloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2454 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 5611 times:

The day when Boeing renames the B787-800 to the B787-200 and Airbus renames the A380-800 the A380-200.


A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
User currently offlineB6JFKH81 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2888 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 5537 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 5):
Take the current B6 T5i debacle:
Ground Breaking still hasn't occrred because B6 can't come to a rental agreement with the PA. It's almost as if the 2 entities (which should be working together) and actually working against each other.

Really? I guess it is a little odd since T5i is taking over where T6 used to be (so a second terminal site) but is going to be an addition to T5, so it will be one building that they want to have the same lease term for? I know that B6 was paying for the expansion themselves and not financing through PANYNJ and the green light was given as per the following press release on 5/31:

http://investor.jetblue.com/phoenix....-newsArticle&ID=1701319&highlight=

Quoting richierich (Reply 7):
Does anybody actually work with the PANYNJ? It is my understanding that they basically define the word bureaucracy!

I think the question should be turned around to be "does the PANYNJ actually work with anybody?" considering they are the ones that seem to roll out the red tape instead of the red carpet for folks trying to work with them LOL.



"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3472 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 5359 times:

"The arrivals hallway into US immigrations is not a very pleasant welcome into the USA, in my opinon."


It's modern, small, quick and very pleasant. From the plane to the curb in 10 minutes. Beats 4 and 1 anyday in my humble opinion


User currently offlinetymnbalewne From Bermuda, joined Mar 2005, 949 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 5264 times:

Another example: ORD.
T1, 2, 3, 5!



Dewmanair...begins with Dew
User currently offlinerichierich From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4260 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5133 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 10):
It's modern, small, quick and very pleasant. From the plane to the curb in 10 minutes. Beats 4 and 1 anyday in my humble opinion

Maybe it's been a while since I arrived at T7 internationally, but the only adjective you used that I would have agreed with is 'small'. I think 10 minutes to the curb is probably a stretch though, unless you are one of the lucky ones off the plane first.



None shall pass!!!!
User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4226 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5116 times:

YYZ has T1 and T3, they will number the terminals differently when pigs start using the airport to land.


Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25300 posts, RR: 22
Reply 14, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4871 times:

Quoting tymnbalewne (Reply 11):
Another example: ORD.
T1, 2, 3, 5!

And Toronto with T1 and T3 since the old T2 closed more than 5 years ago and was then demolished. No need to renumber them as people get used to the numbers.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2007/01/29/terminal2.html
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2007/01/24/pearson-terminal.html

[Edited 2012-08-01 15:34:53]

User currently offlinerwy04lga From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 3176 posts, RR: 8
Reply 15, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 4817 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 5):
while DL pax arrive in a hell hole?
Quoting richierich (Reply 7):
Delta's T3 arrival facilities have to be the worst in the nation

  Perhaps you've heard....Delta might have plans for T-3...



Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7907 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 4432 times:

I think I'm in the small (OCD) minority that would like to see them renumbered...

Quoting cloudyapple (Reply 8):
The day when Boeing renames the B787-800 to the B787-200 and Airbus renames the A380-800 the A380-200.

THIS. It pissed me off when they did that. Also, 747-100, 747-200, 747-300, 747-400... 747-8i?! NOOOOO



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinetharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1865 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3565 times:

There are other precedents. For now, BOS had terminals A, B, C and E. no D.

The general confusion from renaming probably outweighs the ease-of-mind benefit for the OCD anetters.


User currently online1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6531 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3536 times:

Quoting tharanga (Reply 17):
There are other precedents. For now, BOS had terminals A, B, C and E. no D.

The general confusion from renaming probably outweighs the ease-of-mind benefit for the OCD anetters.

And ABQ only has Concourses A, B, and E. C was the TWA concourse, which has since been converted to office space. D was a ground-level commuter aircraft concourse used by Great Plains.



The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
User currently offlinecsavel From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1363 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3528 times:

6th Avenue was renamed "Avenue of the Americas" in I think the LaGuardia administration. I have NEVER heard a New Yorker call it anything other than 6th Avenue when not talking to tourists. Similarly the Triborough bridge was renamed the Robert F. Kennedy bridge about 3 years ago. Not only does everyone still call it the triboro, but a lot of people don't even know it has been officially renamed. I can imagine the confusion when a tourist asks how to drive to the RFK bridge.

Point being that New Yorkers will call places what they want to call them, and the City that Never Sleeps can be incredibly tradition-bound. This often sows confusion. What if the PA numbers the terminal "correctly" but judging by the anecdotes, the old T4 is still called that, as is T8, as is....

A cabbie would have to ask, "Which terminal four do you mean?"

So what they are not in order, I mean seriously.

If you want a few more anecdotes.

Native New Yorkers will still talk of talking the BMT, or the IRT or the IND. They were the three separate and sometimes competing subway systems. The systems combined round about when Jackie Robinson was stealing home!



I may be ugly. I may be an American. But don't call me an ugly American.
User currently offlineblue100 From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 44 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3498 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 10):
It's modern, small, quick and very pleasant. From the plane to the curb in 10 minutes. Beats 4 and 1 anyday in my humble opinion

I second that. I've never had a very long wait when arriving at T7. I've flown BA many times to and from JFK and I can recall one time we landed on 31R and I managed to get from the plane to the airtrain station in no more than 20 minutes after touching down. Granted this was without a checked bag but I was seated in Y.

I just came back with KL to JFK and we arrived just before an LY, EK, EY and a couple of other flights. The lines at immigration weren't bad but I did have to wait some time for my suitcase.


User currently offlineaeroblogger From India, joined Dec 2011, 1363 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3394 times:

BOS is also like this - A, B, C, E.


Airports 2012: IXE HYD DEL BLR BOM CCU KNU KTM BKK SIN ICN LAX BUR SFO PHX IAH ORD EWR PHL PVD BOS FRA MUC IST
User currently offlinevarsity From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 249 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3040 times:

If I recall correctly -- the existing numbering scheme did not exist (at least not in common knowledge) prior to the demolition of the IAB. When I worked in travel in the 80s/90s we referred to them by the largest tenant (Eastern, Delta, Pan Am, WWD, IAB, EWD, TWA international and domestic, British, American, United) as they were identified in the Flight Guides the PA used to mail out every few months. At some point (probably when EAL died) their building and its successor became T1 and after United moved in with BA their building became known as T3 (despite there being no T2) in this guide.

I am wondering if the sequential signs along the approach road were there all along, but that use of the numbers did not extend beyond the airport until the much-marketed replacements of T1 and T4.


User currently offlineBlueman87 From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 535 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3013 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 5):
Why are B6 and AA passengers arriving in beautiful state-of-the-art facilities while DL pax arrive in a hell hole? If you look at an airport like CLT of ATL or MCO, you don't see this kind of disparity.

because they are not paying to have a new one so they get what they get dont blame B6 or AA for having nice terminals cause they paid for it its DL fualt for having the terminals they do



B6 T5 JFK DL T2/3 JFK
User currently offlinevarsity From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 249 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2986 times:

Quoting csavel (Reply 19):
Point being that New Yorkers will call places what they want to call them, and the City that Never Sleeps can be incredibly tradition-bound. This often sows confusion.



See also, Pan Am Building.



25 ANITIX87 : And MIA: D, E, F, G, H, J. No A-C, no I (for obvious reasons). And it's all one GIANT building. Many airports all around the world are like this. TIS
26 jfklganyc : In fairness, 6th Ave and Ave of the Americas carries both titles "because they are not paying to have a new one so they get what they get dont blame B
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...
When Will EZY's LGW-LUX Be On Sale? posted Fri May 4 2012 04:21:10 by Pe@rson
When Will ZA100 Line#7 787 Be Delivered? posted Fri Jan 13 2012 07:11:33 by fleabyte
When Will The A380-900 Be Rolled Out? posted Thu Feb 18 2010 05:32:44 by United Airline
Delta Terminals At JFK Evacuated 10/30 posted Tue Oct 30 2007 19:22:11 by PlateMan
When Will SQ's A380 Flights Be On Res. Systems? posted Wed Aug 8 2007 01:19:36 by Coal
MAXjet To Move Terminals At JFK posted Thu Jul 26 2007 23:39:03 by ThirteenRight
When Will The Title "Dreamliner" Be Dropped posted Mon Jul 9 2007 23:14:55 by Boston92
When Will The 787-10 Be Launched posted Tue Jan 9 2007 22:47:32 by T773ER
When Will AC B777-300ER Be On Production Line? posted Sun Oct 8 2006 23:12:25 by AirCanada014
When Will BA Airbus Family Be Replaced posted Sun Jun 4 2006 10:09:17 by BA787