Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Big Changes Coming For Kansas City Intl. (MCI)  
User currently offlinerising From United States of America, joined May 2010, 269 posts, RR: 1
Posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 6003 times:

Looks like Terminal A could be closed by year-end.

One more step in the move to potentially consolidate airport operations into a new "single-terminal" facility to be built on the site of a closed Terminal A, in an effort to be save costs and increase efficiency. Interesting concept as some airports are moving to separate concourses- MCI is possibly going in reverse having all of its operations under one building. Will be some change considering MCI's somewhat unique set-up, the "drive to your gate" design, with buses connecting the separate terminals.

Suppose it makes sense as MCI way back was a boon as it was a perfect place geographically to stop from NY to LA. But now, planes don't need to stop, and you have empty terminals. Costs could be reduced dramatically with one terminal.

STL is in a somewhat similar boat. At least we see some attempt at adaptation on behalf of airport management.

http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascit...close-terminal-a-by-years-end.html

http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascit...ity-international-airport-may.html


If it doesn't make sense, it's because it's not true.
11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinedc9northwest From Switzerland, joined Feb 2007, 2269 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5918 times:

Well, to be honest, they can certainly accomodate every airline in 2 concourses.

I don't know about the single terminal plan. Since the few people who connect there (99% on WN, I'm sure) don't have to pass through security again, it works as is. I dunno why they want to spend money in changing what works.

No one's gonna set up a hub there anytime soon, so what's the point?


User currently offlinefoxecho From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 746 posts, RR: 17
Reply 2, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5711 times:

Holy crap, that parking situation is going to be horrendous...glad I'm gone from there...

Quoting dc9northwest (Reply 1):
Since the few people who connect there (99% on WN, I'm sure

having worked there I can assure you, thanks to travel agencies and consolidators its a lot more than that, and the majority have to clear security again....I worked for an airline there for 7 years and even had to send people though security again from a different gate area where we had a split operation.


Andrew



..uh, we'll need that to live......
User currently onlineYXwatcherMKE From United States of America, joined May 2007, 971 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 5264 times:

Well having to use MCI a few times back when Midwest was still operating there I found in Difficult to find vendors in the secure side that I wanted so I think it is a smart idea to make this move to a single terminal. The current design was done for a different era when the passenger and the family could walk together to the gate give their love ones hugs and kisses good-bye right next to the door of the jetway. Only if they could still do that, but 09-11-2001 changed all that.


I miss the 60's & 70's when you felt like a guest on the plane not cattle like today
User currently onlinesteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9180 posts, RR: 18
Reply 4, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4842 times:

I looked up MCI's layout on Google Earth. It is a bit of a weird set up. Three round concourses that seem to have their own security check. I think it makes sense to consolidate into one concourse and build a single newer one to accomodate traffic. I'm not sure why they'd want to mothball Terminal A and build the new facility there. It would look kinda weird having an off-center terminal, but maybe that's just me...


Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
User currently offlineGSPSPOT From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3009 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4622 times:

Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 3):
The current design was done for a different era when the passenger and the family could walk together to the gate give their love ones hugs and kisses good-bye right next to the door of the jetway. Only if they could still do that, but 09-11-2001 changed all that.

Indeed.... So sad that things had to change. But yes, MCI's and DFW's original terminals were very similar in concept and definitely from a waaaay bygone era.

Quoting steeler83 (Reply 4):
I think it makes sense to consolidate into one concourse and build a single newer one to accomodate traffic.

Sadly, it does for MCI. Today there are just too few airlines and pretty much any airport that should be a hub is already a hub. I don't see any new upstarts needing a hub in a new city in today's market/economic environment.



Finally made it to an airline mecca!
User currently offlinerising From United States of America, joined May 2010, 269 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3808 times:

Quoting steeler83 (Reply 4):
I'm not sure why they'd want to mothball Terminal A and build the new facility there. It would look kinda weird having an off-center terminal, but maybe that's just me...

My guess is the other two terminals would be demolished with the new "central" terminal being on the lot where terminal A is.

The other interesting tidbit to all this, the names of the circle drives around each concourse, Beirut, Rome, and Amsterdam, with other roads such as Nairobi, Bonn, and Moscow.

If only a dream to go to any of those places from MCI!



If it doesn't make sense, it's because it's not true.
User currently offlineknope2001 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2872 posts, RR: 30
Reply 7, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3193 times:

In comparison with many other airports in its class or smaller, MCI has a serious dearth of vendors and amenities because of the terminal design. There's just not room.

Outside of security, the heavily de-centralized terminal design means limited traffic flow at any one place, so vendors tend to be small and cramped with heavy feast-or-famine cycles. Within security there didn't even used to be bathrooms. That has been remedied in at least some of the busiest gate clusters (not sure if all) . Amenities beyond security -- where they exist -- are mostly small grab-and-go kiosks.

So it's not only that the decentralized design is most costly to run. It's also a design that just does not stack up well with counterparts and hasn't for a long time.

As for the ease of use because gates are so close to the curb, there is some truth to that. But I think it's somewhat overrated. I've used KCI a few dozen times over the years, and the walking isn't nonexistantt, especially for departing passengers who need to stop at the ticket counter. Certainly it's far more convenient than airports like ATL, MSP, LAS, etc. But if you look at the scale and size of the proposed terminal, are we talking an extra 3 minutes?

Though the three-ring design is distinctive for KC, it's not particularly iconic or widely beloved. Something modern and efficient to take its place would be a good change.


User currently offlineBHMNONREV From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 1368 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 2243 times:

Quoting dc9northwest (Reply 1):
Well, to be honest, they can certainly accomodate every airline in 2 concourses.

I don't know about the single terminal plan. Since the few people who connect there (99% on WN, I'm sure) don't have to pass through security again, it works as is. I dunno why they want to spend money in changing what works.

.

No question B and C can accommodate everyone with ease.

But in MCI's case, the single terminal concept is one that is long overdue to replace the circular terminals. When MCI first opened in the 70's before current security measures were initiated it was a very novel idea, to be able to walk from your car to the gate in less than 50 yards. No more.

Quoting knope2001 (Reply 7):
Outside of security, the heavily de-centralized terminal design means limited traffic flow at any one place, so vendors tend to be small and cramped with heavy feast-or-famine cycles. Within security there didn't even used to be bathrooms. That has been remedied in at least some of the busiest gate clusters (not sure if all) . Amenities beyond security -- where they exist -- are mostly small grab-and-go kiosks.

Agreed. I was thru MCI over the year end holiday flying AA to DFW, and the American gate area was an absolute disaster with an almost claustrophobic experience. There was a small bar with seating for maybe 5-6 people and a grab and go kiosk, and extremely limited seating.

I think the model of the proposed terminal replacing A looks like a good start, and a much more realistic possibility than the southern terminal option.


User currently offlineskywaymanaz From United States of America, joined May 2012, 497 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2179 times:

I agree they need to replace the current terminals. I was disappointed they proceeded with the modest remodel after 9/11. Everyone knew the design was unworkable before then but impossible afterward. A friend of mine in DC on business during 9/11 had to connect back from BWI at MCI and vowed he would NEVER connect at MCI again after that experience. I doubt he's the only one given the amount of failed hubs even pre 9/11, TW, BN I, EA, BN II, NJ.

I think they are planning in the wrong location though.


Quoting steeler83 (Reply 4):
It would look kinda weird having an off-center terminal, but maybe that's just me...

Nope it's not just you but maybe we're in the minority. I think an E shaped terminal where B and C currently stand would work better then an H shape at A. Build the middle concourse between B and C by tearing down the ends of the existing terminals. Delta would have to be relocated during construction. I think that location would work a lot better with the current roadway, runway and taxiway layout. The remaining concourses could be be built moving American and Frontier to the first phase of the new terminal and demolish the rest of C. Southwest and every one else could then move over. Build the last part of E where B now stands as demand warrants. Given that the parking garage at A opened in time to see Eastern pull out and B garage opened in time for Braniff's bankruptcy I think phased construction in this location makes more sense.


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7989 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2101 times:

MCI needs to have its terminals rebuilt from the ground up because they were designed back in the days of less-stringent security--it doesn't work well given the security checkpoints the TSA now requires.

User currently onlinesteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9180 posts, RR: 18
Reply 11, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 1718 times:

Quoting skywaymanaz (Reply 9):
I think an E shaped terminal where B and C currently stand would work better then an H shape at A. Build the middle concourse between B and C by tearing down the ends of the existing terminals. Delta would have to be relocated during construction. I think that location would work a lot better with the current roadway, runway and taxiway layout. The remaining concourses could be be built moving American and Frontier to the first phase of the new terminal and demolish the rest of C. Southwest and every one else could then move over. Build the last part of E where B now stands as demand warrants. Given that the parking garage at A opened in time to see Eastern pull out and B garage opened in time for Braniff's bankruptcy I think phased construction in this location makes more sense.

Yep, and you know what? They'll never think of doing something like this. You know why? It actually makes TOO MUCH SENSE!!!  



Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
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...
Big Changes In The N.E. For Colgan/Mesaba posted Wed Sep 7 2011 15:36:02 by azjubilee
Big Storm Coming To DC Area - Bad For Pax posted Thu Feb 4 2010 05:30:51 by Contrails
YX At Kansas City (MCI) posted Mon Sep 10 2007 08:41:08 by Airbusaddict
BIG Changes In DFW For Delta Again... posted Wed Sep 21 2005 07:26:30 by N839MH
Positive Article On Kansas City (MCI) posted Fri Jan 18 2002 00:49:57 by LoneStarMike
Big Changes For QF Fqtv Programme posted Thu Mar 15 2001 01:17:31 by JaseWGTN
Big Changes For Taiwan's Domestic Flight posted Thu Dec 28 2000 19:59:30 by Jiml1126
Midwest Express Opens Hub In Kansas City MCI. posted Wed Oct 18 2000 01:19:17 by TWA902fly
European Top 10 Airports 2012 - Some Big Changes posted Thu Feb 28 2013 05:47:46 by factsonly
Outlook For London City Airport (LCY) posted Sun Feb 10 2013 04:01:48 by SInGAPORE_AIR