Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Future Of JFK Terminal 7?  
User currently online1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6584 posts, RR: 2
Posted (1 year 3 months 3 days ago) and read 6351 times:

With Terminal 3 already coming down and Terminal 2 soon to follow in 2015, I was wondering, what does anyone think the future is for Terminal 7 at JFK?

From what I heard, BA and IB are proposing a move to T8 to be with AA. Also, with AA and US likely merging, the combined ops will likely be consolidated at T8. This would leave AC, CX, FI, QF, UA, and NH as the remaining carriers at T7.

Perhaps an idea would be to expand T1 and T8, where T1 is expanded to accommodate AC, NH, and UA to be with their Star Alliance partner LH, while T8 is expanded to accommodate FI, CX, and QF (the latter two to be with Oneworld partners AA, BA, and IB).

So, what does anyone here think?

[Edited 2013-07-23 17:06:59]


The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5790 posts, RR: 47
Reply 1, posted (1 year 3 months 3 days ago) and read 6314 times:

T7 was modified early in the last decade and has plenty of use. It's not going to be going anywhere for the next 10-15 years at least.


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4287 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (1 year 3 months 3 days ago) and read 6267 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter):
Perhaps an idea would be to expand T1 and T8, where T1 is expanded to accommodate AC, CX, NH, and UA to be with their Star Alliance partner LH, while T8 is expanded to accommodate FI and QF (the latter to be with Oneworld partners AA, BA, and IB).

T8 will not be expanded for any reason other than to give AA more space and allow OW carriers to join them..period. T1 I don't think can really be expanded much either. T7 is not going away...but its use will be very different in a few years I think. I do expect BA to move to T8 when their lease in T7 is up. I expect UA to stay put as well. Realistically, T7 makes the most sense as a sort of Star Alliance terminal. Unless LH is planning to use the A380 into JFK, moving them into T7 wouldn't be the worst idea in the world. I think the best scenario for JFK going forward would be something like this.

T1 - Non DL Skyteam, and any A380 operators
T4 - Delta, non affiliated Intl Partners
T5 - JetBlue, Aer Lingus
T7 - Star Alliance
T8 - AA, most OW carriers.

This also assumes T2's demolition after the next phase of T4 is completed.


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8428 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (1 year 3 months 3 days ago) and read 6216 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter):
From what I heard, BA and IB are proposing a move to T8 to be with AA. Also, with AA and US likely merging, the combined ops will likely be consolidated at T8. This would leave AC, CX, FI, QF, UA, and NH as the remaining carriers at T7.

Perhaps an idea would be to expand T1 and T8, where T1 is expanded to accommodate AC, CX, NH, and UA to be with their Star Alliance partner LH, while T8 is expanded to accommodate FI and QF (the latter to be with Oneworld partners AA, BA, and IB).

CX, Cathay Pacific, is also a OW airline and would in all likelyness move into AA's T8. AS stated many times on this board BA's lease terminates in 2015, that is under 2 years away, what is BA waiting for ? IF T8 is going to build a BA wing they better get going.

AS long a JAL owns a share of T1 its doubtful they would want ANA flying out of there even if Star alliance airline LH owns another equal share. JAL should move into AA terminal 8 and sell its share of T1. UA can fly from either the Jetblue T5 or T4, UA has flights primaily to LAX & SFO. AC and FI will have no problem finding room for their limited JFK flights.


User currently offlineProst From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 1062 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (1 year 3 months 3 days ago) and read 6216 times:

I haven't seen where terminal 2 is going to demolished, is that posted somewhere?

User currently offlinevarsity From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 250 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 3 months 3 days ago) and read 6177 times:

By the way FI has a relationship with B6 much like EI. Maybe once the customs hall opens in T6 they will move there.

User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8428 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (1 year 3 months 3 days ago) and read 6150 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting apodino (Reply 2):
T1 - Non DL Skyteam, and any A380 operators
T4 - Delta, non affiliated Intl Partners
T5 - JetBlue, Aer Lingus
T7 - Star Alliance
T8 - AA, most OW carriers.

This also assumes T2's demolition after the next phase of T4 is completed.

JFK is in the middle of a massive rebuilding phase. The Terminal 3, 6 and 7 sights are all redeveloping into buildings for a new age for bigger planes. I do not believe the T3 & 7 sights will collect dust for long. All the terminal 4 airlines do not like Delta muscling into T4 when they weren't there before.


User currently online1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6584 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 3 months 3 days ago) and read 6148 times:

Quoting Prost (Reply 4):
I haven't seen where terminal 2 is going to demolished, is that posted somewhere?

It was announced when DL opened the first phase of the T4 expansion. DL will be doing a second expansion phase of T4 to replace T2. Read about it here:
http://www.qchron.com/editions/queen...f-7d95-542f-a76d-6fd5d7112017.html



The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
User currently offlineMesaflyguy From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 3202 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 6044 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting apodino (Reply 2):

Wasn't LOT also supposed to move to T5? Or is that going to happen once the new Int'l T5 is opened?



\________(---)________/ :) World's most beautiful aircraft: 757-200, MD-88/90, E-190, A321
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16885 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5372 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 7):

It was announced when DL opened the first phase of the T4 expansion. DL will be doing a second expansion phase of T4 to replace T2. Read about it here

The second phase doesn't replace T-2, it relocates the Regional gates from T-2 to T-4. Phase three will replace T-2, Phase three is planned but not yet launched. We probably have T-2 around for at least another five years.

As for T-8 it's also planned to eventually be completed, to allow BA and other Oneworld Carriers to move to the terminal. However again it's planned and not yet launched, BA's lease at T-7 is up in 2015. It's not even in the realm of possibility that they could expand T-8 by 2015 since we're already halfway through 2013. The expansion of T-8 will probably be announced sometime around 2015, after AA is done with bankruptcy and their merger, with a completion date of 2020.

As of now as folks mentioned T-7 is in fine shape, much better than T-2, T-3, T-5 and T-6 before their replacement. The only problem with T-7 is that during the evening rush the TSA check-point just is not designed to handle the equipment and crowds. I've been in these lines while flying UA PS, your in line with hundreds and hundreds of people boarding 747s. The A380 will only make the situation worse.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3546 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days ago) and read 5015 times:

T7 will be around for a long time.

Modern, adaptable, and good for domestic and international ops

Plane to Customs to curb in 5 minutes off icelandair

Overflow ops from T4 will go there as Delta pushes further in there


User currently offlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7592 posts, RR: 42
Reply 11, posted (1 year 3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4913 times:

Quoting apodino (Reply 2):
Unless LH is planning to use the A380 into JFK, moving them into T7 wouldn't be the worst idea in the world.

Isn't LH part owner of T1?



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlinespacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3630 posts, RR: 12
Reply 12, posted (1 year 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4804 times:

From a passenger perspective, T7 is probably the best terminal at JFK. (I've been through all - including T4 but with the exception of T8 - multiple times.) I don't know about any operational concerns there might be, but there's nothing experientially obvious that would make it a candidate for replacement. The outer facade could use a little cleanup, maybe...


I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
User currently offlinem11stephen From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1247 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (1 year 3 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4569 times:

I'm sure T7 will be torn down just like T1, T3, T4, T6, T8 and T9 all were! The Port Authority has absolutely no idea on how to renovate, repurpose and redevelop existing terminals. T6 was a perfectly fine terminal yet it was torn down just because it was vacant.


My opinions, statements, etc. are my own and do not have any association with those of any employer.
User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3546 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (1 year 3 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4432 times:

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 13):
I'm sure T7 will be torn down just like T1, T3, T4, T6, T8 and T9 all were! The Port Authority has absolutely no idea on how to renovate, repurpose and redevelop existing terminals. T6 was a perfectly fine terminal yet it was torn down just because it was vacant.

It is not in the same shape as those were those. Granted, a decade from now will make it a decade older...and a lot can change.

However, you can not compare T7 (built in the early 70s and extensively remodeled and expanded several times the last one being in the early 2000s) to the dumps that T1, T3, T5, or T6 were or T2 is.

Even TWA T5, for all the landmark talk, was a dump for the last 10 years of its useful life. It was a time warp (and not in a good way) to the 1970s.

T7 is a totally different story


User currently offlineB6JFKH81 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2896 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (1 year 3 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4373 times:

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 13):
T6 was a perfectly fine terminal yet it was torn down just because it was vacant.

I'm sorry, but no. I had to work in T6 when I was with B6. It was old and had MANY issues on the facility side. The fond memories I had when there were heavy rains and sewage would back up into my work space....not just once or twice but MULTIPLE times in my time there. From a customer point-of-view, it was dark, enclosed, unwelcoming, outdated, cramped and dingy looking (even though B6 did everything it could to breathe life into it). It was in no way designed to handle the security needs of today, and was not a wonderful experience for people that fly today. B6 vacated it after building T5, continued to pay rent on T6 so nobody else could move in, and tore it down because they needed to build an international wing of T5 (known as T5i) so they could stop using T4 and house all their operations under one roof (T5/T5i). As the old saying goes, you can only polish a turd so much before you realize it's still just a turd. While I understand some people wanted to save the "Sundrome" part of the building, the terminal side of things was really a disaster and the "Sundrome" would not fit into the plans of the new international wing of T5.



"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
User currently offlineMesaflyguy From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 3202 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (1 year 3 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4219 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 13):
T6 was a perfectly fine terminal yet it was torn down just because it was vacant.

Just like the houses on Long Island were torn down after Sandy just because residents evacuated them! T6 was a disaster and was uninhabitable for any airline in its condition.

Quoting B6JFKH81 (Reply 15):

Hit the nail on the head!



\________(---)________/ :) World's most beautiful aircraft: 757-200, MD-88/90, E-190, A321
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8428 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (1 year 3 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4102 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Terminal 7 is also vintage 1969-1970, it has issues from years of leaks and heavy use. BA's schedule is with the exception of the morning flight all at night. T7 has become to small for the demands placed on it. Just several years agp BA flew only 3 daily 744's to LHR. T8 is the future, BA needs to be under one roof with AA.

User currently offlineflydeltajets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1893 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (1 year 3 months 21 hours ago) and read 3823 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting apodino (Reply 2):
T1 - Non DL Skyteam, and any A380 operators

Terminal 1 doesnt have that many 380 gates so they are limited on 380 ops.

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 11):
Isn't LH part owner of T1?

Yes as well as Korean, Air France and Japan Airlines



The only valid opinions are those based in facts
User currently offlinestaralliance85 From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 201 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 3 months 20 hours ago) and read 3784 times:

I feel

T1- Should be the Star Alliance Terminal. SQ( A380 Gate) , OZ, LX and SA should move there from T4.UA should also move into T!. JL can easily move to T8.


T4: Mostly Skyteam carriers and Non Affiliated international Airlines. KE(A380 gate), AF (A380 gate) , SU and AZ should do an even swap with SQ, OZ, LX and SA so all the airlines in each alliance can be under one roof. Emirates, Virgin (I think one day will join Skyteam) , EL AL, Etihad, Transaero and many other non affiliated airlines should remain in T4.


T7: I dont see why British Airways would want to renew their lease in 2015. That terminal is too small for the transatlantic demand British Airways carries. They can never utilize their A380 from that terminal. And the A380 from JFK to LHR is the most perfect route for that. I feel that British, Cathay and Qantas should move over to Terminal 8. United and ANA should move to Terminal 1.

T8: This should be OneWorld's powerhouse with all of their airlines under one roof.



brad Fitzpatrick
User currently offlinem11stephen From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1247 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (1 year 3 months 2 hours ago) and read 3474 times:

It's just amazing how other major airports (LAX, IAD, etc.) operate just fine with terminals from the 60s and 70s yet the second a terminal hits the age of 35 at JFK it is suddenly, "outdated" "third-world" and "a dump" and must be demolished ASAP.


My opinions, statements, etc. are my own and do not have any association with those of any employer.
User currently offlineanonms From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 620 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 3 months 1 hour ago) and read 3466 times:

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 20):
It's just amazing how other major airports (LAX, IAD, etc.) operate just fine with terminals from the 60s and 70s yet the second a terminal hits the age of 35 at JFK it is suddenly, "outdated" "third-world" and "a dump" and must be demolished ASAP.

I'd hardly consider LAX to be operating just fine with their terminals from the 60s and 70s. Now, it helps that the majority of the terminals have gotten some renovation work done since then, but, their ultimate ancient relic (T3) is really just.... atrocious. Last time I went through that terminal, it had this musky, old odor that I hadn't whiffed since TPE started renovating their terminal from the 1970s.



This is my signature.
User currently offlinehhslax2 From Bahrain, joined Jan 2012, 128 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 3 months ago) and read 3411 times:

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 20):
It's just amazing how other major airports (LAX, IAD, etc.) operate just fine with terminals from the 60s and 70s yet the second a terminal hits the age of 35 at JFK it is suddenly, "outdated" "third-world" and "a dump" and must be demolished ASAP.

The C/D terminal at IAD is a dump. It functions fine, but still a dump.


User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4522 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3313 times:

Quoting apodino (Reply 2):
T1 - Non DL Skyteam, and any A380 operators
T4 - Delta, non affiliated Intl Partners
T5 - JetBlue, Aer Lingus
T7 - Star Alliance
T8 - AA, most OW carriers.

I wonder if the terminals will ever be renumbered?

We have a similar situation here at MIA where the first terminal is now terminal "D" - there are no terminals A,B and C (D just grew and took over the spots where A, B and C used to be).


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8428 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3120 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting staralliance85 (Reply 19):
T4: Mostly Skyteam carriers and Non Affiliated international Airlines. KE(A380 gate), AF (A380 gate) , SU and AZ should do an even swap with SQ, OZ, LX and SA so all the airlines in each alliance can be under one roof. Emirates, Virgin (I think one day will join Skyteam) , EL AL, Etihad, Transaero and many other non affiliated airlines should remain in T4.

Why would AF want to move to be under Delta's thumb at Teminal 4 when they have custom made facilities in termial 1 ? Delta and Skyteam do not change the fact JFK is AF's most important non-European destination. Korean, also a T1 anchoe tenant, would likely want to stay in T1 also.


User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3546 posts, RR: 5
Reply 25, posted (1 year 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3035 times:

Quoting N62NA (Reply 23):
I wonder if the terminals will ever be renumbered?

10 years ago, I would have said yes.

But now, airlines like B6 and DL (especially B6) have gone out of their way to market their terminal. T5 is a part of them. I think those airlines would have issues with a renumbering


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...
Future Of IAH Terminal B? posted Sat Jun 1 2013 22:06:23 by cosyr
The Future Of ORD Terminal 2 posted Tue Feb 26 2013 11:41:54 by AmricanShamrok
The Future Of JFK's Terminals posted Wed Feb 24 2010 15:58:16 by IcelandairMSP
Future Of CVG Terminal 2 And Terminal 1? posted Tue Aug 12 2008 07:22:02 by WA707atMSP
Future Of BOS Terminal A? posted Tue May 11 2004 23:08:52 by Jmc1975
Future Of PHL's Terminal F (w/out US Express) posted Mon Apr 19 2004 16:04:01 by PHLBOS
The Future Of Terminal C In BOS posted Mon May 21 2012 17:34:41 by AlnessW
Any Stunning Night Photos Of TWA JFK Terminal? posted Tue Oct 11 2011 10:41:36 by washingtonian
Future Of Terminal A At DCA posted Sun Sep 4 2011 15:03:32 by washingtonian
Future Of LH 744 FRA-JFK posted Wed Dec 8 2010 10:08:07 by b707forever