Bombayhog From United States, joined May 2001, 528 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 283 times:
When I recently flew into EWR I found it much less horrible than people had often told me it was. The terminal was very new and clean. Ground transportation was incredibly inefficient, however.
JFK can be kind of annoying with all of the never-ending construction, but I like it. And the Virgin terminal there (is it 3?) is very new and nice as well. Don't know about the others as I haven't been to the other terminals in a while. It'll be cool once they have the little train thing connecting all the terminals.
By the way, which terminal does AA fly out of at JFK? How is it?
Ironminds From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 556 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 263 times:
AA flies out of 8 and 9 at JFK; their terminal is fine if a bit threadbare and showing it's age.
I prefer EWR aesthetically, I think, but it's tougher for me to get to (upper east side of manhattan means there's no simple way over to Jersey) time-wise, or at least it feels that way. But I generally fly AA and long-haul, so that means JFK. Also stuff seems to be oddly spaced at EWR, so you might find it tough to have a beer near your gate (no problem with the Fridays at the end of Concourse D).
One big improvement is the new Terminal 4 (International), which means coming home from a third-world hellhole no longer means feeling like you're entering a third-world hellhole!
Milldoh From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 244 times:
JFK easy to get to? Does 'Van Wyck' ring a bell? UGH!!
I'll go with EWR, since I now live in Jersey. Plus, spotting is a LOT easier at EWR - the PA cops there are actually cool. But when I was living on Long Island I would take LGA over JFK.
Ironminds From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 556 posts, RR: 3 Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 234 times:
Oh, getting out to JFK is no picnic (why can't we have a real direct rail link to MANHATTAN, not someplace in East Jesus, Queens?), I agree...Just from where I am, though, I either have to haul all the way up to the GWB or fight my way down to the Lincoln or Holland Tunnel. Oddly it has taken as little as 15 mins to get to JFK and as long as an hour and 15, depending on traffic.
OdiE From United States, joined Jan 2001, 1641 posts, RR: 1 Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 231 times:
I would definitely say JFK! Although the construction were kind of annoying. Terminal 4 is superb, like their glass facade! Terminal 8 looks kind of old as well. Jetblue's Terminal (5 if I am not mistaken) looks not bad!
But one good point about EWR is the landing approach or the take-off path! Could see the whole of Manhattan's skyline from there. Even have a freeway running parallel to the runway!
Jaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 204 times:
Depends where you are. If youre in Jersey, then JFK is a pain in the butt to get to. All said and done, EWR is easier to schlep to from midtown Manhattan. However, EWR has awful food, shopping, etc - totally dumpy.
yep, see that? that little sliver of houses is Rockaway! Just south of JFK! P.S. the Concorde uses the long one (correct me if im wrong, but isnt that the longest in commercial aviation ~2.2miles, right?) and flies right over my house at ~500 ft. Always wakes you up when you get to sleep late (boy have i missed it!) .
FLY FIRST! YOURE WORTH IT!!!! (how do you like THAT for a catchprase!!!!)
RJ_Delta From Chile, joined Oct 2000, 1897 posts, RR: 17 Reply 13, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 145 times:
Hi:
Always, I prefer JFK airport than Newark, the two airports are very good and both serves to many airlines. But I prefer JFK because it has a lot of terminal, more runways, and more possiblities to connect because JFK serve more airlines than EWR. But many airlines with many frequencies cause a lot of traffic and a busy airport. Possible disadvantages: JFK is far than EWR and the terminals are old.
One question what airport is more busy: JFK or EWR?
Virgina340 From United States, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 137 times:
If I'm in Queens it'll be JFK. but If I'm at my parents house it'll be EWR. You guys have to be on drugs if you like JFK because it's convinient. Does Harlem river Drive, Grand Central Parkway and Van Wyck mean anything to you? The NYNJ border needs atleast 2 more bridges or tunnels. Thanks to the lazy asses at Port Authority who blew billions of dollars on the WTC instead of investing money into the much needed repairs of the GWB, Lincoln, JFK, LGA and other roads and tunnels. PA now is renovating these things when they are falling apart. They haven't built a new bridge or tunnel since the 50s.
GlobalDude From United States, joined Sep 2001, 205 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 82 times:
Depends on your criteria. To fly obscure international carriers to less traveled cities the answer is JFK. If you live in Queens, B'lyn, LI or some points in CT, JFK closer.
To fly to more mainstream European capitals and domestically without stopping in a hub, live in NJ, PA or Manhattan then it is EWR.
EWR served more pax last year than JFK, not sure how it will pan out this year, but would guess because of recent events and the sharp decline in int'l traffic, EWR with its stronger domestic network, will remain on top.
EWR is catching up with the rest of the world airports in shopping and food...it will get there, if the construction ever completes.
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 1080 posts, 
From United States, joined Jul 2001, 907 posts, 
From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 556 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, 
From Chile, joined Oct 2000, 1897 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
