A beautiful terminal which was the first of the new JFK
Terminals, only problem is not enough gates. Singapore Airlines just recently moved to Terminal 4, it's too crowded at T-1.
Terminal 2 & 3
's plan from 1999/2000 actually did not include any "new" terminals, the plan called for the demolition of T-3 (Pan Am's World Port). DL
's International flights would then be moved to an expanded T-4 "West" concourse, about 10-12 gates at T-4's West Concourse would be for DL
's International arrivals/Departures. DL
would add their own Ticketing hall and IAB
to Terminal 4's West Side.
They would then expand T-2 by adding 10 regional Gates.
I think at some point they may move their International flights to T-4, what they do with T-2 and T-3 is up in the air but likely T-3 would eventualy be torn down and Song would operate out of T-2.
Which is a shame because I actually like the former Pan Am World Port alot better than TWA's old T-5.
As mentioned the West Concourse may be expanded for DL
's International Arrivals/Departures, with DL
adding their own Ticket counters and FIS facility.
Integrated into a new terminal for Jet Blue, T-6 would be demolished.
See above comments..
Recently underwent a $400 Million Dollar renovation by a British firm which designs Rock Concert stages/sets, excellent job (IMO).
Terminal 8 & 9-
Replaced by a new 39 gate Terminal, which includes a mid-field concourse. The mid-field concourse should open by 2006, the rest of the project should be completed by 2008.
Other airport Improvements..
Jet Blue is building a new Maintenance hangar on the East side of the airport, the only thing I have a problem with here is that they could of just taken over TWA's former Maintenance complex which was designed for wide bodies and could easily accomodate 4 A320s inside with the bay doors shut. It's a shame because the TWA hangar is sitting empty, I don't understand why they are going to build a "new" hangar when they could have used the TWA hangar which is more than adequate.
Mass Transit/Air train-
Eventually there will be a "one seat ride" from JFK
to Manhattan, it will either be in the form of a direct "one seat ride" to NY Penn, or a "One Seat ride" to the "new" Lower Manhattan Fulton Street complex the MTA is going to build.
The one seat ride to Mid-town Manhattan (NY Penn) is the most likely as it is the least expensive, physically all that is needed is to "directly" connect the JFK
Airtrain tracks with the LIRR's tracks at Jamaica station allowing the JFK
Airtrain to operate on LIRR tracks to Penn Station. The JFK
Airtrain is powered with a similar system as the LIRR, however there are technical differences which must be worked out. For one thing the JFK
Airtrain is automated where the LIRR has engineers, conductors etc.. Also the JFK
Airtrain cars would have to be redesigned to withstand a impact with a heavier LIRR Electric MU
Also the JFK
Airtrain cannot operate into NY Penn until capacity is opened up at NY Penn, the tunnels to NY Penn are at maximum capacity with commuter trains with no room for additional service. The MTA is building a new route for "some" LIRR trains to Grand Central Terminal, LIRR re-routing "some" of their trains to Grand Central will free up some space at NY Penn for JFK
Airtrain service. However the "East Side Access" Project will not be complete for atleast another 10 years, so the JFK
Airtrain cannot operate to Manhattan "directly" until there's extra capacity built. Remember Manhattan is an island, you need to tunnel under the East river to reach Penn Station or Grand Central.
The other option which is being studied is to build a "New" East River Tunnel from Brooklyn to Lower Manhattan, this would allow the LIRR's Atlantic Ave branch to access Lower Manhattan. It would also allow JFK
's Airtrain to run on the Atlantic Ave branch to Lower Manhattan via the new East River tunnel, the trains would operate to a new Fulton Street Complex the MTA is going to build .
The new East river Tunnel would cost $3-5 Billion, and take about 10 years to build.
There's also the possibilty both options would be persued, it wouldn't be "High speed" per say unless you consider 80mph on the LIRR to be "High Speed".