UAEflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 1027
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:29 pm

Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 1:43 am

What is the best design airport in the world in term of operation. What i mean by operation is the smoothness of movement, well managed with huge amount of traffic. I would say what is the "professional airport".

My personal view would be
JFK
SIN

Please share your opinions
 
codc10
Posts: 1749
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 1:49 am

Quoting UAEflyer (Thread starter):
JFK

 
 
User avatar
shamrock604
Posts: 2085
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:27 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 1:49 am

This will probably shock everyone, because its an airport much hated on A.net, but i'd consider CDG T1 as being on of those.

Its design, although very unadaptable means short distances and no ramp congestion.
 
wingnutmn
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 10:27 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 1:52 am

I would say DFW, and DEN. Large airports with central terminals and multiple parrallel runways.

If one thinks JFK is a best, then they may as well say LHR too!

Wingnut
Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing! It's a bonus if you can fly the plane again!!
 
User avatar
BasilFawlty
Posts: 796
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 11:23 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 1:53 am

OSL is probably high on the list.
'Every year donkeys and mules kill more people than plane crashes'
 
D328
Posts: 213
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:50 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 1:54 am

JFK, wow, hahaha... That is a JOKE, right???
 
aznmadsci
Posts: 1643
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:02 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 1:54 am

I would say MUC and HKG.
The journey of life is not based on the accomplishments, but the experience.
 
User avatar
shamrock604
Posts: 2085
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:27 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 1:55 am

I dont think you could consider OSL as one having a "huge" amount of traffic, even though it is a very busy airport in European terms.

Efficient it certainly is though!


In Europe, i'd rate CDG, AMS and MUC as airports that really work operationally and that do handle a huge volume of traffic.
 
User avatar
Web500sjc
Posts: 634
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:23 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:00 am

best managed would have to be LHR considering it handles more traffic than JFK with half the runway space.

best designed would have to be either LAX or DEN

LAX has two runways on each side, on each side the outer runway lands airplanes while the inner runway has airplanes take off. the four parallel runways mean there are no intersecting runways, which allows all the runways to be utilized to the maximum especially for the space available,

DEN due to the shear size has an airport designed for any wind condition, and a bit of space to keep airplanes apart, oh and the runway is designed to minimize taxi time- but again its efficiency is due to its far distance form the airport and vast amounts of land.
Boiler Up!
 
NW747-400
Posts: 364
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 1999 4:42 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:02 am

I chock ATL up to my number 1 spot. As a pilot, it is the easiest airport and airspace to get around... quite an accomplishment for the world's busiest airport!
 
Maverick623
Posts: 4632
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:13 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:08 am

Quoting UAEflyer (Thread starter):
JFK
Quoting UAEflyer (Thread starter):
professional airport

     

ATL, DEN, and PDX hold my top spots. PDX may not be as busy, but the terminal and ramp layout is very good.

LHR does pretty well congestion wise, especially compared to JFK, but for the passenger it's really not up to par (except for T5).
"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
 
User avatar
shamrock604
Posts: 2085
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:27 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:18 am

Quoting web500sjc (Reply 8):
LAX has two runways on each side, on each side the outer runway lands airplanes while the inner runway has airplanes take off. the four parallel runways mean there are no intersecting runways, which allows all the runways to be utilized to the maximum especially for the space available,

Yes, its the same design as CDG and ATL, both of which I would rank highly also.
 
User avatar
BasilFawlty
Posts: 796
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 11:23 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:27 am

Quoting shamrock604 (Reply 7):
In Europe, i'd rate CDG, AMS and MUC as airports that really work operationally and that do handle a huge volume of traffic.

AMS is absolutely rubbish when it comes to runway design (very long taxi times in general, because runway 18R-36L is almost always in use), security (which is done at the gate in the non-Schengen area so it takes ages. Security at the Schengen area is acceptable in my view), passport control (almost always long waiting times, both inbound and outbound), de-icing, snow equipment... no, AMS has a long way to go. And I worked at the airport for several years so I know exactly what I'm talking about. 
'Every year donkeys and mules kill more people than plane crashes'
 
User avatar
Web500sjc
Posts: 634
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:23 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:37 am

Quoting shamrock604 (Reply 11):
Yes, its the same design as CDG and ATL, both of which I would rank highly also.

I agree, I just didn't want to muddle my response, you could put MCO, DFW and SEA (cut DFW in half through the terminal and you have a SEA) into that category- on the field having two runways on one side of the terminal, one dedicated to landing, the other to takeoff (or that with a mirror of its self across the terminal).
Boiler Up!
 
drerx7
Posts: 4203
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2000 12:19 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:40 am

As much as I loathe it...I'd have to say ATL.
Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
 
User avatar
shamrock604
Posts: 2085
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:27 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:40 am

Quoting BasilFawlty (Reply 12):
AMS is absolutely rubbish when it comes to runway design (very long taxi times in general, because runway 18R-36L is almost always in use), security (which is done at the gate in the non-Schengen area so it takes ages. Security at the Schengen area is acceptable in my view), passport control (almost always long waiting times, both inbound and outbound), de-icing, snow equipment... no, AMS has a long way to go. And I worked at the airport for several years so I know exactly what I'm talking about.

I worked there for a little while too, and I really liked it!  

Yes, I accept the runway issue, but on the plus side, there is rarely a long queue for the runway, so once you get there, its pretty much take off immediately.

Given the volumes it handles, it manages pretty well from that perspective.

I had not really considered security and passport control. I suppose it depends on how you interpret "operationally". I would see that simply as aircraft movement and turnaround as opposed to the passenger handling side.
 
User avatar
kngkyle
Crew
Posts: 390
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:33 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:47 am

ATL. I don't think you can get much more of an efficient layout.
 
alasizon
Posts: 517
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:58 am

In terms of taxi-in time, BUR.

Though overall, I would say that PDX, SEA (Unless you land on 16R/34L), ATL and DEN have the best layouts. ATL is clearly one of the best just based on the volume of traffic alone.
Ramp Unit Manager & Tower Planner
 
slcdeltarumd11
Posts: 3264
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 7:30 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:16 am

DEN is certainly an honorable mention if not a winner of this category from an airlines position. As a passenger it takes along time to get thru and to rental cars and stuff but for the airlines operationally its fantastic and a large reason why its three airlines hubs.

JFK has to be an actual joke. I don't think the words well managed and JFK have even been in the same sentence before.
 
User avatar
antoniemey
Posts: 1218
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 5:38 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:22 am

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 10):
PDX may not be as busy, but the terminal and ramp layout is very good.

It should be... they spent pretty much my entire life renovating it...
Make something Idiot-proof, and the Universe will make a more inept idiot.
 
jetblue777
Posts: 1191
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 4:13 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:34 am

JFK is my hometown airport and it's among favorites but it's definitely not well designed. Well some terminals (T1, T4, T5 and T8) are great but transferring between terminals is a hassle, that's why it's mostly O&D. Yes there's the AirTrain but there's 8 terminals and the airline assignment seems to be random IMO (LH and KE, AF, SU, etc shares the same terminal despite LH being star and the rest being skyteam (you could also throw in JL which is the only OW carrier in the terminal) Also, both BA and UA shares the same terminal, T4 is where everyone else's operates, besides that DL, B6 and AA has good homes in JFK.

AND whether you're departing or arriving in JFK, chances are, you're never on-time. The last time I departed JFK on-time was last February, pushed back at 5:59AM for a scheduled 6AM departure and we took off more than half an hour later due to snow and we had to de-ice. Though, I still love JFK due to the variety of airlines, traffic and being my hometown airport and it's way ahead of EWR, had bad experiences in EWR and never again would my family use that airport.

IMO, ICN, SFO, ATL, TPA and HKG are among the best.

ICN is the best when it comes to transferring and especially if you're traveling with OZ or KE, since it's only one terminal, you don't have to take any trains or shuttles.

ATL also comes to mind, it's the world's busiest airport yet IMO it's very organized and although transfer is a bit of a hike, it's easy to navigate and well ran.

  

[Edited 2011-04-24 20:37:52]
It's a cultural thing.
 
CIDFlyer
Posts: 1875
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 7:19 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:37 am

DFW and ATL i would think. They are two massive hubs but traffic seems to flow pretty smooth and taxi times seem pretty low (unless you land on the 5th ATL runway)

Im hoping ORD will be like that one day when they finish re-configuring the runways
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:38 am

Quoting web500sjc (Reply 8):
best designed would have to be either LAX or DEN

LAX's ramps are a disaster, though.

I'd say DEN and MUC.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 2125
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:03 am

Most independent ILS approaches:

ORD: 4 plus 2 independent departure runways (after master plan) some long taxiing
DFW: 3 plus 3 independent departure runways (some long taxiing)
DEN: 3 plus 3 departure runways (2 departure runways may cross extended approach paths of two runways) long taxiing
IAH: 3 plus 2 independent departure runways (long taxi on one arriving runway)
ATL: 3 plus 2 independent departure runways (long taxi on one arriving runway)
MCO: 3 plus 1 independent departure runway (long taxi on at least one arrival runway)
DTW: 2 plus 2 independent departure runways (plus crosswind runways)
LAX: 2 plus 2 independent departure runways
CDG: 2 plus 2 independent departure runways
sites.google.com/site/unitedfleetsite/
 
flashmeister
Posts: 2671
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 4:32 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:09 am

Quoting Antoniemey (Reply 19):
It should be... they spent pretty much my entire life renovating it...

LOL, as a fellow Oregonian, I know exactly what you mean... but do you really think that the Port of Portland is done?  
 
flySFO
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 7:26 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:11 am

I would argue SFO (wx delays omitted obviously, this is purely operational). The circular design makes it extremely efficient both as O&D (relatively short walk from curb to gate) and connections (all of Star Alliance is connected airside, which accounts for more than 50% of operations). SFO's terminal ramp design fits the maximum number of gates into minimum area, and best of all there is rarely a taxi time longer than five minutes because the airport is so compact (*cough Denver).
 
splitterz
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 2:40 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:14 am

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 10):
ATL, DEN, and PDX hold my top spots. PDX may not be as busy, but the terminal and ramp layout is very good.

Exactly what I was going to say.
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4588
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:23 am

Quoting flashmeister (Reply 24):
LOL, as a fellow Oregonian, I know exactly what you mean... but do you really think that the Port of Portland is done?

Well, considering the entire south runway is currently ripped up...
 
User avatar
GSPFlyer
Posts: 271
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 3:15 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:24 am

Out of the ones I have been to, ATL would have to take the number one spot. Followed closely by DFW, very efficient, but it seems that my flight taxis to the other side of the complex every time.
 
HiJazzey
Posts: 667
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:00 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:34 am

I found KUL to be very efficient, both in design and operation.
MAD on paper should be great, but I've had bad experiences there.
ZRH is excellent, despite the odd runway layout.
I used to rate RUH very highly. As soon as you're off the rapid turnoff you're at the apron, and the terminals are great too. But it hasn't aged well.
DEN and MUC look good, but I've never been there.

[Edited 2011-04-24 21:37:12]
 
TSS
Posts: 2479
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:52 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:04 am

Quoting GSPflyer (Reply 28):
Out of the ones I have been to, ATL would have to take the number one spot. Followed closely by DFW, very efficient, but it seems that my flight taxis to the other side of the complex every time.

Agreed, although I like the way DFW has a separate parking deck for each individual concourse. Admittedly, that was probably a bigger benefit for O&D pax before AA had more or less exclusive use of 4 out of 5 concourses, though. What would have made DFW dang-near perfect is if the original architects had left enough space between concourses A & B, C & D, and E for inter-concourse taxiways a la ATL.
Able to kill active threads stone dead with a single post!
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18831
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:13 am

Quoting BasilFawlty (Reply 12):
Quoting shamrock604 (Reply 7):
In Europe, i'd rate CDG, AMS and MUC as airports that really work operationally and that do handle a huge volume of traffic.

AMS is absolutely rubbish when it comes to runway design (very long taxi times in general, because runway 18R-36L is almost always in use), security (which is done at the gate in the non-Schengen area so it takes ages. Security at the Schengen area is acceptable in my view), passport control (almost always long waiting times, both inbound and outbound), de-icing, snow equipment... no, AMS has a long way to go. And I worked at the airport for several years so I know exactly what I'm talking about.

That's surprising. I've used AMS many, many times (probably at least 250) over the past 40 years (including connecting there twice on KLM last week) and it's by far the best major hub in Europe in my experience. MUC and ZRH are also very good.

Yes, the taxi times are long to/from runway 18R-36L, but taxi times can also be very short when other runways are used. None of my 4 flights to/from AMS last week used 18R-36L (one departed from 36C), and both arriving flights were early and both departing flights were on time (one pushed back 5 minutes early). And other airports like LHR (which I go out of my way to avoid) often have waits for takeoff behind a long line of other aircraft that far exceed the taxi time to the most distant AMS runway. And arriving flights at AMS in my experience are almost never put into a tedious holding pattern for up to half an hour which is a frequent occurrence at LHR. I will take the 10 to 15 minute taxi time to/from 18R-36L at AMS any day over connecting at LHR.

I actually like the fact that the security check is at the gate for non-Schengen flights at AMS. With that system you don't have to worry about missing your flight if the lines are long at a central security checkpoint followed by a long walk from there to the gate.

I consider AMS one of the best-managed and most efficiently-operated airports in the world. Considering the number of "best airport" and similar awards it's won over the years, I'm obviously not alone.
 
mal787
Posts: 477
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 4:25 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:52 am

Singapore @Amsterdam are my top 2 Brisbane International is also on my favourite list

Mal 787
BN2 Metro, 402,404, Conquest, king air, 707,727.200, 732,733,734,735,736,738,757,762,763,742,743,744, MD11, DC9,Westwind
 
JBirdAV8r
Posts: 3454
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2001 4:44 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:01 am

Quoting NW747-400 (Reply 9):
I chock ATL up to my number 1 spot. As a pilot, it is the easiest airport and airspace to get around

   That airport, most of the time, is a well-oiled machine...truly a "beautiful" thing.
I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
 
bigb
Posts: 722
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:18 am

ATL, DEN, LAX are pretty good in terms of air field lay out.

I'm surprise that IAH isn't getting any honor though. IAH has 8L/26R, 8R/26L, and 9/27 which can handle 3 ILS approaches all at the same time while using 15L/33R and 15R/33L for departures. That isn't all, whenever Departure traffic increase I've seen 9/27 or 8R/26L become used at a departure runway along with the 15/33 runway pairs. On top of that, Terminals are located in the central of all the runways. In my opinion IAH is up there with ATL, DEN, and LAX. Aircrafts arriving on 8L/26R do have a distance to taxi, but they do not have to cross 8R/26L unless arriving from the east.
ETSN Baber, USN
 
A330NZ
Posts: 153
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 2:23 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:35 am

In my continent, I'd say AKL.

The domestic and international terminal being 10-15 minutes walk apart, but there's a free bus between them, there are rarely queues, it's clean and easy to get around. I've also never had to wait more than 2 minutes for my luggage
 
Lufthansa411
Posts: 345
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:54 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:35 am

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 18):
JFK has to be an actual joke. I don't think the words well managed and JFK have even been in the same sentence before.

Certainly not this past winter, when the Port Authority pretty much gave up as soon as snow or fog hit.

Quoting JetBlue777 (Reply 20):
and the airline assignment seems to be random IMO (LH and KE, AF, SU, etc shares the same terminal despite LH being star and the rest being skyteam (you could also throw in JL which is the only OW carrier in the terminal) Also, both BA and UA shares the same terminal, T4 is where everyone else's operates, besides that DL, B6 and AA has good homes in JFK.

The Port Authority has very little say in what terminals the airlines are actually in. Most of the time it is up to the airlines themselves to solicit bids from the various terminals at JFK. The Port Authority must approve terminal assignments, but most of the time that is a formality.

With regards to Terminal 1, AF, KE, LH and JL set up "the Terminal 1 Group" because back in the mid 1990's the International Terminal (now rebuilt as Terminal 4) was in a woeful state of disrepair. When the PA balked at building a new international terminal, the 4 airlines decided to build a terminal that fit their needs. They buffered the excess terminal space with other airlines that were fed up with the other inadequate terminals at JFK. Organising by alliance is not so important for most international airlines at JFK because with a few exceptions most pax do not connect from foreign airlines to US airlines. On a flight of 300 there are maybe 10 connecting pax on average.
Nothing in life is to be feared; it is only to be understood.
 
User avatar
n901wa
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:38 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:39 am

My vote is ATL. I don't know where it fits on traffic, but HNL is my favorite  
 
lppr95
Posts: 72
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 6:24 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:51 am

My opinion:

HKG
MAD
ICN
BKK
KUL
SIN
DEN
"Cathay 018, expect very late landing clearance, 747 departing ahead", tower said.
 
vegasplanes
Posts: 656
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:22 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Sat May 07, 2011 12:02 am

For a big, connecting hub, I vote for DTW, all new terminals during the last decade, wide alleys between A and B/C, and 4 parallel runways.


For just an easy in/out situation, BUR wins hands down.
 
united319
Posts: 446
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 1:07 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Sat May 07, 2011 4:40 pm

Quoting UAEflyer (Thread starter):
JFK

HA! JFK is ridden with GDP's and taxiways out the ying-yang. Last time I flew to JFK on UA, we took off from LAX early, our groundspeed with 575 kts and we still blocked into JFK late because we had to hold for quite a while and then the taxi-time on the ground was approximately 20 minutes.

The best from purely an operational standpoint I would have to say would be...

DFW: Yes terminals A, B, C, & E are dumps, but Security lines are minimal considering it is the 3rd busiest airport in the world, limited to no ramp congestion delays, and it can handle 5 simultaneous approaches at once.

DEN: Only once have I ever seen a GDP take effect.

LAX: Same as DEN accept the ramp congestion, gate space, and terminal layout is very dated.

I am very suprised a lot of people are saying ATL and ORD are oeprationally good, they frequently get slammed with lengthy GDP's similar to SFO, PHL, EWR, & JFK.
It's Time To Fly
 
User avatar
MillwallSean
Posts: 859
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 3:07 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Sun May 08, 2011 3:32 pm

For me the obvious choice has to be HongKong. So efficient so fast and so good service. Just great. From the airport train to the layout its just spot on.

Few people seem to like Bangkok but I do.
One huge terminal makes the place vibrant and the walks aren't that long if you check in through the right door. Queues have never been more than 10 minutes when I have been there and security is easy because its when you leave the gateside shopping area and walk down to the gate area. Smooth design for security, short queues and pretty fast to get through terminals.

SIN is good but taxitimes there tend to be rather long. I shouldn't complain the usual taxiing trip past the parked private planes , a view of the cargo and hangar ramps etc is usually interesting for us that like aviation but great design, nah.
I guess its easier if you arrive or depart from the side of the airport where the gate is. For some reason I never seem to do this.
However security is a breeze, queues exemplary in size, staff professional and courteous and terminals really well managed. So SIN is a great place.

For its sheer size I can agree on ATL but security there isnt good. In no way is it well designed and queues can be long. Actually I don't like the airport mainly due to staff but DFW isnt a bad design either. problem at most US airports is security and the airports just werent designed for it so queues are to long and that makes the entire place rather bad.

Quoting mal787 (Reply 32):
Singapore @Amsterdam are my top 2 Brisbane International is also on my favourite list

Getting from international to domestic for a person in Brisbane cant be called efficient or good design at all. Brisbane international is a lovely airport that I really enjoy with its panoramic window over the stands and short walks, but for those connecting to domestic its a pain. Its a pity because if they would have had an integrated terminal they would have been the best airport in Australia by a mile.

Quoting A330NZ (Reply 35):
In my continent, I'd say AKL.

The domestic and international terminal being 10-15 minutes walk apart, but there's a free bus between them, there are rarely queues, it's clean and easy to get around. I've also never had to wait more than 2 minutes for my luggage

Auckland is horrible, such a small airport and yet a long walk from the arriving gate to the immigration. Always queues and the domestic terminal is hardly visible for anyone stepping outside leaving the international terminal. For a first time visitor AKL is really really a bad design and a new domestic terminal with decent connection couldn't come fast enough.
Why a small airport like AKL cant have domestic and international right next to each other is anyones guess, good design its not though.

Further when 4 or 5 Asian flights arrive during the midday the place is very very crowded, completely incapable of handling the influx, we are talking 3 or 4 wb flights arriving and the place just isnt designed for it. Sure it has improved tremendously from when i started arriving 8 years ago and I often ended up waiting two hours from arrival to getting out but its still a tedious process and a process that just isnt good.
First 30 minutes queue to immigration, followed by what is it 4 baggage carousels where everyone stands waiting.
Then another 20 minutes queue to a MAF inspector that seems to single out anyone that looks Asian for extra screening while western people just of trekking trips to Nepal breezes through.
AKL near the top of my worst airport list.

I recommend anyone flying onto NZ to hit Christchurch as point of entry instead. So much smoother.
No One Likes Us - We Dont Care.
 
tennis69
Posts: 340
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 11:00 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon May 09, 2011 8:58 am

From my viewpoint any airport that combines arriving and departing passengers should not even be in consideration for best designed. CDG, ICN, CAN are examples of well designed and operated facilities.
 
IAHFLYR
Posts: 3941
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 12:56 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon May 09, 2011 11:41 am

Quoting BigB (Reply 34):
I'm surprise that IAH isn't getting any honor though. IAH has 8L/26R, 8R/26L, and 9/27 which can handle 3 ILS approaches all at the same time while using 15L/33R and 15R/33L for departures



One of the best operationally even if the airport doesn't utilize Runway 9 for arrivals nearly as often due to the arrival traffic overflying the 15/33 complex, but still very few delays inbound or outbound until the storms get cooking.
Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.
 
EL-AL
Posts: 1414
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 8:29 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon May 09, 2011 12:44 pm

I say Hong Kong. It was planned perfectly, never found a thing wrong about it.
every day is a good day to fly
 
MH017
Posts: 1473
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 4:17 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon May 09, 2011 1:03 pm

You'll probably kill me for this, but I think TXL is very convenient:

arrival - out of plane, you wait at your own conveyor-belt at the arrival-gate and snap-snap you're in the 'arrivals/public' area and outside...

departure - almost same as above: if you know your gate, you enter the building there, check-in, security next to check-in and you're at the gate already...

Doubt if Berlin-Brandenburg will be as convenient as this one...
don't throw away tomorrow !
 
Severnaya
Posts: 646
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 5:03 pm

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon May 09, 2011 1:23 pm

AMS
MUC
SVO (the D/E/F terminals)
Всяк глядит, да не всяк видит.
 
nipoel123
Posts: 236
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:23 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Mon May 09, 2011 6:22 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 31):
I consider AMS one of the best-managed and most efficiently-operated airports in the world. Considering the number of "best airport" and similar awards it's won over the years, I'm obviously not alone.

  

One minor flaw I've noticed: at peaktime, in the holidayseason, I've waited for two hours for my luggage.
one mile of road leads to nowhere, one mile of runway leads to anywhere
 
YXD172
Posts: 340
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 3:38 am

RE: Best Designed Airport (operational)

Tue May 10, 2011 6:00 am

Quoting nipoel123 (Reply 47):
One minor flaw I've noticed: at peaktime, in the holidayseason, I've waited for two hours for my luggage.

Adding to that (though AMS was very pleasant to travel through) I experienced one of the longest security waiting times I've been through in a while - because my AZ flight was departing around the same time as one of KL's banks! Only time in the last ~30 flights it's taken half an hour for security... but apart from that, great place considering the traffic.
Radial engines don't leak oil, they are just marking their territory!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests