User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13634
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Mon Jan 08, 2018 9:48 pm

T5towbar wrote:
varsity wrote:
Yes Terminal A is going to be replaced. 33 (expandable to 45) gates, common-use (CUTE gates but counter space as well). The new footprint is basically along the airport's southwestern flank where UPS and the post office are now, and will apparently utilize the existing airtrain station for the south long term lot. It looks vaguely like JFK T5.

Any word on when UPS is supposed to move? UA (and others) use that area, along with UPS to park aircraft. I heard rumors is that the new UPS building will be in the North Area (where the former UA Cargo facility was located).


UPS :http://corpinfo.panynj.gov/documents/Port-Authority-Board-Minutes-4843/

http://corpinfo.panynj.gov/documents/Newark-International-Airport-UPS-New-Lease-Agreements/
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
tphuang
Posts: 1905
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:30 pm

WNflyer1523 wrote:
Still waiting on ISP-CLT. Huge market that AA and /or F9 are missing out on.

I’ve also noticed that AA has been somewhat downsizing at JFK. Are pax loads low (pretty sure that this wouldn’t be the case with tens of millions of people within an hour of the airport) or are their planes better needed somewhere else?

Lastly, Southwest is definitely committed to LGA, all they’ve been doing is adding flights/frequencies left and right. They’ve also added a few more frequencies at ISP, likely to try and compete with Frontier. Can anyone see Southwest initiating Saturday flights to the Caribbean from LGA if they get their hands on even more slots?

How in the world is wn getting more lga slots? I bet at this point b6 will pay more if any slot is put up for auction or sales.
 
User avatar
varsity
Posts: 419
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 1999 4:51 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Mon Jan 08, 2018 11:22 pm

VC10er wrote:
varsity wrote:
Yes Terminal A is going to be replaced. 33 (expandable to 45) gates, common-use (CUTE gates but counter space as well). The new footprint is basically along the airport's southwestern flank where UPS and the post office are now, and will apparently utilize the existing airtrain station for the south long term lot. It looks vaguely like JFK T5.

https://www.panynj.gov/airports/ewr-redevelopment/

This PDF has quite a bit of detail and drawings: https://www.panynj.gov/airports/pdf/Pro ... g_Book.pdf

If the cover photo in this article is to be believed, the head house of the existing A will be retained (for what purpose, I don't know).

And in answer to the EWR-as-real-NY-airport question, everybody I know who lives in Manhattan goes to EWR.


WOW! THANKS! Great to see. I must have been under some rock not to have seen this or heard about it before.

It sure is needed.

So, what does this new mega Terminal A spell for UA’s fortress there?

Also, I did read through the pdf “presentation deck” and there doesn’t seem to address the increase in traffic to/from NYC and elsewhere or mass transit solutions to handle so many millions of passengers?

Did I miss something?

Thanks again R


I don't know that it is going to add a tremendous amount of capacity (33 gates vs 29) so I think UA is pretty safe. There isn't enough ramp and runway capacity for someone to build a substantial competing operation anyway, is there?
AB3, DC8, DC9, DH7, D10, E90, M80, M88, 320, 321, 330, 722, 737, 733, 734, 738, 747, 744, 757, 752, 753, 772
AA, AF, B6, CO, DL, EA, EI, FI, HP, KM, LX, MS, NW, OP, PA, TW, UA, US, VS, W9, WO, YX
 
jplatts
Posts: 1730
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Mon Jan 08, 2018 11:24 pm

tphuang wrote:
WNflyer1523 wrote:
Still waiting on ISP-CLT. Huge market that AA and /or F9 are missing out on.

I’ve also noticed that AA has been somewhat downsizing at JFK. Are pax loads low (pretty sure that this wouldn’t be the case with tens of millions of people within an hour of the airport) or are their planes better needed somewhere else?

Lastly, Southwest is definitely committed to LGA, all they’ve been doing is adding flights/frequencies left and right. They’ve also added a few more frequencies at ISP, likely to try and compete with Frontier. Can anyone see Southwest initiating Saturday flights to the Caribbean from LGA if they get their hands on even more slots?

How in the world is wn getting more lga slots? I bet at this point b6 will pay more if any slot is put up for auction or sales.


Southwest would like to add LGA-CMH nonstop service if it can acquire extra slots at LGA, and in addition Southwest could also add LGA-MCO nonstop service and a 2nd daily nonstop between MCI and LGA if it can acquire extra slots at LGA.

The only SWA international destinations that currently have border preclearance are AUA and NAS, and in addition to that, Southwest cannot do weekday or Sunday nonstop service to AUA from LGA since AUA is more than 1,500 miles from LGA. Southwest can also do Saturday-only nonstop service from LGA to SJU since SJU is located in Puerto Rico, which is a U.S. territory, but SJU is too far from LGA for Southwest to serve SJU nonstop from LGA on weekdays or Sundays. Southwest cannot serve its other Caribbean destinations nonstop from LGA since these destinations do not have U.S. CBP border preclearance facilities.

Southwest can add daily nonstop service from LGA to FLL and Southwest can bring back LGA-BWI nonstop service in order to connect passengers to international destinations if it can acquire extra slots at LGA. In addition to connecting passengers to international destinations from LGA, Southwest would be able to provide easier connections to PIT, CVG, CMH, CLE, DTW, SDF, IND, ORF, RDU, CLT, CHS, ECP, and BHM through BWI if it brings back BWI-LGA nonstop service.

Will Southwest ever do international flights out of EWR? Unlike its DAL home base, where nonstop international service is prohibited under the Wright Amendment Reform Act of 2006, Southwest can legally operate nonstop international flights out of EWR if it can acquire access to gates that can be used for international arrivals at EWR.
 
User avatar
varsity
Posts: 419
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 1999 4:51 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Mon Jan 08, 2018 11:30 pm

MO11 wrote:
Only problem is that transit vehicles (whether bus or rail) don't offer space for luggage (outside of putting your backpack on the seat next to you). At least on the NJT commuter cars have some space.


That is true. I am already bracing myself for the stinkeye on the LIRR for my trip to JFK in April. Gonna try to get out there before Mr. Slate blows the whistle.
AB3, DC8, DC9, DH7, D10, E90, M80, M88, 320, 321, 330, 722, 737, 733, 734, 738, 747, 744, 757, 752, 753, 772
AA, AF, B6, CO, DL, EA, EI, FI, HP, KM, LX, MS, NW, OP, PA, TW, UA, US, VS, W9, WO, YX
 
tphuang
Posts: 1905
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Mon Jan 08, 2018 11:40 pm

jplatts wrote:
tphuang wrote:
WNflyer1523 wrote:
Still waiting on ISP-CLT. Huge market that AA and /or F9 are missing out on.

I’ve also noticed that AA has been somewhat downsizing at JFK. Are pax loads low (pretty sure that this wouldn’t be the case with tens of millions of people within an hour of the airport) or are their planes better needed somewhere else?

Lastly, Southwest is definitely committed to LGA, all they’ve been doing is adding flights/frequencies left and right. They’ve also added a few more frequencies at ISP, likely to try and compete with Frontier. Can anyone see Southwest initiating Saturday flights to the Caribbean from LGA if they get their hands on even more slots?

How in the world is wn getting more lga slots? I bet at this point b6 will pay more if any slot is put up for auction or sales.


Southwest would like to add LGA-CMH nonstop service if it can acquire extra slots at LGA, and in addition Southwest could also add LGA-MCO nonstop service and a 2nd daily nonstop between MCI and LGA if it can acquire extra slots at LGA.

The only SWA international destinations that currently have border preclearance are AUA and NAS, and in addition to that, Southwest cannot do weekday or Sunday nonstop service to AUA from LGA since AUA is more than 1,500 miles from LGA. Southwest can also do Saturday-only nonstop service from LGA to SJU since SJU is located in Puerto Rico, which is a U.S. territory, but SJU is too far from LGA for Southwest to serve SJU nonstop from LGA on weekdays or Sundays. Southwest cannot serve its other Caribbean destinations nonstop from LGA since these destinations do not have U.S. CBP border preclearance facilities.

Southwest can add daily nonstop service from LGA to FLL and Southwest can bring back LGA-BWI nonstop service in order to connect passengers to international destinations if it can acquire extra slots at LGA. In addition to connecting passengers to international destinations from LGA, Southwest would be able to provide easier connections to PIT, CVG, CMH, CLE, DTW, SDF, IND, ORF, RDU, CLT, CHS, ECP, and BHM through BWI if it brings back BWI-LGA nonstop service.

Will Southwest ever do international flights out of EWR? Unlike its DAL home base, where nonstop international service is prohibited under the Wright Amendment Reform Act of 2006, Southwest can legally operate nonstop international flights out of EWR if it can acquire access to gates that can be used for international arrivals at EWR.


Yes southwest would like more slots. Who doesn't? But JetBlue really needs the slots and I can't see them getting outbid in any realistic scenario.

And southwest adding lga fll would be an epic disaster like its current service on ewr fll. I can't imagine that one sticking around through another winter if it continues to perform as poorly as last year.
 
User avatar
varsity
Posts: 419
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 1999 4:51 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Mon Jan 08, 2018 11:47 pm

GuruJanitor wrote:

Kieranclarkz wrote:
Any plans to build direct train link from JFK to Manhattan?
Could reduce congestion getting into the city.


Cuomo’s master plan for JFK released a few months back contains a study on the feasibility of a one seat ride to Manhattan and Brooklyn (they specifically mention Penn, Grand Central, and Atlantic Terminal) but there are no plans as of now. His master plan does call for the much needed added capacity on the Air Train to Jamaica and Howard beach going from 2 cars per set to 4, which the stations are already built to accomodate. That is an easy temporary fix.


[strike]I don't understand[/strike] someone unfamiliar with NYC-area politics might wonder why instead of having the PA build stand-alone independent systems, they didn't just have the MTA build a LIRR spur just west of Jamaica that looped around the terminals, a la SEPTA in Philly. They could use the same rolling stock with a few rows of seats removed for bags
AB3, DC8, DC9, DH7, D10, E90, M80, M88, 320, 321, 330, 722, 737, 733, 734, 738, 747, 744, 757, 752, 753, 772
AA, AF, B6, CO, DL, EA, EI, FI, HP, KM, LX, MS, NW, OP, PA, TW, UA, US, VS, W9, WO, YX
 
GuruJanitor
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 7:50 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 12:02 am

varsity wrote:
GuruJanitor wrote:


[strike]I don't understand[/strike] someone unfamiliar with NYC-area politics might wonder why instead of having the PA build stand-alone independent systems, they didn't just have the MTA build a LIRR spur just west of Jamaica that looped around the terminals, a la SEPTA in Philly. They could use the same rolling stock with a few rows of seats removed for bags


Ha, yes. The feasibility study is probably more to say "well we tried" than to actually accomplish anything. One only has to look at how well other LIRR projects are going (East side access, Third track to Hicksville second track to Ronkonkoma etc) to know that a one seat ride to JFK will never happen in our lifetimes.
 
T5towbar
Posts: 444
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:06 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 12:12 am

varsity wrote:
VC10er wrote:
varsity wrote:
Yes Terminal A is going to be replaced. 33 (expandable to 45) gates, common-use (CUTE gates but counter space as well). The new footprint is basically along the airport's southwestern flank where UPS and the post office are now, and will apparently utilize the existing airtrain station for the south long term lot. It looks vaguely like JFK T5.

https://www.panynj.gov/airports/ewr-redevelopment/

This PDF has quite a bit of detail and drawings: https://www.panynj.gov/airports/pdf/Pro ... g_Book.pdf

If the cover photo in this article is to be believed, the head house of the existing A will be retained (for what purpose, I don't know).

And in answer to the EWR-as-real-NY-airport question, everybody I know who lives in Manhattan goes to EWR.


WOW! THANKS! Great to see. I must have been under some rock not to have seen this or heard about it before.

It sure is needed.

So, what does this new mega Terminal A spell for UA’s fortress there?

Also, I did read through the pdf “presentation deck” and there doesn’t seem to address the increase in traffic to/from NYC and elsewhere or mass transit solutions to handle so many millions of passengers?

Did I miss something?

Thanks again R


I don't know that it is going to add a tremendous amount of capacity (33 gates vs 29) so I think UA is pretty safe. There isn't enough ramp and runway capacity for someone to build a substantial competing operation anyway, is there?



I think it would be pretty much "Status Quo"

IMHO, I think that the set-up envisioned would wind up being more than 33 gates. Even if moving AC to Terminal B, you would still need gates for AA; WN; B6; AS; VX; and DL (if they have to move to the new terminal. Plus UA will get some of those gates as well. The three main carriers also uses E-170/75; and CR-7/9. That makes more gates than the standard ML gates. And/or you may get the occasional 757 (AA has the 321 service here) as well. I don't think that there will be many widebody gates either - only DL has the AMS 767/330.flight I was just trying to figure out how this is going to work if DL comes over from B. And will they bring the out bound over to the new A Terminal? They will need about 8 or more gates plus a WB Gate, you would think. So I'm trying to figure out how this is going to be allocated, even with AC going over to Terminal B. You would think that B6 will get 3-4 gates; WN getting 3-4 gates; AS getting 2 gates;. VX getting 2 gates That is all mainline gates. Don't know how many gates will AA need - between 8 to 10 Including a WB gate? If AC stays, they will need 2 gates plus the use of a WB gate. And UA will need 10 or more gates of various sizes. I'm also thinking that the WB gate(s) could be the CUTE gates.

Bottom line is that if DL comes over, you will wind up with the max amount of gates IMHO. I'm just guessing........
A comment from an Ex CON: Work Hard.....Fly Standby!
 
User avatar
varsity
Posts: 419
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 1999 4:51 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 1:19 am

T5towbar wrote:
varsity wrote:
VC10er wrote:

WOW! THANKS! Great to see. I must have been under some rock not to have seen this or heard about it before.

It sure is needed.

So, what does this new mega Terminal A spell for UA’s fortress there?

Also, I did read through the pdf “presentation deck” and there doesn’t seem to address the increase in traffic to/from NYC and elsewhere or mass transit solutions to handle so many millions of passengers?

Did I miss something?

Thanks again R


I don't know that it is going to add a tremendous amount of capacity (33 gates vs 29) so I think UA is pretty safe. There isn't enough ramp and runway capacity for someone to build a substantial competing operation anyway, is there?



I think it would be pretty much "Status Quo"

IMHO, I think that the set-up envisioned would wind up being more than 33 gates. Even if moving AC to Terminal B, you would still need gates for AA; WN; B6; AS; VX; and DL (if they have to move to the new terminal. Plus UA will get some of those gates as well. The three main carriers also uses E-170/75; and CR-7/9. That makes more gates than the standard ML gates. And/or you may get the occasional 757 (AA has the 321 service here) as well. I don't think that there will be many widebody gates either - only DL has the AMS 767/330.flight I was just trying to figure out how this is going to work if DL comes over from B. And will they bring the out bound over to the new A Terminal? They will need about 8 or more gates plus a WB Gate, you would think. So I'm trying to figure out how this is going to be allocated, even with AC going over to Terminal B. You would think that B6 will get 3-4 gates; WN getting 3-4 gates; AS getting 2 gates;. VX getting 2 gates That is all mainline gates. Don't know how many gates will AA need - between 8 to 10 Including a WB gate? If AC stays, they will need 2 gates plus the use of a WB gate. And UA will need 10 or more gates of various sizes. I'm also thinking that the WB gate(s) could be the CUTE gates.

Bottom line is that if DL comes over, you will wind up with the max amount of gates IMHO. I'm just guessing........


Was it announced that AC was moving to TB as part of this? I know their current 787 service to YVR operates out of a B6 gate (I'm assuming because it doesn't fit at their own). All gates and counters in the new terminal are CUTE, though, according to the document. I understand some of the gates are paired specifically for occasional widebody visitors. But there is no CBP/FIS in the initial design. According to the doc that would happen with an expanded head house if the 45-gate option was pursued.
AB3, DC8, DC9, DH7, D10, E90, M80, M88, 320, 321, 330, 722, 737, 733, 734, 738, 747, 744, 757, 752, 753, 772
AA, AF, B6, CO, DL, EA, EI, FI, HP, KM, LX, MS, NW, OP, PA, TW, UA, US, VS, W9, WO, YX
 
airportlover
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 1:27 am

varsity wrote:
VC10er wrote:
varsity wrote:
Yes Terminal A is going to be replaced. 33 (expandable to 45) gates, common-use (CUTE gates but counter space as well). The new footprint is basically along the airport's southwestern flank where UPS and the post office are now, and will apparently utilize the existing airtrain station for the south long term lot. It looks vaguely like JFK T5.

https://www.panynj.gov/airports/ewr-redevelopment/

This PDF has quite a bit of detail and drawings: https://www.panynj.gov/airports/pdf/Pro ... g_Book.pdf

If the cover photo in this article is to be believed, the head house of the existing A will be retained (for what purpose, I don't know).

And in answer to the EWR-as-real-NY-airport question, everybody I know who lives in Manhattan goes to EWR.


WOW! THANKS! Great to see. I must have been under some rock not to have seen this or heard about it before.

It sure is needed.

So, what does this new mega Terminal A spell for UA’s fortress there?

Also, I did read through the pdf “presentation deck” and there doesn’t seem to address the increase in traffic to/from NYC and elsewhere or mass transit solutions to handle so many millions of passengers?

Did I miss something?

Thanks again R


I don't know that it is going to add a tremendous amount of capacity (33 gates vs 29) so I think UA is pretty safe. There isn't enough ramp and runway capacity for someone to build a substantial competing operation anyway, is there?


I can never understand why the Port authority wouldn't just initially build the terminal with 45 gates????? Even if it costs a little bit more now, it will cost billions more in 10 years when the capacity is sorely needed. This just does not make sense to me ever with the Port authority. Also, don't they wanna increase UA competition at EWR. 45 gates would allow more LCC's access to EWR, but the Port authority decides to barely increase capacity. Also, please make terminal A able to handle international arrivals!!!! I mean, I do not understand why they wouldn't if they are building a new terminal. I feel the same way about every project in the New York area. Build the capacity now; do not wait for it to cost more and be even more sorely needed in the future!
 
User avatar
varsity
Posts: 419
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 1999 4:51 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 1:50 am

airportlover wrote:
I can never understand why the Port authority wouldn't just initially build the terminal with 45 gates????? Even if it costs a little bit more now, it will cost billions more in 10 years when the capacity is sorely needed. This just does not make sense to me ever with the Port authority. Also, don't they wanna increase UA competition at EWR. 45 gates would allow more LCC's access to EWR, but the Port authority decides to barely increase capacity. Also, please make terminal A able to handle international arrivals!!!! I mean, I do not understand why they wouldn't if they are building a new terminal. I feel the same way about every project in the New York area. Build the capacity now; do not wait for it to cost more and be even more sorely needed in the future!


Part of me wishes UA would be told "Make TC work for all your needs" so that TA could be freed up, but I won't hold my breath. It seems like there is more growing room on the north side of the airport and that it would be nicer for their pax to be all under one roof, but of course someone would have to pay for it.
AB3, DC8, DC9, DH7, D10, E90, M80, M88, 320, 321, 330, 722, 737, 733, 734, 738, 747, 744, 757, 752, 753, 772
AA, AF, B6, CO, DL, EA, EI, FI, HP, KM, LX, MS, NW, OP, PA, TW, UA, US, VS, W9, WO, YX
 
YYZLGA
Posts: 167
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 4:28 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 1:58 am

airportlover wrote:
I can never understand why the Port authority wouldn't just initially build the terminal with 45 gates????? Even if it costs a little bit more now, it will cost billions more in 10 years when the capacity is sorely needed. This just does not make sense to me ever with the Port authority. Also, don't they wanna increase UA competition at EWR. 45 gates would allow more LCC's access to EWR, but the Port authority decides to barely increase capacity. Also, please make terminal A able to handle international arrivals!!!! I mean, I do not understand why they wouldn't if they are building a new terminal. I feel the same way about every project in the New York area. Build the capacity now; do not wait for it to cost more and be even more sorely needed in the future!


I imagine the main issue is that EWR simply doesn't have the runway capacity for that many more flights. The new terminal will be more spacious, which will facilitate capacity growth through upgauging. It is also designed to accommodate a third parallel runway, which would actually enable an increase in the number of flights. That's more of a long term project, however.

Further to that point, and to the post above, it does raise an interesting question about terminal arrangements if they do go ahead with a third runway. Terminal B will have to go and it's not clear where that capacity will be replaced. Runway 11/29 would go in the study I've seen, so perhaps a Terminal C satellite could be added there in order to replace the Terminal B capacity and allow UA to be in a single terminal.
 
tphuang
Posts: 1905
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 2:42 am

T5towbar wrote:
varsity wrote:
VC10er wrote:

WOW! THANKS! Great to see. I must have been under some rock not to have seen this or heard about it before.

It sure is needed.

So, what does this new mega Terminal A spell for UA’s fortress there?

Also, I did read through the pdf “presentation deck” and there doesn’t seem to address the increase in traffic to/from NYC and elsewhere or mass transit solutions to handle so many millions of passengers?

Did I miss something?

Thanks again R


I don't know that it is going to add a tremendous amount of capacity (33 gates vs 29) so I think UA is pretty safe. There isn't enough ramp and runway capacity for someone to build a substantial competing operation anyway, is there?



I think it would be pretty much "Status Quo"

IMHO, I think that the set-up envisioned would wind up being more than 33 gates. Even if moving AC to Terminal B, you would still need gates for AA; WN; B6; AS; VX; and DL (if they have to move to the new terminal. Plus UA will get some of those gates as well. The three main carriers also uses E-170/75; and CR-7/9. That makes more gates than the standard ML gates. And/or you may get the occasional 757 (AA has the 321 service here) as well. I don't think that there will be many widebody gates either - only DL has the AMS 767/330.flight I was just trying to figure out how this is going to work if DL comes over from B. And will they bring the out bound over to the new A Terminal? They will need about 8 or more gates plus a WB Gate, you would think. So I'm trying to figure out how this is going to be allocated, even with AC going over to Terminal B. You would think that B6 will get 3-4 gates; WN getting 3-4 gates; AS getting 2 gates;. VX getting 2 gates That is all mainline gates. Don't know how many gates will AA need - between 8 to 10 Including a WB gate? If AC stays, they will need 2 gates plus the use of a WB gate. And UA will need 10 or more gates of various sizes. I'm also thinking that the WB gate(s) could be the CUTE gates.

Bottom line is that if DL comes over, you will wind up with the max amount of gates IMHO. I'm just guessing........


It will be all cute gates. I am sure airlines will get some preference use ones but not that many. As has one leased gate and b6 have 2 in the interim terminal a. Wn has 3. I assume that's how many they will get for preferential use in the new terminal.

I don't see why as needs more than 1 dedicated given that it has less than 15 flights.

You could argue b6 and wn may need more but they can just use cute gates. Why does aa need that many preferential use gates?

The only airlines I could see expanding in ewr to challenge ua on some routes are b6 and wn. They might not grow to 100 flight operation, but 50 might be possible.

I could see b6 doing 8 daily to bos and mco each, 6 to fll, 10 to rest of Florida, 6 to Caribbean, 10 transcon and odd flight to msy or las or aus.

Wn can certainly add to all its major focus cities.
 
User avatar
varsity
Posts: 419
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 1999 4:51 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 3:13 am

YYZLGA wrote:
I imagine the main issue is that EWR simply doesn't have the runway capacity for that many more flights. The new terminal will be more spacious, which will facilitate capacity growth through upgauging. It is also designed to accommodate a third parallel runway, which would actually enable an increase in the number of flights. That's more of a long term project, however.

Further to that point, and to the post above, it does raise an interesting question about terminal arrangements if they do go ahead with a third runway. Terminal B will have to go and it's not clear where that capacity will be replaced. Runway 11/29 would go in the study I've seen, so perhaps a Terminal C satellite could be added there in order to replace the Terminal B capacity and allow UA to be in a single terminal.


Well if they demo'd the existing A head house maybe a new TB could be built on the inside/straddling the roadway loop where the central open parking is now. That is kind of a waste of space, and the parking could be consolidated into one or two decks.
AB3, DC8, DC9, DH7, D10, E90, M80, M88, 320, 321, 330, 722, 737, 733, 734, 738, 747, 744, 757, 752, 753, 772
AA, AF, B6, CO, DL, EA, EI, FI, HP, KM, LX, MS, NW, OP, PA, TW, UA, US, VS, W9, WO, YX
 
YYZLGA
Posts: 167
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 4:28 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 7:18 am

An interesting possibility is that it's technically possible to build an independent parallel runway on the site, but it would require completely reconfiguring the airport and slightly shifting Route 9. The RPA didn't consider it in their report, likely because it would be extremely disruptive, but if the PANYNJ ever wanted to completely redo EWR from scratch, it could theoretically work and would mean a huge capacity bump. Even though it would be incredibly difficult and costly, it might still be one of the easier new runways to get built in the NYC area.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13634
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 1:04 pm

varsity wrote:
VC10er wrote:
varsity wrote:
Yes Terminal A is going to be replaced. 33 (expandable to 45) gates, common-use (CUTE gates but counter space as well). The new footprint is basically along the airport's southwestern flank where UPS and the post office are now, and will apparently utilize the existing airtrain station for the south long term lot. It looks vaguely like JFK T5.

https://www.panynj.gov/airports/ewr-redevelopment/

This PDF has quite a bit of detail and drawings: https://www.panynj.gov/airports/pdf/Pro ... g_Book.pdf

If the cover photo in this article is to be believed, the head house of the existing A will be retained (for what purpose, I don't know).

And in answer to the EWR-as-real-NY-airport question, everybody I know who lives in Manhattan goes to EWR.


WOW! THANKS! Great to see. I must have been under some rock not to have seen this or heard about it before.

It sure is needed.

So, what does this new mega Terminal A spell for UA’s fortress there?

Also, I did read through the pdf “presentation deck” and there doesn’t seem to address the increase in traffic to/from NYC and elsewhere or mass transit solutions to handle so many millions of passengers?

Did I miss something?

Thanks again R


I don't know that it is going to add a tremendous amount of capacity (33 gates vs 29) so I think UA is pretty safe. There isn't enough ramp and runway capacity for someone to build a substantial competing operation anyway, is there?


The Port Authority is already in lease negotiations with the airlines involved, they are negotiating renewing their current leases at Terminal A and Terminal B (DL, NK) which will dovetail into the new Terminal One (the Port Authority is officially calling the new Terminal "Terminal One").

Delta would lease five gates and pay the Port Authority aggregate rentals of approximately $55 million over the five-year period. United would
lease five gates and pay the Port Authority aggregate rentals of approximately $65.7 million over the five-year period. Alaska would lease
one gate and pay the Port Authority aggregate rentals of approximately $11.1 million over the five-year period. American would lease seven gates and pay the Port Authority aggregate rentals of approximately $77.7 million over the five-year period. JetBlue would lease two gates and pay the Port Authority aggregate rentals of approximately $22.2 million over the five-year period. Southwest would lease three gates
and pay the Port Authority aggregate rentals of approximately $33.3 million over the five-year period. Air Canada would lease two gates and pay the Port Authority aggregate rentals of approximately $22.2 million over the five-year period. In addition to fixed rentals, all airlines would also remit variable fees, including airport services and other charges.


This is only leases with the Port Authority, it does not include sub-leasing amongst the airlines themselves.

http://corpinfo.panynj.gov/documents/Board-Minutes-6383/

With 33 gates, I would imagine the distribution would be something like this:

AA 5, DL 5, AC 2, B6 3, WN 3, AK 3, UA 8, + 4 cute gates for NK, G4, B6, AC etc..

As for the Terminal B-1 concourse it might either be used to expand the IAB facilities, or UA could grab them. If I were to guess I would guess they're going to expand the FIS, which might still have UA move some departures to Terminal B. Back when CO had their partnership with VS CO London departures operated out of Terminal B. Today UA uses the Terminal B for some International arrivals as they don't have the capacity at Terminal C to handle all of their international arrivals.

Longer term, the Regional Planning Association did a study on behalf of the Port Authority about expanding the region's airports. Their conclusion was the best way forward for EWR was to build a third parallel runway, this would require the demolition of Terminal B and parts of Terminal C. That plan is also why the new Terminal One is pushed so far West on the airport property. The future expansion of the new Terminal One and the inclusion of the FIS would replace the facility at B which would be torn down. A New Terminal C would be built over land occupied by runway 11/29 which would be eliminated. Leaving EWR with two terminals.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
stlgph
Posts: 10462
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 3:05 pm

Will be interesting to see if everyone is forced over to the new quarters and if UA gets any gates there, or not.
I could see them taking over the rest of B and Air Canada staying behind.

Whatever the improvements made, it all cannot come soon enough.
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13634
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 3:28 pm

stlgph wrote:
Will be interesting to see if everyone is forced over to the new quarters and if UA gets any gates there, or not.
I could see them taking over the rest of B and Air Canada staying behind.

Whatever the improvements made, it all cannot come soon enough.


It makes sense for UA to move into B-1, perhaps the Express operation. As mentioned some UA international arrivals use Terminal B, thus it would create an in terminal connecting opportunity which does not exist at Terminal A. Also Terminal B is obviously closer to Terminal C.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
airportlover
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:49 pm

YYZLGA wrote:
airportlover wrote:
I can never understand why the Port authority wouldn't just initially build the terminal with 45 gates????? Even if it costs a little bit more now, it will cost billions more in 10 years when the capacity is sorely needed. This just does not make sense to me ever with the Port authority. Also, don't they wanna increase UA competition at EWR. 45 gates would allow more LCC's access to EWR, but the Port authority decides to barely increase capacity. Also, please make terminal A able to handle international arrivals!!!! I mean, I do not understand why they wouldn't if they are building a new terminal. I feel the same way about every project in the New York area. Build the capacity now; do not wait for it to cost more and be even more sorely needed in the future!


I imagine the main issue is that EWR simply doesn't have the runway capacity for that many more flights. The new terminal will be more spacious, which will facilitate capacity growth through upgauging. It is also designed to accommodate a third parallel runway, which would actually enable an increase in the number of flights. That's more of a long term project, however.

Further to that point, and to the post above, it does raise an interesting question about terminal arrangements if they do go ahead with a third runway. Terminal B will have to go and it's not clear where that capacity will be replaced. Runway 11/29 would go in the study I've seen, so perhaps a Terminal C satellite could be added there in order to replace the Terminal B capacity and allow UA to be in a single terminal.


Yeah, it must be the runways. They really should build a runway over the NJ Turnpike and get rid of all surface parking lots. All parking should be underground or in garages offsite. A massive new terminal building should be erected, and rental car facilities should be moved offsite. The AirTrain should should become standard NJT rail with one-seat rides to Penn, and Amtrak trains, particularly from the south, should continue to stop there. The Path should be expanded to EWR and integrated with the AirTrain. This would allow one-seat access from Newark, Jersey City, and Lower Manhattan, not to mention a two-seat ride from much of Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx. The light rail addition from Staten Island through Bayonne should happen and would provide two-seat access to EWR as well. EWR needs to gain A380-accessible gates for the ME3.

At LGA, one unified terminal should be built, with an expansion to Rikers Island once the facility is closed. Rulers could serve as parking, rental car, and ATC. An AirTrain should be constructed to link Rikers Island with the rest of LGA. Sadly, the MAT should be demolished to streamline operations. All parking should be moved off of the Grand Central, and the terminal should be right on the highway. A new runway should be built in former terminal space. Capacity should be greatly increased, but the airport should remain domestic. Also, LGA should not have transcontinental flights even with increased runway capacity. LGA should remain a large hub for regional flights and flights to major business markets in the Eastern third of the country. Only Canadian and some Caribbean flights should be allowed.

In my mind, JFK needs a huge transformation. The runways should remain where they are, but one unified terminal should be constructed. Parking should be moved underground, but I'm not sure how far due to the waterfront location. Flood protective walls should be installed, and the airport should be organized by alliance. JFK should focus on premier international flights and transcontinental flights. Florida flights should be decreased to open up more room for international fligjrs. JFK should become a European hub, and high-speed rail should connect JFK and LGA to provide easy connections between the two and link neighborhoods with both airports. For example, DL and AA can keep their operations similar as to how they are now, but connections between JFK and LGA should be bookable with the rail addition. The JFK AirTrain needs to be integrated into the subway, and one-seat rides to Lower Manhattan and Midtown should be available from both airports through the rail link between the two.
 
airportlover
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:55 pm

GuruJanitor wrote:
varsity wrote:
GuruJanitor wrote:


[strike]I don't understand[/strike] someone unfamiliar with NYC-area politics might wonder why instead of having the PA build stand-alone independent systems, they didn't just have the MTA build a LIRR spur just west of Jamaica that looped around the terminals, a la SEPTA in Philly. They could use the same rolling stock with a few rows of seats removed for bags


Ha, yes. The feasibility study is probably more to say "well we tried" than to actually accomplish anything. One only has to look at how well other LIRR projects are going (East side access, Third track to Hicksville second track to Ronkonkoma etc) to know that a one seat ride to JFK will never happen in our lifetimes.


Oh God, they can't even get ferries to run right! NYC area projects never get built, but it is fun to think that our great-grandchildren may get to witness a third LIRR track or maybe even the second phase of the 2nd avenue subway!!!! And maybe their grandchildren will see new Hudson River tunnels. We can only hope lol.
 
evank516
Posts: 1431
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:29 am

tphuang wrote:
WNflyer1523 wrote:
Still waiting on ISP-CLT. Huge market that AA and /or F9 are missing out on.

I’ve also noticed that AA has been somewhat downsizing at JFK. Are pax loads low (pretty sure that this wouldn’t be the case with tens of millions of people within an hour of the airport) or are their planes better needed somewhere else?

Lastly, Southwest is definitely committed to LGA, all they’ve been doing is adding flights/frequencies left and right. They’ve also added a few more frequencies at ISP, likely to try and compete with Frontier. Can anyone see Southwest initiating Saturday flights to the Caribbean from LGA if they get their hands on even more slots?

How in the world is wn getting more lga slots? I bet at this point b6 will pay more if any slot is put up for auction or sales.


I believe both slot restrictions and the perimeter rule are relaxed on Saturdays.
 
jplatts
Posts: 1730
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:42 am

evank516 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
WNflyer1523 wrote:
Still waiting on ISP-CLT. Huge market that AA and /or F9 are missing out on.

I’ve also noticed that AA has been somewhat downsizing at JFK. Are pax loads low (pretty sure that this wouldn’t be the case with tens of millions of people within an hour of the airport) or are their planes better needed somewhere else?

Lastly, Southwest is definitely committed to LGA, all they’ve been doing is adding flights/frequencies left and right. They’ve also added a few more frequencies at ISP, likely to try and compete with Frontier. Can anyone see Southwest initiating Saturday flights to the Caribbean from LGA if they get their hands on even more slots?

How in the world is wn getting more lga slots? I bet at this point b6 will pay more if any slot is put up for auction or sales.


I believe both slot restrictions and the perimeter rule are relaxed on Saturdays.


Will Southwest ever add Saturday-only nonstop service to AUS and LAS from LGA? AUS and LAS are possible destinations for Saturday-only nonstop service from LGA on Southwest if Southwest's other Saturday-only nonstop routes at LGA are successful.
 
RichardWelling
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 2:45 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Wed Jan 10, 2018 7:00 am

Source: https://www.wfs.aero/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/WFS-Press-Release-Date-9-Jan-2018.pdf

As it is no surprise, looks like WFS will be operating the soon to be built cargo facility in Cargo Area D. Is it me or does WFS have a monoply with cargo handling in JFK?
I know Dnata is on the rise for ramp/cargo handling in JFK but as of right now. WFS is the largest handler by far.

Hopefully this project will be completed on time as it is long over due.
 
evank516
Posts: 1431
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:15 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Wed Jan 10, 2018 2:57 pm

jplatts wrote:
evank516 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
How in the world is wn getting more lga slots? I bet at this point b6 will pay more if any slot is put up for auction or sales.


I believe both slot restrictions and the perimeter rule are relaxed on Saturdays.


Will Southwest ever add Saturday-only nonstop service to AUS and LAS from LGA? AUS and LAS are possible destinations for Saturday-only nonstop service from LGA on Southwest if Southwest's other Saturday-only nonstop routes at LGA are successful.


Saturday only transcon flights from LGA (such as LAX) have not performed well in the past so I doubt we will see LAS happen.
 
tphuang
Posts: 1905
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Wed Jan 10, 2018 4:05 pm

evank516 wrote:
jplatts wrote:
evank516 wrote:

I believe both slot restrictions and the perimeter rule are relaxed on Saturdays.


Will Southwest ever add Saturday-only nonstop service to AUS and LAS from LGA? AUS and LAS are possible destinations for Saturday-only nonstop service from LGA on Southwest if Southwest's other Saturday-only nonstop routes at LGA are successful.


Saturday only transcon flights from LGA (such as LAX) have not performed well in the past so I doubt we will see LAS happen.


There are reasons why these are not done. On Saturdays, you also get more of a leisure crowd, who would fly out of JFK/EWR anyways.

Of course, WN can add Saturday flights, but they are quite irrelevant in NYC, so it would be very low yielding.
 
VC10er
Posts: 3633
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Thu Jan 11, 2018 6:21 pm

Looking at Google Earth, I cannot help but think that a runway could work on the other side of the Turnpike! Even if it stretched out over the water.
I’d love to see a 779 (or other) cross over me on a bridge if I was driving.
Almost 40 years ago I used to go clubbing in what was a very dangerous and deserted part of Manhattan, now Hudson Yards is covering over my great memories. Anything is possible in NYC and it’s surrounds!
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13634
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Thu Jan 11, 2018 7:13 pm

VC10er wrote:
Looking at Google Earth, I cannot help but think that a runway could work on the other side of the Turnpike! Even if it stretched out over the water.
I’d love to see a 779 (or other) cross over me on a bridge if I was driving.
Almost 40 years ago I used to go clubbing in what was a very dangerous and deserted part of Manhattan, now Hudson Yards is covering over my great memories. Anything is possible in NYC and it’s surrounds!


You would be messing with the Port, which is the busiest on the East coast and third busiest in the Nation. It's economic impact is enormous, you're not taking land from the Port.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
YYZLGA
Posts: 167
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 4:28 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:21 pm

airportlover wrote:


Your proposed plans would certainly improve things quite a bit, but as you know most of them are fairly unlikely. For the medium term, the two runway plans that have had some semi-serious discussion are a third close parallel runway to the west of the existing runways at Newark, and another 4/22 to the west of the terminals at JFK. You can read about the discussion around them in that RPA report. Both plans would be very ambitious, but there's at least some talk of them happening. Switching JFK and LGA to a primary 4/22 orientation, like Newark, would do a lot to reduce the airspace conflicts between the airports. Unfortunately, the 4/22 runways at JFK are only about 900 metres apart, considerably closer than the 1310 metres that would be required for full independent operation in instrument conditions. The dream is that NextGen will make that possible. Then, with a third 4/22 runway west of the terminals, there'd be three independent parallels like CLT, which would make a huge difference. The RPA claims the effect of the fill on Jamaica Bay would be minimal, but I'm not so sure other groups would agree. Right now, it's amazing how little capacity JFK has given that its site is about the size of ATL.
 
codc10
Posts: 2221
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:47 pm

UA wants the lion's share of gates at the new Terminal A, and plans to operate mainline and Express there. There's very little doubt United will get most of what it wants in this case.

STT757 wrote:
You would be messing with the Port, which is the busiest on the East coast and third busiest in the Nation. It's economic impact is enormous, you're not taking land from the Port.


Doing anything east of the current footprint would cost many billions of dollars and is unlikely to ever happen.

West of the airport, however, opens up some more possibilities, but will still cost an astronomical sum of money.
 
airportlover
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Fri Jan 12, 2018 12:09 am

YYZLGA wrote:
airportlover wrote:


Your proposed plans would certainly improve things quite a bit, but as you know most of them are fairly unlikely. For the medium term, the two runway plans that have had some semi-serious discussion are a third close parallel runway to the west of the existing runways at Newark, and another 4/22 to the west of the terminals at JFK. You can read about the discussion around them in that RPA report. Both plans would be very ambitious, but there's at least some talk of them happening. Switching JFK and LGA to a primary 4/22 orientation, like Newark, would do a lot to reduce the airspace conflicts between the airports. Unfortunately, the 4/22 runways at JFK are only about 900 metres apart, considerably closer than the 1310 metres that would be required for full independent operation in instrument conditions. The dream is that NextGen will make that possible. Then, with a third 4/22 runway west of the terminals, there'd be three independent parallels like CLT, which would make a huge difference. The RPA claims the effect of the fill on Jamaica Bay would be minimal, but I'm not so sure other groups would agree. Right now, it's amazing how little capacity JFK has given that its site is about the size of ATL.


Of course my plans aren't feasible, but they really would be nice. Even a little bit of relief would be appreciated. I never knew that JFK's site is the size of ATL. That is basically the epitomy of New York mismanagement lol. I shouldn't be surprised, but I am shocked and scared. I mean, how wasteful can the PANYNJ get!!!! Between their financial mismanagement, their wasteful projects, and their political corruption, I didn't think it could be worse. But in New York anything is possible!
 
YYZLGA
Posts: 167
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 4:28 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Fri Jan 12, 2018 3:01 am

airportlover wrote:
Of course my plans aren't feasible, but they really would be nice. Even a little bit of relief would be appreciated. I never knew that JFK's site is the size of ATL. That is basically the epitomy of New York mismanagement lol. I shouldn't be surprised, but I am shocked and scared. I mean, how wasteful can the PANYNJ get!!!! Between their financial mismanagement, their wasteful projects, and their political corruption, I didn't think it could be worse. But in New York anything is possible!


Part of the problem is that New York's winds are a bit more complicated than Atlanta's, so the airports need crosswind runways, which makes it harder to squeeze in as many runways on a site. But clearly a lot of JFK's space is poorly used. One difference with Atlanta is that in the late 70s, they made the decision to abandon the existing (fairly substantial) terminal entirely and build a new ultra-modern facility from scratch. It became the standard for airports to this day and obviously it's served them well. The more piecemeal approach hasn't worked so well in New York. The other issue is that JFK really wasn't that busy until the last few years. Until JetBlue started, it really was only crowded during the peak periods for overseas flights. So it didn't need extra capacity in the same way. But like so many things in New York these days, the huge capacity reserves from the gigantic infrastructure built before 1970 have finally been used up.
 
aaflyer222
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2017 9:34 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Fri Jan 12, 2018 2:40 pm

does AA have any plan to restart PHL-HPN? they cut it at the end of 2016 due to dash retirements, and they cut SWF to 2x daily. It seems that they would be able to add more to those markets from PHL
74m, 772, 763, 764, 752, 733, 734, 738, 739, a319, a320, a321, s80, m88, m90, e190, e170, e175, e140, e145, cr2, cr7, cr9, dh1, dh3, dh4, at72, s340
 
airportlover
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Sat Jan 13, 2018 1:06 am

YYZLGA wrote:
airportlover wrote:
Of course my plans aren't feasible, but they really would be nice. Even a little bit of relief would be appreciated. I never knew that JFK's site is the size of ATL. That is basically the epitomy of New York mismanagement lol. I shouldn't be surprised, but I am shocked and scared. I mean, how wasteful can the PANYNJ get!!!! Between their financial mismanagement, their wasteful projects, and their political corruption, I didn't think it could be worse. But in New York anything is possible!


Part of the problem is that New York's winds are a bit more complicated than Atlanta's, so the airports need crosswind runways, which makes it harder to squeeze in as many runways on a site. But clearly a lot of JFK's space is poorly used. One difference with Atlanta is that in the late 70s, they made the decision to abandon the existing (fairly substantial) terminal entirely and build a new ultra-modern facility from scratch. It became the standard for airports to this day and obviously it's served them well. The more piecemeal approach hasn't worked so well in New York. The other issue is that JFK really wasn't that busy until the last few years. Until JetBlue started, it really was only crowded during the peak periods for overseas flights. So it didn't need extra capacity in the same way. But like so many things in New York these days, the huge capacity reserves from the gigantic infrastructure built before 1970 have finally been used up.


Yes, the winds are a logical explanation for the crosswind runways. And yes again, New York has finally reached the capacity it was so lucky to have built for it 40-50 years ago. We need another era of infrastructure building, and I do not care how much money it costs. We need to significantly increase capacity and rebuild nearly everything in the NYC area. There are literally no good major infrastructural pieces in New York. The people of the 60s did us good to build all of that "extra@ capacity and we owe it to them to build for future generations. I do not really care how they pay for it because we already pay ridiculous taxes. I mean, our money has to be somewhere, and eventually residents of the area will demand improved infrastructure without tax increases. I actually think the failing infrastructure in New York may push the city into decline. That would be such a shame. We have been thriving for years now, but the infrastructural failures are becoming too much to handle. Everyday there is another train, ferry, or airport issue, and residents are getting fed up. While this disaster occurs, New York area residents, particularly property-owning suburbanites, continue to be taxed like crazy. Property taxes are out of control, and we get some of the worst infrastructure. I really do appreciate the vast network and usability of the region's transit network, but it has to work to properly benefit the region. And it just isn't right now.

I agree that the piecemeal approach New York has taken is flat out dumb and wasteful. Every new project requires millions of dollars worth of review before even starting. Most of these projects never start or sit half finished for years. If JFK had just been completely rebuilt in the 60s or 70s, adding capacity now would not seem as daunting. In fact, we may not have even needed more capacity, just some renovations. Same thing goes for EWR and definitely LGA. Also, the entire phase thing drives me off the wall. They are building the second avenue subway in four little 30-block phases. The first phase took 10 years. So will it be 30-40 years till we see a completed subway if it ever is completed???? I mean, they used to build huge subway lines in a year or two. New York needs to take a new approach to building infrastructure. I am not saying return to the horrendous working conditions of the past, but we need to cut costs and improve efficiency. Also, the MTA, PANYNJ, and NJT need to become one operation. Add New York Waterway to that and the gazillions of private bus companies operating from suburbs. It should be one agency that covers the ENTIRE network, from ferries to buses to roads to trains to airports to donkeys, I really don't care. But it is time for the New York area to become unified in its bureaucracy. I also support ending the city's extra income tax, and CT and NJ residents should pay their own state taxes, not New York taxes. This would create fairness among the states, and the city would be the ultimate beneficiary. We should not make it easier to live in the suburbs in this era of climate change. Sorry for my rant, but it must be said.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 2814
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Sat Jan 13, 2018 1:35 am

EWR-what happens to the old Terminal A? The pdf show it still standing.

If one builds a third parallel runway next to the other two, would UA loose some of Terminal C concourse too?

How is UA going to move Express to the new A and connect with C? The train is outside of security and using buses is not going to work.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 2814
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Sat Jan 13, 2018 1:45 am

And the EWR is the same airport where southbound departures have turn left right after takeoff then right to avoid breaking windows in an old church (so says the United pilots I asked). And one is planning a third runway? Needed yes, but where if not the west of the two.

Building a runway to the east of the turnpike will require buying the four hotels on the SE corner of the Airport and most likely the outlet mall thats next to it too. Not mention that great Ruby Tuesdays next to it. :D
 
VC10er
Posts: 3633
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Sat Jan 13, 2018 7:48 am

STT757 wrote:
VC10er wrote:
Looking at Google Earth, I cannot help but think that a runway could work on the other side of the Turnpike!

You would be messing with the Port, which is the busiest on the East coast and third busiest in the Nation. It's economic impact is enormous, you're not taking land from the Port.


You are indeed correct. I think I actually knew that information about being one of the busiest ports in the country. I guess when I gaze across and see ugly buildings, an IKEA, and discount malls, I’d prefer to see runways.
I’ve loathed the Port Authority, just by having to use the bus terminal often many years ago to see my late parents. A disgusting embarrassment of NYC.
I probably won’t be alive to see a totally new EWR that is perfect and modern- I shall have to make due with Terminal C and a Polaris Lounge for most of the rest of my heavy travel life.
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
AirbusMDCFAN
Posts: 497
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2016 10:51 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Sat Jan 13, 2018 11:14 am

Link/Source: http://atwonline.com/airports-routes/la ... Track=true


"Former US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood will lead an independent investigation of the disruptions at New York JFK following a winter storm last week, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey announced."

"JFK experienced a surge in rescheduled arrivals, gate delays and ground-equipment breakdowns in the wake of a Jan. 4 winter storm that deposited 8 in. of snow there."


Can any of the termianls be expanded to handle additional aircrafts.
 
User avatar
lesfalls
Posts: 3144
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Sat Jan 13, 2018 2:43 pm

airportlover wrote:
YYZLGA wrote:
airportlover wrote:
Of course my plans aren't feasible, but they really would be nice. Even a little bit of relief would be appreciated. I never knew that JFK's site is the size of ATL. That is basically the epitomy of New York mismanagement lol. I shouldn't be surprised, but I am shocked and scared. I mean, how wasteful can the PANYNJ get!!!! Between their financial mismanagement, their wasteful projects, and their political corruption, I didn't think it could be worse. But in New York anything is possible!


Part of the problem is that New York's winds are a bit more complicated than Atlanta's, so the airports need crosswind runways, which makes it harder to squeeze in as many runways on a site. But clearly a lot of JFK's space is poorly used. One difference with Atlanta is that in the late 70s, they made the decision to abandon the existing (fairly substantial) terminal entirely and build a new ultra-modern facility from scratch. It became the standard for airports to this day and obviously it's served them well. The more piecemeal approach hasn't worked so well in New York. The other issue is that JFK really wasn't that busy until the last few years. Until JetBlue started, it really was only crowded during the peak periods for overseas flights. So it didn't need extra capacity in the same way. But like so many things in New York these days, the huge capacity reserves from the gigantic infrastructure built before 1970 have finally been used up.


Yes, the winds are a logical explanation for the crosswind runways. And yes again, New York has finally reached the capacity it was so lucky to have built for it 40-50 years ago. We need another era of infrastructure building, and I do not care how much money it costs. We need to significantly increase capacity and rebuild nearly everything in the NYC area. There are literally no good major infrastructural pieces in New York. The people of the 60s did us good to build all of that "extra@ capacity and we owe it to them to build for future generations. I do not really care how they pay for it because we already pay ridiculous taxes. I mean, our money has to be somewhere, and eventually residents of the area will demand improved infrastructure without tax increases. I actually think the failing infrastructure in New York may push the city into decline. That would be such a shame. We have been thriving for years now, but the infrastructural failures are becoming too much to handle. Everyday there is another train, ferry, or airport issue, and residents are getting fed up. While this disaster occurs, New York area residents, particularly property-owning suburbanites, continue to be taxed like crazy. Property taxes are out of control, and we get some of the worst infrastructure. I really do appreciate the vast network and usability of the region's transit network, but it has to work to properly benefit the region. And it just isn't right now.

I agree that the piecemeal approach New York has taken is flat out dumb and wasteful. Every new project requires millions of dollars worth of review before even starting. Most of these projects never start or sit half finished for years. If JFK had just been completely rebuilt in the 60s or 70s, adding capacity now would not seem as daunting. In fact, we may not have even needed more capacity, just some renovations. Same thing goes for EWR and definitely LGA. Also, the entire phase thing drives me off the wall. They are building the second avenue subway in four little 30-block phases. The first phase took 10 years. So will it be 30-40 years till we see a completed subway if it ever is completed???? I mean, they used to build huge subway lines in a year or two. New York needs to take a new approach to building infrastructure. I am not saying return to the horrendous working conditions of the past, but we need to cut costs and improve efficiency. Also, the MTA, PANYNJ, and NJT need to become one operation. Add New York Waterway to that and the gazillions of private bus companies operating from suburbs. It should be one agency that covers the ENTIRE network, from ferries to buses to roads to trains to airports to donkeys, I really don't care. But it is time for the New York area to become unified in its bureaucracy. I also support ending the city's extra income tax, and CT and NJ residents should pay their own state taxes, not New York taxes. This would create fairness among the states, and the city would be the ultimate beneficiary. We should not make it easier to live in the suburbs in this era of climate change. Sorry for my rant, but it must be said.


Finally someone has the courage to say it. Not many New Yorkers will state the truth regarding the issues that surround New York city with transportation and the ridiculous amount of Inequality/bad infrastructure that exists in the city . It is obvious in a way though as it is much easier and cooler to state that you are from New York then state its negatives because of its "incredible" reputation. As a New Yorker who has just moved abroad and who only was in New York a week ago (I actually even got stuck in the Snow storm even) I have completely changed my image of the airport. Before having left I had a more positive picture pf JFK but now living somewhere else (that being MXP) I see how bad the Port Authority and New York truly is. The way the PA dealt with the storm and still on a normal day how they deal with passengers is absurd. In the end there really is no need for them to improve customer service and expand their facilities to handle more traffic as thats more costly when they can be instead making more money from delays and higher the price of slots. At the same time staff at the airport tend to be very rude and inconsistent (I myself am close friends with a check-in agent at JFK and he is one of the very few exceptions when it comes to friendliness and careness at JFK from experience). I'm not trying to be purely mean towards JFK as I started spotting there and I met many new friends there (nonethless in that time I still received much criticism from the PA about this "hobby" how it is a security threat even though I was practically there every weekend!) and I wish they would raise their standards of quality and friendliness to people who actually want to work in the aviation industry/have a hobby of aviation. At the end of the day it just seems purely about making the big money for the people at the top while the rest of the population has problems.

Cheers,
Lesfalls
My Instagram account: @Jfkmxpairlinespotting
 
airportlover
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Sat Jan 13, 2018 2:53 pm

lesfalls wrote:
airportlover wrote:
YYZLGA wrote:

Part of the problem is that New York's winds are a bit more complicated than Atlanta's, so the airports need crosswind runways, which makes it harder to squeeze in as many runways on a site. But clearly a lot of JFK's space is poorly used. One difference with Atlanta is that in the late 70s, they made the decision to abandon the existing (fairly substantial) terminal entirely and build a new ultra-modern facility from scratch. It became the standard for airports to this day and obviously it's served them well. The more piecemeal approach hasn't worked so well in New York. The other issue is that JFK really wasn't that busy until the last few years. Until JetBlue started, it really was only crowded during the peak periods for overseas flights. So it didn't need extra capacity in the same way. But like so many things in New York these days, the huge capacity reserves from the gigantic infrastructure built before 1970 have finally been used up.


Yes, the winds are a logical explanation for the crosswind runways. And yes again, New York has finally reached the capacity it was so lucky to have built for it 40-50 years ago. We need another era of infrastructure building, and I do not care how much money it costs. We need to significantly increase capacity and rebuild nearly everything in the NYC area. There are literally no good major infrastructural pieces in New York. The people of the 60s did us good to build all of that "extra@ capacity and we owe it to them to build for future generations. I do not really care how they pay for it because we already pay ridiculous taxes. I mean, our money has to be somewhere, and eventually residents of the area will demand improved infrastructure without tax increases. I actually think the failing infrastructure in New York may push the city into decline. That would be such a shame. We have been thriving for years now, but the infrastructural failures are becoming too much to handle. Everyday there is another train, ferry, or airport issue, and residents are getting fed up. While this disaster occurs, New York area residents, particularly property-owning suburbanites, continue to be taxed like crazy. Property taxes are out of control, and we get some of the worst infrastructure. I really do appreciate the vast network and usability of the region's transit network, but it has to work to properly benefit the region. And it just isn't right now.

I agree that the piecemeal approach New York has taken is flat out dumb and wasteful. Every new project requires millions of dollars worth of review before even starting. Most of these projects never start or sit half finished for years. If JFK had just been completely rebuilt in the 60s or 70s, adding capacity now would not seem as daunting. In fact, we may not have even needed more capacity, just some renovations. Same thing goes for EWR and definitely LGA. Also, the entire phase thing drives me off the wall. They are building the second avenue subway in four little 30-block phases. The first phase took 10 years. So will it be 30-40 years till we see a completed subway if it ever is completed???? I mean, they used to build huge subway lines in a year or two. New York needs to take a new approach to building infrastructure. I am not saying return to the horrendous working conditions of the past, but we need to cut costs and improve efficiency. Also, the MTA, PANYNJ, and NJT need to become one operation. Add New York Waterway to that and the gazillions of private bus companies operating from suburbs. It should be one agency that covers the ENTIRE network, from ferries to buses to roads to trains to airports to donkeys, I really don't care. But it is time for the New York area to become unified in its bureaucracy. I also support ending the city's extra income tax, and CT and NJ residents should pay their own state taxes, not New York taxes. This would create fairness among the states, and the city would be the ultimate beneficiary. We should not make it easier to live in the suburbs in this era of climate change. Sorry for my rant, but it must be said.


Finally someone has the courage to say it. Not many New Yorkers will state the truth regarding the issues that surround New York city with transportation and the ridiculous amount of Inequality/bad infrastructure that exists in the city . It is obvious in a way though as it is much easier and cooler to state that you are from New York then state its negatives because of its "incredible" reputation. As a New Yorker who has just moved abroad and who only was in New York a week ago (I actually even got stuck in the Snow storm even) I have completely changed my image of the airport. Before having left I had a more positive picture pf JFK but now living somewhere else (that being MXP) I see how bad the Port Authority and New York truly is. The way the PA dealt with the storm and still on a normal day how they deal with passengers is absurd. In the end there really is no need for them to improve customer service and expand their facilities to handle more traffic as thats more costly when they can be instead making more money from delays and higher the price of slots. At the same time staff at the airport tend to be very rude and inconsistent (I myself am close friends with a check-in agent at JFK and he is one of the very few exceptions when it comes to friendliness and careness at JFK from experience). I'm not trying to be purely mean towards JFK as I started spotting there and I met many new friends there (nonethless in that time I still received much criticism from the PA about this "hobby" how it is a security threat even though I was practically there every weekend!) and I wish they would raise their standards of quality and friendliness to people who actually want to work in the aviation industry/have a hobby of aviation. At the end of the day it just seems purely about making the big money for the people at the top while the rest of the population has problems.

Cheers,
Lesfalls


Ugh. Whenever you leave New York, everything just works better. Also, the agents are so rude and do not give a care in the world. I mean, you have to be a special breed of person to yell like agents at the New York airports. They just don't care and repeat the same thing even if you continually ask them. The TSA agents are also terrible. Aren't they supposed to protecting us??? Like, at least do your job and give some acknowledgement to your customers. It is crazy. And the security lines are ridiculous.
 
stlgph
Posts: 10462
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Sat Jan 13, 2018 4:13 pm

AirbusMDCFAN wrote:
Link/Source: http://atwonline.com/airports-routes/la ... Track=true


"Former US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood will lead an independent investigation of the disruptions at New York JFK following a winter storm last week, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey announced."

"JFK experienced a surge in rescheduled arrivals, gate delays and ground-equipment breakdowns in the wake of a Jan. 4 winter storm that deposited 8 in. of snow there."


Can any of the termianls be expanded to handle additional aircrafts.


The problem in this case wasn't so much the facilities, but the management of the facilities, the "we're total worthless idiots" standard of the Port Authority.
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2004
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Sun Jan 14, 2018 6:56 am

varsity wrote:
MO11 wrote:
Only problem is that transit vehicles (whether bus or rail) don't offer space for luggage (outside of putting your backpack on the seat next to you). At least on the NJT commuter cars have some space.


That is true. I am already bracing myself for the stinkeye on the LIRR for my trip to JFK in April. Gonna try to get out there before Mr. Slate blows the whistle.


A bit off the aviation side but related to JFK itself...the Q10 bus route serving JFK uses a dedicated fleet. I'm surprised that some spots aren't dedicated there for luggage.

Now, as for the storm issue, the PANYNJ needs to get with the operators of terminals and note that if gate space is available and the gate can handle the aircraft in question and flight in nature (i.e., JFK has five or six A380-capable gates, T2 cannot handle international flights unless pre-cleared, T5 cannot handle such flights either except at Gates 25-30, and T8 can only handle such on Concourse B or Gate 47, and nothing longer than a B772 at Gates 1, 3, 5, and 7), such must be handled in an emergency situation (currently, only T4 handles anyone in an emergency, and T4 is also the only terminal open 24/7).
 
EWR777
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 3:06 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:01 pm

LH is bringing the A350 to EWR from MUC effective March 25.

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... f-11jan18/
 
VC10er
Posts: 3633
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:44 pm

lesfalls wrote:
airportlover wrote:
YYZLGA wrote:

Part of the problem is that New York's winds are a bit more complicated than Atlanta's, so the airports need crosswind runways, which makes it harder to squeeze in as many runways on a site. But clearly a lot of JFK's space is poorly used. One difference with Atlanta is that in the late 70s, they made the decision to abandon the existing (fairly substantial) terminal entirely and build a new ultra-modern facility from scratch. It became the standard for airports to this day and obviously it's served them well. The more piecemeal approach hasn't worked so well in New York. The other issue is that JFK really wasn't that busy until the last few years. Until JetBlue started, it really was only crowded during the peak periods for overseas flights. So it didn't need extra capacity in the same way. But like so many things in New York these days, the huge capacity reserves from the gigantic infrastructure built before 1970 have finally been used up.


Yes, the winds are a logical explanation for the crosswind runways. And yes again, New York has finally reached the capacity it was so lucky to have built for it 40-50 years ago. We need another era of infrastructure building, and I do not care how much money it costs. We need to significantly increase capacity and rebuild nearly everything in the NYC area. There are literally no good major infrastructural pieces in New York. The people of the 60s did us good to build all of that "extra@ capacity and we owe it to them to build for future generations. I do not really care how they pay for it because we already pay ridiculous taxes. I mean, our money has to be somewhere, and eventually residents of the area will demand improved infrastructure without tax increases. I actually think the failing infrastructure in New York may push the city into decline. That would be such a shame. We have been thriving for years now, but the infrastructural failures are becoming too much to handle. Everyday there is another train, ferry, or airport issue, and residents are getting fed up. While this disaster occurs, New York area residents, particularly property-owning suburbanites, continue to be taxed like crazy. Property taxes are out of control, and we get some of the worst infrastructure. I really do appreciate the vast network and usability of the region's transit network, but it has to work to properly benefit the region. And it just isn't right now.

I agree that the piecemeal approach New York has taken is flat out dumb and wasteful. Every new project requires millions of dollars worth of review before even starting. Most of these projects never start or sit half finished for years. If JFK had just been completely rebuilt in the 60s or 70s, adding capacity now would not seem as daunting. In fact, we may not have even needed more capacity, just some renovations. Same thing goes for EWR and definitely LGA. Also, the entire phase thing drives me off the wall. They are building the second avenue subway in four little 30-block phases. The first phase took 10 years. So will it be 30-40 years till we see a completed subway if it ever is completed???? I mean, they used to build huge subway lines in a year or two. New York needs to take a new approach to building infrastructure. I am not saying return to the horrendous working conditions of the past, but we need to cut costs and improve efficiency. Also, the MTA, PANYNJ, and NJT need to become one operation. Add New York Waterway to that and the gazillions of private bus companies operating from suburbs. It should be one agency that covers the ENTIRE network, from ferries to buses to roads to trains to airports to donkeys, I really don't care. But it is time for the New York area to become unified in its bureaucracy. I also support ending the city's extra income tax, and CT and NJ residents should pay their own state taxes, not New York taxes. This would create fairness among the states, and the city would be the ultimate beneficiary. We should not make it easier to live in the suburbs in this era of climate change. Sorry for my rant, but it must be said.


Finally someone has the courage to say it. Not many New Yorkers will state the truth regarding the issues that surround New York city with transportation and the ridiculous amount of Inequality/bad infrastructure that exists in the city . It is obvious in a way though as it is much easier and cooler to state that you are from New York then state its negatives because of its "incredible" reputation. As a New Yorker who has just moved abroad and who only was in New York a week ago (I actually even got stuck in the Snow storm even) I have completely changed my image of the airport. Before having left I had a more positive picture pf JFK but now living somewhere else (that being MXP) I see how bad the Port Authority and New York truly is. The way the PA dealt with the storm and still on a normal day how they deal with passengers is absurd. In the end there really is no need for them to improve customer service and expand their facilities to handle more traffic as thats more costly when they can be instead making more money from delays and higher the price of slots. At the same time staff at the airport tend to be very rude and inconsistent (I myself am close friends with a check-in agent at JFK and he is one of the very few exceptions when it comes to friendliness and careness at JFK from experience). I'm not trying to be purely mean towards JFK as I started spotting there and I met many new friends there (nonethless in that time I still received much criticism from the PA about this "hobby" how it is a security threat even though I was practically there every weekend!) and I wish they would raise their standards of quality and friendliness to people who actually want to work in the aviation industry/have a hobby of aviation. At the end of the day it just seems purely about making the big money for the people at the top while the rest of the population has problems.

Cheers,
Lesfalls


I’m a born and raised New York City boy. I will defend this city with great zeal because NYC is one of the greatest cities in the world. However I would be FIRST in line to complain about the Port Authority. They are indeed inept and corrupt. One only need to go through the bus terminal. Try using the men’s room for a real treat! I will also admit that I miss some of the grit of the NYC of my childhood and sometimes will watch something like The French Connection to remember. Frankly the city has become too rich, I’m considering retirement in The Bronx.
I do believe a better future awaits us here when it comes to airports and futuristic mass transit- but it will be for another generation, I won’t live to see it.
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
stlgph
Posts: 10462
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 16, 2018 2:52 pm

The New York Post editorial calls for JFK privatization.

https://nypost.com/2018/01/16/the-time- ... k-airport/

They do raise a good point and a good idea - remote gates similar to LAX to help terminal gate overcrowding to help ease weather delays.
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
Jshank83
Posts: 1944
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Tue Jan 23, 2018 8:20 pm

Quick question for you all. I am flying into NYC (probably staying in times square area), anyway I made this trip last year and getting a cab out of LGA was a disaster. So, has it gotten any better or should I fly into EWR? Flying out of LGA wasn't as big a deal. JFK isn't a nonstop option so it is one of those two. Thanks for your help in advance. If it matters I would fly WN/DL into LGA or WN into EWR.
 
stlgph
Posts: 10462
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Wed Jan 24, 2018 3:11 pm

It entirely depends on time and situation.
As of late, I've been lucky.

Coming back for Thanksgiving and Christmas I was out the door and walked all the way down and was in a car less than 10 minutes.
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
Jshank83
Posts: 1944
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Wed Jan 24, 2018 3:15 pm

stlgph wrote:
It entirely depends on time and situation.
As of late, I've been lucky.

Coming back for Thanksgiving and Christmas I was out the door and walked all the way down and was in a car less than 10 minutes.


Thanks. I will probably be getting in at 11 pm it looks like so maybe that will have less traffic, although that might mean less cabs?
 
stlgph
Posts: 10462
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Wed Jan 24, 2018 3:33 pm

You're welcome.

There will be plenty of cabs to go around at that time of night. Everyone's coming in for the night.
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 4946
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: NYC Area Aviation Thread (JFK/LGA/EWR/ISP/SWF/HPN) - 2018

Wed Jan 24, 2018 4:26 pm

The airports will not get any better until you remove the PA.

JFK has improved somewhat because every terminal is privatized.

LGA is getting rebuilt because every terminal is now privatized.

Terminal A will NEVER get built (and contrary to one posters constant assertions, terminal construction has not started and has no date for starting) until it is privatized

The Port Authority is a corrupt, bloated bi state organization. You take the worst of two corrupt, high tax, overspent states and make a joint organization and you get the PA.

Every project they run is a day late, a dollar short and woefully underwhelming.

If there is ever a new runway in the NY region (a big if) it will be because one of the two states has a big character governor with large ambitions and appreciates a splashy project like a new runway. Sounds like Cuomo right? But even he isnt pushing a runway. And his time might have run out for splashy projects: NYS has a large deficit, a new tax code working against it, and a failing subway that needs attention.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos