Page 1 of 3

Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 2:25 am
by jfklganyc
Just arriving...

Mix of old and new. Narrow walkways between concourses. Up and down. Low ceilings. Pillars and escalators with no clear line of sight anywhere. Homeless against pillars in baggage claim.

It is functional, but not worthy of a crown jewel hub for one of the worlds largest airlines.

So why does UA stick with it instead of investing?

Just to add...there are 9 pillars of various shapes and widths around one claim with low ceilings. It is like a dungeon painted white

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:19 am
by rssgvegas
jfklganyc wrote:
Just arriving...

Mix of old and new. Narrow walkways between concourses. Up and down. Low ceilings. Pillars and escalators with no clear line of sight anywhere. Homeless against pillars in baggage claim.

It is functional, but not worthy of a crown jewel hub for one of the worlds largest airlines.

So why does UA stick with it instead of investing?

Just to add...there are 9 pillars of various shapes and widths around one claim with low ceilings. It is like a dungeon painted white



United just finished with a $120 million renovation of Terminal C. It's roughly a year old.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:24 am
by B737900ER
Because it would cost eleventy billion dollars and take 25 years. This is PANYNJ we’re talking about.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 8:15 am
by Pyrex
Really not sure what are on about (and just flew out of it yesterday) - has to be one of the more modern and spacious terminals in any NYC airport. Off the top of my head, only the AA terminal at JFK is better (but you have way less connection options, and to deal with the Van Wyck).

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 12:11 pm
by jfklganyc
You think the arrivals areas, check in area and security area are some of the most modern in the region?

Just want to make sure I understand?

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 12:20 pm
by Bricktop
Really? I think Terminal C is perfectly fine
Terminal B is crap, and so is the soon to be replaced Terminal A..

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 12:30 pm
by Delta757MD88
As someone who spots at EWR a lot and flies out of there quite frequently here are my thoughts:
-C has gotten much better, the airside is quite nice now especially C1 and C3, the securtiy check areas are pretty much brand new, except for the one being finished. UA just re-did most of their check-in areas and there quite nice now.
-B is standard, nothing to write home about, but the security areas are a mess. But it gets the job done and the customs facility is very good.
-A, probably the worst terminal. The UAX portion (A2) is absolultely dreadful, sometimes I even consider going through security at C and taking the free intra-terminal shuttle. I can't wait for the new terminal two. A is horrific.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 12:38 pm
by Cointrin330
Terminal C opened in the late 1980s and was expanded significantly since then. Not sure what you are talking about. The dining areas and shops have been remodeled and it has been improved substantially, but more cosmetic changes coming to the check in areas. They are not going to demolish it. The PANYNJ is working on multi-billion dollar upgrades to LGA and looking to do the same at JFK. Newark is getting a new Terminal A. Terminal C, of all of EWR's terminals, is the one least in need for being replaced.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 1:07 pm
by jfklganyc
You are comparing it next to two dogs. Out of the 3 terminals at EWR, it is the best.

It is not a modern, 2020 terminal for a crown jewel hub.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 1:36 pm
by BC77008
I'm not sure what people expect airports to deliver. Newark has plenty of places to dine, airline lounges to relax in (for a price), plenty of places to fire up a laptop or charge a device, places to shop, and plenty of hotels nearby. Is Newark Singapore-Changi? Absolutely not! Here in the U.S. people want to simply get through the airport and on to the airplane; if they want to spend all afternoon lingering in a butterfly exhibit, they’ll go to a butterfly exhibit.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 1:46 pm
by lowfareair
I think terminal C is perfectly adequate for its purpose. Could it be better, sure, but compared to (most of) the terminals at NYC's other 2 airports, it's definitely decent.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:01 pm
by drdisque
Honestly, even compare it to UA's other hubs:

T1 at ORD is more dated pretty much everywhere, just easier to navigate. Check in is fine, very functional, but not "nice" or modern by any stretch. Security is adequate but only because UA forced staff ups. When TSA was understaffed the shortcomings of the security design were very glaring (although still better than ORD T3).

DEN uses common landside. Airside concourse B is maybe more spacious but doesn't have the same level of amenities or modernities of EWR C

IAD, common landside, and, well, you know C/D, far worse than EWR C.

IAH C is better than EWR C by most metrics (other than being somewhat labyrinthine) but honestly not by much, the concourses are wider, but it's a really big awkward terminal.

SFO T3 is cramped, and has an average level of amenities.

LAX T7/8 is cramped and outdated throughout (although I know they're working on cosmetic updates and renovations there, at least airside).Check-in/Security is terrible.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:27 pm
by notconcerned
Not sure why UA needs to redo EWR Terminal C considering that there has been lots of investment made in after security concessions, seating, and new Polaris lounge. TSA security has been completely remodeled, much faster and shorter lines. Maybe it's missing a few art pieces and the grand views that other modern terminals have, but like the OP said, it's functional.

Not sure what other US3 carrier hub is that much or significantly nicer than EWR Terminal C. I can only think of AA JFK T8, but that's because the terminal is under-utilized.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:35 pm
by FriscoHeavy
jfklganyc wrote:
You are comparing it next to two dogs. Out of the 3 terminals at EWR, it is the best.

It is not a modern, 2020 terminal for a crown jewel hub.



Airside of EWR Terminal C is actually very nice. Many restaurants, adequately wide concourses, etc. I don't mind being there at all.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:39 pm
by AaronPGH
I actually really like C. Have never had a problem finding quiet space to sit, and it has a lot of good food / amenities. Plus, security has been fast every time.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:44 pm
by jasoncrh
When was the last time you were at LAX United? They've COMPLETELY redone the check in and security area. It's much better and nicer than it's ever been. It definitely use to be a disaster, but nowadays it's nice, spacious, and airy.

drdisque wrote:
Honestly, even compare it to UA's other hubs:

T1 at ORD is more dated pretty much everywhere, just easier to navigate. Check in is fine, very functional, but not "nice" or modern by any stretch. Security is adequate but only because UA forced staff ups. When TSA was understaffed the shortcomings of the security design were very glaring (although still better than ORD T3).

DEN uses common landside. Airside concourse B is maybe more spacious but doesn't have the same level of amenities or modernities of EWR C

IAD, common landside, and, well, you know C/D, far worse than EWR C.

IAH C is better than EWR C by most metrics (other than being somewhat labyrinthine) but honestly not by much, the concourses are wider, but it's a really big awkward terminal.

SFO T3 is cramped, and has an average level of amenities.

LAX T7/8 is cramped and outdated throughout (although I know they're working on cosmetic updates and renovations there, at least airside).Check-in/Security is terrible.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:44 pm
by Polot
I remember not too long ago when Terminal C was basically the nicest terminal in the NYC area...

Terminal C is not some grand amazing white palace, but it is not a dump and perfectly functional. No need to spend billions (and years of headaches for UA) to raze and replace it.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:53 pm
by codc10
Perhaps in 20 or so years when it has outlasted its useful life, but until then, no.

IMO, it’s an above-average facility. Not the best, but far from the worst. EWR C is often called a “dump”, but I think that’s more because of anti-UA/EWR/New Jersey bias than actual shortcomings of the Terminal C facility. No better or worse than lots of US airports.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 4:51 pm
by spinotter
jfklganyc wrote:
You are comparing it next to two dogs. Out of the 3 terminals at EWR, it is the best.

It is not a modern, 2020 terminal for a crown jewel hub.


Yes, but if you are thinking HKG, SIN, or ICN, you are never going to get it at EWR. Terminal A is a mess. C is not too bad for an American airport.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:00 pm
by spinotter
jfklganyc wrote:
You are comparing it next to two dogs. Out of the 3 terminals at EWR, it is the best.

It is not a modern, 2020 terminal for a crown jewel hub.


Yes, but if you are thinking HKG, SIN, or ICN, you are never going to get it at EWR. Terminal A is a mess. C is not too bad for an American airport.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:01 pm
by kimimm19
There's a reason why EWR and most of the major airports including ORD and IAD rank low on the best airports survey...

America is not willing to invest in public transport services in comparison to pretty much everywhere else in the world. It's just how it is.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:02 pm
by kaitakfan
EWR is not great but it’s not as bad as many other airports around the USA. That’s not saying much though. For all the downsides of EWR, atleast you don’t have to worry about remote stand deplaning or boarding like I always seem to get in FRA or Dubai.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:07 pm
by ikramerica
Arrivals halls a us airports generally stink all around. Low ceilings, narrow halls, etc. US airports are all about the departure. Seems weird because wouldn’t a city want to put a pretty face on the gateway INTO their city?

Exceptions are Tampa and MCO where the central terminal is non-sterile so everyone gets the same experience coming and going.

As for EWR, as a hub for UA, the hub experience is fine. It’s spacious and has plenty of dining and sitting space to spend time during transfers. The clubs were crowded but I think they are addressing that. Haven’t been in a while. But connecting through EWR was always pleasant. When I grew up in the area, getting in and out and airport pickups weren’t so wonderful though.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:20 pm
by dmstorm22
I honestly think airside TC is really nice. The C-2 concourse is a bit tight, but C1 and C3 are perfectly fine (C3 especially).

There is still some construction going on, mainly to improve the security areas.

Check in at the Premier Level 3 are nice, open, easy. Regular check-in on Level 2 is a bit cramped.

Major renovations in NY take forever. EWR TC is like 8th in line in NY for a makeover. Out of all the ostensible 'hub' terminals in the NY area, to me only T5 at JFK can be argued as being better.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:24 pm
by FlyHossD
jfklganyc wrote:
Just arriving...

Mix of old and new. Narrow walkways between concourses. Up and down. Low ceilings. Pillars and escalators with no clear line of sight anywhere. Homeless against pillars in baggage claim.

It is functional, but not worthy of a crown jewel hub for one of the worlds largest airlines.

So why does UA stick with it instead of investing?

Just to add...there are 9 pillars of various shapes and widths around one claim with low ceilings. It is like a dungeon painted white


So you feel the need for an open, airy, spacious baggage claim?

I'll agree that the baggage claim area at EWR Terminal C has plenty of pillars, but C is the best of the EWR terminals. And it's the NY/NJ Port Authority that owns the terminal - not UA. If it was that simple, UA wouldn't still have the "temporary" trailer-trash nature of C and D at IAD.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:25 pm
by msp747
kimimm19 wrote:
There's a reason why EWR and most of the major airports including ORD and IAD rank low on the best airports survey...

America is not willing to invest in public transport services in comparison to pretty much everywhere else in the world. It's just how it is.

It's not just the airports, the airlines have to commit to the projects too.

Both sides also need to be careful, or you end up with airports like IAD and MIA with really high costs. I think that's the biggest reason why UA and MWAA won't push ahead on replacing C/D at IAD. They are still trying to reign in costs after their last building spree. Concourse B shows what could be though when they finally get around to building a new C/D.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:29 pm
by Billthe3rd
For everyone complaining about the current state of EWR, Do you live there? Its an Airport, Your there for a few hours. Your will survive. Once JFK and LGA are completed, you might see EWR completely redone.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:37 pm
by hawaiian717
I can't comment on EWR as I've never been there, but the subject line of this thread is preposterous. It proposes "leveling" the terminal, and presumably building a new one from scratch, but that's very difficult to do. If you're going to tear down the facility, the flights using the existing building have to go somewhere else. And there's generally nowhere else to go at an existing airport. You'd have to have the land to build a new facility first, then you can move out of the old one and reuse that space for something else. That's essentially what ONT did several years ago, building brand new Terminal 2 and 4 to replace the old facility. SAN is planning something similar to replace Terminal 1: The old commuter terminal and some cargo facilities will be torn down and a new Terminal 1 will be built there in phases, creating a new space for current T1 airlines to move in to as construction moves westward onto the site of the existing Terminal 1 which will ultimately be torn down.

The only other thing you can do is a piecemeal renovation of the facilities, closing small areas at a time for renovation. This is what's happening at LAX as Southwest's Terminal 1 is redone and Delta plans to remodel Terminal 3.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:50 pm
by CALAV8R
drdisque wrote:
Honestly, even compare it to UA's other hubs:

T1 at ORD is more dated pretty much everywhere, just easier to navigate. Check in is fine, very functional, but not "nice" or modern by any stretch. Security is adequate but only because UA forced staff ups. When TSA was understaffed the shortcomings of the security design were very glaring (although still better than ORD T3).

DEN uses common landside. Airside concourse B is maybe more spacious but doesn't have the same level of amenities or modernities of EWR C

IAD, common landside, and, well, you know C/D, far worse than EWR C.

IAH C is better than EWR C by most metrics (other than being somewhat labyrinthine) but honestly not by much, the concourses are wider, but it's a really big awkward terminal.

SFO T3 is cramped, and has an average level of amenities.

LAX T7/8 is cramped and outdated throughout (although I know they're working on cosmetic updates and renovations there, at least airside).Check-in/Security is terrible.


Hey mate, I think you're spot on! The only exception being LAX which has been completely revamped:
https://www.greaterinflight.com/single-post/2018/01/06/Lights-Camera-T7-%E2%80%93-Uniteds-LAX-is-in-the-Spotlight

EWR is a huge way forward from where it used to be. I imagine the post-creator is just talking about baggage claim?

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:57 pm
by NYPECO
Terminal C is the best terminal at Newark. Not really sure what OP is referring to. It was renovated and now has more shops, seating, restaurants, and entertainment areas along with the Polaris lounge. I don't recall any part that has low ceilings, that's in terminal A.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:59 pm
by winginit
kimimm19 wrote:
There's a reason why EWR and most of the major airports including ORD and IAD rank low on the best airports survey...

America is not willing to invest in public transport services in comparison to pretty much everywhere else in the world. It's just how it is.


That's false. It's simply that other countries can concentrate their public transport investments often to one or two facilities. How quick people are to compare say ORD or IAH to HKG, SIN, or DXB. Can you imagine if the US could concentrate our investment to only a single facility like those countries can? But no, half of the Top 10 busiest airports in the world are in the United States, and even within a single US state or even within a single US city like New York that infrastructure spending needs to be split between multiple facilities.

So no, America very much is willing to invest in public transport services - we simply don't have the luxury of concentration.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 6:02 pm
by Junction
Damn these pesky first world problems.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 6:08 pm
by jph7291
Echoing those above. UA's EWR C is in no need of being leveled, plain and simple. It is easily one of their best hub facilities and one of the nicest in the NYC metro area, even before the recent renovations. There are MANY other places that need more attention at this point. And not just at United...

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 6:30 pm
by drdisque
jasoncrh wrote:
When was the last time you were at LAX United? They've COMPLETELY redone the check in and security area. It's much better and nicer than it's ever been. It definitely use to be a disaster, but nowadays it's nice, spacious, and airy.

drdisque wrote:
Honestly, even compare it to UA's other hubs:

T1 at ORD is more dated pretty much everywhere, just easier to navigate. Check in is fine, very functional, but not "nice" or modern by any stretch. Security is adequate but only because UA forced staff ups. When TSA was understaffed the shortcomings of the security design were very glaring (although still better than ORD T3).

DEN uses common landside. Airside concourse B is maybe more spacious but doesn't have the same level of amenities or modernities of EWR C

IAD, common landside, and, well, you know C/D, far worse than EWR C.

IAH C is better than EWR C by most metrics (other than being somewhat labyrinthine) but honestly not by much, the concourses are wider, but it's a really big awkward terminal.

SFO T3 is cramped, and has an average level of amenities.

LAX T7/8 is cramped and outdated throughout (although I know they're working on cosmetic updates and renovations there, at least airside).Check-in/Security is terrible.



Yes, to be fair the last time I was in LAX T7 was late 2013. I wasn't aware that the renovations they were doing were as significant as you've described.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 6:31 pm
by RyanairGuru
Agree with everyone above who said that after T6 at JFK it is the best terminal in New York.

I suspect the OP is pot stirring........

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 6:59 pm
by ScottB
notconcerned wrote:
Not sure what other US3 carrier hub is that much or significantly nicer than EWR Terminal C. I can only think of AA JFK T8, but that's because the terminal is under-utilized.


DTW McNamara Terminal by a mile -- but it has the benefit of being about 15 years newer. I'd say BOS Terminal A is also a bit nicer if one is willing to call BOS a DL hub now. In the UA network IAH Terminal E is quite a bit nicer but the rest of IAH (especially Terminal B) is really hit-or-miss. DEN is also nicer and a better-designed terminal to boot.

But the whole bit about a need to "level" Terminal C is just preposterous and smacks of an agenda to disparage an airport the OP doesn't like because it's not a "real NYC airport" due to it being located in NJ. It's still one of the nicer airline facilities in NYC and really the only one large enough (with 50+ gates) to host a large hub operation.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:05 pm
by WorldFlier
jfklganyc wrote:
Just arriving...

Mix of old and new. Narrow walkways between concourses. Up and down. Low ceilings. Pillars and escalators with no clear line of sight anywhere. Homeless against pillars in baggage claim.

It is functional, but not worthy of a crown jewel hub for one of the worlds largest airlines.

So why does UA stick with it instead of investing?

Just to add...there are 9 pillars of various shapes and widths around one claim with low ceilings. It is like a dungeon painted white


Here in NJ we have the most expensive road per mile...how much do you think a brand new terminal would cost?

Oh and where would the planes go during construction? You'd have to level terminal A and build something there first..

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:27 pm
by InnsbruckFlyer
I personally like the C3 pier at Terminal C, the one with gates C120 - C139. It's pretty much only used for international flights, IIRC. It's modern, airy, and has a ton of good dining options.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:48 pm
by catiii
B737900ER wrote:
Because it would cost eleventy billion dollars and take 25 years. This is PANYNJ we’re talking about.


Except DL did it pretty quick at JFK and LGA.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:55 pm
by ready5bird
jfklganyc wrote:
Just arriving...

Mix of old and new. Narrow walkways between concourses. Up and down. Low ceilings. Pillars and escalators with no clear line of sight anywhere. Homeless against pillars in baggage claim.

It is functional, but not worthy of a crown jewel hub for one of the worlds largest airlines.

So why does UA stick with it instead of investing?

Just to add...there are 9 pillars of various shapes and widths around one claim with low ceilings. It is like a dungeon painted white




The baggage claim area is probably most dated area of Terminal C but more than functional. After all it is a baggage claim and very close to the parking garage or ground transportation so then waiting for the bags, one doesn't spend much time there.

United is on the finishing side of a significant investment on airside experience. New lounges plenty of places to eat and drink and plenty of power for today's tech. Dating myself I can remember the days of hunting for receptacles for the heavy laptop. Security is much better too. Asia style airports in USA just not going to happen especially since most older metro areas just don't have the real estate to build on.

Is it a crown jewel, no, however for a terminal that was originally built in the 1970's (main building) IMHO United is doing a good job with it.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 8:03 pm
by Blimpie
Homeless against pillars in baggage claim.


I'm pretty sure a brand new shiny multi-billion dollar replacement terminal isn't going to fix that. Perhaps, you should direct that complaint toward the airport authority (or airport police) than UA.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 8:14 pm
by UA772IAD
winginit wrote:
kimimm19 wrote:
There's a reason why EWR and most of the major airports including ORD and IAD rank low on the best airports survey...

America is not willing to invest in public transport services in comparison to pretty much everywhere else in the world. It's just how it is.


That's false. It's simply that other countries can concentrate their public transport investments often to one or two facilities. How quick people are to compare say ORD or IAH to HKG, SIN, or DXB. Can you imagine if the US could concentrate our investment to only a single facility like those countries can? But no, half of the Top 10 busiest airports in the world are in the United States, and even within a single US state or even within a single US city like New York that infrastructure spending needs to be split between multiple facilities.

So no, America very much is willing to invest in public transport services - we simply don't have the luxury of concentration.


I don't think that's quite accurate either. Airports do receive federal funding, however, much of the burden of responsibility is on the state or local level; and certain localities have made airport improvements such as renovations or terminal construction visible priorities. Take a look at San Francisco, Detroit, Denver (in the 90s) as some examples. That being said, I think the US, broadly speaking, views its airports in a more utilitarian function; a means to the destination and not necessarily a destination in itself.

By the way, only 3 US airports are in the top ten by passenger movements: ATL, LAX, and ORD. So it's not a matter of concentration. The 10th busiest airport in China, HGH- saw more passenger movements than the 4th busiest in the US- DFW.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 8:17 pm
by UA772IAD
jasoncrh wrote:
When was the last time you were at LAX United? They've COMPLETELY redone the check in and security area. It's much better and nicer than it's ever been. It definitely use to be a disaster, but nowadays it's nice, spacious, and airy.

drdisque wrote:
Honestly, even compare it to UA's other hubs:

T1 at ORD is more dated pretty much everywhere, just easier to navigate. Check in is fine, very functional, but not "nice" or modern by any stretch. Security is adequate but only because UA forced staff ups. When TSA was understaffed the shortcomings of the security design were very glaring (although still better than ORD T3).

DEN uses common landside. Airside concourse B is maybe more spacious but doesn't have the same level of amenities or modernities of EWR C

IAD, common landside, and, well, you know C/D, far worse than EWR C.

IAH C is better than EWR C by most metrics (other than being somewhat labyrinthine) but honestly not by much, the concourses are wider, but it's a really big awkward terminal.

SFO T3 is cramped, and has an average level of amenities.

LAX T7/8 is cramped and outdated throughout (although I know they're working on cosmetic updates and renovations there, at least airside).Check-in/Security is terrible.


It's definitely an improvement, considering what they had to work with. That being said, aesthetically to me, it still looks incredibly sterile. I don't think they can achieve an airy feeling without leveling the terminal though...

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 9:00 pm
by kimimm19
winginit wrote:
kimimm19 wrote:
There's a reason why EWR and most of the major airports including ORD and IAD rank low on the best airports survey...

America is not willing to invest in public transport services in comparison to pretty much everywhere else in the world. It's just how it is.


That's false. It's simply that other countries can concentrate their public transport investments often to one or two facilities. How quick people are to compare say ORD or IAH to HKG, SIN, or DXB. Can you imagine if the US could concentrate our investment to only a single facility like those countries can? But no, half of the Top 10 busiest airports in the world are in the United States, and even within a single US state or even within a single US city like New York that infrastructure spending needs to be split between multiple facilities.

So no, America very much is willing to invest in public transport services - we simply don't have the luxury of concentration.


Please... With the amount of people that fly through US airports, it should be easy to get the funds to improve facilities through a small fee.

So no, there is plenty of opportunity but all funds that could go to these projects are pocketed by airports and airlines.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 9:10 pm
by winginit
kimimm19 wrote:
Please... With the amount of people that fly through US airports, it should be easy to get the funds to improve facilities through a small fee.


You mean like... landing fees? What a novel concept... if only we had those...

kimimm19 wrote:
So no, there is plenty of opportunity but all funds that could go to these projects are pocketed by airports and airlines.


Airports are government entities... their revenue streams aren't 'pocketed' as profits...

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 9:43 pm
by jfklganyc
RyanairGuru wrote:
Agree with everyone above who said that after T6 at JFK it is the best terminal in New York.

I suspect the OP is pot stirring........


Terminal 6 was Leveled! 8 years ago

~Pot Stirrer

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 9:50 pm
by strfyr51
drdisque wrote:
Honestly, even compare it to UA's other hubs:

T1 at ORD is more dated pretty much everywhere, just easier to navigate. Check in is fine, very functional, but not "nice" or modern by any stretch. Security is adequate but only because UA forced staff ups. When TSA was understaffed the shortcomings of the security design were very glaring (although still better than ORD T3).

DEN uses common landside. Airside concourse B is maybe more spacious but doesn't have the same level of amenities or modernities of EWR C

IAD, common landside, and, well, you know C/D, far worse than EWR C.

IAH C is better than EWR C by most metrics (other than being somewhat labyrinthine) but honestly not by much, the concourses are wider, but it's a really big awkward terminal.

SFO T3 is cramped, and has an average level of amenities.

LAX T7/8 is cramped and outdated throughout (although I know they're working on cosmetic updates and renovations there, at least airside).Check-in/Security is terrible.

I've flown out of ORD's Terminal 1 for years and do NOT see a problem with it. Yeah it's 30+ years old but to demolish it and start over??
Not a snowball's chance in Hell!! The terminal is fully functional, easily maintained and inspected..

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2018 10:18 pm
by SurlyBonds
spinotter wrote:

Yes, but if you are thinking HKG, SIN, or ICN, you are never going to get it at EWR. Terminal A is a mess. C is not too bad for an American airport.


Ladies and gentlemen, in a nutshell, we have the case for American decline.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2018 12:27 am
by drdisque
strfyr51 wrote:
drdisque wrote:
Honestly, even compare it to UA's other hubs:

T1 at ORD is more dated pretty much everywhere, just easier to navigate. Check in is fine, very functional, but not "nice" or modern by any stretch. Security is adequate but only because UA forced staff ups. When TSA was understaffed the shortcomings of the security design were very glaring (although still better than ORD T3).

DEN uses common landside. Airside concourse B is maybe more spacious but doesn't have the same level of amenities or modernities of EWR C

IAD, common landside, and, well, you know C/D, far worse than EWR C.

IAH C is better than EWR C by most metrics (other than being somewhat labyrinthine) but honestly not by much, the concourses are wider, but it's a really big awkward terminal.

SFO T3 is cramped, and has an average level of amenities.

LAX T7/8 is cramped and outdated throughout (although I know they're working on cosmetic updates and renovations there, at least airside).Check-in/Security is terrible.

I've flown out of ORD's Terminal 1 for years and do NOT see a problem with it. Yeah it's 30+ years old but to demolish it and start over??
Not a snowball's chance in Hell!! The terminal is fully functional, easily maintained and inspected..


Nowhere did I suggest that ORD T1 be demolished. I just said that EWR TC compared favorably to it. In fact T1 is good enough that it is retained in the ORD transformational redevelopment while T2 will be demolished and T3 will be heavily modified.

Re: Why doesnt UA level Terminal C EWR?

Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2018 1:31 am
by Natflyer
Billthe3rd wrote:
For everyone complaining about the current state of EWR, Do you live there? Its an Airport, Your there for a few hours. Your will survive. Once JFK and LGA are completed, you might see EWR completely redone.


JFK and LGA completed??? Is that ever going to happen?