Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
airporthistory
Topic Author
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 12:52 am

1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 11:43 am

Hi folks,

In 1989, a scheme was developed that saw the eventual elimination of DFW's semi-circular terminals, replacing them with linear concourses. I wrote a little post about it, featuring some cool pics and layouts: https://www.airporthistory.org/blue-concourse/1989-a-radical-redesign-of-dfw

In hindsight, should they have gone ahead with it? What do you think?
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 5910
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 11:46 am

Of course they should have

Just like Jfk should’ve went ahead with the Jfk 2000 plan

Instead both airports doubled down on an inherently dated design

One thing that DFW has going for it is space. they could do this tomorrow if they wanted to
 
RDUDDJI
Posts: 2209
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 4:42 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:21 pm

Missed opportunity. Now it would probably cost many times as much as it would have in the 70's (even if adjusted for inflation). All of the large airports that only have gates on one side of the concourse/pier are inefficient by design. MSP also comes to mind.

I think it would have been better if the somehow re-routed the roads (tunnels?) and made the concourses perpendicular to the RWY's (ala ATL). That would provide the best option for ramp traffic flow.
Sometimes we don't realize the good times when we're in them
 
BNAMealer
Posts: 775
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2019 8:03 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:43 pm

Huge mistake (understatement) they didn’t do this. This would’ve made DFW much more efficient for connections and would’ve made it surpass ATL as the most “efficient airport” in the US.
 
User avatar
DL747400
Posts: 931
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:04 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:51 pm

DFW absolutely should have begun the transformation from horseshoe to linear terminals back in the '90s. Instead, they had to spend $1 Billion USD on their new peoplemover Skylink and were still stuck with the mess of existing 1970's era horseshoe terminals and falling apart surface roadways connecting them. What a mess. Over the years, when I have had to travel to Dallas or connect through DFW, I always felt a bit sorry for folks who live there and have to use DFW as their primary airport.

I was connecting in AA's Terminal C about 6-months ago and it looked so tired and worn down. That reminds me, why were some of the DFW terminals renovated while others like C were not?
From First to Worst: The history of Airliners.net.

All posts reflect my opinions, not those of my employer or any other company.
 
dtremit
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 1:08 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:07 pm

To be contrarian -- I don't think DFW had the space to do a scheme like this *well*. If you look at the diagram in the linked article, two things jump out.

First, the proposed linear terminal was very narrow -- it's about the "width" of one of ATL's original fingers, which are miserable to navigate when they're crowded. It has to be that narrow to fit within the existing runways, taxiways, and the DFW International Parkway, and still accommodate planes on both sides. It wouldn't have had room inside for things like wide moving walkways that make *good* linear terminals (like DTW-A) work well.

Second, the design as shown only has 54 gates but takes up the space of two semicircle terminals. The semicircles have almost 40 each.

I think the design they ended up with in Terminal D is more efficient, and a better passenger experience than what they would have gotten here. The big missed opportunity is not building more terminals like D -- and eventually replacing the old semicircles. The current plans for Terminal F sound deeply uninspired.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 7754
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:07 pm

DL747400 wrote:
I always felt a bit sorry for folks who live there and have to use DFW as their primary airport.


DFW works better as an O&D airport than as a connecting airport -- but it's not 1974 anymore, and O&D is not the primary purpose.
 
dtremit
Posts: 166
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 1:08 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:09 pm

DL747400 wrote:
I was connecting in AA's Terminal C about 6-months ago and it looked so tired and worn down. That reminds me, why were some of the DFW terminals renovated while others like C were not?


I think C is planned for the same kind of renovation, it just hasn't happened yet. I get the sense that the design of those buildings makes renovating them difficult, disruptive, and slow.
 
Antarius
Posts: 2139
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:13 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
DL747400 wrote:
I always felt a bit sorry for folks who live there and have to use DFW as their primary airport.


DFW works better as an O&D airport than as a connecting airport -- but it's not 1974 anymore, and O&D is not the primary purpose.


I disagree. DFW used to work better for O&D, but now it is so easy to connect. What other major hub allows you to go from any gate to any gate in 10 minutes?
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
User avatar
gdg9
Posts: 1004
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:42 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:22 pm

DL747400 wrote:
. Over the years, when I have had to travel to Dallas or connect through DFW, I always felt a bit sorry for folks who live there and have to use DFW as their primary airport.

I was connecting in AA's Terminal C about 6-months ago and it looked so tired and worn down. That reminds me, why were some of the DFW terminals renovated while others like C were not?


While certainly I would agree the horseshoe design is dated, it is what it is. I don't find it hard using DFW as my home airport - there are nonstops to over 200 places, which very few airports can claim. Transferring terminals is easy with the Skylink train - no more than 9 minute ride to the furthest point. Certainly equal or easier than walking say 35 gates on a long linear terminal ala DTW. Even ATL with its linears has trains to transfer. I might add with several TSA checkpoints rather than one massive chokepoint for security it is very rare that I wait more than 5 minutes at security, PreCheck or normal. I travel about once a month. I would say my main complaint with DFW is the 40+ minute average waits for baggage when flying AA. UA/DL don't have these issues in my experience.

Your point on C is valid though - it is still a dated dump. All of the others have been renovated and modernized. C has not been yet. There is a long standing rumor that it was due to asbestos - that is not true, and I have that direct from the airport. I honestly am not sure why C was not yet renovated.
@dfwtower
 
Elementalism
Posts: 602
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:03 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:32 pm

RDUDDJI wrote:
Missed opportunity. Now it would probably cost many times as much as it would have in the 70's (even if adjusted for inflation). All of the large airports that only have gates on one side of the concourse/pier are inefficient by design. MSP also comes to mind.

I think it would have been better if the somehow re-routed the roads (tunnels?) and made the concourses perpendicular to the RWY's (ala ATL). That would provide the best option for ramp traffic flow.


I was shocked when they decided to build more parking + a hotel on the inside of the concourses at MSP. I always figured they would eventually pave it over and make the G, C, and A concourses accessible from both sides. Im guessing forecasts dont show enough growth at MSP for such an undertaking. And with expansion of terminal 2 and potential to move non-delta carriers there. That will be where expansion happens.
 
User avatar
fraspotter
Posts: 2261
Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 8:12 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:42 pm

gdg9 wrote:
DL747400 wrote:
. Over the years, when I have had to travel to Dallas or connect through DFW, I always felt a bit sorry for folks who live there and have to use DFW as their primary airport.

I was connecting in AA's Terminal C about 6-months ago and it looked so tired and worn down. That reminds me, why were some of the DFW terminals renovated while others like C were not?


While certainly I would agree the horseshoe design is dated, it is what it is. I don't find it hard using DFW as my home airport - there are nonstops to over 200 places, which very few airports can claim. Transferring terminals is easy with the Skylink train - no more than 9 minute ride to the furthest point. Certainly equal or easier than walking say 35 gates on a long linear terminal ala DTW. Even ATL with its linears has trains to transfer. I might add with several TSA checkpoints rather than one massive chokepoint for security it is very rare that I wait more than 5 minutes at security, PreCheck or normal. I travel about once a month. I would say my main complaint with DFW is the 40+ minute average waits for baggage when flying AA. UA/DL don't have these issues in my experience.

Your point on C is valid though - it is still a dated dump. All of the others have been renovated and modernized. C has not been yet. There is a long standing rumor that it was due to asbestos - that is not true, and I have that direct from the airport. I honestly am not sure why C was not yet renovated.



Another story line that got a lot of traction on this site and others was that Terminal C renovation was held off because anything they were going to do to C would be as part of a plan to build a Terminal F. Apparently upon completion of Terminal F, Terminal C would then be demolished and rebuild completely instead of simply renovating. Not sure how viable that plan is though (or if that's even the final plan) considering C is only getting older and more run down and work on F hasn't even started yet.
Last edited by fraspotter on Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The strength of the turbulence is directly proportional to the temperature of your coffee."

— Gunter's Second Law of Air Travel
 
mrbots
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:31 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:42 pm

Guess I'm in the minority. I like flying through DFW because it's so open and spread out with gates only on one side (and I almost always have to change terminals). Don't have to fight foot traffic from both sides going every direction. Also, the American regional terminal isn't like United's at Bush where they throw 30 gates into one not even that large of a waiting area with few restaurants then have to walk down stairs and through a small hallways to get to the plane.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3330
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:48 pm

gdg9 wrote:
DL747400 wrote:
. Over the years, when I have had to travel to Dallas or connect through DFW, I always felt a bit sorry for folks who live there and have to use DFW as their primary airport.

I was connecting in AA's Terminal C about 6-months ago and it looked so tired and worn down. That reminds me, why were some of the DFW terminals renovated while others like C were not?


While certainly I would agree the horseshoe design is dated, it is what it is. I don't find it hard using DFW as my home airport - there are nonstops to over 200 places, which very few airports can claim. Transferring terminals is easy with the Skylink train - no more than 9 minute ride to the furthest point. Certainly equal or easier than walking say 35 gates on a long linear terminal ala DTW. Even ATL with its linears has trains to transfer. I might add with several TSA checkpoints rather than one massive chokepoint for security it is very rare that I wait more than 5 minutes at security, PreCheck or normal. I travel about once a month. I would say my main complaint with DFW is the 40+ minute average waits for baggage when flying AA. UA/DL don't have these issues in my experience.

Your point on C is valid though - it is still a dated dump. All of the others have been renovated and modernized. C has not been yet. There is a long standing rumor that it was due to asbestos - that is not true, and I have that direct from the airport. I honestly am not sure why C was not yet renovated.


I agree, DFW is a breeze to go through. I have been going through DFW since its opening, and the Skytrain makes connections easy, easier than when AA had two terminals and connected them with the TrAAin system.

There was another redesign proposal by AA's former CEO Crandall to build a giant E shaped terminal on the west side on where Terminal D and F are and will be and either tear down A and C (then 2E and 3E) or turn them into any but terminals so Delta could not move into them.
 
bigb
Posts: 1105
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:58 pm

DFW isn’t that bad for connections at all. I really enjoy the airport because of its size and options on changing terminals which helps with dealing with foot traffic (I like walking to make transfers in DFW).

I have even used DFW as O/D and its great for that purpose too. Multiple TSA checkpoints which helps with having shorter lines.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3330
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:10 pm

Without the horseshoe, how else could AA cram 2 MD80s into certain gates? Tight fit, and they did power pushbacks back then.

Image
 
User avatar
chunhimlai
Posts: 596
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2015 11:03 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:52 pm

Not such silly compared to chunhim_lai’s one
 
toxtethogrady
Posts: 1861
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2000 12:33 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:54 pm

I recognize some of my work from back then. A grand scheme, but too much of a capital investment to have been practical.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1428
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:55 pm

No. This was a bad design imho.

Linear parallel concourses in the center of te airport after the pattern of ATL have proven to be the most efficient. DEN and IAD are being built out along that format. SLC is being rebuilt that way. ORD 21 will have some elements of the that design. MUC has a parallel midfield terminal. Even the last small terminal added CDG was built that way. ICN has a modification of the same design. I believe that even the new Beijing airport will have some parallel midfield terminals.
 
User avatar
airporthistory
Topic Author
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 12:52 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:32 pm

At the time, a fantastic color brochure was produced containing several beautiful artist's impressions of the project. I lost it in the early 1990s and have been looking for it ever since. I have asked DFW but they don't have it in their archives anymore. If anyone here can help me locate a copy let me know!
 
YouGeeElWhy
Posts: 492
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 3:42 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:33 pm

Uber and Lyft (and god willing self-driving cars) make the DFW horseshoes a better model.

It would interesting to see some postulating on how self-driving cars impact airport design.
 
usflyer msp
Posts: 3709
Joined: Tue May 23, 2000 11:50 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:42 pm

Antarius wrote:
What other major hub allows you to go from any gate to any gate in 10 minutes?


Any Gate to Any Gate in 10 min? At DFW?? I highly doubt that. Last time I was there my flight to HOU was cancelled and it took 15 min to get from B20 to E34 so I could attempt to get on the previous delayed flight to HOU.
 
User avatar
gdg9
Posts: 1004
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:42 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:48 pm

usflyer msp wrote:
Antarius wrote:
What other major hub allows you to go from any gate to any gate in 10 minutes?


Any Gate to Any Gate in 10 min? At DFW?? I highly doubt that. Last time I was there my flight to HOU was cancelled and it took 15 min to get from B20 to E34 so I could attempt to get on the previous delayed flight to HOU.


Pretty common with Skylink, unless there is some unforeseen delay.
@dfwtower
 
klakzky123
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 4:05 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 5:21 pm

Antarius wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
DL747400 wrote:
I always felt a bit sorry for folks who live there and have to use DFW as their primary airport.


DFW works better as an O&D airport than as a connecting airport -- but it's not 1974 anymore, and O&D is not the primary purpose.


I disagree. DFW used to work better for O&D, but now it is so easy to connect. What other major hub allows you to go from any gate to any gate in 10 minutes?


DTW? Its a single linear terminal with an indoor train. Linear terminals with good transportation are the way to go in my experience. DFW is fine but I wouldn't call it the most efficient transit experience.
 
NiMar
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2019 7:08 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 5:53 pm

jfklganyc wrote:
Of course they should have

Just like Jfk should’ve went ahead with the Jfk 2000 plan

Instead both airports doubled down on an inherently dated design

One thing that DFW has going for it is space. they could do this tomorrow if they wanted to


Google is not helping me on this JFK 2000 plan. Anything out there about this you can point my/our way?
 
Sslovtx87
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Nov 01, 2019 5:31 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 6:03 pm

Howdy folks! First post and DFW resident here...

While I agree that linear concourses with a people mover system (a la DTW) is more efficient, the addition of Skylink essentially accomplishes that same efficiency. Besides the obvious fact that the terminals are semicircular and are in separate buildings, Skylink efficiently connects the user to all gates quickly and requires minimal walking to the gate.

This is in addition to the added benefits to O&D passenger where the distance from entering the terminal to the gate can be as little as 150 feet.
 
26point2
Posts: 1097
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 6:01 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 6:12 pm

Your gate would still be occupied upon arrival.
 
Beechtobus
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 6:18 pm

Thanks for posting this, very cool. I think DFW did a very good job of turning lemons into lemonade and operates as a very efficient o and d and connecting airport. I have connected and started/ended trips there and being a Denverite by birth, I hate to admit traveling thru DFW is rarely a bad experience. Between the skylink and expanding/renovating the terminals over the years, they made a very good o and d airport into a very good connecting airport.

The only drawbacks to the current design is 1) the required maze of roads required to transport cars around the terminals. 2) AA is required to have far more check in counter space and staffing (and more TSA screening areas and staff) than would otherwise be required with a more centralized design. And 3) the design makes public rail transit less efficient than it should be. Once the train drops you off at the airport, you’re still a longish bus ride to your terminal.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 5910
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 6:21 pm

NiMar wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
Of course they should have

Just like Jfk should’ve went ahead with the Jfk 2000 plan

Instead both airports doubled down on an inherently dated design

One thing that DFW has going for it is space. they could do this tomorrow if they wanted to


Google is not helping me on this JFK 2000 plan. Anything out there about this you can point my/our way?



Single centered terminal with trains to satellites. Think TPA. That was closest existing design

“It will certainly take that kind of effort to mitigate Kennedy's reputation among travelers as one of the least welcoming airports in the world. The sense of hopelessness deepened in 1990 when the ambitious plan known as J.F.K. 2000, which called for an enormous central terminal, was scuttled, leaving as its legacy a $21 million baggage-handling system known as the ''tunnel to nowhere.''” NY Times

Article below is about the new development that actually occurred...but makes mention of JFK 2000

 
RDUDDJI
Posts: 2209
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 4:42 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 6:25 pm

Antarius wrote:

I disagree. DFW used to work better for O&D, but now it is so easy to connect. What other major hub allows you to go from any gate to any gate in 10 minutes?


Possible if you just happen to arrive/depart gates in the same concourse, or close to the train. Not even close to possible if you have to walk a few minutes to/from the train on each side and whatever time spent waiting for and riding said train. That's why DFW has a longer D-D MCT (40min) than some larger hubs (i.e. ATL, 35min).
Sometimes we don't realize the good times when we're in them
 
Beechtobus
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of

Fri Nov 01, 2019 6:33 pm

Antarius wrote:
I disagree. DFW used to work better for O&D, but now it is so easy to connect. What other major hub allows you to go from any gate to any gate in 10 minutes?


10 min?? Uh, no. From say E38 to B39, 20-25 min may be possible if you’re running.
 
Sslovtx87
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Nov 01, 2019 5:31 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 6:35 pm

Howdy folks! First post and DFW resident here...

While I agree that linear concourses with a people mover system (a la DTW) is more efficient, the addition of Skylink essentially accomplishes that same efficiency. Besides the obvious fact that the terminals are semicircular and are in separate buildings, Skylink efficiently connects the user to all gates quickly and requires minimal walking to the gate.

This is in addition to the added benefits to O&D passenger where the distance from entering the terminal to the gate can be as little as 150 feet.
 
DFW17L
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 2:53 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 7:51 pm

DFW has a lot of ground transportation infrastructure. Six major freeways (114, 121, 161, 183, 360, and 365), three rail lines (two light rail with stations at two of the terminals, and a heavy rail line to the south of the airport). I can't think of another hub fortress in the middle of a large city, that compares. Yes, I feel sorry for anyone dropping off a rental car.

With gates on one side of each terminal (with the exception of the B stinger), it is much more roomy than ATL, or similar airport terminals with gates on both sides.

I bet it gets more than a little close during the summer months at ATL:

Image
 
jasoncrh
Posts: 772
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:29 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:00 pm

This was very interesting and I was unaware of this - thank you!

One thing - the diagrams show that the proposed linear concourse was parallel to the road that bisects DFW airport's terminals. If it had been perpendicular, it would have gone across the roadway. The maps/ diagrams clearly show that the proposed terminal was parallel.

Also, you wrote "With it's semi-circular terminal buildings...". You should say "its" not "it's". It's, with the apostrophe, is a contraction for "it is". You want the possessive of "it", which is "it".

Other than that, very good.



airporthistory wrote:
Hi folks,

In 1989, a scheme was developed that saw the eventual elimination of DFW's semi-circular terminals, replacing them with linear concourses. I wrote a little post about it, featuring some cool pics and layouts: https://www.airporthistory.org/blue-concourse/1989-a-radical-redesign-of-dfw

In hindsight, should they have gone ahead with it? What do you think?
 
usflyer msp
Posts: 3709
Joined: Tue May 23, 2000 11:50 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:18 pm

gdg9 wrote:
usflyer msp wrote:
Antarius wrote:
What other major hub allows you to go from any gate to any gate in 10 minutes?


Any Gate to Any Gate in 10 min? At DFW?? I highly doubt that. Last time I was there my flight to HOU was cancelled and it took 15 min to get from B20 to E34 so I could attempt to get on the previous delayed flight to HOU.


Pretty common with Skylink, unless there is some unforeseen delay.


I see what the poster was talking about. DFW claims it is no longer than 9 minutes between any two points on the SkyLink but that doesn't include any walking required to get to the SkyLink station. It can take 10 minutes just to walk from from E-Statellite to the SkyLink. So No, All DFW gates are not less than 10 minutes apart.
 
User avatar
airporthistory
Topic Author
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 12:52 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:25 pm

Hi, thanks for your comments. Happy you enjoyed the post!

Regarding "perpendicular" and "parallel", you might have misread. As I wrote, the initial plan was to build three small concourses west and perpendicular to Int'l Parkway. They were very short and did not cross the spine road. This plan then evolved into one longer concourse west and parallel to Int'l Parkway, which is shown in the illustration and layout. Btw, I also have the layouts for the initial 1987 scheme. I will post those in the full DFW feature.

Regarding, "it's" and "its". Thanks, good catch! I know the rule. It was just a mistake.
Last edited by airporthistory on Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Antarius
Posts: 2139
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of

Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:26 pm

Beechtobus wrote:
Antarius wrote:
I disagree. DFW used to work better for O&D, but now it is so easy to connect. What other major hub allows you to go from any gate to any gate in 10 minutes?


10 min?? Uh, no. From say E38 to B39, 20-25 min may be possible if you’re running.


It isn't that far. B1 - B3 are the furthest walk and even then, I can't see (and haven't experienced) 25 minute transfers.

Broader point is, DFW isn't the sexiest airport out there, but it is really easy to get around.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
jasoncrh
Posts: 772
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:29 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:28 pm

Ah cool - thanks for the clarification!! Keep up the good work!

airporthistory wrote:
Hi, thanks for your comments. Happy you enjoyed the post!

Regarding "perpendicular" and "parallel", you might have misread. As I wrote, the initial plan was to build three small concourses east and perpendicular to Int'l Parkway. They were very short and did not cross the spine road. This plan then evolved into one longer concourse east and parallel to Int'l Parkway, which is shown in the illustration and layout. Btw, I also have the layouts for the initial 1987 scheme. I will post those in the full DFW feature.

Regarding, "it's" and "its". Thanks, good catch! I know the rule. It was just a mistake.
 
Antarius
Posts: 2139
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:30 pm

klakzky123 wrote:
Antarius wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:

DFW works better as an O&D airport than as a connecting airport -- but it's not 1974 anymore, and O&D is not the primary purpose.


I disagree. DFW used to work better for O&D, but now it is so easy to connect. What other major hub allows you to go from any gate to any gate in 10 minutes?


DTW? Its a single linear terminal with an indoor train. Linear terminals with good transportation are the way to go in my experience. DFW is fine but I wouldn't call it the most efficient transit experience.


If you stay within your terminal, then yes, it is pretty good. But Mcnamara and North are separated by quite a distance. DTW is also half the size of DFW in terms of passengers.

Out of JFK, LAX, ORD, DFW, ATL, SFO and LAS (which I believe are the busiest in the US), I'd take DFW over almost all of them; ATL being the exception, and DEN is pretty solid too.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
User avatar
airporthistory
Topic Author
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 12:52 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:31 pm

jasoncrh wrote:
Ah cool - thanks for the clarification!! Keep up the good work!

airporthistory wrote:
Hi, thanks for your comments. Happy you enjoyed the post!

Regarding "perpendicular" and "parallel", you might have misread. As I wrote, the initial plan was to build three small concourses east and perpendicular to Int'l Parkway. They were very short and did not cross the spine road. This plan then evolved into one longer concourse east and parallel to Int'l Parkway, which is shown in the illustration and layout. Btw, I also have the layouts for the initial 1987 scheme. I will post those in the full DFW feature.

Regarding, "it's" and "its". Thanks, good catch! I know the rule. It was just a mistake.


Thanks! And to correct my own mistake: the concourse was planned west of International Parkway, not east!
 
sccutler
Posts: 5840
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 9:15 pm

Thank God this never happened! DFW could have ended up another airport saddled with mandatory trains between terminal and gates, like Orlando, Denver and Vegas. Horrid design.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
klakzky123
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 4:05 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 9:52 pm

Antarius wrote:
klakzky123 wrote:
Antarius wrote:

I disagree. DFW used to work better for O&D, but now it is so easy to connect. What other major hub allows you to go from any gate to any gate in 10 minutes?


DTW? Its a single linear terminal with an indoor train. Linear terminals with good transportation are the way to go in my experience. DFW is fine but I wouldn't call it the most efficient transit experience.


If you stay within your terminal, then yes, it is pretty good. But Mcnamara and North are separated by quite a distance. DTW is also half the size of DFW in terms of passengers.

Out of JFK, LAX, ORD, DFW, ATL, SFO and LAS (which I believe are the busiest in the US), I'd take DFW over almost all of them; ATL being the exception, and DEN is pretty solid too.


But that's part of the design. Delta only operates from one terminal (along with its partners) and everyone else is in the other so the airport is intended to limit inter terminal transfers by design. To me that's better design than having AA spread across terminals in DFW.
 
Antarius
Posts: 2139
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Fri Nov 01, 2019 10:34 pm

klakzky123 wrote:
Antarius wrote:
klakzky123 wrote:

DTW? Its a single linear terminal with an indoor train. Linear terminals with good transportation are the way to go in my experience. DFW is fine but I wouldn't call it the most efficient transit experience.


If you stay within your terminal, then yes, it is pretty good. But Mcnamara and North are separated by quite a distance. DTW is also half the size of DFW in terms of passengers.

Out of JFK, LAX, ORD, DFW, ATL, SFO and LAS (which I believe are the busiest in the US), I'd take DFW over almost all of them; ATL being the exception, and DEN is pretty solid too.


But that's part of the design. Delta only operates from one terminal (along with its partners) and everyone else is in the other so the airport is intended to limit inter terminal transfers by design. To me that's better design than having AA spread across terminals in DFW.


Yes, but DTW doesnt have 70 million passengers. McNamara serves what, 25-30 million?
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
ctrabs0114
Posts: 1072
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:09 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Sat Nov 02, 2019 4:18 am

DFW17L wrote:
DFW has a lot of ground transportation infrastructure. Six major freeways (114, 121, 161, 183, 360, and 365), three rail lines (two light rail with stations at two of the terminals, and a heavy rail line to the south of the airport). I can't think of another hub fortress in the middle of a large city, that compares. Yes, I feel sorry for anyone dropping off a rental car.


Did you mean 635?
2019: DAL, MCI, PHX, LAS, DFW, SAT, ORD, SLC, SEA, DTW, PHL, MIA, LAX; B73G (WN x3), B738 (WN, AA, DL), A20N (NK), MD83 (AA), B788 (AA x2), CS1 (DL), B739 (DL), B712 (DL), B752 (AA), B763 (AA), B77W (AA), B789 (AA)
Next: TBA
 
User avatar
chepos
Posts: 7274
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 9:40 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Sat Nov 02, 2019 4:22 am

klakzky123 wrote:
Antarius wrote:
klakzky123 wrote:

DTW? Its a single linear terminal with an indoor train. Linear terminals with good transportation are the way to go in my experience. DFW is fine but I wouldn't call it the most efficient transit experience.


If you stay within your terminal, then yes, it is pretty good. But Mcnamara and North are separated by quite a distance. DTW is also half the size of DFW in terms of passengers.

Out of JFK, LAX, ORD, DFW, ATL, SFO and LAS (which I believe are the busiest in the US), I'd take DFW over almost all of them; ATL being the exception, and DEN is pretty solid too.


But that's part of the design. Delta only operates from one terminal (along with its partners) and everyone else is in the other so the airport is intended to limit inter terminal transfers by design. To me that's better design than having AA spread across terminals in DFW.


And now look at the number of flights DL operates at DTW to the number of flights AA operates at DFW. Not sure how you can compare the two operations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fly the Flag!!!!
 
User avatar
chunhimlai
Posts: 596
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2015 11:03 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Sat Nov 02, 2019 10:15 am

jfklganyc wrote:
NiMar wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
Of course they should have

Just like Jfk should’ve went ahead with the Jfk 2000 plan

Instead both airports doubled down on an inherently dated design

One thing that DFW has going for it is space. they could do this tomorrow if they wanted to


Google is not helping me on this JFK 2000 plan. Anything out there about this you can point my/our way?



Single centered terminal with trains to satellites. Think TPA. That was closest existing design

“It will certainly take that kind of effort to mitigate Kennedy's reputation among travelers as one of the least welcoming airports in the world. The sense of hopelessness deepened in 1990 when the ambitious plan known as J.F.K. 2000, which called for an enormous central terminal, was scuttled, leaving as its legacy a $21 million baggage-handling system known as the ''tunnel to nowhere.''” NY Times

Article below is about the new development that actually occurred...but makes mention of JFK 2000



https://www.pcf-p.com/search/?query=Jfk

The temple like centre terminal will be built and link up the existed terminals like MCO/TPA, but withdrawn due to the cost
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2587
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Sat Nov 02, 2019 1:34 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
DL747400 wrote:
I always felt a bit sorry for folks who live there and have to use DFW as their primary airport.


DFW works better as an O&D airport than as a connecting airport -- but it's not 1974 anymore, and O&D is not the primary purpose.


But at the scale of DFW, the idea of optimizing for O&D traffic was absurd even in the late 1960's when it was designed. The D-FW area of 1974 had nowhere near today's population to support O&D. What were they thinking when they put no provision for centralized security checkpoints in their designs. Yes security screenings were not required till 1973, but skyjackings were already a problem in the 1960's when it was designed. Security screening was already being talked about.
 
vadodara
Posts: 1149
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 7:45 pm

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Sat Nov 02, 2019 4:20 pm

Antarius wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
DL747400 wrote:
I always felt a bit sorry for folks who live there and have to use DFW as their primary airport.


DFW works better as an O&D airport than as a connecting airport -- but it's not 1974 anymore, and O&D is not the primary purpose.


I disagree. DFW used to work better for O&D, but now it is so easy to connect. What other major hub allows you to go from any gate to any gate in 10 minutes?


I think it is being referred from airline ops perspective not pax transfer. The people mover is extremely efficient; only AA baggage transfer is a challenge.

The baggage transfer assumes all bags get sorted at a central location. Using AI/Blockchain they could come up with a distributed system.
 
747superliner
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 2:36 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Sat Nov 02, 2019 4:43 pm

I've connected at DFW well over a dozen times, and having experienced the old TrAAin and the new Skylink, I can say without any doubt the airport is MUCH better for connections with the Skylink. For its size, DFW is fairly efficient, though it will likely never come close to ATL's efficiency. Now you could say weather or any other interruption throws everything out of gear but that's true for any large hub airport. Most days though, DFW does quite well.
 
deltaffindfw
Posts: 1525
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 7:42 am

Re: 1989: A radical redesign of DFW

Sat Nov 02, 2019 4:55 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
DL747400 wrote:
I always felt a bit sorry for folks who live there and have to use DFW as their primary airport.


DFW works better as an O&D airport than as a connecting airport -- but it's not 1974 anymore, and O&D is not the primary purpose.


But at the scale of DFW, the idea of optimizing for O&D traffic was absurd even in the late 1960's when it was designed. The D-FW area of 1974 had nowhere near today's population to support O&D. What were they thinking when they put no provision for centralized security checkpoints in their designs. Yes security screenings were not required till 1973, but skyjackings were already a problem in the 1960's when it was designed. Security screening was already being talked about.


What were they thinking? In 1974, AA was basically nothing at DFW compared to today. Braniff was in 2W (B), DL in 4E (E) and AA (and Eastern) 3E (C). Terminal 2E (A) was a mix of carriers. They most likely had a security checkpoint right next to their check in counters. There was no need for a centralized checkpoint, since all connections for each airline were made in one terminal. In fact, DL has a hub of over 250 flights at its peak - only in Terminal E.

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