Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
jplatts wrote:Here were the number of passengers, number of seats, and load factors for WN flights out of LGA in April 2021:
ATL-LGA - 23773 passengers, 25853 seats, 91.95% load factor
BNA-LGA - 13267 passengers, 17352 seats, 76.46% load factor
DAL-LGA - 15200 passengers, 17256 seats, 88.09% load factor
DEN-LGA - 13064 passengers, 16112 seats, 81.08% load factor
HOU-LGA - 8735 passengers, 9773 seats, 89.38% load factor
LGA-MCO - 7605 passengers, 8437 seats, 90.14% load factor
LGA-MDW - 23675 passengers, 28873 seats, 82.00% load factor
LGA-STL - 8043 passengers, 11329 seats, 70.99% load factor
LGA-TPA - 8205 passengers, 9613 seats, 85.35% load factor
Nicknuzzii wrote:Do you have some EWR?
jfk777 wrote:Emirates is already flying their A380 to JFK and Singapore is scheduled to return with the fall schedule in October via FRA, the same schedule pre-Covid.
cokepopper wrote:It’s interesting that Delta just re opened Terminal 2.
I would think this would play into any future plans for terminal 1 in one form or another. Possible that Delta will re think their plans for a smaller concourse A @termianl 4?
YRA wrote:cokepopper wrote:It’s interesting that Delta just re opened Terminal 2.
I would think this would play into any future plans for terminal 1 in one form or another. Possible that Delta will re think their plans for a smaller concourse A @termianl 4?
Delta just reopened T2?!?
gq wrote:They had to reopen T2. With traveler numbers returning to pre-pandemic times, Delta JFK ops cannot be accommodated solely in T4. It has been a nightmare in the mornings with all flights checking in at T4, 1-2 hour long lines and too many passengers missing check-in cut off times. Delta nickeled and dimed their way into T4 and made too many cutbacks to their ‘JFK expansion’ when they left T-3 and these are some of the consequences
ContinentalEWR wrote:gq wrote:They had to reopen T2. With traveler numbers returning to pre-pandemic times, Delta JFK ops cannot be accommodated solely in T4. It has been a nightmare in the mornings with all flights checking in at T4, 1-2 hour long lines and too many passengers missing check-in cut off times. Delta nickeled and dimed their way into T4 and made too many cutbacks to their ‘JFK expansion’ when they left T-3 and these are some of the consequences
DL didn't "nickel and dime" their way into T4. They funded a large part of the expansion and were at the mercy of the PANYNJ which punches well above its weight and not very efficient, capable, or effective at anything it gets its hands on. T4 was an out-dated facility the day it opened and that all became more apparent as DL moved in. Security lines were always a problem, the space leading through security is too small, the retail complex occupies valuable real estate that could be repurposed into a larger access point to gates through security. The B concourse is a long, low ceiling, uninspiring place, and the A concourse is equally unfit for purpose. T3 had to go. It was literally falling apart and a bottle neck in DL's operation and stood in the way of more effective, high speed taxiways needed in the space it occupied. Delta's operation at JFK isn't amazing but has been a vast improvement over what they had before. B6 and AA are the ones with the best in class facilities at JFK and it is a shame DL couldn't pry T8 out of AA's hands during the AMR bankruptcy, but by then, DL was pregnant with the T4 expansion and AA wouldn't let T8 go.
tinpusher007 wrote:ContinentalEWR wrote:gq wrote:They had to reopen T2. With traveler numbers returning to pre-pandemic times, Delta JFK ops cannot be accommodated solely in T4. It has been a nightmare in the mornings with all flights checking in at T4, 1-2 hour long lines and too many passengers missing check-in cut off times. Delta nickeled and dimed their way into T4 and made too many cutbacks to their ‘JFK expansion’ when they left T-3 and these are some of the consequences
DL didn't "nickel and dime" their way into T4. They funded a large part of the expansion and were at the mercy of the PANYNJ which punches well above its weight and not very efficient, capable, or effective at anything it gets its hands on. T4 was an out-dated facility the day it opened and that all became more apparent as DL moved in. Security lines were always a problem, the space leading through security is too small, the retail complex occupies valuable real estate that could be repurposed into a larger access point to gates through security. The B concourse is a long, low ceiling, uninspiring place, and the A concourse is equally unfit for purpose. T3 had to go. It was literally falling apart and a bottle neck in DL's operation and stood in the way of more effective, high speed taxiways needed in the space it occupied. Delta's operation at JFK isn't amazing but has been a vast improvement over what they had before. B6 and AA are the ones with the best in class facilities at JFK and it is a shame DL couldn't pry T8 out of AA's hands during the AMR bankruptcy, but by then, DL was pregnant with the T4 expansion and AA wouldn't let T8 go.
This!!! Since AA and B6 are in bed together I wonder if consolidating in the new facility B6 plans to build where T7 is now ever crossed their minds? Probably not, Im guessing. But the original build out of T8 would be ideal for DL at JFK.
ContinentalEWR wrote:tinpusher007 wrote:ContinentalEWR wrote:
DL didn't "nickel and dime" their way into T4. They funded a large part of the expansion and were at the mercy of the PANYNJ which punches well above its weight and not very efficient, capable, or effective at anything it gets its hands on. T4 was an out-dated facility the day it opened and that all became more apparent as DL moved in. Security lines were always a problem, the space leading through security is too small, the retail complex occupies valuable real estate that could be repurposed into a larger access point to gates through security. The B concourse is a long, low ceiling, uninspiring place, and the A concourse is equally unfit for purpose. T3 had to go. It was literally falling apart and a bottle neck in DL's operation and stood in the way of more effective, high speed taxiways needed in the space it occupied. Delta's operation at JFK isn't amazing but has been a vast improvement over what they had before. B6 and AA are the ones with the best in class facilities at JFK and it is a shame DL couldn't pry T8 out of AA's hands during the AMR bankruptcy, but by then, DL was pregnant with the T4 expansion and AA wouldn't let T8 go.
This!!! Since AA and B6 are in bed together I wonder if consolidating in the new facility B6 plans to build where T7 is now ever crossed their minds? Probably not, Im guessing. But the original build out of T8 would be ideal for DL at JFK.
Not likely. T8 is emerging rapidly as the oneworld hub at JFK and once T7 closes, BA and IB will co-locate there, and likely so will EI. I don't see AA and B6 combining into a single terminal (new) complex, short of a merger, which neither can afford right now and AA isn't going to give up T8.
ContinentalEWR wrote:DL didn't "nickel and dime" their way into T4. They funded a large part of the expansion and were at the mercy of the PANYNJ which punches well above its weight and not very efficient, capable, or effective at anything it gets its hands on. T4 was an out-dated facility the day it opened and that all became more apparent as DL moved in. Security lines were always a problem, the space leading through security is too small, the retail complex occupies valuable real estate that could be repurposed into a larger access point to gates through security. The B concourse is a long, low ceiling, uninspiring place, and the A concourse is equally unfit for purpose. T3 had to go. It was literally falling apart and a bottle neck in DL's operation and stood in the way of more effective, high speed taxiways needed in the space it occupied. Delta's operation at JFK isn't amazing but has been a vast improvement over what they had before. B6 and AA are the ones with the best in class facilities at JFK and it is a shame DL couldn't pry T8 out of AA's hands during the AMR bankruptcy, but by then, DL was pregnant with the T4 expansion and AA wouldn't let T8 go.
Revelation wrote:ContinentalEWR wrote:DL didn't "nickel and dime" their way into T4. They funded a large part of the expansion and were at the mercy of the PANYNJ which punches well above its weight and not very efficient, capable, or effective at anything it gets its hands on. T4 was an out-dated facility the day it opened and that all became more apparent as DL moved in. Security lines were always a problem, the space leading through security is too small, the retail complex occupies valuable real estate that could be repurposed into a larger access point to gates through security. The B concourse is a long, low ceiling, uninspiring place, and the A concourse is equally unfit for purpose. T3 had to go. It was literally falling apart and a bottle neck in DL's operation and stood in the way of more effective, high speed taxiways needed in the space it occupied. Delta's operation at JFK isn't amazing but has been a vast improvement over what they had before. B6 and AA are the ones with the best in class facilities at JFK and it is a shame DL couldn't pry T8 out of AA's hands during the AMR bankruptcy, but by then, DL was pregnant with the T4 expansion and AA wouldn't let T8 go.
To punch above one's weight is to exceed expectations, so I'm confused by the statement.
DL not only didn't get T8 at JFK during AMR's bankruptcy, they also had to walk away from improvements they paid for at BOS during their own bankruptcy and are only relatively recently getting to take advantage of those improvements.
Yet overall BK was a win for the Big 3 airlines as it removed competition and allowed them to restructure. Sucked for most employees though.
DL may not have been dealt the best hand at NYC or BOS, but hey, they did pretty good for themselves at ATL.
ContinentalEWR wrote:Revelation wrote:ContinentalEWR wrote:In NYC, DL masterfully built a dual facility hub in JFK and LGA that complement each other in ways no other airline with large NYC area operations has ever done..
airzim wrote:ContinentalEWR wrote:Revelation wrote:
Except for United/Continental at EWR if we're including the NYC market.
ContinentalEWR wrote:airzim wrote:Except for United/Continental at EWR if we're including the NYC market.
Nope, you've missed the point. All of the airlines in the NYC area have to contend with split operations. UA's NYC presence pre-merger was pretty small, though it was the #2 airline at EWR, had a token JFK presence with just LAX/SFO + IAD in the end, and LGA was focused on ORD, DEN, and IAD. Yes, UA is a powerhouse at EWR, but at LGA and JFK it is small. B6 is obviously big at JFK, building out EWR, but small at LGA. AA is/was #2 at LGA, #3 at JFK. The point is that DL took two airports out of 3 and dominates each.
Revelation wrote:ContinentalEWR wrote:airzim wrote:Except for United/Continental at EWR if we're including the NYC market.
Nope, you've missed the point. All of the airlines in the NYC area have to contend with split operations. UA's NYC presence pre-merger was pretty small, though it was the #2 airline at EWR, had a token JFK presence with just LAX/SFO + IAD in the end, and LGA was focused on ORD, DEN, and IAD. Yes, UA is a powerhouse at EWR, but at LGA and JFK it is small. B6 is obviously big at JFK, building out EWR, but small at LGA. AA is/was #2 at LGA, #3 at JFK. The point is that DL took two airports out of 3 and dominates each.
I'm a fan of what DL has done in NYC but think it'd be interesting to map out the ROI on all the spends they've done through all the configurations they've moved through at LGA and JFK and the ones they know are still to come. Gotta spend money to make money, but nothing comes cheap in NYC.
ContinentalEWR wrote:Revelation wrote:ContinentalEWR wrote:Nope, you've missed the point. All of the airlines in the NYC area have to contend with split operations. UA's NYC presence pre-merger was pretty small, though it was the #2 airline at EWR, had a token JFK presence with just LAX/SFO + IAD in the end, and LGA was focused on ORD, DEN, and IAD. Yes, UA is a powerhouse at EWR, but at LGA and JFK it is small. B6 is obviously big at JFK, building out EWR, but small at LGA. AA is/was #2 at LGA, #3 at JFK. The point is that DL took two airports out of 3 and dominates each.
I'm a fan of what DL has done in NYC but think it'd be interesting to map out the ROI on all the spends they've done through all the configurations they've moved through at LGA and JFK and the ones they know are still to come. Gotta spend money to make money, but nothing comes cheap in NYC.
Good point on the ROI. DL invested heavily for years and didn't turn a profit on NY until something like 2013 or 2014. The thing about NYC is that you have to be in it, and in a big way. It's the largest O&D market in the country, or it was pre-COVID, and likely will continue to be for a long time.
jfk777 wrote:What is the fascination some people have with Delta taking over American's Terminal 8, AA is not going anywhere. They are EXPANDING at JFK with new 777 flights to Israel and India among other places. British Airways is moving into their T8 and they have all the OW airlines from Finnair, Qantas and Cathay and soon BA. AA is doing very nicely with their terminal on the quieter side of JFK away from all the Delta madness and T4, The replacement for the IAB. The IAB has been replaced but not the problems it had which stayed with T4.
twaconnie wrote:So now it's all over except for the shouting.When is construction scheduled to start?
ContinentalEWR wrote:airzim wrote:ContinentalEWR wrote:
Except for United/Continental at EWR if we're including the NYC market.
Nope, you've missed the point. All of the airlines in the NYC area have to contend with split operations. UA's NYC presence pre-merger was pretty small, though it was the #2 airline at EWR, had a token JFK presence with just LAX/SFO + IAD in the end, and LGA was focused on ORD, DEN, and IAD. Yes, UA is a powerhouse at EWR, but at LGA and JFK it is small. B6 is obviously big at JFK, building out EWR, but small at LGA. AA is/was #2 at LGA, #3 at JFK. The point is that DL took two airports out of 3 and dominates each.
airzim wrote:ContinentalEWR wrote:airzim wrote:
Except for United/Continental at EWR if we're including the NYC market.
Nope, you've missed the point. All of the airlines in the NYC area have to contend with split operations. UA's NYC presence pre-merger was pretty small, though it was the #2 airline at EWR, had a token JFK presence with just LAX/SFO + IAD in the end, and LGA was focused on ORD, DEN, and IAD. Yes, UA is a powerhouse at EWR, but at LGA and JFK it is small. B6 is obviously big at JFK, building out EWR, but small at LGA. AA is/was #2 at LGA, #3 at JFK. The point is that DL took two airports out of 3 and dominates each.
Except DL doesn't dominate JFK, nor to a large extend LGA. I suspect like Revelation postulates, that DL must be burning money running a split operation. Just not sure they can leverage their economies of scale across two fields.
In terms of passenger emplanements, in 2019 (last relevant year) DL only carried 27.4% of total passengers at JFK. B6 was just behind them at 23%
At LGA, they did much better but still only 41% of total passengers. However, AA trailed in second at 25% of total enplanements.
Whereas at EWR, UA carried 65% of all passengers in 2019. The next closest at EWR was American at 5%, and DL at 4%.
Of course we can debate "dominate" but other than UA at EWR, I don't think any airline really dominates the New York market.
https://www.panynj.gov/airports/en/stat ... -info.html
tinpusher007 wrote:airzim wrote:ContinentalEWR wrote:
Nope, you've missed the point. All of the airlines in the NYC area have to contend with split operations. UA's NYC presence pre-merger was pretty small, though it was the #2 airline at EWR, had a token JFK presence with just LAX/SFO + IAD in the end, and LGA was focused on ORD, DEN, and IAD. Yes, UA is a powerhouse at EWR, but at LGA and JFK it is small. B6 is obviously big at JFK, building out EWR, but small at LGA. AA is/was #2 at LGA, #3 at JFK. The point is that DL took two airports out of 3 and dominates each.
Except DL doesn't dominate JFK, nor to a large extend LGA. I suspect like Revelation postulates, that DL must be burning money running a split operation. Just not sure they can leverage their economies of scale across two fields.
In terms of passenger emplanements, in 2019 (last relevant year) DL only carried 27.4% of total passengers at JFK. B6 was just behind them at 23%
At LGA, they did much better but still only 41% of total passengers. However, AA trailed in second at 25% of total enplanements.
Whereas at EWR, UA carried 65% of all passengers in 2019. The next closest at EWR was American at 5%, and DL at 4%.
Of course we can debate "dominate" but other than UA at EWR, I don't think any airline really dominates the New York market.
https://www.panynj.gov/airports/en/stat ... -info.html
Delta doesn’t need to dominate both airports in the same way UA does at EWR. LGA mostly focuses on O&D business markets to and from NYC. It’s not really about feeding pax to JFK for intl connections. That’s why most of those same markets and more are served out of JFK as well. JFK and LGA for Delta will never be fortresses like DTW or ATL but being number one at both, particularly LGA is an enviable position.
airzim wrote:tinpusher007 wrote:airzim wrote:
Except DL doesn't dominate JFK, nor to a large extend LGA. I suspect like Revelation postulates, that DL must be burning money running a split operation. Just not sure they can leverage their economies of scale across two fields.
In terms of passenger emplanements, in 2019 (last relevant year) DL only carried 27.4% of total passengers at JFK. B6 was just behind them at 23%
At LGA, they did much better but still only 41% of total passengers. However, AA trailed in second at 25% of total enplanements.
Whereas at EWR, UA carried 65% of all passengers in 2019. The next closest at EWR was American at 5%, and DL at 4%.
Of course we can debate "dominate" but other than UA at EWR, I don't think any airline really dominates the New York market.
https://www.panynj.gov/airports/en/stat ... -info.html
Delta doesn’t need to dominate both airports in the same way UA does at EWR. LGA mostly focuses on O&D business markets to and from NYC. It’s not really about feeding pax to JFK for intl connections. That’s why most of those same markets and more are served out of JFK as well. JFK and LGA for Delta will never be fortresses like DTW or ATL but being number one at both, particularly LGA is an enviable position.
I'm not suggesting they have to dominate anything. But when you have a split operation between two airports to essentially the same market feeding both local and connection traffic, running multiple flights (let's say JAX-JFK/LGA) on two CRJs or 175s, versus one 175 or 737 JAX-EWR), that inherently raises your operational costs and likely adds downward pressure on yields to fill seats. I suspect DL has no choice but to operate this dual airport strategy to compete for the NYC corporate market, but it still must be incredibly expensive operationally.
jfk777 wrote:Emirates is already flying their A380 to JFK and Singapore is scheduled to return with the fall schedule in October via FRA, the same schedule pre-Covid.
airzim wrote:when you have a split operation between two airports to essentially the same market feeding both local and connection traffic, running multiple flights (let's say JAX-JFK/LGA) on two CRJs or 175s, versus one 175 or 737 JAX-EWR), that inherently raises your operational costs and likely adds downward pressure on yields to fill seats. I suspect DL has no choice but to operate this dual airport strategy to compete for the NYC corporate market, but it still must be incredibly expensive operationally.
ScottB wrote:airzim wrote:when you have a split operation between two airports to essentially the same market feeding both local and connection traffic, running multiple flights (let's say JAX-JFK/LGA) on two CRJs or 175s, versus one 175 or 737 JAX-EWR), that inherently raises your operational costs and likely adds downward pressure on yields to fill seats. I suspect DL has no choice but to operate this dual airport strategy to compete for the NYC corporate market, but it still must be incredibly expensive operationally.
JFK and LGA aren't essentially the same market. Sure, there's some overlap, but there are plenty of NYers who will flat-out refuse to use one or the other (and probably more that will avoid JFK unless there is no other choice for a non-stop). This is literally the key reason why LGA is valuable, and why B6 had planned to use a big chunk of their LGA slots to go 10x daily on BOS-LGA pre-Covid. Yes, it's more costly to run a CR9 or E175 or two daily into JFK from a given market (versus upgauging at LGA) to support the international gateway, but NYC is already an expensive place to do business and the fares charged tend to reflect that.
The split operation was working for DL due to good yields and the fact that most of their markets from NYC don't rely very heavily on connecting traffic.
ScottB wrote:airzim wrote:when you have a split operation between two airports to essentially the same market feeding both local and connection traffic, running multiple flights (let's say JAX-JFK/LGA) on two CRJs or 175s, versus one 175 or 737 JAX-EWR), that inherently raises your operational costs and likely adds downward pressure on yields to fill seats. I suspect DL has no choice but to operate this dual airport strategy to compete for the NYC corporate market, but it still must be incredibly expensive operationally.
JFK and LGA aren't essentially the same market. Sure, there's some overlap, but there are plenty of NYers who will flat-out refuse to use one or the other (and probably more that will avoid JFK unless there is no other choice for a non-stop). This is literally the key reason why LGA is valuable, and why B6 had planned to use a big chunk of their LGA slots to go 10x daily on BOS-LGA pre-Covid. Yes, it's more costly to run a CR9 or E175 or two daily into JFK from a given market (versus upgauging at LGA) to support the international gateway, but NYC is already an expensive place to do business and the fares charged tend to reflect that.
The split operation was working for DL due to good yields and the fact that most of their markets from NYC don't rely very heavily on connecting traffic.
beachroad wrote:ScottB wrote:airzim wrote:when you have a split operation between two airports to essentially the same market feeding both local and connection traffic, running multiple flights (let's say JAX-JFK/LGA) on two CRJs or 175s, versus one 175 or 737 JAX-EWR), that inherently raises your operational costs and likely adds downward pressure on yields to fill seats. I suspect DL has no choice but to operate this dual airport strategy to compete for the NYC corporate market, but it still must be incredibly expensive operationally.
JFK and LGA aren't essentially the same market. Sure, there's some overlap, but there are plenty of NYers who will flat-out refuse to use one or the other (and probably more that will avoid JFK unless there is no other choice for a non-stop). This is literally the key reason why LGA is valuable, and why B6 had planned to use a big chunk of their LGA slots to go 10x daily on BOS-LGA pre-Covid. Yes, it's more costly to run a CR9 or E175 or two daily into JFK from a given market (versus upgauging at LGA) to support the international gateway, but NYC is already an expensive place to do business and the fares charged tend to reflect that.
The split operation was working for DL due to good yields and the fact that most of their markets from NYC don't rely very heavily on connecting traffic.
It does make you wonder how many people on this thread have ever been to NYC?
blacksoviet wrote:Delta kicked Aeromexico out of Terminal 3 in 2004. I think the Port Authority ordered Air France to let Aeromexico take over Gate 2. After Delta demolished Terminal 3 in 2013, they kicked out some airlines that were in Terminal 4. Some of those airlines also moved to Terminal 1.
Air France may consider Delta a bully.
tlecam wrote:beachroad wrote:ScottB wrote:
JFK and LGA aren't essentially the same market. Sure, there's some overlap, but there are plenty of NYers who will flat-out refuse to use one or the other (and probably more that will avoid JFK unless there is no other choice for a non-stop). This is literally the key reason why LGA is valuable, and why B6 had planned to use a big chunk of their LGA slots to go 10x daily on BOS-LGA pre-Covid. Yes, it's more costly to run a CR9 or E175 or two daily into JFK from a given market (versus upgauging at LGA) to support the international gateway, but NYC is already an expensive place to do business and the fares charged tend to reflect that.
The split operation was working for DL due to good yields and the fact that most of their markets from NYC don't rely very heavily on connecting traffic.
It does make you wonder how many people on this thread have ever been to NYC?
Ha, yes. And, objectively, without experience and knowledge of local patterns, it probably does look bizarre.
And for the non-subway averse crowd, JFK to the subway or LIRR (depending on destination) can be a lot better than LGA - bridge or tunnel - Manhattan during peak hours. The vast majority of my travel conformed to the JFK for west coast and international and LGA for everything else pattern.
airzim wrote:As someone who has lived in Lower Manhattan for the last 25 years, I'm pretty aware of the NYC market.
As for facts, JFK and LGA are absolutely operating in the same market. There are plenty of connections by B6 and DL at both airports and to deny that this is a redundant operation is ridiculous.
And as someone who, pre Covid, flew multi weekly for business domestically for the last 25 years, DL is absolutely operating from outstations to JFK to feed long haul as well as operating to LGA to satisfy local O&D demand. That by definition is redundant.
Even now with the concern of business traffic not recovering for years, and long haul flying down significantly, I'm sure DL would love to not be operating across two airports to serve essentially the same market.
IFLYUA767 wrote:This is probably a dumb question but I’m going to ask it anyway. Are they planning to tear down the whole thing at once and rebuild? Is there a proposed timeline for the project? I know that COVID most likely threw a curveball at these plans.
jfklganyc wrote:If you live in NY, you can throw a wall between you and EWR and say you will never fly out of there.
If you live in NJ, you can throw a wall between you and JFK/LGA and say the same thing.
What you can not do is throw a wall around JFK or LGA. They are one market that is co-dependent on each other:
LGA users have to go to JFK to fly anywhere in the world outside a small 1500 mile ring. That is a lot of world!
JFK users have certain small destinations that are flown at lower than desirable frequency or not flown at all…because there is high frequency service on small RJs to LGA. Think cities in Ohio.
JFK also has low frequency service to close in, large cities due to high frequency service at nearby LGA. Think DFW and ORD.
STT757 wrote:jfklganyc wrote:If you live in NY, you can throw a wall between you and EWR and say you will never fly out of there.
If you live in NJ, you can throw a wall between you and JFK/LGA and say the same thing.
What you can not do is throw a wall around JFK or LGA. They are one market that is co-dependent on each other:
LGA users have to go to JFK to fly anywhere in the world outside a small 1500 mile ring. That is a lot of world!
JFK users have certain small destinations that are flown at lower than desirable frequency or not flown at all…because there is high frequency service on small RJs to LGA. Think cities in Ohio.
JFK also has low frequency service to close in, large cities due to high frequency service at nearby LGA. Think DFW and ORD.
I love the snobbery, when you say “Live in NY” your talking about Queens. Staten Islanders, who are NYC residents, prefer Newark airport. There’s no part of Staten Island where the preferred drive to an airport is to go across the Verrazano bridge and Belt Parkway to Kennedy airport.
STT757 wrote:IFLYUA767 wrote:This is probably a dumb question but I’m going to ask it anyway. Are they planning to tear down the whole thing at once and rebuild? Is there a proposed timeline for the project? I know that COVID most likely threw a curveball at these plans.
No, they build one section at a time. The step by step process for the construction is laid out on their website.