If this has been discussed to death, feel free to delete. I was off the grid for 18 months and missed a lot.

I was just catching up on the most recent renderings of the new Terminal at EWR.

I am a bit confused: if there is not going to be a new runway, and EWR is already almost maxed-out with the number of take offs/landings how will EWR deal with the addition of all those new gates and new flights?

Is the old Terminal A being demolished or renovated?

How many United Flights be scheduled from the new Terminal and if international would UA build a second Polaris Lounge at EWR?

Thanks

Never mind the old terminal A - I read it’s being demolished.

Im still wondering how the 2 runways at EWR will accommodate another 33 gates (though I presume the old TA gates should be subtracted from the 33)

In flying over Newark (the city) this past Monday, I saw a large body of water north east of EWR, I couldn’t help but wonder if a runway Island and a bridge over to the airport for aircraft taxing would work?
Yes it is an easy “no way!” But anything is possible if the money is there. Buy a swathe of land from the new car parking lots to create a bridge. Add monorail to the island runway if new terminal and gates are also on the island runway. I LOVE how industrial the area is. The Polaski Skyway is a work of art! More please!

The Port Authority is undertaking a new master plan for the airport, after Terminal A opens (sometime this Fall) they are starting work on a new Terminal B, new Airtrain, and will use the new master plan to guide development for the redevelopment of rest of the airport. Much of the new expansion will be in areas around the former Waverly yards near the current Airtrain station.

https://www.nj.com/news/2022/03/newark-airport-next-on-deck-for-port-authority-makeover.html

The City of Newark, in conjunction with the Port Authority and with funding from the Port Authority and Prudential have been studying totally redeveloping the area around Newark Airport to make it more part of the community. It includes remaking the EWR Airtrain station on the Northeast corridor one that is open to the public, and includes the PATH extension to the rail link station.

The Coalition, Airport City, includes the City of Newark, Port Authority, Rutgers University, NJIT, Prudential, Regional Planning Association (RPA), and the Weitzman School of Design University of Pennsylvania.

https://news.njit.edu/airport-city-newark-coalition-awarded-fourth-round-funding

https://acn.njit.edu/

There have been studies about adding a fourth runway to EWR, the University of Pennsylvania includes a rendering of a new runway layout on page 29 of their excellent EWR Master Book.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5f306a5fb4e00e41d47f3ef5/t/5f5a9a7edc1c6539abfb4c74/1599773342607/Studio_MasterBook_Online.pdf

VC10er wrote:

If this has been discussed to death, feel free to delete. I was off the grid for 18 months and missed a lot.

I was just catching up on the most recent renderings of the new Terminal at EWR.

I am a bit confused: if there is not going to be a new runway, and EWR is already almost maxed-out with the number of take offs/landings how will EWR deal with the addition of all those new gates and new flights?

Is the old Terminal A being demolished or renovated?

How many United Flights be scheduled from the new Terminal and if international would UA build a second Polaris Lounge at EWR?

Thanks

I'm sure that United will not build a 2nd Polaris lounge, but there will be a new United Club. United will have a lot of gates at the new Terminal A, but will change their usage from Express to focused domestic flights. Before CO put all the express flights over in A, it was used for specific cities, such as BOS, DCA and ORD, and I could see UA doing that as well. Business focused routes with the highest O&D in their EWR domestic network to reduce the number of people that will have to bus between A and C. Those will also be the premier pax that will be most positively impacted by the shiny new terminal with more efficient TSA screening. The only reason to consider a Polaris lounge is if they move LAX and SFO to A, which is certainly possible.

But with as many gates as they will have, I assume they can only ensure certain cities fly out of A, and there will probably be a few random flights to different cities each day that get placed there.

I don't think it is the intention as of now, but it would be interesting if when the new Terminal B is built, UA tries to move in there so they have the newest terminal built specifically around their needs, and it will also be closer in proximity to A. They have invested a lot in Terminal C, so maybe not, and there would have to be a lot of work to make all of the concourses at C FIS capable for Intl airlines.

STT757 wrote:

The Port Authority is undertaking a new master plan for the airport, after Terminal A opens (sometime this Fall) they are starting work on a new Terminal B, new Airtrain, and will use the new master plan to guide development for the redevelopment of rest of the airport. Much of the new expansion will be in areas around the former Waverly yards near the current Airtrain station.

https://www.nj.com/news/2022/03/newark-airport-next-on-deck-for-port-authority-makeover.html

The City of Newark, in conjunction with the Port Authority and with funding from the Port Authority and Prudential have been studying totally redeveloping the area around Newark Airport to make it more part of the community. It includes remaking the EWR Airtrain station on the Northeast corridor one that is open to the public, and includes the PATH extension to the rail link station.

The Coalition, Airport City, includes the City of Newark, Port Authority, Rutgers University, NJIT, Prudential, Regional Planning Association (RPA), and the Weitzman School of Design University of Pennsylvania.

https://news.njit.edu/airport-city-newark-coalition-awarded-fourth-round-funding

https://acn.njit.edu/

There have been studies about adding a fourth runway to EWR, the University of Pennsylvania includes a rendering of a new runway layout on page 29 of their excellent EWR Master Book.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5f306a5fb4e00e41d47f3ef5/t/5f5a9a7edc1c6539abfb4c74/1599773342607/Studio_MasterBook_Online.pdf

Great reading! I’m so thrilled for Newark, she is an under developed urban gem just aching for investment. I can imagine hundreds of thousands living well and having jobs supported by the Newark Airport City!

I will try and read everything but do we know if the new light rail will go into lower Manhattan or an easy connection somewhere in NJ?

VC10er wrote:

STT757 wrote:

The Port Authority is undertaking a new master plan for the airport, after Terminal A opens (sometime this Fall) they are starting work on a new Terminal B, new Airtrain, and will use the new master plan to guide development for the redevelopment of rest of the airport. Much of the new expansion will be in areas around the former Waverly yards near the current Airtrain station.

https://www.nj.com/news/2022/03/newark-airport-next-on-deck-for-port-authority-makeover.html

The City of Newark, in conjunction with the Port Authority and with funding from the Port Authority and Prudential have been studying totally redeveloping the area around Newark Airport to make it more part of the community. It includes remaking the EWR Airtrain station on the Northeast corridor one that is open to the public, and includes the PATH extension to the rail link station.

The Coalition, Airport City, includes the City of Newark, Port Authority, Rutgers University, NJIT, Prudential, Regional Planning Association (RPA), and the Weitzman School of Design University of Pennsylvania.

https://news.njit.edu/airport-city-newark-coalition-awarded-fourth-round-funding

https://acn.njit.edu/

There have been studies about adding a fourth runway to EWR, the University of Pennsylvania includes a rendering of a new runway layout on page 29 of their excellent EWR Master Book.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5f306a5fb4e00e41d47f3ef5/t/5f5a9a7edc1c6539abfb4c74/1599773342607/Studio_MasterBook_Online.pdf

Great reading! I’m so thrilled for Newark, she is an under developed urban gem just aching for investment. I can imagine hundreds of thousands living well and having jobs supported by the Newark Airport City!

I will try and read everything but do we know if the new light rail will go into lower Manhattan or an easy connection somewhere in NJ?

The planning in ongoing to extend the PATH train to the Newark Airport Airlink station, it would be a 1.5 mile extension and would link the airport with the World Trade Center via Newark, Harrison and Jersey City.

https://www.panynj.gov/path/en/modernizing-path/extension-project.html

STT757 wrote:

The planning in ongoing to extend the PATH train to the Newark Airport Airlink station, it would be a 1.5 mile extension and would link the airport with the World Trade Center via Newark, Harrison and Jersey City.

https://www.panynj.gov/path/en/modernizing-path/extension-project.html

This would be fantastic.

Back in the early 2000s, the easy way to remember the CO cities out of T-A was "A, B, C & D". ATL, BOS, ORD/MDW, DCA, and DFW.

EMB170 wrote:

Back in the early 2000s, the easy way to remember the CO cities out of T-A was "A, B, C & D". ATL, BOS, ORD/MDW, DCA, and DFW.

I can see that being the case again plus add LAX, SFO, LHR to the mix (large business centers who focus on O/D traffic).

Rumored list of UA TA destinations

Atlanta
Austin
Dallas-Fort Worth
Miami
Nashville
Orlando
Phoenix
Raleigh-Durham
San Diego
Seattle-Tacoma
Tampa
West Palm Beach
Las Vegas
Seattle
Charlotte
Fort Myers
Boston
Detroit
New Orleans
Fort Laudy
Detroit
Portland
Charleston

STT757 wrote:

There have been studies about adding a fourth runway to EWR, the University of Pennsylvania includes a rendering of a new runway layout on page 29 of their excellent EWR Master Book.

LOL. That plan would only run $100 billion or so. Plus I'm sure both Elizabeth and Newark would love all the air traffic right over the downtowns of each. But hey, if you can get the Feds to cut a check for the project then it's all good. Or the PANYNJ could just jack up tolls to $100 into NYC.

November 1st opening, United will have 15 gates and 23 destinations.

https://airlineweekly.com/2022/09/newark-airports-new-3-billion-terminal-a-expected-to-open-in-november/

STT757 wrote:

November 1st opening, United will have 15 gates and 23 destinations.

https://airlineweekly.com/2022/09/newark-airports-new-3-billion-terminal-a-expected-to-open-in-november/

Wonder if they'll have an open house prior to opening? DFW Terminal D had that summer of 2005 and it was great. I hope they'll have something similar for this new terminal.

Do you think UA will expand more of their regional presence at terminal C since some mainline flights are moving to the new terminal? I understand the runway and airspace capacity and with EWR being an O&D hub for UA but it could also use some more connectivity to regional airports.

cosyr wrote:

The only reason to consider a Polaris lounge is if they move LAX and SFO to A, which is certainly possible.

That wouldn't be a factor because J passengers on the LAX/SFO flights don't get Polaris lounge access anyway (unless if they're connecting onto a longhaul flight on a Polaris ticket). J on the former p.s. routes is marketed as United Business and gets UC access included, but no Polaris.

The other thing to consider is that a lot of the aircraft coming from SFO and LAX frequently have turns onto international flights afterward, so I would think that it would make the most operational sense to keep all of those flights in C. I would guess that A would see a lot of domestic O&D-heavy flights on narrowbodies.

ddaly241 wrote:

Do you think UA will expand more of their regional presence at terminal C since some mainline flights are moving to the new terminal? I understand the runway and airspace capacity and with EWR being an O&D hub for UA but it could also use some more connectivity to regional airports.

If anything, fewer regional flights since there will be more mainline-capable gates at United’s disposal.

Willl the new Terminal A have an FIS facility ? Was looking at the most recent update on Google Earth and I see some wide body gates.

If so, which International airlines will be moving there ?

iadadd wrote:

Willl the new Terminal A have an FIS facility ? Was looking at the most recent update on Google Earth and I see some wide body gates.

If so, which International airlines will be moving there ?

No FIS facility, but when the new Terminal B opens there will be an expansion of Terminal A which will connect to the new terminal B FIS. Airlines at the new Terminal A are Air Canada, American, Delta, JetBlue and United. I believe it has five widebody capable gates.

ddaly241 wrote:

Do you think UA will expand more of their regional presence at terminal C since some mainline flights are moving to the new terminal? I understand the runway and airspace capacity and with EWR being an O&D hub for UA but it could also use some more connectivity to regional airports.

You will actually see more gates get turned into Widebody gates. Expect to see LESS gates in C as it will be completely restriped.

CriticalPoint wrote:

ddaly241 wrote:

Do you think UA will expand more of their regional presence at terminal C since some mainline flights are moving to the new terminal? I understand the runway and airspace capacity and with EWR being an O&D hub for UA but it could also use some more connectivity to regional airports.

You will actually see more gates get turned into Widebody gates. Expect to see LESS gates in C as it will be completely restriped.

Sorry if I’m not following along well, but when you say restriped, are you saying a new terminal C or just a renovation of terminal C or is it something else?

ddaly241 wrote:

CriticalPoint wrote:

ddaly241 wrote:

Do you think UA will expand more of their regional presence at terminal C since some mainline flights are moving to the new terminal? I understand the runway and airspace capacity and with EWR being an O&D hub for UA but it could also use some more connectivity to regional airports.

You will actually see more gates get turned into Widebody gates. Expect to see LESS gates in C as it will be completely restriped.

Sorry if I’m not following along well, but when you say restriped, are you saying a new terminal C or just a renovation of terminal C or is it something else?

Sorry bad typing….they are going to repaint all the lead in lines and aircraft safety areas to allow more gates to have widebodies parked on them. This means less overall gates during certain parts of the day as wingspans will eat up the real estate.

CriticalPoint wrote:

ddaly241 wrote:

CriticalPoint wrote:

You will actually see more gates get turned into Widebody gates. Expect to see LESS gates in C as it will be completely restriped.

Sorry if I’m not following along well, but when you say restriped, are you saying a new terminal C or just a renovation of terminal C or is it something else?

Sorry bad typing….they are going to repaint all the lead in lines and aircraft safety areas to allow more gates to have widebodies parked on them. This means less overall gates during certain parts of the day as wingspans will eat up the real estate.

Oh no don’t worry about. I understand what you’re saying.

With NK merging with B6 they will eventually be moved to the new Terminal A, NK will be the only airline to use the B-1 concourse after DL moves to the new terminal. United should try to grab those gates for their UAX CRJ-550 / ERJ-170/175 flights. Similar to what they have been operating out of the old Terminal A's A-2 concourse. At least until the new Terminal B opens.

United can set up their operation like:

Terminal A domestic mainline, Terminal B-1 concourse UAX, Terminal C International, LAX/SFO, hubs (IAH, DEN, ORD, IAD etc..), HNL, OGG, SJU etc..

I'm curious when the United club at the new Terminal A opens, and how big it will be. The new Terminal is getting a AMEX Centurion lounge which will be the largest Centurion lounge.

What To Expect From Your New Centurion Lounge
For those who enjoy a spot of plane spotting, Newark’s Centurion Lounge is set to feature an outside terrace area with views over the airport’s airfield, the Port of Newark, both New York and Newark harbors, and, perhaps most exciting of all, the famous Manhattan skyline.

https://upgradedpoints.com/news/amex-centurion-lounge-newark/

CriticalPoint wrote:

ddaly241 wrote:

Do you think UA will expand more of their regional presence at terminal C since some mainline flights are moving to the new terminal? I understand the runway and airspace capacity and with EWR being an O&D hub for UA but it could also use some more connectivity to regional airports.

You will actually see more gates get turned into Widebody gates. Expect to see LESS gates in C as it will be completely restriped.

Which gates exactly can be re-configured? With the entire west side of C-2 already being wide body, and C-3 all being reconfigured, what else is left? I guess they could reconfigure C101-103-105-107-109-111-113, but the alley in between C1 and C2 is extremely tight and can only either have 2 narrow bodies or a single wide body (when a wide body at 90 gets pushed all other gates are delayed). Thinking this way, bringing in more wide bodies to C seems like it would slow down the operation. What UA should do, however, is make all of C-3 dual jet bridges instead of just 123 and 138. The way in which all of terminal C was designed puzzles me. C121 used to be 777W equipped, but now it can't hold a 777W as 108 now can.. . Also just a last thought, the PA really messed up not including FIS at A. Lastly, international carriers should move to C. With UA getting all of this gate space in the new A, carries like SK, LH, and TP should be in C-3 as C-3 is better capable of handling wide bodies.

Knw1000 wrote:

CriticalPoint wrote:

ddaly241 wrote:

Do you think UA will expand more of their regional presence at terminal C since some mainline flights are moving to the new terminal? I understand the runway and airspace capacity and with EWR being an O&D hub for UA but it could also use some more connectivity to regional airports.

You will actually see more gates get turned into Widebody gates. Expect to see LESS gates in C as it will be completely restriped.

Which gates exactly can be re-configured? With the entire west side of C-2 already being wide body, and C-3 all being reconfigured, what else is left? I guess they could reconfigure C101-103-105-107-109-111-113, but the alley in between C1 and C2 is extremely tight and can only either have 2 narrow bodies or a single wide body (when a wide body at 90 gets pushed all other gates are delayed). Thinking this way, bringing in more wide bodies to C seems like it would slow down the operation. What UA should do, however, is make all of C-3 dual jet bridges instead of just 123 and 138. The way in which all of terminal C was designed puzzles me. C121 used to be 777W equipped, but now it can't hold a 777W as 108 now can.. . Also just a last thought, the PA really messed up not including FIS at A. Lastly, international carriers should move to C. With UA getting all of this gate space in the new A, carries like SK, LH, and TP should be in C-3 as C-3 is better capable of handling wide bodies.

There isn't any FIS in the designs, because once A-3 Gets knocked down, there plans to connect the new terminal to the eventual new Terminal B. It will be much bigger than the whole of the present Terminal B, and will have a much larger FIS facility. There is still work to be done at the new Terminal A, because some of the gates won't be open for the grand opening. I'm not sure when that will be but it will be soon. The concrete hardstand has to be finished near Gates 28 thru 33. A-1 was knocked down, but the old Red Carpet Room area is still there for some reason. C-2 and C-3 (plus Gates 71; 73; 74) has to handle the widebodies, and B will still have to handle some of the International arrivals due to the Customs situation. There are usually mainline RON's / morning departures in C-3. Once the bank is gone, then some International arrivals and tows from B will depart from C-3. So gates are still needed in C, as B can still handle everybody else. I don't know when is the date for construction of the new Terminal B, but is designed to connect to A, hence there will be expandability somewhere along the line.

The 550's and 175's can go back to C-2, and as some gates in C-1 as mainline goes to the new term. Maybe there will be less 550's and more 175's flying here. There is still a hardstand over in C-3 for the 550's. A lot of moving parts are still going on right now.

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

Rumored list of UA TA destinations

Atlanta
Austin
Dallas-Fort Worth
Miami
Nashville
Orlando
Phoenix
Raleigh-Durham
San Diego
Seattle-Tacoma
Tampa
West Palm Beach
Las Vegas
Seattle
Charlotte
Fort Myers
Boston
Detroit
New Orleans
Fort Lauderdale
Detroit
Portland
Charleston

So which domestic mainline routes would remain at Terminal C?

Buffalo, Chicago, Cleveland, Denver, Honolulu, Houston, Jacksonville, Kahului, MCI, LAX, SNA, Memphis, MSP, PIT, SMF, SLC, SAT, San Francisco, San Juan, Sarasota, Washington Dulles, Anchorage, Bozeman, Burlington, Vail, Steamboat Springs, Jackson Hole, Montrose, Myrtle Beach, Norfolk, Portland ME, Reno, Rochester NY, Savannah.

T5towbar wrote:

Knw1000 wrote:

CriticalPoint wrote:

You will actually see more gates get turned into Widebody gates. Expect to see LESS gates in C as it will be completely restriped.

Which gates exactly can be re-configured? With the entire west side of C-2 already being wide body, and C-3 all being reconfigured, what else is left? I guess they could reconfigure C101-103-105-107-109-111-113, but the alley in between C1 and C2 is extremely tight and can only either have 2 narrow bodies or a single wide body (when a wide body at 90 gets pushed all other gates are delayed). Thinking this way, bringing in more wide bodies to C seems like it would slow down the operation. What UA should do, however, is make all of C-3 dual jet bridges instead of just 123 and 138. The way in which all of terminal C was designed puzzles me. C121 used to be 777W equipped, but now it can't hold a 777W as 108 now can.. . Also just a last thought, the PA really messed up not including FIS at A. Lastly, international carriers should move to C. With UA getting all of this gate space in the new A, carries like SK, LH, and TP should be in C-3 as C-3 is better capable of handling wide bodies.

There isn't any FIS in the designs, because once A-3 Gets knocked down, there plans to connect the new terminal to the eventual new Terminal B. It will be much bigger than the whole of the present Terminal B, and will have a much larger FIS facility. There is still work to be done at the new Terminal A, because some of the gates won't be open for the grand opening. I'm not sure when that will be but it will be soon. The concrete hardstand has to be finished near Gates 28 thru 33. A-1 was knocked down, but the old Red Carpet Room area is still there for some reason. C-2 and C-3 (plus Gates 71; 73; 74) has to handle the widebodies, and B will still have to handle some of the International arrivals due to the Customs situation. There are usually mainline RON's / morning departures in C-3. Once the bank is gone, then some International arrivals and tows from B will depart from C-3. So gates are still needed in C, as B can still handle everybody else. I don't know when is the date for construction of the new Terminal B, but is designed to connect to A, hence there will be expandability somewhere along the line.

The 550's and 175's can go back to C-2, and as some gates in C-1 as mainline goes to the new term. Maybe there will be less 550's and more 175's flying here. There is still a hardstand over in C-3 for the 550's. A lot of moving parts are still going on right now.

Looking on the Earthcam they have made a ton of progress just this week, they are cleaning up all the construction equipment and Conex containers in the front and they have striped the roadways, crosswalks etc.. Question, the Earthcam which shows the airside has not been refreshed since August 18. Have they taken down the Jersey barriers separating the Terminal from the airfield, that's when we will know it's getting close.

What’s the rationale for which routes would move to the new terminal?

NotDengXiaoping wrote:

What’s the rationale for which routes would move to the new terminal?

Best I can tell it's domestic routes that are almost all mainline, DTW, CLT are the only ones listed with a mix of mainline and ERJ-175s. Perhaps those ERJ-175s will be replaced with mainline.

STT757 wrote:

NotDengXiaoping wrote:

What’s the rationale for which routes would move to the new terminal?

Best I can tell it's domestic routes that are almost all mainline, DTW, CLT are the only ones listed with a mix of mainline and ERJ-175s. Perhaps those ERJ-175s will be replaced with mainline.

DTW is already scheduled to go to all mainline. I think CLT is following suit as well.

STT757 wrote:

Best I can tell it's domestic routes that are almost all mainline, DTW, CLT are the only ones listed with a mix of mainline and ERJ-175s. Perhaps those ERJ-175s will be replaced with mainline.

Looking at March '23, EWR-DTW shows 5X A319s and CLT shows 6X A319s. Nice to see UA finally offering a consistent product in some key markets.

STT757 wrote:

The Port Authority is undertaking a new master plan for the airport, after Terminal A opens (sometime this Fall) they are starting work on a new Terminal B, new Airtrain, and will use the new master plan to guide development for the redevelopment of rest of the airport. Much of the new expansion will be in areas around the former Waverly yards near the current Airtrain station.

https://www.nj.com/news/2022/03/newark-airport-next-on-deck-for-port-authority-makeover.html

The City of Newark, in conjunction with the Port Authority and with funding from the Port Authority and Prudential have been studying totally redeveloping the area around Newark Airport to make it more part of the community. It includes remaking the EWR Airtrain station on the Northeast corridor one that is open to the public, and includes the PATH extension to the rail link station.

The Coalition, Airport City, includes the City of Newark, Port Authority, Rutgers University, NJIT, Prudential, Regional Planning Association (RPA), and the Weitzman School of Design University of Pennsylvania.

https://news.njit.edu/airport-city-newark-coalition-awarded-fourth-round-funding

https://acn.njit.edu/

There have been studies about adding a fourth runway to EWR, the University of Pennsylvania includes a rendering of a new runway layout on page 29 of their excellent EWR Master Book.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5f306a5fb4e00e41d47f3ef5/t/5f5a9a7edc1c6539abfb4c74/1599773342607/Studio_MasterBook_Online.pdf

The UPenn study copies the RPA’s most recent plan, which isn’t a serious proposal. Airspace restrictions prevent parallel landings from the north. Best way to increase EWR capacity would be to utilize CRDA to use the the crosswind runway more, like they do at PHL, but EWR’s airspace is restricted to the east. Both airports are the same size, have similar configurations, etc. PHL has more airspace to work with, though, which is why 27R/35 landings are more common there and you never see 22L/29 landings at EWR. PHL also uses CRDA for 27L/17 landings, similar to 22L/11 landings at EWR, but EWR ATC doesn’t like using this configuration and they have more staffing issues compared to PHL.

jetblastdubai wrote:

STT757 wrote:

Best I can tell it's domestic routes that are almost all mainline, DTW, CLT are the only ones listed with a mix of mainline and ERJ-175s. Perhaps those ERJ-175s will be replaced with mainline.

Looking at March '23, EWR-DTW shows 5X A319s and CLT shows 6X A319s. Nice to see UA finally offering a consistent product in some key markets.

Doing a little research and wow United is going big with domestic mainline from EWR; MCI 3 73G, PWM 1 A320, ROC 1 73G, BUF 2 A319, STL 2 A319, ORF 2 73G, etc...

It's looking like the '90s again

leader1 wrote:

STT757 wrote:

The Port Authority is undertaking a new master plan for the airport, after Terminal A opens (sometime this Fall) they are starting work on a new Terminal B, new Airtrain, and will use the new master plan to guide development for the redevelopment of rest of the airport. Much of the new expansion will be in areas around the former Waverly yards near the current Airtrain station.

https://www.nj.com/news/2022/03/newark-airport-next-on-deck-for-port-authority-makeover.html

The City of Newark, in conjunction with the Port Authority and with funding from the Port Authority and Prudential have been studying totally redeveloping the area around Newark Airport to make it more part of the community. It includes remaking the EWR Airtrain station on the Northeast corridor one that is open to the public, and includes the PATH extension to the rail link station.

The Coalition, Airport City, includes the City of Newark, Port Authority, Rutgers University, NJIT, Prudential, Regional Planning Association (RPA), and the Weitzman School of Design University of Pennsylvania.

https://news.njit.edu/airport-city-newark-coalition-awarded-fourth-round-funding

https://acn.njit.edu/

There have been studies about adding a fourth runway to EWR, the University of Pennsylvania includes a rendering of a new runway layout on page 29 of their excellent EWR Master Book.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5f306a5fb4e00e41d47f3ef5/t/5f5a9a7edc1c6539abfb4c74/1599773342607/Studio_MasterBook_Online.pdf

The UPenn study copies the RPA’s most recent plan, which isn’t a serious proposal. Airspace restrictions prevent parallel landings from the north. Best way to increase EWR capacity would be to utilize CRDA to use the the crosswind runway more, like they do at PHL, but EWR’s airspace is restricted to the east. Both airports are the same size, have similar configurations, etc. PHL has more airspace to work with, though, which is why 27R/35 landings are more common there and you never see 22L/29 landings at EWR. PHL also uses CRDA for 27L/17 landings, similar to 22L/11 landings at EWR, but EWR ATC doesn’t like using this configuration and they have more staffing issues compared to PHL.

Because of the airspace being restricted at EWR, is there a proposal for new alignments of the airspace for the NYC area airports including EWR? I’ve heard there’s something like this happening but not 100% sure what the status of the plan is. The NYC airspace what I heard is really old since WW2 days, I could be wrong.

Also after the new terminal B is built, what airlines would move into that terminal and how would that affect the airlines at the new terminal A? Example after the new terminal B is built, will that give the opportunity for B6 and UA to grow more at the new terminal A? Like what will happen?

ddaly241 wrote:

Also after the new terminal B is built, what airlines would move into that terminal and how would that affect the airlines at the new terminal A? Example after the new terminal B is built, will that give the opportunity for B6 and UA to grow more at the new terminal A? Like what will happen?

Looking at the preliminary renderings for the new Terminal B it's being design to better accommodate the new generation of wide bodies vs. the current gates which were designed for Eastern and Delta Air Lines.The new Terminal B is planned to be physically connected an expansion to the new Terminal A's concourses, probably a sterile connection to allow passengers arriving at certain Terminal A gates to clear customs at Terminal B.Something similar may be developed for the Terminal C replacement, sterile connection to Terminal B FIS. I think we have to wait for the new master plan to be released.

ddaly241 wrote:

leader1 wrote:

STT757 wrote:

The Port Authority is undertaking a new master plan for the airport, after Terminal A opens (sometime this Fall) they are starting work on a new Terminal B, new Airtrain, and will use the new master plan to guide development for the redevelopment of rest of the airport. Much of the new expansion will be in areas around the former Waverly yards near the current Airtrain station.

https://www.nj.com/news/2022/03/newark-airport-next-on-deck-for-port-authority-makeover.html

The City of Newark, in conjunction with the Port Authority and with funding from the Port Authority and Prudential have been studying totally redeveloping the area around Newark Airport to make it more part of the community. It includes remaking the EWR Airtrain station on the Northeast corridor one that is open to the public, and includes the PATH extension to the rail link station.

The Coalition, Airport City, includes the City of Newark, Port Authority, Rutgers University, NJIT, Prudential, Regional Planning Association (RPA), and the Weitzman School of Design University of Pennsylvania.

https://news.njit.edu/airport-city-newark-coalition-awarded-fourth-round-funding

https://acn.njit.edu/

There have been studies about adding a fourth runway to EWR, the University of Pennsylvania includes a rendering of a new runway layout on page 29 of their excellent EWR Master Book.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5f306a5fb4e00e41d47f3ef5/t/5f5a9a7edc1c6539abfb4c74/1599773342607/Studio_MasterBook_Online.pdf

The UPenn study copies the RPA’s most recent plan, which isn’t a serious proposal. Airspace restrictions prevent parallel landings from the north. Best way to increase EWR capacity would be to utilize CRDA to use the the crosswind runway more, like they do at PHL, but EWR’s airspace is restricted to the east. Both airports are the same size, have similar configurations, etc. PHL has more airspace to work with, though, which is why 27R/35 landings are more common there and you never see 22L/29 landings at EWR. PHL also uses CRDA for 27L/17 landings, similar to 22L/11 landings at EWR, but EWR ATC doesn’t like using this configuration and they have more staffing issues compared to PHL.

Because of the airspace being restricted at EWR, is there a proposal for new alignments of the airspace for the NYC area airports including EWR? I’ve heard there’s something like this happening but not 100% sure what the status of the plan is. The NYC airspace what I heard is really old since WW2 days, I could be wrong.

There was a complete airspace redesign proposal, but that was scrapped about 10 years ago for various reasons. Some elements of it were adopted. EWR, for instance, gained some new departure fixes (I.e. fanning of departures), but they’re not really used so much. From my recollection, PHL would have benefited the most from the new proposals, followed by EWR.

leader1 wrote:

ddaly241 wrote:

leader1 wrote:

The UPenn study copies the RPA’s most recent plan, which isn’t a serious proposal. Airspace restrictions prevent parallel landings from the north. Best way to increase EWR capacity would be to utilize CRDA to use the the crosswind runway more, like they do at PHL, but EWR’s airspace is restricted to the east. Both airports are the same size, have similar configurations, etc. PHL has more airspace to work with, though, which is why 27R/35 landings are more common there and you never see 22L/29 landings at EWR. PHL also uses CRDA for 27L/17 landings, similar to 22L/11 landings at EWR, but EWR ATC doesn’t like using this configuration and they have more staffing issues compared to PHL.

Because of the airspace being restricted at EWR, is there a proposal for new alignments of the airspace for the NYC area airports including EWR? I’ve heard there’s something like this happening but not 100% sure what the status of the plan is. The NYC airspace what I heard is really old since WW2 days, I could be wrong.

There was a complete airspace redesign proposal, but that was scrapped about 10 years ago for various reasons. Some elements of it were adopted. EWR, for instance, gained some new departure fixes (I.e. fanning of departures), but they’re not really used so much. From my recollection, PHL would have benefited the most from the new proposals, followed by EWR.

Eventually there has to be an airspace design soon, because no matter what, pax is definitely rising at EWR. I know the simple answer to that is using larger aircraft but at some point of the day more aircraft movements will be needed at EWR sometime before or around 2040.

STT757 wrote:

ddaly241 wrote:

Also after the new terminal B is built, what airlines would move into that terminal and how would that affect the airlines at the new terminal A? Example after the new terminal B is built, will that give the opportunity for B6 and UA to grow more at the new terminal A? Like what will happen?

Looking at the preliminary renderings for the new Terminal B it's being design to better accommodate the new generation of wide bodies vs. the current gates which were designed for Eastern and Delta Air Lines.The new Terminal B is planned to be physically connected an expansion to the new Terminal A's concourses, probably a sterile connection to allow passengers arriving at certain Terminal A gates to clear customs at Terminal B.Something similar may be developed for the Terminal C replacement, sterile connection to Terminal B FIS. I think we have to wait for the new master plan to be released.

Honestly I can’t wait for this new master plan design to be released. It’s going to be really interesting how these new terminals with that many gates will be used with two main runways.

ddaly241 wrote:

leader1 wrote:

ddaly241 wrote:

Because of the airspace being restricted at EWR, is there a proposal for new alignments of the airspace for the NYC area airports including EWR? I’ve heard there’s something like this happening but not 100% sure what the status of the plan is. The NYC airspace what I heard is really old since WW2 days, I could be wrong.

There was a complete airspace redesign proposal, but that was scrapped about 10 years ago for various reasons. Some elements of it were adopted. EWR, for instance, gained some new departure fixes (I.e. fanning of departures), but they’re not really used so much. From my recollection, PHL would have benefited the most from the new proposals, followed by EWR.

Eventually there has to be an airspace design soon, because no matter what, pax is definitely rising at EWR. I know the simple answer to that is using larger aircraft but at some point of the day more aircraft movements will be needed at EWR sometime before or around 2040.

Not at this time. As long as LGA exists - and they just finished a major overhaul, so it isn’t going anywhere - there really can’t be anything done to change the airspace. Technology is the best bet. Some of the technology, like CRDA, exists and EWR does have it, but there are staffing issues and their controllers are uncomfortable using it. And I don’t think bigger planes are the end all. That causes issues on its own and actually makes airport operations less efficient.

jetblastdubai wrote:

STT757 wrote:

Best I can tell it's domestic routes that are almost all mainline, DTW, CLT are the only ones listed with a mix of mainline and ERJ-175s. Perhaps those ERJ-175s will be replaced with mainline.

Looking at March '23, EWR-DTW shows 5X A319s and CLT shows 6X A319s. Nice to see UA finally offering a consistent product in some key markets.

I think that GSO and RDU may be heading in that direction as well.

When the new terminal opens I'm assuming the A-2 concourse immediately closes on the old Terminal A - will the A-3 concourse immediately close as well? Or will that still be in use until all Terminal One gates are opened? How will that process occur?

tmu101 wrote:

When the new terminal opens I'm assuming the A-2 concourse immediately closes on the old Terminal A - will the A-3 concourse immediately close as well? Or will that still be in use until all Terminal One gates are opened? How will that process occur?

All of old Terminal A will close for good.

Once the new terminal B opens, my guess is United is going to try and not only use it for arrivals, but also departures, and eventually we will see international airlines back at C. Just a thought, has United considered building a 4th concourse on terminal C where the C71 hardstands are? They could probably fit maybe 6-7 737 gates over there. Lastly, I don't see a reason to close A2 and A3 until work on the new B gets started, EWR has a very serious gate situation problem that has an easy fix.

T5towbar wrote:

jetblastdubai wrote:

STT757 wrote:

Best I can tell it's domestic routes that are almost all mainline, DTW, CLT are the only ones listed with a mix of mainline and ERJ-175s. Perhaps those ERJ-175s will be replaced with mainline.

Looking at March '23, EWR-DTW shows 5X A319s and CLT shows 6X A319s. Nice to see UA finally offering a consistent product in some key markets.

I think that GSO and RDU may be heading in that direction as well.

EWR-RDU goes all mainline, 7 A319s.

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

Rumored list of UA TA destinations

Atlanta
Austin
Dallas-Fort Worth
Miami
Nashville
Orlando
Phoenix
Raleigh-Durham
San Diego
Seattle-Tacoma
Tampa
West Palm Beach
Las Vegas
Seattle
Charlotte
Fort Myers
Boston
Detroit
New Orleans
Fort Laudy
Detroit
Portland
Charleston

It's 23 destinations, but this lists two doubles (DTW, SEA). Any ideas what the two destinations are? The non seasonal routes that fit the profile of domestic all mainline routes (that are not hubs) not on the list are CLE, JAX, MSP, SNA, SMF, SAT, SRQ..

STT757 wrote:

jetblastdubai wrote:

STT757 wrote:

Best I can tell it's domestic routes that are almost all mainline, DTW, CLT are the only ones listed with a mix of mainline and ERJ-175s. Perhaps those ERJ-175s will be replaced with mainline.

Looking at March '23, EWR-DTW shows 5X A319s and CLT shows 6X A319s. Nice to see UA finally offering a consistent product in some key markets.

Doing a little research and wow United is going big with domestic mainline from EWR; MCI 3 73G, PWM 1 A320, ROC 1 73G, BUF 2 A319, STL 2 A319, ORF 2 73G, etc...

It's looking like the '90s again

With the mass exodus of regional pilots to mainline and regional pay scales almost touching mainline scales, i think the pendulum has swung, at least for the next 5 years. Maybe keep those RJs into the 2nd tier cities; ALB, LAN, ROA, etc.

Not sure what the master plan is going to come up with, but I think a taxiway around the end of the west runway (4L/22R) would work well.

EWR normally has departing traffic take 4L/22R and arriving traffic on 4R/22L. The arriving traffic has to hold short of the inner runway after landing. The local controller normally waits for about 4 aircraft to land and hold short of 4L/22R, finds a hole (maybe following a heavy departure) and then crosses the 4 aircraft across 4L/22R.

A looping taxiway around the end of the runway (such as ATL approach end 8R or the taxiways at DFW around the ends of 17C, R, and 35 L, C) would hopefully speed up the flow. Looking at Google earth shows both ends of the runways at EWR surrounded by parking lots - I'd imagine it would be easier to acquire this type of property than others. There doesn't look to be as much room available that was used at the DFW taxiway loops, so to work properly you'd have to land and then make a hard turn off the taxiway to reverse direction and then cross at the approach end of 4L/22R to ensure gate-bound aircraft don't taxi into the departure corridor of departing aircraft.

GlobalMoose wrote:

Not sure what the master plan is going to come up with, but I think a taxiway around the end of the west runway (4L/22R) would work well.

EWR normally has departing traffic take 4L/22R and arriving traffic on 4R/22L. The arriving traffic has to hold short of the inner runway after landing. The local controller normally waits for about 4 aircraft to land and hold short of 4L/22R, finds a hole (maybe following a heavy departure) and then crosses the 4 aircraft across 4L/22R.

A looping taxiway around the end of the runway (such as ATL approach end 8R or the taxiways at DFW around the ends of 17C, R, and 35 L, C) would hopefully speed up the flow. Looking at Google earth shows both ends of the runways at EWR surrounded by parking lots - I'd imagine it would be easier to acquire this type of property than others. There doesn't look to be as much room available that was used at the DFW taxiway loops, so to work properly you'd have to land and then make a hard turn off the taxiway to reverse direction and then cross at the approach end of 4L/22R to ensure gate-bound aircraft don't taxi into the departure corridor of departing aircraft.

That was actually in the works a couple years ago, not sure what happened. I can't link directly, it's under June 2014 presentations:

https://www.panynj.gov/corporate/en/board-meeting-info/board-committee-meeting-presentations.html

GlobalMoose wrote:

Not sure what the master plan is going to come up with, but I think a taxiway around the end of the west runway (4L/22R) would work well.

EWR normally has departing traffic take 4L/22R and arriving traffic on 4R/22L. The arriving traffic has to hold short of the inner runway after landing. The local controller normally waits for about 4 aircraft to land and hold short of 4L/22R, finds a hole (maybe following a heavy departure) and then crosses the 4 aircraft across 4L/22R.

A looping taxiway around the end of the runway (such as ATL approach end 8R or the taxiways at DFW around the ends of 17C, R, and 35 L, C) would hopefully speed up the flow. Looking at Google earth shows both ends of the runways at EWR surrounded by parking lots - I'd imagine it would be easier to acquire this type of property than others. There doesn't look to be as much room available that was used at the DFW taxiway loops, so to work properly you'd have to land and then make a hard turn off the taxiway to reverse direction and then cross at the approach end of 4L/22R to ensure gate-bound aircraft don't taxi into the departure corridor of departing aircraft.

Here's what I don't understand about EWR runway usage. On a southwest flow day, they depart most flights from 22R/W presumably so they don't have to issue runway crossing clearances to 11/29. Why can't they just officially close 11/29 on appropriate days except for taxiing (seems like it's used less than 10% of the time anyways), have arriving flights on 22L back taxi to 11/29 and they coulld have continuous taxi flow behind the departures? And on days with a northeast flow, instead of departing 04L full length, dept at intersection CC which would be fine for the majority of depts, then have landings back taxi to the threshold for 04L and go behind the depts? It won't make a tremendous difference on arrival rate, but it would at least help keep the dept flow rate going. And with EWR/NYC airspace, every little bit helps.