Hello everybody. I just came back from PBI on B6 into JFK. Nice flight. I always wonder when the old TWA terminal is going to be of use. I know that B6 store's planes there overnight. Is there any future plans with this terminal.

I also heard that it's a landmark or something like that, so they cant do anything with the terminal. Also, what airline served jetBlue's current terminal (i think terminal 6)?

Thanks so much

Joe

PS- NIKV69, if your reading this, please e-mial me and tell me how it went on monday at ISP. If anyone knows the opening date, PLEASE tell me. THNAKS

Hi joe,

I think that that the terminal 6 is just for B6 use.

But I have a question about the terminal 6, which airlines were using it before Jet Blue does.

Nick

Term 6 was used by various airlines over its life span. When B6 arrived, UA and HP were there.

Expect an announcement shortly regarding B6's plans on rebuilding Term 5 as the mainstay of their JFK ops incorporating the historic aspect of the building.

Terminal 6 (the JetBlue terminal) was originally National Airlines. TWA then moved in and had domestic flights from there. After they consolidated operations into Terminal 5, United/America West used it. Now it is just JetBlue.

As for T5, the building is a landmark and can't be knocked down. JetBlue/Port Authority plans to build a terminal around T5, incorporating the famous design into the building.

I'm pretty sure, though not completely sure, that Terminal 6 was built for the original National, then it went to TWA for their domestic operations and then to jetBlue.

jeremy

I think jetblue is going to use the old TWA terminal--at least that is the plan.

I also think jetblue's current home was also formerly the home of British Airways.

I saw the TWA terminal at JFK last night. Who is paying for the TWA sign to be lit up on the roof?
Also, JFK has no long-haul US airline's aircraft parked there. It looks like a foreign only terminal(s).
JFK also has to be the most dull airport in the world. And the only place I've ever had my socks ex-rayed! What where they looking for in a sock??
LHR and HKG rule.

BA was always at Terminal 7, I belive. I don't think Terminal 6 has a customs facility. Right now, Jetblue parks their planes that aren't doing anything next to Terminal 5, but there are no gates for them to pull up to.

JFK is the best airport in the world!!! 9 Terminals rock! Only LHR is better in my opinion in terms the different aircraft available.

Currently, they are tying to upgrade terminal five to be able to handle modern traffic levels. In the meantime, it is a place where crews can go to receive hookers and drugs during long layovers.

I was just at JetBlue's terminal 6 last week. The rotunda I was in was very crowded as 3 flights were departing within a short time of each other. I didn't really enjoy being there. Also, the bathrooms in the Rotunda are downstairs. I can see why they want to acquire the old TWA terminal.

I was never in TWA Terminal 5. Is that long concrete tube considered historic? I hope they can tear that down. It didn't appear to have any windows, which is a big negative for those of us who like to look out and see the aircraft. I have no problem with keeping the Central Terminal area, but I would think the piers should be rebuilt.

On a side note- I paid the most ever for a beer in Terminal 6. It was a 22 oz draft for $9.00

"JFK also has to be the most dull airport in the world"

On behalf of all aviation enthusiasts everywhere: you are kidding right?!?!

PJ

JetBlue is making plans to build around the TWA terminal. B6 will move into T5, while keeping the historic architecture. T6 doesn't have customs. Therefore, Dominican flights arrive at the international T4 right now and then taxied to T6.

OK, to review here:

Eero Saarinen-designed Terminal 5 is a designated landmark and was so even before the TWA-AA merger. T5 therefore has to be preserved. What will be preserved though is the question. For sure, the main terminal building will be, and in all probability one or both of the aerial walkways will be as well, however in all probability both of the concourses will be demolished.

Terminal 6 was designed by noted architect I.M. Pei for National Airlines and was originally known as The National Airlines Sundome (tying in with their Sunking logo symbolizing them as an airline you fly to Florida-the cornerstone of their marketing approach in the 1970s). Later, TWA's domestic flights used Terminal 6.

Terminal 7 was built for British Airways, who operated something close to a hub at JFK at the end of the 1950s, with flights not only to Britain, but to the Carribean and other destinations as well. United moved in from their former home of T8 in the 1980s at the start of their abortive codeshare with BA, and several BA affiliates and oneworld partners use the terminal now as well. Happily enough BA's current US partner, American, is now right next door at T8-T9...

Terminal 5 will eventually be rebuilt with a massive new semi-circular structure that will replace the concoures of T5 and apparently, T6 in its entirety, which will be demolished (unfortunately in my opinion). The new T5-T6 plan has been scaled back since 9/11 and it's unclear when this will be constructed, however, when it is built I imagine that jetBlue will be the primary tenant, and the new terminal will facilitate a massive increase in their operations from JFK.

Much later this year, Terminal 5 is slated to be used as an art exposition starting in October. In fact, someone posted a thread on this just before the site went down complete with a link to the website, but darn it if the Forum Search engine isn't working!   Must be the power audit...anyway, look through the recent posts to find that thread regarding the exposition at T5 this fall...it was pretty exciting, and if I'm in NYC I might attend it.

-WGW2707

Here are the Port Authority's plans which date back to 1999.

Tear down T6,

Tear down the concourse (gate areas) of T5,

Build a brand new 23 gate terminal on land behind T5 where the concourses are now located and on land where T6 is now located.

The new terminal will have a brand new ticket, baggage hall behind T5. Connected via the "tubes".

However T5's core will no longer house airline functions, everything will be in the new terminal.

Here's a clipping I have of the original plan for the new T5, you can see where T5 is, where it's concourses used to be and where T6 used to be.

This is the original plan from '99/'00 which would have included Jetblue, UAL, TWA and possibly HP. The new Terminal will be only for Jetblue, and have 23 gates.

http://community.webshots.com/photo/95653019/95653104uBlCsg

The TWA terminal is a city landmark. The Port Authority of NY and NJ is a bistate agency. JFK is their land.

Here's what most people don't know: the TWA terminal is not protected from demolition. It also does not have to go through a landmark comission to approve any changes. The Port Authority and JetBlue are going through the whole process because they recognize the integrity and importance of the structure. They also realize the public outcry if they ever touched the terminal.

All of the above plans save the terminal, but none have been approved by the FAA as of yet. They are sure dragging their feet with it. That means that B6 may soon be in the position of running out of gate space at JFK.

This brings to mind an interesting question: will B6 move into the old TWA gate areas while something new is being built? The process will take years and there are dozens of new aircraft coming.

PJ

I think B6 "may" use gate space else where at JFK, or even stairs and buses to/from T6 to a remote stand.

I think most likely though if space gets tight at JFK they will focus growth elsewhere during the interim, they are already launching flights from LGA to FLL.

they are already launching flights from LGA to FLL.

Not according to any flight trackers, nor a photo database.

"Not according to any flight trackers, nor a photo database."

Check back in September ..

Levg79-jetBlue announced today 7 dailies from LGA to FLL, in addition to schedule upgrades from BOS

BTW, what in the wide, wide, world of airplanes is the PANYNJ thinking by reducing the number of gates in the new jetBlue terminal...if jetBlue is only building it with 23 gates, they absolutely will NEED to have the concourses be expandable, or have many of them be twin-gates (able to service two separate planes at once), because at the rate they are growing, and will continue to grow (if they drop every single one of their remaining option, they will STILL have 282 planes, 182 A-320's and 100 E-190's) and you can bet that, unless they re-focus away from their current JFK home, they will need more space than they have right now, and likely quite a few widebody gates as well (not that we'll likely see an A-380 in jetBlue colors, but I could see the A-330-200 going to Europe...

JFK also has to be the most dull airport in the world.

Are you joking? Maybe you were there at an offhour, but JFK is the premier international airport in the United States.

Terminal 7 was built for British Airways, who operated something close to a hub at JFK at the end of the 1950s, with flights not only to Britain, but to the Carribean and other destinations as well. U

That is very interesting. Does anybody know what other destinations they flew to?

Not according to any flight trackers, nor a photo database.

It was announced today.
https://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/1622768/

"if jetBlue is only building it with 23 gates, they absolutely will NEED to have the concourses be expandable".

23 gates is plenty for a LCC, remember they are an LCC not a legacy. Quick turn arounds and shorter gate dwell times, think Southwest.

Southwest airline's largest airports (Phoenix, BWI, Las Vegas) operate with about 200 daily flights from about 20 gates.

Jetblue will grow alot at JFK over the next few years, but they will never operate more flights from JFK than WN does from PHX or Las Vegas.

Southwest at Phoenix,

Southwest flies to 38 cities from Phoenix with 183 daily flights, all operated from 23 gates.

Baltimore,

Southwest flies to 35 Cities with 161 daily departures, from 19 gates.

Las Vegas,

Las Vegas is Southwest's busiest City in terms of Departures, they fly to 44 Cities with 185 daily flights. All from 19 gates.

So with Southwest in mind, Jetblue will be fine with 23 gates at JFK.

STT757, though I can't dispute your WN claims, all of us on here need to realize one thing. B6 will have a boatload and a half of planes. SHUPirate1 hit it right on the head. And while WN has proven you can run a rather large operation on a rather reasonable amount of gates, they've also spread their fleet out a bit. You've mentioned BWI, LAS, and PHX as WN 3 (or 5 or so) "hub" cities- others could include MDW, BNA, and maybe OAK. But what WN doesn't have is their all 400 or so of their planes "based" at one airport. And yes I know B6 has Long Beach, but Long Beach has slot restrictions.
But my point is that B6 can't have 250+ planes based at one location! Think of the delays!! But do I buy the fact that B6 will be based "soley" out of JFK? God no; it'd be foolish to think that! All I'm saying is B6 will probably will desire more gates @ JFK, hence their plans for a combined T5/T6, as the most likely will have a substantial operation there, but also looks towards expanding.
But about T6, my question, which was also implied by Jfklganyc, is that what are B6's "immediate plans" for T5? As Jfklganyc stated at, B6 will probably run out of gate space within a few years, and will need a place to house more planes. Yet if they build a new terminal, what do they do during construction? And more importantly, IMO, why haven't they started construction?? My guess is they want some cash in the bank to pay for a good chunk of their planes. B6 is also dragging their feet, I'm willing to bet, to reach a deal with another airport to "house" -or at least a large part of the airline- B6 during construction, answering the question about what to do during the construction phase: more operations, probably P2P, that will help take the stress off B6's JFK operation while they build up the T5/T6 complex.
But in the long run, I predict B6 will run a hybrid route system: a large hub in JFK, a smaller one in LGB- and probably one in the Midwest-, as well as plenty of P2P routes. But I'm only 18 and my post is way off topic....

To Nosedive:

There are a couple of options B6 could do during construction (some mentioned already):

1) Mobile lounge
2) Temporary building
3) Use part of T-4 (already being done for the DR arrivals)

But the reality will probably be that the construction will focus on the T-5 side before working on T-6, therefore B6 will not have to move anywhere.

When the Embraers come online, there will most likely require less space than the A320's (assuming the E190 has a less wingspan than an A320), therefore B6 could double up the E190s at some gates with some strategic reangling.

In a nutshell, B6 may not need all of the gates of a super-hub. Remember, efficiency is the name of the game here, something WN is good at (as STT757 pointed out with the WN "pseudo-hubs").

Phatfarmlines:

I am aware of other options available to B6 during construction. And B6, I'd wager, has a few ideas of their own we all haven't thought up yet. And you do bring up a good point about the construction starting on the T5 side.
But, with more new planes coming online in the next few years, will the construction site and any other parts of JFK, no matter how its arranged, be enough?
This is why I thought moving some of these new planes away from JFK, in the coming years, to new "locations" (another hub, focus city, P2P...Temporary or not) would be a good idea. And for 2 reasons: temporary relief off of JFK and another well established market(s). By adding frequencies in P2P and/or by establishing a hub and/or focus city, B6 provides more of their customer, and probably makes more money. But, we all know this is speculation. B6 knows more than what we do.
And yes, I do agree that B6 does not need the space of a super hub. Ten years from now, maybe. My point here is that if it wants that space, or may feel the need, B6 should plan on having it. That doesn't mean the "super-hub" is built all at once, but B6 will most likely leave themselves room to expand at JFK if they feel the need to do so.

Even with all of their planes they ordered I really don't think Jetblue has plans for "More than" 200 flights from JFK, 200 would mean they would be very JFK centric which I doubt.

They are going to start spreading out from places like Ft.Lauderdale, Boston, Washington Dulles, Laguardia etc..

And even if they were planning for 200 flights at JFK as I pointed out with WN's operations at LAS, PHX and BWI you can run 200 flights from 23 gates quite easily with the WN quick turn around.

The reason why they have not started actual construction yet for the new terminal is because first they have to go through the planning studies etc.. And second according to Crains NY Jetblue is looking for Private Capital to fund the construction, kind of like Lehman Brothers with T4.

TWA T-5 WAS USED FOR INTNL FLIGHTS AND TWA T-6 WAS USED FOR DOMESTIC FLIGHTS. WHEN TWA CONSOLIDATED ITS OPERATIONS, AND EFFECTIVELY BECAME A SMALLER AIRLINE, IT MOVED ITS OPERATIONS INTO T-6, THE NEWER AND SMALLER BUILDING.

MANY AIRLINES HAD EXPRESSED INTEREST AT Macedonian Airlines (Greece)">IN THE OLD T-5 "WING-SHAPED" BUILDING, HOWEVER THE BUILDING IS AT Macedonian Airlines (Greece)">IN SUCH DISREPAIR AND IS AT Macedonian Airlines (Greece)">IN NEED OF ALOT OF REPAIR WORK, THAT IT WOULD COST A FORTUNE TO REPAIR. WHICH IS WHY AN UNDERTAKING OF THIS KIND WOULD REQUIRE FUNDING OR SUBSIDIZING FROM A THIRD PARTY.

THE NYC LANDMARKS COMMISION HAS DESIGNATED THAT BUILDING AS A LANDMARK, AND THEREFORE CANNOT BE TORN DOWN OR DEMOLISHED.

INCIDENTALLY, IF ANYONE SAW THE MOVIE "CATCH ME IF YOU AN / ZGGG), China">CAN", THE SCENE WHERE LEONARDO PLAYS THE AIRLINE PILOT, AND WHEN HE IS AT THE AIRPORT, WAS FILMED AT Macedonian Airlines (Greece)">IN FRONT OF TWA T-5. LOOK CLOSELY AND YOU WILL SEE THE BUILDING.

PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE SCENE WHEN HE ARRIVES AT THE AIRPORT DRESSED AT Macedonian Airlines (Greece)">IN PAN-AM PILOTS UNIFORM AND WALKING ARM-IN-ARM WITH A BUNCH OF STEWARDESES'S.

A little off-topic, but to answer the question about British Airways' former operations at JFK:

Back in the 1950s and 1960s (and even into the 1970s and 1980s) BOAC/BA used JFK as a transfer point for flights between Europe and its far flung Caribbean/Central American colonies.

I don't have any BOAC timetables from that era, but I've seen route maps and some of the destinations likely served were: Nassau, Freeport, Bermuda, Belize, Grand Cayman, Antigua, Grenada, Barbados, Georgetown (Guyana), Kingston/Montego Bay, San Juan, etc., etc.

Miami was also an important destination for BOAC. Of course, as the 1970s wore on, the UK granted independence to many of its colonies. Longer-range aircraft also enabled the nonstop services from LHR and LGW that are the norm today.

By Nov... JetBlue is currently flying average 95 flights from JFK daily. Plans for JFK do call for expansion of New York's hometown airline and to say never over 200 flights... i think so.

T5 is being held up by the Port Authority's approval of the final plan. T4 has space that has been offered while T5 is built, opening in stages. Don't expect to see B6 give up T6 space all together - if they don't use the space, some one else will.

When UA was using T6 gates, it was for their premium transcon service to LAX/SFO. I miss going through that terminal. It had a real retro feal to it. I could almost imagine I was going to board a National DC10 to Florida. Instead I would get on a 762 to the west coast - that's a retro experience, too.

Bottom line is that Jetblue is the one who came up with 23 gates, not the Port Authority. If Jetblue thought they needed 40 gates they would have asked for 40 gates, however except for the PTVs Jetblue is operating very much the Southwest way.

Im sure they studied Southwest's largest operations (PHX, LAS, BWI) and how they managed their space (gates) to maximize efficiency, 23 gates is more than enough to operate 200 flights.

Im sure Jetblue has big plans for JFK, given the fact that they are asking for 23 gates out of their new Terminal it's pretty clear they are going to be running somewhere between 170 and 210 flights per day which 23 gates operating with Southwest's quick turns would easily handle.

Here's a question:

If B6 is really interested in expanding while spending cautiously, why not use the terminal 5 and terminal 6 complex as is. Do not tell me T5 is not useable. TWA was using it up until 2001 and don't tell me it's not made for large amounts of people--747s were parking there through 1997.
T5 needs a paint job, updated concessions, new Flight Information Displays in the concourses, and new signage. THAT'S IT!

TWA put in a new baggage claim when the old one burnt down in the late 90s. There are brand new FIDS in the main terminal that were installed in 2000. And it is handicapped compliant because it was used up until 2 years ago!

Now I am not saying that a freshly painted, newly floored, updated T5 and T6 complex would be a beautiful hub. But if you connected the two concourses of T5 with the gate area in T6, you would have close to 40 gates, five or six baggage claim areas, four security checkpoints, three separate check-in areas, two separate arrival areas AND PLENTY OF ROOM TO EXPAND WITHOUT SPENDING CLOSE TO A BILLION DOLLARS. It won't be along the lines of MCO, but it sure as hell won't be a disaster either.

PJ

It's been mentioned that T-5 will retain the front part, (main entrance) since it's a registered landmark. The intentions are for B6 to move into that terminal once it's completed. T-6 use be National Airlines terminal, then used by TWA for domestic services. After TWA discontinued use of it, it started to be used by United and America West. In fact, when B6 started operations, United and America west were still using T6. What becomes of T-6 after B6 moves to T-5 is still unknown.

It was ok untill 2001, now however with Increased security requirements it's not realistic.

There's no room for those SUV sized Catscan baggage machines, and the tubes are not wide enough to handle the volumes of people high frequency LCC operations would bring.

"There's no room for those SUV sized Catscan baggage machines, and the tubes are not wide enough to handle the volumes of people high frequency LCC operations would bring."

That is not true. TWA had TWO check in areas. The one to the right was for coach, to the left was first class. One of those areas can easily fit all of the necessary equipment for security. Remember, that check-in area would be supplemented by the T-6 area which is huge.

As for the tubes: TWA used to park 10 747s there at one time. They all arrived and departed in the same general time frame. I was there, I saw it. If it wasn't a 747, it was a 767 or L1011. Most narrow bodies used to go to T6. If the facility can handle all of that at once, it sure can handle A320s/ E190s.

PJ

To Jfklganyc:

If you have ever flown through T-5 during the busy period, you would realize that the terminal was packed to the teeth with passengers.

In today's "post 9/11" airport design standards, T-5 would not fit the requirements. It is necessary to tear down the piers and reconstruct from the beginning.

I would have to disagree about having separate baggage claims and ticketing areas in different terminals. It is much more efficient to have these operations consolidated under one roof.

I have flown through T5 dozens of times in the 5 pm range--if there is a busier time, I am unaware of it.

It served its purpose fine. I am not saying that it is ideal. T6 sure isn't ideal. It's old and has a weird setup. But it's quirky and B6 fixed it up enough that it is useable. In terms of being crowded, the rotundas on either end of T6 are awfully crowded most of the time.

I am saying that it would spread out the growth and be a cheaper way of expanding. B6 should not be in the terminal building business. That's how the majors got into trouble. Keep it simple, keep it cheap. Two perfectly good terminals, up to 40 gates.

It's a Chevy, not a Caddy. But the Chevy still has quite a bit of life in it and a new paint job would help.

PJ

Here's what most people don't know: the TWA terminal is not protected from demolition. It also does not have to go through a landmark comission to approve any changes.

Actually, it does. Just as a Federal Government office in Chicago must abide by Illinois state law, the Port Authority must abide by New York City laws for facilities owned in the city. If T5 is a city landmark with protected status, the Port Authority CANNOT by law disregard that without a legal mandate for doing so (for example, the New York State General Assembly makes it illegal for municipalities to set aside their own landmarks, or the State Supreme Court says such city landmark laws are in violation of the higher-level state laws or constitution).

Jetblue will grow alot at JFK over the next few years, but they will never operate more flights from JFK than WN does from PHX or Las Vegas.

(Cue James Bond theme music)

"Never say Never, Again..."

PBOGDOS:

Turn your CAPS_LOCK key off and STOP SHOUTING!

T5 needs a paint job, updated concessions, new Flight Information Displays in the concourses, and new signage. THAT'S IT!

Actually, it also needs updated, space-gobbling baggage systems now found in airline terminals, as well as additional security equipment to handle the increased screening of baggage and passengers.

The intentions are for B6 to move into that terminal once it's completed

No, the plan is that the old T-5 will become a museum of sorts, or a gallery. The new terminal will be behind T-5, not a part of it.

As for the tubes: TWA used to park 10 747s there at one time. They all arrived and departed in the same general time frame. I was there, I saw it. If it wasn't a 747, it was a 767 or L1011. Most narrow bodies used to go to T6. If the facility can handle all of that at once, it sure can handle A320s/ E190s.

Actually, on this I think you're right. It's the volume of passengers waiting in the lounges after having passed through security screening 1-2 hours before flight time with 2-3 departures during those 1-2 hours that would be a problem.

I would have to disagree about having separate baggage claims and ticketing areas in different terminals. It is much more efficient to have these operations consolidated under one roof.

Not really. Baggage claim is a completely different process from check-in, handled by a different crew. Even below-wing, this is generally handled by (mostly) separate crews.

B6 should not be in the terminal building business. That's how the majors got into trouble.

It had nothing to do with the majors getting in trouble. Those buildings cost a few million dollars, while the majors are in debt for hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars.

A few million dollars??
Last time I checked, the new AA facility was going for 1.3 BILLION. Not such pocket change is it?

As for the NYC landmark laws, they DO NOT APPLY TO THE PA.
Case in point. The World Trade Center did not meet NYC fire codes because it didn't have to. It was state owned land with state owned buildings. Other municipalities may work differently but that's how NY works.

Another example is the Olympic Stadium they are trying to build on the West Side of Manhattan. It's over train tracks owned by the state--therefore the whole process bypasses the City Council review process. Quite interesting since a lot of people are against the project.

As for T5, the original concourse is landmarked too. If the PA MUST abide by NYC conservation laws why is it being knocked down once construction starts? Truth is the whole thing could get knocked down but there would be a public outcry.

PJ

Bottom line...JetBlue is making plans to remove all that it can at T5 and rebuild a terminal. Ultimately, B6 will move operations to T5 and vacate T6.