Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
TropicalSky wrote:Last I checked there is no rail link at FLL....does ATL have rail link?
TropicalSky wrote:Last I checked there is no rail link at FLL....does ATL have rail link?
TonyBurr wrote:JFK does not have a real, direct rail link.
7673mech wrote:TonyBurr wrote:JFK does not have a real, direct rail link.
What am I missing. You are the third person to say that.
I've taken a train from JFK to Jaimaca station, to my childhood home on LI.
zkojq wrote:AKL Auckland. They're planning on building a tram though....in ten years. What a joke.
coolian2 wrote:zkojq wrote:AKL Auckland. They're planning on building a tram though....in ten years. What a joke.
This is mostly inaccurate
Aisak wrote:Redwood839 wrote:LAS isn't that bad considering it's almost next to the strip. I fly in about 6 times a year and very rarely have ever come across traffic.
Being just across Tropicana Ave, I don´t know how hard it would be to extend the monorail from the last stop at MGM Grand to the airport.
WayexTDI wrote:coolian2 wrote:zkojq wrote:AKL Auckland. They're planning on building a tram though....in ten years. What a joke.
This is mostly inaccurate
So, what's the accurate version???
WayexTDI wrote:coolian2 wrote:zkojq wrote:AKL Auckland. They're planning on building a tram though....in ten years. What a joke.
This is mostly inaccurate
So, what's the accurate version???
kavok wrote:LGA, DTW, DFW, IAH, MCO, LAS
blockski wrote:It's also worth remembering that not all rail connections are created equal. For some, the level of service on the rail line stinks. For others, the connection to and from the airport stinks. And some (like, say, FLL) both are bad (shuttle bus to an infrequent rail line).
The best airport/transit links in the US, to my mind, are:
Transit right to the terminal:
DCA - It wasn't always this way, as the Metro station was built a long walk from the original terminal; but since the mid-90s development of Terminals B/C it's hard to bead DCA's easy access. Also helpful that the line doesn't terminate at DCA, you can catch Metro heading in either direction.
ORD: Great connections for all except T5
MDW: A bit of a walk, but still hard to beat the access.
ATL: Very easy connection into the terminal; fairly extensive transit network
These four are also, by far, the most used airport/transit links in the US. SFO could be a lot better if the BART connection was better designed.
There are plenty of other places with light rail networks and airport connections, but the quality of the connection as well as the relative weakness of the transit network often hurts the usefulness of the transit link.
MSP, SEA, and PDX are the best light rail connections.
DFW's station is in an odd location and the dispersed terminal layout makes it difficult; the DART network is large and Dallas isn't nearly as downtown-oriented to support good transit connections.
---
Bus/People Mover connections to transit: These are far too common in the US, mainly (IMHO) because of obscure funding rules that limit how airport funds can be used on transit projects.
JFK: decent connections to a wide range of transit services; even if there were better transit to the terminal itself, the location of JFK would make it kinda difficult to serve.
BOS
OAK
FlyRow wrote:CometOrbit wrote:Prague, Basel, Budapest, Naples, Nice, Venice (bus or boat).
Prague, Budapest have planned metro connections, but it's delayed/slowed every year. Prague will also have a heavy rail connection but it isn't planned to be ready before 2023.
Nice will have a fast tram connection to the city centre in summer 2019.
Starfuryt wrote:IAD is getting a metro extension that should open sometime this year, I was shooting there this past weekend and the stations look nearly complete. That being said the trip from downtown DC would be at least an hour.
blockski wrote:Vio wrote:It's ridiculous how many Canadian Airports don't have train service. Actually NONE do to be accurate. Vancouver has the Canada Line and Toronto has the UP Express, but both are light rail.
That's not accurate at all.
Vancouver's SkyTrain is as good as transit gets. Fully grade-separated, fully automated, fast and frequent service.
The UP Express in Toronto is likewise not 'light rail' in any sense; they operate a DMU train on mainline railways to connect the airport to Union Station. The main criticism here is (correctly) on the UP Express fares, and how they've tried to make it be an 'airport express' rather than just integrating it into the actual transit system.
yonikasz wrote:airplanenut wrote:yonikasz wrote:SEA’s rail link you can walk but it’s like over a mile.
It's about 1/4 mile on a covered walkway... 5 or so minutes. The bigger problem for SEA is that the light rail is a single line and it really only goes north (one stop at the south end of the airport), so unless you are on that line, it's not very useful. It's not a subway or real train line with branches in many directions that feed to an airport line.
Are you counting before you get to the parking garage or after?
TropicalSky wrote:Last I checked there is no rail link at FLL....does ATL have rail link?
Vio wrote:blockski wrote:Vio wrote:It's ridiculous how many Canadian Airports don't have train service. Actually NONE do to be accurate. Vancouver has the Canada Line and Toronto has the UP Express, but both are light rail.
That's not accurate at all.
Vancouver's SkyTrain is as good as transit gets. Fully grade-separated, fully automated, fast and frequent service.
The UP Express in Toronto is likewise not 'light rail' in any sense; they operate a DMU train on mainline railways to connect the airport to Union Station. The main criticism here is (correctly) on the UP Express fares, and how they've tried to make it be an 'airport express' rather than just integrating it into the actual transit system.
It's okay as far as "city service" is concerned. You can't however hop on a train in Chilliwack (West Coast Express for example) and ride to YVR. You also can't hop on VIA-RAIL from London, ON and go to Pearson. You have to change stations.
Compare that to FRA, AMS, LHR, etc....
This is Frankfurt Airport and its train station:
Amsterdam:
santos wrote:LIS an airport with 29M pax in 2018 doesn’t have a train station or connection, albeit it is now connected to the Metro
zakuivcustom wrote:The OP is not wrong - you need to change train to most places (i.e. Midtown Manhattan or rest of LI) at Jamaica Station (or Howard Beach if you choose to go that way) (thus not "direct") via AirTrain (Which, as an Automated People Mover line, is not really a "real" rail link). It's better than having to ride a shuttle bus to the nearest station like LAX (or LTN), but definitely worse than airports like DCA or BOS (Both have Metro line Station next to the terminal), BWI (Commuter Rail Station), etc.
blockski wrote:SFO could be a lot better if the BART connection was better designed.
blockski wrote:MSP, SEA, and PDX are the best light rail connections.
yonikasz wrote:airplanenut wrote:yonikasz wrote:SEA’s rail link you can walk but it’s like over a mile.
It's about 1/4 mile on a covered walkway... 5 or so minutes. The bigger problem for SEA is that the light rail is a single line and it really only goes north (one stop at the south end of the airport), so unless you are on that line, it's not very useful. It's not a subway or real train line with branches in many directions that feed to an airport line.
Are you counting before you get to the parking garage or after?
flymco753 wrote:The people of Detroit continuously vote NO on light rail to and from DTW as well as the region itself. Apparently, the reason is because the project would require an increase in taxpayer money, something in which over 50% of the population in that area either wont use/benefit from, or fund from their taxes. Someone with more knowledge about this metro area could probably explain it better.
ManoaChris wrote:blockski wrote:SFO could be a lot better if the BART connection was better designed.
andblockski wrote:MSP, SEA, and PDX are the best light rail connections.
Curious why you praise SEA and are critical of SFO... having lived in both cities, I greatly prefer SFO.
Beyond the exposed walk to SEA's sound transit station (which isn't convenient to any of the terminals), my biggest complaint is the circuitous route to downtown.
BART, conversely, is almost always the fastest way downtown, and I've never minded the (indoor) walk between terminals to get to the station (which is immediately adjacent to the United side of the international terminal).
ManoaChris wrote:blockski wrote:SFO could be a lot better if the BART connection was better designed.
andblockski wrote:MSP, SEA, and PDX are the best light rail connections.
Curious why you praise SEA and are critical of SFO... having lived in both cities, I greatly prefer SFO.
Beyond the exposed walk to SEA's sound transit station (which isn't convenient to any of the terminals), my biggest complaint is the circuitous route to downtown.
BART, conversely, is almost always the fastest way downtown, and I've never minded the (indoor) walk between terminals to get to the station (which is immediately adjacent to the United side of the international terminal).
Lucaing000 wrote:It amazes me how the #1 O&D airport in the world doesn't have a direct rail link.
CometOrbit wrote:Prague, Basel, Budapest, Naples, Nice, Venice (bus or boat).
Vio wrote:It's ridiculous how many Canadian Airports don't have train service. Actually NONE do to be accurate. Vancouver has the Canada Line and Toronto has the UP Express, but both are light rail.
Beechtobus wrote:blockski wrote:It's also worth remembering that not all rail connections are created equal. For some, the level of service on the rail line stinks. For others, the connection to and from the airport stinks. And some (like, say, FLL) both are bad (shuttle bus to an infrequent rail line).
The best airport/transit links in the US, to my mind, are:
Transit right to the terminal:
DCA - It wasn't always this way, as the Metro station was built a long walk from the original terminal; but since the mid-90s development of Terminals B/C it's hard to bead DCA's easy access. Also helpful that the line doesn't terminate at DCA, you can catch Metro heading in either direction.
ORD: Great connections for all except T5
MDW: A bit of a walk, but still hard to beat the access.
ATL: Very easy connection into the terminal; fairly extensive transit network
These four are also, by far, the most used airport/transit links in the US. SFO could be a lot better if the BART connection was better designed.
Don’t forget Denver. New, speedy train (the A Line) right to the terminal. Service every 15 min with a 35 min ride to downtown’s Union Station. Considered coummuter rail, but service is very metro-like (some level crossings but train has priority). Connections to the rest of Denver’s better than average (by US standards anyhow) light/commuter rail system.
Lucaing000 wrote:List of every airport in the world with 20,000,000+ passenger traffic (2017) with no rail link:
1) LAX (84,557,698)
2) LAS (48,566,803)
3) BOM (47,204,259)
4) CLT (45,909,899)
5) MCO (44,511,265)
6) MNL (42,022,484)
7) XIY (41,857,406)
8) IAH (40,696,189)
9) BOS (38,454,539)
10) MEL (35,997,230)
11) SGN (35,900,000)
12) DOH (35,867,252)
13) HGH (35,570,411)
14) DTW (34,701,947)
15) JED (33,917,282)
16) FLL (32,511,053)
17) SAW (31,385,841)
18) BOG (30,909,932)
19) CJU (29,304,363)
20) DUB (29,582,321)
21) LGA (29,502,219)
22) PMI (27,970,655)
23) RUH (25,425,000)
24) BLR (25,047,272)
25) XMN (24,485,239)
26) AUH (23,760,561)
27) LIM (23,723,193)
28) CUN (23,601,509)
29) SCL (23,324,093)
30) TAO (23,210,530)
31) HAN (23,068,227)
32) DPS (22,863,647)
33) IAD (22,708,073)
34) SAN (22,173,493)
35) SUB (21,882,335)
36) CGH (21,859,453)
37) AKL (20,025,922)
38) TXL (20,460,688)
That's 15/36 airports in the Americas (10 in the US), 4/6 in Middle East, 4/30 in Europe (including 1 in Turkey, soon 2 with the new IST), 13/43 in Asia, 2/4 in Oceania.
This list excludes airports with a station connected to the terminaks by monorail/people mover (JFK,EWR,PHX...).
It amazes me how the #1 O&D airport in the world doesn't have a direct rail link.
Seabear wrote:acos24 wrote:BAINY3 wrote:In the USA:
LAX
FLL
MCO
TPA
HNL
DTW
LAS
LGA
CLT
IAH
AUS
IAD
IAD will have rail some time in 2020, who knows though what with all the delays and scandals with the concrete quality...
FLL has a link to TriRail via a dedicated shuttle between the terminals and the Airport station @ Griffin Rd. PBI also has a shuttle to the W Palm TriRail station.
Brickell305 wrote:FLL is linked to Tri-Rail.
IADCA wrote:ManoaChris wrote:blockski wrote:SFO could be a lot better if the BART connection was better designed.
andblockski wrote:MSP, SEA, and PDX are the best light rail connections.
Curious why you praise SEA and are critical of SFO... having lived in both cities, I greatly prefer SFO.
Beyond the exposed walk to SEA's sound transit station (which isn't convenient to any of the terminals), my biggest complaint is the circuitous route to downtown.
BART, conversely, is almost always the fastest way downtown, and I've never minded the (indoor) walk between terminals to get to the station (which is immediately adjacent to the United side of the international terminal).
If you read the user's posts and the airports referred to, it sounds like he (she?) is mostly a DL and perhaps WN flyer and thus probably has to deal with the AirTrain connection. I just walk to T3 or Int'l for UA, which makes a big difference in terms of perception. My complaint with BART is the opposite direction, connecting down to Millbrae. Yes, there's a SamTrans bus now, but it's a pretty poor excuse when there's literally a direct rail link that's used only a few days a week.
blockski wrote:It's also worth remembering that not all rail connections are created equal. For some, the level of service on the rail line stinks. For others, the connection to and from the airport stinks. And some (like, say, FLL) both are bad (shuttle bus to an infrequent rail line).
The best airport/transit links in the US, to my mind, are:
Transit right to the terminal:
DCA - It wasn't always this way, as the Metro station was built a long walk from the original terminal; but since the mid-90s development of Terminals B/C it's hard to bead DCA's easy access. Also helpful that the line doesn't terminate at DCA, you can catch Metro heading in either direction.
ORD: Great connections for all except T5
MDW: A bit of a walk, but still hard to beat the access.
ATL: Very easy connection into the terminal; fairly extensive transit network
These four are also, by far, the most used airport/transit links in the US. SFO could be a lot better if the BART connection was better designed.
There are plenty of other places with light rail networks and airport connections, but the quality of the connection as well as the relative weakness of the transit network often hurts the usefulness of the transit link.
MSP, SEA, and PDX are the best light rail connections.
DFW's station is in an odd location and the dispersed terminal layout makes it difficult; the DART network is large and Dallas isn't nearly as downtown-oriented to support good transit connections.
---
Bus/People Mover connections to transit: These are far too common in the US, mainly (IMHO) because of obscure funding rules that limit how airport funds can be used on transit projects.
JFK: decent connections to a wide range of transit services; even if there were better transit to the terminal itself, the location of JFK would make it kinda difficult to serve.
BOS
OAK
sassiciai wrote:Manila, the major Philippines gateway has no rail link. The traffic around Manila is fearsome, with some very long jams. There is not even much help from any very convenient, frequent, and dependable bus service. Seems to me the only real way to get to/from the various terminals there into Makati/Malate/etc is by taxi, and to try planning your trip with an arrival time that is outside the worst of the traffic times. How the "city fathers" failed to build out the metro lines into the airport is just amazing.
Clark is even a worse case, but at least it seems a railway link is being constructed!
zakuivcustom wrote:Yes. MARTA goes right into the building housing Coucourse T. Very convenient for people heading to various business districts in Atlanta (Downtown/Midtown/Buckhead and even Perimeter Center all the way north; actually the only "larger" business districts that MARTA doesn't access is Cumberland Area, due to Cobb County not wanting to pay into the MARTA pot). Well, those places and College Park Stn. where IIRC most people working in ATL park their POV at (then ride 1 station into the Airport).
It's fairly reliable, relatively frequent (6 mins/train during peak and 10 mins/train off peak, at least up to Buckhead area), cheap (USD2.5), and you don't have to deal with Atlanta traffic.
StormRider wrote:zakuivcustom wrote:Yes. MARTA goes right into the building housing Coucourse T. Very convenient for people heading to various business districts in Atlanta (Downtown/Midtown/Buckhead and even Perimeter Center all the way north; actually the only "larger" business districts that MARTA doesn't access is Cumberland Area, due to Cobb County not wanting to pay into the MARTA pot). Well, those places and College Park Stn. where IIRC most people working in ATL park their POV at (then ride 1 station into the Airport).
It's fairly reliable, relatively frequent (6 mins/train during peak and 10 mins/train off peak, at least up to Buckhead area), cheap (USD2.5), and you don't have to deal with Atlanta traffic.
MARTA is amazing for anybody who stays north of the perimeter. I used to live in Sandy Springs, only a mile away from the last station on Gold line and it was perfect to get to the airport rather than navigating the horrible mess on 400/85/75 at peak times
Breathe wrote:Most of the airports without a heavy or light rail link being mentioned tend to be in the USA. Is this likely do with the historically car-centric nature of transport planning?
Vio wrote:It's ridiculous how many Canadian Airports don't have train service. Actually NONE do to be accurate. Vancouver has the Canada Line and Toronto has the UP Express, but both are light rail. Even so, cities such as Calgary build 4 or 5 new station in the NE but purposely avoided the airport, even after its mega expansion with runway 35R-17L added and a new "modern" terminal. Being based as a pilot in Calgary, and sometimes having to commute there, it's really annoying that I actually have to rent a car instead of taking the train. Taxi / Uber is insanely expensive. With my airline discount, it's cheaper for me to do that. As a matter of fact I'm doing that today. $50 for 24 hours for the car or $60 each way by taxi / Uber to the SE where I have my crash pad. (It's far, but it's free, so I can't complain). None the less, rail link at Canadian airports are almost none existent. Pretty pathetic.
CometOrbit wrote:FlyRow wrote:CometOrbit wrote:Prague, Basel, Budapest, Naples, Nice, Venice (bus or boat).
Prague, Budapest have planned metro connections, but it's delayed/slowed every year. Prague will also have a heavy rail connection but it isn't planned to be ready before 2023.
Nice will have a fast tram connection to the city centre in summer 2019.
PRG, BSL, BUD all have a fairly short bus connection to the end of the city metro system.
NAP is a short bus ride to Centrale, and I think it is due to have a metro link soon.
VCE is an expensive bus ride to either Mestre or S Lucia stations, or especially for the tourists an even more expensive boat connection (highly scenic).
CTA, in Sicily, has the main railway line passing the end of the runway, but no station.
TXL has a dedicated bus to the centre of Berlin at normal city transport rates - very economical.
Of course at places like ARN there is an expensive direct express train, but you can avoid that by getting the local bus to Marsta station nearby and catching a suburban train. .
Evading premium airport fares is becoming quite an art!
EChid wrote:Vio wrote:It's ridiculous how many Canadian Airports don't have train service. Actually NONE do to be accurate. Vancouver has the Canada Line and Toronto has the UP Express, but both are light rail. Even so, cities such as Calgary build 4 or 5 new station in the NE but purposely avoided the airport, even after its mega expansion with runway 35R-17L added and a new "modern" terminal. Being based as a pilot in Calgary, and sometimes having to commute there, it's really annoying that I actually have to rent a car instead of taking the train. Taxi / Uber is insanely expensive. With my airline discount, it's cheaper for me to do that. As a matter of fact I'm doing that today. $50 for 24 hours for the car or $60 each way by taxi / Uber to the SE where I have my crash pad. (It's far, but it's free, so I can't complain). None the less, rail link at Canadian airports are almost none existent. Pretty pathetic.
Light-rail connections are plainly being included in this topic, as many European airports have exclusively light-rail solutions as well. YYZ isn't even light rail, it's technically a train. So, YVR and YYZ clearly meet this, YUL will within a few years (if you want to get really technical, YUL has a VIA rail stop less than 1km away and VIA picks up passengers there/runs a shuttle to/from the terminal to transfer passengers to and from trains). YTZ has streetcars that leave you a few hundred metres from the ferry/underwater channel.