Austin787
Posts: 380
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 11:39 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:47 pm

SJC and SAT have no direct rail link.
 
TropicalSky
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 1:37 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:47 pm

Last I checked there is no rail link at FLL....does ATL have rail link?
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2774
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:55 pm

TropicalSky wrote:
Last I checked there is no rail link at FLL....does ATL have rail link?


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.
Last edited by zakuivcustom on Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Free Hong Kong! Free China!
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1171
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:56 pm

TropicalSky wrote:
Last I checked there is no rail link at FLL....does ATL have rail link?

ATL does. MARTA Red and Gold lines go to the Domestic Terminal.
 
7673mech
Posts: 522
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 10:10 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:02 pm

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.
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2774
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:08 pm

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.


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.
Free Hong Kong! Free China!
 
coolian2
Posts: 2482
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:34 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:10 pm

zkojq wrote:
AKL Auckland. They're planning on building a tram though....in ten years. What a joke.

This is mostly inaccurate
Q300/ATR72-600/737-200/-300/-400/-700/-800/A320/767-200/-300/757-200/777-300ER/
747-200/-300/-400/ER/A340-300/A380-800/MD-83/-88/CRJ-700/-900
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1171
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:21 pm

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???
 
sw733
Posts: 5856
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 6:19 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:24 pm

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.


The logistics of building one aren't that hard...the Las Vegas taxi union, however, is.
 
WorldFlier
Posts: 314
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:10 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:24 pm

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???


15 Years? Zing!

(And here I thought that only NY/NJ tooks generations to build infrastructure)
 
coolian2
Posts: 2482
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:34 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:27 pm

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???

Light rail (a tram, but bigger - more frequent than trains) is due to be starting construction not much after 2021 but is currently facing an annoying information blackout. The ten year wait has already been dumped and came from a public transport averse government.

https://www.greaterauckland.org.nz/2019 ... ight-rail/
Q300/ATR72-600/737-200/-300/-400/-700/-800/A320/767-200/-300/757-200/777-300ER/
747-200/-300/-400/ER/A340-300/A380-800/MD-83/-88/CRJ-700/-900
 
mfe777
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 5:35 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:36 pm

kavok wrote:
LGA, DTW, DFW, IAH, MCO, LAS


As others have noted, DFW is connected directly by 2 rail lines (DART Orange Line to Dallas and TexRail to Fort Worth), as well as a 3rd rail line a short shuttle ride away (TRE Trinity Rail Express, the first link but redundant for most now).

Since DFW is the only Texas airport with a rail link(s), all other Texas airports can be added to the list. IAH, HOU, AUS, and SAT all lack rail links and there don't seem to be any firm plans to connect these airports to rail.
 
diatraveler
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2001 12:16 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:42 pm

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


DEN has a commuter rail link directly into terminal. Once off the escalator, only about 50 feet to the TSA precheck line.
 
sixfootscream
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:50 pm

CPT
 
CometOrbit
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 5:30 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 6:02 pm

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!
 
dcaproducer
Posts: 184
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:26 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 6:03 pm

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.


Metro at IAD is currently schedule to open in Summer 2020, but the project is already years behind schedule. I would say it's safer to estimate late 2020 or early 2021 for passenger service.
 
User avatar
Vio
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 5:23 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 6:11 pm

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:
Image

Amsterdam:
Image
Superior decisions reduce the need for superior skills.
 
masgniw
Posts: 544
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 6:14 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 6:13 pm

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?


This is so pedantic. The walk from your gate at ORD to the Blue Line stop is just as far, if not further. But no one ever complains it takes away from the rail connectivity.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3077
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 6:16 pm

It may be doom for the NIMBYs in Everett, because Seattle/Puget light rail will be going to Paine Field (at the insistence of the city so it would serve Boeing workers). The peculiar thing about Sound Transit is that it will have one of the longest lines in the world, north Everett to south of Tacoma. Geeks have noted that it is not an optimal system, with only sparse east /west legs, but politically it is what was possible. That connection may force Paine to be the a large secondary airport for the Seattle area.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
Seabear
Posts: 276
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:05 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 6:29 pm

TropicalSky wrote:
Last I checked there is no rail link at FLL....does ATL have rail link?

Yes, FLL does have a "link", shuttle bus from terminal to TriRail. Just as BWI has a bus from terminal to MARTA/Amtrak station.
 
blockski
Posts: 512
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 6:30 pm

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:
Image

Amsterdam:
Image


Yes, those are mainline rail stations. When most people talk about airports with train service, they're talking about transit - not long-distance trains.

It's true you can't hop on VIA rail and get to Pearson. But why would you want to? If Canada had a rail network like Germany or the Netherlands, then sure - but Canada doesn't have that, so there's no point.

Anyway, calling any other transit 'light rail' is wrong. I don't mean to be pedantic about terminology, but it's just wrong. Neither Vancouver's SkyTrain system nor the UP Express are 'light rail' systems, either in terms of the rail technology they use or the system planning (right of way, stop spacing, service characteristics, etc).
 
airbazar
Posts: 9618
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 6:37 pm

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

Since the OP didn't mention what type of rail I assumed that "subway" counted as rail, hence I didn't mention LIS :)
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.

BOS does not have a station next to the terminal. You can walk there but it's not a short walk. Most people take a shuttle bus to/from the terminal.
 
ManoaChris
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 3:34 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 6:38 pm

blockski wrote:
SFO could be a lot better if the BART connection was better designed.


and

blockski 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).
 
airplanenut
Posts: 621
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 8:46 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 7:33 pm

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?

Are you referring to the fact that the turnstiles at the light rail stop are right at the garage, or that you have to walk across a 30' bridge to get from the garage to the terminal building?
Why yes, in fact, I am a rocket scientist...
 
klm617
Posts: 4379
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 8:35 pm

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.


More backwards thinking from our region. What really needs to be done is to secure service on the tracks that run just north of the airport. I think this is one of those things that ridership will grow if it is convenient enough and it needs to run North to Pontiac just like Amtrak does from Chicago. But as many have said the population base that would use it don't have access to it. Even for the most part the Smart bus system is unusable. I also don't think the big three are really onboard with public transit either and that is another issue.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
IADCA
Posts: 1854
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 8:39 pm

ManoaChris wrote:
blockski wrote:
SFO could be a lot better if the BART connection was better designed.


and

blockski 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
Posts: 512
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 8:39 pm

ManoaChris wrote:
blockski wrote:
SFO could be a lot better if the BART connection was better designed.


and

blockski 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).


The BART SFO extension is a well-known fiasco in transit planning circles. The track layout with the wye junction splits service between the airport and Millbrae, limits future expansion and ensures awkward service patterns: https://humantransit.org/2011/02/basics ... river.html

As far as transit goes, SFO and SEA are in different categories because BART is a subway system and Seattle has light rail; and among LRT systems, Seattle's is among the most high-quality. Compare Seattle's light rail connection compared to others like BWI or DFW - it's far superior.

In the future, it will also offer transit access to SEA from both the north and the south; avoiding a terminus at the airport is a big plus.
 
Lucaing000
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2018 11:18 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Mon Feb 11, 2019 8:44 pm

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.
 
winginit
Posts: 2550
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:40 am

Lucaing000 wrote:
It amazes me how the #1 O&D airport in the world doesn't have a direct rail link.


That will of course change in 2023.
 
ExpatVet
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 4:35 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:37 am

CometOrbit wrote:
Prague, Basel, Budapest, Naples, Nice, Venice (bus or boat).

BUD has a train stop. Not in the Terminal, but of a walk, but possible.
L101, 733/4/5/8, 741/2/3 (never managed 744!), MD 80/2/3/8/90, MD11, DHC8/3/Q4, E170, E195, 757, 77W, 763/4, Travel Air 2000. A300/310, A319/320/321, A333, ATR-72, probably a few others I forget. Passenger, not pilot, alas! BUD based.
 
ShanghaiNoon
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:45 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:22 am

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.


The Canada Line is a totally grade-separated system. The Skytrain goes to most places anyone in the Metro Vancouver area needs to go. I know it’s expensive but in the days before the compass card it was pretty easy to just not pay the airport surcharge. I can’t really see the need to integrate the airport with the local Via Rail or Amtrak services. Now those are pathetic.
 
ryanov
Posts: 176
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 4:38 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:58 am

People keep listing airports with perfectly adequate rail transit. BOS has the blue line, which is a short shuttle bus from the terminals, or the Silver Line (BRT) right from the terminal, mostly grade separated into Boston South Station. FLL has a train station, but does require a shuttle bus ride. And I can't figure what anyone has to complain about WRT JFK. It's a good system -- fast, can get to multiple choices, end up in a position to take LIRR or NYCTA.
 
LH658
Posts: 1049
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 7:35 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:50 am

ISB, KHI, LHE, AUH, KWI, JED, RUH, MCT, CMB, AMM, and SLC.
 
synanthropic
Posts: 54
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:05 pm

The FLL Master Plan has rail service coming direct into the airport, though it remains to be seen if/when that will occur. For now, it is linked to tri-rail, which also connects to the high-speed train. I have taken this on multiple occasions with ease.
 
Wednesdayite
Posts: 178
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 8:28 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:09 pm

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.


*cough* WHEN it works *cough*
A318/19/20/21/30/40. B717/27/37/47/57/67/77/87. CRJ2/7. ERJ145/175/190. FKR50. IL62. MD11/82/83/88. TU154.
AA AC AF AI AR AS AT AV AZ BA BW BY CO DA DL F9 FR JJ KL LH MA NW NZ OS RG SU TK U2 UA US VS WN
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2774
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:04 pm

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.


And out of the 4 PRC Airport on this list:
XIY - A metro line is under construction, and should be open by end of this year.
HGH - Same story as XIY, i.e. a new metro line should be open soon
XMN - New airport being built (Estimate Opening Date is 2020) with rail access.
TAO - New Airport opening this year, with a Metro Line going into the new airport.

Otherwise:
LAX People Mover System is being built, so it should be off this list soon.
BOM will get Mumbai Metro Line 3 into the airport proper, whenever that opens.
MNL should get LRT-1 extension into the airport, although not sure how close it is to the terminals.

Ultimately, that leaves a bunch of airports in US with no rail access. LAS is a headcase thanks to the taxi union (although monorail extension is relatively easy). I don't see any rail line for CLT, MCO, and IAH soon, though.
Free Hong Kong! Free China!
 
BAINY3
Posts: 182
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2017 4:42 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:06 pm

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.


I excluded any airports where one has to get on a bus to get to the train station first. So airports like FLL, DAL, BOS, LAX that have somewhat nearby train stations named for them are not included if you can't reasonably walk from the terminal to the station. However, I included airports with tram connections, like JFK, EWR, PHX.
 
blockski
Posts: 512
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:32 pm

IADCA wrote:
ManoaChris wrote:
blockski wrote:
SFO could be a lot better if the BART connection was better designed.


and

blockski 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.


Hi - he/him for pronouns here.

As I noted in another reply (and as you say) the reason BART to SFO is such a fiasco is because of the way the infrastructure dictates service planning. The politicians demanded BART to the terminal. Which is fine, but when an airport has multiple terminals, that's a much bigger challenge than it seems. They also wanted a Caltrain connection, and the design they picked appears on paper to meet all of these needs, but in practice fails most of them.

For a station in the terminal, it's fine for the International terminal, but for others, you still will probably need to board the Airtrain. For service from the south, the wye makes connections to Millbrae very difficult. This is bad enough with Caltrain today, but will be even worse as Caltrain electrifies and becomes more like a rapid transit service - and even worse than that once CAHSR is running.

The better solution would've been to either ditch the wye and terminate all BART trains at SFO, and then extend the Airtrain to Millbrae; Or extend BART to Millbrae and not SFO, and use the Airtrain for a connection.

There are other issues, too - the missed BART/Caltrain connection at San Bruno is an obvious one; that wouldn't be so bad if the BART/Millbrae connection wasn't so bad, but it is.

A good read on the planning failure of BART to SFO here: https://www.thebaycitybeacon.com/politi ... 48e9d.html
 
User avatar
A333MSPtoAMS
Posts: 309
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 3:18 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Wed Feb 13, 2019 4:01 am

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


MSP has a great lightrail service, but only to downtown Minneapolis. There is no direct train service to downtown St Paul. You have to first take the Blue Line to Downtown Minneapolis and transfer to the Green Line to St Paul.
As of Dec 2018 I've flown 417,862 miles on 250 flights on 51 airplane types with 55 airlines traveling thru 97 airports in 43 countries. I've visited 59 countries. 2019 is looking like a pretty decent year for me.
http://cronkflies.com
 
Akiestar
Posts: 953
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 6:51 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Wed Feb 13, 2019 7:52 am

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!


MNL having no access to public transportation is one of the biggest misconceptions about the airport out there. The airport is served by four bus services (P2P bus to CRK, UBE Express, regular city buses and the Airport Loop service to the MRT), and the airport will be connected to the Metro Manila Subway when it's built.

As to why metro lines to the airport weren't built, it's a confluence of factors. Remember that "Manila" to foreigners is really 17 different cities, all of which have their own interests to contend with. Plus the usual suspects: corruption, incompetence and lack of foresight being the top three.
 
User avatar
cranberrysaus
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2018 5:34 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Wed Feb 13, 2019 5:42 pm

I know Charlotte has been considering extending their light rail to CLT for some time now. I'm willing to be it will get there in 15-20 years.
 
StormRider
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Wed Feb 13, 2019 11:58 pm

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
 
User avatar
conaly
Posts: 323
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 10:50 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Thu Feb 14, 2019 10:16 am

New Istanbul Airport ISL does not have a rail connection yet. Yes, the airport is only partly open, but in about a month, most of the traffic will be shifted from Atatürk to ISL. The new metro M11 is still in construction, so it won't be ready by the time most of the traffic is in ISL. And the long distance train connection will even take a few more years.
Airports 2019: ADB, ALG, AMD, ATL, BOS, CTS, DEL, DTW, DUS, EWR, FRA, FUK, HIJ, HND, IST, JFK, MUC, NGO, NUE, OKA, PHL, SIN, STN, YYZ
Planned 2019: BOG, CDG, FRA, HAM, HND, MUC, NUE, ZRH
 
User avatar
cranberrysaus
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2018 5:34 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:47 pm

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


Yeah I live about 15 minutes from North Springs and almost always take MARTA to the airport. Convenient and even in good traffic I like it better than driving.

Only thing I hate is if I have a late return - then it's kind of a pain waiting for the less frequent night service, and then waiting even longer to transfer at Lindbergh.
 
Breathe
Topic Author
Posts: 501
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:06 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Fri Feb 15, 2019 3:11 pm

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?
 
User avatar
cranberrysaus
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2018 5:34 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Fri Feb 15, 2019 4:04 pm

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?


Yes - the postwar boom of car-centric development means that public transit is in a sad state in this country.

Doesn't help either that allegedly General Motors conspired to purchase and dismantle the streetcar systems that already existed.
 
EChid
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:00 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:36 am

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.
2018: DRW-PER-HKG-ICN-MEL-AVV-BNE-OOL-SYD-YYZ-YYZ-YUL-YVR-PDX-SEA-SFO-PEK-KIX-CDG-IST-NRT-HND-BKK-FAT; AC J-TK J-OZ F-DL F-TG J/F-NH J/F-CX J-VA J
 
User avatar
dangerhere
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 2:35 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Sat Feb 16, 2019 2:08 pm

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!



Please read the thread title.
 
User avatar
Vio
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 5:23 am

Re: Large airports without rail links

Sat Feb 16, 2019 8:49 pm

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.



We're nit picking here. Yes, one can interpret it how you want, but for me, even 50 meters is too far away to catch a train, when I have to show up to work, pull my luggage, flight bag and lunch bag in 2 feet of snow. It needs to be seamless integration. Canadian airports (and Canadian cities in general) are far behind their European counterparts, when it comes to transit. Calgary is the most frustrating example. The city decided to run the new C-Train expansion BY the airport... instead of through it. WHY???? Who's lobbying the city council? The Airport and Taxi companies with their exuberant high fees? It costs me $60 by cab to get from the airport to the SE of Calgary, when a C-Train is a matter of dollars.

That's the type of "World Class - Olympic" city Calgary is? It's pathetic... enough said.
Superior decisions reduce the need for superior skills.
 
User avatar
Eindhoven
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 1:21 pm

Re: Large airports without rail links

Wed Feb 20, 2019 6:53 pm

EIN doesn't have a railway station at the airport. We have a bus going to the railway station. Several times there have been plans for a railway line to the airport but nothing ever came of it.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos