Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to fuck up an airport

radiospaetkauf.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 320 posts

Re: How to fuck up an airport

#201

Post by wyclif »

qolop wrote: post #184
da39a3ee wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Prudish? What are you even talking about? I said I found the article interesting and have no problem reading it myself. I also use such language with my friends all the time. I'm not squeamish about it either. And no I'm not Christian, but even if I were why should it matter? I don't want to share it with others. These others include young kids and a parent who has an interest in construction. We don't cuss at home,…

I agree with you. Gratuitous profanity always makes the people using it sound like inarticulate sons of bitches.

Re: How to fuck up an airport

#202

Post by yesiamyourdad »

redsid wrote: post #137

A few decades ago, when my boss (senior exec at major US airline) was negotiating to be a part of Denver International Airport - he wrote in legalese requiring Denver Stapleton airport to be shutdown. He expected DIA to have tons of problems which it did, but killing Stapleton kept DIA on track. Couple of anecdotes - the baggage handling design (I saw the revised version) was shuttling suitcases easily above 25 miles…

I moved to Denver a couple of years after DIA opened. I _hate_ DIA, it's an awful airport. The stupid train. The insane security lines. Baggage takes forever to come out. AUS? Great airport. PDX is a dream. SBA is my absolute favorite, like taking a trip back to the 1960s, walk off the ramp, pick up your bags from the pile they drop off. PHL? Yeah it's dirty and everything's broken, but still it's more efficient than DEN. EWR is expensive, DFW is too much sprawl, still... I hate DEN the most.

I read an analysis of the baggage system about a year after DIA opened, and it was fascinating as a young engineer. Essentially, the original system could never work. Airlines schedule in clusters - they try to make groups of flights arrive in groups and depart in groups, this allows them to create connecting flights. But the DIA system couldn't handle spiky traffic loads, even though this is how airlines design their schedules.

The ridiculous roof had leaks for years.

The current round of modifications and renovations (on a 25 year old airport, they want to renovate?) have been going on more than 2 years, gone over budget, they've already fired the lead contractor once, from what I can tell they're a long way from completion. When I read that part of Berlin's issue was that they wanted more retail, I think this is why they're renovating, they're not trying to create a better traveling experience, they're trying to create a better shopping experience.

They added a Westin onto the end of the terminal, the rates to stay there are absolutely insane. For the life of me, I can't understand why you'd stay out at the airport, when you're a train ride away from downtown.

I'm sure that DIA is the result of a bunch of corruption (Denver is underrated for the corruption here), and I feel like the conspiracy theories are some weird outgrowth of the corruption in the city government here, like some bacteria bloom that pops up around a sewage plume.

Re: How to fuck up an airport

#203

Post by rglullis »

b112 wrote: post #193
rglullis wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait until you find out about this amazing invention called the train . You can take them at the city center, you stop at the city center, no waiting times, faster, safer and cheaper than driving... In all seriousness though, any country serious about climate change should ban short-haul flights.

Last time I took the train, it was more expensive than driving, and took longer too. And certainly far, far slower than a plane could be, with no hours of pre-flight waiting. More comfortable than a plane, with its cramped seating, for sure. Really, a prop plane is not horrible for the environment, especially compared to cars.

If you live in an area with poor rail infrastructure, the solution is to improve it.

Re: How to fuck up an airport

#204

Post by yongjik »

Atsuii wrote: post #178
xxpor wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole not using the jetway thing in Germany blows my mind. I flew Lufthansa SEA-FRA in 2019, and the fully packed 747 had to walk onto the ramp, and load up into buses to get to the terminal. Outrageous. The only time I've ever done that in NA is flying at places like CAK in a micro regional jet.

Apron buses are very common in large airports and I always found it really efficient. From memory I’ve used them at Haneda, Narita and KL. Perhaps the ones in Germany are just altered metro buses though, which would be terrible. Apron buses are efficient due to being low to the ground, having very wide doors to accomodate quick loading and unloading, typically no seats.

They may be efficient given the layout of the airport (which can't be changed), but if you are to design a new airport, you cannot beat the efficiency of jetways. Hundreds of people just walking down the hallway.

Re: How to fuck up an airport

#205

Post by noasaservice »

midnightclubbed wrote: post #112
noasaservice wrote: post #90

You really want to fuck up an airport? Do the following, in no particular order. 1. Spoof GPS, as in emulate the constellation. Randomize it every few minutes. Move transmitter around. 2. Plain old jam GPS. You can buy cheap and nasty GPS jammers. If you're good with electronics, hook em up to a 555 timer and trigger to prevent a lock but like 5% duty cycle. 3. Spoof ADS-B to create thousands or 10's of thousands of…

Activate the ILS landing system. Recalibrate sea level - minus 200 feet.

Wrech with an airport != wreck a plane

Re: How to fuck up an airport

#206

Post by mastercheif »

anonu wrote: post #152

The new LGA terminal is probably a lesson in how not to fuck up an airport. It's beautiful. You'll notice design decisions that take into consideration the post 9/11 security setup: lots of security lines and automation to help move you along. It dawns on you that every airport in USA had to retrofit today's security setup in a space that previously never had it or is too small to create a good people flow.

For anyone with a Passing interest in civil engineering, I highly recommend watching this presentation about the LGA redesign from one of the lead architects: https://youtu.be/Kil-slXgVys

Re: How to fuck up an airport

#207

Post by selimthegrim »

rootusrootus wrote: post #199
Aeolun wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was so surprised going through security in Schiphol Airport recently. I swear there were 3000 people in line, but they have like 30 security checkpoints, and everyone goes in the same line (maybe one per terminal?), so we were through in 15 minutes. It was amazing. I also never realized how much I appreciate everything in that airport being connected by corridors until I had to navigate CDG and it’s stupid trains a…

My brother just went through Schiphol two weeks ago. Scheduled his connecting flight with a five hour layover just to be sure. Took him 5 hours and 20 minutes to make it through security.

Did he make the flight?

Re: How to fuck up an airport

#208

Post by paganel »

bobthepanda wrote: post #118
probably_wrong wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you listen to the podcast they explain that it wasn't his fault. Spoilers: he designed BER for fast passenger transit, just like Tegel, but the airport authorities wanted more shopping space. So they crammed as many shops as they could in detriment of the passenger experience. And then there's the situation with the rise of low-cost airlines who weren't allowed to use the jetway... I definitely recommend listening…

This glosses over some stuff that is definitely his fault. The first issue that caused the issues, the fire system, was designed to suck air underground, because the architect did not want a fire system to obstruct his roof, never mind that smoke and hot air naturally rise. https://www.thegermanreview.de/p/the-real-story-behind-berli...

Maybe half-invented, but I read an architect's memoirs some years ago and he was saying how around the 1940s there were often cases when he and his chief-architect/supervisor at the time were actually chased out (like, physically) from the construction sites whenever they were coming in to add/make some changes that the constructor was considering as being too over the top/unrealistic. We need for that attitude to come back, at least in a metaphorical way, otherwise we'll continue being stuck with projects like this one.

Re: How to fuck up an airport

#209

Post by bigDinosaur »

paganel wrote: post #208
bobthepanda wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This glosses over some stuff that is definitely his fault. The first issue that caused the issues, the fire system, was designed to suck air underground, because the architect did not want a fire system to obstruct his roof, never mind that smoke and hot air naturally rise. https://www.thegermanreview.de/p/the-real-story-behind-berli...

Maybe half-invented, but I read an architect's memoirs some years ago and he was saying how around the 1940s there were often cases when he and his chief-architect/supervisor at the time were actually chased out (like, physically) from the construction sites whenever they were coming in to add/make some changes that the constructor was considering as being too over the top/unrealistic. We need for that attitude to co…

Why would you chase the architect with his insane ideas away when you're getting paid by the hour and the project must be completed at some point because there's no alternative for the government? Unfortunately nobody appears to come off as not corrupt or idiotic in some way in this story.
Post reply on HN