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
How to fuck up an airport
281–290 of 320 posts
Re: How to fuck up an airport
#282Earlier quoted context omitted.
OP likely meant that it is a very sad thing for the environment that we (as a society) privilege air travel instead of train travel for such a short distance and where there’s no need to cross a border. The train brings you in the middle of both city center, directly integrated with transit, you can show up about 10 min before your departure, etc. It’s just the actual rail that is the problem.
If there's no train, though, the turboprop plane is going to be better for the environment than all those people driving.
Re: How to fuck up an airport
#283Earlier quoted context omitted.
I arrived in Heathrow yesterday 2.5 hours before my flight to a huge queue stretching outside the terminals into the parking lots. Mortifying to see. To my surprise I was past security in about an hour.
I was in that self same queue and also made it through surprisingly quick, only for my flight to Frankfurt being cancelled. Back at LHR now for round two.
Re: How to fuck up an airport
#284Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yet you were making wider sweeping statements, too. My argument has some merit, just look at Sri Lanka! https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/07/world/asia/sri-lanka-orga... The connection is more direct for them, but some say that all we did, with environmental targets and oil, was to outsource it all to crazy Putin. He now uses that cash to slaughter and kill. And may yet, as a result, bring about a world war. That is a…
You're doubling down on the Chewbacca defense, please stop. No one is saying that we should "reduce production". Of course, any ban on short-haul flight could only be enacted after there was a better/cheaper infrastructure available. And it so happens that for a lot of cases, the infrastructure exists, it is mostly a matter of ending up with subsidizes and ensuring that government policy accounts for all externalitie…
So to realistically do this, you need fast and cheap rail. No one is going to take rail, which stops at 10+ stops, and takes 7 hours for the trip.
Right now, Ottawa->Toronto isn't too bad, compared to car. Schedule says 4 1/2 to 5 hours.
Yet, you have to get to the rail station, and get from the rail station at each end.
Were I to visit my uncle in Toronto, this means a 30 minute drive to the station, and a cab to my uncle's house, another 30+ minutes.
A car removes some of this, and removes the waiting at each end. And if you drive, you don't need to rent a car, it is more convenient at the other end.
So to compete realistically, to get many people who would drive, to use the train, you need incentive. Not punishment, incentive.
So high speed rail would be good here.
This means loads of infrastructure must be build, which means you must ensure success. This means it has better not be more expensive than a car, and if you and your wife, or family are travelling, this means 10 bucks, maybe 20 per person.
Otherwise a car is far, far cheaper. Current ticket costs are silly.
Now I agree, train is better than car. But is train better than car, or plane, if it costs a gazillion to build, and maintain, and it is barely used?
And yet you're also talking about Seattle/Vancouver, in comparison to SF/LA or Vegas, where the plane is much, much faster than rail or car. So much faster.
So it has better really be fast rail here.
Yet have you looked at the fuel efficiency of fast rail? It is not as good as you think.
And the bus! Let's replace a personal car, with a hot, smelly, loud, uncomfortable bus which most people hate.
You.must be joking.
If you think the only metrix is the environment, you will 100% fail at enacting change.
I will give you another counter example here.
Dams.
For the longest time, environmentalists complained about dams. Lost habitat, they said. And yes, it is true!
Yet compared to anything, anything at all, a dam is best for the environment. Better than nuclear, solar, wind, anything!
And it is is not as if the environment is destroyed, just altered. Some animals go away, to be replaced by different wildlife.
For god sakes, beavers make lakes and dams which can be seen from space!
It is another example of short sightedness. We must enact change in a way that it takes hold, and desired.
Re: How to fuck up an airport
#285Airports make 2/3rds of their money by renting space to shops, and the remaining third by allowing planes to fly. They have a strong incentive to be inefficient, so you will feel you need to arrive 2 hours before departure, or even more, because you don't want to risk losing your flight. I flew ~1,000 times, and saw ~300 airports. I could write tens of books on how to make airports better... But the problem is that t…
Re: How to fuck up an airport
#286Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're doubling down on the Chewbacca defense, please stop. No one is saying that we should "reduce production". Of course, any ban on short-haul flight could only be enacted after there was a better/cheaper infrastructure available. And it so happens that for a lot of cases, the infrastructure exists, it is mostly a matter of ending up with subsidizes and ensuring that government policy accounts for all externalitie…
It makes sense time wise, flights are much, much faster. So to realistically do this, you need fast and cheap rail. No one is going to take rail, which stops at 10+ stops, and takes 7 hours for the trip. Right now, Ottawa->Toronto isn't too bad, compared to car. Schedule says 4 1/2 to 5 hours. Yet, you have to get to the rail station, and get from the rail station at each end. Were I to visit my uncle in Toronto, thi…
Not if takes at least 45 minutes to get to the airport, plus 1-2 hours waiting to board, plus 20-30 minutes to leave the plane and yet another 45 minutes to get to your destination. The 1-hour flight just became a 4-5 hour journey, full of stress and discomfort.
> I will give you another counter example here. Dams.
That's the third strike at Chewbacca defense. I'm really done here.
Re: How to fuck up an airport
#287Why can't such interesting articles be published without the unnecessary profanity? It actually prevents me from sharing it with a lot of people.
The world is falling apart and people are still worried about harmless words. Talk about misplaced concerns...
Re: How to fuck up an airport
#288Earlier quoted context omitted.
If no country is specified you can assume it’s an American talking about their country. So west coast, USA (California or Washington)
I did initially assume that, but then it doesn't make any sense at all. Lufthansa doesn't fly between the US West Coast and Asia except via Europe, and a large number of other airlines offer direct routes between the US West Coast and Asia which are obviously going to be substantially shorter. So... maybe they mean the west coast of some other country?
Every other airline takes at least a couple of hours more. Some take 4+ hours longer.
Re: How to fuck up an airport
#289Frankfurt airport is marginally better. Flights stop in the middle of the runway. Take a bus. Buses are late. Walk for what feels like eternity. No regard for accessibility. I’ve met multiple senior citizens frail, waiting for their wheel chairs and worried that they’re going to miss their connecting flights. As good as German engineering is, the airport infra is equally worse. It’s a shame. I like flying lufthansa.…
> I like flying lufthansa. They have the shortest flight times to Asia from the west coast. Can you elaborate on this? Where do you mean by "west coast"?
Re: How to fuck up an airport
#290Earlier quoted context omitted.
> close the actual city airport that was functioning like a well-oiled You mean which Berlin's airport? As Berlin-native for few years I used the Schönefeld numerous times... and the staff there was some mixture of rude primitive sadists. Behaving towards passengers as if they're taking revenge for something. I just want to fly out of here, you cunt.
That's just German people. If they don't know you, and they're old, and they see an excuse to harass you, they'll probably go for it.