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

Why is it so hard to build an airport?

construction-physics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 574 posts

Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?

#141

Post by busterarm »

jorisboris wrote: post #24

When building https://randomairport.onrender.com/ I noticed that US and Euro airports always look very different Somehow US airports always seem to be surrounded by densely populated residential areas, even in the direction of the runways, while Euro airports don’t seem to have this problem. And secondly Us airports always seem to take huge plots of land compared to Euro airports. My assumption is that Us cities are…

The US has 14 of the 35 busiest airports in the world. Europe has 6, if you count the UK/Heathrow.

If you discount Heathrow, Europe doesn't even have one in the top 10, whereas the US has 5 in the top 10.

The airports are different because the traffic volume is different.

Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?

#142

Post by bradley13 »

Gare wrote: post #120
bradley13 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your definition is accurate, but I think it is incomplete. The stereotypical NIMBY doesn't want something in their backyard, but they still want the advantages of it existing. They want it to be place in someone else's backyard. People opposing airport construction still want to fly. They just want someone else to have the noise.

> People opposing airport construction still want to fly. Maybe they do in America. But in Europe there's not much need/want of frequent flying for the average citizen.

In 2022 (according to Statista) there were around 500 million passenger-flights, compared to the 800 million in the US. Accounting for population differences, that means that Europeans fly around half as often as USAians. Yes, that is less, but it is still a lot.

Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?

#143

Post by filleduchaos »

vemv wrote: post #107

> In the early 1980s, Dallas Fort-Worth Airport covered as much land as the city of Dallas did, and Denver International Airport is as large as the city of San Francisco. This... doesn't fit into my head.

The two runways in my city's fairly small, low traffic airport are roughly 1.7 and 2.42 miles long (2.745 and 3.9 kilometres to be precise).

It doesn't help that the city of San Francisco is quite tiny, only 7 by 7 miles. When you consider that Denver International has to fit six runways as well as its apron, terminals, hangars, various facilities, and the transit space needed to link all these plus an acceptable amount of buffer space for safety and noise reduction...yeah.

Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?

#144

Post by yadaeno »

subzidion wrote: post #52

There's been discussions where the "next" airport should go in the Seattle region, and the consensus is that nobody wants it. The State Legislature created a commission to try and identify some potential sites, but the public backlash was so great that they ended up submitting it's final report with no actual recommendation. One of the interesting ideas (that was proposed even back when SEA was adding it's third runw…

Paine Field is about 35 mins away from Seattle and serves airline traffic as of a few years ago.

Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?

#145

Post by duped »

Airlines should go build their hubs in a better geographical location than major cities, like O'hare. And pay for it with their own money.

At ORD for example, something like half of all the air traffic are connecting flights. There's a bit of money to be made by gate fees, but the pressure on the surrounding suburbs (I don't even know if the neighbors even get those fees, since the airport is technically within Chicago's city limits) to allow whatever expansion is necessary for American and United to make more money ferrying people over our homes is untenable.

Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?

#147

Post by ruszki »

pbsladek wrote: post #113
po wrote: post #30

If you fly into Tokyo you might come in via Narita Airport (NRT) which is actually quite a distance out from tokyo. Violence is extremely uncommon in modern Japan but NRT was the site of violent resistance over several decades. Opposition forces killed several police officers, rioted on several occasions and constructed a giant 200 ft tower to interfere with test flights. Hundreds of acts of vandalism have occurred o…

If flying into NRT and on the way to Tokyo, ~$200ish for the taxi ride. Ooops.

Taxi is not the main way to leave airports in large part of the world.

Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?

#148

Post by vel0city »

sofixa wrote: post #126

> And an airport can’t be too far from a city and remain useful, since travelers need to access the city, workers need to be within commuting distance, and so on. In Canada, Mirabel airport was built 35 miles from Montreal, surrounded by a 79,000 acre buffer zone to prevent any issues of incompatible land use. Mirabel was expected to replace Dorval (today Montreal-Trudeau) as Canada’s main eastern airport, but, in pa…

That sounds like exceptionally poor planning. Just to confirm, the new airport served pretty much only international flights? It should have been the nexus for domestic travel to connect to the big hop to Europe, meaning it should have had a ton of domestic routes as well feeding it.

Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?

#149

Post by pbsladek »

ghaff wrote: post #127
pbsladek wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If flying into NRT and on the way to Tokyo, ~$200ish for the taxi ride. Ooops.

There is a train though which even people on expense accounts usually take.

I expensed the taxi. It was 1am. Train another 2-2.5 hours..

It’s Japan. Obviously I knew about the train lol. Their trains are awesome!

Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?

#150

Post by arnon »

jorisboris wrote: post #24

When building https://randomairport.onrender.com/ I noticed that US and Euro airports always look very different Somehow US airports always seem to be surrounded by densely populated residential areas, even in the direction of the runways, while Euro airports don’t seem to have this problem. And secondly Us airports always seem to take huge plots of land compared to Euro airports. My assumption is that Us cities are…

The US has no alternative forms of transport. Taking an airplane is the most convenient way.

In Germany, Italy, Switzerland, France, and the UK taking a train is faster and more convenient (even if more expensive often)

Post reply on HN