Earlier quoted context omitted.
Paine field is the new seattle area airport.
it barely has any flights anywhere this now
Is there a reason for that? Can it handle more?
Why is it so hard to build an airport?
281–290 of 574 posts
Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?
#282One economic problem is that the express train to or from the airport
(if there is one) is that a roundtrip ticket can quickly cost more than
the roundtrip airfare these days.
That is yet another barrier for disadvantaged people.
When the airport is closer to the city they are often included in the normal public transit system and thus a lot more affordable.
Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?
#283Earlier quoted context omitted.
> One of the interesting ideas [...] is to run high-speed rail to Moses Lake Airport in Central Washington and just expand there. While reading this article, I thought about something like that too. Build an airport quite a while away from the big city, and provide a high-speed, maybe even maglev train there. Make it free for customers. Also, make it very inconvenient for passengers and staff to approach the airport…
I live in Tokyo where we have both Narita, far out but well-ish connected by train with NEX and Haneda, with direct access to the city. Haneda is vastly more convenient.
> Haneda is vastly more convenient.
Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?
#284When 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…
> US airports always seem to be surrounded by densely populated residential areas The US in general is very densely built up. The distinct lack of green space in US cities is very noticeable to the non-US observer. So I think its more of a case that US airports are surrounded by "less" densely populated areas. > And secondly Us airports always seem to take huge plots of land compared to Euro airports. With the except…
> The US in general is very densely built up.
This is the opposite of reality. The US is sprawly and low density.
Of course, that's exactly the problem: sprawling over more space means that it's harder to get to open space for an airport.
Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?
#285Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's your point? You could say the same thing about almost any major infrastructure project. We can't allow a handful of residents somewhere to veto everything. This is exactly what eminent domain was intended for: as long as they received fair compensation then it's fine.
You can't say "they know what they were getting into" when the state shows up and demolishes half a community that had been there for 130 years. I don't think anyone expects the state to force them off their land or their town demolished. > We can't allow a handful of residents somewhere to veto everything. We also shouldn't allow non-residents to profit off the pain of people who actually live where the infrastructu…
We also shouldn't allow non-residents to profit off the pain of people who actually live where the infrastructure is.
Sir, this is the entire point of a suburb. Suburbs exist so their residents can take advantage of the infrastructural, entertainment and commercial benefits of a city without having to contribute to said municipality. Do you really lack that much self-awareness? By virtue of living in the suburb in the first place, you, yourself, are engaging in the very activity that you are decrying.
Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?
#286When 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.
> If you discount Heathrow, Europe doesn't even have one in the top 10, whereas the US has 5 in the top 10.
What a silly statement. "Europe doesn't have one in the top 10 if you remove its one entry in the top 10."
Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?
#287Earlier quoted context omitted.
> One of the interesting ideas [...] is to run high-speed rail to Moses Lake Airport in Central Washington and just expand there. While reading this article, I thought about something like that too. Build an airport quite a while away from the big city, and provide a high-speed, maybe even maglev train there. Make it free for customers. Also, make it very inconvenient for passengers and staff to approach the airport…
I don't think you ever traveled international or your plane got delayed or cancelled. I don't want to carry 4 big bags in the train when I travel international I don't want to travel 30 miles if my plane get cancelled.
This just makes me wonder about a purpose-built train that allows airport luggage carts.
Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?
#288Earlier quoted context omitted.
Part of it is our definition of cities versus metro areas. Boston's population is technically only 650k but Boston proper doesn't even include Cambridge which is like not including one of the boroughs when talking about NYC's population. Granted, we still have a lot less metro areas with over 1 million people but there are still ~50 of them.
Is this something fairly unique to the US or do other countries do this too? that is, having a city boundary that's relatively small compared to the metro area.
It really depends on a number of factors:
* Age of the city
* Natural boundaries (rivers, mountains)
* How government is setup, in some countries (and in some areas of countries) many things are done at the city level, others bump a lot up to county, state, or even country government. The USA manages schools at the city or below, and so city boundaries become well-fought over.
Whenever you see "Unified" you're seeing something built out of smaller, usually city-related, parts.
Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?
#289Earlier quoted context omitted.
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)
The US is also much, much bigger. Germany is about the size of Nevada. France is about the size of the entire Eastern seaboard. The US would definitely be better served with better rail infrastructure, but there's no getting around the fact that Seattle to Boston is 200 miles longer than Lisbon to Moscow, and slightly longer than Edinburgh to Aleppo.
If you look east of the Mississippi, the overall population densities aren't really that bad, and should be able to support high speed rail easily.
...except for the fact that within metro areas, US cities are designed in a very sprawly way that's hostile to public transit. This is an entirely unforced error that has nothing to do with geography and everything to do with culture. We deliberately chose to make our cities sprawly as fuck through various regulations.
Re: Why is it so hard to build an airport?
#290Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> If you discount Heathrow, Europe doesn't even have one in the top 10, whereas the US has 5 in the top 10. What a silly statement. "Europe doesn't have one in the top 10 if you remove its one entry in the top 10."
The UK has a long history of trying to distinguish itself from Europe.
Even before Brexit.
Had I not said what I said, I would have just as likely have had angry Brits in my comments.
You're also really missing the forest for the trees here.