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

411–420 of 574 posts

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

#411

Post by jtbayly »

balderdash wrote: post #358

I would be pretty upset if all of a sudden my house was under the flight path of a new airport (and the associated economic consequences) but I always find it surprising how annoyed people get that put a house near an airport and then complain about it, where one of my parents lives there is a small but fairly busy private airport that has been there close to a hundred years, so almost no one that lives by it now can…

This is not surprising if you think about it.

You understand a new airport generating complaints based on loss of value.

Have you considered what successfully getting an airport shut down might do for the nearby property owners?

It's not uncommon for people to try to (often successfully) tell other people what they can and cannot do with their own land, simply for the benefit of the one trying.

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

#412

Post by bluGill »

TylerE wrote: post #299
ghaff wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So now you'll have the in-city checkin version and the in-airport checkin version? Because you definitely need parking and rental cars somewhere convenient. "Here" means a greater area serviced by a large airport which is a lot more than a city. There probably would even be a market for an in-city bag drop service. But it wouldn't replace people driving to the airport.

If the airport wasn’t way outside town, many of those people wouldn’t need to park, as they could just take public transit or an Uber, and the same would also mean that many people traveling in won’t need to rent a car.

In the us transit isn't normally good enough. most people rent a car. I wish that would change.

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

#413

Post by Arrath »

perlgeek wrote: post #63
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…

> 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…

> run high-speed rail to Moses Lake Airport

Woah, that's a good ways out there

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

#414

Post by Symbiote »

monknomo wrote: post #396
Symbiote wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lived near several 80%-passenger railways in England, and they are not silent but they are quieter and less annoying than roads. Most of the trains were electric, including the freight trains.

US experience is different, with big diesels and primarily freight. I'd rate them as similarly annoying to a divided highway, but I suppose it depends on the region and the specifics

There are a million train spotter videos on YouTube, and given the audience I'm unlikely to find one filmed in someone's back garden.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-wyR316550

(The navy blue trains with yellow 'noses' are high-speed commuter trains, the dark blue, gold and white ones are the high-speed trains to France, the plain white ones are normal-speed commuter trains to London.)

I think the continuously welded rails are the biggest improvement, as they remove most of the "clackety-clack". Instead you get the "hiss", but that's only noticeable from really close.

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

#415

Post by dawnerd »

balderdash wrote: post #358

I would be pretty upset if all of a sudden my house was under the flight path of a new airport (and the associated economic consequences) but I always find it surprising how annoyed people get that put a house near an airport and then complain about it, where one of my parents lives there is a small but fairly busy private airport that has been there close to a hundred years, so almost no one that lives by it now can…

Same people that buy a house next to Disneyland then complain about the fireworks and traffic. They just don’t consider it and the disclosures about it if any are often buried in documents they’re rushed to sign.

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

#416

Post by bluGill »

TylerE wrote: post #395
brewdad wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trouble with this plan is that downtown land is more expensive than rural land. The land area you need to efficiently build the check-in facilities will be similar whether you put it on site or away from the airport. So you'd spend more for the off-site and then still have to build a people mover that provides zero benefit to anyone not going to and from the airport. It makes far more sense to build the airport f…

In an urban environment you can build UP. Airports avoid structure over 40 or 50ft to avoid interfering with the controllers visibility. Instead of having one giant check in hall you could have one floor per airline, for instance.

Airports because of noise have plenty of space nobody else wants so building out isn't an issue.

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

#417

Post by ghaff »

bluGill wrote: post #412
TylerE wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the airport wasn’t way outside town, many of those people wouldn’t need to park, as they could just take public transit or an Uber, and the same would also mean that many people traveling in won’t need to rent a car.

In the us transit isn't normally good enough. most people rent a car. I wish that would change.

I pretty much never rent a car if I'm going into a city. But I'm often not actually going into the city that an airport services.

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

#418

Post by chrisdhal »

reaperducer wrote: post #217
vel0city wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Just to confirm, the new airport served pretty much only international flights? It was a pretty common urban planning concept for a large city to have one airport devoted mostly or entirely to domestic flights, and one mostly or entirely for international flights. New York domestic: EWR New York international: JFK New York freight: LGA Chicago domestic: MDW Chicago international: ORD Houston domestic: HOU Houston int…

> Notice how some airports (IAD, IAH) specifically have "International Airport" in their codes.

Since this is HN, we'll get ultra-pedantic...

IAH is technically "Intercontinental Airport of Houston", not "international" for some reason (full name is "George Bush Intercontinental Airport").

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

#419

Post by dawnerd »

cbhl wrote: post #361
pbsladek wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

If you want to pay ~$200 and get to Tokyo faster, you should fly into HND instead of NRT, full stop.

And from Hnd either the monorail or the airport limousine are very cheap ways into the city. I use the airport limousine to get to Disney and it’s really convenient. WAY cheaper than a taxi

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

#420

Post by dwater »

massysett wrote: post #154
dwater wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Washington DC, Washington National Airport (WAS) is just across a river from downtown and connected by subway, and Dulles International Airport (IAD) was way out past the exurbs when it was constructed and only just got a subway connection several decades later. IAD gets way more traffic and has as long as I can remember. I'd guess that's because it's not possible to add many more flights to WAS.

This is wrong. Reagan National is DCA, not WAS. Also, DCA handles more passengers than IAD. https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2023/02/18/nat...

Sorry, I take the train 10x more than I fly, I mixed up the airport with Union Station.
Post reply on HN