Hartsfield extending plane train (Atlanta, East Point: how much, calculation, prices)

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Holy cow! That's about as much as the whole MARTA system.

They ought to run something like this from the Lindbergh MARTA station up to the Buckhead Village and on up to Lenox and Phipps.

There is already a bus that offers ART-level service via Piedmont Rd. Also, The Peach from Buckhead Station to Arts Center.

[cqholt]

And the plane train would run east-west between the 2 MARTA stations, via all the existing and future concourses, and customs and such. Eliminating the need for any shuttle services.

The issue of the Plane Train inside the secure zone arises and how to solve that? It would be far cheaper to just build another APM-style ATL SkyTrain on the eastside of the airport.

[flyonpa]

I would add an "Extension" of the "Sky" train (would probably have to be renamed).

My quick Google Earth ruler says it would be a 5 mile line.

From the Current N/S Sky Train terminal, would continue then go down underground (Should be done as part of the plan for the end around on 9L), then Turn and parallel between 9R and 10L (the 6th runway) then Turn NorthEast coming above ground somewhere around the USPS building on the loop road, then above ground up and along the road to the International Terminal, to a Station in/near the parking deck.

Most/All of the underground work can be done as Cut and Cover, a much cheaper underground method then tunneling.

It can re-use the current SkyTrain Maintenance shops, Can probably be done in or around $5-600M

A "Northern" route could be done at grade with some overhead with maybe a stop at Delta/Hotels (Maybe move all hotel shuttles to that station, and all the "other" shuttle to the GICC stations (As most of that land will be lost to the new airport hotel)

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Holy cow! That's about as much as the whole MARTA system.

They ought to run something like this from the Lindbergh MARTA station up to the Buckhead Village and on up to Lenox and Phipps.

We do already have a train that runs up there from the airport.

Now why do you think the plane train has such high ridership? And why do so few people drive to their gate? Maybe we need to institute parking minimums at each gate, it's really not fair we make all these people walk or take a train the mile plus distance to their gate, right?

[MattCW]

Not sure what you're on about now, but there's no train to Buckhead Village from anywhere.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by MattCW

Not sure what you're on about now, but there's no train to Buckhead Village from anywhere.

MARTA already goes to Lindbergh and Buckhead from the airport.

Yes, Buckhead Village needs high-capacity transit, but you are not going to get 300k a day riding it if you build a "plane train" between Lindbergh and Buckhead village. My point is the the points being connected and their density / walkability are more important than the exact high-capacity transit vehicle chosen.

[1lifealex]

I have an idea to go from the international terminal to the domestic terminal currently the plane train has four cars or four separate doors to board why not extend the Train by one or two cars have it to where you can only board that one or two cars at the terminals and the other four cars will operate the same way they run now

[magnetar]

Originally Posted by flyonpa

I would add an "Extension" of the "Sky" train (would probably have to be renamed).

I mean yeah; it seems like the Skytrain is already the out-of-security peoplemover system for the airport. If they built a line all the way to the rental car station, which is way tf over there, they can surely afford to build an extension to the International terminal. I mean, they're spending hundreds of millions just rebuilding the parking decks now. It clearly isn't a financial priority but would be nice if they eventually do it.

[testa50]

I still like the solution proposed on Flyertalk when this whole debacle started: a Singapore-style cablecar connecting the domestic concourses with F. People have scoffed at this in the past, and will probably scoff at it again, but no one has ever convinced me of what exactly is technically unfeasible about it. Make lemonade of the situation and make this an icon of Atlanta's airport.

It would cost a lot, but when the alternative is a $500m train there is a good bit of room for expensive contingencies.

The political reality behind any solution--and, yes, the reason for the tiny buses--is that this was an issue poorly anticipated by the design team and politicians behind the project. The number of travelers needing to go between the domestic and international concourses was always thought to be minimal; no, it had to be minimal, or else it would cast doubt over the logic of spending $2bn on a new international terminal that would actually be an inconvenience for many travelers. The number of people, and hence the size of the buses and lack of a permanent solution, was always downplayed severely.

Perhaps as a generation of politicians and managers retires and everyone moves on from the original, rather unpleasant opening of the international terminal, we can actually address this problem in a permanent way.

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by testa50

I still like the solution proposed on Flyertalk when this whole debacle started: a Singapore-style cablecar connecting the domestic concourses with F. People have scoffed at this in the past, and will probably scoff at it again, but no one has ever convinced me of what exactly is technically unfeasible about it. Make lemonade of the situation and make this an icon of Atlanta's airport.

It would cost a lot, but when the alternative is a $500m train there is a good bit of room for expensive contingencies.

The political reality behind any solution--and, yes, the reason for the tiny buses--is that this was an issue poorly anticipated by the design team and politicians behind the project. The number of travelers needing to go between the domestic and international concourses was always thought to be minimal; no, it had to be minimal, or else it would cast doubt over the logic of spending $2bn on a new international terminal that would actually be an inconvenience for many travelers. The number of people, and hence the size of the buses and lack of a permanent solution, was always downplayed severely.

Perhaps as a generation of politicians and managers retires and everyone moves on from the original, rather unpleasant opening of the international terminal, we can actually address this problem in a permanent way.

Smart post. Best post.