Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Pretty horrible way to rank airports. Boston > Baltimore is ridiculous. And any list that ranks NYC airports LaGuardia > JFK > Newark is obviously using terrible metrics.
Wayyy too much importance put on on time %, especially holiday on time %. To illustrate, I've been flying from ATL to PHX pretty often for a long time, and I usually use US Airways. They have lengthened the flight time of the route by 44 minutes since I've been flying it. Meanwhile, Delta's flight times on the exact same route are an average of 15 minutes shorter than US Airways' flights. Usually, we arrive "early" on USAir and then have to wait on the tarmac for our gate to open up--in other words, an inconvenience. So I wouldn't put a ton of stock in those statistics.
Better measures would be the amount of time it takes to get from a daily parking lot to the nearest gate, maximum walk between 2 gates, peak hour security wait, etc.
Points well made...
There is a complexity between regulated flight paths, fuel efficiency characteristics of the plane used, exact flight path used (not all routes between the same two cities are exactly same), and the cost of gas at a given time that influence how long a flight is between two cities. I've been a frequent flier for just a few years and have noticed differences, especially apparent on long haul and/or overseas flights. I've seen an overseas flight take off 45 minutes late, face normal headwinds, but burn a little more fuel and still land on time.
The other thing I don't like about their metrics.
Heavily used hub airports are more likely to face delays, since some regions are more likely to face weather delays or heavy traffic delays. It spreads the risks out, but it will never be at the top either. I also think it depends on an airports reliance on a single airline vs. an airport with a wide variety of choices. Some airlines are worse than others.
I tend to be fond of major hub airports. My home airport is ATL. I am more likely to be delayed, but the delays are usually (not always) shorter. Delta has the ability to make a 2 hour delay caused by a plane needing mechanical attention turn into a 15-20 minute delay by using another plane and immediately adjusting their routes. There is also a wide variety of flight options (time, direct flights, etc...) that non-hub airports don't have. Whereas I have faced longer delays in airports like Vancouver or La Guardia when a plane has mechanical trouble.
Airports with higher levels of direct-flight competition will leader to lower air fares. Also, some airports are much more cost-efficient and that has a small impact air fares as well.
I also like airports that offer friendlier transfers between flights. (JFK not always so fun... unless you get to stay in the same area between flights). International transfers at JFK and Miami are a major pain compared to others like Detroit, DFW, or ATL.
With the new TSA rules you have to re-go through security at all of them after clearing customs. JFK the terminals are more spread. MIA you have to re-go through security with everyone else newly arriving, so the line might be longer and a 1 hr connection can turn into a reeeally tight connection. ATL is an interesting beast. It is really large, which makes people not like it so much, but given it's size it is by far the most efficient airport to travel from one far end to the other far end quickly. DFW isn't too hard to to get around. The design of their airport makes some transfers take a little more time, than ATL and can lower the access to food vendors/services, but it can greatly benefit hometown users with shorter distance between curb/parking to the gate and is easier to get around than JFK or MIA (however this can come at the costs of longer or inconsistent times in the security line and cost-efficiency for the airport).
I have not flown out of, or landed at, enough of the mentioned airports to judge them all....that's why I'm curious what other posters think about the list. AND obviously different lists by different entities will yield completely different results; it all depends on the source's ranking parameters.....change those parameters and the listing order will change....this is only one set of variables.
What is this based on? I had a terrible experience at LAX. I like ORD's service and all but they aren't always on time . I had a good experience in both Orlando and BWI though .
that chicago "ohare" photo is not ohare at all, but midway. awesome journalism.
also
O’Hare International Airport has been voted the "Best Airport in North America" for 10 years by two separate sources: Readers of the U.S. Edition of Business Traveler Magazine (1998–2003) and Global Traveler Magazine (2004–2007)
I have not flown out of, or landed at, enough of the mentioned airports to judge them all....that's why I'm curious what other posters think about the list. AND obviously different lists by different entities will yield completely different results; it all depends on the source's ranking parameters.....change those parameters and the listing order will change....this is only one set of variables.
I have just about decided it also depends on the type of user as well. I fly alot as well, especially international long hauls and I have come to realize that airport designs usually have pros and cons to them, but to get some of the pros there is often some trade off to get that.
I wrote this long reply on another thread yesterday about this issue, because... well I had too much time to kill yesterday, but I thought you might be interested.
"I find the comments on here interesting. I think often some of the best airports are criticized by some people who use it once or twice, but don't understand the major benefits of the airport.
ATL, to me, is the best example of this.
Look at this whole thread and every other comment praises the airport as being one of the best or puts it down as one of the worsts.
Some cons come with benefits and some benefits comes with cons and airports like ATL have some of the extremes.
ATL is the busiest and you can tell when you are in it, but that aside it is actually easy to get around. You can get from one far end to other far end within 10 minutes and you never have to switch terminals. Everything is within the same secured areas. Frequent fliers and frequent international fliers who switch airlines mid-journey will understand the major benefits of those.
I disagree with the notion ATL does not have a wide-variety of food options/services, because everything is in the same secured zone it takes just 5 minutes to go to the next concourse and back. I tend to not like airports with separate terminals and once your past security you can't switch... your stuck in a small area.
Busier airports...
Extreme cons: tons of people and the physical size of the airport is large.
Extreme benefits: a huge variety of flight options (including competition between carriers, larger variety of flight times, flights to multi airports (when the destination has multiple airports), easier/quicker to get on the next flight if you miss your flight, planes often (not always) get replaced quicker with another plane when there is a mechanical problem, cheaper tickets, and the biggest... --more direct flight options--) These are benefits I don't think casual travelers see/understand as much.
Other types of lay outs have trade offs to their design. Take the difference between DFW and ATL and the layout of their terminals.
ATL has a single terminal that is really large and for the most part has a huge single security line with tons of checkpoint stands. DFW has separate terminals with different small check points spread out.
In this regard ATL:
Cons: The main terminal is busier, Most people have further distance to travel Parking/curb to gate, it is more difficult to consolidate large amounts of parking in a single location.
Pros: The security line might have a wait sometimes, but it stays more consistent. No one single check point can back up the whole line. (There is pretty much two major lines that are split into 4 lines that feed into like 40 different checkpoints). This also spreads out risks. It rarely backs up to an extremely long wait when there happen to be lots of flights leaving one set of gates at once. It is also easier to consolidate transit, shuttle, and car rental options.
DFW: Cons: opposite of ATL. A security line can be really short or extremely long. It often depends on how many flights leave that one terminal in one given time. There are fewer checkpoints in each terminal, so if a check point backs up there are fewer alternatives. (It doesn't spread out risk). The check-in desks can also back up in single locations for the same reasons. The airport might have higher costs to build more parking decks at each terminal and perhaps can't benefit in cost savings from massing people to the same check in counters/security lines. Takes a little bit longer to switch terminals, although DFW is one of the best airports to have multi-terminals. It is a little harder go across the airport for better dining options
Pros: Much less distance to travel parking/curb to gate. Easier access to more parking spaces. Potential for quicker security lines, but this comes with an increased risk of really long waits."
So what I am thinking is if someone just wants to park a car, and luckily find a short security line DFW can seem like a great airport. If someone needs consolidated transit/shuttle/car rental services or is connecting flights, or wants more food options, but doesn't mind walking a little bit further or waiting through moderate (but more consistent) security lines ATL can seem like a better airport.
I have just about decided it also depends on the type of user as well. I fly alot as well, especially international long hauls and I have come to realize that airport designs usually have pros and cons to them, but to get some of the pros there is often some trade off to get that.
I wrote this long reply on another thread yesterday about this issue, because... well I had too much time to kill yesterday, but I thought you might be interested.
"I find the comments on here interesting. I think often some of the best airports are criticized by some people who use it once or twice, but don't understand the major benefits of the airport.
ATL, to me, is the best example of this.
Look at this whole thread and every other comment praises the airport as being one of the best or puts it down as one of the worsts.
Some cons come with benefits and some benefits comes with cons and airports like ATL have some of the extremes.
ATL is the busiest and you can tell when you are in it, but that aside it is actually easy to get around. You can get from one far end to other far end within 10 minutes and you never have to switch terminals. Everything is within the same secured areas. Frequent fliers and frequent international fliers who switch airlines mid-journey will understand the major benefits of those.
I disagree with the notion ATL does not have a wide-variety of food options/services, because everything is in the same secured zone it takes just 5 minutes to go to the next concourse and back. I tend to not like airports with separate terminals and once your past security you can't switch... your stuck in a small area.
Busier airports...
Extreme cons: tons of people and the physical size of the airport is large.
Extreme benefits: a huge variety of flight options (including competition between carriers, larger variety of flight times, flights to multi airports (when the destination has multiple airports), easier/quicker to get on the next flight if you miss your flight, planes often (not always) get replaced quicker with another plane when there is a mechanical problem, cheaper tickets, and the biggest... --more direct flight options--) These are benefits I don't think casual travelers see/understand as much.
Other types of lay outs have trade offs to their design. Take the difference between DFW and ATL and the layout of their terminals.
ATL has a single terminal that is really large and for the most part has a huge single security line with tons of checkpoint stands. DFW has separate terminals with different small check points spread out.
In this regard ATL:
Cons: The main terminal is busier, Most people have further distance to travel Parking/curb to gate, it is more difficult to consolidate large amounts of parking in a single location.
Pros: The security line might have a wait sometimes, but it stays more consistent. No one single check point can back up the whole line. (There is pretty much two major lines that are split into 4 lines that feed into like 40 different checkpoints). This also spreads out risks. It rarely backs up to an extremely long wait when there happen to be lots of flights leaving one set of gates at once. It is also easier to consolidate transit, shuttle, and car rental options.
DFW: Cons: opposite of ATL. A security line can be really short or extremely long. It often depends on how many flights leave that one terminal in one given time. There are fewer checkpoints in each terminal, so if a check point backs up there are fewer alternatives. (It doesn't spread out risk). The check-in desks can also back up in single locations for the same reasons. The airport might have higher costs to build more parking decks at each terminal and perhaps can't benefit in cost savings from massing people to the same check in counters/security lines. Takes a little bit longer to switch terminals, although DFW is one of the best airports to have multi-terminals. It is a little harder go across the airport for better dining options
Pros: Much less distance to travel parking/curb to gate. Easier access to more parking spaces. Potential for quicker security lines, but this comes with an increased risk of really long waits."
So what I am thinking is if someone just wants to park a car, and luckily find a short security line DFW can seem like a great airport. If someone needs consolidated transit/shuttle/car rental services or is connecting flights, or wants more food options, but doesn't mind walking a little bit further or waiting through moderate (but more consistent) security lines ATL can seem like a better airport.
Great post........And I think Atlanta has a wonderful airport which is very easy to navigate; however if they expand the terminal much more it may become too large and overwhelming..
What is this based on? I had a terrible experience at LAX. I like ORD's service and all but they aren't always on time . I had a good experience in both Orlando and BWI though .
Here are the parameters.....I'm not sure IF the website used 2009 rankings in the new data but it's listed.
(1) On Time Departures.
(2) On Time Arrivals.
(3) On Time Holiday Departures.
(4) On Time Holiday Arrivals.
(5) Average Security Waiting Time.
(6) Total Tarmac Incidents.
(7) Safety.
(8) Amenities..
Great post........And I think Atlanta has a wonderful airport which is very easy to navigate; however if they expand the terminal much more it may become too large and overwhelming..
I'm not sure I agree. Atlanta's airport is far larger than Minneaspolis', but I find MSP far more intimidating and uncertain (ATL is my home airport, but I've flown into/out of MSP scores of times).
You could add a thousand concourses to Atlanta's airport and it would still make perfect sense to me. The concourses are aligned like dominoes in sequence and you just take the train to the right one.
MSP, on the other hand, is sprawling, with hugely long walks for some gates and a remote terminal a bus ride away from the main terminal. Their food court does beat the hell out of anything ATL has, though.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. I had a good experience in both Orlando and BWI though 
.
.
