U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Missouri > Kansas City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-14-2011, 06:29 PM
 
519 posts, read 471,275 times
Reputation: 325

Advertisements

I find it nice, easy and quaint now that I am living here, but it's no different than Springfield airport. KC should have done something about it's design when TWA raised a fuss. Leaders back then were short sighted about the role of an airport. Thank goodness we have a mayor now who is forward thinking and looking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-14-2011, 09:36 PM
 
Location: KC
388 posts, read 813,042 times
Reputation: 389
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovekcmo View Post
I find it nice, easy and quaint now that I am living here, but it's no different than Springfield airport. KC should have done something about it's design when TWA raised a fuss. Leaders back then were short sighted about the role of an airport. Thank goodness we have a mayor now who is forward thinking and looking.
I'd like to see a new terminal due to the new requirements but if I'm not mistaken the airport was designed and built the way it is because of TWA not the other way around. At least that's the way I've read it here on city-data threads.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2011, 04:17 AM
 
519 posts, read 471,275 times
Reputation: 325
I have a family member who worked for TWA here who told me the 3 terminal drive to your gate was what TWA wanted. But sometime either during construction or soon after it opened TWA wanted wider terminals for their operations and Kansas City couldn't do it because of how much the city had spent in building the terminals so TWA moved operations to St Louis in 1982. If that's true, then TWA kind of help to create an airport that they didn't want in the end.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2011, 07:06 AM
 
11 posts, read 8,333 times
Reputation: 12
a new airport would be nice and needed. If there's not going to be a new central terminal airport, then something should be done to the current terminals to bring them up to date and functional. The current three terminals is an interesting concept but not pratical or functional in my opinion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2011, 09:06 AM
 
1,830 posts, read 3,121,832 times
Reputation: 532
Posted a couple pages ago...

Quote:
Originally Posted by xenokc View Post
^According to this, TWA wanted the 'drive to your gate' concept.

" TWA insisted on a "Drive to Your Gate" concept with flight gates only 75 feet (23 m) from the roadway (signs along the roadway identified the specific flights leaving each gate). "


Kansas City International Airport - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2014, 08:46 PM
 
519 posts, read 471,275 times
Reputation: 325
So when is this new terminal going to happen?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2014, 02:55 PM
 
44 posts, read 22,322 times
Reputation: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
Agreed.

I wonder how many of the oh so hip and "with it" who love to bash KCI have ever considered that it just might be today's "security" measures that are, in fact, the problem?

But no, let's embrace "security" that is unconstitutional and unthinkable in the former United States of America and reject an airport that was the best possible design for the convenience of local travelers just a few short years ago.

In today's world, madness has become the rule....on so many fronts. I am fortunate to have lived for a good many years when it was the exception.

And anyone who lived those years old enough to be aware knows exactly why.
When security concerns rather than people concerns direct the design of an airport we should all be concerned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2014, 02:59 PM
 
44 posts, read 22,322 times
Reputation: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by denverian View Post
What, you're comfortable getting on a plane where your "constitutional rights" weren't "violated" but any terrorist could have walked on with a bomb or knives? Thanks, but no thanks. It's not 1955 anymore.
The security theater that goes on has nothing to do with catching terrorists. It's all about placating nervous "home of the brave" Americans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-25-2014, 03:01 PM
 
44 posts, read 22,322 times
Reputation: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
The sole reason that they're unlikely to go anywhere is that the nation of sheep we are today shrugs its shoulders and says they're unlikely to go anywhere and that (below) it's not 1955 anymore. The collective resignation to the inevitable loss of our once great beacon of hope for the future of freedom for mankind is disturbing beyond words....especially to those of us who grew up in a different country and give a damn. It is pathetic that today so many care so little about giving up so much.
He who gives up freedom to buy security will find he has neither.

A. de T.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2014, 10:54 AM
 
Location: Denver, Colorado U.S.A.
14,174 posts, read 22,575,463 times
Reputation: 10428
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
The security theater that goes on has nothing to do with catching terrorists. It's all about placating nervous "home of the brave" Americans.
Maybe if everyone just carried guns onto planes, then if a terrorist pulls out a knife, or a gun, or a bomb, everyone on the plane could just start shooting. That should work

If you don't think security screening keeps bad things from happening on planes, then that seems like a rather short-sighted opinion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Missouri > Kansas City
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top