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.
Thanks for that, I have not been to O'Hare in about five years so I probably should not have piped in so quickly. Glad to see improvements are being made. Why does O'Hare have no terminal 4, it skips from 3 to 5. I know 5 is the International terminal.
As for the runway project, I would argue it does effect the airport operation, in that it probably will cause some delays when they get into the heart of the construction. One more thing, there was once a plan for a new western terminal that perhaps would have been reached to the main terminals by subway.
I would guess that has been shelved for now with the recession and such.
They numbered them out before they built them, so Terminal 4 was another domestic terminal, and then Terminal 5 was international. I think Terminal 4 would have been the western terminal, although yes, that has been shelved.
They're actually doing the runway work so they don't ever take away capacity, but only add as the project moves on. A new runway was created south of the others, then a runway was lenghthened, then one was decommissioned, etc. They only take away after they've added. I think one of the top priorities is to keep O'hare running as smooth as possible during all work.
They numbered them out before they built them, so Terminal 4 was another domestic terminal, and then Terminal 5 was international. I think Terminal 4 would have been the western terminal, although yes, that has been shelved.
They're actually doing the runway work so they don't ever take away capacity, but only add as the project moves on. A new runway was created south of the others, then a runway was lenghthened, then one was decommissioned, etc. They only take away after they've added. I think one of the top priorities is to keep O'hare running as smooth as possible during all work.
Thanks for that update. O'Hare is still an incredible airport. I think the future is great, and the runway config is the starting point. Eventually I would expect the older terminals to be replaced completely, by that, I mean torn down and rebuilt, not just remodeled. This is perhaps a long-term vision, but at some point it will be needed. I'm sure there is a master plan for the airport, but how soon this plan will turnover is unknown.
ATL is kinda the Wal-Mart of airports. Built to be big, but in the end offering just the bare-bones. The concourses are endless, and while there is a nice train system to connect them, you still feel like you are in an airport "warehouse", just a functional place that serves the masses. Don't get me wrong ATL as a whole, is impressive, but the average traveler doesn't get that, they just see the long terminals and endless gates.
It may be bare-bones, but it is functional. At an airport, all I want to do is leave, so it works for me.
At least you figured out the train. I've run into passengers who never noticed the train from Concourse E to the baggage claim.
Denvers airport is easy to get around, clean, and the subway/tram doesn't take long to get to the main terminal from the concourses. Never been to Atlanta but it looks fairly similar. Just looks like there are way to many different concourses.
Minneapolis is very impressive and pretty efficient. I still don't understand the tram system though.
Many of the the northeast airports are old and crowded and hard to navigate, much like northeastern cities themselves. Airports around the US reflect their cities. Denver is clean, large, easy to navigate and not crowded, much like denver itself. Logan is old, busy, cramped, and poorly designed, much like boston.
There are really two completely different criteria at work here:
1) Proximity to the city and sheer convenience.
2) Amenities in the airport itself and general ease of getting around.
If we were using #1, I'd have to make some unexpected choices. Midway in Chicago is a good example. Kansas City is another, as is San Diego. Birmingham is a fourth. In all those situations, you get off the plane and are pretty much at your meeting in a half-hour. Even Atlanta has the MARTA right there. Just hop on and you get wherever you need to be.
If we were using #2 as the basis, I'd have a completely different list. I like San Francisco's a lot and Detroit's is really good. Also, Bush airport in Houston is just dandy by me. But I HATE Atlanta and Dallas. Both of those are serious pains in the ass to navigate. What's more, they are uncomfortable airports for long layovers.
I dont think O'Hare is that bad, I just think its overwhelming. In terms of shops and restaurants O'Hare is awesome. It's just stressful. Too many people and sometimes can be too big. I thinks a worse combo is a stressful airport with crappy stores/restaurants/bars.
From my experience MIA is the worst. Always stressful, and I have been stranded there twice. Its just very very disorganized almost chaotic. With that being said O'Hare is chaotic too, but just much more organized. Boston on the other hand was just terrible. Logan sucks!
I really liked San Diego's airport. It was laid back and very comfortable. I also like Denver's airport and DC Reagan.
I think Miami and Boston's are the worst. I don't know if it's because I have flown out of O'Hare so many times that I just know my way around, but I don't find it that bad.
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.
