Author

Message

Boofer

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 12:05:28 pm

Boofer
Site Admin

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 949
Location: Carmel, IN

I'm looking at the ATCSCC site on the web (fly.faa.gov) right now. It's a Tuesday morning in October, not a particularly busy time of day. There's some light to moderate rain around the eastern half of the country, but not anything particularly nasty, like a nor'easter, and ice storm, or a Buffalo-style blizzard. And in these conditions, we've got ground stops in place at ORD, ATL, PHL, EWR, JFK, and LGA. If you fly a lot, like I do, you'll probably agree that air travel has definitely returned to the pre-9/11 levels of discomfort and inconvenience. There is so much traffic and congestion at these airports that I, for one, try to avoid them wherever possible. I have flown through ORD exactly once in the last 4 years (because I always avoided it, and when I gave it a chance, I was nightmarishly delayed both direction on my connections). But unfortunately, due to the expense of flying to EWR from IND, PHL has become my airport of choice for the freuqent trips I take to NJ.

Because of the increasing frustration of using these airports, I think airlines hubbing elsewhere might start to see some real competitive advantage. For a passenger who has to connect somewhere (i.e., there's no nonstop option from his origin city to his destination city), I think NW's hub at DTW, UA's hub at IAD, and DL's hub at CVG are very competitive verus CO's EWR hub and US's PHL hub. US's CLT hub and NW's MEM hub are very competitive versus DL's ATL hub. NW's DTW and MSP hubs are very competitive versus UA/AA's ORD hub. If I were a connecting pax, I would prefer to schedule my connection by avoiding ORD, ATL, PHL, and EWR.

I also think general hub dissatisfaction will continue to drive more focus-city approaches, like we're seeing at IND, and more point-to-point service outside of hub-and-spoke routes.

Can I get a peanut crumb with that thimble of Coke?

Indy

Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 03:13:18 pm

Indy
Site Admin

Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 2316
Location: Indianapolis, IN

I've always felt that the driving force behind expansion at places like ATL and ORD was always ego and not some great business model. To me they are poor business plans with no focus on customer service.

Food4Geeks.com - Even Geeks Like To Eat.

Boofer

Posted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 01:34:23 pm

Boofer
Site Admin

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 949
Location: Carmel, IN

I agree that ego has certainly played a part. But I think it's more a matter of the mega-hubs simply having grown to a size that makes them now prone to delays and congestion. Much like parts of I-465 have now grown to the point of delays and congestion simply because too much volume tries to get through at peak times. And now many people prefer to take back roads or other alternate routes to avoid the congested parts of I-465. In that same way, I think people will increasingly plan their connections through less-congested hubs wherever possible.

And now, I-465 is being expanded in certain spots to relieve the congestion. Likewise, ATL added a fifth runway and another terminal in recent years. ORD is reconfiguring its runways and adding capacity in spots, too.

Can I get a peanut crumb with that thimble of Coke?

Boofer

Posted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 01:35:46 pm

Boofer
Site Admin

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 949
Location: Carmel, IN

What other airports suck, for reasons of high probability of delays and related issues?

I'm putting ORD, ATL, EWR, and PHL out there. What others truly suck for the same reasons?

Can I get a peanut crumb with that thimble of Coke?

wanderer

Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 05:19:51 pm


Member

Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 142
Location: IND

Not really a "hub" but BOS and LGA are pretty bad too.

JFK gets thrown in with the whole NYC airspace deal. A disaster on most days that are less than perfect weather days.

LAX's ATC issues can be a hassle too.

stlgph

Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 12:06:09 am


Member

Joined: 27 Jun 2005
Posts: 333
Location: St. Louis, MO

fuck the concern over delays.

La Guardia's main terminal flat out SUCKS.

there's no Starbucks.

7E72004

Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 11:47:52 am


AirTran Reporter

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 341
Location: Indianapolis

what is going on with the meet that Indy was supposed to "set up?"

wanderer

Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 05:05:29 pm


Member

Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 142
Location: IND

stlgph wrote:

fuck the concern over delays.

La Guardia's main terminal flat out SUCKS.

there's no Starbucks.


Always has! If I have a choice of the three (or four) NYC airports...LGA would be my last.

That being said, I am currently posting from the Delta Crown Club at LGA. Laughing

Forum Index  >  General Discussion  >  Airports That Suck

Pages(s):  1