# US Airports and Transit Connections



## saxman

I found this article interesting as I'm always trying to take transit from airports and seeing what's well integrated and what's not. I didn't realize passenger facility charges (PFC's) were blocked from going to transit systems serving the airport. I did find it odd that the author made it seem like so many US airports have train to train systems, when it's not all that many. I guess you could include some shuttle bus to train to be one though. Now it looks like PFC's can go toward transit connections to airports.

U.S. Airports No Longer Have to Build Their Own Terrible Trains


----------



## MIrailfan

Would make it easier for me. Not having to rent a car.


----------



## jis

I guess PANYNJ can now give the median of the Van Wyck Expressway back to NYSDOT and lease it back from them for $1 per year or some thing like that.  It was one of the more convoluted real estate deals to satisfy the bogus requirement of the airport tax usage regulation to enable construction of the JFK Air Train to Jamaica LIRR.

I wonder if PANYNJ will take this opportunity to use some of the Newark Airport tax money to fund the extension of PATH to EWR.


----------



## Blackwolf

Having grown up in the SF Bay Area, I remember with some fanfare the "Big Deal" that having BART connect directly to SFO was. It was a watershed moment, taking one of the first BART trains that ran in June of 2003, when I was able to step right from a train and into the International Terminal without having to perform a transfer-within-a-transfer to do so (looking at you JFK and EWR).


----------



## MARC Rider

Blackwolf said:


> Having grown up in the SF Bay Area, I remember with some fanfare the "Big Deal" that having BART connect directly to SFO was. It was a watershed moment, taking one of the first BART trains that ran in June of 2003, when I was able to step right from a train and into the International Terminal without having to perform a transfer-within-a-transfer to do so (looking at you JFK and EWR).


I don't know how much different it is. You have to take the Airtrain from the actual airline terminals to the BART Station. 

Let's see, the airports with trains inside the terminals not requiring a people mover to connect from the train to the terminal:

Philadelphia - SEPTA
Denver - A line
Chicago - Blue Line L
Washington National - Metro
Dulles -- Metro (when the Silver Line extension actually opens)

Any others?


----------



## Maglev

MARC Rider said:


> Any others?



Honolulu is one step closer to having a train at the airport:









$70 Million Secured for Honolulu Rail Project in New COVID-19 Relief Bill | Maui Now


The new federal funding will help the City and County of Honolulu pay for a portion of its share of the cost of the project, making up for the loss in tax revenue due to the COVID-19 pandemic.




mauinow.com


----------



## joelkfla

saxman said:


> I found this article interesting as I'm always trying to take transit from airports and seeing what's well integrated and what's not. I didn't realize passenger facility charges (PFC's) were blocked from going to transit systems serving the airport. I did find it odd that the author made it seem like so many US airports have train to train systems, when it's not all that many. I guess you could include some shuttle bus to train to be one though. Now it looks like PFC's can go toward transit connections to airports.
> 
> U.S. Airports No Longer Have to Build Their Own Terrible Trains


Frankly, the author sounds like a crank.


----------



## joelkfla

MARC Rider said:


> I don't know how much different it is. You have to take the Airtrain from the actual airline terminals to the BART Station.
> 
> Let's see, the airports with trains inside the terminals not requiring a people mover to connect from the train to the terminal:
> 
> Philadelphia - SEPTA
> Denver - A line
> Chicago - Blue Line L
> Washington National - Metro
> Dulles -- Metro (when the Silver Line extension actually opens)
> 
> Any others?


I don't see the problem if a people mover transfer is required when the station is close to the terminal complex. They usually run every 5 minutes or less, and the ride is rarely more than 10 minutes. They're always easily accessible, with elevators and level boarding.

Most large airports have multiple terminals, anyway. Even if transit goes directly to a terminal, you'd still have to get to another terminal depending on which airline.

I'm not talking about set-ups like JFK or EWR, where the transit station is off property. But at SFO, where the station is right next to the terminal, it just doesn't matter.


----------



## Blackwolf

MARC Rider said:


> I don't know how much different it is. You have to take the Airtrain from the actual airline terminals to the BART Station.
> 
> Let's see, the airports with trains inside the terminals not requiring a people mover to connect from the train to the terminal:
> 
> Philadelphia - SEPTA
> Denver - A line
> Chicago - Blue Line L
> Washington National - Metro
> Dulles -- Metro (when the Silver Line extension actually opens)
> 
> Any others?


Eh, I don't really know what you're referring to here. The BART station is -literally- inside Terminal G at SFO. You take a left at the security screening and walk 400 feet. It really doesn't get much closer... Anywhere.

And one doesn't have to take AirTrain. It's semi-convinient, especially if you're traveling from/to Terminals 1 & 2 (though 1 will be easy to access by foot hopefully by year's end after construction completes). But you can walk to every terminal from the station land-side. Since most of my travel involving SFO is on United and Air Canada, I've used the AirTrain exactly once in 17 years.

Really, I find SFO to be a small airport that is easily walkable to/from BART.

It's pretty good by North American standards.


----------



## jebr

MARC Rider said:


> I don't know how much different it is. You have to take the Airtrain from the actual airline terminals to the BART Station.
> 
> Let's see, the airports with trains inside the terminals not requiring a people mover to connect from the train to the terminal:
> 
> Philadelphia - SEPTA
> Denver - A line
> Chicago - Blue Line L
> Washington National - Metro
> Dulles -- Metro (when the Silver Line extension actually opens)
> 
> Any others?



MSP doesn't require a people mover. Terminal 2 doesn't even have one to use, and Terminal 1 can be accessed a couple different ways without one - if you don't need to check bags and the Skyway Checkpoint is open, then you can simply go up to the skyway level and go through security there. Otherwise, there is a walking path (at least before the recent remodel - not sure if it's there now) through some parking lots over to the check-in area. Most people would use the every-two-minute, one-minute-ride people mover, though.

In fact, the local light rail could arguably be considered part of the airport's people mover system - the airport considers the Blue Line between Terminal 1 and Terminal 2 the way to transfer between terminals, and there's no fare charged between those two stations. Since it's a proof-of-payment system, trains can run through without worrying about how to handle fares for that segment - tickets simply aren't checked between those two stations.


----------



## CTANut

MARC Rider said:


> I don't know how much different it is. You have to take the Airtrain from the actual airline terminals to the BART Station.
> 
> Let's see, the airports with trains inside the terminals not requiring a people mover to connect from the train to the terminal:
> 
> Philadelphia - SEPTA
> Denver - A line
> Chicago - Blue Line L
> Washington National - Metro
> Dulles -- Metro (when the Silver Line extension actually opens)
> 
> Any others?


Cleveland.


----------



## saxman

jebr said:


> MSP doesn't require a people mover. Terminal 2 doesn't even have one to use, and Terminal 1 can be accessed a couple different ways without one - if you don't need to check bags and the Skyway Checkpoint is open, then you can simply go up to the skyway level and go through security there. Otherwise, there is a walking path (at least before the recent remodel - not sure if it's there now) through some parking lots over to the check-in area. Most people would use the every-two-minute, one-minute-ride people mover, though.
> 
> In fact, the local light rail could arguably be considered part of the airport's people mover system - the airport considers the Blue Line between Terminal 1 and Terminal 2 the way to transfer between terminals, and there's no fare charged between those two stations. Since it's a proof-of-payment system, trains can run through without worrying about how to handle fares for that segment - tickets simply aren't checked between those two stations.



MSP is one of my favorites in how it connects to the LRT. Just go up a few flights to the Skyway (if its open) and you can be inside the terminal pretty quickly. The land side people mover would still exist without the LRT station, so it doesn't count as a "train to the train" as the article suggests, IMO. SFO is similar. Their people mover would still exist without BART. Really, the airports I can think of with a long train ride to another train is JFK, EWR, and maybe MIA. LAX will have one too soon.


----------



## MARC Rider

MARC Rider said:


> I don't know how much different it is. You have to take the Airtrain from the actual airline terminals to the BART Station.
> 
> Let's see, the airports with trains inside the terminals not requiring a people mover to connect from the train to the terminal:
> 
> Philadelphia - SEPTA
> Denver - A line
> Chicago - Blue Line L
> Washington National - Metro
> Dulles -- Metro (when the Silver Line extension actually opens)
> 
> Any others?


BWI -- Light Rail goes right into the terminal, but MARC/Amtrak requires a (free) bus ride. How did I forget that one?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

MARC Rider said:


> BWI -- Light Rail goes right into the terminal, but MARC/Amtrak requires a (free) bus ride. How did I forget that one?


Indeed, how did you?


----------



## MARC Rider

Blackwolf said:


> Eh, I don't really know what you're referring to here. The BART station is -literally- inside Terminal G at SFO. You take a left at the security screening and walk 400 feet. It really doesn't get much closer... Anywhere.



Well, that's fine if Terminal G is your destination. When I've flown in (on United), I was far enough away that I needed to use the Air Train, plus, that's where the signs directed me. If you're not familiar with an airport, you can easily get disoriented, so even if some destination is technically walkable, you might not know that, and all you can do is follow the signs.

I was also a little miffed that the fare was pretty pricey for a BART ride, kind of like what NJT does for their fares to Newark Airport.


----------



## jis

MARC Rider said:


> Well, that's fine if Terminal G is your destination. When I've flown in (on United), I was far enough away that I needed to use the Air Train, plus, that's where the signs directed me. If you're not familiar with an airport, you can easily get disoriented, so even if some destination is technically walkable, you might not know that, and all you can do is follow the signs.
> 
> I was also a little miffed that the fare was pretty pricey for a BART ride, kind of like what NJT does for their fares to Newark Airport.


Indeed. I was a frequent flier through SFO on United since the corporate HQ of the company I worked for was in Silicon Gulch. Leaving aside the times I used SFO with a rental car, which of course absolutely requires the use of Air Train, even when I did arrive there via Caltrain/BART, I always tended to take the Airtrain from Terminal G to the next stop to get to my United flight. While theoretically I could walk, I never opted for that. Each to his/her own I suppose.

The design of BART access to SFO IMHO is one of the poorer ones for transit access to airports, and really is far from as convenient as places like Amsterdam or Frankfurt, where the main suburban and intercity line is in the basement of the main terminal. Actually Oakland access using its Air Train is better IMHO.


----------



## me_little_me

jis said:


> The design of BART access to SFO IMHO is one of the poorer ones for transit access to airports, and really is far from as convenient as places like Amsterdam or Frankfurt, where the main suburban and intercity line is in the basement of the main terminal. Actually Oakland access using its Air Train is better IMHO.


You don't have to go to Frankfurt. Atlanta MARTA's entrance/exit is but a few steps from baggage claim and not much more to the ticket counters and on the same level as both. Escalators to trains a few steps from the station entrance gates.


----------



## jis

Which raises a question in my mind. Hypothetically, if the JFK Air Train was run by the MTA and not PANYNJ would that count as a Transit and not an Airport Circulator? Would that change the status of Transit access to JFK viz-a-viz the question being discussed here?


----------



## railiner

jis said:


> Which raises a question in my mind. Hypothetically, if the JFK Air Train was run by the MTA and not PANYNJ would that count as a Transit and not an Airport Circulator? Would that change the status of Transit access to JFK viz-a-viz the question being discussed here?


If the MTA did run the JFK Air Train, the “free zone” would be the only free ride on the entire MTA...


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Do PFC funding restrictions also help explain why so many US airport "trains" run on tires and aren't really trains at all? Or is US light rail construction is so expensive that even bespoke one-off trams are genuinely cheaper?


----------



## Seaboard92

me_little_me said:


> You don't have to go to Frankfurt. Atlanta MARTA's entrance/exit is but a few steps from baggage claim and not much more to the ticket counters and on the same level as both. Escalators to trains a few steps from the station entrance gates.



It really depends which side your baggage claim is. As ATL has two terminals and the MARTA only services the Domestic side. Anything on the International Side requires a bus ride to the Domestic Side to reach the MARTA.


----------



## jis

railiner said:


> If the MTA did run the JFK Air Train, the “free zone” would be the only free ride on the entire MTA...


Staten Island Ferry?

While not specifically MTA, strategic fare free segments are not unheard of.

But either way, my original question still remains, since it has not much to do with whether a fare is collected or not for the segment within the airport. Its main focus is on the Jamaica to Airport segment (and Howard Beach to Airport segment too).


----------



## Eric S

jis said:


> Staten Island Ferry?


Isn't it operated by NYCDOT rather than MTA?


----------



## sttom

jis said:


> The design of BART access to SFO IMHO is one of the poorer ones for transit access to airports, and really is far from as convenient as places like Amsterdam or Frankfurt, where the main suburban and intercity line is in the basement of the main terminal. Actually Oakland access using its Air Train is better IMHO.



I very much have a love/hate relationship with Oakland Airport. My 2 most recent flights were out of it, I drove once and took transit the other time. I personally dislike taking transit to Oakland, transit's only saving grace is I'm too cheap to pay for parking. Having done the transit connection for both BART and Amtrak, having to make a transfer either way is a real pain. The Amtrak connection is the worse of the two since you have to lug your stuff a block from the BART station to the Amtrak station. I understand that the airBART thing was cheaper than a real BART extension and infrastructure projects in California are way more expensive, but having an extension with incompatible infrastructure is another league of poor planning. But poor planning and bloated transit project budgets are par for the course here. I personally find the transfer at Oakland infuriating considering how small Oakland is compared to SFO.

With SFO, its big enough and built enough for there not to be a 100% convenient place to put a station for everyone. But at SFO, the train stops where the airport begins. I can transfer to a people mover if I want to or I can walk if I want to. Even at DIA, the train drops you off near Terminal A and you need to take the people mover if you are going to Terminals B or C. I guess my personal standard would be do you need to transfer and where does the transfer occur. If I have to transfer in the airport I can live with it, if I have to transfer a few miles away, I have a bigger problem with need to transfer.


----------



## Palmetto

MIA and BOS, but one needs to take the MIAMover to the Tri-Rail terminal at MIA.


----------



## railiner

Palmetto said:


> MIA and BOS, but one needs to take the MIAMover to the Tri-Rail terminal at MIA.


And every time I arrive MIA on AA, it seems like I have to take almost a dozen moving walkways and elevators from baggage claim to even get to that MIAMover...


----------



## me_little_me

Seaboard92 said:


> It really depends which side your baggage claim is. As ATL has two terminals and the MARTA only services the Domestic side. Anything on the International Side requires a bus ride to the Domestic Side to reach the MARTA.


Okay, it has a few steps to baggage claim for EIGHTY-EIGHT or more PERCENT of the passengers!


----------



## Asher

Los Angeles has the Flyaway shuttle between LAX and LAUS every 20 minutes. Fast, cheap, efficient.


----------



## Willbridge

sttom said:


> I very much have a love/hate relationship with Oakland Airport. My 2 most recent flights were out of it, I drove once and took transit the other time. I personally dislike taking transit to Oakland, transit's only saving grace is I'm too cheap to pay for parking. Having done the transit connection for both BART and Amtrak, having to make a transfer either way is a real pain. The Amtrak connection is the worse of the two since you have to lug your stuff a block from the BART station to the Amtrak station. I understand that the airBART thing was cheaper than a real BART extension and infrastructure projects in California are way more expensive, but having an extension with incompatible infrastructure is another league of poor planning. But poor planning and bloated transit project budgets are par for the course here. I personally find the transfer at Oakland infuriating considering how small Oakland is compared to SFO.
> 
> With SFO, its big enough and built enough for there not to be a 100% convenient place to put a station for everyone. But at SFO, the train stops where the airport begins. I can transfer to a people mover if I want to or I can walk if I want to. Even at DIA, the train drops you off near Terminal A and you need to take the people mover if you are going to Terminals B or C. I guess my personal standard would be do you need to transfer and where does the transfer occur. If I have to transfer in the airport I can live with it, if I have to transfer a few miles away, I have a bigger problem with need to transfer.


The A-Line can't get any closer at DIA because Level 1 was originally planned to be the rental car area. After the project was well underway the (major) rental car companies had a horrible thought, that without the overhead of running shuttle buses almost anybody could go into their business. They agreed to pay for the late changes to the construction project with a fee they tacked onto rentals. Level 1 became a classy parking area. By the time the rail line was designed the mass security checks were in place in the terminal building so there was no point to bypassing the terminal structure and tunneling to the three concourses.


----------



## Blackwolf

jis said:


> Indeed. I was a frequent flier through SFO on United since the corporate HQ of the company I worked for was in Silicon Gulch. Leaving aside the times I used SFO with a rental car, which of course absolutely requires the use of Air Train, even when I did arrive there via Caltrain/BART, I always tended to take the Airtrain from Terminal G to the next stop to get to my United flight. While theoretically I could walk, I never opted for that. Each to his/her own I suppose.
> 
> The design of BART access to SFO IMHO is one of the poorer ones for transit access to airports, and really is far from as convenient as places like Amsterdam or Frankfurt, where the main suburban and intercity line is in the basement of the main terminal. Actually Oakland access using its Air Train is better IMHO.



I wasn't comparing SFO, or any North American airport to ones in other continents, for good reason. When it it comes to transit, the US is complete garbage! Alas, at least SFO and OAK have physical transit connections. SJC requires a bus transfer from the closest light rail.

And my closest airport, SMF, has no usable transit. At all! Sure, YoloBus and SacRT have bus lines that serve the airport... They're not really usable. You either drive or taxi/Uber/Lyft.


----------



## railiner

I will often use the "el cheapo" way to get from an airport to downtown, if traveling 'light', alone, and not in a hurry...
For example, I use the SamTrans local bus, senior fare was just a buck from SFO to downtown.
Or the TNJ local bus from EWR to Penn Station, Newark, then the PATH train to New York City....


----------



## jis

railiner said:


> Or the TNJ local bus from EWR to Penn Station, Newark, then the PATH train to New York City....


You mean NJT Route 62, right? It will continue to be the cheapest way even after PATH is extended to EWR, unless of course NJT chooses to discontinue it.


----------



## Deni

Cleveland has the train right to the terminal if I remember correctly. (It's been a while)


----------



## Deni

Seaboard92 said:


> It really depends which side your baggage claim is. As ATL has two terminals and the MARTA only services the Domestic side. Anything on the International Side requires a bus ride to the Domestic Side to reach the MARTA.


Same can be said for ORD, you have to take the people mover to get to the international terminal but walk to all the domestic. Frustrates me every time to fly out of the international terminal because the L goes by it before going underground to the station. A new stop with a walkway to the international terminal would be great.

That will change under plans to overhaul O'Hare. There will be a new "Global Terminal" located at the current terminal 2 location which will mix international and domestic for Star Alliance and One World airlines. Then Delta and sky Team airlines will move to the current international terminal, terminal 5. Lots of improvements at Terminal 5 for that, including expanded roadway access but no plans to build a new L stop. Meaning I will avoid Delta and any Sky Team airlines as much as possible.


----------



## railiner

jis said:


> You mean NJT Route 62, right? It will continue to be the cheapest way even after PATH is extended to EWR, unless of course NJT chooses to discontinue it.


Right...meant NJT...old habits die hard

Anyway, it should probably continue even if PATH is extended, since it makes stops every couple of blocks, and I believe continues on to Elizabeth after the airport. Besides carrying people within Newark, it also carries many airport workers.


----------



## jis

railiner said:


> Right...meant NJT...old habits die hard
> 
> Anyway, it should probably continue even if PATH is extended, since it makes stops every couple of blocks, and I believe continues on to Elizabeth after the airport. Besides carrying people within Newark, it also carries many airport workers.


That would be the sane thing to do, but many have difficulty assigning that attribute to many things NJT does.


----------



## railiner

railiner said:


> Right...meant NJT...old habits die hard


At least I didn't call it "Public Service"....


----------



## Willbridge

railiner said:


> At least I didn't call it "Public Service"....


Hey, I rode Public Service Coordinated Transport from Fort Dix to the PABT on my way home from Germany in 1971. The NCO's at Dix had a racket going that I'll skip some details on, but they operated a limo service to EWR. There was a stampede of guys wanting to go home, willing to pay anything. One other West Coaster and I wanted to see NYC once more and like me he had figured out the racket. Our ride on PSC was way cheaper.

Going to Fort Dix in 1969 to be shipped I rode Penn Central from NYP to Trenton and then a local bus out to the post. It was pretty easy.


----------



## railiner

Willbridge said:


> Hey, I rode Public Service Coordinated Transport from Fort Dix to the PABT on my way home from Germany in 1971. The NCO's at Dix had a racket going that I'll skip some details on, but they operated a limo service to EWR. There was a stampede of guys wanting to go home, willing to pay anything. One other West Coaster and I wanted to see NYC once more and like me he had figured out the racket. Our ride on PSC was way cheaper.
> b
> Going to Fort Dix in 1969 to be shipped I rode Penn Central from NYP to Trenton and then a local bus out to the post. It was pretty easy.


Yes....I worked in the Port Authority Bus Terminal for Continental Trailways back then...the Public Service route to Fort Dix and McGuire AFB was very busy due to the war going on, with express service around the clock. And since McGuire was a major MAC base for deployment, there was a huge amount of baggage headed there. The National Bus Traffic Association, representing the bus carrier's, arranged to handle this baggage via trucks from either New York or Philadelphia, regardless of the passenger's routing. Besides Public Service from New York and Philly, Continental Trailways ran several daily trips to Fort Dix/McGuire from Washington and Baltimore.


----------



## west point

About Atlanta international terminal connecting to MARTA. . For departing passengers as far as I know you do have to take a bus to the check in. Arriving passengers can after clearing customs go thru TSA and then catch people mover to MARTA station. Its been a while so if that is no longer a option let me know.


----------



## lstone19

sttom said:


> Even at DIA, the train drops you off near Terminal A and you need to take the people mover if you are going to Terminals B or C.



Everyone needs to take the people mover to get to Concourses B and C as the people mover is inside security and is the only way to get to them. It's more correct to say that the train drops you off near the terminal building (check-in/baggage claim) and from there you can either go through the main security checkpoint and take the people mover to any concourse (including Concourse A) or go through the secondary checkpoint that allows you to walk to Concourse A. The train station is on the south end of the terminal building while the secondary checkpoint that lets you walk to Concourse A is on the north end so walking means walking the length of the terminal building and then walking across the bridge that connects the terminal building to Concourse A. Using Google Earth, it appears to be just short of a 1/2 mile from the train station to Concourse A if you choose to walk it.


----------



## jis

I don't think we are talking about whether you have to or may find it conveient to take an APT on the air side. There are many airports with transit terminal at the main terminal where all the checkin, baggage etc. facilities are, and then either the necessity or the possibility of taking an APT to terminal pods after you pass the security checkpoint in the main terminal. I would consider those airports as ones with excellent transit connectivity, e.g. Frankfurt am Main. Denver falls in this category.


----------



## Willbridge

lstone19 said:


> Everyone needs to take the people mover to get to Concourses B and C as the people mover is inside security and is the only way to get to them. It's more correct to say that the train drops you off near the terminal building (check-in/baggage claim) and from there you can either go through the main security checkpoint and take the people mover to any concourse (including Concourse A) or go through the secondary checkpoint that allows you to walk to Concourse A. The train station is on the south end of the terminal building while the secondary checkpoint that lets you walk to Concourse A is on the north end so walking means walking the length of the terminal building and then walking across the bridge that connects the terminal building to Concourse A. Using Google Earth, it appears to be just short of a 1/2 mile from the train station to Concourse A if you choose to walk it.


I've walked it. Knowing that I was going to slide into a seat with little leg room for the Denver>Frankfurt trip I found it to be a nice walk. I skipped using the moving sidewalk.


----------



## sttom

lstone19 said:


> Everyone needs to take the people mover to get to Concourses B and C as the people mover is inside security and is the only way to get to them. It's more correct to say that the train drops you off near the terminal building (check-in/baggage claim) and from there you can either go through the main security checkpoint and take the people mover to any concourse (including Concourse A) or go through the secondary checkpoint that allows you to walk to Concourse A. The train station is on the south end of the terminal building while the secondary checkpoint that lets you walk to Concourse A is on the north end so walking means walking the length of the terminal building and then walking across the bridge that connects the terminal building to Concourse A. Using Google Earth, it appears to be just short of a 1/2 mile from the train station to Concourse A if you choose to walk it.


My overall point is that there is a difference between having to make a transfer within the airport complex and having to make one several miles away and that transfer only being convenient for one agency.

SFO is what would be considered a poorly designed airport based on best design practices today vs Denver which is designed with good practices. SFO is basically a circle with arms sticking out of them with each arm having its own check in and security areas. Denver has 1 check in and security area and the terminal areas are in separate buildings. Which is better for traffic flow from the aircraft perspective since multiple planes can be moving at once and new terminals can be added as needed so long as there is space.

SFO was designed to only be accessed by cars. Not to mention it’s not in a great layout for planes either, but that is a different discussion. My secondary point is that SFO being circular in shape, there is no 1 location a train station could have been tacked on decades later where it would be convenient for everyone. The smarter option would have been to found a place to stick a second station for the cost of the Millbrae part of the extension or at least not an outrageous amount more. Denver on the other hand, only have 1 main check in and security area frankly would have had as hard of a time screwing up the locations of a rail station as SFO and BART would have had satisfying most people who would be using the airport. There is always going to be a contingent of people unwilling to walk x number of feet before a transit extension is personally seen as a waste of money by this hypothetical person that would have probably driven anyways.

Oakland on the other other hand, has a really bad connection. Not only do you have to deal with going up or down stairs with luggage at your starting station, but you will have to go up a second flight of stairs with your luggage, to ride a people mover, go down yet more stairs to walk to the check in area. And this is assuming you took BART and not Amtrak. The airBART thing was built just to say there is a connection to Oakland Airport and not for it to be a useful part of the system.

While I may consider Oakland the better airport, it’s transit connection by far is the worst. I personally dislike flying through DIA, but that has more to do with it feeling like a mall than an airport. It frankly has a really useful transit connection which is good in my opinion.


----------



## crescent-zephyr

St. Louis Missouri and Tacoma / Seattle Washington have convenient light rail connections as well. Both also connect the airports to the Amtrak Stations.


----------



## jis

crescent-zephyr said:


> St. Louis Missouri and Tacoma / Seattle Washington have convenient light rail connections as well. Both also connect the airports to the Amtrak Stations.


I would not characterize the light rail connection at Seatac as convenient. Walking endlessly through parking structures to get to it is not my idea of convenient. It is of course good that you can get to it eventually.


----------



## crescent-zephyr

jis said:


> I would not characterize the light rail connection at Seatac as convenient. Walking endlessly through parking structures to get to it is not my idea of convenient. It is of course good that you can get to it eventually.



It’s been a few years but I remember it being pretty simple. Maybe I was just happy to be getting on the Starlight that morning! (With pacific parlour car of course!)


----------



## jis

crescent-zephyr said:


> It’s been a few years but I remember it being pretty simple. Maybe I was just happy to be getting on the Starlight that morning! (With pacific parlour car of course!)


Yes, it is simple in the same sense that it is simple to walk from Columbus Circle to Penn Station.  Indeed with the Parlour Car carrot hanging in front almost anything would seem simple. I do agree with that part.


----------



## Trogdor

It’s difficult to get a good, close airport station if the line itself is designed/intended to go beyond the airport. Seattle is reasonably convenient to the airport, but does require a long walk. On the other hand, while certainly a major destination, the Link light rail goes beyond SeaTac airport and thus, in order to be convenient for non-airport passengers, doesn’t go right up to the terminal.

SFO is an interesting one. Besides the points already made, I’d say their nonsensical service pattern could have been improved if they had made San Bruno the main Caltrain connection instead of Millbrae. The BART tracks cross over the Caltrain tracks just south of the existing San Bruno station. Caltrain does have a San Bruno stop, but it’s not conveniently connected to BART. One of the biggest failings in terms of airport connection was not making it convenient for people riding Caltrain from the south to access SFO via BART. Until a couple of years ago, you could not ride directly to SFO from Millbrae on weekdays before 7 pm, because the Millbrae and SFO trains were on different routes. Off peak service combined the two, meaning through riders had to make the long, time-wasting deviation via SFO.

They recently added SFO-Millbrae shuttle trains to fill in the gap. This would be completely unnecessary if Caltrain and BART had a better connection than Millbrae (and this would help not only those going to the airport from the south, but also those who make Caltrain/BART connections as part of their regular daily commute, because they’d have twice as much BART service they could ride).


----------



## jis

Trogdor said:


> It’s difficult to get a good, close airport station if the line itself is designed/intended to go beyond the airport. Seattle is reasonably convenient to the airport, but does require a long walk. On the other hand, while certainly a major destination, the Link light rail goes beyond SeaTac airport and thus, in order to be convenient for non-airport passengers, doesn’t go right up to the terminal.


Another example of such is the WMATA Silver Line at Dulles. The airport station is across a large parking lot from the famous Eero Saarinen designed terminal building.

But then again Dulles is just goofy all around. The oddly positioned Terminal C APM station is a longish walk away from the main terminal. Of course it is done that way because some day there will be a concourse built around where the station is. The good thing is that Terminal C has its own C&I processing facility for connecting flights, so you don't have to go for a hike half way across Virginia just to get C&I processed after arriving on a United international flight only to take the same hike back for the domestic flight.


----------



## Blackwolf

Trogdor said:


> It’s difficult to get a good, close airport station if the line itself is designed/intended to go beyond the airport. Seattle is reasonably convenient to the airport, but does require a long walk. On the other hand, while certainly a major destination, the Link light rail goes beyond SeaTac airport and thus, in order to be convenient for non-airport passengers, doesn’t go right up to the terminal.
> 
> SFO is an interesting one. Besides the points already made, I’d say their nonsensical service pattern could have been improved if they had made San Bruno the main Caltrain connection instead of Millbrae. The BART tracks cross over the Caltrain tracks just south of the existing San Bruno station. Caltrain does have a San Bruno stop, but it’s not conveniently connected to BART. One of the biggest failings in terms of airport connection was not making it convenient for people riding Caltrain from the south to access SFO via BART. Until a couple of years ago, you could not ride directly to SFO from Millbrae on weekdays before 7 pm, because the Millbrae and SFO trains were on different routes. Off peak service combined the two, meaning through riders had to make the long, time-wasting deviation via SFO.
> 
> They recently added SFO-Millbrae shuttle trains to fill in the gap. This would be completely unnecessary if Caltrain and BART had a better connection than Millbrae (and this would help not only those going to the airport from the south, but also those who make Caltrain/BART connections as part of their regular daily commute, because they’d have twice as much BART service they could ride).



Here is a well written article, with insightful comments that add even more clarity, about the BART<->SFO project. 









BART to SFO is Everything Wrong with Bay Area Transit — Pedestrian Observations


Every year, thousands of holiday travelers endure the soul-numbing BART trip to and from SFO. Does it really have to be this way?




www.thebaycitybeacon.com


----------



## saxman

And then there are airports where a transit line was built nearby, but you still have to take a shuttle bus to get there. I'm looking at you Dallas Love Field. When DART was building the Green/Orange line to the northwest of Dallas, they were mostly using old rail ROW that goes by Love Field, but wanted to tunnel a detour to get to the terminal. The problem was that the Fed didn't think this was worth the cost and wouldn't offer federal funding for that part of the project. DART couldn't afford it on its own, so here we are. If you like planes, its a beautiful view from the train to watch Southwest planes takeoff and land. But if you want to get there, you have to transfer to a bus that runs every 20 minutes. But Southwest HQ gets a nice station too. There are ideas to build a tunnel from the Burbank Station with perhaps a moving sidewalk or people mover.

DFW, of course, was designed as a car airport in the 60's. You drive up to your gate and walk across the concourse with very little effort. That was the idea. Rail service was an afterthought, so ridership on the Orange Line and TexRail is relatively low for a major airport. The Silver Line to DFW is slated to open in 2023 though!


----------



## Palmetto

So there's a newish station at TF Green Airport in Providence, and it's connected to the terminal by a walkway, I believe. So why hasn't Amtrak stopped there? It's been more than 5 years that the new station was put in.

I should mention that the MBTA stops there, and that might be sufficient, unless one is going to New London [which the T does not].


----------



## jis

Palmetto said:


> So there's a newish station at TF Green Airport in Providence, and it's connected to the terminal by a walkway, I believe. So why hasn't Amtrak stopped there? It's been more than 5 years that the new station was put in.


Has that platform track, which is an MBTA and RIDOT funded project mostly, been electrified yet? If not that would be a significant reason for Amtrak to not stop there.

The other issue is that there is a single platform there on the southbound side, which is literally impossible to access from the northbound main. Even if it was, accessing it would cause all sorts of conflicting moves across the southbound main in the middle of a high speed section. So until another platform is built with an electrified siding on the northbound side, you can rest completely assured that Amtrak is not going to stop at TF Green Warwick. It will just be served by MBTA.


----------



## Eric S

I seem to recall that space was left for that additional northbound track and platform but don't recall ever seeing anything resembling a timeframe when it might be added.


----------



## rail sale

I've created this map with all (the ones I tracked down) Airports that connect to Amtrak . US Transit and Connected Rail. Take a look, Thanks.


----------



## Trogdor

rail sale said:


> I've created this map with all (the ones I tracked down) Airports that connect to Amtrak . US Transit and Connected Rail. Take a look, Thanks.
> View attachment 22170



I don’t know if I would count San Diego as being connected by rail, unless you wanted to go on a very hefty hike. There are tracks near the airport property, but no connection to the passenger terminal.


----------



## hlcteacher

thank you, will be very helpful


----------



## jiml

Nice map. Obvious omission is Burbank Bob Hope Airport. Exit the airport and cross the street to Amtrak and Metrolink, and I believe there's a station for another Metrolink line on the north side of the airport. One of the best-served airports I know of.


----------



## MARC Rider

rail sale said:


> I've created this map with all (the ones I tracked down) Airports that connect to Amtrak . US Transit and Connected Rail. Take a look, Thanks.
> View attachment 22170


Miami? The metro station is a bit of a walk in a marginal neighborhood from the Amtrak station. Better to use a cab or a ride share.
Los Angeles? I wasn't aware that any rail transit actually served the airport terminal. I think you need to take a shuttle bus to the nearest light rail, but if I were going from LAX to LAUPT, I'd just take the direct Flyaway bus.
San Francisco? The connection between BART and Amtrak is clumsy at best, and usually involves a bus ride from the Embarcadero to Emeryville.

I'm surprised you didn't mention the Oakland Airport, which has connections to BART and I think a Capitol Corridor station in the general vicinity.

The BWI connection involves a shuttle bus ride from the terminal.
The South Bend airport connection involves riding the South Shore all the way into Chicago in order to connect to Amtrak, even though some Amtrak trains stop in South Bend. And when you get to Millennium Station, you have to take a crosstown bus to get to Union Station where the Amtrak trains are.
At O'Hare, there's infrequent Metra service remote from the terminal that will take you to Union Station. The much more frequent CTA Blue Line leaves right from the terminals, but drops you off at Clinton, an non-accessible station that's a 2 block walk from Union Station. 
At Boston, it's probably better to take the Silver Line bus direct from the Airport to South Station rather than ride the Blue Line/Green Line/Red Line trains.

Actually, if you think about it, all-rail connections between Amtrak and American airports are pretty pitiful. Things look a little better if you're willing to take a bus.


----------



## jis

In Miami, ditch Amtrak at Hollywood station and transfer to Tri-Rail there to get to Miami Airport.

Yes. Oakland Amtrak station is indeed connected to the airport via an interesting People Mover through the BART station which is a short walk.

In Boston, yes definitely Silver Line. No one in their right mind would take the Subway shuffle specially with baggage.

IIRC in San Francisco connecting fro, BART to Amtrak works the best for me from IIRC McArthur via the Emery Go Round Shuttle to Emeryville. But as @Bob Dylan would say YMMV.


----------



## John Bredin

MARC Rider said:


> The BWI connection involves a shuttle bus ride from the terminal.
> [snip]
> At O'Hare, there's infrequent Metra service remote from the terminal that will take you to Union Station. The much more frequent CTA Blue Line leaves right from the terminals, but drops you off at Clinton, an non-accessible station that's a 2 block walk from Union Station.


BWI is a bit like O'Hare: commuter rail requires a shuttle bus, but the city train system (light rail in Baltimore, Blue Line in Chicago) takes you to the airport terminals.


----------



## MARC Rider

John Bredin said:


> BWI is a bit like O'Hare: commuter rail requires a shuttle bus, but the city train system (light rail in Baltimore, Blue Line in Chicago) takes you to the airport terminals.


Whoops. Forgot about the light rail. And it does go to Penn Station, though I think you have to change trains (or just walk the couple of blocks from the Mount Royal Station.)


----------



## west point

Atlanta's Marta station airport is probably one of the best IMHO. It is right inside and the walk to ticketing is just 300 - 800 feet depending on airline. The international part I have no idea now. BTW at one time almost 10% of all boardings on MARTA was at the airport. That number has decreased because of expansion of the rail network.


----------



## jebr

west point said:


> Atlanta's Marta station airport is probably one of the best IMHO. It is right inside and the walk to ticketing is just 300 - 800 feet depending on airline. The international part I have no idea now. BTW at one time almost 10% of all boardings on MARTA was at the airport. That number has decreased because of expansion of the rail network.



However, the MARTA rail network doesn't serve the Amtrak station easily (I think it's about a mile walk last time I looked.) In terms of Amtrak connections, EWR and OAC are the only two that come to mind that have simple rail connections to Amtrak - pretty much all the others involve some distance walking with not-terribly-clear signage or transferring between trains.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Philly has excellent Rail connections between the Airport and 30th Street Station.

And even though you have to walk a bit from Union Station to the Train stop, the Rail Line to the Portland, Oregon Airport takes you right to the Terminal.

Seattle's biggest problem is that the Rail Stop @ SEA-TAC Airport is in the Parking Garage.

Dallas and Ft Worth have done a really good job of creating Rail to DFW( Tex-Rail) from the Intermodel Station in Ft Worth, but from Dallas on DART you have to change Trains @ West End Station after getting on @ Union Station , or walk from Union Station to West End Station to catch the Train to DFW.

Love Field still requires a Bus Ride from the DART stop to the Airport.


----------



## Willbridge

jebr said:


> However, the MARTA rail network doesn't serve the Amtrak station easily (I think it's about a mile walk last time I looked.) In terms of Amtrak connections, EWR and OAC are the only two that come to mind that have simple rail connections to Amtrak - pretty much all the others involve some distance walking with not-terribly-clear signage or transferring between trains.


Denver has a simple connection between plane and train. It's a long walk for some points, but it's popular enough that service had to be added before long-range plans called for that. Trade off a long walk at the airport for a short walk to a hotel or Amtrak on the downtown end.

Portland has the track needed to run directly between the airport and Union Station (which includes intercity buses) but stuck with a historic service pattern when the new trackage opened, so a same-platform transfer is needed. As with Denver, there are hotels and motels that can be reached on the airport line that are a short walk without a transfer.


----------



## railiner

Bob Dylan said:


> Philly has excellent Rail connections between the Airport and 30th Street Station.


At one time Amtrak trains (briefly) went there directly...






__





The Museum of Railway Timetables (timetables.org)






www.timetables.org


----------



## jis

railiner said:


> At one time Amtrak trains (briefly) went there directly...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Museum of Railway Timetables (timetables.org)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.timetables.org


Yes, the good old Atlantic City Service.

My completely random fantasy is an hourly service between Philadelphia Airport and Jamaica/JFK Airtrain via Philly 30th St., Conrwells Heights, Trenton, Metropark, Newark Airport, Newark, New York Penn. Now after the LIRR Main Line triple tracking is complete, maybe it could be extended to Ronkonkoma.

It is a service that is virtually impossible to even vaguely conceive of now because of the major internecine warfare among various government agencies that are all supposed to be primarily working for us, that will ensue.

This sort of thing would happen in Europe. Unlikely in the US and specifically more so in the highly fragmented government agencies running short regional service on the NEC.


----------



## jebr

Willbridge said:


> Denver has a simple connection between plane and train. It's a long walk for some points, but it's popular enough that service had to be added before long-range plans called for that. Trade off a long walk at the airport for a short walk to a hotel or Amtrak on the downtown end.
> 
> Portland has the track needed to run directly between the airport and Union Station (which includes intercity buses) but stuck with a historic service pattern when the new trackage opened, so a same-platform transfer is needed. As with Denver, there are hotels and motels that can be reached on the airport line that are a short walk without a transfer.



For some reason Denver slipped my mind - but yes, I'd consider that a pretty easy, clear connection. My general definition is "would an airline be comfortable guaranteeing a connection and having passengers do that connection themselves" - and while that's subjective, the number of airports that come to mind that would meet that definition for me is quite low. It basically needs to be a connection that's nearly foolproof to make even for an inexperienced traveler. Walking a few blocks in a city center where there isn't clear signage doesn't meet that standard for me, and having to change trains is a dealbreaker most of the time by that standard (if it's extremely well-signed and well-announced, I might consider it, but even the one in MSP I wouldn't quite qualify as meeting that high of a standard.)


----------



## railiner

The Keystone Line goes right by the Harrisburg airport, but the nearest station is at Middletown, about a mile and a half East...


----------



## joelkfla

jebr said:


> For some reason Denver slipped my mind - but yes, I'd consider that a pretty easy, clear connection. My general definition is "would an airline be comfortable guaranteeing a connection and having passengers do that connection themselves" - and while that's subjective, the number of airports that come to mind that would meet that definition for me is quite low. It basically needs to be a connection that's nearly foolproof to make even for an inexperienced traveler. Walking a few blocks in a city center where there isn't clear signage doesn't meet that standard for me, and having to change trains is a dealbreaker most of the time by that standard (if it's extremely well-signed and well-announced, I might consider it, but even the one in MSP I wouldn't quite qualify as meeting that high of a standard.)


At Miami, after a 3-minute APM ride to the intermodal facility, it's a 30 minute ride on TriRail directly to the Amtrak Hollywood station. While weekday service runs only once an hour most of the day, it's on a published schedule, so I think that would meet your standards (so long as travel is during TriRail's hours of service.)


----------



## jis

railiner said:


> The Keystone Line goes right by the Harrisburg airport, but the nearest station is at Middletown, about a mile and a half East...


The new station that is being built is about a mile from the terminal building, but it is not clear that there will be any egress on the airport side west of Anne Street. The priority for pedestrian connection is to the Penn State Harrisburg Campus on Lawrence Street with a planned pedestrian overpass across the highway/Main St. The airport at most might get some sort of a shuttle if there is demand I suppose.

A site adjacent to the airport terminal was considered and rejected in favor of a location near downtown but off the curve, which made ADA compliance impossible at the original site.


----------



## railiner

jis said:


> Yes, the good old Atlantic City Service.
> 
> My completely random fantasy is an hourly service between Philadelphia Airport and Jamaica/JFK Airtrain via Philly 30th St., Conrwells Heights, Trenton, Metropark, Newark Airport, Newark, New York Penn. Now after the LIRR Main Line triple tracking is complete, maybe it could be extended to Ronkonkoma.
> 
> It is a service that is virtually impossible to even vaguely conceive of now because of the major internecine warfare among various government agencies that are all supposed to be primarily working for us, that will ensue.
> 
> This sort of thing would happen in Europe. Unlikely in the US and specifically more so in the highly fragmented government agencies running short regional service on the NEC.


IIRC, when the PRR owned the LIRR, they did at one time run a thru Pullman between Pittsburgh and Montauk...that’s probably as close as you can ever get, to your fantasy...


----------



## MIrailfan

Burbank Airport has a connection to Metrolink/Amtrak. SFO connects to BART which you can take to Richmond or Oakland.


----------



## rail sale

MIRAILFAN said:


> Burbank Airport has a connection to Metrolink/Amtrak. SFO connects to BART which you can take to Richmond or Oakland.


Thanks, I've added here Check out the Airports, Baseball and Football venues you can get to by using the #Amtrak national network. You can also see all the tram, light rail and subway connected cities.


----------



## jiml

MIRAILFAN said:


> Burbank Airport has a connection to Metrolink/Amtrak. SFO connects to BART which you can take to Richmond or Oakland.


Kudos on reading through previous posts in this thread and summarizing with your own.


----------



## Trollopian

rail sale said:


> Thanks, I've added here Check out the Airports, Baseball and Football venues you can get to by using the #Amtrak national network. You can also see all the tram, light rail and subway connected cities.



Thank you, rail sale, from this baseball fan! For other lovers of trains and the great American summer pastime, revisit the thread at Self-guided baseball trip on Amtrak?.

Since you nicely ask us to suggest additions to your map, how about this one: the Harrisburg PA Senators, the Washington Nationals' AA farm team, play at FNB Field on charming City Island, less than a mile from the Amtrak station which has some of the best small-city service anywhere.


----------



## MIrailfan

jiml said:


> Kudos on reading through previous posts in this thread and summarizing with your own.


where


----------



## Ryan

Extensive discussion on SFO starting with the 4th post in the thread.



Blackwolf said:


> Having grown up in the SF Bay Area, I remember with some fanfare the "Big Deal" that having BART connect directly to SFO was. It was a watershed moment, taking one of the first BART trains that ran in June of 2003, when I was able to step right from a train and into the International Terminal without having to perform a transfer-within-a-transfer to do so (looking at you JFK and EWR).



Burbank was previously covered as well:


jiml said:


> Nice map. Obvious omission is Burbank Bob Hope Airport. Exit the airport and cross the street to Amtrak and Metrolink, and I believe there's a station for another Metrolink line on the north side of the airport. One of the best-served airports I know of.


----------



## rail sale

Trollopian said:


> Thank you, rail sale, from this baseball fan! For other lovers of trains and the great American summer pastime, revisit the thread at Self-guided baseball trip on Amtrak?.
> 
> Since you nicely ask us to suggest additions to your map, how about this one: the Harrisburg PA Senators, the Washington Nationals' AA farm team, play at FNB Field on charming City Island, less than a mile from the Amtrak station which has some of the best small-city service anywhere.


Oh that looks like an awesome park! I've added it to my map at Check out the Airports, Baseball and Football venues you can get to by using the #Amtrak national network. You can also see all the tram, light rail and subway connected cities.


----------



## jiml

rail sale said:


> Oh that looks like an awesome park! I've added it to my map at Check out the Airports, Baseball and Football venues you can get to by using the #Amtrak national network. You can also see all the tram, light rail and subway connected cities.


If the border ever re-opens and Amtrak resumes either through or connecting service to Toronto, the station is right next door to the ballpark.


----------



## Bob Dylan

jiml said:


> If the border ever re-opens and Amtrak resumes either through or connecting service to Toronto, the station is right next door to the ballpark.
> 
> View attachment 22259


Always be Skydome to me!


----------



## VentureForth

saxman said:


> And then there are airports where a transit line was built nearby, but you still have to take a shuttle bus to get there. I'm looking at you Dallas Love Field. When DART was building the Green/Orange line to the northwest of Dallas, they were mostly using old rail ROW that goes by Love Field, but wanted to tunnel a detour to get to the terminal. The problem was that the Fed didn't think this was worth the cost and wouldn't offer federal funding for that part of the project. DART couldn't afford it on its own, so here we are. If you like planes, its a beautiful view from the train to watch Southwest planes takeoff and land. But if you want to get there, you have to transfer to a bus that runs every 20 minutes. But Southwest HQ gets a nice station too. There are ideas to build a tunnel from the Burbank Station with perhaps a moving sidewalk or people mover.
> 
> DFW, of course, was designed as a car airport in the 60's. You drive up to your gate and walk across the concourse with very little effort. That was the idea. Rail service was an afterthought, so ridership on the Orange Line and TexRail is relatively low for a major airport. The Silver Line to DFW is slated to open in 2023 though!


I second this evaluation. The DART and TexRail stations at the airport are inconvenient. You have about a 5-10 minute walk just to get indoors, then another 5-10 minutes getting to security, then another 5-10 minutes getting to the SkyLink. It's not horrible, but for the mobility impaired, it can be quite difficult as no airport mobility services are available outside (to my knowledge). Add inclimate weather or the Texas Heat and it can be miserable. 

Is the Silver (Cotton Belt) line going to be any better? I think it just parks with TexRail at Terminal B?

I would really really like to see an underground walk from Burbank with moving sidewalks. But the bus isn't so bad. I have a friend who used to commute via Burbank to Love daily and enjoyed it. He also didn't work at the terminal but rather at another location at the airport that the bus can service, whereas a direct link to the terminal would be an inconvenience.


----------



## saxman

VentureForth said:


> I second this evaluation. The DART and TexRail stations at the airport are inconvenient. You have about a 5-10 minute walk just to get indoors, then another 5-10 minutes getting to security, then another 5-10 minutes getting to the SkyLink. It's not horrible, but for the mobility impaired, it can be quite difficult as no airport mobility services are available outside (to my knowledge). Add inclimate weather or the Texas Heat and it can be miserable.
> 
> Is the Silver (Cotton Belt) line going to be any better? I think it just parks with TexRail at Terminal B?



Yeah, its about 5 minutes or less to get indoors from DART at Terminal A. Same from TexRail into Terminal B. There are ADA shuttle buses that serve each terminal on the upper level, or the SkyLink, of course. 

Yes, the Silver Line will share the platform with TexRail at Terminal B.


----------



## NEPATrainTraveler

My local airport, AVP, as with the rest of northeast PA, has no passenger train service, unfortunately. AVP is served by a local bus though, which is operated by LCTA (Wilkes-Barre's public transit system) that connects the airport with downtown Scranton (outbound from Wilkes-Barre) and downtown Wilkes-Barre (inbound to Wilkes-Barre). The bus drops off and picks up right at the entrance to the terminal building. The bus only runs during the day though, no night service and no Sunday service either. There are only a handful of runs a day in each direction, so the frequency is not great. Better than nothing though.


----------



## VentureForth

saxman said:


> Yeah, its about 5 minutes or less to get indoors from DART at Terminal A. Same from TexRail into Terminal B. There are ADA shuttle buses that serve each terminal on the upper level, or the SkyLink, of course.
> 
> Yes, the Silver Line will share the platform with TexRail at Terminal B.


I know it doesn't seem like much, but why couldn't they just dig under for the last 1/4 mile and provide weather proof indoor transfers? I know, I know... Cost.


----------



## Willbridge

VentureForth said:


> I know it doesn't seem like much, but why couldn't they just dig under for the last 1/4 mile and provide weather proof indoor transfers? I know, I know... Cost.


There are also the security issues. As Denver's new airport assumed a future rail access the basement could have been designed for a station shell directly beneath. Even before the 9/11 concerns there was thought given to the dangers of rail transportation. Of course, autos and trucks were okay beneath the structure.


----------



## boratwanksta

South Bend's airport, has the South Shore Line(South Bend-Chicago) directly serving that airport. And while it isn't a direct train connection, Transpo bus route #4 does put you(after you board it at South Bend Airport) within 21/2 blocks(if you get off/on at Orange St and Olive St), of the South Bend Amtrak station. http://sbtranspo.com/images/uploads/pdfs/4_Schedule.pdf

I remember back when 'Mayor Pete' was still South Bend mayor, that a few people(including Pete) did float the idea of restoring South Shore Line service(and/or Amtrak service) back into the former South Bend Union Station building. Which when I've visited South Bend in the past, appears to sometimes be used for events, such as(at least according to signage I saw inside, through one of the windows) for a job fair for Four Winds Casino South Bend. Which is across the street from the South Bend Cubs stadium. Hopefully that does occur one day where train service does use South Bend Union Station one day, again. There also is a bus transit center, within a few blocks of the SB Cubs stadium, and the former(still standing, btw) South Bend Union Station station building.


----------



## jebr

Willbridge said:


> There are also the security issues. As Denver's new airport assumed a future rail access the basement could have been designed for a station shell directly beneath. Even before the 9/11 concerns there was thought given to the dangers of rail transportation. Of course, autos and trucks were okay beneath the structure.



I find it even more surprising, then, that the Blue Line in MSP goes right under the airport and basically into the (enclosed) parking ramp lobby. The tracks run underground under two active runways, along with parts of the C and G concources. It's mightily convenient, and I'm not sure it would've happened had planning been done 10 years later - planning was done in the late 90s and groundbreaking was in January 2001, with opening in 2004.


----------



## Willbridge

jebr said:


> I find it even more surprising, then, that the Blue Line in MSP goes right under the airport and basically into the (enclosed) parking ramp lobby. The tracks run underground under two active runways, along with parts of the C and G concources. It's mightily convenient, and I'm not sure it would've happened had planning been done 10 years later - planning was done in the late 90s and groundbreaking was in January 2001, with opening in 2004.


I'm familiar with that. The security concern in Denver was locally manufactured. In Minneapolis a similar concern was developed at Mall of America. In Lakewood, Colorado the police did not want a transit bus transfer center at the civic center near the police station "...because of the kind of people it would bring." They were over-ruled and it's been working fine for over two decades.


----------



## VentureForth

Willbridge said:


> There are also the security issues. As Denver's new airport assumed a future rail access the basement could have been designed for a station shell directly beneath. Even before the 9/11 concerns there was thought given to the dangers of rail transportation. Of course, autos and trucks were okay beneath the structure.


Every train that travels south of Washington Union Station goes right under the United States Capitol Building, so I don't think that was the main concern.


----------



## Ryan

You are incorrect. They don't even run under the grounds, let alone the building.


----------



## jis

Ryan said:


> You are incorrect. They don't even run under the grounds, let alone the building.


Indeed. There really is a very good reason that the tunnel in question is called the First Street Tunnel. That is as close as it gets to the Capitol Building.

In terms of surface features, it runs between the Russell and Dirksen Senate Office Buildings, then by the front of the Supreme Court and the Library of Congress, and then curves under the Cannon House Office Building to emerges near the crossing of D St. SE and New Jersey Ave, SE.


----------



## Trollopian

Dulles Airport (IAD), serving mostly longer-haul (including international) flights to/from the DC area, is another airport served by a "better-than-nothing," rail-to-bus connection: Airport and Rail Access | WMATA.

Current scuttlebutt is that the Silver Line extension to Dulles will open in early 2022. Station will be above-ground, opposite the terminal, so not a weather- and barrier-free schlep. See https://www.dullesmetro.com/silver-line-stations/dulles-airport1/. But at least it'll provide passengers and their wheeled luggage a nonstop ride to the inner VA suburbs and central DC. I've returned to Dulles on many international flights, and just cringed with embarrassment when fellow passengers from, y'know, civilized countries expected that there'd be a smooth way to take public transit into the nation's capital. Nah. They had to wait for a pokey and infrequent bus or rent a car.


----------



## Trollopian

In my other town (I'm "bi-urban"), don't hold your breath waiting for rail service at the airport. But assuming you arrive by air rather than chug in on Amtrak's Capitol Limited or Pennsylvanian, the 28X Airport Flyer is one of Pittsburgh's great bargains. $2.75 by cash ($2.50 with a ConnectCard) from the airport to downtown and the university district. Respectably frequent service, every half-hour during peak weekday times and less frequent (but still available) on weekends and holidays. See PortAuthority.org - Airport Service.

Wondering whether to invest in a ConnectCard, the transit system's tap-and-ride "smart card?" Well, you can also use it to ride Pittsburgh's iconic inclines. Yinz welcome.


----------



## John from RI

jis said:


> You mean NJT Route 62, right? It will continue to be the cheapest way even after PATH is extended to EWR, unless of course NJT chooses to discontinue it


It is unlikely that New Jersey Transit will discontinue bus route 62 which connects Newark Airport with Newark Penn Station. The reason is that the bus makes a number of other stops too. Frugal travelers will find the NJT 62 Bus the cheapest connection between the Airport and Newark Penn Station by far. And the bus also stops at NJT's Elizabeth Station which is convenient for people who want to take an NJT train toward Trenton. There is a bus stop at each NJ Liberty Airport Terminal. 

The Monorail and the EWR train station are convenient if a lot more expensive. And the trains run directly to New York Penn Station. And it is possible to change at Secaucus for Morris and Essex, Boonton and Bergen County or Main Line trains.


----------



## John from RI

jis said:


> Has that platform track, which is an MBTA and RIDOT funded project mostly, been electrified yet? If not that would be a significant reason for Amtrak to not stop there.
> 
> The other issue is that there is a single platform there on the southbound side, which is literally impossible to access from the northbound main. Even if it was, accessing it would cause all sorts of conflicting moves across the southbound main in the middle of a high speed section. So until another platform is built with an electrified siding on the northbound side, you can rest completely assured that Amtrak is not going to stop at TF Green Warwick. It will just be served by MBTA.


There are MBTA trains between Providence and Wakefield RI (a commuter station) which stop at Warwick and are accessible to the TF Green Airport. They are not frequent; if you plan to use one I suggest you be sure to look at the MBTA schedule for its Providence line. 
If you are at the T F Green Airport in Warwick and want to change to an Amtrak train the most direct way is to go to Providence either by train or by bus. Rhode Island Public Transit Authority (RIPTA) offers frequent bus service between the Airport and its Providence Bus Station at Kennedy Plaza. That is a 10-minute walk from the Amtrak Station. There are also frequent busses to the Gaspee Street entrance. 
From the Airport there is also a RIPTA bus no. 66 to Kingston Amtrak Station stopping at University of Rhode Island and other places.


----------



## BCL

San Jose was mentioned. They used to have the free VTA Route 10 that looped from the Santa Clara Caltrain/ACE/Amtrak station and 1st Street in San Jose. It looks like it was merged with VTA Route 60, but no longer free. However, it does connect with the Santa Clara station, the VTA Light Rail Green/Blue lines, and Milpitas BART station.


----------



## Trollopian

Trollopian said:


> Dulles Airport (IAD), serving mostly longer-haul (including international) flights to/from the DC area, is another airport served by a "better-than-nothing," rail-to-bus connection: Airport and Rail Access | WMATA.
> 
> Current scuttlebutt is that the Silver Line extension to Dulles will open in early 2022. Station will be above-ground, opposite the terminal, so not a weather- and barrier-free schlep. See https://www.dullesmetro.com/silver-line-stations/dulles-airport1/. But at least it'll provide passengers and their wheeled luggage a nonstop ride to the inner VA suburbs and central DC. I've returned to Dulles on many international flights, and just cringed with embarrassment when fellow passengers from, y'know, civilized countries expected that there'd be a smooth way to take public transit into the nation's capital. Nah. They had to wait for a pokey and infrequent bus or rent a car.



Newest scuttlebutt is that Dulles extension will open in "late fall or winter" (i.e., late 2022 or early 2023). From a _Washington Post_ story about Metro's new general manager, hired from Austin, TX and scheduled to start in July, "On Thursday, [Andy] Off [senior vice president for capital projects and interim general manager] said Metro was several weeks away from starting final tests and preparations to open the 11.4-mile Silver Line extension from Reston to Loudoun County. The extension, delayed by nearly four years because of construction issues, could open in late fall or winter, providing the first rail stop to Washington Dulles International Airport."



https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/06/10/metro-wmata-general-manager/


----------



## west point

Start service or even testing? What about the shortage of 7000 cars?


----------



## joelkfla

west point said:


> Start service or even testing? What about the shortage of 7000 cars?


They're planning to return them to service late summer, so they should be ready. Perhaps they can have some ready for non-revenue testing of the extension sooner.





Metro on schedule to restore 7000-series railcars in late summer | WMATA







wmata.com


----------

