Atlanta's airport connection is surprisingly good. It's a $2.50 regular metro service that goes straight to downtown and major attractions. Downsides are the lack of coverage by the MARTA in general and also a lack of density at many stations. But it works great for traveling from the world's busiest airport, as the stop is inside the airport's baggage claim, and you'll regularly see locals and businesspeople headed to the airport with their bags.
Portland is equally good in this regard. The station is actually in the airport, conveniently next to the main entrance and baggage claim, and there's no extra fare to ride.
Yeah, it worked well for me getting into the city but on the return without any announcement the service was suspended due to 'maintenance' issues and I would have missed my flight, I got a cab just in time and made it but I could have been stranded there. i wasn't alone in this situation. Since most transit is operated by government agencies nowadeys I've seen a lot of this, my father rode the LIRR to work for years and he was rarely late either way and this was the olde LIRR that was supposedly bankrupt, my more recent experiences have been a lot worse, seems like it's late more often than not and nobody cares
And Atlantans have actively worked against expanding transit in that city. White suburbanites don't want poor black and brown people coming into their areas.
Excellent video as always! Airports are almost always huge employers, and if you can optimize for capacity, connectivity, & speed, and provide a discounted fare for airport workers, you have a winning combination!
It's a good video indeed. The biggest problem in the video seems to be very American though. Would you consider doing a video on Schiphol or a similar airport?
Hey Reese! Knew I would see you here! Free transport for airport workers. Most of them are low income blowing a good part of their pay on cars. Free rides out and back takes that burden from them. Even better if it is 24/7.
Frankfurt, Germany has a nice approach on solving the problem with different fares for commuters and travelers. Single tickets to and from the airport cost more than for the rest of the city. Meanwhile season tickets (weekly, monthly, annually) cost the same to and from the airport, so staff has an affordable option. Also the airport is really well-connected to the transit network with buses, urban and regional rail and even high speed rail to all major German cities. Worth checking out.
Frankfurt Airport with high speed rail is integrated so well that Lufthansa sells train tickets directly with your flight to most German cities and guarantees the transfer between plane and train.
Since the high-speed line to Cologne was finished, there are no actual planes flying that route any more. If you book Frankfurt-Cologne via the airline, you get a train.
I am often going from my home rail way station to the Fernbahnhof with the ICE train to catch my flight the very next day. There is an ICE line going from Leipzig to Wiesbaden through my station. I don't see a reason to bring a car down to a parking garage at the airport, costing 100 Euros for some three weeks. The travel fare for my ICE Ticket comes down to maybe 80-90 Euros with nothing to worry about a car among 100s. Frankfurt is pure chaotic when it comes to parking. One time we had our car stalled and the airport just closed the sector of the parking garage, making it harder for the ADAC to come to jumpstart our car. Since then I hate bringing a car to Frankfurt airport.
@Zaydan Alfariz That does not change anything. You can't get points on other partner airlines. They want to emphasize the inter modularity and the ability to start any "flight" from any rail station if you like. There was a pilot project where you could collect Miles and More miles on train trips with the Deutsche Bahn, where people traveled on DB trains to get the HON station on rail.
Not to mention that for the cost of that round trip Denver ticket, you can get to other major cities in Germany like Mannheim and Stuttgart, rather than just across town.
DC's Metro finally (FINALLY!) opened service to Dulles a few weeks ago. Now you can get to all three of the region's major airports (Dulles, Reagan, & Baltimore's Thurgood Marshal) by train. It's a bit annoying that they don't even have the option of doing an express to Dulles, because of the way Metro is designed. I know some have proposed a way for it to work, but considering how Metro actually functions on a day-to-day basis, I think it's kind of silly. I like that there isn't a special fee for the airport route, though it's WAY out there, so you pay more because distance matters on Metro. They're talking about a restructuring of fees in the coming year(s), that might include doing zones like I've seen in several European cities. Unfortunately, the biggest issue remains Metro itself. It doesn't run early enough to get to the airport for an early flight & it doesn't run late enough to get a train into the city if you land late. So, cabs or rideshares will likely still be important early & late on a given day.
I was just about to comment about this! Part of the issue with the DC metro IMO is that they never built a third express rail, so if there's track work in a station, single tracking must occur, which is slow and annoying. Results in stuff like entire lines being closed for repairs.
Yeah, the trains have no way to bypass the stations. Seems like a major design flaw, but with how many underground and elevated stations it has and how hugely expensive the thing already is, there was probably no useful way to implement an express route. At least the silver line itself runs pretty fast. The times I have used it I found it amusing when the train is blowing past people on the interstate. Not too many places in the USA you can see that.
A train to Dulles after more than fifty years. At the time when Dulles is becoming an "old, small" airport. Far away in the middle of nowhere. Fly into NYC and take Amtrak south to DC.
@@cbeomjun, Metro was built with only daily commuters in mind, but has grown to be a valuable means of traveling around the region, a region that has ballooned in population since Metro was built. Sadly, it wasn't built to handle the greater demand, and so far, none of the expansions have done anything to help. It's crazy to me that they didn't built 3 or 4 tracks from East Falls Church to Dulles. Frankly, anywhere that's above ground, they should add tracks to the system so trackwork & malfunctions aren't such a problem.
idk if it's already implemented but I think there should be an express train (still normal price) that only stops at Rosslyn, Metro Center, and L'ENFANT PLAZA (sorry copy and pasted for spelling) and then turns around and comes back. That way it gets you into the city real quick, bypassing all the smaller stops, and takes you to the major transfer stations on the Silver line.
I worked at Denver International Airport prior to the A Line train and took the Skyride bus (though I still had to use a car to get to the park and ride). My employer provided me with an RTD EcoPass, which gave me unlimited rides anywhere in the network. I realize that not all airport employers are able to provide such a perk, but I definitely appreciated it.
Again, this seems to be a largely North American problem caused by that strange unwillingness to use busses or trains. Here's In the Netherlands you can't even pay for dedicated airport transit, if you wanted to. It's just regular public transport for regular public transport prices. It's simply inconceivable for me how you'd plan an airport without providing public transport connections. I'd assume you never get your planning permission approved if you'd try. And where there is dedicated airport transit that would not be considered regular public transport, it's the easiest thing to do is to subsidise commuted for airport employees, or even offer it for free (as is currently the case for UKs Bristol Airport).
In New York, there is no direct airport transit because all construction costs would be paid by the Metropolitan Transit Authority or the Port Authority, both regional, multi-jurisdictional entities that do not want to foot the bill (add AMTRAK and NJ Transit to the mix). New York CAN get federal subsidies for those stupid “train to plane” connectors which guarantee a more than one-seat ride. In The New York metropolitan area, there is virtually no chance that Subway or Long Island Railroad riders (to Kennedy International, KJFK, or LaGuardia, KLGA) or NJ Transit or AMTRAK riders (to Newark, KEWR) will ever see service to these airports despite these rail lines’ close proximity to each airport. There may be a glimmer of hope for KLGA as tentative plans to extend one Subway line is on the table. Good luck with that.
I worked at Denver International over the summer and they gave you a grand total of 35$ to go towards the ridiculously expensive 200$ per month for the all zone monthly RTD pass. Still cheaper than relying on a car, but the trip from where I lived to the Airport required 2 trains, one of which stopped service after midnight. So the choice was rely on the sometimes unreliable service (shortage of operators) or buy a car to get to and from the airport. The vast majority of employees I worked with drove instead, as Denver is still relatively car focused, and you also got free parking at the airport.
So, airport workers get free parking at the airport if they drive, but if they want to ride the train, they have to pay the bulk of the fare out of pocket. Completely backwards, although this being the U.S., I can't say I'm surprised.
As a Portlander it only recently occurred to me that places charge more for some lines then others. I was still a kid when the zone system was phased out (school gave us free passes), but iirc even that was based on distance rather then charging more for specific routes. The idea that it costs more to use transit just because it goes to a specific place (even if you don't need to go to the lines terminus) is wild to me.
@@AssBlasster Another thing I realised is that looking at the comments I've seen some ideas that cities should charge more for tourists then residents. Portland's system naturally does that by offering
Most of those cases have most of the line priced similarly to the rest of the system, but adds an additional surcharge for boarding and/or alighting at the airport station(s). I know that's the case with both Stockholm and Edinburgh.
BART in the San Francisco area has wildly disproportionate pricing. Going to the airport costs a large amount extra, partly because it's being used as a source of funding to defray the steep loans taken to build the overwrought BART extension, international terminal, and large parking garage. I don't know if it's disproportionately funding those non-transit goals. More shamefully, service within San Francisco and Oakland costs vastly more per distance and per maintenance cost than the far flung commuter-only stations. So BART effectively subsidizes far-suburbanites an hour or more from towntown at the cost of the much poorer residents of places like Oakland. So yes, transit absolutely is like this sometimes.
@@wasmic5z Singapore's trains don't charge extra to go to/from the airport (though they don't have a lot of seats & the trains are crowded with people going to suburbs en-route to the airport instead) but the taxis do - S$5 on weekends, public holidays & after 1700h on weekdays, & S$3 at other times, which has led to an ugly situation where some taxis wait near the airport from 1630h-1700h on weekdays but refuse to pick up passengers before 1700h, because they can then charge less
People always want to complain about Atlanta's MARTA system, but if you fly out of ATL, or work there, it's an excellent choice. When I had a job that required me to fly 2 trips a week, we were offered a MARTA pass that the company would pay for. There is also pretty good frequency for the trains at the airport, and it's only about 15 mins to the 5 points station where you can transfer to other lines. I used to take it all the time to the airport and it was great not having to drive and figure out where to park. The train station was located right next to the terminal so it was a 2 min walk to either check in or security.
The problem with MARTA is it's train routes are too limited. It only really works from a few locations in the metro area. A vast majority will still have to drive to the airport.
I had to take a bus to the airport to catch a red-eye flight (2am) a while ago--only to discover a few days before that they'd changed the airport bus schedule so that it didn't run after 10pm anymore--which is pretty dumb, considering flights leave and arrive all day. Ended up sitting at the gate for 7 hours for my flight. As much as I think Austin is getting better (slowly, by degrees, with new light rail and tram services coming online over the next eight years, and new rapid bus lines over the next few), it's a long way from being even passable by the standard of most major cities outside the US. You might find a video in how Austin is getting its transit redevelopment (Project Connect) right or wrong, by the way.
I wouldn't catch the Airport bus in the wee hours just because of security issues. A lot of places (especially transit hubs) are sketchy at night and chances are you're carrying expensive stuff. I use Uber instead.
I didn't realize until I heard it a couple months ago that some workers can't use the metro train (and from your comment, the bus) to get to work on time at the airport, if it doesn't run 24-hours!
Great video! To me, it seems like subsidizing transit for airport employees even more (i.e., down to free or at least the level of bus fare) would be the fairest approach. I can’t remember where I read this, but at least in the US, airport passenger fees can only go to the facility itself and cannot fund associated transit projects. It seems like that would be the most fair way to fund airport transit over the long term: it wouldn’t burden airport employees and it also wouldn’t raise local taxes on people who might not necessarily use the airport. Side note: I’ve both used RTD and Uber/Lyft to get to and from the Denver airport. Have been thoroughly impressed with RTD: even factoring in wait time for a train, you aren’t spending that much more time and it’s about $40 cheaper.
Amsterdam Schiphol station is the fifth busiest station in the Netherlands, as this station also functions as a hub for several destinations. Schiphol Station is connected to all major cities throughout the Netherlands. In addition, the Thalys to Belgium and France also stops here. In the future, the Eurostar will also stop here, currently this train only runs past Schiphol Airport, but does not stop because there is no customs area on the platform to the UK.
That's probably in the US. In the rest of the world though, the number of metro rail service commuters are now reaching and surpassing pre-COVID levels.
When you were discussing fares, it reminded me I’m still blown away that it’s not standard in the US to cover employee’s commute expenses if it’s public transit. Here in Japan, pretty much every company covers the employees train pass to the office.
My company gives a transport allowance once you get promoted to being a manager or higher, but if you're in a fairly big company located in a more remote location e.g. industrial estates, often free shuttle buses will be provided to/from train stations
Example of better system in Sydney Australia: The main international airport is in the city, not the outskirts, so the trains go there as just another two stops (local and international have separate stops to save on walking), then the train continues on towards or from the city with multiple stops on the way. The train tickets to and from the airport are more expensive if you're just getting a one way ticket, which most travellers are, but the weekly tickets that airport staff get are regular priced as if they were going the same number of stops anywhere else in the train network. I believe they added a surcharge to train trips to and from the airport so taxi companies wouldn't lose a major part of their business. It's worthwhile to get a taxi if the destination is relatively close to the airport, otherwise if you really want to reduce costs you go to the next stop from the airport and get a regular ticket from there to the closest station to your destination and get a taxi for the last portion of your journey if it's not within walking distance while carrying your bags.
Airport express service also arguably becomes less necessary if the airport is close to downtown. In Phoenix, the airport is only around 6 miles from downtown, and it lacks express service. However, a light rail ride to downtown is around half an hour, factoring in wait times and the airport people mover, which is known as the SkyTrain (the airport is called Sky Harbor International).
True, but then the city has made the tradeoff of occupying a very large section of level buildable land near downtown with an airport instead of other development.
I get it -- if you're an affluent traveler it's really convenient to alight close to your destination. But for the rest of humanity that lives in a city, there's not much difference between plopping an airport in the middle of a city and running a huge freeway through it. It's a lot of land that no one wants as a neighbor, dedicated for the use of noisy vehicles that emit large amounts of pollutants.
A shame you missed Sydney, Australia. The airport link is part of the greater transit link, from a lower socioeconomic part of the city, and continues into the main stations of the 'downtown' area, then continues back down toward other lower socioeconomic areas. It also passes at least one rail interchange, with trains from others lower socioeconomic areas. This makes it easy for airport, and surrounds, workers to access their workplace, but also for travellers to head into the city, and thus beyond, or take the southbound route to the outer south western suburbs. Though the airport terminal stations have an access fee, this is capped at a low weekly rate for airport employees. Some of the areas serviced by the Airport Link rail do not have easy bus access, especially from the suburbs where the rail originates from.
In my experience, Heathrow in London does a pretty good job of providing options for each "segment" of rider. You mentioned the Heathrow Express, which is quick (and pricey) for business travelers. The Piccadilly line is part of the normal Tube network (and is slower as a result), but it's much cheaper. And the new Elizabeth line is sort of a "mid-tier" option: slightly slower than the Express but about 1/4 the cost. I've ridden all three (as a tourist), and they're all great.
Elizabeth line is great, it means going from Heathrow to the City of London is one single train rather than changing at Paddington. Also because of the link at Farringdon with Thameslink it makes Heathrow no longer a horrible journey from a lot of suburban London.
Houston Intercontinental has no train connection to the outside world, but it has an adorable "People Mover" built by the same company that built the People Mover at Disney World.
@@grahamturner2640 You can't live in Houston if you can't drive a car. I lived there for fifteen years, and it is a wasteland of highways, with a miserable public transit system. Locals sometimes joke that they like driving an hour to buy stuff or do anything because they want to support the local oil and gas industry, but when they do things like build e.g. the 28 lane Katy Expressway, it doesn't feel like a joke.
@@daniel-wood isn’t the Houston transit system basically “a nice relaxing way to get of your car and get around downtown”. What’s the point of transit if you need a car to use it?
@@daniel-wood Houston is a new city, even by North American standards. I’m a native. My parents moved here in the early sixties. Parts of town that are now considered inner city were still gravel roads or even farmland then. The trains your city has, or got rid of, were not originally built in Houston, just like they were not built much anywhere in the country between the 60’s and late 80’s. Attempts to add light rail have been ridiculously expensive, and deadly. Bad projects, overly influenced by bad politicians, generally have a way of getting voters to just say no to future projects. Unlike most areas of the country, people coming here are generally welcomed by tradition (large waves of people sometimes create some issues, but it gets sorted). We are building more bike lanes, but probably over doing it given the weather. We are building denser in the city, but still building out. If you want a dense urban area with bike lanes and light rail, it’s here, but the school district is dirt and the price is high along with the property taxes. So people move out to newer school districts and commute. There’s nothing wrong with Houston that isn’t political even though our present and previous mayors weren’t all that bad. Well, and the weather. Lol.
Not gonna lie, when I saw this title I figured you'd be covering the history of why most U.S. cities don't have a direct one-seat terminal-to-downtown rail link (and the FAA regulation behind it that got repealed two years ago). But this is still fascinating.
@@obriaind very basically, for several decades airports have relied on an FAA per-airline-ticket fee called PFCs for internal infrastructure improvements, but there was a rule that it couldn't be spent on projects that go outside the airport. This is why a lot of U.S. airports build mini trains that go from the terminal to the station for the city's main system (think JFK's AirTrain or the Miami shuttle train) rather than simply taking the city's rail system and running it to the terminal itself. That FAA rule finally got repealed in 2021 because the administrators wanted the D.C. Silver Line to go to Dulles.
Zurich Airport is where it's at. It's Zurich's biggest bus hub. Has 2 tram lines. 3 intercity trains stop there and 2 S-Bahn lines. Taking you to any neighbourhood or any city in Switzerland.
Chicago Ohare started charging $5 for boarding the Blue Line, but airport workers get the $2.50 fare still if their employer registers their Ventra card. The JFK AirTrain continues to raise their fares, now at $8, but they still sell the 10 ride pass for $25. Anyone can buy it.
ATL has an amazing connection. I flew there and took the train it put me one block away from my hotel in Midtown I usually stay at. ATL is a nightmare to drive through and the train beats Uber every day of the week. Same with Washington DC, flying into DCA and then then jumping on a train to get to the downtown area is just the best feeling ever.
Here in L. A. we're building a people mover to finally connect our airport to the light rail system and a centralized car rental complex. But I can remember years ago when the light rail was first being built that they intended to bring it right into LAX. However the rental car companies, taxis, buses and shared ride vans all lobbied hard against it saying it would hurt their business. And they got their way. It took until now with traffic a snarled mess (it can literally take half an hour to fight thru the main loop of the airport) to finally say we don't care, we got to do something.
Amsterdam Schipol and Zurich are the best I've experienced. They have huge mainline rail stations underground that go straight to the city centre within 20 minutes. The thing to remember with airport transfers is most people have heavy suitcases, so a bus is definitely NOT optimal due to the steps, narrow aisles and also the fact that they get stuck in traffic. When you have a plane to catch, you don't want to have that stress. A fast, frequent train with level boarding, spacious interiors and good luggage racks is the best solution for travellers.
Schiphol is also especially great in this regard because a lot of the inter-city and even international trains going to or through Amsterdam stop at the airport as well, so you do not even have to get into the metro to switch from train to plane like in many other cities, where the central train station is located in the city center. So I can pretty much get onto a train on the other end of The Netherlands and get directly to the airport without having to change even once. Frankfurt in Germany, for example, has a similar system with a directly connected overland train station.
@@der_ludo5460 It's the same in Zurich. Zurich Airport station is a through station located on the east-west axis of the country and is part of the main line. So every intercity line stops there regularly. Plus several S-Bahn lines.
Schiphol airport here in the Netherlands has a train station under the terminal that is part of the national network directly connected to Amsterdam and The Hague. Besides that there are normal busses connecting it to Amsterdam and other commuter hubs around the airport. And there is a high speed bus line directly to Haarlem as there is no direct train that goes there.
"Connected to Amsterdam and The Hague" is underselling it a bit. Yes, trains go to Amsterdam, but they'll continue to places like Nijmegen, Enschede and Groningen. The ones going in the direction of The Hague continue on to the likes of Rotterdam, Breda and even (as you mentioned) Belgium and France. That's the best thing about the Schiphol train station; an awful lot of people living all over the country can take a direct intercity service to Schiphol Airport, without ever having to change trains. Not only does that make it more convenient for those people, but also for everyone taking the train to, from or through Amsterdam. Can you imagine if everyone going to Schiphol Airport had to change trains at Amsterdam Centraal? It would make that station unbearably busy all day long.
The Cleveland rail transit goes directly into the terminal of the airport. It’s so convenient and I use it every time I fly. Way cheaper and easier. I think it’s the only rail transit in America that goes directly into the terminal. E: I've looked these up and most to all don't go directly into the terminal. They stop outside or very near but not into the terminal itself.
In Anchorage, AK there's a rail station at the airport, but no one in the city can use it. Why? Because it's used exclusively to drop off cruise ship passengers after they land in either Seward or Whittier. What a missed opportunity.
Denver is a bit of an outlier in that it has one of the highest base fares for transit in the United States. Also, many transit agencies don't charge a supplement for the airport rail connection. A lot of it comes down to how the connection was funded as if the FAA funded the rail project, as is the case with the JFK Air Train in New York City, the rail service must be dedicated to getting people to the airport and not to other destinations. As for the Stapleton neighborhood, the main development occurred where the terminal used to be, which was about a mile south of the railroad tracks where the commuter line was built. One factor that limits rail usage by airport workers is the timing of the work schedule. Many airport shifts start very early, with 4:00 am start times common. Most rail transit has a first trip at 5:00 am or later on weekends, so airport workers have a problem using these services. At least Denver makes a provision for these workers with a train leaving Union Station at 3:00 am, arriving at Denver International Airport at 3:37 am. They also run feeder busses to the rail line as well as direct bus service to the airport designed for airport workers.
Great video! I'm a Denver resident and I think I remember hearing a lot of airport employers do provide an RTD ecopass (unlimited free rides) to workers
I'm a frequent choice rider on the UP Express in Toronto. Some notes about the prices though: if you get a PRESTO card it's $9.25 CAD ($6.85 USD) to ride, and not $12.35 CAD (around $9 USD) , but the card costs $6 CAD so is effectively built in to a round trip ticket. The benefit is that you can then use it on the TTC and take the streetcars and subway all over town, and if you're a frequent rider you effectively get a 30% discount. It's definitely worth it.
What I've noticed is that generally, places with airports far out have high-speed express services only or have high-speed express services open first. For example, Beijing International Airport only has the Airport Express. Shanghai opened the Maglev first in 2002 and then the line 2 connection later. However, more local connections could make more sense provided it's high speed enough and has a lot of development around the route. The silver line in DC is very successful even though it's a normal metro line with tons of stops between the airport and downtown, but it is relatively high speed compared to driving and has a lot of development surrounding its stations.
Id like to put a word in for Sydney's airport link. From the airport (either domestic or international) terminals its about 10 minutes to central station, the airport is on a regular line, the T8 campbelltown line, and has close connections to the T4 at wolli creek and connections to all other lines at central. Getting from anywhere in sydney to the airport is just the time to get to central (which you need to do to do most line switchovers) plus 10 minutes. Being on a high volume main line it also has frequent trains both directions. The line also goes through the city circle which loops around underneath the CBD so you can get to touristy destinations without changing lines.
Thank you for linking you Nebula video on Shanghai, most creators seem to forget to link the video they advertise, thank you for saving me a few minutes!
I live in Salt Lake City and I think our transit options are the best case scenario. Our airport is served by a plethora of bus service, but we also have a light rail. This light rail operates every 15 minutes from 4:45 AM til about 11PM, and it’s a full line, taking an hour from end to end, but those ends intersect the other 2 light rail lines we have as well as our commuter rail. Students get free access to all public transit, low income and disabled fares are about $1 and it’s reliable.
You also forgot that the intermodal station also connects to AmTrak and Greyhound. I can forgive you for forgetting that though since both of those services are largely forgettable anyway, but a couple of the other "mass transit" systems serving Salt Lake and connecting it to the rest of the country. The downtown free fare system is also extremely convenient for not just locals but also tourists where downtown Salt Lake is extremely easy to get around. I have my problems with UTA, but this is one of the things they did right in terms of connecting Trax to the airport. And I have been proven wrong about Trax where I have been increasingly impressed by that system.
@@GlanderBrondurg my apologies! SLC served much of northern Utah, southern Idaho and Wyoming. I haven’t used Amtrak and greyhound since moving here. TRAX and UTA is great in my experience. Only know I can give both of them is reduced service on Saturday and extremely limited service on Sundays. I understand that not many business travelers are active on Sunday and it’s a Mormon thing, but other than that I’ve found very few other examples inside of America that do it better.
@@peturf1788 I used to live in Logan, which has its own separate bus system from UTA. Indeed it is very frustrating that UTA and the CVTD (Cache Valley's bus system) have two stops only five miles apart from each other yet are still not connected. Yes, it is possible to walk between the two stops from Mantua to Wellsville if you want to walk on the shoulder of a federal highway that ought to be a freeway, but it is just one of many issues about mass transit in Utah. I currently live in Utah County, where UTA's connections are extremely limited and the nearest bus stop is about two miles away from my house. It could certainly improve, but I am happy for what does exist and I don't mind taking an Uber to a Front Runner station when I need to use the airport. That is at least a healthy part of the Utah mass transit infrastructure and well worth the minor expense.
An additional aspect for Denver is the airport itself is not motivated to get rid of parking because it makes so much money from the fees. All of the money for the landside projects, outside the airport fence, is being invested in car infrastructure. They also do not encourage employees to ride the light rail, and are even developing a new parking lot for just employees so they can renovate the old one for more passenger vehicles.
having flown in and out of Zurich a couple weeks ago I thought the transit to and from the airport was some of the best I've seen, while it had two tram lines that went to the airport, the rail station at the airport wasn't just for an express service only to Zurich but you were able to catch a train to almost anywhere in the country from that airport, which honestly helps a ton IMO not only for a wide variety of destinations but also meant that trains to and from zurich were frequent.
An extra bit of detail about UP Express that highlights the way these services can be targeted to visitors, especially business travelers: at launch, the one way fare was $27.50.
That's true - another detail that was missed is that Toronto Pearson Airport employees are able to ride the UP Express for $3.50 per ride after setting up an employee account rather than paying the full fare, making it an affordable option for those coming from downtown.
I like to fly into Midway in Chicago. Get off the plane, get your bags, and walk to the back of the terminal, and there’s an L station right there. Orange line to the Loop, where most of the hotels are. And it’s just a regular L train, which means if you get a pass for the duration of your trip, it applies to that ride, as well as any others you will be making.
I particularly enjoy the situation of Schiphol Amsterdam airport. You have direct and local trains stopping there, plus trains in other directions like Utrecht, Leiden- The Hague and Rotterdam - Breda. And it's serviced by several local bus lines and still is connected to a highway so that cars and taxis can still get there. But seriously though: Take the train to Amsterdam Central. Single fare is 4 euro and 70 cents! A taxi would cost you 6 times as much!
Philly has an airport train and buses. Both are used by everyone. The train connects to the major lines like the EL, the buses, and the suburban train line along with Amtrak. It connects to center city and the certain colleges. I forget how expensive the tickets are but the train is definitely used often.
Fares range from $6.75 to $8.00 for the Regional Rail Airport line. Senior citizens ride free with the Senior Key Card. (The card is free, and provides free service on all SEPTA routes.) The major problem with the airport line is that weekend service is hourly, which is outrageous for a major airport. Weekday service is every half hour, which is bearable. But they really need to improve weekend service to make it better for everyone.
We took the Blue Line to get to downtown Chicago from O'Hare as the fastest and smoothest option. My wife is susceptible to motion sickness and stop-and-go traffic is very unpleasant for her. They charge a higher single-ride fare for boarding at the airports in Chicago but pass holders can ride at their same monthly rate. My wife made use of her sick bag anyway after witnessing a bum defecate on the platform right there at State & Lake when we got off the train.
Copenhagen Airport has both busses, metro, regional trains and intercity trains. It's probably one of the best airports in the world. Especially, comparing to the American ones. Minneapolis-Saint Paul is good though which is affordable and easy to get to.
Great video, however I think a missed opportunity to talk about good, affordable train to airport connections is the Link light rail in Seattle. It goes from Northgate, a major shopping center, through downtown, connects the stadiums, and ends past Seatac. One-way fares are $3.50 as you do need to pay to get past the gates at the airport. They do offer low income ORCA passes for $1 one-way. An issue with the Link is that it isn't a 24/7 service, so late or early flights represent a problem, however the time schedule during the day is consistent and on time. Also, they give free ridership to University of Washington students. Sound Transit is also expanding the Link thought this has run into various issues recently which has set back the completion date on projects.
For what it's worth link (and all the other agencies) isn't free for us UW students, it's an annual fee in our tuition that was made mandatory within the last few years. At around $110 it's well worth the money
Having good transit is one thing, making it affordable is another. Both are very important! In Germany, they recently introduced a new ticket: for around $50/month, you can ride any transit in the country, including all local trains. Only long-distance trains are excluded. While there are the obvious discussions regarding subsidies and who pays for what, I think in the end this is the right thing to do.
This depends on the jurisdiction and how things are funded. In many places in the US, subsidizing some service is actually a way to eventually cancel it altogether. First you pretend like you want to help the less affluent riders by subsidizing a service. Then you justify cuts in service because “it loses too much money”. The system degrades because it’s chronically underfunded. The system loses coverage, becomes dirtier, less safe and anyone who isn’t a less-affluent captive rider stops using it. Then you can safely cancel it “to save money” because “no one is using it” and promise to replace it with some futuristic sounding boondoggle like autonomous pods, or monorail or something similarly silly but never do. Voila! Transit reduction achieved!
@@TohaBgood2 The worst part is that road infrastructure are funded by... you guest it, the government. And in the long run public transit become cheaper. Yeah some road freight is inevitable but having so many heavy 18wheelers degrade the roads really fast when trains don't degrade as fast. As for big cities, do we really need to explain why car are far from being a solution? Just look at NYC or LA and imagine if everyone had a car... You'd spend 2h+ in them to commute in and out of work.
Couple things to add about Toronto's UP express train that make it a bit more affordable for locals. The cost of riding the UP is a bit cheaper if you're using a Presto card (the transit card for the greater Toronto area). the cost is around $9 as opposed to the $12. There are also meet and greet fares that are significantly cheaper fares for locals making short-ish trips to the airport. UP express also has an employee discount program for airport employees. You have to apply for the program and jump through a couple hoops, but the cost of a one way trip for employees is $3.50, which is comparable to the $3.25 TTC subway/bus fare.
I live in denver, not near the a line. I walk to the W line station and go to the airport that way. Around 1:05 one way. Pretty convenient compared to the 45 minute drive.
Boston's system is pretty great. They have the silver line bus system directly from the airport that goes downtown and to the major commuter rail station, as well as the blue line T station, which also goes downtown and provides connections to other T lines. One of the downsides, though, is that the airport stop is in the middle of the blue line, so it's a little difficult to board if you have a lot of luggage and the train is full. I guess that's what the silver line is for though.
You're presumably aware, but for anyone reading this who has not been to Boston, the Blue Line from the airport is regular subway fare (2.40) and the Silver Line is free going from the airport (and regular subway fare heading to the airport), another big plus for Boston. While it would be nice if the Blue Line Airport station was free, it's still a great deal and is more reliable than the Silver Line (due to Silver running in mixed traffic, and often getting caught up in heavy delays in the Ted Williams Tunnel).
Schiphol in the Netherlands is so well connected to the train that on multiple occasions I have stopped there to get a midnight snack after coming back from a concert or something in Amsterdam. It was simply the most convenient way to get food
Besides connecting it to the city have a look at Amsterdam or Zurich airport, not just connected to the city but to the whole country as the airport railway stationis a major railway hub!
I can't emphasize enough the difference in pre-flight experience that good transit makes. In most of the US, you're either stuck with an expensive taxi/ride-share or bumming a ride from someone you know to get to/from the airport. A reliable, decently fast transit connection that can reach most of the city takes so much stress out of the trip, and it makes for a nice orientation to the city as a visitor. Unfortunately, only SF and NYC have even a semblance of this in the US...
As a european it is really beyond me, why you would design an airport without a trainstation. Zurich airport has an underground trainstop with trains from and to Zurich mainstation (10 min away) every 5 - 10 minutes. It’s just a regular train line. Depending on where you want to go, you often pass the airport.
A lot of airport transit depends on the airport. Some airports see transit as competition to THEIR parking lots which are hige revenue generators so they want a cut for each ticket. Sydney Australia had exorbitant fee (to a point where it agreed to create walkable path to Willi Creek that avoids the airport train fee !!!) Vancouver charges extra for boadring train there. Montréal doesn't (yet) have train, but ist 747 bus service has been a great success. Minimum fare is $11 (day pass), but if you have monthy pass, you can use it, so airport workers ride it as a normal bus. One problem: police clamped down on safety issues and bus capacity is limited by baggage rack space, no baggage allowed on floor, so this means you may not be able to board the bus you at the scheduled time you had planned. (victim of its success). The bus goes directly to Lionel Groulx Metro and on the highway, much (but not all) of the way is on dedicated bus lane. With no traffic, 15-20 minutes. When the REM station opens in a few years, it will actually take longer to get downtonw (it first travels to northern end of island and then back south) but will have stations in between so for many, it will be shorter. Essentially no seats on REM and no baggage racks. When the airport nearly went bankrupt again (due to COVID this time) , work on station stopped until they could get more government funding and I beleive (but not sure) that the station is no longer the airport's which is good news because it reduces odds of the airport tax on the station. Washington, Philadelphia and Miami have excellent transit at airport (Miami has both Metro and Tri Rail commuter trains) which don't have any airport surcharge. In march of 2016, a predicted snow fall turned into a heavy snow storm with little warning. I managed to get to the pool that night, but the return trip, the buses at metro station weren,t moving, but did find a 747 bus going to Dorval which a whole bunch of us boarded (driver accepted everyone). I decided to make it to the airport where I might catch a taxi home, while those who lived in Dorval were let off at the highway exit. I eventually got to the airport. (quite the adventure). It was the scene of a disaster movie like the 1970s airport movies. Planes from overseans had not been cancelled since the predictions at time of departure was for just a snowfall. They landed, but passengers had no means to get home except for that 747 bus that kept running. The line up for taxis spanned twice the airlport terminal lenght. At departures, people sleeping on baggage on floor and some lucky to sleep on the check-in baggage belts (more comfy), firemen distributing blankets, and airport vehicles trying to keep the airport road ramps clear. Lots of flashing lights and beeping, but barely any traffic. (got home at about 03:00 after catching a hotel van that dropped me of at the highway exit nearest to me). The reason I point this out is that such events really shine the light on how many people transit through an airport and you really need huge capacity to carry them from airport to where they are going. The bus is nice, but nowhere near capable of handling that level of capacity. (And the REM's tiny seatless 2 car trains likely won't either). Going to airport is easier as there is more of a even flow. But when you have a 747/777 unloading, that is perhaps 400 people unloading at same time, all with luggage. And on busy airportl you have that happening every few minutes.
Denver Airport is pretty good. They have an LRT line that goes from the airport terminal to the train station with several stops inbetween. Denver Airport's inter-terminal subway is also really good. Denver Airport in general is just really nice.
Londons airports are all ( yes it has 5 for some reason) connected to fast rail connections to the city with Heathrow having the Elizabeth and Picadilly lines as well as Heathrow Express. Thameslink connects Luton and Gatwick through central London aswell, Stanstead has its own fast rail service thats well connected on its way into the city and Southend.... well it has a train.
And not to mention, Luton also has services northwards to Bedford, Leicester and Nottingham; Stansted has trains to Cambridge, Leicester and Birmingham and; Gatwick is connected to various places along the south coast + Reading.
The city of Milan recently opened a new metro line to one of its three airports (the closest of the three, another one is already served by conventional rail): though the line will not be finished until next test at least, the fare for the airport is no different than a normal trip inside the city; essentially, it makes no difference that you are going to the airport or sonewhere else, which I think is great 👍👍
I rode that one this April when we were in Italy. It's funny how the only people currently riding that metro line are those going or coming from Linate Airport. That'll obviously change once the whole line is opened, but it's funny to see a metro train so relatively empty, and with nearly everybody carrying a suitcase.
One additional benefit of trains over busses is that people have an easier time with the train system. The train stations are in fixed places, and tend to have relatively frequent and stable service, as opposed to bus schedules which (in my experience) are more complicated and shift based on local priorities at the time.
Also, I thought I saw Dulles airport outside Washington DC there. Keep an eye on the new Silver line extension that recently opened, bringing airport service to the area. So far, I’ve not ridden enough to see how it’s going, but it’s an interesting case study in the post-COVID world
I think the billion dollar corporations & not the government should pay airport worker’s train fare. Maybe they even go crazy & pay a living wage! These companies already get too many subsidies that go towards stock buybacks.
Over the years I've really enjoyed using BART from SFO to Dublin/Pleasanton so my family doesn't have to drive all the way into the city to pick me up. BART might not be the best subway system, but it has been very reliable and helpful over the years. I also used the KLIA train in Kuala Lumpur about a week ago and it was wonderful.
Zurich is like THE example to follow. It's not just connected to commuter rail, bus and tram services, but also to Intercity lines. Fares are the same, like to any other destination. The only thing swiss lacks is highspeed trains. Not that relevant for Swiss commuters, but really annoying for european business travelers, which are basically forced to take the plane over the train all the time...
Surprised to not find any comments regarding MSP's transit connection. The Blue Line LRT opened in 2004 directly connecting Minneapolis-St Paul Intl Airport to Downtown Minneapolis. Fare is standard at only $2.00 non-rush hour ($2.50 during rush hour), and only takes about 20 minutes to get to DT Minneapolis. Operates every 12 minutes nowadays but will hopefully return to 8-minute headways in the coming months, and operates from 4am to midnight. LRT Platform is located just underground of the terminal, takes less than 5 minutes to get to from baggage claim. In addition, it has connections to the Green Line LRT via DT Minneapolis and five BRT lines along its route. Six more BRT lines and 2 LRT extensions coming online before 2030 . Quite impressive for the 16th largest MSA in the US.
Love your videos! Thank you. I live in a Seattle suburb and I can’t wait to ride the rail to the airport. Driving to Seatac is a nightmare for me. Parking at the airport can also be crazy expensive.
The direct lightrail route to SEA-TAC was the thing that clinched me moving to Seattle in 2017. I live in Capitol Hill and it's an easy ride to the airport... not that I travel like I used to for business pre-2020. 😭
in edmonton, there is one bus from the airport, to the LRT, that runs every hour...then you have take the LRT where youre going.. the hotel shuttle service shut down during covid and never got back up
I traveled to London, the tube is connected to the airport but it doesn't feel like it's a separate line. It's just as connected as everything else and the whole system is so user friendly
In Europe, Frankfurt and Zurich are awesome for airport train transits! A good transportation system doesn't make a difference between choice and captive riders - everybody uses it.
Note that UP Express and GTAA (the operators of Toronto Pearson) have a reduced fare program for authorized airport employees, which is only $3.50 per ride / $140 for a monthly pass. Also PRESTO reduces the $12.35 fare to $9.25 which is also available if using contactless credit or debit card. Finally, the TTC offers a regular fare 900 Airport Express bus every 10minutes or so to Kipling Station at the end of Line 2 for a 45 minute total trip into downtown. That bus is pretty fast and typically has a luggage rack.
But the hands down, best airport rail connection in the world is Amsterdam Schiphol, which has a multi-platform train station in the basement with regional, express, intercity, and highspeed trains. No one can beet the Dutch! In North America, I quite like the Canada Line in Vancouver, which is helped because Vancouver has NO FREEWAY to downtown from the airport, meaning that a multi-station metro line takes the same time as driving on local arterial roads with traffic lights every few blocks.
Glasgow unfortunately doesn't have a designated metro system to and from the airport which is actually outside of the city. There are bus services that go to and from the airport to the central bus station, there was going to be a metro system to be built but the new Scottish government decided to abolish it much to everyone's dismay. Edinburgh has a tram service to and from the airport to the city centre which has high passenger numbers. Aberdeen airport is served by a train service in the town next to it. So in short having some kind of metro system to and from an airport can work.
Helsinki airport got a rail line in 2015, but that's also services multiple existing and new developments and they build multiple reservations for new stations. The line also is basically a continuation of an existing line that was a dead end and now looks like a heart when connected to the Finnish main line. Now there's a plan to build a new high speed line to Tampere to free up the main line and the line would be going through the airport perpendicular to the commuter line. I don't know would they sell tickets for the trains to Helsinki because currently you can't by tickets on long distance trains between two stations inside the Helsinki regional transport authority (HSL) area (except stations in Järvenpää for some reason), but I can see them making a exception for the airport. Few more details: The trains to the airport (more like via) start and end at Helsinki, but its not a circle service as Helsinki is a terminus station and train go the same route in reverse when they leave Helsinki. No actual long distance trains stop in any stations in Järvenpää and the trains that stop in Järvenpää are local trains (more like regional trains, but marketed same as local). The thing I was talking about was you can't buy a VR (the national train operator) ticket inside the HSL area (except of course trips to outside that area). For the actual long distance trains you must reserve a seat so you can't travel on those on a HSL ticket.
I go with the train to school, and have to change train at the Schiphol Airport station. Very pleasant underground station, and whenever I have to wait a few minutes I can just go and get something to eat upstairs. Also easy to go there by bus or even by car whenever the first train isn't going because of maintenance or something.
This seems like a simple problem to solve. Give airport employees a discounted fare. It could be handled in many different ways. This would not be rocket science. Airport employers could provide employees with transit passes as one option.
I signed up for Nebula four or five months ago, but have only actually gone on it three times. It's really a badly designed site for watching videos, and the streaming quality is awful. I constantly have to wait for videos to buffer like it's 2010 again, and there are no common player features like jumping forward/back in the video. Also, when you advertise that there's a "nebula exclusive video" but then it's only 2 minutes long, that feels pretty misleading. There's also no app for game consoles which is how I (and tens of millions of other people) watch all of my media. I would be happy to support you guys (more than half of my YT subs are on nebula) but I definitely am not going to renew my subscription if the user experience doesn't improve.
Zurich even though the distances are quite shorter has also a diverse set of possibilities to get to the airport. At first there are suburban bus lines from the bordering communes and 2 tramlines (one which goes to the city center of Zurich and the other which is a tangential route in the north of the city) but except if you are living on those lines you won't take those options as the integrated fare system for all transit types gives you the possibility to either use the S-Bahn or various Regional and even Interregional and Intercity trains to get from pretty much every rail station in the region to the airport way quicker
Interesting video! I am actually a mid to high paid airport worker in The Netherlands who takes the train to get to the office at the airport. I would have loved to also see a more European view on this topic, maybe even with Amsterdam Schiphol as an example of an airport train done right. A lot of your arguments and comparisons simply do not apply to the case of Amsterdam. Anyway, maybe something for a Part 2 on this topic?
Agreed, Amsterdam is well connected to multiple rail services for workers and various types of travellers. While enjoying the City Beautiful videos, they are very US-centric, and Europe and the rest of the world take a different approach to public transport in project design and who they assume it is built for. A lot of focus is on transport affordability in the videos rather than looking at its timely effectiveness vs cars or public safety and frequency. Or am I wrong? +1 for looking at the European Airport Public Transport connections video.
Europe does a better job of rail connections to the airport for sure. Schiphol is the gold standard, but I'd also add in Wien, Zurich, Geneva, and at least Frankfurt. Maybe Copenhagen and Paris CDG are in that list too. And that's just thinking of the direct mainline rail connections!
@@LoveStallion It varies enormously, but unfortunately I have seen some disgusting toilets. However I never actually contracted a norovirus infection there. I can't say the same about London City Airport.
Despite your name showing you're obviously a Dutchy, I think you are not Dutch enough. While our airports is indeed pretty well connected, true Dutchness would have you complain that it's still not good enough. Schiphol really needs to be connected to the Noordzuid lijn, but that is still not good enough. The HSL only becomes a proper high speed rail line quite some kilometers south of Schiphol and the HSL takes the normal slow rail network towards Amsterdam downtown. To be truly good that connection ought to be a proper high speed connection all the way from Amsterdam CS, includinga dedicated platform at both station for the HSL alone. And I'd say that even that is not good enough. Amsterdam CS together with the airport should have true and proper high speed rail connections to Brussels/Paris, Berlin and Cologne (including their airports) before I'd say we have a decent interconnectedness.
Just a normal train or metro station in the airport is definitely the best model overall. If there's a need for express services, add express services throughout the network, they'll improve the experience.
I always see this inconvenience with Narita Airport being located far from Tokyo. For a long time, international flights were restricted to that airport instead of the much closer Haneda Airport. Paying a train ticket for this distance using either JR or Keisei taking over an hour to central Tokyo riding commuter express. Cut time reserving a fast limited express premium train ticket having the fewest stops and space for luggage. Probably around $25, twice more than just basic fare. Or otherwise, take the shuttle bus or if you want to pay over $200 for a taxicab.
San Diego is exploring expanding our light rail (trolley) to the airport. The SAN terminals are very close to our downtown and the existing light rail network. There are bus connections from the terminals to Washington Street and Santa Fe Depot stations. But it's annoying how many people complain public transit doesn't go to the airport because as you said, it's the only time they'll use public transit, and they ignore the bus exists. I take our local 992 bus that connects to SAN when I fly and it's mostly filled with airport workers, but almost every seat is almost taken! If we do connect SAN to our light rail, I hope it is just another stop rather than a destination. It could go both directions, to our downtown and to our beach communities. It should benefit airport workers and San Diegans who use public transit regularly over travelers.
Think the plan is to build light rail to the new train station at Old Town. So it'll replace the buses that stop across Pacific Highway from the Middletown trolley station. Sounds like it'll be more people-mover than a light rail extension. I heard the airport shuttles will stop at Old Town now? I usually use the 992 because I have an easy transfer to it.
I agree that airport workers, potential captive riders, should always be catered to in planning airport rail links. The HART Honolulu automated metro is expected to carry many more workers than visitors to airport, especially because it won't go into Waikiki. Los Angeles LAX will soon be connected to light rail, but neither downtown nor Hollywood will be a direct ride. It will be much more efficient to use transit for airport workers, however.
Have been to Japan numerous times and having an airport rail link in my home city of Toronto - Airport transit is so helpful. One note - fares for the Toronto express services is that it is $3 cheaper if you have an IC card called Presto. Trains much faster that navigating our busy highways and they connect to several other transit options. Trains are just more attractive to visitors and business people heading to downtown from the airport. You make a great point about more affordable transit options for lower earning airport workers though. One of our (delayed) Light Rail projects in Toronto is expect to reach YYZ in about 10 years from now - offering a lower fare with free transfers to the Toronto transit network
The A-Line to Denver International Airport is amazing. It's so relaxing taking it to and from the airport when I travel. It's one of my favorite parts about traveling lol.
I watched this video on my way to O’Hare airport as a passenger in a car. I am a choice rider, and it takes me 15-25 minutes to drive to the airport. If I were to take Chicago’s (terrible) train system, it would take me well over an hour and a half, and I would have to switch trains and train stations downtown. I would happily take a train, if it was a more efficient option, but you’re right - I would never take a bus.
Gimpo airport has to be the clear winner, it's a transfer station for 4 lines (including the crazy ridership line 9) with another commuter rail connection on the way
Philly's SEPTA line to the airport is pretty good. It can be a bit pricy depending on where you are coming from, but it gets you to the Center City transportation hubs nice and quickly.
I used the Philly Regional Rail airport line yesterday. Fares from the 3 major Center City/30th St. Station stops range from $6.75 to $8.00. That's pricey for daily or frequent use, but otherwise reasonable, in my opinion. Senior citizens ride free! Yes, the ride-for-free senior key card applies to the airport train too. The major problem with the line is that weekend service is hourly, which is outrageous for a major airport. Weekday service is better at half-hour intervals. At the least, weekend service should be half-hour intervals.
Amsterdam Schiphol has this done almost perfect, with NS trains frequently serving riders to Downtown Amsterdam, the Hague, Rotterdam and Utrecht, and high speed Thalys service to Belgium and Paris. The only downfall there is the Amsterdam Metro doesn’t go there yet.
Manchester UK has a rail service from Downtown that is either Express or make a few stops. There is a tram as well that goes through low income areas which also goes from Downtown via a different route and is very well designed for airport workers as it runs from 3am.
In the DC area, we got around that with Washington National Airport by putting it on the Blue and Yellow Lines of the Metro, and it isn't even a terminal stop. The newer Silver Line was also extended to Dulles Airport, which is in the Virginia suburbs, very recently, and the MARC Penn Line train that runs between Union Station and Baltimore throughout the day has a connecting shuttle between its stop near BWI Airport and the terminal.
I live in Stuttgart, Germany and here the airport is just a regular stop in the metro (S-Bahn) network. Last year a tram line (U-Bahn) was extended towards the airport and in few years it will get a High Speed Rail station aswell. And since it's a regular stop you obviouly pay the regular fee, about 3€ for the 27 minutes ride from or to Stuttgart Main Station.
London Heathrow, a bit like Shanghai, has a mix of everything. There's the fast but expensive Heathrow Express, which whisks you straight to Paddington in 15 minutes on comfortable trains (which is a long way from anywhere and one of the least convenient mainline London stations), the Underground in the form of the Piccadilly Line, which is much cheaper but stops everywhere and takes 50-60 minutes to central London, or the newly opened Crossrail Elizabeth Line, which has some stops but not as many as the Piccadilly and takes about 30-40 minutes to central London. Both the Piccadilly and Crossrail continue beyond London and out the other side, so widen the net of how many people can get a direct train. Manchester again has both trams providing access from the local suburbs, and regional trains from as far away as Liverpool, Blackpool, the Lake District, Yorkshire, Teesside, North Wales and Scotland, which between them run about 6 fast trains every hour from the centre of Manchester. If you have a good public transport network then integrating multiple services to the airport is an absolute no-brainer. If you don't have much of a network then it needs more careful thought to ensure that you are providing for both workers, travellers from and travellers to - the needs of a local resident flying _from_ the airport are not the same as the needs of a visitor flying _to_ the airport.
@Zaydan Alfariz Paddington the Movie is named after the books that were written in the 1950s and 1960s. In the story, he is found at Paddington Station, and so the family that adopts him calls him Paddington.
Choice Riders and Captive Riders are actually an interesting topic on itself: Captive riders due to having little in terms of alternative options can in theory be milked heavily while providing very poor overall service. So having some Choice Riders on the same line can actually be beneficial to Captive Riders as those will bring in additional revenue while also forcing a certain amount of quality on the transit company. Public transit will only begin to endanger the car, if its performance is good enough to make drivers reconsider even though they are Choice Riders first and foremost.
NYC and NJ has a long way to go before they have painless train commute, what they have now is multiple hops which is highly inefficient and inconvenient
I live in Barcelona. The airport train currently only serves T2 as until 2009 it was the only terminal (divided into 3 A, B and C but they were all connected on the air side) , it has a regular fare with the integrated system, where it is in zone one but a single fare is not part of the integrated system so they annexed it to zone 4. The new line that will connect to T2 with a new underground station connected directly to the terminal and to T1 (at the final stages before opening) will most likely have a special higher fare for a single or a basic 8/10 rides card (the one used by infrequent users and tourists) but the same with other cards like a monthly card (which is 20€). There is also a metro line (the same as planned for the train, more for same as single and basic - same for the rest). The regular bus and the night buses have regular fares for all cards and single. The special express airport bus that works 24h is not part of the integrated system and has a special fare (5.90€ one way, 10.20€ return) but airport workers get special cards for the regular integrated fares that they can use on this bus. Originally I'm from Israel and from the inauguration of the new, and main, terminal 3 a train service was offered with anew station at this terminal with services through Tel Aviv up to the north and to Jerusalem. In a few years new lines will connect to it with more services to other parts of the country so the station will be extended by a second island platform with two more tracks. All train services (and buses) have the same cost as the rest of the country (it's a small country - the size of New Jersey). The future metro system will also connect to the airport. As for workers at the airport - by law all workers are entitled for a refund of their daily commute to work by public transport. There is a maximum cap for each day but since the much cheaper option is a monthly pass so that's what the employer will pay for.
I actually found this extremely interesting given that I have seen this in two different places Toronto and Vancouver. Toronto goes for the expensive option where as Vancouver has there’s more joined into the network at similar to rates across the whole metro line. The biggest hurdle I would say for Vancouver and Victoria B.C is that there should be a couple of new skytrain routes connecting across the system instead of a downtown core connections, expanded routes to UBC which a university city close to with 10s of thousands of people living/working there, better connections to Surrey, an airport bus line to Victoria Airport, better faster transit options to the western communities of Sooke and Langford.
still love how they removed a heavy rail line to Sooke for a bike path and still the idiots ride bikes on the narrow winding 60kmh road at night in the rain. Real safe! and ya the bus sucks too! one per hour is not near enough.
Atlanta's airport connection is surprisingly good. It's a $2.50 regular metro service that goes straight to downtown and major attractions. Downsides are the lack of coverage by the MARTA in general and also a lack of density at many stations. But it works great for traveling from the world's busiest airport, as the stop is inside the airport's baggage claim, and you'll regularly see locals and businesspeople headed to the airport with their bags.
ATL has one of the better rail connections and it's only 15 mins to Peachtree center in the middle of downtown.
Portland is equally good in this regard. The station is actually in the airport, conveniently next to the main entrance and baggage claim, and there's no extra fare to ride.
Yeah, it worked well for me getting into the city but on the return without any announcement the service was suspended due to 'maintenance' issues and I would have missed my flight, I got a cab just in time and made it but I could have been stranded there. i wasn't alone in this situation. Since most transit is operated by government agencies nowadeys I've seen a lot of this, my father rode the LIRR to work for years and he was rarely late either way and this was the olde LIRR that was supposedly bankrupt, my more recent experiences have been a lot worse, seems like it's late more often than not and nobody cares
th-cam.com/video/4D-yvE5y0go/w-d-xo.html
F ATL.
And Atlantans have actively worked against expanding transit in that city.
White suburbanites don't want poor black and brown people coming into their areas.
Excellent video as always! Airports are almost always huge employers, and if you can optimize for capacity, connectivity, & speed, and provide a discounted fare for airport workers, you have a winning combination!
It's a good video indeed. The biggest problem in the video seems to be very American though. Would you consider doing a video on Schiphol or a similar airport?
Hey Reese! Knew I would see you here! Free transport for airport workers.
Most of them are low income blowing a good part of their pay on cars.
Free rides out and back takes that burden from them. Even better if it is 24/7.
Frankfurt, Germany has a nice approach on solving the problem with different fares for commuters and travelers. Single tickets to and from the airport cost more than for the rest of the city. Meanwhile season tickets (weekly, monthly, annually) cost the same to and from the airport, so staff has an affordable option. Also the airport is really well-connected to the transit network with buses, urban and regional rail and even high speed rail to all major German cities. Worth checking out.
Frankfurt Airport with high speed rail is integrated so well that Lufthansa sells train tickets directly with your flight to most German cities and guarantees the transfer between plane and train.
Since the high-speed line to Cologne was finished, there are no actual planes flying that route any more. If you book Frankfurt-Cologne via the airline, you get a train.
I am often going from my home rail way station to the Fernbahnhof with the ICE train to catch my flight the very next day. There is an ICE line going from Leipzig to Wiesbaden through my station. I don't see a reason to bring a car down to a parking garage at the airport, costing 100 Euros for some three weeks. The travel fare for my ICE Ticket comes down to maybe 80-90 Euros with nothing to worry about a car among 100s. Frankfurt is pure chaotic when it comes to parking. One time we had our car stalled and the airport just closed the sector of the parking garage, making it harder for the ADAC to come to jumpstart our car. Since then I hate bringing a car to Frankfurt airport.
@Zaydan Alfariz That does not change anything. You can't get points on other partner airlines. They want to emphasize the inter modularity and the ability to start any "flight" from any rail station if you like. There was a pilot project where you could collect Miles and More miles on train trips with the Deutsche Bahn, where people traveled on DB trains to get the HON station on rail.
Not to mention that for the cost of that round trip Denver ticket, you can get to other major cities in Germany like Mannheim and Stuttgart, rather than just across town.
DC's Metro finally (FINALLY!) opened service to Dulles a few weeks ago. Now you can get to all three of the region's major airports (Dulles, Reagan, & Baltimore's Thurgood Marshal) by train. It's a bit annoying that they don't even have the option of doing an express to Dulles, because of the way Metro is designed. I know some have proposed a way for it to work, but considering how Metro actually functions on a day-to-day basis, I think it's kind of silly.
I like that there isn't a special fee for the airport route, though it's WAY out there, so you pay more because distance matters on Metro. They're talking about a restructuring of fees in the coming year(s), that might include doing zones like I've seen in several European cities.
Unfortunately, the biggest issue remains Metro itself. It doesn't run early enough to get to the airport for an early flight & it doesn't run late enough to get a train into the city if you land late. So, cabs or rideshares will likely still be important early & late on a given day.
I was just about to comment about this!
Part of the issue with the DC metro IMO is that they never built a third express rail, so if there's track work in a station, single tracking must occur, which is slow and annoying. Results in stuff like entire lines being closed for repairs.
Yeah, the trains have no way to bypass the stations. Seems like a major design flaw, but with how many underground and elevated stations it has and how hugely expensive the thing already is, there was probably no useful way to implement an express route.
At least the silver line itself runs pretty fast. The times I have used it I found it amusing when the train is blowing past people on the interstate. Not too many places in the USA you can see that.
A train to Dulles after more than fifty years. At the time when Dulles is becoming an "old, small" airport. Far away in the middle of nowhere. Fly into NYC and take Amtrak south to DC.
@@cbeomjun, Metro was built with only daily commuters in mind, but has grown to be a valuable means of traveling around the region, a region that has ballooned in population since Metro was built. Sadly, it wasn't built to handle the greater demand, and so far, none of the expansions have done anything to help. It's crazy to me that they didn't built 3 or 4 tracks from East Falls Church to Dulles. Frankly, anywhere that's above ground, they should add tracks to the system so trackwork & malfunctions aren't such a problem.
idk if it's already implemented but I think there should be an express train (still normal price) that only stops at Rosslyn, Metro Center, and L'ENFANT PLAZA (sorry copy and pasted for spelling) and then turns around and comes back. That way it gets you into the city real quick, bypassing all the smaller stops, and takes you to the major transfer stations on the Silver line.
I worked at Denver International Airport prior to the A Line train and took the Skyride bus (though I still had to use a car to get to the park and ride). My employer provided me with an RTD EcoPass, which gave me unlimited rides anywhere in the network. I realize that not all airport employers are able to provide such a perk, but I definitely appreciated it.
Again, this seems to be a largely North American problem caused by that strange unwillingness to use busses or trains. Here's In the Netherlands you can't even pay for dedicated airport transit, if you wanted to. It's just regular public transport for regular public transport prices. It's simply inconceivable for me how you'd plan an airport without providing public transport connections. I'd assume you never get your planning permission approved if you'd try. And where there is dedicated airport transit that would not be considered regular public transport, it's the easiest thing to do is to subsidise commuted for airport employees, or even offer it for free (as is currently the case for UKs Bristol Airport).
Though i agree with Your case. I actually like Coca-Cola more than Pepsi
the North American grindset of making even our car alternatives car dependant
What if I don't wanna learn how to use public transit when car transport is all I know?
In New York, there is no direct airport transit because all construction costs would be paid by the Metropolitan Transit Authority or the Port Authority, both regional, multi-jurisdictional entities that do not want to foot the bill (add AMTRAK and NJ Transit to the mix). New York CAN get federal subsidies for those stupid “train to plane” connectors which guarantee a more than one-seat ride. In The New York metropolitan area, there is virtually no chance that Subway or Long Island Railroad riders (to Kennedy International, KJFK, or LaGuardia, KLGA) or NJ Transit or AMTRAK riders (to Newark, KEWR) will ever see service to these airports despite these rail lines’ close proximity to each airport. There may be a glimmer of hope for KLGA as tentative plans to extend one Subway line is on the table. Good luck with that.
It's not a strange unwillingness, our public transit is just garbage
I worked at Denver International over the summer and they gave you a grand total of 35$ to go towards the ridiculously expensive 200$ per month for the all zone monthly RTD pass. Still cheaper than relying on a car, but the trip from where I lived to the Airport required 2 trains, one of which stopped service after midnight. So the choice was rely on the sometimes unreliable service (shortage of operators) or buy a car to get to and from the airport. The vast majority of employees I worked with drove instead, as Denver is still relatively car focused, and you also got free parking at the airport.
Denver is also a stop on the Amtrak California zephyr route
And has a new airport even further outside the downtown.
So, airport workers get free parking at the airport if they drive, but if they want to ride the train, they have to pay the bulk of the fare out of pocket. Completely backwards, although this being the U.S., I can't say I'm surprised.
As a Portlander it only recently occurred to me that places charge more for some lines then others. I was still a kid when the zone system was phased out (school gave us free passes), but iirc even that was based on distance rather then charging more for specific routes. The idea that it costs more to use transit just because it goes to a specific place (even if you don't need to go to the lines terminus) is wild to me.
I recently vacationed in Portland and loved the ease of using the pubilc transit. $5/day pass that tracks itself in the app is pretty smart too.
@@AssBlasster Another thing I realised is that looking at the comments I've seen some ideas that cities should charge more for tourists then residents. Portland's system naturally does that by offering
Most of those cases have most of the line priced similarly to the rest of the system, but adds an additional surcharge for boarding and/or alighting at the airport station(s). I know that's the case with both Stockholm and Edinburgh.
BART in the San Francisco area has wildly disproportionate pricing. Going to the airport costs a large amount extra, partly because it's being used as a source of funding to defray the steep loans taken to build the overwrought BART extension, international terminal, and large parking garage. I don't know if it's disproportionately funding those non-transit goals.
More shamefully, service within San Francisco and Oakland costs vastly more per distance and per maintenance cost than the far flung commuter-only stations. So BART effectively subsidizes far-suburbanites an hour or more from towntown at the cost of the much poorer residents of places like Oakland.
So yes, transit absolutely is like this sometimes.
@@wasmic5z Singapore's trains don't charge extra to go to/from the airport (though they don't have a lot of seats & the trains are crowded with people going to suburbs en-route to the airport instead) but the taxis do - S$5 on weekends, public holidays & after 1700h on weekdays, & S$3 at other times, which has led to an ugly situation where some taxis wait near the airport from 1630h-1700h on weekdays but refuse to pick up passengers before 1700h, because they can then charge less
People always want to complain about Atlanta's MARTA system, but if you fly out of ATL, or work there, it's an excellent choice. When I had a job that required me to fly 2 trips a week, we were offered a MARTA pass that the company would pay for. There is also pretty good frequency for the trains at the airport, and it's only about 15 mins to the 5 points station where you can transfer to other lines. I used to take it all the time to the airport and it was great not having to drive and figure out where to park. The train station was located right next to the terminal so it was a 2 min walk to either check in or security.
The problem with MARTA is it's train routes are too limited. It only really works from a few locations in the metro area. A vast majority will still have to drive to the airport.
For Denver, it's $10.50 PER DAY. It's a 24-hour pass for ALL-DAY transit. So you can use it by bus, train, etc.
I had to take a bus to the airport to catch a red-eye flight (2am) a while ago--only to discover a few days before that they'd changed the airport bus schedule so that it didn't run after 10pm anymore--which is pretty dumb, considering flights leave and arrive all day. Ended up sitting at the gate for 7 hours for my flight.
As much as I think Austin is getting better (slowly, by degrees, with new light rail and tram services coming online over the next eight years, and new rapid bus lines over the next few), it's a long way from being even passable by the standard of most major cities outside the US. You might find a video in how Austin is getting its transit redevelopment (Project Connect) right or wrong, by the way.
And the food court and lounges closed at 10PM too, right?
Can't even get a coffee for seven hours!
I wouldn't catch the Airport bus in the wee hours just because of security issues. A lot of places (especially transit hubs) are sketchy at night and chances are you're carrying expensive stuff. I use Uber instead.
I didn't realize until I heard it a couple months ago that some workers can't use the metro train (and from your comment, the bus) to get to work on time at the airport, if it doesn't run 24-hours!
@@joe_runs International airports never really close.
Great video! To me, it seems like subsidizing transit for airport employees even more (i.e., down to free or at least the level of bus fare) would be the fairest approach.
I can’t remember where I read this, but at least in the US, airport passenger fees can only go to the facility itself and cannot fund associated transit projects. It seems like that would be the most fair way to fund airport transit over the long term: it wouldn’t burden airport employees and it also wouldn’t raise local taxes on people who might not necessarily use the airport.
Side note: I’ve both used RTD and Uber/Lyft to get to and from the Denver airport. Have been thoroughly impressed with RTD: even factoring in wait time for a train, you aren’t spending that much more time and it’s about $40 cheaper.
This rule just changed a year or two ago. Airport passenger facility charges can now be used for transit projects.
@@saxmanb777 that’s great news!
Amsterdam Schiphol station is the fifth busiest station in the Netherlands, as this station also functions as a hub for several destinations. Schiphol Station is connected to all major cities throughout the Netherlands. In addition, the Thalys to Belgium and France also stops here. In the future, the Eurostar will also stop here, currently this train only runs past Schiphol Airport, but does not stop because there is no customs area on the platform to the UK.
I agree with most of this EXCEPT that metro systems may not recover. NYC, despite the media, is actually starting to set records again on the metro.
That's probably in the US.
In the rest of the world though, the number of metro rail service commuters are now reaching and surpassing pre-COVID levels.
@@ianhomerpura8937 Even in Canada, Brampton Transit (9th largest city, but a Toronto suburb) is above 2019 levels of ridership.
When you were discussing fares, it reminded me I’m still blown away that it’s not standard in the US to cover employee’s commute expenses if it’s public transit. Here in Japan, pretty much every company covers the employees train pass to the office.
My company covers it, but lots don't. And, of course, the jobs that pay the least tend to also be the least likely to offer transit benefits.
My company gives a transport allowance once you get promoted to being a manager or higher, but if you're in a fairly big company located in a more remote location e.g. industrial estates, often free shuttle buses will be provided to/from train stations
Example of better system in Sydney Australia:
The main international airport is in the city, not the outskirts, so the trains go there as just another two stops (local and international have separate stops to save on walking), then the train continues on towards or from the city with multiple stops on the way. The train tickets to and from the airport are more expensive if you're just getting a one way ticket, which most travellers are, but the weekly tickets that airport staff get are regular priced as if they were going the same number of stops anywhere else in the train network. I believe they added a surcharge to train trips to and from the airport so taxi companies wouldn't lose a major part of their business. It's worthwhile to get a taxi if the destination is relatively close to the airport, otherwise if you really want to reduce costs you go to the next stop from the airport and get a regular ticket from there to the closest station to your destination and get a taxi for the last portion of your journey if it's not within walking distance while carrying your bags.
Airport express service also arguably becomes less necessary if the airport is close to downtown. In Phoenix, the airport is only around 6 miles from downtown, and it lacks express service. However, a light rail ride to downtown is around half an hour, factoring in wait times and the airport people mover, which is known as the SkyTrain (the airport is called Sky Harbor International).
True, but then the city has made the tradeoff of occupying a very large section of level buildable land near downtown with an airport instead of other development.
@@CurrentlyVince tell me you’ve never been to Sky Harbor without telling me you’ve never been to Sky Harbor
It’s even faster to get from Sky Harbor to Downtown Phoenix on Valley Metro Rt. 13.
I get it -- if you're an affluent traveler it's really convenient to alight close to your destination. But for the rest of humanity that lives in a city, there's not much difference between plopping an airport in the middle of a city and running a huge freeway through it. It's a lot of land that no one wants as a neighbor, dedicated for the use of noisy vehicles that emit large amounts of pollutants.
It would make sense to grade separate Phoenixes Light Rail.
A shame you missed Sydney, Australia. The airport link is part of the greater transit link, from a lower socioeconomic part of the city, and continues into the main stations of the 'downtown' area, then continues back down toward other lower socioeconomic areas. It also passes at least one rail interchange, with trains from others lower socioeconomic areas. This makes it easy for airport, and surrounds, workers to access their workplace, but also for travellers to head into the city, and thus beyond, or take the southbound route to the outer south western suburbs. Though the airport terminal stations have an access fee, this is capped at a low weekly rate for airport employees. Some of the areas serviced by the Airport Link rail do not have easy bus access, especially from the suburbs where the rail originates from.
bro stop saying lower socioeconomic ur making MacArthur sound crappy but it’s really improved and will keep improving after the new airport opens.
In my experience, Heathrow in London does a pretty good job of providing options for each "segment" of rider. You mentioned the Heathrow Express, which is quick (and pricey) for business travelers. The Piccadilly line is part of the normal Tube network (and is slower as a result), but it's much cheaper. And the new Elizabeth line is sort of a "mid-tier" option: slightly slower than the Express but about 1/4 the cost. I've ridden all three (as a tourist), and they're all great.
Elizabeth line is great, it means going from Heathrow to the City of London is one single train rather than changing at Paddington. Also because of the link at Farringdon with Thameslink it makes Heathrow no longer a horrible journey from a lot of suburban London.
When I was in London I chose the Piccadilly Line as it had the advantage of providing a direct train to Kings Cross-St Pancras, where my hotel was
Houston Intercontinental has no train connection to the outside world, but it has an adorable "People Mover" built by the same company that built the People Mover at Disney World.
How do people get there if they can’t use a car?
@@grahamturner2640 bus, uber
@@grahamturner2640 You can't live in Houston if you can't drive a car. I lived there for fifteen years, and it is a wasteland of highways, with a miserable public transit system. Locals sometimes joke that they like driving an hour to buy stuff or do anything because they want to support the local oil and gas industry, but when they do things like build e.g. the 28 lane Katy Expressway, it doesn't feel like a joke.
@@daniel-wood isn’t the Houston transit system basically “a nice relaxing way to get of your car and get around downtown”. What’s the point of transit if you need a car to use it?
@@daniel-wood Houston is a new city, even by North American standards. I’m a native. My parents moved here in the early sixties. Parts of town that are now considered inner city were still gravel roads or even farmland then. The trains your city has, or got rid of, were not originally built in Houston, just like they were not built much anywhere in the country between the 60’s and late 80’s.
Attempts to add light rail have been ridiculously expensive, and deadly. Bad projects, overly influenced by bad politicians, generally have a way of getting voters to just say no to future projects. Unlike most areas of the country, people coming here are generally welcomed by tradition (large waves of people sometimes create some issues, but it gets sorted). We are building more bike lanes, but probably over doing it given the weather. We are building denser in the city, but still building out.
If you want a dense urban area with bike lanes and light rail, it’s here, but the school district is dirt and the price is high along with the property taxes. So people move out to newer school districts and commute. There’s nothing wrong with Houston that isn’t political even though our present and previous mayors weren’t all that bad. Well, and the weather. Lol.
Not gonna lie, when I saw this title I figured you'd be covering the history of why most U.S. cities don't have a direct one-seat terminal-to-downtown rail link (and the FAA regulation behind it that got repealed two years ago). But this is still fascinating.
Wait what? I want to hear more about this so I can know what cloud to shake my fist at.
@@obriaind very basically, for several decades airports have relied on an FAA per-airline-ticket fee called PFCs for internal infrastructure improvements, but there was a rule that it couldn't be spent on projects that go outside the airport. This is why a lot of U.S. airports build mini trains that go from the terminal to the station for the city's main system (think JFK's AirTrain or the Miami shuttle train) rather than simply taking the city's rail system and running it to the terminal itself. That FAA rule finally got repealed in 2021 because the administrators wanted the D.C. Silver Line to go to Dulles.
Zurich Airport is where it's at.
It's Zurich's biggest bus hub.
Has 2 tram lines.
3 intercity trains stop there and 2 S-Bahn lines. Taking you to any neighbourhood or any city in Switzerland.
Chicago Ohare started charging $5 for boarding the Blue Line, but airport workers get the $2.50 fare still if their employer registers their Ventra card. The JFK AirTrain continues to raise their fares, now at $8, but they still sell the 10 ride pass for $25. Anyone can buy it.
Note about denver airport's train: The $10 fare actually includes a day pass for all of RTD, so it's effectively $5 each way for commuters.
ATL has an amazing connection. I flew there and took the train it put me one block away from my hotel in Midtown I usually stay at. ATL is a nightmare to drive through and the train beats Uber every day of the week. Same with Washington DC, flying into DCA and then then jumping on a train to get to the downtown area is just the best feeling ever.
I live in Denver and pretty much every airport employee gets free transit passes for working out there, so it isn't 20 a day.
Here in L. A. we're building a people mover to finally connect our airport to the light rail system and a centralized car rental complex. But I can remember years ago when the light rail was first being built that they intended to bring it right into LAX. However the rental car companies, taxis, buses and shared ride vans all lobbied hard against it saying it would hurt their business. And they got their way. It took until now with traffic a snarled mess (it can literally take half an hour to fight thru the main loop of the airport) to finally say we don't care, we got to do something.
Amsterdam Schipol and Zurich are the best I've experienced. They have huge mainline rail stations underground that go straight to the city centre within 20 minutes. The thing to remember with airport transfers is most people have heavy suitcases, so a bus is definitely NOT optimal due to the steps, narrow aisles and also the fact that they get stuck in traffic. When you have a plane to catch, you don't want to have that stress. A fast, frequent train with level boarding, spacious interiors and good luggage racks is the best solution for travellers.
Schiphol is also especially great in this regard because a lot of the inter-city and even international trains going to or through Amsterdam stop at the airport as well, so you do not even have to get into the metro to switch from train to plane like in many other cities, where the central train station is located in the city center. So I can pretty much get onto a train on the other end of The Netherlands and get directly to the airport without having to change even once. Frankfurt in Germany, for example, has a similar system with a directly connected overland train station.
In Singapore instead of installing luggage racks, we remove seats instead ;) but the trains are cheap
@@der_ludo5460 It's the same in Zurich. Zurich Airport station is a through station located on the east-west axis of the country and is part of the main line. So every intercity line stops there regularly. Plus several S-Bahn lines.
If you have airport ID the fare for the UP Express in Toronto is $3 each way, and many airline staff choose to live near the other 2 stations
Schiphol airport here in the Netherlands has a train station under the terminal that is part of the national network directly connected to Amsterdam and The Hague. Besides that there are normal busses connecting it to Amsterdam and other commuter hubs around the airport. And there is a high speed bus line directly to Haarlem as there is no direct train that goes there.
"Connected to Amsterdam and The Hague" is underselling it a bit. Yes, trains go to Amsterdam, but they'll continue to places like Nijmegen, Enschede and Groningen. The ones going in the direction of The Hague continue on to the likes of Rotterdam, Breda and even (as you mentioned) Belgium and France. That's the best thing about the Schiphol train station; an awful lot of people living all over the country can take a direct intercity service to Schiphol Airport, without ever having to change trains. Not only does that make it more convenient for those people, but also for everyone taking the train to, from or through Amsterdam. Can you imagine if everyone going to Schiphol Airport had to change trains at Amsterdam Centraal? It would make that station unbearably busy all day long.
The Cleveland rail transit goes directly into the terminal of the airport. It’s so convenient and I use it every time I fly. Way cheaper and easier.
I think it’s the only rail transit in America that goes directly into the terminal.
E: I've looked these up and most to all don't go directly into the terminal. They stop outside or very near but not into the terminal itself.
St Louis
Atlanta
Denver does as well.
SLC
BWI
In Anchorage, AK there's a rail station at the airport, but no one in the city can use it.
Why? Because it's used exclusively to drop off cruise ship passengers after they land in either Seward or Whittier. What a missed opportunity.
Denver is a bit of an outlier in that it has one of the highest base fares for transit in the United States. Also, many transit agencies don't charge a supplement for the airport rail connection. A lot of it comes down to how the connection was funded as if the FAA funded the rail project, as is the case with the JFK Air Train in New York City, the rail service must be dedicated to getting people to the airport and not to other destinations. As for the Stapleton neighborhood, the main development occurred where the terminal used to be, which was about a mile south of the railroad tracks where the commuter line was built. One factor that limits rail usage by airport workers is the timing of the work schedule. Many airport shifts start very early, with 4:00 am start times common. Most rail transit has a first trip at 5:00 am or later on weekends, so airport workers have a problem using these services. At least Denver makes a provision for these workers with a train leaving Union Station at 3:00 am, arriving at Denver International Airport at 3:37 am. They also run feeder busses to the rail line as well as direct bus service to the airport designed for airport workers.
Great video! I'm a Denver resident and I think I remember hearing a lot of airport employers do provide an RTD ecopass (unlimited free rides) to workers
I'm a frequent choice rider on the UP Express in Toronto. Some notes about the prices though: if you get a PRESTO card it's $9.25 CAD ($6.85 USD) to ride, and not $12.35 CAD (around $9 USD) , but the card costs $6 CAD so is effectively built in to a round trip ticket. The benefit is that you can then use it on the TTC and take the streetcars and subway all over town, and if you're a frequent rider you effectively get a 30% discount. It's definitely worth it.
What I've noticed is that generally, places with airports far out have high-speed express services only or have high-speed express services open first. For example, Beijing International Airport only has the Airport Express. Shanghai opened the Maglev first in 2002 and then the line 2 connection later. However, more local connections could make more sense provided it's high speed enough and has a lot of development around the route. The silver line in DC is very successful even though it's a normal metro line with tons of stops between the airport and downtown, but it is relatively high speed compared to driving and has a lot of development surrounding its stations.
Id like to put a word in for Sydney's airport link. From the airport (either domestic or international) terminals its about 10 minutes to central station, the airport is on a regular line, the T8 campbelltown line, and has close connections to the T4 at wolli creek and connections to all other lines at central. Getting from anywhere in sydney to the airport is just the time to get to central (which you need to do to do most line switchovers) plus 10 minutes. Being on a high volume main line it also has frequent trains both directions. The line also goes through the city circle which loops around underneath the CBD so you can get to touristy destinations without changing lines.
Thank you for linking you Nebula video on Shanghai, most creators seem to forget to link the video they advertise, thank you for saving me a few minutes!
I live in Salt Lake City and I think our transit options are the best case scenario.
Our airport is served by a plethora of bus service, but we also have a light rail. This light rail operates every 15 minutes from 4:45 AM til about 11PM, and it’s a full line, taking an hour from end to end, but those ends intersect the other 2 light rail lines we have as well as our commuter rail.
Students get free access to all public transit, low income and disabled fares are about $1 and it’s reliable.
You also forgot that the intermodal station also connects to AmTrak and Greyhound. I can forgive you for forgetting that though since both of those services are largely forgettable anyway, but a couple of the other "mass transit" systems serving Salt Lake and connecting it to the rest of the country. The downtown free fare system is also extremely convenient for not just locals but also tourists where downtown Salt Lake is extremely easy to get around. I have my problems with UTA, but this is one of the things they did right in terms of connecting Trax to the airport. And I have been proven wrong about Trax where I have been increasingly impressed by that system.
@@GlanderBrondurg my apologies! SLC served much of northern Utah, southern Idaho and Wyoming. I haven’t used Amtrak and greyhound since moving here. TRAX and UTA is great in my experience. Only know I can give both of them is reduced service on Saturday and extremely limited service on Sundays. I understand that not many business travelers are active on Sunday and it’s a Mormon thing, but other than that I’ve found very few other examples inside of America that do it better.
@@peturf1788 I used to live in Logan, which has its own separate bus system from UTA. Indeed it is very frustrating that UTA and the CVTD (Cache Valley's bus system) have two stops only five miles apart from each other yet are still not connected. Yes, it is possible to walk between the two stops from Mantua to Wellsville if you want to walk on the shoulder of a federal highway that ought to be a freeway, but it is just one of many issues about mass transit in Utah.
I currently live in Utah County, where UTA's connections are extremely limited and the nearest bus stop is about two miles away from my house. It could certainly improve, but I am happy for what does exist and I don't mind taking an Uber to a Front Runner station when I need to use the airport. That is at least a healthy part of the Utah mass transit infrastructure and well worth the minor expense.
An additional aspect for Denver is the airport itself is not motivated to get rid of parking because it makes so much money from the fees. All of the money for the landside projects, outside the airport fence, is being invested in car infrastructure. They also do not encourage employees to ride the light rail, and are even developing a new parking lot for just employees so they can renovate the old one for more passenger vehicles.
having flown in and out of Zurich a couple weeks ago I thought the transit to and from the airport was some of the best I've seen, while it had two tram lines that went to the airport, the rail station at the airport wasn't just for an express service only to Zurich but you were able to catch a train to almost anywhere in the country from that airport, which honestly helps a ton IMO not only for a wide variety of destinations but also meant that trains to and from zurich were frequent.
An extra bit of detail about UP Express that highlights the way these services can be targeted to visitors, especially business travelers: at launch, the one way fare was $27.50.
That's true - another detail that was missed is that Toronto Pearson Airport employees are able to ride the UP Express for $3.50 per ride after setting up an employee account rather than paying the full fare, making it an affordable option for those coming from downtown.
I like to fly into Midway in Chicago. Get off the plane, get your bags, and walk to the back of the terminal, and there’s an L station right there. Orange line to the Loop, where most of the hotels are. And it’s just a regular L train, which means if you get a pass for the duration of your trip, it applies to that ride, as well as any others you will be making.
I particularly enjoy the situation of Schiphol Amsterdam airport. You have direct and local trains stopping there, plus trains in other directions like Utrecht, Leiden- The Hague and Rotterdam - Breda. And it's serviced by several local bus lines and still is connected to a highway so that cars and taxis can still get there. But seriously though: Take the train to Amsterdam Central. Single fare is 4 euro and 70 cents! A taxi would cost you 6 times as much!
Philly has an airport train and buses. Both are used by everyone. The train connects to the major lines like the EL, the buses, and the suburban train line along with Amtrak. It connects to center city and the certain colleges. I forget how expensive the tickets are but the train is definitely used often.
Fares range from $6.75 to $8.00 for the Regional Rail Airport line. Senior citizens ride free with the Senior Key Card. (The card is free, and provides free service on all SEPTA routes.) The major problem with the airport line is that weekend service is hourly, which is outrageous for a major airport. Weekday service is every half hour, which is bearable. But they really need to improve weekend service to make it better for everyone.
@@jm-bv1wh every train service should start running more often like the EL does and PATCO.
We took the Blue Line to get to downtown Chicago from O'Hare as the fastest and smoothest option. My wife is susceptible to motion sickness and stop-and-go traffic is very unpleasant for her. They charge a higher single-ride fare for boarding at the airports in Chicago but pass holders can ride at their same monthly rate. My wife made use of her sick bag anyway after witnessing a bum defecate on the platform right there at State & Lake when we got off the train.
Copenhagen Airport has both busses, metro, regional trains and intercity trains. It's probably one of the best airports in the world. Especially, comparing to the American ones. Minneapolis-Saint Paul is good though which is affordable and easy to get to.
Great video, however I think a missed opportunity to talk about good, affordable train to airport connections is the Link light rail in Seattle. It goes from Northgate, a major shopping center, through downtown, connects the stadiums, and ends past Seatac. One-way fares are $3.50 as you do need to pay to get past the gates at the airport. They do offer low income ORCA passes for $1 one-way.
An issue with the Link is that it isn't a 24/7 service, so late or early flights represent a problem, however the time schedule during the day is consistent and on time. Also, they give free ridership to University of Washington students.
Sound Transit is also expanding the Link thought this has run into various issues recently which has set back the completion date on projects.
For what it's worth link (and all the other agencies) isn't free for us UW students, it's an annual fee in our tuition that was made mandatory within the last few years. At around $110 it's well worth the money
Biggest problems with LINK is service times, drop offs location (North end of the airport), and security.
Having good transit is one thing, making it affordable is another. Both are very important! In Germany, they recently introduced a new ticket: for around $50/month, you can ride any transit in the country, including all local trains. Only long-distance trains are excluded. While there are the obvious discussions regarding subsidies and who pays for what, I think in the end this is the right thing to do.
This depends on the jurisdiction and how things are funded. In many places in the US, subsidizing some service is actually a way to eventually cancel it altogether. First you pretend like you want to help the less affluent riders by subsidizing a service. Then you justify cuts in service because “it loses too much money”. The system degrades because it’s chronically underfunded. The system loses coverage, becomes dirtier, less safe and anyone who isn’t a less-affluent captive rider stops using it. Then you can safely cancel it “to save money” because “no one is using it” and promise to replace it with some futuristic sounding boondoggle like autonomous pods, or monorail or something similarly silly but never do.
Voila! Transit reduction achieved!
@@TohaBgood2 The worst part is that road infrastructure are funded by... you guest it, the government. And in the long run public transit become cheaper. Yeah some road freight is inevitable but having so many heavy 18wheelers degrade the roads really fast when trains don't degrade as fast.
As for big cities, do we really need to explain why car are far from being a solution? Just look at NYC or LA and imagine if everyone had a car... You'd spend 2h+ in them to commute in and out of work.
Couple things to add about Toronto's UP express train that make it a bit more affordable for locals. The cost of riding the UP is a bit cheaper if you're using a Presto card (the transit card for the greater Toronto area). the cost is around $9 as opposed to the $12. There are also meet and greet fares that are significantly cheaper fares for locals making short-ish trips to the airport. UP express also has an employee discount program for airport employees. You have to apply for the program and jump through a couple hoops, but the cost of a one way trip for employees is $3.50, which is comparable to the $3.25 TTC subway/bus fare.
I live in denver, not near the a line. I walk to the W line station and go to the airport that way. Around 1:05 one way. Pretty convenient compared to the 45 minute drive.
For the Denver Airport RTD trips it's actually $10.50 for an all-day pass not one way
Boston's system is pretty great. They have the silver line bus system directly from the airport that goes downtown and to the major commuter rail station, as well as the blue line T station, which also goes downtown and provides connections to other T lines. One of the downsides, though, is that the airport stop is in the middle of the blue line, so it's a little difficult to board if you have a lot of luggage and the train is full. I guess that's what the silver line is for though.
You're presumably aware, but for anyone reading this who has not been to Boston, the Blue Line from the airport is regular subway fare (2.40) and the Silver Line is free going from the airport (and regular subway fare heading to the airport), another big plus for Boston.
While it would be nice if the Blue Line Airport station was free, it's still a great deal and is more reliable than the Silver Line (due to Silver running in mixed traffic, and often getting caught up in heavy delays in the Ted Williams Tunnel).
Schiphol in the Netherlands is so well connected to the train that on multiple occasions I have stopped there to get a midnight snack after coming back from a concert or something in Amsterdam. It was simply the most convenient way to get food
Besides connecting it to the city have a look at Amsterdam or Zurich airport, not just connected to the city but to the whole country as the airport railway stationis a major railway hub!
I can't emphasize enough the difference in pre-flight experience that good transit makes. In most of the US, you're either stuck with an expensive taxi/ride-share or bumming a ride from someone you know to get to/from the airport. A reliable, decently fast transit connection that can reach most of the city takes so much stress out of the trip, and it makes for a nice orientation to the city as a visitor. Unfortunately, only SF and NYC have even a semblance of this in the US...
As a european it is really beyond me, why you would design an airport without a trainstation. Zurich airport has an underground trainstop with trains from and to Zurich mainstation (10 min away) every 5 - 10 minutes. It’s just a regular train line. Depending on where you want to go, you often pass the airport.
A lot of airport transit depends on the airport. Some airports see transit as competition to THEIR parking lots which are hige revenue generators so they want a cut for each ticket. Sydney Australia had exorbitant fee (to a point where it agreed to create walkable path to Willi Creek that avoids the airport train fee !!!) Vancouver charges extra for boadring train there.
Montréal doesn't (yet) have train, but ist 747 bus service has been a great success. Minimum fare is $11 (day pass), but if you have monthy pass, you can use it, so airport workers ride it as a normal bus. One problem: police clamped down on safety issues and bus capacity is limited by baggage rack space, no baggage allowed on floor, so this means you may not be able to board the bus you at the scheduled time you had planned. (victim of its success). The bus goes directly to Lionel Groulx Metro and on the highway, much (but not all) of the way is on dedicated bus lane. With no traffic, 15-20 minutes. When the REM station opens in a few years, it will actually take longer to get downtonw (it first travels to northern end of island and then back south) but will have stations in between so for many, it will be shorter. Essentially no seats on REM and no baggage racks. When the airport nearly went bankrupt again (due to COVID this time) , work on station stopped until they could get more government funding and I beleive (but not sure) that the station is no longer the airport's which is good news because it reduces odds of the airport tax on the station.
Washington, Philadelphia and Miami have excellent transit at airport (Miami has both Metro and Tri Rail commuter trains) which don't have any airport surcharge.
In march of 2016, a predicted snow fall turned into a heavy snow storm with little warning. I managed to get to the pool that night, but the return trip, the buses at metro station weren,t moving, but did find a 747 bus going to Dorval which a whole bunch of us boarded (driver accepted everyone). I decided to make it to the airport where I might catch a taxi home, while those who lived in Dorval were let off at the highway exit. I eventually got to the airport. (quite the adventure). It was the scene of a disaster movie like the 1970s airport movies. Planes from overseans had not been cancelled since the predictions at time of departure was for just a snowfall. They landed, but passengers had no means to get home except for that 747 bus that kept running. The line up for taxis spanned twice the airlport terminal lenght. At departures, people sleeping on baggage on floor and some lucky to sleep on the check-in baggage belts (more comfy), firemen distributing blankets, and airport vehicles trying to keep the airport road ramps clear. Lots of flashing lights and beeping, but barely any traffic. (got home at about 03:00 after catching a hotel van that dropped me of at the highway exit nearest to me).
The reason I point this out is that such events really shine the light on how many people transit through an airport and you really need huge capacity to carry them from airport to where they are going. The bus is nice, but nowhere near capable of handling that level of capacity. (And the REM's tiny seatless 2 car trains likely won't either). Going to airport is easier as there is more of a even flow. But when you have a 747/777 unloading, that is perhaps 400 people unloading at same time, all with luggage. And on busy airportl you have that happening every few minutes.
Yea, it's a weird situation, when you can't integrate a airport line w. existing public transport infrastructure.
Denver Airport is pretty good. They have an LRT line that goes from the airport terminal to the train station with several stops inbetween. Denver Airport's inter-terminal subway is also really good. Denver Airport in general is just really nice.
Londons airports are all ( yes it has 5 for some reason) connected to fast rail connections to the city with Heathrow having the Elizabeth and Picadilly lines as well as Heathrow Express. Thameslink connects Luton and Gatwick through central London aswell, Stanstead has its own fast rail service thats well connected on its way into the city and Southend.... well it has a train.
And not to mention, Luton also has services northwards to Bedford, Leicester and Nottingham; Stansted has trains to Cambridge, Leicester and Birmingham and; Gatwick is connected to various places along the south coast + Reading.
The city of Milan recently opened a new metro line to one of its three airports (the closest of the three, another one is already served by conventional rail): though the line will not be finished until next test at least, the fare for the airport is no different than a normal trip inside the city; essentially, it makes no difference that you are going to the airport or sonewhere else, which I think is great 👍👍
I rode that one this April when we were in Italy. It's funny how the only people currently riding that metro line are those going or coming from Linate Airport. That'll obviously change once the whole line is opened, but it's funny to see a metro train so relatively empty, and with nearly everybody carrying a suitcase.
One additional benefit of trains over busses is that people have an easier time with the train system. The train stations are in fixed places, and tend to have relatively frequent and stable service, as opposed to bus schedules which (in my experience) are more complicated and shift based on local priorities at the time.
Also, I thought I saw Dulles airport outside Washington DC there. Keep an eye on the new Silver line extension that recently opened, bringing airport service to the area. So far, I’ve not ridden enough to see how it’s going, but it’s an interesting case study in the post-COVID world
I think the billion dollar corporations & not the government should pay airport worker’s train fare. Maybe they even go crazy & pay a living wage! These companies already get too many subsidies that go towards stock buybacks.
Would you like a pony and a backrub too?
Over the years I've really enjoyed using BART from SFO to Dublin/Pleasanton so my family doesn't have to drive all the way into the city to pick me up. BART might not be the best subway system, but it has been very reliable and helpful over the years. I also used the KLIA train in Kuala Lumpur about a week ago and it was wonderful.
Zurich is like THE example to follow. It's not just connected to commuter rail, bus and tram services, but also to Intercity lines. Fares are the same, like to any other destination.
The only thing swiss lacks is highspeed trains. Not that relevant for Swiss commuters, but really annoying for european business travelers, which are basically forced to take the plane over the train all the time...
Surprised to not find any comments regarding MSP's transit connection. The Blue Line LRT opened in 2004 directly connecting Minneapolis-St Paul Intl Airport to Downtown Minneapolis. Fare is standard at only $2.00 non-rush hour ($2.50 during rush hour), and only takes about 20 minutes to get to DT Minneapolis. Operates every 12 minutes nowadays but will hopefully return to 8-minute headways in the coming months, and operates from 4am to midnight. LRT Platform is located just underground of the terminal, takes less than 5 minutes to get to from baggage claim. In addition, it has connections to the Green Line LRT via DT Minneapolis and five BRT lines along its route. Six more BRT lines and 2 LRT extensions coming online before 2030 . Quite impressive for the 16th largest MSA in the US.
Denver’s $10.50 is for a day pass…this is pretty important to note
Love your videos! Thank you. I live in a Seattle suburb and I can’t wait to ride the rail to the airport. Driving to Seatac is a nightmare for me. Parking at the airport can also be crazy expensive.
The direct lightrail route to SEA-TAC was the thing that clinched me moving to Seattle in 2017. I live in Capitol Hill and it's an easy ride to the airport... not that I travel like I used to for business pre-2020. 😭
in edmonton, there is one bus from the airport, to the LRT, that runs every hour...then you have take the LRT where youre going.. the hotel shuttle service shut down during covid and never got back up
Ah, yes the 747, wife use to work at the Boston Pizza and take it to work
I traveled to London, the tube is connected to the airport but it doesn't feel like it's a separate line. It's just as connected as everything else and the whole system is so user friendly
In Europe, Frankfurt and Zurich are awesome for airport train transits!
A good transportation system doesn't make a difference between choice and captive riders - everybody uses it.
Note that UP Express and GTAA (the operators of Toronto Pearson) have a reduced fare program for authorized airport employees, which is only $3.50 per ride / $140 for a monthly pass. Also PRESTO reduces the $12.35 fare to $9.25 which is also available if using contactless credit or debit card.
Finally, the TTC offers a regular fare 900 Airport Express bus every 10minutes or so to Kipling Station at the end of Line 2 for a 45 minute total trip into downtown. That bus is pretty fast and typically has a luggage rack.
But the hands down, best airport rail connection in the world is Amsterdam Schiphol, which has a multi-platform train station in the basement with regional, express, intercity, and highspeed trains. No one can beet the Dutch! In North America, I quite like the Canada Line in Vancouver, which is helped because Vancouver has NO FREEWAY to downtown from the airport, meaning that a multi-station metro line takes the same time as driving on local arterial roads with traffic lights every few blocks.
Glasgow unfortunately doesn't have a designated metro system to and from the airport which is actually outside of the city. There are bus services that go to and from the airport to the central bus station, there was going to be a metro system to be built but the new Scottish government decided to abolish it much to everyone's dismay. Edinburgh has a tram service to and from the airport to the city centre which has high passenger numbers. Aberdeen airport is served by a train service in the town next to it. So in short having some kind of metro system to and from an airport can work.
Helsinki airport got a rail line in 2015, but that's also services multiple existing and new developments and they build multiple reservations for new stations. The line also is basically a continuation of an existing line that was a dead end and now looks like a heart when connected to the Finnish main line. Now there's a plan to build a new high speed line to Tampere to free up the main line and the line would be going through the airport perpendicular to the commuter line. I don't know would they sell tickets for the trains to Helsinki because currently you can't by tickets on long distance trains between two stations inside the Helsinki regional transport authority (HSL) area (except stations in Järvenpää for some reason), but I can see them making a exception for the airport.
Few more details:
The trains to the airport (more like via) start and end at Helsinki, but its not a circle service as Helsinki is a terminus station and train go the same route in reverse when they leave Helsinki.
No actual long distance trains stop in any stations in Järvenpää and the trains that stop in Järvenpää are local trains (more like regional trains, but marketed same as local). The thing I was talking about was you can't buy a VR (the national train operator) ticket inside the HSL area (except of course trips to outside that area). For the actual long distance trains you must reserve a seat so you can't travel on those on a HSL ticket.
I go with the train to school, and have to change train at the Schiphol Airport station. Very pleasant underground station, and whenever I have to wait a few minutes I can just go and get something to eat upstairs. Also easy to go there by bus or even by car whenever the first train isn't going because of maintenance or something.
This seems like a simple problem to solve. Give airport employees a discounted fare. It could be handled in many different ways. This would not be rocket science. Airport employers could provide employees with transit passes as one option.
I signed up for Nebula four or five months ago, but have only actually gone on it three times. It's really a badly designed site for watching videos, and the streaming quality is awful. I constantly have to wait for videos to buffer like it's 2010 again, and there are no common player features like jumping forward/back in the video. Also, when you advertise that there's a "nebula exclusive video" but then it's only 2 minutes long, that feels pretty misleading. There's also no app for game consoles which is how I (and tens of millions of other people) watch all of my media.
I would be happy to support you guys (more than half of my YT subs are on nebula) but I definitely am not going to renew my subscription if the user experience doesn't improve.
Zurich even though the distances are quite shorter has also a diverse set of possibilities to get to the airport. At first there are suburban bus lines from the bordering communes and 2 tramlines (one which goes to the city center of Zurich and the other which is a tangential route in the north of the city) but except if you are living on those lines you won't take those options as the integrated fare system for all transit types gives you the possibility to either use the S-Bahn or various Regional and even Interregional and Intercity trains to get from pretty much every rail station in the region to the airport way quicker
Interesting video! I am actually a mid to high paid airport worker in The Netherlands who takes the train to get to the office at the airport. I would have loved to also see a more European view on this topic, maybe even with Amsterdam Schiphol as an example of an airport train done right. A lot of your arguments and comparisons simply do not apply to the case of Amsterdam. Anyway, maybe something for a Part 2 on this topic?
Agreed, Amsterdam is well connected to multiple rail services for workers and various types of travellers. While enjoying the City Beautiful videos, they are very US-centric, and Europe and the rest of the world take a different approach to public transport in project design and who they assume it is built for. A lot of focus is on transport affordability in the videos rather than looking at its timely effectiveness vs cars or public safety and frequency. Or am I wrong? +1 for looking at the European Airport Public Transport connections video.
But Schipol has bad bathrooms. Let us recognize that.
Europe does a better job of rail connections to the airport for sure. Schiphol is the gold standard, but I'd also add in Wien, Zurich, Geneva, and at least Frankfurt. Maybe Copenhagen and Paris CDG are in that list too. And that's just thinking of the direct mainline rail connections!
@@LoveStallion It varies enormously, but unfortunately I have seen some disgusting toilets. However I never actually contracted a norovirus infection there. I can't say the same about London City Airport.
Despite your name showing you're obviously a Dutchy, I think you are not Dutch enough. While our airports is indeed pretty well connected, true Dutchness would have you complain that it's still not good enough.
Schiphol really needs to be connected to the Noordzuid lijn, but that is still not good enough. The HSL only becomes a proper high speed rail line quite some kilometers south of Schiphol and the HSL takes the normal slow rail network towards Amsterdam downtown. To be truly good that connection ought to be a proper high speed connection all the way from Amsterdam CS, includinga dedicated platform at both station for the HSL alone. And I'd say that even that is not good enough. Amsterdam CS together with the airport should have true and proper high speed rail connections to Brussels/Paris, Berlin and Cologne (including their airports) before I'd say we have a decent interconnectedness.
Just a normal train or metro station in the airport is definitely the best model overall. If there's a need for express services, add express services throughout the network, they'll improve the experience.
I always see this inconvenience with Narita Airport being located far from Tokyo. For a long time, international flights were restricted to that airport instead of the much closer Haneda Airport. Paying a train ticket for this distance using either JR or Keisei taking over an hour to central Tokyo riding commuter express. Cut time reserving a fast limited express premium train ticket having the fewest stops and space for luggage. Probably around $25, twice more than just basic fare. Or otherwise, take the shuttle bus or if you want to pay over $200 for a taxicab.
San Diego is exploring expanding our light rail (trolley) to the airport. The SAN terminals are very close to our downtown and the existing light rail network. There are bus connections from the terminals to Washington Street and Santa Fe Depot stations. But it's annoying how many people complain public transit doesn't go to the airport because as you said, it's the only time they'll use public transit, and they ignore the bus exists. I take our local 992 bus that connects to SAN when I fly and it's mostly filled with airport workers, but almost every seat is almost taken! If we do connect SAN to our light rail, I hope it is just another stop rather than a destination. It could go both directions, to our downtown and to our beach communities. It should benefit airport workers and San Diegans who use public transit regularly over travelers.
Think the plan is to build light rail to the new train station at Old Town. So it'll replace the buses that stop across Pacific Highway from the Middletown trolley station. Sounds like it'll be more people-mover than a light rail extension.
I heard the airport shuttles will stop at Old Town now? I usually use the 992 because I have an easy transfer to it.
Orlando mco would be a huge rail. Most visitors go from mco to Disney. A train would take tons of traffic away from the entire city.
I agree that airport workers, potential captive riders, should always be catered to in planning airport rail links. The HART Honolulu automated metro is expected to carry many more workers than visitors to airport, especially because it won't go into Waikiki. Los Angeles LAX will soon be connected to light rail, but neither downtown nor Hollywood will be a direct ride. It will be much more efficient to use transit for airport workers, however.
Have been to Japan numerous times and having an airport rail link in my home city of Toronto - Airport transit is so helpful.
One note - fares for the Toronto express services is that it is $3 cheaper if you have an IC card called Presto.
Trains much faster that navigating our busy highways and they connect to several other transit options. Trains are just more attractive to visitors and business people heading to downtown from the airport. You make a great point about more affordable transit options for lower earning airport workers though. One of our (delayed) Light Rail projects in Toronto is expect to reach YYZ in about 10 years from now - offering a lower fare with free transfers to the Toronto transit network
Imagine instead of taking a train to the airport, you just have a train, and it takes you where you need to go and you skip the airport altogether.
The A-Line to Denver International Airport is amazing. It's so relaxing taking it to and from the airport when I travel. It's one of my favorite parts about traveling lol.
I watched this video on my way to O’Hare airport as a passenger in a car. I am a choice rider, and it takes me 15-25 minutes to drive to the airport. If I were to take Chicago’s (terrible) train system, it would take me well over an hour and a half, and I would have to switch trains and train stations downtown. I would happily take a train, if it was a more efficient option, but you’re right - I would never take a bus.
Gimpo airport has to be the clear winner, it's a transfer station for 4 lines (including the crazy ridership line 9) with another commuter rail connection on the way
Philly's SEPTA line to the airport is pretty good. It can be a bit pricy depending on where you are coming from, but it gets you to the Center City transportation hubs nice and quickly.
I used the Philly Regional Rail airport line yesterday. Fares from the 3 major Center City/30th St. Station stops range from $6.75 to $8.00. That's pricey for daily or frequent use, but otherwise reasonable, in my opinion. Senior citizens ride free! Yes, the ride-for-free senior key card applies to the airport train too. The major problem with the line is that weekend service is hourly, which is outrageous for a major airport. Weekday service is better at half-hour intervals. At the least, weekend service should be half-hour intervals.
Amsterdam Schiphol has this done almost perfect, with NS trains frequently serving riders to Downtown Amsterdam, the Hague, Rotterdam and Utrecht, and high speed Thalys service to Belgium and Paris. The only downfall there is the Amsterdam Metro doesn’t go there yet.
Manchester UK has a rail service from Downtown that is either Express or make a few stops. There is a tram as well that goes through low income areas which also goes from Downtown via a different route and is very well designed for airport workers as it runs from 3am.
In the DC area, we got around that with Washington National Airport by putting it on the Blue and Yellow Lines of the Metro, and it isn't even a terminal stop. The newer Silver Line was also extended to Dulles Airport, which is in the Virginia suburbs, very recently, and the MARC Penn Line train that runs between Union Station and Baltimore throughout the day has a connecting shuttle between its stop near BWI Airport and the terminal.
I live in Stuttgart, Germany and here the airport is just a regular stop in the metro (S-Bahn) network. Last year a tram line (U-Bahn) was extended towards the airport and in few years it will get a High Speed Rail station aswell. And since it's a regular stop you obviouly pay the regular fee, about 3€ for the 27 minutes ride from or to Stuttgart Main Station.
London Heathrow, a bit like Shanghai, has a mix of everything.
There's the fast but expensive Heathrow Express, which whisks you straight to Paddington in 15 minutes on comfortable trains (which is a long way from anywhere and one of the least convenient mainline London stations), the Underground in the form of the Piccadilly Line, which is much cheaper but stops everywhere and takes 50-60 minutes to central London, or the newly opened Crossrail Elizabeth Line, which has some stops but not as many as the Piccadilly and takes about 30-40 minutes to central London. Both the Piccadilly and Crossrail continue beyond London and out the other side, so widen the net of how many people can get a direct train.
Manchester again has both trams providing access from the local suburbs, and regional trains from as far away as Liverpool, Blackpool, the Lake District, Yorkshire, Teesside, North Wales and Scotland, which between them run about 6 fast trains every hour from the centre of Manchester.
If you have a good public transport network then integrating multiple services to the airport is an absolute no-brainer. If you don't have much of a network then it needs more careful thought to ensure that you are providing for both workers, travellers from and travellers to - the needs of a local resident flying _from_ the airport are not the same as the needs of a visitor flying _to_ the airport.
@Zaydan Alfariz Paddington the Movie is named after the books that were written in the 1950s and 1960s. In the story, he is found at Paddington Station, and so the family that adopts him calls him Paddington.
Choice Riders and Captive Riders are actually an interesting topic on itself: Captive riders due to having little in terms of alternative options can in theory be milked heavily while providing very poor overall service. So having some Choice Riders on the same line can actually be beneficial to Captive Riders as those will bring in additional revenue while also forcing a certain amount of quality on the transit company.
Public transit will only begin to endanger the car, if its performance is good enough to make drivers reconsider even though they are Choice Riders first and foremost.
NYC and NJ has a long way to go before they have painless train commute, what they have now is multiple hops which is highly inefficient and inconvenient
I live in Barcelona. The airport train currently only serves T2 as until 2009 it was the only terminal (divided into 3 A, B and C but they were all connected on the air side) , it has a regular fare with the integrated system, where it is in zone one but a single fare is not part of the integrated system so they annexed it to zone 4. The new line that will connect to T2 with a new underground station connected directly to the terminal and to T1 (at the final stages before opening) will most likely have a special higher fare for a single or a basic 8/10 rides card (the one used by infrequent users and tourists) but the same with other cards like a monthly card (which is 20€). There is also a metro line (the same as planned for the train, more for same as single and basic - same for the rest).
The regular bus and the night buses have regular fares for all cards and single.
The special express airport bus that works 24h is not part of the integrated system and has a special fare (5.90€ one way, 10.20€ return) but airport workers get special cards for the regular integrated fares that they can use on this bus.
Originally I'm from Israel and from the inauguration of the new, and main, terminal 3 a train service was offered with anew station at this terminal with services through Tel Aviv up to the north and to Jerusalem. In a few years new lines will connect to it with more services to other parts of the country so the station will be extended by a second island platform with two more tracks. All train services (and buses) have the same cost as the rest of the country (it's a small country - the size of New Jersey).
The future metro system will also connect to the airport.
As for workers at the airport - by law all workers are entitled for a refund of their daily commute to work by public transport. There is a maximum cap for each day but since the much cheaper option is a monthly pass so that's what the employer will pay for.
I actually found this extremely interesting given that I have seen this in two different places Toronto and Vancouver. Toronto goes for the expensive option where as Vancouver has there’s more joined into the network at similar to rates across the whole metro line. The biggest hurdle I would say for Vancouver and Victoria B.C is that there should be a couple of new skytrain routes connecting across the system instead of a downtown core connections, expanded routes to UBC which a university city close to with 10s of thousands of people living/working there, better connections to Surrey, an airport bus line to Victoria Airport, better faster transit options to the western communities of Sooke and Langford.
you can take the 300 line, runs every 20 mins, overnight, from downtown to the airport for $3.20.. or go to kipling and take the 900 express for $3.20
still love how they removed a heavy rail line to Sooke for a bike path and still the idiots ride bikes on the narrow winding 60kmh road at night in the rain. Real safe! and ya the bus sucks too! one per hour is not near enough.