New York LaGaurdia used to be a pit. Low ceilings, dripping water, then-Vice President Joe Biden underscored how much of a national embarassment the place was. But security was near the entrance, and gates just past security. It was easy in and out. Now it’s a beautiful facility.
There’s central security and long walks. The place is beautiful but it takes longer. And although the building is so much nicer, we don’t have another runway. The airport isn’t well-connected to public transit. And the airspace is just as connected. So, in truth, the airport is a better place to wait but the waits are the same or even longer.
Bill Maher gets it:
Someone needs to explain what’s the point of leaving a review of an airport.
Oh look, [this user] says the food court doesn’t have enough vegan options. I guess we won’t fly to see Grandma ever again.
Airports aren’t supposed to meet your needs, they are pugratores with a Panda Express.
You don’t go because they are good, you go becuase that’s where the plane is!
Matthew Klint (Live and Let’s Fly) calls Maher “profoundly wrong.” He says that’s because Singapore Changi is great, that u.s. airports are getting better – like LAX and LaGuardia – and “every one of those airports proves Bill wrong…why shouldn’t airports have vegan options in the food court?” Klint suggests grocery stores, architecture, lounges, restaurants, movie theaters and butterfly gardens are lovely in an airport!
And if you’ve given up, and think that an airport is a place that you should have to show at 2-3 hours before your flight, amenities make the stay better! Plus, if your model for how to fund large capital expenditures it to monetize passengers, high end retail is a great way to do it!
But at its most fundamental, the purpose of air travel is to get someplace quickly. The goal is to get to, through, and out of the airport as fast as possible – or at least it should be. The best airports are well-connected. There’s no long walks. Security isn’t a bottleneck (or invasive).
Aside from Tortas Frontera there’s not a single restaurant at an airport in the United States that I’d be equally happy eating at outside the airport. And I like a nice airport lounge when I have to be at the airport. But the lounge itself isn’t the point of the airport, it’s a way to mitigate the inefficiencies of the airport.
An FBO – private terminal – doesn’t usually have any of these things. Some are nice enough inside, but most are pretty spartan. And in terms of amenities the most you may get besides vending machines may be a barista bar. You don’t need to spend much time there.
Showing up at the airport 3 hours early is a waste of maybe up to $100 billion a year. It’s a systemic failure nobody is trying to fix. We’ve given up on seeing air travel as an efficient means of transportation (and it’s obviously only gotten worse over the last 25 years, post-9/11).
We’ve given up on air travel being an efficient way to travel. Instead, we focus on ways to make the ossified airport more bearable. We need to remind ourselves what the purpose of the airport actually is.
When I was in management and the usual complainers would spew their verbal diarrhea on me I would always ask for their idea on how to fix it. Where possible, I would then give them the resources and authority to attempt to fix the problem. Now I know you can’t fix much of what you are disgusted with, but I ask for solutions or examples of success instead of a litany of complaints.
That being said, I do enjoy the blog.
Berlin Tegel airport was fantastic for flyers – a donut shape, you would get off your plane and then walk a few steps straight to the curb where the taxis were waiting. Literally less than 2 minutes to the curb.
The replacement – Brandenburg Airport – has endless (quite boring) hallways, definitely many steps backwards in terms of passenger convenience.
I’m sure it’s different for a business traveler but if I’m going on vacation I’d rather start and end it stress free by getting to the airport early. What’s that extra 45 min to an hour going to do for me at home or the hotel ? If rather settle on grab a drink at lounge and relax than sprinting through the airport. There are too many variables between traffic to airport , lines at airport etc to get there for the minimum amount of time spent not flying.
I have been increasingly looking at airports as a quick in and out experience. I have other things i would rather use my time for…..not waiting at the airport or even in the lounge (especially if im traveling in a premium cabin – i get food onboard anyway).
Airports in europe just dont get this….BER is a mess now….FRA is just painful and worst airport ever…..CDG is better ish…heathrow is OK as originating (especially with first class check in) but a pain for connections……i would say ARN/HEL/CPH/OSL get it…..scandinavian simplicity….
Canada – YYZ is just as bad as FRA…..YUL marginally better. YOW is amazing….YVR is pretty decent too……
USA – SFO is amazing as its my home airport….you can get in and out very quickly. LAX is still bad until the people mover gets installed but then still adds layers of complexity. all NYC airports are miseable. IAD/DCA are zoos and long to traverse. MIA…the worst in the nation. DEN of course nothing works. ORD in fact is quite simple weirdly….as long as you know the checkpoints to go through.
I agree … airports need allow quick travel to and from….not be an IKEA maze to get revenue from the passenger. I had a friend once want to go to SFO 5 hours before a FJ flight …im like you need 90 min tops….your time to waste of course.
Gary, what you like some cheese with your whine? These new airports (especially LGA Terminals B & C, Newark Terminal A, and soon JFK Terminals 1 and 6/7) are worth it, including the ‘walk.’
@Michael Mainello — Been awhile. How’r things going? Still promoting #47 and all his policies as ‘the greatest ever’ and ‘right about everything’? Fun ‘AI’ videos lately; so Presidential!
The new LGA is wonderful. Security is very efficient (especially at terminal B). Lounges are great. Yes your walk may be a few minutes longer (some of the terminal C delta gates do feel a bit far) but the generally more efficient security may help with the extra walking time (note: would not say the same about the new EWR TA where I find security to take forever). Not exactly a lot of real estate next to LGA to build another runway and a remarkable feat of engineering that they accomplished the new LGA at all.
People who live in NY absolutely love the new LGA. As for walking, New Yorkers love to walk! Everything isn’t a car trip directly from our home to an office/store. We walk to and from the subway and offices/stores and we like it that way. Feature not a bug.
As for waiting around (or “enjoying the journey before you get to the destination”) apparently Americans really love to sit and pass the time while spending money! Who knew.
Bubby’s in Terminal C has a pretty good restaurant in Tribeca. Real star though is King David Tacos which are excellent breakfast tacos, highly recommend. (Yes I realize I am recommending breakfast tacos assembled in NY to someone who lives in TX, but King David sources its flour tortillas from TX, so…).
Yes, flying private is more efficient. Being wealthy also generally leads to more efficient experiences than the other alternative. At least the general public now has a more pleasant space to sit and pass the time…
@Garry —> Can we agree that there is a difference between a “professional” passenger (e.g.: you, other bloggers in the same vein, Tom Stuker, etc.) and the “average” flier. You like to arrive at the airport just in time. Most people like to arrive, at a minimum, early enough that they aren’t worried about missing their flight. Some people — and I confess I’m one of them — actually follow the airline’s recommendation of arriving at the airport X hours prior to departure. Sometimes that might be an hour, an hour and a half, two hours (especially airports serving major metro areas). In an area where traffic is unpredictable, where driving to the airport can take anywhere from 30 to 60 minutes, or forever if there’s a car accident on “the” bridge, “the” tunnel or other chokepoint that will really screw up the morning commute, I would much rather spend time in the lounge than in my car, stressed out, driving 5 miles an hour…
In this, I’m with Matthew and not with Maher. And AUS is a different experience than SFO, LAX, JFK, etc.
Larger airports have become glorified malls that just happened to also be a place you can take a flight. Some large airports are better than others. DFW and SFO much better than LAX or MIA. Aside from an airline club I’d take a VPS over TPA, ATL or MIA any day of the week.
@Peter — Bubby’s fluffy pancakes are indeed delicious. Line-out-the-door by 9AM on weekend mornings (at least the one in Tribeca). And after you have a stack of those, you’ll need to ‘go for a long walk.’
@Jason gets it. Matthew is right; Bill Maher is wrong (shocker), I mean, I still watch Real Time, and do enjoy New Rules, and some of the guests/panelists/bits, but doesn’t mean I agree with him, especially not on airports (he flies ‘private’ anyway, especially when we runs to Vegas after his taping for shows). If you’re ever visiting LA, you can request go to attend a taping; it’s a fun time, relatively small audience.
Question: Did they move the front doors at LGA? Did they move the gates? If the answer to both questions is “No”, then it probably takes about as long to get from one to the other as it ever did. Relocating the security line is probably not impactful to the overall journey.
Also, what exactly is the big hurry? Typically, when I get on an airplane, it’s to go someplace far away, in some cases very far away. A trip that took my great grandparents days and sometimes weeks. I frequently fly between LA and NYC, a journey that takes about 7-8 hours door to door. I have learned to relax and not strain myself to shave off a few minutes of that journey by cramming not enough clothes into too small of a bag because I don’t want to “waste time” at the luggage carousel. I get there early, settle into the lounge, and appreciate that I’m going someplace thousands of miles away in a matter of hours, and doing it fairly comfortably.
What are you advocating for here? Spending billions of dollar to shave 10 or 15 minutes from a seven-hour journey? I’d rather spend the money on making the journey more pleasant.
@LAX Tom — “What are you advocating for here? Spending billions of dollar to shave 10 or 15 minutes from a seven-hour journey?” Sure seems like Gary’s pitching that here. Talk about ‘waste, (fraud, and abuse.)’ It really is an odd flex to go from having old, inefficient airports, to having new ones, but still, nothing ever good enough for some folks, Gary included.
Low ceilings saves energy. Grand airports have bigger heating and AC bills. The old LGA was sort of ok, in my opinion.
@1990 you are boring. No one cares what you think.
@Johhny — That was weak. You can do better. Feed me more. Spicier!
Why not both?
Beautiful airports with great food, but also efficient security and connections, connected to the citie’s transit network directly (none of the air train/ shuttle bullshit) and to the road system.
@IsaacM — If possible, yes, absolutely both. I think SFO actually does a decent job, with the highway nearby and the BART connection. I suppose ORD does too with the connection on the Blue Line.
However, not all cities were built in the age of airplanes, or motor vehicles, so they’ve had to adapt. And others simply have no meaningful mass-transit (most red states, like, what’r you to do at Houston or Dallas but drive)… then there’s Los Angeles, which really should have better mass transit, and I suppose they’re trying with that APM project at the airport (much delayed.)
NYC area airports really need better connectivity; JFK is best with its AirTrain; LGA Q70 bus is it for now (wish they’d extended the AirTrain); EWR, there’s a bus, and plans to extend AirTrain to Newark’s Penn Station (PATH, NJ transit, Amtrak, etc.)
Maher ir right and he’s funny about it too. No one cares what MK or the gas bag think,
Sorry Gary, but I disagree on the math. Cost allocations are tough things. And, I contend you can’t assume that the (say) 30 minutes Pat arrives “earlier than necessary” is 1) time Pat does not actually use productively or 2) time Pat would have used productively if it didn’t occur. Simply, arriving earlier doesn’t mean the time is lost, and arriving later doesn’t mean the saved time isn’t lost. This is particularly true with the technology we have today vs. when I did my peak business flying in the 90s.
@1990 I’ve lived in both Chicago and SF and loved the connectivity.
And yeah I was looking at the NYC airports when I said that. They shouldn’t be making hurdles for using transit to the airport in otherwise a great transit city.
I lived in New York suburbs for a bit and found it really hard to get to the airports, I didn’t have the money to take a taxi at the time.
“Airports have mistaken comfort for purpose.”
Airports have purpose but a lot of the shopping places do not. There is a limit on included at no extra cost luggage and adding extra luggage costs a lot or is not allowed so where do all of the purchases go? As for comfort, there is not a lot of that in airports unless you buy it by spending a lot on a credit card so you can get into a lounge. Unfortunately the purpose of airports has been degraded a lot by the shopping mall experience. But, money talks so many of the users get screwed so some can profit. I would prefer airports with efficient services, only a few food places and nothing else.
There have been times I have chosen different flights to avoid some connections airports. If I can avoid New Yorks terminals I will. Im not a business flyer, so I do have more flexibility. Also a comfortable airport can reduce stress and anxiety. Many airports need to be better streamlined.
This is for isaac’s post
This was their moto for many years.
“Copenhagen Airport.The first airport built for people”
@cairns — Both sides seem to enjoy and loathe Bill Maher at names, probably because he’s willing to critique everyone (as any decent satirist should). You’ve been fairly right-wing on here, so, perhaps, you enjoy when he’s giving such harsh ‘feedback’ to ‘the left’ (yeah, he’s no fan of ‘wokeness,’ that’s for sure, and he does support Israel with few exceptions.) Yet, I wonder whether you’d still like Bill when he’s reminding your side of their shortcomings; like, I’d imagine, you might not take it as well; for instance, Bill’s stances on religion (he’s not a fan, see his documentary Religulous, 2008), on #47 (sure, he met with him recently, but he’s still not a fan of his regime or its policies, frequently referring to him as an authoritarian), and on #47’s supporters, such as yourself, referring to you having Trump Devotion Syndrome (a different ‘TDS’ it seems, a kin to that of the North Koreans for their Dear Leader.) Anyway, interesting observations, no?
@IsaacM — Yes, living in NYC (including its suburbs) is not cheap. And we (who live here) certainly do pay our fair share in local, state, and federal taxes. That said, NYC does have a better mass transit system compared to most other places in the country. And its good value for riders, even though the MTA is raising the fee to $3/ride in January 2026 (from $2.90 since 2023, and $2.75 before it since 2015). Compared to systems that charge for distance (see Tokyo), I’d say, the NYC Subway is still one of the best; like, to get from Far Rockaway Queens on the A Train all the way to 207th Street in the Bronx (40 stations, +30 miles, just $3.)
@1990 I’m thrilled that you mentioned Far Rockaway.
For a brief time I was working at a construction site in Far Rockaway while living in Rockland County. I recall one time when we were rushing to complete a job and I was on the train to Manhattan and in turn get on the Pascack Valley train to Nanuet.
It’s well connected. Except to the airport, I would rather have a subway station right at the airport like Chicago airports.
@IsaacM — Ahh, yes. I’d say, one is not a ‘real’ New Yorker if you’ve never ridden the Subway, and if you have taken it to JFK, then you really should know the difference between the ‘Far Rockaway’ and the ‘Lefferts’ trains, because if you take the wrong ‘A train,’ you won’t make it to Howard Beach (for the connection to the JFK AirTrain). Also, if you miss ‘Howard Beach,’ then you get the scenic view of ‘Jamaica Bay’ from the train, ending up at Rockaway Beach (and if you ‘fall asleep’ you may be on that A to the southeastern most end… alas, then you’ve made it to Far Rockaway!) That place feels like parts of the Florida coastline more-so than NYC (buncha old apartments). While it is ‘good’ that the subway connects those communities, I’d want a car if I lived anywhere on Long Island or in New Jersey. Manhattan, Brooklyn, is really the exception where you can do without.
@LAX Tom–I agree with your assessment and would like to expand on it a bit.
It seems to me that it’s fair not to like having to get to the airport too early, wait in long lines, walk too far, etc., if you are taking a relatively short flight. So, in Gary’s case, if I were flying intra-Texas, his arguments might apply. Ditto for some very short flights on the east coast, flying intra-California, or intra-PNW (YVR, SEA, PDX), etc. In those cases, the billions spent on airports would be better spent on true high-speed rail corridors. That would be better for the environment and save time.
However, I almost never take truly short flights. More often than not, I am flying coast-to-coast, TATL, or TPAC. The time to get through the airport is largely fixed, so as the flight length increases, it becomes a much smaller percentage of total travel time. My shortest flight in recent memory was SEA-SMF, but driving would have taken 12 hours each way, so it’s not really short. In these cases, I would much rather get to the airport early than have to rush to catch a flight. I used to have a boss who said, “if you’ve never missed a flight, you’re getting to the airport too early.” That worked for him but it would never work for me.
@Isaac–I arrive at the airport early sometimes because I want to indulge at the airport lounge, even if I am booked in the front of the bus. As much as anything else, that has to do with the probability of flight delays/cancellations. Yes, I can get food onboard the flight, but when? I think of airport lounge food as a “hedge fund” asset. When I am not in the front of the bus (which is most of the time these days), a good lounge (e.g., Delta, Amex) tends to have good food for no additional expense, as compared with airplane food that is hit or miss (both in terms of expense and availability) and pricey for what you get.
Finally, as is the case with most things, beauty (or airport efficiency) is in the eye of the beholder. In the early 1970s, when DFW opened, it was extremely efficient for local residents. One could essentially drive up to the gate and go through security at that gate. No huge waits and very short walks, as long as you knew your flight’s gate–and assuming it didn’t change. That system didn’t last long, though, largely because it was a horrible setup for connecting passengers. The linear layout of the gates made for horribly long walks between gates and having to go through security at each gate just didn’t work. Personally, I am happy to see improved amenities at airports but would also like to see more high-speed rail corridors going forward.
@1990 – EWR also had the Newark Airport Rail Terminal (Amtrak, NJ Transit), on the AirTrauin from the terminals.
100% agreed.
I like Gary and I like Matthew. Both can be pompous *es at times but I am siding with Gary this time.
Airports don’t have to be nice. They have to be efficient, well-connected (both airside and landside), fast, and comfortable…..in that order.
If you start making your airport nice for folks stranded overnight because you can’t keep you * together to NOT strand them in the first place, I am going to avoid you. You can shove your dancing fountain where the sun don’t shine.