Newark Airport Air Train to be replaced

This according to northjersey.com
http://www.northjersey.com/news/newark- ... -1.1473289" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Very interesting. I'm wondering if it wouldn't make sense to rebuild the system as two independent systems:

1 - Post-security, primarily to link terminals

2 - Pre-security, primarily to link parking lots and other mass transit options

The post security link would allow for greater operational flexibility for airlines, since you could make gate changes inter-terminals without forcing passengers to go through security again. It also allows folks making connections ease of access between terminals. It ALSO allows me to go to Starbucks in Terminal C, and not have to drink the nasty coffee in terminal A, while I wait for the flight after making it through security quicker than normal.

You wouldn't need two completely independent systems, you could have the stations separated with a partition that keeps the pre- and post-security portions separate. The Skytrain at MIA operates very similarly. Half of the system is to allow for passengers inside security to move from one end of the large terminal to the other end. The other part of the system picks up incoming international travelers and takes them directly to customs. All passengers are riding the same train, but are forced into their respective cars based on if they are in the international or gate section of the station.

While it's neat to read about how the airport's construction was designed with the AirTrain in mind 30 years before it became reality, it's a shame to know that its overall failure was due to cutting corners (or not, since they decided to not accommodate larger trains? ) and taking the cheap route. Hopefully the replacement would be an AirTrain 2.0 that is better designed and future-proofed for growth. From my experience, airports with non-road methods of transportation are much easier to navigate than airports where a bus is needed to reach the terminals. Even the AirTrain at EWR, despite its many problems, makes it very easy to get around if you're traveling off-peak in good weather when the train is functioning.

When the eventual replacement time comes, it will be interesting to see how it affects the rail station. If airport transportation were to revert to buses (*shudders*), I guess some new kind of connection would be put in. If AirTrain 2.0 becomes reality, unfortunately they would likely need to shut down the station again like while the AirTrain was closed a year or two ago.

The system is not going to last past 2020 so they have to do something ASAP.

The Port Authority wants to extend the PATH to the airport station on the NEC; maybe they'll extend it right into the airport terminals, and actually have a one seat ride.

At first I thought about PATH, but that carries with it operational inflexibilities of the rest of the PATH system. It would be much better if the airport transit system just connected to PATH, rather than if PATH replaced it.

Notches too tight

When architects for the Port Authority dreamed up a new airport for Newark in the late 1960s, they drew three terminal buildings on the edge of an oval parking lot. The plans included wide gaps between the buildings, to be knitted together someday by a mass transit system.
....
Newark didn’t have enough passengers to require a people mover, so the planners tried to think ahead. Since they didn’t know which system would eventually work, they placed a notch in the ceilings of the terminal buildings, just behind the check-in desks. That way, when a train eventually was needed, the Port Authority would have an easy place to build it.
....
But there was a problem. Over the ensuing two decades, train systems for airports had grown more complex — and fatter — said Lawrence Fabian, a city planner who specializes in airport people movers.

The notch, perfectly sized in the early 1970s, now seemed very small.
...
Multiple companies bid on the project, Lawrence said, but most offered trains too big for the notch. Only one had a system that fit: Von Roll Transport’s monorail, which originally was developed for small amusement parks and shopping centers in the Southern Hemisphere.
...
“If you decided that you wanted something larger, you would have had to spend money to demolish the terminal by the notch and then rebuild it,” Lawrence said. “So that was a factor. It was an important factor.”

At many airports I have been to (DEN, SFO, DFW, PHX, ATL) they use Bombardier's Innovia APM to move the crowds. These cars have plenty of room with large doors, quite a contrast to the small, multi-compartment articulated monorail that EWR has. They are all located inside security (and the one at DEN is completely underground).

I guess it will come down to what will be more efficient to maintain. Weight will be a considerable factor. I also believe upgrading the monorail to something like the Bombardier cars will be much more efficient than building heavy 3rd rail with PATH cars.

In addition, building a people mover system inside security would provide seamless connections for the passengers and would not require as extensive of a train network outside the terminals. Those can be filled in by buses, which several airports have in place. But in such a case, the terminals may have to undergo major changes in their layouts for efficiency. Pick your poison.

The one at ATL is also completely underground

jackintosh11 wrote:The one at ATL is also completely underground

You are right. I meant to single out DEN since that seems to be in the only "non-weather neutral" location. It is currently 16 degrees there with the last of the snow falling tonight with about 7 inches on the ground, from the reports. I am not sure if Bombardier's cars have been tested under these conditions, albeit they still seem like they would be more robust than what AirTrain has now.

But despite all those problems, the Port Authority decided AirTrain Newark was worthy of an expansion. A four-mile extension to the Northeast Corridor, where passengers could connect with NJ Transit trains, opened in 2001 at a cost of $415 million.

The whole system isn't even 4 miles. Maybe the author mistakenly googlemaped Newark Penn, where a better monorail should have gone 20 years ago.

Now that's a great idea. It's probably cheaper and less intrusive per mile to build than PATH, and it would give direct transfers from NJT, light rail, Amtrak, and PATH all at Newark Penn.

Don't get me started on that PATH extension. IMHO it is the result of NJ/NY politics as usual (and how different favors can get handed out and pockets lined), and not the result of a careful best bang for the buck analysis. JS

pumpers wrote:Don't get me started on that PATH extension. IMHO it is the result of NJ/NY politics as usual (and how different favors can get handed out and pockets lined), and not the result of a careful best bang for the buck analysis. JS

Hey come on, why have a consolidated Newark Penn Station with PATH, EWR Monorail, NJT, Amtrak, Light Rail, and Bus all under one roof, when you can build a massive, hard on the eyes, train traffic slowing, new station in the middle of a brownfield with no connection to the outside world. FML.

Because NJT has made their sevices so perfect and there's no way they could make it better so they have leftover money to spend on a new station

Hawaiitiki wrote: Hey come on, why have a consolidated Newark Penn Station with PATH, EWR Monorail, NJT, Amtrak, Light Rail, and Bus all under one roof, when you can build a massive, hard on the eyes, train traffic slowing, new station in the middle of a brownfield with no connection to the outside world. FML.

A bold, inspired solution: move Newark Airport to downtown Newark, on top of Penn Station. They could use the Passaic River for a seaplane base like Laguardia. The operator at Dock could double as an air traffic controller.