Originally Posted by
drewguy
Easier to do if/when building new at C/D, but the flow would be like it is now except that when you get off plane into segregated corridor you would walk to train where there's a segregated station (connecting pax would go to midfield customs). Trains stopping there would stop only at arrivals hall but would otherwise use the same tracks/tunnel.
As it is right now, you walk to the end of the C concourse (near C1) to get onto moonbuggy. You would just have people walk in the other direction (towards train). Retrofitting A/B would be harder because they didn't design around this plan, but concept would be the same. They might have to expand the station underground to create a separate platform, but you'd only need one side because flow is only one direction. (And maybe there's even room to use one end of one existing platform for this at B.
That all said, might be easier to install some of those international-style jet bridges where you walk up or down depending on whether you're international/domestic/Schengen and have arriving int'l pax exit jet bridge and go down an escalator to ramp level and get on Cobuses to the IAB, which could be reconfigured for a ground level entrance. At least then the moonbuggies can be retired.
It's certainly doable with a new Concourse C as the INTL arrival gates for UA can be clustered near the existing/remote AeroTrain station. It would be little different than the current C with the walkway to the CBP moonbuggy station. It's entirely different for Concourse A/B. There, you have all of A and at least half of B that will need a sealed walkway to a dedicated AeroTrain platform. That's probably three to four times as extensive as what's in place for the current C INTL arrivals to the point that it might just be too far for passengers to walk just to get to a train station. In fact, some will be walking much further than those going to the existing remote C station.