Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > American Airlines | AAdvantage
Reload this Page >

DFW - New Terminal F announced, C renovation to occur (~2020-2025)

DFW - New Terminal F announced, C renovation to occur (~2020-2025)

    Hide Wikipost
Old May 20, 19, 5:23 am   -   Wikipost
Please read: This is a community-maintained wiki post containing the most important information from this thread. You may edit the Wiki once you have been on FT for 90 days and have made 90 posts.
 
Last edit by: JDiver
Wiki Link
DFW Airport and American Airlines Announce Plans for Sixth Terminal
American Airlines Newsroom, Monday, May 20, 2019, 12:30 PM - link
Download PDF (English) PDF Format (opens in new window)

American Airlines, DFW Airport strike deal to build new $3 billion terminal
Mitchell Schnurman, Dallas News, 20 May 2019 - link

DFW and AA have agreed to build a completely new Terminal F, with 24 gates, at the southwest terminals area as depicted below. Terminal F, currently a parking lot, is estimated to cost $3 billion and is hoped to open in 2025. SkyLynk already is routed in such a way it will not require modifications other than the usual two SkyLink terminals built into the terminal.

DFW also agreed to spend ~$500 million to renovate the existing Terminal C. Terminal C, built in 1974, is the only unrefurbished terminal of the original terminals built.

Bonds will be issued to fund the projects, which will be paid off by airline landing and other fees, rents and passenger facility charges levied on passengers. As American accounts for ~86% of DFW passenger traffic, much of the income will be through AA.

According the DFW airport, DFW generated about $1.3 billion in profit for American in 2017, over 30 percent of Americanís total 2017 operating income. Approximately 40% of passengers are originating or terminating their travel at DFW; ~60% are connecting.

ďA 2015 economic impact study indicates DFW Airport contributes more than $37 billion to the Dallas-Fort Worth economy, with nearly 60,000 jobs at the Airport and more than 228,000 jobs created across the region. In 2018, DFW Airport awarded more than $150 million in contracts to small, women- and minority-owned businesses, and concessions agreements generated more than $155 million in revenues for disadvantaged businesses. (AA)
Print Wikipost

Reply

Old May 20, 19, 8:31 pm
  #16  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Programs: AA
Posts: 16
2025? Plllease!

One call to China AIrport Construction Company and flights begin 2022 latest. The Admirals Club could add another 18 months but call CAAC and get that bit done in two months, three max. Full-color Mao mural gratis.
JuanTT is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 19, 9:09 am
  #17  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: DFW
Programs: AA EXP, LT Gold
Posts: 2,844
Terminal D took 5 years (appx) to build, so I think the 5-6 year estimate here is very realistic.

I'm guessing they will have to tear down the current Skylink elevated track in order to build the terminal? But maybe with the F terminal only being 24 gates, they are accounting for building inside / around that. I'm sure that would make the construction process go a little slower.

Terminal D has 27 gates, so 24 on the new terminal seems realistic... especially if it's all widebody.

I do think it's very possible that there's no customs / immigration at the new terminal and instead is just a people mover over to D. Then again, with AA's expansion into Central America lately out of DFW, I'm guessing they would like another CBP location at KDFW.
econometrics is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 19, 9:11 am
  #18  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Programs: AA
Posts: 9,596
Originally Posted by econometrics View Post
I'm guessing they will have to tear down the current Skylink elevated track in order to build the terminal? But maybe with the F terminal only being 24 gates, they are accounting for building inside / around that. I'm sure that would make the construction process go a little slower.
When the Skylink was built, it was specifically designed to accommodate a future F terminal.
wrp96 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 19, 9:19 am
  #19  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: DFW
Programs: AA EXP, LT Gold
Posts: 2,844
Originally Posted by wrp96 View Post
When the Skylink was built, it was specifically designed to accommodate a future F terminal.
I realize that was the intent... but that was nearly 20 years ago. If you look at the overhead pics today, the F terminal would have to be nearly a footprint copy of D in order to do that.

Building a terminal around an elevated train track should be fun for the engineers and construction crews.
wrp96 and BWISkyGuy like this.
econometrics is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 19, 9:23 am
  #20  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Programs: AA
Posts: 9,596
Originally Posted by econometrics View Post
I realize that was the intent... but that was nearly 20 years ago. If you look at the overhead pics today, the F terminal would have to be nearly a footprint copy of D in order to do that.

Building a terminal around an elevated train track should be fun for the engineers and construction crews.
True dat!
wrp96 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 19, 10:39 am
  #21  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Programs: AAdvantage
Posts: 97
It'll be interesting for sure to see what they do with the Skylink, but if they do tear down the track that's already in the future "F" spot, it would seem like such a waste. Imagine the money and riding time that could have been saved from Skylink going straight to D/E instead of an unnecessary journey around the Express South parking lot.

In addition, if they do rebuild the tracks at F, they'd have to at least build something temporary in the meantime as there is no way they're going to shut down the Skylink for 5 years. So while I'm also not sure how they build a terminal around the existing tracks, I would think that would be the smartest thing.
arc727 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 19, 11:32 am
  #22  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 637
I'm assuming the SKY LINK stays as is. You only need a few Terminal Touches on it to connect. Any shape can be built around and under it. Without Parking and IFS it will essentially be like a extension of D with a moving sidewalk I assume to connect. The closest gates would be used for International and segregated from the others, for domestic. I would also assume the domestic O&D flights would retrieve luggage in F and than go curbside for pick up or a bus to rental cars, parking and other terminals.
AggieNzona is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 19, 12:03 pm
  #23  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Dallas, TX, AA 3MM EXP, WN
Posts: 1,800
Why not just take the Term D plans and rebuild using same plans. That should cut a couple years off
MrMan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 19, 12:34 pm
  #24  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Plano, TX, USA
Programs: AA: EXP, 4MM; HH: Lifetime Diamond; SPG/MAR Life Plat Prem Hertz: Prez Circle
Posts: 470
Pretty certain when they replaced the old TrAAin with Skylink they explicitly said they laid it out to support an eventual Terminal F.

As for the plans, reading both the S-T and Morning News coverage, it appears they are thinking of these much more in terms of the needs of a connecting customer instead of O/D and trying to take into account changes in security, planes, technology, local transportation - in other words a design for today, instead of a design for 2005. I would definitely rather see this take a year longer and have a design that isn't stale as soon as it opens.
stewlevine is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 19, 3:23 pm
  #25  
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Stilllwater OK
Programs: AAdvantage Plat Pro, World of Hyatt Globalist, Marriot "member"
Posts: 819
I can't see how in that site it makes much sense to do anything that is substantially different than D. There isn't enough room really to put gates on two sides of a terminal there, especially if we are talking about widebody gates. If you laid a two sided terminal N-S, you would need clearance under the skylink and clearance widthwise between skylink support columns which is maybe doable structurally but not ideal (is there a security risk?). If you build a NS terminal toward the E side, and build stingers towards the W, you don't have enough length for more than a few gates on either side and it would be a squeeze to put in two stingers.

As for the convenience of two sided terminals, I think it is highly overrated for a few reasons. First, I don't think it substantially reduces walking distances. Putting gates on the outside of a C allows for a denser configuration of gates per length of walking in the terminal than a straight line anyways. Even at D (and E satellite), each corner comfortably hosts three stands adding some density as well. Also, most connecting traffic is changing terminals anyways and the biggest reduction in walking distance has to do with average distance from the gate to the inner terminal train system. At DFW, you are usually a few gates from a Skylink. At a place like DEN or ATL, you are often farther than that. Secondly, two sided terminals don't accommodate concessions and bathrooms as comfortably. DFW has space on the inside of the curve to put concessions and bathrooms near every gate without feeling cramped!

My bet is that the airport and AA wants a competitive design process to make sure they've vetted their options, but will go with a D type of design, which, to remind you, is widely acclaimed. I bet they build a N half first and then a S half as (and if) needed later (though, maybe all at once). My bet it that they connect F via a connection building to D with two levels, the upper being for international arrivals to funnel towards D to avoid a new international arrivals being buildt. (like what exists between B and D now). On the inside edge of the of terminal, now, I wouldn't be surprised there to see bigger differences for better ticketing and security areas and maybe a new hotel, conference, or office building type of a space....

Last edited by MarkOK; May 23, 19 at 7:30 am
MarkOK is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 19, 5:13 pm
  #26  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Wanting First. Buying First.
Programs: Lifetime Executive Diamond Platinum VIP with Braniff, Eastern, Midway, National & Pan Am
Posts: 4,973
Originally Posted by AlwaysAisle View Post
Also mentioned that Terminal F gates will be international gates but CIQ facility will remain at Terminal D which will be a lot of distance from Terminal F.
As one of The Ticket's favorite drops goes: "This is a [****]ing disaster."
econometrics and bscooter26 like this.
Herb687 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 19, 8:05 pm
  #27  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: DFW
Programs: AA EXP, LT Gold
Posts: 2,844
Originally Posted by Herb687 View Post
As one of The Ticket's favorite drops goes: "This is a [****]ing disaster."
Always nice to see a P1 pop in on FT. 💪🏼
econometrics is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 19, 11:02 am
  #28  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Texas
Programs: Hyatt Explorist ex-Diamond; Marriott Platinum Life; Hilton, AA, United ex-status
Posts: 1,970
It'll be interesting for sure to see what they do with the Skylink, but if they do tear down the track that's already in the future "F" spot, it would seem like such a waste. Imagine the money and riding time that could have been saved from Skylink going straight to D/E instead of an unnecessary journey around the Express South parking lot.

In addition, if they do rebuild the tracks at F, they'd have to at least build something temporary in the meantime as there is no way they're going to shut down the Skylink for 5 years. So while I'm also not sure how they build a terminal around the existing tracks, I would think that would be the smartest thing.
It didn't really make any real financial sense to tear down the old parking garages just to replace them with bigger better ones. But they did. They are bigger. They are arguably better (except for getting into and out of, but I digress). Not to mention tearing down an entire hotel just to move it over a few feet. How many millions did that cost? But it is bigger and better.
jayer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 19, 12:57 pm
  #29  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: PHL
Programs: AA EXP / HH Diamond
Posts: 542
IF the Skylink path needs to be modified, the worst-case scenario in my mind is "breaking the loop" during the necessary phases of construction. In other words, D and E become defacto terminal stations. Getting from E to D would require "the long way" via C, A, and B. D to E would be the same in reverse. Not ideal, but likely better than an airside shuttle, and certainly better than a landside shuttle requiring another trip through TSA. And it will still be better than the groundbreaking, oft-broken, unidirectional trAAin...
JDiver likes this.
Flyer78 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 19, 11:14 pm
  #30  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Programs: an inch longer than you. Seriously, this is BS just for bragging.
Posts: 1,119
Originally Posted by jayer View Post
It didn't really make any real financial sense to tear down the old parking garages just to replace them with bigger better ones. But they did. They are bigger. They are arguably better (except for getting into and out of, but I digress). Not to mention tearing down an entire hotel just to move it over a few feet. How many millions did that cost? But it is bigger and better.
If the Grand Hyatt at DFW seems to you like the old Hyatt torn down and "moved over a few feet", you need to get out to more hotels! It's on a completely different scale, brand position, facilities, and about 30 years more modern amenities.
As far as tearing down and rebuilding garages, more garage space means more income for the airport, which is the biggest moneymaker for any airport. Makes complete financial sense once you stop and see the numbers.
BWISkyGuy likes this.
LovePrunes is online now  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread