LHCVG

I'm curious about that too: the wording keeps tripping me up, but what I come up with is:

1) This Tier 2 East project; fairly self-explanatory
2) The fat connector between the A/B/IAB Concourse and the Terminal, the Low-A Gates Extension, the little Z-Gate spur depicted in teal, the teardown/rebuild of C/D West of the T2E Concourse, and small teal portion of the E Concourse inline with the Tower
3) To my reading, the dark blue sections jutting out from the teal part of E are the next phase of the project once fully fleshed-out

Slightly different interpretation of the colors, but to me that correlates best with their wording, and the implication that A/B and the Terminal aren't going to factor much into this project, aside from connectivity. It also makes sense that the full E build-out would be a subsequent phase (setting aside whether it makes more sense to do it all in one fell swoop financially speaking).

Section 107

Although they have a contract out to renovate the mobile lounges and planemates, they have been desperate for many years to get away from them. Now we know how they will actually make it happen. I do wonder what the contingency plan is for getting to/from Main Term and Tier 3 when the train decides to go on strike...I hope it is not just walking - that is one heckuva walk.

drewguy

I think it's grey - existing; teal - next phase of construction (C/D replacement, new E - "Tier 2" ); blue - second phase (additional E (or F) - "Tier 3")

drewguy

Apologies if this was posted, but from a similar thread in United forum: https://aeroxplorer.com/articles/dul...ted-growth.php

Lays out the alternatives in consideration a bit more. I'm a bit surprised they don't align more closely with the original plans of continued parallel concourses (C/D, E/F, G/H) and instead have various mid-field crossings and so forth.

zig666

Extensive Article in the WaPo today with a bunch of different pictures compared to the update a month ago:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/trans...wpisrc=nl_buzz

Section 107

a recent Washington Psst LTTE opines that the name of IAD should be changed Opinion | Washington’s international airport needs one more new thing: A name - The Washington Post because John Dulles had too negative an influence for the country.

What are the forum's thoughts on a name change? should it happen with the redesign?

amanuensis

I have never liked Dulles because it sounds too much like Dallas. I only gave possible alternatives a minute of thought, but "Washington NOVA" sounds good to me.

futuramadramallama

While these are all mere renderings, I'm a bit intrigued by some of them. For the 14-gate proposal, this is the first time I've seen "staggered-depth" stands where aircraft alternate being further and nearer from the terminal, and jetbridges are correspondingly longer or shorter. It's an interesting design. IIRC, it's usually the case aircraft are at uniform "depth" whether it's a remote stand or at a terminal. (I see no reason why it can't be staggered-depth, it's just a trivial-but-interesting bit.)

As for the three different masterplan renders, what WaPo described as the "H concept," the "Heaven/Vision concept," and the "Tier concept," I think the H is a bit odd. The Heaven/Vision matches one of the modern airport style trends and might have tons of room for concessions and lounges and interior space. The Tier idea seems the most practical and gives aircraft the most room to maneuver; the other two create alleys which in practice, seem to delay ground movements quite a bit.

I do doubt Dulles will ever needs this much capacity though, lol.

Section 107

A 5th runway has been in the master plan for IAD since at least 2005. DCA could fit more flights during the 11pm - 7am overnight hours (of course, that is only IF the planes meet the night-time noise abatement restrictions). But since no-one will fly those overnight times from DCA, and DCA has, or is very close to having hit max operations capacity during the 7am-11pm hours, So the result should be minimal growth at DCA while continuing steady growth of int'l and domestic/short-haul traffic at IAD, eventually possibly maybe justifying or necessitating a fifth runway. Getting to enough operations to need the 5th runway is decades out. But the expected steady growth at IAD does probably justify expanding the terminals now. And it is cheaper to build it now than later. Having said all of that, I believe it is more possible than not that massive development of V-STOL technology will make very long runways not so necessary....

futuramadramallama

That's fair. And since we're discussing capacity, I think what Dulles may have is an appeal issue, not a capacity issue. I was surprised to learn that DCA and IAD enplane about the same number of passengers per year, despite IAD on average accommodating much larger planes.

Excepting those already in the right area, I can count on one hand the number of people I know who "don't mind" going out to IAD (others may know more). The construction of the Silver Line surely helped, but it's still comparatively far to get out there. For the time being, it remains fodder for cocktail-party small talk that quite a lot of WAS residents aren't willing to go as far as IAD in the cases when DCA is a comparable (or even more expensive) option.

djp98374

SUX is already taken…..

VAX…that should work well

Section 107

That made me remember the Pontiac 6000 from Robocop 6000 SUX | RoboCop Wiki | Fandom
VAX is good, and just like with the name for National, folks can refuse to use it or not.

SandBoxJohn

Adam Tuss
NBC4 Washington
YouTube

amanuensis

I wonder how much the airport authority paid for the Lego model -- and did the builder get at least enough to cover the cost of materials and his time? My guess is yes on the materials, no on his time.