![]() |
Originally Posted by biggestbopper
(Post 14487713)
Oakland Airport is actually closer to downtown SF than is SFO.
Certainly a whole lot closer than SJC. Furthermore if you are renting a car you have to pay the toll to cross the bay bridge. SFO is much closer to San Francisco than most other city airports in the United States. Whilst one is correct that SFO is not within the SF City limits its probably the most convenient city airport in the US. As for rental cars its also more convenient with the rental car center and if one has loyalty is quick and painless. The problem is usually the long queue with all the leisure travellers. SJC has recently moved most of their rental cars into a rental car center off site. |
Originally Posted by KathyWdrf
(Post 14494916)
And the driving distance (via I-880 & I-80/Bay Bridge) from OAK to downtown SF is ~21 miles.
... All this info is readily available from online (and/or paper) maps.... And all this info is now readily available from FT (which is online :p ) |
Originally Posted by Eastbay1K
(Post 14496352)
Yes, but a bird flying northeast from OAK could get to the SF Downtown faster than flying from SFO.
And all this info is now readily available from FT (which is online :p ) |
Originally Posted by Silver Fox
(Post 14497571)
Why would a bird need an airport? Couldn't it fly itself? :D
|
Being a SF resident, my choices are:
1) SFO 2) OAK (far behind SFO) 3) SJC (far behind OAK) I rate OAK far below SFO regardless of whether taking BART or car. By BART, you have to take the bus connector from the airport to the station. :td: By car, you are subject to Bay Bridge traffic. :td: SJC is just too far. From SFO, I don't advise taking BART either, unless you are alone and on a tight budget. By car or taxi, on the other hand, the drive from SFO is usually easy. (North of the 101/280 interchange, choose 280 at certain times to avoid 101 traffic.) Of course, as others have noted, SFO is subject to weather-related delays much more so than OAK or SJC. |
Originally Posted by biggestbopper
(Post 14487713)
Oakland Airport is actually closer to downtown SF than is SFO....
But in our universe, SFO is about 8 miles closer to downtown SF by car than is OAK, as I posted above. (And, there's no bridge to cross, either! ;)) |
Rezzing this from the grave.
I'm doing a small segment run san-phx-sjc/sfo and then back. Same price for either SJC or SFO, with about 3 hours at either SFO or SJC. Any recommendations for this? Slightly bigger plane into sfo (321 vs 319). Any suggestions? I probably won't leave the terminal. SFO might be better for planespotting, but I'll be there again in a couple weeks (I've never been there). My only reason to goto SJC would be to cross off another airport from my list. Good enough reason, or no? |
Not an answer to BThumme's question, though there may be some informational value. With the long-term shut down of SFO runway capacity, is anyone else shifting to SJC?
|
Originally Posted by 365RoadWarrior
(Post 22859782)
Not an answer to BThumme's question, though there may be some informational value. With the long-term shut down of SFO runway capacity, is anyone else shifting to SJC?
Are you claiming that SFO is "nowhere near SF?" |
Originally Posted by BThumme
(Post 22859694)
My only reason to go to SJC would be to cross off another airport from my list. Good enough reason, or no?
PS -- SJ is one of the world's great cities. It is right up there with Barstow, Baker, Bakersfield, Carson City, Laughlin, et al. It is the cultural, economic, and spiritual center of the known universe. But I wouldn't put the airport on my bucket list. |
Originally Posted by mike_la_jolla
(Post 22860003)
OMG! THAT is not a good reason to go to SJC. Actually, merely thinking about this makes me a little ill. For planespotting, SFO would be better but you have a near certain chance of flight delays with SFO.
PS -- SJ is one of the world's great cities. It is right up there with Barstow, Baker, Bakersfield, Carson City, Laughlin, et al. It is the cultural, economic, and spiritual center of the known universe. But I wouldn't put the airport on my bucket list. |
I vote for SFO. You could spend a quality 90 minutes just bumming around the landside part of the International Terminal.
|
Originally Posted by BThumme
(Post 22859694)
I'm doing a small segment run san-phx-sjc/sfo and then back.
Same price for either SJC or SFO, with about 3 hours at either SFO or SJC. Any recommendations for this? Slightly bigger plane into sfo (321 vs 319). Any suggestions? I probably won't leave the terminal. SFO might be better for planespotting, but I'll be there again in a couple weeks (I've never been there). My only reason to goto SJC would be to cross off another airport from my list. Good enough reason, or no? |
Originally Posted by darthbimmer
(Post 22866637)
If you're not planning to leave the terminal-- and with a 3 hour connection you'd be rushing to try-- the city and its environs don't matter. SJC is a nice airport now with its renovation complete. Flying US into SFO you'll be in the worst part of that airport. On that basis I would pick SJC over SFO. Add in the greater chance of delays at SFO and SJC becomes a stronger pick. The fact that SJC lets you tick one more box on your list is the final kicker.
|
As a frequent SJC traveller (today marked 13 weeks in a row flying out of that airport) from Phoenix you'll be coming in via US Air, which is in terminal A. Terminal B is the renovated terminal for Alaska and Southwest, but it's connected together about where the ANA 787 comes in. It's a nice terminal don't get me wrong, but I would not suggest this airport as a layover airport. There's not Admirals Club, no US Air club, just a Club at SJC, which is $35 for a day pass right across from Volaris gates.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 2:49 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.