A look at SFO T3 Progress - "As nice or nicer than T2"
#16
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
#17
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Between EWR & PHL
Programs: UA MileagePlus dirt (former hard-way Silver); AS Mileage Plan MVP; Hilton Honors Silver
Posts: 1,586
No reason to think the City wouldn't want to refresh F at some point, but I suspect Terminal 1 would be next on the refresh list. (IIRC, wasn't Boarding Area B - the so-called "UX Circle of Doom" - was originally supposed to be redone after CO vacated? My memory might be fuzzy on this point.) Terminal 1 is in desperate need of some love - at least T3 is interconnected post-security, and has an airside connector to International G. Terminal 1 is like EWR Terminal A's slightly prettier cousin.
#18
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Orygun
Posts: 461
It looks very nice. I am excited to see to finished product next year.
Before starting work on boarding area F, though, maybe they need to work on adding another runway on the 10/28 alignment (or adding spacing between the extant runways) so that fog and rain don't cause backups. I know that the political landscape in the Bay Area might mean that never happens.
Before starting work on boarding area F, though, maybe they need to work on adding another runway on the 10/28 alignment (or adding spacing between the extant runways) so that fog and rain don't cause backups. I know that the political landscape in the Bay Area might mean that never happens.
#19
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,373
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 4.2.2; en-us; Galaxy Nexus Build/JDQ39) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/534.30)
Are they owned or leased?
Originally Posted by SFO777
Yeah, I'm sure AA and VX would let UA use those T2 gates.
#20
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Denver • DEN-APA
Programs: AF Platinum, EK Gold, AA EXP, UA 1K, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 21,602
#21
Moderator: Mileage Run, United Airlines; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The City/Honolulu
Programs: UA 3MM; Hyatt Glob*****; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 14,473
#22
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 5,825
With all the fancy / local food coming to T3, how much longer do you think Burger King has?
Can anybody comment on the food at the newish Anchor Brewing Company restaurant?
April 16 SFO Commission Meeting:
Award of Contract No. 9185.9
Terminal 1/Boarding Area B Redevelopment Program Management
Support Services
T1 Partners, A Joint Venture of Parsons Transporation Group, Inc., the
Allen Group, LLC, and EPC Consultants, Inc.
$4,453,178
Resolution awarding Professional Services Agreement, Contract No. 9185.9,
Terminal 1/Boarding Area B Redevelopment Program Management Support
Services, to T1 Partners, a joint venture of Parsons Transportation Group,
Inc., The Allen Group, LLC, and EPC Consultants, Inc., in an amount not to
exceed $4,453,178 for the first year of services.
This PDF gives a great overview (proposal?) of potential T1 redevelopment. Even includes a connector to the Int'l terminal (Date TBD).
Construction Management Association NorCal
http://www.cmaanorcal.org/pdfs/11291...esentation.pdf
Can anybody comment on the food at the newish Anchor Brewing Company restaurant?
Award of Contract No. 9185.9
Terminal 1/Boarding Area B Redevelopment Program Management
Support Services
T1 Partners, A Joint Venture of Parsons Transporation Group, Inc., the
Allen Group, LLC, and EPC Consultants, Inc.
$4,453,178
Resolution awarding Professional Services Agreement, Contract No. 9185.9,
Terminal 1/Boarding Area B Redevelopment Program Management Support
Services, to T1 Partners, a joint venture of Parsons Transportation Group,
Inc., The Allen Group, LLC, and EPC Consultants, Inc., in an amount not to
exceed $4,453,178 for the first year of services.
This PDF gives a great overview (proposal?) of potential T1 redevelopment. Even includes a connector to the Int'l terminal (Date TBD).
Construction Management Association NorCal
http://www.cmaanorcal.org/pdfs/11291...esentation.pdf
Last edited by iluv2fly; Apr 29, 2013 at 10:16 pm Reason: merge
#23
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Denver • DEN-APA
Programs: AF Platinum, EK Gold, AA EXP, UA 1K, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 21,602
This PDF gives a great overview (proposal?) of potential T1 redevelopment. Even includes a connector to the Int'l terminal (Date TBD).
http://www.cmaanorcal.org/pdfs/11291...esentation.pdf
http://www.cmaanorcal.org/pdfs/11291...esentation.pdf
#24
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,373
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 4.2.2; en-us; Galaxy Nexus Build/JDQ39) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/534.30)
If they're leased and set up for common use, then it seems like negotiating use by other airlines such as UA at off times wouldn't be impossible. Worth planning for the possibility, anyway, by having a connector... I wonder why this isn't planned.
If they're leased and set up for common use, then it seems like negotiating use by other airlines such as UA at off times wouldn't be impossible. Worth planning for the possibility, anyway, by having a connector... I wonder why this isn't planned.
#25
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: UA 1K 1MM (finally!), IHG AMB-Spire, HH Diamond
Posts: 60,174
A look at SFO T3 Progress - "As nice or nicer than T2"
I hope Subway and BK make it in T3. Sometimes I don't want to spend $15 or $20 for a light meal.
#26
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
It looks very nice. I am excited to see to finished product next year.
Before starting work on boarding area F, though, maybe they need to work on adding another runway on the 10/28 alignment (or adding spacing between the extant runways) so that fog and rain don't cause backups. I know that the political landscape in the Bay Area might mean that never happens.
Before starting work on boarding area F, though, maybe they need to work on adding another runway on the 10/28 alignment (or adding spacing between the extant runways) so that fog and rain don't cause backups. I know that the political landscape in the Bay Area might mean that never happens.
In any event congress is raiding the federal airport improvement fund to pay for air traffic controllers, so no idea where the money would come from anyway.
The solution may be better GPS landing technology so that they can hit the full max take offs and landings even in bad weather. I would expect that that technology may be deployed before they could get a runway done.
LarkSFO, thanks for posting the links, very interesting.
#27
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: retired from SFO Terminal 3
Posts: 7,437
#28
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.995MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,854
#29
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 5,825
If you look at aerial photo's over time, it really is amazing how much of the Bay / wetlands has been filled in over the past century...
http://www.savesfbay.org/stopping-bay-fill
"Save The Bay Halts Airport Project to Fill the Bay
In 1998, SFO reversed a decade of denials and announced it would build runways farther into San Francisco Bay by launching a $75 million public relations campaign to sell the public on the largest proposed Bay fill project since the 1960s. SFO's media blitzes and paid opposition research instead strengthened a deep regional consensus against paving over more of our Bay, which has already been shrunk by one-third.
In response to growing criticism of the project led by Save The Bay and our supporters, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors ordered a management audit of the airport by the City Budget Analyst. The audit confirmed that SFO tried to sell the runways instead of studying alternatives, ignored public input, skirted contracting regulations and let consultants and vendors gorge themselves at the trough.
After four years of intense public scrutiny and Save The Bay advocacy, and with the airport more than $4 billion in debt, SFO shelved its plans and the Board of Supervisors prohibited any further spending on runway expansion into the Bay. Finally in 2008, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed a resolution that no additional fill should be placed in San Francisco Bay for new or reconfigured runways at San Francisco International Airport, ending a nearly decade long battle."
Hopefully, newer / improved technology will enable additional capacity on existing runways even when weather is bad...
http://www.savesfbay.org/stopping-bay-fill
"Save The Bay Halts Airport Project to Fill the Bay
In 1998, SFO reversed a decade of denials and announced it would build runways farther into San Francisco Bay by launching a $75 million public relations campaign to sell the public on the largest proposed Bay fill project since the 1960s. SFO's media blitzes and paid opposition research instead strengthened a deep regional consensus against paving over more of our Bay, which has already been shrunk by one-third.
In response to growing criticism of the project led by Save The Bay and our supporters, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors ordered a management audit of the airport by the City Budget Analyst. The audit confirmed that SFO tried to sell the runways instead of studying alternatives, ignored public input, skirted contracting regulations and let consultants and vendors gorge themselves at the trough.
After four years of intense public scrutiny and Save The Bay advocacy, and with the airport more than $4 billion in debt, SFO shelved its plans and the Board of Supervisors prohibited any further spending on runway expansion into the Bay. Finally in 2008, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed a resolution that no additional fill should be placed in San Francisco Bay for new or reconfigured runways at San Francisco International Airport, ending a nearly decade long battle."
Hopefully, newer / improved technology will enable additional capacity on existing runways even when weather is bad...