hungarianhc

yes but considering that you can only fly to LAX/SFO/IAD from there, I wouldn't exactly call it a hub....

Madone59

Darn right! There is a BK Lounge right in N, better than any RRC or F lounge....as long as you've got 'coupes'

pinniped

I've always liked SEA. My only (completely minor) complaint: the initial ID checkers at the central security lines (near all of the good food) used to refuse to accept my UA elite and/or F class BP. They instructed me to go to N elite security and traipse back to the central food area airside.

(I can't be 100% sure this wasn't a TSA mandate, but I believe the BP checkers at the time were not TSA employees. It felt to me like an airport thing, not related to actual security.)

Sometimes I would do the traipsing; other times I'd just go to N and not shop or buy anything. To me, it seems like the airport would want to encourage UA elites to enter security there - increasing the likelihood that they spend money in the airport.

Without looking at the rankings (just the cities in each category), I would have guessed DEN, MCI, ABQ for the three winners. I never would have guessed DTW and don't fly into Indy enough to have an opinion. Some of the smaller airports where I've had pleasant experiences were bashed pretty good. For example, I was a weekly commuter in/out of DCA for years and found it incredibly convenient in all respects. Great airport whether you're cabbing, driving, or taking the train.

I also tend to accept both ORD and MDW better than the average traveler. I guess years of living in Chicago have taught me how to best navigate my way in, out, and through those two places.

GoAmtrak

I can't believe SFO fared so poorly. SFO is more easily accessible by car or transit from the urban city center than the average US hub. Its terminals are fairly new or renovated (T3 isn't new but isn't a dump). The international terminal is stunningly beautiful and functional. SFO is flush with locally-owned food vendors (far more variety than at DEN if you count groundside). Security is a highly variable, subjective experience but I've never had any horror stories there. The worst part of SFO is vulnerability to weather delays, but I don't think that was a factor in these ratings.

And I really don't get the ongoing MCI fetish. It's in the middle of nowhere; transportation options are thin. The brutalist design is sad and oppressive. The food choices are abominable. And I hate being corralled in that small gate area once past security with nothing but one pair of restrooms and a bottled water and beer kiosk.

bmustaf

Clearly, JD Power & Associates never had to retrieve checked baggage in DEN.

I kid, I kid, and I know there's a lot worse out there. In my opinion, though, for the investment, the size of the airport, and volume DEN does a HORRIBLE job with baggage service. I say this as a Denver resident that uses DEN nearly weekly for business and pleasure but has learned to check bags only in the most necessary of circumstances .

d3van

Bias-aside, YVR is my home airport and I am shocked it is rated so poorly. The only major irritating issue for me is the baggage claim can be quite slow at times, but this is an issue in many airports.

The rest of the airport is spacious and beautiful and generally a decent place to kill time at compared to most of the other airports I have traveled through.

whakojacko

yea I dont get it either. YVR ought to up there with PDX near the top from that list (never been to MCI, so I cant comment on it)

danBfree

Check out the survey. Transportation and location aren't relevant. "Access" is defined by the ease of parking and dropping off/picking up passengers.

From curb to gate and reverse, MCI is the fastest airport I've ever used (other than "airports" that don't have a terminal.) Because of this, the lack of amenities in the terminal and beyond security are only relevant when you're delayed. The lack of aesthetics in the terminal is mitigated - in the extreme - by the fact that one can spend less than two minutes getting to your gate when departing, and as little as thirty seconds in the terminal on arrival. It is a horrible airport to connect in - which is why no airline could possibly hub there, and which probably doesn't impact the survey at all.

Anyway, that's why it is fetishized. It is really, really good at most of the things the survey cares about, and the things it is bad at are either limited to one category (food/retail) or ignored entirely (location/transportation, available destinations).

GoAmtrak

You're right; the "accessibility" metrics are a joke. They should take into account airport location relative to surrounding population and attractions, condition of roads leading to the airport, ease of car rentals, and transit coverage. Factoring in none of that, yeah, MCI is great.

The short curb-to-gate distance is great for families and folks with disabilities, but it deprives me of exercise between long bouts of sitting. I usually walk the length of the terminal if I have time, and there's not much to see besides the check-in counters. The lack of amenities is also a real bummer. I'm usually at the airport way early regardless of the airport and regardless of whether I'm on business. No one likes lines, but I'd take a more traditional layout with longer security lines in exchange for robust terminal amenities in a heartbeat. The one thing MCI has is free wi-fi, which is nice but not essential given WWAN.

As for security, MCI uses contractors (whether that's a plus or minus is debatable). I've heard a few TSOs say some really dumb things in front of pax, like, "Hey Mike, uh, oh $*&^, I think my cell phone got a virus!" Real professional.

gijoe24jp

Airports Council International (ACI) just released their world airport ranking.

1. ICN
2. SIN
3. HKG

Is anyone surprised that all three top airports are in Asia? I am not. Airports in the US are old and do not offer passengers enough things to do.

According to the article below, "ICN boasts many unique luxury features such as a golf course, spa, private sleeping rooms, a casino, and indoor gardens."

http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/02...omment-page-2/

langleyoaker

In 2009 IAD served 23.2 million, DCA 17.6 million, and BWI 20.9 million.

pinniped

Re: MCI, my home airport. It's wonderful for O&D but I can see why people would not want to connect there. Maybe a short WN connection wouldn't be so bad. As for destinations, it has nonstops to every major U.S. market that I can think of. For int'l, it's 1-stop everywhere - just pick your alliance and go through their hub.

Ground transit from MCI isn't any different than any of the other airports that have a consolidated rental facility. Most airports of its size don't link directly to trains and MCI is no exception. The rural location of the airport actually provides a blessing: very long and far apart runways. MCI rarely entirely closes for weather.

The food selection is indeed quite lame. Again, not usually an issue for O&D except during delays.

Supposedly there's some sort of master plan for how they'd reconfigure an entire terminal if an airline wanted to use MCI as a significant hub. Something more radical than just making a long multi-gate corral like they do for WN and YX today. Still, I hope that never happens...it's much more convenient being a non-hub city.

3Cforme

U.S. airports are largely short-haul, domestic traffic focus in passenger numbers. If O&D, I want easy in and out. If connecting, I want a 50-minute connection time and to be on my way. Spas and golf courses are worse than worthless in those scenarios as they compete for space.

haddon90

i agree in regards to SFO. how that isn't higher baffles me. especially for hubs, SFO is my favorite. easy access, great food, and i've never had any significant delays there.

DEN is really high up there too...love that airport.

FlyingBear

Agreed. Having been through 1 and 3, its like night and day, even compared to SFO and DTW, which I consider nice for US airports. Being fairly new helps them considerably, but there were other things too. I thought that the service folks at both airports were great. The ICN/Asiana staff that helped us with our transfer were incredibly nice. There also seemed to be an abundance of personnel at both airports.