Talk:John F. Kennedy International Airport

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the John F. Kennedy International Airport article.
Article policies

Contents

[edit] Location

Is it entirely on the coast of the bay, or is part of it actually in the bay? (Did they extend a runway beyond the natural coastline onto landfill that they dumped in the bay?)

[edit] Name

I think that this page should be renamed to the fuller "John F. Kennedy International Airport", since the airport is also well known under this name. WhisperToMe 00:57, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)


[edit] Terminals

I added a new short stub relating to the Pan AM worldport called Worldport (Pan Am). i also added some information related to the architects of the Worldport in the kennedy main article, and am wondering because there is so much info on the individual terminals, they might need their own longer articles and need to pull out that sort of information from the kennedy main article. As info is added on the structures, they might get too long. For instance, the TWA terminal deserves a very long wikipedia article, as it has been written about alot through the years. BrandlandUSA 12:14, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Tragedy

The word tragedy has been in the article since the first version. I strongly disagree with those who state that it is POV. Are we now required not to offend al-Qaeda supporters? Brooklyn Nellie (Nricardo) 23:21, Apr 13, 2004 (UTC)

Its not necessary to call it a tragedy. Let the reader decide if September 11 was a tragedy or not. WhisperToMe 23:32, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

It may be tragic, but the word Tragedy suggests a certain amount of inevitability. Y control 14:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why was this moved?

Is there a reason "New York/" was added? That does not seem to be part of the official or common name. --SPUI (talk) 23:46, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have moved it back, after finding no evidence of a name change. --SPUI (talk) 00:06, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I was just about to do the same. That was exactly the right thing to do. Nohat 00:13, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There are three airports in the New York area and to avoid confusion with which one. Like O'Hare is Chicago O'Hare. SNIyer12 19:14, 7 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Yep, but they don't do that in New York. WhisperToMe 20:19, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Christopher Elliot comment

Does this deserve to be here? I did a Google search on him, and the results were weak, at best. Pacific Coast Highway 18:44, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Significant Presence

I've removed the line that BA has a significant presence and someone has been restoring it. Being the leading non-US carrier out of Kennedy does not earn British Airways special mention. They have 8 flights a day to their hubs (7 to London, 1 to Manchester). American, United, and Air Canada each have 10-11 flights a day out of Heathrow and SAS has 20, so do they have a significant presence there? Dbinder 22:36, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I sort of think that while BA only has a certain number of flights, maybe it continues to be reinserted because they have a name at the top of the terminal. it does indicate they have a larger presence than other international carriers, but see both pointsBrandlandUSA 12:07, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New York-JFK or New York-Kennedy??

When listing the destinations of airlines that fly to this airport, what is the best designation for JFK? New York-JFK or New York-Kennedy? I think that the designation should be listed as "New York-JFK" because every single airport article on Wiki have "New York-JFK" as the designation for JFK Airport. What are your suggestions? Bucs2004 20:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd go for New York-JFK, since I don't think people say "I'm flying from Kennedy to XXX" but rather "I'm flying from JFK to XXX". Elektrik Blue 82 21:46, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Okay, because I saw one user kept putting the designation "New York-Kennedy" instead of "New York-JFK" under the airport articles Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport and Austin Bergstrom International Airport but I have switched it back from "New York-Kennedy" to "New York-JFK". Bucs2004 22:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Kennedy or JFK are both acceptable according to Wiki:Airports Talk page. I would stick with Kennedy, though, since other cities with multiple airports don't use the codes. Such as Hobby, LaGuardia, O'Hare, Midway, Intercontinental, Dulles, etc., etc. 70.123.197.99 01:05, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree but I would recommend looking at all the airport articles and see that "New York-JFK" is used and not "New York-Kennedy". But you can feel free to change them all to Kennedy but I think it will look weird. Bucs2004 02:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
It would be easier to change this sole code JFK to Kennedy than to change LaGuardia to LGA, Dulles to IAD, Hobby to HOU, O'Hare to ORD,... 70.123.197.99 04:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
What exactly is the determining factor in naming the airport? IMHO, it should be named according to what it is more commonly known. It just happens that JFK is known by its IATA code. Can there be a vote on this if it is an issue? Elektrik Blue 82 05:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
While this issue seems to have died over a year ago, I will add my comments. Being a local, I can tell you that both "JFK" and "Kennedy" are used in reference to the airport. Both are appropriate, IMHO. This is easy to compare to because of NYC's 3 major airport, since while locals often refer to JFK as "JFK", you virtually never hear LaGuardia referred to as "LGA" or Newark referred to as "EWR"... in both cases its generally just "LaGuardia" and "Newark". I think the BIG difference here compared to other multi-airport cities is that JFK is not just the code, its the VERY FAMOUS initials of the VERY FAMOUS guy its named after...Famartin 01:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SriLankan Airlines (Formerly Air Lanka)

What terminal does SriLankan Airlines (Formerly Air Lanka) go to? I did not see it in the list of airlines at each terminal. 69.138.62.148 04:58, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

AFAIK, JFK is not a destination of UL. It only codeshares with EK on flights to JFK. Elektrik Blue 82 07:27, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chairs

Are the chairs in other terminals as impossible to sit in without slouching down & compressing your spine as they are in Terminal 7? --JimWae 04:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Abandoned Runways

There are at least 3 abandoned runways at JFK that have been converted to taxiways. They've always looked obvious to me from the airport diagram. I've only seen mention of them on an airliners.net discussions board which is not reliable enough to use as a source. If anyone has more info on them with a definitive source we may want to include it in the article. Taxiway L and a section of taxiway Y were runway 7R/25L. This runway was abandoned either after Worldport was constructed or expanded. The instrument approach lights for it were mounted on wood pilings extended into Jamaica Bay. The wood pilings are still there and easiy visible on Google Earth. Taxiway Z was once runway 1R/19L. Taxiway E was a commuter plane runway 14/32 and only recently converted to a taxiway. Runways 7L/25R and 1L/19R have been completely built over though. [1]

SkyWayMan 02:45, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Destinations

Doesn't United operate a direct flight to Tokyo-Narita (UA891 via LAX) and a direct flight to Melbourne (UA839 via LAX and SYD) so shouldn't these be included as they're direct flights?Blahx100 13:31, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

also US Airways flies JFK-LAS-DEN (US601 operated by America West) so should that be included too?Blahx100 13:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
United also flies to Hong Kong from JFK (direct flight, UA891 JFK-LAX-NRT-HKG) so should that be included too?Blahx100 13:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
UA also has a direct flight to Seoul-Incheon (UA893 via SFO) so should that go in too?Blahx100 13:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
US airways flies JFK-LAS-SAN (US532 operated by America West-does that go in too?Blahx100 13:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
If I am correct, these are faux direct flights, the airline uses just one flight number but there is an aircraft change in the last US city (ie. LAX or SFO) before proceeding to a foreign destination. And because of that, we don't list it here. See WP:AIRPORTS for details. Cheers. /ɪlεktʃɹɪk bluː/ 14:59, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
From the WP:AIRPORTS page:
List non-stop and direct flights only. That means the flight number and the aircraft, starts at this airport and continues to one or more airports. Avoid using the description 'via' since that is more correctly listed as another destination. If passengers can not disembark at a stop on a direct flight, then do not list it as a destination or as 'via'. Direct flights are not always non-stop flights. However, avoid listing most domestic United States direct flights, as virtually all of these are simply flights from one "spoke city" to a hub, with the plane continuing from the hub to a second spoke city. Including these flights dramatically increases the length of destination listings, artificially inflates the airline's presence at a location and requires constant updating, as these "timetable direct" destinations have little rhyme or reason and may change as often as every week or two.
therefore the US Airways flights shouldn't be included but what about the United Flights? This doesn't say anything about plane changes. Blahx100 07:25, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
"...the flight number and the aircraft..." means no plane changes. DB (talk) 18:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

An anon. editor continued to list Qantas as serving LAX from JFK. Qantas does not operate this route. This route is operated by American with a Qantas flight number, and connects to a Qantas flight at LAX. If this editor is reading this, please stop restoring this incorrect information. It will be removed each time. Neo16287 20:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

To the above person: Qantas does fly its own planes between JFK and LAX once per day as Qantas Flight 108, which continues to Sydney. However, domestic passengers can't fly Qantas from JFK to LAX. Yes, American does have Qantas codeshares on its flights from JFK to LAX, but one flight is actually operated by Qantas on a Qantas aircraft. I made the latest change to the article, but I made a note of how domestic passengers can't fly Qantas to LAX. I think my edit might be a little bit wordy, however, so if someone wants to fix it up then go ahead. Please note that I was not the individual previously adding LAX as a Qantas destination. Aaporter 87 00:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ground Transportation

Am I the only one who thinks that the Helicopter section reads like an advertisment? Rob110178 07:31, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Terminal 7

Anon. editors continue to tout this terminal as the British Airways Terminal. Terminal 7 was the BA terminal at one time, but today is used by more airlines than just BA. It has not been referred to as the British Airways Terminal in official or legitimate writings for some time now. Please stop renaming Terminal 7 the British Airways Terminal. Your edit is incorrect, and will be reverted. Neo16287 22:36, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I have requested semi-protection on this article seen here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection. If approved, hopefully this will make the load lighter.. Rob110178 23:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
I arrived from Manila, Phillipines via Hong Kong, Hong Kong, last March 29, 2007. the airline I rode was Cathay Pacific Flight 831 from Hong Kong. When we got out of the jetway and proceeding to US Customs it was announced, "Welcome to the British Airways Terminal, Terminal 7 at John F. Kennedy International Airport. After you have gone through US Customs please proceed to Baggage Claim 9 to get your baggage. Welcome to New York!". So Terminal 7 is called the British Airways Terminal, ain't I correct? -chris^_^ 04:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I guess that is the official name. However, considering the number of airlines operating out of that terminal, I'd still leave it out. In most WP airport articles that attach an airline name to a terminal, the terminal isn't actually named after the airline. However, due to one airline controlling the terminal, it is commonly referred to as that (e.g. United Airlines terminal at O'Hare, Delta terminal in Boston, etc.). DB (talk) 05:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I have read on airliners.net that BA actually owns Terminal 7 (which, ironically, is not the case with any of its terminals in the UK). I do not know how or where to verify this, however. colerc

[edit] Semi-Protected

Semi-Protection has been applied, hopefully this will help the article Rob110178 00:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. Thank you! Neo16287 02:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Helipad

When there is regular Helicopter service from JFK to Downtown Manhattan, why is there no mention of a helipad on the list of runways? Braditude 08:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Seperation of domestic/international flights

I've noticed that at a few US airports (specifically JFK, EWR, ORD and LAX) some airlines domestic and international destinations are seperated. This is not set up in the standard form as set forth in the ProjectWiki Airport guide. Plus, when it's being done, it's inconsistent even within the airport page - i.e. DL and UA destinations being seperated, but AA and NW remaining intact at LAX. Also, people don't/shouldn't break it down for the airlines' regional ops, because 1) it looks awful, and 2) it just doesn't make much sense. So, stop doing it. Thanks. Andrewb729 17:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] QF JFK-LAX

Stop adding Los Angeles as a destination for Qantas!!! Many anon IPs have been adding it as a destiantion for Qantas. Yes, they do fly JFK-LAX-SYD but Qantas has no rights to transport passengers from JFK to LAX only! You cannot book a ticket for JFK-LAX only! Your edits are incorrect and will be reverted. Bucs2004 02:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

If you contact the Qantas call center, you can book a ticket for JFK-LAX, a two-day (or however long) stopover in LAX, then a continuing flight LAX-SYD. Both parts are required, but this clearly constitutes a trip to Los Angeles, and in any case it is misleading to state merely Sydney--at least the designation should be "Sydney via Los Angeles" so as not to imply that a nonstop commercial flight of this distance is possible. I have not, however, made any edits on this point personally. colerc —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.131.161.122 (talk) 00:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
True, but if you put Los Angeles as a destination you are giving them a thought that they can fly, and by fly I mean only fly JFK-LAX without a connecting flight to SYD, AKL, MEL, or BNE after a day or two. It is a policy on WP:AIRPORTS to write direct flights, and direct flights is a flight that operates with one flight number and aircraft from one destination to another with a stop or two. That's why we should list Sydney as a destination. But if we list Sydney via Los Angeles we are giving the people an impression that you can't fly to SYD directly as you need to change flights in LAX, thus it is not a direct flight if we list it as Sydney via Los Angeles. -chris^_^ 03:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
so, am i right or not? Qantas would not let me book a JFK-LAX ticket only on their website.Bucs2004 18:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
I think you are right. Being able to stop in LA is not a "trip to Los Angeles," it's a trip to Australia with a stopover. If one cannot buy a ticket just to LAX, it shouldn't be listed as a destination. V-train 20:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
I agree. Qantas won't let me book just JFK-LAX...well I could, but I would have to go via SYD, but forget it. It should not be listed as a destination. Neo16287 04:11, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

To help solve the Qantas issue, I made a note stating that the Sydney flight from New York involve a stop in Los Angeles but passengers cannot purchase to fly from JFK-LAX on QF. Hopefully this will help. Cheers!!! Bucs2004 23:03, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Terminal 4

I used to depart from Terminal 4 when I used to ride NWA to MNL. And I noticed that in Terminal 4 all the gates either begin with A or B and if you want to go to the A gates you have to go through final security screening. And to go to the B gates you have to go to a different security screening. And the A & B gates are separated by the food court so if you want to go to the B gates from the A gates you have to go thru security screening again. So technically Terminal 4 is divided into Concourse A & B. So in the article page of this airport Terminal 4 should be divided into Concourse A & B. Right? -chris^_^ 23:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Anybody?! -chris^_^ 14:32, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

While most airlines stick to one side, it is possible (at least in theory, not sure if this ever happens in practice) that an airline might switch back and forth depending on which gates were available on a particular day, or that an airline with multiple flights might operate from both sides (I think Virgin America may already be doing this). So it is not straightforward to divide the two, and unlike say the Central Terminal Building at LGA, all T4 departures and arrival facilities (check-in, customs, baggage claim) are integrated, weakening the claim of separate terminals. colerc —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.131.161.122 (talk) 01:03, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone have any good pictures of the terminal that you can post on this page? The immigration halls is not exactly the most interesting part of this great and hugely important terminal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardnyc (talk • contribs) 00:37, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why is there absolutely nothing in this article, save for a small mention?

Of the recent terror plot against JFK International? I can find very few news items or sources about this anywhere, save for the linked article or the tiny mention in the section for accidents and other incidents.

Does anyone else find this a bit weird? 76.18.140.105 22:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

In the grand scheme of things, the alleged plot is a minor footnote in the airport's history, so it really shouldn't get much more than a small mention in this article. It should link to a larger article specifically about the plot, though - but nobody's written it yet. Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit, after all. FCYTravis 23:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Alleged plot. Heh. NPOV might be nice, Travis. 208.111.222.96 00:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
NPOV is exactly why I said "alleged plot," good sir. All crimes are alleged until proven otherwise by admissions of guilt or a conviction in a court of law. My personal opinion on the existence of the plot is of no consequence - what does matter is fundamental fairness and the justice system. If we start ruling people guilty before they've been convicted, we're no better than the Iranians. FCYTravis 00:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
"we're no better than the Iranians" - rather ironic in a discusion about NPOV ;-) (although for what it's worth, I agree totally with that statement, however POV it may be). Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 16:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually, Travis, as far as the criminal justice systems is concerned, the accused is innocent until proven guilty. This principle of one field does not apply universally. It would make little sense to say, for instance, that a witness to a crime should reserve judgment on whether the person was guilty until a jury verdict were reached. "Innocent until proven guilty" has a lot less application than people seem to think. It's not a rule of truth, it's a rule of a small number of cases in the United States judicial system (most are civil cases anyway). So, even in the courts, "innocent until proven guilty" is applicable to less than a majority of cases. 208.111.222.96 22:18, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
The rule of "innocent until proven guilty" is applicable to all Wikipedia articles, and that's what we're discussing here. FCYTravis 07:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
A plot cannot be proven guilty, nor can it be presumed innocent. It's not a criminal defendant; it's not even a person. Stop embarassing yourself, Travis. 153.104.14.64 17:27, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
The existence of the plot is not proven until those who allegedly devised it are convicted in a court of law of the conspiratorial crimes related to its creation. It's a pretty simple concept, really. This situation is not like a crime of physical violence or property loss, where the death, injury or theft is provable whether or not anyone is ever charged with a crime. (It would be rather silly to say "alleged murder" where there is a body lying in a pool of blood with 10 gunshot wounds, after all.) In this case, there is no independently verifiable evidence that the plot exists, outside the statements of FBI officials and federal prosecutors. Given that the allegation that the plot exists is a point of legal contention, and that it has not yet been proven in a court of law, it is an alleged plot. Stop embarrassing yourself, anonymous user. FCYTravis 19:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:JFKAirportFromAir.JPG

This is a very poor picture, both in illustrating the subject and in composition and I have removed it from the head of the article. The diagram it replaced did a much better job of representing the article visually. Cumulus Clouds 15:07, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Calgary on Northwest Airlines

There has been some editing disputes on whether or not Calgary should be listed as a destination. Per WP:AIRPORTS, we do not list thru flights that require a connection at one of its hubs. Should Calgary be listed as a destination for NWA? Bucs2004 16:36, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think we should include it. Like you said, the flight goes through a NWA hub, so really CGY is a destination from whatever hub its coming from, and not JFK. Sox23 19:08, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brussels on BA?

Is there a source for this? The BA website doesn't show any JFK-BRU flights that aren't connecting flights for May, June or July 2008. 21:55, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Brussels Airports has New York-JFK listed as a destination for BA but i have removed it from that page. Bucs2004 (talk) 03:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Travel Time Inaccuracies

The Article says:

Travel time between JFK and Midtown Manhattan is approximately 30-40 minutes (depending on the originating/terminating terminal at JFK) using AirTrain and the Long Island Rail Road at Jamaica Station ($8 to $12); or approximately 75 minutes using AirTrain and the New York City Subway A train at Howard Beach-JFK Station ($2) or E, J and Z trains at Sutphin Boulevard Station ($2).

Alot of this is inaccurate.

Getting to Manhattan by the AirTrain and the subway's A-train takes much longer than the E,J, and Z trains, though still not nearly a 75-minute trip. The A-Train station at Howard Beach is closer than Jamaica Station or Sutphin Boulevard though not by a whole lot. The A commutes to Manhattan via traveling all the way through souther and central Queens, through Brooklyn and into Manhattan, with a fairly lengthy commute time for a Subway though 75 minutes it may not be. The latter three trains simply travel west through northern Queens, with the J and Z using the Queensboro Bridge and the expedient E train using Queens Boulevard and a tunnel. As far as the LIRR goes, the majority of people use it to connect to the AirTrain and not vice versa. It wouldn't make much sense to use it to get to Manhattan.

-Alan 24.184.184.177 (talk) 18:29, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Headline text

[edit] El Al

El Al operates out of Terminal 4 not 8. They have since Terminal 4 was built and I know of no plans for this to change. I work in Terminal 8 so I would know.

141.157.223.185 (talk) 08:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] American Airlines + Terminal 8+9

As of 02.16.08, American Airlines has vacated Terminal 8 and moved to Terminal 9 (leaving the remaining airlines it shared with in Terminal 9 there) Xatticus —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.123.251.204 (talk) 04:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] BA London-City Flights

Has BA announced flights to LCY from NYC yet...some sources say just to New York City but not saying service will be from JFK or Newark. Cause I just removed it again from the destinations list. Couldn't find anything to back this up. Thanks!! 74.183.173.237 (talk) 03:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] OpenSkies

Will OpenSkies operate flights from JFK to CDG or ORY? Since OpenSkies is not listed on the Charles de Gaulle Airport...instead it is listed on the Orly Airport page instead. 220.249.22.135 (talk) 12:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I am not yet very experienced with Wikipedia, so I did not make any edits on the JFK airport page. But I am wondering why there are so few images of the airport and its terminals and so little information about JFK, which is the most important international getaway in the United States. There are no pictures of JFK Airtrain, no view of the great terminal 4 (only a picture showing the passport control area which is certainly not the highlight of this tremendous terminal), etc.. There are no images of the new Jet Blue terminal that is currently under construction and is scheduled to open in the Fall of 2008. The page on Israel's Ben Gurion Airport which was a featured article on Wikipedia short time agi, I think, is a good example of how the JFK should look like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardnyc (talk • contribs) 00:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)