Cory6188 wrote:

The Airport Express in HKG might take the cake. Not only is it a super easy one seat ride from Hong Kong & Kowloon, with a short walk from the station into the terminal, but you can actually check your bag at the train station in town and then you don't have to drag it on the train - not sure it gets much more seamless than that.

From my point of view, anything that is labeled "Express" does not get the prize. It does not only mean that is more expensive, but also that it is disconected from the rest of the city transit system in terms of tickets, etc. You cannot get in one ticket anywhere on the city.

The best approach is certainly the way Dutch/German/Swiss do. The airport is just another part of the city, so you don't need anything "express" or "Special" if you have an excellent public transportation network like they do. In ZRH you can even see people shopping on the supermarkets on Sunday since it is one of the few places in the country where they are open that day.

That might be the ultimate sign of integration of the airport on a regional scale. The airport is such a common place (e.g. you live in a wealthy country where everybody flies multiple times a year) that doing your grocery shopping there is just another option.

Let’s not forget a Brussels. Another one seat train ride to downtown. Now you have to pay an airport tax in addition to the train fare.

PHL has direct access from all terminals on Septa Regional Rail direct to all 3 main train stations in Center City.
30th St Station is the main Amtrak and NJ Transit terminal, and all trains continue thru to Suburban and Jefferson stations.
Large train cars with luggage racks. You can buy tickets thru Center City to outlying suburban locations with one change.
http://www.Septa.org.

btbx11 wrote:

I'm surprised no one (that I noticed) has mentioned Newark. Super-convenient almost one seat ride to Midtown Manhattan. But yeah, SFO, YYZ, SLC, DCA best in North America in my opinion.

If EWR counts as good, then JFK must be amazing:

1. JFK's airtrain is more frequent and less crappy than Newark to get you to the station
2. NJ Transit from EWR station and the LIRR from Jamaica both bring you to Penn Station
3. LIRR from Jamaica runs more frequently than NJ Transit
4. JFK also provides the A and E train connections if you need to go to Brooklyn or Queens

Basel-Euroairport is served by a bus, but it works really well anyway. Zürich and Geneva are both top class. I don't think I've experienced a German airport that was bad. Even Schönefeld works really well.
London-Luton sucks. Many French and Italian airports can be a bit tedious too, but that might be more of a language problem.

TransWorldOne wrote:

Can you beat AMS? Barely 15 minutes from terminal to Centraal Station on the express train.

Copenhagen beats that by a little bit. Both intercity trains, busses and the metro. 13-14 minutes with the intercity and between 11 and 15 minutes by metro, depending on your halt.

malev2012 wrote:

InnsbruckFlyer wrote:

Vienna: ÖBB RailJet (High Speed Intercity Train) to Hauptbahnhof takes 18 Minutes, IIRC
Frankfurt: S-Bahn to Hauptbahnhof takes ~11 Minutes
Munich: S-Bahn to Hauptbahnhof takes ~30 Minutes

The CAT train goes to Mitte closer to city center and has fewer stops from VIE but more expensive than rail jet

There is also the S-bahn to Mitte. Why anybody bothers with the CAT is beyond me.

EricAY05 wrote:

ZRF->Hbh is certainly not free. I think prices have to be factored into the discussion as well. OSL, for example, is a joke. The train ride to downtown literally costs more than many flights to OSL. Heathrow Express is very close and totally useless if you have to continue your journey from Paddington by tube or bus or whatever.

SCQ83 wrote:

From my point of view, anything that is labeled "Express" does not get the prize. It does not only mean that is more expensive, but also that it is disconected from the rest of the city transit system in terms of tickets, etc. You cannot get in one ticket anywhere on the city.

Yup, I agree that prices are important too.

Oslo isn't that bad when you take the ordinary S-bahn, ahem, "T-banen". The most ridiculous thing is that it only takes something like 5 minutes more than the super expensive dedicated train.
The Vienna CAT is ridiculously overpriced, but there are really cheap and decent alternatives. Stockholm is really stupid. It's almost as if they actively try to keep potential stop-over visitors from spending their money in Stockholm.

VSMUT wrote:

Basel-Euroairport is served by a bus, but it works really well anyway. Zürich and Geneva are both top class.

.

That is why I haven't included Basel Airport. Using a bus is not very Swiss. And if you want to go to Strasbourg, good luck! You need to ride the train to St Louis (France) walk about 200m in a secondary road and board the bus to BSL. So badly planned... but that is already France

VSMUT wrote:

I don't think I've experienced a German airport that was bad. Even Schönefeld works really well.

.

Schönefeld is a dump. Tegel is another one. SXF at least has regional trains and S-Bahn but they are both disconnected from big transportation links. Not sure if long-distance trains can or will stop at BER (so SXF) if it is ever opened!.

VSMUT wrote:

Oslo isn't that bad when you take the ordinary S-bahn, ahem, "T-banen". The most ridiculous thing is that it only takes something like 5 minutes more than the super expensive dedicated train.
The Vienna CAT is ridiculously overpriced, but there are really cheap and decent alternatives. Stockholm is really stupid. It's almost as if they actively try to keep potential stop-over visitors from spending their money in Stockholm.

And I used BMA a couple of years ago and the only connection to the center is a bus and we had to wait outside like 15 min (in winter in Stockholm ). Really messy for the "Stockholm-City" airport; even in LCY you have the DLR. Scandinavians might do some stuff well, but not public transportation (I reckon density here is a key player).

Themotionman wrote:

It's got to be MME!!! Such a frequent service and really popular with the locals!

I'm assuming that was meant as a joke!

MME doesn't have it's own train station and the one that's nearby only has I believe one or two trains a week stopping at the station and a report that I read on the Pprune website states that approximately 15 passengers had used it to connect to MME during 2017 so I would totally discount what your saying especially the words ''frequent'' ''really'' and more importantly the word ''popular''.

Pisa (Italy) deserves to be mentioned here. There's the PisMover, the unmanned cable train that goes between Pisa airport and the central station which is at the edge of the city center. Only the famous tower is at the other side of the center but this is a nice and cozy walk through the main shopping street.

I have walked from PSA Airport to the city center (Tower). It is maybe a 45 minute walk in a completely urban area, and that is because the Tower is in the opposite side of the city. Otherwise from the airport to the main train station in Pisa is a 20 minute walk in a typical middle-class Italian residential neighbourhood; nothing particularly unpleasant or ugly to be next to an airport.

zakuivcustom wrote:

I can't really say either airports in Tokyo has "very exceptional" one-seat train ride, though. NRT has Keisei, which is faster but only goes to Ueno/Nippori and required a change of train to "downtown" areas like Shinjuku or Tokyo Stn. area. Although JR Narita Express is a one-seat ride to Tokyo Stn. and Shinjuku, it's painfully slow (1 hr+ to Shinjuku Stn.). Meanwhile, HND maybe close to central Tokyo, but neither Keikyu/Toei Subway (Running as a single commuter/subway line), which only goes to Shinagawa, with its station near central Tokyo somewhat away from the main strip. The monorail only goes up to Hamamtsucho, again requiring a change of train to go to Tokyo Stn. or Shinjuku.

I think that's being a little nitpicky with the term "downtown", though. Tokyo, like New York where the term "downtown" was first coined, has various different city centers. That's why the term "downtown" even exists, because there's also a midtown and an uptown, which are equally important city centers. The same is really true of Tokyo.

I think it's unrealistic and kind of unfair to expect a transport option in a city the size of Tokyo, with multiple city centers, to be able to take anyone anywhere they want to go in a single seat. This would be like expecting a single subway line in New York to go to both airports, Long Island City, downtown Brooklyn, downtown Manhattan, midtown Manhattan, and uptown Manhattan. It's not only unfeasible, it doesn't really make logical sense for a single line to make that route. So my criteria for large cities like New York or Tokyo is just that the transport option gets me to an area inside *a* city center, but not necessarily *all* city centers. That also puts this "competition" on an equal footing between large and smaller cities, since each of these city centers is comparable to a smaller city in its own right. (Brooklyn alone is as large as Osaka, for example. I keep bringing up New York just because I'm from there.)

On that basis, I do think the Tokyo Monorail is a good one-seat ride to get you into the city. It's fast, it's fun, and if you do need to transfer (and not everybody does), it's pretty easy. Really I could say the same about the Keikyu line or even the limousine buses going to TCAT, though the buses are much slower. But they're single seat and a lot more comfortable than the monorail.

SCQ83 wrote:

From my point of view, anything that is labeled "Express" does not get the prize. It does not only mean that is more expensive, but also that it is disconected from the rest of the city transit system in terms of tickets, etc. You cannot get in one ticket anywhere on the city.

Depends. The fastest trains to NGO, KIX, and NRT are all "Limited Express", which is more of a dedicated train to bring people to the airport, although you have regular commuter trains (which are, well, cheaper but much slower) that reach all those airports also. Those trains are also not "disconnected" from the rest of the transit system, either.

spacecadet wrote:

zakuivcustom wrote:

I can't really say either airports in Tokyo has "very exceptional" one-seat train ride, though. NRT has Keisei, which is faster but only goes to Ueno/Nippori and required a change of train to "downtown" areas like Shinjuku or Tokyo Stn. area. Although JR Narita Express is a one-seat ride to Tokyo Stn. and Shinjuku, it's painfully slow (1 hr+ to Shinjuku Stn.). Meanwhile, HND maybe close to central Tokyo, but neither Keikyu/Toei Subway (Running as a single commuter/subway line), which only goes to Shinagawa, with its station near central Tokyo somewhat away from the main strip. The monorail only goes up to Hamamtsucho, again requiring a change of train to go to Tokyo Stn. or Shinjuku.

I think that's being a little nitpicky with the term "downtown", though. Tokyo, like New York where the term "downtown" was first coined, has various different city centers. That's why the term "downtown" even exists, because there's also a midtown and an uptown, which are equally important city centers. The same is really true of Tokyo.

I think it's unrealistic and kind of unfair to expect a transport option in a city the size of Tokyo, with multiple city centers, to be able to take anyone anywhere they want to go in a single seat. This would be like expecting a single subway line in New York to go to both airports, Long Island City, downtown Brooklyn, downtown Manhattan, midtown Manhattan, and uptown Manhattan. It's not only unfeasible, it doesn't really make logical sense for a single line to make that route. So my criteria for large cities like New York or Tokyo is just that the transport option gets me to an area inside *a* city center, but not necessarily *all* city centers. That also puts this "competition" on an equal footing between large and smaller cities, since each of these city centers is comparable to a smaller city in its own right. (Brooklyn alone is as large as Osaka, for example. I keep bringing up New York just because I'm from there.)

On that basis, I do think the Tokyo Monorail is a good one-seat ride to get you into the city. It's fast, it's fun, and if you do need to transfer (and not everybody does), it's pretty easy. Really I could say the same about the Keikyu line or even the limousine buses going to TCAT, though the buses are much slower. But they're single seat and a lot more comfortable than the monorail.

Well, if Haneda access is really without problem, they would not be planning the new "Haneda Access Rail Line" (Which will not open until 2030 earliest) that will be a one-train ride to Tokyo Stn. AND Shinjuku Stn.. There were also multiple plans to extend the Monorail further north (to Tokyo Stn.) for years with no avail, either. There was also plans for that spur lines on Toei Asakusa Line (Through service from Keikyu) to go to Tokyo Stn. for the same reason - current subway stations at Nihonbashi or Higashi-Ginza are somewhat far from Otemachi/Marunouchi.

Another note - the whole "One train to Tokyo Stn. and Shinjuku Stn." (and Shinagawa, Shibuya, or even Yokohama) is how Narita Express train even stay in competition against the cheaper and quicker Keisei Skyliners anyway.

ikramerica wrote:

Marco Polo in Venice has the must fun one via water bus, though the walk to the boats maybe not so short (I forget).

This would get my vote every time, it's been 18 months since I was last there, but at the time there was a lot of construction going on at the terminal, it's a bit of hike, especially with suitcases, but the ride from the dock to Venice proper is hard to beat, it's not the quickest, it certainly isn't the cheapest, but the view is hard to beat.

btbx11 wrote:

I'm surprised no one (that I noticed) has mentioned Newark. Super-convenient almost one seat ride to Midtown Manhattan. But yeah, SFO, YYZ, SLC, DCA best in North America in my opinion.

While it's not technically a one-seat ride (AirTrain to the station, then NJT/Amtrak), I also think that Newark is definitely more convenient to reach by public transit than LGA, at least from Midtown. The commuter trains are quick and run way more frequently than I had expected them too (flew into EWR for the first time this summer)

As for other well-connected airports, I find LIS and especially MAD to be really convenient. The latter offers two different rail options that are fully integrated into the network, shame that they charge a premium when you buy your ticket at the airport though.

[*]

flyPIT wrote:

As others have stated, ZRH and GVA. Fast, frequent, nonstop heavy rail to the city center, and in the case of GVA it's free! ZRH --> Haubtbahnhof might be free too, I don't remember.

ZRH also has tram [light rail] service- line 10, which maybe more convenient if your actual destination is on the east side of the river/lake.

Gemuser

mtnwest1979 wrote:

STL light rail has stations at both terminals and easy ride to town. Frequent and takes aboit 35 minutes.

On paper yes, but the MetroLink is so crime ridden, it's not worth it.

SCQ83 wrote:

Cory6188 wrote:

The Airport Express in HKG might take the cake. Not only is it a super easy one seat ride from Hong Kong & Kowloon, with a short walk from the station into the terminal, but you can actually check your bag at the train station in town and then you don't have to drag it on the train - not sure it gets much more seamless than that.

From my point of view, anything that is labeled "Express" does not get the prize. It does not only mean that is more expensive, but also that it is disconected from the rest of the city transit system in terms of tickets, etc. You cannot get in one ticket anywhere on the city.

The best approach is certainly the way Dutch/German/Swiss do. The airport is just another part of the city, so you don't need anything "express" or "Special" if you have an excellent public transportation network like they do. In ZRH you can even see people shopping on the supermarkets on Sunday since it is one of the few places in the country where they are open that day.

That might be the ultimate sign of integration of the airport on a regional scale. The airport is such a common place (e.g. you live in a wealthy country where everybody flies multiple times a year) that doing your grocery shopping there is just another option.

You really should visit HK. All fares are integrated on a single card and while it's more expensive than other services, it's on the order of 10-15 USD. To my mind, Hong Kong has the best transport system in the world bar none. I haven't been to Singapore but I consider it way better than Tokyo for example.

LupineChemist wrote:

You really should visit HK. All fares are integrated on a single card and while it's more expensive than other services, it's on the order of 10-15 USD. To my mind, Hong Kong has the best transport system in the world bar none. I haven't been to Singapore but I consider it way better than Tokyo for example.

I have been to HKG and used that train. From my point of view dedicated, "exclusive" services for airports cannot be the best. The "best" is where the airport is completely integrated on a regional level with no particular fares or dedicated trains.

I also recall HKG airport is relatively far from the city center.

SCQ83 wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

Basel-Euroairport is served by a bus, but it works really well anyway. Zürich and Geneva are both top class.

.

That is why I haven't included Basel Airport. Using a bus is not very Swiss. And if you want to go to Strasbourg, good luck! You need to ride the train to St Louis (France) walk about 200m in a secondary road and board the bus to BSL. So badly planned... but that is already France

Wouldnt it be faster to take Bus no. 50 to the SBB, and then get the train to Strasbourg from there?

SCQ83 wrote:

Schönefeld is a dump. Tegel is another one. SXF at least has regional trains and S-Bahn but they are both disconnected from big transportation links. Not sure if long-distance trains can or will stop at BER (so SXF) if it is ever opened!.

Disconnected? From SXF they run more or less directly to all the major transport hubs in Berlin. Physically it's a dump, but you can't complain about the services. It's very cheap too.
The new airport station has been designed for ICE services, so fingers crossed that it will happen some day in my lifetime...

VSMUT wrote:

Wouldnt it be faster to take Bus no. 50 to the SBB, and then get the train to Strasbourg from there?

Not really. It would be more time consuming and more expensive, since you are basically "back-tracking". Doing that way you are doing BSL-Basel SBB-(St Louis)-Strasbourg. The other way is BSL-St Louis-Strasbourg. And the "French" train station in Basel is another dump, so not really more pleasant in any way.

HKG, NRT, KIX, ZRH, KUL, BRU, CDG is not bad either if talking about taking the TGV, not the RER of course!

zakuivcustom wrote:

Well, if Haneda access is really without problem, they would not be planning the new "Haneda Access Rail Line" (Which will not open until 2030 earliest) that will be a one-train ride to Tokyo Stn. AND Shinjuku Stn.. There were also multiple plans to extend the Monorail further north (to Tokyo Stn.) for years with no avail, either. There was also plans for that spur lines on Toei Asakusa Line (Through service from Keikyu) to go to Tokyo Stn. for the same reason - current subway stations at Nihonbashi or Higashi-Ginza are somewhat far from Otemachi/Marunouchi.

Another note - the whole "One train to Tokyo Stn. and Shinjuku Stn." (and Shinagawa, Shibuya, or even Yokohama) is how Narita Express train even stay in competition against the cheaper and quicker Keisei Skyliners anyway.

Haneda is not really easy if you are carrying a lot of stuff. You need to go up and down stairs to change train...

As for Narita, I agree with you, if you go to Shinjuku or Shibuya, unless you really want to save a few yens, it doesn't really make sense to take the Skyliners.

Themotionman wrote:

It's got to be MME!!! Such a frequent service and really popular with the locals!

To be fair the one-seat ride with either be to Middlesbrough or Darlington so not exactly a missed opportunity

Fred

It sounds like we’re just listing any airport with direct public transportation at this point regardless of distance.

You won’t beat BOS, no it’s not a modern train like HKG but the silver line will have you from the terminal door to downtown in literally 5-10mins.

And since we’re going wild and just naming anything in this thread we might as well throw ORD in the mix. Again not as modern as you might find in Asia or Europe but it’s pretty damn convienent.

DEN has to be in this conversation-- the trains are all newer and it's a 39-minute ride from DEN to Union Station in the heart of downtown. At the airport for your return journey, there are ticketing and baggage check facilities at the train station, so you simply have to take the escalator up to security.

ATL is a 15-20 minute ride on the train from the airport to Five Points. Never even have to set foot outside.

DCA is also extremely convenient. I imagine when it opens though, taking metro to downtown from IAD will be miserable.

I'm curious to know if anyone has used the new DART light rail connection to DFW? Certainly was a long time coming.

Several people have repeated the same cities here. What are the rules? Is it an airport linked via a special train or line? (JFK, BKK, HKG). Are we looking for an airport that is intergrated into the public transit rail of the city? (SYD, SIN, ATL, PDX, SLC, MAD)

SCQ83 wrote:

German/Swiss airports are the best. IMO the best connectivity is provided in an airport with

- Long-distance trains to other cities
- Suburban/urban trains to the city center and other areas
- Bus services (if necessary)
- No special supplement to reach the airport (we are in 2018!)

So the airport is completely linked to a national rail system. All at so convenient frequencies that you don't even bother to think about how to get in or out at any time.

IMO they tick the box with high marks: Amsterdam, Düsseldorf, Frankfurt, Köln, Genève, Zürich, Copenhagen. Those are all airports exceptionally well connected by train and where you are about 10-15 minutes to the city center on a standard city public transportation ticket. Munich is already too far from the city and too expensive.
...

I'd add BRE (streetcar to the main station in 15 minutes) and NUE (subway). MUC is great if you don't consider the airport's distance to the city centre. I mean it's not the fault of the train system, is it?

USAirKid wrote:

SEA has a one seat ride on Link Light Rail. https://www.soundtransit.org/Schedules/Link-light-rail

Some folks will complain its a bit of a long walk to the link station from the airport terminal. Its not the shortest walk, but its dictated by the terminal's v-shape design.

It is a bit of a walk to/from, but you're smack downtown in half an hour. It's certainly better than trying to talk someone into a pick up/drop off at SEA these days.

Elsewhere, AMS, IST and BOS have all impressed me on visits. My first visit to AMS was on a four hour layover and I managed to get around town a bit, see a museum and still get back to AMS in time to get through security.

mackdad wrote:

Several people have repeated the same cities here. What are the rules? Is it an airport linked via a special train or line? (JFK, BKK, HKG). Are we looking for an airport that is intergrated into the public transit rail of the city? (SYD, SIN, ATL, PDX, SLC, MAD)

While Madrid is very well connected, IMO it is far from optimal.

- Suburban train (C1): it only reaches T4. If you are landing in T123 you need to take a (free) bus shuttle between the terminals. Schedules are far from optimal, at peak times maybe 15-20 minutes but for instance to catch the first trains in the morning you have sometimes 1 hour gaps between trains!

- Metro (L8) fine since you have two stations in T123 and T4. However there is a "metro supplement". Ironically Barajas (town) metro station is located between the two airport stations and has no supplement.

- 24h Express Bus. OK concept with a prime (5 Euros). Considering there are other options, it is fine.

- Other bus lines. There are other bus lines that reach the airport and are not actively published by AENA since they have "standard" prices. They should.

- High-speed train. IMO a critical issue. Chamartín is only 3 stops away in the C1 side so for interconnection (train/plane) you need to change at T4. So for someone going from T1 to Chamartín to pick a train, you have to take to above mentioned free shuttle bus to T4, the the Cercanías from T4 to Chamartín and then the train. To Atocha it is even longer.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

ORD good access but far too many stops on the Blue Line; in an ideal world they would have Express service.

Agreed - an express service on this would be a boon to the traffic on (always clogged) I90: the introduction of a rapid service could get tens of thousands of cars of this road every day, and save hundreds of millions in needed improvements in the I90. Why has no one in Chicago pushed for this before? It has always seemed a complete no-brainer to me. But then again, much as I love Chicago, the city and the state often make what seem to outsiders like me, bizarre decisions.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

ORD good access but far too many stops on the Blue Line; in an ideal world they would have Express service.

vhtje wrote:

Agreed - an express service on this would be a boon to the traffic on (always clogged) I90: the introduction of a rapid service could get tens of thousands of cars of this road every day, and save hundreds of millions in needed improvements in the I90. Why has no one in Chicago pushed for this before? It has always seemed a complete no-brainer to me. But then again, much as I love Chicago, the city and the state often make what seem to outsiders like me, bizarre decisions.

The Blue Line takes 35-40 to get into the loop with headways as short as 3 minutes.. That's on par (or often better than) many cities' service. Not sure why it gets so many complaints.

masgniw wrote:

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

ORD good access but far too many stops on the Blue Line; in an ideal world they would have Express service.

vhtje wrote:

Agreed - an express service on this would be a boon to the traffic on (always clogged) I90: the introduction of a rapid service could get tens of thousands of cars of this road every day, and save hundreds of millions in needed improvements in the I90. Why has no one in Chicago pushed for this before? It has always seemed a complete no-brainer to me. But then again, much as I love Chicago, the city and the state often make what seem to outsiders like me, bizarre decisions.

The Blue Line takes 35-40 to get into the loop with headways as short as 3 minutes.. That's on par (or often better than) many cities' service. Not sure why it gets so many complaints.

Because it is not just the journey time that is the issue. The very frequent stops are frustrating. It’s freezing. Oh here’s another stop, the doors open and in comes the cold. The carriages do not have anywhere to store luggage - so luggage is constantly in the way of other short journey passengers as they make ingress and egress. The seats are not great.

An airport servicing a large city needs a dedicated rapid train system; nobody in the US seems to understand this; instead airports are given over to cars. It is always much more convenient to get to the rental car garage at a US airport than it is to public transport (SFO might be a notable exception). This is the direct opposite of Europe - LHR, ZHR, FRA etc all have direct train access from the terminal buildings, and you have to search to find the rental cars.

I really wish Chicago would show leadership on this and show the rest of the US how it is done. Mostly because it could be achieved so easily and relatively cheaply.

vhtje wrote:

masgniw wrote:

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

ORD good access but far too many stops on the Blue Line; in an ideal world they would have Express service.

vhtje wrote:

Agreed - an express service on this would be a boon to the traffic on (always clogged) I90: the introduction of a rapid service could get tens of thousands of cars of this road every day, and save hundreds of millions in needed improvements in the I90. Why has no one in Chicago pushed for this before? It has always seemed a complete no-brainer to me. But then again, much as I love Chicago, the city and the state often make what seem to outsiders like me, bizarre decisions.

The Blue Line takes 35-40 to get into the loop with headways as short as 3 minutes.. That's on par (or often better than) many cities' service. Not sure why it gets so many complaints.

Because it is not just the journey time that is the issue. The very frequent stops are frustrating. It’s freezing. Oh here’s another stop, the doors open and in comes the cold. The carriages do not have anywhere to store luggage - so luggage is constantly in the way of other short journey passengers as they make ingress and egress. The seats are not great.

An airport servicing a large city needs a dedicated rapid train system; nobody in the US seems to understand this; instead airports are given over to cars. It is always much more convenient to get to the rental car garage at a US airport than it is to public transport (SFO might be a notable exception). This is the direct opposite of Europe - LHR, ZHR, FRA etc all have direct train access from the terminal buildings, and you have to search to find the rental cars.

I really wish Chicago would show leadership on this and show the rest of the US how it is done. Mostly because it could be achieved so easily and relatively cheaply.

Easily and cheaply? I see you don't understand US politics.

We don't need express transit to airports. Places like SEA, SFO, PDX, ORD, JFK and many other US airports have easy connections with main rail. They all can get you downtown in the 40 min range with good headways, affordable prices, and countless transfers. I don't see the point of shelling out billions of dollars for constructing express rail lines that have singular purpose and don't even save that much time when you can leverage existing systems in an extremely efficient manner.

masgniw wrote:

We don't need express transit to airports. Places like SEA, SFO, PDX, ORD, JFK and many other US airports have easy connections with main rail. They all can get you downtown in the 40 min range with good headways, affordable prices, and countless transfers. I don't see the point of shelling out billions of dollars for constructing express rail lines that have singular purpose and don't even save that much time when you can leverage existing systems in an extremely efficient manner.

To be fair about ORD - the "easiest" quicker downtown access would be extend the Metra Line (North Central Service) into the airport, and (much) increase its frequency. Good luck with that, though.

US is not the only country that seems to think "all stop metro system" is the solution, though. In mainland China, and airports like CAN (1+ hour with 15+ stops to either "old" downtown Guangzhou aka Liwan area or "new" downtown aka Tianhe area) and both airports in Shanghai (Even SHA/Hongqiao, the "in town" airport, takes 40+ mins to areas like Nanjing East Road with ~10 stops on the Metro, Pudong is worse, taking 1.5 hr with ~20 stops on Shanghai Metro. And BTW, the Maglev is useless). There are few airports that are connected the Chinese Railway (Some on intercity railway i.e. what I consider "semi-HSR"), though, like WUH and CTU.

P.S. Just on a side note - the OP only talks about "one-seat ride". In another word, I guess it DOESN'T necessarily have to be train? So I guess something like LAX Flyaway Bus can be included also?

zakuivcustom wrote:

P.S. Just on a side note - the OP only talks about "one-seat ride". In another word, I guess it DOESN'T necessarily have to be train? So I guess something like LAX Flyaway Bus can be included also?

True, busses are allowed too however in my opinion trains are better. A bus has a limited capacity and is often less comfortable. For an airport the size of LAX you'd definitely expect some kind of rail connection at the center of the airport, but there isn't. Best they can offer is Aviation / LAX Station at the Green line, but to get from there to Union Station isn't exactly easy and it isn't non-stop either. Besides, Aviation / LAX Station is a good walking distance away from the airport.

Therefor I'd say LAX certainly doesn't make it to the top airports in the world.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

zakuivcustom wrote:

P.S. Just on a side note - the OP only talks about "one-seat ride". In another word, I guess it DOESN'T necessarily have to be train? So I guess something like LAX Flyaway Bus can be included also?

True, busses are allowed too however in my opinion trains are better. A bus has a limited capacity and is often less comfortable. For an airport the size of LAX you'd definitely expect some kind of rail connection at the center of the airport, but there isn't. Best they can offer is Aviation / LAX Station at the Green line, but to get from there to Union Station isn't exactly easy and it isn't non-stop either. Besides, Aviation / LAX Station is a good walking distance away from the airport.

Therefor I'd say LAX certainly doesn't make it to the top airports in the world.

I am just using the Flyaway Bus as example (It is the first example I can think of in US).

The Airport Metro Connector APM would help (whenever it is complete...), but even after that’s done, it Is still not a one-seat ride, so LAX is not going to be qualify on this list any time soon.

Has anyone mentioned BHX? While technically you have to ride the ~2 minute (and free) Monorail to get from the terminal to the railway station, from there you can be in New Street in 10 minutes. Furthermore, regional trains connect you directly with dozens of smaller towns between Birmingham and London, then Virgin West Coast and CrossCountry can take you as far as Edinburgh or Bournemouth straight from the airport platform!

Always considered BHX my airport of choice for this reason despite living geographically closer to all the London airports.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

zakuivcustom wrote:

P.S. Just on a side note - the OP only talks about "one-seat ride". In another word, I guess it DOESN'T necessarily have to be train? So I guess something like LAX Flyaway Bus can be included also?

True, busses are allowed too however in my opinion trains are better. A bus has a limited capacity and is often less comfortable. For an airport the size of LAX you'd definitely expect some kind of rail connection at the center of the airport, but there isn't. Best they can offer is Aviation / LAX Station at the Green line, but to get from there to Union Station isn't exactly easy and it isn't non-stop either. Besides, Aviation / LAX Station is a good walking distance away from the airport.

Therefor I'd say LAX certainly doesn't make it to the top airports in the world.

Sigh. LAX FlyAway is more comfortable than most any subway system. It uses coach-style buses and stores luggage underneath the passenger area that the driver helps stow for you. I don't see a lot of trains offering that.

ikramerica wrote:

Marco Polo in Venice has the must fun one via water bus, though the walk to the boats maybe not so short (I forget).

Agreed. The terminal is being continuously expanded, and the inauguration of the new water terminal and elevated walkway (see e.g. this video between 00:18 and 00:26: https://youtu.be/3tFTc9BWE2U?t=17) has tremendously improved waterside accessibility. Depending on where you need to go, the water bus ride can take anywhere from 30 to 90 minutes, and it is quite pricey at 15 euros one way or 8 euros for residents, but it is very scenic.

VSMUT wrote:

SCQ83 wrote:

Schönefeld is a dump. Tegel is another one. SXF at least has regional trains and S-Bahn but they are both disconnected from big transportation links. Not sure if long-distance trains can or will stop at BER (so SXF) if it is ever opened!.

Disconnected? From SXF they run more or less directly to all the major transport hubs in Berlin. Physically it's a dump, but you can't complain about the services. It's very cheap too.
The new airport station has been designed for ICE services, so fingers crossed that it will happen some day in my lifetime...

I fly from SXF every couple of weeks and would agree that the transport links are convenient and cheap, at only 3,10EUR. I can leave the office, hop on the train at Friedrichstraße and be at the airport in 30 minutes, and honestly I much prefer the convenience of a rail connection to the risk of being stuck in a traffic jam in the access road to TXL.

The only thing I detest about SXF, apart from the abysmal terminal facilities and F&B offerings, is the seemingly endless trek between the platform and the terminal, especially in the winter as the walkway is only partly covered. Also, the timetables of the regional trains from SXF towards the city could use some adjustments, as they depart at weird intervals (:03 and :44 past the hour). It's a bit better travelling from the city centre to the airport, as there is a train almost exactly every 30 minutes, plus of course the S9 and S45.

One airport that technically would have a good connection, but hardly tells anyone, is DUS. I don't use the airport too much, but only this year, about 20 years after being there for the first time, I noticed that they have two different train stops. One is Dusseldorf Airport, which is connected to the Terminal building by SkyTrain and would be the logical choice for most. But even more conveniently located is Dusseldorf Airport Terminal station. Granted, it doesn't have long-distance train connections, but for those coming from or going to the city centre, this doesn't make much difference. And it saves you buying another ticket, as technically you would need to pay for the SkyTrain (something I have always refused to do...)

VSMUT wrote:

. I don't think I've experienced a German airport that was bad.

Berlin-Tegel. The TXL bus, while frequent, is an absolute nightmare and almost impossible to have a comfortable ride on. No luggage racks, and it can barely accommodate all the people travelling to and from the airport as well. Packed to the gills. The traffic to and from the airport can be bad as well.

DUS, FRA and MUC do have excellent rail connections, though. Although for some reason my S8 train from MUC yesterday was stuck at Ostbahnhof for at least 10-15 minutes (technical issue perhaps)...

EricAY05 wrote:

ZRF->Hbh is certainly not free. I think prices have to be factored into the discussion as well. OSL, for example, is a joke. The train ride to downtown literally costs more than many flights to OSL. Heathrow Express is very close and totally useless if you have to continue your journey from Paddington by tube or bus or whatever.

Don't take the Flytoget. Just take NSB - it's like 5 minutes slower (literally) and costs less than €10 (well, usually - it's 92NOK).

OlafW wrote:

One airport that technically would have a good connection, but hardly tells anyone, is DUS. I don't use the airport too much, but only this year, about 20 years after being there for the first time, I noticed that they have two different train stops. One is Dusseldorf Airport, which is connected to the Terminal building by SkyTrain and would be the logical choice for most. But even more conveniently located is Dusseldorf Airport Terminal station. Granted, it doesn't have long-distance train connections, but for those coming from or going to the city centre, this doesn't make much difference. And it saves you buying another ticket, as technically you would need to pay for the SkyTrain (something I have always refused to do...)

I don't think I've ever noticed anyone buying a ticket for the SkyTrain. There's no enforcement (that I've ever seen). But yes, the terminal station is a neat trick. I only discovered it last time I was there.

SCQ83 wrote:

And I used BMA a couple of years ago and the only connection to the center is a bus and we had to wait outside like 15 min (in winter in Stockholm ). Really messy for the "Stockholm-City" airport; even in LCY you have the DLR. Scandinavians might do some stuff well, but not public transportation (I reckon density here is a key player).

In general I think we do, and CPH is probably one of the best connected airports. But BMA is a mess, since the future of the airport is a bit unclear, there hasn't been any investments in public transport links to the airport.

How about SBN (South Bend IN). You can walk over to the South Shore and be in down town Chicago IL in just under 2 hours. Just because it's a different city in a different state shouldn't rule it out.

Let’s not forget Lisbon. Red line all the way.

exFWAOONW wrote:

How about SBN (South Bend IN). You can walk over to the South Shore and be in down town Chicago IL in just under 2 hours. Just because it's a different city in a different state shouldn't rule it out.

This is exceedingly convoluted and there's no way anyone does this.

Australian airports are quite poor in this regard. Almost always they're privatised, and in the case of SYD and BNE they're ran on public rolling stock. In BNE the 16km trip to the CBD costs the same as a ~250km trip from Gold Coast to Gympie on the exact same rolling stock. In SYD the rail link continues to the suburbs causing congestion problems at certain times of the day. What I do like about SYD is I can step off the plane and with fortunate timing be at Circular Quay within 30-35 minutes.

ADL at least has an affordable local bus, but going along public roads it is prone to traffic congestion and takes a lot longer than it should concidering the how close the airport is to the CBD.

If I'm not in a rush I'll seek out the most affordable way even if it takes much longer. When I go to AKL I'll usually take a local bus to Onehunga or Papatoetoe then local train for half as much as the Skybus.

The key is do your research beforehand and find out which is the best option. I wonder how many tourists get off at LHR and automatically take the Heathrow Express because it has the most prominent marketing, without realising the Heathow Connect or the Tube are cheaper options.

I'm traveling to OSL next month and realised I can the NSB train to Sentralstasjon only has a 3 minute disadvantage to the Flytoget but costs 90 NOK less (US$11) each way.

vhqpa wrote:

The key is do your research beforehand and find out which is the best option.

Definitely. Doing that, I could avoid the station access fee at SYD, walking over to Wolli Creek before returning to the city through both airport stops. It is quite some walk, especially with suitcase, but stepping off of a 10 hour flight, I felt there's nothing wrong with taking a morning stroll...

ACCS300 wrote:

I'd argue YVR is up there too, trains every 6-9 mins, $3 going to YVR and $9 from YVR, about 25 mins to city centre.

What's up with the price difference? Train fares from AMS are precisely the same as train fares to AMS.