With GLA's railway link getting canned again, it got me thinking about the number of large airports (circa 10 million pax) that don't have any form of rail link and solely rely on road transport to get to.

The only other majors one that I can think of are:

DUB
PER (one is under construction)
MEL
LAX (people mover to subway under construction)
LTN (has a proposed people mover to railway station)

What other major airports don't have a rail link?

LGA, DTW, DFW, IAH, MCO, LAS

YUL

In the USA:

LAX
FLL
MCO
TPA
HNL
DTW
LAS
LGA
CLT
IAH
AUS
IAD

Germany's 4th busiest surprisingly, TXL

AKL Auckland. They're planning on building a tram though....in ten years. What a joke.

KEF broke the 10 million passenger barrier last year and has no rail connections. In fact, Iceland doesn't have a rail network at all with all connections both inside the city of Reykjavik and across the country either by road, air or ferry.

Prague, Basel, Budapest, Naples, Nice, Venice (bus or boat).

IAD is getting a metro extension that should open sometime this year, I was shooting there this past weekend and the stations look nearly complete. That being said the trip from downtown DC would be at least an hour.

BAINY3 wrote:

In the USA:

LAX
FLL
MCO
TPA
HNL
DTW
LAS
LGA
CLT
IAH
AUS
IAD

IAD will have rail some time in 2020, who knows though what with all the delays and scandals with the concrete quality...

kavok wrote:

LGA, DTW, DFW, IAH, MCO, LAS

DFW has been connected to the Dallas light rail system since 2014. Also, just in the last month, a new rail service connecting DFW to Fort Worth (TEX rail) began service.

MCO doesn't have any rail service yet, but they've built the station and are working on the connections to add service.

Other airports with projects underway:

IAD doesn't currently have rail service, but it's under construction right now and should open within a year.

Similarly, HNL has a rail line under construction that will serve the airport.

For busy US airports without service and without concrete plans to build new service: CLT, TPA come to mind.

kavok wrote:

LGA, DTW, DFW, IAH, MCO, LAS

DART (Orange Line) goes to DFW, as does TEXRail (to Fort Worth), so that can be taken off the list.

LAX is currently the busiest airport (by miles) without direct rail access. Once that APM is finish, though, I believe the next busiest airport without rail access is LAS (Which could have been solve if they ever extend that monorail to the airport). After that it's CLT and MCO, then MNL (Although MNL has a proposed subway line going into the airport). After that is, well, IAH and its awful public transport access.

Another "busy" airport without rail links would be PRG (~16.8M pax in 2018).

EDIT:

CometOrbit wrote:

Prague, Basel, Budapest, Naples, Nice, Venice (bus or boat).

BUD technically has a rail link, although the station is next to the closed T1 rather than T2 (Which is the terminal in use).

In the U.S. it's easier to list those that do have a rail link. Even an airport like JFK or BOS that do have rail service, the station is off-airport and you must take the airport's terminal train/bus to the rail station. You can't just walk there, at least not easily.

Breathe wrote:

LTN (has a proposed people mover to railway station)

LTN has Luton Airport Parkway station with trains to London St. Pancras taking just 30min. There are buses waiting to bring you the last 1/1.5 mile to the terminal. Have used this service twice recently and have found it to be just fine.

ShanghaiNoon wrote:

YUL

There is a rail connection currently under construction to the airport that will link downtown as well as both north and south shore and west end of montreal island

FlyingHollander wrote:

Breathe wrote:

LTN (has a proposed people mover to railway station)

LTN has Luton Airport Parkway station with trains to London St. Pancras taking just 30min. There are buses waiting to bring you the last 1/1.5 mile to the terminal. Have used this service twice recently and have found it to be just fine.

But the railway station is not IN the airport, though, nor there's a "train" (Monorail or People Mover) from the terminal to the railway station.

Or else one can argue that LAX has rail links via that "G" Shuttle to LAX/Aviation (Currently Hawthrone/Lennox Station due to Construction) on LA Metro Green Line.

BOM - Mumbai does not have any train/tram link as of yet. Although there are proposed metro links in the near future. The nearest current train station is around 2km away.

LUXembourg, but I heard they're working on a rail link.

PMI is the busiest in Spain without rail link (29 million PAX). Despite being an island, Palma de Mallorca has suburban trains and even an underground metro system. https://www.tib.org/en/web/ctm/metro

ALC is the second busiest in Spain without train connection. Really stupid because otherwise Alicante metro area has a relatively good suburban train / tramway network (Alicante TRAM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alicante_Tram ) yet the extension to the airport hasn't been built yet.

LAX is the most annoying, specially with the extremely heavy traffic on the 405 and into LAX.

LAS isn't that bad considering it's almost next to the strip. I fly in about 6 times a year and very rarely have ever come across traffic.

SEA’s rail link you can walk but it’s like over a mile.

CometOrbit wrote:

Prague, Basel, Budapest, Naples, Nice, Venice (bus or boat).

Prague, Budapest have planned metro connections, but it's delayed/slowed every year. Prague will also have a heavy rail connection but it isn't planned to be ready before 2023.

Nice will have a fast tram connection to the city centre in summer 2019.

It's ridiculous how many Canadian Airports don't have train service. Actually NONE do to be accurate. Vancouver has the Canada Line and Toronto has the UP Express, but both are light rail. Even so, cities such as Calgary build 4 or 5 new station in the NE but purposely avoided the airport, even after its mega expansion with runway 35R-17L added and a new "modern" terminal. Being based as a pilot in Calgary, and sometimes having to commute there, it's really annoying that I actually have to rent a car instead of taking the train. Taxi / Uber is insanely expensive. With my airline discount, it's cheaper for me to do that. As a matter of fact I'm doing that today. $50 for 24 hours for the car or $60 each way by taxi / Uber to the SE where I have my crash pad. (It's far, but it's free, so I can't complain). None the less, rail link at Canadian airports are almost none existent. Pretty pathetic.

The people of Detroit continuously vote NO on light rail to and from DTW as well as the region itself. Apparently, the reason is because the project would require an increase in taxpayer money, something in which over 50% of the population in that area either wont use/benefit from, or fund from their taxes. Someone with more knowledge about this metro area could probably explain it better.

FlyRow wrote:

Nice will have a fast tram connection to the city centre in summer 2019.

NCE is very close to the existing train line (between Nice and Cannes). I never understood why they never tried to connect the airport to the train with some kind of structure with automated people movers like Orlyval or Düsseldorf Airport.

LIS an airport with 29M pax in 2018 doesn’t have a train station or connection, albeit it is now connected to the Metro

flymco753 wrote:

The people of Detroit continuously vote NO on light rail to and from DTW as well as the region itself. Apparently, the reason is because the project would require an increase in taxpayer money, something in which over 50% of the population in that area either wont use/benefit from, or fund from their taxes. Someone with more knowledge about this metro area could probably explain it better.

Yes, the issue is that the majority of DTW users are coming from Oakland County, Northwestern Wayne County (Livonia/Plymouth/Northville area), Macomb County, or Washtenaw County. If the rail were to be paid for either through PFC's or a regional millage, they would all end up paying for it, yet pretty much all of the proposals just propose linking DTW to Downtown, which would not be usable to any of those communities where the bulk of valuable homes (which would pay the highest millage) or frequent travelers live. The only way it's getting built is if a coalition of downtown business owners pays for it.

SCQ83 wrote:

FlyRow wrote:

Nice will have a fast tram connection to the city centre in summer 2019.

NCE is very close to the existing train line (between Nice and Cannes). I never understood why they never tried to connect the airport to the train with some kind of structure with automated people movers like Orlyval or Düsseldorf Airport.

Indeed, there is even a station 800m from T2 (St,Laurent Du Var) , and 600m from T1 (Nice St. Agustin).

acos24 wrote:

BAINY3 wrote:

In the USA:

LAX
FLL
MCO
TPA
HNL
DTW
LAS
LGA
CLT
IAH
AUS
IAD

IAD will have rail some time in 2020, who knows though what with all the delays and scandals with the concrete quality...

FLL has a link to TriRail via a dedicated shuttle between the terminals and the Airport station @ Griffin Rd. PBI also has a shuttle to the W Palm TriRail station.

BAINY3 wrote:

In the USA:

LAX
FLL
MCO
TPA
HNL
DTW
LAS
LGA
CLT
IAH
AUS
IAD

FLL is linked to Tri-Rail.

Vio wrote:

It's ridiculous how many Canadian Airports don't have train service. Actually NONE do to be accurate. Vancouver has the Canada Line and Toronto has the UP Express, but both are light rail.

That's not accurate at all.

Vancouver's SkyTrain is as good as transit gets. Fully grade-separated, fully automated, fast and frequent service.

The UP Express in Toronto is likewise not 'light rail' in any sense; they operate a DMU train on mainline railways to connect the airport to Union Station. The main criticism here is (correctly) on the UP Express fares, and how they've tried to make it be an 'airport express' rather than just integrating it into the actual transit system.

EuroAirport Basel-Mulhouse-Freiburg has no rail connection, AFAIK

SAN, at 25 million+ pax per year, has Amtrak, Coaster, and the trolley line run by it, but not into it. The story was that when the Blue Line trolley was being extended north from downtown, an original proposal sought to put a line into the airport, but the cab drivers' lobby threw a fit and said, "that'll take money from our childrens' mouths!" or something along that line. So, instead, we ended up with Harbor Drive in the condition it is today.

Some in our community have thrown a fit that the new terminal has been delayed; I on the other hand am glad that Circulate San Diego stood up and said, "no, we need mass transit!". We most definitely need to have some sort of rail link here!!

drdisque wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

The people of Detroit continuously vote NO on light rail to and from DTW as well as the region itself. Apparently, the reason is because the project would require an increase in taxpayer money, something in which over 50% of the population in that area either wont use/benefit from, or fund from their taxes. Someone with more knowledge about this metro area could probably explain it better.

Yes, the issue is that the majority of DTW users are coming from Oakland County, Northwestern Wayne County (Livonia/Plymouth/Northville area), Macomb County, or Washtenaw County. If the rail were to be paid for either through PFC's or a regional millage, they would all end up paying for it, yet pretty much all of the proposals just propose linking DTW to Downtown, which would not be usable to any of those communities where the bulk of valuable homes (which would pay the highest millage) or frequent travelers live. The only way it's getting built is if a coalition of downtown business owners pays for it.

It'll probably happen eventually, but I'd say this is the single largest problem the airport is facing next to consolidated rental car facilities. The airport is definitely not visitor friendly.

Redwood839 wrote:

LAS isn't that bad considering it's almost next to the strip. I fly in about 6 times a year and very rarely have ever come across traffic.

Being just across Tropicana Ave, I don´t know how hard it would be to extend the monorail from the last stop at MGM Grand to the airport.

EZE, biggest international airport in Argentina with 10M pax, has no rail link either.
Actually, AEP, the busiest airport with 13M pax, has a train passing just by the airport's outside fence, but no station.
It has been planned many times, but the road transport and taxi drivers unions are too strong to let that happen.

blockski wrote:

The UP Express in Toronto is likewise not 'light rail' in any sense; they operate a DMU train on mainline railways to connect the airport to Union Station. The main criticism here is (correctly) on the UP Express fares, and how they've tried to make it be an 'airport express' rather than just integrating it into the actual transit system.

I've heard this before, and as an outsider I don't understand how the fare - IINM $12.90 for frequent service essentially from the terminal to the heart of downtown - is at all unreasonable for the service offered. Can you help me understand?

It's also worth remembering that not all rail connections are created equal. For some, the level of service on the rail line stinks. For others, the connection to and from the airport stinks. And some (like, say, FLL) both are bad (shuttle bus to an infrequent rail line).

The best airport/transit links in the US, to my mind, are:

Transit right to the terminal:
DCA - It wasn't always this way, as the Metro station was built a long walk from the original terminal; but since the mid-90s development of Terminals B/C it's hard to bead DCA's easy access. Also helpful that the line doesn't terminate at DCA, you can catch Metro heading in either direction.
ORD: Great connections for all except T5
MDW: A bit of a walk, but still hard to beat the access.
ATL: Very easy connection into the terminal; fairly extensive transit network

These four are also, by far, the most used airport/transit links in the US. SFO could be a lot better if the BART connection was better designed.

There are plenty of other places with light rail networks and airport connections, but the quality of the connection as well as the relative weakness of the transit network often hurts the usefulness of the transit link.

MSP, SEA, and PDX are the best light rail connections.

DFW's station is in an odd location and the dispersed terminal layout makes it difficult; the DART network is large and Dallas isn't nearly as downtown-oriented to support good transit connections.

---

Bus/People Mover connections to transit: These are far too common in the US, mainly (IMHO) because of obscure funding rules that limit how airport funds can be used on transit projects.

JFK: decent connections to a wide range of transit services; even if there were better transit to the terminal itself, the location of JFK would make it kinda difficult to serve.
BOS
OAK

Manila, the major Philippines gateway has no rail link. The traffic around Manila is fearsome, with some very long jams. There is not even much help from any very convenient, frequent, and dependable bus service. Seems to me the only real way to get to/from the various terminals there into Makati/Malate/etc is by taxi, and to try planning your trip with an arrival time that is outside the worst of the traffic times. How the "city fathers" failed to build out the metro lines into the airport is just amazing.

Clark is even a worse case, but at least it seems a railway link is being constructed!

yonikasz wrote:

SEA’s rail link you can walk but it’s like over a mile.

It's about 1/4 mile on a covered walkway... 5 or so minutes. The bigger problem for SEA is that the light rail is a single line and it really only goes north (one stop at the south end of the airport), so unless you are on that line, it's not very useful. It's not a subway or real train line with branches in many directions that feed to an airport line.

DAL does not. You have to take a bus 2 - 2.5 miles to get to the Inwood Road light rail station.

flymco753 wrote:

The people of Detroit continuously vote NO on light rail to and from DTW as well as the region itself. Apparently, the reason is because the project would require an increase in taxpayer money, something in which over 50% of the population in that area either wont use/benefit from, or fund from their taxes. Someone with more knowledge about this metro area could probably explain it better.

Lack of population density and no meaningful (People Mover - ha!) rail transit to connect to. These are the same problems with LAS, MCO and TPA. Rail just isn't a substantial part of the transit network for those cities. $3 Billion to build a single rail line from the airport(s) to 'downtown' isn't going to change that. Seattle Link, ~14 miles from Sea-Tac to Westlake, $2.6 Billion in construction costs and fares cover 40% of operating costs across the Sound Transit network. You might as well ask why FLL doesn't have any big downhill ski resorts nearby.

I fly to Vegas a lot for business and you have to be careful with the cab drivers there. Some of the drivers will attempt to take the highway to the strip to pad the fare. The taxi lobby is very strong there and they lobbied hard to prevent the monorail from extending to the airport. I am not sure this is ever going to happen. Car rentals are cheap there and Uber is quick and inexpensive to get around town. Avoid taking a taxi if you can.

Cubsrule wrote:

blockski wrote:

The UP Express in Toronto is likewise not 'light rail' in any sense; they operate a DMU train on mainline railways to connect the airport to Union Station. The main criticism here is (correctly) on the UP Express fares, and how they've tried to make it be an 'airport express' rather than just integrating it into the actual transit system.

I've heard this before, and as an outsider I don't understand how the fare - IINM $12.90 for frequent service essentially from the terminal to the heart of downtown - is at all unreasonable for the service offered. Can you help me understand?

Sure - that's the current fare. The original fare was $27.50 cash, $19.00 with a Presto card. Consequently, no one was riding it and they had to slash fares after less than a year. You can read more here: https://www.citylab.com/transportation/ ... ry/551012/

The other big change was that they had been charging a flat fare no matter where you boarded; they changed that to charge less if you boarded for less than the full ride, and they offered a discount for transfers to the TTC.

airplanenut wrote:

yonikasz wrote:

SEA’s rail link you can walk but it’s like over a mile.

It's about 1/4 mile on a covered walkway... 5 or so minutes. The bigger problem for SEA is that the light rail is a single line and it really only goes north (one stop at the south end of the airport), so unless you are on that line, it's not very useful. It's not a subway or real train line with branches in many directions that feed to an airport line.

Are you counting before you get to the parking garage or after?

JFK does not have a real, direct rail link.

blockski wrote:

It's also worth remembering that not all rail connections are created equal. For some, the level of service on the rail line stinks. For others, the connection to and from the airport stinks. And some (like, say, FLL) both are bad (shuttle bus to an infrequent rail line).

The best airport/transit links in the US, to my mind, are:

Transit right to the terminal:
DCA - It wasn't always this way, as the Metro station was built a long walk from the original terminal; but since the mid-90s development of Terminals B/C it's hard to bead DCA's easy access. Also helpful that the line doesn't terminate at DCA, you can catch Metro heading in either direction.
ORD: Great connections for all except T5
MDW: A bit of a walk, but still hard to beat the access.
ATL: Very easy connection into the terminal; fairly extensive transit network

These four are also, by far, the most used airport/transit links in the US. SFO could be a lot better if the BART connection was better designed.

Don’t forget Denver. New, speedy train (the A Line) right to the terminal. Service every 15 min with a 35 min ride to downtown’s Union Station. Considered coummuter rail, but service is very metro-like (some level crossings but train has priority). Connections to the rest of Denver’s better than average (by US standards anyhow) light/commuter rail system.

PHL (all terminals) have direct commuter train service to Center City and the suburbs on Septa Regional Rail and depart every 30 mins.

kavok wrote:

LGA, DTW, DFW, IAH, MCO, LAS

DFW has DART to downtown Dallas and TEX Rail to downtown Ft Worth.

YUL will be connected by the new REM system in 2022