Why is that remote stands are so common in Europe's major hubs such as FRA, CDG, DUS, LHR, BCN? Not flying LCC's but mainline carriers like LH, KL, AF, IB
Every time I get a remote stand I see several empty gates from the bus.
Why is that in the US you never get a remote stand even in the most crowded hubs like ORD, ATL?
Poor traffic management? Poor scheduling? Something else?
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Re: Remote Stands
upperdeckfan wrote:Why is that remote stands are so common in Europe's major hubs such as FRA, CDG, DUS, LHR, BCN? Not flying LCC's but mainline carriers like LH, KL, AF, IB
Every time I get a remote stand I see several empty gates from the bus.
Why is that in the US you never get a remote stand even in the most crowded hubs like ORD, ATL?
Poor traffic management? Poor scheduling? Something else?
Different pricing structures, many airports charge less for usage of remote stands. Bay planning can be a hideous game of Tetris, different turn and layover times. May have been vacant at that time you saw them but only as the free time was shorter than that of a carrier who was willing to pay.
US DOT anti discrimination act requirements make passenger handling on remote stands equipment and resource intensive, (purely speculation) but this could make it prohibitively expensive for ongoing usage in US ports. Not to mention US Pax handling above wing is very lean as it is.
Re: Remote Stands
Are turn-arounds shorter in Europe? You can't turn a plane in 20min, which is common in EU-airports, but you can't do that with a jetbridge.
Might also be a culture thing, not to judge or over generelize. But in the US walking is much less common, even for short trips the car is king. In Europe walking (or biking) is much more common, so the minute outside / in the rain isn't percieved as bas as in the US maybe.
Might also be a culture thing, not to judge or over generelize. But in the US walking is much less common, even for short trips the car is king. In Europe walking (or biking) is much more common, so the minute outside / in the rain isn't percieved as bas as in the US maybe.
-
- 32andBelow
- Posts: 6736
- Joined:
Re: Remote Stands
Different cost structures. In the USA most of the gates are owned by the airlines themselves. They can use them as many times as day as they want.
-
- GalaxyFlyer
- Posts: 12400
- Joined:
Re: Remote Stands
Different cultures alright! In the US, the customer rules; elsewhere the customer is self loading freight. That said, once the customer leaves the carriers’ jetway, it’s a horror show here.
GF
GF
-
- DiamondFlyer
- Posts: 3835
- Joined:
Re: Remote Stands
32andBelow wrote:Different cost structures. In the USA most of the gates are owned by the airlines themselves. They can use them as many times as day as they want.
That's not true. Most airlines have exclusive lease rights to a gate, but very few airports do airlines actually own the gates.
Re: Remote Stands
[url]c[/url]
I think this has definitely something to do with it. Being European, I was in the States this summer and asked in town A if we could walk along the beach to Town B (about 2km distance). I asked because I wanted to know if there was a footpath along the beach, but the man replied with: you Europeans can walk it, we would always take the car. Fine example of how cultures are different I guess. Not judging either!
Also, maybe it's a space thing? Airports in the US seem to be designed with growth in mind, whereas some of the bigger airports in Europe tend to be growing faster then anticipated, leaving not enough room to add gates with jet bridges.
FlyRow wrote:Might also be a culture thing, not to judge or over generelize. But in the US walking is much less common, even for short trips the car is king. In Europe walking (or biking) is much more common, so the minute outside / in the rain isn't percieved as bas as in the US maybe.
I think this has definitely something to do with it. Being European, I was in the States this summer and asked in town A if we could walk along the beach to Town B (about 2km distance). I asked because I wanted to know if there was a footpath along the beach, but the man replied with: you Europeans can walk it, we would always take the car. Fine example of how cultures are different I guess. Not judging either!
Also, maybe it's a space thing? Airports in the US seem to be designed with growth in mind, whereas some of the bigger airports in Europe tend to be growing faster then anticipated, leaving not enough room to add gates with jet bridges.
Re: Remote Stands
Would agree with the view that it's a cultural 'thing' and also with the fact that North America is, in my opinion, overly sensitive to people with any kind of physical or mental disability.
I flew from ORD to Buttcrack, Nebraska recently on ERJ145, we landed, taxied on stand (there was only 2 gates), FA opened the main door with integrated airstairs, we then waited 10 mins whilst some bored teenager manoeuvred a jetbrige in to place, finally we could disembark the aircraft. Had it been Europe the door would have opened, pax would disembark using the five steps down to the apron and walked the few meters to the terminal done and dusted in about 3 minutes!
Another strange set up was at PDX a few days ago, arrived from YVR with AC on Q400, pulled up to the gate, doors opened, but again a long wait as some complicated piece of kit with a ramp was wheeled in to place so that pax didn't have to negotiate the four steps down from the aircraft, but pointless as you then had to walk (shock horror!) up a full set of airstairs in to the jetbridge to get to the terminal!
Us Europeans really don't have such an issue with walking out to an aircraft or taking a short bus ride to a remote stand, especially as many of our airports were built 50, 60 or even 70 years ago and are now enclosed by urban expansion leaving them no room to expand terminals and install more jetbridge equipped gates.
I flew from ORD to Buttcrack, Nebraska recently on ERJ145, we landed, taxied on stand (there was only 2 gates), FA opened the main door with integrated airstairs, we then waited 10 mins whilst some bored teenager manoeuvred a jetbrige in to place, finally we could disembark the aircraft. Had it been Europe the door would have opened, pax would disembark using the five steps down to the apron and walked the few meters to the terminal done and dusted in about 3 minutes!
Another strange set up was at PDX a few days ago, arrived from YVR with AC on Q400, pulled up to the gate, doors opened, but again a long wait as some complicated piece of kit with a ramp was wheeled in to place so that pax didn't have to negotiate the four steps down from the aircraft, but pointless as you then had to walk (shock horror!) up a full set of airstairs in to the jetbridge to get to the terminal!
Us Europeans really don't have such an issue with walking out to an aircraft or taking a short bus ride to a remote stand, especially as many of our airports were built 50, 60 or even 70 years ago and are now enclosed by urban expansion leaving them no room to expand terminals and install more jetbridge equipped gates.
Re: Remote Stands
I think it's far simpler than that. Contact stands are for short stays, remote stands for longer stays. At CDG and FRA it's probably a space issue. No available contact gate, you park at a remote stand.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: gunsontheroof and 39 guests