Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Travel Discussion
Reply to "Why does Concourse D at Dulles (United) only have the "Mobile Lounges"?"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The new E concourse under construction now, along with a future F concourse, will replace both C and D concourses. There will be an airport subway under the new F once it is built. C and D will be demolished after E and F are opened. To be honest, the AirTrain is not really faster than the moon buggies were. It is fastest to walk from Main to B concourse underground, but for some reason MWAA makes that underground walkway to B very difficult to find. [/quote] But what has taken so long? I’ve been hearing about “new concourses” since I moved here in 2007. Articles about E concourse seem to gloss over that part. If anything Dulles has lost flights since we’ve lived here. We used to use it more and now find ourselves nearly always at DCA. [/quote] I head Dulles wanted United to pay for it and United wanted the opposite. I have walked miles in IAD while getting to my gate, plus at least 5-6 escalators each time. It's insanity trying to reach D gates. I like the mobile lounges a lot, but I'm very sensitive to smells and the diesel gives me really bad headaches every time I ride them. Honestly a walking tunnel between all the gates would have been less walking than being forced to use the airtrain. Dulles did the same thing with the metro entrance. They made it very far away and completely inconvenient. Not sure why an AIRPORT doesn't consider convenience to be #1[/quote] Re: the Metro location- that was basically a money saving decision- estimates were that it would be approximately $300 million more to go directly under the terminal. That was the original design, but as costs escalated (of course), they decided to put it above ground. It's a symptom of the general problem in the US that infrastructure projects, especially rail, are so costly and difficult to build. Rail in particular because we just don't have a strong enough industry with enough experience.[/quote] Plus a ton of bureaucracy and buy America requirements[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics