Calgary International Airport II

[CorporateWhore]

Sorry if I'm asking a question that's already been answered, but does anyone have any photos of what this central waiting area looks like (perhaps a time stamp in the video above)?

How far away from the gates are they?

[Bigtime]

The video is all from pre-security side, nothing post.

Here is the interactive map page for the terminal, gives an idea of where everything is in relation to gates:

http://www.yyc.com/en-us/travellerinfo/maps.aspx

[Riise]

Originally Posted by CorporateWhore

As a guy who is chronically early to everything, I have a feeling I'm going to hate this new call-to-gate system. And it's not just a case of "show up later", because the problem with airports is that they are a total crapshoot. Sometimes you breeze through security, sometimes there's a 200 person line. So people like me show up early every damn time just in case. Especially when I'm with my kids.

Indeed, it is a case of waiting somewhere different than before. When my flight is in a terminal that uses Call to Gate, I still arrive at the airport at the same time but I just spend a majority of the time post-security in a central area rather than at my gate.

I will concede that I've never had to do Call to Gate with children. However, there are more activities to do and spaces to explore in a central area than gate-side seating. That positive does have to be weighed against the battle of getting all the mini-people into gear once the gate is revealed.

[Tobuz]

Originally Posted by Riise

As such, the issue isn't that people are sitting on the floor but rather they have been given their gate information before the point in time where the system was deigned to handle their presence at the gate. The provision of information isn't a design flaw of the system but rather a poor implementation of the system that prevents it from working as it was designed to work.

If YYC is able to ensure the way in which travellers obtain their gate information (e.g. Boarding Passes, FIDs and Mobile Apps) does not prematurely provide this gate information, the system will have its chance to work.

Gates are always assigned and known well in advance. For the terminal to function, you're saying that this readily available info needs to be hidden from customers?

To make CTG work, you're suggesting that the 9+ airlines who use the new terminal would have to each take steps to suppress that information from their apps and mobile services just so their customers can't see it ... all for one airport, because of where that airport authority wants people to sit?

And what about when people look out the window and see their plane ... for BA, KLM, Hainan and Alaska, there will only ever be one of their aircraft at an ITB gate in the pre-departure window? How will passengers not know which gate they're going to use when they can see their plane parked??

[VIce]

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

Really, I'm not defending CTG, I'm quite skeptical; but how could you possibly expect it to work without communication? After you have correctly pointed out the learned behaviour of travelers all over the world? You might as well say "this will never work"!

Well, maybe they'll manage to increase retailers' revenue per passenger. Probably will. And they'll probably just as likely be remembered by lots of non-Calgarians as, "that strange airport that didn't want us at the gates. And I had to search ALL OVER just for a measly little drink of water!"

Its not that there should be no communication per se, but that the functional design of the space itself communicates its use all on its own. That is, the layout and design of the space should make staying in the holding area the only intuitive option. The layout of the space communicates with a much louder voice than printed signage; that really only helps when you know what you want to do, but just need help with details. They don't actually change your behavior.

[Tobuz]

Originally Posted by VIce

Its not that there should be no communication per se, but that the functional design of the space itself communicates its use all on its own. That is, the layout and design of the space should make staying in the holding area the only intuitive option. The layout of the space communicates with a much louder voice than printed signage; that really only helps when you know what you want to do, but just need help with details. They don't actually change your behavior.

+1000!!! Well said.

[Mazrim]

So if Westjet is announcing the gate 75 minutes before departure, are we all supposed to stand around at the gate for 30-40 minutes before they board? I mean, even in the old terminal that still happened all the time (I never understood why people would be lining up 60 minutes before the flight. Sit down, people!) Also, will any preboard/last call announcements be broadcast to the hold room?

Last time I flew, my wife and I were swapped with a couple so they could be closer to other family members (and I had infinite legroom thanks to the change - love the CRJ!). If people are still loitering in the holdroom, how do those kind of seating changes happen? Just closer to boarding I guess?

It'll be interesting to try this out in a couple weeks for sure.

[s211]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

So if Westjet is announcing the gate 75 minutes before departure, are we all supposed to stand around at the gate for 30-40 minutes before they board? I mean, even in the old terminal that still happened all the time (I never understood why people would be lining up 60 minutes before the flight. Sit down, people!)

It's called a mortal fear of not securing overhead stowage of carry-on, and the situation has only been getting worse. It's quite amusing to watch; WestJet has the best theatre to watch in this regard.

[Riise]

Originally Posted by Tobuz

For the terminal to function, you're saying that this readily available info needs to be hidden from customers?

Yup. It's not like they'd be hiding the cure to cancer, they'd be revealing travel information at a later time.

Originally Posted by VIce

Its not that there should be no communication per se, but that the functional design of the space itself communicates its use all on its own. That is, the layout and design of the space should make staying in the holding area the only intuitive option. The layout of the space communicates with a much louder voice than printed signage; that really only helps when you know what you want to do, but just need help with details. They don't actually change your behavior.

Okay, I get what you are saying. It's actually a reasonable request but I wonder if there are valid considerations that the airport had to make that prevented an optimum design.

[yyc_engineer]

Looking at the YYC Departures schedule, it looks like there are 0 flights departing out of B gates today. I can't image WS or AC are in any rush to move flights there, and with all International flights moved to D/E will there be anybody at B anytime soon? New Leaf? Transat Domestic?

I'd image this will be devastating for tenants in B, including the much maligned Whopper Bar...

http://www.yyc.com/travellerinfo/flightinformation/flightschedule.aspx?leg=departure

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by MMMBeer

Probably wouldn't cost that much to implement - however agree with Cage that it is also a business decision. Also "life requirement" is a bit much, where does one draw the line on that: should food be free too? Milk for the kids? baby formula?

Water in context of "life requirement" is a different ballgame from food. You can live without food for a long time, but a baby not able to get baby formula because there is no water to mix with the power is a real issue.

Anyway - all good for the environmentally unfriendly yuppies that pay money for bottles that have inferior product and destroy the planet.

[Bokimon]

We as the travelling public will need to adapt and accept the new reality of modern air travel and perhaps change our habits when arriving at an airport going forward. Events like 9-11 changed everybody's travelling habits for the worse but this move can change for the better. I believe one of the improvements in the IFP will help soften the urgency to get there as early as possible.
Some friends of mine will arrive at the airport 3-4hrs early, even for a domestic flight to Van or TO, it's insane.
Even with a boarding ticket already printed out and carry on bags only, they would be the prime fodders for all the retail vendors in the commons to grab some of their money on food and merch since they'll be so bored and probably hungry. Maybe YYCAA is secretly hoping steady streams of those types..

Over time, most people who are regular travelers will adapt to this and irregular travelers may simply follow the queues of what everybody else is doing once they are at an airport. That might be the main human communicator to get everybody else in sync with the new program as intended by its very design. Though people should get the opportunity to know & yes pay attention if something new is being implemented which will affect the way they transit in a modern 21st century airport.
That will be the airports job, the airlines, and even media outlets touting this to communicate this effectively so we can accept this and make the steady improvements we need to make to experience this in a positive manner.

I give kudos to yyc for taking some of the modern design systems that european airports currently use.
The world's busiest Int'l airport LHR already uses this system extensively and almost a hundred million travellers who transit through there (well QEll and T5 at least) breeze through this in a sinch, and they probably have even more irregular travellers sharing the same kind of gripes many Calgarians currently are. (But LHR also has water stations to quell the gripes )

I always travel and whenever I show up to an airport (EU airports particularly for Europe travel), I am so well prepared that arriving 1hr prior to departure or even 45mins I can breeze thru security, grab a snack or my own drink at a vendor and then go to my gate as it will already be assigned by then. Many systems are in place where I am able to comfortably execute this kind of tight transit over there, I feel good that eventually the same sort of expediency can be possible at our airport too. (I show up 1.5hrs usually)

Otherwise great discussion, I am learning lots and there are lots of valid points of pros and current (hopefully short term) cons.

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by VIce

Its not that there should be no communication per se, but that the functional design of the space itself communicates its use all on its own. That is, the layout and design of the space should make staying in the holding area the only intuitive option. The layout of the space communicates with a much louder voice than printed signage; that really only helps when you know what you want to do, but just need help with details. They don't actually change your behavior.

A wonderful, well-stated ideal; the right principle to hold in one's design. However, the "space" is an "airport". Thanks to expectations built all over the world, "airport" communicates "go through security, buy your newspaper/gum/coffee/hamburger, and then go wait at your gate". Users' expectations are so well-ingrained in all but the novice traveler, that I submit it would be extremely difficult to make a design that communicates CTG.

I'm not the most imaginative person around, but I don't know how this would be accomplished short of making the gate areas so inhospitable (I'm thinking of train platforms at Grand Central Terminal or Toronto's Union Station) that you obviously don't want to be there. And considering the extremely limited "bandwidth" of airport gates vs. train doors and the inevitable waits at the gate for boarding, "train platform" would be a worse cure than the disease -- I may be a captive user of YYC, but I sure wouldn't want to be in such an airport.

I respect and agree with your criticisms of the design. If you have better ideas, I'd love to hear them. (Wish I could actually visit the new terminal sooner than 6 months from now, it's tough to make constructive statements!)

[EdmontonTraveller]

Originally Posted by outoftheice

One further point to make in terms of call to gate: YYC is the only airport I've come across with half the airport using a "traditional" gate assignment system and the other half using a call to gate system. I know that the airport authority views the new international terminal as just that, a new terminal which is somehow separate from the existing building but I can't see a single passenger using YYC agreeing with them. From the passenger's perspective it is simply an extension of the existing building

Your point is valid; Auckland uses CTG-lite in Int'l and has published gate info in Dom. Two VERY different buildings if that helps.

Has anyone seen a designated wait area for customers requiring mobility assistance (eg wheelchair)? That's one approach to managing anxiety of some passengers worried about getting to their gate on-time. I'm not a fan of a corral, but defer to those who use it and their opinions. Gatwick's looked terrible IMHO.

[Suburgatory]

Originally Posted by suburbia

Water in context of "life requirement" is a different ballgame from food. You can live without food for a long time, but a baby not able to get baby formula because there is no water to mix with the power is a real issue.

Anyway - all good for the environmentally unfriendly yuppies that pay money for bottles that have inferior product and destroy the planet.

Washroom. Sink. Faucet on. Water.

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by Suburgatory

Washroom. Sink. Faucet on. Water.

Not sure if I've ever seen temperature controls at the airport's touch-free faucets, but if they don't.... yuck. Warm-ish water... no thanks.

And though I know very well that any public fountain is not going to be uncontaminated, I would wager that the bathroom sink is always worse-off. Double yuck.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

Not sure if I've ever seen temperature controls at the airport's touch-free faucets, but if they don't.... yuck. Warm-ish water... no thanks.

And though I know very well that any public fountain is not going to be uncontaminated, I would wager that the bathroom sink is always worse-off. Double yuck.

Any washroom at YYC has temperature controls on the right hand side of the faucet near the base. Rotate down for hot and up for cold. I have been using the temperature controls for the past 10 years.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Suburgatory

Washroom. Sink. Faucet on. Water.

Pretty tough to drink directly from a faucet.

Another example of abandoning the planet by requiring more garbage?

And that's beyond the reality that it is pretty off-putting to get drinking water from a public washroom.

I'm really trying to understand if you feel you've found your calling in life in supporting large institutions against water fountains so they can make a buck, or if you just want to argue with me. I really feel for you, as you seem intelligent and clearly have a lot of energy. If you could just find a more noble cause, you could make a real difference in this world. Till then though, I'll continue enjoying you arguing with me on every post I make. Still scratching my head why you feel a need to defend the airport's decision to not have accessible water for the masses. Have you tried Metamucil?

<keep smiling - I'm just joking a pinch - have a nice day>

[Suburgatory]

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

Not sure if I've ever seen temperature controls at the airport's touch-free faucets, but if they don't.... yuck. Warm-ish water... no thanks.

And though I know very well that any public fountain is not going to be uncontaminated, I would wager that the bathroom sink is always worse-off. Double yuck.

From my experience most public washroom faucets run mostly cold. Water from a fountain is the same as a bathroom faucet, aside from temperature. Isn't the issue moot anyways as aren't there going to be bottle filling stations in the food court area due to one of the airline's union contracts requiring it for their staff?

[Suburgatory]

Originally Posted by suburbia

Pretty tough to drink directly from a faucet.

Another example of abandoning the planet by requiring more garbage?

And that's beyond the reality that it is pretty off-putting to get drinking water from a public washroom.

I'm really trying to understand if you feel you've found your calling in life in supporting large institutions against water fountains so they can make a buck, or if you just want to argue with me. I really feel for you, as you seem intelligent and clearly have a lot of energy. If you could just find a more noble cause, you could make a real difference in this world. Till then though, I'll continue enjoying you arguing with me on every post I make. Still scratching my head why you feel a need to defend the airport's decision to not have accessible water for the masses. Have you tried Metamucil?

<keep smiling - I'm just joking a pinch - have a nice day>

I'm not defending the airport's decision one bit. You have four choices. Go thirsty while bitching and complaining on twitter, adapt and draw water from a bathroom faucet, buy a bottle of water from a retailer, or beg for a free water at Starbucks.

Is it ideal? No. Would I choose a fountain first if it was available. Yes. If it wasn't available would I buy a bottle of water. No. I prefer my water coffee flavoured anyways.