Salt Lake International Airport Development Thread

[Reeder113]

A few more pics of the central tunnel:









https://slcairport.com/thenewslc/reb...gress-gallery/

[Reeder113]

Anyone in the know-how care to explain this tunnel, and why there seems to be different corridors, etc? Are they planning on having a tram/train in there? Which section will house the moving walkways? Is that the center section?

Is it going to be something like this (eventually)?.....where red is the main walkway, and green is where the trains will run?

[ThePusherMan]

Train is planned eventually but from what I know not until a third terminal is built.

[SLCPolitico]

Originally Posted by Reeder113

Anyone in the know-how care to explain this tunnel, and why there seems to be different corridors, etc?

Here's a pic from the Phase 2 page of the project's website showing the different corridors and what they'll be used for.

[Reeder113]

Originally Posted by SLCPolitico

Here's a pic from the Phase 2 page of the project's website showing the different corridors and what they'll be used for.

Very cool, thanks! Looks like I was right on the money!

[i-215]

Originally Posted by ThePusherMan

Train is planned eventually but from what I know not until a third terminal is built.

Which is going to tick the heck off everyone who uses the new airport.

They'd be smart to build it now and expand it to Concourse C later.

[Atlas]

Originally Posted by i-215

Which is going to tick the heck off everyone who uses the new airport.

They'd be smart to build it now and expand it to Concourse C later.

Yeah I agree with this. Didn't they save like $300 million by changing the phasing/logistics due to the pandemic last year? Sounds like a good reuse of some of that money to build the train now.

[billbillbillbill]

I have now flown through the new airport 15 or so times with about half of them either departing or arriving in the B terminal. It is a long walk but a big chunk of that walk is traversing down Terminal A to get to the tunnel. It is going to be a totally different experience when you walk right out of security and go down the stairs to the tunnel. The total length of the tunnel is 1000'. I just can't imagine building the infrastructure for a train that goes only 1000' from one end of the tunnel to the other. A moving sidewalk can transport just as easily for fractions of the cost.

I'm sure some of the other complaints is Delta connections between terminals. Correct me if I'm wrong but once Terminal A east is done, will Delta use any gates in Terminal B? If not, there will rarely be a mad dash through the tunnel to make a connecting flight.

[i-215]

But they are going to have to build it anyway once the C gates open.

It's buying half the system now, half later — versus paying for all of it later.

Heck, just put in ONE side which goes back and forth constantly.

[Reeder113]

Originally Posted by i-215

But they are going to have to build it anyway once the C gates open.

It's buying half the system now, half later — versus paying for all of it later.

Heck, just put in ONE side which goes back and forth constantly.

Yeah, it would be very strange for them to build the infrastructure for the new trains, but not actually install the trains, themselves. Especially considering the $300 million they saved on construction costs during the pandemic.

I agree that they should just build it now, even if it is only 1,000 feet long.

[Reeder113]

[Hatman]

In regards to the train in the tunnel: If it follows the example of just about every other terminal-connecting train I am aware of, the train will probably be a cable-hauled people mover rather than an independent vehicle. The benefits are that all the moving parts are located in a maintenance area at one of the ends of the system, and that no major components for movement are located on the trains themselves (such as motors, brakes, etc). This makes it more reliable, and dramatically reduces the likelihood of the train getting stuck between stations, since large stationary motors hauling cables are far more reliable than small motors wedged onto the vehicles themselves.

So imagine a chairlift at a ski resort. There will be a big wheel on each end to reverse the cable direction, and a lot of little rollers in between. Those big wheels require some pretty massive foundations, and it would be an interesting use of tax dollars to build all that infrastructure at the north concourse only to rip it all out again when the far north concourse starts construction. I guess they've been tearing out everything and rebuilding stuff for 10 years now, so they could start with a shorter train and expand it later - its just a matter of cost and practicality.



As for the new bus-bridge service: I hope all the testing runs smoothly and that UTA is able to open the new airport station early. The current bus bridge to the temporary platforms is functional, yes, but in my experience it crosses a boundary of what delays passengers are willing to tolerate. My family was happy to fly in and take TRAX to my house for years, but with this bus bridge in place, they've all demanded I pick them up. It will be so nice to tell them to use the train again.

[i-215]

I suppose that makes sense. It's more like a sideways elevator than a streetcar.

Maybe the airport could operate an electric bus in the tunnel in the meantime?

[N830MH]

Originally Posted by SLCPolitico

Here's a pic from the Phase 2 page of the project's website showing the different corridors and what they'll be used for.

Thanks for sharing this! I share it on the aviation related forums. Hope they build a new trams.

[locolife]

Originally Posted by Hatman

In regards to the train in the tunnel: If it follows the example of just about every other terminal-connecting train I am aware of, the train will probably be a cable-hauled people mover rather than an independent vehicle. The benefits are that all the moving parts are located in a maintenance area at one of the ends of the system, and that no major components for movement are located on the trains themselves (such as motors, brakes, etc). This makes it more reliable, and dramatically reduces the likelihood of the train getting stuck between stations, since large stationary motors hauling cables are far more reliable than small motors wedged onto the vehicles themselves.

So imagine a chairlift at a ski resort. There will be a big wheel on each end to reverse the cable direction, and a lot of little rollers in between. Those big wheels require some pretty massive foundations, and it would be an interesting use of tax dollars to build all that infrastructure at the north concourse only to rip it all out again when the far north concourse starts construction. I guess they've been tearing out everything and rebuilding stuff for 10 years now, so they could start with a shorter train and expand it later - its just a matter of cost and practicality.



As for the new bus-bridge service: I hope all the testing runs smoothly and that UTA is able to open the new airport station early. The current bus bridge to the temporary platforms is functional, yes, but in my experience it crosses a boundary of what delays passengers are willing to tolerate. My family was happy to fly in and take TRAX to my house for years, but with this bus bridge in place, they've all demanded I pick them up. It will be so nice to tell them to use the train again.

I’m most familiar with sky harbor since I live in Phoenix, The SkyTrain here does not operate on a cable system, instead it uses vehicles on tires called Bombardier Innovia APM 200, an automated people mover system (APM) manufactured by Bombardier Transportation. I use the train almost every time I travel and enjoy the views as most of the track is above ground and I believe it’s the only airport train that passes over an active taxiway. it’s a bit of a bummer to me that the SLC train will be in a tunnel. I much prefer airport trains with views.

I do agree that a train is needed at the new SLC airport, for being a mid-size airport the walking distances can be crazy. I do miss the convenience of size the old SLC had but the new building is gorgeous.

[Atlas]

Thinking about it more, the walking distances for most passengers will definitely decrease when the new tunnel opens. Gates at the far west end of the second terminal will have a similar walk as before but moving eastward all of the gates will have progressively shorter walks from the entrance than they do currently. A nice moving walkway in the tunnel will probably be enough, as planned.

Still, having a tram would be a nice feature.

[locolife]

Originally Posted by Atlas

Thinking about it more, the walking distances for most passengers will definitely decrease when the new tunnel opens. Gates at the far west end of the second terminal will have a similar walk as before but moving eastward all of the gates will have progressively shorter walks from the entrance than they do currently. A nice moving walkway in the tunnel will probably be enough, as planned.

Still, having a tram would be a nice feature.

Yeah, hopefully they can do something to cut down on the walking time. I know I'm not the only one who finds it frustrating.

https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-...-design-layout

[Reeder113]

Originally Posted by locolife

Yeah, hopefully they can do something to cut down on the walking time. I know I'm not the only one who finds it frustrating.

https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-...-design-layout

I think the design of the airport is fine. I think people are frustrated right now because we're in the transition phase, and the airport isn't complete. Once it's complete there won't be any backtracking like there is now (which only happens if you're in concourse B).

[Hatman]

Originally Posted by locolife

I’m most familiar with sky harbor since I live in Phoenix, The SkyTrain here does not operate on a cable system, instead it uses vehicles on tires called Bombardier Innovia APM 200, an automated people mover system (APM) manufactured by Bombardier Transportation. I use the train almost every time I travel and enjoy the views as most of the track is above ground and I believe it’s the only airport train that passes over an active taxiway. it’s a bit of a bummer to me that the SLC train will be in a tunnel. I much prefer airport trains with views.

I do agree that a train is needed at the new SLC airport, for being a mid-size airport the walking distances can be crazy. I do miss the convenience of size the old SLC had but the new building is gorgeous.

The Sky Train in Phoenix is awesome. It's the only place I can think of where a bridge goes over a taxiway, rather than under it:


I still can't figure out why it does this, since it goes under several other taxiways further west on its route.

But the Sky train is a totally different beast than what is proposed in SLC. Sky Train is 2.4 miles. Systems such as the Minneapolis, Cincinnati, and Detroit airport people movers are all about a half mile in length, if that.

I did find that I was wrong about some of the people movers I've ridden on. Atlanta and Denver both use self-propelled vehicles, so I guess my theory isn't totally correct.

One day, I hope there will be a skytrain connection from the Welcome Center, where the elevated TRAX station was supposed to go, all the way to the railroad tracks south of I-80. That is a distance of 2 miles, and a connection could be made there to the future* Tooele commuter rail line. In that case, an elevated automated train would make the most sense, and you'd get some pretty spectacular views.

[Reeder113]

Originally Posted by Hatman

One day, I hope there will be a skytrain connection from the Welcome Center, where the elevated TRAX station was supposed to go, all the way to the railroad tracks south of I-80. That is a distance of 2 miles, and a connection could be made there to the future* Tooele commuter rail line. In that case, an elevated automated train would make the most sense, and you'd get some pretty spectacular views.

That would be awesome, Hatman.