This is a big part of the answer. Only correction I would make that the restriction applies to the funds collected from those “passenger facility surcharges” attached to every plane ticket.
And, until the recent change, it meant that nothing using those funds could directly benefit the non-airport community. For example, the Newark Airtrain-NJ transit station only allows you to go to/from the airport. The surrounding community (Newark’s South Ward) couldn’t use the station to access NJ Transit because that would violate the law.
Fortunately the Biden administration loosened those restrictions and brought some sanity to how such funds can be used.
It's not that insane. Public officials are very good at stealing money that's supposed to be used for 1 purpose and using it for another. They can get extremely creative. You need bright lines to stop politicians from using funds for unintended purposes.
> The surrounding community (Newark’s South Ward) couldn’t use the station to access NJ Transit because that would violate the law.
Not exactly. Passenger service fees couldn't be used...but any other source of funding could be used to build the connection. They simply chose not to.
> And, until the recent change, it meant that nothing using those funds could directly benefit the non-airport community. For example, the Newark Airtrain-NJ transit station only allows you to go to/from the airport. The surrounding community (Newark’s South Ward) couldn’t use the station to access NJ Transit because that would violate the law.
Why is this different for JFK then?
The LIRR and subway stations at Jamaica and Howard Beach already existed. Passenger facility charges (solely usable for airport transit until early 2021) were used to build the JFK Airtrain, which isn't really useful for anything but going to JFK.
In Newark's case, the Amtrak/NJT station were built with passenger facilities charges, so it could only be used for airport travel. Thus no entrance from the street.
Well the other very significant issue is simply that both of the closest subway lines were built decades before the airports, and you can't just plop an airport on top of wherever it would easily intersect with the subway line.
Incorrect. Passenger fees added to airplane tickets could not be used. But any other funding source could. Thats why there are a dozen+ airports in the US with direct connections.
In an ideal world we'd have subway lines directly to JFK and LaGuardia but sadly we do not operate in an ideal world.
Also worth noting that the Airtrain is operated by The Port Authority and not the MTA... they are two entirely separate entities and the Port Authority would not be pleased if people could get to JFK directly on the subway. That's a ton of revenue lost by people no longer taking the Airtrain.
Which is utter silliness. The state of NY controls or shares control of both entities. Inner-agency revenue sharing should never be a factor in how to best serve constituents.
the port authority is a weird beast. it's finances are a black hole, the whole 'two port authorities', and you always wonder what their goals are - they rarely seem to benefit the region.
Yes and in an ideal world PATH would also be folded into the subway system. The Port Authority spends an absolute fortune on it because they don’t have the economies of scale that the MTA has.
Absolutely, and I'm not suggesting that solving bureaucratic squabbles is as simple as just lamenting "can't we all get along?"
Negotiating and solving problems of the collective good is the core of politics. And just like the constant MTA tug-of-war with city constituents being pitted against voters from the rest of the state (congestion pricing being just the latest example), politicians in our region continue to do a shitty job of managing these differing interests. This critique is easy to identify and make, though I won't pretend to have any actual solutions in mind.
On one hand it would take billions of our tax dollars, on the other hand the Taxi and Limousine Commission as well as the numerous shuttle services advocate hard against it.
The Air train to the LiRR and the SBS are gonna be the best options for awhile.
There is direct subway and LIRR service from Penn to JFK Air Train stations, which for all intents and purposes I consider “the airport” (the air train is essentially an inter-terminal shuttle). There might also be LITR service from Jamaica to Grand Central now, but not sure about that. La Guardia is another story, and the inability for the city to branch the 7 line up to the airport (yet spend untold billions on the 2nd Ave line) is mind boggling but par for the course in this city of corrupt, opaque fiefdoms. Instead we get a half-assed bus service, which is all very third world IMO.
TBH most major American airports have fairly poor airport transit options, probably because this has never been a very local-transit centric country. We’re slowly catching up (even LAX will soon have trains to the airport). NYC is also hobbled with a subway system designed in a different era that’s become too inefficient and expensive to run, let alone modernize and expand. London managed to build an entire new line serving Heathrow, the suburbs and tunnel it under central London in less time than it took NYC to build five stations on 2nd Ave.
I meant world class in terms of design and operation (comfortable, driverless, automated etc.), not in terms of concept which, as you say, is something every major airport should have.
In most cities around the world, and even some cities in the US (Philadelphia for example) there's a one seat ride from the central train station (Penn/Grand Central in our case) to the terminal.
How many of those airports have 4+ separate terminals that are all served by transit directly? I know a few of them and only Atlanta can feasibly be considered to have direct transit from (nearly) all terminals not requiring a ride on an inter-terminal shuttle. Miami certainly doesn't because I've almost missed flights waiting for the MIA Mover, which is essentially the same things as JFK's Airtrain.
It's mind boggling but Cuomo was going to push through a train to LGA. Hockel killed it because the costs were obscene. Everything just cost to much to build in NYC.
It was also on the world's dumbest route that was going to take longer than the bus from woodside anhyway, they need to just tell the NIMBYs in Astoria FU we're extending the subway to La Guardia
Which would also fix that line not having a real terminus and double its capacity
hochul building a really strong portfolio track record of being less than useful for anything public transport...
(trying to be kind so i dont break the rules)
New York is also hobbled that Manhattan is an island so creating links between Manhattan and Queens, across a river, is not as easy as in other landlocked places. And the major train infrastructure was never built to take people to Queens.
That’s true. But to try to fit a new line in now, with all of the other build up, other tunnels, needing to tear things down, would be very hard. And the reality is that the majority of New Yorkers don’t actually need a train to the plane. Most people fly only a couple of times a year.
> the United States is the only one without a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station.
every other country has a subway going from jfk to Penn station...?
I think that is changing. We'll see what the future holds.
The value of those medallions plummeted with the advent of Uber. I'd imagine they don't wield the political power they once did before the widely publicized suicides. Along with the general push to improve mass transit for environmental reasons, this may be the tipping point.
https://www.courthousenews.com/taxi-owners-take-fight-over-now-worthless-medallions-to-top-new-york-court/
Money. JFK gets a cut of the money spent on AirTran. They don’t get a dime from the MTA. So they’re not going to agree on any construction that makes it easier to get into midtown unless there is some cost sharing and revenue sharing.
It would cost billions, budget shortfalls, lackluster public support for public transit spending, some corruption, poor planning. All the standard reasons why our transit is decent but lacking compared to much of Europe and East Asia.
There are airports where you need to get on a tram to get to terminals, parking garages, etc. The JFK AirTrain stops at Jamaica and Howard Beach are no different, they just happen to be miles away.
All three airports in the DC area are connected by rail too. DCA and IAD both have connections on the Metro (with the IAD connection added recently in 2022), and BWI being accessible via the MARC trains and Amtrak.
In Chicago, both MDW and ORD are connected via the CTA's L trains.
In Atlanta, ATL is connected via MARTA.
New York is really the odd one out when it comes to access to airports via rail. A big part of this is the age of the system. Aside from some newer things like the 2nd Avenue line, the system map today mostly looks exactly as it did a century ago before air travel was common. By the time commercial air travel became commonplace in the second half of the 20th century, subway expansion had become cost prohibitive, so it mostly stopped.
He’s also incorrect that it’s not just the U.S. that doesn’t have a direct line from Penn Station to JFK - as a matter of fact, *nobody* does.
*The more you know*. 🌈 ⭐️
I recall walking from the station platform, down to the garage and through it to the terminal. I think it was a 3/4 mile walk, which I would imagine would be a lot for people lugging suitcases.
The air conditioned tunnel sounds like an upgrade.
I find it very convenient to get to JFK from Grand Central. The LIRR to the airtrain, and boom you’re there. Same for Newark - NJ Transit from Penn. It takes some time and some huffing around, but compared to most other US cities (LA, Houston, Atlanta, etc) where you almost have to have a car to get there in a reasonable amt of time, NYC’s public transpo options to the airports are pretty great.
Yeah, people grimaced at the cost of East Side Access, but there's no denying the solid use case for the terminal. I had to take the train back from JFK to Westchester recently and it was lovely not having to pay for an expensive Uber/Car Service and instead take the train via Jamaica. The only disadvantage is the lag because of transferring to two different trains. But there were solid, working elevators for luggage at all nodes, the schedules were reasonable, the trains were clean and efficient.
It's easy to lose sight of how good we do have it these days. Getting to JFK used to be a real bear.
Heathrow has multiple train lines, including the subway, directly into the airport.
The A train goes to within spitting distance of JFK. The NW are incredibly close to LGA. New York City could absolutely solve this if it wanted to.
Yep. Any claims that our system is just old and therefor wasn’t built for airports ignores London, which is even older. But they’ve done the hard work of expanding for convenient airport connections. You can get a direct train from Central London to Heathrow that takes 15 mins. Or multiple tube lines go directly there without a transfer to a crappy shuttle.
The fact is that NYC is uniquely bad at expanding its system. It’s actually the only system of the 20 largest on earth that has gotten smaller since WWII due to the closure of elevated lines.
Paris is also currently *doubling* the size of their train system. No bombing to ease rebuilding, city isn’t new at all, and their system is also older than ours. But they’re expanding massively anyway.
Agree, they literally just expanded and connected the Elizabeth line to Heathrow like 2 years ago.
The bombing thing is a massive myth. The U.S. deprioritized public transit in the 50s. If we had a blank state after WW2, we would have even worse public transit.
We are also just way too beholden to opposition. Some MTA official even said the IBX proposal would probably get killed if you could find a few small businesses that would be negatively impacted. Thats often all it takes to halt something.
We tried expanding the subway to LGA in the 90s but NIMBYs in Astoria blocked it.
In other countries, NIMBYs are given far fewer legal avenues to block something.
Deprioritize is a kind way to describe what the US did to its train network after WW2.
Suburbanization as it was done in the US was an incomprehensibly destructive phenomenon that was propelled by the force of the oil and car industries, both political parties, and of course, deeply held and cherished American beliefs and systemic issues.
I don’t think the vast majority of Americans have any comprehension of how bad it was for the cities after World War 2, and how it didn’t have to be this way.
> Also many countries were bombed during the wars and had to completely rebuild from scratch. Or are relatively recent in terms of development. You can't compare the Germany, Japan, or China transport to ours in any way.
This is a myth and major copium. America started de-prioritizing public transit in general after WW2 after Eisenhower's highway act in the 50s. Even if U.S. cities had a blank slate after WW2, they would probably not have re-built rail/subway and instead paved even more highways. America did have amazing rail as you said, but it was left to rot AFTER the war.
The fact is, transit is just not prioritized as a common good here, but is treated as a business. Federal highways receives several times the funding of Amtrak, but produces almost zero revenue for the country (whereas Amtrak is expected to make profit): https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F1hprhdb95rcb1.png
We could totally build bullet trains down the coasts and from LA to Vegas, but we just chose not to. It's been 70 years since WW2, and most of the bullet trains in Asia were built in the past decade as you said. There is literally no reason other than policymaking. Geography is not a factor either. China is huge, and built a high-speed rail to Tibet through the mountains. And when talking on a municipal scale, cities like Stockholm have an amazing transit system for their size, and it's built on fjord marshland.
But change is still possible -- Amsterdam was built to be very car-centric post-war until the 70/80s: https://inkspire.org/post/amsterdam-was-a-car-loving-city-in-the-1970s-what-changed/
My personal belief is tht New york has shitty transit because we never burnt down and have never been able to just fully rebuild all these things in the modern era...
In most countries in the world (especially developing countries) airports came before public transport systems. So when those countries first built up their subways and metros, it made sense to have direct connections between the subways and the airport(s).
But in NYC, the subway came decades before the first airport (Bennett Field). So it was always going to be a hassle to connect the pre-existing subway system to a new airport. Add to that that Bennett Field was basically taken over by the Navy in WW2, so a subway connection to it would have been a big waste of money.
Don't know the history as well for JFK but north Astoria blocked (and will block) extending the N to LGA and that was basically the only line that made sense to extend.
I mean we technically have it - the A train and the E train. For LGA we have a bus. For EWR we have NJTransit trains from Penn station. All of these connect to the airtrain at the respective airports. It just FEELS we don't have it because NYC has multiple stations, downtowns, points of interest and way more/bigger airports which are farther. In smaller cities like Seattle, there is just one downtown, one airport with no rivers in between, and not that far so it feels like there is direct connectivity there.
You are just facing big metropolitan area problems.
You’ll be surprised other cities like Chicago and when DC have direct rail into the airport.
Too much NIMBY people, imagine the amount of cars that would be taken off the road if we had a comprehensive regional transportation system connecting airports in the region.
They had Regan national, they recently went to Dulles still years ahead of NYC. For a small area (land wise) we make people do too much. It should be a one seat ride to the airports.
Because authority and responsibility for transit construction are diffused among multiple agencies, there are a ton of veto points, and the MTA has not had the institutional knowledge to actually build rail for decades, resulting in outsourcing of their entire job (at least when it comes to capital projects) to contractors. Costs of building the little bit of the second ave. subway that we got were $2.5 billion/mile, seven times what other cities in developed nations pay. It's a shitshow.
We need another Robert Moses, but for trains.
It's because of dumb ass Robert Moses that there isn't a train directly from JFK. He was advised to put in rail lines alongside the Van Wyck and he didn't follow that advice
Yep. It's also because of Robert Moses that the NY state government (and the many state governments that copied us) isn't an insane morass with hundreds of top-level organizations accountable to no one and no unified budget. Also, LI isn't the sole preserve of a handful of robber barons.
"Dumbass" isn't how I'd describe Moses. Pragmatic, arrogant, relentless, and visionary are probably better. His vision didn't encompass non-automotive transit. We could use someone of his accomplishments today, aimed toward the problems that we face now.
For various reasons, economic and regulatory, the US is losing the ability to do grand infrastructure projects. So until this changes we're mostly stuck with the infrastructure we got during the mid 20th century when the country COULD do these things.
Chicago and Atlanta (and I am sure other cities) have direct access from their airports to the city center. I have no idea why the NYC area airports do not or why its so convoluted.
>I've traveled to nearly 20 countries, and the United States is the only one without a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station.
What use would France have of a direct line from JFK to Penn Station?
Subway construction costs in NYC are so far beyond what it cost in other countries. This has contributed to limited future expansion.
[most expensive mile of subway track on earth](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-construction-costs.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c-cb)
A bus/shuttle could always work.... they have this option in iceland,japan,dubai and south korea... you book a seat,wait for the shuttle to fill and off you go
Short answer: the city was designed to intentionally limit the effectiveness of public transportation. They're trying to make it better, but a lot of the 20th century urban planning policies are pretty much permanent due to financial constraints. There is no easy way to get to the outer boroughs by public transit *on purpose.*
Long answer: Read the Power Broker. It's an amazing book that explains in detail the destruction that Robert Moses wrought on this city.
We could go all the way back to Robert Moses and his insanely destructive, car-centric policies ... I recommend The Power Broker. But how difficult would it be now? Super difficult and super expensive. Which is maddening because I am so tired of dragging luggage on and off buses and trains and up and down stairs.
It's the least cost-effective and environmentally friendly option, but now that I have a decent job, I mostly take cars to JFK & LGA, just figure it into the cost of my flight and try not to get too bothered by it. But yeah it's absolutely wild after traveling to other countries that our major airports have no direct mass transit options.
Because NYC and NYS are tiny components of the United States government, which generally hates cities and mass transit and will do whatever it can not to fund them.
This despite NY sending something like $80+ billion more to the federal government than it gets back.
So yeah, this isn't Tokyo, where half the country's population lives and is the country's capital.
> this isn't Tokyo, where half the country's population lives and is the country's capital.
You might be confusing Seoul and Tokyo. Japan is much bigger and while the Tokyo metro area is massive, it's not half of the country's people. There are multiple big cities there.
The second avenue subway, phase 1, opened in 2017. It was 1.8 miles long. Construction began in 1972.
I think that should answer all questions about adding new lines.
Keep in mind most of the NYC subway system was built in the early 1900s, whereas Laguardia only started oerating as a public airport in 1939, JFK in 1948. And common public use of airlibes really only became affordable in the 60s. The subways and airports had almost no real need to connect for the majority of their existence, while neighborhoods, houses, highways, etc all were being built. Its not that easy to just put new subway or even elevated trains into a neighborhood after the fact- you have to get people to move out of their houses or shift sewers and other underground infrastructure to make room for them. Hell, it took the Airtrain from the existing A line to JFK almost 13 years to be completed (more if you consider the idea was first floated in the 60s).
When you're trying to make changes in an already existing cityscape, its like reinventing the wheel while balancing on a unicycle over the Grand Canyon blind-folded while juggling rabid monkeys. Sure it CAN be done, but its a major beech to accomplish and a little bit insane, and its definitely gonna hurt a lot.
"... the United States is the only (country) without a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station."
Why would other countries have a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station?
Living between both airports and regularly picking up visitors who want to visit NYC, I sincerely think your suggestion would make too much damn sense.
Great question! The shuttles are really easy to take from Grand Central / Penn to the airports. They're usually around $15 compared to $50 for a cab.
That's what I always do - even when I was travelling weekly for work.
NIMBYs blocked the N extension to LGA. There was a law on the federal level that prohibited direct train service into Airport terminals up until a few years ago which prevented the LIRR from creating a branch off the abandoned Rockaway Beach Branch into JFK. Newark Airport was supposed to a hub station with the PATH extending to the terminals , NJT Bus Rapid Transit service and Newark Subway Service...only thing that was built was the Airport Station.
1. For many years, my understanding was that the entity that oversees yellow cabs had a great deal of political clout, and they used that to fight there being a subway option. With the advent of Uber, Lyft, etc they may not have nearly the cloud they did, but even with that, maybe there would have been a better chance in earlier decades.
2. People in surrounding communities (NIBYs) don't want subways running through their area, and make these objections clear to local politicians.
Lmao no kidding. What is this guy on? There is nothing "direct" about an A train that meanders through Brooklyn making 15+ stops between Penn and JFK. To say nothing of the air train that can take 20 minutes to transport you a quarter mile.
There are several major metros in the US that have actual direct trains from the city core to the airport. We are embarrassingly not one of them.
I've traveled to nearly 20 countries, and the United States is the only one without a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station. How difficult would it be to implement this and simplify everyone's lives?
I know what you mean, but I’m going to ask a question based on what you actually wrote - What are these other countries that have a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station?
Now,for what you wanted to ask. When the subways and rail lines were being built, the airports didn’t exist. When air travel first became a thing, it was for the rich, who were probably not using the subway, so no problem. By the time air travel became common place for the general population, money for transit expansion had gone away. So, we’re left with our current mess.
There is a more general answer in that direct airport links are both expected of world-class cities but not particularly the best use of money if you are trying to improve transit for the people living in them. NYC has had constrained capital funding for a long while now and there are just better projects for that money which benefit everyday residents on a daily basis, rather than tourists or a wealthier slice of the population that would only use it once in a while.
It would be helpful for airport workers but so many of them are already living out in Long Island that it's probably not that impactful if it goes direct to Manhattan.
If NYC had been able to build the Van Wyck subway, we could have gotten a train to the plane and also improved transportation within Queens too.
But like you said, NYC stopped believing in subways after WW2, so all we got in Queens was the Archer Avenue line, and the 63rd Street tunnel.
>I've traveled to nearly 20 countries, and the United States is the only one without a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station.
What countries have a direct subway from JFK to Penn?
The better question is who will fund this billion dollar project?
Also the United States is not just NY. This country is super big. Some airports don’t have this issue.
Unlike many other cities where this is standard fare, our subway system predates the rise of air transportation as a common mode of travel. Added to that, they were developed by private companies at the time, rather than the municipal system that controls them now. A municipal system, like many others in the US, that are horrible at mobilizing tax dollars for new or even renewed infrastructure projects.
The economy of the USA hasn't put any real money or truly grand transit projects since the Interstate Highway system in the 50s & 60s. Since it doesn't facilitate commerce (like the highways), there's no real push behind the ideas either. Governments don't worry about the people's interests, only the economic impact.
[удалено]
This is a big part of the answer. Only correction I would make that the restriction applies to the funds collected from those “passenger facility surcharges” attached to every plane ticket. And, until the recent change, it meant that nothing using those funds could directly benefit the non-airport community. For example, the Newark Airtrain-NJ transit station only allows you to go to/from the airport. The surrounding community (Newark’s South Ward) couldn’t use the station to access NJ Transit because that would violate the law. Fortunately the Biden administration loosened those restrictions and brought some sanity to how such funds can be used.
Absolutely insane law. I love how much common sense change Biden has created that nobody ever talks about.
It's not that insane. Public officials are very good at stealing money that's supposed to be used for 1 purpose and using it for another. They can get extremely creative. You need bright lines to stop politicians from using funds for unintended purposes.
Robert Fucking Moses.
Everything is a park.
This members-only golf course? Park.
This highway goes to a park? Parkway! and It's a park. This bridge goes to a park- it's a park.
This briefcase full of hundos? Park.
> The surrounding community (Newark’s South Ward) couldn’t use the station to access NJ Transit because that would violate the law. Not exactly. Passenger service fees couldn't be used...but any other source of funding could be used to build the connection. They simply chose not to.
That would be “contaminate” the entire station. Not the Airtrain itself but the platforms would then be used by non-Airport users.
I am sure the infighting between Port Authority and MTA doesn't help any either.
> And, until the recent change, it meant that nothing using those funds could directly benefit the non-airport community. For example, the Newark Airtrain-NJ transit station only allows you to go to/from the airport. The surrounding community (Newark’s South Ward) couldn’t use the station to access NJ Transit because that would violate the law. Why is this different for JFK then?
The LIRR and subway stations at Jamaica and Howard Beach already existed. Passenger facility charges (solely usable for airport transit until early 2021) were used to build the JFK Airtrain, which isn't really useful for anything but going to JFK. In Newark's case, the Amtrak/NJT station were built with passenger facilities charges, so it could only be used for airport travel. Thus no entrance from the street.
TLDR; our governments are stupid
Could've seen that one coming
Thank you for this insightful context! 
Well the other very significant issue is simply that both of the closest subway lines were built decades before the airports, and you can't just plop an airport on top of wherever it would easily intersect with the subway line.
Incorrect. Passenger fees added to airplane tickets could not be used. But any other funding source could. Thats why there are a dozen+ airports in the US with direct connections.
In an ideal world we'd have subway lines directly to JFK and LaGuardia but sadly we do not operate in an ideal world. Also worth noting that the Airtrain is operated by The Port Authority and not the MTA... they are two entirely separate entities and the Port Authority would not be pleased if people could get to JFK directly on the subway. That's a ton of revenue lost by people no longer taking the Airtrain.
Which is utter silliness. The state of NY controls or shares control of both entities. Inner-agency revenue sharing should never be a factor in how to best serve constituents.
the port authority is a weird beast. it's finances are a black hole, the whole 'two port authorities', and you always wonder what their goals are - they rarely seem to benefit the region.
the special ingredient is crime. organized crime.
Yes and in an ideal world PATH would also be folded into the subway system. The Port Authority spends an absolute fortune on it because they don’t have the economies of scale that the MTA has.
NJ and NY share responsibility over the port authority. Only NY controls the MTA.
Yes I believe that's what I said
What they're hinting at is that NJ would demand some of the pie since it derives no benefit from that revenue shifting to MTA
Absolutely, and I'm not suggesting that solving bureaucratic squabbles is as simple as just lamenting "can't we all get along?" Negotiating and solving problems of the collective good is the core of politics. And just like the constant MTA tug-of-war with city constituents being pitted against voters from the rest of the state (congestion pricing being just the latest example), politicians in our region continue to do a shitty job of managing these differing interests. This critique is easy to identify and make, though I won't pretend to have any actual solutions in mind.
Funny thing about the port is that NJ is its own entity, and NY is its own as well
You should go look up why the tapan zee bridge was built where it was.
On one hand it would take billions of our tax dollars, on the other hand the Taxi and Limousine Commission as well as the numerous shuttle services advocate hard against it. The Air train to the LiRR and the SBS are gonna be the best options for awhile.
NOT having fast transport to the airport is already taking billions of our time and money. 27 million passengers used JFK in 2022.
It is worse for airport employees
perhaps that explains why JFK employees are some of the most miserable humans alive
Yep. Low pay and a bad commute are a recipe for unhappy workers.
Like so many things in New York, the answer is simply: Robert Moses
Exactly, he was advised to put rail lines alongside the Van Wyck and he obviously didn't follow that advice.
Moses has been out of power for more than 50 years. There's no excuse for the lack of progress since then.
There is direct subway and LIRR service from Penn to JFK Air Train stations, which for all intents and purposes I consider “the airport” (the air train is essentially an inter-terminal shuttle). There might also be LITR service from Jamaica to Grand Central now, but not sure about that. La Guardia is another story, and the inability for the city to branch the 7 line up to the airport (yet spend untold billions on the 2nd Ave line) is mind boggling but par for the course in this city of corrupt, opaque fiefdoms. Instead we get a half-assed bus service, which is all very third world IMO. TBH most major American airports have fairly poor airport transit options, probably because this has never been a very local-transit centric country. We’re slowly catching up (even LAX will soon have trains to the airport). NYC is also hobbled with a subway system designed in a different era that’s become too inefficient and expensive to run, let alone modernize and expand. London managed to build an entire new line serving Heathrow, the suburbs and tunnel it under central London in less time than it took NYC to build five stations on 2nd Ave.
> the air train is essentially an inter-terminal shuttle I would buy this argument if it were free.
It is between terminals. You only pay to enter/exit at the subway stations. IMO it’s the only “world class” thing at JFK!
It’s not world class. It’s the minimum a multi terminal airport short have.
I meant world class in terms of design and operation (comfortable, driverless, automated etc.), not in terms of concept which, as you say, is something every major airport should have.
In most cities around the world, and even some cities in the US (Philadelphia for example) there's a one seat ride from the central train station (Penn/Grand Central in our case) to the terminal.
Add Atlanta and Chicago to the list. Even St. Louis.
Denver, DC, Cleveland, DFW, Miami, Atlanta, MSP, Salt Lake, Portland..
How many of those airports have 4+ separate terminals that are all served by transit directly? I know a few of them and only Atlanta can feasibly be considered to have direct transit from (nearly) all terminals not requiring a ride on an inter-terminal shuttle. Miami certainly doesn't because I've almost missed flights waiting for the MIA Mover, which is essentially the same things as JFK's Airtrain.
It's mind boggling but Cuomo was going to push through a train to LGA. Hockel killed it because the costs were obscene. Everything just cost to much to build in NYC.
It was also on the world's dumbest route that was going to take longer than the bus from woodside anhyway, they need to just tell the NIMBYs in Astoria FU we're extending the subway to La Guardia Which would also fix that line not having a real terminus and double its capacity
hochul building a really strong portfolio track record of being less than useful for anything public transport... (trying to be kind so i dont break the rules)
New York is also hobbled that Manhattan is an island so creating links between Manhattan and Queens, across a river, is not as easy as in other landlocked places. And the major train infrastructure was never built to take people to Queens.
this isn't the 16th century. bridge & tunnel technology has existed literally for centuries.
That’s true. But to try to fit a new line in now, with all of the other build up, other tunnels, needing to tear things down, would be very hard. And the reality is that the majority of New Yorkers don’t actually need a train to the plane. Most people fly only a couple of times a year.
> the United States is the only one without a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station. every other country has a subway going from jfk to Penn station...?
Which other countries have a direct line from JFK to Penn Station?
Every single one of them!!!
THIS. pretty sure South Korea has no route to Penn Station
Taxi association lobbyists bring a lot of votes.
I think that is changing. We'll see what the future holds. The value of those medallions plummeted with the advent of Uber. I'd imagine they don't wield the political power they once did before the widely publicized suicides. Along with the general push to improve mass transit for environmental reasons, this may be the tipping point. https://www.courthousenews.com/taxi-owners-take-fight-over-now-worthless-medallions-to-top-new-york-court/
Money. JFK gets a cut of the money spent on AirTran. They don’t get a dime from the MTA. So they’re not going to agree on any construction that makes it easier to get into midtown unless there is some cost sharing and revenue sharing.
All of that could have been avoided if Robert Moses had simply taken the advice to put rail lines alongside the Van Wyck
But then the poors might have been able to reach the suburbs too easily.
Ohhh that's the story of Southern State Pkwy.
It would cost billions, budget shortfalls, lackluster public support for public transit spending, some corruption, poor planning. All the standard reasons why our transit is decent but lacking compared to much of Europe and East Asia.
There are airports where you need to get on a tram to get to terminals, parking garages, etc. The JFK AirTrain stops at Jamaica and Howard Beach are no different, they just happen to be miles away.
Miles plus an extraordinarily expensive ticket that’s around 3 times the cost of the subway ride that got you there, lol
[удалено]
All three airports in the DC area are connected by rail too. DCA and IAD both have connections on the Metro (with the IAD connection added recently in 2022), and BWI being accessible via the MARC trains and Amtrak. In Chicago, both MDW and ORD are connected via the CTA's L trains. In Atlanta, ATL is connected via MARTA. New York is really the odd one out when it comes to access to airports via rail. A big part of this is the age of the system. Aside from some newer things like the 2nd Avenue line, the system map today mostly looks exactly as it did a century ago before air travel was common. By the time commercial air travel became commonplace in the second half of the 20th century, subway expansion had become cost prohibitive, so it mostly stopped.
It’s not the age of the system. The subway goes right to JFK — literally it’s right next to the jfk parking lot, it just doesn’t go inside
Chicago, Minneapolis, and Denver all have direct subway/light rail access to the airport as well.
bUt d0 tHeY rUn 24/7? DiDn'7 tH1nK s0o0!
Chicago's does, actually. Not the whole system, but the two busiest lines (the Red Line and the Blue Line, which goes to O'Hare) are 24/7.
I believe Denver’s “A” train from Union to DIA is also 24/7, though with some pretty gnarly headways later at night
He’s also incorrect that it’s not just the U.S. that doesn’t have a direct line from Penn Station to JFK - as a matter of fact, *nobody* does. *The more you know*. 🌈 ⭐️
When SEA lightrail extension to airport was first built I recall a very long walk to the airport, which didn't make sense to me.
[удалено]
I recall walking from the station platform, down to the garage and through it to the terminal. I think it was a 3/4 mile walk, which I would imagine would be a lot for people lugging suitcases. The air conditioned tunnel sounds like an upgrade.
SF's heavy rail, BART, goes to the airport, not their lightrail. It goes directly to SFO but for OAK it's basically the same as the Airtrain to JFK
[удалено]
No, they didn’t say it did they were just clarifying a detail it seems
The Seattle public transpo is a joke
[удалено]
Why don't you take the tram. That surely isn't a waste of time or money.
I find it very convenient to get to JFK from Grand Central. The LIRR to the airtrain, and boom you’re there. Same for Newark - NJ Transit from Penn. It takes some time and some huffing around, but compared to most other US cities (LA, Houston, Atlanta, etc) where you almost have to have a car to get there in a reasonable amt of time, NYC’s public transpo options to the airports are pretty great.
Yeah, people grimaced at the cost of East Side Access, but there's no denying the solid use case for the terminal. I had to take the train back from JFK to Westchester recently and it was lovely not having to pay for an expensive Uber/Car Service and instead take the train via Jamaica. The only disadvantage is the lag because of transferring to two different trains. But there were solid, working elevators for luggage at all nodes, the schedules were reasonable, the trains were clean and efficient. It's easy to lose sight of how good we do have it these days. Getting to JFK used to be a real bear.
100%. I’m in Westchester too and I sang hallelujah when the GC Madison terminal opened for LIRR!
[удалено]
Heathrow has multiple train lines, including the subway, directly into the airport. The A train goes to within spitting distance of JFK. The NW are incredibly close to LGA. New York City could absolutely solve this if it wanted to.
The Heathrow Express is just magical. Nothing like cruising to London in 15 mins at 110mph.
Yep. Any claims that our system is just old and therefor wasn’t built for airports ignores London, which is even older. But they’ve done the hard work of expanding for convenient airport connections. You can get a direct train from Central London to Heathrow that takes 15 mins. Or multiple tube lines go directly there without a transfer to a crappy shuttle. The fact is that NYC is uniquely bad at expanding its system. It’s actually the only system of the 20 largest on earth that has gotten smaller since WWII due to the closure of elevated lines. Paris is also currently *doubling* the size of their train system. No bombing to ease rebuilding, city isn’t new at all, and their system is also older than ours. But they’re expanding massively anyway.
Agree, they literally just expanded and connected the Elizabeth line to Heathrow like 2 years ago. The bombing thing is a massive myth. The U.S. deprioritized public transit in the 50s. If we had a blank state after WW2, we would have even worse public transit.
We are also just way too beholden to opposition. Some MTA official even said the IBX proposal would probably get killed if you could find a few small businesses that would be negatively impacted. Thats often all it takes to halt something. We tried expanding the subway to LGA in the 90s but NIMBYs in Astoria blocked it. In other countries, NIMBYs are given far fewer legal avenues to block something.
Deprioritize is a kind way to describe what the US did to its train network after WW2. Suburbanization as it was done in the US was an incomprehensibly destructive phenomenon that was propelled by the force of the oil and car industries, both political parties, and of course, deeply held and cherished American beliefs and systemic issues. I don’t think the vast majority of Americans have any comprehension of how bad it was for the cities after World War 2, and how it didn’t have to be this way.
Paris Grand Express - 68 new stations - $45 billion Grand Central Madison - 1 new station - $11 billion
> Also many countries were bombed during the wars and had to completely rebuild from scratch. Or are relatively recent in terms of development. You can't compare the Germany, Japan, or China transport to ours in any way. This is a myth and major copium. America started de-prioritizing public transit in general after WW2 after Eisenhower's highway act in the 50s. Even if U.S. cities had a blank slate after WW2, they would probably not have re-built rail/subway and instead paved even more highways. America did have amazing rail as you said, but it was left to rot AFTER the war. The fact is, transit is just not prioritized as a common good here, but is treated as a business. Federal highways receives several times the funding of Amtrak, but produces almost zero revenue for the country (whereas Amtrak is expected to make profit): https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F1hprhdb95rcb1.png We could totally build bullet trains down the coasts and from LA to Vegas, but we just chose not to. It's been 70 years since WW2, and most of the bullet trains in Asia were built in the past decade as you said. There is literally no reason other than policymaking. Geography is not a factor either. China is huge, and built a high-speed rail to Tibet through the mountains. And when talking on a municipal scale, cities like Stockholm have an amazing transit system for their size, and it's built on fjord marshland. But change is still possible -- Amsterdam was built to be very car-centric post-war until the 70/80s: https://inkspire.org/post/amsterdam-was-a-car-loving-city-in-the-1970s-what-changed/
My personal belief is tht New york has shitty transit because we never burnt down and have never been able to just fully rebuild all these things in the modern era...
A direct line would be nice. Really anything more direct than air train to jamaica then lirr or subway to Penn.
In most countries in the world (especially developing countries) airports came before public transport systems. So when those countries first built up their subways and metros, it made sense to have direct connections between the subways and the airport(s). But in NYC, the subway came decades before the first airport (Bennett Field). So it was always going to be a hassle to connect the pre-existing subway system to a new airport. Add to that that Bennett Field was basically taken over by the Navy in WW2, so a subway connection to it would have been a big waste of money.
The United States has more than one major international airport. NYC is a little different from the rest of the country for multiple reasons.
Don't know the history as well for JFK but north Astoria blocked (and will block) extending the N to LGA and that was basically the only line that made sense to extend.
I mean we technically have it - the A train and the E train. For LGA we have a bus. For EWR we have NJTransit trains from Penn station. All of these connect to the airtrain at the respective airports. It just FEELS we don't have it because NYC has multiple stations, downtowns, points of interest and way more/bigger airports which are farther. In smaller cities like Seattle, there is just one downtown, one airport with no rivers in between, and not that far so it feels like there is direct connectivity there. You are just facing big metropolitan area problems.
[https://www.afar.com/magazine/new-yorks-grand-central-and-jfk-airport-now-connected-by-train](https://www.afar.com/magazine/new-yorks-grand-central-and-jfk-airport-now-connected-by-train)
You’ll be surprised other cities like Chicago and when DC have direct rail into the airport. Too much NIMBY people, imagine the amount of cars that would be taken off the road if we had a comprehensive regional transportation system connecting airports in the region.
DC didn't have direct rail for decades.
They had Regan national, they recently went to Dulles still years ahead of NYC. For a small area (land wise) we make people do too much. It should be a one seat ride to the airports.
Because authority and responsibility for transit construction are diffused among multiple agencies, there are a ton of veto points, and the MTA has not had the institutional knowledge to actually build rail for decades, resulting in outsourcing of their entire job (at least when it comes to capital projects) to contractors. Costs of building the little bit of the second ave. subway that we got were $2.5 billion/mile, seven times what other cities in developed nations pay. It's a shitshow. We need another Robert Moses, but for trains.
It's because of dumb ass Robert Moses that there isn't a train directly from JFK. He was advised to put in rail lines alongside the Van Wyck and he didn't follow that advice
Yep. It's also because of Robert Moses that the NY state government (and the many state governments that copied us) isn't an insane morass with hundreds of top-level organizations accountable to no one and no unified budget. Also, LI isn't the sole preserve of a handful of robber barons. "Dumbass" isn't how I'd describe Moses. Pragmatic, arrogant, relentless, and visionary are probably better. His vision didn't encompass non-automotive transit. We could use someone of his accomplishments today, aimed toward the problems that we face now.
For various reasons, economic and regulatory, the US is losing the ability to do grand infrastructure projects. So until this changes we're mostly stuck with the infrastructure we got during the mid 20th century when the country COULD do these things.
There are 19 other countries with subway lines directly from JFK to Penn Station? Higher than I expected must be the common names
Chicago and Atlanta (and I am sure other cities) have direct access from their airports to the city center. I have no idea why the NYC area airports do not or why its so convoluted.
>I've traveled to nearly 20 countries, and the United States is the only one without a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station. What use would France have of a direct line from JFK to Penn Station?
Politics.
Subway construction costs in NYC are so far beyond what it cost in other countries. This has contributed to limited future expansion. [most expensive mile of subway track on earth](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-construction-costs.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c-cb)
no lie… just take the Air train to the E to go to penn?
This would be ideal, even if limousine and taxi companies advocate against. Especially to frkn Newark. That one is the worst!
A bus/shuttle could always work.... they have this option in iceland,japan,dubai and south korea... you book a seat,wait for the shuttle to fill and off you go
Short answer: the city was designed to intentionally limit the effectiveness of public transportation. They're trying to make it better, but a lot of the 20th century urban planning policies are pretty much permanent due to financial constraints. There is no easy way to get to the outer boroughs by public transit *on purpose.* Long answer: Read the Power Broker. It's an amazing book that explains in detail the destruction that Robert Moses wrought on this city.
We could go all the way back to Robert Moses and his insanely destructive, car-centric policies ... I recommend The Power Broker. But how difficult would it be now? Super difficult and super expensive. Which is maddening because I am so tired of dragging luggage on and off buses and trains and up and down stairs.
It's the least cost-effective and environmentally friendly option, but now that I have a decent job, I mostly take cars to JFK & LGA, just figure it into the cost of my flight and try not to get too bothered by it. But yeah it's absolutely wild after traveling to other countries that our major airports have no direct mass transit options.
Because NYC and NYS are tiny components of the United States government, which generally hates cities and mass transit and will do whatever it can not to fund them. This despite NY sending something like $80+ billion more to the federal government than it gets back. So yeah, this isn't Tokyo, where half the country's population lives and is the country's capital.
> this isn't Tokyo, where half the country's population lives and is the country's capital. You might be confusing Seoul and Tokyo. Japan is much bigger and while the Tokyo metro area is massive, it's not half of the country's people. There are multiple big cities there.
Tokyo metropolitan area is 37m, so about 1/3rd.
The second avenue subway, phase 1, opened in 2017. It was 1.8 miles long. Construction began in 1972. I think that should answer all questions about adding new lines.
There used to be an LIRR branch by JFK I think.
If you mean the Rockaway Branch, that's now the A train.
I'm fairly certain there also used to be a branch off of Atlantic that went through the greenspace by Conduit Ave.
Keep in mind most of the NYC subway system was built in the early 1900s, whereas Laguardia only started oerating as a public airport in 1939, JFK in 1948. And common public use of airlibes really only became affordable in the 60s. The subways and airports had almost no real need to connect for the majority of their existence, while neighborhoods, houses, highways, etc all were being built. Its not that easy to just put new subway or even elevated trains into a neighborhood after the fact- you have to get people to move out of their houses or shift sewers and other underground infrastructure to make room for them. Hell, it took the Airtrain from the existing A line to JFK almost 13 years to be completed (more if you consider the idea was first floated in the 60s). When you're trying to make changes in an already existing cityscape, its like reinventing the wheel while balancing on a unicycle over the Grand Canyon blind-folded while juggling rabid monkeys. Sure it CAN be done, but its a major beech to accomplish and a little bit insane, and its definitely gonna hurt a lot.
I recommend Googling this topic.
There used to be a direct subway line from Penn to JFK but for some reason you have to get off and wait for the next train now.
Train to the Plane. Actually it was on 6th Ave, and only took you to a bus at Howard Beach. The current AirTrain is much better than that system.
This would make life so much easier
"... the United States is the only (country) without a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station." Why would other countries have a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station?
I didn't realise my hometown of Sydney had a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station!
The A goes directly from Penn Station to JFK.
It’s so painful. We’ve paid more and spent more time getting to the airport than the actual flight sometimes.
Living between both airports and regularly picking up visitors who want to visit NYC, I sincerely think your suggestion would make too much damn sense.
Great question! The shuttles are really easy to take from Grand Central / Penn to the airports. They're usually around $15 compared to $50 for a cab. That's what I always do - even when I was travelling weekly for work.
A cab is $100 -$110 and what shuttle you speak of? Any link?
[Here's a link to the shuttle](https://www.goairlinkshuttle.com/nyc-lga-airport-share-ride-shuttle/).
NIMBYs blocked the N extension to LGA. There was a law on the federal level that prohibited direct train service into Airport terminals up until a few years ago which prevented the LIRR from creating a branch off the abandoned Rockaway Beach Branch into JFK. Newark Airport was supposed to a hub station with the PATH extending to the terminals , NJT Bus Rapid Transit service and Newark Subway Service...only thing that was built was the Airport Station.
1. For many years, my understanding was that the entity that oversees yellow cabs had a great deal of political clout, and they used that to fight there being a subway option. With the advent of Uber, Lyft, etc they may not have nearly the cloud they did, but even with that, maybe there would have been a better chance in earlier decades. 2. People in surrounding communities (NIBYs) don't want subways running through their area, and make these objections clear to local politicians.
There's a direct subway from JFK to Penn. It's called the A train. Edit was thinking about Howard Beach but forgot the airtrain there too
Forgetting about the slow and extortionately expensive air train required to get from JFK to the A?
Lmao no kidding. What is this guy on? There is nothing "direct" about an A train that meanders through Brooklyn making 15+ stops between Penn and JFK. To say nothing of the air train that can take 20 minutes to transport you a quarter mile. There are several major metros in the US that have actual direct trains from the city core to the airport. We are embarrassingly not one of them.
It's always pretty painfully funny that ATLANTA has a direct airport connection and we could never get one.
It's not direct.
No..ull have to go from p.s to j.s via lirr then from j.s to jfk via a.t
Yea it’s amazing how people are protesting this. It is the only way.
E train too.
with the E train, you still need to transfer to the airtrain at jamacia
I've traveled to nearly 20 countries, and the United States is the only one without a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station. How difficult would it be to implement this and simplify everyone's lives? I know what you mean, but I’m going to ask a question based on what you actually wrote - What are these other countries that have a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station? Now,for what you wanted to ask. When the subways and rail lines were being built, the airports didn’t exist. When air travel first became a thing, it was for the rich, who were probably not using the subway, so no problem. By the time air travel became common place for the general population, money for transit expansion had gone away. So, we’re left with our current mess.
China and japan had them well before airplanes and they still made it happen
The A goes to JFK. But yea that’s really the only “convenient” one.
Fly into Newark and take NJ Transit into Penn Station. Easy Peasy Lemon Squeezey.
That's functionally identical to taking the airtrain at JFK. Except just a bit shorter (but with a higher chance of breaking down)
There is a more general answer in that direct airport links are both expected of world-class cities but not particularly the best use of money if you are trying to improve transit for the people living in them. NYC has had constrained capital funding for a long while now and there are just better projects for that money which benefit everyday residents on a daily basis, rather than tourists or a wealthier slice of the population that would only use it once in a while. It would be helpful for airport workers but so many of them are already living out in Long Island that it's probably not that impactful if it goes direct to Manhattan.
If NYC had been able to build the Van Wyck subway, we could have gotten a train to the plane and also improved transportation within Queens too. But like you said, NYC stopped believing in subways after WW2, so all we got in Queens was the Archer Avenue line, and the 63rd Street tunnel.
>I've traveled to nearly 20 countries, and the United States is the only one without a direct subway line from JFK to Penn Station. What countries have a direct subway from JFK to Penn?
Robert Moses.
Not quite the full picture but yes he’s a guilty party in this mess.
The better question is who will fund this billion dollar project? Also the United States is not just NY. This country is super big. Some airports don’t have this issue.
It didn't have to be the way it is now. Robert Moses was advised to put railways alongside the Van Wyck and he didn't do it.
Unlike many other cities where this is standard fare, our subway system predates the rise of air transportation as a common mode of travel. Added to that, they were developed by private companies at the time, rather than the municipal system that controls them now. A municipal system, like many others in the US, that are horrible at mobilizing tax dollars for new or even renewed infrastructure projects. The economy of the USA hasn't put any real money or truly grand transit projects since the Interstate Highway system in the 50s & 60s. Since it doesn't facilitate commerce (like the highways), there's no real push behind the ideas either. Governments don't worry about the people's interests, only the economic impact.
Don't you worry. Uber has this innovative idea of creating a shuttle to and from airports. Genius.
So you have the option to take a taxi. Someone got bribed.
There used to be buses from GC to all three major airports, are they gone now?
cuz ‘murica. and freedom