4 ms·

The main buildings are just big blocks, maybe nothing to show. But they must contain all these restaurants etc, not just rooms -- so guests will probably only w

by iguy 8y ago

The main buildings are just big blocks, maybe nothing to show. But they must contain all these restaurants etc, not just rooms -- so guests will probably only walk through the lobby a few times. Have a drink there, I guess. Still, it's really great that they kept the building. Super hard to imagine this being the right scale for an airport, where would you put the endless snaking queue for the x-ray machines?

ghaff 8y ago
At the time that the terminal was being closed down, I mentioned it to someone at my company who had been a higher-up at an airline (very post-TWA) which used that terminal. His comment was basically that it was a really awful terminal :-)
- iguy 8y ago
  I had to check but it only closed in 2001, I'm sure it was really awful to use by then! Never went there, but can confirm air travel was not very Mad Men by that point.
  - ghaff 8y ago
    You throwing the date out there made me realize I was confused. I was a bit surprised to read TWA when I was thinking that it was Pan Am's terminal. And, indeed, that was the one I was thinking of and that one was actually demolished a few years back. [1] It was also quite iconic. I probably flew through there at some point. My dad used to travel internationally on Pan Am all the time and he told me that that's where he always got his hair cut. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worldport_(Pan_Am) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worldport_(Pan_Am)
    - bronco21016 8y ago
      The old Pan Am terminal was truly atrocious. There were tarps, hoses, and buckets everywhere for the leaking roof. Also there was limited seating for any of the gates because there of course had to be tons of Hudson News shops. I’m definitely one to feel airline nostalgia but that place definitely needed to go.
drfuchs 8y ago
Well, it was a fine scale for a 1960’s airport, when there were no x-ray machines, or security of any sort, really, theater or otherwise. Without a ticket or even an ID, you could walk right up to a gate and meet your arriving friend, no problem. The only lines were at the check-in counters.

by iguy 8y ago

ghaff 8y ago

At the time that the terminal was being closed down, I mentioned it to someone at my company who had been a higher-up at an airline (very post-TWA) which used that terminal. His comment was basically that it was a really awful terminal :-)

iguy 8y ago
I had to check but it only closed in 2001, I'm sure it was really awful to use by then! Never went there, but can confirm air travel was not very Mad Men by that point.
- ghaff 8y ago
  You throwing the date out there made me realize I was confused. I was a bit surprised to read TWA when I was thinking that it was Pan Am's terminal. And, indeed, that was the one I was thinking of and that one was actually demolished a few years back. [1] It was also quite iconic. I probably flew through there at some point. My dad used to travel internationally on Pan Am all the time and he told me that that's where he always got his hair cut. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worldport_(Pan_Am) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worldport_(Pan_Am)
  - bronco21016 8y ago
    The old Pan Am terminal was truly atrocious. There were tarps, hoses, and buckets everywhere for the leaking roof. Also there was limited seating for any of the gates because there of course had to be tons of Hudson News shops. I’m definitely one to feel airline nostalgia but that place definitely needed to go.

drfuchs 8y ago

Well, it was a fine scale for a 1960’s airport, when there were no x-ray machines, or security of any sort, really, theater or otherwise. Without a ticket or even an ID, you could walk right up to a gate and meet your arriving friend, no problem. The only lines were at the check-in counters.