4 ms·

100% agree, the international arrivals area is dreary and depressing. And slow. Get off the plane, go directly to a shuttle bus, drive around a while, then go

100% agree, the international arrivals area is dreary and depressing. And slow. Get off the plane, go directly to a shuttle bus, drive around a while, then go in and wait in what was clearly never really intended to be an arrivals area. I gather than there are so few international arrivals that it will likely never be upgraded, but I sure would love to see the fancy face scanning electronic passport reader kiosks like other places have. And in a place that is reachable in the main terminal, without the shuttle bus experience.

jeffbee 2y ago
It's a miracle that Portland has direct international service at all. They probably had to bodge on the customs area after the place was built to pick up that route to Vancouver. Also good to keep in mind that a lot of older airports seem kludged together because they were. Fifty years ago passengers were screened at the gate. Then they invented central screening. Then they invented TSA and stopped letting non-passengers into the terminals.
- cozzyd 2y ago
  Vancouver has preclearance no?
  - jeffbee 2y ago
    I don't know what it was like in the 60's though.
- rootusrootus 2y ago
  I'm very happy they have a direct route to LHR. I wish BA was more pleasant to fly, but at least they're using 787s for the route. > they invented TSA and stopped letting non-passengers into the terminals I'd like them to uninvent that. I so fondly remember when family could take you to the gate, and meet you when you came home. Now that planes have impenetrable doors, I don't think we need to keep up the absurd level of "security"
  - jdenning 2y ago
    I really wish we could get rid of the TSA, but I don't think it'll ever happen. It's not about security, the whole thing is a jobs program (and always was IMO).
    - fakedang 2y ago
      I think studies have shown that the TSA sucks at threat detection, but is a significant factor in threat aversion in the first place. It sucks but in the current world we live in, the alternative is travel bans placed against many countries a fraction of whose citizens have a propensity for terrorism. That would include a bunch of American allies and even the US, incidentally.

jeffbee 2y ago

It's a miracle that Portland has direct international service at all. They probably had to bodge on the customs area after the place was built to pick up that route to Vancouver. Also good to keep in mind that a lot of older airports seem kludged together because they were. Fifty years ago passengers were screened at the gate. Then they invented central screening. Then they invented TSA and stopped letting non-passengers into the terminals.

cozzyd 2y ago
Vancouver has preclearance no?
- jeffbee 2y ago
  I don't know what it was like in the 60's though.
rootusrootus 2y ago
I'm very happy they have a direct route to LHR. I wish BA was more pleasant to fly, but at least they're using 787s for the route. > they invented TSA and stopped letting non-passengers into the terminals I'd like them to uninvent that. I so fondly remember when family could take you to the gate, and meet you when you came home. Now that planes have impenetrable doors, I don't think we need to keep up the absurd level of "security"
- jdenning 2y ago
  I really wish we could get rid of the TSA, but I don't think it'll ever happen. It's not about security, the whole thing is a jobs program (and always was IMO).
  - fakedang 2y ago
    I think studies have shown that the TSA sucks at threat detection, but is a significant factor in threat aversion in the first place. It sucks but in the current world we live in, the alternative is travel bans placed against many countries a fraction of whose citizens have a propensity for terrorism. That would include a bunch of American allies and even the US, incidentally.