Sunday, June 08, 2008

GFK plans forthcoming

A reliable source tells me that the plans for the new Grand Forks International Airport terminal will be released within the next week or two. What are you hoping to see in this new structure? Will a new terminal make you more likely to use GFK in the future?

34 comments:

Anonymous said...

A new terminal would be great. Im assuming they would increase the variety of destinations you can depart to, which would be really nice. Right now the selection just sucks and so do the planes. The last few times I have flown out of GFK I had to get on a propellor plane with 9 rows of seats, WTF?

Seriously, some modernization would be nice. We have a $100 million dollar hockey arena, but our airport still uses fifty year old planes.

dale said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Im not saying that the small planes are the airports fault, Im saying that the lack of choice in destinations is whats only making small planes available. If there were flights to either coast, or just somewhere other than MN, they would be able to use larger planes because more people would be flying out of GF. There are 13000 students at UND, many of which are not from North Dakota or MN. It takes me almost 12 hours just to get home on breaks (summer, winter, etc.) I live on the west coast. It costs almost as much to fly to and from Grand Forks as it does to fly to Europe! And on international flights at least you dont have to ride on a plane with 9 rows and propellors.

Anonymous said...

There is only one prop plane that flies in and out of GF a day. Out of the 5 flights there are 3 DC-9s, 1 CRJ, and 1 Saab prop. One of the DC-9s flights changes over to a CRJ during certain times of the year. I don't think I'll get it, but I wish the terminal was two stories, so you didn't have to walk up stairs after scanning your boarding pass. It would be nice to do that before hand and just get right on to the plane. I also hope for a soda machine that sells bottles of water. It would be really nice to be able to buy a bottle of water after going through security.

dale said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
PartTime said...

49% of air travelers in the Grand Forks area travel to other (Fargo, Minneapolis and Winnipeg) airports to fly out of, that's a lot of people....finding a way to keep those travelers here to fly out of Grand Forks is the key, a Western flight to Denver or Salt Lake would help.

As for the GF terminal, I would like to see a two story terminal go up if they are going to build a new one, it's called building for the future (usually you build with the next 25-50 years in mind). At the least, if they build just the one story, I hope they build it so that a second story can be added to it at a later date.

Anonymous said...

With the trouble airlines are facing now and will in the future, you may have no airliner to enter from a new terminal.

Barbara said...

Does anyone know if GFK has tried courting newer airlines like Allegiant Air? Allegiant flies to Vegas out of Fargo, it'd be nice if they flew East out of Grand Forks. Maybe to Baltimore, DC, Chicago or even Orlando, FL. If they went East out of Forks and West out of Fargo to bigger hubs, it at least opens up more options once you get to the hub. Especially if they could get them to fly those routes more than a few months out of the year.

Anonymous said...

Dale said "No, the lack of a market here is what makes small planes fly out of Grand Forks"

Thats exactly why I said that if there were more choices there would be a market. There are 13000 students at UND, many of whom arent from North Dakota or MN. Accordingly, there are MANY students who would utilize the Grand Forks airport if there were a variety of flights available. Think about how many students (and regular GF residents for that matter) that regularly drive to Fargo or Minneapolis to get a decent flight home over their summer, winter and spring breaks. If there were adequate flights from GFK, they would be booked on a regular basis.

Its not that there isnt a market (because there is), its that the market is not being utilized.

dale said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

I too, hope the terminal is two stories, but I've only heard of plans to the contrary. My guess is that it will resemble, in some form, the new Flight Service Center, which was designed by the same architectural firm.

My sense, though, is that Lonnie Laffen appreciates how aspirational this kind of building is for an entire region and will do his best to design something that is not only highly functional, but challenges us as well.

Anonymous said...

Anyone know the rates for the private plane/jet services that are offered at GFK?

I noticed there is at least one company that has their own jets.

I wonder what their prices are???

Anonymous said...

to anonymous at 6:14

It may not be as satisfactory for you as a vending machine with bottled water, but you should know that you can bring an empty water bottle through security and then fill it at the water fountain. That's what I have done>

Anonymous said...

I've seen too many times what people have done at drinking fountains and I can't convince myself to get water out of them.

Anonymous said...

The plan, at the moment, is for a two-story building.

PartTime said...

anon 11:55.......The original plan was for a two story terminal, but to save money, they are now looking at a one story terminal. I believe that's what I have heard and read in the Herald.

Anonymous said...

Why dont they just build a new airport. Grand Forks Airport sucks. Its super tiny, there are not decent flights, the planes are so crappy and small that I feel like Im in a flying coffin, and having to walk to the plane is reminiscent of a third world country. The little diner there makes me want to take a large dose of anti-depressants.

MattFacingSouth said...

^^^

It sounds like the problems you have are with the terminal, and they're planning to re-do it. Building an entirely new airport would be super-expensive (ever looked into how much runways and taxiways cost?), not to mention unnecessary because the state of the current ones is just fine.

And I think UND would have something to add to this discussion.

Anonymous said...

Not much would be gained by building a new "airport" vs. a new "terminal." I think there was talk at one time about relocating the new terminal on the west side of the north-south runway, but plans were scrapped for environmental or drainage reasons. I do think that airport road is dark, ugly, narrow and unsafe, but hopefully that will be fixed when the new terminal is built.

ec99 said...

As long as NWA holds a monopoly out there, it doesn't make any difference. They used to absorb the GFK-MSP fare if you had a connection...that became history long ago. Now, they charge $25 to check a second bag. I imagine they'll eventually charge to check anything. And what do get now for the enormous charge for flying 280 miles? A three oz cup of tepid water.

dale said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

How in any way would that be the customers fault? If your speaking of customer's putting up with crap from the airlines and not voicing their opinion, well, obviously we dont have a choice. Short of EVERYONE protesting the airlines and not flying, there is very very little if anything the customer can do except make their own alternative choices about flying. However, I too bill by the hour, and those 4-5 hours that it takes to get to Minneapolis to get a real flight are worth far, far more than the extra few hundred bucks I'd pay flying out of GFK on a 1 hour flight.

dale said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

If your being philosophical about then yes, there are always other choices and alternatives.

Unfortunately, I live in a world were reasonableness governs the majority of the things I do. Sure I could just drive to MN, or to the east or west coast instead of flying, but in the end it would only hurt me, and the airlines would never even notice my silent protest.

I, like you, have to put up with lousy service and high prices.

dale said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

I don't know if it's a good comparison to downplay the service on the airline out of GFK, ie NWA, when if you drove to MSP, you would probably be flying NWA. They make up 85 percent of the flights there, so it's unlikely you would be flying anything else. You could be better off driving the 7 hours to Omaha, where there are multiple airlines, including Southwest.

dale said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

The only point in driving to MSP from Grand Forks is to get a direct flight. The non-direct flights with tons of layovers is what sucks

Anonymous said...

The only point in driving to MSP from Grand Forks is to get a direct flight. The non-direct flights with tons of layovers is what sucks

Anonymous said...

My point is you're wasting 5 hours driving. I've rarely, if ever had a 5 hour layover in MSP. My layovers are usually about 1 to 1.5 hours. Sun Country does not fly any place that I normally travel to, so that is why I never use them.

Anonymous said...

Oh I have definitely had a 5 hour layover at MSP before. You must not travel much. I am definitely more traveled than you. I also bring my own hand sanitizer and portable toothbrush. Occasionally, I will also bring a romance novel to read while I take a dump.

Anonymous said...

Southwest needs to stop the crap and start flying to MSP or even Fargo, time to dump northwest.

Anonymous said...

northwest is the giant cameltoe of airlines

Anonymous said...

August 2006 - GF to Denver - it was a 3 or 5 hour layover in MSP, can't remember for sure. What I do remember is the flight out of Fargo got us to Denver in about the same amount of time we would have been waiting in MSP and only drove for 50 minutes.