Greatest Airport in the World?

[Pangur Bán]

Here are the busiest 10 airports in the whole world in terms of passengers:

1) Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson, USA
2) Chicago O'Hare, USA
3) London Heathrow, England
4) Tokyo, Japan
5) Los Angeles, USA
6) Dallas/Ft Worth, USA
7) Frankfurt, Germany
8) Paris Charles de Gaulle, France
9) Amsterdam Schiphol, Netherlands
10) Phoenix, USA

[Seattle-Tacoma is 23rd ]

For number of aircraft [taking off and landing], the biggest are:

1) Chicago O'Hare, USA
2) Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson, USA
3) Dallas/Ft Worth, USA
4) Los Angeles, USA
5) Phoenix, USA
6) Paris Charles de Gaulle, France
7) Minneapolis, USA
8) Las Vegas, USA
9) Cincinnati, USA
10) Denver, USA

For total cargo, the biggest 5 are:

1) Memphis, USA
2) Hong Kong Chek Lap Kok, China
3) Tokyo, Japan
4) Anchorage, USA (Alaska)
5) Los Angeles, USA
6) Seoul, South Korea
7) New York JFK, USA
8) Frankfurt, Germany
9) Singapore
10) Louisville, USA



[SOURCE: AIRPORTS.ORG]

What's more, Frankfurt serves more international destinations than anywhere in the world; London Heathrow serves more international passengers than anywhere else in the world. Hong Kong’s Chek Lap Kok won the world’s best airport award for 2003 from Skytrax Research. I should also note that Dubai, Singapore and Copenhagen are consistently praised as great airport experiences.

But, based on everything, it looks as if we must decide between Atlanta and Chicago, with LA and Tokyo behind them.

Anyhoo, what does everyone think?

 

[amadeus]

Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport is by far the best airport in the United States, if not the world.

 

[Marla_Singer]

I don't see the purpose of such a comparison (well sorry !). The two largest cities in Europe are London and Paris. Both cities considered it would be better for them to have several airports. For London, of course there is Heathrow... but there are also London Gatwick and Lutton Airports. That's the same with Paris where you have of course Paris Charles de Gaulle (CDG), but also Orly and Le Bourget Airports. If you put all together all London and Paris airports, they are ranked a lot higher in your Top 10. Paris CDG is specialized in international flights, Paris Orly is specialized in european/domestic flights and Paris Le Bourget is specialized in Cargo flights. I think we can say the same about New York airports since there's not only JFK airport but also La Guardia and Newark.

Well anyway, I voted for Paris CDG because the two new terminals simply rock !!! If you're planning to visit Paris, I advise you to take Air France simply to land in the terminal 2F, it's wonderful. On the opposite side, the terminal 1 is a dirty and ugly concrete circle... a kind of "jewel of the 70's" that has turned out 30 years later into crap.

 

[Plexus]

Personally, I like LAX, probably just due to my familiarity with it. Although O'hare is a nice airport.

 

[stormbind]

I don't understand the question.

Airspace in different regions is more crowded than others and issues such as this dictate what level of service can be supplied - what is the question asking?

I might prefer visiting one because it has a cool mono-rail, or another one has better shops, or another one has fewer delays, or another one has better security, or...

Really, what is the poll about?

 

[WickedSmurf]

I'll let you know when I've been to them all....

 

[Pangur Bán]

Originally posted by Marla_Singer
I don't see the purpose of such a comparison (well sorry !). The two largest cities in Europe are London and Paris. Both cities considered it would be better for them to have several airports. For London, of course there is Heathrow... but there are also London Gatwick and Lutton Airports. That's the same with Paris where you have of course Paris Charles de Gaulle (CDG), but also Orly and Le Bourget Airports. If you put all together all London and Paris airports, they are ranked a lot higher in your Top 10. Paris CDG is specialized in international flights, Paris Orly is specialized in european/domestic flights and Paris Le Bourget is specialized in Cargo flights. I think we can say the same about New York airports since there's not only JFK airport but also La Guardia and Newark.

Marla, London has 4 main airports (Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and Luton [1 T!]), and Paris has Beauvais too, used by Ryanair.

Actually, Europe's largest city is Moscow. Istanbul is 2nd London is 3rd, St Petersburg is 4th, Berlin is 5th, Madrid 6th, Rome 7th, Kiev 8th, and Paris is only 9th.

But the poll is about airports, not cities

 

[Turner]

I've only been to a handful.

Didn't like DFW. Too Freaking big!

I won $100 in a slot machine at Vegas.

Kansas City International, it's alright. No better than SFO, SJC, or Oakland International.

But my favorite was Medford Airport in Oregon. Why? I dunno. . . .I just liked it. It was small and to the point. . . Of course, it could afford to be small and to the point!

Mostly I don't like them. Overpriced stuff in the gift shops, security (before or after 9/11) is a joke, too big, noisy. . . too many people.

Ah well. Maybe I'd feel differently if I flew a lot more than I do now.

 

[stormbind]

I think the newest ones generally have better architechture, and those built in open areas have a better view.

Does this help answer the question?

 

[Marla_Singer]

Originally posted by calgacus
Actually, Europe's largest city is Moscow. Istanbul is 2nd London is 3rd, St Petersburg is 4th, Berlin is 5th, Madrid 6th, Rome 7th, Kiev 8th, and Paris is only 9th.

Your statistics are only about Administrative divisions. There's no "Geater Paris" that has been created in the 80's like there's a "Greater London". If you go to Paris, you'll realize the "city of Paris", where lives only 2,000,000 people, is simply the downtown of a lot larger area of 11,500,000 people. It's a bit like if you were considering that the City of Westminster population would be a good figure to evaluate the population of the London Area.

The main issue to make good statistics of the population of European cities is that administrative divisions are very different all accross Europe. There are actually more municipalities in France alone (36,000) than in all the rest of Europe together. As a consequence, people often under-evaluate french cities population.

I've found the figure below about European Urban Areas. Sometimes many cities are linked simply because they form together one large area with several different city centers.

Top 10 largest EU Urban Areas (2004) :

1. Paris : 11 367 200
2. Rhine-Ruhr Area* : 11 291 100
3. London : 11 229 200
4. Randstad Area** : 6 576 700
5. Madrid : 5 179 900
6. Milan : 4 047 100
7. Berlin : 3 930 200
8. Barcelona : 3 905 300
9. Naples : 3 609 000
10. Manchester-Liverpool : 3 601 600[/list=1]* Rhine-Ruhr Area is actually several cities that has created a large urban area. The main cities of it are Cologne, Essen, Dortmund, Düsseldorf.
    ** Randstad is about the same in the Netherlands with Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague, Utrecht.
    
    All over Europe, we should add Moscow (12 622 400), Istanbul (10 301 400) and Saint Petersburg (5 881 000). Hope it helps.
    
    Source : The World Gazetteer

 

[Pangur Bán]

Originally posted by Marla_Singer
Your statistics are only about Administrative divisions. There's no "Geater Paris" that has been created in the 80's like there's a "Greater London". If you go to Paris, you'll realize the "city of Paris", where lives only 2,000,000 people, is simply the downtown of a lot larger area of 11,500,000 people. It's a bit like if you were considering that the City of Westminster population would be a good figure to evaluate the population of the London Area.

The main issue to make good statistics of the population of European cities is that administrative divisions are very different all accross Europe. There are actually more municipalities in France alone (36,000) than in all the rest of Europe together. As a consequence, people often under-evaluate french cities population.

I've found the figure below about European Urban Areas. Sometimes many cities are linked simply because they form together one large area with several different city centers.

Top 10 largest EU Urban Areas (2004) :

1. Paris : 11 367 200
2. Rhine-Ruhr Area* : 11 291 100
3. London : 11 229 200
4. Randstad Area** : 6 576 700
5. Madrid : 5 179 900
6. Milan : 4 047 100
7. Berlin : 3 930 200
8. Barcelona : 3 905 300
9. Naples : 3 609 000
10. Manchester-Liverpool : 3 601 600[/list=1]* Rhine-Ruhr Area is actually several cities that has created a large urban area. The main cities of it are Cologne, Essen, Dortmund, Düsseldorf.
    ** Randstad is about the same in the Netherlands with Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague, Utrecht.
    
    All over Europe, we should add Moscow (12 622 400), Istanbul (10 301 400) and Saint Petersburg (5 881 000). Hope it helps.
    
    Source : The World Gazetteer

1. 
   
   Well, if you fiddle the numbers in that way, you can make any city the largest. Why not, for instance, make London cover the whole south-east of England? Sure, the Ile de France is a densely populated area, but so is the Dutch Rhineland. Cities are cities, conurbations are conurbations
   
   At any rate, it still means Moscow is Europe's biggest city
   
   Measurements of Paris's metropolitan population vary wildely.
   
   
   Here Paris is 4th (9.8 millions), behind Mos, Lon and ISt. Wikipedia repeats this. So does this website

 

[Marla_Singer]

Originally posted by calgacus
Well, if you fiddle the numbers in that way, you can make any city the largest. Why not, for instance, make London cover the whole south-east of England? Sure, the Ile de France is a densely populated area, but so is the Dutch Rhineland. Cities are cities, conurbations are conurbations

At any rate, it still means Moscow is Europe's biggest city

Don't you see the point ? My point is just that it's stupid to consider there's only 2 million people in Paris. Actually, I live personnally in Issy (South West suburbs of Paris)... so officially, I'm not a Parisian (I don't elect the mayor)... but I just have to take the subway (underground) to go to the University which is in St Denis (Northern Suburbs). I have to cross "Paris" to go there. Between where I am (Issy, South) and my university (St Denis, North) there are only buildings, not a single house. I just live in Paris like someone from South Kensington lives in London.

 

[Pangur Bán]

I see your point Marla, but once you get away from official figures, it gets quite subjective. Sure, you can add a few million to Paris's population - but why 11.4 million and not 9.8 million?

Like I said, a city is a city and a conurbation is a conurbation!

 

[Stapel]

Schiphol! It is only 30 miles from my home, and more important:

It it annoys more leftwingers than any other airport in the wordl!

 

[Marla_Singer]

Originally posted by calgacus
I see your point Marla, but once you get away from official figures, it gets quite subjective. Sure, you can add a few million to Paris's population - but why 11.4 million and not 9.8 million?

Like I said, a city is a city and a conurbation is a conurbation!

Exactly, and I'm not talking of a conurbation, I'm talking of a city !!!! Where do you see Paris as a conurbation ? A conurbation with what other city ? You say my figures are subjective but aren't administrative divisions even more subjective ? What makes you think it's better to stop London in this or that street than in another one ? For which reason Fulham should be in London and Issy outside of Paris ? People who decides so are politicians, not scientists.

By the way, I've never considered Paris to be larger than London. In such a scale, there's no difference between 11 million people and 11 million people. That's by the way a reason why I consider we can't rank cities like you did. To me, Paris and London are definitly larger than any other European cities (and not conurbations). Way after that, you'll find much smaller cities like Berlin, Madrid or Milan. Next time you go to Paris, I'll show you I'm right.

PS : By the way, I'm talking about official figures. Where have you seen I wasn't talking about such ???

 

[stormbind]

Urgh, such a pointless debate.

*Tells USAF trainers to "practice" dropping nukes in the Paris region*

Now there's no argument. I accept the applaus!

*Bows for his admiring fans*

 

[Marla_Singer]

By the way, I deeply support an evolution of Administrative divisions in France. Our municipalities didn't change since 1789 when cities had grown a lot during the 19th and the 20th century. As a result, municipalities that were just villages when administrative divisions have been done are now "districts" of larger cities. In all European countries, people have changed their administrative municipalites to fit them better with the actual development of it. Everywhere except in France.

I deeply support such an evolution in France. Mostly because I can't vote for the mayor of Paris even if I spend all my time in his electorial ground. I consider that to not be democratic. Moreover, different mayors are always fighting against each other to get the new Public Library or to not get the new Recycling plant. As a result, there's no well-planned and coherent evolution of the city.

However, I'm almost sure it won't change because the mayors of the small suburban cities don't want to lose their power. Moreover, people in here are used to it and they wouldn't sponsor such a change. But to me, it has really bad effects on the city management.

 

[polymath]

I think Heathrow is the world's busiest airport. Actually there's some distinction between how many runways there are and what have you etc. but Heathrow has a take off and a landing every 90 seconds - pretty awesome and I don't think any other airport can match that.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Originally posted by Marla_Singer
Exactly, and I'm not talking of a conurbation, I'm talking of a city !!!! Where do you see Paris as a conurbation ? A conurbation with what other city ? You say my figures are subjective but aren't administrative divisions even more subjective ? What makes you think it's better to stop London in this or that street than in another one ? For which reason Fulham should be in London and Issy outside of Paris ? People who decides so are politicians, not scientists.

[/I]

Paris, like almost every other large European city, is surrounded by medium sized towns which blur a city's boundaries. You are talking of a conurbation. Since cities are no longer defined by city-walls, we have no choice but to accept the administrative divisions, simply because there is no other consistent way of determing the size of cities for comparison.

Originally posted by Marla_Singer

By the way, I've never considered Paris to be larger than London. In such a scale, there's no difference between 11 million people and 11 million people. That's by the way a reason why I consider we can't rank cities like you did. To me, Paris and London are definitly larger than any other European cities (and not conurbations). Way after that, you'll find much smaller cities like Berlin, Madrid or Milan. Next time you go to Paris, I'll show you I'm right.
[/I]

You forgot Moscow again I've been to Paris of course, and it definitely feels smaller than Istanbul and London. I entered Paris from Beauvais, and it took about ten minutes on a bus to get from what I recognized as the natural beginning of the city to the central, downtown area. In contrast, it took about 5 hours on the train to get from the beginning of European Istanbul to the Sultanahmet (the old centre of Istanbul) - still on the European side. I find it VERY hard to believe that Paris is bigger than Istanbul.

Originally posted by Marla_Singer


PS : By the way, I'm talking about official figures. Where have you seen I wasn't talking about such ???

Of course the figures are official. I was meaning official in regards to the definition of the city in general, and Paris in particular.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Originally posted by polymath
I think Heathrow is the world's busiest airport. Actually there's some distinction between how many runways there are and what have you etc. but Heathrow has a take off and a landing every 90 seconds - pretty awesome and I don't think any other airport can match that.

In take offs and landings, Heathrow doesn't even make the top ten. Heathrow is actually 14th!

Heathrow has 347 217 pa. In contrast, O'Hare has 688 030 pa, and Hartsfield-Jackson has 673 556 pa