This terminal was first opened in 1954 and was the main terminal for much of its life. In the 1980s, SFO made this the international terminal and it stayed that way until the new international terminal opened in 2000. The terminal sat there unused for the last decade until a renovation plan came along that culminates with today’s opening.

As you can imagine, a lot of work had to be done to get this terminal into shape to serve customers today. Since it is now primarily a domestic terminal, more gates were added to reflect smaller aircraft being used. There are now 14 gates split evenly between Virgin America and American. American is moving over from Terminal 3. Its old concourse will shut down and be renovated so that it can become a terminal for Star Alliance members next year. Virgin America is currently in the international terminal and that will just leave more space for future international flight growth.

For Virgin America, this was important because it has a ton of airplanes coming online and no place to put them in the international terminal. Now it will go from roughly 3 gates (lots of sharing in the international terminal, so it’s a rough estimate) to a whopping 7 gates on the south side of the terminal. American, however is going in the opposite direction. It is shrinking from 9 gates today down to 7 to start. The plan is to eventually only use 6 gates and there will be one common use gate.

When you enter the terminal, the center is dominated by the stairs down from the AirTrain station. On the right is Virgin America’s counter and on the left is American’s. The counters have a nice look to them with wood paneling and good lighting. Both counters angle in toward the security area. One interesting thing to note is that the only retail outside security is a Starbucks. Not even a newsstand is out there, so if you’re meeting someone in the terminal, you won’t find much to keep you busy.

The security area is huge, as you’d expect. They were very smart to build it on a floating floor, so that as TSA requirements for cabling and power change (they always do), the changes can be made easily without having to drill all over the floor.

After security, you get into the recompose area where there are comfortable seating benches in an open space to get your things together. This is unlike the usual TSA benches in that they’re a) padded and b) outside the security area. Those insane jellyfish-looking things which you barely see at upper left are art, and they will actually move around in the breeze.

On the left of the recompose area is the Admiral’s Club which has double the space of the existing one and some trees. Yep, those fake trees in the middle add an interesting flair. This also has two shower rooms, something that will be huge for inbound Asian passengers connecting to American since there is no arrivals lounge for their use in the international terminal.

Back in the terminal, after the recompose area, you walk into the narrow neck of the terminal which is lined with shops. (There’s a better view of the jellyfish-looking art here.) They’ve gone with local businesses, plenty of organic food, a wine bar, etc. In other words, it’s exactly what you’d expect in San Francisco. Interestingly, there are no gates here. The airplanes that park along the neck can be accessed via long jet bridges from the main gate area.

The neck opens up into a pentagon-ish shaped gate area. The large central space will have tables and chairs giving a similar airy, outdoor feel as you find JetBlue’s Terminal 5 at JFK. They really opened this thing up to bring in a ton of light.

My favorite feature is the refill stations on either side of the main area. There is clean drinking water fountains that are meant for you to refill your containers that you couldn’t bring through security with liquid. It’s a great touch that’s also very fitting for the eco-friendly Bay Area.

The gate areas ring the pentagon with some shops in the middle. The seating is actually very comfortable (though the armrests prevent finding a good bed in case of a REALLY long delay). There are power outlets all over the place, including at some desk work stations that are scattered throughout the terminal. This has a very “Virgin America” feel to it, and I imagine American simply gets to benefit from it. (They came into the project later – apparently Southwest was originally supposed to go in here, but that never happened.)

The gate podiums have a very open feel to fit with the terminal, but let’s talk about the most important feature: location. This terminal sits very close to the runway 1L and has a perfect view out toward the Bay. There is probably no better place to watch airplanes than here, as long as you don’t mind looking through glass.

Baggage claim is just a sea of carousels, undoubtedly hampered by the original building structure. It looks perfectly functional, however.

In the end, this project cost $383 million for 14 gates. That will increase cost per enplanement at the airport by $0.66 per passenger, or about 5 percent. Considering what the airport got out of this, I give them full credit for keeping costs in check. Will these gates be necessary? If Virgin America continues to operate and grow as it plans, then yes. I suppose we’ll know for sure in a few years if they were necessary or not. But for now, travelers on Virgin America and American can just enjoy what appears to be one of the most friendly and functional terminals around.

[See more photos from my tour of SFO Terminal 2, including one of the piece of art so big that they just let it stay where it was and built around it.]

You would think that the airports that get pounded by thunderstorms all summer would be the ones that rank at the bottom, so it’s even more surprising that San Francisco sits below everyone else by a fair margin. There wasn’t a single drop of rain the entire month at the airport. San Francisco saw only 70.2 percent of flights arrive within 15 minutes of schedule in August. The next worst was Miami at 75.9 percent and then LaGuardia at 76.4 percent. So what gives?

Those of you who live in the Bay Area or fly there frequently are probably shaking your heads right now because you know the pain all too well. The problem? It’s too foggy at the airport by the Bay and the runways are too close together to operate at full capacity in the fog. In a city that loves the environment more than just about anything, this isn’t likely to get fixed any time soon.

But before we dig into the reasons, I’ll put up a virtual layout of the Bay Area for those who don’t know it. (Before you jump on me with hate-spewing comments, realize that I absolutely love it up there, so this map was drawn with love. Well, except for that part about Berkeley. As a Stanford grad, I have no love for you weenies in the East Bay.)

As you can see, SFO sticks out into the Bay from the peninsula, just south of the city of San Francisco itself. In case you were wondering, much of the peninsula there is made up of mountains and the area between the mountains and the Bay is filled with people. The airport has nowhere to go. Now let’s look at the airport in greater detail.

Here you can see the airport up close. It has two sets of parallel runways that are perpendicular to each other. When the winds allow, the airplanes come in from the east and land over the Bay. Departures go to the north. (Yes, some long haul departures use the same runways as arrivals because the runways are so much longer.) But it’s not shifting winds that cause the airport to back up. The problem actually usually happens when airplanes are using this preferred configuration.

On a beautiful sunny day, the controllers can line up airplanes to land simultaneously. The runways are only 750 feet apart (centerline to centerline) but when the airplanes can see each other, that’s ok. When airplanes can’t see each other and they need to do instrument landings, the required distance between runways goes up a lot. You need 2,500 feet to do staggered approaches and 4,300 feet to do approaches exactly parallel to each other. SFO isn’t even close.

There are two ways to solve this problem. One is the technological way – get more accurate systems that allow for airplanes to be much closer to each other even when they can’t see each other. That has happened to some extent as airlines have worked with the airport and the feds to come up with ways to increase the throughput when visibility drops. The other way is to physically move the runways. The only real option there is to push one runway further out to the north into the Bay. I think we all know that in a place like San Francisco, that’s not going to happen. Environmentalists will win that battle every time.

So instead, air travelers just end up suffering any time the visibility goes down. What’s most frustrating about that is it’s very often a beautiful sunny day until the last few miles of the approach when that fog messes things up. In August, that happens a fair bit, and it’s why SFO had the worst on time performance despite not having a drop of rain.

The strangest thing about all this is when flying to San Francisco, you should throw all other advice out the window. What do people usually tell you? Fly in the morning to avoid delays, right? Not to San Francisco. As you might imagine, fog is worse in the morning and will often clear out by afternoon. So the afternoon arrivals are in better shape than the morning ones. Here’s the chart.

Definitely not what you’d expect to see at most airports, right? So next time you’re flying into SFO, keep that in mind. Afternoon flights might work out better, or if you really don’t want to take chances, there’s always Oakland . . .

Real Estate Developer Rick Caruso Eyes Expansion Into Airports – BNET
The man behind The Grove development in LA is now eyeing airports to improve shops and dining.

using miles for wedding travel – AntiBride.com
If you’re having your wedding, it’s a great time to try and use miles.

FAA Slaps American with $787,500 Fine For Lax Maintenance – BNET
The FAA is trying to step things up when it comes to enforcement. That latest is an American fine.

Pittsburgh’s European Connection Will Cost the City $5 Million – BNET
Pittsburgh is paying through the nose to keep Delta’s struggling flight to Paris at the airport.

The Cranky Flier: Booking Beyond Price – Sparksheet
I guest posted on the Sparksheet about the difficulty of encouraging people to book beyond price. (Hint: distribution makes life hard)

US Airways Pilots Oppose New York Slot Swap with Delta, Defy Logic – BNET
I roast the US Airways pilots for their decision to oppose the slot swap. It makes no sense.

best flying tip: arrive early – antibride.com
If you’re stressed about travels, the best thing you can do is arrive early. Just give yourself some extra time.

Airports in Boston and San Francisco Team Up with Twitter Promo – BNET
You don’t often see two airports getting together for promotional purposes, but that’s exactly what Boston and San Francisco are doing.

ExpressJet CEO Leaves for a Lesser Title at American – BNET
Looks like ExpressJet’s CEO has had enough of the regional biz, he’s heading to American to run maintenance. Hmm.

Airline Year Over Year Unit Revenue Changes Aren’t As Good as They Seem – BNET
Yes, the year-over-year comparisons are good, but that’s because things had fallen off a cliff last year. It’s not time to get excited just yet.

If you’re up in San Francisco, things are really ugly. As of 1130a PT, SFO was seeing delays between 4 hours 1 minute and 4 hours 15 minutes and INCREASING. Holy crap.

I’ve been listening to the live air traffic control feed at SFO this morning (yes, I’m a dork), and it’s ugly. There are constant windshear alerts and there have been microbursts on the runway. I just heard an aircraft cleared to land with 42 knot winds gusting to 52 knots and a windshear alert with a 20 knot loss of speed due to wind change. Those controllers and pilots deserve medals for flying through this stuff today.

And outside my window in LA, the rain just started. We’ll get the worst of it tonight and tomorrow, hoping that the recent burn areas hold up and don’t end up turning into mud rivers. All that being said, we need the rain and snow throughout California. Stay safe today.

Even considering that past history, I don’t think anyone could have predicted today’s announcement that the airline would return to San Francisco (SFO) in the Fall. This one is the most surprising of all.

Back on March 4, 2001, the airline packed up and left the airport. At the time there were 14 daily flights to only Phoenix and San Diego, but the combination of horrible delays, gate constraints, and high costs made them decide it wasn’t worth it. They said that they would serve the Bay Area through San Jose and the much larger operation at Oakland.

Well today they’ve decided to come on back to town. Reading the release alongside this SFGate article and this Inside Bay Area article makes it clear that costs have come down enough to make it attractive again. In addition, they say there is enough gate space. The long term plan to renovate the old international terminal (now Terminal 2) means there are growth opportunities in the long run. But how is on time performance doing?

Well thanks to the DOT, we can pull this info up fairly easily.

As you can see, on time percentage bottomed out at around 60% for the year 2000. It’s no wonder the airline pulled out in early 2001. But you can see that the numbers began to rebound. Of course after 9/11, there were a lot fewer flights so being on time was a lot easier.

Now look where we are today. The number of flights rebounded in 2006 so that there were only 2.5% fewer flights than in 2000. That comes out to about 9 fewer flights per day on average. Yet the airport still was able to achieve a 70% on time arrival rate – 10 points higher than in 2000.

Why exactly is Southwest doing this? I’m not entirely sure, but it’s probably a competitive move. Frontier has expressed an interest in expanding in San Francisco. Its flights to Las Vegas are said to be doing well while its flights to Los Angeles struggle. Still, this seems to be a pretty clear sign from Southwest that they’re going to play hard. Alaska has also said it wants to expand further in California, so this could be a hint to them as well.

I’m not so sure this says anything to JetBlue. That airline has effectively abandoned its plans to expand in the West unless it connects into the east coast network. I wouldn’t expect to see Southwest flying the long hauls from here, at least not in the beginning. In fact, they said they’ll probably have 12 to 14 flights at the beginning. I’d put my money down on Vegas, Phoenix, San Diego, and Chicago/Midway. They should be able to coexist with JetBlue. I also don’t think this is a message to United or American either.

The big loser here? Well it very well may be Virgin America. Now JetBlue, AirTran, and Southwest will all fly to San Francisco. JetBlue and Southwest also fly to Oakland and San Jose. I think they’re trying to build a case that there isn’t a need for another airline in the Bay Area, because they are already providing low fares and good service. It’s true they don’t have the cool inflight entertainment that Virgin does, but that doesn’t motivate the DOT. The DOT wants low fare competition from majority US-owned airlines. If there already is low fare competition, I would think they’d be less likely to revisit Virgin America’s application, especially in light of the ownership issues so far.

Well, remember that little airline called Virgin America? They were going to be based in SFO and their first flight was to be to JFK until the DOT decided that they were foreign controlled more than the law allows. Virgin America plans to respond with their plans to the DOT tomorrow, January 10, but most people are skeptical about them being able to take flight. If they do, it won’t be for awhile.



So JetBlue saw the opportunity to be the only low cost carrier in this lucrative market without imminent threat of another airline’s entry and they jumped on it.



The Boston flight is only a redeye eastbound with an evening return westbound so it’s not much of a threat to existing airlines, but the same can’t be said for JFK. Even though there are only four daily flights, they’re spread out well during the day. This is bound to hurt Delta with three flights a day and American with five flights a day by lowering fares and stealing customers. United, which has 7 flights a day on its premium service flights, is bound to be hurt less since they cater mostly to business and first class customers. Of course, they will feel some of the pinch.



It’s an interesting and good move for JetBlue. They now serve the Bay Area well with most of the operation in Oakland but flights into San Jose and now San Francisco as well. It wouldn’t surprise me to see LAX flights next since they already have their main base of operation at Long Beach with smaller operations at Burbank and Ontario.