As I mentioned in my trip report last week, I flew into SFO on a recent trip to the Bay Area but back out of Oakland. This wasn’t by design, but since I knew they were both pretty easy options from the city, I felt comfortable choosing the best flight times/prices out of either airport. Once we settled on going into one and out of the other, I knew it would be worth a comparison post. Let’s get it on.
[Disclosure: OAK may be a sponsor of the Cranky Weekly Review, but it had nothing to do with this trip and didn’t even know about it.]
This has been a hot topic in the news lately. After all, when Oakland decided to rename itself San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport to reflect its location, SFO blew its top. Lawsuits were flying, and… well it all just seemed so dumb. But none of that matters. Which is more convenient?
In one corner we have the heavyweight champion, San Francisco International Airport. Weighing in at about 500 daily flights, home to the mighty United Airlines hub, and collector of fog, SFO sits a mere 7ish miles south of the southern border of the city of San Francisco itself.
In the other corner, we have the little airport with a big name, welterweight champion San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport. Weighing in at about 140 flights a day, home to Southwest’s fleet of LUVjets, and gateway to the not-so-great Hegenberger Road stretch of Oakland, OAK sits about 7ish miles east of San Francisco, as long as you don’t mind a little swim in the Bay.
Of course, straight-line distance is totally irrelevant, so I thought I’d put together this real-life test. I decided the best plan would be to compare times between airport security and the Embarcadero station in San Francisco. That’s where we would be getting on and off BART to make our way up to Fisherman’s Wharf.
I had hoped to include transit all the way to the hotel in the calculation, but since it was SF Pride, transit was all messed up within the city. That didn’t seem like an accurate measure. So, let’s see how each side did.
At SFO, we walked outside of security at 1:52pm. That’s when the clock officially started.
We made our way up the stairs to the AirTrain which was ready and waiting for us. We were on the train at 1:55pm.
After passing Terminal 3 and the International Terminal, we hopped off the AirTrain and went into the BART station. We had already loaded our Clipper cards on our phones so there was no delay in purchasing tickets anywhere along the route. There was a yellow train waiting, but it didn’t leave for several minutes. We were moving at 2:08pm.
Thirty one minutes later, we pulled into the Embarcadero station at 2:39pm, popping up above ground to find a perfect day for a nice stroll along the water.
Total time from SFO security to Embarcadero was 47 minutes… not too shabby.
On the return, we made it to the Embarcadero station and hopped right on a 9:57am green train.
It’s a quick trip to the Oakland Coliseum stop, where we arrived at 10:16am. This is where we made a fatal mistake.
The BART line to the airport seems well-timed to match with arriving trains, but we dawdled as I took some photos of an empty Coliseum. We walked up to the platform just as it pulled away. That meant we had a 10 minute wait for the next one at 10:28am. We had nothing but time, but it wasn’t great for comparison purposes.
The 10:28am car got us into the airport at 10:37am. We walked right over to security in Terminal 1, arriving at 10:41am.
Total time from Embarcadero to Oakland security was 44 minutes.
We have a winner… and it’s everybody!
We can argue about a minute here or a minute there. For example, should I have just said that it was 10 minutes faster for Oakland because I missed the earlier one? Should I have added more time since I didn’t have to wait when we got to BART and the train was ready? No, absolutely not. The point here is that timing will absolutely vary depending upon when you arrive at any given point along the way. So we need to take this with broader strokes.
A three minute difference here means it’s effectively the same. If you got off at Powell St instead of Embarcadero, that’s a two minute shift. The point is, you can be in the city pretty easily in about the same time from either airport. So when you’re looking at flights, if you’re riding transit, either is a good option and you should always check both.
Not a lot of places can say they have good public transit access to two airports. Good on you, Bay Area.
67 comments on “Airport Death Match: Is SFO or OAK Faster to San Francisco?”
Now if only more major US cities can get public transit options to their airports that are similarly fast & convenient, or make their options much better (looking at you, NYC). < 45 minutes from airport terminal to city center should be the rule, not the exception.
Public transit connections to airports (especially & ideally subway/light rail, but also buses to a much lesser extent) are great and should be encouraged more. However, while they are useful for airline pax (locals and even some well-prepared visitors), in my experience they are most useful for (and often most used by) airport workers. This is especially true at airports in that serve more sprawling, "car-focused" metro areas, such as ATL.
I agree that should be the norm, but do to DOT wisdom as we all know urban transit funding cant be directly used for service to the airport. At least that was what the rule use to be. That is why AirTrain exists.
Minor nitpick here, but the old rule wasn’t about transit funding, but about airport funding.
The logic was that the FAA didn’t (and doesn’t) want airports to be secret piggy banks used to fund and finance non-airport projects, hence the rule (generalized for all modes) that you can use airport funds to build an access *to* the airport, but not a bypass *around* or *through* the airport where non-airport users would see a big benefit.
The problem is that transit has a different geometry, and that transit is a service, not just a piece of infrastructure like a road. But the transit infrastructure you build dictates the kind of service you can run.
Under the old rule, Dulles rail is the canonical example. The line runs through the airport; but the FAA determined that the airport could only pay for the station itself (not any of the associated tracks or guideway required to serve the airport), because it would be used only by airport customers, but the guideway would be used by people just passing through.
Had they built an AirTrain, then the airport could’ve paid for the whole thing, but with a forced transfer for all customers.
That’s really interesting detail. Would the situation have been different if the silver line terminated at IAD instead of continuing further into Loudon county? Or perhaps that’s not the best example of the general case considering that the airport authority MWAA was heavily involved with the entire Silver line Metrorail expansion.
Yes, in theory, if Dulles was the last stop, you could make the case that only airport customers would use it and therefore the airport could pay for everything on airport property.
FWIW, nobody wanted that as a plan – the Airport didn’t want people trying to use up their parking capacity for air travelers doing park and rides, and Loudoun Co. wanted more Metro access than just an airport station, and the yard location required enough extra track so that an extension made more sense.
Good summary of the issues and the relatively recent change here: https://www.vice.com/en/article/z3v5j3/us-airports-no-longer-have-to-build-their-own-crappy-trains
And the actual policy change here: https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/airports/pfc/pfc_updates/pfc_75_21_rail_access_policy.pdf
It might have been harder to get the entire project funded if it had stopped at the airport because of the buy-in required from Loudoun, especially since the drivers who are paying the tolls predominantly live there. That fight was so long ago, I’ve kind of forgotten all the details, but I seem to remember Loudoun having a lot of sway due to that.
You’re right Ben, Loudon was definitely going to get stops beyond Dulles due not only to the tolls but other taxes that can be levied in areas around the stations as well as to the county itself. It adds a new jurisdiction (read source of potential funding) to wmata and also makes it easier for wmata to extract more money from Virginia by having more stations in the state.
So what you’re saying is convenient transportation to airports should be subsidized, whether or not you use the airport. Typical elitist liberal attitude.
Um, roads to the airport are subsidized, whether or not you use the airport. Why should transit be different? And in many cases, including BART, there is a substantial airport surcharge on the transit fare (often with a scheme so that the surcharge effectively doesn’t apply to airport workers, which seems fair and appropriate) so that those who use the airport in fact do pay for the convenient transportation.
People driving to and parking at the airport imposes a very real cost on all of society (similar to driving pretty much everywhere else), so it is in all of our interest to reduce the number of people who have to drive to the airport because public transit doesn’t suit their needs.
Just gonna Ralph Wiggum it (go banana!) and ask to through SJC into the mix as well…
SJC is not a good option if your destination is San Francisco or Fishermans Wharf
Mike – SJC isn’t even worth mentioning. It’s well over an hour and a half via transit and that includes train to bus connection.
SJC is terrible for transit. There is a bus that connects to both the light rail and commuter rail (Caltrain) and they are in opposite directions from each other. SJC is the easiest airport to get a rental car since you can walk to the rental car center.
It’s at least 90 minutes to get to downtown SF by transit.
The airport choice is ultimately airline dependant. If you fly WN then OAK is you airport. If you fly someone else more than likely SFO is you choice. I know this wasn’t part of the comparision, but I wonder, does renting a car change the metric significantly?
That depends on two factors, traffic & destination. We all know how traffic clogged bay area freeways can get not to mention SF streets at times.
Greg – Probably would, yes. The Bay Bridge is tough, though when we were traveling it probably wouldn’t have been so bad.
FWIW, we always walk to and from BART to whatever terminal we are in. The Airtrain is not much faster, and its a great airport to walk through.
Eh…this all depends if you are a visitor who will only use public transit and not leave the city or if you need a car. If the latter, SFO wins hands down because the Bay Bridge is an unpredictable mess to be avoided at all costs.
If you are a car driving local local that doesn’t live in the East Bay peninsula, SFO also wins.
Proud to say the DC area has 3 airports with easy and affordable rail access. It’s not the same as Cranky’s door to door comparison but I thought I’d share travel times from the aptly named Metro Center station to each of our 3 airports:
To DCA – Blue line Metro takes 19 minutes.
To IAD – Silver line Metro takes (gulp) 52 minutes. I guess that’s our equivalent of taking the tube to LHR!
To BWI – Red line Metro to Union Station is 5 minutes then Amtrak to BWI is 20-26 minutes (Acela/metroliner) or MARC to BWI averages 35 minutes.
Beat that Paris! Or any European city not named London!
I think that BWI time is a bit optimistic, given the need to catch the shuttle bus. Plus the extra wait time for less frequent MARC and Amtrak service…
FWIW I get these travel times from Metro Center via google maps (including walk times, transfers, etc)
Metro Center to DCA: 23 minutes
Metro Center to IAD: 56 minutes
Metro Center to BWI: 64 to 79 minutes – the faster time with Amtrak, but requires a longer wait for the train at Union Station, and a net of 20 minutes (waiting and travel time combined) for the shuttle bus from the BWI rail station to the terminal.
Good comparison. I used Metro center to approximate the most central location. I live near Union station so I just time the train accordingly.
The shuttle from the BWI rail station to the airport is annoying as hell but it made BWI one of the first true multimodal airports in the country. They should try harder to match the buses to the train arrivals though.
If you live near Union Station, getting to DCA is much faster if you take the Yellow line in Gallery Place. Even starting the trip at Metro Center, one is better off backtracking the short stop to Gallery Place and take the Yellow line.
Amtrak and MARC are infrequent enough that you really need to time it to catch a specific train, which means you have to build in some padding during the transfer at Union Station – maybe ~15 extra minutes to be safe in case the metro is delayed or you have to wait unusually long between trains. If you don’t live near the red line, then you need even more padding in your schedule, because you need to account for possible delays transferring between metro lines, especially on weekends. If you live on the orange line, it might make sense to ride out to New Carrollton and catch the MARC there, rather than transferring to get to Union Station.
Overall I’d say the transit options to BWI are only good for pretty specific situations. If you can walk to Union Station it’s great. If you live on the red line within DC itself, then it’s OK. If you live anywhere else, I’d either pay a premium to fly out of DCA (or maybe IAD if I lived along the silver line), or if I had a car I’d just drive to BWI and park in one of the cheaper lots with a shuttle bus.
Commuter rail airport connections in NYC were similar. I used to live near Penn Station, which made LIRR to JFK and NJT to EWR really convenient. They didn’t really make sense for people that weren’t walking distance to Penn Station, though.
Good point on the heavy rail schedule so I thought I’d check. This is for a weekday (weekends much different).
MARC has a minimum of 1 departure per hour on the Penn line with 2 or more trains per hour during multiple AM and PM peak hours. Amtrak (Acela, metroliners, NE regional) has a minimum of 2 trains per hour up to 3 and 4 during rush hours.
Worst case scenario is 3 trains per hour off peak and as many 6 per hour during peak times. That’s pretty good connectivity IMO.
It’s true that you can get to LHR, LGW, LCY, STN and LTN pretty easily with public transport in London. The quickest options are not always very cheap, however (Heathrow Express has only become justifiable to me now that I am an old fart and I earn a US salary). When returning to the US, I try to get the earliest UA flight of the day, to give me a fighting chance of making it back to East Lansing on the same day – but getting to LHR for an 8am flight by public transport is pretty much impossible (unless you are traveling from central London, and even then…). As a former-SF resident, I loved using the Judah and BART to SFO – really convenient, and at the time, very affordable. Such a shame most of the US lacks decent transport infrastructure (that does not involve flying).
The relatively new Elizabeth Line is only a little slower but costs way less than the Heathrow Express
If you buy early, you can get Heathrow Express for cheap. It was £22 round trip for me, which seems reasonable to me. The tickets are good for the entire day, so it’s not like you have to make a certain train.
I know the Dulles station was on my mind when I was walking to the Heathrow Express stop recently. The people who still complain about the location of the Dulles station probably would have collapsed during their walk at LHR!
CDG to Chatelet by RER (regional train) is 25/30 minutes. Train station is in the middle of terminal 2.
ORY to Châtelet by M14 (automatic metro line, so not subject to strikes), or subway as you’d call it in the us), is 25 minutes.
Guess Paris beats London any day, and probably also your US capital city !…
I did the RER to CDG. You’re leaving out the time it takes riding the metro to one of the handful of stations to get on those trains. Plus 3 airports vs 2. Plus we’re in a country known to be ambivalent (at best) if not downright hostile toward public transit. So we still win! ;-)
> Beat that Paris! Or any European city not named London!
I don’t have the numbers handy and am too lazy to work it out online, but I think S-Bahn from FRA to downtown Frankfurt is pretty fast, easy and convenient, too.
It is. I’ve done that as well. There’s really nothing to prove, I didn’t think my comment would be construed as a competitive call to arms, lol!
>>> Beat that Paris! Or any European city not named London!
I don’t have the numbers handy and am too lazy to work it out online, but I think S-Bahn from FRA to downtown Frankfurt is pretty fast, easy and convenient, too.<<
Frankfurt is not the capital of Germany, though. It's Berlin. And it used to be Bonn (and still slightly is).
When I was a Bay Area kid, if someone referred to a BART line by color you knew they were from out of town, just like someone saying “the 101”. Back in the day you either took a Concord, Fremont, Richmond, or Daly City train.
The lines have always had those colors on the map, and I wonder if it’s become a normal thing to call them by those colors. That’s certainly how it works with a lot of other train systems and the country.
BART has made a consistent effort recently to emphasize the line colors. It has retired he last of the original 70s fleet, and the line/color is displayed on the new trains and included in station announcements. I don’t think locals and regulars have picked it up, but nowadays an out-of-town guest or infrequent rider can navigate the system without needing to know where the @#*& Antioch is.
You don’t put “the” in front of the freeway numbers? I thought that was a West coast thing.
Bill – It is very much a SoCal thing. When I moved up there for grad school, I still called it the 101 since I grew up on that road down south.
But I always called it 280 since I didn’t have that road before. People always corrected me on saying the 101 and I promptly ignored them.
I never knew! Since I had a stint in LA prior to one in the bay area, I not only said “the 101” but I also said the 280, the 680, the 880 and the 85. Nobody corrected me, the bastards! Tried to bring it back East but I couldn’t make “the 95” and “the 395” stick.
Putting “the” in front of highway numbers is a Southern California thing. There are plenty of other things to mock about Northern Californians, but at least we say our highways the way God intended.
Naming trains by their endpoints makes more sense to me. It’s a commuter rail system and most users know where Richmond, Antioch, Dublin, Pleasanton, Fremont, Daly City, Millbrae, and SFO are. It’s like when they added the non-sequential exit numbers on the freeway. They’re useless.
SFO has many, many more ATC delays due to weather and traffic.
OAK has far fewer ATC delays.
I go to OAK if my destination is the Bay Area. I would go to SFO only if I need to connect.David
The bigger issue regarding OAK or SFO is airline access. If you don’t care for cattle call boarding it’s moot, you’re hitting SFO anyway.
Ignoring a connection where I didn’t get off the plane, I’ve flown into OAK once. I’d happily do so again if my destination was San Francisco and i could get a properly timed nonstop on WN. Flew into SFO more recently as AS had a better timed nonstop (UA did as well, but I prefer AS).
As for transit-enabled airports, DEN is decent despite being way out. You have to sit on the A line for awhile but it’ll get you there, and there are a few buses into the airport as well. ATL with MARTA isn’t bad either, nor is PDX with the MAX.
CF, I encourage you to do the same think with ORD and MDW and DFW and DAL.
Why stop there. Let’s do as many of these comparisons as possible as they sound interesting. TPG does these types of comparisons on getting to & from airports all the time on YT. I saw a similar type of video this morning from “Paul’s transport vlog,” a channel dedicated to construction/ expansion of the Sydney rail network.
This was a collaboration with another channel “Building beautifully” based around improving city planning/ better access to public transit in greater Sydney.
They compared the current rail network between several destinations & how the expansion of the automated Sydney metro network will cut commutes by a huge margin. The further out from the CBD you were the greater the time savings in most cases.
Sounds good! I’ll be taking the Rapid from CLE to the terminal tower on Thursday! Very few people know CLE has direct (meaning in the airport) rail access to downtown and points as far East as Shaker Heights.
Whoever does MDW needs to add the 15 minute walk from the terminal through 14 different parking garages (slight exaggeration) to the orange line CTA station.
I live in the DFW area. It’s not really a great comparison because only a relatively small percentage of visitors go to downtown Dallas. The area is very spread out to say the least.
There is only bus service to Love Field. You can connect to the train but it’s far easier just to get a cab.
From DFW to downtown Dallas, it’s DART rail, or the T to downtown Fort Worth. Both take about 55 minutes.
The DFW train station is at Terminal A (Dallas) or B (Fort Worth). Take a shuttle from the arrivals area.
Probavly a total of about 1:10 to 1:15 to either.
As a 17-year resident in San Francisco, I can confirm that SFO and OAK are about equidistant from DOWNTOWN SF, especially when using BART (and less stops to OAK). Have I driven to OAK in 25 minutes door to door with no traffic on the bridge? Yes. But, if traveling by car, SFO is typically closer as it is to other parts of San Francisco. Another thing is that SFO over the last 7 or so years has really renovated most of the terminals with nice amenities (and $24 burritos to boot). OAK has started renovations, but not completed them. The difference is a large hub airport versus a midsize regional airport. Delays are part of life at SFO (since 2020 things have fared better, though), at OAK things tend to run much smoother. If you fly UA or International (for the most part) you are SFO bound. If you are a WN flyer or East Bay dweller, OAK is your preferred airport. And for those who mentioned SJC – if you live south of Palo Alto that airport becomes very competitive and your preferred regional airport. SJC is a decent airport, but over an hour from where I live and work personally. Ultimately, OAK is a viable option to travel to SF, but just know YMMV!
I live on BART equidistant between SFO and OAK airports on purpose. Your analysis is almost correct. The equidistant BART stop is Powell or Civic Center, because (on weekdays) there are twice as many BART trains to OAK from downtown SF as SFO.
As for the comparison, one factor to consider is that in SFO, you can avoid the Airtrain if you arrive at the correct terminal or are down for a quick walk to the BART station. This will significantly reduce the travel time.
But as others have said, it’s great that the bay area has such good public transit with airport connectivity. Even the best transit cities in the US, like New York and Boston, are lacking in this area.
Good point, if you fly United, you never need to use it because Terminal 3 is walking distance to BART. Honestly, it only really makes sense to use the air train from Terminal 1. From Terminal 2 the walk is not that long, and from International A gates, you can just walk across the international check in area to BART pretty quickly.
They really screwed up by putting BART in the international terminal. Most international passengers have a ton of luggage and using the train isn’t practical. It is much more useful for domestic passengers.
New York is pretty good?
JFK: 2 different AirTrain terminals (E/J/Z and LIRR at Jamaica, A at Howard Beach), plus bus connections to a couple other subway lines.
LGA: LaGuardia Link Q70 free express bus to trains in Queens (E/F/M/R/7 and LIRR), and M60 bus to stops in Harlem (1/2/3/4/5/6/A/B/C/D and Metro North), plus some bus connections to other stops in Queens.
EWR: (worst of the 3) AirTrain to NJ Transit and Amtrak, bus to Newark Penn Station (PATH to World Trade Center), and Express Bus to midtown Manhattan.
In my opinion the biggest low-hanging fruit would be:
1. Much better guidance for people from out of town. Options are confusing – there should be really clear signage on how to get to midtown or downtown.
2. Add an exclusive bus lane along the full route of the Q70 bus (on the BQE, Grand Central Parkway, and airport roads). The bus is great, it just spends too much time in traffic. This shouldn’t require new construction – just add paint and bollards to the existing roadway. It won’t happen because drivers will be upset at the perceived loss of highway lanes, but it would probably be a net win if it pulls more Ubers and taxis off the road to LGA.
3. Add an Express Bus that goes directly to the EWR terminals via the Holland Tunnel. Lower Manhattan is annoying because the transit options are much slower than an Uber, especially during off-peak hours with low traffic. Uber will take you on a “straight shot” through the Holland tunnel, while transit options are a 3-seat require you to go up to midtown, or go down to the Financial District for a 3-seat ride to the airport (subway, PATH, bus). An Express bus through the Holland tunnel would save a lot of time and probably attract decent ridership.
Extending the N/W to LGA makes a lot of sense and would be great, but it will never happen due to a combination of neighborhood opposition and the MTA’s ability to build anything at a reasonable cost.
The LGA recommendation does little to help people in Nassau or Suffolk Counties. Millions of people live outside midtown. Would be great if their was a direct connection to the LIRR in Woodside or Jamaica, rather than just extending some subway lines.
For me OAK has the unique advantage of smooth and friendly CBP, but I only travel to South of the boarder once a year at most.
If only we can have HKG/TYO/SIN-OAK. One can dream!
With Global Entry, I’m consistently through immigration at SFO in 5 minutes. The longest I can think of recently was maybe 10 minutes with some unlucky timing. At SFO, they’re busy but efficient in my experience. Friendly, though, is not an adjective I would use (though I’m not sure I’ve ever met a friendly US immigration officer anywhere).
I feel I need to “push back” a bit here. I don’t think the three large NYC metro area airports are especially awful to get to via transit between them and Manhattan. Is the transit “world class”? No. But you can reach them *relatively* quickly (and reliably) on transit, and in most cases with just 1 transfer to an AirTrain (which would likely have to happen in any regard given the multi-terminal layouts of these airports, even for those parking long-term or renting cars).
Here are the times from Midtown/Rockefeller Center to each airport leaving at 5:00PM on Friday, as per Google Maps (including walking times):
via Regional Rail
to JFK Terminal 5 = 51 minutes (walk to GCT + LIRR + AirTrain)
to EWR Terminal A = 67 minutes (subway to Penn + NJT + AirTrain)
to LGA Terminal B= 49 minutes (walk to GCT + LIRR + LGA Link Bus)
via Rapid Transit
to JFK Terminal 5 = 62 minutes (walk to E + AirTrain)
to EWR Terminal A = —
to LGA Terminal B= 44 minutes (walk to F + LGA Link Bus)
via Taxi/Car (assumes average of fastest & longest travel times in Google Maps with no waiting time):
to JFK Terminal 5 = ~ 88 minutes
to EWR Terminal A = ~ 55 minutes
to LGA Terminal B= ~ 48 minutes
Here are the times from Downtown/Pine & Nassau Streets to each airport leaving at 5:00PM on Friday, as per Google Maps (including walking times):
via Regional Rail
to JFK Terminal 5 = —
to EWR Terminal A = 83 minutes (walk to PATH + NJT + AirTrain)
to LGA Terminal B= —
via Rapid Transit
to JFK Terminal 5 = 65 minutes (walk to A + AirTrain)
to EWR Terminal A = —
to LGA Terminal B= 63 minutes (walk to E + LGA Link Bus)
via Taxi/Car (assumes average of fastest and longest travel times in Google Maps with no waiting time):
to JFK Terminal 5 = ~ 88 minutes
to EWR Terminal A = ~ 53 minutes
to LGA Terminal B= ~ 50 minutes
So, from the CBD (including walking times) you can get to LGA or JFK in about an hour; EWR needs a bit more time. That’s honestly not too bad when one considers the *average* driving times. Keep in mind that (unlike starting right at Embarcadero station) I did not start right at the major rail hubs. So the travel time from GCT or Penn would be less. These may vary a bit depending on the EXACT starting location, but you get it.
My point is simply this: while not European or Asian in terms of absolute speed, the transit connections to the three major NYC airports aren’t awful, and there are a VARIETY of transit modes and options to choose from. I do it all the time, and it’s relatively easy. I think the “story” that NYC airport access via transit is bad is just that – a “story”, and a dated one. It was more true just 20 or so years ago, before the AirTrain(s) were built, before the LGA Link bus, before the availability to get the LIRR at Grand Central. But it is less so now, I feel.
The Newark AirTrain connectors are some of the worst designed public transit in the US. Why did they make the cars so tiny and chop them up so small? It’s slow and claustrophobic for no good reason!
The correct approach (like with ORD, SFO, SEA, PDX, ATL, BOS, DCA, and others I’m sure I’m missing) is to have the rail stop directly in the airport. The approach of all thee NYC airports (and Oakland) of having stupid, overpriced connector trains just makes the process more aggravating. It’s so disappointing how much it sucks to get to any NYC airport on trains given that New York has by far the best public transit in the US (and even the PATH in Jersey is great).
Anon – The Newark AirTrain is the small monorail (and I agree it’s too small) so that it could fit into the envelope designed along the airside of the early 1970s A-B-C terminals for an inter-terminal shuttle. When the PA decided to build the darn thing they for whatever reason wanted it to fit in those narrow guideways that were oh-so-Disney. Originally it served only as an inter-terminal connector and shuttle to some adjacent parking areas. Then they decided that it would be the vehicle they extend to the “new” EWR station on the Northeast Corridor, served by NJ Transit and Amtrak.
A long-gestating plan is to completely rebuild the Newark AirTrain (a monorail) with an actual large higher capacity steel-on-steel train, AND to extend the PATH service from Newark Penn to the EWR connector station on the Northeast Corridor (with an additional stop in south Newark). You’ll still need to transfer there to get to the AirTrain. But PATH would then have a one-seat ride from the EWR connector station directly into the World Trade Center in Manhattan. A plus.
And I agree – the ideal is to have a single airport station. But again, I must reiterate that both JFK and EWR are of such a size that the multi-terminal layout would require some type of additional transfer to a distribution system in the airport in any event. Remember – this happens at ATL as well, just airside. The “Plane Train” I believe has higher daily boardings than the entire MARTA system. Eek!
The fact that there is no DIRECT subway connection to NYC’s airports is absurd to me as an outsider, let alone “express” trains (with few stops) to the major transit hubs in downtown/midtown Manhattan. I just always assume that this “oversight” is intentional and is intended as a political giveaway to the taxi lobby.
When I lived in Westchester County ~11 years ago, I flew out of LGA by taking the commuter rail to Manhattan (a stop in Harlem, I believe?) then a bus to LGA, using the offficial/preferred way to get to the airport. I was the only person on the bus with a carryon, stood out like a sore thumb, and didn’t feel overly comfortable (even as a person who visited the city reguarly). On my return (which was after dark) I spent the extra money for an Uber to get to the commuter rail station I’d parked my car at.
Kilroy – I agree that a “direct” connection is the idea, but as I mentioned in other comments I also feel that the layout of JFK and EWR in particular mean that a connection to some sort of distribution system is likely inevitable. Should it be “free”? Yes. But whether I transfer at Jamaica to the distributor or in front of one of potentially several terminals is kind of moot to a large extent.
Jamaica is served by both express subway trains and the even-more-express LIRR, with service to either Penn or GCT, so that’s actually pretty easy I feel.
Newark is more difficult via transit, but should improve with the projects I mentioned in another comment. (Rebuilt AirTrain and PATH extension.)
But I would prefer a direct line, yes – but what we have isn’t avid-awful is my point.
The one where I agree that a direct subway link is the easiest to justify is LGA, and it’s absurd it doesn’t have one. BUT the connection to and from the express subway hub at Jackson Heights and the LIRR at Woodside via the FREE LGA Link bus is not too shabby, frankly.
The trip to the suburbs is always a tougher nut to crack, but that’s not what we were comparing. Even if we lived in Europe a trip from Westchester would likely have involved a bus. (And FWIW the M60 to 125th Street I have found to be fine. And everyone has carryon luggage on it! Sometimes too many people! That’s one of the reasons the LGA Link bus is now supplied by the MTA with buses that have luggage racks, as is only logical! ;)
They’re built that way partially because FAA funds can’t be used for general-purpose transit systems – you can only use them for dedicated airport connectors. Results in a not ideal outcome for passengers.
On transit options: JFK is good, LGA is decent now, and EWR kind of sucks, especially when you compare travel times vs. an Uber or Lyft from most locations in Manhattan.
The big problems with EWR:
1. On weekends, NJ Transit runs a schedule that only requires one track through the North River tunnels. For example, NYC-bound trains only go through the tunnel from 6:15 – 6:45 AM, then it is exclusively used by outbound trains from 6:45 AM – 7:15 AM. Repeat every hour. This means that trains are all “bunched” into short windows of time every hour, rather than being spread out over time. For example, if you arrive at the Newark AirTrain station at 11:19 AM on a Saturday, you’ll be there just in time to see a train pulling away. Unfortunately for you, the next train isn’t until 12:06 PM (47 minutes between trains). Even though there are 3 trains per hour during this time of day, your effective wait time is much longer than you’d expect. You also can’t call an Uber from the train station – you’d need to pay (again) to ride the AirTrain back to the terminal to do that. I recommend always checking the NJ Transit train schedule before you get on the AirTrain at Newark. If there is a long gap you’re better off taking one of the other options (Uber, Express Bus to midtown, 62 bus to Newark + PATH to WTC).
2. The AirTrain has low capacity and is unreliable. You need to build time in your schedule to cover getting stuck in the AirTrain for a while.
3. Penn Station is not near most people’s final destinations, and requires a subway transfer that adds time to your trip. It’s also somewhat complicated to find the correct place to board your NJ Transit train if it’s your first time there.
I fly into and out of SFO and/or OAK on WN every week for work in Downtown SF and always take BART. My experience is the same as this article describes; the BART connection is honestly great to/from either airport. The Bay Area is very fortunate to have real transit options for its airports. As a result, I mainly book flights on price and schedule rather than connections — on WN, OAK is almost always more expensive but has a much more robust schedule than anything offered at SFO.
One small advantage not mentioned here is the ability to get a good seat on BART if you want one and minimize wait chances. On this measure, SFO always wins, especially at rush hour. It’s pleasant enough an experience that I’m actually able to get some work done on the trip to/from SFO, which I can’t always do to/from OAK. The BART Yellow Line originates at SFO, headed directly for Downtown, and both the Yellow/Red Line trains that serve SFO are usually less crowded traveling up and down the SF Peninsula than the OAK-serving Blue/Green Line trains crossing SF Bay. I haven’t looked at the data, but I’d imagine that BART’s peak load factors, especially in commute hours, are experienced in the Transbay Tube. Also, after a change last year, Yellow Line trains are now 8 cars, while Red/Blue/Green Line trains are 6 cars (all down from the COVID-era 10 cars), headways on the Yellow Line trains are now every ten minutes (from 15), and Red Line trains are routed to run directly to SFO first rather than stopping at the next stop (Millbrae) first as they had done previously. Effectively there’s a lot more direct service to SFO now than there used to be. Conversely, the Red/Green Line trains heading towards OAK had their headways cut to 20 minutes (from 15). And then you have the OAK Airport Connector trip, which is totally fine but adds a transfer and often some more wait. It’s still better than the pre-Connector AirBART bus service, albeit a bit more expensive.
Another factor out-of-towners should consider is the time of day and safety. At night, the Coliseum Station can be quite sketchy, as it’s in a high-crime neighborhood. And unlike at SFO, you have to wait for your main train on the Coliseum Station platform, which can take a while (especially at night when the trains run less frequently). I recall having waited 20 minutes on that platform at night because of bad transfer timing.
I definitely think the crime risk / general sketchiness is way higher in Deep East Oakland than SFO. Oakland has very high crime rates, and the Coliseum Station is near a lot of the very worst Oakland neighborhoods for crime. San Francisco, though not perfect, has had way lower crime rates, especially violent crime rates, than Oakland for decades. I live in San Francisco, but the worst deranged homeless BART passenger encounters I’ve had have all been in the East Bay (not in SF or the Peninsula), including sharing a BART car with a guy smoking meth in the middle of the afternoon after an A’s game!
By contrast, the SFO Station, where you will wait for the train to leave is super safe, well lit, and clean, unlike the Coliseum Station. Yes, there are some occasional shady or poorly behaved passengers on the train travelling through the Peninsula and City, but way fewer.
I’m not generally someone who’s paranoid about crime (I’m male, pretty big, in my 40s, and give off a good leave-me-alone vibe), and I ride public transit in SF (MUNI) all the time, including to get to work. But if safety and generally not feeling like you have to constantly be watching your back is a concern (especially at night), I would strongly recommend SFO over OAK.
At night I would strongly recommend just taking an Uber or Lyft between OAK and SF. As you mentioned, BART gets infrequent and sketchy, and the Bay Bridge rarely has bad congestion late at night, so an Uber is fast, not crazy expensive, and takes you right to your destination without transfers.
Excellent points and I’m glad that you made them. The area around OAK has (sadly) gotten much worse over the past 15 years and it was rough even that long ago. Something about that particular part of Oakland brings out the worst and most randomly aggressive potential attackers that I’ve seen almost anywhere. Scary stuff. Retail is abandoning Hegenburger because it’s soooo bad. It’s sad because OAK airport is such a pleasure to use.
SFO on the other hand can be a nightmare on the wrong day, but it’s a lot more secure as are the transportation links. I’ve stayed in the area of SFO and it’s perfectly safe and fine for a late night arrival. Of course the best of both worlds would be SJC, but that only works for folks from Palo Alto or Hayward southward (which is still a very solid catchment area).