Jump to content

Talk:Low-cost carrier terminal

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Low cost carrier terminal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:02, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

LCCT vs LC Airports vs Regular airports with some LC traffic

[edit]

While the article deals with terminals built with low-cost operations in mind, I find many examples that do not actually fit into the LCCT concept, especially in Europe, such as Gatwick (the airport does not really incorporate the LCCT concept in any of the two terminals, but has with time been occupied with many low-cost carriers), Amsterdam (while the airport is not a LC Airport, it incorporates a LC pier, where H-gates -non-Schengen- and M-gates -Schengen- are located), and some airports that are included just because they have low-cost traffic, such as Budapest, Dublin or Riga.

Some examples are also outdated. Ramenskoye shows as a proposed concept, while it is already built and operating as Moscow-Zhukovsky Airport. El Palomar was turned into a low-cost airport, but then closed during Covid, and never reopened. Schönefeld was turned into Berlin Airport T5, and now closed since 2022, while Berlin Airport has a new dedicated LCCT, designated as T2.

I will try to correct some of the examples, but I am still posting this message in case a better way to organise the examples could be found. Albertocsc (talk) 15:37, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mention Marine Air Terminal at LaGuardia?

[edit]

The operations at Marine Air Terminal at LaGuardia International Airport today meet the description of a low-cost carrier terminal. Perhaps it should be mentioned in some fashion?

This terminal, like most low-budget terminals I have seen, is not connected to the main terminals of the airport, and has separate ground access.

The Marine Air Terminal: •Is used exclusively by budget air carriers •Has a no-frills facility, utilizing a relatively ancient terminal building with low ceilings. (Rather than mimicking the design of old airports terminals, it simply purposes an old one that has been landmarked and retained) •lacks in amenities

I think it might warrant mention because it operates identically to purpose-build low-cost carrier terminals. SecretName101 (talk) 13:47, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Low-cost_carrier_terminal&oldid=1202668127"