Saw in a promo video that 5 million man hours built the new airport, that I think cost 1.5 billion. If my math is correct, that means for every man hour, the project cost $300 million. Does that line up with major public construction projects costs?

I'm no mathologist, but I believe that would be $300 million for every one million man hours.

I think you forgot to carry the one.

$1,500,000,000 / 5,000,000 hours = $300/hour.

-Rob

Drop six 0s of 5 million to get 5, drop six 0s off of 1.5 billion to get 1,500. 15 divided by 5 is 3 tack on the two 0s from the 1,500 and you get 300. Not forgetting the units, $300 per man hour. It’s practically automatic when I do it in my head.

Is that 1.5 billion the cost of labor only? Or does it include the cost of materials?

There's a lot of concrete in those runways and taxiways.

quote:

Originally posted by pbslinger:
Saw in a promo video...?

I read that wrong the first time. Was confused.

Wait - KC got a new airport? Finally?!!? Lord I hated flying in and out of that old shithole.

quote:

Originally posted by Georgeair:
Wait - KC got a new airport? Finally?!!? Lord I hated flying in and out of that old shithole.

Most convenient airport ever. Everyone loved it. Complaints were rare. Now it’s like most other modern airports. If you like them, you’ll like this one.

quote:

Originally posted by Georgeair:
Wait - KC got a new airport? Finally?!!? Lord I hated flying in and out of that old shithole.

It's a new terminal, planes use the same runways.

quote:

Originally posted by Sigmund:

quote:

Originally posted by Georgeair:
Wait - KC got a new airport? Finally?!!? Lord I hated flying in and out of that old shithole.

It's a new terminal, planes use the same runways.

$1.5 Billion and all you got is a new terminal. Must be some terminal for $1.5B

quote:

Originally posted by Georgeair:
Wait - KC got a new airport? Finally?!!? Lord I hated flying in and out of that old shithole.

It’s been a long time since I was there, but once I had to change gates which meant leaving the secure area and going through security at the other set of gates again, which also meant throwing out the water I’d bought at the last airport.

I have a relative that lives in KC and loved the old airport. I think it was better for people who started and ended there than it was for those of us who connected.

Well my math was off, as I feared. Is an error of one million times significant?

So what I really wanted was a discussion of how bloated a terminal project, not an entire airport, is at 1.5 billion. So if the 5 million hours cost $100 per hour, that'd be $500 million spent for labor, leaving a billion for materials. What can a billion dollars of materials build?

quote:

Originally posted by Pale Horse:

quote:

Originally posted by Georgeair:
Wait - KC got a new airport? Finally?!!? Lord I hated flying in and out of that old shithole.

It’s been a long time since I was there, but once I had to change gates which meant leaving the secure area and going through security at the other set of gates again, which also meant throwing out the water I’d bought at the last airport.

I have a relative that lives in KC and loved the old airport. I think it was better for people who started and ended there than it was for those of us who connected.

Having to change terminals in a three terminal airport was one of the worst aspects of the old airport. Not sure you could walk it, even if a path existed. If you knew ahead of time that you needed to do it before landing, catching a bus to another terminal wasn't a big deal. If you found out about it upon landing, then had to do it on a time crunch, it wouldn't have been fun.

quote:

Originally posted by Pale Horse:


It’s been a long time since I was there, but once I had to change gates which meant leaving the secure area and going through security at the other set of gates again, which also meant throwing out the water I’d bought at the last airport.

I have a relative that lives in KC and loved the old airport. I think it was better for people who started and ended there than it was for those of us who connected.

It was only really bad for connections in other terminals, which was fairly rare unless you were switching carriers. However, the big thing is that was the case prior to 9/11 and the additional checkpoints. Prior to that you could get dropped off about a 60-90 second walk from any gate. They were super easy to access. The post 9/11 checkpoints changed all that. It wasn't designed for that at all. It was the worst the first year or so after as there was nearly nothing but gate behind the checkpoint. Handful of bathrooms and a vending machine or two, that's it. I can see how it was an excellent design pre 9/11. Flew out of it many times before and after and you could get dropped off 30-50 feet from a gate or checkpoint. The ring road system made traffic pretty easy to manage as well.

Over time they added more facilities behind the checkpoints. Though that never solved the problem you mention, having to go through a checkpoint all over again to get to another gate even if you just stepped off a plane if you were unlucky enough to have your connection gate in a different area. I haven't flown out of the new one yet, but I've heard it's much better.

quote:

Originally posted by pbslinger:
What can a billion dollars of materials build?

Approximately a modern, full sized 65,000 seat pro-football stadium plus parking lots.

For me, the “old” Kansas City airport was the one west the river. So actually in Kansas City, KS.

At least one commercial airline flight lost a wheel of its landing gear to the bridge over the river.

As a boy, I worked for a man that got his private and commercial license via the GI Bill flying Cessna 140s (tail draggers) and a Mooney Mark 20 out of that airport.

The Mooney had wood wings, and its prop was driven by rubberised fan belts rather than a gear train.

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:
For me, the “old” Kansas City airport was the one west the river. So actually in Kansas City, KS.

At least one commercial airline flight lost a wheel of its landing gear to the bridge over the river.

As a boy, I worked for a man that got his private and commercial license via the GI Bill flying Cessna 140s (tail draggers) and a Mooney Mark 20 out of that airport.

Maybe you are talking about Fairfax airport. My Dad had a light plane and used to "Fly to Wyoming for antelope hunting" Him and his buddies wives dropped them off at Fairfax, a bit of sightseeing and they landed at Municipal airport, where their girlfriends picked them up. Return trip at end of weekend.

quote:

Originally posted by pbslinger:
Well my math was off, as I feared. Is an error of one million times significant?

So what I really wanted was a discussion of how bloated a terminal project, not an entire airport, is at 1.5 billion. So if the 5 million hours cost $100 per hour, that'd be $500 million spent for labor, leaving a billion for materials. What can a billion dollars of materials build?

Don't know the specifics of KCI, but from my former life woking in architecture with a lot of experience in airport design, I can tell you airport terminals are one of the most complicated building types.

A lot of factors go into them. First just the complexities of it all; baggage handling systems, security, communication (audio and visual paging, flight information screens, way finding, etc.), aircraft support, people moving on a large scale (elevators, escalators, moving walkways, trams, etc.), even bathroom facilities. Then there's all the different functions enclosed; ticketing, retail, food service, circulation, boarding lounges, car rental, ground services, baggage claim, etc.

Then there's security, think TSA is a pain in the ass to deal with as a traveler? Try being a design architect and dealing with them. First there's all of their design requirements. Second there's the tug of war between airport management and TSA. TSA wants square footage, lots of square footage. Airport management doesn't want to give up any square footage that they don't collect revenue on. Now throw in passenger and baggage screening space and equipment...

Then the building material demands of terminals; basically every surface below 42" has got to be gorilla proof having suitcases, carts, etc banged into them, paint and drywall ain't gonna' stand up. Travertine floors aren't selected just because they look good, flooring in public spaces needs to be extremely durable to stand up to the wear. The large volume of space enclosed is going to require more structure, more enclosure (glass, metal panels, etc.), more HVAC to condition the space. Being the gateway to the community, there's going to be a desire to have the building make a statement through design so the building's form is going to be more than a warehouse building.

Not saying there isn't waste, cost overruns, corruption at KCI, just saying the airport terminals are one of the most expensive building types there is.

Don't care.
But how's the BBQ?
If I've just battled several belligerent passengers and their tasty support animals, how well are they cooked up while I wait for my luggage?

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:

prop was driven by rubberised fan belts rather than a gear train.

Not correct. The propellor is neither driven by belt nor gear train; it is mounted on an extension of the crankshaft. Direct drive -- engine RPM and propellor RPM are the same. Geared propellors were rather uncommon in airplanes of this size during the years that the M20 was produced, although the Cessna 175 has a geared prop.

You might be thinking of the landing gear. Shock absorption / suspension for the main wheels is a stack of rubber donut type things, rather than the hydraulic type used by many other airplanes such as the Bonanza / Baron / TravelAir family.