Talk:Orlando International Airport

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the airport project.

Florida Mid‑importance

	Florida portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Orlando International Airport.

Passenger count incorrect?

This article states "In 2017, MCO handled 44,611,265 passengers" but then links to List of the busiest airports in the United States which shows only 21,565,444 for 2017. Am I misreading something here? 107.192.236.103 (talk) 01:23, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have never heard MCO being an acronym for "Mickey's Corporate Office" and I have lived here my whole life (33 years). Disney is not all there is to Orlando and that statement needs to be removed or at least cited for a source. Donniewan75 —Preceding undated comment added 20:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Concourses are attached to the main terminal, such as Miami International. Airsides are separate buildings not attached the the terminal. Terminals are buildings that hold the check-in/arrivals areas. If there's only one terminal with not separate areas for gates, then there's no concourses or airsides. If there are two separate attached gate areas, those areas are called concourses. If there is one terminal with separate satelite buildings attached by trains/walkways that hold the gates, those are called airsides. If there is more than one building holding check-in/arrivals areas, then those are different terminals and can each have their own separate councourses/airsides, such as is the case with John F. Kennedy International Airport. PRueda29

What is an airside, and how is it different (if at all) from a concourse? Answers by edits to the article would be sufficient. Nohat 07:38, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

From what I understand, GOAA calls MCO's 4 different terminals airsides instead of concourses becuase they're not connected to the main terminal via hallways or other customary methods of connecting buildings (rather, they're just connected by the AGTSs). Theoretically, each airside has 3 concourses (except Airside 2, gates 100-129, which has 2)--since, generally, concourses are considered long hallways with gates. --VCA 16:13, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I assume AGTS is what is described in the article as a "people mover"? All this needs to be clarified in the article because the terminology is obscure and confusing. Nohat 00:54, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Top international destinantion/ Sao Paulo

I'm sorry but I do not believe that 900,000+ passengers fly between Orlando and Sao Paulo Why? Because of the amount of passengers that flies between Sao Paulo and Orlando, and for more proof look at the top international carriers. TAM carries about 298,000+ passengers between Orlando and Sao Paulo in 2014 (not 2015 yet). Can someone please fix this issue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:68BB:65F0:C9BB:75D4:AD82:4F4F (talk) 23:15, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

B52 Crash?

Why hasn't anyone mentioned the B-52 crash in 1971? Granted, most of Orlando's made up of transplants now, but it was a big deal then. A whole lot of kids were killed in the crash as well as the aircrew. I refuse to do it because im sick of people nitpicking and calling me a liar here but someone else can if they want to put up with the nonsense from petty wikipedia czars.

Thank you for your suggestion, in futre could you make it a new section of the article such as I have just done. If you can cite the source for the B-52 crash, and you can write it in Wikipedia's style guide it should be fine, and help the article. Do not be scared not to do it.Tjnewell 10:27, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Multimodal

I removed the commentary stating that MCO would be the first multi-modal airport in Florida. This is a curious statement given that ALL airports are multi-modal. (An airport that wasn't multi-modal would only have airplanes land and take off from it, there would be no cars, buses, etc.)

User:cliffb 05:24, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Accidents/Incidents

Does anyone else find the current sole entry for the accidents section totally non-notable? Apparently the aircraft made an emergency landing after an engine failure. The accident itself didn't happen in Orlando (the aircraft was only destined there) and no one was hurt, the plane wasn't even severely damaged, let alone written off. I don't believe it is worth mentioning here, as the quotation provided is a typical mainstream media overstatement/dramatization, and the event wasn't exactly rare. Engines fail all the time. Anyone else with me for removing it? --KPWM_Spotter (talk) 03:38, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

jetBlue

Does anyone know when jetBlue is scheduled to move into Airside 1? 68.52.36.127 (talk) 18:51, 31 July 2008 (UTC) I have no clue ATTM, possibly September 2010. Virgin America may fill jetBlue's Airside 2 Gates......--167.93.84.126 (talk) 12:40, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TPA serves "Greater Orlando"?

I like Orlando as much as the next person, but Tampa is not part of the "Greater Orlando" area no matter how many times you repeat it. It didn't work when you guys tried to interfere in Tampa's baseball franchise attempts in the 90s, either.

Calling Tampa part of Greater Orlando is like calling New York City part of Greater Philadelphia. 72.248.33.186 (talk) 14:52, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

..they're not in the same SMSA, so the point is moot. Ajpajpajp1 (talk) 02:59, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aer Lingus

For those who keeps changing the airside from 1 to 3, the airline uses Airside 1 not Airside 3 as per http://www.orlandoairports.net/ops/airlines.htm and the airport's online timetable. 68.119.73.36 (talk) 02:06, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OIA vs MCO

I've removed statement because there was no source, but also because I doubt it's accurate:

Although strictly speculative, it is possible that this media use in Central Florida may stem from the long time reference of Miami International Airport as "MIA" and an erroneous media assumption that that code is a contraction for the name "Miami International Airport." However, MIA is the actual airport code for that facility, a code based on the first three letters of "Miami" and not as a contraction for that airport's formal name.

To the best of my knowledge, many airports are known as _IA as an abbreviation of "[city name] International Airport". Closer than Miami, Tampa International Airport is known as TIA. I think Miami is one of the few instances around the world where the IATA code resembles both the _IA abbreviation and the city name. However, I don't think that has any relevance to this article. AHeneen (talk) 21:09, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

...OIA is in local use only, and is certainly not official. Ajpajpajp1 (talk) 02:58, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

Something crazy is going on with the references section. Specifically reference 2. Any thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.102.129.39 (talk) 22:23, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Orlando International Airport. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:23, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gates 60-69

Anybody know whatever happened to gates 60-60? They once were part of the airside serving gates 70-99. Might that be worth mentioning in this article? I’ve found nothing that says what happened to them. Geekynerdyguy1996 (talk) 00:35, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

...gates 60-69 were used by Comair when they were the Delta Connection carrier based there; economies of scale with the CRJ 100 and 200 series aircraft used at MCO (as well as their northern hub at CVG) caused the airline to fold, and the ground level commuter gates were removed. Ajpajpajp1 (talk) 03:01, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Airside 2 not complete

...there is a grassy area northeast of the terminal building in the shape of an extension to that wing of the terminal building that has not been built upon; an additional 7 gates would fit there, but GOAA has elected not to proceed with those gates due to recent downturns in Aviation economic conditions; the section on the completion of terminal 2 needs to be rewritten. Ajpajpajp1 (talk) 02:57, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]