Like this article?
Please consider supporting us with a simple donation!
Add the Lambert-St. Louis 2000 Master Plan to your airport collection!
Click the images below to purchase a high-quality digitized copy of this visionairy 62-page plan, a must-have for airport history fans!
A 1969 image showing a model for the future terminal of the new Hamburg Kaltenkirchen Airport.
Published: December 4, 2019
Hamburg Kaltenkirchen: The DFW of Europe!
The AirportHistory archive contains a ton of materials on never-built airports, as well as unbuilt schemes at existing airports. Even though they were never built, they are part of airport history and they make for fascinating stories!
Today, we present our first feature on the never-built mega airport of Hamburg Kaltenkirchen, which bore more than a passing resemblance to Dallas/Fort Worth!
Today, we present our first feature on the never-built mega airport of Hamburg Kaltenkirchen, which bore more than a passing resemblance to Dallas/Fort Worth!
THE NEED FOR A NEW AIRPORT FOR HAMBURG
Hamburg is a wealthy and vibrant port city, located in the north of Germany. It is Germany's second largest city by population, after Berlin. During the 1950s, Hamburg was booming. In the period between 1950 and 1961, its population grew by 15% to 1.8 million people.
It was projected that in the ensuing decades, the number of inhabitants would swell by another 20% to 2.2 million inhabitants. As a result, passenger traffic at the Hamburg Fuhlsbüttel Airport was growing rapidly. In 1962, the airport handled just over a million passengers, making it the third busiest airport behind Frankfurt Rhein Main and Berlin Tempelhof.
Hamburg is a wealthy and vibrant port city, located in the north of Germany. It is Germany's second largest city by population, after Berlin. During the 1950s, Hamburg was booming. In the period between 1950 and 1961, its population grew by 15% to 1.8 million people.
It was projected that in the ensuing decades, the number of inhabitants would swell by another 20% to 2.2 million inhabitants. As a result, passenger traffic at the Hamburg Fuhlsbüttel Airport was growing rapidly. In 1962, the airport handled just over a million passengers, making it the third busiest airport behind Frankfurt Rhein Main and Berlin Tempelhof.
Kaltenkirchen was to develop into a major international hub serving northern Germany.
At the time, Fuhlsbüttel was Lufthansa's second largest base after Frankfurt--it even had been Lufthansa's main base for a number of years after the establishment of post-war Lufthansa in 1955. Due to this historic presence, the carrier still operated its largest maintenance facilities at Fuhlsbüttel. The future looked golden.
However, Fuhlsbüttel Airport's convenient downtown location meant that the airport was highly constrained and could not expand. If Hamburg wanted to retain its important position, something had to be done.
However, Fuhlsbüttel Airport's convenient downtown location meant that the airport was highly constrained and could not expand. If Hamburg wanted to retain its important position, something had to be done.
A mid-1960s view of Hamburg Fuhlsbüttel Airport. With a less than ideal layout, no room to expand and traffic booming, the case for a new airport seemed solid.
|
THE KALTENKIRCHEN PROJECT
In 1962, the decision was taken to develop a new large airport approximately 20 miles (30 kilometers) north of Hamburg, near the town of Kaltenkirchen, which would give its name to the new airport. Ambitions were big. Kaltenkirchen was to develop into a major international hub serving northern Germany. Interestingly, there were no plans to close Fuhlsbüttel, with the airport likely focusing on important business connections after the opening of Kaltenkirchen. A large area of land measuring 5500 acres (2200 hectares) was purchased, and in 1965, Hamburg Airport received the building permit for the project. |
|
A scalable mega airport
The master plan envisaged the construction of four runways and six passenger terminals, with room for two more terminals (right of image) if needed.
FOUR-RUNWAY LAYOUT
In 1969, three competing consortia presented their terminal design schemes. The chosen plan, proposed an airport with two 13,000-foot (4,000-meter) parallel runways laid out in an east-west direction, with the passenger terminals located between the runways.
If needed, the runways could be extended to an astonishing 19,291 feet (5,880 meters). Two more runways could be added in the future, providing a total of four parallel runways. In Europe today, only Paris de Gaulle Airport could would have matched its runway capacity.
In 1969, three competing consortia presented their terminal design schemes. The chosen plan, proposed an airport with two 13,000-foot (4,000-meter) parallel runways laid out in an east-west direction, with the passenger terminals located between the runways.
If needed, the runways could be extended to an astonishing 19,291 feet (5,880 meters). Two more runways could be added in the future, providing a total of four parallel runways. In Europe today, only Paris de Gaulle Airport could would have matched its runway capacity.
A model of the airport looking toward the south. The airport was neatly divided in zones for passenger terminals (left), maintenance (upper right), freight (lower right) and all other facilities (middle). Very clean. Very tight. Very German. I like it. A great difference with a modern master plan would be large parcels of land being allocated to landside commercial development (i.e. offices, hotels). Also, the concept of a spine road is used less nowadays, as it can become congested with through traffic.
SEMI-CIRCULAR TERMINALS
The plan envisaged the construction of a series of semi-circular passenger terminals, built on opposite sides of a spine road bisecting the airport. Initially, one terminal would be built, generating a capacity of about 5.5 million annual passengers. Additional terminals could be added on a flexible basis as traffic grew.
The plan envisaged the construction of a series of semi-circular passenger terminals, built on opposite sides of a spine road bisecting the airport. Initially, one terminal would be built, generating a capacity of about 5.5 million annual passengers. Additional terminals could be added on a flexible basis as traffic grew.
|
The master plan envisaged the construction of six semi-circular terminals, providing a total of 80 gates served by boarding bridge, and 40 remote stands. If required in the far future, there was even space provided for the construction of a seventh and eighth passenger terminal.
Total capacity would be well over 30 million annual passengers, a number that arguably could be more than doubled based on current understanding of capacity and the use modern technologies. The terminals would be connected by means of small Automated People Movers (APM), each carrying up to four persons, and running on an intricate system of tracks traversing the airport. A large freight area was also planned, providing a final capacity of 3 million tonnes of cargo, as well as large aircraft maintenance area. The airport was to be connected to Hamburg by means of a new motorway spur and a light rail (S-bahn) connection. |
A pair of semi-circular terminals, with the spine road running through the middle. The preferred concept had a more compact landside compared to the concept shown in the image at the top of the page and below.
|
Kaltenkicrchen was scheduled to open in 1975, the year that downtown Fuhlsbüttel Airport was expected to reach its ultimate capacity.
A view from the departure curb looking inside into the departure hall. The main advantage of the semi-circular concept was that the distance from curb to plane was very short. Note the small automated people mover vehicles at the mezzanine level. Cool!
Enjoying this article?
Sign up to our e-mail newsletter to know when new content goes online!
A view of one of the terminal concepts, highlighting the landside area. Passengers arriving at the airport by train would transfer to small automated vehicles, taking them to their designated terminal. This concept had a more spacious landside than the concept that was finally chosen (see black & white image above).
A DALLAS LOOK-ALIKE?
The design was quite similar to that of Dallas/Fort Worth Airport, which was being planned around the same time. Both made use of the concept of semi-circular terminals built on opposite sides of a spine road. Also, both airports made use an APM system to connect the terminals.
But there were major differences too: DFW's terminals were longer and provided more close contact gates than those of Kaltenkirchen's (20 vs 15). However, Kaltenkirchen's terminals boasted two levels instead one, separating departing and arriving traffic. This made sense as most traffic was international rather than domestic, requiring a separation of levels. Kaltenkirchen's terminals were also wider, presumably to create more space for functions such as security, customs and immigration facilities.
Another difference was the sheer scale of the plans. The DFW master plan foresaw the construction of 13 semi-circular terminals and seven runways, as opposed to Kaltenkirchen's eight terminals and four runways. This made sense, as air traffic in Europe at the time was at much lower levels than in the US.
The design was quite similar to that of Dallas/Fort Worth Airport, which was being planned around the same time. Both made use of the concept of semi-circular terminals built on opposite sides of a spine road. Also, both airports made use an APM system to connect the terminals.
But there were major differences too: DFW's terminals were longer and provided more close contact gates than those of Kaltenkirchen's (20 vs 15). However, Kaltenkirchen's terminals boasted two levels instead one, separating departing and arriving traffic. This made sense as most traffic was international rather than domestic, requiring a separation of levels. Kaltenkirchen's terminals were also wider, presumably to create more space for functions such as security, customs and immigration facilities.
Another difference was the sheer scale of the plans. The DFW master plan foresaw the construction of 13 semi-circular terminals and seven runways, as opposed to Kaltenkirchen's eight terminals and four runways. This made sense, as air traffic in Europe at the time was at much lower levels than in the US.
A 1974 aerial of Dallas/Fort Worth's terminal 2W. DFW's terminals were longer than those of Kaltenkirchen. As a result, it boasted almost twice as many gates as Kaltenkirchen's terminals. Traffic at Kaltenkirchen would be mainly international. Hence, departures and arrivals were level separated and the terminals were wider in order to allow for security, immigration and customs facilities. However, the capacity per terminal was more or less the same.
DELAYS
The airport was scheduled to open in 1975, the year that downtown Fuhlsbüttel was projected to reach its ultimate capacity. However, due to local opposition and slower than expected traffic growth, the project timetable kept slipping.
Final approval for the project finally came in 1977, but due to fierce opposition, the approval was revoked in 1980. After that, the project slowly disappeared off the political agenda. Finally, it was decided to expand Fuhlsbüttel instead. However, Hamburg Airport management took a strategic view and never sold the land, even increasing its land holdings.
The airport was scheduled to open in 1975, the year that downtown Fuhlsbüttel was projected to reach its ultimate capacity. However, due to local opposition and slower than expected traffic growth, the project timetable kept slipping.
Final approval for the project finally came in 1977, but due to fierce opposition, the approval was revoked in 1980. After that, the project slowly disappeared off the political agenda. Finally, it was decided to expand Fuhlsbüttel instead. However, Hamburg Airport management took a strategic view and never sold the land, even increasing its land holdings.
After the cancellation of the Kaltenkirchen scheme, expansion efforts focused on the existing Hamburg Fuhlsbüttel Airport, pictured here in the mid-1980s.
CANCELLATION
In the ensuing decades, the discussion about Kaltenkirchen flared up from time to time, with the last serious debate dating back to 2003. In 2013, it was decided to bury the project permanently and one of the shareholders of the project, the city of Kiel, sold off its part of the land for commercial and residential development.
In 2018, Hamburg Helmut Schmidt Airport, as it is now called, handled over 17 million passengers, making it the fifth busiest airport in Germany, behind Frankfurt, Munich, Düsseldorf and Berlin Tegel. Although Lufthansa's subsidiary Eurowings maintains a major presence at Hamburg, it pales in comparison to Lufthansa's hub operations at Frankfurt and Munich.
In the ensuing decades, the discussion about Kaltenkirchen flared up from time to time, with the last serious debate dating back to 2003. In 2013, it was decided to bury the project permanently and one of the shareholders of the project, the city of Kiel, sold off its part of the land for commercial and residential development.
In 2018, Hamburg Helmut Schmidt Airport, as it is now called, handled over 17 million passengers, making it the fifth busiest airport in Germany, behind Frankfurt, Munich, Düsseldorf and Berlin Tegel. Although Lufthansa's subsidiary Eurowings maintains a major presence at Hamburg, it pales in comparison to Lufthansa's hub operations at Frankfurt and Munich.
A 2010 aerial of Hamburg Airport's terminals. After the cancellation of the Kaltenkirchen scheme, Hamburg was completely rebuilt. The current passenger volume (17 million passengers in 2018) was several times more than airport planners in the 1960s deemed possible.
WHAT IF?
I often wonder what would have happened if Kaltenkirchen had opened in 1975. It would have opened many years before the new Munich Airport (1992). Perhaps, instead of Munich, Hamburg would have become Lufthansa's second hub, or perhaps even its main hub, considering its ideal runway layout.
Do you agree? Let us know your thoughts on the Kaltenkirchen project. Please share your comments below!
See more rare airport photos in our other articles and photo specials.
I often wonder what would have happened if Kaltenkirchen had opened in 1975. It would have opened many years before the new Munich Airport (1992). Perhaps, instead of Munich, Hamburg would have become Lufthansa's second hub, or perhaps even its main hub, considering its ideal runway layout.
Do you agree? Let us know your thoughts on the Kaltenkirchen project. Please share your comments below!
See more rare airport photos in our other articles and photo specials.