Or Santa BarBAra
Mines Field became LA Muncipal Airport in 1931, and airport codes didn’t start until the 1930s so it probably never had one. LA became LAX in 1947.
And even if the original official name didn’t include “Los Angeles”, it was still the Los Angeles airport, so it could have had a name reflecting that.
I suspect that, for the most part, most airports are referred to by the locals as just “the airport”. Aside, of course, from municipalities with more than one major airport, like Chicago and New York City.
I live in Chicago, and I’ve only heard it as “O-R-D,” not as “ord,” the very rare times I actually hear it instead of “O’Hare.” (I admit, my sample size for this is very low, as people generally only use ORD in written communication, in my experience. I pronounce it O-R-D in my head when I read it.) Do others typically pronounce it?
Same as you. Unless it’s an abbreviation, like DEN, I would spell it out.
How many of us would assume our airport has connected passenger terminals?
I certainly thought so of DTW. But it doesn’t. There’s the McNamara terminal that has a Delta hub, then on the other side of the airport campus is the Evan’s terminal. Both are accessible from the highway and I think they run a shuttle bus between the two but they are not connected by any means.
The terminals at JFK are, for the most part, disconnected. Most are or were operated by the airlines themselves (Pan Am, TWA, American, United, JetBlue, etc). That’s changing now, though.
In the months after 9/11, there was an uptick in jokes about L.A.’s airport having “lax” security.
1960s and before airports tended to be built with disconnected terminals. Newly-built (say post 1980s) airports tend to be fully connected terminals. Old airports that have been through enough terminal replacement / renovation cycles tend to become more-connected over time unless the terminals are a couple / few miles apart. In which case they may build an automated people mover on the secure side or put up with shuttle busses on either the secure or non-secure side.
Airline funding and politics gets involved too. E.g.
Back when Northwest was the Big Kahuna at DTW they arranged for the city and state, with a lot of NWA seed money, to build them a shiny new ginormous terminal for them and them alone to use. On the only free land anywhere on the airport’s property, which was out in the middle between the runways a couple miles from the entire existing decrepit tiny 1950s terminal. Hooray for them; sucks to be traveling on any other airline.
Once NWA (later Delta) was out of the old decrepit terminal (say about 1995 - 2000 IIRC?), there was room to spare for all the other airlines there. So it was slowly torn down piecemeal and the new and current terminal was built in about 5 stages on the same land. And each time a new segment opened and an old one closed, all the tenant airlines had to play musical gates, ticket counters, and offices. Such fun.
So now the non-Delta terminal is all shiny and still semi-new (completed 2015ish?). But it remains a couple miles and several runways away from the new (albeit now older of the two) midfield Delta terminal.
Because of the need to cross runways to get between the two terminals an elevated people mover between terminals is not possible. And a surface level one with undercuts below the runways doesn’t pass security regs. So it would have to be a purely underground train a la Atlanta to connect the two terminals. But it would have to be built deep underground to clear all the buried infrastructure and road underpasses already under the surface airfield. So far the city of Detroit doesn’t have the spare $5Billion necessary for such a Big Dig. And probably never will. And Congress has become remarkably stingy about paying for infrastructure anywhere in the USA.
And now you know … the rest of the story.
Lots of major US and foreign airports are in substantially the same bind. The details and timelines vary, but they’re mostly land-locked both horizontally and vertically and are already overcrowded and bursting before you start tearing stuff down to make room to build new. Which constraints make the construction vastly harder (read more expen$ive) and slower (read double more expen$ive).
A lot of these things would have been much cheaper if the airport had been built that way to begin with, rather than growing piecemeal over the ages.
Or Santa Barbara Airport. Or maybe this is a whoosh?
I’ve noticed that I’ve transitioned from O’Hare to O-R-D to Ord over the years.
Toronto (YYZ) has a train landside between the terminals and offsite parking, but nothing airside. Star Alliance is basically Terminal 1 and everyone else is Terminal 3 so I’m not sure how commom x transiting between terminals is required.
As a side note, Air Canada has always dominated YYZ, and my impression is that T1 is essentially “Air Canada and friends” and T3 is “everybody else”. I haven’t been to either one in many years but my son travels a lot and when he shows up early for a flight he always prefers T1 for its amenities. I get the impression that T3 is kinda like being banished to the outer wilderness, and I also note that that’s where Air Canada’s major domestic competitors live.
It used to be, but since the most recent renovation it’s not bad. I get access to the AC lounges, so I do prefer T1.
Off to Iceland in a few weeks on Iceland Air so I’ll have to use credit card perqs to access a lounge in T3 before we fly.
When I lived in Chicago in the 90s it was “O’Hare” and “Midway”.
In Washington DC area now, it’s usually “BWI”, “Reagan National” and “Dulles”.
Some folks say “BeeWee” for BWI, but not many. I think it’s funny that way.
YYZ, aka Toroonto Lester B. Pearson International Airport, unlike some other airports with pretentious billings, bills itself on its website simply as “Toronto Pearson”. If you want to sound like a local, refer to it simply as “Pearson”.
Yet, interestingly, while Toronto uses “Pearson,” Montrealers don’t call their airport (YUL) “Trudeau,” for “Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport.” They just call it “Dorval.”
A small sample, but I asked a couple of Montrealers why they don’t use “Trudeau” for their airport, like Torontonians use “Pearson” for theirs. Their answer pretty much amounted to, “It’s been Dorval since forever, and it works.”
I used to live in Montreal, and “Dorval” is indeed how locals refer to YUL. Calling it “Trudeau” is also problematic because it’s also the name of our current Prime Minister, who incidentally many Quebeckers don’t like. So yeah, I bet “Dorval” works! 
wolfpup, sort of the same here with the Washington airport. It’s official name is the “Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport”. but most of the time people just call it National or Washington National. A few call it Reagan National, but never heard it just called Reagan airport. Or maybe I don’t travel there enough…