Do We Need Two Airports Both Named ‘San Francisco?’

In the year ending Jan. 30, about 748,000 passengers flew from Newark to Atlanta. Specifically, they flew from Newark Liberty International Airport to Hartsfield- Jackson Atlanta International Airport.

That’s a mouthful, isn’t it? I wonder how many of those 748,000 —tabulated by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics— used the full airport names, as opposed to saying “Newark” or “Newark Airport” to “Atlanta.” Could the number who used the full names be zero?

This question arises because Port of Oakland commissioners last week approved a proposal to rename Oakland International Airport. The new name would be San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport. On Thursday, San Francisco filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against of Oakland.

The goal seems to be to use the airport name to inform people that Oakland International Airport is located within the San Francisco Bay area. In fact, for a large portion of the Bay Area, the Oakland airport is closer to home than the San Francisco airport is. Both airports have rapid transit service on BART as well as highways that sometimes have horrible traffic jams.

Of course, knowledgeable travelers already know which airport to use. But the less knowledgeable could be seriously harmed. "This new name will cause confusion and chaos for travelers, which will damage the travel industry for the entire region,” San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu said in a prepared statement.

San Francisco International is one of the country’s most important airports. At SFO, United Air Lines has the best West Coast hub. The airport has 56 international destinations, many on international carriers. United and 40 other carriers oppose the name change, as do San Francisco’s chamber of commerce and hotel council.

“The name change could cause confusion and inconvenience for many travelers who are not familiar with the region, and lead to problems such as passengers inadvertently booking travel to the wrong airport,” a United spokesperson said Thursday in an email.

The proposed new name has three problems.

First, as United says, it is easy to envision that a passenger unfamiliar with the Bay Area has a flight to Asia and decides, based on the airport names, to fly to San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport to connect to an international carrier.

Whoops. Who pays for hotel when they miss their flight to Asia?

Secondly, why should the name Oakland come second at Oakland’s airport? Oakland has lost its football team and its basketball team and it is going to lose its baseball team. All of these moves involve horrid stories of billionaire owners deserting loyal fans. And now the Port of Oakland wants to join them.

Thirdly, why adopt a new name that no one will ever say?

Looking at airport name changes, most don’t work. Idlewild to Kennedy was an exception that took place in 1963. The 1998 change from Washington National Airport to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport made the airport into a political football, given the politics of naming an airport after a president who fired 11,345 air traffic controllers for striking.

Newark Liberty International Airport and Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport obviously added unused words. And last month a group of Republican members of Congress introduced a bill to change the name of Washington Dulles International Airport to Donald J. Trump International Airport.

I say stop the madness, starting in Oakland.