Not only is Abu Dhabi Airport getting a new terminal, but it’s also getting a new name…
In this post:
Abu Dhabi Airport being named after Zayed
As of February 9, 2024, Abu Dhabi International Airport (AUH) will officially be renamed Zayed International Airport. The significance of the date is that this is when the official opening ceremony for the new terminal is taking place, even though the terminal will already have been in operation for several months.
This change is coming under a directive from the President of the UAE, Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan (who is also the ruler of Abu Dhabi). Presumably the airport is being named after Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, the founder of the UAE, who is also his father. He was also the first president of the UAE, and served in that role from 1971 until 2004, when he passed away.
I’m not a fan of “named” airports
I totally get how airports end up being named after people. It’s a way to honor someone who played a significant role in a place. And I especially get it in the Middle East, where everything is government owned, and there are rulers who call all the shots. In the United States, we also have a bad habit of naming some airports after politicians, which just seems a bit much to me, especially with how divisive seemingly everything has become.
All that being said, personally I very much appreciate when airports are just named simply, based on their location. I don’t want to connect at Hamad, or Zayed, or Hartsfield-Jackson, or George Bush Intercontinental. I’d rather connect in Doha, or Abu Dhabi, or Atlanta, or Houston. For cities with multiple airports, it would be nice if the names reflected the specific areas they’re in, or some other identifying feature, rather than just being named after different people.
Naming an airport after a person just creates additional confusion, and makes virtually every announcement longer. Soon, presumably Etihad crews will be welcoming people to “Zayed International Airport in Abu Dhabi,” rather than “Abu Dhabi International Airport.”
Bottom line
As of February 2024, Abu Dhabi International Airport will be renamed Zayed International Airport, after the founder of the UAE. This coincides with the official opening ceremony of the airport’s new terminal.
What do you make of Abu Dhabi Airport being renamed?
As an Emirati, I can't even begin to explain what the name of our late President means to us. This is a person that transformed the UAE into what it is today. When I saw the announcement of the name change it brought tears into my eyes.
The reason I wrote this just to try to explain our point of view, yes it might be inconvenient for others but it means allot to our...
As an Emirati, I can't even begin to explain what the name of our late President means to us. This is a person that transformed the UAE into what it is today. When I saw the announcement of the name change it brought tears into my eyes.
The reason I wrote this just to try to explain our point of view, yes it might be inconvenient for others but it means allot to our nation.
Thank you Ben for highlighting the name change and correctly identifying where the name comes from.
Totally agree just leave the names of the airports to their respective city names - changing this becomes so tiresome and give them Terminal 1,2& 3 for cities with multiples
I agree with Ben’s ideas on airport naming. If there is an airport named after a person at least 1) Be for an airport in a major city with multiple airports, where the name helps to clarify identification 2) the airport code should match the airport name.
I concede that there are some person-named airports that just work (and follow the above rules) most notably: JFK, LGA, CDG and ORD. For most Canadians, referring...
I agree with Ben’s ideas on airport naming. If there is an airport named after a person at least 1) Be for an airport in a major city with multiple airports, where the name helps to clarify identification 2) the airport code should match the airport name.
I concede that there are some person-named airports that just work (and follow the above rules) most notably: JFK, LGA, CDG and ORD. For most Canadians, referring to Toronto’s main airport as “Pearson” is also very natural.
So what's the airport code going to be, since AUH will still be operational?
AUH.
It is not a new airport, just a 'new' terminal, that has been collecting dust for 7 years already.
Here he comes. Here comes John Wayne. I'm not gonna cry about my pa. I'm gonna build me an airport, put my name on it. — Tobias
Another article that is unnecessary. The airport codes will remain the same and you can still search by city.
Get over yourself.
Information is information. If it’s not relevant to you, just move on.
One exeption is JFK. JFK is so engrained, that one can't change.
Ben you must hate driving through Miami then. I swear Calle Ocho has 5 names, 3 of which are complete pandering
I don't think naming airports after people is bad. Chopin, Bob Hope, Leonardo Da Vinci. Those are fine. Politicians are the problem. George Bush, Harry Reid, Ronald Reagan don't deserve to be memorialized like that.
Except no one calls FCO Leonardo Da Vinci. It’s Fiumicino to almost everyone. Guess Ben loves Italian airports since most are known by the neighborhood they’re found in (Fiumicino, Ciampino, Peretola, Linate, etc)
Except Bologna is also referred to as Marconi, Venice as Marco Polo
I agree: Naming airports after prominent artists or local heroes is fine with me. Rio de Janeiro's international airport, IATA code GIG, is named after Antônio Carlos "Tom" Jobim, a renowned Brazilian musician who composed the melody of The Girl of Ipanema. Santiago, Chile's main airport (SCL) is named after Comodoro Arturo Merino Benitez, the founder of Chile's Air Force and LAN (Chile's first airline). The names are rather long, though...
Liverpool John Lennon is good as well
I agree with you wholeheartedly, Ben, about not liking named airports. Santo Domingo's airport is officially "Aeropuerto Internacional De Las Américas - Dr. José Francisco Peña Gómez (politician)". That's quite a mouthful! Who even says that?
@Ben I generally agree with you except when you state that you want to connect "at Houston" or "at Chicago" which are places where there are multiple airports.
Right now we have Houston-Bush or Houston-Hobby or Chicago O-Hare or Chicago-Midway.
Regardless of whether the naming is after people, there is still a need to name airports differently particularly when there are multiple in the same city/area.
Right, but like some have mentioned, you could make them descriptive of where they are -- London City is perfect. Midway and O'Hare could be Chicago-South and Chicago-Southwest. Admittedly that direction often isn't going to be relevant to travelers headed to the city, but it's at least a start on helping people with the often confusing task of determining which airport they would rather fly into.
I agree with the sole exception of Bob Hope in Burbank. That was pretty cool, IMO.
It’s been changed to
Hollywood Burbank Airport…
In NE/SE Asia, most of major airports are not named after people - Tokyo Haneda/Narita, Seoul Gimpo/Incheon, Shanghai Hongqiao/Pudong etc.
Only notable exceptions are Philippines (e.g. Manila Ninoy Aquino) and Indonesia (e.g. Jakarta Soekarno-Hatta), as far as I know.
Indonesia has at least 20, probably more, airports named after people. Also, there's all the "Sultan Shah ____" airports in Malaysia. Tough to think of any others in that area though.
Yeah, Malaysia has Kuala Lumpur Sultan Abdul Aziz Shah and so forth. Thank you for letting me know.
I also recalled that Taipei Taoyuan was called Chiang Kai-Shek Airport in the past.
I'm Malaysian. Yes we have named airports, but from my experience we don't actually refer to the airports using their formal names in regular practice. Just say [town name]+Airport and you'll be set, and "Sultan Abdul Aziz Shah Airport" will always be "Subang Airport" for us simply because the name was entrenched in popular use since the 60s.
The named airports are mostly smaller airports in smaller locales though, the big ones like PEN, KUL,...
I'm Malaysian. Yes we have named airports, but from my experience we don't actually refer to the airports using their formal names in regular practice. Just say [town name]+Airport and you'll be set, and "Sultan Abdul Aziz Shah Airport" will always be "Subang Airport" for us simply because the name was entrenched in popular use since the 60s.
The named airports are mostly smaller airports in smaller locales though, the big ones like PEN, KUL, JHB, BKI, and KCH are all named after their locale/focus city. The many rural airstrips in Sarawak and Sabah are also named after the town/settlement.
In that case, are we renaming JFK back to Idlewild, or just calling it “New York Airport”? I guess both work pretty well!
I am honestly surprised that airports havent figured out how easy money it would be to have the name sponsored like all of our stadiums do. How has no one figured this out yet lol.
You would need to lock a company into a 20+ year sponsorship. You can't expect airlines, aviation bodies and passengers to switch every few years just because the airport found a new sponsor.
We have that arrangement in the Dubai metro rail system. Every 3 years there has been a change of name for most stations, quite confusing to keep up to say the least!
Because you can't have every major airport in the world called "HSBC International Airport" :)
I am with you. Just stick to the geographic location for the airport. I live in Atlanta and I am used to Hartsfield and, in the last decade or so (I don't remember when they changed it) Hartsfield-Jackson. But Hartsfield was before my time (and I am 51) though I do remember Maynard Jackson. But there are likely new arrivals here that have no idea who either are. And I sure would not know who...
I am with you. Just stick to the geographic location for the airport. I live in Atlanta and I am used to Hartsfield and, in the last decade or so (I don't remember when they changed it) Hartsfield-Jackson. But Hartsfield was before my time (and I am 51) though I do remember Maynard Jackson. But there are likely new arrivals here that have no idea who either are. And I sure would not know who Zayed was and where that airport is. Seems to me it obscures the publicity for a city that a major international airport brings. Stick to International Airport and name the terminal or something - Tom Bradley for example in LA or even the Maynard Jackson International Terminal in ATL - for the person you want to honor. Or better yet...stop naming everything after politicians. I would prefer Georgia Taxpayers International Terminal.
As others have pointed out, they can't "Just stick to the geographic location for the airport" because many places in the same geographic area have multiple airports.
What would they do in London? Even disregarding Stansted and Luton, what are they going to do, turn Heathrow & Gatwick into Hounslow & Crawley? Then leave the only "London" airport as a small inner city field that most aircraft can't fly into?
If you ask Heathrow Airport where the name comes from, it is actually quite appropriately named.
"The name Heathrow is named after the ancient hamlet Heath Row, upon where the airport is now built. The settlement, which was largely an agricultural area, was demolished fully in 1944 to make way for the development of the airfield."
The Gatwick name for the area of the airport can be traced back to the 13th century, so not quite a modern whim.
Actually @Grumpy, I think you'd need to name it Georgia Tourist and Visitors Tax Airport, as the visitors to the airport, car renters and hotel guests pay far more for the airport than those who live in Atlanta and don't stay at hotels or rent cars.
Does anyone actually listen to announcements anymore, everyone is on their phone 24/7 and we all have all connecting info on our phones so there is no need to listen to welcome/connecting announcements in the plane.
I listen to the announcements, And I do not travel with a cell phone. There are other things in life besides a cell phone.
Why was my comment not posted?
Naming them isn't so bad, especially for cities with multiple airports.
What really sucks is RE-NAMING them-- that's when you end up with people not knowing that "National" and "Reagan" airport are the same place.
Seen the same for "Bush" vs. "Intercontinental," and Burbank airport seems to get a new name every time some politician gets a whim: the airport has had 4 different official names in the last 21yrs.
And then, there's dreading...
Naming them isn't so bad, especially for cities with multiple airports.
What really sucks is RE-NAMING them-- that's when you end up with people not knowing that "National" and "Reagan" airport are the same place.
Seen the same for "Bush" vs. "Intercontinental," and Burbank airport seems to get a new name every time some politician gets a whim: the airport has had 4 different official names in the last 21yrs.
And then, there's dreading the ones that are inevitably GOING to get their name changed:
Americans are deluding themselves if they don't believe that MDW or ORD won't someday be renamed "Obama International Airport," or that PBI won't inevitably end up "Trump International Airport."
Doubt very much if you're ever going to see Trump International Airport anywhere, anytime.
Businesses (especially real estate holdings) are scrambling to get the Trump name expunged, as it's increasingly poisonous and bad for business.
Every airport is a run-for-profit business after all.
If you believe that'll last, then you're seriously underestimating USAmericans' ability to forget-then-whitewash relatively recent history.
"International" is also overused.
Strongly agree. Just look at the most of European "international" airports and how the majority of their names don't include "international"...
Just look at the most of European "international" airports and how the majority of their names don't include "international"
It's understood that they're "international" because without the ability to process arrivals from outside the Schengen zone, they wouldn't have much service to speak of.
That in no way applies to many of the US airports being whined about, as many of them cannot be assumed to have the ability to process an international arrival sans...
Just look at the most of European "international" airports and how the majority of their names don't include "international"
It's understood that they're "international" because without the ability to process arrivals from outside the Schengen zone, they wouldn't have much service to speak of.
That in no way applies to many of the US airports being whined about, as many of them cannot be assumed to have the ability to process an international arrival sans a mobile unit being pre-staffed.
The ones who can-- advertise it.
though not very effectively. ;)
Well, no... unfortunately that's more a lack of understanding on your part.
For most airports in the USA, Canada, and other countries with large(r than longhaul) domestic components, it's meant to signify an airport with internalized customs/immigration-processing procedures and/or facilities, which not all of them can be assumed to have.
That people "international" in the title is meant to advertise an actual international offering, is another matter entirely.
This isn't always the cade though. For example, Jacksonville's (FL) airport is called Jacksonville International Airport. However, there isn't any immigration or customs facility at the airport. It currently only has domestic flights (Air Canada used to fly there from Toronto, but they have a preclearance facility and that flight started about a decade ago and ended 5 years ago).
@JB
Incorrect. First, they don't have to have a dedicated facility ready to go, just a plan to create one capable of being sealed to "sterilize" a flight.
Second, no airport without such can accept even precleared flights; due to the fact that any error at the departure end can require a precleared flight to be re-screened.
Alaska Airlines found that out the hard way in 2002, when they were forced to refund tickets...
@JB
Incorrect. First, they don't have to have a dedicated facility ready to go, just a plan to create one capable of being sealed to "sterilize" a flight.
Second, no airport without such can accept even precleared flights; due to the fact that any error at the departure end can require a precleared flight to be re-screened.
Alaska Airlines found that out the hard way in 2002, when they were forced to refund tickets on their new YVR-SNA flights, as SNA's CBP/FIS facilities weren't in operation at the time, and they had no plan for a temporary sterile quarter.
Jackson Medgar Wiley Evers international airport in Mississippi. Lol flights to 10 domestic destinations.
Love how US airports often proclaim themselves as international when they have absolutely no international passenger or cargo services.
I guess it’s like the World Series which is between two countries. Many Americans can’t grasp the concept of the existence of anything beyond their borders.
^ Again, it's not about having international flights/cargo arrivals.... it's having the ABILITY to "STERILIZE" specific quarters to HANDLE any such flights.
Many small airports have this ability, as well as to have a mobile CBP unit from a nearby port within 1hr.
This is not to be confused with "International Airport of Entry," and even more nebulous term:
Under that, powerhouses like JFK and LAX do not meet the definition, but San Diego and Seattle do.
Wouldn’t a better name be ‘Abu Dhabi Zayed Airport’ like Sydney Kingsford smith or Mumbai Chatrapathi Shivaji Airport. Especially for a city like Abu Dhabi which has long lived in the shadow of Dubai in terms of tourism and global awareness.
There is no "Mumbai" in the official name of CSMIA. The holding company that operates the airport is MIAL however (Mumbai International Airport Limited).
Many major cities have two airports with commercial service... Connecting in "Houston" or "Chicago" doesn't make sense because then it's unclear WHICH airport in that area you mean.
^ This part. What I was coming to say.
The name could be Chicago Midway Airport, not Chicago Midway International Airport. Hobby Airport could be the full name. Houston Intercontinental Airport is good enough. No need to add Bush.