COERJ145 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1420 posts, RR: 1 Posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3462 times:
Hi all,
I'm gonna be flying UA from BOS to PHX in april and I have two choices for outbound flights, a 2hr LAX connection(mainline to UAX) or a 50 minute SFO connection(mainline to Ted, both flights arrive around the same time. Having been through LAX multiple times, I found it easy, but I havn't been through SFO in years, so I was wondering which airport you found easier for connections.
Laxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22241 posts, RR: 51 Reply 1, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3452 times:
I'd stick with the longer LAX connection. You just never know what might happen with Bay Area weather (rain / low ceilings) that might eat into that tight 50mins. LAX connection as you state is rather easy on UA all being under one roof.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Jfrworld From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 362 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3410 times:
It all depends on which you would rather do, spend more time on the ground or in the air.
at SFO, TED and UA mainline are under the same roof, in the same terminal. So, from a connection perspective, its easy. Flight time from SFO-PHX is usually ~1:45, whereas flight time from LAX-PHX is ~ 1:05. Although you might be on the ground in LAX an hour longer than you would if you connected through SFO, the flight time is also less. Also, I believe that LAX-PHX is all UA Express. I'm not sure if that matters to you.
Since, SFO is my home airport, I'm partial, but I don't think it really matters in the grand scheme. Oh, and the terminal in nicer in SFO.
United319 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 513 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3378 times:
SFO definately. UA's facilities in LAX are run down, and flat out falling apart. Also it is tough connecting in LAX at times. I once had 15 minutes to get from gate 88 (express) to gate 66 and there are no moving walkways at all. It was quite a hike. SFO has moving walkways, and is more compact. Also I would rather fly on a Ted A320 over an OO CRJ. Go with SFO.
Jasp25 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 613 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3364 times:
B747forever From United States of America, joined May 2007, 16598 posts, RR: 11 Reply 6, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3352 times:
I would go for LAX, because of the 2hr connection time, and because you haven't been in SFO for years, and the time is really tight.
HT From Germany, joined May 2005, 6475 posts, RR: 26 Reply 7, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3348 times:
Quoting COERJ145 (Thread starter): I'm gonna be flying UA from BOS to PHX in april and I have two choices for outbound flights, a 2hr LAX connection(mainline to UAX) or a 50 minute SFO connection
Only if you really have no other option than to fly transcon from the Eastcoast to the Westcoast and than backtrack to PHX, I would prefer the 2-hr connection at LAX. Like "Laxintl" said, the 50 min connection might be eaten away by wx-issues in the Bay Area.
I respect your wish to fly via SFO or LAX, but are there no suitable connections for your timings available via DEN or even ORD or IAD when staying with UA ?
Any options on US (HP) ?
-HT
Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
Mauiman31 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 434 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3340 times:
I prefer SFO terminal and services, but I have had more weather delays (fog) over the years at SFO than LAX.
HA_DC9 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 647 posts, RR: 1 Reply 9, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3301 times:
Quoting Laxintl (Reply 1): I'd stick with the longer LAX connection. You just never know what might happen with Bay Area weather (rain / low ceilings) that might eat into that tight 50mins. LAX connection as you state is rather easy on UA all being under one roof.
My feelings as well even though I love both airports. I did have one situation at SFO though that raised a red flag for me. I flew UA RNO-SFO-LAS a few years back and we parked at the international terminal at SFO. I presume the aircraft (A319 mainline) was going to an international segment for its next flight. However, the FAs told us as we were parking that we would have to exit outside of the security zone at the intl terminal and then go through security again at the domestic side if we had a connecting flight which I did as my LAS flight was a Ted flight that was scheduled to depart 45minutes later. I barely made it in time as I had to fight the midday rush through security. I am not familiar enough with UA operations at SFO, but I hope that was just and isolated "incident" and not a normal occurance.
Burnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7421 posts, RR: 9 Reply 12, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3259 times:
Everytime i flew United into San Francisco its been late, LAX offers more to see, and SFO wasn't a spectacular airport IMO.
Quoting Jfrworld (Reply 2): at SFO, TED and UA mainline are under the same roof, in the same terminal.
Thats not entirely true, i flew DEN-SFO and we arrived at the international terminal, of which you must go outside of security then come back through even for domestic flights.
Personally id go for LAX.
"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1420 posts, 
From Germany, joined May 2005, 6475 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Taiwan, joined Jul 2003, 390 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
