Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
New LAX Terminal Approved  
User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26175 posts, RR: 50
Posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7940 times:

LA City Council Approves new LAX Terminal.

The LA City Council today directed LAWA to proceed with previously "green lighted" project for the construction of a midfield satellite concourse just west of TBIT that could accommodate at least 10 VLA (A380) aircraft.

LAWA has 30 days to report back on its specific plans and timeline for completion of the terminal which is currently estimated to be no later than 2011.

Article on the subject written just prior to today's vote.
http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/9168752.html

[Edited 2007-08-15 21:15:28]


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
31 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7822 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7940 times:

About time!!! Thank god!!!


Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26175 posts, RR: 50
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7662 times:

Will be interesting to see the plans LAWA puts forward.

There has been talk of building the facility in two wings with either the North or South side going up first instead of building the entire facility in as a single project that would take longer. Also the final facility gate configuration will be interesting, but it must be capable of holding atleast 10 VLAs.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineAwysBSB From Brazil, joined Sep 2005, 566 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7584 times:

Quoting Laxintl (Thread starter):
project for the construction of a midfield satellite concourse just west of TBIT

Why adding more gates to western area of TBIT did not come first?


User currently offlineLAXPAX From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 82 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7518 times:

How strange, I thought I heard this reported on a local radio station on Monday. I guess they could’ve been talking about the "upcoming" vote, but I could’ve sworn I heard them say “the city council has approved the plan.”

Maybe they DID say that, and it’s just another sad example of the poor aviation reporting around here...



"Remember, no matter where you go... there you are." -- Buckaroo Banzai
User currently offlineTravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3556 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7356 times:

Excellent news. I assume this new terminal will be replacing those remote stands out in the western part of the airfield?

User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26175 posts, RR: 50
Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7250 times:

Quoting Travelin man (Reply 5):
I assume this new terminal will be replacing those remote stands out in the western part of the airfield?

I suspect a few will remain for the sheer fact that overnight and long term parking will always be required along with knwoing the remotes serve VIP flights often and are the designated bomb threat search area.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineUALAX From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 145 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7228 times:

What's interesting is that per the Daily Breeze article, the midfield terminal will have its own customs and immigration facility. Will the people mover that will connect to the Bradley Terminal be part of the same line that will go to the Green Line?

User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26175 posts, RR: 50
Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7130 times:

Quoting UALAX (Reply 7):
Will the people mover that will connect to the Bradley Terminal be part of the same line that will go to the Green Line?

No the people mover discussed is simply to connect the satellite concourse to TBIT directly.

The more ambitious people mover connecting the terminals with off airport facilities such as consolidated car rental lot and green line still has a very long way to go before ever becoming reality and it quite dependent on willingness of other parties including DOT and Caltrans to participate, let alone help fund.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineAdam T. From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 957 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7114 times:

Is this new midfield terminal the beginning of the large master plan that LAX has come up with?

LAX Masterplan


User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26175 posts, RR: 50
Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7098 times:

Quoting Adam T. (Reply 9):
Is this new midfield terminal the beginning of the large master plan that LAX has come up with?

Yes the terminal was one of the "green lighted" projects part of the LAX Masterplan court settlement late 2005.

Most visible projects to date have been the 25L/07R runway relocation that started last summer and the 3 year TBIT remodel begun this February.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineAdam T. From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 957 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7082 times:

Thanks for the clarification Laxintl, has the linear concourse to replace Terminals 1, 2, and 3 been green lit as well?

User currently offlineJsnww81 From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2074 posts, RR: 15
Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7082 times:

Where does this project fit in relative to the plans to add gates to the west side of the existing TBIT? There were also plans to relocate the taxiways beyond TBIT (and the American Eagle satellite) so that more jetbridges/holdrooms could be added to that side of the terminal. Will this happen before that, or concurrent with that project?

User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13552 posts, RR: 100
Reply 13, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7082 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Question: How will road access be improved at the TBIT? Its nearly impossible to pick up/drop off people as is!

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 1):
About time!!! Thank god!!!

yes.

Quoting UALAX (Reply 7):
What's interesting is that per the Daily Breeze article, the midfield terminal will have its own customs and immigration facility.

 pray  I really hope so. 10X more space is needed. Hopefully the FAA/federal government will rule the passenger cap is illegal and let the airport expand.

Quoting Adam T. (Reply 9):
Is this new midfield terminal the beginning of the large master plan that LAX has come up with?

I hope not. There used to be a plan for a HUGE western terminal.  bigthumbsup  "A city builds wealth on transportation." I accept the western Terminal plan is dead. But something needs to be done to expand LAX. Unless fast rail to ONT is built soon... there is no way to commute from the Westside or Southbay to another international airport.

From
http://www.laxmasterplan.org/

Quote:

The number of aircraft gates will decrease from the existing 163 to 153 to place practical constraints on numbers of operations and passengers handled and limit the throughput of LAX to approximately 78.9 MAP.

I'm happy to see expansion making some (if albeit small) progress.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26175 posts, RR: 50
Reply 14, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7046 times:

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 13):
Hopefully the FAA/federal government will rule the passenger cap is illegal and let the airport expand.

There is nothing for the Federal government to review as being illegal as there are no strict passenger caps.
The 75mil passenger limit agreement was crafted very carefully (with FAA input), and does allow the airport to exceed this threshold, however the airport will withdraw from use 10 gates. In otherwords LAX could have 80mil annual pax, just a lot fewer gates and facilities to serve them. Nothing illegal about that.

The airport has to constrict demand one way or the other. The rent battles with the airlines and such are just a way for the city to attempt to ensure the 75mil limits are not exceeded in the foreseeable future.

Quoting Adam T. (Reply 11):
Thanks for the clarification Laxintl, has the linear concourse to replace Terminals 1, 2, and 3 been green lit as well?

No.

Quoting Jsnww81 (Reply 12):
There were also plans to relocate the taxiways beyond TBIT (and the American Eagle satellite) so that more jetbridges/holdrooms could be added to that side of the terminal. Will this happen before that, or concurrent with that project?

No the added backside gates on TBIT are not part of this project and were not part of the TBIT remodel which began in February either.

But the midfield concourse will indeed require the demolition of the ex TWA hangars, AE terminal, AA low and superbay hangars, US Air hangar and other midfield facilities including the ARFF station.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineRampRat74 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1547 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 6977 times:

It will be a sad day when the American low bay hangar comes down. I believe it was built before the present terminal complex was completed.

When I flew out of LAX in the 70's as a kid on AA. I always looked over to the lighted AA sign on the hangar. It was a cool sight, and still is.


User currently offlineJkj777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 398 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6791 times:

LAX is a terrible airport to fly in and out of. I live in Marina Del Rey (a couple miles north) and use it because of it's convenience. Every time I go in or out I have some type of long wait; either in the car on the way to the airport or going through security. They need one large centralized terminal such as ATL. At least if there is a change in flight plans and you are put on another airline you do not have to go out of security and repeat the process. Why not just put forth the money and build one extremely large central passenger area? There is plenty of room to the west of TBIT. They could even use the Westchester golf course for a parking area. The golf course is pretty awful.

User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13552 posts, RR: 100
Reply 17, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6746 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 14):
Nothing illegal about that.

True. Illegal was the wrong word. FAA monies have to be used to expand capacity or one risks triggering a call on previous funds. However, I see a huge need to expand capacity. Businesses will leave LA without more capacity. Try and run banking consulting without easy access to flights. The airport has been there forever and, in my opinion, should have been expanded with the large west terminal. I should have phrased it that I hope the cap is eliminated.

As jfk777 noted, the experience at LAX is sup-par. Use the West land to good advantage with a terminal that has multiple times more floor space (utilized by gates, seating, more bathrooms, stores, and for mercy's sake better baggage claims!).

I'm very happy to see expansion. International is needed. But with BUR, LGB, SNA, and LAX all approaching artificial limits... its going to strain the economy. What's going to happen, ration leisure travel? Hopefully there will be expansion somewhere in the area.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21590 posts, RR: 59
Reply 18, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6739 times:

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 8):
it quite dependent on willingness of other parties including DOT and Caltrans to participate, let alone help fund.

While I love aviation, LAX is "awesomely perfect" compared to the state of our highways and roads in the Los Angeles area. Let's get some of the improvements promised 20, 30 and 50 years ago to those before we build a people mover at LAX.

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 13):
"A city builds wealth on transportation."

But transportation is more than aviation. LA needs more highways, wider highways, massive repairs to other roads, expansion of certain rail options, etc., etc. After that, let's worry about people movers.

Quoting Jkj777 (Reply 16):
Every time I go in or out I have some type of long wait; either in the car on the way to the airport or going through security.

As someone who also flies out of it a lot, I find this hard to believe.

You may experience this, but not "every time" unless you only travel at peak times, in which case, every airport is pretty much like that at certain peak times.

LAX doesn't suck nearly as bad as people make out.

And for anyone to want LAX to be turned into ATL, I question their sanity...



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineCharles79 From Puerto Rico, joined Mar 2007, 1331 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6687 times:

Excellent news to all of us that use LAX as our primary (and in my case thus far only) airport in the LA area. In another thread I was met with some resistance when I suggested that the airport needed expansion...good to see that the city council has more sense than that and approved this much needed terminal. LAX is far from perfect, but I like it's cul de sac setting that makes everything so close, and the fact that I can walk from home to catch a flight. My only hope is that the terminals get upgraded (I know some are privately owned but wishful thinking is free!) and that the customs/immigration section in that new terminal is made into a true "welcome mat" for our visitors. My only other suggestion is that LAX could use a third runway...only problem is that there's no space! Perhaps out in the ocean...

Cheers!

Charles


User currently offlineJkj777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 398 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6592 times:

Well, lkramerica, you need to fly out of ATL more if you believe it is pure sanity. I have flown in and out of ATL more than 75 times and it is always busy (busiest airport in the world). But, there is a consistent, steady approach by everyone there. If there is bad weather (very common in the spring, summer, and fall) it still flows relatively smoothly. At LAX, all it takes is one small disturbance to cause mayhem. Two weeks ago, there was a wreck with a cab and two cars when I was trying to get to terminal 5. It took almost 30 minutes to get from Sepulveda to Terminal 1. I got out of the car and walked the rest of the way faster than we could drive. LAX is horrible and I will stand by it. I think that the biggest majority of people would agree with this. Why do you think every mayor since 1930 has tried to change it? They all realize the airport is less than good and want a lasting impact on the area. A redeveloped terminal area that makes life easy for all will definetely get that mayors name on a terminal or bathroom facility. Too bad SNA is not closer to Marina Del Rey.....

Why does LAX not take advantage of the vast ocean? Reclaimed land appears to be the way to go in Asia where land expansion is no longer possible. Before you environmentalists jump in (the water will always remain tainted and dirty), let's keep this just aviation related.


User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26175 posts, RR: 50
Reply 21, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6309 times:

Quoting Jkj777 (Reply 16):
They need one large centralized terminal such as ATL.



Quoting Jkj777 (Reply 16):
Why not just put forth the money and build one extremely large central passenger area?

That idea was one of the LAX masterplan proposals, and was soundly opposed by just about every party including law enforcement. Previous Mayor Hahn had proposed building a huge off airport check-in facility in the Sepulveda Square area (where Staples, BofA etc are now North of LAX on Sepulveda) which would connect to the current terminals which in essence would solely become gate concourses.

Quoting Charles79 (Reply 19):
My only other suggestion is that LAX could use a third runway...

LAX already has 4 runways. Runway capacity has not really ever been an issue. The airport can handle over 100 movements per hour and usually sits about 60-70.

There was once a proposal however to use Hawthorne airport as a reliever for commuter ops only and would have been linked to the central terminal area by a people mover. Not much came of it, as it was not seen as a true need.

Quoting Jkj777 (Reply 20):
Why do you think every mayor since 1930 has tried to change it?

1930s the place was called Mines Field and full of orange orchards. Back then and thru the war, LA's aviation hub were United Airport(todays Burbank) and now closed Grand Central airport in Glendale
LAX really came into life in the late 50s with the jetage. Airport then saw some design changes including upper level roadway, construction of T-1 and TBIT for the 1984 Olympics. Its really only been the two most recent mayors that have been actively involved with LAX and various expansion proposals.

Consider the fact back in the early 1980s the airport had barely 30million or so passengers, today mere 20 years later its exceeded 60million. At the same time international travel via LAX saw a 4X jump. I dont think any forecaster was even close in predicting the massive growth SoCal would experience in air travel over the next few decades. Matter of fact many air carriers were complaining back in 1984 when TBIT opended that the City had built a white elephant of a terminal that was way too big, and could never be utilized while saddling them with its debt. Today the place looks like a postage stamp with all the traffic!

Quoting Jkj777 (Reply 20):
Why does LAX not take advantage of the vast ocean?



Quoting Jkj777 (Reply 20):
Before you environmentalists jump in

I would not even go there, as building an large ocean airport is not something that will happen in the US, especially in a state like California. Authorities cant even at the moment cross Pershing drive to the bluffs over looking the airport as there are federally protected species including some special blue butterfly.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26175 posts, RR: 50
Reply 22, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6232 times:

Btw - here is an article on yesterdays vote.

Quote:
Los Angeles City Council OKs plan for LAX's super-size era

A $1.2 billion concourse aimed at better accommodating super-size airliners at Los Angeles International Airport is expected to be completed by January 2012 under a plan approved Wednesday by the City Council.

The project will bring new gates to LAX for the first time since renovations were made in anticipation of the 1984 Summer Olympics, held in Los Angeles.

Plans call for using airport revenues generated by airline and passenger fees to build eight to 10 new gates at the so-called Midfield Concourse, located just west of Tom Bradley International Terminal.

The facility will also house a new U.S. Customs and Border Protection screening system, concession stands and an underground tunnel equipped with a people-mover that would connect the new gates to the Bradley terminal.

Plans call for allowing the new concourse to be expanded over time to hold up to 40 gates, according to Lindsay.

The satellite concourse was allowed as part of a legal settlement nearly two years ago, when it was named one of several projects that could proceed.

http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/9191932.html?page=1&c=y



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineAS739X From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6200 posts, RR: 24
Reply 23, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5898 times:

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 6):

Agreed. The remote gates are used so heavily that LAX really can't afford to build there yet.

Now LAXINTL, what is the plan with Americans hangars and the AE remote gates? Obviously taxiways "S" and "Q" will stay looking at the Master Plan. So all the build will be on Americans current land.

ASSFO



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26175 posts, RR: 50
Reply 24, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 5600 times:

As long has been know the AA hangars along with pretty much everything just west of taxiway S until the CO hangars and Coast Guard facilities would have to be razed. As far as the hangar, AA has an option to build a single much smaller replacement hangar and run up blast fence area. I have not heard if they will be exercising this option. For the AE facility, again AA needs to make some big decisions as to the future of AE operations.


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
25 STT757 : Instead of the ATL approach of a mega consolidated facility I think the better approach for LAX would be the JFK redevelopment plan, work with the car
26 ArcrftLvr : Sorry to be a bit off topic, but, does anyone know who is managing all of the construction/improvements on behalf of LAWA? Do they hire their own cons
27 Lax44 : Arrivals and Departures? LAX is doing well over 100 per hour. If you count helicopter movements there have been 150+ hours this summer.
28 Laxintl : I have a printed FAA capacity report(from 2006) that shows LAX has averages 74 hourly "FAA Tower movements", with the facility having capability of h
29 Lax44 : I'm ATC in the cab. A busy hour (arrivals and departures) is about 130. Most hours are 100-115 now during the summer; the recent DAL/BTA expansion has
30 Post contains links and images Laxintl : Well I can see how the FAA "average hourly volume" traffic numbers come up according to LAWA http://www.lawa.org/lax/volTraffic.cfm Annual air carrier
31 Jacobin777 : I just flew "in and out of" LAX yesterday (actually connecting flight)...and I had no problems at all.... .....I flew out of ATL a few years ago, wor
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Avianca In September In New MIA Terminal posted Mon Aug 13 2007 22:07:22 by RICARIZA
LAX Terminal Help Needed posted Thu Aug 2 2007 18:50:19 by RNOcommctr
New BA Terminal 5 Website posted Tue Jun 19 2007 14:17:40 by Concorde001
LAX Terminal 6 posted Thu Jun 7 2007 03:57:03 by ContinentalEWR
LAX Terminal Information posted Wed Jun 6 2007 20:26:47 by GentFromAlaska
Virtual Fly Through The New IND Terminal posted Sun May 27 2007 23:02:40 by KarlB737
LAX Terminal 2 Evacuated posted Thu May 17 2007 07:36:18 by WesternDC1010
New Manila Terminal... Open Yet? posted Tue Apr 17 2007 15:54:42 by 747hogg
Crews Fix IND New Midfield Terminal's Beam Problem posted Mon Mar 26 2007 21:10:00 by KarlB737
LAX Terminal One History posted Sun Mar 25 2007 18:56:52 by HeyWhaTheHay