Rumor: Star Carriers Moving In With UA At LAX? — Civil Aviation Forum

Sponsor Message:


My Starred Topics \| Profile \| New Topic \| Forum Index \| Help \| Search

Rumor: Star Carriers Moving In With UA At LAX?

Rolo987 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 293 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 4779 times:

I heard a rumor that some Star Alliance carriers will be moving into UA's terminal at LAX this year. Anyone heard if this is true?

15 replies: All unread, jump to last

LAXdude1023 From Lebanon, joined Sep 2006, 6780 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 4772 times:

Quoting Rolo987 (Thread starter):
I heard a rumor that some Star Alliance carriers will be moving into UA's terminal at LAX this year. Anyone heard if this is true?

I would say that theres no way in hell that the star carriers could fit in T7 with them. Its already packed to the brim.

DFW Fan Boy: Im crude, irreverent, and blunt, but Im not clueless. I offer no apologies.

LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22063 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 4698 times:

Nice rumor, but serious doubt it,

1) TBIT Star carriers just finished spending lots of money of their new large lounge and are committed to spend more as part of the continuing TBIT remodel and upgrades.
2) UA is gate constrained as is certain parts of the days, and additionally really does not have that many widebody FIS gates available to handle multiple overlapping activity.
3) UA LAX is not in the business of 3rd party handling with barely being right staffed on the ramp and customer service for their own activity. In the past LH had been handled by UA, but in short order went back to TBIT
4) Air Canada has ownership stake in T-2 and earns strong income from this. Cant see them walkaway unless if their stake was bought out for a large sum. Even in Air Canada bankruptcy the carrier did not sell its share of LAX-2.
5) US Airways just finished a multi million renovation of its facilities in T-1 as part of combining facilities with America West. Additionally leaving T-1 would mean handing Southwest whom has been constrained at LAX carte-blanche to expand at the airport.

From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California

Axio From New Zealand, joined Jul 2006, 307 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4587 times:

6) AirNZ won't want to give up their special transit space in T2

Time for a new viewing deck at AKL!

Rolo987 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 293 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4533 times:

Quoting Axio (Reply 3):
AirNZ won't want to give up their special transit space in T2

Special Transit Space?

RoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8753 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4490 times:

I personally think NZ moving to T6/T7 would be very beneficial for them as many people make connections with UA. Yes they also codeshare with other airlines, but think that they would really benefit from collocating with UA.

If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!

Eta unknown From Comoros, joined Jun 2001, 2010 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 4344 times:

About as much truth in that rumor as there would be in airlines jumping in line to be handled by DL again at LAX.

LH and NZ (LAX-SYD nonstop only) both tried it with UA and let's just say they won't be running back.

Jcavinato From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 516 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 4328 times:

Alliance carriers moving in at key airports around the world means that it will be very hard to divorce from the brand. It is better for the traveler, and it brings more and closer conveniences. But, if one were merged with another, or decided to go their own way or another way, it would be quite a barrier to exit.

Zkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4739 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 4287 times:

Quoting Rolo987 (Reply 4):
Quoting Axio (Reply 3):
AirNZ won't want to give up their special transit space in T2

Special Transit Space?

NZ2/1 AKL-LAX-LHR-LAX-AKL pax in transit don't have to clear customs/immigration and can instead remain in the gate-lounge... I understand that there are only 3 services at LAX that are allowed to do that... it certainly makes LAX a simpler process for those pax that get to do so.

54 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.

Rolo987 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 293 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4190 times:

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 8):
I understand that there are only 3 services at LAX that are allowed to do that

Are the other two for French pax on AF and TN continuing on to Tahiti?

HT From Germany, joined May 2005, 6473 posts, RR: 27
Reply 10, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4155 times:

Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 8):
NZ2/1 AKL-LAX-LHR-LAX-AKL pax in transit don't have to clear customs/immigration and can instead remain in the gate-lounge... I understand that there are only 3 services at LAX that are allowed to do that... it certainly makes LAX a simpler process for those pax that get to do so.

Intersting to know. Until now I was under the assumption, that no sterile transfers at any U.S.-airport were possible.

Why was this not possible for RG when they flew GRU - LAX - NRT which was their most profitable route ?

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 2):
1) TBIT Star carriers just finished spending lots of money of their new large lounge

This is a really nice facility.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 2):
continuing TBIT remodel and upgrades.

Once the new Immigration area is completed (or is it already ?) immigration for visitors at TBIT should become less hassle compared to what it can be a present. I have experienced 0 to 60 minutes waiting times down there ...
-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 !

Nzrich From New Zealand, joined Dec 2005, 1488 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3815 times:

and dont forget the newly renovated koru lounge !!!

"Pride of the pacific"

Zkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4739 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3745 times:

Quoting HT (Reply 10):
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 8):
NZ2/1 AKL-LAX-LHR-LAX-AKL pax in transit don't have to clear customs/immigration and can instead remain in the gate-lounge... I understand that there are only 3 services at LAX that are allowed to do that... it certainly makes LAX a simpler process for those pax that get to do so.

Intersting to know. Until now I was under the assumption, that no sterile transfers at any U.S.-airport were possible.

Why was this not possible for RG when they flew GRU - LAX - NRT which was their most profitable route ?

Probably something to do with NZ pax flying from one visa-waiver country to another (New Zealand-LAX-England) vs AFAIK all South American countries require a visa to transit the US?.
There were other factors also but it does make a big difference to NZ... NZ could of course route all UK/Europe flights via Asia instead of the US which is something I'd imagine the US would prefer not to happen.

Quoting Rolo987 (Reply 9):
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 8):
I understand that there are only 3 services at LAX that are allowed to do that

Are the other two for French pax on AF and TN continuing on to Tahiti?

Yeah I think one or both are used also.

54 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.

UAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3355 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3187 times:

Whilst from a practical point of view it would make lots of sense to have all the carriers under one roof, lets ne honest this is not going to happen. I have been through UA's terminal at LAX on many occasions and its packed to the gills. Even if dccarriers wanted to move there, it just cannot accomadate them.

Travelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2760 times:

There is no possible way that any combination of Terminals 6, 7, and 8 (the terminals United uses) could handle:

LH - FRA (2x)
LH - MUC (1x)
LX - ZRH (1x)
OZ - ICN (2x)
NZ - AKL (2x)
NZ - LHR (1x)
NZ - NAN (3x/wk)
NH - NRT (1x)
SQ - NRT/SIN (1x)
SQ - SIN (1x)
CA - PEK (1x)
TG - BKK (1x)
US - CLT (4x)
US - PHL (5x)
US - PHX (8x)
US - LAS (7x)
AC - YVR (4x)
AC - YYZ (4x)
AC - YUL (1x)
AC - YEG (1x)
AC - YYC (3x)

Squeezing 50+ more flights (many international wide-bodies) into UA's terminals would cause a meltdown.

Legacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 1843 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2683 times:

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 8):
NZ2/1 AKL-LAX-LHR-LAX-AKL pax in transit don't have to clear customs/immigration and can instead remain in the gate-lounge...

Yes and No. It is true that transiting passengers are held in a Transit room but there are CBP Officers there to clear Immigration formalities. The passengers are exempt lining up in the traditional Immigration lines. If CBP has a Baggage issue, they will pul it of the plane.

John@SFO

Top Of Page

Forum Index

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

Printer friendly format

Similar topics: