DeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8583 posts, RR: 8 Posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3059 times:
Could someone please tell me what gates at T5/6 can hold what A/c?
Like gate XX can hold up to a 744.
Also which gates do and do not have FIS.
"Oh look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky! Look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky!" LM 1922-2011 Go Dawgs! G.A.T.A.
The777Man From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 6082 posts, RR: 56 Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3047 times:
60, 61, 62, 63 up to 764
64, 65 up to 752 (possibly 753)
66 752 (753?)
67A 752
67B 763
68A 752 (753?)
68B 744
69A 744
69B 763
FIS in T6: 66, 68A, 68B and 69B.
The777Man
Need a Boeing 777 Firing Order....Further to fly....GA, T5, CI and LX 777s
DeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8583 posts, RR: 8 Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2993 times:
DeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8583 posts, RR: 8 Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2955 times:
also forgot to ask which gates are Delta at in T6?
"Oh look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky! Look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky!" LM 1922-2011 Go Dawgs! G.A.T.A.
DeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8771 posts, RR: 13 Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2909 times:
Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 3): also forgot to ask which gates are Delta at in T6?
Aaway From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1442 posts, RR: 14 Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2856 times:
DeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8583 posts, RR: 8 Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2812 times:
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22036 posts, RR: 51 Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2792 times:
Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 6): Ok so Could DL like close both gate 50B and 51B and use a 744 on 51A?
?? 50 and 51 are on opposite sides of the terminals.
But, no either way the alleyway is not wide enough for 744 wingspan. I believe largest that can be accomodate is MD-11.
DeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8583 posts, RR: 8 Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2777 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 7):
But, no either way the alleyway is not wide enough for 744 wingspan. I believe largest that can be accomodate is MD-11.
crap Ok i'll try again lol
close gate 51A and 53B then could say an A332 or a 777 fit?
"Oh look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky! Look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky!" LM 1922-2011 Go Dawgs! G.A.T.A.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22036 posts, RR: 51 Reply 9, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2751 times:
Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 8): crap Ok i'll try again lol
close gate 51A and 53B then could say an A332 or a 777 fit?
Well at one time there was a pure gate 51 that took a MD-11 (daily Swissair). I suspect the terminal could be again reconfigured to hold a large plane, however not sure about the alley way as the A332 and 777 wingspans are 30-40 feet more than the MD-11.
One of the issues with T-5 is that from its inception with its Western Airlines roots was primaly designed as a narrow body 727 terminal with a few large gates for planes like the DC-10. Its not the most ideal widebody facility without knocking out adjacent gates, and in the case of international ops flooding the smallish FIS.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
DeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8583 posts, RR: 8 Reply 10, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2732 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 9): One of the issues with T-5 is that from its inception with its Western Airlines roots was primaly designed as a narrow body 727 terminal with a few large gates for planes like the DC-10. Its not the most ideal widebody facility without knocking out adjacent gates, and in the case of international ops flooding the smallish FIS.
Ok I also have a question about that could DL make the FIS larger?
"Oh look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky! Look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky!" LM 1922-2011 Go Dawgs! G.A.T.A.
DeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8771 posts, RR: 13 Reply 11, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2704 times:
Both the alleyway between T4/T5 and T5/T6 is 200 feet wide, so if an A330 can't make it down one, it can't make it down the other. Thus, that limits the gates an A330/747/777 can use to only 57, 58 and 59.
As noted above, 59 is useless for the A330/747/777, so we're really only looking at 57 (777/330 only) and 59 (all of the above). If you want a 2nd 744 gate, you'd have to knock out 59 (or simply put a smaller plane like an A32x/737 in there - that should be able to put a 744 at 57 and leave sufficient room at 58 for a smaller plane to park there.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22036 posts, RR: 51 Reply 12, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2680 times:
Suppose with money anything is possible, however it would likely call for major redesign and construction. (and off course get CBP to staff it)
As reference from documents that I have, for the United 90,000 sq.ft FIS facility that opened in 1996, saw the carrier invested $51mil of its own funds into the project. And this was with making use of much of the existing airport structure already.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Aaway From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1442 posts, RR: 14 Reply 13, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2639 times:
Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 11): Both the alleyway between T4/T5 and T5/T6 is 200 feet wide, so if an A330 can't make it down one, it can't make it down the other. Thus, that limits the gates an A330/747/777 can use to only 57, 58 and 59.
Just a couple of items: The C-9 and C-8 alleyways are between 175' - 180' wide - just wide enough for the wingspan of the B764.
Gate 59 is not deep enough to accomodate the length of the A330 series or B777 series.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 7): not all the gates in T-5 can be used concurrently depending on aircraft type at adjacent gates.
Correct - if 58 is occupied by a B744, gate 56 is not usable.
Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 10): Ok I also have a question about that could DL make the FIS larger?
According to the floorplan, it would be difficult, at best. As currently constructed, the FIS occupies the footprint of the western portion of the T-5 ticketing building. T-4 abuts to the west. Immediately east is the T-5 vestibule and domestic baggage claim. The north face abuts World Way. The south face projects toward the T-5 ramp.
I'd suggest that the FIS could, theorectically, be expanded. Whether its practical (due to underground utilities, structural considerations, easements, etc.) is open to question.
[Edited 2008-12-27 22:22:09]
With a choice between changing one's mind & proving there's no need to do so, most everyone gets busy on the proof.
DeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8583 posts, RR: 8 Reply 14, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2626 times:
Quoting Aaway (Reply 13): Correct - if 58 is occupied by a B744, gate 56 is not usable.
And if an A332 or 772 is in 58 can 56 be used?
IMHO the only to Tpac 744 flights we will ever see from LAX is NRT and SYD if it does well.
Anything eles would likely be T7s.
"Oh look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky! Look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky!" LM 1922-2011 Go Dawgs! G.A.T.A.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22036 posts, RR: 51 Reply 15, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2609 times:
Aaway From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1442 posts, RR: 14 Reply 16, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2606 times:
Since those types have shorter fuselages than the B744, they'd be able to use the regular lead-in line. 56 would be available without restriction.
The Google Maps image of T-5 gives a good perspective. It's physical projection southward vis-a-vis Twy C that limits the depth of the ramp for gates 57, 58 and 59.
[Edited 2008-12-27 22:48:57]
With a choice between changing one's mind & proving there's no need to do so, most everyone gets busy on the proof.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22036 posts, RR: 51 Reply 17, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2605 times:
I'll defer to Aaway as my gate plots dont discrminate between 777 vs 744 at 58.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Aaway From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1442 posts, RR: 14 Reply 18, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2580 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 17): I'll defer to Aaway as my gate plots dont discrminate between 777 vs 744 at 58.
That's a good point...my response was tailored to his query of the B772 and A332. If a B773, then the B744 lead-in line would have to be used.
With a choice between changing one's mind & proving there's no need to do so, most everyone gets busy on the proof.
The777Man From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 6082 posts, RR: 56 Reply 19, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2511 times:
FL787 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1499 posts, RR: 12 Reply 20, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2310 times:
Quoting The777Man (Reply 19): Correct but it probably would not cost much to put up a glass wall around jet bridge door and then it would be joined to FIS T7.
Yeah I just used 69A and connecting it to FIS would be the easiest way to create a new international gate in the airport
Aaway From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1442 posts, RR: 14 Reply 21, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2227 times:
Quoting The777Man (Reply 19): Quoting Aaway (Reply 5):
64 = 739 (note: may have been downgauged when gate reverted to LAWA control
Must have been a VERY recent change since UA used it for a 752 about a month ago if not even more recent
Recollections from my time as a UA employee, as well as my time doing contract work for UA certainly have larger gauge a/c using 64.
The LAWA gate plot I reference is dated Sept. '08., which coincides with CO relinquishing the gate to LAWA. Since you've seen larger a/c subsequent to the transfer, I'd suppose the explanation is that the B739 reference is a max. size when the adjacent gates are occupied.
With a choice between changing one's mind & proving there's no need to do so, most everyone gets busy on the proof.
Flyboy7974 From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 1540 posts, RR: 2 Reply 22, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2170 times:
Just because I saw the terminal question about LAX and sidenote, looking at new issue of "Airports of the World" put out by same company that does Airliner World, and can't believe with LAX being a main topic for the NOV/DEC 2008 issue, what an error they allowed on one of their prime pictures of LAX. Stupid, but picture top page 47 that shows obviously terminals 6/7 and they list it as "viewing north and noticing UA's dominance of terminals 7/8."
Uh what, are they looking at the same picture I am, because terminal 6 is mostly CO with two UA a/c in this picture and then yeah, terminal 7 obviously is all UA, but what, terminal 8 isn't in the picture at all. Um, hmmmmm, um, yeah, I don't even know, I want that guy's job though if they're having maritinis at the Theme Restaurant before they did this article or took these pictures cuz something not right.
The777Man From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 6082 posts, RR: 56 Reply 23, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2034 times:
Quoting Aaway (Reply 21): I'd suppose the explanation is that the B739 reference is a max. size when the adjacent gates are occupied.
Don't think that's correct either since there have been aircraft both at 66 and 62 when a 757 is at 64.
UA hasn't been using 64 very much since VX left T6 and now use 69A, 67B and sometimes even 67A. UA had a departure from 67B a few about a week ago for the first time in 18 months.
CO has also used 65 for a 738 that RON. Seen that recenlty and didn't really see that before.
The777Man
Need a Boeing 777 Firing Order....Further to fly....GA, T5, CI and LX 777s
DFWEagle From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1064 posts, RR: 9 Reply 24, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2000 times:
Sorry if it is a little bit off-topic, but would anyone happen to have the same information for the gates in Terminal 4 at LAX?
Ryan / HKG
25 Aaway: Here you go: Gate #...Max a/c...remarks ...40........B752......B738 if 42A is occupied by B767 series. ...41........B744 ...42A......B763 ...42B.....
26 DFWEagle: Thanks Aaway, that’s exactly what I was looking for! Is gate 43 really so tightly restricted (to only an M80) when a 777 is occupying gate 41? I th
27 Aaway: My error as 41 and 43 can accomodate B744s simultaneously. The M80 restriction applies when 45 is occupied by B767 series.
28 AAFLT1871: No word on what the changes are if a A380 is thrown into the picture?
29 LAXintl: No plans for the A380 @ T-4. Only other terminal besides TBIT and remote gates that will be configured ifor the A380 s a single gate at T-2 most like
30 The777Man: As for gate 66, there are markings on the ramp for parking DC-10s there so I assume you can fit a 763 there and probably a 764; just need to paint mar
31 DeltaL1011man: hate to bump but can I get this info for T2?
32 Aaway: Terminal 2 gate info as follows: Gate #...Max A/c.....remarks ..21.....A346/B744....max A/c is A321 if 21B in operation. ..21B......B752.........close
33 DeltaL1011man: Ok thanks......this should be the last one T3 please?
34 Aaway: Editing a couple of previous posts: At T-4, gates 41 and 43 are the FIS gates At T-2, ALL gates are FIS gates. Terminal 3 gate info as follows: Gate #
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8583 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
