Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
LAX Begins Bradley Terminal Expansion  
User currently offlinetravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3504 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 11515 times:

I didn't see this info posted here, so thought some of you may be interested that LAX broke ground yesterday for the Bradley International Terminal expansion project. Expected completion will be 2013. I speak for many LAX travelers when I say "it's about time".

"LAX begins work on city's 'most expensive project'"

http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_14448597



33 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineazjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3941 posts, RR: 27
Reply 1, posted (4 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 11476 times:

I guess I'm not picturing how they're going to do this. The article says the project will include building to the north and south of the current TBIT and that the current concourse will be demolished. Aren't there taxiways to the north and south? What's going to be left in between the new stuff? Sounds to me the article was missing some key points. Good news either way.

User currently offlinetravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3504 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 11431 times:

The only taxiway (that I'm aware of) that will be affected by this construction is the north/south one currently directly behind Bradley now. But for specifics I'd let LAXintl or someone else take a stab at providing details. I did run across additional renderings that may show a little bit better how it's going to look.





User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25416 posts, RR: 49
Reply 3, posted (4 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 11423 times:

What they broke ground on yesterday was the "Bradley West" portion.

Other parts of the modernization including the TBIT remodel have been ongoing for while.

Quoting azjubilee (Reply 1):
I guess I'm not picturing how they're going to do this. The article says the project will include building to the north and south of the current TBIT and that the current concourse will be demolished. Aren't there taxiways to the north and south?

In simplistic terms, new North and South concourse wings will be built on TBIT built to the west of the current concourses.
When those are complete the current concourses will be razed.

For the taxiway, the taxiways immediately to the West of TBIT "Q" it will be relocated Westward, hence the closure of the American Eagle facility, new fire station construction, and eventually razing of hangars in the way.

This image should provide a bit of a visual of what is being done in the short run.
http://www.lawa.org/uploadedFiles/Ai.../Fig_Phas_TL-S_twy_close%20(2).pdf



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11640 posts, RR: 61
Reply 4, posted (4 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 11376 times:

Quoting travelin man (Thread starter):
I speak for many LAX travelers when I say "it's about time".

Oh good God yes - you do speak for me. Having traveled through TBIT in November on my way to HKG (CX), I can definitely say that the main terminal/check-in area and security are a complete and total mess. Once you got through, the terminal was alright - if spartan - but this will definitely upgrade the experience considerably.


User currently offlinetravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3504 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 11337 times:

Interestingly the article says "Just weeks ago, work was quietly completed on a $723.5 million project to refurbish the interior of the Bradley Terminal with new boarding bridges, improved restrooms and updated sets of lounges, signs, floors and lights."

Does this include the inline baggage system? Last year in May I took a BA flight and still had to go through the whole "check in and then shlep your bags to the screening area" shuffle. I think the new inline baggage system should help reduce the chaos considerably, but that's just a guess.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25416 posts, RR: 49
Reply 6, posted (4 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 11296 times:

Quoting travelin man (Reply 5):
Does this include the inline baggage system?

Yes on January 19th. --see slide-11

Also slide 5 has diagram of the Bradley West element which might of interest.

http://www.lawa.org/PDF/board_agenda...ogram%20%20Management%20Update.pdf



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineazjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3941 posts, RR: 27
Reply 7, posted (4 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 11265 times:

So they're basically going to build a new concourse parallel to the current TBIT. Will there be multiple concourses to the west? Or will it be another linear terminal? Unless the building will be longer, how is this going to actually ADD gates? Seems like a waste to have spent all the money on refurbishing the current TBIT, only to tear it down in a few years. That reminds me of the DTW C concourse at the NWA terminal. Only a few years after it was built, it was razed for a more civilized and functional building.

*Edit - I see now. The new building will have gates on both sides, as opposed to the one sides TBIT we have today.

[Edited 2010-02-23 15:31:23]

User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11640 posts, RR: 61
Reply 8, posted (4 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 11264 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 6):
Also slide 5 has diagram of the Bradley West element which might of interest.

Also - I know this was discussed several months ago, and may have been settled.

But I remember there was some discussion on the AA deal with LAWA, and whether it would go through, contingent on the number of net new gates TBIT was to get, and whether that would put the LAWA total gate count above the contractually agreed-upon limits LAWA agreed to several years ago with the City.

So, in short: with this TBIT West expansion, is the AA-LAWA TBIT deal - I believe it involved preferential use (international and/or domestic) - on 4 gates in the south concourse - a done deal? Is it contingent on something?

Thanks for the LAX updates/info - always interesting.


User currently offlinetravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3504 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (4 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 11208 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 6):
Yes on January 19th. --see slide-11

Also slide 5 has diagram of the Bradley West element which might of interest.

Thanks for the info. The whole Powerpoint was interesting.


User currently offlineaaway From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1523 posts, RR: 14
Reply 10, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 11157 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 8):
So, in short: with this TBIT West expansion, is the AA-LAWA TBIT deal - I believe it involved preferential use (international and/or domestic) - on 4 gates in the south concourse - a done deal? Is it contingent on something?

Both LAWA and the L.A. City Council approved the deal. The contingency was TBIT having 19 contact gates upon completion.



With a choice between changing one's mind & proving there's no need to do so, most everyone gets busy on the proof.
User currently offlineLDVAviation From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 1069 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 11067 times:

Quoting aaway (Reply 10):
Both LAWA and the L.A. City Council approved the deal. The contingency was TBIT having 19 contact gates upon completion.

How many gates will TBIT have when this phase of the construction is done? I understand that the Northern wing will not be fully built because of the existing quandary over whether or not to move the North field runways. So, minus that extension, how many contact gates will there be?


User currently offlinenra-3b From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 166 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 11024 times:

I was out at LAX yeaterday. Looks like taxiway "Q" has been closed already. They might be serious this time.... The new taxiway west of the American hangar is well underway. Don't know when that will open.

Cheers,
Bob


User currently offlineBlatantEcho From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1913 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 10981 times:

This is will be great. That whole terminal is just awful. One of the biggest US gateways deserves better, and I'm thrilled that they are finally moving forward!


They're not handing trophies out today
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25416 posts, RR: 49
Reply 14, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 10970 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 8):
Is it contingent on something?
Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 11):
How many gates will TBIT have when this phase of the construction is done? I understand that the Northern wing will not be fully built because of the existing quandary over whether or not to move the North field runways. So, minus that extension, how many contact gates will there be?

As AAway states the contingency was dependent on what the final TBIT will look like and if it will have 19 gates or not.

As displayed on page 5, of the link of reply 6, the North portion of the terminal is not fully built out providing for 17 total contact gates as currently envisaged and approved.

While NASA submitted their preliminary North airfield study report last week that recommended doing nothing, this will have be reviewed and acted on by the Airport Commision when finalized which will finaly determine how the TBIT councourses and gate counts at the end.

Quoting nra-3b (Reply 12):
I was out at LAX yeaterday. Looks like taxiway "Q" has been closed already.

Yes for about a month now.

Quoting nra-3b (Reply 12):
The new taxiway west of the American hangar is well underway. Don't know when that will open.

Early summer



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineLDVAviation From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 1069 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 10850 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 14):
As displayed on page 5, of the link of reply 6, the North portion of the terminal is not fully built out providing for 17 total contact gates as currently envisaged and approved.

Is it 17 or 18? There's one gate in that diagram on page 5 that doesn't have a plane. Is that a full gate or just a B gate?


User currently offlineaaway From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1523 posts, RR: 14
Reply 16, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 10821 times:

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 15):
Is it 17 or 18? There's one gate in that diagram on page 5 that doesn't have a plane. Is that a full gate or just a B gate?

Actually its 16 gates considering the dogleg remnant contains gates122, 123A and 123B. The "empty gate" depicted on the diagram is planned as a swing gate.



With a choice between changing one's mind & proving there's no need to do so, most everyone gets busy on the proof.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25416 posts, RR: 49
Reply 17, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 10822 times:

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 15):
Is it 17 or 18? There's one gate in that diagram on page 5 that doesn't have a plane. Is that a full gate or just a B gate?

17 - The key word here is "contact" (jetway) gates.

There is indeed a single spot that could accommodate a smaller plane depending on what is on adjacent gates, but no jetway is provided.
And yes the North end gate - 123 is currently an A and B gate also.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinelaca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4018 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 10712 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 6):
Yes on January 19th. --see slide-11

Also slide 5 has diagram of the Bradley West element which might of interest.

http://www.lawa.org/PDF/board_agenda...e.pdf

Thanks so much for the link LAXIntl. I apreciate all the information you provide and I for one know I'll always learn something new from you.

On page 5 are the a/c in bold green coloring A380 capable gates?

Will the remote gate area be removed with this expansion?


User currently offlineLAXLocal From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 79 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 10655 times:

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 11):

How many gates will TBIT have when this phase of the construction is done? I understand that the Northern wing will not be fully built because of the existing quandary over whether or not to move the North field runways. So, minus that extension, how many contact gates will there be?

Moving the 24's northward is now a dead issue.


LAXLocal



LAXLocal
User currently offlineLDVAviation From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 1069 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 10506 times:

Quoting LAXLocal (Reply 19):
Moving the 24's northward is now a dead issue.

Well, here's the LA Times on the subject: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...report20-2010feb20,0,4156371.story


User currently offlineLDVAviation From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 1069 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 10436 times:

Quoting aaway (Reply 16):
Actually its 16 gates considering the dogleg remnant contains gates122, 123A and 123B. The "empty gate" depicted on the diagram is planned as a swing gate.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 17):
17 - The key word here is "contact" (jetway) gates.

There is indeed a single spot that could accommodate a smaller plane depending on what is on adjacent gates, but no jetway is provided.
And yes the North end gate - 123 is currently an A and B gate also.

Thanks to both of you for keeping us well informed.

One more question:

If the Airport Commission does build out the Northern Wing, with or without the Northfield runway reconfiguration, how many gates would there be in total?


User currently offlineLAXLocal From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 79 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 10049 times:

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 20):
Well, here's the LA Times on the subject: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...report20-2010feb20,0,4156371.story

Yup, the airport commission asked for the last and final study, using MIT experts and NASA computer modeling,....and now they don't agree with the outcome.
The fact is, 80% of the runway incursions happen on the SOUTH runways. And this is even AFTER the addition of the center taxi way between the 25's, and moving 25L south.

The new runway incursion alarm/ground radar/alarm system is the prudent way to keep LAX safe.

LAXLocal



LAXLocal
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25416 posts, RR: 49
Reply 23, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 9875 times:

Quoting LAXLocal (Reply 22):
,....and now they don't agree with the outcome.

Its the FAA that continues to raise concerns and urge reconfiguration, not really LAWA itself.

Anyhow - have you read the preliminary NASA report?
It basically says there will be another accident at LAX, costing 150 lives, but in their estimate this is a statistical reasonable loss and the movement of runways while it would indeed make the airport safer, it’s not much of a statistical improvement, hence solely on safety grounds they have a hard time justifying the move.
But the report does acknowledge reconfigured runways would have other benefits operational which combined might make their move worth it.

I suspect at the end of the day, the FAA will maintain its stance that the current configuration is not ideal, and posses added operational complexities, while not fully meeting Federal spacing criteria.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineaaway From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1523 posts, RR: 14
Reply 24, posted (4 years 7 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 9322 times:

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 15):
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 14):
As displayed on page 5, of the link of reply 6, the North portion of the terminal is not fully built out providing for 17 total contact gates as currently envisaged and approved.
Is it 17 or 18? There's one gate in that diagram on page 5 that doesn't have a plane. Is that a full gate or just a B gate?
Quoting aaway (Reply 16):
Actually its 16 gates considering the dogleg remnant contains gates122, 123A and 123B. The "empty gate" depicted on the diagram is planned as a swing gate.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 17):
17 - The key word here is "contact" (jetway) gates.

There is indeed a single spot that could accommodate a smaller plane depending on what is on adjacent gates, but no jetway is provided.
And yes the North end gate - 123 is currently an A and B gate also.

For the benefit of the questioner(s), paraphrasing the following paragraph lifted from the 21Sep09 LAWA BOAC report ('Project Description', pgs6-7):

"...The development of new gates along the west side of the new concourse includes four gates on the south concourse...at the north concourse three gates...two new gates between the new north and south concourses."

"...The twelve gates that currently exist along the east side of TBIT would be replaced by nine new gates..."


   So, depending on the source of your info, its either 16, 17, or 18 gates!!!

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 21):
One more question:

If the Airport Commission does build out the Northern Wing, with or without the Northfield runway reconfiguration, how many gates would there be in total?

I think the BOAC will agree to a build out. Ultimate number of gates will depend on the ADG (Aircraft Design Group) mix chosen. With the west side of new concourse being available, I could see 20, 21 gates.

Quoting LAXLocal (Reply 19):
Moving the 24's northward is now a dead issue.

It will now likely take a back seat to other projects yet to be commissioned at the airport. More importantly, with regard to whatever intent the BOAC may now have, the political support is now lacking. Both Villaraigosa and Rosendahl staked their potential support for reconfiguration on the NASA report showing that the current configuration was indeed unsafe.

I'll add this though - Westchester and surrounding communities thought the original Riordan expansion plan was D.O.A. Yet, the development that is now occurring at LAX is essentially that plan, albeit with modifications and compromises.

Years ago, when this topic was a subject of discussion on this website, I accurately predicted that LAWA would take elements of the original plan and get them through on a piecemeal basis. That is exactly what has happened.

Having said that, I'm not prepared to make a prediction on the North Airfield - I need to get a better perspective from the various stakeholders. But, I don't believe its as dead as you all would like it to be.

Quoting LAXLocal (Reply 22):
Yup, the airport commission asked for the last and final study,

Well no, that's not quite accurate. The BOAC was goaded by the L.A. City Council to pursue an alternative to the five previous studies that were deemed biased.

Quoting LAXLocal (Reply 22):
The fact is, 80% of the runway incursions happen on the SOUTH runways. And this is even AFTER the addition of the center taxi way between the 25's, and moving 25L south.

And the south side handles more traffic than the north side, with this ratio of operations being split on a 60/40 basis.

Quoting LAXLocal (Reply 22):
The new runway incursion alarm/ground radar/alarm system is the prudent way to keep LAX safe

Unfortunately the alarm system does nothing to address the increasing usage of aircraft designed/sized beyond the scope of LAX's current configuration.



With a choice between changing one's mind & proving there's no need to do so, most everyone gets busy on the proof.
25 Post contains images ikramerica : But I do. LAX could operate using 3 runways for anything larger than 180 seats/1500nm range and not suffer operational problems. 3 parallel runways +
26 PITrules : Remember when LAX was at its peak about 10 years ago they were pushing well over 700,000 operations/yr. They are down significantly from that, but wh
27 Post contains images ATLflyer : So will there be another concourse built in the future as a phase II or have they scrapped that idea? Also are they going to build the Midfield termin
28 LAXLocal : Yes I have read the report. The day it became public. Ok...so the BOAC didn't ask for the new study, they were "goaded"......Um..ok? Yes, the south s
29 2707200X : I like the new proposals for the Tom Bradley Terminal expansion, right now the planes stand wingtip to wingtip at the terminal and it is a security ni
30 Post contains links PITrules : I don't think so, look at image 5 (alternative C) http://www.airport-technology.com/projects/losangeles/losangeles5.html It would only take 50-100' t
31 ikramerica : It either involves ripping down the ends of all the north terminals or pushing the airport outward into the adjoining neighborhood, burying sepulveda
32 PITrules : Did you even look at the link? Image 2 is the no build plan. Image 5 is the scenario which I'm taking about. Both images show the existing north term
33 Post contains links aaway : " Prompted by demands from area City Councilman Bill Rosendahl , airport commissioners ordered the NASA study" http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/..
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...
LAX Before Tom Bradley Terminal posted Mon Jul 24 2006 19:25:07 by Mcbee85
LAX Terminal 4 And Tom Bradley Terminal Arrivals posted Thu Feb 3 2005 22:04:58 by UCLAX
BHM Terminal Expansion posted Thu Jul 2 2009 22:32:51 by TSS
Terminal B Expansion IAH Discussion posted Wed Jun 10 2009 12:00:53 by Drerx7
Allegiant To Fund Terminal Expansion At AZA posted Mon Aug 25 2008 14:22:56 by Chumley
HKG Terminal Expansion? posted Sun Jul 20 2008 18:37:29 by EK413
Tom Bradley Terminal Extension Question posted Mon Apr 21 2008 10:00:53 by Tonystan
What Will Happen After MKE Terminal Expansion? posted Sun Apr 13 2008 13:12:48 by MKE22
Runway And Terminal Expansion At IFP, Awesome! posted Thu Dec 13 2007 16:33:08 by NIKV69
Hartford Bradley Terminal B (Gates) posted Sat Nov 10 2007 18:38:22 by Yankees