User avatar
psa1011
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:37 pm

UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:11 pm

I flew UA 468 last night from PDX-SFO on a 757-200.

We landed 20 minutes early in clear weather and made our way to T3, at which point we stopped near gate 90 and held for an available gate. We waited 15 minutes. Then we pulled into to G93 (which had just been vacated by a UA 777 to LHR/FRA), and then waited another 10-12 minutes for the aircraft door to open.

Even on a fogless evening, the flight experience took about a half hour longer than necessary due to gate space and staffing (not sure where the individual assisting with the 777 pushback went). And even when the renovated pier of T3 opens, I can't see the situation improving dramatically.

Any thoughts on what can be done?
 
spiritair97
Posts: 1191
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 9:28 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:21 pm

Maybe they can take the amount of aircraft that can be at the airport at a gate/parking space, and have 3/4 of that amount of crews to operate a turnaround there at any time.
 
n471wn
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 12:23 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:23 pm

The best thing to do is to fly into OAK----it is closer to downtown San Fran than is SFO. We long time Bay Area residents only use SFO when we have to---like on international flights. The problem is SFO needs another runway out in the Bay and the Environmental Whacko's who run this place will not even discuss it-----avoid SFO at all costs.
 
User avatar
psa1011
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:37 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:30 pm

Runways were actually not the problem in this case. Maybe UA could start using more of G for domestic flights?
 
jetmatt777
Crew
Posts: 2855
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:34 pm

You mentioned you had arrived 20 minutes early. You waited for a gate because of that, that happens all the time everywhere including outstations. They plan gate assignments based on the schedules, not necessarily by what time an aircraft is expected to be touching down on the runway.

As for why they took forever to open the door, I can't explain that. But waiting for a gate was a non issue since you arrived earlier than the station was planning for.
Lighten up while you still can, don't even try to understand, just find a place to make your stand and take it easy
 
User avatar
psa1011
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:37 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:44 pm

True, we did arrive early. Although the block time was 1h51m, when even the longest PDX-SFO flight should only take 1h30. So they're either blocking that long for fog, or overcrowded gates, and not at PDX.
 
n782nc
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:31 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:50 pm

Quoting n471wn (Reply 2):

Not all people who want to protect the environment are wackos... Expand the economy but try to do so in the most environmentally sensitive way.

The problem with OAK is that while it's closer to dtwn SF as the crow flies, the Bay Bridge and Nimitz Freeway are commonly absolute hell. I personally take my chances with 101 and SFO's problems than deal with the East Bay's traffic. The new BART connection will help, but SFO is still more convenient to get to from SF.

Quoting PSA1011 (Thread starter):

The main problem with UA @ SFO is lack of available gates. They've tried to remedy some of the problems by moving ops to T1, but that only goes so far. I agree that when B/A E opens, it won't help that much. Hopefully some compromise will be reached regarding a new runway, possibly using PSP's as a way to reduce the impact on the bay.
Stairway to Seven
 
AADC10
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 7:40 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:56 pm

Quoting PSA1011 (Thread starter):
And even when the renovated pier of T3 opens, I can't see the situation improving dramatically.

Why not? UA does not want to send any more aircraft to the old CO gates in T-1 than they have to, since it is a pain to connect to the UA gates in T-3 and I believe the former AA pier had more gates than CO had in T-1.

Quoting PSA1011 (Thread starter):
then waited another 10-12 minutes for the aircraft door to open

That seems to happen surprisingly often at UA hubs, particularly when there is a gate change or an early arrival. They sometimes seem to forget to send someone to the jetbridge.
 
n782nc
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:31 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:03 pm

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 7):
Why not? UA does not want to send any more aircraft to the old CO gates in T-1 than they have to, since it is a pain to connect to the UA gates in T-3 and I believe the former AA pier had more gates than CO had in T-1.

Yes, there are more gates, but the plan is to have AC and US use all 6-7 of the 9 positions. What's left for UA will not be near enough to dramatically improve the situation.
Stairway to Seven
 
User avatar
psa1011
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:37 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:05 pm

Quoting N782NC (Reply 6):
The main problem with UA @ SFO is lack of available gates. They've tried to remedy some of the problems by moving ops to T1, but that only goes so far. I agree that when B/A E opens, it won't help that much. Hopefully some compromise will be reached regarding a new runway, possibly using PSP's as a way to reduce the impact on the bay.

Wouldn't using more of G help, or have they maxed out that opportunity?
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5563
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:07 pm

Quoting PSA1011 (Thread starter):
We landed 20 minutes early in clear weather and made our way to T3, at which point we stopped near gate 90 and held for an available gate. We waited 15 minutes. Then we pulled into to G93 (which had just been vacated by a UA 777 to LHR/FRA), and then waited another 10-12 minutes for the aircraft door to open.

Early arrivals mess up everything for the terminal staff. You left 5 min late and arrived 20 min early.

Gates might not be available - as you mentioned.

When they have to put you into a different gate, the staff to work you flight - usually the next leg for the aircraft - has to move to that gate and get the computers setup.

The baggage crew is in the wrong place for the off load and on load.

The service crew is in the wrong place for any services the plane needs.

I would suspect the delay in opening the door was a combination of trying to get the baggage straight so pax would know where to go, and the gate agents not being at the gate yet.

I've seen the same type thing at DFW with AA and at ATL with DL in the past.

Airlines could be more efficient, if they hired larger staffs for the airports. Though of course costs would go up.

Everyone is in the minimal staff possible mode of operation these days.
 
dartland
Posts: 514
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 5:09 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 7:53 pm

Quoting N782NC (Reply 6):

Quoting n471wn (Reply 2):

Not all people who want to protect the environment are wackos... Expand the economy but try to do so in the most environmentally sensitive way.

The problem with OAK is that while it's closer to dtwn SF as the crow flies, the Bay Bridge and Nimitz Freeway are commonly absolute hell. I personally take my chances with 101 and SFO's problems than deal with the East Bay's traffic. The new BART connection will help, but SFO is still more convenient to get to from SF.

Yes and Yes. I live in SF and almost nobody I know flies out of OAK for above reasons (as well as connectivity options).


Also -- I fly in and out of SFO all the time, mostly on UA, and I have not had a major wait for a gate at all this year (can't think of any wait more than 5 minutes). So while I appreciate that you faced a problem, I don't necessarily find that it is endemic. There are always flukes like this, but I have seen no evidence of a trend or systemic problem that needs fixing.
 
modesto2
Posts: 2669
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2000 3:44 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 8:45 pm

If the City is my final destination, SFO is generally more convenient (assuming no wx delays). Especially when taking BART, it's more convenient to hop on BART and be in downtown in about 30 min vs taking OAK's Air BART bus and transferring at the Coliseum station.

As others have also said, despite an early arrival, it's a logistic headache to change gates. When crews are expecting a particular flight at a particular gate, changing the gate assignment causes a ripple effect that is often more trouble than it's worth. UA certainly isn't perfect, but there's far more to airline operations than meets the eye.
 
usairways85
Posts: 3548
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 11:59 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 9:52 pm

Quoting PSA1011 (Reply 5):
True, we did arrive early. Although the block time was 1h51m, when even the longest PDX-SFO flight should only take 1h30. So they're either blocking that long for fog, or overcrowded gates, and not at PDX.

Airlines pad schedules all the time at delay prone airports. It results in a better on-time percentage.

Quoting Jetmatt777 (Reply 4):
You mentioned you had arrived 20 minutes early. You waited for a gate because of that, that happens all the time everywhere including outstations. They plan gate assignments based on the schedules, not necessarily by what time an aircraft is expected to be touching down on the runway.

Pretty much answers it.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:08 pm

Currently there are 13 gates in the closed off section E of Terminal 3 (former AA gates). They are remodeling that section of the terminal. While it is happening, UA is short of gates. Airplanes waiting for gates is relatively common, especially if flights are early, which they typically are during good weather.

It should all be fixed by the end of 2013. 13 gates is a lot.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
User avatar
psa1011
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:37 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:15 pm

So the answer looks to be yes, United is struggling with overcrowding and understaffing, and has to create padded blocks for flights to create an image of on-time performance and efficiency at SFO 
 
User avatar
CV880
Posts: 941
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 7:56 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:18 pm

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 14):
It should all be fixed by the end of 2013. 13 gates is a lot.

+ USAir will be married to AA by that time.
 
hereandthere41
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 5:31 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:45 pm

Quoting N782NC (Reply 8):

I'm not sure that's still the plan for US to move over to these gates. My understanding is that UA will occupy the majority of these new gates now.

Quoting PSA1011 (Reply 15):

When you leave for work in the morning, don't you allow extra time for rush hour traffic? It's no different with the airlines. They have to plan for traffic and delays.

Quoting PSA1011 (Reply 9):

If you haven't noticed lately, UA is using the G gates for lots of domestic flights, especially during the off-peak international hours like early morning. I believe with the October schedule UA will move UAX to terminal 1 and the former UAX gates 76-79 will be converted to mainline like they used to be when Shuttle was around.
 
n782nc
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:31 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:47 pm

Quoting PSA1011 (Reply 9):
Wouldn't using more of G help, or have they maxed out that opportunity?

Yep, as far as I know, G is maxed out during peak hours. However, there is still plenty of gate space off-peak.

Quoting CV880 (Reply 16):
USAir will be married to AA by that time.

It's still an 'if". I for one do NOT want to see that merger happen.
Stairway to Seven
 
n471wn
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 12:23 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:21 am

Quoting N782NC (Reply 6):
The problem with OAK is that while it's closer to dtwn SF as the crow flies, the Bay Bridge and Nimitz Freeway are commonly absolute hell. I personally take my chances with 101 and SFO's problems than deal with the East Bay's traffic. The new BART connection will help, but SFO is still more convenient to get to from SF.

This is simply not true as 101 between SFO and the City is among the most congested freeways in California----expecially around Army Street. I'll race you to the Ferry Building any day of the week and I will win.
 
UALAMT
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2012 8:45 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:27 am

Sounds Like being more patient with your time.SFO is a major Intl airport. I dont think 15 minutes is too much to ask considering all things involved.
 
fshplns
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:03 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Wed Sep 26, 2012 3:23 am

Quoting Jetmatt777 (Reply 4):
You mentioned you had arrived 20 minutes early. You waited for a gate because of that, that happens all the time everywhere including outstations. They plan gate assignments based on the schedules, not necessarily by what time an aircraft is expected to be touching down on the runway.

As for why they took forever to open the door, I can't explain that. But waiting for a gate was a non issue since you arrived earlier than the station was planning for.
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 10):

Early arrivals mess up everything for the terminal staff. You left 5 min late and arrived 20 min early.

Gates might not be available - as you mentioned.

When they have to put you into a different gate, the staff to work you flight - usually the next leg for the aircraft - has to move to that gate and get the computers setup.

The baggage crew is in the wrong place for the off load and on load.

The service crew is in the wrong place for any services the plane needs.

I was going to answer to this post, but it seems the two posters above, have hit the nail on the head. I currently work in the position that has to make those decisions (on the ground gate changes). When a flight shows up extra early as yours did, we try our best to find another available gate. Sometimes it takes the other work groups time to catch up with the gate change. Cant speak for SFO, as I work on the other side of the country, ATL. We also have our extremely early flights, but on a much smaller scale.

Chris
 
christao17
Posts: 902
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 12:14 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Wed Sep 26, 2012 3:38 am

Quoting n471wn (Reply 19):
I'll race you to the Ferry Building any day of the week and I will win.

That assumes that the Ferry Building is the intended destination. Depending on where you are going in the city, SFO is often more convenient than OAK. Also true if you live anywhere on the Peninsula and even the western side of the south bay.
Keeping the "civil" in civil aviation...
 
n782nc
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:31 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:03 am

Quoting n471wn (Reply 19):

Your kidding... The Nimitz and Bay Bridge are less congested and less of a hassle than 101 or 280 on the peninsula? I absolutely can't believe that, considering my commute from my house (adjacent to SFO) into the Financial District never takes more than 25-30 minutes.

Quoting christao17 (Reply 22):

   Agreed
Stairway to Seven
 
SFOHORIZON
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 5:09 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:28 am

Quoting n471wn (Reply 2):
The best thing to do is to fly into OAK----it is closer to downtown San Fran than is SFO. We long time Bay Area residents only use SFO when we have to---like on international flights. The problem is SFO needs another runway out in the Bay and the Environmental Whacko's who run this place will not even discuss it-----avoid SFO at all costs.

As an 8-year SF resident, I disagree 100%.

I just google mapped it, and the trip to SFO is less miles and takes less time than the trip to OAK.
I have also driven both routes multiple times and the drive to SFO has always been shorter.
I loathe driving across the Bay Bridge or taking BART to OAK. I drive/BART to SFO whenever possible.
 
UA772IAD
Posts: 1269
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:43 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Wed Sep 26, 2012 5:41 am

Quoting n471wn (Reply 2):
The best thing to do is to fly into OAK

And deal with the nightmare that the Bay Bridge can be, especially at the mixing bowl before the toll plaza at rush hour? No thanks. Then there's the congestion at the off ramps once you hit SF city....

Quoting n471wn (Reply 19):
This is simply not true as 101 between SFO and the City is among the most congested freeways in California----expecially around Army Street. I'll race you to the Ferry Building any day of the week and I will win.

Why take 101? 280 is much faster and will get you to surface streets much closer to the financial district than 101. Try the 3rd street exit next time by the Ball Park and shoot up Second or Third Street to Market.

Quoting Jetmatt777 (Reply 4):

You mentioned you had arrived 20 minutes early. You waited for a gate because of that, that happens all the time everywhere including outstations. They plan gate assignments based on the schedules, not necessarily by what time an aircraft is expected to be touching down on the runway.

The move for customer service from 90 to G93 is a huge move. CSRs are assigned flights, so once that 777 flight closed, the CSRs are moving on to their next assignment... whether that's to the breakroom, home or to another flight. Mobilizing all the ground personnel to get to the appropriate place takes a lot of time and communication.

Quoting PSA1011 (Reply 9):
Wouldn't using more of G help, or have they maxed out that opportunity?

G is used when needed, but its not ideal. For one, its a bit confusing for those unfamiliar (or not paying attention) with the airport to navigate to from the domestic termial. Especially if one is doing self-check in with minimal contact from a contracted agent who simply checks IDs and tags luggage (an AirServ agent vs. a UA CSR).

G isn't really equipped for domestic ops. There isn't a customer service desk airside, so if s#*t hits the fan and a flight is cancelled, its more of a headache for customer service ops. Also, transporting inbound bags to the inbound bag room, below the baggage claim area in T3 is time consuming; and from a customer standpoint, less conveinient and slightly confusing to navigate to from the G concourse.

UA also shares the gates wtih its Star partners, so while UA has real estate and ops set-up here, the gates operate more like common use gates...

I love the G concourse, but I see why UA limits its use to international ops.

I don't remember the UAX terminal (gates 76-79) during the shuttle area, but space is pretty tight. With mainline ops there, its going to be a zoo!
 
rickabone
Posts: 152
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 8:06 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:18 pm

In addition to being a gate issue, I believe it's a staffing issue as well. There are times of day when all of the gates are full, and arriving early doesn't help that situation, but there are many times of day that are slower, but United, along with several other airlines don't have enough ground crew working to bring the aircraft to the gate. They will frequently sit a few feet away from the gate waiting for a ground crew to either guide them in or move equipment out of the way. I have seen delays in the 10-15 minute range for this on a regular basis, though it does seem to be far less frequent than it was a year ago. I do believe they have made progress on this issue.
 
apodino
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:30 pm

Quoting SFOHORIZON (Reply 24):

As an 8-year SF resident, I disagree 100%.

I just google mapped it, and the trip to SFO is less miles and takes less time than the trip to OAK.
I have also driven both routes multiple times and the drive to SFO has always been shorter.
I loathe driving across the Bay Bridge or taking BART to OAK. I drive/BART to SFO whenever possible.

The problem with this is any advantage gained by using SFO is negated by the fact that the airport runs 2 hours delays almost every day due to fog. Which means that if you fly into OAK...you will probably get to your destination in a more timely manner because you will be waiting two hours if you are flying into SFO.

This is why I agree with the poster who said just fly into OAK if you value your time. Unfortunately no one who books takes into account likely delays, they just look at the scheduled time. Then again, most people aren't on A.Net either.
 
mikeology
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:20 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:32 pm

Quoting n471wn (Reply 19):
This is simply not true as 101 between SFO and the City is among the most congested freeways in California----expecially around Army Street. I'll race you to the Ferry Building any day of the week and I will win.

I'll gladly take that bet

Quoting christao17 (Reply 22):
That assumes that the Ferry Building is the intended destination. Depending on where you are going in the city, SFO is often more convenient than OAK. Also true if you live anywhere on the Peninsula and even the western side of the south bay.

Exactly. Lived on the Peninsula my entire 26 years of existence and OAK would never be faster. As you mentioned for those on the peninsula lets not forget the San Mateo Bridge. Longest in the Bay Area and at least 8-10 just to cross. I could make it to SFO in that amount of time from Redwood City and north


Also I wonder from numerous SFO posts on here. Would inneficency be more with domestic flights. All the International flights i've taken have been on time. More priority?
 
n471wn
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 12:23 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:36 pm

Quoting apodino (Reply 27):
The problem with this is any advantage gained by using SFO is negated by the fact that the airport runs 2 hours delays almost every day due to fog. Which means that if you fly into OAK...you will probably get to your destination in a more timely manner because you will be waiting two hours if you are flying into SFO.

This is why I agree with the poster who said just fly into OAK if you value your time. Unfortunately no one who books takes into account likely delays, they just look at the scheduled time. Then again, most people aren't on A.Net either.

Thank you my friend for saying this better than I did.......I cannot tell you how many people I know have come to your conclusion and have changed to Oakland. I will grant my detractors the point that if they use BART then SFO is better for obvious reasons as the bus bridge from BART to Oakland is a joke.
 
Alias1024
Posts: 2231
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:13 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Wed Sep 26, 2012 5:57 pm

Quoting mikeology (Reply 28):
Also I wonder from numerous SFO posts on here. Would inneficency be more with domestic flights. All the International flights i've taken have been on time. More priority?

International inbound flights (except Canada) aren't going to get caught in the flow delay programs that SFO often has. For example, right now SFO is running a flow program affecting all aircraft departing in the US within 1,000 miles of SFO, and all aircraft departing for SFO from Vancouver Center.

There's actually a fairly reliable pattern to the flow delays during the summer. If your flight is scheduled to arrive at SFO before 9 am you will probably be in the air before the flow gets started (unless it's a real close in airport like anything in California and MFR, EUG, RNO). If your flight arrives after 1 pm you will probably not have flow as the marine layer will have likely burned off, though your flight could be late if the aircraft went through SFO earlier in the day and got caught in flow. It's really the mid to late morning flights that take the brunt of it in the summer. Winter is a whole different ballgame since it's often Pacific storms that slow the arrival rate due to low clouds, rain, and wind direction and those can be at any time of the day or night.

[Edited 2012-09-26 10:58:33]
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
 
UA772IAD
Posts: 1269
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:43 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Thu Sep 27, 2012 8:29 pm

Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 30):
There's actually a fairly reliable pattern to the flow delays during the summer. If your flight is scheduled to arrive at SFO before 9 am you will probably be in the air before the flow gets started (unless it's a real close in airport like anything in California and MFR, EUG, RNO). If your flight arrives after 1 pm you will probably not have flow as the marine layer will have likely burned off, though your flight could be late if the aircraft went through SFO earlier in the day and got caught in flow. It's really the mid to late morning flights that take the brunt of it in the summer. Winter is a whole different ballgame since it's often Pacific storms that slow the arrival rate due to low clouds, rain, and wind direction and those can be at any time of the day or night.

Agreed.

Early morning trans-cons will either hold at the gate, or slow way down once airborne. They usually arrive within reasonable time and well within the legal domestic-international transfer window, as I've noticed that many passengers on those first few flights are either connecting to the mid-day Asia departures, or are O&D and going landside.

Actually, the early RNO flights have been the only ones to give me trouble, in which case the aircraft will sit at the gate in RNO until cleared for departure.

You may get on the ground faster in OAK, but where you're ultimately going and how you're getting there determines how much time you really save...I'll still take my chances with SFO if I'm headed to the City or connecting elsewhere though.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19754
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Thu Sep 27, 2012 10:17 pm

Quoting n471wn (Reply 19):
This is simply not true as 101 between SFO and the City is among the most congested freeways in California----expecially around Army Street. I'll race you to the Ferry Building any day of the week and I will win.

I promise you that 101 from the City to SFO is not even a third as congested as the Bay Bridge is.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
ytib
Posts: 374
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:22 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Thu Sep 27, 2012 11:43 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 32):
I promise you that 101 from the City to SFO is not even a third as congested as the Bay Bridge is.

That will change next year when the new bridge opens. ha ha ha

Bottom line is it depends on where you are going, if I am visiting people I know in Alameda it is a no brainer to use OAK. Since I can call them when taxiing to the gate and usually get there by the time I get to the curb.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:21 am

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 14):

Currently there are 13 gates in the closed off section E of Terminal 3 (former AA gates). They are remodeling that section of the terminal.

Currently, there's not even a building there.

Quoting UA772IAD (Reply 25):
I love the G concourse, but I see why UA limits its use to international ops.

They don't, as has been stated.

NS
 
SFOHORIZON
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 5:09 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:43 am

That's an excessive exaggeration that's just not true.

Yes, SFO has some fog delays. But, it's not everyday. And even when it does have delays, it's not an automatic 2 hour delay.

Quoting apodino (Reply 27):
The problem with this is any advantage gained by using SFO is negated by the fact that the airport runs 2 hours delays almost every day due to fog. Which means that if you fly into OAK...you will probably get to your destination in a more timely manner because you will be waiting two hours if you are flying into SFO.
 
jetmatt777
Crew
Posts: 2855
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Fri Sep 28, 2012 5:13 am

Quoting UA772IAD (Reply 25):
The move for customer service from 90 to G93 is a huge move. CSRs are assigned flights, so once that 777 flight closed, the CSRs are moving on to their next assignment... whether that's to the breakroom, home or to another flight. Mobilizing all the ground personnel to get to the appropriate place takes a lot of time and communication.

Yes, I am aware of this. I work the ramp and operations, I know all about moving gate to gate to work flights.
Lighten up while you still can, don't even try to understand, just find a place to make your stand and take it easy
 
User avatar
SFOA380
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 4:35 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:49 pm

Quoting gigneil (Reply 34):
Currently, there's not even a building there.

Yes there is... It is stripped down to the metal and being refurbished in much the same way that the old central terminal was transformed into T2, but on a somewhat smaller scale.
 
User avatar
legacyins
Posts: 1810
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 1:11 pm

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:06 pm

Quoting sfoa380 (Reply 37):

I flew into SFO on Monday and was quite surprised the pier was gone. All that is showing is the base with nothing on top. So, the Terminal might be there but the pier where the fates are is completely gone.
 
UA772IAD
Posts: 1269
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:43 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Fri Sep 28, 2012 5:13 pm

Quoting gigneil (Reply 34):
They don't, as has been stated.

Well aware of this thank you.   I've worked domestic flights out of G. I forgot the words "try not."   G is used as overflow when necessary for domestic ops.
 
civetfive
Posts: 183
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 1:44 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:18 pm

Quoting SFOHORIZON (Reply 35):

Last year I had to start flying Bay Area - Orange County about twice a week between May and September. UGH. I ended up doing 31 round trips total, the first 12 between SFO-SNA, and ended up with 33 hours of delays for ~23 hours of in-air time. I finally wised up and did SFO-LAX, SJC-LAX or SJC-SNA in the mornings, and LAX-SJC or SNA-SJC for evening returns, and had less than 5 hours of delays total after making the switch.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: UA @ SFO Inefficient (not Due To Fog)?

Sat Sep 29, 2012 4:36 am

Quoting sfoa380 (Reply 37):
Yes there is... It is stripped down to the metal and being refurbished in much the same way that the old central terminal was transformed into T2, but on a somewhat smaller scale.

In so much as something see through can be a building   At least in August, there was only the foundation.

NS

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 910A, a380787, Bing [Bot], carljanderson, DeSpringbokke, FAST Enterprise [Crawler], flightsimer, HALtheAI, hkcanadaexpat, iahcsr, jaybird, kabq737, KarelXWB, klm617, notdownnlocked, qf789, SInGAPORE_AIR, Teganuma, TurnaroudUK, usflyer123, Yahoo [Bot] and 382 guests