Los Angeles Basin (BUR/LAX/LGB/ONT/SNA) Aviation - 2023

travaz · Mon Mar 13, 2023 8:09 pm

Wow I like the Icon version kind of Reto and fits well with the Hollywood theme.

BigPlaneGuy13 · Mon Mar 13, 2023 8:41 pm

BigPlaneGuy13 wrote:
Big news, all. BUR has finally released its first renderings for the completely new build of the 14 gate terminal. There are three finalists that the public will be voting on in mid April. As a semi frequent user of this airport, I am delighted by all three choices.

https://elevatebur.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Updated_Preliminary-Design-Concepts_ElevateBUR.pdf

Upon further review, I think 1 and 2 are the best. 3 is bland. 2 looks like the SoFi stadium architecture which would be interesting. What I love about 1 is the warm tones and the wood. What I love about all the options is the exaggerated ceiling heights. Much much needed. A bit surprised to see that the airport will still refrain from building jet bridges.

theVagabond · Mon Mar 13, 2023 8:44 pm

BigPlaneGuy13 wrote:
Big news, all. BUR has finally released its first renderings for the completely new build of the 14 gate terminal. There are three finalists that the public will be voting on in mid April. As a semi frequent user of this airport, I am delighted by all three choices.

https://elevatebur.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Updated_Preliminary-Design-Concepts_ElevateBUR.pdf

I think I like the inside look of #1 but the mid-century-modern outside look of #2. Personally, don't care for #3.

WN732 · Mon Mar 13, 2023 10:18 pm

I love #1 and #2. Both are really good representations of Southern California architecture. I'm also glad they will continue with ground boarding gates.

arfbool · Mon Mar 13, 2023 11:53 pm

"The Icon" looks a bit like the TWA Hotel at JFK.

Wneast · Thu Mar 16, 2023 2:39 am

Wait so anybody know why LGB hasn’t relocated the three AA slots yet ?

mesasurf · Thu Mar 16, 2023 3:52 am

Where on the BUR grounds would the new terminal be built?

Bradin · Thu Mar 16, 2023 6:55 am

mesasurf wrote:
Where on the BUR grounds would the new terminal be built?

“In order to improve safety at the Bob Hope Airport (“Airport”), the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority (“Authority”) intends to build a 14-gate 355,000 square foot replacement passenger terminal. This facility will be located either in the northeast quadrant (preferred location) or the southwest quadrant of the Airport."

Per: https://elevatebur.com/

hl8208 · Fri Mar 17, 2023 5:21 am

Another rendering of T9 at LAX was recently released and can be seen within this link.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lax-terminal-9-industry-showcase-tickets-580599969137

mesasurf · Fri Mar 17, 2023 7:20 am

[photoid][/photoid]

hl8208 wrote:
Another rendering of T9 at LAX was recently released and can be seen within this link.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lax-terminal-9-industry-showcase-tickets-580599969137

What airlines would use T9? Both UA and AA are nowhere near what they used to be at LAX. This facility looks like it would better fit for B6.

Bradin · Fri Mar 17, 2023 7:47 am

mesasurf wrote:
[photoid][/photoid]
hl8208 wrote:
Another rendering of T9 at LAX was recently released and can be seen within this link.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lax-terminal-9-industry-showcase-tickets-580599969137

What airlines would use T9? Both UA and AA are nowhere near what they used to be at LAX. This facility looks like it would better fit for B6.

There was some push by United to own it. Now it seems to have reverted into an "international common-use terminal" - which doesn't make sense because TBIT is common-use.

Maybe Star Alliance carriers will move to Terminal 9?

Edit: Some notes from the LAWA's December meeting

gmcc · Fri Mar 17, 2023 8:10 am

mesasurf wrote:
[photoid][/photoid]
hl8208 wrote:
Another rendering of T9 at LAX was recently released and can be seen within this link.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lax-terminal-9-industry-showcase-tickets-580599969137

What airlines would use T9? Both UA and AA are nowhere near what they used to be at LAX. This facility looks like it would better fit for B6.

The general consensus seems to be that T9 will be a UA/star alliance terminal allowing LAWA to consolidate the three alliiance into separate parts of thr Airport. T2 T3 and TBIT for DL/skyteam, T4, T5 and TBIT for AA/ oneworld, and T7, T8 ,T9 for UA/star alliance. WN get T1 and most of concourse 0. If AC moves out of T6, as suggested by the point guy article, HA might be able to move back there from the TBIT west purgatory they are stuck in now.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thepointsg ... rview/amp/

ldvaviation · Fri Mar 17, 2023 2:31 pm

hl8208 wrote:
Another rendering of T9 at LAX was recently released and can be seen within this link.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lax-terminal-9-industry-showcase-tickets-580599969137

The conceptual design is derivative. It looks like La Guardia's new Terminal B.

But that's not the worst part of it. Nothing will be done to improve the facades of T7 and T8. After you pass the new T4 facade, things will continue to look bleak and banal. As if it wasn't bad enough that LAWA/United did not build a proper APM core building for T7. It's just so sad how the APM walkway to T7 attaches to the existing bridge from the parking garage.

Moreover, with the market for municipal bonds being what it is, T9 is going to cost much more per square foot than TBIT West. Of course, the capital costs are passed down (terminal by terminal) to the airlines. But now that the airlines have been segregated by alliance, it's getting harder for them to offer resistance to LAWA's spending. Indeed, why would the airlines that remain in TBIT complain about the high costs of building a facility for their competitors in another alliance. Given LAWA's terminal rate formula, they will not have to pay for it.

atlflyer · Fri Mar 17, 2023 5:13 pm

ldvaviation wrote:
hl8208 wrote:
Another rendering of T9 at LAX was recently released and can be seen within this link.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lax-terminal-9-industry-showcase-tickets-580599969137

The conceptual design is derivative. It looks like La Guardia's new Terminal B.

But that's not the worst part of it. Nothing will be done to improve the facades of T7 and T8. After you pass the new T4 facade, things will continue to look bleak and banal. As if it wasn't bad enough that LAWA/United did not build a proper APM core building for T7. It's just so sad how the APM walkway to T7 attaches to the existing bridge from the parking garage.

Moreover, with the market for municipal bonds being what it is, T9 is going to cost much more per square foot than TBIT West. Of course, the capital costs are passed down (terminal by terminal) to the airlines. But now that the airlines have been segregated by alliance, it's getting harder for them to offer resistance to LAWA's spending. Indeed, why would the airlines that remain in TBIT complain about the high costs of building a facility for their competitors in another alliance. Given LAWA's terminal rate formula, they will not have to pay for it.

That’s the most disappointing thing about LAX…is the facade switch from new to old to new constantly. Like even part of T2 still retains the ancient facade and part of T4 will retain the barrel vaulted roof. T5,6, 7 & 8 facades hardly have been touched. Forever a piecemeal of architecture.

atlflyer · Fri Mar 17, 2023 5:17 pm

atlflyer wrote:
ldvaviation wrote:
hl8208 wrote:
Another rendering of T9 at LAX was recently released and can be seen within this link.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lax-terminal-9-industry-showcase-tickets-580599969137

The conceptual design is derivative. It looks like La Guardia's new Terminal B.

But that's not the worst part of it. Nothing will be done to improve the facades of T7 and T8. After you pass the new T4 facade, things will continue to look bleak and banal. As if it wasn't bad enough that LAWA/United did not build a proper APM core building for T7. It's just so sad how the APM walkway to T7 attaches to the existing bridge from the parking garage.

Moreover, with the market for municipal bonds being what it is, T9 is going to cost much more per square foot than TBIT West. Of course, the capital costs are passed down (terminal by terminal) to the airlines. But now that the airlines have been segregated by alliance, it's getting harder for them to offer resistance to LAWA's spending. Indeed, why would the airlines that remain in TBIT complain about the high costs of building a facility for their competitors in another alliance. Given LAWA's terminal rate formula, they will not have to pay for it.

That’s the most disappointing thing about LAX…is the facade switch from new to old to new constantly. Like even part of T2 still retains the ancient facade and part of T4 will retain the barrel vaulted roof. T5,6, 7 & 8 facades hardly have been touched. Forever a piecemeal of architecture.

I wish LAX would have found a way to rebuild the terminals brand new from ground up like at LaGuardia. If they found a way at LGA on that tiny footprint, they could have at LAX.

Maybe there’s hope LAX will finish the remaining facades for a unified look one day?

gmcc · Fri Mar 17, 2023 5:38 pm

atlflyer wrote:
ldvaviation wrote:
hl8208 wrote:
Another rendering of T9 at LAX was recently released and can be seen within this link.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lax-terminal-9-industry-showcase-tickets-580599969137

The conceptual design is derivative. It looks like La Guardia's new Terminal B.

But that's not the worst part of it. Nothing will be done to improve the facades of T7 and T8. After you pass the new T4 facade, things will continue to look bleak and banal. As if it wasn't bad enough that LAWA/United did not build a proper APM core building for T7. It's just so sad how the APM walkway to T7 attaches to the existing bridge from the parking garage.

Moreover, with the market for municipal bonds being what it is, T9 is going to cost much more per square foot than TBIT West. Of course, the capital costs are passed down (terminal by terminal) to the airlines. But now that the airlines have been segregated by alliance, it's getting harder for them to offer resistance to LAWA's spending. Indeed, why would the airlines that remain in TBIT complain about the high costs of building a facility for their competitors in another alliance. Given LAWA's terminal rate formula, they will not have to pay for it.

That’s the most disappointing thing about LAX…is the facade switch from new to old to new constantly. Like even part of T2 still retains the ancient facade and part of T4 will retain the barrel vaulted roof. T5,6, 7 & 8 facades hardly have been touched. Forever a piecemeal of architecture.

As far as T6, my guess is that AS/LAWA will eventually bring the facade up to the current center terminal facade standards but it will have to be as an ammendment to the current or a new lease. The current AS lease limits the Define Terminal Improvement Project reimbursement cost to approx. $220 million which is the cost of the current T6 renovations see the below LAWA DTIP T6 board action.

https://lawa.granicus.com/MetaViewer.ph ... a_id=45528

For reference LAWA CTA facade requirements.

https://cloud1lawa.box.com/s/cxwbhj36zg ... 3pk9x7zdar

hl8208 · Fri Mar 17, 2023 6:53 pm

atlflyer wrote:
That’s the most disappointing thing about LAX…is the facade switch from new to old to new constantly. Like even part of T2 still retains the ancient facade and part of T4 will retain the barrel vaulted roof. T5,6, 7 & 8 facades hardly have been touched. Forever a piecemeal of architecture.

This goes for the new TBIT core as well, which looks like it was literally slapped on with the older portion clearly visible from the sides. At least the new T9 will have a single design language. With the way the West Gates went, I would not be surprised if the final product ends up looking a lot more value-engineered than what's seen here.

d8s · Fri Mar 17, 2023 7:23 pm

atlflyer wrote:
ldvaviation wrote:
hl8208 wrote:
Another rendering of T9 at LAX was recently released and can be seen within this link.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lax-terminal-9-industry-showcase-tickets-580599969137

The conceptual design is derivative. It looks like La Guardia's new Terminal B.

That’s the most disappointing thing about LAX…is the facade switch from new to old to new constantly. Like even part of T2 still retains the ancient facade and part of T4 will retain the barrel vaulted roof. T5,6, 7 & 8 facades hardly have been touched. Forever a piecemeal of architecture.

What I still love about LAX, you walk from T4 or T7 satellite to the baggage claim vis the tunnels and the tiles are the wall are circa 1962.

Bradin · Fri Mar 17, 2023 9:18 pm

atlflyer wrote:
ldvaviation wrote:
hl8208 wrote:
Another rendering of T9 at LAX was recently released and can be seen within this link.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lax-terminal-9-industry-showcase-tickets-580599969137

The conceptual design is derivative. It looks like La Guardia's new Terminal B.

But that's not the worst part of it. Nothing will be done to improve the facades of T7 and T8. After you pass the new T4 facade, things will continue to look bleak and banal. As if it wasn't bad enough that LAWA/United did not build a proper APM core building for T7. It's just so sad how the APM walkway to T7 attaches to the existing bridge from the parking garage.

Moreover, with the market for municipal bonds being what it is, T9 is going to cost much more per square foot than TBIT West. Of course, the capital costs are passed down (terminal by terminal) to the airlines. But now that the airlines have been segregated by alliance, it's getting harder for them to offer resistance to LAWA's spending. Indeed, why would the airlines that remain in TBIT complain about the high costs of building a facility for their competitors in another alliance. Given LAWA's terminal rate formula, they will not have to pay for it.

That’s the most disappointing thing about LAX…is the facade switch from new to old to new constantly. Like even part of T2 still retains the ancient facade and part of T4 will retain the barrel vaulted roof. T5,6, 7 & 8 facades hardly have been touched. Forever a piecemeal of architecture.

That's my biggest complaint about a lot of United States airports. It seems like it's a bunch of things haphazardly thrown together on the wall, and hoping something sticks.

Major airports like LAX and JFK seem to be some of the worse offenders. LAX in particular, can't even get its own architectural design philosophy down in terminals they have complete control over (think TBIT and MSC) let alone terminals more or less 'owned/managed' by an airline.

At the same time, when reading the 'design guidelines' ( https://www.lawa.org/lawa-our-lax/plan-and-ordinances ), it calls for "New construction and rehabilitation of terminals should be compatible with the existing terminals and add cohesion to the overall CTA." However, these are just "guidelines".

LAX772LR · Mon Mar 20, 2023 9:03 pm

aaway wrote:
The more likely scenario for DL intetnational ops is a return to the T2 FIS once that is reopened & redeveloped.

BTW, where are we with that?

Has LAWA/CBP (or whomever was the holdout) allowed FIS to return to the non-TBIT terminals? If not, is there a timeline for such?

ldvaviation wrote:
But now that the airlines have been segregated by alliance

Huh? That's not a thing that's happened at LAX....

N1120A · Mon Mar 20, 2023 9:32 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
aaway wrote:
The more likely scenario for DL intetnational ops is a return to the T2 FIS once that is reopened & redeveloped.

BTW, where are we with that?

Has LAWA/CBP (or whomever was the holdout) allowed FIS to return to the non-TBIT terminals? If not, is there a timeline for such?

ldvaviation wrote:
But now that the airlines have been segregated by alliance

Huh? That's not a thing that's happened at LAX....

The plan is ultimately to segregate by alliance, at least partially, as mentioned above. 2/3/Bradley North ST, Bradley South/4/5 OW, 7/8/9 *A.

As for the FIS, there is an active project to renovate the T2 FIS for DL. There is zero reason for the T6/7 FIS to not open immediately, other than typical idiocy from CBP and LAWA.

ScottB · Mon Mar 20, 2023 9:48 pm

Bradin wrote:
That's my biggest complaint about a lot of United States airports. It seems like it's a bunch of things haphazardly thrown together on the wall, and hoping something sticks.

Major airports like LAX and JFK seem to be some of the worse offenders. LAX in particular, can't even get its own architectural design philosophy down in terminals they have complete control over (think TBIT and MSC) let alone terminals more or less 'owned/managed' by an airline.

It's really a reflection of how U.S. airports have grown over the years. We don't typically tear down functional infrastructure just because architectural trends have changed in the intervening decades, and airline tenants are often willing to tolerate suboptimal operating conditions in order to keep costs under control.

JFK in particular was planned around the "Terminal City" concept under which each key airline was allowed to design and build its own terminal according to its needs and desire to make an architectural statement. That's how you got iconic buildings like the Saarinen TWA terminal or the Pan Am Worldport. But it's not a concept which aged well and the operations of hub carriers in the 21st century aren't exactly compatible with terminals having only 10 to 20 gates. But JFK is also busy enough that tearing down large chunks of the terminal area is incompatible with maintaining normal operations, and the biggest carriers at JFK (DL, B6, AA) still need terminals tailored to their operations, while the T1 carriers need something entirely different.

gmcc · Mon Mar 20, 2023 9:55 pm

N1120A wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
aaway wrote:
The more likely scenario for DL intetnational ops is a return to the T2 FIS once that is reopened & redeveloped.

BTW, where are we with that?

Has LAWA/CBP (or whomever was the holdout) allowed FIS to return to the non-TBIT terminals? If not, is there a timeline for such?

ldvaviation wrote:
But now that the airlines have been segregated by alliance

Huh? That's not a thing that's happened at LAX....

The plan is ultimately to segregate by alliance, at least partially, as mentioned above. 2/3/Bradley North ST, Bradley South/4/5 OW, 7/8/9 *A.

As for the FIS, there is an active project to renovate the T2 FIS for DL. There is zero reason for the T6/7 FIS to not open immediately, other than typical idiocy from CBP and LAWA.

T7 FIS is open as the linked report below shows approx 37000 US customs arriving passengers in Jan. Small in comparison to TBIT at approx. 750,000 but open. Once the T6 connector to T7 FIS is done the T7 numbers should go up.

https://www.lawa.org/-/media/17320b1cac ... 678d2e.pdf

bzcat · Mon Mar 20, 2023 10:40 pm

gmcc wrote:
mesasurf wrote:
[photoid][/photoid]
hl8208 wrote:
Another rendering of T9 at LAX was recently released and can be seen within this link.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lax-terminal-9-industry-showcase-tickets-580599969137

What airlines would use T9? Both UA and AA are nowhere near what they used to be at LAX. This facility looks like it would better fit for B6.

The general consensus seems to be that T9 will be a UA/star alliance terminal allowing LAWA to consolidate the three alliiance into separate parts of thr Airport. T2 T3 and TBIT for DL/skyteam, T4, T5 and TBIT for AA/ oneworld, and T7, T8 ,T9 for UA/star alliance. WN get T1 and most of concourse 0. If AC moves out of T6, as suggested by the point guy article, HA might be able to move back there from the TBIT west purgatory they are stuck in now.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thepointsg ... rview/amp/

Technically, there is no more T2. LAWA is in the process of a multi-year terminal rebranding and way-finding project that will see LAX terminal numberings reduced to make more sense based on landside access. The first phase of the project is the new T3 which incorporates the old T2 airside as a concourse. Eventually, there will be similar combined numbering for T4 and T5 once AA completes the renovation and connects landside into a single area. And T1 will also get two concourses once concourse 0 construction is complete. T8 is already mis-named since it is not a terminal but a concourse of T7 but the name will probably not change until T9 is open for business.

This photo below is a bit dated because it was before the T4/5 project launched but you can see what LAWA wants to do eventually.

T1 (100 gates) - WN
T3 (300 gates - the map below shows this as 200) - DL
T4 (400 gates - formerly TBIT, the map below shows this as 300) - common use
T5 (500 gates - the map below shows T4/T5 seperately before AA launched the project to combine T4 and T5 landside) - AA
T6 (600 gates) - common use
T7 (700 gates) - UA
T8 (800 gates) - common use

atlflyer · Mon Mar 20, 2023 10:41 pm

ScottB wrote:
Bradin wrote:
That's my biggest complaint about a lot of United States airports. It seems like it's a bunch of things haphazardly thrown together on the wall, and hoping something sticks.

Major airports like LAX and JFK seem to be some of the worse offenders. LAX in particular, can't even get its own architectural design philosophy down in terminals they have complete control over (think TBIT and MSC) let alone terminals more or less 'owned/managed' by an airline.

It's really a reflection of how U.S. airports have grown over the years. We don't typically tear down functional infrastructure just because architectural trends have changed in the intervening decades, and airline tenants are often willing to tolerate suboptimal operating conditions in order to keep costs under control.

JFK in particular was planned around the "Terminal City" concept under which each key airline was allowed to design and build its own terminal according to its needs and desire to make an architectural statement. That's how you got iconic buildings like the Saarinen TWA terminal or the Pan Am Worldport. But it's not a concept which aged well and the operations of hub carriers in the 21st century aren't exactly compatible with terminals having only 10 to 20 gates. But JFK is also busy enough that tearing down large chunks of the terminal area is incompatible with maintaining normal operations, and the biggest carriers at JFK (DL, B6, AA) still need terminals tailored to their operations, while the T1 carriers need something entirely different.

Luckily JFK is being completely modernized where there will be modern architecture from check-in…why can’t LAX do something about the piecemeal architecture. Even modernized T4 will have chunks of dated parts. The concourse still will have sections left completely alone. And although T7 and T8 are nice inside, the outside still looks straight from 1970. Similar to how JFK T2 looked which is now closed and will be demolished.

atlflyer · Mon Mar 20, 2023 10:43 pm

Will anything be done about the interior of T5 at LAX? I see AA doesn’t seem to have anything planned…

LAX772LR · Mon Mar 20, 2023 11:21 pm

ScottB wrote:
mesasurf wrote:
Interesting to see DL separating themselves as the clear No. 1 carrier at LAX. Hope they can continue to grow there.

Despite what DL inherited at LAX when they bought WA, I doubt anyone would have predicted 20 years ago that DL would be the #1 carrier at LAX.

Funnily enough, go back a decade earlier, and the situation with [email protected] almost directly mirrors it.

DL played the long game in both of the nation's largest coastal gateways, and largely won.

LAX772LR · Mon Mar 20, 2023 11:25 pm

BGS91762 wrote:
I’m surprised other Asian carriers haven’t started at ONT since the majority of Greater LA Asian population lives closer to ONT.

Shouldn't be, because that statement is in no way accurate. Majority of Chinese and Taiwanese, sure... but that's about it.

Koreans, Filipinos, Thais, Japanese, Malay, Indonesians, and Indians all live far closer to LAX.

Vietnamese primarily in the OC, and could go either way with similar ease; though fairly certain that when VN and/or QH come to SoCal, it'll be at LAX.

stlAV8R · Mon Mar 20, 2023 11:27 pm

N1120A wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
aaway wrote:
The more likely scenario for DL intetnational ops is a return to the T2 FIS once that is reopened & redeveloped.

BTW, where are we with that?

Has LAWA/CBP (or whomever was the holdout) allowed FIS to return to the non-TBIT terminals? If not, is there a timeline for such?

ldvaviation wrote:
But now that the airlines have been segregated by alliance

Huh? That's not a thing that's happened at LAX....

The plan is ultimately to segregate by alliance, at least partially, as mentioned above. 2/3/Bradley North ST, Bradley South/4/5 OW, 7/8/9 *A.

As for the FIS, there is an active project to renovate the T2 FIS for DL. There is zero reason for the T6/7 FIS to not open immediately, other than typical idiocy from CBP and LAWA.

T7 FIS has been open at least a year now.

MIflyer12 · Mon Mar 20, 2023 11:38 pm

ScottB wrote:
Bradin wrote:
That's my biggest complaint about a lot of United States airports. It seems like it's a bunch of things haphazardly thrown together on the wall, and hoping something sticks.

Major airports like LAX and JFK seem to be some of the worse offenders. LAX in particular, can't even get its own architectural design philosophy down in terminals they have complete control over (think TBIT and MSC) let alone terminals more or less 'owned/managed' by an airline.

It's really a reflection of how U.S. airports have grown over the years. We don't typically tear down functional infrastructure just because architectural trends have changed in the intervening decades, and airline tenants are often willing to tolerate suboptimal operating conditions in order to keep costs under control.

JFK in particular was planned around the "Terminal City" concept under which each key airline was allowed to design and build its own terminal according to its needs and desire to make an architectural statement. That's how you got iconic buildings like the Saarinen TWA terminal or the Pan Am Worldport. But it's not a concept which aged well and the operations of hub carriers in the 21st century aren't exactly compatible with terminals having only 10 to 20 gates. But JFK is also busy enough that tearing down large chunks of the terminal area is incompatible with maintaining normal operations, and the biggest carriers at JFK (DL, B6, AA) still need terminals tailored to their operations, while the T1 carriers need something entirely different.

I wouldn't say it's how U.S. airports have grown over the years, but how the growth of terminals has been financed: not as national pride schemes with lavish budgets and national funding, but as locally-owned & operated facilities where cities/counties haven't wanted to borrow $Billions (or tens of $Billions) to give passengers latest & greatest. Airports get financed on the backs of airlines - leases and enplanement charges - and carriers are very happy to push back: to build less, to build less ostentatiously, and to build later. That DL was willing to spend big money at LAX and LGA (and UA at EWR), really is the exception.

Remember complaints that SMF was building too much too soon (and how much passenger traffic has grown since the terminal opended in 2011)? Remember when WN pushed to open a veritable bus depot at Boeing Field instead of paying for improvements at Sea-Tac?

ScottB · Tue Mar 21, 2023 5:33 am

atlflyer wrote:
Luckily JFK is being completely modernized where there will be modern architecture from check-in…why can’t LAX do something about the piecemeal architecture. Even modernized T4 will have chunks of dated parts. The concourse still will have sections left completely alone. And although T7 and T8 are nice inside, the outside still looks straight from 1970. Similar to how JFK T2 looked which is now closed and will be demolished.

Because the exterior of the terminal is way, way down on the list of what airlines care about. Sure, if you're building entirely new structures then you build something that looks good from the outside. But the airline is going to want to invest its money in things like lounges, shopping/restaurants and gate areas where the HVCs spend their time. Most frequent travelers just aren't looking at the outside of the terminal.

hl8208 · Tue Mar 21, 2023 12:05 pm

The LAWA incentive program (linked below) was brought up by another poster on another thread, and it outlines a list of overseas destinations that LAWA is trying to woo airlines into launching before April, 2024. Some of these have either already started (OSL, VIE/BCN?), while some are slated to begin (Latam to GRU, Sichuan to TFU). Others have either been previously flown (EZE, BKK, KUL, remaining secondary China, India, Africa) and/or airlines have to some extent expressed an intention to start (TAP to LIS, AI to India, VN to SGN). Thought it'd be interesting to speculate which of these we can see starting before the incentive program expires next year.

https://www.lawa.org/-/media/lawa-web/lawa-airport-operations/files/lawa-airline-incentive-program.ashx

Bradin · Sat Mar 25, 2023 8:36 pm

Cross linking: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1476737&p=23731549&hilit=lax#p23731549

FedEx is vacating 7401 World Way W, Los Angeles, CA 90045 and moving all maintenance to Indianapolis.

Maybe this enables AA to move SuperBay to 7401 and then we can actually get a properly completed MSC South?

aaway · Sat Mar 25, 2023 11:00 pm

Bradin wrote:
Cross linking: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1476737&p=23731549&hilit=lax#p23731549

FedEx is vacating 7401 World Way W, Los Angeles, CA 90045 and moving all maintenance to Indianapolis. Maybe this enables AA to move SuperBay to 7401 and then we can actually get a properly completed MSC South?

I have doubts that AA would move there. The former UA (nee CO) facility is vacant and has space for reconfiguration should there be a desire for a reconfiguration.

Bradin · Sat Mar 25, 2023 11:11 pm

aaway wrote:
Bradin wrote:
Cross linking: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1476737&p=23731549&hilit=lax#p23731549

FedEx is vacating 7401 World Way W, Los Angeles, CA 90045 and moving all maintenance to Indianapolis. Maybe this enables AA to move SuperBay to 7401 and then we can actually get a properly completed MSC South?

I have doubts that AA would move there. The former UA (nee CO) facility is vacant and has space for reconfiguration should there be a desire for a reconfiguration.

Are you perchance referring to this facility?

https://goo.gl/maps/ZWSwWC4Zi84ZZDcQA

rjbesikof · Sun Mar 26, 2023 12:15 am

hl8208 wrote:
The LAWA incentive program (linked below) was brought up by another poster on another thread, and it outlines a list of overseas destinations that LAWA is trying to woo airlines into launching before April, 2024. Some of these have either already started (OSL, VIE/BCN?), while some are slated to begin (Latam to GRU, Sichuan to TFU). Others have either been previously flown (EZE, BKK, KUL, remaining secondary China, India, Africa) and/or airlines have to some extent expressed an intention to start (TAP to LIS, AI to India, VN to SGN). Thought it'd be interesting to speculate which of these we can see starting before the incentive program expires next year.

https://www.lawa.org/-/media/lawa-web/lawa-airport-operations/files/lawa-airline-incentive-program.ashx

I think these are the most to least likely:
-DL LAX-EZE
-LA LAX-UIO
-AA LAX-KUL
-UA LAX-BKK

aaway · Sun Mar 26, 2023 3:40 am

Bradin wrote:
aaway wrote:
Bradin wrote:
Cross linking: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1476737&p=23731549&hilit=lax#p23731549

FedEx is vacating 7401 World Way W, Los Angeles, CA 90045 and moving all maintenance to Indianapolis. Maybe this enables AA to move SuperBay to 7401 and then we can actually get a properly completed MSC South?

I have doubts that AA would move there. The former UA (nee CO) facility is vacant and has space for reconfiguration should there be a desire for a reconfiguration.

Are you perchance referring to this facility?

https://goo.gl/maps/ZWSwWC4Zi84ZZDcQA

Yes

LAXPolaris · Tue Mar 28, 2023 7:06 am

Have seen a bunch of posts related to this topic over the past few months, but I am still unclear what is going on. Can someone provide me a rundown of what the plan is for T9 at LAX? It is going to UA/Star Alliance? Is it going to be an extension of TBIT with a bunch of random airlines?

portola2727 · Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:21 pm

LAXPolaris wrote:
Have seen a bunch of posts related to this topic over the past few months, but I am still unclear what is going on. Can someone provide me a rundown of what the plan is for T9 at LAX? It is going to UA/Star Alliance? Is it going to be an extension of TBIT with a bunch of random airlines?

No one knows for sure yet but considering that it's right next to UA's hub at LAX, it makes a lot of sense to make T9, the Star hub. In effect, it will clear some of the congestion at TBIT considering that by the time T9 is finished, MSC south will also be finished, which pretty much moves all the nonaligned and smaller domestic carriers off the horseshoe. T9 will most likely be a copy of SFO's International Terminal G where UAL will fly it's own long haul and colocate with any Star JV partners.

LAXPolaris · Tue Mar 28, 2023 11:17 pm

portola2727 wrote:
LAXPolaris wrote:
Have seen a bunch of posts related to this topic over the past few months, but I am still unclear what is going on. Can someone provide me a rundown of what the plan is for T9 at LAX? It is going to UA/Star Alliance? Is it going to be an extension of TBIT with a bunch of random airlines?

No one knows for sure yet but considering that it's right next to UA's hub at LAX, it makes a lot of sense to make T9, the Star hub. In effect, it will clear some of the congestion at TBIT considering that by the time T9 is finished, MSC south will also be finished, which pretty much moves all the nonaligned and smaller domestic carriers off the horseshoe. T9 will most likely be a copy of SFO's International Terminal G where UAL will fly it's own long haul and colocate with any Star JV partners.

Does UA want to / plan to grow LAX if they get these additional gates?

portola2727 · Wed Mar 29, 2023 2:50 am

LAXPolaris wrote:
portola2727 wrote:
LAXPolaris wrote:
Have seen a bunch of posts related to this topic over the past few months, but I am still unclear what is going on. Can someone provide me a rundown of what the plan is for T9 at LAX? It is going to UA/Star Alliance? Is it going to be an extension of TBIT with a bunch of random airlines?

No one knows for sure yet but considering that it's right next to UA's hub at LAX, it makes a lot of sense to make T9, the Star hub. In effect, it will clear some of the congestion at TBIT considering that by the time T9 is finished, MSC south will also be finished, which pretty much moves all the nonaligned and smaller domestic carriers off the horseshoe. T9 will most likely be a copy of SFO's International Terminal G where UAL will fly it's own long haul and colocate with any Star JV partners.

Does UA want to / plan to grow LAX if they get these additional gates?

Again, too early to call but I assume that UAL wants to grow out of LAX with the new gates considering that they've been lobbying LAX for years now for a Terminal 9.

LAXPolaris · Wed Mar 29, 2023 5:14 am

portola2727 wrote:
LAXPolaris wrote:
Have seen a bunch of posts related to this topic over the past few months, but I am still unclear what is going on. Can someone provide me a rundown of what the plan is for T9 at LAX? It is going to UA/Star Alliance? Is it going to be an extension of TBIT with a bunch of random airlines?

No one knows for sure yet but considering that it's right next to UA's hub at LAX, it makes a lot of sense to make T9, the Star hub. In effect, it will clear some of the congestion at TBIT considering that by the time T9 is finished, MSC south will also be finished, which pretty much moves all the nonaligned and smaller domestic carriers off the horseshoe. T9 will most likely be a copy of SFO's International Terminal G where UAL will fly it's own long haul and colocate with any Star JV partners.

@portola2727 well said. You make a great point about SFO terminal G, I hadn't thought of that but that is a great comparison to what this could potentially be. Obviously it wouldn't get to the same number of flights on UA metal as SFO, but I do think they could grow out of LAX for sure. Plus, there are way more Star flights coming into LAX vs SFO, so if they are all in T9 right next to UA T7/8 that could feed a lot of domestic connections for UA.

What new routes do you think could potentially work from LAX once they have additional gate space? On the long haul side I would guess FRA, MUC, and AKL as the most likely ones. And on the domestic side, I would like to see DFW and either MIA or FLL.

Philippine333 · Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:02 am

LAX772LR wrote:
BGS91762 wrote:
I’m surprised other Asian carriers haven’t started at ONT since the majority of Greater LA Asian population lives closer to ONT.

Shouldn't be, because that statement is in no way accurate. Majority of Chinese and Taiwanese, sure... but that's about it.

Koreans, Filipinos, Thais, Japanese, Malay, Indonesians, and Indians all live far closer to LAX.

Vietnamese primarily in the OC, and could go either way with similar ease; though fairly certain that when VN and/or QH come to SoCal, it'll be at LAX.

Oh yeah speaking of which, are there any chances of VN starting HAN-LAX or SGN-LAX this year in 2023? Been waiting for this route after VN started flying SGN-SFO.

LAX772LR · Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:26 am

Philippine333 wrote:
Oh yeah speaking of which, are there any chances of VN starting HAN-LAX or SGN-LAX this year in 2023? Been waiting for this route after VN started flying SGN-SFO.

VN plans to eventually.

But according to the CEO of LAWA, both Bamboo and VietJet have also expressed interest in serving LAX, with an announcement by one of them "imminent."

One can only presume that that means Bamboo, as VietJet doesn't have an aircraft that can serve LAX nonstop, and likely not even 1stop either (they have A330s, but they're 9abreast and would likely struggle to cross the Pacific even with a stop at the likes of NRT/ICN/etc).

jplatts · Thu Mar 30, 2023 1:59 pm

Wneast wrote:
Wait so anybody know why LGB hasn’t relocated the three AA slots yet ?

WN adding LGB-TUS nonstop service is a possibility if WN gets extra LGB slots with TUS being one of the top markets traveled to from Greater Los Angeles on WN that doesn't currently have WN nonstop service out of LGB.

WN adding LGB-BWI nonstop service is also a possibility if WN gets extra LGB slots with BWI being a hub for WN along with BWI being one of the top markets traveled to from Greater Los Angeles on WN that doesn't currently have WN nonstop service out of LGB.

BWI/DCA/IAD/TUS also currently do not have any nonstop service out of BUR/LGB/ONT/SNA/SBD.

LAXPolaris · Sat Apr 01, 2023 2:31 am

Does anyone know what is going on with the T6/T7 customs facility? Historically, most all of UA's international arrivals have gone into T7 as a handful of the gates (74-77) and connected to a customs facility shared with T6. The exception was the really early ones, such as SYD and MEL that went to TBIT instead. I flew from HND to LAX last Sunday, and we got into gate 77, but were then bussed to TBIT to go through customs. I thought that was really strange, but assumed something weird was just going on that day and it was a one time thing. Since then, I have been looking at the flights this past week, and now pretty much every flight before 4pm or so is going into TBIT. Even the 1st of the 2 daily LHR flights have been going to TBIT, and that gets in at like 3:30pm.

Does anyone know what might be causing this? My only guess is staffing shortages with the border agents, but seems strange that they are still using T7 after 5pm or so, but the morning/early afternoon flights are going to TBIT. I assume this is also affecting Alaska, who shares the same customs facility between these two terminals.

asteriskceo · Sat Apr 01, 2023 7:03 pm

LAXPolaris wrote:
Does anyone know what is going on with the T6/T7 customs facility? Historically, most all of UA's international arrivals have gone into T7 as a handful of the gates (74-77) and connected to a customs facility shared with T6. The exception was the really early ones, such as SYD and MEL that went to TBIT instead. I flew from HND to LAX last Sunday, and we got into gate 77, but were then bussed to TBIT to go through customs. I thought that was really strange, but assumed something weird was just going on that day and it was a one time thing. Since then, I have been looking at the flights this past week, and now pretty much every flight before 4pm or so is going into TBIT. Even the 1st of the 2 daily LHR flights have been going to TBIT, and that gets in at like 3:30pm.

Does anyone know what might be causing this? My only guess is staffing shortages with the border agents, but seems strange that they are still using T7 after 5pm or so, but the morning/early afternoon flights are going to TBIT. I assume this is also affecting Alaska, who shares the same customs facility between these two terminals.

Basically the new schedule doesn’t mesh with CBP’s schedule. The bussing operation occurs when the aircraft is needed at T7 for a quicker turnaround.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LAXPolaris · Sat Apr 01, 2023 7:29 pm

asteriskceo wrote:
LAXPolaris wrote:
Does anyone know what is going on with the T6/T7 customs facility? Historically, most all of UA's international arrivals have gone into T7 as a handful of the gates (74-77) and connected to a customs facility shared with T6. The exception was the really early ones, such as SYD and MEL that went to TBIT instead. I flew from HND to LAX last Sunday, and we got into gate 77, but were then bussed to TBIT to go through customs. I thought that was really strange, but assumed something weird was just going on that day and it was a one time thing. Since then, I have been looking at the flights this past week, and now pretty much every flight before 4pm or so is going into TBIT. Even the 1st of the 2 daily LHR flights have been going to TBIT, and that gets in at like 3:30pm.

Does anyone know what might be causing this? My only guess is staffing shortages with the border agents, but seems strange that they are still using T7 after 5pm or so, but the morning/early afternoon flights are going to TBIT. I assume this is also affecting Alaska, who shares the same customs facility between these two terminals.

Basically the new schedule doesn’t mesh with CBP’s schedule. The bussing operation occurs when the aircraft is needed at T7 for a quicker turnaround.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Interesting, I assume this is just a temporary thing? Once peak summer season hits I hope they aren't doing this. There will be move international arrivals into both T6 and T7 from both UA and AS, so would hope they staff up that terminal's CBP earlier than 4pm.

stlAV8R · Tue Apr 04, 2023 1:49 pm

I believe May 18th the schedule gets better again.

N1120A · Tue Apr 04, 2023 2:12 pm

BigPlaneGuy13 wrote:
BigPlaneGuy13 wrote:
Big news, all. BUR has finally released its first renderings for the completely new build of the 14 gate terminal. There are three finalists that the public will be voting on in mid April. As a semi frequent user of this airport, I am delighted by all three choices.

https://elevatebur.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Updated_Preliminary-Design-Concepts_ElevateBUR.pdf

Upon further review, I think 1 and 2 are the best. 3 is bland. 2 looks like the SoFi stadium architecture which would be interesting. What I love about 1 is the warm tones and the wood. What I love about all the options is the exaggerated ceiling heights. Much much needed. A bit surprised to see that the airport will still refrain from building jet bridges.

Having ramp boarding was one of the conditions of building a new terminal to start with.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net