Alaska Airlines Mileage Plan - Empty A concourse gates at SEA

Sorry if this is the wrong forum, but since it could possibly effect AS...
move as necessary :-).

Anyone know what the Port of Seattle is going to do with the 3 freed up A gates (A12,A13,A14) at Seatac now that Delta has consolidated at the S gates. They look to be collecting dust :-). I'm sure the restaurant located near A14 isn't very happy with the loss of passengers in their area. Is AS interested or no?

Highly unlikely, in my opinion. Those A gates are about as far away from AS' current ops as you could possibly be at SEA.

Hawaiian Airlines will be moving to the end of the A Concourse in November.

I would guess there's zero chance that AS would be interested. Those are literally, the furthest gates from N/C/D. The purpose of AS consolidating into C/N and reducing D usage was to reduce potential transit times for connections. And with reduced schedules, adding any gates, let alone at the end of A, probably won't happen.

Hawaiian Airlines will be moving to the end of the A Concourse in November.

Who get B5 and B7?

The purpose of AS consolidating into C/N and reducing D usage was to reduce potential transit times for connections.LOL yes because N is so much closer than D :p:confused::rolleyes::D thanks AS for looking out for us. And making fast connections with AS new partner DL is oh so fun working up a sweat as you double time all the way to S gates

LOL yes because N is so much closer than D :p:confused::rolleyes::D thanks AS for looking out for us. And making fast connections with AS new partner DL is oh so fun working up a sweat as you double time all the way to S gates

Word has it that AS may be vacating most of D in favor of N. Connections between C and N are actually pretty easy.

I don't think the connection to S is really all that bad with the trains. Just make sure you give yourself 15 minutes or so.

I'm sure it's been mentioned before, but as a Board Room member, I really don't like the N Gates:(

I'm sure it's been mentioned before, but as a Board Room member, I really don't like the N Gates:(

You will once there's a BR over there :D

You will once there's a BR over there :D

Oh yes... this sounds like quite the project when it comes time... refused to use the UA dungeon of a RCC there... going to be building on the roof ^^

Oh, and why N vs. A, AS wants to expand from SEA long-term and the N gates are apparently the only gates that can be expanded (physically) outward... making a bigger satellite terminal...

As reported too, AS is working on moving terminals in LAX and that will yield a new BR as well :cool:

American has been using the far end A gates.

The whole A concourse project is looking more and more like a boondoggle. Both club spaces in the mezzanine, once occupied by AAdmirals Club and DL CRC, stand empty and unleased. DL is pulling out, AS is not interested, AA is hardly a major player at SEA. The A gates are a hell of a long walk from anything else at the airport, and IMO not desirable by any airline that's not occupying south-side check-in desks on the landside. (Can you imagine sending passengers on the hike from the AS landside bag-check desks to gate A14? Tell them to pack a lunch.)

The A gates were hugely expensive, and they're turning out to be the LCC district (VX, F9, B6) plus a handful of AA and foreign-carrier ops in the wee hours... what a shame. VX + F9 + B6 add up to about eight departures a day, I think. The concessionaires must be beside themselves, knowing what the Port has been renting that space for (crazy rent demands by the Port are why the AA and DL club spaces were vacated).

Word has it that AS may be vacating most of D in favor of N. Connections between C and N are actually pretty easy.

I don't think the connection to S is really all that bad with the trains. Just make sure you give yourself 15 minutes or so.

I strongly diusagree that N is "not bad". It blows my mind that AS has disregarded the convenience of their pax

First, as it can take a good 10 mins extra to get to N gaves vs even the furthest C or D gates, I have to plan get to the airport at least 10 minutes earlier for every flight, becuase even if the flight is schedulked to leave from C, I've had gate changes to N between setting off from Lynnwood and getting to the airport.

Second, there is no BR at N. I have been on the fence about BR membership for the last couple of years; using N vs D gates keeps me firmly on the "not buying BR" side of the fence.

Third, although mainline to mainline connections are not much worse to than than end of C to end of D, mainline to Horizon connections are a heck of a lot worse when N is involved.

All in - a huge :td: and :mad: to AS for screwing pax with this N-gate switch.

I strongly diusagree that N is "not bad". It blows my mind that AS has disregarded the convenience of their pax

First, as it can take a good 10 mins extra to get to N gaves vs even the furthest C or D gates, I have to plan get to the airport at least 10 minutes earlier for every flight, becuase even if the flight is schedulked to leave from C, I've had gate changes to N between setting off from Lynnwood and getting to the airport.


I'd take the C/N configuration with the train over a connection ORD, DFW or ATL...even going from C2 over to N, is going to be much quicker than a typical connection at any of those airports.

It blows my mind that AS has disregarded the convenience of their pax

I, for one, sure appreciate the "convenience" of an airline that's expanding their service and has to adjust things accordingly by adding gate space that will improve their operations and destinations served nonstop. A tram ride isn't a bad price to pay for that.

You will once there's a BR over there :D

I may have missed a thread, but is it confirmed a BR will be put there? I can't say it's too bad with all my PDX QX connections through SEA, but it is a pain if I am in the current BR and need to lug myself over to N or S.

Recently, I arrived at 11pm on US and the plane parked at A11 (which is quite a hike even with moving sidewalks -- good exercise though).

I believe that we speculated in an old thread that *A might move to the A concourse with the RCC and PC in the old AC and CR locations (or possibly a joint *A club location). US could use A1 and A2. CO could use A3, A4, A5, and A6. UA could use A7-A14.

Recently, I arrived at 11pm on US and the plane parked at A11 (which is quite a hike even with moving sidewalks -- good exercise though).

I believe that we speculated in an old thread that *A might move to the A concourse with the RCC and PC in the old AC and CR locations (or possibly a joint *A club location). US could use A1 and A2. CO could use A3, A4, A5, and A6. UA could use A7-A14.

If the gates were co-located there would be no need for multiple clubs under the current lounge reciprocity between CO/UA/US. Also, would CO really need 4 gates? I would think they could get by with three and perhaps have an agreement with UA to share a 4th in case of IRROPS.

I may have missed a thread, but is it confirmed a BR will be put there? I can't say it's too bad with all my PDX QX connections through SEA, but it is a pain if I am in the current BR and need to lug myself over to N or S.

There will be eventually...

Before the fuel price saga it was almost a go to remodel the old AAdmirals Club (apparently above the C gates)... but when fuel spiked and travel dropped... other fish to fry...

Here's what I posted at the ANC MVPG Lunch in October:

BR questions... Expanded Hours... potentially opening a new one in C in SEA too...

3 years ago did a test... not justified - liquor costs went thru the roof! (laughing)
If we do another test it will be in the summer... got feedback in PDX BR... tested an hour earlier, and it stuck...
SEA room most used 35-40K a month in that room... maybe we can add furniture- didn't work well...
Started looking at converting space at the end of C upstairs into a second room... now that were loooking at our growth... will be opening

United room in basement really dumb

Flagship room in N concourse on top ^

only place in SeaTac that can grow... can expand it out and add more gates...


I was typing away furiously so it wasn't as clear as it could have been... During the Q&A session an MVPG wanted to know if longer hours could be had in the BR's... including putting one in the C gates.

Reply to hours was that in ANC the liquor costs went thru the roof with extra hours... lots of slope workers IIRC... If they were to test this again, it would be during the peak demand of summer months...

AS had feedback that the ANC redeye to PDX got in before the BR was open, so they extended the hours of the PDX BR to earlier in the morning, and it has stuck (Nice improvement- think this was a year or two ago)

The Seattle Boardroom is used the most, with 35,000-40,000 visits a month! As I mentioned above, looked into C gates BR... but due to growth patterns, and potential of N Concourse, looking at building a Flagship Boardroom on the roof of the N gates... United's basement club is really a dump, so not an option... just need to build up. [That was the basic jest of that conversation... but no real dates set]

The more pressing issue is AS' move from T3 to IIRC T6 at LAX, and that will involve a new club as well (and will be completed before any N gates Boredroom)...

beckoa thank you for the information.

I, for one, love the new PDX hours, helps all my East Coast runs that fly out at 6 ish and I really don't love going to the old NWA lounge. The staff in the AS BR are far superior.

I am glad to see that they are taking time to do what makes the most sense when looking at all the places they are expanding. I'll be renewing my BR membership another year and it's nice to see that there are at least ideas around where to prioritize and put different ideas in play.

I can believe the traffic in the SEA BR myself. Commute hours make it hard to find a seat anyway. A flagship BR would be really neat and combat any ideas VX or another carrier would have (although I doubt they would) on building something nifty in SEA. I assume SEA will still be trying to capture more Int'l flights anyway.

I also didn't know we could use the UA room in SEA. I know it's been thrown around to start a sticky on the BR, but with all the changes with CO and the people who may want to get in with those of us with access, maybe it's the right time.

beckoa thank you for the information.

I, for one, love the new PDX hours, helps all my East Coast runs that fly out at 6 ish and I really don't love going to the old NWA lounge. The staff in the AS BR are far superior.

I am glad to see that they are taking time to do what makes the most sense when looking at all the places they are expanding. I'll be renewing my BR membership another year and it's nice to see that there are at least ideas around where to prioritize and put different ideas in play.

I can believe the traffic in the SEA BR myself. Commute hours make it hard to find a seat anyway. A flagship BR would be really neat and combat any ideas VX or another carrier would have (although I doubt they would) on building something nifty in SEA. I assume SEA will still be trying to capture more Int'l flights anyway.

I also didn't know we could use the UA room in SEA. I know it's been thrown around to start a sticky on the BR, but with all the changes with CO and the people who may want to get in with those of us with access, maybe it's the right time. <emphasis mine>

No, was referring to how AS called the UA RCC a dump in the N gates, and that they are planning on making a much nicer lounge on the roof, so there is plenty of room and nice lighting...

As far as a sticky... I think it was both a critical mass of not too many AS posters, and enough with BR memberships... so we could try it out...

If the gates were co-located there would be no need for multiple clubs under the current lounge reciprocity between CO/UA/US. Also, would CO really need 4 gates? I would think they could get by with three and perhaps have an agreement with UA to share a 4th in case of IRROPS.

That's why I said "possibly a joint *A club"! Furthermore, CO could probably get by with 2 gates most of the time. UA probably doesn't need 8 gates at this point, either. I was just quickly trying to remember the thread that we had earlier. Do FT'ers need to nitpick everything that is stated???
:td::td::td:

I strongly diusagree that N is "not bad". It blows my mind that AS has disregarded the convenience of their pax

First, as it can take a good 10 mins extra to get to N gaves vs even the furthest C or D gates, I have to plan get to the airport at least 10 minutes earlier for every flight, becuase even if the flight is schedulked to leave from C, I've had gate changes to N between setting off from Lynnwood and getting to the airport....

All in - a huge :td: and :mad: to AS for screwing pax with this N-gate switch.

I'd take the C/N configuration with the train over a connection ORD, DFW or ATL...even going from C2 over to N, is going to be much quicker than a typical connection at any of those airports.

Disagree with dgwright99 and agree with rybob1.

I spent 10 hours in SEA in September trying to fly standby to the East Coast. I must have tried five or six different flights (to EWR, BOS, and DCA). Some of the flights were timed very closely together, and the WORST ones to bounce between were C and D. I broke out in a sweat a couple of times running back and forth between C and D.

Conversely, the last "connection" was the most convenient. I was listed for a DCA flight out of C11 and was waiting there for the standbys to clear. At the last minute (literally), I opted to change for a BOS flight leaving at about the same time out of N7. Had the flight been in D, there's no way I would have made it. But transiting to N was super easy--I bounced down the escalator, hopped on a train 30 seconds later, and arrived at N about two minutes after that. Without even running, I made it from C11 to N7 in literally 5 minutes. It would have taken at least 10 at a good-paced jog to get down to D11, and I would have been one of those sweat-covered passengers that FTers love to complain about sitting next to. ;)

I'll take C and N over D ANY day of the week. And getting to N is extremely easy for SEA O&D traffic as well: just clear D concourse security and pop down the escalators immediately adjacent. You'll be at N within 5 minutes of clearing security.

Disagree with dgwright99 and agree with rybob1.

I was told they (Alaska or the airport) did a study and this configuration saves time on average as you pointed out. I don't like it though when I have a close connection and have to wait for the train. That's just a mental thing, needing to get somewhere quickly and just standing there doing nothing.

I'd take the C/N configuration with the train over a connection ORD, DFW or ATL...even going from C2 over to N, is going to be much quicker than a typical connection at any of those airports.

It's also better than a connection from T5 to T1 at LHR or between LAX and LGB or LGA and EWR, but what has that to do with anything ?

It's also a whole lot better than if AS decided to relocate entirely to the N and S terminals.

Considering how much worse it might possibly be does nothing to mitigate or excuse a bad decision.

I was told they (Alaska or the airport) did a study and this configuration saves time on average as you pointed out. I don't like it though when I have a close connection and have to wait for the train. That's just a mental thing, needing to get somewhere quickly and just standing there doing nothing.

I agree, and I think that's most people's problem using the train (it's mine too). Even though it can be quicker, I have some mental block against taking it. That, and the lack of a BR in N, of course.

Considering how much worse it might possibly be does nothing to mitigate or excuse a bad decision.

I don't see how moving to the only terminal where you can expand your gate space footprint is a bad decision for an airline that's expanded their presence in their hub by a lot in the past 10 years. It may be less convenient for you to take a tram, but your convenience isn't the only factor here (and setting aside that other people disagree on the fact that it's less convenient to go to N- I myself find it to be pretty much a wash, and I am also someone who is pretty good at not spending extra time in SEA if I can avoid it). There's also the convenience factor of an airline with a lot of nonstops out of SEA.

AS can't expand staying at C/D. They can if they move D operations to N.

Of course, you could always fly an airline out of A or B concourse to protest the injustice of AS moving to where it makes sense for their operations planning down the road, even if it forces you to a tram. You don't mind flying WN, right?

I was told they (Alaska or the airport) did a study and this configuration saves time on average as you pointed out. I don't like it though when I have a close connection and have to wait for the train. That's just a mental thing, needing to get somewhere quickly and just standing there doing nothing.

Seatac will also be adding a 3rd train. Trains come by about every 2 and a half minutes currently. That number will be between 1 and 1 min 30 seconds with the new train from what I've been told.

I feel like this is deja vu because we've buried this discussion quite a few times in other threads about the impending D to N move. I'll summarize for those that missed it the last few times.

D - Absolutely worst bagwell setup. The ramp up into the bagwell is inclined. Pushing heavy bag carts uphill to get them set up to load outbound bags is a huge pain in the butt. When it's slick...good luck.

D - The most crowded gate space ever. D1-D4 see the majority of our ground damage and aircraft damage incidents because of how tight of a space it is there. Watch a turn at D1 sometime. The catering truck drivers should be given a gold medal for the maneuver they have to do to get in there. A/C damage can cost thousands of dollars, and in some cases, single incidents have costed over $100,000. That goes straight to the bottom line and negatively affects everyone. Even the pax.

D - Less parking spaces than we have equipment for. We have a serious space problem in D like I've mentioned. It is a big pain to orchestrate all that movement and parking.

D - New 737NGs = Longer wingspan = Longer fuselage = less space than before. In the days of only MDs, 737-400s and 737-200s, D was fine. I don't know if anyone remembers but we had to reconfigure a lot of gates to fit the 737NGs. In terms of flexibility in our operation, having to block some gates because planes can't fit there is highly inefficient and just plain silly.

Now for N..

N - The only building that can be expanded like others have said.

N - An amazing bagwell that has 10 times the space the D bagwell. The Port is going to begin building a conveyor from the Alaska ticket counter all the way to the N bagwell. So your bags will have a less likely chance of being lost in transition.

N - Space is plentiful on the ramp. Every gate on N has tons of space for parking and free movement. The N gates are also closer to the runway. It has been proven that taxi times from the N gates are on average 5 or more minutes less than from D gates. You have to remember, D gates aren't that much farther away...but how many times can you think of your flight getting stuck in the alleyway while another plane pushes off of C or N? I know it's happened a lot to flights I've been on. Sometimes we can be sitting there for an extra 10 minutes waiting for it to clear out.

N - As others have mentioned...it has been tested multiple times. The connecting times between N and C gates is significantly less than C-D. I got off a flight once in N and overheard 2 guys complaining their next flight was closing from a C gate in 10 minutes. They were sure they weren't going to make it. So they even leisurely walked to the train. Guess what? They still made it. And when you think about it, connecting from C to C or N to N is so much easier than even from D to D. If you got off D11 you are so far away from D1. In the C and N gates that just doesn't happen.

N - Having N allows us to do the Future Gate Experience. You probably already have seen it at the East end of the N gates. Where all the counters for a lot of gates are cluttered together. We will end up doing that all over N and all over C. You can't do that on D. There are few gates in close proximity to each other.

Sure you can debate whether or not you think this is benefiting you. If you live in SEA and your flight leaves out of D1 then of course it is worse off. But you have to think from an operational standpoint, and a huge population of other passengers, this is a better deal. I know SEA pax are a huge portion of our fliers, but so are connecting pax. And a lot of the time connecting pax are at the mercy of on time arrivals whereas local pax can plan ahead and get there early. The new gate setups will allow us to be more efficient inside the terminal as well as outside.

So beyond just what you see from a pax standpoint there are so many other reasons why this makes sense operationally. Unfortunately, those differences are less noticeable to a pax. Because when your flight is on time and your bag makes it there with you, or you make your connecting flight in time, you barely notice. It's when things go bad that you take note. So we are hoping that you notice things a lot less pretty soon here.

BUT THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!


sorry, I didn't have anything to contribute but I felt this thread lacked sufficient whining about silly things :)

My Gosh! It sounds like "D" is the ugly stepchild of SEA-TAC!!:p

By all means, AS should move completely to "N" and let some poor airline with only a few flights at SEA be placed at "D".

All joking aside, it does sound like "D" has too many gates in a too small space. Perhaps moving AS to "N" would help substantially. Then, the POS could reconfigure "D" to be more palatable for other carriers (i.e. remove a couple of the gates).

402Fanatic

Thanks for the comprehensive rundown... with a couple o' chuckles ;)

Nice to see SEA is adding another train... IIRC there has been increased frequency in the past...

the Future Gate Experience

Sweet. Are you gonna sell tickets to the Future Gate Experience? :D

(All joking aside, I did notice this last time I passed through SEA, and it works fine, but I'm not sure exactly how it's an improvement. Does it allow additional flexibility or something? It's not a massive overhaul like Airport Of The Future was.

(Why is it that AS airport initiatives all sound like Epcot attractions? ;))

Also, from a passenger connecting standpoint (disregarding the actual AS operations side of it), I'd be fine with D if they rerouted the tram and added a stop at the end of D. Then D would be even more convenient than N. But as it is now, D--especially the end of D--is just too dang far from everything else.

FWIW, A could use a tram stop down at the end there. Of course, we'll have to wait and see who ends up using it...

I just wish that they would retrofit moving sidewalks from the threshold of B to the "bend" in the middle of A.

Sweet. Are you gonna sell tickets to the Future Gate Experience? :D

(All joking aside, I did notice this last time I passed through SEA, and it works fine, but I'm not sure exactly how it's an improvement. Does it allow additional flexibility or something? It's not a massive overhaul like Airport Of The Future was.

(Why is it that AS airport initiatives all sound like Epcot attractions? ;))


Haha good observation.

There are a few reasons for the new setup. On one hand it increases productivity because you need less agents to staff all the gates. You only need an agent at each gate at the time of boarding. The rest of the time they aren't needed. If you time departures around those gates, you can have less agents do the same amount of work as before.

On the other hand, you essentially create a service center in addition to a place for people to go to ask specific questions about their flight. So instead of running around to the nearest agent, you just head to that counter. The agents who work that desk will work specific flights, but they also can assist extra customers and help each other out much more quickly. If a customer needs something and there is a line at their gate, they'd have to run over to the next gate and find someone without this system. Here though, you have someone 2 steps away. I think this helps from a productivity standpoint too because now you have multiple agents tackling issues and the fact that they can overhear each other and delegate more effectively with a large group helps.

That's just my take from what I've heard and my observations so far.

There are a few reasons for the new setup. On one hand it increases productivity because you need less agents to staff all the gates. You only need an agent at each gate at the time of boarding. The rest of the time they aren't needed. If you time departures around those gates, you can have less agents do the same amount of work as before.

On the other hand, you essentially create a service center in addition to a place for people to go to ask specific questions about their flight. So instead of running around to the nearest agent, you just head to that counter. The agents who work that desk will work specific flights, but they also can assist extra customers and help each other out much more quickly. If a customer needs something and there is a line at their gate, they'd have to run over to the next gate and find someone without this system. Here though, you have someone 2 steps away. I think this helps from a productivity standpoint too because now you have multiple agents tackling issues and the fact that they can overhear each other and delegate more effectively with a large group helps.

Ah, OK. I see.

Under the Old-Town Gate Experience currently implemented everywhere else, it seems like there would be three agents working a flight: two at the counter (handling seating assignments, upgrades, standby lists, etc.--it's a pretty hectic, stressful job, based on what I've read in this thread (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-mileage-plus/606224-operational-upgrades-gate-agents-perspective.html)!) and one at the door to the jetway. (On some flights, I only see one person working the counter, so I'm not sure what the criteria for staffing a flight.)

So, this Future Gate Experience thing seems like it might reduce the number of people needed to work a flight, since the load can be shared with other agents who aren't busy. But will it actually work? When I was at N in September, the stantions with cordoned-off lines for each gate in front of the consolidated counter were only wide enough for a single-file line in front of a single agent, so it seems like you won't be able to have more than one person work a flight. Plus, if four flights are going out at once, there's no way you can cram 8 people behind the consolidated counter, and I wouldn't expect the GAs to have to work more than one flight at once (working a single flight is stressful enough, much less tabbing back and forth between multiple flights!)

Also, it seems to work in corners or ends of concourses (like the end of N, where it is implemented now) much better than in long, linear concourses. In linear concourses, having a consolidated counter for more than two gates is difficult, since, by necessity, the gates would be so far apart that the counter may end up very far from the door to the jetway (and may even be separated by restaurants, gift shops, etc.!). It works well at the end of N and would work well at the end of C (and D, if AS weren't moving out of there) in SEA, the end of B and C in ANC (except that AS won't be occupying B, and I'm not sure if DL/NW will be moving out of the end of C and giving C8 to AS), and the round end of T3 at LAX (except that AS is moving out of there, too). Perhaps the Future Gate Experience needs to be set up to coincide with redeveloping airport concourses to a series of round satellite hubs (kind of like LAX's T3 was originally laid out before they built the above-ground connection to the terminal and in-filled it with gates).

It'll be interesting to see how it develops. One thing: AS needs to come up with a new look for the Future Gate Experience (kind of like how they did with the Airport of the Future). Right now, it kind of looks cheeseball, like they just took some counters and smashed them together (which is what they did). It looks very temporary (like the area is under construction) and can be confusing to people who are used to looking for a counter near the gate itself.

One thing: AS needs to come up with a new look for the Future Gate Experience (kind of like how they did with the Airport of the Future). Right now, it kind of looks cheeseball, like they just took some counters and smashed them together (which is what they did). It looks very temporary (like the area is under construction) and can be confusing to people who are used to looking for a counter near the gate itself.Probably because the "Future Gate Experience" hasn't happened yet.

Under the Old-Town Gate Experience currently implemented everywhere else, it seems like there would be three agents working a flight: two at the counter (handling seating assignments, upgrades, standby lists, etc...)Two agents is the norm: one at the counter, one at the door. Sometimes only one depending upon how full the flight is.

Probably because the "Future Gate Experience" hasn't happened yet.

It has at some of the N gates like N7- the podiums where standby happens are all concentrated at the east side of N for a bunch of gates, and there's just an overhead monitor at each individual gate.

FWIW, I was scheduled in at 5PM and out at 5:35 (boarding time) on a connection between Oakland and Redmond last week. We landed at N3 and took off from C2D. Not only did I easily make the connection, I also spent 15 minutes in the BR between flights. I agree with other posters who find the new gate configuration to be a positive, not a negative. In my mind there was nothing worse than the far D gates - not near anything, and few amenities.

Dave

Two agents is the norm: one at the counter, one at the door. Sometimes only one depending upon how full the flight is.
Really? There were three working the (oversold) SEA-EWR flight at D7 on 9/10/09--two at the podium and one at the door. Three were also working SEA-DCA at C11 the same day (again, two at the podium and one at the door). ANC-SEA had 2.5--one at the door, one working the counter on flight 108 full-time, and another one that kept going on-board the aircraft to do head-counts (they were trying to clear the standby list but were having issues with figuring out how many open seats they had for the 35 people on the standby list).

It has at some of the N gates like N7- the podiums where standby happens are all concentrated at the east side of N for a bunch of gates, and there's just an overhead monitor at each individual gate.That doesn't sound particularly futuristic.

That's because AS hasn't designed the Skynet robot overlords to go with the Future Gate Experience yet. :p

Haha good observation.

On the other hand, you essentially create a service center in addition to a place for people to go to ask specific questions about their flight. So instead of running around to the nearest agent, you just head to that counter. The agents who work that desk will work specific flights, but they also can assist extra customers and help each other out much more quickly. If a customer needs something and there is a line at their gate, they'd have to run over to the next gate and find someone without this system. Here though, you have someone 2 steps away. I think this helps from a productivity standpoint too because now you have multiple agents tackling issues and the fact that they can overhear each other and delegate more effectively with a large group helps.


I think this is a better customer experience too, when I am in MSP or ATL and try to go to a DL or UA agent that is not specifically for a flight they are managing, they certainly do not help me at all. AS on the other hand, never been a problem. I certainly don't go to a gate that is mid boarding process, but when I see that there are few people or it just closed, why can't they just take a moment? So perhaps this is a win for efficiency and a win for us.

Don't forget, free refills on soft drinks in the N Terminal...

So with the move from D to N, and the likelihood of UA moving to B with CO, what will happen to D? Will the Port having an airline move over there? My wish would be for WN to move over there!

As for CO, I think they need a total of 5 gates. While they are not as busy during the day, they do have a few planes that RON and depart early in the morning. A few times that I have done the late night IAH-SEA, we've deplaned from S. While it would be nice to sorta make A the Star concourse, I think B is rather adequate, just as long as we can find a place to move WN!

Don't forget, free refills on soft drinks in the N Terminal...

:confused:

So with the move from D to N, and the likelihood of UA moving to B with CO, what will happen to D? Will the Port having an airline move over there? My wish would be for WN to move over there!

As for CO, I think they need a total of 5 gates. While they are not as busy during the day, they do have a few planes that RON and depart early in the morning. A few times that I have done the late night IAH-SEA, we've deplaned from S. While it would be nice to sorta make A the Star concourse, I think B is rather adequate, just as long as we can find a place to move WN!

Certainly, A or B could be the *A concourse. However, A has two empty club locations. IIRC, the Delta CR used to be on B. Did they take that room for shops/restaurants or does the space still exist? The current PC is NOT big enough for a *A lounge. In addition, *A on the A concourse has a certain ring to it...:D

Don't forget, free refills on soft drinks in the N Terminal...

:confused:

+1

Certainly, A or B could be the *A concourse. However, A has two empty club locations. IIRC, the Delta CR used to be on B. Did they take that room for shops/restaurants or does the space still exist? The current PC is NOT big enough for a *A lounge. In addition, *A on the A concourse has a certain ring to it...:D

Yeah... keep them over there ;)

Certainly, A or B could be the *A concourse. However, A has two empty club locations. IIRC, the Delta CR used to be on B. Did they take that room for shops/restaurants or does the space still exist? The current PC is NOT big enough for a *A lounge. In addition, *A on the A concourse has a certain ring to it...:D
Even though I know A is relatively new, I don't remember DL in B nor they had a CR there as well. If it was before B7, it's probably been converted into offices. The only things around B7 are the Starbucks and the Sbarro.

Yes the PC is way too small, especially during the processing of an ANC, EWR, and IAH flight departing at the same times! But those ladies are total sweethearts!

I'm just curious how the musical chairs will play out at SEA, especially since I'm there almost monthly and how CO and UA will coordinate out of SEA. Also, since AS just started IAH, I may have to see how they compare to CO.

http://www.portseattle.org/seatac/

Port has announced that Hawaiian will move arrivals and departures to concourse A. Probably will take the end ones that DL had and AA had been using on occasion since their 767s can be accommodated there.

Perhaps UA will move to B and they'll relegate WN to the awful D gate area. For awhile US moved to N to share with UA when they first joined Star...but now they're back in A. Is there no love for the ugly red-headed stepchild of the star alliance?

Whats with A9 anyway?

http://photos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs078.snc3/14535_331709925483_532240483_9723528_270370_n.jpg

http://photos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs078.snc3/14535_331709925483_532240483_9723528_270370_n.jpg

The A gates are horribly far away. I wish AS could just consolidate onto the B and C gates and let the airlines with the smaller presence use N and S.

Port has announced that Hawaiian will move arrivals and departures to concourse A. Probably will take the end ones that DL had and AA had been using on occasion since their 767s can be accommodated there.
An employee of HA posted on airliners.net that HA has already moved to Concourse A and using A10-A12 as of 01Nov.
Perhaps UA will move to B and they'll relegate WN to the awful D gate area. For awhile US moved to N to share with UA when they first joined Star...but now they're back in A. Is there no love for the ugly red-headed stepchild of the star alliance?
Yes, I would love for WN to leave B and they can populate D. If B becomes the new CO/UA concourse, then the US gates are not too far since they're at the lower A gates. While US is the red-headed stepchild, the main cooperation is between CO and UA.

The A gates are horribly far away. I wish AS could just consolidate onto the B and C gates and let the airlines with the smaller presence use N and S.

Probably not enough room in the B gates to make it worthwile... more expansion options from N...