RetiredSFOATC

Having been involved in planning for many of these disruptions "back in the day" I can assure you that these things are not taken lightly by anyone. The FAA used to have sort of a "get-used-to-it" attitude, and to a degree it still does, but since the 1980s, there was a definite shift to stakeholder input. That largely came from congressional inquiries into how/why something bad happened that cost the users money and some not-so-fun aftermath dialogue. Now, there are lots of conversations and planning meetings, etc. for these kinds of things. All that said, this is an airport operator (City/County of SF) call, and everyone else, including the FAA, has to make it work. But, again, there is lots of conversation and exchange about it ahead of time.

RetiredSFOATC

The airport usually chooses September as the least impactful time of year for major work. The summer travel season is over, the spring and summer northwesterlies are calmer, and -hopefully- it's before the winter weather kicks in. I have seen it all go wrong though during these projects - and SFO operating on only one runway is, in a word, ugly. There are some things that even the FAA can't control.

chipmaster

Yes the airport must at somepoint make a decision and do something to take capacity offline. I work in a business that factory runs 7x24 all days but there are times one take the main software or power down but we plan everything around that.

If the airport decided to that capacity is going down, then FAA is in the best position to plan for how many takeoffs and landings are realistic then force a capacity cut. To let all planes come as usually and stack them means all along the west coast delays will mount as likely international and east coast incoming get priority and everything backs up. Those outbound that have connects will possibly miss connnects causing all sorts of un-predictable collateral fall out. Seems interesting that FAA, city and airlines all prefer the random chaos that will result from letting it go with a known bottle neck than force a more controlled capacity cut. Pretty much means no guts IMHO at the leadership level everywhere.

RetiredSFOATC

I can understand how it might seem that way. And taking major capacity offline isn't good in any business, but as you (@chipmaster) point out, it has to be done occasionally. What I *can* assure you is that as nasty as this runway closure seems, it is HIGHLY planned for, along with a number of contingencies, and all the stakeholders (airlines, etc.) are involved in the planning. FAA/ATC will have traffic management programs in place to avoid chaos on that (arrival) front, but if the individual airlines don't adjust their capacity/schedules to match the airport's, then it's on them. The difference between this and a significant weather event is that they have been talking about this for months, working with the users to be sure that everyone understands the capacity reductions, and then, the airlines who are paying attention will adjust their schedules -including allowing for connecting pax- well in advance. It doesn't mean that ALL flights will be delayed, or everyone will feel the pain, and I think there is usually plenty of leadership working on this - it's not their first rodeo.

enzian

RetiredSFOATC

Well, you won't like this (IOW it won't help) but I'd say you have about a 55-45 chance that it will be open on time. There are so many unknowns - like weather over the course of the closure - that it's almost impossible to be spot on with these predictions. But, I think you have a slight nod in your favor, as they usually do build in some cushion to the schedule to allow for some unforeseen issues. If it helps, by that time in the closure calendar, they will have gotten about as efficient and practiced with the handicapped operation as possible, so it should go as smoothly as it can, even if it doesn't open on time. And you can certainly watch that flight over the course of the closure to see how it performs as the 27th approaches. To be on the safe side, I wouldn't plan anything important around scheduled arrival time on the 27th.

Kacee

I think they finished the runway work early when they did a less substantial overhaul of 28L in 2017. Relatively speaking, SFO is a pretty well run airport.

Legend717

I tend to agree, but be that as it may, I've just rebooked my itinerary (at my own expense, thanks a lot AS) to connect via LAX.
Which I'm bummed about, because the SFO-JFK was on a 321neo, while the LAX-JFK flight is on a... 738. Waaah-waaaaaaaaaaah.
But, on the bright side, the AS crews seem to be light years ahead of the VX ones in friendliness. Granted, you miss out on snob appeal, but... not my thing.

I really wish they'd done what UA and AA did, I'd happily have rebooked for free. But in the end, I decided the outbound of my vacation was worth spending my own cash.

StephanP37

s0ssos

Could I ask how you get Admirals Club access at SFO because you list AS status?

NoLaGent

An AS ticketed passenger would have to be an AC member or buy a day pass for the SFO AC.

s0ssos

I know, cause it is excluded from Alaska's lounge club. Just wondering if StephanP37 had some trick.

NoLaGent

I would love to know that one as well, but I don't think it exists. I've enjoyed the CX lounge on occasion, but I'm definitely looking forward to the new lounge in T2 next year.

Flying for Fun

Perhaps, like me, he has a Citi Executive CC with an AC membership. I can use it at all Alaska Lounges and all Admirals Clubs as well as AA's partner lounges. The Latam VIP lounge in SCL is spectacular. I use the SFO AC everytime I am there. Nice to have a shower before heading into the city especially on an early arrival.

James.

RetiredSFOATC

OK, another long answer.... sorry. Generally, if everything else is cooperating (weather, etc.), and only 28L is closed, domestic departures (the majority of which would use runways 01L and R) should not be having to wait too long. But I got some new information today that I did not see in the original press release from the airport. Over the course of the 20-day closure of 28L, runways 01L and R will each be closed as well, for ten days each (in succession). So basically, two of the airport’s four runways will be closed over the course of the 20 days. That will sting – from the departure aspect now, as well as the arrivals.

If there is (bad) weather, then that throws much of the intensive planning out the window. The planning relied heavily on the historical meterologic data that September is one of the least-impacted weather months in the Bay Area. September is also after the heaviest part of the busy summer travel season (SFO just came off of a record-setting August for aircraft operations).

Years ago, when fuel became really expensive and it was very counterproductive to have aircraft stacked up on the taxiway waiting for departure, a procedure called "gatehold" became more widely used, and I am sure there will be quite a bit of those procedures in use during the closures. Basically when gatehold is in effect, the controllers in the tower create a *virtual* cue for departures so that the aircraft await their turn while still in the gate, hopefully better managing the cues of aircraft at the runway(s). So you might not be stuck in line on the taxiway, but you might instead be stuck sitting on the aircraft at the gate... I suppose that's more of a semantic difference, if the issue is being strapped into your seat and not going anywhere.

If I were flying through SFO during this time (fortunately I’m not!), I would be checking my flight’s history every day to see how they have been coping, and how my flight is performing. I expect there will be planned diversions to other airports and passengers bussed to/from SFO. IMHO, that could beat the aircraft traffic jam at SFO itself in terms of elapsed time (we'll save the debate about bay area freeway traffic for later).

As the airport says though, the best strategy will be to try to get in or out of SFO before 9:00am if you have to go through there.