New LAX Plan
Jul 5, 2002 | 9:51 am
#2
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 89
Looks like the plan will be a hard sell. Though I agree with the changes (increase security and reduce in-Airport roadway congestion by moving check-in outside the terminal area and using mass transit within the airport) this will be lots of money for no increase in gates and a more time-consuming travel experience.
Jul 7, 2002 | 3:59 am
#3
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: LAX (Temporarily in ORD)
Posts: 591
What is the connection to increased security that I've been hearing about? I've heard that it would have prevented a 7/4 type shooting, but I think it would have just moved the shooting from the Bradley Terminal to the new passenger check-in facility. Are there aspects of this new plan that are more secure?
cnk
cnk
Jul 8, 2002 | 10:06 am
#4
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN A-list preferred, United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 22,860
Precisely. The primary hazards are car bombs and human bombs. Their targets are large crowds. Having passenger drop-off in one place is therefore inherently less safe than having it in several places. Thus the current configuration is actually safer. Or at least it will be once they stop the hair-trigger evacuations of terminals which create huge crowds right next to the roadway.
Jul 8, 2002 | 9:36 pm
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Nashville -Past DL Plat, FO, WN-CP, various hotel programs
Programs: DL-MM, AA, SW w/companion,HiltonDiamond, Hyatt PLat, IHF Plat, Miles and Points Seeker
Posts: 11,405
It is sad that all of this is being driven by emotion and reaction, instead of basic management. As the last poster indicates, the proposal is to put more people in one place vs. spreading them out.
In the end the REAL RESULT is to make flying more of a hassle. Logic would be a welcome entry in this whole thing.
Jul 8, 2002 | 9:38 pm
#6
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Nashville -Past DL Plat, FO, WN-CP, various hotel programs
Programs: DL-MM, AA, SW w/companion,HiltonDiamond, Hyatt PLat, IHF Plat, Miles and Points Seeker
Posts: 11,405
And another thing.
Many have mentioned Narita airport in Tokyo as one that has such great security. Yes, they do ask to see your passport when you enter the grounds.
So what? They do not check your bags, so a nut can still bring things in. And to be honest, the subway system provides much more opportunity than an airport.
Jul 9, 2002 | 2:17 pm
#7
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: LAX (Temporarily in ORD)
Posts: 591
Would the new LAX be able to react to evacuations better?
If somebody ran up the down escalator or got past security without being screened, perhaps it would be easier to evacuate. If it's noticed quickly, the tram could be shut down, keeping the terminals from being evacuated.
On the other hand, if it's not noticed quickly, then all terminals would need to be evacuated. And where do you evacuate them to? If all the screening equipment is located at the new facility, they'd all have to take the tram back out.
cnk
If somebody ran up the down escalator or got past security without being screened, perhaps it would be easier to evacuate. If it's noticed quickly, the tram could be shut down, keeping the terminals from being evacuated.
On the other hand, if it's not noticed quickly, then all terminals would need to be evacuated. And where do you evacuate them to? If all the screening equipment is located at the new facility, they'd all have to take the tram back out.
cnk
Jul 9, 2002 | 4:08 pm
#8
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN A-list preferred, United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 22,860
The tram itself is a target for the car- or self-bombers, giving terrorists a mile-long route to attack. The more you look at the new plan, the more you realize that if there is a solution (doubtful at best) this is definitely not it. The plan accomplishes little beyond inconveniencing passengers, and probably makes security worse. In fact, just the newness of the airport after the change makes it a more attractive target, as in: "Look, we can bomb even your newest and best-secured airport." No thanks.
Jul 9, 2002 | 8:42 pm
#9
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN A-list preferred, United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 22,860
I was able to make the points in my preceding post to the KFI (AM 640) radio audience on the John and Ken show this evening. The hosts did a superb clear-eyed evaluation of the plan.
Jul 9, 2002 | 10:14 pm
#10
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: LAX (Temporarily in ORD)
Posts: 591
Sorry I missed that, nsx.
Does anybody know where to get detailed information about the new airport plan? lawa.org has a long .pdf report in the publication section of http://www.laxmasterplan.org, but it's an early report on the options being considered, not a final report on the actual plan released on July 2.
cnk
Does anybody know where to get detailed information about the new airport plan? lawa.org has a long .pdf report in the publication section of http://www.laxmasterplan.org, but it's an early report on the options being considered, not a final report on the actual plan released on July 2.
cnk