Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Destinations > America - USA > Los Angeles
Reload this Page >

LAX T4-T5 connector tunnel (now open)

LAX T4-T5 connector tunnel (now open)

Old May 10, 2013, 12:16 pm
  #16  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
Originally Posted by wrcraig
I think the skybridge idea may be toast. There are more recent docs floating around suggesting that the connex from TBIT to the MSC may now be a tunnel that could also connect to the proposed airside peoplemover system around LAX.
Ah, I missed that. I recall reading some FAQs where LAWA responded to "Why not build a tunnel to connect the TBIT West Concourse?" with "the bridge would be cheaper than building a tunnel." Oh well, less expensive and Los Angeles airport construction are like oil and water; if there's an expensive option, LAWA will choose that one.
FWAAA is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 1:56 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Southern California/Los Angeles
Programs: Various
Posts: 2,776
-------------.
0.-
Robt760 is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 3:37 pm
  #18  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Programs: AA, WN, UA, Bonvoy, Hertz
Posts: 2,491
So, did we have any deeper discussion elsewhere about AA at T3 or is it just continues to be an old diagram with potential for US after combined operations?

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo....main/5735946/

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/us-ai...ove-t1-t3.html

Because of TBIT, there is no good way to get from T4 to T3.

Rasheed
rasheed is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 4:55 pm
  #19  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
One of the computer-generated renderings of the new T-4 to TBIT connector building shows an almost identical building on the north side of TBIT to connect it to T-3. Don't know the timeline or whether there's a realistic chance it ever gets built.
FWAAA is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 5:06 pm
  #20  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Programs: AA (PPro/3MM/Admirals Club), AS, UA, Marriott (Gold), HHonors (Gold), Accor (Plat)
Posts: 2,602
Originally Posted by FWAAA
In the wake of September 11, 2001, frequent checkpoint security "failures" resulted in the evacuation and rescreening of multiple LAX terminals even though the "failure" was at T-4 or T-5 or T-6, etc. The fear-mongers said that because of the tunnels, all connected terminals had to be re-screened.

I don't recall who, exactly, gave the order to close the tunnels but IIRC, all of the south side tunnels were locked in late 2001. In the years since, however, all of the tunnels were re-opened except for the T-4 to T-5 tunnel. With AS now in T-6, I'd vote to re-open the T-4 tunnel.
Last time I did an AA to AS connection (with tons of time), my AS bus decided to go to the AE terminal first because of some people in great danger of missing their connection (with no AE bus in sight). While it didn't make me late, it really made me want to just be able to walk over to T6 on my timeline and not be at the mercy of a bus system.
makfan is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 6:17 pm
  #21  
Moderator: American AAdvantage
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NorCal - SMF area
Programs: AA LT Plat; HH LT Diamond, Matre-plongeur des Muccis
Posts: 62,948
Moved to the proper destination forum for this discussion.

JDiver
senior moderator
JDiver is offline  
Old May 11, 2013, 11:38 am
  #22  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Programs: Alaska FF
Posts: 302
Originally Posted by wrcraig
I may have jumped the gun on assuming the T4-T5 tunnel would reopen. The FB post was vague, but this news release suggests that the "secure connections" to T5-T8 will (only?) be on buses via the new busport that will also be part of the T4-TBIT connector.
That is correct. Secure connections between T4 and the other terminals on south side will take place by bus. No plans to reopen the tunnel and one less reason to do so when the bus port becomes operational.

As to the bus service between T4 and the other terminals, it will be unidirectional. Only the airside bridge between T4 and TBIT will be bi-directional to facilitate international/domestic connections between T4 and TBIT. Remember as well that AA plans to move all of its international ops (and perhaps some domestic ops) to TBIT by 2014 when all the gates become operational.
LDVFlyer is offline  
Old May 15, 2013, 8:58 am
  #23  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: LAX
Programs: AA Plat, DL, AS, UA, IHG Plat
Posts: 2,391
Originally Posted by FWAAA
In the wake of September 11, 2001, frequent checkpoint security "failures" resulted in the evacuation and rescreening of multiple LAX terminals even though the "failure" was at T-4 or T-5 or T-6, etc. The fear-mongers said that because of the tunnels, all connected terminals had to be re-screened.

I don't recall who, exactly, gave the order to close the tunnels but IIRC, all of the south side tunnels were locked in late 2001. In the years since, however, all of the tunnels were re-opened except for the T-4 to T-5 tunnel. With AS now in T-6, I'd vote to re-open the T-4 tunnel.
I thought the tunnels were closed when AA renovated T4 (or was it when Delta renovated T5)? The post 9/11 closing was only temporary.

Either way, I think LAWA doesn't have any position or much say on reopening the tunnel. It is up to AA and Delta to work out their differences.
bzcat is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2013, 7:47 am
  #24  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: USA
Programs: AA Plat; HH Diamond; IHG Plat; SPG Plat;Hertz Pres Circle; Jelly of the Month Club - Marmalade Level
Posts: 167
Originally Posted by Spiff
It should never have been closed in the first place. The dolt responsible for that decision should be caned and terminated.
I was there and played a significant role in the decision. There were good reasons for it. It would appear that the problems have been addressed. And, no, I'm not saying what they were.
OrvilleWright is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2013, 8:04 am
  #25  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: USA
Programs: AA Plat; HH Diamond; IHG Plat; SPG Plat;Hertz Pres Circle; Jelly of the Month Club - Marmalade Level
Posts: 167
Originally Posted by FWAAA
In the wake of September 11, 2001, frequent checkpoint security "failures" resulted in the evacuation and rescreening of multiple LAX terminals even though the "failure" was at T-4 or T-5 or T-6, etc. The fear-mongers said that because of the tunnels, all connected terminals had to be re-screened.

I don't recall who, exactly, gave the order to close the tunnels but IIRC, all of the south side tunnels were locked in late 2001. In the years since, however, all of the tunnels were re-opened except for the T-4 to T-5 tunnel. With AS now in T-6, I'd vote to re-open the T-4 tunnel.
As I posted elsewhere, I had a significant role in the decision. There were many reasons for closing the tunnels at that time, some of which being not appropriate for discussion here. Over the years, most of the issues have been resolved to the point that the post- 9-11 decisions may no longer be relevant, supplanted by other reasons unknown to me.

I can touch briefly on one 2001-2002 problem - a security breach at T-4, under the protocols then in effect, could result in dumping and re-screening the entire South side (Terminals 4-8) under certain conditions and, in fact, that did happen more than once. Recovering from that impacted thousands of people at LAX, impacted connections across the country, took a lot of resources to resolve and was quite costly. Several solutions were brought forth that would have kept the tunnels open, but entities other than LAWA resisted them for their own reasons. That left tunnel closure as the last resort, ultimately being the only choice left and it was both imposed and accepted by default.

Last edited by OrvilleWright; Aug 9, 2013 at 8:05 am Reason: Spelling error correction.
OrvilleWright is offline  
Old Aug 11, 2013, 3:58 pm
  #26  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ONT
Programs: AGR, UA, AA
Posts: 476
However, you have the "gates of doom" between T5 and T6 already. I don't see how this is any different between T4 and T5. If you want to buy yourself more time have gates of doom on either side of the tunnel so that the far gate can be shut once sterility is breached.

On a side note, I hate the "I know why they were but I can't tell you" type responses. If you can't answer the question, then don't.
calwatch is offline  
Old Aug 11, 2013, 4:30 pm
  #27  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: USA
Programs: AA Plat; HH Diamond; IHG Plat; SPG Plat;Hertz Pres Circle; Jelly of the Month Club - Marmalade Level
Posts: 167
Originally Posted by calwatch
However, you have the "gates of doom" between T5 and T6 already. I don't see how this is any different between T4 and T5. If you want to buy yourself more time have gates of doom on either side of the tunnel so that the far gate can be shut once sterility is breached.

On a side note, I hate the "I know why they were but I can't tell you" type responses. If you can't answer the question, then don't.
Part of the problem was in actually getting the gates closed. They don't just come crashing down accompanied by a klaxon sounding. Somebody has to specifically and physically do it. A second problem was in communicating the need to close them. There were delays that resulted in "barn door closed after the horse is gone" and reluctance to adopt proposed solutions. But, those were 2001-2002 problems and may or may not account for 2013 closure.

Sorry you don't like the "I can't tell you," but I can't. And, I did answer the question, subject to some very real limitations. The answer is "There were good reasons at the time." The fact that you don't get to personally see the reasons so you can decide if they met your personal standards is immaterial.
OrvilleWright is offline  
Old Aug 11, 2013, 4:48 pm
  #28  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ONT
Programs: AGR, UA, AA
Posts: 476
Originally Posted by OrvilleWright
Part of the problem was in actually getting the gates closed. They don't just come crashing down accompanied by a klaxon sounding. Somebody has to specifically and physically do it. A second problem was in communicating the need to close them. There were delays that resulted in "barn door closed after the horse is gone" and reluctance to adopt proposed solutions. But, those were 2001-2002 problems and may or may not account for 2013 closure.

Sorry you don't like the "I can't tell you," but I can't. And, I did answer the question, subject to some very real limitations. The answer is "There were good reasons at the time." The fact that you don't get to personally see the reasons so you can decide if they met your personal standards is immaterial.
Then don't answer the question in the first place, but don't feel personally offended when someone anonymous asks for your caning when you can't answer the question. That's the point.
calwatch is offline  
Old Aug 11, 2013, 5:26 pm
  #29  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: USA
Programs: AA Plat; HH Diamond; IHG Plat; SPG Plat;Hertz Pres Circle; Jelly of the Month Club - Marmalade Level
Posts: 167
Originally Posted by calwatch
Then don't answer the question in the first place, but don't feel personally offended when someone anonymous asks for your caning when you can't answer the question. That's the point.
Have a nice day!
OrvilleWright is offline  
Old Aug 11, 2013, 11:53 pm
  #30  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend, Moderator, Information Desk, Ambassador, Alaska Airlines
Hilton Contributor BadgeIHG Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: FAI
Programs: AS MVP Gold100K, AS 1MM, Maika`i Card, AGR, HH Gold, Hertz PC, Marriott Titanium LTG, CO, 7H, BA, 8E
Posts: 42,942
This would help with xfers and lounge access

Hope something happens. Those shuttle buses are slllow at LAX. Remember T-3 to T-6
beckoa is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.