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

How does LAX even run with so much going on?

How does LAX even run with so much going on?

Old Jun 5, 17, 2:10 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Boston
Posts: 148
How does LAX even run with so much going on?

It is a hub for almost every airline in the country and is a destination for a ton international airlines. Now I'm hearing that the legacy carrriers want to invest millions and billions to expand their terminals/gate areas. How exactly is this airport going to handle a/c, pax, crew (airline and airport/ground), construction etc.

I'm guessing that tarmac and road congestion will be prevalent after all this.

And secondly how come the other LA area airports don't expand to accomodate operations of lcc's that don't carry many connecting pax such as Allegiant, Spirit, Southwest etc?
a330boston is offline  
Old Jun 5, 17, 2:49 pm
  #2  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Austin, Texas
Programs: Airline nobody. Sad!
Posts: 25,701
Originally Posted by a330boston View Post
I'm guessing that tarmac and road congestion will be prevalent after all this.
To be fair, road congestion is already quite bad around LAX.

Originally Posted by a330boston View Post
And secondly how come the other LA area airports don't expand to accomodate operations of lcc's that don't carry many connecting pax such as Allegiant, Spirit, Southwest etc?
SNA/BUR physically don't have space to expand. LGB is prohibited legally from expanding operations. ONT is seemingly too far out for many people (LAX is about 18-20 driving miles from downtown LA, ONT is over 40).
TheBOSman is offline  
Old Jun 6, 17, 2:51 pm
  #3  
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: VNY | BUR | LAX
Programs: AAdvantage | MileagePlus
Posts: 11,756
Originally Posted by a330boston View Post
I'm guessing that tarmac and road congestion will be prevalent after all this.
As far as road congestion is concerned:
LAX Landside Access Modernization Program
TWA884 is offline  
Old Jun 6, 17, 9:38 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brooklyn
Programs: Bolt Bus Rewards
Posts: 441
Originally Posted by a330boston View Post

And secondly how come the other LA area airports don't expand to accomodate operations of lcc's that don't carry many connecting pax such as Allegiant, Spirit, Southwest etc?
There was a proposal to convert the closed El-Toro Marine Air Station in Orange County into an international airport. It was defeated by ballot initiatives in the early '00's
AMflier is offline  
Old Jun 6, 17, 10:31 pm
  #5  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: So Cal
Posts: 524
It's a shame ONT is not utilized more. It has a longer runway than any of LAX's runways, so it can accommodate any airframe out there. They would just need to expand the customs/immigration set up and add some additional parking. In 2007 it saw more than 7 million pax, and as of 2016 it was down to 4.2 million pax.
brodielayne is offline  
Old Jun 7, 17, 12:26 am
  #6  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Silicon Valley
Programs: Starwood Platinum, Marriott Platinum, Hilton Silver
Posts: 961
ONT is a long drive for much of LA
clarkef is offline  
Old Jun 7, 17, 4:38 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: USA
Programs: DL Gold / AA Gold
Posts: 609
The only way for LAX.
Reclaim the land. Close Docweiler. Expand into the Pacific. <deleted by moderator>. Better LAX.

Last edited by TWA884; Jun 7, 17 at 10:24 am Reason: Going OMNI/PR
JohnnyRockets is offline  
Old Jun 7, 17, 7:45 am
  #8  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Boston
Posts: 148
Originally Posted by TheBOSman View Post
To be fair, road congestion is already quite bad around LAX.



SNA/BUR physically don't have space to expand. LGB is prohibited legally from expanding operations. ONT is seemingly too far out for many people (LAX is about 18-20 driving miles from downtown LA, ONT is over 40).
Why exactly is LGB prohibited from expansion? Is it near densely populated area?
a330boston is offline  
Old Jun 7, 17, 7:48 am
  #9  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Austin, Texas
Programs: Airline nobody. Sad!
Posts: 25,701
Originally Posted by a330boston View Post
Why exactly is LGB prohibited from expansion? Is it near densely populated area?
Yep. And those people don't like the planes much.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_B...rport#Overview
TheBOSman is offline  
Old Jun 7, 17, 8:07 am
  #10  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 30,582
LAX has 4 parallel runways, none of them cross, and on a world standard, I believe that to be better than many of the busiest airports.
Eastbay1K is online now  
Old Jun 7, 17, 8:47 am
  #11  
dll
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: LAX
Programs: AA EX PLT; Marriott Plt; *wood Plt
Posts: 2,230
Above and beyond the four parallel runways LAX also has generally reliable and consistent weather, save for a few stray days of storms or crazy wind. This makes operations more or less dependable and helps keep the airport operating on a steady rhythm.

It has many faults and problems, but I'm grateful being an LAX-based traveler to have the variety of carriers here, nonstop to most anywhere in the world, and operations that are generally consistent. It makes travel just a little less stressful. If I were JFK or LGA-based I'm not sure I could manage my mental state.
dll is offline  
Old Jun 7, 17, 9:14 am
  #12  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Boston
Posts: 148
Originally Posted by TheBOSman View Post
And those people don't like the planes much.
Lol they never go on trips by flight
a330boston is offline  
Old Jun 7, 17, 9:54 am
  #13  
TTT
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: 45 North
Programs: DL DM MM, HH Diamond, SPG Plat
Posts: 9,439
Originally Posted by a330boston View Post
Why exactly is LGB prohibited from expansion? Is it near densely populated area?
It's LA, everywhere is densely populated.

It's the classic case of "not in my backyard". People want the benefit of something (airport, power station, etc.) but they don't want to have to deal with the negatives personally.
TTT is offline  
Old Jun 7, 17, 10:41 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: LAX
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by dll View Post
Above and beyond the four parallel runways LAX also has generally reliable and consistent weather, save for a few stray days of storms or crazy wind. This makes operations more or less dependable and helps keep the airport operating on a steady rhythm.

It has many faults and problems, but I'm grateful being an LAX-based traveler to have the variety of carriers here, nonstop to most anywhere in the world, and operations that are generally consistent. It makes travel just a little less stressful. If I were JFK or LGA-based I'm not sure I could manage my mental state.
My thoughts exactly. Our consistent winds and sunny days do wonders for keeping everything operating smoothly (the current runway construction, not so much ) and we are spoiled by our choices of airlines and routes. If we had the fog, winter storms, thunderstorms and variable winds that often impact most of the country's hubs it would be a mess. I have been JFK/LGA/EWR based and I'll take LAX (and driving on the 405 to get there) any day! I have a friend that flies frequently for work that takes every opportunity to complain about the airport and describes it as "third world." I very rarely use terminals 1-3 but the terminals I do frequent (TBIT-7) are fine. Or maybe I'm just so used to it and know exactly what to expect.

ONT did make a push to become an alternate to LAX - they updated and expanded the terminal and marketed it as a Los Angeles airport, but the "if you build it, they will come" plan hasn't worked out, which is really too bad. For a significant amount of people, it would be more convenient than LAX. For me it's 60 miles vs 18 for LAX, so the price differential would need to be substantial for me to consider it. The city also wanted Palmdale to be an alternate airport and that didn't work out at all. That plan never made any sense to me - I can't imagine driving that far to take a regional flight.

Originally Posted by TTT View Post
It's LA, everywhere is densely populated.

It's the classic case of "not in my backyard". People want the benefit of something (airport, power station, etc.) but they don't want to have to deal with the negatives personally.
Don't get me started on people that buy a house under the flight path of an airport and then complain about the noise. Personally, I'd like to live right about where the LAX In-N-Out is so I could watch landings all day.
princeville is offline  
Old Jun 7, 17, 10:46 am
  #15  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Long Beach, CA
Programs: AA PLT, Hilton Diamond, IHG PlatAmb, Marriott Gold, Hyatt Discoverist, Radisson Gold
Posts: 2,856
Originally Posted by a330boston View Post
Why exactly is LGB prohibited from expansion? Is it near densely populated area?
There are a number of particularly evil council members whose sole mission in life is to defeat the airport expansion. Even building a new terminal while still within the context of lawsuit settlement's allowable number of flights was fought tooth and nail. Recently, they defeated an initiative to start international flights - again, completely within the context of the allowable flights.

It's utterly frustrating living here with some of the ridiculous responses to the airport use.

That said, those of us in Long Beach are generally equidistant to LAX or SNA so I typically search "LAX, LGB, SNA" for flights and we're fortunate as a prior poster mentioned - plentiful flights, lots of competition, nonstops to most places in the world, and pretty cheap fares. But, at 80,000,000 passengers, LAX is bursting at the seams. Since we are so often regarded as the busiest O&D airport in the world, that means a bigger percentage of that 80M is entering/leaving via the roadways, which is where I've truly noticed the congestion. It's just generally a pain to get in and out of the terminal area.

Last week, even though I was flying out of T4, it was just easier to walk from Park 'N Fly than sit on the shuttle in traffic.
OskiBear is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread