JohnnyP

I have decided I hate London-Heathrow. It's old, it's ugly, it's frustrating to navigate, it has too many "useless" security checkpoints, and it was surely designed by someone on a hallucigenic drug at the time.

The thing that really grated me the wrong way last week was the fact that arriving passengers are denied access to *Gold lounges unless they are continuing on IN THE SAME TERMINAL.

I flew in via ORD on UA, with a connecting flight on BD from T1 in LHR. I stopped by the SQ lounge for a shower and was absolutely denied entry. Went to the RCC where, again, I was denied entry unless I went back out through security, re-entered T3 and came back to the RCC.

So... I tromped through security to get back into the terminal where I already was in the first place. (Can someone explain the logic there??) Went back to the SQ lounge and was AGAIN denied entry because I was departing out of T1. The RCC was more forgiving this time, and allowed me to take a shower.

Why the runaround? Why couldn't it be like FRA?

Warrenlm

Many airlines from many countries arrive at LHR and thus LHR passes everyone through LHR security. Lounges cannot admit you unless you are traveling onward and have passed through security. All that makes sense to me.

But, I have not heard that you must depart from the same terminal the lounge is in.

------------------
[email protected]

KenF

I agree on both points!

(There that's confusing, isn't it?)

If you do not have an onward boarding pass with a Star Alliance airline, you cannot get into the *Gold lounges, regardless of status. Those are the rules, and the lounge is perfectly right to deny access if this is the case.

However

If your onward flight is on Star Alliance, and you are in possession of a boarding pass and a Star Gold card, then you should be able to use any Star Gold lounge, regardless of airline, or location. Those are also the rules, and any lounge that refuses access needs a good kicking (via your programs customer care route).

Of course, there are lounges that you cannot access at some airports due to security restrictions, and that is beyond the airlines control, but, LHR does not appear to enforce such rules (as long as you are going via flight connections, anyway) so that is not an issue here.

My interpretation of the rule is that as long as you can get to the front door of the lounge, you should be allowed in.

Cross carrier lounge access is one of the big benefits of Star Gold, so I think it is important that we don't let it get eroded!

Ken.

"When I get real bored, I like to drive downtown and get a great parking spot, then sit in my car and count how many people ask me if I'm leaving." - Steven Wright

apx068

Hi there,
The reason that you cannot enter *any* lounge on arrival is that there is a UK law that specifically prohits it. If you are flying on a connecting flight you can use a lounge, but only after you have gone throught the flight connections / security. Then you're considered a departing passenger! This is why all LHR "arrivals" facility are after immigration and customs.

BAA (the operators of LHR) want to go to the correct terminal straight away. They do not want passengers waiting in a different terminal - lets face it, inter-terminal transfers are not so easy at LHR. Hence the T3 lounges will really not want you to let you in if you are departing out of T1. I don't think that complaining to UA or SQ would have any positive result, the answer would probably be "These are the rules imposed by LHR on us".

Whilst it appears a bit silly, I can see the logic of trying to get people in the right place at the right time.

Jason

Greg45

Well, if it was more like FRA it would have bad overcrowded LH lounges

But seriously, I don't understand why so many passengers choose LHR as their gateway to Europe, and why all American airlines use LHR so much. Personally, I prefer FRA, CDG, MUC, ZRH, CPH, ....

Transfer between terminals, repeated useless security checks, foggy weather, old facilities, overcrowded airspace, long connection times (in FRA, MUC, ZRH you could connect from an international flight to a European connection in half the time!)

I try to avoid LHR unless I am on BA.

JohnnyP

And I shall forevermore do the same. After I returned to the SQ lounge the second time, the receptionist pulled out a document from the UK Customs office that delineated exactly which passengers could use which lounges... My complaint is more about the logic of this "law" than not being able to gain access to the lounge. Afterall, it's not SQ's or UA's fault.

PITBULL1K

thats one less person to clog up the lounges...as we all know every airport is so much better than Heathrow...US airports are so much nicer.....better designed, smaller, more user friendly and with far better security in place...(sarcasm btw)

By the way, Frankfurt is no better, its security checkpoints are bizarre mid terminal, and the distances are just as long as heathrow, but by all means go through it and leave LHR to everyone else.

MillionMiles

I don't know what you have to complain about when compared with US airport security these days.

I have always found LHR's security personnel to be courteous and efficient in what they do. Unlike those lowly paid US conterpart who can be absolutely rude to the nth degree.

As for access to SQ lounge. I am not aware they have an arrivals invitation to UA passengers. You could have gone to UA's new arrival lounge for your shower.

LHR may be big and confusing at times, security inconvenience isn't one aspect I would fault it on.

pdx1M

What I really don't understand at LHR is the security for connecting passengers in the same terminal. Arrive T3, depart T3, you still get to go through a security check that includes x-ray. However, the entrance and exit to that check are in the same place. So if I had anything of concern in a bag, I leave it with a colleague, go through security without it, then pick it back up. Then the colleague can do the same. So exactly what are they trying to accomplish with that????

Warrenlm

I did not want to quote your entire post in case you decided to get less specific with the analysis. But this aspect was noted by the LHR security guy I talked to a few years ago in an altercation about entrance to the RCC. I asked what they were doing about it and he just looked at me. I guess he was thinking "What you want a new terminal?".



------------------
[email protected]

Markie

According to my BAA Annual Report - there is a new requirement to segregate arriving and leaving passengers being imposed by the UK Government. BAA has put money aside to fund this.

Therefore, I guess this issue will be mute as you'll have to go through Connections to get back to the 'airside' part of the terminal.

Eastbay1K

I can't wait to see the logistics of this one...an upper level? or something on the lower lever. Fun. And finally after getting all the moving walkways repaired in T3.

kempis

I have about 6 hours to kill at LHR on sunday and I am thinking about visit the SK,UA,TG,AC and SQ lounge. Wish me luck

TA

I have to agree here. I have made the decision several times in the past few years to fly to Germany (MUC/FRA) instead of going through LHR.

What's the point of going to LHR? The taxes on your ticket sometimes add up to more than your ticket. There's no particular reason I *want* to spend 50 pounds on a crappy "bed-and-breakfast" near London if I don't have to. And I can go elsewhere and get more for my money.

Avoid it if you can.

Shareholder

There are no Customs/Immigration fees on LHR connecting flight tickets. And its security measures are no different than those found at many other airports, including NRT which also requires one to go through a complete X-ray security screening when connecting from one flight to another, even in the same terminal and even if flights arrive/depart from adjacent gates. I find LHR to be much better than AMS, and right now FRA is a mess with all the construction going on. Not to mention the aforementioned overcrowded LH lounge situation which calls out for a third tier of STAR elite.