Phil Level

Every time Obama flies into LAX, I think it would make more sense for him to use ONT. From a security standpoint, ONT seems to be much more controllable than LAX.

But then I live in West LA area, which often gets the worst of the disruption for street closures.

dr__bob

ONT is by far the most convenient, in terms of access, for me. I almost always fly domestic out of there, either on UA or WN. But long time ago (back in the NW days), NW stopped flying out of there. Which was strange, since the flights to MSP were almost always full (at least when I flew). One day in LAX, I ran into a former ONT NW gate agent. I asked why NW didn't fly out of ONT any more, and he said that it was the fees. Much higher at ONT than LAX.

In recent years it has been clear: LAX pax numbers go up as ONT pax go down. LAX gets construction, ONT gets neglect. This is way the local govts and chambers are clamoring for local control. LAWA doesn't seem concerned with ONT at all, other than siphoning more of the ONT pax to LAX.

The community out here is huge: there are 6 million people (or so) in the Riverside-San Bernardino area. I'm sure that most of them would prefer not having to drive the 1+ hours to LAX.

ncorman

It all depends where POTUS is heading, street security is costly and highly disruptive. You would think the secret service would always prefer to use an AFB or NAS due to the higher security as well.

Weyland Yutani Corp

Agreed & well written!

writerguyfl

That's another reason why I can't understand why anyone more So Cal residents aren't supporting local control of ONT. Even if you never fly out of ONT, you should want it to succeed because it means one less car driving 40+ miles through multiple communities to get to LAX or other airports.

Of course, the average person seems to think that money from LAX was used to build the new terminals at ONT. But, according to the Set ONT Free folks, it's the opposite. LAWA charges a 15% administrative fee on revenue produced at ONT.

(Source: http://setontariofree.com/faq)

HkCaGu

LAX has two pairs of runways. When AF1 lands, arrivals from one side of the airport are shut off usually until Marine 1 takes off--usually 10-20 minutes, depending on how long the Villaraigosa/Garcetti-Brown handshakes take. Meanwhile, the other side of LAX operates as normal.

ONT can't handle a "temporary shut off" the same way. And clearing traffic from Marine 1 especially if he's heading west of Downtown LA will cause a lot of air traffic disruption. Having Marine 1 fly north of south out of LAX causes little problem.

ncorman

The new mayor of LA has announced his new board for LAWA today with 6 of 7 members being replaced. It will be interesting to see if this helps with the separation the Inland Empire wants for Ontario.

ShotgunKid

I don't know if this adds to this conversation, but I would love to fly into ONT since my in-laws don't live too far from there. However, booking family with multiple tickets, I have always found fares to be double to triple what I could get flying into SNA. Not that SNA is bad.

golfingboy

Howdy from Bangkok, reading the International Hearld Tribune. There is an article about the state of ONT.

Was a bit surprised to see that in the newspaper.

1kBill

Read the same article while in Kuala Lumpur!

Link is here.

If they cannot somehow increase the traffic, I wonder if they should consider consolidating the terminals in order to cut costs and improve the terminal experience for the remaining pax.

wilp888

I thought the air space around LAX is off limits when AF1 arrives or depart and all activities on all runways are stopped. How can the "other side of LAX" operates as usual?

Kacee

That would be a huge improvement. At least half the gates in T4 are currently not in use.

HkCaGu

Only GA activity is prohibited the entire time of presidential presence. Commercial aviation is only shut down in the very immediate vicinity.