Originally Posted by cerealmarketer
(Post 21403566)
Improving the connecting halls is part of the plan. And re-vamping the T7 ticketing lobby is part of it. But for some reason the T6 one is not part of the scope, maybe they will unify it all in the T7 section now that security will be removed from part of it.
I actually think LAX is fine for connections as it is, but improvements to compete w/ LAX's other tenants is OK w/ me. Then there's Terminal 8, which reminds me of UA's IAD C |
Originally Posted by IAH-OIL-TRASH
(Post 21403828)
T6 is already in decent shape (relative to T7). TSA security isn't cramped like T7's. Plus UA shares T6 w/ Alaska, so it gets a little complicated. UA controls T7, plus it's central to UA's 3 concourses.
I actually think LAX is fine for connections as it is, but improvements to compete w/ LAX's other tenants is OK w/ me. Then there's Terminal 8, which reminds me of UA's IAD C |
Originally Posted by exerda
(Post 21403872)
The improvements they could make for connections: moving walkways (at least in the hall at the base of the three terminals), and of course, something for the international-to-domestic connections (which if you're at all unfamiliar with LAX can be quite confusing, and inconvenient for those who are familiar).
|
I miss Spago's in Terminal 7; that was good food and I always looked forward to eating there. And Terminal 6 is such a dump, I hate having to use that.
|
Originally Posted by cerealmarketer
(Post 21403566)
Improving the connecting halls is part of the plan. And re-vamping the T7 ticketing lobby is part of it. But for some reason the T6 one is not part of the scope, maybe they will unify it all in the T7 section now that security will be removed from part of it.
Originally Posted by IAH-OIL-TRASH
(Post 21403828)
T6 is already in decent shape (relative to T7). TSA security isn't cramped like T7's. Plus UA shares T6 w/ Alaska, so it gets a little complicated. UA controls T7, plus it's central to UA's 3 concourses.
I actually think LAX is fine for connections as it is, but improvements to compete w/ LAX's other tenants is OK w/ me. Then there's Terminal 8, which reminds me of UA's IAD C |
Originally Posted by lhrsfo
(Post 21403235)
The other area that needs improvement is the connection between international arrivals in T6/7, and domestic connections. Currently, the arriving passengers who are connecting are dumped out in the arrivals section and have to find their own way to the departures section, with no effective signage and an escalator (unsigned) leading upstairs from which you have to double back (again, not properly signed) to reach the entrance to the security area.
Originally Posted by IAH-OIL-TRASH
(Post 21403828)
I actually think LAX is fine for connections as it is, but improvements to compete w/ LAX's other tenants is OK w/ me.
Well, this thread explains what I saw Wednesday in the LAX GFL waiting for the PVG flight. A group of UA corporate "visitors" was welcomed into the lounge from departments like Real Estate, Facilities Maintenance and Architecture. They kept their voices low so despite my attempts to listen in, I just heard a few things. They discussed the need for changes, how out of date the lounge is and how poor the kitchen facility is considering that they are supposed to prepare a decent offering for UA's best passengers. Later they discussed putting in work stations in the far left corner (as you are walking in) in front of the windows and using the natural light. That concerned me and after that I got the impression the lounge may close and be used for something else. I was starting to worry we may lose the lounge but after reading the proposal being put forward it all sounds good. The GLF will be co-located with the United Club on the new fourth floor and will enjoy better access to the gate level than the current situation of an elevator which primarily moves trash from the restaurants or UA's highest premium passengers. So glad they are going to do some revamping at LAX, it could be so much nicer! |
Originally Posted by exerda
(Post 21400623)
It is good news, but I have to ask: when the heck is UA going to work with the MWAA to get a new midfield concourse at IAD? I know we're not the biggest hub, but our "temporary" dump of a terminal really needs to be replaced and made into a flagship for the new UA and the national capital region.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/membe...312-dulles.jpg |
Originally Posted by cerealmarketer
(Post 21403566)
Improving the connecting halls is part of the plan.
Originally Posted by FWAAA
(Post 21402012)
I suspect that UA will help pay for some of the remaining $379 million through rental payments over the next few years.
Originally Posted by cerealmarketer
(Post 21401514)
Looks like the club will all be on a new floor built above the current club, but taking up the entire width of the concourse rather than just one side now. Should have some nice views and larger than both of today's clubs combined.
Originally Posted by cerealmarketer
(Post 21401514)
There will also be a new security area built at the gate level; no more snaking from that ground level sideways angle.
http://boardingarea.wpengine.netdna-.../09/image1.png The second will be at the T8 end of T7 on the ticketing level and running east/west rather than north/south. It will have 5 lanes and will be "exclusively" for T8 passengers, though the terminals will remain connected. http://boardingarea.wpengine.netdna-.../09/image2.png There will also be a GS lobby adjacent to that T8 checkpoint.
Originally Posted by cerealmarketer
(Post 21401514)
But no real changes to the rest of the terminal. Just the club, part of ticketing, and security checkpoint.
|
Originally Posted by IAH-OIL-TRASH
(Post 21403828)
T6 is already in decent shape (relative to T7). TSA security isn't cramped like T7's. Plus UA shares T6 w/ Alaska, so it gets a little complicated. UA controls T7, plus it's central to UA's 3 concourses.
I actually think LAX is fine for connections as it is, but improvements to compete w/ LAX's other tenants is OK w/ me. Then there's Terminal 8, which reminds me of UA's IAD C |
Originally Posted by uanj
(Post 21404598)
...Intl to domestic transfers are the pits...
|
Originally Posted by TA
(Post 21400579)
Well is the story that United is slow to catch up, or that LAWA management and operating methods in general are not conducive to it being a leading airport (customer experience-wise)?
|
Originally Posted by DCBob
(Post 21404801)
Terminal 8 doesn't even deserve a number. It's the back closet of Terminal 7. It also has no edible food. At least IAD Terminal C has Wendy's!
|
Originally Posted by starflyer
(Post 21404919)
UA is slow to catch on. They were consistently told that as a premier airline at LAX they were eligible for free terminal and gate upgrades, but these never materialized. They finally caught on when they kept seeing other airlines receiving gate and terminal upgrade offers for only tens of dollars.
|
$11,000+ per Sq Ft. High costs for Construction.
That is a high cost.
I am sure UA will be paying for lots of it, albeit not up front, but in long term lease rates. There must be lots of structural, mechanical and infrastructure costs on this project. |
All I can say is that is that it is about time...that T7 was renovated!
It--like the rest of LAX, to be honest--has been so ghetto for too long. The odd times I flew AA out of T-4, I was embarrassed to be a UA flier because T-4 was definitely more modern. I'm sad, however, to hear that the UC at T-6 will be closing. As long as they continue to operate flights out of T-6 and that distance between T-6 and T-7 exists, T-6 deserves its own UC. Moreover, at least make sure that there's a TSA Pre-Check at T-6. Even when I have a flight out of T-6, I enter through T-7, because of the TSA Pre-Check, then waltz on over to T-6. It would be nice to just go directly to T-6. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 9:58 am. |
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.