EWR764

UA has expressed its interest in a T9 facility, but until now we did not know much in the way of details besides the fact that UA would like to use it to co-locate some *A partners. Prior T9 concepts looked more like a mirror image of T8 across Sepulveda, and appeared to consist mostly of narrowbody gates. This made sense as it was first conceptualized in the dotcom era when UA had lots of 737 service up and down the West Coast.

Now, LAWA is proposing an "Airfield & Terminal Modernization Project" (ATMP) which will result in various improvements in the airfield (both North and South complexes), roadways and a terminals, with a T0 occupying the space of an existing Park 'N' Fly lot adjacent to T1, and T9 in the area currently containing DL TechOps facilities, the Eagles Nest (AA) and some various other facilities. https://www.lawa.org/ATMP The Notice of Preparation/Initial Study was filed today: https://cloud1lawa.app.box.com/s/w1d...3sr8w9k19fdn93

It's a good read, but relevant to this forum is one of the design concepts for T9, courtesy of LAFlyr on Twitter:



https://twitter.com/LAflyr

This is a much larger facility than I had envisioned, but given the fact that UA publicly stated a desire to co-locate Star partners, this would make sense to bring the widebody operations of, at the very least, UA's JV partners under one roof. It would also permit significantly more gate space for UA operations throughout the day outside of the midday and evening peak periods for international departures.

Interesting... if facility constraints are a problem for UA at LAX currently, this is the solution. As conceived here, it would result in an addition of about 60% more gates to the current T7/8 complex, assuming some of the WB gates can flex into additional narrowbody parking positions.

Colin

all enabled by getting rid of Mayor Villaraigosa's insane 153 gate cap agreement in 2006

the pictures also show a full expansion of Bradley's midfield concourse to the south for a full parallel terminal with Bradley main.

with lots of Star Alliance moving to T9 and Eagle's Nest closure, it looks like LAWA is planning to give AA the whole of T5 and shift a bunch of domestic carriers into Bradley.

building full landside terminal for T9 (instead of servicing T9 airside via T7 landside like T8) is prolly 4x on the cost side

mr8

I do hope the Star Alliance Lounge also gets moved from TBIT to T9. I always really enjoyed that lounge when flying out of LAX on code-shares.

GDL

Wow. There would be a massive reorganization of roadways, facilities, terminals, etc. Seems to me a decades long project if approved. Looking forward to reading the LAWA Study Report and gawking at the renderings and pictures.

jsloan

Agreed.

Am I the only one that hopes that this would come with a massive gate renumbering? Maybe giving each concourse a letter and then doing gates A1-A20, B1-B17, etc., as necessary? The current system seems.. outdated.

riphamilton

i'm all for this simply because of the separate access roads for proposed T9. anything to avoid world way around the morning/evening departure banks. hopefully (if this ever comes to fruition), UA will run p.s. flights out of T9.

EWR764

FWIW, this is the original design concept for T9, circa 2000, clearly oriented to a domestic/regional operation for UA. Obviously, at the time, LAX was a very different operation for United.

sapguy

downinit

Absolutely nothing useful from LAX. Looks like I will continue to avoid flying UA. Surely there are a few people on the west coast who enjoy going to Europe and do not want to stop by EWR on the way. I guess they don't mind ceding all of us to the LH group. It would be nice if they could at least add some PE seats to the premium transcon flight, as that is the only way I would even consider transiting in NY on a TATL. I wouldn't mind breaking up a flight in PE, but definitely not so in J.

downinit

They might exist in theory, but I have never once been able to book a TATL flight from LAX with the LAX-EWR segment in PE. It always comes back as a mixed class flight with the transcon in Y and the TATL in PE, regardless of the aircraft used.

dkc192

UA is not losing revenue if pax are "ceded" to the LH group--they're all part of a revenue-sharing JV on TATL flights. The real benefit of having UA metal TATL is for elites--those of us with Plus Points to burn have a better time using them on UA metal than on LH group metal: you need to book a high fare bucket to be able to use Plus Points on LH, and you can't use them on LX/OS altogether.

WineCountryUA

I'm more familiar with SFO and SFO-EWR has 4-5 flights (out of 8) daily with PremiumPlus

Checking LAX-EWR (for next Monday) has 5 out of 8 with PremiumPlus

downinit

But try to get a transcon PremPlus on a TATL flight from LAX. I have been trying for a few years and I have never once seen one come up on UA or google flights, for a myriad of different routes.

WineCountryUA

a few year ago and today are different situations -- you will need routes with PremPlus but LAX-LHR/FRA there are multiple options thru multiple hubs and a few non-stops from SFO.

downinit

You seem to be missing the Mixed Cabin note. Try clicking on the flight info and tell me what you see.