PSA: Upcoming LAX Facility Changes

Discussion in 'United Airlines | MileagePlus' started by UA Insider, Sep 12, 2014.  |  Print Topic

  1. UA Insider
    Original Member

    UA Insider Official Representative

    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    1,458
    Status Points:
    720
    Hi everyone,

    With a lot of activity around the corner at LAX, we’d like to provide you with an update on our long-term construction plans, and what that means for your travel experience in the interim.

    Our goal is to offer a world-class experience at our LAX hub, and to that end we will be investing $450 million over the next several years to modernize our facilities and enhance the experience for our customers. Some changes have already occurred, including reconfiguration of multiple gates in Terminal 8 to handle additional narrow-body mainline aircraft. We will begin further improvements later this year, and by the end of 2017 we plan to open:
    • A brand-new check-in lobby and Premier check-in area
    • A dedicated Global Services Reception with direct security lane access
    • A reconfigured and expanded security checkpoint
    • A refurbished baggage claim area
    • Renovated gate-area hold rooms
    • A brand-new United Club with sweeping views and new amenities
    To prepare for these changes, we will consolidate our operations into Terminals 7 and 8 over the next few weeks. Here’s what you need to know if you’re traveling to, from or through LAX:

    Beginning September 24, 2014, the following changes will occur in the check-in lobby:
    • The Premier Lobby in Terminal 6 will close, and a temporary Premier lobby with Global Services check-in area will be available in Terminal 7
    • Global Services members will be invited to enter LAX curbside through Terminal 7
    • Dedicated Global Services security lanes will also remain available
    Beginning October 27, 2014, the following changes will occur in our operations:
    • United will no longer use gates located in Terminal 6 (gates 60, 61, 62, and 63)
    • The United Club in Terminal 6 will close
    • The current United Club in Terminal 7 will continue to be available
    • The current United Global First Lounge in Terminal 7 will convert to a United Club
    • All departing flights and most arriving flights will be consolidated into Terminals 7 & 8
      • Please note: Some international arrivals may use the Tom Bradley International Terminal (TBIT). These include flights from Sydney and Melbourne, and some flights from Mexico on a seasonal basis.
    Thanks for your patience during this transition, and we appreciate your “pardoning our dust” as we work to improve our facilities at LAX.

    -UA Insider
     
    8MiHi, desamo, mikeschu and 5 others like this.
  2. genemk2

    genemk2 Gold Member

    Messages:
    5,831
    Likes Received:
    14,588
    Status Points:
    11,070
    Thanks. Will the dedicated 1K and other Premier Access Lines for the Security Checkpoint remain the same?
     
  3. redtailshark

    redtailshark Silver Member

    Messages:
    1,041
    Likes Received:
    875
    Status Points:
    895
    OK, this sounds like a reasonable idea.

    While you are at it @ LAX, can you:

    a. turn up the temperature in the T7 United Club? A little...
    b. speed up the wifi connection in that club
    c. upgauge from the horrible CR2s that operate many routes from T8 - can't we have even a 319 @ TUS?

    and as our Nige Tufnell fan asks over on FT, what about the GFL? It had better be there when I actually want to use it after these years of flying low-rent UA...

    For some reason, I can't post a comment to FT. I suspect a secretive move by the notorious backroom censorious mods and their shadowy allies, frightened as always of sharkspeak and indeed, of any and all open speech.
     
  4. genemk2

    genemk2 Gold Member

    Messages:
    5,831
    Likes Received:
    14,588
    Status Points:
    11,070
    I heard the GFL will disappear from LAX -- if I remember correctly, there is only 1 flight that has GF out of LAX -- LAX-SYD -- so there isn't much point in keeping it around.

    I agree with (b), disagree with (a), and I'm sure route management relies on hard data, not customer request, for (c).
     
  5. Wandering Aramean
    Original Member

    Wandering Aramean Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,216
    Likes Received:
    61,745
    Status Points:
    20,020
    LAX-LHR, too, right? And GS pax in C can use the F lounge.

    Not surprised this is happening and it doesn't really affect me at all. But it is a cut to the service levels. We'll see if they put something back for those pax with the new lounge going in upstairs.
     
    ssullivan and genemk2 like this.
  6. genemk2

    genemk2 Gold Member

    Messages:
    5,831
    Likes Received:
    14,588
    Status Points:
    11,070
    Yeah, and LAX-LHR.
     
  7. dayone
    Original Member

    dayone Silver Member

    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    824
    Status Points:
    795
    Three years?
     
  8. Seacarl
    Original Member

    Seacarl Gold Member

    Messages:
    10,521
    Likes Received:
    11,372
    Status Points:
    16,520
    Not just a cut to the service levels, but also a cut to the number of flights UA will operate at LAX and to any growth ambitions. During a station tour we were told that UA's LAX operation was at its maximum capacity with the number of gates they had. Giving up 4 gates is a pretty substantial number, depending on how intensively you schedule them that could be represent upwards of 40 potential flights/day lost. With the demand for gates by AS DL and AA, I don't see UA having much chance to get those gates back. It effectively cedes capacity to the rivals.
     
    8MiHi and Garp74 like this.
  9. mikeschu
    Original Member

    mikeschu Gold Member

    Messages:
    8,848
    Likes Received:
    16,879
    Status Points:
    14,520
    I can envision a scenario where UA goes to less frequent but larger planes at LAX and tries to route people via SFO or DEN whenever possible. That means more mainline out of LAX and less locations to fly to.
     
    ssullivan likes this.
  10. Wandering Aramean
    Original Member

    Wandering Aramean Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,216
    Likes Received:
    61,745
    Status Points:
    20,020
    UA's mainline ops at LAX are up YoY, not down. More passengers and a larger share of the total. I seem to recall that some of the at-risk flying by SkyWest is being cut so that's part of the change, I'm sure.
     
    genemk2 and ssullivan like this.
  11. ssullivan
    Original Member

    ssullivan Gold Member

    Messages:
    27,358
    Likes Received:
    60,275
    Status Points:
    20,020
    Yep, and they've reconfigured some gates in Terminal 8 to allow an increase in mainline operations there.
     
    8MiHi likes this.
  12. ssullivan
    Original Member

    ssullivan Gold Member

    Messages:
    27,358
    Likes Received:
    60,275
    Status Points:
    20,020
    Yep, some of the Southwest EMB-120 routes are being cut. But, overall, they've been upgauging equipment there. There seem to be a lot fewer Airbus and 752 flights, with the 739ER and 753 becoming the norm at LAX.
     
  13. mikeschu
    Original Member

    mikeschu Gold Member

    Messages:
    8,848
    Likes Received:
    16,879
    Status Points:
    14,520
    LAX-CLD is toast, and it wouldn't surprise me to see E120 frequencies change significantly, or the E120 fleet moved north and replaced by less-frequent CR2s.
     
  14. Seacarl
    Original Member

    Seacarl Gold Member

    Messages:
    10,521
    Likes Received:
    11,372
    Status Points:
    16,520
    So... less connecting traffic, less of a hub, more O/D only? For those communities that had both LAX and SFO service, LAX was always the safer connecting point since it has far fewer ATC delays than SFO.

    UA has eliminated LAX-PDX. Wonder how long LAX-LAS and LAX-PHX will be around. And some of the others like ABQ, DFW etc.
     
  15. colpuck
    Original Member

    colpuck Gold Member

    Messages:
    14,500
    Likes Received:
    21,641
    Status Points:
    16,520
    UA has SFO why not leave DL and AA to battle it out for LAX?

    Sent from a reasonably priced car.
     
  16. radonc1951

    radonc1951 Gold Member

    Messages:
    5,113
    Likes Received:
    11,605
    Status Points:
    11,070
    I am always amused when I see statements such as the last bullet point.
    It makes me think "What new amenities are they going to be giving us?".......two sets of "Towers of Carbohydrate Power" instead of one.?:confused::oops:

    Things just haven't been going so well at the UCs for the past several years. But I am always willing to be pleasantly surprised. ;)
     
  17. ssullivan
    Original Member

    ssullivan Gold Member

    Messages:
    27,358
    Likes Received:
    60,275
    Status Points:
    20,020
    UA is still number one at LAX, and has grown capacity there. They're hardly abandoning it to AA and DL.
     
  18. mikeschu
    Original Member

    mikeschu Gold Member

    Messages:
    8,848
    Likes Received:
    16,879
    Status Points:
    14,520
    Won't argue about LAX being "safer" as a connecting point from a WX/ATC perspective.

    They won't eliminate LAX-LAS though... too much money to be made there. It's going to be reducing or eliminating surrounding destinations like CLD/SAN/PSP/IYK/SBA/BFL/FAT/IPL/YUM/SBP/SMX first where they don't need the frequency or capacity.
     
    Wandering Aramean likes this.
  19. Wandering Aramean
    Original Member

    Wandering Aramean Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,216
    Likes Received:
    61,745
    Status Points:
    20,020
    I'll agree on the F&B options but not overall on the facilities. The renovations have been nice and much needed.
     
    8MiHi and ssullivan like this.
  20. ssullivan
    Original Member

    ssullivan Gold Member

    Messages:
    27,358
    Likes Received:
    60,275
    Status Points:
    20,020
    Yep, the look of the new clubs is great. And, food and beverage is a much simpler thing to fix down the road, should they ever decide to get around to it. But the new and renovated clubs look great, and things like very fast Wi-Fi and tons of outlets everywhere are much appreciated improvements.
     
    Wandering Aramean and IDGflygirl like this.
  21. radonc1951

    radonc1951 Gold Member

    Messages:
    5,113
    Likes Received:
    11,605
    Status Points:
    11,070
    I agree that the physical facilities are much improved, but useage has significantly increased as well. Physically nice facilities are great but if you have no place to sit, extra outlets and nice tables will not do you much good. And I think that we can all agree that at peak hours, the clubs have an aura of dating bar on a Saturday night :p. In fact, I suspect one of the reasons that adult beverage choice and quality took a huge hit was due to increasing passenger throughput in the clubs.

    But I will definitely grant that maintaining and upgrading the physical plant is better than letting it deteriorate. (I wonder if *A requirements has anything to do with it?)
     
    HaveMilesWillTravel likes this.
  22. Wandering Aramean
    Original Member

    Wandering Aramean Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,216
    Likes Received:
    61,745
    Status Points:
    20,020
    Having seen some other lounges around the world I'll be betting "no" on this one. ;)
     
  23. HaveMilesWillTravel
    Original Member

    HaveMilesWillTravel Gold Member

    Messages:
    12,504
    Likes Received:
    20,198
    Status Points:
    16,520
    Don't worry, my membership expires at the end of September :)
     
  24. 8MiHi

    8MiHi Silver Member

    Messages:
    1,015
    Likes Received:
    1,255
    Status Points:
    945
    At least two of the gates in 6 were tow-in gates which appeared to limit operations there. With some careful planning and re-configuring they may be more efficient in their use of gates in 7 & 8 to the point of losing little or no capacity.
     
    Garp74 and ssullivan like this.

Share This Page