SANFan wrote:

[Yes, I believe when the FIS project is totally done -- summer 2019 -- they could get 4 wide bodies into the 6 gates, but no room for anything else. But the 4 w/b
bb

I'm wondering why they won't just add those additional gates while they're working on the
FIS so they won't have to go back and add them later? Int'l traffic could explode during
the timeframe of 2018/19 where they might need those additional gates sooner than
anticipated.

mikeyp224 wrote:

The current international gates are actually 20, 21 and 22.

Oops! My bad!

LH was "delayed" due to flight crew the other day...the plane was towed to North Ramp where it overnighted. LH uses contract workers above the wing, and below the wing, no united workers.

FIs will begin July 1st, 2018 with all Intl carriers coming over and utilizing the new Facility. Gate 48 is now a stripped for all 767, 777 & 787 variants, 747, A330-200/300, A340-300, A350-900/1000...Delta is back to using the gate for now since gate 49 is next to be added to the FIs.

In other words, Gate 48 will most likely see JAL, LH & BA using that gate until 51 is complete. All the stars will have to align to make sure these flights have no overlaps...unless they keep Gates 20 & 22 as backups.

redrooster3 wrote:

FIS will begin July 1st, 2018 with all Intl carriers coming over and utilizing the new Facility. Gate 48 is now a stripped for all 767, 777 & 787 variants, 747, A330-200/300, A340-300, A350-900/1000...Delta is back to using the gate for now since gate 49 is next to be added to the FIs.

In other words, Gate 48 will most likely see JAL, LH & BA using that gate until 51 is complete. All the stars will have to align to make sure these flights have no overlaps...unless they keep Gates 20 & 22 as backups.

Don't forget WK! There are 3 months to go before the new FIS facilities open -- and the current one closes -- so I expect at least a couple more gates, 49 and 50?, should be ready to go by July 1. (Of course the plan is to have all 4 gates functional as swing gates and capable of receiving arriving int'l flights/pax so I think that will be the case.) By opening day, there should be no problem handling 2 wide bodies simultaneously, even if it means no room for narrow bodies at that same time.

There's also the option, as has been mentioned up-thread, of moving a widebody to another gate once it's arriving int'l pax have been deplaned at FIS.

The stripping for A359/1000s is certainly intriguing. Do you suppose someone knows something that we don't?! Or is just wishful thinking...

bb

SANFan wrote:

The stripping for A359/1000s is certainly intriguing. Do you suppose someone knows something that we don't?! Or is just wishful thinking...
bb

Perhaps DL may send an A350 our way, or LH may start using them here when they phase out the A343?

Anyone know what the deal with the Emirates 777 sitting at SAN currently is?

just found it --- diverted Emirates Cargo that was headin to LAX from mexico. was a cool sight sitting on the east taxiway

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAE ... /MMMX/KSAN

Just returned last night from a week in Mexico City. I took Alaska's nonstop from SAN. Outward bound the flight was completely full except for a few first class seats. The return trip was 3/4 full in coach and about the same in first class. The flight was great and convenient and I am really bummed Alaska is cancelling this service, why didn't they give it a longer try?

I got my head bitten off in an earlier thread asking about an LH 340 I just saw land an SAN for not “Googling it first”. I’m at the dog park in Balboa, watching planes land.

At the risk of asking what maybe obvious to members who watch these developments like hawks (I thought that more up-to-date a.net members are here for this!) , I noticed BA landed a 777 instead of their 747-400 yesterday. One off, or permanent change in equipment?

rjsampson wrote:

I got my head bitten off in an earlier thread asking about an LH 340 I just saw land an SAN for not “Googling it first”. I’m at the dog park in Balboa, watching planes land.

At the risk of asking what maybe obvious to members who watch these developments like hawks (I thought that more up-to-date a.net members are here for this!) , I noticed BA landed a 777 instead of their 747-400 yesterday. One off, or permanent change in equipment?

No head-biting here, rj'!

For the last year or 2, BA has pretty much been using The Queen to SAN in the winters, then they switch for the summer to the 773. I think it's at least partly due to a/c availability because the SAN pax counts are certainly higher in the summer so the 747 would make more sense then, IMO. Could be cargo is a factor as well or maybe the balance of premium capacity vs. economy seats... (And lets' not forget that now BA has a worthy competitor to Europe from another great legacy carrier with a huge hub at FRA!)

Perhaps you've seen that when our new FIS facilities open (on or about July 1 as of now) and there's lots of gate space, it is believed by some that BA might change their times in SAN -- earlier I would expect -- and that change might allow them to use 747s year-round!

So to answer your question, effective March 25, Speedbird became a 773; the summer skeds go thru early November. I think we need to wait a bit to see what BA will do at the end of this summer season.

bb

rjsampson wrote:

I got my head bitten off in an earlier thread asking about an LH 340 I just saw land an SAN for not “Googling it first”. I’m at the dog park in Balboa, watching planes land.

You should be lashed about the ears with a pool noodle for not knowing everything there is to know about LH in San Diego!

Coincidentally, I was recently walking my dogs in my Bay Park neighborhood and heard an unusual engine sound from an overhead aircraft. I looked up and was surprised to see a large 4 engined aircraft soaring overhead on the standard flight path looping around San Diego as it lined up for SAN. It took me a moment to realize it was the LH 340. It was quite a sight. What I also found interesting was that the plane appeared to have flown down the coast and was now turning inland, following the routes all planes fly to line up with SAN's runway. This is in contrast to BA's flight which always appears to have flown directly from the northwest.

I love my neighborhood because all the planes flying down the coast - mostly 737s and 320s - fly overhead.

Don't forget folks, we've also got Edelweiss's 340 coming to town now too, on Mo and Fr, at various times until the schedule stabilizes on June 1. So on Mondays, SAN has the privilege of having two A340s come a calling!

bb

JAAlbert wrote:

rjsampson wrote:

I got my head bitten off in an earlier thread asking about an LH 340 I just saw land an SAN for not “Googling it first”. I’m at the dog park in Balboa, watching planes land.

You should be lashed about the ears with a pool noodle for not knowing everything there is to know about LH in San Diego!

Coincidentally, I was recently walking my dogs in my Bay Park neighborhood and heard an unusual engine sound from an overhead aircraft. I looked up and was surprised to see a large 4 engined aircraft soaring overhead on the standard flight path looping around San Diego as it lined up for SAN. It took me a moment to realize it was the LH 340. It was quite a sight. What I also found interesting was that the plane appeared to have flown down the coast and was now turning inland, following the routes all planes fly to line up with SAN's runway. This is in contrast to BA's flight which always appears to have flown directly from the northwest.

I love my neighborhood because all the planes flying down the coast - mostly 737s and 320s - fly overhead.

Looks like this one. Odd routing.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/DLH ... /EDDF/KSAN

Or this one

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/DLH ... /EDDF/KSAN

Ive been watching some of the SAN videos posted of recent and have noticed a lot of more non-widebody aircraft using taxiway C instead of B as they taxi to meet up with the bottom of 27.

Is this a relatively new development for 737s and 757s and other twin aisle craft?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnV8FPRa5F0

washingtonflyer wrote:

Looks like this one. Odd routing.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/DLH ... /EDDF/KSAN

Or this one

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/DLH ... /EDDF/KSAN

Yes, exactly, that's the route it took over my place the other day! And compare it to BA 272 which flies in over Arizona, where as LH enters US airspace over Washington. It is interesting that both London and Frankfurt appear to be on a similar latitude, so why LH goes so far north is interesting.

I've seen BA fly this route a couple of times, it flew the same
route that all the flights out of the North fly, including JAL

I've caught Speedbird a few times on this northerly routing, but probably no more than half-a-dozen times in the last year or so. I often check because when it does, I can it i can watch them from my home in University Heights, which is just south of the main flight path into Lindbergh at about 6000 ft. Would love to see that gorgeous LH A340 on approach...

williaminsd wrote:

i can watch them from my home in University Heights, which is just south of the main flight path into Lindbergh at about 6000 ft. Would love to see that gorgeous LH A340 on approach...

I live in the North Park / Normal Heights area, (you live just west of me.) I can usually catch the northbound flights when they head
in over Mission Valley, the JAL 787 looks beautiful when it comes in during the mid-morning hours, I'll be looking
out for the LH A340 if it continues to fly the northbound route. I was thinking, maybe there's bad weather somewhere
that's causing the LH A340 to swing so far to the North?

SANFan wrote:

lets' not forget that now BA has a worthy competitor to Europe from another great legacy carrier with a huge hub at FRA!)
bb

I'm still dreaming that the loads will be so good that someday LH will send one their beautiful
744s our way Just like Speedbird ! (I can't help it! I dream big!)

rjsampson wrote:

I got my head bitten off in an earlier thread asking about an LH 340 I just saw land an SAN for not “Googling it first”.

As SANFan said, we won't bite your head off here, this is usually the thread where we keep you up to date
about San Diego Int'l Airport, (aka. Lindbergh Field.)

Seeing all the heavy metal going in and out of SAN, makes you wonder when PAL makes that jump and sends a 747 or 777 to SAN.

washingtonflyer wrote:

Seeing all the heavy metal going in and out of SAN, makes you wonder when PAL makes that jump and sends a 747 or 777 to SAN.

I think, according to the chatter of late, SAN would be more likely to see some flavor of 'Bus here -- the 330 (if the suggestion of MNL-HNL-SAN comes true) or 338 or ??? (if the YVR tag-ion happens or perhaps even a nonstop) -- but it sure would be something great to have anything of PR's serve SAN, wouldn't it?!!!

bb

It looks as if LH#466 is not coming today. According to another thread, Lufthansa has
cancelled nearly 800 flights due to a strike, I'm guessing our flight was one of the 800.
Flightaware says "Cancelled".

First time post - I've been following this thread for quite a while and find the information quite interesting. I have a question that I don't think has been asked. What do the SAN experts on this board think will happen if Lorena Gonzalez's assembly bill to move the management of SDIA from the current board system to the Port of San Diego passes in Sacramento. I'm thinking this is a real possibility since the Port is not as well funded in its union related benefit packages and SAN has not done Project Labor Agreements for some of their large capital projects. I think the SAN management is much more competent than the Port's management, but who knows what will happen when politicians are involved.

Should we expect delays to the Terminal 1 expansion projects that are currently being designed? What about new domestic and international routes?

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opi ... story.html

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opi ... story.html

AZTECFAN wrote:

First time post - I've been following this thread for quite a while and find the information quite interesting. I have a question that I don't think has been asked. What do the SAN experts on this board think will happen if Lorena Gonzalez's assembly bill to move the management of SDIA from the current board system to the Port of San Diego passes in Sacramento. I'm thinking this is a real possibility since the Port is not as well funded in its union related benefit packages and SAN has not done Project Labor Agreements for some of their large capital projects. I think the SAN management is much more competent than the Port's management, but who knows what will happen when politicians are involved.

Should we expect delays to the Terminal 1 expansion projects that are currently being designed? What about new domestic and international routes?

That is a really good question. I've heard about Lorena Gonzalez's assembly bill about folding SDIA management to the Port Authority,
unfortunately, I'm just looking at this as an ordinary joe.I'm hoping that someone else on this thread can really shed some light on this.
I'm wondering why the Port Authorty and SDIA management can't just work together? The Port Aurthorthy can focus on the traffic issues
around SAN, while SDIA management continues to focus on the T-1 replaement?

SANMAN66 wrote:

I can usually catch the northbound flights when they head
in over Mission Valley, the JAL 787 looks beautiful when it comes in during the mid-morning hours

I remember the first few times I saw the JAL 787 fly in over mission valley, I was struck at how it seemed to glow as it soared over. A fellow a.netter explained that it was probably the fact that the composite wings were painted a light color which made the plane stand out against others. I realized he was right - it's those white wings that make the plane appear so bright from below.

SANFan wrote:

Don't forget folks, we've also got Edelweiss's 340 coming to town now too, on Mo and Fr, at various times until the schedule stabilizes on June 1. So on Mondays, SAN has the privilege of having two A340s come a calling!

bb

I'm guessing this might put to rest the "A343 is underpowered" myth. I could see a requirement for it to depart from RWY 9 in, perhaps low visibility/Santa Ana wind conditions. It'll have to make due with 8,400' of usable runway, and then IMMEDIATELY have to clear the obstruction that is Banker's Hill (150', I think?)

...would this potentially incur a weight penalty?

rjsampson wrote:

I'm guessing this might put to rest the "A343 is underpowered" myth. I could see a requirement for it to depart from RWY 9 in, perhaps low visibility/Santa Ana wind conditions. It'll have to make due with 8,400' of usable runway, and then IMMEDIATELY have to clear the obstruction that is Banker's Hill (150', I think?)

...would this potentially incur a weight penalty?

I'm not sure if the A343 is more underpowered than the 747, but there are couple of youtube videos where the BA 744 is
doing RWY-9 takeoffs, which comes as a surprise to me, I always thought that 747s could not do RWY-9 takeoffs due to
steep terrain (Banker's Hill,etc.), if the A343 has the same engine power as the 744, then it should have no problem taking
off from RWY-9. (Those videos of the BA 744 taking off from RWY-9 are awesome!)

AZTECFAN wrote:

First time post - I've been following this thread for quite a while and find the information quite interesting. I have a question that I don't think has been asked. What do the SAN experts on this board think will happen if Lorena Gonzalez's assembly bill to move the management of SDIA from the current board system to the Port of San Diego passes in Sacramento. I'm thinking this is a real possibility since the Port is not as well funded in its union related benefit packages and SAN has not done Project Labor Agreements for some of their large capital projects. I think the SAN management is much more competent than the Port's management, but who knows what will happen when politicians are involved.

Should we expect delays to the Terminal 1 expansion projects that are currently being designed? What about new domestic and international routes?

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opi ... story.html

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opi ... story.html

I'd be wary of anything Lorena Gonzalez proposes and you can bet however she sugar coats this, it's benefiting her union donors.

Everyone talking about the North approach of the heavies. I saw BA super low headed east over La Mesa last Saturday. I thought it was a north approach, just lower. It was actually a missed approach with a north go around. I've never seen them turn that way on a MA, thought it was always to the south.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/BAW273/history/20180407/1425Z/EGLL/KSAN

The next board meeting isn't until next week but some milestones for the FIS project are in the materials. Some of this isn't new but it's nice to have it all in one place.

• Construction, Phase 1 Completion: June 2018
• FIS Build-out Phase 1 Construction: 68% complete
• Gates 48 & 49 reopened
• Gate 51 closed 3/20 & will reopen 4/30
• British Airways & West jet: Construction Completion 4/3
• Japan Airlines: Construction Completion 4/20
• Phase 2 Airside work: 100% Design in progress
• Gate 47 (Phase 2) will close 5/1
• Start of CBP equipment move-in: 5/18/2018

There's also a budget item for 4 electric busses to "Provide transportation between terminals for FIS passengers" to start July 2019. I hadn't heard of these before. Anyone know if these are for airside or landside use?

amadorE175 wrote:

The next board meeting isn't until next week but some milestones for the FIS project are in the materials. Some of this isn't new but it's nice to have it all in one place.

• Construction, Phase 1 Completion: June 2018
• FIS Build-out Phase 1 Construction: 68% complete
• Gates 48 & 49 reopened
• Gate 51 closed 3/20 & will reopen 4/30
• British Airways & West jet: Construction Completion 4/3
• Japan Airlines: Construction Completion 4/20
• Phase 2 Airside work: 100% Design in progress
• Gate 47 (Phase 2) will close 5/1
• Start of CBP equipment move-in: 5/18/2018

There's also a budget item for 4 electric busses to "Provide transportation between terminals for FIS passengers" to start July 2019. I hadn't heard of these before. Anyone know if these are for airside or landside use?

Some of these dates may be off, I visually can confirm Gate 51 closed April 3rd and hasn't been used since HA pushed out of that gate that date. They have now resorted to Gate 48, Gate 49 is still in use at DL.

I'd be wary of anything Lorena Gonzalez proposes and you can bet however she sugar coats this, it's benefiting her union donors.

I agree with you completely. At least the San Diego Union Tribune is taking a realistic view.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opi ... story.html

Just an interesting tidbit of info I discovered just now as I was searching for SAN-OGG flights on HA for an upcoming trip: it looks as if most dates in May and June are on the 767-300 instead of the A321. Does anyone know if this is an upgauge due to demand, or just the result of A321 teething issues?

Scooter wrote:

Just an interesting tidbit of info I discovered just now as I was searching for SAN-OGG flights on HA for an upcoming trip: it looks as if most dates in May and June are on the 767-300 instead of the A321. Does anyone know if this is an upgauge due to demand, or just the result of A321 teething issues?

Hey Scooter. There have been a few threads on the subject of HA's 321 fleet in the last month or two.

Essentially, the deliveries are FUBAR these days -- due to engine issues -- for HA as well as many other customers of the NEOs. Many of HA's new summer flights starring their new aircraft are cancelled, delayed, or at least being substituted for. The last I heard was that the inaugural of SAN-OGG has been delayed until May 17 (from the 1st) but that it would then operate as promised (with the NEO.) From what you're reporting, HA is instead subbing 767s for some of our Maui flights. (At least that's better than some of the alternatives!) I hope there is at least daily service in the market as originally scheduled.

If I were planning a trip to Maui from SAN, on HA, I would be aware that the carrier's plans for the route this summer might continue changing -- at a minimum, the aircraft type to be used on any given day. (I might use AS this year and hopefully, by 2019, HA will have an actual fleet of 321NEOS in-house!)

You might also want to keep checking the HA Press Releases page on their website; I know some of these changes are being officially written up there.

That's my take and understanding on the situation. Anyone else have anything to add, or correct?

bb

SANFan wrote:

HA is instead subbing 767s for some of our Maui flights. (At least that's better than some of the alternatives!)

bb

I'll take a 767 over an A321 any day!!

SANFan wrote:

Scooter wrote:

Just an interesting tidbit of info I discovered just now as I was searching for SAN-OGG flights on HA for an upcoming trip: it looks as if most dates in May and June are on the 767-300 instead of the A321. Does anyone know if this is an upgauge due to demand, or just the result of A321 teething issues?

Hey Scooter. There have been a few threads on the subject of HA's 321 fleet in the last month or two.

Essentially, the deliveries are FUBAR these days -- due to engine issues -- for HA as well as many other customers of the NEOs. Many of HA's new summer flights starring their new aircraft are cancelled, delayed, or at least being substituted for. The last I heard was that the inaugural of SAN-OGG has been delayed until May 17 (from the 1st) but that it would then operate as promised (with the NEO.) From what you're reporting, HA is instead subbing 767s for some of our Maui flights. (At least that's better than some of the alternatives!) I hope there is at least daily service in the market as originally scheduled.

If I were planning a trip to Maui from SAN, on HA, I would be aware that the carrier's plans for the route this summer might continue changing -- at a minimum, the aircraft type to be used on any given day. (I might use AS this year and hopefully, by 2019, HA will have an actual fleet of 321NEOS in-house!)

You might also want to keep checking the HA Press Releases page on their website; I know some of these changes are being officially written up there.

That's my take and understanding on the situation. Anyone else have anything to add, or correct?

bb

I am scheduled to fly SANOGG in less than a month. When I booked I was originally booked N/S both ways. Shortly after the announcement of the teething issues, the outbound leg switched to SANHNLOGG, but still remained N/S on the inbound and on a 321. So I just looked at my itinerary and HA38 for 17MAY is now a 763. I am actually surprised it just didn't switch to one stop via HNL. Anyways, adds a new type to my log as I've been on more 321s than 767s.

Hi all - new poster here with a question about the SAN curfew. I was on AA517 from PHL-SAN the other night. The flight is scheduled to land at ~11:30 PM, however after some maintenance issues on the ground in Philadelphia we were told that SAN has a "hard curfew" after midnight and we would thus be diverted to ONT and bused the rest of the way which is exactly what happened. However, there was a passenger on the plane who was insistent that the curfew is for departures only and does not affect arriving flights. The airport website appears to back her up, stating "There are no noise related Time of Day Restrictions on arriving aircraft. Arrivals are permitted 24-hours a day." (http://www.san.org/Airport-Noise/Noise- ... -explained) Anyone have any thoughts on why we were diverted? Maybe the website is just out of date, or there is a fine after midnight AA didn't want to pay? Any insight would be appreciated!

TigerTheTurtle wrote:

Hi all - new poster here with a question about the SAN curfew. I was on AA517 from PHL-SAN the other night. The flight is scheduled to land at ~11:30 PM, however after some maintenance issues on the ground in Philadelphia we were told that SAN has a "hard curfew" after midnight and we would thus be diverted to ONT and bused the rest of the way which is exactly what happened. However, there was a passenger on the plane who was insistent that the curfew is for departures only and does not affect arriving flights. The airport website appears to back her up, stating "There are no noise related Time of Day Restrictions on arriving aircraft. Arrivals are permitted 24-hours a day." (http://www.san.org/Airport-Noise/Noise- ... -explained) Anyone have any thoughts on why we were diverted? Maybe the website is just out of date, or there is a fine after midnight AA didn't want to pay? Any insight would be appreciated!

Normally the passenger is correct in that the curfew is for departures only. However there's a current project to repave the runway. Since we only have one, the only way to do it is the close the runway completely and repave a little bit each night. So for now, the curfew means no departures or arrivals between midnight and 5am.

https://www.10news.com/news/san-diego-a ... ed-nightly

hawaiian717 wrote:

TigerTheTurtle wrote:

Hi all - new poster here with a question about the SAN curfew. I was on AA517 from PHL-SAN the other night. The flight is scheduled to land at ~11:30 PM, however after some maintenance issues on the ground in Philadelphia we were told that SAN has a "hard curfew" after midnight and we would thus be diverted to ONT and bused the rest of the way which is exactly what happened. However, there was a passenger on the plane who was insistent that the curfew is for departures only and does not affect arriving flights. The airport website appears to back her up, stating "There are no noise related Time of Day Restrictions on arriving aircraft. Arrivals are permitted 24-hours a day." (http://www.san.org/Airport-Noise/Noise- ... -explained) Anyone have any thoughts on why we were diverted? Maybe the website is just out of date, or there is a fine after midnight AA didn't want to pay? Any insight would be appreciated!

Normally the passenger is correct in that the curfew is for departures only. However there's a current project to repave the runway. Since we only have one, the only way to do it is the close the runway completely and repave a little bit each night. So for now, the curfew means no departures or arrivals between midnight and 5am.

https://www.10news.com/news/san-diego-a ... ed-nightly

That makes sense thank you for the clarification

Today, Wednesday, Apr 25, VX no longer exists. (From a SAN perspective, IMHO, the single-routé carrier will not be missed by many... The same, or even better, frequency of flights to/from SFO will continue, simply with a different livery.)

Apparently, the VX ticket counter in T2E, next to AA, is no more; THE Alaska ticket counter remains in T1W.

However, gate 26 in T2E will continue to be used by Alaska for, at least for now, all of AS's (Airbus) SFO departures. When a passenger checks in at the AS ticket counter/kiosk, he/she will be directed to the correct gate and terminal. The only issue I can see is that a SFO-bound traveler is going to need extra time to walk from the T1W ticket counter over to the T2E security clearance and out to gate 26.

Two other issues I see in the near future are 1) what gate will Airbus flights to other destinations besides SFO -- upcoming flights to SEA, Cabo, and ??? -- be using, and 2) what will AS do with pax connecting from or to SFO from another AS flight that will be arriving/departing from a gate in T1W? Will there be some sort of shuttle behind security connecting AS's ops in T2E and T1W or will those unfortunate pax have to break security while walking between the two terminals, only to have to clear TSA again?

I hope there is or soon will be some plan to not abuse connecting pax who have the bad luck to have to change terminals during their connection at SAN.

In early 2019, all of Alaska's ops will relocate to T2E so any of these issues will disappear. (But that is prolly 8-10 months away...)

bb

SANFan wrote:

2) what will AS do with pax connecting from or to SFO from another AS flight that will be arriving/departing from a gate in T1W? Will there be some sort of shuttle behind security connecting AS's ops in T2E and T1W or will those unfortunate pax have to break security while walking between the two terminals, only to have to clear TSA again?

I hope there is or soon will be some plan to not abuse connecting pax who have the bad luck to have to change terminals during their connection at SAN.
bb

I'm wondering about this too. I flew out of T1W and AS has put up signs directing connecting passengers to check with a gate agent. I was short on time so I didn't have time to snap a photo or talk to an agent. I've sent an email to clarify. Will update with any answer.

amadorE175 wrote:

The next board meeting isn't until next week but some milestones for the FIS project are in the materials. Some of this isn't new but it's nice to have it all in one place.

There's also a budget item for 4 electric busses to "Provide transportation between terminals for FIS passengers" to start July 2019. I hadn't heard of these before. Anyone know if these are for airside or landside use?

I'm wondering if these buses might also be used for intra-AS connections between T2E and T1W and even for WN connections involving their handful of flights using T1W with their main ops in T1E? That would make sense to me. This would of course require using the buses airside. I'd be curious to see what, if anything, you hear back.

bb

TigerTheTurtle wrote:

Hi all - new poster here with a question about the SAN curfew. I was on AA517 from PHL-SAN the other night. The flight is scheduled to land at ~11:30 PM, however after some maintenance issues on the ground in Philadelphia we were told that SAN has a "hard curfew" after midnight and we would thus be diverted to ONT and bused the rest of the way which is exactly what happened. However, there was a passenger on the plane who was insistent that the curfew is for departures only and does not affect arriving flights. The airport website appears to back her up, stating "There are no noise related Time of Day Restrictions on arriving aircraft. Arrivals are permitted 24-hours a day." (http://www.san.org/Airport-Noise/Noise- ... -explained) Anyone have any thoughts on why we were diverted? Maybe the website is just out of date, or there is a fine after midnight AA didn't want to pay? Any insight would be appreciated!

Hi! Glad you're here!
It's true as the other poster mentioned, they're doing some work on the runway, normally arrivals are around the clock.
(I've flown into SAN a couple of times after midnight), there used to be a USAirways flight that used to arrive every
morning around 1:00am. I think it was from LAS.

SANMAN66 wrote:

(I've flown into SAN a couple of times after midnight), there used to be a USAirways flight that used to arrive every
morning around 1:00am. I think it was from LAS.

Probably was LAS, since US Airways and America West before them had a bank of flights leaving LAS between 11pm and 12am.

My latest arrival at SAN was 2:30am on a very delayed Hawaiian 767 from HNL.

When does the work start on the runway? I was at the County Administration building and I saw a plane depart SAN a little after 1:00am! They were taxiing at a fast pace before takeoff!I guess they'll get fined departing after curfew.

SANFan wrote:

amadorE175 wrote:

The next board meeting isn't until next week but some milestones for the FIS project are in the materials. Some of this isn't new but it's nice to have it all in one place.

There's also a budget item for 4 electric busses to "Provide transportation between terminals for FIS passengers" to start July 2019. I hadn't heard of these before. Anyone know if these are for airside or landside use?

I'm wondering if these buses might also be used for intra-AS connections between T2E and T1W and even for WN connections involving their handful of flights using T1W with their main ops in T1E? That would make sense to me. This would of course require using the buses airside. I'd be curious to see what, if anything, you hear back.

bb

Well, it doesn't look like the buses will be for AS connections. The reply from the airport indicates that connecting pax will have to walk or take a cart between the terminals and re-clear security with a recommended 1.5 hour connection time. I suppose it's not surprising that there's not a better plan since AS will be moving relatively soon and the volume of connecting pax likely small. I have to say, it will be very strange to catch AS flights from T2E once the move takes place. T1W is increasingly crowded but I'll miss the rotunda.

JetBlue, Spirit, Sun Country, and Allegiant Airlines will be moving to T1W.

What changes are airlines making Alaska is moving who are they replacing and who is replacing Alaska or is it reconstruction?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Apparently AS and F9 are both moving to T2E in early 2019 AFAIK. (Seems like Frontier could have just stayed put in T1W?)

And according to Amador'

JetBlue, Spirit, Sun Country, and Allegiant Airlines will be moving to T1W.

Do we know if that's the complete list of cx that will live in T1W?

So if that's it for those moving to T1W, then I would guess that WN is going to be using several gates there as well; the 4 cx listed by Amador' wouldn't possibly need more than 5 or 6 gates would they? And there are 8 gates in T1W. So it looks like WN might gain 2 or 3 more gates in T1W. And I hope at least they will start some kind of inter-terminal shuttle to carry their connecting pax between T1E and T1W.

bb

Southwest has announced the initial California cities for their upcoming Hawaii service:

https://www.southwest.com/html/air/news ... awaii.html

SAN, OAK, SJC, SMF