Opinions on using LAX?

[alexcr]

I'm curious what folks see as the pros and cons of using the FBOs at LAX, from both a flight standpoint and a passenger experience standpoint.

Our outbound flights would be early morning departures (~6:30 AM) on Fridays and Saturdays, and our return flights would be late evening returns (~8:00 PM) on Sundays and Mondays.

While I think my preference would be to use nearby HHR, that might not always be an option. And VNY and BUR are likely too far a drive north for some of our passengers. Similarly, LGB might be a bit too far south.

I should note that cost wouldn't be a factor here, as we wouldn't be the ones incurring any additional fees from using LAX.

Thanks in advance!

 

[jayhawk74]

You may want to look at ONT. Also once traffic returns to normal (or even 3/4 of normal) there will be delays that will surpass the additional drive time to LGB. BUR. VNY, and ONT.

 

[alexcr]

You may want to look at ONT. Also once traffic returns to normal (or even 3/4 of normal) there will be delays that will surpass the additional drive time to LGB. BUR. VNY, and ONT.

Thanks, @jayhawk74. Do you think there would be delays even at the hours we'd be flying in and out?

 

[Ravioli]

HHR, SMO, and TOA would all be better than LAX for passenger and pilot experience.

 

[Aviatorbrew]

You can’t go wrong with burbank

 

[AA5Bman]

It sounds like you’re considering some sort of charter or commercial service? HHR would be ideal if you’re trying to be in the South Bay, Torrance probably next. Why not Torrance if HHR doesn’t work? I don’t know if this is still true, but I always had difficulty getting an IFR clearance into HHR due to proximity with LAX.

If you’re trying to be more convenient than the airlines... don’t make your passengers go to LAX! Ugh. It’s just such a cluster around there...

 

[alexcr]

It sounds like you’re considering some sort of charter or commercial service? HHR would be ideal if you’re trying to be in the South Bay, Torrance probably next. Why not Torrance if HHR doesn’t work? I don’t know if this is still true, but I always had difficulty getting an IFR clearance into HHR due to proximity with LAX.

If you’re trying to be more convenient than the airlines... don’t make your passengers go to LAX! Ugh. It’s just such a cluster around there...

We'd be using charter operators and/or card programs for flights. Regarding LAX...

• I was hoping that at the early morning hours we'd be flying out - and, to a lesser extent, the hours we'd be flying back in - we'd be able to avoid some of the issues typically associated with LAX. Do folks disagree?

• I've been told that since we'd of course be using the FBOs at LAX, which are located away from the terminals, it would be a lot easier getting in and getting out, at least from a ground transportation standpoint. Is that not the case?

It seems like some operators are tentative about using HHR, even with light to midsize jets, I believe due to the somewhat short runway. I imagine it would be the same deal with TOA, where I believe the runway is fairly similar? Also, I figure if we're looking at TOA, we might as well use LGB at that point. SMO wouldn't work due to all the restrictions there, and I think the runway there is even shorter than HHR and TOA. ONT is way too far away.

 

[kayoh190]

I honestly don't think LAX is that big of a PITA if cost isn't an issue. The FBOs are on the south complex away from all the airliner traffic and are immediately off the 105 freeway. In my 135 days we'd use LAX all the time when curfews were an issue at LGB/SNA, and especially these days when air traffic has dropped off a cliff, I'd go for it.

 

[Ventucky Red]

There are shuttles that go from LAX to BUR, and it is a $40 Uber ride... Shouldn't be too much of a stretch for your passengers... you're going pay more than that in landing fees at LAX @ $6.00 per 1000 lbs

 

[AA5Bman]

In a normal economy, a 6:30AM departure wouldn't get your passengers out of being in rush hour. The 405/105 interchange can be slammed at four in the morning. I remember this article "Top 10 Worst Traffic Spots in the World!!" and three of them were on the 405 within a handful of miles of LAX - also coinciding with my commute at the time, ugh. FWIW, I will admit that not having to go through the LAX horseshoe would make departing LAX a lot less stressful, but the 405/105/Century/PCH/Sepulveda BS around LAX is a lot more intense and congested than the Crenshaw/120th/Prarie zone at HHR.

Now that I think about it, I don't think Torrance will work because I think (can't really remember) they have Santa Monica-like rules and limit departures before 7AM. HHR has a number of commercial operators and good amount of jet traffic. Is 4900' really that short at sea-level? I am not a jet operator, just a regular Joe that lived in the South Bay for a long time and flew (and had my plane based at) HHR. And had the world's worst commute!

 

[Ravioli]

Friends don't make friends drive to LAX.
The best way to get to LAX is in a coffin.

Those bits of advice also cover the ENTIRE area west of the 405 between Manchester and Rosecrans avenues.

 

[Geosync]

If BUR or LGB, are too far then just do LAX, especially since they're paying. But explain the options beforehand. If they complain after the LAX experience then for the future you suggest BUR or LGB and a black car waiting at the FBO. VNY is always a clust*uck but they may like the optics of getting off the jet at a busy FBO like movie stars and there is a lot of jet support and FBOs at VNY.

BUR is so easy that I can't believe how many operators cram into VNY.

 

[alexcr]

In a normal economy, a 6:30AM departure wouldn't get your passengers out of being in rush hour. The 405/105 interchange can be slammed at four in the morning. I remember this article "Top 10 Worst Traffic Spots in the World!!" and three of them were on the 405 within a handful of miles of LAX - also coinciding with my commute at the time, ugh. FWIW, I will admit that not having to go through the LAX horseshoe would make departing LAX a lot less stressful, but the 405/105/Century/PCH/Sepulveda BS around LAX is a lot more intense and congested than the Crenshaw/120th/Prarie zone at HHR.

Now that I think about it, I don't think Torrance will work because I think (can't really remember) they have Santa Monica-like rules and limit departures before 7AM. HHR has a number of commercial operators and good amount of jet traffic. Is 4900' really that short at sea-level? I am not a jet operator, just a regular Joe that lived in the South Bay for a long time and flew (and had my plane based at) HHR. And had the world's worst commute!

Interesting. I've been mostly based in LA for the past six years, and my experience is a bit different. I've found that it's a pretty late-rising city, and if you're on the roads before 7:00 AM, traffic is typically pretty reasonable. Especially if you're being driven to LAX from the north, it can be a pretty breezy trip. I suppose it can be a different story when you're being driven to LAX from the south, e.g. the South Bay or Orange County, but even then it doesn't seem too crazy. 8:00 AM and onward, though, it is indeed brutal.

As for the runway length at HHR and perhaps TOA, I think it depends on the operator. It seems like some light and midsize operators might just be a little more cautious. For whatever it's worth, I do know that on the occasional wet day, even the main operator based at HHR has to ferry their jets to another airport.

 

[alexcr]

If BUR or LGB, are too far then just do LAX, especially since they're paying. But explain the options beforehand. If they complain after the LAX experience then for the future you suggest BUR or LGB and a black car waiting at the FBO. VNY is always a clust*uck but they may like the optics of getting off the jet at a busy FBO like movie stars and there is a lot of jet support and FBOs at VNY.

BUR is so easy that I can't believe how many operators cram into VNY.

Yeah, I have nothing against BUR and VNY. It's just that when you potentially have some of your passengers coming from the South Bay or even Orange County, BUR and VNY might as well be up in San Francisco. LAX and HHR are definitely the most central, in my opinion, for the greater LA metro area, especially when you potentially have passengers coming from the north and south.

 

[alexcr]

A lot of the responses so far have been about road traffic, but I'm even more so curious to get people's perspective on potential flight issues, and the associated potential for delays, to be aware of at LAX.

Again, our outbound flights would be early morning departures (~6:30 AM) on Fridays and Saturdays, and our return flights would be late evening returns (~8:00 PM) on Sundays and Mondays. So, if we have to use LAX, my hope is that our early departures would put us at a lower risk of delays. Am I being overoptimistic? And how about potential issues for the return flights? Note that this would be when things are expected to return somewhat to normal.

I'd be curious what folks with experience flying into and out of LAX think. In case it's helpful, we'd be using either the Atlantic FBO or Signature FBO there.

 

[AA5Bman]

@alexcr It is true that if you had to pick approaching LAX from the north or south on a weekday at 6AM, it would be a lot better, traffic-wise to do it from the north. Where are the clients?

 

[alexcr]

@alexcr It is true that if you had to pick approaching LAX from the north or south on a weekday at 6AM, it would be a lot better, traffic-wise to do it from the north. Where are the clients?

It will mostly be a mix, which is why the centrality of LAX (and HHR, if it works) is pretty appealing.

Of course, if we have particular trips where it's mainly just passengers coming from either the south or north, we can always adjust accordingly and use one of the other airports we've been discussing.

 

[Dave Theisen]

As a charter customer, trust me, you are still the one paying the fees.

 

[alexcr]

As a charter customer, trust me, you are still the one paying the fees.

I hear ya, but my point is, we're being charged the same whether we use VNY versus HHR versus LAX versus whatever else. So that's not a factor here.

 

[kayoh190]

A lot of the responses so far have been about road traffic, but I'm even more so curious to get people's perspective on potential flight issues, and the associated potential for delays, to be aware of at LAX.

It's been a long time since I've done 135 in and out of LAX, but back then I did it a lot, and didn't feel the delays were all that bad, if there were any at all. Sometimes we'd have to reposition an airplane from SNA/LGB to LAX to prepare for an early morning departure, and even just grabbing the TEC route meant *at most* an extra 5-10 minutes at the end of the runway before being released. On the outbound, sometimes we'd have a 15-20 minute taxi for departure because of the line of airliners, but usually it was far less.

I stand by my original post - if it's the most convenient airport to drive to and cost doesn't matter, I think it's a fine option. A lot of people posting on this thread are bitching about LAX as an airline passenger. It's an entirely different airport when rolling up to Signature to step onto your private jet.

 

[RyanB]

Ross @ LGB is awesome!

 

[Shawn]

Even though you will be flying private out of an FBO likely outside rush hour traffic, know that from a customer perception LAX is still notoriously awful in regards to traffic, delays, cancelations...you will mitigate a lot of that but the prection is still there form the customer who might not might not mind traveling a few min to get out of another airport that may to them at least seem more efficient.

To many LAX is an airport of last retort and would gladly sacrifice amenities, convince, and a bit more time for ease of use and better experience.

 

[alexcr]

Even though you will be flying private out of an FBO likely outside rush hour traffic, know that from a customer perception LAX is still notoriously awful in regards to traffic, delays, cancelations...you will mitigate a lot of that but the prection is still there form the customer who might not might not mind traveling a few min to get out of another airport that may to them at least seem more efficient.

To many LAX is an airport of last retort and would gladly sacrifice amenities, convince, and a bit more time for ease of use and better experience.

That's a fair point. Only problem is that LAX to, say, VNY or BUR is a lot more than an additional few minutes. With no traffic, which is rarely the case in LA, that's a 30 minute drive. With heavy traffic, that can easily be a 90 minute drive. So for someone coming from the south, it can quickly become unviable.

 

[N1120A]

You may want to look at ONT. Also once traffic returns to normal (or even 3/4 of normal) there will be delays that will surpass the additional drive time to LGB. BUR. VNY, and ONT.

ONT is in a terrible location for higher end clientele.

It sounds like you’re considering some sort of charter or commercial service? HHR would be ideal if you’re trying to be in the South Bay, Torrance probably next. Why not Torrance if HHR doesn’t work? I don’t know if this is still true, but I always had difficulty getting an IFR clearance into HHR due to proximity with LAX.

If you’re trying to be more convenient than the airlines... don’t make your passengers go to LAX! Ugh. It’s just such a cluster around there...

I've had no issues getting IFR into or out of HHR. They are pretty good about it these days.

We'd be using charter operators and/or card programs for flights. Regarding LAX...

• I was hoping that at the early morning hours we'd be flying out - and, to a lesser extent, the hours we'd be flying back in - we'd be able to avoid some of the issues typically associated with LAX. Do folks disagree?

• I've been told that since we'd of course be using the FBOs at LAX, which are located away from the terminals, it would be a lot easier getting in and getting out, at least from a ground transportation standpoint. Is that not the case?

It seems like some operators are tentative about using HHR, even with light to midsize jets, I believe due to the somewhat short runway. I imagine it would be the same deal with TOA, where I believe the runway is fairly similar? Also, I figure if we're looking at TOA, we might as well use LGB at that point. SMO wouldn't work due to all the restrictions there, and I think the runway there is even shorter than HHR and TOA. ONT is way too far away.

HHR's runway is 4884', with an LDA on 25 of 4193'. Unless you are using the biggest of biz jets, you're gonna be fine. SMO is now 3500', so you would have an issue with anything that was too big. Then again, they just did SMO-TEB in a Falcon 8X.