Honestly, the way American politics works makes it somewhat more efficient if someone can have influence on the internet than simply taking a position in office
If the Angels get to be a Los Angeles team in Anaheim then Ontario can definitely be a LA airport. Plus look how many major metro airports are actually more than an hour outside of town.
No. Nonono. No. We are not doing a Los Angeles Airport at Ontario and Anaheim and Desert Center. It's going to be called Ontario and just Ontario and everybody will just have to live with that. A lot of people spent a lot of effort to get it away from Los Angeles-it is not going back.
The Angel’s name and his proposed name is plain ridiculous. LaGuardia does just fine without a geographic name. How about Southern California International?
I had a moment in the middle of watching this one where I realized just how much work goes into each of these videos. Thanks for everything you do. These videos are such a great resource.
RE: an infill station at UC Riverside, it was originally planned with the Perris Valley Line. It was supposed to be along Watkins, and I fought for it hard, but a bunch of people who bought houses next to train tracks didn't want to listen to trains. It's obvious, but you're gonna have to fight a very angry hornet's nest called Friends of the Hills.
Yeah, now there is a station with UCR in the name that is NOWHERE near UCR and at one point didn't even have a bus connection to it (I think they added it back recently). Watkins wasn't perfect. There would be no room for parking and probably at least a house or two would have had to demolished. There would still need to be a shuttle bus to UCR because even though it would literally be across the street from campus property, it's the very edge of campus with nothing except the maintenance yard and some dorms within easy walking distance. But it would beat what we ended up with.
38:05 I like how you mention not needing to relocate a station here if future changes mean that this line will be disused. What the region needs is a concrete long range plan that they’ll stick to and see through. This includes land acquisition, ensuring that rights of way are protected (e.g. on interstates, power corridors), and not changing direction when there is a change in government - which is what happens literally everywhere. LA is doing a lot & doing some of it right too; but it’s got so much damage to undo that it’s going to take a century of effort and planning to reshape it into a sustainable city for the future. Great vid as always. 😊
I agree with you but politics still get in the way. LA Metro bought a freight right of way in the South Bay decades ago and now the nimbys living along are mad about the future C/K Line extension in Torrance that will use that very right of way. LA Metro just voted to continue to use the right of way but the NIMBYs are threatening a lawsuit.
I appreciate all of your videos. As a Transit Civil Engineer your videos are amazing and really help educate the public, support future expansion funding, and make my day. Thank you for all your hard work.
8:00: To make the point even stronger,I would have counted _four_ east-west freeways (that are always slammed) connecting the LA area to the Inland Empire. I-210/CA-210 (Pasadena Freeway/Foothill Freeway), I-10 (San Bernardino Freeway), CA-60 (Pomona Freeway/Moreno Valley Freeway), and CA-91 (Riverside Freeway). I think 91 was the one not shown. That one "originates" in Torrance on the coast (south of LAX) and then connects southern LA _county_ to both Orange County and the Inland Empire. Despite missing LA proper, this freeway has occasionally earned the distinction "busiest" highway in the U.S., so absolutely merits inclusion. It intersects I-15 in Corona, at a point only 10 minutes or so (at freeway speed) from the airport. If one originates in Riverside and drives direct to LAX (75-ish minutes), CA-91 is most of the route. Missing that drive on the 91 alone makes ONT the more convenient airport. Similarly, anyone leaving OC bound for ONT will be on CA-91. Also worth pointing out that I-15 connects (transects) all four of these east-west freeway corridors basically at ONT. With a buffer of a few city blocks, the airport is bounded by freeways on three sides. Sandwiched between I-10 (north) and CA-60 (south), I-15 skirts its eastern boundaries. That north-south corridor on I-15 from CA-210 to CA-91 takes about 20 minutes because the "vertical" spacing between all four E-W freeways is quite narrow at that point. One could within about 20 minutes exit I-210 to SB I-15, then pass the 10, ONT, and the 60, before the merge onto the 91. That's a lot of E-W lanes!
I think for locals, there's a sense of pride in the name ONTARIO... not to mention the $$$ spent to re-brand ONT away from LA. That was a whole thing a while back. Keep up the great and diligent work!
A direct regional rail link from LAUS to ONT would be fantastic for ONT's growth and for the entire L.A. Metro area. Getting from LAX to DTLA is never going to be easy and the environmental impacts of LAX are terrible.
I propose they fast track the Los Angeles Union-Rancho Cucamunga California HSR project to ASAP because that would enable both HSR to Los Angeles-Ontario International Airport and L.A. Union Station to be connected to Las Vegas. And since the corridor is basically just getting electrified and double-tracked with grade separation without any crazy long or expensive tunnel sections lord knows SOME form of government could find the cash for it, especially if it was tied in with Metrolink electrification the same way the Caltrain line between San Francisco and San Jose is a joint effort that benefits both rail operators...
Beefing up San Bernardino service for eventual HSR service would be GREAT! CAHSR is so inefficient as is that it'll be a miracle when the IOS (from Bakersfield to Merced) opens!
@@PASH3227 Sadly I agree! And yet the Central Valley, Palmdale/Lancaster and I.E. regions are the fastest growing in the state (for obvious housing cost/sprawl space reasons) so maybe it will be less about connecting them to SF and LA and more with themselves soon enough... Or maybe connecting these cheaper cities with jobs in LA or the Bay a few times a week commuting via HSR or beefed up regional rail... Even with its flaws I hope most of the project can be salvaged... It's good on paper, just really really messy in reality...
i have lived in rancho cucamonga all my life and i am BEGGING for a crumb of public transit and walkable communities. when i used to live in europe and on my vacations in asia, i cry everytime i can walk out the door and be on some form of public transit. here, i have to drive an hour in any direction to get to somewhere i like being. with that said i am excited for the immense potential for the inland empire. it's a shitty place to be, for now, but its MY shitty place. i just dont wanna grow old and still have to rely on a car to get myself around, if thats the case then i'm moving elsewhere for quality of life.
34:50 I don't get it, why not have the Las Vegas and San Diego HSR lines branch off to the East of ONT instead? (In other words -> I get why they would want Rancho Cucamonga as a terminal in a 1st phase, but why not disconnect it in a 2nd phase? That way Ontario stn would eventually take a ~similar role to that of e g the Amsterdam airport stn)
I literally grew up at ONT from the 70s to 90s. My dad was part of the original joint police/fire operation controlled by LAX. I used to travel regularly from ONT to wherever I needed to go (I grew up in Ontario and went to college at Redlands) using its original tiny terminal on the west end. I now live in Sacramento and it's really unfortunate that the terrible traffic in SoCal makes Long Beach and Burbank my current choices. Burbank actually provides a compelling example of what's possible, almost by accident. I land at the airport, walk across the street, grab a 20-minute train for about $7, and I'm in downtown LA's central rain terminal. Contrary to popular belief, I can literally get all over LA without car using this strategy. ONT is still suffering from the underutilization and mistreatment under its LAX ownership, and the parochial disrespect of the Inland Empire as a vast wasteland east of LA. Its potential has also been exacerbated by the foolish decision (in my opinion) of California's HSR project to emphasize a connection between LA and San Francisco, something nobody needs, rather than Las Vegas, San Diego, LA and Sacramento, the areas with the most projected need for housing and economic activity involving physical goods. Your video really demonstrates something I was corrected on early in my government career - letting reason and logic creep into your decision making. A funny example of this is the way ONT's second runway was built - LAX said no, and the ONT folks simply ignored them and built it guerrilla-style without any permission. I have no idea how they pulled it off but my dad was quite proud...he and fellow firefighters were out there pouring concrete themselves, LOL.
Wow! I was not expecting all this information, it was entertaining and informative and your explanation were easy to follow, thank you for making such a great video 👍
I don't know how much traffic the lines get but consider that the upper practical limit for intercity/hsr type service (eg 2 narrow doors per 25m car and heavy luggage) is 8 trains per hour per platform track. And that is already stretching it. So if both regional and hsr tracks are to be used to capacity 2 platform tracks per direction each will be necessary at least. With provisions for those the station should be planned for 8 heavy rail tracks in addition to LRT, BRT and rideshare/taxi.
Yes, build the A Line extension! And ugh, SB County needs to wake up and realize how ridiculously stupid the musk tunnels are. When ONT builds new terminals they should definitely look at renumbering them. Maybe switch to letters to avoid confusion between new/old numbers. I'm sure whatever they come up with will be less confusing than LAX's renumbering plan.
All airports within the region should nay MUST start with Los Angeles-__________ just like London. As soon as you have more than one airport in a city with commercial flights it should be mandatory to put the City/Region name in front... I.e. Los Angeles-Palmdale, Los Angeles-Burbank, Los Angeles-Long Beach, Los Angeles-Van Nuys, Los Angeles-Ontario, Los Angeles-Santa Ana, Los Angeles-Victorville, etc. And yes I do agree with the video's main point. With 2 long runways and 24-hour operation all within the actual L.A. metro region this airport has the most potential to act as a second major hub for the region with the most capacity potential especially when you break it down by that graph and where is the closest airport to where people live. Especially when you look at population growth trends and the Inland Empire is still where in California people are streaming into ironically along with the Imperial and Central Valley's... It's the expensive coastal cities that are bleeding residents and are going through an economic hollow out largely due to housing costs and availability...
Fun fact: a few years ago, someone tried to book a business trip for me from Toronto to San Fransisco, but booked Ontario (ONT) to SF instead. I 100% agree with the name change.
@@johnmaster3748 Referring to Orange County transit proposals, not the airport. He alluded he had a longer video he was going to make about OC (I'm sure with no shortage of OC digs).
Alternate idea for use in an emergency (such as them actually building the off brand Teala tunnels). Just take those tunnels, put 4 foot guage tracks in them, and buy copies of the new Glasgow Subway trains, which run in tunnels of a similar size.
1. It will remain Ontario and just Ontario. The locals just spent a lot of effort de-Los Angelesifying it and they ain't going to undo such. 2. I think having the A Line and ARROW meet in Rancho and then have both of them continue to Ontario Airport on the same right of way makes sense. Maybe electricity the ARROW side eventually and have Brightline use those tracks to eventually connect to Ontario for a one seat ride. More duplicated service, but this way everything meets at Rancho and you could transfer from both the A Line and the ARROW to Brightline at Rancho-and transfer from A Line to ARROW without needing to transfer to Metrolink or a bus in between.
As a resident and frequent flyer for ONT. the one thing that baffles me is that for an international airport there is only like two restrooms with one stall for the men it would be nice to not be waiting in a queue after hours of waiting
You could just call it the Pomona Valley Airport. Pomona sounds LA enough. Valley really adds that extra little bit of Cali to it, and helps distinguish it from Panama. Plus it sticks with the small-city theme, and you don't have to mix it up with some other bum nowhere airport like Imperial County.
Dang, I'm just imagining the size of that rail station... it might end up as one of the biggest West of Chicago by Phase 4 if nothing else gets built out West.
The problem with ontario airport vs lax is the ticktes or airfares are more expensive and not too many international flights, so who wants to fly from ontario they should star using more inter flights and cheaper airfares.
They should seriously look at installing an elevated & fully automated 24/7 transit system from the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink station to Ontario International Airport and into the airport terminal similar to either LAX APM or Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport APM. 😊 Other station stops & airport terminals can be added as well like having a station somewhere at Ontario Mills Mall, the convention center/Toyota Arena, & others. Total less than 6 miles.
ONT is about to get much busier if they can connect to Brightline West (to Vegas). Thus creating another, great option for consumers. Edit: METROLINK FUCKIN SUCKS. They add stress to commuting to & past LA Union by never being on time & always having to yield to freight.
I still don't understand why running the A line and Metrolink in the same corridor (from Pomona to Upland) is the best option for that corridor. You have convinced me that I should not simply dismiss those arguments for extending the A line beyond Pomona as duplicative.
Light rail can provide more frequent service than Metrolink, plus Claremont and Montclair are more major stops than North Pomona, with the latter being a transit hub for IE buses. I’m pretty sure Arrow is also looking to extend its service to North Pomona, or at least Montclair (and possibly beyond to LAUS), which means more frequent service between the IE and LA via an easy transfer to the Metro A Line.
@@ChrisJones-gx7fcUsing the DMU trains as seen on the Arrow line, the Metrolink SB Line can very much operate at the same frequencies as Light Rail. Those trains are often referred to as Diesel Light Rail in other countries. As it is, SBCTA has stated again and again that they cannot afford to operate trains on the A line at any headways shorter than 20 minutes and possibly they will need to run 30 minute headways off peak (due to their lack of local funding). In all likelihood most A-line trains will be turning back at Pomona-North even if the line is built (now for $1 Billion???) from Pomona to Montclair. And Montclair is just a Caltrans Park-and-Ride now with some apartments nearby plus a dying mall over a 15 minute walk away.
@@erik_griswold I’d say A Line should at least reach Claremont, as that’s home to a lot of people and a nice walkable downtown, plus the university there. Plus that’s still within LA County so no issue with SBCTA. As for issues with Metro’s “end of line policy” and kicking off riders at the end of the day, which seeing what it’s done in places like Long Beach and Santa Monica can turn cities away from wanting to be a terminus, that’s something that hopefully Metro will be addressing and solving with new policies over the next few years, including fare endorsement and an increased safety presence, as well as better maintaining and cleaning of trains, buses and stations, plus things the cities can do to provide more low-income housing and other services to help those people, and be willing to build those places and not listen to the whims of a select few NIMBYs over the greater public.
@@ChrisJones-gx7fc The Metrolink line can (and should) be electrified and double tracked from Redlands to Pomona (and beyond to Baldwin Park). The Stadler FLIRT rolling stock (Arrow) should be easily upgraded to use overhead catenary. I don't see why the A line needs to go on the same corridor, why not cross the San Bernardino Line and run the A line further south (along Holt? or Mission?). That way the Pomona station is an interchange. I guess you could use Pomona-Claremont section to cross the A line over (or under) the Metrolink San Bernardino tracks but I still think the two services should diverge as quickly as possible.
I'm SO GLAD someone made this comment before I had to. When the Gold Line, now A Line, was extended to Azusa ridership at the Covina Metrolink Station fell. transit users opted for the slower option since the frequency was much higher. I expect boardings at the Pomona and Claremont Stations to drop once the A Line serves them since it's cheaper and more frequent. Montclair boardings should grow, as the station will become a major transit hub. Metrolink should study closing the Claremont and Pomona Stations so Metrolink and LA Metro don't take away riders form each other. Closing the 2 stations would also speed up service, giving Metrolink more time savings. As LA Metro builds out its light rail system and OmniTrans builds out the BRT system, Metrolink needs to compliment, not compete, with these services by being fast and having only a few stations.
Eeeeghghhghg... *LA Empire Airport* is not my favorite but you are unquestionably correct, it would be a major improvement and help tremendously. When first visiting LA I consistently ignored Ontario airport because, get this, I thought it was Ontario Canada that kept popping up. (Of course, when I did figure out it was Ontario, CA, CA, CAlifornia the lack of usable public transit doomed it forever more).
Los Angles Inland would make a good name for the Ontario International Airport with the FAA airport code being LAI (full name - Los Angles Inland Empire International Airport). Los Angles Inland is a good descriptive name with LAI being a good contrast to LAX.
Time to eat the edible and watch another Nandert video. I rewatch them. Also. Have you gone through the best airport yet? Long Beach! You must. Okay. Back to LIA…
Nandert suggested Long Beach close since it's so close to LAX. Little does he know that will never happened because residents LOVE how fast flights out of Long Beach are!
❤ this channel. You deserve way more subs. One critique on this video; why can’t we just nix the parking and build the ONT station next to the airport terminals x, and then Just build shops hotels etc around the station. This would allow people to more directly hop into their trains reducing the need for the APM, which would probably get very congested with your grand plans (i sincerely mean that this was a great video).
Normalize traveling through ONT! I live in OC, but I travel through ONT any chance I get. The best thing about ONT is having flights to East/South East Asia
Really liked this video. One problem, though, just from watching this state for the last 5 decades. Any infrastructure project budgeting, when you look at their numbers, needs the cost budget tripled, or even quadrupled, and the time budget expanded 5x... Nothing can be built here. It is just not possible.
I'm from the IE and Los Angeles Imperial Airport would be confusing to me. Los Angeles - Inland Empire International Aiport doesn't have a ring to it but describes it clearly.
It would be far from a one seat ride but ONT could even get people from OC via Metrolink's IEOC line. If Metrolink ever does an IEOC express to San Bernardino, ONT could be an attractive alternative to LAX, especially for trans-Pacific flights.
I agree that a reliably scheduled Metroliink rail service from OC to ONT would be a welcome change from battling traffic (and uncertain travel times) on the 405 to reach LAX. The video focused on northern connections and connections to DTLA and undersold the potentail of rail from the south, which would also justify the investment in that multi-modal transit center that is the linchpin of the desired regional system. A well-connected ONT alleviates passenger crunching at both LAX and SNA! Imagine also if the Coaster ran express from Oceanside to ONT on Metrolink-owned tracks. (This could work short-term, while we all wait for HSR between LA and SD.)
the IEOC line is also BNSF's Southern Transcon, a very busy freight route that CAHSR was unsuccessfully able to reduce train traffic on with its plan for a new intermodal facility in Colton, which would have opened up space for HSR trains. Their latest LA-Anaheim plan still calls for two electrified passenger tracks and two nonelectrified freight tracks, but only two HSR roundtrips per hour instead of four, with freight potentially being allowed to share one of the electrified tracks if needed. Given the limited capacity, it's unlikely Metrolink would be able to increase frequencies enough from OC to Ontario to make it a viable option, though any increased frequency would be a good thing, especially more weekend service. The better fix for OC-LAX travel should be to extend the Metro C Line the three short miles between its current terminus at the end of the 105 freeway and the Metrolink Norwalk station, allowing an all-rail ride with just two transfers at Norwalk and the LAX APM. It'd probably take longer than driving but should be less stressful not having to deal with traffic or having to go around the horseshoe, although with the opening of the APM it's likely many people will get dropped off/picked up at one of those stations instead.
@@ChrisJones-gx7fcYou are assuming that a connection between the C Line and the Norwalk Metrolink station will ever happen. Metro has gone out of it's way to not do it because the City of Norwalk hates the idea (and for good reason-unless you spend the extra money to tunnel the whole thing it would destroy half the city).
@@Geotpf and you assume it won’t. To my knowledge the city of Norwalk has opened up to the idea more in recent years, and it is on Metro’s Measure M project list albeit way down with a possible opening of 2046. Plus it wouldn’t have to be underground, at least not most of the way. It could relatively easily go on a viaduct along Imperial Highway, with possible stops at Firestone Blvd and Norwalk Blvd, at least the latter. It’s too important a connection to keep missing from Metro’s network, especially with California HSR possibly having a station at Norwalk. I’d say it has much greater certainty than most of the proposals made in this video.
Not a California resident, just visited several times As an outsider, Ontario Int'l Airport is pretty unlucky with naming. Ontario makes people think of Toronto, San Bernardino is used, "Los Angeles" is used by LAX. Perhaps calling it after some famous person is the best way to go
I think I remember LAX having an "Imperial Terminal" that was accessed from Imperial Blvd. One of my siblings took a charter flight to Europe from there. Trans International Airways?
How about creating a video to improve the connection between Orange County and the Inland Empire? Currently, there are no plans for rail transit to link these two regions.
@@HeStoned05But it isn’t along the SR57 corridor. And the IEOC line is desperately under serviced due to it being owned by BNSF between Anaheim and San Bernardino
As someone who lives 10 min drive from this airport, no one here wants to be associated with Los Angeles. Also your plans for that transit platform is pretty unrealistic as that area is smaller than you think.
All the metrolink options are going to be like 1 minute from my house. Lol wonder how the traffic is going to pick up. Theres a bunch of empty space along 8th they could stick a station.
I find this a fun but pointless exercise as demand is not there for transit and lack of transit is not the reason for low demand. LAX is a vortex that benefits by flight, seat or gate caps at LGB, SNA and BUR. ONT does not have a lot of business headquarters requiring travel or else it would have always had more flights. As you note, there are currently no constraints on ONT flights. It even operates 24 hours. Crowded highways leading to/from ONT are the same as elsewhere in the LA area. I'm not sure if you mentioned but SAN also takes some of ONT's "natural" passengers from south of the I-15 split in Temecula and Murietta.
The demand is their? Doesn’t need business flyer! With NEW ownership that’s DOING IT THE RIGHT WAY! It will work! People who live in this area the inland empire DESERVE IT!😊
What about San Bernardino International Airport? that's an airport with even more potential than Ontario imo.. quite literally, it was built to handle up to over 9 million passengers and handle even the largest existing aircraft, including the Airbus A380 and the Boeing 747. instead it's public terminals have gone unused since they were constructed, and the airport as of present only serves commercial cargo aircraft (i.e. Amazon and Fedex), small aircraft/private jets, and a start up airline (breeze airline) that as of 2023 offers public passenger service. I am not sure the reason what happened, but I can only assume there's a financial reason why plans for the airport never came to fruition, but the potential is still there, especially in such a densely population center of San Bernardino city and also the densely populated adjacent cities of Riverside, Moreno Valley, Redlands, Rialto, etc.
Can confirm people think Canada when they hear “Ontario.” There was one time I was flying home from Boston to Phoenix, and my flight was diverted to Ontario due to a dust storm in Phoenix. I presume Mesa Gateway Airport was also affected, and there aren’t any other commercial aviation airports in the valley. When the pilot announced the diversion, a lot of people on the plane thought we were going to Canada.
it's funny, i grew up only knowing ontario, california since i had family living there. it wasn't until years later down the line that i learned of ontario, canada. the only reason i think of the latter now is because i don't hear people mention the former much if at all lol.
The Musk hole is madness. I don’t think most people are aware of how vastly different levels of people are lane (or tunnel) of cars can carry when compared to a rail line. A subway line can carry 10 to 20 thousand people per hour depending on frequency. A light rail can carry roughly half that. A lane for cars can carry - at best - 500 people per hour. It is an order of magnitude of difference! This is why so much of Southern California has been paved - the inefficiency of car traffic (that’s not even counting all the extra space taken up by the sprawling developments that cars permit).
It's not just that, but if I recall, when it first launched, it wasn't even autonomous...which is baffling since most of the current system is grade- separated except for at-grade stops I think? Hell, even your average APM is more advanced than this crap.
@@randomscb-40charger78 the latest version being done by SBCTA and a few other public entity players is an autonomous vehicle on-demand system, similar to one at London's Heathrow Airport. If Ontario remains a relatively small airport, where such a system would meet projected demand, it could make sense, but if Ontario is anticipating the huge growth in passenger numbers that it is, then such a low capacity system would not make sense. If Ontario really is projected to become the second busiest airport in SoCal, it needs a high capacity transit option(s), whether that be an APM from one of the Metrolink SB Line stations (I'd vote Rancho Cucamonga primarily because of Brightline West), a potential LA Metro A Line extension, though with how far that line already is and the issues it's having now with service frequency and scheduling I'm not sure that'd be the best route forward, or both. In the short term increased shuttle service and BRT could suffice, but some type of a rail option, whether an individual system or connected into one or more of the existing ones, absolutely should be in the cards and pursued. LAX's transit is an APM connected to two Metro light rail lines, both of which require a transfer to reach downtown LA, and one of them a second transfer to reach Union Station, making the FlyAway bus still the most convenient as well as fastest option to get between Union Station and LAX. Most likely once the APM opens, FlyAway will terminate at one of its stations, probably Metro Center alongside other buses and Metro light rail. It'd be kinda sad for LAX to have less transit connectivity than Ontario. I'm not sure something as grandiose as what was ultimately envisioned here is feasible, financially or politically, but there certainly could be something done that's a fair enough compromise between this and nothing. I'm a bit skeptical of CAHSR's Phase 2 to San Diego prospects, given their financial struggles now with just Phase 1 between SF and LA and the skepticism that alone may never get done, at least not with the current funding situation. I'm an avid supporter of CAHSR and firmly believe it will reach SF and LA, and by the 2040s for sure if not sooner, but a lot will need to go right for it for that to happen. Reaching Sacramento by 2050 is also very much within the realm of feasibility, as is San Diego via the IE but maybe less so, at least not until the 2060s.
The Southern Californian was conceived in a car, birthed in a car, lost their virginity in a car and knows nothing, through social engineering, about transportation without using a car.
The tunnel itself is fine. It's all the shitty cars inside that's the problem. Ironically these tunnels at 12' are JUUUUUUUUST large enough to squeeze a London deep level tube train down which would make sense if you could pair existing rail subways with cheap tunnelling.. But alas...
The narrowest sections of the London Underground tubes have an interior diameter of 11' 6" which is 6" narrower than the standard sized Musk tunnel... Too bad he's so anti-train because it would be a win--win solution for all if we had automated subways running down these tunnels everywhere... We'd never have traffic jams again!
I have lived in the Inland Empire my whole life and ONT has a lot of potential. Its very modern compared to old LAX. Prices are much cheaper at LAX so many IE residents just travel to LAX to fly which hurts revenue for ONT. The airport needs to reduce prices. The airport is to expensive for the average IE resident
How much extra do you spend on fuel and parking by going to LAX? Also, greater chance of flight delays and traffic to get there. Is it really worth it?
@@tolumnia My parents live in IE as well, and I prefer to fly into LAX when I visit them due to the higher costs of flights to and from ONT, like OP mentioned. I only pay $10 to get to and from LAX using the SB Metrolink line and LAX Flyaway connection. Im not spending on gas, or dealing with traffic. ONT needs to figure out a way to drive down prices on flights, as its losing potential customers to LAX.
@@gilbertobarrios1920 ok but this adds a TON of travel time. From Rancho Cucamonga station to LAX, it's a one hour train ride via Metrolink to Union Station, and another 40 minute FlyAway bus to LAX, not counting transfer time. you're easily adding 2-3 hours, depending on your flight schedule and train/bus schedules. ONT flights are not that much more expensive than LAX.
True but you would save hundreds if you did the Metro. Plus you can always ask for a ride from a friend or family member. Sure it may cost the same if you do the numbers but ONT needs to be competitive if they want to expand. @rustydomino
I really like this. Of course, now we're two letters into a third word (INternational vs INland) but yes, I really like this. Way better than Los Angeles East Airport. or Los Angeles Imperial Airport.
Sending my hate mail right now as an IE resident. All jokes aside, great video on the potential of the ONT airport, and what that could do for the region.
IE native as well mate!!! ONT definitely has a lot of potential but prices are stupidly overpriced compared to LAX. It needs more flights and be more competitive in order to be a power house of an airport
While Nandert's focus is obviously how the airport's potential growth will impact regional transit, I am equally fascinated by how ONT's growth might influence airline traffic. Probably, these are closely connected! Passenger growth drives the need for better transit connections, and better transit spurs the addition of more flights. Could Ontario ever become to LA what Newark EWR is to NY or BWI is for DC? E.g., a busy airport with strong domestic and international options. As Nandert demonstrated, it has the long runways already and also lacks the restrictions faced by the other SoCal candidate air fields. Arguably, SNA and BUR already fill the niche in short-haul domestic service that LaGuardia plays for the New York area and DCA plays for DC. Yet, LA lacks a second airport with substantial long-haul connections, both domestic and international. That is the role ONT should aspire to. I think this vision is feasible for three reasons. First, the three legacy U.S. airlines already use LAX as a hub/crew base. If any one of them chose to "corner the regional market" by upping the ante at a second SoCal airport, they already have local staffing to jumpstart expansion. Such a move by one of United/American/Delta might also spur at least one of their alliance partners to bring international routes with heavy aircraft to the Inland Empire. Second, flights to/from Europe (or the eastern U.S.) would save up to 20-30 minutes of flight time by using ONT instead. That may seem insignficant for a 10 hour flight, but fuel is the airlines' biggest cost. Even that small savings on a daily basis, year after year, could make expanded service to ONT a good investment. Third, we know from the first video in this series that LAX is the #1 airport in the world for origin/destination travel. Since the airlines don't primarily rely on passengers changing planes, shifting some traffic east would have minimal impact on the business model for sucess at LAX. It would be more about whether passengers want to go there. Currently, the biggest drawback to ONT attracting flights from farther away is that many non-local travelers, especially the business fliers, want to head downtown. For them, LAX will be closer to their destination. (It's probably a wash for those tourist travelers bound for Disneyland.) The intermodal tansit center Nandert envisioned mitigates the transfer-time issue with faster service not only to DTLA but to the broader LA basin than comparably available from LAX. I don't know how much growth in passenger numbers would need to occur for ONT to start attracting investment from both transit planners _and_ airlines, but I suspect there's some sweet spot (15 million? 20? 30?) where both the long-haul flights and the investment in regional transit converge to create a virtuous cycle that elevates ONT into just such an airport powerhouse. Not likely in this decade. But, during the '30s? One can see a pathway! Now, if we can just get the transit portion moving....
All the pieces are there for Ontario to flourish including the large reserve land for new terminals, on a future HSR line, near Metrolink and in a part of the region that is the fastest growing... Makes sense to me! It does need an Avelo, Spirit or Southwest or really anchor the traffic though... Everyone else seems to have a dominant player but Ontario...
For several years it was called LA/Ontario International Airport. I personally liked that name as it does serve the eastern part of the LA area. Also, most airlines will list Ontario as an option when you put Los Angeles in their websites as a destination.
As a part-time IE resident, the reason why the airport dropped LA from its official name, all began when the Ontario city government filed a legal complaint against them in April of 2013, claiming that Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) was treating the airport like crap. After years of negotiations, LAWA finally agreed to turn over the airport’s operations to the City of Ontario. In November of 2016, operation of the airport went to the newly-created Ontario International Airport Authority (OIAA) from LAWA, and it has been that way ever since.
Have no care about LA and its airports but this series was awesome, informative and easy to follow. Amazing job also I was waiting for this third video to drop.
I treat ONT as a family secret to avoid the long lines, shitty terminal design, and nightmarish parking/drop-off/pickup of literally every other airport in SoCal. The less people know about ONT the better.
As a Palmdale resident and having thought about it, you're right that a PMD airport wouldn't be much of a player (even with the prevalence of aerospace companies and employees out here). If/when CAHSR and High Desert Corridor rail are built out, it would render regional air service to Northern California or Las Vegas superfluous, and any other short/medium-haul air routes (Denver, Phoenix, Pacific Northwest) would be better served, as you mentioned, by rail *from* the AV to the primary airports (LAX, BUR, ONT).
With how horrible the fight was between LAWA and San Bernardino County, you will never get that airport renamed. LAWA tried its hardest to completely bankrupt ONT and the effects are still being felt
![Tee Grizzley - Blow for Blow (feat. J. Cole) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wNLN5xsx5dc/mqdefault.jpg)
Dude, run for office! You got my vote.
Run for Mayor of Ontario please.
Honestly, the way American politics works makes it somewhat more efficient if someone can have influence on the internet than simply taking a position in office
He won't win in deep-blue California unless if he somehow pretends to be some kind of oppressed minority to fool the voters.
Please!
I physically checked your page 20 times over the last month hoping this gets posted
SAME BRO
no it was actually insane
If the Angels get to be a Los Angeles team in Anaheim then Ontario can definitely be a LA airport. Plus look how many major metro airports are actually more than an hour outside of town.
No. Nonono. No. We are not doing a Los Angeles Airport at Ontario and Anaheim and Desert Center. It's going to be called Ontario and just Ontario and everybody will just have to live with that. A lot of people spent a lot of effort to get it away from Los Angeles-it is not going back.
Ontario WAS an LA airport and was owned by them. Not any more.
I mean Santa Ana does just fine without being called LA anything.
The Angel’s name and his proposed name is plain ridiculous. LaGuardia does just fine without a geographic name. How about Southern California International?
@@ec1628probably won’t use Southern California since an airport already has that in the name.
Its my sleepover and I get to choose the movie!!!
💀
Babe wake up, a Nandert video just dropped
I wish I had a babe 😔
This comment is such a staple for the nandert comments section
@@shlubbers1778Also the @milesintransit comment section.
Me. I’m babe.
@@radudeATL did you wake up, Babe?
I had a moment in the middle of watching this one where I realized just how much work goes into each of these videos. Thanks for everything you do. These videos are such a great resource.
RE: an infill station at UC Riverside, it was originally planned with the Perris Valley Line. It was supposed to be along Watkins, and I fought for it hard, but a bunch of people who bought houses next to train tracks didn't want to listen to trains.
It's obvious, but you're gonna have to fight a very angry hornet's nest called Friends of the Hills.
Yeah, now there is a station with UCR in the name that is NOWHERE near UCR and at one point didn't even have a bus connection to it (I think they added it back recently).
Watkins wasn't perfect. There would be no room for parking and probably at least a house or two would have had to demolished. There would still need to be a shuttle bus to UCR because even though it would literally be across the street from campus property, it's the very edge of campus with nothing except the maintenance yard and some dorms within easy walking distance. But it would beat what we ended up with.
Classic problem that will impede any of these transit plans unless we get some streamlining and governance fixes from the CA state government.
i’m mad that youtube didn’t put this in my regular feed
I watch videos both from my regular feed and my subscription feed
“And you’re not about to tell me that fucking Luton or Stansted are in London” 😂😂😂
ish................ And it's a Mighty Big ISH...
I looove flying into Ontario over LAX! It's SO much easier!!!
38:05 I like how you mention not needing to relocate a station here if future changes mean that this line will be disused. What the region needs is a concrete long range plan that they’ll stick to and see through.
This includes land acquisition, ensuring that rights of way are protected (e.g. on interstates, power corridors), and not changing direction when there is a change in government - which is what happens literally everywhere. LA is doing a lot & doing some of it right too; but it’s got so much damage to undo that it’s going to take a century of effort and planning to reshape it into a sustainable city for the future.
Great vid as always. 😊
I agree with you but politics still get in the way. LA Metro bought a freight right of way in the South Bay decades ago and now the nimbys living along are mad about the future C/K Line extension in Torrance that will use that very right of way.
LA Metro just voted to continue to use the right of way but the NIMBYs are threatening a lawsuit.
I appreciate all of your videos. As a Transit Civil Engineer your videos are amazing and really help educate the public, support future expansion funding, and make my day. Thank you for all your hard work.
Please tell me city/county planners have come to you about your plans youve created?
8:00: To make the point even stronger,I would have counted _four_ east-west freeways (that are always slammed) connecting the LA area to the Inland Empire. I-210/CA-210 (Pasadena Freeway/Foothill Freeway), I-10 (San Bernardino Freeway), CA-60 (Pomona Freeway/Moreno Valley Freeway), and CA-91 (Riverside Freeway). I think 91 was the one not shown. That one "originates" in Torrance on the coast (south of LAX) and then connects southern LA _county_ to both Orange County and the Inland Empire. Despite missing LA proper, this freeway has occasionally earned the distinction "busiest" highway in the U.S., so absolutely merits inclusion. It intersects I-15 in Corona, at a point only 10 minutes or so (at freeway speed) from the airport. If one originates in Riverside and drives direct to LAX (75-ish minutes), CA-91 is most of the route. Missing that drive on the 91 alone makes ONT the more convenient airport. Similarly, anyone leaving OC bound for ONT will be on CA-91.
Also worth pointing out that I-15 connects (transects) all four of these east-west freeway corridors basically at ONT. With a buffer of a few city blocks, the airport is bounded by freeways on three sides. Sandwiched between I-10 (north) and CA-60 (south), I-15 skirts its eastern boundaries. That north-south corridor on I-15 from CA-210 to CA-91 takes about 20 minutes because the "vertical" spacing between all four E-W freeways is quite narrow at that point. One could within about 20 minutes exit I-210 to SB I-15, then pass the 10, ONT, and the 60, before the merge onto the 91. That's a lot of E-W lanes!
I think for locals, there's a sense of pride in the name ONTARIO... not to mention the $$$ spent to re-brand ONT away from LA. That was a whole thing a while back. Keep up the great and diligent work!
A direct regional rail link from LAUS to ONT would be fantastic for ONT's growth and for the entire L.A. Metro area. Getting from LAX to DTLA is never going to be easy and the environmental impacts of LAX are terrible.
here we go!!
I propose they fast track the Los Angeles Union-Rancho Cucamunga California HSR project to ASAP because that would enable both HSR to Los Angeles-Ontario International Airport and L.A. Union Station to be connected to Las Vegas. And since the corridor is basically just getting electrified and double-tracked with grade separation without any crazy long or expensive tunnel sections lord knows SOME form of government could find the cash for it, especially if it was tied in with Metrolink electrification the same way the Caltrain line between San Francisco and San Jose is a joint effort that benefits both rail operators...
Beefing up San Bernardino service for eventual HSR service would be GREAT!
CAHSR is so inefficient as is that it'll be a miracle when the IOS (from Bakersfield to Merced) opens!
@@PASH3227 Sadly I agree! And yet the Central Valley, Palmdale/Lancaster and I.E. regions are the fastest growing in the state (for obvious housing cost/sprawl space reasons) so maybe it will be less about connecting them to SF and LA and more with themselves soon enough... Or maybe connecting these cheaper cities with jobs in LA or the Bay a few times a week commuting via HSR or beefed up regional rail... Even with its flaws I hope most of the project can be salvaged... It's good on paper, just really really messy in reality...
hell yeah i know what i'm doing instead of working today
i have lived in rancho cucamonga all my life and i am BEGGING for a crumb of public transit and walkable communities. when i used to live in europe and on my vacations in asia, i cry everytime i can walk out the door and be on some form of public transit. here, i have to drive an hour in any direction to get to somewhere i like being. with that said i am excited for the immense potential for the inland empire. it's a shitty place to be, for now, but its MY shitty place. i just dont wanna grow old and still have to rely on a car to get myself around, if thats the case then i'm moving elsewhere for quality of life.
While most of this video is speculation SCORE will make Metrolink faster and the high speed rail is actually happening!
34:50 I don't get it, why not have the Las Vegas and San Diego HSR lines branch off to the East of ONT instead?
(In other words -> I get why they would want Rancho Cucamonga as a terminal in a 1st phase, but why not disconnect it in a 2nd phase?
That way Ontario stn would eventually take a ~similar role to that of e g the Amsterdam airport stn)
Please do an update in regards to OC Public Transport :((
I literally grew up at ONT from the 70s to 90s. My dad was part of the original joint police/fire operation controlled by LAX. I used to travel regularly from ONT to wherever I needed to go (I grew up in Ontario and went to college at Redlands) using its original tiny terminal on the west end. I now live in Sacramento and it's really unfortunate that the terrible traffic in SoCal makes Long Beach and Burbank my current choices. Burbank actually provides a compelling example of what's possible, almost by accident. I land at the airport, walk across the street, grab a 20-minute train for about $7, and I'm in downtown LA's central rain terminal. Contrary to popular belief, I can literally get all over LA without car using this strategy.
ONT is still suffering from the underutilization and mistreatment under its LAX ownership, and the parochial disrespect of the Inland Empire as a vast wasteland east of LA. Its potential has also been exacerbated by the foolish decision (in my opinion) of California's HSR project to emphasize a connection between LA and San Francisco, something nobody needs, rather than Las Vegas, San Diego, LA and Sacramento, the areas with the most projected need for housing and economic activity involving physical goods.
Your video really demonstrates something I was corrected on early in my government career - letting reason and logic creep into your decision making. A funny example of this is the way ONT's second runway was built - LAX said no, and the ONT folks simply ignored them and built it guerrilla-style without any permission. I have no idea how they pulled it off but my dad was quite proud...he and fellow firefighters were out there pouring concrete themselves, LOL.
Wow! I was not expecting all this information, it was entertaining and informative and your explanation were easy to follow, thank you for making such a great video 👍
Never what I would have thought Ontario airport would behere
ONT My Beloved, been using it for most of my travels since I was born
I don't know how much traffic the lines get but consider that the upper practical limit for intercity/hsr type service (eg 2 narrow doors per 25m car and heavy luggage) is 8 trains per hour per platform track. And that is already stretching it. So if both regional and hsr tracks are to be used to capacity 2 platform tracks per direction each will be necessary at least.
With provisions for those the station should be planned for 8 heavy rail tracks in addition to LRT, BRT and rideshare/taxi.
Yes, build the A Line extension! And ugh, SB County needs to wake up and realize how ridiculously stupid the musk tunnels are.
When ONT builds new terminals they should definitely look at renumbering them. Maybe switch to letters to avoid confusion between new/old numbers. I'm sure whatever they come up with will be less confusing than LAX's renumbering plan.
I would totally vote for LA Imperial airport. People always get confused when I say I'm flying to Ontario, CA. They assume Ontario, Canada.
All airports within the region should nay MUST start with Los Angeles-__________ just like London. As soon as you have more than one airport in a city with commercial flights it should be mandatory to put the City/Region name in front... I.e. Los Angeles-Palmdale, Los Angeles-Burbank, Los Angeles-Long Beach, Los Angeles-Van Nuys, Los Angeles-Ontario, Los Angeles-Santa Ana, Los Angeles-Victorville, etc.
And yes I do agree with the video's main point. With 2 long runways and 24-hour operation all within the actual L.A. metro region this airport has the most potential to act as a second major hub for the region with the most capacity potential especially when you break it down by that graph and where is the closest airport to where people live. Especially when you look at population growth trends and the Inland Empire is still where in California people are streaming into ironically along with the Imperial and Central Valley's... It's the expensive coastal cities that are bleeding residents and are going through an economic hollow out largely due to housing costs and availability...
Fun fact: a few years ago, someone tried to book a business trip for me from Toronto to San Fransisco, but booked Ontario (ONT) to SF instead.
I 100% agree with the name change.
Ontario California has a reputation and history worth keeping. ONT all the way.
6:07 - Oakland airport renamed itself to San Francisco Bay Area Oakland Airport recently for the same reasons
Yeah, there was a huge hissy fit over that.
Orange county next!
He covered SNA in the second video (about a month ago).
@@johnmaster3748 Referring to Orange County transit proposals, not the airport. He alluded he had a longer video he was going to make about OC (I'm sure with no shortage of OC digs).
i was curious about his OC County streetcar grid plans
Alternate idea for use in an emergency (such as them actually building the off brand Teala tunnels). Just take those tunnels, put 4 foot guage tracks in them, and buy copies of the new Glasgow Subway trains, which run in tunnels of a similar size.
1. It will remain Ontario and just Ontario. The locals just spent a lot of effort de-Los Angelesifying it and they ain't going to undo such.
2. I think having the A Line and ARROW meet in Rancho and then have both of them continue to Ontario Airport on the same right of way makes sense. Maybe electricity the ARROW side eventually and have Brightline use those tracks to eventually connect to Ontario for a one seat ride. More duplicated service, but this way everything meets at Rancho and you could transfer from both the A Line and the ARROW to Brightline at Rancho-and transfer from A Line to ARROW without needing to transfer to Metrolink or a bus in between.
Just flew out of Ontario last week and actually really like how small and not packed it was compared to my regular San Diego Airport
As a resident and frequent flyer for ONT. the one thing that baffles me is that for an international airport there is only like two restrooms with one stall for the men it would be nice to not be waiting in a queue after hours of waiting
You could just call it the Pomona Valley Airport. Pomona sounds LA enough. Valley really adds that extra little bit of Cali to it, and helps distinguish it from Panama. Plus it sticks with the small-city theme, and you don't have to mix it up with some other bum nowhere airport like Imperial County.
I have used the visitor pass to greet family at the gate. It was super easy to get and very quick. FYI it is also available at Sea-Tac
Dang, I'm just imagining the size of that rail station... it might end up as one of the biggest West of Chicago by Phase 4 if nothing else gets built out West.
The problem with ontario airport vs lax is the ticktes or airfares are more expensive and not too many international flights, so who wants to fly from ontario they should star using more inter flights and cheaper airfares.
They should seriously look at installing an elevated & fully automated 24/7 transit system from the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink station to Ontario International Airport and into the airport terminal similar to either LAX APM or Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport APM. 😊 Other station stops & airport terminals can be added as well like having a station somewhere at Ontario Mills Mall, the convention center/Toyota Arena, & others. Total less than 6 miles.
This is magnificent. Can LA Metro hire you?
Would love to see a SAN episode :)
Btw I just discovered you with this video and I already love your work✌
Bro went off
Why can’t we just give unilateral control of transit expansion in the L.A. region to Nandert akin to Robert Mosses levels of control?
ONT is about to get much busier if they can connect to Brightline West (to Vegas). Thus creating another, great option for consumers.
Edit: METROLINK FUCKIN SUCKS. They add stress to commuting to & past LA Union by never being on time & always having to yield to freight.
I still don't understand why running the A line and Metrolink in the same corridor (from Pomona to Upland) is the best option for that corridor. You have convinced me that I should not simply dismiss those arguments for extending the A line beyond Pomona as duplicative.
Light rail can provide more frequent service than Metrolink, plus Claremont and Montclair are more major stops than North Pomona, with the latter being a transit hub for IE buses. I’m pretty sure Arrow is also looking to extend its service to North Pomona, or at least Montclair (and possibly beyond to LAUS), which means more frequent service between the IE and LA via an easy transfer to the Metro A Line.
@@ChrisJones-gx7fcUsing the DMU trains as seen on the Arrow line, the Metrolink SB Line can very much operate at the same frequencies as Light Rail. Those trains are often referred to as Diesel Light Rail in other countries. As it is, SBCTA has stated again and again that they cannot afford to operate trains on the A line at any headways shorter than 20 minutes and possibly they will need to run 30 minute headways off peak (due to their lack of local funding). In all likelihood most A-line trains will be turning back at Pomona-North even if the line is built (now for $1 Billion???) from Pomona to Montclair. And Montclair is just a Caltrans Park-and-Ride now with some apartments nearby plus a dying mall over a 15 minute walk away.
@@erik_griswold I’d say A Line should at least reach Claremont, as that’s home to a lot of people and a nice walkable downtown, plus the university there. Plus that’s still within LA County so no issue with SBCTA.
As for issues with Metro’s “end of line policy” and kicking off riders at the end of the day, which seeing what it’s done in places like Long Beach and Santa Monica can turn cities away from wanting to be a terminus, that’s something that hopefully Metro will be addressing and solving with new policies over the next few years, including fare endorsement and an increased safety presence, as well as better maintaining and cleaning of trains, buses and stations, plus things the cities can do to provide more low-income housing and other services to help those people, and be willing to build those places and not listen to the whims of a select few NIMBYs over the greater public.
@@ChrisJones-gx7fc The Metrolink line can (and should) be electrified and double tracked from Redlands to Pomona (and beyond to Baldwin Park). The Stadler FLIRT rolling stock (Arrow) should be easily upgraded to use overhead catenary. I don't see why the A line needs to go on the same corridor, why not cross the San Bernardino Line and run the A line further south (along Holt? or Mission?). That way the Pomona station is an interchange. I guess you could use Pomona-Claremont section to cross the A line over (or under) the Metrolink San Bernardino tracks but I still think the two services should diverge as quickly as possible.
I'm SO GLAD someone made this comment before I had to. When the Gold Line, now A Line, was extended to Azusa ridership at the Covina Metrolink Station fell. transit users opted for the slower option since the frequency was much higher. I expect boardings at the Pomona and Claremont Stations to drop once the A Line serves them since it's cheaper and more frequent. Montclair boardings should grow, as the station will become a major transit hub.
Metrolink should study closing the Claremont and Pomona Stations so Metrolink and LA Metro don't take away riders form each other. Closing the 2 stations would also speed up service, giving Metrolink more time savings.
As LA Metro builds out its light rail system and OmniTrans builds out the BRT system, Metrolink needs to compliment, not compete, with these services by being fast and having only a few stations.
Small note: there is absolutely zero way that the Corona end of the BRT line goes south of SR91.
Eeeeghghhghg... *LA Empire Airport* is not my favorite but you are unquestionably correct, it would be a major improvement and help tremendously. When first visiting LA I consistently ignored Ontario airport because, get this, I thought it was Ontario Canada that kept popping up. (Of course, when I did figure out it was Ontario, CA, CA, CAlifornia the lack of usable public transit doomed it forever more).
Los Angles Inland would make a good name for the Ontario International Airport with the FAA airport code being LAI (full name - Los Angles Inland Empire International Airport).
Los Angles Inland is a good descriptive name with LAI being a good contrast to LAX.
Time to eat the edible and watch another Nandert video. I rewatch them. Also. Have you gone through the best airport yet? Long Beach! You must. Okay. Back to LIA…
Nandert suggested Long Beach close since it's so close to LAX. Little does he know that will never happened because residents LOVE how fast flights out of Long Beach are!
❤ this channel. You deserve way more subs.
One critique on this video; why can’t we just nix the parking and build the ONT station next to the airport terminals x, and then Just build shops hotels etc around the station. This would allow people to more directly hop into their trains reducing the need for the APM, which would probably get very congested with your grand plans (i sincerely mean that this was a great video).
Normalize traveling through ONT! I live in OC, but I travel through ONT any chance I get. The best thing about ONT is having flights to East/South East Asia
Really liked this video. One problem, though, just from watching this state for the last 5 decades. Any infrastructure project budgeting, when you look at their numbers, needs the cost budget tripled, or even quadrupled, and the time budget expanded 5x...
Nothing can be built here. It is just not possible.
I'm from the IE and Los Angeles Imperial Airport would be confusing to me. Los Angeles - Inland Empire International Aiport doesn't have a ring to it but describes it clearly.
It would be far from a one seat ride but ONT could even get people from OC via Metrolink's IEOC line. If Metrolink ever does an IEOC express to San Bernardino, ONT could be an attractive alternative to LAX, especially for trans-Pacific flights.
I agree that a reliably scheduled Metroliink rail service from OC to ONT would be a welcome change from battling traffic (and uncertain travel times) on the 405 to reach LAX. The video focused on northern connections and connections to DTLA and undersold the potentail of rail from the south, which would also justify the investment in that multi-modal transit center that is the linchpin of the desired regional system. A well-connected ONT alleviates passenger crunching at both LAX and SNA! Imagine also if the Coaster ran express from Oceanside to ONT on Metrolink-owned tracks. (This could work short-term, while we all wait for HSR between LA and SD.)
the IEOC line is also BNSF's Southern Transcon, a very busy freight route that CAHSR was unsuccessfully able to reduce train traffic on with its plan for a new intermodal facility in Colton, which would have opened up space for HSR trains. Their latest LA-Anaheim plan still calls for two electrified passenger tracks and two nonelectrified freight tracks, but only two HSR roundtrips per hour instead of four, with freight potentially being allowed to share one of the electrified tracks if needed. Given the limited capacity, it's unlikely Metrolink would be able to increase frequencies enough from OC to Ontario to make it a viable option, though any increased frequency would be a good thing, especially more weekend service.
The better fix for OC-LAX travel should be to extend the Metro C Line the three short miles between its current terminus at the end of the 105 freeway and the Metrolink Norwalk station, allowing an all-rail ride with just two transfers at Norwalk and the LAX APM. It'd probably take longer than driving but should be less stressful not having to deal with traffic or having to go around the horseshoe, although with the opening of the APM it's likely many people will get dropped off/picked up at one of those stations instead.
@@ChrisJones-gx7fcYou are assuming that a connection between the C Line and the Norwalk Metrolink station will ever happen. Metro has gone out of it's way to not do it because the City of Norwalk hates the idea (and for good reason-unless you spend the extra money to tunnel the whole thing it would destroy half the city).
@@Geotpf and you assume it won’t. To my knowledge the city of Norwalk has opened up to the idea more in recent years, and it is on Metro’s Measure M project list albeit way down with a possible opening of 2046. Plus it wouldn’t have to be underground, at least not most of the way. It could relatively easily go on a viaduct along Imperial Highway, with possible stops at Firestone Blvd and Norwalk Blvd, at least the latter. It’s too important a connection to keep missing from Metro’s network, especially with California HSR possibly having a station at Norwalk. I’d say it has much greater certainty than most of the proposals made in this video.
Not a California resident, just visited several times
As an outsider, Ontario Int'l Airport is pretty unlucky with naming. Ontario makes people think of Toronto, San Bernardino is used, "Los Angeles" is used by LAX. Perhaps calling it after some famous person is the best way to go
PLEASE what is that music in the first section of the video!?
Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim vibes with that name
Thanks for this informative journey. Where are you from by the way?
I love flying from ONT but it’s often more expensive than LAX
Can you talk about Airports in the Antelope Valley? Would really like to know what the plan for air travel there is gonna be like
Imperial Blvd is the south side of LAX which will lead to confusion, not that anybody would like to make a landmark of THAT part of Imperial Blvd.
I think I remember LAX having an "Imperial Terminal" that was accessed from Imperial Blvd. One of my siblings took a charter flight to Europe from there. Trans International Airways?
@@randallking775 Been there, done that. Exact same airline.
How about creating a video to improve the connection between Orange County and the Inland Empire? Currently, there are no plans for rail transit to link these two regions.
Halelujah!
San Bernardino is connected to cities in Orange County through the IEOC line
@@HeStoned05But it isn’t along the SR57 corridor. And the IEOC line is desperately under serviced due to it being owned by BNSF between Anaheim and San Bernardino
This has been an issue for a very long time. Great video!! No if the powers that be get off their ass and actually make it happen!!
55 minutes on Ontario Airport? Cinema
And your point is????????🤷♂️
Do the “Insane potential of the Omaha airport” next!
As someone who lives 10 min drive from this airport, no one here wants to be associated with Los Angeles. Also your plans for that transit platform is pretty unrealistic as that area is smaller than you think.
I wonder if you did one on DFW airport also?
We will have personal flying cars before the freight lines change their tracks. Otherwise, I would love to see ONT take some more load off LAX.
Los Angeles Inland Airport. Simple; easy to understand
Hell no. We are not Los Angeles out here.
All the metrolink options are going to be like 1 minute from my house. Lol wonder how the traffic is going to pick up. Theres a bunch of empty space along 8th they could stick a station.
Now get LAX to Union Station and you can even fly in internationally to one airport and continue on domestically from a nearby airport.
Great video. But KONT isn't a part of lawa anymore. Ontario sued LAWA for independence and won.
Is there a quick train to get to thebairport from LA or OC? If not, have fun IE passengers
❤
Not sure if the proposals for some the new regional rail connections are crazier than the ideas proposed in the DJ Petesake April Fools video
Name it for Frank Zappa! (5:38) and then everyone will know where it is like Bob Hope Airport.
He’s cooking
I find this a fun but pointless exercise as demand is not there for transit and lack of transit is not the reason for low demand. LAX is a vortex that benefits by flight, seat or gate caps at LGB, SNA and BUR. ONT does not have a lot of business headquarters requiring travel or else it would have always had more flights. As you note, there are currently no constraints on ONT flights. It even operates 24 hours. Crowded highways leading to/from ONT are the same as elsewhere in the LA area. I'm not sure if you mentioned but SAN also takes some of ONT's "natural" passengers from south of the I-15 split in Temecula and Murietta.
The demand is their? Doesn’t need business flyer! With NEW ownership that’s DOING IT THE RIGHT WAY! It will work! People who live in this area the inland empire DESERVE IT!😊
Almost everything in IE is east/west for transit. I get it was just about the airport, but wow that looks weird with no north/south.
It competes with LAX and that is a big money maker for the city. (See: Parking lot fees. ect)
What about San Bernardino International Airport? that's an airport with even more potential than Ontario imo.. quite literally, it was built to handle up to over 9 million passengers and handle even the largest existing aircraft, including the Airbus A380 and the Boeing 747. instead it's public terminals have gone unused since they were constructed, and the airport as of present only serves commercial cargo aircraft (i.e. Amazon and Fedex), small aircraft/private jets, and a start up airline (breeze airline) that as of 2023 offers public passenger service.
I am not sure the reason what happened, but I can only assume there's a financial reason why plans for the airport never came to fruition, but the potential is still there, especially in such a densely population center of San Bernardino city and also the densely populated adjacent cities of Riverside, Moreno Valley, Redlands, Rialto, etc.
That airport not big enough! Plus ONT has 2 long runways more land to grow
This pretty much would make Ontario Airport the Union Station of the East.
Score doesn't address the Riverside line because UP owns it, and that funding is not designated for that.
The only problem is that this all makes sense
Can confirm people think Canada when they hear “Ontario.” There was one time I was flying home from Boston to Phoenix, and my flight was diverted to Ontario due to a dust storm in Phoenix. I presume Mesa Gateway Airport was also affected, and there aren’t any other commercial aviation airports in the valley. When the pilot announced the diversion, a lot of people on the plane thought we were going to Canada.
it's funny, i grew up only knowing ontario, california since i had family living there. it wasn't until years later down the line that i learned of ontario, canada. the only reason i think of the latter now is because i don't hear people mention the former much if at all lol.
True but knowing Ontario they will never drop the name as they shooting to be best right now and want to the recognition
I was at the gate for our flight to ONT while in DEN and the loudspeaker literally announced "Ontario, Canada" instead of "Ontario, California" smh
The Musk hole is madness. I don’t think most people are aware of how vastly different levels of people are lane (or tunnel) of cars can carry when compared to a rail line. A subway line can carry 10 to 20 thousand people per hour depending on frequency. A light rail can carry roughly half that. A lane for cars can carry - at best - 500 people per hour. It is an order of magnitude of difference!
This is why so much of Southern California has been paved - the inefficiency of car traffic (that’s not even counting all the extra space taken up by the sprawling developments that cars permit).
It's not just that, but if I recall, when it first launched, it wasn't even autonomous...which is baffling since most of the current system is grade- separated except for at-grade stops I think? Hell, even your average APM is more advanced than this crap.
@@randomscb-40charger78 the latest version being done by SBCTA and a few other public entity players is an autonomous vehicle on-demand system, similar to one at London's Heathrow Airport. If Ontario remains a relatively small airport, where such a system would meet projected demand, it could make sense, but if Ontario is anticipating the huge growth in passenger numbers that it is, then such a low capacity system would not make sense.
If Ontario really is projected to become the second busiest airport in SoCal, it needs a high capacity transit option(s), whether that be an APM from one of the Metrolink SB Line stations (I'd vote Rancho Cucamonga primarily because of Brightline West), a potential LA Metro A Line extension, though with how far that line already is and the issues it's having now with service frequency and scheduling I'm not sure that'd be the best route forward, or both. In the short term increased shuttle service and BRT could suffice, but some type of a rail option, whether an individual system or connected into one or more of the existing ones, absolutely should be in the cards and pursued.
LAX's transit is an APM connected to two Metro light rail lines, both of which require a transfer to reach downtown LA, and one of them a second transfer to reach Union Station, making the FlyAway bus still the most convenient as well as fastest option to get between Union Station and LAX. Most likely once the APM opens, FlyAway will terminate at one of its stations, probably Metro Center alongside other buses and Metro light rail. It'd be kinda sad for LAX to have less transit connectivity than Ontario. I'm not sure something as grandiose as what was ultimately envisioned here is feasible, financially or politically, but there certainly could be something done that's a fair enough compromise between this and nothing.
I'm a bit skeptical of CAHSR's Phase 2 to San Diego prospects, given their financial struggles now with just Phase 1 between SF and LA and the skepticism that alone may never get done, at least not with the current funding situation. I'm an avid supporter of CAHSR and firmly believe it will reach SF and LA, and by the 2040s for sure if not sooner, but a lot will need to go right for it for that to happen. Reaching Sacramento by 2050 is also very much within the realm of feasibility, as is San Diego via the IE but maybe less so, at least not until the 2060s.
The Southern Californian was conceived in a car, birthed in a car, lost their virginity in a car and knows nothing, through social engineering, about transportation without using a car.
The tunnel itself is fine. It's all the shitty cars inside that's the problem. Ironically these tunnels at 12' are JUUUUUUUUST large enough to squeeze a London deep level tube train down which would make sense if you could pair existing rail subways with cheap tunnelling.. But alas...
The narrowest sections of the London Underground tubes have an interior diameter of 11' 6" which is 6" narrower than the standard sized Musk tunnel... Too bad he's so anti-train because it would be a win--win solution for all if we had automated subways running down these tunnels everywhere... We'd never have traffic jams again!
I have lived in the Inland Empire my whole life and ONT has a lot of potential. Its very modern compared to old LAX. Prices are much cheaper at LAX so many IE residents just travel to LAX to fly which hurts revenue for ONT.
The airport needs to reduce prices. The airport is to expensive for the average IE resident
How much extra do you spend on fuel and parking by going to LAX? Also, greater chance of flight delays and traffic to get there. Is it really worth it?
@@tolumnia My parents live in IE as well, and I prefer to fly into LAX when I visit them due to the higher costs of flights to and from ONT, like OP mentioned. I only pay $10 to get to and from LAX using the SB Metrolink line and LAX Flyaway connection. Im not spending on gas, or dealing with traffic. ONT needs to figure out a way to drive down prices on flights, as its losing potential customers to LAX.
@@gilbertobarrios1920 ok but this adds a TON of travel time. From Rancho Cucamonga station to LAX, it's a one hour train ride via Metrolink to Union Station, and another 40 minute FlyAway bus to LAX, not counting transfer time. you're easily adding 2-3 hours, depending on your flight schedule and train/bus schedules. ONT flights are not that much more expensive than LAX.
True but you would save hundreds if you did the Metro. Plus you can always ask for a ride from a friend or family member. Sure it may cost the same if you do the numbers but ONT needs to be competitive if they want to expand. @rustydomino
tf do you mean old LAX its gotten a renovation over the past few years and looks insanely different plus they are almost done.
Los Angeles INLAND Airport
If Oakland can change its name to San Francisco Bay Area…I guess Los Angeles Inland would work too.
That's the name I was thinking too!!
I really like this. Of course, now we're two letters into a third word (INternational vs INland) but yes, I really like this. Way better than Los Angeles East Airport. or Los Angeles Imperial Airport.
I’ve been trying to create an easy and memorable acronym.
Still trying…
Los Angeles Inland Empire International
Sending my hate mail right now as an IE resident. All jokes aside, great video on the potential of the ONT airport, and what that could do for the region.
IE native as well mate!!! ONT definitely has a lot of potential but prices are stupidly overpriced compared to LAX. It needs more flights and be more competitive in order to be a power house of an airport
While Nandert's focus is obviously how the airport's potential growth will impact regional transit, I am equally fascinated by how ONT's growth might influence airline traffic. Probably, these are closely connected! Passenger growth drives the need for better transit connections, and better transit spurs the addition of more flights. Could Ontario ever become to LA what Newark EWR is to NY or BWI is for DC? E.g., a busy airport with strong domestic and international options. As Nandert demonstrated, it has the long runways already and also lacks the restrictions faced by the other SoCal candidate air fields. Arguably, SNA and BUR already fill the niche in short-haul domestic service that LaGuardia plays for the New York area and DCA plays for DC. Yet, LA lacks a second airport with substantial long-haul connections, both domestic and international. That is the role ONT should aspire to. I think this vision is feasible for three reasons. First, the three legacy U.S. airlines already use LAX as a hub/crew base. If any one of them chose to "corner the regional market" by upping the ante at a second SoCal airport, they already have local staffing to jumpstart expansion. Such a move by one of United/American/Delta might also spur at least one of their alliance partners to bring international routes with heavy aircraft to the Inland Empire. Second, flights to/from Europe (or the eastern U.S.) would save up to 20-30 minutes of flight time by using ONT instead. That may seem insignficant for a 10 hour flight, but fuel is the airlines' biggest cost. Even that small savings on a daily basis, year after year, could make expanded service to ONT a good investment. Third, we know from the first video in this series that LAX is the #1 airport in the world for origin/destination travel. Since the airlines don't primarily rely on passengers changing planes, shifting some traffic east would have minimal impact on the business model for sucess at LAX. It would be more about whether passengers want to go there. Currently, the biggest drawback to ONT attracting flights from farther away is that many non-local travelers, especially the business fliers, want to head downtown. For them, LAX will be closer to their destination. (It's probably a wash for those tourist travelers bound for Disneyland.) The intermodal tansit center Nandert envisioned mitigates the transfer-time issue with faster service not only to DTLA but to the broader LA basin than comparably available from LAX. I don't know how much growth in passenger numbers would need to occur for ONT to start attracting investment from both transit planners _and_ airlines, but I suspect there's some sweet spot (15 million? 20? 30?) where both the long-haul flights and the investment in regional transit converge to create a virtuous cycle that elevates ONT into just such an airport powerhouse. Not likely in this decade. But, during the '30s? One can see a pathway! Now, if we can just get the transit portion moving....
All the pieces are there for Ontario to flourish including the large reserve land for new terminals, on a future HSR line, near Metrolink and in a part of the region that is the fastest growing... Makes sense to me! It does need an Avelo, Spirit or Southwest or really anchor the traffic though... Everyone else seems to have a dominant player but Ontario...
For several years it was called LA/Ontario International Airport. I personally liked that name as it does serve the eastern part of the LA area. Also, most airlines will list Ontario as an option when you put Los Angeles in their websites as a destination.
As a part-time IE resident, the reason why the airport dropped LA from its official name, all began when the Ontario city government filed a legal complaint against them in April of 2013, claiming that Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) was treating the airport like crap. After years of negotiations, LAWA finally agreed to turn over the airport’s operations to the City of Ontario. In November of 2016, operation of the airport went to the newly-created Ontario International Airport Authority (OIAA) from LAWA, and it has been that way ever since.
Have no care about LA and its airports but this series was awesome, informative and easy to follow. Amazing job also I was waiting for this third video to drop.
Hour long video LETS GOOOOOOOO
I treat ONT as a family secret to avoid the long lines, shitty terminal design, and nightmarish parking/drop-off/pickup of literally every other airport in SoCal. The less people know about ONT the better.
Inland empire peoples do not CARE for your useless opinion 😊
As a Palmdale resident and having thought about it, you're right that a PMD airport wouldn't be much of a player (even with the prevalence of aerospace companies and employees out here). If/when CAHSR and High Desert Corridor rail are built out, it would render regional air service to Northern California or Las Vegas superfluous, and any other short/medium-haul air routes (Denver, Phoenix, Pacific Northwest) would be better served, as you mentioned, by rail *from* the AV to the primary airports (LAX, BUR, ONT).
With how horrible the fight was between LAWA and San Bernardino County, you will never get that airport renamed. LAWA tried its hardest to completely bankrupt ONT and the effects are still being felt