St. Louis Lambert Int. Airport [airline/hub/operations/info]

All the ways we move people and things: trains, planes, automobiles, biking, walking, etc.
First unread post4138 posts
Well this seems random. I didn't know shipping livestock overseas was a thing.

St. Louis Lambert International Airport is looking at a new source of air cargo — livestock.
yeah, when pigs fly....
Southwest Airlines Soaring in St. Louis

http://fox2now.com/2017/02/13/southwest ... -st-louis/
^ Southwest is nice for families and non-stop domestic travel, but doesn't do anything for business or international travelers. The situation in Terminal 1 with the legacy carriers is pathetic (to put it nicely), which reflects very poorly on St. Louis as a region for businesses and international travel/connections to the wider world.
Southwest is nice for families and non-stop domestic travel, but doesn't do anything for business
Couldn't disagree with you more and the bolded parts are why. I see lots of obvious biz travellers on my WN flights.
Randy wrote:
Sun Feb 19, 2017 8:41 am
^ Southwest is nice for families and non-stop domestic travel, but doesn't do anything for business or international travelers. The situation in Terminal 1 with the legacy carriers is pathetic (to put it nicely), which reflects very poorly on St. Louis as a region for businesses and international travel/connections to the wider world.
Not sure what you mean in terms of Terminal 1 and the Southwest is better for families for that matter. Can you elaborate?

As a frequent business traveler my recent trip in and out of Terminal 1/Delta was as good as any other experience and comparable to most airports I go to. The gripe I have as frequent business traveler with STL is no consolidated car rental & reliance on shuttle buses for everything The plus side of Terminal 1, is one of the best covered taxi stands around once you have a good idea where it is at.

As far as Southwest vs. Legacy on business travel I fly almost exclusively Delta & United and my opposite in equipment flies almost exclusively Southwest for business. Both have trade offs. On my end, you have to fly a lot to the good perks or the good customer service such as my upgrade in and out of St Louis or recent flight change when I left my fricking license at home. However, Southwest gives you a lot of flexibility & paying for the bump to front of line is minimal cost & well worth it.
Southwest is nice for families and non-stop domestic travel, but doesn't do anything for business or international travelers.
Totally disagree. Southwest's biz class allows early boarding and great perks/rewards and early TSA priority line. In fact, not only is Southwest is the #1 and largest domestic carrier... they are becoming a choice for biz travelers as well.

https://skift.com/2017/01/26/southwest- ... el-demand/

To get an A Boarding position is rare these days 24 hours before check in because businesses and biz travelers are entitled to A Class and / or purchasing A Class.

I fly biz class on SWA and love the excellent service, ontime flights, nonstop service, baggage service and customer service.... not to mention rewards.

I cannot stand flying any other biz class on the "legacy" airlines.

As for Terminal 1... I think the terminal looks great asite does the concourses. Not sure what your comment was eluding too.
Randy wrote:
Sun Feb 19, 2017 8:41 am
^ Southwest is nice for families and non-stop domestic travel, but doesn't do anything for business or international travelers. The situation in Terminal 1 with the legacy carriers is pathetic (to put it nicely), which reflects very poorly on St. Louis as a region for businesses and international travel/connections to the wider world.
Are you perhaps talking about aircraft, flight numbers, and destinations? The physical assets of the terminal itself seem pretty acceptable now. It's clean and brightly lit now, if still quiet. There's not much landside, but both the A and C concourses have what I would call acceptable amenities, particularly for the smallish airport we've become. There are sexier things it could use were it a place where folks needed to make a long layover . . . but it's generally not. (And it never is for me, since it's always been my O/D.) Some of that stuff might come with the expanded WN presence, actually. Probably not showers, free wifi, or a good traveler's rest, but at least more food, better lounges, and maybe more places to walk about and watch planes while you're waiting.

If you're talking overseas destinations, I suppose I could grant that. On this board (and in the popular press), folks seem most interested in traveling to Western Europe. Much hay has been made about it, but what local businesses are likely to move because we don't have those flights that would stay if we did? Monsanto? Honestly, in terms of economics, I'd say direct flights to China or Israel would make the most sense. We probably do more business with East Asia than Europe, anymore, what with ag and tech connections. And we seem to have attracted a lot of attention from Israeli chemical and biotech firms. But I doubt we'd have enough traffic to fill a daily with the legs for either destination. And in terms of people, I think we'd do better with direct flights to Sarajevo or Saigon. Not that we could fill those either, but I wouldn't be surprised if we actually generate more trips to either of those than London or Paris. Tourist trips, mind. Not business. But still, bodies in seats. And I'm speaking anecdotally and off the cuff, so I'm likely wrong about some of it. Maybe all of it.

So if you're talking destinations or quality of iron I can, sadly, agree with you. But I also don't see it as a problem that can be fixed with anything other than organic growth. If we get bigger and busier the routes will grow to reflect that. If not . . . there are lots of lovely places that have small airports. Big isn't everything. I believe we're still clinging to our Beta world city status. And I hope we can capitalize on that. But if we do, I suspect it will need to be organic . . . and it will drive the airport, not the other way around.
symphonicpoet wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2017 1:05 am
I believe we're still clinging to our Beta world city status.
Not quite, unfortunately: St. Louis is currently ranked a Gamma+ city (KC is Gamma-).
symphonicpoet wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2017 1:05 am
...so I'm likely wrong about some of it. Maybe all of it.
That's sort of the Internet in a nutshell, isn't it?
I flew home from a conference in San Antonio yesterday and was on a WN direct flight. I knew many of the passengers on the flight and the majority were connecting through St. Louis, going either to MSP, DTW, or BOS. That was nice to see.
matguy70 wrote:
Sun Feb 19, 2017 1:35 pm
I cannot stand flying any other biz class on the "legacy" airlines.
While I can understand how some people prefer Southwest over AA / UA / DL when flying in coach, I can't comprehend someone saying that they prefer Southwest to First Class / Business Class on a legacy airline.

Even on domestic flights, the seats provide significantly more room and on long-haul international routes (which WN doesn't fly), business class provides a seat which turns into fully-flat bed.

Greg
A question for airline enthusiasts. A quick google search says the local Bosnian population to be around 70k. What would that need to be/what would need to happen for a STL to Sarejevo direct?
RuskiSTL wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2017 5:04 pm
A question for airline enthusiasts. A quick google search says the local Bosnian population to be around 70k. What would that need to be/what would need to happen for a STL to Sarejevo direct?
Seeing Sarejevo doesn't have a direct flight to anywhere in the Americas I would assume it would have to be a crazy high number to get the demand it needed. That airport doesn't even do 1 million passangers a year.
jshank83 wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2017 5:25 pm
RuskiSTL wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2017 5:04 pm
A question for airline enthusiasts. A quick google search says the local Bosnian population to be around 70k. What would that need to be/what would need to happen for a STL to Sarejevo direct?
Seeing Sarejevo doesn't have a direct flight to anywhere in the Americas I would assume it would have to be a crazy high number to get the demand it needed. That airport doesn't even do 1 million passangers a year.
That's why I was wondering. STL seems to have the best chance at filling flights both ways with so many people flying to see family.

I know in many Eastern European countries people prefer to travel by bus or train, which makes sense when you look at the destination locations out of Sarajevo airport. Also apparently their national airline was an organizational mess and shut down just a couple years ago. But if you think of the future and an improving economy, which stands to get a huge bump whenever Bosnia joins the EU, then it makes sense for STL leaders to think about opening up flights to Sarajevo.

Is there anywhere to see detailed information about flights out of Lambert? For instance number of flights organized by the passenger's final destination?
^Sarajevo's a small town, they'll probably want to first look into flights to London, Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam, Milan, Rome, Madrid, Moscow, etc.... (all of which they don't currently have) before any trans-Atlantic flights, at which point New York's JFK would be the obvious choice.
RuskiSTL wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2017 6:10 pm


Is there anywhere to see detailed information about flights out of Lambert? For instance number of flights organized by the passenger's final destination?
This is something from 2014 that shows seat deficits to different places. They have tabs for Europe. It is obviously old since some of them go to places we now have direct flights on the domestic side but it gives you an idea. I am pretty sure the numbers are per day.

http://flystlbusiness.com/RouteDevelopment
While I can understand how some people prefer Southwest over AA / UA / DL when flying in coach, I can't comprehend someone saying that they prefer Southwest to First Class / Business Class on a legacy airline.
First class is wasted on a flight 4 hours or less... so from STL that is anywhere domestic. Personally, the cost of first class is so ridiculous that, unless you are a rewards members using upgrades or working for a company that gets the upgrades... it is a joke. I far prefer my friendly, easy and comfortable biz class boarding and, always bulkhead and/or aisle seat on an airline that is known for excellent customer service, high rewards, free baggage, no change fees and free cancellations, priority TSA line, excellent safety record, newer large 737 planes (nothing smaller), free onboard live TV and Movies WIFI and comfortable leg room seating. In addition, from STL mostly all nonstop service without headache connections.
^I usually fly southwest because of the nonstop flights, rebooking/flight change flexibility, and free tv. Those are probably the things that get me on their planes the most. I find myself booking a lot of flights far in advance and changing them when I'm closer. If other airlines did this I would be more likely to fly them. I'll fly delta if it's direct and not a super small plane because they have decent in flight entertainment options and their comfort seats aren't much of an upcharge. I would probably fly United more often if they didn't fly so many 135/145 baby jets and charge so much for more extras. They are probably the airline besides Southwest that has direct flights to cities I go to the most often. I don't mind airplanes that are 2x2, especially if I am traveling with someone else so no one has to have a middle (or sit across the aisle) but I want it to at least have stream to device options.

I do think first or at least more legroom options matter to some business people but most people I know here are good with using Southwest for business these days. As long as they have wifi and a direct flight they are usually happy. Besides Boston, it seems like most routes to bigger cities at least have one airline option that has multiple class planes anyways. If it is a really big deal to have that they can get it.
Trololzilla wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2017 2:00 am
Not quite, unfortunately: St. Louis is currently ranked a Gamma+ city (KC is Gamma-).
I was thinking we were a B -. Can't find statistics earlier than 2015, by which time it seems GaWC had already dropped us to G+. Assuming we were ever B- inside GaWC's existence. On the other hand, they rate London and New York ahead of Shanghai and Tokyo, so they're probably smoking something. We're in good company, in any case. St. Petersburg, Cologne, and Osaka are fine fine towns.
symphonicpoet wrote:
Tue Feb 21, 2017 1:47 am
Trololzilla wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2017 2:00 am
Not quite, unfortunately: St. Louis is currently ranked a Gamma+ city (KC is Gamma-).
I was thinking we were a B -. Can't find statistics earlier than 2015, by which time it seems GaWC had already dropped us to G+. Assuming we were ever B- inside GaWC's existence. On the other hand, they rate London and New York ahead of Shanghai and Tokyo, so they're probably smoking something. We're in good company, in any case. St. Petersburg, Cologne, and Osaka are fine fine towns.
Actually, they aren't "smoking something". New York and London currently are the undisputed financial capitals of the world and are heavily influential in political, social, and cultural affairs. Any arguments that Shanghai and Tokyo meet those requirements are really unfounded.
It would be interesting in terms of international travel if there was also an increase in demand to and from overseas places from here in the past year with the strong growth. It is of note that even accounting for a little over half of last years increase was in connecting traffic, there was still growth that was higher than many places on a local traffic year over year demand especially when you strip out the connecting traffic that was present before.
matguy70 wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2017 10:18 pm
First class is wasted on a flight 4 hours or less... so from STL that is anywhere domestic. Personally, the cost of first class is so ridiculous that, unless you are a rewards members using upgrades or working for a company that gets the upgrades... it is a joke.[\quote]

You might want to double check that... the cost of domestic first class fares has dropped significantly to the point where the premium over coach can be under $100, especially for last minute purchases. Additionally, some airlines are offering buy-ups to F for significantly less than an actual F fare.
I far prefer ... priority TSA line....
If you are talking about PreCheck, don't expect that to continue. The TSA has stated that they plan to remove that from passengers who have not explicitly signed up (and paid) for PreCheck.

Greg
gregl wrote:
Tue Feb 21, 2017 11:02 am
matguy70 wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2017 10:18 pm

I far prefer ... priority TSA line....
If you are talking about PreCheck, don't expect that to continue. The TSA has stated that they plan to remove that from passengers who have not explicitly signed up (and paid) for PreCheck.

Greg

I think he is talking about the Southwest fly by lane that lets you cut the line, not TSA pre check. I know other airlines have it for higher fare classes also though.
Chalupas54 wrote:
Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:57 am
symphonicpoet wrote:
Tue Feb 21, 2017 1:47 am
Trololzilla wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2017 2:00 am
Not quite, unfortunately: St. Louis is currently ranked a Gamma+ city (KC is Gamma-).
I was thinking we were a B -. Can't find statistics earlier than 2015, by which time it seems GaWC had already dropped us to G+. Assuming we were ever B- inside GaWC's existence. On the other hand, they rate London and New York ahead of Shanghai and Tokyo, so they're probably smoking something. We're in good company, in any case. St. Petersburg, Cologne, and Osaka are fine fine towns.
Actually, they aren't "smoking something". New York and London currently are the undisputed financial capitals of the world and are heavily influential in political, social, and cultural affairs. Any arguments that Shanghai and Tokyo meet those requirements are really unfounded.
My argument is that finance is HEAVILY overrated. What does it do, really? It doesn't build computers, or cars. Or tanks. It doesn't build houses. London and New York don't really have a lock on all the money anymore. Just the trading floors. And that's all virtual now. It could be literally anywhere. In my garage, for instance. All you need is enough fiber and enough servers. Population and production are far far far more important. And I see no way in which London or New York are really more connected or more influential. London's political influence largely evaporated a hundred years ago. And New York's is fading very very fast.
I should say this is getting off topic a bit off topic and my language was, perhaps, poorly chosen and over-emotional. I have an opinion about the relative importance of financial institutions and other organizations, such as popular, cultural, educational, and political to influence the course of events. But that probably belongs on a different thread. I am, however, interested in the airport. My apologies for dragging things off topic.