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 post3904 posts
jshank83 wrote:
Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:30 pm
It is a shame we couldn't get this here.


Amazon plans 2,700 jobs, $1.5B investment at CVG
Jason Williams and Scott Wartman , Cincinnati 2:17 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2017
010417_SOUTHWEST_CVG_19Buy Photo
(Photo: The Enquirer/Kareem Elgazzar)
Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport will become a worldwide air cargo hub for Amazon, state and airport officials said Tuesday.

The Seattle-based company plans to invest more than $1 billion into the operation and employ 2,700 workers at CVG. The news about Amazon's investment was part of special board meetings organized by the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority and the Kenton County Airport Board, which oversees the airport.


http://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/2 ... /97283034/
Dammit. Huge loss. You guys see recently how Amazon was getting warehouse space in Hazelwood, just north of STL? How they are beginning to charge MO state sales taxes TODAY because of their anticipated ground operations in the State? Hubbing at STL was what was anticipated with these moves. They're already up to 40 767-300s... Dammit.
Cargo carriers like FedEx, DHL and others have more than one regional hub. Sounds like Cincinnati could be Amazon's main hub - not sure - but it would not be out of the question for St. Louis to become a regional cargo hub for Amazon still.

It would cool if that could happen.
arch city wrote:
Wed Feb 01, 2017 10:15 am
Cargo carriers like FedEx, DHL and others have more than one regional hub. Sounds like Cincinnati could be Amazon's main hub - not sure - but it would not be out of the question for St. Louis to become a regional cargo hub for Amazon still.

It would cool if that could happen.
I don't believe DHL maintains any North American/regional air service. Believe the air service was contracted out to UPS a few years ago and their main hub shut down.

Makes sense for Amazon to fly into Lambert with a big enough metro size but not sure if they really need regional hubs in the immediate future. Might way off base but can't imagine that Amazon is even close to FedEx & UPS in terms of overnight, time sensitive packages requiring air service. More or less enough leased space at Lambert to cover demand of incoming and outgoing parcels.
It was of note that air cargo increased 12% last year to go with the increase of 10% in passengers. And more air cargo does help the latter in reducing landing fees, and at times could create new passenger routes since some of those exist or profit well based on the belly cargo that rides along, particularly on international routes.

It will be interesting to see how fast it takes for Southwest to use those four gates being renovated. Since it would allow for more peak time flights which have lots of connecting opportunities that could make new routes feasible. Though I think there is the issue of Southwest getting into a plane crunch later this year because of their oldest model planes having to be mass retired when the MAX series pops up.
They either have 87 or 88 300s still in service depending on where I look. That is a lot to retire this year. I wonder if they will push some of those back until they get more deliveries of newer planes. (assuming that is an option)
I think its not an option. Because the FAA mandated that a pilot couldn't be certified for that and the MAX models and they wanted their pilots to be able to fly any plane they have. Especially since they planned on retiring those next year anyway, just could be a crunch after this summer for around a year. Wonder if there is some things they might add from here in new or added frequency once they did have the planes available but they can't now.
^ I see it says they can build about 45 planes a month. That is more than I figured they were building so maybe the gap won't be too bad. I obviously don't know how many of those are going to Southwest though. They have 3 different versions in production (counting the max 8) on order.
dredger wrote:
Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:37 am
I don't believe DHL maintains any North American/regional air service. Believe the air service was contracted out to UPS a few years ago and their main hub shut down.

Makes sense for Amazon to fly into Lambert with a big enough metro size but not sure if they really need regional hubs in the immediate future. Might way off base but can't imagine that Amazon is even close to FedEx & UPS in terms of overnight, time sensitive packages requiring air service. More or less enough leased space at Lambert to cover demand of incoming and outgoing parcels.
Thanks for clarifying DHL. And I forgot to mention UPS too.

For the record, FedEx wanted St. Louis to be a regional hub, but officials declined - as I recall - because of TWA's growing presence at Lambert. The China Hub was short-lived, but at least one plane or two planes arrived. With that said, I think air cargo interest in St. Louis could literally take off with the right connections (no pun intended), right marketing as well as incentive packages.

With the river, interstate, railroad and airport connections, St. Louis is long overdue for being a major air cargo hub.
I was driving by the airport today and 2 of these shot by me taking off. I know the pic isn't easy to see but they both looked all white and had rods out the front of the nose. I didn't know if they were test flying the new prototype trainer but there were 2 of them, so I thought that might rule that out. I figured someone on here might know.

Thanks.

Image
They were building two prototypes. The second one was substantially complete in September. (Still yellow, but the fuselage was in one piece already.) Maybe they're both flight worthy now. That does look like the T-X in silhouette. I think I've seen it (or them) fly over my house a few times. For the record, the second unit has an N-number. (N382TX) If you scroll down this Defense Update you can see a September photo of the second aircraft. (The one in primer yellow.) I'm going to go out on a limb and say that's what you saw. Incidentally . . . good catch!
symphonicpoet wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2017 3:44 am
They were building two prototypes. The second one was substantially complete in September. (Still yellow, but the fuselage was in one piece already.) Maybe they're both flight worthy now. That does look like the T-X in silhouette. I think I've seen it (or them) fly over my house a few times. For the record, the second unit has an N-number. (N382TX) If you scroll down this Defense Update you can see a September photo of the second aircraft. (The one in primer yellow.) I'm going to go out on a limb and say that's what you saw. Incidentally . . . good catch!
Cool! Thanks for the info. It caught me off guard seeing them but it was neat to see.
I'll bet!
One thing I think would solidify us in Southwest's system is an operating base. They already have several, but I wonder if they've ever considered using American's former base west of Concourse A. I do know STL is the home base for Trans States, and many of their aircraft get routed through STL and most of their dispatch occurs here as well.
^There still is a sign that says "American Airlines Ground Operations Center" on the road over that way. Do you have any clue what goes on there? I wouldn't think there is much for American to have here anymore. There are usually cars parked there when I go by though
I doubt this will happen simply because of all the terminals and concourses (except B) complete gut renovations now completed or done. But would have been something to look at years ago after AA cut flights and now with Terminal E growing to the west in D.
Thanks Mill for posting. As far as vision

◾demolition of all concourses at Terminal 1 to be replaced with a single long concourse similar to Austin, Detroit, or the future Salt Lake City airport

I agree that this vision for Terminal 1 is way out there as matguy70 noted with all the rebuild of existing gates. However, you could almost make the current concourse A & C linear by adding gates between them in a modified version (mix of new and existing) & converting/rebuilding B into a new security access/customs & immigration area. re open gates at the end of concourse C when you take out some of the current gates for constructions

◾a westward expansion of the main Terminal 2 building and an eastward extension of Concourse E

Isn't this essentially happening in respects to utilizing the current terminal/concourse E?

◾an eastward expansion of the Terminal 2 parking garage
◾a new building between the two terminals where Concourse D now stands, possibly a hotel or parking garage.

I think in short term this could very much be considered even after you remodel the four Concourse D gates. Lambert still has way too many under utilized gates and even being a Southwest focus city it will not bring back demand for all those gates. Airport should find ways to maximize parking near airport as it will only improve revenues as well as give Lambert the hotel option.
Yes thanks for posting Mill, interesting plans. I would think the Eastward expansion of the East Terminal would be the least expensive option on a new terminal besides the current Westward revamping of Terminal D. On Google maps it looks like they could squeeze 4-5 gates before running up against the existing cargo buildings.

But I agree that it will probably be a long time before we see a new terminal.
I'm not in terminal two very often, as I don't really fly domestically, but my recollection from picking up friends there was that the place was cramped and rather grim ten years ago. I'd assume that now it's a madhouse. I'd guess that if there's any one part of the airport that probably needs expansion it's the landside facilities in terminal two. (That or shuffle who lives where. There are doubtless carriers in T1 that don't need so much landside anymore. Put them in cramped land.)

It seems to me as though all the remodels of all the concourses thus far have been rather basic and cosmetic; much needed, but not hugely involved. Reopening D for WN could actually be a very good first step in the plan. As you reopen disused but functional gates it gives you the room to temporarily close more desirable gates so that you can expand past them. Once that expansion is complete you can begin to more seriously consider demolishing concourse structure and replacing it with new. But please, for heaven's sake, keep it all connected airside. Geeze? How difficult is that?
I fly through T2 probably 90% of the time and Concourse A the other 10%. T2 isn't all that bad, but maybe it is just because I am used to it and I don't spend much time in it besides sitting at the gate for 20 minutes at a time. If you have a connection and a longer layover it might be worse than what I experience. That said I would rather have a layover in T2 than A (which an A layover would be really rare anyways). I really don't remember D all that well so I hope to get a look at it sometime soon. Depending on the shape it is in and what kind of food establishments even fit in there, they are going to have to figure out something. If it is in good shape I am sure it is fine, if it is as bad as people talk about, being tight and not much room for things, they might have to figure out something else sooner than later.

Anyways, I do wish all the concourses were connected. I still do remember walking from C through D to E and how you could kill some time exploring a little. In theory, if you wanted to start this renovation you could move everyone in A to C/D and get a pretty good chunk of it done before you made your way to where the current C is. Then hopefully you would have enough gates done to move everyone (except Southwest) in the new part while you finish it off. I don't think it will happen anytime soon but if Southwest keeps expanding pretty soon you are going to run out of room to move people when you are working where the current C/D is depending on how many gates the new area could handle when only partially finished. I guess if you expanded T2 east first that would help out.

All that said I like most in here doubt anything happens soon besides the continuation of E taking over D.


Subject change here. Do any of you see Jetblue or Spirit coming anytime soon? Where would they have gates? I really could pass on having Spirit but I thought I would throw it out there also. If they lowered other peoples prices then I would be okay with it. Also, are there any destinations you could see a current airline picking up (besides Southwest) or are those pretty much just going to be what they are for now?
With D I wonder if all the gates would be reused anyway due to either need for shops and restaurants where there isn't space otherwise or gates that can't accommodate 737 sized aircraft.

As for Spirit and JetBlue, I picture them and anyone else will go in C. Spirit may be apprehensive in coming here since I think they are not doing too great in Kansas City and Allegiant seems to be doing well in Mid-America. JetBlue could see due to need to cater specifically to Boston travelers with St. Louis is one of the biggest holes for them (also this route might be the biggest monopoly domestic market from both sides) and their codeshare agreements could help fill up planes of local travelers going overseas. Also wonder if Southwest adding frequency to this route is preemptive move here, or it could be the added connections here and demand needed it anyway. Since that could be a fast demand growth route due to startup community here.

Another possibility I see is Delta adding Seattle, since they are starting to connect dots east of the Rockies there and for some reason Alaska Is downgauging one flight there just at start of peak season which seems really odd. This could cause Delta to have an opening along with its less risky to start since you could use a smaller plane due to distance allows it where anywhere further east won't allow it. Alaska downgauging may be due to needing the 737 for a route starting further east where an e175 can't reach and they are in a plane crunch. They are also a possibility to add something once their merger with Virgin America is complete. If they are wanting to compete for fliers in California, they may add destinations from there to here, especially with here being the easternmost point an e175 can reach from California which allows more options, and wonder a bit if Southwest adding a 2nd San Diego flight over summer is possibly tied to this. (could be tied to the SNA issue)

Don't see much else with everyone else having their hubs covered here (something most similar sized airports can't say actually), but maybe some of those could use added frequency/gauge if some of those are packed at certain times. At this point other than the couple possibilities and further Southwest expansion (which could be any number of places), guess is anything else will likely be international which is likely why that's being said more due to where things stand now here.
imperialmog wrote:
Tue Feb 07, 2017 10:22 am
With D I wonder if all the gates would be reused anyway due to either need for shops and restaurants where there isn't space otherwise or gates that can't accommodate 737 sized aircraft.
I was looking at old satellite imagery and comparing the markings for the current southwest planes and trying to figure out how they got all those planes into D when it was running. I guess I didn't think about them using some smaller planes on that concourse. It is sometimes tough to tell what is what in those old pics. Looking back now it looks like there were a lot of MD-8x's (or something smaller with the engines on the back). I am guessing you could fit more of those in. Using some of those extra gates for restuarants would be a good idea I never thought about. It isn't like they will need them all anyways.

The two I would like to see JetBlue add are Boston (because Southwest's prices are crazy) and JFK because we don't have it. I also wondered if Southwest upgauging Boston was to try to keep them out as well. DL has built up Boston more lately also. I was wondering if a smaller jet there for them would maybe be an option. We'll see I guess.
jshank83 wrote:
Tue Feb 07, 2017 10:37 am
imperialmog wrote:
Tue Feb 07, 2017 10:22 am
With D I wonder if all the gates would be reused anyway due to either need for shops and restaurants where there isn't space otherwise or gates that can't accommodate 737 sized aircraft.
The two I would like to see JetBlue add are Boston (because Southwest's prices are crazy) and JFK because we don't have it.
How long has it been since STL to JFK was a thing? Didn't realize this.
RuskiSTL wrote:
Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:39 am
jshank83 wrote:
Tue Feb 07, 2017 10:37 am
imperialmog wrote:
Tue Feb 07, 2017 10:22 am
With D I wonder if all the gates would be reused anyway due to either need for shops and restaurants where there isn't space otherwise or gates that can't accommodate 737 sized aircraft.
The two I would like to see JetBlue add are Boston (because Southwest's prices are crazy) and JFK because we don't have it.
How long has it been since STL to JFK was a thing? Didn't realize this.
I think AA stopped STL-JFK in 2003 and picked up one regional jet flight a day for a short time before shutting it down completely.
bprop wrote:
RuskiSTL wrote:
Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:39 am
jshank83 wrote:
Tue Feb 07, 2017 10:37 am
The two I would like to see JetBlue add are Boston (because Southwest's prices are crazy) and JFK because we don't have it.
How long has it been since STL to JFK was a thing? Didn't realize this.
I think AA stopped STL-JFK in 2003 and picked up one regional jet flight a day for a short time before shutting it down completely.
Delta stopped JFK back in 2011 I believe. I am pretty sure they cut St Louis and Kansas City.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk