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 post4673 posts
Ok slow down the rodeo here.

Lambertand SWA don't have a "situation" or "problem" going on at all. Where some of these comments come from is just beyond me.

Terminal 2 and Councourse E is serving SWA perfectly right now. The additional gates in the new reuse concourse area are sufficient now and any expansion further into D/E concourse will be absolutely fine.

Southwest's primary passenger increases in STL are by large connection flights and SWA is flowing nicely and timely through STL. The new added security areas in T2 are helping and TSA lines in T2 are running faster than in T1 all concourses.

TWA flights use to come in on Concourse C and have connections to Concourse D. That was a hike. If SWA needs to utilize all of D/E... passengers do not have as long as walks as back thenand the moving walkways are very efficient and available throughout D/E.

The only place that STL is taking (right now) a strong look at is the T2/E luggage carousels and wait times. With the new international flights and other international carriers using the E customs, gates an luggage .... yes, they are addressing that. I will say by the end of this summer, T2 will have additional baggage carousels added and a reconfiged lower level area under construction.

SWA will receive their new airplanes come later his year and any expansion plans until late 2018 will be reconfigured flights departures/arrivals/connections/scheduled will be the only thing SWA will be doing.
stl07 wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:58 pm
dredger wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 3:37 pm
jshank83 wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 2:37 pm
Reading through the March minutes from the airport commission meeting:

Wingtips meeting expectations so far.

Sidenote: I watched KC's latest airport update. Southwest had a representative there that mentioned "gate constraints at Midway and even St. Louis". I found that curious since I feel like we have plenty of gates. He did mention later their biggest constraint at airports in general is baggage systems because they "crush them". Maybe that is more of our constraint than gates?
I think the reality is that T2 baggage, curbside and short term parking was all designed for expected use of only the T2 gates themselves. I think Southwest STL expansion has been a pleasant surprise in itself but no one should be surprised if Southwest sees constraints and issues as the expand beyond T2's infrastructure. The idea of remodelling E gates and turning lights on in Concourse D is sufficient enough for Southwest expansion and Lambert' itself in long term is just plain shortsighted.
Lambert had a plan. Move WN to C and AA to E. Plenty of space for expansion and plenty of baggage claims. WN told them to take a hike. Lambert looked to the future - it was WN that didn't
Was any reason given or rumored?
ldai_phs wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 7:20 pm
stl07 wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:58 pm

Lambert had a plan. Move WN to C and AA to E. Plenty of space for expansion and plenty of baggage claims. WN told them to take a hike. Lambert looked to the future - it was WN that didn't
Was any reason given or rumored?
I don't think it ever was released why they didn't want to move (assuming they actually were asked to move) but I think it was assumed they liked having their own terminal and could pretty much have it set up/run however they wanted. Plus T2 is newer and nicer in my opinion than C.
matguy70 wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2018 7:18 pm

The only place that STL is taking (right now) a strong look at is the T2/E luggage carousels and wait times. With the new international flights and other international carriers using the E customs, gates an luggage .... yes, they are addressing that. I will say by the end of this summer, T2 will have additional baggage carousels added and a reconfiged lower level area under construction.
Hopefully this comes to fruition. To me this is the really the main issue with T2, along with what seems like a lack of landside space upstairs. Things are getting pretty tight in there now but the plus is everything is pretty compact. I thought they might end up extending the building to the west but if they can reconfigure things downstairs and get in an extra carousel then that is good enough.
I know a lot of people here talk about how landslide space is skinny in STL T2. Just flew in on a late 2am arrival flight from Las Vegas and Concourse C and B there are skinnier than skinny and jammed packed. Low ceilings and unattractive. Many airports are like that. T2 has tall ceilings even in the E concourse and wider spaces as well.
Getting ready to book a June flight to TPA on WN and there are now 5 nonstops on Saturday! That is the same frequency as TW in the late 90's.

I thought I read somewhere that if Lambert officials absolutely needed new gates for WN that they would expand to the east of the existing gates of T2?
matguy70 wrote:
Fri Apr 13, 2018 3:49 am
I know a lot of people here talk about how landslide space is skinny in STL T2. Just flew in on a late 2am arrival flight from Las Vegas and Concourse C and B there are skinnier than skinny and jammed packed. Low ceilings and unattractive. Many airports are like that. T2 has tall ceilings even in the E concourse and wider spaces as well.
For me it has nothing to do with being skinny, it is lack of space in general. I dropped my wife off at 4 am today and the security line was out the door. Skinny is fine but I wish it was longer. Lots of airports like you mentioned are skinny but most have more room when you go into security so you aren't even close to out a door, or you have some extra room to wait for people, etc. Once WOW starts all those people are going to be pretty much blocking their desk and it runs into TSA pre. It also blocks people coming out of the secure area to go to the parking garage. I know they are adding a security lane so hopefully that helps some but it is still going to be tight quarters.

What I would like to see them do is build on this grass area to add some room upstairs and which would allow more room downstairs for extra baggage carousels. If they can get more in without building that is fine also but this would add some room. I would really like there to be at least one restaurant (besides Starbucks) outside of security in T2 also. It isn't necessary but when I am waiting to pick up people it would be nice to have a place to grab a beer or snack while I wait, like you can in T1. Extending the building would allow room for this (as well as just more room in general). I know it wouldn't be cheap and maybe using money to do this doesn't make sense, but in a perfect world I think it would be a nice upgrade.

Image

The length of airside doesn't bother me. Vegas has huge distances between connections at times. People movers in D help. The airside of T2 I have no issues with.

I would love to see some kind of 5/10/20 year plan for the airport. I know they put out some reports but nothing is very specific as to things they are thinking about that would be drastic changes. We all love to speculate about how we would change the airport, which is a lot of fun, but I would love to know what the actual people in charge are thinking.
That seems pretty logical. I wonder how hard it would be to just extend the current T2 roof and building in both directions to, say, double its size lengthwise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
“I’ve encouraged my family, friends, and myself not to fly on Allegiant Air”



https://www.cbsnews.com/video/60-minute ... d=50434283
moorlander wrote:
Fri Apr 13, 2018 2:53 pm
“I’ve encouraged my family, friends, and myself not to fly on Allegiant Air”



https://www.cbsnews.com/video/60-minute ... d=50434283
They should open a hub in St. Charles, perfect fit.
Ugh, not to get too far off-topic but that 60 Minutes episode on Allegiant is nothing more than an unsubstantiated, sensationalist hit piece. The vast majority of Allegiant's MX issues are with their MD-80s, since they're ancient, but seeing as they'll all be gone by 2019, it shouldn't really matter so much.
FYI for those of you that like plane spotting they have a bunch landing on Runway 29 today. Great view from T1 cell phone lot.

EDIT: 30R is back open so I doubt anymore land on 29.

Image



Image
This may have been posted sometime here - but this is an expansion plan for STL and their model ideas from 2015/2017 reports.
http://www.gatewaystreets.org/2017/visi ... t-airport/
matguy70 wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 5:30 pm
This may have been posted sometime here - but this is an expansion plan for STL and their model ideas from 2015/2017 reports.
http://www.gatewaystreets.org/2017/visi ... t-airport/
Interesting, thanks for posting. I really don't know why they haven't expanded T2's parking garage. That should have been done awhile ago. I would think they wouldn't have any trouble making the money back fairly quickly.

It is also good to see expanding landslide of T2 is in the plans. As I mentioned last week, I think that would make a lot of sense.

I would be curious if knocking down D is still in the cards now. I guess they could always do the extension on T2 east as pictured then they wouldn't need the old D gates anymore.
^RuskiSTL,

Thank you. That's a neat article. It brings back some neat memories and it's heartwarming to see other folks excited about TWA.

^matguy70,

It's been a while, but I've certainly seen those and related plans posted here. Not recently though. I'm inclined to think they'd be a lot of buck for not a lot of bang right now, save for the T2 garage and maybe the T2 landside. Nice to see the link. And even better, the link to the ISU study inside the article. That's new. I've seen the renderings out of it, but it's neat to glance through the whole study. (And will be better to read in its entirety as time allows.)
matguy70 wrote: This may have been posted sometime here - but this is an expansion plan for STL and their model ideas from 2015/2017 reports.
http://www.gatewaystreets.org/2017/visi ... t-airport/
T2 plans seem straightforward and intuitive. Terminal expansions (F16) and Parking expansion (F17) are ideas that have been floated here as well and its good to see the airport is looking at the same ideas.

T1 is more confusing. I get the reasoning is due to the closeness to the taxiway, but it seems MUCH harder to pull off. The logistics of completely replacing the current gates are very complicated if we assume the airport needs to function during the same period. It would also abandon the capital investment we have seen on concourse C after the tornados which seems wastful as that portion of the concourse is comparably very nice. Also it seems like the net number of gates would drop significantly which doesn't seem like a great idea. In general i would want to see more of the plan.

Replacing D is an interesting mystery. Overall i hate to see a net reduction in gates, but I don't reject it out of hand.
matguy70 wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 5:30 pm
This may have been posted sometime here - but this is an expansion plan for STL and their model ideas from 2015/2017 reports.
http://www.gatewaystreets.org/2017/visi ... t-airport/
Wow!! Going to repost these images (created/posted back in July 2016)

Image


Full-boat enhancements:

Image
Image
-
Struggling to get T1 graphic posted from gateways streets.

But hands down, this is my favorite vision for T1 going forward because it finally consolidates concourse security access to one spot along with the ability to add new customs/immigration where B stands now and consolidates T1 gates into one concourse which also clear the way to utilize part of D for future consolidated car facitily, more parking, new hotel and maybe go with one metrolink airport station completely enclosed w an automated people mover shuffling between T1 baggage, Car Rental/metrolink, and T2 baggage
It appears to me that building an entirely new terminal in a new location would be both cheaper and take less time than a complicated semi renovated semi-new build as outlined in the images above. Additionally, a gate reduction at STL would not necessarily be a bad thing
Could someone at least reassure me that Yamasaki's masterpiece isn't under threat?

Image

Image
No one really knows what will happen. If we are talking about any sort of major changes to Terminal 1 like those posed above,
I can tell you with 90% certainty that a completely new terminal in a new location makes more financial sense and 100% logistical sense.
ldai_phs wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:40 pm
It appears to me that building an entirely new terminal in a new location would be both cheaper and take less time than a complicated semi renovated semi-new build as outlined in the images above. Additionally, a gate reduction at STL would not necessarily be a bad thing
There has to be about a 0% chance they will tear down T1 landslide anytime soon. As framer referred to, I can't see any way they would get rid of it. I also can't see them tearing down T2 since it is fairly new.
jshank83 wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 9:40 pm
ldai_phs wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:40 pm
It appears to me that building an entirely new terminal in a new location would be both cheaper and take less time than a complicated semi renovated semi-new build as outlined in the images above. Additionally, a gate reduction at STL would not necessarily be a bad thing
There has to be about a 0% chance they will tear down T1 landslide anytime soon. As framer referred to, I can't see any way they would get rid of it. I also can't see them tearing down T2 since it is fairly new.
Yes, I agree with you that it is very unlikely that any major changes will be made to STL in the near-mid future. In the very long term though, I believe a new terminal is coming. A new terminal makes a lot more sense than those drawings posted above.
ldai_phs wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 9:38 pm
No one really knows what will happen. If we are talking about any sort of major changes to Terminal 1 like those posed above,
I can tell you with 90% certainty that a completely new terminal in a new location makes more financial sense and 100% logistical sense.
I'm also not sure how just rebuilding T1 airside is going to be more expensive than rebuilding an entire terminal. T1 landslide doesn't need replaced in my opinion.

I would say nothing REALLY needs replaced (besides maybe a airside extension and parking garage extension in T2). It won't lead to more service, just more fees. But all this is fun to speculate what each person thinks they should do to make it ideal.