we are now tied with San Antonio with 8%.
- 179
I picked up a friend from the airport the other day. I'm sitting outside in the "limo cab" section for 15 minutes waiting for her. As I sit there and listen to my electronic jams I start looking around at the Garage, road, and concourse area. *It is so ugly.* I have never really observed the nastiness of our airport. I only fly, maybe, once a year so I'm there twice a year but it's usually a quick ride on the metro. I saw dirty glass panels with aluminum framing ATTACHED to the top of concrete Jersey Barriers. The barriers are dirty and the aluminum framing is poorly constructed. I was amazed at the shear ugliness. I wish I had my camera.
You can imagine the happiness I felt when I read that this area I was parked at will get a renovation!!!
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/s ... enDocument
Mayor Slay has a lot of faults like everyone but you gotta admit that he really does want to improve our city and regions' image! What a week...
You can imagine the happiness I felt when I read that this area I was parked at will get a renovation!!!
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/s ... enDocument
Mayor Slay has a lot of faults like everyone but you gotta admit that he really does want to improve our city and regions' image! What a week...
Very nice to hear. Too bad they didn't do this before that damn $1 B concrete mile.
A lot of upgrades have been made at Lambert but it does need a serious facelift. It is so dark and dreary inside the aiport and the low ceilings makes you feel claustrophobic at times.
I also like the glass dome to protect people from crappy weather. Hopefully they can design a better "5-minute parking/pick-up" system than what is currently in place, along with improving baggage delivery operations because baggage delivery at Lambert SUCKS.
![]()
A lot of upgrades have been made at Lambert but it does need a serious facelift. It is so dark and dreary inside the aiport and the low ceilings makes you feel claustrophobic at times.
I also like the glass dome to protect people from crappy weather. Hopefully they can design a better "5-minute parking/pick-up" system than what is currently in place, along with improving baggage delivery operations because baggage delivery at Lambert SUCKS.
The rest of the work will be phased over the next five years, with work at baggage claim and the glass canopy likely to be undertaken last. Construction will be staged to reduce disruption.
Hmm, makes me wonder that this incredible, modern looking canopy has a good chance of NOT happening?! I think it looks great and I really hope they build it. I think they should also get rid of all the ticket counters in the main terminal that block the view of the runways. who in the hell uses these anymore? I guess for checking luggage, but that's it. Maybe they could at least scale them down.
This is good news. But..
Aren't Lambert's fees among the highest of all airports? Will this have any affect on its desirability to airlines?
Airport officials are confident they can afford the renovations, relying
on bonds and higher fees on airlines.
Aren't Lambert's fees among the highest of all airports? Will this have any affect on its desirability to airlines?
Will this have any affect on its desirability to airlines?
Not really. They will just pass those costs on to the consumer so we will see slightly higher ticket prices.
However, upgrades to the airport makes it more attractive to airlines so by creating better a value-added proposition you can justify raising the costs to the airlines.
"among the highest fees in the country"
Please tell me you're joking. we should slash these as much as possible.
Please tell me you're joking. we should slash these as much as possible.
St.Louis UAB alumni wrote:Will this have any affect on its desirability to airlines?
Not really. They will just pass those costs on to the consumer so we will see slightly higher ticket prices.
I agree, but I think there's some subtle cause-and-effect as well.
If the airport can make more money from merchant leases and parking fees, it can cut the rates airlines are charged to use the terminal....
That revenue is especially important in Pittsburgh, where US Airways, which controls about 80 percent of the gates, has been threatening to leave because of higher-than-average gate fees.
edit: oops, deleted link.
I was going to add that the threat of leaving probably has more clout when there are alternate airports nearby. Some articles mentioned airport authorities tweaking gate fees in order to spread air traffic load to lesser-used airports.
Virgin America poll: STL, 9% (highest rating).
i've been dreaming of this for years. I especially like the interior shot of the main terminal. It looks like the totally cleaned everything up and exposed the buildings skylights! very nice. I pray to God they follow this plan.
I suppose this is a good thing, but it's a shame that the main terminal will be visually obscured. It's one of our few really nice modernist buildings (designed in the mid-50's by Minoru Yamasaski, who went on to design many buildings all over the world, including the NY World Trade Center)
^ Agreed. But at least the canopy follows the shape of the terminal. Wonder how that will look from 70.
- 6,775
Framer wrote:I suppose this is a good thing, but it's a shame that the main terminal will be visually obscured. It's one of our few really nice modernist buildings (designed in the mid-50's by Minoru Yamasaski, who went on to design many buildings all over the world, including the NY World Trade Center)
And Pruitt-Igoe!
Framer wrote:I suppose this is a good thing, but it's a shame that the main terminal will be visually obscured. It's one of our few really nice modernist buildings (designed in the mid-50's by Minoru Yamasaski, who went on to design many buildings all over the world, including the NY World Trade Center)
I totally agree, the main terminal is one of my favorite buildings in the area. I'm not entirely sold on the idea that a large canopy like this is really necessary, though I'm happy that the original design of the building was taken into account. What I'm most happy to hear is that the approched for the airport will be rerouted. The current entry to the terminal is a disaster. There are only a few hundred feet for motorists to figure out which of 5 or so directions that they need to go. This alone is worth the cost and inconvenience of the new construction. Now if only they could finish construction in the garage.
Interesting note on USAToday's "Today in the Sky" online column...
http://blogs.usatoday.com/sky/amtrak_tr ... index.html
My connecting flight is on Amtrak…
This may not be earth-shattering news, but if you’re flying to a high-fare airport, you may save some money by using Amtrak as part of your trip. For example, I’m traveling today to visit family in Jefferson City, Mo., where the closest airport is about 25 miles away and is served by only one carrier. As you might expect, fares are high. To help get around that, I’m using a free flight voucher to fly to St. Louis on United and will then take the St. Louis Metrolink light rail from Lambert Airport to the Amtrak station. The fare from St. Louis to downtown Jefferson City is just $17. Even if I bought a ticket to St. Louis, doing the Jefferson City leg by train as opposed to connecting by air would still save me $150 to $200 based on typical airfares. Of course, this option only works to cities that have convenient Amtrak service to nearby big cities. And though I have 90 minutes between my flight and my train, my train is the last one of the day. If I miss it, I’ll be scrambling for other options.
http://blogs.usatoday.com/sky/amtrak_tr ... index.html
My connecting flight is on Amtrak…
This may not be earth-shattering news, but if you’re flying to a high-fare airport, you may save some money by using Amtrak as part of your trip. For example, I’m traveling today to visit family in Jefferson City, Mo., where the closest airport is about 25 miles away and is served by only one carrier. As you might expect, fares are high. To help get around that, I’m using a free flight voucher to fly to St. Louis on United and will then take the St. Louis Metrolink light rail from Lambert Airport to the Amtrak station. The fare from St. Louis to downtown Jefferson City is just $17. Even if I bought a ticket to St. Louis, doing the Jefferson City leg by train as opposed to connecting by air would still save me $150 to $200 based on typical airfares. Of course, this option only works to cities that have convenient Amtrak service to nearby big cities. And though I have 90 minutes between my flight and my train, my train is the last one of the day. If I miss it, I’ll be scrambling for other options.
The canopy could be wonderful. If anyone has been to PDX (Portland, Or) they have something similar and it's quite atmospheric. Then again, PDX has an eight-story parking garage adjacent to the terminal covered in some very nice Pacific NW vines which should cover the whole parking facade in a few more years.
Either way, the renovations are long overdue. That's been said. But will $105 million really be enough to make a significant freshening of the entire main terminal, concourses A-B-C, and the roadway improvements? It's a lot of money but, let's be honest, STL needs a lot of help.
Freshening the concourses and main terminal to an extant to make them pleasant would be a chore, one eschewed by similarly decrepit (or at least once so) airports like Detroit, NY-JFK, DC-National, among a host of others, most notably Indy's new terminal.
Point is, for now, this will probably do. But, in the long-run, if STL wants to ever attract a major airline presence (more than being a piddling "hub" for American) it will need to do something to attract some airline to recognize STL's potential as a strategically-located hub.
Sorry this is going to be a long post. I hate reading long-winded posts too. But . . .
One of the major problems handicapping STL's growth right now--almost contradictory to economics--is that the local aviation market is in a pretty solid equilibrium. When TWA left and AA dumped a lot of mainline services, cut destinations, etc. what was left over was an airport primarily serving Origin/Destination travelers from the metro area, a considerable enough number, and enough connecting passengers to allow AA to serve enough destinations to still give the airport enough non-stop flights. This means AA still can get by with premium prices and fairly minimal focus operations. The other major airlines do their part in covering generally destination passengers, which leaves Southwest.
How Southwest holds the airport in balance is by providing enough competition to keep the other airlines' prices competitive enough to reduce the appeal for new airlines to begin operations, on top of the high landing costs. Neither, however, does Southwest necessarily want to use STL as one of its bigger connection cities because it also operates much traffic from Chicago-Midway with far more O/D passengers, Kansas City, and Nashville both whose diaspora of airlines after the large-scale consolidation of airlines in the 80's left them ample space for the airline and a fairly empty market dominated by the bigger carriers and their high prices.
In essence, bad facilities + relatively competitive ticket prices (versus, say, fortresses like Minneapolis, Detroit, Cincinnati, Denver, Charlotte, etc.) + high landing fees = minimal incentive for new airlines to begin service unless simply connecting dots in their route network.
What I was getting after is that if the city wants to hike up competition and maybe get on track to restore its status as a major airport again, it has to campaign to airlines like (and specifically) JetBlue to not only begin their typical JFK/Boston/Dulles service to the airport but to use it has a way to connect to the lesser cities of the Midwest it serves in the Northeast. That or the next time another large-scale airline start-up occurs in the US, it might be time the airport and city put on some sort of a show for such new airline. Skybus, a huge low-cost startup, is beginning its hub operations from Columbus of all places. If Columbus can host a major start-up airline presence, there's no reason a bigger metro area and airport couldn't too. Maybe if Virgin America ever gets off the ground (which, it might sadden some of you, has begun to actually look somewhat dubious) they'll be enlightened enough to get their Midwest presence to STL, but time will tell.
Oh, and all that was leading up to my grand conclusion. The airport is going to have to replace concourses A-B-C eventually. They might as well start to build some economic incentive for that to happen. Otherwise, ten, twenty, or thirty years down the road it might still be in the doldrums operating a relic of St. Louis' embarrassingly short-sighted period of the 70's/80's.
Ta-da. If anyone reads that whole thing, then I appreciate it. I just felt like this forum needed my enlightened analysis as an aviation enthusiast.
Either way, the renovations are long overdue. That's been said. But will $105 million really be enough to make a significant freshening of the entire main terminal, concourses A-B-C, and the roadway improvements? It's a lot of money but, let's be honest, STL needs a lot of help.
Freshening the concourses and main terminal to an extant to make them pleasant would be a chore, one eschewed by similarly decrepit (or at least once so) airports like Detroit, NY-JFK, DC-National, among a host of others, most notably Indy's new terminal.
Point is, for now, this will probably do. But, in the long-run, if STL wants to ever attract a major airline presence (more than being a piddling "hub" for American) it will need to do something to attract some airline to recognize STL's potential as a strategically-located hub.
Sorry this is going to be a long post. I hate reading long-winded posts too. But . . .
One of the major problems handicapping STL's growth right now--almost contradictory to economics--is that the local aviation market is in a pretty solid equilibrium. When TWA left and AA dumped a lot of mainline services, cut destinations, etc. what was left over was an airport primarily serving Origin/Destination travelers from the metro area, a considerable enough number, and enough connecting passengers to allow AA to serve enough destinations to still give the airport enough non-stop flights. This means AA still can get by with premium prices and fairly minimal focus operations. The other major airlines do their part in covering generally destination passengers, which leaves Southwest.
How Southwest holds the airport in balance is by providing enough competition to keep the other airlines' prices competitive enough to reduce the appeal for new airlines to begin operations, on top of the high landing costs. Neither, however, does Southwest necessarily want to use STL as one of its bigger connection cities because it also operates much traffic from Chicago-Midway with far more O/D passengers, Kansas City, and Nashville both whose diaspora of airlines after the large-scale consolidation of airlines in the 80's left them ample space for the airline and a fairly empty market dominated by the bigger carriers and their high prices.
In essence, bad facilities + relatively competitive ticket prices (versus, say, fortresses like Minneapolis, Detroit, Cincinnati, Denver, Charlotte, etc.) + high landing fees = minimal incentive for new airlines to begin service unless simply connecting dots in their route network.
What I was getting after is that if the city wants to hike up competition and maybe get on track to restore its status as a major airport again, it has to campaign to airlines like (and specifically) JetBlue to not only begin their typical JFK/Boston/Dulles service to the airport but to use it has a way to connect to the lesser cities of the Midwest it serves in the Northeast. That or the next time another large-scale airline start-up occurs in the US, it might be time the airport and city put on some sort of a show for such new airline. Skybus, a huge low-cost startup, is beginning its hub operations from Columbus of all places. If Columbus can host a major start-up airline presence, there's no reason a bigger metro area and airport couldn't too. Maybe if Virgin America ever gets off the ground (which, it might sadden some of you, has begun to actually look somewhat dubious) they'll be enlightened enough to get their Midwest presence to STL, but time will tell.
Oh, and all that was leading up to my grand conclusion. The airport is going to have to replace concourses A-B-C eventually. They might as well start to build some economic incentive for that to happen. Otherwise, ten, twenty, or thirty years down the road it might still be in the doldrums operating a relic of St. Louis' embarrassingly short-sighted period of the 70's/80's.
Ta-da. If anyone reads that whole thing, then I appreciate it. I just felt like this forum needed my enlightened analysis as an aviation enthusiast.
eh.. ok.. The rendering of ours looks a LOT more impressive and I think it would compliment the main building well. A good gut-rehab of the terminal building should be the main priority.
The main terminal building is actually quite impressive. All modern airports are/were based on this Yamasaki design.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0805065 ... eader-link
The main terminal building is actually quite impressive. All modern airports are/were based on this Yamasaki design.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0805065 ... eader-link
St. Louis is now top of the list for Virgian America at 7%
http://www.letvafly.com/mt/2007/01/tell ... irgin.html
http://www.letvafly.com/mt/2007/01/tell ... irgin.html
- 11K
The photos are awesome - thanks Gary. As someone who is now through Lambert on a regular basis, I look forward to the changes (I only wish they were started 5 years ago).
I really believe that Lambert is poised for a big comeback - capacity is there, the renovations will make it attractive and the new runway should provide for any expansion. The industry is so cyclical that it will come back around the StL.
I really believe that Lambert is poised for a big comeback - capacity is there, the renovations will make it attractive and the new runway should provide for any expansion. The industry is so cyclical that it will come back around the StL.
- 3,428
Southwest Airlines Says Additional Flights Will Start in June
DALLAS (AP) -- Southwest Airlines announced Thursday it is adding 18 flights in 15 cities this summer as the discount carrier expands its fleet of aircraft.
Starting in June, Southwest will have daily nonstop flights between Fort Lauderdale, Fla., and Providence, R.I., as well as between Houston's Hobby Airport and San Diego.
On June 17, the airline said it would begin five new daily nonstop roundtrip flights between Denver and Oakland, Calif.
By Aug. 4, Southwest will have one new daily nonstop roundtrip between Baltimore and Oklahoma City, as well as an additional daily nonstop roundtrip between Baltimore and St. Louis, for a total of five daily.
The Dallas-based company's fleet will grow by between 7 percent and 8 percent this year with the addition of 37 new Boeing 737s, Chief Executive Officer Gary Kelly said.
"We have already announced that we will begin service in San Francisco later this year, and we will continue to add routes within our existing network," he said in a release.
Southwest Airlines Co. shares rose 20 cents, or 1.3 percent, to close at $15.15 on the New York Stock Exchange.
DALLAS (AP) -- Southwest Airlines announced Thursday it is adding 18 flights in 15 cities this summer as the discount carrier expands its fleet of aircraft.
Starting in June, Southwest will have daily nonstop flights between Fort Lauderdale, Fla., and Providence, R.I., as well as between Houston's Hobby Airport and San Diego.
On June 17, the airline said it would begin five new daily nonstop roundtrip flights between Denver and Oakland, Calif.
By Aug. 4, Southwest will have one new daily nonstop roundtrip between Baltimore and Oklahoma City, as well as an additional daily nonstop roundtrip between Baltimore and St. Louis, for a total of five daily.
The Dallas-based company's fleet will grow by between 7 percent and 8 percent this year with the addition of 37 new Boeing 737s, Chief Executive Officer Gary Kelly said.
"We have already announced that we will begin service in San Francisco later this year, and we will continue to add routes within our existing network," he said in a release.
Southwest Airlines Co. shares rose 20 cents, or 1.3 percent, to close at $15.15 on the New York Stock Exchange.
- 476
I think STL would make a great hub for Southwest. Theyre getting huge! I always fly southwest, partly because I prefer the low-key East Terminal, but also because the airline is so great.
...the no assigned seats means I can find the cutest girl to sit next to...
...the no assigned seats means I can find the cutest girl to sit next to...