urbanSTL

very good news. hopefully enough people will switch from AA to make all these new flights mainline. seems to me that Delta is looking into making us at least a focus city. maybe even more service if landing fees come down with Chinese cargo.

Yes, we have a China cargo flight -- to MidAmerica

http://www.stltoday.com/business/column ... 2bc8b.html


Local delegation heading back to China for more cargo hub talks

http://www.stltoday.com/business/column ... 78c22.html

Someguy wrote:very good news. hopefully enough people will switch from AA to make all these new flights mainline. seems to me that Delta is looking into making us at least a focus city. maybe even more service if landing fees come down with Chinese cargo.

The problem with the flights Delta is adding is that NONE of them are mainline -- they are all on regional jets, even though some do have first class seating.

Out of the 40 flights Delta will have out of STL in November, only 16 are on mainline aircraft, providing a daily total seat count of 3933.

Although American will only have 34 flights per day, 32 are on mainline aircraft, providing a daily total seat count of 4907 -- 25% higher than DL.

Personally, I'll keep choosing AA based on the planes they serve STL with.

Greg

GregL wrote: The problem with the flights Delta is adding is that NONE of them are mainline -- they are all on regional jets, even though some do have first class seating.

Personally, I'll keep choosing AA based on the planes they serve STL with.

Greg

I Dont quite understand. Are you complaining that the planes are not BIGGER planes? Or that the planes are not operated by the parent company (Mainline)

You can have a "mainline" that operates small planes...

I am still in debating which airline I will be flying the second most on.
#1- Southwest (hands down #1)
#2/#3- United (Continental)- Now the #1 largest airline, it is has some pretty good international (Pacific and Atlantic) destinations from Chicago and Houston. Plus if I have to connect on a Southwest flight, I might consider just flying United instead to get the points.
#2/#3- Delta- Just because it has more flights than AA and the connections doesnt go through Chicago.
#4- AA/Other airlines. AA is just another "Other" airline at STL now.

O yea, Travel and Leisure just ranked St/ Louis as the 3rd worst airport behind NY and LA. Crazy!
http://travel.yahoo.com/p-interests-35116807

zink wrote:
I Dont quite understand. Are you complaining that the planes are not BIGGER planes? Or that the planes are not operated by the parent company (Mainline)

Either way, so what? They still get you where you need to go, right?

At this point, most of those bigger, mainline AA planes are just shuttling you to O'Hare or DFW. Me? I'll gladly take a Delta RJ if it shortens my trip and keeps me away from those two headache airports.

jmstokes wrote: Going to DC next week, on an Embraer 145. I'd do anything to get out of spending 2 hours in that cramped cigar tube, including a connection. Unfortunately, this is a training trip and I couldn't book my own travel.

JM, I think if I remember correctly you do travel alot... As a frequent traveler myself, I am in the exact opposite boat as you.

As far as room, the ERJ usually has MORE room in the seating area. Look at the airlines and check out the seat width and pitch, most are the exact same as the 737 or MORE.

In addition, I LOVE THE ERJ.
- You are guaranteed an aisle or window or some in-cases you get the aisle/window seat (the single row on the left side)
- Probably the quietest commercial plane around. Especially sitting in the front, compared to a 737 it is like you cant hear the engine.
- SUPER FAST boarding. Less people = fast boarding.

The only true downside I see that is true and not opinionated is that the overheads will not store the normal size carry on. At the same time it allows you to not stress over about trying to find an overhead space.

I typically fly United, so I'm in economy plus, which has tons more legroom. If I'm on AA, it's in first, as it'll be an international trip. You're right on the legroom and buttroom. The 145 is very similar. The lack of first or much in the way of exit seating is a big negative for me.

Righto on the boarding. However, the many airports where I have to walk outside and through a door and up some stairs get on my nerves. Jet bridges were invented for a reason. This isn't as much an issue for me as when I travel with my father, who can't handle stairs.

Don't even get me started on the RJs in irregular operations. That's when I despise them the most. Always seem to be first to get cancelled or delayed in favor of mainline full size planes.

For the average joe flyer, it probably doesn't matter. For the 1k / Exec Platinum / Diamond set it makes a difference.

jmstokes wrote:I typically fly United, so I'm in economy plus, which has tons more legroom. If I'm on AA, it's in first, as it'll be an international trip. You're right on the legroom and buttroom. The 145 is very similar. The lack of first or much in the way of exit seating is a big negative for me.

Righto on the boarding. However, the many airports where I have to walk outside and through a door and up some stairs get on my nerves. Jet bridges were invented for a reason. This isn't as much an issue for me as when I travel with my father, who can't handle stairs.

Don't even get me started on the RJs in irregular operations. That's when I despise them the most. Always seem to be first to get cancelled or delayed in favor of mainline full size planes.

For the average joe flyer, it probably doesn't matter. For the 1k / Exec Platinum / Diamond set it makes a difference.

Will you hire me for something? I want to fly around a bunch. I'll answer your phone or something while you're at your important international business meetings; get you a coffee/tee/water/beer even.

jmstokes wrote:Flying constantly sucks. Trust me, you don't want to do it.

Second that. So glad I'm "grounded" in this latest job.

jmstokes wrote:Flying constantly sucks. Trust me, you don't want to do it.

That's just because you're flying out of the 3rd worst airport in the country.

jmstokes wrote:

stlwriterman wrote:Either way, so what? They still get you where you need to go, right?

I flew a lot for my old job, and will again for my new job. Going to DC next week, on an Embraer 145. I'd do anything to get out of spending 2 hours in that cramped cigar tube, including a connection. Unfortunately, this is a training trip and I couldn't book my own travel.

To me, yes, it does make a huge difference. I'm fine with an RJ for anything up to about 90 minutes. Beyond that they're just too cramped. Somewhere like SLC? No way. I do think there's a big difference between the EMB145 & CRJ200 and the larger CR700, CR900 and EMB170s. If they run the latter, fine, let me at them. The former? No. They're awful planes meant for the shortest flights.

Fair enough. I probably only fly about 8 times a year, and I'm not all that big a guy. So in-plane comfort isn't my biggest issue. When I do fly, I'm usually going to the Northeast or the West Coast, and if I can't go direct, I'd just as soon head in the direction I'm going (i.e. Detroit or Cincy or Denver or Salt Lake, than have to head via either Chicago or Dallas). Shorter trip that way.

Have to chuckle, I was crying the upgrade blues when I booked AA out of SFO so my boss could fly them. I typically fly Delta (a lot of work in Southeast lately - Atlanta is crowded but lot of connections and preferable schedules) and take advantage of my upgrade status every chance I can. An upgrade to First Class saved me more then once from missing my flight because I was able to walk past the 7:00 am Concourse A security line backup

I would have to agree with the frequent business travelers as I travel frequently myself. Mainline service with priority status makes a huge difference on everything. At the same time, I quit getting mad at the travel world. My belief is flying even with delays or a connection is better then the oxcart any day of the week.

ricke002 wrote:

jmstokes wrote:Flying constantly sucks. Trust me, you don't want to do it.

That's just because you're flying out of the 3rd worst airport in the country.

The East terminal (terminal 2) is really busy now, so it is getting difficult to find a place to sit at one of two regular restaurants. They need more restaurant and shopping options there.

And no free wifi is ridiculous. You have to get a Boingo subscription. Airports that are serious about attracting businesses to the region provide it for free.

From Dallas Morning News commenting on SW Airlines move into Newark Airport.

"In a report Monday, airline analyst Hunter Keay at Stifel Nicolaus predicted that the first cities out of Newark will be Chicago, Baltimore or St. Louis.

That last one is intriguing because it would give Southwest customers from Dallas one-stop service to the New York area through St. Louis. At present, a trip to New York LaGuardia on Southwest requires at least two stops."

http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/arch ... lue-t.html

gary kreie wrote:The East terminal (terminal 2) is really busy now, so it is getting difficult to find a place to sit at one of two regular restaurants. They need more restaurant and shopping options there.

And no free wifi is ridiculous. You have to get a Boingo subscription. Airports that are serious about attracting businesses to the region provide it for free.

I'm finding that many big airports have dropped free wifi and started charging, usually with Boingo or T-mobile.

Alex Ihnen wrote:Didn't Google offer free wi-fi at a dozen airports or so this past holiday season? Was that just temporary, or am I mis-remembering altogether?

yeah, that was unfortunately only a couple of months of service. we do need to figure out a way to get it permanently free though, should be simply a money issue too since we know the hardware is there from google's brief wifi extravaganza. anyone think AT&T might be willing to sponsor it?

Someguy wrote:yeah, that was unfortunately only a couple of months of service. we do need to figure out a way to get it permanently free though, should be simply a money issue too since we know the hardware is there from google's brief wifi extravaganza. anyone think AT&T might be willing to sponsor it?

There wasn't any new hardware, you just went into the existing Boingo portal where Google showed you a short video intended to guilt you into donating to charities, then your access was free.

I wonder how many of the business travelers who grumble about paying for wireless at the airport, then go on to stay at hotels that charge $15/night for internet. If you do that more than 4 nights a month, you come out ahead by just paying $60/month for a Verizon MiFi.

I'll also throw out that in most airports and hotels I've been to that offer free Internet, I found it to be slower or unreliable -- some weeks it worked fine and others it wouldn't. There's little direct financial incentive to make it not suck. Denver's airport is the worst; they inject ads above every web page you visit, which breaks a lot of more complex sites.

From that perspective, I'm ok with it being for-pay if it means the infrastructure is better maintained, but they ought to offer opportunities for sponsorship by shops and restaurants in the airport. They should be able to hand out cards for 15 or 30 minutes access time if you spend money at their place.