urbanSTL

^ good point, Didn't think about it but international flights now require airlines to verify passports prior to issue boarding pass. Found myself trying to check in online to last my trip to Mexico City and come to realize after calling customer service that they won't allow you to do it because of passport verification. In other words, couldn't even get a boarding pass from OAK to Orange County because of my connecting flight to MEX.

You also expressed my thought, Southwest to facilitate quick turn arounds have pass through passengers stay on plane. Their shouldn't be any reason they couldn't do the same if origination is in STL even if you have a stop over along the way to international

We would probably visit what ever country they have a direct flight to. How about a travel company that specializes in tours/flights for cities with no direct international stops. So each quarter there is a direct flight to like Japan,Norway,ect.

Or now that delta basically owns virgin Atlantic, I don't see why they can't experiment with a stl to LHR direct.

Was just in London on vacation. I noticed that another family on our flight to Chicago from St. Louis was also on the London flight. There may have been others. I agree we could support a nonstop to LHR. If one airline would offer it, they would instantly get all of the STL to LHR business unless they priced it unreasonably.

Other localish things I noticed. 1) In the Underground, there is a prominent poster advertising Chicago. It says, Big Ben meet Big Bean, with a picture of Chicago's mirrored bean-like sculpture. 2) Also heard a busker in the underground playing Johnny B Good, 3) At Covent Garden, i was surprised to see a Shake Shack. I assume it is related to the one in NY. 4) Tower Bridge has a set of technologically significant bridges through history. Eads is featured for cantilever construction and caissons. I am sure Eads caissons were used for the tower bridge built 20 years after Eads.

The Thames seems similar to the Mississippi in that it is mud bottom and fast flowing each way with the tides. And it floods sometimes. But they manage to build high banks and floating docks anyway. We could do the same.

We wouldn't need a daily. 2x or 3x weekly would be 26,000 to 40,000 peeps a year assuming a 88percent load factor. Plus if you can get southwest to do it, we can easily be their "international hub" as we are already their 10th largest "hub"

shadrach wrote:The 767 has an average seating capacity of about 300. In a year, that's 109,500 people. That's what, 3% of the Metro St. Louis population. Could St. Louis sustain that kind of number?

Last year, 10 million US citizens visited all of Europe, that's about the same percentage (3%) of the total US population. But that's all of Europe and no just London (or any one European city.)

I guess if it made business sense, we'd have the flights.

Was that 10 million citizens, or 10 million trips. I would think some business people would visit multiple times per year. Also, many may have changed planes in London on the way to somewhere else in Europe.

zink wrote:Or now that delta basically owns virgin Atlantic, I don't see why they can't experiment with a stl to LHR direct.

The problem is that there isn't the travel base to support international flights out of STL on an aircraft which can fly the route. I saw a website not too long ago (I wish I had the link still, but...) that totaled up the top 100 international destinations out of the top 100 metro areas in the United States.

The average daily passenger count to the top five European destinations out of STL totaled about 150 per day, assuming you can capture 100% of the passengers, which is not likely due to frequent flyer allegiance, etc.

gary kreie wrote:If one airline would offer it, they would instantly get all of the STL to LHR business unless they priced it unreasonably.

Daily passenger volume STL-LHR is under 100 per day and assuming they would get all (or even 50%) of passenger volume is unlikely. If you are hoping for connections to other cities in Europe, you have lost the benefit of STL having a non-stop flight. Flying STL-ORD-FRA is not much different (in fact, it's less hassle) than flying STL-LHR-FRA.

Alex Ihnen wrote:And the flight would pull big numbers outside of metro region - think short-ish connections from Memphis, Iowa, Arkansas, even Indy, etc.

Considering we don't (or shortly won't) have flights from STL to Memphis, Indy, Little Rock / Arkansas or Iowa, that's not going to add much.

I'm not trying to be a downer here, but the comments here show very little understanding of the 2013 airline industry.

Greg

other than nextstl.com, I visit airliners.net most often. Recently, I encountered this thread: http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forum ... 04610/1/#1

If (and that's a big if) I understand it correctly, in 2011, this is the how many St. Louisans we're flying internationally daily. At least to the top 10 destinations....mostly leisure flights.


1. Cancun, Mexico..................................321
2. Toronto, Canada..................................102
3. Montego Bay, Jamaica..........................89
4. London, United Kingdom........................78
5. Punta Cana, Dominican Republic............77
6. Puerto Vallarta, Mexico..........................59
7. Frankfurt am Main, Germany...................44
8. Paris, France.........................................37
9. Seoul-Incheon, South Korea....................35
10. Vancouver, Canada...............................32

soulardx wrote:other than nextstl.com, I visit airliners.net most often. Recently, I encountered this thread: http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forum ... 04610/1/#1

If (and that's a big if) I understand it correctly, in 2011, this is the how many St. Louisans we're flying internationally daily. At least to the top 10 destinations....mostly leisure flights.


1. Cancun, Mexico..................................321
2. Toronto, Canada..................................102
3. Montego Bay, Jamaica..........................89
4. London, United Kingdom........................78
5. Punta Cana, Dominican Republic............77
6. Puerto Vallarta, Mexico..........................59
7. Frankfurt am Main, Germany...................44
8. Paris, France.........................................37
9. Seoul-Incheon, South Korea....................35
10. Vancouver, Canada...............................32

Here's a direct link to the Brookings report he's using:

http://www.brookings.edu/research/interactives/aviation

Keep in mind that these numbers he's quoting are daily. International flights to European flights wouldn't be daily, at least at first. So taking London as an example, he's reporting 78 people a day, on average, flying from Saint Louis to London. That's 546 people a week. Now, assuming those numbers are accurate and with the very large caveat that I know next to nothing about the aviation industry, it would seem that this would sufficient volume to support two direct flights a week, even accounting for a split of traffic amongst a couple of airlines. Too, it would be reasonable to assume a non-stop would potentially attract new travelers which would boost volume a bit.

These numbers are from 2011. I know Lambert has seen modest gains in volume since then. I don't know how much of that overall increase can be attributed to international flights, but it would seem reasonable to assume those numbers would be slightly higher as well.

Interestingly, totaling those numbers show 842 passengers daily going to the top 10 international destinations. Over a year, that adds up to 307,330 passengers a year. The brookings report says that 763,491 passengers left for international destinations during 2011. That means, if those numbers are accurate, that the top ten destinations accounted for only about 40% of total international traffic that year. I expected that number to be higher.

Or am I misreading all of this?

-RBB

Alex Ihnen wrote:

gregl wrote:Considering we don't (or shortly won't) have flights from STL to Memphis, Indy, Little Rock / Arkansas or Iowa, that's not going to add much.

I'm not trying to be a downer here, but the comments here show very little understanding of the 2013 airline industry.

Greg

Wait, Lambert is cutting flights to Memphis, Indy, Little Rock, Iowa, etc.?

Southwest killed its nonstop to Little Rock last month, and I'm pretty sure there isn't a single STL-LIT nonstop left.

roger wyoming II wrote:

Alex Ihnen wrote:

gregl wrote:Considering we don't (or shortly won't) have flights from STL to Memphis, Indy, Little Rock / Arkansas or Iowa, that's not going to add much.

I'm not trying to be a downer here, but the comments here show very little understanding of the 2013 airline industry.

Greg

Wait, Lambert is cutting flights to Memphis, Indy, Little Rock, Iowa, etc.?

To add insult to injury, it looks like to get to Indy on Southwest they make you fly first to KC on many flights!

The reason there is no Indy route is because Indianapolis-STL on American was ERJ 145's. It is simply not efficient for SWA to fly direct there from STL, as the flight would be less than 20 minutes with tailwinds going eastbound. Also, how is it insulting that we fly to Kansas City? Their airport is in free-fall. Their Indy route will most likely be on the chopping block soon. SWA, AAL and DAL are cutting flights there. Delta- Los Angeles American- O'Hare Southwest- OKC, Houston, Baltimore(BWI is rumored). They recorded their first uptick in passengers in May, but it was a 0.1% increase.

Daily doesn't mean a lot. If they are just taking total passengers divided by 365...it is meaningless. This why you have that 2x weekly route. You don't assume everyone flys out evenly through out the week. This why you offer a Friday and Sunday night departure to LHR which is your 2x weekly and capture your business and leisure travelers.

matguy70 wrote:A few points:

STL does serve IA nonstop to Burlington.
Southwest has just adding Des Moines to their flight route (with the incorporation of AirTran). Des Moines is not a target airport for STLians - and SWA is only flying a nonstop to Chicago for connections there.

Southwest dropped Little Rock awhile back- but you can drive to Little Rock pretty damn fast.
I don't think STL has ever had a flight to Indy nonstop.

International traffic to/from STL looks fairy good with those numbers. But remember, regardless of originating passengers (STLians) it is the connection flights in a city that makes up most of an international flights seats. We would have to see a carrier like Delta, American, or even Southwest (or partnering airline) to get a nonstop European flight daily.

Southwest routes many of their connections through their STL "hub" to many of their destination routes from STL nonstop. I/E, I very much doubt STLians fill many of the markets (like Grand Rapids, MI) everyday... however Southwests connecting passengers in STL do. Being a top 10 focus city / hub for Southwest allows us to have over 40 nonstop destinations from STL just on Southwest.

It almost appears STL is taking over Nashville's place as a Midwest hub (Midway is more a national hub). Southwest hasn't cut routes out of BNA, but have reduced total traffic movements of about 76 daily departures, they now have 67..reversed number ^_^

Is St. Louis the only airport not considering a CONRAC facility to eliminate rental car shuttle buses for out-of-town businessmen?

http://www.autorentalnews.com/tag/conrac/page/1.aspx

LAX has been taxing St. Louisans $10 per car since 2007 to build up its funds for construction of a CONRAC facility with light rail shuttle to replace buses.

Alex Ihnen wrote:Wait, Lambert is cutting flights to Memphis, Indy, Little Rock, Iowa, etc.?

Delta is closing it's hub in Memphis, those flights go away in September.

Southwest has already discontinued service to Indianapolis and Little Rock. They are shifting away from very short-haul flights like those.

I'm fairly certain we don't have any service to Iowa once the American Airlines regional jet flights were discontinued several years ago.

Greg