Share
7,810
Life MemberLife Member
7,810

PostAug 08, 2013#1526

Chalupas54 wrote:Two issues. One- STL to LA is 4 hours, always an MD-80. BNA-MIA 1 hour. 737-800. MCI-ORD 1 hour 30 mins. 737-800. Also, Delta maintains their MD-80s and A320s. They all have been refurbished, and have inflight-tv. American's appear to never have been. Delta is retiring all of it's A320's and replacing them with 737-800s. Even though the MD-80 is a child of St Louis, I never have liked it. Very rough, loud, and SMALL. The MD-80s being twelve years old are the last ones ever built. But, American does use the 757, as well as DAL. Have you seen the new DAL 757 interior? LIE FLAT SEATS. :shock: American? Having flown in first on the 757, it's incredibly mediocre. I hope American's new Airbus A319s and 321s are much nicer than their current cattle planes.
That STL to/from LAX in MD80s makes me angry. I've booked 3 weeks out and still been stuck with a middle seat towards the back. The flights are always full. I can't figure why they aren't flying something bigger on that route.

And I've flown other short AA routes in the newer 737-800s. Though I will admit every time I've done the MSP to/from ORD it's been one of the cursed MD80s.
159
Junior MemberJunior Member
159

PostAug 08, 2013#1527

dweebe wrote:
Chalupas54 wrote:Two issues. One- STL to LA is 4 hours, always an MD-80. BNA-MIA 1 hour. 737-800. MCI-ORD 1 hour 30 mins. 737-800. Also, Delta maintains their MD-80s and A320s. They all have been refurbished, and have inflight-tv. American's appear to never have been. Delta is retiring all of it's A320's and replacing them with 737-800s. Even though the MD-80 is a child of St Louis, I never have liked it. Very rough, loud, and SMALL. The MD-80s being twelve years old are the last ones ever built. But, American does use the 757, as well as DAL. Have you seen the new DAL 757 interior? LIE FLAT SEATS. :shock: American? Having flown in first on the 757, it's incredibly mediocre. I hope American's new Airbus A319s and 321s are much nicer than their current cattle planes.
That STL to/from LAX in MD80s makes me angry. I've booked 3 weeks out and still been stuck with a middle seat towards the back. The flights are always full. I can't figure why they aren't flying something bigger on that route.

And I've flown other short AA routes in the newer 737-800s. Though I will admit every time I've done the MSP to/from ORD it's been one of the cursed MD80s.
Full does not mean profitable in the airline industry. Close to 1/3 of available economy seats on the S80 are reserved for elites and Main Cabin Extra, which is available for purchase.

AA has the 738s working transcontinental and overwater flying from Miami and longer stage length routes from ORD/DFW. Miami hasn't seen S80s since 2005, that's why you see 738s on short routes like MIA-TPA. Airline use the most economical aircraft for the mission, end of story. AA doesn't stock parts for the 738s in STL and many of the line mechanics there know the MDs better than most anymore with their vast experience with the series at Ozark and TWA.
7,810
Life MemberLife Member
7,810

PostAug 08, 2013#1528

JAL007 wrote:Full does not mean profitable in the airline industry.
I realize that.
JAL007 wrote:AA doesn't stock parts for the 738s in STL and many of the line mechanics there know the MDs better than most anymore with their vast experience with the series at Ozark and TWA.
The part/mechanic angle certainly makes sense. I've asked AA employees before and nobody could offer a reason why we get such old planes here. The TWA/Ozark legacy explains it.

I guess it means we'll have another 10 years of getting AA's oldest planes at Lambert. There's nothing worse than sitting down, looking over at the sun shade handle and seeing "McDonnell Douglas" molded on the plastic
455
Full MemberFull Member
455

PostAug 08, 2013#1529

Chalupas54 wrote:Have you seen the new DAL 757 interior? LIE FLAT SEATS. :shock: American? Having flown in first on the 757, it's incredibly mediocre. I hope American's new Airbus A319s and 321s are much nicer than their current cattle planes.
Delta has a subset of 757s (known as the "75E") which fly JFK-LAX/SFO and to Europe which have lie flat seats. American also has a subset of 757s which fly international routes which have lie-flat seats.

Delta's domestic 757s have standard domestic F seats, just like American. The only difference is DL's F seats have 37" pitch while AA's have 39".

AA will have a subset of their A321s which are configured with lie-flat First and Business class seats for the JFK-LAX/SFO routes. The domestic A319s and A321s will be standard domestic F seats.
Also, Delta maintains their MD-80s and A320s. They all have been refurbished, and have inflight-tv.
Delta does NOT have any in-flight entertainment on their M88, M90, A319 or A320 aircraft. There has been some refurbishment of the MDs but I don't see a big difference vs. AA's planes.

Personally, I MUCH prefer the MD-80 over a 737 - fewer middle seats and, provided you are not sitting in the very back, much quieter.

Greg
3,433
Life MemberLife Member
3,433

PostAug 08, 2013#1530

I fly the STL/LAX AA flight on the MD-80 several times per year, and it is always full. Business people that fly that long route get to higher reward levels quickly, so they take up most of the seats. And many St. Louisans want to fly AA since that is where all their old TWA frequent flyer miles ended up. So I also was wondering why AA doesn't try to sell more seats in line with demand for their product in St. Louis, rather than push everyone to the competing SW Airlines non-stop to LA when their planes fill up a month early. Maybe they just assumed the overflow will be happy to change AA planes in Dallas.

Seems like AA moved the St. Louis TWA hub to Dallas terminal D, blaming St. Louis for their 911 downturn. Then they went bankrupt anyway. You have to wonder who was in charge of their business plan.

They do have wifi for sale most of the time on that flight, by the way.
7,810
Life MemberLife Member
7,810

PostAug 08, 2013#1531

gary kreie wrote:I fly the STL/LAX AA flight on the MD-80 several times per year, and it is always full. Business people that fly that long route get to higher reward levels quickly, so they take up most of the seats. And many St. Louisans want to fly AA since that is where all their old TWA frequent flyer miles ended up. So I also was wondering why AA doesn't try to sell more seats in line with demand for their product in St. Louis, rather than push everyone to the competing SW Airlines non-stop to LA when their planes fill up a month early. Maybe they just assumed the overflow will be happy to change AA planes in Dallas.
I've also noticed that the STL-LAX flights look to have a heavy businessperson presence and little leisure travel. I'm not saying it's what you see on a LA-SFO or DC-NY flight: but not far from it. I've also done the STL-DFW-LAX runs and I'm also amazed at the number of people transferring with me at DFW.

I know there's a million pieces to the puzzle, but there's got to be some odd reasons American can't get more revenue out of a STL-LAX route. There appears to be demand at good rates and they're choosing to let it go elsewhere.
1,054
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,054

PostAug 08, 2013#1532

gregl wrote:
Chalupas54 wrote:Have you seen the new DAL 757 interior? LIE FLAT SEATS. :shock: American? Having flown in first on the 757, it's incredibly mediocre. I hope American's new Airbus A319s and 321s are much nicer than their current cattle planes.
Delta has a subset of 757s (known as the "75E") which fly JFK-LAX/SFO and to Europe which have lie flat seats. American also has a subset of 757s which fly international routes which have lie-flat seats.

Delta's domestic 757s have standard domestic F seats, just like American. The only difference is DL's F seats have 37" pitch while AA's have 39".

AA will have a subset of their A321s which are configured with lie-flat First and Business class seats for the JFK-LAX/SFO routes. The domestic A319s and A321s will be standard domestic F seats.
Also, Delta maintains their MD-80s and A320s. They all have been refurbished, and have inflight-tv.
Delta does NOT have any in-flight entertainment on their M88, M90, A319 or A320 aircraft. There has been some refurbishment of the MDs but I don't see a big difference vs. AA's planes.

Personally, I MUCH prefer the MD-80 over a 737 - fewer middle seats and, provided you are not sitting in the very back, much quieter.

Greg
Actually, Delta DOES have pull down TV's with Delta On-Air programming on their MD-90s. I have been on at least 3 MD-90 flights with DAL that had the pull-down screens. Actually, may I inform you that Delta announced on Tuesday a complete overhaul of all 757s in their fleet? They will ALL have lie-flats and Seat-back AVOD, so they can operate the aircraft on more routes. For instance, they would be able to fly the same plane from Boston to Atlanta, then continue on to somewhere in the Caribbean, with out having to change equipment. It also reduces idle time for the aircraft. You may not see much difference because it appears you don't fly Delta. I have never been on a Delta flight with an aircraft that smells like human waste, was delayed for equipment failure, have them run out of drinks, and have 6 overhead compartments which would not shut, and had to be taped down. All those experiences happened to me on American's MD-80s, in the past 5 years.

PostAug 08, 2013#1533

dweebe wrote:
I know there's a million pieces to the puzzle, but there's got to be some odd reasons American can't get more revenue out of a STL-LAX route. There appears to be demand at good rates and they're choosing to let it go elsewhere.
I as well, find it extremely perplexing. Personally, I think most people should stop being so sheepish for AA. They are an awful company. They rank with Spirit in Consumer Report's Worst Airlines. I am (as I have stated so much previously) pleased how more and more people are switching to Delta and Southwest (even United). But with AA's purchase of USAir it will set other airlines back quite a bit. But, USAir does not have a huge STL base. I think we will see AA cut more routes from STL once the takeover is done. I can see Pittsburgh, Philadelphia on the chopping block. Philadelphia is going to get huge cuts from AA, as their JFK gateway hub is 200 miles north.
7,810
Life MemberLife Member
7,810

PostAug 08, 2013#1534

The one nice thing about American is if departing St. Louis, you know you'll almost always get a nicer plane on the 2nd leg leaving DFW or ORD.
8,912
Life MemberLife Member
8,912

PostAug 08, 2013#1535

dweebe wrote:
gary kreie wrote:I fly the STL/LAX AA flight on the MD-80 several times per year, and it is always full. Business people that fly that long route get to higher reward levels quickly, so they take up most of the seats. And many St. Louisans want to fly AA since that is where all their old TWA frequent flyer miles ended up. So I also was wondering why AA doesn't try to sell more seats in line with demand for their product in St. Louis, rather than push everyone to the competing SW Airlines non-stop to LA when their planes fill up a month early. Maybe they just assumed the overflow will be happy to change AA planes in Dallas.
I've also noticed that the STL-LAX flights look to have a heavy businessperson presence and little leisure travel. I'm not saying it's what you see on a LA-SFO or DC-NY flight: but not far from it. I've also done the STL-DFW-LAX runs and I'm also amazed at the number of people transferring with me at DFW.

I know there's a million pieces to the puzzle, but there's got to be some odd reasons American can't get more revenue out of a STL-LAX route. There appears to be demand at good rates and they're choosing to let it go elsewhere.
Me and the almost Mrs are taking that flight soon to LAX on the MD80 en route to KOA, HNL, and LIH. We're using up the last of the Advantage miles to do it and then hopefully we'll never have to fly AA again. MUAHAHAHA
455
Full MemberFull Member
455

PostAug 08, 2013#1536

Chalupas54 wrote:Actually, Delta DOES have pull down TV's with Delta On-Air programming on their MD-90s. I have been on at least 3 MD-90 flights with DAL that had the pull-down screens.
Delta MD-90s once had IFE, but removed it several years ago.
Actually, may I inform you that Delta announced on Tuesday a complete overhaul of all 757s in their fleet?
You can inform me of that but you would be incorrect. DL announced an overhaul of the
"75E" sub-fleet of 757s. These aircraft (ironically, former TWA planes) are used on the JFK-LAX/SFO/SEA routes and some service to Europe. This is similar to what UA does on their 757 PS aircraft and what AA will offer on their A321Ts. http://takingoff.delta.com/post/5742343 ... ew-757-200

There is no need for lie-flat beds on 95+% of the routes DL operates the 757 on, such as STL-ATL. They will not remove 6-8 F seats on routes where there is not a competitive reason to add lie-flat seats.

Greg
788
Super MemberSuper Member
788

PostAug 08, 2013#1537

I've been flying up to chicago quite a bit and prefer AA to SW. I prefer the MD80 to SW's 737 because the seats seats feel more comfortable, there are fewer people, and the lights are more pleasant. On SW I feel like I'm stepping into a Walmart. Southwest employees are usually much nicer though.

Here at Lambert, T1 is not nearly as busy as T2. SW also allows free checked bags, so those lines are really long. Last time I flew SW up to NYC I almost missed my flight because there were so many families checking strollers and whatnot. From what I've seen, their prices are pretty much the same as AA.
1,982
Never Logs OffNever Logs Off
1,982

PostAug 08, 2013#1538

You think SWA is the same pricing as AA? I'm not a frequent flier, but I have flown a decent amount the last few years.

It's just my experience, so I certainly wouldn't call you wrong, but I'm frequently able to find really good deals with SWA. If I have to fly American or Delta I've pretty much already accepted I'm going to take a hit on the price.

SWA probably has flights for that much too, it just seems like it's a lot easier to get a good deal with SWA.

The experience on SWA is bargain-ish, I suppose, but I greatly prefer them to Delta or AA.
1,054
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,054

PostAug 08, 2013#1539

gregl wrote:
Delta MD-90s once had IFE, but removed it several years ago.


Greg
So last week was several years ago? MSP-STL had them. If I recall correctly the show was the Big Bang Theory. You're wrong. Either that or I live in dreamland and I flew myself.

PostAug 08, 2013#1540

flipz wrote:I've been flying up to chicago quite a bit and prefer AA to SW. I prefer the MD80 to SW's 737 because the seats seats feel more comfortable, there are fewer people, and the lights are more pleasant. On SW I feel like I'm stepping into a Walmart. Southwest employees are usually much nicer though.

Here at Lambert, T1 is not nearly as busy as T2. SW also allows free checked bags, so those lines are really long. Last time I flew SW up to NYC I almost missed my flight because there were so many families checking strollers and whatnot. From what I've seen, their prices are pretty much the same as AA.
I agree, some Southwest flights are quite pricey. I do think SWA needs to add a premium cabin, if they truly want to appeal to business travelers. They do now have free tv that you can stream on laptop or tablet, without having to pay for Internet. The STL ticket counters need an immediate expansion, or they buy out the other rows of counters.. I have seen lines stretched out the door. On SWA I don't think I ever have missed a connection. I know some that have, and have been given vouchers while on AA I have missed seven, because they were late, the DFW Skytrain broke down and we were stranded on the air bridge, equipment failure, and being denied boarding because of how the plane was to heavy ( That I understand). I received no vouchers, no food coupons, nothing.
2,831
Life MemberLife Member
2,831

PostAug 09, 2013#1541

Here's the deal, SWA doesn't have to do anything. Their biz model is the only airline in the air that makes money - and for 40 consecutive years. They offer early bird check-in, A list (mostly biz people) passenger boarding and faster security clearance lines and WiFi / and now TV on most longer flights.

As for AA, they could give a crap about STL. There is no way in hell that AA will ever fly a nonstop European international flight from STL. They had their chance to make STL what ever they wanted it to be... and they didn't. I personally would have liked to have seen them belly up than merge with USairways and keep the American Name.

Delta is the national carrier chance of getting an European international flight. They may invest in it in the future. Otherwise, I can see an international carrier looking at STL with a code share program. When and if Southwest goes across the pond, STL will have an international nonstop flight.

I could also see an Asian carrier bringing nonstop flights to STL from Asia. This I think would happen more quickly with cargo and international Asian trade. STL's Asian population continues to grow.
455
Full MemberFull Member
455

PostAug 09, 2013#1542

matguy70 wrote:As for AA, they could give a crap about STL. There is no way in hell that AA will ever fly a nonstop European international flight from STL. They had their chance to make STL what ever they wanted it to be... and they didn't. I personally would have liked to have seen them belly up than merge with USairways and keep the American Name.
I agree. Forget AA. They've decided to abandon St. Louis.

We should concentrate on on those who have shown interest in us (Southwest, Delta) and attracting more airlines such as Virgin, JetBlue, Spirit, or Sun Country. Perhaps we could attract a discount foreign airline such as Ryanair. Also, what happened to starting another home based airline? Nothing has changed the fact that St. Louis airports have a lot of excess capacity and a nearly perfect geographical location. Its hard to imagine that all the talent that was with TWA decided to move to Chicago with AA.

Its also kind of sad that FedEx and UPS decided a few decades back not to use St. Louis as their national hubs because the Lambert was too busy and Mid America wouldn't be ready in time. Now that Lambert has emptied out and MidAmerica is underutilized, maybe we can do something to attract their business back?
2,831
Life MemberLife Member
2,831

PostAug 10, 2013#1543

[[Starting a new hometown airline]]

In this day and era of air traffic and fuel costs / the air industry is almost an instant failure (unless you have a billion dollar fortune to lose at first.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_de ... ted_States
A recent airline that tried to go nationwide and failed in 6 months to do so (going back to only charter flights) Vision Airlines. They actually came to Lambert STL for a brief few months.

Our airport director, Rhonda, was the former Operations Director for the TWA and then AA hub in St. Louis. She has done a better job with Lambert than any other director IMO and continues to re-create Lambert. She took the position in a very rough time after AA cuts and the airport needed new direction. She knows that airport probably better than any other person today and is continuously courting new service and opportunities. I also believe she would give service to any airline over AA any day (just thinking). :wink:
4,489
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
4,489

PostAug 10, 2013#1544

Lambert-St. Louis International Airport

07/26/2013
Lambert St Louis steps up drive for cargo charter traffic

Lambert St Louis International Airport (STL) is stepping up its efforts to increase freight and logistics activity on and around the airport, with a new drive for cargo charter traffic.

STL has recently been concentrating its marketing on scheduled freighter services; it has now decided to increase its efforts to win charter business as well, and is taking steps to position itself as the ideal cargo charter airport for the US mid West.

STL is making itself more “charter-friendly” by increasing the amount of charter-related information on its website. The website also now features details of local ancillary service providers such as cargo handlers, freight forwarders, customs brokers and specialist equipment operators. The aim is to simplify the flight planning process for charter brokers and operators.

Says the airport’s Cargo Development Director, David Lancaster: “Attracting scheduled freighter services is a long process, especially in the currently unfavourable environment where freighters are being parked and frequencies reduced. We continue to work hard for this business, but tangible results could take some time yet.

“On the other hand, ad hoc charters continue to flourish. We already accommodate many such flights each year, and we are well suited and located to expand this important area of our business.”

Among the many benefits that Lancaster cites for charter operators is STL’s central location, within 500 miles of one-third of the US population, and 48 hours’ trucking time from 70% of US business. He also speaks of its lack of night-time operating curfews, its 24/7 Customs presence, its proximity to inland waterways and major highways and the lack of ramp congestion and slot constraints. In addition, STL boasts four live runways that can accommodate any fully-loaded aircraft with maximum fuel load – including the B747F-8F, An-124 and An-225.

STL strategy is actively to encourage all forms of cargo and logistics activity on and around the airport; this is fully supported by local government as a vitally-important driver of employment and economic prosperity for the region. The airport already generates an estimated US$ 3.6 billion annually for the 16-county area surrounding it.

Concludes Lancaster: “Some of the leading charter operators already pick STL whenever they are allowed a choice of airport by their customers, and they speak highly of the ease of operating here. We now want the rest of the sector to get the message loud and clear that we love cargo charters!”

Read Statistics
1,320
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,320

PostAug 10, 2013#1545

RFT and Post-Dispatch report that Lambert will now have limited free wi-fi. Passengers will get the first 20 minutes of access free and will have the option to purchase additional access.

http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyr ... _louis.php
159
Junior MemberJunior Member
159

PostAug 10, 2013#1546

JuanHamez wrote:
matguy70 wrote:As for AA, they could give a crap about STL. There is no way in hell that AA will ever fly a nonstop European international flight from STL. They had their chance to make STL what ever they wanted it to be... and they didn't. I personally would have liked to have seen them belly up than merge with USairways and keep the American Name.
I agree. Forget AA. They've decided to abandon St. Louis.

We should concentrate on on those who have shown interest in us (Southwest, Delta) and attracting more airlines such as Virgin, JetBlue, Spirit, or Sun Country. Perhaps we could attract a discount foreign airline such as Ryanair. Also, what happened to starting another home based airline? Nothing has changed the fact that St. Louis airports have a lot of excess capacity and a nearly perfect geographical location. Its hard to imagine that all the talent that was with TWA decided to move to Chicago with AA.
I've never understood the bitterness towards American Airlines/AMR in St. Louis or among the former TWA employees. Face it, had AMR not purchased TWA's assets in 2001 operations would have ceased and the airline liquidated. Many TWA employees remained employed with AA for several years after the asset purchase and some remain in St. Louis and throughout the system today. Obviously the cuts were devastating for the impacted employees and the St. Louis community but AA had to restructure and delegate company resources to markets they can serve profitably-Chicago, Dallas/Ft Worth, Los Angeles, Miami, and New York. Go search online and you'll find plenty of people in Boston and the San Francisco Bay Area carping about AA's cuts there over the years too.

St. Louis is still a tier two city for AA-they maintain a flight attendant base, recently built a fantastic new Admirals Club, and operate 28 peak day flights in the current schedule. It's one of the larger non-hub stations in the system and is well served. The fact that many here don't like to accept is that St. Louis doesn't have a robust business community to support the air service levels the airport enjoyed in years past. Running an airline hub with 80% connecting traffic is not profitable and definitely not sustainable long term. Originating & destination traffic pays the bills and is centered around major cities and business centers that generate higher revenues for the airlines than St. Louis-think Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Houston, Miami, New York, etc.

Virgin America in St. Louis? Get real. As it is they have deferred deliveries for A320 family aircraft and growth in the past year is virtually non-existent. They are just now starting to operate in the black after six years of losses. St. Louis really doesn't fir their current business model and are likely to enter many other markets before pursuing St. Louis.

jetBlue may be an opportunity but I wouldn't count on anything beyond a handful of flights to BOS, JFK and maybe FLL or RSW. Much of their growth is focused in the Caribbean right now and with their next generation aircraft will begin more longer range international flying from FLL. If jetBlue saw value in serving St. Louis they probably would be there already.

Starting a hometown airline? Not a chance.
1,054
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,054

PostAug 10, 2013#1547

JAL007 wrote:
JuanHamez wrote:
matguy70 wrote:As for AA, they could give a crap about STL. There is no way in hell that AA will ever fly a nonstop European international flight from STL. They had their chance to make STL what ever they wanted it to be... and they didn't. I personally would have liked to have seen them belly up than merge with USairways and keep the American Name.
I agree. Forget AA. They've decided to abandon St. Louis.

We should concentrate on on those who have shown interest in us (Southwest, Delta) and attracting more airlines such as Virgin, JetBlue, Spirit, or Sun Country. Perhaps we could attract a discount foreign airline such as Ryanair. Also, what happened to starting another home based airline? Nothing has changed the fact that St. Louis airports have a lot of excess capacity and a nearly perfect geographical location. Its hard to imagine that all the talent that was with TWA decided to move to Chicago with AA.
I've never understood the bitterness towards American Airlines/AMR in St. Louis or among the former TWA employees. Face it, had AMR not purchased TWA's assets in 2001 operations would have ceased and the airline liquidated. Many TWA employees remained employed with AA for several years after the asset purchase and some remain in St. Louis and throughout the system today. Obviously the cuts were devastating for the impacted employees and the St. Louis community but AA had to restructure and delegate company resources to markets they can serve profitably-Chicago, Dallas/Ft Worth, Los Angeles, Miami, and New York. Go search online and you'll find plenty of people in Boston and the San Francisco Bay Area carping about AA's cuts there over the years too.

St. Louis is still a tier two city for AA-they maintain a flight attendant base, recently built a fantastic new Admirals Club, and operate 28 peak day flights in the current schedule. It's one of the larger non-hub stations in the system and is well served. The fact that many here don't like to accept is that St. Louis doesn't have a robust business community to support the air service levels the airport enjoyed in years past. Running an airline hub with 80% connecting traffic is not profitable and definitely not sustainable long term. Originating & destination traffic pays the bills and is centered around major cities and business centers that generate higher revenues for the airlines than St. Louis-think Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Houston, Miami, New York, etc.

Virgin America in St. Louis? Get real. As it is they have deferred deliveries for A320 family aircraft and growth in the past year is virtually non-existent. They are just now starting to operate in the black after six years of losses. St. Louis really doesn't fir their current business model and are likely to enter many other markets before pursuing St. Louis.

jetBlue may be an opportunity but I wouldn't count on anything beyond a handful of flights to BOS, JFK and maybe FLL or RSW. Much of their growth is focused in the Caribbean right now and with their next generation aircraft will begin more longer range international flying from FLL. If jetBlue saw value in serving St. Louis they probably would be there already.

Starting a hometown airline? Not a chance.
I agree with you 200%. I actually wrote a letter to JetBlue last year ( I was 14, and knew suggesting the route online would not get to them) and asked in a very business like manner if they were interested in the St Louis Market. Their reply stated "We are very interested in St Louis, and have received many inquiries just like yours wishing for us to fly there. We know the St Louis market is a region in which our brand could flourish. At the current time, we are focused on developing our Caribbean-South American route system. Once that is complete, we will add routes to the interior and most likely St Louis. Thank you so much for your business and interest!"

As for Virgin, I also agree. VAM is currently trying to get slots in Atlanta and Houston. They also were looking at Denver, but due to DEN having 3 major hub, two of them being low cost carriers, Denver is not profitable for them. I think Virgin America might come to STL within the near future(5-6 years).

Another airline that may fly to St Louis is Spirit, and I do know that they have cited St Louis and Kansas City as desirable destinations.
277
Full MemberFull Member
277

PostAug 11, 2013#1548

As someone who has no inside or professional knowledge of the airline industry, I'd like to say this: the best chances for St. Louis to have an international flight to either Europe or Asia is Delta or American. Connections on Southwest do wonders for the airport's monthly passenger #'s, but that doesn't translate to a catchment area relevant to international flights. So a willing legacy carrier(or international codeshare partner), plus a business community in STL willing to somewhat guarantee revenue per flight is the best chance. That, or white collar travel between STL and Europe picks up exponentially, such as increased business connections between St. Louis and Glasgow or something.
1,054
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,054

PostAug 11, 2013#1549

captainjackass wrote:As someone who has no inside or professional knowledge of the airline industry, I'd like to say this: the best chances for St. Louis to have an international flight to either Europe or Asia is Delta or American. Connections on Southwest do wonders for the airport's monthly passenger #'s, but that doesn't translate to a catchment area relevant to international flights. So a willing legacy carrier(or international codeshare partner), plus a business community in STL willing to somewhat guarantee revenue per flight is the best chance. That, or white collar travel between STL and Europe picks up exponentially, such as increased business connections between St. Louis and Glasgow or something.
I don't see Glasgow, London, Manchester, Frankfurt, and Dublin as STL possibilities. The two potential markets that are not overcrowded and have a major DAL presence are Amsterdam and Paris. Amsterdam is a true possibility, and if given proper support and circumstances, I do think STL could support a 4X weekly route to Amsterdam. We all know STL is actively in talks with Delta (The only one they have publicly stated) in hopes to land a European route. I agree, I don't see it happening w/o business support.
455
Full MemberFull Member
455

PostAug 11, 2013#1550

Chalupas54 wrote:
gregl wrote:Delta MD-90s once had IFE, but removed it several years ago.
So last week was several years ago? MSP-STL had them. If I recall correctly the show was the Big Bang Theory. You're wrong. Either that or I live in dreamland and I flew myself.
It is possible that one or a few of the more recently received MD-90s did not have the IFE removed prior to entry into service, but Delta does not indicate there is IFE on their MD-90 fleet and I have flown on many MD-90s which do not have IFE.

Greg
Read more posts (8170 remaining)
Share