urbanSTL

Thought experiment. Consider a large secure zone that includes a new airport or airport terminal and a new stadium? I was thinking of some of the synergies. Imaging a large secure zone like Disney World that includes the airport, a stadium, metro-link access, housing, hotels, and retail. You probably could not have cars inside security, since there is no easy way to check them for guns. But otherwise, I don't think this would violate any weapons rights any more than Disney World or the Airports or stadiums today for folks who choose to enter or live there.

Some synergism:
1. Teams and fans flying in from other cities would have been screened at their home airports and wouldn't need any additional screening. It would become a national destination for NCAA BB events etc. due to the convenience and concentration of services with no need for security after arrival. We could make it easy for folks to explore the city, but many just fly in and out for meetings, etc. The zone would be a prime space for national business meetings.
2. Large Parking areas could be put under runway approaches and noise abatement areas where large flat areas are required.
3. Most residents or season ticket holders could get TSA Pre-Checks for easy entry. Employees would be screened as they are now.
4. Retail, concessions, security labor and machines, could all be shared.
5. Since there is a surge of people arriving at an airpot before an event, none during the event, and and another surge after the event, one could imagine using the stadium field itself as part of the airport processing before and after a big event if it could be turned around quickly.

Just a thought experiment. There are probably more synergism I'm not thinking about.

For the record here's the story on the STLBJ, which is behind their paywall. This entry, though is available for free and contains quotes from some of the business travelers interviewed for the story, including an architect who works for HOK and Adam Crane of the SLSO.

innov8ion wrote:I'm sure they want it but there's not enough demand and it makes no fiscal sense to subsidize. Our business base / consumer demand simply needs to grow if we want better options at Lambert.

I'm curious why you feel it makes no sense to subsidize. If one of businesses' biggest complaints is the difficulty of flying elsewhere, then wouldn't offering a subsidy to an airline to provide more direct flights in theory make it more attractive for businesses to move here, bringing jobs/HQs/taxes to the region? Other cities do this today for international flights.

I'm not arguing - I honestly don't know. Do you feel the investment would realize a sizable enough return?

-RBB

I don't think it would. If I were a business looking to move headquarters, a public subsidy to bring in flights would not instill great confidence in that region as a likely location. Airlines are in the business of moving a lot of people (or mail/goods) at once, and you can't do that in a low inbound/outbound region. Even a public subsidy, I suspect, would be a net loss for the airline in STL's current travel market.

No, I don't think this is a chicken/egg issue. For the air travel industry to pay attention to St. Louis, the region will need to significantly increase individual flyers. Subsidizing flights would likely only lead to more semi-empty manifests, not new regional businesses. They've got the data -- if St. Louis is strong in certain markets (say, showing heavier travel to the Carolina Triangle due to our plant/life sciences industry), they'll adjust their flight inventory accordingly on their own.

Just spitballing. I don't do enough air travel for work or pleasure to be anywhere near an expert on the matter.

rbb wrote:

innov8ion wrote:I'm sure they want it but there's not enough demand and it makes no fiscal sense to subsidize. Our business base / consumer demand simply needs to grow if we want better options at Lambert.

I'm curious why you feel it makes no sense to subsidize. If one of businesses' biggest complaints is the difficulty of flying elsewhere, then wouldn't offering a subsidy to an airline to provide more direct flights in theory make it more attractive for businesses to move here, bringing jobs/HQs/taxes to the region? Other cities do this today for international flights.

I'm not arguing - I honestly don't know. Do you feel the investment would realize a sizable enough return?

-RBB

First, I'm not an Aerospace Analyst but I have been through B-School so I likely have a decent grasp of the basics. From the perspective of the airlines, they'll assess macro-economic trends. Are there patterns of growth or retraction in the overall market? What about the St. Louis market? Then they'll look at individual performance. Existing connections that are continually missing targets might hit the chopping block. These set of analyses might impact whether they'd be more apt to add new or remove existing local connections.

As far as adding specific new connections, airlines can project demand and if a new connection looks promising and complements their existing network, it may be added. Also, we must realize that we can't look only at individual connections for any of these decisions. These are networks, so changing one connection can affect the overall network positively or negatively. Airlines utilize systems of equations to help maximize their profits and limit risk.

I presume that individual stakeholders like corporations, etc work with the Airport Commission who interfaces with the Airlines. Stakeholders that are pressing for certain connections could pool together and show demand. Of course, the general population fills x% of these routes too.

In any case, the gist is this. If a corporate subsidy to help add a new connection is less than the business cost of that corporation not being able to utilize that connection, they may subsidize it. If not, they'll look at other options like non-direct flights, charters, etc. Of course, they can b**** too. And sure, other parties can subsidize as well but rationally they'll only make commitments that are likely to add to the bottom line and not detract from it. These decisions simply have to make business sense.

This is a simplified look at what's going on behind the scenes, but it should be a fairly close approximation of how these decisions are made.

Getting a new roof. I guess I'd never really thought about the dome's roof being copper. I just always assumed it was painted green.

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog ... llion.html

Lambert-St. Louis International Airport is getting a new, $6.7 million copper roof, airport officials announced Tuesday.
The new roof, which will replace the airport’s current, 60-year-old copper top, is separate from the airport's $70 million renovation that is set to wrap up this spring.

imperialmog wrote:In terms of the connecting flights wasted time issue, I think that is really a problem with anyone going west especially for transpacific flights due to the flight schedules and service going to western hubs.

This is not really the problem you think it is. Tokyo, Shanghai, Beijing, Seoul and Hong Kong can all be reached 1-stop from St. Louis, with a 1-2 hour connection. Flights to those cities are available from cities including Chicago, Detroit, Dallas and Houston. There is no need to fly to the west coast to access those markets.

The harder cities to reach include Singapore and Bangkok -- which, due to location or market issues, have limited non-stop service to the US. Many Singapore Airlines flights to SIN now make a stop somewhere after leaving the US and before arriving in Singapore.

Greg

Whats the chances of Lambert getting a flight or 2 from British Airways.? I don't think St.Louis was a US Airways stronghold right?

BrickCity4470 wrote:Whats the chances of Lambert getting a flight or 2 from British Airways.? I don't think St.Louis was a US Airways stronghold right?

My guess is actually quite good, this is likely them saying in addition to any markets where American has a significant FF base as well. And I remember somewhere saying they want to as they grab more 787s that they want to add at least 5 more US destinations to their route system, which at that point St. Louis would more likely than not be one of them.

Also I noticed something when I was checking up my upcoming trip on Southwest's website, is that even though it wasn't announced it seems they are adding a nonstop flight to San Francisco. This makes sense and the bay area was one of their big gaps in their network from here. I am thinking they are picking there over Oakland since any connecting options from Oakland are better served from Denver along with going to San Francisco they would get more business travellers which if I'm not mistaken Southwest tends to focus on out of St. Louis based on their route network here being heavy on that. (in with that I also saw they are adding a 3rd DCA flight from the slots they got from the AA/US merger)

imperialmog wrote:(in with that I also saw they are adding a 3rd DCA flight from the slots they got from the AA/US merger)

AA will be adding 2 more DCA flights, bringing them up to 5x daily.

Greg

For anyone interested, here is the SWA press release about the STL additions, among others:

Beginning Nov. 2, 2014, Southwest Airlines will add additional daily nonstop service between Washington Reagan National Airport and:
Akron-Canton (new route)
Dallas Love Field (new route)
Houston (Hobby) (additional flights)
Indianapolis (new route)
St. Louis (additional flights)

The carrier will publish its November schedules in mid-May, allowing Customers to book these DCA flights and previously announced new nonstop options for its Dallas Customers at southwest.com.
Southwest Airlines also today announces new service between:
St. Louis and San Francisco, daily nonstop roundtrip begins Sept. 30, 2014, at introductory fares as low as $119 one-way
Los Angeles and Omaha, daily nonstop roundtrip begins June 9, 2014, at introductory fares as low as $159 one-way
St. Louis and Los Angeles, third daily nonstop roundtrip begins June 8, 2014
Boise and Los Angeles, (Saturday only) nonstop roundtrip begins June 14, 2014

http://southwest.investorroom.com/index ... &item=1876

I wonder if this could be a sign by Southwest that they may start adding more flights going west from here in the future. There is also the issue that if I'm not mistaken they can't really add many more flights at Midway and that airport is getting rather delay-prone lately, so they may have to have more of their east-west connecting flow occur in other places.

Its interesting the added DCA flight since AA also announced an added frequency lately. Though that makes sense for them due to the merger there will be connecting opportunities there with a combined AA/US, but if i'm not mistaken isn't AA adding more LGA flights as well? (it seems there has been huge increases overall to there the last couple of years) Is that related to the rapid increase in the financial services jobs in the area that is creating more demand to NYC? Which that got me thinking, is the way the job market and whatnot the last few years here in terms of types of jobs and startups, is that creating more demand for business or pleasure to certain markets from here? And if so, what markets could see new or expanded numbers of flights from here?

I imagine WN will do opportunistic growth from STL-things like SFO which we just saw. In terms of a large scale expansion I personally wouldn't count on it. They have their plate full with new DAL markets coming online later this year and new international flying as well.

STL while among the larger non-hub stations for AA really isn't going to see much change from the merger. They have the new Admirals Club, I imagine if anything you will see more large RJ flying take over as the S80s exit the fleet. As it is now the midday ORD departures are on E-175s which IMO is an upgrade over the S80. LAX will likely transition to 738s at some point in the near future, but aside from that I wouldn't count on much.

JAL007 wrote:I imagine WN will do opportunistic growth from STL-things like SFO which we just saw. In terms of a large scale expansion I personally wouldn't count on it. They have their plate full with new DAL markets coming online later this year and new international flying as well.

STL while among the larger non-hub stations for AA really isn't going to see much change from the merger. They have the new Admirals Club, I imagine if anything you will see more large RJ flying take over as the S80s exit the fleet. As it is now the midday ORD departures are on E-175s which IMO is an upgrade over the S80. LAX will likely transition to 738s at some point in the near future, but aside from that I wouldn't count on much.

I have a hard time seeing too much in the short term for Southwest expanding out of STL, though I do wonder if they have to eventually if they are getting tight on capacity out of Midway, but I am wondering if they need some more gates here. But they really have a lot on their plate with the DAL markets later this year along with LGA and DCA slots and add to that next year the international terminal at HOU opens up so they will be tight on planes fast. It does make me wonder what are the busiest routes that lack non-stop options that they might try to add in the future, i'm getting the feeling Austin is the most likely next add in the future.

Isn't AA expanding frequency on both DCA and LGA?

Also I just got back from a weekend trip to Boston, and I was wondering what are the odds of JetBlue at some point starting a route to St. Louis? I have noticed that Southwest does have a significantly higher price there than anywhere else on the east coast from here due to lack of non-stop competition unlike the rest of the NE corridor.

imperialmog wrote:Also I just got back from a weekend trip to Boston, and I was wondering what are the odds of JetBlue at some point starting a route to St. Louis? I have noticed that Southwest does have a significantly higher price there than anywhere else on the east coast from here due to lack of non-stop competition unlike the rest of the NE corridor.

From March 18th:

Lambert-STL Airport
‏@flystl
FYI...we're working on it. Hv a great day. RT @stcharlespilot: @AerospaceInfo Only if @JetBlue would come to @flystl! That'd be great!

-RBB

Mike Shannon's will be opening up it's 3rd restaurants in Lambert Int

imperialmog wrote:Isn't AA expanding frequency on both DCA and LGA?

AA will be up to 6x LGA and 5x DCA, all on CRJ-700s.

Greg

UA has loaded a second SFO flight on Skywest E-175 beginning in October. The schedule has been tweaked a bit but nice increase in capacity to 1x 320 and 1x E75. Hopefully this means UA is sticking to the market although I could see both flights going to E75s in the future.

JAL007 wrote:UA has loaded a second SFO flight on Skywest E-175 beginning in October. The schedule has been tweaked a bit but nice increase in capacity to 1x 320 and 1x E75. Hopefully this means UA is sticking to the market although I could see both flights going to E75s in the future.

How is this timed? Since having extra frequency will help out as well for connecting to United and their partners Transpacific flights from SFO depending on timing. Since it is most extensive from that hub compared to their other ones. I didn't know that plane had the range to do that route, especially going west.

It is interesting is all the SFO capacity increase this year, is there any particular reason or is some of this reaction to others? I was thinking maybe the tech startups occuring in the area lately could be driving increase in traffic demand to that market. It is good seeing the added SFO capacity and west coast overall here. I'm not sure what holes domestically there is left for both any non-stop and at least a daily year round non-stop. I'm half intrigued as to what are the busiest routes from here that lack it to guess what could be added in the future. (if I had to take a guess the most likely next move is Southwest starting non-stop to Austin since that might be the busiest destination from here without a non-stop)