urbanSTL

I hope this isn't like the so called China hub that we keep throwing money at and never seems to materialize.

I thought the issue is that the money never ended up getting thrown at the china hub?

captainjackass wrote:I thought the issue is that the money never ended up getting thrown at the china hub?

Well, I suppose that is right. The truth was there wasn't any money to throw during the middle of a deep recession.

I was wondering since today is the start of Southwest finally able to go nationwide out of Love Field in Dallas nonstop, how will that impact their operations here? Since they often used connections out of here to get to there? Will that cause a negative impact much here, or not that much since the way their route network is done there is connecting routes on either end of the St. Louis-Dallas route. I don't think there is that much frequency reduction due to that and its a significant local traffic market. Which brings a question I'm curious on, what is the biggest O+D markets from here in terms of starting and ending flight itineraries?

Also, hasn't Southwest changed their model quite a bit in the last decade or so? It seems to be really noticeable here, especially in they are now preferring big city primary airports for the most part (especially in the NE corridor). It makes me wonder what their long term future here will be due to being heavily focused on business markets from here. (if I'm not mistaken, St. Louis is about the largest market where they are the dominant player in terms of service so they could have more opportunity to get higher paying business traffic)

imperialmog wrote:I was wondering since today is the start of Southwest finally able to go nationwide out of Love Field in Dallas nonstop, how will that impact their operations here? Since they often used connections out of here to get to there? Will that cause a negative impact much here, or not that much since the way their route network is done there is connecting routes on either end of the St. Louis-Dallas route. I don't think there is that much frequency reduction due to that and its a significant local traffic market. Which brings a question I'm curious on, what is the biggest O+D markets from here in terms of starting and ending flight itineraries?

Also, hasn't Southwest changed their model quite a bit in the last decade or so? It seems to be really noticeable here, especially in they are now preferring big city primary airports for the most part (especially in the NE corridor). It makes me wonder what their long term future here will be due to being heavily focused on business markets from here. (if I'm not mistaken, St. Louis is about the largest market where they are the dominant player in terms of service so they could have more opportunity to get higher paying business traffic)

From what I understand, the only way this affects STL is that there will be fewer DAL-STL flights. Also SWA is now having to compete with Virgin America at Love.

All i have to say about Lambert is that its the most beautiful airport in america. I know some of you probably think I'm smoking something but i just love how it looks. I hope someday that it will return to more of a international airport

RedOctober wrote:All i have to say about Lambert is that its the most beautiful airport in america. I know some of you probably think I'm smoking something but i just love how it looks. I hope someday that it will return to more of a international airport

The redone roof does look good with the copper shine.

Well.. I picture that the airport people are starting to look a little more at international growth, in part due to most of the domestic holes have been plugged. I did see the British Airways route to Austin is doing quite well which does bode well for here, especially considering their other 787 new routes to other areas of the world isn't doing as well. So when they are wanting and able to add more 787 routes they will likely lean towards North America.

Another international possibility is if Southwest does any of their Mexico/Caribbean flights out of here. Also of note with Love Field, one of the restrictions is they are not allowed to fly internationally from there and Southwest did note that they will likely by the end of the decade fly to Canada. (taxes and fees there is a big reason why they and several others haven't yet) One possibility if they do that is Dallas-St.Louis-Canada routes as a way of getting around the remaining restrictions (this was done a lot with the Wright Amendment restrictions that ended yesterday) It depends if they do it from Midway instead, but they might not due to their increasing operational issues there combined with O'Hare and United/Air Canada would likely pressure them on fares.

dweebe wrote:I guess due to the low ceiling/fog yesterday some planes were using the rarely used west runway. I've never seen that before.

The A concourse airlines (Delta & United) will use 11/29 when departures are taking off to the NW and land when arrivals are coming in from the NW. It results in a much shorter taxi than having to use the 12/30 runways in those situations.

Greg

imperialmog wrote:

RedOctober wrote:All i have to say about Lambert is that its the most beautiful airport in america. I know some of you probably think I'm smoking something but i just love how it looks. I hope someday that it will return to more of a international airport

Well.. I picture that the airport people are starting to look a little more at international growth, in part due to most of the domestic holes have been plugged. I did see the British Airways route to Austin is doing quite well which does bode well for here, especially considering their other 787 new routes to other areas of the world isn't doing as well. So when they are wanting and able to add more 787 routes they will likely lean towards North America.

I have heard from many people that KSTL is really upping it's game with BA. The Austin route's success is really pivotal for STL's hopes of getting a flight, as it proves STL can sustain one.

Chalupas54 wrote:

imperialmog wrote:

RedOctober wrote:All i have to say about Lambert is that its the most beautiful airport in america. I know some of you probably think I'm smoking something but i just love how it looks. I hope someday that it will return to more of a international airport

Well.. I picture that the airport people are starting to look a little more at international growth, in part due to most of the domestic holes have been plugged. I did see the British Airways route to Austin is doing quite well which does bode well for here, especially considering their other 787 new routes to other areas of the world isn't doing as well. So when they are wanting and able to add more 787 routes they will likely lean towards North America.

I have heard from many people that KSTL is really upping it's game with BA. The Austin route's success is really pivotal for STL's hopes of getting a flight, as it proves STL can sustain one.

From what has been stated, the airport people here do seem to be working harder on this than in the past. It could be where the airport is now this can be focused on more with other issues resolved. Also, it sounds like there is growing corporate support in the area for it which they did call out in the past as much as the business community was complaining, they weren't being proactive as much as now. From what some have said it seems like the new business community here in places like Cortex seem to be more proactive on it. (which sounded like they were a factor in recent increased service to the Bay Area as well) Also, would the financial services industry also drive demand for such service? I'm not sure of the makeup of the industry and workforce locally in it, but they might also want such service to a global financial hub. (and possibly drive demand for front of the plane seats)

Also with the Austin route's success, especially compared to their other 787 intro routes; it would likely focus on other markets in the US that don't have transatlantic service. The airport director said the big reason BA went there first was they considered San Antonio as part of the same market due to it being not too far from Austin, so combined traffic leapfrogged other potential routes they would test this on. Though the big issue now is they won't get any more 787s for another year.

Speaking of Austin, wasn't Southwest having right around thanksgiving a few non-stop flights from here to there? That could be a sign that when they get more planes its a route they would like to start regular service on.

shadrach wrote:I was looking at a couple sites—flystl/kayak/southwest/etc—and noticed STL does not have service to the following:

Memphis
Indianapolis
Little Rock
Jacksonville, FL

I'm all for international flights, but these ones are low-hanging, no-brainers. I'm speechless and kinda embarrassed there are no nonstop flights to Memphis, Indy or Little Rock.

I think the issue is with the first three is that they don't make sense anymore due to TSA making it where you save no time flying vs driving. Southwest ended non-stop to Little Rock just in the past year (same with Louisville for similar reasons). The issue is there wasn't enough local traffic to have enough frequency which is needed on short routes, and Southwest has been cutting those short routes a lot in recent years overall.

Jacksonville I could see down the line in time. Also there are a couple other routes I would note that would be nice to see added that don't have year round daily service. Almost any route that would be added would be almost certainly be Southwest doing it.

Austin
Hartford
San Diego (this has seasonal Southwest service but traffic between these two cities is enough to warrant year-round service, also Alaska has added routes from San Diego in recent years and could be tempted to jump in)
Portland, OR (Either Southwest or Alaska could start this due to connecting options on one end by either airline; also it sounded like Frontier's seasonal summer 3x weekly did well)

And here are a couple of routes Southwest ended in the last couple years when they really cut back from these cities that could return as they get more planes (and these were about the last ones cut)
Albuquerque (due to adding things out of Denver in recent years and affects of Wright Amendment ending)
Birmingham, AL (decreased flights due to entering Atlanta)

And a possible wildcard add in time for Southwest network connectivity
Charleston, SC

Some other things I would like is some of their summer frequency adds to be year round like added flight to Raleigh, Boston, and New Orleans (also can't rule out down the road JetBlue popping in on service to Boston, since that might be a route that is seeing sizable traffic growth here due to local business development)

Note: one wild card is what Southwest will do with Midway, since they may be hitting capacity there so they may want to shift connecting passengers somewhere else and St. Louis would be most likely place to do it due to ample service already. If that occurs growth would be affected by more connections here.

I would be curious to what the busiest routes out of here that lack non-stop service on a year round daily basis.

Edit: I did remember seeing that people in Des Moines have been wanting Southwest to add St. Louis next from there. Mainly due to Monsanto and to have better connectivity to Southwest's system instead of relying too much on Midway. There could be incentives involved from Iowa people on that, and its right around the edge of that distance where flying could be faster than driving. (the route not being an interstate does tilt it more towards flying than otherwise)

I can confirm the Des Moines comment. There are efforts by Iowa to get that route. STL is viewed as much easier and faster and overall more convenient than Midway for Midwestern cities. I have flown the Omaha-STL route several times and that flight is always 100% full and occasionally they oversell it. The same is true for Tulsa and Oklahoma City.

shadrach wrote:I was looking at a couple sites—flystl/kayak/southwest/etc—and noticed STL does not have service to the following:

Memphis
Indianapolis
Little Rock
Jacksonville, FL

Southwest has been eliminating many short-haul routes. With higher oil prices and the "convenience" of post-9/11 security, they are no longer anywhere near as profitable as they were years ago.

Another route Southwest will be (or maybe already has) discontinuing is Cleveland. That will leave STL with 6 day/week service on United... which may still go away as they continue to dismantle their former hub there.

gregl wrote:

shadrach wrote:I was looking at a couple sites—flystl/kayak/southwest/etc—and noticed STL does not have service to the following:

Memphis
Indianapolis
Little Rock
Jacksonville, FL

Southwest has been eliminating many short-haul routes. With higher oil prices and the "convenience" of post-9/11 security, they are no longer anywhere near as profitable as they were years ago.

Another route Southwest will be (or maybe already has) discontinuing is Cleveland. That will leave STL with 6 day/week service on United... which may still go away as they continue to dismantle their former hub there.

I think the oils isn't as much anymore as the security issues. Also note that speed limits are higher now than in the past which cuts time for driving. Short-haul flying doesn't make sense anymore.

I think Southwest ended non-stop to Cleveland years ago.. I think around 2007 or so. But I could see that one restart when United ends the service there or when they get some more planes since that is a huge issue now. Speaking of former hubs, isn't there a good argument that St. Louis is better off than almost if not every other city that lost a hub? Biggest reason is most other cities didn't wind up with a significant Southwest presence to a large number of destinations non-stop. I saw something that in terms of non-stop service, most of the cities served from here in the TWA days that are over 300 miles away are still served by at least one airline now.

Oh, did see that the airport is addressing some of their parking issues with adding more spaces near Terminal 2. Has anyone else noticed that parking has been a lot more crowded overall at the airport the past year or so? I know coworkers have said they are having issues with full lots when they didn't before.

I am.currently at Kansas City Airport, and this really drives home the point of how blessed we are with Lambert and its renovations. This airport really is dead and really quite dumpy. This airport has to be an embarrassing welcome to Kansas City.

^I was just there this weekend as well. Flew into KC for the first time in my life, having always driven or taken Amtrak.

The airport is a strange design which probably was great when it opened, but makes little sense with modern security requirements.

The worst thing I noticed was not the airport itself but the $60 cab ride to County Club Plaza. I found that outrageous. What would CWE to Lambert cost? Maybe $35? STL is really lucky to have an airport that's close, and most of all, having Metrolink provide direct affordable airport access.

I believe a few cab companies have flat airport rates in STL. for instance I do
believe the flat rate from Chesterfield is 45, and 35 from downtown STL. Also our rail service is a huge blessimg

Lambert really looks better than ever. I love the bright, white lower level and updated concourses. I love the new copper roof too. I wish they could keep it polished like that. Now, to get D full again, perhaps southwest expanding?
Also, perhaps a local beers bar area where the MO wine bar is in the main terminal. That thing screams welcome to missourah! Everything else is looking good though.

jcity wrote:Lambert really looks better than ever. I love the bright, white lower level and updated concourses. I love the new copper roof too. I wish they could keep it polished like that. Now, to get D full again, perhaps southwest expanding?
Also, perhaps a local beers bar area where the MO wine bar is in the main terminal. That thing screams welcome to missourah! Everything else is looking good though.

I could see D starting to get filled in since Southwest has filled up terminal 2 now. Also at this point it might not be doable anymore to tear down D (at least all of it) to place a consolidated car rental facility which would be helpful. (unless there are other places or ways of doing it) The issue of putting that facility there is having enough room for Southwest to grow without cutting off their operations in two, since a sizable amount of the traffic here is connecting traffic. (how much percentagewise is that?) That also reminds me, why not also show off local flavor and tourist attractions in Terminal 2 because of the connecting traffic, highlighting local places and events to attract those travelers for future trips here.

The improvements and renovations that have been done look really good, not sure what is the next work that will be done. If I had to guess it might be improving international arrival facilities, especially since there does seem to be a start of a push for that here. (likely due to having fewer domestic holes now) I have to ask, could the current facilities and gates for that handle for example a BA 787? Or would something have to be done.


Update: Did see an article in the St. Louis Business Journal that Alaska Airlines announced today they are adding a 2nd flight on Wed-Sun to Seattle starting in June to at least August (likely the end of their schedule period so not sure if its seasonal or permanent add) It looked like the timing is helpful too with a morning departure late evening arrival here. Curious if Boeing and their moves were a factor in this but it is good to have more non-stop morning flights to the west coast.

The last time I flew into STL was in August, and SWA was 5 gates deep into D Concourse. First, that concourse does need modernization ASAP. However, there was signage that highly encouraged passengers to go left for restaurants and shops. However, with some aesthetic upgrades that area definitely could hold an LHR flight.