Yeah there was wall with double doors on either side of this section and it seemed like it was for 2 gates? Glad that they can incrementally open if necessaryimperialmog wrote:Isnt' those last couple gates in question only open about a year ago, after the renovations in C were completed? Since for some reason I remember them adding those around a year ago since AA needed it. Guessing they will renovate that area eventually, especially if they need to go down another gate or two. Not sure how likely that would be in the next year or two, guess is if JetBlue starts serving here they would go there.
Just flew out of San Jose, California to Portland, OR PDX and noticed STL was on the board twice - on an AA flight (thru DFW) and a Southwest flight (thru Phoenix). Interesting that the boards were listing STL as a destination from SJC - since other flights that were continuation city flights (and not nonstop) were not listed.
Then got through security and saw a huge billboard for STL that read "Gateway to St. Louis through Silicon Valley" - by the CVB here in STL. NOW, I read that the NGA is moving through that area too - connecting STL to Silicon Valley. So... that being said, watch for SJC on airlines short list to add STL - SJC non stops. Looks as maybe AA and Southwest will jump?!
http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2016/05/17/ ... on-valley/
Then got through security and saw a huge billboard for STL that read "Gateway to St. Louis through Silicon Valley" - by the CVB here in STL. NOW, I read that the NGA is moving through that area too - connecting STL to Silicon Valley. So... that being said, watch for SJC on airlines short list to add STL - SJC non stops. Looks as maybe AA and Southwest will jump?!
http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2016/05/17/ ... on-valley/
We'll know Lambert is getting really healthy when terminal C is open back up all the way to the end and renovated.STL-SEA wrote:Yeah there was wall with double doors on either side of this section and it seemed like it was for 2 gates? Glad that they can incrementally open if necessaryimperialmog wrote:Isnt' those last couple gates in question only open about a year ago, after the renovations in C were completed? Since for some reason I remember them adding those around a year ago since AA needed it. Guessing they will renovate that area eventually, especially if they need to go down another gate or two. Not sure how likely that would be in the next year or two, guess is if JetBlue starts serving here they would go there.
This area is off-limits to passengers for the majority of the day.arch city wrote:But if they are using carpeting over the people mover and passengers have access to it, that's ghetto.
At the end of the day, it is used for a RON (remaining overnight) aircraft -- usually an ex-USAirways route. At the start of the day, it is used when there is a peak number of flights (AA has 7 departures between 5am & 6:30am) putting a pinch on available gates. Occasionally it is also used when one or more delayed flights result in all gates being filled.
AA is now also using gate A27 for overflow on occasion as well.
^ I have to agree with Arch City sentiments whether it is just occasional overflow flight in the morning or not. Step up to the plate and make the same improvements for all gate(s) being used.
I'm still at the believe that their is plenty of utilization left in C as well as B and enough time before it is used up that you can justify putting the wrecking ball to most if not all of D in order to put forth a future vision.
I'm still at the believe that their is plenty of utilization left in C as well as B and enough time before it is used up that you can justify putting the wrecking ball to most if not all of D in order to put forth a future vision.
Rumors are Southwest will announce a new destination with their schedule release tomorrow.. possibly non-daily service to Mexico.
Greg
Greg
Southwest is slowing down growth in most markets for the next year - but I, too, can see some international flights on tap with Southwest's major growth and connections through STL. Call it what you want - Focus City blah blah , STL has become a "hub" for Southwest. Lambert's connection traffic is soaring numbers on growth and primarily with SWA. In addition, the international gates are now in place for SWA to utilize with connection flights as well.
B is being utilized for group bookings. C is primarily utilized. D is getting converted to E slowly as SWA grows. A portion of D I would like to see replaced with food/shopping options and a connection from Terminal 1 to Terminal 2.I'm still at the believe that their is plenty of utilization left in C as well as B and enough time before it is used up that you can justify putting the wrecking ball to most if not all of D in order to put forth a future vision.
^ Utilitizing D for something other then its original TWA purpose is just more hand me down mentality of a structure that was underwhelming to begin with. Nor can I see enough foot traffic to warrant it as an oversize enclosed foot bridge. Heck, if Greg can argue that Lambert needs all of its gates used in TWA hub heyday within the next 5 years then I will back off my argument that D needs to go away.
At minimum, I would at least see what HOK would envision for the airport if D were to go away and E/International gates were to be replaced for an expanded SWA including them adding international and reasonable traffic counts with BA flight to London or a Norwegian Air international flight thrown in there.
At minimum, I would at least see what HOK would envision for the airport if D were to go away and E/International gates were to be replaced for an expanded SWA including them adding international and reasonable traffic counts with BA flight to London or a Norwegian Air international flight thrown in there.
Actually D was built to accommodate Ozark Airlines not TWA. It was TWA that would buy Ozark in the late 80's.
photo of Ozark D Concourse:
http://iidbs.com/ozark/stlhub9.jpg
photo of Ozark D Concourse:
http://iidbs.com/ozark/stlhub9.jpg
What if B concourse was torn down and international gates replaced it that also connected A and C after security? Alose why does anyone not talk about getting rid of terminal 2 and fully utilize terminal 1?
I may add that yesterday in Terminal 2 lines were long BUT security was finally fast. It's no secret that TSA all over the US is hurting for staff. The last few times I've gone through either terminal the security line was frustratingly slow. Yesterday, they were fully staffed and actively trying to make the line move as quick as possible.
I remember in the 80's that Ozark was all along D, TWA was "owned" C and everyone else (Delta, United etc) was over at A.matguy70 wrote:Actually D was built to accommodate Ozark Airlines not TWA. It was TWA that would buy Ozark in the late 80's.
photo of Ozark D Concourse:
http://iidbs.com/ozark/stlhub9.jpg
- 3,429
So Terminal 2 has 14 jetways, but they are numbered from 4 to 26 using even numbers only until you get 31 and 33. So I assume they numbered them this way to leave space for inserting more jetways in a future terminal 2 expansion. Doesn't this imply they could double the number of jetways at Terminal 2 if they chose to? I don't see room on the tarmac for that, but why else would they skip every other number. I don't see that at any other airport.
- 8,912
Even numbers are on one side and the odd on the other.gary kreie wrote:So Terminal 2 has 14 jetways, but they are numbered from 4 to 26 using even numbers only until you get 31 and 33. So I assume they numbered them this way to leave space for inserting more jetways in a future terminal 2 expansion. Doesn't this imply they could double the number of jetways at Terminal 2 if they chose to? I don't see room on the tarmac for that, but why else would they skip every other number. I don't see that at any other airport.
- 1,610
So they are planning on building out on the south side of T2? That means they'll have to relocate the parking garage, potentially reroute/tunnel I-70 and build new taxi ways. Sounds expensive, they should just renovate Concourse D instead.moorlander wrote:Even numbers are on one side and the odd on the other.gary kreie wrote:So Terminal 2 has 14 jetways, but they are numbered from 4 to 26 using even numbers only until you get 31 and 33. So I assume they numbered them this way to leave space for inserting more jetways in a future terminal 2 expansion. Doesn't this imply they could double the number of jetways at Terminal 2 if they chose to? I don't see room on the tarmac for that, but why else would they skip every other number. I don't see that at any other airport.
- 8,912
ricke002 wrote:So they are planning on building out on the south side of T2? That means they'll have to relocate the parking garage, potentially reroute/tunnel I-70 and build new taxi ways. Sounds expensive, they should just renovate Concourse D instead.moorlander wrote:Even numbers are on one side and the odd on the other.gary kreie wrote:So Terminal 2 has 14 jetways, but they are numbered from 4 to 26 using even numbers only until you get 31 and 33. So I assume they numbered them this way to leave space for inserting more jetways in a future terminal 2 expansion. Doesn't this imply they could double the number of jetways at Terminal 2 if they chose to? I don't see room on the tarmac for that, but why else would they skip every other number. I don't see that at any other airport.
Whaaaaat? hahahaha. NO!
My theory for why there are only even numbered gates in T2 is because there are gates on only 1 side.
That's correct. When Lambert renumbered the gates in the 1990s, the arrangement was even number gates on the north side on a concourse and odd number gates on the south side of a concourse.moorlander wrote:My theory for why there are only even numbered gates in T2 is because there are gates on only 1 side.
Greg
What's the story with the Air National Guard space?ricke002 wrote:So they are planning on building out on the south side of T2? That means they'll have to relocate the parking garage, potentially reroute/tunnel I-70 and build new taxi ways. Sounds expensive, they should just renovate Concourse D instead.moorlander wrote:Even numbers are on one side and the odd on the other.gary kreie wrote:So Terminal 2 has 14 jetways, but they are numbered from 4 to 26 using even numbers only until you get 31 and 33. So I assume they numbered them this way to leave space for inserting more jetways in a future terminal 2 expansion. Doesn't this imply they could double the number of jetways at Terminal 2 if they chose to? I don't see room on the tarmac for that, but why else would they skip every other number. I don't see that at any other airport.
In my dream world they construct a new building to house everything (ticketing, security, baggage claim, short term parking, rental cars, maybe even a hotel?) where Lot A is and spilling over into the ANG space. People movers would connect to the following satellite terminals.
-New terminal 3 would be built where the American Airlines operations center is and would fully utilize that criminally unused. runway 29. Maybe international/charters would go here.
-Current terminal 1 would be cleaned up with concourse B removed, concourses A and C shortened but the current main hall used for gates.
-Current terminal 2 would remain Southwest's and set up how they needed.
T2 planning is probably good example of how projections are really a crap shoot. I doubt that anyone expected SWA would have the demand and flights coming in and out of STL when T2 was built. At the same time, the design itself almost give no smooth transition for tear down of older gates and building new gates that compliment the design.
Very different then say T1 Concourse A which mirrors C as well as offers a path/smooth transition to add gates if ever desired while complimenting or not compromising the original design of main terminal ticket/baggage area. Can't say that for garage in front of T1. Another one that I wished they would have torn down and started over instead of spending millions doing patch jobs.
Very different then say T1 Concourse A which mirrors C as well as offers a path/smooth transition to add gates if ever desired while complimenting or not compromising the original design of main terminal ticket/baggage area. Can't say that for garage in front of T1. Another one that I wished they would have torn down and started over instead of spending millions doing patch jobs.
Valid points, I think your right on about B Concourse. Lets not forget that Customs/immigration officials can easily move between T1 and T2 for flights. Its a matter of designing and building out the necessary space. In other words, why not have at least a couple of international gates for both T1 and T2. Bring Frontier, Charter flights & hopefully a BA London flight over to B in T1. Walking distance would be about the same to A or B and lot less of a hike then trying to reopen D. Disembarking international passengers can disembark at the old security area for Concourse right into the baggage area a quick right or left to re enter security for domestic flights. Let Southwest take over international gates E @ T2.STL-SEA wrote:What if B concourse was torn down and international gates replaced it that also connected A and C after security? Alose why does anyone not talk about getting rid of terminal 2 and fully utilize terminal 1?
Three main reasons:STL-SEA wrote:What if B concourse was torn down and international gates replaced it that also connected A and C after security? Alose why does anyone not talk about getting rid of terminal 2 and fully utilize terminal 1?
1) Terminal 2 is significantly newer than Terminal 1. No reason to tear down a less than 20 year old building.
2) While Terminal 1 has some unused gates, there is nowhere near enough gates available without using the unrenovated portions of Councourses C & D. Even if those gates were used, they would be significantly further away from the ticketing counters than any gates in Terminal 2.
3) I sincerely doubt that Terminal 1's security checkpoints would be able to handle the additional passenger volume.
Greg
There simply is no need for a project like this for the foreseeable future.dweebe wrote:In my dream world they construct a new building to house everything (ticketing, security, baggage claim, short term parking, rental cars, maybe even a hotel?) where Lot A is and spilling over into the ANG space. People movers would connect to the following satellite terminals.
-New terminal 3 would be built where the American Airlines operations center is and would fully utilize that criminally unused. runway 29. Maybe international/charters would go here.
-Current terminal 1 would be cleaned up with concourse B removed, concourses A and C shortened but the current main hall used for gates.
-Current terminal 2 would remain Southwest's and set up how they needed.
One of the best qualities of the Rhonda Hamm-Niebruegge administration is that she has been very fiscally responsible while getting a number of projects completed which have greatly improved the passenger experience.
I simply don't see the airport (and the City) from taking on significant debt for projects which would be a marginal improvement from the passenger's perspective.
Greg
- 1,868
Or we could take out a bunch of debt and connect terminals 1 and 2 with a gondola.
- 985
At this point taking out D without connecting to any other gates really isn't a smart idea due to what Southwest has now. They would either have to build new gates somewhere or put say a tunnel between C and E in case Southwest needed more gates down the road.
Wasn't the need for AA needing a couple more gates related to them rebanking their hubs last year causing schedule changes that caused more planes being here at the same time? Also those those last two C gates used and a couple more unused ones there might be in line for renovation in the near future. Considering what may be needed the next few years the need to go a little further down C might be needed. Likely reasons is if JetBlue starts service here which would use up a gate or two depending on schedule (since I assume the airport wouldn't want any new entrant going into A). and if Alaska post VA merger wants to start adding any California destinations, since any additional flights due to timings would likely require them to get a 2nd gate. (this may happen, especially since St. Louis is within E175 range and is about as far east one can go from anywhere in California)
Also nothing new with the holiday season schedule extension by Southwest. Seems to be mainly the normal seasonal frequency adjustments. (shame they only compare to the previous timeframe and compare same time last year) Though the additional Atlanta frequency might be a difference over same time last year, and overall is a slight increase in total flights.
Wasn't the need for AA needing a couple more gates related to them rebanking their hubs last year causing schedule changes that caused more planes being here at the same time? Also those those last two C gates used and a couple more unused ones there might be in line for renovation in the near future. Considering what may be needed the next few years the need to go a little further down C might be needed. Likely reasons is if JetBlue starts service here which would use up a gate or two depending on schedule (since I assume the airport wouldn't want any new entrant going into A). and if Alaska post VA merger wants to start adding any California destinations, since any additional flights due to timings would likely require them to get a 2nd gate. (this may happen, especially since St. Louis is within E175 range and is about as far east one can go from anywhere in California)
Also nothing new with the holiday season schedule extension by Southwest. Seems to be mainly the normal seasonal frequency adjustments. (shame they only compare to the previous timeframe and compare same time last year) Though the additional Atlanta frequency might be a difference over same time last year, and overall is a slight increase in total flights.
- 3,429
I like the idea of a tunnel from E gates to C gates. I just flew SW back from Boston Logan. They recently moved SW to a brand new terminal that has check-in, security, and gates 1-12 on the main airport road, and then an underground tunnel with moving sidewalks to a brand new gates extension. You go through security at the first drive-up terminal, and then take the tunnel to the extended gates terminal if your gate is 13 through 22. Here is a picture.
![]()
I could easily see a tunnel taking folks about the same distance to gates at the end of terminal C underground.
I could easily see a tunnel taking folks about the same distance to gates at the end of terminal C underground.
I know and I'm sorry. I was just trying to find someway to get more use out of that billion dollar white elephant runway. But it would be nice to at least get a unified car rental center at Lambert.gregl wrote:There simply is no need for a project like this for the foreseeable future.dweebe wrote:In my dream world they construct a new building to house everything (ticketing, security, baggage claim, short term parking, rental cars, maybe even a hotel?) where Lot A is and spilling over into the ANG space. People movers would connect to the following satellite terminals.
-New terminal 3 would be built where the American Airlines operations center is and would fully utilize that criminally unused. runway 29. Maybe international/charters would go here.
-Current terminal 1 would be cleaned up with concourse B removed, concourses A and C shortened but the current main hall used for gates.
-Current terminal 2 would remain Southwest's and set up how they needed.
One of the best qualities of the Rhonda Hamm-Niebruegge administration is that she has been very fiscally responsible while getting a number of projects completed which have greatly improved the passenger experience.
I simply don't see the airport (and the City) from taking on significant debt for projects which would be a marginal improvement from the passenger's perspective.
Greg