urbanSTL

The new runway from what I have seen and experienced does seem to be preferred by those in concourse A mainly due to less taxiing as a result. Also it likely gets used more when weather is bad due to the parallel runways can't be used in the same time in bad weather due to closeness. (this was one of the reasons for the runway being built as well, bad weather performance)

Also MD-90, it seems by looking at google flights Delta also now uses it one some of the flights to MSP. interesting using that app is being able to see what planes are used on each route to get a sense of capacity. (sadly does not show different 737 models since there is noticeable size differences in those)

Interesting on the airports website too is the passenger number data, especially noting the significant increase in traffic starting from November 2015. It would be interesting to know the nature of the growth, since due to timing it predates most of the Southwest adds so its more than just people connecting here contributing to it, so its also local demand rising at a good clip.

For anyone interested, a 763 came through STL yesterday after a WX diversion MIA-ORD. Was on the ground at C28 for about 75 minutes before continuing onto ORD. Also of note, the line stripes on C28 were also modified recently to include the 787; C8 is also able to handle the 787 and 777. I certainly am not going to sugar coat this and lead anyone to believe scheduled service is imminent, but the station also does have container handling equipment in place (not everyone station in the system has this).

JAL007 wrote:For anyone interested, a 763 came through STL yesterday after a WX diversion MIA-ORD. Was on the ground at C28 for about 75 minutes before continuing onto ORD. Also of note, the line stripes on C28 were also modified recently to include the 787; C8 is also able to handle the 787 and 777. I certainly am not going to sugar coat this and lead anyone to believe scheduled service is imminent, but the station also does have container handling equipment in place (not everyone station in the system has this).

That's cool to say the least. In the event service was scheduled, hypothetically British Airways, would flights depart from C and arrive in E?

Also, United will resume mainline flights to Newark, O'Hare, Denver this October. This is what I found on United.com-

Newark- once daily on a 737-700
O'Hare- twice daily on a 737-800
Denver- appears to fluctuate between once and twice daily between an Airbus 320 and 737-700.
San Francisco- Twice daily on A320 and 737-900.

shadrach wrote: Or, like the 763, maybe Lambert is becoming the preferred choice in a diversion/bad weather/emergency situation.

This.

STL is on the great circle route for most trans-Atlantic routes into DFW, which makes it an ideal diversion point. Couple that with being 250 miles from ORD and having maintenance staff... STL is very convenient for widebody diversions.

Greg

Yes - it is open and used as needed - but not fully renovated at the very last few gates.

10.5% higher comparing June 2015 to June 2016.
9.3% Higher for first half of 2016 compared to first half of 2015

http://flystl.com/Newsroom/Blog/tabid/4 ... arter.aspx

gregl wrote:I have strong reason to believe that the remainder of the C concourse (C27 & up) will be renovated in the not to distant future.

Greg

who is going to occupy these gates? or is it just speculation for future expansion? these were the original heavy gates as well, right? I seem to remember getting on a 767 to SFO back in the early 2000's from the end of C.

How about converting concourse D into a casino? Let's put some slots in there and spice up the wait for boarding.

duckman wrote:

gregl wrote:I have strong reason to believe that the remainder of the C concourse (C27 & up) will be renovated in the not to distant future.

Greg

who is going to occupy these gates? or is it just speculation for future expansion? these were the original heavy gates as well, right? I seem to remember getting on a 767 to SFO back in the early 2000's from the end of C.

And I remember taking a 747 nonstop to Honolulu.

I can't help to think that somehow, someway Lambert needs to come up with a plan or vision to be able to board and disembark international flights for both Terminal 1 (whether it be rebuilt & new customs area at end of C, modify or rebuild gates D next to C security checkpoint or reactivate Concourse B) - for International code share partners/frontier/charter flights and Terminal 2 - Southwest Airlines Boarding at Terminal 1 but not being able to disembark just doesn't make sense to me in the long term if a serious effort is behind international code share flights.

With international boarding and disembarking at Terminal 1 you can have two stand alone terminals. Essentially what Detroit has - Delta terminal and all others in separate terminal. Southwest Airlines doesn't code share and the idea that you somehow need to maintain a 1/4 mile long walkway & ties up ground for a few just users is beyond me. The mentality of keeping concourse D as is because you might need some more gates in a decade or two continues the perception of region just wanting to maintain its 2nd or 3rd tier status

I don't really get why Customs is in E anyways right now. Southwest doesn't have any international flights, at the moment. I assume it was in C before when TWA/American were doing them so there has to be a way to set it up. If nothing else, just make the extension part of it the "International Area". That is enough room for any flights they would get. If American or someone else at some point needs extra gates then they can start expanding into E or move cape/air choice one to E/B. Frontier and the charters board in C so they might as well disembark is C also. Southwest could probably use the extra gate it is taking up anyways.

The other option is couldn't they just make D the International terminal (rebuild it some if needed)? Put it back where it connects to C and to E. This way when southwest does start international it can still be connected.

Either way it doesn't make sense to have airlines board and disembarck at different gates. Until southwest has international flights they should all be out of C.

what a difference 18 years makes:

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stor ... tory6.html

this maybe why the international arrivals are where they are.

I thought and was mentioned somewhere international arrivals moved from C had to do with the way it was designed you had to go trough security again even if here was your final destination after going through customs.

Also its not unusual for international departures and arrivals to be different terminals. I remember going to London the couple times this was done at O'Hare. its also a way to not have the arrival gate clogged if they move it elsewhere for departure.

Also on keeping D, I doubt it will be in hope of use a decade or two out, since at this point Southwest would have to start taking D gates if they want to expand any more. So it could very well be sooner.

Also with this year traffic numbers doing so well (likely better than most comparable airports this year) and documented as being broad. Will next year have much new/expanded service? Since it would be odd if there isn't, but still a bit early to know.

Hardest sentence to swallow in that article.....

"In 1999, the airline will add daily flights to Tokyo."

i think at this point, propose to get rid of the existing terminals and have one central terminal. no sense in having two of something if one can do it just fine. also if you get rid of the existing terminals you can use both sides of that concourse.

for the record i am an architect and i used to work at an office that did airports, at least we thought we did.

^^^ Shadrach goes big.

I believe someone else or maybe it was yourself Shadrach that pointed out that you could literally connect A and C concourse on linear basis and build new security ingress & egress from ticketing vault/claim baggage at where concourse B stands now. One advantages is the Terminal 1 would get one big direct security access that also spill right into the middle of the baggage claim instead of one end, you can build the new Term 1 security access with customs/immigration in mind, and add international compatible gates midway between Concourse A and C. You would also still have the ability to maintain tarmac space on each side of the concourse in current sections that have it for A and C.

Or another way to put it visually, cut out a section of D and insert in the gap between A and C with concourse B being your new security access, shops and food concourse. Might not be dreaming as big as Shadrach but think you get a clean, modern concourse with full international gate capabilities for Terminal 1 while freeing up space for another near and short term parking/consolidated care rental facility between Terminal 1 & 2.