St. Louis Lambert Int. Airport [airline/hub/operations/info]

matguy70 · PostJul 27, 2016#24012016-07-27T23:45+00:00

Actually, Terminal 4 at Madrid's (Spain) Airport is huge - bigger than those:

Terminal 4 is one of the world's largest airport terminals in terms of area, with 760,000 square meters (8,180,572 square feet) in separate landside and airside structures. It consists of a main building, T4 (470,000 m²) and a satellite building, T4S (290,000 m²), which are approximately 2.5 km apart. 76 Gates total. [wiki]

I is one of the most beautiful terminals inside I have ever been in.

mill204 · PostJul 28, 2016#24022016-07-28T05:13+00:00

^ Yes, Madrid Barajas T4 looks like a beautiful terminal, but it is nowhere near the biggest—the main concourse is 3,800 ft long, the satellite concourse is 3,100 ft long. (Note that in my original post, I'm only counting the size of individual concourses, not entire terminals.)

symphonicpoet · PostJul 28, 2016#24032016-07-28T09:24+00:00

I think you two are talking apples and oranges, since Shadrach is discussing interior volume and mil204 is talking concourse length. To add gates you need length, but to add amenities you need volume. The airside at Seoul Incheon isn't especially long, but the amenities can't be beat: two story mall, traveler's rest, free showers, museum, hotel . . . lots of interior volume, but only about 44 gates. (And another 30 or so at the midfield terminal.) Of course none of them are terribly far from one another, which is the bonus of not having an absurdly long concourse. (Though the long linear concourse does seem to be the order of the day in East Asia. Shanghai Pudong has a pair at 4500 feet or so. And Tan Sohn Nhat has a crooked one at over three thousand. Even at Hong Kong, which is has branches going every which way in the main terminal, it's still four thousand feet from security to either end. And that's not counting the bus ride out to midfield, should that be necessary.) Anyway . . . back to the discussion at hand. May we be so lucky that Lambert has a need for customs again soon.

arch city · PostJul 29, 2016#24042016-07-29T21:54+00:00

I recently went to Los Angeles (LAX) for a music event/festival and quick vacation.

I thought some airliner geeks here (no offense intended) would love this video. As my plane taxied to the terminal we passed a LAN Boeing Dreamliner as well as big boys from Qantas, Virgin America, Hawaiian, Jet Blue, Spirit, AA, etc. - all in the video. LAX is a true aerotropolis. You see this in the video on approach. I filmed this entire video.

Also, as the plane approaches LAX, you can see where "lying" Stan Kroenke's new stadium project is supposed to go in Inglewood.

JAL007 · PostJul 31, 2016#24052016-07-31T03:29+00:00

arch city wrote:I recently went to Los Angeles (LAX) for a music event/festival and quick vacation.

I thought some airliner geeks here (no offense intended) would love this video. As my plane taxied to the terminal we passed a LAN Boeing Dreamliner as well as big boys from Qantas, Virgin America, Hawaiian, Jet Blue, Spirit, AA, etc. - all in the video. LAX is a true aerotropolis. You see this in the video on approach. I filmed this entire video.

Also, as the plane approaches LAX, you can see where "lying" Stan Kroenke's new stadium project is supposed to go in Inglewood.

Five-stars. Thanks for posting-no offense taken whatsoever. LAX is awesome and as you said there are few other airports you can see a line up with say, an El Al 777 followed by an Alaska 737-800, followed by an Emirates A380.

Of course, the legendary spotting location is by In-N-Out on Sepulveda, but Imperial Highway is also great and has better views. Here in BOS there are several good spots; depending on which runways are in use.

It would be nice if STL got some kind of spotting area set-up although it would most be WN 737s

Thanks again for sharing, and I hope you had a great trip.

10-intuition · PostJul 31, 2016#24062016-07-31T06:17+00:00

I am a airplane spotter at heart. This is a hobby I do whenever I travel the world.

Lambert did have a place to spot airplanes near Lindbergh and Natural Bridge before the adding that W1-W runway. I remember when I was a kid that was a spot for spotters to go to and watch planes land. Back then there was lots of airlines and aircraft variety, particularly Ozark's DC-9s, TWA B727, B747, B767s, L-1011s. Now that spot is just a gravel area and police would hassle you if one was staying there to watch airplane landing due to security issues.

There is a good place to do airplane spotting at Lambert if you aren't flying out and not able to access the AAdmirals Club. On the upper level of the main terminal ticketing hall, there is a tiny window spot next to the restaurant/old Burger King and winery restaurant location you can stand and watch airplanes on the tarmac.

JAL007 · PostJul 31, 2016#24072016-07-31T15:37+00:00

Agreed on the Admirals Club. Is the dining spot you mention at the west end of the upper level ticketing hall? I thought most of the windows were along a non-public corridor behind the ticket counters.

PostJul 31, 2016#24082016-07-31T15:41+00:00

shadrach wrote:Hardest sentence to swallow in that article.....

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

Even in 1999 with the amount of feed TW had, TYO really wouldn't be viable. Nor did they have any suitable aircraft in the fleet at the time.

10-intuition · PostAug 01, 2016#24092016-08-01T00:41+00:00

JAL007 wrote:Agreed on the Admirals Club. Is the dining spot you mention at the west end of the upper level ticketing hall? I thought most of the windows were along a non-public corridor behind the ticket counters.

Yep, I am referring to the dining spot on the upper level in main terminal ticketing hall. There is a small part of the window by the restaurant you can still watch airplanes departing and taxiing. That spot will give you a lot of Delta activity since its next to concourse A. However, I wouldn't think it would be a good idea to stay there too long as it may draw suspicion from airport police, last time I was there I spent about an hour and saw the afternoon rush with AA, Delta, Frontier, United, and Southwest planes going by.

JAL007 · PostAug 01, 2016#24102016-08-01T01:15+00:00

Thanks why would spotting draw any suspicion? Is that an unauthorized/non-public area? Perfectly normal for people to wander around airports waiting for someone, etc. Only time I was confronted was at TLV and a friendly explanation made total sense to them. Not sure why that would be an issue at STL.

10-intuition · PostAug 01, 2016#24112016-08-01T02:06+00:00

While at Paris CDG I was waiting for my flight back to the US, I went to a gate that gave a great view of the tarmac. I was taking pictures of all kinds of airlines and airplanes going by. This was before all the terrorist attacks in France. I was confronted by CDG airport security and they told me I cannot loiter in that area. After a friendly explanation and showing the pictures I took of the airplanes, he then told me its okay.

I think standing in on place for a long period of time may draw suspicion to some, but most people would ignore it. RDU does a great job for spotting fans. They make it a family day with playgrounds complete with a kids runway, picnic tables, and an observation platform with audio from the control tower.

I just wish Lambert builds a new place for plane spotting.

DogtownBnR · PostAug 01, 2016#24122016-08-01T13:39+00:00

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/lo ... /87478166/

The competition for flights (especially international flights) is only going to get tougher. Nashville is expanding their airport. They already have an advantage because the Music City is a huge tourist destination and growing by leaps and bounds.

JAL007 · PostAug 01, 2016#24132016-08-01T18:58+00:00

DogtownBnR wrote:http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/lo ... /87478166/

The competition for flights (especially international flights) is only going to get tougher. Nashville is expanding their airport. They already have an advantage because the Music City is a huge tourist destination and growing by leaps and bounds.

Terminal expansion/modernization programs are nice but don't really do much to attract new service from air carriers. If anything, incumbent carriers generally dislike programs (that aren't purpose built for them at their hubs/gateways/other strategic stations) as it both increases costs and adds capacity for competitors. The newer facility at IND is aesthetically pleasing and all, but they have considerable debt and annual debt service requirements. Enplanements at Indy have fallen since the terminal opened; and it hasn't been the major catalyst for air service like many proponents had hoped. Kansas City is also planning a clean sheet/new passenger terminal, but again they also don't have strong fundamentals for new service aside from a few opportunistic additions from incumbent service.

To the airport admins credit, I think they really "get it" and have taken a balanced, disciplined approach at making improvements designed to improve the passenger experience and allow the facility to operate more efficiently. They're far from perfect-at the end of the day they too are a bloated government bureaucracy but I get the sense they are realists are don't have their heads buried in the sand waiting for 1999 traffic levels to return.

Chalupas54 · PostAug 01, 2016#24142016-08-01T22:47+00:00

DogtownBnR wrote:http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/lo ... /87478166/

The competition for flights (especially international flights) is only going to get tougher. Nashville is expanding their airport. They already have an advantage because the Music City is a huge tourist destination and growing by leaps and bounds.

BNA doesn't need expansion, just modernizing. Renovation is very much needed, the airport seems stuck in 1994. That full vision I doubt comes to pass. ATM, Lambert seems more poised to get Int'l service than BNA.

gregl · PostAug 01, 2016#24152016-08-01T23:03+00:00

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.

Sadly, after follow-up with my source, I believe my earlier comment was made in error....

Greg

matguy70 · PostAug 02, 2016#24162016-08-02T02:08+00:00

I agree that Nashville is "poised" and located strategically as is STL. Both the airports are working on attracting EU or Asian international service. That being said, RIGHT NOW (August 2016) STL has far aggressively completed much of their "vision" in revamping and rehabbing Lambert. The airport looks great here and both T1 and T2 and concourses have undergone all renovations inside and continue outside.
Population today in STL is far larger than Nashville:
STL Metro is nearing 3 million.
BNA Metro is 1.7 million
(By 2035 the population of BNA Metro will be nearing 2.5 million)
The airports are both Southwest Focus Cities - but Southwest does not have any partnerships with other airlines - however, STL maintains a larger amount of flights through other major carriers than BNA does. Southwest offers far more flights and destinations out of STL than BNA as well.
There are 7 nonstop destinations to the Caribbean and Mexico through STL and 4 to the Caribbean and Mexico through BNA.
There are currently 75 non-stop destinations from STL. There are currently 50 non-stop destinations from BNA.

Now this isn't saying that International airlines are not looking at BNA. Nor is it saying that they are not looking at STL.
But these airlines have to look at the money that these airports and the seats these airports can fill now - not in 2020 or 2025 or 2035. They need to be able to meet at least 200 seats each day they fly non-stop out of the airport to international cities. Lambert-STL currently knows that STL can (now) fill those flights (if not daily) from STL. Not only would STL be ideal for our city's businesses and residents but attractive for other cities around STL including BNA.

Lambert-STL has their customs and immigration gates completed and has been an international hub in the past. The airport has the capacity to land/operate and service large body planes. STL has state-of-the-art facilities and runways in place now. There is no wait to come to STL now.

I should add that STL has direct rail service to all of it's mega-downtown and business districts. BNA has no urban rail system.

JAL007 · PostAug 02, 2016#24172016-08-02T02:53+00:00

Candidly, I don't think any international pax arriving into STL would be rushing into Downtown on MetroLink. Like it or not, many out of towners (myself included) don't feel safe on MetroLink but regularly avail ourselves to transit in other cities. The problem with MetroLink is (a) there are so few people riding it (b) the people that do are often upto mischief making it an unpleasant journey (c) Alignment is poorly planned-If I'm going to Clayton it's a 15-minute drive tops in traffic down I-170 or an hour long ordeal on Metro requiring me to go into the city, change trains and back west.

As neat as BA service would be the St. Louis market really isn't ready for it and IMO it would add minimal value to their network. Airline network planning departments are tasked with deploying their aircraft assets in a manner to maximize network utility and RASM, not appeal to airport authorizes. The Routes conference is coming up, I imagine STL will send a representative.

http://www.routesonline.com/events/182/ ... utes-2016/

PostAug 02, 2016#24182016-08-02T02:57+00:00

Candidly, I don't think any international pax arriving into STL would be rushing into Downtown on MetroLink. Like it or not, many out of towners (myself included) don't feel safe on MetroLink but regularly avail ourselves to transit in other cities. The problem with MetroLink is (a) there are so few people riding it (b) the people that do are often upto mischief making it an unpleasant journey (c) Alignment is poorly planned-If I'm going to Clayton it's a 15-minute drive tops in traffic down I-170 or an hour long ordeal on Metro requiring me to go into the city, change trains and back west.

As neat as BA service would be the St. Louis market really isn't ready for it and IMO it would add minimal value to their network. Airline network planning departments are tasked with deploying their aircraft assets in a manner to maximize network utility and RASM, not appeal to airport and chamber of commerce departments. The Routes conference is coming up, I imagine STL will send a representative.

http://www.routesonline.com/events/182/ ... utes-2016/

Chalupas54 · PostAug 02, 2016#24192016-08-02T03:28+00:00

JAL007 wrote:
As neat as BA service would be the St. Louis market really isn't ready for it

How so? And, in what way could we make ourselves ready for it?

jshank83 · PostAug 02, 2016#24202016-08-02T13:53+00:00

matguy70 wrote: They need to be able to meet at least 200 seats each day they fly non-stop out of the airport to international cities. Lambert-STL currently knows that STL can (now) fill those flights (if not daily) from STL.

I have a feeling the first flights will be more like three times a week than daily. It seems like that is how other cities started them. My girlfriends company just started letting their workers fly business class to Europe. They go to France fairly often. I doubt we get a direct flight to Paris but either way they will have a layover so maybe this way they have the layover in London instead of Atlanta/Chicago/New York.

imperialmog · PostAug 02, 2016#24212016-08-02T14:14+00:00

I was thinking isn't some of the biggest hurdles to having such a flight is as much available aircraft to start new routes and any uncertainties as a result of Brexit? It does seem like on this end here there is growing momentum to getting it, from some of the infrastructure upgrades to be ready in place along with there being more of a focus. The latter seems to be as much a result of not much in domestic needs left. There was a push for more west coast service the last few years and that has been met with a significant increase.

Another factor is where the increase in the significant increase in traffic lately coming from. There could be in the numbers a similar percentage increase in people going/coming from overseas to the numbers. 9%+ growth so far in traffic this year is more than just the sizable Southwest rampup this past year contributing to it.

jshank83 · PostAug 02, 2016#24222016-08-02T14:49+00:00

Now that there are more European lowcost carriers flying Atlantic routes do you think there is any chance Southwest would codeshare with any of those? What do you think keeps Southwest from codesharing? I am guessing it would be money related but I do not know.

jeffrk · PostAug 02, 2016#24232016-08-02T16:23+00:00

So I realize that I'm no expert, but I found it worth mentioning that a recent trip to France took us through the following via Delta and Air France: STL-CVG, CVG-CDG then CDG-BOD. What struck me was how packed the Delta 767-300 was from Cincinnati to Paris. This is a daily round trip, and they were begging for someone to take a flight credit to fly out the next day as it was oversold. Now I realize the history with Delta and CVG, but if Cincinnati can sell out a daily flight to Paris, surely we could do well with a flight to LHR/CDG/FRA at least a few days a week? Just a thought.

Carry on...

mill204 · PostAug 02, 2016#24242016-08-02T17:00+00:00

Fascinating tidbit from Wikipedia on how CVG has been able to sustain a flight to Paris despite having less than half the passenger traffic of STL.

The only remaining intercontinental service by Delta is a daily evening departure to Paris. In addition to serving the heavy international travel demand of local companies such as P&G and GE Aviation, the daily Paris flight is also sustained in great part because it ferries jet-engine parts between factories in Cincinnati and France due to GE Aviation's presence. Each year the flight carries 4,200,000 pounds (1,900,000 kg) of engine parts.

dredger · PostAug 02, 2016#24252016-08-02T17:11+00:00

jshank83 wrote:Now that there are more European lowcost carriers flying Atlantic routes do you think there is any chance Southwest would codeshare with any of those? What do you think keeps Southwest from codesharing? I am guessing it would be money related but I do not know.

Can't help but think of Norwegian Air and its direct flight out of Oakland (Southwest) and a few other airports now. Feels like it make a good fit if Norwegian Air would entertain a STL flight even if they don't code share with Southwest.

Well I don't believe Lambert needs a massive rebuild I still think it would be advantageous for Terminal 1 to have the ability to disembark as well as board an international flight. Whether that is a rebuilt Concourse B and or rebuilding a portion of D next to the security area for C concourse.

St. Louis Lambert Int. Airport [airline/hub/operations/info]

Choose Display Mode