urbanSTL

Chalupas54 wrote:

JAL007 wrote:

jshank83 wrote:Condor going to PIT. Now have 3 different Europe Airlines... I find that a little annoying.

http://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/n ... sonal.html

In addition to Greg's point Pittsburgh/Allegheny county have worked in a collaborative manner to attract and retain young people and support entrepreneurship, start-ups, etc.

The paper pushers in St. Louis have been more concerned with TIFs relocating existing big box stores between nearby municipalities, building an IKEA, and a silly tram system no one will actually ride.

This may not be what the overly exuberant STL promoters like hearing, but at least PIT has worked with the hand they've been dealt in the last 20 years, attracted new businesses, pentetrated growing industries like health care rather than buried their heads in the sand and focused on sports and glory days long lost.

Again another slam on St Louis. Your posts are very frustrating and troll-like.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I really feel that you should be banned from this forum. You clearly do not look into what St Louis has done with Cortex, Arch Grants and many other instances of trying to rebrand itself as well as trying to grow its economy. St. Louis has struggled. THIS IS NOT NEWS TO ANYONE. All you do is come in here and post this absolutely unnecessary spiel about how Pittsburgh is so much better than St Louis, which does nothing but piss people off. Having recently moved to the New York City area, your comments are of the typical "the east coast does everything better" viewpoint. Please take your "St Louis can do nothing right" crap out of this forum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^the grass is always greener

This may not be what the overly exuberant STL promoters like hearing, but at least PIT has worked with the hand they've been dealt in the last 20 years, attracted new businesses, pentetrated growing industries like health care rather than buried their heads in the sand and focused on sports and glory days long lost.

Pittsburgh has built three publicly funded stadiums in the last 15 years, and they have one of the most devoted fanbases in all of sports.

What's the "silly team system"?

Was thinking compairing Pittsburgh to hear for air service is a not an equal comparison. Note that due to geography, Pittsburgh has or will have flights that are not possible to from here due to range issues. Also, they are further east of a number of hubs compared to hear. Only hubs to get to Europe from there that don't involve backtracking is the NE corridor and Toronto; while here Chicago, Detroit, and Minneapolis would not be that much out of the way. (and even Atlanta and Charlotte don't backtrack and are good connecting point options during winter due to much less winter weather) Also, in a place like Pittsburgh, there is also ability to draw from many more people outside the metro area for flights, here not so much due to more remote. So comparing is a bit of apples to oranges, note the tradeoff does seem to be a lot more west coast flights from here than Pittsburgh due to the same location aspects. That and just think local officials were not focusing as much on international service until recently, and instead looked at filling the domestic holes that are now filled.

Also in terms of Terminal 2 amenities, is there any other room available left to add stores and shops with what is open now? Since I did see there was likely to be a look at amenities there soon due to the strong growth the past year in both local and connecting traffic making things crowded at times. There was also something I saw relating to may have to look at expanding baggage claim area there too due to capacity issues at times. That would get so much worse if you did see increases in international flights when that baggage claim area gets that traffic plus the existing Southwest traffic, especially if its timed with some of the arrival rushes that they have here (which as much as they hate to use the term, its basically a hub bank with having that many arrive at the same time)

imperialmog wrote:Also in terms of Terminal 2 amenities [...]There was also something I saw relating to may have to look at expanding baggage claim area there too due to capacity issues at times. That would get so much worse if you did see increases in international flights when that baggage claim area gets that traffic plus the existing Southwest traffic.

International flights would not impact Baggage Claim as all bags need to be claimed as part of the Immigration & Customs process, at which point customers would leave the terminal to the unsecured area with their bags.

Greg

Chalupas54 wrote:
I really feel that you should be banned from this forum. You clearly do not look into what St Louis has done with Cortex, Arch Grants and many other instances of trying to rebrand itself as well as trying to grow its economy. St. Louis has struggled. THIS IS NOT NEWS TO ANYONE. All you do is come in here and post this absolutely unnecessary spiel about how Pittsburgh is so much better than St Louis, which does nothing but piss people off. Having recently moved to the New York City area, your comments are of the typical "the east coast does everything better" viewpoint. Please take your "St Louis can do nothing right" crap out of this forum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not sure where you get that I have some affinity for Pittsburgh...other than working out of there for a few weeks and visiting a friend in medical school at PITT, I haven't spent much time nor am I nearly as familiar with the area as I am St. Louis, Greater Boston area , or South Florida. Point is that Pittsburgh works collaboratively, understands where they've come from and has tried new approaches that are producing results. People here are quick to point out that GOOG doesn't have a presence in STL (but does in Kansas City), PIT has representation of several tech firms that aren't in STL.

Look this topic is Lambert Airport, but I felt that perspective was germane to implicit question of why PIT has upto three peak season transatlantic flights yet STL doesn't. I have nothing against St. Louis or Lambert other than closed minded, out of touch, 'bury our heads in the sand and live in the past' lines of thinking. I graduated from CHS and still maintain ties to the area and visit several times a year. The airport topic is of most interest and most connected to me personally. If the mods direct me to refrain from posting here or offer redirection as they see appropriate I will act in accordance. If you don't like the perspective I have to share simply don't read or respond to the posts. This forum may also have an ignore function which is worth its weight in gold on several other forums I frequent.

I am sure STL has tech companies that PIT doesn't have (Square, etc). Two of those flight from PIT to Europe are in planes that could not make the trip from St. Louis. One requires a layover in Iceland. It does 2/3s the airport passengers STL does. A list of places you can't fly direct from it are: San Diego, Seattle, Portland, Salt Lake City, and others. I am more than happy I can fly those places non stop than Europe. So before we just go comparing cities let's make sure it's not an apples to oranges comparison. There is nothing to me that says PIT/STL are better or worse than the other one. In my mind they are pretty much equal. There are pluses and minuses with both cities but in the end they are pretty much a wash.

Either way, I am in this part of the forum to talk about airports. There are other threads to talk about the tech communities.

^ As to CORTEX, haven't they been involved in pushing for more service here and have in the last few years? Since it seems the business community was passive until rather recently on that, and the activity is coming more from the startup scene.

Another thing, noting on other threads about how it seems growth locally has been going faster the past year or so than a long time, it seems to coincide with a sizable bump in airport traffic. Since it is still running at about 9% growth this year. And when it started coincided with this, and can't be explained by the Southwest adds increasing connections here because it predates most of those. Not sure where people are coming from or going to, but that would likely attract more new service or expand existing.

As for international flights, at this point a lot of any new stuff might be that due to not much left domestically to add that is obvious. Though at this point with the size Southwest has any growth from smaller places might go here instead of say an extra Midway flight due to space. Places like Jacksonville and Hartford come to mind as possibilities at some point. Just unsure what the largest trafficked unserved destinations are at this point

This is slightly off topic . . . but we're great at reliving glory days, so I give you . . .

Neato
It only cost $8.6M
2M boardings in 1956
12,752,331 in 2015

Cool video. Thanks for sharing

JAL posted

I have nothing against St. Louis or Lambert other than closed minded, out of touch, 'bury our heads in the sand and live in the past' lines of thinking.

..and there it is.

Stop trolling and flaming these boards. It really gets old....especially from a person who does not live or work in STL or even knows what is going on in this great city. I'm glad you're involved with other boards... so please now go play there. You're correct... this is OUR sandbox and please go "bury your head in the sand" somewhere else.

I value what JAL has to say and the industry knowledge he brings to the thread. Let's all just chill out

^What Moorlander says. JAL can sound a little abrasive sometimes, but his criticisms don't seem entirely false. There's an element of truth to them. We've all been a little hung up on flights to Europe lately and all the while the airport has been doing just fine, thanks. Sure, a flight to Europe would be nice, but if you're a cheapskate like me you'll be going for the cheaper one or two-layover flight anyway and you'll never use that direct flight. (Didn't fly direct even in TWA days. Always had layovers at JFK or ORD or Dulles or what have you. So it kind of comes out the same from my end. The airport is quieter, but my personal flight experience today is just as good as it ever was. Especially if I don't fly *^!+&#.)

Questions for thread on Lambert going forward. Undoubtly it has the runway capacity, it is centrally located and with right aircraft no doubt direct service can be provided to Europe and Mexico/Latin America. So....

1) How does Lambert make it possible to have an airline board and disembark an international flight at the same gate in Terminal 1? Does this exist at the end of Concourse C but not utilized or refurbished (not sure how TWA handled it). If their is international gates and customs areas at end of C sealed off are they really beneficial to Lambert overall anymore considering it is not a hub airport? To the last question, I think it is a time for a redo considering you might have a variation of international flights/airlines to/from a non hub airport. The idea of at two or three new international gates by bridging concourse A & C with international gates/relocating some of the gates currently near the current security checkpoints & rebuild B as a two level bridge with one central security to all Terminal 1 gates on top level & customs/international area on lower level sounds right to me. .

2) Do you keep the status quo for Southwest airlines in terms of E and old D gates as well as keeping ingress/egress/parking the same? I can't see how you can improve the cramped parking/drop off and pickup location without demo of D to free up space. From there, someone with a whole better grasp of design could have a new vision of E and any future southwest gates. The key to me is know you extend drop and pickup areas as well have space for additional structured parking

3) Also wanted to add a organizational change question, Does City give us some control by doing a joint Port Authority District with the county? Among other things I believe the city re-entering as another muni in the county is a plus, in the long term I believe the shared economic development organization will be a plus, and eventually combining the St Louis river port & airport with a joint city-county port authority makes a lot of sense to me just as the city-county are together in the Convention Center & Museum District for tax purposes, etc. In other words, the city should give up some control of the airport to gain a better regional position for themselves and St. Louis county.

dredger wrote:Questions for thread on Lambert going forward. Undoubtly it has the runway capacity, it is centrally located and with right aircraft no doubt direct service can be provided to Europe and Mexico/Latin America. So....

1) How does Lambert make it possible to have an airline board and disembark an international flight at the same gate in Terminal 1? Does this exist at the end of Concourse C but not utilized or refurbished (not sure how TWA handled it). If their is international gates and customs areas at end of C sealed off are they really beneficial to Lambert overall anymore considering it is not a hub airport? To the last question, I think it is a time for a redo considering you might have a variation of international flights/airlines to/from a non hub airport. The idea of at two or three new international gates by bridging concourse A & C with international gates/relocating some of the gates currently near the current security checkpoints & rebuild B as a two level bridge with one central security to all Terminal 1 gates on top level & customs/international area on lower level sounds right to me. .

The only FIS (federal inspection service) facility in Terminal 1 is at the end of Concourse C and hasn't been used for at least a decade. Although the LGW flights ended in 11/2003, AA had periodic weekend seasonal service to CUN/PVR through 2006 and those flights were cleared in the facility. I do not know the status of the facility, but I believe the glass enclosed corridors leasing to stair way have come down and the airport plan going forward is for all int'l arrivals requiring FIS to use the newer facility at D/E gates beside Terminal 2.

The AC flights from YYZ pre-clear, and the Frontier and Vision charter Mexico & Caribbean flying goes into the T2 FIS.

dredger wrote: 2) Do you keep the status quo for Southwest airlines in terms of E and old D gates as well as keeping ingress/egress/parking the same? I can't see how you can improve the cramped parking/drop off and pickup location without demo of D to free up space. From there, someone with a whole better grasp of design could have a new vision of E and any future southwest gates. The key to me is know you extend drop and pickup areas as well have space for additional structured parking

Any gate expansion for WN will likely continue to be westward onto the former "D" gates. The gates that they most recently assumed were relabeled and numbered as "E" gates. IMO things are leveling off for them, but we may see a few opportunistic adds. I suspect if they do ultimately pursue more of the former D gates we will see a more significant but cost conscious refurbishment of the concourse.

I think for parking the airport may need to better align rates and "steps" for parking charges. The daily rate is relatively cheap, so much so that business travelers who are gone for a full week can justify keeping a vehicle there whereas if they parked off site the space could turnover several times in the interim. Not sure what land they really could tap, aside from perhaps some of the vacant cargo buildings to east end of the terminal (near the cellphone lot and where taxis stage)

dredger wrote: 3) Also wanted to add a organizational change question, Does City give us some control by doing a joint Port Authority District with the county? Among other things I believe the city re-entering as another muni in the county is a plus, in the long term I believe the shared economic development organization will be a plus, and eventually combining the St Louis river port & airport with a joint city-county port authority makes a lot of sense to me just as the city-county are together in the Convention Center & Museum District for tax purposes, etc. In other words, the city should give up some control of the airport to gain a better regional position for themselves and St. Louis county.

I'm not sure here, but I agree absent a merger/collaboration with St. Louis County there is no imminent change of control for the airport.

dredger wrote: 1) How does Lambert make it possible to have an airline board and disembark an international flight at the same gate in Terminal 1? Does this exist at the end of Concourse C but not utilized or refurbished (not sure how TWA handled it). If their is international gates and customs areas at end of C sealed off are they really beneficial to Lambert overall anymore considering it is not a hub airport? To the last question, I think it is a time for a redo considering you might have a variation of international flights/airlines to/from a non hub airport. The idea of at two or three new international gates by bridging concourse A & C with international gates/relocating some of the gates currently near the current security checkpoints & rebuild B as a two level bridge with one central security to all Terminal 1 gates on top level & customs/international area on lower level sounds right to me. .

The FIS area on Concourse C has several problems.

First of all, it's not very big. I flew LGW-STL in the 90s and was glad I was flying Business class, so I was at the front of the line.

Second and, more important, is that all passengers -- even those terminating their travel in STL -- need to reclear security after going through immigration and customs because the only exit is back into the secured area of the terminal.

While it is a bit of a pain to have international arrivals in a different terminal than departures, it's not all that rare. It happens at airports like Seattle and Chicago. It would actually be less of a problem here because it is unlikely there would be many passengers connecting instead of starting / ending their journey.

Greg

This is the part I've always been confused about. If you are cleared to be on a plane, fly over the country, and enter the country, why are you still a risk to get back on a plane? Are there not requirements from the orgin country for security clearances to be able to fly to the US so that you are not bringing illegal items through customs? Just a thought.

duckman wrote:This is the part I've always been confused about. If you are cleared to be on a plane, fly over the country, and enter the country, why are you still a risk to get back on a plane? Are there not requirements from the orgin country for security clearances to be able to fly to the US so that you are not bringing illegal items through customs? Just a thought.

Very simple. You can put a box cutter in checked luggage, you can't carry it on.

When you go through customs, you take your checked luggage with you and recheck it with the airline after.

The security check is to ensure you did not take something permitted in checked luggage out and carry it with you.

Greg

Back in the day when that customs area was built this was probably less of a concern. You probably still had to clear security, as carry on and checked requirements were different even then, but it was less onerous. (And airside security lines tend to be less onerous, even now. I've had to clear them in Atlanta, San Francisco, and probably a few other places I'm forgetting. Not to mention special "extra screening" at the gate for flights with international origins and destinations in the US.) All that said, I don't see a problem with international arrivals at one terminal and departures (potentially) at another. I've seen that many places both here and abroad. They work fine. You have to plan your connections accordingly, but . . . no big deal. The airlines mostly know that. Even in Chicago.