This drives me crazy more than anything. I am sure it has something to do with connections but I don't like it. I would think they could change which bank it is in. I have started booking United from some SFO-STL flights now because of the way Southwest times theirs. Like you said they leave the same time here and are both early morning flights from SFO/OAK to STL. They finally are breaking up their return flights in the latest schedule release but the ones out are the same time still (sometimes right next to each other gate wise). I don't know why they cant break it up to morning and late afternoon both ways.imperialmog wrote: ↑Mar 09, 2017Though it would be nice if they didn't have the SFO and OAK flight go out at the same time which is odd.
- 985
^ Maybe this is why those new gates are being added. To allow for one to leave in the morning or add a frequency. And as you note as much as Southwest avoids using the h-word and banks, their ops here is very much has banked hub aspects. So adding those gates are likely to add more flights at those peak times and could make new routes viable with more possible connection options.
- 1,054
IMO, STL already has sufficient service to the Bay. I would only see an SJC route getting the axe after a few short weeks.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Also, I am still perplexed we have not seen JetBlue or Virgin America enter the STL market yet. Even Spirit to a greater extent. I feel like JetBlue definitely has a market here in STL. I know we were heavily considered for a route back in 2009, but I'm not sure much has happened since then.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
AA has reduced and exited several codeshare markets with AS. Especially with the build up at LAX and LUS service from PHX their network has less need for an expensive codesharing lift than before. Personally I'm a bit surprised by several of these additions. I suspect between WN and UA/OO they feel the STL market is well covered. I dobut it will make UA go to 2x mainline, but adding capacity could deter them from entering.jshank83 wrote: ↑Mar 09, 2017Alaska/Virgin just did a major expansion out of the Bay area. I was hoping we would add a flight (to SJC) but we aren't on the list. I guess 4 flights a day already is enough for us. They did add MCI, IND, MSY, BNA(Virgin), but those cities all only had 1 or 2 a day to the bay area and we have 4. I thought we might have a chance because they codeshare with AA.
for reference
https://newsroom.alaskaair.com/2017-03- ... e-Bay-Area
Spirit is likely only a matter of time, but they tend to avoid high cost airports which STL is up there for. Granted with new leadership (Bob Fornro from AirTran) they are going to several higher CPE markets like PIT (while maintaining LBE for time being at least).Chalupas54 wrote: ↑Mar 09, 2017Also, I am still perplexed we have not seen JetBlue or Virgin America enter the STL market yet. Even Spirit to a greater extent. I feel like JetBlue definitely has a market here in STL. I know we were heavily considered for a route back in 2009, but I'm not sure much has happened since then.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
JetBlue could also happen but at the moment they have more low hanging fruit in the Caribbean, expansion from FLL and adding capacity to top business centers from BOS. Their E90 fleet is not long for this world but could be a good sized aircraft for this market but it has a very CASM.
Before Southwest went to 3 (and now 4 in the summer) a day to Boston, I really couldn't figure out why Delta or JetBlue didn't come in on a smaller plane if nothing else. There has to be business people that would fill their seats that give more space. Also, that is one of the most expensive one way routes from STL. I don't see it under $170 very often. There has to be room for someone to come in and bring the price down some and still make money. Nashville has 3 airlines that fly the route and it is under $100 most of the time. It would also add some European connections. But I have ranted about this before.JAL007 wrote: ↑Mar 10, 2017
Spirit is likely only a matter of time, but they tend to avoid high cost airports which STL is up there for. Granted with new leadership (Bob Fornro from AirTran) they are going to several higher CPE markets like PIT (while maintaining LBE for time being at least).
JetBlue could also happen but at the moment they have more low hanging fruit in the Caribbean, expansion from FLL and adding capacity to top business centers from BOS. Their E90 fleet is not long for this world but could be a good sized aircraft for this market but it has a very CASM.
How do you think Spirit coming in would impact Southwest/Frontier? I am torn on it because I would pretty much never fly on Spirit because I have only heard really bad things. Do you think it would add people who don't usually fly or would it take away from people flying other airlines now? If it is going to take away from Southwest/Frontier and make them drop routes then I would rather they just don't come in. Although, I guess if they fly to places Southwest currently doesn't have competition maybe it would bring prices down some.
Another note in the January airport commission meeting it says landing fees are down to $7.65 and anticipated to decrease more. I am under the impression that is still pretty high but does anyone know how it compares to other airports?
Most of the WN traffic is flow, but local pax benefit with the added frequency (STL is a small-medium(ish) WN hub just not in name. STL's rates are outrageously high, and had been caught in a downward spiral of having fewer departures to spread the large fixed costs (and debt service for 11/29) across.jshank83 wrote: ↑Mar 10, 2017Before Southwest went to 3 (and now 4 in the summer) a day to Boston, I really couldn't figure out why Delta or JetBlue didn't come in on a smaller plane if nothing else. There has to be business people that would fill their seats that give more space. Also, that is one of the most expensive one way routes from STL. I don't see it under $170 very often. There has to be room for someone to come in and bring the price down some and still make money. Nashville has 3 airlines that fly the route and it is under $100 most of the time. It would also add some European connections. But I have ranted about this before.JAL007 wrote: ↑Mar 10, 2017
Spirit is likely only a matter of time, but they tend to avoid high cost airports which STL is up there for. Granted with new leadership (Bob Fornro from AirTran) they are going to several higher CPE markets like PIT (while maintaining LBE for time being at least).
JetBlue could also happen but at the moment they have more low hanging fruit in the Caribbean, expansion from FLL and adding capacity to top business centers from BOS. Their E90 fleet is not long for this world but could be a good sized aircraft for this market but it has a very CASM.
How do you think Spirit coming in would impact Southwest/Frontier? I am torn on it because I would pretty much never fly on Spirit because I have only heard really bad things. Do you think it would add people who don't usually fly or would it take away from people flying other airlines now? If it is going to take away from Southwest/Frontier and make them drop routes then I would rather they just don't come in. Although, I guess if they fly to places Southwest currently doesn't have competition maybe it would bring prices down some.
Another note in the January airport commission meeting it says landing fees are down to $7.65 and anticipated to decrease more. I am under the impression that is still pretty high but does anyone know how it compares to other airports?
Airports Council International used to publish a listing. I don't have it handy, but MIA by comparison, charges $1.63/1000lbs and that is by no standard a low cost facility or operation. Contrast that to CLT at about 90 cents. So yes STL is still sky high and when carriers consider adding service to new markets they take on risk and high costs makes them less willing to do so.
Traffic up 5.6% in January. Nice start to the year. It is lower than any month last year but I still think solid.
http://www.flystl.com/uploads/documents ... Report.pdf
http://www.flystl.com/uploads/documents ... Report.pdf
- 1,054
Also, not sure if there is any truth to this, but a friend of mine who lives in Shiloh works part time at MidAmerica and says that Allegiant is allegedly in talks to relocate its flights to Lambert in the next few years.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not saying he is wrong but I am sure midamerica is giving them a great deal and they seem to be doing well there so I'm not sure I see their incentive to move. They seem to like secondary airports when it is viable. I grew up on the IL side and people there seem to love midamerica.Chalupas54 wrote: ↑Mar 11, 2017Also, not sure if there is any truth to this, but a friend of mine who lives in Shiloh works part time at MidAmerica and says that Allegiant is allegedly in talks to relocate its flights to Lambert in the next few years.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 488
I don't know anything about how airports work but doesn't lambert have really high landing fees (maybe that's cargo only?) seems like mid America would have way lower fees. I'd love more flights out of STL just seems weird for a cheap airline to increase their costs.Chalupas54 wrote: ↑Mar 11, 2017Also, not sure if there is any truth to this, but a friend of mine who lives in Shiloh works part time at MidAmerica and says that Allegiant is allegedly in talks to relocate its flights to Lambert in the next few years.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Wouldn't surprise me if this one comes to fruition. If one looks at how their network has evolved in the past three years or so moving to STL would make sense and give them access to a much larger customer base. I hope you didn't just out someone, there must only be a handful of part timers working for their ground handler at BLV. It would be unfortunate for BLV and St. Clair county but who cares. Shame for them that the white elephant is just about breaking even after two decades of losses and saddling tax payers with debt. No one the MO side would ever consider going over there let alone traveling from BLV. The sense I get is people from Southern IL come to St. Louis County to spend money at restaurants and retailers that don't have a presence in their area. I can't ever remember someone in Clayton having reason or desire to go to "the east side" but maybe that has changed now.Chalupas54 wrote: ↑Mar 11, 2017Also, not sure if there is any truth to this, but a friend of mine who lives in Shiloh works part time at MidAmerica and says that Allegiant is allegedly in talks to relocate its flights to Lambert in the next few years.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I conquer.
Allegiant survives because it flies mostly into secondary airports.
Screw the East side. That's the thinking that has St. Louis so screwed in the first place. People only caring about their own area and not the whole region.JAL007 wrote: ↑Mar 12, 2017
It would be unfortunate for BLV and St. Clair county but who cares. Shame for them that the white elephant is just about breaking even after two decades of losses and saddling tax payers with debt. No one the MO side would ever consider going over there let alone traveling from BLV. The sense I get is people from Southern IL come to St. Louis County to spend money at restaurants and retailers that don't have a presence in their area. I can't ever remember someone in Clayton having reason or desire to go to "the east side" but maybe that has changed now.
I for one am happy that airport finally has a chance to break even and if that means Allegiant stays there than so be it. I would rather that happen and the east side have a closer airport option than see that airport go back to losing millions a year. Allegiant moving to STL would hurt the east side more than it would help STL.
And of course people on the IL side come to the MO side more than visa versa. The MO side has the core. You could interchange IL side with Wentzville/Lake St. Louis for people in Clayton or the city. The state doesn't have anything to do with it. There is no reason for them to go further out from the core than they already are unless they know someone who lives out there.
Point taken, but IME people only caring about their area/their municipality is NOT unique to St. Louis and has been the case everywhere I have lived or spent meaningful time. I think in St. Louis it's just more pronounced with the city/county fued and structure of municipalities and townships. Boston & Cambridge are fighting constantly, a point of contention being the Seaport/Innovation district which has courted several Cambridge firms like Zipcar and separately recruited outside firms like GE from Fairfield. Same story in Dallas/Ft. Worth, it's well known Amon Carter would have his wife pack a lunch since he wouldn't spend a single dollar in Dallas.jshank83 wrote: ↑Mar 12, 2017Screw the East side. That's the thinking that has St. Louis so screwed in the first place. People only caring about their own area and not the whole region.
I for one am happy that airport finally has a chance to break even and if that means Allegiant stays there than so be it. I would rather that happen and the east side have a closer airport option than see that airport go back to losing millions a year. Allegiant moving to STL would hurt the east side more than it would help STL.
And of course people on the IL side come to the MO side more than visa versa. The MO side has the core. You could interchange IL side with Wentzville/Lake St. Louis for people in Clayton or the city. The state doesn't have anything to do with it. There is no reason for them to go further out from the core than they already are unless they know someone who lives out there.
With respect to G4, I do think and have heard before they've considered moving and/or adding service to STL. Of course airlines routinely meet with airports (even for pie in the sky long shot possibilities) as this business continues to be very relationship based and egotistical. Look at how they've added service to EWR, built up a considerable presence at LAX, AUS, MEM, and CVG.
- 1,610
I don't like it. At least their Mapping feature. Shows all B & D gates, as well as the further down C gates and doesn't show the shops/restaurants correctly. That's generally the only reason I go to an airport website.
- 985
On the landing fees, wasn't at its peak it was a lot higher than what it is now? In the range of around 50% higher than current? And what is the timetable in terms of paying off the runway bonds anyway? Since this is also why the ideas of massive terminal improvements is silly, because that would just rack up more debts and raise fees.
Heard a story on the radio and also mentioned on the airports page they expect an increase during spring break of 13% over last year total. That seems a bit high, unless there is strong spring break demand this year. I picture the reason January growth isn't as fast as last year is all of the adds over the previous 18 months or so are starting to show up in the previous year numbers to compare to.
Thursday will be interesting to see what happens with Southwest extending schedule, since its the one after they retire their oldest planes and the MAX enters service. So any permanent cuts would likely happen then. Might be interesting to see is if they do anything with the flights to the Bay Area due to Alaska focusing there as a preemptive or retaliatory move. Of course, they could to be silly start SJC.. that departs at nearly the same time as the SFO and OAK flights.
Heard a story on the radio and also mentioned on the airports page they expect an increase during spring break of 13% over last year total. That seems a bit high, unless there is strong spring break demand this year. I picture the reason January growth isn't as fast as last year is all of the adds over the previous 18 months or so are starting to show up in the previous year numbers to compare to.
Thursday will be interesting to see what happens with Southwest extending schedule, since its the one after they retire their oldest planes and the MAX enters service. So any permanent cuts would likely happen then. Might be interesting to see is if they do anything with the flights to the Bay Area due to Alaska focusing there as a preemptive or retaliatory move. Of course, they could to be silly start SJC.. that departs at nearly the same time as the SFO and OAK flights.
3.5MB just on the static landing page, and a separate enormous (~1MB) header graphic - different on every page - for subpages. Who gets paid to make these sites? And this is mobile-friendly?
(Edit to add: What's funny is, the ginormous image in the background is "only" 250K. Another (useless) image on the landing page is an astounding 2.6MB, and is scaled down and jammed into a tiny 300px box)
Pathetic.
I found this interesting. It may have been posted before but I missed it. It list all the gates and their status (if in use and who uses them). After Southwest opens the new ones in June over half the available gates in the airport will be in use (44 in use/42 Vacant). This is counting in B gates which I doubt really will be used again. I don't count Vacant-usable gates as in use.
http://www.flystl.com/uploads/documents ... m_2017.pdf
http://www.flystl.com/uploads/documents ... m_2017.pdf
- 985
^ If I recall don't C27 and C28 get used by American during busier times of the year? I picture the other usable vacant ones in A are sometimes used either in peak season or due to weather related issues and diversions.
Its a bit odd they are renovating an area for 4 more E gates this year if there isn't the huge bump from Southwest that makes it needed. Unless its because of them having overflow issues at times when things are off due to weather already or they also need that area for more shops and restaurants. They may really need it next year so its getting ready for that.
Its a bit odd they are renovating an area for 4 more E gates this year if there isn't the huge bump from Southwest that makes it needed. Unless its because of them having overflow issues at times when things are off due to weather already or they also need that area for more shops and restaurants. They may really need it next year so its getting ready for that.
^I think they are up 8 or 9 flights a day this summer over last summer. I can't remember exactly. I think we are at 109 now and it was right at 100 last year. So that would be at least 2 more gates assuming they already are full for some banks. I can't remember how many banks they run though? (even though they won't say banks)
- 6,120
They need to make this more obvious, and some of the navigability issues mentioned elsewhere still apply, but maybe this has the information you wanted . . .
PDF map
You can find it at the bottom of the map page under "printable maps and directions." The new map does seem like a step backwards from the last iteration. That said, they're just porting in Google Maps. Not sure why the Googz gutted their terminal map, but boy did they. Might be some kind of TSA request (demand) seeing as Bing appears to have nerfed theirs as well.