urbanSTL

gregl wrote: ↑

May 11, 2017

Chalupas54 wrote: ↑

May 09, 2017

Also, our departure out of STL last night (around 9:50 PM CT) was incredibly steep.

Also, there were only 35 people on my flight from St Louis to Omaha.

I think your second sentence answers the question in the first sentence.

Aircraft with limited payload on short flights can take off much faster / steeper than full flights on a long flight.

Greg

Ah, excellent point. One of the links provided earlier did state that Lambert has a noise abatement procedure, which prioritizes making as little noise as possible of St. Charles.

A new sculpture to be installed at Lambert, designed by Wash U architecture students, and partly fabricated at TechShop:



Much more info here:

https://source.wustl.edu/2017/05/sculpt ... es-flight/

framer wrote: A new sculpture to be installed at Lambert, designed by Wash U architecture students, and partly fabricated at TechShop:



Much more info here:

https://source.wustl.edu/2017/05/sculpt ... es-flight/

Oh, very good. The landside portion of the East Terminal needed some help when last I was in there. The crowding and general improvisatory messiness had gotten rather dire. Some good art would surely help to make it feel more welcoming to those stuck there not flying. And probably those flying as well.

So I had some free time tonight so I started looking through the bid documents for the new Local Concept Restaurant in T2.

I noticed on the sign in sheet for the first meeting and two stuck out.

Three Kings Public House
Llywelyn's Pub

None of the others had restaurant names. Either building companies or concessions companies it looks like.

http://www.flystl.com/uploads/bid-docum ... t-2017.pdf

Nice catch. I find it somehow interesting that both OHM Concessions and HMS Host list Schlaffly as one of their brand partners at Lambert. I guess they work together somehow. I'm not quite sure what ATS was doing there, but maybe they have to be involved to get supplies in and out. Very interesting. I suppose it's quite possible that OHM, HMS Host, or both could go out and find a brand partner and walk them through it without any need for the local partner's culinary staff to sit through a pre-bid meeting. On the other hand, if Llewelyns or Three Kings is willing to work with either or both concessionaires and vice versa then that is suggestive. I expect some back room negotiations will be unfolding over the next week or so. That really is a surprisingly short list, but it is a complex bid, so maybe that scared off a lot of would be bidders.

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

May 16, 2017

Nice catch. I find it somehow interesting that both OHM Concessions and HMS Host list Schlaffly as one of their brand partners at Lambert. I guess they work together somehow. I'm not quite sure what ATS was doing there, but maybe they have to be involved to get supplies in and out. Very interesting. I suppose it's quite possible that OHM, HMS Host, or both could go out and find a brand partner and walk them through it without any need for the local partner's culinary staff to sit through a pre-bid meeting. On the other hand, if Llewelyns or Three Kings is willing to work with either or both concessionaires and vice versa then that is suggestive. I expect some back room negotiations will be unfolding over the next week or so. That really is a surprisingly short list, but it is a complex bid, so maybe that scared off a lot of would be bidders.

I also looked through the question and answers. One was asking does the establishment get a lesser rent/financial obligation if the gates down that way end up closing up. The answer was no. I wonder if that would scare anyone off. I don't see them closing those gates anytime soon but its a risk. I am sure that is the normal agreement but I could see it making someone nervous since it already is out of the way a bit. They did offer them some signage to direct people there for the first so many months though.

stlgasm wrote: ↑

May 16, 2017

Today (Tuesday), St Louis on the Air on 90.7 will be all about Lambert's recent upswing. Tune in if you can.

I listened and not much new came out.

Southwest is opening 3 of the 4 new gates in June and the other one later in the year.
Expects the same amount of growth as last year.
No talk about international flights.
No talk of any destinations not announced..
A lot of the privatization talk but nothing of note.

I did notice in some satellite imagery I have access to that as of Monday all 3 jetways are in.

stlgasm wrote:Today (Tuesday), St Louis on the Air on 90.7 will be all about Lambert's recent upswing. Tune in if you can.

A side note- this past weekend I flew to Columbus on Southwest Airlines, and Lambert felt like O'Hare compared to the Columbus airport.

Agreed. I have made many connections through STL this year on Southwest. T2 is overcrowded, but I think the airport has done a GREAT job spreading everyone out, and there's no lack of amenities. I also notice this on the tarmac as well. The last few times I've departed, there's been a queue of 5 aircraft. I honestly NEVER thought the airport would see this type of growth again. This is a great time for the airport.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It will be interesting with the added gates if they want to see how if it relieves any backups at peak times before adding things to see how much they could fit into peak times. Odd one will be a bit later, which makes me think there is growth planned since why you wouldn't have them all open now. Another possibility is they are needing these gates if they are less able to use the international arrivials ones due to others using it.

This wouldn't be the time for any new destinations served to be announced due to it being too early for next year. Don't know what Southwest could add domestically at this point. But there were surprise seasonals this summer nobody saw coming, so it could be due to size here any point that needed more capacity could be in play if they are already served by MDW or DAL they would consider here.

imperialmog wrote: ↑

May 16, 2017

Odd one will be a bit later, which makes me think there is growth planned since why you wouldn't have them all open now.

I wasn't really expecting anything new from the route announcement Thursday (for Nov-Jan) until they said they were opening a gate later. Now I think maybe there will be. I know gate agents keep mentioning Cancun. I guess winter would be the time to add it? Cincy is about the only other one I could see them add soon since that station is just coming online. I would expect it gets added in the next year so they can connect through here. Besides that I can't see much. But like you said I didn't see Charleston coming either. Maybe Jacksonville or Charlotte? Indy I think is still too close but I guess they could add i for connections also. I am interested to see what happens.

I think the FLL is a normal seasonal thing too. Though hopefully it stays year round this time due to their Caribbean expansion to better connect to those destinations. Also could see them keep it at least 2x a day as preventative move against JetBlue like they did with Boston.

Milwaukee is good to have added frequency for business travelers. Have to see later if the times line up with the central states flight bank or the east flight bank since it seems to be timed for these. (likely reason for more gates to build banks out) Likely expect to see Pittsburgh go to 2x down the road. That and make New Orleans and Raleigh 2x daily year round since its most of the year that now.

Did look at the Cancun flight and it seems to be timed well for getting connecting feed to fill out the flight. Could also only be Saturday due to wanting to see how it does and plane availability. I do wonder if anything else down the road could be added if it does well. But the issue then could be gate availability if a transatlantic flight happens since this flight for example might be at a similar time as one.

Woohoo!! FINALLY! Did anyone else get Cancun?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Chalupas54 wrote: ↑

May 18, 2017

Woohoo!! FINALLY! Did anyone else get Cancun?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nashville, Saturday only also.

Oh wow, that's cool.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Chalupas54 wrote: ↑

May 21, 2017

Also, has anyone else read up on the new KCI proposal? It sounds interesting, but I don't think the voters will approve it. Anyone else have thoughts on it and what it could mean for STL?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think them having a horrible set up has helped us a lot with Southwest. I hope they don't get the new terminal because it helps us get more flights. At this point it may be too late for them to make a big difference though. Even if it gets approved it would be years before it is built.

jshank83 wrote:

Chalupas54 wrote: ↑

May 21, 2017

Also, has anyone else read up on the new KCI proposal? It sounds interesting, but I don't think the voters will approve it. Anyone else have thoughts on it and what it could mean for STL?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think them having a horrible set up has helped us a lot with Southwest. I hope they don't get the new terminal because it helps us get more flights. At this point it may be too late for them to make a big difference though. Even if it gets approved it would be years before it is built.

I agree for the most part. I feel the new terminal won't attract new service, it will just make it much more convenient for current airlines to operate at the airport. Statistically, new terminals don't guarantee new service, if anything it kills new routes. Case and point, KIND and KSMF. KCI is far and away the worst airport in operation in our country, however. Any type of improvement will go along ways. In terms of us vs them, I feel Southwest has positioned us to be a connection point for midwestern cities, while MDW has very much become a national point of connection. I don't think a new KCI will change our stance. Also, in terms of international service, Kansas City is only yielding an average of 250-300 passengers per day heading to Europe, even less to Asia, South America. I don't believe they have regularly scheduled service to Cancun, and I did read on airliners.net that Air Canada may pull out of KCI. They recently added another STL flight so I don't think that applies to us. Either way, the airport issue in KC is very confusing and concerning, as Kansas I believe is proposing to build their own airport near Olathe.

In regards to another peer Airport, a dehubbing of CVG is most likely imminent. Their STL and BNA flights have become sporadic, and the hub operation at the airport is not profitable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

jshank83 wrote: ↑

May 21, 2017

Saw this [727] at the airport today. Haven't seen one of them in awhile.

Two of the last three times I've been out there I saw 727s and I got distracted and didn't look the third time. I looked up the first one and it was a freight charter TSU215 belonging to IFL Group/Contract Air Cargo.



The second one was parked in much the same spot so, behind Cargo City just east of the East Terminal. I simply assumed it was another freight charter. From my own photograph the second 727 appears to have the same paint scheme as the 727 you saw, though I saw it on the 18th.



I thought about wandering over to cargo city to see if I could get a better look from the lot, but it was getting towards dinner time and my stomach got the best of me. Glad you got a nice shot. And glad to see some lovely old birds about. Also, have you noticed that Delta seems to be sending two 757-200s daily lately? One around three and another around eight? (Or the same one twice, as likely as not.)

I actually halfway wondered if I saw you Friday. If you noticed a schmuck in a red Miata that would have been me.

Chalupas54 wrote: ↑

May 22, 2017

I agree for the most part. I feel the new terminal won't attract new service, it will just make it much more convenient for current airlines to operate at the airport. Statistically, new terminals don't guarantee new service, if anything it kills new routes. Case and point, KIND and KSMF. KCI is far and away the worst airport in operation in our country, however. Any type of improvement will go along ways. In terms of us vs them, I feel Southwest has positioned us to be a connection point for midwestern cities, while MDW has very much become a national point of connection. I don't think a new KCI will change our stance. Also, in terms of international service, Kansas City is only yielding an average of 250-300 passengers per day heading to Europe, even less to Asia, South America. I don't believe they have regularly scheduled service to Cancun,



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think Southwest would have more flights to KC if they got a new terminal, but I don't think it would be anything crazy.

AA flies from KC to Cancun on Saturdays and Sundays in summer. Saturdays they fly longer. Delta/Aeromexico (I can't tell which plane is actually is. They both sell the tickets) does Saturdays during summer. Nothing during the week though.

I did see AA is pulling all flights to LGA from KC. That kind of shocked me.

I picture any change in KC will not likely have much negative impact here, on possible reason is a fee issue that could arise where fees rise there.

Also isn't longer term a reason for growth with Southwest here is due to maxing out Chicago and Dallas due to space issues? So any growth would involve shifting connections elsewhere or adding flights in smaller places having to go to another place? Main competition for new service seems to be Nashville for this due to similar role in system. Though there it is positioned better to grow by connecting NE traffic to Florida bypassing Baltimore (especially important in winter) which here is too far out of the way. Ironically its also the main competition for getting transatlantic service at this point as well.

^ Have to agree.

I think the bigger question for STL is if privatization will play out at Lambert?. A lot of questions especially how does a privatization work if city is expecting a pay day, still have considerable debt on the runway expansion and private operator wants it return on investments without an increase in fee somewhere. The only scenario that plays out in my mind is Southwest makes a play to be a private operator of Terminal 2 as a test bed for the upcoming era of Fed openly and admittedly takes back seat to infrastructure when POTUS admin formalizes its transportation policy in a couple of weeks

Then again, I'm not surprised but the idea that the city takes the six million a year without putting it back into the airport whether it pays down bonds or giving a try at subsidizing a direct European flight seems like a loss opportunity to either get landing fees down or promote more international connections. So city going private, gets a pay day along with operator while fees are risen setting back the airport after all the work they have done wouldn't surprise me either.