^^^ Vegas is number two- wow!!
AA seems to go well out of its way to compete with SW on flights to Dallas from St. Louis, why don't they do the same with Chicago?
jlblues wrote:AA seems to go well out of its way to compete with SW on flights to Dallas from St. Louis, why don't they do the same with Chicago?
The difference between ORD and MDW make a big difference, just the same as DFW vs. DAL. SW and AA compete quite well in both markets when you look at their yields.
It appears KLM is looking at entering mid-size markets in the United States. They have entered Portland, Hartford (operated by NWA). They are considering entering Pittsburgh. Hopefully they are considering STL!
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsbu ... 42731.html
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsbu ... 42731.html
Thanks for all the info, but us common folk don't know all of the codes. Could you speak in plain English once in a while? 
MattnSTL wrote:Thanks for all the info, but us common folk don't know all of the codes. Could you speak in plain English once in a while?
I'll try to translate
SW = Southwest
NWA = Northwest
KLM = Royal Dutch Airlines (Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij)
DFW = Dallas Fort Worth
DAL = Dallas Love Field
ORD = O'Hare
MDW = Chicago Midway
- 34
Don't KLM and NWA code share already? And doesn't KLM already have direct flights from Memphis to Amsterdam because of this code share? If true, its doubtful they'd pick St. Louis as one of its target markets.
steveinphila wrote:Don't KLM and NWA code share already? And doesn't KLM already have direct flights from Memphis to Amsterdam because of this code share? If true, its doubtful they'd pick St. Louis as one of its target markets.
Yes. KLM and Northwest have some type of agreement for both code sharing and flight operations. NWA doesn't have any staff in Europe, it is all handled by KLM. The article cites Pittsburgh as a potential new route for NWA/KLM. Memphis already has daily A330 service to Amsterdam, and they are looking for service to Northwest (NW) hub at Tokyo-Narita (NRT). They have talked about running a daily Boeing 787 some time in the coming years.
I think this is very significant for St. Louis and I think it isn't a question of if but when we will see regularly scheduled transatlantic service. A combination of things such as the Boeing 787/Airbus A350 (both of which allow for smaller loads and superb range), EU open skies, Lambert's incentive program, and the weak dollar (which is both good and bad) are all good for new flights to Europe at Lambert.
- 277
I read today that Big Sky Airlines is downsizing significantly, in fact altogether eliminating its east coast routes, which are primarily routed to Cincinnati and Boston. Cape Girardeau-Stl used to be a Regions route. There maybe others. I wonder if Great Lakes has any interest in picking those routes up, as they have 4 or 5 routes at St. Louis now?
May interest some of you to know (if you haven't looked at the MidAmerica St. Louis Airport thread)... Direct International service to Shannon, Ireland looks like it is coming to MidAmerica St. Louis.
http://www.bnd.com/homepage/story/209155.html
http://www.bnd.com/homepage/story/209155.html
Interesting article in tomorrows PD about prospects for a route to LGW:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/busine ... enDocument
Could this be hinting something in the works?
Here is a link to some discussion about it:
http://www.airliners.net/discussions/ge ... n/3766466/
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/busine ... enDocument
Could this be hinting something in the works?
Here is a link to some discussion about it:
http://www.airliners.net/discussions/ge ... n/3766466/
^I think it's wishful thinking. AA is content and has been for some time. They don't have the aircraft either. NW/KLM don't have an appropriate aircraft or operational structure able to support it. St. Louis as a whole lacks the corporate traffic/subsidizing, high fare traffic and O&D passengers. I'm sticking to my feeling that it won't happen in the near future.
- 3,428
Billkn wrote:^I think it's wishful thinking. AA is content and has been for some time. They don't have the aircraft either. NW/KLM don't have an appropriate aircraft or operational structure able to support it. St. Louis as a whole lacks the corporate traffic/subsidizing, high fare traffic and O&D passengers. I'm sticking to my feeling that it won't happen in the near future.
I think AA is shortsighted just going for business people who like to change planes in Chicago and Dallas. I try to avoid both places like the plague, with their very long taxiways and frequent plane congestion that make you miss your connection. With Southwest going after their business passengers here with direct flights, I think AA will eventually be reduced to people who fly between Dallas and Chicago unless they work to decongest those hubs and add direct flights to major cities like Detroit or Phoenix, vs. Oklahoma City.
Another reason AA hasn't jumped on this opportunity is simply because they are short on aircraft (besides the 28 oldest MD-80s in storage). AA is also in desperate need of 777s and 787s, to replace the 767s. Don't expect the 757s to be going anywhere anytime soon-they are starting to refurbish them. AA returned the leased TWA 757s earlier this (last year 
) as the leases were up. Many fliers favored the TWA 757s over the AA 757s as they were newer (delivered 1996-2001) and had quieter engines.
With their recent order of 737s that had been differed, per their gentleman's agreement with Boeing they have the right to purchase the 787 at a set price (well below list). They will order the 787, however it will be in the 2008/2009 time frame. Keep in mind, they didn't take delivery of their first 777 until 2000, when it was already in service for five years. Any future deliveries are on hold as far as AA is concerned as they are working with their unions on contracts.
Unfortunately, St. Louis is not high on their priorities and they would rather have a 767/777 on a Latin America route out of MIA than have a 767/777 operating STL-LON. Many of us here on Urban STL and on airliners.net (blog with thread attached on other post) know that St. Louis could sustain service through cargo and connecting traffic. The short answer is AA sees routes from DFW or MIA to Asia or Latin America more profitable than STL-LON.
Routes to Hawaii are notorious for producing poor yields on all routes for all carriers. Delta has reduced service and down sized to 757s, AA cut ORD-OGG (Maui), therefore I wouldn't expect us to get STL-HNL back soon.
In conclusion, it is not a question of if but when STL-LON will resume.
) as the leases were up. Many fliers favored the TWA 757s over the AA 757s as they were newer (delivered 1996-2001) and had quieter engines. With their recent order of 737s that had been differed, per their gentleman's agreement with Boeing they have the right to purchase the 787 at a set price (well below list). They will order the 787, however it will be in the 2008/2009 time frame. Keep in mind, they didn't take delivery of their first 777 until 2000, when it was already in service for five years. Any future deliveries are on hold as far as AA is concerned as they are working with their unions on contracts.
Unfortunately, St. Louis is not high on their priorities and they would rather have a 767/777 on a Latin America route out of MIA than have a 767/777 operating STL-LON. Many of us here on Urban STL and on airliners.net (blog with thread attached on other post) know that St. Louis could sustain service through cargo and connecting traffic. The short answer is AA sees routes from DFW or MIA to Asia or Latin America more profitable than STL-LON.
Routes to Hawaii are notorious for producing poor yields on all routes for all carriers. Delta has reduced service and down sized to 757s, AA cut ORD-OGG (Maui), therefore I wouldn't expect us to get STL-HNL back soon.
In conclusion, it is not a question of if but when STL-LON will resume.
- 3,428
b777stl wrote:
Unfortunately, St. Louis is not high on their priorities and they would rather have a 767/777 on a Latin America route out of MIA than have a 767/777 operating STL-LON. ... The short answer is AA sees routes from DFW or MIA to Asia or Latin America more profitable than STL-LON.
Well lately AA is not high on my list of priorities, and I'm a gold AAdvantage flyer. I'm finding Southwest and Northwest more profitable for me with better non-stops to some cities. But I am flying AA to SFO next week because they have a nice 9:15 AM nonstop to SFO that gets me to San Jose by 1 PM without going through Dallas or Chicago.
- 466
so it looks like there are to be more flights to denver starting in may. it's part of a package to expand at dia, but hey, that makes four airlines that fly non stop to denver. good for me. options are good.
- 277
That's going to hurt Frontier. All of a sudden Southwest has this huge presence in Denver. But good news for STL also. That's got to put Southwest's daily departures from Lambert at or near 100.
- 466
if i had my preference, i would take frontier. in denver i can walk to the gate and not take the underground tram thingy to concourse c, plus the security line to the walk way is always much shorter. and in st louis, there is only one gate, so when you need to speak with someone, it's not a hassle. one time last winter i had a flight when there was to be one of those big snow storms. i called the frontier customer service number, but the wait time was 2 hours, so it was faster for me to hop on metrolink, go to the ticket counter and get a seat for that night.
- 667
stlterp wrote:Countdown to AA pulling out of Denver? It's already downsized to RJs...
I would not be surprised if AA gets rid of the DEN flights after SWA starts their 3 times daily service.
I was in Denver last month for a stop over on my way to LA for Christmas, used United and flew from STL-DEN on a B737-500, then from DEN-SNA (John Wayne/OC) on B757-200. That B737 jet is much nicer than riding in a cramped and bumpy RJ. Though on the way back to STL I rode on a CRJ-700, but that was a nightmare since I had to stay a night in O'**** because I missed my connecting flight because the plane was delayed in O'**** for about 4 hours. I didn't leave John Wayne Airport until 7pm, originally I was supposed to leave at 1pm from SNA-ORD. I did make United compansate me for the inconvienence in the form of $100 towards future travel and some bonus MileagePlus miles! Oh, when I landed in STL I see a United A320 at the gate and it was bound for DEN. At least STL still has some mainline aircraft and not all RJs!
I just wish STL would get some international flights to Europe or Asia. And I would like to see service return for STL-SJC (San Jose, CA) and STL-ONT (LA/Ontario). I miss the day I could fly to those airports for cheaper and non-stop than I coulf fly to LAX or SFO. I don't mind and wish Southwest would add those instead of adding destinations that AA, UAL, or NWA already have from STL.
United?!? It must have had to make an emergency landing or something...10-intuition wrote:Oh, when I landed in STL I see a United A320 at the gate and it was bound for DEN. At least STL still has some mainline aircraft and not all RJs!
- 667
jlblues wrote:United?!? It must have had to make an emergency landing or something...10-intuition wrote:Oh, when I landed in STL I see a United A320 at the gate and it was bound for DEN. At least STL still has some mainline aircraft and not all RJs!
The flight was probably suppose use B737s or CRJs, but I am guessing it was some last minute fleet shuffle by United and they substituted the A320. You have to remember that day (Dec 27th) a lot of people got stranded at DEN and ORD because of lack of crew/staff for United's operations. This also affected me when I flew to O'**** and missed my connection there. I ended up staying at the Hilton at the airport.
INCREASE IN SERVICE
Lambert-St. Louis International Airport has recorded a sixth straight month of growth in the number of boarding passengers. The Thanksgiving week travel rush proved to be good news for Lambert. 280,000 passengers traveled through Lambert during an 8-day period showing a 12 percent increase over projections. For all of November, Lambert recorded a six percent increase in boarding passengers and a four percent increase in connecting passengers.
CELL PHONE LOT
![]()
(St. Louis) Lambert-St. Louis International Airport has flipped the switch for a giant Airline Flight Display Board at its new Cell Phone Lot west of the Main Terminal on Lambert International Boulevard.
Lambert Cell Phone Lot users can now check the status of flights on the color LED board (6.5 ft H x 16 ft W) that shows all incoming flights within an hour of their scheduled arrival time. The arrival information is cycled through at 12 flights per page. Each flight is identified as “In Range,” “Arrived,” “Delayed,” or “Cancelled.”
Even if a flight is listed as “Arrived,” motorists are encouraged to wait until their arriving party actually calls them to say they are ready to picked up. The Cell Phone Lot is a free zone that allows motorists to conveniently wait for passengers without having to pay for short term parking, or crowd the pick up zones at the baggage claim areas. Motorists must remain with their vehicles at all times. Directional signs are in place on airport roadways to guide motorists to the Cell Phone Lot.
Lambert-St. Louis International Airport has recorded a sixth straight month of growth in the number of boarding passengers. The Thanksgiving week travel rush proved to be good news for Lambert. 280,000 passengers traveled through Lambert during an 8-day period showing a 12 percent increase over projections. For all of November, Lambert recorded a six percent increase in boarding passengers and a four percent increase in connecting passengers.
CELL PHONE LOT
(St. Louis) Lambert-St. Louis International Airport has flipped the switch for a giant Airline Flight Display Board at its new Cell Phone Lot west of the Main Terminal on Lambert International Boulevard.
Lambert Cell Phone Lot users can now check the status of flights on the color LED board (6.5 ft H x 16 ft W) that shows all incoming flights within an hour of their scheduled arrival time. The arrival information is cycled through at 12 flights per page. Each flight is identified as “In Range,” “Arrived,” “Delayed,” or “Cancelled.”
Even if a flight is listed as “Arrived,” motorists are encouraged to wait until their arriving party actually calls them to say they are ready to picked up. The Cell Phone Lot is a free zone that allows motorists to conveniently wait for passengers without having to pay for short term parking, or crowd the pick up zones at the baggage claim areas. Motorists must remain with their vehicles at all times. Directional signs are in place on airport roadways to guide motorists to the Cell Phone Lot.
Does anybody actually use the cell phone lots? Admittedly, I've only been to the airport at 5am or 11pm, recently, but on neither occasion have I seen more than 2 vehicles waiting in the lot, myself included. I've even seen a few cars I believed were headed to the lot - traveling down the airport road at 30mph - make u-turns before they get there.
- 284
Mill204 wrote:Does anybody actually use the cell phone lots? Admittedly, I've only been to the airport at 5am or 11pm, recently, but on neither occasion have I seen more than 2 vehicles waiting in the lot, myself included. I've even seen a few cars I believed were headed to the lot - traveling down the airport road at 30mph - make u-turns before they get there.
I was in there last night, 7-ish. There were about a half-dozen cars, maybe 8. Not exactly jammed, but being used.
It is a long way off from the terminal, though, especially if you're coming from the east.