They are adding a 2nd baggage input (between E24 and E29) so they can load baggage twice as fast from the planes to the carousels. Right now there is only one so that explains long waits when 14 planes land at once and they get backed up waiting their turn to drop the bags into the system.The Mayor wrote:Good to know about them at least building to to handle another story in the future, they will surely need it. Any details on these airside upgrades? I hadn't heard anything about that.jshank83 wrote:I think construction is supposed to start in the fall. Not sure of an exact date. The airside upgrades might be sooner and are probably needed the most.The Mayor wrote: ^ Looks pretty good. I fly primarily out of T2 (in fact I don't think I've ever even been in A) but I'd like to see a little sprucing up on the T2 side. It looks pretty good already, but I'd like to see similar lighting fixtures and new signage like the renovated A and C gates. Especially in the old D gates Southwest has re-purposed, it does look a little more drab down there, though busy as hell if this past Monday was any indication. Bodes well for Southwest's upcoming terminal and gate expansion.
Speaking of that, anyone know when the new T2 baggage expansion is scheduled to start construction? Also I think they're missing an opportunity to build an expansion to the upper level ticketing and security checkpoint area at the same time. It is getting way too crowded in there. While this has been discussed here and I fully understand Southwest's reasoning for wanting to stay put, I really wish they were in T1.
Cost was the reason it isn't being built as 2 stories now but they are building it to be able to support a 2nd story in the future.
^ Gotcha. At first I thought you were talking about airside improvements in the terminal (aesthetics and whatnot) but this makes more sense, and is good news.
Dual Customs Cargo Facility must still be moving along.
A. Draft Ordinance authorizing the Director of Airports of The City of St. Louis to approve and execute the “Consent to Change In Ownership and Control Structure of Bi-National Gateway Terminal LLC” whereby the City consents to the change in ownership of Bi-National Gateway Terminal, LLC (“Bi-National”).
B. Draft Ordinance authorizing the Assignment and Assumption of Interest in Dual Customs Agreement and Consent of The City of St. Louis agreement by and between Bi-National Gateway Terminal, LLC (“Bi-National” or “Assignor”) and Brownsville International Air Cargo, Inc. (“BIAC” or “Assignee”), and The City of St. Louis (“City”) (the “Consent of Assignment Agreement”).
https://www.flystl.com/uploads/document ... 5-1-19.pdf
A. Draft Ordinance authorizing the Director of Airports of The City of St. Louis to approve and execute the “Consent to Change In Ownership and Control Structure of Bi-National Gateway Terminal LLC” whereby the City consents to the change in ownership of Bi-National Gateway Terminal, LLC (“Bi-National”).
B. Draft Ordinance authorizing the Assignment and Assumption of Interest in Dual Customs Agreement and Consent of The City of St. Louis agreement by and between Bi-National Gateway Terminal, LLC (“Bi-National” or “Assignor”) and Brownsville International Air Cargo, Inc. (“BIAC” or “Assignee”), and The City of St. Louis (“City”) (the “Consent of Assignment Agreement”).
https://www.flystl.com/uploads/document ... 5-1-19.pdf
- 66
Back in the late 90s what other airlines besides TWA and Southwest fly out of Lambert? Were the other airlines' gates all in concourse A? Did SW have a monopoly on the E gates back then as well?
Also when going through the concourse A security, it seems very jerry-rigged. It seems like the space it occupies was never designed to have a security checkpoint there, and is very cramped. Was A security originally somewhere else? Or was there much more room there before 9/11?
Also when going through the concourse A security, it seems very jerry-rigged. It seems like the space it occupies was never designed to have a security checkpoint there, and is very cramped. Was A security originally somewhere else? Or was there much more room there before 9/11?
^ jshank or others will probably have some more details but I do believe that Southwest has always used the East Terminal, I think it was actually built for them. I would imagine American, United, Northwest, Continental, and others that are now largely defunct and or merged with other airlines also served the airport, but I wouldn't know about particular gate assignments.
I've never flown from A, so I can't speak to your second question.
I've never flown from A, so I can't speak to your second question.
All major US airlines flew out of Lambert - American, Delta, United, Continental, Northwest, USAirways, America West. TWA had B, C & D. Southwest had the East Terminal. All other airlines were in A.Perseus767 wrote: Back in the late 90s what other airlines besides TWA and Southwest fly out of Lambert? Were the other airlines' gates all in concourse A? Did SW have a monopoly on the E gates back then as well?
Also when going through the concourse A security, it seems very jerry-rigged. It seems like the space it occupies was never designed to have a security checkpoint there, and is very cramped. Was A security originally somewhere else? Or was there much more room there before 9/11?
Originally, Concourse A security was 2-3 metal detectors where the exit from A is today. Post 9/11, the requirement for more sophisticated scanners required a rebuild of the security area into what it is today.
^Good info Greg. Greg is always good with info, especially from the past. I knew Delta/United have pretty much always been in A. And TWA in B/C/D. Ozark was in D I think also (but in the 80s). The rest I wasn't sure.
- 66
Thanks for the info. I fly often in/out of A. I thought A might have had a connector similar to B. I wish that was the case so you are not stuck there and could walk around C.
I didn't know that Terminal 2 was built for Southwest, I assumed it was built for TWA.
Security seems cramped in many older airports because, as stated, pre-9/11 security requirements were much laxer, requiring much less infrastructure, staff, and physical space.
AFAIK, the only way to move from A to any other concourse/terminal airside (i.e. without going through security again) is via a Cape Air (?) shuttle.
AFAIK, the only way to move from A to any other concourse/terminal airside (i.e. without going through security again) is via a Cape Air (?) shuttle.
- 985
^ From what I have heard some of the next generation equipment in development will be much less space intensive with better technology.
Also wasn't T2 built well after Southwest entered the market? Where was Southwest between the time they entered the market in the mid 1980s and construction of T2?
Also wasn't T2 built well after Southwest entered the market? Where was Southwest between the time they entered the market in the mid 1980s and construction of T2?
The B-C connector was not built until the late 90s. Prior to that, an out of security connection was required to go between B & C/D, which was obviously very inconvenient as TWA controlled all 3 concourses.Perseus767 wrote: Thanks for the info. I fly often in/out of A. I thought A might have had a connector similar to B. I wish that was the case so you are not stuck there and could walk around C.
A (much) smaller East Terminal existed prior to the opening of the current Terminal 2. I forget what the gate situation was because I only once flew Southwest before T2 opened. It was basically a small terminal which allowed access to Southwest's gates as well as Concourse D.imperialmog wrote: ^ From what I have heard some of the next generation equipment in development will be much less space intensive with better technology.
Also wasn't T2 built well after Southwest entered the market? Where was Southwest between the time they entered the market in the mid 1980s and construction of T2?
It saved my butt one time when I was working as a consultant any flew out every week. Got stuck behind an accident on 70 WB. My weekly Monday flight to Cleveland always left out of the very end of the D concourse. I took a chance by parking in the East Terminal garage and going through security there. Made it 5 minutes before departure. Would never have made it going through T1. Thankfully, it used the same gate as usual that day!
- 221
imperialmog wrote: ^ Also wasn't T2 built well after Southwest entered the market? Where was Southwest between the time they entered the market in the mid 1980s and construction of T2?
Southwest entered the STL market in 1985 and T2 opened in 1998.
Here's an interesting blog I found, which commemorated the 25th anniversary of SWA in STL, back in 2010.
SWA 25th Anniversary
Southwest always operated out of the East Terminal. They never operated out of Concourse A.frequentflyer wrote:Southwest entered the STL market in 1985 and T2 opened in 1998. If I recall, SWA operated out of Concourse A
- 221
^^^ Thanks for the clarification. I read your post just before mine where you mentioned the "much" smaller East Terminal. I've flown Southwest from their first days here and I remember their original setup was quite different than the present situation. I have flashes of memory, but can't remember how this all worked together.
I deleted the reference to Concourse A in my original post.
I deleted the reference to Concourse A in my original post.
Tidbit in news on city estimate board approving bond refinancing plan. Sounds like a small win in order get better rate on debt and a few more dollars back into the airport.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... e7120.html
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... e7120.html
I followed the exchange on Twitter a couple weeks ago. Without further justification, it really seemed that the Mayor and the President of the BoA were just intent on torpedoing the airport. I guess that a well-performing airport does not help the privatization cause politically...dredger wrote: Tidbit in news on city estimate board approving bond refinancing plan. Sounds like a small win in order get better rate on debt and a few more dollars back into the airport.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... e7120.html
Yep, the political lure of the pot of gold at the end of the airport privatization rainbow is too much for the political powers to be.
Unfortunately, I think this is a golden time to put forth plan for expanding T2 to the east on additional gates, baggage space and more importantly doable projects to rebuild part of the road way & re align a small part of metrolink to extend curbside and expand short term parking for Southwest with access to old D gates already in place. It would solidify SWA STL presence as focus city for years to come at a fraction of cost to what KC is trying to do with its new terminal in order to replace the very outdated arrangement they presently have. To me the biggest focus for city leaders should be long term vision for T2 expansion to east, Short term parking & hotel and T1 concourses
Unfortunately, I think this is a golden time to put forth plan for expanding T2 to the east on additional gates, baggage space and more importantly doable projects to rebuild part of the road way & re align a small part of metrolink to extend curbside and expand short term parking for Southwest with access to old D gates already in place. It would solidify SWA STL presence as focus city for years to come at a fraction of cost to what KC is trying to do with its new terminal in order to replace the very outdated arrangement they presently have. To me the biggest focus for city leaders should be long term vision for T2 expansion to east, Short term parking & hotel and T1 concourses
Why would the airport and Southwest spend that kind of money when SWA can simply just keep expanding into the D Concourse? The baggage area is already being expanded and it's being built so a second story could be added on should they need more landside space up top. There is plenty of gate space left in D for further SWA expansions in the future. Rerouting roadways, MetroLink, parking facilities, etc just doesn't seem at all like a smart use of limited airport funds when there are plenty of available gates just to the west. Southwest's presence is already solidified in St. Louis, they continue to grow and add dozens of flights, they like St. Louis more over Midway and are shifting connections down here from up there and they're putting up a sizable chunk of money for the currently planned baggage area extension. They're not going anywhere. KC desperately needs a new terminal, not to steal SWA from STL (LOL), but because of deferred maintenance, overhead costs, staffing and operational issues (multiple spread out checkpoints), disconnected terminals and a whole host of other design issues, issues that Lambert at it's present time doesn't suffer from.dredger wrote: Yep, the political lure of the pot of gold at the end of the airport privatization rainbow is too much for the political powers to be.
Unfortunately, I think this is a golden time to put forth plan for expanding T2 to the east on additional gates, baggage space and more importantly doable projects to rebuild part of the road way & re align a small part of metrolink to extend curbside and expand short term parking for Southwest with access to old D gates already in place. It would solidify SWA STL presence as focus city for years to come at a fraction of cost to what KC is trying to do with its new terminal in order to replace the very outdated arrangement they presently have. To me the biggest focus for city leaders should be long term vision for T2 expansion to east, Short term parking & hotel and T1 concourses
If someone is going to take the MetroLink from T2, a walk through a parking garage isn't going to stop them. Money would be better spent sprucing up that path than rerouting 250 ft closer to the terminal. Plus you could easily fit 4 gates in that parking lot without moving any roads.
As for Concourse D, worst case scenario it's a 6/10 mile walk from your gate to baggage claim. Which is doable, but might be the longest airport walk in the U.S. Off of a quick spot check, I found a 0.63 mile walk at JFK, but those appear to be pretty small gates.
As for Concourse D, worst case scenario it's a 6/10 mile walk from your gate to baggage claim. Which is doable, but might be the longest airport walk in the U.S. Off of a quick spot check, I found a 0.63 mile walk at JFK, but those appear to be pretty small gates.
St. Louis needs to focus on international. If nothing else, for talent recruitment.
Regarding T2 MetroLink—did it once. In January. That's a verrrry cold wait and walk.
Regarding T2 MetroLink—did it once. In January. That's a verrrry cold wait and walk.
How long do you think a limo or car service would last if the mentality is that they could keep using the same car until the wheels off while going down I70 after picking up a client?
My point is that infrastructure such as concourse D doesn't last forever and becomes more maintenance intensive as it ages, is often designed for the desired use at that time it was build (this case old TWA hub days), limits other options (hotel, short term parking and a lot of unused tarmac) and at some point you have to make an effort to replace. My bigger point is Lambert is a reflection and a front door to the region as a whole whether it be for business traveler or tourist and some day the region might wake up to its tier 3 status going on tier 4. A single story baggage add on addition of $15-20 million is not going to get you on a path of reversing the city status relative to others let alone change any perceptions as it when it comes to your aging facilities.
Going above and beyond will. I agree that you don't need new terminals but Concourse D needs to go IMO as a two cent arm chair planner and as frequent business traveler.
My point is that infrastructure such as concourse D doesn't last forever and becomes more maintenance intensive as it ages, is often designed for the desired use at that time it was build (this case old TWA hub days), limits other options (hotel, short term parking and a lot of unused tarmac) and at some point you have to make an effort to replace. My bigger point is Lambert is a reflection and a front door to the region as a whole whether it be for business traveler or tourist and some day the region might wake up to its tier 3 status going on tier 4. A single story baggage add on addition of $15-20 million is not going to get you on a path of reversing the city status relative to others let alone change any perceptions as it when it comes to your aging facilities.
Going above and beyond will. I agree that you don't need new terminals but Concourse D needs to go IMO as a two cent arm chair planner and as frequent business traveler.
I agree with everything you said except this snippit. Midway is maxed out. They don't like STL over Midway, they just don't have room to expand at midway so flights are being moved here. If they had room there I would have no doubt that they would keep as much up there as they could. They have to start moving connecting out of MDW so they can maximize O&D. Not to say STL wouldn't still be growing but having MDW and DAL maxed out has helped things.The Mayor wrote:they like St. Louis more over Midway
^ I thought I had read somewhere here, maybe a few pages back, they liked the runway layout better and something about snow removal. Can't remember the exact details though.
@dredger
St. Louis' status isn't going to change with a little 4 gate expansion to the east in an old parking lot. Nor would it with a full sized new terminal. St. Louis has way bigger perception issues and none of them are going to be fixed by aggressive airport expansion. People with an interest in stuff like this, like us, might put a lot thought into it (especially those of us that tend to hold onto the old TWA days), but your average person doesn't care too much, an airport is a place to pass though, not hang out in. I'm also a frequent user of the airport and honestly I think it's a fine front door to the region. D needs to be improved as I've mentioned here before (and likely could be without full scale demolition), I would like to see it widened a bit, maybe a nicer facade, but other than that there is more than enough capacity for any future growth.
Also that baggage extension is closer to $26 million and will be constructed with the option for a second floor should an upper level expansion become necessary, which I think eventually it will.
@dredger
St. Louis' status isn't going to change with a little 4 gate expansion to the east in an old parking lot. Nor would it with a full sized new terminal. St. Louis has way bigger perception issues and none of them are going to be fixed by aggressive airport expansion. People with an interest in stuff like this, like us, might put a lot thought into it (especially those of us that tend to hold onto the old TWA days), but your average person doesn't care too much, an airport is a place to pass though, not hang out in. I'm also a frequent user of the airport and honestly I think it's a fine front door to the region. D needs to be improved as I've mentioned here before (and likely could be without full scale demolition), I would like to see it widened a bit, maybe a nicer facade, but other than that there is more than enough capacity for any future growth.
Also that baggage extension is closer to $26 million and will be constructed with the option for a second floor should an upper level expansion become necessary, which I think eventually it will.