AirTran Airways Lambert Field

b777stl · PostJul 29, 2007#12007-07-29T01:49+00:00

Has anyone had an opportunity to fly AirTran into Lambert yet? I came in on the evening flight 781 today from Atlanta. This not only was my first time on AirTran in St. Louis, it was also my first time in several years. I usually take Delta to Atlanta, however this was the only way for me to get home tonight.

Upon arrival at Lambert, we had to wait almost forty five (45) minutes from scheduled arrival for our luggage. This is much longer than usual (from MY experience at Lambert on other carriers). AirTran plans to expand from here in the near future. Has anyone else had the opportunity to travel on AirTran at Lambert?

southslider · PostJul 29, 2007#22007-07-29T04:05+00:00

Yes, I flew AirTran to/from Charlotte via Atlanta recently, but I didn't have any checked luggage. Personally, I'd fly them again.

b777stl · PostJul 29, 2007#32007-07-29T13:59+00:00

How long were you in ATL? If I had to fly that route, I would do AA or Us Air, although they are regional jets. Too bad AA is not replacing our STL-ATL route with Md-80s on select runs. Currently, they run seven Embraer 145s on this route. Delta has six MD-80s and one CRJ-700/900. I predict that at some point they will add mainline, as AirTran grows in popularity here. Also, expect AirTran to begin routing their new 737s through STL as they are always receiving deliveries. In two years, they'll have more 737s than 717s.

shadrach · PostJul 30, 2007#42007-07-30T12:35+00:00

I just flew in Friday evening on Airtran flight 781 (arrive @ 5:00)

We had to wait that long too. And the sign at baggage claim (M5) said something like:Sign Test 781.

Rant-

People from the flight were asking me where the flight luggage was coming in. (I know because it was on the arrival board.) I then asked the information desk why the sign didn't say AirTran and they shrugged, said it was AirTran's problem and went back to her magazine.

(Argh! Second-class airport with second-class employees)

b777stl · PostJul 30, 2007#52007-07-30T13:29+00:00

People from the flight were asking me where the flight luggage was coming in. (I know because it was on the arrival board.) I then asked the information desk why the sign didn't say AirTran and they shrugged, said it was AirTran's problem and went back to her magazine.

(Argh! Second-class airport with second-class employees)

Lambert really needs to reconsider it's future. Considering AA has 4 out of 6 claims, we either need more claims, fewer claims for AA, or more flights on AA to justify it. M3 and M4 are used for American Eagle/American Connection, while M1 and M2 are for mainline service.

The new 'Airport Experience' program will not do much to solve this problem. They are simply replacing all six claims.

In my opinion, the whole program is a joke. Our airport will be just like Cleveland or San Antonio, which have been refreshed but are by no means state of the art. I think just starting with a new terminal and replacing concourse by concourse is best.

The city is too busy patting themselves on the back, with the display above the C/D checkpoint. [/code]

PostJul 30, 2007#62007-07-30T14:13+00:00

AirTran announced that they will be offering STL-SRQ seasonally beginning November 15th. The route will be operated by Boeing 717 aircraft.

AirTran isn't paying any fees to St. Louis for the first 12 months of the route, and they are likely not paying anything to Sarasota Bradenton. (Sarasota doesn't want their airport to close due to it's proximity to Tampa)

JetBlue entered that market last year with service to New York-JFK, and they won't pay anything for six months.

shadrach · PostJul 30, 2007#72007-07-30T14:17+00:00

Is this in addition to the Orlando service?

b777stl · PostJul 30, 2007#82007-07-30T16:11+00:00

Yes! This is in addition to Orlando. This will be seasonal initially, however I suspect if people keepbuying tickets they'll continue the service. They have an $89 (one way) online special which must be booked by 8/31 and travel by 12/19.

cmd+h · PostJul 30, 2007#92007-07-30T16:36+00:00

I travel a lot for business and, in my experience, throughout 2007 Lambert always has a 45 minutes wait for luggage with any airline. Plus, I've had more of my luggage destroyed and/or lost at Lambert this year than I ever have in my entire life!

They don't score high on my list of places to fly into right now. Too bad I live here

10-intuition · PostJul 30, 2007#102007-07-30T19:07+00:00

CMD+H wrote:I travel a lot for business and, in my experience, throughout 2007 Lambert always has a 45 minutes wait for luggage with any airline. Plus, I've had more of my luggage destroyed and/or lost at Lambert this year than I ever have in my entire life!

They don't score high on my list of places to fly into right now. Too bad I live here

I recently flew to Buffalo-Niagara Int'l Airport earlier this month using NWA. I used this airport since flying to Toronto from STL has gotten so expensive and I didn't want to have the nightmare of stopping at O'Hare or flying on Air Canada's small CRJ-200. Once I arrived in Buffalo I rented a car to drive to Toronto to see my relatives and friends. Buffalo's airport is surprisingly very nice and very modern. The waiting for my luggage at baggage claim there took only 20 minutes. However, when I got back to STL it was 55 minutes of waiting before I got my luggage, M2 also had luggage from a Delta flight from Atlanta too. They need to speed up the baggage claim process. I don't understand how STL's airport can get away with this. The airport is the first impression someone gets of the city when someone arrives. Detroit Metro and Buffalo-Niagara are much nicer airports than the main terminal in STL. The one thing I gripe about Buffalo's airport is TSA security checkpoint, that line took almost 2 hours to get through I barely made it onto my flight (5 minutes before doors closed!).

Plus, its nice to see Air Tran adding flights to STL, especially that SRQ route. However, STL still keeps getting hosed by ****ty AA. I still can't get a good price I want on airfares to places like Austin, San Fran, or Toronto!

I hope Virgin America chooses STL has a hub, it would help rid of AA's dominance and arrogance towards STL.

Sorry for going off topic, but I had to vent.

b777stl · PostAug 02, 2007#112007-08-02T13:36+00:00

I hope Virgin America chooses STL has a hub, it would help rid of AA's dominance and arrogance towards STL.

I think it is highly unlikely that Virgin America will pick STL as a hub. For several reasons:

a) They will need to have significant operations in SFO before they will be looking for another hub

b) They will likely want somewhere that offers a large number of O&D pax in addition to connecting.

c) Don Carty, AA ceo (1998-2003) serves as chairman for Virgin America. He was one of the advocates for AA to purchase TWA, and later to drop our operations here. I can tell you he doesn't think highly of St. Louis and will not want Virgin America to have any large scale operations here.

While I hope St. Louis can get some more flights, I think we should be counting on more operations by AA, WN (Southwest), FL (AirTran), F9 (Frontier) and B6 (JetBlue).

AA likely won't do much in response to FL initally, (other than match their fares) however I can see some new routes in the future. (Vegas was always packed on the 757s and I don't know why we are down to one MD-80. I would expect a 757 on this route before the holiday season)

Now, I could see JetBlue having a presence similar to what they have in BOS. It took them two years after entering the market to build to what they have now. I can picture the D concourse packed with A320s and E190s

shadrach · PostAug 02, 2007#122007-08-02T13:52+00:00

^ I think that's the best course. AirTran and Southwest and now Airtran (keep addin' boys!) are good tenants for Lambert.

If Frontier and Northwest could keep adding flights--bits and pieces--then frequency and options will help fill out the consourses.

Virgin would give STL a 'cool factor' it desperately needs. Even kirky airlines like Jet Blue and Ted would do that.

But what I desire - as we all do - is the return of non-stop international flights.

b777stl · PostAug 02, 2007#132007-08-02T14:02+00:00

shadrach, I think you have it right. One thing however, don't expect Ted to come to St. Louis-ever. Ted is operated by United with its Crew and A320 aircraft in a one class config. Ted primarily serves UA's hubs and leisure destinations (such as TPA, MCO, LAS).

Hopefully, we can can score some LHR service with the EU free skies (this was a major benefit to STL as any airline could operate this route pending they can get a slot, which isn't an issue here, but is at LHR) Currenly, AA is the only one that can operate STL-LGW an hasn't operated it since 2003.

shadrach · PostAug 02, 2007#142007-08-02T14:20+00:00

I'm not familiar with routes/FAA and all that.

First I know nothing of airline regualtion so maybe you all can elucidate for me.

What little I know or understand is that an airline is granted landing rights at an airport. So AA can land in Gatwick. Where it chooses to originate from is up to AA.

Or how does the new law help STL?

b777stl · PostAug 02, 2007#152007-08-02T15:08+00:00

shadrach , not a problem I don't mind explaining. The European Union (EU) recently passed open skies which will allow virtually any carrier, from virtually anywhere in the world to fly to European airports, pending they can get a slot. This will take effect March 31, 2008. Until then, AA is the only carrier that has the rights to operate service from STL-LGW (London Gatwick).

This will be an asset to STL because AA is trying to send as many of their operations as they can to London's Heathrow, pending they can get a slot. While there are no guarantees AA will start STL-LHR, this was a big step in the right direction for St. Louis to get service. This would allow BA (British Airways) for example to start a route pending they could get a slot here (which of course wouldn't be an issue, as the airport authority would love to have them and give them incentives $$)

On a typical day, an average of 85-100 people fly from St. Louis to the London area airports. This number alone will not make it profitable for an airline to operate that route. However, as our feed of connecting flights continues to grow with more mainline service, AA could send more people connecting through STL. This would be ideal, as those are the people who typically spend money at the shops and concessions.

BA and AA are partners under the Oneworld Alliance (among other carriers), therefore their flights codeshare. This would allow people to fly LHR-STL on BA and then fly STL-SEA (Seattle, WA) for example on AA.

This will also benefit people in our area who want to travel to Africa, Middle East, or parts of Asia. Many of those flights leave from London Heathrow, which has the most international passengers of any airport in the entire world. Right now, flights to those places from Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas/Fort Worth, and New York JFK are limited. Therefore people in STL have to fly to one of those cities, then fly to London, then fly to where ever they're going. Make sense?

shadrach · PostAug 02, 2007#162007-08-02T15:32+00:00

yeah. I didn't realize that routes were assigned to origin/destination cities. I thought it was you got a slot at the airport.

IOW, when AA aquired TWA, I thought they took the Gatwick and Paris landing rights and gave them to Chicago.

This new ruling will be good. The argument for STL as a connector will also be true for Indy and Memphis and so on. The competition among 2nd tier cities for international flight will be intense.

b777stl · PostAug 02, 2007#172007-08-02T23:59+00:00

I know Indy has been working to get some international service as well. The Indy market is very different than St. Louis because most of their point-to-point routes are operated by LCC's (Low Cost Carriers) such as FL or WN. NW does have a focus city at IND, however they only serve leisure destinations, all of which already have international flights. Therefore, they really couldn't get the connections that would sustain their service.

As for Memphis, it has considerable presence by NW (comparable to AA's presence here). NW currently operates daily service to Amsterdam from MEM. I would say we have a better chance of getting BA than they would because AA codeshares with BA. On the other hand, NW could certainly have service with connection to many cities such as Milwaukee, Omaha, and San Antonio that also don't have service. Finally, London service will be unlikely as they can easily reach Amsterdam from their area.

PostNov 12, 2007#182007-11-12T01:28+00:00

Now that AirTran has possession of gate B-10 at Lambert, I would expect them to start some new routes, possibly BWI, LAS, and maybe even MIA. There is expected to be a major announcement at Lambert on Thursday (newsworthy enough that the airport announced it before the carrier(s) involved). Additionally, Thursday is the date that they start their STL-SRQ non-stop service with the Boeing 717.

stlmo314 · PostNov 12, 2007#192007-11-12T15:53+00:00

What do you think the possibility is that they'll announce LGA service, since Airtran just took over ATA's gates there?

b777stl · PostNov 12, 2007#202007-11-12T17:32+00:00

STLMO314 wrote:What do you think the possibility is that they'll announce LGA service, since Airtran just took over ATA's gates there?

I am sure they have considered STL-LGA. They purchased six slots from ATA as they are ending service to Chicago-Midway in February. FL (AirTran) currently serves LGA from ATL and CAK (Akron-Canton) only. There are other markets that they will pursue with the valuable LGA slots before STL. I predict they will ass BWI, BOS, and of course more to ATL.

It would be great for them to start the route, as it would help drive down fares on STL-LGA for AA's cash cow on that route. As for New York service, I would expect B6 (Jetblue) to start STL-JFK before FL (AirTran) starts STL-LGA.

We'll find out more on Thursday...

dredger · PostNov 13, 2007#212007-11-13T21:49+00:00

I would take either more Airtran flights or JetBlue coming in (prefer Airtran since they might try to build upon something more substantial in the future). Anything to get more direct connections. I have to get New Orleans for business on short notice. AA pride themselves in getting a premium on short notice direct flights! Have enought time so the indirect and cheaper flight will prevail.

tm8951 · PostNov 14, 2007#222007-11-14T14:59+00:00

b777stl wrote:Now that AirTran has possession of gate B-10 at Lambert, I would expect them to start some new routes, possibly BWI, LAS, and maybe even MIA. There is expected to be a major announcement at Lambert on Thursday (newsworthy enough that the airport announced it before the carrier(s) involved). Additionally, Thursday is the date that they start their STL-SRQ non-stop service with the Boeing 717.

Interesting, hopefully some good news for Lambert. I bet the announcement has to do with Airtran as well. They have to be adding more flights if they are adding an additional gate because they are only operating 6 daily flights. We are definitely on the up swing in carriers adding flights, with Southwest's recent announcement of new service to PHL and Frontier adding a new flight to DEN for a total of 4 daily. Southwest will now be at 75 daily once service to PHL starts. They haven't had that many flights since the 90's.

b777stl · PostJan 16, 2008#232008-01-16T02:22+00:00

Anyone been on AirTran's STL-SRQ-STL flight? If so, was it full? I am hoping to head down to Florida this weekend and non-rev this flight. It looks like there are a few empty seats on the non-rev system. I've only been on FL (AirTran) to ATL from here.

PostJan 22, 2008#242008-01-22T03:21+00:00

January 19, 2008

AirTran Airways 796

Depart: STL 10:30 (actual 10:21) Gate B12 Arrive: SRQ 13:50 (actual 13:42) Gate B12

Boeing 717 N923AT (Manufactured 2005)

Seat 11A (29% load factor)

Ticket Price: ID-90 Non-Revenue

I decided to head down to Florida this past weekend and escape the cold weather here in St. Louis. I had never been to Sarasota before and wanted to see Siesta Key, The Ringling Museum, and warm weather!

I took MetroLink to the airport as I usually do. This time I decided to use the MetroLink long term parking at Brentwod I-64 on the 9th floor as it was a bit chilly to walk to the train with luggage. MetroLink was fairly busy for an early Saturday morning.

Arrived at Lambert within 38 minutes and checked in at AirTran counter. It turns out our aircraft had overnighted here as AirTran canceled the early morning flight from ATL (due to weather there).

Later headed to B gate security, where there wasn't much of a line; only a few people from my flight and about a dozen people with AA boarding passes.

Once through security, headed to gate B12 to find our aircraft, however no CSA (customer service agent) or AirTran personnel. I had the experience of waiting on one of the wonderful blue rockers, which was a big hit among the children on our flight. Once our CSA arrived at the gate, I was called and issued a boarding pass and seat assignment on the flight. I was talking to him about why AirTran no longer uses B10, and he explained that at this time of year they simply don't need it as their turn time is very short. (Immediately after we taxied FL from Orlando had just landed)

Several announcements were made for revenue passengers to purchase upgrades to Business class for $60, however it appeared that no one took them up on the offer.

Boarding was quick as there were only 34 pax on a plane seating 117 (12F/105Y). Flight attendants were professional and made us feel welcome on the flight. Free headsets were passed out and an announcement was made regarding the free XM radio programming.

After a safety demo, we took off on runway 12R/30L for SRQ.

Beverage service commenced shortly after take off (and went very quickly!). Pretzels and Biscoff cookies were served along a choice of beverage. There was a crowd that each ordered two drinks (at 11 a.m.), so they kept the FA busy. They had a bit of a problem as AirTran doesn't accept cash on board. I had a coffee with cream, however the coffee was terrible so I asked for a Cherry Coke to wake myself up. While enjoying the Cherry Coke I tuned into easy listening music on XM. FAs made frequent passes for refills; and I had a Vitamin Water (if only my carrier AA offered Vitamin Water

).

After beverage service, one FA took a seat in Business while the other two were in the back talking and doing sudoku puzzles, and were still approachable and professional if we needed anything.

About an hour later, we started our descent for Sarasota. FAs made frequent passes for trash.

Overall, I had a great experience as a non-rev.

I talked to the CSAs in SRQ and they said the route has performed at 50% LF at very best. They suspect AirTran will pull the route (they have done that in the past when incentives run out). I know that they got incentives from both Lambert and Sarasota for this flight. However, I think they will wait it out and see. Keep in mind, AirTran has among the lowest operating costs with the B717 as it is a very economical aircraft and their labor costs (non-union) are significantly less than AA or WN (Southwest). I sure hope this doesn't happen, however they need people buying tickets to sustain the service!

I have pics to post, however I'm having trouble posting them on a Mac (any help please??)

[/img]

jmedwick · PostJan 22, 2008#252008-01-22T20:37+00:00

^ Just a question, but has AirTran been running adds locally to trumpet their service?

St. Louisians are the type that without someone knocking them over the head with adds telling them service is available and ideally cheaper than AA, folks won't make the switch.