dredger wrote: ↑Sep 16, 2017
symphonicpoet wrote: ↑Sep 15, 2017
Before we go any further in this discussion, I'd like to suggest that everyone look at Southwest's other major mid-continent stations on a map. Dallas Love, Chicago Midway, and Houston Hobby. Go. I'll wait. Take a look. Just a glance, really. It won't take long. All three have something fairly simple and obvious in common. Something that dramatically does not pertain at their number five mid-continent station. (And I think the largest one presently without benefit of an operating base.)
They do have an odd network. One which doesn't rely quite so heavily on massive hubs. But those operating bases are suggestive. And the number of connections. They surely do have at least modest hubs. And as they grow they will need to grow them.
Not sure were you are going with these comments or simply my poor reading comprehension. But as frequent business traveler who frequents Hobby wan who lived in Chicago while old Midway was torn down and replaced piece by piece at a time the one common thread to me is they all these airports have relatively new and bigger terminals for an expanding Southwest. Believe Houston Hobby is continuing to invest in its terminals by adding three or maybe four new international gates.
Maybe I'm crazy, but it seems obvious to me: All three are really quite small. All three are geographically very confined. None has any room to expand. They've got between eighteen and thirtytwo gates. They're really not much bigger than the east terminal. And I'm not remotely sure where you could expand any of them. They're deep in cities. They're surrounded by tight runway configurations that look like they'd be a bear to change. I'm guessing all three of them are presently more or less at their maximum capacity with current technology. In short, they're all very small. So where does Southwest grow their mid-continent connecting traffic? I think we've been seeing the answer to that. And Kansas City can pitch a new terminal all night long, but they're talking about building something about half the size of what we've already got. Their advantage is that they're a cheaper station. A quarter of a billion dollars of new terminal might change that. And we'd still have more capacity. Lambert could use some tweaks here and there, but I would be cautious before committing to spending in nine figures. A new linear concourse could run into that very quickly. I don't really see how that's any less complex than KCI's nine figure proposals for their new terminal. (Much of which can be done without disrupting operations, since the place is so very large geographically.) Keep in mind, the only reason Southwest is in T2 is because TWA was in T1 and there wasn't enough room for them. We built them a new terminal. Well, we have a nice refurbished terminal that's now half empty. More than half. It's much bigger and it's much more convenient for connecting traffic. The C concourse alone is larger than all of T2. AA isn't using it for connections. It has six gates which can be isolated for international. The customs hall isn't ideal for O&D, but it'd be fine for connections and locals would live with it. I don't know anyone's lease terms, but I expect something could be worked out if, or when necessary.
symphonicpoet wrote:
And if, at some point, it becomes necessary to connect from DL to WN then at that point we can find a way to connect A to C via a transformed (and by then likely open) B. It will be interesting to see how all of this unfolds.
Will make my pitch again, a vision that includes new linear Terminal I concourse along the alignment of A & C with legacy carriers & current carriers on one side, new international gates in the middle and Southwest on the other side consolidates, updates and right sizes the airport while freeing up a significant amount of tarmac space for non aviation revenues. You could essentially build and replace without significant impacts on current facilities while maintaining & utilizing T1 Main Concourse with its available baggage space and iconic ticketing space/roof which is still by far the best part of Lambert IMO
Don't get me wrong, I would love to see A and B/C/D/E connected. But they've never been connected for good reason. The geometry makes it a little complex. (When I previously proposed it I wasn't so aware of that.) And everyone that's in the same frequent flyer universe is already inside of one concourse. Airline schedules do not now connect between concourses and even in TWA hub days only did so inside of B/C/D which were already connected. And people don't usually self connect so the utility would be marginal. I'd love it, but I don't see a what it would really do from the airline's perspective. Sure, they'll pay for useful things. How is it useful? I'll agree that it's sexy. I'm just not sure what the airlines get from it.
My take is at some point Southwest is going to demand more out of STL sooner than later. Pure speculation, but I wouldn't be surprised in back room conversations that the team behind MCI new terminal is pitching Southwest constantly & the obvious choice is shift STL operations west. No one plays nice even if airports are in the same state.
Could be easily off base but it would be great to be the fly on the wall when and or if Southwest has told Airport Director what Lambert needs to deliver on for continued expansion and or a role in expanded North America/international route network. To me it has nothing to do with cheapest facility as it is clear that a lot of Southwest focus city operations and expansions are happening at terminals with significant investment. Not too mention the fact that Southwest started expanded STL ops even though landing fees were relatively significant. T2 was a step that landed a big fish. The big fish got bigger so what do you do next?
Southwest started here when it was cheaper. Before W1W, which raised landing fees through the roof. They initially expand here because AA left the O&D way the crap underserved, so it was worth their while. Now it seems to me that they're expanding because they really have no choice and this is quite possibly their best option. (Which, by the way, is also why TWA expanded here. They wanted Chicago as I understand it. Chicago was too expensive by far. And there was a lot of competition. And MCI wouldn't fix the mess TWA had just then ordered. So we got them.)
As it happens, I very much believe Southwest is already asking for more. And they're getting it. I don't think Lambert rebuilt the end of D on spec. And that's likely an interim fix. And now they're rebuilding more of C. (Or at least floating plans to do so.) Why? Who's expanding over there? American?
Also, just for the record, Southwest was already here and they weren't the big fish in T2 days. That was the early 90s. TWA was still growing their hub here. We were happy to see Southwest, as TWA prices were, at times, rather brutal. Southwest kept that in check. They do that everywhere they can. That was pretty much their MO then. They moved in where the big boys had hubs, usually in smaller airports like Dallas Love or Chicago Midway. They offered something cheaper. If Mid America had been up and running in the 80s I rather expect Southwest would be in Belleville now and we wouldn't be having precisely the same conversation. Now they are themselves one of the big boys. The shoe is on the other foot. And as such, they're beginning to find their mid-continent stations a little cramped. But there is one where expansion would be . . . trivial.
