The beauty of a good leader, and I believe Hamm-Niebrugge was very much one such, is that they can elevate the people around them. Hopefully the team she has left behind her will continue some of the spectacular work she did, and he'll to make the next director better as well. Anyway, yes, spot in Shadrach.
Yes. Points 2 and 4 are really the same. I was just riffing. And saying Rhonda was ‚beyond capable‘ doesn’t do justice to how stellar of a job she did. I have so much admiration and respect. It’s rare to have someone with down-in-the-trenches knowledge, Strategic Vision, leadership and relationship building. She‘s one hell of a Venn Diagram.
I could see someone with Southwest experience as well. That would be a smart move.
I could see someone with Southwest experience as well. That would be a smart move.
I would absolutely positively agree on first two points. Rhonda was huge and the person they need to bring much needed guidance and leadership for her salary. So yes, I think it is reasonable to assume that the salary will be rising to meet the needs of a major airport rebuild..jshank83 wrote: ↑5:42 PM - 17 days ago2 for sureshadrach wrote: ↑12:16 AM - 17 days agoThe upward salary adjustment makes me ponder (but Not Limited to) a couple things:
1. STL was blessed to have Rhonda, a passionate, home-grown and ‚beyond capable’ director to serve in a role that probably demanded a higher salary.
2. They can’t attract the qualified candidate with the current amount.
3. they’ve identified a candidate and this is part of the negotiation
4. the Airport Commission, hiring consultants, are upping the number to get the individual (unicorn) that can steer a major rebuild, attract new Airlines, routes, frequencies and revenue. And that doesn’t come cheap.
Stickig with a lower salary (like College Football programs) telegraphs that the Status Quo is good enough.
Here‘s hoping they find the right person. I wouldn’t be surprised of it were an international hire.
What is eye popping to me is STL literally buying into a unicorn story and it will be too much. in other words, maybe they have found someone but at what point is it to good to be true or paying too much for what you might actually get. Maybe a college football analogy. Colorado school paid top dollar for Deion "Prime Time" Sanders and Indiana paid pretty good money to a guy lived for coaching football.
Ha. I totally get that! Nebraska is my analogy. Colorado is good too. The St. Louis School Board has that story many times over; I do worry about that.
My gut tells me this is different. (Fingers crossed.) The privitazation effort may be too recent exercise the same folly. Unicorns do exist, silver bullets don‘t.
BTW, in disclosure, I’ve posted here how I thought that could have been positive if it played out to the next phase. The way it ended up proved many right and how naive I was. Perhaps nothing‘s changed.
My gut tells me this is different. (Fingers crossed.) The privitazation effort may be too recent exercise the same folly. Unicorns do exist, silver bullets don‘t.
BTW, in disclosure, I’ve posted here how I thought that could have been positive if it played out to the next phase. The way it ended up proved many right and how naive I was. Perhaps nothing‘s changed.
August international loads (Customs)
Combined both ways
Lufthansa Frankfurt 90%
British London 88.6%
Air Canada Montreal 79.6%
Air Canada Toronto 79%
Combined both ways
Lufthansa Frankfurt 90%
British London 88.6%
Air Canada Montreal 79.6%
Air Canada Toronto 79%
Surprised to see Montreal surprising Toronto, even if it is only slightly, and presumably a smaller aircraft. Love the Europe numbers.
Toronto is 2 flights a day, Montreal is one. So Toronto basically had twice the passengers. Plane sizes are the same in July-October.symphonicpoet wrote: ↑5:15 AM - 13 days agoSurprised to see Montreal surprising Toronto, even if it is only slightly, and presumably a smaller aircraft. Love the Europe numbers.
That makes sense. Still, happy to see Montreal having similar load factors. I hope they're both good enough to keep things going. (I say on my way back to Lambert via in flight Wi-Fi.)
Every year at Christmas time my daughter flies non-stop from relatives in St Louis to relatives in Little Rock on SW. But SW now killed that flight & makes you change planes in Dallas making the trip twice or 3 times as long. Is this part of moving STL flights to Nashville?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
June actual loads (DOT)
British London 93.2%
Southwest Punta Cana 92.8%
Lufthansa Frankfurt 90.3% (97% outbound)
Frontier Cancun 84.7%
Southwest Cabo 84.8%
Southwest Cancun 83.6%
AC Toronto 83.4% (Jazz only, no mainline numbers)
Southwest Montego 80.7%
Frontier Punta Cana 77.2%
No Montreal due to no Air Canada mainline posted.
British London 93.2%
Southwest Punta Cana 92.8%
Lufthansa Frankfurt 90.3% (97% outbound)
Frontier Cancun 84.7%
Southwest Cabo 84.8%
Southwest Cancun 83.6%
AC Toronto 83.4% (Jazz only, no mainline numbers)
Southwest Montego 80.7%
Frontier Punta Cana 77.2%
No Montreal due to no Air Canada mainline posted.
We got KCI long term expansion renderings before STL even put anything out. Argh.
^ yes, I’m sure you’re really disappointed.
They’re not comparable. St. Louis has master plan documents that were just completed.
They’re not comparable. St. Louis has master plan documents that were just completed.
Yes, I want to see the STL renderings instead of getting a new schedule that’s pushed back every other month.addxb2 wrote:^ yes, I’m sure you’re really disappointed.
Well here is the St. Louis Master Plan (https://www.flystl.com/about/planning-department/reports-and-documents/)
The stage that St. Louis is working through is not comparable to Kansas City's master plan.
The stage that St. Louis is working through is not comparable to Kansas City's master plan.
After traveling a lot recently and spending time in a number of different airports, one of the biggest things I’m hoping for with the new St. Louis terminal is that it is functional, intuitive, and easy to navigate.
I know it will be one large terminal, which could potentially mean some long walks, so I’m hoping there will be plenty of automated walkways or other ways to make getting from Point A to Point B quick and easy. One thing I’ve noticed at some of these massive airports is how daunting it can be to transfer between concourses. You can end up walking forever, taking trains or shuttles, and then finally get to your gate only to discover there are limited food or drink options in that particular area.
Personally, I would take function over something that is simply super pretty or architecturally impressive. I’ve been through Toronto Pearson’s international terminal quite a few times, and while parts of it may look nice, I find it completely dysfunctional. There can be nowhere to sit, very few bathrooms, tons of high end shopping, and surprisingly few practical food options. That’s not what I want from an airport. I’d rather have comfortable seating, accessible bathrooms, convenient food and coffee, and an easy path to my gate.
For me, I’d much rather see a modern airport that prioritizes easy navigation, reasonable walking distances, plenty of seating, bathrooms where you actually need them, and good food options throughout rather than one that simply looks impressive.
When it comes to restaurants, I personally prefer supporting local restaurants when I’m in St. Louis, but I’m not sure the average traveler necessarily cares that much about having a huge representation of the local food scene in an airport. I think having a few great St. Louis options would be fantastic, but I also think the national chains are important. Starbucks, McDonald’s, Chick fil A, etc. are familiar, predictable options that travelers actively look for when they’re in a hurry or traveling with kids. Honestly, I think St. Louis does a pretty good job of balancing those things in the current airport. And I still think it’s almost laughable that the new Kansas City airport doesn’t have a Starbucks.
Ultimately, I hope the new terminal feels modern without sacrificing convenience. Give me an airport that is easy to navigate, has food and coffee options in every major area, has familiar national brands alongside a few great local concepts, has enough seating and bathrooms, and gets me from the entrance to my gate without feeling like I’m walking a marathon. I’ll take that over a beautiful airport that is frustrating to actually use any day.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I know it will be one large terminal, which could potentially mean some long walks, so I’m hoping there will be plenty of automated walkways or other ways to make getting from Point A to Point B quick and easy. One thing I’ve noticed at some of these massive airports is how daunting it can be to transfer between concourses. You can end up walking forever, taking trains or shuttles, and then finally get to your gate only to discover there are limited food or drink options in that particular area.
Personally, I would take function over something that is simply super pretty or architecturally impressive. I’ve been through Toronto Pearson’s international terminal quite a few times, and while parts of it may look nice, I find it completely dysfunctional. There can be nowhere to sit, very few bathrooms, tons of high end shopping, and surprisingly few practical food options. That’s not what I want from an airport. I’d rather have comfortable seating, accessible bathrooms, convenient food and coffee, and an easy path to my gate.
For me, I’d much rather see a modern airport that prioritizes easy navigation, reasonable walking distances, plenty of seating, bathrooms where you actually need them, and good food options throughout rather than one that simply looks impressive.
When it comes to restaurants, I personally prefer supporting local restaurants when I’m in St. Louis, but I’m not sure the average traveler necessarily cares that much about having a huge representation of the local food scene in an airport. I think having a few great St. Louis options would be fantastic, but I also think the national chains are important. Starbucks, McDonald’s, Chick fil A, etc. are familiar, predictable options that travelers actively look for when they’re in a hurry or traveling with kids. Honestly, I think St. Louis does a pretty good job of balancing those things in the current airport. And I still think it’s almost laughable that the new Kansas City airport doesn’t have a Starbucks.
Ultimately, I hope the new terminal feels modern without sacrificing convenience. Give me an airport that is easy to navigate, has food and coffee options in every major area, has familiar national brands alongside a few great local concepts, has enough seating and bathrooms, and gets me from the entrance to my gate without feeling like I’m walking a marathon. I’ll take that over a beautiful airport that is frustrating to actually use any day.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
After seeing Kansas City Airport, I was quite not impressed. It is a fine looking airport, but it is also very plane Jane - I actually think Wichita's new airport is more creative and nicer. That being said, there is literally no Starbucks or national chains. STL has six Starbucks terminals/concourses wide and countless national chains.
I'm not too worried. The linear concourse concept reminds me of some airports I've liked fine, and it's honestly not that different from what the TWA hub functionally was back in the day, just with easier taxiways and without the shuttle shortcut between C and D. The TWA hub, from end of C to end of D, was over 4000'. The new concourse will be, what, 3000' and change? Aesthetically, I prefer what we have to a single absolutely straight shot, but they work fine. Think Detroit's A concourse, or T1 and T2 at Shanghai Pudong. Those all seem to work just fine. The airports where I have problems are more like DFW when there's a gate change and the People Mover is down, or Charlotte when people crowd a gate. Or a tight connection on an international arrival in Chicago. A spacious, double loaded, single concourse will be the cat's meow. I kind of hope they do something to break up the visual monotony of a couple of the longest concourses I've seen, but the initial renderings give me a lot of hope on that count.
Seeing mixed results from PIT and CLE for Iceland and Dublin, I'm not so sure I want Iceland in St. Louis. I think compared to other mid-sized regions, STL and Cincinnati (London/Paris) have the best service offerings. Solid/fundamental service offerings and less reliance on tourism. Dublin isn't really an option now with BA but I worry Iceland would be meh and damage the strong reputation STL has earned.jshank83 wrote: ↑6:33 PM - 8 days agoJune actual loads (DOT)
British London 93.2%
Southwest Punta Cana 92.8%
Lufthansa Frankfurt 90.3% (97% outbound)
Frontier Cancun 84.7%
Southwest Cabo 84.8%
Southwest Cancun 83.6%
AC Toronto 83.4% (Jazz only, no mainline numbers)
Southwest Montego 80.7%
Frontier Punta Cana 77.2%
No Montreal due to no Air Canada mainline posted.
Vancouver (likely) and Mexico City (less likely) are what I'd like to see next.
https://t100tool.com/t100
Totally agree...Nice post!Dbehrens0111 wrote: ↑6:11 PM - 7 days agoAfter traveling a lot recently and spending time in a number of different airports, one of the biggest things I’m hoping for with the new St. Louis terminal is that it is functional, intuitive, and easy to navigate.
I know it will be one large terminal, which could potentially mean some long walks, so I’m hoping there will be plenty of automated walkways or other ways to make getting from Point A to Point B quick and easy. One thing I’ve noticed at some of these massive airports is how daunting it can be to transfer between concourses. You can end up walking forever, taking trains or shuttles, and then finally get to your gate only to discover there are limited food or drink options in that particular area.
Personally, I would take function over something that is simply super pretty or architecturally impressive. I’ve been through Toronto Pearson’s international terminal quite a few times, and while parts of it may look nice, I find it completely dysfunctional. There can be nowhere to sit, very few bathrooms, tons of high end shopping, and surprisingly few practical food options. That’s not what I want from an airport. I’d rather have comfortable seating, accessible bathrooms, convenient food and coffee, and an easy path to my gate.
For me, I’d much rather see a modern airport that prioritizes easy navigation, reasonable walking distances, plenty of seating, bathrooms where you actually need them, and good food options throughout rather than one that simply looks impressive.
When it comes to restaurants, I personally prefer supporting local restaurants when I’m in St. Louis, but I’m not sure the average traveler necessarily cares that much about having a huge representation of the local food scene in an airport. I think having a few great St. Louis options would be fantastic, but I also think the national chains are important. Starbucks, McDonald’s, Chick fil A, etc. are familiar, predictable options that travelers actively look for when they’re in a hurry or traveling with kids. Honestly, I think St. Louis does a pretty good job of balancing those things in the current airport. And I still think it’s almost laughable that the new Kansas City airport doesn’t have a Starbucks.
Ultimately, I hope the new terminal feels modern without sacrificing convenience. Give me an airport that is easy to navigate, has food and coffee options in every major area, has familiar national brands alongside a few great local concepts, has enough seating and bathrooms, and gets me from the entrance to my gate without feeling like I’m walking a marathon. I’ll take that over a beautiful airport that is frustrating to actually use any day.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The one difference with Iceland is we would have a lot more feed than PIT does with it. Nashville for example was 95% full and the best station for them in June. Southwest feed I am sure helped. Once Southwest actually starts selling their tickets it makes it a bit easier.addxb2 wrote: ↑5:06 PM - 6 days agoSeeing mixed results from PIT and CLE for Iceland and Dublin, I'm not so sure I want Iceland in St. Louis. I think compared to other mid-sized regions, STL and Cincinnati (London/Paris) have the best service offerings. Solid/fundamental service offerings and less reliance on tourism. Dublin isn't really an option now with BA but I worry Iceland would be meh and damage the strong reputation STL has earned.jshank83 wrote: ↑6:33 PM - 8 days agoJune actual loads (DOT)
British London 93.2%
Southwest Punta Cana 92.8%
Lufthansa Frankfurt 90.3% (97% outbound)
Frontier Cancun 84.7%
Southwest Cabo 84.8%
Southwest Cancun 83.6%
AC Toronto 83.4% (Jazz only, no mainline numbers)
Southwest Montego 80.7%
Frontier Punta Cana 77.2%
No Montreal due to no Air Canada mainline posted.
Vancouver (likely) and Mexico City (less likely) are what I'd like to see next.
https://t100tool.com/t100
chart (1).png
chart (2).png
I’m under the impression the only reason we don’t have Vancouver yet is the souring US/Canada relations making AC shy from adding it
Any idea how Indianapolis' Dublin flight is doing?addxb2 wrote:Seeing mixed results from PIT and CLE for Iceland and Dublin, I'm not so sure I want Iceland in St. Louis. I think compared to other mid-sized regions, STL and Cincinnati (London/Paris) have the best service offerings. Solid/fundamental service offerings and less reliance on tourism. Dublin isn't really an option now with BA but I worry Iceland would be meh and damage the strong reputation STL has earned.jshank83 wrote: ↑6:33 PM - 8 days agoJune actual loads (DOT)
British London 93.2%
Southwest Punta Cana 92.8%
Lufthansa Frankfurt 90.3% (97% outbound)
Frontier Cancun 84.7%
Southwest Cabo 84.8%
Southwest Cancun 83.6%
AC Toronto 83.4% (Jazz only, no mainline numbers)
Southwest Montego 80.7%
Frontier Punta Cana 77.2%
No Montreal due to no Air Canada mainline posted.
Vancouver (likely) and Mexico City (less likely) are what I'd like to see next.
https://t100tool.com/t100
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Loads for Aer Lingus across their US network in June. I apologize for the airport codes instead of city namesStlAlex wrote: ↑9:09 PM - 6 days agoAny idea how Indianapolis' Dublin flight is doing?addxb2 wrote:Seeing mixed results from PIT and CLE for Iceland and Dublin, I'm not so sure I want Iceland in St. Louis. I think compared to other mid-sized regions, STL and Cincinnati (London/Paris) have the best service offerings. Solid/fundamental service offerings and less reliance on tourism. Dublin isn't really an option now with BA but I worry Iceland would be meh and damage the strong reputation STL has earned.jshank83 wrote: ↑6:33 PM - 8 days agoJune actual loads (DOT)
British London 93.2%
Southwest Punta Cana 92.8%
Lufthansa Frankfurt 90.3% (97% outbound)
Frontier Cancun 84.7%
Southwest Cabo 84.8%
Southwest Cancun 83.6%
AC Toronto 83.4% (Jazz only, no mainline numbers)
Southwest Montego 80.7%
Frontier Punta Cana 77.2%
No Montreal due to no Air Canada mainline posted.
Vancouver (likely) and Mexico City (less likely) are what I'd like to see next.
https://t100tool.com/t100
chart (1).png
chart (2).png
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Inbound to DUB
LAX 91%
SFO 91%
MCO 83%
ORD 83%
BOS 79%
EWR 78%
JFK 77%
PHL 76%
CLE 75%
IND 75%
BDL 74%
BNA 73%
RDU 71%
IAD 67%
SEA 66% - Cut to summer only
DEN 64%- CUT
MSP 58% - CUT
PIT 56%
Outbound to US
ORD 95.4%
CLE 94.4%
LAX 92.8%
MCO 92.5%
BOS 91.9%
DEN 91.1% - CUT
EWR 91.1%
BNA 89.4%
SFO 88.9%
JFK 87.5%
PHL 87.2%
IND 86.0%
RDU 82.2%
MSP 80.1% - CUT
SEA 78.3% - Cut to summer only
BDL 75.9%
IAD 73.8%
PIT 67.2%
Better Europe to US than reverse surprised me a bit for June
