I couldn't find a STL thread so I decided to start one.

Welcome and feel free to join in.

New Service upcoming:
WN STL-CHS 2x weekly starting in June
DL STL-MCO Saturday only starting in February

108 daily WN flights starting in June

What flights would you like to see added? I personally am looking forward to see what the 2016 year end numbers are going to be.

Thanks for joining in!

Been wanting to start an STL discussion for a while, just never seem to find the time..lol

Just some general observations, it appears that with WN reaching the 108 level is not coming at the expense of AA or DL. AA remains #2 in market share, with 43 daily flights serving 9 destinations. AA has fluctuated between 42-45 for the last several years now. 25 flights mainline, 18 regional

Delta seems to be holding their own and has found a nice little niche at Lambert, with 29 dailies (17 mainline, 12 regional) to six desintations in June 2017, with United bringing up the rear with 30 (1 mainline, 29 regional). Pretty much an afterthought at this point, still disheartening to see we still can't get a two-class jet to either EWR or IAH. I know UA is upgauging flights, but in June 2017 still looks like ERJ hell with 18 of 29 regional daily flights on the Embraer.

As far as a wish list, LAX and SEA on DL would be welcome although SEA may be maxed right now with AS and WN. Another carrier to BOS I believe would do well, as WN has added another daily for a total of three and they are always packed. A B6 flight or two would be a dream..

LHR? meh, I don't think at this point anyone is bothered about it anymore, as the local business community has shown very little interest in providing the needed incentives to make it work. The powers that be in STL need to continue to focus on terminal improvements as well as additional domestic possibilities

BHMNONREV wrote:

AA remains #2 in market share, with 43 daily flights serving 9 destinations. AA has fluctuated between 42-45 for the last several years now. 25 flights mainline, 18 regional

Delta seems to be holding their own and has found a nice little niche at Lambert, with 29 dailies (17 mainline, 12 regional) to six desintations in June 2017, with United bringing up the rear with 30 (1 mainline, 29 regional). Pretty much an afterthought at this point, still disheartening to see we still can't get a two-class jet to either EWR or IAH. I know UA is upgauging flights, but in June 2017 still looks like ERJ hell with 18 of 29 regional daily flights on the Embraer.

As far as a wish list, LAX and SEA on DL would be welcome although SEA may be maxed right now with AS and WN. Another carrier to BOS I believe would do well, as WN has added another daily for a total of three and they are always packed. A B6 flight or two would be a dream..

I saw AA is adding a 3rd flight (1st non mainline) to Miami. I don't know if that is normal in the summer or not but that is nice.

I also hope DL adds more destinations. I usually fly WN just because nonstop is the most important to me but I would fly DL more if they offered more spots. I agree with SEA. It looks like they might add more this week but I think we pretty much have SEA covered. Although, AS is changing one of their planes to a smaller jet (which I would guess is based on demand) but maybe that opens up seats for DL?

I really thought B6 would add Boston but now WN keeps adding flights there, 4 now for summer, so that probably is out. I really would perfer B6 add JFK becuase we don't have any flights there and that would open up European connections.

I also agree it is a shame that UA is only has small jets from EWR. I connected back from Europe through there a couple months ago and having to fly on a 145 was pretty horrible. Most of those flights are 135/145 for us. I would rather see them get combine 2 flights into a bigger jet. The only time I fly UA anymore is if it's a flight to Europe or sometimes to SFO if they WN times don't work for me. I also want to know why the WN flights to SFO and OAK almost always leave within 5 minutes of each other. I would think they would spread those out.

BHMNONREV wrote:

LHR? meh, I don't think at this point anyone is bothered about it anymore, as the local business community has shown very little interest in providing the needed incentives to make it work. The powers that be in STL need to continue to focus on terminal improvements as well as additional domestic possibilities

I think the problem is less local business and more a factor of the city and county not having their shit together, as usual. The revenue guarantee should be coming from them, not local businesses.

I worked for a couple very large companies in STL and I think they'd rather invest any money spent on a revenue guarantee into the corporate air force they already own rather than sink money down a rabbit hole. While STL fights well above its weight for big business, I'm not sure that business generates the international traffic needed to make such a flight successful. I know for a fact that a company like Centene isn't regularly sending people across the pond, and if they are, they're execs on one of the private jets. Inbev actually moved their North American HQ to NYC for this very reason – because it was too damn hard to get to STL by air from anywhere outside of the country. So, nix them for any sort of significant international travel as well.

777PHX wrote:

Inbev actually moved their North American HQ to NYC for this very reason – because it was too damn hard to get to STL by air from anywhere outside of the country. So, nix them for any sort of significant international travel as well.

Their NA headquarters is still in STL. They moved a bunch of marketing jobs to New York though. Maybe those are the people who fly more. I don't know.

Jshank83 wrote:

777PHX wrote:

Inbev actually moved their North American HQ to NYC for this very reason – because it was too damn hard to get to STL by air from anywhere outside of the country. So, nix them for any sort of significant international travel as well.

Their NA headquarters is still in STL. They moved a bunch of marketing jobs to New York though. Maybe those are the people who fly more. I don't know.

Well, the company can say whatever they want, the top NA execs all moved to NYC several years ago. My knowledge here extends a bit farther than Google.

More Wn schedule released today.

STL-PNS 1x Saturday (new route)
STL-AUS 2nd Daily

With both Transtates and GoJet having crew bases in STL, I wouldn't count on much of a push out of RJs. That's the way it happens to work, but unless United shrinks TSA, there will always be numerous 145 operations for United

Speaking of the AS service. Does anyone have any information on how the STL-PDX flights have been doing?

777PHX wrote:

I think the problem is less local business and more a factor of the city and county not having their shit together, as usual. The revenue guarantee should be coming from them, not local businesses.

Absolutely not. There is exactly nothing stopping businesses from both the city and the county getting together to cut a check to an airline just like there's nothing stopping them from cutting a check for a soccer stadium.

All this crap about reunifying the city and county is nothing more than a third rate scam to funnel county money into fixing the city's problems. The "Better Together" idiots are a bunch of con-artists planning to do all sorts of great things as long as they can do it with somebody else's money.

bigfoot0503 wrote:

Speaking of the AS service. Does anyone have any information on how the STL-PDX flights have been doing?

I found the stats for Jan-Oct 2016
STL to PDX 83.3% full ------ JAN/FEB were the lowest by far.
PDX to STL 87.7% full ------JAN/FEB were by far the lowest. Without those two it would be over 90%

STL to PDX
month seats passengers load%
1 2356 1757 74.5%
2 2204 1621 73.5%
3 2356 1984 84.2%
4 2100 1852 88.2%
5 2356 2151 92.3%
6 2280 1918 84.1%
7 2356 1990 84.5%
8 2356 1995 84.7%
9 2280 1875 82.2%
10 2356 2029 86.1%
T 23000 19172 83.3%

PDX to STL
1 2356 1705 72.4%
2 2204 1582 71.8%
3 2356 2053 87.1%
4 2100 2062 98.2% --wow
5 2356 2090 88.7%
6 2280 2096 91.9%
7 2356 2030 86.2%
8 2356 2119 89.9%
9 2280 2071 90.8%
10 2356 2126 90.2%
T 23000 19934 87.7%

Also FWIW the Southwest flights on this route are around 94% full.
Alaska flights Between STL and SEA are around 82.2% full (they are downgrading one of the daily flights to a smaller plane starting in June)

777PHX wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

777PHX wrote:

Inbev actually moved their North American HQ to NYC for this very reason – because it was too damn hard to get to STL by air from anywhere outside of the country. So, nix them for any sort of significant international travel as well.

Their NA headquarters is still in STL. They moved a bunch of marketing jobs to New York though. Maybe those are the people who fly more. I don't know.

Well, the company can say whatever they want, the top NA execs all moved to NYC several years ago. My knowledge here extends a bit farther than Google.

Just because it's a big corporation, don't let InBev fool you. They do *not* travel as freely as AB once did when it was on its own.
When the InBev ceo travels ... he flies coach. Yes, internationally.

The New York City office opened as a matter of principle for show to press and other trade, not because of the airport.

BHMNONREV wrote:

LHR? meh, I don't think at this point anyone is bothered about it anymore, as the local business community has shown very little interest in providing the needed incentives to make it work. The powers that be in STL need to continue to focus on terminal improvements as well as additional domestic possibilities

Hear, hear!

777PHX wrote:

I think the problem is less local business and more a factor of the city and county not having their shit together, as usual. The revenue guarantee should be coming from them, not local businesses.

"Them" means the taxpayers of St Louis County and the City of St Louis. Are you saying that the City and the County should levy a property tax for a revenue guarantee for a nonstop flight to London? Are there really people in STL who can afford to go London who don't because there's not a nonstop? Because, in effect, that's who'd be subsidized because I can assure you the fares won't be cheap on the nonstop.

777PHX wrote:

I worked for a couple very large companies in STL and I think they'd rather invest any money spent on a revenue guarantee into the corporate air force they already own rather than sink money down a rabbit hole.

What a great investment decision then! Private companies don't think it's worth it, so might as well send the bill to the taxpayers so they can toss their money down a rabbit hole. That strategy has worked very well for the City of St Louis . . . not hard to find a whole history of rabbit holes there . . . Alice?

BMI727 wrote:

All this crap about reunifying the city and county is nothing more than a third rate scam to funnel county money into fixing the city's problems. The "Better Together" idiots are a bunch of con-artists planning to do all sorts of great things as long as they can do it with somebody else's money.

Bingo. Not that County is any prize, but if I were them, I'd put calls from City on block.

Getting back to LHR, I get the sense that St. Louis flyers are resigned to no non-stops, but I wonder how many of them can't stand the fact that they have to go through...Chicago!

The only non-stop to Europe I can foresee would be with BA's sister airline EI (Aer Lingus) to DUB, but only if they secured the same sort of assurances as they did with BDL.

stlgph wrote:

[

Just because it's a big corporation, don't let InBev fool you. They do *not* travel as freely as AB once did when it was on its own.
When the InBev ceo travels ... he flies coach. Yes, internationally.
.

I'm very well aware of this and you are right. I'm not the one here claiming a LHR flight would be buoyed by Inbev traffic.

stlgph wrote:

The New York City office opened as a matter of principle for show to press and other trade, not because of the airport.

The top North American executive positions moved to NYC several years ago. Fact. I was at One Busch when it happened. You weren't.

jetero wrote:

What a great investment decision then! Private companies don't think it's worth it, so might as well send the bill to the taxpayers so they can toss their money down a rabbit hole. That strategy has worked very well for the City of St Louis . . . not hard to find a whole history of rabbit holes there . . . Alice?

As far as I can tell, DL received a revenue guarantee sourced from tax payers dollars to open PIT-CDG several years ago. Now, if St. Louis wants an international flight, the county and city can get their shit together and work something out similar, or they can continue to whine about being a third tier backwater city and go without service. Anyone that has lived in the area for any amount of time will tell you the latter is what's going to happen.

BN727227Ultra wrote:

BMI727 wrote:

All this crap about reunifying the city and county is nothing more than a third rate scam to funnel county money into fixing the city's problems. The "Better Together" idiots are a bunch of con-artists planning to do all sorts of great things as long as they can do it with somebody else's money.

Bingo. Not that County is any prize, but if I were them, I'd put calls from City on block.

Getting back to LHR, I get the sense that St. Louis flyers are resigned to no non-stops, but I wonder how many of them can't stand the fact that they have to go through...Chicago!

I don't want this to get into a big county/city discussion since this is an airline forum but I think the city needs to be part of the county (not make the county and the city all the city). The city isn't doing the greatest, I think we all know that but if this region is ever going to turn around we need to start working together. By putting the city in the county at least whoever is in charge of the county can be the go to person for the region to get things done. I would rather the county have some overseeing power in the city, maybe it could clean it up some. Now people have to deal with way too many people to get anything major done and everyone is in fighting with each other over projects. Will the county have to support the city some at least at first, probably, but I think it is worth it in the long run to help get everyone under one umbrella. I am county resident. Bringing it all back to the airport, I doubt it would make a big difference short term at least. Maybe it would be better long term assuming that under one umbrella everyone can get on the same page and increase business/population.

Surprised to see Delta join the party on the MCO route. WN has pretty much dominated that and with F9 as well, it will be interesting to see how this works on a Saturday only. CRJ900 too? I would be shocked if it lasted a year.

BTW I am totally for city/county unification. It makes ZERO sense the way it is now.

BN727227Ultra wrote:

BMI727 wrote:

Getting back to LHR, I get the sense that St. Louis flyers are resigned to no non-stops, but I wonder how many of them can't stand the fact that they have to go through...Chicago!

Other options besides ORD for us to get over to the other side of the pond I avoid ORD like the plague.

TWA302 wrote:

Surprised to see Delta join the party on the MCO route. WN has pretty much dominated that and with F9 as well, it will be interesting to see how this works on a Saturday only. CRJ900 too? I would be shocked if it lasted a year.

It only goes til August 12th. I think it is just seasonal.

I looked up a couple of the seat maps just to get an idea at this point (obviously with time still to sell seats) STL to MCO

Feb 18 not all that full maybe 1/3 so far
Feb 25 50ish percent full
Mar 4 75ish percent full
Mar 11 All main cabin non perferred seats are sold out. some comfort and first class left.
Mar 18 Same as above with more first class sold
Mar 25 Over 50% sold

Once you get into April there is a lot more seating available.

Is it ok to include Cahokia in the discussion? Ultimate Shuttle, which is focused on Cincinnati's Lunken Airport might be a candidate to fly to Cahokia as a public charter. Think it would work?

masseybrown wrote:

Is it ok to include Cahokia in the discussion? Ultimate Shuttle, which is focused on Cincinnati's Lunken Airport might be a candidate to fly to Cahokia as a public charter. Think it would work?

Yeah that is okay. Any airport in the region. The other airports aren't really big enough to have their own thread. I planned on MidAmerica talk in here also. I know they are buying a portable jetway/bridge because now they will have 3 airplanes on the ground at times. I am sure that airport is still a moneypit but at least it is having pretty big service increases.

Kind of off-topic perhaps, but I've been to STL many times, from my childhood in the couple of years before TWA went-belly up, to just this past summer . Every time I've gone back since around 2002 or so it has looked like a ghost town and it's a sad sight to see. This past year was quite sombering as my father and I were flying to STL to attend my grandfather's funeral, and he was telling me about the 747s and L1011s that used to fly there and how busy the place used to be, while there were *maybe* two people in our lines of sight. STL is near and dear to my heart, and I hope someone besides WN is able to see some potential in it.

richcam427 wrote:

Kind of off-topic perhaps, but I've been to STL many times, from my childhood in the couple of years before TWA went-belly up, to just this past summer . Every time I've gone back since around 2002 or so it has looked like a ghost town and it's a sad sight to see. This past year was quite sombering as my father and I were flying to STL to attend my grandfather's funeral, and he was telling me about the 747s and L1011s that used to fly there and how busy the place used to be, while there were *maybe* two people in our lines of sight. STL is near and dear to my heart, and I hope someone besides WN is able to see some potential in it.

My family spent many nights at the observation area at the end of 12R. Before the 747s and Elton Elevens, most of TW, AA flights were Boeing and Convair four-holers with the odd BAC-111 or DC-9. EA brought in their share of Convairs, too.

By 1984-1988, the OZ/TW hub was as impressive as Delta's in ATL. My last flights were in 1991, crack of dawn on DL so I had no idea how things were on the TW side. But I had no inkling that it would be anything other than a dynamic hub operation. Who knew?

Sadly, the good ol' days aren't coming back. Sigh.

richcam427 wrote:

STL is near and dear to my heart, and I hope someone besides WN is able to see some potential in it.

Even though it has been almost 40 years since I lived there, it still holds a special place in my heart as well.

I believe WN has seen some potential as they continue to add new flights/destinations to their route map from Lambert, so the demand is definitely there. As for the Big Three, can't see much more being added than what currently is available. Possibly up-gauging some flights but only to the hubs and nothing point to point.

St. Louisans need to use what they have and see what happens, and not complain about what they used to have. Those days are in the rear view.

Fill it and they will come..

Forget international flights, the city and the state are too busy trying to crap away taxpayer's dollars and state land on a major league soccer stadium.

jetero wrote:

"Them" means the taxpayers of St Louis County and the City of St Louis. Are you saying that the City and the County should levy a property tax for a revenue guarantee for a nonstop flight to London? Are there really people in STL who can afford to go London who don't because there's not a nonstop? Because, in effect, that's who'd be subsidized because I can assure you the fares won't be cheap on the nonstop.

{checkmark}

BN727227Ultra wrote:

Bingo. Not that County is any prize, but if I were them, I'd put calls from City on block

There is exactly no rational reason why the county would want to tie the millstone of the city around its neck.

777PHX wrote:

Now, if St. Louis wants an international flight, the county and city can get their shit together and work something out similar, or they can continue to whine about being a third tier backwater city and go without service.

Last time I checked there were no border checkpoints along I-64. There is absolutely nothing stopping all of the people who want international flights; to poach conventions and sporting events from Indianapolis, Louisville, etc.; to build a soccer stadium or whatever else from getting together and funding it privately with participation from those in the city, the county and (gasp!) St. Charles.

There is one reason, and one reason only, why they want to politically re-unify the city and the county: so they can do all those things with somebody else's money. It's a scam, pure and simple.

TWA302 wrote:

BTW I am totally for city/county unification. It makes ZERO sense the way it is now.

What's in it for the county?

Jshank83 wrote:

I am sure that airport is still a moneypit but at least it is having pretty big service increases.

Some things never change.

777PHX wrote:

Forget international flights, the city and the state are too busy trying to crap away taxpayer's dollars and state land on a major league soccer stadium.

That's the latest con, but international flights come up from time to time.

777PHX wrote:

stlgph wrote:

[

Just because it's a big corporation, don't let InBev fool you. They do *not* travel as freely as AB once did when it was on its own.
When the InBev ceo travels ... he flies coach. Yes, internationally.
.

I'm very well aware of this and you are right. I'm not the one here claiming a LHR flight would be buoyed by Inbev traffic.

stlgph wrote:

The New York City office opened as a matter of principle for show to press and other trade, not because of the airport.

The top North American executive positions moved to NYC several years ago. Fact. I was at One Busch when it happened. You weren't.

jetero wrote:

What a great investment decision then! Private companies don't think it's worth it, so might as well send the bill to the taxpayers so they can toss their money down a rabbit hole. That strategy has worked very well for the City of St Louis . . . not hard to find a whole history of rabbit holes there . . . Alice?

As far as I can tell, DL received a revenue guarantee sourced from tax payers dollars to open PIT-CDG several years ago. Now, if St. Louis wants an international flight, the county and city can get their shit together and work something out similar, or they can continue to whine about being a third tier backwater city and go without service. Anyone that has lived in the area for any amount of time will tell you the latter is what's going to happen.

Not sure what your point is. Do you think Pittsburgh is better for a nonstop flight to Paris? What a yardstick! Yeah, sinking taxpayer dollars into a vanity transatlantic flight is really going to solve everything. That attitude is what made St. Louis a "third tier backwater city" to begin with. (Your words . . . how nice to describe a city where you live (or lived.))

jetero wrote:

Not sure what your point is. Do you think Pittsburgh is better for a nonstop flight to Paris? What a yardstick! Yeah, sinking taxpayer dollars into a vanity transatlantic flight is really going to solve everything. That attitude is what made St. Louis a "third tier backwater city" to begin with. (Your words . . . how nice to describe a city where you live (or lived.))

The point was to show what was necessary for a peer of St. Louis's to get a transatlantic flight.

Thanks for proving my point for me. It's provincial thinking people like yourself that will ensure St. Louis will remain the third rate backwater city that it already is. And as I pointed out previously, the city and the state are too busy spending tax payer dollars on much more worthwhile pursuits, like major league soccer stadiums. The hypocrisy behind the notion that transatlantic flights are a waste of money while pursuing a soccer(!) stadium is appalling.

instead of sending 3-4 daily LGA flights (And sometimes 1 from KJFK) by DL (Endavor/expressjet), why not use a single 717 or 737-800/a320?

kennedyspotter wrote:

instead of sending 3-4 daily LGA flights (And sometimes 1 from KJFK) by DL (Endavor/expressjet), why not use a single 717 or 737-800/a320?

I would imagine more frequency is better. You can fly out in the morning and back in the evening. Only one flight a day takes that away.

Renovations have currently started on more sections of concourse E for the D concourse expansion. I had heard it was going to happen, I am happy it actually is in motion.

My family spent many nights at the observation area at the end of 12R. Before the 747s and Elton Elevens, most of TW, AA flights were Boeing and Convair four-holers with the odd BAC-111 or DC-9. EA brought in their share of Convairs, too.

If you're talking about Eastern 880's or 990's, they never had any. The last Convairs Eastern ever flew were the 440's and they were gone by the early 1970's and only flew on some short hauls on the East Coast.

AA had a pretty major operation at STL prior to acquiring TWA's assets, using 707's/720's/727's/Lockheed Electras (L188), etc. But TWA had a major operation there, including a lot of widebodies.

777PHX wrote:

Thanks for proving my point for me.

You're welcome?

superjeff wrote:

If you're talking about Eastern 880's or 990's, they never had any.

I squat corrected! And it's not like I haven't read the 880 page on Wikipedia (sheepish).

Maybe I saw a 720 and not recognized it!

Stats through November are out.

November was up 11.7%

12,810,391 for Jan-Nov up 9.3% total

http://flystl.com/Portals/0/Air%20Traff ... an_Nov.pdf

I found this article out of the KC star. It is talking about MCI airport being on Trump's priority list for infastructure projects. Down lower it says Lambert is on it also for expansion. The word expansion seems weird as I would think it means upgrades, since it doesn't really need "expanded".

http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics ... 91799.html

Jshank83 wrote:

bigfoot0503 wrote:

Speaking of the AS service. Does anyone have any information on how the STL-PDX flights have been doing?

I found the stats for Jan-Oct 2016
STL to PDX 83.3% full ------ JAN/FEB were the lowest by far.
PDX to STL 87.7% full ------JAN/FEB were by far the lowest. Without those two it would be over 90%

STL to PDX
month seats passengers load%
1 2356 1757 74.5%
2 2204 1621 73.5%
3 2356 1984 84.2%
4 2100 1852 88.2%
5 2356 2151 92.3%
6 2280 1918 84.1%
7 2356 1990 84.5%
8 2356 1995 84.7%
9 2280 1875 82.2%
10 2356 2029 86.1%
T 23000 19172 83.3%

PDX to STL
1 2356 1705 72.4%
2 2204 1582 71.8%
3 2356 2053 87.1%
4 2100 2062 98.2% --wow
5 2356 2090 88.7%
6 2280 2096 91.9%
7 2356 2030 86.2%
8 2356 2119 89.9%
9 2280 2071 90.8%
10 2356 2126 90.2%
T 23000 19934 87.7%

Also FWIW the Southwest flights on this route are around 94% full.
Alaska flights Between STL and SEA are around 82.2% full (they are downgrading one of the daily flights to a smaller plane starting in June)

Thanks for the stats on the STL-PDX flights. With some very respectable loads makes you wonder if Alaska may upguage the PDX flight from its' present E175 equipment.

I just got back from DEN. Our outbound flight WN409 1/24 went out 1/2 full with just over 70 and the return WN4788 1/25 was about the same with 93. Pretty surprised that the loads on these were this low. Does anyone have the loads for the direct STL-DEN/DEN-STL flights on WN? With ski season in full-force I would have thought the loads would be higher. Back in late October these flights were full. As with most WN flights I am on they are going out full or a seat or two empty, but seeing 1/2 full to DEN is strange.

Jshank83 wrote:

I found this article out of the KC star. It is talking about MCI airport being on Trump's priority list for infastructure projects. Down lower it says Lambert is on it also for expansion. The word expansion seems weird as I would think it means upgrades, since it doesn't really need "expanded".

http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics ... 91799.html

Here is an article from late 2015 that talks about MCI renovation versus a totally new build.
http://www.kansascity.com/news/business/article49042210.html

Not shocked the price tag has jumped $8 million between the time the most recent was published. KCI is a mess does need a rebuild.

On the STL front, I don't see 'expansion' happening unless WN has a massive increase in service prompting them and the city to renovate D. They have been slowly creeping towards the end of E when they added 33 and 31. I don't know how much more their current 15 gates could handle. That would be interesting information to know from someone. Anyone?

TWA302 wrote:

On the STL front, I don't see 'expansion' happening unless WN has a massive increase in service prompting them and the city to renovate D. They have been slowly creeping towards the end of E when they added 33 and 31. I don't know how much more their current 15 gates could handle. That would be interesting information to know from someone. Anyone?

They are already renovating more of D. They are adding 2 or 3 gates down old concourse D (gates E34/36/38 I think) and a couple restuarants. They are also adding an unaffiliated airline club area across from E31/33

These pics are off another forum from about a week ago. I don't know if the guy who posted them is in this forum or not.

https://s23.postimg.org/o3f1scm4b/20170122_202143.jpg

https://s24.postimg.org/4q5d7stj9/20170122_202132.jpg

https://s29.postimg.org/s2f8t5scn/20170122_202201.jpg

Outside gate doors (I took this one) https://s29.postimg.org/rhcgpyc6v/IMG_8956.jpg

Link to the airport club bidding http://flystl.com/Portals/0/Solicitatio ... 202016.pdf


Also the expansion for STL with reguard to Trump's list is for a Cargo hanger that is privately owned. Not for commercial traffic.

Just missed 14 mil.

Final number for 2016 13,959,126.

Top 10 airports in growing capacity at 9.1%

If we add in midamerica we can say its over 14 mil for the region though seeing some airports (like MCI, CLE, etc) have allegiant at their main airport


http://flystl.com/Newsroom/Blog/tabid/4 ... -2016.aspx

Jshank83 wrote:

Just missed 14 mil.

Final number for 2016 13,959,126.

Top 10 airports in growing capacity at 9.1%

If we add in midamerica we can say its over 14 mil for the region though seeing some airports (like MCI, CLE, etc) have allegiant at their main airport


http://flystl.com/Newsroom/Blog/tabid/4 ... -2016.aspx

Impressive numbers. Glad to see this. 1.2 million more PAX YOY is quite an accomplishment.

TWA302 wrote:

On the STL front, I don't see 'expansion' happening unless WN has a massive increase in service prompting them and the city to renovate D. They have been slowly creeping towards the end of E when they added 33 and 31. I don't know how much more their current 15 gates could handle. That would be interesting information to know from someone. Anyone?

New article on expansion into concourse D. With pics.

http://www.kmov.com/story/34356485/lamb ... -expansion

TWA302 wrote:

I just got back from DEN. Our outbound flight WN409 1/24 went out 1/2 full with just over 70 and the return WN4788 1/25 was about the same with 93. Pretty surprised that the loads on these were this low. Does anyone have the loads for the direct STL-DEN/DEN-STL flights on WN? With ski season in full-force I would have thought the loads would be higher. Back in late October these flights were full. As with most WN flights I am on they are going out full or a seat or two empty, but seeing 1/2 full to DEN is strange.

I have numbers for Jan-Oct. 2016

DEN-STL 84.2% full
STL-DEN 85.4% full

Jan 2016

DEN-STL 78.6% full
STL-DEN 81% full

Oct 2016

DEN-STL 88.4% full
STL-DEN 83.1% full

I am guessing you being on Tues/Wed flights factored in also. I figure they are two of the slower days.

I feel like my flights are always full unless it is to another focus city like MDW/BNA. I flew to BNA a fair amount from August 2014-April 2016 and it had some really lean flights, now they are adding another one. I flew back from Midway a Monday morning a couple weeks ago and it wasn't even half full.

Jshank83 wrote:

TWA302 wrote:

On the STL front, I don't see 'expansion' happening unless WN has a massive increase in service prompting them and the city to renovate D. They have been slowly creeping towards the end of E when they added 33 and 31. I don't know how much more their current 15 gates could handle. That would be interesting information to know from someone. Anyone?

New article on expansion into concourse D. With pics.

http://www.kmov.com/story/34356485/lamb ... -expansion

So crazy I had no idea this was happening. I fly 2-3 times per month and am thrilled to see them adding these new D gates. While I wish they would leave the TW colors, it's time for a refresh

Thanks for the story.

Great to see WN continue to grow, and a few more gates in D reopening. I know the airport will likely never see the traffic the old TWA hub had when I was a kid back in the 80s and 90s, but it's nice to see the airport experiencing some substantial growth for a change. I'll have to see if the extension down D is done when I'm back up to see family in early August.

NolaMD88fan wrote:

Great to see WN continue to grow, and a few more gates in D reopening. I know the airport will likely never see the traffic the old TWA hub had when I was a kid back in the 80s and 90s, but it's nice to see the airport experiencing some substantial growth for a change. I'll have to see if the extension down D is done when I'm back up to see family in early August.

They are saying it will be complete in the month of June, so hopefully it will. Hard to believe that just 17 years ago, more than DOUBLE the PAX came through STL. 30 million.... You are right. It would be hard to imagine getting back to that level again, but you never know.

jetero wrote:

As far as I can tell, DL received a revenue guarantee sourced from tax payers dollars to open PIT-CDG several years ago. Now, if St. Louis wants an international flight, the county and city can get their shit together and work something out similar, or they can continue to whine about being a third tier backwater city and go without service. Anyone that has lived in the area for any amount of time will tell you the latter is what's going to happen.

Not sure what your point is. Do you think Pittsburgh is better for a nonstop flight to Paris? What a yardstick! Yeah, sinking taxpayer dollars into a vanity transatlantic flight is really going to solve everything. That attitude is what made St. Louis a "third tier backwater city" to begin with. (Your words . . . how nice to describe a city where you live (or lived.))[/quote]

if DL (on behalf of AF) could fly a 757 to STL like they do to PIT, I think they would. But it doesn't have the legs, and larger aircraft don't have the right economics.

I do find it amazing that British Cal. could fly daily 707 LGW STL a million years ago (70s and 80s), and it was largely an O&D route. The logical successor is DY but their equipment is too large.

DaufuskieGuy wrote:

Yeah, sinking taxpayer dollars into a vanity transatlantic flight is really going to solve everything. That attitude is what made St. Louis a "third tier backwater city" to begin with.

Unfortunately, "buying" international routes has become a fact of life for non-hub cities. PIT recently bought WOW and Condor flights also, as did New Orleans with BA. Cincinnati lost three corporate headquarters operations (Chiquita, Luxottica, and Toyota) in a large part because of insufficient air service. The cities that subsidize these routes can demonstrate an economic benefit to their regions.