Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
When Will Airlines Start Picking Up STL?  
User currently offlineTriJetFan1 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1128 posts, RR: 7
Posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3245 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I was wondering when the international routes will start to came back to STL? Will AA do it? When will it actually be a hub again like when TWA was there?


Earned PPL June 26, 2007
29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12090 posts, RR: 50
Reply 1, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3224 times:

Sorry to say it I do not see it happening anytime soon. STL day in the sun has come and gone.


You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineLambertMan From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2064 posts, RR: 36
Reply 2, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3227 times:

There wasn't that many international routes in the first place, but the ones that were there at one time here is my guess:
YVR-doubtful, only if AA made it a major connecting point again
PVR-No
MEX-No
LGW-doubtful
CDG-No

There has been talk that Mexicana would start service in to St Louis, but I don't necessarily see where they would fly to. If I were to place my bets on a transatlantic service I'd have to say FRA, our number one international destination.

It won't be a large hub for the forseeable future, but I can envision a 240 flight a day operation. There are destinations that could use a few more frequencies (LAS, LAX, LGA, SAN) and there are few holes AA could fill on the route map (SJC, PDX, SMF, DTW).


User currently offlineJetboyflyhi From France, joined Oct 2004, 179 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3192 times:

Sorry but I don't see STL as a good transatlantic gateway all the airlines have figured this out.......BUT STL is a great place I have had much fun in the city.


Chicken or Beef?
User currently offlineLambertMan From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2064 posts, RR: 36
Reply 4, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3166 times:

Sorry but I don't see STL as a good transatlantic gateway all the airlines have figured this out.......BUT STL is a great place I have had much fun in the city.

Everyone on a.net has figured it out too.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy


User currently offlineCloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3124 times:

Saint Louis and Pittsburgh were always "artificial" hubs in that there was never enough O&D traffic to support them. Strong hubs have strong O&D. When the economy went south, these hubs had to go. Many of the domestic flights that Lambertman mentions are Southwest destinations. Because the presence of Southwest denies AA the opportunity to make business travelers pay through the nose, AA can no longer afford their cost structure on those routes. It is unlikely that AA will replace these routes unless they can get their costs down to Southwest's level. Even then, they could probably find more effective ways to deploy their capacity.

There are a few ways that Saint Louis could get some extra traffic. A Jetblue E-190 based mini hub might work - concentrating on cities that are to small for Southwest, with a few A320 flights to Jetblue hubs such as JFK. Airtran could have done the same thing with 717's, but they have chosen MDW instead and who could blame them? Another possibility is an independently operating regional - but this is a longshot as we all know how Independence is doing at the moment. Primaris or some other new International carrier might choose Saint Louis as a destination, codesharing with AA or any new Lo-Co entrant, but this is an even bigger longshot.

Even if one of the above were to happen, it is unlikely that Saint Louis would ever become anything like what it was when TWA was around. About 6 months ago when Jim Parker was asked to name some weak markets, Saint Louis was the first word out of his mouth. He said he is not surprised AA cut back. This is a very bad sign for the long term future of traffic at Lambert.


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24631 posts, RR: 86
Reply 6, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3099 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

LambertMan:

A small surprise for you - among a bunch of other routes, USA 3000 has applied for (scheduled) STL/PVR:

http://dms.dot.gov/search/document.cfm?documentid=304628&docketid=19673

And there is still - still - the unresolved querstion of who will get STL/CUN.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineLambertMan From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2064 posts, RR: 36
Reply 7, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3087 times:

It was a weak market previously, but it has turned the corner for WN.

Of the flights that I mentioned where I thought they could fill some holes, only DTW is a WN route. I say DTW because of rumors last spring that suggested it would be restarted.


User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12090 posts, RR: 50
Reply 8, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3089 times:

Mariner

USA3000 is owned by Apple Vacations and I would say the reason they have filed to fly it as a scheduled flight is so they can sell it air only on there web page. The majority of the seats though will be sold as vacation packages by Apple Vacations.



You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24631 posts, RR: 86
Reply 9, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3066 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Luv2fly:

Which would be the same reason that they have applied for STL/CUN - causing those of us who have an interest in Frontier some grief.

There is only one authority available for STL/CUN, and if USA 3000 gets it, Frontier can't.

The original applications went in last March - but the DOT still hasn't decided between the two.

 Smile/happy/getting dizzy

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5213 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3050 times:

People on airliners.net are so quick to write off cities that are struggling a bit. Fifty years ago Boston was a provincial joke likely to be blown away by the next nor'easter and today Boston is - well, it's still a dump, but at least it's not about to blow away.  Big grin

Times change and I'm sure they will for St Louis, Pittsburgh, etc. Given what loads STL can command, the small 7E7 may be just the plane for a couple of routes to Europe.



Consilivm: Cave ne nothi te vexant
User currently offlineLambertMan From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2064 posts, RR: 36
Reply 11, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3013 times:

Apparently the St Louis-Cancun decision will come in January. I find 9 months to be ridiculous especially considering that Griggs sent a letter of endorsement to the DOT in favor of F9.

User currently offlinePilotpip From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3139 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2986 times:

With all the attention ORD has gotten in the last few weeks I wouldn't be surprised if AA figures out what flights are mostly connections and tries to move a couple to STL. It would help their on time numbers greatly. However I don't see this happening. It's about money, and STL doesn't make said money.


DMI
User currently offlineStlgph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 9234 posts, RR: 26
Reply 13, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2953 times:

Unfortunately for St. Louis the basic principles of economic geography just do not work in favor for Lambert Airport ever becoming the 8th busiest airport once again. I am currently doing a study on the airport on this very topic for my senior assignment for college for my economic geography major and concentration, which, btw, once finished and defended, I will be glad to share with you all.

If there is an airport in the next few years that will be gaining any type of "new hub" or new concentration status, it will be, in my opinion and forecast, Indianapolis, once the new terminal opens in 2007-2008. I say this simply because the airport will provide passengers and operators with a beautifully designed, set up, state of the art terminal located perfect to a three runway configuration allowing for addition of flights causing little or no back up to the existing system.

St. Louis, on the other hand is just getting ridiculous about raising landing fees and gate fees to the existing carriers trying to spread out the loss of revenue from the 200 plus flights a day eliminated in Oct. 2003 to pay for the new runway, which no carrier will feasibly use...let alone there is no need for.
These costs leave a lot of carriers hesitant to expand flights here and instead of filling the gap left by American/TWA, they are instead pawning off mainline to express regional jets, particularly American, Continental, and United.

Plus no airline wants to pay high rent rates for an airport, which, for the most part, is a dump. They'll spend $1.2 billion plus on pointless runway or $500 million on ballpark which isn't needed, but they can't even at least spend a few thousand dollars to get lighted signs at the airport gates or get some new carpeting here and there. The airport is a shame and until the state/city/authority shells out some major bucks to revamp the entire concourse c & d, no airline is going to operate a hub operation here ever again.

Even Southwest has eliminated flights here since American pulled out. One look/comparison at a schedule or route map from a year ago and you can see the difference. I think 30 some odd flights are gone from their schedule alone.

For now, airfares to some cities are just outrageous, if not ludicrous, which is causing a lot of companies to rethink their travel needs and budget. A University of Illinois (Jan Bruener) study predicts nearly 80,000 jobs to be lost over the next ten years from the hub elimination affecting local business, convention business, airport business, etc. It was an interesting read.















Eternal darkness we all should dread. It's hard to party when you're dead.
User currently offlineLambertMan From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2064 posts, RR: 36
Reply 14, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2950 times:

STLGph,

Those flights were eliminated before the cuts were announced. We had 58 Southwest flights after the cuts, since then they added 1 to FLL and LAX, 2 to MCO, and 1 to OMA and OKC.

I can't say that I agree with your IND idea either. St Louis' o/d is nothing to brag about, but IND's is worse and the yield is as well. People are driving from all over to IND to get cheap airfares, and their o/d numbers still aren't that great. As someone pointed out above, IND would would clearly have to be a "artificial hub", something that really isn't very popular these days.

[Edited 2004-11-30 06:51:56]

User currently offlineERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6729 posts, RR: 18
Reply 15, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2934 times:

I have stated this before, and I will state it again. If I were STL, I would not want to be a "hub" anymore. I think they are doing good as they are. PIT will turn out fine also. They will get flights taht the area can handle. Much like RDU and BNA has done. The glory days of hubs is slipping away. More and more airlines are going P2P. I feel that STL should get whomever they can to initiate as many P2P routes as possible. Don't let any one airline run the entire show or the airport is at the mercy of someone else's whim..


Aiming High and going far..
User currently offlineEjmmsu From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1692 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2908 times:

American's presence there is still nothing to scoff at. STL pax can still get non-stop flights to most all large business destinations when you add AA's presence with all the other airlines flying there. There are also still many commuter flights to most nearby locals.


"If the facts do not conform to the theory, they will have to be disposed of"
User currently offlineStlgph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 9234 posts, RR: 26
Reply 17, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2824 times:

Lambert-

Thing is, Indianapolis is probably the next city to hit a million people. There is little/no competing airport around it offering equal fares. People do make the drive from even places as Cincinnati -and- St. Louis (myself sometimes included) to take advantage of their low airfares. For the most part, Indianapolis is one of the few continuing success stories as far as air traffic growth post 9-11. Go Indianapolis.


ERJ-

The problem with "not having a hub" here is that the new runway, at $1.2 billion and rising every day, was funded on the economics of a hub operation here, as far as landing fees, gate fees, and passenger facility charges. With the elimination of the hub status, the bonds could default and in turn, royally screw the denizens of Missouri. That is why they are so desperate for whatever the whazoo they can get here.




Eternal darkness we all should dread. It's hard to party when you're dead.
User currently offlineSkedguy From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 134 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2751 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Stlgph,

You mention that IND is likely to be a "new hub" once the terminal project is built later this decade and airlines have a brand-new, state-of-the-art facility. You also [correctly] talk about the rising costs at STL vis-a-vis the new runway and reduced landing fees that the airport is collecting.

However, what about paying for the new IND terminal? The irony is that the terminal is going to exact a heavy financial burden on the airlines serving the market, and the costs of operating at IND are likely to increase substantially before they ever come down.

No legacy carrier is going to open up a new hub at IND due to the rising costs, and even if a LCC such as B6 wanted to open a focus city there because of its geographic attractiveness, the operating costs would still be a huge deterrent. TZ is only building its presence there because it is being pushed out of MDW, and NW simply sees blood in the water and wants the traffic (see their actions in MKE).

I’m not saying that your study is incorrect (I haven’t seen it), but I think you should at least give thought to how those costs in IND are going to balance against a relatively small O&D base compared to hubs such as ORD, DFW, ATL, or PHL.

Good luck on your work!


User currently offlineERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6729 posts, RR: 18
Reply 19, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2742 times:

However, what about paying for the new IND terminal? The irony is that the terminal is going to exact a heavy financial burden on the airlines serving the market, and the costs of operating at IND are likely to increase substantially before they ever come down.

I don't know about all that. Here at RDU, RDUAA is basically building a new terminal atop the old one. They are increasing gates from 26 to 40+. A new customs office. A bigger security area. The entire shabbang. But RDU is not raising lease/gate/landing fee rates or anything like that. The airlines are not being affected. The finances for this project is coming from increase parking fees ($1-$2), increased passenger fees ($1-$2), federal grants (the largest contributor), and state grants (the smallest contributor). The entire project (Terminal C renovation and the eventual Terminal A renovation) is going to be funded by a $1 billion grant/loan RDUAA has received. And as stated above, the majority of the money is coming from the federal grants and the increase passenger fees. So it doesn't necessarily have to cause a financial burden on the airlines.



Aiming High and going far..
User currently offlineStlgph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 9234 posts, RR: 26
Reply 20, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2703 times:

Sked—

Thank you for your wishes, but just to clarify, quickly, that my work is going to be focusing on Lambert Airport and not Indianapolis. Although I am sure that Indianapolis will receive a mention, and don’t you worry, I will definitely be talking about O&D bases and the spatial proximity of the ORD market place close by to both airports.

But yes the next post hits the IND terminal project right on the head. The airport is essentially paying for itself with little raising of any landing rates or parking rates. The project has been in the works for years and I believe the entire project, including the revamping of the I-70 access route, is being done with little or no burden to all.

If TZ does make it and revamp their IND operations successfully, I can see how their current MDW operation might be copycated at IND, even with competition from NW.

Cheers and thanks for your wishes!
GH



Eternal darkness we all should dread. It's hard to party when you're dead.
User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9375 posts, RR: 52
Reply 21, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2661 times:

As for where IND is getting its money, a lot of it revolves around FedEx. FedEx is the number one carrier and it pays quite a bit for its operations. Also the city sees developing IND as crucial to the local economy because the one thing that Indiana has is geography for transportation. They want to develop into a huge air, rail and truck hub. The city supports the development and is helping with the bill. The airlines aren't the ones footing the bill entirely, so it might work because the area wants a hub, but it would have to be artificial. IND can't compete with Chicago which is just 150 miles away. O/D there is high, and there are already 4 hubs in that city.

As far as STL goes, I see Frontier as a player. They have some recognition in the area, and have a fair stucture low enough to compete with WN and AA. They won't develop a hub, but MCI and STL provide some growth opportunities for them since their levels of service have dropped in the wake of TWA's demise.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineAa777jr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2630 times:

I flew STL-LGW a few summers ago, sad to see AA isn't utilizing STL for more internationall traffic.

AA777jr


User currently offlineSkedguy From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 134 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2579 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Stlgph,

10-4 on the STL study. I grew up there, so I'm always nostalgic when I recall my childhood sitting at the airport and watching TW 747s, 767s, and L10s come and go. It's just a shame what's happened there.

Anyway, I read you comment below about IND costs. I don't deny that the city might be footing some of the bill as some others have suggested (I admit that I don't know all the specific facts here), but are you absolutely sure what you're saying below is correct?

"But yes the next post hits the IND terminal project right on the head. The airport is essentially paying for itself with little raising of any landing rates or parking rates. The project has been in the works for years and I believe the entire project, including the revamping of the I-70 access route, is being done with little or no burden to all."

Where I work, I know many people are very concerned about the IND situation from a long-term cost perspective, and everything I've heard suggests the opposite of what you're proposing above. On top of that, it's also my understanding that the project has been deferred for a while due to the current financial situation of the most of the carriers there. That alone suggests that the potential cost burdens on the airline tenants are impacting the project.

Just curious about your thoughts.

PS: I recently read that IND, although it saw a 6.4% increase in O&Ds in 2003 versus 2002, still ranks 38 in terms of top 100 US airports by O&Ds. By comparison, STL ranks 28, and MDW ranks 23.


User currently offlineStlgph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 9234 posts, RR: 26
Reply 24, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2559 times:

Sked--

I'd be willing to bet with expansion from ATA and NW, IND's ranking will go up on that list. The airport is underserved as it is and compared to STL and MDW, both of those airports had more nonstop destinations than IND, which up until recently was majorly relying on connecting traffic. Until ATA & NW's recent expansions, IND was never much of an O & D airport, it was just a destination.

Everybody has their own take on the airport, I am sure. Even if the airport was completely self supporting 100% and you showed every person the accounting ledger to prove them so, Ma and Pa up the street would still be swearing money is coming from their pocket to pay for the project. I've also read that while the project was deferred because of the financial state of most airlines, that it was also because the current terminal adequately serves the needs it is already providing. But if traffic is to grow and the airport is to go anywhere on anybody's list, the new terminal will have to be built as the airport is operating at near capacity as it is.

Don't forget, you and I both live in the cornfields where "if you build it, they will come."

;p

Cheers!

GH





Eternal darkness we all should dread. It's hard to party when you're dead.
25 Cloudy : There are destinations that could use a few more frequencies (LAS, LAX, LGA, SAN) and there are few holes AA could fill on the route map (SJC, PDX, SM
26 Pilotpip : STL isn't helping itself out by raising fees as much as they have either. I know they need to keep things running but passing it on to the consumer di
27 Stlgph : I believe all fees for landing, terminal, gate, etc. are raising as of January 1, 2005.
28 LambertMan : According to interactive route map on Southwest's website: LAX LAS SAN SJC SMF PDX and DTW are all Soutwest cities. LAS is a hub in all but name, and
29 Stlgph : Yes but if fees keep raising for the airlines, how long can STL stay within Southwest's operations range of being able to offer tons of flights with l
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Primaris Airlines. When Will They Start? posted Wed Nov 12 2003 04:54:48 by SunValley
When Will AA Start Recalling Pilots? posted Mon Jul 10 2006 02:39:38 by ORDTerminal1
When Will FRA Start Work On T3? posted Tue Apr 25 2006 18:46:47 by FRAspotter
When Will AI Start Serving SFO posted Thu Jan 19 2006 12:16:36 by Camair
When Will Boeing Start Building AC 1st 777-300ER? posted Mon Dec 26 2005 07:14:57 by AirCanada014
DL JFK-KBP When Will It Start? posted Fri Dec 2 2005 05:14:22 by Thepilot730
When Will DL Start Its Flights ATL/TLV? posted Sat Nov 26 2005 18:53:06 by LY777
Oil Price Rising: When Will Airlines Collapse? posted Sat Aug 13 2005 10:15:54 by Udo
When Will Eurofly Start The New Flights? posted Tue May 10 2005 20:46:39 by NightFlier
When Will AA Start DFW-BOG? posted Thu Feb 17 2005 22:49:10 by Avianca