Sun Country is going to use C27.

Gate Diagram for reference.

https://www.flystl.com/uploads/document ... n-2018.pdf

Jshank83 wrote:

Sun Country is going to use C27.

Gate Diagram for reference.

https://www.flystl.com/uploads/document ... n-2018.pdf

What airline is “city gate” shows c27 & 28?

Edit... nm. Looks like operational but open gates available for use.

Correct. Vacant means no jetbridge, City Gate means there is one for use per turn.

AA uses C28 a couple times a day on a per turn basis. Now that they are doing a remodel/reopening C25-30 I am hoping AA just leases it out. Right now it is dumb how they have to open a door to that area just for when it is in use.

Frontier extended their schedule today. Everything stays the same except DEN goes to 2x a day on Monday only. I find that super random to just be one day of the week at 2x.

Jshank83 wrote:

I find that super random to just be one day of the week at 2x.

Everything about F9 is random

Jshank83 wrote:

Frontier extended their schedule today. Everything stays the same except DEN goes to 2x a day on Monday only. I find that super random to just be one day of the week at 2x.

So JAX survived... wow
Now we have 2 airlines from the region to JAX.

So is MBJ just not coming back...

stl07 wrote:

So is MBJ just not coming back...

??

The only service between STL and MBJ is a year-round service via Apple with seasonal service on Southwest starting next spring. Did you mean another airport?

Trololzilla wrote:

stl07 wrote:

So is MBJ just not coming back...

??

The only service between STL and MBJ is a year-round service via Apple with seasonal service on Southwest starting next spring. Did you mean another airport?

Check out the apple charter linup for next year

Meh, I wouldn't look into it too much at the moment; I would imagine there's a bit more flux with charters. Besides, even if Apple stops it, WN will still have service (and have it when it's used most often).

Trololzilla wrote:

Meh, I wouldn't look into it too much at the moment; I would imagine there's a bit more flux with charters. Besides, even if Apple stops it, WN will still have service (and have it when it's used most often).

I emailed he airport about it recently. Got this response.

Montego Bay has not been added as a vacation charter destination for next year. Southwest has committed to March 2019 as a scheduled destination and we'll have to wait and see if that gets extended.

------

I'm hopeful Southwest extends it now. It got decent loads and ran twice a week at times. Apple/Frontier also cut back Cancun for next year in the fall.

I'm wondering if WN knew ahead of schedule that the MBJ flights would be cut, allowing them to wiggle into that market?

Jshank83 wrote:

Trololzilla wrote:

Meh, I wouldn't look into it too much at the moment; I would imagine there's a bit more flux with charters. Besides, even if Apple stops it, WN will still have service (and have it when it's used most often).

I emailed he airport about it recently. Got this response.

Montego Bay has not been added as a vacation charter destination for next year. Southwest has committed to March 2019 as a scheduled destination and we'll have to wait and see if that gets extended.

------

I'm hopeful Southwest extends it now. It got decent loads and ran twice a week at times. Apple/Frontier also cut back Cancun for next year in the fall.

Wow. That would be huge to lose MBJ Jan-Feb. If Apple doesn't add it back would WN have time and resources to make that happen to fill the void?

Jshank83 wrote:

Correct. Vacant means no jetbridge, City Gate means there is one for use per turn.

AA uses C28 a couple times a day on a per turn basis. Now that they are doing a remodel/reopening C25-30 I am hoping AA just leases it out. Right now it is dumb how they have to open a door to that area just for when it is in use.

Yes, C27 and C28 are in a large room behind two small doors with the gate numbers labeled. These are beyond a moving walkway that is not operating and currently covered by carpeting. As Jshank mentioned, the doors are closed when there are no flights going in or out. It's a two-story room, but there's another level visible above, with a walled-off staircase near C27 leading up; I think it is the old TWA lounge, but I'm not sure. I also know that the closed FIS is in that general area, near the end of C.

AA does use C28, and I've been through it. I was on a morning flight to LAX on an L-US A319 back in June 2018, and that was my first time using it. I also arrived at C28 on an MD-83 from DFW in August. It is quite a slog from C28 to bag claim, though.

While AA does use C28, I've never seen anyone use C27. It makes sense that SY would operate from it; if more airlines, such as JetBlue or Spirit, came in, they could use C27 as well. I think SY should also put their check-in at the vacant area next to Air Choice One in the lobby.

maps4ltd wrote:

It's a two-story room, but there's another level visible above, with a walled-off staircase near C27 leading up; I think it is the old TWA lounge, but I'm not sure. I also know that the closed FIS is in that general area, near the end of C.

Correct on both accounts.

Speaking of which: in the past, both United and Delta have expressed interest in opening a lounge at Lambert. There doesn't really seem to be much if any room to do so near Concourse A; could either carrier, long-term, choose to move over to C and also remodel the old TWA lounge into a useful space? Otherwise, could we perhaps see another common-use lounge take that space in the long-term?

Trololzilla wrote:

maps4ltd wrote:

It's a two-story room, but there's another level visible above, with a walled-off staircase near C27 leading up; I think it is the old TWA lounge, but I'm not sure. I also know that the closed FIS is in that general area, near the end of C.

Correct on both accounts.

Speaking of which: in the past, both United and Delta have expressed interest in opening a lounge at Lambert. There doesn't really seem to be much if any room to do so near Concourse A; could either carrier, long-term, choose to move over to C and also remodel the old TWA lounge into a useful space? Otherwise, could we perhaps see another common-use lounge take that space in the long-term?

Delta considered a Sky Club in a modestly sized space in concourse A when STL was an "s curve" city, but I doubt that's still an option. Who knows what kind of condition the current lounge space is in on the third story of Concourse C. I've always wondered if anyone has any pictures of that space - I faintly remember it as a kid and, like many others, have some pretty cool memories of St. Louis' brush with being an international airport hub. I found the article link below over at Urban STL detailing the construction of Concourses C and D. Pretty cool stuff.

https://web.archive.org/web/20120514014 ... 9_26-1.pdf

maps4ltd wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

Correct. Vacant means no jetbridge, City Gate means there is one for use per turn.

AA uses C28 a couple times a day on a per turn basis. Now that they are doing a remodel/reopening C25-30 I am hoping AA just leases it out. Right now it is dumb how they have to open a door to that area just for when it is in use.

Yes, C27 and C28 are in a large room behind two small doors with the gate numbers labeled. These are beyond a moving walkway that is not operating and currently covered by carpeting. As Jshank mentioned, the doors are closed when there are no flights going in or out. It's a two-story room, but there's another level visible above, with a walled-off staircase near C27 leading up; I think it is the old TWA lounge, but I'm not sure. I also know that the closed FIS is in that general area, near the end of C.

AA does use C28, and I've been through it. I was on a morning flight to LAX on an L-US A319 back in June 2018, and that was my first time using it. I also arrived at C28 on an MD-83 from DFW in August. It is quite a slog from C28 to bag claim, though.

While AA does use C28, I've never seen anyone use C27. It makes sense that SY would operate from it; if more airlines, such as JetBlue or Spirit, came in, they could use C27 as well. I think SY should also put their check-in at the vacant area next to Air Choice One in the lobby.

I think AA uses C27 sometimes also. But it's pretty rare. Way less than C28. There was a PFC document out a year or two ago that said how often C27/28 was used by AA. I might still have it downloaded somewhere but I'm not sure.

I think the C FIS was under it. But as zilla mentioned you are correct about it being at the end.

JetBlue, etc would also have 29/30 available after the open them back up in March if someone new comes.

https://travelguide.wowair.com/?utm_sou ... 1535504529
Here's something I didn't quite expect...
Hit the arrow at the right side of the banner once then hit it again

Yeah that looks to be part of the marketing incentives promised to WOW. There was even a nice full-page ad about STL a few months back, if I can find it.

I have two itineraries booked for travel to Europe via DL next year. All flights in and out of STL were booked with mainline jets (mostly 717s) coming and going, but have recently been changed to regional jets. I’m sure that this may be normal, but it’s a bit disappointing.

Anyone know if there is a main reason for this? Seems a bit early to determine load predictions.

jrkstl wrote:

I have two itineraries booked for travel to Europe via DL next year. All flights in and out of STL were booked with mainline jets (mostly 717s) coming and going, but have recently been changed to regional jets. I’m sure that this may be normal, but it’s a bit disappointing.

Anyone know if there is a main reason for this? Seems a bit early to determine load predictions.

Are they E-Jets? that might explain it

CRJ-700 and CRJ-900

Not the end of the world, I realize...

Jeff

No complaints about Delta Connection CRJ7/9 here. I've found it to be comfortable and usually get a movie in on the Delta studio on my phone.

[threeid][/threeid]

Trololzilla wrote:

Yeah that looks to be part of the marketing incentives promised to WOW. There was even a nice full-page ad about STL a few months back, if I can find it.

I like the travel blogs. Neat idea. As others state, we “don’t have tourism” yet we have a ton to do here. I know we aren’t Chicago or MSP, but I think about when we have friends visit we spend 3-4 days and put a dent in the Must Dos for visitors. Pretty excited to see how this all plays out for us.

https://travelguide.wowair.com/category/st-louis/

TWA302 wrote:

[threeid][/threeid]

Trololzilla wrote:

Yeah that looks to be part of the marketing incentives promised to WOW. There was even a nice full-page ad about STL a few months back, if I can find it.

I like the travel blogs. Neat idea. As others state, we “don’t have tourism” yet we have a ton to do here. I know we aren’t Chicago or MSP, but I think about when we have friends visit we spend 3-4 days and put a dent in the Must Dos for visitors. Pretty excited to see how this all plays out for us.

https://travelguide.wowair.com/category/st-louis/

Scout Guide is launch their Saint Louis version this week. It's kind of lame and aimed at middle-aged housewives but still a large network, good for Saint Louis to have one.

jrkstl wrote:

I have two itineraries booked for travel to Europe via DL next year. All flights in and out of STL were booked with mainline jets (mostly 717s) coming and going, but have recently been changed to regional jets. I’m sure that this may be normal, but it’s a bit disappointing.

Anyone know if there is a main reason for this? Seems a bit early to determine load predictions.

Depending on when they are they could switch back. I have had my flights switch a couple times before. I like 900s and 700s though. I am a fan of no middle seat, especially when traveling with someone else. I assume you are flying through DTW (possibly MSP)?

maps4ltd wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

Correct. Vacant means no jetbridge, City Gate means there is one for use per turn.

AA uses C28 a couple times a day on a per turn basis. Now that they are doing a remodel/reopening C25-30 I am hoping AA just leases it out. Right now it is dumb how they have to open a door to that area just for when it is in use.

Yes, C27 and C28 are in a large room behind two small doors with the gate numbers labeled. These are beyond a moving walkway that is not operating and currently covered by carpeting. As Jshank mentioned, the doors are closed when there are no flights going in or out. It's a two-story room, but there's another level visible above, with a walled-off staircase near C27 leading up; I think it is the old TWA lounge, but I'm not sure. I also know that the closed FIS is in that general area, near the end of C.

AA does use C28, and I've been through it. I was on a morning flight to LAX on an L-US A319 back in June 2018, and that was my first time using it. I also arrived at C28 on an MD-83 from DFW in August. It is quite a slog from C28 to bag claim, though.

While AA does use C28, I've never seen anyone use C27. It makes sense that SY would operate from it; if more airlines, such as JetBlue or Spirit, came in, they could use C27 as well. I think SY should also put their check-in at the vacant area next to Air Choice One in the lobby.

Yeah, that's the second Ambassador club that TWA had. I think it closed around the same time as the merger. I've been up there once. It has great views of the 12/30s.

Jshank83 wrote:

Depending on when they are they could switch back. I have had my flights switch a couple times before. I like 900s and 700s though. I am a fan of no middle seat, especially when traveling with someone else. I assume you are flying through DTW (possibly MSP)?

Yes. One trip is via DTW and the other is MSP.

I am nerdly happy that our trip in March to Budapest includes an A359 from DTW-AMS

jrkstl wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

Depending on when they are they could switch back. I have had my flights switch a couple times before. I like 900s and 700s though. I am a fan of no middle seat, especially when traveling with someone else. I assume you are flying through DTW (possibly MSP)?

Yes. One trip is via DTW and the other is MSP.

I am nerdly happy that our trip in March to Budapest includes an A359 from DTW-AMS

Let me know how it is. I could have taken one to AMS but opted for a 330 for the 2 seats together seating.

Jshank83 wrote:

Let me know how it is. I could have taken one to AMS but opted for a 330 for the 2 seats together seating.

Will do. I too normally like the seating on the 330, but had hoped to upgrade to premium economy on the 359. Since it appears that our ticket class (purchased via river cruise line) doesn’t allow it, we’ve chosen aisle seats for both of us.

jrkstl wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

Let me know how it is. I could have taken one to AMS but opted for a 330 for the 2 seats together seating.

Will do. I too normally like the seating on the 330, but had hoped to upgrade to premium economy on the 359. Since it appears that our ticket class (purchased via river cruise line) doesn’t allow it, we’ve chosen aisle seats for both of us.

That is what my wife and I normally do on narrow bodies. We sit across the aisle from each other. Premium economy looks nice on the 359 but its also a decent jump in price (which I guess makes sense). We did economy plus on our AMS flight for the overnight and got a bulkhead which worked out nicely. But it's cheaper than the new premium economy, obviously.

Have fun on your trip!

TWA302 wrote:

[
I like the travel blogs. Neat idea. As others state, we “don’t have tourism” yet we have a ton to do here. I know we aren’t Chicago or MSP, but I think about when we have friends visit we spend 3-4 days and put a dent in the Must Dos for visitors. Pretty excited to see how this all plays out for us.

https://travelguide.wowair.com/category/st-louis/

I've traveled to nearly every major city in the US and just about every corner of the country. There are things we don't have. We don't have an ocean. We don't have mountains. We don't have canyons. We're not as big as the banner cities of New York, Chicago, and LA. We don't have quite as many museums or shows. But honestly? There's as much to do here as nearly anywhere. There's as much to see here as Seattle, Minneapolis, or even Philadelphia or Boston. (None of which means I didn't enjoy Seattle, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, or Boston. I did.)

It's not all about size. We genuinely have as much to offer as a much larger city since . . . wait for it . . . we were much larger when it mattered. The big era of institutional foundation and expansion was fully a century ago. As a result we punch well above our current weight. To the surprise of literally everyone I've ever shown around the town. We have tourism. We have the potential for quite a lot more. What do you want? We have museums. We have art. We have music. We have parks. We have industrial exploration. If there's any problem it's that in a lot of cases it's rather spread out. (Like everything else in this town.) If we could concentrate all our science and technology displays in one place we'd have an absolutely world class science and technology museum. But it's spread out between several museums and collections, not all of which have "science" or "technology" in the name. The same is true of history, art, and probably everything else. This can be both a curse and a blessing. It can dilute the "wow" factor of things a bit. But there's enough concentration that the highlights really are quite impressive in their own right, and there's always more to do: smaller but darn tantalizing things just over the horizon. The art museum is great, but it's still worth seeing Lauermeir, Wash U. Pulitzer, and a half dozen other collections around town that may or may not have art in the name. (The Botanical Garden, for instance, has a bang-up sculpture collection even though it's not in the mission statement.) You've just never seen it all. (Even me.) Which makes an impression all its own.

I think we are a tourist destination, more than folks realize locally. But we really could be even more of one. There's enough here worth seeing. Thanks to the arch our picture is in the consulate in Ho Chi Minh City, and I'd wager most other US embassies and consulates around the world. (One of maybe three or four US cities. New York, I think was in there. The Statue of Liberty, at least. But maybe not even Chicago. There really weren't very many.) We can do this. There's more beyond the shadow of the wicket than you would guess. More music. More art. More food. More culture. More to see.

I have lived in Seattle and St. Louis and can confidently say that St. Louis is not even remotely comparable to Seattle. Earlier you mentioned that St. Louis doesn’t have mountains, an ocean, or a bigger city than something like LA or NYC. Seattle is definitely a bigger city than St. Louis and is growing at close to the same rate as the Bay Area. It also has mountains (most notably Mt. Rainier) and an ocean. This is why Seattle has no problem attracting international/trans-pacific/trans-Atlantic flights. Seattle is also home to 3 very large companies, one in which denied St. Louis as their second HQ: Amazon, Microsoft, and Boeing. While Boeing has a large presence in St. Louis, it is in no way close to the scope that Seattle has.

737MAX10 wrote:

I have lived in Seattle and St. Louis and can confidently say that St. Louis is not even remotely comparable to Seattle. Earlier you mentioned that St. Louis doesn’t have mountains, an ocean, or a bigger city than something like LA or NYC. Seattle is definitely a bigger city than St. Louis and is growing at close to the same rate as the Bay Area. It also has mountains (most notably Mt. Rainier) and an ocean. This is why Seattle has no problem attracting international/trans-pacific/trans-Atlantic flights. Seattle is also home to 3 very large companies, one in which denied St. Louis as their second HQ: Amazon, Microsoft, and Boeing. While Boeing has a large presence in St. Louis, it is in no way close to the scope that Seattle has.

But have you ever been to the Lake of the Ozarks?

LambertMan wrote:

737MAX10 wrote:

I have lived in Seattle and St. Louis and can confidently say that St. Louis is not even remotely comparable to Seattle. Earlier you mentioned that St. Louis doesn’t have mountains, an ocean, or a bigger city than something like LA or NYC. Seattle is definitely a bigger city than St. Louis and is growing at close to the same rate as the Bay Area. It also has mountains (most notably Mt. Rainier) and an ocean. This is why Seattle has no problem attracting international/trans-pacific/trans-Atlantic flights. Seattle is also home to 3 very large companies, one in which denied St. Louis as their second HQ: Amazon, Microsoft, and Boeing. While Boeing has a large presence in St. Louis, it is in no way close to the scope that Seattle has.

But have you ever been to the Lake of the Ozarks?

Absolutely, and I really enjoy the Lake of the Ozarks. However it does not compare to Lake Washington or Lake Union. Those also happen to be right by the city within walking distance and do not require a rental car to get there.

737MAX10 wrote:

LambertMan wrote:

737MAX10 wrote:

I have lived in Seattle and St. Louis and can confidently say that St. Louis is not even remotely comparable to Seattle. Earlier you mentioned that St. Louis doesn’t have mountains, an ocean, or a bigger city than something like LA or NYC. Seattle is definitely a bigger city than St. Louis and is growing at close to the same rate as the Bay Area. It also has mountains (most notably Mt. Rainier) and an ocean. This is why Seattle has no problem attracting international/trans-pacific/trans-Atlantic flights. Seattle is also home to 3 very large companies, one in which denied St. Louis as their second HQ: Amazon, Microsoft, and Boeing. While Boeing has a large presence in St. Louis, it is in no way close to the scope that Seattle has.

But have you ever been to the Lake of the Ozarks?

Absolutely, and I really enjoy the Lake of the Ozarks. However it does not compare to Lake Washington or Lake Union. Those also happen to be right by the city within walking distance and do not require a rental car to get there.

I am pretty sure Lambert was being sarcastic.

Jshank83 wrote:

737MAX10 wrote:

LambertMan wrote:

But have you ever been to the Lake of the Ozarks?

Absolutely, and I really enjoy the Lake of the Ozarks. However it does not compare to Lake Washington or Lake Union. Those also happen to be right by the city within walking distance and do not require a rental car to get there.

I am pretty sure Lambert was being sarcastic.

That would make sense! Haha I’m pretty defensive about my favorite city that I’ve ever been to. One of reasons why I love it so much is that is has a ton of international flights from flagship carriers in a city not nearly as big as LA or NYC. Definitely make a trip out there if you can / if you haven’t been before. Alaska Airlines is fantastic for getting out there on their 739.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

737MAX10 wrote:

I have lived in Seattle and St. Louis and can confidently say that St. Louis is not even remotely comparable to Seattle. Earlier you mentioned that St. Louis doesn’t have mountains, an ocean, or a bigger city than something like LA or NYC. Seattle is definitely a bigger city than St. Louis and is growing at close to the same rate as the Bay Area. It also has mountains (most notably Mt. Rainier) and an ocean. This is why Seattle has no problem attracting international/trans-pacific/trans-Atlantic flights. Seattle is also home to 3 very large companies, one in which denied St. Louis as their second HQ: Amazon, Microsoft, and Boeing. While Boeing has a large presence in St. Louis, it is in no way close to the scope that Seattle has.

Ehh, to me it seems that growth is very quickly becoming problematic in Seattle, i.e. it's starting to have a lot of the same affordability problems the Bay Area has been dealing with for years. I'd much rather have more steady, sustainable growth here than boom.

Boeing's operation here is naturally smaller because it's almost entirely military, whereas Seattle gets most of the civilian stuff (and military versions of civilian products). There's not infinite demand for fighters around the world as there is for, say, a 737, so the operation is sized accordingly (here's hoping that Boeing wins the T-X contract).

It's also seeming more and more likely that Amazon played everyone for that "HQ2" scam. They'll likely just end up building something near D.C. so they can be a constant buzz in legislator's ears.

Not to say that I disagree with you that Seattle is currently more desirable than St. Louis; it absolutely is. But I think it's unfair to compare the two cities just in the ways that you have.

^Also the original poster only was comparing them on tourism, not everything (business climate, etc) so what companies are there vs here really isn't part of it.

737MAX10 wrote:

I have lived in Seattle and St. Louis and can confidently say that St. Louis is not even remotely comparable to Seattle. Earlier you mentioned that St. Louis doesn’t have mountains, an ocean, or a bigger city than something like LA or NYC. Seattle is definitely a bigger city than St. Louis and is growing at close to the same rate as the Bay Area. It also has mountains (most notably Mt. Rainier) and an ocean. This is why Seattle has no problem attracting international/trans-pacific/trans-Atlantic flights. Seattle is also home to 3 very large companies, one in which denied St. Louis as their second HQ: Amazon, Microsoft, and Boeing. While Boeing has a large presence in St. Louis, it is in no way close to the scope that Seattle has.

We're discussing tourism, not growth. We already addressed mountains and oceans. Yes, Seattle has nearby mountains and oceans. We're talking other things. In terms of parks, museums, music, and cultural attractions I think we are easily the equal of Seattle and quite probably the better. We have a better orchestra and a better zoo. We have a closely equivalent art museum. We have a better botanical garden by leagues upon leagues. A better Japanese garden. Better parks. But no mountains or beaches. Meh. I'd say it's about even at best until you get to the mountains. Yes, Seattle is bigger. 3.9 to 2.9. Sure. But that's not a huge difference. But it's also more crowded, more wet, and colder. And far more expensive. And it has Spamazon and Microsoft. But who's going to tour a corporate campus? I'll admit, I'd enjoy touring the Boeing plant. Once. But Microsoft? It's an office park. Who cares unless you work there? Seattle ain't all that. Seriously. Not bad. But not special. Average. Normal. Absolutely dead typical of American cities. Closely equivalent to Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, or Philadelphia to a cultural tourist. Better than Atlanta. Probably not quite Boston, though close. Not Chicago or New York. Not New Orleans. Not Washington DC. (Which, to be fair, cheats. And punches far above its weight.) Not San Francisco in its heyday, but I haven't been to SF since the early 80s and I gather it's a much less pleasant place to be now. (I certainly don't intend to ever go back.) Remember. We're talking specifically tourism. Not where to live. I'm NOT talking about growth. I'm NOT talking about jobs or flights. I'm not even talking landscape. I'm only talking about where a well informed urban tourist could have a good time. Cultural stuff. And the US really and truly only has one dominant culture. No matter what some folks might tell you.

Me? I don't really do US city tourism much anymore unless perhaps it's on the way to somewhere else. Seen them all, save a few in Texas, Hawaii, and Alaska. What's the point to going back? Pretty much every city in the US is the same after a while, but for size. Same kinds of museums. Basically the same restaurants. Same music, with a few minor regional variations. Same shows. Same architectural styles. Same same same. I go to deserts. Sometimes mountains. And maybe, once in a while, an ocean if it's not out of the way. But if you want to see a US city as you're from not the US? This one is good and you saw the picture in your embassy. You probably did not see Seattle.

You want to go skiing? Go to Silverton, or maybe Ouray CO. Gorgeous towns. Stunning mountains. Great snow. Not too crowded. You want a nice ocean? Go to Bar Harbor ME. You want a beach? St. Augustine is great.

Not knocking Seattle. It has a lot. It does. You have skiing and beaches and culture. That's non-trivial, even if it's not the absolute best skiing, beaches, or culture. It's a good place to go. Easy button. But I don't think it's worlds better than St. Louis for tourism. We have better culture and more character. Not worlds better, but somewhat. Just . . . no mountains. You have us beat there. Take it. Run with it. But try not to be a complete asshat about it.

symphonicpoet wrote:

................Seattle ain't all that. Seriously. Not bad. But not special. Average. Normal. Absolutely dead typical of American cities. Closely equivalent to Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, or Philadelphia to a cultural tourist.....

You lost all credibility, with the above statement. Stating that Cincinnati and Pittsburgh are equivalent to Philadelphia to a cultural tourist clearly proves that you have likely never been to any of them.

Really? Have you no familiarity with the Cincinnati orchestra, which might well be the finest in the US? Or the Carnegie museum? I think you need to go look at everything with a less jaundiced eye.

In fairness I have no desire to start a pissing match. But let's be honest here: to someone from outside most places are much closer to one another than any of us want to think. Even New York and Nashville. And I am quite serious. I've been to all of the cities mentioned. Generally more than once. Several many times. All of them and many many more. And they're all the same, within reason. They're all American. If you don't like that . . . I'm very sorry.

Also: I bloody like Philadelphia. It's a lovely place. If you think it's an insult to be compared to Pittsburgh then you're the one with the problem.

I was wondering...

It seems that Southwest has Saturday-only service to Cancun, but Frontier has daily service. Why? Isn't Frontier known for its sub-daily service? I would think it would be the other way around.

Does anyone have LF data for the STL-CUN flights on both airlines? Thanks.

maps4ltd wrote:

I was wondering...

It seems that Southwest has Saturday-only service to Cancun, but Frontier has daily service. Why? Isn't Frontier known for its sub-daily service? I would think it would be the other way around.

Does anyone have LF data for the STL-CUN flights on both airlines? Thanks.

Frontier flies for Apple Vacations so they help keep the planes full. Frontier just sells extra tickets on the side. Southwest is going daily though starting November 3.

2017 full year
Frontier 81%
Southwest 80% (started October)
2018 Jan-March
Frontier 83.5%
Southwest 88% (Southwest was daily in March)

symphonicpoet wrote:

737MAX10 wrote:

I have lived in Seattle and St. Louis and can confidently say that St. Louis is not even remotely comparable to Seattle. Earlier you mentioned that St. Louis doesn’t have mountains, an ocean, or a bigger city than something like LA or NYC. Seattle is definitely a bigger city than St. Louis and is growing at close to the same rate as the Bay Area. It also has mountains (most notably Mt. Rainier) and an ocean. This is why Seattle has no problem attracting international/trans-pacific/trans-Atlantic flights. Seattle is also home to 3 very large companies, one in which denied St. Louis as their second HQ: Amazon, Microsoft, and Boeing. While Boeing has a large presence in St. Louis, it is in no way close to the scope that Seattle has.

We're discussing tourism, not growth. We already addressed mountains and oceans. Yes, Seattle has nearby mountains and oceans. We're talking other things. In terms of parks, museums, music, and cultural attractions I think we are easily the equal of Seattle and quite probably the better. We have a better orchestra and a better zoo. We have a closely equivalent art museum. We have a better botanical garden by leagues upon leagues. A better Japanese garden. Better parks. But no mountains or beaches. Meh. I'd say it's about even at best until you get to the mountains. Yes, Seattle is bigger. 3.9 to 2.9. Sure. But that's not a huge difference. But it's also more crowded, more wet, and colder. And far more expensive. And it has Spamazon and Microsoft. But who's going to tour a corporate campus? I'll admit, I'd enjoy touring the Boeing plant. Once. But Microsoft? It's an office park. Who cares unless you work there? Seattle ain't all that. Seriously. Not bad. But not special. Average. Normal. Absolutely dead typical of American cities. Closely equivalent to Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, or Philadelphia to a cultural tourist. Better than Atlanta. Probably not quite Boston, though close. Not Chicago or New York. Not New Orleans. Not Washington DC. (Which, to be fair, cheats. And punches far above its weight.) Not San Francisco in its heyday, but I haven't been to SF since the early 80s and I gather it's a much less pleasant place to be now. (I certainly don't intend to ever go back.) Remember. We're talking specifically tourism. Not where to live. I'm NOT talking about growth. I'm NOT talking about jobs or flights. I'm not even talking landscape. I'm only talking about where a well informed urban tourist could have a good time. Cultural stuff. And the US really and truly only has one dominant culture. No matter what some folks might tell you.

Me? I don't really do US city tourism much anymore unless perhaps it's on the way to somewhere else. Seen them all, save a few in Texas, Hawaii, and Alaska. What's the point to going back? Pretty much every city in the US is the same after a while, but for size. Same kinds of museums. Basically the same restaurants. Same music, with a few minor regional variations. Same shows. Same architectural styles. Same same same. I go to deserts. Sometimes mountains. And maybe, once in a while, an ocean if it's not out of the way. But if you want to see a US city as you're from not the US? This one is good and you saw the picture in your embassy. You probably did not see Seattle.

You want to go skiing? Go to Silverton, or maybe Ouray CO. Gorgeous towns. Stunning mountains. Great snow. Not too crowded. You want a nice ocean? Go to Bar Harbor ME. You want a beach? St. Augustine is great.

Not knocking Seattle. It has a lot. It does. You have skiing and beaches and culture. That's non-trivial, even if it's not the absolute best skiing, beaches, or culture. It's a good place to go. Easy button. But I don't think it's worlds better than St. Louis for tourism. We have better culture and more character. Not worlds better, but somewhat. Just . . . no mountains. You have us beat there. Take it. Run with it. But try not to be a complete asshat about it.

Culture? Ok, I'll bite. What does STL have for culture other than some streets/cities named after some French guys and Soulard? Oh, that's right, we have the biggest concentration of Bosnians in the US. We're clearly a major US city.

Those things you listed are nice, but tourists aren't coming to STL to see that stuff when they can see equivalents in any number of major US cities. No one is flying to STL to go to the art museum or the zoo and no one is flying to STL because of the "culture".

Interesting...
Silver is bidding for FLW service against cape air

I like how midwestindy puts out some of his info so I am going to copy it. I won't do it for everything but I will for some routes.

I put in the INTL LF numbers for March (I'll do domestic June later this week)

YYZ on AC
Total seats up 58% Total passengers up 28%

CUN on F9
Total seats even, Total passengers down 6%

HUX on Swift
Total seats up 10%, Total passengers up 61%

MBJ on Swift
Total seats up 61%, Total passengers up 20%

PVR on Swift
Total seats up 13%, Total passengers up 37%

PUJ on Swift
Total seats up 13%, Total passengers up 1%

Link to LF spreadsheet.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

stl07 wrote:

Interesting...
Silver is bidding for FLW service against cape air

Do you have a link? I can't find anything. To what airport?

Interesting seeing they just cut some routes.

Fort Leonard Wood

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... aKLoN1rQX_

stl07 wrote:

Fort Leonard Wood

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... aKLoN1rQX_

I thought I was googling it right, but apparently not. I can't read their articles but thanks for posting anyway.

To what airport, I meant from Fort Leonardwood to what airport? I figured Silver might fly somewhere else than STL.