FYI The June update terminal construction status report was posted today https://www.buildkci.com/wp-content/upl ... 6.2022.pdf

Here are the Q1 2022 PDEW's out of MCI to the top contiguous U.S. markets traveled to from MCI that don't currently have WN nonstop service out of MCI:
MCI-SLC - 115
MCI-BOS/MHT/PVD - 114
MCI-DTW - 109
MCI-MSP - 100
MCI-CLT - 92
MCI-PHL - 82
MCI-SAT - 79
MCI-RDU - 61
MCI-JAX - 52
MCI-SMF - 51
MCI-CLE/CAK - 46
MCI-PSP - 37
MCI-CMH - 35
MCI-ABQ - 35
MCI-PIT - 34
MCI-ORF - 32
MCI-IND - 32
MCI-TUS - 31
MCI-CVG - 30
MCI-ABQ - 28

jplatts wrote:

Here are the Q1 2022 PDEW's out of MCI to the top contiguous U.S. markets traveled to from MCI that don't currently have WN nonstop service out of MCI:
MCI-SLC - 115
MCI-BOS/MHT/PVD - 114
MCI-DTW - 109
MCI-MSP - 100
MCI-CLT - 92
MCI-PHL - 82
MCI-SAT - 79
MCI-RDU - 61
MCI-JAX - 52
MCI-SMF - 51
MCI-CLE/CAK - 46
MCI-PSP - 37
MCI-CMH - 35
MCI-ABQ - 35
MCI-PIT - 34
MCI-ORF - 32
MCI-IND - 32
MCI-TUS - 31
MCI-CVG - 30
MCI-ABQ - 28

ABQ is listed twice at 35 and 28.

FlyingSicilian wrote:

ABQ is listed twice at 35 and 28.

I just noticed that error.

The PDEW of MCI-ABQ was 35 passengers/day in Q1 2022 and the PDEW of MCI-ELP was 28 passengers/day in Q1 2022.

FlyingSicilian wrote:

jplatts wrote:

Here are the Q1 2022 PDEW's out of MCI to the top contiguous U.S. markets traveled to from MCI that don't currently have WN nonstop service out of MCI:
MCI-SLC - 115
MCI-BOS/MHT/PVD - 114
MCI-DTW - 109
MCI-MSP - 100
MCI-CLT - 92
MCI-PHL - 82
MCI-SAT - 79
MCI-RDU - 61
MCI-JAX - 52
MCI-SMF - 51
MCI-CLE/CAK - 46
MCI-PSP - 37
MCI-CMH - 35
MCI-ABQ - 35
MCI-PIT - 34
MCI-ORF - 32
MCI-IND - 32
MCI-TUS - 31
MCI-CVG - 30
MCI-ABQ - 28

ABQ is listed twice at 35 and 28.

I remember flying PHX-ABQ-MCI a few years ago on WN. When did ABQ nonstop service end?

Vctony wrote:

I remember flying PHX-ABQ-MCI a few years ago on WN. When did ABQ nonstop service end?

WN dropped MCI-ABQ nonstop service 2 years ago due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and WN was still operating MCI-ABQ nonstop service 3 years ago.

strangeplanes wrote:

Beautiful

Build KCI posted a pic on their Twitter the other day of the gate signs, and WOW do the gate areas look TINY. It reminds me of the H and K concourses in ORD. Not exactly what you'd call modern. That is awfully concerning for a brand new, state-of-the-art airport. Please tell me this is just some type of optical illusion.

KCaviator wrote:

Build KCI posted a pic on their Twitter the other day of the gate signs, and WOW do the gate areas look TINY. It reminds me of the H and K concourses in ORD. Not exactly what you'd call modern. That is awfully concerning for a brand new, state-of-the-art airport. Please tell me this is just some type of optical illusion.

I dug up the pic and the concourse looks much smaller than I expected also so maybe it is just a weird angle or something.

pmanni1 wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

strangeplanes wrote:

KCI route director posted his travels in Germany this week. Lufthansa or Eurowings to KC next year?

Justin Meyer tweeted he was headed to Düsseldorf, which is eurowings headquarters, and was boarding a eurowings flight at LHR. Could be nothing but..

In order for an international flight to work the airline would have to have business class and first class customers. Discount carriers won't work. Businesses aren't going to want to put executives on low cost airlines.

Edelweiss would be perfect

[photoid][/photoid]

Jshank83 wrote:

KCaviator wrote:

Build KCI posted a pic on their Twitter the other day of the gate signs, and WOW do the gate areas look TINY. It reminds me of the H and K concourses in ORD. Not exactly what you'd call modern. That is awfully concerning for a brand new, state-of-the-art airport. Please tell me this is just some type of optical illusion.

I dug up the pic and the concourse looks much smaller than I expected also so maybe it is just a weird angle or something.

A shot using a zoom lense would make the imagery look flatter (and the rooms smaller)

Yikes ... concourse looks extremely small.

The concourse with gates on both sides is 100 feet across, which is the same as SLC and DTW for a couple quick examples. I think it is not only the photo, but maybe that particular gate. The image in question does make that hold room look quite small but also does not show how much further back it goes behind the photographer. Can be hard to judge scale in the photos, but here is a gallery with departure lounges that look on par with most modern terminals.

https://www.buildkci.com/images/departu ... ake-shape/

QXorVX wrote:

The concourse with gates on both sides is 100 feet across, which is the same as SLC and DTW for a couple quick examples. I think it is not only the photo, but maybe that particular gate. The image in question does make that hold room look quite small but also does not show how much further back it goes behind the photographer. Can be hard to judge scale in the photos, but here is a gallery with departure lounges that look on par with most modern terminals.

https://www.buildkci.com/images/departu ... ake-shape/

These pics still make it look small to me, but again I am sure they will be fine. If it is on par with DTW then it should be good. Maybe I was thinking taller ceilings all the way across or something. I think it is always hard to judge size with nothing in the pic (seats/people/desks/etc).

Ive been thru Denver's new gates, they are nice. Just more light would have been better. But again once we see people in the space it will be easier to judge
https://thepointsguy.com/news/southwest ... concourse/

Speaking of MCI-ABQ, I remember when EA had their mini hub there and flew MCI-ABQ with a tag to TUS via the lovely 727

halrudy wrote:

Speaking of MCI-ABQ, I remember when EA had their mini hub there and flew MCI-ABQ with a tag to TUS via the lovely 727

that flight is actually referenced in the hilarious movie Outrageous Fortune filmed in 1987, offering the customer an alternative flight to ABQ "I've got a connection available thru Kansas City"

sz1998 wrote:

Yikes ... concourse looks extremely small.

I thought the same thing. Here is a picture of people walking through the area for reference.

Looks wider than St Louis.

If each wing has 10 gates there will not much traffic circulating down those corridors

Tons of photos and videos from a tour today were posted on Twitter.
https://twitter.com/zachishere/status/1 ... vxBKfFpTTw

RJNUT wrote:

halrudy wrote:

Speaking of MCI-ABQ, I remember when EA had their mini hub there and flew MCI-ABQ with a tag to TUS via the lovely 727

that flight is actually referenced in the hilarious movie Outrageous Fortune filmed in 1987, offering the customer an alternative flight to ABQ "I've got a connection available thru Kansas City"

Y E S ! And even better, at the time the EA connection through MCI was indeed faster than the TW connection through STL so it was actually plausible that they caught up to the man they were chasing after by catching the KC connection.

strangeplanes wrote:

Looks wider than St Louis.

Id hope it is, if it isn't that is a huge miss. Are there measurements anywhere? I would be curious to see them to compare to some other airports just to gauge it better.

I’m not sure the hallway is bigger than STL. If you look at the cart with the trash cans on it, the cart is usually 32” wide. That means the blue tape squares are more than likely 4 feet wide. I count 8 squares across meaning that hall is 32 feet wide. The eleven people wearing safety vests seem to fill the space. I would hate to see what the hall will look like when one plane of 150 people are deplaning while another 150 people patiently wait their time to board. That area will be packed… and that’s with just one plane. I do like all of the natural light that comes in from all the windows as seen in other photos.

Jshank83 wrote:

strangeplanes wrote:

Looks wider than St Louis.

Id hope it is, if it isn't that is a huge miss. Are there measurements anywhere? I would be curious to see them to compare to some other airports just to gauge it better.

Measuring on Google Earth, here are some dimensions for total concourse widths at a few airports.

MCI - 100'
DEN new expansion - 140'
STL - 75'
ATL ranges from 60-120'
DTW - 100'
SLC - 100-120'

DEN1895 wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

strangeplanes wrote:

Looks wider than St Louis.

Id hope it is, if it isn't that is a huge miss. Are there measurements anywhere? I would be curious to see them to compare to some other airports just to gauge it better.

Measuring on Google Earth, here are some dimensions for total concourse widths at a few airports.

MCI - 100'
DEN new expansion - 140'
STL - 75'
ATL ranges from 60-120'
DTW - 100'
SLC - 100-120'

I am more curious on the inside walkways between the gates, but I know thats hard to tell on imagery

DEN1895 wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

strangeplanes wrote:

Looks wider than St Louis.

Id hope it is, if it isn't that is a huge miss. Are there measurements anywhere? I would be curious to see them to compare to some other airports just to gauge it better.

Measuring on Google Earth, here are some dimensions for total concourse widths at a few airports.

MCI - 100'
DEN new expansion - 140'
STL - 75'
ATL ranges from 60-120'
DTW - 100'
SLC - 100-120'

Thanks for that. Its probably going to be fine, the new DEN areas are wider than the originals which are probably closer to 120’, and those areas like UA B gates have 4 moving sidewalks in the middle; UA typically uses the equivalent of two gates for widebodies and I would expect the same if MCI someday had widebodies. MCI will be only 6-8 gates per side long from the central node, no moving walkways; WN is 73G or 738, legacies are today at largest 757, 739, or 321s mixed with RJs. Planned expansion to 50 gates comes by extending A South.

I think it would only be an issue if B were to be significantly lengthened (which would require moving existing structures) necessitating moving walkways… and it might be easier to add a concourse parallel to A South where current Terminal C stands today… but either of those would far future unless a hub were established (unfortunately not likely).

That’s what I posted about. There are only around 10 gates in each wing so the hallways only need to support local traffic to that set of gates. It’s not like STL, IND, Denver, ATL, etc where you have to walk past a lot of gates to get to your own.

It is definitely better than what they have now…. Looking forward to seeing it

Found this on another website. Dotted lines show future expansion areas:

DEN1895 wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

strangeplanes wrote:

Looks wider than St Louis.

Id hope it is, if it isn't that is a huge miss. Are there measurements anywhere? I would be curious to see them to compare to some other airports just to gauge it better.

Measuring on Google Earth, here are some dimensions for total concourse widths at a few airports.

MCI - 100'
DEN new expansion - 140'
STL - 75'
ATL ranges from 60-120'
DTW - 100'
SLC - 100-120'

Shocking DTW is the same width. That just shows what the interior architecture does to perception. DTW feels a lot bigger than those pictures look with the narrow hallway.

Width is good, the wide open gate house shots prove how long it really is.

There is also the second aspect that many don't appreciate yet while getting caught up on concourse width, plenty of restrooms beyond security. I have to tell friends if you land at MCI, leave security first before using the facilities.

strangeplanes wrote:

Found this on another website. Dotted lines show future expansion areas:

A better look at the 50 gate expansion:

strangeplanes wrote:

strangeplanes wrote:

Found this on another website. Dotted lines show future expansion areas:

A better look at the 50 gate expansion:

Is there any projection on when they think they would add it? or just for some date in the future. Obviously it is pretty early to think about or they would have built it from the start. Smart to have the option to plan down the road for future decades.

Jshank83 wrote:

strangeplanes wrote:

strangeplanes wrote:

Found this on another website. Dotted lines show future expansion areas:

A better look at the 50 gate expansion:

Is there any projection on when they think they would add it? or just for some date in the future. Obviously it is pretty early to think about or they would have built it from the start. Smart to have the option to plan down the road for future decades.

The first few gates can be added immediately once Terminak B is demolished. The full build out requires a head house expansion.

strangeplanes wrote:

strangeplanes wrote:

Found this on another website. Dotted lines show future expansion areas:

A better look at the 50 gate expansion:

Looks like a small space for 50 more gates

strangeplanes wrote:

strangeplanes wrote:

Found this on another website. Dotted lines show future expansion areas:

A better look at the 50 gate expansion:

Thanks for posting. I was a bit curious as to how gates numbered to B69 given planned growth to 50 gates and the diagram also shows where wide-body multi-bridge capable gates are - across from the FIS in A South.

I would guess the headhouse would only need to be expanded if more ticket counters or baggage carousels (or more FIS space, but that’s hard to imagine today) are needed for O&D and or added carriers. If it is somehow more connecting traffic or existing carriers growth, perhaps just the expanded concourse.

KC is pushing hard for BA with London the top contender for MCI-TATL and the top target for service (no surprise). Airport leaders recently met with BA in May 2022 (and plenty times in the past) with the goal to have them launch by 2024 (sorry, don't expect any announcement this fall) or at least before the WC. The 2026 WC was used as one of the selling points as KC is the only host city without long haul flights. 400+ PDEW to Europe with plenty more potential from neighboring cities like ICT and OMA who would likely drive to KC to use the flight. LHR is also the most sought after European city by area companies.

https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/in ... -to-europe

I'm now thinking the recent $5 million incentive was to counteract IND's offer. I'm not concerned with BA's recent mention of IND from last year as airlines change plans at the last minute all the time. KC has slightly more traffic to LHR than IND, a greater catchment area and is farther away from a major hub.

trexel94 wrote:

KC is pushing hard for BA with London the top contender for MCI-TATL and the top target for service (no surprise). Airport leaders recently met with BA in May 2022 (and plenty times in the past) with the goal to have them launch by 2024 (sorry, don't expect any announcement this fall) or at least before the WC. The 2026 WC was used as one of the selling points as KC is the only host city without long haul flights. 400+ PDEW to Europe with plenty more potential from neighboring cities like ICT and OMA who would likely drive to KC to use the flight. LHR is also the most sought after European city by area companies.

https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/in ... -to-europe

I'm now thinking the recent $5 million incentive was to counteract IND's offer. I'm not concerned with BA's recent mention of IND from last year as airlines change plans at the last minute all the time. KC has slightly more traffic to LHR than IND, a greater catchment area and is farther away from a major hub.

Probably not a great sign for other like sized markets to get anything either. Europe is such a mess and seems like it will be next year. I wouldn’t be surprised if they push adding many new routes until they can get things back in order. Unless you want Iceland. I could see those expanding.

B6 is downgauging to the E190 in the fall.

evank516 wrote:

B6 is downgauging to the E190 in the fall.

Ditto for MKE as well. Might be a winter change. B6 commonly used the E190 to ORD, CLE and MSP during their first few years of service as well.

trexel94 wrote:

evank516 wrote:

B6 is downgauging to the E190 in the fall.

Ditto for MKE as well. Might be a winter change. B6 commonly used the E190 to ORD, CLE and MSP during their first few years of service as well.

Hopefully. That A220 is a NICE plane. Very comfortable ride.

evank516 wrote:

trexel94 wrote:

evank516 wrote:

B6 is downgauging to the E190 in the fall.

Ditto for MKE as well. Might be a winter change. B6 commonly used the E190 to ORD, CLE and MSP during their first few years of service as well.

Hopefully. That A220 is a NICE plane. Very comfortable ride.

A220 deliveries are not coming as fast as they hoped. They moved E90 away from FLL for operational reasons, so now have to use E90 for some of the shorter routes. They are taking 16 A220s next year. After the low winter season, these will be back to A220.

tphuang wrote:

evank516 wrote:

trexel94 wrote:

Ditto for MKE as well. Might be a winter change. B6 commonly used the E190 to ORD, CLE and MSP during their first few years of service as well.

Hopefully. That A220 is a NICE plane. Very comfortable ride.

A220 deliveries are not coming as fast as they hoped. They moved E90 away from FLL for operational reasons, so now have to use E90 for some of the shorter routes. They are taking 16 A220s next year. After the low winter season, these will be back to A220.

Any idea on how JFK-MCI is performing?

evank516 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

evank516 wrote:

Hopefully. That A220 is a NICE plane. Very comfortable ride.

A220 deliveries are not coming as fast as they hoped. They moved E90 away from FLL for operational reasons, so now have to use E90 for some of the shorter routes. They are taking 16 A220s next year. After the low winter season, these will be back to A220.

Any idea on how JFK-MCI is performing?

Not good, from my source. Not good at all.

sea13 wrote:

evank516 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

A220 deliveries are not coming as fast as they hoped. They moved E90 away from FLL for operational reasons, so now have to use E90 for some of the shorter routes. They are taking 16 A220s next year. After the low winter season, these will be back to A220.

Any idea on how JFK-MCI is performing?

Not good, from my source. Not good at all.

Loads for May combined both ways
JFK 75%
BOS 68%

Outbound on both were about 10 points higher than inbound.

No clue what fare prices were though. Seemed pretty cheap but I cant remember.

Jshank83 wrote:

sea13 wrote:

evank516 wrote:

Any idea on how JFK-MCI is performing?

Not good, from my source. Not good at all.

Loads for May combined both ways
JFK 75%
BOS 68%

Outbound on both were about 10 points higher than inbound.

No clue what fare prices were though. Seemed pretty cheap but I cant remember.

Fare data isn't out for Q2, and I think it only operated for 1 week in Q1. However, the fact that B6 is offering $69 fares all the way up through next week, and MCI-JFK is a 3:30 HR flight is not a great sign.

Midwestindy wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

sea13 wrote:

Not good, from my source. Not good at all.

Loads for May combined both ways
JFK 75%
BOS 68%

Outbound on both were about 10 points higher than inbound.

No clue what fare prices were though. Seemed pretty cheap but I cant remember.

Fare data isn't out for Q2, and I think it only operated for 1 week in Q1. However, the fact that B6 is offering $69 fares all the way up through next week, and MCI-JFK is a 3:30 HR flight is not a great sign.

In what world is that terrible? Its been a slow start for sure but is it really that bad? B6 fares have been fairly low for many cities (from DEN its under $120 for some flights) recently and its MCI loads/marketshare has been steadily increasing. Market share for B6 at MCI for June was at 1.6 which is surpassing F9 and G4, and was 1.4 for May. Enough with the sky-is-falling rhetoric. B6 will be fine

BTW, NK is launching PHX starting Nov 7th. No official press release so I don't know the frequency but the flights are for sale.

trexel94 wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

Loads for May combined both ways
JFK 75%
BOS 68%

Outbound on both were about 10 points higher than inbound.

No clue what fare prices were though. Seemed pretty cheap but I cant remember.

Fare data isn't out for Q2, and I think it only operated for 1 week in Q1. However, the fact that B6 is offering $69 fares all the way up through next week, and MCI-JFK is a 3:30 HR flight is not a great sign.

In what world is that terrible? Its been a slow start for sure but is it really that bad? B6 fares have been fairly low for many cities (from DEN its under $120 for some flights) recently and its MCI loads/marketshare has been steadily increasing. Market share for B6 at MCI for June was at 1.6 which is surpassing F9 and G4, and was 1.4 for May. Enough with the sky-is-falling rhetoric. B6 will be fine

BTW, NK is launching PHX starting Nov 7th. No official press release so I don't know the frequency but the flights are for sale.

You used the word terrible not me. But ask anyone in the industry, $69 fare for a full service carrier with 7 days til departure is incredibly low (Even DL's fares are arguably low). Look at the STL/OMA/OKC-LGA flight prices, which are similar stage length (each are $200+)

But if you want to say a 1:1ish comparison, look at the MKE-JFK pricing vs. MCI-JFK (both started at the same time)

MKE-JFK is pricing sizably higher than MCI-JFK and it is 300mi shorter.

Midwestindy wrote:

trexel94 wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Fare data isn't out for Q2, and I think it only operated for 1 week in Q1. However, the fact that B6 is offering $69 fares all the way up through next week, and MCI-JFK is a 3:30 HR flight is not a great sign.

In what world is that terrible? Its been a slow start for sure but is it really that bad? B6 fares have been fairly low for many cities (from DEN its under $120 for some flights) recently and its MCI loads/marketshare has been steadily increasing. Market share for B6 at MCI for June was at 1.6 which is surpassing F9 and G4, and was 1.4 for May. Enough with the sky-is-falling rhetoric. B6 will be fine

BTW, NK is launching PHX starting Nov 7th. No official press release so I don't know the frequency but the flights are for sale.

You used the word terrible not me. But ask anyone in the industry, $69 fare for a full service carrier with 7 days til departure is incredibly low (Even DL's fares are arguably low). Look at the STL/OMA/OKC-LGA flight prices, which are similar stage length (each are $200+)

But if you want to say a 1:1ish comparison, look at the MKE-JFK pricing vs. MCI-JFK (both started at the same time)

MKE-JFK is pricing sizably higher than MCI-JFK and it is 300mi shorter.

Funny enough, didn't someone here say earlier that B6 was pleased with the performance? Do you feel B6 will pull the plug? Any idea on how AS and NK performed when they first started?
MCI-NYC has far more competition than MKE or even most cities of its size. We have AA, B6, DL, UA & WN. It also doesn't help that UA upgraded EWR to mainline which is somewhat rare for most midwest cities. As far as fares go, this is anecdotal as $69 fares do appear but are certainly not the average. I believe in the long run, B6 will be fine at MCI. The mild panic on this forum isn't justified.

First jetway and ground crew fit test
The rest of the photos are here: https://www.facebook.com/media/set?vani ... 4100807479

trexel94 wrote:

First jetway and ground crew fit test
The rest of the photos are here: https://www.facebook.com/media/set?vani ... 4100807479

Do we think that means that is AS' gate? or its just a random gate?