Jshank83 wrote:

October loads newer routes

AA
AUS 62% - nice 17 point jump here

NK - MUCH better than last month. Hopefully passed the meltdown residuals
LAX 77.5%
LAS 76%
MCO 71%
FLL 63%
PNS 47%

F9
ATL 61% - nice jump here also. 61% isn't great but better than I expected.

WN
JAX 82%
SRQ 81.5%
VPS 79%
MYR 76.5%
LGB 76%
MIA 71%
SNA 71% (ran a lot more inbound than out. Must have been a 4x week inbound and 1x out)

I'm interested in the MIA route O & D. I would have thought this route would be doing a lot better than 71%

TWA302 wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

October loads newer routes

AA
AUS 62% - nice 17 point jump here

NK - MUCH better than last month. Hopefully passed the meltdown residuals
LAX 77.5%
LAS 76%
MCO 71%
FLL 63%
PNS 47%

F9
ATL 61% - nice jump here also. 61% isn't great but better than I expected.

WN
JAX 82%
SRQ 81.5%
VPS 79%
MYR 76.5%
LGB 76%
MIA 71%
SNA 71% (ran a lot more inbound than out. Must have been a 4x week inbound and 1x out)

I'm interested in the MIA route O & D. I would have thought this route would be doing a lot better than 71%

It was 56% in September. 70% average since it started. Seems like a lot of capacity down there now. G4/NK/WN to FLL and WN/AA/F9 to MIA.

O&D Pre covid was 332 a day one way.
2nd qtr 2021 was 361. That’s before NK came in and F9 started it. So maybe a bit higher now.

TWA302 wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

October loads newer routes

AA
AUS 62% - nice 17 point jump here

NK - MUCH better than last month. Hopefully passed the meltdown residuals
LAX 77.5%
LAS 76%
MCO 71%
FLL 63%
PNS 47%

F9
ATL 61% - nice jump here also. 61% isn't great but better than I expected.

WN
JAX 82%
SRQ 81.5%
VPS 79%
MYR 76.5%
LGB 76%
MIA 71%
SNA 71% (ran a lot more inbound than out. Must have been a 4x week inbound and 1x out)

I'm interested in the MIA route O & D. I would have thought this route would be doing a lot better than 71%

New route to a new station and you think 71% is a let down? What were you expecting?

TVNWZ wrote:

TWA302 wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

October loads newer routes

AA
AUS 62% - nice 17 point jump here

NK - MUCH better than last month. Hopefully passed the meltdown residuals
LAX 77.5%
LAS 76%
MCO 71%
FLL 63%
PNS 47%

F9
ATL 61% - nice jump here also. 61% isn't great but better than I expected.

WN
JAX 82%
SRQ 81.5%
VPS 79%
MYR 76.5%
LGB 76%
MIA 71%
SNA 71% (ran a lot more inbound than out. Must have been a 4x week inbound and 1x out)

I'm interested in the MIA route O & D. I would have thought this route would be doing a lot better than 71%

New route to a new station and you think 71% is a let down? What were you expecting?

I didn’t say it was a let down. I thought it would be 80 or close. Flew it twice in September, once in mid October and three times this summer. It was near full on each leg.

October loads - combined both ways
AS
SEA 87%

AA
LAX 86.5%
PHL 85%
DCA 84.5%
PHX 82.5%
MIA 82.5%
CLT 82.5%
DFW 80.5%
ORD 68% - Mainline and Envoy only
AUS 62% - nice 17 point jump here
LGA - can't separate out from DL

DL
DTW 82.5%
ATL 79.5%
LGA 78% - Endeavor only
MSP 71%
SLC 67.5%

NK - MUCH better than last month. Hopefully passed the meltdown residuals
LAX 77.5%
LAS 76%
MCO 71%
FLL 63%
PNS 47%

F9
MCO 74.5%
LAS 69.5%
DEN 68.5%
ATL 61% - nice jump here also. 61% isn't great but better than I expected.

SY - Just went they finally get good loads they go on a break...
LAS 93% - 3 flights total
MSP 87% - 4 flights total

WN - the rest I'll get to in the next few days.
JAX 82%
SRQ 81.5%
VPS 79%
MYR 76.5%
LGB 76%
MIA 71%
SNA 71% (ran a lot more inbound than out. Must have been a 4x week inbound and 1x out)

UA - still need to get to these also

Here are the Q3 2021 PDEW's of top domestic destinations traveled to from STL that don't currently have WN nonstop service out of STL:
STL-SEA - 260 (WN planning on resuming STL-SEA nonstop service on a Saturday-only basis on 6/11/2022)
STL-DFW - 202 (DFW not currently served by WN, WN serves DAL in DFW/DAL market nonstop from STL)
STL-ORD - 166 (WN serves MDW in CHI market nonstop from STL)
STL-IAH - 130 (WN serves HOU in IAH/HOU market nonstop from STL)
STL-PDX - 120 (WN planning on resuming STL-PDX nonstop service on a Saturday-only basis on 4/9/2022)
STL-ECP - 98 (WN planning on resuming STL-ECP nonstop service on 3/6/2022)
STL-EWR - 92 (WN no longer serves EWR, WN still serves LGA in NYC market nonstop from STL)
STL-SJC - 87 (WN planning on resuming STL-SJC nonstop service on 3/12/2022)
STL-PNS - 78 (WN planning on resuming STL-PNS nonstop service on 3/12/2022)
STL-SFO - 74 (WN still serves OAK in the SFO/OAK/SJC market nonstop from STL)
STL-CHS - 67 (WN planning on resuming STL-CHS nonstop service on a Saturday-only basis on 6/11/2022)
STL-IAD - 62 (WN serves DCA/BWI in WAS market nonstop from STL)
STL-ORF - 59
STL-MYR - 53 (WN planning on resuming STL-MYR nonstop service on 3/19/2022)
STL-BDL - 46
STL-VPS - 43
STL-SAV - 42
STL-RIC - 39
STL-ABQ - 31
STL-GEG - 30
STL-RNO - 29

Is WN likely to add nonstop service out of STL to any of the above destinations (apart from the ones that WN already has plans to resume nonstop service to out of STL)? If so, which of the above routes are likely to be added by WN out of STL?

jplatts wrote:

Here are the Q3 2021 PDEW's of top domestic destinations traveled to from STL that don't currently have WN nonstop service out of STL:
STL-SJC - 87 (WN planning on resuming STL-SJC nonstop service on 3/12/2022)
STL-PNS - 78 (WN planning on resuming STL-PNS nonstop service on 3/12/2022)
STL-SFO - 74 (WN still serves OAK in the SFO/OAK/SJC market nonstop from STL)

STL-VPS - 43

Oak is on a pause like SJC also.

VPS is also scheduled to resume like others.
SEA comes back in March. Not June as you listed

LH STL-FRA route is up for a Cranky award https://crankyflier.com/2022/01/19/anno ... rk-awards/

I can't remember if it was this forum or another one I am on but someone was asking about how many gates in C used to be connected to customs. Here is the floor plan. Looks like 6 gates (30, 32, 34, 35, 36, 38) went thru customs although I don't think they could fit in 6 planes to those gates anymore. I think getting 4 - 737s and bigger on the end cap would be tough.

With the new plan I can't see any way they go back and open customs in C back up anymore but just an fyi

Note: this is a few years old so some of that vacant would be NK now.

I think on the end a 737-size plane wouldn't be too much of a problem. I think the functionality of the end gates - at least in the TWA days - was a puzzle piece with the type of plane coming in at the time. If you had a widebody at C38 - i think it took 35 out of service. It looks as though through some image.Google photos TWA could park a 747 at 36, but could only get an S80 at 35 and 38 at the same time while that 747 was there.

I remember going out of 35 on a 757 once to IND and if I recall correctly, it was either C23 or 25 which could also see a 757 at times.

stlgph wrote:

I think on the end a 737-size plane wouldn't be too much of a problem. I think the functionality of the end gates - at least in the TWA days - was a puzzle piece with the type of plane coming in at the time. If you had a widebody at C38 - i think it took 35 out of service. It looks as though through some image.Google photos TWA could park a 747 at 36, but could only get an S80 at 35 and 38 at the same time while that 747 was there.

I remember going out of 35 on a 757 once to IND and if I recall correctly, it was either C23 or 25 which could also see a 757 at times.

This is from 85 which has a good perspective

With the way they have the lines painted now I can’t see how you get 3 more in there. Even 2 would be tight.


They don’t have the smaller plane gates further down C to be able to move the parking spots for C33 and C34 further west. 34 now is where 36 used to be.

November number for STL are out.

Passengers
Up 132% over Nov20
Up 61% YTD vs 2020
Down 17.5% vs Nov19

Cargo
up 22.5% vs Nov20
Up 30% on the year.


Looks like it be around 10.5 million passengers for the year.


https://www.flystl.com/uploads/document ... vember.pdf

Just repaint the lines
We already know in photos, videos, and old schedules you can load up the end of C with 767s and L1011s.

It's interesting to go back on images.google.com and type in Concourse C STL and see all the different gate numbering assignments throughout the years.

I believe this one is most representative of the final years of TWA:

https://www.flickriver.com/photos/eruss ... 547817057/

stlgph wrote:

Just repaint the lines
We already know in photos, videos, and old schedules you can load up the end of C with 767s and L1011s.

It's interesting to go back on images.google.com and type in Concourse C STL and see all the different gate numbering assignments throughout the years.

I believe this one is most representative of the final years of TWA:

https://www.flickriver.com/photos/eruss ... 547817057/

Yeah, I remember TW having L1011’s on the north side and 747’s on the ends. The lines can be repainted. TW used to cram in as many planes as possible. I remember many arrivals waiting for a gate in a 727. The ramp between C/D would become a bit of a bottleneck with planes going out and planes coming in.

Who remembers when the gates were all sequential? As in the numbering didn’t restart for each concourse. I seem to recall old signage going up to gate 90+
http://www.departedflights.com/STL89.html

The Nov passenger numbers rebounded nicely. Hopefully the airport can keep up the momentum in 2022.

dcaproducer wrote:

stlgph wrote:

Just repaint the lines
We already know in photos, videos, and old schedules you can load up the end of C with 767s and L1011s.

It's interesting to go back on images.google.com and type in Concourse C STL and see all the different gate numbering assignments throughout the years.

I believe this one is most representative of the final years of TWA:

https://www.flickriver.com/photos/eruss ... 547817057/

Yeah, I remember TW having L1011’s on the north side and 747’s on the ends. The lines can be repainted. TW used to cram in as many planes as possible. I remember many arrivals waiting for a gate in a 727. The ramp between C/D would become a bit of a bottleneck with planes going out and planes coming in.

Who remembers when the gates were all sequential? As in the numbering didn’t restart for each concourse. I seem to recall old signage going up to gate 90+
http://www.departedflights.com/STL89.html

The Nov passenger numbers rebounded nicely. Hopefully the airport can keep up the momentum in 2022.

I don’t think they can be repainted to fit more. They already are next to each other all the way down. That’s what I was getting at is because they don’t have all the RJs they can’t just cram a bunch of small RJ only painted gates like before. So the markings are all for 737 type or bigger and there isn’t room to fit as many in. That’s why 34 is where 36 used to be.

Interestingly southwest is hiring a recruiter at STL. I could only find another smilier posting at DAL, which is obviously for their HQ. I don't think it means anything at all in terms of increased service, I just find it to be a bit unusual.

Jshank83 wrote:

dcaproducer wrote:

stlgph wrote:

Just repaint the lines
We already know in photos, videos, and old schedules you can load up the end of C with 767s and L1011s.

It's interesting to go back on images.google.com and type in Concourse C STL and see all the different gate numbering assignments throughout the years.

I believe this one is most representative of the final years of TWA:

https://www.flickriver.com/photos/eruss ... 547817057/

Yeah, I remember TW having L1011’s on the north side and 747’s on the ends. The lines can be repainted. TW used to cram in as many planes as possible. I remember many arrivals waiting for a gate in a 727. The ramp between C/D would become a bit of a bottleneck with planes going out and planes coming in.

Who remembers when the gates were all sequential? As in the numbering didn’t restart for each concourse. I seem to recall old signage going up to gate 90+
http://www.departedflights.com/STL89.html

The Nov passenger numbers rebounded nicely. Hopefully the airport can keep up the momentum in 2022.

I don’t think they can be repainted to fit more. They already are next to each other all the way down. That’s what I was getting at is because they don’t have all the RJs they can’t just cram a bunch of small RJ only painted gates like before. So the markings are all for 737 type or bigger and there isn’t room to fit as many in. That’s why 34 is where 36 used to be.

So C34 doesn’t go out as far as the parking areas used to. If you look closely at the satellite image you can see the old lines. That “roadway” for ramp vehicles cuts through the former gate areas. The gates have been shifted around. They’ve moved some doors as well haven’t they? Regardless the space exists if the move everything around.

Jshank83 wrote:

dcaproducer wrote:

stlgph wrote:

Just repaint the lines
We already know in photos, videos, and old schedules you can load up the end of C with 767s and L1011s.

It's interesting to go back on images.google.com and type in Concourse C STL and see all the different gate numbering assignments throughout the years.

I believe this one is most representative of the final years of TWA:

https://www.flickriver.com/photos/eruss ... 547817057/

Yeah, I remember TW having L1011’s on the north side and 747’s on the ends. The lines can be repainted. TW used to cram in as many planes as possible. I remember many arrivals waiting for a gate in a 727. The ramp between C/D would become a bit of a bottleneck with planes going out and planes coming in.

Who remembers when the gates were all sequential? As in the numbering didn’t restart for each concourse. I seem to recall old signage going up to gate 90+
http://www.departedflights.com/STL89.html

The Nov passenger numbers rebounded nicely. Hopefully the airport can keep up the momentum in 2022.

I don’t think they can be repainted to fit more. They already are next to each other all the way down. That’s what I was getting at is because they don’t have all the RJs they can’t just cram a bunch of small RJ only painted gates like before. So the markings are all for 737 type or bigger and there isn’t room to fit as many in. That’s why 34 is where 36 used to be.

????

The markings per this layout: https://airlinemaps.tumblr.com/post/189 ... april-1986 existed and worked with all of the C gates being used by S80, 757, 767, L1011, and 747 aircraft with 757+ being routinely used at C30,32,34,36,38 as we've seen by photos, YouTube video, and plus the fact that many of us, including myself, were there. I remember Paris and London and Maui and Honolulu routinely going out of 36 and 38 pretty much right at the same time.

So paint is paint - we could go out there and repaint this configuration again right now, if we wanted to.

dcaproducer wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

dcaproducer wrote:

Yeah, I remember TW having L1011’s on the north side and 747’s on the ends. The lines can be repainted. TW used to cram in as many planes as possible. I remember many arrivals waiting for a gate in a 727. The ramp between C/D would become a bit of a bottleneck with planes going out and planes coming in.

Who remembers when the gates were all sequential? As in the numbering didn’t restart for each concourse. I seem to recall old signage going up to gate 90+
http://www.departedflights.com/STL89.html

The Nov passenger numbers rebounded nicely. Hopefully the airport can keep up the momentum in 2022.

I don’t think they can be repainted to fit more. They already are next to each other all the way down. That’s what I was getting at is because they don’t have all the RJs they can’t just cram a bunch of small RJ only painted gates like before. So the markings are all for 737 type or bigger and there isn’t room to fit as many in. That’s why 34 is where 36 used to be.

So C34 doesn’t go out as far as the parking areas used to. If you look closely at the satellite image you can see the old lines. That “roadway” for ramp vehicles cuts through the former gate areas. The gates have been shifted around. They’ve moved some doors as well haven’t they? Regardless the space exists if the move everything around.

Doors are in the same spots. They have closed some gates due to lack of space but they are all in the same spots as far as I have seen.

Jshank83

I can see your thought based on how things are currently painted, but the parking at the end of C used to extend east. Look at the satellite image you posted and you can make out the old lines.

I also found this in the A.net database. It shows c36/c38. C34 was around the north side.
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Trans-W ... XyFCNcg%3D

This shot shows both gates in use simultaneously.
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Trans-W ... XyFCNcg%3D

I also did a Google search. This is a sat image with the old jet bridges in place. A couple (c34) are missing in this shot.
//uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201604 ... e45467.jpg

It sure looks like the end of C was re-striped recently and C28 and C30 are big enough for widebodies. Wonder what the plans are…

stltrojan wrote:

It sure looks like the end of C was re-striped recently and C28 and C30 are big enough for widebodies. Wonder what the plans are…

C28 has been the wide body gate for charters for a long time. There have been some 747 charters out of it a few years ago. I think LH is going to end up there. C30 is leased by Spirit so not really sure we will see any on it.

Jshank83 wrote:

October loads - combined both ways
AS
SEA 87%

AA
LAX 86.5%
PHL 85%
DCA 84.5%
PHX 82.5%
MIA 82.5%
CLT 82.5%
DFW 80.5%
ORD 68% - Mainline and Envoy only
AUS 62% - nice 17 point jump here
LGA - can't separate out from DL

DL
DTW 82.5%
ATL 79.5%
LGA 78% - Endeavor only
MSP 71%
SLC 67.5%

NK - MUCH better than last month. Hopefully passed the meltdown residuals
LAX 77.5%
LAS 76%
MCO 71%
FLL 63%
PNS 47%

F9
MCO 74.5%
LAS 69.5%
DEN 68.5%
ATL 61% - nice jump here also. 61% isn't great but better than I expected.

SY - Just went they finally get good loads they go on a break...
LAS 93% - 3 flights total
MSP 87% - 4 flights total

WN - the rest I'll get to in the next few days.
JAX 82%
SRQ 81.5%
VPS 79%
MYR 76.5%
LGB 76%
MIA 71%
SNA 71% (ran a lot more inbound than out. Must have been a 4x week inbound and 1x out)

UA - still need to get to these also

UA
IAD 87%
IAH 87%
DEN 84%
EWR 83%
ORD 78.5% (UA/Air Wisconsin/Gojet Only)

I'm pretty sure the gate we are seeing now as C15 wasn't angled over in the hub days. It seems as though it was 'moved' to that angle position to make room in the C1-7 area for the props.

I'm pretty sure the gate we are seeing now as C15 wasn't angled over in the hub days. It seems as though it was 'moved' to that angle position to make room in the C1-7 area for the props.

Read thru the BLV meeting notes from December. A lot of good stuff in them that is worth reading if you are interested.

What I thought were highlights.

Focused on east and west coast for new routes.
Potential routes mentioned in different places throughout PDX, AUS, BNA, DEN, Houston, LAX, SNA, SAN, BWI
Said no to Chicago. It is too close.

At current average fare of $52 the break even load is 68%
At $80 it goes down to 55%
No concerns on issues with loads/pricing apparently.

Talked about how their biggest competition is other Allegiant cities. They have to prove they deserve a route more than someone else and they will make more money on it. Example given was LAS-EUG vs BLV-BWI. Route might work for both but if they only have one plane available they will pick the one with less risk.

BLV costs for airlines is 15% of that at STL. They did a cost analysis for F9 and they would save 2.5 mil a year if they moved to BLV. Also, said frontier isn’t going to move but at some point the ULCCs might start to consider it.

Crew base talk. They have been meeting with Allegiant about it. It would be needed to open up routes to west coast cities without a base. The airport has presented G4 with plans and potential schedules. Up to 12 flights a day.
They hope to get it finalized this year but covid could push it back.

Talked about the Viva/Allegiant joint partnership. Said they need to get a bigger customs area in order. Some of the destinations they get into with this I think they looked it at wrong. They are saying 15 Mexican destinations by 2031 and that is definitely not how I saw the filing. CUN, PVR, SJD are the ones they seem to feel good about though. Those 3 were also mentioned in the meeting today apparently about being started by 2023/24. I’m still a little skeptical on anything besides Cancun. I’ll have to go back and read thru the filing again.

States that 60% of passengers originate from here. 40% are visitors from somewhere else. They say that’s abnormally high to have 40% coming from elsewhere. It is a higher number than I would have guessed.

Expect 360,000 passengers this year. That’s a 40k (12.5%) jump over 2021.

Entire document
https://337o3y2ky46c3a240z2z8o22-wpengi ... -16-21.pdf

Also the county chairman tweeted out some updates from the meeting today.

Does it dig into a customer profile at all? Be interesting to see what counties and in what states it breaks down into %-wise.

Thanks for this.

stlgph wrote:

Does it dig into a customer profile at all? Be interesting to see what counties and in what states it breaks down into %-wise.

Thanks for this.

No mention of that. When talking about originators from here they said they get pretty good pull from Springfield, IL area because we have so many more G4 flights than them. But that was all. They didn’t breakdown where the 40% incoming were from. Maybe Florida/Arizona retired people coming back to see family?

Jshank83 wrote:

TWA302 wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

It is still there. It is just off of the page. page 53 has everything

Hey Jonathan, you will (I hope) laugh at all the "Karens" in this post. I thought you did a great job. Just another reason why I HATE Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Iflystlouis/posts/4712526995482331/?comment_id=4712697625465268&reply_comment_id=4712725242129173&notif_id=1642031934157441&ref=notif&notif_t=group_comment_mention

Most stuff I saw was positive so if a few people want to get all bent out of shape about my opinion on something a decade away with a ton of unknowns, that’s on them

The St. Louis history and memories group, which I follow since they do post some interesting pictures, was pretty bad. There's a lot of old hands on there, so there's some general bitterness over lost glory, I guess. (Not that I blame them. I go there sometimes.) I jumped in and defended the plan and management as best I could.

Hadn't seen the I Fly the Louie Louie page before. Sent in a request to join it. We'll see if I regret that move, but it's always good to see more aviation pics.

TWA302 wrote:

This is from 85 which has a good perspective

TWA DC-9s, most likely 87 at the earliest as the OZ acquisition was late 86.

Jshank83 wrote:

Impressive going from 2 gates to 5 plus a remote stand. Also interesting how they are baiting F9 to move there.

OzarkD9S wrote:

TWA302 wrote:

This is from 85 which has a good perspective

TWA DC-9s, most likely 87 at the earliest as the OZ acquisition was late 86.

Good call, as in '85 TW only had the MD-80 series as their DC-9-10's were retired in '79 I believe. You can also see the TWA logo on the D Gates so I would think this would be '87 at the earliest

TWA302 wrote:

stlgph wrote:

I think on the end a 737-size plane wouldn't be too much of a problem. I think the functionality of the end gates - at least in the TWA days - was a puzzle piece with the type of plane coming in at the time. If you had a widebody at C38 - i think it took 35 out of service. It looks as though through some image.Google photos TWA could park a 747 at 36, but could only get an S80 at 35 and 38 at the same time while that 747 was there.

I remember going out of 35 on a 757 once to IND and if I recall correctly, it was either C23 or 25 which could also see a 757 at times.

This is from 85 which has a good perspective

I've never seen STL that busy!

TWA302 wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

Impressive going from 2 gates to 5 plus a remote stand. Also interesting how they are baiting F9 to move there.

I had forgotten they technically have 3 gates now. One of those has a ground loading now. It is in the middle of the two with jetbridges off the current terminal. Looks like it’s still ground loading in this. I got excited at first because I thought they were adding a 5th jetbridge.

ItnStln wrote:

TWA302 wrote:

stlgph wrote:

I think on the end a 737-size plane wouldn't be too much of a problem. I think the functionality of the end gates - at least in the TWA days - was a puzzle piece with the type of plane coming in at the time. If you had a widebody at C38 - i think it took 35 out of service. It looks as though through some image.Google photos TWA could park a 747 at 36, but could only get an S80 at 35 and 38 at the same time while that 747 was there.

I remember going out of 35 on a 757 once to IND and if I recall correctly, it was either C23 or 25 which could also see a 757 at times.

This is from 85 which has a good perspective

I've never seen STL that busy!

Go into the A.net photo database and look at STL. You'll see a lot of planes and packed taxiways with long lineups for the runways. In the TW days it was jammed. This is why 11/29 was built. At the time it was conceived it was needed.

dcaproducer wrote:

ItnStln wrote:

TWA302 wrote:

This is from 85 which has a good perspective

I've never seen STL that busy!

Go into the A.net photo database and look at STL. You'll see a lot of planes and packed taxiways with long lineups for the runways. In the TW days it was jammed. This is why 11/29 was built. At the time it was conceived it was needed.

I will, thanks for the recommendation!

dcaproducer wrote:

ItnStln wrote:

TWA302 wrote:

This is from 85 which has a good perspective

I've never seen STL that busy!

Go into the A.net photo database and look at STL. You'll see a lot of planes and packed taxiways with long lineups for the runways. In the TW days it was jammed. This is why 11/29 was built. At the time it was conceived it was needed.

Great info/update on BLV. The terminal construction photos look good progress is being made. I think they'll hit their completion target.
It's interesting they'll have the (4) jet bridges and (2) stair loading spots. Even if F9 wanted to move to BLV, I could see it getting cramped with G4 at times.

dcaproducer wrote:

ItnStln wrote:

TWA302 wrote:

This is from 85 which has a good perspective

I've never seen STL that busy!

Go into the A.net photo database and look at STL. You'll see a lot of planes and packed taxiways with long lineups for the runways. In the TW days it was jammed. This is why 11/29 was built. At the time it was conceived it was needed.

hell, in some of those photos I think in this database and on other sites, you'll find Continental 757s in there going to Newark, Houston *AND* Cleveland, respectively.
those were the days.

2021 3rd qtr PDEW. I already halved them so these are one way.
Denver as 1 surprised me a bit but I guess outdoors things were all the rage.

STL only, does not include BLV
1 Denver, CO 544.5
2 Los Angeles, CA (Metropolitan Area) 532
3 Washington, DC (Metropolitan Area) 464.5
4 New York City, NY (Metropolitan Area) 460.5
5 Orlando, FL 437.5
6 Dallas/Fort Worth, TX 431.5
7 Las Vegas, NV 417.5
8 Atlanta, GA (Metropolitan Area) 352.5
9 Miami, FL (Metropolitan Area) 331
10 Houston, TX 311.5
11 Phoenix, AZ 309
12 Chicago, IL 290
13 Seattle, WA 260
14 Boston, MA (Metropolitan Area) 232
15 San Francisco, CA (Metropolitan Area) 232
16 Tampa, FL (Metropolitan Area) 220.5
17 Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN 214.5
18 Philadelphia, PA 180.5
19 Fort Myers, FL 173
20 Charlotte, NC 166.5
21 San Diego, CA 161
22 Salt Lake City, UT 156.5
23 Detroit, MI 143
24 Austin, TX 140
25 Portland, OR 120
26 Raleigh/Durham, NC 108
27 Panama City, FL 98
28 Sacramento, CA 97
29 Cleveland, OH (Metropolitan Area) 88
30 San Antonio, TX 82
31 Jacksonville, FL 78
32 Pensacola, FL 78
33 Nashville, TN 76
34 New Orleans, LA 72
35 Charleston, SC 66.5
36 Pittsburgh, PA 64.5
37 Sarasota/Bradenton, FL 61
38 Norfolk, VA (Metropolitan Area) 59
39 Myrtle Beach, SC 53
40 Omaha, NE 46.5
41 Hartford, CT 46
42 Valparaiso, FL 43
43 Savannah, GA 42
44 Oklahoma City, OK 41.5
45 Milwaukee, WI 41
46 Richmond, VA 38.5
47 Kansas City, MO 31.5
48 Albuquerque, NM 30.5
49 Spokane, WA 30
50 Reno, NV 29
51 Portland, ME 28.5
52 Bozeman, MT 27.5
53 Boise, ID 27
54 Colorado Springs, CO 26.5
55 Tucson, AZ 25.5
56 Wichita, KS 24.5
57 Columbus, OH 24.5
58 West Palm Beach/Palm Beach, FL 24
59 Albany, NY 24
60 Tulsa, OK 21.5
61 Key West, FL 21.5
62 Fresno, CA 21
63 El Paso, TX 20.5
64 Syracuse, NY 19.5
65 Buffalo, NY 19.5
66 Greenville/Spartanburg, SC 19.5
67 Jackson, WY 19
68 Grand Rapids, MI 18.5
69 Des Moines, IA 17.5
70 Little Rock, AR 16.5
71 Kalispell, MT 16
72 Palm Springs, CA 16
73 Harrisburg, PA 14.5
74 Hilton Head, SC 14.5
75 Rochester, NY 14.5
76 Wilmington, NC 14
77 Birmingham, AL 14
78 Columbia, SC 14
79 Greensboro/High Point, NC 13
80 Bangor, ME 12.5
81 Traverse City, MI 12
82 Eugene, OR 12
83 Medford, OR 11
84 Missoula, MT 11
85 Knoxville, TN 11
86 Burlington, VT 10.5
87 Rapid City, SD 10.5
88 Asheville, NC 10
89 Fargo, ND 10
90 Cincinnati, OH 10
91 Santa Barbara, CA 10
92 Daytona Beach, FL 9.5
93 Harlingen/San Benito, TX 9.5
94 Bend/Redmond, OR 9
95 Billings, MT 8.5
96 Corpus Christi, TX 8.5
97 Lubbock, TX 8.5
98 Fayetteville, NC 8
99 Sioux Falls, SD 8
100 Aspen, CO 7.5
101 Jacksonville/Camp Lejeune, NC 7.5
102 Allentown/Bethlehem/Easton, PA 7
103 Augusta, GA 7
104 Amarillo, TX 7
105 Green Bay, WI 7
106 Midland/Odessa, TX 7
107 Mobile, AL 6.5
108 Baton Rouge, LA 6.5
109 Grand Junction, CO 6.5
110 Gulfport/Biloxi, MS 6.5
111 Killeen, TX 6.5
112 Montrose/Delta, CO 6.5
113 Chattanooga, TN 6
114 Charlottesville, VA 6
115 Jackson/Vicksburg, MS 6
116 Madison, WI 6
117 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, PA 5.5
118 Bismarck/Mandan, ND 5.5
119 Great Falls, MT 5.5
120 Lafayette, LA 5.5
121 Mission/McAllen/Edinburg, TX 5.5
122 Pasco/Kennewick/Richland, WA 5.5
123 Roanoke, VA 5.5
124 Huntsville, AL 5

Jshank83 wrote:

2021 3rd qtr PDEW. I already halved them so these are one way.
Denver as 1 surprised me a bit but I guess outdoors things were all the rage.

STL only, does not include BLV
1 Denver, CO 544.5
2 Los Angeles, CA (Metropolitan Area) 532
3 Washington, DC (Metropolitan Area) 464.5
4 New York City, NY (Metropolitan Area) 460.5
5 Orlando, FL 437.5
6 Dallas/Fort Worth, TX 431.5
7 Las Vegas, NV 417.5
8 Atlanta, GA (Metropolitan Area) 352.5
9 Miami, FL (Metropolitan Area) 331
10 Houston, TX 311.5
11 Phoenix, AZ 309
12 Chicago, IL 290
13 Seattle, WA 260
14 Boston, MA (Metropolitan Area) 232
15 San Francisco, CA (Metropolitan Area) 232
16 Tampa, FL (Metropolitan Area) 220.5
17 Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN 214.5
18 Philadelphia, PA 180.5
19 Fort Myers, FL 173
20 Charlotte, NC 166.5
21 San Diego, CA 161
22 Salt Lake City, UT 156.5
23 Detroit, MI 143
24 Austin, TX 140
25 Portland, OR 120
26 Raleigh/Durham, NC 108
27 Panama City, FL 98
28 Sacramento, CA 97
29 Cleveland, OH (Metropolitan Area) 88
30 San Antonio, TX 82
31 Jacksonville, FL 78
32 Pensacola, FL 78
33 Nashville, TN 76
34 New Orleans, LA 72
35 Charleston, SC 66.5
36 Pittsburgh, PA 64.5
37 Sarasota/Bradenton, FL 61
38 Norfolk, VA (Metropolitan Area) 59
39 Myrtle Beach, SC 53
40 Omaha, NE 46.5
41 Hartford, CT 46
42 Valparaiso, FL 43
43 Savannah, GA 42
44 Oklahoma City, OK 41.5
45 Milwaukee, WI 41
46 Richmond, VA 38.5
47 Kansas City, MO 31.5
48 Albuquerque, NM 30.5
49 Spokane, WA 30
50 Reno, NV 29
51 Portland, ME 28.5
52 Bozeman, MT 27.5
53 Boise, ID 27
54 Colorado Springs, CO 26.5
55 Tucson, AZ 25.5
56 Wichita, KS 24.5
57 Columbus, OH 24.5
58 West Palm Beach/Palm Beach, FL 24
59 Albany, NY 24
60 Tulsa, OK 21.5
61 Key West, FL 21.5
62 Fresno, CA 21
63 El Paso, TX 20.5
64 Syracuse, NY 19.5
65 Buffalo, NY 19.5
66 Greenville/Spartanburg, SC 19.5
67 Jackson, WY 19
68 Grand Rapids, MI 18.5
69 Des Moines, IA 17.5
70 Little Rock, AR 16.5
71 Kalispell, MT 16
72 Palm Springs, CA 16
73 Harrisburg, PA 14.5
74 Hilton Head, SC 14.5
75 Rochester, NY 14.5
76 Wilmington, NC 14
77 Birmingham, AL 14
78 Columbia, SC 14
79 Greensboro/High Point, NC 13
80 Bangor, ME 12.5
81 Traverse City, MI 12
82 Eugene, OR 12
83 Medford, OR 11
84 Missoula, MT 11
85 Knoxville, TN 11
86 Burlington, VT 10.5
87 Rapid City, SD 10.5
88 Asheville, NC 10
89 Fargo, ND 10
90 Cincinnati, OH 10
91 Santa Barbara, CA 10
92 Daytona Beach, FL 9.5
93 Harlingen/San Benito, TX 9.5
94 Bend/Redmond, OR 9
95 Billings, MT 8.5
96 Corpus Christi, TX 8.5
97 Lubbock, TX 8.5
98 Fayetteville, NC 8
99 Sioux Falls, SD 8
100 Aspen, CO 7.5
101 Jacksonville/Camp Lejeune, NC 7.5
102 Allentown/Bethlehem/Easton, PA 7
103 Augusta, GA 7
104 Amarillo, TX 7
105 Green Bay, WI 7
106 Midland/Odessa, TX 7
107 Mobile, AL 6.5
108 Baton Rouge, LA 6.5
109 Grand Junction, CO 6.5
110 Gulfport/Biloxi, MS 6.5
111 Killeen, TX 6.5
112 Montrose/Delta, CO 6.5
113 Chattanooga, TN 6
114 Charlottesville, VA 6
115 Jackson/Vicksburg, MS 6
116 Madison, WI 6
117 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, PA 5.5
118 Bismarck/Mandan, ND 5.5
119 Great Falls, MT 5.5
120 Lafayette, LA 5.5
121 Mission/McAllen/Edinburg, TX 5.5
122 Pasco/Kennewick/Richland, WA 5.5
123 Roanoke, VA 5.5
124 Huntsville, AL 5

Norfolk at #38 is the highest on the list that STL has no service to. Fascinating that Bangor ME or Traverse City MI would have more traffic between STL than CVG.

February 2022 Frequency update

Flights per week February
February 2022 (January 2022) February 2020 (%vs February 2020)
WN 561 (557) 734 (-23.5%)
AA 244 (224) 254 (-3.9%)
DL 137 (142) 183 (-25.1%)
UA 129 (127) 196 (-34.1%)
NK 43 (39) XX
F9 29 (28) 29 (FLAT)
G4 19 (14) 20 (-5%)
AS 7 (7) 6 (+16.6%)

Total STL 1252 (1233) 1616 (-22.5%)

Seats based on Monday (Jan 2022 seats) vs February 2020
AA 4411 (4037) -1.21% to -3% - I might have had the 737 seats wrong in 2020
DL 2476 (2508) -24.66%
UA 1276 (1280) -27.21%


Notes:

Apple Vacations flights to SJD and HUX start back up
AA - Adding more flights back. Getting close to precovid.
WN - SLC starts back daily mid month
G4 - FLL starts back up
UA - more 145s than mainline

Full Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

ItnStln wrote:

TWA302 wrote:

stlgph wrote:

I think on the end a 737-size plane wouldn't be too much of a problem. I think the functionality of the end gates - at least in the TWA days - was a puzzle piece with the type of plane coming in at the time. If you had a widebody at C38 - i think it took 35 out of service. It looks as though through some image.Google photos TWA could park a 747 at 36, but could only get an S80 at 35 and 38 at the same time while that 747 was there.

I remember going out of 35 on a 757 once to IND and if I recall correctly, it was either C23 or 25 which could also see a 757 at times.

This is from 85 which has a good perspective

I've never seen STL that busy!

Are those Air Midwest turboprops?
Remember going to the northwest side of the airport to watch airplanes land in the 1979 and 80.. The ramp looked like that but add in a sprinkle of TWA 707s. Life was so cool back then for an Avgeek.

william wrote:

ItnStln wrote:

TWA302 wrote:

This is from 85 which has a good perspective

I've never seen STL that busy!

Are those Air Midwest turboprops?
Remember going to the northwest side of the airport to watch airplanes land in the 1979 and 80.. The ramp looked like that but add in a sprinkle of TWA 707s. Life was so cool back then for an Avgeek.

I know the closest one (Metro and S340) are and I assume the others are Scheduled Skyways? Others pointed out that this is 87, so it must be before Air Midwest fell apart and their 340s went to American. Also the great Easter egg in the background is the Flying Tigers 747.

TWA302 wrote:

william wrote:

ItnStln wrote:

I've never seen STL that busy!

Are those Air Midwest turboprops?
Remember going to the northwest side of the airport to watch airplanes land in the 1979 and 80.. The ramp looked like that but add in a sprinkle of TWA 707s. Life was so cool back then for an Avgeek.

I know the closest one (Metro and S340) are and I assume the others are Scheduled Skyways? Others pointed out that this is 87, so it must be before Air Midwest fell apart and their 340s went to American. Also the great Easter egg in the background is the Flying Tigers 747.

Thanks, I forgot about Skyways airlines. They used to be fly to Fort Leonard Wood from STL.

symphonicpoet wrote:

Here's a couple of screenshots of the plans to give a better idea:

Regarding the new terminal plan, I’ll credit STL for being ambitious but to me it seems like a huge amount of money spent to not even increase the total terminal space or gate count. STL could have well over 62 gates in its current layout.

If they really wanted to, why not demolish B, build a straight-line terminal connector between A and C, (gives them a ton of room where B is now to build security, customs, and concessions) and then build onto the east and west ends of A/C to replace T2. A and C have been remodeled and look modern and clean, and it saves money from having to build over them again. It’s basically the same plan they have, they just keeps the current A and C terminals.

MLIAA wrote:

symphonicpoet wrote:

Here's a couple of screenshots of the plans to give a better idea:

Regarding the new terminal plan, I’ll credit STL for being ambitious but to me it seems like a huge amount of money spent to not even increase the total terminal space or gate count. STL could have well over 62 gates in its current layout.

If they really wanted to, why not demolish B, build a straight-line terminal connector between A and C, (gives them a ton of room where B is now to build security, customs, and concessions) and then build onto the east and west ends of A/C to replace T2. A and C have been remodeled and look modern and clean, and it saves money from having to build over them again. It’s basically the same plan they have, they just keeps the current A and C terminals.

I think the issue is the current concourses are old and although they look decent inside the outside is in rough shape. C leaks when it rains. Upkeep probably is more expensive than just replacing. No need to half ass it to save a few bucks.

While that idea does make sense, admittedly, it sounds as though in the long-run, a new rebuild of the portions of the A and C concourses which would end up as part of the structure would have to be practically tore up and rebuilt anyway to best accommodate ground infrastructure, electrical, plumbing, heating, ventilation, fire systems, etc. etc. So if you're going to go through all that work and all that trouble, may as well just take it a step further and get the concourse design and infrastructure you want when the cost differences is probably in the low millions, which at that scale, is pennies on the dollar for the end result.

Both of those replies make sense, thank you! Now that you mention it, I have seen buckets of rainwater in C in the past. Might as well start over then.

MLIAA wrote:

symphonicpoet wrote:

Here's a couple of screenshots of the plans to give a better idea:

Regarding the new terminal plan, I’ll credit STL for being ambitious but to me it seems like a huge amount of money spent to not even increase the total terminal space or gate count. STL could have well over 62 gates in its current layout. .

I would say going from 49 to 62 gates is a hefty increase.