We need a new airport!!!

Transportation topics in KC
swid
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Financial District

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby swid » Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:12 am

Cranky Flier has a follow-up article to the one he posted last week; this one is an interview with a Southwest exec.

Per the follow-up article, SW currently has about 25-30 flights/day going through St. Louis that it would prefer to have going through KC.

User avatar
ldai_phs
Western Auto Lofts
Western Auto Lofts
Posts: 543
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby ldai_phs » Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:49 am

what percentage of SWA flights per day in STL is that?

swid
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Financial District

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby swid » Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:59 am

STL's Departures page lists 88 SW flights for the remainder of the day. Without putting too much work into it, I'm guessing they have about 130-140/day overall.

KC has about 70 SW flights/day currently.

earthling
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3990
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby earthling » Thu Nov 09, 2017 12:45 pm

brewcrew1000 wrote:
im2kull wrote:
earthling wrote:.. if KC can build up as a hub.


I sure hope that every time anyone in this thread mentions "Hub" they're NOT talking about a specific airlines hub, and are actually meaning to say "More flights" in general.


An actual single airline "Hub" would be one of the worst things to ever happen to KC and KCI!


I think he means a Fortress Hub where one single airline is so dominant that other airlines will not expand beyond it biggest hubs thus leads to super high fares like Cincinnati to KC for 400 roundtrip. Some examples of these were Cincinnati/Delta (that has died off though). Memphis and Minneapolis were like this also when Northwest was dominate at these airports. I don't think we will ever see fortress hubs again because of airlines like Spirit and Frontier


I mean at least mini or mid-sized hubs for several airlines, not one dominating hub. Agree that dominate hubs (using over 80% of gates) are bad for airline fares, but several airlines using KCI as smaller hubs gets us more flights and maintains competition.

earthling
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3990
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby earthling » Thu Nov 09, 2017 12:50 pm

swid wrote:Per the follow-up article, SW currently has about 25-30 flights/day going through St. Louis that it would prefer to have going through KC.


An article earlier this year quoted KCI officials claiming that KCI has more local passenger traffic than STL does. Can't find it, any confirmation?

User avatar
ldai_phs
Western Auto Lofts
Western Auto Lofts
Posts: 543
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby ldai_phs » Thu Nov 09, 2017 1:20 pm

I think the numbers are about the same^ Someone posted it on the UrbanSTL.

brewcrew1000
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1978
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:10 am
Location: Broadway/Gilham according to google maps

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby brewcrew1000 » Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:21 pm

earthling wrote:
brewcrew1000 wrote:
im2kull wrote:
I sure hope that every time anyone in this thread mentions "Hub" they're NOT talking about a specific airlines hub, and are actually meaning to say "More flights" in general.


An actual single airline "Hub" would be one of the worst things to ever happen to KC and KCI!


I think he means a Fortress Hub where one single airline is so dominant that other airlines will not expand beyond it biggest hubs thus leads to super high fares like Cincinnati to KC for 400 roundtrip. Some examples of these were Cincinnati/Delta (that has died off though). Memphis and Minneapolis were like this also when Northwest was dominate at these airports. I don't think we will ever see fortress hubs again because of airlines like Spirit and Frontier


I mean at least mini or mid-sized hubs for several airlines, not one dominating hub. Agree that dominate hubs (using over 80% of gates) are bad for airline fares, but several airlines using KCI as smaller hubs gets us more flights and maintains competition.


I could really see an airline like Alaska Airlines setting up a mini-hub here, they have already added non stops from SFO and San Diego in the past year and if they had increased frequencies from all there west coast hubs into KCI they could set up a little Midwest to East Coast feeder hub. Alaska's West Coast to East Coast flights are kind of pathetic and only offer like 1 or 2 flights a day from its west coast hubs. Setting up 4 or 5 flights a day each from SEA, Portland, SFO and San Diego into KCI could set up a nice mini-hub for increased East Coast Traffic.

Alaska has seen a lot of increased competition from Delta in the Pacific Northwest and I think they really need to think outside the box and grow beyond the West Coast if they want to survive. Once SW starts flying to Hawaii, i think its going to really take a hit on Alaska.

Another airline I wish would come to KCI is JetBlue, i've been waiting on them for 10 years now.

swid
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Financial District

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby swid » Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:36 pm

If your state doesn't touch an ocean or Great Lake, it's almost assuredly "here be dragons" territory for JetBlue.

KCFan
New York Life
New York Life
Posts: 375
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:30 pm
Location: Northland

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby KCFan » Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:48 pm

swid wrote:If your state doesn't touch an ocean or Great Lake, it's almost assuredly "here be dragons" territory for JetBlue.


JetBlue is the air line Johnson County had been working on when there was concern we weren't going to build a new terminal in KC. So would be awesome if we could get them in the new terminal.

STLguy1
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 11:13 pm

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby STLguy1 » Fri Nov 10, 2017 5:14 am

Just a few comments. Cranky Flier is stated as "Cranky Flier. A snarky airline industry blog established in 2006" run by a guy that hasn't been in the airline biz since 2005 and has been debunked by more airlines and industry leaders than Donald Trump has been by Dems and the GOP. He is called cranky for a reason. He hates SWA as well. A few years ago I remember Doug Parker, the last CEO of USairways before merger with AA called the crazy flier one of the most clueless and arrogant writers on the www. I'll look for a reference to that.

From the KC Star October 27 before vote:
"As the boss for the dominant airline serving KCI, [Southwest Airline's] Gary Kelly is one person who could make the call about if Kansas City gets more flight options from a new terminal. But he stopped short of making that promise. “Tell me what fuel prices will be in a year, tell me what the economy will be in a year, no one can predict the future,” Kelly said. “So there are no guarantees in life."

Sure I will be willing to bet more service in KC, but in the next 4 to 5 years (if the new terminal is ready by then) SWA will be ramping up it's operations in STL and other focus cities even more.

So here's my www industry fame... I have been in the airline and travel industry for 33 years and have owned Missouri's largest group travel company for the past 21 years. Whew, I'm ready to retire. Hehe. I fly SWA twice a week to LAX from either MCI or STL. Landed this evening in STL at 1am after a 2 hour delay and will return to MCI tmmrw evening on the 10:05pm STL to MCI flight. I will never be or never call myself a "cranky flier" nor will I start blogging. Anyway... here is my take.

I, personally, am thrilled KC will get a new terminal, however, I wish it would be built better to accommodate larger growth and connections. I am not a fan of single terminal / shared airlines gate areas. The only airport I can think of that actually has large volume operations on a single terminal / shared gate areas is PDX. Most others see more O&D traffic only and little growth in connections.

Let me put it this way... airlines don't pick airports because of glitzy lights, fountains, tiles and amenities.

Airlines pick airports for destinations, locations (flight times), passenger volumes / originating traffic , connections ease and schedules, landing costs, and bottom dollars (filling flights).

Let's break that down for STL and MCI.

Destinations: STL has 10 Fortune 500 companies, MCI has 1 on the Kansas side (Sprint) which looks dismal and about to be bought by TMobile anytime and literally disolved because of diplications. The Wall Street Journal says that it would be "disastrous" for the KC area in terms of job loss and economics. I'm worried about this for KC. STL also has nearly 200 more Fortune 1000 companies than the MCI area. Both airports are located perfectly. STL is centered for east coast medium hauls and west coast long hauls. In addition, cities like Tulsa, Wichita, OKC and Omaha are major areas that SWA in now connecting through STL... all of which are too close to MCI...as airlines, like SWA, have eliminated most of their short haul flights. 

Passenger Volumes / Originating traffic: as of last month, STL has the highest yield on O&D for SWA over all medium sized airports. The STL Metro has almost a million more people than the immediate MCI area. Originating traffic will not only allow SWA to provide and fill nonstop flights but then provide the connections from other cities through STL. Originating traffic has to be there for nonstops in the first place. In July O&D passenger traffic In STL had a 7.2% increase over last July. In 4 or even 10 years time, STLs originating traffic will most likely continue to exceed that of the MCI area served. 

Connections / schedules: Southwest LITERALLY has their own very nice and new terminal and now international gates in STL... with room to grow. Their investment in STLs Terminal 2 expansion (SWA alone has spent over 3 million in expansion terminal updates in STL in the past 5 years) and growth has been enormous in recent years and continues.

MCI's new terminal (the biggest drawback I see) is a single terminal of 30 to 35 gates. SWA will be "sharing' this terminal and gates around theirs with all airlines. This is where SWA "luvs" STL in many ways. They have their own operations (and most likely to add a crew base soon) in STL. SWAs major "hubs" all have this.... Chicago Midway, Phoenix (concourse), Denver (concourse), Dallas LUV, Houston Hobby, Baltimore (concourse), Orlando (concourse), Atlanta (concourse), see the trend. 

SWA growth in STL over the past 15 years has been carefully cultivated. Their route network in the past 20 years (mainly in the past few years with acquiring AirTran) has boomed. They have been strong in crafting a profitable schedule and have grown to be the largest domestic USA carrier. They have went from (with growing pains) as a "low cost" and "focus city" airline to a big contender and legacy (almost 50 years) airline now having to position themselves a little differently moving connections through more less "hubs." They have trimmed fat and have / are luring the business travelers. Overall, they have done an amazing job IMO and STL has not only faired well... They have been poised by SWA for SWAs future growth. 

Landing Costs: The new MCI will be funded completely by private dollars and the airlines. They haven't said how much yet.... but the airlines will be paying higher landing costs (around 9 to 12 dollars per pax) and gate costs in the new single terminal. In STL today they are paying 11.00 per pax, however their investment in their own terminal and concourse in STL and STL Internationals investment in SWA is deep seeded... remember they are getting the highest return on their O&D pax in STL for medium sized airports. In addition, STL has a larger runway capacity and ability to land / take off during busy times/schedules for all airlines and in inclement weather. 

I personally think STLs hundred of millions of dollars in renovations in all terminals and concourses looks great.

I think that it is long overdue for a new MCI, but it may be a little too late when looking at airline expansion. The airlines serving MCI now are doing just that "serving" MCI and the demand and traffic they are warranting. The new airport will give travelers a better view and amenities but service will most likely stay the same (as long as the airlines bottom dollars and planes are filled). NEW airports (ask Indy and many others) bring little if any new service or routes. If an airline felt there was money to be made in MCI right now.... They will put their plane on schedule NOW as there is not a capacity issue in the current configuration and for O&D traffic. The "new airport = more service" is a myth and the airlines and industry will tell you that too. 

But overall, it will be a mega better "welcome to KC" than the craphole on life support KC has now.

User avatar
ldai_phs
Western Auto Lofts
Western Auto Lofts
Posts: 543
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby ldai_phs » Fri Nov 10, 2017 8:04 am

You've shared All Interesting points that were also shared on Urban STL.

Remember.
1. New Terminal will be able to handle double the number of flights we currently use.
2. The estimated fees per passenger have been announced. And as far as I know it's lower than STL.
3. $3million isn't a huge investment. Not nearly large enough to consider something in the bag. Not that I think SWA will abandon STL over night.

KCFan
New York Life
New York Life
Posts: 375
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:30 pm
Location: Northland

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby KCFan » Fri Nov 10, 2017 8:50 am

SWA has over half of KCI's market now so they will have a huge say in the new terminal design and I'm sure they will have first choice of where they want to be. KCI only connects 4% passengers right now, which is probably the lowest percentage in the midwest so there will be room to grow. I believe KC has a higher percentage of population that flies than St. Louis does. Additionally, the KC market is growing faster than St. Louis (and was on a nice up tick last year) while St. Louis' metro actually lost population (not much), but I don't know how that is even possible for a city of St. Louis' size. I don't think KC is going to come in and steal a bunch of flights that St. Louis already has, but I do think KC will be a growth airport for airlines that want to grow. And who knows, maybe another recession shakes the industry up because a lot of flights will be lost and then KC can grab some of them when the industry expands again. We're 4 years away from the new KCI opening, which is a long time and I'm sure there will be plenty of change between now and then.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Power & Light
Power & Light
Posts: 27691
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby KCPowercat » Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:30 am

None of this matters right now.

hartliss
Western Auto Lofts
Western Auto Lofts
Posts: 534
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 4:05 pm
Location: Brookside

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby hartliss » Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:35 pm

STLguy1 wrote:Just a few comments. Cranky Flier is stated as "Cranky Flier. A snarky airline industry blog established in 2006" run by a guy that hasn't been in the airline biz since 2005 and has been debunked by more airlines and industry leaders than Donald Trump has been by Dems and the GOP. He is called cranky for a reason. He hates SWA as well. A few years ago I remember Doug Parker, the last CEO of USairways before merger with AA called the crazy flier one of the most clueless and arrogant writers on the www. I'll look for a reference to that.

From the KC Star October 27 before vote:
"As the boss for the dominant airline serving KCI, [Southwest Airline's] Gary Kelly is one person who could make the call about if Kansas City gets more flight options from a new terminal. But he stopped short of making that promise. “Tell me what fuel prices will be in a year, tell me what the economy will be in a year, no one can predict the future,” Kelly said. “So there are no guarantees in life."

Sure I will be willing to bet more service in KC, but in the next 4 to 5 years (if the new terminal is ready by then) SWA will be ramping up it's operations in STL and other focus cities even more.

So here's my www industry fame... I have been in the airline and travel industry for 33 years and have owned Missouri's largest group travel company for the past 21 years. Whew, I'm ready to retire. Hehe. I fly SWA twice a week to LAX from either MCI or STL. Landed this evening in STL at 1am after a 2 hour delay and will return to MCI tmmrw evening on the 10:05pm STL to MCI flight. I will never be or never call myself a "cranky flier" nor will I start blogging. Anyway... here is my take.

I, personally, am thrilled KC will get a new terminal, however, I wish it would be built better to accommodate larger growth and connections. I am not a fan of single terminal / shared airlines gate areas. The only airport I can think of that actually has large volume operations on a single terminal / shared gate areas is PDX. Most others see more O&D traffic only and little growth in connections.

Let me put it this way... airlines don't pick airports because of glitzy lights, fountains, tiles and amenities.

Airlines pick airports for destinations, locations (flight times), passenger volumes / originating traffic , connections ease and schedules, landing costs, and bottom dollars (filling flights).

Let's break that down for STL and MCI.

Destinations: STL has 10 Fortune 500 companies, MCI has 1 on the Kansas side (Sprint) which looks dismal and about to be bought by TMobile anytime and literally disolved because of diplications. The Wall Street Journal says that it would be "disastrous" for the KC area in terms of job loss and economics. I'm worried about this for KC. STL also has nearly 200 more Fortune 1000 companies than the MCI area. Both airports are located perfectly. STL is centered for east coast medium hauls and west coast long hauls. In addition, cities like Tulsa, Wichita, OKC and Omaha are major areas that SWA in now connecting through STL... all of which are too close to MCI...as airlines, like SWA, have eliminated most of their short haul flights. 

Passenger Volumes / Originating traffic: as of last month, STL has the highest yield on O&D for SWA over all medium sized airports. The STL Metro has almost a million more people than the immediate MCI area. Originating traffic will not only allow SWA to provide and fill nonstop flights but then provide the connections from other cities through STL. Originating traffic has to be there for nonstops in the first place. In July O&D passenger traffic In STL had a 7.2% increase over last July. In 4 or even 10 years time, STLs originating traffic will most likely continue to exceed that of the MCI area served. 

Connections / schedules: Southwest LITERALLY has their own very nice and new terminal and now international gates in STL... with room to grow. Their investment in STLs Terminal 2 expansion (SWA alone has spent over 3 million in expansion terminal updates in STL in the past 5 years) and growth has been enormous in recent years and continues.

MCI's new terminal (the biggest drawback I see) is a single terminal of 30 to 35 gates. SWA will be "sharing' this terminal and gates around theirs with all airlines. This is where SWA "luvs" STL in many ways. They have their own operations (and most likely to add a crew base soon) in STL. SWAs major "hubs" all have this.... Chicago Midway, Phoenix (concourse), Denver (concourse), Dallas LUV, Houston Hobby, Baltimore (concourse), Orlando (concourse), Atlanta (concourse), see the trend. 

SWA growth in STL over the past 15 years has been carefully cultivated. Their route network in the past 20 years (mainly in the past few years with acquiring AirTran) has boomed. They have been strong in crafting a profitable schedule and have grown to be the largest domestic USA carrier. They have went from (with growing pains) as a "low cost" and "focus city" airline to a big contender and legacy (almost 50 years) airline now having to position themselves a little differently moving connections through more less "hubs." They have trimmed fat and have / are luring the business travelers. Overall, they have done an amazing job IMO and STL has not only faired well... They have been poised by SWA for SWAs future growth. 

Landing Costs: The new MCI will be funded completely by private dollars and the airlines. They haven't said how much yet.... but the airlines will be paying higher landing costs (around 9 to 12 dollars per pax) and gate costs in the new single terminal. In STL today they are paying 11.00 per pax, however their investment in their own terminal and concourse in STL and STL Internationals investment in SWA is deep seeded... remember they are getting the highest return on their O&D pax in STL for medium sized airports. In addition, STL has a larger runway capacity and ability to land / take off during busy times/schedules for all airlines and in inclement weather. 

I personally think STLs hundred of millions of dollars in renovations in all terminals and concourses looks great.

I think that it is long overdue for a new MCI, but it may be a little too late when looking at airline expansion. The airlines serving MCI now are doing just that "serving" MCI and the demand and traffic they are warranting. The new airport will give travelers a better view and amenities but service will most likely stay the same (as long as the airlines bottom dollars and planes are filled). NEW airports (ask Indy and many others) bring little if any new service or routes. If an airline felt there was money to be made in MCI right now.... They will put their plane on schedule NOW as there is not a capacity issue in the current configuration and for O&D traffic. The "new airport = more service" is a myth and the airlines and industry will tell you that too. 

But overall, it will be a mega better "welcome to KC" than the craphole on life support KC has now.


Thanks stlguy, good perspective which I agree with. Let's all be proud of what we are getting and let the flight economic dominos fall where they will. We are already fortunate to have the service we have today.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Power & Light
Power & Light
Posts: 27691
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby KCPowercat » Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:46 pm

Southwest can easily move from STL to MCI in 2021 they have no ties there....it's just silly to claim otherwise or fret over it now.

User avatar
Highlander
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8839
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby Highlander » Fri Nov 10, 2017 1:49 pm

Now that the single terminal has passed, I am looking at a map of KCI in Google Maps and wondering how they will be able to construct the terminal while keeping operations going seamlessly. It just doesn't look like there is enough space unless they encroach upon KCI logistical support off Paris and Bogota Streets or impinge on the circular approach road that services the terminal. It looks like aircraft departing from Terminal B will have to take a longer route to the main N-S runway with construction going on just to the north.

Has a map been provided showing how new the terminal will fit onto the existing KCI plan? It's difficult to envision.

Also, from Google Maps, there is what appears to be a construction project just east of the terminal complex presently going on - anybody know what that is?

User avatar
WSPanic
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3212
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby WSPanic » Fri Nov 10, 2017 2:22 pm

Highlander wrote:Now that the single terminal has passed, I am looking at a map of KCI in Google Maps and wondering how they will be able to construct the terminal while keeping operations going seamlessly. It just doesn't look like there is enough space unless they encroach upon KCI logistical support off Paris and Bogota Streets or impinge on the circular approach road that services the terminal. It looks like aircraft departing from Terminal B will have to take a longer route to the main N-S runway with construction going on just to the north.

Has a map been provided showing how new the terminal will fit onto the existing KCI plan? It's difficult to envision.

Also, from Google Maps, there is what appears to be a construction project just east of the terminal complex presently going on - anybody know what that is?


Don't know how accurate this is - from April 2016. But halfway down this article they have a new single terminal structure as an overlay on the existing map.

http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article73988477.html

User avatar
GRID
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14059
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby GRID » Fri Nov 10, 2017 2:23 pm

Good post STLguy1, but I do think it's just a bit biased toward StL. I have always thought that KC sort of "missed the boat" by letting the terminal situation drag out so long. Had MCI built a new terminal 10-15 years ago, I really do think that MCI would be a large focus city for Southwest today and during that time, the airline has pretty much moved on from KC and built up major focus cities in Denver, St Louis and few other cites all taking flights that could have gone to KC.

Regardless, I think that KCI still needs a new terminal even if no new flights are added, but if I were StL, I would be at least a little concerned.

Southwest has not really spent of a lot of cash in StL. A few million bucks is basically nothing. So they don't really have a huge vested in interested in staying if something better comes along. While I'm sure there are some nice things about having a whole terminal to yourself, I don't see it as as major problem. SW has two terminals at BWI that share a major concourse, but they easily work with other airlines in terminal C when the gates are full etc. If anything, I would think it would give them a bit more flexibility for gate availability etc which will help them keep flights on time and passengers happy.

SW basically runs the show at MCI and they will be the primary input from the airlines for the new terminal. Basically, the new terminal will be designed just how SW wants and I actually see them liking it as much ore more than having their own renovated terminal in an airport like StL. SW Is a part of the design and funding process from the ground up. MCI will be every bit of what they want from an airport.

You are underestimating the size of the KC market. While the STL metro is larger, the market area is not that much larger. It might even be smaller.
The CMSA of KC is 2.5 million and the CMSA of StL is 2.9 million. That's only 400k difference and Topeka is very much a part of the MCI market area. So Topeka alone brings the MCI market area up to about the same as StL. So really the local KC/Topeka region of 2.8 million vs the StL region of 2.9 million. Not much of a difference. Not to mention that KC is growing about twice as fast as StL.

Here is where I think the MCI market can really threaten STL. MCI has a much larger potential market as far as geography. You drive a couple of hours from STL and you are quickly in range of another major international airport territory. People in the rural areas around STL can go to Indy or Memphis or Nashville or Louisville or Chicago or KC. On the other hand, MCI is by far the largest airport serving a huge area that includes many small metros like Omaha, Wichita etc. People in Manhattan, KS or even Lincoln, NE don't have too many other options. If MCI has a more comfortable terminal it will be more attractive to people that live in Omaha or Wichita or Springfield to make the drive to MCI for a nonstop. Right now MCI is not fun for those types of travelers that have to get to their airport very early and need restaurants etc. Or KCI could be a focus hub for this region with a lot more commuter flights from Omaha, Little Rock, Wichita, Tulsa, Des Moines, Springfield etc where can make a quick connection to their final destination. Again, this is not really an option at the current terminal. Nobody wants to connect through MCI right now.

So while I do think MCI may have missed the boat, I'm not so sure the boat can't still come back to MCI and StL would likely take the biggest hit if it did.

User avatar
Highlander
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8839
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby Highlander » Fri Nov 10, 2017 2:50 pm

WSPanic wrote:
Highlander wrote:Now that the single terminal has passed, I am looking at a map of KCI in Google Maps and wondering how they will be able to construct the terminal while keeping operations going seamlessly. It just doesn't look like there is enough space unless they encroach upon KCI logistical support off Paris and Bogota Streets or impinge on the circular approach road that services the terminal. It looks like aircraft departing from Terminal B will have to take a longer route to the main N-S runway with construction going on just to the north.

Has a map been provided showing how new the terminal will fit onto the existing KCI plan? It's difficult to envision.

Also, from Google Maps, there is what appears to be a construction project just east of the terminal complex presently going on - anybody know what that is?


Don't know how accurate this is - from April 2016. But halfway down this article they have a new single terminal structure as an overlay on the existing map.

http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article73988477.html


Thanks. Surprise I missed that. I thought I'd read everything pretty thoroughly. So, there would be detours in the taxi routes for the aircraft and parking construction would indeed encroach on the circular road if that is an accurate drawing. That also will compress the area in which planes have to operate around the gate. Could be some operational issues. But there's plenty of room for new terminals should air traffic ever dictate we need it.

User avatar
Highlander
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8839
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Postby Highlander » Fri Nov 10, 2017 2:54 pm

GRID wrote:ry bit of what they want from an airport.

You are underestimating the size of the KC market. While the STL metro is larger, the market area is not that much larger. It might even be smaller.
The CMSA of KC is 2.5 million and the CMSA of StL is 2.9 million. That's only 400k difference and Topeka is very much a part of the MCI market area. So Topeka alone brings the MCI market area up to about the same as StL. So really the local KC/Topeka region of 2.8 million vs the StL region of 2.9 million. Not much of a difference. Not to mention that KC is growing about twice as fast as StL.

Here is where I think the MCI market can really threaten STL. MCI has a much larger potential market as far as geography. You drive a couple of hours from STL and you are quickly in range of another major international airport territory. People in the rural areas around STL can go to Indy or Memphis or Nashville or Louisville or Chicago or KC. On the other hand, MCI is by far the largest airport serving a huge area that includes many small metros like Omaha, Wichita etc. People in Manhattan, KS or even Lincoln, NE don't have too many other options. If MCI has a more comfortable terminal it will be more attractive to people that live in Omaha or Wichita or Springfield to make the drive to MCI for a nonstop. Right now MCI is not fun for those types of travelers that have to get to their airport very early and need restaurants etc. Or KCI could be a focus hub for this region with a lot more commuter flights from Omaha, Little Rock, Wichita, Tulsa, Des Moines, Springfield etc where can make a quick connection to their final destination. Again, this is not really an option at the current terminal. Nobody wants to connect through MCI right now.

So while I do think MCI may have missed the boat, I'm not so sure the boat can't still come back to MCI and StL would likely take the biggest hit if it did.


I was thinking the same thing. Two metro areas directly to the west with well over 100,000 people easily within an hours drive of KCI and St Joseph to the north. Also, I know Wichita people that frequently use KCI. KC doesn't have the business drivers, however, that St Louis has but we do have but I suspect Cerner and Garmin alone generate quite a bit of international traffic.


Return to “Kansas City Transportation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests