KCI Flight Schedule Adjustments

[dnweava]

I have an outside the box idea (I'm sure this won't work economically and my plan will be roasted but I will share anyways). So it seems we have to essentially subsidize or bribe the airlines to get us an overseas direct flight so I have an idea that could we split the cost of that subsidy with the another 2nd tier type city that would also like to add an overseas connection.

So with a quick research, it seems some of the biggest cities in Europe without a direct flight to North America are places like Hamburg, Dortmund, Florence and the biggest cities in South America without a direct flight are cities are some fairly large Brazilian cities like Porto Alegre, Recife, and Belo Horizonte (metros of 4 to 6 million each)

While there would little traffic between KC and those cities directly, it could cut down many trips either way from being a 3 legs to a 2 leg trip and maybe even start some business/tourism traffic between the 2 places. Maybe a beach city like Recife or tourist city like Florence could see the economic benefits of teaming up with us?

[normalthings]

I have an outside the box idea (I'm sure this won't work economically and my plan will be roasted but I will share anyways). So it seems we have to essentially subsidize or bribe the airlines to get us an overseas direct flight so I have an idea that could we split the cost of that subsidy with the another 2nd tier type city that would also like to add an overseas connection.

So with a quick research, it seems some of the biggest cities in Europe without a direct flight to North America are places like Hamburg, Dortmund, Florence and the biggest cities in South America without a direct flight are cities are some fairly large Brazilian cities like Porto Alegre, Recife, and Belo Horizonte (metros of 4 to 6 million each)

While there would little traffic between KC and those cities directly, it could cut down many trips either way from being a 3 legs to a 2 leg trip and maybe even start some business/tourism traffic between the 2 places. Maybe a beach city like Recife or tourist city like Florence could see the economic benefits of teaming up with us?

Look at my previous post. KC, STL, CIN, IND, etc need to plug into a major hub on the Euro side to make this work and even then its a risk for the Airline. A TATL flight represents a tens of millions of $ investment by the airline. If you think the incentive required on a route that will probably work is high, imagine what you will need to spend on a route that probably won't work. Conversely, 2nd tier Euro cities want to plug into 1st tier US hubs.

The top destination from KC is the UK with around 90 June PPDEW. These flights require/survive on connecting traffic. So a KC flight to LHR would need 60% connecting traffic to fill up based on current numbers. Obviously LHR-KCI will be stimulated but connecting is a very big piece of the puzzle.

LH and STL have been surprised to see travelers connecting at STL to other points in the Us. It is a very bad experience at their airport and so it might be an opportunity for KCI to drive additional traffic. One of the KCI updates mentioned they added special facilities for inbound international passengers to connect domestically.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

I have an outside the box idea (I'm sure this won't work economically and my plan will be roasted but I will share anyways). So it seems we have to essentially subsidize or bribe the airlines to get us an overseas direct flight so I have an idea that could we split the cost of that subsidy with the another 2nd tier type city that would also like to add an overseas connection.

So with a quick research, it seems some of the biggest cities in Europe without a direct flight to North America are places like Hamburg, Dortmund, Florence and the biggest cities in South America without a direct flight are cities are some fairly large Brazilian cities like Porto Alegre, Recife, and Belo Horizonte (metros of 4 to 6 million each)

While there would little traffic between KC and those cities directly, it could cut down many trips either way from being a 3 legs to a 2 leg trip and maybe even start some business/tourism traffic between the 2 places. Maybe a beach city like Recife or tourist city like Florence could see the economic benefits of teaming up with us?

That’s actually a pretty interesting concept. I wonder how hard the logistics side would be to organize an operation like that. Is there any examples of a midsized airport getting an operation like that going?

[beautyfromashes]

Look at my previous post. KC, STL, CIN, IND, etc need to plug into a major hub on the Euro side to make this work and even then its a risk for the Airline. A TATL flight represents a tens of millions of $ investment by the airline. If you think the incentive required on a route that will probably work is high, imagine what you will need to spend on a route that probably won't work. Conversely, 2nd tier Euro cities want to plug into 1st tier US hubs.

Yes, but don't you think we will continue to see more diversification? It used to be there were only a few international hubs in the United States. Now, there are many cities that could be a connection point as we see more transAtlantic nonstops. The same will be happening in Europe. Rome will develop more nonstops. They already have India, China, Japan, the ME and parts of Africa. Sure, there won't be multiple trips per day like CDG or LHR will have but there is a network to get to the rest of the world that wasn't there. Plus, if you prove you can support a dedicated flight to Rome or Barcelona or Madrid, you'd have to think the big players (Paris, Amst, London) would pick up on that and add one as well.

[beautyfromashes]

Look at my previous post. KC, STL, CIN, IND, etc need to plug into a major hub on the Euro side to make this work and even then its a risk for the Airline. A TATL flight represents a tens of millions of $ investment by the airline. If you think the incentive required on a route that will probably work is high, imagine what you will need to spend on a route that probably won't work. Conversely, 2nd tier Euro cities want to plug into 1st tier US hubs.

Yes, but don't you think we will continue to see more diversification? It used to be there were only a few international hubs in the United States. Now, there are many cities that could be a connection point as we see more transAtlantic nonstops. The same will be happening in Europe. Rome will develop more nonstops. They already have India, China, Japan, the ME and parts of Africa. Sure, there won't be multiple trips per day like CDG or LHR will have but there is a network to get to the rest of the world that wasn't there. Plus, if you prove you can support a dedicated flight to Rome or Barcelona or Madrid, you'd have to think the big players (Paris, Amst, London) would pick up on that and add one as well.

[herrfrank]

Yes, but don't you think we will continue to see more diversification? It used to be there were only a few international hubs in the United States. Now, there are many cities that could be a connection point as we see more transAtlantic nonstops. The same will be happening in Europe. Rome will develop more nonstops. They already have India, China, Japan, the ME and parts of Africa. Sure, there won't be multiple trips per day like CDG or LHR will have but there is a network to get to the rest of the world that wasn't there. Plus, if you prove you can support a dedicated flight to Rome or Barcelona or Madrid, you'd have to think the big players (Paris, Amst, London) would pick up on that and add one as well.

The problem with Rome is not its size or its catchment. It's Alitalia, or whatever the name is this week. Italy, like Russia, should have an international carrier worth its salt, but both countries have failed that test. (Have you ever connected at Sheremetevo?)

For better or for worse, Europe has developed into three or four superhubs: LHR, FRA, CDG and maybe AMS. ZRH, IST, MAD, KEF, etc. just don't fly to enough places to compete.

The US is doing something similar with ATL, DFW, MIA and ORD. New York, Boston, DC are all big enough to support point-to-point traffic. But if someone from Hamburg or Florence, as mentioned upthread, needs to go to Spartanburg or Billings... Well, they aren't going to go via NYC. They will get to a Europe superhub, connect to a US superhub, and do the travel with two spokes and one hub-to-hub sector. KC is one of those spokes now.

Our move is to transition from a spoke to US superhubs into a transatlantic sector to a Euro superhub. That is the move we need.

[beautyfromashes]

For better or for worse, Europe has developed into three or four superhubs: LHR, FRA, CDG and maybe AMS. ZRH, IST, MAD, KEF, etc. just don't fly to enough places to compete.

The US is doing something similar with ATL, DFW, MIA and ORD. New York, Boston, DC are all big enough to support point-to-point traffic. But if someone from Hamburg or Florence, as mentioned upthread, needs to go to Spartanburg or Billings... Well, they aren't going to go via NYC. They will get to a Europe superhub, connect to a US superhub, and do the travel with two spokes and one hub-to-hub sector. KC is one of those spokes now.

Yes, it seems both continents are developing a second tier of international connection points. And the legacy cities will have more connections. But, there will be less dependency on them (unless you're going to Billings). Perhaps the person in Rome can go to Las Vegas through Dallas instead of NY. Or the person in KC can go to India through Rome instead of Paris. Mid-tier to mid-tier seems to be closer to a reality. The problem with Kansas City is we aren't even mid-tier right now and this could have dramatic negatives for our city. It's not just whether we can cut time on travel to a Mediterranean beach or European city. It's whether we are a player in the international marketplace at all.

[herrfrank]

^Agreed

KC needs a flight to CDG, LHR, AMS, or FRA

I really thought London was close. The signs were all pointing toward it

[GRID]

For better or for worse, Europe has developed into three or four superhubs: LHR, FRA, CDG and maybe AMS. ZRH, IST, MAD, KEF, etc. just don't fly to enough places to compete.

The US is doing something similar with ATL, DFW, MIA and ORD. New York, Boston, DC are all big enough to support point-to-point traffic. But if someone from Hamburg or Florence, as mentioned upthread, needs to go to Spartanburg or Billings... Well, they aren't going to go via NYC. They will get to a Europe superhub, connect to a US superhub, and do the travel with two spokes and one hub-to-hub sector. KC is one of those spokes now.

Yes, it seems both continents are developing a second tier of international connection points. And the legacy cities will have more connections. But, there will be less dependency on them (unless you're going to Billings). Perhaps the person in Rome can go to Las Vegas through Dallas instead of NY. Or the person in KC can go to India through Rome instead of Paris. Mid-tier to mid-tier seems to be closer to a reality. The problem with Kansas City is we aren't even mid-tier right now and this could have dramatic negatives for our city. It's not just whether we can cut time on travel to a Mediterranean beach or European city. It's whether we are a player in the international marketplace at all.

Yeah, I think that's the problem. KC's airport tier is basically Omaha, OKC or Des Moines now with a few more flights to satisfy the local market. KCI needs to get back to being somewhat of a regional hub for that part of the midwest. It would have happened decades ago if the terminal were replaced decades ago. So this is KC's chance to take KCI to the next level. I hope the aviation department can get it done or the current types of passengers and flights probably will not even be able to sustain half of the new retail space at KCI.

Hopefully over the next five years, KCI will become a totally different type of airport. A major upgrade from the small O/D local airport it has become. It's one of the things KC as a whole needs. I would imagine KCI has even been one of the reasons KC is typically at the loosing end of corporate mergers.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

For better or for worse, Europe has developed into three or four superhubs: LHR, FRA, CDG and maybe AMS. ZRH, IST, MAD, KEF, etc. just don't fly to enough places to compete.

The US is doing something similar with ATL, DFW, MIA and ORD. New York, Boston, DC are all big enough to support point-to-point traffic. But if someone from Hamburg or Florence, as mentioned upthread, needs to go to Spartanburg or Billings... Well, they aren't going to go via NYC. They will get to a Europe superhub, connect to a US superhub, and do the travel with two spokes and one hub-to-hub sector. KC is one of those spokes now.

Yes, it seems both continents are developing a second tier of international connection points. And the legacy cities will have more connections. But, there will be less dependency on them (unless you're going to Billings). Perhaps the person in Rome can go to Las Vegas through Dallas instead of NY. Or the person in KC can go to India through Rome instead of Paris. Mid-tier to mid-tier seems to be closer to a reality. The problem with Kansas City is we aren't even mid-tier right now and this could have dramatic negatives for our city. It's not just whether we can cut time on travel to a Mediterranean beach or European city. It's whether we are a player in the international marketplace at all.

Yeah, I think that's the problem. KC's airport tier is basically Omaha, OKC or Des Moines now with a few more flights to satisfy the local market. KCI needs to get back to being somewhat of a regional hub for that part of the midwest. It would have happened decades ago if the terminal were replaced decades ago. So this is KC's chance to take KCI to the next level. I hope the aviation department can get it done or the current types of passengers and flights probably will not even be able to sustain half of the new retail space at KCI.

Hopefully over the next five years, KCI will become a totally different type of airport. A major upgrade from the small O/D local airport it has become. It's one of the things KC as a whole needs. I would imagine KCI has even been one of the reasons KC is typically at the loosing end of corporate mergers.

A Delta lounge is pretty telling for how much they’re thinking they’ll invest in the airport going forward. They don’t put those just anywhere. This summer and fall will be fairly telling about what the new terminal means to the airlines.

[GRID]

Yes, it seems both continents are developing a second tier of international connection points. And the legacy cities will have more connections. But, there will be less dependency on them (unless you're going to Billings). Perhaps the person in Rome can go to Las Vegas through Dallas instead of NY. Or the person in KC can go to India through Rome instead of Paris. Mid-tier to mid-tier seems to be closer to a reality. The problem with Kansas City is we aren't even mid-tier right now and this could have dramatic negatives for our city. It's not just whether we can cut time on travel to a Mediterranean beach or European city. It's whether we are a player in the international marketplace at all.

Yeah, I think that's the problem. KC's airport tier is basically Omaha, OKC or Des Moines now with a few more flights to satisfy the local market. KCI needs to get back to being somewhat of a regional hub for that part of the midwest. It would have happened decades ago if the terminal were replaced decades ago. So this is KC's chance to take KCI to the next level. I hope the aviation department can get it done or the current types of passengers and flights probably will not even be able to sustain half of the new retail space at KCI.

Hopefully over the next five years, KCI will become a totally different type of airport. A major upgrade from the small O/D local airport it has become. It's one of the things KC as a whole needs. I would imagine KCI has even been one of the reasons KC is typically at the loosing end of corporate mergers.

A Delta lounge is pretty telling for how much they’re thinking they’ll invest in the airport going forward. They don’t put those just anywhere. This summer and fall will be fairly telling about what the new terminal means to the airlines.

Agreed. That's why I'm holding out hope that the airlines will ramp up flights to KC over the next few years.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

Yeah, I think that's the problem. KC's airport tier is basically Omaha, OKC or Des Moines now with a few more flights to satisfy the local market. KCI needs to get back to being somewhat of a regional hub for that part of the midwest. It would have happened decades ago if the terminal were replaced decades ago. So this is KC's chance to take KCI to the next level. I hope the aviation department can get it done or the current types of passengers and flights probably will not even be able to sustain half of the new retail space at KCI.

Hopefully over the next five years, KCI will become a totally different type of airport. A major upgrade from the small O/D local airport it has become. It's one of the things KC as a whole needs. I would imagine KCI has even been one of the reasons KC is typically at the loosing end of corporate mergers.

A Delta lounge is pretty telling for how much they’re thinking they’ll invest in the airport going forward. They don’t put those just anywhere. This summer and fall will be fairly telling about what the new terminal means to the airlines.

Agreed. That's why I'm holding out hope that the airlines will ramp up flights to KC over the next few years.

If nothing materializes by summer of ‘25 I’d definitely lose hope at that point, I’d think that’s a long enough timeframe for airlines to truly gauge the opportunities for KC.

[normalthings]

in may, DEN-MCI goes to 5x daily mainline on United

[SingleMalt12]

The current KCI sucks for connecting flight. Three terminals (now two), and not built so much for moving baggage between planes.
It could be that with the new terminal, and IF the support structure allows for fast movement of luggage between planes, KCI could be a hub, could.

The question is, does it make economic sense to put a hub at KCI. Given that there are hubs in Denver, Dallas, Minneapolis, Chicago, in the midwest, is there a compelling need? I can't find one but that's just me.

As for Delta lounges, there are at least 50 around the country. A cursory look at their current offerings from KCI looks like mainly Delta hubs with a few point to point trips tossed in. Does a Delta hub in KCI look like a possibility? Again, I just don't see it.

[WoodDraw]

We’re not that far from Detroit, Minneapolis, and Atlanta. So delta doesn’t need a Midwest hub.

[dev49]

in may, DEN-MCI goes to 5x daily mainline on United

I only see 4x in May unless I am missing something.

[trexel94]

The current KCI sucks for connecting flight. Three terminals (now two), and not built so much for moving baggage between planes.
It could be that with the new terminal, and IF the support structure allows for fast movement of luggage between planes, KCI could be a hub, could.

The question is, does it make economic sense to put a hub at KCI. Given that there are hubs in Denver, Dallas, Minneapolis, Chicago, in the midwest, is there a compelling need? I can't find one but that's just me.

As for Delta lounges, there are at least 50 around the country. A cursory look at their current offerings from KCI looks like mainly Delta hubs with a few point to point trips tossed in. Does a Delta hub in KCI look like a possibility? Again, I just don't see it.

Certainly not a full hub operation but I could see Delta building KC into a small focus city something akin to RDU or PDX. A few more p2p to major business cities (DCA, RDU, CVG etc), a couple leisure destinations (they could bring back Orlando and Cancun along with adding Jacksonville, FLL) and of course a flight to CDG.

The upcoming lounge is bigger than CVG, BNA and RDU locations and 50 % the size of Seattle's. It wouldn't make much sense otherwise to lease such a huge space with no anticipated traffic increase. Is DL leasing an additional gate?

[Cratedigger]

With the new airport and Canadian Pacific, is there any talk of nonstop flights to Calgary? Could see a nonstop to the Banff/Jasper area being a well traveled tourist route.

[normalthings]

in may, DEN-MCI goes to 5x daily mainline on United

I only see 4x in May unless I am missing something.

Saw this on another forum but I’m not finding it either now

[DaveKCMO]

With the new airport and Canadian Pacific, is there any talk of nonstop flights to Calgary? Could see a nonstop to the Banff/Jasper area being a well traveled tourist route.

Isn't this all fairly predictable based on the number of people traveling the city pair in question?