U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Missouri > Kansas City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-21-2011, 09:59 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
10,705 posts, read 18,498,983 times
Reputation: 5415

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by xenokc View Post
It seems those who don't realize KCI's weaknesses are the ones who don't travel often. Is great to get in/out of quickly for locals but is overall not a good design in this age. It was designed before security checkpoints so was totally open, where you'd get the services of the entire terminal from the gate. The gates weren't walled off when first opened.

It's not the 'politicos' who desire new terminals, it's anyone who travels often through KCI and those who understand eco development impact. It's a terrible design for hub activity (ever since the security gates were added).

I understand though that many think new terminals would be a waste as for locals who don't hang out in the airport, it's considered one of the easiest airports in the world. It was rated by a French airline rag a few years ago as easiest airport to deal with. Sucks though if you're between flights or need to hang out for a while. The access to cab is also an awful setup, worst I've seen in any airport - in the world, literally.
I could be wrong, but swear you used to rip my head off for saying KCI's terminal sucked and needed to be replaced. . Hopefully more people come around and it happens. If KC messes this up, some other city will get the money instead.

Even when MCI was my hometown airport, I pretty much hated it. I do not see what people in KC see in that terminal setup. If it's just the short walks, well, that pretty much figures. (midwest mentality). Short walks and free wifi is all kci has going for it.

Here is the basic plan which was conceived during the master plan study a few years ago. It will be something like this.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-21-2011, 10:06 AM
 
Location: Denver, Colorado U.S.A.
14,174 posts, read 22,500,688 times
Reputation: 10428
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenokc View Post
It seems those who don't realize KCI's weaknesses are the ones who don't travel often. Is great to get in/out of quickly for locals but is overall not a good design in this age. It was designed before security checkpoints so was totally open, where you'd get the services of the entire terminal from the gate. The gates weren't walled off when first opened.

It's not the 'politicos' who desire new terminals, it's anyone who travels often through KCI and those who understand eco development impact. It's a terrible design for hub activity (ever since the security gates were added).

I understand though that many think new terminals would be a waste as for locals who don't hang out in the airport, it's considered one of the easiest airports in the world. It was rated by a French airline rag a few years ago as easiest airport to deal with. Sucks though if you're between flights or need to hang out for a while. The access to cab is also an awful setup, worst I've seen in any airport - in the world, literally.
The article also explained how it's important for a city to attract large companies by having international flights. Denver recently landed some large corporate HQ (I forgot the name of the company) and one of the reasons they cited for moving to Denver was that we have daily non-stop flights to Europe. Denver is getting close to having a daily non-stop to Asia as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2011, 10:07 AM
 
1,830 posts, read 3,110,519 times
Reputation: 532
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcmo View Post
I could be wrong, but swear you used to rip my head off for saying KCI's terminal sucked and needed to be replaced. .
It was probably the 'way' you go off on long winded rants, not the fact the airport is a poor design for this age. But I can see how those who do not travel often find KCI an easier airport to deal with.. a trade rag in France ranked it easiest in the world a few years ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2011, 10:11 AM
 
Location: Denver, Colorado U.S.A.
14,174 posts, read 22,500,688 times
Reputation: 10428
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcmo View Post
I could be wrong, but swear you used to rip my head off for saying KCI's terminal sucked and needed to be replaced. . Hopefully more people come around and it happens. If KC messes this up, some other city will get the money instead.

Even when MCI was my hometown airport, I pretty much hated it. I do not see what people in KC see in that terminal setup. If it's just the short walks, well, that pretty much figures. (midwest mentality). Short walks and free wifi is all kci has going for it.

Here is the basic plan which was conceived during the master plan study a few years ago. It will be something like this.
I think people in KC need to walk a little more to burn off all the barbeque
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2011, 10:25 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
10,705 posts, read 18,498,983 times
Reputation: 5415
But it's true. People in KC seriously freak out over walking.

Had KC built a new terminal 15 years ago, I'm pretty confident that KC and denver may be swapped today or at least even.

There is no reason that with KC's central location to the population center of the country, three long wide open runways, massive room for expansion and a huge regional market from Omaha to Wichita to Des Moines to Tulsa that KC should be a big domestic (with some international) hub. Today, KC should be at least on par with Denver or Minneapolis.

There is one reason. 75' walks and now KC even has Southwest overlooking the airport because of the terminal situation.

An inadequate airport (terminal and landlocked runways) is what ultimately killed St Louis. They still have a crappy old terminal and their new runway is a few years too late and the runway takes forever to get to from the gates. KC could and should have been able to capitalize on what was going on in StL, but didn't. The terminal in KC is the reason why TWA left KC for STL in the first place.

KCI has no excuse for not being one of the premier airports between the coasts other than those pesky 75 foot walks.

Last edited by kcmo; 11-21-2011 at 10:54 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2011, 10:49 AM
 
Location: Denver, Colorado U.S.A.
14,174 posts, read 22,500,688 times
Reputation: 10428
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcmo View Post
But it's true. People in KC seriously freak out over walking.

Had KC built a new terminal 15 years ago, I'm pretty confident that KC and denver may be swapped today or at least even.

There is no reason that with KC's central location to the population center of the country, three long wide open runways, massive room for expansion and a huge regional market from Omaha to Wichita to Des Moines to Tulsa that KC should be a big domestic (with some international) hub. Today, KC should be at least on par with Denver or Minneapolis.

There is one reason. 75' walks and now KC even has Southwest overlooking the airport because of the terminal situation.

An inadequate airport (terminal and landlocked runways) is what ultimately killed St Louis. They still have a crappy old terminal and their new runway is a few years too late and the runway takes forever to get to from the gates. KC could and should have been able to capilize on the what was going on in StL, but didn't. The terminal in KC is the reason why TWA left KC for STL in the first place.

KCI has no excuse for not being one of the premier airports between the coasts other than those pesky 75 foot walks.
Very true. I still don't really understand why Denver has such a busy and large airport. I suppose it supports over 4 million people along the Front Range and there are no large airports anywhere near Denver.

The last time I flew into STL it was still a bustling airport. I caught a red-eye out of LAX on some sort of wide-body aircraft, maybe a 777. This would have been around 1998.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2011, 10:59 AM
 
1,830 posts, read 3,110,519 times
Reputation: 532
STL took a massive hit from near 30M passengers a year to now around 12M, which was KCI's peak. STL is now ranked 31st and KC 32nd. KCI is actually busier now than other previous hub airports like Cincy and Memphis. KCI is busier than nearly all other markets around its size (Cleveland, Milwaukee, Indy, Columbus, etc). It just doesn't appear that way because all activity is at each gate, not bottlenecked through concourses that lead to a central point like other airports. KCI is hardly a dead airport, it just appears to be because of the way it's designed.. to not have to deal with hassles, which it is successful with. It's the security gates that make it a poor design, but not having to walk through people bottlenecks is actually a good design depending on perspective. The design makes it look deader than it is though.

KCI
RITA | BTS | Transtats

STL
RITA | BTS | Transtats
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2011, 11:05 AM
 
Location: Tower Grove East, St. Louis, MO
12,064 posts, read 27,212,345 times
Reputation: 3739
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenokc View Post
STL took a massive hit from near 30M passengers a year to now around 12M, which was KCI's peak. STL is now ranked 31st and KC 32nd. KCI is actually busier now than other previous hub airports like Cincy and Memphis. KCI is busier than nearly all other markets around its size (Cleveland, Milwaukee, Indy, Columbus, etc). It just doesn't appear that way because all activity is at each gate, not bottlenecked through concourses that lead to a central point like other airports. KCI is hardly a dead airport, it just appears to be because of the way it's designed.. to not have to deal with hassles, which it is successful with. It's the security gates that make it a poor design, but not having to walk through people bottlenecks is actually a good design depending on perspective. The design makes it look deader than it is though.

KCI
RITA | BTS | Transtats

STL
RITA | BTS | Transtats
That's pretty bad when you think about STL being the 16th largest metro in the U.S. Though, from an entirely anecdotal standpoint, I've had better luck getting non-stops out of St. Louis than in Kansas City. The difference is that KC seems to be adding new non-stops, and St. Louis hasn't been.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2011, 11:11 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
10,705 posts, read 18,498,983 times
Reputation: 5415
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenokc View Post
STL took a massive hit from near 30M passengers a year to now around 12M, which was KCI's peak. STL is now ranked 31st and KC 32nd. KCI is actually busier now than other previous hub airports like Cincy and Memphis. KCI is busier than nearly all other markets around its size (Cleveland, Milwaukee, Indy, Columbus, etc). It just doesn't appear that way because all activity is at each gate, not bottlenecked through concourses that lead to a central point like other airports. KCI is hardly a dead airport, it just appears to be because of the way it's designed.. to not have to deal with hassles, which it is successful with. It's the security gates that make it a poor design, but not having to walk through people bottlenecks is actually a good design depending on perspective. The design makes it look deader than it is though.

KCI
RITA | BTS | Transtats

STL
RITA | BTS | Transtats
But KC serves a MUCH Larger market than Indianapolis or Columbus or Milwaukee or Cincy. Those places have another major city airport or airports two hours away.

KCI is the biggest airport for an immediate region of around 3 million (topeka/St Joe etc) and super regional market of like 8-10 million or more as KC is a flying option for places like Iowa, Nebraska, most of Kansas, half of Missouri including some pretty good sized metro areas that are not large enough to sustain an airport like KC.

KC should be a Denver when it come to air travel. It should be one of the largest hubs in the country and the terminal is really the only thing that has kept that from happening IMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2011, 11:13 AM
 
1,830 posts, read 3,110,519 times
Reputation: 532
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragx6 View Post
That's pretty bad when you think about STL being the 16th largest metro in the U.S. Though, from an entirely anecdotal standpoint, I've had better luck getting non-stops out of St. Louis than in Kansas City. The difference is that KC seems to be adding new non-stops, and St. Louis hasn't been.
Non-stops fluctuate a lot in non primary airports, especially with the airline mergers and constant adjustments in secondary hubs. STL tends to fluctuate from 60-80 non-stop cities and KCI tends to fluctuate from 50-70 or so cities. KCI had 72 cities a few years ago, before mergers killed some. When KC had Braniff, was probably more. Mergers harm airports more than anything, which is what killed STL (TWA) and Cincy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Missouri > Kansas City
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top