Kansas City Airport's Future: Good Things on the Way (Joplin: for sale, transfer)

[aragx6]

^Flying in won't really be bad assuming you have no reason to stick around. It will just seem barren and weird.

Flying out, don't go hungry because it's unlikely there will be anything other than a 3-hour old bagel sandwich to purchase beyond the security gates.

[lovekcmo]

KCI was obsolete the day it opened. It never materialized like the city envisioned. TWA wanted it rebuilt and the city refused to do so, so TWA left. The city wasted $250+ million dollars the last 10 years on it and it's still not a functional airport. More people hate KCI with a passion, than like it and the city knows that. I'm embarrassed by it and wish we had a nice and decent airport.

[lovekcmo]

KC has never been forward thinking, the city loss the FFA years ago because downtown was dead, now it's a great downtown, but no conventions. The airport needs to be rebuilt but it may be too late for hub status, KC lost out on that decades ago. In traveling and living in different parts of the country, I have never had one person tell me they love the airport here, but have been told countless times how much they hated this airport. People in this city are also way overweight, maybe the should walk through a terminal to catch a flight, might do them good.

[xenokc]

Originally Posted by lovekcmo

KCI was obsolete the day it opened.

No quite. It was obsolete shortly after it opened, when the Feds required Security checkpoints. The airport wasn't designed for that concept. Was bad timing that it happened after Design rather than before. The airport would be more doable as a hub if there were no such thing as security gates, though it would've needed to better tie together all 3 terminals if a major hub. Major hubs mean higher ticket prices though for the locals. A secondary hub in each terminal for 3 airlines would've been great.

[xenokc]

Originally Posted by lovekcmo

now it's a great downtown, but no conventions.

Fewer, not none. Careful with the extremes. Now that more cities want to be a convention city, it's not surprising. The competition is fierce. When that many cities are vying for conventions, you wonder if KC should even waste more resources on convention infrastructure. Would like to see more hotels downtown but they should not bother going after the big conventions. Go after the smaller ones and if they can build a reputation back for larger ones, go for it.

BTW, KC was apparently 3rd largest convention city back in the 1920s or so.

KC has never been forward thinking,

Again with the absolutes. Never? In the 1920's, this was one hopping town. Ignoring The Prohibition was about as forward thinking as it gets. Just because they aren't strong in some areas today doesn't meant they don't going after other things. KC is strong in freight transportation/warehousing, animal health research, small business entrepreneurs, auto industry, graphic arts, has a pretty decent foodie/wine culture, is a major telcom town, above avg tech town and growing with a lot of recognition. KC area got Google fiber afterall and is a fairly significant contributor to Android/mobile phone development.

Cities change. Is better to go after what you can do best rather than try to sustain a past that is not as opportunistic as other things might be. Conventions are hardly what I'd call opportunistic when there is more convention cities supply than demand in this economy.

[lovekcmo]

My apology on the extremes, I was thinking fewer conventions but wrote no conventions. Looking back is a better way of saying it, looking back the airport design may not have been the best way to go along with building the stadiums outside of downtown which may not have been the best location. You would think there could be a way to do something with the current airport terminals. I once sat next to an off duty TWA captain years ago and he said what the city should do with KCI is to close off the terminals, make them all secure, build a central terminal with trams taking passengers to the three different terminals. He also said the design of the terminals was the sole reason TWA moved their operations to St. Louis.

[xenokc]

^According to this, TWA wanted the 'drive to your gate' concept.

" TWA insisted on a "Drive to Your Gate" concept with flight gates only 75 feet (23 m) from the roadway (signs along the roadway identified the specific flights leaving each gate). "

It's after the security was added that being a hub became more difficult. If there were no such thing a security checkpoints or if they knew it was coming before the airport Design, TWA would likely have stayed in KC. It was just really bad timing. The Feds added airport security just after KCI opened.

Kansas City International Airport - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[vinix1999]

"though it would've needed to better tie together all 3 terminals if a major hub..."

I read years ago that they left space in the foundations of the terminals for some kind of mass transit system to connect them. Obviously it would have greatly increased the cost to have such a system. I think it was discussed again when they were planning the new long term parking lots and if a mass transit system would be used to connect the lots to the terminals.

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by denverian

I'm flying in to KCI this Friday... haven't been in KC for 5 years, so I'll get a refresher on the wonders of KCI lol!

Just pretend like you just landed in Topeka and it should feel about right. .

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by vinix1999

"though it would've needed to better tie together all 3 terminals if a major hub..."

I read years ago that they left space in the foundations of the terminals for some kind of mass transit system to connect them. Obviously it would have greatly increased the cost to have such a system. I think it was discussed again when they were planning the new long term parking lots and if a mass transit system would be used to connect the lots to the terminals.

The people mover system was scrapped, but it was part of the last big bond issue the aviation dept passed to renovate the terminals and build the new long term parking and consolidated rental car facility.

I think it was going to cost around 250 million.

I’m not sure it would have really helped do anything other than give people an alternative to the little red buses. But then you would have to walk clear to the end of a terminal to reach the people mover to the next terminal and walk however far in the next terminal. And what if you had to go from terminal A to terminal C? Yikes. As bad as the little red buses are, they are probably more efficient because they are more gate to gate service.

It might be different if the concourses of the terminals were secure and therefore the people mover corridors were also secure and then moving sidewalks could be added to the exiting terminals (never seen curved moving sidewalks though) and you didn’t have to go through security again to change gates or terminals, but the terminals at KCI are just so narrow that KCI can’t really be retrofitted into something like that and still function properly. It works in DFW (which also has the circular short walk terminals but their terminals are much larger). Even there, they have some of the same issues. Since they have much larger terminals they can secure large common areas and sustain amneties, plus one of their terminals is busier than all of KCI so they have the volume to split up the airport anyway.

KCI would still have almost all the same problems it has today had they added the people movers.