Venture, I was reading an article yesterday about renovations coming to LGA. In the article, a consultant was quoted as saying to the effect of the new LGA should not offer anything for regional jets because regional jets are dying and will be gone within 20 years. When people talk about regional jets dying, does that include jets like the Embraer 170s and 190s? Or is it more focused on things like the CRJs? Where is the line drawn on what qualifies as a regional jet?

I would say most of the focus is on 50-seats and smaller. Airlines are trying to park them and get rid of them as much as they can right now. Though if oil prices can keep falling, that might help to save them - and service in markets that need them. However, operating costs aren't much different - if not lower - when comparing to the 70+ seat models.

Adding $26,000 to the checked baggage system budget for a "more robust" barrier wall...due to the "narrowed tug routes".

I'm glad they just now realized making the tug routes inside the terminal building so narrow would cause issues.

Some of the equipment has already been damaged due to collisions with carts. It's just simply too tight of a space. This system they are building is a monster, the bagroom is barely big enough to hold it.

http://www.okc.gov/AgendaPub/view.aspx?cabinet=published_meetings&fileid=2535358

This whole project is a waste of money. The original terminal expansions should have actually rebuilt the terminal building to modern infrastructure standards instead of just doing a facelift and building a new concourse.

Can't do it the right way first, have to half arse it and go back 17 times to fix things and make the issue that much worse.

What is real nice is when you get approvals from everyone including the TSA and then part way through construction everyone decides the baggage system area needs to be expanded from the parameters those everyone involved in the system gave you after the lower levels, foundations and steel has been built. That is what are are in the middle of in the new terminal building at Minot.

Will Rogers World Airport opens special parking for holidays | News OK (http://newsok.com/will-rogers-world-airport-opens-special-parking-for-holidays/article/5376939)

Are there any plans to fix the horrible signage in the tunnel? To make the tunnel a more inviting space? To fix the elevator call lights which hardly ever work? To make the elevator seem more like it belongs in an airport and less like in a factory?

There is a signage update that is about to redo all signs in and around the airport.

They are adding some aesthetic features to the tunnel including a video wall.

Which elevator seems like a freight elevator? The only one I can think of is by the east checkpoint. It IS a freight elevator to get items up to the second floor for the food vendors,.

There is a signage update that is about to redo all signs in and around the airport.

They are adding some aesthetic features to the tunnel including a video wall.

Which elevator seems like a freight elevator? The only one I can think of is by the east checkpoint. It IS a freight elevator to get items up to the second floor for the food vendors,.

The parking garage elevators definitely feel like freight elevators.

I'm not saying the elevators are the most aesthetically pleasing, but in my personal experience living in high rises the last almost 8 years, they are better than the freight elevators I've been dealing with.

Are there any plans to fix the horrible signage in the tunnel? To make the tunnel a more inviting space? To fix the elevator call lights which hardly ever work? To make the elevator seem more like it belongs in an airport and less like in a factory?

Here is the update catch22 was talking about:

http://www.okctalk.com/transportation/39321-airport-tunnel-project.html

The parking garage elevators definitely feel like freight elevators.

While they are not the most aesthetically pleasing, at the end of the day they are airport parking garage elevators. The way some people pack their bags, they are fulfilling the "freight" part.

Plenty of Parking still available at the airport, I know an off airport parking site misinformed some people saying the airport parking is full, there is still plenty available parking at the airport

New Parking Option For OKC Air Travelers - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports | (http://www.news9.com/story/27691178/new-parking-option-for-okc-air-travelers)

I wonder who started the new business. I would bet that if the parking spot couldn't hack it with their well oiled machine then it is next to impossible to make it work.

Parking garage elevators also suffer from exposure to more elements and vandalism. The finishes are usually the standard manufacturer finishes, you just really can't do the same level of finish on them that you can in an indoor, conditioned space with security around. That is one area where a significant upgrade is wasted money better spent elsewhere which is always an issue with public buildings.

New Parking Option For OKC Air Travelers - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports | (http://www.news9.com/story/27691178/new-parking-option-for-okc-air-travelers)

Meh, it's just not enough savings compared to next to the terminal garage parking for me. We've rehashed this argument on this board before, but the parking at the terminal garage is just too cheap for anything like this to really succeed, in my opinion.

Agreed pahdz....and the off-site folks charge more than the daily rate already.

The garage often fills up quickly (especially before 6:30 am on Mondays), but there's still PLENTY of surface lot and the shuttles do a pretty dang good job of making sure you don't wait outside too long. I don't think I've ever waited more than 5 minutes. Of course, now that I have said that, the next time I go, i'll have to walk it... lol.

The offsite parking u.s.a Parking has been open since the summer, so many companies have come and gone. Sunpark, Parking spot. etc. plus with it being so far from the airport about 4 or 5 stop lights I believe it is probably more than a 4 minute drive unless all lights are green. The parking at the airport is just to cheap for off airport parking to compete with. For as many on airport shuttle parking lots ( 3 of them) the shuttles do a pretty good job at picking up customers with short wait times. The Garage does get full often even after the 1,000+ parking space expansion, next year after rental car facility gets built that should free up garage space for traveling customers.

The airport artificially keeps prices low to stifle private competiton. They pretty much have a monopoly and have so much land bordering the airport that no one can compete with the airport. (The landlord can't compete with a tenant on services so all the land the airport owns could not be turned into off airport parking by a private party).

The airport makes money on the volume of parkers and not the price. They flood the market with cheap parking to ensure they control the market share.

The airport artificially keeps prices low to stifle private competiton. They pretty much have a monopoly and have so much land bordering the airport that no one can compete with the airport. (The landlord can't compete with a tenant on services so all the land the airport owns could not be turned into off airport parking by a private party).

The airport makes money on the volume of parkers and not the price. They flood the market with cheap parking to ensure they control the market share.

So do they make a profit on parking in spite of keeping prices so low?

So do they make a profit on parking in spite of keeping prices so low?

I'm sure they do, I can't remember the exact figure but the daily garages hold around 2,400 cars. At $7 a day and 80% occupancy that's $5 million in revenue just from garage parking. The expansion cost somewhere around $30 million. So that's probably close to being paid off, if not already. All the surface lots probably hold 7,000 or more cars. And those are cheap asphalt lots that are raking in revenue.

total parking in all lots combined is 7,400 just an fyi. 80 plus employees run the parking facility, you have to remember new shuttles, shuttle maintenance, trucks, golf carts etc is not cheap along with toll booth revenue equipment there is so much more expense then meets the eye. but of course the airport will make a profit on parking, it would be stupid if they didn't, but at least they are not price gouging and charging more then what should be like other airports who charge two to three times more

The airport artificially keeps prices low to stifle private competiton. They pretty much have a monopoly and have so much land bordering the airport that no one can compete with the airport. (The landlord can't compete with a tenant on services so all the land the airport owns could not be turned into off airport parking by a private party).

The airport makes money on the volume of parkers and not the price. They flood the market with cheap parking to ensure they control the market share.

Crazy idea, the airport actually having enough parking to serve the public air travelers using it.

Does anybody know if the parking spot actually sold the land to the new owners or is it just a rental. I am betting the new owners are some oil guys.

Crazy idea, the airport actually having enough parking to serve the public air travelers using it.

Crazy idea: the private sector creating a good experience for customers. Many private parking operators have complementary hot coffee ready, water bottles, snack, cookies, car detailing and washing, etc. however due to the absolute monopoly the city has on parking, the private sector can't charge enough to provide top quality service. The airport charges $7 a day, which allows no room for the private sector. Cheap is king in OKC.

The airport also doesn't give a flying flip about the employees. Companies pay $55 a month per employee for use of the employee lot, and the lines on the parking lot are completely worn and have been for years. We park in the employee lot based on oil stains. The OKC airport management is a joke, they are so detached from reality it's not even funny.

The airport artificially keeps prices low to stifle private competiton. They pretty much have a monopoly and have so much land bordering the airport that no one can compete with the airport. (The landlord can't compete with a tenant on services so all the land the airport owns could not be turned into off airport parking by a private party).

The airport makes money on the volume of parkers and not the price. They flood the market with cheap parking to ensure they control the market share.
...as opposed to DIA. If I am doing a 1-2 day trip I will park at DIA, if I am gone much longer than that I will park off-airport at the Canopy parking facility. Any holiday travel I use the covered parking at Canopy. I like not having to deal with the possibility of cleaning off snow when I get in late at night. They also offer the detailing and other services as well.

I picked my wife up at DIA this past Monday night (around 9:00 PM), it was already nuts and most of the airport surface lots and garage spaces were filling up. I have had to go to the airport for project meetings and some of the garages and lots were full even on non-prime days. They just don't have enough parking there, never had that issue in OKC but then the last time that I had to park there was in 2003.

DIA Parking
Valet: $33.00/day
Garage: $24.00/day
Surface: $13.00/day
Shuttle: $8.00/day

Canopy
Valet: $21.00/day
Covered: $16.00/day (this is a large metal building with some open sides and not fabric canopies)
Open Air: $10.00/day

Crazy idea: the private sector creating a good experience for customers. Many private parking operators have complementary hot coffee ready, water bottles, snack, cookies, car detailing and washing, etc. however due to the absolute monopoly the city has on parking, the private sector can't charge enough to provide top quality service. The airport charges $7 a day, which allows no room for the private sector. Cheap is king in OKC.

When I'm starting a trip, I usually just want to park my car and get inside the airport. The extra service of a private vendor would have to be pretty darn enticing to get me to use it. When it comes to plunking down money for the privilege of letting my car sit on a paved surface, cheap definitely has a say in my final decision.

Extra service, if not valued by the consumer, is no value. The last post shows that sometimes the most basic is what is needed and wanted. There will be niches who may want more services and they will pay...but they will pay even when there are cheaper alternatives. If upscale parking is valued, then private operators can provide that now. It isn't the city that kills it.

Extra service, if not valued by the consumer, is no value. The last post shows that sometimes the most basic is what is needed and wanted. There will be niches who may want more services and they will pay...but they will pay even when there are cheaper alternatives. If upscale parking is valued, then private operators can provide that now. It isn't the city that kills it.Don't go to the Picasso Store, it wasn't what we thought it was.

May try out USAPARK tomorrow morning. $2/day is hard to beat. Hopefully the shuttles are prompt as we have a 6 AM flight.

I copied and pasted the following comment that was made on the Convention Center thread because it may apply here more. We know that if we increase our convention numbers which will happen if this is done right and not taking the cheap route we do all to often, that much more air travel will be coming to OKC. With that said, is it possible for our city leaders to really make a push for some type of bigger expansion that what is proposed already and perhaps really recruit a mini hub type situation? I think we have the set up to be a fantastic mini hub and would love to see this become a possibility. It will increase our chances of landing more companies to locate or re-locate here which further helps our economy, unemployment rate, etc. It is the one thing that I think has really held us down for companies passing on us and we could change that. Things are going on here and it's getting the attention of the nation, but when it comes to this, we probably will never know how many companies or jobs it has cost us. Below is the post, please feel free to comment but be nice.


This is a factor that has concerned me for a long time. What can be done about this? Can our city leaders agressively pursue some type of mini hub type situation? If you think about it, we have so much land at our airport, very nice run ways, an air traffic control center, etc. DFW is about to bust at the seam but I am sure that won't matter. Is is possible that with our expansion we could add on to that and have a rail system from the airport to DT? Having more direct flights and a mini hub type situation will bring in more people for conventions and without a doubt easier to convince companies to locate here or relocate here. In fact, I think that might one of the biggest factors that determines whether a company will move it's HQ here and why we don't see more.

To me it would be worth the money to invest in this to pursue because I think it has hurt us more than we will ever admit. The problem is how do we get it done? Keep in mind, I am not talking about a major hub, just a mini hub that would be a positive or an airline and help our city as well. Could they be enticed to come here with funding, and a great facility? When you talk about TIF this would be an area that would add so much to our city. Citizens from all over would have more access and those in south of OKC would choose not to drive to DFW and Tulsa peeps would drive to OKC at times. If we get more conventions and a few businesses coming here it is worth it and then some.

This has been rehashed on here several times, but long story short, no this is not happening.

It has little to do with OKC and everything to do with the state of the airline industry. Look at how many hubs there were in 1995 and compare it to now. Until recently the only city about OKC's size that was a hub was Memphis with Northwest/Delta. They dehubbed it back in 2010, and blew up Memphis's economy in the process.

I disagree it hurts us, because a company that needs easy access to cheap airfare will not be looking at a market of OKC size to begin with. So nothing is lost. I also disagree that air service here is terrible. You can fly nonstop to 14 of the nation's 20 largest metros. It may not be cheap, but it's a helluva lot better than most markets under 1.5 million.

This has been rehashed on here several times, but long story short, no this is not happening.

It has little to do with OKC and everything to do with the state of the airline industry. Look at how many hubs there were in 1995 and compare it to now. Until recently the only city about OKC's size that was a hub was Memphis with Northwest/Delta. They dehubbed it back in 2010, and blew up Memphis's economy in the process.

I disagree it hurts us, because a company that needs easy access to cheap airfare will not be looking at a market of OKC size to begin with. So nothing is lost. I also disagree that air service here is terrible. You can fly nonstop to 14 of the nation's 20 largest metros. It may not be cheap, but it's a helluva lot better than most markets under 1.5 million.I don't remember exactly what, but I do recall Steve saying a deal fell through that would have been huge for OKC a few years ago and it was due to lack of air service.

The airline industry is not one of "If you build it, they will come." There is simply no logistical sense in creating a hub at OKC other than geography. The O in O&D here in OKC would simply not support such a venture economically.

I don't remember exactly what, but I do recall Steve saying a deal fell through that would have been huge for OKC a few years ago and it was due to lack of air service.

Perhaps a coveted route or more mainline or more frequencies might have helped that, but it's nowhere near worth setting up a hub or focus city operation to try to lure some fish. Unless there's some really low-hanging fruit available (ala Delta in Seattle), it ain't happening here.


The airline industry is not one of "If you build it, they will come." There is simply no logistical sense in creating a hub at OKC other than geography. The O in O&D here in OKC would simply not support such a venture economically.

Quite. Kansas City and St. Louis definitely have geography going for them, but their glory days as hubs are past. And as for here, if we can scarcely fill a regional jet year-round to the largest city in the country, it doesn't speak too highly of supporting any sort of large and profitable operation. (Profitable being the key, as planes full on junk fares don't help much.)

The airline industry is not one of "If you build it, they will come." There is simply no logistical sense in creating a hub at OKC other than geography. The O in O&D here in OKC would simply not support such a venture economically.

Correct - airlines aren't charities - they add routes and flights if there's demand for them in the first place, not to try to "create" the demand. Airlines aren't like BLVDs; the concept of "induced demand" - which is illogical anyway - is even more illogical when it comes to airline route planning.

I don't remember exactly what, but I do recall Steve saying a deal fell through that would have been huge for OKC a few years ago and it was due to lack of air service.

That's my point. I seriously doubt that said company set up shop in Louisville, Virginia Beach, New Orleans, or any other city our size. They probably had to go to a much larger city.

When comparing airports, you can only compare markets of equal size.

For me WRWA is just like the convention center. Trying to 'sell' it on economic terms is a non-starter. Both should be viewed as a quality of life issue. It is okay to have nice things without having to financially justify it 9 ways from Sunday. I have an awesome TV and it doesn't make me a dime - but it improves my life. I was in WRWA this time last year and it is hard to express how un-impressed I was with the place. It doesn't have to be a hub, a mini-hub, or even more than 15 gates, but it should at least be something to be proud of and enhance the travel experience of people using it. I have said it before but the changes made here at JIA are perfect example of what WRWA could do, but they would have to tear it down to the ground to do it.

For me WRWA is just like the convention center. Trying to 'sell' it on economic terms is a non-starter. Both should be viewed as a quality of life issue. It is okay to have nice things without having to financially justify it 9 ways from Sunday. I have an awesome TV and it doesn't make me a dime - but it improves my life. I was in WRWA this time last year and it is hard to express how un-impressed I was with the place. It doesn't have to be a hub, a mini-hub, or even more than 15 gates, but it should at least be something to be proud of and enhance the travel experience of people using it. I have said it before but the changes made here at JIA are perfect example of what WRWA could do, but they would have to tear it down to the ground to do it.

What? Really and seriously? I disagree and think the CC must make a statement as well as the CC Hotel. WRWA could and should be bigger. I did not say a major hub, I know better than that. We do lose out on companies locating her due to our airport and lack of flights. We will lose out on some conventions because of this as well. Hopefully we still gain much more than what we are losing now with our current CC.

For me WRWA is just like the convention center. Trying to 'sell' it on economic terms is a non-starter. Both should be viewed as a quality of life issue. It is okay to have nice things without having to financially justify it 9 ways from Sunday. I have an awesome TV and it doesn't make me a dime - but it improves my life. I was in WRWA this time last year and it is hard to express how un-impressed I was with the place. It doesn't have to be a hub, a mini-hub, or even more than 15 gates, but it should at least be something to be proud of and enhance the travel experience of people using it. I have said it before but the changes made here at JIA are perfect example of what WRWA could do, but they would have to tear it down to the ground to do it.

Completely disagree Kerry. I am in Tucson for business this week and TUS is a fat freaking turd compared to WRWA. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the facilities in OKC.

Completely disagree Kerry. I am in Tucson for business this week and TUS is a fat freaking turd compared to WRWA. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the facilities in OKC.

That's very true. There are many major airports and airports in cities of comparable size that are much worse than WRWA.

OKC could become a mini-hub (or whatever the preferred term is)... someday. As was said earlier, compare the state of the airline industry today to what it was 25 years ago. We don't know how things will look 25 years from now. 2040 is a long time away. OKC needs to start planning today to become the city we want it to be in the future.

I don't think that means expanding Will Rogers tomorrow. I think it means building our downtown the right way, getting mass transit throughout the city, connecting the airport to our downtown, getting a nice convention center, attracting more out of state businesses, etc. It's a long term goal and a lot of things have to happen the right way for it to work out, and a lot of those things aren't under our control.

I copied and pasted the following comment that was made on the Convention Center thread because it may apply here more. We know that if we increase our convention numbers which will happen if this is done right and not taking the cheap route we do all to often, that much more air travel will be coming to OKC. With that said, is it possible for our city leaders to really make a push for some type of bigger expansion that what is proposed already and perhaps really recruit a mini hub type situation? I think we have the set up to be a fantastic mini hub and would love to see this become a possibility. It will increase our chances of landing more companies to locate or re-locate here which further helps our economy, unemployment rate, etc. It is the one thing that I think has really held us down for companies passing on us and we could change that. Things are going on here and it's getting the attention of the nation, but when it comes to this, we probably will never know how many companies or jobs it has cost us. Below is the post, please feel free to comment but be nice.


This is a factor that has concerned me for a long time. What can be done about this? Can our city leaders agressively pursue some type of mini hub type situation? If you think about it, we have so much land at our airport, very nice run ways, an air traffic control center, etc. DFW is about to bust at the seam but I am sure that won't matter. Is is possible that with our expansion we could add on to that and have a rail system from the airport to DT? Having more direct flights and a mini hub type situation will bring in more people for conventions and without a doubt easier to convince companies to locate here or relocate here. In fact, I think that might one of the biggest factors that determines whether a company will move it's HQ here and why we don't see more.

To me it would be worth the money to invest in this to pursue because I think it has hurt us more than we will ever admit. The problem is how do we get it done? Keep in mind, I am not talking about a major hub, just a mini hub that would be a positive or an airline and help our city as well. Could they be enticed to come here with funding, and a great facility? When you talk about TIF this would be an area that would add so much to our city. Citizens from all over would have more access and those in south of OKC would choose not to drive to DFW and Tulsa peeps would drive to OKC at times. If we get more conventions and a few businesses coming here it is worth it and then some.

It is optimistic that there will be a significant chance in convention numbers to begin with just because of a new building (one issue with having the company likely to build the building contracted to write the report), new capacity and renovations has been built all across the country for a number of years while the number of major events has been decreasing, and many of the largest convention centers have only gotten more aggressive on subsidizing the events they already have. The most likely way I expect we can get more events their is creating our own local and regional events of the type we do not already have or expanding an event we already do at a smaller venue to fit the scale of the convention center.

OKC could become a mini-hub (or whatever the preferred term is)... someday. As was said earlier, compare the state of the airline industry today to what it was 25 years ago. We don't know how things will look 25 years from now. 2040 is a long time away. OKC needs to start planning today to become the city we want it to be in the future.

I don't think that means expanding Will Rogers tomorrow. I think it means building our downtown the right way, getting mass transit throughout the city, connecting the airport to our downtown, getting a nice convention center, attracting more out of state businesses, etc. It's a long term goal and a lot of things have to happen the right way for it to work out, and a lot of those things aren't under our control.
Maybe you aren't aware of the current expansion projecsts already planned at WRWA.

In reality, there isn't much missing from this route map when it comes to major markets...

If this isn't good enough for one company, too bad on them. One company unfortunately isn't going to provide the O&D required to sustain a route in most cases. If it was the actual excuse used by that business years ago on why they didn't come here, it was cover up they were probably using us as a barging chip for the city they actually wanted to go to.

http://www.weatherspotlight.com/screencap/map.gif

Oh, we are already better than Tucson and other minor cities? Well then why upgrade at all if WRWA is already better. [/SARC]

Another non-starter with me: claiming to be the cleanest dirty shirt in the hamper.

Oh, we are already better than Tucson and other minor cities? Well then why upgrade at all if WRWA is already better. [/SARC]

Another non-starter with me: claiming to be the cleanest dirty shirt in the hamper.

Kerry, what areas is WRWA lacking when it comes to the business traveler? I ask because I am one and find it to be more than adequate for my needs.

I think one of our biggest issues is how close we are to Dallas which has nonstop flights to most major cities in the world. Then, you have Houston which is the same way. So, from basically anywhere in the world, you can have a connecting flight of hour away to get to OKC. Why would an airline expand into OKC when they can increase their number of flights to larger cities?

Maybe you aren't aware of the current expansion projecsts already planned at WRWA.

I'm totally not. Never claimed to be an expert on airline travel or anything like that. All I am saying is that if we want Will Rogers to increase in size and importance, the most important step is to increase the city in size and importance.

Fast forward 20 years and let's pretend that Core 2 Shore has been a big succees. Most of that area has filled in to Deep Deuce level density. Downtown has 40,000 people living in it. We've got another dozen towers over what we have today. The convention business is doing very well. The OKC metro is closing in on 2 million people. The Thunder have won a few NBA championships. There's light rail service connecting Will Rogers to downtown. OKC is growing like present day Austin, etc. At that point in time, it's certainly possible that we could significantly add to the airport. We could get a lot more flights to more locations. Yes, Dallas is big, and it's close, but if there is a lot of demand to go to OKC, they'll send more planes here. At the same time, let's say that St. Louis ends up in the same shape as Detroit today. Their economy is in the tank, their airport sucks, the layout is such that they can't upgrade it to meet new government safety regulations, whatever. It's not unfathomable that someone else's troubles could become our gain.

My only point was that we could turn Will Rogers Airport into a palace and it still won't make more people want to fly here. We need to upgrade the city itself.

Kerry, what areas is WRWA lacking when it comes to the business traveler? I ask because I am one and find it to be more than adequate for my needs.

All I can add to the conversation was my experience. Low ceiling in baggage claim, the curve of the terminal goes the wrong, too many interior columns, poor signage, security check points that look thrown together at the last minute, a departure board in the terminal that isn't even readable, and whole host of other issue. Maybe you don't experience these things because you don't require/use these services the way someone from out of town does.

An airport doesn't have to be big to be nice. For example, Michiana Regional Airport,

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Y7x2eiMYDOY/TpS9r2h33tI/AAAAAAAAAfQ/OHHU4cbCR5M/s320/sbn_0132_levels.JPG

http://www.airportimprovement.com/content/story.php?article=00376

It's bad underneath too. Support columns in the way of everything in the bag room. The whole terminal redesign, while attractive and easy on the eyes, is a complete disaster functionally.

All I can add to the conversation was my experience. Low ceiling in baggage claim, the curve of the terminal goes the wrong, too many interior columns, poor signage, security check points that look thrown together at the last minute, a departure board in the terminal that isn't even readable, and whole host of other issue. Maybe you don't experience these things because you don't require/use these services the way someone from out of town does.

An airport doesn't have to be big to be nice. For example, Michiana Regional Airport,

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Y7x2eiMYDOY/TpS9r2h33tI/AAAAAAAAAfQ/OHHU4cbCR5M/s320/sbn_0132_levels.JPG

South Bend Airport Completes Expansion & Changes Leadership by Rebecca Kanable (: May-June, 2012) (http://www.airportimprovement.com/content/story.php?article=00376)

I can definitely agree with some of your assessment (the low ceiling at bag claim and the old U-shaped carousels are quite off-putting), but I think the airside areas at OKC aren't terrible - not the greatest - but there's definitely worse out there. I don't think there are too many columns in the gate areas - the connectors are still open in appearance. Natural light is also abundant. I could do with a better color scheme (seriously, who thought of black on green for the signage?) - but that central flight display is mostly readable (to me anyway?). What's the worst are the garages and underground tunnel - those are truly repulsive. Will be interesting to see just how much they do to the tunnel. A higher ceiling there would be nice too.

All I can add to the conversation was my experience. Low ceiling in baggage claim, the curve of the terminal goes the wrong, too many interior columns, poor signage, security check points that look thrown together at the last minute, a departure board in the terminal that isn't even readable, and whole host of other issue. Maybe you don't experience these things because you don't require/use these services the way someone from out of town does.

An airport doesn't have to be big to be nice. For example, Michiana Regional Airport,

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Y7x2eiMYDOY/TpS9r2h33tI/AAAAAAAAAfQ/OHHU4cbCR5M/s320/sbn_0132_levels.JPG

South Bend Airport Completes Expansion & Changes Leadership by Rebecca Kanable (: May-June, 2012) (http://www.airportimprovement.com/content/story.php?article=00376)

An airport doesn't have to be nice to be functional. Our airport is easy to get in and out of, easy to pick someone up or drop someone off at. Low ceilings and a u shape belt aren't as important as the ability to walk forty feet to be picked up and another 40 feet to catch a cab or car service after picking up your bag. The pick up and drop off areas are nice. The security may look thrown together but it is very functional (especially the precheck/crew lines). If you fly Delta, you literally walk off the plane to the exit which exits directly to the escalator down and the baggage belt is to the right or you walk directly out to transportation. I'll take this over the nice new pretty Milan airport where they make you walk/funnel through the shopping area and then double back to your gate. I respect your perspective but don't necessarily agree with it. That's why there are 31 flavors at Baskin Robbins

For me WRWA is just like the convention center. Trying to 'sell' it on economic terms is a non-starter. Both should be viewed as a quality of life issue. It is okay to have nice things without having to financially justify it 9 ways from Sunday. I have an awesome TV and it doesn't make me a dime - but it improves my life. I was in WRWA this time last year and it is hard to express how un-impressed I was with the place. It doesn't have to be a hub, a mini-hub, or even more than 15 gates, but it should at least be something to be proud of and enhance the travel experience of people using it. I have said it before but the changes made here at JIA are perfect example of what WRWA could do, but they would have to tear it down to the ground to do it.

I fly all over the country about two times a month and quality-wise I think WRWA matches up well with all of the airports I've flown to or through. I know you don't like the decor but that's a personal preference and it looks just like San Diego's airport, which is pretty nice as well. My only complaints are that we don't have a nice restaurant and bar similar to the one at the renovated love field (though this isn't that big of deal since WRWA's food and beverage offerings are pretty good, especially considering that almost no one lays over here and generally you don't have to spend more than an hour or so at WRWA) and the security check point and greeting area situation which is about to be fixed. People complain about the lack of direct flights, but the airport itself is pretty nice. It's a hell of a lot nicer than the majority of DFW and EWR which are major airports.

All I can add to the conversation was my experience. Low ceiling in baggage claim, the curve of the terminal goes the wrong, too many interior columns, poor signage, security check points that look thrown together at the last minute, a departure board in the terminal that isn't even readable, and whole host of other issue. Maybe you don't experience these things because you don't require/use these services the way someone from out of town does.

An airport doesn't have to be big to be nice. For example, Michiana Regional Airport,

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Y7x2eiMYDOY/TpS9r2h33tI/AAAAAAAAAfQ/OHHU4cbCR5M/s320/sbn_0132_levels.JPG

South Bend Airport Completes Expansion & Changes Leadership by Rebecca Kanable (: May-June, 2012) (http://www.airportimprovement.com/content/story.php?article=00376)

What difference do low ceilings make in the area that people spend the least of their time in? The poor signage is being fixed right now and someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe they are changing the departure boards but I have never found them unreadable.. The security check points were thrown together at the last minute because of September 11th and are being changed as phase 1 of the new renovation plan.

What? Really and seriously? I disagree and think the CC must make a statement as well as the CC Hotel. WRWA could and should be bigger. I did not say a major hub, I know better than that. We do lose out on companies locating her due to our airport and lack of flights. We will lose out on some conventions because of this as well. Hopefully we still gain much more than what we are losing now with our current CC.

Maybe if it was...TALLER???

Oh, we are already better than Tucson and other minor cities? Well then why upgrade at all if WRWA is already better. [/SARC]

Another non-starter with me: claiming to be the cleanest dirty shirt in the hamper.

You're instincts are right, Kerry... You shouldn't move here. Our city is never gonna measure up to your lofty standards and you would never be anything but frustrated and unhappy here...

We that live here are very excited about all the great things happening in our city and where we've come in the last 20 years and in truth, you're just a guy taking pot shots from afar that adds very little that's meaningful to the discussion...

...but to get back on topic, I like our airport a lot, I like all the current and planned improvements. It's nicer and very easy to get in and out of compared to most.

JTF/Catch - didn't we already discuss this when we were talking about the new baggage system? I'm pretty sure we all nailed down the fact that the curve of the building means 100000% NOTHING to an airport too. WRWA was not bulldozed to the ground, so you're stuck with some infrastructure left over from the old design (which might I remind you was quite a new concept in modernity when it was built...people came to OKC just to see the airport and its design back then....all we had before that was Wiley Post, so don't tell me we didn't make a million times over improvement there).

You should be so lucky that we had such an amazing renovation that still increased gate count, gave us nice facilities, places to eat on the INSIDE of security (you'd be amazed at how many LARGER airports still don't have this to any degree), and without any interruption in service. Since you're such an expert at how things SHOULD be done, JTF, how would you have done it differently to maintain service?

As for baggage claim, why do you care how high the ceiling is? Does it affect you in any way if it's a 10' ceiling versus 20'? I believe everyone's goal there is to spend as little time in that area as possible. It's no shorter than most LARGER airports, not to mention the countless smaller ones. SEATAC, O'Hare, etc.

In traveling all over the country, I've come to appreciate how FAST our airport operates. The smaller size makes it incredibly nimble and able to perform fantastically (even if the airlines can't because of lack of proper maintenance....AA). Look at somewhere like Hobby, it's not fancy, but it gets the job done. Same goes for places like Phoenix, Salt Lake, George Bush, etc. I'm pretty damned proud of our little WRWA and you just have to look up to TUL to see what we could have been stuck with if we didn't do what we did. They did a good job with what they had, but its still lipstick on a pig. At least here, we got a new animal. I'll be more proud of it after the expansion so it doesn't appear so dinky when you pull up to it, but that's just in my head.

And just finding pictures with google for terminal hallways doesn't grade the airport. There are about a trillion other things that go with it. And if you are going to post a pic like that, you should pay attention to what you're posting. Our terminals all have higher and more open space than that one. The ceiling near the gate in that picture is still a 10' ceiling. At WRWA it goes to the roof in the gate terminals. And in the "curved" terminal, it's actually a mirror of what you have in the image, but WRWA is actually higher.

WRWA was not bulldozed to the ground, so you're stuck with some infrastructure left over from the old design (which might I remind you was quite a new concept in modernity when it was built...people came to OKC just to see the airport and its design back then....all we had before that was Wiley Post, so don't tell me we didn't make a million times over improvement there).

It's not any big deal but I think you're confused or misspoke, bomber. The building that has been remodeled did not take the place of Wiley Post. It replaced the older terminal on the West side of Meridian in the same area.

All I can add to the conversation was my experience. Low ceiling in baggage claim, the curve of the terminal goes the wrong, too many interior columns, poor signage, security check points that look thrown together at the last minute, a departure board in the terminal that isn't even readable, and whole host of other issue. Maybe you don't experience these things because you don't require/use these services the way someone from out of town does.
So it was a remodel of a 40+ year old facility designed under different standards, there will always be compromises with that. It also had to remain operational during the remodel which always creates a bunch of compromise. The design was all a compromise because people didn't want to spend the money on an entirely new facility. A new facility of suitable size for OKC would be in the $250-400 million range with all of the latest and greatest features. We are doing a brand new 6-gate airport in Minot and final cost of building, tenant finish-out, technology and furniture/fixtures is going to approach $100 million. That is with surface parking lots, the proposed 3 level garage garage would be in the $30-40 million range. We have been going after the Kansas City airport remodel that is planned for the future. The new New Orleans airport is over $200 million and that is not an entire facility, just pieces of it. Just the new STRP/hotel at DIA is in the $750 million range and costs are still going up, the original airport was $4.8 billion twenty years ago. It all comes down to money and how much cities, their taxpayers and bond holders are willing to pay for.

The security areas were completely changed in response to 9/11 after the project was under way, I know that because I did most of the drafting of the changes. No one was happy with how they came out. DIA is looking at completely redoing all of their security areas and moving the main security check point out of the Great Hall because it too was thrown in there in response to 9/11.

There are some renderings and pictures of construction photos on the MOT Facebook page.
Facebook - Minot International Airport (https://www.facebook.com/whyflyminot)