Kerry, you seem particularly cranky and captious this morning.

Kerry, you seem particularly cranky and captious this morning.

Just about the airport :). They spent a lot of money to produce what they have today and now there are plans to add even more - but they are trying to bolt it all on to a structure that isn't designed to modern airport standards. It's like fixing up a Ford Pinto - no matter how much you spend, at the end of the day you still have a Ford Pinto.

Having traversed through 20+ airports now worldwide I can honestly say WRA is not a bad airport. It's a spoke airport, where people mostly go to get their flights, not shop and eat because they have a four hour layover. It has its pros and cons and some valid points have been made here, but I have seen much worse, believe me. Ever been at Paris Charles-de-Gaulle? It's supposed to be this "grand" airport of a major world city and certainly doesn't represent it as gateway. Broken toilets, no hot running water in the winter months, cold, metal seats, concessions that are mostly on the landside... I could go on and on. The only reason I don't mind it as much as thousands of other pasengers is I'm an aviation freak and it does allow for some great spotting (including the long, circuitous, winding bus rides). Like I said, WRA is not perfect by any means and has some down sides, but it certainly does the job and I do appreciate it.

So after a 12 hour shift yesterday, going to try to jump in and not completely throw off the discussion. LOL


This is awesome! Hopefully it happens. I want to see a skylink type light-rail though going from the airport to the (future) off-site rental car facility.

Something like that would be pretty nice. I could see something to where it picks you up in the plaza area and then have stops at the northern shuttle lot/Four Points hotel, Rental car facility/Southwest/Customs location and then eventually a commuter rail station further north on Meridian. The Bombardier trains that DFW uses aren't cheap though, but their system was somewhat inflated with the way they built it. That whole system cost more then $860 million to build.


Trust me; in an industry where we literally track things down to the penny. If there was money to be made by having a hub in Oklahoma City, the industry would have put one here.

This.


As I've stated several times, the escalator/stairs down for arriving passengers should be BEFORE they get to the common, non-secured area in the upper level.

That way, you completely separate arriving and departing passengers and have greeters wait downstairs where they belong and where all the ground transportation is anyway. Keeps them completely away from the ticket counters and security screening areas.

Why we refuse to do this is a mystery to me and defies all common sense.

Completely agree. This is the reality of them putting a really nice gate area onto the very old original structure that is the check in area. If anything, they should spend the money to tear down the last of the old structure (central terminal/check in area) and get that modernized.

You want to live somewhere with a crappy airport? Move to KC

It's been a while since I've been to KCI but I don't particularly remember it being that bad. It could have changed though.

The worst I have experience with is probably Augusta, Georgia hands down. That one reminds me of Sandpiper airport from the '90s sitcom "Wings."

I wonder if there is a phase to realign the runways to allow for future expansion...

I don't really see any need to realign the runways at all at this point. 13/31 is a bit of an odd ball, but there really isn't much you can do with it if you want a crosswind runway. I guess you could do an East-West runway on the south end of the airport north of 89th street...but those taxi times might annoy airlines a bit.


The long (long) term plan has one more gate concourse south of the terminal, though keep in mind this is the same grounds plan that is leaving space for if we might ever need another 10,000-ish N/S runway parallel to the two main ones southwest of where runways & taxiways are now.

The master plan is good for dreaming, but most of those ideas aren't going to be needed. I would say we need to stay away from another concourse being developed off the central area. It's just going to mess with the flow in that area too much. I'm always a fan of more straight concourses. I can't see us needing it anytime in the next 20 years though and the East Concourse will give plenty of room for expansion in that direction.

The new runway idea, a 3rd N/S runway is just stupid. We are NO where near capacity on the current runways setup and a third is just going to be a waste of several hundred millions of dollars. We should though get the N/S pair extended to probably 12,000 ft at some point to provide idea operating conditions when it gets hot out.


The airports site plan easily doubles the current number of gates without moving the runways/taxiways, if we really needed them there are was to add several more could be added on top of that. For the foreseeable future we have less destinations that can be served profitably than space to build new gates, there are some cities with three or four times the enplanements that OKC has with only a few more destinations, outside of ones with some sort of unique geographical/destination advantage most of those would be somewhere between well served to having plenty of spare capacity at double our current number of gates. The idea I got was that the possibility of an additional runway southwest of the existing ones, was it would be in addition to the existing ones, not replacing but realistically even at triple the current number of gates I am not sure we would would be in need another major N/S runway.

Completely agree with your points. A 3rd N/S runway is a waste. San Diego operates with ONE runway. We had over 26,000 scheduled flights into WRWA last year...San Diego had over 81,000. Until we see aircraft lined up consistently coming in on both approaches to the runways, then we don't need to worry about spending a ton of cash on another runway.

Gate areas, yes we are getting low on available gates but the situation also is there aren't that many players anymore in the industry.

If you guys are content with an airport that rivals Augusta, GA and Monroe, LA then more power to you - its your airport. Here are some of my observations ....

*clipped*

..... If there is a MAPS IV it should only contain 3 projects.
1) Brand new WRWA - scrap everything from the economy lot to the last boarding gate
2) Regional rail
3) Bus system improvement

Points 1-3, 7, 9 and 10 are all pretty much due to the reuse of the extisting central structure. It should have been replaced in all of this as well, but wasn't. They just put some lipstick on the pig and called it good. By them keeping so much of the old structure behind, it hurt the flow of the terminal going into the gate areas. This is why the big central FIDS screen is worthless now due to the security check points.

All in all though, they are going to address the check point problems. The claim areas and such downstairs would require a completely rebuild of the central structure I have a feeling. It definitely should be the central area for all arriving pax and their parties.

As far as #11 with seating, I think that is just nature of the beast of any airport. They'll never have enough for every pax waiting for a flight. Just how it goes.

As for the scrap everything, the gate areas I like. I would have preferred a moving walkway added down the middle of the west concourse (and eventually the east), but I guess we need to walk more these days anyway. :)


I like the option of deplaning and staying on the upper level when I am being picked up. I rarely travel with checked bags and downstairs is a congested nightmare, so I walk straight to a waiting car and leave.

The rental car relocation was wrong in my opinion. As Pete wrote, waiting for a shuttle to take you to the car adds a pickup point to identify and walk to, another line to wait in, another mode of conveyance to endure.

I appreciate the walk between garage and terminal, especially underground via moving sidewalk. But it's stark down there, with the only memorable decorations being glass cubes filled with seized contraband. Take a hint from DTW's tunnel connecting Terminal A to Terminal B/C. We don't need all of the lights and music, but please give us something other than harsh fluorescent lights, sight lines receding to a vanishing point, and silence.

I really haven't seen the lower level be THAT bad to just go down the escalator and out to the pick up area. Of course, I deal with flying into Chicago several times a year so the number of people here compared to there is nothing. :) As far as the rental car center, right or wrong - it's done. I just hope we can setup an ideal transit system to get people out there. I like the idea of a tram instead of buses. The tunnel of course is something that needs redone, but we've been down this road how many times on this forum? LOL

I would imagine its extremely unlikely anybody would be at WRWA for a layover being that its a regional spoke and not a hub. The only reason I can think of anyone would have to spend a decent amount of time there is if flights were delayed/cancelled due to severe weather or something. Am I right in that assessment?

Unlikely but not unusual. Southwest has some connecting traffic here and I know a couple of the other airlines have pax connecting here from time to time as well.

It's been a while since I've been to KCI but I don't particularly remember it being that bad. It could have changed though.

The worst I have experience with is probably Augusta, Georgia hands down. That one reminds me of Sandpiper airport from the '90s sitcom "Wings."

Unless MCI has changed, there are limited to zero food services beyond security, which is just unacceptable.

WRWA is decent enough for a small 17 gate airport in my opinion especially when compared to what it replaced. True, the vintage-looking stone among other things already dates it and the ingress/egress section is kinda wonky but for the most part it's easy to navigate; it's bright, clean and very importantly, the runways are long with a lot of open space. Has nothing to do with expansion, but I do wish they would take the "World" part out of the name as it seems very gimmicky in a self-deprecating sort of way. Dub thee and it will become? A relic of some of the big thinking of our leaders from the 60s?

MCI is my least favorite connection point, by far. You have to the leave secure area to eat and use a descent restroom. Terrible. They were the worst victim of post 9/11 security requirements I have seen in the country...not really their fault, it is just the way the place was designed way back. The intention was to have a very short walk from vehicle drop-off to gate. And before tight security, it looks like it would have worked great and was a smart design. But now, no.

LGB would have been tops on my list of worst airports until they opened their new terminal about a year ago. I flew through there on B6 about 9 years ago and it was the pits. The terminal was a series of office trailers all connected together. Absolutely horrible in there. Looks like their new space is very nice, indeed. For what it's worth, I love WRWA. But I've said that before. For our city it is great.

No joke about MCI. my first time there a few years ago a woman told me where the restroom was by pointing so I left my bag and such with the gf. she didn't tell me that it was outside of the security gates. so that was a pain to retrieve my ID and boarding pass to get back into the gate area.

You want to live somewhere with a crappy airport? Move to KC

Yes. I'm so glad I'm not the only one. I love flying out of KC because I can be dropped off right outside the door and walk inside, immediately go through security, and catch my flight. But aesthetically it is awful, and once you go through security the only thing that is there besides a waiting area is the equivalent of a gas station quick shop table with a few snacks and a cooler of drinks.

In regards to WRWA, I stand by my first post. I love it. It's quick and easy to get in and out and IMO has a nice terminal and waiting areas. Sorry JTF, but I don't think an airport has to be the most architecturally modern structure to be a great airport. I also don't understand your complaints on the waiting area size. Even airports with as much traffic as DFW have gates with minimal seating, and then a few large gates with a ton of seating. Most people aren't going to show up to their gate an hour before boarding, so huge waiting areas aren't necessary. The fact that bchris liked your comment only cements my thoughts that your comments were overly negative. :Smiley122

It's been a while since I've been to KCI but I don't particularly remember it being that bad. It could have changed though.

The worst I have experience with is probably Augusta, Georgia hands down. That one reminds me of Sandpiper airport from the '90s sitcom "Wings."

Whoops, looks like the others beat me to it.

I still get a kick out of people that think our airport is small.

Is WRWA the best in the country. No. But is far from the disaster that Kerry makes it out to be. It is in the upper half of the top 50 us airports. And that is on the low side

Is WRWA the best in the country. No. But is far from the disaster that Kerry makes it out to be. It is in the upper half of the top 50 us airports. And that is on the low side

WRWA isn't in the upper half of the top 50 in the US. It actually doesn't even make the Top 50. Last I checked it came in at #65, right above Louisville and right below Tucson. I would consider WRWA to be a step above a small regional airport though and anybody who makes it out to be that hasn't traveled much.

WRWA isn't in the upper half of the top 50 in the US. It actually doesn't even make the Top 50. Last I checked it came in at #65, right above Louisville and right below Tucson.

What are you checking?

Here are my 2 cents. And Ive flown out of many airports.

The hallway from The Parking Garage as many have mentioned is small market. I'd love for them to do something similar to what Detroit Metro has with the lights. Those are cool and give the airport an awesome feel. If you don't know what I am talking about, do a youtube search.

The baggage claim area does not feel like an "airport". Low ceilings.

The "Giddy Up" shuttle needs a name change. I know it's a local name thing but if you want a "Big League" feel, then naming is everything and the name "Giddy Up" bugs me. Maybe I'm the only one :)

Giddy Up is very stereotypically OKC. They should change it if they want to present a more big league image. I swear sometimes it feels like OKC still thinks its a small town in many ways. Giddy Up is more appropriate for Branson, MO.

What are you checking?

Wikipedia.

Quit complaining about the tunnels there is currently a request for bids for improvements out right now

Quit complaining about the tunnels there is currently a request for bids for improvements out right now

What is there that encourages you in any way that the tunnels will be done properly this time? They sure as hell weren't done properly before.

A lot of people do not realize that Will Rogers Airport sits on 8,000+ acres of land. That's more than the total area of Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson (4,700 acres). So yeah, while the terminal maybe small, the airport itself is way more than enough size-wise. There's way more than enough space for additional expansion, not like it will be needed except in the case Oklahoma City becomes an out-of-control boomtown.

Even the runways are way more than needed, it's a blessing that this airport has three runways for the traffic levels it has. Most larger airports (mainly hubs) around the world and in the U.S. are clamouring for more runways. London Gatwick and San Diego Lindbergh Field are way busier than OKC and they have only one runway (granted, LGW built another parallel "runway" but that's only used as a taxiway these days, unless the actual runway is under maintenance since it is too close to the main runway). Gatwick handles about 60 movements per hour on a single runway. We get what, 80 or so in the entire day? Also, re-aligning the runways is not necessary at all; both main runways run north-south (90% of our prevailing winds are northerly or southerly) and then there's the crosswind runway that runs NW-SE. What's more, both main runways are already spaced wide enough apart that they already meet the FAA's parallel runway separation requirements for simultaneous landings.

I still get a kick out of people that think our airport is small.

What I get a kick out of is the idea that some people drive to Dallas to fly out of DFW. I'm not going to say it doesn't happen, but you could not pay me to do that.

WRWA isn't in the upper half of the top 50 in the US. It actually doesn't even make the Top 50. Last I checked it came in at #65, right above Louisville and right below Tucson. I would consider WRWA to be a step above a small regional airport though and anybody who makes it out to be that hasn't traveled much.

I'm sure he is talking about quality, not the amount of traffic. Just because an airport has more traffic doesn't mean it is nicer.

I think some on this board are drilling OKC hard about presenting itself as "big league" and not being allowed to get away with amenities with humorous names such as the Giddy Up shuttle. While I agree we could use a name change on that shuttle, I don't think it should have anything to do with being "big league".

Honestly, why is it okay for Houston to get away with having a rodeo as its largest civic event and be "big league"? The term is being taken out of context and shouldn't be thrown around every single solitary time something is done in OKC with which someone doesn't agree.

I think some on this board are drilling OKC hard about presenting itself as "big league" and not being allowed to get away with amenities with humorous names such as the Giddy Up shuttle. While I agree we could use a name change on that shuttle, I don't think it should have anything to do with being "big league".

Honestly, why is it okay for Houston to get away with having a rodeo as its largest civic event and be "big league"? The term is being taken out of context and shouldn't be thrown around every single solitary time something is done in OKC with which someone doesn't agree.

Yes, BChris mainly is obsessed with the idea that OKC shouldn't market any of its western culture because it makes us look backward. I for one completely disagree and think when done in moderation (like ftw) it can be a great marketing tool.

Wikipedia.

You actually trust Wiki ? Anyone can alter it can't they ?

Yes, BChris mainly is obsessed with the idea that OKC shouldn't market any of its western culture because it makes us look backward. I for one completely disagree and think when done in moderation (like ftw) it can be a great marketing tool.

I never said that western culture shouldn't be marketted at all. "Giddy Up" on the other hand is more appropriate as the name of a ride at Frontier City or something in Branson.

Points 1-3, 7, 9 and 10 are all pretty much due to the reuse of the extisting central structure. It should have been replaced in all of this as well, but wasn't. They just put some lipstick on the pig and called it good. By them keeping so much of the old structure behind, it hurt the flow of the terminal going into the gate areas. This is why the big central FIDS screen is worthless now due to the security check points.

This is the literal and figurative heart of the problem. When they opted to reuse the existing building it messed everything up because that main building is ill-suited for the needs of a modern airport. So now not only do they need to tear it out, but everything they attached to it will need to go as well. I can't believe the Airport trust is actually contemplating attaching anything else to it. They have a cornerstone that is not capable of carrying the load.

You actually trust Wiki ? Anyone can alter it can't they ?

It's surprisingly hard to alter Wikipedia, actually. Most people who make this argument have no idea of the complicated governance structure that it has.

You actually trust Wiki ? Anyone can alter it can't they ?

You can go try and alter it and if it isn't sourced and found to be accurate, they'll likely change it back.

Wikipedia.

Link? I didn't know Wikipedia was in the business of ranking the quality of airports.

Honestly, why is it okay for Houston to get away with having a rodeo as its largest civic event and be "big league"? The term is being taken out of context and shouldn't be thrown around every single solitary time something is done in OKC with which someone doesn't agree.

It's because Houston is also known for being a cosmopolitan, world-class, international city that has all the amenities one would expect to go along with that. Oklahoma City at the present time simply cannot compare, even on a smaller scale.

It's because Houston is also known for being a cosmopolitan, world-class, international city that has all the amenities one would expect to go along with that. Oklahoma City at the present time simply cannot compare, even on a smaller scale.

Just out of curiosity. Why do you come to this forum, other than an obsession with forums, if you hate being/living in OKC so much?

Here are my 2 cents. And Ive flown out of many airports.

The hallway from The Parking Garage as many have mentioned is small market. I'd love for them to do something similar to what Detroit Metro has with the lights. Those are cool and give the airport an awesome feel. If you don't know what I am talking about, do a youtube search.

The baggage claim area does not feel like an "airport". Low ceilings.

The "Giddy Up" shuttle needs a name change. I know it's a local name thing but if you want a "Big League" feel, then naming is everything and the name "Giddy Up" bugs me. Maybe I'm the only one :)

Those are three things I would really like to see addressed. The renovated areas of the airport are pretty good even though there are a few things that could be improved. Overall the upper section of the airport feels about right for a city the size of OKC; and the lower level is a bit of a dungeon.

Jacksonville has an absolute slam dunk of an airport, and they are not that much larger than ours.

You actually trust Wiki ? Anyone can alter it can't they ?

To be fair, the aviation sections on Wikipedia are patrolled pretty tightly by a those with industry connections to ensure the info is right. Like with everything, a bad apple gets through but usually fixed pretty quickly.

Here is the deal in a nutshell. I've made the statement that OKC is doing great things and improving by the day. What is has not lost however is it "small time" mentality and it hinders it from truly becoming "major league". OKC currently is among the top 30 largest cities in the country yet around 70 or so in airport size. It is a given it will never be a large hub like Dallas or Atlanta but it MUST become much more than it currently is if we are going to be viewed seriously as a major city. Their is no reason we can't have a top 30-35 type airport with more options.

People from OKC area and south do drive to DFW because of much better options and fares and who can blame them. People from north of OKC within a 45 min drive sometimes go Wichita which can take away from OKC. Until an expansion and agreements are made that give us more flights and better prices, this is what we can expect. When companies come here looking to locate or re-locate, don't for a second think they don't take things like this into consideration and I'm sure it has cost us many times in the past. We need to keep improving the quality of life and let the word spread but it is also vital to bring more people to this city for other reasons. We MUST become some type of destination spot for people to come and check out. Also, get that Convention Center and Hotel built asap instead of waiting 6 more years. Increase our convention business and it could translate into more companies coming here indirectly. OKC needs to have a big time, booming type feeling for those who arrive at our gates if they want to be taken seriously. If not, it is what it currently is, a fairly nice regional airport that is barely in the top 100. To me that is not acceptable for the #27 largest city in the country. People, please let our local and state governments hear your voices about making these bold decisions and quit playing politics with each other. We lose out when they let a film tax credit expire, we lose when we can't even have normal liquor laws because and it's blamed on safety for people. That is bull, it's a conspiracy and only a select few profit. Once again, another factor in some businesses not wanting to locate here. Finally, I shudder to think what NBA teams and their reps think when they see our airport? I find it embarrassing that they probably laugh at how tiny and "minor league" it is compared to every other team in that league. We are becoming a major league city and can achieve that with the right decisions but we have to STOP holding ourselves back with our "small town" mentality.

Just out of curiosity. Why do you come to this forum, other than an obsession with forums, if you hate being/living in OKC so much?

I am going to be in OKC for at least a few more years whether I want to be or not. I enjoy keeping up with the progress and development happening here. Despite having been away over a decade, my roots are partially here.


Here is the deal in a nutshell. I've made the statement that OKC is doing great things and improving by the day. What is has not lost however is it "small time" mentality and it hinders it from truly becoming "major league". OKC currently is among the top 30 largest cities in the country yet around 70 or so in airport size. It is a given it will never be a large hub like Dallas or Atlanta but it MUST become much more than it currently is if we are going to be viewed seriously as a major city. Their is no reason we can't have a top 30-35 type airport with more options.

People from OKC area and south do drive to DFW because of much better options and fares and who can blame them. People from north of OKC within a 45 min drive sometimes go Wichita which can take away from OKC. Until an expansion and agreements are made that give us more flights and better prices, this is what we can expect. When companies come here looking to locate or re-locate, don't for a second think they don't take things like this into consideration and I'm sure it has cost us many times in the past. We need to keep improving the quality of life and let the word spread but it is also vital to bring more people to this city for other reasons. We MUST become some type of destination spot for people to come and check out. Also, get that Convention Center and Hotel built asap instead of waiting 6 more years. Increase our convention business and it could translate into more companies coming here indirectly. OKC needs to have a big time, booming type feeling for those who arrive at our gates if they want to be taken seriously. If not, it is what it currently is, a fairly nice regional airport that is barely in the top 100. To me that is not acceptable for the #27 largest city in the country. People, please let our local and state governments hear your voices about making these bold decisions and quit playing politics with each other. We lose out when they let a film tax credit expire, we lose when we can't even have normal liquor laws because and it's blamed on safety for people. That is bull, it's a conspiracy and only a select few profit. Once again, another factor in some businesses not wanting to locate here. Finally, I shudder to think what NBA teams and their reps think when they see our airport? I find it embarrassing that they probably laugh at how tiny and "minor league" it is compared to every other team in that league. We are becoming a major league city and can achieve that with the right decisions but we have to STOP holding ourselves back with our "small town" mentality.

Exactly!

I really don't think the airport is that bad, but for a city this size it could/should be bigger. I think its plenty nice enough, it should just have better rates, more direct flights, and more overall traffic. I can fly to Charlotte out of Northwest Arkansas Regional for around half the cost of flying out of OKC.

I really don't think the airport is that bad, but for a city this size it could/should be bigger. I think its plenty nice enough, it should just have better rates, more direct flights, and more overall traffic. I can fly to Charlotte out of Northwest Arkansas Regional for around half the cost of flying out of OKC.
Are you suggesting the "Field of Dreams" (If you build it, they will come) principle would actually lure airlines to fulfill your dream of "better rates, more direct flights and more overall traffic" simply because our airport is bigger? Do the principles of supply and demand not apply to OKC? Do you not think that if there was sufficient demand here that the market would respond? Can you cite any industry sources saying that the reason we don't have better rates, more direct flights and more overall traffic is that our airport is too small? Or is this all simply conjecture from pie-in-the-sky, no-actual-skin-in-the-game thinking?

I can fly to Charlotte out of Northwest Arkansas Regional for around half the cost of flying out of OKC.

Oklahoma City airport lands new flights to NC | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-airport-lands-new-flights-to-nc/article/3939691)

Let me first say this whole needing to use the terms and call ourselves "big league" or "major league" is in itself a display of small town mentality and is really getting tired. It just portrays images of a little kid crying for attention because they can't sit at the big kids table at Christmas. Enough is enough. Grow up people.


Here is the deal in a nutshell. I've made the statement that OKC is doing great things and improving by the day. What is has not lost however is it "small time" mentality and it hinders it from truly becoming "major league". OKC currently is among the top 30 largest cities in the country yet around 70 or so in airport size. It is a given it will never be a large hub like Dallas or Atlanta but it MUST become much more than it currently is if we are going to be viewed seriously as a major city. Their is no reason we can't have a top 30-35 type airport with more options.

Drawing a comparision like this just exhibits lack of understanding for the industry. Airport catchment areas go well beyond city limits. Sure OKC may be 29th in population, but we are 44 in MSA rankings. We also need to keep in mind that many cities ranked ahead of us in enplanements are going to have another draw. So let's look at a few and to avoid any knocks at Wiki, here is the data: http://www.faa.gov/airports/planning_capacity/passenger_allcargo_stats/passenger/media/CY12CommercialServiceEnplanements.pdf


Oklahoma City is #64.
Omaha is #62 and has benefited in the past with service from Midwest encouraging direct P2P routes. However, they are only boarding a couple hundred thousand more than us. Not a big deal.
Anchorage is #59 but they benefit from being the main point of entry for flights to that part of the world. They board 400,000 more than us.
Buffalo is #57 and has the benefit of cross boarder feed from Ontario.
Albuquerque is #56 and they don't really have any viable competing airport anywhere near them.
Hartford is #55 but has a much higher regional population to pull from and a more diverse economy.

I could really keep going on but we need to be honest, we are exactly where we should be at this point. Flights aren't 100% full. In 2013 Oklahoma City overall only filled 76.69% of all available seats. Buffalo filled 82.99% and Omaha filled 81.46%. OKC will never be a top 30-35 airport without a significant population and economic boom. Even then it is still crazy talk and will be tough to really charge up the list.


People from OKC area and south do drive to DFW because of much better options and fares and who can blame them. People from north of OKC within a 45 min drive sometimes go Wichita which can take away from OKC.

We did this comparison in the other thread a while ago. ICT provides little advantage over OKC. DFW...you can't compete with a major hub. If people want to drive the 3 hours to get there, more power to them. You can't deal with competing for passengers like that. I really think the draw of DFW gets overplayed a bit, not that it doesn't happen but not to a significant degree. This isn't Flint or Toledo being sucked dry by Detroit Metro or Rockford by the Chicago airports. If people are willing to drive that far you can't price the service profitably to keep them.


Until an expansion and agreements are made that give us more flights and better prices, this is what we can expect.

So what? You want us to become Wichita which is paying Southwest up to $7 million a year to artificially keep fares down? People aren't using the service to its fullest that we have here already. I am also tired of bitching about air fares being too high. This isn't the 90s anymore with cheap fuel. When a line item goes from being 20-30% of your costs to over 60%, the passengers need to realize their dreams of $99 coast to coast fares are dead and its time to start paying for the service being provided. They bitch about being nickled and dimed with ancillary fees - they did it to themselves. You want the cheap air fare, well then you are going to have to pay for the extra services that aren't going to be included anymore. Outside of a few exceptions like premium fares or airlines like Southwest and JetBlue, your air fare is to pay for that seat and nothing else. You want a drink, checked bags, assigned seats, heck even carry ons - time to pay up. Not saying I agree with that style of service, but the sense of entitlement that air travelers have is insane.

The flight offers from OKC are pretty damn exceptional considering how much consolidating has happened. I remember not that long ago you couldn't get to the east or west coasts from OKC without making a connection - now we have half a dozen cities on the coasts.


When companies come here looking to locate or re-locate, don't for a second think they don't take things like this into consideration and I'm sure it has cost us many times in the past. We need to keep improving the quality of life and let the word spread but it is also vital to bring more people to this city for other reasons. We MUST become some type of destination spot for people to come and check out. Also, get that Convention Center and Hotel built asap instead of waiting 6 more years. Increase our convention business and it could translate into more companies coming here indirectly. OKC needs to have a big time, booming type feeling for those who arrive at our gates if they want to be taken seriously. If not, it is what it currently is, a fairly nice regional airport that is barely in the top 100. To me that is not acceptable for the #27 largest city in the country.

Oklahoma will always be at a disadvantage when it comes to being a destination market. When you look outside what do you see? Exactly. Not many people are rushing to vacation on the Plains without some other attraction to bring them in. We don't have the water (our man made lakes don't count), we don't have the mountain ranges for recreation in the winter, and we don't have the self made attractions like Vegas. We also have some of the more crazy weather in the country which doesn't sit well with most. However, we have a strong economy and a good jobs sector that will continue to grow and with it so will air service as it is needed.


People, please let our local and state governments hear your voices about making these bold decisions and quit playing politics with each other. We lose out when they let a film tax credit expire, we lose when we can't even have normal liquor laws because and it's blamed on safety for people. That is bull, it's a conspiracy and only a select few profit. Once again, another factor in some businesses not wanting to locate here. Finally, I shudder to think what NBA teams and their reps think when they see our airport? I find it embarrassing that they probably laugh at how tiny and "minor league" it is compared to every other team in that league. We are becoming a major league city and can achieve that with the right decisions but we have to STOP holding ourselves back with our "small town" mentality.

Again...if you think our airport is tiny, you haven't traveled much. People need to get over it. We have a right sized airport that fits our needs. The expansion plans will provide a guide for future growth, but we aren't seeing airlines bust down the doors to get in here - mainly because there aren't many left and those that are are mostly here already. As far as NBA teams and their reps think about our airport? Probably the same thing at every airport "where is the bus to get on?" Note...the teams don't exactly come in to the pax terminal as far as I'm aware (Catch can correct me). They will park their charter aircraft at an FBO and deplane there...just like they do at every other airport in most cases.

For those in the reality-based community Venture's summary from the end of December of likely 2014 expansion is worth a read:

http://www.okctalk.com/transportation/36144-2014-oklahoma-commercial-aviation-discussion.html#post725623

Venture is correct, NBA teams run out of the AAR FBO, not the terminal building.

This is how I see it and I will use a car analogy.

OKC is a Ford Escape town and we have a Ford Escape airport. Some people think we should have a Cadillac Escalade airport so we can be a Cadillac Escalade city. The reality is OKC can't support (or even afford) an Escalade airport and we will never be a Cadillac Escalade city. However, the Ford Escape comes in 3 trim levels (S, SE, and Titanium) and each trim level has its own set of options. The problem is we have the 'S' trim level with minimal options and OKC should have the Titanium trim level with ALL the options. We might have an Escape airport but let's have the best damned Escape airport on the planet - not a 1962 retrofit.

^ That is the right approach for sure. I disagree with your assessment that a total demo and rebuild is necessary to accomplish that. The cost benefits of that method don't add up IMO. The newer areas of the terminal are not embarrassing despite a few things that could use some work, but most airports have at least a few issues like that. I've seen a few truly bad airports and WRWA isn't even close until you go downstairs.

Focusing on improvements for the lower level and tunnel would help immensely. Can't do much about the ceiling heights at baggage claim within the current footprint, but I am sure some smart architect could come up with something that would work. Maybe push the actual claim area to the north and build a more inviting area where the kind of silly garden area is now. No way do I have any sort of specific design in mind, but I don't think a scorched earth approach is necessary.

The problem is the "new" area that looks good is attached to an existing structure that is inadequate on almost every level. Even if you tear out the original structure you would have the exact same space limitations because you just can't move the new stuff 80 feet further out unless you tear it down as well. Maybe we should do what Colorado Spring did about 20 years ago and just build a new terminal on the southside of the airport with an entrance off of 104th, but this time build it with future expansion in mind. They could even run Meridian under the crosswind runway so the Meridian hotels don't complain.

Just out of curiosity. Why do you come to this forum, other than an obsession with forums, if you hate being/living in OKC so much?

I personally don't get it. I have done a decent amount of traveling and have been to a handful of Top 30 or so metros, and IMO every city is more alike than different for the most part. Yes, if you are big into public transit, the arts, and big urban downtowns then there are obviously cities that have more of that than the rest. But for the most part every city offers the same things, they're just presented differently. I know plenty of people from Dallas, Houston, Austin, KC, and the like who are in OKC and love it.

IMO I think he cares too much about what people who have never been to OKC say about OKC on the internet, and he lets that override any positive feelings he has about the city. Too bad, it's his loss.

The problem is the "new" area that looks good is attached to an existing structure that is inadequate on almost every level. Even if you tear out the original structure you would have the exact same space limitations because you just can't move the new stuff 80 feet further out unless you tear it down as well. Maybe we should do what Colorado Spring did about 20 years ago and just build a new terminal on the southside of the airport with an entrance off of 104th, but this time build it with future expansion in mind. They could even run Meridian under the crosswind runway so the Meridian hotels don't complain.

I think a new terminal build out would be a total waste, so that's just off the table. I do think we can remove the original structure without having to impact the new facility. The parking structure directly north of the terminal can all be removed. A new structure can then remove the curve and provide a straight central terminal terminal structure. Think something very similar to AUS. If we need to further expand, we have the east concourse which could wrap around back to the north or a new satellite terminal immediately south. It might require elimination of taxiway G to have enough clearance though. Long term in the fantasy world though, I would remove 13/31 and put in a new 9/27 on the south end of the air field.


IMO I think he cares too much about what people who have never been to OKC say about OKC on the internet, and he lets that override any positive feelings he has about the city. Too bad, it's his loss.

This exactly. I know my home town gets a massive negative rap mostly, especially being close to Detroit, but it has some real jewels in the cultural and attraction arena that really compete with some of the best in the country. However, if I get so focused on what people say about it online I would go nuts. People will have opinions of Oklahoma City...and those will always last. It is not different than talking about old people in Florida, hipsters in Seattle, or rude people in New England. There will always be people that perpetuate the stereotype, but no one is perfect.

I enjoy living here. Am I going to stay? Not sure. The hotter summers really make me miserable and I really struggle being far from any major body of water. At the end of the day I've been here about 15 years now, but I also don't want to keep myself from experiencing other areas of the country as well. We have so many different areas in this nation that I think it is almost a disservice not to experience life in other parts, and that means more than visiting for a week or two.

I think a new terminal build out would be a total waste, so that's just off the table. I do think we can remove the original structure without having to impact the new facility. The parking structure directly north of the terminal can all be removed. A new structure can then remove the curve and provide a straight central terminal terminal structure. Think something very similar to AUS. If we need to further expand, we have the east concourse which could wrap around back to the north or a new satellite terminal immediately south. It might require elimination of taxiway G to have enough clearance though. Long term in the fantasy world though, I would remove 13/31 and put in a new 9/27 on the south end of the air field.

I wonder what the duration, cost difference, and passenger disruption would be for doing that vs. just building a whole new terminal and parking garages south of the airport.

I wonder what the duration, cost difference, and passenger disruption would be for doing that vs. just building a whole new terminal and parking garages south of the airport.

A lot. It would be extremely expensive to start from scratch. The great thing about having the concourse on the north, is all the support facilities are close by. If you need maintenance to come out, they can be there in about 5 minutes. All the fuel storage facilities are on the north end of the field, and there is a satellite fuel farm on the north side of the west concourse, delivering fuel from the fuel tanks on the north side. Fuel trucks can be refueled in about 10-15 minutes, with very little drive time to reload. Cargo facilities are closeby, if we need to use Fedex or UPS to get some freight or passenger bags shipped for us (in the case that we failed to deliver on time or misrouted), we can have them to freight carriers in very little time with very little lead time.

In order to build a terminal on the south end of the field, you will lose all of those synergies and resources available.

Also, having the terminal midfield, allows short taxi times no matter which runways are in use. If you have a terminal at the south end of the field, any time the wind is out of the south, you will have to taxi about 2 miles for takeoff. That takes a while at 15 mph, and to cross a runway.

The terminal would have to be built at the very south end of the runways, due to building distance requirement for runway 13/31, guaranteeing that taxi time.

http://gyazo.com/9519d2fc050af6efa4074cd6533c21fa.png

And in the case of departures to the north, the taxi time wouldn't be LONG ENOUGH to have the engines warmed up for departure. So airplanes would sit at the end of the runway waiting to warm up. Even in the hot summer, engines still need to heat up.

catch22 and venture...knocking it out of the park...valuable info here

We have so many different areas in this nation that I think it is almost a disservice not to experience life in other parts, and that means more than visiting for a week or two.

Not to derail this thread, but I was talking with a buddy of mine about that the other day. Sometimes I take for granted how truly MASSIVE the US is. There is what, 52 US metro areas with populations over 1 million? There are SO many options for people to choose from when they try and pick a home, in so many different areas that differ both culturally and climate-wise. Even in other large countries like France, Germany, UK, Australia, etc. there is what, maybe 5 cities (10 max) with populations that large? It's just nuts to me. When I look back on it I'm so glad I had a job lined up before graduation, because I would've gone absolutely bonkers trying to decide what part of the country, let alone what city, I would want to live in when I started looking for a job.

Oklahoma City unveils plans for $70 million expansion at Will Rogers World Airport | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-unveils-plans-for-70-million-expansion-at-will-rogers-world-airport/article/3939884)

Article states they want to have the expansion completed by 2017...

Oklahoma City unveils plans for $70 million expansion at Will Rogers World Airport | News OK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-unveils-plans-for-70-million-expansion-at-will-rogers-world-airport/article/3939884)

Article states they want to have the expansion completed by 2017...

The one and only comment on that article makes my head hurt.

it appears that comment was removed... what did it say?

it appears that comment was removed... what did it say?

"I know how to relieve congestion at security checkpoints....remove them. Oh, and while they're at it they can repeal the Patriot Act, deactivate DHS, stand down TSA and basically give us our 4th amendment back."