Will Rogers World Airport

[mugofbeer]

Alaska is using Frontier's old gate, and has no issues filling their flights, and as AP says, AA has a gate adjacent to Gate 2 and they have never had problems.

People don't book flights based on where the departure gate is, and if someone does they are in a very small minority of near zero effect to the bottom line of the ticketing carrier.

I respectfully disagree. The business flyers may not but the retired elderly absolutely do if the ticket prices are similar. I'm done. Back to subject..

[ljbab728]

I respectfully disagree. The business flyers may not but the retired elderly absolutely do if the ticket prices are similar. I'm done. Back to subject..

I interact with potential flyers every day and, while that may sound logical, it's just not correct. I have never once in my 30 years in the travel business had a traveler express any concern about the location of a gate in making a decision about purchasing a ticket.

[no1cub17]

Yes. I was dead serious but perhaps wrong, Mr. Snark. Frontier was an entirely Denver-OKC airline. With United and SW (whose gates are directly by security) they may have lost a lot of business. I enjoyed Frontier prior to their Spiritization going to many destinations. The gates at both Denver and OKC were always at the end of the terminal. SW never is. I hope you are a little more friendly to real people, dude.

First off, F9 wasn't entirely Denver-OKC. Prior to switching to an ULCC model, they had a sizeable hub at DEN and provided stiff competition for UA and WN by connecting pax throughout the country via DEN, including Alaska and Mexico.

And as others have mentioned, F9 used Gate 2 (IIRC). AA for example uses 4 and 6 and seems to do fairly well here (well according to William Crum, AA isn't even one of the main airlines at OKC but I digress).

So are you suggesting that if a pax bought an F9 or AA ticket, got to the airport, checked in, made their way through security, then realized "oh no, AA is a 5 minute walk away! what to do!" - that they would just stop at Gate 20 and board a WN or DL flight instead? That's not how it really works...

And what do you mean "The gates at both Denver and OKC were always at the end of the terminal?" That statement just doesn't make logical sense. Again F9 had a large hub operation at DEN. DEN's terminals are big, far better than we'll ever have at OKC.

F9 pulled out of OKC because OKC no longer fit their business model as they transitioned to a point-to-point ULCC, not because their gate was a 5 minute walk from security. And I understand that walking 5 minutes to get anywhere is a pretty un-Oklahoman concept, but that's another topic for another day. And all airlines provide wheelchair assistance to get through security and to the gate (and even during the boarding process) to those that need it, so that's a moot point.

And I really wasn't trying to be snarky - I was just trying to confirm that that's what you were saying, because it's just kind of far-fetched to say the least.

[mugofbeer]

I interact with potential flyers every day and, while that may sound logical, it's just not correct. I have never once in my 30 years in the travel business had a traveler express any concern about the location of a gate in making a decision about purchasing a ticket.

No problem. Clearly you have the background. I fly to OKC several times a year and have heard comments from from some folks but, as you say, it may not be enough to matter. Curious they left OKC but still fly to multiple smaller cities with far smaller potential but as long as they stay Spirit Airlines Lite, I won't fly them anymore.

[tfvc.org]

I interact with potential flyers every day and, while that may sound logical, it's just not correct. I have never once in my 30 years in the travel business had a traveler express any concern about the location of a gate in making a decision about purchasing a ticket.

Especially considering that Will Rogers is a small airport with short concourses. I have had to walk from one end of a concourse to another concourse and walk to the end of that one many times, and the length of those concourses are twice as long as WR.

[BG918]

No problem. Clearly you have the background. I fly to OKC several times a year and have heard comments from from some folks but, as you say, it may not be enough to matter. Curious they left OKC but still fly to multiple smaller cities with far smaller potential but as long as they stay Spirit Airlines Lite, I won't fly them anymore.

I miss DEN-OKC on Frontier. Always the cheapest option on that route, and kept fares on SW and United lower. Frontier has significantly downsized their ops in Denver but still has a lot of flights. SW has picked up a lot of those flights and increased frequency to a lot of cities out of DEN.

For West Coast connections out of OKC you can't beat Denver (unless you fly nonstop to LA, SF and Seattle though there is not much frequency from OKC, only 1x to SF and Seattle and 2x to LA daily)

[catch22]

3x to LAX, but your point is still valid.

[Laramie]

Not as expensive to expand the airport now; expect a boost in air traffic as soon as we get over this current oil slump.

Better to have the capacity to put the gates in place--stay ahead on expansion. You're close enough where in may be economical to attract passenger traffic from Tulsa & Wichita. Will OKC International Flights be attractive to those two major cities.

Yet Tulsa International Airport still faces plenty of challenges.

Officials estimate that they lose the business of 25 percent of area air travelers to other airports in the region such as Dallas-Fort Worth International, Kansas City and Oklahoma City. Gaining those customers is important to the future of the airport and the metro area.

Passenger traffic up at Tulsa airport, but many opt to fly out of other cities - Tulsa World: Aerospace

Oklahoma City may be able to re-established international flights into Mexico.

Wichita Dwight D. Eisenhower National Airport - Passenger count N/A - 1,923 acres

(former Wichita Mid Continent Airport)

To Tulsa 133 miles
To OKC 153 miles
To Kansas City 181 miles To Dallas 339 miles

Tulsa International Airport - 2,840,324 - 4,360 acres

To Oklahoma City 101 miles
To Wichita 133 miles
To Kansas City 220 miles To Dallas 236

Oklahoma City Will Rogers World Airport - 3,834,009 - 8,100 acres

To Tulsa 101 miles
To Wichita 153 miles
To Kansas City 300 miles To Dallas 182 miles

2014 passenger counts (arrivals/departures)

[Jeepnokc]

Not as expensive to expand the airport now; expect a boost in air traffic as soon as we get over this current oil slump.

Better to have the capacity to put the gates in place--stay ahead on expansion. You're close enough where in may be economical to attract passenger traffic from Tulsa & Wichita. Will OKC International Flights be attractive to those two major cities.



Passenger traffic up at Tulsa airport, but many opt to fly out of other cities - Tulsa World: Aerospace

Oklahoma City may be able to re-established international flights into Mexico.

Wichita Dwight D. Eisenhower National Airport - Passenger count N/A - 1,923 acres

(former Wichita Mid Continent Airport)

To Tulsa 133 miles
To OKC 153 miles
To Kansas City 181 miles To Dallas 339 miles

Tulsa International Airport - 2,840,324 - 4,360 acres

To Oklahoma City 101 miles
To Wichita 133 miles
To Kansas City 220 miles To Dallas 236

Oklahoma City Will Rogers World Airport - 3,834,009 - 8,100 acres

To Tulsa 101 miles
To Wichita 153 miles
To Kansas City 300 miles To Dallas 182 miles

2014 passenger counts (arrivals/departures)

What is covered under acres? The actual building?

[BG918]

3x to LAX, but your point is still valid.

Isn't the United Express flight only 3 or 4 times a week though? Is it a seasonal daily non-stop ?

[catch22]

Isn't the United Express flight only 3 or 4 times a week though? Is it a seasonal daily non-stop ?

Daily year round.

[Snowman]

What is covered under acres? The actual building?

At those sizes it is the entire airport grounds and other property owned plausible for expansion or related services, like how ours is creating the new development east of the runways for more industrial/commercial/retail activity.

[Jeepnokc]

At those sizes it is the entire airport grounds and other property owned plausible for expansion or related services, like how ours is creating the new development east of the runways for more industrial/commercial/retail activity.

LOL. I should have had better glasses on. I was seeing the comma as a period. Thus, OKC being 8.1 acres....not 8100 acres. I live on 6 acres so was confused as building not near as big as my property and there was no way you are landing a big plane here.

[no1cub17]

For West Coast connections out of OKC you can't beat Denver (unless you fly nonstop to LA, SF and Seattle though there is not much frequency from OKC, only 1x to SF and Seattle and 2x to LA daily)

Plenty of west coast connections (heck, both coasts) via DFW (AA) and IAH (UA) also.

[gopokes88]

Why doesn't the city give out subsidies to help airlines establish routes? Once they're established and profitable use the subsidy money to get another route established. Abq did this successfully with jet blue to ny

[ljbab728]

Why doesn't the city give out subsidies to help airlines establish routes? Once they're established and profitable use the subsidy money to get another route established. Abq did this successfully with jet blue to ny

Most airlines won't make that kind of decision based on a potential subsidy. They look more long term than that.

[venture]

Why doesn't the city give out subsidies to help airlines establish routes? Once they're established and profitable use the subsidy money to get another route established. Abq did this successfully with jet blue to ny

There are cities with millions being thrown at airlines right now, and airlines aren't biting. Subsidies are turning into a thing of the past.

[bombermwc]

Airlines used to look at that stuff because it meant they could get a reduced operating expense for a term. But what they realized over time, was that if the route didn't justify operation without a subsidy, then they were going to lose money regardless or make so little profit that it wasn't worth it. That's when you see other cost savings taking place and quality starts to suffer. You get a crappier airplane, crappier flight schedule, etc. With all the mergers that have happened in the industry, look at the airports like PIT that lost their hub status as well....so much empty gate space and the city is left having to pay to maintain that extra space too....can't just lock off a terminal at an airport like a space at the mall.

[Just the facts]

Not as expensive to expand the airport now; expect a boost in air traffic as soon as we get over this current oil slump.

Better to have the capacity to put the gates in place--stay ahead on expansion. You're close enough where in may be economical to attract passenger traffic from Tulsa & Wichita. Will OKC International Flights be attractive to those two major cities.

Yet Tulsa International Airport still faces plenty of challenges.

Officials estimate that they lose the business of 25 percent of area air travelers to other airports in the region such as Dallas-Fort Worth International, Kansas City and Oklahoma City. Gaining those customers is important to the future of the airport and the metro area.

Passenger traffic up at Tulsa airport, but many opt to fly out of other cities - Tulsa World: Aerospace

Kind of blows the whole argument that OKC isn't losing a tremendous number of passengers to DFW out of the water doesn't it. Where is my thread of Great Plains International?

[Laramie]

Kind of blows the whole argument that OKC isn't losing a tremendous number of passengers to DFW out of the water doesn't it. Where is my thread of Great Plains International?

Great Plains was a good concept. You (JTF) said that Great Plains Airlines would have been a good idea if they were flying somewhere.

http://www.okctalk.com/businesses-em...big-bucks.html

http://www.okctalk.com/general-civic...s-article.html

We never lost passengers to DFW or Love Field for that matter because we never had them to begin with; however we have managed to stop the bleeding that fed those mega Metroplex airports. It's time we took a page from their (DFW/Love Field) playbook.

Oklahoma City is geographically positioned where it could someday be considered for mini-hub status. Continue to build on our flight menu to make it attractive where we pull passengers from neighboring cities like Tulsa, Wichita, Fort Smith, Wichita Falls & Lawton. Although it will take time, work to get International flights to Mexico; then a few other international destinations--OKC is a closer to those neighboring cities than DFW or Love Field.

[BG918]

Great Plains was a victim of bad timing trying to get established during the aerospace downturn after 9/11 and the early 2000's recession (which hit Tulsa particularly hard in the telecom sector). I think the same service today would have had more of a chance at success with a fleet of DASH-8's or something similar. I flew TUL-COS a couple times to go skiing as an alternate to DEN (before SW competed with United on that route).

I think there would be enough demand on smaller planes for flights to regional airports that GPA served like Colorado Springs (maybe just seasonal), Albuquerque and Nashville; also Austin, San Antonio, Little Rock and New Orleans with a resumption of service to Kansas City (previously served by SW) and Memphis (previously served by NW/Delta).

[Just the facts]

Great Plain Airlines and Great Plains International Airport are two different subjects.

http://www.okctalk.com/transportatio...l-airport.html

[mugofbeer]

They had good doughnuts, too.

[bombermwc]

Great Plain Airlines and Great Plains International Airport are two different subjects.

http://www.okctalk.com/transportatio...l-airport.html

And that airport would never see any support from anyone in the state. TUL and OKC both are too well established and make their immediate customer base happy. We don't gain anything by combining the two. We get more gates, but you absolutely would not get to the status of some major airport. You WOULD piss everyone off that went from having a 20 minute drive, to an hour. Right now DFW is close enough that driving/flying to DFW takes about the same amount of time. If you added more time to the drive for OKC folks, you ABSOLUTELY would lose traffic to DFW. Why would I drive an extra 45 minutes in the wrong direction if I could drive to DFW with the same amount of total travel time, but save several hundred dollars? Right now, we pay for the convenience of time.

[Just the facts]

If you want to talk about GPI we can do so in that thread. I'll copy your comment and respond over there.