Will Rogers World Airport

[catch22]

I believe Alaska + Horizon operate about 150 daily departures out of PDX to about 20 or so destinations. Definitely a hub.

[OUman]

My chief issue (and why I feel like the expansion as designed is a monumental waste of money) is the Observation Deck. There are dozens of low cost ideas that have been floated on this board that seem way more important than an Observation Deck. That thing seems like a solution looking for a problem.

Most of the relatively low cost (compared to $89 freaking million) recommendations are from people who actually use the airport frequently. The Observation Deck would be for people who rarely use it. Why spend so much money on those people rather than the people you should be serving? Makes no sense to me.

I respectfully disagree with what you have said about the observation deck. Being an avid aviation enthusiast (and aviation photographer), I definitely plan on going there to watch planes. May not be a big deal to you, but sure is a source of excitement for me. And many others are out there like myself, wanting to watch planes but not having a dedicated facility to do so. The last thing I want to do is get in trouble for watching planes from a road near the airport. If there's a dedicated spot in the terminal, it's a 100% guarantee I'm going to be there on a frequent basis.

And when we had the old observation tower in the original terminal (just before Concourse B), I used to go there also. Never was it empty. There were always others there enjoying the view of the airfield and aircraft.

Airports across the world have observation decks or outdoor spotting areas. Here in the U.S.: AUS, HOU, IAH, MSP, DFW, MIA, and many smaller airports either have an observation area indoors or a facility outdoors. Heck, even the small terminal at Tri-Cities Airport in Tennessee has an observation deck.

All major airports in Japan, Europe, all have dedicated aircraft spotting areas. Heck, in Japan, they roll out the red carpet for aviation spotters. I believe at Nagoya Chubu Centrair, there's a stadium-like outdoor arena next to the airport for people who want to watch planes!

I'm not quite sure why you think it's a "monumental waste of money", especially when the deck itself is not costing like 90% of the $89 million. Of course I don't have the exact figures, but I'm very sure the core costs of the project are going to be for the main body of the expansion (windows, glass, hold room chairs, electronic signs, concrete, steel etc). One observation deck isn't driving the cost all the way to $89 million.

For an airport of our size and traffic figures, we have a pretty impressive array of destinations. We could definitely use higher frequency for many routes at OKC. As for getting more carriers to launch nonstop routes, the airport trust has an Air Service Initiative that gives incentives for airlines to start new nonstop flights or add more frequency. But only if the flights get used will the airlines keep adding destinations and flights. If this year keeps up the pace the chance of that happening is definitely good.

[bombermwc]

I believe Alaska + Horizon operate about 150 daily departures out of PDX to about 20 or so destinations. Definitely a hub.

And while Southwest doesn't use "hubs", it is a major transfer station (whatever you want to call it) for their west coast flights.

[PhiAlpha]

I agree with your thoughts. OKC is an end point. People come in and they go out. Any effort should be to focus on 1) more direct flights, and 2) make it easier to get in and out.

If we are an end point, the focus of any change should be to make it easier for people utilizing the airport to get in and get out. It should start with better and closer parking. Elevators in a parking garage that work more frequently, people movers (which are great) that work all of the time, maybe designate a shuttle for Lot 3 rather than making Lot 3 people sit through drop-offs in multiple lots.

Sure, reconfigure security. My experience is that it's not bad. But, I'm not going to argue that it can be improved. I have no idea how more space will help if TSA maintains the same amount of personnel. Does some of the $89m pay for more TSA to move the lines faster?

My chief issue (and why I feel like the expansion as designed is a monumental waste of money) is the Observation Deck. There are dozens of low cost ideas that have been floated on this board that seem way more important than an Observation Deck. That thing seems like a solution looking for a problem.

Most of the relatively low cost (compared to $89 freaking million) recommendations are from people who actually use the airport frequently. The Observation Deck would be for people who rarely use it. Why spend so much money on those people rather than the people you should be serving? Makes no sense to me.

Can some of the $89m go towards subsidizing more direct flights? ( I know it can't...just expressing a little frustration.)

I don't think the observation deck is even that large of percentage, so I don't really understand why this one small part of the expansion makes you think the whole thing is a waste of money. It is fixing a problem at the airport as part of the reason they are adding it is to create additional waiting areas for people greeting arriving passengers. It isn't just a runway observation area (like the one that they had there prior to the 90s renovation), part of the observation area looks down into the terminal below allowing people to wait up there until they see arriving passengers or to see off departing passengers. There isn't much in the way of greeting space at Will Rogers compared to other airports of our size, so the observation area IS addressing a problem that they have identified, even several people on OKCTalk have identified that as an issue.

[Celebrator]

I don't think the observation deck is even that large of percentage, so I don't really understand why this one small part of the expansion makes you think the whole thing is a waste of money. It is fixing a problem at the airport as part of the reason they are adding it is to create additional waiting areas for people greeting arriving passengers. It isn't just a runway observation area (like the one that they had there prior to the 90s renovation), part of the observation area looks down into the terminal below allowing people to wait up there until they see arriving passengers or to see off departing passengers. There isn't much in the way of greeting space at Will Rogers compared to other airports of our size, so the observation area IS addressing a problem that they have identified, even several people on OKCTalk have identified that as an issue.

Right. I have used this as an example before, but Manchester, NH (MHT) has an observation area that looks over the security checkpoints on the interior, and the apron and runways on the exterior. It is climate controlled and they have these great rocking chairs up there making it a nice place to wait for folks arriving or watching folks depart.

[catch22]

Albuquerque has one too.

[PaddyShack]

There is also one at BZE in Belize.

[PhiAlpha]

TSA may eliminate security screening from 150 medium and small airports:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/01/polit...rts/index.html

Well that seems like a bad idea...

[amocore]

Well that seems like a bad idea...

Let s remove the seat belts from cars to save few $ too...

[jedicurt]

Well that seems like a bad idea...

well... if you keep cutting taxes... you have to save money somewhere to prevent massive cuts in services

[Zuplar]

Doesn't TSA have a bad failure rate during their tests? I believe they improved but I still don't know that it was all that good. We might be just about as well off if we had our own security with metal detectors and bomb sniffing dogs.

[HOT ROD]

And OKC used to have an observation tower. I don't see anything wrong with OKC allocating funds for an observation area, in fact, I think it adds to the amenities of the facility in such a way that it modernizes it at a very low comparative cost.

Just because a business person traveling frequently during rush hour may not use it doesn't mean OKC shouldn't have modern facilities that WOW others. I honestly wish they didn't remove the past observation tower as it was unique and I recall countless trips to the airport to watch the action as a youngster. Just imagine if OKC had the tower and this new observation. ..

[whatitis]

Doesn't TSA have a bad failure rate during their tests? I believe they improved but I still don't know that it was all that good. We might be just about as well off if we had our own security with metal detectors and bomb sniffing dogs.

they are worse than I thought. it was 95% in 2015
in 2017 they wouldn't say the failure rates but it was more than half. When ABC news asked the source if it was 80% the source said "you're in the ballpark"

It's reactive prevention so it doesn't do anything. the shoe bombing attempt the guy made it through security (in France)
Then you read about a test through Minneapolis and they missed 17 out of 18 weapons being brought on by agents.
quote from the article
The TSA “red team” attempted to smuggle 18 different items past airport security that should easily be detected but prevailed almost every time, the Fox affiliate reported.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...ed-items-minn/

It's just not accomplishing anything. It's just preventing people from bringing breast milk or making old ladies get full pat downs.

[Zuplar]

they are worse than I thought. it was 95% in 2015
in 2017 they wouldn't say the failure rates but it was more than half. When ABC news asked the source if it was 80% the source said "you're in the ballpark"

It's reactive prevention so it doesn't do anything. the shoe bombing attempt the guy made it through security (in France)
Then you read about a test through Minneapolis and they missed 17 out of 18 weapons being brought on by agents.
quote from the article
The TSA “red team” attempted to smuggle 18 different items past airport security that should easily be detected but prevailed almost every time, the Fox affiliate reported.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...ed-items-minn/

It's just not accomplishing anything. It's just preventing people from bringing breast milk or making old ladies get full pat downs.

Yeah that 95% one was the one I was thinking. I thought they got it down to half, but even if they did, IMO that's horrible.

Something else that is done now that would have made a huge difference is locking the cockpit doors. Had they not been able to gain access would have changed that outcome. Of course using some sort of explosive would still take out a plane, but again the dogs should be able to sniff that out.

At one point I had watched a documentary on how Israel does their airport security and how they US should model ours off theirs. I don't remember specifics, but I remember it being interesting and a way to save money. I really don't think getting rid of TSA is as big of a deal as some may thing, as long as we still have some security at airports.

[Rover]

Yeah that 95% one was the one I was thinking. I thought they got it down to half, but even if they did, IMO that's horrible.

Something else that is done now that would have made a huge difference is locking the cockpit doors. Had they not been able to gain access would have changed that outcome. Of course using some sort of explosive would still take out a plane, but again the dogs should be able to sniff that out.

At one point I had watched a documentary on how Israel does their airport security and how they US should model ours off theirs. I don't remember specifics, but I remember it being interesting and a way to save money. I really don't think getting rid of TSA is as big of a deal as some may thing, as long as we still have some security at airports.

Don’t know if it’s changed in the last couple of years, but in Tel Avi, the screening was WAY more than here. I went through scanners separate from my bags which were scanned and waiting on the other side of my screening. I then had to unpack and repack my bag in front of two agents who occasionally also picked up and inspected items. Then the bags were taken out to the tarmac by the plane. When we went out to board, we had to go identify which bags were ours and then we boarded and our bag loaded. If everyone was boarded and there was a bag or more left, we would have to de-board and start the identification over.

[d-usa]

Of note is that the TSA proposals would limit the elimination of screenings to airports serving planes with something like fever than 60something seats, and that people connecting to other flights would have to go through a normal screening process at the connecting airport.

I think airports complaining about having to have a new “stateside” terminal separated from all their “airside” terminals will stop this in the tracks. It would eliminate gate flexibility at those airports, and they would incur costs to build new security terminals as well.

[Zuplar]

Don’t know if it’s changed in the last couple of years, but in Tel Avi, the screening was WAY more than here. I went through scanners separate from my bags which were scanned and waiting on the other side of my screening. I then had to unpack and repack my bag in front of two agents who occasionally also picked up and inspected items. Then the bags were taken out to the tarmac by the plane. When we went out to board, we had to go identify which bags were ours and then we boarded and our bag loaded. If everyone was boarded and there was a bag or more left, we would have to de-board and start the identification over.

Yeah that sounds way worse, and nothing like what I saw. As a matter of fact I remember in the documentary them talking about not having near the scanners and whatnot that we do. Not doubting your experience at all, as I feel like what you are saying is what I'd expect, that's why I found the documentary interesting. I'll see if I can find it as I'm sure it was online somewhere.

[catch22]

Don’t know if it’s changed in the last couple of years, but in Tel Avi, the screening was WAY more than here. I went through scanners separate from my bags which were scanned and waiting on the other side of my screening. I then had to unpack and repack my bag in front of two agents who occasionally also picked up and inspected items. Then the bags were taken out to the tarmac by the plane. When we went out to board, we had to go identify which bags were ours and then we boarded and our bag loaded. If everyone was boarded and there was a bag or more left, we would have to de-board and start the identification over.

For what it’s worth, positive bag match is a thing here in the USA too for international flights. I’ve had to offload 145 bags on a 737 to cancun once to find a bag that the passenger didn’t show up for. After 25 minutes of unloading and reloading the passenger stumbled up to the gate drunk from the bar and they boarded and we had to load his bag.

I also work the Narita trip fairly often and it happens on occasion but it’s easier since all the bags are loaded in containers. We know exactly which container to pull and from there it only takes a few minutes to dig around in it and find the bag.

For some reason everyone that misses a flight and needs their bag pulled has a black roller bag.

[Laramie]

WRWA should conduct a study toward long-term (10-15 year) capital improvements plan.

[brianinok]

WRWA should conduct a study toward long-term (10-15 year) capital improvements plan.

YES. But, you know, that might be a little too eye-opening. If our growth continues at 10% this year, then we average 5% growth over 15 years, that 15th year we would have over 8.6 million passengers. Would even the currently-planned, built-out terminal accommodate that? It's more than double what is traveling through the airport now.

[no1cub17]

Not to derail the conversation but is PDX really a hub? I can't think of what airline hubs there besides the mini-hub Alaska Airlines does with its Horizon unit.

PDX used to be an international gateway hub for Northwest Airlines (mainly to Japan iirc) which became Delta. This was cut and now I don't think there's ANY international out of PDX anymore. Perhaps Catch can educate us since he lived there but I think the reason PDX is so nice is because it USED to be a gateway (along with they probably just wanted a nice airport to compete) but no longer is.

I just think prospective is important, especially when we compare OKC to other airports/markets.

DL definitely still flies PDX-NRT. There are also AC and AM flights to Canada and Mexico which are also international.

[catch22]

YES. But, you know, that might be a little too eye-opening. If our growth continues at 10% this year, then we average 5% growth over 15 years, that 15th year we would have over 8.6 million passengers. Would even the currently-planned, built-out terminal accommodate that? It's more than double what is traveling through the airport now.

I’m afraid the terminal building itself will hit capacity before the concourses. The master plan takes WRWA through year 2050 I believe, however it was done on very conservative estimations of traffic. It does include a third concourse jetting out to the south. (Makes a large “ T “ out of all 3 concourses. While that will provide gate capacity, the terminal building will be too small to handle that I think, especially since we have little connecting volume.

[pure]

since this is the airport thread, I figured I would ask here, and perhaps bring back some memories.

Back in the early 90's when I was a kid, I remember when we would go to the airport, there would be these seats with a TV built-in. I think you had to pay a quarter or something like that for them to work. Am I remembering this right?

[mugofbeer]

Yes. You are right. TVs to pass the time.

[Mr. Blue Sky]

Loved Hot Rod's thoughts on the old observation tower. I, too, remember putting the dime in the turnstile to visit the observation deck. Good memories and wish it was still there. As for the terminal outgrowing itself, are we talking about the same airport? Everytime I go to the airport everybody comes out of the gate areas at the same small area and feels more like a big city bus station than a big city airport. A lot of neat things at WRWA, but a crowded terminal doesn't seem to be of any concern in the near future. In fact, coming home to Will Rogers I've heard many whispers of surprise at how quiet the airport is. A huge positive that I'm always impressed with is the cleanliness and general upkeep of the facility. Folks at the airport, no offence meant, it just is what it is, which honestly is kind of refreshing after a day at O'Hare or any number of truly busy chaotic airports.