# Another bridge to nowhere?



## TinCan782 (Sep 29, 2015)

The $313 Million U.S. Airport You've Never Heard Of -

http://huff.to/1LhmbvS


----------



## trainman74 (Sep 29, 2015)

Don't be so presumptuous with your headlines, Huffington Post!

I have heard of it. Its Wikipedia article says that it was used as a "Fleecing of America" report on "NBC Nightly News," which I think is where I remember it from.


----------



## TinCan782 (Sep 29, 2015)

trainman74 said:


> Don't be so presumptuous with your headlines, Huffington Post!
> 
> I have heard of it. Its Wikipedia article says that it was used as a "Fleecing of America" report on "NBC Nightly News," which I think is where I remember it from.


So what...it still sounds like "pork" to me...Huff or otherwise.


----------



## XHRTSP (Sep 29, 2015)

This airport's been around for two decades. The 90s called, they want their outrage back!


----------



## TinCan782 (Sep 29, 2015)

XHRTSP said:


> This airport's been around for two decades. The 90s called, they want their outrage back!


Ah...very good. I haven't been keeping up with St. Louis news for a couple of decades!


----------



## BCL (Sep 29, 2015)

I suppose they technically share the runways with the air force base.

Now I have seen some pretty large airports that are basically used for nothing but charter and general aviation. Lake Tahoe Airport used to have the occasional schedule jet flight, but they apparently couldn't serve more than one airline at a time. I got lost there once and saw nobody there. There was a car rental but it was closed.


----------



## BCL (Sep 29, 2015)

It sounds like the author read the AP story.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/todayinthesky/2015/09/28/struggling-southern-illinois-airport-gambles-on-vegas-route/72959492/

Also - they don't have any food service - only vending machines.

http://www.bnd.com/news/local/article23183661.html

And then there's their website:

http://www.flymidamerica.com

Strike that. They got a new restaurant.

http://www.bnd.com/news/local/article27382312.html

Some of the reading I did was that they perhaps wanted a restaurant before security such that they could service workers at Boeing and North Bay Produce. Boeing apparently has an assembly facility on site to build parts for military planes, and the produce wholesaler has air cargo deliveries sent straight to their warehouse at the airport.


----------



## XHRTSP (Sep 30, 2015)

The idea of this airport never was that good, but just remember back during that time STL was a TWA hub and bursting at the seams.


----------



## BCL (Sep 30, 2015)

XHRTSP said:


> The idea of this airport never was that good, but just remember back during that time STL was a TWA hub and bursting at the seams.


Other than the location, I think part of what happened was that they expanded STL in terms of the terminals and runways. Then of course TWA basically disappeared after American bought them out.

Still - it serves a purpose and it's not as if they'd save any money by just shutting it down. I don't think Boeing would be very happy about that after they spent so much building a manufacturing facility there.


----------



## Anderson (Oct 3, 2015)

The airport also seems to have, per wikipedia, served a role in propping up Scott AFB during the last BRAC round. On the one hand, this isn't Montreal Mirabel by any stretch...but it's a pretty standard case of a second airport for a city "not working out".

With that being said, with _very_ few exceptions (San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, Washington, Dallas, and South Florida) most metro areas are arguably better-served with a single airport than with multiple airports. Those exceptions are generally super-major hubs (NYC, CHI, LAX, SFO), geographically spread out (LAX, South Florida), and/or have their "best"/"most convenient" airport location somehow constrained (NYC, WAS, DAL).


----------



## BCL (Oct 3, 2015)

Anderson said:


> The airport also seems to have, per wikipedia, served a role in propping up Scott AFB during the last BRAC round. On the one hand, this isn't Montreal Mirabel by any stretch...but it's a pretty standard case of a second airport for a city "not working out".
> 
> With that being said, with _very_ few exceptions (San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, Washington, Dallas, and South Florida) most metro areas are arguably better-served with a single airport than with multiple airports. Those exceptions are generally super-major hubs (NYC, CHI, LAX, SFO), geographically spread out (LAX, South Florida), and/or have their "best"/"most convenient" airport location somehow constrained (NYC, WAS, DAL).


I suppose there is some traffic at Boeing Field, but passenger service is mostly short haul by turboprop.

SFO is frankly a mess. They really need to do something about the flow control when there's fog. Besides the fact that many people actually live closer to OAK or SJC, those don't have enough traffic that they get impacted by fog, since their traffic can handle a single runway fine. SFO has to reduce runway use when there's fog, and then they planes start backing up.

Also - I think multiple airports have worked pretty well in the DC/Baltimore area.


----------



## Anderson (Oct 3, 2015)

BCL said:


> Anderson said:
> 
> 
> > The airport also seems to have, per wikipedia, served a role in propping up Scott AFB during the last BRAC round. On the one hand, this isn't Montreal Mirabel by any stretch...but it's a pretty standard case of a second airport for a city "not working out".
> ...


DC/Baltimore is spread out enough; I should have put them in the second category as well (Woodbridge-BWI and Baltimore-Dulles are both hour-long trips without traffic). It isn't quite the situation in the Bay Area or New York, but you've got two distinct population centers to deal with...South Florida is probably the best analogue.

SFO...well, that whole situation reeks of lousy planning. Because of the fog issues the better plan would probably have been to build up San Jose and improve the transit line back _then_. Ah, the forward thinking 60s...


----------



## BCL (Oct 3, 2015)

Anderson said:


> BCL said:
> 
> 
> > Anderson said:
> ...


They'd love to build new runways To create greater spacing. However, you can take a look at SFO on a map and instantly recognize that it was built on reclaimed land. They've been talking about building two new runways, but then they would have to fill in the bay, and there's opposition to that. They would need to negotiate removal of infill somewhere else.

I'm not sure about San Jose. Their current public transportation to the airport consists of light rail and a free bus to the airport. Once BART gets to San Jose it'll add that on top. Frankly OAK and SFO will still have superior transit options.


----------

