MCI Airport - Innovative Private Approach
Jun 3, 2017, 7:54 am
#16
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 129
Kansas City is centrally located, three runways and has few weather delays. All the makings of a great future hub.
Jun 3, 2017, 9:03 am
#17
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,719
It wasn't designed for any level of security. The blueprints were drawn up in the 1960s and MCI opened in 1972. Mandatory airport security did not start nationwide until '73.
Unless I'm mistaken, TWA had a big hand in MCI's design and demanded the mini-DFW, drive-right-to-your-gate configuration. (Good for O/D traffic, not so good for a hub because of gate-to-gate distances, and TWA conceived of MCI as its grand central-US hub, but... whatever.)
When they had to layer all those security checkpoints into the mix, and the mini gate areas could not cope with 747 and L-1011 pax loads, TWA demanded major changes to the still-nearly-new terminals at taxpayer expense. Local officials told them to get lost, which is why TWA moved camp to STL.
Correct me if I've gotten anything wrong, but I think history shows MCI was struggling almost from opening day.
Unless I'm mistaken, TWA had a big hand in MCI's design and demanded the mini-DFW, drive-right-to-your-gate configuration. (Good for O/D traffic, not so good for a hub because of gate-to-gate distances, and TWA conceived of MCI as its grand central-US hub, but... whatever.)
When they had to layer all those security checkpoints into the mix, and the mini gate areas could not cope with 747 and L-1011 pax loads, TWA demanded major changes to the still-nearly-new terminals at taxpayer expense. Local officials told them to get lost, which is why TWA moved camp to STL.
Correct me if I've gotten anything wrong, but I think history shows MCI was struggling almost from opening day.
Jun 4, 2017, 12:12 pm
#18
Original Member and FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Kansas City, MO, USA
Programs: DL PM/MM, AA ExPlat, Hyatt Glob, HH Dia, National ECE, Hertz PC
Posts: 16,579
Even the strongest proponents here in Kansas City have pretty much given up any talk of a hub, and the proposed new terminal will have 35 gates, enough to replace the existing gates (actually a few less gates than they currently have, but they will be able to do more common use for smaller carriers like Alaska, Spirit, and Allegient, and the international gates will be able to be used for domestic departures, which the current single international arrival gate can not). The plans call for it to be designed to have 7 gates added for 42 total. In any event, even if they added the 7 gates, the most gates a single airline could have would be about a dozen, hardly enough for a hub. You could hope for it to be a focus city, and it might be a good spot for Southwest to expand a little, and there's room for AS/VX and B6 to come in potentially.
Jun 4, 2017, 2:20 pm
#19
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 129
Even the strongest proponents here in Kansas City have pretty much given up any talk of a hub, and the proposed new terminal will have 35 gates, enough to replace the existing gates (actually a few less gates than they currently have, but they will be able to do more common use for smaller carriers like Alaska, Spirit, and Allegient, and the international gates will be able to be used for domestic departures, which the current single international arrival gate can not). The plans call for it to be designed to have 7 gates added for 42 total. In any event, even if they added the 7 gates, the most gates a single airline could have would be about a dozen, hardly enough for a hub. You could hope for it to be a focus city, and it might be a good spot for Southwest to expand a little, and there's room for AS/VX and B6 to come in potentially.
International would be a good bet, with gates that can handle the bigger planes.