Lambert-St Louis International Airport is a hub without an airline. It has been struggling with the dramatic drop in traffic since TWA went under and American slowly culled the remains, and now it’s trying to reconfigure itself to be a smaller airport. That’s not something you see very often.

Just a few years ago, St Louis was the major hub of TWA. Traffic was booming and they even saw a need to build a new runway. Now that runway has proven to be completely unnecessary. American plucked TWA out of bankruptcy and has done nothing but shrink St Louis since. The halls of concourses C and D used to be packed full of travelers. Now, as I discovered when I flew through St Louis on American in December, D is nearly empty and C is fading fast. So here’s the new plan:

Not much is changing on Concourse A. That’s the home of the “other” airlines. Nobody is moving in or out over there. But there are a few stragglers currently scattered that will be consolidated on C. Concourse B will basically be shut as the last tenant, AirTran, will move into a space in C where American used to be. Concourse D is already cut off just a few gates in, but now the rest will be closed as well. Frontier and Cape Air will move over to C and that’s where Midwest will go when it starts service. Concourse E, which is part of a separate terminal and isn’t connected to the rest of the airport, will continue to be the home of Southwest. That’s the liveliest part of the airport these days, and it’s the newest part as well.

Back in concourses A and C, $50 million in renovations will take place. There will be new lighting, paint, and restrooms to give them a newer look. There will also be new restrooms and ticket counters in the main terminal area. They’ll be raising ceilings and increasing natural light throughout to give it a more modern feel.

Basically, they’re bringing an old terminal up to par while trying to seal off the past. That’s a painful thing to go through, I imagine.

too fat to fly? know before you go – antibride
Another day, another fat person is angry that they were bumped for needing two seats. Don’t let it happen to you.

United Most On-Time for 2009? Count Us Skeptical – BNET
United is claiming it was the most on time in 2009. The claim is legally accurate, but there’s a huge asterisk in front of it that makes it all but worthless.

Maybe Mitt Romney should have tried a ‘knee defender’ – Christian Science Monitor
I weighed in on reclining and what NOT to do when a former presidential candidate asks you to stop it.

Brett at Cranky Flier Explains his Concierge Service – FrugalTravelGuy
The Frugal Travel Guy chose Cranky Concierge for his first guest post. Take a look, and stick around to see all the deals he uncovers.

Liquor (and Revenue) Could Flow at Las Vegas Airport – BNET
Revenue is down at Vegas McCarran airport, so they want to add a liquor store to boost funds. I love it. It’s so Vegas.

It’s time for another episode of Ask Cranky. I’ve received this question in many different forms ever since my days doing airline pricing, so I thought now would be a good time to answer it.

Why is it cheaper for me to fly from Fairbanks, Alaska to Denver than it is to fly from Fairbanks to Seattle? What happens if we just don’t get back on the plane after the layover in Seattle?

Kim

There’s nothing worse than trying to figure out airline pricing. After 3 years on the inside, I understand it, but it still makes my head hurt. This question, however, about why two flights cost more than one or why longer flights cost more than shorter ones is pretty easy. It’s actually just economics – supply and demand.

Back in the days of regulation (prior to 1978), pricing was pretty straightforward. There was effectively a price per mile. While that may make sense from a cost perspective (sort of), it doesn’t make much sense from a revenue perspective. So after deregulation, the airlines really started to try to maximize revenue. Crazy idea, I know. Let’s look at these two market to illustrate my point.

Fairbanks to Seattle is a monopoly for Alaska. They fly it nonstop and nobody else does. What’s more, only one other airline even offers fares on that route, and its Delta with a connection in Salt Lake that only goes a few times a week and requires serious backtracking.

So Alaska can really set the pricing in this market to be the most lucrative for them without having to worry about serious competitive threat.

Meanwhile in the Fairbanks to Denver market, it’s a very different scene. Yes, Frontier recently announced seasonal nonstop flights a few times a week, so they can charge a premium. But the competitive landscape puts serious pressure on fares. Alaska can offer several connections per day over Seattle while Delta can offer its connections over Salt Lake as well. This may not be the most competitive route in the world, but it’s certainly more competitive than the Seattle market.

Making problems even worse is the market size. Fairbanks to Seattle is a much bigger market than Denver to Fairbanks. So if Alaska lowers fares in Denver, it may be able to fill up a few seats with connections via Seattle whereas those seats might have gone empty otherwise. And that brings us to the next question – why not just buy a ticket to Denver and get off in Seattle?

If you have a one way ticket and no checked bags, then you can do that and you probably won’t get caught. It’s called hidden city ticketing, but the airlines don’t allow this. So, there’s always a chance you’ll get caught and then made to pay the difference between what you paid and the full walk up fare. (You don’t want to do that.)

If you have a checked bag, then you obviously have a problem. It will go on even if you don’t. And if it’s a roundtrip ticket, there are other problems. If you don’t show up for a single flight in your reservation, the rest of your trip is canceled. So you might be tempted to buy a ticket from Fairbanks to Denver roundtrip. The problem is that once you miss that flight to Denver, your return will be canceled as well and then you’re in trouble. I wouldn’t recommend it.

While some airlines are moving away from First Class, British Airways continues to embrace it. They’ve just rolled out the latest version of their First Class product, and it seems very, well, British. I like that about BA, even though I highly doubt I’ll ever sit in these seats.

I consider myself something of an Anglophile, so I like the traditional, stuffy British style, stiff upper lip and all. That’s why I was with Margaret Thatcher when she condemned those silly world tails. People want British Airways to be British. And when it comes to First Class, I want some of that traditional British service. Heck, you can put Mr Belvedere up there and I’d even be happy. So here’s what they’ve done.

If you know BA’s First Class, this seat will look fairly similar. In fact, the biggest difference is that, as you can see, Rachel Weisz is now included in the price of the ticket. This isn’t a Singapore-style suite where you’re completely and totally closed off from the world, so you and Rachel will have to be discreet. Some people may not be thrilled that they don’t have a closed-off suite, but for some reason, it really doesn’t bother me.

The one thing that really stands out is the window. I know that sounds dumb, but it’s incredible how much that impacts the cabin feel. Unfortunately, the BA stock photos don’t show the window very well, so I took the one that got closest. To see some great pics, go to Business Traveller’s coverage.

As you can see, they’ve put inside paneling that effectively eliminates the round window that we’ve all come to expect on an airplane. There are now blinds on bigger interior windows that, when closed, make you forget you’re on a plane. It’s a pretty cool effect in pictures. I can’t wait to see what it looks like on an airplane (undoubtedly as I’m turning right to go to a lesser class).

Some of the little touches are nice as well. For example, you’ll find a wardrobe in each seat so you can hang your clothes. There is also a leather-bound desk. Totally unnecessary, but then again, isn’t First Class in general?

The seat has been installed on a single 777 so far, but it sounds like it’ll be awhile before it starts going on to the rest of the fleet. Guess we’ll all just have to wait.

Now that Japan Air Lines has decided to stick with American, it looks like this whole US-Japan open skies deal will go through. And when that happens, the US will have four slot pairs to dole out to US carriers who want to fly between the US and Haneda, Tokyo’s close-in airport. This hasn’t been allowed since before Narita opened, and as you might imagine, airlines are falling all over each other to get in there.

What’s so great about Haneda? Take a look at this map.

It’s 24km by car south of Central Tokyo while Narita is 74km northeast of town. But the biggest reason airlines want to fly here? Limited competition, of course. With only four slot pairs to a close-in airport for one of the largest cities in the world, who wouldn’t want to fly there? And that has made for some pretty goofy applications, even with the annoying timing restrictions that are in place to protect Japanese carriers.

Here’s what we’ve seen so far:

• United wants to fly daily from San Francisco
• American wants to fly daily from JFK and LA
• Delta wants to fly daily from Seattle, Detroit, LA, and Honolulu
• Continental wants to fly daily from Newark and Guam
• Hawaiian wants to fly twice daily from Honolulu

That’s 11 applications for 4 slot pairs. You math majors can figure out that not everyone is going to get what they want. The DOT says that it will decide this way.

Our principal objective in this proceeding will be to maximize the public benefits that will result from introducing U.S.-flag carrier service in the U.S.-Haneda market. In this regard, we will consider which applicant or applicants will most likely offer and maintain service that best meets the needs of the traveling and shipping public.

Now they don’t say it here, but I imagine this is supposed to be the American public and not the general public. With that in mind, Continental can kiss its Guam application goodbye and Hawaiian and Delta can forget about Honolulu. See, those markets are more important for Japanese tourists than anything else. So while the flights would be good for the local economy, they certainly aren’t strong enough candidates to support the American traveling public.

That leaves us with 7 applications for four slots. We’re getting closer. If I were a betting man, I’d say that Delta has the inside track. The other carriers will all be entering into joint ventures with Japanese carriers who will have their own slots to use. Delta is the only one who won’t have that option. As I said, I doubt we’ll see them get the Honolulu option, and to be honest, Seattle may be a tougher sell as well, but LA and Detroit seem quite plausible. After that, they’ll probably spread the wealth around, I’d imagine.

My biggest question is this . . . is anyone going to want to use these flights? Haneda may be closer to Tokyo than Narita, but the flight times (at least the eastbound ones) simply suck. The Japanese are only allowing these slots to be used when Narita is under curfew. So flights on US carriers to and from Haneda can only operate between 10p and 7a. What’s worse? Departures to the continental US can only occur between midnight and 7a. That’s a killer.

Take a look at American’s proposed Haneda schedule to get a good idea of what we’re working with. Flights from LA would leave at 645p and arrive Haneda at 1005p. That’s not that bad – you can get in a full day of work in LA and fly out. But the return? It leaves Haneda at 1205a and will arrive LA at 610p. Nobody wants to take a flight that leaves at midnight when you end up losing a full day on your way to LA anyway. And a 610p arrival will make only a few regional connections available from LA. I’d rather travel a bit further and go to Narita at a normal hour.

The problem is similar for an east coast trip. Flights from JFK would leave at 720p and arrive at 1020p. Not bad if you want to get in a full day of work in New York. But the return? It actually leaves at 7a, the latest possible, with a 650a arrival in New York. That’s certainly better than a midnight departure with an 1150p arrival. At least this schedule allows for connections, but it wastes so much time. You end up having to spend a full night in Tokyo when you probably would rather board a plane and head home.

The saving grace, again, is that only a few flights will be allowed. So I imagine they’ll do ok, but it’s not going to be ideal.