Omaha Eppley Airfield - DISCUSSION

[Renovator2559]

The DSM terminal will eventually reach the size of the current OMA terminal by 2046.

Meanwhile OMA is to expand ~72%.

Whenever I have picked up family members at DSM, DSM feels like a regional airport, it doesn't feel like a big city airport and DSM tucked in a typical suburb with low density homes makes it seam regional class.

[CBJason]

Whenever I have picked up family members at DSM, DSM feels like a regional airport, it doesn't feel like a big city airport and DSM tucked in a typical suburb with low density homes makes it seam regional class.

What? DSM is in city limits. If you take the respective airports and pick a roughly central point downtown, DSM is approximately 1-1.5 miles (2-3 minutes) more of a distance than OMA. Just because homes are nearby doesn’t mean it’s suburban.

[Bob from Omaha]

Both airports are well-located. Both are close to downtown. Both are near freeways. Both are building new terminals and both are growing nicely. The only problem with DSM is the current terminal which was originally built in 1948. That will dramatically change in a couple of years.

[Renovator2559]

What? DSM is in city limits. If you take the respective airports and pick a roughly central point downtown, DSM is approximately 1-1.5 miles (2-3 minutes) more of a distance than OMA. Just because homes are nearby doesn’t mean it’s suburban.

To clarify, my comment about DSM feeling "regional" or suburban isn’t about its technical location within city limits, point taken,
it’s definitely in Des Moines proper. I’m talking about the vibe and surroundings. The low-density residential areas around DSM, with single-family homes and quieter streets, give it a suburban feel compared to the more urban energy around larger airports like OMA. It’s like Elkhorn, technically in Omaha’s city limits but feels like a suburb. It's all about the experience of driving in and out of DSM International Airport.



DSM is just around the corner of this intersection to the left where the compact tree-lined lagoon is, across the street on the other side of Fleur Drive DSM is flanked by stripmalls.



Street View of intersection.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/yA88a4BCq9CKmAaB6

Both airports are well-located. Both are close to downtown. Both are near freeways. Both are building new terminals and both are growing nicely. The only problem with DSM is the current terminal which was originally built in 1948. That will dramatically change in a couple of years.

On the terminal size, Bob from Omaha, you’re right that DSM’s new 265,000 sq ft terminal is smaller than OMA’s planned 650,000 sq ft. DSM’s long-term plan does aim for growth to match OMA’s current size by 2046, which shows they’re planning for future demand. OMA’s 72% expansion is ambitious and reflects its role as a bigger regional hub. Both airports are sizing up based on their studies, but DSM’s current scale and setting do make it feel more like a regional airport than a major metro one, even if it’s technically urban.

Here is a picture I took of the DSM International Airport terminal recently. DSM upgrades are mostly wrapping up and as we know, it will be completed sooner than Eppley Airfield.

[Bob from Omaha]

I'm not sure anyone flying gives a second thought about the strip malls near DSM. A lot of airports are near industrial sites or whatever. What does that have to do with the actual airport? I'm not sure what the point even is. DSM is growing fast.

I guess you and I will agree to disagree.

[CBJason]

Correct, airports are where they are because that was chosen location long ago. Can’t argue with whatever “feelings” he gets though. However, his use of the terms ‘regional’ and ‘hub’ are totally out of place. Just odd rambling.

[Renovator2559]

My point about DSM’s suburban vibe isn’t about its city limits status, it’s the feel driving through. Fleur Drive’s strip malls and stroads (check my street view link) and the low-density neighborhoods scream suburb, like Elkhorn in Omaha. My recent DSM terminal pic shows its smaller, regional scale, even with upgrades. Not knocking DSM’s growth, just noting its setting feels more of a regional airport.

[skinzfan23]

I totally get what you mean. The view and short distance driving down Abbott into downtown does seem a lot more impressive. Although Des Moines, as everyone mentioned has been doing well for airport numbers.

A lot of areas around airports look weird though mostly due to height restrictions and all the industrial buildings. Recently drove around Ohare in Chicago and it hasn’t changed much on the west side of the airport in 30 years.

[Bob from Omaha]

KCI & Den are out in the middle of nowhere. Is that good or bad?

[zedmib]

KCI and DEN were designed to replace obsolete and space constrained airports. Stapleton in Denver was demolished and redeveloped. KC municipal is still active, primarily for corporate and private traffic.
PROS:
1. Space to grow. Both are huge and can still add runways and terminals. OMA has limited physical growth. Can extend runways but no new ones. DSM could add a runway.
2. 24 hour operation. Being away from residential neighborhoods allow more distant airports to operate at full capacity all day with minimal noise complaints. OMA limits overnight operations due to noise issues over Council Bluffs.
CONS:
1. Transportation. It's a Long drive to DEN. They do now have a metro link to downtown. KCI does not.
2. Convenience. OMA and DSM have great proximity to their users. Business takes this into account. I think this is why KC downtown airport stayed open.

[Bob from Omaha]

I saw that OMA got $7 million for the International program...build out & operations. The paywall at owh stopped my while I was reading. I didn't see if it was for bribing an airline.

[Mr.Nuke]

I saw that OMA got $7 million for the International program...build out & operations. The paywall at owh stopped my while I was reading. I didn't see if it was for bribing an airline.

Federal grant for construction of the FIS itself. No bribe. Another very good sign it will be staffed though after the ~2007 debacle.
----

After the first international flights are potentially added, Bacon said he would like to add more international flights to destinations beyond the tropical regions. He mentioned Canada as an aspiration.
“We used to have direct flights to Canada. I hope we can get those reinstated,” Bacon said.

From said article, Also another sign of bragging without understanding. The #1 destination in Canada from Omaha is Toronto. As Bacon noted it was previously served. Toronto didn't and still doesn't require a FIS due to pre-clearance in Toronto.

[joleo]

I saw that OMA got $7 million for the International program...build out & operations. The paywall at owh stopped my while I was reading. I didn't see if it was for bribing an airline.

Federal grant for construction of the FIS itself. No bribe. Another very good sign it will be staffed though after the ~2007 debacle.
----

After the first international flights are potentially added, Bacon said he would like to add more international flights to destinations beyond the tropical regions. He mentioned Canada as an aspiration.
“We used to have direct flights to Canada. I hope we can get those reinstated,” Bacon said.

From said article, Also another sign of bragging without understanding. The #1 destination in Canada from Omaha is Toronto. As Bacon noted it was previously served. Toronto didn't and still doesn't require a FIS due to pre-clearance in Toronto.

The issue with the Canada flight is United didn't put a codeshare flight number on it like they have on the rest of their Toronto-United States flights. Which meant you couldn't fly united one-way to europe and Air Canda back or vice versa. Because of the long flight time from Omaha to Toronto, it was very difficult to connect both ways to Europe so it is a huge advantage take United one of the ways. If you just purchase two one-way tickets that wasn't priced well. You could only take advantage of this if you were on frequent flier miles. I think Omaha-Toronto would work but it's a must to have the United code placed onto the flights for it to work with only one flight a day.

[Bob from Omaha]

OKC will have AA Saturday only flights to Cancun this winter.

[Mr.Nuke]

The issue with the Canada flight is United didn't put a codeshare flight number on it like they have on the rest of their Toronto-United States flights.

I don't think that was the issue...

Which meant you couldn't fly united one-way to europe and Air Canda back or vice versa. Because of the long flight time from Omaha to Toronto, it was very difficult to connect both ways to Europe so it is a huge advantage take United one of the ways.

It was basically impossible which unless there were two flights and there were on a couple of routes like LHR. That should also be a pretty good sign Air Canada wasn't really interested in connecting passengers to Europe or even a lot of Canadian destinations for that matter. The outbound flight may have hit a late domestic Canadian bank of flights I don't remember, but in general if you are flying to a Hub at 8 at night options are probably limited i.e. United's last flight to Omaha right now leaves at 8:05. Someone arriving at ORD 7:40 or 7:50 whatever the AC arrival at YYZ was wouldn't make that connection.

I'm not sure why there was never a codeshare, but I'm also not sure United would've wanted there to be one on the route either... From a consumer standpoint I'm also not convinced it would've been necessarily attractive price wise either. I'm not sure the exact rules of Air Canada and United's code share arrangement at the time*, but often codeshares are limited to certain fare buckets, a certain percentage of seats, etc that can screw around with the pricing when you add a segment on another airline.

I also really think you are overplaying the European connection angle. For starters it isn't like it is that difficult to connect to Europe from Omaha right now, particularly on the popular destinations. Plus, the other airlines that Air Canada would've effectively been competing against are throwing hundreds more seats at the connecting point than Air Canada would've been on one 50 seat flight per day.

Additionally, this isn't that big of a market. Omaha's European PDEW in my best educated guess is about 130 to 140 based on some data from other airports that I've seen**. With Air Canada's share of the airport traffic while they were flying to Eppley, that comes to about 3 "extra" passengers per day. Loads were so bad for multiple months that a few passengers potentially connecting to Europe or maybe a few additional passengers being able to book the flight on a code share weren't going to save it.

I think Omaha-Toronto would work

The airline operating the flight got dropped by Air Canada and filed bankruptcy. Air Canada served KC sporadically since Covid. I believe it went seasonal for a while. However, they didn't serve Kansas City at all this year. They've yet to say if they're going to next summer. If they're not flying to Kansas City they aren't doing Omaha.

* This has changed a bit since the route was flown as they announced a U.S. Canada JV in 2022 so it would be potentially less of an issue now. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... 91571.html
**I can walk through this number too if anyone is interested.

[Mr.Nuke]

Spirit is hanging on by a thread. Jet Blue as well. Frontier is adding a lot of new routes but just one in OMA. We'll see how that works out. Allegiant is doing some growth. Breeze is questionable in OMA but who knows? I still can't figure out Avelo.
That basically leaves Southwest. The big unknown. Should be an interesting rest of 2025 & 2026.

Breeze won't touch OMA as long as LNK is subsidizing them there. Avelo is in fairly bad shape financially as well...

Below is possible list in OMA (personal list)
United: IAD and/or EWR. Needed for east coast connection and Europe connections.

They clearly feel they don't. They're also getting a ton of planes over the next several years so maybe that changes, but...

Breeze: Several options, CHS, TPA, RDU would be the 3 highest as they are big in all 3 cities

CHS and RDU are consistently in the 20's PDEW wise. TPA would warrant an immediate response from SW if it went remotely well and again I don't think they'll have any interest in Eppley when they're getting paid millions to fly 50 miles away.

Southwest: Lots of options, they are in order; BWI, SAN switching to daily, LAX, AUS going daily(would rather see Delta), MKE are the highest.

MKE is another market with hardly any demand...

Allegiant is limited unless they turn Omaha into a base like they did DSM. Then OMA would gain 10 more cities on Allegiant really fast...think their route map from DSM which is 22 cities nonstop! That would be amazing as Allegiant is cheap and very well traveled and liked from DSM.
I could see them adding FLL without having to have a base in OMA but Southwest added it a few saturdays to head them off, so far it is working unfortunately.

And again Southwest would presumably head off any viable route these guys added too.

If OMA did incentives like most other airports do now, they would have a ton more service and possibly an Allegiant base! They should model what DSM does on that. It is good for the long run. Don't model what LNK does, that is excessive and no need to do that!

Like others said the airport seems to be doing fine without it...

-------
Eppley is likely to become very unattractive for the ULCCs of the world i.e. Avelo, Breeze, Allegiant, and Frontier in the near term. By Eppley's own admission cost per enplaned passengers is going to go up significantly over the next several years to start paying off of the terminal work. Typically those airlines aren't keen on flying out of more expensive airports to operate at.

[joleo]

One thing about OMA's expansion. The rental building. While there are some other airports that have similar car rental areas in/next to the terminal like OMA, most still force you to take a shuttle to a remote building. KC's remote building has its entrance in the basement. DSM is building a new remote building but you'll need to take a shuttle. The new or relatively new one at OMA is walkable. For me anyway this is a great idea. Not dealing with the weather, not waiting for a shuttle, that's a great idea. If I'm in a hurry to get to my rental I'd rather not deal with a shuttle.

I hate airports that make you shuttle to a rental facility. It is an awful design. I want something quick, many of my trips are short and some of my business trips are out and back in the same day and I don't have time to go take a shuttle to a rental facility many times.

TPA used to be in the airport and it was great, now you have to take a train to it which isn't terrible. Other airports like Sea-Tac and Vegas have terribly long bus rights to the rental facility!

OMA definitely did this right!! I live in DSM and didn't realize we are moving our facility! Glad I never have to rent here! Right now, DSM is perfect because you can rent your car while waiting for your bag, then grab your bag when it comes 15 minutes later and on your way! This is the best design out of all airports and used to be able to do this at Eppley as well but at least you don't have to take the dreaded bus!

[BuildTaller]

I hate airports that make you shuttle to a rental facility. It is an awful design. I want something quick, many of my trips are short and some of my business trips are out and back in the same day and I don't have time to go take a shuttle to a rental facility many times.

How about PHX with their Sky Train?

[Mr.Nuke]

I hate airports that make you shuttle to a rental facility. It is an awful design. I want something quick, many of my trips are short and some of my business trips are out and back in the same day and I don't have time to go take a shuttle to a rental facility many times.

I get it from a space stand point i.e. it takes up space close to the terminal, but I totally agree the last thing I want to do when I get to my destination is ride a shuttle bus to some remote parking lot. That is where Eppley was really smart to incorporate it into the new parking garage.

[joleo]

I hate airports that make you shuttle to a rental facility. It is an awful design. I want something quick, many of my trips are short and some of my business trips are out and back in the same day and I don't have time to go take a shuttle to a rental facility many times.

How about PHX with their Sky Train?

Mods, feel free to move this to the discussion thread.

Skytrain like PHX or TPA are fine as long as I'm not checking bags. If I check bags, I want to get my car while waiting for bags to come out. I will say bags come out fast at many airport and often arrive at bag claim before I get there! Recent examples with this in past year are Dublin, Tampa and Denver. Des Moines, my home airport is terrible, takes a solid 15 minutes for bags to come after getting off the plane, I've sat and watch the bag handlers, they are not quick! I can't speak to Eppley, I haven't checked a bag through Eppley in a long time. I fly mostly United as a FYI as I know this varies by airline for example Southwest is slow in Denver while United is super quick!

[Bob from Omaha]

KC posted July numbers. They are also not having a great year.

When Southwest basically has 50% market share at your airport and they are way down for the year it isn't too surprising.

Yeah, but what happens many times is that the other majors see increases, as can be seen in the above airports.

[Uffda]

TPA used to be in the airport and it was great, now you have to take a train to it which isn't terrible. Other airports like Sea-Tac and Vegas have terribly long bus rights to the rental facility!

Yes TPA previously use to be very convenient- grab your check bag, exit and walk across street to car rental places.

It is ok now but very convoluted. Once in main terminal you go down a long escalator (ground level) to get your checked bag, then go up an even longer escalator (4th floor) to get to the tram station. Ride the tram to Economy garage, then take an elevator down from 4th to ground level where you then walk a couple hundred feet to get into another elevator to go to the floor your car is on. It’s too bad they didn’t figure out a way to go from tram station 4th straight to garage

[jjjjhskr]

News out of Tulsa

[Mr.Nuke]

August +2.6%, down 1.7% YTD
https://www.flyoma.com/wp-content/uploa ... istics.pdf

[Bob from Omaha]

News out of Tulsa

I think it's the side building I marked with an arrow. It 's kind of like Milwaukee but MLW's intl arrivals building is really separate, with it's own parking lot.

TUL:



MLW

[Bob from Omaha]

August +2.6%, down 1.7% YTD
https://www.flyoma.com/wp-content/uploa ... istics.pdf

It's iffy but OMA might finish slightly ahead of last year. It would be a stretch but IF OMA managed a 2.5% increase you'd be looking at 5,409,259. It would have to kick a s s these last four months to do it.

[Mr.Nuke]

August +2.6%, down 1.7% YTD
https://www.flyoma.com/wp-content/uploa ... istics.pdf

It's iffy but OMA might finish slightly ahead of last year. It would be a stretch but IF OMA managed a 2.5% increase you'd be looking at 5,409,259. It would have to kick a s s these last four months to do it.

I'm assuming the 2.5% increase is referring to 5.4 million for 2026, right? Or are you saying a 2.5% increase over last year to get to 5.4 million this year? Either way, especially with the last 3 months historically being Eppley's weakest, to get to 5.4 million for THIS year it would be roughly an 11% increase over the last four months and that isn't happening,

With that said, I think it is very possible for Eppley to finish ahead of last year despite still being down through August. That would require roughly 3.5% growth over the last 4 months from last year. We know from TitosBuritoBarn's post on the last page that seats for the last three months are going to be up about 5% over last year. That seems achievable.

[Bob from Omaha]

I hadn't looked before. Carrier Air Ops were up 12.2% in August and 7% for the year. I don't know seat counts but interesting.

[jjjjhskr]

With Allegiant exiting LAX should we be expecting them to add a flight to BUR? (Burbank)

[Mr.Nuke]

With Allegiant exiting LAX should we be expecting them to add a flight to BUR? (Burbank)

Not sure, but I don't see any reason to expect it either. They shifted a minimal number of destinations over to Burbank. They also cited the high cost per enplanement for pulling out of LAX. Eppley's CPE is going to skyrocket here very shortly too that if anything I think Allegiant and Frontier or more likely to pull out completely (not saying that happens, again just more likely--->) than add new destinations.

[Bob from Omaha]

CPE is negotiated between the OAA & the airline on an individual basis, in most cases. LAX is one thing, OMA is another.

Not saying OMA would bribe Allegiant or Frontier but it could happen.

[Garrett]

Low Cost airlines are largely on a pretty firm down swing these days anyway from what I've read.

[Brad]

Low Cost airlines are largely on a pretty firm down swing these days anyway from what I've read.

There’s nothing low cost right now… flights have been expensive lately.

[Mr.Nuke]

CPE is negotiated between the OAA & the airline on an individual basis, in most cases. LAX is one thing, OMA is another.

Not saying OMA would bribe Allegiant or Frontier but it could happen.

On some level it is via gate rentals/landing fees, etc., but CPE reported by the airport and forecast going forward by the airport is on a cumulative basis. Per Eppley's own bond filings CPE is going up significantly to pay off the terminal. Eppley theoretically has zero incentive to cut corners for Allegiant or Frontier when they represent 5.2% of the airports traffic either. I'm not saying that I think either pull out either, I'm just saying I'm doubting either are happy that Eppley's CPE is going up and it is more likely that the contract rather than expand here near term.

Low Cost airlines are largely on a pretty firm down swing these days anyway from what I've read.

Several are in big trouble.

[Mr.Nuke]

There’s nothing low cost right now… flights have been expensive lately.

There is certainly some truth (a lot of truth) to that, but some of these low cost or ultra low cost airlines on a relatively comparison basis, are uber sensitive to operating out of higher cost airports. It is kind of odd to me that Allegiant was flying to LAX to begin with given this. The traditional Ultra low cost carrier model, and they employ it well is to fly into secondary airports i.e. why they're going to Burbank now instead of LAX or Sanford instead of Orlando or Mesa instead of PHX, etc.

[Bob from Omaha]

Allegiant and Frontier are profitable. Spirit and Jetblue are the ones who are under water.

FYI, while Allegiant does mainly fly to smaller or secondary airports, they also fly to Boston, Newark and Denver.

As for cost, that depends on where you fly from.

[BuildTaller]

The traditional Ultra low cost carrier model, and they employ it well is to fly into secondary airports i.e. why they're going to Burbank now instead of LAX or Sanford instead of Orlando or Mesa instead of PHX, etc.

FYI, while Allegiant does mainly fly to smaller or secondary airports, they also fly to Boston, Newark and Denver.

Just to point out, Allegiant is flying FROM Mesa, TO Omaha. We are the "smaller" secondary airport in that situation.

[Mr.Nuke]

Just to point out, Allegiant is flying FROM Mesa, TO Omaha. We are the "smaller" secondary airport in that situation.

That isn't what a secondary airport means... Mesa is a "secondary" airport for the Phoenix metro area Said airport had 1,886,055 passengers last year. By your own definition, there Mesa is the secondary airport because Eppley had 5,277,326 passengers last year. Beyond that, again though, PHX had 52,325,266. Hence, Mesa is a secondary airport for the Phoenix metro.

Secondary airports are exactly this. A second airport in a metro area that has a larger airport. It is cheaper to operate out of there and they are likely getting subsidies to do so. This is a perfect example of a typical airport a LCC or especially ULLC will operate out of. The only other conceivable definition of a secondary airport (and it isn't) would be that more people are flying to the airport instead of the other airport and for Mesa in the winter there is no way that is happening on their end versus Omaha either...

Like Bob said there are some exceptions, but generally the ULCC model is to fly into a "secondary" airport like Mesa instead of PHX or Punta Gorda instead of Tampa or Sanford instead of Orlando, these are all Allegiant examples. The fact that Omaha is smaller than the Phoenix metro doesn't make Omaha the "secondary" airport.

[Mr.Nuke]

Allegiant and Frontier are profitable. Spirit and Jetblue are the ones who are under water.

Allegiant wasn't last year, nor where they in the latest quarter. Frontier isn't a major player here or nationally, and despite turning a profit I don't know that they're in "great" shape. Spirit, Jetblue, and Avelo are all under financial stress which should paint a broader picture for the ULCC market right now.

FYI, while Allegiant does mainly fly to smaller or secondary airports, they also fly to Boston, Newark and Denver.

And I never said they didn't. Those airports are clearly contrary to their main business model though. They are obviously were flying to LAX from here, but now they're citing LAX's CPE as a reason of pulling out of there completely for a secondary airport in the market. I'm merely saying Eppley's CPE is going to skyrocket here shortly too. It isn't going to be a favorable environment for the ULCC's. And in general out of Eppley they're flying to secondary airports. DEN in particular isn't that expensive of an airport to fly out of CPE wise either.

[Garrett]

I’m surprised JetBlue is considered to be in the “low cost” airline category considering just how nice all of the flights I’ve ever taken with them have been. Nice seats, built in personal entertainment pads, as many free snacks and drinks as you want. That’s the polar opposite of a Spirit flight to me, and even better service than I usually get on the big mainline carriers