Greg wants to know:

"I heard on the news the airport got a $5 million grant, was that expected and if so or if not what is that going to. If unexpected what will that be put towards?"

The money was expected. It goes towards construction of the new terminal. Read more on the web site of Senator Bond.

Speaking of the new terminal... New aerial photographs arrived yesterday. Click here to see a BIGGER version.

Robert has questions about long lines and responds to the post about the mongrel that doesn't hunt...

"I know security lines have been much longer because of the spring break rush, my question is what features will the new airport have in security to minimize this problem. Do we have the capabilities of a second security line in the new terminal if needed? Also...I know thinking out in the future when the new terminal gets to 30-40 gates will security be through one centralized area or where there be 2-3 security section spread through out the airport. Thanks so much. My 2 cents on the above commentary [ that dog don't hunt ] I love Allegiant and find SGF comparable for some routes, however on some routes SGF is almost 3-4 times the price. I always shop all prices and end up driving somewhere now only 1 out of every 3 times vs. 2 out of 3 just 5 yrs ago. I would love to see Allegiant add more destinations and hope this will happen if gas ever gets back under control. Thanks for listening to my banter and once again thanks for making yourself accessible to the public–it shows us how you really care about letting us get insight into the running of the airport."

Robert...I'm going to be long winded...forgive me.

The length of security lines is dependent upon several factors, including: 1) the layout of the operation; meaning how well does the physical layout of the security operation lend itself to getting people through the line quickly? 2) How big is the crowd of customers? 3) Are there enough security employees on duty to get people through the process in a timely fashion?

In our current terminal we're hamstrung by cramped space–there isn't nearly enough space at either of our "security checkpoints" (that's the official lingo for security lines). It's a problem at many airports. Why? Because terminals built before September 2001 didn't anticipate post 9/11 security requirements. The new terminal is designed to accommodate post 9/11 security. That should speed up the screening process.

You ask about a second check point in the new terminal...

When the new terminal opens it will have ten gates and one check point. The physical layout of the checkpoint is designed to accommodate at least the maximum number of customers that can efficiently use ten gates. In other words, when we out grow ten gates and start adding more, I think it's a good bet we'll add security check points. Make sense?

Thanks for the comments about shopping for fares in an educated and open-minded manner. That's really all we're asking people to do. Bottom line: sometimes it only makes sense to fly from other airports. But please don't assume it always makes sense...

A lot of you reading this blog are business people. You know full well the importance of perception. That is, how people perceive your business. You also know how frustrating it can be. You know how your business works. You know what services you offer—but there’s always that disgruntled customer out there who knows better than you.

I got a proverbial earful from an airport critic a couple of months ago via email. And brothers and sisters let me tell you, his perception is reality. Just ask him.

“I just saw one of your commercials on TV. Everyone of these folks that you are using to talk up your cause is flying on their company’s dime.”

I happen to know that everyone of them also uses the airport on their own dime. I didn’t even bother to rebut.

“We, the citizens of Springfield, are spending millions of dollars on this new airport of yours when you cannot even fill up the present airport.”

I did rebut this one. First of all, we’re not building a new airport; we’re building a new terminal. Secondly, not one cent of Springfield tax money goes to the airport. The airport pays its own way. I could have written several pages about the deficiencies of the current terminal, but figured it wasn’t worth the effort.

There was a lengthy paragraph on fares.

“I was a salesman for over 20 years…I can count on both hands the number of times that I flew out of Springfield. The cost of flying out of here is unreal….”

I attempted to explain that the goal of the commercials was to get more people to use the airport; and the more people use the airport the cheaper fares are. I thought about suggesting that he should base his fare perceptions on current fares, rather than ancient history, but again, it didn’t seem worth the effort. I was right. He came back with this:

“I know your passenger volume has more than doubled, but prices are still higher. That dog won’t hunt!”

Excuse me?! Has this airport ever said that Springfield fares would become equal to Kansas City or St. Louis? No. We’ve only said that prices would go down as passenger volume goes up. And by the way, that dog does hunt…

The proof came the day after the email exchange in the form of the new leakage study. The study concludes that in the past three years we’ve seen an 18 percent improvement in the number of people using the airport—these are people who previously left the market to fly from cheaper airports. This tells me two things: fares are less than they used to be and the vast majority of customers have decided the difference in price isn’t worth the drive to airports in Kansas City, St. Louis or Tulsa.

We need your help. The next time you hear someone tearing down our airport challenge them: do they know that Springfield has a low cost airline in the form of Allegiant Air? Do they know that Allegiant roundtrip fares are sometimes less than $200? Do they know that shopping for tickets ahead of time will sometimes narrow the difference in cost between Springfield and other airports to just $30 or $40? Do they know that bad mouthing the airport serves no purpose other than to perpetuate the myth that Springfield is always higher? Please educate them!

As columnist George Will once said, "You're entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts!"

George wonders:

"Have any airlines added flights or taken away flights to existing destinations? I just made a Delta flight from Atlanta the other morning and was stunned there was only one other flight from ATL. I typically fly American so am used to more flights, but was just curious if there has been any rise/fall in existing service flight amounts?"

Flight schedules are always expanding and contracting. The cycles of expansion and contraction usually follow the peaks and valleys of the travel season. Spring and summer and the busiest times (more flights). The 1st Quarter is the slowest time (fewer flights).

Delta currently has three daily runs to Atlanta and it's been that way for some time. George...I suspect you're used to American's nine daily flights to Dallas!?