Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Not A Daley Solution To The Wright Issue?  
User currently offlineACAfan From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 710 posts, RR: 6
Posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 4235 times:

In the cover of darkness, bulldoze the runway at Dallas Love.

WN will be forced to move to DFW.

Problem solved.












[Please dont flame me. I love DAL, WN, and I despise the AAntichrist and DFW. I present this idea as a solution to the problem. I did not say I liked it.]


Freddie Laker ... May be at peace with his maker ... But he is a persona non grata ... with IATA
51 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 4228 times:

Two reasons come to mind:

Airport generates more than $2 billion annually to the Dallas economy.

Estimated 24,243 jobs attributable to Love Field.


User currently offlineTi717 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 227 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 4190 times:

Also Dallas has little control of DFW( have to play nice with Fort Worth, Useless, Irving) and all the control of Love. I.E. All money at Love goes to City of Dallas, Little money at DFW goes to City of Dallas.

Ti717



Sir, don't you think we should turn on the runway lights?" "No, that's just what there expecting us to do!"
User currently offlineFlyingTexan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 4189 times:

Although Dallas Mayor Laura Miller is questionable at times, I tend to think she doesn’t govern like the Daleys.

 spin 


User currently offlineCkfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5206 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4144 times:

I read that FLL is fighting the FAA on using more than one runway for commercial operations, due to noise concerns. Someone suggested ripping out extra runways. The response was that the FAA must approve any runway closings. Apparently, FAA rules and regs. don't apply in Chicago.

The ironic thing is that King Richard II (his father was King Richard I) said that if he gave notice, then the matter would be tied up in court by lawyers. The man is a lawyer, as well as 2 of his brothers and his late father. He basically took away a lot of billable hours from his brothers and sisters in the legal profession.

He probably would have won in court, but let some friends earn downpayments for summer homes on Lake Michigan.


User currently offlineTravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3494 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4120 times:

The moment that happens WN will pack up and take its headquarters (and all associated jobs) to HOU, LAS, PHX, SAT, or any other place more "friendly" to its operations.

User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13070 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4098 times:

The demilition of the Megis (?) Field on the waterfront near downtown Chicago was in part a response to serious security/terror questions after 9/11 of a small airport so close to the downtown of a major American city. Yes Daley and his friends did it in the wrong way, but one can understand some legitment reasons for the closing of that field.

User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4080 times:

Quoting ACAfan (Thread starter):
In the cover of darkness, bulldoze the runway at Dallas Love.

WN will be forced to move to DFW.

Problem solved.

Because DAL serves an improtant GA role. While I support a closure to Commercial Traffic, the GA traffic trying to migrate to DFW creates capacity problems. As was the intent, DAL was to close only to Commerical Traffic, not close it's doors.


User currently offlineCjpark From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1248 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4070 times:

Quoting Ti717 (Reply 2):
Also Dallas has little control of DFW( have to play nice with Fort Worth, Useless, Irving) and all the control of Love. I.E. All money at Love goes to City of Dallas, Little money at DFW goes to City of Dallas.

Ti717

Actually the City of Dallas owns 60% of DFW.

All revenue generated by the airports through landing fees, rents and concessions must be by law put back into the airports operations. The argument that the City of Dallas gets revenues from DAL is wrong.

Actually what the city needs to do is to raise the Gate Rental Fees and Landing Fees to match DFW. However I think all the city needs to do is close the Fire Station at DAL to make WN move.



"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
User currently offlineBlink182 From Azerbaijan, joined Oct 1999, 5480 posts, RR: 15
Reply 9, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4023 times:

Let's not forget though that Southwest's entire fleet is registered in Dallas...hence Southwest might just be Dallas' biggest tax payer. The city can close down the DAL fire station or raise operating fees, but Southwest has a right to register its fleet somewhere else, thus robbing the city of Dallas from tax dollars that might otherwise be there.

blink



Give me a break, I created this username when I was a kid...
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4014 times:

Quoting Blink182 (Reply 9):
Let's not forget though that Southwest's entire fleet is registered in Dallas...hence Southwest might just be Dallas' biggest tax payer.

The fleet contracts were probably done elsewhere to avoid taxes completely as is often done and the registration is Federal.


User currently offlineFoxBravo From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2996 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3969 times:

Quoting Blink182 (Reply 9):
Let's not forget though that Southwest's entire fleet is registered in Dallas

Eh? As far as I know, Southwest's entire fleet--like every other aircraft on the N register--is registered with the FAA in Oklahoma City...



Common sense is not so common. -Voltaire
User currently offline727EMflyer From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 547 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3930 times:

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 10):
The fleet contracts were probably done elsewhere to avoid taxes completely as is often done and the registration is Federal.

Here are the registered owners of three randomly selected airliners operated by Texas's home town airlines:

N212WN: 73G operated by Southwest Airlines
Southwest Airlines Corporation
PO Box 36611
Dallas TX 75235

N951U: MD-80 operated by American Airlines
Boeing Capital
4060 Lakewood Blvd 6th Floor
Long Beach CA 90808

N24706: 73G operated by Continental Airlines
Wells Fargo Bank Northwest, NA Trustee
299 S Main St # U1228-120
Salt Lake City UT 84111

Granted most airlines lease their fleets these days, and IIRC WN leases some too, but who do you think collects property taxes on these jets? Not Houston, and AA isn't paying Dallas!


User currently offline727EMflyer From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 547 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3926 times:

Oh, yeah, and what Chicago did with Meigs was illegal and the city faces a (token) fine. As aviation enthusiasts we should all look for the expansion of flight and the construction of more airports, NIMBY's be damned!

User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 14, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3912 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR




Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 6):
The demilition of the Megis (?) Field on the waterfront near downtown Chicago was in part a response to serious security/terror questions after 9/11 of a small airport so close to the downtown of a major American city. Yes Daley and his friends did it in the wrong way, but one can understand some legitment reasons for the closing of that field.




Care to explain how the downtown area is safer with the closure of Meigs? Without an operating control tower and protected airspace, one can now fly even closer to the skyscrapers in nontowered airspace, without even talking to ATC.


2H4





Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineCkfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5206 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3904 times:

LTBEWR:

Meigs Field was less a security threat than the threat to aviation safety that Richie has created. By closing Meigs, there is more GA traffic going into MDW. MDW's airspace is already tight, because of the amount of space ORD uses. But putting biz jets and Cessnas in with MD-80s and 757s is not a good combination.

In terms of economics, Meigs was almost walking distance from McCormick Place, Chicago's convention center. A lot of conventioneers, as well as other business people flew in, because Meigs is so close to both McCormick Place and the Loop.

From what I've read, several large corporations decided against moving into the Loop, because Meigs closed. I don't know if they looked into locating near Palwaukee, DuPage, or Aurora, or simply picked other metro areas, but you don't close an airport that can stimulate economic growth.

Richie has been trying to close Meigs and turn it into a park since he became Mayor in 1989, saying that only "rich Republicans" use it. First, the last thing Chicago has needed is more park space in and around the Loop. The City needs to a) fix up the parks that it already has in the neighborhoods and b) add more park space in the neighborhoods.

Apparently, Richie is not an aviation buff.


User currently offlineWorkbench From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3885 times:

Quoting Blink182 (Reply 9):
Let's not forget though that Southwest's entire fleet is registered in Dallas...hence Southwest might just be Dallas' biggest tax payer. The city can close down the DAL fire station or raise operating fees, but Southwest has a right to register its fleet somewhere else, thus robbing the city of Dallas from tax dollars that might otherwise be there.

How much tax revenue does the city get. I thought aircraft regs were federal and it cost about $12.00 to register a airplane.


User currently offlineFoxBravo From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2996 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3878 times:

Quoting 727EMflyer (Reply 12):
Here are the registered owners of three randomly selected airliners operated by Texas's home town airlines:

These are not really good examples, since only one of the aircraft is actually owned by the airline in question. These addresses do not mean that the aircraft are registered to a specific address for tax reasons. Property taxes are not a consideration when it comes to the registration of commercial aircraft--they're simply not an issue. Registration is a federal matter, and the address on record is the address of whoever happens to own the plane. If you look up an aircraft that is registered in the name of American, I think you will find that the address is in fact in Texas.

Let's go through them one by one:

N212WN: 73G operated by Southwest Airlines
Southwest Airlines Corporation
PO Box 36611
Dallas TX 75235


Ok, this one is easy--this aircraft is owned by WN, and WN is based in Dallas, hence the Dallas contact information.

N951U: MD-80 operated by American Airlines
Boeing Capital
4060 Lakewood Blvd 6th Floor
Long Beach CA 90808


This aircraft, however, is not owned by AA at all, but appears to be owned by and leased from Boeing Capital in Long Beach.

N24706: 73G operated by Continental Airlines
Wells Fargo Bank Northwest, NA Trustee
299 S Main St # U1228-120
Salt Lake City UT 84111


This aircraft is not owned by CO, but by what we call an "owner trust". For a variety of reasons, title is held by a trust (usually in Delaware or Utah, as in this case, and quite frequently with Wells Fargo as trustee) instead of an individual. It could be because the beneficial owner is a foreign entity (only "U.S. citizens" can register aircraft with the FAA), or because the aircraft is subject to some sort of financing arrangement.

So, to be fair, let's try another aircraft that IS owned by American Airlines. Here are the results for N221AA, another MD-80:

Registered Owner

Name AMERICAN AIRLINES INC
Street 4333 AMON CARTER BLVD # MD5569
City FORT WORTH State TEXAS Zip Code 76155-2672
County TARRANT
Country UNITED STATES

So, you can see, the address on record with the FAA is really just the mailing address of the owner of the plane, not some sort of devious plan to avoid paying property taxes in Texas.

[Edited 2005-07-20 02:26:54]


Common sense is not so common. -Voltaire
User currently offlineSPREE34 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 2244 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3871 times:

LTBEWR...."The demilition of the Megis (?) Field on the waterfront near downtown Chicago was in part a response to serious security/terror questions after 9/11 of a small airport so close to the downtown of a major American city. Yes Daley and his friends did it in the wrong way, but one can understand some legitment reasons for the closing of that field."

Complete and total Bullshit. There are/were no legitimate reasons for this.



I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
User currently offlineCjpark From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1248 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3852 times:

Let's not forget though that Southwest's entire fleet is registered in Dallas...hence Southwest might just be Dallas' biggest tax payer. The city can close down the DAL fire station or raise operating fees, but Southwest has a right to register its fleet somewhere else, thus robbing the city of Dallas from tax dollars that might otherwise be there.

blink

Blink,
WN has a fleet worth over a Billion dollars. They list in the year end report 15Mil in taxes to the city of Dallas. Just based on a billion dollars in fleet supposedly taxed in Dallas is what? Just rest assured that I wished my property taxes could be so low.

Let WN go we can fill the spot with a good responsible corporate citizen.



"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
User currently offlineTexan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4275 posts, RR: 52
Reply 20, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3826 times:

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 19):
Let WN go we can fill the spot with a good responsible corporate citizen.

Just a bit of clarification...by "fill the spot with a good responsible corporate citizen," are you talking about closing DAL and having other businesses relocate to DAL land?

Texan



"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
User currently offlineFoxBravo From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2996 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3821 times:

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 19):
WN has a fleet worth over a Billion dollars. They list in the year end report 15Mil in taxes to the city of Dallas.

Good point, and I would add that (a) WN's fleet is worth a lot more than a billion dollars (as a conservative guess, I'd say at least 5 billion), and (b) these taxes are probably attributable mainly to real estate, i.e., WN's corporate headquarters.



Common sense is not so common. -Voltaire
User currently offlineSLUAviator From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 357 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3812 times:

LTBEWR, as we saw in Tampa, a Cessna will NOT hurt a skyscraper. Hell, the Citations and King Air's that also used Meigs would probably not hurt a skyscraper either.

The reality of it is MDW and ORD are not really that far from downtown Chicago. One could easily take off from either airport and be over downtown before anyone has time to react. We are talking about 15 miles from ORD and around 10 for MDW. Mere minutes at any airplane speed. And don't tell me that being in controlled airspace makes a difference, if you are out to start trouble you don't care if you are in controlled airspace or not.

Anyone who believes the crap about Meigs detracts from a safer downtown area is a model for ignorance.

On that tragic night mayor Daley and any other Daley lost my vote.



What do I know? I just fly 'em.......
User currently offlinePlanespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3526 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3809 times:

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 6):
The demilition of the Megis (?) Field on the waterfront near downtown Chicago was in part a response to serious security/terror questions after 9/11 of a small airport so close to the downtown of a major American city. Yes Daley and his friends did it in the wrong way, but one can understand some legitment reasons for the closing of that field.

no offense dude, but the security threat posed by the location of Meigs field was about as serious as a can of silly string at a high school football game. There was absolutely no good reason to do what he did. Normally I am pretty Daley-neutral, but this went beyond the normal political corruption that chicagoans are accustomed to and have come to expect from the family dynasty that has run their city for the past 50 odd years. But it did prompt the federal goverment and the FAA to put in resrictions on the type of blackbook operation that happened at meigs, and any city that tries to repeat that feat will be subjected to millions of dollars in fines.



Do you like movies about gladiators?
User currently offlineNonrevman From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1297 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3808 times:

A closure of Love Field would be a disaster to the entire metroplex, not just Dallas and those who use Love Field. American at least has some competition on interstate and adjacent state routes thanks to WN. Without WN, American has an even tighter monopoly, and fares out of here will be worse than they already are. If Love Field closes, you can bet your life that WN will move its corporate headquarters, costing the area thousands of jobs. With layoffs by all of the other carriers, the hub closure by DL, and all of the other firms laying off, do we really need this?

As a side note, I am going to become a teacher thanks to an alternative certification program. Many teacher candidates are not getting jobs this year because now the supply of teachers is greater than demand in many areas, unless you want to teach in the Bumblebee ISD 70 miles from here. They attribute the change to many laid off people trying to teach. Anyway, we really do not need another major corporation and taxpayer pulling out of here.

I do not think WN would simply pack up and move to DFW. This is not the type of airport they want to serve. At best, they might offer a limited number of flights. If they did that, those flights would be PACKED with low fare seekers and those who remain loyal to WN. Yet, I do not think they will ever have a sizeable, if any operation at DFW.


25 Boeing7E7 : Got my vote. I'm all for LAX, SAN, ORD and SFO taking out a neighborhood or two. And the address of the lien/lease holder doesn't mean the paperwork
26 Dadoftyler : CJ, puh-LEASE. A better corporate citizen like, who? Your beloved AA? How long did you spend polishing your AA employee (or your AAdvantage card if n
27 FoxBravo : As someone who deals with this sort of paperwork every day, I can't say I've heard of this. We do try to close deals while the aircraft is in a tax-f
28 Boeing7E7 : That must be why we signed 328Jet deals in Singapore when I worked for Dornier. The "example" I gave is no different than the one you just gave of fl
29 Cjpark : Dadoftyler, I am not employed by DFW or AA or any other airline. Are you? WN leaves another company will come in. Dallas makes squat off of the airpor
30 Dadoftyler : CJ, Um...no, sorry. The convention business in Dallas used to be huge--we used to be the #2 market in the country--and that's suffered big-time due in
31 Texan : What kind of company? Another airline or FBO? There are 7 FBOs already on the field and no other airline would really want to take it's place. Moreov
32 Cjpark : DadofTyler and Texan, Do us all a favor and look around the Metroplex and tell us how many people are employed by aviation as compared to say the Tele
33 Apodino : Well Guess What. If You get your way there will be more corporate jets and stuff like that which will keep your noise levels high. If there is more c
34 Cjpark : So tell me Apodino what do you have to gain from the repeal of the WA?
35 Post contains images LMP737 : Actai Actually a Daley solution would be to have jobs at LUV given to your political supporters. Contracts given out not by lowest bidder but by a rig
36 Apodino : Me personally, absolutely nothing. Thats not the point. If you have read my posts on this topic in the various forums, I have said my opposition to t
37 MAH4546 : After all the hoopla, all they've done lately is end service to Fort Lauderdale and Tampa. They have never said that. Establishing a new hub is the l
38 N1120A : Not in any way, shape or form. Based on the size of aircraft Meigs could take in, there was absolutely no security threat. Also, if you worry about a
39 C680 : Who do you work for? TSA? Secret Service? Fox News? Seriously, Meigs was all about politics, and nothing about aviation (or security) If you apply yo
40 DfwRevolution : >> A distant neighbor, at that. See post in another thread....Inwood and Royal is a huge stretch to complain about Southwest's noise. CJpark, is it t
41 SCCutler : Aircraft and other assets used for business purposes are taxed as Business Personal Property (BPP), and Southwest's aircraft are all sited in Dallas
42 Cjpark : Good Catch! So you actually do live in the Dallas area. The comment about Inwood and Royal was meant to check if any of you knew the City. We actuall
43 Post contains links OPNLguy : Using the above general information, I used my MS mapping program to approximate your location. I picked a point halfway between Royal and Walnut Hil
44 Cjpark : OPNL Good attempt at trying to localize the air traffic over Dallas. WN's planes are all over the sky of the Metroplex. When we used to live at the Vi
45 Post contains images OPNLguy : Good attempt to evade the question... Let's leave Dallas as a whole out of it, and just have you answer the question as it pertains just to your resi
46 Cjpark : OPNL Is the WA fight about low fares or is it about competition between airports? Besides I answered your question. And that was a pretty good attempt
47 OPNLguy : Not competely... You said GA noise wasn't bad (except for the 20-year old Lear or Citation). How about the 737s on the 13L centerline 2.3 miles perpe
48 Cjpark : Anytime an aircraft flys over or even near your house you will hear it. If you go back and read my previous posts you will see that my concern for noi
49 OPNLguy : Over, yes. Near, maybe, depending upon where you are relative to its flight path. In a "sideline" location such as yours, 2.3 miles perpendicular to
50 Cjpark : Maybe you should turn up your hearing aid.
51 Apodino : Assuming, that they move at all. For all we know no one might move. They may all be comfortable at DFW. And I think most of the airlines are tied to
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Not Many BA To S. America posted Thu Nov 23 2006 14:29:14 by Amirs
Why WN Will Fight To The Death At DAL posted Tue Apr 25 2006 01:53:48 by Iluv2pilot
Q 400 And ATR 72 Why Not More Orders In The US? posted Sat Apr 22 2006 22:15:15 by Cumulonimbus
Possible Solution To The Fuel Crisis? posted Mon Mar 7 2005 02:03:44 by Kbuf737
Why Not More Service To MYR? posted Thu May 20 2004 04:25:02 by Dixiedelta
Why Doesn't UA Fly To The Mexican Resort Areas? posted Mon Jan 12 2004 23:55:55 by ElectraBob
Why Not Design Planes To Fly Higher? posted Fri Dec 5 2003 14:44:03 by Pkone
Why Not Asian Airlines To Helsinki? posted Thu Nov 6 2003 18:38:23 by FinnWings
Why No Russian Planes To The US? posted Fri Sep 26 2003 03:33:31 by Wedgetail737
Why No Direct Service To The Mid-East From DTW posted Fri Dec 28 2001 23:06:13 by Thomasphoto60
Why Not Many BA To S. America posted Thu Nov 23 2006 14:29:14 by Amirs
Why WN Will Fight To The Death At DAL posted Tue Apr 25 2006 01:53:48 by Iluv2pilot
Q 400 And ATR 72 Why Not More Orders In The US? posted Sat Apr 22 2006 22:15:15 by Cumulonimbus
Possible Solution To The Fuel Crisis? posted Mon Mar 7 2005 02:03:44 by Kbuf737
Why Not More Service To MYR? posted Thu May 20 2004 04:25:02 by Dixiedelta
Why Doesn't UA Fly To The Mexican Resort Areas? posted Mon Jan 12 2004 23:55:55 by ElectraBob
Why Not Design Planes To Fly Higher? posted Fri Dec 5 2003 14:44:03 by Pkone
Why Not Asian Airlines To Helsinki? posted Thu Nov 6 2003 18:38:23 by FinnWings