Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Politicians/Community Haggling Over DCA Perimeter  
User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2757 posts, RR: 1
Posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4172 times:

Another round of here we go again?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn.../AR2010070605250.html?hpid=topnews

As per the Washington Post article, a carefully crafted “$34 billion aviation bill [that] would upgrade the country's air traffic control system, fund capital improvements and enhance pilot training…” is being disrupted by some western representatives who want nonstop service to DCA from their outside-of-parameter locales.

Furious Virginia senators [Mark Warner (D) and James Webb (D)], joined by the regional airports authority and local civic groups, said they had been blindsided by backdoor deals that would unravel a delicately crafted agreement to restrict air travel from National, just four miles from Capitol Hill.

"I'm horrified," said Leo Schefer, president of the Washington Airports Task Force, a nonprofit group that has fought to limit National's capacity. "It's a bunch of Western senators meddling with our local community. How would they feel if we started meddling with their community?"


But Senators Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), Dorgan (D-N.D.) and Hutchison (R-Tex.), McCain (R-Ariz.) and Boxer (D-Calif.) are advocating fairness for all in the U.S. to have nonstop flights to DCA.

Also threatened in this bill are the rights for FedEx workers to unionize, and raising passenger facility charges from the current $4.50 to $7.00.

Exemptions granted since 2000 allow 12 round-trip flights a day beyond the 1,250-mile limit. They are:

DEN 1473 mi
F9 3 X 320
UA 1 X 752

SLC 1848 mi
DL 1 X 757

PHX 1976mi
US 1 X 752 and 2 X 320

LAS 2086 mi
US 1 X 319

LAX 2308 mi
AS 1 X 73H

SEA 2325 mi
AS 2 X 73H

The most obvious hole in DCA’s nonstop routes is the lack of a nonstop to SFO. Maybe once Senator Boxer gets that, this bill will sail on to smooth passage?

39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25138 posts, RR: 46
Reply 1, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4150 times:

Its the annual DCA perimeter rule tussle.

Western states want the restriction lifted or relaxed, while the Eastboard want to keep it.

Nothing new   



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2078 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4078 times:

Lifting the restriction doesn't add slots or cause more traffic, it just allows the airlines that operate there more freedom within their network. You will see fewer RJs and more people will be able to fly directly into the city without creating congestion. There is no sensible reason to oppose it. Therefore, it will not pass again this year.

User currently offlineSANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 5411 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4065 times:

Yawn. Please let me know when anything actually passes on any of the various bills involving the DCA perimeter issue.

Quoting point2point (Thread starter):
The most obvious hole in DCA’s nonstop routes is the lack of a nonstop to SFO.

Sorry point' but SFO is NOT the "most obvious" hole; there is another large community in California (with a rather huge military presence) that is also deserving of, and expecting, nonstop service to National airport. (There is a lot of business between that city and a big, 5-sided building practically across the street from DCA...)

bb


User currently offlineSurfandSnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2864 posts, RR: 30
Reply 4, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4049 times:

48 additional flights per day?!?!? My my my, that would really shake things up at DCA, and for that matter, IAD.

If this bill passes, I could see the airlines having a field day! Imagine the possibilities...

AS adding DCA-PDX, additional DCA-SEA/DCA-LAX, and maybe even DCA-SAN!

AA consolidating its presence at DCA - shifting all LAX and SJU flights from IAD to DCA, leaving IAD a small spoke with token flights to DFW and MIA...

DL beefing up its DCA-SLC flights and maybe even starting flights from DCA to LAX, LAS, and SEA...

F9 bolstering its DCA-DEN schedule and maybe even do a p2p flight or two  ...

B6 closing what's left of a once impressive IAD focus city and consolidating ops at DCA - shifting LGB and OAK from IAD over to DCA, dropping D.C.-CUN (if they even fly IAD-CUN anymore), and maybe adding stuff like DCA-SJU, DCA-SLC, DCA-LAS, DCA-BUR, DCA-AUS, DCA-SAN, DCA-SMF, DCA-SJC, DCA-SFO, etc.

UA could finally start a competitive DCA-DEN schedule and link DCA with its SFO and LAX hubs

US could do all kinds of things, from transcons (DCA-SEA/SFO/LAX/SAN/PDX/SMF/SNA) to flights like DCA-ABQ, DCA-SAT, etc. just to appease lawmakers  ...

VX shifting all (or some, if they can't move them all) LAX/SFO-IAD flights over to DCA...

It sounds like all slots would be for beyond-perimeter flights, so I have to think that AirTran stands very little, if anything, to gain from this, but you never know...



Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2757 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4021 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
Nothing new

Yes and no... at least the politicians in DC are aligning themselves along geographical lines on the issue, rather than party lines like almost everything else...  
Quoting silentbob (Reply 2):
There is no sensible reason to oppose it. Therefore, it will not pass again this year.

It's scary that there's too much truth to that...

Quoting SANFan (Reply 3):
Sorry point' but SFO is NOT the "most obvious" hole; there is another large community in California (with a rather huge military presence) that is also deserving of, and expecting, nonstop service to National airport.

I can agree with you, and not to diminish your point, but my lines of thinking when stating that were geography. SAN has LAX sort of up the road there not that far away, while SFO has nothing to DCA anywhere near it. And I would say that both SAN and SFO need to be allowed to have nonstop service to DCA

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 4):
48 additional flights per day

Yes, endless possibilities there, and you did a good job pointing a lot of them out

[Edited 2010-07-07 23:05:48]

User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25138 posts, RR: 46
Reply 6, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3971 times:

Quoting silentbob (Reply 2):
You will see fewer RJs and more people will be able to fly directly into the city without creating congestion.

Well if total flight activity is not increased, the reduction of RJ's will reduce or potential see the elimination of services to communities that today have DCA service.
That certainly is not a good thing, and quite worthy of push back from the representatives from such locations.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinestasisLAX From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3280 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3966 times:

I think there should be several taxpayer funded "studies" that Congress needs to do, in order to waste more time and tax dollars on this perimeter topic...... politicians   


"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin
User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5241 posts, RR: 25
Reply 8, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3934 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 6):
Well if total flight activity is not increased, the reduction of RJ's will reduce or potential see the elimination of services to communities that today have DCA service.
That certainly is not a good thing, and quite worthy of push back from the representatives from such locations.

Which is exactly why I don not foresee the total lifting of restrictions at DCA. As you correctly point out, many smaller communities stand to lose service to DCA if restrictions are lifted, and politicians from those communities are going to fight tooth and nail to make sure that does not happen. We may very well see a few more beyond-perimeter flights added, but I do not believe that the perimeter will be lifted.



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2078 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3925 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 6):
Well if total flight activity is not increased, the reduction of RJ's will reduce or potential see the elimination of services to communities that today have DCA service.
That certainly is not a good thing, and quite worthy of push back from the representatives from such locations.

That's exactly what was going to happen with the forced slot sale, yet there was no hue and cry about that. It's not like WN or other bidders were going to fly to DSM, GSP or PNS, you would have seen more flights to New York, Boston and Chicago and a further reduction in profitability of the majors on those routes.

In this situation you would be more likely to see frequency to smaller cities be reduced (3-2 for example) and larger aircraft put on the routes. Eliminating a city entirely would be unlikely.


User currently offlineCGKings317 From Canada, joined Nov 2005, 306 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3920 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

If I may interject an idea: to satisfy the desires of western communities to have expanded access to DCA whilst managing the inherent growth, Id propose 10 additional beyond-perimeter slots-exemptions to be awarded as follows:

Schedule A:
-3 slots go to incumbents to increase frequencies at airports with existing service (subtract 3 slots from within-perimeter airports)
-2 slots go to new entrants to airports that already have an exemption by incumbent to increase competition at said airports (eg DL LAX-DCA, addition to route already flown by AS)

Schedule B:
- 5 slots go to airlines that will fly between "new entrant" airports to DCA with one slot each to said airport.

Schedule A benefits western hubs and large metropolitan areas that already have exemptions whereas Schedule B benefits airports like SAN, SFO, PDX, AUS, SNA, SMF, etc.

This plan would increase the number of flight by 7. To me this sounds like a workable solution that will balance the need to increase long-range flights to large population centers in the west with the desire by many western cities to diversify the beyond-perimeter menu of available destinations.

Thoughts?

~CGKings317  



I love ✈ & volcanoes but the 2 of them dont get along, just ask KLM867 & PH-BFC
User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2757 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3889 times:

Quoting CGKings317 (Reply 10):
Schedule B benefits airports like SAN, SFO, PDX, AUS, SNA, SMF, etc.

I like this schedule, because it expands the cites with access to DCA. I also would think that there are maybe are a few cities within parameter (don't know exactly which ones, too much research for now) that can go from 5 RJs a day to 4 without much sweat, and have that RJ go to IAD if they really have the traffic. So a few of these can be cut to create slots for some other cities that have no nonstops at present.

Also, just by looking at the senators involved here, let’s make some guesses:
Rockefeller (D-W.Va.)? .... big puzzle.... WV is within parameter, probably owes someone a BIG favor
Dorgan (D-N.D.).....BIS-DCA/1316 mi
Hutchison (R-Tex.).....AUS-DCA/1315 mi.....SAT-DCA/1381 mi.....ELP-DCA/1719 mi
Boxer (D-Calif.).....SFO-DCA/2442 mi.....SAN-DCA/2276 mi.....SMF-DCA/2381 mi
McCain (R-Ariz.)?..... another puzzle.....more PHX flights?.....TUS-DCA/1955 mi?

Also, is an A320 at DCA that's either taking off to or landing from CLT or MIA any different than the A320 that would be doing the same from SFO or PDX?


User currently offlineCGKings317 From Canada, joined Nov 2005, 306 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3873 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting point2point (Reply 11):
Also, is an A320 at DCA that's either taking off to or landing from CLT or MIA any different than the A320 that would be doing the same from SFO or PDX?

We must have a telepathic user interface between us because I was pondering nearly the EXACT same question.  As an extension, a Ford F-150 in the parking lot owned by a PAX going to CLT or MIA takes up the same amount of space and burden as a Ford F-150 owned by a PAX going to PDX or SFO.

~CGKings317  



I love ✈ & volcanoes but the 2 of them dont get along, just ask KLM867 & PH-BFC
User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2757 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3842 times:

Quoting CGKings317 (Reply 12):
We must have a telepathic user interface between us because I was pondering nearly the EXACT same question.

I thought about this some, and I think that upon landing there would be no difference. However (and this is only a guess, anyone can please correct if inaccurate) upon take-off to a longer destination, there would have to be more fuel, and thus more weight, and thus more power needed for take-off, so maybe a few more emissions? But other than this, even if there is a difference, how much could it be?


User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6750 posts, RR: 32
Reply 14, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3650 times:

Quoting point2point (Reply 11):
McCain (R-Ariz.)?..... another puzzle.....more PHX flights?.....TUS-DCA/1955 mi?

Not a puzzle, the largest slot-holder at DCA is headquartered in his state and stands to gain immensely from being able to shift slots being used for CRJ's/ERJ's to places like PIT, BUF, PHL, CMH, etc. over to flights to SEA, SFO, LAX, SAN, PHX, AUS, SAT, etc.

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 4):
AS adding DCA-PDX, additional DCA-SEA/DCA-LAX, and maybe even DCA-SAN!

If the number of beyond-perimeter slots really does increase by 48, AS will likely lose its monopoly on LAX-DCA, and is not likely to gain enough slots to be competitive in markets like SAN-DCA or LAX-DCA.

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 4):
UA could finally start a competitive DCA-DEN schedule and link DCA with its SFO and LAX hubs

True, but the IAD hub takes a huge hit since much of the beyond-perimeter traffic they serve at IAD moves over to DCA.

Quoting CGKings317 (Reply 12):
As an extension, a Ford F-150 in the parking lot owned by a PAX going to CLT or MIA takes up the same amount of space and burden as a Ford F-150 owned by a PAX going to PDX or SFO.

The issue is more along the lines of slots currently being occupied by RJ's to inside-perimeter markets will be shifted to mainline aircraft operating to outside-perimeter markets. If DL takes the slots being used for DCA-BOS right now and repurposes them for DCA-SLC and DCA-LAX, that does place some strain on passenger facilities, although it is also a far more efficient use of those slots.

Quoting silentbob (Reply 9):
It's not like WN or other bidders were going to fly to DSM, GSP or PNS, you would have seen more flights to New York, Boston and Chicago and a further reduction in profitability of the majors on those routes.

"Reduction in profitability" on routes is a gain for consumers, since it means airfare costs drop. It is inexcusable that US Airways charges $600 for a walk-up fare between DCA and BOS.


User currently offlineSuperDash From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 574 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3552 times:

First of all, I personally would love to see the LGA and DCA perimeter rule banished. Free trade for all. But since that ain't gunna happen, here is a suggested compromise (assuming the airlines would be interested in this). Allow UA to add 2 Denver flights. Allow Alaska to add 2-3 more LAX flights. Allow Alaska to add 1 more SEA flight. Allow US Air to move their LAS flight to PHX. Allow Delta to add 2 more SLC flights. Then solicit for 4-6 more flights to be flown to cities not currently served (San Francisco, Portland, Sacramento, San Jose, San Diego) with a max of 3 to any one city. 12-14 new flights total.

User currently offlineYflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1019 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3548 times:

Quoting point2point (Reply 11):
McCain (R-Ariz.)?..... another puzzle.....more PHX flights?.....TUS-DCA/1955 mi?



I believe Senator McCain has previously expressed a desire to eliminate all perimeter rules, so he might be supporting this proposal on general principle rather than a desire for a specific flight to DCA.


User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2757 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3380 times:

Quoting Yflyer (Reply 16):

I believe Senator McCain has previously expressed a desire to eliminate all perimeter rules, so he might be supporting this proposal on general principle rather than a desire for a specific flight to DCA.

Hmmmmm? It's hard for me to see McCain stand on any general principle... (LOL, and this goes for most of the politicos, considering how they all tweak and nuance all their positions)  

.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 14):

Not a puzzle, the largest slot-holder at DCA is headquartered in his state and stands to gain immensely from being able to shift slots being used for CRJ's/ERJ's to places like PIT, BUF, PHL, CMH, etc. over to flights to SEA, SFO, LAX, SAN, PHX, AUS, SAT, etc.

I personally think that this makes more sense.

Quoting SuperDash (Reply 15):
First of all, I personally would love to see the LGA and DCA perimeter rule banished.

Yes, but then doesn't the local community, (esp. the loud and vocal DCA group) get some say so in their local matters? They seem to be the ones most dedicated to maintaining the status quo

(edit added) Does anyone think that if there were no local community opposition, that DCA might have had its parameter lifted long ago?

[Edited 2010-07-08 13:26:15]

User currently offlineAtlwest1 From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1046 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3345 times:

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 4):
It sounds like all slots would be for beyond-perimeter flights, so I have to think that AirTran stands very little, if anything, to gain from this, but you never know...

If anything i bet they could procure slots if they feel oppurtunities are good enough for them. They do very very well to DCA.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co. or Airt
User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2078 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3300 times:

Quoting ScottB (Reply 14):
"Reduction in profitability" on routes is a gain for consumers, since it means airfare
costs drop. It is inexcusable that US Airways charges $600 for a walk-up fare between DCA and BOS.

1. Given the financial state of the airlines over the last couple years, let alone the net reduction in fares since deregulation, lowering air fares is the last thing the industry needs.

2. If you don't want to pay $600, take a bus, train or drive yourself. Or buy in advance and pay significantly less. A high walk up fare is no different that the high price at a convenience store relative to a grocery store. You pay extra when you're in a hurry.

3. The higher fares on some routes help support the routes that aren't as profitable, or lose money.


User currently offlineSurfandSnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2864 posts, RR: 30
Reply 20, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3232 times:

Quoting point2point (Reply 17):
Does anyone think that if there were no local community opposition, that DCA might have had its parameter lifted long ago?

It's not just the local community. It's all the small markets (and the folks that represent them) in the Northeast, South, and Midwest that could lose their connections to DCA too. Obviously DL would probably want to add flights to SLC, LAX, SEA, etc. at the expense of network spokes like JAN, LEX, DSM, and MSN, much to the detriment of Mississippi, Kentucky, Iowa, and Wisconsin, respectively! So its a constant battle between airlines and Western states on one end and Eastern states and the local community on the other...



Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently offlineYULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2178 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2984 times:

What makes sense in perimeter rules is that for short-distance flying, you want to use the nearest airport, whereas for longer distance, it matters less if the airport is further as you go for a longer trip and have less alternatives to flying. You see that in Japan for instance with HND vs NRT.

If that's lifted, then there's a chance airlines may want to substitute local flights to flights from the West, and those local flights will end up being transferred to IAD, which is a lot further to downtown DC and will make the flights less relevant.

imo, a local flight transferred to IAD will lose more interest than what a long-distance one transferred to DCA will gain, and it may not work out that well at the end....

But yes, it's all about a Western vs Eastern state competition, also. The East tries to protect its exclusive access to the most convenient airport. Those western senators would do the exact opposite thing of what they are doing now, if they were Eastern senators.

(i thought the western states did not like the influence of bureaucratic Washington, so, then why on Earth do they need a flight to DC downtown???)   



When I doubt... go running!
User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6750 posts, RR: 32
Reply 22, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2909 times:

Quoting silentbob (Reply 19):
1. Given the financial state of the airlines over the last couple years, let alone the net reduction in fares since deregulation, lowering air fares is the last thing the industry needs.

The well-run airlines did not suffer over the last couple of years. Southwest paid some of the highest wages in the industry, lost money on its hedges, and still posted a net profit of $99 million in 2009. And they do not charge the sort of ridiculous walk-up fares for which US and other network carriers are infamous.

Quoting silentbob (Reply 19):
2. If you don't want to pay $600, take a bus, train or drive yourself. Or buy in advance and pay significantly less. A high walk up fare is no different that the high price at a convenience store relative to a grocery store. You pay extra when you're in a hurry.

It is very different, in that the convenience store won't go through the ridiculous shenanigans of charging $1.50 for a gallon of milk and a box of cereal as a package and $6.00 for the gallon of milk alone. Compare that to a one-way BOS-DCA-MCO on US for tomorrow being priced at $142 while buying just the BOS-DCA flight is $604.

Slots at DCA are public property; the airlines are granted the rights to use those slots in order to serve the public. It is far from clear that the public is well-served by exorbitant walk-up fares. It is not the government's job to prop up inefficient market players by protecting their slot interests.

In any event, it appears that many passengers have simply chosen to fly from BOS to BWI or IAD rather than pay high fares on US... well, until B6 starts its BOS-DCA flights this fall.

Quoting silentbob (Reply 19):
3. The higher fares on some routes help support the routes that aren't as profitable, or lose money.

What benefit do passengers on high-fare routes gain from subsidizing passengers on unprofitable routes? Would you be happy to pay twice as much as your neighbor for gasoline just because you can afford it?


User currently offlinekgaiflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 4267 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 2820 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

DCA is the only Washington airport *without* direct service to San Diego. I've flown full UA planes from IAD, and full WN planes from BWI. Personally, I think DCA service would work -- since the airport is only two Metro stops from the Pentagon.

User currently offlineDCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4499 posts, RR: 33
Reply 24, posted (4 years 1 month 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2266 times:

The latest installment in the ongoing soap opera, As the DCA Perimeter Turns, or, John McCain's Guiding Light. (BTW, point2point, the word is perimeter, not parameter)

Any new perimeter-exemption slots at DCA should be *altogether new slots.* MWAA is fully justified to have a policy of mostly shorter-haul flights at DCA, and longer-haul flights at bigger IAD. Shorter routes benefit more from a closer airport. And no medium or smaller East coast market should lose a viable DCA flight to support a passel of existing slots going West. As several have noted, Eastern congresscritters will fight hard to defend their DCA access, as they well should. If the Westerners think they're going to get 24 existing slot pairs (48 slots) reassigned to exemption, they'll be stopped by a brick wall of Easterners and NIMBY's.

Rather, I think the Westerners should request that say 10 new slot-pairs be added to DCA, with exemption status, on top of the existing DCA slots. Such a small number would not congest DCA either in the terminal or on the airfield, and would offer more beyond-perimeter coverage. The airport has probably lost more seat capacity than that in downgauging since the financial crisis. Something like what CGKings317 proposes would be a very good idea.

A smaller group of new slots would probably be politically easier to approve as well. Not that the NIMBY's, 95% of whom no doubt moved near DCA after the jet age started, have just cause to complain. And they'll object either if new slots are added, or if existing slots are converted. So I say just do what needs to be done and add new slots. But they and their senators are a reality that has to be dealt with, so don't try for too much at once.

Hutchison can't reasonably expect two slot-pairs to be assigned to West Texas. I don't have figures handy, but would be very surprised if say either ELP or MAF could support say a daily CR7 to DCA.

Jim

[Edited 2010-07-08 19:05:02]


Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
25 Aesma : That seems a very complicated issue. I have one question : are those representatives fighting for their electorate's access to this airport, or is it
26 tharanga : Let's pursue this point. Despite this logic, United Express serves plenty of these small nearby communities from IAD. Are these passengers overwhelmi
27 Post contains images point2point : Duh? Thanx. Sometimes if it doesn't underline in the red, I tend to skip over it. Good thing that I at least got it right in the title. Duh? LOL I ll
28 vin2basketball : What about AUS, SAT?
29 Post contains links DCAYOW : USAirways has setup a website for those wanting to allow for slot conversions. Just a point of record, the conversions can only be from large hub airp
30 SANFan : I may be wrong here 'YOW, but I think this is an old website (from either last year or maybe even the year before.) The whole "hub-airport-conversion
31 DCAYOW : This site has been reactivated and the conversion idea is what is most developed in Hill conference discussions. This was not well reported in the me
32 SANFan : OK, 'YOW, thanks for the clarification. I do think it would be a good idea, US Airways, if there were some kind of date, or update section, or some c
33 ScottB : It may not affect service to small communities in the short term, but it is not clear to me that the airlines converting slots would be prevented in
34 FlyPNS1 : That's the key point. Unless the government requires every slot at DCA to be categorized (small, medium, large, beyond perimeter) OR requires that al
35 Aesma : Sorry but that was an honest question, around here most politicians take the train. The way I wrote my question shows I have a clue.
36 LHCVG : I think the point above was that flying the aforementioned BOS-DCA flight for $604 does to some extent subsidize the, say, $50 CLT-MCO fare elsewhere
37 dolphinflyer : ELP and MAF are non-issues. AUS and SAT are the two largest airports with strong O&D demand AUS-DCA 1,315 miles (per Great Circle Mapper) SAT-DCA
38 Post contains images point2point : Hey Aesma, I was just having some fun with you, didn't mean anything insensitive. You noticed the . But in all seriousness, most or these filight out
39 Post contains images DCA-ROCguy : The article said Hutchison was seeking to have Congress designate slot pairs for "West Texas." San Antonio and Austin aren't in the Western part of t
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...
Low Flyer Over ATL posted Thu Jul 1 2010 13:15:04 by GolfOscarDelta
American Airlines Gets 737 Make-Over posted Wed Jun 30 2010 02:08:36 by propilot83
KLM Chief Warns Emirates Over Expansion posted Thu Jun 24 2010 12:40:51 by EK156
BA Compensates Man 'humiliated' Over UM Seat Policy posted Thu Jun 24 2010 08:12:21 by readytotaxi
IND On Diverson? Huge Storms Over IND Tonight posted Tue Jun 22 2010 00:27:03 by fedex1
Over Flight Rights: How Much? posted Mon Jun 21 2010 16:57:04 by UAL747
Iberia A340 Over SVQ (Seville) posted Wed May 5 2010 05:27:04 by Hagic
Southwest 737 Priority Over American MD-80 posted Sun May 2 2010 22:08:20 by MrSkyGuy
Low Flying Plane Over Jupiter, FL, May 1st, 2010 posted Sat May 1 2010 17:35:19 by bucks918
Quad Over Norfolk Today? posted Thu Apr 29 2010 13:58:08 by 747400sp