cjpark
Posts: 1199
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:56 am

'We've been stiff-armed' by Southwest
D/FW Airport exec argues for status quo in Wright Amendment controversy

http://dallas.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/2005/09/26/story1.html

Interesting interview with Kevin Cox of DFW from the Dallas Business Journal. Excerpts below:


DBJ: You've offered financial incentives to various airlines to fill Delta's empty gates. Did you think you'd have a taker by now?
KEVIN COX: Yes, we did. We have been meeting with every airline, or airlines-in-the-making that don't even have aircraft yet. We actually had three carriers that had expressed an interest in the gates. But since then fuel prices have escalated, and Southwest announced its intention to seek repeal of the Wright Amendment. Those two things -- and the industry's uncertainty -- have significantly dampened our ability to fill those gates.

DBJ: So those three carriers are out of the picture now?
COX: Southwest, which was one of the three, looked us in the face and said they were interested, could make money at D/FW and could operate there efficiently. A week later they announced their desire to repeal the Wright Amendment. That same day a second carrier called me at three in the afternoon and indicated that as long as this cloud of uncertainty of the Wright Amendment exists, they're not going to bet their company on coming to D/FW Airport. The third carrier is at D/FW and was going to announce a major expansion, which they have chosen not to do.


DBJ: What about the argument that Wright's repeal would lead to the "Southwest effect," where fares drop, boosting traffic at both airports?
COX: What Southwest doesn't tell you is that D/FW already has low-cost service to six of the 15 cities that Southwest will potentially fly to. And before the end of the year, we'll add three more, giving us nine of the 15. Any stimulation -- the "Southwest effect" -- has already been experienced in six of those 15 cities; and within the next six months, it will be experienced in nine of the 15. So any great increase in traffic stimulation has probably already occurred, or will be occurring, and it has nothing to do with Southwest Airlines.

DBJ: Southwest also argues that it would incur "double costs" operating from both airports.
COX: They do that now in Los Angeles and in southern Florida. Plus, we have offered Southwest free rent, and we'll buy their equipment and pay their electricity. Their start-up costs the first year are basically zero at D/FW. I personally had a conversation with (CEO Gary) Kelly and said, "Come on out; we will make you a deal." We are open to negotiation. But we've been stiff-armed since the day they announced they want repeal.

DBJ: Southwest also contends that D/FW is too costly and too congested.
COX: We put together a presentation to combat that. We got about 10 minutes into our presentation to Gary Kelly and he stopped us and said, "Let's be honest; we can operate out of D/FW Airport. We operate out of more congested airports like Los Angeles. We operate out of more expensive airports, and we aren't scared of American Airlines." Southwest takes on every carrier in every market and does so effectively. To pretend that they can't do it at D/FW is just disingenuous. We have one of the lowest net costs per enplaned passenger of any major airport in the country.

DBJ: In terms of filling Delta's gates at D/FW, aren't prospective carriers fearful of American Airline's dominance there?
COX: Three factors keep carriers from coming. Any one is significant, but together they are virtually insurmountable. That doesn't mean that every day we aren't out there pushing it. Flying into a big American hub is a very difficult task. However, AirTran has shown it can be done. They flew right into Delta's hub and have now gained a significant market share because of their low-cost structure. Also there are the fuel prices and the Wright Amendment cloud of uncertainty. All three have chilled our ability to bring in a carrier.

DBJ: Critics say D/FW's "high fares" are essentially an invisible tax on North Texans. Will that ever change?
COX: I think it's going to happen regardless of what happens with the Wright Amendment. As I mentioned before, it's already happened. The airline industry is having to reinvent itself. No longer can a carrier, even with great dominance, demand high fares simply because it's dominant. American has made great strides at reducing its expenses to have more competitive fares. I respectfully disagree that adjusting the fares is anything we are going to be able to do, or (that the subject) has anything to do with the Wright Amendment. The market is going to adjust the fares. And fares are coming down. Our average, one-way domestic fare in fourth-quarter 2004/first-quarter 2005 was around $153. More than 25% of our passengers today pay less than $100 on a one-way fare.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8659
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 12:25 pm

What's he going to do next week, pull out the world's smallest violin and play the world's sadest song?
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 1:13 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 2):
What's he going to do next week, pull out the world's smallest violin and play the world's sadest song?

No, next week there will be another press conference at DFW, this one on behalf of the Girl Scouts, with new claims that Love Field airplane noise adversely impacts cookie sales near the airport.....  Yeah sure

Nothing new from Mr. Cox, SOSDD...
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
ckfred
Posts: 4763
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 1:48 pm

This does show one thing. While many people have accused AA of playing a very rough game of hardball, WN has grown sufficiently powerful, so that it, too, can play just as rough, if not rougher.

I'm not saying that the WA should or shouldn't be repealed. But WN is now capable of being as threatening of a competitor as AA.

If I'm the CEO of an LCC, whether currently flying or in the process of starting operations, this article shows that WN will more that just fire a warning shot across the bow. AirTran learned that, when WN got into the bidding for TZ gates at MDW.
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 2:04 pm




Hey OPNL...you're a dispatcher, maybe you know this:

When the crack in the Earth opens up and swallows DFW whole, will the FAA be warning us ahead of time?

I plan to do some flying in the Dallas area pretty soon, and want to be prepared for any NOTAMs or TFRs that may pop up.




2H4


Intentionally Left Blank
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 2:07 pm

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 5):
When the crack in the Earth opens up and swallows DFW whole, will the FAA be warning us ahead of time?

Nah, about 30 minutes after it happens, there'll be a groundstop out...  Wink
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 2:12 pm




Ok, I'll plan around that, then. Thanks for the heads-up.


 smile 




2H4


Intentionally Left Blank
 
jetdeltamsy
Posts: 2688
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 11:51 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 2:18 pm

Yea, the attitude of the DFW people is pretty sad.

Southwest is going to do what they have to do to make more money. If they can't get Wright repealed, they'll go to DFW and hammer Ameican into the dirt.

This is an interesting saga playing out. Will Wright be repealed? I think so.
Tired of airline bankruptcies....EA/PA/TW and finally DL.
 
flyibaby
Posts: 718
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:23 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 2:58 pm

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 6):
Nah, about 30 minutes after it happens, there'll be a groundstop out...

Yeah...haha...they'll issue a groundstop but it will only affect ZNY, ZDC!  Smile
 
LongbowPilot
Posts: 526
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 4:16 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 3:31 pm

Remember, there is a 3.00 port fee for transitting DFW.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11022
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 5:27 pm

Quoting Jetdeltamsy (Reply 8):
Yea, the attitude of the DFW people is pretty sad.

Southwest is going to do what they have to do to make more money. If they can't get Wright repealed, they'll go to DFW and hammer Ameican into the dirt.

This is an interesting saga playing out. Will Wright be repealed? I think so.

You are correct, the WA will be repealed, if not this year, it will be next year, which is a Congressional election year.

BTW, Kevin Cox is the DFW tAAlking mouth peice AAgAAinst the repeAAl of the Wright AAmendment.

Has everyone scene those corny TV ads, or heard the radio ads, DFW is putting out?
 
cjpark
Posts: 1199
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 9:20 pm

This is typical, there has not been one response to the topic to counter what Kevin Cox is saying. I wonder why?
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
SPREE34
Posts: 1574
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:09 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 9:33 pm

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 12):
This is typical, there has not been one response to the topic to counter what Kevin Cox is saying. I wonder why?

Because he didn't say anything. He read the company line. Again.

I flew through DFW last week. 3rd time this year. Time from touchdown to gate last week, 32 minutes. Gate to next takeoff 21 minutes.
I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
 
adh214
Posts: 346
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 1999 6:07 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 9:51 pm

Frankly, I am getting little bit tired of Southwest's line "We can't move to DFW because of X, Y, or Z." This article shows that clearly they can compete with American and operate in more congested airports than DFW. Southwest has even acknowledged this fact.

The noise around Love field is annoying and only going to get worse. DFW has plenty of space for Southwest and they should just move all of their opperations to DFW. Love Field could be closed (or shrunk) and redeveloped into taxable property for the city and schools in Dallas.

Andrew
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:38 pm

Yes, I registered just to respond to this thread (someone is laughing I gaurantee), but I felt that I could not let the rampant intellectual dishonesty repeatedly displayed in WA threads by fellow Texans go unanswered.

No, you can't just close or shrink DAL and expect it to become viable tax base property. How long has the old Naval Air Station been closed? Is it tax base active now? No, it's not. In fact, I believe it needs several million in haz-mat clean up before anyone will touch it. Why then do people seem to suggest that closeing DAL would transform it into a magic fairy land of economic muscle? And everyone living in the metroplex knows the DISD would just steal the money anyways  Smile

..."The noise".. oh yes, the noise. I spent a lot of time working at a certain (not to be named for legal reasons) pricey auto dealership complex that engulfs most of the north eastern side of DAL. I would always try to arrive before dawn so I could catch the old (yellow just doesn't work for me) Airborn Express 762 coming in. Wait... a 762 at love? Already? Isn't that more noisy then anything Southwest has in their fleet now that the 732's are gone? What pray tell is going to be generateing all the new noise? Don't try feeding us higher gross. Lower gross means, high climb rate at higher power = lower noise footprint. Higher gross means, lower climb rate at de-rated power after takeoff = also low noise footprint. *gasp* It's called noise abatement procedures. They are already in effect at DAL. It's not like higher weight aircraft are going to start busting the rules left and right and drag raceing out of DAL. The noisiest things at DAL are the gaggles of old corporate jets, Tom Hicks' 722, and the occasional 18 visiting from NFW. They aren't noisy because of weight. They are noisy because the type of engines they have. Southwest's planes are actually some of the quieter aircraft on the field.

..."It's going to hurt DFW". No it's not. Unless DAL finds a place to plow out another good 3500ft of runway, and cram another terminal on mockingbird.. DFW is going to be just fine. It's not like FDX, UPS, BA, LH....etc are just going to up and crunch into DAL... hopeing to avoid a swim in bachman lake. How many airports are around LAX? Is LAX in danger? JFK? ORD? MIA? SFO? IAD? There are plenty of large airports operating with smaller airports only a short distance away. DFW will be just fine with DAL operating without restrictions... that is if DFW's management can unstick their necks from their posteriors and operate like a real buisness.

... a high speed train connecting the two airports would be dandy though...

So please, stop telling half lies about the WA, DAL, and DFW. Let Southwest open up DAL into a real airport. AA, stop being brats. DFW, realize that fuel costs aren't the reason your airport stinks. I only have one thing that I would like Southwest to ammend in their ops. Stop trying to kill us at TSA!!!!

Get over it guys. WA needs to be banished. WA will be banished. Banishing WA will be better for the community then stragleing a successful airport and airline.
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
planefreakaa
Posts: 102
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 4:26 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:00 pm

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 15):
What pray tell is going to be generateing all the new noise?

here's one, AA super 80. ever hear one of those on take off, kind of reminds me of a 727. very loud. definatly wake up the neighbors.

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 15):
It's going to hurt DFW". No it's not.

yes it is, when AA pulls 50 or so flights out of DFW and moves them to DAL. you can bet your little garland farm on that one.
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:36 pm

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 12):
This is typical, there has not been one response to the topic to counter what Kevin Cox is saying. I wonder why?

Because they can't.

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 5):
When the crack in the Earth opens up and swallows DFW whole, will the FAA be warning us ahead of time?

I'd be more concerned about this is LA.
 
dagolden1
Posts: 46
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 1:04 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:40 pm

Good post MDorBust  bigthumbsup 

Quoting Planefreakaa (Reply 16):
yes it is, when AA pulls 50 or so flights out of DFW and moves them to DAL. you can bet your little garland farm on that one.

And they just HAVE to do this why????
 
ckfred
Posts: 4763
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:44 pm

Repeal of the WA is dead for this year. Congress is too busy with hurricane relief, and the nomination of Justice O'Conner's successor.

On the other hand, it will be interesting to see what happens in the House now the Rep. DeLay has stepped down as Majority Leader. Repeal depended, in part, on whether Rep. DeLay would support it.
 
typhaerion
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 11:27 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:46 pm

Quoting Planefreakaa (Reply 16):
here's one, AA super 80

So you are saying that it isnt the increase of Southwest traffic, but AA who will purposefully tank DAL noise wise so that people complain. And we wonder (not really) what depths that AA will stoop to to win the day anyway.

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 12):
I wonder why?

Beacause we can read, unlike you, and feel no need to re-post all fo our old arguments. If you feel the need to hear them again, you can go back and read threads 'WN at DAL vs WA' et. all.

Quoting Ckfred (Reply 4):
But WN is now capable of being as threatening of a competitor as AA.

I picked this idea up from that article too. Very, very interesting. Not totally a suprise, but to see blatent proof in a respected newssource that WN now holds a very big stick is refreshing. At least everyone knows it now.
For some, the sky is the limit. For us, it is only the beginning... -- Jack Hunt
 
kellmark
Posts: 547
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2000 12:05 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:48 pm

Andrew, I find it amazing that you would want to restrict choices and have higher fares to protect AA and DFW.

Do you work for one of them?

SW should be able to make any business decision they feel is in their best interest. In this case it also happen's to be in the public's interest as repealing the Wright Amendment would allow open and free competition as it should be in all airline markets. I say this having no interest in them and never even having flown them, bu I do not like it when people are forced to pay higher prices and be inconvienced just to benefit certain entities.

It is simple. Compete. DFW should compete like any other airport should compete. MIA competes against FLL. ORD competes against MDW. SFO competes against OAK.
 
typhaerion
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 11:27 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:48 pm

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 17):
Because they can't.

Welcome back Boeing7E7. I suggest you do some reading too, sir.
For some, the sky is the limit. For us, it is only the beginning... -- Jack Hunt
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:52 pm

Quoting Typhaerion (Reply 22):
Welcome back Boeing7E7. I suggest you do some reading too, sir.

I did. I suggest you actually have a valid response to the issue. I've more than made my point about 100 times. I'm spent.
 
texan
Posts: 4063
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:58 pm

Quoting Planefreakaa (Reply 16):
yes it is, when AA pulls 50 or so flights out of DFW and moves them to DAL. you can bet your little garland farm on that one.

Please don't tell me AA is going to drop all the way down to 950 daily departures from DFW!!! How will the Metroplex survive?!?

And it really sounded that all Cox was saying was that WN doesn't want to help him out and that if they don't wanna come voluntarily they should be forced to come because if they don't I'm gonna throw a temper tantrum and writhe on the ground and cause a big fit because they are being mean. What Cox fails to mention is that there was no deal in place. DFW wanted WN to take over 23 gates within 2 years and operate to markets that already have a glut of capacity for half their flights, with another 10% going to markets that currently do not have nonstop service from DFW (which, in WN's system, would include BOI, which AA tried but could not make work, and MHT). Yes, DFW offered a deal. They offered a deal where, while WN would not have to spend a whole lot in rent, they would have to fly unprofitable routes and open up brand spankin' new cities that not even AA serves from DFW. The cost was too high for WN with not nearly enough benefit. Simple as that.


And as for the noise, the DHL 727s, the private G-Is, G-IIs, G-IIIs, AC-90s, AC-95s, and a plethora of other aircraft, not the least of which being the 2200 ABX 762 departure, make a whole lot more noise and cause more noise pollution than WN's flights. In fact, WN accounts for only about 30% of traffic out of DAL; the rest of the noise is GA.

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
ckfred
Posts: 4763
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:03 am

There's the old saying, becareful what you wish for, because you might get it. If WN gets the WA repealed, B6 could very well decide to move into DAL, even with only a few gates.

After all, would you rather fly to the New York or L.A. areas with a singing F/A after boarding cattle-car style, or would you like satallite TV with a reserved seat?
 
legion242
Posts: 216
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:18 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:04 am

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 15):



Quoting MDorBust (Reply 15):
No, you can't just close or shrink DAL and expect it to become viable tax base property. How long has the old Naval Air Station been closed? Is it tax base active now? No, it's not. In fact, I believe it needs several million in haz-mat clean up before anyone will touch it. Why then do people seem to suggest that closeing DAL would transform it into a magic fairy land of economic muscle? And everyone living in the metroplex knows the DISD would just steal the money anyways

The old Naval Air Station doesn't have the best of locations though. Comparing them is not possible. DAL real estate is prime, not Grand Prarie.

New Football stadium in 20 years at DAL?!?! How cool would that be?
Don't make me release the monkeys!!
 
qxq400
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 1:42 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:18 am

Quoting Cjpark (Thread starter):
COX: They do that now in Los Angeles and in southern Florida. Plus, we have offered Southwest free rent, and we'll buy their equipment and pay their electricity. Their start-up costs the first year are basically zero at D/FW. I personally had a conversation with (CEO Gary) Kelly and said, "Come on out; we will make you a deal." We are open to negotiation. But we've been stiff-armed since the day they announced they want repeal.

Free rent,buy there new equipment, pay there bills, sounds pretty good to me. WN is just staying at DAL on principle,kinda like a kid throwing a temper tantrum. They are trying the same thing with SEA. WN just grow up.  cry   banghead 
Welcome baby Madison Renee
 
texan
Posts: 4063
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:21 am

Quoting Legion242 (Reply 26):
The old Naval Air Station doesn't have the best of locations though. Comparing them is not possible. DAL real estate is prime, not Grand Prarie.

New Football stadium in 20 years at DAL?!?! How cool would that be?

However, the environmental contamination is worse at DAL. The land cannot be used for housing, schools, etc. Especially on the east side of the field over by the White Elephant (Dalfort building), the land is too highly contaminated to house anything else. The land below DAL wouldn't even pass muster with the Bush Administration's EPA. It has highly corrosive and highly damaging chemicals all throughout the land.

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
texan
Posts: 4063
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:23 am

Quoting Qxq400 (Reply 27):
Free rent,buy there new equipment, pay there bills, sounds pretty good to me.

It does sound good. Everything DFW says sounds good. However,

Quoting Texan (Reply 24):
What Cox fails to mention is that there was no deal in place. DFW wanted WN to take over 23 gates within 2 years and operate to markets that already have a glut of capacity for half their flights, with another 10% going to markets that currently do not have nonstop service from DFW (which, in WN's system, would include BOI, which AA tried but could not make work, and MHT). Yes, DFW offered a deal. They offered a deal where, while WN would not have to spend a whole lot in rent, they would have to fly unprofitable routes and open up brand spankin' new cities that not even AA serves from DFW. The cost was too high for WN with not nearly enough benefit. Simple as that.

Not quite a good deal anymore.

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
cjpark
Posts: 1199
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:34 am

Quoting Texan (Reply 28):
However, the environmental contamination is worse at DAL. The land cannot be used for housing, schools, etc. Especially on the east side of the field over by the White Elephant (Dalfort building), the land is too highly contaminated to house anything else. The land below DAL wouldn't even pass muster with the Bush Administration's EPA. It has highly corrosive and highly damaging chemicals all throughout the land.

Texan

Can you at least post a link to an EPA or State Commision study on pollution at DAL to back up your claim that the land is not suited for anything else?
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
texan
Posts: 4063
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:41 am

It was a report by a local law firm, Haynes & Boone. The land was examined in the early 1990s for a possible sale. Unfortunately that report is not available on the internet. I'll check with the firm to see if I can get a copy of it (I know the lawyer who was in charge of investigating the environmental concerns).

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:43 am

Quoting Planefreakaa (Reply 16):
here's one, AA super 80. ever hear one of those on take off, kind of reminds me of a 727. very loud. definatly wake up the neighbors.

Yes, AA's super 80's are pretty loud beasts.

Are you suggesting though that AA is going to transfer flights to DAL, destroying any ability of passengers to transfer through those flights, in hopes of hurting Southwest? Yes, AA did similar with their f100's in the past, but that was to drive out a start up LCC with limited routes... not a well established airline. If AA really wants to hurt thier airline that bad, they are welcome to it, but any one with any reason would leave AA entact at DFW.

Quoting Legion242 (Reply 26):

The old Naval Air Station doesn't have the best of locations though. Comparing them is not possible. DAL real estate is prime, not Grand Prarie.

New Football stadium in 20 years at DAL?!?! How cool would that be?

Not entirely uncompareable. Several companies have looked at purchaseing the old NAS property. Most stop dead when they find out the states requirements for cleanup and how much it would cost. Irronically, the closest the NAS property came to being used... was as a corporate airport under the Millenium Dallas Airport project. Currently Vought aircraft is fighting to re-open the field.. as.. yes, an airfield. To make things better.. The city of Dallas cashed out $500,000 to make repairs to the 12 year neglected base to attempt to pull in more customers... to an airfield. Close DAL what?!

Oh, and Jerry already got his new stadium.
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
adh214
Posts: 346
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 1999 6:07 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:47 am

Quoting Kellmark (Reply 21):
Andrew, I find it amazing that you would want to restrict choices and have higher fares to protect AA and DFW.

Do you work for one of them?

No I don't work in the industry. However, I do live in the Metroplex and see no point in cramming extra capacity into Love field when there is PLENTY of capacity at DFW. (and yes, this will result in more noise because there will be more planes flying over head even if they are relatively quite ones.)

Andrew
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:55 am

Quoting Kellmark (Reply 21):
SWA should be able to make any business decision they feel is in their best interest. In this case it also happen's to be in the public's interest as repealing the Wright Amendment would allow open and free competition as it should be in all airline markets. I say this having no interest in them and never even having flown them, but I do not like it when people are forced to pay higher prices and be inconvienced just to benefit certain entities.

What a concept--SWA running its own business, and not DFW, AA, the cities of Dallas and Ft. Worth, nor any of the pro-Wright folks. You'd think that after 34 years that people could acknowledge that SWA knows how to successfully run an airline...  Yeah sure
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
texan
Posts: 4063
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 1:00 am

Quote:
Helmets, scarves and goggles were still popular accessories for pilots when Southwest Airmotive started repairing engines in 1942 at Love Field, outside Dallas. And just as people at the time had yet to conceive of jumbo jets and stealth technology, they were similarly unfamiliar with the health dangers posed by chemical waste.

Airplane fuel and chemical solvents were standard tools for cleaning engines in the 1940s, 50s, 60s and 70s; spreading these pollutants on the ground was a standard method of disposal. Southwest, which was purchased by Cooper Industries in 1973, also kept the waste in water-filled pits and underground storage tanks that frequently leaked.

In 1981 Aviall Services purchased four engine repair facilities from Cooper, including Love Field. Aviall continued to pollute the sites for several years, until the company discovered extensive pollution from airplane fuel when removing underground storage tanks from one of the sites.

Aviall first notified the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission of the pollution in 1986. The commission did not penalize Aviall, but advised the company that it was violating several Texas laws and advised it on appropriate cleanup measures.

Worse news for Aviall came in 1991, when the company found harmful amounts of trichloroethylene or TCE at one of the sites. Breathing small amounts of TCE may cause headaches, lung irritation, dizziness, poor coordination, and difficulty concentrating, according to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Breathing it for long periods may cause nerve, kidney, and liver damage.

The company later discovered chromium, TCE and other chemicals in the soil and groundwater at all four facilities it purchased from Cooper. To date, the cleanup has cost Aviall millions of dollars. Although Aviall sold the facilities in the mid-1990s, it is still footing the bill for removing the waste.

Link to court case summary


Aviall has also had to pay for cleanup for streets around DAL, including Shorecrest, Reeves, Wylie, Putnam, Weiss, and Love Field Drive.

I'll try to find a little more info for you. And no, the area is still not safe to build on.

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
legion242
Posts: 216
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:18 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 1:54 am

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 31):
Irronically, the closest the NAS property came to being used... was as a corporate airport under the Millenium Dallas Airport project. Currently Vought aircraft is fighting to re-open the field.. as.. yes, an airfield. To make things better.. The city of Dallas cashed out $500,000 to make repairs to the 12 year neglected base to attempt to pull in more customers... to an airfield.

My bad, I thought that the Base was in Grand Prarie, not Dallas.
Don't make me release the monkeys!!
 
legion242
Posts: 216
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:18 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:14 am

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 31):
Irronically, the closest the NAS property came to being used... was as a corporate airport under the Millenium Dallas Airport project. Currently Vought aircraft is fighting to re-open the field.. as.. yes, an airfield. To make things better.. The city of Dallas cashed out $500,000 to make repairs to the 12 year neglected base to attempt to pull in more customers... to an airfield.

My bad, I thought that the Base was in Grand Prarie, not Dallas.
Don't make me release the monkeys!!
 
FCYTravis
Posts: 1172
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 4:21 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:16 am

Quoting Adh214 (Reply 32):
there is PLENTY of capacity at DFW

If there's plenty of capacity at DFW, why do I sit on the ground for 15 or 20 or 30 minutes every time I fly through there?

I quit sending my business to AA because DFW sucks. Now I connect on HP at PHX or LAS and all is right with the world.
USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
 
cjpark
Posts: 1199
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: A New Twist On The Wright Amendment Debate

Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:35 am

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...h&navby=case&no=0010197cv0&exact=1

Aviall Services, Inc. ("Aviall") appeals the summary judgment dismissal of its contribution claim based on the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), 42 U.S.C. § 9613(f)(1). The district court ruled that Aviall could not seek contribution from Cooper Industries, Inc. ("Cooper") unless Aviall had incurred or at least faced
liability under a CERCLA administrative abatement or cost recovery action. We affirm, holding that the text of CERCLA requires this result.

I

Cooper ran an aircraft engine maintenance business at several of its industrial facilities. The rebuilding of aircraft engines required the use of petroleum and other hazardous substances, some of which seeped into the ground and groundwater through underground storage tanks and spills. Among the industrial facilities contaminated were Love Field, Carter Field and Forest Park
(collectively, the "Facilities"). In 1981, Cooper sold its aircraft engine maintenance business, along with the Facilities, to Aviall. Several years later, Aviall began discovering some of the contamination that had occurred at the Facilities. Aviall admits, though, that the pollution of the Facilities continued under its stewardship as well.

Aviall notified the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission ("TNRCC") of the contamination at its Facilities. In turn, the TNRCC sent several letters to Aviall informing the company that it was in violation of Texas state environmental laws. Notably, the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") never contacted Aviall or designated the Facilities as contaminated sites.
In 1984, Aviall began a decade-long environmental cleanup, spending millions of dollars. In early 1995, Aviall for the first time contacted Cooper seeking reimbursement. Aviall eventually sold the Facilities to another private party, but it contractually retained a continuing responsibility for the environmental cleanup.

In 1997, Aviall filed this lawsuit against Cooper based in part on CERCLA's § 107(a) "cost recovery" provision, which allows innocent persons to recover environmental response costs from liable parties. Aviall later amended its complaint dropping the § 107(a) cost recovery claim, while adding contribution claims under § 113(f)(1) of CERCLA as well as under the Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act, Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 361.344(a) (West 1992 & Supp. 2001), and the Texas Water Code, Tex. Water Code Ann. § 26.3513(j) (West 2000). The district court granted Cooper's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the § 113(f)(1) CERCLA contribution claim
and then declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law contribution claims. Relying on the plain language of the statute, the court held that Aviall could not assert a § 113(f)(1) contribution claim unless it was subject to a prior or pending CERCLA action involving either § 106 (federal administrative abatement action) or § 107(a) (cost recovery action by the government or a
private party).(1)

On appeal, Aviall admits that neither the EPA nor any private party has filed a CERCLA claim against it. Notwithstanding this lack of federal action against it, Aviall claims that it canpursue CERCLA-based contribution because it voluntarily cleaned up the contamination, or at least it did so at the behest of a state environmental agency. Before discussing the merits of these
arguments, we briefly review the structure and history of CERCLA.

II
Congress enacted CERCLA to facilitate the cleanup of hazardous waste sites, and to shift the costs of environmental response from the taxpayers to the parties who benefitted from the use or disposal of the hazardous substances. See OHM Remediation Serv. v. Evans Cooperage Co., Inc.,116 F.3d 1574, 1578 (5th Cir. 1997). The statute allows parties who incur environmental cleanup costs to recover from persons commonly referred to as "potentially responsible parties" ("PRPs").

See 42 U.S.C. § 9607(a). Subject to certain statutory exceptions, PRPs are broadly defined to include: (1) current owners and operators of vessels or facilities that accepted hazardous substances; (2) past owners or operators of facilities where hazardous substances were disposed; (3) persons who
by contract or agreement arranged for the disposal or transport of hazardous substances; and (4) persons who accept or accepted hazardous substances for transport to disposal or treatment facilities. See 42 U.S.C. § 9607(a).


>>>>>Notably, the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") never contacted Aviall or designated the Facilities as contaminated sites. <<<<<

Texan
So you cannot at this time cite an EPA study that would designate Love Field as an contaminated site. Do you think that if Love Field was an evironmental hazard creating health issues it might all ready have been shutdown? Especially with all of the Rich and Powerful People that live due east and north east of the airport.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
texan
Posts: 4063
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:53 am

Cjpark,

Conversly, has the EPA commisssioned a study of all harmful sites around the US? There is literally a lake of jet fuel underneath DAL. The amounts of TCE and other chemicals are at higher than acceptable levels. Yes, the ground is contaminated, and yes it can be dangerous. It is one of the main reasons the large Dalfort maintenance area is still sitting empty. It would cost too damn much money to clean it up and put anything of use there. And no, if you look at the contaminated sites around Dallas, not only have they not been shut down, but they've built things like elementary schools on the former lead smelter sites, and have since been sued over it. Plus, the "Rich and Powerful People that live due east and north east of the airport" live a far enough distance away so that their ground is not contaminated with the substances.

Cjpark, the EPA has not even closed down or done an in depth study on the TXI smelter in Midlothian, which, according to independent research, accounts for more than 24% of Dallas' pollution on it's own! Just because there is no EPA study on the hazardous materials below DAL does not mean that there are no harmful materials there.

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 3:51 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 16):
Quoting 2H4 (Reply 5):
When the crack in the Earth opens up and swallows DFW whole, will the FAA be warning us ahead of time?

I'd be more concerned about this is LA.

Actually that is a legitimate concern at DFW, they are talking about drilling for Natural Gas under the airport.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
cjpark
Posts: 1199
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 3:58 am

Texan to answer your question

Quoting Texan (Reply 39):
Conversly, has the EPA commisssioned a study of all harmful sites around the US?

Yes please see the link below.

http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/npl.htm
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:14 am

Anyone notice the eventual resemblence of these Wright threads to the infamous Monty Python sketch?  Wink

M: (Knock)
A: Come in.
M: Ah, Is this the right room for an argument?
A: I told you once.
M: No you haven't.
A: Yes I have.
M: When?
A: Just now.
M: No you didn't.
A: Yes I did.
M: You didn't
A: I did!
M: You didn't!
A: I'm telling you I did!
M: You did not!!
A: Oh, I'm sorry, just one moment. Is this a five minute argument or the full half hour?
M: Oh, just the five minutes.
A: Ah, thank you. Anyway, I did.
M: You most certainly did not.
A: Look, let's get this thing clear; I quite definitely told you.
M: No you did not.
A: Yes I did.
M: No you didn't.
A: Yes I did.
M: No you didn't.
A: Yes I did.
M: No you didn't.
A: Yes I did.
M: You didn't.
A: Did.
M: Oh look, this isn't an argument.
A: Yes it is.
M: No it isn't. It's just contradiction.
A: No it isn't.
M: It is!
A: It is not.
M: Look, you just contradicted me.
A: I did not.
M: Oh you did!!
A: No, no, no.
M: You did just then.
A: Nonsense!
M: Oh, this is futile!
A: No it isn't.
M: I came here for a good argument.
A: No you didn't; no, you came here for an argument.
M: An argument isn't just contradiction.
A: It can be.
M: No it can't. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
A: No it isn't.
M: Yes it is! It's not just contradiction.
A: Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
M: Yes, but that's not just saying 'No it isn't.'
A: Yes it is!
M: No it isn't!
A: Yes it is!
M: Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.
(short pause)
A: No it isn't.
M: It is.
A: Not at all.
M: Now look.
A: (Rings bell) Good Morning.
M: What?
A: That's it. Good morning.
M: I was just getting interested.
A: Sorry, the five minutes is up.
M: That was never five minutes!
A: I'm afraid it was.
M: It wasn't.
Pause
A: I'm sorry, but I'm not allowed to argue anymore.
M: What?!
A: If you want me to go on arguing, you'll have to pay for another five minutes.
M: Yes, but that was never five minutes, just now. Oh come on!
A: (Hums)
M: Look, this is ridiculous.
A: I'm sorry, but I'm not allowed to argue unless you've paid!
M: Oh, all right.
(pays money)
A: Thank you.
short pause
M: Well?
A: Well what?
M: That wasn't really five minutes, just now.
A: I told you, I'm not allowed to argue unless you've paid.
M: I just paid!
A: No you didn't.
M: I DID!
A: No you didn't.
M: Look, I don't want to argue about that.
A: Well, you didn't pay.
M: Aha. If I didn't pay, why are you arguing? I Got you!
A: No you haven't.
M: Yes I have. If you're arguing, I must have paid.
A: Not necessarily. I could be arguing in my spare time.
M: Oh I've had enough of this.
A: No you haven't.
M: Oh Shut up.

Life imitating art...  Wink
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:17 am

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 38):
exan
So you cannot at this time cite an EPA study that would designate Love Field as an contaminated site. Do you think that if Love Field was an evironmental hazard creating health issues it might all ready have been shutdown? Especially with all of the Rich and Powerful People that live due east and north east of the airport.

Now see, this is exactly the type of intellectual dishonesty that I was previously referrring to. You have presented a statement based on a civil case attempt at compensation that finds no compensation can be paid since the acts were "voluntary" without an EPA mandate. ... then attempt to state that no EPA mandate means no contamination.

I'm sorry, but either that is a failure of logic on your part or intentional misguidence.

I assume you know something about aircraft to post on this forum... includeing something about the materials that go into and leak out of aircraft. Not to mention the ones sprayed all over it, and the taxiways and sloshed around in MX buildings. To even imply that after a half century of jet ops, these materials haven't managed to permiate the ground is a bit daft. All heavy op airports have contamination in the ground. You can mitigate it to a degree, but operations extended over time will result in ground contamination. Or, are you going to claim that Aviall also secretly polluted the old NAS? The reason that the NAS has an EPA report and not DAL is because there were attempts to rezone the NAS property which requires an environmental study when transferring form heavy industrial zones to possible habbitation zones.

You are flailing blindly to support a horribly flawed idea that DAL should become something else based probably on a belief that it would be cheap and easy to convert it to another use. It would be neither cheap, nor easy. Nor do I think many of the existing buisnesses that are in the DAL area would remain there once their primary location motive is removed.

And no.. ground contamination inside a heavy industrial zone would not neccessitate that the facility be closed. Not even remotely. There's a major difference between contaminated land sitting between two runways, and contaminated land sitting under your childs swing set.
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:26 am

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 43):
I'm sorry, but either that is a failure of logic on your part...

...or intentional misguidence.

"Ding!"
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
MrMcCoy
Posts: 361
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:17 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:26 am

OPNLguy had it right.. Life is definately beginning to imitate art.  Wink
It only takes five years to go from rumor to standard operating procedure.
 
legion242
Posts: 216
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:18 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:13 am

What about the old airport at Austin? I travel through there by road quite often, and as far as I can tell, and I may be wrong, there was no environmental cleanup before converting it to commercial property. They are now building state of the art movie studios on the land. Presumably, they also would have had many of the same problems that DAL would have.
Don't make me release the monkeys!!
 
apodino
Posts: 3045
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:24 am

Don't forget Stapleton Airport as well in DEN.
 
cjpark
Posts: 1199
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: A New Twist On The Wright Amendment Debate

Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:37 am

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 43):
Now see, this is exactly the type of intellectual dishonesty that I was previously referrring to. You have presented a statement based on a civil case attempt at compensation that finds no compensation can be paid since the acts were "voluntary" without an EPA mandate. ... then attempt to state that no EPA mandate means no contamination.

That is exactly the point! The government has not stepped in as said that the site is too polluted to be used for anything else.

The NAS has an EPA report because it was a military base and all base closings have to have an EPA study on the grounds to limit government liability and to assist in clean up of the old facilities.

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 43):
I assume you know something about aircraft to post on this forum... includeing something about the materials that go into and leak out of aircraft. Not to mention the ones sprayed all over it, and the taxiways and sloshed around in MX buildings. To even imply that after a half century of jet ops, these materials haven't managed to permiate the ground is a bit daft.

So you might say that the airport is no more polluted that your average Freeway or road side correct?
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: 'We've Been Stiff-armed' By Southwest

Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:45 am

You mean the airport reclimation that had been on-going for around six years now?  Smile Don't worry, they'll finish someday.

Any who. $55mil was spent cleaning up Bergstrom just to the point where it was safe to use for passenger traffic (environmental issues only). Austin hasn't disclosed how much they have spent at Mueller, but I can only guess it must be similar since it's a more thorough clean up, but of less toxic materials.

If you look at the development pictures linked below, you can see a lot of dirt being moved in and out. That's the cleanup underway. It shows especially in the December photos.

http://www.rmma.net/progress.html
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos