There is significant demand for flights to Dallas and Houston, both of which are in the DCA perimeter, from all 3 DC airports. While Southwest has nonstops to DAL and HOU from both BWI and DCA, Southwest does not currently serve DAL and HOU nonstop from IAD. Is there enough demand for Southwest to add nonstop service from IAD to DAL and HOU? Will Southwest end up adding nonstop service from IAD to DAL and HOU?

Why is Rep. Cuellar insisting on SAT-DCA nonstop service if Southwest could add nonstop service to IAD from SAT or an extra nonstop to BWI from SAT? There will be easier access to the National Mall and Downtown DC from IAD with the opening of the Silver Line extension to IAD in 2020, and the completion of the extension of the Silver Line to IAD might open the door to Southwest adding additional nonstop routes out of IAD.

A few thoughts from a longtime DC local:

*Nobody* downtown wants to go to BWI or IAD, period, if they do not have to. When the Silver Line is completed, there will be, I think, 19 stops, and a train change between Union Station and IAD. Once at IAD, down the escalator to the long tunnel under the parking bowl to the terminal building. Still a long haul. BWI has the MARC train from Union Station. But then you disembark the MARC at the BWI Amtrak station a mile away, and have to rumble around on a bus to get to the terminal.

Meanwhile, DCA is five miles from the Capitol Building and a 15-minute drive or short Metro ride, with the DCA Metro station directly attached to Terminal B-C.

Also, it's a status thing. Dallas-Ft. Worth, Houston, and Austin have DCA nonstops. I'm guessing Rep. Cuellar isn't the only San Antonio bigwig who wants DCA service. I'm surprised it's taken this long for Cuellar to introduce some kind of legislation to get SAT in on the fun.

At my count, there are five west-of-perimeter markets that still do not have DCA service that could probably support it: SAT, SAN, SJC, OAK, and SMF. Were I a Member from one of those cities, I'd be trying to add a DCA-slot amendment to any bill I could until I got one. Congress could not possibly care less about what MWAA or Alexandria-Arlington NIMBY's want. Members want to fly home conveniently--wouldn't you if you had to fly home every week? I'm surprised the legislators from these five cities have tolerated being DCA have-nots as long as they have, given that so many outside-of-perimeter markets have them. They'll get their flights, more likely by slots being *added* rather than converted. Again, what MWAA wants couldn't matter less. It's just a matter of time.

Jim

DCA-ROCguy wrote:

At my count, there are five west-of-perimeter markets that still do not have DCA service that could probably support it: SAT, SAN, SJC, OAK, and SMF. Were I a Member from one of those cities, I'd be trying to add a DCA-slot amendment to any bill I could until I got one. Congress could not possibly care less about what MWAA or Alexandria-Arlington NIMBY's want. Members want to fly home conveniently--wouldn't you if you had to fly home every week? I'm surprised the legislators from these five cities have tolerated being DCA have-nots as long as they have, given that so many outside-of-perimeter markets have them. They'll get their flights, more likely by slots being *added* rather than converted. Again, what MWAA wants couldn't matter less. It's just a matter of time.

Jim

The Virginia Delegation most certainly cares what MWAA thinks; MWAA has made it a priority to cultivate a relationship with the Virginia Senators and the rest of the DC-area delegation.

MWAA also inserted a clause in the new leases at both DCA and IAD that gives them the right to renegotiate the terms of the deal if Congress changes the perimeter rule.

For each additional beyond perimeter flight Congress adds, MWAA gets to send more money from DCA to IAD. If Congress eliminates the perimeter rule entirely, MWAA can force a complete renegotiation of the lease at both airports.

blockski wrote:

Again, IAD was built to accommodated jets (longer runways, more buffer for noise, etc). There were no standards for what a modern airport would/should look like then. This was also before deregulation, so while the airport didn't catch on quickly as a commercial enterprise, it was nonetheless the only way to serve international flights into DC.

IAD being the only solution for international flights to/from DC is not entirely true. It certainly would have been possible to have used BAL (now BWI) as D.C.'s international gateway, although I suspect that federal politicians in that era weren't enthused about having to use a facility controlled by the City of Baltimore (at that time). That was also a time when large, government-planned infrastructure projects were in vogue, even when there was little consideration given to the actual utility of said projects -- and IAD fits that bill exactly!

DfwAussie wrote:

Where do you put all the gates? IAD becomes a ghost town with the possible exception of the UA hub. DCA may need to get e new round of beyond perimeter flights, but small number. It's fairly well maxxed out already.

An elimination of the perimeter doesn't really lead to demand for more gates -- really just somewhat larger gates as slots which are sub-optimally used for regional flights end up being repurposed to beyond-perimeter mainline flights. The situation is somewhat akin to the result of the slot swap at LGA between DL & US; pre-swap, US used many of its slots for short flights operated with turboprop equipment. Post-swap, WS & B6 use divested slots for mainline aircraft and DL has no flights operated by anything smaller than a 50-seat RJ, with many 70- to 76-seat RJs having replaced US's turboprops and flying longer routes. No new gates were built although a connector was built between Terminals C & D to facilitate passenger connections. And even though commercial aircraft movements were flat at LGA between 2011 (when the swap was okayed) and 2016, passenger traffic at LGA increased from 24.1 million in 2011 to 29.8 million in 2016 simply due to larger average aircraft gauge.

WWads wrote:

IAD should have been given a dedicated heavy rail line from day one, but MWAA just had to get that parking revenue.

That wouldn't have worked given that the Metrorail system opened well over a decade after the airport, and a standalone rail line between the District and the airport would have been an abject failure. Planners "got" the need for expedited access to the airport which is why the Dulles Access Road exists -- and in the 1960s, mobility planning was automobile-centric.

WWads wrote:

The Silver Line is a farce, and an entirely inefficient solution. Not installing an express track makes things even worse.

Agreed regarding the Silver Line, but I doubt the passenger volume exists to justify an express track (and the accompanying service) to Dulles. Even with express service, DCA is always going to win out for convenience just because it is so much closer to the District and the vast majority of transfer stations.

SANFan wrote:

I agree that the total pax count to all 3 WAS airports must be considered, but the number of pax who actually DO fly into Reagan Airport, despite having to stop or change planes enroute is also very important. Those folks REALLY want to fly in and out of Reagan despite the fact that they could fly nonstop into Dulles or BWI. We don't -- although maybe the airlines do -- really know how many of travelers using IAD and BWI would fly into DCA if they could, but I'm sure that number would be considerable.

I think that the in-perimeter O&D numbers for traffic distribution among the three airports, in cases where all three airports are served non-stop with reasonable frequency from another airport/market, are somewhat illustrative, although the figures can be somewhat skewed in favor of BWI thanks to lower average fares there. BOS-IAD, for example, captures 13% of the BOS-WAS market with average BOS-IAD fares within $2 of BOS-DCA. BUF-IAD only gets 5.6% of the BUF-WAS market even with nearly identical fares among BWI/DCA/IAD. ATL-IAD takes 20% of the ATL-WAS market, but that is partly thanks to fares about 10% lower than ATL-DCA.

The "natural" size of IAD's catchment within the overall WAS market seems to be roughly 15-20% of the total when factors like fares, schedule, and availability of non-stops are comparable. DCA is generally around half and the remainder goes to BWI. So in the case of a market like SAN and its 900 PDEW, one could expect around 500 or so of that total to prefer DCA, although I suspect it would be even higher given the large fraction of military/government travel on the route. I'd guess that over half of the SAT O&D would prefer DCA as well for similar reasons.

D L X wrote:

But then the Vermont, Maine, West Virginia, Arkansas, MIssissippi and Kentucky delegations lose their nonstops!

LIT doesn't have a non-stop to DCA and I suspect that the XNA-DCA flight supports itself commercially anyway. I think the largest threat would potentially be to CRW-DCA, and while the drive between the two is long & circuitous, it's ridiculous to devote two slot pairs to a route with only 20 PDEW. The JAN-DCA flight uses a slot exemption, as does LEX-DCA, but SDF isn't that far from Frankfort and there's plenty of traffic from Louisville to support DCA service. Service to DCA from BTV and PWM is justified by the commercial demand in those markets.

jplatts wrote:

Why is Rep. Cuellar insisting on SAT-DCA nonstop service if Southwest could add nonstop service to IAD from SAT or an extra nonstop to BWI from SAT?

Seriously? By that logic, why does anyone want DCA service?

jplatts wrote:

There will be easier access to the National Mall and Downtown DC from IAD with the opening of the Silver Line extension to IAD in 2020, and the completion of the extension of the Silver Line to IAD might open the door to Southwest adding additional nonstop routes out of IAD.

Let's see . . . I'm a traveler who makes my decision based on convenient Metro service. What airport do you think I am using today, and what airport do you think I'll still be using in 2020?

Southwest does have room to do at least 30 extra flights out of Terminal A at DCA if it can get extra slots at DCA. There are at least 11 additional within-perimeter destinations that Southwest could serve nonstop from DCA if Southwest acquires additional slots at DCA, and there are at least 5 beyond-perimeter destinations that Southwest could serve nonstop from DCA if extra beyond-perimeter slot exemptions are added at DCA, including SAT, SAN, PHX, LAS, and DEN.

jplatts wrote:

Southwest does have room to do at least 30 extra flights out of Terminal A at DCA if it can get extra slots at DCA. There are at least 11 additional within-perimeter destinations that Southwest could serve nonstop from DCA if Southwest acquires additional slots at DCA, and there are at least 5 beyond-perimeter destinations that Southwest could serve nonstop from DCA if extra beyond-perimeter slot exemptions are added at DCA, including SAT, SAN, PHX, LAS, and DEN.

But why would WN want to add flights from DCA if it has BWI and IAD and the Silver Line is opening in 3 years?

I might be naive, but what's the point of the perimeter if AUS and SLC has direct flights to DCA?

According to Congresswoman Comstack the rules committee ruled the proposed amendment out of order. In short, nothing will come of this initiative.

jplatts wrote:

Why is Rep. Cuellar insisting on SAT-DCA nonstop service...

Its primarily about access to the Pentagon. San Antonio - for those that might not be aware - is a huge military town. Joint Base San Antonio is composed of two AFBs and US Army Fort Sam Houston. Tens of thousands military and civilian personnel, as well as the location of the USAF's basic training.

DCA-ROCguy wrote:

I'm guessing Rep. Cuellar isn't the only San Antonio bigwig who wants DCA service. I'm surprised it's taken this long for Cuellar to introduce some kind of legislation to get SAT in on the fun.

San Antonio has recently brought on a new airport director (a retired AF general) who has been tasked by city to improve the nonstop flight portfolio from the airport. This route is an obvious choice.

DariusBieber wrote:

I might be naive, but what's the point of the perimeter if AUS and SLC has direct flights to DCA?

And LAX, DEN, SEA, PHX, and SFO. (And SJU, right?)

San Antonio has recently brought on a new airport director (a retired AF general) who has been tasked by city to improve the nonstop flight portfolio from the airport. This route is an obvious choice.[/quote]

It's about time. San Antonio's lack of nonstop flights is on of the main reasons AT&T moved their HQ to Dallas a few years ago. It's got to be excruciating for city officials to watch Austin's airport thrive 80 miles to the northeast while SAT's air service remains mostly stagnant. I would like to see SAT gain nonstop flights to BOS (B6), DCA (WN?), PDX (AS), and more Mexico service (QRO, BJX, SLP, PVR, SD, CZM, etc.)
Pipe dream would be BA to LHR like AUS which, don't forget, is a smaller city and with less people in the MSA than SAT.

jetero wrote:

DariusBieber wrote:

I might be naive, but what's the point of the perimeter if AUS and SLC has direct flights to DCA?

And LAX, DEN, SEA, PHX, and SFO. (And SJU, right?)

And dont forget about PDX. Daily AS service.

TransWorldOne wrote:

It's about time. San Antonio's lack of nonstop flights is on of the main reasons AT&T moved their HQ to Dallas a few years ago. It's got to be excruciating for city officials to watch Austin's airport thrive 80 miles to the northeast while SAT's air service remains mostly stagnant. I would like to see SAT gain nonstop flights to BOS (B6), DCA (WN?), PDX (AS), and more Mexico service (QRO, BJX, SLP, PVR, SD, CZM, etc.)
Pipe dream would be BA to LHR like AUS which, don't forget, is a smaller city and with less people in the MSA than SAT.

Sadly it's a fool's bargain. There's very little an airport director can do to get an airline to add service. (And, likewise, AUS management should not get credit for any increases in service.) Regardless, I wish SAT the best of luck. It's light years better of a city than Austin.

TransWorldOne wrote:

And dont forget about PDX. Daily AS service.

Forgot about that one, thanks.

jetero wrote:

TransWorldOne wrote:

It's about time. San Antonio's lack of nonstop flights is on of the main reasons AT&T moved their HQ to Dallas a few years ago. It's got to be excruciating for city officials to watch Austin's airport thrive 80 miles to the northeast while SAT's air service remains mostly stagnant. I would like to see SAT gain nonstop flights to BOS (B6), DCA (WN?), PDX (AS), and more Mexico service (QRO, BJX, SLP, PVR, SD, CZM, etc.)
Pipe dream would be BA to LHR like AUS which, don't forget, is a smaller city and with less people in the MSA than SAT.

Sadly it's a fool's bargain. There's very little an airport director can do to get an airline to add service. (And, likewise, AUS management should not get credit for any increases in service.) Regardless, I wish SAT the best of luck. It's light years better of a city than Austin.

TransWorldOne wrote:

And dont forget about PDX. Daily AS service.

Forgot about that one, thanks.

San Antonio and Austin are the best cities in Texas, in my opinion. They both have completely different cultures though, which I don't think is necessarily a bad thing. It's really too bad SAT doesn't get more national and global acclaim. After all, there's SeaWorld, Six Flags, Schlitterbahn Waterpark, and of course the Alamo and Riverwalk and lots of Mexican-American culture. SA could be a smaller version of Orlando but it just can't seem to market itself as such.

People forget that the DCA perimeter in the '80s was 1,000 miles. Jim Wright, father of the Right (Wrong) Amendment pushed through Congress an extension of 250 miles that allowed DFW to get nonstops to DCA (and IAH as well, but just short for AUS and SAT).

I flew DFW-IAD-DCA and DCA-BWI-DFW as a kid to get to DC.

Love him or hate him, but Jim Wright did what Bin Crandall wanted. Since it was in his district, he had the power, and AA had the $...

There shouldn't be politicians making commercial decisions like this in the first place.

While I certainly agree that DCA needs slots, that does not justify the micro management, the grandfathering. It is all graft.

DCA should be open to ANY airline doing ANY route they please, provided they are the high bidder for the rented slot.

With 200 passenger A321 and 737-10s, DCA can handle quite a large amount of growth.

DariusBieber wrote:

I might be naive, but what's the point of the perimeter if AUS and SLC has direct flights to DCA?

They each have a flight, singular. There are a total of 20 daily perimeter exemptions at DCA, out of ~325 daily departures.

TransWorldOne wrote:

San Antonio and Austin are the best cities in Texas, in my opinion.

Agree to disagree on Austin! It's one notch above Lubbock, two above Midland, and three above Amarillo in my book.

Flighty wrote:

There shouldn't be politicians making commercial decisions like this in the first place.

I agree that politicians need to leave this alone. The rest of the country loves the mantra of keeping Washington out of their state/city/town/county, but this is the rest of the country getting involved in our daily lives! I have a feeling that Congress making decisions like these with the their local airports wouldn't sit well. I don't think Congress should be involved in these processes period, but they've always wanted to make sure they had a convenient ride home on the weekends.

Flighty wrote:

While I certainly agree that DCA needs slots, that does not justify the micro management, the grandfathering. It is all graft.

That's the problem though — things are pretty maxed out as it is. I think many current slots are being poorly utilized and are effectively being squatted on with the use of regional jets, but the issue is gate space more than anything. Trading RJs for mainline would effectively mean fewer overall slots due to parking.

Flighty wrote:

DCA should be open to ANY airline doing ANY route they please, provided they are the high bidder for the rented slot.

The first part I am in agreement with you, to a point. IAD was ostensibly built to serve this portion of the region for all but local traffic, but perimeter expansion and beyond perimeter flights have taken a toll on the health of IAD. DCA being healthy and well-utilized is a great thing, but it shouldn't be at the expense of the region's global gateway. The MWAA has contributed general mismanagement to combine with Congressional easing of restrictions on DCA to place a heavy burden on Dulles. Without healthy domestic traffic, it's primary tenant (UA) is effectively doomed. If DCA disappeared, IAD would continue to serve the region and all of its aviation needs, but the opposite isn't true. DCA being the primary DC airport is not good for the region.

In my opinion, the primary issue at DCA is that not nearly enough slots were forcibly divested by the AA merger. They have more than 50% of the market share, in addition to having 12 beyond perimeter slots, four more than the next carrier (Alaska), and eight more than either DL or UA. I don't feel that any carrier should maintain anything larger than a 33% percent market share — even if that 17% were entirely given to the second largest carrier, Southwest (14%), AA would STILL be the largest carrier.

The second part opens up a dangerous precedent though: bidding money for slots. That effectively squeezes out the little guys, encourages increased slot squatting, and potentially opens up other busy/slot restricted airports to the same practices — LGA, EWR, JFK, LGB, etc. That's why they're allocated rather than bought or rented, but either practice admittedly is faulted because of political meddling. Funds raised from slot auctions could be a good way for the FAA and/or airport authorities in various cities to fund infrastructure projects, but it would have to be crafted in a way to keep things fair among all respective users so as not to be dominated by the richest possible tenants. I think that "bidding" without a dollar value being affixed is a good process, but that the bids should be awarded by an apolitical board on a merit basis. Let's be honest though, it'll be a cold day in hell before that happens.

blockski wrote:

The Virginia Delegation most certainly cares what MWAA thinks; MWAA has made it a priority to cultivate a relationship with the Virginia Senators and the rest of the DC-area delegation.
MWAA also inserted a clause in the new leases at both DCA and IAD that gives them the right to renegotiate the terms of the deal if Congress changes the perimeter rule.
For each additional beyond perimeter flight Congress adds, MWAA gets to send more money from DCA to IAD. If Congress eliminates the perimeter rule entirely, MWAA can force a complete renegotiation of the lease at both airports.

Yes, the Virginia delegation cares, because they represent the NOVA NIMBY's. Maryland cares, too some extent; noise is an issue in parts of Montgomery County, but not so much in PG. But the DC-area delegation is of course a tiny minority of the national Congress. And I wasn't talking about eliminating the perimeter rule entirely, so it's not clear why you're bringing up that point.

If Congress wanted to, they could squash whatever MWAA wants, and rewrite any 'deal' they wanted to. Congress tolerates MWAA's wants to some extent out of courtesy to the local delegation.

Jim

modernArt wrote:

Its primarily about access to the Pentagon. San Antonio - for those that might not be aware - is a huge military town. Joint Base San Antonio is composed of two AFBs and US Army Fort Sam Houston. Tens of thousands military and civilian personnel, as well as the location of the USAF's basic training..

Military, Air Force, National Security / Intelligence, Cyber Security and Defense contractors are the primary reasons why SAT needs access to DCA. The sort of passengers that need to get to DC quickly and cannot wait to go to IAD and take the Silver Line! This route should have been started decades ago. But I guess the real problem is to find an airline that can operate it even if the perimeter rules are relaxed.

I find it difficult to do same day business trips from AUS/SAT to DC due to very limited options in the morning hours. WN operates a pair of 5:15 AM departures out of AUS/SAT each to BWI. By the time you get to work in DC it's already lunch time. The late evening departure from BWI is helpful but nonetheless a non stop from SAT-DCA would be significantly better since it cuts down on commute time. I don't think these efforts will materialize though...

DCA-ROCguy wrote:

blockski wrote:

The Virginia Delegation most certainly cares what MWAA thinks; MWAA has made it a priority to cultivate a relationship with the Virginia Senators and the rest of the DC-area delegation.
MWAA also inserted a clause in the new leases at both DCA and IAD that gives them the right to renegotiate the terms of the deal if Congress changes the perimeter rule.
For each additional beyond perimeter flight Congress adds, MWAA gets to send more money from DCA to IAD. If Congress eliminates the perimeter rule entirely, MWAA can force a complete renegotiation of the lease at both airports.

Yes, the Virginia delegation cares, because they represent the NOVA NIMBY's. Maryland cares, too some extent; noise is an issue in parts of Montgomery County, but not so much in PG. But the DC-area delegation is of course a tiny minority of the national Congress. And I wasn't talking about eliminating the perimeter rule entirely, so it's not clear why you're bringing up that point.

If Congress wanted to, they could squash whatever MWAA wants, and rewrite any 'deal' they wanted to. Congress tolerates MWAA's wants to some extent out of courtesy to the local delegation.

Jim

I personally don't think Congress should have any say at all, but I'm a bit of a D.C. home rule and statehood enthusiast.

I brought up the lease provisions for a reason. Even if complete elimination of the perimeter is off the table for now, the reason MWAA has those provisions in the leases is that eliminating the rule would be extraordinarily disruptive and destabilizing to their operation, and thus they want to ensure they have protection. They also want to get the airlines on board to some degree with the status quo. UA doesn't want more DCA exemptions, obviously. And since more exemptions would, in effect, mean AA is further subsidizing UA at IAD, then both of MWAA's largest tenants buy in to the status quo.

It is fun to think of what might happen without the perimeter rule. But if it were to be eliminated, it would best be done in a way to phase it out and not just deliver a windfall to current DCA operators. MWAA would certainly want financial protection for IAD. There might be room for a deal. But making that deal would require a specific negotiation, not just the whims of one congressman trying to insert an amendment into a defense appropriations bill.

Not to be difficult, but the DC area needs to get with the times and IAD needs to get the brunt of the focus. I don't see the harm in switching a within-perimeter slot to one outside the perimeter as there's no capacity increase, but I also think that as other large, metropolitan areas around the world get large superhubs well outside of the city center, we in the US need to embrace that approach as well. I know that there's more to it (HSR from the airport to the city center, for example, and not a metro line with a double-digit number of stops) to make that viable, but that's the wave of the future, and IAD was built with that in mind.

DCA-ROCguy wrote:

If Congress wanted to, they could squash whatever MWAA wants, and rewrite any 'deal' they wanted to. Congress tolerates MWAA's wants to some extent out of courtesy to the local delegation.

Which is terrible considering Congressional involvement in MWAA affairs has twice been ruled unconstitutional.

sirloin wrote:

Not to be difficult, but the DC area needs to get with the times and IAD needs to get the brunt of the focus. I don't see the harm in switching a within-perimeter slot to one outside the perimeter as there's no capacity increase, but I also think that as other large, metropolitan areas around the world get large superhubs well outside of the city center, we in the US need to embrace that approach as well. I know that there's more to it (HSR from the airport to the city center, for example, and not a metro line with a double-digit number of stops) to make that viable, but that's the wave of the future, and IAD was built with that in mind.

I completely agree. Protections that strongly favored IAD existed for decades, but have been eroded over the past 20 years despite MWAA objections, and those of many locals. IAD is the airport capable of serving every one of the region's needs, but it's never really been given a fair shake. The Silver Line helps, but it's hardly a savior. Only HSR would make IAD convenient enough to become the airport of choice for those living closer to DC, but as with anything around here, it'll take 30 years to build it even if they started planning today. The fact that DCA now has a higher passenger count than IAD is a clear indication that the erosion of protections which existed in favor of IAD have caused serious damage, and continuing to open up the perimeter or beyond perimeter flights could be catastrophic. The DC area needs IAD to be a healthy, functional airport. One look around the ramp at 1500 every day will tell you how important this airport is to the region.

"I think SAN is classified as a "large-sized" market, hence the distinction. Whether SAN is large or medium I guess is all a matter of perspective."

In fact, SAT and AUS are only 97 miles part. I'm guessing that outlying suburbs of San Antonio already use AUS which has a larger menu of flights.

SAN, on the other hand, is isolated by gridlock from SNA, LGB, and LAX. And its catchment area includes not only the entire county, in addition to the city, but also the adjacent Camp Pendleton and part of Mexico. I sense there is a stronger business case for DCA-SAN over DCA-SAT.

And besides, SAT is already served nonstop from *both* nearby BWI and IAD.

kgaiflyer wrote:

In fact, SAT and AUS are only 97 miles part. I'm guessing that outlying suburbs of San Antonio already use AUS which has a larger menu of flights.

AUS and SAT each have 5 daily flights to the DC area (IAD, BWI and DCA) and AUS has a lone flight on WN to DCA that reaches there at 5 PM. So there isn't a larger menu of flights out of AUS in this particular case.

One thing is for sure, both SAT and SAN are rightfully deserving of flights to DCA on their own merits. It makes me sick to see how many less deserving cities have connectivity to DCA just because they happen to fall within the perimeter.

SATexan wrote:

One thing is for sure, both SAT and SAN are rightfully deserving of flights to DCA on their own merits. It makes me sick to see how many less deserving cities have connectivity to DCA just because they happen to fall within the perimeter.

I agree, SAT': the artificial perimeter. Taking it a step further, I feel there are 4 or 5 beyond-perimeter cities that SHOULD have nonstops to DCA, and would probably be able to support them. Until things (the existing laws) change, I do not really like to see all these special efforts by various congress-members to sneak in exemptions for THEIR particular city. (All right, so maybe that's because nobody that I'm aware of is trying to do anything like that regarding SAN!)

We need another 'open and complete' Beyond-Perimeter hearing, as we've had before, where those deserving cities -- as I posted earlier, "deserving" most likely being determined by the cx themselves -- plus maybe just a couple of additional slots for the large cities (like LA and SFO) that already have service to DCA, but could use more. The rules of the case would have to be carefully created so that the cx don't all just apply for LAX and SFO, etc., and I personally would not like to see more "flexi-slots" that can be moved around at the whim of the cx. Also, where possible, these 'new' slots would hopefully be "created" from existing with-in perimeter routes, so as not to increase the total number of flights serving Reagan Airport..

I certainly know what I would like to see for SAN (ok, ok, that would be at least one daily nonstop each for AS and WN -- the market can certainly support at least that level of service) but nothing's going to happen until the feds decide how next to proceed with the question of DCA air service. And given what's going on these days in DC, in Congress, I'm not holding my breath.

My only hope in the meantime is that either AA or DL will have a huge epiphany and decide to move an LA-DCA flight to SAN-DCA! (Ha ha ha... yeah right!)

bb

seem's to me that if an airline want's to add a flight beyond the perimeter for DCA, they should use one of their current DCA slot's and move it to say a SAT non-stop while dropping say, 1 DCA to MDW....no new flight just a new destination.....I remember flying to IAD when it use to be out in the boonies, nothing around, not it's part of the cluster$uck that is the DC metro area....IAD use to be easier back in the day when it was out in the middle of no-where-land and no traffic....just easier to go into DCA and make the treck on the metro and leave the driving to someone else....

Let's go back to 1980 when the perimeter rule was 1,000 miles and no exceptions, and no Jim Wright protecting his AA contingency before the Reagan Revolution kicked his ass out.