Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4104
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 31, 2017 4:42 pm

Continued from the 2017 thread, which can be found here:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1375491

We'll limit discussion to the DC Metro Airports, RIC, and ORF/PHF since there's now a separate discussion thread for CHO/ROA/LYH.

As before, here are some possible areas of discussion:
- What's in the near term future at Dulles/National/BWI? New airlines/routes?
- Construction updates at IAD and DCA
- Potential future deal between UA/MWAA to replace IAD Concourse C/D?
- Slot usage at DCA
- RIC finally got its first west coast flight (DEN) and appears to be performing well; are there other potential routes that could follow?
- Silver Line updates

Just like other areas threads, this is an open and ongoing discussion about the DMV region. Enjoy!
 
iadbudd
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:36 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 31, 2017 5:40 pm

It's interesting to see that Volaris is starting nonstop to SAL with continuing service to SJC this spring from IAD. Seems like it might be a profitable route due to huge Salvadorian community in the DC area and their lower fares. This will certainly tap into Avianca's (former TACA) dominance in this market. Its a overnight flight as well leaving around 1am getting to SAL at the break of dawn.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4104
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 31, 2017 7:06 pm

iadbudd wrote:
It's interesting to see that Volaris is starting nonstop to SAL with continuing service to SJC this spring from IAD. Seems like it might be a profitable route due to huge Salvadorian community in the DC area and their lower fares. This will certainly tap into Avianca's (former TACA) dominance in this market. Its a overnight flight as well leaving around 1am getting to SAL at the break of dawn.

I think you mean SJO — SJC (San Jose, CA) would be quite the continuing service! I agree that this should make for a successful route for them. It does dip into Avianca's market, but considering the numbers that travel back and forth, I think they'll both be fine. TAI and AVA already have multiple daily flights (at least on some days) from what I've noticed, so clearly the demand is there.
 
iadbudd
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:36 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 31, 2017 7:58 pm

Yes I meant SJO. Also it was mentioned some of their flights would continue onto MEX after SAL, but I can't find it on their website. Only SJO.
 
iadbudd
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:36 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 31, 2017 8:03 pm

As far as future growth at Dulles at least during the popular 2-6pm European bank there is just no gate space available except for Hardstand R gate space. Any European flights would have to be on the second European bank of 7-10pm.
 
jplatts
Posts: 3515
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 31, 2017 8:34 pm

Will Southwest ever add OMA-BWI nonstop service? Southwest currently serves DCA nonstop from OMA, but does not currently serve BWI nonstop from DCA. Omaha is also one of the largest U.S. cities and the largest Midwestern city without any nonstop service to BWI, and the Omaha metropolitan area is the largest metropolitan area in the Midwest without any nonstop service to BWI.

There are only 4 airports served by Southwest Airlines (SFO, TUL, EWR, and PHL) that have nonstop service out of BWI on airlines other than Southwest and that do not currently have nonstop service out of BWI on Southwest. SFO currently has nonstop service out of BWI on United and Virgin America, but not on Southwest. TUL currently has nonstop service out of BWI on Allegiant, but not on Southwest. Southwest wants to defend its California customer base against increased competition from Alaska, and Southwest could add BWI-SFO nonstop service in order to better compete against UA and AS. TUL currently has no nonstop service to MDW, IAD, or DCA and only less than daily seasonal nonstop service to BWI on Allegiant, and Southwest could add TUL-BWI nonstop service in order to provide easier access to Baltimore and Washington, D.C. from TUL along with easier access to connections to SWA destinations in the Northeast from TUL. PHL is too close to BWI for Southwest to serve PHL nonstop from BWI, but EWR did have nonstop service from BWI on Southwest in the past.

BWI and DCA are two of the top destinations traveled to from ONT, but BWI and DCA are not currently served nonstop from ONT. ONT is beyond the DCA perimeter and cannot be served nonstop from DCA without a beyond-perimeter slot exemption, but Southwest could add nonstop service from ONT to BWI since there is demand for flights from ONT to destinations that are not currently served nonstop from ONT. Southwest would also be able to connect passengers to other East Coast destinations from ONT through BWI if it adds ONT-BWI nonstop service.
 
CapitalAvGeek
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 12:45 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sun Dec 31, 2017 8:35 pm

Not sure if the arrival and departure times for the new flights have been posted but here they are below.

Volaris (2X weekly operated by A320)
Departure SJO: 1:30PM
Arrival SAL: 3:04PM
Departure SAL: 4:45PM
Arrival IAD: 11:35PM

Departure IAD: 1:52AM

Arrival SAL: 5:00AM
Departure SAL 6:00AM
Arrival SJO 7:35AM

Cathay (4X weekly operated by A350-1000)
Departure HKG: 6:35PM
Arrival IAD: 10:20PM

Departure IAD: 1:15AM

Arrival HKG: 5:10AM

There should be no issue with gate space since only a few international gates are used around these times.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4104
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Mon Jan 01, 2018 3:49 am

RIC will be getting its second daily DEN flight. I'm not sure if it's just for the summer, or if it will continue beyond that. A morning flight was added on an E175 operated by Skywest, with the evening flight continuing to be on an A319. Clearly this route is doing well for UA, so fingers crossed for some more RIC to West Coast service.
 
jeffrey1970
Posts: 1481
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2001 1:41 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Mon Jan 01, 2018 4:17 am

I have often wondered if El Al would ever consider flying to Washington.
God bless through Jesus, Jeff
 
User avatar
ElroyJetson
Posts: 816
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:04 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Mon Jan 01, 2018 7:47 am

atcsundevil wrote:
RIC will be getting its second daily DEN flight. I'm not sure if it's just for the summer, or if it will continue beyond that. A morning flight was added on an E175 operated by Skywest, with the evening flight continuing to be on an A319. Clearly this route is doing well for UA, so fingers crossed for some more RIC to West Coast service.



That is great news and I commend UA for taking the risk to start flying from RIC to DEN. Published reports I have seen indicate the existing A319 flight has a consistent 80-85% load factor. Clearly UA is making money or they would not be adding a second flight.

I would love to see AA fly RIC to PHX and WN from RIC to MDW and STL or possibly BNA.

ORF to DEN and STL should have already happened. The opportunities are there, particularly from RIC. Let's see if any other airlines are willing to take a little risk.
707 717 727 72S 737 733 737-700 747 757 753 767-300 764 A319 A320 DC-9-10 DC-9-30 DC-9-50, MD-82 MD-88 MD-90 DC-10-10 DC-10-40 F-100
 
User avatar
vatveng
Posts: 1255
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 11:49 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:48 am

ElroyJetson wrote:
ORF to DEN and STL should have already happened. The opportunities are there, particularly from RIC. Let's see if any other airlines are willing to take a little risk.


I think we used to have STL service when TWA still existed.

Frontier flew a lot of people between PHF-DEN for several years. They pulled it as part of their ULCC conversion and after their Apple Vacations PHF contract ended, deciding they could make more money with that plane somewhere else (TTN). But it did serve to highlight the fact that Virginia (outside DC) could support transcon service. So UA's success RIC-DEN doesn't surprise me. My wish list includes a SLC nonstop on DL.
 
blockski
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Mon Jan 01, 2018 1:34 pm

jeffrey1970 wrote:
I have often wondered if El Al would ever consider flying to Washington.


A year or so ago, MWAA accidentally posted one of their confidential docs on website about route development. El Al was on the list, as I gather TLV is one of the biggest unserved destinations out of IAD.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... vi-430449/

That article also mentioned Air India and Cathay Pacific starting service, both of which have happened. It’s clearly something MWAA is working on.
 
LoudounHound
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 8:43 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Mon Jan 01, 2018 1:47 pm

From yesterday's OAG thread:

UA IAD-ALB JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4 AUG 3>4
UA IAD-BTV JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-BUF JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-CAE JUL 4>3
UA IAD-CVG JUN 3>4 JUL 1.9>4 AUG 1.9>4
UA IAD-DAY JUL 3>2
UA IAD-FLL JUN 1.0>1.8 JUL 1.0>2
UA IAD-GSO MAR 2>3
UA IAD-GSP JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4 AUG 3>4
UA IAD-MCI JUN 1.9>3 JUL 1.8>3 AUG 1.9>3
UA IAD-PVD JUN 2>4 JUL 2>4 AUG 2>4
UA IAD-PWM JUN 2>4 JUL 2>4 AUG 2>4
UA IAD-RIC JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-ROC JUL 4>3
UA IAD-SAV JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-SCE JUL 4>3
UA IAD-SDF JUN 1.0>1.8 JUL 1.0>2
UA IAD-STL JUL 4>3
UA IAD-SYR JUL 4>3
UA IAD-TYS JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4 AUG 3>4

That's some encouraging adds. They're almost entirely on the United Express side, but that's where most of the cuts have been for the past couple years.

The MWAA approved capex budget for 2017 included funding for, among other things, renovations to IAD's C/D concourse to make it last another 10 years. Funding was also included to convert two existing concourse B gates to international, and to add up to six B gates. Presumably activity over the past 12 months was behind the scenes, i.e. selling the bonds, hiring design teams, etc. Does anyone know the status of these projects? I would have to guess that the six new gates would require relocating UA's express operation.
 
ual763
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Mon Jan 01, 2018 2:04 pm

LoudounHound wrote:
From yesterday's OAG thread:

UA IAD-ALB JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4 AUG 3>4
UA IAD-BTV JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-BUF JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-CAE JUL 4>3
UA IAD-CVG JUN 3>4 JUL 1.9>4 AUG 1.9>4
UA IAD-DAY JUL 3>2
UA IAD-FLL JUN 1.0>1.8 JUL 1.0>2
UA IAD-GSO MAR 2>3
UA IAD-GSP JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4 AUG 3>4
UA IAD-MCI JUN 1.9>3 JUL 1.8>3 AUG 1.9>3
UA IAD-PVD JUN 2>4 JUL 2>4 AUG 2>4
UA IAD-PWM JUN 2>4 JUL 2>4 AUG 2>4
UA IAD-RIC JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-ROC JUL 4>3
UA IAD-SAV JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-SCE JUL 4>3
UA IAD-SDF JUN 1.0>1.8 JUL 1.0>2
UA IAD-STL JUL 4>3
UA IAD-SYR JUL 4>3
UA IAD-TYS JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4 AUG 3>4

That's some encouraging adds. They're almost entirely on the United Express side, but that's where most of the cuts have been for the past couple years.

The MWAA approved capex budget for 2017 included funding for, among other things, renovations to IAD's C/D concourse to make it last another 10 years. Funding was also included to convert two existing concourse B gates to international, and to add up to six B gates. Presumably activity over the past 12 months was behind the scenes, i.e. selling the bonds, hiring design teams, etc. Does anyone know the status of these projects? I would have to guess that the six new gates would require relocating UA's express operation.


So instead of rebuilding C & D, their busiest terminal, they're just going to ensure it lasts another 10 years and yet continue to add on to B? That is depressing. I bet they won't mind using United passenger airport fees to build those B gates either...
From flying to the NOTAM office
 
LoudounHound
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 8:43 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Mon Jan 01, 2018 2:23 pm

So instead of rebuilding C & D, their busiest terminal, they're just going to ensure it lasts another 10 years and yet continue to add on to B? That is depressing. I bet they won't mind using United passenger airport fees to build those B gates either...[/quote]

Yes, but it takes two to tango. A completely new C/D would be very expensive, and UA has been unwilling to commit to it financially. Some of the new B gates would likely go to *A partners, meaning UA would realize some benefits.
 
jeffrey1970
Posts: 1481
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2001 1:41 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Mon Jan 01, 2018 2:59 pm

blockski wrote:
jeffrey1970 wrote:
I have often wondered if El Al would ever consider flying to Washington.


A year or so ago, MWAA accidentally posted one of their confidential docs on website about route development. El Al was on the list, as I gather TLV is one of the biggest unserved destinations out of IAD.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... vi-430449/

That article also mentioned Air India and Cathay Pacific starting service, both of which have happened. It’s clearly something MWAA is working on.




Thank you for that information.
God bless through Jesus, Jeff
 
CapitalAvGeek
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 12:45 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Mon Jan 01, 2018 3:48 pm

LoudounHound wrote:
From yesterday's OAG thread:

UA IAD-ALB JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4 AUG 3>4
UA IAD-BTV JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-BUF JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-CAE JUL 4>3
UA IAD-CVG JUN 3>4 JUL 1.9>4 AUG 1.9>4
UA IAD-DAY JUL 3>2
UA IAD-FLL JUN 1.0>1.8 JUL 1.0>2
UA IAD-GSO MAR 2>3
UA IAD-GSP JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4 AUG 3>4
UA IAD-MCI JUN 1.9>3 JUL 1.8>3 AUG 1.9>3
UA IAD-PVD JUN 2>4 JUL 2>4 AUG 2>4
UA IAD-PWM JUN 2>4 JUL 2>4 AUG 2>4
UA IAD-RIC JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-ROC JUL 4>3
UA IAD-SAV JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-SCE JUL 4>3
UA IAD-SDF JUN 1.0>1.8 JUL 1.0>2
UA IAD-STL JUL 4>3
UA IAD-SYR JUL 4>3
UA IAD-TYS JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4 AUG 3>4

That's some encouraging adds. They're almost entirely on the United Express side, but that's where most of the cuts have been for the past couple years.

The DAY, ROC, SCE, and SYR cuts are because the 37 seat Dash 8 was used, and now United is upgrading them to 50 seat aircraft.

Yesterday in the OAG thread I posted that there was a net gain of eight flights. Very positive news for sure!
 
User avatar
ElroyJetson
Posts: 816
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:04 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:21 pm

vatveng wrote:
ElroyJetson wrote:
ORF to DEN and STL should have already happened. The opportunities are there, particularly from RIC. Let's see if any other airlines are willing to take a little risk.


I think we used to have STL service when TWA still existed.

Frontier flew a lot of people between PHF-DEN for several years. They pulled it as part of their ULCC conversion and after their Apple Vacations PHF contract ended, deciding they could make more money with that plane somewhere else (TTN). But it did serve to highlight the fact that Virginia (outside DC) could support transcon service. So UA's success RIC-DEN doesn't surprise me. My wish list includes a SLC nonstop on DL.



Both RIC and ORF had mainline flights to STL for a number of years when TWA still existed. By all accounts the flights were successful. I think WN could easily fly ORF and RIC to STL and make money. In fact, I think the flights would be very successful. I think WN's management has gotten ultra conservative and risk adverse which is a shame. Certainly a number of WN employees on this message board have indicated that, and feel the highly conservative approach by management at WN is hurting them. Look how long it took them to start modest international flights to Mexico and the Caribbean.

I don't know....maybe WN will grow some balls and expand in the Southeast where they are relatively weak, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Certainly RIC, GSO, ORF and a number of other cities in the Southeast are ripe for the picking.


Funny, but WN built it's success on taking risks other airlines would not during the Herb Kelleher days. It is unfortunate to see the corporate culture change so dramatically.
707 717 727 72S 737 733 737-700 747 757 753 767-300 764 A319 A320 DC-9-10 DC-9-30 DC-9-50, MD-82 MD-88 MD-90 DC-10-10 DC-10-40 F-100
 
rodney0414
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 12:51 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 02, 2018 12:43 am

i think southwest tried Saturday service to ORF from Denver last year. It must not have been successful because they stopped it. granted it was only on saturday.
 
Jshank83
Posts: 3443
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 02, 2018 5:20 am

ElroyJetson wrote:
Both RIC and ORF had mainline flights to STL for a number of years when TWA still existed. By all accounts the flights were successful. I think WN could easily fly ORF and RIC to STL and make money. In fact, I think the flights would be very successful. I think WN's management has gotten ultra conservative and risk adverse which is a shame. Certainly a number of WN employees on this message board have indicated that, and feel the highly conservative approach by management at WN is hurting them. Look how long it took them to start modest international flights to Mexico and the Caribbean.

I don't know....maybe WN will grow some balls and expand in the Southeast where they are relatively weak, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Certainly RIC, GSO, ORF and a number of other cities in the Southeast are ripe for the picking.


Funny, but WN built it's success on taking risks other airlines would not during the Herb Kelleher days. It is unfortunate to see the corporate culture change so dramatically.


FWIW. RIC and ORF are two of the highest PDEW's from STL that don't have service. ORF is 57 average and RIC is 44. Those numbers are one way. Not super high but WN runs other routes to STL with lower. They are closer feeder routes though (ICT, DRM, TUL, LIT). It might depend how much westerly connection traffic they can feed from ORF/RIC through STL.
 
DCA-ROCguy
Posts: 4207
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2000 5:03 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 02, 2018 6:14 am

CapitalAvGeek wrote:
The DAY, ROC, SCE, and SYR cuts are because the 37 seat Dash 8 was used, and now United is upgrading them to 50 seat aircraft.
Yesterday in the OAG thread I posted that there was a net gain of eight flights. Very positive news for sure!


I wondered about that with the ROC route. Sad to see the smaller-seat-increment aircraft go, because they allow greater frequency. But as long as capacity is being maintained, it's still keeping up service.

I'll be very interested to watch the staging of the construction at DCA as the new security areas and the regional-aircraft concourse are built. I'm not thrilled about MWAA sucking money out of DCA to support IAD and its big debt load, because this is a big project and will no doubt increase DCA's CPE. But the new concourse is an affirmation of DCA's traditional role going back to the US and Allegheny days of short-haul regional flights, even as DCA has taken on a limited LCC and long-haul aspect.

Jim
Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4104
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 02, 2018 12:58 pm

DCA-ROCguy wrote:
I'm not thrilled about MWAA sucking money out of DCA to support IAD and its big debt load, because this is a big project and will no doubt increase DCA's CPE.

If I recall correctly, that's exactly how IAD's debt load got so high, because they offloaded debt from the DCA renovation onto IAD. So, fair is fair. Besides, DCA was supposed to be closed a half century ago, so because that didn't happen and now that DCA is a more profitable domestic hub than IAD, then I don't see anything wrong with DCA being used to prop up IAD. No, it's not the most convenient airport for many people, but the region can survive without DCA — it can't survive without IAD.
 
blockski
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 02, 2018 5:23 pm

atcsundevil wrote:
DCA-ROCguy wrote:
I'm not thrilled about MWAA sucking money out of DCA to support IAD and its big debt load, because this is a big project and will no doubt increase DCA's CPE.

If I recall correctly, that's exactly how IAD's debt load got so high, because they offloaded debt from the DCA renovation onto IAD. So, fair is fair. Besides, DCA was supposed to be closed a half century ago, so because that didn't happen and now that DCA is a more profitable domestic hub than IAD, then I don't see anything wrong with DCA being used to prop up IAD. No, it's not the most convenient airport for many people, but the region can survive without DCA — it can't survive without IAD.


I can't speak to how the debt load got so high in the first place, but I have no issue with sharing costs/revenues between DCA and IAD because of the history. The two airports were designed to be operated as a complementary pair.

There are a whole bunch of reasons why that might've been a bad idea, but that doesn't change the fact that they're both owned and managed by a single entity, and that entity's mandate was to operate the two airports as a system.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4104
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 02, 2018 6:29 pm

blockski wrote:
I can't speak to how the debt load got so high in the first place, but I have no issue with sharing costs/revenues between DCA and IAD because of the history. The two airports were designed to be operated as a complementary pair.

There are a whole bunch of reasons why that might've been a bad idea, but that doesn't change the fact that they're both owned and managed by a single entity, and that entity's mandate was to operate the two airports as a system.

Well, they weren't designed to be complementary, but that's how things ended up due to politics. IAD was supposed to replace DCA, and DCA was due to be scaled back and closed. As we know, that never even came close to actually happening thanks to Congress. That said, I agree with you, that they're complementary now, so sharing debt loads at this point is okay by me.

The debt load on IAD has been a decades-long culmination of mismanagement — who would have guessed?! Unfortunately the original layout of the airport (or lack thereof) has cost billions over the years to try to rectify, but ultimately created the disjointed patchwork that exists today. The APM, the new security area, the IAB, among other projects (not to mention dumping even more money into a temporary building that reached its designed end of life about 20 years ago) has saddled the MWAA with more debt than it knows what to do with. The DCA renovation kickstarted a lot of it though, because that was massively expensive, so they spread the debt between the two. Their spending spree in the 90s and 2000s has put them in their current predicament.

In any event, DCA can withstand higher usage fees. As a matter of fact, logic should dictate that DCA have significantly higher usage fees due to the convenience factor. IAD having the significantly higher fees is completely contradictory. But logic isn't really considered by MWAA...never has been, and never will be.
 
blockski
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 02, 2018 6:50 pm

atcsundevil wrote:
blockski wrote:
I can't speak to how the debt load got so high in the first place, but I have no issue with sharing costs/revenues between DCA and IAD because of the history. The two airports were designed to be operated as a complementary pair.

There are a whole bunch of reasons why that might've been a bad idea, but that doesn't change the fact that they're both owned and managed by a single entity, and that entity's mandate was to operate the two airports as a system.

Well, they weren't designed to be complementary, but that's how things ended up due to politics. IAD was supposed to replace DCA, and DCA was due to be scaled back and closed. As we know, that never even came close to actually happening thanks to Congress. That said, I agree with you, that they're complementary now, so sharing debt loads at this point is okay by me.

The debt load on IAD has been a decades-long culmination of mismanagement — who would have guessed?! Unfortunately the original layout of the airport (or lack thereof) has cost billions over the years to try to rectify, but ultimately created the disjointed patchwork that exists today. The APM, the new security area, the IAB, among other projects (not to mention dumping even more money into a temporary building that reached its designed end of life about 20 years ago) has saddled the MWAA with more debt than it knows what to do with. The DCA renovation kickstarted a lot of it though, because that was massively expensive, so they spread the debt between the two. Their spending spree in the 90s and 2000s has put them in their current predicament.

In any event, DCA can withstand higher usage fees. As a matter of fact, logic should dictate that DCA have significantly higher usage fees due to the convenience factor. IAD having the significantly higher fees is completely contradictory. But logic isn't really considered by MWAA...never has been, and never will be.


It's not purely MWAA's fault, however. They're constrained by a number of different rules and regulations that were tailored to an entity operating a single, self-sustaining airport - and not the kind of system that MWAA has.

(It's also worth nothing that MWAA was indeed charged with operating the two airports as a system - since they were created to manage that system well after the actual construction of IAD by the FAA).

The plans for IAD were indeed a bit too grandiose IMO, but it's also worth noting how much the original layout at IAD got right. The actual airfield at IAD has been quite resilient. It was designed for the jet age and managed to set many of the standards for it. What completely changed was the whole terminal model. At least the IAD airfield left them more room to eventually get things right (even at great cost). It could've been worse; it could've been MCI.
 
DCAfan
Posts: 143
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 02, 2018 7:37 pm

ATCsundevil,

The main reason IAD debt level got so high is that MWAA spent $5 billion on the D2 capital construction program at Dulles. Your theory that Dulles subsidized the building of the Pelli designed terminal at DCA, if true, would have been in violation of federal statutory law. If the facts supported this contention surely United would have sought legal redress.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4104
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:56 pm

blockski wrote:
It's not purely MWAA's fault, however. They're constrained by a number of different rules and regulations that were tailored to an entity operating a single, self-sustaining airport - and not the kind of system that MWAA has.

This is true. PANYNJ is obviously a much larger operation, but they seem to have some similar issues. I think at this point they're probably a little better organized and managed than MWAA, however.

blockski wrote:
(It's also worth nothing that MWAA was indeed charged with operating the two airports as a system - since they were created to manage that system well after the actual construction of IAD by the FAA).

Of course — get inherited a mess to begin with. The mess just has a lot more debt now!

blockski wrote:
The plans for IAD were indeed a bit too grandiose IMO, but it's also worth noting how much the original layout at IAD got right. The actual airfield at IAD has been quite resilient. It was designed for the jet age and managed to set many of the standards for it. What completely changed was the whole terminal model. At least the IAD airfield left them more room to eventually get things right (even at great cost). It could've been worse; it could've been MCI.

I agree. The original design for IAD was a little too revolutionary, but at least it wasn't anything the airport couldn't overcome after spending a bunch of money. MCI is a much more extreme example, because they've been hobbled by a terrible design for 40-some years. IAD effectively had a clean slate and a lot of space to work with. The idea totally flopped, but it wasn't catastrophic. It just cost a lot of money to fix, and became a pretty good case study of what not to do.

DCAfan wrote:
The main reason IAD debt level got so high is that MWAA spent $5 billion on the D2 capital construction program at Dulles.

Yes, that's exactly what I said. Allow me to recap:
Unfortunately the original layout of the airport (or lack thereof) has cost billions over the years to try to rectify, but ultimately created the disjointed patchwork that exists today. The APM, the new security area, the IAB, among other projects (not to mention dumping even more money into a temporary building that reached its designed end of life about 20 years ago) has saddled the MWAA with more debt than it knows what to do with. The DCA renovation kickstarted a lot of it though, because that was massively expensive, so they spread the debt between the two.


DCAfan wrote:
Your theory that Dulles subsidized the building of the Pelli designed terminal at DCA, if true, would have been in violation of federal statutory law. If the facts supported this contention surely United would have sought legal redress.

Theory? Interesting word choice. I never said IAD subsidized DCA. They moved money around to prop up DCA, just like they're doing with DCA to prop up IAD now. I'm not sure how it's against federal law when the same authority operates both airports. Doing so only drove up passenger usage fees at IAD, which is something that doesn't materially affect United. Their costs aren't directly increased when the cost is shifted to the passengers. It just makes the airport less competitive.

Then again, your theory on how NextGen will magically create new capacity at DCA is deeply flawed, too.
 
User avatar
janders
Moderator
Posts: 1102
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:27 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 02, 2018 9:09 pm

Story posted today about traffic breakdown between DCA/IAD/BWI. Traffic is spread pretty evenly between the 3 airports. Unique compared to other large US metro areas where a single airport tends to dominate.

https://ggwash.org/view/66085/these-gra ... s-airports
"We make war that we may live in peace." -- Aristotle
 
jplatts
Posts: 3515
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 02, 2018 9:14 pm

atcsundevil wrote:
Well, they weren't designed to be complementary, but that's how things ended up due to politics. IAD was supposed to replace DCA, and DCA was due to be scaled back and closed. As we know, that never even came close to actually happening thanks to Congress. That said, I agree with you, that they're complementary now, so sharing debt loads at this point is okay by me.


A situation similar to the IAD/DCA situation existed in the DFW Metroplex as DFW International Airport was intended to replace both Dallas Love Field (DAL) and Greater Southwest International Airport (GSW). However, even though DFW Airport did become the main commercial airport for the DFW Metroplex after its opening almost 44 years ago, DFW Airport did not completely replace DAL and Southwest Airlines did remain at DAL after the opening of DFW Airport. DAL also used to have perimeter restrictions similar to the DCA perimeter rule under the Wright Amendment, which has since been repealed, but the Wright Amendment restrictions at DAL used to be more restrictive than the perimeter restrictions imposed at DCA under DCA perimeter rule.

The Wright Amendment was enacted for reasons similar to that of the DCA perimeter rule as the Wright Amendment was enacted to protect DFW and the DCA perimeter rule was enacted to protect IAD. However, the DCA situation is not identical to the DAL situation since the big 3 legacy carriers (AA, DL, and UA) combined have over 50% market share at DCA, with the mainline operations of AA, DL, and UA combined constituting 42% of the market share at DCA, whereas Southwest has over 90% market share at DAL. Another big difference between the IAD/DCA situation and the DFW/DAL situation is that there are significantly more passengers who travel to and from DFW than the number of passengers traveling to and from DAL, whereas there are more passengers traveling to and from DCA (which is a much smaller airport by geographical size than IAD is) than passengers traveling to and from IAD (which is a much bigger airport by geographical size than DCA is).
 
capitalflyer
Posts: 627
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:43 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 02, 2018 10:32 pm

LoudounHound wrote:
From yesterday's OAG thread:

UA IAD-ALB JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4 AUG 3>4
UA IAD-BTV JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-BUF JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-CAE JUL 4>3
UA IAD-CVG JUN 3>4 JUL 1.9>4 AUG 1.9>4
UA IAD-DAY JUL 3>2
UA IAD-FLL JUN 1.0>1.8 JUL 1.0>2
UA IAD-GSO MAR 2>3
UA IAD-GSP JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4 AUG 3>4
UA IAD-MCI JUN 1.9>3 JUL 1.8>3 AUG 1.9>3
UA IAD-PVD JUN 2>4 JUL 2>4 AUG 2>4
UA IAD-PWM JUN 2>4 JUL 2>4 AUG 2>4
UA IAD-RIC JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-ROC JUL 4>3
UA IAD-SAV JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4
UA IAD-SCE JUL 4>3
UA IAD-SDF JUN 1.0>1.8 JUL 1.0>2
UA IAD-STL JUL 4>3
UA IAD-SYR JUL 4>3
UA IAD-TYS JUN 3>4 JUL 3>4 AUG 3>4

That's some encouraging adds. They're almost entirely on the United Express side, but that's where most of the cuts have been for the past couple years.

The MWAA approved capex budget for 2017 included funding for, among other things, renovations to IAD's C/D concourse to make it last another 10 years. Funding was also included to convert two existing concourse B gates to international, and to add up to six B gates. Presumably activity over the past 12 months was behind the scenes, i.e. selling the bonds, hiring design teams, etc. Does anyone know the status of these projects? I would have to guess that the six new gates would require relocating UA's express operation.



Looking at the budget I don't see anything about adding gates, only "gate expansion". And seeing it is for 2017, I don't see any new gates going up on B Concourse. See below 2017 CAPEX Budget

Access Highway Road Improvements $ 13,000
Commercial Curb - 3rd Lane Expansion 6,500
Concourse A/B - Gates Upgrades and Roof Replacement 22,625
Aircraft Gate Expansion 55,000
Rooftop Units 45,105
International Arrivals Building (IAB) Capacity Enhancements 24,000
Main Terminal Entrance Doors Replacement 4,280
Main Terminal Roof Replacement 5,000
Baggage Handling System Improvements - Inbound and Outbound 25,000
Main Terminal Ticket Counter Capacity Expansion 1,200
Airfield Pavement Panel Replacement 115,400
Runway 1R-19L - Design and Emergency Repairs 30,000
Utility Building Main Feeder Replacement 3,775
Power Distribution Upgrades 2,700
Sanitary Sewer System Improvements/Stormwater Management 15,300
AeroTrain Major Maintenance Cycle 29,838
Mobile Lounge/Planemate Rehabilitation 20,670
Special Systems Replacement and Upgrades 8,200
Fire Alarm System Replacement 6,500
Audio/Visual Paging System Replacement 4,500
Other Planning and Programming 7,000
 
LoudounHound
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 8:43 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 02, 2018 11:18 pm

The MWAA approved capex budget for 2017 included funding for, among other things, renovations to IAD's C/D concourse to make it last another 10 years. Funding was also included to convert two existing concourse B gates to international, and to add up to six B gates. Presumably activity over the past 12 months was behind the scenes, i.e. selling the bonds, hiring design teams, etc. Does anyone know the status of these projects? I would have to guess that the six new gates would require relocating UA's express operation.[/quote]


Looking at the budget I don't see anything about adding gates, only "gate expansion". And seeing it is for 2017, I don't see any new gates going up on B Concourse. See below 2017 CAPEX Budget

Access Highway Road Improvements $ 13,000
Commercial Curb - 3rd Lane Expansion 6,500
Concourse A/B - Gates Upgrades and Roof Replacement 22,625
Aircraft Gate Expansion 55,000
Rooftop Units 45,105
International Arrivals Building (IAB) Capacity Enhancements 24,000
Main Terminal Entrance Doors Replacement 4,280
Main Terminal Roof Replacement 5,000
Baggage Handling System Improvements - Inbound and Outbound 25,000
Main Terminal Ticket Counter Capacity Expansion 1,200
Airfield Pavement Panel Replacement 115,400
Runway 1R-19L - Design and Emergency Repairs 30,000
Utility Building Main Feeder Replacement 3,775
Power Distribution Upgrades 2,700
Sanitary Sewer System Improvements/Stormwater Management 15,300
AeroTrain Major Maintenance Cycle 29,838
Mobile Lounge/Planemate Rehabilitation 20,670
Special Systems Replacement and Upgrades 8,200
Fire Alarm System Replacement 6,500
Audio/Visual Paging System Replacement 4,500
Other Planning and Programming 7,000[/quote]

Look at this link to the 2017 budget: http://www.mwaa.com/sites/default/files/2017_budget.pdf. Navigate to p. 152 to see the list of capital expenditures approved for IAD, with a couple highlights as follows:
Multiple phase Concourse C/D rehabilitation
Multiple Concourse B expansion, to include creating sterile corridor for Gates B64-69, converting two domestic B gates to international, and adding an A380 capable gate
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4104
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Wed Jan 03, 2018 12:06 am

jplatts wrote:
A situation similar to the IAD/DCA situation existed in the DFW Metroplex as DFW International Airport was intended to replace both Dallas Love Field (DAL) and Greater Southwest International Airport (GSW). However, even though DFW Airport did become the main commercial airport for the DFW Metroplex after its opening almost 44 years ago, DFW Airport did not completely replace DAL and Southwest Airlines did remain at DAL after the opening of DFW Airport. DAL also used to have perimeter restrictions similar to the DCA perimeter rule under the Wright Amendment, which has since been repealed, but the Wright Amendment restrictions at DAL used to be more restrictive than the perimeter restrictions imposed at DCA under DCA perimeter rule.

The Wright Amendment was enacted for reasons similar to that of the DCA perimeter rule as the Wright Amendment was enacted to protect DFW and the DCA perimeter rule was enacted to protect IAD. However, the DCA situation is not identical to the DAL situation since the big 3 legacy carriers (AA, DL, and UA) combined have over 50% market share at DCA, with the mainline operations of AA, DL, and UA combined constituting 42% of the market share at DCA, whereas Southwest has over 90% market share at DAL. Another big difference between the IAD/DCA situation and the DFW/DAL situation is that there are significantly more passengers who travel to and from DFW than the number of passengers traveling to and from DAL, whereas there are more passengers traveling to and from DCA (which is a much smaller airport by geographical size than IAD is) than passengers traveling to and from IAD (which is a much bigger airport by geographical size than DCA is).

There are a bunch of examples like that. HOU was supposed to close when IAH opened, too. Politics always get involved, but even more so here in DC. Congress would have never let their convenient airport close, especially not when they owned the bloody thing. When IAD opened, it was a lot like the new DEN airport when that opened — there was absolutely nothing out this way. Even when I was a kid growing up nearby almost 30 years ago, there still wasn't much around IAD. Reston was just getting going, Route 28 was still two lanes and stop lights, and IAD was basically at the back of beyond. Not anymore. The only thing that hasn't changed, is that DCA is still more convenient for Congress. They don't own it anymore, but they still very much control its fate.

This is why more recent examples have specific legal language requiring the replaced airport to close so that it doesn't split traffic so badly. Denver replaced Stapleton, Hong Kong Chep Lap Kok replaced Kai Tak, Panama City ECP replaced the old PFN.. I would also use BER as an example, since it's legally supposed to replace Schönefeld and Tegel, but that's a whole other can of worms. Moral of the story is that cities have generally learned their lesson. Opening massively expensive new airports while keeping your old, far more convenient airport open isn't quite so smart in most cases, because it doubles your infrastructure, doubles your costs, and provides no efficiency gains.

All of that notwithstanding, DC is large enough population and area wise to support multiple airports. If DCA closed, a huge portion of the population would be left quite far from an airport. There would be some times of the day that it would probably be quicker to drive to RIC than get to IAD or BWI for some folks. However, I think that DCA needs to be somewhat scaled back to reflect the premium nature of the airport. Fees and fares should be higher, and frequency to destinations should be reduced to add more diversity in destinations (except the shuttle). DCA is bursting at the seams while IAD and BWI still have loads of capacity to offer, so this should be forcibly balanced out so one airport isn't so overloaded. But that's just my two cents.
 
DCA-ROCguy
Posts: 4207
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2000 5:03 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Wed Jan 03, 2018 6:17 am

Two cents, indeed. Fortunately, Federal authorities have made sure DCA stayed open. Closing DCA would be bad policy because Dullles is too far out. And no, DCA should not be made more expensive by fees/ cost and anyone "forcibly" sent to IAD. The Federal government made the bad and unnecessary decision not to build IAD in Burke as originally intended. Instead of standing up to the NIMBY's, as they probably still could have at that time, they built IAD all the heck the way out in Chantilly. That's their problem, not the problem of air travelers today. We're voting with our feet and choosing DCA for most domestic air travel, and will continue to do so. Somebody's idea of "where space is" and what's "bursting at the seams" is irrelevant.

Fortunately, elected representatives, who have to travel constantly and recognize that air travel should be convenient, make policy on this question. Aviation enthusiasts with little regard for the needs of air travelers, don't. :) In this case: good for the politicians!

Jim
Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4104
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Wed Jan 03, 2018 8:57 am

DCA-ROCguy wrote:
Two cents, indeed. Fortunately, Federal authorities have made sure DCA stayed open. Closing DCA would be bad policy because Dullles is too far out.

We can agree to disagree. I never said it should be closed though, I just said that was the original plan. In fact, I argued the opposite. DCA is without question a necessity to the region, but I believe it is imperfect in its current operation.

DCA-ROCguy wrote:
And no, DCA should not be made more expensive by fees/ cost and anyone "forcibly" sent to IAD.

Having DCA be more expensive isn't forcibly doing anything to anybody. If someone wants a cheaper fare, there's incentive to get to IAD or BWI. Most budget-minded travelers wouldn't think twice about a somewhat longer trip to a different airport. Why shouldn't there be a premium for using the more convenient option? Just because you don't want it that way doesn't make it logical. Paying a premium to save time or effort is an everyday occurrence, so airports be exempt?

For example, LCY is more expensive and (for some) more convenient than LHR or LGW. People still trek out to LHR/LGW, or even to STN or LTN, to avoid the premium of a more expensive, more convenient airport. No one is forced to do anything, they're simply paying for more or less convenience. That doesn't make LCY any less successful or competitive, it arguably makes it more so.

Why should DCA be any different from this? People will pay the premium, which would allow the MWAA to more effectively operate IAD alongside DCA. IAD provides services in which DCA is either limited or unable, so a thriving IAD is good for the DC area. People unwilling to pay the premium have two very effective alternatives, just as Londoners do in droves.

Ultimately, the pretext that DCA should be as accessible and affordable to everyone isn't a very American ideal! My intent is for that to be sarcasm, but there is still some truth to that statement. IAD is generally less convenient, so it should cost passengers less than the equivalent service at DCA. To keep them equal or to have DCA be cheaper is IAD sort of subsidizing DCA in a way.

DCA-ROCguy wrote:
Somebody's idea of "where space is" and what's "bursting at the seams" is irrelevant.

DCA-ROCguy wrote:
Aviation enthusiasts with little regard for the needs of air travelers, don't. :) In this case: good for the politicians!

It has nothing to do with my regard for the needs of air travelers — that's literally my job on a daily basis is to look after the well-being and safety of passengers and crew (if my username wasn't already a clue), so I'm probably a little more than an "enthusiast". Another part of my job is dealing with the frequent headache that is DCA. Convenient it may be, but it can barely handle the traffic it receives even on a good day...and on a bad day, well, things can get very bad. Because of that, "bursting at the seams" is sure as hell relevant to me, which makes it relevant to the passengers regularly facing EDCT times, flow controls, and holding because we have nowhere to put them. DCA holds more than any airport outside of New York, so yes, that's absolutely relevant. IAD and BWI both have tons of capacity to spare, so to allow for such an imbalance seems like a waste of infrastructure, at the very least.
 
blockski
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Wed Jan 03, 2018 12:56 pm

DCA-ROCguy wrote:
Two cents, indeed. Fortunately, Federal authorities have made sure DCA stayed open. Closing DCA would be bad policy because Dullles is too far out. And no, DCA should not be made more expensive by fees/ cost and anyone "forcibly" sent to IAD. The Federal government made the bad and unnecessary decision not to build IAD in Burke as originally intended. Instead of standing up to the NIMBY's, as they probably still could have at that time, they built IAD all the heck the way out in Chantilly. That's their problem, not the problem of air travelers today. We're voting with our feet and choosing DCA for most domestic air travel, and will continue to do so. Somebody's idea of "where space is" and what's "bursting at the seams" is irrelevant.

Fortunately, elected representatives, who have to travel constantly and recognize that air travel should be convenient, make policy on this question. Aviation enthusiasts with little regard for the needs of air travelers, don't. :) In this case: good for the politicians!

Jim


Was it also bad policy for Denver to close Stapleton when they opened DEN?

Evaluating all policy solely based on the convenience of a few isn’t exactly a foolproof rubric.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4104
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sat Jan 06, 2018 12:31 am

Had a Southwest B38M come out of RIC earlier. Nice to see RIC getting a little MAX action. Southwest typically runs -700s from RIC, so I'm wondering if it was a sub.
 
User avatar
vatveng
Posts: 1255
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 11:49 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sat Jan 06, 2018 1:34 am

atcsundevil wrote:
Had a Southwest B38M come out of RIC earlier. Nice to see RIC getting a little MAX action. Southwest typically runs -700s from RIC, so I'm wondering if it was a sub.


Maybe an upgauge because ORF has been effectively closed for two days?
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4104
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sat Jan 06, 2018 5:25 am

vatveng wrote:
atcsundevil wrote:
Had a Southwest B38M come out of RIC earlier. Nice to see RIC getting a little MAX action. Southwest typically runs -700s from RIC, so I'm wondering if it was a sub.


Maybe an upgauge because ORF has been effectively closed for two days?

I'm not sure. There were a few flights that got out of ORF and PHF tonight, but it's definitely been limited. ORF is still having decreased braking action, so I'm sure that's part of it.
 
jplatts
Posts: 3515
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sat Jan 06, 2018 10:01 am

Will Congress ever enact legislation to add extra beyond-perimeter slot at DCA? Southwest could add nonstop service from DCA to DEN, LAS, OAK, PHX, SAT, and SAN and Delta could add nonstop service from DCA to SEA if Congress adds extra beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA, if Southwest gets additional beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA, and if Delta gets additional beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA.

AA holds 12 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions, AS will hold 12 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions with the AS-VX merger, F9 holds 6 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions, UA holds 4 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions, DL holds 4 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions, and WN only currently holds 2 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions. Congress should add extra beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA in order to improve competition at DCA and in order to level the playing field for DL, UA, and WN at DCA. DL and WN should both be given extra beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA if Congress enacts legislation granting extra beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA.
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 1609
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sat Jan 06, 2018 1:56 pm

My guess is that SAN is probably the largest unserved market for DCA that is outside the perimeter limit. LAX, SEA, PDX, SFO, DEN, PHX, LAS, etc. all have exemptions. SAT would be my second guess.

AA (actually US) used to fly DCA-SAN and I heard it was wildly popular. So maybe, WN could get SAT and AA or AS would pick up SAN?
 
blockski
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sat Jan 06, 2018 2:09 pm

jplatts wrote:
Will Congress ever enact legislation to add extra beyond-perimeter slot at DCA? Southwest could add nonstop service from DCA to DEN, LAS, OAK, PHX, SAT, and SAN and Delta could add nonstop service from DCA to SEA if Congress adds extra beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA, if Southwest gets additional beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA, and if Delta gets additional beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA.

AA holds 12 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions, AS will hold 12 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions with the AS-VX merger, F9 holds 6 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions, UA holds 4 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions, DL holds 4 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions, and WN only currently holds 2 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions. Congress should add extra beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA in order to improve competition at DCA and in order to level the playing field for DL, UA, and WN at DCA. DL and WN should both be given extra beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA if Congress enacts legislation granting extra beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA.


MWAA doesn’t want more beyond perimeter exceptions. They want a stable environment. Frankly, DCA is pretty competitive as it is. What MWAA wants is to encourage more growth and competition at IAD, not DCA.

MWAA has tried to enlist the airlines in favor of stability at DCA, but trying to terms of the use and lease agreement to the status quo on the perimeter rule. If congress changes it, MWAA can void the leases for all airlines at both DCA and IAD. Basically, they’re reserving the right to jack up prices at DCA to support IAD if Congress decides to stick their nose in this again.

They’ve worked to get the regional congressional delegation on board.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4104
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sat Jan 06, 2018 3:01 pm

jplatts wrote:
Will Congress ever enact legislation to add extra beyond-perimeter slot at DCA? Southwest could add nonstop service from DCA to DEN, LAS, OAK, PHX, SAT, and SAN and Delta could add nonstop service from DCA to SEA if Congress adds extra beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA, if Southwest gets additional beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA, and if Delta gets additional beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA.

AA holds 12 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions, AS will hold 12 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions with the AS-VX merger, F9 holds 6 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions, UA holds 4 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions, DL holds 4 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions, and WN only currently holds 2 beyond-perimeter slot exemptions. Congress should add extra beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA in order to improve competition at DCA and in order to level the playing field for DL, UA, and WN at DCA. DL and WN should both be given extra beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA if Congress enacts legislation granting extra beyond-perimeter slot exemptions at DCA.

Beyond perimeter slots comes up here constantly, and rumors of discussion on Capitol Hill seems to come up about every two years (the last in 2016). However, actual legislation of perimeter exemption slots is extremely rare. Since it was officially codified to the present perimeter (1,250sm) in the 80s, there have only been three times that perimeter exemption slots have been granted — twice in the early 2000s (in large part due to the efforts of John McCain to help out America West), and the last in 2012. There was a push two years ago to extend the entire perimeter itself, but it failed because it was fairly overwhelmingly unpopular across the industry.

Several airlines are actually against perimeter extension or exemption slots, notably United, for obvious reasons. United is clearly a massive airline with a lot of political clout, so they certainly have their say in the process. MWAA is also against it, but their political pull isn't felt the same way as airlines. Airlines have tremendous pull in aviation politics, even on a day-to-day operational basis (particularly when it comes to the New York airports).

As blockski mentioned, perimeter exemption slots creates a lot of instability in the market and for MWAA, primarily with relation to IAD, and maintaining an overall competitive market. DCA is extremely important to the District, but IAD is, too. IAD is the only airport capable of serving as the region's international gateway, but it can't solely function in that role. It needs a healthy domestic operation, but it's been greatly affected by the instability generated by perimeter exemptions.

The two waves of exemptions granted in the early 2000s created around 50 exemption slots. That came right on the back of 9/11 and the economic downturn that followed. IAD had great uptick a few years later with Independence Air, but that quickly collapsed, and things got pretty bleak for a while on domestic ops. The 2013 exemption only applied to eight existing slots, so that didn't cause nearly the same disruption, but the point is still the same — cannibalizing the market for the sake of politics is less than ideal. Creating eight more total perimeter exemption slots won't put IAD on the ropes just like it didn't five years ago, but it's still disruptive to the operation, and it's still another chip away. DCA is federally owned, and therefore owned by all Americans, but it is frustrating to have Congressmen from other states meddle in our aviation market.

This is been a constant battle for close to six decades since the opening of IAD, and it won't end anytime soon. However, I wouldn't expect to see new exemptions anytime soon...at the very least because Congress is a little preoccupied. They can't even manage get around to the FAA reauthorization, which is already on about the 10th extension.
 
DCA-ROCguy
Posts: 4207
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2000 5:03 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sat Jan 06, 2018 8:01 pm

atcsundevil wrote:
Having DCA be more expensive isn't forcibly doing anything to anybody. If someone wants a cheaper fare, there's incentive to get to IAD or BWI. Most budget-minded travelers wouldn't think twice about a somewhat longer trip to a different airport. Why shouldn't there be a premium for using the more convenient option? Just because you don't want it that way doesn't make it logical. Paying a premium to save time or effort is an everyday occurrence, so airports be exempt?


DCA should cost what it costs to run DCA. IAD should cost what it costs to run IAD. BWI should cost what it costs to run BWI. There is no just basis to charge a "premium" (read: more money for MWAA to use incompetently) at DCA.

atcsundevil wrote:
For example, LCY is more expensive and (for some) more convenient than LHR or LGW. People still trek out to LHR/LGW, or even to STN or LTN, to avoid the premium of a more expensive, more convenient airport. No one is forced to do anything, they're simply paying for more or less convenience. That doesn't make LCY any less successful or competitive, it arguably makes it more so. Why should DCA be any different from this? People will pay the premium, which would allow the MWAA to more effectively operate IAD alongside DCA. IAD provides services in which DCA is either limited or unable, so a thriving IAD is good for the DC area. People unwilling to pay the premium have two very effective alternatives, just as Londoners do in droves.


Again, DCA should cost what it costs to run DCA. IAD should cost what it costs to run IAD. LCY is no comparison to DCA, in any event. DCA is a major airport, where as LCY is a very tiny airport. I'm not sure what you mean by "effectively" running IAD, but if you mean that DCA should subsidize it, no.

atcsundevil wrote:
Ultimately, the pretext that DCA should be as accessible and affordable to everyone isn't a very American ideal! My intent is for that to be sarcasm, but there is still some truth to that statement. IAD is generally less convenient, so it should cost passengers less than the equivalent service at DCA. To keep them equal or to have DCA be cheaper is IAD sort of subsidizing DCA in a way.


DCA being funded by DCA passengers, and IAD being funded by IAD passengers, seems very American and absolutely not a 'subsidy' of DCA by IAD.

atcsundevil wrote:
It has nothing to do with my regard for the needs of air travelers — that's literally my job on a daily basis is to look after the well-being and safety of passengers and crew (if my username wasn't already a clue), so I'm probably a little more than an "enthusiast". Another part of my job is dealing with the frequent headache that is DCA. Convenient it may be, but it can barely handle the traffic it receives even on a good day...and on a bad day, well, things can get very bad. Because of that, "bursting at the seams" is sure as hell relevant to me, which makes it relevant to the passengers regularly facing EDCT times, flow controls, and holding because we have nowhere to put them. DCA holds more than any airport outside of New York, so yes, that's absolutely relevant. IAD and BWI both have tons of capacity to spare, so to allow for such an imbalance seems like a waste of infrastructure, at the very least.


Although every one of us here is an enthusiast in the sense of freely participating in this site, yes, I should not have used the word to describe someone who works in the industry.

However much work it is to manage the air traffic there, DCA is not congested in terms of flight delays. BTS lists the national average for on-time flights Jan-Oct 2017 as 84.77 %, with weather 0.24 and national system 4.73 of that; DCA is 78.8%, with weather 0.7 and national system 6.04 percent isn't far out of line. Compare to EWR at 73.75, with weather .45 and national system 10.28. DCA being slotted below capacity (as New York's airports should be, but that's a different discussion) no doubt helps. Now that most major West Coast markets have at least one DCA nonstop, we probably won't see more outside-of-perimeter slots added. SAN and SMF, I think, are the last two large markets without a DCA flight. So aircraft movements at DCA are not going to grow in any meaningful way, unless there's some way general av could grow (and that wouldn't be caused by airlines). Airline aircraft-movements growth will need to happen at IAD and BWI.

DCA is used as its demand warrants, and IAD is used as its demand warrants. Somebody's idea of an "imbalance" or "waste of infrastructure" is irrelevant. In any event, IAD will continue to grow naturally as international traffic grows, and as population continues to grow westwards in Virginia. Not rapid growth, for sure, but steady. If MWAA can stop building white-elephant projects like the terminal-concourses rail system, IAD should do just fine.

Jim
Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4104
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sun Jan 07, 2018 3:46 pm

United will be starting ORF-DEN daily starting in June. I'm not sure if it will be on an E175 or if it'll be mainline. Clearly United is having success from Central Virginia to the west, having already made the decision to go double-daily from RIC (E175 and A319).
 
User avatar
ElroyJetson
Posts: 816
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:04 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:23 pm

atcsundevil wrote:
United will be starting ORF-DEN daily starting in June. I'm not sure if it will be on an E175 or if it'll be mainline. Clearly United is having success from Central Virginia to the west, having already made the decision to go double-daily from RIC (E175 and A319).



First, thanks for the DC/VA/MD thread. Since you have started this thread I have said a number of times ORF-DEN should have already happened. I think this is another smart move by UA and I again applaud there willingness to take the risk.

Having lived in the Richmond area for many years folks want other options going west other than ATL, DFW, DTW or ORD. Those links have existed for years but DEN, STL, or SLC would be very welcome (and needed) additions. I feel quite certain folks in the Tidewater region feel the same way and will support the new UA flight.

Hopefully WN will get on board and recognize the opportunity. Flights to STL, BNA, and MDW are hanging out there and are ripe for the picking. The Tidewater region has around 1.6 million people. Richmond has around 1.3 million. There is enough population to support flights like ORF-DEN. To me that is more than obvious. Maybe route planners will realize what is out there. I certainly hope so.
707 717 727 72S 737 733 737-700 747 757 753 767-300 764 A319 A320 DC-9-10 DC-9-30 DC-9-50, MD-82 MD-88 MD-90 DC-10-10 DC-10-40 F-100
 
User avatar
ElroyJetson
Posts: 816
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:04 am

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 5:11 am

Confirmed today that the ORF-DEN flight will be a mainline A319.


https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... es-in-s18/
707 717 727 72S 737 733 737-700 747 757 753 767-300 764 A319 A320 DC-9-10 DC-9-30 DC-9-50, MD-82 MD-88 MD-90 DC-10-10 DC-10-40 F-100
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4104
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 5:35 am

ElroyJetson wrote:
Confirmed today that the ORF-DEN flight will be a mainline A319.


https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... es-in-s18/

Wow, good for them. I had assumed it would start out on an E175 like RIC did, although they did bump RIC up to the A319 pretty fast, so it makes sense. Either way, UA must like what they see. Hopefully the double daily to RIC is sustainable, this add notwithstanding — the two markets are still relatively independent of each other, so it shouldn't be an issue, but if RIC can perform well being twice daily, RIC and ORF will have to start looking more attractive to DL and AA to follow suit with some west coast nonstops.

Like you've said before, it would be great to see WN get in the mix, but I'm not so sure they're in a position to do so fleet wise right now. They're still making up for capacity losses, especially with the classics gone. It seems like they've been behind the ball on capacity since they dumped the 717s, so it's been an issue for a while. Once they catch up, I would have to think they'd get a little more involved at RIC. A solitary route is very out of character for them.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 11097
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 2:48 pm

QR brings QSuite to IAD for first time

https://www.qatarairways.com/en/press-r ... s-releases
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4104
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 4:57 pm

qf789 wrote:
QR brings QSuite to IAD for first time

https://www.qatarairways.com/en/press-r ... s-releases

Thanks for sharing. It makes sense they'd add it to IAD after JFK. They were here long before Emirates or Etihad...that makes them pretty well established, but considering Emirates normally sends an A380 and Etihad their 787-9, Qatar would want to make sure they've got their most competitive product flying here.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 11097
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: DC/VA/MD Aviation Thread - 2018

Tue Jan 09, 2018 5:16 pm

atcsundevil wrote:
qf789 wrote:
QR brings QSuite to IAD for first time

https://www.qatarairways.com/en/press-r ... s-releases

Thanks for sharing. It makes sense they'd add it to IAD after JFK. They were here long before Emirates or Etihad...that makes them pretty well established, but considering Emirates normally sends an A380 and Etihad their 787-9, Qatar would want to make sure they've got their most competitive product flying here.


Since you mentioned EY, here's a photo on approach to IAD in the snow

Image

https://twitter.com/EtihadAirways/statu ... 1420913664
Forum Moderator
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8

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