Southwest is going to mop the floor with Alaska. No way As will ever be able to pull this off.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

SyracuseAvGeek wrote:

Southwest hasn’t tried them and American only recently (past week) began BUF-DFW. Additionally Southwest would be using a much larger aircraft (737) than Alaska would be (E175)

The bigger question is where are they going to get the gates? The new schedules will likely max out their gate usage at DAL. I really doubt even an E75 would work, you're talking relatively small markets. . I'm not even sure they need to fly east again. There's probably a couple of western cities they might be able to eek out of their gates.

I think if AS wanted to fly east from DAL, they’d have kept the LGA/DCA slots. I also think that to invest in such flying, they’d need both room for growth as well as a compelling reason to do so. After all it’s not like they don’t have a lot on their plate already. Afaic, dropping LGA/DAL and focusing on feeding DAL from existing hubs and focus cities shows that, at most, they are trying to have a solid presence in the metroplex.

I see nothing wrong with your last statement. Two gates isn't enough to make even a focus city. I suspect they won't make another attempt to go east. One of my friends is scheduled to fly DAL-SEA-DAL soon. I'll get a trip report from him.

F27500 wrote:

Southwest is going to mop the floor with Alaska. No way As will ever be able to pull this off.

Pull what off? Adding a few frequencies to their hubs and focus cities, to most of which the already have more frequencies than WN?

I have no idea if AS actually intends this as a competitive move, but they dont usually add flights frivolously.

All opinions are welcome, but you need to explain yourself, otherwise your opinion doesnt add anything to the discussion. What do you think they are trying to do that they won't pull off? Why dont you think they will pull it off?

A couple of thoughts on this topic.

If AAG were in fact gate-sitting at Love Field, why wouldn't they just run a shuttle back and forth between DAL and AUS (as VX did) and perhaps IAH/HOU? Seems that would be less fuel and expense and according to many here on A.net, the flights will be empty anyway so what difference does it make where they fly from DAL?

And why in the world are people talking about AS starting up flying east from DAL again? Been there, done that. They voluntarily dropped that flying (to DCA & LGA) and decided to concentrate on w/c-DAL flying. The number of people on this forum who continually feel that AAG has no clue what it's doing is amazing.

Since AS decided to limit their flying to DAL from their 6 major west coast cities (hubs and focus cities of SEA, PDX, SFO, SJC, LAX and SAN) I do not find it difficult to understand their increasing the number of flights to most of those cities. If they want to be a player in the markets, especially competing against WN, how can they be expected to do that by offering only 1 daily r/t (such as they do currently in the SAN-DAL market) or even 2? Some call it gate-sitting, I call it offering a viable schedule with multiple daily flights in some important markets from the Dallas area, that are also very important AAG cities?.

How can people think it's a horrible mistake for AAG to offer adequate service from their 6 major lower-48 cities to a major U.S. destination such as Dallas?

bb.

USAirKid wrote:

B1168 wrote:

Question. Why not just use shuttle buses instead of jet bridges? I suppose a few extra gates for buses isn’t a gigantic work.

The Wright amendment prohibits the use of bus gates at DAL.

Wasn't the Wright amendment fully repealed in 2014?

tphuang wrote:

They are definitely not doing this because their DAL operations are doing well. SEA is probably doing okay. LAX/SFO are going in the wrong direction since VX went away. All the other routes are haemorrhaging money.

This is all about keeping those 2 gates. Since they've cut back a bunch of routes since Q4 of last year, their RASM will be going up YoY this quarter. And probably Q1/Q2 next year also. Maybe, they think it's worth loosing money on this operation to keep a presence in the middle of the country. In the end of the day, there are only so many places an airline can loose money on. Devoting resources to this means they are going to trim frequencies on some of those premium transcon routes.

Can you cite the data showing the routes are hemorrhaging cash? I wasn’t aware that the data was publicly available.

Premium Transcons won’t be trimmed as a result of this. QX will be doing the expanded flying and they are bringing several Qs back into service to cover for the increase in planned PAE/DAL (an increase of 11 daily round trips) for the Embraer fleet.

yonikasz wrote:

USAirKid wrote:

B1168 wrote:

Question. Why not just use shuttle buses instead of jet bridges? I suppose a few extra gates for buses isn’t a gigantic work.

The Wright amendment prohibits the use of bus gates at DAL.

Wasn't the Wright amendment fully repealed in 2014?

No. It was amended.
The five party agreement was what basically replaced it.
Lots of new restrictions in place, which was the only way to get the concerned parties to agree to relaxing the old restrictions.
Of course, “agreement” and “Love Field” don’t belong in the same sentence for any period of tome greater than two months.

SyracuseAvGeek wrote:

Does anyone think they could expand into some smaller cities in upstate NY (ALB, ROC, SYR) nonstop from DAL that both AA (with DFW) and WN have over looked? The distance to upstate NY from Dallas is still shorter than their longest current route from DAL with the E175 (which is SEA).

AS has only 3 gates at DAL. Too few to scale it to a focus city. SJC where they are 2nd behind WN they have about 10 and the airport is process of expanding.

DAL will be more of a spoke for eastward expansion from West.

VX tried to put their gates at LGA/DCA to use without too much luck.

YouGeeElWhy wrote:

WaywardMemphian wrote:

With all the growth to the north, i'd think McKinney would be a olace I'd want to set up shop, not expand DAL when more WA restrictions sunset.

NIMBYs will keep McKinney from having commercial service which i can understand their plight. DFW has more than enough capacity with its airports. As soon as Dallas can bust that 20 gate cap on DAL they need to do so and I’d guess if they can get International service too that would soften the blow for WN. AA is going to work to suppres growth (e.g. no Terminal F) at DFW, so City of Dallas needs to lead that growth with DAL.

The real game changer would be Fort Worth opening Meacham to commercial service. ULCCs heading there and a possible Southwest sandwich would be very interesting.

My wet dream would be UA heading back to Love with more service than IAH (hoping DEN also as Im both a WN employee with UA parents) but alas...

vadodara wrote:

AS has only 3 gates at DAL. Too few to scale it to a focus city. SJC where they are 2nd behind WN they have about 10 and the airport is process of expanding.

DAL will be more of a spoke for eastward expansion from West.

VX tried to put their gates at LGA/DCA to use without too much luck.

AS only has two gates at DAL. The rest of your post still stands though.

Although it’s interesting that the DAL gates only move between airlines in packs of two. No single gates finding their way to another airline. (I know about DL squeezing in on a WN gate, but that counts as a WN hate in my book.)

TWA772LR wrote:

The real game changer would be Fort Worth opening Meacham to commercial service. ULCCs heading there and a possible Southwest sandwich would be very interesting.

My wet dream would be UA heading back to Love with more service than IAH (hoping DEN also as Im both a WN employee with UA parents) but alas...

Are you assuming Meacham ISN'T open to commercial service? It has always been available, and thus we see how ignorant your statement about it being a game-changer is. No one wants to fly there. Also, there will be no "Southwest sandwich" as the WA prevents WN from operating from any other airport in the region (80mi radius), including McKinney, without giving up gates at DAL.

zululima wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

The real game changer would be Fort Worth opening Meacham to commercial service. ULCCs heading there and a possible Southwest sandwich would be very interesting.

My wet dream would be UA heading back to Love with more service than IAH (hoping DEN also as Im both a WN employee with UA parents) but alas...

Are you assuming Meacham ISN'T open to commercial service? It has always been available, and thus we see how ignorant your statement about it being a game-changer is. No one wants to fly there. Also, there will be no "Southwest sandwich" as the WA prevents WN from operating from any other airport in the region (80mi radius), including McKinney, without giving up gates at DAL.

The 5-party agreement actually allows WN to operate out of airports other than DAL in the DFW Metroplex without having to give up gates at DAL starting in 2025.

zululima wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

The real game changer would be Fort Worth opening Meacham to commercial service. ULCCs heading there and a possible Southwest sandwich would be very interesting.

My wet dream would be UA heading back to Love with more service than IAH (hoping DEN also as Im both a WN employee with UA parents) but alas...

Are you assuming Meacham ISN'T open to commercial service? It has always been available, and thus we see how ignorant your statement about it being a game-changer is. No one wants to fly there. Also, there will be no "Southwest sandwich" as the WA prevents WN from operating from any other airport in the region (80mi radius), including McKinney, without giving up gates at DAL.

Isn't Meacham restricted by the Wright Amendment now?

wedgetail737 wrote:

Isn't Meacham restricted by the Wright Amendment now?

The provision of the 5-party agreement that restricted commercial passenger air service in the DFW Metroplex to DFW and DAL had expired more than 4 years ago on October 13, 2014 when the Wright Amendment was repealed. Other airports in the DFW Metroplex such as FTW, AFW, and TKI can now be opened up to commercial passenger air service.

While the Wright Amendment Reform Act of 2006 imposes restrictions on commercial passenger air service out of DAL and charter operations out of DAL, the Wright Amendment Reform Act of 2006 does not prohibit commercial passenger air service out of airports other than DFW or DAL in the DFW Metroplex.

jplatts wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

Isn't Meacham restricted by the Wright Amendment now?

The provision of the 5-party agreement that restricted commercial passenger air service in the DFW Metroplex to DFW and DAL had expired more than 4 years ago on October 13, 2014 when the Wright Amendment was repealed. Other airports in the DFW Metroplex such as FTW, AFW, and TKI can now be opened up to commercial passenger air service.

While the Wright Amendment Reform Act of 2006 imposes restrictions on commercial passenger air service out of DAL and charter operations out of DAL, the Wright Amendment Reform Act of 2006 does not prohibit commercial passenger air service out of airports other than DFW or DAL in the DFW Metroplex.

Thanks for the education. I guess it's just matter of time that an airline would have the guts to start service out of another Metroplex airport other than DAL and DFW. Didn't someone try Meacham some 10 years ago or so? Isn't Neelman's new proposed airline (Moxy?) looking at Meacham?

I would not rule out either of Alliance or McKinney.

While McKinney would make more sense, Alliance May have an easier path to fruition.

USAirKid wrote:

vadodara wrote:

AS has only 2gates at DAL. Too few to scale it to a focus city. SJC wh ere they are 2nd behind WN they have about 10 and the airport is process of expanding.

ck.

AS only has two gates at DAL. The rest of your post still stands though.

Typo, always has been 2 gates.

zululima wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

The real game changer would be Fort Worth opening Meacham to commercial service. ULCCs heading there and a possible Southwest sandwich would be very interesting.

My wet dream would be UA heading back to Love with more service than IAH (hoping DEN also as Im both a WN employee with UA parents) but alas...

Are you assuming Meacham ISN'T open to commercial service? It has always been available, and thus we see how ignorant your statement about it being a game-changer is. No one wants to fly there. Also, there will be no "Southwest sandwich" as the WA prevents WN from operating from any other airport in the region (80mi radius), including McKinney, without giving up gates at DAL.

The general focus has been on WN, as an overflow in the Metroplex to maxed-out DAL and unpalatable DFW. This can’t happen until after 2024 - until then, nothing is likely to happen.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

zululima wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

The real game changer would be Fort Worth opening Meacham to commercial service. ULCCs heading there and a possible Southwest sandwich would be very interesting.

My wet dream would be UA heading back to Love with more service than IAH (hoping DEN also as Im both a WN employee with UA parents) but alas...

Are you assuming Meacham ISN'T open to commercial service? It has always been available, and thus we see how ignorant your statement about it being a game-changer is. No one wants to fly there. Also, there will be no "Southwest sandwich" as the WA prevents WN from operating from any other airport in the region (80mi radius), including McKinney, without giving up gates at DAL.

The general focus has been on WN, as an overflow in the Metroplex to maxed-out DAL and unpalatable DFW. This can’t happen until after 2024 - until then, nothing is likely to happen.

Can any of these airports begin building anything in anticipation of service prior to 2024? Or absolutely nothing can happen until 2024?

wedgetail737 wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

zululima wrote:

Are you assuming Meacham ISN'T open to commercial service? It has always been available, and thus we see how ignorant your statement about it being a game-changer is. No one wants to fly there. Also, there will be no "Southwest sandwich" as the WA prevents WN from operating from any other airport in the region (80mi radius), including McKinney, without giving up gates at DAL.

The general focus has been on WN, as an overflow in the Metroplex to maxed-out DAL and unpalatable DFW. This can’t happen until after 2024 - until then, nothing is likely to happen.

Can any of these airports begin building anything in anticipation of service prior to 2024? Or absolutely nothing can happen until 2024?

I imagine they can do whatever they want but are probably not going to do snything before they know somebody is coming. I certainly wouldn’t want to invest millions only to have another ridiculous Wright Amendment “amendment”.

vadodara wrote:

I would not rule out either of Alliance or McKinney.

While McKinney would make more sense, Alliance May have an easier path to fruition.

I wouldn't count on seeing passenger service out of Alliance, since they seem to be more focused on cargo ops (see: Amazon Air's new hub at ATW). Then again, stranger things have happened...

Apologize if it's been discussed already, but it looks like one of Alaska's SEA-DAL flights will be on the 737 starting April 30th: https://www.google.com/flights#flt=SEA. ... .USD.19080

vadodara wrote:

SyracuseAvGeek wrote:

Does anyone think they could expand into some smaller cities in upstate NY (ALB, ROC, SYR) nonstop from DAL that both AA (with DFW) and WN have over looked? The distance to upstate NY from Dallas is still shorter than their longest current route from DAL with the E175 (which is SEA).

AS has only 3 gates at DAL. Too few to scale it to a focus city. SJC where they are 2nd behind WN they have about 10 and the airport is process of expanding.

DAL will be more of a spoke for eastward expansion from West.

VX tried to put their gates at LGA/DCA to use without too much luck.

There will be plenty of gates at SJC for a banked hub.

A guy can dream, can’t he?

AirFiero wrote:

vadodara wrote:

SyracuseAvGeek wrote:

Does anyone think they could expand into some smaller cities in upstate NY (ALB, ROC, SYR) nonstop from DAL that both AA (with DFW) and WN have over looked? The distance to upstate NY from Dallas is still shorter than their longest current route from DAL with the E175 (which is SEA).

AS has only 3 gates at DAL. Too few to scale it to a focus city. SJC where they are 2nd behind WN they have about 10 and the airport is process of expanding.

DAL will be more of a spoke for eastward expansion from West.

VX tried to put their gates at LGA/DCA to use without too much luck.

There will be plenty of gates at SJC for a banked hub.

A guy can dream, can’t he?

I thought AS was building a hub in SJC.........

lhpdx wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

vadodara wrote:

AS has only 3 gates at DAL. Too few to scale it to a focus city. SJC where they are 2nd behind WN they have about 10 and the airport is process of expanding.

DAL will be more of a spoke for eastward expansion from West.

VX tried to put their gates at LGA/DCA to use without too much luck.

There will be plenty of gates at SJC for a banked hub.

A guy can dream, can’t he?

I thought AS was building a hub in SJC.........

Now known as a “focus city”. I haven’t heard anything about a full blown hub. So far, only my dream to see SJC have a hub again.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

zululima wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

The real game changer would be Fort Worth opening Meacham to commercial service. ULCCs heading there and a possible Southwest sandwich would be very interesting.

My wet dream would be UA heading back to Love with more service than IAH (hoping DEN also as Im both a WN employee with UA parents) but alas...

Are you assuming Meacham ISN'T open to commercial service? It has always been available, and thus we see how ignorant your statement about it being a game-changer is. No one wants to fly there. Also, there will be no "Southwest sandwich" as the WA prevents WN from operating from any other airport in the region (80mi radius), including McKinney, without giving up gates at DAL.

The general focus has been on WN, as an overflow in the Metroplex to maxed-out DAL and unpalatable DFW. This can’t happen until after 2024 - until then, nothing is likely to happen.

I don’t believe WN thinks of DFW as unpalatable at all. Remember, they just recently acquired an Airline that operates at the world’s busiest Airport. I actually think that absent the total repeal of the Wright Amendment and DAL being allowed to develop the full 32 Gate master plan, that WN will operate a split operation at DFW with probably a minimum of 10 gates.

SWADawg wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

zululima wrote:

Are you assuming Meacham ISN'T open to commercial service? It has always been available, and thus we see how ignorant your statement about it being a game-changer is. No one wants to fly there. Also, there will be no "Southwest sandwich" as the WA prevents WN from operating from any other airport in the region (80mi radius), including McKinney, without giving up gates at DAL.

The general focus has been on WN, as an overflow in the Metroplex to maxed-out DAL and unpalatable DFW. This can’t happen until after 2024 - until then, nothing is likely to happen.

I don’t believe WN thinks of DFW as unpalatable at all. Remember, they just recently acquired an Airline that operates at the world’s busiest Airport. I actually think that absent the total repeal of the Wright Amendment and DAL being allowed to develop the full 32 Gate master plan, that WN will operate a split operation at DFW with probably a minimum of 10 gates.

Well that’s good news for DFW, not so much for Meacham et al.

SWADawg wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

The general focus has been on WN, as an overflow in the Metroplex to maxed-out DAL and unpalatable DFW. This can’t happen until after 2024 - until then, nothing is likely to happen.

I don’t believe WN thinks of DFW as unpalatable at all. Remember, they just recently acquired an Airline that operates at the world’s busiest Airport. I actually think that absent the total repeal of the Wright Amendment and DAL being allowed to develop the full 32 Gate master plan, that WN will operate a split operation at DFW with probably a minimum of 10 gates.

I agree with your point, and ATL isn't the only airport served by WN that carries more domestic passengers per year than DFW does since LAX also carries more domestic passengers per year than DFW does.

WN also now serves airports that it previously stayed out of such as ATL, BOS, CLT, CVG, DEN, MEM, MSP, LGA, EWR, DCA, and IAD.

WN can likely make DFW work in addition to DAL since (a) WN has strong brand recognition in the DFW Metroplex, (b) some of the individuals traveling to the DFW Metroplex are going to destinations that are closer to DFW than to DAL, (c) over 2 million people in the DFW Metroplex live closer to DFW than to DAL, and (d) there is significant demand for WN service in the DFW Metroplex.

Both AS and DL are able to make DFW and DAL work, even though AS and DL both served DFW prior to the repeal of the Wright Amendment.

If WN started DFW, what if anything would they do differently? Would they duplicate their service at DAL, or would they fly a very different schedule from DFW?

AirFiero wrote:

If WN started DFW, what if anything would they do differently? Would they duplicate their service at DAL, or would they fly a very different schedule from DFW?

If WN does start service out of DFW, WN would likely fly a different schedule out of DFW than it does out of DAL, but the majority of WN's nonstop service out of DFW would be to domestic destinations that are already served nonstop out of DAL on WN. WN might also add nonstop service to international destinations such as CUN, PVR, and SJD from DFW since the 5-party agreement restricts nonstop international passenger service in the DFW Metroplex to DFW.

SFOtoORD wrote:

This fits with the theory. I’m sure WN would rather have AS as a weaker player at DAL than have DL butting in.

I'm sure Southwest would rather have underutilized Alaska gates they can try and leverage for Delta, rather than have to give up their own...

zululima wrote:

Are you assuming Meacham ISN'T open to commercial service? It has always been available, and thus we see how ignorant your statement about it being a game-changer is. No one wants to fly there.

FTW is open for commercial service, however the city also tore down the passenger terminal to make room for more private flights, and makes no efforts to attract service. A few ULCCs have expressed interest this year and the city has made the right noises (it is a public airport after all...) while pointing out these airlines are going to have to operate out of a temporary terminal somewhere (paid by whom?) before the city considers building a new passenger terminal. And the other question is where to build, there isn't a lot of vacant space...

AFW is more or less the same story. No passenger terminal, and no rush to build one, however space is available.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

The general focus has been on WN, as an overflow in the Metroplex to maxed-out DAL and unpalatable DFW. This can’t happen until after 2024 - until then, nothing is likely to happen.

So unpalatable that after Southwest's acquisition of AirTran closed, Southwest had to be threatened with a lawsuit for violating the 5-party agreement before they stopped operating out of DFW.

AirFiero wrote:

vadodara wrote:

SyracuseAvGeek wrote:

Does anyone think they could expand into some smaller cities in upstate NY (ALB, ROC, SYR) nonstop from DAL that both AA (with DFW) and WN have over looked? The distance to upstate NY from Dallas is still shorter than their longest current route from DAL with the E175 (which is SEA).

AS has only 3 gates at DAL. Too few to scale it to a focus city. SJC where they are 2nd behind WN they have about 10 and the airport is process of expanding.

DAL will be more of a spoke for eastward expansion from West.

VX tried to put their gates at LGA/DCA to use without too much luck.

There will be plenty of gates at SJC for a banked hub.

A guy can dream, can’t he?

Ha ha, why not? If you call a bank of flights to some select business destinations as a hub then certainly.

Boeing's new aftermarket services division, Boeing Global Services (BGS), is headquartered in Plano, TX which DAL is very convenient for. With significant BGS presence in the Seattle area, this will drive additional air traffic between the Seattle offices and the headquarters in Plano as BGS ramps up.

QXAS wrote:

tphuang wrote:

They are definitely not doing this because their DAL operations are doing well. SEA is probably doing okay. LAX/SFO are going in the wrong direction since VX went away. All the other routes are haemorrhaging money.

This is all about keeping those 2 gates. Since they've cut back a bunch of routes since Q4 of last year, their RASM will be going up YoY this quarter. And probably Q1/Q2 next year also. Maybe, they think it's worth loosing money on this operation to keep a presence in the middle of the country. In the end of the day, there are only so many places an airline can loose money on. Devoting resources to this means they are going to trim frequencies on some of those premium transcon routes.

Can you cite the data showing the routes are hemorrhaging cash? I wasn’t aware that the data was publicly available.

Premium Transcons won’t be trimmed as a result of this. QX will be doing the expanded flying and they are bringing several Qs back into service to cover for the increase in planned PAE/DAL (an increase of 11 daily round trips) for the Embraer fleet.

I've posted a bunch of numbers on this forum using a combination of LF and Average Fare from BTS. That's my source. They've definitely trimmed frequencies on EWR-SFO for several months and BOS-LAX and cut PDX-ATL. As I said, it's hard to imagine they can do well on any of these WN hub to hub routes. There is not many routes out of SEA that WN can generate higher yield on 737 vs AS regional, DAL is one of them. That should give you an idea of how dominant WN is at DAL.

Next summer, WN will be up to 130+ departures at SAN with 14+ flights on routes like SAN-SJC/SMF and they will be flying to HI. Even in a year where they cut a lot of growth elsewhere, they are adding a lot at SJC/SAN. I see this as AS not only holding on to those gates but also fighting back against WN. Every airline has to pick and choose which money loosing routes to stay on for strategic reasons. And AS has made the decision for it to be here.

keep in mind, there's no 320's into DAL at all with this new sked. so the equipment is half the size. almost the same amount of seats, just more flights in/out, to make it look busy. They need to re-open LGA, and add ORD, ATL, DCA, RDU, AUS--Get the nation's tech centers involved

olddominion727 wrote:

keep in mind, there's no 320's into DAL at all with this new sked. so the equipment is half the size. almost the same amount of seats, just more flights in/out, to make it look busy. They need to re-open LGA, and add ORD, ATL, DCA, RDU, AUS--Get the nation's tech centers involved

“To make it look busy”?

They aren’t interested in using DAL as a hub, they are feeding it from their existing hubs and focus cities. They’re already getting their butt kicked by WN in their stronger markets - WN will wipe the floor with them in those other markets you mentioned. Honestly, they’re better off leasing the LGA/DCA slots to WN and putting their resources into markets where they have more FF penetration.

olddominion727 wrote:

keep in mind, there's no 320's into DAL at all with this new sked. so the equipment is half the size. almost the same amount of seats, just more flights in/out, to make it look busy. They need to re-open LGA, and add ORD, ATL, DCA, RDU, AUS--Get the nation's tech centers involved

AS is adding a 737-800 to the SEA-DAL route in April.

olddominion727 wrote:

keep in mind, there's no 320's into DAL at all with this new sked. so the equipment is half the size. almost the same amount of seats, just more flights in/out, to make it look busy. They need to re-open LGA, and add ORD, ATL, DCA, RDU, AUS--Get the nation's tech centers involved

From DAL? They just leased their LGA/DCA gates to WN.

Regarding the tech centers, your point is valid. AUS is already connected to 2 more AS hubs/focus cities besides SEA. Expect the same for several more.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

olddominion727 wrote:

keep in mind, there's no 320's into DAL at all with this new sked. so the equipment is half the size. almost the same amount of seats, just more flights in/out, to make it look busy. They need to re-open LGA, and add ORD, ATL, DCA, RDU, AUS--Get the nation's tech centers involved

“To make it look busy”?
They aren’t interested in using DAL as a hub, they are feeding it from their existing hubs and focus cities. They’re already getting their butt kicked by WN in their stronger markets - WN will wipe the floor with them in those other markets you mentioned. Honestly, they’re better off leasing the LGA/DCA slots to WN and putting their resources into markets where they have more FF penetration.

It remains to be seen whether these flights will actually operate; I am betting the answer 's "no".

alfa164 wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

olddominion727 wrote:

keep in mind, there's no 320's into DAL at all with this new sked. so the equipment is half the size. almost the same amount of seats, just more flights in/out, to make it look busy. They need to re-open LGA, and add ORD, ATL, DCA, RDU, AUS--Get the nation's tech centers involved

“To make it look busy”?
They aren’t interested in using DAL as a hub, they are feeding it from their existing hubs and focus cities. They’re already getting their butt kicked by WN in their stronger markets - WN will wipe the floor with them in those other markets you mentioned. Honestly, they’re better off leasing the LGA/DCA slots to WN and putting their resources into markets where they have more FF penetration.

It remains to be seen whether these flights will actually operate; I am betting the answer 's "no".

Sure, but are you disagreeing with something I said?

alfa164 wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

olddominion727 wrote:

keep in mind, there's no 320's into DAL at all with this new sked. so the equipment is half the size. almost the same amount of seats, just more flights in/out, to make it look busy. They need to re-open LGA, and add ORD, ATL, DCA, RDU, AUS--Get the nation's tech centers involved

“To make it look busy”?
They aren’t interested in using DAL as a hub, they are feeding it from their existing hubs and focus cities. They’re already getting their butt kicked by WN in their stronger markets - WN will wipe the floor with them in those other markets you mentioned. Honestly, they’re better off leasing the LGA/DCA slots to WN and putting their resources into markets where they have more FF penetration.

It remains to be seen whether these flights will actually operate; I am betting the answer 's "no".

That is certainly possible, but it would be a very un-AS like move.

wedgetail737 wrote:

olddominion727 wrote:

keep in mind, there's no 320's into DAL at all with this new sked. so the equipment is half the size. almost the same amount of seats, just more flights in/out, to make it look busy. They need to re-open LGA, and add ORD, ATL, DCA, RDU, AUS--Get the nation's tech centers involved

AS is adding a 737-800 to the SEA-DAL route in April.

And a 737-900 by July!

PlanesNTrains wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

“To make it look busy”?
They aren’t interested in using DAL as a hub, they are feeding it from their existing hubs and focus cities. They’re already getting their butt kicked by WN in their stronger markets - WN will wipe the floor with them in those other markets you mentioned. Honestly, they’re better off leasing the LGA/DCA slots to WN and putting their resources into markets where they have more FF penetration.

It remains to be seen whether these flights will actually operate; I am betting the answer 's "no".

Sure, but are you disagreeing with something I said?

No; I agree with you

vadodara wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

vadodara wrote:

AS has only 3 gates at DAL. Too few to scale it to a focus city. SJC where they are 2nd behind WN they have about 10 and the airport is process of expanding.

DAL will be more of a spoke for eastward expansion from West.

VX tried to put their gates at LGA/DCA to use without too much luck.

There will be plenty of gates at SJC for a banked hub.

A guy can dream, can’t he?

Ha ha, why not? If you call a bank of flights to some select business destinations as a hub then certainly.

Do you have a point here?

First, AS serves all 4 Hawaii destinations from SJC, plus some cities in Mexico. Second, a hub need not be the size of DFW or ATL to still be a banked hub with flights timed specifically for connections. I don’t know how many total gates AS will end up with or at least have access to, but it could be 14-16. That is plenty for an airline like AS on the west coast to have a small to medium hub operation.

Perhaps you weren’t aware SJC already was a hub for AA, when the airport was MUCH smaller.

Actually very aware of Reno’s hub as well.

Why did the hub disappear?

B1168 wrote:

WaywardMemphian wrote:

With all the growth to the north, i'd think McKinney would be a olace I'd want to set up shop, not expand DAL when more WA restrictions sunset.

What about other small airports?

There's a 50-mile rule that none of the Wright parties will support new service at their airports for a while longer, but it's entirely unenforceable anyway. Only really effects Fort Worth - Meacham and Dallas Executive.

The most ideally placed given the population changes in DFW are Addison, Denton, Fort Worth - Alliance and McKinney. NIMBYS will fight Addison and McKinney. Addison is landlocked and fully developed. That leaves Denton County. For a ULCC, I think it might make sense, but for a major I just don't think the population is there yet. If the Denton County portion of US 380 gets built, however, that would massively change things, as most of the new population in the DFW area would be closer to DTO than DAL, and some even closer than DFW.

legend500 wrote:

B1168 wrote:

WaywardMemphian wrote:

With all the growth to the north, i'd think McKinney would be a olace I'd want to set up shop, not expand DAL when more WA restrictions sunset.

What about other small airports?

There's a 50-mile rule that none of the Wright parties will support new service at their airports for a while longer, but it's entirely unenforceable anyway. Only really effects Fort Worth - Meacham and Dallas Executive.

The most ideally placed given the population changes in DFW are Addison, Denton, Fort Worth - Alliance and McKinney. NIMBYS will fight Addison and McKinney. Addison is landlocked and fully developed. That leaves Denton County. For a ULCC, I think it might make sense, but for a major I just don't think the population is there yet. If the Denton County portion of US 380 gets built, however, that would massively change things, as most of the new population in the DFW area would be closer to DTO than DAL, and some even closer than DFW.

I remembered one ULCC planing to use an airport in Fort Wirth for service, use A220-300, and wish to start in 2020. They have every reason to consider DTO as well.
Addison... that is done. Leave it as an executive airport.
McKinney actually seems to have more land nearby than DTO to develop. That is the best news when you want to operate as an ULCC to avoid curfew; but I am not so sure about its ability to grab as many pax as DTO can.
But regardless, the first priority is to get any law trouble(s) into trash can as soon as we can. Otherwise? A mere daydream.

As maybe many expected, these increases have been pulled out of the schedule before ever being flown.

Instead one of the SFO frequencies will shift to SEA but the schedule will remain at 13 flights a day out of DAL as of Aug 27:

3x LAX
3x SEA
2x PDX
2x SFO
2x SJC
1x SAN
(All E75 except for one PDX gets mainline for a few days around Labor Day)

unmlobo wrote:

As maybe many expected, these increases have been pulled out of the schedule before ever being flown

This is being done strategically due to ongoing litigation in Dallas that is threatening the likelihood of being able to use both gates, so rather than having to possibly cancel and reschedule guests later - and reduce staffing levels after ramping them up - the decision was made to be proactive in the face of this uncertainty and adjust the schedules now, just in case.

unmlobo wrote:

As maybe many expected, these increases have been pulled out of the schedule before ever being flown.

Instead one of the SFO frequencies will shift to SEA but the schedule will remain at 13 flights a day out of DAL as of Aug 27:

3x LAX
3x SEA
2x PDX
2x SFO
2x SJC
1x SAN
(All E75 except for one PDX gets mainline for a few days around Labor Day)

enilria wrote:

This is not happening because of demand. It would be interesting to know why it *is* happening. I’m sure it’s a bargaining ploy.

A particular posted accuses me of always being wrong on AS@DAL, but it appears I was right on the money again. This was just a ploy to hold their gates amid questionable performance at the WN hive. Not surprising. They should have just sold the gates to DL and let them fight the battle with a lot more resources.