Airliners.net

What is the point of the 1,500 mile perimeter rule at LGA and the 1,250 mile perimeter rule at DCA? I understand that both airports are slot restricted, but why shouldn't US Airways or any other airline be allowed to use some of the slots it already has to fly more lucrative routes, such as DCA-SFO nonstop or LGA-LAX? If they can do it, shouldn't they be allowed to. They allow Delta to fly 1,800+ miles to SLC from DCA and America West and Alaska to PHX, LAS, and SEA. They may call it encouraging competition, but it seems to me more like playing favorites. And the runway length obviously isn't the issue. I also understand that they want competition to exist with IAD and JFK and EWR, but is there anything else behind this that someone could shed some light on because to me it just doesn't make sense. Thanks.

US A333 PIT:

I'm not sure of this, but I suspect the DCA perimeter rule was created in part to assure some passengers would have to use IAD. Recall that when IAD was opened in 1962 it was well outside the city (since then, of course, considerable buildup has occurred around the airport). I suspect IAD was so inconvenient no one would use it; hence the perimeter rule assured passengers would have to use IAD, the airport could collect landing and passenger fees, and the government could pay down the debt used to finance IAD's construction.

Just a thought.

--David Earnest
Arlington, VA

They seem anachronistic now, especially with 737, 757, and A320 making transcon flights.

I asked a Port Authority employee once at a panel discussion when we would see something like AS DCA-SEA or TW DCA-LAX here at LGA. He pretty much dodged the question, giving the limp runway answer, and saying that the largest aircraft you'll ever see at LGA is the 764. I don't see why, expecially with the slot system, an airline can't choose to use a slot to carry passengers on a transcon flight (say a US 319 to LGA-LAX). He also alluded to politics (duh) in America West getting permission to fly DCA to PHX. I imagine it was a slippery slope from there...

If the fact that there are hardly any AA/UA/NW/DL flights to their midwest hubs is any indication, I think at this point JFK's niche is pretty well carved out...

As said on this site before, since part of GLA's runways are on piers, they can only handle so much WEIGHT, regardless of runway length.

A300 had to be forbidden because the main gear was close together, causing most of the plane's weight to hit the runway in a smaller area, thus more stressful.

Bigphilnyc: The weight the pier can handle has nothing to do with the topic. I'm not asking about bigger planes flying into LGA and DCA (although LGA handles heavies on a routine basis) I'm just trying to figure out why, as Triscl stated, can't US Airways send an A319 nonstop to LAX or SFO, or SAN? I'm not asking for additional slots either. Just longer haul routes.

The perimeter rules are obviously very artificial restrictions on traffic in and out of LGA and DCA. But they do serve a purpose. For one it preserves service to smaller markets within the perimeter that would otherwise not have service, or require a connection through an east coast hub. The justification behind a CHO-LGA or ILM-DCA is actually fairly good as there are a fair number of government and business connections between those two markets to justify a handful of turboprop flights a day. Secondly it is not like there is a lack of non-stop service into the Washington and New York markets from beyond the perimeter. The advantage of having a LAX-LGA vs. LAX-JFK/EWR nonstop does seem somewhat negligible.

Negligible or not, it would be heavily demand and very lucrative. I say let them do it.

No, definitely not a lack of non-stop service between NYC and LA, for instance, but I would think in terms of where their services are concentrated, US would have a good argument for being allowed to do a west coast n/s from LGA.

Well an argument can be made why it is unfair that USAirways has been pretty much excluded from the beyond the perimeter slot awards at DCA. Airlines like America West, Frontier, and Alaska haven't spent millions upon millions of dollars in PFCs and their own money in developing facilities like USAirways has. Additionally there is not a lack of competition into DCA as well.

However on the other hand, politics aside, I can understand the need to bring in low-fare competition into DCA. However a handful of flights to Phoenix and Denver don't constitute low-fare competition.

Why expand LGA and DCA when IAD and JFK are under utilized especially with regards to domestic service.

If you let one airline fly LGA-LAX you would have to let them all fly LGA-LAX, which would lead to congestion and smaller cities like Knoxville or Greensboro losing out to more LAX flights.

Allowing airlines to fly from DCA and LGA-LAX would mostly benefit US Airways, why would the Government change the current law to benefit one airline?.

There are plenty of flight from JFK to the West coast, both JFK and LGA are in the same borough (Queens). Why do you need two airports in the same borough a couple miles apart flying the exact same routes?

Right now they are building the JFK Air Train which will allow a direct connection from NY Penn Station to JFK via the LIRR at Jamaica station, plans are already in the works to allow the JFK Airtrain to travel on LIRR tracks to NY Penn and possibly Lower Manhattan via a new East Rive tunnel without transfers, a One Seat ride from JFK to Mid-town and Lower Manhattan.

If/when that happens JFK will become easier and quicker to get to than LGA from Manhattan, the current set up at LGA and DCA allows smaller airlines like Air Train and smaller Cities like Louisville to have access to LGA.

If West Coast flights were allowed from LGA smaller cities would lose LGA service and smaller airlines would be pushed out, also airports like JFK and IAD would lose service.

This would only benefit US Airways, which does not make sense.

The status quo will remain, except for DCA where Congress allowed some smaller carriers to gain slot rights to fly outside the Perimeter.

"which would lead to congestion and smaller cities like Knoxville or Greensboro losing out to more LAX flights."

Who cares? That's what capitalism is about...competition.

Why should I have to stopover in the middle of nowhere (no offense to them) because of a silly reason like that?

Because JFK is in the same Borough, right down the Van Wyck.

"That's what capitalism is about...competition."

Even capitalism has boundaries, making folks drive to JFK instead of LGA is no big deal. Except for folks in Astoria.

-------------------------
A300 had to be forbidden because the main gear was close together, causing most of the plane's weight to hit the runway in a smaller area, thus more stressful.
-------------------------

Must be post-Eastern, because EA used the A300 at some Shuttle flights LGA-BOS, especially post-PATCO.

No the Port Authority "fortified" the pier's pillings just to support Eastern's A-300s.

So at first the A300s were not allowed, then the PA strengthened the piers thus allowing Eastern and on occasion CO and Pan Am to operate A300s into LGA.