Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:28 am

Well since my post was deleted about WN announcing service from DAL to Delhi, I decided to start a new thread in a similar vain, but with no "attempt" at humor............

Just thinking out loud about would and could WN work around the law by using 737's with only 56 pax ?? Would that be a 737-600 model, isn't that the smallest model now being built by Boeing?

Would be kinda funny to see WN do this since AA and DFW is raising SUCH a ruckus about opening up DAL to long-haul flights...............

Maybe they could have two and two seating similar to YX's B-717 and extra leg room for us "Long-tall Texans" !!

This point of this thread is just a "what-if" scenario..........that is all.
 
N908AW
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:05 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:38 am

In one word?

No.

The business plan would have to be turned almost as upside down as it would if they started service to DEL. Although I do think it'd be funnier if WN started TLS ops...
'Cause you're on ATA again, and on ATA, you're on vacation!
 
hz747300
Posts: 2417
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:38 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:39 am

Another airline already tried that, funnyman, and I believe the stupid law is interpretted to be any plane designed to hold 56 passengers. Meaning if WN was willing to forgo fleet commonality, they could in essence, use ERJ-135s to launch continental services.

This is why the law is stupid and makes no sense. It is designed solely to inhibit competition and retard growth. There is no basis in reality for this law, and not forcing AA and DFW Airport Authority to compete on the merits of the product they offer to the DFW consumer is unjust, unreasonable, and un-American at its root.

Many city airports have noise control laws, and I imagine the same exists for Love Field. So already, DFW has the ability to offer round-the-clock service, which is one advantage it will have to work with. The other is the ability to offer connecting service to overseas destinations.
Keep on truckin'...
 
N908AW
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:05 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:44 am

Quoting HZ747300 (Reply 2):
Another airline already tried that, funnyman, and I believe the stupid law is interpretted to be any plane designed to hold 56 passengers. Meaning if WN was willing to forgo fleet commonality, they could in essence, use ERJ-135s to launch continental services.

So like, what would happen if a full 56-passenger plane had a lady on board who had a baby inflight?  scratchchin 
'Cause you're on ATA again, and on ATA, you're on vacation!
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:45 am

Quoting HZ747300 (Reply 2):
Another airline already tried that, funnyman, and I believe the stupid law is interpretted to be any plane designed to hold 56 passengers.

It was interpreted as 56 seat -installed- since Legend was able to operate that way until they eventually folded....

What's so ironic about that is that Legend got help from Congressman Joe Barton in getting DOT to see it that way, and today, Barton is mad-dog against Wright Amendment repeal... Go figure...
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:47 am

Quoting N908AW (Reply 3):
So like, what would happen if a full 56-passenger plane had a lady on board who had a baby inflight?

The airline would charge her for an extra seat, of course...  Wink (It's a tough revenue environment these days....)
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:48 am

Well Legend did try it, yet they spent around $20million in court just to get the permission to actually start service from DAL. Then they spent around another $20million to build their own terminal, so that only left them with about $25million to run the airline to start with. Plus, AA had a BIG part in Legend's failure, whether you want to admit it or not.

I agree, it would not fit with WN's operating philosophy, I'm just asking how difficult would it be to do this? Just have a dedicated fleet of 737-600's with the 56 seats in it.............

I'm not really aware of any laws at Love Field about the noise issue, yet so many people, especially the NIMBY's, complain about adding additional service from DAL due to noise. Yet, WN's fleet now that the 737-200's are gone is EXTREMELY quiet compared to all the general aviation jets such as the Lears and the older G-2's and 3's that leave there all the time..........that is what most people tend to forget or not realize. It is basically the general aviation jets that are making the most noise at DAL.
 
hz747300
Posts: 2417
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:38 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:49 am

Quoting N908AW (Reply 3):
So like, what would happen if a full 56-passenger plane had a lady on board who had a baby inflight?

Well, it depends, if it was leaving DAL American Airlines and the DFW Airport Authrority would either want the plane shot down by the Texas Air National Guard, or the infant passenger to be fined US$50,000, or more likely, both. If the plane was flying to DAL then American Airlines and the DFW Airport Authrority would want the Texas Air National Guard to intercept and force the plane to land at DFW where it will be billed punative landing fees in triplicate, and in the infant in question will be removed from the plane and flogged like a graphiti vandal in Singapore, in front of his or hers parents.

Good question, glad you asked. Those points needed clarity.
Keep on truckin'...
 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:50 am

Well you know WN is starting to charge "larger" passengers for another seat these days........the lady wouldn't be charged for having the baby on board though. Children under two fly for free !!  Smile
 
User avatar
OzarkD9S
Posts: 5730
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 2:31 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 9:08 am

A better option would be E-170's configured for 56 seats, not as drastic a seating loss, and in a two class configuration with a larger biz-class, might make economic sense.

But not operated by WN, that would blow their whole modus operandi.

Legend II perhaps?
Next up: STL DEN PSP DEN STL
 
luv2fly
Posts: 11056
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 2:57 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 9:25 am

Ask Midwest (2 X 2) how it is going for your answer!
You can cut the irony with a knife
 
N908AW
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:05 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 9:29 am

Quoting HZ747300 (Reply 7):
Good question, glad you asked. Those points needed clarity.

Am I detecting sarcasm? I was being sarcastic too. Although God knows the baby would probably show up on the No-Fly list.

[Edited 2005-09-01 02:31:45]
'Cause you're on ATA again, and on ATA, you're on vacation!
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 10:09 am




Quoting N908AW (Reply 3):
So like, what would happen if a full 56-passenger plane had a lady on board who had a baby inflight?



AA/DFW would probably fly some kind of protest banner over DAL...

 sarcastic 



2H4


Intentionally Left Blank
 
JayDavis
Topic Author
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 2:29 pm

Hey Luv2Fly,

You really can't compare YX and their operation with 2 x 2 aircraft in MKE with an airline trying it in the Dallas market.

The Metroplex is a MUCH larger population base than MKE.

I just wonder if Legend could have made it, IF they had had more $$$$ on hand? You also wonder if they could have survived after 9/11? I doubt it, but it was a very nice airline to fly.
 
cjpark
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 9:41 pm

WN could quit asking for special favors and just start service from DFW. Lease a few gates build up the business and be done with it.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
goingboeing
Posts: 4727
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 1999 1:58 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Thu Sep 01, 2005 10:19 pm

Quoting JayDavis (Reply 13):
I just wonder if Legend could have made it, IF they had had more $$$$ on hand? You also wonder if they could have survived after 9/11? I doubt it, but it was a very nice airline to fly.

It wouldn't have mattered if Legend had beaucoup bucks on hand, they wouldn't have lasted - even without AA retrofitting the F100's. Legend's plan was to capture the "full fare" coach passenger and provide them first class service and legroom. But in the market they entered, price rules. If it's between flying a coach seat on an AA plane out of DFW to LGA for $250 and paying $900+ to fly on Legend, most corporate travel departments would have nixed any plans to send employees on the $900 flight. Very few leisure travellers would have paid the 9 bills to fly them either. So Legend found themselves offering first class service for $250 or less - no way to make money doing that. Had they stuck with their business plan of charging full coach, they would have been flying around half full (if that) 56 seat aircraft.
 
qqflyboy
Posts: 1635
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:47 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:23 am

Quoting HZ747300 (Reply 2):
This is why the law is stupid and makes no sense. It is designed solely to inhibit competition and retard growth.

Actually, the law was created to create competition and spur growth. As much as some don't like it now, the law was created to protect North Texas' investment in DFW. What I find interesting is Southwest knew the restrictions when they began their fledgling carrier. They have the opportunity to fly from DFW.

Here's some food for thought. People think the Wright Amendment is stunting growth and does not provide for competition. I think it does the opposite. If the W.A. is repealed then there will be unfair advantages and less competition. Why? The same reason Southwest wants to move to Boeing Field. They want their own gig so they don't have to compete with other airlines. If Southwest moved to DFW, that would be increased competition, which in turn, would bring fares down and aid in growth. By repealing Wright, or opening BFI to WN, competition is stifled.

Since there is no willingness to change the master plan of Love Field, Southwest's monopoly at Love would suddenly become extremely valuable. It's not desirable now because of the restrictions. All the other airlines learned to play by the rules and fly out of DFW. The point is, there won't be any room for other carriers to come in to DAL once the restrictions are lifted, and that is where the competition ends. The same that will happen should they move to BFI. Which leads me to this question: If Southwest is going to build a terminal at BFI, how many gates will be available for other airlines to allow for competition? My guess is not very many.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
 
N200WN
Posts: 696
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 7:09 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:23 am

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 14):
WN could quit asking for special favors and just start service from DFW. Lease a few gates build up the business and be done with it.

No means No. WN will see this thing through even if takes years.
 
workbench
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 1999 3:22 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:25 am

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 14):
WN could quit asking for special favors and just start service from DFW. Lease a few gates build up the business and be done with it.

CJPark?

Why should WN be forced to change their business plan to make AA happy? The Wright is Wrong! You can bet if DFW had restrictions AA would be kicking and screaming all the way to the supreme court.
The Wright will go away!
 
qqflyboy
Posts: 1635
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:47 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 1:02 am

I am not going to bash Southwest... I love them just as much as the next guy. Hell, I probably fly them for pleasure just as much or more then the airline I work for.

However, I disagree with Southwest's position on the Wright Amendment. And yes, I work for AA, but stronly believe I would feel the same if I worked for another airline. Why did Southwest start flying from DAL? Did they not have the opportunity from the beginning to fly from DFW? I am asking seriously, because I don't know. My guess, and this is only a guess, is Southwest chose DAL because of the lack of competition. They were a new carrier trying to establish themselves in the post deregulation market. In my opinion, they did a smart thing by choosing DAL to limit competition and get themselves established.

Obviously, they are more than established now. What was thier plan all along? They had to have had some idea during the growth they've enjoyed DAL wasn't going to work in the long run. They've even been supportive of Wright, in the past, when it suited them. Now, they have this about face. Why? Because it no longer suits them, and moving to DFW does not suit them either because they'll face competition. Just as I mentioned above, moving to BFI suits them quite well because of less competition. Smart on the company's behalf. But all this chatter about Wright stifling competition is, in my opinion, "smoke and mirrors." (Couldn't resist using a famous(?) Texan's favorite line.)

If Southwest had just started from DFW, or would move to DFW, there would be all the competition in the world with ZERO restrictions. Southwest even has a nearly empty terminal waiting for them there. Has DFW offered to pay for WN to move to DFW? I wonder what kind of response this offer would generate.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
 
cjpark
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 1:10 am

Quoting Workbench (Reply 18):
Quoting Cjpark (Reply 14):
WN could quit asking for special favors and just start service from DFW. Lease a few gates build up the business and be done with it.

CJPark?

Why should WN be forced to change their business plan to make AA happy? The Wright is Wrong! You can bet if DFW had restrictions AA would be kicking and screaming all the way to the supreme court.
The Wright will go away!

First of all the issue is between airports not airlines. No matter how many times you prattle on about how unfair it is to WN that fact will not change.

The real question is why Dallas tax payers why should we dole out tax dollars to suit WN's business plan when we have an underutilized airport at DFW they can fly long distance legally.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
cjpark
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 1:12 am

Quoting N200WN (Reply 17):
WN could quit asking for special favors and just start service from DFW. Lease a few gates build up the business and be done with it.

No means No. WN will see this thing through even if takes years.

Nope they will serve DFW. It is just a matter of time. If anything Wright and restrictions on airports will be even stronger as a result of WN's pandering for special favors.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
workbench
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 1999 3:22 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 3:42 am

CjPark-

I strongly disagree with you. First of all the Wright was originally set up to protect DFW more than 30 years ago. DFW has built up strong and no longer needs the protection. The only thing the WA does now is protect AA, and forces the people of North Texas to shell out much more money for airtravel since there is no competition.
So it is about airlines. It is an AA vs WN, where as WN and the people of not only North Texas suffer but ALL of the USA, do some research at
www.setlovefree.com

And WN will never serve DFW, they wont give in. The WA will go away.
 
AAgent
Posts: 540
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 11:41 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 4:13 am

As quoted from the www.setlovefree.com website...

"The Wright Amendment has a strong history of stifling competition and creating high fares."

O.K., I'll bite on this one... So why has WN chosen to stay at such a terrible airport for so many years instead of setting their love of low fares free at DFW?

Best Regards,
AAgent

Oh, and by the way...It will be interesting to see how much Southwest really loves their low fares when their fare skewing fuel hedges run out in the not so distant future.
War Eagle!
 
cjpark
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: A New Twist On The Wright Amendment Debate

Fri Sep 02, 2005 6:10 am

Quoting Workbench (Reply 22):
CjPark-

I strongly disagree with you. First of all the Wright was originally set up to protect DFW more than 30 years ago. DFW has built up strong and no longer needs the protection. The only thing the WA does now is protect AA, and forces the people of North Texas to shell out much more money for airtravel since there is no competition.
So it is about airlines. It is an AA vs WN, where as WN and the people of not only North Texas suffer but ALL of the USA, do some research at
www.setlovefree.com

And WN will never serve DFW, they wont give in. The WA will go away.

Workbench,

Where in the amendment does it mention AA or Wn or any other airline? It specifically limits air travel from Dallas Love Field no more no less.

This whole debate is centered on the selfish intentions of one airline WN. The promise of low fares is nothing more than a distraction from the real issue. WN will eventually serve the area from DFW the market will force them to.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
apodino
Posts: 3979
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 12:43 pm

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 21):

Nope they will serve DFW. It is just a matter of time. If anything Wright and restrictions on airports will be even stronger as a result of WN's pandering for special favors.

Totally disagree with you there. I think there is a better chance of them pulling out of Dallas than there is of them serving love field. Southwest cannot serve DFW profitably, and as long as that is true, they will NEVER EVER EVER EVER serve the airport. And if they do add the restrictions to Love Field and Southwest pulls out, they probably take their HQ with them, which will cause a lot of metroplex jobs to leave the area, delivering a major blow to the local economy.

Yes it is true that WN wants the amendment repealed for selfish reasons, and American wants it in place for Selfish reasons. You cannot deny that fact. When I look at the issue, I tend to look at the big picture. What people have been forgetting in this entire debate, and I bring it up again and again until people get it in their heads is the other airlines, and there are alot of them. The problem is most of them don't really compete with AA at DFW. They just compete with them on flights to the Hubs, which basically protects the turf of these airlines. Delta had to close their hub because they can't compete with AA at DFW. Yes DFW is underutilized at the moment and the airport is bleeding red ink. I attribute this to two problems, American's cutthroat mentality, and terrible terrible management at DFW. Fagan and Cox need to go and bring in someone who can run DFW much better, and make all the airports into one regional authority. I think thats a step that needs to happen with or without wright in place. Secondly, there needs to be real competition in the DFW market. The problem is how do we get it? The airport is big enough for a second airline to hub there? How do we get there. Southwest? Well, we know about Southwest, they cannot operate at the airport and be profitable for a lot of reasons, so I doubt you will ever see them at DFW. NW and DL will be bankrupt shortly, so thats out. CO has a hub in nearby IAH, so I doubt they would go. UA would likely lose a hub before they add one, so they are out. It would have to be one of the LCC's. B6? Well, they are building up a fortress in the NE with JFK and soon BOS, and are more concerned it seems with linking leisure markets than business routes. They could do it, but I don't see it. FL? Well, they have been building up a bit of a presence in DFW, and if they take a few more aircraft, they could use it to link east and west. So they could be a possiblity, but I don't think they quite have the fleet. The other possiblity is the merged US/HP. The one thing this company would lack would be a midwest hub, given that the new company would be very strong on both coasts. The problem is that as long as AA continues the predatory practices at DFW, Parker himself says that any further expansion wouldn't be sustainable.

Based on what I have seen, the only airline with the resources to compete with AA in the DFW market would be WN. However, WN will not lose money to serve DFW. Which basically means that DFW is pretty static in terms of expansion. The only way that AA can get some competion in my opinion is with a repeal of the Wright Amendment. Yes the competition would only be on a few routes. But if I know American, they will flood the market with seats and lower fares to try to drive Southwest out, not easy to do. Because their position in some markets would be weakend by this, this would leave them somewhat vulnerable at DFW to competition in other areas. Thats where another airline moves in and accepts DFW's offer. AA is put in a tough situation, because they have to figure out which routes to defend. If they flood every single market and lower fares to compete, they will have to suspend some routes which they currently serve to free up the aircraft, and some of these routes might be high yielding. With the build up in FLL of other airlines, how many markets can AA flood? Arpey will have some tough decisions to make.

As for the arguments of DFW becoming another YMX if the Wright Amendment is repealed I don't see it happening. 70 percent of the traffic at DFW today is connecting, and I don't see American sacrificing these connecting passengers for only O and D passengers by moving too many flights to DAL, except on some routes like LGA, and ORD. Also, Ft. Worth is closer to DFW, and the airport is in the middle of one huge metropolitan area. And MDW and HOU are closer to their cities and don't get the traffic that the bigger airports get. I forsee DAL becoming nothing more than an MDW if wright is repealed. And with the quiet jets that the airlines will bring in, there will be no noticeable noise difference. I used to live next to an airport and I could barely hear MD-88's when they took off.

At least this is the way I see it. I support a wright repeal not for southwest, but because it would benefit all airlines in the metroplex, save for maybe American. But I want all the other airlines to have a chance to compete equally, and I just don't see how it can happen with wright in place.
 
goingboeing
Posts: 4727
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 1999 1:58 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 1:05 pm

Quoting AAgent (Reply 23):
Oh, and by the way...It will be interesting to see how much Southwest really loves their low fares when their fare skewing fuel hedges run out in the not so distant future.

That's 4 years from now. Thing is, I'm sure they'll price accordingly, unlike the majors who sell a one dollar seat for 50 cents.
 
FlewGSW
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:45 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 1:26 pm

Back in 1974, the landing fees at the new DFW were sooooooooo high, I see why WN's business plan was to fly from DAL. Shoot, even back in the late 70's AA combined about the DFW landing fees being too high, and only flew 727s into DFW (they had 747s, 707s and DC-10s back then).

But operating fees have changed, and WN can make $ at DFW. And WN knows it. And so should all of you.

As to 56 seaters, WN is telling BFI that they will only operate one sub-fleet type for noise considerations. If WN is willing to rusticate one fleet type to a specific airport, then, gosh, they just might consider converting some 737s to 56 seaters and dedicate them to DAL. Makes cents.

By the way, if WN wants to get their hands on some RJs that meet the 56 seat limit, I hear DL has a Comair up for quick sale. Ummmmmmmmmmmm
 
cjpark
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 10:00 pm

Quoting Apodino (Reply 25):
Totally disagree with you there. I think there is a better chance of them pulling out of Dallas than there is of them serving love field. Southwest cannot serve DFW profitably, and as long as that is true, they will NEVER EVER EVER EVER serve the airport. And if they do add the restrictions to Love Field and Southwest pulls out, they probably take their HQ with them, which will cause a lot of metroplex jobs to leave the area, delivering a major blow to the local economy.

Never say never.

Kelly and Barnett can be replaced and they probably will be once they lose the WA battle. The next group will be smart enough to read the writing on the wall and play by the rules.

Concerning the possible threat that loosing WN to our local economy if WN removed their headquarters from the city. Not that big of a deal. We would lose more if Walmart pulled out both in Jobs and Tax Revenue.

Kelly is the tail wagging the dog in this instance. He can't win on the local level so he goes national. Not a good way to build trust within the community is it?
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
stirling
Posts: 3897
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 2:00 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 10:44 pm

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 28):
Kelly is the tail wagging the dog in this instance. He can't win on the local level so he goes national

First off, since this is Federal Law...going national is requisite.

Not because "He Can't win Locally" as you have stated. It is going to take a quorum of all 50 states and their elected officials to remove these anti-competitive restrictions....So if it is truely a "LOCAL" issue, why is the Federal Government involved?

Spin it however you like, the Wright Amendment suppresses commerce.
Delete this User
 
cjpark
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: A New Twist On The Wright Amendment Debate

Fri Sep 02, 2005 11:07 pm

Stirling,

Has it ever crossed your mind that had WN worked with the community (Local Leaders) to find a way to repeal the law first that the North Texas delegation would have dealt with the law themselves. They could have just added an amendment to the last Transportation bill and the rest of Congress would not have had to be concerned with it at all since it would cost their districts nothing.

Instead now we have a national debate on a local issue based on the motives of one company willing to go to what seems to any extreme to get what they want.

The only reason the Wright Amendment suppresses commerce as you say it is because the one airline that could render the amendment useless without special legislation refuses to compromise. Care to tell us who that airline is?
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
workbench
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 1999 3:22 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 11:40 pm

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 28):
Kelly and Barnett can be replaced and they probably will be once they lose the WA battle

WN will not loose the WA battle, every analyst says it WILL be repealed. Why should WN be forced to change their business plan and move to a different airport where their operating costs be significantly higher? I really really doubt that the WA has any chance to stay. The majority of the US public wants it repealed. I was on a recent flight and the flight attendant made an annoucement that "if it (the wright ammednment) is repealed you could see airfares nationwide drop as much as 50%!." So log on to www.setlovefree.com WOW thats a lot! The whole plane broke out in applause.....
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Fri Sep 02, 2005 11:52 pm

Quoting AAgent (Reply 23):
"The Wright Amendment has a strong history of stifling competition and creating high fares."



Quoting AAgent (Reply 23):
O.K., I'll bite on this one... So why has WN chosen to stay at such a terrible airport for so many years instead of setting their love of low fares free at DFW?

It's because the Wright Amendment drove the Southwest's growth elsewhere, i.e. not DAL.

Consider:

-In 1979, SWA service to MSY started from DAL in 1979. The Wright Amendment also went into effect.

-In 1980, SWA service to ABQ, OKC, and TUL from DAL started. This was also the year that Predident Reagan fired the striking PATCO controllers and air traffic was a mess.

-In 1981, no new service.

-In 1982, service starts at PHX, SAN, LAX, LAS, and SFO, but not from DAL.

-In 1983, service starts at DEN Stapleton (to be stopped in 1985 due persistent ATC delays at DEN from Stapleton's too-close runways), again, not from DAL.

-In 1984, service to LIT from DAL starts. This was the last new service flown from Dallas Love.

Over the last 21 years since LIT was added, Southwest expanded to many places in the USA (again, not from DAL) and proved a pretty successful business model was in place.

Meanwhile, during the same timeframe, 1979-1982 saw the decline and fall of Braniff (v1.0). Delta began building their DFW hub in the 1980s, and, of course, they pulled the plug on that earlier in 2005. Meanwhile, AA moved their HQ to DFW from NYC in 1979 and built a mega-hub at DFW.

In summary, Southwest pretty much "maxed out" all the destinations serviceable from DAL back in 1984 and thus has been tolerating the WA restrictions there as they've profitably grown elsewhere starting in 1982. During that time, AA (and to a lesser, now extinct extent, DL) flew to more far flung destinations from DFW. With little meaningful competition there, everyone knows how much higher the fares are than average. (That's the "stiffling competition" part of the WA to area consumers.) There's absolutely no reasons why DFW and DAL couldn't and shouldn't compete just like ORD and MDW do. Right now, Metroplex travelers (and those to travel from elsewhere to the Metroplex and back) don't have that choice.

What changed SWA's WA stance was Delta's decision in the fall of 2004 to dismantle their DFW hub effective in early 2005. There was a desire to pick-up some of Delta's "slack" from the overall Dallas-Ft. Worth metro market, but they didn't want to serve DFW for a variety of reasons. Since the intent of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 was to get government -out- of airline regulating (fares and routes) and promoting free-market competetion, and further, that DFW's "survival" in 2004 (30 years from its 1974 opening) was hardly at risk anymore, SWA said "enough" and started going after WA repeal.

A key element in the debate here is the DFW/AA connection. The debate is often framed as if DFW itself will return to its natural prairie state with Wright repeal, but I think we all can readily concede that that's not going to happen. To be sure, AA will lose -some- passengers/revenue to longer SWA flights at Love, but compliance with the existing Love Master Plan assures that Love will never be anything but a small fraction of DFW's size. Some folks might just as easily -prefer- to fly AA since they live closer to DFW, and/or prefer their service and FF plan. Some might just as easily prefer Southwest's at Love.

If AA's revenue goes down to some degree as a result, that's unfortunate, but it's also an inescapable part of business. There are those who feel that the WA has helped Southwest, but it's equally helped AA incubate an increasingly massive hub over the years, to the point where 2 airlines over there (Braniff and Delta) have thrown in the towel in competing with them. AA is the proverbial 800-lb. gorilla, and they have certain leverages at DFW. Southwest has certain leverages at DAL. Each airline should be able to utilize their leverages, but that's not possible at a Wright-constrained Love Field.

[Edited 2005-09-02 17:00:35]
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
cjpark
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 1:15 am

Quoting Workbench (Reply 31):
WN will not loose the WA battle, every analyst says it WILL be repealed. Why should WN be forced to change their business plan and move to a different airport where their operating costs be significantly higher? I really really doubt that the WA has any chance to stay. The majority of the US public wants it repealed. I was on a recent flight and the flight attendant made an annoucement that "if it (the wright ammednment) is repealed you could see airfares nationwide drop as much as 50%!." So log on to www.setlovefree.com WOW thats a lot! The whole plane broke out in applause.....

I realize that you are very young but if you believe everything you hear from any company/government/media outlet you are too gullible for your own good.
Airfares will not drop that much and the coverage of the lower airfares will affect fewer markets than WN would lead you to believe. WN is not crippled by the WA nor has it ever been.

I really doubt that there is that much support for the WA repeal. If there was you can bet it would have all ready been to the floor for a vote in both houses of Congress.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
AAgent
Posts: 540
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 11:41 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 4:55 am

Quoting AAgent (Reply 23):
So why has WN chosen to stay at such a terrible airport for so many years instead of setting their love of low fares free at DFW?



Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 32):

It's because the Wright Amendment drove the Southwest's growth elsewhere, i.e. not DAL.

BINGO! We have a winner! That's the whole underlying point of the Wright Amendment. It IS to discourage growth at DAL because growth was not intended as part of the long term plan. The plan was (and continues to be) for the community to unite behind one world class international airport, DFW. No doubt, American Airlines clearly has a huge presence at DFW, but it could have just as easily have been another airline had fate decided otherwise. Who knows, had Southwest served DFW, then perhaps AA would not be in the dominant position that it enjoys today. Perhaps we'll never know. The point is that DFW, as it was designed to be, is the focus of air travel for the entire Metroplex. The only distraction from that focus is the presence of ONE airline that steadfastly refuses to step onto the world stage at DFW. Instead, they've chosen to pursue convoluted legal remedies that allow them to stay at DAL, draining both air traffic and tax dollars that would have otherwise gone to support the communities premier international airport facility.

Quite simply, Wright must stay or DAL must go. A strong DFW is more important to the region than the whimsical fantasies of ONE airline. DAL is all about WN, that's practically the only reason it's on anyone's radar screen at all. Alternatively, DFW is an airport for all, a playing field where just about any airline is welcome to compete. Who knows, in the next 20 years or so we could see a new dominant carrier at DFW, but if it's going to be Southwest they've at least got to get into the game!

Best Regards,
AAgent
War Eagle!
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 5:14 am

Quoting AAgent (Reply 34):
uite simply, Wright must stay or DAL must go.

Sorry, it's not quite as simple as that...

Quoting AAgent (Reply 34):
A strong DFW is more important to the region than the whimsical fantasies of ONE airline.

Here's another example of blurring distinctions between a "strong DFW" and a "strong AA."

If AA moves some of its 800-900 daily DFW flights to DAL, DFW will still be "strong." If DFW is supposedly going to falter because of the loss of 50-75 flights, well, maybe they're not so strong to begin with, but hey, we know that's not true, right? BTW, I'm talking about a few flights, i.e. 50-75, and not the whole "hub" move AA likes to infer in the press releases to scare the Love neighbors with.

Quoting AAgent (Reply 34):
DAL is all about WN, that's practically the only reason it's on anyone's radar screen at all. Alternatively, DFW is an airport for all,

With 83% of the traffic at DFW, DFW is "about" AA just like DAL is about WN. As I said previously, there's no rational reason why DFW and DAL can't compete with each other just like ORD and MDW do.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
qqflyboy
Posts: 1635
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:47 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 5:25 am

From Friday's Jetwire, AA's daily employee newsletter:

"---SOUTHWEST IS FREE TO FLY ANYWHERE, RIGHT NOW, FROM DFW---
The Wright Amendment was not enacted to hurt, punish or limit Southwest Airlines. In fact, it applies equally to all airlines who choose to fly from Love Field. Southwest, like any airline, can fly anywhere it wants from DFW today. Southwest competes at airports in Southern California, Chicago, Florida, Philadelphia and others - why not at DFW? Instead, they choose not to fly from DFW and are seeking an economic windfall from Congress through the repeal of the amendment. The more people know about the truth behind the Wright Amendment, the more they'll realize that the repeal of the amendment is just plain wrong."

And people say AA is afraid of competition? Funny how AA and DFW have invited WN to compete head to head at DFW. Here's the problem, again, with repealling the Wright Amendment: The master plan at DAL limits the potential growth at DAL. WN has a near monopoly on the the number of movements allowed. If the WA is repealled, no other airline would have the slots available to compete with WN at DAL. That's unfair competition. If WN were to move to DFW, all airlines would have the equal opportunity to compete and the competition there between AA and WN would be healthy. Look at Airtran, they're doing just fine competing with AA on the routes they both fly. Having one airline fly exclusively from one airport drives up fairs, having more than one airline fly from the same airport lowers fares. Repealling Wright will not lower fares.

To learn more, visit http://www.keepdfwstrong.com/ .
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 5:35 am

Quoting QQflyboy (Reply 36):
From Friday's Jetwire, AA's daily employee newsletter:

"---SOUTHWEST IS FREE TO FLY ANYWHERE, RIGHT NOW, FROM DFW---

Yes, but it's SWA's business decision not to do so, for a variety of reasons.

AA gets to make their own business decisions, Exxon-Mobil gets to make theirs, GM and Ford get to make theirs, etc. etc. but it seems like everyone -other- than SWA wants to make SWA's business decisions for them....
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
AAgent
Posts: 540
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 11:41 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 5:42 am

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 35):
With 83% of the traffic at DFW, DFW is "about" AA just like DAL is about WN.

That 83% of the traffic was not a gift to American Airlines, it was earned the hard way. Sadly, that large slice of the pie could easily be lost to a worthy competitor.

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 35):
As I said previously, there's no rational reason why DFW and DAL can't compete with each other just like ORD and MDW do.

Why should there be competing airports when the flying public has to pay for two separate facilities. There's no reason for the metroplex to waste money on a second airport to support the operations of one airline. (Yes, I know Continental flies RJ's out of there, but you get the point.)

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 35):
Here's another example of blurring distinctions between a "strong DFW" and a "strong AA."

No blurring at all, my friend. Again, there is no doubt that AA is strong at DFW, but there's no reason that WN couldn't be strong there as well. It's about the airports...It's NOT about the airlines. Power shifts constantly among the airlines, so the airline that's strong this year may not be so strong next year. Contrary to your assertion, DFW does NOT exist primarily for the purpose of serving American Airlines, it exists to serve practically any airline that wishes to serve the DFW marketplace. The same can not be said for DAL and WN. It is commonly known that DAL would essentially be closed to commercial service were it not for the presence of WN. Therefore, I again reassert my contention that DFW can be strong with or without AA and that it is certainly plausible that WN could be strong at DFW.

Best regards to you, my friend.
AAgent


Edited for spelling...oops. (Their vs. There)

[Edited 2005-09-02 22:47:28]
War Eagle!
 
LY4XELD
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 5:14 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 5:51 am

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 37):
AA gets to make their own business decisions, Exxon-Mobil gets to make theirs, GM and Ford get to make theirs, etc. etc. but it seems like everyone -other- than SWA wants to make SWA's business decisions for them....

Did SWA not make the business decision to fly out of Love Field and not choose to fly out of DFW (and continue to do so when the Wright Amendment was enacted)? And did they not remain "passionately neutral" on their stance with the Wright Amendment for years and years?
 
ContinentalFan
Posts: 343
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 2:47 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 5:55 am

Quoting AAgent (Reply 38):
That 83% of the traffic was not a gift to American Airlines, it was earned the hard way. Sadly, that large slice of the pie could easily be lost to a worthy competitor.

In part it is a gift to AA, because AA's most powerful and capable competitor, WN, is hamstrung by the WA. Like previous posters have said, there is no reason for DFW/DAL to co-exist (fully, not hamstrung) like ORD/MDW, IAH/HOU, SFO/SJC/OAK, or LAX/SNA/BUR/etc.

I highly doubt that DFW's hold on the North Texas market is so tenous that it would collapse if the Wright Amendment was repealed.
 
cjpark
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:15 am

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 37):
Quoting QQflyboy (Reply 36):
From Friday's Jetwire, AA's daily employee newsletter:

"---SOUTHWEST IS FREE TO FLY ANYWHERE, RIGHT NOW, FROM DFW---

Yes, but it's SWA's business decision not to do so, for a variety of reasons.

AA gets to make their own business decisions, Exxon-Mobil gets to make theirs, GM and Ford get to make theirs, etc. etc. but it seems like everyone -other- than SWA wants to make SWA's business decisions for them....

Come on WN does not own the airport, you are allowed to fly from any airport at the publics largesse. There is no such thing as an unregulated airline or business of any kind.

FYI, Exxon Mobil cannot drill where ever they want to nor can they build pipelines, refineries or gas plants anywhere they want to. GM and Ford are required by federal law to build cars that meet specific standards. All companies are required to meet or maintain enviromental, safety and employment standards.

No industry or business is allowed to choose its business plan without some type of interference from the Government. Get another argument. Your business plan is to serve the public by providing a transportation service using public facilities. That gives the public the right to tell you where you can or cannot fly from.

AA is not telling where you can fly to or from it is the Federal Government on behalf of the public.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
FlewGSW
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:45 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:16 am

Stirling

Local communities do a lot of zoning commerce.
Liquor sales locations are zoned, and that suppresses commerce.
Cigarettes are restricted to 18+ age, and that suppresses commerce.
Guns are restricted
Adult entertainment is zoned
Building zones, housing zones, and....

Airports!

A community has the right to ZONE where a specific type of commerce is allowed. If you think that is suppressing commerce, you have a different definition than I of practiced zoning laws. Dallas and Fort Worth were forced by the Federal government to address the issue of creating just one airport for the entire area. And the answer was DFW, in the middle of the "metroplex", where any airline can fly from with no restrictions and any business model, including WNs.

WA will stay along with restrictions at LGA, DCA, SNA, BFI , and other airports because a local community has the right to limit where, when, and how a specific type of commerce is located.
 
AAgent
Posts: 540
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 11:41 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:17 am

Quoting ContinentalFan (Reply 40):
In part it is a gift to AA, because AA's most powerful and capable competitor, WN, is hamstrung by the WA.

Let's make it clear. WN isn't the only competitor in the area, and DFW has quite a number of competing air carriers, both past and present. American has earned it's position at DFW, and to maintain that status it must CONTINUE to earn that honor one flight at a time. Again, the dominant position is not a gift...it's a hard won honor.

Quoting ContinentalFan (Reply 40):
I highly doubt that DFW's hold on the North Texas market is so tenous that it would collapse if the Wright Amendment was repealed.

I'm not aware of any prediction of "collapse" for DFW if the Wright Amendment were repealed. However, it is clear that the expense of maintaining a second facility to serve what amounts to essentially one airline is a tremendous waste of resources. Very simply, it's a bad business decision for the Metroplex. A single, strong DFW, with a variety of competing carriers is the Wright future for the Metroplex.

Best Regards,
AAgent
War Eagle!
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:28 am

Quoting LY4XELD (Reply 39):
Did SWA not make the business decision to fly out of Love Field and not choose to fly out of DFW (and continue to do so when the Wright Amendment was enacted)?

Yes, and there was no obligation to move to DFW because SWA wasn't a signatory airline. The City of Dallas tried to -selectively- close the airport (to commercial traffiv versus closing it outright) but since the airport received federal funds the courts ruled (more than once) that as long as Love was open as an airport SWA could use it. The DFW/AA crowd seem to beating a dead horse on this one issue.

Quoting LY4XELD (Reply 39):
And did they not remain "passionately neutral" on their stance with the Wright Amendment for years and years?

Yep, and I think you'll find that the definition of "neutral" is neither for nor against. SWA went off and grew where it was unconstrained, and it's darn hard to argue with the success of the business model in the years the westward expansion started in 1982 (LIT in 1984 notwithstanding).

Quoting AAgent (Reply 38):
That 83% of the traffic was not a gift to American Airlines, it was earned the hard way.

Whether it was "earned" or not is immaterial to the issue, the point is it's -there-, it -exists-....

Quoting AAgent (Reply 38):
Sadly, that large slice of the pie could easily be lost to a worthy competitor.

Yes, and that's just business issue, an AA business issue, not an DFW airport issue.

Quoting AAgent (Reply 38):
Why should there be competing airports when the flying public has to pay for two separate facilities. There's no reason for the metroplex to waste money on a second airport to support the operations of one airline.

By the same token, why should Chicago pay for both ORD and MDW? (Hint: Airlines flying from MDW keep price competition on airlines flying out of ORD, which benefits travelers). It's a pity that travelers to/from the Metroplex don't have the same choice, and I think that was the intent of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978. What's even more goofy about the DFW/AA "airlines should compete-not airports" argument is that AA serves MDW, do they not?

Quoting AAgent (Reply 38):
DFW does NOT exist primarily for the purpose of serving American Airlines, it exists to serve practically any airline that wishes to serve the DFW marketplace.

Any airline willing to take on the 800-lb gorilla on its own turf that is. Do you think that maybe SWA would prefer the synergies of its existing facilities at Love, and learning from the experiences of Braniff (v1.0) and Delta? Yes, SWA flies into some "busy" airports, but have you noticed that the MO over the years has been to avoid fortesss hubs? Ever notice that SWA isn't in ATL, or MSP, or ORD? And SWA is supposed to heed the "objective" call of DFW/AA "inviting" us to DFW?
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:40 am

Quoting AAgent (Reply 43):

I'm not aware of any prediction of "collapse" for DFW if the Wright Amendment were repealed.

 spit  Have you checked the keepAAstrong, er, the keepdfwstrong website lately?
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
qqflyboy
Posts: 1635
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:47 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 7:14 am

I have given some thought about comapring DFW/DAL to ORD/MDW. I really don't think they are the same. Both ORD and MDW are at capacity. Neither airport has room to grow without massive construction projects. In the recent past MDW was more of a reliever airport to ORD. DAL certainly isn't a reliever airport to DFW since DFW is no where near capacity.

Why did Southwest change its mind about Wright? They said themselves it was because of the loss of DL in the North Texas market... they wanted to pick up the slack DL left behind. Did they forget DL abandoned DFW, not DAL? If Southwest wants to pick up the slack left by Delta, then they're going to have to fly from the airport Delta flew from.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
 
AAgent
Posts: 540
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 11:41 pm

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 7:27 am

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 45):
Have you checked the keepAAstrong, er, the keepdfwstrong website lately?

I try to make it a habit not to frequent websites that are so clearly biased on the issue...even when that website agrees with me. I find a forum such as this in which both sides of an issue are subjected to lively and spirited debate to be far more interesting.

Best Regards,
AAgent
War Eagle!
 
AirplanePeanut
Posts: 407
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 12:00 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 7:27 am


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Barry Crawford




56 seat F100's just for DAL ops.

  Peanut

[Edited 2005-09-03 00:27:59]
..
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: WN Working Around The Wright Amendment

Sat Sep 03, 2005 8:02 am

Quoting AAgent (Reply 47):
I try to make it a habit not to frequent websites that are so clearly biased on the issue...

I sorta prefer www.fightwright.org myself; it's run by someone who has zero connection with SWA as far as employment or stock ownership. The guy actually lives closer to DFW, but supports repeal because he knows it'll drive some DFW fares down. Lots more links to stuff as well....
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.

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