Delta Leaves DAL 10/18 Due To No Gate Space Part 2

Cubsrule · Sun Oct 05, 2014 9:33 pm

Quoting cjpark (Reply 145):
They will never need more than the 20 gates anyway.

On what do you base this assertion? A BWI/MDW/LAS-sized operation needs well more than 20 gates.

hohd · Sun Oct 05, 2014 10:39 pm

DOT wants more competition and wants this competition to come from smaller carriers, hence VX was chosen. Otherwise, we will have only 4 carriers dominating US domestic traffic. Look for incidents of similar nature, where DL, AA, UA and WN will be asked to give up gates and/or accommodate smaller carriers. Also UA may want to use this gate space for future growth and hence the gate squatting. DL can always sue, but they wont because it is not worth it.

In fact DOT should try to restrict DL's growth at SEA also and allow AS to grow and be independent.

mayor · Mon Oct 06, 2014 1:50 am

Quoting hohd (Reply 151):

In fact DOT should try to restrict DL's growth at SEA also and allow AS to grow and be independent.

So a virtual monopoly for AS? No such thing as competition allowed at SEA? That seems to be a new federal policy, if I'm not mistaken.

CO777DAL · Mon Oct 06, 2014 2:26 am

Check out the new UA Aircraft Terminal Parking Position Striping at DAL

I definitely look forward to UA plans at Dallas Love Field. UA biggest clue is hiding in plane (sp) sight! Notice DAL is now striped for Boeing 737/738/739, Airbus A319/A320, Embraer E170/E175, Embraer ERJ135/145, and CRJ200/700. One thing I find very interesting is the E190 spot.

The old UA gates at DAL were only striped for ERJ134/145, CRJ200/700 and Q400. Also this specific striping in the photo is only at the two new UA gates at DAL. WN and VX are different.

cjpark · Mon Oct 06, 2014 2:28 am

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 150):
On what do you base this assertion? A BWI/MDW/LAS-sized operation needs well more than 20 gates.

Simple, WN accepted the number of gates at to be held at 20. They agreed to that number in the compromise.

[Edited 2014-10-05 19:31:51]

par13del · Mon Oct 06, 2014 2:32 am

Quoting CO777DAL (Reply 153):
The old UA gates at DAL were only striped for ERJ134/145, CRJ200/700 and Q400. Also this specific striping in the photo is only at the two new UA gates at DAL. WN and VX are different.

Two things, we do know that WN will be leasing a gate from UA for the rest of the year, since they only operate 737's the striping makes sense.
Additionally, since WN only flies 737's I think any airline who starts service at DAL will want to use that size a/c, unless they plan on flying routes that are not serviced by WN. I agree some RJ's can be more comfortable than the 737 but if used at DAL with limited gates I would assume the larger the a/c the better.

Cubsrule · Mon Oct 06, 2014 3:48 am

Quoting cjpark (Reply 154):
Simple, WN accepted the number of gates at to be held at 20. They agreed to that number in the compromise.

How do you get from accepting a compromise to not wanting/needing more?

CO777DAL · Mon Oct 06, 2014 4:05 am

Quoting par13del (Reply 155):
Two things, we do know that WN will be leasing a gate from UA for the rest of the year, since they only operate 737's the striping makes sense.

The WN gates are only marked for 737-700 and 737-800.

The UA gates are marked specifically for UA aircraft.
I'll start towards the back and go forward. First thing is 02, since this is the second UA gate.
Then Embraer-170 and new Embraer-175 W that UA has ordered. Also the CRJ-200.
Next Airbus A319, CRJ-700, Embraer ERJ-135 (only UA has) and ERJ-145
Boeing 737-700, Airbus A320, and Embraer 190**
Boeing 737-800
Boeing 737-900

UA444 · Mon Oct 06, 2014 5:23 am

Quoting CO777DAL (Reply 157):
The UA gates are marked specifically for UA aircraft. I'll start towards the back and go forward. First thing is 02, since this is the second UA gate. Then Embraer-170 and new Embraer-175 W that UA has ordered. Also the CRJ-200.Next Airbus A319, CRJ-700, Embraer ERJ-135 (only UA has) and ERJ-145Boeing 737-700, Airbus A320, and Embraer 190**Boeing 737-800Boeing 737-900

While I agree that they likely will be planning more capacity into DAL sometime in the future, gate lines don't necessarily mean anything. At IAD for a long time UA still had 727 and DC-10 lines freshly painted long after those planes had left the fleet. And DL IIRC had DC-9 lines painted at LAX and those birds never flew out there.

[Edited 2014-10-05 22:24:37]

737tdi · Mon Oct 06, 2014 6:08 am

As a WN employee I believe that DL should have the opportunity to use DAL. It was not WNs decision to limit the gates. It was the city of Dallas/Fort Worth and the politicians that limited the gates. It is also the same with no Intl. flights out of DAL. I know you guys are smarter then this. It was a compromise by all involved. Imagine if WN could fly Intl. flights. The majority of the population in this area is Dallas and north. You have Dallas, Richardson, Plano, Allen, Mesquite, Garland, Carrolton, Farmers Branch, McKinney that all have direct access to DAL via nice freeways and not toll roads. Millions of people direct into DAL, yes they can go to DFW but it involves toll roads, bad parking, long lines etc.. Who wouldn't rather use DAL? It is a short drive into the airport via a couple of side streets and is quite simple. DFW is not. I hate that they limited the gates, WN can handle competition, they have proven that. They don't need to go to DFW to prove it. I believe that UA will hemorrhage trying to compete, they are not a local airline. I don't wish bad on any of my fellow airline companies. I just think UA will not do well out of DAL. JMO

LAXintl · Mon Oct 06, 2014 4:18 pm

According to Star-Telegram SkyTalk columnist twitter feed this morning, Gary Kelly says SWA has an agreement with United to utilize its DAL gates as "overflow on an as needed basis".

cjpark · Mon Oct 06, 2014 6:39 pm

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 156):
How do you get from accepting a compromise to not wanting/needing more?

They could have held out for more gates, or they could have rejected the compromise completely. The point is WN has an unbreakable monopoly on the airport as the result of the gate limit.

So who actually benefits from the gate limit at DAL more than WN?

jetblue1965 · Mon Oct 06, 2014 6:50 pm

Quoting CO777DAL (Reply 153):

I definitely look forward to UA plans at Dallas Love Field. UA biggest clue is hiding in plane (sp) sight! Notice DAL is now striped for Boeing 737/738/739, Airbus A319/A320, Embraer E170/E175, Embraer ERJ135/145, and CRJ200/700. One thing I find very interesting is the E190 spot.

Aint nobody be giving Jeff no frigging ideas, okay. Next thing you know, UA DAL gates will be striped for EMB120.

klwright69 · Mon Oct 06, 2014 6:53 pm

Quoting 737tdi (Reply 159):

As a WN employee I believe that DL should have the opportunity to use DAL. It was not WNs decision to limit the gates. It was the city of Dallas/Fort Worth and the politicians that limited the gates. It is also the same with no Intl. flights out of DAL. I know you guys are smarter then this. It was a compromise by all involved. Imagine if WN could fly Intl. flights. The majority of the population in this area is Dallas and north. You have Dallas, Richardson, Plano, Allen, Mesquite, Garland, Carrolton, Farmers Branch, McKinney that all have direct access to DAL via nice freeways and not toll roads. Millions of people direct into DAL, yes they can go to DFW but it involves toll roads, bad parking, long lines etc.. Who wouldn't rather use DAL? It is a short drive into the airport via a couple of side streets and is quite simple. DFW is not. I hate that they limited the gates, WN can handle competition, they have proven that. They don't need to go to DFW to prove it. I believe that UA will hemorrhage trying to compete, they are not a local airline. I don't wish bad on any of my fellow airline companies. I just think UA will not do well out of DAL. JMO

I don't understand. It is said that UA is not a" local airline," but is DL? UA is already at DAL and has been for a long time. It must be going fine for them there.

par13del · Mon Oct 06, 2014 7:14 pm

Quoting cjpark (Reply 161):
They could have held out for more gates, or they could have rejected the compromise completely. The point is WN has an unbreakable monopoly on the airport as the result of the gate limit.

So who actually benefits from the gate limit at DAL more than WN?

If WN had rejected the compromise I think the city of Dallas would have implemented some physical restrictions at the airport to replace the WA, neither of the cities wanted DAL to be able to offer unfettered service.

WN benefits from the gate limit but the split is also a curse, on it's face it looks non-competitive which will lead to challenges which will only hurt WN since they have the most to give up, and it does ultimately restrict their business.
If traffic increases when the WA is lifted they will struggle to accommodate due to the gate limit.

william · Mon Oct 06, 2014 7:44 pm

Quoting cjpark (Reply 154):
Check out the new UA Aircraft Terminal Parking Position Striping at DAL

I definitely look forward to UA plans at Dallas Love Field. UA biggest clue is hiding in plane (sp) sight! Notice DAL is now striped for Boeing 737/738/739, Airbus A319/A320, Embraer E170/E175, Embraer ERJ135/145, and CRJ200/700. One thing I find very interesting is the E190 spot.

The old UA gates at DAL were only striped for ERJ134/145, CRJ200/700 and Q400. Also this specific striping in the photo is only at the two new UA gates at DAL. WN and VX are different.

How is that picture? Isn't the old concourse torn down by now?

CO777DAL · Tue Oct 07, 2014 1:49 am

Quoting william (Reply 165):
How is that picture? Isn't the old concourse torn down by now?

What do you mean? This is the new United gates and taken this October. There is still part of the old concourse to be demolished. Also the old UA and DL gates are still at the old terminal which is still operating.

usflyguy · Tue Oct 07, 2014 2:59 am

Quoting cjpark (Reply 161):
So who actually benefits from the gate limit at DAL more than WN?

American. The gate limit at DAL limits the number of nonstop destinations and/or frequencies offered against their flights at DFW.

Thomaas · Tue Oct 07, 2014 3:14 am

I wonder if UA will ever try something beyond IAH at DAL. It seems to me like they could be successful serving ORD, SFO and maybe even LAX, DEN and even EWR from both DAL and DFW.

justplanenutz · Tue Oct 07, 2014 10:45 am

Gary Kelly had some interested comments on this topic yesterday:

http://blogs.star-telegram.com/sky_t...es-at-love-field-for-overflow.html

1) United gate just for overflow
2) Demand for DAL will far exceed capacity
3) 20 gate limit could change, but he won't lead the fight

I still think that sooner or later (whether DFW has 205 or 305 gates) market economics will prevail.

william · Tue Oct 07, 2014 2:39 pm

Quoting justplanenutz (Reply 169):
Gary Kelly had some interested comments on this topic yesterday:

http://blogs.star-telegram.com/sky_t...es-at-love-field-for-overflow.html

1) United gate just for overflow
2) Demand for DAL will far exceed capacity
3) 20 gate limit could change, but he won't lead the fight

I still think that sooner or later (whether DFW has 205 or 305 gates) market economics will prevail.

Why is the CEO of SWA not going to lead the fight for more gates?

par13del · Tue Oct 07, 2014 2:49 pm

Quoting william (Reply 170):
Why is the CEO of SWA not going to lead the fight for more gates?

Less political clout?
Any fight that WN leads will automatically result in push back for their initial staying at DAL and challenging the move to DFW when the new airport opened. If they do not lead the next fight, they can sit on the sidelines and say it is pax driven, that way, when the city does approve additional gates they can punish WN by making them all public access with no favored lease holder.

justplanenutz · Tue Oct 07, 2014 3:05 pm

Quoting william (Reply 170):
Why is the CEO of SWA not going to lead the fight for more gates?

I think a fair reading of the politics of the Wright repeal is that WN joined, but did not lead, that fight. Pols from states outside the Wright perimeter (Shelby from AL most notably) and a few from Texas were the leaders. WN only joined the fight when it came clear they could win.

It is more likely that DL or VX would be the leaders next go round, and they might go to court rather than Congress.

[Edited 2014-10-07 08:08:04]

blueflyer · Tue Oct 07, 2014 3:31 pm

Quoting justplanenutz (Reply 169):
United gate just for overflow

Maybe I am missing something, but that doesn't make sense. If this gate is for overflow, which by definition cannot be scheduled, how is Southwest's schedule so packed that it cannot accommodate Delta at one of its gates? I think Delta's lawyers will read this and demand the aviation department give them the gate immediately, for good reason.

Quoting william (Reply 170):
Why is the CEO of SWA not going to lead the fight for more gates?

In order to avoid legal battles with other airlines and the FAA over competition, if more gates become available, it's anybody-but-Southwest first in the allocation game.

justplanenutz · Tue Oct 07, 2014 3:41 pm

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 173):
Maybe I am missing something, but that doesn't make sense. If this gate is for overflow, which by definition cannot be scheduled, how is Southwest's schedule so packed that it cannot accommodate Delta at one of its gates?

I presume WN can schedule their 16 gates more tightly knowing they have the United gate for irregular ops. Of course, if United has irregular ops themselves, that plan goes up in smoke.

Polot · Tue Oct 07, 2014 4:01 pm

Quoting william (Reply 170):
Why is the CEO of SWA not going to lead the fight for more gates?

See section 14 of the 5 party agreement: http://www.dallas-lovefield.com/pdf/Wright_Amend_Agreement061506.pdf

Basically WN, along with the other parties, agree to not attempt to modify or defeat the agreement, either directly or indirectly (i.e. give encouragement/support).

usflyguy · Tue Oct 07, 2014 5:57 pm

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 173):
how is Southwest's schedule so packed that it cannot accommodate Delta at one of its gates? I think Delta's lawyers will read this and demand the aviation department give them the gate immediately, for good reason.

160 flights out of 16 gates is 10 flights per day and WN very rarely schedules anything before 6 am or after 10 pm... add in turn times, 20 minutes between departure of one flight and arrival of the next and you will find that WN is pretty efficient in using its resources.

Maybe DL should have offered up a bit more money to sublease one of UA's gates. Money talks or else you walk.

cjpark · Tue Oct 07, 2014 7:38 pm

Quoting usflyguy (Reply 167):
American. The gate limit at DAL limits the number of nonstop destinations and/or frequencies offered against their flights at DFW.

And yet there are no such limits on the number of nonstop destinations and or frequencies offered by the other airlines against American at DFW?

klwright69 · Tue Oct 07, 2014 8:08 pm

Quoting Thomaas (Reply 168):
I wonder if UA will ever try something beyond IAH at DAL. It seems to me like they could be successful serving ORD, SFO and maybe even LAX, DEN and even EWR from both DAL and DFW.

Very interesting. DEN was not a success. Let's see what else is up their sleeves.

Quoting usflyguy (Reply 176):
Maybe DL should have offered up a bit more money to sublease one of UA's gates. Money talks or else you walk.

Hindsight is always 20-20.

sccutler · Tue Oct 07, 2014 8:28 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 92):

Quoting sccutler (Reply 90):
We've been discussing the planning and circumstances surrounding the original creation of DFW Regional Airport, and the City of Dallas' options and intentions.

Something else I stumbled on, a bit lengthy and covers others but I found it an interesting read.
http://www.airfields-freeman.com/TX/Airfields_TX_FtWorth_NE.htm

Yep. Amon Carter Field's failure was, in essence, the catalyst for the development of DFW Regional Airport - the DOT in DC strong-armed Dallas and Fort Worth into working together to develop a joint-use airport, and they backed up their persuasion by refusing to fund further improvements at Love Field (further improvements at Amon Carter would have been teats on a boar hog - it was a flop from the word, "Go," for a whole lot of reasons, principally centering on the fact it was (1) closer to Fort Worth at a time when Fort Worth was a lot smaller than Dallas, and (2) owned by Fort Worth (whose Mayor expressed such profound distaste for Dallas that, when he was compelled to visit the city, he packed a sack lunch to avoid spending money with a Dallas merchant).

Quoting Dallas (Reply 120):
Who fought for Denver Stapleton when DIA was being proposed?

Same airport sponsor - no issue.

Quoting cjpark (Reply 154):
Simple, WN accepted the number of gates at to be held at 20. They agreed to that number in the compromise.

Yep. Black and white.

hivue · Tue Oct 07, 2014 9:49 pm

Quoting cjpark (Reply 145):
WN will eventually operate out of all 20 gates.

I think this may very well happen but I don't see it being a stable situation. The setup at DAL now is weird, it will get weirder after 10/13 with one carrier who can fly anywhere in the CONUS controlling 80% of the gates, and, if WN does eventually wind up with all the gates at the airport, will constitute a total freak of nature. I see some lawsuit to remove WN's stranglehold being successful somewhere down the line.

airliner371 · Wed Oct 08, 2014 8:57 pm

Delta can now stay at DAL until the end of the year.
http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2...a-air-lineslove-field-matter.html/

Wonder where/how they are going to operate.

Sooner787 · Wed Oct 08, 2014 8:58 pm

Well, it appears DL has gotten a reprieve , at least thru rest of the year....

http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/2...through-the-end-of-the-year.html/'

par13del · Wed Oct 08, 2014 9:34 pm

So does the airport have any unused gates at this time, is it possible that till the end of the year the airport will have 21 or 22 gates in use, say it ain't so.

airliner371 · Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:08 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 183):
is it possible that till the end of the year the airport will have 21 or 22 gates in use

No, that is strictly prohibited. Starting on Monday, DAL is restricted to 20 gates .

Sooner787 · Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:12 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 183):
So does the airport have any unused gates at this time, is it possible that till the end of the year the airport will have 21 or 22 gates in use, say it ain't so.

I suspect they're letting DL operate out of the old terminal wing they're currently using.

This gives the City of Dallas time to talk some sense into UA and give DL one of the

gates they want without alot of lawyers getting rich in a legal fight

Dallas · Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:51 pm

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 185):
I suspect they're letting DL operate out of the old terminal wing they're currently using.

I would think DL would use one of the 20 in the new terminal (one of WN or UA's) or else it would open up another can of worms. Should DL be able to continue operating out of the old terminal, AA, DFW, or the City of Fort Worth (as well as WN, UA, and the City of Dallas) could file a lawsuit as the new Compromise Agreement would be breached.

par13del · Wed Oct 08, 2014 11:08 pm

Quoting Dallas (Reply 186):
Should DL be able to continue operating out of the old terminal, AA, DFW, or the City of Fort Worth (as well as WN, UA, and the City of Dallas) could file a lawsuit as the new Compromise Agreement would be breached.

Well 20 gates is 20 gates, and the airlines have done nothing wrong, so either the city of Dallas is going to breach the agreement or they are going to pay big bucks to an airline for a gate.
My money is on the city breaching the agreement with the consent of the city of Forth Worth, it does however create a precedent which may come back to bite.

par13del · Thu Oct 09, 2014 12:05 am

So in the dedicated thread on DL at Love the article posted there says DL is getting the gate from WN until January 2015, hmmmm, so how close is the relationship.
http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/2...-through-the-end-of-the-year.html/

Okie · Thu Oct 09, 2014 12:44 am

Quoting par13del (Reply 187):
Well 20 gates is 20 gates, and the airlines have done nothing wrong

Quoting par13del (Reply 187):
so either the city of Dallas is going to breach the agreement or they are going to pay big bucks to an airline for a gate

Delta never had a lease, they had a sub-lease from AA there was no agreement to breach.
The DOJ said the AA lease was to be invalid and to offer the lease to other airlines, the DOJ determined that DL was not eligible.
The city of Dallas along with the rest of the 5 party agreement had to follow.

DL's issue is with the DOJ no other party. DL can waste money and sue who ever they want, all parties were following the DOJ directive.

Okie

Cubsrule · Thu Oct 09, 2014 12:56 am

Quoting par13del (Reply 188):
hmmmm, so how close is the relationship.

WN may be doing the City a favor more than it's doing DL a favor.

par13del · Thu Oct 09, 2014 1:12 am

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 190):
WN may be doing the City a favor more than it's doing DL a favor.

Yeah, that's the flip side, will be interesting to see if the DL flights are successful what happens next year when they decide they want to continue operations.
Now for the conspiracy hat, monitor the DL routes and see the level of competition.

The WA threads may be going away but the DL threads at DAL are just starting

Cubsrule · Thu Oct 09, 2014 1:31 am

Quoting par13del (Reply 191):
Yeah, that's the flip side, will be interesting to see if the DL flights are successful what happens next year when they decide they want to continue operations.

I think the inquiry is somewhat different then, as UA will actually be using both gates a fair amount (obviously, with increased use due to the absurd turn times).

Okie · Thu Oct 09, 2014 1:58 am

Quoting par13del (Reply 191):
The WA threads may be going away but the DL threads at DAL are just starting

Since the DOJ determined that DL was ineligible to operate at DAL then I would expect that to be at least 2 years down the road before there is a change in the Presidency since the DOJ is the executive branch.
Then whatever time it would take to run through federal court if the next president's AG would even let that happen.
Right now the DOJ has the trump card and the 5 parties are restrained until 2025.
I would guess a non starter for 2yrs even if a new administration would even entertain then 2 more years.
Four years down the road who knows VX or UA could be gone from DAL or looking for more gates themselves.

It appears to me that while many seem to be faulting WN here that the DOJ's decision was to protect whoever got the 2 gates and protect them from outside competition.
WN was already boxed in, CO/UA boxed in, AA boxed out, DL boxed out.

Okie

Cubsrule · Thu Oct 09, 2014 2:00 am

Quoting okie (Reply 193):
Since the DOJ determined that DL was ineligible to operate at DAL

How, exactly, did DoJ determine that DL was ineligible to operate at DAL?

VX being more deserving of the gates is a lot different than DL being "ineligible."

aaway · Thu Oct 09, 2014 2:24 am

Quoting Dallas (Reply 120):
Who fought for Denver Stapleton when DIA was being proposed?

The saga of DAL/DFW, Dallas vs. Fort Worth, had been very instructive to the City of Denver. Once it became clear that the new international airport was going to be built, the City of Denver assured the closure of Stapleton.

Continental did attempt to persuade the city to let Stapleton remain open. COs' proposal involved retaining one runway for the purpose of serving the old CO maintenance base.

Okie · Thu Oct 09, 2014 2:37 am

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 194):
How, exactly, did DoJ determine that DL was ineligible to operate at DAL

DL offered a very expansive proposal for the two gates that they were subleasing when DOJ indicated AA was going to have to surrender the gates.
18-20 flights I believe, just search anut or google and such an aggressive response may have influenced the DOJ to declare them ineligible.
It appears that the DOJ wanted to protect who got the gates from AA and DL whether it was B6, NK, VX, F9 or anyone else.
I suppose I was surprised that neither B6 or NK showed any interest but in spite of all the carrying on here the bottom line is that DAL is a niche airport.
AA, DL, CO and many others have made an major attempts to find major failures and left with only a few niche routes/markets remaining.

Okie

Cubsrule · Thu Oct 09, 2014 3:01 am

Quoting okie (Reply 196):
DL offered a very expansive proposal for the two gates that they were subleasing when DOJ indicated AA was going to have to surrender the gates.

Yes. Again, DoJ finding VX more deserving of the gates in no way means that DoJ found DL "ineligible" to operate at DAL. DL could lease 5 gates from WN tomorrow and start running 60 daily flights and DoJ would applaud it.

par13del · Thu Oct 09, 2014 10:21 am

Also as it relates to AA gates, the DOJ only got involved due to the merger between AA and US, nothing to do with the WA and its revised plans for the airport.
So technically - in my opinion - the only thing that the DOJ has in this issue is the two AA gates, nothing more.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 197):
DL could lease 5 gates from WN tomorrow and start running 60 daily flights and DoJ would applaud it.

bnatraveler · Thu Oct 09, 2014 2:14 pm

Discussion on DL being kicked out has been closed and the conversation has been moved to a new thread: Delta Temp Accommodated at DAL through 1/6/15 (by greggariouspdx Oct 8 2014 in Civil Aviation)

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net