DL Gets To Stay At Love Field

ridgid727 · Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:24 pm

Judge Kinkeade ruled that the 5flights do not interfere with WN's operation and that DL can stay.

>

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...68sa2y?cmpid=yhoo.headline&ref=yfp

[Edited 2016-01-08 15:29:02]

GSPSPOT · Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:43 pm

Very interesting! Wonder if they'll upgauge any of their DAL flights? I know they have a larger operation out at DFW but we Townies would love that!

n471wn · Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:44 pm

I hope SWA fights this all the way to the Supreme Court and trust me this will not stand

ridgid727 · Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:47 pm

According to the Ft Worth Star Telegram, its still not entirely over., and they also quoted the judge as saying the DAL needs more than 20 gates, and that it inhibits consumer choices etc..

http://www.star-telegram.com/news/bu...sky-talk-blog/article53780900.html

GSPSPOT · Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:58 pm

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 3):
and they also quoted the judge as saying the DAL needs more than 20 gates, and that it inhibits consumer choices etc..

I have believed that since the hated WA was instituted.

LAXintl · Sat Jan 09, 2016 12:18 am

All the ruling said is that Delta can operate 5 flights per day at DAL while the case it still being litigated.

dbo861 · Sat Jan 09, 2016 12:19 am

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 3):
According to the Ft Worth Star Telegram, its still not entirely over., and they also quoted the judge as saying the DAL needs more than 20 gates, and that it inhibits consumer choices etc..

But is there any room to actually add more gates now that the new terminal is built?

Okie · Sat Jan 09, 2016 1:06 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 5):
All the ruling said is that Delta can operate 5 flights per day at DAL while the case it still being litigated.

I did not expect Kinkeade to step outside the boundaries of the Wright Amendment.

The down side is that DL is going to have to challenge the WA to ever get more than 5 gate times.

I really do not see any of the 5 parties, City of Dallas, City of Ft Worth, American Airlines, DFW airport and Southwest Airlines offering any support for gate expansion short term.

Okie

CalTex · Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:08 am

Quoting Okie (Reply 7):
I really do not see any of the 5 parties, City of Dallas, City of Ft Worth, American Airlines, DFW airport and Southwest Airlines offering any support for gate expansion short term.

In addition, there's the issue of infrastructure. DAL is already bursting at the seams for curb space and parking; adding more gates and flights would require another upgrade on top of the projects already in progress.

I would really like to see more gates at DAL in the future, but there are intermediate steps that also need to happen.

CV880 · Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:41 am

Quoting GSPSPOT (Reply 1):

Very interesting! Wonder if they'll upgauge any of their DAL flights? I know they have a larger operation out at DFW but we Townies would love that!

Bring on the 744's.

TWA772LR · Sat Jan 09, 2016 5:55 am

Can't DL just take the old Legend terminal? It's got 5 gates. You can make a decent sized focus city with that number, and an airline like DL can give WN a run for their money with that.

It's existing infrastructure, clear of the new terminal, and they can Deltafy it all they want with near-minimal investment, the largest being a Sky Club if they choose to do that.

PGNCS · Sat Jan 09, 2016 6:04 am

Quoting n471wn (Reply 2):
I hope SWA fights this all the way to the Supreme Court and trust me this will not stand

I have no idea whether it will stand of not, but why should I trust you that it won't? A personal dislike of the ruling does not a legal argument make. If you want us to believe you that "this will not stand" you need to provide facts and not expect us to trust you. Do you have knowledge of this case beyond what's on this forum?

notdownnlocked · Sat Jan 09, 2016 7:58 am

Can't DL just take the old Legend terminal? It's got 5 gates. You can make a decent sized focus city with that number, and an airline like DL can give WN a run for their money with that.

It's existing infrastructure, clear of the new terminal, and they can Deltafy it all they want with near-minimal investment, the larg est being a Sky Club if they choose to do that.

Yes they should take the Legend terminal over. Put in a Sky Club and you can rest your weary self there. Are you trolling? I did do interviews about 20 years ago with the Legend employees as an ERAU student before they started operations. Maybe I should drive out there and see if they are still there for a follow up interview. I've heard that over the last 15 years that Legend has no less than 9% load factor so what is the problem?

AWACSooner · Sat Jan 09, 2016 9:51 am

Part of me thinks this is a veiled way to tell DL and WN "keep challenging this up the chain so WA can finally be deemed unconstitutional," because I think that's where it's headed.

Quoting PGNCS (Reply 11):

I have no idea whether it will stand of not, but why should I trust you that it won't? A personal dislike of the ruling does not a legal argument make. If you want us to believe you that "this will not stand" you need to provide facts and not expect us to trust you. Do you have knowledge of this case beyond what's on this forum?

Good god, ever heard of a figure of speech?
Why is everyone on this board so quick to jump down each others' throats over menial things? Get a freakin life!

AA737-823 · Sat Jan 09, 2016 10:09 am

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 10):
Can't DL just take the old Legend terminal? It's got 5 gates.

Quoting notdownnlocked (Reply 12):
Yes they should take the Legend terminal over.

Guys, try to keep up!
The Legend terminal hasn't existed in, like, eight years!
It was torn down early in the process of building the new terminal.
The parking garage still stands, and is in use.
The ADMIN portion of their building is used by CBP, as I recall. But the gates themselves are history.

SWADawg · Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:13 pm

There are still the 4 gates attached to the main terminal that belonged to AA and UA that have had the jet bridges removed but the building is still there and attached to the main terminal building. All they have to do is reattach the jet bridges and they're back in business. Give DL access to 2 and VX the other 2 and allow WN to take the other 20 in the new terminal and call it a day. That would be the best short term solution and compromise to this whole issue. If I were Delta, I would push to have the WA ammended to allow for the use of those 4 gates again.

[Edited 2016-01-09 06:15:26]

[Edited 2016-01-09 06:19:19]

B757capt · Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:37 pm

Quoting SWADawg (Reply 15):
There are still the 4 gates attached to the main terminal that belonged to AA and UA that have had the jet bridges removed but the building is still there and attached to the main terminal building. All they have to do is reattach the jet bridges and they're back in business. Give DL access to 2 and VX the other 2 and allow WN to take the other 20 in the new terminal and call it a day. That would be the best short term solution and compromise to this whole issue. If I were Delta, I would push to have the WA ammended to allow for the use of those 4 gates again.

AA wants gates at DAL. AA was forced to give its DAL gates up in the merger DOJ settlement. AA won't allow others to get new gates without a say so, neither will WN.

DTWPurserBoy · Sat Jan 09, 2016 4:26 pm

Quoting CV880 (Reply 9):
Bring on the 744's.

I recall with great fondness watching 747-100's of BN, AA and DL taking off and landing at DAL in the early 70's. My first flight on a 747 was on DL from DAL-ATL while I was in the USAF in the spring of 1971.

fraspotter · Sat Jan 09, 2016 6:24 pm

Quoting B757capt (Reply 16):

AA wants gates at DAL. AA was forced to give its DAL gates up in the merger DOJ settlement. AA won't allow others to get new gates without a say so, neither will WN.

I really fail to see what AA is screaming at. They have their superhub a few miles away at DFW where they have exclusive use of 3 terminals if you count Eagle. Why are they going on about a gate or 2? Just trying to stick it to WN any way they can? The whole WA idea was originally influenced partly by AA and the rise of DFW so the idea that they can still influence or try to dictate what goes on at an airport they no longer serve is ridiculous.

TWA772LR · Sat Jan 09, 2016 7:29 pm

Quoting notdownnlocked (Reply 12):

First of all, don't be an ass. I'm not from Dallas and I've only heard of the Legend terminal. And Legend ain't Delta, DL would've had an easier time in that terminal. Second of all, I was a child when Legend shuttered, so how should I know about their operations?

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 14):
Guys, try to keep up!

I don't follow Dallas-related aviation stuff that closely. Just as I don't expect anyone else here to follow Houston stuff closely. I didn't know it was demoed.

rbavfan · Sat Jan 09, 2016 10:09 pm

Quoting dbo861 (Reply 6):
But is there any room to actually add more gates now that the new terminal is built?

They have area where they could add another terminal & concourse. Look at Google maps.

Okie · Sat Jan 09, 2016 10:58 pm

Quoting rbavfan (Reply 20):
They have area where they could add another terminal & concourse. Look at Google maps.

Does not matter if there is room for a 100 gates.
It will literally take an act of Congress to add gates which would require either voluntarily for the 5 parties to modify the WA or a higher court and probably to the SC to declare the WA invalid.

Okie

par13del · Sat Jan 09, 2016 11:42 pm

Quoting Okie (Reply 7):
I really do not see any of the 5 parties, City of Dallas, City of Ft Worth, American Airlines, DFW airport and Southwest Airlines offering any support for gate expansion short term.

Technically they cannot, they made that commitment in writing in the new WA document.

superjeff · Sat Jan 09, 2016 11:47 pm

If,and it is a big IF, any of the interested parties wants to fight it "all the way up," I think they would have a chance. The airport has room for more gates (back in the day I think they had about 70), and two parallel runways capable of large airplanes. The WA is clearly anticompetitive, any way you slice it.

I live in Dallas and usually fly in and out of DFW but the airport is viable and should be open to anyone who wants to fly there. The Highland Park/University Park NIMBY's shouldn't be able to prevent this.

That being said, the City isn't going to fight to open Love Field any more than they have to, so Delta, American, and anybody else will have to force the issue.

Nola · Sun Jan 10, 2016 12:27 am

It doesn't matter if the WA is anticompetitive. Congress can pass any law regulating interstate commerce, which is exactly what interstate air travel is. (Intra-state air travel is different, which is why WN was allowed to avoid CAB regulation by flying solely within TX originally).

According to the judge's ruling--based solely on the news articles--all the judge did was allow DL to continue its current flight schedule in the interest of not creating chaos for travelers until after trial on the merits and judgment.

That's all this means, folks.

B757capt · Sun Jan 10, 2016 12:32 am

[/quote]

Quoting fraspotter (Reply 18):

AA wants access to downtown Dallas. I find it to be a very simple argument.

Should more gates become available I think AA should get a shot at them. Just like every other airline that wants to.

e38 · Sun Jan 10, 2016 12:55 am

Reference the number of gates at Dallas Love Field by superjeff (Reply 23), "back in the day I think they had about 70 . . ." folks I realize this is slightly off topic, but on the last day of operation at Dallas Love Field (January 12, 1974), prior to the opening of DFW, there were 55 gates in use which included 40 upper level gates equipped with jetways and 15 ground-level boarding gates. superjeff, the gate numbers went to 70, but there were some gaps in the numbers. The gates were designated as follows:
The Green Concourse had 14 gates: Gates 1 - 15 (all upper level gates with jetways; there was no Gate 13). All gates on the Green Concourse were used by American (and actually, during the last three or four years before the opening of DFW, it was not called the Green Concourse, but the American Airlines concourse),
The Yellow Concourse had 20 gates: Gates 21- 40 (9 upper level gates with jetways and 11 ground level boarding gates). At the entrance to the Yellow Concourse, there was Gate 20, but this was not used for aircraft. Gate 20 was a lower level boarding lounge with an Eastern Air Lines check in counter and Eastern used it for passengers to board buses that would shuttle them to the aircraft. The Eastern Air Lines aircraft actually parked at Gates 36 and 38 on the Yellow Concourse. I did not include Gate 20 in the gate count at Dallas Love Field.
The Red Concourse had 21 gates: Gates 41 - 70 (17 upper level with jetways and 4 ground level boarding gates). There were no Gates 44 - 49; 52, 53 or 65.

The Green (West) Concourse was used by American.
The Yellow Concourse (North) was used by Delta, Eastern, Frontier, Southwest, and the commuter/air taxi airlines (Gates 21 and 22).
The Red Concourse (East) was used by Braniff, Continental, Texas International, Ozark, and intermittently by Mexicana - Gate 59 (when they paid their lease).

e38

fraspotter · Sun Jan 10, 2016 4:41 am

Quoting B757capt (Reply 25):

I'm sorry but getting to downtown Dallas from DFW is not the epic journey so many people try to make it out to be.

deltal1011man · Sun Jan 10, 2016 8:20 am

Quoting n471wn (Reply 2):

I hope SWA fights this all the way to the Supreme Court and trust me this will not stand

WN kool-aid is strong.
funny, I remember during the DL/US slot swap the WN fan boys were crying because big bad Delta and US airways would give WN all the slots it wanted and were anti-competitive

but bring up DAL and WN should have a complete monopoly.

Quoting SWADawg (Reply 15):
There are still the 4 gates attached to the main terminal that belonged to AA and UA that have had the jet bridges removed but the building is still there and attached to the main terminal building. All they have to do is reattach the jet bridges and they're back in business. Give DL access to 2 and VX the other 2 and allow WN to take the other 20 in the new terminal and call it a day. That would be the best short term solution and compromise to this whole issue. If I were Delta, I would push to have the WA ammended to allow for the use of those 4 gates again.

Wait, Delta and Virgin should have to move out of the new terminal why exactly?

Quoting fraspotter (Reply 18):

I really fail to see what AA is screaming at. They have their superhub a few miles away at DFW where they have exclusive use of 3 terminals if you count Eagle. Why are they going on about a gate or 2? Just trying to stick it to WN any way they can? The whole WA idea was originally influenced partly by AA and the rise of DFW so the idea that they can still influence or try to dictate what goes on at an airport they no longer serve is ridiculous.

Because AA now has the size that they could add its main hubs to DAL (PHX/PHL/CLT/LAX/ORD possibly NYC)

I don't see why, just because AA has a DFW hub they should be left out of DAL.

Quoting B757capt (Reply 25):

Should more gates become available I think AA should get a shot at them. Just like every other airline that wants to.

Everyone should get a shot at them.
As normal though the government is doing everything it can to protect Southwest.

B757capt · Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:31 pm

Quoting fraspotter (Reply 27):

It's not an epic journey. However it's much more convenient.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 28):
Everyone should get a shot at them.
As normal though the government is doing everything it can to protect Southwest.

Yes sir. Welcome to my RU list!

Cubsrule · Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:36 pm

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 28):
As normal though the government is doing everything it can to protect Southwest.

Which government are you talking about?

topbanana · Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:38 pm

Quoting e38 (Reply 26):
The Green (West) Concourse was used by American.
The Yellow Concourse (North) was used by Delta, Eastern, Frontier, Southwest, and the commuter/air taxi airlines (Gates 21 and 22).
The Red Concourse (East) was used by Braniff, Continental, Texas International, Ozark, and intermittently by Mexicana - Gate 59 (when they paid their lease).

To give a visual of what e38 wrote, here is a Love Field terminal map from 1972:

http://www.departedflights.com/DAL72.html

KarlB737 · Sun Jan 10, 2016 4:48 pm

Quoting n471wn (Reply 2):
I hope SWA fights this all the way to the Supreme Court and trust me this will not stand

Be careful what you ask for. What if the Supreme Court were to toss the whole Wrong Amendment and all is restrictions and rule that DAL must provide enough gates for any and all airlines that want to fly in and out of there.

SWADawg · Sun Jan 10, 2016 5:35 pm

Quoting KarlB737 (Reply 32):

If they go unlimited gates at DAL again, then I wouldn't have any problem with it and I doubt WN would either.

fraspotter · Sun Jan 10, 2016 7:50 pm

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 28):
Because AA now has the size that they could add its main hubs to DAL (PHX/PHL/CLT/LAX/ORD possibly NYC)

I don't see why, just because AA has a DFW hub they should be left out of DAL.

They shouldn't be left out permanently but when space is already so limited it shouldn't be at the expense of other airlines who don't have a hub in the immediate vicinity or WN who is one of the big reasons why DAL is even still in existence.

superjeff · Sun Jan 10, 2016 8:04 pm

Fraspotter, you are right that Southwest is the main reason Love Field even exists as a passenger facility at this time. That was because of their actions in the 1970's. They weren't around when everybody else was required to sign on to moving to DFW. When Southwest got to stay at DAL, Braniff fought it, and they were able to operate a limited service out of Love, and, in fact, that was 40 years ago. The situation is quite different now.

Just like in other cities where there are more than one airport, here in Dallas any airline should be able to fly out of either of them, or both, if they want. Southwest flies out of SFO, SJC, and OAK, for example in the San Francisco area; also multiple airports in the Washington/Baltimore area, Los Angeles area, and New York (EWR and LGA). The only reason they don't fly out of DFW is because they don't choose to do so. That should not be a reason to keep AA, or anybody else, out of Love Field.

The Wright Amendment is clearly anti-competitive, Love Field can easily handle more than 20 gates, and airplanes today are much quieter than back in the 1970's anyway. Let American operate out of Love Field, as well as Delta, United, and anybody else, and let Southwest also operate out of DFW if they should choose to do so. Southwest is as strong as any of their competition these days and doesn't need governmental help to compete. They do a good job competing on their own.

DTWPurserBoy · Sun Jan 10, 2016 8:38 pm

The ultimate irony is that the author of the Wright Amendment, Congressman Jim Wright was well into his 90's during the last election and was denied the right to vote because he didn't have a valid driver's license. I don't know man people that age that do.

Congress could easily revoke the amendment if they chose to do so. But then the old noise issue which was one of the main reasons for building DFW will raise its ugly head in all probability.

DDR · Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:34 pm

Quoting superjeff (Reply 35):

Excellent post! You summed everything up nicely and with facts.

There obviously is interest from airlines to operate out of Love Field. More gates should be built. I think eventually this is going to happen anyway. And yes, AA has just as much of a right to new gates as anyone else. I think a great stipulation would be that the smallest jets that can be operated would have to have at least 100 seats. That would keep the airport from becoming a RJ nightmare with small jets taking off every 5 minutes. I'm thinking of air traffic because of DFW being so near by.

par13del · Sun Jan 10, 2016 10:09 pm

Quoting superjeff (Reply 35):
Just like in other cities where there are more than one airport, here in Dallas any airline should be able to fly out of either of them, or both, if they want.

Except the cities of DAL and DFW do not want a wide open DAL, they were behind the 20 gate limit and all the restrictions which ensure that WN and ultimately DAL is fully restricted and protection continues for DFW, I guess the bonds used to build DFW have not been paid off.

Cubsrule · Sun Jan 10, 2016 10:23 pm

Quoting KarlB737 (Reply 32):
What if the Supreme Court were to toss the whole Wrong Amendment and all is restrictions and rule that DAL must provide enough gates for any and all airlines that want to fly in and out of there.

There is no law requiring endless gates (or slots). Otherwise, facilities like LGA, SNA, DCA and even arguably ORD, SEA and LAX would be illegal.

Okie · Sun Jan 10, 2016 11:48 pm

Quoting superjeff (Reply 35):
The Wright Amendment is clearly anti-competitive, Love Field can easily handle more than 20 gates, and airplanes today are much quieter than back in the 1970's anyway. Let American operate out of Love Field, as well as Delta, United, and anybody else, and let Southwest also operate out of DFW if they should choose to do so. Southwest is as strong as any of their competition these days and doesn't need governmental help to compete. They do a good job competing on their own.

Interesting your comments.
DOJ indicated AA and DL operating out of DAL was anti-competitive.
CO/UA bailed and leased their gates to WN because of lack of profitability, DL was not interested in their lease.

As the WA stands now forcing WN to give up 5 gate times for DL under the WA is practically the worst scenario for DL long term if Kinkeade temporary ruling stands.
DL would be shown no harm period. DL would not have any further recourse. All conditions of the WA would be adhered.

Quoting AWACSooner (Reply 13):
Part of me thinks this is a veiled way to tell DL and WN "keep challenging this up the chain so WA can finally be deemed unconstitutional," because I think that's where it's headed.

The 5 parties can not re-open but DL can if it is shown harm. I tend to agree that will end up being what challenges the WA.

Fort Worth does not want the WA re-opened.
DFW does not want the WA re-opened.
AA does not want the WA re-opened they want to compete with DL at DFW, AA has failed miserably several times at DAL.
WN can not re-open the WA at this point.
Not sure that the City of Dallas would want to re-open they have vested interest at DFW as well.

Okie

cjpark · Wed Jan 13, 2016 3:56 am

Congrats to Delta!

Unfortunately the City of Dallas will soon have so much more to be grateful about, because Southwest had to stay at DAL after this goes to trial.

atypical · Thu Jan 14, 2016 8:39 am

This suite was initially filed by the city of Dallas in large part to halt the FAA's formal investigation of the city's compliance with the terms of the Airport Improvement Program funds contractual obligations. The judge mooted the injunction the city was seeking against the FAA to halt the investigation. There now is no way the city can halt the investigation prior to trial and the FAA will certainly have finished its investigation by the time a trial starts.

The AIP contains contractual obligations where the city told the FAA it had the legal authority to meet all the condition and then agreed to meet those conditions. Interestingly enough, all contracts signed by the city and airlines include a provision the city could implement unilateral changes to the lease in order to meet AIP obligations. The city could have acted in a number of ways that would not have required such a serious step as issuing contractual changes.

The city didn't and that what is going to burn them. The judge even notes when it came to the competition plan,

"...then Mayor Linda Miller acknowledged the need for the City, 'if we are responsible, [to] create a very clear policy...for how we are in real terms going to be executing this.' Now this case, the Court is asked to follow through with what the City should have done years ago."

The problem is that the FAA is likely going to see the same thing, but the FAA will see that as a violation of the AIP. The terminal still has $31 million in grant payments to receive from the FAA. If the city is found to be in violation of the AIP contract the city may loose not only the remaining $31 million but all future AIP funds until the issue is corrected. WARA does not give the city any breathing room because, as with the original Wright Amendment, the FAA is the government agency charged with interpreting its meaning. The DOJ won't involve itself where the FAA has responsibility.

Dallas is out of cheap or easy ways to resolve the mess it put itself in.

[Edited 2016-01-14 00:41:58]

cjpark · Sat Jan 16, 2016 1:50 am

Quoting atypical (Reply 42):
he problem is that the FAA is likely going to see the same thing, but the FAA will see that as a violation of the AIP. The terminal still has $31 million in grant payments to receive from the FAA. If the city is found to be in violation of the AIP contract the city may loose not only the remaining $31 million but all future AIP funds until the issue is corrected. WARA does not give the city any breathing room because, as with the original Wright Amendment, the FAA is the government agency charged with interpreting its meaning. The DOJ won't involve itself where the FAA has responsibility.

$31 million is chicken scratch compared to what the city will eventually have to pay will have to pay to resolve this problem,

jhooper · Sat Jan 16, 2016 7:10 pm

Somebody please give me a logical argument (not necessarily a legal one) why Delta should not be allowed to operate a handful of flights to Love Field?

AA737-823 · Sat Jan 16, 2016 8:58 pm

Quoting jhooper (Reply 44):
Somebody please give me a logical argument (not necessarily a legal one) why Delta should not be allowed to operate a handful of flights to Love Field?

I can give it to you, though I see it's weaknesses myself:
Delta had no interest in the gates at the time the plan was made. Southwest wanted 16, AA wanted 2, and CO wanted 2.
End of story.
Fast forward, and AA agrees to cede their 2 so that they can merge with US Air.
Virgin wants them. Delta wants them. Courts rule Delta can't have them, because they want low-cost competition.

Whether we agree with these things or not (I see both sides, but don't ever tell a.net that!), that's the gist of where we are.

jb1087xna · Sat Jan 16, 2016 9:11 pm

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 45):
Delta had no interest in the gates at the time the plan was made. Southwest wanted 16, AA wanted 2, and CO wanted 2.
End of story.
Fast forward, and AA agrees to cede their 2 so that they can merge with US Air.

Two questions on this --
When was the original plan put together? While courts may reference a decision made long ago, the business world changes rapidly. Just because DL thought DAL wasn't valuable 2-3 years ago doesn't mean that it's not now.

Why did AA cede the gates for the merger?

Cubsrule · Sat Jan 16, 2016 9:47 pm

Quoting jb1087xna (Reply 46):
Just because DL thought DAL wasn't valuable 2-3 years ago doesn't mean that it's not now.

With DL's long history at MDW and HOU (not to mention having had a hub in the Metroplex in the not-that-distant past), I don't really buy this argument.

atypical · Sat Jan 16, 2016 10:21 pm

Quoting jhooper (Reply 44):
Somebody please give me a logical argument (not necessarily a legal one) why Delta should not be allowed to operate a handful of flights to Love Field?

The problem is the gate restrictions. Congress passed a law prohibiting more than 20 gates at Love. Southwest would like to utilize all 20 gates to their capacity (10 flights a day for each gate). Southwest has also invested a lot of time and money on lawyers and politics to see Love expanded. It is natural they would want to get every single gate they could.

The problem is what is good for Southwest is not necessarily good for anyone else. I can easily give good logical arguments for both positions, Delta retaining flights or Southwest having all flights, that really have rave little or no bearing to why they are in court now.

Quoting cjpark (Reply 43):
$31 million is chicken scratch compared to what the city will eventually have to pay will have to pay to resolve this problem,

I think you are right and I think all the less expensive options have long since past.

usflyguy · Sun Jan 17, 2016 12:20 am

Quoting superjeff (Reply 35):
The only reason they don't fly out of DFW is because they don't choose to do so.

never mind the fact that Southwest would have to give up a gate at DAL for every couple of flights they operate out of DFW.

Quoting jhooper (Reply 44):
Somebody please give me a logical argument (not necessarily a legal one) why Delta should not be allowed to operate a handful of flights to Love Field?

They had the opportunity to sublease the gates from UA and they did not find them valuable enough to pay the market rate for the gate, so UA leased the gates to WN.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net