|
| |
06/05/06 Airline
Competition and What's good for Love Field area neighborhoods.
With all the talk about the Wright
Amendment, there is a plan that brings more
competition without disturbing the neighborhoods too
much more around Love Field.
Southwest now has leases on most of the gates (21,
I've read), and they agreed not to try and change the
Wright amendment--as evidenced by Herb Kelleher
(co-founder of Southwest):
Operationally, it's [the Wright Amendment]
extremely difficult, but I pledged we wouldn't
seek to overturn it.
Interview with
Herb Kelleher concerning Wright Amendment,
Financial World, March 21, 1989. |
With this pledge by Mr. Kelleher, people
bought houses, invested in businesses, etc. around
Love Field. Since this pledge changed about a year
ago, there are several important considerations now.
|
Some history. The federal government (CAB, which is
now the FAA) forced all certified interstate airlines
to fly out of one airport, DFW airport (in the early
1970s), so as not to duplicate airport costs.
Ft. Worth closed its airport, as was supposed
to happen to Love Field.
It's not hard to support the case that it was a good
thing that it didn't close. |
|
|
06/05/06 Greg M:
Sharon ? you?ve become a shill for AA. You?re supporting a
government monopoly that has extracted more of the average citizen?s
cash then 10 arenas.
Editor's comments: Since the 80's, I have publicly fought for
and supported the Wright Amendment -- not for AA,but for my
neighborhoods' quality of life.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
In the early 1970's,
Southwest Airlines was not yet a certified
interstate carrier. They were a very
small start up at the time,
so they got out of having to move because the FAA
didn't have jurisdiction over state (in this case a
state of Texas) airlines. Southwest was
allowed to fly out of Love Field within Texas. They
could have, but chose not to,
fly out of DFW airport. The other airlines
didn't have a choice. |
|
|
06/05/06
JC:
That's what happens when you
compromise with evil (known as the Wright amendment ) in the first
place. Nothing can come from it but
more lies more dishonesty.
Wright Amendent was never
needed in the first place but to create yet another layer of
protection for those that were its supporters, another
layer of protection as defined by gifts like money, vacations, support
around re-election time; usual games
politicians play with other people's money.
Forget Herb's "lie".
His business has stood the test of the time,
and the area has enjoyed that time.
If they didn't know it before,
they know it now.
People lie. When that lie
(Wright Amendment) is allowed to grow like a weed in your yard,
don't be surprised how many other weeds
sprout up. Blame the constituency
that kept Wright in Congress and all those who follow his style.
|
|
Anyway, if the Wright Amendment were to be lifted, it
should have these as minimum requirements:
To have real competition at Love Field there needs
to be more access to gates for other carriers.
The current 19 gate utilization (for flights) at Love
Field is as follows:
Southwest: 14 (another 7 are used for training)
American: 3
Continental: 2
|
With respect to the surrounding neighborhoods, there
should not be a significant increase in the number of
flights out of Love Field. No more than a 20%
increase in flights over what there is currently each
day. With the current air traffic these days out of
Love, I think it would mean another 30 or so flights
per day. It would go from somewhere around 145 per
day to 175. |
|
|
06/05/06
Darryl Baker:
The City screwed this deal up from the very beginning! If
Dallas was even remotely serious about getting Southwest to DFW
Airport, it should have NEVER signed and renewed leases for more
than 30 years!
The City should have NEVER
shared in any improvement costs. Southwest insisted on being at
Love Field and should have shouldered ALL
costs for maintenance and improvement. There is NO WAY the City
should have kept the landing fees below the higher market rates
Southwest WILLINGLY pays in other cities.
The City of Dallas was truly asleep at the wheel on this deal.
Finally, a $50 million
parking garage to serve one tenant whose return on investment will
not come anywhere near this cost in our lifetimes?
Both staff and Council need to be fired
for this brain dead decision!
|
|
The property values of the existing home and business
owners will vastly be reduced if there is a big jump
in air traffic. I suggest you spend
some time on Mockingbird
Ln., near the QT gas station across from Love
Field. It's
already pretty noisy--even at 10:00 PM.
There is no doubt that at least 95% of the public
would say something similar to the following gate plan
would be competitive and fair. If the gate
utilization is increased by 2 gates to 21 total
gates, then this would be fair:
Southwest: 7 gates
American: 7 gates
Other airlines/charters (Continental, US Air, United,
Northwest, Delta, etc.): 7 gates
If the total number of gates used for flights is
increased by 5 (for a total of 24 gates), then it
would be 8 for each Southwest, American and the Other
airlines. If it goes to 27 gates, it's 9 a piece.
Southwest turned down something like a 20 gate offer
from DFW airport about a year ago. There's not a gate
capacity issue at DFW like there is at Love.
2) Since Love Field has shorter runways and no clear
zones (I've heard it's something like a 1,000 ft.
beyond the runways), the size of the planes
need to be limited to a Boeing 737-700.
I've read Southwest has several and is
currently buying more and and MD-80s,
what American has been flying for years). Some
airlines use Airbus planes.
Bigger planes than these don't need to be landing on
these shorter runways that were built before jet
engines were even invented. Starting the 60's, new airports
built starting had to have "clear zones" at the end of
the runways.
Older airports that were built in the 1920's and such
with much shorter runways got "grandfathered" in and
were exempted from the "clear zone" requirement
even though good size jets land at them today. There
have been overruns on these older, shorter runways.
Clear zones give an increased safety factor on
landings and takeoffs.
Any growth beyond this number of gates, flights or
size of planes, would go to DFW airport where there is
not a gate capacity issue, the runways are much
longer, and they have the clear zones for the runways.
There should be something in this for the city of Ft.
Worth who had to close down their airport in the early
1970's because the federal government (CAB/FAA) made
them since they didn't want to put money into more
than one airport and have cost duplication.
I actually live in Dallas County, but I do believe we
should be good neighbors to Fort Worth on this matter.
Fort Worth will lose tax revenue as flights shift from
DFW to Love. Any suggestions? If the Wright
amendment is lifted, maybe a certain percentage
of the new flights' ticket sales should go to Fort
Worth. Maybe 1-2%.
Since Ft. Worth is getting caught up in this beyond
their control and should be somehow compensated, the
same goes for DFW airport since they will lose
business that could not have been anticipated with Mr.
Kelleher changing his pledge on the Wright amendment.
Like any business, DFW airport has
made capital expenditures based on forecasted business
with the Wright amendment in place, as Mr.
Kelleher said would happen.
It's my hope that something like these ideas gets
circulated to the public because it does bring
increased competition while somewhat minimizing the
impact to the neighborhoods around Love Field.
Dave Wallace
| |
|
