Austin Dave Does Dangerfield

[DCAflyer]

US Airways To Congress: Where's the Love?
By Keith L. Alexander
Washington Post, Tuesday, June 3, 2003; Page E01



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...0-2003Jun2.html

 

[ITRADE]

----------------
On 6/3/2003 1011 AM RowUnderDCA wrote:

----------------
On 6/3/2003 9:56:48 AM ITRADE wrote:



"US Airways'' turboprops also have 76 seats but are smaller than the jets. Current regulations permit the airline to fly regional jets with no more than 56 seats."

WTF!!!!?????  US''s biggest turboprop carries 50 - if the Dash-8-300s are still around.

----------------​

I''m sorry to say this, but I find Alexander''s work particularly inaccurate. He constantly repeated a stat about U (I think it was about the size of its planes) that was just rediculously wrong. (Oh.. I think it was along the lines of U replacing A330''s with regional jets.) He stated this over and over again, cutting and pasting the stat in various articles.


----------------​

Interesting to see the paragraph where Dave wants a RJ terminal at DCA. Had not heard of that one before. Where is it going to go? In place of the hanger? Below the MWAA offices?

 

[RowUnderDCA]

----------------
On 6/3/2003 9:56:48 AM ITRADE wrote:


"US Airways'' turboprops also have 76 seats but are smaller than the jets. Current regulations permit the airline to fly regional jets with no more than 56 seats."

WTF!!!!?????  US''s biggest turboprop carries 50 - if the Dash-8-300s are still around.

----------------​

I''m sorry to say this, but I find Alexander''s work particularly inaccurate. He constantly repeated a stat about U (I think it was about the size of its planes) that was just rediculously wrong. (Oh.. I think it was along the lines of U replacing A330''s with regional jets.) He stated this over and over again, cutting and pasting the stat in various articles.

 

[Todd B]

Please try to post the article link next time to avoid any copyright issues.

Thanks

 

[ITRADE]

"US Airways'' turboprops also have 76 seats but are smaller than the jets. Current regulations permit the airline to fly regional jets with no more than 56 seats."

WTF!!!!????? US''s biggest turboprop carries 50 - if the Dash-8-300s are still around.

 

[BillLumbergh]

----------------
On 6/3/2003 10:16:59 AM DCAflyer wrote:


Todd,

There is no copyright infringement if you quote an article and disclose its source. It clearly was not quoted for commercial purposes. The reason I cut and paste articles is because oftentimes the links don''t work. But from now on, if usaviation wants links, I''ll do that.

DCAflyer

----------------​

Here is the clear language from www.washingtonpost.com''s website on copyright:

"YOU MAY NOT COPY, REPRODUCE, DISTRIBUTE, PUBLISH, DISPLAY, PERFORM, MODIFY, CREATE DERIVATIVE WORKS, TRANSMIT, OR IN ANY WAY EXPLOIT ANY PART OF THIS SERVICE, EXCEPT THAT YOU MAY DOWNLOAD MATERIAL FROM THIS SERVICE FOR YOUR OWN PERSONAL, NONCOMMERCIAL USE AS FOLLOWS: YOU MAY MAKE ONE MACHINE READABLE COPY AND/OR ONE PRINT COPY THAT IS LIMITED TO OCCASIONAL ARTICLES OF PERSONAL INTEREST ONLY."

The reproduction of the entire article would be contrary to the Post''s guidelines. Since papers have different standards, its our policy to assume the strictest copyright rights and to not reproduce entire articles verbatim.

 

[DCAflyer]

Itrade said: Interesting to see the paragraph where Dave wants a RJ terminal at DCA. Had not heard of that one before. Where is it going to go? In place of the hanger? Below the MWAA offices?


DCAflyer responds: Itrade, I assume he wants the building that was used as the interim terminal during construction of the new B&C terminal building. I don''t know what the building is being used for now, if anything. It''s in a great location, just north of the C terminal and a tunnel connecting C with what I assume would be called the D terminal would be easy to do, either below or above ground, or at ground level.

 

[N786P]

Dave said he gets no respect.....Well maybe somebody should explain to him that respect is earned..he has in no way earned my respect, and that of others, he seems to have a nasty habit of talking out of both sides of his mouth.

 

[ITRADE]

----------------
On 6/3/2003 11:32:37 AM DCAflyer wrote:


Who else besides U, UAL, and AC is in the middle finger (I love the reference, BTW... it is so appro pos to the new U way of doing business)?  If there are no other carriers in the middle finger besides the three of us, and if U were allowed to construct a new terminal north of C, that would make everything from the middle finger northward essentially the Star terminal.  They could burrow a tunnel connecting the three fingers so that people don''t have to exit and enter checkpoints when making connections (a major inconvenience).

----------------​

American.

 

[ITRADE]

Part of the old interim terminal is now once again a US hanger. A separate part houses some of the MWAA offices.

UA uses, I think, two gates at DCA - 29 and 31. Their only flights are to ORD and they basically run that as a shuttle - every hour on the hour.

US could consolidate its operations given that gates 23-25 used to be mainline gates but now are essentially just parking spots for the RJs.

Ideally, US will want to consider how it interplays with United AND Air Canada at DCA given that Air Canada occupies gate space in the middle finger - I think gate 27.

 

[DCAflyer]

Todd,

There is no copyright infringement if you quote an article and disclose its source. It clearly was not quoted for commercial purposes. The reason I cut and paste articles is because oftentimes the links don''t work. But from now on, if usaviation wants links, I''ll do that.

DCAflyer

 

[RowUnderDCA]

----------------
On 6/3/2003 10:27:33 AM DCAflyer wrote:


Itrade said:  Interesting to see the paragraph where Dave wants a RJ terminal at DCA.  Had not heard of that one before.  Where is it going to go?  In place of the hanger?  Below the MWAA offices?


DCAflyer responds:  Itrade, I assume he wants the building that was used as the interim terminal during construction of the new B&C terminal building.  I don''t know what the building is being used for now, if anything.  It''s in a great location, just north of the C terminal and a tunnel connecting C with what I assume would be called the D terminal would be easy to do, either below or above ground, or at ground level. 


----------------​

I had thought that there were plans for a commuter terminal on the north end of the airport, near U''s concourse. But plans are plans. Perhaps it''s a project that is included in a master plan or an Airport Layout Plan. But, I swear I''ve been hearing about the possiblity for awhile.

But, if I were MWAA (DCA), I''d create a small plane terminal area by the old terminal building and AMR''s now-demolised gates AND a stand-alone terminal at the location that U loads its Dashes. But I don''t imagine that it will be connected to the new terminal, but rather accessed by bus.

We''ll see. Ideally, for U, the new small jet terminal would be accessible from U''s gates from within security. I wonder if U and UA could consolidate into the new small jet terminal and U''s north concourse, if U puts large-small jets in the new terminal and it otherwise has lots of capacity.

 

[DCAflyer]

Yeah, I just went to the WMAA website and saw that American holds five of the 12 gates there. It really kinda funny that they will be sandwiched in with all star airlines.

 

[DCAflyer]

Who else besides U, UAL, and AC is in the middle finger (I love the reference, BTW... it is so appro pos to the new U way of doing business)? If there are no other carriers in the middle finger besides the three of us, and if U were allowed to construct a new terminal north of C, that would make everything from the middle finger northward essentially the Star terminal. They could burrow a tunnel connecting the three fingers so that people don''t have to exit and enter checkpoints when making connections (a major inconvenience).

 

[RowUnderDCA]

Well... I do recall seeing an Airport Layout Plan of DCA from the 90s that calls for a Remote Commuter Terminal east of the U Hangars and North of the U concourse (don't know if it contemplated RJ's). Of course it showed the existing 'new' terminal... but also indicated the eventual demolition of the AMR concourse AND the NWA terminal. FWIW