Dallas Love Field Gate Feud

topDawg

Veteran
Nov 23, 2010
2,957
2,353
My understanding is Delta got one of the Alaska gates but really wants space to add SLC/DTW and possibly MSP flights as well.

Its not going to happen and its a real shame Congress has the stupid gate cap for the airport. No one is going to unseat SWA but its a little ridiculous that an airline, with a history of continuous service to secondary airports (HOU/MDW/FLL/LGB/SNA/BUR) can't add some extra options.
 
OP
S

SWAMECH

Senior
Apr 26, 2005
400
144
My understanding is Delta got one of the Alaska gates but really wants space to add SLC/DTW and possibly MSP flights as well.

Its not going to happen and its a real shame Congress has the stupid gate cap for the airport. No one is going to unseat SWA but its a little ridiculous that an airline, with a history of continuous service to secondary airports (HOU/MDW/FLL/LGB/SNA/BUR) can't add some extra options.
Stay tuned Dawg, there has been some movement towards the possibility of looking at adding some more gates (5-10) as an analyst group has been watching and ran some numbers and said that opening just 5-10 more gates at LF would have a very great positive impact on the passengers, airlines and huge increases for city and all the businesses that support airport operations as well as the growth in jobs and security. The COD has not completely disregarded the idea but did say they would expect another onslaught of pressure from all the folks that live around Dallas Love Field. With the way they are cleaning up all around the LF areas and improvements planned for the road ways and traffic expect this to happen some time in the future. Like I said after the W/A agreement and restrictions went into place there will be another visit to open up LF further and also don't totally disregard the possibility of even international flights too, trust me, it's all coming sometime. Might be 5-10 or even 20 years but it's coming. WHY ELSE would they have "pre-build" into the current LF airport all the means and real estate areas equipped to handle customs areas? As well as the ability to very quickly and easily add more gates. YES the current terminals at LF were built to easily expand further and already has the real estate and the room and area to accommodate customs. Now why would anyone build all that into the current construction? Because they already knew back then that all this will get revisited and passed at a later date and at a little at a time as I suggested it would. Little here, little there in small chuncks and SWA will get what they originally wanted in the long run...
 

eolesen

Veteran
Jul 23, 2003
15,863
9,389
Not. Gonna. Happen.

Congress didn't negotiate this. Dallas, Fort Worth, DFW, WN, and AA did. It's contractual. Binding. Non-severable. It's more secure than your union pension.

The only role Congress played was repealing the Wright Amendment in 2006, and I don't see them stepping back into it.
 
OP
S

SWAMECH

Senior
Apr 26, 2005
400
144
Not. Gonna. Happen.

Congress didn't negotiate this. Dallas, Fort Worth, DFW, WN, and AA did. It's contractual. Binding. Non-severable. It's more secure than your union pension.

The only role Congress played was repealing the Wright Amendment in 2006, and I don't see them stepping back into it.
The exact same crap was said when the fight for the W/A to go away came up, the exact. People, just like you just did, said No way, they will NEVER get rid of the W/A as there are too many people and co's involved, no way in hell, they said. Bye-Bye W/A!!! Never say never...
 

eolesen

Veteran
Jul 23, 2003
15,863
9,389
That's some interesting revisionist history. I remember saying Congress was not going to impose a settlement, and they didn't.

Don't forget it took over 40 years of lawsuits to get to a compromise which allowed WN to fly beyond neighboring states. Arguably, that was within Congress's purview since the original Wright Amendment got involved due to the interests of interstate commerce and transportation.

Now that it's repealed, there's no more interest for Congress to be involved with. Certainly, you don't want the precedent of legislators from 49 other states determining how many gates there are at your local airport...

Or maybe you do. Just be careful when that type of mentality creeps into other areas of governance.
 
OP
S

SWAMECH

Senior
Apr 26, 2005
400
144
Didn't take the entire 40 years E and you know it. It took little nibbles at a time as SWA is still doing, and sometime in the future there will be no restrictions at LF. Little by little, small chunks at a time instead of fighting for the largest chunk all at once, easier that way...
 

eolesen

Veteran
Jul 23, 2003
15,863
9,389
The only nibbles as you put it happened from 1998 to 2005. 1998 is when Continental and Mesa started to play with intrastate travel. 2000 stretched the definition of the 56 seat rule got stretched way further than anyone thought possible. But that was about it. Those weren't lawsuits to change Wright and neither benefitted WN. They were lawsuits to play within the letter of the law.

Fact is the restrictions at DAL didn't change materially from 1971 to 2005 when Missouri was added not by lawsuit, but by sneaking an amendment into a budget appropriation when nobody was in a position to do anything about it. WN may have screwed up with that, because a year later, you had the five party agreement which took away Congress's ability to meddle entirely...

All because Dallas reneged on its 1968 agreement to close down Love....

The lawsuit around the former Legend terminal didn't get shut down until 2019.

You can keep dreaming about Congress making the 5PA go away and taking away local control over how airports get used, but that would then require the perimeter rules at LGA and DCA to be abolished and limits at SNA & LGB to be tossed, and the interests keeping those protections in place have much deeper pockets.... far deeper than WN's.
 
OP
S

SWAMECH

Senior
Apr 26, 2005
400
144
The only nibbles as you put it happened from 1998 to 2005. 1998 is when Continental and Mesa started to play with intrastate travel. 2000 stretched the definition of the 56 seat rule got stretched way further than anyone thought possible. But that was about it. Those weren't lawsuits to change Wright and neither benefitted WN. They were lawsuits to play within the letter of the law.

Fact is the restrictions at DAL didn't change materially from 1971 to 2005 when Missouri was added not by lawsuit, but by sneaking an amendment into a budget appropriation when nobody was in a position to do anything about it. WN may have screwed up with that, because a year later, you had the five party agreement which took away Congress's ability to meddle entirely...

All because Dallas reneged on its 1968 agreement to close down Love....

The lawsuit around the former Legend terminal didn't get shut down until 2019.

You can keep dreaming about Congress making the 5PA go away and taking away local control over how airports get used, but that would then require the perimeter rules at LGA and DCA to be abolished and limits at SNA & LGB to be tossed, and the interests keeping those protections in place have much deeper pockets.... far deeper than WN's.
No one reneged on anything. SWA sued and forced a ruling, so no one reneged at all... Just keep watching, the LF drama will go on for years little by little.
 
OP
S

SWAMECH

Senior
Apr 26, 2005
400
144
Ah yes, the grand FTW experiment. I'm not sure if it even lasted a year for YV?
Yes, and it doesn't matter who or when as it was all little chunks at a time by design and of course spread out over time. Time is in my side, says SWA...