Denver was truly a required airport as Stapleton wasn't doing it's duty. Though it's construction goes down as one of the "what not to do" examples in large scale projects. IAD was, being built in a field 40 odd miles west of DC in the fields of Norther Virginia was a gamble. One that paid off. One of the few. Washington, up until Dulles, really didn't have international air-service on the same degree as it does today. Ottawa has poor service for a 'national capital' and until a few years ago, one couldn't fly a commercial jet between Ottawa and Washington.. and you could for a few months. No longer. Berlin is also poorly served as a national capital. Until recently, I believe the only national capital you could fly to from Berlin was Ulan Bator, Mongolia. DFW was also built as a bit of a gamble. Dallas has grown by leaps and bounds, and AA's move from New York to DFW certainly did help. Every time I hear about the 'proposed' new Chicago airport I really wonder if they are serious. Didn't Lisbon, Portugal build a new airport in the middle of nowhere? What about Milan, Italy? Narita? Building and running airports, and running airlines are two business' that I wouldn't put my cash into. Matthew On Saturday, February 15, 2003, at 03:02 PM, Evan McElravy wrote: > Fiasco? Sometimes...Mirabel certainly is, arguably DIA as well. Dulles > though? OK, it was built in BFE, but it's not as if Washington can, you > know, do without international air service, and it sure isn't going > into > DCA. DFW: lot of slime (Wright Amendment et al.) associated with it, > not > ideally located, but having three airlines with hubs in the Dallas > area has > been good for the city, and certainly Delta and American wouldn't have > fit > at Love Field. Then there's Austin -- this was done relatively on the > cheap > since the Air Force base was there for the taking. I was always fond of > Mueller, having flown into it many, many times, but it was truthfully > far > too small (especially in the runway department, many times I flew in > there > when the landings went clear to the end) and in the middle of an > eminently > commercially developable area. So it's a mixed bag. > > Evan McElravy > emcelr@po-box.mcgill.ca > > > >> I think most major Canadian cities went through the "we are growing, >> we >> need a new airport" fiasco. A few US cities went through this as well, >> hence Dulles, Denver, Dallas, and recently Austin. >