Twenty years on and things finally came to a head. In 1964 the Civil Aeronautics Board ruled that Love Field (Dallas) and Great Southwest International (Fort Worth) were unsuitable for future needs. It ordered the great rivals to find a site for a joint airport within 180 days or it would do the job for them. Minds were suitably concentrated by the ultimatum. Enter the entrepreunurial Mayor of Dallas, J. Erik Jonsson, as chairman of an Interim Airport Board and things began to happen. A site was found diplomatically situated 17 miles from both cities, money was raised, prairie land was bought and the Dallas Fort Worth Regional Airport Board created in 1968. The first commercial flight landed at the new DFW on January 13, 1974 and they have been landing and taking off in increasing numbers ever since. In 2000 DFW was the world's fifth busiest airport and plans to get bigger. ----- Original Message ----- From: "David MR" <damiross3@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: "The Airline List" <AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Allan9" <exatc@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 8:16 PM Subject: RE: Southwest seeing how the wind blows > Al, > I'm not missing that point. I believe every major metro area such as > Dallas/Ft Worth should have more than one airport and those airports > should > not have any artificial limits placed on them. I think DFW could have > prospered even with DAL having no artificial limits placed on it. > > Basically what we had was politicians screwing the people again. > > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: The Airline List [mailto:AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of > Allan9 > Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 17:02 > To: AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Southwest seeing how the wind blows > > > Dave the one point you may be missing was when DFW was built the Wright > Ammendment was put in place to force all the airlines to go to DFW. The > locals (politicians) had to pay their share of the matching funds in order > to pay for the airports' construction. They felt if one (major) carrier > refused to go to DFW then others would follow suit and the airport would > not > be finiancially feasible. > So along came the Wright Ammendment basically forcing them to do it. We > tend to forget that when the concept was created Dallas Air Carrier > traffic > was no where near what it is today. Denver took the same approach after > seeing what Dallas did. > Al > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David MR" <damiross3@xxxxxxxxxxx> > To: "The Airline List" <AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Allan9" > <exatc@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 6:03 PM > Subject: RE: Southwest seeing how the wind blows > > >> Al, Clay, >> >> DAL, by city regulation, is limited to 32 gates. There are currently 16 >> gates in use. >> >> Although DAL use to have 747 service (Braniff between DAL/HNL), I don't >> see >> DAL getting very large aircraft. I see more narrow bodies operating >> frequent flights to business destinations such as NYC, LA, SF, and >> Chicago. >> This is in addition to the current short-haul flights to neighboring >> states >> and within the state of Texas. >> >> I think the Wright Amendment was wrong from day 1. There's no reason why >> a >> large metropolitan area should not have 2 (or more) airports with airline >> operations. On a similar subject, it was wrong for Denver to close >> Stapleton when International opened. The former would be more convenient >> for short haul flights while the latter could do the long haul. After >> all, >> does it make sense to take a 1 or 1.5 hour flight only to have another 1 >> or >> so to get to your destination after the flight arrives? >> >> David >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/airlinediscussion/ - an alternative to the >> Airline List at CUNY - a list where the moderator actually moderates and >> it >> is okay to have differing opinions without being subjected to moderation >> by >> a moderator who doesn't moderate his own list >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: The Airline List [mailto:AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of >> Allan9 >> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 12:37 >> To: AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Subject: Re: Southwest seeing how the wind blows >> >> >> To strt with I am in favor of repealing the Wright restrictions. >> However, >> questions I have is what is the additional markets they could serve. The >> longest runway reportedly is 8800 feet. I don't think there is >> sufficient >> distance between runway centerlines to allow simultaneous ILS approaches. >> The traffic flows would appear to conflict with the appraoches into DFW. >> I've seen what can happen and the resultant restrictions (ORD/MDW). >> There >> are only about 30-32 gates atl DAL and over half are now in use. >> Reportedly >> there is no room for expansion of the terminal or runways. So as I see >> it >> you probably could add about 15 flights per hour (maybe). Just for the >> sake >> of discussion. TDo a Google search on Dallas Love Master Plan. I did a >> quick scan of it. >> >> Al >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Clay Wardlow" <clay.wardlow@xxxxxxxx> >> To: "Allan9" <exatc@xxxxxxxxxx>; "The Airline List" >> <AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 12:42 PM >> Subject: RE: Southwest seeing how the wind blows >> >> >> Al, >> >> Yes, sorry. DMN = Dallas Morning News, it's the only Dallas newspaper. >> >> There were quite a few people leaving comments on the "What do you >> think" section. I'd say 99% of them were infavor or repealing the Wright >> amendment. >> >> I whole-heartedly agree. However, I would like to understand the other >> side. Does DFW really believe that Love poses a threat? Can 30-something >> gates really treaten 141+ gates? >> >> DFW is usually around the 3-busiest airport in the world. How is letting >> little ol' Love out of the Write amendment really going to hurt DFW? >> >> Clay - formerly of DFW >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Allan9 [mailto:exatc@xxxxxxxxxx] >> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 9:19 AM >> To: The Airline List; Clay Wardlow >> Subject: Re: Southwest seeing how the wind blows >> >> Clay >> Pardon my dumb question but what is DMN? >> Dallas Morning News? >> Al >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Clay Wardlow" <clay.wardlow@xxxxxxxx> >> To: <AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 11:51 AM >> Subject: Re: Southwest seeing how the wind blows >> >> >> I've been reading the comments by people left on the DMN. Everyone seems >> very passionate about repealing the Write amendment. >> >> >> >> Is there any reason to keep it? >> >> >> >> Clay - SEA >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Clay Wardlow >> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 8:44 AM >> To: Airline List >> Subject: Southwest seeing how the wind blows >> >> >> >> http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/111604dnbussouth >> west.67342.html >> >> >> >> Southwest Airlines Co. signaled Monday that it intends to watch the >> political reaction to its newfound opposition to flight restrictions at >> Dallas Love Field before mounting any campaign to remove them. >> >> The Dallas-based discounter wants to hear from a variety of >> constituencies interested in repealing the Wright amendment, the federal >> law that limits flights from the airport to Texas and nearby states. >> >> "We are waiting to hear how people respond," said Ron Ricks, senior vice >> president for law, airports and public policy at Southwest, in an >> interview at the carrier's headquarters at Love Field. >> >> On Friday, Southwest chief executive Gary Kelly sent up an unexpected >> flare in a battle that began decades ago but has been dormant until the >> last few months. In a speech before area executives, he denounced the >> 1979 statute as "anti-competitive." >> >> So far, Mr. Kelly's comments have drawn negative reactions from >> officials at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, American Airlines >> Inc., and city halls in Dallas and Fort Worth. >> >> All cited concerns that opening Love Field to long-haul flights would >> pose a critical challenge to the health of D/FW, an economic engine to >> North Texas. >> >> But several prominent area lawmakers have welcomed a renewed discussion >> of the Wright amendment. >> >> Mr. Ricks said he has received supportive calls from the offices of >> three lawmakers, including Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan. He declined to >> name the other two but said one is from Texas. >> >> Many area travelers have also voiced their opposition to the >> restrictions that allow airlines to fly non-stop from Love Field only >> within an area that includes Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, New >> Mexico, Kansas, Alabama and Mississippi. >> >> Mr. Ricks said Southwest officials reconsidered their neutral position >> on the Wright amendment after rival Delta Air Lines Inc. said in >> September it was pulling its hub at D/FW. That left Southwest with three >> choices: >> >> * Do nothing, and watch somebody else fill the vacuum. >> >> * Pick up the slack at D/FW. >> >> * Expand at Love Field. >> >> "We don't want to do nothing," Mr. Ricks said. "That's not Southwest's >> M.O." >> >> After careful consideration Southwest ruled out going to D/FW, because >> it knew that airport's biggest tenant, American, would pull out all the >> stops to protect its home turf, Mr. Ricks said. >> >> What's more, he said, moving flights to D/FW would cannibalize the >> airline's successful Love Field operation. >> >> It made more sense to bolster Love, which suffered more than most >> airports from the September 2001 terrorist attacks because it relies >> entirely on shorter flights, many of which can be replaced by car trips, >> he said. >> >> An unrestricted Love Field would also be good for Dallas, Mr. Ricks >> said, because more long-haul flights could bolster the city's economy >> and convention business. >> >> He also noted several times that Southwest is the fifth-biggest taxpayer >> in the city of Dallas because it pays property taxes on its entire fleet >> of Boeing jets. >> >> "If business is down at Love Field, business is down in Dallas," Mr. >> Ricks said. >> >> The Texas congressional delegation, which is likely to play a central >> role in any Wright repeal effort, had a mixed reaction last week to Mr. >> Kelly's remarks. >> >> Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Dallas, >> said they were willing to consider the matter. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Ennis, >> said he opposes it. Republican Sen. John Cornyn said he needs more time >> to think about it. >> >> Support from out-of-state lawmakers could also prove key if Midwestern >> and Southern states, driven by a desire for more low-fare Southwest >> flights, fight hard for them in Congress. >> >> Even as he reiterated that the airline didn't have a campaign planned, >> Mr. Ricks rattled off reasons a repeal made sense and wouldn't hurt >> D/FW. >> >> Topping the list was a city master plan that restricts to 32 the number >> of gates that airlines can operate at Love Field. Today, only 16 are in >> operation. D/FW has 138 gates. >> >> Love Field "will never grow to a point where it will threaten D/FW >> Airport," Mr. Ricks said. >> >> But that argument didn't fly with D/FW or Fort Worth-based American. >> >> "We think the Wright amendment has helped ensure the success of D/FW, >> and we believe it's still relevant today," said Tim Wagner, an American >> spokesman. >> >> D/FW worries that repealing the Wright amendment would bring a repeat of >> 2000, when American and Delta added new service at Love Field to compete >> against Legend Airlines. >> >> "We earnestly believe, and history has shown, that many other airlines >> would try to get in to compete head-to-head with Southwest at a close-in >> airport," said Kevin Cox, D/FW's chief operating officer. >> >> If Love Field grew to its limit, D/FW estimates, the city airport could >> attract millions of passengers who would otherwise use the nation's >> third-busiest airport. >> >> "Southwest is doing this to protect its monopolistic control over Love >> Field and not bring in added competition to the Dallas-Fort Worth >> marketplace," Mr. Cox said. >> >> He called the airline's approach "caustic and divisive." >> >> Southwest had its own criticisms. >> >> The city of Fort Worth, which avows loyalty to D/FW, has, over the >> years, asked Southwest to add service at Fort Worth Meacham Airport, and >> the cargo hub, Alliance Airport, Mr. Ricks said. >> >> "They said quite specifically Meacham Field is not subject to the Wright >> amendment, you can fly from Meacham," Mr. Ricks said. "What I find >> ironic is that when we talk about flying out of Love Field they say we >> are going to hurt D/FW." >> >> Fort Worth City Manager Charles Boswell said his city has approached >> Southwest about starting service from its airport, but he said he >> doesn't recall any discussion about interstate flights or service from >> Alliance. >> >> >> >> >> >> Clay Wardlow | Technical Publications | ADIC <http://www.adic.com/> | >> Redmond, WA | 425-897-7448 >> --- >> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. >> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >> Version: 6.0.791 / Virus Database: 535 - Release Date: 11/8/2004 >> >> --- >> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. >> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >> Version: 6.0.791 / Virus Database: 535 - Release Date: 11/8/2004 >> >> > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.791 / Virus Database: 535 - Release Date: 11/8/2004 > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.791 / Virus Database: 535 - Release Date: 11/8/2004 > >