Clt & Dca - Facing The Void
- Thread starter BoeingBoy
- Start date
autofixer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,804
- 241
Has anyone got any ideas as to where to get some capital to up-start? "When one door closes, another opens." How about we call it Piedmont Airlines and we have a slogan like, "Jet Piedmont"? We could offer point to point flights out of CLT and GSO to major business destinations, such as EWR, ORD, BOS, DCA, TPA, MCI, DFW, IAH, West Coast. We could offer reasonable fares and friendly service. We could show some "Southern Hospitality" and be less "cool" and "efficient".
jimntx
Veteran
True, but his question was not what happens to the money gained by auctioning off the slots. We all know that the money will go to pay off the ATSB-backed loans. His question (and I'm curious also) was are there any restrictions to who can obtain those slots? Can a foreign airline purchase landing rights at DCA? I thought there were size restrictions on the a/c that could land and takeoff at DCA; so, could a 777 or 747 even land there?
For that matter, DCA is a special case anyway. If US Airways does liquidate, can the slots just be bought up by whoever can bid the most money for them? Or, does the FAA (?) get back in the act and control which airline or airlines gets slots like they did last time slots came open? Not everyone who wanted or could afford a slot got one.
For that matter, DCA is a special case anyway. If US Airways does liquidate, can the slots just be bought up by whoever can bid the most money for them? Or, does the FAA (?) get back in the act and control which airline or airlines gets slots like they did last time slots came open? Not everyone who wanted or could afford a slot got one.
Air conditioned
Advanced
- Mar 18, 2004
- 216
- 0
autofixer said:
Piedmont Airlines already exists and operates as a wholly owned subsidiary of USAirways.
They fly Dash-8 turboprops and its headquarters are in Salisbury MD.
(Wasn't sure if you were aware of that not...but it was a great idea!
)Jim, there are a couple of things that prevent DCA from being used by foreign carriers.
One is, as you mentioned, the runways. None of them are even 7,000 feet long, so it's more restrictive than LGA or ISP.
The other is the range restrictions. Other than the few slots handed to a few western airlines, nobody gets to go farther than halfway across the country nonstop out of DCA.
Now, granted, I figure a foreign airline could fly from DCA to Europe via, say, JFK. As long as they didn't take on any DCA-JFK pax, I guess that'd work.
One is, as you mentioned, the runways. None of them are even 7,000 feet long, so it's more restrictive than LGA or ISP.
The other is the range restrictions. Other than the few slots handed to a few western airlines, nobody gets to go farther than halfway across the country nonstop out of DCA.
Now, granted, I figure a foreign airline could fly from DCA to Europe via, say, JFK. As long as they didn't take on any DCA-JFK pax, I guess that'd work.
jimntx
Veteran
But, we still don't have an answer to whlinder's question. There is something sticking in the back of my mind that only U.S.-based airlines can fly into DCA, but I can't find it in any regs. Does anyone know for sure whether or not foreign airlines would be allowed to use DCA?
700UW said:
What defines a "true" international flight? Why is a flight between the US and Canada not international? Just because it preclears? That doesn't make it a domestic flight, it simply preclears. Flights from the US to certain Canadian airports (Calgary, Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver, and a small handful of others) prelcear, as do flights to Nassau, Freeport, Aruba, Bermuda, and Shannon (Ireland). US Airways could (foolishly) apply for beyond perimter to fly DCA-SNN. I don't see why that wouldn't be a "true" international flight.
jimntx
Veteran
I don't think 700W was implying that a flight from Canada was not a true International flight. The fact is that since U.S. Customs preclears flights from Canada to the U.S., those flights can land at airports that do not have Customs and Immigration facilities and personnel.
MWeiss posted that none of the DCA runways are as long as 7000 ft. As far as a DCA-SNN flight, any a/c capable of flying the route would probably be too big to land at DCA. And, unless seriously weight restricted (as in not enough fuel to make the flight or not enough passengers or freight to make it pay), I certainly don't think one could take off from DCA.
MWeiss posted that none of the DCA runways are as long as 7000 ft. As far as a DCA-SNN flight, any a/c capable of flying the route would probably be too big to land at DCA. And, unless seriously weight restricted (as in not enough fuel to make the flight or not enough passengers or freight to make it pay), I certainly don't think one could take off from DCA.
OP
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #12
I think (but could be corrected) that the biggest plane allowed at DCA is the 757/A321. Add in the perimeter rule, and international service (except Canada/Caribbean, as mentioned) is out.
As for ownership, slots are a funny animal. They are awarded by the government, although they have so far allowed airlines to sell them. They can be reclaimed by the government - hence the ATSB requires U to maintain enough utilization so that the slots are not reclaimed.
I have never heard of a foreign airline buying slots (of course most foreign airlines are not interested in slots at DCA/LGA). The slots they use are usually created for them (or were when more airports had capacity controlled), as their flights are usually the result of bilateral negotiations.
Anyone is welcome to correct any of the above...
Jim
As for ownership, slots are a funny animal. They are awarded by the government, although they have so far allowed airlines to sell them. They can be reclaimed by the government - hence the ATSB requires U to maintain enough utilization so that the slots are not reclaimed.
I have never heard of a foreign airline buying slots (of course most foreign airlines are not interested in slots at DCA/LGA). The slots they use are usually created for them (or were when more airports had capacity controlled), as their flights are usually the result of bilateral negotiations.
Anyone is welcome to correct any of the above...
Jim
REK is about 500 miles longer than DCA-LAX. FI flies BWI-REK with a 757. Operationally, the runway length might get in the way of DCA-REK. Would the government also get in the way?
I'm still curious as to whether a foreign airline could snatch up the slots. I know AC has some, but I can envision a scenario where the Star Alliance purchases slots to ensure Star presence at DCA and then selects the appropriate member airline to utilize the slots for the Alliance's benefit.
I'm still curious as to whether a foreign airline could snatch up the slots. I know AC has some, but I can envision a scenario where the Star Alliance purchases slots to ensure Star presence at DCA and then selects the appropriate member airline to utilize the slots for the Alliance's benefit.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #14
If a foreign entity were to buy slots and lease them to United, they would consider them an investment which would have to return a profit just as any other investment that a company would make. Any banker or investment company in the US could buy US’ slots and lease them to airlines if they wanted to since slots theoretically are pretty valuable assets.
However, worldwide nearly all slots are held by airlines and not be investment companies. Airlines sell and lease slots to each other but not many others get into the process for a couple reasons. First, slots are extraordinarily perishable – they are nothing more than a right to operate one flight per period (usually per day) at a specific time. Second, they are highly specific, many slots, including US’ slots at DCA, have restrictions attached to their use – within 1000 miles by aircraft of a certain size. They are very dependent on an airline’s schedule and essentially only the network planning dept. of an airline knows where slots would be needed; an outside investor would take a large risk by buying an asset for which someone else could ruin the value. And finally, and perhaps most importantly, it is highly likely that the US government will change the rules for slot holdings at LGA and DCA – the only truly constrained airports in the US from a slot perspective. Given that US is a major slot holder at DCA and LGA, there is considerable opportunity for the gov’t to change slot rules to allow LCCs greater access to LGA and DCA and then proclaim that airports in the US are open for business to all new carriers. They cannot now say that and many speculate that part of the reason they refuse to let go of their influence on the airline industry is because it has not yet been a market where there is truly free access. Incidentally, the US is by far the most liberal country in the world in allowing new entrant airlines access to its airports so being able to prove would go a long ways to denouncing those who say that the US government is protectionistic of its airlines.
And even if the government doesn’t intervene, legacy airlines and LCCs alike can come up with all the cash that is needed to acquire the slots and facilities necessary to operate at both LGA and DCA. The only way those slots are not likely to come on the open market is if US creates a business plan which involves investing in a totally refashioned airline, including aircraft, hubs, and slots and gains an investor to back them by creating a business plan that is so uniquely US that no one else would be interested in investing in the business apart from what it could be as a knock off off US.
However, worldwide nearly all slots are held by airlines and not be investment companies. Airlines sell and lease slots to each other but not many others get into the process for a couple reasons. First, slots are extraordinarily perishable – they are nothing more than a right to operate one flight per period (usually per day) at a specific time. Second, they are highly specific, many slots, including US’ slots at DCA, have restrictions attached to their use – within 1000 miles by aircraft of a certain size. They are very dependent on an airline’s schedule and essentially only the network planning dept. of an airline knows where slots would be needed; an outside investor would take a large risk by buying an asset for which someone else could ruin the value. And finally, and perhaps most importantly, it is highly likely that the US government will change the rules for slot holdings at LGA and DCA – the only truly constrained airports in the US from a slot perspective. Given that US is a major slot holder at DCA and LGA, there is considerable opportunity for the gov’t to change slot rules to allow LCCs greater access to LGA and DCA and then proclaim that airports in the US are open for business to all new carriers. They cannot now say that and many speculate that part of the reason they refuse to let go of their influence on the airline industry is because it has not yet been a market where there is truly free access. Incidentally, the US is by far the most liberal country in the world in allowing new entrant airlines access to its airports so being able to prove would go a long ways to denouncing those who say that the US government is protectionistic of its airlines.
And even if the government doesn’t intervene, legacy airlines and LCCs alike can come up with all the cash that is needed to acquire the slots and facilities necessary to operate at both LGA and DCA. The only way those slots are not likely to come on the open market is if US creates a business plan which involves investing in a totally refashioned airline, including aircraft, hubs, and slots and gains an investor to back them by creating a business plan that is so uniquely US that no one else would be interested in investing in the business apart from what it could be as a knock off off US.
RowUnderDCA
Veteran
- Oct 6, 2002
- 2,123
- 1
i think that discussions like this lead to the false impression that "slots" are a pervasive and significant item in the industry. They are not.
