Competition in the Skies: Is Delta the Problem, or the Solution?

[Kev3188]

What about flights other than originators, your turn times for all the other flights seem unrealistic....I believe SW will defend DAL just like DL did in ATL when SW showed up..They aint going to make it easy for DL to waltz in and become a powerhouse..

15-20 minutes for an originator, or even offloading an RON is at best overly optimistic. That same time frame for a turn is a recipe for consistent failure.
 
 

 

yes. thank you.
 
IF WN can turn a flight on 30 minutes that will carry at least twice as many passengers as DL will carry on a large RJ but apparently some don't want to admit that DL will have to adapt its operational procedures to what WN uses if it wants to argue that DL should be allowed to slot its flights into WN's schedule and argue for the use of gate space at DAL.

...And some refuse to admit that MGST's exist for a reason, and that even with those in place the argument that DL can run a fairly "robust" operation ex-DAL can still be made.

If you want to box yourself into a corner w/r/t :15-20 minute gate times, have at it. You are arguing for planned failure on a consistent basis, and I can't imagine DL will allow that to happen- especially when they can likely get what they want using the existing standards for launches/turns.

The risk involved for an (at best) incremental advantage you're trying make the case for is not worth the potential downside.
 
Separation of flights at any given gate is a separate issue within the overall discussion. Same church, different pew, if you will.

 

[Kev3188]

So will DAL be done by vendors or will DL actually use their own employees?

Good one.

 

[WorldTraveler]

15-20 minutes for an originator, or even offloading an RON is at best overly optimistic. That same time frame for a turn is a recipe for consistent failure.
 
 

 

...And some refuse to admit that MGST's exist for a reason, and that even with those in place the argument that DL can run a fairly "robust" operation ex-DAL can still be made.

If you want to box yourself into a corner w/r/t :15-20 minute gate times, have at it. You are arguing for planned failure on a consistent basis, and I can't imagine DL will allow that to happen- especially when they can likely get what they want using the existing standards for launches/turns.

The risk involved for an (at best) incremental advantage you're trying make the case for is not worth the potential downside.
 
Separation of flights at any given gate is a separate issue within the overall discussion. Same church, different pew, if you will.

of course E would like to say I'm making up crap despite the fact that I was personally involved in the topic being discussed... even while acknowledging that the CBP has different procedures for different airports.
 
So it's ok for him to say that there is no consistency in CBP procedures but then say that I am making up crap because it doesn't fit his narrative?
 
He is an IT consultant.  He is not paid to be an operations or network expert if that involves professional credentials even if he wants to try to convince us otherwise. 
 
 
I'm not boxing myself into anything.  I have suggested that DL might resort to using less than minimum times in order to gain access to the airport.
 
It is kind of hard to argue that DL should be given access to an airport where WN uses turn times that are below DL's. 
 
I'm not staking anything on reduced times.  I am saying it could well be part of DL's argument that their schedule can be accommodated into the existing known DAL schedule.
 
BTW, based on WN's current schedule at DAL, they have 11 flights between 6 and 7 a.m. and 8 flights between 4 and 5 pm, the hours when DL's schedule indicated they would have the heaviest gate usage. 
 
DAL will likely be DL employees above wing and contractors below wing based on how similar stations are staffed. 

 

[700UW]

And you are a missionary with no connection to dl.

 

[eolesen]

He is an IT consultant.  He is not paid to be an operations or network expert if that involves professional credentials even if he wants to try to convince us otherwise.

Well, you'd better email my boss, and tell him my job description doesn't match what you think it is supposed to be... My group happens to specialize in network & operations efficiency. We do a heck of a lot more than just GDS.

More to the point, I worked FIS at both JFK & ORD, and managed policies & procedures over both airside and cabin service (including lavs).

You might have been an agent once upon a time. Who knows, since you're so secretive...


The funnier part in your response is you totally missed the joke. Must be sad to have tunnel vision...

 

[WorldTraveler]

To borrow a phrase

Blah blah blah

Meanwhile DL will be at DAL... You're not. Betting against me are you?

 

[eolesen]

Nope, no plans on being at DL or DAL anytime soon. Too busy on the other side of the world right now, and I can think of dozens of better ways to spend my Saturday than worrying about what your latest narrative says.

 

[WorldTraveler]

yeah, I was just over there too. 
 
are you going to stay there until Oct 2014?
 
if not, the only reason you don't want to bet is because you aren't really that sure that DL won't be at DAL... and I am quite confident they will be.

 

[eolesen]

Frankly, "winning" isn't as important to me as it seems to be to you.

But more importantly, you seem to have no clue as to what I've been saying for the last five months on the subject.

Had you paid attention, you'd see that all I (and others) have said (consistently) is that DL won't be getting two gates to themselves, and that their proposed level of service is a fantasy.

But I've also been quite clear in saying DL's existing pattern of service, while not guaranteed, is more or less a given to be accommodated.

 

[swamt]

Bingo!  Ditto! Exactly!  And yes WT is an idiot, the more he post the more it shows, carry on, pls carry on...

 

[WorldTraveler]

E,
 
swamt has been saying that there is no such thing as gate sharing at DAL   HE posted many times that WN wouldn't give up anything of the 16 gates, let alone anything else that they might acquire to DL.
 
You have said what I have said all along that the two gates aren't as cut and dry as swamt or even the DOJ wants to make them out to be.
 
DL is obviously going to push to get as much of its service as possible.  I still say it will likely be far closer to what they proposed than what they have today.
 
DAL, the DOJ, and WN are all going to do all they can to give DL just enough to keep them from having any reason to suing to gain access - but the information that you, E, showed provides more than enough evidence to show that there is a legal basis for DL being at DAL and that WN is nowhere near close to using their gates to levels necessary to argue that they cannot accommodate any flights by another carrier. 

 

[swamt]

As usual you are wrong again.  Never have I ever said that there is no such thing as gate sharing, you are lying.  And yes this is why you get to be called an idiot because you can't comprehend.  I have in fact told you that airlines could and may end up sharing gates at DAL.  Matter fact I even told you it would be funny if both VX and Delta had to do that.  I believe United is doing it currently. 
The 2 gates, cut and dry?  I have told you SWA has great competition for these 2 gates, and I believe more might come.
Like the DOJ has already said, Delta just doesn't meet the criteria and is not an LCC.
I will stand behind that SWA will not give up any of their 16 gates provided by the repeal of the W/A.
Delta can grow at DFW with no limitations what-so-ever.  SWA cannot.
Nice try trying to pull E into your web of BS and lies...

 

[WorldTraveler]

you have specifically said that WN would not give up access to any of its 16 gates. 
 
Did you read what E has written and what I have said all along?  WN does not have exclusive rights to anything at DAL.
 
And you continue to argue that the basis for DL's exclusion from DAL is that the DOJ believes that LCCs should have free reign of a major airport to the exclusion of other carriers.
 
DL obviously doesn't agree with you because they haven't pulled their DAL flights.
 
DL will be at DAL and the reasons that E regarding preferential, not exclusive usage of gates at DAL is precisely why.  The fact that DL will vigorously challenge the DOJ's legal right to select carriers to serve an airport based  on expected price is yet another.
 
DL will be at DAL to your and WN's great consternation.

 

[robbedagain]

you keep saying DL will be at DAL  yet the FED GOVT has made it absolutely clear that DL is not an LCC and the fact that DL does not meet the CRITERIA that the DOT/DOJ set up   therefore  DL is not getting the 2 gates at DAL       not sure what part you do not understand here but an LCC is what WN VX B6 NK etc are    I suppose we can just sit back and watch DL throw in a Legal Challenge  like they were suppose to do regarding the US/AA merger

 

[WorldTraveler]

you can't seem to grasp (yes I said it) that DL and I clearly believe that the case of the two gates is not the only means by which DL can serve DAL and also that DL will fight to serve the airport.
 
It was AA/US' merger that started this whole process by the DOJ in which they said that the legacy carriers collude among themselves - a charge that DL will vigorously challenge if it has to.
 
Further, it is AA/US' problem that they agreed to the DOJ's divestiture requirements.  DL will fight that the DOJ has the legal right to do what it has done IF DL CANNOT GET ACCESS TO DAL.
 
The reason why no case has not been started is because DL is still working to get its service at DAL and DAL, WN, and the DOJ all know that the basis that DL is using to say that it should be there is something they cannot deny.
 
We can beat this horse as long as you want. DL will be at DAL.