A couple of weeks ago I wrote about how there were discussions going on about possibly adding more exemptions to DCA’s perimeter rule (this was initially flagged by Jake Sherman at Punchbowl News). There’s an update, as bipartisan legislation has been introduced to make this a reality. Let’s go over the details — personally I’m strongly in favor of this.
In this post:
The basics of Washington National Airport’s perimeter rule
Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA) is the airport closest to Washington DC, and is therefore the favored airport for most politicians. The airport isn’t very large and there’s a lot of demand for it (given how lucrative government business can be for airlines), so it’s slot controlled.
The airport has what’s known as a perimeter rule, which has been around since 1966, when jets started flying to the airport. This rule generally prohibits airlines from operating routes longer than 1,250 statute miles nonstop.
However, there are a limited number of exemptions, whereby up to 40 daily flights (20 roundtrips) are allowed to destinations farther than that. Current destinations beyond the perimeter rule include Austin (AUS), Denver (DEN), Las Vegas (LAS), Los Angeles (LAX), Phoenix (PHX), Portland (PDX), Salt Lake City (SLC), San Francisco (SFO), San Juan (SJU), and Seattle (SEA).
What’s the logic for the perimeter rule? Well, this was initially intended to protect Washington Dulles Airport (IAD) as the transcontinental and international gateway for the area. The concern at the time was that Dulles Airport couldn’t thrive if National Airport wasn’t limited in this way.
By the way, there’s an honorable story about late Senator John McCain related to the perimeter rule. In 1999, he led an effort to repeal the perimeter rule. He wasn’t successful, but some exemptions (including one to his home airport of Phoenix) were allowed. He reportedly refused to take the nonstop flight and rather opted to connect, so that it didn’t appear that he was just trying to repeal the rule for his own interests.
Legislation could alter DCA perimeter rule
A couple of weeks ago, the Capital Access Alliance started pushing for adjustments to the perimeter rule at DCA. This was backed by Delta Air Lines, and interestingly one of the lobbyists is a close friend of House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (you’ve gotta love how politics works).
We’ve now seen the introduction of legislation in support of this. The Direct Capital Access Act has been introduced in Congress by US Representatives Hank Johnson (D-GA) And Burgess Owens (R-UT). I first have to stop and acknowledge the extent to which Delta is clearly behind this. I’m sure it’s no coincidence that the politicians involved are both from states with big Delta hubs, and that they’ll almost certainly be getting some campaign contributions from the airline.
Anyway, this legislation would allow for an additional 56 daily slot exemptions (meaning 28 pairs, since two are required for a roundtrip) to the perimeter rule. 40 of those slots would be for existing airlines at the airport, while 16 of those slots would be for airlines that don’t currently have service at the airport.
Since Delta is supportive of this, it’s probably worth noting that Delta’s current exempted routes include service to Los Angeles (LAX) and Salt Lake City (SLC). I have to imagine that Delta would love to add additional flights in those markets, as well as service to Seattle (SEA), and maybe even to San Diego (SAN).
For what it’s worth, San Antonio (SAT) and San Diego (SAN) are the seventh and eighth largest cities in the United States, respectively, and they don’t currently have any exempt flights per the perimeter rule.
Why I’m in favor of DCA perimeter rule changes
I’m hugely in favor of the perimeter rule at DCA being eliminated altogether, but I guess adding some more exempted slots is a good start.
First of all, there’s not a risk of Washington Dulles Airport failing anymore. The airport is a major hub for United, Washington National would still be slot restricted (so wouldn’t actually see a net expansion in terms of number of flights), and the population in Northern Virginia has increased significantly over the years.
More importantly, though, airlines really aren’t operating service at Washington National Airport that’s in the best interest of consumers. A huge percentage of flights at the airport are in high frequency markets with regional jets.
That’s because airlines don’t want to lose their slots (and slots have a use ’em or lose ’em clause), so they basically just fly regional jets nearly hourly in many markets. Being able to operate nonstop flights to more destinations would almost certainly cause airlines to increase capacity in some existing markets, and in turn upgrade aircraft on existing routes.
For example, rather than American operating 12 regional jets per day between Washington and New York, wouldn’t it be better to have eight flights with larger jets, and then four flights to new destinations that aren’t currently served?
While I understand the general need for slots at some airports, I think the current system used for these restrictions simply isn’t in the best interest of consumers. When airlines do slot squatting by flying regional jets into heavily congested airports, that keeps fares high. As far as I’m concerned, slots being awarded should factor in the total number of seats an airline is willing to offer to a destination, rather than just the total number of frequencies.
Bottom line
Legislation has been introduced that’s intended to create more perimeter rule slot exemptions at Washington National Airport. Delta is behind this lobbying effort, and it’s no surprise that this legislation has been introduced by politicians from Georgia and Utah.
With this legislation, we could see 56 additional daily slots (or 28 slot pairs) added, allowing more nonstop flights between the airport and destinations that are 1,250+ statute miles away.
It’s anyone’s guess if this proves successful. Personally I think the perimeter rule should be eliminated altogether, as the concept is so outdated, and doesn’t benefit consumers. This isn’t just in the best interest of politicians, it’s in the best interest of the public as well.
What do you think — should the DCA perimeter rule DCA be abolished, or should we at least see exemptions expanded?
And still no proper rail and bus connections to IAD and BWI ...
More flights in/out of DCA? That means more diverts into IAD at the slightest irregularity... this may work out just great for IAD.
The biggest issue with removing the perimeter rule at DCA is the size of the airport and associated roadways. The airport is actually really small and somewhat crowded. Adding lots of bigger planes will make the airport more crowded. Also note the slot rule is you have to use slots 80% of the time over all your slots. This means you can have slots you never use but meet the rule because you use 80%...
The biggest issue with removing the perimeter rule at DCA is the size of the airport and associated roadways. The airport is actually really small and somewhat crowded. Adding lots of bigger planes will make the airport more crowded. Also note the slot rule is you have to use slots 80% of the time over all your slots. This means you can have slots you never use but meet the rule because you use 80% your slots 100% of the time. This also wouldn't rule out more international flying to the airport via US preclearance from places like Dublin Ireland.
Like many of your articles just from your prospective to serve customers or as an avgeek and not considering the other aspects
I would love it if there were more direct flights to National. It's not as much of an issue now that the Silver line is running, but it's still the easiest airport for me to fly into and direct flights from the west coast run at a premium right now.
People on ground thinks the airport is crowded, politicians disagree.
Let's see who wins.
Congress, after you pass this bill, see you next time we need to bailout airlines.
But if we're going to overload DCA why not dream big.
Next are we going to see more DCA-Europe, perhaps a boom in SNN?
Maybe with Tony Douglas gone and news of EY growing again we could see a new bold move?
...
People on ground thinks the airport is crowded, politicians disagree.
Let's see who wins.
Congress, after you pass this bill, see you next time we need to bailout airlines.
But if we're going to overload DCA why not dream big.
Next are we going to see more DCA-Europe, perhaps a boom in SNN?
Maybe with Tony Douglas gone and news of EY growing again we could see a new bold move?
AUH-DCA-XXX-AUH. A fully loaded 787 might not make it to AUH, but should be able to load more than enough to reach Europe. That is we're ignoring the limited space of DCA, like the politicians, that because the 787 can land and have enough gates, it wouldn't be blocking the way of CRJs E75s 737s or 320s trying to taxi.
Then let's ask for an immigration facility or more pre-clearance in Europe.
There is no ground congestion at DCA that can't be fixed by American changing the way it schedules its flights at DCA which runs as a tightly banked operation.
AA is trying to support the number of flights it has by connecting passengers over DCA in a banked hub structure - and that is what causes ground congestion.
Nothing any other airline does at DCA causes ground congestion problems and there is ample...
There is no ground congestion at DCA that can't be fixed by American changing the way it schedules its flights at DCA which runs as a tightly banked operation.
AA is trying to support the number of flights it has by connecting passengers over DCA in a banked hub structure - and that is what causes ground congestion.
Nothing any other airline does at DCA causes ground congestion problems and there is ample space to operate more mainline flights in nearly every other terminal.
@Tim Dunn
So now you're blaming AA?
Regardless, I'm not trying to oppose or support the perimeter rule.
When an airport is at capacity, it's at capacity. Designers couldn't have foreseen 100 years in the future.
That's what you get using a design that was intended for DC-3 with piston engines not 787 with huge turbofans.
there are no scheduled widebodies at DCA.
Yes, it is AA's heavily banked structure at DCA that creates ground congestion, esp. since AA's operation that gets congested is heavily concentrated in a relatively small part of the airport.
Thanks for the update, but please be specific.
Does the proposed legislation add 56 net new slots, or is the proposal to convert 56 current slots to beyond perimeter slots? There's a big difference.
Ben, I am not sure you appreciate the LGA-DCA dynamic. It serves business travelers that need hourly flights because we don’t know when our meeting ends etc. I’d just take the Acela if I had to wait more than an hour at the airport.
BWI & IAD are connecting airports that serve the D.C. area. DCA is a destination - and should never allow fares with connections to a third point, and no international flights - if the airlines can do this, then break perimeter rule. Currently AS is the only carrier to fly from 3 major west coast cities into DCA; UA serves 2; AA 2 flights from LAX only. None of them are from the capital of...
BWI & IAD are connecting airports that serve the D.C. area. DCA is a destination - and should never allow fares with connections to a third point, and no international flights - if the airlines can do this, then break perimeter rule. Currently AS is the only carrier to fly from 3 major west coast cities into DCA; UA serves 2; AA 2 flights from LAX only. None of them are from the capital of these west coast states - Seattle, San Francisco, and Los Angeles.
We’ll see if the airlines would want all the n/s flights if they don’t allow travel to a 3rd point.
Oops… AS has 4 nonstops! PDX too.
That's insanely ridiculous. So you're saying that Delta should not be allowed to sell connections onward from Atlanta to destinations over its hub in Atlanta, or that United should not be able to sell connections beyond its Houston or Chicago hubs? That proposal will go nowhere.
I live in DC, and I fly United from DCA to Houston and then connect onward from houston all the time to smaller cities such as El Paso...
That's insanely ridiculous. So you're saying that Delta should not be allowed to sell connections onward from Atlanta to destinations over its hub in Atlanta, or that United should not be able to sell connections beyond its Houston or Chicago hubs? That proposal will go nowhere.
I live in DC, and I fly United from DCA to Houston and then connect onward from houston all the time to smaller cities such as El Paso or Corpus Christi or Merida (Mexico) That could never support nonstop service to any DC airport.
Fat chance - there's no basis in law to make such a provision. Get real.
100%. Insanely stupid post. I live in NW DC, DCA is my home airport and super convenient. I very often route through hubs - especially when flying my preferred carrier DL. I also take a number of AA non-stops when more convenient or connecting doesn't make as much sense. Trekking to IAD or BWI would add so much time and inconvenience.
I don't think that's what this poster was saying. The poster's proposal was to bar flights where DCA was a middle stop (e.g., Houston to DCA to LGA), not to bar flights originating from DCA that have a connection. It sounds like a logistical nightmare to execute, but DC residents would be the least affected of anyone by it.
As a matter of fact, Air Canada operates a number of flights to Toronto and Montreal daily out of Terminal 1 at DCA.
Come on, you can't go by city population when talking about potential airline passengers, you have to go by total metro area population. San Diego metro area is 17th biggest in the US, and San Antonio is 24th.
you actually base forecast travel demand by existing travel demand considering any limitations such as perimeter restrictions at DCA and LGA and multi-airport dynamics
Maybe so, but SAT and SAN are big military towns with a lot of traffic between them and DC, both military and contractors. The current daily traffic numbers between SAT/SAN and DCA probably (and easily) support a non-stop flight.
Exactly, SA & SD cannot be looked at through a normal lense. Each has 5+ major Military bases plus a thriving tourism industry, and major immigration/business from the America's.
I was on a direct DCA-MSY-SAT WN flight in early December on a Wednesday. At least 50 through passengers were with me headed to SAT (I live in SAT and was in DC on business). There is demand between DCA and SAT.
The WaPo had a piece on this yesterday as well: https://wapo.st/3LTBxJD
It is my life goal to see LHR open a customs facility in T3 (or T5C) and an exemption made for a daily LHR - DCA flight run by AA in an all premium A321. If Delta opens this door, that’d be great, thanks!
I had always predicted BA doing this first from LCY if the perimeter rule was lifted. With the stop in Ireland for fuel and, more importantly on this route, for customs... it would have been an easy winner.
Of course this was before they got rid of the A318... but maybe if they decide to bring back something via the A220...
Could JetBlue do this to London with their planes?
Re: the comment that RJs are all DCA can handle, do you think the carriers care? As the author said, they're just squatting on slots. Landing fees are the culprit. Airlines pay based on the max landing weight of their flights into DCA. Start charging a flat rate landing fee and you'll see bigger planes replacing RJs immediately.
Ben, I love your articles, but as a DC native and an air traffic controller that works arrivals to the DC metro airports, you're wrong here. DCA is currently leading the nation in the frequency at which airborne holding is required. More than Newark, more than LaGuardia, more than Kennedy. That's in large part due to ramp congestion, and specifically the new concourse built for American. A321s pushing from the new concourse are blocking taxiways...
Ben, I love your articles, but as a DC native and an air traffic controller that works arrivals to the DC metro airports, you're wrong here. DCA is currently leading the nation in the frequency at which airborne holding is required. More than Newark, more than LaGuardia, more than Kennedy. That's in large part due to ramp congestion, and specifically the new concourse built for American. A321s pushing from the new concourse are blocking taxiways and forcing airborne holding multiple times each day. We held six times for 20-45 minutes in a single day last week. The airport has a high percentage of regional jets **because that's all it can handle**. It's already running beyond its capabilities with no possibility for further expansion of the airfield. Dulles was built for a reason. It has four runways with plans for a fifth and capacity to spare. Relaxing or eliminating the DCA perimeter even with slot controls will make the airport even less manageable. It limits the effectiveness of ground stops and EDCTs during high demand periods because more flights will already be in the air. The airport is barely coping as it is, and messing with the perimeter rules again will only cause significantly worse problems. Just to give you an idea of how bad things are right now — I refuse to fly out of DCA despite its convenience. Holdings and diversions for volume, ramp congestion, and VIP movements simply make it unpredictable and unreliable, in my opinion.
I'm sorry but that is simply not accurate in totality.
DCA has one of the best on-time percentages in the Northeast. Of course there are ground limitations but that is true at every airport, even places as big as ATL and DFW. Airlines have to build reasonable schedules including managing the traffic flow on the ground.
ATC is supposed to serve the airlines and the people, not the other way around.
I'll give a working air traffic controller's opinion more weight than yours (and certainly mine) on the issue of airport congestion. As Mark Twain once observed, "There are three kinds of lies - lies, damned lies, and statistics."
Let's go... 30R/L for IAD!
Could you clarify what you mean by “more flights will already be in the air”?
If I read Ben’s article correctly the # of flights in/out of DCA wouldn’t change. I flew LGA-DCA every week back in 2019 on DL… flying into DCA was never an issue - my flights back to LGA were almost always delayed, but it was because of congestion in/around LGA.
Anyway, I think your points are mostly valid… AA needs to get those a321’s out of the way!
there is no believable universe where DCA has worse delays than any of the 3 NYC airports.
other airlines at DCA should not be negatively impacted by AA's inability to manage its ground operation
multiple terminals are capable of handling all mainline aircraft. Where the airlines fly them should not be impacted.
@Tim Dunn Where did I say delays were worse at DCA than the NY metros? I said the frequency of airborne holding is significantly higher. I also don't know what you mean by, "ATC has to serve airlines and people, not the other way around." because I didn't say anything that would imply otherwise. I think you're reading things from my comment that aren't there. The whole point is that we're a service, but it...
@Tim Dunn Where did I say delays were worse at DCA than the NY metros? I said the frequency of airborne holding is significantly higher. I also don't know what you mean by, "ATC has to serve airlines and people, not the other way around." because I didn't say anything that would imply otherwise. I think you're reading things from my comment that aren't there. The whole point is that we're a service, but it negatively impacts that service when sectors become overloaded due to holding. AA creates their schedules, and currently there's a detrimental impact to airport operations. We aren't holding because we want to, we're holding because we have to. But sure, I guess you're the expert on my job, so we'll just go with what you said.
@tom0706 More flights will already be in the air if they're coming from beyond the perimeter. Ground stops and ground delays are implemented in a first tier or internal basis. That means that all flights within a given distance of the airport (roughly 500 miles) or within that en route center's area of responsibility (in this case, Washington Center) will be stopped or delayed on the ground to manage or balance demand. Priority is obviously given to aircraft already in the air, so those on the ground will have to wait until there's a sufficient gap in the sky, and crucially, the airport can accept the traffic. Right now, it's easier to manage demand on short notice because so many flights are first tier. They can simply be kept on the ground while airborne volume is managed. If more of that traffic is coming from two, three, or four hours away, it renders those traffic management tools useless, because they will often have departed before the airport required flow management. There are other methods we can use to meter flights while they're enroute, but they aren't effective in some situations. At that point, holding becomes the only option, which is the last resort. It puts an added burden on the sector having to hold by increasing complexity, which is why the other tools exist to ideally prevent or limit that from happening.
People seem to think that slot controls mean that airlines have a precise time for takeoff and landing, but that isn't how it works. DCA is heavily banked and, demand regularly exceeds the rate at which the airport can actually accept traffic. It's effectively a single runway field with the added complexity of a prohibited area, no ILS landing south, congested flows in and out, and limited taxiway and ramp space. There's no other single airport in the world that contends with the slew of complexities DCA deals with given the volume it's expected to handle. The current situation already isn't working, and making changes like these can only impact things for the worse because it takes more tools out of the traffic management toolchest. But I'm sure people like @Tim Dunn will still fight me in the comments, because how could I possibly know how any of this works..
ATC
If en route holding is not leading to delayed arrival times, then airlines are either compensating, or there is simply compacted demand, which is spread out at other points in the schedule.
Do you accurately note that DCA is heavily banked and that is the problem. Not every airline banks, it schedules at DCA and they should not be forced to have suboptimal use of their slots because of AAs scheduling.
The new concourse doesn’t have any gates that can handle A321s. Just CRJs and E-Jets
and AA has plenty of gates that can handle mainline aircraft that are used for regional jets.
Same for other airlines.
Arguing that all airlines should not be allowed to convert some slots to longer haul flights that will likely use larger aircraft because AA can't convert all of its flights to mainline because of facilities limitations is not logical.
AA isn't going to try to do that anyway. And neither will DL or...
and AA has plenty of gates that can handle mainline aircraft that are used for regional jets.
Same for other airlines.
Arguing that all airlines should not be allowed to convert some slots to longer haul flights that will likely use larger aircraft because AA can't convert all of its flights to mainline because of facilities limitations is not logical.
AA isn't going to try to do that anyway. And neither will DL or UA which also use regional jets completely stop using them. WN does not use regional jets at all. They should not be penalized in flying to more distant destinations because of a few airlines' limitations in handling RJs
I couldn't disagree more. I live 10 minutes from DCA and travel 250K miles/year to and from. The airport is convenient, accessible and I simply have not experienced the frequency of disruption that you apparently have. This is despite nearly always traveling to a hub (specifically, DFW, IAH and ORD).
If I can fly more places without having to connect, it would be delightful.
I am against artificial market restrictions and regulations that serve...
I couldn't disagree more. I live 10 minutes from DCA and travel 250K miles/year to and from. The airport is convenient, accessible and I simply have not experienced the frequency of disruption that you apparently have. This is despite nearly always traveling to a hub (specifically, DFW, IAH and ORD).
If I can fly more places without having to connect, it would be delightful.
I am against artificial market restrictions and regulations that serve no purpose to the general traveling public. It's hard to imagine something that more fits that description than the perimeter rule.
The new concourse at DCA was built for American, that is true. What isn’t true is “321’s pushing from the new concourse are blocking taxiways.” The D gates of Terminal 2 at DCA are for regional aircraft only. None of the gates (pavement) are marked to accommodate parking of any jet larger than an E175. In fact, AA agreed in the planning of that wing they wouldn’t use it for larger airplanes.
Correction the new wing are the E Gates, not D. AA operates out of C, D and E gates at DCA.
You mean the E gates. The D gates are mostly mainline gates.
One minor obstacle to getting rid of regional aircraft at DCA is Congress. It would have to approve the change. And part of that change would be to get rid of commuter slots. I'm not sure of the exact number, but a large percent (close to half, I believe) of American's DCA slots are limited to commuter aircraft (defined as seating 76 or fewer passengers). One of the concerns with eliminating commuter slots is that...
One minor obstacle to getting rid of regional aircraft at DCA is Congress. It would have to approve the change. And part of that change would be to get rid of commuter slots. I'm not sure of the exact number, but a large percent (close to half, I believe) of American's DCA slots are limited to commuter aircraft (defined as seating 76 or fewer passengers). One of the concerns with eliminating commuter slots is that the airport can't physically handle the increased number of passengers. Another is that it would give American an undue advantage as it holds the vast majority of commuter slots. One possible soilution could be to change the definition of commuter aircraft to include those with, say, 135 or fewer seats.
I do tend to agree that a relaxation of the perimeter rule at National (and LGA, but that's a different discussion) would be beneficial overall. A couple of possible compromises come to mind.
First, extend the perimeter to 1625 statute miles. That would bring state and territorial capitals such as Denver, Austin and San Juan into the perimeter, not to mention Santa Fe, the capital of New Mexico. The airlines that currently have those exemptions would be able to use them elsewhere. State capitals like Sacramento, CA, Salem, Oregon, and Boise, Idaho could benefit from non-stop service to DCA.
Next, add some new exemptions, and make most of them flexible, instead of the current practice of tying virtually all of them to particular routes. As with the current flexible exemptions, an airline would have to surrender an in-perimeter slot pair to get a beyond perimeter exemption.
It is not a surprise that AA and UA are the most opposed. AA has every reason to NOT want to allow regional jet slots to be converted to mainline use to more distant parts of the country - and your comment reflects that - while UA wants to protect its hub.
It is not a mistake that Delta - the largest slot holder in the country - is the one most willing to push for changes to benefit consumers and not just to protect its feifdom.
and why should any airline have to give up slots in order to gain the freedom to use a bigger plane?
Delta and Southwest on one end of the airport should not be penalized by American's inability to manage its ground operation.
@Tim, I didn't suggest that an airline had to give up slots to fly larger aircraft. This isn't the first time You've inaccurately read one of my comments. I was simply suggesting that any newly created flexible beyond perimeter slots should require giving up within perimeter slots. That's what's done now. I don't think there's a need to add more overall slots at DCA.
you said:
"As with the current flexible exemptions, an airline would have to surrender an in-perimeter slot pair to get a beyond perimeter exemption."
in perimeter flights are disproportionately RJ at DCA.
using a longhaul (flight there should be no perimeter - not just an extended one) should not require giving up any flights.
the statement that AA at DCA can't handle larger aircraft is not B6, DL UA or WN's problem.
How about just exempting an additional 1x/day to each state and territorial capital outside the current perimeter? With some adjustments for some of the western states, e.g. SEA for Olympia, RNO for Carson City, etc.
In favor of this, but they need to let others into some markets besides AA DL etc. How about some Breeze And Avelo.
If the perimeter rule was revoked yet remained slot controlled, all the RJ flights would be gone tomorrow. Those flights can move to Dulles.
I could see opening up a few more destinations, but not eliminate the rule. Years back - DFW was outside the perimeter, and the AA route to DFW - was DCA-IAD-DFW, only for pickup. Then they extended to 1250 miles and DFW and IAH opened.
Originally when they added transcons they gave them to the non-major carriers - like Alaska Air, TWA, etc. When AA acquired US - they converted the DCA-SAN to a 2nd...
I could see opening up a few more destinations, but not eliminate the rule. Years back - DFW was outside the perimeter, and the AA route to DFW - was DCA-IAD-DFW, only for pickup. Then they extended to 1250 miles and DFW and IAH opened.
Originally when they added transcons they gave them to the non-major carriers - like Alaska Air, TWA, etc. When AA acquired US - they converted the DCA-SAN to a 2nd DCA-LAX and then cancelled 2 of the IAD-LAX flights.
I could see AA doing the same. Although they do not have much to cancel out of IAD -as not much left. AA could add DCA-SAN, DCA-SEA.
Close dca. And make Dulles world class
Now that's a great idea!
That's what SHOULD'VE happened from day-1, but they made the same major mistake that Montreal, Milan, Osaka, and arguably Dallas all made... and that's allow fatcats to keep the closer airport open for "convenience."
Thus the big international airports never lived up to their true forecasted capabilities.
Dubai also seems dead-set on making this same mistake.
I have flown in/out of Reagan National at least 200 times. I always connect first (west coast) and I dont mind. I love the small airport feel and speed at DCA, but it has been slowing down.
Arlington is a hot bed of growth and this change will benefit Amazon HQ2 and VI to the congested expense of DC travelers.
Do this and next the rental cars will move off site. Sigh.
At a Time is a great info spot. Keep it up!
If I were AA, I'd be in favor if I could get exclusive DCA - LHR route, the XLR could fly it and give AA a huge advantage in DC.
You're forgetting about oneeee not-so-little thing: A321 is a bit of a runway hog.
Not as bad as the 739ER; but it ain't no 757, that's for sure.
I realize that the -LXR comes with a completely different inboard flap system compared to all previous A32X, but at 102tonnes, it's also significantly heavier than any previous A320family member as well.
...thus it'd certainly be "interesting" to watch someone try to get an A321 off...
You're forgetting about oneeee not-so-little thing: A321 is a bit of a runway hog.
Not as bad as the 739ER; but it ain't no 757, that's for sure.
I realize that the -LXR comes with a completely different inboard flap system compared to all previous A32X, but at 102tonnes, it's also significantly heavier than any previous A320family member as well.
...thus it'd certainly be "interesting" to watch someone try to get an A321 off of only 7100ft of runway, for a transatlantic nonstop, while carrying profit-potential payload!
But if AA ends up with a seating density similar to JetBlue's A321LRs (138 total seats), perhaps it could work?
I don't believe DCA has any immigration facilities, as it isn't an international airport. So unless it flies from an airport with a preclearance facility (such as Dublin), an international flight cannot land at DCA.
It does, but they're not sufficient to handled scheduled service.
Keep in mind that even an airport that accepts pre-cleared flights must STILL be able to process CBP arrivals on its own in an emergency, even if that contingency involves only calling a mobile-customs crew, and simply roping off part of the terminal during processing.
You really should look at the schedules. AA and DL long ago abandoned hourly shuttles to LGA. during peak times of day you might see that, but not all hours like there were 20 years ago.
Boston is too far to take the train - at least 8 hours one way these days.
People complain, but all of those smaller cities with flights to DCA actually have demand for nonstop flights to DCA. Most...
You really should look at the schedules. AA and DL long ago abandoned hourly shuttles to LGA. during peak times of day you might see that, but not all hours like there were 20 years ago.
Boston is too far to take the train - at least 8 hours one way these days.
People complain, but all of those smaller cities with flights to DCA actually have demand for nonstop flights to DCA. Most people are not changing planes at DCA - they are coming to DC, not flowing over. Not sure how you can value one as higher than the other when legitimate demands are being served.
"Not sure how you can value one as higher than the other when legitimate demands are being served."
It's theoretically possible that if this anticompetitive restriction were removed, nothing would change because the current use is (coincidentally) the most valuable. But that's highly unlikely and we aren't testing it now, since the restriction prevents that.
DCA - PVR non-stop, please!
DCA doesn't have CBP/FIS facilities sufficient to routinely process non-precleared international operations.... and there'll likely be icebergs in Hades before it ever does.
I don't see hourly shuttles between BOS/NYC/DCA stopping. Too much business travel where timing matters for those markets.
New York flights arent hourly anymore, and havent been for a long time. Boston is a longer flight and there's a lot of demand for it.
Looked on AA. They’re pretty much hourly. Some hours don’t have a flight and then the next hour has 2. 12 direct flights a day from DCA to NYC area on AA.
Because the train is unpleasant and wifi doesn't work. DCA/LGA is 35 mins in air and effectively the same amount of time door to door. For business travelers with status, its a much nicer journey.
Why on earth would anyone fly DCA-NYC? Just hop on a train. Nobody traveling DCA-NYC on business lives close to EWR, JFK or LGA anyway.
The train is routinely over $500 roundtrip. I can get roundtrip tickets on american for $200-$250. It's easier in DC for me to get from my home in DC to DCA than it is to Union Station. Why on earth would I take the train? There's nothing compelling about it.
Ben is right. Perimeter rules at both DCA and LGA limit competition, increase fares, and reduce service as they protect incumbents.
DCA and LGA have much higher percentages of regional jets than other hubs because airlines are forced to use their slots on high frequency short flights instead of more efficient mainline aircraft.
There is no reason why DCA and LGA can't handle more mainline service all across the country, esp. if ATC continues to...
Ben is right. Perimeter rules at both DCA and LGA limit competition, increase fares, and reduce service as they protect incumbents.
DCA and LGA have much higher percentages of regional jets than other hubs because airlines are forced to use their slots on high frequency short flights instead of more efficient mainline aircraft.
There is no reason why DCA and LGA can't handle more mainline service all across the country, esp. if ATC continues to struggle to fully staff their centers.
There is also a much more compelling case environmentally for larger aircraft on mainline than so many regional jets. There are no new regional jets in the US that use new generation aircraft while there are multiple versions of new generation powered mainline aircraft.
Hell has frozen over. I agree, Tim.
Per DCA, I'm not sure the airport can handle more mainline aircraft taking over the regional slots without some infrastructure improvement, but I agree with the sentiment.
To be clear about infrastructure, I just mean the jetways/gates themselves, not necessarily the space within the terminal.
Now that terminal E is open at DCA and it's not using the infamous Gate 35X anymore, I don't think it'd be that hard to use larger jets instead of regional ones.
you could definitely get some mainline planes into the regional gates, sure, but the spacings between jetways wasn't designed for the wingspan or clearance of a larger jet vs a CR9 or E175. You'd lose total gates at DCA .
Max,
if you weren't as focused on arguing w/ me, you could probably find lots that we agree on.
Yes, this makes sense for everyone.
DCA can figure out the facilities issues if Congress pushes more access to the western US.
And some terminals are suited to handle all mainline aircraft or use them; let's also not forget several airlines have the A220 which has coast to coast range and great...
Max,
if you weren't as focused on arguing w/ me, you could probably find lots that we agree on.
Yes, this makes sense for everyone.
DCA can figure out the facilities issues if Congress pushes more access to the western US.
And some terminals are suited to handle all mainline aircraft or use them; let's also not forget several airlines have the A220 which has coast to coast range and great runway performance as well as takes up very little terminal space compared to other aircraft types.
The main issue I see with eliminating the perimeter rule is that I don’t think DCA could adequately handle the increase in passengers. MWAA, the airport authority that operates DCA and IAD shared that one of the reasons for the regional concourses that was finished two years ago was that DCA was already well over capacity and if the perimeter rule was eliminated, the terminal might not be able to handle all those new passengers....
The main issue I see with eliminating the perimeter rule is that I don’t think DCA could adequately handle the increase in passengers. MWAA, the airport authority that operates DCA and IAD shared that one of the reasons for the regional concourses that was finished two years ago was that DCA was already well over capacity and if the perimeter rule was eliminated, the terminal might not be able to handle all those new passengers.
I’m not saying that more exemptions shouldn’t be granted on a limited basis, I think San Antonio and San Diego have proved that they can support DCA flights without resulting in too many IAD cuts but completely eliminating the perimeter rule would make DCA much more unpleasant to travel from.
How about we stop flights to NYC & Boston, make Amtrak actually work and use thode slots to fly to places outside the northeast? Win win for everyone.
To really make Amtrak work the entire system would need to be redesigned, including taking over numerous acres of private land. And we would be back to politics as usual and endless costs. Just look at the moronic train they're trying to do in California.
Amtrak already owns the DC-NY-BOS market and it's a barely functional railroad. We need to increase frequency and speed, and cut the RJs from this route.
20 years and 100 court cases from now this might work, if we start today. In the meantime, removing the perimeter restriction is a win.
Boston is 8-9 hours away on the train. Stopping flights would be a bad idea.
I would love for National to have the perimeter rule removed completely. IAD is a PITA to get to for everyone who lives in DC, NOVA, and SOMA, and National is a completely better airport experience. The only downside to DCA vs. IAD is that DCA doesn't have anywhere near the number of lounges available to people who aren't loyal to one airline (DL, AA, or UA), but aside from that, DCA is superior in...
I would love for National to have the perimeter rule removed completely. IAD is a PITA to get to for everyone who lives in DC, NOVA, and SOMA, and National is a completely better airport experience. The only downside to DCA vs. IAD is that DCA doesn't have anywhere near the number of lounges available to people who aren't loyal to one airline (DL, AA, or UA), but aside from that, DCA is superior in every way.
That said, I've not experienced the "new" DC departure experience, so I'm unclear on what that's like.
Actually, I no longer feel IAD is a pain to get to. Now that the Silver Line goes through downtown DC straight thru to Dulles for the grand total of $6-7, it is a breeze to get there and cheap to boot.
Apparently you don't have to drive up I-95 to get to DCA. I love DCA as long as I'm not flying from the old terminal. But IAD is much easier for me to get to.
Some brainwashed person told me on another post that we have freedom and the free market. And either fairness or freedom is non sequitur.
Perimeter rule and slot restriction doesn't look free to me. Might make it look fair to some airlines and IAD but definitely not a free market.
Getting rid of the perimeter rule will be a tall order, largely because of the local NIMBYs who will scream about how flights to beyond perimeter destinations are somehow louder than flights to BOS/LGA.
I've never heard this argument, ever, in all my years of living in DC.
Doesn't mean you're wrong, but so far, those particular NIMBY histrionics have yet to be heard, at least by me.
There are periodic stories in the local media about this (locals whining about DCA noise). You may have to dig around to find them, but they're there.
What about those Blackhawks all over the capital all day all night NIMBY?
"What about those Blackhawks all over the capital all day all night NIMBY?"
You are insane.
I mean that in the nice way.
I mean that sound is a lame excuse when you constantly have Blackhawks flying around.
From 2016, but we 8,670 noise complaints in 2015 including 6500 from one person.... heh
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/travel/one-person-filed-6-500-noise-complaints-reagan-national-airport-n538031
"Someone living near Washington’s Reagan National Airport (DCA) is really ticked off about the increased noise generated by new flight patterns at that close-in airport.
So ticked off that during 2015 that person filed 6,500 of the 8,670 noise complaints about DCA received by the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority — an average of 18 complaints a day over the...
From 2016, but we 8,670 noise complaints in 2015 including 6500 from one person.... heh
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/travel/one-person-filed-6-500-noise-complaints-reagan-national-airport-n538031
"Someone living near Washington’s Reagan National Airport (DCA) is really ticked off about the increased noise generated by new flight patterns at that close-in airport.
So ticked off that during 2015 that person filed 6,500 of the 8,670 noise complaints about DCA received by the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority — an average of 18 complaints a day over the course of the year, according to the Washington Post."
It will come. Right now, Dulles neighbors, who built their houses right under the approach paths three years ago, are screaming bloody murder that they can hear planes. In a just world, they'd be told to pound sand. This, however, is not a just world.
I agree with Ben, the perimeter rule should be eliminated.
I think it's worth noting that until recently, DCA was also the only airport that had Washington Metro service. Now that Dulles has the Silver Line station, opened a few months ago, this aspect is no longer an issue for travelers who prefer not to rent a car or ride in cabs.
In addition to the noted frequencies between DCA and LGA, the airport also has an obscene number of American Eagle nonstops to very small airports. (Wilmington, NC comes to mind.) AA has real pricing power for these routes, and they're assuredly more profitable than adding frequencies to LAX. That's not great for the consumer, but it explains AA's resistance.
Would imagine there's a decent amount of connections on AA through DCA to those lower tier markets like Wilmington
There certainly are, although not mentioned in the post. AA even has a number of non-stops to places not along the East Coast, such as to GRR, LAN, DSM, MAD, etc.
SFO has one United and one Alaska RT per day, keeping prices high.
Would love to see that expanded!
The airport we should REALLY have opened up to beyond perimeter operations is LGA… it’s a joke that the best airport for Manhattan gets DEN or once a week Saturday service beyond perimeter and that’s it.
I’d guess Delta wants SEA/LAX-DCA slots for sure, but yeah, sure, add some beyond slots. SAN, SAT, SJC might be logical too. I’m
'the best airport for Manhattan' is debatable.
Well, maybe best airport to the Upper East Side...
...but I'd take EWR to reach Lower Manhattan and most of Midtown, *any* day over LGA, especially since it can be done completely by rail.
You’re a bus snob - LGA is :25 minutes to midtown via Q70 and E or F express lines.