186 replies to this topic

[renamerusk]

....parking revenue earned in the airport; revenue that is used for improvements and operations at the airport. ...The airport is rightfully sensitive to parking and commuter abuse.

 

 

DFW is banning drivers (for hire or otherwise) from idling at the terminal.....

 

 Just like parking revenues, the airport uses revenues from taxi permits to improve the infrastructure at the airport.  And too, the quality of the airport in and out experience is important to DFW administration.   DFW Airport has shown that it will protect and control business activity within its property. 

 

I think that this is a prudent decision.

[CFerguson]

With the new rail link to DFW, I'm going to have to re-think the nickname I gave it: Drive Frantically and Wait.

[txbornviking]

*** very tangentially related***
As DFW Airport looks at a possible Terminal F, here's a very impressive structure being built outside Beijing.

 

https://www.theatlan...uilding/580954/

[ramjet]

Air travel is a torturous experience, much like a root canal.  I wish "they" would focus as much energy on the comfort of the boarding, in-flight, exiting passenger as they do with those waiting on the ground at the airport.  It's like someone offering you a Twix before stomping on an exposed raw nerve.  (I just flew to DFW from Austin and back this weekend.  And it was only an hour flight.  Oy!)

[txbornviking]

thoughts? should the idea of selling DFW be considered?

how should Fort Worth then spend/invest the proceeds?

 

I know my thoughts, but am curious what the "forum hive-mind" thinks.

"Experts think that DFW should fetch $15 billion to $20 billion upfront. "

" Dallas and Fort Worth would split that money, but it wouldn’t be an even split. Dallas actually owns 64 percent of the airport because, as the larger city, it chipped in more to build it."
 

https://www.dmagazin...ll-dfw-airport/

[renamerusk]

Boy, you beat me to it.

 

Guess who is not for it?  Hint -

 

I love my romance with Rawlings; or it is better for the regionalism and comradery;  even though the suburbs get most of the taxes.

[JBB]

"Aw shucks, I don't want to lose my fun time with my buddy Mike" is a stupid reason to not want to explore the idea. And that's not name-calling. I really do think it sounds like it lacks any intelligent thought. At least Mayor Rawlings gives an answer that reflects something beyond a junior high education.

I ran across the article last week and I think the idea has some merit, especially since much of the value (both the implicit value and the true tax value) stays in place for the cities involved.

[Dylan]

Question: If Fort Worth and Dallas were to sell DFW, would the board become controlled by the private company?

 

If so, HECK NO!

 

Fort Worth MUST remain in partial control of DFW Airport, and not allow Dallas or a private company to take over and make decisions that are detrimental to this city.

 

What would stop a private company from renaming DFW as "The Greater Dallas Metroplex Airport?"

[txbornviking]

How Airports Make Money:

 

a fun little 10 minute video discussing operations at Heathrow (which was privatized in 1986)

[JBB]

Fort Worth MUST remain in partial control of DFW Airport, and not allow Dallas or a private company to take over and make decisions that are detrimental to this city.

I agree. I would favor something that resembles more of a public-private partnership that allows a level of local control than a complete privatization.

[renamerusk]

Question: If Fort Worth and Dallas were to sell DFW, would the board become controlled by the private company?

 

If so, HECK NO!

 

Fort Worth MUST remain in partial control of DFW Airport, and not allow Dallas or a private company to take over and make decisions that are detrimental to this city.

 

What would stop a private company from renaming DFW as "The Greater Dallas Metroplex Airport?"

 

 

I agree. I would favor something that resembles more of a public-private partnership that allows a level of local control than a complete privatization.

 

 

 

  Just how do Dallas and Fort Worth control DFW Airport?

 

  Many of the board member have absolute no professional experience in governing something like an airport.  Honestly, appointments made to the DFW Airport Board seem to amount to an honorary title bestowed upon individuals who are connected to other people within the two cities; and seems not to be base upon professional airport management training.

[JBB]

The board's relationship to the airport management is comparable to each city's council to their own city management: budget approval, contract and large purchase approval, hiring and evaluation of the CEO, etc.

[renamerusk]

A story is trickling out that the "want" of the design by American Airlines will be radically different from the current layout.  Seems that terminal parking will not be included in the new terminal.

 

I think that this speaks to the issue that the "horseshoe" layout is not the most efficient layout for the airlines going forward.

[RD Milhollin]

Rename, I saw something about this, and it appears you are correct in this assumption.

[John T Roberts]

There's an article in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram that explains that American Airlines wants the terminal to be a transfer terminal.  If it was only used for transfers, it would not need to be a horseshoe, nor would it need parking, since most of its "customers" would be arriving and departing by plane.

[elpingüino]

There's an article in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram that explains that American Airlines wants the terminal to be a transfer terminal.  If it was only used for transfers, it would not need to be a horseshoe, nor would it need parking, since most of its "customers" would be arriving and departing by plane.

That article is available to read for free at Architectural Record, https://www.architec...efine_caption=1

[renamerusk]

A robust discuss in The Forum was started in the "DFW Airport Carriers" Thread and much of what was debated finds itself in the FWST Article.  Its yet again another affirmation to the power of this media outlet in Fort Worth.  I encourage and enjoy that we delve into the issues more thoroughly as these discussion do have a way of reaching more readers via the traditional outlets (newspapers, local news).  Gordon Dickson should become a member, if not already one.

[tamtagon]

Seems like a different terminal shape is beneficial for the transfer passenger intended to use the terminal, airport and carrier(s). Strangely sad that it's refreshing no parking would be needed! haha

 

The notion of a transfer terminal makes so much sense I disappointed I hadn't thought of it first - though maybe just calling it a transfer terminal is the novelty many of us "amateur planners" glossed over without mention since it's such a germane aspect of expansion at DFW. 

 

I hope the relative agility of expansion plans built to accommodate will help facilitate DFW evolving into a dual hub global portal.  

[txbornviking]

Beijing's new airport is scheduled to open September of this year.

$13B and an expected 100 million passengers per year.

 

 

https://www.bbc.com/...minal-look-like

[Dylan]

Here are my thoughts from the "DFW Airport Carriers" thread a few months ago:

 

I'm a fan of DFW's semi-circles. It forces each terminal to have more than one checkpoint (thus, fewer passengers per checkpoint). Also, all gates are on one side of a walkway.

 

At other airports, you'll see one checkpoint per terminal... or even one checkpoint serving multiple terminals (thus, longer lines).

 

 

 

Basically, Semi-circle terminals are better for passenger convenience (at the expense of airport resources); traditional terminals are better for airline & airport resources (at the expense of passenger convenience).

[renamerusk]

....Basically, Semi-circle terminals are better for passenger convenience (at the expense of airport resources); traditional terminals are better for airline & airport resources (at the expense of passenger convenience).

 

  Perhaps realizing that an airport's fundamental purpose is to be the agent of transiting clients while the purpose of convenience outside of transiting point to point falls upon other agencies.  Airports are the tool of the airlines.  For airlines to be efficient and profitable, their equipment must be used repeatedly within the travel time period; and this means the minimal layover time and maximum connections nodes.   

 

An airline asks only that a passenger reasonably arrives 45-55 mins prior to departure (25 for security/25 for gate boarding). I think most travelers prefer as short as possible the time spent in the airport.  This scenario is actually the highest utilization of the airport and airline resources.

[Electricron]

While  I understand why American Airlines, for that matter all airlines, like Transfer Terminals for its hub system of operations, I do no think the citizens of Dallas and Fort Worth, you know the people who actually pay "all" the taxes subsiding DFW, would like subsidizing planes that do not service them.  

 

Every jet airliner landing at DFW should at least provide the opportunity for local citizens to board or alight from it.

 

Whereas I do not believe DFW passenger numbers will drop anytime soon, do not forget what has happen to other cities - like Memphis for example. It's major carrier left, and other carriers drop services too. Do not make the same mistake making  your airport to large subsidizing airlines hub activities. This additional Transfer Terminal would be useless if American Airlines decided to pack up and move elsewhere. 

[Doohickie]

Every jet airliner landing at DFW should at least provide the opportunity for local citizens to board or alight from it.

 

 

And I'm sure that even at a designated transfer terminal, there will be opportunity for local boarding.  It just means you can't park right at the terminal.  I'm sure there will be the option to park close to another terminal and use Skylink into Terminal F.

 

I haven't parked at the terminal in years; I typically park at South Remote.  With improved rail service to the airport, I expect to use rail in the future, thus I won't need any no parking all.  And as the article noted, Uber/Lyft provides a large portion of transportation in and out of the airport.

 

So it seems a little disingenuous to make the logical jump to "local citizens" not being able to board or alight from the new terminal.

[JBB]

Totally anecdotal experience on my part, but go check out one of the cell phone lots in the evening to see the impact of Uber/Lyft.  I arrived early to pick up a family member a few weeks ago and the north lot was filled up and it appeared that nearly every car was there for Uber/Lyft.  No doubt the south lot sees similar business and that doesn't count people staking out the terminal parking or the drop off/pick up lanes waiting for calls.

[renamerusk]

We live in vastly different environment than the one that existed nearly 50 years ago when DFW Airport began operations.  Airlines and passenger view the airport in today's world.

 

It is the fudiciary responsibility of American Airlines and other airlines to operate profitably, efficiently while providing their customers with the both desirable and timely destinations.

 

DFW Airport is a cog in the national air service network. Even though Fort Worth and Dallas exercises oversight, the federal government builds runways, control towers, radars, etc. The 65 million passengers and airline companies pay user fees and other charges.  Local taxes are not the key component supporting the airport.

[JBB]

Isn't the airport self supporting?  I seem to remember hearing that the cities don't put any tax dollars toward its operation or any of its expansion projects.

[renamerusk]

Isn't the airport self supporting?  I seem to remember hearing that the cities don't put any tax dollars toward its operation or any of its expansion projects.

 

  I think that sounds about right. 

 

The airport may owns the mineral rights on its property, I think, as well as the ability to lease land to businesses located within the territory of the airport.  DFW Airport would even be more self supporting if it were allowed to keep the sales tax receipt that otherwise go to Euless, Irving, Grapevine, etc.

[renamerusk]

Seems like a different terminal shape is beneficial for the transfer passenger intended to use the terminal, airport and carrier(s). Strangely sad that it's refreshing no parking would be needed! haha

 

The notion of a transfer terminal makes so much sense I disappointed I hadn't thought of it first - though maybe just calling it a transfer terminal is the novelty many of us "amateur planners" glossed over without mention since it's such a germane aspect of expansion at DFW. 

 

I hope the relative agility of expansion plans built to accommodate will help facilitate DFW evolving into a dual hub global portal.  

 

The expansion plans for DFW's Terminal F should include tracks for the airport connector trains:Tarrant Express Rail and the creation of a Dallas Express Rail (DER).

 

 The Cotton Belt Line (CBL) will have an outcome similar to Tarrant Express Rail when it comes to commuters: lower than projected ridership; and like Tarrant Express Rail,  the line does not follow along the commuting principle pattern of the area. 

 

Now for sure,  DART is dug in to completing the CBL, but it would have been smarter to use that money to upgrade the Dallas Zone of Trinity Rail Express so that it could run an express train from Union Station Dallas to DFW Airport Terminal B, D & F. with an approach for DER at the south entrance to DFW Airport.

 

DART and Trinity Metro should coordinate with DFW Airport to build double tracks below grade at Terminal B, D and F. so that riders can embark and disembark the trains in 3 terminals.

[Austin55]

Terminal F details announced - open 2025, $3B
https://twitter.com/...0176141317?s=19

[Austin55]

Lot of interesting discussion on the airliners.net thread

 

https://www.airliner...p?f=3&t=1422969

[JBB]

That thread is interesting.  Discussions on Airliners get a little argumentative sometimes, but there are usually people posting that know their stuff.  From what I've read there and elsewhere, some variation on Terminal D is what we'll likely see with F and I think that makes sense given that the Sky Link infrastructure is already in place to support that type of arrangement.  There shouldn't be any need to make room for jumbos like the 747 and the A-380 since one is on the way out of passenger and the other one won't be around forever.  What they do beyond F in the 20-25 years after it opens will be interesting.  By that time, A through E will be due for another renovation.

[Austin55]

They've also already paved the apron the same as D. 

 

With only 24 gates I'm wondering if it'll be mostly for heavies like 777's and 787's? Especially if it carries and international focus. 

[JBB]

There seem to be people that are convinced that it needs to be for international traffic, but I've seen plenty of speculation that it will be a connection terminal. 

 

That thread also has a lot of interesting information Terminal C.  I was not aware of some of the history of that terminal.  Demolishing and rebuilding seems to make some sense, but it doesn't look like the budget mentioned supports that.

[Dylan]

Terminal C isn't identical to A or E? That surprised me.

 

It's funny how the only American Airlines-designed terminal ( C ) is the most flawed terminal.

[RD Milhollin]

Look for a unified/single security checkpoint area at Terminal F. It will most likely have standard, PreCheck, and employee/crew access lanes all in one centralized area. There may be some new design for the queuing area outside the checkpoint to add to the security aspect. 

[Dylan]

If that happens, it would be highly unfortunate.

 

But, we've been hearing that DFW and AA want a more efficient terminal at the expense of passenger convenience, so I wouldn't be surprised.

[renamerusk]

Has construction of the a new terminal to be designated F commenced?

 

D-Magazine (Dallas) thinks Dallas and Fort Worth should sell DFW Airport to a private company (Amazon? Google? Facebook?)...you know what?; so do I.

 

https://www.dmagazin...ll-dfw-airport/

[elpingüino]

The Dallas Business Journal reported on the project named Terminal F Phase 1.
https://www.bizjourn...terminal-f.html

The item the board will vote on Thursday is an extension of four gates to Terminal D that can be used for domestic and international travel. The four gates will connect Terminal D with Terminal F when that structure is eventually built.

[hannerhan]

Has construction of the a new terminal to be designated F commenced?

 

D-Magazine (Dallas) thinks Dallas and Fort Worth should sell DFW Airport to a private company (Amazon? Google? Facebook?)...you know what?; so do I.

 

https://www.dmagazin...ll-dfw-airport/

 

OK let's think about that.  The minute a private company buys DFW Airport, the sole consideration for the new owners in every decision will be "how many dollars does this put in my pocket?"  And they have a legally monopolistic business.

 

What could possibly go wrong?

[txbornviking]

 

Has construction of the a new terminal to be designated F commenced?

 

D-Magazine (Dallas) thinks Dallas and Fort Worth should sell DFW Airport to a private company (Amazon? Google? Facebook?)...you know what?; so do I.

 

https://www.dmagazin...ll-dfw-airport/

 

OK let's think about that.  The minute a private company buys DFW Airport, the sole consideration for the new owners in every decision will be "how many dollars does this put in my pocket?"  And they have a legally monopolistic business.

 

What could possibly go wrong?

 

 

Heathrow was privatized in 1986 and seems to be working well, so it coooooooould be done successfully

[renamerusk]

OK let's think about that.  The minute a private company buys DFW Airport, the sole consideration for the new owners in every decision will be "how many dollars does this put in my pocket?"  And they have a legally monopolistic business....

 

 Isn't that what DFW Airport is doing now; making decision to how many dollars can it put in its pocket; a pocket that Fort Worth get very little if any of those dollars.

 

 Fort Worth could receive a windfall of dollars to put into its general funds.  Those funds could be used to modernize the City's aging infrastructure. 

 

 There is scant reason to think about it twice.

[hannerhan]

 

OK let's think about that.  The minute a private company buys DFW Airport, the sole consideration for the new owners in every decision will be "how many dollars does this put in my pocket?"  And they have a legally monopolistic business....

 

 Isn't that what DFW Airport is doing now; making decision to how many dollars can it put in its pocket; a pocket that Fort Worth get very little if any of those dollars.

 

 Fort Worth could receive a windfall of dollars to put into its general funds.  Those funds could be used to modernize the City's aging infrastructure. 

 

 There is scant reason to think about it twice.

 

 

To your first question: no.  Look at the board of directors of DFW Airport.  These are people with a vested interest in seeing the airport serve the community.

 

Much has been written about the benefits and downsides of privatization of airports.  It's a very well-researched topic.  And to show my hand, I'm really just playing devil's advocate here, as I generally believe that privatization is a good thing in most cases like this.  And frankly if we had two real airport options in Fort Worth I'd be all for both of them being privatized without hesitation.   

 

But DFW Airport is a true monopoly when it comes to international air travel and it's a partial monopoly when it comes to domestic air travel (Love Field being constrained on supply).  I just recognize that unfettered capitalism in a monopolistic situation comes with teeth.

[renamerusk]

I thought that the board of directors are people with vested in the recruitment of airlines and making their operations efficient, who  by the way are their primary customers as they should be; our role as consumers is secondary, as it should be.

 

An airport is a self sustaining enterprise and its obligation is to the schools of Fort Worth, the streets, water quality, parks, etc. that are the vested interest of the City of Fort Worth.

 

If Fort Worth were to sell its ownership in DFW Airport, I can not imagine how it would have a negative impact upon the City; but if it were to price the value of the economic impact of the airport; list that value to the private market; Fort Worth would likely receive a capital gain of significant impact to its general fund.

 

All that said, without further clarity, the question or concerns about a monopoly that you advocate so far seem to be unconvincing as it is a faulty premise.

[hannerhan]

I thought that the board of directors are people with vested in the recruitment of airlines and making their operations efficient, who  by the way are their primary customers as they should be; our role as consumers is secondary, as it should be.

 

An airport is a self sustaining enterprise and its obligation is to the schools of Fort Worth, the streets, water quality, parks, etc. that are the vested interest of the City of Fort Worth.

 

If Fort Worth were to sell its ownership in DFW Airport, I can not imagine how it would have a negative impact upon the City; but if it were to price the value of the economic impact of the airport; list that value to the private market; Fort Worth would likely receive a capital gain of significant impact to its general fund.

 

All that said, without further clarity, the question or concerns about a monopoly that you advocate so far seem to be unconvincing as it is a faulty premise.

 

Who is the primary customer: 

https://www.dfwairpo...t/p3_106747.pdf

 

It's clearly the consumer.  Airlines won't pay an airport unless the consumer is willing to pay the airline for use at that airport.  It all starts with the consumer, and if you look at DFW's own annual report, it's spelled out plainly that the consumer is DFW's primary customer.

 

As far as the board's obligation, I think it's pretty clear that when you have the local mayors on the board of directors, interests are going to be a bit different than if the board was all made up of private equity types from New York whose sole interest is the IRR calculation.  I don't think what I'm saying is very far-fetched.  

 

And if you don't agree that DFW Airport has monopolistic characteristics, maybe we should just agree to disagree and call it a day.

[renamerusk]

The primary customer of any airport is their airlines.  If it were passengers , passengers would be directly targeted by ads that would go something like this:

 

"Come fly DFW Airport; join DFW Airport Frequent Flyer Club, Book DFW Airport Fare Sale, etc".

 

Airports are infrastructure, very expensive, cost prohibited, regulated great spans of land; therefore cities typically only need or can afford one airport.  Perhaps you are confusing airports with airlines.  Yes, Southwest Airlines is an monopoly at Love Field and American Airlines is a virtual monopoly at DFW Airport; so companies can become monopolistic particularly when there is only one or two places where the public is obliged to do business. 

 

The use of the term monopoly to describe the function of DFW Airport is being misapplied in this instance. 

[youngalum]

Sale DFW to PE guys in New York and slowly see the name change to just Dallas--will not happen overnight but it will happen

[renamerusk]

That's okay with me; because it is virtually happening anyway.

 

With the one time infusion of money from the sale of the airport, both Fort Worth and Dallas could use it to further improved their public schools.  Top schools will bring in higher income residential and higher paying jobs.  I believe that the benefits derived from selling the airport clearly outweigh the outdate label of "DFW Airport".

[elpingüino]

DFW is considering a six-month pilot program of a self-driving (but still manned) shuttle to pick up passengers at remote parking. https://www.dallasne...te-parking-lot/

[renamerusk]

The highlights or in my words, the elitist tropes of an arrogant, highly paid corporate climber as read from the Dallas Morning News:

 

The six-month lease would cost $300,000 and would help the airport decide how it can use autonomous vehicles in the future for even more, like moving baggage and the bridges that connect terminals to airplanes....."The technology is moving fast and there are a lot of companies looking at autonomous vehicles," said Paul Puopolo, the airport's executive vice president of innovation.  If approved, the test could start in November......But eventually, he [Puopolo] said, the hope is the vehicles can operate without any employees at all.

 

I was grateful and once much in need of employment as an airport shuttle employee and who was not alone , that depended upon a job as a shuttle driver to take care my self. Others needed their job to care for their family.  It is menial job but it is work, not a hand out.  I would like to know how this benefits the passengers greater than under the current model.

 

I am disappointed that the airport would consider eliminating human labor at its lowest rungs within its organization while rewarding those at the top for doing so. Just because a "lot of companies"  are downsizing or eliminating workers, its not necessarily the best thing for a maintaining a stable society. 

 

[Austin55]

We dug deep into this discussion a while back, but here's a really great blog post on a cancelled 1988 plan for linear terminals at DFW,

 

https://www.airporth...redesign-of-dfw