Midway: Southwest Plane Crashes through fence.

WBBM | WBBM

[sharkhawk]

A plane has apparently crashed through a fence at Midway airport in Chicago. Southwest airline 737 plane now sitting in intersection of 55th and Central. Channel 7 has confirmed, fire and ambulances on way. Details still sketchy.

[Paleo Conservative]

LaGuardia in NYC is bad too - the end of the runway is in the water. I remember being on an L1011 coming into LaG, and I thought it was an awfully big plane to be going into LaG. SO I asked the stewardess, "can a plane this big land at LaGuradia". Her response - "I think so". real comforting.

It's taking off not landing that's the problem at La Guardia. It was specifically the requirement for a widebody to be able to takeoff from La Guardia with and engine failure that forced McDonnel Douglas to add the tail engine to what had been a twin engined design for the DC-10.

[Paleo Conservative]

I can agree to disagree. The repeal vs not to repeal Wright really doesn't affect me now as I live in Oklahoma and it's been close to 7 years since I've flown anywhere. As you had initially brought up Love Field and I had experience with the issue, I was enjoying our debate.

That's not true. Every flight going through Love instead of DFW decreases the number of connection opportunities for passengers orginating at other airports.

The policy of having no interline baggage handling is an anticompetitive measure. I can't get a ticket from CRP to any New York City area airport through the Southwest online system. I might be tempted to fly Southwest from CRP to HOU and transfer to Air Tran to fly to to LGA via ATL, but the absolute refusal to offer interline baggage transfer even for an additional fee means I must get my baggage first from the baggage claim area and then check into the other flight. If the Southwest flight is delayed and I miss my other flight, I'm out the money I paid for that flight.

Back in the 1970's the Justice department investigated similar anticompetitive practices in the long distance telecommunications industry. Prior to the consent decree announced on January 1, 1982, AT&T would not allow competitive long distance companies to have the same 1+ access to their long distance service that AT&T enjoyed from the local Bell telephone companies. As a result of that consent decree, AT&T was required to let Bell customers specify the carrier of their choice of long distance companies that would be used when dialing 1+Area Code+telephone number. I see Southwest's refusal to offer any kind of interline services as being very similar to AT&T's policy of making competitive long distance services harder to access back in the 1970's.

[Sally'sConcerns]

So your answer is to support the Wright Amendment? Or to make it even more restrictive by forcing Southwest to fly only out of DFW?

Explain how you're making sense. Do you have the same complaint about Hobby Airport and Houston Intercontinental? You might be tempted to fly Southwest from Corpus to Houston Hobby and transfer to Air Tran at Houston Intercontinental? Or do you want to also force Southwest to fly exclusively out of Houston Intercontinental? Or reverse it to: You might be tempted to fly Southwest from Corpus to Houston Intercontinental and transfer to Air Tran at Houston Hobby?

You want interline baggage transfer even for a slight fee when the flights fly into separate airports that are over 20 miles apart?

The repeal vs not to repeal Wright really doesn't affect me now as I live in Oklahoma and it's been close to 7 years since I've flown anywhere.

You neglected the last part of my statement. Repeal of the Wright Amendment doesn't affect me since I don't fly anymore.

Why wouldn't you support repeal of the Wright Amendment where you and your luggage could fly into Dallas Love and then fly non-stop to La Guardia?

Your comparison of AT&T and the airlines doesn't really fly because 1 + area code were going to the same place using the same switching routes. It would be ridiculous for Southwest to transfer your luggage from Houston Hobby to Houston Intercontinental or from Dallas Love to DFW.

[Warriormom]

No hard feelings - I was also enjoying the debate, but the bullet points summed up my position.

You are wrong about Wright not affecting you. In the new transportation bill just signed into law, restrictions on SW flying to Missouri have been exempted from Wright. As a result, American has reduced their rates from DFW to some routes in Missouri. An earlier poster said that was proof that American could lower their fares. My question is, how much is American losing when they charge those fares? The airline industry can't raise ticket prices enough to cover the higher cost of jet fuel right now.

American is a major employer in the North Texas area. After 9/11, when the airlines were hit hard, the economy in N. Texas suffered, as did the already hurting economy in Tulsa where American has their maintenance facility. I'm not saying I want the government to prop up failing businesses, but I don't want them to go out of there way to make some businesses fail. The Federal Government (which is you and I) has already taken over the pension plan for United and I personally don't want to take over any other pension plans.

Love was supposed to be torn down when DFW was built. SW begged "please, please, we'll only fly little trips and won't hurt anyone" and got Wright. If there had originally been a provision in Wright to say that when DFW was strong and stable, Wright would be repealed, I might feel differently - but there isn't. A deal is a deal.

[Warriormom]

No hard feelings - I was also enjoying the debate, but the bullet points summed up my position.

You are wrong about Wright not affecting you. In the new transportation bill just signed into law, restrictions on SW flying to Missouri have been exempted from Wright. As a result, American has reduced their rates from DFW to some routes in Missouri. An earlier poster said that was proof that American could lower their fares. My question is, how much is American losing when they charge those fares? The airline industry can't raise ticket prices enough to cover the higher cost of jet fuel right now.

American is a major employer in the North Texas area. After 9/11, when the airlines were hit hard, the economy in N. Texas suffered, as did the already hurting economy in Tulsa where American has their maintenance facility. I'm not saying I want the government to prop up failing businesses, but I don't want them to go out of there way to make some businesses fail. The Federal Government (which is you and I) has already taken over the pension plan for United and I personally don't want to take over any other pension plans.

Love was supposed to be torn down when DFW was built. SW begged "please, please, we'll only fly little trips and won't hurt anyone" and got Wright. If there had originally been a provision in Wright to say that when DFW was strong and stable, Wright would be repealed, I might feel differently - but there isn't. A deal is a deal.

[Sally'sConcerns]

I know American is a major employer in the DFW area. I have some good friends who work for American and a couple of them went through the pain of United shutting down, another was the senior stew with Braniff when they shut down. I don't want them losing their jobs especially since a few are close to retirement age.

The funny thing is they don't agree with the Wright Amendment but because they're afraid of what might happen to American, they're kind of forced to support it. They would love for American to be as profitable as Southwest is and they realize American has made mistakes and missteps along the way. It's the old caught between a rock and a hard place. They recognize there are things American needs to change and that American would do well to be more like SW but on the other hand they don't want to get caught in any type of restructuring that might take place if American revamped. I can't really blame them for being 'selfish' either.

Heck, I like American Airlines. You can't live in the DFW area and not like them.(Well, I guess if one had ever had a bad experience with them one could dislike them but that doesn't apply to me.) On the other hand I admire Southwest and I don't like seeing them held back by the Wright Amendment.

I really believe eventually Southwest will prevail and the Wright Amendment will be repealed. It will either be incremental as found in the new transportation bill or it will be in one fell swoop. I can only hope American will do what they need to do in order to survive. As I've said in my other posts, I don't believe there would be a mad rush to Love Field. Even when SW is finally allowed to fly nonstop they still will have to bid on slots/gates so I foresee it would be a gradual expansion into some markets and they wouldn't expand into other markets due to the cost.

Even before 911 the economy in N. Texas was having a hard time. The dot-com and telecom industries were hit hard and that had an affect on the Dallas economy. I was exposed to the trickle down effect since I worked for the "Bank of the Northern Hemisphere" in mortgage banking. When the Dallas economy stalled they decided to move their production unit to 2 facilities up north. I could have taken a cut in salary and transferred but chose to look elsewhere within the bank. Thankfully I was one of the lucky few who found a position where my skills would transfer to a different department. Due to unforeseen circumstances I had to retire early.

As far as Love initially supposing to be torn down, it wasn't and that now is water under the bridge. Another thing to consider is American may not survive even if the Wright Amendment isn't repealed. I don't want that to happen at all! To me, American is part of the Texas landscape so I want them to succeed as much if not more-so than I want Southwest to continue to be successful.

[Central Scrutiniser]

Midway was built for DC3 up to DC7's and Constellations.

No way to expand it without taking out neighborhoods.

[Warriormom]

The Wright Amendment isn't holding SW back - Wright is holding Love back - and for very good reasons. I have friends that fly for both airlines and they all know how I feel. Right now AA is hurting, but coming back strongly. Two years ago, their stock was trading somewhere around $5 per share - Friday it closed at $19.

I guess my heart goes out to the majors because 9/11 hit them hard. I believe United and American were targed partly because of their names. In my opinon SW has spent years making deals only looking to take the next step with no intention of honoring their agreements. I lived through the Braniff mess - I don't want N. Texas to go through that again.

I agree that Wright will eventually be repealed. I just pray it is incrementally and gives American time to catch up. The new CEO at American seems up to the challenge.

You keep saying that there isn't room for growth at Love - you're correct. SW holds a monopoly on the gates there so there isn't much room for AA to come in a compete fairly. The Congresswoman from Dallas (who I am on the opposite side of politically) has said that if Wright is repealed, she will introduce legislation to tear down Love. Kit Bond is so furious with AA for what happened with TWA that he made sure Wright was lifted with respect to MO in the recent transportation bill. This is a political football.

[Sally'sConcerns]

It may be a political football but if so it's been being played for years.

You say the Wright Amendment isn't holding SW back that it's holding Love back. Then you say SW has a monopoly on the gates at Love so based upon what you're saying my statement about Wright holding SW back is correct.

The Congresswoman from Dallas (who I am on the opposite side of politically) has said that if Wright is repealed, she will introduce legislation to tear down Love.

Great idea! Let's throw the baby out with the bathwater.

In my opinon SW has spent years making deals only looking to take the next step with no intention of honoring their agreements.

Just because you keep your eye on the ultimate goal and continue to work towards attaining it doesn't mean you turn your back on incremental victories. They did in fact honor each agreement while it was in affect until a door opened where they could negotiate a new agreement. Do not we do that in our personal lives? If my goal is to earn xx amount of money do I turn down all raises/promotions simply because I'm not given xx right out of the starting gate? Does that mean I'm not honorable if I accept x instead of xx until I can negotiate up to xx?

I believe United and American were targed partly because of their names.

On that you and I are in total agreement.

[DakotaRed]

I'm not really addressing expansion. I'd imagine the airport was built long before a major intersection was built off the end of the runway.

Here where I live, we had one of the oldest private airports in the country, Evergreen Airpark. It was built when nothing was there but pastures. Over the years, residences and businesses were buit right off the end of the runways and of course, new residents starting complaining about the airport, which used to host one of the largest antique airshows every August.

When the original owner passed way, his son took over and has now decided to close the airport and sell it off to developers who have announced they will raze the hangers and build retail space and more condominiums and apartments. This in a stretch that is already wall to wall condominiums and shopping centers.

I'd also be willing to bet there have been more fatal car accidents at this intersection over the years than fatal aircraft incidents.

I think it's tragic that we allow developers to purchase land bordering airports and build whatever they wish, with no regard to the publics safety about aircraft landing and taking off. When something does finally happen, we blame the airport and airplane.

If we can prevent building on land due to some snail gartner bug, why can't we have a little common sense to prevent massive buildups around airports already there for a buffer zone?

[Central Scrutiniser]

Well, Southwest evidently issued a note to all their pilots urging them to start using the autobrake.

This crash is a warning call to Southwest, they were lucky it wasn't worse.

[Warriormom]

The Wright Amendment ISN'T holding SW back. There is an entire terminal at DFW that was left vacant by the departure of Delta. DFW has offered SW many sweet deals to move. SW whines in their commericals to "please release me". They can release themselves tomorrow if they would just move to DFW.

[hoosierham]

As long as people insist on traveling without regard to the severe weather people will die in transportation crashes.

Somehow Americans especially have gotten the notion that you may go anywhere anytime in complete safety and then act outraged if something bad happens.

[tinytutu]

The directive was issued on Monday of LAST week. What's your point?

[Central Scrutiniser]

My bad, I misread it.

My point is that SW lucked out this time, hopefully there won't be a next time.

[AmericanDave]

Thanks, just wanted to make sure it wasn't rumour. SW would do well to re-evaluate that decision since it is a corporate one, not a individual pilot choice.

[martin_fierro]

You're still here, Troll?

Or is that "wizard of zot"?

"red man in blue city"?

"conservative eagle"?

"mechanical mandible"?

[conservative in nyc]

In most cases, the airports were there before the city grew up around them. And the runways were plenty long enough to handle the planes of the day when built. Airplanes have gotten bigger since then, and no other Midway-type airport can be built in this country - there needs to be a buffer zone at the end of the runway.

But closing older, close-in airports like Midway or LaGuardia would really inconvenience business travelers, since they'd have to go much further to get to the airport. The closest suitable location in the Chicagoland area is Peotone, which is 50 miles or so from the city. O'Hare is pretty much maxed out until the runways get realigned. And I have no idea how they'd ever replace LaGuardia - there's not enough big lots of land around New York City for 75 miles or so. Stewart Airport near Newburgh would be the only place I could think of. Expanding JFK or Newark wouldn't be an option (although JFK has some non-peak capacity).

[Rte66]

Thanks for making the point I wanted to make. Bottom line: I fly into and out of all 4 airports -- IAH, Hobby, Love, DFW -- and there is absolutely no comparison for me as to convenience. It's Hobby and Love for me, hands down. Add a minimum of 4-6 wasted hours of extreme hassles for IAH or DFW. Not enjoyable.

[conservative in nyc]

The Wright Amendment made sense when it was put into place in the 1970s. Dallas screwed up in 1971 by not making Southwest sign an agreement to move to DFW when it opened as part of its Love Field gate lease. The Metroplex simply wasn't large enough for two full-service airports then - and probably even in 1980 and 1990. Now, the Metroplex's population is over 5 million. A metro area with a population of 5 million can probably support two full-service airports. But opening Love Field to all flights might lower the number of flights at DFW, if Dallas O&D traffic moves from DFW to Love Field.

And if Love Field is opened up to all traffic, everyone should have equal access to Love Field's gates. Southwest might have to give up something to get something.