SWA proposal for operation at King County

[k_EAT=ho_ME]

"But adding hundreds of daily jet flights to Boeing Field would be a huge quality of life issue for neighborhoods under those flight paths, which range from Tukwila to Beacon Hill to Magnolia."

The BFI noise police recently sent an operator there a nasty gram because their 172 operating on a company flight plan was "only" 1200' AGL (ducking under Bravo VFR) above Magnolia. Imagine how bad their panties get wadded up over the potential of all those 73's every day.

 

[SirFlyALot]

Boeing Field is not that much closer to Seattle than is Sea-Tac. Geographically, it's not that much of an advantage; maybe a ten-minute difference in driving time coming from Seattle. Coming from south Puget Sound or from much of the Eastside, Sea-Tac is closer.

SWA proposes that their new eight-gate terminal be located on the east side of BFI along Airport Way. Without major revisions to roads allowing access to Airport Way and to Airport Way itself, Sea-Tac will be much easier to drive into and access. Expect some very large backups getting in and out of BFI unless some big changes are made.

Also, Alaska Airlines has said that if SWA is allowed to pull out of Sea-Tac, it also will move at least a portion of it's operations to BFI as well. Losing SWA would not be a tremendous blow to Sea-Tac, but losing Alaska would be. If losing Alaska Airlines as a tenant of Sea-Tac is a consequence of SWA going to BFI, then major resistance should be expected from the Port of Seattle and the political forces it can muster.

 

[Snoopy58]

Without major revisions to roads allowing access to Airport Way and to Airport Way itself, Sea-Tac will be much easier to drive into and access. Expect some very large backups getting in and out of BFI unless some big changes are made.

Well, $130,000,000 might be enough to build some "major revisions" & "big changes" there. Southwest has some very sharp people looking at issues like these (see the .pdf of the Southwest web site -- clearly not amateur hour), and they're all about a good customer service experience.

 

[ivauir]

Boeing Field is not that much closer to Seattle than is Sea-Tac. Geographically, it's not that much of an advantage; maybe a ten-minute difference in driving time coming from Seattle.

Not true, you've made this assertion before (or someone did) and it is just wrong.
I grew up on capital hill and Boeing Field can be way faster than SEA TAC when the traffic backs up. That will apply to airborne traffic and taxiing too. This has the potential to work out very well.
Ultimatly it doesn't matter: this is about the cost more than anything else. All SEA TAC has to do to keep SWA is control their costs. They are the most expesive airport in the system and they want to get even more expensive. Like D H says "my freind you have say - no way, I won't pay, I won't paaaaaay!"

 

[ReverseSensing]

All SEA TAC has to do to keep SWA is control their costs.

They've got to pay for those plastic stomach-looking thingies hanging from the ceiling halfway down the A concourse somehow. Those things are friggin' creepy.

 

[XR650R]

SWA just showed their hand- and trust me there will be sweeteners added if necessary. Alaska has to either put up with checkbook in hand or shut up. It's that simple. And another point- you don't want to get into a spending contest with SWA.

 

[miles otoole]

Herb's thoughts in Seattle

Shamelessly plagiarized from Airliners.net

http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/2233293/

[font=ARIAL,]

[font=ARIAL,]Hey guys! I got an once of a lifetime opportunity in the last few hours and I thought I'd share it with you. Herb Kelleher, executive Chairman of Southwest Airlines (WN) and the entire Board of Directors for Southwest came to Seattle today to tour several of our facilities. Everyone knew that he was coming, but I got a heads-up from an engineering friend of mine that Herb and his crew were specifically coming to his office in the 737 Final Assembly building to shake hands and take a look around. Well he got me in and I got to meet the "old pissant" as he calls himself. I shook his hand and spoke with him briefly for a minute, telling him about what I do at Boeing and whatnot, before Alan Mulally came over and stole his attention away. (Of course I had to defer to my CEO http://www.airliners.net/discussion...milies/wink.gif )

Anyway...about half an hour after I met him, Alan (Mulally) held an hour long "Excellence Hour" session with Herb as the guest of honor. Let me tell you, that guy is one charismatic speaker! He spoke for maybe 15 minutes from his notes and then opened it up to a Question and Answer session. (I was seated on the aisle seat, 5th row back) I decided that there was a question I wanted to ask that I didn't get to, so I was the first one with my hand up and got to ask my question in front of thousands of employees over a microphone.

My question was: "When it comes time to replace the 737, what kind of specifications are you looking for in a new airplane?"

His reply (paraphrased as I was hurriedly scribbling notes): "Well we (the board) took a tour of the Interiors Display center this morning and saw the mockup of the new 787. And let me tell you, this is going to change the face of air travel as we know it today. Now if you (Boeing) can take the experience with the 787 and use it to shrink into a new 737, I'll order a few hundred of 'em!"

(Note: this is particularly neat for anyone that was at the SEA meet because the chairman and board toured the exact same mock-up that we saw, over a year ago. We really got an insider's look that most people outside of the industry never get!)

Anyway.. that was the highlight of the speech for me, but below are the rough notes that I took in chronological order:

• I noted that as I came in, there was a shiny new, 73G parked outside of the Rosie the Riveter cafe, with ropestands all around it. I've never seen an a/c parked there. It turns out that Alan and some of the other Boeing exec's did a photo op with the WN exec's in front of this new plane (N220WN), that is going to be delivered on August 1st; the 215th 73G for Southwest. With the next 73G (# 216) to be delivered on 8/24.
• There are currently 436 737's in service with WN, with orders and options for 315 more.
• Alan Mulally seemed to confirm that we (Boeing) are indeed working on a 737-replacement when he introduced Herb as a "long time 737 supporter that is getting ready to support us on another great airplane."
• Herb was a hilarious speaker that immediately won over the crowd as he came to the podium, as he blew kisses to us in response to our thunderous standing ovation. He then immediately followed up with several jokes about himself possibly "getting canned" by the Board tomorrow when they meet here in Seattle; and how he's a "great cure for insomnia."
• He address the move to BFI immediately in his opening remarks, saying that he loves Boeing so much he wanted to move in next door at BFI by 2009.
• He told a hilarious story about how years ago during the negotiations for the launch of the 733, he went out drinking Fogcutters the night before with someone (can't remember the name). And Boeing took them out early the next morning on a hydrofoil in Puget Sound. Well while he was waiting to go on the boat, he turned to someone and said "I need to give up drinking, I can't keep level, I'm trembling." To which they informed him that it wasn't him, it was a floating dock. Herb immediately came back "Oh wait, I'm back! I'm not giving up drinking!"
• He also said remarked about his negotiating tactics with Boeing. That he called up Airbus years ago and asked if they had any lighters and if they could send him one. While they sent him 25. And so when he went into the negotiations with Boeing he "accidentally" dropped his smokes and lighter on the floor. When Phil Condit bent over to pick them up for him he nearly died when Herb was using an Airbus lighter!" http://www.airliners.net/discussion...ilies/rotfl.gif
• More about the move to BFI: "We are giving King County something for nothing. We will pay all of the expenses." He noted that originally the Port of Seattle was talking something in the ballpark of $25 per passenger in fees, and now remarkably after he gets serious about moving to BFI, they're now suggesting something around $13 per pax! But regardless, WN is "determined to come to BFI in 2009." And that "if Sea-Tac is so fragile that it can't handle losing 8% of it's revenue, then it shouldn't have been built." He also remarked that there will be a Wild Turkey Burboun store in the new BFI terminal.
• Regarding the threat by AS/QX to move operations to BFI: "If other airlines wanna make the investment that we are, then they're welcome to. There has been a spot that has specifically been left open so they can build their own terminal and garage."
• Regarding our favorite show, Airline: "AIRLINE was a gutsy thing for us to do." But apparently it's paid off for them as "the reservation center lights up and the number of job applications goes up about 20-30% the day after AIRLINE shows."
• And last but not least, a question was directed to Alan and Herb together about shrinking the 787 into a 737 derivative to which Herb replied: "If he (Alan) doesn't make a 787 derivative for us, he'll have a much higher voice then he has now. We are covetous of what the 787 can do for us and want it in a 737 as soon as possible.

[/font][/font]

 

[SWA/FO]

Awesome baby!!!

 

[beytzim]

Thanks for the forward. Anyone know what's so different about the 787 interior?

 

[SirFlyALot]

Not true, you've made this assertion before (or someone did) and it is just wrong.

I grew up on capital hill and Boeing Field can be way faster than SEA TAC when the traffic backs up. That will apply to airborne traffic and taxiing too. This has the potential to work out very well.

Ultimatly it doesn't matter: this is about the cost more than anything else. All SEA TAC has to do to keep SWA is control their costs. They are the most expesive airport in the system and they want to get even more expensive. Like D H says "my freind you have say - no way, I won't pay, I won't paaaaaay!"

You grew up in Seattle? So did I! Lived there since 1976. Yes, of course, if traffic is bad enough, it could take hours, maybe days, to get from BFI to SEA. It could take years to get from the U District to the Mercer St Exit. However, most of the time, it is about a ten minute (or so) drive. From much of the Eastside (via 405), SEA is equidistant or even closer than BFI in terms of driving time. For example, I live on the Eastside now, and BFI is about ten minutes further than SEA.

And yes, you're right, the move doesn't have a lot to do with geography. I only brought up the point for those who are unfamiliar with Seattle and would compare moving to BFI as a situation that is similar to the advantages of MDW, where it is significantly closer to downtown Chicago than ORD.

And, as you are familiar with Seattle, you know that road access to BFI is limited especially on the east side of the airport where the new terminal is proposed. Road and infrastructure modifications will be necessary. Is SWA going to pay for those?

In return for this capital investment, Southwest Airlines requests that King County provide for the following:

• Deliver a site by an agreed upon date that is ready for the commencement of construction.

• Make necessary roadway and signage improvements facilitating access to KCIA.

• Provide for other services as outlined in an exhibit to the Airport Lease Agreement entitled “Project Development Agreement.”

Well, no I guess they are not going to pay for those improvements. How much will they cost? I might have missed them in the proposal, but I didn't see any figures offered for how much SWA's venture is going to cost the taxpayers. SWA contends, "only minor highway and access improvements are likely to be required." That is almost laughable. Personally, as a taxpayer, I'm not in favor of spending what is likely to be at least several tens of millions of dollars in order to help SWA gain a competitive advantage in Seattle.

Also, a major fight should be expected from Alaska Airlines both on the business and political fronts. Seattle is Alaska's home turf, their headquarters, and their main base of operations. They will not let SWA gain a major advantage in Seattle without a huge stink. They will spend money to defend Seattle and they will spend a lot of money if they have to. They do not want to have to do that, so be ready for them to begin calling in political favors and lining up support to oppose SWA's move. Ivauir, as you know, Alaska is a bit of an institution in the Northwest. They have lots of friends in high places here. I imagine SWA does too, but probably not to the extent that Alaska does. Maybe SWA will end up getting what they want, but it will probably not end up being as easy as they would like.