Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's a difference. Atlanta has one airport, DFW has two. Both the Atlanta and DFW areas have two airlines with significant presences: both Delta and Southwest at ATL for Atlanta and American at DFW and Southwest at DAL (Love Field) for Dallas. If you totaled both, the DFW area would come out slightly more diverse but the difference isn't great. The biggest difference is that DFW has more foreign flags carriers but the foreign flags to ATL carry more passengers because almost all have ties to Delta. Most of the foreign flags at DFW do not have ties to American.
And you can fly pretty much anywhere in the world nonstop from DFW, including Australia which is more rare than Africa.
What ATL has over DFW is the number of destinations to Europe and the Caribbean as well as the flight to Johannesburg. What DFW has over ATL is the number of foreign flags and the flight to Sydney/Brisbane as well as the upcoming announced flights to Asia (Hong Kong and Shanghai). Both ATL and DFW serve over 200 destinations. Not too shabby.
Obviously, ATL benefits from being on the eastern seaboard. DFW benefits from being in the heartland. Unless I'm mistaken, a nonstop flight from Atlanta to Sydney is not possible, as is a nonstop flight from DFW to Johannesburg. Odd that just a few hundred miles in either direction changes that equation.
Also, I'm fairly certain that DFW has the hold on Central and South American destinations, though Delta has seen enormous growth in its market down there out of ATL. On the flip side, as you mentioned, Delta owns Europe (thanks in large part to its acquisition of Pan Am years ago).
Obviously, ATL benefits from being on the eastern seaboard. DFW benefits from being in the heartland. Unless I'm mistaken, a nonstop flight from Atlanta to Sydney is not possible, as is a nonstop flight from DFW to Johannesburg. Odd that just a few hundred miles in either direction changes that equation.
Also, I'm fairly certain that DFW has the hold on Central and South American destinations, though Delta has seen enormous growth in its market down there out of ATL. On the flip side, as you mentioned, Delta owns Europe (thanks in large part to its acquisition of Pan Am years ago).
It seems that DFW has more Mexican destinations, but when you factor in South America and the Caribbean ATL has just as many.
Now why on earth would I be mad when I live under the flight path of 747's and other wide bodies from multiple foreign carriers from all corners of the globe (except Africa). I see about 30 foreign flag airlines fly out of SFO per day compared to ATL's what 6?
Sorry but I prefer to have a choice of many airlines when flying overseas and not be forced on Delta or their skyteam partners.
Last edited by Fastphilly; 11-27-2013 at 11:01 PM..
Here's a difference. Atlanta has one airport, DFW has two. Both the Atlanta and DFW areas have two airlines with significant presences: both Delta and Southwest at ATL for Atlanta and American at DFW and Southwest at DAL (Love Field) for Dallas. If you totaled both, the DFW area would come out slightly more diverse but the difference isn't great. The biggest difference is that DFW has more foreign flags carriers but the foreign flags to ATL carry more passengers because almost all have ties to Delta. Most of the foreign flags at DFW do not have ties to American.
And you can fly pretty much anywhere in the world nonstop from DFW, including Australia which is more rare than Africa.
What ATL has over DFW is the number of destinations to Europe and the Caribbean as well as the flight to Johannesburg. What DFW has over ATL is the number of foreign flags and the flight to Sydney/Brisbane as well as the upcoming announced flights to Asia (Hong Kong and Shanghai). Both ATL and DFW serve over 200 destinations. Not too shabby.
Way to go!! Excellent post. I'm still mad that DFW took our Qantas flight from SFO. I hear the loads are good from DFW.
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,133,609 times
Reputation: 3145
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterlemonjello
Why? Its a matter of airline preference and airport preference. I NEVER use Love Field even though they are equidistant from my house. The ammount of traveler ammenities at DFW blow anything out of Love Field out of the water (lounges, options to eat, shopping, etc.). As for connections, DFW is one of the absolute easiest airports to connect in. There is a train that can take you to any terminal in the airport in less than 8 minutes.
The savvy traveler has more of a clue about these things.
We were talking about congestion and the business of putting planes in the air. Trains, lounges and shopping are compensatory measures for large-footprint airport designs. Who wants to spend all day in an airport?
The knock against Love Field is the governmental (mostly "govern" and not much "mental") attempt to restrict flight distances out of Love Field, in order to prop up business at DFW. Why would such a measure be needed? If Dallas travelers could catch an easy, direct flight to LA or NY out of Love by simply walking up to the gate, boarding the plane and taking off, don't you think they'd choose that over DFW's nonsense?
In the Bay Area, we have three international airports to choose. My most convenient is SFO, which is a large enough airport to have all the "amenities" you mention (much better ones than DFW, I might add), but is built on a small enough footprint to be convenient and manageable. Still, I often choose Oakland, which is farther away, because of direct flights on Southwest and the step-on, step-off nature of going through that airport. Both are accessible by public transportation. The best of both worlds might be SJC, which has a small, linear terminal layout, but has all those "amenities" you love so much. You can park right at the terminal and walk onto your plane at SJC. It's convenient in everything but its location to me.
If I'm flying to international destinations, I guess killing a day in an airport is part of the deal. And some people like malls (which is what large airports are becoming) more than others, I suppose. Given the choice between giant airports and more convenient, smaller fields, in terms of ease of getting on and off the plane and on my way, though, I pick the smaller ones.
Now why on earth would I be mad when I live under the flight path of 747's and other wide bodies from multiple foreign carriers from all corners of the globe (except Africa). I see about 30 foreign flag airlines fly out of SFO per day compared to ATL's what 6?
Sorry but I prefer to have a choice of many airlines when flying overseas and not be forced on Delta or their skyteam partners.
Some men like fat girls. Whatever makes you happy. I'd rather live next to the world's largest airport.
In what way is it a benefit to passengers for an airport to have a large footprint like this?
I think that airports typically like to have a large footprint so that they have room to expand and have fewer neighbors complaining. LAX has been buying out a surrounding neighborhood for years.
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,133,609 times
Reputation: 3145
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Easy
I think that airports typically like to have a large footprint so that they have room to expand and have fewer neighbors complaining. LAX has been buying out a surrounding neighborhood for years.
Of course. I understand that. That's no benefit to passengers, though. A benefit to passengers would be to bring more flights to Burbank or John Wayne, not make LAX larger and more difficult to navigate. The taxi time after landing there is already terrible.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
