The DOT had four slot pairs to give away at National as part of the recent Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reauthorization. As a quick refresher, National has a rule that prevents any flights longer than 1,250 miles from operating at the close-in airport. About a decade ago, Congress started allowing exemptions, primarily so Congressmen could fly nonstop to get to their home district (my interpretation, at least).

As part of the reauthorization bill this year, eight more slot pairs (one takeoff and one landing) were added to the pool. Four of them were meant for the big incumbent airlines at the airport. These airlines could convert one normal slot to one long haul. Here’s what they did.

• American will start a daily flight to its Los Angeles “cornerstone”
• Delta will add a second daily flight to its Salt Lake hub
• United will start a daily flight to its San Francisco hub
• US Airways will start a daily flight to San Diego

With the stage set, there were four more to give away either to new entrants or limited incumbents. There was a lot of competition for these, so the results weren’t easy to predict. Let’s start with the losers.

• Air Canada wanted to fly to Vancouver, but it’s a small, highly seasonal market.
• Alaska wanted to fly to San Diego, but that was its second choice. Once US Airways announced it would fly the route, this became a tough sell.
• Frontier wanted to fly to Colorado Springs, but that’s a very small market and would have been hard to justify.
• JetBlue wanted to fly to Austin, but that was also a second choice and Southwest put that up as its first choice.
• Sun Country wanted to fly to Vegas, but there are already a lot of flights in that market and Sun Country couldn’t connect people anywhere from there either.

Each of those had a big flaw, especially when compared to the four that seemed to deserve the flights far more. Incredibly, those four are actually the ones that won. Here they are.

• Alaska gets one daily flight to Portland. Portland is the airline’s second hub and has a decent-sized local market. Alaska will not only bring good service to the locals, which are largely loyal to Alaska, but it also adds good connecting options for a lot of small cities. This one seemed like the most obvious winner to me.
• JetBlue gets one daily flight down to San Juan. This one is a great move since JetBlue has been building up its presence in San Juan. This gives nonstop service to a place that will benefit from it, and it also opens up new connecting opportunities into the rest of the Caribbean. I like this route and how it fits into JetBlue’s strategy quite nicely.
• Southwest gets one daily flight to Austin. Nobody flies to Austin from National today and if anyone can serve it well, it’s Southwest. That’s why Southwest was obvious for this route while JetBlue was a longshot. It’s no surprise that Southwest won this.
• Virgin America gets one daily flight to San Francisco. Even though San Francisco will already get its first nonstop to National from United, that certainly won’t be a low fare service. Besides, Virgin America was the only applicant with no service to National, so you had to figure that the airline would get a foot in the door. The airline actually wanted two pairs, but the DOT rightfully shot that down and spread the wealth. This market should do well.

So, for once, I’ll say “good work, DOT.” Something tells me this praise won’t last very long.

If you’d like, you can read the full decision at regulations.gov.

And then if you go over to JFK, just a little update. Of course, terminal five, we’re close to celebrating four years of really just optimum performance through that facility. We’re very close with the Port Authority of extending terminal five. We call it T5 International internally. It’s on the footprint of the former terminal six. Terminal six is — was not landmarked. It was obviously, as you know, originally there to support National Airlines decades ago. It is now a tarmac, and we are very hopeful that we will be breaking ground on an international arrival facility similar to what you see happening over at terminal four. There’s a lot of growth happening at Kennedy. We believe that having all of our operation under one roof — and again we will have Hawaiian Airlines in here very shortly — is really exciting.

This might not be breaking news, but it’s the first time I’ve really thought about this. An international facility at Terminal 5 would do wonders, wouldn’t it? Of course, it would allow JetBlue’s own international arrivals to land at Terminal 5 instead of running a split operation today, but it can do much more than that.

JetBlue has already announced that its partner Hawaiian will begin flying out of T5 when it comes to JFK. Hawaiian, however, is the only partner that can do that right now. American is certainly too large and it has its own new facility there anyway. Cape Air, the only other domestic partner, doesn’t fly to JFK. All the other partners are international, though I do wonder if Aer Lingus could move today because of its pre-clearance. I’m not sure. But, if JetBlue builds a new international wing on the footprint of the old Terminal 6, that opens a whole new opportunity, and it comes at a good time. Here’s JetBlue’s corner of JFK:

Remember that Delta is actively working to take over a huge chunk of Terminal 4 as a replacement for Terminal 3. With that, all existing airlines in Terminal 4 will be pushed to the eastern concourse, I believe. And you know which airlines are included there?

Aer Lingus, El Al, Emirates, LOT, Singapore, South African, TAM, and Virgin Atlantic are all both partners with JetBlue and tenants in Terminal 4. Given the opportunity to make connections simple and move to a brand new facility, you would think that many of these would jump at the chance. Sure that might not include airlines like Virgin Atlantic, which have invested a significant amount of money in facilities, but others don’t quite have those deep ties.

That would create a monster of an opportunity. Keeping all those flights in the same terminal reduces minimum connecting times and allows airlines to schedule tighter connections. For an airline like El Al, it could help make connections more competitive by reducing total transit time. The shorter the travel time, the higher those flights show up in reservation system displays. That could be a big deal for some of these airlines, which might be at a disadvantage versus other airlines that can connect within the US on their own flights.

I haven’t seen a ton of information on this Terminal 5 expansion yet, but it seems like a great plan for both JetBlue and its partners.

ACI-NA is the big trade group representing airports, so you can imagine that our discussion quickly turned toward airports in relation to growth. Did Doug’s statement mean that there wasn’t a reason for airports to build and grow? Greg sees Doug’s underlying point as being that there’s “no need for new investment.” But when it comes to airports, Greg certainly thinks there is a need. So, is there?

Readers of this blog may think that I’m against any airport investment, but if you think that, you’re misreading me. I’m against stupid investment, and there is a lot of that around the country. I’m all for smart investment when it makes sense. My favorite example is, of course, JetBlue’s Terminal 5 at JFK. JetBlue needed a new operating space and they built one that’s excellent and not overly-expensive. I’m also a fan of San Francisco’s redo of Terminal 2 for Virgin America and American. I’m even a fan of the recent refurb of LAX’s Terminal 6.

But there are far more examples around of wasted expense. Think about Sacramento’s new monster, the new terminal building in Indianapolis, or the new Bradley Terminal expansion at LAX. Don’t even get me started on Miami.

Those are projects that cost a lot and inevitably hurt the air service in the community. Now, Greg was quick to remind me that “‘cost-effective’ and ‘cheap’ are not synonyms.” That is very true. But these projects were simply overbuilt. Does LAX need a soaring roof to look like the waves and the mountains? Does Sacramento need a train to get people to the new concourse? No. In both those situations, there was a need for something new. LAX has a Bradley Terminal with small holdrooms and almost no concessions behind security. It’s a mess. And Sacramento had an old terminal that was falling apart. But these facilities could have been built for function instead of form, and the benefits to the public would have been greater.

The way airports are funded in the US means that airports need to be smart about this. They can’t just go and build a massive, gleaming new operation like in Beijing because travelers will have to pay for it. In the US, they either pay directly via the Passenger Facility Charge (which tops out at $4.50 after Congress refused to allow an increase to $7.50) or they pay indirectly via higher fares because it costs the airlines more to operate.

So if an airport builds too much at too high of a cost, then it stands to lose service. Greg points out that it should be the community’s decision, and he’s right. As he says, “There is that risk that communities must, and are willing to, accept. Should not be up to feds or airlines.” But the problem is that the community doesn’t have much of a say.

If someone says to you, “hey, you want a fancy new airport?,” you’re going to say yes. But what if they say you can only have it if it means fewer flights? Then it’s a different story. But it really doesn’t matter what you say because the airports aren’t often run by elected officials. You can’t vote out an airport executive if she does something against your interests. You don’t get to vote on how airports spend their money. So the community doesn’t really get to decide.

Instead, airports that build smart and keep costs low benefit from greater levels of service. Those airports that build too much and get too expensive risk losing out. Think about LAX. Will it lose a lot of Asia flights if costs go up by $10 a person? Maybe not. But the airport is set on spreading those costs around to all airlines. So will Southwest be hurt on its flights to Phoenix if costs go up by $10 a head? You bet. Those flights may not be as glamorous, but they’re very important to a lot of people, and they will see cutbacks.

So, airports should be able to spend money as they see fit, but when they mess up, they risk losing service and doing a great deal of damage to the community. Responsible spending by an airport is great, there just needs to be more of that.

I wrote about the advantages of this move for the customer over at Conde Nast last week as part of a photo slideshow. But there are advantages beyond the customer as well.

Alaska now has the benefit of a more stable operation. With preferential use gates, it is not at the whim of other airlines any longer, and it has a lot more gates that it can utilize. Even better for Alaska, it has been able to consolidate its employee groups in one big place beneath the departure level in the concourse. In other words, it will be a lot easier for Alaska to operate at LAX now. And yes, it will mean easier customs and immigration processing, better waiting areas, and easier connections to major partner Delta for customers.

It may have cost $238 million to get this done, but the benefit to travelers and to the airline is readily apparent. This is the kind of project I like to see: smart, cost effective use of resources to make a dramatic improvement in how things work.

In the Trenches: Our Money Back Guarantee – Intuit Small Business Blog
It’s a rare occurrence, but every so often we get a client who invokes our moneyback guarantee. In some cases, it makes me want to rethink the proposition completely.

This was my first chance to see the newly-refurbished US Airways Express aircraft operated by Mesa. It was also the first chance I had to fly a US Airways mainline aircraft into Long Beach in quite some time. Overall, everything was fine but the ground experience in both places left something to be desired.

As usual, I left home an hour before the flight and found myself in a short but barely-moving security line. It was apparently amateur-hour at LGB with every other person forgetting to empty pockets, take liquids out, remove shoes etc. Once through, I tried to find a seat in the packed trailer terminal.

It was packed because US Airways, Delta, and Alaska were all pushing out airplanes at the same time, and the little trailer isn’t meant to handle that much at once. I can’t wait until the new concourse opens up.

Even though everything was running on time, it was a tense situation just because of the packed house. When they called boarding for our flight, people rushed up to get on board quickly just to escape the terminal.

The agent who was boarding was aggressive and forced almost everyone to tag their bags for planeside checking for this CRJ-900. The guy in front of me balked and said he had brought his (relatively small) bag on board this exact same aircraft type on the way out, but she wanted to hear nothing of it. She barked back at him that he had to check his bag.

He looked like he wanted to fight, but instead, he just shoved his boarding pass in front of the agent and said “fine, just check me in.” That did it. She made him stand to the side, scolding him publicly for his behavior. Soon after, she let him board after his tone softened. I was just happy to be out of there.

The construction is coming along nicely but that means the walk to the airplane is long and confusing. With several aircraft boarding at once, we all merged into one lane for walking and then there was a split to different aircraft at the end. Needless to say, they were pretty loudly announcing where our airplane was going once we boarded, just in case.

This was my first chance to see the new Mesa interiors and they looked good. First Class seats were a nice touch, and even the recovered leather coach seats looked significantly better. Our mostly full flight pushed back just about on time and we took off on a relatively uneventful flight.

I say “relatively” uneventful, because there were some strange characters onboard. The woman next to me stared at a copy of her itinerary for most of the flight. She just held it up in front of her face . . . for maybe 30 minutes. Very weird.

I had my customary ginger ale and that’s when I started to notice that these seats didn’t look as good as I first thought. The seatback looked like stucco that had been painted over one too many times. There were chips in the paint and it just didn’t look great.

More annoyingly, these seats would not stay upright. The flight attendant had asked several of us to push the button to bring our seats up before departure. I had figured that came from the last person in the seat, but I was wrong because when we descended into Phoenix, the same thing happened. Apparently, these seats do their own thing.

Normally after a hard week of work, I like to stay overnight and have a beer with friends. But I couldn’t leave my wife alone with the little guy any longer, so I came back Friday night, taking advantage of a nice mainline flight home.

I got to the airport about an hour in advance and it was surprisingly busy. The A350 model I had won at the conference was suspicious enough that the TSA pulled me aside and searched my bag. Funny.

I went to my gate and found a fair number of people waiting around with our airplane there already. I had thought that tickets provided by US Airways were upgradeable if seats were open so I went to the gate agent to ask. She looked at me funny and asked if this was a mileage ticket. I explained to her what it was and she said I could buy an upgrade like anyone else for $50. Ok. I didn’t take it and just went to wander and remember the good old days when I use to roam these halls.

I’m always surprised when I find someone who I knew from my America West days, but sure enough I ran into a guy who was there back then and we caught up on life. He took at a look at my ticket and said it really did look like it was a travel voucher used to purchase it. Interesting. I should ask the US Airways folks about that one.

I went to board the flight and asked the gate agent if it was full. Without looking up, she said it was very full and hurried me along. It wasn’t full at all. I took my window seat and had an empty middle and aisle next to me. I’m guessing we were three quarters full at most for the short ride home.

The captain was in a good mood. He came on and thanked “junior travelers” James and Bella for stopping by the cockpit on their way on to the airplane. I loved that because I knew the kids probably went nuts hearing their names over the PA. It’s a little thing, but it’s a great way to make kids feel special when they fly.

The airport had gone and uncharacteristically switched the runways on us, so we had a long taxi to the west end of the airport only to take off to the east and then turn right around. It was a mostly clear night so the view was beautiful. I had a ginger ale and soon we were on our way into Long Beach and I was on my way home.

Bob Hope Airport faces tough times – Burbank Leader
I was asked for my comments on Burbank Airport’s new proposed transportation center.

YOUR MONEY: New route maps at New York-area airports – Reuters
A reporter saw my post on winners and losers in the Delta New York LaGuardia slot swap and asked for more details.

What the US Airways–American Airlines Domain Names Really Mean – Conde Nast Daily Traveler
I love the speculation out there that buying domain names means US Airways/American is a done deal. Not quite. But it does tell us a little about what US Airways is thinking.

In the Trenches: Hiring Locally or Afar? – Intuit Small Business Blog
As I look for employees, I find myself looking at long distances for some candidates. That brings up some questions.

Travel Style: Brett Snyder (aka Cranky) – JohnnyJet
Johnny is starting to do these short interviews and I was one of the ones lucky enough to be asked about how I travel. There’s one thing in there that might surprise people – I’ve never stepped foot on one very large continent.

I had plenty of time to spend on the outside of the airplane, because they had us waiting around for quite some time until Governor Jerry Brown arrived and gave a little speech. In the meantime, we could walk around all different sides of the airplane without anyone stopping us. It was a lot of fun. My first impression was probably skewed by the fact that it was nose to nose with a C-17, the military transport aircraft they make in Long Beach.

The 787 really is a good-looking airplane. That nose makes it look mean and fast. In fact, the only thing that makes it look a little slower is the engines themselves. They’re so large and impressive in their own right that they seem a little too big for the airplane. I will say that the engines with their scalloped cowlings and curved fan blades are a sight to be seen.

I think what I liked seeing most, however, was the big wing. It’s not A380-massive by any stretch, but it’s contoured with raked and curved wingtips on the end. It’s a thing of beauty.

Enough about the outside. It was finally time to head in. While many people fawned over the seats, I couldn’t have cared less. This is a Boeing demonstrator and we’ll never see those seats on an airplane in service. For me, I was interested in seeing some other features, which I covered in this 1:55 video. (Sorry about some of the sound being too soft.)

First up was the new entryway. Though Boeing clearly made the entry larger than you’ll ever see on any airline, the height of the ceiling with the new arch feature really did make for a different impression of openness. I look forward to seeing how that works with bulkheads on either side in actual airline service.

Next up was the overhead bin. They’re big. Nothing revolutionary but certainly big. Last and most important, I wanted to see those big, beautiful windows.

They really are huge and they’re close together. They provide some excellent visibility for passengers. As a window seat guy, I’m really excited about that. But the big win for me was getting to test out the window dimmers.

The 787 doesn’t have window shades but instead uses a method that dims the windows as you like. It takes 90 seconds for the windows to get their darkest, but even then it’s only 98 percent opaque. This is the best thing to happen to windows on airplanes in years. Now those who want to look outside can still do it while those who want to watch movies without glare or sleep can do it as well. I know it sounds silly, but this is a huge improvement.

I didn’t get to experience the low cabin noise, higher humidity, or lower cabin pressurization altitude, because we didn’t fly. Something tells me I’m going to need to seek one of these out sooner rather than later.

[See all my photos of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner]

• American will use an exemption to fly from National to LA
• Delta will use an exemption to add a 2nd daily flight from National to Salt Lake
• United will use an exemption to start National to San Francisco
• Virgin America wants to use an exemption to also do National to San Francisco
• Southwest has applied for a different slot to fly to Oklahoma City (and then on to Dallas)
• Frontier wants that same slot to fly to Louisville
• US Airways wants to keep that slot flying to Jackson, MS

If you really want to keep up on this, follow Dan Webb over at Things in the Sky. But for now, let’s get talking. What will US Airways do with its slot exemption? Who will get the four beyond perimeter slots for new entrants? Will Sarah find out that her husband has been cheating on her with her sister? Tune in next time on Slots of our Lives.