There was a big dog-and-pony show at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport last week touting American’s growth. This didn’t sound like much to me until I saw the details. Holy cow. American is turning on the jets with a massive number of new gates at DFW in the not-so-distant future.
You may recall the previous DFW growth plan which was announced in 2023. Terminals A and C would each get new stubby piers which would add 5 and 4 net new gates respectively. Those were dedicated to American. Then there was the new 15-gate Terminal F which was going to be built as cheaply and annoyingly as possible.
Terminal F v1.0 would have no headhouse (ticketing/baggage claim) and no parking. It was just a rectangle built at the edge of the current footprint. This was rumored to be for Southwest, Frontier, and some of the cats and dogs in Terminal E today, presumably opening a little more space for American somewhere in E.
Here is how I expected it would look back then:
But now, it’s a whole new ballgame. American will still get those 9 gates in Terminals A and C, but Terminal F has been put on steroids with a total of 31 gates coming online. And all of those will go to American.
Here’s how I think the new design will look:
As you can see, this now creates a real headhouse which will have ticketing and baggage functions. It will be connected to Terminal D via a walkway, and it will have international-capable gates, expanding the airport’s customs/immigration processing capability.
The Skylink station will be on the hypotenuse of that left corner triangle which creates easy access into the gates for connections from other terminals. It may look like the track disappears in that image, but the Skylink actually runs on top of part of the new addition and airplanes will taxi under it at some point. Here’s a rendering from American Airlines and DFW:
It looks to me like the existing gates D1/2/3/4 will now just flow right into the new terminal. That’s great news for locals who get stuck flying out of those gates today, because it is one long walk from the rest of the D gates.
As you can tell, this design will be very different than the rest of the airport. It’s half a normal semi-circle, but it has gates on both sides instead of a roadway and parking as in the other terminals so it is a far more efficient use of space. This allows American to put a lot more gates in a smaller footprint — it will have the same number of gates as A does after that 5-gate addition is built — but the design does create other issues. Most importantly: how do you even get there if you’re not connecting?
This is where that new rectangular parking garage comes into play. Right now, that area is just an empty field, but you can see in that rendering that it will become a large parking structure. According to the release, this garage will have a “built-in curbside circulation and an innovative baggage drop and check-in area to maintain the quick access to check in and security that customers have come to expect.”
American clarified that this will be where people get dropped off since F v2.0 won’t have the big curbside of the other terminals, but then people will walk across the footbridge and into the terminal where baggage and ticketing will be.
This doesn’t come cheap. The original Terminal F build was supposed to come in at $1.63 billion. It’s now going to be about $4 billion with this added scope.
Is it worth it? Of course it is. DFW is American’s bread-and-butter. It has an enormous, profitable hub there which it wants to keep growing. By the time this is done, Delta’s Atlanta hub might look tiny. I never thought we’d see the day.
Put it this way. As of now according to Cirium data, DFW is scheduled to have 919 departures per day on average in July. Delta in Atlanta? It has 902 daily scheduled. Now, Delta does have much bigger airplanes flying — it averages 160 seats per departure in Atlanta while American has 136 — but just think about how many more departures American can run through DFW with all those new gates. It is going to be the biggest single airline hub in the world.
The key question for me now is exactly how many new gates American will get. We know for sure that American gets the 9 new gates in A and C as a net increase with no loss elsewhere. But if American is getting the full 31 gates in F, it is going to have to give back something. A DFW spokesperson told me “…DFW airport will receive back gates currently operated by American Airlines to be used in the future for other airlines.”
I couldn’t get any more detail on that, but the obvious assumption is that it will give some at least some of the gates it has in E today and presumably some space in D as well since it can do international flying at F. But how many gates will go back? We don’t know. What is clear is that it will be a big net gain, and I’d be surprised if it was anything less than a couple dozen net new gates in the end. The first ones start coming online in 2027, so get ready for growth.
30 comments on “American Turbocharges DFW Growth with Terminal F Takeover”
Cranky,
Please explain how the cost could be so high for a Wal-Mart styled terminal?
The United States sucks, absolutely sucks, at infrastructure. It’s more expensive here than most other places in the world. But you’re right, it should not cost anything like the quote.
Someone is getting incredibly rich off of this.
Grift. And remember, this price being quoted is pre tariff.
Angry Bob – Beats me. We can’t seem to build anything cheaply in the US.
I’m not sure what the “Wal-Mart” reference is supposed to mean here.
There are lots of reasons for escalating costs of infrastructure projects, but nothing about this project says Wal Mart. It’s not like they are proposing a big warehouse with some jetbridges attached.
Wal-Mart = the average big box store that is built on the cheep & is expected to last 20-years or less before replacement.
Hypotenuse’ means the third leg of a right triangle.
I’m just trying to figure out what ‘hypotenuse’ means
SEA is looking to replace its south satellite and its going to be over $2B. It’s not growing, just a replacement.
The question, as always, is who’s paying for what?
The answer, as usual, will be the public. But how??? Revenue bonds, increased passenger facility use fees, increased cost per emplanenent?
One wonders if Southwest is floating around the mix here.
I think as long as Elliott is driving the train probably not. They want money out RIGHT NOW, and they are not really concerned with future growth.
Too bad because with how they are constrained at Love (fixed at 20 gates) they could establish more there.
I don’t think AA needs any help getting things done at DFW.
Southwest may be more interested in expanding their Dallas market by building up McKinney than jumping into the fray at DFW.
The rendering kindly omits showing the actual taxiway cutting under the train tracks – they must be proposing a substantial modification to the actual tracks themselves, because most of the existing support columns aren’t spaced widely enough for even an E175 to fit between them.
AA putting more eggs in their DFW basket. I guess they have to bolster the network in the place that makes the most financial sense to them since the northeast is a puzzle they cannot solve.
The only challenge is the risk associated with putting too much in one hub.
The challenge AA will have to solve is how to grow in non-Southeast regions. AA is very strong in the Southeast w/ MIA, DFW, and CLT. Continuing to grow Dallas from the fortress mega-hub is a smart move, but it does not have to be a choice to recover #1 at LAX and rebuild in the Northeast.
As long as Dallas continues to be one of the fastest growing MSAs in the US both economically and population wise, the potential will continue to grow. Given Austin and San Antonio have limitations in their growth due to much higher competition, their proximity to each other and Dallas and Houston, and far smaller size to ever compete vs Dallas and Houston directly, DFW’s (like IAH) catchment is quite strong. UA and AA will heavily benefit from this.
In 5-10 years DFW will overtake Chicago to become the 3rd largest metropolitan area in the US. In 15-20 years, it will be on-par with Los Angeles – sure things can change and eventually this exponential growth can slow, but the potential of a fortress hub in an MSA of that size is something that doesn’t exist to the same extent today.
In comparison, ATL which is another phenomenal hub for DL is the 9th biggest MSA if you combine the Bay Area (SF and San Jose are separate for some reason) and is growing at half of the rate of Dallas and Houston. It is also growing fast, but not crazily so (on-par w/ Miami’s growth).
In addition to San Francisco–San Jose, Washington–Baltimore should be considered a single conurbation, as they are when measured by CSA rather than MSA. Those CSAs along with Chicago edge out the Dallas–Fort Worth CSA, though as you mention the explosive growth in its suburbs is helping Dallas close the gap.
Chicago is the only one of those places with an airport hierarchy similar to Dallas. The bulk of traffic is served by a single mega hub airport and supported by a single smaller Southwest dominant airport. The difference of course is that unlike DFW, O’Hare is split between two major carriers. With United trying to wrestle AA out of O’Hare though, the airline market dynamics may not be that different between those two similarly sized CSAs in that 10–15 year time frame.
LA is a different story altogether. Its CSA population includes the Inland Empire and is over twice that of Dallas. Even with metro Dallas’s growth it won’t come close to the LA market anytime soon.
and DFW airport at the time I write this is under an FAA ground delay program due to thunderstorms.
DFW has a much higher percentage of GDP programs than other southern US hubs including ATL and also more than ORD
DFW = Does Not Function (when) Wet!
Doesn’t Function Wet
A nice, unexpected use of hypotenuse
Doesn’t it feel like AA should be focusing on gauge instead of gates or number of flights? Part of DL’s success in ATL is lower CASM from the higher gauge, no? Would also help some with the GDP issue Tim mentioned above (i.e. less flights = quicker IROP recovery)
Who currently uses that parking area that will be displaced? Are those employees? Or is that a Park & Ride that will move to the parking deck?
The parking area has been closed for quite some time (more than a year, if memory serves), actually, in preparation for construction of the original Terminal F design. It used to be passenger parking. Now they park a few odd buses there when they aren’t in service, but those will be easy to relocate.
The apron space is used for parking planes during the day (i.e. international flights with long sit times) and for charters (with air stairs and buses) so they’ll have to find another spot for those, but that shouldn’t be too hard. It’s a massive airfield.
Great economics, strategic growth, blah blah blah… my OCD self will never be able to fly there, or even look at the terminal map, again… because HOW COULD YOU NOT DO ANOTHER HORSESHOE?!?!? Terminal D’s boxy-ness was hard enough to swallow. There are just some things in life that need to be symmetrical, all other considerations be damned. We’re basically just turning it into another JFK.
The power of DFW is why AA hasn’t felt the need to grow ORD as much as United has had to. UA can claim they “win” ORD all day, but they don’t have a Dallas or Atlanta to back them up or a home to dominate. Instead, they have DEN and IAH which are two lesser desirable hubs for reasons of geography, population, and competition.
DFW is a great connecting point if you live south, but for large parts of country, it is too far out of the way. It’s one of the reasons I never fly AA. Denver being more central makes it a great connecting point, which seems to be the point of a hub. Also, United seems to be flexing its muscle there. Southwest has also dialed back its ambition in Denver with Elliot running the show, so UA has seen its market share grow there.
Geographically, there are other cities that make better hubs, such as DEN, MCI, STL, and ATL. However, DFW’s disadvantage isn’t that great considering it is projected to the nation’s second or third largest MSA in the next 10 years. It’s a sweet spot for AA to have.
Oh, and for those that can’t fly that far south, they’ve got an option on AA through ORD.
The goal is to be the most profitable airline. Not sure why one needs a “home to dominate”. United has hitched its wagon to international growth, not dominating the US. While AA certainly has a desirable position at DFW, it’s outposts (Northeast and West in particular) hurt its overall profitability.
Is it better to have a dispersed hub system with huge international presences where all hubs are profitable (as Scott Kirby has stated) vs a mega profitable hub and significant laggards? Time will tell, but I don’t see how anyone can puff their chest out as a AA fanboy when it comes to current financial performance.
Why would anyone in their right mind want to connect at DFW in the summer? (or even now as Tim Dunn has pointed out)
It takes a day or two to recover after T-storms hit.
Also, I don’t think anyone has mentioned what a PITA it will be to connect from Terminal A to the far end of new Terminal F if there’s on 1 train stop near the headhouse!
Having lived in both Dallas and Houston. I can say I can’t stand either place. But DFW is a far better airport to fly to or from than any other I’ve seen in the US. The addition sounds pricey, but there’s at least a better than even chance it will be done right.
And… totally unrelated… DFW has one of the best, if not THE best, plane watching/ aircraft spotting set-ups I’ve seen. Founders Plaza, built on the north edge of the airport was built with true aircraft geeks in mind.