Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/4126132/

Topic: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Alitalia744
Posted 2008-08-29 17:17:24 and read 20861 times.

Delta filed for 3x weekly LAX-GRU today with the DOT to begin on 12/14/2008 with 767-332ER aircraft.

http://airlineinfo.com/ost10/ost082908.html#Anchor-Delta-3800

http://airlineinfo.com/ostpdf71/466.pdf

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2008-08-29 17:29:53 and read 20842 times.

Funny competiting against fellow Skyteam member Korean Air.

The route request is contingent of getting two United Brazil slots, similar tactic that AA itself is pursuing and the DOT has yet to rule on.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Dellatorre
Posted 2008-08-29 17:34:59 and read 20815 times.

That is a bit unexpected!!! Never heard of DL being interested in flying such route. Maybe it has something to do with KE performance over the specific segment. Since KE does not have extra frequencies, DL is taking take of that.

If DL manages to get those frequencies, I guess JJ interest in LAX will be weaker than ever!!!

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Klkla
Posted 2008-08-29 17:39:56 and read 20796 times.

This will be a godsend for me if approved.

Looks like they will be fighting AA over those United authorities. From the same link provided in the original post (if you scroll up the page). This is part of Delta's response to AA's application:

"However, Delta has today filed a competing application for re-allocation of both of the dormant U.S.-Brazil frequencies currently allocated to United. Delta would use these two frequencies to open a new U.S. carrier gateway at Los Angeles. The relief requested by Delta and American are mutually exclusive, and the Department is required to institute a comparative selection proceeding to consider the merits of the competing applications in accordance with Ashbacker Radio Corp. v. FCC."

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-08-29 17:40:12 and read 20784 times.

This may be a stupid question, but isn't LAX-GRU a fairly long route for a 763?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: AF086
Posted 2008-08-29 17:42:59 and read 20768 times.

Using which freqiencies? There are only two left in the pool which can be used anywhere. The new frequencies (the second round of the expansion) of the bilateral will only be available next july and cannot be used at GRU.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Klkla
Posted 2008-08-29 17:47:07 and read 20738 times.



Quoting AF086 (Reply 5):
Using which freqiencies? There are only two left in the pool which can be used anywhere.

In addition to the two they want from United they would reallocate one of their existing twenty one allocations.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: AF086
Posted 2008-08-29 17:51:25 and read 20705 times.



Quoting Klkla (Reply 6):
In addition to the two they want from United they would reallocate one of their existing twenty one allocations.

United uses 14 of their 21 frequencies all year yound and the other 7 during the peak season on the IAD-GIG nonstop service. UA already lost 7 US-Brazil frequencies to Delta in the past, let's see how they'll react this time.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-08-29 17:52:17 and read 20702 times.



Quoting Klkla (Reply 6):
existing twenty one allocations.

...which, before someone asks, are daily ATL-GRU (DL104/105), daily JFK-GRU (DAL121/122), and daily ATL-GIG (DL60/61)

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2008-08-29 18:01:05 and read 20658 times.



Quoting AF086 (Reply 7):
of their 21 frequencies

United has 23 Brazil frequencies.

The ones AA and DL want to strip are the 2 odd ones which were hand me downs from Pan Am and grandfathered outside the normal DOT dormancy rules.

So firstly, the DOT has to determine of they can truly strip United of the frequencies, and secondly if so run a route selection competition between AA and DL as they both are contesting the same things.

In other words -- neither AA nor DL are about to start anything this winter as both their applications wish for as this will be a drawn out exercise.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MCOflyer
Posted 2008-08-29 18:01:12 and read 20635 times.



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 4):
This may be a stupid question, but isn't LAX-GRU a fairly long route for a 763?

Well its 6156miles according to GCM, but according to Boeing commercial its right at the limit depending on configuration:

http://boeing.com/commercial/767family/pf/pf_rc_losangeles.html

Hunter

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Flynavy
Posted 2008-08-29 18:03:17 and read 20634 times.



Quoting Alitalia744 (Thread starter):
with 767-332ER aircraft

You mean no Gulf Air planes?! Yay!

 Smile

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: RoseFlyer
Posted 2008-08-29 18:03:50 and read 20636 times.

I am very surprised DL is wanting to do LAX-GRU. It seems from the lay person's perspective that the route makes a lot of sense since GRU is south of LAX. But if you look at the map, you'd realize that LAX-GRU only saves 250 miles over LAX-MIA-GRU. MIA and ATL are the logical takeoff points for South America.

This route also is extremely long for a 763ER. I'm surprised it can make it that far. LAX-GRU is about the same length as LAX-ICN and no airline flies from the US to Asia nonstop on a 767. If DL will fly to GRU from LAX, then I guess they could do Asia from LAX with their 767s, although South America has fewer winds to deal with.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Alitalia744
Posted 2008-08-29 18:07:45 and read 20613 times.

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 12):
no airline flies from the US to Asia nonstop on a 767.

Correction Rose, no airline YET flies US to Asia nonstop on a 767....

[Edited 2008-08-29 18:15:24]

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Klkla
Posted 2008-08-29 18:13:50 and read 20585 times.



Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 12):
But if you look at the map, you'd realize that LAX-GRU only saves 250 miles over LAX-MIA-GRU. MIA and ATL are the logical takeoff points for South America.

Speaking only from my own perspective, from someone who flies LAX-GRU 5-6 times a year, the possibility of a upgradeable non-stop flight is a huge advantage and saves a lot of time not having to make connections. I have no idea how many other people in LA would appreciate this benefit but for me it would be huge.

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 12):
This route also is extremely long for a 763ER.

It's right at the current limits... but remember that Delta has ordered the new blended winglets which will extend the range of the aircraft.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: HALFA
Posted 2008-08-29 18:18:34 and read 20546 times.



Quoting Alitalia744 (Thread starter):
Delta filed for 3x weekly LAX-GRU today with the DOT to begin on 12/14/2008 with 767-332ER aircraft.

I'm shocked, but I will be SO happy if they get the route and start service soon!.

Quoting Dellatorre (Reply 2):
Maybe it has something to do with KE performance over the specific segment.

Perhaps, as well as looking at RG's loads on the route during their years of serving LAX.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 4):
This may be a stupid question, but isn't LAX-GRU a fairly long route for a 763?

That was my first thought as well. Not a stupid question at all. I think if it happens, it will be weight restricted quite often. AC was/is weight restricted frequently on their flights from GRU to YYZ.

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 12):
LAX-GRU is about the same length as LAX-ICN and no airline flies from the US to Asia nonstop on a 767.

I know what you meant with this statement, but technically it's not true. Hawaii is in the US and Manila is in Asia. HA flies 4 times weekly from HNL to MNL on a 767-300. Please don't forget about us.  Smile

HALFA

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: C010T3
Posted 2008-08-29 18:36:35 and read 20458 times.

Does somebody know if the bilateral got more liberal and would allow DL to code-share with KE?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Evan767
Posted 2008-08-29 18:41:42 and read 20444 times.

Oh my, how funny so many doubted the crazed WorldTraveler and other DL supporters for their predictions of LAX-international routes even to places like South America. This is good stuff..

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Mir
Posted 2008-08-29 18:49:58 and read 20408 times.



Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 12):
If DL will fly to GRU from LAX, then I guess they could do Asia from LAX with their 767s, although South America has fewer winds to deal with.

Much fewer winds to deal with. The jetstream over Alaska is a killer. LAX-GRU is more manageable for the 767 than LAX-Asia.

-Mir

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: C010T3
Posted 2008-08-29 18:50:54 and read 20406 times.

Well, if the route works, I predict that DL will apply for the GRU-restricted frequencies of July and use them on ATL-GIG. That would free up the GRU-unrestricted frequencies for a daily LAX-GRU. The only problem that DL is probably not anticipating are the slots at GRU for the departure. They might only get some after midnight.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: JKJ777
Posted 2008-08-29 18:54:01 and read 20372 times.

This could work. I have flown the ATL flight 101 and 110 numerous times in the past months and that flight is ALWAYS full regardless of the aircraft type. From talking to fellow passengers it seems as if a great majority of those folks are conitnuing on to South America. If that one flight is any indication of how a direct LAX-South America would work, DL will enjoy the potential profits. I hope to see them get it and do well with it.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-08-29 19:16:07 and read 20311 times.



Quoting Evan767 (Reply 17):
:


Oh my, how funny so many doubted the crazed WorldTraveler and other DL supporters for their predictions of LAX-international routes even to places like South America. This is good stuff..

believe me I smile at what comes out of ATL more and more these days. Yes, I predicted 767 service from LAX to South America and as Alitalia744 notes, I've also predicted, 767 service from LAX to Asia.

KE does not operate daily service. DL is proposing 3X/week. The two could be quite complementary.

There is little headwind operating a north-south route like this. The route should amount to 12 - 12.5 hrs in the air, well within the range of a 767, esp. one w/ winglets.


Part of DL's point in this whole exercise is to ensure that AA does not use frequency stripping to add frequencies to the Brazil route case in which DL was clearly awarded the majority of the frequencies.

Adding an additional frequency or two to AA to a new Brazil city is not worth near as much a new route to the largest Brazil market from one of the top O&Ds to Brazil. Whether DL wins or not is probably not as important as that they will prevent AA from walking away from these frequencies.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: EXAAUADL
Posted 2008-08-29 19:34:41 and read 20253 times.

Isnt DL discontinuing LAX-SEA/PDX/DEN/PHX on and on..What wil lthey fill it with. THe local market is kinda small for DL/RG/KE

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: HALFA
Posted 2008-08-29 19:49:45 and read 20209 times.



Quoting C010T3 (Reply 19):
The only problem that DL is probably not anticipating are the slots at GRU for the departure. They might only get some after midnight.

This shouldn't be too big of a problem. Those of us who flew regularly on RG's GRU-LAX nonstop were quite used to leaving GRU very late in the evening. IIRC, RG's flight left GRU at 11:50pm. (When it was on time  Smile )
This might be a better departure time for crew scheduling purposes as well. They could schedule an early afternoon departure from LAX with an early morning arrival in GRU. The crew could then go to the hotel and get a full day's rest, like they do with their ATL-GIG, and ATL-GRU flights, and then work the flight back to LAX that same evening, with an early morning arrival in LAX, as opposed to having a crew layover at GRU for 2 and 3 nights since it will only operate 3 X weekly.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 21):
There is little headwind operating a north-south route like this. The route should amount to 12 - 12.5 hrs in the air, well within the range of a 767, esp. one w/ winglets.

The normal flight time on this route is closer to 11 hours 20-40 minutes, and you are correct, winds are not usually a problem.

Aloha,
HALFA

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Panamair
Posted 2008-08-29 20:05:21 and read 20159 times.



Quoting HALFA (Reply 23):
They could schedule an early afternoon departure from LAX with an early morning arrival in GRU.

The proposed schedule has a 2100 (9pm) departure out of LAX and an afternoon arrival at GRU (1pm or 3pm depending on season). Return is supposed to leave GRU at either 2120 or 2255 depending on season, with a 0600 arrival at LAX.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-08-29 20:29:32 and read 20089 times.

DL's route application states that the shortest segment would be LAX-GRU in the summer at 12.1 block hours and the longest segment would be 13.1 for GRU-LAX in the winter. No other US airline is currently operating 767s over 12 hrs; DL has a subfleet of 763s equipped with lie flat cockpit crew rest beds.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Klkla
Posted 2008-08-29 21:01:23 and read 20720 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 25):
DL has a subfleet of 763s equipped with lie flat cockpit crew rest beds.

Maybe that explains something I thought was interesting about Delta's application. They said they would be flying the route with a 767-300ER with 34 Biz Elite seats. AFAIK their 763E's all have either 36 or 30 BE seats. The missing two seats must be what you're referring to.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: AmtrakGuy
Posted 2008-08-29 21:08:51 and read 20673 times.

Maybe DL will code-share with NWA flights from Asia and Hawaii along with AS. DL may end up having 3 airlines to feed some passengers flying LAX -- GRU.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-08-29 21:43:49 and read 20586 times.



Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 22):
Isnt DL discontinuing LAX-SEA/PDX/DEN/PHX on and on..What wil lthey fill it with. THe local market is kinda small for DL/RG/KE

RG no longer serves LAX, let alone the USA...

Quoting AmtrakGuy (Reply 27):
Maybe DL will code-share with NWA flights from Asia and Hawaii along with AS. DL may end up having 3 airlines to feed some passengers flying LAX -- GRU.

Indeed correct. DL could take advantage of the CI TPE-LAX, DL/NW NRT-LAX flight, the KE ICN-LAX flight, as well as AS connections in the LAX market. This route is not such a pipedream when it comes down to it.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: EWRCabincrew
Posted 2008-08-29 22:13:59 and read 20511 times.



Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 12):
no airline flies from the US to Asia nonstop on a 767



Quoting Alitalia744 (Reply 13):
Correction Rose, no airline YET flies US to Asia nonstop on a 767....

HA flies to MNL with a 767 and CO flew HNL-NGO with a 764.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-08-29 22:18:07 and read 20500 times.



Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 12):
no airline flies from the US to Asia nonstop on a 767.

UA has in the past from PDX and SEA

AA has in the past from SJC (short period after 9-11 on SJC-NRT)

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Klkla
Posted 2008-08-29 22:17:31 and read 20483 times.



Quoting AmtrakGuy (Reply 27):
Maybe DL will code-share with NWA flights from Asia and Hawaii

The application asks for the service to begin in December. I don't think Delta will need to codeshare anything with NWA by December  kiss 

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2008-08-29 22:26:48 and read 20480 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 30):
UA has in the past from PDX and SEA

Care to share the details as to when you believe this occurred?

UA's 767-300s have not flown scheduled across the Pacific to Asia. Matter of fact the union contract dont allow it, due to crew rest and base time zone crossing restrictions.

There was to be side letter to allow for SEA-NRT once the new premium cabins were but nothing has came of it.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Tonytifao
Posted 2008-08-29 23:04:33 and read 20393 times.

Wow! I think this would be a great addtition to DL network. I just think they need a better and more comfortable aircraft for this long route. They could offfer great connections to the west coast plust Hawaii!  Smile Go Delta!

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: B777ER
Posted 2008-08-29 23:17:58 and read 20378 times.



Quoting Klkla (Reply 26):
Maybe that explains something I thought was interesting about Delta's application. They said they would be flying the route with a 767-300ER with 34 Biz Elite seats. AFAIK their 763E's all have either 36 or 30 BE seats. The missing two seats must be what you're referring to.

IIRC, DL takes out the first couple J seats in the center (with some additional mod's) and has a large box type area that is enclosed and inside of this is where the pilots can lay down.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: United1
Posted 2008-08-30 00:20:49 and read 20295 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 30):
UA has in the past from PDX and SEA

If your thinking back prior to the PA purchase UA used DC-10-30s and 747-100/200 series aircraft on SEA/PDX-NRT and SEA-HKG. The 767-200s were never scheduled across the Pacific however they were used on UAs original transatlantic flights. AFAIK the 767-300 has never been used across the Pacific by UA, you probably would not see them used as a sub even (putting aside the contract limitations) as any of the 777s can do SEA-NRT.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-08-30 00:21:14 and read 20293 times.

I called it. I said that if DL can get any more GRU rights they will go to LAX or more ATL flights and I was told that the yields suck on this route and they would never do it.........yea I guess I was wrong.  Yeah sure
Anyways What GRU flight will lose a day? JFK-GRU?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: United1
Posted 2008-08-30 00:25:15 and read 20276 times.



Quoting B777ER (Reply 34):
IIRC, DL takes out the first couple J seats in the center (with some additional mod's) and has a large box type area that is enclosed and inside of this is where the pilots can lay down.

Thats exactly what they do seats 1C & 1E are removed to accommodate the box....does anyone know how many of the aircraft have or are scheduled to have the modification.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: HALFA
Posted 2008-08-30 00:30:46 and read 20269 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 36):
I said that if DL can get any more GRU rights they will go to LAX or more ATL flights and I was told that the yields suck on this route and they would never do it.........yea I guess I was wrong.

Join the club! Several of us have argued this point over the years as there are several members here that will continue to try and convince us that yields on LAX-GRU are very low, or worse, are money losing. I will continue to disagree until I see evidence proving otherwise.
I welcome DL's entry to this market, and hope that they will not operate it on the same days as KE, should they be awarded the slot.

Quoting Panamair (Reply 24):
The proposed schedule has a 2100 (9pm) departure out of LAX and an afternoon arrival at GRU (1pm or 3pm depending on season). Return is supposed to leave GRU at either 2120 or 2255 depending on season, with a 0600 arrival at LAX.

Thanks for that. The return GRU-LAX will make for nice connections from LAX and especially for me to HNL.
This is great news!

HALFA

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-08-30 00:37:06 and read 20250 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 28):
Indeed correct. DL could take advantage of the CI TPE-LAX, DL/NW NRT-LAX flight, the KE ICN-LAX flight, as well as AS connections in the LAX market. This route is not such a pipedream when it comes down to it.

Also the CZ flights

Quoting United1 (Reply 37):
Thats exactly what they do seats 1C & 1E are removed to accommodate the box....does anyone know how many of the aircraft have or are scheduled to have the modification.

I want to say its 12 but im not 100% on that.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cws818
Posted 2008-08-30 01:04:04 and read 20219 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 21):



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 36):

Your collective flashes of intuition notwithstanding, one would have thought that DL would have attempted an established, proven intercontinental route from LAX before embarking upon this adventure. This is particularly so given the fact that DL has been either, depending on how one views recent history, incapable of sustaining, or unwilling to fully establish intercontinental routes from LAX; BZE/MGA/FRA/NRT/NGO/HKG (whether or not via TPE's fueling facilities) come to mind. Additionally, sub-weekly overseas routings from Los Angeles, other than resort destinations, such as those plied by NZ, for example, are disadvantaged from the start; although LA does not have major financial infrastructure (since the purchases of First Interstate & Security Pacific), the market is sufficiently commercial and affluent to expect daily service from LA to any major destination served nonstop. GRU is, obviously, a major world city and major destination.
There is, of course, a market from LAX-GRU. It was on RG's better-performing routes, after all. However, it could very well prove too thin for the likes of DL. UA tried it during the 1990s (at greater than 3x/wk, I believe), and UA is one of LA's big hitters. Even bigger, lately, than UA is AA, whose Latin American expertise is the unsurpassed among North American carriers; and even AA, with all of their domestic and Southern Hemisphere might, has not yet elected to try this route. When Angelinos think of intercontinental air travel, and choose to fly a domestic carrier, DL is rarely the option that comes to mind first. AA, UA - certainly; DL, however, has become something of an airborne Buick in this market: people are aware of its existence, but are not particularly enthralled by it.
It is also worth noting that in the current economic climate, applying for a route simply to spite another carrier - in this case AA - is ill-advised, not to mention petty. DL is touted here as oh so very superior in every respect, or so it seems, that one would assume they might have much bigger and more laudable things to do....

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: EXAAUADL
Posted 2008-08-30 01:38:17 and read 20160 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 28):
Indeed correct. DL could take advantage of the CI TPE-LAX, DL/NW NRT-LAX flight, the KE ICN-LAX flight, as well as AS connections in the LAX market. This route is not such a pipedream when it comes down to it.

code share always generates less traffic than onlines connects. Only think D Lwill offer thru LAX is longer eplased times for SEA/PDX/YVR versus DFW or IAH. As for Asia-GRU, fares are very very low given the distances, plus the elasped time again is shorter via ATL, DFW, IAH, even EWR

It was a pipe dream for UA back in 2000 with a hub and $25 oil. It will be for DL today with no hub and $130 fuel

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Transpac787
Posted 2008-08-30 08:10:41 and read 19234 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 39):
I want to say its 12 but im not 100% on that.

I'd imagine all of these 763's are to get the winglet mod??

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MasseyBrown
Posted 2008-08-30 08:52:51 and read 19058 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 36):
I said that if SA)">DL can get any more GRU rights they will go to LAX or more ATL flights and I was told that the yields suck on this route and they would never do it.........yea I guess I was wrong.

There is good traffic potential from LAX to South America, but in the past it has been true about the yields. The profitability of eastern US-SA routes has been improving over the past couple of years, so SA)">DL must see LAX as part of that.

If so, maybe you could predict LAX-EZE next for SA)">DL. That route used to generate 100k pax a year even for an apparently indifferent UA.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Alitalia744
Posted 2008-08-30 09:30:56 and read 18883 times.

Quoting EWRCabincrew (Reply 29):
HA flies to MNL with a 767 and CO flew HNL-NGO with a 764.

I should have said mainland.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 28):
Indeed correct. DL could take advantage of the CI TPE-LAX, DL/NW NRT-LAX flight, the KE ICN-LAX flight, as well as AS connections in the LAX market. This route is not such a pipedream when it comes down to it.

Exactly.

Quoting B777ER (Reply 34):
IIRC, DL takes out the first couple J seats in the center (with some additional mod's) and has a large box type area that is enclosed and inside of this is where the pilots can lay down.

Yes and more may be coming.

[Edited 2008-08-30 09:35:26]

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Evan767
Posted 2008-08-30 10:28:12 and read 18599 times.



Quoting Alitalia744 (Reply 44):
Yes and more may be coming.

Do you or anyone know how many orders Delta has for winglets for their 763ER's? Does Delta have options to put winglets on all of their 763ER's for fleet commonality?

How many more miles/flight time will Delta get with the added winglets?

What is the timeline on installation?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-08-30 10:39:15 and read 18536 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 39):
Also the CZ flights

Unless DL departs late at night the CZ connection will be useless.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-08-30 11:02:26 and read 18424 times.



Quoting Evan767 (Reply 45):
Do you or anyone know how many orders Delta has for winglets for their 763ER's? Does Delta have options to put winglets on all of their 763ER's for fleet commonality?

30 for the 763s. DL has options to put winglets on all 757s,737s and 763ERs.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-08-30 11:40:21 and read 18248 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 46):
Unless DL departs late at night the CZ connection will be useless.

Most South American departures are at night...as they arrive early in the morning. I would expect a 10-11pm departure.

The question I have is...

DL operates JFK-TLV with a 767 at a distance of 4934nm...now this flight sometime has to make a fuel stop in MAN due to the length of the flight...

LAX-GRU is listed at 5350nm, 416nm longer than JFK-TLV. How can DL make this work without a fuel stop somewhere???

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LACA773
Posted 2008-08-30 11:46:53 and read 18218 times.

Will DL's schedule compliment KE's?
I hope they get this route approved and it works out for them.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Evan767
Posted 2008-08-30 11:59:20 and read 18188 times.



Quoting OOer (Reply 48):
LAX-GRU is listed at 5350nm, 416nm longer than JFK-TLV. How can DL make this work without a fuel stop somewhere???

First of all, Delta's longest 763ER flight is LOS-ATL, and even AMM-JFK is longer than TLV-JFK. And you should always base a route on block time, not mileage. Block time for LOS-ATL is 13.15 and the maximum block time for GRU-LAX in the winter is 13.10. Delta is able to operate LOS-ATL while AMM-JFK is weight restricted. However, winglets on these aircraft should be able to make all these routes work with mostly full capacity and cargo.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-08-30 12:23:57 and read 17994 times.



Quoting OOer (Reply 48):
LAX-GRU is listed at 5350nm, 416nm longer than JFK-TLV. How can DL make this work without a fuel stop somewhere???

The same way the RG made the route work with the 767-300 second service in 2001...

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jmbarros12
Posted 2008-08-30 12:32:16 and read 17931 times.



Quoting Alitalia744 (Thread starter):
with 767-332ER

I was wondering why DL would not use the 764's on this route... Is it too much of supply?

Quoting Dellatorre (Reply 2):
aybe it has something to do with KE performance over the specific segment. Since KE does not have extra frequencies, DL is taking take of that.

If I'm not wrong, KE flies a 772 on GRU-LAX and if DL decided to start flying this route based on KE's performance, why not flying it with a larger plane than the 763?

Sds,

Joao Marcelo

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: C010T3
Posted 2008-08-30 12:40:04 and read 17893 times.



Quoting Jmbarros12 (Reply 52):
I was wondering why DL would not use the 764's on this route... Is it too much of supply?

The 764 does not have the range.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-08-30 12:43:24 and read 17901 times.

The 767-400 has a range a little shorter than the -300, and there are no spare 777s at the moment.

Let me add...ATL-LOS and JFK-AMM are SEVERELY weight restricted. We have heard on occasion DL sub the 777 on ATL-LOS to get the backlog of bags out there!

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jmbarros12
Posted 2008-08-30 12:48:18 and read 17855 times.



Quoting C010T3 (Reply 53):
The 764 does not have the range

True, just checked it...

Tks for the info.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Panamair
Posted 2008-08-30 13:08:59 and read 17796 times.



Quoting United1 (Reply 37):
does anyone know how many of the aircraft have or are scheduled to have the modification.

There are currently 7 that have the 34/181 configuration - ships 1607 - 1613. They are mandatory on the following routes:
ATL-LOS
JFK-TLV
JFK-AMM
JFK-CAI

JFK-DKR-CPT uses it 99% of the time though I don't believe it's mandatory due to each leg of the flight being within the limits for a regular pilot rest seat.

This type also frequently shows up on JFK-PSA, JFK-MAD, JFK-DUB (don't ask me why two of the shortest routes in the system get it frequently).

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-08-30 13:30:33 and read 17691 times.



Quoting Jmbarros12 (Reply 52):
I was wondering why DL would not use the 764's on this route... Is it too much of supply?

lack of range.

Quoting Jmbarros12 (Reply 52):
If I'm not wrong, KE flies a 772 on GRU-LAX and if DL decided to start flying this route based on KE's performance, why not flying it with a larger plane than the 763?

Lack of A/C. If they get the route it could A332 post merger.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-08-30 13:43:52 and read 17668 times.



Quoting Jmbarros12 (Reply 52):
If I'm not wrong, KE flies a 772 on GRU-LAX and if DL decided to start flying this route based on KE's performance, why not flying it with a larger plane than the 763?

The DL flight will not start or end in NRT, or ICN. The only way that LAX-GRU with DL metal will be a bigger aircraft would be if the route was created as GRU-LAX-NRT and v.v. using NW metal for the interim.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MCOAviationFan
Posted 2008-08-30 14:19:12 and read 17484 times.



Quoting Panamair (Reply 56):
There are currently 7 that have the 34/181 configuration - ships 1607 - 1613. They are mandatory on the following routes:
ATL-LOS
JFK-TLV
JFK-AMM
JFK-CAI

For the past several months ATL-LOS has been blocked just below 12 hrs in both directions. As a result, the modified 767 has not been used on this route. This also negates the need for 4 pilots and DL has been operating with 3 pilots.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-08-30 15:13:26 and read 17291 times.

Starting October the LOS-ATL leg will be blocked at 12:10

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-08-30 15:23:20 and read 17291 times.

AMM is at several thousand feet of elevation. The problems with performance out of AMM are due to altitude and summer heat, not range.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MCOAviationFan
Posted 2008-08-30 16:37:26 and read 16952 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 61):
AMM is at several thousand feet of elevation. The problems with performance out of AMM are due to altitude and summer heat, not range.

Someone recently posted that DL was changing the AMM schedule to allow for a late evening departure from AMM. This should help with the heat issue.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Evan767
Posted 2008-08-30 16:44:05 and read 16929 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 61):
The problems with performance out of AMM are due to altitude and summer heat, not range.

Amman isn't that high up. And yes, range does contribute to the reason why the plane is booked to 150 in the back. However, the main reason the plane can't operate well out of Amman is the afternoon heat. The plane leaves at half past noon. I've tried to nonrev out of Amman and the plane left without me with 10 seats open in coach and 7 people sitting in Business Class. They still had to offload passenger's bags for it to get to JFK. However, I talked to the station manager in AMM and he says this is a big problem and they are soon going to make the Amman flight leave at midnight for better performance, because the main factor in Amman is the heat taking it's toll on the 763ER's engines. Still, Amman seems to be a good performer and I could see it sticking around in Delta's network for the foreseeable future.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Evan767
Posted 2008-08-30 16:44:47 and read 16925 times.



Quoting MCOAviationFan (Reply 62):
Someone recently posted that DL was changing the AMM schedule to allow for a late evening departure from AMM. This should help with the heat issue.

Yes, see my post above.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2008-08-30 16:52:43 and read 16876 times.



Quoting Evan767 (Reply 63):
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 61):
The problems with performance out of AMM are due to altitude and summer heat, not range.

Amman isn't that high up.

It's 2,395 ft ASL which can still affect payload on long sectors especially when combined with high temperatures.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Evan767
Posted 2008-08-30 16:57:26 and read 16853 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 65):
It's 2,395 ft ASL which can still affect payload on long sectors especially when combined with high temperatures.

Yeah, but it's not that bad. I'm not saying it doesn't contribute. I'm just saying it's a smaller factor than the afternoon heat.

[Edited 2008-08-30 16:57:48]

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-08-30 18:22:48 and read 16719 times.

look at the performance charts on Boeing's website to see the difference between sea level and 2000 ft ASL. Altitude is indeed a significant factor. The heat pushes it over the edge but CAI does not have the problems AMM has and the heat can be similar; the schedules are similar. to AMM

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Transpac787
Posted 2008-08-30 19:15:46 and read 16648 times.



Quoting Evan767 (Reply 63):
the heat taking it's toll on the 763ER's engines.

DL has both GE and PW engines on their 763's, though the PW's are mostly found on the 763ER's while the GE's are mostly on their 763A's. Anyhow, the PW engines, on the 767, tend to be a lot better than the GE's. Hot/high performance, as well as fuel efficiency. United, with PW4060's on their 763ER's, have some of the longest-ranged 763's in the world, even though they don't operate them on any route longer than 10.5 hours.

So, you may be partially correct in that the GE birds might have a bigger problem, but I'd imagine the 763's with the crew bunkrooms are probably PW-powered birds.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: SESGDL
Posted 2008-08-30 19:30:53 and read 16631 times.



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 68):
So, you may be partially correct in that the GE birds might have a bigger problem, but I'd imagine the 763's with the crew bunkrooms are probably PW-powered birds.

They are actually GE-powered 767-300s. DL has a lot of PW-powered -ERs, ships 172-199 and ships 1200 and 1201, as well as a lot of GE powered -ERs are well, ships 1501-1506, 1521, 1601-1613 and 1701-1708.

Jeremy

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: United1
Posted 2008-08-30 19:36:18 and read 16629 times.

DL has IIRC...

21 764ER GE powered
30 763ER GE powered
29 763ER PW powered (2 are being retired the end of this year)
17 763 GE
4 763 PW

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Alitalia744
Posted 2008-08-30 22:50:02 and read 16489 times.



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 68):
Anyhow, the PW engines, on the 767, tend to be a lot better than the GE's.

Not necessarily. Look at DL - it's the GE birds that are doing the longest flights...

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Transpac787
Posted 2008-08-30 22:59:59 and read 16483 times.



Quoting Alitalia744 (Reply 71):
Not necessarily. Look at DL - it's the GE birds that are doing the longest flights...

And the longest 767 route in the world, TLV-MIA, is done by a PW-power 762.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Snorre - VAP

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: NewYorkCityBoi
Posted 2008-08-31 04:01:57 and read 16324 times.



Quoting Alitalia744 (Reply 13):
Correction Rose, no airline YET flies US to Asia nonstop on a 767

Hainan Airlines flies PEK-SEA on 767-300

LAX-GRU is far.. but Delta also does JFK-EZE too

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Transpac787
Posted 2008-08-31 08:29:38 and read 16198 times.



Quoting NewYorkCityBoi (Reply 73):
LAX-GRU is far.. but Delta also does JFK-EZE too

JFK-EZE is about 800nm shorter than LAX-GRU. Their 767 flights to Africa are a good deal longer than JFK-EZE too.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: SJOtoLIR
Posted 2008-08-31 12:14:32 and read 16052 times.



Quoting MasseyBrown (Reply 43):
There is good traffic potential from LAX to South America

For the time being BOG, LIM, SCL and GRU are sustaining scheduled non-stop services out of LAX.
Regards.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Dispatchguy
Posted 2008-08-31 15:17:40 and read 15892 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 61):
AMM is at several thousand feet of elevation. The problems with performance out of AMM are due to altitude and summer heat, not range.

It seems that a LOT of times recently, I have seen where the AMM-JFK trip makes a fuel stop in SNN so as to be able to accommodate the loads coming out of AMM; I do concur, that retiming the departure out of AMM to a nighttime departure will help.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-08-31 16:19:53 and read 15840 times.

This is where DL needs the A332 that NW has. Putting an A332 on CAI/TLV/AMM would allow DL to maximize the revenue on those flights!

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: JJ8080
Posted 2008-08-31 18:10:24 and read 15703 times.

Rumors has it that DL could make the flight LAX-LIM-GRU, in order to make it daily and maximize loads (cargo and pax),. The info came from a friend working on LSG SkyChefs and aviation fan, so, nothing confirmed, just rumors..... I was wondering, RG used to fly GRU-LIM-LAX with 767s correct?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2008-08-31 18:25:33 and read 15684 times.



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 72):
And the longest 767 route in the world, TLV-MIA, is done by a PW-power 762.

As a sidenote, LY's last TLV-MIA flight is tonight. They announced a couple of months ago that they were dropping the route.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: 2travel2know
Posted 2008-08-31 18:37:22 and read 15656 times.



Quoting JJ8080 (Reply 78):
Rumors has it that DL could make the flight LAX-LIM-GRU, in order to make it daily and maximize loads (cargo and pax),.

Is Perú going to allow a U.S. airline traffic rights between LIM and GRU? Braniff had them once upon a time.
It will depend on the current U.S. - Perú and U.S. - Brazil bilaterals if DL will be O.K. to carry passengers between LIM and GRU, but - for the record - "recently" CO tried to get 5th rights from the Peruvians, in this case LIM-VVI, and the answer was no.

LIM might be the only stop between LAX and GRU that would make some sense if really needed.
I can think of other DL Latinamerican destinations that could work from LAX and GRU, like BOG, which has limited GRU flights but has altitude issues; or PTY, but PTY already has LAX daily and GRU twice daily.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-08-31 19:02:01 and read 15600 times.



Quoting JJ8080 (Reply 78):
rs..... I was wondering, RG used to fly GRU-LIM-LAX with 767s correct?

RG operated:

747/MD-11/763 = LAX-GRU-GIG
747/762 = LAX-LIM-GRU

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-08-31 19:11:58 and read 15572 times.

How about LAX-MEX-GRU...get a little feed from AM in MEX and load them up!

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-08-31 19:18:20 and read 15583 times.



Quoting OOer (Reply 77):
This is where DL needs the A332 that NW has. Putting an A332 on CAI/TLV/AMM would allow DL to maximize the revenue on those flights!

The 332 is larger but doesn't have any better performance. On a route like TLV or CAI where it is at sea level, the 332 could add more seats but the 767 has better performance than the 330.

Quoting 2travel2know (Reply 80):
Is Perú going to allow a U.S. airline traffic rights between LIM and GRU?

no.

If DL is going to fly LAX-GRU it will be nonstop.

Their route application isn't for LAX-XYZ-GRU.

IT is for nonstop service.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-08-31 19:38:14 and read 15534 times.

It has a longer range...therefore DL could actually carry some cargo on TLV/CAI instead of having to stop in MAN everytime the winds are too strong coming back! This way the plane could leave full, with all the bags...and with a little cargo. Instead of leaving pax/cargo behind and/or stopping in MAN.

So yes, DL would benefit from putting an A332 on this route!

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-08-31 19:50:48 and read 15510 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 83):
The 332 is larger but doesn't have any better performance. On a route like TLV or CAI where it is at sea level, the 332 could add more seats but the 767 has better performance than the 330

The 763ER has 5,900nm
The A332 has 6,800nm
Looks to me like the A332 has better range which would mean it should be able to carry more fuel/PAX/Cargo.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-08-31 19:55:49 and read 15519 times.



Quoting OOer (Reply 84):
It has a longer range...therefore DL could actually carry some cargo on TLV/CAI instead of having to stop in MAN everytime the winds are too strong coming back! This way the plane could leave full, with all the bags...and with a little cargo. Instead of leaving pax/cargo behind and/or stopping in MAN.

what manufacturers quote and what actually happens in real life are two very different things.

I do not know any 332 route that operates regularly beyond 13hrs, 15 minutes which is the flying time for LOS-ATL on the 763ER by Delta.

I don't know where you get the idea that TLV-JFK "regularly" stops in MAN but it doesn't.

You also can't demonstrate that the 332 would not have the same problem out of AMM as DL is having. DL is departing from a 2000 + ft airport in the summer at 95 degrees plus F - the 332 can't make the flight nonstop either. Check the Airbus and Boeing performance charts if you disagree.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Speedbird0125
Posted 2008-08-31 19:57:38 and read 15500 times.

So now, DL's gonna compete with KE too.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Speedbird0125
Posted 2008-08-31 19:58:22 and read 15500 times.

How's KE doing on this route (GRU-LAX-ICN)?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Bobnwa
Posted 2008-08-31 20:02:17 and read 15492 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 85):
The 763ER has 5,900nm
The A332 has 6,800nm
Looks to me like the A332 has better range which would mean it should be able to carry more fuel/PAX/Cargo.

Have you ever done a weight and balance on any aircraft let alone a 767ER or a A332?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-08-31 20:11:29 and read 15482 times.



Quoting Speedbird0125 (Reply 88):
How's KE doing on this route (GRU-LAX-ICN)?

Loads look ok but that means very little. Others on here say Yields suck but I don't think you will find anyone that knows or if they know can't tell you on this site.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 86):
You also can't demonstrate that the 332 would not have the same problem out of AMM as DL is having. DL is departing from a 2000 + ft airport in the summer at 95 degrees plus F - the 332 can't make the flight nonstop either. Check the Airbus and Boeing performance charts if you disagree.

He did say out of CAI and TLV nothing about AMM. Almost any airplane (of that size) would have the same problem due to being high and hot.
Just for Sh*ts though could a 77E/77L do better than a 763 at AMM?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: HALFA
Posted 2008-08-31 20:32:59 and read 15451 times.



Quoting Speedbird0125 (Reply 88):
How's KE doing on this route (GRU-LAX-ICN)?

I flew on this flight about 4 weeks after it's launch and the flight was packed (GRU-LAX) and fares are high.
You will not find fares for less than US$1000.00. My trip report is here:

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...ums/trip_reports/read.main/129637/

HALFA

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-08-31 20:55:28 and read 15421 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 86):
I don't know where you get the idea that TLV-JFK "regularly" stops in MAN but it doesn't.

I work that flight at least once per month...and its happened more than once to me, and several other times to those who work that flight 4-5 times per month!

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-08-31 21:30:19 and read 15378 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 86):
I do not know any 332 route that operates regularly beyond 13hrs, 15 minutes which is the flying time for LOS-ATL on the 763ER by Delta.

I do not know any other operators besides Delta that have scheduled flights on the 767-300 blocked over 12 hours.

Look, everyone knows the A332 has longer legs than the 767-300...why keep arguing?

The longest route the A332 does is KE ICN-ZRH blocked at 12:15


Also, LOS is a very bad example, as DL can never take a fullboat and regularly leaves bags behind...no cargo! On some occasions DL has had to substitute the 767-300 on that route with a 777 due to the backlog of bags and cargo in ATL!!!!!

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: RwSEA
Posted 2008-08-31 21:34:20 and read 15362 times.

Interesting choice - this should compliment KE's service nicely. It's nice to have more options from the West Coast, and hopefully this flight will have more success than some of DL's other LAX expansion.

Quoting NewYorkCityBoi (Reply 73):
Hainan Airlines flies PEK-SEA on 767-300

No, it's operated by the A332.

However, it should be noted that AC has several 767 flights from YVR, including ICN, PVG, and PEK.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: HB-IWC
Posted 2008-08-31 21:55:32 and read 15328 times.



Quoting OOer (Reply 93):
The longest route the A332 does is KE ICN-ZRH blocked at 12:15

AF279 NRT CDG blocks at 12.45 and is operated with A332. Before that, AF183 HKG CDG blocked at 13.20. This flights has since been upgraded to B772ER. AF also used to operate the A332 on CAN CDG, with a block time of 13.10. This flight currently goes with A343. AF also operated KIX CDG with A332 before upgrading it to B77W.

I'm sure you can find more A332 operated sectors with block times around 12.30 to 13 hours.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Transpac787
Posted 2008-08-31 23:21:49 and read 15280 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 86):
I do not know any 332 route that operates regularly beyond 13hrs, 15 minutes which is the flying time for LOS-ATL on the 763ER by Delta.

QF now operates an A332 on LAX-AKL, which I believe is a good bit over 13 hours blocktime.


Also important to note here are NW's specific A332's. NW has the A330-223 and A330-323X, both of which have the PW4068A with 70,000# thrust-rating. I could look up the MGTOW's for NW-specific birds, but I would bet it's not the max-certified MGTOW for the A332 and A333, respectively. The longest flights NW uses their A332 on are AMS-PDX and SFO-NRT, both of which have about an 11:30 blocktime, depending on seasons.

So, given their utilization, NW would have been foolish to get an overkill certified gross weight on their specific planes as they would just be paying more expensive landing fees everywhere they go for no reason.

With that in mind, it is very possible that the DL 763ER's (with winglets) may have better performance and lift capability for these routes, as compared to a (potentially) reduced-max-weight A332. But on the flip-side of that, DL/NW could easily get their A332/A333 certified to higher gross weights if they have a need for it.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-01 00:34:47 and read 15241 times.



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 96):
Also important to note here are NW's specific A332's. NW has the A330-223 and A330-323X, both of which have the PW4068A with 70,000# thrust-rating.

Does NW have the highest thrust engines on them? I know that DL's 77Es had Trent 892s but they upgraded them to 895s which made the thrust go up. If NW doesn't have the highest thrust what would it take to upgrade them? Would it be mostly software like the RR Trents? Or would it be a mostly hardware thing making it cost to much to do so?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-09-01 05:26:53 and read 15130 times.



Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 95):
AF279 NRT CDG blocks at 12.45 and is operated with A332. Before that, AF183 HKG CDG blocked at 13.20. This flights has since been upgraded to B772ER. AF also used to operate the A332 on CAN CDG, with a block time of 13.10. This flight currently goes with A343. AF also operated KIX CDG with A332 before upgrading it to B77W.

Thank you for the additional info...

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: A330323X
Posted 2008-09-01 06:58:21 and read 15061 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 97):
Does NW have the highest thrust engines on them?

They have the highest thrust engines made by P&W, but other engine manufacturers make higher thrust engines for the A330.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 97):
If NW doesn't have the highest thrust what would it take to upgrade them?

The PW4173.  Wink

(That's the engine that US ordered from Pratt, only to have Pratt not be able to make the thing, screwing US [and NW] in the process.)

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-01 07:09:28 and read 15079 times.



Quoting Speedbird0125 (Reply 87):
So now, DL's gonna compete with KE too.

they will work together, not compete. KE operates 4X/week. DL is asking for 3X/week.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 90):
Just for Sh*ts though could a 77E/77L do better than a 763 at AMM?

by far. both are much longer range. degraded performance is more of an issue at the end of the performance envelope. the 77E or L would not be at the edge of the envelope for JFK-TLV or AMM

Quoting OOer (Reply 92):
I work that flight at least once per month...and its happened more than once to me, and several other times to those who work that flight 4-5 times per month!

curious.... I've watched TLV-JFK frequently and saw it one time and it was for a crew change, not a performance issue. Would you be so kind as to PM when you see a diversion and I'll look at delta.com and verify? If I don't hear from you, I'll presume it doesn't happen w/ the frequency you think it does.

Quoting OOer (Reply 93):
Look, everyone knows the A332 has longer legs than the 767-300...why keep arguing?

no they don't and there is no evidence that it does.

The 332 is LARGER but it is not more CAPABLE than the 763ER. And remember the 763ER is getting winglets in a couple months which will improve its performance even further.

The 763 is primarily a US operated airplane and both AA and UA have large fleets of 777s, so they have no reason to push 763ERs. DL is pushing the 763ER because it is capable of doing so and because they want to use the 777s to the limits of their capabilities as well. The 763ER isn't going anywhere for AA or DL and continues to have favorable total economics (including much lower ownership costs) and performance that has not been beat by any aircraft.

Quoting OOer (Reply 93):
Also, LOS is a very bad example, as DL can never take a fullboat and regularly leaves bags behind...no cargo!

it's bad only because baggage weights per passenger are more than double what is used on other routes. If baggage weights were comparable, the 763ER would take no restrictions.

FWIW, DL has asked Airbus for performance data on the 332 and Airbus wouldn't guarantee that the 332 could do better than the 763ER.

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 95):
AF279 NRT CDG blocks at 12.45 and is operated with A332. Before that, AF183 HKG CDG blocked at 13.20. This flights has since been upgraded to B772ER. AF also used to operate the A332 on CAN CDG, with a block time of 13.10. This flight currently goes with A343. AF also operated KIX CDG with A332 before upgrading it to B77W.

I'm sure you can find more A332 operated sectors with block times around 12.30 to 13 hours.

I remember it was used on several western Europe to Asia sectors but you can see it has often been upgraded to a 777... the 777 isn't that muh bigger in terms of passenger size so clearly the 332 isn't capable enough that a 332 can make the route w/ no restrictions - and carrying the cargo that Asian flights generate.

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 96):
I could look up the MGTOW's for NW-specific birds, but I would bet it's not the max-certified MGTOW for the A332 and A333, respectively.

I have often heard that NW does not have the highest performance a/c in its fleet - and it has not been necessary given they operate largely to/from AMS and NRT which are relatively "easy" airports to serve techinically compared with other airports in those regions.

In contrast, DL has the highest performance aircraft in every one of its int'l fleet or a subfleet that has the highest performance.

I believe the 763ERs with GE engines have the same thrust as the 764ERs even though the 3ER has a 38,000 pound lower MTOW. While the 764 is not terribly well powered (like the 333), the 763ER w/ GE engines has one of the highest thrust/weight ratios available.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-09-01 08:34:42 and read 15003 times.

Last time I was on a flight from TLV-JFK that made a fuel stop was on the 18th of August.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Transpac787
Posted 2008-09-01 08:41:04 and read 14978 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 97):
Does NW have the highest thrust engines on them?

The highest thrust Pratt & Whitney engines available for the A330's, but not the highest-thrust engine available between PW, GE, and RR available for A330's. NW has the PW4168A, with 70k thrust-rate. I believe both GE and RR offer a 72k thrust-rate engine for the A330.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 97):
If NW doesn't have the highest thrust what would it take to upgrade them? Would it be mostly software like the RR Trents?

A complete engine replacement, which would cost MUCH more than it's worth.

A.net user Lightsaber could explain this much better than any of us, but from what I gather from his explanations, PW was working on developing a PW4172 (72k thrust rate) to compete with the GE and RR counterparts for the A330, but something went wrong in the development process - much like the PW4092 for the 777 - and they ended up having to offer a slightly-reduced power engine: an upgraded PW4168, the PW4168A.

From what I understand though, the PW motors are the most fuel-efficient 70k-thrust option for the A330.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 100):
I have often heard that NW does not have the highest performance a/c in its fleet - and it has not been necessary given they operate largely to/from AMS and NRT which are relatively "easy" airports to serve techinically compared with other airports in those regions.

I cannot answer for sure, but I would imagine this is correct, that NW's A330's are not the highest-performance ones around. The job NWA needs them for they do very well. The "short range" Transpac flights, as well as all of their TransAt flights.

So, like I said in my reply 96, it really is quite possible that DL's current 763's would do better at the Africa routes than the NW A332's.

Maybe the NW decision for A330 over 777 is finally coming back full circle to haunt them?? Man, what I would have given to see the 777-251/ER  cloudnine   Sad

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2008-09-01 08:43:19 and read 14996 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 100):
they will work together, not compete. KE operates 4X/week. DL is asking for 3X/week.

Small point of Clarification. KE flies LAX-GRU 3x a week. But I still get your point.

Does anyone know what kind of schuedule DL would be looking at for LAX-GRU? I think the whole point of this flight needs to be connecting people coming from Asia.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-09-01 09:14:53 and read 14946 times.

WorldTraveler, instead of arguing back and forth like everyone else on this forum is used to...why dont we agree to disagree and just wait and see what DL does in the next year or so. If after the merger this or some of the other long 767 routes go to the A330 then we will be able to see that DL obviously thinks the Airbus can perform better...if not, well then DL thinks the 767 is adequate for those routes...k?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2008-09-01 09:38:28 and read 14906 times.

The proposed schedule for the winter is

LAX-GRU
2100-1525+1

GRU-LAX
2255-0600+1

Certainly not conducive for Asia connections off NW, CI, CZ, unless one expect customers to wait around 6-12hours.


And again, before we get too excited for this flight, we can basically guarantee it wont commence in December as Delta proposes as the DOT must first determine if United can be stripped of its dormant frequencies, and if so, must run a competition as both AA and DL want the same set of frequencies. This alone could take the DOT thru December, with DL obviously needing 90 or so days to market the flight prior to launch also.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: HB-IWC
Posted 2008-09-01 10:24:39 and read 14824 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 100):
I remember it was used on several western Europe to Asia sectors but you can see it has often been upgraded to a 777... the 777 isn't that muh bigger in terms of passenger size so clearly the 332 isn't capable enough that a 332 can make the route w/ no restrictions - and carrying the cargo that Asian flights generate.

At least for Air France, the upgrades from A332 to B777 have had nothing to do with the perceived lack of capability of the A332 on the Asia to Europe routes. Rather, the cabin configuration and the larger premium cabins have been the driving force of the upgrades. If the A332 were to underperform on the Asia to Europe sectors, Air France would not be using it on an almost daily basis between Tokyo and Paris.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-01 11:14:39 and read 14736 times.



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 105):
LAX-GRU
2100-1525+1

GRU-LAX
2255-0600+1

Certainly not conducive for Asia connections off NW, CI, CZ, unless one expect customers to wait around 6-12hours.

The flight is designed for both connections and O/D. If the flight were to depart in time for the NW NRT service the flight wouldhave to leave GRU at 255am to arrive in LAX at 1000am, that would be both an unattractive and unrealistic departure. I am also under the guise that GRU has time limitations for aircraft movements as well. There has to be give and take on this route. Not everyone that travels from GRU-LAX is connecting to Asia, nor is everyone on this service going to want to fly the marathon 24 hours that the trip will take w/o connections.

Quoting OOer (Reply 93):
The longest route the A332 does is KE ICN-ZRH blocked at 12:15

INCORRECT

QF
12.40
LAX-AKL
A330-200

AM-Transportes Aereos Meridionais (Brazil)">JJ
12.25
LHR-GRU
A330-200

Quoting OOer (Reply 93):
Also, LOS is a very bad example, as DL can never take a fullboat and regularly leaves bags behind...no cargo! On some occasions DL has had to substitute the 767-300 on that route with a 777 due to the backlog of bags and cargo in ATL!!!!!

When was the last time that that happened? Or was that just some idle "galley chat"?

Quoting OOer (Reply 84):
So yes, DL would benefit from putting an A332 on this route!

Perhaps, however we cant sit and play a game of what if. For the time being DL is opting to use the 767-300 on the service, so they see a need and demand for this aircraft type on this routing. The schedule DL is using would allow DL to do a ATL turn for example, once the aircraft is back at LAX.

Quoting OOer (Reply 82):

How about LAX-MEX-GRU...get a little feed from AM in MEX and load them up!

WHY?

AM offers the 777-200 on MEX-GRU, there is no additional lift needed from MEX-GRU for SkyTeam.

Quoting OOer (Reply 48):
Most South American departures are at night...as they arrive early in the morning. I would expect a 10-11pm departure

INCORRECT

AR used its LAX-MEX-EZE with a mid-evening departure
AV used its LAX-MEX-BOG and LAX-BOG with a morning departure
RG used its GIG-GRU-LAX-NRT/NGO-LAX-GRU-GIG with a 2pm depart time
LA has had a midday departure from LAX-LIM-SCL for a number of years
VP used its GRU-LAX-KIX/SEL-LAX-GRU with a 3pm depart time

Quoting OOer (Reply 48):
LAX-GRU is listed at 5350nm, 416nm longer than JFK-TLV. How can DL make this work without a fuel stop somewhere???

The same way that RG operated the second evening service from LAX-GRU-GIG in the past with the 767-300. The same way that AZ operated SFO-MXP in the past with the 767-300. And on and on and on.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2008-09-01 11:27:16 and read 14716 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 107):
Not everyone that travels from GRU-LAX is connecting to Asia, nor is everyone on this service going to want to fly the marathon 24 hours that the trip will take w/o connections.

I'm well aware of that.

I'm pointing out the fact that the flights are far from ideal for Skyteam connections to/from Asia as several have pointed out as this being a target for the flight

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-01 11:36:41 and read 14682 times.



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 108):
I'm pointing out the fact that the flights are far from ideal for Skyteam connections to/from Asia as several have pointed out as this being a target for the flight

Understandable, however I as well have pointed out that if the flight is pushed back any further it will be at a time that is both unattractive, and from what I understand outside of the time constraints for movements at GRU. There is going to be give and take on this one. Most Brazilians that I know, and trust me I know plenty as I have family in Brazil and in volumes. The ones that I do know that travel to Asia be it for business or be it for pleasure tend to use the European airlines and now Middle Eastern airlines because of the service levels not offered on the US airlines.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-09-01 11:42:37 and read 14674 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 107):
When was the last time that that happened? Or was that just some idle "galley chat"?

That I know for sure...in December.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 107):
For the time being DL is opting to use the 767-300 on the service, so they see a need and demand for this aircraft type on this routing.

No, they are not opting to use this aircraft...this is the ONLY aircraft available time being!

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 107):
Quoting OOer (Reply 48):
Most South American departures are at night...as they arrive early in the morning. I would expect a 10-11pm departure

INCORRECT

AR used its LAX-MEX-EZE with a mid-evening departure
AV used its LAX-MEX-BOG and LAX-BOG with a morning departure
RG used its GIG-GRU-LAX-NRT/NGO-LAX-GRU-GIG with a 2pm depart time
LA has had a midday departure from LAX-LIM-SCL for a number of years
VP used its GRU-LAX-KIX/SEL-LAX-GRU with a 3pm depart time

1st - I didnt say there are no day departures.
2nd - Whats the ration of night departures vs day departures? Exacly, quit trying to sound intelligent!
3rd - We are talking about DL, and all but 1 of DL S.A. departures are at night!

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 107):
Quoting OOer (Reply 48):
LAX-GRU is listed at 5350nm, 416nm longer than JFK-TLV. How can DL make this work without a fuel stop somewhere???

The same way that RG operated the second evening service from LAX-GRU-GIG in the past with the 767-300. The same way that AZ operated SFO-MXP in the past with the 767-300. And on and on and on.

SFO-MXP is over 200 miles shorter than LAX-GRU! And AZ has their birds configured with less seats than DL. Therefore less weight!

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Yellowtail
Posted 2008-09-01 11:43:26 and read 14671 times.

More throwing stuff against a wall....I give this one 6 months..obviously they have so much confidence in the route that they are goign to go for it all and 3X a week!

..what do you say WT....up for a bet?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-01 11:54:36 and read 14663 times.



Quoting OOer (Reply 110):
That I know for sure...in December.

The comment I responded to was about the 777 being used in place of the 767 to LOS..

Quoting OOer (Reply 110):
1st - I didnt say there are no day departures.
2nd - Whats the ration of night departures vs day departures? Exacly, quit trying to sound intelligent!
3rd - We are talking about DL, and all but 1 of DL S.A. departures are at night!

The comment made in the original post was a blank statement. What I did was disprove the theory that was put forth that LAX departures to South Am were in the majority at night. If you intended to say just DL in general, then it should have been included, not just a blanket statement in a topic about LAX.

Quoting OOer (Reply 110):
SFO-MXP is over 200 miles shorter than LAX-GRU! And AZ has their birds configured with less seats than DL. Therefore less weight!

The 200 miles is nothing. Having flown to GRU many times before. The 200 miles could be equated to all of one additional turn around the city.

Quoting OOer (Reply 110):
No, they are not opting to use this aircraft...this is the ONLY aircraft available time being!

Playing on words.. DL is opting to operate the 767-300 on LAX-GRU because the route does not have the demand to warrant a 777-200. Fleet availability or not DL does not see the need to operate the 777 on LAX-GRU. If the demand was there DL would operate the LAX-GRU route with a 777, however they dont see the need to and they want to get there hands into the market so they are going to use a fleet type with less seats. If DL wanted to they could operate the 777 and downgrade ATL-TLV to a 767-300.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-01 12:02:28 and read 14645 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 100):
curious.... I've watched TLV-JFK frequently and saw it one time and it was for a crew change, not a performance issue. Would you be so kind as to PM when you see a diversion and I'll look at delta.com and verify? If I don't hear from you, I'll presume it doesn't happen w/ the frequency you think it does

 checkmark 

I have heard of DL crews timing out and thus causing diversions. If what OOer says is true it would have happened to TW in the past as well as to Israir. It doesn't, and didn't, so I am left to believe it is nothing more than crew timing out, if not a problem specific to the DL 767-300 fleets. However saying something so blanket such as "JFK-TLV diverts frequently" is both false and erroneous.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-09-01 12:52:05 and read 14600 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 112):
The comment I responded to was about the 777 being used in place of the 767 to LOS..

And my answer was to yor question. This past December DL did substitute the 767 with a 777 on more than 1 occasion.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 112):
What I did was disprove the theory that was put forth that LAX departures to South Am were in the majority at night.

Are you telling me that LAX has more S. America departures during the day than at night?

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 112):
The 200 miles is nothing. Having flown to GRU many times before. The 200 miles could be equated to all of one additional turn around the city.

Once again, 200 miles plus less seats on the plane! Don't just take part of the statement...look at the whole thing.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 112):
If DL wanted to they could operate the 777 and downgrade ATL-TLV to a 767-300.

Now I dont know what you are smoking...but I need some! Because this statement is so ludacris even the hyena is laughing at you!

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2008-09-01 13:17:17 and read 14556 times.



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 96):
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 86):
I do not know any 332 route that operates regularly beyond 13hrs, 15 minutes which is the flying time for LOS-ATL on the 763ER by Delta.

QF now operates an A332 on LAX-AKL, which I believe is a good bit over 13 hours blocktime.

QF 332 block time LAX-AKL is 13:20. They currently seem to be using the 332 three days a week and the 743 four days a week (743 block time 12:40). About an hour less AKL-LAX.

QF also uses the 332 SYD-BOM, block time 12:45. Half an hour less BOM-SYD..

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-01 13:20:54 and read 14540 times.



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 102):
Man, what I would have given to see the 777-251/ER

Or 777-251/LR

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 107):
When was the last time that that happened? Or was that just some idle "galley chat"?

It happened Last Dec. i think but it could have been the year before.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 107):
AM offers the 777-200 on MEX-GRU, there is no additional lift needed from MEX-GRU for SkyTeam.

Not only that but with AS and UA having LAX-MEX DL would have to buy the route off of them due to the bilateral. (2 carriers from the US 2 from Mexico)

Quoting Yellowtail (Reply 111):
More throwing stuff against a wall....I give this one 6 months..obviously they have so much confidence in the route that they are goign to go for it all and 3X a week!

Do you know anything about Brazil routes? All of the frequencies are with carriers. UA has 2 that they do not use. DL is asking for those 2 plus 1 extra(and I think it will have to come from ATL-GRU or ATL-GIG or JFK-GRU) So for DL to go 7x weekly they would have to cut one of the other routes down to 2x weekly. Plus KE already has 3x weekly LAX-GRU flights. SkyTeam (if they get this) will have 6x weekly LAX-GRU (3 KE 3 DL).  Wink

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-09-01 13:23:18 and read 14538 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 113):
It doesn't, and didn't, so I am left to believe it is nothing more than crew timing out, if not a problem specific to the DL 767-300 fleets.

It had nothing to do with the crew timing out because we all kept going after landing in MAN. I guess the fact that the PIC told myself and the rest of the crew prior to leaving TLV that we were going to have to stop in MAN because we were too heavy and could not make it across the atlantic without stopping for more fuel could not actually be the reason...right?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OA412
Posted 2008-09-01 13:25:31 and read 14539 times.



Quoting Yellowtail (Reply 111):

So why exactly aren't you working in network development at DL since you clearly think you know better than the people in charge of such things?  Yeah sure

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: JJ8080
Posted 2008-09-01 13:38:27 and read 14510 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 112):
Playing on words.. DL is opting to operate the 767-300 on LAX-GRU because the route does not have the demand to warrant a 777-200. Fleet availability or not DL does not see the need to operate the 777 on LAX-GRU. If the demand was there DL would operate the LAX-GRU route with a 777, however they dont see the need to and they want to get there hands into the market so they are going to use a fleet type with less seats. If DL wanted to they could operate the 777 and downgrade ATL-TLV to a 767-300.

Incorrect. Even if DL saw the need of operating 772s on LAX-GRU route (either because of capacity or range), they would first consider the revenues and results they manage to get with the 772s on their current routes. They are short of 772s and are not able to be mistaken.

In the future, with the imminent merger, we may see LAX-GRU upgraded to daily service and flown by 772 or even a NW 744 if they manage to do well on Brazil-Asia traffic.


IMO, we can stay here for days discussing about 763s range vs. A332s range, and how short legs does the 763 have to fly LAX-GRU, but, if DL applied for LAX-GRU, scheduling it with 763ER, this is because the range should not be a problem at all.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Evan767
Posted 2008-09-01 14:00:00 and read 14489 times.



Quoting OOer (Reply 117):
It had nothing to do with the crew timing out because we all kept going after landing in MAN. I guess the fact that the PIC told myself and the rest of the crew prior to leaving TLV that we were going to have to stop in MAN because we were too heavy and could not make it across the atlantic without stopping for more fuel could not actually be the reason...right?

OOer, I've talked to the ACS for Delta in Tel Aviv and yes, they do have "weight and balance issues to JFK all the time." The flight is a troublemaker for them. But they take care of everything beforehand to avoid having to divert. That means offloading bags, offloading cargo, not boarding nonrevs, taking off pax as a last resort, etc. The OCC in ATL figures it all out prior to departure. Now, looking on Flightaware, TLV-JFK has diverted to Manchester once since May 1st. And that was the day you just happened to be working the flight, August 18th. Were you looking on flightaware too?

Quoting OA412 (Reply 118):
So why exactly aren't you working in network development at DL since you clearly think you know better than the people in charge of such things?

 checkmark  I hate those that comment, "I give it 6 months, 1 year MAX." It simply reveals they don't know much at all about route planning. Delta has executives in the network planning department that are experienced and well aware of what routes work and what routes fail and for what reason they work and fail. Glen Hauenstein is a veteran in this field and he is a big factor in why Delta's extraordinary network is what it is today.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-09-01 14:05:52 and read 14458 times.



Quoting Evan767 (Reply 120):
Were you looking on flightaware too?

No, I was working that flight!

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Yellowtail
Posted 2008-09-01 14:17:37 and read 14430 times.



Quoting OA412 (Reply 118):
So why exactly aren't you working in network development at DL since you clearly think you know better than the people in charge of such things?  

Because DL would never think of actually talking to people on the ground at the destination or hiring somebody who actually knows what they are talking about.  Smile You sure you ain't WT in disguise Big grin Look..DL tries..but it almost seems like a half hearted try.

Seriously..how many routes has DL tried from JFK and LAX recently and axed....SJO, GUA, PTY et al...my hand is already beginning to hurt  banghead 

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-01 14:50:31 and read 14388 times.



Quoting Yellowtail (Reply 122):
Because DL would never think of actually talking to people on the ground at the destination or hiring somebody who actually knows what they are talking about. You sure you ain't WT in disguise Look..DL tries..but it almost seems like a half hearted try.

Seriously..how many routes has DL tried from JFK and LAX recently and axed....SJO, GUA, PTY et al...my hand is already beginning to hurt

Again Do you know how the Brazil frequencies work? I doesn't matter what DL has or has got at LAX. If DL wanted to make it daily i would guess they would have to try and get UA's seasonal GIG frequencies. Also Glen Hauenstein is one of the best if not the best at his job so I think that he knows just a little more than you do about what routes to cut and what routes to add and keep.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-01 16:58:38 and read 14308 times.



Quoting OOer (Reply 104):
WorldTraveler, instead of arguing back and forth like everyone else on this forum is used to...why dont we agree to disagree and just wait and see what DL does in the next year or so. If after the merger this or some of the other long 767 routes go to the A330 then we will be able to see that DL obviously thinks the Airbus can perform better...if not, well then DL thinks the 767 is adequate for those routes...k?

as soon as you can document that the flight really is frequently diverting due to performance issues, I'll accept it. I don't think it is. And the evidence provided below indicates so.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 107):
The flight is designed for both connections and O/D. If the flight were to depart in time for the NW NRT service

remember there is no assurance the NRT schedule will stay the way it is now... it is also possible that DL could regauge LAX-NRT and add a 2nd frequency- one that is designed for S. American connections and one for beyond NRT connections.

Quoting Yellowtail (Reply 111):
More throwing stuff against a wall....I give this one 6 months..obviously they have so much confidence in the route that they are goign to go for it all and 3X a week!

..what do you say WT....up for a bet?

DL will not drop a GRU flight. It is highly profitable. You do realize that LAX is the top O&D on just about every US-GRU flight by every carrier, don't you? There is more than enough local traffic and even more when you consider the S. America to Asia traffic.

Quoting Evan767 (Reply 120):
Now, looking on Flightaware, TLV-JFK has diverted to Manchester once since May 1st. And that was the day you just happened to be working the flight, August 18th. Were you looking on flightaware too?

yes, that is indeed "frequent" isn't it?

Are we really arguing about frequent diversions when the flight has diverted once in 120 days?

Quoting Yellowtail (Reply 122):
Seriously..how many routes has DL tried from JFK and LAX recently and axed....SJO, GUA, PTY et al...my hand is already beginning to hurt

central America and Mexico are not GRU. Every one of those other markets have ample opportunities for carriers to come and go... not so w/ Brazil.

As I've said before, DL's attention will be shifting towards building LAX. If you feel betrayed from the past, you will see something different in the future.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-01 17:16:34 and read 14259 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 124):
remember there is no assurance the NRT schedule will stay the way it is now... it is also possible that DL could regauge LAX-NRT and add a 2nd frequency- one that is designed for S. American connections and one for beyond NRT connections.

I wouldn't think we will see a 2nd daily flight. Maybe 2-3x weekly (Like SEA is now) but that will be about it. With ANA,JL,AA,UA and DL/NW on the route the LAX-NRT market is very well covered.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-01 18:42:39 and read 14191 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 125):
I wouldn't think we will see a 2nd daily flight. Maybe 2-3x weekly (Like SEA is now) but that will be about it. With ANA,JL,AA,UA and DL/NW on the route the LAX-NRT market is very well covered.

In theory a 800am departure from LAX-NRT would be the first morning flight to NRT from the West Coast. The route could be flown to capture LA area O/D as well as the connecting traffic from Brasil. There also could be the inbound sector from this service flown from NRT with a 1030pm or 11pm departure time to attract the last flight of the day crowd destined for LAX or the Brasil service. There has been a lot of rumors thrown around. However, if you take the A330-200 2x per day on LAX-NRT, combine that with an LAX-GRU service and you have the need for the A330-200 in the LAX market. At current the 744 does the service, but in this instance you could spread the seats over the two flights and not go out on a limb with aircraft that are to big or expand to to may seats in the LAX-NRT market.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 124):

Are we really arguing about frequent diversions when the flight has diverted once in 120 days?

Flight Attendants often seem to have very different twists on words, than those of us on the ground use.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-01 18:49:09 and read 14156 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 126):
There has been a lot of rumors thrown around.

Such as?

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 126):
However, if you take the A330-200 2x per day on LAX-NRT, combine that with an LAX-GRU service and you have the need for the A330-200 in the LAX market. At current the 744 does the service, but in this instance you could spread the seats over the two flights and not go out on a limb with aircraft that are to big or expand to to may seats in the LAX-NRT market.

I guess that if you did a morning and a afternoon flight it would work but like you said it would have to be a A332 maybe (big maybe) 1x 777 1x A332.
Its more of a question of slots though. Do you want to use 2 slots on it or keep it a 744 and open up something new like BOS 787 or JFK 777/787?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-01 19:07:54 and read 14156 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 127):
Such as?

Take a look and search the forum for the DL/NW route and aircraft speculations

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 127):
I guess that if you did a morning and a afternoon flight it would work but like you said it would have to be a A332 maybe (big maybe) 1x 777 1x A332.
Its more of a question of slots though. Do you want to use 2 slots on it or keep it a 744 and open up something new like BOS 787 or JFK 777/787?

Again, only a rumor, the current NW gateways will more than likely be modified in frequency DTW and MSP could both lose a NRT service. In that instance JFK could gain (re-gain) nonstop service to NRT, and LAX could gain a second NRT service. Also the 2nd HNL-NRT may end up getting axed in favor of ATL-NRT #2.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Ocracoke
Posted 2008-09-01 19:56:13 and read 14084 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 86):
what manufacturers quote and what actually happens in real life are two very different things.
I do not know any 332 route that operates regularly beyond 13hrs, 15 minutes which is the flying time for LOS-ATL on the 763ER by Delta.

I don't know where you get the idea that TLV-JFK "regularly" stops in MAN but it doesn't.

You also can't demonstrate that the 332 would not have the same problem out of AMM as DL is having. DL is departing from a 2000 + ft airport in the summer at 95 degrees plus F - the 332 can't make the flight nonstop either. Check the Airbus and Boeing performance charts if you disagree.

This one made me chuckle. Did you actually mean to type this?  scratchchin 

Soooooo, I disagree with you, and look up the Airbus performance charts. But I can't trust that either, because whatever Airbus quotes in their performance charts is a totally different thing than what happens in real life anyways.  confused  Thus, I can't trust what the manufacturer's quote, but if I disagree, I have to look at their performance charts. But whatever they say there I can't trust, because it's different from what really happens in real life. But if I disagree that it's different, I have to look at their performance charts, but I can't trust that because......

And around and around and around we go on the merry-go-round!  crazy 

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cws818
Posted 2008-09-01 20:16:36 and read 14059 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 124):
As I've said before, DL's attention will be shifting towards building LAX. If you feel betrayed from the past, you will see something different in the future.

"Will be shifting towards building LAX"???? They made such a shift in the past year or so, and with smashing success.
Southern California frequent fliers don't feel particularly "betrayed" by, or "from the past" - The LA market is quite different from an Iowa cornfield (you know, the one in "Field of Dreams") - "build it and they will come" doesn't necessarily ring true here. The consequence of DL's Southern California maneuvering during the past decade or so is that they are not the carrier that comes first to mind when making travel plans - AA, UA, WN and (to a certain extent) AS do, as do many of the overseas carriers.
DL has a great terminal @ LAX, probably the nicest terminal, even, but their market presence to/from that terminal and in the LA market is not exactly noteworthy.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cws818
Posted 2008-09-01 20:17:45 and read 14053 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 125):
I wouldn't think we will see a 2nd daily flight. Maybe 2-3x weekly (Like SEA is now) but that will be about it. With ANA,JL,AA,UA and DL/NW on the route the LAX-NRT market is very well covered.

Indeed, all that plus SQ!

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Transpac787
Posted 2008-09-01 20:25:20 and read 14047 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 116):
Or 777-251/LR

Would have been nice, no doubt. While totally irrelevant at this point, NW doesn't have much need for a 772LR, unless they wanted something like DTW-HKG nonstop, and even then a 788 could do it.

Quoting Evan767 (Reply 120):
That means offloading bags, offloading cargo, not boarding nonrevs, taking off pax as a last resort, etc.

Unless I'm mistaking, official DL policy is to offload pax before bags. Afterall, what's the point of traveling if all your stuff isn't able to go along with you??

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 128):
Again, only a rumor, the current NW gateways will more than likely be modified in frequency DTW and MSP could both lose a NRT service.

This sounds more like your personal hopes and dreams for route restructuring, rather than any logical or sensical argument.

DTW is currently the only 744 pilot base. The 2x DTW-NRT flights are required for crew positioning purposes, for all of the NRT-south flights. To have 1x DTW-NRT would "strand" 744 cockpit crews over in NRT for weeks.

And since a NRT 744 pilot base is out of the question, you will see 2x DTW-NRT for quite some time, even into the initial merged NW/DL. Unless a second 744 pilot base is opened (eg ATL with a 744 operating ATL-NRT), 2x DTW-NRT will stay just as it is now.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 128):
Also the 2nd HNL-NRT may end up getting axed in favor of ATL-NRT #2.

Again, this seems to be a personal dream of yours, rather than a factually-based observation.

The NRT-HNL flights (3x daily, during peak season), are from approx 830p to 900p. Much later than a desirable NRT-US mainland flight time. These NRT time slots cannot simply transfer to any time you want, and that time is in the range of 200pm to 500pm local for all NRT-US flights. So, those HNL slots are really only good for "south" routes out of NRT. SIN, BKK, MNL, etc.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LACA773
Posted 2008-09-01 20:37:59 and read 14006 times.



Quoting OOer (Reply 114):


Are you telling me that LAX has more S. America departures during the day than at night?

Basically that's the case. Actually, LA operates both LIM and SCL nonstops in the afternoon, AV leaves in the evening to BOG as well as KE 3x weekly to GRU so it's half and half.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Evan767
Posted 2008-09-01 20:40:59 and read 14011 times.



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 132):
Unless I'm mistaking, official DL policy is to offload pax before bags. Afterall, what's the point of traveling if all your stuff isn't able to go along with you??

When I was talking to the DL employees in AMM, they were telling me directly that they were taking off "bags". I believe him. It's my understanding that if the bags don't go on your flight they'll be rerouted through somewhere else. Say you're flying AMM-LAX via JFK and there are weight and balance issues. They might reroute the bags AMM-TLV-ATL-LAX or AMM-CDG-LAX or AMM-DXB-LAX or just go on the flight the next day if it's operating and has light loads. Afteralll, what's the point of having your bags go on without you if you aren't traveling? The same thing will happen the next day. So get the pax to their destinations and have their bags come a day (or less if youre lucky) later.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Alitalia744
Posted 2008-09-01 20:56:18 and read 13977 times.



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 132):
This sounds more like your personal hopes and dreams for route restructuring, rather than any logical or sensical argument.

No, not a pipe dream. There will be shifts.

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 132):
DTW is currently the only 744 pilot base. The 2x DTW-NRT flights are required for crew positioning purposes, for all of the NRT-south flights. To have 1x DTW-NRT would "strand" 744 cockpit crews over in NRT for weeks.

One doesn't need to have a pilot base to have aircraft operate out of an airport. JFK had 777s for a lil'while and there definitely was no 777 base at JFK.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-01 21:18:46 and read 13934 times.



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 132):
Would have been nice, no doubt. While totally irrelevant at this point, NW doesn't have much need for a 772LR, unless they wanted something like DTW-HKG nonstop, and even then a 788 could do it.

I was thinking something like DTW-HKG,PEK,DXB,PVG,DEL,BOM,TLV and ICN.

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 132):
DTW is currently the only 744 pilot base. The 2x DTW-NRT flights are required for crew positioning purposes, for all of the NRT-south flights. To have 1x DTW-NRT would "strand" 744 cockpit crews over in NRT for weeks.

MSP doesn't have a 744 base? Don't they have some type of 747 base though? 742? Anyways as soon as ATL can get a 744 base it will likely be opened. ATL-NRT,GRU,LHR,FCO,CDG could all use 744s.

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 132):
The NRT-HNL flights (3x daily, during peak season), are from approx 830p to 900p. Much later than a desirable NRT-US mainland flight time. These NRT time slots cannot simply transfer to any time you want, and that time is in the range of 200pm to 500pm local for all NRT-US flights. So, those HNL slots are really only good for "south" routes out of NRT. SIN, BKK, MNL, etc.

One would think that they could somehow re-work NRT to make 2x daily ATL/LAX-NRT and 1x daily JFK-NRT work. My guess is MSP and HNL would lose 1 daily NRT flight to make it happen.

Quoting Alitalia744 (Reply 135):
JFK had 777s for a lil'while and there definitely was no 777 base at JFK.

Bad thing is now JFK has a 777 base and no 777s

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Pellegrine
Posted 2008-09-01 22:20:33 and read 13870 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 100):
no they don't and there is no evidence that it does.

The 332 is LARGER but it is not more CAPABLE than the 763ER. And remember the 763ER is getting winglets in a couple months which will improve its performance even further.

The A330-200 at 233 tonne MTOW has 800 nm more range than the 767-300ER at 196.9 tonne (412,000 lb) MTOW. This is not hard to find information.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-01 22:21:03 and read 13879 times.



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 132):
This sounds more like your personal hopes and dreams for route restructuring, rather than any logical or sensical argument.

DTW is currently the only 744 pilot base. The 2x DTW-NRT flights are required for crew positioning purposes, for all of the NRT-south flights. To have 1x DTW-NRT would "strand" 744 cockpit crews over in NRT for weeks.

There is a merger and it involves DL swallowing NW. This NW will remain NW under DL is getting both dillusional and tiresome. It amazes me to see the amount of wishful thinking in this forum that NW crews will be the only ones trained for the 744, and DTW and MSP will be the only bases with NW movements. Reality a year from now will deal a very different hand. As has been discussed time and time again the only 744 sims are not in DTW and they can be placed in ATL at HQ as well. In addition there is a lot of talk, see previous threads, and so forth that explain routings such as MSP-NRT-ATL-NRT-MSP, and DTW-NRT-LAX-NRT-LAX and so forth. So dont think for a minute the 744 fleet will remain solely on NW routes, or solely in the operational hands of NW employees.

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 132):
Again, this seems to be a personal dream of yours, rather than a factually-based observation.

The NRT-HNL flights (3x daily, during peak season), are from approx 830p to 900p. Much later than a desirable NRT-US mainland flight time. These NRT time slots cannot simply transfer to any time you want, and that time is in the range of 200pm to 500pm local for all NRT-US flights. So, those HNL slots are really only good for "south" routes out of NRT. SIN, BKK, MNL, etc.

Not a pipe dream ask business after business in HNL and they will show the Asian traffic shift from the Japanese to Chinese market. More so the HNL slots as have been discussed may very well be put to better use to operate LAX#2 and ATL#2. It is much to premature to say that it wouldn't happen. This a merger, not a walk in the park. DL wanted NW for the Asian market. That is of no secret. DL also wanted the additional fleet types and got it for a song.

To make a comment such as the above in refernce to how desirable a routing timing maybe is both false and not forward thinking. DL wants to be the business persons airline to Asia. In that offering the first out and last out service from LAX-NRT or v.v. is a dynamic and profitable advantage. Trying to say that HNL slots cannot be used to an advantage for additional ATL or LAX lift is lost in all reality. Also remember, not all NRT traffic on NW is connecting as you would otherwise elude to above. DL will be changing a lot of things, get ready, this is no tea dance.

As it was so well said in another thread the NW 744 F/A better stear their beverage cart in the direction of ATL as they will be heading their soon.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 136):
I was thinking something like DTW-HKG,PEK,DXB,PVG,DEL,BOM,TLV and ICN

ATL will see HKG, and DEL long before DTW.

DTW will more than likely never see TLV, DXB, DEL, or BOM service on DL.

ICN will more than likely be flown from DTW within the next few years.

PEK, PVG are becoming over-crowded markets from the USA. In all honesty I can see LAX-PEK, PVG being more viable long-term for the new DL than DTW.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-01 22:33:53 and read 13866 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 136):

MSP doesn't have a 744 base? Don't they have some type of 747 base though? 742? Anyways as soon as ATL can get a 744 base it will likely be opened. ATL-NRT,GRU,LHR,FCO,CDG could all use 744s.

From the DL side of things as has been discussed before the following routings for the 747-400:

ATL-CDG (2 services combined into 1)
ATL-FCO (Seasonal)
ATL-GRU
ATL-LAX
ATL-LHR
ATL-NRT

JFK-FCO (Seasonal)
JFK-LHR (2 services combined into 1)

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Transpac787
Posted 2008-09-01 22:56:34 and read 13837 times.

Quoting Evan767 (Reply 134):
It's my understanding that if the bags don't go on your flight they'll be rerouted through somewhere else.

It's definitely possible, I'd just think something like that would be a colossal pain in the ass for both DL and the pax. Especially with international PPBM restrictions, something like that might cause more trouble than it's worth.

Quoting Alitalia744 (Reply 135):
JFK had 777s for a lil'while and there definitely was no 777 base at JFK.

No, there definitely IS a 777 base at JFK. A single flight, JFK-BOM, and at least for the cockpit crews, JFK 777 base is VERY junior. At least *was*, as the BOM flight is being moved to ATL

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 136):
MSP doesn't have a 744 base?

Nah... MSP has a temporary 742 base as well as an A330 base. Some trips do begin and terminate in MSP, but there are deadheads to/from DTW for those trips.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 136):
Don't they have some type of 747 base though?

MSP used to have quite a large 742 base, along with SEA and HNL (ANC is still around). All three of those bases are long gone though.... well, again save for the temp. base for the 742 charter flights.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 136):
My guess is MSP and HNL would lose 1 daily NRT flight to make it happen.

HNL could make sense, but MSP is only 1x daily as is, except for a Saturday-only service of NW3/NW14, which is the 2nd daily NRT

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 136):
Bad thing is now JFK has a 777 base and no 777s

Funny how those things work out, haha.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 138):
It amazes me to see the amount of wishful thinking in this forum that NW crews will be the only ones trained for the 744, and DTW and MSP will be the only bases with NW movements.

Wishful thinking??

Did you read ANYTHING I said?? I am not wishing that NW 744's remain piloted and flown to NW-only stations. What I'm trying to tell you, it's logistically impossible to cut the 2nd DTW-NRT given CURRENT FLIGHT SCHEDULES. Of course there will be shifts, no one is denying that.

But, for you to so brazenly declare that the 2nd DTW-NRT will be immediately cut is infinitely short-sighted, ridiculous, and without any basis of support.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 138):
such as MSP-NRT-ATL-NRT-MSP, and DTW-NRT-LAX-NRT-LAX and so forth.

Completely impossible routings.

MSP-NRT-ATL would require (with ground service time) approximately 28 hours per day of aircraft utilization - same for ATL-NRT-MSP.

Out of what abyss did you pull those ideas for routings??

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 138):
More so the HNL slots as have been discussed may very well be put to better use to operate LAX#2 and ATL#2.

As I said, it CAN'T WORK unless you want a 400pm arrival into LAX or a 700pm arrival into ATL, which would translate into about a 600pm departure from LAX leading to a near 900pm arrival in NRT.

It simply wouldn't work. I am not suggesting these NRT slots can't be shifted because it's "anti-NW" as you are hellbent on believing I'm suggesting. I'm saying the slots can't be shifted because the flight times would be of NO benefit for a 2nd LAX or a 2nd ATL flight.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 138):
DL wanted NW for the Asian market. That is of no secret.

I'm glad you told me.

The fact still remains, the way you suggest DL/NW use their NRT slots, with all of your proposed shifts, would be an absolute cluster. Not totally impossible, just totally ridiculous.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 138):
Trying to say that HNL slots cannot be used to an advantage for additional ATL or LAX lift is lost in all reality.

Have you lost your mind?? I'm not saying it can't be done. It CAN be done, but if it WERE done you'd have the most bizarrely timed flights imagineable. A late-evening arrival in LAX and a late-night departure from LAX to NRT, with an even later arrival into NRT, missing all connections beyond NRT.

What possible benefit do you see in that??

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 138):
this is no tea dance.

Like to use extinct figures of speech, much??

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 139):
From the DL side of things as has been discussed before the following routings for the 747-400:

Again, out of what abyss did you pull those routes??

Your own personal hopes and dreams for 747-400 utilization?? Do you offer ANYTHING beyond other thread discussions to back yourself up??

[Edited 2008-09-01 22:58:21]

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-02 00:45:21 and read 13794 times.



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 140):
But, for you to so brazenly declare that the 2nd DTW-NRT will be immediately cut is infinitely short-sighted, ridiculous, and without any basis of support

Who said immediately, it wasn't me. It has been discussed in other topics, do a search, there are plenty to chose from. The importance of DTW and MSP in the merged airline will be sharing the much larger company of the incumbent hubs that are much more O/D and revenue driven including ATL and JFK. To think that the DTW-NRT route requires 2x 744 per day in a merged airline with the Worlds largest hub at ATL would be both lost on reality and short-sided.

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 140):
Completely impossible routings.

MSP-NRT-ATL would require (with ground service time) approximately 28 hours per day of aircraft utilization - same for ATL-NRT-MSP.

Out of what abyss did you pull those ideas for routings??

The same abyss that says that there is not 28 hours in a day, and the very same abyss that calls such routings - Aircraft Utilization. To think that DTW-NRT will be a 744 and ATL-NRT will be a smaller aircraft is lopsided, and unfeasible. ATL fills seats to 3x as many markets as DTW. The 744 is put to much, much better use in ATL than it is in DTW. Dont be to surprised to see the DTW-NRT route slashed to 1x per day in the coming years. It is bound to happen, and believe you me that all of this is being looked at as we speak. The boys down in ATL are doing their homework and they are doing it in overtime. Every single route from MSP and DTW that can erode yields from ATL is being looked at. Every single widebody route from MSP and DTW that can be downgraded or rationalized with less frequency is being looked at. What worked for NW is not what works for DL.

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 140):
As I said, it CAN'T WORK unless you want a 400pm arrival into LAX or a 700pm arrival into ATL, which would translate into about a 600pm departure from LAX leading to a near 900pm arrival in NRT.

Not sure why 400pm arriving into LAX is a problem as it would serve a number of domestic US connections, as well as feed off of the evening departure from LAX-GRU, not to mention the enormous wealth of O/D in the Los Angeles market. In reference to the 700pm arrival time in ATL that would work absolute wonders for DL as they have a major Latin Am and South Am push from 800pm-1000pm. Again both late arrivals into LAX and ATL would be a great advantage. The only disadvantage is for the other airlines that have near identical flights times from NRT-LAX.

On the Japanese side of things a late evening arrival from ATL and LAX would do wonders for the O/D travellers, and transfer passengers from LAX and ATL that are using NRT as theur final destination. Why is the A.net mentality that 50 connections is needed to make a route work continuing to show up. If by your argument no airline should arrive in any market to late to make connections.

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 140):
The fact still remains, the way you suggest DL/NW use their NRT slots, with all of your proposed shifts, would be an absolute cluster. Not totally impossible, just totally ridiculous.

What is ridiculous about rationalizing routes and frequencies to maximizer profit. There is way to much NW centric thinking in this thread, and way to little forward thinking DL thinking in this thread. Do you honestly think that NRT-HNL can claim a higher yield than a NRT-ATL-GRU, NRT-ATL-EZE, NRT-ATL-SCL, NRT-ATL-LIM, NRT-LAX-GRU, NRT-LAX-MEX, NRT-LAX-JFK routing? Honestly, I mean that in all seriousness. Why would an airline in the middle of one of the worst fuel cost surges want to use up to 3 744 on a beach market that at best is struggling to be profitable?

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 140):
Have you lost your mind?? I'm not saying it can't be done. It CAN be done, but if it WERE done you'd have the most bizarrely timed flights imagineable. A late-evening arrival in LAX and a late-night departure from LAX to NRT, with an even later arrival into NRT, missing all connections beyond NRT

Again, please see above. It is and has been spelled out clearly and in volumes LAX-NRT is a heavy O/D route. In addition many, many business people from LAX and ATL markets that have connected via either market terminate their journeys in Narita. Adding to that GRU-LAX-NRT, GRU-ATL-NRT and so forth have NRT as a terminating market, as it is the final destination. I dont think there is a ton of people flying daily from GRU to BKK, or GRU to MNL.

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 140):
Like to use extinct figures of speech, much??

Extinct? .. No, only educated  Wink

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 140):
Your own personal hopes and dreams for 747-400 utilization?? Do you offer ANYTHING beyond other thread discussions to back yourself up??

Do a search it is not the first time and it will not be the last time that list is discussed, and not only by myself. I cannot help but think you are bitter that DL is taking over NW. I am sorry, it happens, just as DL took over the PA TATL routes from JFK. It happens, we have to just move on with it. To listen to all of the excuses thrown into this topic about how stupid you perceive me and others and what routes that will be augmented in the merger is almost laughable. I am not going to sit here and play a game of make believe. I am here just as quality posters such as Alitalia744 and others are to discuss a DL route. I am not hear to try and eat away at DL. Nor am I hear to sit back and let people make false claims such as DL moving the NW 744's onto DL routes are a bad idea. I am hear to discuss what I want to discuss, and what we who understand DL are hear to discuss. If you are so offended by the moves of DL into the NW network, start a thread and vent there. The personal prods and what not you are throwing around in this topic to myself and to others on the DL side of things is both uncalled for and has no space in this forum.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Bobnwa
Posted 2008-09-02 03:30:00 and read 13755 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 136):
MSP doesn't have a 744 base? Don't they have some type of 747 base though? 742? Anyways as soon as ATL can get a 744 base it will likely be opened. ATL-NRT,GRU,LHR,FCO,CDG could all use 744s.

Again let me point out that it is not necessary to have a pilot base for the 744 to be able to have 744 flights. Crews deadhead all the time, and will continue to.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-02 07:04:37 and read 13654 times.

With DL's success of all their LAX-Latin America additions (ie zero) this should be a real winner. I'm beginning to think DL has something against KE.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MasseyBrown
Posted 2008-09-02 07:08:48 and read 13640 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 138):
DTW will more than likely never see TLV, DXB, DEL, or BOM service on DL.

It's not hard to see DTW, where DL will have little competition, losing eastbound flow traffic to JFK.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Incitatus
Posted 2008-09-02 07:11:13 and read 13636 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 124):
As I've said before, DL's attention will be shifting towards building LAX.

Haven't we heard this before?

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 100):
they will work together, not compete. KE operates 4X/week. DL is asking for 3X/week.

I am unsure as to whether the concept of Delta and Korean not competing on LAX-GRU is legal in Brazil. Have you checked on this? I am shooting an email to Solange at ANAC and asking her. Do you mind if I quote you?

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 21):
Part of DL's point in this whole exercise is to ensure that AA does not use frequency stripping to add frequencies to the Brazil route case in which DL was clearly awarded the majority of the frequencies.

Maybe Delta will be able to make this route work, maybe not. But let me see if I get this right: DL is announcing GRU-LAX to "make a point"? I thought the whole idea of a company was to make money. I don't believe DL would add to its services something that will cost ~ 40 million USD / year just to make a point.

Delta's plans in Brazil have been incredibly fickle. Over the span of 6 weeks, DL changed its plans for the new US-Brazil frequencies twice - publicly - who knows how many times internally. Asia-Brazil through LAX faces a host of competitors - US hubs, CDG, FRA, AMS, ZRH, JNB and now Dubai. LAX-Brazil nonstop faces competition from US hubs, Air Canada and price leaders like Copa and Aeromexico. Then LAX faces competition from several airports across the Basin. Tough.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2008-09-02 07:13:23 and read 13639 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 128):
Again, only a rumor, the current NW gateways will more than likely be modified in frequency DTW and MSP could both lose a NRT service.

Sounds more like you making s**t up. DTW and MSP arent going to lose NRT service.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 141):
Who said immediately, it wasn't me. It has been discussed in other topics, do a search, there are plenty to chose from. The importance of DTW and MSP in the merged airline will be sharing the much larger company of the incumbent hubs that are much more O/D and revenue driven including ATL and JFK. To think that the DTW-NRT route requires 2x 744 per day in a merged airline with the Worlds largest hub at ATL would be both lost on reality and short-sided.

I dont think they will look at it that way. They are going to want to use each hub to if potential. If a flight preforms better at DTW than ATL, that would be something to consider. It doesnt matter if ATL is DL's hub and DTW is NW's hub. They arent going to shut everything down at MSP and DTW and move it. That makes no sense. The idea of this merger isnt to make ATL larger. Its big enough as it is. Its to grow DL's network and route map. The point would be completely moot if they just shift everthing to ATL. ATL-NRT will probably be upgraded to a 744, but if both DTW-NRT flights go out full and make money, why change that? I havent looked at numbers for profitablilty for the DTW-NRT, but I have for ATL-NRT. It does well, I wouldnt be surprised if DTW-NRT was actually a better preformer.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-02 07:23:43 and read 13611 times.



Quoting Incitatus (Reply 145):
Delta's plans in Brazil have been incredibly fickle. Over the span of 6 weeks, DL changed its plans for the new US-Brazil frequencies twice - publicly - who knows how many times internally.

 checkmark   checkmark  They seem to be throwing darts at this point.

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 145):
Asia-Brazil through LAX faces a host of competitors - US hubs, CDG, FRA, AMS, ZRH, JNB and now Dubai. LAX-Brazil nonstop faces competition from US hubs, Air Canada and price leaders like Copa and Aeromexico. Then LAX faces competition from several airports across the Basin. Tough.

And the local market is thin on business, thick on VFR

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Yellowtail
Posted 2008-09-02 07:56:05 and read 13574 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 143):
With DL's success of all their LAX-Latin America additions (ie zero) this should be a real winner. I'm beginning to think DL has something against KE.

I got flamed earlier for suggesting that this route would no work. Welcome to my club!

We are on record....We will see if WT, DLL1011 etc have to eat their thread comments in a few months......

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: SlcDeltaRUmd11
Posted 2008-09-02 08:37:20 and read 13541 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 143):
With DL's success of all their LAX-Latin America additions (ie zero) this should be a real winner

Delta has been having some really bad times at LAX, this seems like a very risky route. I guess the only thing that could make this work is if it is complimentary to korean air. I wouldnt book it too far out if deltas latest LAX expansionS are any prediction for this flight.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-02 08:44:47 and read 13529 times.



Quoting SlcDeltaRUmd11 (Reply 149):
I guess the only thing that could make this work is if it is complimentary to korean air

The other problem is they're down 40% in terms of domestic seats out of LAX, so the only reasonable connections on DL metal going forward will be Hawaii and SLC. Yikes.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-09-02 08:47:54 and read 13589 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 150):
The other problem is they're down 40% in terms of domestic seats out of LAX, so the only reasonable connections on DL metal going forward will be Hawaii and SLC. Yikes.

I have no idea how adequately-served the LAX-Brazil market is now, but it's certainly possible for a route to survive on local traffic alone. I'm not saying it will or won't happen here, but you have to figure that DL is aware of the lack of connecting possibilities.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2008-09-02 08:54:51 and read 13591 times.



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 151):
I have no idea how adequately-served the LAX-Brazil market is now, but it's certainly possible for a route to survive on local traffic alone. I'm not saying it will or won't happen here, but you have to figure that DL is aware of the lack of connecting possibilities.

Historically LAX-GRU has been pretty low yielding except when its a through flight to Asia. DL does have an uphill battle and I personally think this flight wont last long if it starts at all. Their only hope is to perfectly time the flight for Asia connections.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-09-02 08:54:51 and read 13564 times.

This flight could also bring in some connections on AS from the pacific northwest and Alaska...correct? Also...gives people from the mountain states another option...go thru ATL or LAX??? There is potential on this route. Everyone flames DL for starting service and then terminating it if it does not make money, DL has tried more routes than any other carrier as of late...some will work, and some wont!

[Edited 2008-09-02 09:06:13]

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Yellowtail
Posted 2008-09-02 09:06:35 and read 13544 times.



Quoting OOer (Reply 153):
some wont!

......most don't
 Big grin

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OA412
Posted 2008-09-02 09:30:41 and read 13487 times.

Quoting Yellowtail (Reply 148):
I got flamed earlier for suggesting that this route would no work. Welcome to my club!

This would be why:

Quoting Yellowtail (Reply 154):
......most don't
 

Care to back that statement up with any facts? No matter what route DL annouces in Central/South America, your knee-jerk reaction is to say "I give it 6 months" then you act surprised when you get flamed.

[Edited 2008-09-02 09:32:58]

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Papatango
Posted 2008-09-02 12:02:59 and read 13358 times.

Folks, the bottom line is come 2009 Delta will control all the aircraft and will fly them wherever they think they can make the most profit.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Yellowtail
Posted 2008-09-02 12:36:40 and read 13323 times.



Quoting OA412 (Reply 156):
No matter what route DL annouces in Central/South America, your knee-jerk reaction is to say "I give it 6 months"

I have only said 6 months...ONCE..this time...previous to that on the JFK-CentAm routes I said one year..I was just about right....previous to that (after DL started the routes) I said I give LAX-Lat Am routes 8 months before a drawdown...I was off by one month,.

So whose predictions are more accurate.

Time will tell my friend.....LAX ain't a glory hole.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-09-02 12:47:52 and read 13303 times.



Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 152):
Historically LAX-GRU has been pretty low yielding except when its a through flight to Asia. DL does have an uphill battle and I personally think this flight wont last long if it starts at all.

What do you know that the folks at ATL don't? Or are you arguing that they're either delusional or starting the route with no intention of it succeeding?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Yellowtail
Posted 2008-09-02 12:50:20 and read 13290 times.



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 159):
delusional

Probably delusional....similar to US
 Big grin

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Transpac787
Posted 2008-09-02 13:03:57 and read 13256 times.

Here's a thought...

While the 787's are significantly delayed (goddamnit Boeing....) when those eventually make it to the fleet, what is the probability that they will operate these routes?? The routes too small for a 777, but seemingly too far for a decent payload on a 763 or 332?? The 787 would be the perfect plane for almost all of them!!

LAX-GRU
JFK-TLV
JFK-AMM
ATL-LOS

All of those. 787 easily has the range, and would be nearly the perfect-sized plane for the markets.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: United1
Posted 2008-09-02 13:10:45 and read 13238 times.



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 162):
when those eventually make it to the fleet, what is the probability that they will operate these routes??

Probably a virtual certainty...

The additional passengers in Y due to the new seats DL is installing is going to at the very least going to cancel out any performance gain by the winglets. All of those routes are right about at the point where the 787 was designed to operate, the edge of the 767 operational envelope and beyond.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-02 14:11:08 and read 13156 times.



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 140):
No, there definitely IS a 777 base at JFK. A single flight, JFK-BOM, and at least for the cockpit crews, JFK 777 base is VERY junior. At least *was*, as the BOM flight is being moved to ATL

The 777 base hasn't been open but about a half of a year. AFAIK the first few weeks of the 77L on JFK-BOM was with Atlanta crews.

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 140):
HNL could make sense, but MSP is only 1x daily as is, except for a Saturday-only service of NW3/NW14, which is the 2nd daily NRT

Oh. Though MSP-NRT was 2x daily.

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 142):
Again let me point out that it is not necessary to have a pilot base for the 744 to be able to have 744 flights. Crews deadhead all the time, and will continue to.

Never said it was. I just asked if MSP had a 744 base.  Wink re-read my post if you need to.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 143):
With DL's success of all their LAX-Latin America additions (ie zero) this should be a real winner. I'm beginning to think DL has something against KE.

Well seeing as DL will be on differnt days as the KE flight that makes very little since.

Quoting Yellowtail (Reply 148):
We are on record....We will see if WT, DLL1011 etc have to eat their thread comments in a few months......

I would like to go on record and say I don't even think Delta will get the 2 flights.  Wink
I think AA will get them.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-02 14:21:24 and read 13152 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 165):
Well seeing as DL will be on differnt days as the KE flight that makes very little since.

Where does it say that? KE operates a turn while DL is proposing a long sit in GRU so I'm not sure how you can line up the flights that easily.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LipeGIG
Posted 2008-09-02 18:02:28 and read 12979 times.

Seems to be a move to fight with AA to get 1 of the 2 unused frequencies from UA. In the end, AA will get 1 and DL the other 1.

In my opinion, DL would do better doing a JFK-GIG (as they can extend the JFK-GRU 6x weekly) but probably they are considering to apply for a New York-Rio flight next year (when 14 frequencies will be available and may include GIG)

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 105):
LAX-GRU
2100-1525+1

GRU-LAX
2255-0600+1

Interesting schedule for LAX and California, terrible for any connection including in Brazil.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-02 18:41:58 and read 12928 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 166):

DL is asking for 3x weekly and KE has 3x weekly I just don't think that DL is that dumb to try to fly the route on the days KE does.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cws818
Posted 2008-09-02 22:59:42 and read 12804 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 141):
ont be to surprised to see the DTW-NRT route slashed to 1x per day in the coming years. It is bound to happen, and believe you me that all of this is being looked at as we speak. The boys down in ATL are doing their homework and they are doing it in overtime. Every single route from MSP and DTW that can erode yields from ATL is being looked at. Every single widebody route from MSP and DTW that can be downgraded or rationalized with less frequency is being looked at. What worked for NW is not what works for DL.

A few comments:

- The "boys," men and women "down in ATL" should indeed be doing their homework, within the confines of the antitrust laws and merger control regulations;
- Sure it is possible that the TPAC routes from MSP/DTW have the potential of eroding yields from DL's ATL-NRT route. It is also quite possible, however, that many routings via MSP/DTW make a great deal more sense than routings via ATL do - e.g. SWF, BDL, PVD, BOS, PWM, etc...
The merger should be about offering MORE opportunities in those markets; it should NOT be viewed as a zero-sum game between NW's hubs and DL's ATL cornucopia;
- As for "What worked for NW is not what works for DL": if the "boys down in ATL" are really doing their homework, then they should realize that what works for NW might just also work for the merged entity! Moving frequencies from MSP/DTW to ATL shouldn't be the rationale for this transaction - DL is more than capable of building ATL on its own, without route transfers; in fact, it has done so.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: HALFA
Posted 2008-09-02 23:33:18 and read 12774 times.



Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 167):
Interesting schedule for LAX and California, terrible for any connection including in Brazil.

Hi Felipe,

Are there not many domestic flights departing with GOL or TAM from GRU in the 1630-1830 hour? I would think an arrival time into GRU at 1525 would be ok?

As far as arrival in LAX, it will be great and much better than KE's late night arrival there.

Aloha,
HALFA

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Klkla
Posted 2008-09-03 02:00:18 and read 12720 times.



Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 164):
Seems to be a move to fight with AA to get 1 of the 2 unused frequencies from UA. In the end, AA will get 1 and DL the other 1.

In my opinion, DL would do better doing a JFK-GIG (as they can extend the JFK-GRU 6x weekly) but probably they are considering to apply for a New York-Rio flight next year (when 14 frequencies will be available and may include GIG)

I agree that this is somewhat of a power play between DL and AA. I would imagine that DL never seriously considered trying to take those two authorities from UA until they saw AA make their move and somewhat brilliantly came up with a counter strategy that I think has a pretty good chance of succeeding.

AA's proposal will only add a couple of frequencies to a market that is already well served. Delta's application would open up a market that is definitely underserved, which I would think should sway the decision in their favor should the frequencies be taken from United.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Bobnwa
Posted 2008-09-03 06:19:28 and read 12680 times.



Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 142):
Anyways as soon as ATL can get a 744 base it will likely be opened. ATL-NRT,GRU,LHR,FCO,CDG could all use 744s.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 162):
Never said it was. I just asked if MSP had a 744 base. re-read my post if you need to.

And I was pointing out that ATL does not need a 747 base for it to have 747 flights, as you keep harping on. Do you understand that concept?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Incitatus
Posted 2008-09-03 06:46:32 and read 12659 times.



Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 164):
In my opinion, DL would do better doing a JFK-GIG (as they can extend the JFK-GRU 6x weekly) but probably they are considering to apply for a New York-Rio flight next year (when 14 frequencies will be available and may include GIG)

Don't you think JJ has a better shot at making GIG-JFK work than Delta? The market now has no nonstop service and that says going straight to two competitors pretty much makes it a money loser. Then JFK is not very well located or convenient for connections. If JJ is able to attract connections to the GIG flight instead of GRU, it should be able to sustain the flight.

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 164):
Interesting schedule for LAX and California, terrible for any connection including in Brazil.

I wonder if Delta has looked at implementation details. Brazil might turn down their GRU schedule, even if it is only two extra weekly flights.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: C010T3
Posted 2008-09-03 07:18:29 and read 12639 times.



Quoting Incitatus (Reply 170):

Don't you think JJ has a better shot at making GIG-JFK work than Delta? The market now has no nonstop service and that says going straight to two competitors pretty much makes it a money loser. Then JFK is not very well located or convenient for connections. If JJ is able to attract connections to the GIG flight instead of GRU, it should be able to sustain the flight.

Apparently, JJ plans to fly GIG-JFK with 763s after all. DL has a superior product on their 763s, so would have the upper hand. Now, DL's performance at GIG could be just as strong as at GRU even with JJ as a competitor. There is space for double daily flights to NYC.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Hardiwv
Posted 2008-09-03 08:39:09 and read 12578 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 21):
KE does not operate daily service. DL is proposing 3X/week. The two could be quite complementary.

If DL gets the 3 weekly frequencies both DL and KE would operate 6 weekly flights. The problem is that KE operates GRU-LAX daylight while DL proposed schedule is red-eye.

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 164):
Interesting schedule for LAX and California, terrible for any connection including in Brazil.

The focus will be on O&D LAX-GRU.

Quoting C010T3 (Reply 171):
Apparently, JJ plans to fly GIG-JFK with 763s after all. DL has a superior product on their 763s, so would have the upper hand.

What a comparison...two sub-standard products. Difficult to know which one is worst! I still think that because of onboard service TAM would be superior to DL's Jurassic B763.

Rgs,

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LipeGIG
Posted 2008-09-03 09:05:36 and read 12553 times.



Quoting HALFA (Reply 167):
Are there not many domestic flights departing with GOL or TAM from GRU in the 1630-1830 hour? I would think an arrival time into GRU at 1525 would be ok?

Hi Halfa !
For places like GIG, SSA and POA yes, you have good connections all day, but not for all places. TAM hub banks are in the early morning and late night.

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 170):
Don't you think JJ has a better shot at making GIG-JFK work than Delta? The market now has no nonstop service and that says going straight to two competitors pretty much makes it a money loser. Then JFK is not very well located or convenient for connections. If JJ is able to attract connections to the GIG flight instead of GRU, it should be able to sustain the flight.

DL has a good base of customers in NYC and the fact of having two competitors on such route it's not bad. Remember there are 5 competitors on SAO-NYC and probably at least 50% of their passengers are connections, including 40% continues on AA flight to GIG, a good portion on CO thru IAH flight as well as TAM. I'm one that uses DL JFK service and looks for Rio.
JFK is now the 2nd largest market for US-Brazil flights and i'm sure there's space for 2 daily GIG-JFK (of course it will generate a reduction on SAO-JFK demand)

Quoting C010T3 (Reply 171):
There is space for double daily flights to NYC.

Agree 100%

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 170):
I wonder if Delta has looked at implementation details. Brazil might turn down their GRU schedule, even if it is only two extra weekly flights

Yes, you're right ! And the night departure slot isn't so easy to get.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Abrelosojos
Posted 2008-09-03 11:22:11 and read 12470 times.

Quoting HALFA (Reply 38):
Join the club! Several of us have argued this point over the years as there are several members here that will continue to try and convince us that yields on LAX-GRU are very low, or worse, are money losing. I will continue to disagree until I see evidence proving otherwise.
I welcome DL's entry to this market, and hope that they will not operate it on the same days as KE, should they be awarded the slot.

= I am one of those, and I continue to maintain that the demand isn't hot for LAX-GRU. At the end of its range, the 76's are super inefficient in today's oil environment ... it was one of the reasons RG was burning money. I do also think that the route has DL throwing darts ... but I do think their 3x announcement is the right way to test the market ... or perhaps, they have been "informed" by their Skyteam partner KE that eventually ICN-LAX-GRU will perhaps be re-routed to ICN-MEX-GRU ....

Saludos,
A.

[Edited 2008-09-03 11:22:38]

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Hardiwv
Posted 2008-09-03 12:00:42 and read 12434 times.



Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 174):
... but I do think their 3x announcement is the right way to test the market ... or perhaps, they have been "informed" by their Skyteam partner KE that eventually ICN-LAX-GRU will perhaps be re-routed to ICN-MEX-GRU ....

No doubt DL read the results of KE and it is no secret that KE is doing very good in GRU-LAX even with one leg daylight. KE has managed to find an interesting market niche by operating GRU-LAX. The problem of DL is that its product is far inferior to KE B772 3-class used in GRU.

Rgs,

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LipeGIG
Posted 2008-09-03 14:20:41 and read 12404 times.



Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 174):
= I am one of those, and I continue to maintain that the demand isn't hot for LAX-GRU. At the end of its range, the 76's are super inefficient in today's oil environment ... it was one of the reasons RG was burning money. I do also think that the route has DL throwing darts ... but I do think their 3x announcement is the right way to test the market

Agree with you and as i mentioned, seems to be more to get the frequency from UA and not let AA to get all of them. My question is that if DL expect to receive only 1 frequency from UA, and what do they do with 2 weekly flights.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-03 15:32:06 and read 12372 times.



Quoting Yellowtail (Reply 148):
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 143):
With DL's success of all their LAX-Latin America additions (ie zero) this should be a real winner. I'm beginning to think DL has something against KE.

I got flamed earlier for suggesting that this route would no work.

KE and DL have transpac ATI. They can't compare notes on routes to Latin America but alliance partners share more than enough other data that DL can put 2 plus 2 together.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 174):
it was one of the reasons RG was burning money.

Wrong. RG was losing money because they started int'l flights on 2-3 months notice and then were surprised that they didn't work. Gol is a good domestic airline but they are in way over their head trying to tell RG how to run and long haul int'l airline.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-03 16:19:37 and read 12318 times.



Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 169):
And I was pointing out that ATL does not need a 747 base for it to have 747 flights, as you keep harping on. Do you understand that concept?

Oh well in that case then your wrong. To fly ATL-GRU,FCO,LHR and CDG they would have to A) start said routes from DTW with a 744 (not likely) or B) open a pilot base. Also when they want to fly them to GRU they will HAVE to open a base due to that lack of DTW-GRU flights and the frequencies to start said flight. Also if they start those routes out of Atlanta then they would need more 744s to have both ATL/DTW-GRU,FCO,LHR and CDG plus most of the routes they have today. The only like 744 routed from DTW is DTW-NRT-ATL-NRT-DTW. If MSP-NRT,HNL-NRT,DTW-KIX,DTW-NGO all lose 744s then they should have close to the number needed for Atlanta opps. (BTW GRU/FCO would be seasonal for the summer/wenter(which means summer in GRU(but winter in Atlanta) and summer in FCO)
Do you understand THAT concept???

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 177):
KE and DL have transpac ATI. They can't compare notes on routes to Latin America but alliance partners share more than enough other data that DL can put 2 plus 2 together.

Even though the route is ICN-GRU with stop in LAX (same flight number) it wouldn't fall under the ATI?

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 172):
Jurassic

Yea because 13 years old as the avg. fleet ages is really that old.  Yeah sure

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 174):
I do also think that the route has DL throwing darts

I don't.....If DL was just wanting more flights into GRU they could have made Atlanta 9x weekly.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: HALFA
Posted 2008-09-03 17:17:33 and read 12260 times.



Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 173):
Hi Halfa !
For places like GIG, SSA and POA yes, you have good connections all day, but not for all places. TAM hub banks are in the early morning and late night.

Thanks for that, I wasn't aware that most of TAM bank flights were early A.M., late P.M.

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 172):
What a comparison...two sub-standard products. Difficult to know which one is worst

Hi Hardi! I am curious to know why you think TAM's product is "sub-standard". Are you only referring to their flights operated with their newly acquired 767's or all flights in general? My flights from the U.S. to Brazil with JJ have been fantastic!

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 174):
I am one of those, and I continue to maintain that the demand isn't hot for LAX-GRU

Yes, I remember you!  Smile
I would love to know how KE's load factors have been since they started. Felipe, do you have the numbers for this?

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 174):
. or perhaps, they have been "informed" by their Skyteam partner KE that eventually ICN-LAX-GRU will perhaps be re-routed to ICN-MEX-GRU ....

I would find this very hard to believe, especially due to the fact that in January of 2009, Korean citizens will fall under the U.S. Visa Waiver Program and will not require visa's to enter the U.S. making this flight much more attractive for Korean's to transit the U.S. on their way to Brazil. If anything, their ICN-LAX-GRU flight will be MORE attractive.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 174):
. At the end of its range, the 76's are super inefficient in today's oil environment ... it was one of the reasons RG was burning money.

I would say that RG's MD-11's were far more of a oil burn/money drain than their 767's were.

Aloha,
HALFA

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-03 17:25:29 and read 12272 times.

no, DL-KE cannot jointly plan their Latin strategies even if the flight originates in Asia.

forgive me if I missed something, but why is it not possible for DL to have a 744 base in ATL? It would have to be flown by former NW pilots but that doesn't mean there can't be a 744 base. The whole point of a joint contract is to remove those barriers.

There will be a 330 base in ATL staffed by NW pilots until there is a joint certificate and there will be 767 pilots based in NW hubs.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-03 17:36:05 and read 12243 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 180):

no, DL-KE cannot jointly plan their Latin strategies even if the flight originates in Asia.

Ok wasn't sure thanks WT.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 180):
forgive me if I missed something, but why is it not possible for DL to have a 744 base in ATL? It would have to be flown by former NW pilots but that doesn't mean there can't be a 744 base. The whole point of a joint contract is to remove those barriers.

Because I said it will happen and if I say it Bob will disagree.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Hardiwv
Posted 2008-09-04 00:19:03 and read 12122 times.



Quoting HALFA (Reply 179):
Hi Hardi! I am curious to know why you think TAM's product is "sub-standard". Are you only referring to their flights operated with their newly acquired 767's or all flights in general?

I was refering to the B767, but even JJ A330s are sub-standard if compared to the product of legacy European carriers operating in Brazil such as AF, BA, LH and KL. There are only 3 TAM aircraft refitted with the new business product.

Quoting HALFA (Reply 179):
I would find this very hard to believe, especially due to the fact that in January of 2009, Korean citizens will fall under the U.S. Visa Waiver Program and will not require visa's to enter the U.S. making this flight much more attractive for Korean's to transit the U.S. on their way to Brazil. If anything, their ICN-LAX-GRU flight will be MORE attractive.

Correct. Brazil is also listed a one of the countries for joining the US Visa Waiver Program but there is no date set for this to be effected yet as some conditions are still to be met.

Rgs,

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: C010T3
Posted 2008-09-04 04:59:53 and read 12083 times.



Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 182):
There are only 3 TAM aircraft refitted with the new business product.

Yes, the famous slides.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Bobnwa
Posted 2008-09-04 05:15:55 and read 12085 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 180):
forgive me if I missed something, but why is it not possible for DL to have a 744 base in ATL? It would have to be flown by former NW pilots but that doesn't mean there can't be a 744 base. The whole point of a joint contract is to remove those barriers.

There will be a 330 base in ATL staffed by NW pilots until there is a joint certificate and there will be 767 pilots based in NW hubs.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 181):
Because I said it will happen and if I say it Bob will disagree.

WT, I inever said the DL will not have a747 or 330 base in Atlanta, I am only trying to point out th the junior member that an airline can have flights out of a city with a particular aircraft without having a crew base there. I pointed out to the junior member that NWA has 330 flights out of BOS,PDX,SFO,MEM etc to AMS and 744 flights without a crew base in any of them. Also I would like to point out that NWA does not fly the 330 or 747 domestically, so there are no widebody flights, 747 or 330 between the departure city and the crew base. The crews either deadhead or arrive on a turnaround the previous day. Again, it is not necessary to have a crew base in a city to have flights out of that city.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Incitatus
Posted 2008-09-04 06:40:17 and read 12028 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 177):
KE and DL have transpac ATI. They can't compare notes on routes to Latin America but alliance partners share more than enough other data that DL can put 2 plus 2 together.

Great to hear you are backtracking from your original statement that Korean and Delta would not compete on GRU-LAX.

Delta's approach to partnership (rely on a partner's data to offer competitive services) reminds me of VARIG and Lufthansa. VARIG added GRU-MUC and got great results. The results were so good that partner Lufthansa "put 2 plus 2 together" and started a competitive service. In the end VARIG had to leave the market because Lufthansa took away most passengers. But..., when and if Delta starts service, that is unlikely to happen in GRU-LAX because Korean's product is so much better.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-04 10:33:08 and read 11952 times.



Quoting Incitatus (Reply 185):
Great to hear you are backtracking from your original statement that Korean and Delta would not compete on GRU-LAX.

I know you really try to argue but there is nothing contradictory. DL and KE cooperate on their entire networks but have ATI only on their transpac services. Because GRU-LAX does not fall under ATI, they cannot discuss strategies but they do exchange a great deal of information such as PNR data showing passenger itineraries.

If DL and KE are competitors to Latin America and not partners, then AA has no partners over the Atlantic at all. Strangely, though, that is what they want.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Abrelosojos
Posted 2008-09-04 10:42:00 and read 11925 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 177):
Wrong. RG was losing money because they started int'l flights on 2-3 months notice and then were surprised that they didn't work.

= Even looking further back in history though, LAX-GRU did not work for RG. I am not talking about the short-lived RG. Also, route announcements do not need to be as prolonged in many countries where distribution channels are not as direct.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 178):
I don't.....If DL was just wanting more flights into GRU they could have made Atlanta 9x weekly.

= Vamos a ver.

Quoting HALFA (Reply 179):
Yes, I remember you! Smile
I would love to know how KE's load factors have been since they started. Felipe, do you have the numbers for this?

= I am glad I am remembered  Smile. Mark my words though - unless KE exits this route (and I think likely), DL will struggle to make this work.

Quoting HALFA (Reply 179):
I would find this very hard to believe, especially due to the fact that in January of 2009, Korean citizens will fall under the U.S. Visa Waiver Program and will not require visa's to enter the U.S. making this flight much more attractive for Korean's to transit the U.S. on their way to Brazil. If anything, their ICN-LAX-GRU flight will be MORE attractive.

= I still think KE will re-route this via MEX. Perhaps I am insane in saying it. Korea is on the shortlist of countries planned to go to visa-waiver, but I don't think it will happen in 2009. Also, the visa-waiver does not take over the fact that you still have to probably clear customs and immigration at LAX.

Quoting HALFA (Reply 179):

I would say that RG's MD-11's were far more of a oil burn/money drain than their 767's were.

= In some ways, irrelevant no? RG M11 operated in different fuel environment than their recent 76 operations.

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 182):
Correct. Brazil is also listed a one of the countries for joining the US Visa Waiver Program but there is no date set for this to be effected yet as some conditions are still to be met.

= Unfortunately, I do not see this happening in the near future. I hope I am proved wrong.

Cheers,
A.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LipeGIG
Posted 2008-09-04 10:48:38 and read 11912 times.



Quoting HALFA (Reply 179):
I would love to know how KE's load factors have been since they started. Felipe, do you have the numbers for this?

Halfa, I'm trying to get an inside info.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 187):
I am glad I am remembered . Mark my words though - unless KE exits this route (and I think likely), DL will struggle to make this work.

Agree 100%

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: HALFA
Posted 2008-09-04 10:57:22 and read 11903 times.



Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 188):
Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 187):
I am glad I am remembered . Mark my words though - unless KE exits this route (and I think likely), DL will struggle to make this work.

Agree 100%

I am curious Felipe, which part of that statement do you agree with? That KE will exit the route, or that DL will struggle if KE doesn't leave? Do you not think that a 6 X per week LAX-GRU-LAX flight will work, or is it the timing of the flights?
I believe the demand is there. There always has been.

HALFA

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-04 11:14:13 and read 11889 times.



Quoting HALFA (Reply 189):
I believe the demand is there

Oh it's there, but it's very low yield. Whereas NYC-Brazil might be 20% premium traffic +/-, LAX-GRU is around 5%, never mind the fact that DL will have no connectivity in LAX other than Hawaii and SLC.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Abrelosojos
Posted 2008-09-04 11:17:57 and read 11891 times.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 190):

Oh it's there, but it's very low yield. Whereas NYC-Brazil might be 20% premium traffic +/-, LAX-GRU is around 5%, never mind the fact that DL will have no connectivity in LAX other than Hawaii and SLC.

= Exactly right ... and why I think LAX-GRU with both DL and KE will not work. The route is sort of like BOS-GRU ... low yielding VFR. Now, the only rationale I can think of for DL filing the route are:

1/ They have confirmed knowledge that KE is going to go ICN-MEX-GRU.
2/ Throwing darts to see if the market can get stimulated.
3/ Saving frequencies from being taken by others on the US-BRA market.

Cheers,
A.

PS: I am curious what Maverick and Lipe think ... but if DL were smart(er), a better route experimentation might have been LAX-EZE with a stop somewhere on a 2-3x frequency. I have a feeling LA is studying this.

[Edited 2008-09-04 11:19:06]

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-04 11:36:38 and read 11863 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 190):

Oh it's there, but it's very low yield. Whereas NYC-Brazil might be 20% premium traffic +/-, LAX-GRU is around 5%, never mind the fact that DL will have no connectivity in LAX other than Hawaii and SLC.

It's not that bad in terms of yield. And there are several trans-pacific markets served today that generate lower yields (stage-adjusted) than GRU does.

Also, look for some changes in the "connectivity" arena for DL at LAX. A pro-rated codeshare is the same whether it operates with a Delta livery or that of another carrier.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2008-09-04 11:59:21 and read 11834 times.



Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 191):
PS: I am curious what Maverick and Lipe think ... but if DL were smart(er), a better route experimentation might have been LAX-EZE with a stop somewhere on a 2-3x frequency. I have a feeling LA is studying this.

DL and LA fly LAX-EZE directly (one stop). Via ATL and SCL respectively.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Hardiwv
Posted 2008-09-04 12:34:21 and read 11801 times.



Quoting Incitatus (Reply 185):
But..., when and if Delta starts service, that is unlikely to happen in GRU-LAX because Korean's product is so much better.

Agree 100%

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 187):
I still think KE will re-route this via MEX. Perhaps I am insane in saying it.



Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 191):
1/ They have confirmed knowledge that KE is going to go ICN-MEX-GRU.

MEX-GRU market needs more capacity and the current AM daily service operates with high loads and high fares. There is need for more capacity and therefore AM already announced increased frequencies to 9 weekly (2 additional weekly B767 daylight).

Your idea about KE routing the flight via MEX is interesting but it would also entail a revision in the bilateral Korea-Brazil.

Quoting HALFA (Reply 189):
I believe the demand is there. There always has been.

Agreed. And if there is a casualty (DL x KE) I have no doubt it will be DL. KE product is so much superior. But the market is there for a daily LAX-GRU and both could operate simultaneously.

Rgs,

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-04 13:12:04 and read 11773 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 192):
A pro-rated codeshare is the same whether it operates with a Delta livery or that of another carrier.

...until that other carrier finds a more valuable passenger and closes off availability to DL

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 191):
I am curious what Maverick and Lipe think ... but if DL were smart(er), a better route experimentation might have been LAX-EZE with a stop somewhere on a 2-3x frequency. I have a feeling LA is studying this.

I'd say the market is smaller than GRU but slightly higher yield. That said, with all the additional Brazil capacity coming online soon, GRU-USA fares are going ot slip. Might be a good jumping off point for TPAC for LA, with connectivity to LIM, EZE, and SCL though, visa issues aside.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Ocracoke
Posted 2008-09-04 19:10:14 and read 11586 times.



Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 187):
= I still think KE will re-route this via MEX. Perhaps I am insane in saying it. Korea is on the shortlist of countries planned to go to visa-waiver, but I don't think it will happen in 2009. Also, the visa-waiver does not take over the fact that you still have to probably clear customs and immigration at LAX.

Won't MEX-ICN be an issue?

AM has to fly their NRT route with a stop in TIJ. Isn't that because of the altitude in MEX? How would KE be any different, if they fly the same equipment (B777), but fly even farther to ICN?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: JJ8080
Posted 2008-09-04 19:24:05 and read 11577 times.



Quoting Ocracoke (Reply 199):
Won't MEX-ICN be an issue?

AM has to fly their NRT route with a stop in TIJ. Isn't that because of the altitude in MEX? How would KE be any different, if they fly the same equipment (B777), but fly even farther to ICN?

Very well remembered... I think it is an issue indead.... Anyway, I don't see any motive for KE to change the flight to ICN-MEX-GRU since LAX results are good and DL's product can't even try to face theirs..... As Hardiwv said, there is plenty of demand for daily LAX-GRU service and maybe even 9 to 10 weekly, as RG used to fly once uppon a time.

As a side note, do anyone know when DL will have all 763ER fleet refited with flat BE seats??

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: SESGDL
Posted 2008-09-04 22:15:54 and read 11513 times.



Quoting JJ8080 (Reply 197):
As a side note, do anyone know when DL will have all 763ER fleet refited with flat BE seats??

I heard the modifications were supposed to begin late this winter but that was a while ago and I could be totally misinformed.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 195):
...until that other carrier finds a more valuable passenger and closes off availability to DL

Yes, because the likelihood of that is incredible!  Yeah sure

Jeremy

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Hardiwv
Posted 2008-09-05 00:31:17 and read 11459 times.



Quoting Ocracoke (Reply 196):
AM has to fly their NRT route with a stop in TIJ. Isn't that because of the altitude in MEX? How would KE be any different, if they fly the same equipment (B777), but fly even farther to ICN?



Quoting JJ8080 (Reply 197):
Very well remembered... I think it is an issue indead....

Indeed, in fact JAL also routes NRT-MEX via YVR.

Quoting JJ8080 (Reply 197):
I don't see any motive for KE to change the flight to ICN-MEX-GRU since LAX results are good and DL's product can't even try to face theirs..... As Hardiwv said, there is plenty of demand for daily LAX-GRU service and maybe even 9 to 10 weekly, as RG used to fly once uppon a time.

Your point is well developed and correct.

Rgs,

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Incitatus
Posted 2008-09-05 06:51:40 and read 11413 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 178):
I don't.....If DL was just wanting more flights into GRU they could have made Atlanta 9x weekly.

No it could not. The frequency distribution is subject to DoT approval so any airline could create a better case than more ATL-GRU. The reality is that Delta looked at the map and looked for a route that would make a strong case. Making money was secondary.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 186):
I know you really try to argue but there is nothing contradictory.

I am really your friend and I am keeping you from getting in trouble by your own making with a careless collusion statement like you did.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-05 07:01:07 and read 11476 times.



Quoting SESGDL (Reply 198):
Yes, because the likelihood of that is incredible!

If you're AS, would you rather take the lowest SEALAX fare (around $100), or the SEALAX prorate off of the lowest SEAGRU fare (about $20)?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LipeGIG
Posted 2008-09-05 15:15:24 and read 11370 times.



Quoting Incitatus (Reply 200):
No it could not. The frequency distribution is subject to DoT approval so any airline could create a better case than more ATL-GRU. The reality is that Delta looked at the map and looked for a route that would make a strong case. Making money was secondary.

They're just fighting for the 2 UA frequencies and AA is asking for 1. Probably DOT will grant AA 1 and DL 1... so what to expect... a two weekly flight reducing lets say JFK-GRU to 6x weekly ?

I don't think DL will be able to get 2 frequencies as they want as AA case is also strong.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Victrola
Posted 2008-09-05 16:00:09 and read 11323 times.



Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 187):
= I still think KE will re-route this via MEX. Perhaps I am insane in saying it. Korea is on the shortlist of countries planned to go to visa-waiver, but I don't think it will happen in 2009. Also, the visa-waiver does not take over the fact that you still have to probably clear customs and immigration at LAX

What type of equipment would they need for ICN MEX GRU? Remember that MEX has an altitude situation. Is there anything that can do MEX ICN with a full load?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-05 18:04:45 and read 11273 times.



Quoting Victrola (Reply 203):
What type of equipment would they need for ICN MEX GRU? Remember that MEX has an altitude situation. Is there anything that can do MEX ICN with a full load?

77L or A345, if I am not mistaken. However, I cannot see KE operating ICN-MEX nonstop, SkyTeam or not. The connections from AM to South America can be produced much easier using the traffic flows of DL at ATL. If ICN-MEX was opened I could see it as a tag operating something like ICN-LAX-MEX, or ICN-SFO-MEX.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2008-09-06 14:09:54 and read 11121 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 204):
Quoting Victrola (Reply 203):
What type of equipment would they need for ICN MEX GRU? Remember that MEX has an altitude situation. Is there anything that can do MEX ICN with a full load?

77L or A345, if I am not mistaken.

I think that even they would be subject to some payload restrictions on a 6541 nm nonstop from MEX's high altitude.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Hardiwv
Posted 2008-09-09 02:16:30 and read 10883 times.



Quoting Incitatus (Reply 200):
The reality is that Delta looked at the map and looked for a route that would make a strong case. Making money was secondary.

I really dont think making money is secondary in DL or any other airlines run as serious business, especially in such high competitive environment.

I am sure DL read the results of partner KE so far in LAX-GRU. In addition, if they think that ATL-GRU would not make a "strong case" they had a series of other routes which they could open such as JFK-GIG. This means that the selection of LAX-GRU as compared to other routes was examined in detail before a decision was made.

Rgs,

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: C010T3
Posted 2008-09-09 03:47:35 and read 10866 times.



Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 206):
they had a series of other routes which they could open such as JFK-GIG

That would kill an eventual application for GIG frequencies next year.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-09 05:27:19 and read 10836 times.

MEX-Asia can't be operated nonstop except poss. w/ the 77L because of MEX' altitude. MEX - Asia will have a high degree of traffic leakage to US gateways because of performance issues. AM's NRT flight helps but it is still not nonstop so isn't a clear winner in recapturing share.

The reason why CO was able to start ATL-GIG is because they have not been taking advantage of the additional seasonal frequencies that are available and are used by AA and DL on a pretty consistent basis.

You can argue that CO might increase the strength of its argument to get IAH-GIG on a regular basis after proving what it can do in the peak season - or CO might decide the route is not viable on a year round daily basis but works well on a seasonal, less than daily basis.

LAX is the top O&D for just about every major east coas originating European and Latin route. There is every reason to think LAX-GRU will work very well for DL, esp. since the NW LAX-NRT flight is the "other half" of a success DL strategy to carry Asia-Latin traffic. Adding more Asian routes from LAX will help DL to ensure LAX-GRU will work very well. LAX-GRU will be the first of several LAX-S. America flights by DL and several more LAX- Asia flights. It should be obvious that DL takes a great deal of liberty in adding and pulling short haul routes, esp. on RJs, but has a pretty good track record of adding and sustaining longhaul routes. As a percentage of total routes added since 2005, DL is still flying at least as high of a percentage of long haul routes as other carriers.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Hardiwv
Posted 2008-09-09 06:12:23 and read 10801 times.



Quoting C010T3 (Reply 207):
That would kill an eventual application for GIG frequencies next year.

And GRU-LAX could kill DL application for GRU-LAX daily in 2010.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 208):
is every reason to think LAX-GRU will work very well for DL, esp. since the NW LAX-NRT flight is the "other half" of a success DL strategy to carry Asia-Latin traffic. Adding more Asian routes from LAX will help DL to ensure LAX-GRU will work very well.

Very good point about the synergies with NW which we normally overlook.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 208):
LAX-GRU will be the first of several LAX-S.

The same way JFK-GRU was instrumental in building DL's JFK hub and one of the first long-haul routes of DL system in JFK. We can now clearly see how DL anchors its hub-building mechanism on selected routes among which GRU stands out.

Rgs,

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Incitatus
Posted 2008-09-09 07:03:40 and read 10742 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 208):
There is every reason to think LAX-GRU will work very well for DL, esp. since the NW LAX-NRT flight is the "other half" of a success DL strategy to carry Asia-Latin traffic.

GRU-JFK-NRT on JL (not daily)
GRU-CDG-NRT on AF (twice daily)
GRU-FRA-NRT on LH
GRU-MUC-NRT on LH (not daily)
GRU-LHR-NRT on BA
GRU-ZRH-NRT on LX
GRU-AMS-NRT on KL
GRU-FCO-NRT on AZ
GRU-MXP-NRT on AZ (not daily)
GRU-JFK-NRT on AA
GRU-DFW-NRT on AA
GRU-ATL-NRT on DL
GRU-ORD-NRT on UA
GRU-IAD-NRT on UA
GRU-IAH-NRT on CO
GRU-EWR-NRT on CO

Did I miss any airline doing 1-stops between Sao Paulo and Tokyo? There is another long list of 1-stops from Rio to Tokyo or from Sao Paulo to other cities in Asia or GRU-NRT 1-stops using more than one carrier. With so many services, the ability to price above the full cost per seat is impaired. There is absolutely no money to be made by Delta flying Brazil-Asia traffic through LAX.

Notice this is a far cry from the 80s. At that time Europe-Japan flights almost always stopped in Anchorage, which made a trip from Brazil to Asia via Europe impractical. Brazilian gateways in the US were Miami, JFK and LAX. JFK had very few flights to Asia. LAX was often by far the best way (sometimes the only way) to get to Australia, Hawaii, Japan and Eastern/South Asia. Nowadays there are many equivalent or better routes, and the Brazil-Australia traffic goes through the South Pacific.

Delta is just after frequencies to prevent other airlines from using them - though I am not critizing them for doing that. All airlines do it.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Hardiwv
Posted 2008-09-09 07:07:46 and read 10744 times.

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 210):
Did I miss any airline doing 1-stops between Sao Paulo and Tokyo?

You forgot EK GRU-DXB-NRT. In fact, I have inside information from EK that one of the reasons which may trigger EK to implement a second daily DXB-GRU (A345) is the strong demand and high yields of connecting pax from GRU to NRT with EK.

Plus add AC GRU-YYZ-NRT another pupular route which will be upgraded to B77W in December.

Rgs,

[Edited 2008-09-09 07:09:29]

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-09 07:17:53 and read 10718 times.



Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 211):
You forgot EK GRU-DXB-NRT. In fact, I have inside information from EK that one of the reasons which may trigger EK to implement a second daily DXB-GRU (A345) is the strong demand and high yields of connecting pax from GRU to NRT with EK.

They don't fly to NRT  Confused

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 208):
There is every reason to think LAX-GRU will work very well for DL

Except for the whole "filling the plane with anything but low yield passengers" part

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 208):
As a percentage of total routes added since 2005, DL is still flying at least as high of a percentage of long haul routes as other carriers.

DL's international seats out of LAX are down up to 70% YOY for the next quarter.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Hardiwv
Posted 2008-09-09 07:28:23 and read 10705 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 212):
They don't fly to NRT

Sorry, KIX and NGO. In fact, most of the Brazilian community in japan lives around NGO area.

Rgs,

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Incitatus
Posted 2008-09-09 07:51:34 and read 10671 times.



Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 211):
Plus add AC GRU-YYZ-NRT another pupular route which will be upgraded to B77W in December.

Yes, I forgot that one - a very popular and affordable choice when it is available. Right now it is not available as a one stop because AC is flying YYZ-YVR-NRT.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2008-09-09 08:39:24 and read 10634 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 208):
esp. since the NW LAX-NRT flight is the "other half" of a success DL strategy to carry Asia-Latin traffic.

Other half?

The flights dont even connect -- you expect travellers to hang around LAX for 11hr 15mins Eastbound and 6hr 45mins Westbound to connect to Asia on NW1/2?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-09 10:10:34 and read 10580 times.



Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 209):

And GRU-LAX could kill DL application for GRU-LAX daily in 2010.

or demonstrate that it is viable for daily service.

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 210):
Did I miss any airline doing 1-stops between Sao Paulo and Tokyo?

but that says nothing about how much demand is there. I have flown several of those GRU-US flights and can tell you there are always dozens of passengers connecting from Brazil to Asia.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 212):
Except for the whole "filling the plane with anything but low yield passengers" part

yes, we know that is the cry you and others always make to try and prove that a route is not viable. Problem is it is your BIASED, UNSUBSTANTIATED opinion.

Come back w/ facts on what US carriers actually get in revenue for their Japan-Brazil traffic and then we'll talk. And you still assume that they fill the entire plane with that kind of traffic. They also have very viable US operations.

Despite what you want to present, Brazil is highly profitable for DL.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 215):
The flights dont even connect

you're smart enough to know that if DL obtained the LAX-GRU rights, they could retime or add LAX-NRT flights to make that flight work. Think just a tad outside of the box.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: C010T3
Posted 2008-09-09 10:46:36 and read 10532 times.



Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 209):
And GRU-LAX could kill DL application for GRU-LAX daily in 2010.

Why? A thrice weekly flight is a pretty good candidate for extra frequencies. However, DL cannot count on the revocation of CONAC's resolution # 006/2007 by 2010. GRU's T3 will not be ready. The only thing that can be done is the transference of the unrestricted frequencies from GIG to GRU

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2008-09-09 11:00:16 and read 10526 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 216):
you're smart enough to know that if DL obtained the LAX-GRU rights, they could retime or add LAX-NRT flights to make that flight work. Think just a tad outside of the box.

The NRT flights would not be re-timed unless NW/DL want to give up on its NRT mini-hub operation. Between NRT curfew's, slots and the intra-Asia flying the operational window on flight times is rather minimal.

If anything GRU would need to be re-timed, however you'd end up with some ugly times on the Brazil end instead.

For instance:

NRT-LAX 1555-0930
LAX-GRU 1130- 0355

GRU-LAX 0340-1045
LAX-NRT 1245-1630

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-09 11:18:38 and read 10502 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 216):
Despite what you want to present, Brazil is highly profitable for DL.

I've never stated otherwise.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 216):
yes, we know that is the cry you and others always make to try and prove that a route is not viable. Problem is it is your BIASED, UNSUBSTANTIATED opinion.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 216):
Come back w/ facts

Here are a few, quite substantiated, facts. Where are yours?

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 150):
The other problem is they're down 40% in terms of domestic seats out of LAX, so the only reasonable connections on DL metal going forward will be Hawaii and SLC



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 190):
Whereas NYC-Brazil might be 20% premium traffic +/-, LAX-GRU is around 5%, never mind the fact that DL will have no connectivity in LAX other than Hawaii and SLC.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 212):
DL's international seats out of LAX are down up to 70% YOY for the next quarter.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-09 14:50:58 and read 10449 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 219):
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 150):
The other problem is they're down 40% in terms of domestic seats out of LAX, so the only reasonable connections on DL metal going forward will be Hawaii and SLC



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 190):
Whereas NYC-Brazil might be 20% premium traffic +/-, LAX-GRU is around 5%, never mind the fact that DL will have no connectivity in LAX other than Hawaii and SLC.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 212):
DL's international seats out of LAX are down up to 70% YOY for the next quarter.

all of this is either inaccurate or has nothing to do with DL's ability to make LAX-GRU work.

You also assume that what DL has now at LAX is what DL will have if they win the route. DL does have codeshare relationships and a fleet of 800 mainline and another 500+ regional aircraft it can use to support the route.

It also is rather meaningless to say what the percentage of current premium passengers on the route is compared with NYC. NYC is well served by US and foreign airlines and there is an established and detailed record of passengers; not so with LAX.


We know you believe that you know more than the execs of DL and other airlines. Since their boards hired their execs and not you, I'm gonna stick with them.

Continuing to state that DL's routes don't work hasn't apparently stopped them. Once again, they have a very strong track record for adding long-haul flying. They have added and removed short-haul and regional flying on an opportunistic basis; despite your assertions, you cannot prove one way or another that the short-haul and RJ flying that DL has removed was not profitable or there to pursue strategic goals.

I'll still go on record as saying that DL will not only succeed at LAX-GRU if it is able to win approval for the route and that it will be the first of several new LAX-S. America and Asia flights.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Incitatus
Posted 2008-09-09 15:08:10 and read 10420 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 220):
You also assume that what DL has now at LAX is what DL will have if they win the route.

Come on. Delta is applying to get two frequencies a week, it is going to borrow another frequency from somewhere (JFK-GRU, which according to you is a pot of gold), to offer 3 flights a week on an iffy market. Then you are saying Delta is going to build a hub at LAX if they win these two measly frequencies. Really, you have to be kidding.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OA412
Posted 2008-09-09 15:30:30 and read 10396 times.



Quoting Incitatus (Reply 221):
Then you are saying Delta is going to build a hub at LAX if they win these two measly frequencies

In fairness to WT, he didn't say they'd build a hub at LAX, he said they'd add more flights to LAX.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-09 16:32:35 and read 10355 times.



Quoting Incitatus (Reply 221):
Come on. Delta is applying to get two frequencies a week, it is going to borrow another frequency from somewhere (JFK-GRU, which according to you is a pot of gold), to offer 3 flights a week on an iffy market. Then you are saying Delta is going to build a hub at LAX if they win these two measly frequencies. Really, you have to be kidding.

Well I would say its some kind of sign. They could have gone after DTW-GRU which by the time its started it would be a Delta Air Lines Inc. hub (aka DL,OH and NWs holding company)

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-09 16:57:33 and read 10337 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 220):
all of this is either inaccurate or has nothing to do with DL's ability to make LAX-GRU work.

It's 100% accurate. Prove me wrong otherwise. I know you can't.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 220):
You also assume that what DL has now at LAX is what DL will have if they win the route.

Nope. DL is going to add all kinds of LAX connectivity by DEC09? Keep dreaming.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 220):
. NYC is well served by US and foreign airlines and there is an established and detailed record of passengers; not so with LAX.

That would actually be an argument I would make against your case. All kinds of competition to NYC and still a high premium ratio....one 3x weekly nonstop in LAX and still not much to speak of in the front cabin, before, during, or after.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 220):
you cannot prove one way or another that the short-haul and RJ flying that DL has removed was not profitable or there

There is very little profitable RJ flying at any airline. The likelihood of cutting a profitable RJ route is near zero.

Quoting OA412 (Reply 222):
In fairness to WT, he didn't say they'd build a hub at LAX, he said they'd add more flights to LAX.

In fairness to the rest of us WT has changed his story about as often as DL's routes in LAX Yeah sure

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-09 17:29:57 and read 10297 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 224):
In fairness to the rest of us WT has changed his story about as often as DL's routes in LAX

so he has changed his story two times then?

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 224):
Nope. DL is going to add all kinds of LAX connectivity by DEC09? Keep dreaming.

Well I wouldn't say a large number but I wouldn't rule out a few routes. Plus a new RJ carrier at LAX. (OO)

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 224):
There is very little profitable RJ flying at any airline. The likelihood of cutting a profitable RJ route is near zero.

I'm going to have to ask for proof on this one.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-09 20:19:27 and read 10298 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 225):

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 224):
In fairness to the rest of us WT has changed his story about as often as DL's routes in LAX

so he has changed his story two times then?

WT has the one that has steadfastly maintained that DL would fly to deep S. America and would add transpac routes from LAX. That has not changed.

DL focused its attention for the past several years on JFK... the focus will now shift to LAX.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 225):

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 224):
Nope. DL is going to add all kinds of LAX connectivity by DEC09? Keep dreaming.

Well I wouldn't say a large number but I wouldn't rule out a few routes.

M11 doesn't understand that no matter how unprofitable RJs may or may not be, they are still in the fleets of network airlines and will be for years to come. If DL needs to invest in LAX to develop int'l routes, it will add RJ flying to support it. The issue is not whether the RJ makes sense but whether it is necessary to support the flight.

M11 also can't get past the idea that DL just might decide they want to build a larger operation using mainline aircraft in LAX. Remember that it was less than 3 years ago that DL had a much smaller operation at JFK than it does now.

What should be apparent is that DL has defied conventional (a.net) wisdom and has grown and is on the verge of becoming the world's largest carrier - not because they followed CW but because they have proven CW isn't really accurate after all. Other carriers are still living by CW and we see where that has left them.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-09 20:49:31 and read 10267 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 223):
They could have gone after DTW-GRU which by the time its started it would be a Delta Air Lines Inc. hub (aka DL,OH and NWs holding company)

There is little if any demand for a route such as DTW-GRU. Hub or no hub there is very little traffic and business trade between DTW and GRU, let alone DTW and South America as a whole.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 218):
If anything GRU would need to be re-timed, however you'd end up with some ugly times on the Brazil end instead.

For instance:

NRT-LAX 1555-0930
LAX-GRU 1130- 0355

GRU-LAX 0340-1045
LAX-NRT 1245-1630

Would it be possible to operate a schedule similar to the following:

NRT-LAX 855pm-230pm
LAX-GRU 500pm-830am+

GRU-LAX 1140p-645am+1
LAX-NRT 900am-100pm+1

In this instance, if applicable to the operational guidelines for NW at NRT DL/NW could market the LAX-NRT as the first flight of the day from the West Coast to Japan and on the return the NRT-LAX service could be marketed as the last flight of the day from the Japan market to the West Coast.

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 213):
Sorry, KIX and NGO. In fact, most of the Brazilian community in japan lives around NGO area

Correct!

There is a need for a link from Brazil to Japan at this point, besides JL, the way in which I believe DL/NW are planning LAX is that initially they will use there NRT service and then expand to markets such as KIX and NGO. This of course is all planned for when the 787 program comes into play. Hopefully at that time the US economy will settle down and permit routes such as LAX-NGO and KIX to be flown successfully by an airline.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-09 20:51:40 and read 10267 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 226):
M11 doesn't understand that no matter how unprofitable RJs may or may not be, they are still in the fleets of network airlines and will be for years to come. If DL needs to invest in LAX to develop int'l routes, it will add RJ flying to support it. The issue is not whether the RJ makes sense but whether it is necessary to support the flight.

Not sure I can agree The only 3-4 routes that might come back to LAX (that I have heard) are mainline. Well 2-3 now that FLL is back.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 226):
M11 also can't get past the idea that DL just might decide they want to build a larger operation using mainline aircraft in LAX. Remember that it was less than 3 years ago that DL had a much smaller operation at JFK than it does now.

I will say this. Different CEO. Anderson seems to have only cared about this merger from day one (the main reason I hope it gets shot down) Gerry had much bigger and better plans for DL at LAX. More M90s to move more 737s and even some of the M90s to LA. The RJs where only going to be to get a name back into the market then once the deal was done(M90 deal) they would add mainline into some off the cities move the RJs to smaller cities and was looking at mainline International Opps. Anderson has pretty much pissed it all away. Xjet wanted to go fine but they could have moved OO in and they haven't. Also they STILL haven't done anything about the M90s that where going to be here last summer. Other than a few more mainline flights I wouldn't look for anything more till Anderson leaves or gets over the merger. Gerry/Jim/Ed's Stand alone plan is looking better and better.  Wink
Also note DL is starting to pull JFK down not up. Wink

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2008-09-09 20:55:08 and read 10260 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 227):
Would it be possible to operate a schedule similar to the following:

Sure anything is possible, however you are going to loose some many NRT beyond connections now as you are changing the times by 5hrs and 3hr30mins respectively increasing the NRT sit significantly.

At the end of the day, I believe feeding Asia connections would be a much higher priority for DL/NW then a 3x per week GRU flight at LAX.

As others have mentioned there are dozens of more convenient routings to get from Brazil to Japan either via Europe or other US/Canadian hubs which do not have long sit times as this DL schedule does.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: 717-200
Posted 2008-09-09 21:47:57 and read 10240 times.



Quoting Alitalia744 (Reply 13):
Correction Rose, no airline YET flies US to Asia nonstop on a 767....

Actually when OZ began service to SEA back in the mid '90s they used the 767-300ER on the route to Kimpo before the days of ICN.



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Joe Pries - ATR Team

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2008-09-09 22:08:50 and read 10233 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 227):
There is little if any demand for a route such as DTW-GRU. Hub or no hub there is very little traffic and business trade between DTW and GRU, let alone DTW and South America as a whole.

That is true. DTW-GRU would be hard. Even thought the O&D to GRU isnt astronomical from hubs like ATL, DFW, and IAH, they can get 40-60 O&D pax on a route to GRU. Given that, its not difficult to get more connecting pax from Asia, the West coast and the midwest. That can fill the rest of the plane.

The O&D from DTW to GRU is smaller. Maybe it could work with a 763, but thats pushing it.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-09 22:14:44 and read 10228 times.



Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 231):

That is true. DTW-GRU would be hard. Even thought the O&D to GRU isnt astronomical from hubs like ATL, DFW, and IAH, they can get 40-60 O&D pax on a route to GRU. Given that, its not difficult to get more connecting pax from Asia, the West coast and the midwest. That can fill the rest of the plane.

The other thing that DTW lacks to Brazil is a VFR market. ATL, IAH, DFW, all have a decent Brazilian VFR market due to the Brazilian ex-pat communities in each of the aforementioned markets.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cws818
Posted 2008-09-10 01:02:11 and read 10199 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 220):
You also assume that what DL has now at LAX is what DL will have if they win the route. DL does have codeshare relationships and a fleet of 800 mainline and another 500+ regional aircraft it can use to support the route.

DL has a substantial fleet now, and a recently-emptied (to an extent) terminal @ LAX. The results speak for themselves, or, rather, the lack of results speak for themselves.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-10 05:58:57 and read 10175 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 227):
Would it be possible to operate a schedule similar to the following:

NRT-LAX 855pm-230pm
LAX-GRU 500pm-830am+

GRU-LAX 1140p-645am+1
LAX-NRT 900am-100pm+1

it is also very possible that DL could choose to operate TWO flights/day LAX-NRT, with smaller aircraft than the 744. One would be better timed to connect w/ S. America; one would be better timed for beyond NRT connections. Further, there is no assurance that the current NW NRT hub will remain as it currently exists.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 228):
I will say this. Different CEO. Anderson seems to have only cared about this merger from day one (the main reason I hope it gets shot down)

what seems abundantly clear is that people here don't grasp what it takes to run successful businesses. A.netters want to see everything happen all at one time. Airlines that have done that in the past have failed miserably. DL is the ONLY airline that is pulling off a merger. They intend to do it well. They will focus on building LAX when the time is right. DL has engaged in the most aggressive int'l expansion of any US airline and has built a globe spanning network - and that is before the NW merger. DL will build LAX but they will do it in the appropriate time. That time will come and it will be obvious that I understand this industry and DL's strategies while others.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 231):
DTW-GRU would be hard.

Every route requires development time. DTW is positioned to be able to connect traffic as well as ORD does.... and right now DTW has more service to Japan than ORD does. On our last flight to Brazil, my wife sat next to a Brazilian passenger who was returning from training with one of the Big Three US automakers.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Incitatus
Posted 2008-09-10 07:10:47 and read 10119 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 235):
what seems abundantly clear is that people here don't grasp what it takes to run successful businesses.

 checkmark 

Building LAX on a strategy of pushing Asia <> South America connecting traffic is borrowing a page from 25 years ago when the world was very different.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-10 07:15:00 and read 10117 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 225):
I'm going to have to ask for proof on this one.

Seriously? Did you not notice the whole RJ slash and burn we've been going through, especially with 50 seaters and smaller?

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 226):
M11 doesn't understand that no matter how unprofitable RJs may or may not be, they are still in the fleets of network airlines and will be for years to come.

Eh...no. M11 understands that quite well.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 226):
M11 also can't get past the idea that DL just might decide they want to build a larger operation using mainline aircraft in LAX.

Cuz they just did that. And pulled the majority of it back out of LAX. In fact I think they're smaller in LAX in terms of ASMs than they were before the build up. They'll have to put a lot of that back if they want LAX to be the new JFK, obviously.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 231):
DTW-GRU would be hard.

The local market is bigger than ATLSCL, it has a fairly good premium demand, and has ties to the auto industry in Brazil. Might not be half bad particularly with Japan connections, especially to NGO and NRT since it's one of the shortest routings. I'd certainly take that over GRULAX Wink.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-09-10 07:36:02 and read 10100 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 235):
Every route requires development time. DTW is positioned to be able to connect traffic as well as ORD does.... and right now DTW has more service to Japan than ORD does.

I tend to agree that DTW-GRU can probably work if ORD-GRU does. Does NW serve more cities ex-DTW than UA serves ex-ORD? I feel like they might.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2008-09-10 07:52:37 and read 10080 times.



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 238):
tend to agree that DTW-GRU can probably work if ORD-GRU does



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 237):
The local market is bigger than ATLSCL, it has a fairly good premium demand, and has ties to the auto industry in Brazil. Might not be half bad particularly with Japan connections, especially to NGO and NRT since it's one of the shortest routings. I'd certainly take that over GRULAX .

The one thing I will say that might make DTW work is the fact that it has NGO and KIX connections. Its O&D is smaller, but not nonexistant. Although Ill disagree with the part about it working just because ORD-GRU does. DTW and ORD have different economies, kinda apples and oranges if you will.

Thats also true about the O&D being larger than ATL-SCL. Flights to SCL are specific. The flight from ATL-SCL works simply because of the ATL hub and Atlanta's location to South America (easy connections). I know the DFW-SCL flight is very successful. The reason being is Chilean produce. Cargo is HUGE on that route (mostly connecting it to NRT). However, in high season, the pax loads are high too.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-09-10 07:57:47 and read 10079 times.



Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 239):
DTW and ORD have different economies, kinda apples and oranges if you will.

No question, but I can point to a specific industry in Detroit (the auto industry) with fairly tight ties to Brazil. I can't really do that in Chicago.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Incitatus
Posted 2008-09-10 09:34:49 and read 10040 times.



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 239):
No question, but I can point to a specific industry in Detroit (the auto industry) with fairly tight ties to Brazil. I can't really do that in Chicago.

While Ford and GM are big in Brazil and the subsidiaries generate travel to their headquarters, their product lines in Brazil are very similar to Ford and Opel in Europe. Travel between Brazil and Detroit may be big but the ties may be overstated.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-10 10:17:50 and read 10016 times.



Quoting Incitatus (Reply 235):
Building LAX on a strategy of pushing Asia <> South America connecting traffic is borrowing a page from 25 years ago when the world was very different.

It is obvious that KE still reads from that book, and has found success. Some rumors remain stories, while others transcend time.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 237):
I tend to agree that DTW-GRU can probably work if ORD-GRU does.

DTW and ORD are opposing markets. One is booming and full of industry as a World marketplace. The other struggles in the midst of one of the worst economies and has seen company after company leave the market. The other thing to keep in mind is that while ORD has a decent Brazilian ex-pat community and business ties, DTW has no ex-pat community from Brazil nor strong business links between the two.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-09-10 15:05:58 and read 9931 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 241):
The other thing to keep in mind is that while ORD has a decent Brazilian ex-pat community and business ties,

Where's the ex-pat community concentrated? I grew up in Chicago and never knew about a population of Brazilians... you've piqued my interest.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-10 15:14:03 and read 9926 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 234):
DL is the ONLY airline that is pulling off a merger.

So DL is the only smart one out of the bunch then? hardly. I take it the other airlines seem to think a merger was a bad idea. I would say that FL,F9,WN,AS,UA,US,CO,AA,B6,VX,NK not merging says alot more than DL and NW merging.  Wink

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 234):
DL has engaged in the most aggressive int'l expansion of any US airline and has built a globe spanning network - and that is before the NW merger

And again a different CEO. The CEO now likes to cut not add.  Wink

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 234):
That time will come and it will be obvious that I understand this industry and DL's strategies while others.

Your about the only one. And BTW DL's "strategies" are very simple. Run back to Atlanta.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 236):
Seriously? Did you not notice the whole RJ slash and burn we've been going through, especially with 50 seaters and smaller?

I understand that but to say most RJ flights are money losers is a bit hard to believe. Some but I would say what is left is making money or is close to it.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-10 17:03:44 and read 9870 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 243):
So DL is the only smart one out of the bunch then? hardly. I take it the other airlines seem to think a merger was a bad idea. I would say that FL,F9,WN,AS,UA,US,CO,AA,B6,VX,NK not merging says alot more than DL and NW merging.

No. It says that most of them couldn't find the right partner, the right deal, or an interested buyer.

FL wanted a deal with YX. YX and F9 are fighting extinction. UA begged for a deal, but nobody wanted them. CO nearly did a deal with UA until they saw the mess. B6 took LH's $$$ as quick as they could. VX and NK have closed books and lots of silence. US is still digesting the HP/US deal.

Basically, the only ones left are WN, AS and AA. And the truth is that there isn't a viable partner out there that substantially improves AA's strategic or financial position.

The NW deal was clearly a good move for Delta's future. Other airlines have to make decisions based on their own circumstances. A merger with NW can be a great thing for Delta, while not making mergers, in general, good for the rest of the industry.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-10 17:22:09 and read 9874 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 236):
Cuz they just did that. And pulled the majority of it back out of LAX. In fact I think they're smaller in LAX in terms of ASMs than they were before the build up. They'll have to put a lot of that back if they want LAX to be the new JFK, obviously.

and so are alot of other airlines at LAX. Wanna tell us how much UA is down at LAX?

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 243):
So DL is the only smart one out of the bunch then? hardly. I take it the other airlines seem to think a merger was a bad idea. I would say that FL,F9,WN,AS,UA,US,CO,AA,B6,VX,NK not merging says alot more than DL and NW merging.

Jetlanta answered well but alot of airlines wanted mergers but decided that high fuel prices meant they had to sit on the sidelines. There will be more consolidation - but it will not be near as good of a fit (DL and NW overlap on fewer routes than any other network carriers) and DL/NW have a significant head start.


There are plenty of airlines that would love to pull off a merger... there will be an increase in merger talk again and that will confirm that some airlines still do not have viable standalone strategies.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 243):
And again a different CEO. The CEO now likes to cut not add.

that is simply not accurate. DL has a far larger international operation OUTSIDE of ATL than at any time in its history. LAX is not a barometer of the DL system - and you will get your growth at LAX in due time.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 243):
Your about the only one. And BTW DL's "strategies" are very simple. Run back to Atlanta.

see above

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-10 17:48:43 and read 9842 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 245):


that is simply not accurate. DL has a far larger international operation OUTSIDE of ATL than at any time in its history. LAX is not a barometer of the DL system - and you will get your growth at LAX in due time.

Maybe so but what is the largest International hub? ATL what other hubs have had international routes cut/downgraded? LAX,CVG,JFK and SLC. Point of the story is your keep saying growth and in less Anderson a big U-turn it doesn't look like it. Other than move a few route around and add 6-7 cities Anderson has pretty much cut everything else.
Also I would have to look at the numbers but i would say that back in the 1990s DL had a large network outside of ATL. PDX hub,FRA hub and PA's JFK hub. If I had to guess I would say it was larger then than now. Plus ATL has 2 almost three times the international routes than JFK.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 245):
and so are alot of other airlines at LAX. Wanna tell us how much UA is down at LAX?

So what DL was larger 3 years ago than they are now. Not a good sign they are going to grow.
UA has little to do with this so I'm not to sure why bring them in but I can count it by asking how much WN is up in LA?

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 245):
There are plenty of airlines that would love to pull off a merger... there will be an increase in merger talk again and that will confirm that some airlines still do not have viable standalone strategies.

Other than UA and US I cant think of any that said they are will to merge. All the other carriers said they will wait to see if DL/NW go at it first.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-09-10 18:03:54 and read 9821 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 244):
And the truth is that there isn't a viable partner out there that substantially improves AA's strategic or financial position.

The best thing for AA long-term would probably be picking up pieces of US East in Chapter 7. You're right, though, that there's not much they can do now.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-10 19:44:56 and read 9763 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 246):
ATL what other hubs have had international routes cut/downgraded? LAX,CVG,JFK and SLC.

ATL has had routes cut? VIE?

The fact that ATL has had proportionately less cut is a tribute to how strong the ATL hub is, not that DL isn't committed to other hubs. JFK has had more growth over the past year than any other hub.

LAX will get its growth in time.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 246):
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 245):
and so are alot of other airlines at LAX. Wanna tell us how much UA is down at LAX?

So what DL was larger 3 years ago than they are now. Not a good sign they are going to grow.

So apparently no airline is going to add any new routes because EVERY US airline is cutting domestic capacity. In terms of SYSTEM capacity, AA and UA have cut far more than ther carriers. I guess by your logic, they are relegated to obsolesence.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 246):
Other than UA and US I cant think of any that said they are will to merge. All the other carriers said they will wait to see if DL/NW go at it first.

CO reviewed merger proposals. AA is the only network airline that has not acknowledged it has considered a merger proposal.

Everyone except for DL and NW in both the network and low fare categories have been unable to put a deal together. Plain and simple. Attempting to rationalize why they haven't is pure speculation on their part. The fact is that only DL and NW have come up with a deal.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-10 19:49:09 and read 9749 times.



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 242):
Where's the ex-pat community concentrated? I grew up in Chicago and never knew about a population of Brazilians... you've piqued my interest.

Here is some information on Brazilians in Chicago:

http://www.brazilianculturalcenter.org/

http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/1542.html

http://www.chicagogsb.edu/alumni/clubs/brazil/news.aspx

http://capoeira.uchicago.edu/

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: C010T3
Posted 2008-09-10 20:13:44 and read 9724 times.



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 242):
Where's the ex-pat community concentrated? I grew up in Chicago and never knew about a population of Brazilians... you've piqued my interest.

Brazilians generally don't concentrate. The only exceptions in the world can be found in MA and NJ. Brazilians are averse to ghetto building and try really hard to mingle. There is a recent development in China though, in and around Shenzhen I think, but that's rather due to a large cultural distance.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-10 20:14:10 and read 9760 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 248):

ATL has had routes cut? VIE?

Never said ATL didn't have route cuts. JFK and LAX have had FAR more than we have though.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 248):
So apparently no airline is going to add any new routes because EVERY US airline is cutting domestic capacity. In terms of SYSTEM capacity, AA and UA have cut far more than ther carriers. I guess by your logic, they are relegated to obsolesence.

Never said that it would mean no growth but getting smaller than what you where 3 years a go is not a good sign that they will grow (again) in said market.
But for an airline to take over a hub cut it bring it back and cut it come out the smallest they have ever been in the market says to me they are not going to be building a large operation at LAX. Some T-pac flights? sure but that will be about it.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 248):
JFK has had more growth over the past year than any other hub.

And JFK has had more cuts in the last year then it has since the PA hub pull down. The fact JFK got flights over the last year mean very little when most of them get cut.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-10 20:20:13 and read 9760 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 251):
Never said that it would mean no growth but getting smaller than what you where 3 years a go is not a good sign that they will grow (again) in said market.

and tell how many CITIES have the same level of service they had 3 years ago? Precious few. Practically every city is seeing reduced levels of seats and markets have been cut - for every airline.
Again, if that is the basis for you to predict the future, then there is no more growth coming ANYWHERE.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 251):
And JFK has had more cuts in the last year then it has since the PA hub pull down. The fact JFK got flights over the last year mean very little when most of them get cut.

that is patently wrong. DL's operation at JFK is larger than it was a year ago. Not even close to "most" flights that were added have been cut.

Get over the drama and stick with facts.

What is your ax to grind? You say "we" in ATL. Did DL require to come to work in ATL in order to keep your job?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-10 20:20:19 and read 9758 times.



Quoting C010T3 (Reply 250):
Brazilians generally don't concentrate. The only exceptions in the world can be found in MA and NJ. Brazilians are averse to ghetto building and try really hard to mingle. There is a recent development in China though, in and around Shenzhen I think, but that's rather due to a large cultural distance.

Exactly!

The Brazilians that I know which include both friends, and family can be found in many different places including: San Francisco, Los Angeles, Dallas, Houston, London, Milan, and Paris. They dont centralize themselves in one area. Most of the Brazilians that have got out of Brazil are doing very well for themselves. For example I have a number of relatives from Goias that are now living in the SF Bay Area, they live in the Bay Area from San Mateo to as far north as Mill Valley to as far East as Sacramento. Overall Brazilians dont tend to focus on one area as stated above, they mix with others and often times have very good positions with very good firms.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Panamair
Posted 2008-09-10 22:06:54 and read 9715 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 251):
And JFK has had more cuts in the last year then it has since the PA hub pull down. The fact JFK got flights over the last year mean very little when most of them get cut.

That is completely untrue and you know it. JFK now has around 200 departures a day (including DCI) during the peak season and this is more than at any other time in DL's history of serving JFK. For most years, the # of JFK departures hovered around 70-90 daily. DL has essentially more than doubled its JFK flights in the past 2-3 years. Given the slot constraints at JFK, you can bet that DL will not be giving up its 200 daily flights portfolio. Sure there have been pulldowns, but these have been replaced by new flights in order to keep all those slots.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 246):
Anderson has pretty much cut everything else.

Anderson is operating in a different fuel environment than Grinstein or even Mullin. DL was cutting left and right in 2005 when it entered bankruptcy as well and Anderson was nowhere near Delta then.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 243):
And again a different CEO. The CEO now likes to cut not add

LMAO! This CEO is now trying to add a whole new airline (in fact the 5th largest airline) - that's about the largest ADD to Delta in it entire history!

Honestly, your irrational dislike of Anderson is beginning to sound like the disdain for the new DLNW that one other poster has because of the whole MN issue. Most of your anti-Anderson rant has centered around "I just don't trust that guy" rather than based on any concrete evidence or solid reasons...

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-09-11 06:34:24 and read 9616 times.



Quoting C010T3 (Reply 250):
Brazilians generally don't concentrate.

Agreed. Usually, though, you can find SOME indication of a relatively large population. I've never seen anything in Chicago. Very interesting...

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-11 07:04:57 and read 9598 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 245):
and so are alot of other airlines at LAX. Wanna tell us how much UA is down at LAX?

No one has said other airlines were going to grow LAX into the next DL @ JFK, but in the interest of your never ending quest for self affirmation, UA is down about 20% in domestic seats over the same period. They maintain 36 domestic routes against DL's 12 out of LAX.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-11 08:43:19 and read 9572 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 256):
No one has said other airlines were going to grow LAX into the next DL @ JFK, but in the interest of your never ending quest for self affirmation, UA is down about 20% in domestic seats over the same period. They maintain 36 domestic routes against DL's 12 out of LAX.

There has NEVER been a time when DL was larger than UA at LAX so I'm not sure what point you want to make that DL is down ALONG WITH UA and other carriers.

Again, should we expect that NONE of the big six airlines will ever grow at LAX again since they are all currently down?

Did you ever make a B in school and have a professor tell you that you should not expect that you would ever make an A again?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-11 13:28:20 and read 9468 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 252):


and tell how many CITIES have the same level of service they had 3 years ago? Precious few. Practically every city is seeing reduced levels of seats and markets have been cut - for every airline.
Again, if that is the basis for you to predict the future, then there is no more growth coming ANYWHERE.

AA at MIA is still growing and or not cutting anything. ATL most likely has more flights. DFW,IAH and CLT seem to have grown and or still growing. If CLT keeps going it will pass MSP in hub size soon.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 252):
that is patently wrong. DL's operation at JFK is larger than it was a year ago. Not even close to "most" flights that were added have been cut.

Almost all of the Latin America flights added have been cut or are now 1-2x weekly also BOM gets cut,CDG,LGW,ORY. Other than CVG, JFK has taken the hard hits for the 4 hubs.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 252):
What is your ax to grind? You say "we" in ATL. Did DL require to come to work in ATL in order to keep your job?

Nope My ax that I am grinding is how DL can do no wron when in real life they have f**ked up a pretty good bit. I don't work for DL and if you read my posts you will see I am one of the larger DL lovers on here but some of us need to see that DL can screw up and can not make every city in the world a hub. DL has failed more times than had a hub work. PDX,LAX,DFW and the only one that seems to work is JFK.
BTW just because someone calls you out doesn't mean that hate DL.  Wink Also I want an LAX DL hub more than most people on here but I doesn't look like it will happen.  Wink

Quoting Panamair (Reply 254):
LMAO! This CEO is now trying to add a whole new airline (in fact the 5th largest airline) - that's about the largest ADD to Delta in it entire history!

I agree with that but he has not added many cities. I'm not saying he wont add any but I don't see him going out a starting a new JFK.  Wink

Quoting Panamair (Reply 254):
Anderson is operating in a different fuel environment than Grinstein or even Mullin. DL was cutting left and right in 2005 when it entered bankruptcy as well and Anderson was nowhere near Delta then.

Again I do agree fuel has alot to do with it but i don't think Anderson will add very much anywhere. Surely not start the next JFK type hub at LAX. If UA goes out then DL will move if not DL will add a few more mainline flights back and some T-Pac flights that won't work from DTW or ATL and that will be about it.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-11 13:45:13 and read 9443 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 257):
Again, should we expect that NONE of the big six airlines will ever grow at LAX again since they are all currently down?

How are you not understanding that what DL recently did at LAX was very different from the other carriers simply reducing service? DL added a ton of service, and then pulled most of it--so much so that they are smaller in LAX than they were before the blitz.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 257):
Did you ever make a B in school and have a professor tell you that you should not expect that you would ever make an A again?

Well DL clearly got an F for just about everything except for the preexisting routes at LAX. I welcome them to try again but what is going to be different this time besides fuel?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-11 14:31:23 and read 9414 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 259):

How are you not understanding that what DL recently did at LAX was very different from the other carriers simply reducing service? DL added a ton of service, and then pulled most of it--so much so that they are smaller in LAX than they were before the blitz.

Everybody, but maybe Virgin, is smaller than they were before at LAX. Much smaller.

You know that vast majority of that service was ExpressJet pro-rate flying. The Delta metal stuff was clearly marginal, developmental service that was more vulnerable to rising fuel prices. JAX, CMH, RDU, BDL and the Central American markets just aren't that big and rich to support nonstop service when oil is over $140/barrel.

Some of it will come back over time and some of Delta's moves at LAX will be different markets. I doubt they will do most of the ExpressJet markets EVER on their own metal. They never intended to in the first place. XJ was a zero risk proposition for them. I think you will see the DL code available in a lot of other West Coast markets in the near future, however.

I'm not going to claim that DL will be #1, but when you factor in NW, it gets pretty close to revenue parity with AA and UA. And KE/AF are two of the top four international carriers at LAX, in terms of revenue. (#1 & #2 in terms of traffic) (QF and CX are the other two)

In fact, for YE 1Q08, Adjusted MIDT has AA at 12% Revenue Share, UA at 12%, WN at 5% and DL+NW at 9%. While Delta has pulled a lot of seats this fall, most were in low revenue markets. UA, on the otherhand, pulled HKG and FRA which are going to really hurt Revenue Share. If Delta gets GRU, you are going to see a situation where DL's LAX revenues are approaching parity with UA.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-11 14:40:48 and read 9418 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 258):


Almost all of the Latin America flights added have been cut or are now 1-2x weekly also BOM gets cut,CDG,LGW,ORY. Other than CVG, JFK has taken the hard hits for the 4 hubs.

And tell us what has been added. I know it absolutely hates for you to admit it, but DL has added more service than it has removed.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 258):
BTW just because someone calls you out doesn't mean that hate DL. Also I want an LAX DL hub more than most people on here but I doesn't look like it will happen.

But you obviously do have an ax to grind because if you didn't, you would at least be objective enough to consider the additions and subtractions. You obviously aren't interested in objectivity.

You will get a significant international presence at LAX in time. And in the meantime, there is absolutely no risk that anyone else will add it. When DL gets around to adding more int'l service from LAX, it will be all the rave.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 259):
DL added a ton of service

let me repeat ONCE AGAIN. The ExpressJet RJ service - which is what has drawn the most criticism - was suspended by ExpressJet. It was flown AT RISK by ExpressJet and DL agreed with them they should no longer have to take the risk. I know memories are short, but the reality is that DL offered XJet the opportunity to deploy aircraft that were pushed out of the CO network. XJ was anxious to find a place to fly those planes and so they started their own branded flying along with the DL at risk flying. DL needed someone to run planes in and out of its terminal. The agreement met needs for both XJ and DL.

DL no longer is under threat of having LAWA take its terminal; XJ's stockholders could no longer handle the losses from the DL at risk (pro rate) and branded flying. The planes were returned to CO.

DL is actually the winner in this whole fiasco at the expense of XJ and CO.

When you remove from consideration the XJ flying at LAX, DL has actually cut alot less capacity than you indicate.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-11 15:13:55 and read 9370 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 261):
When you remove from consideration the XJ flying at LAX, DL has actually cut alot less capacity than you indicate.

Of course, but it's still quite a bit of mainline capacity, and it still remains clear that DL couldn't make profitable inroads into the markets that it tried, whether it's LAXSEA or LAXTIJ.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Panamair
Posted 2008-09-11 15:25:25 and read 9362 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 258):
but he has not added many cities

Alright, now you're forcing me to go all Lambert on you!

Cuts from JFK in 2008:
AUS, LGW, OTP, BOM, CDG, SJD, PTY, GUA, SJO, LIR

Added to JFK in 2008:
CLT, IAH, MSP, BGR, YYG (seasonal), YHX (seasonal), AGP, LYS, EDI, TLV, CAI, AMM, DKR, CPT, GEO, ANU, BOG, EZE, BON

BTW, ATL had ONE new transatlantic destination this summer: ARN.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-11 15:26:08 and read 9375 times.

see Jetlanta's post.

LAX is still primarily a spoke city for DL. It will be developed at the appropriate time. In all likelihood, int'l longhaul expansion will drive domestic expansion. DL has committed its resources to developing Latin America, SW Asia, and Europe from the eastern US hubs (and of course SLC). The focus will shift to East Asia and transpac routes and LAX will get a piece of the action.

Since there is virtually no threat of another US carrier expanding from the west coast to Asia, DL can start working on LAX and other west coast transpac routes when DL is ready to.

There will be appropriate domestic flights both mainline and regional partner to make those int'l flights to Latin America and Asia work.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-11 16:19:27 and read 9336 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 262):
Of course, but it's still quite a bit of mainline capacity, and it still remains clear that DL couldn't make profitable inroads into the markets that it tried, whether it's LAXSEA or LAXTIJ.

Yeah, but the mainline capacity DL has cut is not out of line with AA, and especially UA. In this environment, it is silly to look at DL in a vacuum. Legacy carriers have cut a LOT of capacity at LAX. Perhaps it says something about the current market dynamics there.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OA412
Posted 2008-09-11 16:51:31 and read 9316 times.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 258):
ORY

ORY was never cut as it was simply never started.

Quoting Panamair (Reply 263):
Alright, now you're forcing me to go all Lambert on you!

  

[Edited 2008-09-11 16:53:21]

[Edited 2008-09-11 16:54:01]

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: FlyDreamliner
Posted 2008-09-11 16:57:04 and read 9306 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 141):

The same abyss that says that there is not 28 hours in a day, and the very same abyss that calls such routings - Aircraft Utilization. To think that DTW-NRT will be a 744 and ATL-NRT will be a smaller aircraft is lopsided, and unfeasible. ATL fills seats to 3x as many markets as DTW. The 744 is put to much, much better use in ATL than it is in DTW. Dont be to surprised to see the DTW-NRT route slashed to 1x per day in the coming years. It is bound to happen, and believe you me that all of this is being looked at as we speak. The boys down in ATL are doing their homework and they are doing it in overtime. Every single route from MSP and DTW that can erode yields from ATL is being looked at. Every single widebody route from MSP and DTW that can be downgraded or rationalized with less frequency is being looked at. What worked for NW is not what works for DL.

What has worked well at NW will, more likely than not, continue to work well and make money for DL. Combining what works well at DL and what works well at NW is what makes mergers like this worthwhile, not just tossing out everything good from NW, for no real reason, just to do everything for the sake of "old Delta."

You see the world in an ATL centric model. The fine folks in Atlanta are doing their homework, and their comparing how much DTW and MSP flights will erode yields out of ATL, SLC, and JFK, and how much ATL, JFK, and SLC flights will erode yields out of DTW and MSP. If it's more profitable to sacrifice an ATL flight to boost an MSP flight, that's what they'll do, and vise-versa. There are a lot of flights that just work better out of hubs that aren't ATL.

Quoting MasseyBrown (Reply 144):


Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 138):
DTW will more than likely never see TLV, DXB, DEL, or BOM service on DL.

It's not hard to see DTW, where DL will have little competition, losing eastbound flow traffic to JFK.

Yes and no. JFK is jammed up, maxed out for traffic, restricted, and prone to terrible delays and disruptions. DTW, on the other hand, runs smooth as butter must all of the time, and has capacity to spare. Obviously, the strong NYC market will drive DL to make the most of its operations at JFK, but for connecting traffic when there is more than JFK can easily handle, I think we'll see DTW pick a lot of that up.

For instance (this is just an example), if there is a strong JFK-BOM, a large portion of it is connecting traffic, and they want to grow, they can add a DTW-BOM to pick up a lot of the connecting traffic, free up more seats for O&D on the JFK flight, and do very well with the both of them, and have more resilience in their network for doing so.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 146):
Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 128):
Again, only a rumor, the current NW gateways will more than likely be modified in frequency DTW and MSP could both lose a NRT service.

Sounds more like you making s**t up. DTW and MSP arent going to lose NRT service.

Well, MSP has only one daily NRT service (most of the time, at least), and I doubt they'll cut it. We might in time see the 744 swapped for a 772 or 788 (which I'd be just fine with  Smile but I doubt it is going anywhere. MSP is the second largest domestic hub in the combined DL/NW, only surpassed by ATL. It serves a good part of the country better than any other hub, and serves as solid competition for UA and AA out of ORD. Yields on MSP-NRT are good, and geographically, the flight's not that long either (a little over 10 hours airborn eastbound).

DTW is another solid hub, well positioned for T-ATL traffic, and with a great facility. It's an asset, and one that DL won't pass up utilizing without good reason.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2008-09-11 17:13:34 and read 9290 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 260):
I'm not going to claim that DL will be #1, but when you factor in NW, it gets pretty close to revenue parity with AA and UA.

Since when is revenue a measure of size?

Normally its number of flights, seats in the market, ASMs or even movements help denote size or the scope of the operation.

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 260):
And KE/AF are two of the top four international carriers at LAX, in terms of revenue. (#1 & #2 in terms of traffic) (QF and CX are the other two)

So you would say an airline like Mexicana with 18 or so daily flights is not one of the top international airlines at LAX?
Sure it is, as revenue figures are not a measure of size or scale of operations. Revenue totals will obviously will look different if you fly 250miles to Vegas, or 7000 to Australia or in all leisure vs more business markets.

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 260):
In fact, for YE 1Q08, Adjusted MIDT has AA at 12% Revenue Share, UA at 12%, WN at 5% and DL+NW at 9%. While Delta has pulled a lot of seats this fall, most were in low revenue markets.

Look at Delta later in the year. DL ops have dropped of a cliff. Started with a dribble in the spring, increased during the summer, and now in September really have scalled down.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 261):
You will get a significant international presence at LAX in time

Yes, you continue saying so year after year like a broken record.  Yeah sure

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-11 17:22:33 and read 9267 times.



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 268):
Since when is revenue a measure of size?

uhhh.... it is the basis of comparison of ALL companies and ALL units within any company.

Further, it is the basis by which we can say, for instance, that the US has the world's largest economy. It is not because we consume more oil than everyone else but that we PRODUCE and CONSUME more in DOLLARS - REVENUE.

It IS money that makes the world go around.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 268):
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 261):
You will get a significant international presence at LAX in time

Yes, you continue saying so year after year like a broken record.

Perhaps I happen to know that it WILL happen. Let me reiterate, though, that no other US carrier is making any noise about doing anything w/ LAX so there is no rush for expansion. Last time I checked, LAX is also losing foreign carrier service as well. DL should be received with open arms when they start their expansion.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-09-11 17:35:33 and read 9239 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 269):
Further, it is the basis by which we can say, for instance, that the US has the world's largest economy. It is not because we consume more oil than everyone else but that we PRODUCE and CONSUME more in DOLLARS - REVENUE.

You're confusing absolute size with market share. Look to the auto industry, for instance. We talk all about market share of various manufacturers, but we measure that in units of output (i.e. cars), not in dollars. We do this because we've found that measure to be more illuminative. Why is revenue more useful here?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-11 17:43:04 and read 9236 times.



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 268):
Since when is revenue a measure of size?

Normally its number of flights, seats in the market, ASMs or even movements help denote size or the scope of the operation.

Well, it is how airlines compare their size in a market with each other. Revenue Share is the single most important measure that airlines use when looking at their size/share of a market.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 268):
So you would say an airline like Mexicana with 18 or so daily flights is not one of the top international airlines at LAX?
Sure it is, as revenue figures are not a measure of size or scale of operations. Revenue totals will obviously will look different if you fly 250miles to Vegas, or 7000 to Australia or in all leisure vs more business markets.

But see, you are looking at operational measures as the standard. That's fine. But airlines really don't care how many flights they have, its sort of a side item. They really care about how much revenue they generate.

I'm not sure why that doesn't make sense to you.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2008-09-11 17:55:58 and read 9223 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 269):
It IS money that makes the world go around.

Yes, but are talking about airline presence at a specific airport.

If revenue is the key measure, I suggest you quickly contact people such as the DOT/BTS, and have them revise their statistical measurements. Cant see a hint about revenues in their airport airline rankings.
http://www.transtats.bts.gov/airports.asp

In my 20 years of doing what I do I've never seen revenue being a measure to gauge a carriers size at an airport. Route performance yes, but not airport presence or size.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 269):
Last time I checked, LAX is also losing foreign carrier service as well.

Airlines come and go. There are a few new ones including Alitalia(allegadly leaving), Emirates, V Australia.

Also for the record, year over year international traffic is up.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 269):
DL should be received with open arms when they start their expansion.

Well if previous experience is any measure it will likely go over like a thud in the market.

What Delta simply does not understood here in Los Angeles is just because you add flights does not mean people will come.
Any loyalty or affinity for Delta in the market has expired many years ago following the Western pull down both by the consumer and travel professionals in SoCal.

In addition LA in many ways is very much blessed that its travel needs are already well met by a host of airlines which which have strong market presence and loyal following.

I've cant recall hearing an Angeleno complain about lack of service, prices or options, so its not as if there is a hostage market or void that Delta needs to fill.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-11 18:09:37 and read 9219 times.



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 272):

Yes, but are talking about airline presence at a specific airport.

If revenue is the key measure, I suggest you quickly contact people such as the DOT/BTS, and have them revise their statistical measurements. Cant see a hint about revenues in their airport airline rankings.
http://www.transtats.bts.gov/airports.asp

In my 20 years of doing what I do I've never seen revenue being a measure to gauge a carriers size at an airport. Route performance yes, but not airport presence or size.

That's because you've never had a job that has had access to market-level revenues.

You can show me every operational stat you want. If you REALLY think that's how airlines compare themselves at the highest levels, you simply don't know what you don't know.

Revenue is the Gold Standard of Network Planning diagnostics. It is ALL about revenues.

Frequencies and traffic comparisons are the domain of people without access to the revenue data.

Sorry. It's that simple.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXdude1023
Posted 2008-09-11 18:19:44 and read 9208 times.



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 272):
What Delta simply does not understood here in Los Angeles is just because you add flights does not mean people will come.

Absolutely. This isnt Atlanta. We are a much larger, much more complex, much more international market than Atlanta. DL wont recieve a heros welcome just for showing up. That was their problem the last time the tried to expand LAX.

If any of you think DL is guaranteed any success just for adding flights to LAX, youre wrong. They would have to steal away a chunk of the many AA, UA, and WN loyal flyers here. Working in the travel industry myself here in Los Angeles, I can tell you that would be very difficult. Even if they do, then they have to compete with all the international carriers here as well. Thats a daunting task too.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-11 18:32:32 and read 9192 times.



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 270):
You're confusing absolute size with market share

as Jetlanta says, revenue is the key for everything - including airlines.

Share is simply the division of the total reported revenue among the airlines.

I am confused about nothing.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 272):
Airlines come and go.

So it's ok for AIRLINES to come and go from LAX but it's not ok for DL to drop a route and then re-add something later? Please.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 272):
I've cant recall hearing an Angeleno complain about lack of service

LAWA sure is though.

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 274):
If any of you think DL is guaranteed any success just for adding flights to LAX, youre wrong

I never said they would walk in and succeed. That is why they have not added any transpac service since their short-lived attempt to move the PDX operation to LAX.

DL won't be stealing from UA and AA. AA has one transpac route from LAX now and NW already carries far more passengers at higher average fares than either AA or UA. DL will become LAX' largest US based airline to Asia the minute they acquire NW (although NW will continue to operate under its own certificate and report to the DOT as NW but the money will go to DL's bank accounts). UA's presence in LAX is dependent on connecting passengers via SFO. As soon as nonstop service is operated and DL wins the corporate contracts, UA will lose most of its best LAX business.

DL has never flown LAX-S. America and flew LAX-Asia only, first to NRT with no partner and little feed on either end and even shorter to NGO and FUK, very small routes again with no partner or feed. Sustaining LAX-Asia post 9/11 made little sense for DL... it became apparent that AA couldn't sustain SEA or SJC to NRT either.

The NW merger will give DL the presence to compete in Asia, including from the west coast.
NW has never had a strong, sustained presence on the west coast. DL has never had a presence in Asia. NW has never flown to S. America. It isn't too hard to see that NW's strengths in Asia and DL's domestic and Latin strengths will allow the west coast, including LAX to Asia to be developed.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2008-09-11 18:58:41 and read 9229 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 273):
That's because you've never had a job that has had access to market-level revenues.

I guess what I do these days does not count then  Yeah sure

I do see the DOT 10% coupon data, GDS MIDT tapes along with IATA traffic and ticket reports.

Still does not change the fact that airlines are not measured in size based on revenues at airports.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 275):
So it's ok for AIRLINES to come and go from LAX but it's not ok for DL to drop a route and then re-add something later? Please.

Delta did not drop or add simply a route. It added 40 of them, to only see them go bye bye.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 275):
LAWA sure is though.

At ONT and PMD

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 275):
DL will become LAX' largest US based airline to Asia the minute they acquire NW

Huh? With a single flight to NRT?

Give us a break. While they might exceed AA in offerings with beyond NRT connections, United by far is the largest US based airline to Asia from the West Coast as you correctly mention the many connections they can offer via SFO in addition to their NRT nonstop.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 275):
and DL wins the corporate contracts, UA will lose most of its best LAX business.

If and when... I certainly cant see those with West Coast travel centric needs looking at DL being much of an option as they yet again have failed to provide much if any Western flying unless if you expect people back track to SLC.
And no I dont consider the AS partnership substituting for DL own metal. If folks wanted AS, they can happily stick to corporate contract with AA for example.

btw- I really feel sorry for the few folks that DL managed to yet again fake out in the last two years with its historical yo-yo LAX market presence.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-11 19:05:53 and read 9221 times.



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 276):
I guess what I do these days does not count then Yeah sure

I do see the DOT 10% coupon data, GDS MIDT tapes along with IATA traffic and ticket reports.

Still does not change the fact that airlines are not measured in size based on revenues at airports.

I really don't care what data you look at. If you aren't working in an airline Network Planning department, or haven't in the past, you don't know what you are looking for in that data.

Let me be as blunt as I can be. When airline Network Planning departments compare the size of each carrier's presence at an airport, they are looking primarily at Revenue Share. They care little about how many flights or even how many passengers are carried.

Now, they may publicly talk about traffic or operations, but that isn't the internal metric. Not by any stretch.

I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to understand. Why in the world would the number of passengers a carrier flows through LAX be more important than the amount of revenue they generate?

Seriously, why?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-11 19:18:20 and read 9216 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 260):
Everybody, but maybe Virgin, is smaller than they were before at LAX. Much smaller.

WN? (note am asking a question)

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 261):
And tell us what has been added. I know it absolutely hates for you to admit it, but DL has added more service than it has removed.

In the last year? Ok
LYS,AGP,IST,KBP,LHR,DKR(-CPT),CAI,AMM and TLV. (BTW I am a DL lover get it now or should I post it again?)
cut :
Binghamton
Bucharest
Guatemala City
London Gatwick
NAirobi via Dakar
Paris Orly
Punta Cana
Quebec City
Santiago, DR
Santo Domingo
BOM
GRU (pending LAX-GRU JFK-GRU will go 6x weekly)

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 261):
But you obviously do have an ax to grind because if you didn't, you would at least be objective enough to consider the additions and subtractions. You obviously aren't interested in objectivity.

I told you about my ax its people who say Delta can do no wrong.  Wink

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 261):
You will get a significant international presence at LAX in time. And in the meantime, there is absolutely no risk that anyone else will add it. When DL gets around to adding more int'l service from LAX, it will be all the rave.

Sure and DL will be the largest carrier at LAX right?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-11 19:34:08 and read 9198 times.



Quoting Panamair (Reply 263):
BTW, ATL had ONE new transatlantic destination this summer: ARN.

and one lost VIE. But on my last count DL still leads JFK something like 23-25. In terms of A/C size then DL wins as 7-8(?) JFK flights are 757s and all the rest are 763s while ATL is most 763 with a good bit of 764s.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 264):
Since there is virtually no threat of another US carrier expanding from the west coast to Asia, DL can start working on LAX and other west coast transpac routes when DL is ready to.

AA? I would be willing to bet if they can't get DFW-China (due to pilots) they will go after LAX-China and they have 7 77Es come by 2015(?)

Quoting Panamair (Reply 263):
Alright, now you're forcing me to go all Lambert on you!

HAHAHAHAHAHA good one.

Quoting OA412 (Reply 266):
ORY was never cut as it was simply never started.

Its still a cut in my book. They said it would happen but it didn't.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 278):
Binghamton
Bucharest
Guatemala City
London Gatwick
NAirobi via Dakar
Paris Orly
Punta Cana
Quebec City
Santiago, DR
Santo Domingo
BOM
GRU (pending LAX-GRU JFK-GRU will go 6x weekly)

Forgot about CDG

Quoting Panamair (Reply 263):
AUS, LGW, OTP, BOM, CDG, SJD, PTY, GUA, SJO, LIR

read my above list. If some of these are back its for 2-3 flights a week at the most AFAIK.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cws818
Posted 2008-09-12 00:31:13 and read 9113 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 248):
AX will get its growth in time.

Yes, it will get growth and re-growth. AA/AS/UA will undoubtedly attempt to increase their SoCal market shares when circumstances make that possible. DL, history suggests, will do the same thing. The $64,000 question, though, is how many months DL's attempt will last.

History is instructive.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cws818
Posted 2008-09-12 00:44:42 and read 9116 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 234):
DL is the ONLY airline that is pulling off a merger

That is only partially true.

First, DL is the only airline who has penned a merger agreement. AA, AS, CO seem to have determined that a merger is more trouble than it is worth at this time. UA and US seem to be unwanted, at present, in any contemplated "merger dance."

Second, and contrary to your steadfast, almost evangelical predictions of success, the merger has NOT YET been approved.

Therefore, you are proffering two misrepresentations - (1) that DL and DL alone is able to consummate a merger transaction, when no other carrier has made a merger proposal; and (2) that DL/NW has been granted governmental sanction. Neither, obviously, is true.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 234):
They intend to do it well. They will focus on building LAX when the time is right

They focused on building LAX over the past few years. As we all know, it was a smashing, unprecedented, shining success.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 234):
DL has engaged in the most aggressive int'l expansion of any US airline and has built a globe spanning network

Well, perhaps if they started to serve Monrovia, Karachi, Dhahran, etc....then they could be Pan Am's postmortem alter-ego.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 234):
DL will build LAX but they will do it in the appropriate time.

They thought that the past 2 years were an appropriate time to build LAX The proof will be in the pudding, and in whether or not it lasts for more than a matter of months...

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-12 06:23:09 and read 9084 times.



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 276):
Still does not change the fact that airlines are not measured in size based on revenues at airports.

Traffic data is far faster to come by... and airports themselves don't really care much about what kind of revenue a passenger brings but how many passengers are served. A passenger from LAX to MEX (and the airline serving it) pays the same fees as a passenger flying to ICN but the economic impact to the region is far higher for an int'l flight. There is not an airport in the world that would turn down on an economic basis an intercontinental flight in favor of a domestic flight.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 276):
Delta did not drop or add simply a route. It added 40 of them, to only see them go bye bye.

again. stick w/the fact (I know it' hard for you... but XJ dropped most of those flights, not DL.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 276):
At ONT and PMD

LAWA is on public record as being concerned about the drop in int'l flights at LAX and you know it. You really aren't interested in LAX' well being if you believe the status quo among US carriers is satisfactory at LAX concerning int'l flights.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 276):

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 275):
DL will become LAX' largest US based airline to Asia the minute they acquire NW

Huh? With a single flight to NRT?

Give us a break. While they might exceed AA in offerings with beyond NRT connections, United by far is the largest US based airline to Asia from the West Coast

Yes, NW already carries more passengers at higher average fares on its LAXNRT flight than o either AA or UA based on DOT data. UA has the same ONE flight per day from LAX to Asia than NW and AA do.

The statement is about LAX - not the west coast. But I will go so far as to say that if DL even gives a half hearted attempt at west coast to Asia expansion, it won't be difficult to pass UA from the west coast to Asia since UA is cutting transpac flights right now.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 278):
(BTW I am a DL lover get it now or should I post it again?)

remind me not to recommend your idea of love to anyone.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 279):
AA? I would be willing to bet

in your dreams. AA has done less in the way of int'l expansion than any other US airline.

Quoting Cws818 (Reply 280):
History is instructive.

but it is hardly a complete predictor of success. If it were, there were lots of people on this board who would have never made it out of kindergarten.

Quoting Cws818 (Reply 281):
First, DL is the only airline who has penned a merger agreement

and until someone else gets that far, it is pure speculation about what they might do. Companies aren't judged on speculation but results.

And I'll gladly bet you that DL will obtain approval for the NW merger. If you believe otherwise, I'll bet you to dinner at your nearest 5 star restaurant.

Quoting Cws818 (Reply 281):
they could be Pan Am's postmortem alter-ego.

Pan Am never carried as many int'l passengers as DL does now.

Based on August 2008 traffic data, DL is the largest US int'l airline. DL mainline carried nearly 2% more int'l RPMs than AA and over 10% more than UA. DL has become the US' largest int'l carrier based on traffic (at stat that laxintl likes) EVEN BEFORE the NW merger.

DL didn't need to acquire NW to become the dominant US int'l airline but it needed it to become well rounded in its service to Asia. Anyone who looks at DL's route map and growth over recent years to Latin America, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and South/SW Asia should not be too surprised to see that DL will take the leading position to Asia. LAX will become a part of that.

No US airline has bothered to developed LAX-S. America until now. DL will develop LAX-S. America and LAX-Asia - something no other US airline has been able to do. Those who continue to argue DL won't succeed at LAX will only look more foolish when DL does begin the routes and obtains success.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-12 13:56:05 and read 8984 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 282):
in your dreams. AA has done less in the way of int'l expansion than any other US airline.

Point? AA has 7 777s on order they will send them somewhere.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 282):
remind me not to recommend your idea of love to anyone.

Because I call you out on your LAX hub promises? That means I must not like DL?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-12 15:35:46 and read 8921 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 283):
Point? AA has 7 777s on order they will send them somewhere.

for delivery when?

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 283):
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 282):
remind me not to recommend your idea of love to anyone.

Because I call you out on your LAX hub promises?

I don't expect anyone to blanket endorse anything but you have some serious axes to grind. Again,, I wouldn't recommend your idea of love to anyone I care about.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-12 15:52:30 and read 8902 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 284):
I don't expect anyone to blanket endorse anything but you have some serious axes to grind. Again,, I wouldn't recommend your idea of love to anyone I care about.

WT I don't think I can say it any clearer. You want to mark me as a DL hater fine but you wrong.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 284):
for delivery when?

Sometime before 2015.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-12 16:35:33 and read 8882 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 285):


WT I don't think I can say it any clearer. You want to mark me as a DL hater fine but you wrong.

that is fine. I would ask that you be objective instead of so emotional in your statements then.

By 2015, DL will have replaced the 744 fleet it will acquire from NW and have a fleet of 777s comprising 2ERs, LRs, and 3ERs that will exceed more than 30 frames.

Of course AA's move to convert 757s to int'l use should increase the number of int'l widebodies avaialble to it - a move CO, DL, NW, and US recognized a couple years ago

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-12 16:42:36 and read 8866 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 286):
By 2015, DL will have replaced the 744 fleet it will acquire from NW and have a fleet of 777s comprising 2ERs, LRs, and 3ERs that will exceed more than 30 frames.

That would be really stupid. The 744s might be on the way out but to replace them by 2015? Hell some of them are not very old at all.

And I'll say it.............they will use the DC-9s to fly the crews home. bigthumbsup   bigthumbsup 

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 286):
Of course AA's move to convert 757s to int'l use should increase the number of int'l widebodies avaialble to it - a move CO, DL, NW, and US recognized a couple years ago

I'll agree with this but AFAIK most of the 75As will replace 763s which will replace A300s.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: United1
Posted 2008-09-12 16:42:58 and read 8868 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 286):
Of course AA's move to convert 757s to int'l use should increase the number of int'l widebodies avaialble to it - a move CO, DL, NW, and US recognized a couple years ago

I don't know if you are going to see much of an increase in AAs international widebody flying because of this, a good chunk of that capacity is going to have to be used to back fill for the A300s that are leaving the system.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2008-09-12 17:04:11 and read 8856 times.



Quoting United1 (Reply 288):

I don't know if you are going to see much of an increase in AAs international widebody flying because of this, a good chunk of that capacity is going to have to be used to back fill for the A300s that are leaving the system.

A300 capacity will largely be replaced by increased frequency and the new, higher density 160 seat 737-800s.

For example, MIA-PTY can go from 1x 757/1x A300 to 3x 738 and capacity will be nearly flat.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: SoBe
Posted 2008-09-12 17:33:34 and read 8806 times.



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 287):
That would be really stupid. The 744s might be on the way out but to replace them by 2015? Hell some of them are not very old at all.

In 2015, 10 out of 16 will be 25 and 26 years old. At that point would DL want to keep running the last 6 as a small sub-fleet?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: DeltaL1011man
Posted 2008-09-12 20:57:40 and read 8750 times.



Quoting SoBe (Reply 290):
In 2015, 10 out of 16 will be 25 and 26 years old. At that point would DL want to keep running the last 6 as a small sub-fleet?

25-26 isn't that old. As long as the 76Es keep trucking the 744s will fly right next to them. Sadly  Sad

If DL ordered the 77W i would be very happy and would win a bet. Maybe they could be in on the 777-300ERX?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cws818
Posted 2008-09-13 02:41:48 and read 8701 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 282):
No US airline has bothered to developed LAX-S. America until now. DL will develop LAX-S. America and LAX-Asia - something no other US airline has been able to do.

Sadly, you are incorrect. UA previously flew LAX-GRU (obviously discontinued for sometime) and did so at the same time they flew Transpacific routes ex-LAX.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 282):
And I'll gladly bet you that DL will obtain approval for the NW merger. If you believe otherwise, I'll bet you to dinner at your nearest 5 star restaurant.

I think they will probably obtain merger approval, as well.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 282):
Companies aren't judged on speculation but results.

Yes, they are. Since we are talking about DL and LAX, then DL can be judged fairly based on their results in the LA market, which have not been impressive.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-13 15:29:16 and read 8579 times.



Quoting Cws818 (Reply 292):
Sadly, you are incorrect. UA previously flew LAX-GRU (obviously discontinued for sometime) and did so at the same time they flew Transpacific routes ex-LAX.

I didn't say no one else ever flew the route. But UA has clearly not developed the route if it no longer operates it.

Quoting Cws818 (Reply 292):
Yes, they are. Since we are talking about DL and LAX, then DL can be judged fairly based on their results in the LA market, which have not been impressive.

the people that influence company actions - the stockholders and the BOD - work off results, not speculation. A.net would be dead if people had to only work w/ facts.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cws818
Posted 2008-09-13 23:45:00 and read 8452 times.



Quoting Cws818 (Reply 292):

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 282):
No US airline has bothered to developed LAX-S. America until now. DL will develop LAX-S. America and LAX-Asia - something no other US airline has been able to do.

Sadly, you are incorrect. UA previously flew LAX-GRU (obviously discontinued for sometime) and did so at the same time they flew Transpacific routes ex-LAX.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 293):
I didn't say no one else ever flew the route. But UA has clearly not developed the route if it no longer operates it.

No, what you asserted was that no US carrier has, up until the current DL application, attempted to develop Los Angeles-South America in tandem with LAX-Asia. As I noted, UA made an attempt to do just that some years ago. The fact that they no longer serve the market indicates that their attempt to develop that traffic flow was not successful. It is not that UA has not "bothered to develop" Asia-LAX-S.America, rather it is that UA found their attempt to do so less than financially fruitful.

If you were to take a look at the "Timetables & Route Maps" section at www.airchive.net, you will find that Pan Am (I)'s 25 October 1979 map shows LAX-CCS, as well as LAX-NRT, LAX-OSA, LAX-AKL, and LAX-SYD.

Clearly, history shows that the notion of connecting South America to Asia via LAX has been tried before. The facts indicate that DL has not come up with the brilliant idea of doing so before anyone else had. DL has not found a market/route that has never been served before in this case; on the contrary, what they have found is a market/route that has been served before, but which is not served, at present. So, here, DL has not invented the proverbial wheel.

Quoting Cws818 (Reply 292):
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 282):
Companies aren't judged on speculation but results.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 293):
Quoting Cws818 (Reply 292):
Yes, they are. Since we are talking about DL and LAX, then DL can be judged fairly based on their results in the LA market, which have not been impressive.

the people that influence company actions - the stockholders and the BOD - work off results, not speculation. A.net would be dead if people had to only work w/ facts.

Where to begin....
First, a company's actions are typically influenced by management, with the interests of the stockholders in mind, and with the BOD in the loop. The shareholders don't simply organize a caucus at the conclusion of which they present DL management with a list of actions to be taken. Similarly, corporate BOD's do not meet on a daily or weekly basis, as you know. Under the common law of corporations, a Board of Directors is the body that controls a corporate entity; almost invariably, the Board delegates day-to-day, week-to-week corporate control functions to management. Management, in turn, keeps the Board apprised of the actions it has taken, is taking, and plans to take.

Second, since management actually determines a corporation's courses of action, management must work off of results, as you have stated. When the corporation in question is DL, and when the set of results in question is LAX (or the Southern California market, more generally), DL management must be guided, at least in part, by what results DL has, to date, had in LAX/SoCal. Recent history demonstrates that the results have been less than stellar. For all of DL's maneuvering over the past few years, all they have managed to do is open and then shut a gaggle of routes and retain control of their gates in T5 (plus 61, 63, 65 in T6). One would hope that the bigwigs at DL are not being guided solely by the quaint maxim that "size matters." Evidence suggests that they are not: 10 years ago, DL mainline used all of Concourses A & B at CVG-T3; today, Concourse A sees NW, CO, DL Connection, and a bit of DL mainline. Clearly, DL realized that they were too big for their own good at CVG. Similarly, DL seems to have come to the conclusion that they were too big for their own good at LAX. Before you trot out that old saw about DL's recent expansion/deflation being a function of ExpressJet, please note that I am referring to markets like LAX-MGA/GUA/BZE/BOS/IAD (did that even start?)....

Since you seem to be asking to be presented with facts, here you go. Lets take a look at DL's results at LAX, keeping in mind that the term "results" refers, by definition, to the past, or to what has come before now:

- DL Worldwide Timetable, 2 March 1992 - weekly departures from LAX, pages 247-252 (DL mainline & DL Connection):
ACA (8), ANC (3), ATL (42), BFL (42), YYC (7), CVG (21), DFW (35), FAT (63), GDL (14), HNL (28), IPL (21), IYK (30), ZIH (3), OGG (7), LAS (56), MZT (7), MEX (21), MRY (28), MSY (7), JFK (21), EWR (14), ONT (34), SNA (40), MCO (21), PMD (41), PSP (77), PHX (28), PDX (25), PVR (7), SMF (27), SLC (63), SAN (191), SFO (114), SJC (7), SBP (42), SBA (62), SMX (42), SEA (35), TPA (7), TEX [Telluride] (3), NRT (6), TUS (28), YVR (21), YUM (28).

TOTAL: 1427/week; avg 203.86/day

- DL Worldwide Timetable, 5 April 1998 - weekly departures from LAX, pages 198-202 (DL mainline & DL Connection):
ATL (55), BFL (49), CVG (28), DFW (21), FAT (42), GDL (7), HNL (28), OGG (7), LAS (29), MEX (14), MSY (7), JFK (21), SNA (42), MCO (21), PSP (35), PHX (7), SLC (56), SAN (77), SFO (28), SJC (21), SBA (49), TPA (14), NRT (6).

TOTAL: 693/week; avg. 99/day

- DL on SkyTeam Downloadable Timetable (updated 13 September 2008), Week of 14 September 2008 - weekly departures from LAX (DL mainline & DL Connection):
ATL (69), CVG (17), HNL (14), GDL (4), LIH (5), KOA (4), OGG (7), CUN (1), JFK (45), SLC (47), PVR (2).

TOTAL: 215/week; avg. 30.71/day

An examination of the data above lends itself to the conclusory phrase "how the mighty have fallen."

If the DL management are truly clued into DL's results when it comes to LAX, then they might just realize that "if at first you don't succeed, try, try again" does not always ring true. Their forthcoming, as you assert, efforts to build a west coast transpacific gateway would probably be best expended in a market other than Los Angeles.

Finally, allow me to save your fingers the trouble of typing: I am not, as you might think, one of those who has "not seen the light" of DL transcendent, ascendent, and all-conquering. I have no problem with DL; they are a fine company. But, they are a fine company that has not been able to make it work in Southern California.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-14 12:30:33 and read 8377 times.

my original wording was that UA has not developed LAX-S.America. You may argue with what "developed" means but given they don't operate it anymore doesn't tell me they are a factor in the current discussion.

Quoting Cws818 (Reply 294):
Since you seem to be asking to be presented with facts, here you go. Lets take a look at DL's results at LAX, keeping in mind that the term "results" refers, by definition, to the past, or to what has come before now:

thank you for your lengthy reply but you have just confirmed what I said. The Board and Execs guide the company as a whole. They have done what they believe is in the best interests of DL. While LAX interests you, it is not the sole interest DL leaders must consider. It is pure speculation to think that DL's reputation or leadership is tied to any one city, including LAX.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cws818
Posted 2008-09-14 22:45:32 and read 8224 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 295):
The Board and Execs guide the company as a whole.

Thank you for reading what I wrote regarding corporate structure. Your reading comprehension is excellent.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 295):
hey have done what they believe is in the best interests of DL.

One would hope so.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 295):
While LAX interests you, it is not the sole interest DL leaders must consider. It is pure speculation to think that DL's reputation or leadership is tied to any one city, including LAX.

This thread is about LAX-GRU. One would assume, therefore, that a focus on LAX is pertinent to the discussion. You, though, are the one who has crowed about DL's future including a glorious ascendance into a dominant position at LAX. I presented facts that do not comport with your picture; I appreciate your ignoring them.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-15 06:50:00 and read 8158 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 275):
DL won't be stealing from UA and AA.

DL will be stealing from itself in ATL primarily.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 261):
When you remove from consideration the XJ flying at LAX, DL has actually cut alot less capacity than you indicate.

Mainline DL seats are down 20-25% this month through DEC.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-15 06:59:32 and read 8138 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 277):
When airline Network Planning departments compare the size of each carrier's presence at an airport, they are looking primarily at Revenue Share.

That's totally untrue.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 282):
stick w/the fact (I know it' hard for you... but XJ dropped most of those flights, not DL.

And they were dropped......why?

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 286):
I would ask that you be objective instead of so emotional in your statements then.

You of all people should heed your own advice.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-15 07:29:37 and read 8118 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 298):
That's totally untrue.

Then perhaps you can enlighten me?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-15 08:53:38 and read 8067 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 299):
Then perhaps you can enlighten me?

How do you determine the revenue share at an airport for any point in the future, say first quarter 2009?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-15 09:52:11 and read 8085 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 300):

How do you determine the revenue share at an airport for any point in the future, say first quarter 2009?

That's not a measure. It's a projection. Apples & oranges. We are talking about measures.

I stand by my statement. Network Planning departments across the industry and across the world look at airport Revenue Share as the ultimate measure of competitive comparison at the airport level. Airlines are ranked according to how much of the local O&D revenue they command.

I'm sorry, but there is no counter-argument here. It is what it is.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-15 12:04:43 and read 8022 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 301):
Network Planning departments across the industry and across the world look at airport Revenue Share as the ultimate measure of competitive comparison at the airport level

Where does that revenue data come from, broken out by airport and airline?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2008-09-15 12:14:47 and read 8011 times.



Quoting Cws818 (Reply 294):
If you were to take a look at the "Timetables & Route Maps" section at www.airchive.net, you will find that Pan Am (I)'s 25 October 1979 map shows LAX-CCS, as well as LAX-NRT, LAX-OSA, LAX-AKL, and LAX-SYD.

Clearly, history shows that the notion of connecting South America to Asia via LAX has been tried before.

Braniff also operated nonstop LAX-South America for a few years before they went out of business in 1982. If memory correct their nonstop destinations from LAX were BOG/LIM/SCL.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Hardiwv
Posted 2008-09-15 12:16:59 and read 8008 times.

And what about the question raised about on the potential of DL teaming up with KE and therefore offering 6 weekly operations for LAX-GRU? Would it be possible for both airlines to fully codeshare on the route and time the schedule the same way they do for ICN-LAX and other routes?

Rgs,

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-15 13:30:15 and read 7958 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 302):

Where does that revenue data come from, broken out by airport and airline?

DOT DB1B and Adjusted MIDT can each provide this data. DB1B would typically be used in domestic markets, while the MIDT would be used in international.

It's all there. You just have to know how to query it from the database. The carriers know how.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-15 13:43:47 and read 7930 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 305):
It's all there. You just have to know how to query it from the database. The carriers know how.

The problem is that data is full of pitfalls (ie carriers missing) and delayed.

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 277):
compare the size of each carrier's presence at an airport, they are looking primarily at Revenue Share

If you're looking at size, it is almost always seats, departures, ASMs, or some combination thereof. That data is relatively transparent and current. If the airport publishes passengers by carrier that can be used too, but DB1B and MIDT are not very good measurements of absolute size but rather relative share.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-15 14:00:36 and read 7927 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 306):

The problem is that data is full of pitfalls (ie carriers missing) and delayed.

The carriers use thoroughly scrubbed data, not what you get off the DOT website,. It always has some minor issues, but is considered accurate by the industry.

This is who most carriers get it from...

http://www.airlinedata.com/

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 306):
If you're looking at size, it is almost always seats, departures, ASMs, or some combination thereof. That data is relatively transparent and current. If the airport publishes passengers by carrier that can be used too, but DB1B and MIDT are not very good measurements of absolute size but rather relative share.

Again, you are not talking about statistics that mean relatively little in the grand scheme of things. DB1B and MIDT are excellent measures of REVENUE, which is the single most important metric an airline (or almost any other company, government or individual) is concerned with.

If $100 million dollars a year in O&D Revenue is generated at an airport in a year, an airline Network Planning department (whose entire reason to exist is the maximization of revenue) is going to be far more concerned about how it maximizes its share of the revenue than it is about how many flights it has or passengers it carries.

You don't get any prizes for maximizing traffic or operations. It's all about revenue. I don't care what is out there publicly for the consumption of the uninformed. The Network Planning, Revenue Management, Finance and Executive Office groups are primarily focused on revenues, with the latter two also concerned with expenses.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-15 20:11:47 and read 7845 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 297):
DL will be stealing from itself in ATL primarily.

Based on 1st quarter 2008 data, DL carried 16% of LAX-GRU passengers - 10% over ATL and 6% over JFK. AA carried 45% of LAXGRU traffic over MIA, DFW, and JFK. UA and CO each carried about 10%.

So, a DL nonstop will likely pull passengers off of AA.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cws818
Posted 2008-09-15 23:14:39 and read 7772 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 308):
Based on 1st quarter 2008 data, DL carried 16% of LAX-GRU passengers - 10% over ATL and 6% over JFK. AA carried 45% of LAXGRU traffic over MIA, DFW, and JFK. UA and CO each carried about 10%.

So, a DL nonstop will likely pull passengers off of AA.

And the other 39% would be from whom? I'd venture that DL would pull traffic off of CO or UA before AA, simply based on the strength of AA's schedules in the US-Brazil market.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Hardiwv
Posted 2008-09-16 00:15:52 and read 7760 times.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 308):
Based on 1st quarter 2008 data, DL carried 16% of LAX-GRU passengers - 10% over ATL and 6% over JFK. AA carried 45% of LAXGRU traffic over MIA, DFW, and JFK. UA and CO each carried about 10%.

So, a DL nonstop will likely pull passengers off of AA.

From June 2008 you also have to consider KE LAX-GRU 3 x weekly service with the 3-class B772. I am sure KE would also have pulled away many pax from Sky partner DL, plus AA, CO and UA.

Of course, a new route also "creates" traffic which means that not all pax would have been "stolen" from other airlines, especially in the case of KE which also brings many connecting pax from Asia/Korea.

Rgs,

[Edited 2008-09-16 00:17:12]

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cws818
Posted 2008-09-16 03:26:51 and read 7732 times.



Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 304):
And what about the question raised about on the potential of DL teaming up with KE and therefore offering 6 weekly operations for LAX-GRU? Would it be possible for both airlines to fully codeshare on the route and time the schedule the same way they do for ICN-LAX and other routes?

This is pure speculation, but I would assume that, given the state of the LAX-Brazil market, KE/DL could at least request the same treatment that UA/RG had, although I confess I do not know what that treatment precisely was....

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-16 07:03:56 and read 7681 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 307):
The carriers use thoroughly scrubbed data, not what you get off the DOT website,. It always has some minor issues, but is considered accurate by the industry.

Oh I'm well aware...you can scrub it all you want; it's still an estimate based off agency bookings and airlines like Ryanair will not show accurate, if any, passengers.

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 307):
You don't get any prizes for maximizing traffic or operations. It's all about revenue.

Of course, but that's internal. If you want to compare airlines' relative size at an airport, it's always some measure of capacity, be it seats, passengers, or ASMs.

Quoting Cws818 (Reply 309):
And the other 39% would be from whom? I'd venture that DL would pull traffic off of CO or UA before AA, simply based on the strength of AA's schedules in the US-Brazil market.

Most of those passengers are just going with whomever is cheapest, but since AA has the largest seat share they'll get the largest share of the cheap traffic

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-09-16 07:08:48 and read 7677 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 312):

Most of those passengers are just going with whomever is cheapest, but since AA has the largest seat share they'll get the largest share of the cheap traffic

I'd normally agree with this assertion, but since MIA and JFK are likely the two best-yielding US destinations ex-Brazil, I'm not sure that's true. Still, AA has such a massive seat advantage that the yield difference might not make much difference.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-16 07:35:34 and read 7660 times.



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 313):
I'd normally agree with this assertion, but since MIA and JFK are likely the two best-yielding US destinations ex-Brazil, I'm not sure that's true

I'm just talking about the LAX pax connecting over those hubs

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-09-16 07:42:51 and read 7647 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 314):
I'm just talking about the LAX pax connecting over those hubs

...but I'm still not sure it's true. Of the American carriers, AA most likely carries the most local passengers to Brazil, which may mean that they have fewer seats available for connections and thus perhaps command higher yields. I realize this is hypothetical (for I have no idea what the real numbers are), but it's a real possibility.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-16 07:52:32 and read 7637 times.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 312):
Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 307):
The carriers use thoroughly scrubbed data, not what you get off the DOT website,. It always has some minor issues, but is considered accurate by the industry.

Oh I'm well aware...you can scrub it all you want; it's still an estimate based off agency bookings and airlines like Ryanair will not show accurate, if any, passengers.

OK, completely wrong on two major counts...

First, DOT data is not an estimate of agency data. DOT data is basically a 10% sample of all flight coupons pulled at domestic U.S. airports. That sample size is considered statistically relevant and therefore is multiplied by 10 to get a industry-accepted standard measure.

Second, of course Ryanair won't be in this data because it is domestic U.S. data. I'm sure you are referring to MIDT. MIDT is certainly less accurate than U.S. DOT data is for domestic services, however once it is PROPERLY adjusted by reputable sources, it is considered the industry's standard international revenue/traffic data source. Is it 100% accurate? Of course not. Is there anything better? Absolutely not.

I can tell you with absolute certainty that airlines around the world use Adjusted MIDT as their primary source of revenue/traffic data for international services. All of their route planning is built off of this data. You name a major, reputable airline...they use Adjusted MIDT as their primary source.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 312):

Of course, but that's internal. If you want to compare airlines' relative size at an airport, it's always some measure of capacity, be it seats, passengers, or ASMs.

But see, you and I are talking about completely different things. You are saying people compare carrier size at an airport by operational statistics. Of course they do. It's the data that people have at their disposal. I'm saying that the IMPORTANT metric for comparing a carrier's relative size at an airport is Revenue Share. Now, this may not be important to you, but it is important to the carriers.

Let's put it this way...

Would you rather be the carrier that generates more traffic at an airport or the carrier that generates more revenue? More seats or more revenue? More flights or more revenue?

Which metric is really most important to the carrier?

[Edited 2008-09-16 08:18:36]

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-16 08:30:46 and read 7610 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 316):
First, DOT data is not an estimate of agency data.

I'm not talking about DOT data. I believe WN and B6 weren't included in DB1B until recently either.

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 316):
I can tell you with absolute certainty that airlines around the world use Adjusted MIDT as their primary source of revenue/traffic data for international services.

Yes. But to judge their absolute size at any airport? No.

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 316):
But see, you are talking about completely different things.

I'm really not sure what you're arguing about. Capacity is always ASMs. Revenue share is something different, and without the context of pax, seats, or ASMs, it's not super helpful either. When was the last time you heard an airline extoll its revenue share of an airport?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-16 08:47:17 and read 7595 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 317):
I'm not talking about DOT data. I believe WN and B6 weren't included in DB1B until recently either.

No, you are referring to MIDT. WN and B6 have always been included in DB1B. It isn't optional. (Unless you are VX and trying to skirt the issue)

This is the fundamental point here. And trust me, I'm really not trying to be a jerk. But you just don't know what you are talking about. I will give you credit that you have enough knowledge to be conversant, but you are simply in over your head.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 317):
Yes. But to judge their absolute size at any airport? No.

Again, airlines compare themselves to each other by REVENUE SHARE at the airport level. Any other measure is trivial in the halls of Network Planning...which is really what this is all about. They may use comparisons using other metrics, but the fundamental and most important metric is revenue.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 317):
I'm really not sure what you're arguing about. Capacity is always ASMs. Revenue share is something different, and without the context of pax, seats, or ASMs, it's not super helpful either. When was the last time you heard an airline extoll its revenue share of an airport?

Airlines don't extol it because uniformed people don't understand it. People understand ops, paxs and flights. You are talking about PR. For example, its the silly business about who has more flights in NYC vs Metropolitan New York. Its silly and irrelevant. What Delta really cares about is the fact that CO has a significantly higher Revenue Share in the NYC market. As does AA. Despite all the stats about traffic, flights and capacity...what the airlines really compete on is revenue performance. All of the flights that DL has added in NYC are an attempt to increase Revenue Share. The capacity itself does nothing for Delta without accomplishing that.

To the extent that you don't understand all of this, you really don't understand the Network Planning function of the airline industry. It's not a knock, very few people who haven't working in Network really understand it.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-16 09:39:47 and read 7559 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 318):
No, you are referring to MIDT. WN and B6 have always been included in DB1B. It isn't optional. (Unless you are VX and trying to skirt the issue)

I don't often deal with domestic so that's possible.

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 318):
Again, airlines compare themselves to each other by REVENUE SHARE at the airport level. Any other measure is trivial in the halls of Network Planning...which is really what this is all about.

I don't know what airline you've been in contact with but that is simply not true.

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 318):
the fundamental and most important metric is revenue.

It's RASM, if anything.

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 318):
Airlines don't extol it because uniformed people don't understand it. People understand ops, paxs and flights. You are talking about PR.

What about a call? Annual report? Quarterly report? Show me *anywhere* where an airline talks about revenue share on the airport level. By route? Yes. Average Fare? Yes. But comparing straight revenue numbers for US carriers out of YYZ is not going to get you very far without the context of their relative capacity.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-16 10:07:26 and read 7543 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 319):

I don't know what airline you've been in contact with but that is simply not true.

All of them, literally. It's my job.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 319):
It's RASM, if anything.

RASM is just a breakdown of Revenue. And nobody compares RASM on an airport level due to varying stage lengths of flights. Absolute Revenue is the fundamental comparison.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 319):
What about a call? Annual report? Quarterly report? Show me *anywhere* where an airline talks about revenue share on the airport level. By route? Yes. Average Fare? Yes. But comparing straight revenue numbers for US carriers out of YYZ is not going to get you very far without the context of their relative capacity.

You still don't get it. I'm not talking about general numbers for public consumption. I'm talking about what Network Planners use as the basis of comparison. Usually airport-level data isn't publicly discussed period. And what is discussed is very superficial and typically for the benefit of marketing and PR folks.

There is always context with any sort of dataset. Let me put this as simply as I can...again.

AC cares far more about how much of the total revenue pie they get out of YYZ than any other metric. Do you think they'd rather carry the most passengers or the most revenue?

I'd be happy to provide you more context via PM, if it would help. Like I said, I'm really not trying to argue with you here. I think you know a lot, but you are just wrong here.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-16 11:55:46 and read 7500 times.

airlines long ago gave up the idea that hauling the most passengers is the best business strategy. DL did that for years but it couldn't make money w/ that strategy post 9/11 because fares fell too far. It is precisely because of DECREASED REVENUES that airlines are cutting CAPACITY. No airline cares how much traffic that generate at LAX or any other airport if they aren't generating sufficient revenues. A publicly owned company can make traffic generation and stimulation as its primary goal but a private company cannot. Maintaining high traffic will only be a goal if is also the most profitable goal.

The only reason why DL is faring better than most US airlines right now is because they are able to redeploy assets from domestic to int'l routes more effectively than other airlines. Airlines like AA have been much less willing to take the risk or have not had the assets to redeploy so they have simply cut deeper.



The highest priority for any company that wants to survive is REVENUE.

The basis of comparison between companies is the same basis used for internal goals. You cannot hold yourself to one standard but compare yourself to others by another standard.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-16 12:38:05 and read 7463 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 320):
And nobody compares RASM on an airport level due to varying stage lengths of flights

OK, so lets say AA has 110% of the revenue of DL at COS. What does that mean for AA or DL?

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 320):
Do you think they'd rather carry the most passengers or the most revenue?

Of course they focus on revenue, but comparing total revenue at an airport is silly without any context.

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 320):
but you are just wrong here.

I totally disagree; I think you're oversimplifying and relying on a sketchy data source, even though it is the primary data source. It's good for estimating share and change in share over time but I would never use it for an absolute value.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Abrelosojos
Posted 2008-09-16 12:52:27 and read 7449 times.

Wow. This is becoming quite the thread - amusing reading as I wait for a long winding route to DRC that would have defied many QSI routings.

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 194):
Your idea about KE routing the flight via MEX is interesting but it would also entail a revision in the bilateral Korea-Brazil.

= However, I do see this happening. I think DL and KE may share info/rev on this route. As I have mentioned, I cannot see both DL and KE servicing this route.

Quoting Ocracoke (Reply 196):
Won't MEX-ICN be an issue?

AM has to fly their NRT route with a stop in TIJ. Isn't that because of the altitude in MEX? How would KE be any different, if they fly the same equipment (B777), but fly even farther to ICN?

= Great point, and perhaps this is something that prevents (along with bilateral) KE from starting this.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 208):
LAX is the top O&D for just about every major east coas originating European and Latin route. There is every reason to think LAX-GRU will work very well for DL, esp. since the NW LAX-NRT flight is the "other half" of a success DL strategy to carry Asia-Latin traffic. Adding more Asian routes from LAX will help DL to ensure LAX-GRU will work very well. LAX-GRU will be the first of several LAX-S. America flights by DL and several more LAX- Asia flights. It should be obvious that DL takes a great deal of liberty in adding and pulling short haul routes, esp. on RJs, but has a pretty good track record of adding and sustaining longhaul routes. As a percentage of total routes added since 2005, DL is still flying at least as high of a percentage of long haul routes as other carriers.

= WT, I am usually a fan of DL and their service (for an American carrier). But, I feel your analysis is sometimes colored by unnecessary DL flag waving. Couple of points:

> Do you have data that supports LAX is the top O&D for just about every major east coast originating European and Latin route?

> What other routes is DL planning to serve from LAX to South America as you mention? The only POSSIBLE destination I can think of not covered in South America is EZE - besides that, where would DL serve?

> Do not forget U.S. transit requires immigration clearance. Given the plethora of options from GRU to Asia, why would a passenger want to fly DL via LAX? Moreover, the J pax will fly superior Asian or European products (until DL upgrades their entire fleet) - ok, the indifferent Y pax may fly DL ... but then they have a/visa issues to deal with ... and b/ DL will NOT make revenue sending a relatively inefficient aircraft at the end of their range for low yielding traffic.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 216):
Despite what you want to present, Brazil is highly profitable for DL.

= ATL-Brasil is profitable. Does not mean LAX will be the same.

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 307):
The carriers use thoroughly scrubbed data, not what you get off the DOT website,. It always has some minor issues, but is considered accurate by the industry.

This is who most carriers get it from...

http://www.airlinedata.com/

= More than DBP, there are other firms who provide MIDT data - Sabre amongst others.

Saludos,
A.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-16 13:46:16 and read 7428 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 322):

OK, so lets say AA has 110% of the revenue of DL at COS. What does that mean for AA or DL?

It means that AA is 10% larger at COS vs. Delta. More importantly, look at it this way...

At LAX, AA may have fewer ops and paxs than UA, but it actually generates more revenue than UA. This is primarily driven by its strength in the transcon and LHR markets. So while the rest of the world thinks UA is bigger at LAX, the Network Planning groups actually realize that AA has a bigger piece of the revenue pie there, and therefore is the larger carrier in the market. Because AA commands a larger share of the LAX O&D revenue, it is the bigger carrier.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 322):

Of course they focus on revenue, but comparing total revenue at an airport is silly without any context.

True, but the context you should be looking at is Expenses, not traffic or operations. On an absolute basis, Revenue is more important than any operational statistic. There is a reason Revenue is the TOP line on Income Statement, while your other metrics are buried in different operating stats tables.

Comparing Total Revenue is not only NOT silly, it makes perfect sense. A dollar is a dollar. If AA generates $75 million on 80 flights and WN generates $45 million on 115 flights, AA is the dominant carrier. Now, that isn't the same as profitable., but if you are comparing SIZE, revenue is the metric. As I said earlier, this is tied to RASM in a way. AA flies many more ASMs than WN and also generates higher fares.

Under your theory, WN is bigger than AA at LAX because they have more operations. However, American flies bigger aircraft on longer hauls and generates significantly more revenue on an absolute and RASM basis. Therefore, AA is larger at LAX.

Simply put, the carrier that commands more of the air travel dollar in a market is the larger carrier. It's quite simple.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 322):

I totally disagree; I think you're oversimplifying and relying on a sketchy data source, even though it is the primary data source. It's good for estimating share and change in share over time but I would never use it for an absolute value.

Well, you don't work in Network Planning, do you?

Very few industries have anything remotely approaching the competitive data that DB1B and Adjusted MIDT provide. They are not perfect, but they are considered statistically accurate by the industry and are thus the basis for all important comparisons.

Let me say this also, I've dealt one-on-one with Network Planners from the top to the bottom of the food chain at every reputable U.S. airline and many foreign carriers. The operational statistics you talk about simply are not a valid form of comparison for them. Operations are irrelevant. Traffic is important ONLY when they also know the Average Fare. Of course, what do you get when you combine Traffic and Average Fare? REVENUE!

There isn't a competent Network Planning team in the industry that doesn't look at Revenue as the single most important metric. So when they are comparing competitive sizes, Revenue Share is what they look at first.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-09-16 15:07:35 and read 7382 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 324):
So when they are comparing competitive sizes, Revenue Share is what they look at first.

But network planning is not a pissing match. I hope that networks don't get planned based on competitive sizes...

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-16 15:15:23 and read 7396 times.



Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 323):
= However, I do see this happening. I think DL and KE may share info/rev on this route.

it is doubtful that DL will be able to obtain antitrust immunity w/ an Asian airline on US-Latin America routes. There is no example of ATI between a US carrier and a foreign destination (5th freedom ATI). It is unlikely that Latin governments would allow a 3rd country carrier to cooperate w/ a US carrier - they are scared of the US carriers right now - which is why US-Latin bilaterals are now some of the most restrictive in the world for US carriers.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 323):
> Do you have data that supports LAX is the top O&D for just about every major east coast originating European and Latin route?

yes... tell me the city you are interested in and I will tell you the ranking LAX has as an O&D for that city.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 323):
> What other routes is DL planning to serve from LAX to South America as you mention? The only POSSIBLE destination I can think of not covered in South America is EZE - besides that, where would DL serve?



Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 323):
> Do not forget U.S. transit requires immigration clearance.

most of the major Asian countries are in the Visa waiver program. A significant portion of those travelling from Latin America to Asian countries also have US visas.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 323):
= ATL-Brasil is profitable. Does not mean LAX will be the same.

totally agree. but when LAX is one of the top O&Ds for US-Brazil routes, LAX-GRU is not unknown. There is an abundance of data.

As of now, DL and AA have both told the DOT that there will have to be a route case to decide the allocation of the unused UA frequencies since AA is asking for one of them for its new Brazil routes and DL is asking for two for the LAX-GRU service. The DOT has not indicated when it will start the route case.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-16 15:23:17 and read 7378 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 324):
if you are comparing SIZE, revenue is the metric.

It's one of the metrics. The revenue data by airport for other airlines is not as accurate as schedule data, nor can it be used to compare future, present, and past operations. More often than not ASMs are used to gauge size since not only can they be compared in different time frames, they are also more accurate, more precise, and represent revenue potential. That's not to say that revenue isn't important.

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 324):
Well, you don't work in Network Planning, do you?

No, just your garden variety flight attendant with access to these tools Yeah sure

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 324):
they are considered statistically accurate by the industry and are thus the basis for all important comparisons.

Have you ever compared it to actual numbers?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2008-09-16 15:38:00 and read 7357 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 326):
Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 323):
> Do not forget U.S. transit requires immigration clearance.

most of the major Asian countries are in the Visa waiver program. A significant portion of those travelling from Latin America to Asian countries also have US visas.

However for most of them it's still less of a hassle to connect in Canada or Europe. That's no doubt a major reason why AC carried many of the Olympic teams from several countries in Latin America and the Caribbean to/from PEK for the recent games, including Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela, Mexico, Cuba and I believe one or two other Caribbean countries.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-16 16:14:55 and read 7344 times.



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 328):
However for most of them it's still less of a hassle to connect in Canada or Europe.

yes it is but the US carriers have more seats from Latin America to Asia connecting over the US than any other country does. US carriers won't get all of those passengers but they don't need to - they are going after enough to make both of the segments to/from the US profitable.

Based on US DOT data, LAX-GRUas an O&D is about 40% of the size of the ATL-GRU SEGMENT for 1Q08. Since DL operated more than daily service ATLGRU for many weeks during 1Q08 and used larger aircraft, 3X/week w/ a 763ER from LAX is probably about the right size for the market. Of course, foreign carrier traffic is not shown in DOT O&D data but there is foreign carrier share of LAX-GRU. DOT data also does not show totally foreign passengers such as Asia - Latin America which are known to constitute a fairly high percentage of DL's ATL-S. America flights.

As for the question about what other S. American routes DL might start from LAX, logic would say LIM, BOG, and SCL would be the highest on the list. Also some of the Central America routes would do alot better w/ one or two Asian flights feeding them if both segments were so timed.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: FlyASAGuy2005
Posted 2008-09-16 17:53:23 and read 7310 times.

Wow, i'm going to take my time tonight and read through the thread so that I can comment. In the mean time, can we get a part deuce?............

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-09-16 19:07:33 and read 7275 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 329):
As for the question about what other S. American routes DL might start from LAX, logic would say LIM, BOG, and SCL would be the highest on the list.

Why not EZE? SCL would be very tough if EZE wouldn't work-- EZE is a much larger market with no competition.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-16 19:28:45 and read 7261 times.



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 325):

But network planning is not a pissing match. I hope that networks don't get planned based on competitive sizes...

Trust me, that is not how planning is done. But the issue was the relative size of carriers at a particular airport. My point all along has been that the metrics that most people use are simply not the MOST important metrics that airlines themselves use.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 327):
It's one of the metrics. The revenue data by airport for other airlines is not as accurate as schedule data, nor can it be used to compare future, present, and past operations. More often than not ASMs are used to gauge size since not only can they be compared in different time frames, they are also more accurate, more precise, and represent revenue potential. That's not to say that revenue isn't important.

Again, you are measuring OPERATIONS. You are correct that they are a bit more accurate, but not in a statistically relevant way. You are incorrect in your statement that they represent potential revenue. Your data does not take Average Fares into account, and therefore is completely useless in determining revenue potential.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 327):

No, just your garden variety flight attendant with access to these tools Yeah sure

 Smile Dude, I'm REALLY not trying to give you a hard time here and frankly, I'm impressed with your tenacity. But you are just looking at things from an outside perspective. I've spent more than a decade in Network Planning and Network Planning Consulting. I live and breathe this stuff.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 327):
Have you ever compared it to actual numbers?

Again, you do not access to the adjusted data, either DB1B or MIDT. The adjusted stuff is very expensive and considered statistically valid. Each is viewed by the industry as the standard data sources for revenue and traffic statistics.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-16 19:46:17 and read 7253 times.



Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 330):



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 331):
Why not EZE? SCL would be very tough if EZE wouldn't work-- EZE is a much larger market with no competition.

EZE is very much a possibility but it is a thinner market and there is less rlow from EZE to Asia. Most of EZE's int'l flow is to Europe and much less to Asia than to Brazil.

it is indeed a possibility, though.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-09-16 20:03:18 and read 7240 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 333):
Most of EZE's int'l flow is to Europe and much less to Asia than to Brazil.

 checkmark I don't think Asia connections can sustain any of these flights by themselves, though--and I think DL is making a big mistake if they're counting on a huge influx of traffic to Asia. LAX isn't a much better option than ATL (EZE-ATL-NRT is less than 300 miles longer than EZE-LAX-NRT), and for the foreseeable future, ATL will offer more connecting opportunities from Latin America and to Asia.

In the end, the larger local market and the lack of competition should help EZE more than the relatively lower traffic to Asia hurts it.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Hardiwv
Posted 2008-09-17 05:05:11 and read 7161 times.



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 329):
Based on US DOT data, LAX-GRUas an O&D is about 40% of the size of the ATL-GRU SEGMENT for 1Q08



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 329):
Of course, foreign carrier traffic is not shown in DOT O&D data but there is foreign carrier share of LAX-GRU. DOT data also does not show totally foreign passengers such as Asia - Latin America which are known to constitute a fairly high percentage of DL's ATL-S. America flights.

Very interesting information. Also you have to consider that a possible DL LAX-GRU could capture new traffic from West Coast and at the same time generate new traffic LAX-GRU which is caused by nonstop operations.

One interesting possibility to enhance loads and yields could be a GIG tag-on operating LAX-GRU-GIG as RG did in the past with success. This would not increase costs and DL already has a well established base in Rio de Janeiro and its brand is well know in this market. The GIG tag-on would certainly enhance the possibility of the flight and at the same time maximise aircraft utilisation in case the flight operates both legs red-eye.

Rgs,

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-17 07:11:02 and read 7139 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 332):
Again, you do not access to the adjusted data, either DB1B or MIDT.

Just answer the question. Have you ever compared it to actuals?

Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 332):
You are incorrect in your statement that they represent potential revenue. Your data does not take Average Fares into account, and therefore is completely useless in determining revenue potential.

Of course ASMs on their own are not the be all end all.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-17 07:59:44 and read 7121 times.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 336):
Just answer the question. Have you ever compared it to actuals?

Who's actuals? Airport "actuals" that don't know the difference between revenue and non-revenue passengers or zero-fare passengers?

I'm not sure why I have to say it again, but here goes. DB1B is the industry accepted standard data source for O&D traffic and revenue. EVERY airline uses it. It might not match perfectly with an individual airline's internal data but no airline releases data at the airport or route level. Through the ADJUSTMENT PROCESS used by Database Products and other vendors, the data is put into a form where the differences are STATISTICALLY accurate and considered by the entire industry to be valid.

I frankly don't care that you don't "agree" at this point. You are now arguing that every single airline in the industry is using bad data that shouldn't be accepted because you've seen differences in the "unadjusted" version and what you think is accurate from other sources. Let me tell you, you are simply out of your league and in over your head at this point.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Abrelosojos
Posted 2008-09-17 08:16:23 and read 7103 times.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 326):
It is unlikely that Latin governments would allow a 3rd country carrier to cooperate w/ a US carrier - they are scared of the US carriers right now - which is why US-Latin bilaterals are now some of the most restrictive in the world for US carriers.

= Let us not group all Latin governments as being "scared of US carriers right now". Anywhere there is ability, the bilaterals have changed. LAN, Avianca, TAM, TACA, and COPA all do pretty well competing against their American counterparts. Even taking out TACA and COPA as carriers to "restrictive" countries, this holds.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 326):
yes... tell me the city you are interested in and I will tell you the ranking LAX has as an O&D for that city.

= I don't care about the "ranking of LAX". I want you to tell me that for the cities mentioned below, how (as you said), LAX is the number one originating O&D for all cities in Latin America and Europe.

Europe:
*um, lets pick random big cities

- London, Paris, Madrid, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Milan, Brussels, Tel Aviv, Manchester, Athens, Moscow, Barcelona

Latin America:
*um, any top Latin city

- Mexico City, Caracas, Bogota, Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, Guayaquil, Lima, Quito

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 326):
most of the major Asian countries are in the Visa waiver program. A significant portion of those travelling from Latin America to Asian countries also have US visas.


= Um, NO. The only major Asian country in the VWP is Japan. Unless you are telling me of the huge O&D demand between Singapore and Latin America ... or better, Brunei and Latin America.

And, even if they have U.S. visas, why go through the hassle when you can get options via Europe/Canada/even Mexico that require no visas and immigration mayhem.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 326):
totally agree. but when LAX is one of the top O&Ds for US-Brazil routes, LAX-GRU is not unknown. There is an abundance of data.

= LAX-GRU is not in the top 5 ... but it is irrelevant. I would say there is a bigger demand from ORD or DTW than LAX.

Saludos,
A.

[Edited 2008-09-17 08:40:15]

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Abrelosojos
Posted 2008-09-17 08:21:20 and read 7102 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 332):
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 327):
Have you ever compared it to actual numbers?

Again, you do not access to the adjusted data, either DB1B or MIDT. The adjusted stuff is very expensive and considered statistically valid. Each is viewed by the industry as the standard data sources for revenue and traffic statistics.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 337):
Who's actuals? Airport "actuals" that don't know the difference between revenue and non-revenue passengers or zero-fare passengers?

= Jetlanta and MaverickM11 ... both of you are right and get over your contest. You are comparing two different things. MaverickM11 is referring to airline actuals which only specific route planners at that particular airline has. Jetlanta you are dealing with industry aggregate data - which is probably the best industry wide metric - but still an approximation. MIDT does not account for ever increasing web bookings, and DB is a synthesis of a sample of 10% of the market.

So why can't we agree that both help - depends on what you have access to.

Saludos,
A.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-17 08:28:22 and read 7093 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 337):
You are now arguing that every single airline in the industry is using bad data that shouldn't be accepted because you've seen differences in the "unadjusted" version and what you think is accurate from other sources

No, I'm saying every airline is careful how they use these tools and are aware of their shortcomings.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 339):
MaverickM11 is referring to airline actuals which only specific route planners at that particular airline has

 checkmark 

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 339):
So why can't we agree that both help - depends on what you have access to.

I'm down with that Smile

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-17 10:56:33 and read 7047 times.



Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 274):

If any of you think DL is guaranteed any success just for adding flights to LAX, youre wrong. They would have to steal away a chunk of the many AA, UA, and WN loyal flyers here. Working in the travel industry myself here in Los Angeles, I can tell you that would be very difficult. Even if they do, then they have to compete with all the international carriers here as well. Thats a daunting task too.

Last we all checked AA does not fly LAX-GRU, UA ended LAX-GRU years ago, and WN doesn't fly south of the border. DL is offering a route that no other US airline is offering. It is a route that can be proven over time to be a valuable addition to not only the DL network but the Los Angeles region. KE aside, DL has more FF'ers in the LA area adding to that DL/NW are set for a merger that like it or not will be looking at LAX as a rather hearty Asian and South Pacific gateway.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 276):

Give us a break. While they might exceed AA in offerings with beyond NRT connections, United by far is the largest US based airline to Asia from the West Coast as you correctly mention the many connections they can offer via SFO in addition to their NRT nonstop.

UA has shrunk its Asian/Pacific market in the past few years with the termination of the following routes:

HKG-NRT
HNL-KIX
JFK-NRT
LAX-AKL
LAX-HKG
ORD-KIX
SFO-NGO
SFO-TPE
SFO-CAN* (Postponed)

While true UA has the largest SFO-Asia market by a US airline, it does not hold that very same story for LAX. UA who once connected LAX to HKG, as well as NRT no longer has a competitive edge as far as markets that are served from LAX. The merger between DL/NW will allow for additional traffic to the Asian market and the South Pacific market from LAX. Like it or not DL wants LAX as a major T-Pac gateway. Its newly refurb on -board products will give it a competitive edge against AA and UA in the market. In addition the new "suites" will only further their lead in the coming years. As has been said before give it a little while longer and more routes will be added to the DL LAX network, and those routes are not going to be domestic for the most part. DL has a profound chance at LAX.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-17 11:04:51 and read 7045 times.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 339):

= Jetlanta and MaverickM11 ... both of you are right and get over your contest. You are comparing two different things. MaverickM11 is referring to airline actuals which only specific route planners at that particular airline has. Jetlanta you are dealing with industry aggregate data - which is probably the best industry wide metric - but still an approximation. MIDT does not account for ever increasing web bookings, and DB is a synthesis of a sample of 10% of the market.

So why can't we agree that both help - depends on what you have access to.

Not exactly.

He is arguing that carriers do not measure their relative size at an airport by Revenue Share because he has never seen them do so. He thinks that operating statistics such as flights and passengers are the primary comparative metrics that airlines use when evaluating their relative size in a market.

My point has been that, while those more "operational" statistics may be used as the public basis of comparison, Network Planning groups are far more interested in Revenue Share than any other metric, and are ultimately more important. DB1B and Adjusted MIDT are the primary datasets that airlines use to determine these shares.

MaverickM11 is basically saying that the only metrics you can use to compare airlines at a particular airport with are boardings (from the airport operator, I assume) or schedule data (from OAG). Of course, airport boarding statistics are also full of errors, starting with the inclusion of non-revenue and zero-fare traffic. OAG data tells you what was scheduled to operate, not what actually operated. Neither give you any concept about how much MONEY is moving around...which is ultimately what is important here.

I'll also correct you on something, Adjusted MIDT is "adjusted" to account for all direct carrier bookings, including web bookings. In most markets, MIDT starts at above a 60% sample size, so using other data sources such as DB1B, carrier reports, airport reports and other government data as adjustment factors, you can get MIDT to full 100% market size with relative confidence. Carriers do this all the time.

Regardless, no matter what data source we are talking about, the fact is that REVENUE SHARE is the most important metric that airlines use when comparing their relative market position at any given airport.

[Edited 2008-09-17 11:26:28]

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-17 11:43:07 and read 7015 times.



Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 335):
Very interesting information. Also you have to consider that a possible DL LAX-GRU could capture new traffic from West Coast and at the same time generate new traffic LAX-GRU which is caused by nonstop operations.

yes there would be some traffic stimulation. And yes, there would be some diversion from other west coast flights.

Part of the reason why LAX-GRU would be successful is because access to Brazil is so limited. While no carrier wants to give up traffic to another carrier, they will replace what they might lose to DL from LAX w/ traffic from other cities because the US-Brazil treaty is so limited.

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 335):
One interesting possibility to enhance loads and yields could be a GIG tag-on operating LAX-GRU-GIG as RG did in the past with success. This

that could work but DL just doesn't do widebody tags. They are too expensive and only make sense if you can't generate enough traffic on a nonstop basis. The costs do go up significantly when you put a tag on the end of a flight so the incremental revenue hurdle is much higher for a tag than it would be for a few more passengers on a nonstop - such as by increasing gauge or capacity.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 338):
= Let us not group all Latin governments as being "scared of US carriers right now".

true... all may be overstating it but many Latin carriers don't want to compete against several large, US airlines w/ strong alliances and networks. Brazil is one of the most restrictive example and they are the topic of this discussion.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 338):
- London, Paris, Madrid, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Milan, Brussels, Tel Aviv, Manchester, Athens, Moscow, Barcelona

LAX has nonstop service to several of these cities so it would not be expected that those cities w/ nonstop service would be top O&Ds for LAX-XYZ flights. MXP is #5 over JFK for DL. TLV is #3 over JFK. MAN is #12 . SVO is #6 over JFK. BCN is #1 over JFK.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 338):
- Mexico City, Caracas, Bogota, Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, Guayaquil, Lima, Quito

CCS is #1 over ATL. BOG is #4 ovr ATL. UIO is #6 over ATL. etc

In markets where LAX is not high on the list over ATL, it is for either AA via DFW or CO via IAH if they serve those markets.

LAX is a major traffic and revenue generator for int'l traffic to all logical points going east or south.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 338):
= Um, NO. The only major Asian country in the VWP is Japan.

S. Korea is on its way to the VWP if not in already.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 338):
And, even if they have U.S. visas, why go through the hassle when you can get options via Europe/Canada/even Mexico that require no visas and immigration mayhem.

but you still can't deny that many passengers who fly from Latin America already have US visas.... the US is one of the top trading partners w/ most Latin American countries. Unless you are talking VFR traffic and no part of the family is in the US, there is a high possibility that globe trotting Latins have visas. Remember again that visas are a potential issue for one very small group of people; Japanese don't need them and they are the largest source of Asia-Latin traffic.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 338):
= LAX-GRU is not in the top 5 ... but it is irrelevant. I would say there is a bigger demand from ORD or DTW than LAX.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 341):
While true UA has the largest SFO-Asia market by a US airline, it does not hold that very same story for LAX. UA who once connected LAX to HKG, as well as NRT no longer has a competitive edge as far as markets that are served from LAX. The merger between DL/NW will allow for additional traffic to the Asian market and the South Pacific market from LAX. Like it or not DL wants LAX as a major T-Pac gateway. Its newly refurb on -board products will give it a competitive edge against AA and UA in the market. In addition the new "suites" will only further their lead in the coming years. As has been said before give it a little while longer and more routes will be added to the DL LAX network, and those routes are not going to be domestic for the most part. DL has a profound chance at LAX.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: United1
Posted 2008-09-17 11:51:23 and read 7015 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 341):
UA has shrunk its Asian/Pacific market in the past few years

Actually UA has grown its network since 2003 (when the earliest of the routes that you mentioned, LAX-AKL, was discontinued.)

Asia Pacific 2003
December 2003 24,315,339 ASM/ 18,973,819 RSM

Asia Pacific 2007
December 2007 32,462,746 ASM/ 26,431,206 RSM

Now with UA cutting SFO-TPE/NGO, LAX-HKG and adding NRT-TPE, LAX-MEL you will see a drop in UAs ASMs/RSMs this year but it won't be by 25% (UA is actually growing by .5-1.5% internationally this year) which is what you would need to say that UA has shrunk its Pacific network in the past few years.

Also you mentioned a few posts back that UA used to serve CDG out of LAX which is true they did, UA operated SFO-CDG 4 times a week and LAX-CDG 3 times a week before the route was transferred to a daily SFO.

Now back on topic...

If DL wants to develop LAX as a Pacific hub they are more then welcome to try and do so, however LAX has never been successfully used by any carrier as a transfer hub for Pacific traffic, LAX is all about O&D. Thats why AAs, UAs, NWs and indeeds DLs former LAX Pacific/Atlantic routes have always come and gone depending on the amount of traffic in and out of the LAX metro area. LAX-GRU might work but based on the flight times that have been posted here I can't imagine that DL is going to rely on any transpacific traffic to feed the route. To me this sounds like an experiment, lets dip our toes in the market and see if it works if it doesn't work out well we lost a little money on a long shot.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2008-09-17 11:52:08 and read 7012 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 341):
Last we all checked AA does not fly LAX-GRU, UA ended LAX-GRU years ago, and WN doesn't fly south of the border. DL is offering a route that no other US airline is offering. It is a route that can be proven over time to be a valuable addition to not only the DL network but the Los Angeles region. KE aside, DL has more FF'ers in the LA area adding to that DL/NW are set for a merger that like it or not will be looking at LAX as a rather hearty Asian and South Pacific gateway.

LAXdude1023's point is that just becasuse some one adds a flight does not mean that people will flock to it.

There are extremely strong corporate relationships with UA and AA in SoCal in addition to the average Joe and Sally whom also are UA and AA FF'ers.

Delta's market following and goodwill expired many moons ago, so just because it adds a LAX-GRU nonstop will not neccesarily steal people whom will flock from others. I wont, nor would my large office if we need to head to Brazil. (we are 100% Star and OW flyers)

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Lambert747
Posted 2008-09-17 12:13:26 and read 7010 times.



Quoting United1 (Reply 344):
Also you mentioned a few posts back that UA used to serve CDG out of LAX which is true they did, UA operated SFO-CDG 4 times a week and LAX-CDG 3 times a week before the route was transferred to a daily SFO

I mentioned LAX-GRU, not LAX-CDG

Quoting United1 (Reply 344):
Actually UA has grown its network since 2003 (when the earliest of the routes that you mentioned, LAX-AKL, was discontinued.)

Asia Pacific 2003
December 2003 24,315,339 ASM/ 18,973,819 RSM

Asia Pacific 2007
December 2007 32,462,746 ASM/ 26,431,206 RSM

Grown in one aspect, and shrunk in another.

Routes Terminated - 2001 Onwards:

HKG-DEL
HKG-NRT
HNL-KIX
JFK-HKG
JFK-NRT
LAX-AKL
LAX-HKG
LHR-DEL
ORD-DEL (Announced never started)
ORD-KIX
SFO-CAN
SFO-NGO
SFO-TPE

Routes Started - 2001 Onwards:

IAD-PEK (Aircraft Downgraded)
IAD-NRT
ORD-PEK
ORD-PVG
NRT-TPE
SFO-NGO (Since Terminated)
SFO-PEK ?
SFO-PVG ?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2008-09-17 12:17:22 and read 6997 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 346):
Grown in one aspect, and shrunk in another.

Regardless of citypair adjustments, United Pacific ops have grown over the years as the ASM numbers show.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: United1
Posted 2008-09-17 13:01:39 and read 6968 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 346):
ORD-DEL (Announced never started)

AFAIK ORD-DEL was never announced simply rumored....on here.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 346):
Grown in one aspect, and shrunk in another.

The only two areas where UA has actually shrunk over the past few years (when did 2001 become "a few years ago" or even recent?) is Latin America and Domestically. UA has continued to expand over the Atlantic and Pacific even while going through restructuring. Some of that has been by shifting capacity form one market to the other and some of that has simply been using UAs aircraft more effectively (a lot less 3 cabin aircraft on US domestic routes.)

If you really want to go back a ways UA is light years ahead of where they were when UA first entered the Pacific Market in 1985....

As for UA shifting capacity, what is wrong with that? UA goes where the money is and if that means shifting routes around so be it.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 346):
I mentioned LAX-GRU, not LAX-CDG

Must have seen that somewhere else, never mind then.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Hardiwv
Posted 2008-09-17 13:03:43 and read 6968 times.



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 346):
Routes Started - 2001 Onwards:

IAD-PEK (Aircraft Downgraded)
IAD-NRT
ORD-PEK
ORD-PVG
NRT-TPE
SFO-NGO (Since Terminated)
SFO-PEK ?
SFO-PVG ?

You forgot IAD-GIG dedicated daily.

Rgs,

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OA412
Posted 2008-09-17 13:12:14 and read 6953 times.



Quoting United1 (Reply 348):
AFAIK ORD-DEL was never announced simply rumored....on here.

ORD-DEL was announced in an official UA press release. IINM the flight was even put on sale prior to the decision not to begin the flight.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: United1
Posted 2008-09-17 13:14:08 and read 6964 times.



Quoting OA412 (Reply 350):
Quoting United1 (Reply 348):
AFAIK ORD-DEL was never announced simply rumored....on here.

ORD-DEL was announced in an official UA press release. IINM the flight was even put on sale prior to the decision not to begin the flight.

Your right, I just looked it up interesting I never thought it got that far along. I'm assuming it got squashed after 9/11?

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2008-09-17 13:17:38 and read 6968 times.



Quoting United1 (Reply 348):
AFAIK ORD-DEL was never announced simply rumored....on here.

It was much more then a rumor. Here is the press release.

Quote:
UNITED AIRLINES TAKES THE FAST TRACK TO INDIA WITH NEW DAILY NON-STOP SERVICE LINKING CHICAGO WITH NEW DELHI

For Immediate Release
Unique Service Provides Only Non-Stop Flight From the U.S.


CHICAGO, Aug. 14, 2001 – United Airlines (NYSE:UAL) announced today that it will launch non-stop daily service between Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport and New Delhi’s Indira Gandhi International Airport, on October 27, 2001. The addition makes United the only airline that flies nonstop between the United States and India, and offers customers some of the fastest travel times between major cities in the two countries. The new flights will be available for sale Thursday, August 16, 2001.

In addition to meeting the needs of business and leisure travelers in Chicago, the new service will be the fastest way to reach New Delhi from many cities across North America, including the East Coast. Using convenient connections through Chicago O’Hare, United’s largest airport and hometown hub, customers on the East Coast will find the Chicago connection quicker and more convenient than traveling eastbound to India via Europe. Additionally, United’s unique flight schedule has an early departure from the U.S., allowing for same-day connections to many major cities in India including Mumbai (Bombay) and Kolkata (Calcutta). The return flight schedule from New Delhi will provide one of the only daylight departures to the United States, with plenty of time for customers to connect in New Delhi from major business centers in India.

"India is a dynamic and fast-growing country which has been under-served from the U.S. These new flights will provide tremendous opportunities for both local and connecting customers," said Rono Dutta, president of United Airlines. "We’re excited about linking our primary hub airport at Chicago with New Delhi, and opening up India to the whole U.S."

United will offer Boeing 747-400 three-class service, featuring a configuration of 14 state-of-the-art United First Suites, 73 seats in United Business, 88 seats in United Economy Plus and 172 seats in United Economy. The new flight will cover nearly 7,500 miles across the polar route that United Airlines helped pioneer.

As a result of the new non-stop service, United Airlines will withdraw service between Hong Kong and New Delhi and between London and New Delhi.

"Our ultimate goal has always been to serve India non-stop from the United States," added Dutta. "Connecting service via London and Hong Kong has been popular with customers, however regulatory restrictions in Hong Kong have made the route difficult to operate. The new non-stop route opens up tremendous opportunities for travelers and we believe that the service will be very successful."

The company said operation of the new flight would be subject to certain governmental approvals.

United flight UA 992 will depart Chicago O’Hare at 3:40 p.m., arriving in New Delhi at 5:25 p.m., the following day. The return flight, UA 991, will depart New Delhi at 11:15 a.m. and arrive in Chicago at 2:50 p.m. The planned flying time from Chicago to New Delhi will be 14 hours and 15 minutes, while the planned flying time from New Delhi to Chicago will be 15 hours and 5 minutes.

Matter of fact, UA was to do a proving run on the route on 9/12 or 9/13 as I recall, which obviously never happended.

Following 9/11, United discountinued DEL completely on 9/17.

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 349):
You forgot IAD-GIG dedicated daily.

They are discussing Pacific ops.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2008-09-17 13:32:04 and read 6951 times.



Quoting United1 (Reply 348):
Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 346):
ORD-DEL (Announced never started)

AFAIK ORD-DEL was never announced simply rumored....on here.

On August 16, 2001 UA did announce daily ORD-DEL nonstop service to commence October 27, 2001. Due to 9/11 it never happened. First part of the relevant UA press release here.
http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-27075442_ITM

Another news item from India here based on the press release.
http://www.rediff.com/money/2001/aug/16united.htm

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: United1
Posted 2008-09-17 13:32:43 and read 6940 times.



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 353):
Quoting United1 (Reply 348):
Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 346):
ORD-DEL (Announced never started)

AFAIK ORD-DEL was never announced simply rumored....on here.

On August 16, 2001 UA did announce daily ORD-DEL nonstop service to commence October 27, 2001. Due to 9/11 it never happened. First part of the relevant UA press release here.

Gotcha....neat didnt know that particular bit of trivia.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Victrola
Posted 2008-09-17 13:44:39 and read 6938 times.

As a frequent traveller to Latin America living in Los Angeles, I am very doubtful the Delta flights to Sao Paulo will work.

I am an American Airlines frequent flyer mainly due to the fact that I travel to a wide variety of destinations in Latin America and the Caribbean. American simply has the best network to this region. In order to gain upgrades and maintain my frequent flyer status, I will continue to fly American whenever possible. Granted a Delta non stop to GRU would be slightly more convenient for me. However I am willing to take the AA flight to DFW and catch the DFW-GRU nonstop just to get those roughly 12000 frequent flyer miles.

I imagine other people like me in Los Angeles will do the same thing for the same reasons.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Jetlanta
Posted 2008-09-17 14:11:17 and read 6921 times.



Quoting Victrola (Reply 355):
As a frequent traveller to Latin America living in Los Angeles, I am very doubtful the Delta flights to Sao Paulo will work.

I am an American Airlines frequent flyer mainly due to the fact that I travel to a wide variety of destinations in Latin America and the Caribbean. American simply has the best network to this region. In order to gain upgrades and maintain my frequent flyer status, I will continue to fly American whenever possible. Granted a Delta non stop to GRU would be slightly more convenient for me. However I am willing to take the AA flight to DFW and catch the DFW-GRU nonstop just to get those roughly 12000 frequent flyer miles.

I imagine other people like me in Los Angeles will do the same thing for the same reasons.

If AA can't get you there nonstop and Delta can, they cease having the best network to the region for L.A. customers.

You may not change your habits, but many will. They always do when presented with nonstop service.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: OOer
Posted 2008-09-17 14:16:16 and read 6907 times.

With over 350 replies can we please get a part 2 to this thread....

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: WorldTraveler
Posted 2008-09-17 14:22:28 and read 6906 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 356):

Quoting Victrola (Reply 355):
As a frequent traveller to Latin America living in Los Angeles, I am very doubtful the Delta flights to Sao Paulo will work.

I am an American Airlines frequent flyer mainly due to the fact that I travel to a wide variety of destinations in Latin America and the Caribbean. American simply has the best network to this region. In order to gain upgrades and maintain my frequent flyer status, I will continue to fly American whenever possible. Granted a Delta non stop to GRU would be slightly more convenient for me. However I am willing to take the AA flight to DFW and catch the DFW-GRU nonstop just to get those roughly 12000 frequent flyer miles.

I imagine other people like me in Los Angeles will do the same thing for the same reasons.

If AA can't get you there nonstop and Delta can, they cease having the best network to the region for L.A. customers.

You may not change your habits, but many will. They always do when presented with nonstop service.

I'd like to know what business you are in where you accept the status quo in the industry and say that if you aren't number one, don't even bother.

I'll remind you and others again that in just over 12 years, DL has built itself into a viable force in Latin America and by this winter (US), will have the 2nd largest network in Latin America. DL has clearly not accepted the status quo in Latin America and has/will pass CO and UA who have been in the region much longer.

What DL has done in Latin America, Europe, the Middle East, and Africa will characterize what they will do in East Asia.

Clearly there are people who would prefer to see DL stay as a weak domestic carrier and not challenge the "establishment" in key int'l markets but that is not the strategy DL has chosen and DL IS succeeding at its global expansion plans.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: Cubsrule
Posted 2008-09-17 14:33:39 and read 6893 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 356):
You may not change your habits, but many will. They always do when presented with nonstop service.

I think that statement needs to be amended slightly, at least for business travelers. They change their habits when presented with convenient nonstop service. Whether 3x/week is sufficiently convenient is, obviously, an open question.

Topic: RE: Delta Applies For 3x LAX-GRU
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2008-09-17 14:48:35 and read 6885 times.



Quoting Jetlanta (Reply 342)