Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5677637/

Topic: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: FL787
Posted 2013-01-31 13:56:28 and read 10226 times.

DL continues to build up their LAX presence even on routes with AS/QX on it. It will be interesting to see if they start adding smaller California destinations in the future.

LAX-SJC will be 4x daily CR7 starting June 10th. It is now viewable on DL's desktop timetable.

LAX-SJC
0830-0945
1210-1325
1630-1745
1945-2100

SJC-LAX
0645-0800
1020-1135
1400-1515
1820-1935


With AA and DL both on this route now, what are the chances AS stays on it? They have some strength on the SJC side but it's certainly no hub.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-01-31 13:59:26 and read 10222 times.

Quoting FL787 (Thread starter):
With AA and DL both on this route now,

The main gorilla on the route is SWA - with 10-11 flights per day depending on week.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2013-01-31 14:01:48 and read 10203 times.

What's going on here? DL starts LAXSEA, AS increases LAXSEA, DL starts ATLANC (a little late for the summer season) and now LAXSJC. I'm not saying, I'm just saying...

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: deltaflyertoo
Posted 2013-01-31 14:02:50 and read 10183 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
The main gorilla on the route is SWA - with 10-11 flights per day depending on week.

True to that!!

Recently flew DL (or Skywest) from SMF to LAX. Was intrigued on arrival how T5 was a lot of CRJ7's and not a lot of mainline.

Is DL doing okay at LAX? I'm biased as I work in entertainment industry where everyone is all about American on a one sided route to NY (Sometimes LHR) and then VX and now and then a little United (specifically to Asia-sometimes to EWR/ORD). But NEVER hear anything about Delta, ever.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: yellowtail
Posted 2013-01-31 14:07:10 and read 10148 times.

Quoting FL787 (Thread starter):
DL continues to build up their LAX presence even on routes with AS/QX on it. It will be interesting to see if they start adding smaller California destinations in the future.

I keep saying this in various threads, but no one seems to be taking me seriously. Watch for DL to turn LAX into a HUB (a a la JFK)..all the signs are there.

Right now, everyone thinks it is to feed SYD..

DL wants the cornerstones to be NYC, LAX, MIA, DTW , SEA with two connecting hubs (ATL, SLC) in the middle. I know this plan sounds far fetched, esp MIA but does is not risk adverse. We need to look no further than them getting in the fuel business to see that

Perhaps someone can give us a breakdown of what they now have out of LAX
ATL
DTW
JFK
GUA
SYD
SFO
SEA
SJC
CUN
MEX
LAS
OAK
SLC
FLL
Any more?

[Edited 2013-01-31 14:09:33]

[Edited 2013-01-31 14:09:57]

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: panamair
Posted 2013-01-31 14:07:33 and read 10148 times.

They also just upped LAX-OAK to 5x daily (from 4), LAX-SFO to 12x daily (from 11x), and LAX-SMF to 5x daily (from 4x) starting June 10. LAX-PHX also increased to 5x daily from 4.

Also LAX-LAS remains at 9x daily but will be upgauged to 7x A319 and 2x CR9 (vs the old 4x A319 and 5x CR9).

[Edited 2013-01-31 14:09:13]

[Edited 2013-01-31 14:10:40]

[Edited 2013-01-31 14:18:22]

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-01-31 14:11:53 and read 10105 times.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 4):
FLL
Any more?

MIA, not FLL.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: panamair
Posted 2013-01-31 14:15:33 and read 10060 times.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 4):
Perhaps someone can give us a breakdown of what they now have out of LAX
ATL
DTW
JFK
GUA
SYD
SFO
SEA
SJC
CUN
MEX
LAS
OAK
SLC
FLL
Any more?

They don't have MEX; they have GDL instead.

Basically international is:

SYD, NRT, HND,
GUA,
GDL, CUN, and PVR.

Domestic:

HNL, LIH, KOA, OGG, SFO, SJC, OAK, SMF, SEA, LAS, PHX, SLC, SAN, MCI, MSP, DTW, CVG, CMH, JFK, ATL, MEM, BNA, RDU, MCO, TPA, MIA, IND, and MSY

With the latest adds, they should be at about 110-113 flights a day

[Edited 2013-01-31 14:22:25]

[Edited 2013-01-31 14:23:41]

[Edited 2013-01-31 14:45:36]

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Alasizon
Posted 2013-01-31 14:18:24 and read 10024 times.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 4):
Perhaps someone can give us a breakdown of what they now have out of LAX

Mainline
ATL
CUN
CVG
CMH
DTW
GDL
GUA
HNL
IND
OGG
MCI
KOA
LAS
LIH
MEM
MIA
MSP
BNA
JFK
MCO
PVR
RDU
SLC
SYD
TPA
NRT
HNL

Regional
LAS
OAK
PHX
SMF
SLC
SAN
SFO
SEA

And now SJC can be added to the regional list.

[Edited 2013-01-31 14:21:35]

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: BoeingGuy
Posted 2013-01-31 14:23:16 and read 9976 times.

My guess is that AA drops the route. AA already dropped SJC-SNA and SJC-SAN. I'll bet AS/QX stays.

There are now four carriers flying SJC-LAX and one flying SJC-SNA which I thought was always a well traveled route. I'd like to see AS/QX jump into SJC-SNA and give a second carrier on that route. So far, QX has declined SNA slots when they came up though.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Alasizon
Posted 2013-01-31 14:26:14 and read 9942 times.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 9):
So far, QX has declined SNA slots when they came up though.

I think in part because of SAN and also some other expansions they chose.
With the new terminal, I could see them accepting the slots this time around.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: bobloblaw
Posted 2013-01-31 14:27:08 and read 9942 times.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 4):
I keep saying this in various threads, but no one seems to be taking me seriously. Watch for DL to turn LAX into a HUB (a a la JFK)..all the signs are there.

Only if they want to lose a LOT of money.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 9):
My guess is that AA drops the route. AA already dropped SJC-SNA and SJC-SAN. I'll bet AS/QX stays.

AA dropped SJC-SNA because it wasnt part of Corner strategy.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: FL787
Posted 2013-01-31 14:30:18 and read 9902 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
The main gorilla on the route is SWA - with 10-11 flights per day depending on week.

Very true and obviously UA is on the route as well. I only mentioned those two because they codeshare with AS.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 4):
DL wants the cornerstones to be NYC, LAX, MIA, DTW , SEA with two connecting hubs (ATL, SLC) in the middle.

I hope you just forgot MSP because I don't think it's going anywhere.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 9):
My guess is that AA drops the route. AA already dropped SJC-SNA and SJC-SAN. I'll bet AS/QX stays.

I don't see AA dropping the route. LAX is an AA cornerstone, SNA and SAN were not.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: BoeingGuy
Posted 2013-01-31 14:33:40 and read 9874 times.

Quoting FL787 (Reply 12):
I don't see AA dropping the route. LAX is an AA cornerstone, SNA and SAN were not.

Yeah, but SJC is not. We know that AA has a disdain for SJC. I still vote that AA is odd-man out if the route can't support 4 carriers.

Does anyone know if QX and DL will code share on each others flights?

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: panamair
Posted 2013-01-31 14:36:18 and read 9839 times.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 13):
Does anyone know if QX and DL will code share on each others flights?

DL already codeshares on the QX flights currently.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-01-31 14:43:09 and read 9773 times.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 13):
Yeah, but SJC is not. We know that AA has a disdain for SJC. I still vote that AA is odd-man out if the route can't support 4 carriers.

An airline that has been successfully flyng the route for 20+ years is the odd man out? Are you kidding me?

AA isn't dropping the route. Would not be surprised to see CR7s come onto it as CR7s likely start moving to LAX when ERJ-175s come into LGA.

[Edited 2013-01-31 14:44:16]

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: FL787
Posted 2013-01-31 14:44:29 and read 9756 times.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 13):
Quoting FL787 (Reply 12):
I don't see AA dropping the route. LAX is an AA cornerstone, SNA and SAN were not.

Yeah, but SJC is not.

By that logic AA would only be flying between hubs. AS is one of the most successful airlines in the US for a reason and I think they'll see that they're not going to be able to compete with WN for O&D traffic and there will not be enough flow traffic left for them with both AA and DL on the route. I think AS would be better off shifting the Qs to another route out of SJC.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: FATFlyer
Posted 2013-01-31 14:53:24 and read 9687 times.

Quoting Alasizon (Reply 8):

Just for fun I took your list and marked with a star the cities being flown in 1992 by DL/DLConn when the LAX operation was at its peak number of flights of over 200 per day. I used this source.
http://www.departedflights.com/WALAXhub.html

Mainline
* ATL
CUN
* CVG
CMH
DTW
* GDL
GUA
* HNL
IND
* OGG
MCI
KOA
* LAS
LIH
MEM
MIA
MSP
BNA
* JFK
* MCO
* PVR
RDU
* SLC
SYD
* TPA
* NRT
* HNL

Regional
* LAS (was only mainline in 1992)
OAK
* PHX (was mainline in 1992)
* SMF (was mainline in 1992)
* SLC (was only mainline in 1992)
* SAN (was mix of mainline and regional in 1992)
* SFO (was mainline in 1992)
* SEA (was mainline in 1992)
* SJC


Flown in 1992 but currently not being operated:
Mainline
ACA
YYC
DFW
EWR
MZT
MEX
MSY
PDX
RNO
TUS
YVR

Regional
BFL
FAT
IPL
IYK
MRY
ONT
SNA
PMD
PSP
SBP
SBA
SMX
YUM

Interesting to see the change in the LAX operation 20 years later.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: klkla
Posted 2013-01-31 15:11:20 and read 9569 times.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 4):
DL wants the cornerstones to be NYC, LAX, MIA, DTW , SEA with two connecting hubs (ATL, SLC) in the middle. I know this plan sounds far fetched, esp MIA but does is not risk adverse. We need to look no further than them getting in the fuel business to see that

MIA? Not a chance. DL gets what they need in the S.E. United States and Latin American from ATL. Trying to muscle in on AA's turf in MIA would be about as stupid as AA doing the same thing in ATL.

Los Angeles is a different animal altogether. It's the second largest metro area and no single airline comes close to dominating it. Delta has been successful in recent years at increasing it as a focus city.

In general DL's hub/focus strategy is coming together quite nicely. SLC, MSP, DTW and ATL are perfectly situated to connect domestic travel. In addition all four are fortress hubs which will keep profits high (especially as SW dismantles what little competition they had from AirTran in ATL).

Internationally JFK's geographical proximity to Europe, SEA's to Asia, LAX to Hawaii/Australia, and to a lesser degree than MIA but still formidable ATL's proxmimty to Latin American for about 80% of the country makes DL a strong international player.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: BoeingGuy
Posted 2013-01-31 15:36:32 and read 9427 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 15):
An airline that has been successfully flyng the route for 20+ years is the odd man out? Are you kidding me?

No I'm not kidding you. AA flew a lot of routes successful that they've dropped. As I've pointed out before, AA has dropped numerous routes that another carrier comes in and operates successfully, especially AS (PDX-ORD, SEA-STL, SJC-OGG, etc). I'll bet NH does well on SJC-NRT. I can think of a lot of 20 year routes that they dropped. I don't see the market sustaining 4 carriers and I'm guessing from past history - especially with AA at SJC - that they'll be the ones to drop.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: atlengineer
Posted 2013-01-31 15:40:48 and read 9400 times.

Quoting klkla (Reply 18):
In general DL's hub/focus strategy is coming together quite nicely. SLC, MSP, DTW and ATL are perfectly situated to connect domestic travel.

I would also add in LGA for domestic. I think DL flies almost 50 percent of the flights out of LGA to many of the airports in the densely populated NE and connects them to the rest of the network.

ATLengineer

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-01-31 15:41:03 and read 9399 times.

Glad to see DL restart one of their old routes picked up from Western.   

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-01-31 15:44:06 and read 9374 times.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 19):
No I'm not kidding you. AA flew a lot of routes successful that they've dropped. As I've pointed out before, AA has dropped numerous routes that another carrier comes in and operates successfully, especially AS (PDX-ORD, SEA-STL, SJC-OGG, etc).

And? AA doesn't drop routes that are successful for it. The fact that AA drops routes that other airlines may decide to fly instead is irrelevant. LAXSJC works for AA; SJCOGG did not, just like how FLLLAX didn't work for Delta, but it works for AA. Or how SJCAUS became a weak link for AA; and then AS couldn't make it work; but finally Southwest did.

Delta is the weakest link in LAXSJC, not AA nor UA nor AS nor WN.
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 19):
I don't see the market sustaining 4 carriers and I'm guessing from past history - especially with AA at SJC - that they'll be the ones to drop.
AA won't be dropping it. And bookmark this post and revisit it two years from now - AA will still be flying LAXSJC.

If anything, SJC only stands to benefit from AA's domestic route focus right now, which will be centering on connecting major AA elite out-stations - which SJC remains - to more of it's hubs, as we see with upcoming LAXRDU and IAHJFK.

[Edited 2013-01-31 15:51:00]

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: HiFlyerAS
Posted 2013-01-31 15:47:15 and read 9350 times.

Quoting FL787 (Reply 12):
Very true and obviously UA is on the route as well. I only mentioned those two because they codeshare with AS.

AS code-share with WN and UA? Not in a MILLION years.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: deltairlines
Posted 2013-01-31 15:50:27 and read 9316 times.

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 17):
Flown in 1992 but currently not being operated:
Mainline
MSY

Delta has between 1-2x/day nonstop service on LAX-MSY. Mixture (depending on the day of week) of A319/A320/737-800 equipment.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: wedgetail737
Posted 2013-01-31 15:50:55 and read 9730 times.

With DL adding the SJC-LAX market, I would be surprised if AS/QX will stay in that market and give the AS passengers to DL. Maybe they'll add that QX resource to their SAN build-up and add frequency to their current QX destinations from SAN. Just my 2 cents.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: steex
Posted 2013-01-31 15:51:09 and read 9710 times.

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 23):
AS code-share with WN and UA? Not in a MILLION years.

FL787 was referencing AA and DL, the two carriers he mentioned operating LAX-SJC in the OP. AS most certainly codeshares with both of them.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: diverdave
Posted 2013-01-31 16:32:40 and read 9738 times.

Quoting panamair (Reply 7):
With the latest adds, they should be at about 110-113 flights a day

Seems like T5 is reasonably busy these days. Nice job that they held onto it during bankruptcy.

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 17):
Just for fun I took your list and marked with a star the cities being flown in 1992 by DL/DLConn when the LAX operation was at its peak number of flights of over 200 per day.

Do you know which terminals were in use by Delta at the time?

Thank you,
David

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: B747forever
Posted 2013-01-31 16:51:33 and read 9598 times.

DL seems once again committed to build up LAX. With their 49% stake in VS we might even see LAX-LHR on DL metal.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: MaverickM11
Posted 2013-01-31 16:53:55 and read 9593 times.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 4):
Watch for DL to turn LAX into a HUB (a a la JFK)..all the signs are there.

I don't know--they're #4 at LAX, which is a tough place to be, especially when AA/UA/WN are unlikely to go anywhere.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: MSYtristar
Posted 2013-01-31 16:56:56 and read 9541 times.

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 17):
Flown in 1992 but currently not being operated:
Mainline
ACA
YYC
DFW
EWR
MZT
MEX
MSY
PDX
RNO
TUS
YVR

MSY has been flown nonstop by DL since '07 or '08. Seasonally it's 2X daily and it's 1X daily year-round. The morning LAX-MSY is very popular with the Hollywood crowd.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: deltaflyertoo
Posted 2013-01-31 17:06:17 and read 9473 times.

Quoting B747forever (Reply 28):
DL seems once again committed to build up LAX. With their 49% stake in VS we might even see LAX-LHR on DL metal.

No, that will never happen in a million years unless something happened to VS. That route is already saturated (much like LA to Tokyo is), why DL would ADD an additional 200+ seats on top of the code share with VS and burn yields more is beyond me.

I see this speculation a lot-i.e. DL adding its own metal where VS already competes (or vice versa). Not sure the rational or what the thinking is when people suggest this. DL is using VS for the routes that VS already has the traffic but that DL would fail to do well if it then entered itself, suck as LHR to LAX or LHR to SFO, etc.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-01-31 17:14:29 and read 9384 times.

Quoting B747forever (Reply 28):
With their 49% stake in VS we might even see LAX-LHR on DL metal.

No. The entire point of the JBA is to use the Virgin brand in markets where Delta otherwise would never succeed/has already failed (i.e. LHRMIA, LHRLAX).

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: deltairlines
Posted 2013-01-31 17:36:02 and read 9158 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 32):
No. The entire point of the JBA is to use the Virgin brand in markets where Delta otherwise would never succeed/has already failed (i.e. LHRMIA, LHRLAX).

Agree - the only markets I can see that VS flies where DL might take over some of the flying are BOS/JFK/EWR. Can't really see anywhere else.

With VS also having Premium Economy, there is significant demand for that product, especially out of LAX/SFO/MIA. All the more reason to keep VS on those routes, as Premium Economy is a separate cabin vs. the extra legroom/recline but that's it of Delta's Economy Comfort.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: PIEAvantiP180
Posted 2013-01-31 17:52:56 and read 8979 times.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 29):

The same can be said of AA and NYC, smaller then UA and DL but its not stopping them from expanding and competing. LA is large like NYC and if DL can serve the important markets just like AA does out of NYC they should be able to stay competitive with the rest of the crowd. I believe LA is large enough for all 4 airlines AA, UA, WN, and DL.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: klkla
Posted 2013-01-31 18:21:54 and read 8758 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 32):
No. The entire point of the JBA is to use the Virgin brand in markets where Delta otherwise would never succeed/has already failed (i.e. LHRMIA, LHRLAX).

Really? This was the ENTIRE point? How long ago did DL fly LHR-LAX? I don't remember DL failing on that route any time in recent history.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: enilria
Posted 2013-01-31 18:33:31 and read 8654 times.

Quoting FL787 (Thread starter):
DL continues to build up their LAX presence even on routes with AS/QX on it. It will be interesting to see if they start adding smaller California destinations in the future.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
The main gorilla on the route is SWA - with 10-11 flights per day depending on week.

For far too long they have been losing money flying RJs against WN on the East Coast. It's time to expand that money losing strategy to the West Coast.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: B747forever
Posted 2013-01-31 18:36:28 and read 8601 times.

Quoting deltaflyertoo (Reply 31):
No, that will never happen in a million years unless something happened to VS. That route is already saturated (much like LA to Tokyo is), why DL would ADD an additional 200+ seats on top of the code share with VS and burn yields more is beyond me.

What I mean is that DL could operate on of the daily flights on its own metal while VS operates the other one, not adding more capacity.

If DL is committed to make Los Angeles a hub they have to expand into international key markets, such as London. They already have SYD and NRT. LHR is the next natural international destination.

Quoting deltairlines (Reply 33):
With VS also having Premium Economy, there is significant demand for that product, especially out of LAX/SFO/MIA. All the more reason to keep VS on those routes, as Premium Economy is a separate cabin vs. the extra legroom/recline but that's it of Delta's Economy Comfort.

Same thing can be said BA/AA, yet AA operates a single daily flight without any premium economy!

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: jetlanta
Posted 2013-01-31 18:37:52 and read 8623 times.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 29):
I don't know--they're #4 at LAX, which is a tough place to be, especially when AA/UA/WN are unlikely to go anywhere.

Not in terms of revenue. In fact, the AA, UA and DL are only separated by low single digits in terms of revenue share. Its a HUGE market. There is plenty of room for all three network carriers.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: FATFlyer
Posted 2013-01-31 18:50:39 and read 8479 times.

Quoting deltairlines (Reply 24):
Delta has between 1-2x/day nonstop service on LAX-MSY. Mixture (depending on the day of week) of A319/A320/737-800 equipment.
Quoting MSYtristar (Reply 30):
MSY has been flown nonstop by DL since '07 or '08. Seasonally it's 2X daily and it's 1X daily year-round. The morning LAX-MSY is very popular with the Hollywood crowd.

Thanks, I just used Alasizon's list from reply #8 without checking current schedules.

Quoting diverdave (Reply 27):
Do you know which terminals were in use by Delta at the time?

T5 and T6.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Deltal1011man
Posted 2013-01-31 19:23:50 and read 8277 times.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 9):
My guess is that AA drops the route.

Uh.. no

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 13):
Yeah, but SJC is not.

uh hub(LAX)-Spoke(SJC)

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 13):
Does anyone know if QX and DL will code share on each others flights?

DL has its code on QX, no telling if QX will codeshare on the DL side.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 13):
We know that AA has a disdain for SJC.

How? because they cut back the hub?

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 15):

AA isn't dropping the route. Would not be surprised to see CR7s come onto it as CR7s likely start moving to LAX when ERJ-175s come into LGA.

IIRC MQ already runs a CR7 (or two) to SJC from LAX.

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 17):
MSY

Delta has 2x most days on LAX-MSY(319/320 mix)

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 19):
No I'm not kidding you. AA flew a lot of routes successful that they've dropped. As I've pointed out before, AA has dropped numerous routes that another carrier comes in and operates successfully, especially AS (PDX-ORD, SEA-STL, SJC-OGG, etc). I'll bet NH does well on SJC-NRT. I can think of a lot of 20 year routes that they dropped. I don't see the market sustaining 4 carriers and I'm guessing from past history - especially with AA at SJC - that they'll be the ones to drop.

Other than PDX-ORD what is one key factor you are leaving out?

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 22):

And? AA doesn't drop routes that are successful for it. The fact that AA drops routes that other airlines may decide to fly instead is irrelevant. LAXSJC works for AA; SJCOGG did not, just like how FLLLAX didn't work for Delta, but it works for AA. Or how SJCAUS became a weak link for AA; and then AS couldn't make it work; but finally Southwest did.

This.

Quoting diverdave (Reply 27):
Do you know which terminals were in use by Delta at the time?

T5 and T6

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 29):
I don't know--they're #4 at LAX, which is a tough place to be, especially when AA/UA/WN are unlikely to go anywhere.

4 in what? Last numbers I saw was DL was less than 1% smaller than WN in market share without adding in any DCI flights. Total flights DL is going to be very close to WN....who i think is right around 110 flights a day...

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 32):

No. The entire point of the JBA is to use the Virgin brand in markets where Delta otherwise would never succeed/has already failed (i.e. LHRMIA, LHRLAX).

uh. two things,
1) Delta has never flown LAX-LHR. As much as you want the AF failure to be Delta's fail its not.
2) you have no idea what DL/VS will do as far as routes. SEA-LHR will come first, but I'd be willing to bet LAX-LHR is going to happen on Delta metal.

Quoting klkla (Reply 35):
Really? This was the ENTIRE point? How long ago did DL fly LHR-LAX? I don't remember DL failing on that route any time in recent history.

Never.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: BoeingGuy
Posted 2013-01-31 20:12:32 and read 7933 times.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 40):
Other than PDX-ORD what is one key factor you are leaving out?

Uh let's see. I can think of two. Smaller airplanes and not part of a cornerstone. Did I guess correctly?

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Deltal1011man
Posted 2013-01-31 20:20:16 and read 7894 times.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 41):

Uh let's see. I can think of two. Smaller airplanes and not part of a cornerstone. Did I guess correctly?

nope you got it.

So basically you want AA to try to be like Southwest? p2p? or do you just care about SJC and have an ax to grind?

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: FATFlyer
Posted 2013-01-31 20:41:55 and read 7726 times.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 40):
Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 17):MSY
Delta has 2x most days on LAX-MSY(319/320 mix)

See my comment just above your post.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Tomassjc
Posted 2013-01-31 20:49:04 and read 7697 times.

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 25):
I would be surprised if AS/QX will stay in that market and give the AS passengers to DL.


Maybe not. Keep in mind that 1 of the 3 QX SJC-LAX flights originates in RNO, the second in BOI, and both carry a significant amount of online thru passengers. Both are AM departures are consistently full and carry quite a bit of AS connecting traffic to Mexico as well. I could see the evening SJC-LAX flight going away as most of it connects to DL red eyes going east out of LAX.

What I believe would be ideal would be for AS to have their LAX-MEX flight originate in SJC in the early morning, and return through LAX in the evening.   

Tomas SJC

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: HiFlyerAS
Posted 2013-01-31 21:35:00 and read 7456 times.

Quoting Tomassjc (Reply 44):
What I believe would be ideal would be for AS to have their LAX-MEX flight originate in SJC in the early morning, and return through LAX in the evening.

I'd love to see this and other creative ideas. AS flew BOI-LAX years ago...maybe a tie-in via SJC and on to GDL, SJD, MEX, etc out of LAX would be what it takes for BOI-LAX to return. WN has been so successful at these multi-leg, direct flights. I never understood why more airlines don't go back to that. Same-plane, direct is sure better than having to change planes in a hub.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: mah4546
Posted 2013-01-31 21:37:38 and read 7446 times.

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 38):
Not in terms of revenue. In fact, the AA, UA and DL are only separated by low single digits in terms of revenue share. Its a HUGE market. There is plenty of room for all three network carriers.

The revenue data you continue to cite is incomplete and does not include international. It's of no real value, but you already knew that.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 40):

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 32):

No. The entire point of the JBA is to use the Virgin brand in markets where Delta otherwise would never succeed/has already failed (i.e. LHRMIA, LHRLAX).

uh. two things,
1) Delta has never flown LAX-LHR. As much as you want the AF failure to be Delta's fail its not.
2) you have no idea what DL/VS will do as far as routes. SEA-LHR will come first, but I'd be willing to bet LAX-LHR is going to happen on Delta metal.

Uh. Reading comprehension. If Delta wants to bleed even more money the MIALHR and BOSLHR, I'm sure LAXLHR will be a great strategy for them.

Quoting klkla (Reply 35):
Really? This was the ENTIRE point? How long ago did DL fly LHR-LAX? I don't remember DL failing on that route any time in recent history.

Again. Reading compression.

And yes, that's the point. DL would never succeed on LAXLHR. It knows that. It also probably knows that in the late 1990s VS successfully convinced a large number of entertainment companies in LA to carve out LAXLHR for itself, even when they were aligned with other carriers, which continues today. That lucrative traffic wants a VS plane. Just for that little fact alone, it makes no sense to use DL metal on LAXLHR.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Deltal1011man
Posted 2013-01-31 21:45:43 and read 7387 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 46):

Uh. Reading comprehension. If Delta wants to bleed even more money the MIALHR and BOSLHR, I'm sure LAXLHR will be a great strategy for them.

Wow, I would say something but I'm not going to take a ban, talk to yourself on the reading comprehension.

You said DL flew LAX-LHR and it failed....prove it.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 46):

And yes, that's the point. DL would never succeed on LAXLHR. It knows that. It also probably knows that in the late 1990s VS successfully convinced a large number of entertainment companies in LA to carve out LAXLHR for itself, even when they were aligned with other carriers, which continues today. That lucrative traffic wants a VS plane. Just for that little fact alone, it makes no sense to use DL metal on LAXLHR.

Who said Delta would replace VS?


and how do you know, as a fact, Delta could never make it work? Give me a break dude. (oh, speaking of LAX, didn't you tell me 2? years ago all the new flying, manly LAX-RDU/CMH would be gone? goo call on that.) Like it or not Delta is growing in LA and they are here to stay.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: laxboeingman
Posted 2013-01-31 22:07:51 and read 7236 times.

Is it the same e/q on the flights or are they using multiple planes? Assuming everything runs on time, the schedule could work with one plane.

I do not think this will do well because of the WN presence. I do think, however, it will be able to survive because of the frequent fliers who will take that flight up or down the coast rather than flying on WN.

Thank you,

laxbeoingman

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: BDL757
Posted 2013-01-31 22:32:14 and read 7107 times.

Quoting FL787 (Reply 12):
Quoting yellowtail (Reply 4):
DL wants the cornerstones to be NYC, LAX, MIA, DTW , SEA with two connecting hubs (ATL, SLC) in the middle.

I hope you just forgot MSP because I don't think it's going anywhere.

I agree, MSP has a good location and is said to be DL's 2nd most profitable hub.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: bobloblaw
Posted 2013-02-01 00:42:59 and read 6789 times.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 19):

I'm not sure why AA is the odd man out. DL is increasing overall capacity by what? 15%? Why can AA hold their own against 10-11 WN 737s but 4 CR7s break them?

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Deltal1011man
Posted 2013-02-01 01:22:22 and read 6713 times.

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 50):

I'm not sure why AA is the odd man out. DL is increasing overall capacity by what? 15%? Why can AA hold their own against 10-11 WN 737s but 4 CR7s break them?

I want to first say that I don't think DL is going to run AA off the route


but It could very easily run AA off the route depending on the routes performance now. If AA has very low margins on the route(or even losing money, but it still benefits the hub) the Delta seats could cause the margins on the route to become to red enough that it has to go.

Capacity is capacity. If the route has to much without DL then, depending on who wants to burn money the longest, it could run AA out of the market. (again, I don't think will happen)

and of course then you have to look at cost and yada yada.

Quoting BDL757 (Reply 49):
I agree, MSP has a good location and is said to be DL's 2nd most profitable hub.

Other than CVG/MEM no hub is going anywhere. Delta is, however, trying to have solid growth on the west coast.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: yellowtail
Posted 2013-02-01 05:22:34 and read 6265 times.

based on a 130 departures a day...IHMO DL is rapidly approaching hub status in LAX. While it will never works as a domestic hub.....if DL can slowly build it is a Transpac and Latin Hub (for the Western US) it will work as their is a nice O&D base to both regions.

Traffic to certain parts of Central America too (like LIR) is quite strong from the Pacific NW. For example...my flight last week from IAH to BZE was largely folks connecting from the west coast.

Quoting FL787 (Reply 12):
I hope you just forgot MSP because I don't think it's going anywhere.
Quoting BDL757 (Reply 49):
I agree, MSP has a good location and is said to be DL's 2nd most profitable hub.

Yes I forgot MSP...sorry....how could I forget those nice folks!

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: RWA380
Posted 2013-02-01 05:39:08 and read 6195 times.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 2):
hat's going on here? DL starts LAXSEA, AS increases LAXSEA, DL starts ATLANC (a little late for the summer season) and now LAXSJC. I'm not saying, I'm just saying...

That between DL & AS building stronger ties together, might very well mean, that between the two of them operating several identical key routes, they will create an advantage for themselves that the competition will have a tough time competing with. Will they be able to kill off the competition by doing this?

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 9):
I'd like to see AS/QX jump into SJC-SNA and give a second carrier on that route. So far, QX has declined SNA slots when they came up though.

AS had several SNA-OAK mainline flights for years, and those were all cancelled in favor of going non-stop SNA-PDX/SEA.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 13):
Does anyone know if QX and DL will code share on each others flights?
Quoting panamair (Reply 14):
DL already codeshares on the QX flights currently.

I heard that AS flight numbers would not be showing up on the DL LAX-SEA-LAX flights, is that correct?

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 21):
Glad to see DL restart one of their old routes picked up from Western

I agree, I have always been a bit bitter about DL's disregard to maintaining more of the WA network, except SLC of course.

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 45):
I'd love to see this and other creative ideas. AS flew BOI-LAX years ago...maybe a tie-in via SJC and on to GDL, SJD, MEX, etc out of LAX would be what it takes for BOI-LAX to return. WN has been so successful at these multi-leg, direct flights. I never understood why more airlines don't go back to that. Same-plane, direct is sure better than having to change planes in a hub.

I can only remember AS fling mainline into BOI from SEA. Is it possible the flight you mentioned routed BOI-SEA-LAX-MEX?

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: laca773
Posted 2013-02-01 05:49:50 and read 6141 times.

Quoting B747forever (Reply 37):

If DL is committed to make Los Angeles a hub they have to expand into international key markets, such as London. They already have SYD and NRT. LHR is the next natural international destination.

What is all this nonsense about DL starting LAX-LHR?? This talk is completely insane, unless this is part of your airline computer program game where you run your own airline. I don't see this happening ever!!!!! AF tried it for a few months and it failed miserably.
As it is, I don't see why UA is still on the route. I think they should turn it over to NZ which has a much better product, similar to what they did with their LAX-AKL service.

Perhaps AS & DL are trying to do something together with this new DLC service. At least it's not on those nasty CR5s (CRJs).

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: rangercarp
Posted 2013-02-01 06:00:36 and read 6083 times.

Does DL still code share with eagle on SJC - LAX?

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: yellowtail
Posted 2013-02-01 06:09:46 and read 6067 times.

If Vs is brought into the JV...technically they will have LAX-LHR.

I would like to see DL restart LAX-SAL/SJO/MEX..maybe with 319s

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: jetlanta
Posted 2013-02-01 06:16:33 and read 6041 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 46):
The revenue data you continue to cite is incomplete and does not include international. It's of no real value, but you already knew that.

And the revenue you cite includes what? Oh yes, you never cite any revenue, do you?

But let's go with your point that the data doesn't fully account for international traffic. Does that make me wrong? Nope.

Here is data from the DOT's T-100 for the YE September 2012 for LAX. It includes ALL capacity operated to/from LAX including international.

Revenue Passenger Miles Share:
UA: 15.3%
AA: 14.3%
DL: 12.0%

But let's take a look into the future. For schedules loaded for the Calendar Year 2013, here is how capacity breaks down in 2013:

UA: 13.6%
AA: 12.4%
DL: 10.6%

Now consider what I said, which you questioned:

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 38):
Not in terms of revenue. In fact, the AA, UA and DL are only separated by low single digits in terms of revenue share. Its a HUGE market. There is plenty of room for all three network carriers.

Tell me where that is wrong. In FACT, the DOT DB1B shows that Delta's average fare out of LAX is $271, versus $274 for UA and $248 for AA. The DB1B sample, it is a big sample and is considered accurate at a domestic carrier level (since they are required to report, unlike foreign flags). It includes both domestic and international revenues for U.S. carriers. Since we are talking about average fares and not traffic, we can use DB1B with a degree of confidence.

So Delta had a 2.3 point RPM disadvantage in 2012 versus AA. It has a 1.8 point ASM disadvantage in loaded schedules for 2013 (not including this LAX-SJC addition). But it has a 9.3 point fare advantage. So, the net is that AA is likely still marginally larger at LAX in revenue, but the difference is becoming negligible.

The industry has changed dramatically in the past few years. The old idea that AA holds some grand franchise at LAX is simply dated. All three legacy carriers are now major players in the market. Given capacity constraints, that is the way it will likely stay.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: HiFlyerAS
Posted 2013-02-01 06:33:00 and read 5957 times.

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 53):
I can only remember AS fling mainline into BOI from SEA. Is it possible the flight you mentioned routed BOI-SEA-LAX-MEX?

Apologies...I swore AS used to run BOI-LAX as a mainline flight but can't seen to find any record of it. Currently QX is running BOI-SJC-LAX as mentioned by Tomas SJC. It does well on an Q400...if it left earlier in the morning (like 6am instead of 8am) with a continuation on to Mexico I could see it as a successful mainline flight.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: steex
Posted 2013-02-01 08:15:27 and read 5570 times.

Quoting klkla (Reply 35):
Really? This was the ENTIRE point? How long ago did DL fly LHR-LAX? I don't remember DL failing on that route any time in recent history.
Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 40):
uh. two things,
1) Delta has never flown LAX-LHR. As much as you want the AF failure to be Delta's fail its not.
2) you have no idea what DL/VS will do as far as routes. SEA-LHR will come first, but I'd be willing to bet LAX-LHR is going to happen on Delta metal.
Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 47):
Wow, I would say something but I'm not going to take a ban, talk to yourself on the reading comprehension.

You said DL flew LAX-LHR and it failed....prove it.

I don't really have any reason to enter this discussion, but Mark said:

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 32):
No. The entire point of the JBA is to use the Virgin brand in markets where Delta otherwise would never succeed/has already failed (i.e. LHRMIA, LHRLAX).

Notice he included "would never succeed" right before "has already failed." He then provided an example of failed (LHR-MIA) and one that he presumably believes would never succeed (LHR-LAX). I don't have enough information to judge DL's likelihood for success if they attempted the route, but clearly he didn't say that DL has already failed on LAX-LHR.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Josh32121
Posted 2013-02-01 08:30:24 and read 5514 times.

AF flew LAX-LHR with the DL code on it right after LHR was opened up to carriers besides BA/VS/AA/UA. It was part of the JV, so while DL technically didn't operate, it was marketed by DL as a DL flight, and it didn't succeed. Piggybacking on VS' existing market share on that route will surely play out better for DL than selling a DL ticket on the French flag carrier to fly to the UK.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: tommy767
Posted 2013-02-01 08:35:57 and read 5494 times.

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 17):
Mainline
ACA
YYC
DFW
EWR
MZT
MEX
MSY
PDX
RNO
TUS
YVR

For hub status it would be nice to see LAX-EWR and LAX-DFW once again.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: surfdog75
Posted 2013-02-01 08:44:26 and read 5457 times.

Does DL have enough gate capacity to substantially increase the number of flights in LAX if they wanted? Is there a possibility of moving some RJs to another location and busing passengers like Eagle does? LAX is sort of a mess but I know they crammed some flights into JFK under less that ideal circumstances when they decided to expand there.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: LDVAviation
Posted 2013-02-01 08:56:26 and read 5402 times.

Quoting surfdog75 (Reply 62):
Does DL have enough gate capacity to substantially increase the number of flights in LAX if they wanted? Is there a possibility of moving some RJs to another location and busing passengers like Eagle does? LAX is sort of a mess but I know they crammed some flights into JFK under less that ideal circumstances when they decided to expand there.

Moving RJ's to another location would mean creating new gates in a facility like Eagle's. Those are numbers that would count against the airport's gate limit.

The airport board is saving those numbers for the satellite concourse to TBIT and the extension to the new north concourse of TBIT. Which probably means that Delta will end up cramming any additional RJ flights into T5 (LAX).

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: B747forever
Posted 2013-02-01 09:06:54 and read 5342 times.

Quoting laca773 (Reply 54):
AF tried it for a few months and it failed miserably.
Quoting Josh32121 (Reply 60):
flew LAX-LHR with the DL code on it right after LHR was opened up to carriers besides BA/VS/AA/UA. It was part of the JV, so while DL technically didn't operate, it was marketed by DL as a DL flight, and it didn't succeed.

Even though the AF LHR-LAX flight was part of JV, we still have to remember it was operated by AF, and not DL. One would think it should not matter whether AF or DL operates it (after all isnt the point of JV metal neutrality?), but apparently it does which is evident by the latest transfer of flights from AF metal to DL metal. You can not use AF's failure on the route to gauge DL's performance on the route if they ever would operate it.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: cornutt
Posted 2013-02-01 09:20:54 and read 5280 times.

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 17):
Regional
BFL
FAT
IPL
IYK
MRY
ONT
SNA
PMD
PSP
SBP
SBA
SMX
YUM

Wow, there are some really short routes in this list. LAX-SNA? You'd never see that today... it would take longer for the pax to clear TSA than it would for them to just drive there. I wonder if a lot of these were just continuing service on flights originating from SLC.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: diverdave
Posted 2013-02-01 09:51:17 and read 5151 times.

Quoting rangercarp (Reply 55):
Does DL still code share with eagle on SJC - LAX?

All of the Delta codeshares with American Eagle out of LAX were discontinued last year.  

David

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: RWA380
Posted 2013-02-01 10:39:39 and read 4949 times.

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 58):
I swore AS used to run BOI-LAX as a mainline flight but can't seen to find any record of it.

I found this AS/QX route map from 1992, it shows a line between BOI & LAX, I can not find the matching schedule or OAG, but I think this could possibly be the smoking gun you are looking for. This map has BOI showing as a a jointly served city by both QX & AS. Maybe someone else can substantiate if this service was QX or AS.

http://www.departedflights.com/AS060792.html

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: klkla
Posted 2013-02-01 11:50:29 and read 4685 times.

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 46):
Again. Reading compression.
Quoting mah4546 (Reply 46):
Quoting klkla (Reply 35):Really? This was the ENTIRE point? How long ago did DL fly LHR-LAX? I don't remember DL failing on that route any time in recent history.
Again. Reading compression.

Again. Learn how to write and people will comprehend what you are saying.

You said :

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 32):
No. The entire point of the JBA is to use the Virgin brand in markets where Delta otherwise would never succeed/has already failed (i.e. LHRMIA, LHRLAX).

1st - That is not the entire point and in fact has nothing to do with why they're investing in Virgin, You lose a lot of credibility when you say things like this that are not based on fact.

2nd - Your wording is dubious: If you had written "...where Delta otherwise would never succeed (LHRLAX) or has already already failed (LHRMIA)" you wouldn't have to be so rude to people when defending your poorly written factually incorrect statements.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: BoeingGuy
Posted 2013-02-01 11:53:10 and read 4678 times.

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 58):

Apologies...I swore AS used to run BOI-LAX as a mainline flight but can't seen to find any record of it. Currently QX is running BOI-SJC-LAX as mentioned by Tomas SJC. It does well on an Q400...if it left earlier in the morning (like 6am instead of 8am) with a continuation on to Mexico I could see it as a successful mainline flight.

I'll bet you are thinking of LAX-GEG which has been mainline in the past. AS tried it with mainline jets in the mid-2000s and then QX did it with CR7s.

I'd like to see AS try a SJC-MEX non-stop, not just the through 737 through LAX that Tom suggested. WIth the heavy hispanic population in SJC I could see it working, just like GDL does.

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 53):
AS had several SNA-OAK mainline flights for years, and those were all cancelled in favor of going non-stop SNA-PDX/SEA.

Yep, I'm well aware of that. However, SJC-SNA carries more high-tech traffic and AS is building up SJC a bit. I would think that at least a few QX Q400s in the market would work. WN has a complete monopoly on that route since AA pulled SJC-SNA and B6 pulled SJC-LGB.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: deltaflyertoo
Posted 2013-02-01 12:04:33 and read 4633 times.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 56):
I would like to see DL restart LAX-SAL/SJO/MEX..maybe with 319s

They can't do LAX-MEX, some Mexican route authority (others here would know better its name) that prohibits only 2 US carriers to fly the route-AS and UAL have it from LAX. DL puts a codeshare on Aeromexico flights for this.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: dlflynhayn
Posted 2013-02-01 12:49:08 and read 4448 times.

Quoting deltaflyertoo (Reply 70):

They can't do LAX-MEX, some Mexican route authority (others here would know better its name) that prohibits only 2 US carriers to fly the route-AS and UAL have it from LAX. DL puts a codeshare on Aeromexico flights for this

Yes definitely one that route planners in ATL screwed up!! I use to off load that flight almost daily and it was always packed to the gills with cargo ocra etc. it was a hell flight to work but thought it was a money maker for DL...

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Alasizon
Posted 2013-02-01 13:18:30 and read 4327 times.

Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 39):
Quoting deltairlines (Reply 24):
Delta has between 1-2x/day nonstop service on LAX-MSY. Mixture (depending on the day of week) of A319/A320/737-800 equipment.
Quoting MSYtristar (Reply 30):
MSY has been flown nonstop by DL since '07 or '08. Seasonally it's 2X daily and it's 1X daily year-round. The morning LAX-MSY is very popular with the Hollywood crowd.

Thanks, I just used Alasizon's list from reply #8 without checking current schedules.

Whoops, looks like I missed MSY....

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 52):
if DL can slowly build it is a Transpac and Latin Hub (for the Western US) it will work as their is a nice O&D base to both regions.

There isn't much that DL can go into from LAX that would be a profitable LATAM market that doesn't already have competition. The main issue is that most of the traffic tends to originate in LATAM when coming to LAX and a lot of people who fly to places such as Belize either already take other carriers or connect over other hubs like IAH, DFW and MIA.

Quoting surfdog75 (Reply 62):
Does DL have enough gate capacity to substantially increase the number of flights in LAX if they wanted?

There are certain slack times in the DL schedule at LAX. But from what I can tell, DL can expand maybe another 10-15% before they hit their reasonable limit.

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 67):
I found this AS/QX route map from 1992, it shows a line between BOI & LAX, I can not find the matching schedule or OAG, but I think this could possibly be the smoking gun you are looking for. This map has BOI showing as a a jointly served city by both QX & AS. Maybe someone else can substantiate if this service was QX or AS.

I'll have to go back and look at my old AS mags to look but I seem to recall that the reason why BOI is marked as a dual station is because there was a night run from SEA-BOI much like the SEA-GEG runs by AS which freed up some parking spaces.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: usdcaguy
Posted 2013-02-01 14:50:35 and read 4095 times.

Is there any chance of DL starting to service to any of the smaller Mexican interior markets, such as BJX/MLM/ZCL? There must be enough demand from LAX to some of those places, although I know UA currently serves BJX-LAX as a holdover from CO.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: deltaflyertoo
Posted 2013-02-01 15:15:01 and read 4039 times.

Quoting usdcaguy (Reply 73):
There must be enough demand from LAX to some of those places, although I know UA currently serves BJX-LAX as a holdover from CO.

Indeed their probably is, but, you have to wonder is such a market "high yielding" and or "lucrative" or the type of pax DL wants? DL and the other "Legacies" have made it know they REALLY only want one type of pax and that is the high yield, last minute, affluent biz traveler. I'm sure if there a case for affluent biz peeps in those interior markets of Mexico looking to connect to Asia, DL would be on it but alas I don't think there is and that is why you don't see DL making a beline for such routes.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Alasizon
Posted 2013-02-01 15:32:58 and read 3999 times.

Quoting usdcaguy (Reply 73):
Is there any chance of DL starting to service to any of the smaller Mexican interior markets, such as BJX/MLM/ZCL? There must be enough demand from LAX to some of those places, although I know UA currently serves BJX-LAX as a holdover from CO.

I would think if they wanted to, they would. Unfortunately the pax coming from these areas more than likely are not affluent enough as the post above me mentioned and also the opinion of Mexico has taken a real hit here in the LAX area because of the drug violence. As such, I can see DL using their expansion out of LAX elsewhere that would bring in better profits.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: yellowtail
Posted 2013-02-01 15:54:28 and read 3976 times.

Quoting dlflynhayn (Reply 71):
Yes definitely one that route planners in ATL screwed up!! I use to off load that flight almost daily and it was always packed to the gills with cargo ocra etc. it was a hell flight to work but thought it was a money maker for DL...

LAX-SAL was profitable too.

IIRC there was an article a few years ago interviewing somebody high up in DL that mentioned that it wasn't that their C. Americans ops were unprofitable from LAX it was just that they could make more money with the asset elsewhere. And that was why the pulled the plug on that whole operation.

IMHO, they are having second thoughts on that decision now. For example GUA-LAX does really well.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: AADC10
Posted 2013-02-01 16:44:30 and read 3912 times.

Quoting cornutt (Reply 65):
Wow, there are some really short routes in this list. LAX-SNA? You'd never see that today... it would take longer for the pax to clear TSA than it would for them to just drive there.

There are probably very few O&D passengers on LAX-SNA. Most passengers are probably connecting to transcon or international flights. LAX-SJC too is probably to feed flights out of LAX. LAX-SJC O&D is pretty much owned by WN.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: peanuts
Posted 2013-02-01 16:47:59 and read 3903 times.

What I find most interesting in threads like these is that DL's abilities keep being challenged yet at the same time DL is making huge strides at chipping away patiently in very important markets...
The sceptics and others in denial have plenty of (old) ammunition to fire but the momentum is clearly on DL's side.
Even after AA's rebirth there is just so much catching up to do for AA. It's not like DL is just gonna watch idly by as a lean AA tries to gain some momentum after it exits CH11.

AA has some great opportunities ahead of them but to get there is just not as easy as it used to be.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: deltairlines
Posted 2013-02-01 17:09:26 and read 3857 times.

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 77):
There are probably very few O&D passengers on LAX-SNA. Most passengers are probably connecting to transcon or international flights.

Exactly. I've driven from a hotel I stay at very frequently (Hyatt Irvine; one exit south of SNA on the 405) and made it to LAX within 40 minutes. By the time you clear security, fly, get into the pattern at LAX, and taxi in alone, you could be sitting at LAX barring rush hour traffic. If you had to go from Irvine to downtown, Metrolink is much cheaper and faster.

I have taken SNA-LAX once a few years back on a United EMB-120. It was a Saturday 915p departure and I had spent my day in southern Orange County. Was easier to just get on the plane at SNA (where, at that hour, I showed up about 25 minutes before departure with me having done OLCI), flew the 9 minutes to LAX getting off the plane at 945p and then hopped on a 1045p transcon to Dulles. Given that it was a frequent flyer award, it cost me nothing extra; I would have had to leave where I was at the same time anyway to get to LAX (if not earlier to plan for 405 traffic!) so all in all it was simply a less-stressful experience. Plus I get to say I flew a cool little line in Southern California (which stayed my shortest fixed-wing flight until five years later when I took the B6 BUR-LGB-BUR one-day special).

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Tomassjc
Posted 2013-02-01 18:34:04 and read 3750 times.

As of this evening, I'm not finding anything in Sabre or on Delta's website in regards to this new service.....

Tomas SJC

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Deltal1011man
Posted 2013-02-01 19:16:54 and read 3698 times.

Quoting steex (Reply 59):

Notice he included "would never succeed" right before "has already failed." He then provided an example of failed (LHR-MIA) and one that he presumably believes would never succeed (LHR-LAX). I don't have enough information to judge DL's likelihood for success if they attempted the route, but clearly he didn't say that DL has already failed on LAX-LHR.

Not its not clear at all.
and he is counting AF's fail on LAX-LHR as DL's. (or he needs to work on how he words things)

Quoting Josh32121 (Reply 60):
It was part of the JV, so while DL technically didn't operate, it was marketed by DL as a DL flight, and it didn't succeed

doesn't mean much. Its an AF flights leaving from T2.

and its was with a 777 with F. Way to much plane, way to much F, for starting the route. (and of course it was a different time. Delta was much smaller in the LA market then.)

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 63):

The airport board is saving those numbers for the satellite concourse to TBIT and the extension to the new north concourse of TBIT. Which probably means that Delta will end up cramming any additional RJ flights into T5 (LAX).

Not true. Delta has set up hard stands for RJs over at the hangar.

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 63):

Moving RJ's to another location would mean creating new gates in a facility like Eagle's. Those are numbers that would count against the airport's gate limit.

Ah or you do what they have been doing now, hard stand parking.

Quoting diverdave (Reply 66):
All of the Delta codeshares with American Eagle out of LAX were discontinued last year.

Which is why I'm kinda shocked Delta hasn't jumped into some smaller intra-cali markets. (ie FAT/MYR/SBA)

Quoting klkla (Reply 68):

2nd - Your wording is dubious: If you had written "...where Delta otherwise would never succeed (LHRLAX) or has already already failed (LHRMIA)" you wouldn't have to be so rude to people when defending your poorly written factually incorrect statements.

This.

Quoting deltaflyertoo (Reply 70):
DL puts a codeshare on Aeromexico flights for this.

And the AS flights(which is who got the Delta/Western rights to LAX-MEX)

Quoting dlflynhayn (Reply 71):
oute planners in ATL screwed up!

Leo. thank him.

Quoting Tomassjc (Reply 80):

thats because its loaded on Saturdays. His source is the Delta timetable which is normally updated Tue/Wed before the load into Delta.com(again, on Saturday) Check again on Sunday and it should be on Delta.com
but for those of us that can and know where to look, we normally find out on Monday.....just wait for it to become public via the timetable.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Tomassjc
Posted 2013-02-01 19:54:30 and read 3637 times.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 81):
thats because its loaded on Saturdays. His source is the Delta timetable which is normally updated Tue/Wed before the load into Delta.com(again, on Saturday) Check again on Sunday and it should be on Delta.com but for those of us that can and know where to look, we normally find out on Monday.....just wait for it to become public via the timetable.


Thanks! I'll check Sabre again on Sunday.

Tom

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: PIEAvantiP180
Posted 2013-02-01 20:04:33 and read 3631 times.

My Android delta app is only showing 3 daily flights instead of 4, is this a loading error?

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: LDVAviation
Posted 2013-02-01 20:10:06 and read 3630 times.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 81):
Not true. Delta has set up hard stands for RJs over at the hangar.

LAWA doest not count those

However, if Delta tried to turn that hanger into a formal terminal (like the Eagle terminal), I don't think LAWA would be agreeable.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: mesaflyguy
Posted 2013-02-01 22:05:58 and read 3515 times.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 81):

"Which is why I'm kinda shocked Delta hasn't jumped into some smaller intra-cali markets. (ie FAT/MYR/SBA) "

Really? MYR? I'm not completely sure but last time I checked MYR was in South Carolina!  

By the way, and I didn't think it would need to be stated, but given the trijectory into much of this thread headed, I should let ya know that I AM just kidding. I know you probably didn't mean MYR, I just figured I'd give you a heads up.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Deltal1011man
Posted 2013-02-01 23:52:37 and read 3424 times.

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 84):

However, if Delta tried to turn that hanger into a formal terminal (like the Eagle terminal), I don't think LAWA would be agreeable.

but what about the gate loss for the last MQ building? (the box was there then, even though I think UA had moved everything back to T7/8 by that time)

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 84):
LAWA doest not count those

right, What I mean is there are other ways. So they may not be able to grow gate space per say but they can do more RJ hard stand parking.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Deltal1011man
Posted 2013-02-01 23:54:49 and read 3422 times.

Quoting mesaflyguy (Reply 85):

Crap, MRY not MYR

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: laca773
Posted 2013-02-02 06:01:05 and read 3271 times.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 69):
I'd like to see AS try a SJC-MEX non-stop, not just the through 737 through LAX that Tom suggested. WIth the heavy hispanic population in SJC I could see it working, just like GDL does.

I'd like to see AS start this too. I think they have a great chance of making of this route being a success. They could start out 4x a week with a redeye southbound. I thought Volaris would have already started this route 2x a week, but they have been slow @ SJC. MEX also flew to MLM and did very well (from what I remember).

Quoting deltaflyertoo (Reply 70):
They can't do LAX-MEX, some Mexican route authority (others here would know better its name) that prohibits only 2 US carriers to fly the route-AS and UAL have it from LAX. DL puts a codeshare on Aeromexico flights for this.

DL blew it on LAX-MEX. AS has done a good job serving the market with 2x daily flights compared to DL flying it once daily and not being able to decide to operate it as a redeye, or morning/noontime departure. I don't think DL can figure out what to do with LAX-GDL.

Perhaps we'll see DL bring back LAX-SAL one day. After all, the only service is flown by TA nonstop and many don't like flying TA (now AV).

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Deltal1011man
Posted 2013-02-02 06:13:55 and read 3249 times.

Quoting laca773 (Reply 88):

DL blew it on LAX-MEX. AS has done a good job serving the market with 2x daily flights compared to DL flying it once daily and not being able to decide to operate it as a redeye, or morning/noontime departure. I don't think DL can figure out what to do with LAX-GDL.

Uh what? Delta had up to 3 flights a day to MEX.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: CIDFlyer
Posted 2013-02-02 06:36:24 and read 3238 times.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 4):

I keep saying this in various threads, but no one seems to be taking me seriously. Watch for DL to turn LAX into a HUB (a a la JFK)..all the signs are there.

Right now, everyone thinks it is to feed SYD..

DL wants the cornerstones to be NYC, LAX, MIA, DTW , SEA with two connecting hubs (ATL, SLC) in the middle. I know this plan sounds far fetched, esp MIA but does is not risk adverse. We need to look no further than them getting in the fuel business to see that

Perhaps someone can give us a breakdown of what they now have out of LAX
ATL
DTW
JFK
GUA
SYD
SFO
SEA
SJC
CUN
MEX
LAS
OAK
SLC
FLL
Any more?[Edited 2013-01-31 14:09:33][Edited 2013-01-31 14:09:57]

umm, where exactly does their THIRD largest hub MSP fit into DL's plans? They fly MSP-LAX also

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: HiFlyerAS
Posted 2013-02-02 09:15:57 and read 3100 times.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 89):
Uh what? Delta had up to 3 flights a day to MEX.

Maybe at the highpoint but service got really spotty towards the end and unpredictable. I think at one point it got down to one redeye that was not even daily.

Quoting laca773 (Reply 88):
Perhaps we'll see DL bring back LAX-SAL one day. After all, the only service is flown by TA nonstop and many don't like flying TA (now AV).

I think within two-three years you could see AS flying any or all of LAX-SJO, SAL, BZE, possibly even PTY. AS was held back by T3 and TBIT...now with the move to T6 they have the gates and the CIS to make it happen.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: delta2ual
Posted 2013-02-02 09:59:54 and read 3054 times.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 78):
AA has some great opportunities ahead of them but to get there is just not as easy as it used to be.

I agree 100%. I don't see why AA/UA/DL can't all be successful. Each one has strengths and weaknesses. I like this site for learning new information but I do get tired of the "mine is bigger than yours" mentality on here. Everything is a competition; we just have to remember that 99% of what we read on here is subjective and opinion-based.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: yellowtail
Posted 2013-02-03 15:18:02 and read 2635 times.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 78):
What I find most interesting in threads like these is that DL's abilities keep being challenged yet at the same time DL is making huge strides at chipping away patiently in very important markets...
The sceptics and others in denial have plenty of (old) ammunition to fire but the momentum is clearly on DL's side.

exactly.

Quoting laca773 (Reply 88):
Perhaps we'll see DL bring back LAX-SAL one day. After all, the only service is flown by TA nonstop and many don't like flying TA (now AV).

I would agree. DL did well on this route (just like it does on LAX-GUA now). The SAL economy is doing well and DL would do well to get back into this market.

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 91):
I think within two-three years you could see AS flying any or all of LAX-SJO, SAL, BZE, possibly even PTY. AS was held back by T3 and TBIT...now with the move to T6 they have the gates and the CIS to make it happen.

While I would agree, I think it depends on what DLs plans for LAX are and whether AS intends to cooperate more or less with DL. DL already has name recognition and sales teams in these markets so their path to success will be much easier than AS.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: RWA380
Posted 2013-02-04 03:22:50 and read 2399 times.

Quoting delta2ual (Reply 92):
I agree 100%. I don't see why AA/UA/DL can't all be successful. Each one has strengths and weaknesses.

I doubt any one carrier will become a dominating force at LAX, I'm not sure any one carrier could get the ground facilities needed to be that large there. I see LA's importance for O & D, as well as a gateway for Australia and New Zealand, Asia as well, each carrier you mentioned have some unique destinations, unique to each carriers route map.

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 91):
I think within two-three years you could see AS flying any or all of LAX-SJO, SAL, BZE, possibly even PTY. AS was held back by T3 and TBIT...now with the move to T6 they have the gates and the CIS to make it happen.

OK, obviously if AS wishes to grow, new destinations are going to be part of the plan. Since AS has been going at a pretty good clip for a while and there is still a steady stream of new aircraft arriving this year and next, profits are up, I see no sign of Chester slowing down. As AS has most likely tapped most of the best destinations that the fleet can reach from ANC, SEA & PDX, at least those places that have merit, I am sure there are a few others that are being considered.

It then makes sense that AS will be looking to grow their California operations. With the close proximity of SAN & LAX, my question is, will AS have to choose one over the other to focus the resources on, or will AS make an attempt to grow both destinations, much like they have with PDX & SEA and their close proximity?

If AS could get into Central America before WN, that may give them an edge that makes things go well for AS. But other than Central America, and some connect the dots with Hawaii possibly, where else can AS expand from Southern California that would be worth the effort to tap?

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: laca773
Posted 2013-02-04 04:51:39 and read 2369 times.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 89):
Uh what? Delta had up to 3 flights a day to MEX.

Uh what? Yeah what. They flew this route 3x a day early on after the merger with WA using 733s!!! The last few years the route operated it was flown with a daily rotation, generally a red eye, and swapped at other times to a noontime departure. 757s were used in the end. I'm not going to go back and give the historical information immediate post merger with WA.

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 91):
think within two-three years you could see AS flying any or all of LAX-SJO, SAL, BZE, possibly even PTY. AS was held back by T3 and TBIT...now with the move to T6 they have the gates and the CIS to make it happen.

Agreed! They have the right product to go up against TA (Now AV) in the market with their cost structure. The only difference is AV is a full service, no BOB airline.

Topic: RE: DL To Start LAX-SJC
Username: Tomassjc
Posted 2013-02-04 05:46:29 and read 2325 times.

And this just in, from another thread across the board:

"Beginning May 1 Virgin America announced Monday it will offer four daily flights from San Jose to Los Angeles beginning May 1. The airline plans to add 15 workers in San Jose."

http://www.mercurynews.com/business/...-america-begins-san-jose-l-flights

Tomas SJC


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/