PanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 9 Posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5553 times:
Okay, perhaps it's a silly question, but here goes:
About a month ago, I helped a teacher at my school plan her trip on Delta SAN-ATH, via CVG and JFK (she is a Delta Premiere member). It was kind of fun showing her how the internet timetables work, and I helped her with flight schedules for internal Greece travel (Athens-Channia-Thessaloniki-Athens) on Olympic Airways.
Here's the question - with so many Delta flights from JFK to Europe, why is there not more of a concentration of domestic flights to/from JFK to connect? Yes, I realize that B6 has developed a significant hub there, and that Song is focusing on competing with that, but does Delta rely heavily on O&D passengers out of NYC as justification for keeping that many flights at JFK instead of CVG or ATL?
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
Padcrasher From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5507 times:
LGA and EWR are better situated to handle the domestic demand for NYC travel. So many of domestic routes would not work from JFK especially those to smaller sized markets.
But the more apt term for Delta's operation there is "gateway". They rely on local NYC demand to fill International flights and have feeder flights from many destinations to help out. But they don't really get into domestic connecting service.
One could argue that EWR is a gateway not a hub for CO because they rely so much on local O&D business. Even CO as big as they are does not connect many domestic passengers in EWR.
JetBlueAtJFK From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1687 posts, RR: 3 Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5475 times:
Quoting PanAm747 (Thread starter): with so many Delta flights from JFK to Europe, why is there not more of a concentration of domestic flights to/from JFK to connect?
Well JFK is more of international flights and then connecting them to their hubs and some other focus cities. Song is building up so I guess there is no need for DL to build up there to. As Song gets bigger at JFK, then DL will be International and flights to hubs. Not much else, probably a while away though.
LGAtoIND From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 490 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5477 times:
There are many connections possible at JFK on DL. I know that Comair has numerous flights to many smaller cities to connect with DL's International bank at JFK. IND, CVG, RDU, PHL, STL, PIT, are just some examples.
TinPusher007 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 963 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5425 times:
Quoting Padcrasher (Reply 1): LGA and EWR are better situated to handle the domestic demand for NYC travel. So many of domestic routes would not work from JFK especially those to smaller sized markets.
This really isn't true as evidenced by B6. LGA has a limited number of domestic cities that can be served due to the 1500nm perimeter rule. EWR is in NEW JERSEY...nuff said. But New York isn't really in the best location geographically to connect passengers on domestic flights. To answer the original question, I think DL just screwed the pooch on building up JFK and didn't do so until its territory was threatened/stolen by B6.
"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
Luv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12055 posts, RR: 50 Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5398 times:
Quoting Padcrasher (Reply 1): One could argue that EWR is a gateway not a hub for CO because they rely so much on local O&D business. Even CO as big as they are does not connect many domestic passengers in EWR.
JetBlueAtJFK From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1687 posts, RR: 3 Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5369 times:
Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 5): Quoting Padcrasher (Reply 1):
One could argue that EWR is a gateway not a hub for CO because they rely so much on local O&D business. Even CO as big as they are does not connect many domestic passengers in EWR.
Your kidding right?
I know, are you kidding, do you live in NY????? It is pretty big hub if you ask me, hint hundreds of flight to everywhere and the ads on every street in Manhattan.
Padcrasher From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5311 times:
It doesn't have anything to do with the size of CO's operation. It's big. But the domestic business to/from EWR primarily O&D, not connecting. So in that respect it's not a connecting hub. Internationally you could look at as a gateway. Not that calling it a hub is wrong. The do connect domestic passengers.
Cslusarc From Canada, joined May 2005, 821 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5154 times:
I think DL wants its passengers to double and tripple to connect to JFK-exclusive destinations like ATH - Athens, NCE - Nice and VCE - Venice. First I think that DL's transborder, intercontinental and express operations at JFK doesn't fit their network well. They are reminants of DL's (and Pan-Am's) long history. I think that DL's future at JFK is an all Song operation with limited flights to major transcontinental and sun destinations. I think it would make sense for DL to "sell" or swap these route athorities, their related slots (at destination airports) and some flight equiptmemt (like B767-300ERs) to friendly competitor CO. I think that more customers would benefit by having CO operate these routes from EWR than JFK.
Delta4eva From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 344 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5117 times:
Quoting Cslusarc (Reply 11): I think it would make sense for DL to "sell" or swap these route authorities, their related slots (at destination airports) and some flight equiptmemt (like B767-300ERs) to friendly competitor CO
Why would Delta do this??? Delta is doing just fine with their international gateway at JFK. Even without any connecting traffic, the O&D of NYC is enough. However, Delta does have many connecting opportunities with Song, Delta mainline, and Delta Connection. I have often wondered why Delta just doesn't start calling JFK a hub because of their large operation. I think in the coming years, Delta/Song will continue to build their presence at JFK.
BigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2848 posts, RR: 7 Reply 14, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5078 times:
Bigger isn't always better in this case. If DL does well with O&D at JFK, why would they need to add domestic feeder flights to JFK when they can feed the transatlantic flights out/in of CVG and ATL? It's all about profit, not size, and an airline can only do so much with the resources they have.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is the availaiblity of slots at JFK during the peak hours when the transatlantic flights arrive and depart. It's my understanding that JFK can get very congested, but I am sure the NYC residents and airline employees can attest to the craziness of JFK when it is backed up. Anybody have any insight on the slot situation at JFK?
Tsnamm From United States of America, joined May 2005, 624 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5020 times:
actually a great deal of CO's business in EWR is connecting business,,,thats why they can offer flights to secondary cities in Europe such as EDI and BRS...if O&D traffic was the primary source of passengers BA/AA/DL could and would add flts to these destinations...when you can consolidate 400 plus flights to feed these smaller cities local O&D traffic is not nearly as important...
Kkfla737 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1033 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4922 times:
Both Pan Am and TWA attempted to use JFK to feed passengers to Europe. But by the time PA and TW developed storng domestic feeder networks, airlines such as American (Chicago), Northwest (Boston and later Detroit), Delta (Atlanta), and Continetal (Newark) developed alternative gateways to Europe with much stronger connecting possibilies and the ability to avoid the infamous JFK customs agents. TWA and PA thus were primarily reliant on O&D to Europe from JFK, and these days with Continetal at EWR and US at PHL offering almost as many European options (I think Istanbul, Moscow and Athens are the only exclusive Delta cities left in Europe among US carriers) DL need not waste too much effort making JFK a major connecting facility. They do have flights from just about every major city even if they are RJ flights timed to connect with the European departures, and that is good enough.
You might want to inform Bruce Lakefield that he does not run a US carrier. I was under the impression that US Airways was, in fact, based in Arlington, Virginia, which is part of the United States, and flies nonstop from Philadelphia to Venice.
Burma's constitutional referendum options: A. Yes, B. Go to Insein Prison!
Panamair From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4729 posts, RR: 26 Reply 21, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4799 times:
DL's operation at JFK is really not that shabby. In fact, if you take DL Mainline, Song, and Delta Connection together, the overall DL presence at JFK is the largest it has ever been. DL now offers nonstop service from JFK to 56 cities/airports (20 international-including YYZ, MEX- and 36 domestic-including SJU) through approx. 115 daily flights. The number of cities offered is more than any other carrier at JFK (including B6).
B6's development at JFK has helped DL tremendously as well in terms of developing JFK into a domestic-travel-friendly airport.
Laxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 23560 posts, RR: 50 Reply 22, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4792 times:
Quoting Delta4eva (Reply 12): Delta is doing just fine with their international gateway at JFK
Delta is not really doing "just fine" at all at JFK. International operations have shrunk over the years with more and more service being shifted to Atlanta. Between 2000 and 2004, DL has reduced JFK European city pairs from 20 to 13. Domestic operations like the transcons have not worked very well and are being now being tried on Song. JFK international flights are using DL's smallest equipment type, while Atlanta has sees both larger aircraft and additional frequencies on several city pairs.
In 2004, of DL 13, European cities serviced from JFK less then 25% had positive operating margins for the company, while in comparison all but a few of the Atlanta European services had either a positive or breakeven margin for the year.
The biggest beneficiary, and possible cause of Delta slide at JFK has been Continental. The carrier has seen strong growth on Atlantic services in the last few years with multiple destinations being added from its EWR hub.
DL has floundered at JFK with several on/off attempt to grow/reduce the size of the operation. I think with DL's continued cost cutting an realignment more and more services could very well be shifted to Atlanta causing DL JFK reduce in importance in the overall network. DL is clearly being squeezed on many sides, Jetblue on Florida and transcon flying, along with CO at EWR with its domestic and particularly growing international network.
Delta has not been able to achieve positive results with either NYC O&D traffic, nor using JFK as a connecting hub for the last several years.
I know there are some strong DL fans on the a.net that dont want to admit that the last vestiges of Pan Am's European operations at JFK are no longer a crown jewel for Delta. While probably also disliked by some of the same people Atlanta is becoming the airlines international traffic hub. At least it produces some postive results for the carrier something JFK continues to fail to do.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Newkai From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 330 posts, RR: 1 Reply 24, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4702 times:
Quoting Panamair (Reply 21): B6's development at JFK has helped DL tremendously as well in terms of developing JFK into a domestic-travel-friendly airport.
Yep, B6 is DL (and all other trans-atlantic carriers') feeder airline at JFK! For example, DL, AA, and more used to have their subsidiaries feed people into JFK from places like Upstate NY. When B6 came along, the major's puddlejumpers became less attractive than taking a $49 flight with B6. AE and BEX stopped flying to JFK from Upstate around this time. Manually bringing over you luggage used to be a pain, but has gotten a lot easier with the SkyTrain.
25 DAL767400ER: DL has only 5 777s available, and why they are kept at ATL has been explained here: http://www.airliners.net/discussions...eneral_aviation/read.main/
26 FlyPNS1: But this is exactly the problem....DL is afraid (or not able) to compete. They bailed on LAX because the competition was too strong. They bailed on D
27 EA CO AS: I was under the impression that US Airways was, in fact, based in Arlington, Virginia For the moment, yes. Soon to be Tempe, Arizona.
28 TinPusher007: Exactly my point....DL is my favorite airline but the only place they flex any muscle is mostly ATL and its other two hubs in CVG and SLC. Everywhere
29 Padcrasher: laxintl You seem to know what is going with Delta up in JFK in the past. I would characterize it the same way...But you're going off years where Delta
30 Panamair: Actually that is not entirely true. Some of these JFK-Europe flights were simply not making money, competition or no competition. For example, you ca
31 Padcrasher: At JFK all US airlines are in a much weaker position versus their European counterparts. You just do not see one US airline being the dominant carrier
32 Klwright69: If that is the case why didn't JFK-NRT work out? it does not bode well if DL plans on launching JFK-Asia services in the near future does it? NRT is
33 TWFirst: Maybe, maybe not. But what isn't debatable is that WHERE their operation is located IS shabby beyond belief. If getting to EWR weren't more inconveni
34 Padcrasher: That is crazy. It depends on where you at if JFK or EWR is more than convenient. EWR gets only 14% of Manhattan business. Kings/Queens/Long Island muc
35 TWFirst: No shit. That's not my point. Re-read my post. My point is, if the 2 airports were equally convenient for someone, why would they choose JFK... Delta
36 Kkfla737: And in essence they have bailed on Orlando also. At one time Delta flew from Orlando to major cities throughout the nation, and some European destina
37 Padcrasher: If a tree fell in the woods and no one heard does it make sound? What does a this hypothetical have to do with reality? You think if JFK had better fa
38 TWFirst: You're a day late and a dollar short... you still don't get it. I'll dumb it down for you: Delta's Terminal 3 SUCKS. IT'S ABSOLUTELY AWFUL. That's rea
39 DAL767400ER: Ok, so if DL is always running away with their tail between their legs, then why did DL even set up Song to compete with JB and not just give up JFK?
40 TWFirst: By the way, I meant to say JFK T3, although T2 is just as bad.
41 TinPusher007: I did mention that song is a formidable response to B6. ATL isn't in question...they own it. I would guess 75% of their eggs are in that basket and t
42 ORD: I like Delta but just want to clarify a few points. This is true if you include Delta Connection. But mainline is significantly lower. At its high poi
43 FlyPNS1: And how much money is DL making? Clearly, there are times when you have to cut your losses and move on, but you also have to be willing to defend som
44 Tsnamm: However the IAT and Terminal One are state of the art and as nice as Terminal C in EWR...and I would expect AA's new terminal to also be that nice or
45 TWFirst: Irrelevant. We're talking about Delta and its operations at JFK... not other airlines' operations or their facilities at JFK. Yes, the other terminal
46 DeltaMIA: Nobody picks an airport based on terminals. They pick it based on convenience. Do you really think the business traveler is saying to him/herself tha
47 TWFirst: Bullpucky. All things being equal.... equal convenience, comparable price.... a business traveler is going to pick EWR. Why would anyone want to wait
48 TinPusher007: Preach.....this is the best analysis of DL with respect to its operation that I've heard yet. The odd thing is that its been this way with two differ
49 RJpieces: All things being equal.... equal convenience, comparable price.... a business traveler is going to pick EWR. Sure, all things being equal. But that i
50 Laxintl: My point exactly. Atlanta grows in prominence for DL's European network while JFK has declined. JFK currently is neither able to get the proper trans
51 TWFirst: How is it possible to draw that conclusion? I think it is much more plausable to conclude that Delta's facilities costs and opportunity costs associa
52 Tsnamm: you go back and forth from DL specifically to JFK generally...my only point to you is that there are state of the art facilities at JFK, not just EWR
53 DeltaMIA: The difference with DL is that the city wanted all the money up front. B6 got a 40 year mortgage. For convenience. I said that. People won't inconven
54 DeltaMIA: The difference with DL is that the city wanted all the money up front. B6 got a 40 year mortgage. For convenience. I said that. People won't inconven
55 TWFirst: Ummmm, no. Please re-read my posts. At all points, I am specifically comparing DL's JFK Terminal 2/3 ops to CO's EWR Terminal C ops. Nowhere did I me
56 B4real: There's really no discussion here. DL actually calls JFK a hub. http://news.delta.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=9748 quoting: Today marks the fir
57 JFKLGANYC: "JFK T2 looks and feels like a third world facility... undoubtedly the most confusing, cramped, ugly and dirty international terminal we have in this
58 Padcrasher: What's wrong with DL terminal at LAX?
59 TinPusher007: Ill use your own words here... Im with Padcrasher...what on earth do you see wrong with DL's LAX facility. It is one of the most elegant terminals I'
60 DeltaMIA: Yeah I would much rather sit in NY traffic around 4pm than sit in Terminal 3. Obviously this is your opinion and I don't see anyone else on this thre
61 Apodino: Depends on what you are talking about. Certainly DL's Terminal 5 facility is among the nice parts of LAX and a pleasure to travel through. But DL also
62 TWFirst: Well, you go right ahead and sit in NY traffic... I'll take rail from Brooklyn, thank you very much.... and if it isn't rush hour, then I'll take a c
63 TinPusher007: I have flown out of both. While the 2 to 3 gates that DL has on T6 are not as nice as T5..it too doesn't belong on that list.
64 Klwright69: I completely agree on that! The comparison is an exaggeration.
65 Commavia: I agree -- AA's BOS terminal, on balance, isn't that bad. Granted, maybe it doesn't look as 'sleek' as some other terminals, but it is generally clea