Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia  
User currently offlineUAL#1fan From United States of America, joined May 2001, 88 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 8285 times:

Northwest serves more destinations, but United has more nonstop flights from the U.S. I would think UA is more dominant, but NW may generate a lot of intra-Asia flights.

So which airline carries more passengers to Asia? How do the other U.S. airlines stack up against these two? I know AA is coming up fast.

Finally, should we expect more expansion in Asia from either UA or NW in the near future?


United Air Lines -Mainliners Coast to Coast
67 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24864 posts, RR: 46
Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 8235 times:

According to DOT stats, between Jan-October 2005 the NW vs UA Pacific operations compare as follows;

PAX
NW - 4,471,400
UA - 4,151,000

PRK's
NW - 27,966,809,000
UA - 34,988,331,000

ASK's
NW - 31,878,430,000
UA - 42,944,485,000

Load Factor:
NW - 87.7%
UA - 81.5%

FTK's
NW - 1,592,513,000
UA - 945,940,000

So, basically with the exception of Freight operations, United has a significantly larger Pacific network, however NWA carries more people as a result of its higher load factor.

From other reports I have seen, United also enjoys a consistent revenue yield premium over NW going back several years.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineBobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6449 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 8196 times:

The latest figures by Air Transport World for passengers carried Trans Pacific
1. NW -4,904,000
2. UA -4,554,000
3. AA--797,000

Revenue passenger kilometers
1. UA-38,298,929,000
2. NW -30,444,822,000
3. AA--7,910,047,000

Frieght Ton kilometers
1. NW-1,763,338,000
2. UA-1,043,718,000
3. AA--448,741,000

Figures are for Jan-Nov 2005
Numbers for UA include Australia, which really isn't Asia.
Numbers do not include numbers for India (which is in Asia)for any carrier.


User currently offlineUAL#1fan From United States of America, joined May 2001, 88 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7946 times:

I've often wondered why NW doesn't add more nonstop routes to Asia?

Perhaps DTW/MSP-PEK, MSP-HKG, or MSP-PVG?



United Air Lines -Mainliners Coast to Coast
User currently offlineBurnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7531 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7936 times:

Quoting UAL#1fan (Reply 3):
I've often wondered why NW doesn't add more nonstop routes to Asia?

They dont have enough planes to do so right now, the 787 should open a lot of doors for things like that again.



"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11434 posts, RR: 61
Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7897 times:

Quoting UAL#1fan (Thread starter):
Northwest serves more destinations, but United has more nonstop flights from the U.S. I would think UA is more dominant, but NW may generate a lot of intra-Asia flights.

I have often said -- sometimes to flames from others here on A.net -- that in the long-run, United's strategy will be more successful in the future, with more prospects for growth and profitability.

Increasingly, as more and more flights shift to smaller aircraft with longer range, traditional hubs are being overflown as markets grow, airlines that are better positioned to capture this growth are going to be more successful. Personally, I think United's strategy (along with AA's and CO's) lends itself much more to this trend than Northwest's.

Northwest continues to use very large aircraft (many 747s) to funnel traffic through an old-style hub in Narita, whereas UA is using more and more smaller 777s to overfly Narita and other traditional Pacific hubs and connecting points (mostly in Japan) and serve markets nonstop. That means emerging markets like Korea, Hong Kong, China, and Vietnam (I know it's not nonstop, but neither carrier has the plane to serve it nonstop).

In the long-run, Northwest is always going to be able to operate a hub at Narita. There is huge O&D there, Northwest has a huge presence in the market, good brand penetration and a loyal FF base, and lots of flights from U.S. gateways and hubs. However, I think that as time goes on, Northwest is going to have to continue to shrink its aircraft size out of NRT to more A330s and 757s (especially 757s) and less and less 747s. The reason is that in the future, United is going to be able to transit more people, from more cities, through its U.S. hubs, whereas Northwest is only going to be able to transit people over its Japanese hubs from cities than can support a nonstop to Tokyo. In addition, most people would rather connect in their home country, thus why AA, CO, and United will ultimately be more successful in capturing Asia-bound connecting traffic offering connections over, say, DFW, IAH or ORD, versus NRT, NGO or KIX. Just my $.02.

Quoting UAL#1fan (Thread starter):
How do the other U.S. airlines stack up against these two? I know AA is coming up fast.

AA is definitely the next largest U.S. carrier to Asia after these two. CO has much more capacity to Asia overall, but most of it is operated by AirMike from GUM, and not from the U.S. mainland. AA has 8 daily 777s from the U.S. nonstop to Asia, compared with 4 for CO and 1 for DL.


User currently offline102IAHexpress From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1156 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7856 times:

How does CO stack up when taking to account their Air Mike operations?

User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16820 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7836 times:

Quoting Commavia (Reply 5):
AA has 8 daily 777s from the U.S. nonstop to Asia, compared with 4 for CO and 1 for DL.

If you include the Honolulu-Nagoya route and the EWR-Dehli route CO has 6 nonstops from "the US" to Asia, eight if you include Tel Aviv which is technically in Asia.

Tokyo:
EWR 1 777, IAH 1 777, Guam 3 (767-400, 737-800)

Hong Kong:
EWR 1 777, Guam 1 737-800

Beijing:
EWR 1 777

Nagoya:
Honolulu 1 767-400, Guam 2 737-800

Delhi:
EWR 1 777

Tel Aviv:
EWR 2 777



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineHNL From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 333 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7821 times:

Do those UA numbers include the South Pacific flights too?


HNL - There's no place like it!
User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11434 posts, RR: 61
Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7821 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 7):
If you include the Honolulu-Nagoya route and the EWR-Dehli route CO has 6 nonstops from "the US" to Asia, eight if you include Tel Aviv which is technically in Asia.

I was referring more to the Far East and Pacific.


User currently offlineJano From Slovakia, joined Jan 2004, 827 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7800 times:

Regarding NW strategy in Asia: We have to take into account that NW is getting B787s starting in 2008 at a rate of 6 aircraft per year until 2010. Plus they have options for 50 more. And those 18 B787s are going to be used for non-stop routes to various points in Asia. Thus NW will start eliminating UA's comparative advantage of non-stop routes while still maintaining its hub in NRT and funneling some of the traffic through there.


The Widget Air Line :)
User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24864 posts, RR: 46
Reply 11, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7800 times:

Again my DOT stats are only Jan-Oct05;

Air Micronesia
Pax - 1,273,000
RPK - 4,092,704,000
ASK - 5,618,279,000
FTK - 65,951,000
Load factor - 72.8%

Continental Pacific Ops
Pax - 427,000
RPK - 5,029,987,000
ASK - 6,496,819,000
FTK - 157,560,000
Load factor - 77.4%

So overall, when both CO and Air Mike are added together they would come in 3rd place compared to NWA and UAL.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9507 posts, RR: 52
Reply 12, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7782 times:

One thing not to forget is that United has a first clas cabin. This is a huge source of revenue over Northwest. UA can survive with lower load factors if it demands a premium. I think UA and NW compete well and will continue to be the dominant carriers.

UA to some degree has more room to expand. NW lacks a good hub for nonstop flights from the United States. UA has SFO, which is great for connecting people. I think with time, UA will add more nonstop flights from SFO. I just think that there is more growth opportunities from SFO since there are no slot restrictions like NW at NRT and UA can offer service between more cities with a single stopover. With NW you often have to stop twice from much of the country. This is not desirable at all for high yielding passengers.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineMalpensaSFO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7777 times:

Quoting UAL#1fan (Reply 3):
I've often wondered why NW doesn't add more nonstop routes to Asia?

Unfortunately it has been tried and failed:

LAX-HKG
SEA-HKG

LAX-KIX
MSP-KIX
SEA-KIX

HNL-NGO

JFK-NRT
LAS-NRT
ANC-NRT

DTW-PEK

LAX-SEL
ORD-SEL
SEA-SEL
MSP-SEL

Quoting Commavia (Reply 5):
Northwest continues to use very large aircraft (many 747s) to funnel traffic through an old-style hub in Narita, whereas UA is using more and more smaller 777s to overfly Narita and other traditional Pacific hubs and connecting points (mostly in Japan) and serve markets nonstop.

DTW-NRT
NW 744

HNL-NRT
NW 744
UA 772

LAX-NRT
UA 744
NW 742

JFK-NRT
UA 772

MSP-NRT
NW 744

ORD-NRT
UA 744

PDX-NRT
NW 332

SEA-NRT
UA 772
NW 332

SFO-NRT
UA 744
NW 332

Quoting Commavia (Reply 5):
That means emerging markets like Korea, Hong Kong, China, and Vietnam (I know it's not nonstop, but neither carrier has the plane to serve it nonstop).

yet only one airline serves all four..  wink 


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26376 posts, RR: 76
Reply 14, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7727 times:

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 13):
HNL-NRT
NW 744
UA 772

LAX-NRT
UA 744
NW 742

Reverse those. NW moved the JFK-NRT 744 to LAX when they suspended that route and HNL-NRT is a 742.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineB6FA4ever From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 816 posts, RR: 11
Reply 15, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7686 times:

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 13):
LAX-NRT
UA 744
NW 742

i thought NW was now using a B747-400 on the LAX-NRT route...? unless i'm smokin something i shouldn't *LOL*

~B6FA4ever


User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24864 posts, RR: 46
Reply 16, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7658 times:

Quoting B6FA4ever (Reply 15):
i thought NW was now using a B747-400 on the LAX-NRT route...? unless i'm smokin something i shouldn't *LOL*

The -200 clunker is back. NW returned a few -400s during its Ch11 process forcing the return of the -200 for most of the past winter.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently onlineSESGDL From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3466 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7614 times:

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 13):
LAX-HKG
SEA-HKG

LAX-KIX
MSP-KIX
SEA-KIX

HNL-NGO

JFK-NRT
LAS-NRT
ANC-NRT

DTW-PEK

LAX-SEL
ORD-SEL
SEA-SEL
MSP-SEL

NW also flew MSP-HKG in the late 90s. It didn't last long.

Jeremy


User currently offlineCentrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3598 posts, RR: 20
Reply 18, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7553 times:

Commavia. You have a very good point there about NW and their strategy.

To me it seems that NW got the 744s but didn't want something between the DC10 and the 744. They have the 777 in the Pilot contracts (I think they did who knows now) but decided it was too big as a replacement for the DC10. Thus the A333 and A332.

The 787 is the key here. They have one of the larger orders for the type and I think they will be used to go up against the competition from UA, CO, AA as well as the Asian carriers that will start expanding with smaller aircraft.

I have said many times that I think the 747 will be phased out. Not 100% but will be phased. It will make no sense to have 747s flying from DTW and MSP to Asia when you can do it with a plane half the size with greater operations and costs. NW has enough slots to do double and triple daily to NRT with flights continuing on to other locations as well as non-stops flights.

Example: NW currently has two flights to MNL. DTW-NGO-MNL and MSP-NRT-MNL. The DTW-NGO-MNL one is packed but not with people to/from NGO but mostly from the Philippines. NW could change these flights to 787s as well as add a non-stop from SEA, MSP or DTW (all in range of the 787) to MNL. That would make one non-stop to NGO/NRT continuing on to MNL, and two non-stops to MNL from North America.

You mention the use of 757s in Asia. They have been doing quite a bit of that but it could be more. I mentioned in the thread about NW and 757 winglets, that NW should build up flights from smaller airports to NGO, KIX and NRT. These could be originating in CTS, FUK, NAHA, or smaller Asian cities that can't do a non-stop to North America and filter through to NGO, NRT or KIX. There is where the 747 is or frequency with 787s.

I think we will see MSP-HKG coming back as the immigrant population from Hong Kong boomed after Hong Kong was returned to China. But I think MSP-SGN would be the best bet. HUGE O&D in MSP. All of these with 787s.

So where do the 747s go? They go to conversion, desert and some stay around to do MSP/DTW-NRT-Large Asian City that Japanese like to travel to. But I could see them reduce the fleet and streamline big time.

This will give NW a lead over the other U.S. Carriers in Asia. Though UA has started non-stops, they will start running into fleet issues and an aging fleet. They will need 787s as well. CO is the next for expansion to Asia. They have great Hubs in EWR and IAH. They have the planes on order and will need more but could give NW and UA a run for their money.

One more thing NW will need to do to keep competative. BRING BACK INTERNATIONAL FIRST CLASS!!!! They did away with it when First class was just Business with extra leg room and reclined further. Now they must compete with Asian Carriers, AA, CO, and UA who all have First class products as well as business.



Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16820 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7468 times:

Quoting Commavia (Reply 9):

I was referring more to the Far East and Pacific.

So then it's 5, EWR-NRT,HKG, PEK : IAH-NRT: HNL-Nagoya

Quoting Centrair (Reply 18):
The 787 is the key here. They have one of the larger orders for the type and I think they will be used to go up against the competition from UA, CO, AA as well as the Asian carriers that will start expanding with smaller aircraft

CO has 10 firm plus 5 options for the 787-800, since CO's 767 fleet is quite young (oldest frame from 2000) the 787 will not be replacing any other aircraft. The 787-800 will be for pure growth mainly to Asia.

Something like:

Newark-
Seoul, Taipei, Osaka, Nagoya

Houston-
Beijing



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineUAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 7246 times:

Quoting Centrair (Reply 18):
One more thing NW will need to do to keep competative. BRING BACK INTERNATIONAL FIRST CLASS!!!! They did away with it when First class was just Business with extra leg room and reclined further. Now they must compete with Asian Carriers, AA, CO, and UA who all have First class products as well as business.

Does CO have initernational first??


User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 21, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 7220 times:

Quoting Centrair (Reply 18):
They have been doing quite a bit of that but it could be more. I mentioned in the thread about NW and 757 winglets, that NW should build up flights from smaller airports to NGO, KIX and NRT. These could be originating in CTS, FUK, NAHA, or smaller Asian cities that can't do a non-stop to North America and filter through to NGO, NRT or KIX. There is where the 747 is or frequency with 787s.

NW can't hub flights at any airport in Japan without the flight number being an extension of a flight that begins or ends in the U.S. They can't simply field a fleet of 757's throughout Asia to meet up with one or two flights ex-NGO or KIX.

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 20):
Does CO have initernational first??

No, they have BusinessFirst, sold as business class.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineAlexPorter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 7198 times:

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 13):
MSP-SEL

I think that DTW-ICN or perhaps MSP-ICN would be more successful today with Korean Air's SkyTeam membership along with NW. This is the same idea that helps AF successfully operate CDG-MEX, for instance. I think DTW-MXP could work for the same reason, although that is straying off-topic from East Asia.


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26376 posts, RR: 76
Reply 23, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 7189 times:

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 16):
The -200 clunker is back. NW returned a few -400s during its Ch11 process forcing the return of the -200 for most of the past winter.

They just can't seem to get that 742 off of NW1/2 can they? They said that the canceling of the JFK-NRT route would mean a permanent upgrade to the 744, but I just looked at the schedule and saw that it was a 742 once again.

Quoting Centrair (Reply 18):
To me it seems that NW got the 744s but didn't want something between the DC10 and the 744. They have the 777 in the Pilot contracts (I think they did who knows now) but decided it was too big as a replacement for the DC10. Thus the A333 and A332.

Actually, the A333 is the same size as the A343, which is just a touch smaller than a 772. The difference is that the A333 doesn't have the range of the 772ER, and can't make Continental Asia from almost anywhere in the US. NW once has A343s on order, but had to cancel that as an overall avoidance of Chapter 11

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 20):
Does CO have initernational first??

No they do not

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 21):
NW can't hub flights at any airport in Japan without the flight number being an extension of a flight that begins or ends in the U.S.

Actually, they can and do.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 24, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 7178 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 23):
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 21):NW can't hub flights at any airport in Japan without the flight number being an extension of a flight that begins or ends in the U.S.

Actually, they can and do.

NW has beyond rights (5th freedom) in Japan. So if they fly NRT-HKG, there has to be a USA-NRT flight number on the NRT-HKG portion. A change of guage is allowed.

Which flights does NW operate in Japan independent of a connecting flight number from a U.S. gateway?



International Homo of Mystery
25 MotorHussy : I'd rather fly the relevant Asian carrier any day Regards MH
26 N1120A : Point taken. My mistake
27 Cricket : The battle for India is being conceded to AA and CO on the non-stop front. In fact, while NW still flies (thankfully now the A330) to BOM (they canned
28 Bobnwa : Enough Indian passengers like NW to BOM to keep the flights full every day. These flights art very succesfull for NWA!!
29 Bobnwa : Yes they do. Because of this UA is larger across the Pacific, but NW is largest to Asia of the US carriers.
30 Centrair : All NW flights that fly within Japan are considered International Flights. They leave from international terminals and passengers must connect to oth
31 UAL777UK : I thought as much.
32 Cricket : I'm not denying that - but many people use the airline because of O&D traffic and/or airline loyalty, but many people hated the old DC-10's on the ro
33 FlyDreamliner : They have a hub in NRT. Also, they fly to NRT from more American cities than any other airline. I believe they fly there from MSP, DTW, PDX, and eith
34 MalpensaSFO : NORTHWEST MSP-NRT 2 DTW-NRT 2 LAX-NRT SFO-NRT SEA-NRT PDX-NRT HNL-NRT 2 UNITED ORD-NRT 2 JFK-NRT LAX-NRT 2 SFO-NRT 2 HNL-NRT 2 AMERICAN ORD-NRT DFW-N
35 ORD : United also flies SEA - NRT nonstop.
36 B777A340Fan : I doubt it, the battle between NW and UAL is definitely one by the latter. Why? Because UAL has the oh-so-awesome Star Alliance by its side. UAL bene
37 Post contains links Burnsie28 : That may be true... for now. There has been some rumor of Cathay leaving one world for skyteam, whether that happens or not is yet to be seen. China
38 Bobnwa : Good web site Burnsie!!!
39 Incitatus : Are these numbers really TRANSPACIFIC passenger counts, or include intra Asia? The NW numbers seem hugely inflated compared to the frequencies presen
40 Bobnwa : They probably include intra-asia for both UA and NW. NW has 11 Japan non-stops when DTW-NGO is counted. Six of those aircraft are 744 aircraft which a
41 Burnsie28 : Ad in DTW-KIX, since MSP-NRT is 2x on Weekends.
42 Laxintl : Numbers represent flights in the Pacific region. So yes they include intra-Asia flying The DOT breaks down US airline international traffic into "Atl
43 AeroWesty : You can easily calculate the average stage length for each passenger carried using the numbers in Reply #2. American 6166 miles, Northwest 3857 miles
44 Burnsie28 : Thats true, if you really also wanted to stick with pure Asia, take out United's flights to Australia. That would put UA even lower.
45 Hjulicher : I think the introduction of the 787 will only improve NW's presence in Asia. I'm sure the flights to Narita will remain, as passengers from relatively
46 CHI787ORD : NW does not have a strong O&D hub to run these routes. While MSP and DTW are important cities domestically, internationally, they're not. Atleast not
47 Centrair : MSP-PVG...poor MSP/DTW-PEK...poor MSP-HKG...might be better now that the Hong Kong immigrant Population increased after 2000 in MSP. Also you know Th
48 CHI787ORD : Honestly, I do not mean to sound too "Chicago-centric", but Wisconsin and Minnesota can use ORD as their international regional hub. It just makes se
49 Carpethead : UA cannot fill ORD to any Asian city based on O&D alone. From what I have seen, there are very few baggage tags that terminate in ORD. Both NW & UA r
50 Hjulicher : what makes ORD and SFO so strong as international cities? I don't see what SFO offers so much of. There is the computing industry in the bay area, but
51 AeroWesty : Going back to the days of the Pan Am Clippers, the San Francisco Bay Area has been a natural departure point to Asia (mainly because it was closer to
52 Post contains links Laxintl : I guess you have not visited San Francisco nor aware of the history and economics of California. On the economic side, California is the single large
53 MalpensaSFO : Companies headquartered in San Francisco: Anchor Brewing Company Bank of the West Barclays Global Investors Bechtel Corporation Boudin Bakery Busines
54 Post contains images Commavia : Yeah, because the U.S. automakers are doing so well right now while the U.S. information technology industry continues to collapse! [Sarcasm, of cour
55 David31998 : I have flown NWA (usually from DET) to China every year since 1996. NWA had direct flights until a few years ago. Now, you must go through the Narita
56 Hjulicher : I'm not sayting that San Francisco and Chicago don't operate on a global scale, and I agree that those cities do warrant plenty of international trave
57 AeroWesty : I look at it this way. Detroit is a one-horse town, similar to Washington, DC. Some of the very same arguments you make for Detroit could be used to
58 ORD : I don't mean to get off topic, but you have your facts wrong. GM, for example, does not do well in other parts of the world. Their Asian share is a s
59 Burnsie28 : NW would like to bring back direct service, however what is keeping them is lack of aircraft. I would expect it to come back quickly after they get a
60 SESGDL : I definitely think MSP-SGN would work, the Twin Cities has the largest Mong population in the world outside of Asia. Also has one of the largest Viet
61 Cricket : Lets look at India - which has huge linkages to the Bay Area (Infotech rules) - a majority of the Indians settled in the US reside in Calif, and most
62 Bobnwa : NW would never try to fill any international flight out of DTW or any other city with only O&D passengers. Neither would any other carrier with very
63 Post contains images Nimish : And even worse that UA (who once had flights to India, and has a major hub at SFO & LAX), is still "monitoring" the situation. I'd like to call them
64 Post contains images Cricket : However SFO-India would be primarily O&D. CO's numbers on the EWR-DEL service are also gravitating towards O&D from the NYC area rather than connecti
65 MalpensaSFO : Demographics and Commerce would prove that Detroit is far behind San Francisco and Chicago in Global/International importance. San Francisco, Los Ang
66 CHI787ORD : Actually, I believe Windsor or Sarnia, Ontario is. NYC is the primary business hub in the United States, but Chicago still has the second largest bus
67 Commavia : Houston, Atlanta and Dallas all have more Fortune 500 companies. But yes, of course, Chicago is still an enormous business market.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
NW 757 Ops For Asia Details... posted Tue Jul 22 2003 04:08:20 by Dtwintlflyer
The Battle For Slots At DCA posted Thu Dec 26 2002 18:47:27 by FlyPNS1
The Battle For LaGuardia, Who Will Win? posted Sat Sep 30 2000 15:23:34 by Ishky15
AF Vs IB: Battle For The World's Dirtiest Airline posted Thu Apr 29 2004 05:24:33 by QF744
CO Vs UA In Battle For HKG posted Sat Mar 3 2001 20:20:20 by Republic
How Good Are The Loads For UA 837 On JUL 8? posted Mon Jun 19 2006 05:06:17 by Malaysia
UA Or NW To Asia? posted Wed Mar 15 2006 05:29:07 by BoeingFever777
The Answer For LCC Vs Legacy Carriers? posted Sun Feb 5 2006 16:13:33 by Mirrodie
Time Mag Article: Battle For The Sky posted Mon Feb 7 2005 20:56:04 by NYC777
UA's And NW's USA-NRT-Other Cities In Asia Flights posted Tue Nov 30 2004 16:18:20 by Pe@rson