Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
DL And The China Authorities For 2008  
User currently offlineDL777LAX From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 521 posts, RR: 2
Posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4889 times:

all right, first of all, this is my first post, i have been a long time reader of this board however.

I'm sorry if this has been discussed before. Anyway, here is my idea:

If AA or NW gets the China route authority, it may hurt Delta's case for applying for 2008. So, in a case where the competition would be greater, would it be in the realm of possibility for them to do something rather unexpected and start LAX-PEK/PVG? I have seen a lot of people speculate that Delta will build up LAX, and, if they are going to in fact build it up, why not by-pass the routes with heavier competition (LAX-Japan, Hong Kong, Australia, etc.)?

thanks, and once again, i appoligize if this has been discussed.


Blindly following anything is bad, unless of course your blind and your following a guide dog.
36 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAirCanada014 From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 1513 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4879 times:

I just hope UA continues to expand overseas to ASIA. I wonder if AA will expand further along with CO and NW.. Its nice to see those four airlines overseas to ASIA...Imagine combining the operation of AC and UA for Pacific route from North America to ASIA...

User currently offlineDL777LAX From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 521 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4846 times:

Quoting AirCanada014 (Reply 1):
I just hope UA continues to expand overseas to ASIA. I wonder if AA will expand further along with CO and NW.

Well, seeing as how Asia are both UA's and NW's bread and butter, they will continue to expand. AA will probably not expand that much in Asia because of the union rules that limited flying to 14 hours a leg. Also, I read a very good report on AA's utilaization of the 777, and they basically fly 50 T7s to 20 destinations. The growth is very conservative.

But, back to what i asked about before, if AA or NW get the route authority, it will probably make ATL-China less attractive due to the competition on AA and NW. What are the odds that, in the LAX buildup, they initiate LAX-PEK/PVG?



Blindly following anything is bad, unless of course your blind and your following a guide dog.
User currently offlineCentrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3598 posts, RR: 20
Reply 3, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4782 times:

I don't understand why if AA or NW got authority in this round that DL might not be able to in 2008.

I think that DL will have a good case in 2008. Whoever gets rights this time might not apply again. Whoever doesn't get rights this time will resubmit their application from the 2006 round.



Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
User currently offlineDL777LAX From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 521 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4775 times:

Quoting Centrair (Reply 3):
I don't understand why if AA or NW got authority in this round that DL might not be able to in 2008.


What I meant was, that the argument for AA and NW is similar to DL's argument for 06'.

I have a good feeling they will get the 08 decision, much on the same basis that CO will get the 06 one. Who said that DL couldn't start a route to china from somewhere outside ATL?

All right, I just remembered that the AA application was re routed to be something like DFW-ORD-PVG-DFW. even still, though, DTW and ORD/DFW would steal quite a bit of DL's connecting market. The main point of DL's last application was connectivity. AA's is also about connectivity. And AA would route someone lets say in Savannah, to DFW-ORD-China. the extra stop would be inconvenient.

AA may have shot themselves in the foot in the eyes of the DOT, because of the 14 hour rules the pilot union imposed upon themselves. However, if AA goes for the application again, the main focus will still be connectivity, and new gateways in the US.

for DL, LAX would be a more viable destination from china for three reasons. CA and MU fly to PEK and PVG respectively. from what i understand about CA, is that the service level on it are fairly disappointing. plus, the flights are either daily or less. CZ, a future sky team member, has a secondary hub in PEK that could provide feed. so, if DL was to apply for LAX-PEK, they would have feed from both internal china, and latin america, two hot destinations with not that many links to each other. DL at LAX could serve as a nice connecting point for lat-am to asia.

[Edited 2007-01-06 08:56:57]


Blindly following anything is bad, unless of course your blind and your following a guide dog.
User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4068 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4764 times:

The round going on right now for USDOT to pick an airline route is only for those that have existing service into China. DL will compete once again for route authority for 2008 when any new carrier can then come in. DL is the only major overseas U.S. carrier that now lacks a China authority. NW or CO getting an additional route shouldn't hurt DL's chances next year to get a route from ATL-PEK/PVG as has been proposed by them. AA getting one from DFW could however be something that isn't good for this proposal (This was recently modified to ORD to satisfy their pilots). After ATL, I think DL will seek an approval from LAX or possibly SEA for either of those two China ports of entry. They will look at JFK as being their port of entry into India with service to BOM they initiated just last month. The reason I elude to SEA is that the Pacific Northwest is one part of the country with strong cultural and ethnic ties to the Chinese mainland that is overlooked particularly by any of the big Chinese National airlines since YVR is just up the road, and the bilateral with Canada is more favorable, hence AC with routes to China from both YYZ and YVR.


DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineCentrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3598 posts, RR: 20
Reply 6, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4761 times:

I see what you are saying now.

The one thing that NW doesn't have going for it is Latin America. THis is a plus for DL. AA has a good latin route system but as you said AA shot itself in the foot. CO could do more damage than AA or NW for DL due to their EWR hub however CO's latin routes mainly go out of IAH right?

DL has worked hard for ATL to make it what it is and using it as a focus is important. That being said, if they were to not only get the authority for LAX-PEK but also launch a few other routes out of LAX then it might be worth it. I would say...SYD or HKG would be good.



Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25404 posts, RR: 49
Reply 7, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4754 times:

I'll say that a US carrier should certainly operate to China from LAX. There are 3 mainland Chinese carriers versus no US presence on the route.

I'll reserve my judgement whether this should be DL or not. I'm still not sold on the long term viability on DL's LAX build up especially the RJ flying.

Both UA or AA could make a better case in my view with their established presence and networks at the airport.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineAQ737 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 612 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4727 times:

However, just thinking outside the box:

AA does a good job of connecting most business centers and major cities with both DFW and ORD. There are some airports that receive DFW or ORD service but most sizeable airports receive service from both. Thus, unless you are originating from DFW, the stop in ORD doesn't matter because you can be routed from Origin-ORD-PEK rather than Origin-DFW-ORD-PEK as stated earlier. On the return, you can be routed DFW-Origin, thus maintaining a one-stop connection to most destinations.

However, it does seem absurd and AA won't get the rights.

Aq737


User currently offlineDL777LAX From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 521 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4717 times:

The reason why I don't see SEA working for DL is because of the relatively small presence they have in SEA. They only fly to SLC, CVG, ATL, and JFK. They do have a codeshare agreement with AS, but, I would think that DL would have more then just flights to the hubs going international. I could see NW adding SEA-China before DL would. However, DL could codeshare with NW on that flight.

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 7):

I'll reserve my judgement whether this should be DL or not. I'm still not sold on the long term viability on DL's LAX build up especially the RJ flying.
Both UA or AA could make a better case in my view with their established presence and networks at the airport.

I believe the RJ flying is short term, DL is stretched on aircraft afaik

Although they both do have decent networks at LAX, the fact of the matter is DL is regretting there de-hubbing and downsizing of LAX. AA and UA have been pretty dormant in LAX too, not much new. UA focuses its operations across the pacific at SFO. AA hasn't done to much with LAX, the international services they offer are limited, SJD,SJO,LHR,NRT,SAL,YYZ, plus San Luis Potosi on American Eagle.
Domestic, they fly to SAT, AUS, DFW, LAS, MIA, FLL, MCO, BNA, XNA, STL, ORD, BOS, IAD, JFK, Lihue, KOA, HNL, DEN, Vail (seasonally) and OGG. plus intra-california on American Eagle. (FAT, SAN, SBA, San Luis, Monterey, SFO, SJC).

the fact of the matter is, DL could overtake AA easily in LAX. UA will defend LAX until they realize that the assets in SFO lean toward UA's favor, and having two large operations 300 miles apart haven't exactly proved to be complimentary to each other.

(Not trying to sound like a smart a$$, just my view of it all).



Blindly following anything is bad, unless of course your blind and your following a guide dog.
User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25404 posts, RR: 49
Reply 10, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4701 times:

Quoting DL777LAX (Reply 9):
I believe the RJ flying is short term,

I tend to believe so also. I'm just not sure if the markets they are/will be serving with RJs will be viable to accept mainline equipment after being stuck with the medicore equipment in the mean time.

Quoting DL777LAX (Reply 9):
DL is regretting there de-hubbing and downsizing of LAX.

I bet they are now. Outside of the AirCal's & PSA, LAX for the longest time was United and Delta(Western) territory. DL assumed a well sized presence at the airport and a large and loyal frequent flyer base in California.

While UA walked away with all the DL Skywest flying, I'd say the DL downsizing really awakened AA to focus more on LA. Besides transcon services, AA really only consistently maintained service to its hubs from LA historically but with DL departure they grew into many new cities and also grew the Eagle network.

Quoting DL777LAX (Reply 9):
the fact of the matter is, DL could overtake AA easily in LAX.

I would not say easily. For the first 10 months of 2006, DL carried about 3.6 million passengers thru LAX, while AA had 7.7 million.
It would take incredible huge growth on DL's part to boost its volume and market share while at the same hoping AA and UA would be willing to concede a little.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineFUN2FLY From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1045 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 4620 times:

More importantly, another week's gone by w/o the DOT telling us who gets the new 2007 US - China authority. Amazing, really. I think every A.netter could have reviewed the case and made the right decision by now!

User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4068 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4496 times:

Quoting DL777LAX (Reply 9):
The reason why I don't see SEA working for DL is because of the relatively small presence they have in SEA. They only fly to SLC, CVG, ATL, and JFK. They do have a codeshare agreement with AS, but, I would think that DL would have more then just flights to the hubs going international. I could see NW adding SEA-China before DL would. However, DL could codeshare with NW on that flight.

Keep in mind that part of my argument for SEA eventually is the longstanding code-shares they have with AS that would likely increase should such a flight become a reality there. You're correct about NW and a likely joint code-share on the flight itself with them, but NW isn't much bigger than DL there, just the maintenance hanger and a few flights to Hawaii. After AS, UA is the next biggest operator there. But that said, SEA wouldn't come for DL until after ATL and LAX. SEA would like a China route, but can't get any takers due to their proximity to YVR and Canada's more favorable bilateral with China.
Upon their merger with Western 2 decades ago, DL had a much larger operation at LAX than UA, but under two highly inept CEOs they squandered it in a substantial way.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offline102IAHexpress From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1156 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 4440 times:

Quoting DL777LAX (Thread starter):
So, in a case where the competition would be greater, would it be in the realm of possibility for them to do something rather unexpected and start LAX-PEK/PVG?

I doubt it. I wonder if their international product could compete with the Asian carriers that fly into LAX. DL best bet in 2008 is via ATL.


User currently offlineLawnDart From United States of America, joined May 2005, 970 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 4352 times:

Quoting FUN2FLY (Reply 11):
another week's gone by w/o the DOT telling us who gets the new 2007 US - China authority. I think every A.netter could have reviewed the case and made the right decision by now!

 laughing  rotfl  laughing  rotfl  laughing  rotfl  laughing 

I can see it now...a.netters deciding who wins the 2007 US-China route authority...AA...no, wait...CO! Yes, CO! Hold on...NW...no, NW sux...UA...UA's got authority already, and no AVOD...CO...wait, CO doesn't offer First Class...AA...no, AA shot themselves in the foot with the duty-limit required reroute thru ORD...UA...UA sux...CO, they're the best international service...EWR sux...NW...no, they have DC9s...

Hey, FUN2FLY, thanks for the laugh...


User currently offlineDL777LAX From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 521 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 4228 times:

Quoting 102IAHexpress (Reply 13):
I doubt it. I wonder if their international product could compete with the Asian carriers that fly into LAX.

I believe there was a thread on there new first, but I cant find it. So, here is the next best thing: http://news.delta.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=10405.

Besides, MU and CA are the only direct flights from PEK/PVG to LAX, and, reading what others have to say, http://www.airlinequality.com/Forum/air_china.htm, and http://www.airlinequality.com/Forum/c_eastrn.htm.

reading through, it sounds like DL would get a lot of customers who would fly UA, NW, NH, or JL through NRT, KE or OZ through ICN or CX through HKG (go south to go back north?) because it would be the only nonstop, besides those mentioned (CA/MU), to PEK/PVG. Many passengers look at connecting as a pain, if there is a non-stop available, chances are they would take it If the service isn't worth the convince of skipping a layover, which sounds like the case here, they flock to other carriers.



Blindly following anything is bad, unless of course your blind and your following a guide dog.
User currently offlineRwSEA From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 3105 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 4198 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 12):
just the maintenance hanger and a few flights to Hawaii.

Um, don't forget AMS and NRT too! Plus, have you seen the frequencies and size of equipment on SEA-MSP, especially in Summer?

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 12):
SEA would like a China route, but can't get any takers due to their proximity to YVR and Canada's more favorable bilateral with China.

Agreed. We had China Eastern to PVG until a few years ago. My higher priority at the moment would be CX to HKG. NW couldn't pull it off with a 742, but I think the route could be extremely successful with a smaller plane (such as A340 or 787).


User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4155 times:

It is hard to believe that the DOT hasn't made a decision by now. You almost have to wonder if any airlines really want a China route because they have to start it with so little notice. There is no reason why the DOT can't make a decision so airlines have at least 6 months and ideally 9 months of time to properly market and prepare for a flight. That the DOT doesn't understand that speaks volumes about how detached they are from how airlines operate.

I don't think what happens with the 2007 decision will affect DL at all. DL will undoubtedly push for a route from ATL... they have had the mayor and several business groups lobbying on their behalf.

The only real decision is whether DL will apply for PVG or PEK service. If the 2007 award is to PEK, DL will probably apply for PVG service and vice versa. DFWPEK would reduce the value of ATLPEK but would leave the east coast to PVG underserved. Likewise if CO gets EWRPVG for 2007, then there is opportunity for the east coast to PEK.

My gut says that DL prefers PEK because of the Olympics and the shorter flight which could allow use of the 777ER. They do have 777LRs to be delivered by the time the new China route is awarded and I expect that DL could argue, esp. for PVG, that the 777LR would provide more cargo lifting capability than any other Asia to midwest/central or eastern US destination. The LR could be an advantage for DL in this route case.

I do think you will see DL add China service from Asia. Right now, AA is in lockdown mode because of their pilots footdragging so even if AA wanted to add China service, it's likely their pilots would try to get something in return for flying the route - something AA mgmt is not willing to do.


User currently offlineAircanada014 From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 1513 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4147 times:

I can see DOT award to UA and NW... as for CO who knows maybe they will expand.. As for DL I dont know if they deserve to get it since they didn't expand their ASIA route in early 90s and 80s..

User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4133 times:

And of course we know that AA has NEVER pulled out of an Asia route nor has NW... not sure about CO but it's a stretch to say that any airline has ever not pulled down a limited access route. (which incidentally most of DL's Asia routes in the 90s were to destinations that any airline could have served). Note how little service there is to Japanese regional cities (other than NRT) from the US even today. Hard to condemn DL when other airlines have yet to be able to make those routes work. South Korea and Taiwan have open skies agreements with the US and Thailand and Hong Kong both have unused route authorities available to US airlines. DL hasn't kept any airline from expanding in Asia - so your argument is pretty weak, Air Canada. Not all airlines have a practical international monopoly from their country as AC does.

User currently offline102IAHexpress From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1156 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4133 times:

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 17):
It is hard to believe that the DOT hasn't made a decision by now. You almost have to wonder if any airlines really want a China route because they have to start it with so little notice. There is no reason why the DOT can't make a decision so airlines have at least 6 months and ideally 9 months of time to properly market and prepare for a flight. That the DOT doesn't understand that speaks volumes about how detached they are from how airlines operate.

Not so hard to believe really, for the 2005/2006 route authorities the DOT also took it’s time. I think those authorities were awarded in February of 2005 and CO subsequently started their PEK route in June of that year.
In any event I think for the 2008 route authorities we could see DL AA and CO propose routes from the South.


User currently offlineUSPIT10L From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 3295 posts, RR: 7
Reply 21, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4131 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 12):
Keep in mind that part of my argument for SEA eventually is the longstanding code-shares they have with AS that would likely increase should such a flight become a reality there. You're correct about NW and a likely joint code-share on the flight itself with them, but NW isn't much bigger than DL there, just the maintenance hanger and a few flights to Hawaii. After AS, UA is the next biggest operator there. But that said, SEA wouldn't come for DL until after ATL and LAX. SEA would like a China route, but can't get any takers due to their proximity to YVR and Canada's more favorable bilateral with China.
Upon their merger with Western 2 decades ago, DL had a much larger operation at LAX than UA, but under two highly inept CEOs they squandered it in a substantial way.

NW has far more FF loyalty at SEA than DL does. SEA has to be in the top 5 for WorldPerks customer cities (behind MSP and DTW of course).

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 17):
Keep in mind that part of my argument for SEA eventually is the longstanding code-shares they have with AS that would likely increase should such a flight become a reality there. You're correct about NW and a likely joint code-share on the flight itself with them, but NW isn't much bigger than DL there, just the maintenance hanger and a few flights to Hawaii. After AS, UA is the next biggest operator there. But that said, SEA wouldn't come for DL until after ATL and LAX. SEA would like a China route, but can't get any takers due to their proximity to YVR and Canada's more favorable bilateral with China.
Upon their merger with Western 2 decades ago, DL had a much larger operation at LAX than UA, but under two highly inept CEOs they squandered it in a substantial way.

I'd love to see DL get the authority, particularly ATLPEK.



It's a Great Day for Hockey!
User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4105 times:

You didn't quite quote the right people, USPIT, but I think we get to the same conclusion. DL is in the driver's seat in returning to be a powerhouse in LAX. AA is the only likely force that could challenge DL but they are in labor lockdown right now which is keeping them from moving anything forward. It's sad that AA is missing out on so much int'l expansion right now but it leaves more opportunities for other carriers - and probably leaves LAX completely to DL to expand.

User currently offlineDL777LAX From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 521 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3786 times:

So, to sum up what a lot of people are saying, a lot are saying that if DL was to be awarded the route authority, they would start it up through ATL, before starting a route to LAX? But, a lot believe LAX will happen eventually, correct?

In that case, hopefully DL gets awarded the china route four times in a row. (ATL/LAX-PEK/PVG)



Blindly following anything is bad, unless of course your blind and your following a guide dog.
User currently offlineJoFMO From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 2211 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3723 times:

I am frustrated by the whole procedure. It totally ignores any marked forces.

In an ideal world every US carrier could fly to China as often as they wont. That's obviously not the case. But does anyone really believe DL could compete in an open market with a flight ATL-PEK or AA with DFW-PVG?
There is no way these routes would be flown. They would be crashed by the competetion from SFO, LAX, ORD, DTW and NYC and the likes of UA, NW and CO.
The proposed routes from ATL and DFW could only work because much more viable routes are prevented and long established carriers are not allowed to fly them. Instead newcommers with arcward routes are choses.

There is a reason why NW does not fly to Brazil. The competition in MIA, ATL, HOU, nad DFW is much too strong. NW would get a bloody nose. But if Brazil would be as much restricted as China is, DTW-GRU would a gold mine.

So why doesn't the US authorithies just make an auction for the traffic rights? This way the the bidder with the most viable route option would win. Sounds much more logical too me


25 MastaHanky : Out of curiosity, does anybody see a possibility of a ATL-CAN or a LAX-CAN in the future? I wouldn't expect them to apply for this route in the first
26 DAL767400ER : Well, the AA folks in Dallas do, as do the DL folks in Atlanta, and last I heard, those folks were actually responsible for making an airline work an
27 JoFMO : Maybe we should talk German. It seems you have completely misundertsood me. DL and AA believe that they can do in the current market, which is heavil
28 WorldTraveler : So why does DL operate a larger transatlantic gateway from ATL than any other airline does outside of the NE (and that would be CO) since ATL is so fa
29 DAL767400ER : That is strictly your opinion and not proven by any facts. Oh yeah? Better tell that to the folks in Dallas, looks like they are about to make a disa
30 DCAYOW : IAD-PEK would work, just as IAD-NRT has worked for 25 years and now up to double daily!
31 JoFMO : I also think that IAD-PEK will work. But largely bacause there is a lack of seats to PEK. Due to the heavy restrcitions nearly every route to China w
32 B2443 : Say if AA or UA did get the authority, would they be able to change its originating city or add a stop in between? For example, AA's DFW-PEK eventual
33 DFWEagle : When AA was given their frequency for ORD-PVG, they were only given the ORD-PVG authority so they cannot fly any other city pairs or add any stops in
34 Gigneil : I am fairly confident that United can put up quite a challenge to Delta at LAX, being the largest carrier there. NS
35 DCAYOW : I agree wholeheartedly with your first paragraph. I have no doubt that is likely true. However, what the DOT likes to see is new gateways to destinat
36 United777atGU : I was skeptical about UA's service on top of NH's, but boy Tilton's crew must have some Japanese blood in the family because they know what they're d
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...
DL And The MD-90 To GEG posted Mon Jul 10 2006 10:42:43 by ASMD11
DL And The Dash-8 posted Wed Apr 26 2006 23:23:16 by Leo8448
DL And The Future Of Its Fleet (Other Airlines Too) posted Sat Oct 1 2005 17:03:20 by DeltaGuy767
DL And The MD-11 posted Tue Sep 21 2004 02:03:22 by DLKAPA
3-way Battle For China. AA, DL, And CO posted Thu Sep 23 2004 14:00:59 by Pilotcoex
China Airlines And The Drive For Safety posted Wed Jun 9 2004 23:33:05 by Singapore_Air
1980 DL And UA Routes For The DC8-71 posted Fri Aug 9 2002 21:07:09 by TranStar
Air China Special Colors For 2008 Olympics posted Thu Nov 2 2006 15:15:21 by Clickhappy
China Deliveries For The A-380 posted Mon Sep 18 2006 17:10:07 by DLPMMM
DOT China Proceedings For 2007- The Fun Begins posted Mon Jul 10 2006 20:10:55 by BALAX