Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SAS First Service To SEA?  
User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3805 posts, RR: 29
Posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4962 times:

When SAS started service CPH-SEA-CPH 2 Sept 1966...

How many weekly frequencies were initially offered on the route in each direction?

Was the service non-stop from the beginning... or was there a tech stop or an intermediate stop at some other North American city served by SAS?

Since the only longhaul types in the SAS fleet at the time of their first CPH-SEA were DC-8-33s and a pair of DC-8-55s, which type was used on their first SEA services... or did it vary as to which variant was assigned day-to-day?

Interestingly, but not surprisingly, SAS was the first European airline to serve SEA, a route which seems to have consistently performed well for them for 40+ years Smile

40 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32781 posts, RR: 72
Reply 1, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4948 times:



Quoting Tango-Bravo (Thread starter):
a route which seems to have consistently performed well for them for 40+ years

It hasn't made a dime for the past two years, at least.



a.
User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3805 posts, RR: 29
Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4838 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 1):
It hasn't made a dime for the past two years, at least.

In spite of reportedly very high load factors in terms of both pax (around 90% year round average?) as well as cargo? Also, isn't CPH-SEA a reasonably high-yielding route patronized largely by business travelers? ...rather than predominantly VFR traffic as one might suppose due to the large population of Scandinavian ancestry in the SEA and U.S. Pacific Northwest.

Seems like if any particular longhaul international route has any potential to make money, it will have been/should have been nicely to highly profitable over the past two years. Why not CPH-SEA-CPH for SAS?


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32781 posts, RR: 72
Reply 3, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4815 times:



Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 2):


Seems like if any particular longhaul international route has any potential to make money, it will have been/should have been nicely to highly profitable over the past two years. Why not CPH-SEA-CPH for SAS?

In part because their entire long-haul network is unprofitable, but two years ago only Singapore lost more money than the Seattle route (and maybe Bangkok, too, but I'm not positive). Singapore has since been discontinued.

With Lufthansa at SEA this summer, and with SAS going to SFO, I would say the future of the route is in doubt. Hopefully they stick it through.



a.
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5582 posts, RR: 28
Reply 4, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4773 times:

I miss the DC10's I'd hate to see them leave entirely. Having said that, maybe they will be the [first] sacrificial lamb in the SEA-Europe battle. Too bad, because I always enjoy the A343 passing low over my house and then later roaring back towards CPH.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25311 posts, RR: 22
Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4510 times:



Quoting Tango-Bravo (Thread starter):
Was the service non-stop from the beginning... or was there a tech stop or an intermediate stop at some other North American city served by SAS?

It was nonstop from the beginning as I recall.


User currently offlineMadViking From Canada, joined Jul 2003, 194 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4452 times:

I've read here before that the 343s had weight restrictions because of heavy cargo loads (carrying flowers or fruit) back to CPH. If so could a DC8-33 or 55 make it non-stop? I know Winnipeg was used as tech stop for LAX but it would be too far a southern deviation for CPH-SEA-CPH.

User currently offlineEVA777SEA From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 473 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4424 times:



Quoting MadViking (Reply 6):
I've read here before that the 343s had weight restrictions because of heavy cargo loads (carrying flowers or fruit) back to CPH. If so could a DC8-33 or 55 make it non-stop? I know Winnipeg was used as tech stop for LAX but it would be too far a southern deviation for CPH-SEA-CPH.

Considering we have a 12,000 foot runway, we are low, it rarely gets especially hot here, and SEA-CPH is well within the A343's range, I doubt it took weight restrictions. The only restrictions on it should be the amount of cargo they could carry before going over MTOW.


User currently offlineSuprazachair From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Feb 2004, 634 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4345 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 1):
It hasn't made a dime for the past two years, at least.

Not calling you out, but as much as I've heard this I've yet to see a source...


User currently offlineSomeone83 From Norway, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 3386 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4336 times:



Quoting MadViking (Reply 6):
I've read here before that the 343s had weight restrictions because of heavy cargo loads (carrying flowers or fruit) back to CPH

No, that had to be a 333. The 343 have no problems flying eastwards from SEA, but a 333 has occasionally been used on the route and has then been operated with weight restrictions


User currently offlineEVA777SEA From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 473 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4239 times:



Quoting Suprazachair (Reply 8):
Not calling you out, but as much as I've heard this I've yet to see a source...

He's referring to an article from 2005. So as far as we know, it has been losing money as recently as 2005. As far as the current state of the route, is anyone's guess.


User currently offlineTod From Denmark, joined Aug 2004, 1725 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4190 times:



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 5):
It was nonstop from the beginning as I recall.

It was in 1970

Tod


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32781 posts, RR: 72
Reply 12, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4153 times:



Quoting Suprazachair (Reply 8):
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 1):
It hasn't made a dime for the past two years, at least.

Not calling you out, but as much as I've heard this I've yet to see a source...

While I'm not going to run a search right now, there's a media source in the Airliners.net archives if you search for SEA-CPH.



a.
User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3805 posts, RR: 29
Reply 13, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4143 times:



Quoting Tod (Reply 11):
It was in 1970

Which means that DC-8-62s were by then in service with SAS... which had substantially greater range/payload capability that the DC-8-33s and -55s SAS had as their only longhaul types the during the first year or so of CPH-SEA-CPH service.

Can anyone confirm whether CPH-SEA was among the first SAS routes to have DC-8-62s assigned...and were the similar but higher capacity (s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d) DC-8-63s ever used on the route by SAS as the regular equipment type?


User currently offlineWA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2226 posts, RR: 8
Reply 14, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 4079 times:



Quoting Tod (Reply 11):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 5):
It was nonstop from the beginning as I recall.

It was in 1970

Tod

I think Viscount724 is correct!

I checked the NTSB report for the SK DC-8-62 that crashed in the Pacific 6 miles west of LAX on 13 Jan 1969. The NTSB report says "The aircraft was operating as Flight SK-933 in regularly scheduled international passenger service from Copenhagen, Denmark, to Los Angeles, California, with an en route stop and scheduled crew change at Seattle, Washington".

So, CPH-SEA was operated nonstop as early as 1969.



Seaholm Maples are #1!
User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined exactly 15 years ago today! , 6835 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 4002 times:

In 10/66 it was three flights a week CPH-SEA-LAX, along with two CPH-Sondre Stromfjord-LAX. Near as I can make out the time difference CPH to SEA was 8 hours, which would make the schedule time 9 hr 50 min CPH-SEA and 9-25 SEA-CPH. So looks like they tried to do it nonstop, at least.

User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25311 posts, RR: 22
Reply 16, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 3957 times:



Quoting MadViking (Reply 6):
I've read here before that the 343s had weight restrictions because of heavy cargo loads (carrying flowers or fruit) back to CPH. If so could a DC8-33 or 55 make it non-stop?



Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 13):
Quoting Tod (Reply 11):
It was in 1970

Which means that DC-8-62s were by then in service with SAS... which had substantially greater range/payload capability that the DC-8-33s and -55s SAS had as their only longhaul types the during the first year or so of CPH-SEA-CPH service.

Can anyone confirm whether CPH-SEA was among the first SAS routes to have DC-8-62s assigned...and were the similar but higher capacity (s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d) DC-8-63s ever used on the route by SAS as the regular equipment type?

I think Tod's posting referring to 1970 means that he has a timetable showing that they operated CPH-SEA nonstop in 1970. I don't think he means that it wasn't nonstop prior to 1970. I am almost certain that SK operated nonstop to SEA from the time they began service, except possibly on rare occasions when winds were unusually strong where they may have stopped at SFJ.

CP Air operated their DC-8-40s (R-R Conway powered) YVR-AMS nonstop starting in 1961 and the DC-8-30 and -40 had similar payload-range performance. Great circle mileage YVR-AMS (4174 nm) and SEA-CPH (4230 nm) are almost the same.


User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3805 posts, RR: 29
Reply 17, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 3928 times:

Quoting Timz (Reply 15):
So looks like they tried to do it nonstop, at least.

And certainly the DC-8-55's advertised range of 4970nm (=just over 5700 statue miles) with maximum payload means CPH-SEA and v.v. non-stop is altogether realistic. Speaking of the DC-8-55s of SAS, perhaps it is no coincidence that that the startup date of CPH-SEA was soon after their second -55 had been delivered to SAS.

And speaking of SAS DC-8-55s and SEA, below is one of the more interesting photos (to me anyway) in the a.net data base showing just such a combinatuion, dated September 1968... by which time SAS had taken delivery of six DC-8-62s. Have always wondered whether this photo indicates that DC-8-55 was the aircraft of choice for SAS on CPH-SEA or if it just happened to be a day when there was an aircraft substitution or even something else altogether such as, perhaps, LN-MOH was being operated that day on a charter flight on behalf of Scanair or...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mel Lawrence



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 16):
CP Air operated their DC-8-40s (R-R Conway powered) YVR-AMS nonstop starting in 1961 and the DC-8-30 and -40 had similar payload-range performance. Great circle mileage YVR-AMS (4174 nm) and SEA-CPH (4230 nm) are almost the same.

Excellent point that I had previously overlooked. Thank you. Wonder if the -43s of (then) Canadian Pacific Airlines (CPA) and the -32s of SAS could cover the virtually identical distances and flightpaths non-stop with reasonable consistency without reduced payloads. The parallels between SAS and CPA in the development of their respective "polar routes" to Europe is (to me) among the most interesting accounts in the history of airlines, beginning with the fact that first services by both airlines were with DC-6B aircraft and Sondre Stromfjord was a common refueling stop for both, used by no other airlines (to my knowledge) on a regular basis.

By the way, the routing CPH-SEA-LAX and v.v. continued into the years when SAS used 747-283Bs and DC-10-30s on the route at various times/seasons.

[Edited 2008-02-13 15:51:47]

User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25311 posts, RR: 22
Reply 18, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 3880 times:



Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 17):
SAS and CPA in the development of their respective "polar routes" to Europe is (to me) among the most interesting accounts in the history of airlines, beginning with the fact that first services by both airlines were with DC-6B aircraft and Sondre Stromfjord was a common refueling stop for both, used by no other airlines (to my knowledge) on a regular basis.

Although they were only a charter carrier at the time, Canadian carrier Wardair also made regular stops at SFJ. Their first longhaul aircraft was a DC-6B leased from Canadian Pacific in 1962 which required a SFJ stop on flights to/from western Canada. When they put their sole 727-100 into service in 1966, they were one of the very rare transatlantic 727 operators. Those flights also stopped at SFJ to/from points like YVR/YYC/YEG. From eastern Canada (YYZ/YUL etc.) they were more likely to stop in Iceland. The fuel stops ended when they put the 707-320C into service a couple of years later.

Wardair's DC-6B (LGW 1963) and 727-100 (LGW and MAN) below. Assuming the date of the first 727 photo is correct, it was only 3 weeks old then,delivered April 25, 1966. It was the first Boeing jet sold in Canada.




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © John Varndell
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dave Jones



User currently offlineAlexinwa From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 3835 times:

I hate rumors,......HOWEVER........

SK crews that overnight here in SEA have said that from what THEY HAVE HEARD.........SEA may or may not go.....however others will fall before SEA. Long time relationship with SEA was the main reason. They named the SFO route has a maybe.

It was also said that SK and LH believe that they can take market share away from other airlines here at SEA. As they belive they offer a much better product. (Im guessing that was a stab at BA and NW???)

IMHO.............LH to SEA is the death ok SK. Which is really too bad, I only fly SK to Germany,......however very excited about flying LH internationally, I have flown them many times within Germany.



You mad Bro???
User currently offlineBrisseDK From Denmark, joined Nov 2007, 383 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3755 times:



Quoting Alexinwa (Reply 19):
SK crews that overnight here in SEA have said that from what THEY HAVE HEARD.........SEA may or may not go

What does that even mean? Of course it "may or may not go", what other options are there?

Quoting Alexinwa (Reply 19):
They named the SFO route has a maybe.

Come on, the route hasn't even been launched yet.

Regards,
BJ



Frequent flyer based in CPH - mostly heading to: OSL, HEL, KEF, FAE and EWR
User currently offlineLegacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2077 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3751 times:



Quoting Alexinwa (Reply 19):
SK crews that overnight here in SEA have said that from what THEY HAVE HEARD.........SEA may or may not go.....however others will fall before SEA. Long time relationship with SEA was the main reason. They named the SFO route has a maybe.

Is this a rumor you are trying to start. As stated, SFO is planning to start in October 2008 with three flights a week.
Anyone can say SEA may or may not go just like any route from any airport. very confusing statement.
 spin 



John@SFO
User currently offlineMadViking From Canada, joined Jul 2003, 194 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (6 years 7 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3542 times:

Once upon a time, SAS had a niche in the Pacific Northwest providing a convenient link to Europe. Even with a large Scandinavian rooted population, connections via Copenhagen were a vital source of revenue. Now with NW, AF, BA 2x, MP and LH anxious to start 332s, unfortunately it may be a matter of time before economic viability verses market share determines SEA's outcome. During the 80's and early 90's SAS was sharing airport operating cost with Thai until they pulled out. I remember once landing on 937 and being greeted by staff in Thai uniform.

Operating a daily (or low season 5x) 343 may be too large a size of aircraft. Funny, when they were operating 763s they could have used a 343 type capacity but now the opposite is true. Maybe a 787 would be more sustainable in the future. Wishful thinking, not to mention at least 5 to 6 years before an order would become available.

Slowly but surely, Stockholm seems to be chasing where the money really is, and applying their limited resources towards it. With a limited STAR connections presence at SEA, it could be the beginning of the end with LH's arrival. On the other hand, as mentioned above, if LH and SK successfully join forces to combat BA, AF and NW, maybe there's hope after all.  crossfingers 


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32781 posts, RR: 72
Reply 23, posted (6 years 7 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3514 times:



Quoting MadViking (Reply 22):
Now with NW, AF, BA 2x, MP and LH anxious to start 332s

Small correction, but MP no longer flies to Seattle, at least not passenger flights.



a.
User currently offlineEVA777SEA From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 473 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 7 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3471 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 23):
Small correction, but MP no longer flies to Seattle, at least not passenger flights.

Correct, they still fly cargo flights here. Did they ever fly pax jets to SEA?


25 MadViking : I remember seeing MP 763s operating a few times a week. Possibly seasonal?
26 Erikr : MP also flew DC-10s and 747-200s pax during the summers in the 1980s. I flew each in 1985 and 1989 respectively. The 1989 flight was a AMS-SEA-OAK-SEA
27 EXAAUADL : I dont think there is any true VFR traffic from SEA-CPH...Those people immigrated to the US over 100 years ago. Its not like NYC-SDQ.
28 AlexInWa : To correct your statement sir...........It was the SK crews that told me about the SFO route. I had not even heard of it. And regardless of what you
29 Tango-Bravo : If the descendants of Scandinavian immigrants in the SEA/Pacific Northwest area are anything like those in Minnesota (where I and my wife of Norwegia
30 Post contains images BrisseDK : With all due respect, the only statement you should correct is your own. It simply didn't make sense in the first place! Claiming that a route may or
31 EVA777SEA : So all of the sudden the route will be dropped with out any announcement? Uh huh.
32 Post contains images MadViking : A tactic that is used to preserve whatever life may be left on this route. To announce that sometime in the future the route will be dropped, would i
33 BrisseDK : Makes sense! Well, eventually they would have to make an announcement, just waiting for the right moment! Duh! Regards, BJ
34 Post contains images Kevin777 : Agree.. and with AF it doesn't look any better, although a different alliance, it's still a punch to SK's market True... my grandmothers both have fr
35 MadViking : This would be the right formula if fleet numbers don't change, hence the dropping of a city or tightening up somewhere else is the only way to secure
36 AFKLMLHLX : Why would SAS even start that route? Is there a high population of Scandinavian residents in the SEA-TAC area? I mean in some remote way SEA kind of s
37 RwSEA : Well as discussed above (did you read?), SK started serving SEA well over 40 years ago, before there was any such thing as the Star Alliance. The rou
38 Viscount724 : For many years SK had the only direct service between SEA and Continental Europe. Pan Am's SEA-LHR route was the only other direct service to Europe
39 Post contains images Kevin777 : Nope, not really, the other days of the week they're gonna use it for DEL. Either way you couldn't fit 7x weekly Europe -US West Coast into the sched
40 Tango-Bravo : If ever there was a U.S. to Scandinavia VFR market that should have worked well, it was MSP-OSL-MSP, with codeshare connections through OSL operated
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...
Kingfisher Plans First U.S. Service To SFO, NYC posted Fri Nov 24 2006 19:57:15 by Laxintl
Korean To Begin Freighter Service To SEA. posted Sat May 13 2006 10:34:20 by Gunsontheroof
Next New Service To SEA? posted Thu Jul 15 2004 23:17:19 by BCAInfoSys
SAS Starts Service To Shanghai! posted Sat Oct 11 2003 08:15:16 by Birka340
SAS First A 333 To CPH. posted Fri Oct 4 2002 22:34:31 by Solnabo
SAS A340-300 To SEA posted Wed May 15 2002 04:33:18 by United777
SAS Past Service To LAX posted Sat Dec 9 2000 09:27:40 by Aeri28
What About Expanded Asian Service To Sea? posted Sun Oct 15 2000 07:44:16 by Mason
SAS New Service To Birmingham posted Sun Jul 9 2000 11:20:25 by Bhx
SAS First To Introduce E-mail And Internet Service posted Fri Jan 26 2001 19:52:31 by SAS_A330-300
SAS First A 333 To CPH. posted Fri Oct 4 2002 22:34:31 by Solnabo