Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
DL 777 ATL - LAX Year Round?  
User currently offlineCloudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 793 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 5188 times:

As part of the the new SYD route, Delta is flying a 777LR between ATL and LAX. Are they planning to do this permanently, or is this just for the summer only and will eventually be downgraded?


"Six becoming three doesn't create more Americans that want to fly." -Adam Pilarski
37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAWACSooner From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 1800 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 5170 times:

Well...where else is DL gonna rotate a 777LR into LAX for the SYD run?

User currently offlineTranspac787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3163 posts, RR: 13
Reply 2, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 5046 times:

Not to mention, DL is having to dead-head crews on EVERY flight, both LAX-ATL and ATL-LAX. The cost of this SYD flight is going to be astronomical compared to other carriers.

Essentially, DL must pay the cockpit crews for flying ATL-SYD while most of them will only fly the LAX-SYD portion. In an already intensely competitive market, DL is setting themselves up for failure.



A340-500: 4 engines 4 long haul. 777-200LR: 2 engines 4 longer haul
User currently offlineC767P From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 879 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 4994 times:

Wow, such anticompetitive comments. I don't understand why some people absolutely hate it when carriers enter new markets. Competition is always good for the consumer. Delta just started SYD, let's see how it performs before judging them. I doubt that Delta thinks they are going to recieve the same kind of yields that Qantas is getting and I'm sure they did their research before taking the risk of operating the flight. Of all the airlines Delta has certainly reached the furthest in expanding their route network since their bankruptcy restructuring. I would think people would appreciate that as it gives them more travel options. Some new markets have worked very well and some have not, that's just how it works.

User currently offlineDeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8868 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 4990 times:



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 3):
Essentially, DL must pay the cockpit crews for flying ATL-SYD while most of them will only fly the LAX-SYD portion. In an already intensely competitive market, DL is setting themselves up for failure.

I wouldn't be shocked if LAX saw a 777 pilot base sooner than later.


User currently offlineLuckyone From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 2130 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 4967 times:



Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 5):
I wouldn't be shocked if LAX saw a 777 pilot base sooner than later.

That would make sense, or will we see some W routings? The 744's are rumoured to be gone sooner than later and their likely replacement is a 777 of some sort.


User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5639 posts, RR: 11
Reply 6, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 4944 times:



Quoting C767P (Reply 4):
Wow, such anticompetitive comments. I don't understand why some people absolutely hate it when carriers enter new markets. Competition is always good for the consumer. Delta just started SYD, let's see how it performs before judging them. I doubt that Delta thinks they are going to recieve the same kind of yields that Qantas is getting and I'm sure they did their research before taking the risk of operating the flight. Of all the airlines Delta has certainly reached the furthest in expanding their route network since their bankruptcy restructuring. I would think people would appreciate that as it gives them more travel options. Some new markets have worked very well and some have not, that's just how it works.

People here know their history well enough to know that HUNDREDS of "well researched" route launches have UTTERLY FAILED.
Not get the same yields as Qantas, you say? What about United? Or ANZ? I think there are even several other carriers offering service on the route.
See, this stuff is why the airline industry invented CODE-SHARING. Sadly, SkyTeam doesn't really have a lot going for it in that region of the world.
Farthest reaching route network? Yeah, that did Pan Am a world of good... didn't it?

Anyhow, in a less negative tone, I'd love to fly this route. 777-2LR isn't a bird you see every day. But, alas, I'm a Continental guy, and the SkyTeam days for CO are numbered.


User currently offlineC767P From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 879 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 4896 times:

I guess Delta should just go back to Monroe, LA where they started. Expansion is silly... Pan Am didn't have a very good domestic network to feed their international flights, which is not the case with Delta. Has Delta made some bad moves with new routes? Definately yes, particularly with domestic flights such as DAL-MEM and trying to go head to head with Airtran on some routes. It baffles me to think about why DL would want to fool around in competing for low yield leisure routes with the likes of FL and B6.

User currently offlineTranspac787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3163 posts, RR: 13
Reply 8, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 4874 times:

Quoting C767P (Reply 4):
Competition is always good for the consumer.

And there are a lot of us who are airline employees who like to see our companies do well. What's best for the consumer is often counter-productive to the growth of the company. Lower fares obviously equal lower margins and revenues.

Why would us airline employees like or embrace that??  

Quoting C767P (Reply 8):
Pan Am didn't have a very good domestic network

Try non-existent, prior to 1978  

Quoting C767P (Reply 8):
particularly with domestic flights such as DAL-MEM

You're judging a flight before it's started?? I'll also venture a guess you have zero info about its advance booking numbers.

[Edited 2009-07-03 14:54:14]


A340-500: 4 engines 4 long haul. 777-200LR: 2 engines 4 longer haul
User currently offlineC767P From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 879 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 4840 times:



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 9):
You're judging a flight before it's started?? I'll also venture a guess you have zero info about it's advance booking numbers.

Seems like a flight based on pride to me. Aside from ATL, CVG, SLC Delta abandoned the Dallas market back in 2004. They tried DAL-ATL and it didn't work, not sure what makes them think MEM would. Words cannot express how much I miss Gerald Grinstein and Jim Whitehurst, I miss the honesty and reasoning they brought to Delta.


User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5225 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 4814 times:



Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 7):
Or ANZ

NZ has not operated nonstop LAX-SYD in a number of years.

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 7):
Farthest reaching route network? Yeah, that did Pan Am a world of good... didn't it?

I'm sure that you are well aware that you're comparing apples to oranges. Until deregulation PA didn't have a domestic network. Even with the NA buyout, their domestic network really didn't complement their international network and was many many times smaller than the combined domestic network of NW/DL.



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineC767P From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 879 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 4806 times:



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 9):
And there are a lot of us who are airline employees who like to see our companies do well. What's best for the consumer is often counter-productive to the growth of the company. Lower fares obviously equal lower margins and revenues.

Are you in favor of airline regulation then? As a consumer I am certainly glad that I have options to who I give my money to. If one airline controls a route then who is going to keep them honest in pricing? Who is going to make sure they provide adequate customer service? Competition keeps companies in check. With just one airline controlling that market segment I have no choice but to fly with them and they can give me the screw every which way they want. If I have several options in that market segment then that will force the airlines to compete for my service and my money.

Perhaps other industries feel the same way. Maybe we should let Ford have a monopoly in dealerships in some states, GM in another, Toyota..., etc... Afterall I'm sure care sales associates want to see their companies do well and if that's the only option to the consumer then no worries.


User currently offlineJbmitt From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 543 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4704 times:

any chance of seeing Delta bridge the 772LR into LAX from JFK, rather than ATL? I know JFK - LAX is competitive and ATL is a monopoly, but the business product is top notch.

User currently offlinePackcheer From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 326 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4692 times:

I wonder if DL could find a way to make some profitable runs with the 777LR between ATL-JFK-LAX, and then have their crews overnight/stay put somewhere instead of having to deadhead them on every flight into LAX.....

Just a thought....



Things that fly, Girls and Planes...
User currently offlineJetstar From United States of America, joined May 2003, 1616 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4653 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting C767P (Reply 8):
I guess Delta should just go back to Monroe, LA where they started. Expansion is silly

Using that rational, IBM would still be a small business machine maker, McDonalds would still be a small hamburger joint and Microsoft would still be a small software company.

Quoting C767P (Reply 8):
Pan Am didn't have a very good domestic network to feed their international flights, which is not the case with Delta.

That was in the days of regulation, the government would not let Pan AM set up a domestic network, that’s why they overpaid and bought National Airlines, so they would have a domestic network feeding their international flights.


User currently offlineThegreatRDU From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2310 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4629 times:

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 3):
Not to mention, DL is having to dead-head crews on EVERY flight, both LAX-ATL and ATL-LAX. The cost of this SYD flight is going to be astronomical compared to other carriers.
Man, there seems to be absolutely no logic for DL to start this flight.
Essentially, DL must pay the cockpit crews for flying ATL-SYD while most of them will only fly the LAX-SYD portion. In an already intensely competitive market, DL is setting themselves up for failure.

  
V Australia, Qantas, United.....
Honestly, Where's the logic in this DL?
Your entering a bloodbath, is there another route where this 77L could be better served?
Quoting C767P (Reply 10):
Words cannot express how much I miss Gerald Grinstein and Jim Whitehurst, I miss the honesty and reasoning they brought to Delta.

     

[Edited 2009-07-03 17:05:38]

[Edited 2009-07-03 17:36:44]


Our Returning Champion
User currently offlineCloudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 793 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 4547 times:

And is suppose that dead-heading a crew from ATL is adding so much to the cost that it turns an otherwise highly profitable route in a big money drain. Honestly, this is like canceling a flight because the cost of a bag of peanuts went up by half a cent.

I agree that a LAX base is likely - as NW and Delta combine, it makes sense that they will start consolidating planes, and that might mean more 777s through LAX. But even if not, why does the whole plane need to go to ATL? The crew can just as easily deadhead on a 757.



"Six becoming three doesn't create more Americans that want to fly." -Adam Pilarski
User currently offlineNjdevilsin03 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 725 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 4524 times:

All I know is I used a few reward points and got a nice comfy seat up front on the 77L atl-lax in August.


717, 727, 731, 732, 733, 734, 735, 73G, 738, 752, 753, 762, 763, 777, DC9, MD80, DC10, L1011, ERJ, CRJ, ATR, DH8, A300,
User currently offlineDeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9081 posts, RR: 12
Reply 18, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 4382 times:



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 3):



Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 5):
I wouldn't be shocked if LAX saw a 777 pilot base sooner than later.

Don't worry about that. If NYC got a 777 base and it stayed open with no 777s flights........it likely LAX is next in line for a 777(abit small) base

Quoting C767P (Reply 10):
Words cannot express how much I miss Gerald Grinstein and Jim Whitehurst, I miss the honesty and reasoning they brought to Delta.

Agree.

Quoting Jbmitt (Reply 13):
any chance of seeing Delta bridge the 772LR into LAX from JFK, rather than ATL? I know JFK - LAX is competitive and ATL is a monopoly, but the business product is top notch.

very unlikely. ATL-LAX on the T7 will do pretty good with loads............JFK-LAX.....not so much. I do think that on the few weeks LAX-GRU runs the 767 comes from JFK.



yep.
User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4307 times:



Quoting Jbmitt (Reply 13):
any chance of seeing Delta bridge the 772LR into LAX from JFK, rather than ATL? I know JFK - LAX is competitive and ATL is a monopoly, but the business product is top notch.

I would say near zero. Way to much a/c for the route.

Quoting Jetstar (Reply 15):
Using that rational, IBM would still be a small business machine maker, McDonalds would still be a small hamburger joint and Microsoft would still be a small software company.

You don't take sarcasm to well  Smile .

Quoting Jetstar (Reply 15):
That was in the days of regulation, the government would not let Pan AM set up a domestic network, that's why they overpaid and bought National Airlines, so they would have a domestic network feeding their international flights.

The post was precisely geared towards deregulation when carriers grew international operations overnight and Pan Am was no longer the monopoly. Now, there were carriers with descent domestic ops and a competitive product across the post and Pan Am, for a time, didn't offer both so their clock began...



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineNzrich From New Zealand, joined Dec 2005, 1515 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4293 times:



Quoting OA412 (Reply 11):
NZ has not operated nonstop LAX-SYD in a number of years.

That is correct but NZ sells a lot of Aussie to USA fares so carries quite a reasonable percentage of that traffic even thou its not direct ..



"Pride of the pacific"
User currently offlineDLPMMM From United States of America, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 3580 posts, RR: 10
Reply 21, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4293 times:



Quoting Jhooper (Reply 2):
Delta is going to get their butt kicked on the LAX-SYD run. I'd be surprised if it lasts a year.



Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 3):
Essentially, DL must pay the cockpit crews for flying ATL-SYD while most of them will only fly the LAX-SYD portion. In an already intensely competitive market, DL is setting themselves up for failure.

Delta only needs to fill some 250 or so seats per day. The least amount of any carrier serving the route. DL should have the least problem sustaining the route, given the other carriers are much more exposed on this route from a financial perspective

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 7):
People here know their history well enough to know that HUNDREDS of "well researched" route launches have UTTERLY FAILED.
Not get the same yields as Qantas, you say? What about United? Or ANZ? I think there are even several other carriers offering service on the route.
See, this stuff is why the airline industry invented CODE-SHARING. Sadly, SkyTeam doesn't really have a lot going for it in that region of the world.
Farthest reaching route network? Yeah, that did Pan Am a world of good... didn't it?

Anyhow, in a less negative tone, I'd love to fly this route. 777-2LR isn't a bird you see every day. But, alas, I'm a Continental guy, and the SkyTeam days for CO are numbered.

You just made the point of why DL will be successful on the route. Skyteam is not small. Delta will have the only reasonable Skyteam alternative from the USA (ICN is not reasonable). By your own admission, you would be likely to use DL on the route of CO stayed in Skyteam.

Delta does not need to drive any other airline off the route to be successful. Delta needs only to fill 250 or so seats per day profitably from their existing Skyteam base that is currently being forced to fly on other carriers. Compare that with the break even seats sales needed per day for all the other carriers on the route.

Delta will survive on the route. The profitability level is questionable with the current yields, but DL is better situated to outlast the others.


User currently offlineCragley From Australia, joined Jul 2004, 426 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4272 times:

Well I'm all booked for my flight on DL from SYD to LAX and am looking forward as to how they compare.

I have flown QF, UA and NZ on the route and I doubt they could be any worse than UA so whatever the outcome, I'm sure it will be a success.

If anyone is going to go, it's UA! If DL can tie up connections in LAX through Detroit, Atlanta, Minneapolis then they will be laughing. Not all people travelling to the states finish in LAX. QF only really offers JFK additionally or codeshares with AA which are diffiult to get cheaper fares on.

So I wish DL all the best  Smile


User currently offlineCALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2493 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4236 times:



Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 22):
You just made the point of why DL will be successful on the route. Skyteam is not small. Delta will have the only reasonable Skyteam alternative from the USA

It helps f the Skyteam members have flight to connect to.
Aeroflot connect times westbound 5:45, eastbound 12:20
AF conncect time westbound 3:40 east 8:20
KL connect time westbound 7:25 eastbound 11:40
Alitalia donesn't serve LAX
Copa - have they left for CO and Star?
Asia carriers wouldn't connect to SYD via LAX


User currently offlineTYCOON From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 379 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4151 times:

Sorry, but I don't understand the last post by CALPSAFltSkeds, can you explain better?
Also, AF has nearly three flights a day from CDG to LAX (arriving in LAX 13h00, 16h00 and 19h00). And you forgot the largest Skyteam player in LAX after DL (in terms of flights at least) Aeromexico. Could be some connecting traffic from Mexico to SYD, especially since AM and DL share the same terminal in LAX.


25 DeltaL1011man : The flight will get feed from A) sky FFs B) O/D C) people who are willing to fly XXX-ATL/SLC-LAX-SYD. Also the (abit small) networks in LAX of AS and
26 Gemuser : This is the bit I really, really don't understand. With basically all the world to play in DL chooses to send one of the worlds most expensive airlin
27 VirginFlyer : I suspect the logic for Delta is along the lines that long term the route will return to 2 or maybe 3 non-stop players, and as such return to being r
28 PPVRA : Exactly. It's not all about costs, its also about revenue. You put a decent plane on the route and that's a competitive advantage. Unfortunately, DL'
29 CALPSAFltSkeds : Sorry, I did take into affect the three AF flights and picked the closest one to the DL to get the best connection, which is 3 hours 40 mins on the w
30 DeltAirlines : I really doubt a passenger from Europe is going to route over both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans to get to Sydney rather than flying via DXB/East A
31 DLDTW1962 : I think DL will have a chance with this new flight. Give it some time. With Qantas scaling back alot of their international routes including SYD-USA,A
32 CALPSAFltSkeds : I agree, but was just responding to posts that somehow Skytyeam will boost connections to this flight that many think is adding capacity to an overse
33 Atlanta : I have a feeling DL will be successful on this route, have loads yet come out for the first three days of flight? Atlanta
34 DLPMMM : Who said anything about connections to lots of other Skyteam member flights? I said Skyteam FFers. Lots of them in the S Cal area. Lots of them throu
35 CALPSAFltSkeds : Maybe it will work, but has someone looked at the O&D counts from the Southeast to SYD? How about the total O&D to SYD from east of the Mississippi?
36 Gemuser : Now read Cragley post again. It's not really relevant to FFs. Sure many people fly to more places than Oz, BUT IF they fly North America/Oz REGULARLY
37 Lufthansa : I want to question this 100 PAX a day thing. Everybody keeps on quoting it like its Delta's birthright... but has anybody thoguht of how many of thes
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 FA's ATL LAX SYD posted Fri Mar 20 2009 15:58:59 by 767ER
777 ATL-LAX? posted Tue Mar 3 2009 08:54:27 by Joperrin89
DL 777 ATL-PHX Feb. 4th posted Sat Jan 5 2008 20:12:57 by D328
DL 777 At LAX? posted Tue Apr 25 2006 00:23:25 by Travelin man
ATL-BCN Year Round? posted Wed Mar 8 2006 17:08:52 by 767-332ER
DL 777 In LAX On 03/19 posted Sat Mar 19 2005 04:06:56 by DeltaMIA
DL Year-round ATL-BCN posted Sun Jul 15 2007 00:19:21 by 767-332ER
How Often Is 777 Substituted On DL ATL-LAX? posted Fri May 25 2007 15:16:36 by DeltaGator
DL MD-88 Doing ATL-LAX posted Tue Jun 2 2009 20:07:52 by Tinpusher007
DL Puts 777 ATL-LOS posted Mon Apr 27 2009 09:35:49 by BigGSFO