Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
DOT Tentatively Grants DL SEA-HND  
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11840 posts, RR: 62
Posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2278 times:

Very surprised UA didn't get SFO-HND ...

http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2012/11/dot-backs-deltas-request-to-fly-seattle-tokyo-haneda.html/

[Edited 2012-11-15 09:52:31]

62 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9706 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2300 times:

It is hard to tell if it is favoritism that the DOT is showing Delta or if their business proposal is actually the one that makes the most sense. UA wants SFO-HND, but ANA is already on the route. DL's first choice was SEA-HND, but the DOT decided that a different route was better and now has caved into allowing DL SEA-HND.

All I care is that the routes get used even if this will result in the demise of UA's SEA-NRT service.

[Edited 2012-11-15 09:59:16]


If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinedavescj From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 2307 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2292 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 1):
All I care is that the routes get used even if this will result in the demise of UA's SEA-NRT service.

I will be interested to see if the route is sustainable. I would have thought SFO - HND would have stronger O/D and connections both. But what do I know?

That said, I doubt SEA - NRT will go away. I think this due to both connections in NRT onward and the times HND tend to have for arrival/departure.

Dave



Can I have a mojito on this flight?
User currently offlineMSPNWA From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1994 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2290 times:

I tell you. Our government is so corrupt. Amazing how a corporation can do no wrong with a public resource. Failure is rewarded in this country.

User currently offlineTdan From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 450 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2295 times:

Not a very good standard to establish by the DOT iyam:

Step 1: Apply for restricted frequencies using the biggest plane and frequency possible from a hub
Step 2: Delay, reduce, downgauge, delay (repeat)
Step 3: Ask to move authority
Step 4: Request granted
Step 5: ...............
Step 6: Profits!

Using this logic, UA/CO should have requested SFO-HND, DEN-HND, ORD-HND and EWR-HND only to have it granted and move it to HND-GUM and operated by a 738  



We will ride this thunderbird, silver shadows on the earth, a thousand leagues away our land of birth... -Captain Bruce
User currently offlineTdan From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 450 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2293 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 1):
UA wants SFO-HND, but ANA is already on the route.

Not even! it's JAL on the route, so a competitor! SMH at my government



We will ride this thunderbird, silver shadows on the earth, a thousand leagues away our land of birth... -Captain Bruce
User currently offlineenilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7552 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2301 times:

Quoting Tdan (Reply 4):
Step 1: Apply for restricted frequencies using the biggest plane and frequency possible from a hub
Step 2: Delay, reduce, downgauge, delay (repeat)
Step 3: Ask to move authority
Step 4: Request granted
Step 5: ...............
Step 6: Profits!

South Park reference?  

Agreed. I'm shocked HA didn't get it. I'm not big on second chances with scarce authorities.


User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17786 posts, RR: 46
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2292 times:

Quoting enilria (Reply 6):
I'm not big on second chances with scarce authorities.

2nd?? This has got to be the 10th chance 



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7859 posts, RR: 19
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2297 times:

Quoting commavia (Thread starter):
Very surprised UA didn't get SFO-HND ...

So UA will remain out of HND? Sounds unfortunate. Oh well, good news for DL.

Quoting enilria (Reply 6):
Agreed. I'm shocked HA didn't get it. I'm not big on second chances with scarce authorities.

Doesn't HA already fly there?



我思うゆえに我あり。(Jap. 'I think, therefore I am.')
User currently offlineTdan From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 450 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2291 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 7):
2nd?? This has got to be the 10th chance

At least! Don't forget China and Brazil either... To DL's credit, they have some fantastic DOT lobbyists to make up for their lack of network planning prowess. Maybe they're just smarter than all of us and always intended to do these moves to monopolize frequencies and crowd out any competition?  
Quoting enilria (Reply 6):
South Park reference?

The underpants gnomes always show up when you least expect it  



We will ride this thunderbird, silver shadows on the earth, a thousand leagues away our land of birth... -Captain Bruce
User currently offlinecatiii From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 3075 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2296 times:

The DOT order is 9 pages long, but I tried to cut and paste in the relevant sections on the pleadings by the carriers and the decision explanation by DOT.


POSITION OF THE PARTIES
American asserts that Los Angeles is the largest U.S. mainland Origin & Destination (O&D) market to Tokyo, with two times more local passengers than San Francisco and six times more local passengers than Seattle. American states that the Los Angeles-Haneda market is currently served by the Star alliance, through flights operated by All Nippon Airways Co., Ltd. (ANA) displaying the designator codes of United and US Airways, Inc. (US Airways); and by the SkyTeam alliance, through flights operated by Delta. American argues that its proposal would enhance inter-alliance competition in the large Los Angeles-Haneda market by allowing its alliance, oneworld, to compete directly with Star and SkyTeam.

American also states that it would provide significant connecting opportunities for 25 U.S. cities, including the 10 largest U.S. mainland-Tokyo O&D markets.4 Through its immunized cooperative relationship with Japan Airlines Co., Ltd. (JAL), it would provide connecting opportunities beyond Haneda to 29 cities in Japan, as well as to Shanghai, Beijing, Bangkok, Hong Kong, Seoul, Singapore, and Taiwan.

The competing carriers contend that the Los Angeles-Tokyo market is already well served and the market would not support an additional Los Angeles-Haneda flight. United argues that the Los Angeles-Tokyo market already has nearly twice the amount of service as San Francisco, and selecting Los Angeles would leave San Francisco - the second largest West Coast-Tokyo market - without any nonstop U.S. carrier service to Haneda. Delta contends that, if American receives the Los Angeles-Haneda slots, it would likely reduce its current Los Angeles-Narita service, as it did with its New York (JFK)-Narita service when it was awarded a New York-Haneda slot pair.7 Hawaiian argues that American’s track record of repeated cancellations on its New York (JFK)-Haneda service suggests that an additional allocation at Los Angeles would be a waste of valuable resources.

Delta maintains that its proposal would make the most productive use of the Haneda slot pair. Delta states that Seattle is the largest U.S.-Tokyo O&D market without any nonstop Haneda service, and that Seattle competes with San Francisco and Los Angeles for U.S.-Tokyo traffic. Delta states that, through the combination of its own services and its partnership with Alaska, Delta would provide one-stop service to Haneda from 42 points in the United States.

Delta notes that, subsequent to the 2010 U.S.-Haneda Combination Services Allocation Proceeding, the American/JAL and United/ANA joint ventures were granted antitrust immunity, and argues that American and United are able to access Haneda through the metal-neutral transpacific joint venture flights of their Japanese partners.10 Delta further states that it is the sole independent network competitor against the Star and oneworld immunized alliances, and that only its proposal would preserve the three-way alliance competitive market structure that currently exists in the U.S.-Haneda market.

The competing carriers question the viability of Delta’s proposal, given the size of the Seattle-Haneda market and the fact that Delta’s proposed connections rely heavily on code-share service provided by Alaska. American argues that Seattle is the sixth largest Tokyo O&D market and the smallest market proposed in this proceeding, and points out that Los Angeles is the largest O&D market proposed in this proceeding.12 Hawaiian asserts that the Seattle market is not large enough to support additional Tokyo service and that Delta’s proposal will suffer the same fate as its Detroit-Haneda service.

United calls Delta’s competition arguments based on metal neutrality misguided, contending that additional opportunities for U.S. carriers, consumers, and communities are key benefits of immunized joint ventures.14
Hawaiian asserts that, of the four U.S. carrier services to Haneda, its Honolulu-Haneda service has been the most successful, and that an award for Kona-Haneda service would make the best use of the slot pair. Hawaiian states that Kona is underserved as the second-largest U.S.-Tokyo O&D market without nonstop service to/from Tokyo, and the only market proposed in this proceeding without nonstop service to Tokyo. Hawaiian further states that only its proposal will provide a sustainable ongoing volume of passengers.15 Hawaiian argues that selecting its proposal would reduce concentration in markets dominated by the oneworld, SkyTeam, and Star alliances, while doubling Hawaiian’s Tokyo service.

Hawaiian acknowledges that its proposal would largely serve Japan originating passengers, but asserts that the introduction of a nonstop Kona-Haneda flight would have a substantial positive impact on Hawaii’s tourism-based economy, create over 1,400 U.S. jobs, and generate $74 million in new exports annually.

The competing carriers generally argue that an award to Hawaiian would place half of the limited Haneda opportunities in the state of Hawaii, and that the public interest would not be served by primarily benefiting Japanese leisure passengers. Delta and United argue that Hawaiian does not need a limited Haneda slot pair since it is free to begin service at Narita.19 The competing carriers also question the timeline for instituting Hawaiian’s proposed service, given Hawaiian’s own acknowledgement that Kona International Airport may require updates to Customs and Immigration facilities.

United maintains that its San Francisco-Haneda proposal would best maximize public benefits by combining the large San Francisco gateway with numerous online connections, claiming the most online connections of any applicant in this proceeding. United argues that its proposal would provide nonstop Haneda service in the second largest West Coast-Tokyo market, a market that is nearly three times larger than the Seattle-Tokyo market.21 United further argues that it has the largest and most comprehensive hub on the West Coast, and that its San Francisco-Haneda proposal would reach a catchment area far larger than the proposals offered by Delta and Hawaiian.

United asserts that it is the only U.S. carrier serving Japan that is not permitted to operate at Haneda with its own aircraft and crews, and that selection of its proposal would establish competitive parity among U.S. carriers at Haneda, while also providing competition with the San Francisco-Haneda services provided by American’s oneworld partner, JAL.
American argues that United should not receive an award since United and its Star alliance partner ANA already command the largest presence in the U.S.-Japan nonstop market, operating a combined 210 weekly nonstop frequencies compared to oneworld’s 118 weekly nonstop frequencies.24 Hawaiian argues that the San Francisco-Tokyo market already has abundant service, and that the market is not large enough to accommodate United’s proposed service addition.25 Delta contends that, if United were awarded a San Francisco-Haneda slot pair, it would reduce its San Francisco-Narita service, while Delta’s proposal would inject true new capacity to Tokyo.

TENTATIVE DECISION
We have tentatively decided that it is in the public interest to grant the motion of Delta to move its Detroit-Haneda slot pair to provide daily scheduled services between Seattle, Washington and Tokyo’s Haneda International Airport, rather than select an alternative use for that slot pair.

Since we last examined the allocation of Haneda slots in the 2010 U.S.-Haneda Combination Services Allocation Proceeding, we have had the benefit of two years of U.S. carrier experience operating within the limited arrival/departure-time window at Haneda. We also now have the benefit of knowing which U.S. gateways Japanese carriers have chosen to serve with their limited slot pair allocations – Honolulu and Los Angeles for ANA; and Honolulu and San Francisco for JAL.

Against this background, and having considered the entire record before us, we tentatively select Delta’s proposed Seattle-Haneda service. We tentatively find that Delta’s proposal would best serve the public interest by providing the first nonstop Haneda service on a significant mainland U.S.-Tokyo route that currently lacks any such service, thereby establishing a new U.S. gateway to Haneda. We tentatively find that Delta’s proposed service would further serve the public interest by providing a number of western cities with a first one-stop connecting opportunity to Haneda.27 We tentatively find in addition that other cities that now enjoy one-stop connections over more southerly gateways would gain the option of service over a less circuitous northwest gateway.28Allowing Delta to move from Detroit to Seattle would also advance one of the prime objectives we sought to achieve in our last Haneda proceeding, namely, seeking with our limited number of Haneda opportunities to address a diversity of public interest goals. We tentatively find that an outcome that brings first-time Haneda service and first U.S.-flag Haneda service to the sixth-largest O&D market, while also promoting the geographic diversity of the U.S.-Haneda gateways, would be consistent with our established approach for the award of limited Haneda slot opportunities and would best serve the public interest.

The competing carriers argue that Delta’s proposal should not be selected because the Seattle-Tokyo O&D market is the smallest proposed in this proceeding. We tentatively find, however, that only Delta’s proposal would open Haneda access to a new region of the country, the Pacific Northwest, resulting in a greater number of service options for the traveling public.

We have also considered the competing carriers’ argument that Delta’s connecting services rely too heavily on services operated by its code-share partner Alaska.29 Alaska points out, however, that its marketing relationship with Delta is more comprehensive than traditional code-share arrangements, and that Alaska and Delta regularly adjust their schedules to facilitate effective connections.30 Also, Delta notes that Alaska provides effective feed traffic for Delta’s other Seattle services to Asia.31 Therefore, we tentatively find that the proposed connections, offered through Delta’s marketing relationship with Alaska, further support the viability of Delta’s proposed new gateway service and grant of Delta’s motion.

We tentatively find that the public benefits that would be achieved by our tentative selection outweigh the benefits of the other applications.

We recognize that American would provide service in the largest U.S.-Tokyo market proposed in this proceeding. However, we note that Los Angeles already has two daily nonstop flights to Haneda. Delta serves Los Angeles-Haneda with its own flights, and United offers Los Angeles-Haneda service through its code share with ANA. Given the very limited opportunities for U.S. carrier service to Haneda, we tentatively do not find American’s arguments persuasive for adding more Haneda service at Los Angeles while other significant U.S.-Tokyo gateways have no access to Haneda.

United’s proposal offers certain notable attributes. It would offer the first U.S.-carrier nonstop service using its own aircraft in the sizeable San Francisco-Haneda market, the second largest U.S.-Tokyo O&D market in this case. United also would offer an extensive number of on-line connections through its San Francisco hub to an appreciable catchment area. On balance, however, we tentatively find that our public interest objectives in this proceeding would be better served by establishing the first U.S.-flag nonstop Haneda service of any sort at Seattle. While San Francisco may not have service to Haneda from a U.S. carrier operating its own aircraft, American offers daily nonstop San Francisco-Haneda service through its code share with JAL. While United’s San Francisco hub might arguably reach more passengers than the combined Delta/Alaska hub at Seattle, we tentatively find that the Delta proposal offers important advantages of its own in terms of catchment area. Specifically, we note that Delta will provide more new cities with first one stop Haneda service than United; that it will better serve the Pacific Northwest; and that, in a number of cases, service via Seattle is less circuitous than service over San Francisco.33 Against this background, we tentatively find that an award to Delta represents the better allocation of this limited Haneda opportunity.

While we note that Kona currently lacks nonstop service to Tokyo, we recognize that the State of Hawaii now enjoys three of the eight total U.S.-Haneda route-opportunities available to U.S. and Japanese carriers. Consistent with our ongoing goal of using our limited Haneda rights to address a variety of public interest objectives, including the objective of geographically diverse gateways, we tentatively find that the public interest would be better served by opening Haneda nonstop access to a new region of the country, the Pacific Northwest, than by allocating a fourth Haneda route to Hawaii.

Our tentative decision to allow Delta to move its slot pair to Seattle is limited to the proposal considered in this proceeding. Should any carrier, including Delta, currently serving Haneda wish to change its gateway, it should expect a comparable comparative selection proceeding to determine whether it is in the public interest to allow the carrier to do so.


User currently offlineseahawks7757 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 160 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2302 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 1):
All I care is that the routes get used even if this will result in the demise of UA's SEA-NRT service.

One rumor that is floating around is that UA may switch the route to the 787 and change what time the flight goes to work with the ANA flight so that they are not both going at the same time.


User currently offlineDL WIDGET HEAD From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2100 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2292 times:

Great news for Delta, Alaska, and Seattle !

User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6187 posts, RR: 24
Reply 13, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2290 times:

Quoting seahawks7757 (Reply 11):
UA may switch the route to the 787

Not going to happen. It's probably one of those local rumors.



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1872 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2298 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Reading the DoT's rationale for the decision, it seems to make sense. They want to spread the slot pairs out to allow more gateways and more opportunities for different geographical areas to get service. To me, that seems quite fair.

I do hope however that DoT puts a significant caveat on this award; that DL quickly establish and maintain that route for a certain prescribed minimum period of time or they lose the slot. Given LAX to HND is already heavily served, UA's proposed SFO service should be in the back-up slot.


User currently offlineblrsea From India, joined May 2005, 1426 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2295 times:

Quoting catiii (Reply 10):
The DOT order is 9 pages long, but I tried to cut and paste in the relevant sections on the pleadings by the carriers and the decision explanation by DOT.

Thanks! The DoT response is very comprehensive. I don't know if SEA can support both NRT and HND though!


User currently offlineANA787 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 329 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2295 times:

Goodbye UA SEA-NRT! Already way too much capacity in the SEA-Tokyo market.

User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6187 posts, RR: 24
Reply 17, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2294 times:

Quoting commavia (Thread starter):
Very surprised UA didn't get SFO-HND ...

Me too. I'm actually disappointed. I am sure it will happen at some time. But for now the DOT will continue to go with DL's shanigans.



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlineenilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7552 posts, RR: 14
Reply 18, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2295 times:

Quoting Tdan (Reply 9):
Quoting enilria (Reply 6):
South Park reference?

The underpants gnomes always show up when you least expect it  

My fave all-time line from South Park.


User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10601 posts, RR: 14
Reply 19, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2299 times:

Quoting as739x (Reply 17):
But for now the DOT will continue to go with DL's shanigans.

How is it shenanigans (sp)? This was what DL wanted in the first place. UA, from the beginning was behind the 8 ball with SFO-HND because of their partnership with ANA. It's already metal neutral, I believe so it doesn't make any difference if UA or ANA is flying it, right? The purpose of the slot awards is to benefit US carriers, not foreign carriers.


The usual suspects are on here, slamming DL, as they have been from the beginning, on the HND slots. Is there something in the route awards that states that a carrier MUST operate a route or keep a certain type of a/c on it in perpituity? If not, you really don't have much to complain about.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17786 posts, RR: 46
Reply 20, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2300 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 19):
. Is there something in the route awards that states that a carrier MUST operate a route or keep a certain type of a/c on it in perpituity?

This reminds me of the DIA bag system that never worked, but conveniently there was nothing in the contract that stipulated that it had to work 



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineMSPNWA From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1994 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2296 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 19):
Is there something in the route awards that states that a carrier MUST operate a route or keep a certain type of a/c on it in perpituity?

Irrelevant. In the end there's this thing called integrity that rules above grammatical technicalities.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11840 posts, RR: 62
Reply 22, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2298 times:

I will be interested to see the implications of this on two things:

1. I simply don't see how UA will be able to hold on in SEA-NRT now - with DL now going to 744 on SEA-NRT next summer, plus new SEA-HND, plus NH now only SEA-NRT, I do not think the demand in the market is big enough to support that much capacity.

2. I wonder if this might entice AA to try and shift JFK-HND to LAX-HND?


User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6517 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2298 times:

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 3):
I tell you. Our government is so corrupt. Amazing how a corporation can do no wrong with a public resource. Failure is rewarded in this country.



Please supply any info that the US government has acted corrupt in this matter. Are you saying bribes were paid?

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 21):
Irrelevant. In the end there's this thing called integrity that rules above grammatical technicalities.



Just what the hell does that statement mean?


User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3432 posts, RR: 5
Reply 24, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2295 times:

Quoting enilria (Reply 6):
South Park reference?
Quoting Tdan (Reply 9):
The underpants gnomes always show up when you least expect it

Caught the reference & laughed out load immediately

Quoting ANA787 (Reply 16):
Goodbye UA SEA-NRT! Already way too much capacity in the SEA-Tokyo market
Quoting commavia (Reply 22):
1. I simply don't see how UA will be able to hold on in SEA-NRT now - with DL now going to 744 on SEA-NRT next summer, plus new SEA-HND, plus NH now only SEA-NRT, I do not think the demand in the market is big enough to support that much capacity

The route has doubled in capacity in less than a year, from DL & UA 1x daily, to DL, UA & NH 1x daily plus SEA-HND now.
I agree UA will leave the route, I thought this from the day NH announced their flight. DL in co-operation with AS has created a pretty successful operation at SEA. I expect we will see more connecting options this next year from AS & DL.

Quoting commavia (Reply 22):
2. I wonder if this might entice AA to try and shift JFK-HND to LAX-HND?

AA would need to do just what DL did, and give the route back then reapply as DL has done. Many thought DL would be turned away with the reapplication, and indeed it seems DL has won out, I think DL's argument was solid and the stronger ties dog and pony show they did a few weeks back in SEA with both CEO's was in part about this route, IMO.



AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently offlinejet-lagged From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 877 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2635 times:

Do we know what kind of aircraft Delta must/will use?

User currently offlineDL WIDGET HEAD From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2100 posts, RR: 5
Reply 26, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2796 times:

Quoting jet-lagged (Reply 25):
Do we know what kind of aircraft Delta must/will use?

The Tokyo-Haneda flight, which is scheduled to begin in March 2013, will operate using Boeing 767-300ER aircraft featuring full flat-bed seats in BusinessElite, Delta’s popular Economy Comfort seating and in-flight entertainment in every seat throughout the aircraft.


User currently offlinedeltairlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8912 posts, RR: 12
Reply 27, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2971 times:

Quoting jet-lagged (Reply 25):
Do we know what kind of aircraft Delta must/will use?
Quoting DL WIDGET HEAD (Reply 26):
The Tokyo-Haneda flight, which is scheduled to begin in March 2013, will operate using Boeing 767-300ER aircraft featuring full flat-bed seats in BusinessElite, Delta’s popular Economy Comfort seating and in-flight entertainment in every seat throughout the aircraft.

To be specific, it'll be one of the newly-configured 76Zs with 26J/200Y (high density configuration).


User currently offlineIrishAyes From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2230 posts, RR: 15
Reply 28, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2973 times:

This is all starting to sound like affirmative action   

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 1):
All I care is that the routes get used even if this will result in the demise of UA's SEA-NRT service.
Quoting davescj (Reply 2):
That said, I doubt SEA - NRT will go away. I think this due to both connections in NRT onward and the times HND tend to have for arrival/departure.
Quoting ANA787 (Reply 16):
Goodbye UA SEA-NRT! Already way too much capacity in the SEA-Tokyo market.
Quoting commavia (Reply 22):
1. I simply don't see how UA will be able to hold on in SEA-NRT now - with DL now going to 744 on SEA-NRT next summer, plus new SEA-HND, plus NH now onl

I've heard the opposite from my internal sources at UA, in that SEA-NRT is not going anywhere. It is actually a strong-performing route for UA.

I flew on this route week before last in BF. Completely packed to the gills across all cabins. It is unfortunately flown on a non-IPTE configured 777. Nevertheless, I've been told UA intends to hold onto it.

The NH 787 is very low-density. I flew it on the outbound. The Y cabin accommodates only 112 seats, and 46 in C.

With DL up-gauging SEANRT, UA probably wants to maintain as much capacity as possible to hold down their market share.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 3):
I tell you. Our government is so corrupt. Amazing how a corporation can do no wrong with a public resource. Failure is rewarded in this country.

To be perfectly truthful, from what I can recall, the situation was really not all that different 6-7 years ago when the DOT was allocating route authorities to US carriers seeking rights to China. It was as slimy and murky then as it is now, yet political and economic conditions were part of a different landscape.

It's no lie that the slot allocation system is pretty bureaucratic, and we're all aware of that, but I don't think there's any real need to take it to a macro level to inject political rhetoric into your commentary...

Quoting enilria (Reply 6):
Agreed. I'm shocked HA didn't get it. I'm not big on second chances with scarce authorities.

True, but on the flip side, the argument is valid: why grant the vast majority of the HND slots to promote tourism in Hawaii? Little to no beneficiary for the mainland US.

Quoting seahawks7757 (Reply 11):
One rumor that is floating around is that UA may switch the route to the 787 and change what time the flight goes to work with the ANA flight so that they are not both going at the same time.

Doubtful. UA intends to use the 787s to open up long-thin routes (DEN-NRT) and right-size routes that have seasonal capacity demand shifts (like IAH-AMS). If UA maintains SEA-NRT, I would be very surprised if it is considered as an early 787 candidate.

Quoting commavia (Reply 22):
2. I wonder if this might entice AA to try and shift JFK-HND to LAX-HND?

Could be. How is AA doing on JFK-HND? I did not think they stood a chance on this LAX-HND.

For anyone curious, here's the market share breakdown on LAX-TYO (by alliance):

Star:
ANA: 21.1%
SQ: 16.2%
UA: 10.1%
Total: 47.4%

SkyTeam
DL: 18.8%
KE: 8.4%
Total: 27.2%

OneWorld
JAL: 9.7%
AA: 9.6%
MH: 6.1%
Total: 25.4% (incl MH), 19.3% w/o MH



next flights: jfk-icn, icn-hkg-bkk-cdg, cdg-phl-msp
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17786 posts, RR: 46
Reply 29, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2991 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 22):
1. I simply don't see how UA will be able to hold on in SEA-NRT now - with DL now going to 744 on SEA-NRT next summer, plus new SEA-HND, plus NH now only SEA-NRT, I do not think the demand in the market is big enough to support that much capacity.

This is more like ATLNRT post DL/NW merger, where it went from 1 daily 777 to 1 daily 744 plus a few weekly 777s, only to all reduce quickly back to 1 daily 777. DL is going to quickly be responsible for the majority of the SEATYO traffic with no additional capacity on the NRT end for beyond flow, and the same AS codeshare they have limited control over in SEA.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6187 posts, RR: 24
Reply 30, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2889 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 19):
UA, from the beginning was behind the 8 ball with SFO-HND because of their partnership with ANA.

And why should that count against them? NH serves NRT from SFO



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9706 posts, RR: 52
Reply 31, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2904 times:

Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 28):
I've heard the opposite from my internal sources at UA, in that SEA-NRT is not going anywhere. It is actually a strong-performing route for UA.

I flew on this route week before last in BF. Completely packed to the gills across all cabins. It is unfortunately flown on a non-IPTE configured 777. Nevertheless, I've been told UA intends to hold onto it.

The NH 787 is very low-density. I flew it on the outbound. The Y cabin accommodates only 112 seats, and 46 in C.

I wouldn't say strong performing. It was not the worst performing route to NRT. LAX-NRT yields were always worse. However with the addition of two flights NH SEA-NRT and DL SEA-HND, I don't see the capacity to sustain it. The last time there had been 3 daily year round SEA-TYO flights was around 2002. Now we are looking at 4.

Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 28):
With DL up-gauging SEANRT, UA probably wants to maintain as much capacity as possible to hold down their market share.

UA doesn't chase market share. They gave up on market share in SEA to AS and DL years ago.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2889 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 29):

Isn't ATLNRT now a 744 again? Upguaged at the beginning of the summer if memory serves me correctly.


User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 3208 posts, RR: 7
Reply 33, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2906 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 31):
The last time there had been 3 daily year round SEA-TYO flights was around 2002.

To be exact, the AA SEA-NRT flight (which was 6/week always, incidentally) was discontinued in 12/2001 IIRC.


User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3607 posts, RR: 0
Reply 34, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2870 times:

I gotta say i didnt expect this one. I wonder if LAX-HND is suddenly less important to them?

User currently offlineADent From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1397 posts, RR: 2
Reply 35, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2867 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 19):
It's already metal neutral, I believe so it doesn't make any difference if UA or ANA is flying it, right?

But there is no metal on the route. ANA doesn't fly HND-SFO.

Quoting as739x (Reply 30):
And why should that count against them? NH serves NRT from SFO

I think earlier the DOT said ANA has the authority to fly HND-SFO, so they wanted to treat UA like it had authority it wasn't using.


User currently offlineusdcaguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 990 posts, RR: 2
Reply 36, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2824 times:

There is something very unsure about SEA to Tokyo 4x a day in addition to SEA-TPE/ICN/KIX/PEK/PVG(S13). No way there will be enough demand for everyone. My bet is on either UA or NH shifting out a flight to NRT by 4Q13 or DL dropping HND by 1Q14. Also, you have to factor in the possibility of a recession in the next six months. Time will tell, but my hunch is that this is all too much capacity and that half the freshman class won't be here next year.

User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10601 posts, RR: 14
Reply 37, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2783 times:

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 23):
Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 21):Irrelevant. In the end there's this thing called integrity that rules above grammatical technicalities.


Just what the hell does that statement mean?

Good question, considering that what I was asking had nothing to do with grammar.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 7
Reply 38, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2823 times:

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 21):
Irrelevant. In the end there's this thing called integrity that rules above grammatical technicalities.

LOL   

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 32):
Isn't ATLNRT now a 744 again? Upguaged at the beginning of the summer if memory serves me correctly.

Went back to a 744 as soon as they had enough flatbed a/c to operate it. ATL-NRT requires 2 a/c.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineairportugal310 From Tokelau, joined Apr 2004, 3686 posts, RR: 2
Reply 39, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2795 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 37):
Good question, considering that what I was asking had nothing to do with grammar.
Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 38):
LOL  
Quoting bobnwa (Reply 23):
Just what the hell does that statement mean?

Hilarious stuff. When you can't slam him for being wrong, just mock him. Cute.

Quoting mayor (Reply 19):
The usual suspects are on here, slamming DL,

Of course they are...the usual suspects are also on here defending DL, even though it's clear they botched the HND thing from the get-go. But Mama DL can do no wrong, right?

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 21):
Irrelevant. In the end there's this thing called integrity that rules above grammatical technicalities.

Amen. Sadly it doesn't count in business, but nontheless a true statement for personal living



I sell airplanes and airplane accessories
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10601 posts, RR: 14
Reply 40, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2802 times:

Quoting airportugal310 (Reply 39):
even though it's clear they botched the HND thing from the get-go.

I'd say it was the DOT that botched it, moreso than DL.

Quoting airportugal310 (Reply 39):
oting MSPNWA (Reply 21):Irrelevant. In the end there's this thing called integrity that rules above grammatical technicalities.
Amen. Sadly it doesn't count in business, but nontheless a true statement for personal living

And yet, he still didn't answer my question. Is there a statement in the route awards that says an airline MUST run that route or type of a/c on the route, forever? They have no right to drop a route or change equipment?



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinetravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3553 posts, RR: 0
Reply 41, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2775 times:

LAX-HND and Hawaii-HND are already very well-served. It sounds like it came down to SFO-HND or SEA-HND.

I don't understand why people think UA should have received SFO-HND. For the most part it seems people think DL was "sneaky" and shouldn't be rewarded with SEA-HND. But wasn't that DL's initial request -- SEA-HND before they were "forced" to do DTW-HND?

Sorry, I just don't think UA can claim "we have none of our own metal flying to HND so give it to us", while simultaneously trumpeting their ANA JV and saying "it doesn't matter who flies you across the Pacific, we share the revenue!" It's completely disingenuous.

Seattle has no non-stop HND service. SFO does. Ergo Seattle wins. It seems rather simple.

(BTW these slot restrictions are ridiculous and I hope they are eliminated soon. Airlines should be free to fly where and when they want, without the governments dictating IMO.)


User currently offlinepsa1011 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 316 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2768 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting commavia (Thread starter):
We tentatively find that Delta’s proposed service would further serve the public interest by providing a number of western cities with a first one-stop connecting opportunity to Haneda.27 We tentatively find in addition that other cities that now enjoy one-stop connections over more southerly gateways would gain the option of service over a less circuitous northwest gateway.

It's interesting how the DOT refers to Delta providing service to all of these western cities, albeit via codeshare. Was this decision based on Alaska's financial performance? I wonder how this may have turned out if the partner airline doing all of the domestic connection wasn't performing so well based on cash flow (e.g., American, VX). In any case, I think it's interesting that the decision does not even mention Alaska, even though it's such an important part of the argument.

I am also unclear on the "number of western cities" that will benefit from this - United already serves many of these cities from SFO. And yes it may mean backtracking, but only if, say, a Klamath Falls - SFO - HND flight, with layover, resulted in longer travel time than Klamath Falls - SEA - HND. For some of these smaller markets, frequency and connection time can be more important than backtracking slightly (in this case it's a difference of about 300 miles).

So in the end I can only really believe the argument that SEA is as yet unserved. I wonder how DOT will think about this once JAL/ANA start SEA as well.


User currently offlineMSPNWA From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1994 posts, RR: 2
Reply 43, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2686 times:

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 23):
Just what the hell does that statement mean?

Exactly what it says. Just because you can do it doesn't mean you should do it.

Throughout this whole HND slot process, the DOT, DL, and AA have deserved a heap of criticism for their actions. If they can't take the heat, it's their problem. You wonder how airlines, in this case, DL, sometimes get little respect? Respect is earned, not given away.

[Edited 2012-11-15 19:50:42]

User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10601 posts, RR: 14
Reply 44, posted (2 years 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2677 times:

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 43):
Respect is earned, not given away.

I'm thinking, that in your case, even THAT wouldn't work. Of course, you STILL haven't answered my question  



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinecarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2975 posts, RR: 3
Reply 45, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2598 times:

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 33):
To be exact, the AA SEA-NRT flight (which was 6/week always, incidentally) was discontinued in 12/2001 IIRC.

Correction, it was discontinued in Jan 2002. How do I know this, because I was on that last flight.


Perhaps DL will rescind their decision to upgauge the NRT-SEA from A333 to 744 and having double daily 763 on TYO-SEA.
Even though there maybe four flights in the near future on TYO-SEA, UA flew 744, AA with 777/MD11, and NW with 742 in the late-90s. With the smaller gauge aircraft, the number of seats being offered maybe almost the same.


User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6517 posts, RR: 9
Reply 46, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2565 times:

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 43):
Exactly what it says. Just because you can do it doesn't mean you should do it.

Ok with that statement. Now how about your claim about the US government being corrupt in awarding the route to DL?


User currently offlineFSDan From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 756 posts, RR: 2
Reply 47, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2565 times:

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 43):
You wonder how airlines, in this case, DL, sometimes get little respect? Respect is earned, not given away.

DL has earned my respect. First of all, I've never had a bad experience flying with them. But also, I definitely think DL is more innovative than any of the other legacy airlines in their network-planning department (e.g. leading other legacies in flying to Africa, while not being afraid to drop routes that aren't performing well financially (Europe)), their desire to actually please customers (e.g. 750-mile rule, leading the charge on getting rid of 50-seaters, investing in long-haul product and making sub-par facilities better), and their business in general (oil refinery, partnership with AS, even the in-flight safety videos).

That's just my take. I certainly don't dislike the other legacies, and they have all made their own innovative business decisions, but for me, DL sticks out a little above the rest, and for that, I respect them.



SEA SFO SJC LAX ONT SAN DEN IAH DFW OMA FSD MSP MSN MKE ORD DTW CVG MEM JAN BHM RSW ATL CLT BWI PHL LGA JFK MEX LIM KEF
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7972 posts, RR: 51
Reply 48, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2525 times:

I am obviously a Delta fan, but I try to be objective as possible. I really don't get the outrage. DL earns the route it didn't want as their #1 choice, they fly it as best as they can, it isn't making money, they downgrade equipment, still doesn't make money, so they ask the DOT to reconsider giving them SEA instead.

What's so outrageous? Why would DL fly a route bleeding money? I don't think there was a cynical plan to get SEA and I'm sure they'd rather have had DTW-HND make money and to avoid this whole debacle.

NOTHING wrong with asking an agency to consider. NOTHING wrong with downgrading equipment on a money losing route. I'm sure DL didn't plan to lose that money



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3432 posts, RR: 5
Reply 49, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2493 times:

Quoting carpethead (Reply 45):
Perhaps DL will rescind their decision to upgauge the NRT-SEA from A333 to 744 and having double daily 763 on TYO-SEA.

After they flew one into SEA a month or so back to make their "big announcement", if they do downgauge again, it will be another huge waste of resources, I thought flying a 744 to SEA from ATL just for that announcement was ridiculous anyway



AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17786 posts, RR: 46
Reply 50, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2484 times:

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 32):

Isn't ATLNRT now a 744 again? Upguaged at the beginning of the summer if memory serves me correctly.

Yes it is now.

Quoting carpethead (Reply 45):
Perhaps DL will rescind their decision to upgauge the NRT-SEA from A333 to 744 and having double daily 763 on TYO-SEA.

Given past performance, you can count on it 



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10601 posts, RR: 14
Reply 51, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2457 times:

Quoting carpethead (Reply 45):
Perhaps DL will rescind their decision to upgauge the NRT-SEA from A333 to 744 and having double daily 763 on TYO-SEA.

What decision? Surely you aren't taking that vague statement by Glen Hauenstein as a "decision"? As I mentioned before, members on A.net are reading more into it than it actually is.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17786 posts, RR: 46
Reply 52, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2467 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 51):
What decision? Surely you aren't taking that vague statement by Glen Hauenstein as a "decision"?

It's selling as a 744 this Summer  



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 53, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2472 times:

Let's start counting number of months before DL requests to shift the slot to HNL-HND or LAX-HND. As long as the slot times into/out of Haneda are atrocious, SEA-HND would have a tough time succeeding.

User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10601 posts, RR: 14
Reply 54, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2449 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 52):
Quoting mayor (Reply 51):What decision? Surely you aren't taking that vague statement by Glen Hauenstein as a "decision"?
It's selling as a 744 this Summer

My mistake.......wrong thread.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineflyPBA From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 55, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2474 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 53):

Let's start counting number of months before DL requests to shift the slot to HNL-HND or LAX-HND. As long as the slot times into/out of Haneda are atrocious, SEA-HND would have a tough time succeeding.

1. that is ridiculous ... Seattle can more than support this flight considering Delta is making Seattle their Asian gateway + Alaska connecting service

2. the slot times have nothing to do with Seattle ... and everything to do with that is when Japan has allowed these "extra" flights into HND regardless of where they originate.

3. Seattle is the closest US city in the lower 48 to Asia which makes it an efficient place to operate a flight to/from.


I really can't understand why so many people here think Seattle is a little parochial backwater ... we do have a few companies here that do a lot of business in Japan afterall (you know ... like Amazon, Starbucks, BCA, etc ...)


User currently offlineklkla From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 941 posts, RR: 0
Reply 56, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2464 times:

Quoting carpethead (Reply 45):
Perhaps DL will rescind their decision to upgauge the NRT-SEA from A333 to 744 and having double daily 763 on TYO-SEA.

From a customer standpoint DL's reconfigured 763 is just as comfortable as the reconfigured 744 so there is no doubt Delta will adjust capacity as needed. I would almost put money on it that both HND and NRT end up being 763 routes in the future and that's not necesarily a bad thing.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 53):
Let's start counting number of months before DL requests to shift the slot to HNL-HND or LAX-HND. As long as the slot times into/out of Haneda are atrocious, SEA-HND would have a tough time succeeding.

Why would they apply to switch to a market they already serve (LAX) or a market already served by another American carrier which would certainly be denied by DOT?


User currently offlinejet-lagged From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 877 posts, RR: 0
Reply 57, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2440 times:

Quoting flyPBA (Reply 55):

I really can't understand why so many people here think Seattle is a little parochial backwater ... we do have a few companies here that do a lot of business in Japan afterall (you know ... like Amazon, Starbucks, BCA, etc ...)
[/quote]


Weyerhaeuser, Costco, REI, Paccar, T-mobile, Microsoft . . . .

(ok, maybe not all in japan itself, but Seattle is an important place!)

[Edited 2012-11-16 19:57:34]

User currently offlinequiet1 From Thailand, joined Apr 2010, 358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 58, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2405 times:

IIRC, during the initial award of HND slots the DOT denied UA the SFO-HND route partly because UA proposed 777 equipment and DOT wanted maximum capacity on US carriers so awarded the slot to DL who proposed using 744s, no? And, now the DOT re-awards the slot to a DL 767? ??

User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 7
Reply 59, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2366 times:

Quoting quiet1 (Reply 58):
IIRC, during the initial award of HND slots the DOT denied UA the SFO-HND route partly because UA proposed 777 equipment and DOT wanted maximum capacity on US carriers so awarded the slot to DL who proposed using 744s, no? And, now the DOT re-awards the slot to a DL 767? ??

That wasn't a deciding factor as far as I know.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlinewedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5950 posts, RR: 6
Reply 60, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2365 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 52):
It's selling as a 744 this Summer

SEA-NRT is selling as a 744 for the Seattle peak-season only. It will most likely go back to an A333 after September. Also, the schedule for SEA-NRT and SEA-HND are almost opposite. I think AS connections alone could make this work.

It wouldn't surprise me if to see NH replace their 787 with 777-300ER equipment at the beginning of the summer season.

Quoting flyPBA (Reply 55):
2. the slot times have nothing to do with Seattle ... and everything to do with that is when Japan has allowed these "extra" flights into HND regardless of where they originate.

You are correct. But the timing in SEA will help also. The mid-morning to early-afternoon time slots for international airlines is pretty jam-packed. The S-gates can only handle so much. Even the late afternoon time-slots for international is pretty full during the summer.

I think the SEA-HND will do fine.


User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6517 posts, RR: 9
Reply 61, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2352 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 53):
Let's start counting number of months before DL requests to shift the slot to HNL-HND or LAX-HND. , SEA-HND would have a tough time succeeding.


I(f you were running Delta a yearfrom now, and decided the aircraft could make more profit from HNL or LAX would you not seek to drop SEA?. . RA does not play CEO board games as many on this forum appear to do. His job is to make DL as profitable as possible and the strategy appears to be working


User currently offlinedeltairlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8912 posts, RR: 12
Reply 62, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2340 times:

Quoting flyPBA (Reply 55):
2. the slot times have nothing to do with Seattle ... and everything to do with that is when Japan has allowed these "extra" flights into HND regardless of where they originate.

That being said, the slot times on SEA-HND are not as dire as DTW-HND.

When DTW-HND was running, it was a 700p-ish flight out of Detroit, landing in Haneda at about 10 pm. Return was an early morning 630a-ish flight. Great times for Tokyo originating traffic, but when that flight was more relying on connections from the US, it just wasn't plausible, considering it would mean someone from the States would need to pay for 2 nights hotel in Tokyo - not a small order considering the cost of such rooms.

At least with the West Coast flights, it's an early evening departure from LAX/SEA, arriving into Tokyo at night (so you still have the issue of paying for a night hotel on that first night). But on the return at least, you get a full day in Tokyo, then leave at midnight and you get back to the States in late afternoon - enough time to go have dinner and the evening in Seattle or LA, or plenty of time to make connections throughout the West Coast (as well as the redeye banks to the East Coast if so inclined).


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...
DOT Fines DL Connection(ASA) For Discrimination posted Wed May 2 2012 12:04:14 by LAXintl
DL SEA-CDG, Beginning 3/2012 posted Fri Nov 4 2011 13:52:26 by jetjack74
DOT Final Decision On HND Routes posted Tue Jul 6 2010 10:12:32 by deltal1011man
DL SEA-Hawaii posted Sat Feb 6 2010 12:10:10 by AlexInWa
DOT Approved DL-DJ Codeshare, Defers V Australia posted Thu Sep 3 2009 11:14:30 by LAXintl
US DOT Merges DL/NW Route Authorities posted Mon Dec 29 2008 15:42:34 by WorldTraveler
DOT Gives DL Slots To Launch DCA-SLC posted Wed Nov 27 2002 21:35:41 by FlyPNS1
DL 764 Landing At SEA Today. posted Sat Oct 20 2012 07:38:56 by wedgetail737
DL 777-200ER At SEA? posted Sat Sep 29 2012 09:31:57 by wedgetail737
How Does DL Make Money SEA-Asia, Close PDX-Asia posted Sat Sep 15 2012 12:40:09 by olddominion727