Help Me Understand This Delta Move — Civil Aviation Forum

Sponsor Message:


My Starred Topics \| Profile \| New Topic \| Forum Index \| Help \| Search

Help Me Understand This Delta Move

Boeing757/767 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 2264 posts, RR: 2
Posted (13 years 3 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 852 times:

Delta Air Lines today announced new 767-300 service between Hartford and JFK -- a whopping 100-mile flight.

The flight number continues on to Paris, but a change of plane is needed.

As a Connecticut resident, I'm all for more flights to Hartford. But in the time it takes to catch this flight and wait at JFK for European connections, you could drive to JFK.

Current connections involve Jetstream 41 commuters. Instead of these or the 767-300, why not replace them with regional jets coming into the DL network?

Anyway, why would Delta commit a 767-300 to this route considering the distance is so small?

Free-thinking, left-leaning secularist

5 replies: All unread, jump to last

FlyAA757 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 997 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (13 years 3 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 717 times:

My guess is that this aircraft would have just been sitting around anyway and that DL is now running VERY low on gate space in the afternoon/evening at JFK. It looks like theres a Delta 767-300 factory pumping those things out around the corner at 4/5/6PM at JFK!

FlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6049 posts, RR: 25
Reply 2, posted (13 years 3 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 691 times:

I think FlyAA is right....Delta needs to get that 767 out of the way....so why not send it on a little jaunt up to BDL (a fine airport might I add....the first time I ever flew was from BDL). It does seem wasteful and I bet it won't last for too long. Once other planes come on line, Delta will probably do some shuffling of aircraft.

CannedSpam From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (13 years 3 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 685 times:

I would say that DL is using this flight to reposition the aircraft for the Europe trip. AA does the same thing..although not on such a short distance. Since the aircraft needs to go from BDL to JFK, why not offer it as revenue service and market it as a onestop to Europe rather than send it as a ferry flight?

DeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8770 posts, RR: 13
Reply 4, posted (13 years 3 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 675 times:

Boston could use another. Currently, we have a 4:30 shuttle to LGA, 5:00 763 ER to JFK and a 72S to LGA at 5:30. The 763 goes to AMS (against NWA). I say the flight should go to BOS, then to JFK, then to Europe (Paris???)

Jeff

Bbinchi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (13 years 3 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 649 times:

I tend to agree with "CannedSpam". When I worked Res. for DL many years ago we had a late night L-1011 fly in to CVG (I think from ATL and it was nearly full every night) during the fall and winter months. Then the a/c laid over in CVG and went out with perhaps a 25% load factor to ORD around 08:00 the next day. But, from O'Hare, it went out chock full to PBI at around 0930.

It seemed to make no sense at all; we always thought why not operate that L10 ATL-ORD at night? We thought surely a late-night ATL-ORD L10 would make just as much money (maybe more) as ATL-CVG.

I guess DL figured if the a/c had to lay over somewhere why not make it CVG (so long as you could fill it up on that leg), put in on the short hop to ORD early the next morning (popular business run but not enough to fill all 302 seats on the L10 in those days) and make some more money? However, given the loads on that CVG-ORD run it seemed like any incremental revenue would have been offset by fuel/crew expenses and landing fees.

Bill

Top Of Page

Forum Index

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

Printer friendly format

Similar topics: