SRT75 wrote:

panamair wrote:

LAX-CDG 3x weekly 77L

Here we go again. An American carrier tries to fly to Paris from Los Angeles with its own metal. All have tried. All have failed.

Go daily or go home. 3x weekly is no use to the business traveller who will be the strength or weakness of the route.

Channex757 wrote:

SRT75 wrote:

panamair wrote:

LAX-CDG 3x weekly 77L

Here we go again. An American carrier tries to fly to Paris from Los Angeles with its own metal. All have tried. All have failed.

Go daily or go home. 3x weekly is no use to the business traveller who will be the strength or weakness of the route.

Don't forget that Air France also flies LAX-CDG, and that Delta and Air France are joint venture partners. It doesn't really matter if Delta only operates three times a week themselves, because Air France also provides regular service.

klm617 wrote:

lavalampluva wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

I see no indication at all the DL will not continue to utilize DTW as a major hub. Not only is your constant drama inappropriate on A.net, but it's not even accurate.

Be careful. I've been called a bully, by some, for saying similar things to him.

It is what it is in the USAToday article it lists every addition in the Delta press release except for the added DTW-CDG capacity.

I'd believe delta.com before USA Today.

lavalampluva wrote:

klm617 wrote:

lavalampluva wrote:

Be careful. I've been called a bully, by some, for saying similar things to him.

It is what it is in the USAToday article it lists every addition in the Delta press release except for the added DTW-CDG capacity.

I'd believe delta.com before USA Today.

+1
This is all getting a little ridiculous. Talk about spurious reasoning...
But to make it quite clear: Delta has a hub in Detroit. Delta will continue to have a hub in Detroit.
My goodness

I'm surprise Delta did not add more seasonal daily to Europe from its Atlanta hub.

klm617 wrote:

lavalampluva wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

I see no indication at all the DL will not continue to utilize DTW as a major hub. Not only is your constant drama inappropriate on A.net, but it's not even accurate.

Be careful. I've been called a bully, by some, for saying similar things to him.

It is what it is in the USAToday article it lists every addition in the Delta press release except for the added DTW-CDG capacity.

That is because DTW is not important. To anybody.

Delta's press release announces the added DTW-CDG service. Delta themselves say it's being added. does not matter AT ALL what USA Today says

KLDC10 wrote:

lavalampluva wrote:

klm617 wrote:

It is what it is in the USAToday article it lists every addition in the Delta press release except for the added DTW-CDG capacity.

I'd believe delta.com before USA Today.

+1
This is all getting a little ridiculous. Talk about spurious reasoning...
But to make it quite clear: Delta has a hub in Detroit. Delta will continue to have a hub in Detroit.
My goodness

klm617 wrote:

717atOGG wrote:

lavalampluva wrote:

Someone will really be happy that DTW is getting another daily international flight.

They'll be upset that they didn't get DTW-DUB or MAN though. Seriously however, great adds for DL and I can imagine that all these flights will do well.

Yes a new destination would have been better or even KLM taking over an AMS rotation but an extra CDG from DTW is really no big deal. I suspect maybe they will reduce DTW-AMS by one flight as Delta likes to keep the capacity flat at DTW so every add they is more often than not a reduction.

Although you’ll find a way to say this won’t happen, DL loaded schedules and capacity to AMS from DTW actually increases with 3x A333 and 1x A332 instead of 1x A333 and 3x A332.

DL just uploaded a bunch of S18 transatlantic changes today including most of the new services discussed in this thread except JFK-PDL and the JFK-LHR A330 changes. Some changes I noticed include:

JFK-CPH goes 764 from 763/752 last summer
JFK-SNN goes 752 from 763 last summer
JFK-ZRH goes A332 from 763 last summer
JFK-FRA goes 763 from 764 last summer
JFK-ATH goes 1xA333 daily and 1x764 daily from 2x A333 daily last summer
JFK-CDG goes A333 from 777 last summer
JFK-BCN goes A333 from 777 last summer
PIT-CDG goes 763 from 752 last summer
SEA-CDG goes 777 from 333 last summer
SEA-AMS goes 1x daily A333 and 1x 763 daily from 2x daily A333 last summer
ATL-FRA goes 763 from 764 last summer
ATL-ZRH goes 763 from 764 last summer
ATL-LHR goes 1x A333 and 1x A332 from 2x763 last summer
DTW-LHR goes 1x daily A332 and 1x daily 763 from 2x daily 763 last summer
DTW-FRA goes 1x 763 from 1x 764 or A332 last summer
DTW-AMS goes 3x A333 and 1x A332 from 3x A332 and 1x A333 last summer
DTW-CDG 2nd flight on 763 added
EWR-AMS still seems to be around as a 763.

panamair wrote:

DL just uploaded a bunch of S18 transatlantic changes today including most of the new services discussed in this thread except JFK-PDL and the JFK-LHR A330 changes. Some changes I noticed include:

JFK-CPH goes 764 from 763/752 last summer
JFK-SNN goes 752 from 763 last summer
JFK-ZRH goes A332 from 763 last summer
JFK-FRA goes 763 from 764 last summer
JFK-ATH goes 1xA333 daily and 1x764 daily from 2x A333 daily last summer
JFK-CDG goes A333 from 777 last summer
JFK-BCN goes A333 from 777 last summer
PIT-CDG goes 763 from 752 last summer
SEA-CDG goes 777 from 333 last summer
SEA-AMS goes 1x daily A333 and 1x 763 daily from 2x daily A333 last summer
ATL-FRA goes 763 from 764 last summer
ATL-ZRH goes 763 from 764 last summer
ATL-LHR goes 1x A333 and 1x A332 from 2x763 last summer
DTW-LHR goes 1x daily A332 and 1x daily 763 from 2x daily 763 last summer
DTW-FRA goes 1x 763 from 1x 764 or A332 last summer
DTW-AMS goes 3x A333 and 1x A332 from 3x A332 and 1x A333 last summer
DTW-CDG 2nd flight on 763 added
EWR-AMS still seems to be around as a 763.

That's a lot of A333 flights added, especially considering that JFK-LHR is going all 330. Some of the LHR flights must be 332. Either way there are some downguages or cuts that haven't been published.

Jeremy

SESGDL wrote:

That's a lot of A333 flights added, especially considering that JFK-LHR is going all 330. Some of the LHR flights must be 332. Either way there are some downguages or cuts that haven't been published.

Jeremy

I would guess that the LHR A330 services would all be on the A330-200. There will be A332s freeing up from SEA-HKG, DTW-PEK and multiple DTW-AMS.

panamair wrote:

DTW-CDG 2nd flight on 763 added

The original flight will go from a 333 to a 332, and in August go to a 76W. DTW-CDG next August will look like 2x 76W and 1x 777*

*Operated by Air France

SEA-CDG goes 777 from 333 last summer
SEA-AMS goes 1x daily A333 and 1x 763 daily from 2x daily A333 last summer

So I guess that DL won't be ending SEA-CDG. I think the second daily flight on AMS being downgauged to 763 from A332 was necessary due to the A330s being moved to JFK-LHR. I'm anxious to hear about TPAC changes on DL, if there will be any.

The 777 fleet rotation is interesting. The 77ER fleet is MSP-HND-LAX-HND-MSP-CDG-SEA-HKG-SEA-CDG-MSP, requiring seven aircraft. What doesn't add up is the 77L fleet when LAX-CDG/AMS starts on June 16. Delta runs out of 777s when ATL-PVG starts on July 20, with all aircraft operating and no spares. Delta is supposedly starting the 777 refurbishment next year with the goal of finishing by year end. In addition, Delta will supposedly have 11 A350-900s delivered by July 2018. I say supposedly as six were scheduled for this year but it appears the sixth aircraft won't be delivered until January. Anyone guessing with route(s) will switch the A350-900? Off the top of my head I'd say ATL-NRT or DTW-PVG, possibly both if Delta were to get creative with timings with PEK/PVG, as they have in the past due to their close relationship with MU.

SESGDL wrote:

panamair wrote:

DL just uploaded a bunch of S18 transatlantic changes today including most of the new services discussed in this thread except JFK-PDL and the JFK-LHR A330 changes. Some changes I noticed include:

JFK-CPH goes 764 from 763/752 last summer
JFK-SNN goes 752 from 763 last summer
JFK-ZRH goes A332 from 763 last summer
JFK-FRA goes 763 from 764 last summer
JFK-ATH goes 1xA333 daily and 1x764 daily from 2x A333 daily last summer
JFK-CDG goes A333 from 777 last summer
JFK-BCN goes A333 from 777 last summer
PIT-CDG goes 763 from 752 last summer
SEA-CDG goes 777 from 333 last summer
SEA-AMS goes 1x daily A333 and 1x 763 daily from 2x daily A333 last summer
ATL-FRA goes 763 from 764 last summer
ATL-ZRH goes 763 from 764 last summer
ATL-LHR goes 1x A333 and 1x A332 from 2x763 last summer
DTW-LHR goes 1x daily A332 and 1x daily 763 from 2x daily 763 last summer
DTW-FRA goes 1x 763 from 1x 764 or A332 last summer
DTW-AMS goes 3x A333 and 1x A332 from 3x A332 and 1x A333 last summer
DTW-CDG 2nd flight on 763 added
EWR-AMS still seems to be around as a 763.

That's a lot of A333 flights added, especially considering that JFK-LHR is going all 330. Some of the LHR flights must be 332. Either way there are some downguages or cuts that haven't been published.

Jeremy

Also a number of 764 flights gone, unless those are on SA routes.

DeSpringbokke wrote:

The 777 fleet rotation is interesting. The 77ER fleet is MSP-HND-LAX-HND-MSP-CDG-SEA-HKG-SEA-CDG-MSP, requiring seven aircraft. What doesn't add up is the 77L fleet when LAX-CDG/AMS starts on June 16. Delta runs out of 777s when ATL-PVG starts on July 20, with all aircraft operating and no spares. Delta is supposedly starting the 777 refurbishment next year with the goal of finishing by year end. In addition, Delta will supposedly have 11 A350-900s delivered by July 2018. I say supposedly as six were scheduled for this year but it appears the sixth aircraft won't be delivered until January. Anyone guessing with route(s) will switch the A350-900? Off the top of my head I'd say ATL-NRT or DTW-PVG, possibly both if Delta were to get creative with timings with PEK/PVG, as they have in the past due to their close relationship with MU.

We speculated before that MSP-HND and HND-LAX could be run with heavy 242T A333s. If flexibility is needed it might come from there. Or yeah, A359. DL will have plenty of capacity. I agree with you A350 will gravitate to the longest routes in DL's system in order to get max fuel savings. DTW-PVG is a long ride. Longest I have ever done. 7200 mi+. Or of course they could send it LAX-Sydney. Probably more likely. DL has the highest unit fuel burn of anyone in that market.

panamair wrote:

except JFK-PDL

Funny enough, if you go to a site like Expedia you can see Delta did load JFK-PDL this weekend as scheduled. Problem seems to be that PDL wasn't added as a destination to delta.com, and therefore you can't search for it or buy it directly from Delta yet. Oops!

jbs2886 wrote:

Also a number of 764 flights gone, unless those are on SA routes.

I only listed some changes. There are still many other 764 flights out there with no changes from last summer such as:
JFK-NCE
JFK-VCE
JFK-PRG
JFK-DUB
JFK-MAD
ATL-VCE
ATL-MXP
ATL-MAD
ATL-MUC
ATL-DUS
ATL-EZE
ATL-LIM
Also they are being used domestically on JFK-LAX

panamair wrote:

jbs2886 wrote:

Also a number of 764 flights gone, unless those are on SA routes.

I only listed some changes. There are still many other 764 flights out there with no changes from last summer such as:
JFK-NCE
JFK-VCE
JFK-PRG
JFK-DUB
JFK-MAD
ATL-VCE
ATL-MXP
ATL-MAD
ATL-MUC
ATL-DUS
ATL-EZE
ATL-LIM
Also they are being used domestically on JFK-LAX

I meant that a number of the changes you listed were switching aircraft from 764s to other types, consequently, it is curious where those planes will be used.

klm617 wrote:

jbs2886 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

I read that artical twice and unless I'm mussing something there is no mention of the additional DTW-CDG flight go figure.

USA Today must be implying that the DL DTW hub is dead and unimportant.

Show lack of respect for the Detroit hub even in the mainstream media unimportant yes but dead no.

From what I've seen, DTW is full of emotionally unstable teenagers...

I kid, but another DTW a.netter actually talked to me about you. People aren't pleased with your constant moaping

jubguy3 wrote:

From what I've seen, DTW is full of emotionally unstable teenagers...

I kid, but another DTW a.netter actually talked to me about you. People aren't pleased with your constant moaping

From my own experience (as recently as last month), it's full of airplanes and passengers. Because it's a hub, dammit!

I'm not surprised that more reasonable DTW a.netters are getting annoyed with this whole thing. It's only been a couple of days since I discovered the odd, distorted world of the DTW fanboy, but I've already read enough nonsense to last the rest of the year. I've done my best to answer their accusations, but it's like talking to a brick wall - facts simply don't matter; there must always be a conspiracy.

Flighty wrote:

We speculated before that MSP-HND and HND-LAX could be run with heavy 242T A333s.

LAX is already going to the A333 for this winter but goes back to the 777 for the summer. MSP is still a 777 throughout.

Sightseer wrote:

Flighty wrote:

We speculated before that MSP-HND and HND-LAX could be run with heavy 242T A333s.

LAX is already going to the A333 for this winter but goes back to the 777 for the summer. MSP is still a 777 throughout.

Just curious, if DL changes aircraft, will they need the approval of the DOT so AA doesn't cry foul?

11725Flyer wrote:

Sightseer wrote:

Flighty wrote:

We speculated before that MSP-HND and HND-LAX could be run with heavy 242T A333s.

LAX is already going to the A333 for this winter but goes back to the 777 for the summer. MSP is still a 777 throughout.

Just curious, if DL changes aircraft, will they need the approval of the DOT so AA doesn't cry foul?

Nope, it’s about the same capacity anyways. AA is putting smaller aircraft in new routes in any event (772s to 789s).

11725Flyer wrote:

Sightseer wrote:

Flighty wrote:

We speculated before that MSP-HND and HND-LAX could be run with heavy 242T A333s.

LAX is already going to the A333 for this winter but goes back to the 777 for the summer. MSP is still a 777 throughout.

Just curious, if DL changes aircraft, will they need the approval of the DOT so AA doesn't cry foul?

I think a switch to the A333 or A350 (down the road) should be fine since both of those are larger than the 777 in DL's configuration.

KLDC10 wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

From what I've seen, DTW is full of emotionally unstable teenagers...

I kid, but another DTW a.netter actually talked to me about you. People aren't pleased with your constant moaping

From my own experience (as recently as last month), it's full of airplanes and passengers. Because it's a hub, dammit!

I'm not surprised that more reasonable DTW a.netters are getting annoyed with this whole thing. It's only been a couple of days since I discovered the odd, distorted world of the DTW fanboy, but I've already read enough nonsense to last the rest of the year. I've done my best to answer their accusations, but it's like talking to a brick wall - facts simply don't matter; there must always be a conspiracy.

Its both funny and sad... because I'm sure the vast majority of detroit a.netters are reasonable people but when the select few act confused that detroit isn't a Global Mega hub already... Detroit has service to an amazing amount of asian destinations, lots of capacity to europe, an amazing terminal building, and can be described as doing quite well in what is otherwise a struggling market... do they not understand that almost every single other market in the US feels the same way about "missing out" on flights? DTW is doing pretty well if you ask me...

jubguy3 wrote:

KLDC10 wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

From what I've seen, DTW is full of emotionally unstable teenagers...

I kid, but another DTW a.netter actually talked to me about you. People aren't pleased with your constant moaping

From my own experience (as recently as last month), it's full of airplanes and passengers. Because it's a hub, dammit!

I'm not surprised that more reasonable DTW a.netters are getting annoyed with this whole thing. It's only been a couple of days since I discovered the odd, distorted world of the DTW fanboy, but I've already read enough nonsense to last the rest of the year. I've done my best to answer their accusations, but it's like talking to a brick wall - facts simply don't matter; there must always be a conspiracy.

Its both funny and sad... because I'm sure the vast majority of detroit a.netters are reasonable people but when the select few act confused that detroit isn't a Global Mega hub already... Detroit has service to an amazing amount of asian destinations, lots of capacity to europe, an amazing terminal building, and can be described as doing quite well in what is otherwise a struggling market... do they not understand that almost every single other market in the US feels the same way about "missing out" on flights? DTW is doing pretty well if you ask me...

Rumors are the DSM-6 will be adding "DTW Dysphoria" because it's too big to ignore.

jubguy3 wrote:

KLDC10 wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

From what I've seen, DTW is full of emotionally unstable teenagers...

I kid, but another DTW a.netter actually talked to me about you. People aren't pleased with your constant moaping

From my own experience (as recently as last month), it's full of airplanes and passengers. Because it's a hub, dammit!

I'm not surprised that more reasonable DTW a.netters are getting annoyed with this whole thing. It's only been a couple of days since I discovered the odd, distorted world of the DTW fanboy, but I've already read enough nonsense to last the rest of the year. I've done my best to answer their accusations, but it's like talking to a brick wall - facts simply don't matter; there must always be a conspiracy.

Its both funny and sad... because I'm sure the vast majority of detroit a.netters are reasonable people but when the select few act confused that detroit isn't a Global Mega hub already... Detroit has service to an amazing amount of asian destinations, lots of capacity to europe, an amazing terminal building, and can be described as doing quite well in what is otherwise a struggling market... do they not understand that almost every single other market in the US feels the same way about "missing out" on flights? DTW is doing pretty well if you ask me...

And that's a very common misconception here on a.net this market is not struggling it's being suppressed.

klm617 wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

KLDC10 wrote:

From my own experience (as recently as last month), it's full of airplanes and passengers. Because it's a hub, dammit!

I'm not surprised that more reasonable DTW a.netters are getting annoyed with this whole thing. It's only been a couple of days since I discovered the odd, distorted world of the DTW fanboy, but I've already read enough nonsense to last the rest of the year. I've done my best to answer their accusations, but it's like talking to a brick wall - facts simply don't matter; there must always be a conspiracy.

Its both funny and sad... because I'm sure the vast majority of detroit a.netters are reasonable people but when the select few act confused that detroit isn't a Global Mega hub already... Detroit has service to an amazing amount of asian destinations, lots of capacity to europe, an amazing terminal building, and can be described as doing quite well in what is otherwise a struggling market... do they not understand that almost every single other market in the US feels the same way about "missing out" on flights? DTW is doing pretty well if you ask me...

And that's a very common misconception here on a.net this market is not struggling it's being suppressed.

HAHAHA. I knew you were going to go for that. Detroit is certainly rebounding and i pity the people who discount detroit's strengths but they're rebounding from a bad place. I actually have family in detroit and have spent a bit of time there. Detroit's economy faltered because the industries that bolstered its economic strength left... we are seeing much of the same thing in coal towns across PA and WV. The fact that detroit operates such an amazing airport with such a large amount of international traffic is something that i find amazing, not something to use to attack detroit for why its amazing that it has said service. For example, detroit is the only airport in the CONUS that has service to nagoya.

What is the difference between "struggling" and "suppressed"? You picked your own synonym, good for you?

jubguy3 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

Its both funny and sad... because I'm sure the vast majority of detroit a.netters are reasonable people but when the select few act confused that detroit isn't a Global Mega hub already... Detroit has service to an amazing amount of asian destinations, lots of capacity to europe, an amazing terminal building, and can be described as doing quite well in what is otherwise a struggling market... do they not understand that almost every single other market in the US feels the same way about "missing out" on flights? DTW is doing pretty well if you ask me...

And that's a very common misconception here on a.net this market is not struggling it's being suppressed.

HAHAHA. I knew you were going to go for that. Detroit is certainly rebounding and i pity the people who discount detroit's strengths but they're rebounding from a bad place. I actually have family in detroit and have spent a bit of time there. Detroit's economy faltered because the industries that bolstered its economic strength left... we are seeing much of the same thing in coal towns across PA and WV. The fact that detroit operates such an amazing airport with such a large amount of international traffic is something that i find amazing, not something to use to attack detroit for why its amazing that it has said service. For example, detroit is the only airport in the CONUS that has service to nagoya.

What is the difference between "struggling" and "suppressed"? You picked your own synonym, good for you?

No, this poster believes DL is intentionally "suppressing" DTW growth and that if DL weren't there it would be a hub like ATL. Obviously UA and/or AA would leave ORD just to take over DTW. Or some other airline completely changes strategy to create a mega-hub that DTW deserves! This poster is relentless and single-handedly ruining this forum.

jbs2886 wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

And that's a very common misconception here on a.net this market is not struggling it's being suppressed.

HAHAHA. I knew you were going to go for that. Detroit is certainly rebounding and i pity the people who discount detroit's strengths but they're rebounding from a bad place. I actually have family in detroit and have spent a bit of time there. Detroit's economy faltered because the industries that bolstered its economic strength left... we are seeing much of the same thing in coal towns across PA and WV. The fact that detroit operates such an amazing airport with such a large amount of international traffic is something that i find amazing, not something to use to attack detroit for why its amazing that it has said service. For example, detroit is the only airport in the CONUS that has service to nagoya.

What is the difference between "struggling" and "suppressed"? You picked your own synonym, good for you?

No, this poster believes DL is intentionally "suppressing" DTW growth and that if DL weren't there it would be a hub like ATL. Obviously UA and/or AA would leave ORD just to take over DTW. Or some other airline completely changes strategy to create a mega-hub that DTW deserves! This poster is relentless and single-handedly ruining this forum.

Oh ok that makes more sense. I don't know if he is having trouble comprehending what I'm saying but I just said that DTW is actually doing fairly well considering the market... lol.

If I keep teasing him that my home airport SLC has a KLM flight on the 787 and his doesn't will he go away? Or become more relentlessly ignorant?

jbs2886 wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

And that's a very common misconception here on a.net this market is not struggling it's being suppressed.

HAHAHA. I knew you were going to go for that. Detroit is certainly rebounding and i pity the people who discount detroit's strengths but they're rebounding from a bad place. I actually have family in detroit and have spent a bit of time there. Detroit's economy faltered because the industries that bolstered its economic strength left... we are seeing much of the same thing in coal towns across PA and WV. The fact that detroit operates such an amazing airport with such a large amount of international traffic is something that i find amazing, not something to use to attack detroit for why its amazing that it has said service. For example, detroit is the only airport in the CONUS that has service to nagoya.

What is the difference between "struggling" and "suppressed"? You picked your own synonym, good for you?

No, this poster believes DL is intentionally "suppressing" DTW growth and that if DL weren't there it would be a hub like ATL. Obviously UA and/or AA would leave ORD just to take over DTW. Or some other airline completely changes strategy to create a mega-hub that DTW deserves! This poster is relentless and single-handedly ruining this forum.

Again moderators, can we please block / suspend these trolls! If not, please let me know how to cancel my membership. This forum was useful and informative, but a few trolls have destroyed it, and the common threat is the busiest airport in Michigan.

Thank you!

So is Delta’s EWR-AMS staying or ?
Press release states suspended (no date given )
But the flight continues to be for sale through out the summer.
Anyone have further information?

cokepopper wrote:

So is Delta’s EWR-AMS staying or ?
Press release states suspended (no date given )
But the flight continues to be for sale through out the summer.
Anyone have further information?

I was wondering the same thing... I'm also wondering why the JFK-LHR A330 change wouldn't have been loaded with the rest of these. Some current A330 routes will need to move to 767s if they are really going to upgauge the JFK-LHR flights (since as published today the schedule requires 10 out of 11 332s and 31 out of 31 333s...).

Regarding the 764s, as of now it looks like there will be 1x daily on JFK-SFO and 4x daily on JFK-LAX. The schedule would require 1 764 to RON at LAX and 3 to RON at JFK. So the 764 utilization is still 20 out of 21 like this past summer.

Like others have said, I would expect ATL-NRT to transition to the 359 before ATL-PVG starts in July. As is, 10 out of 10 frames would be required to fly LAX-CDG/AMS, LAX-PVG, LAX-SYD, DTW-PVG, ATL-JNB, ATL-AMS, and ATL-NRT in June.

As someone who lives in PIT now, I'm utterly shocked at the capacity increases to the EU in the last year and next year with this DL add. From what I've read, WW is going gangbusters here, having expanded their flights to daily in peak and going year round less than daily. I'm even more shocked that Condor is coming back next year at 3x a week for a longer season given the operational snafus that seemed to plague their introduction. Additionally, having flow DL CDG-PIT a couple times and never seeing it full, I'm surprised they're going 763. I suppose a larger Delta One cabin might be the reason, though, as the 16 seats on the 752 seemed to always be full. Although, I suppose to could be a competitive response to a competitor having longhaul widebody service, too.

As for all the DTW posts on here, it's certainly a market that Delta constrains from a pricepoint for connecting traffic, but I'm not sure I'd say they constrain local traffic much/if at all. Just as an example, from PIT, nonsensical connections over ATL/LGA/JFK abound, when for most routings, DTW would be far more efficient as it's the closest hub to PIT. It is what it is, though, and the markets are clearly loaded for local demand rather than connecting demand. There surely isn't much demand for n/s PIT-DTW when you can drive it in 4.5 hours, but surely there's a ton more connecting demand than they load. That said, they also don't have to compete on the route, whereas they do on PIT-ATL/LGA/JFK. It seems to me that it's much more complicated than some market vendetta.

If anybody and everybody thinks that their city is getting more TATL flights, I guess I should contribute? SLC.

I'd like to see Delta (or KLM) to add another AMS flight and make LHR year round. I'd also like to see Frankfurt on DL. I'd imagine that any of those would have a little better chance of coming to fruition seeing as that SLC is a an actual Delta hub...

jubguy3 wrote:

I'd like to see Delta (or KLM) to add another AMS flight

They both already fly SLC-AMS already.

LAX772LR wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

I'd like to see Delta (or KLM) to add another AMS flight

They both already fly SLC-AMS already.

Yikes, lol I am aware of that... I fly on both of them to AMS probably 10 times a year minimum. I was implying that I wanted another AMS fight (key: another) because all TATL flights leave Salt Lake City after 6:00 I believe, which sometimes isn't very convenient. So a morning flight would be more useful.

However AMS and CDG see almost exactly the same number of PAX each year (the most recent data I found was 2016, so this may not be accurate considering when KLM added). If anything I would expect DL or possibly AF (and yes i know i fought a bunch of people about this earlier, SLC is a SkyTeam hub, it's more likely to end up with AF just like it did with KLM) to add SLC. Or to continue shuttling PAX through Amsterdam and make the KLM flight daily??? I know delta has stated expanding European capacity is a priority in SLC so hopefully something comes to fruition as the recent TATL flights mature.

jubguy3 wrote:

because all TATL flights leave Salt Lake City after 6:00 I believe, which sometimes isn't very convenient. So a morning flight would be more useful.

1) that's not accurate, as the CDG flight leaves earlier than that.

2) there's a reason that they, like nearly all US originating TATL flights, leave in the afternoon/evening... because only markets with EXTREMELY high percentages of high-yielding O&D can support morning eastbound TATL operations.

You can count the gateways on one hand that have them, and even fewer of them have such flights year-round.
SLC is not likely be to among them, any time soon.

FSDan wrote:

Regarding the 764s, as of now it looks like there will be 1x daily on JFK-SFO and 4x daily on JFK-LAX. The schedule would require 1 764 to RON at LAX and 3 to RON at JFK. So the 764 utilization is still 20 out of 21 like this past summer.

Correction to my earlier post: there would only need to be 2x 764s resting overnight at JFK, with one inbound on a redeye from LAX. Utilization is still 20 out of 21, though.

LAX772LR wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

because all TATL flights leave Salt Lake City after 6:00 I believe, which sometimes isn't very convenient. So a morning flight would be more useful.

1) that's not accurate, as the CDG flight leaves earlier than that.

2) there's a reason that they, like nearly all US originating TATL flights, leave in the afternoon/evening... because only markets with EXTREMELY high percentages of high-yielding O&D can support morning eastbound TATL operations.

You can count the gateways on one hand that have them, and even fewer of them have such flights year-round.
SLC is not likely be to among them, any time soon.

Yikes, didn't realize that. Thanks for the info.

Something that I will point out... one of the AMS and the CDG flights both come in within 5 minutes of each other I believe??? It puts an incredible amount of strain on FIS. Even 15-20 minutes apart would be better in my opinion.

jubguy3 wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

because all TATL flights leave Salt Lake City after 6:00 I believe, which sometimes isn't very convenient. So a morning flight would be more useful.

1) that's not accurate, as the CDG flight leaves earlier than that.

2) there's a reason that they, like nearly all US originating TATL flights, leave in the afternoon/evening... because only markets with EXTREMELY high percentages of high-yielding O&D can support morning eastbound TATL operations.

You can count the gateways on one hand that have them, and even fewer of them have such flights year-round.
SLC is not likely be to among them, any time soon.

Yikes, didn't realize that. Thanks for the info.

Something that I will point out... one of the AMS and the CDG flights both come in within 5 minutes of each other I believe??? It puts an incredible amount of strain on FIS. Even 15-20 minutes apart would be better in my opinion.

Not quite, there have been some changes over the last year or so with service increases. A brief history, at least as I've observed it:

When DL first started operating the AMS flight it was scheduled around the same time as the CDG flight (the arrival times might have been offset by a little, but I can't remember; I know they departed the same time for a while). When KLM started their flight last summer, they operated pretty much the same schedule, and I believe that was when DL moved theirs to an earlier one, which they've used ever since. Meanwhile, KLM has since moved to a really late schedule, which changed when they restarted the flight this summer on the 789. LHR is also a later flight, and CDG departs around the same time but arrives a little earlier than before. So this is what the schedule roughly looks like now:

DL57 from AMS arrives ~12:30, DL56 to AMS departs ~15:00
DL107 from CDG arrives ~13:30, DL106 to CDG departs ~17:00
DL51 from LHR arrives ~17:30, DL50 to LHR departs ~20:30
KL609 from AMS arrives ~19:00, KL610 to AMS departs ~21:00

Generally, though, the few times I've done FIS at SLC it's always moved pretty quickly, certainly much faster than any other airport I've gone through, so even with two arrivals I doubt it would get too terrible.

And FWIW, I thought the really late schedule on KLM was better than the in-the-middle one they had last year, it gave me the whole morning and then some before I had to get on my connecting flight, and I got home close to a respectable bedtime, which made jet lag a breeze

Edit: made the schedule easier to read

I see the new DL JFK-GLA managed almost 90% loads on some of their new seasonal route, often carrying more than the established UA to EWR. With the latters winter withdrawal, wondered if DL would consider year round GLA?