UAL#1fan
Topic Author
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun May 27, 2001 12:32 pm

UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:47 am

Northwest serves more destinations, but United has more nonstop flights from the U.S. I would think UA is more dominant, but NW may generate a lot of intra-Asia flights.

So which airline carries more passengers to Asia? How do the other U.S. airlines stack up against these two? I know AA is coming up fast.

Finally, should we expect more expansion in Asia from either UA or NW in the near future?
United Air Lines -Mainliners Coast to Coast
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 20476
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:05 am

According to DOT stats, between Jan-October 2005 the NW vs UA Pacific operations compare as follows;

PAX
NW - 4,471,400
UA - 4,151,000

PRK's
NW - 27,966,809,000
UA - 34,988,331,000

ASK's
NW - 31,878,430,000
UA - 42,944,485,000

Load Factor:
NW - 87.7%
UA - 81.5%

FTK's
NW - 1,592,513,000
UA - 945,940,000

So, basically with the exception of Freight operations, United has a significantly larger Pacific network, however NWA carries more people as a result of its higher load factor.

From other reports I have seen, United also enjoys a consistent revenue yield premium over NW going back several years.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4485
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:15 am

The latest figures by Air Transport World for passengers carried Trans Pacific
1. NW -4,904,000
2. UA -4,554,000
3. AA--797,000

Revenue passenger kilometers
1. UA-38,298,929,000
2. NW -30,444,822,000
3. AA--7,910,047,000

Frieght Ton kilometers
1. NW-1,763,338,000
2. UA-1,043,718,000
3. AA--448,741,000

Figures are for Jan-Nov 2005
Numbers for UA include Australia, which really isn't Asia.
Numbers do not include numbers for India (which is in Asia)for any carrier.
 
UAL#1fan
Topic Author
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun May 27, 2001 12:32 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:13 am

I've often wondered why NW doesn't add more nonstop routes to Asia?

Perhaps DTW/MSP-PEK, MSP-HKG, or MSP-PVG?
United Air Lines -Mainliners Coast to Coast
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5042
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:15 am

Quoting UAL#1fan (Reply 3):
I've often wondered why NW doesn't add more nonstop routes to Asia?

They dont have enough planes to do so right now, the 787 should open a lot of doors for things like that again.
 
commavia
Posts: 10087
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:32 am

Quoting UAL#1fan (Thread starter):
Northwest serves more destinations, but United has more nonstop flights from the U.S. I would think UA is more dominant, but NW may generate a lot of intra-Asia flights.

I have often said -- sometimes to flames from others here on A.net -- that in the long-run, United's strategy will be more successful in the future, with more prospects for growth and profitability.

Increasingly, as more and more flights shift to smaller aircraft with longer range, traditional hubs are being overflown as markets grow, airlines that are better positioned to capture this growth are going to be more successful. Personally, I think United's strategy (along with AA's and CO's) lends itself much more to this trend than Northwest's.

Northwest continues to use very large aircraft (many 747s) to funnel traffic through an old-style hub in Narita, whereas UA is using more and more smaller 777s to overfly Narita and other traditional Pacific hubs and connecting points (mostly in Japan) and serve markets nonstop. That means emerging markets like Korea, Hong Kong, China, and Vietnam (I know it's not nonstop, but neither carrier has the plane to serve it nonstop).

In the long-run, Northwest is always going to be able to operate a hub at Narita. There is huge O&D there, Northwest has a huge presence in the market, good brand penetration and a loyal FF base, and lots of flights from U.S. gateways and hubs. However, I think that as time goes on, Northwest is going to have to continue to shrink its aircraft size out of NRT to more A330s and 757s (especially 757s) and less and less 747s. The reason is that in the future, United is going to be able to transit more people, from more cities, through its U.S. hubs, whereas Northwest is only going to be able to transit people over its Japanese hubs from cities than can support a nonstop to Tokyo. In addition, most people would rather connect in their home country, thus why AA, CO, and United will ultimately be more successful in capturing Asia-bound connecting traffic offering connections over, say, DFW, IAH or ORD, versus NRT, NGO or KIX. Just my $.02.

Quoting UAL#1fan (Thread starter):
How do the other U.S. airlines stack up against these two? I know AA is coming up fast.

AA is definitely the next largest U.S. carrier to Asia after these two. CO has much more capacity to Asia overall, but most of it is operated by AirMike from GUM, and not from the U.S. mainland. AA has 8 daily 777s from the U.S. nonstop to Asia, compared with 4 for CO and 1 for DL.
 
102IAHexpress
Posts: 898
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 6:33 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:39 am

How does CO stack up when taking to account their Air Mike operations?
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13267
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:44 am

Quoting Commavia (Reply 5):
AA has 8 daily 777s from the U.S. nonstop to Asia, compared with 4 for CO and 1 for DL.

If you include the Honolulu-Nagoya route and the EWR-Dehli route CO has 6 nonstops from "the US" to Asia, eight if you include Tel Aviv which is technically in Asia.

Tokyo:
EWR 1 777, IAH 1 777, Guam 3 (767-400, 737-800)

Hong Kong:
EWR 1 777, Guam 1 737-800

Beijing:
EWR 1 777

Nagoya:
Honolulu 1 767-400, Guam 2 737-800

Delhi:
EWR 1 777

Tel Aviv:
EWR 2 777
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
HNL
Posts: 439
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 1:51 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:47 am

Do those UA numbers include the South Pacific flights too?
HNL - There's no place like it!
 
commavia
Posts: 10087
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:47 am

Quoting STT757 (Reply 7):
If you include the Honolulu-Nagoya route and the EWR-Dehli route CO has 6 nonstops from "the US" to Asia, eight if you include Tel Aviv which is technically in Asia.

I was referring more to the Far East and Pacific.
 
Jano
Posts: 747
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2004 1:48 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:48 am

Regarding NW strategy in Asia: We have to take into account that NW is getting B787s starting in 2008 at a rate of 6 aircraft per year until 2010. Plus they have options for 50 more. And those 18 B787s are going to be used for non-stop routes to various points in Asia. Thus NW will start eliminating UA's comparative advantage of non-stop routes while still maintaining its hub in NRT and funneling some of the traffic through there.
The Widget Air Line :)
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 20476
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:49 am

Again my DOT stats are only Jan-Oct05;

Air Micronesia
Pax - 1,273,000
RPK - 4,092,704,000
ASK - 5,618,279,000
FTK - 65,951,000
Load factor - 72.8%

Continental Pacific Ops
Pax - 427,000
RPK - 5,029,987,000
ASK - 6,496,819,000
FTK - 157,560,000
Load factor - 77.4%

So overall, when both CO and Air Mike are added together they would come in 3rd place compared to NWA and UAL.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:53 am

One thing not to forget is that United has a first clas cabin. This is a huge source of revenue over Northwest. UA can survive with lower load factors if it demands a premium. I think UA and NW compete well and will continue to be the dominant carriers.

UA to some degree has more room to expand. NW lacks a good hub for nonstop flights from the United States. UA has SFO, which is great for connecting people. I think with time, UA will add more nonstop flights from SFO. I just think that there is more growth opportunities from SFO since there are no slot restrictions like NW at NRT and UA can offer service between more cities with a single stopover. With NW you often have to stop twice from much of the country. This is not desirable at all for high yielding passengers.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
MalpensaSFO
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:17 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:54 am

Quoting UAL#1fan (Reply 3):
I've often wondered why NW doesn't add more nonstop routes to Asia?

Unfortunately it has been tried and failed:

LAX-HKG
SEA-HKG

LAX-KIX
MSP-KIX
SEA-KIX

HNL-NGO

JFK-NRT
LAS-NRT
ANC-NRT

DTW-PEK

LAX-SEL
ORD-SEL
SEA-SEL
MSP-SEL

Quoting Commavia (Reply 5):
Northwest continues to use very large aircraft (many 747s) to funnel traffic through an old-style hub in Narita, whereas UA is using more and more smaller 777s to overfly Narita and other traditional Pacific hubs and connecting points (mostly in Japan) and serve markets nonstop.

DTW-NRT
NW 744

HNL-NRT
NW 744
UA 772

LAX-NRT
UA 744
NW 742

JFK-NRT
UA 772

MSP-NRT
NW 744

ORD-NRT
UA 744

PDX-NRT
NW 332

SEA-NRT
UA 772
NW 332

SFO-NRT
UA 744
NW 332

Quoting Commavia (Reply 5):
That means emerging markets like Korea, Hong Kong, China, and Vietnam (I know it's not nonstop, but neither carrier has the plane to serve it nonstop).

yet only one airline serves all four..  wink 
TO FLY IS TO SERVE
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 10:05 am

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 13):
HNL-NRT
NW 744
UA 772

LAX-NRT
UA 744
NW 742

Reverse those. NW moved the JFK-NRT 744 to LAX when they suspended that route and HNL-NRT is a 742.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
B6FA4ever
Posts: 752
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 6:49 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 10:15 am

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 13):
LAX-NRT
UA 744
NW 742

i thought NW was now using a B747-400 on the LAX-NRT route...? unless i'm smokin something i shouldn't *LOL*

~B6FA4ever
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 20476
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 10:23 am

Quoting B6FA4ever (Reply 15):
i thought NW was now using a B747-400 on the LAX-NRT route...? unless i'm smokin something i shouldn't *LOL*

The -200 clunker is back. NW returned a few -400s during its Ch11 process forcing the return of the -200 for most of the past winter.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
SESGDL
Posts: 2621
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 6:25 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 10:32 am

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 13):
LAX-HKG
SEA-HKG

LAX-KIX
MSP-KIX
SEA-KIX

HNL-NGO

JFK-NRT
LAS-NRT
ANC-NRT

DTW-PEK

LAX-SEL
ORD-SEL
SEA-SEL
MSP-SEL

NW also flew MSP-HKG in the late 90s. It didn't last long.

Jeremy
 
centrair
Posts: 2845
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:44 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 10:58 am

Commavia. You have a very good point there about NW and their strategy.

To me it seems that NW got the 744s but didn't want something between the DC10 and the 744. They have the 777 in the Pilot contracts (I think they did who knows now) but decided it was too big as a replacement for the DC10. Thus the A333 and A332.

The 787 is the key here. They have one of the larger orders for the type and I think they will be used to go up against the competition from UA, CO, AA as well as the Asian carriers that will start expanding with smaller aircraft.

I have said many times that I think the 747 will be phased out. Not 100% but will be phased. It will make no sense to have 747s flying from DTW and MSP to Asia when you can do it with a plane half the size with greater operations and costs. NW has enough slots to do double and triple daily to NRT with flights continuing on to other locations as well as non-stops flights.

Example: NW currently has two flights to MNL. DTW-NGO-MNL and MSP-NRT-MNL. The DTW-NGO-MNL one is packed but not with people to/from NGO but mostly from the Philippines. NW could change these flights to 787s as well as add a non-stop from SEA, MSP or DTW (all in range of the 787) to MNL. That would make one non-stop to NGO/NRT continuing on to MNL, and two non-stops to MNL from North America.

You mention the use of 757s in Asia. They have been doing quite a bit of that but it could be more. I mentioned in the thread about NW and 757 winglets, that NW should build up flights from smaller airports to NGO, KIX and NRT. These could be originating in CTS, FUK, NAHA, or smaller Asian cities that can't do a non-stop to North America and filter through to NGO, NRT or KIX. There is where the 747 is or frequency with 787s.

I think we will see MSP-HKG coming back as the immigrant population from Hong Kong boomed after Hong Kong was returned to China. But I think MSP-SGN would be the best bet. HUGE O&D in MSP. All of these with 787s.

So where do the 747s go? They go to conversion, desert and some stay around to do MSP/DTW-NRT-Large Asian City that Japanese like to travel to. But I could see them reduce the fleet and streamline big time.

This will give NW a lead over the other U.S. Carriers in Asia. Though UA has started non-stops, they will start running into fleet issues and an aging fleet. They will need 787s as well. CO is the next for expansion to Asia. They have great Hubs in EWR and IAH. They have the planes on order and will need more but could give NW and UA a run for their money.

One more thing NW will need to do to keep competative. BRING BACK INTERNATIONAL FIRST CLASS!!!! They did away with it when First class was just Business with extra leg room and reclined further. Now they must compete with Asian Carriers, AA, CO, and UA who all have First class products as well as business.
My name is Centrair but HND is closer. Let's Japanese Aviation!
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13267
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 11:50 am

Quoting Commavia (Reply 9):

I was referring more to the Far East and Pacific.

So then it's 5, EWR-NRT,HKG, PEK : IAH-NRT: HNL-Nagoya

Quoting Centrair (Reply 18):
The 787 is the key here. They have one of the larger orders for the type and I think they will be used to go up against the competition from UA, CO, AA as well as the Asian carriers that will start expanding with smaller aircraft

CO has 10 firm plus 5 options for the 787-800, since CO's 767 fleet is quite young (oldest frame from 2000) the 787 will not be replacing any other aircraft. The 787-800 will be for pure growth mainly to Asia.

Something like:

Newark-
Seoul, Taipei, Osaka, Nagoya

Houston-
Beijing
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2164
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:49 pm

Quoting Centrair (Reply 18):
One more thing NW will need to do to keep competative. BRING BACK INTERNATIONAL FIRST CLASS!!!! They did away with it when First class was just Business with extra leg room and reclined further. Now they must compete with Asian Carriers, AA, CO, and UA who all have First class products as well as business.

Does CO have initernational first??
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:08 pm

Quoting Centrair (Reply 18):
They have been doing quite a bit of that but it could be more. I mentioned in the thread about NW and 757 winglets, that NW should build up flights from smaller airports to NGO, KIX and NRT. These could be originating in CTS, FUK, NAHA, or smaller Asian cities that can't do a non-stop to North America and filter through to NGO, NRT or KIX. There is where the 747 is or frequency with 787s.

NW can't hub flights at any airport in Japan without the flight number being an extension of a flight that begins or ends in the U.S. They can't simply field a fleet of 757's throughout Asia to meet up with one or two flights ex-NGO or KIX.

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 20):
Does CO have initernational first??

No, they have BusinessFirst, sold as business class.
International Homo of Mystery
 
AlexPorter
Posts: 1655
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 11:10 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:38 pm

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 13):
MSP-SEL

I think that DTW-ICN or perhaps MSP-ICN would be more successful today with Korean Air's SkyTeam membership along with NW. This is the same idea that helps AF successfully operate CDG-MEX, for instance. I think DTW-MXP could work for the same reason, although that is straying off-topic from East Asia.
Last Flight: SCX701 MSP-PHX B738 8Jan2008
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:46 pm

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 16):
The -200 clunker is back. NW returned a few -400s during its Ch11 process forcing the return of the -200 for most of the past winter.

They just can't seem to get that 742 off of NW1/2 can they? They said that the canceling of the JFK-NRT route would mean a permanent upgrade to the 744, but I just looked at the schedule and saw that it was a 742 once again.

Quoting Centrair (Reply 18):
To me it seems that NW got the 744s but didn't want something between the DC10 and the 744. They have the 777 in the Pilot contracts (I think they did who knows now) but decided it was too big as a replacement for the DC10. Thus the A333 and A332.

Actually, the A333 is the same size as the A343, which is just a touch smaller than a 772. The difference is that the A333 doesn't have the range of the 772ER, and can't make Continental Asia from almost anywhere in the US. NW once has A343s on order, but had to cancel that as an overall avoidance of Chapter 11

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 20):
Does CO have initernational first??

No they do not

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 21):
NW can't hub flights at any airport in Japan without the flight number being an extension of a flight that begins or ends in the U.S.

Actually, they can and do.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:51 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 23):
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 21):NW can't hub flights at any airport in Japan without the flight number being an extension of a flight that begins or ends in the U.S.

Actually, they can and do.

NW has beyond rights (5th freedom) in Japan. So if they fly NRT-HKG, there has to be a USA-NRT flight number on the NRT-HKG portion. A change of guage is allowed.

Which flights does NW operate in Japan independent of a connecting flight number from a U.S. gateway?
International Homo of Mystery
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3269
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 8:41 pm

I'd rather fly the relevant Asian carrier any day

Regards
MH
come visit the south pacific
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 8:49 pm

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 24):

Point taken. My mistake
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
cricket
Posts: 2085
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 8:23 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:03 pm

The battle for India is being conceded to AA and CO on the non-stop front. In fact, while NW still flies (thankfully now the A330) to BOM (they canned BLR even before they started) and DL to BOM and MAA, most Indian passengers somehow still prefer the Euro/SE Asian carriers on these legs. (That said the non-stops to DEL have been doing quite well, because they're non-stops). If US carriers are serious about the Indian market they will have to go in for C-market aircraft (who says those planes don't have a market) - but becasuse the choice on that front is very clear they'll have to stump up a lot of cash. Or they could just carry on doing East Coast/Midwest-DEL non-stops.
A300B2/B4/6R, A313, A319/320/321, A333, A343, A388, 737-2/3/4/7/8/9, 747-3/4, 772/2E/2L/3, E170/190, F70, CR2/7, 146-3,
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4485
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:16 pm

Quoting Cricket (Reply 27):
In fact, while NW still flies (thankfully now the A330) to BOM (they canned BLR even before they started) and DL to BOM and MAA, most Indian passengers somehow still prefer the Euro/SE Asian carriers on these legs.

Enough Indian passengers like NW to BOM to keep the flights full every day. These flights art very succesfull for NWA!!
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4485
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:20 pm

Quoting HNL (Reply 8):
Do those UA numbers include the South Pacific flights too?

Yes they do. Because of this UA is larger across the Pacific, but NW is largest to Asia of the US carriers.
 
centrair
Posts: 2845
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:44 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:27 pm

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 24):
Which flights does NW operate in Japan independent of a connecting flight number from a U.S. gateway

All NW flights that fly within Japan are considered International Flights. They leave from international terminals and passengers must connect to other NW or NW codeshare international flights. They are not "Domestic" flights.

NGO-NRT NW 78 and NRT-NGO NW 77 are operated in Japan however they continue/originate to/in SPN. So the route is NRT-NGO-SPN and SPN-NGO-NRT. But one can fly HKG-NRT-NGO or DTW-NGO-SPN if they want. JL also operates flights like this. Instead of starting non-stops from NGO, they make a connecting flight that fill the big planes up at NRT. I can see these increasing as NRT becomes more restricted.
My name is Centrair but HND is closer. Let's Japanese Aviation!
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2164
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:55 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 23):
No they do not

I thought as much.
 
cricket
Posts: 2085
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 8:23 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 10:16 pm

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 28):
Enough Indian passengers like NW to BOM to keep the flights full every day. These flights art very succesfull for NWA!!

I'm not denying that - but many people use the airline because of O&D traffic and/or airline loyalty, but many people hated the old DC-10's on the route. I know some people love them as aircraft, but in terms of IFE and all, they weren't up to the mark - not that LH has IFE in Y either. The problem is that demand far exceeds supply on all US-India routes and most US carriers have had a very depressing attitude towards India - one or two routes at best.
A300B2/B4/6R, A313, A319/320/321, A333, A343, A388, 737-2/3/4/7/8/9, 747-3/4, 772/2E/2L/3, E170/190, F70, CR2/7, 146-3,
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 11:35 pm

Quoting UAL#1fan (Reply 3):
I've often wondered why NW doesn't add more nonstop routes to Asia?

They have a hub in NRT. Also, they fly to NRT from more American cities than any other airline. I believe they fly there from MSP, DTW, PDX, and either SFO or LAX
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
MalpensaSFO
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:17 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Tue Apr 25, 2006 11:41 pm

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 33):
Also, they fly to NRT from more American cities than any other airline. I believe they fly there from MSP, DTW, PDX, and either SFO or LAX

NORTHWEST

MSP-NRT 2
DTW-NRT 2
LAX-NRT
SFO-NRT
SEA-NRT
PDX-NRT
HNL-NRT 2

UNITED

ORD-NRT 2
JFK-NRT
LAX-NRT 2
SFO-NRT 2
HNL-NRT 2

AMERICAN

ORD-NRT
DFW-NRT 2
LAX-NRT
SJC-NRT
JFK-NRT

CONTINENTAL

IAH-NRT
EWR-NRT
GUM-NRT 2

DELTA

ATL-NRT
TO FLY IS TO SERVE
 
ord
Posts: 1356
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 1999 10:34 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:34 am

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 34):
UNITED

ORD-NRT 2
JFK-NRT
LAX-NRT 2
SFO-NRT 2
HNL-NRT 2

United also flies SEA - NRT nonstop.
 
b777a340fan
Posts: 655
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:42 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 2:06 am

Quoting UAL#1fan (Thread starter):
NW may generate a lot of intra-Asia flights

I doubt it, the battle between NW and UAL is definitely one by the latter. Why? Because UAL has the oh-so-awesome Star Alliance by its side. UAL benefits from SQ, TG, OZ, NH's networks and as a passenger, I am therefore more likely to fly UAL at the beginning. NW only has KE as a fellow asian member of Sky Team, which isn't as convenient and/or wide as UAL's partners. As far as AA expanding to Asia, it's a strong possibility, but they may be prevented to do so because of financial difficulties. I think AA is more focused on Latin America where it has to work hard to keep its dominance. What remains to be seen is which airline will gain India's surging demand.
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5042
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 2:22 am

Quoting B777A340Fan (Reply 36):

I doubt it, the battle between NW and UAL is definitely one by the latter. Why? Because UAL has the oh-so-awesome Star Alliance by its side

That may be true... for now. There has been some rumor of Cathay leaving one world for skyteam, whether that happens or not is yet to be seen. China Southern and Malaysia are likely to become members of SkyTeam, thus oppening a whole new world.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 24):

NW has beyond rights (5th freedom) in Japan.

Just to expand on that http://www.aviationpast.com/Rights.html
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4485
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:10 am

Good web site Burnsie!!!
 
incitatus
Posts: 2749
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:49 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:18 am

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 2):
The latest figures by Air Transport World for passengers carried Trans Pacific
1. NW -4,904,000
2. UA -4,554,000
3. AA--797,000

Are these numbers really TRANSPACIFIC passenger counts, or include intra Asia? The NW numbers seem hugely inflated compared to the frequencies presented in reply 34. NW has 10 NRT nonstops and American has 6. How can the transpacific passenger count be 6 times more?
Stop pop up ads
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4485
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:49 am

They probably include intra-asia for both UA and NW. NW has 11 Japan non-stops when DTW-NGO is counted. Six of those aircraft are 744 aircraft which are quite larger than the aircraft AA uses.

The more meaningful number when comparing would be RPK.
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5042
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 4:20 am

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 40):
They probably include intra-asia for both UA and NW. NW has 11 Japan non-stops when DTW-NGO

Ad in DTW-KIX, since MSP-NRT is 2x on Weekends.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 20476
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 4:27 am

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 39):
Are these numbers really TRANSPACIFIC passenger counts, or include intra Asia?

Numbers represent flights in the Pacific region. So yes they include intra-Asia flying

The DOT breaks down US airline international traffic into "Atlantic, Latin and Pacific".

If you look at the ASK/RPK stats you can see that UA & NW have a wide margin lead over AA.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 4:43 am

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 39):
The NW numbers seem hugely inflated compared to the frequencies presented in reply 34.

You can easily calculate the average stage length for each passenger carried using the numbers in Reply #2.

American 6166 miles, Northwest 3857 miles, and United 5225 miles.

American has no beyond rights from Asian destinations, Northwest carries a lot of 5th freedom traffic beyond Japan, and while United has the same rights as Northwest (plus runs others, such as HKG-SIN and HKG-SGN), they carry passengers on the 8000-mile long haul to Australia that no one else does, bumping up their average stage length.
International Homo of Mystery
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5042
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:33 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 43):
American has no beyond rights from Asian destinations, Northwest carries a lot of 5th freedom traffic beyond Japan, and while United has the same rights as Northwest (plus runs others, such as HKG-SIN and HKG-SGN), they carry passengers on the 8000-mile long haul to Australia that no one else does, bumping up their average stage length.

Thats true, if you really also wanted to stick with pure Asia, take out United's flights to Australia. That would put UA even lower.
 
hjulicher
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 2:26 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:07 am

I think the introduction of the 787 will only improve NW's presence in Asia. I'm sure the flights to Narita will remain, as passengers from relatively large cities in Asia, (but no direct flights to US) will need to connect in Asia, and it will be in NRT. Americans who usually fly to the major cities will fly direct from where ever NW decides to base the flights. DTW is great for connected east coast passengers, and SEA could be used as expansion too. So overlay the 787 on the current routes, and you have a stronger, more flexible network across the atlantic than NW. Yes, UA has Star, but NW, in the event of an oversold flight, or cancellation, can funnel passengers on it's own metal because it's more flexible and resilient of a system than point to point flying. I think that NRT will remain a moderate hub, but point to point flying will also be used. I also think that some of the A332's will go to transatlantic operations, and I think we'll see more flights to India as well.
LH 442
 
CHI787ORD
Posts: 679
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 11:27 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:17 pm

Quoting UAL#1fan (Reply 3):
I've often wondered why NW doesn't add more nonstop routes to Asia?

Perhaps DTW/MSP-PEK, MSP-HKG, or MSP-PVG?

NW does not have a strong O&D hub to run these routes. While MSP and DTW are important cities domestically, internationally, they're not. Atleast not compared to the likes of UA's ORD and SFO. These routes would not work.

That's one thing I've always admired about UA, they have hubs in some of the best cities in America: Chicago, Los Angeles, San Fransisco, Denver, and Washington.
 
centrair
Posts: 2845
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:44 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:25 pm

Quoting CHI787ORD (Reply 46):
NW does not have a strong O&D hub to run these routes

MSP-PVG...poor
MSP/DTW-PEK...poor
MSP-HKG...might be better now that the Hong Kong immigrant Population increased after 2000 in MSP.

Also you know The Chinese like ginseng...which is grown in Wisconsin and Minnesota. Also they eat a lot of soy...a product of the Dakotas, Minnesota and Iowa. Not to mention MSP has many fortune 500 companies. You know those little ones like 3M and General Mills.

However I will concede that MSP-HKG may not be 744 worthy. I still think NW should have gotten the 772ER.
My name is Centrair but HND is closer. Let's Japanese Aviation!
 
CHI787ORD
Posts: 679
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 11:27 am

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:30 pm

Quoting Centrair (Reply 47):
Also you know The Chinese like ginseng...which is grown in Wisconsin and Minnesota. Also they eat a lot of soy...a product of the Dakotas, Minnesota and Iowa. Not to mention MSP has many fortune 500 companies. You know those little ones like 3M and General Mills.

Honestly, I do not mean to sound too "Chicago-centric", but Wisconsin and Minnesota can use ORD as their international regional hub. It just makes sense to me for someone to jump on a MSP-ORD-HKG flight on UA rather than NW experimenting and failing with MSP-HKG.
 
Carpethead
Posts: 2567
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 8:15 pm

RE: UA Vs. NW -the Battle For Asia

Wed Apr 26, 2006 4:22 pm

Quoting CHI787ORD (Reply 46):
NW does not have a strong O&D hub to run these routes.

UA cannot fill ORD to any Asian city based on O&D alone. From what I have seen, there are very few baggage tags that terminate in ORD.
Both NW & UA rely on the huge catchment to the south and east and western Midwest to feed its Asian services.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos