flymco753 wrote:

Do you think the reason that DY hasn't added DTW yet is because of the opposition they're dealing with? I also think the problem with WOW and DTW is they would have to fly with a very restricted weight capacity considering the fact that DTW is on the far edge of the operating range for their A321.

Look at you, actually doing research, now if only you got the point that Orlando on JetBlue is not going to happen, that that would be something.

klm617 wrote:

flyDTW1992 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

The second Delta flight to LHR has been on and off for many years now

British Airways does not view anything different if Delta ran 5 daily flights or Delta ran 1 and Virgin ran 1. They are metal neutral and British Airways is only technically competing with 1 carrier per say. While it would be great to have British Airways, their current strategy and business plans suggest that Detroit is not their main concern, actually it is near the bottom of the list of airports in the USA they can add, whereas Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Indianapolis, Saint Louis, and others are nearing the top or at the very top of their list as a priority.

thedetroitpole wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

Do you think the reason that DY hasn't added DTW yet is because of the opposition they're dealing with? I also think the problem with WOW and DTW is they would have to fly with a very restricted weight capacity considering the fact that DTW is on the far edge of the operating range for their A321.

Look at you, actually doing research, now if only you got the point that Orlando on JetBlue is not going to happen, that that would be something.

But they are doing PIT which is actually a few miles further than DTW-KEF

thedetroitpole wrote:

I think I have a solution for LOT in Detroit. I asked several Polish people of Detroit if they would utilize a nonstop to Warsaw and all of the 25 people said no, and these are first and second generation Polish. While I looked up the statistics, the Detroit/Livonia/Warren metropolitan area has a significant amount of Polish, but a low number suggests they fly back to Poland. I asked families (including mine) if they were willing to come to the US, majority states yes, so a direct flight from Warsaw to Detroit is not feasible if there is only feed happening from the Poland side.

What was their reason for not choosing LOT ?

I doubt this will be better than DTW
*DL JFK-BGR APR 0>1.0 MAY 0>2 JUN 0>2 JUL 0>2


Delta ends Detroit Bangor flights in favor of JFK as they continue to reduce their presence in Detroit by diverting traffic through other hubs.

Positively, DL will fly all mainline to STL, CLT, GRR, BNA, adding 4th daily and 2nd mainline to JFK, I'd say that's good. Hey AA, does DTW-LAX look promising now? 7th daily coming next summer for DL. Maybe DL has a feeling AA can make a well timed A321 or 737 work?

flymco753 wrote:

Positively, DL will fly all mainline to STL, CLT, GRR, BNA, adding 4th daily and 2nd mainline to JFK, I'd say that's good. Hey AA, does DTW-LAX look promising now? 7th daily coming next summer for DL. Maybe DL has a feeling AA can make a well timed A321 or 737 work?

I wouldn't get excited over the domestic summer schedule yet. Let's not forget that DL released a major revision of its peak summer schedule (which began July 1) this year in May,

As I said in the other thread, the seventh LAX flight (early morning DTW departure, late afternoon LAX return) has been scheduled multiple times annually since the merger, but has nearly always been cancelled as the calendar goes forward.

FWIW, since everybody seems to think MCO is the gold standard...

Summer 2017, DL will offer the lowest capacity on DTW/MCO since 1992:

1992: 2xD95, 2x72S, 757
1993: 4x72S, 757, D10
...
2016: M88, 4x757, 753 [previous low]
2017: 320, 4x739, 757 [tentative]

*note that the 1992 & 1993 numbers are NW-only; DL itself offered two daily flights (mixture of 72S & M88) on the route.

compensateme wrote:

FWIW, since everybody seems to think MCO is the gold standard...

Summer 2017, DL will offer the lowest capacity on DTW/MCO since 1992:

1992: 2xD95, 2x72S, 757
1993: 4x72S, 757, D10
...
2016: M88, 4x757, 753 [previous low]
2017: 320, 4x739, 757 [tentative]

*note that the 1992 & 1993 numbers are NW-only; DL itself offered two daily flights (mixture of 72S & M88) on the route.

I wonder why, the O&D is high all year, I wonder if it's because of how many LCC's on the route. Also according to RITA, a year ago the MCO route had 480,000 pax through, by the end of this year it should be 580,000. I've flown every airline on this route this year and every single time they're full.

DL's recent summer 2017 schedule revision vs. actual 2016 for peak-day departures:
connection-mainline--total:
2016: 276-191--467
2017: 258-204--462

Overall physical capacity is down about 2%. On the bright side, the % of flights operated with 50-seaters drops to less than 25% vs. 30% a few months ago (and over 50% a few years ago).

Notable additions: seventh DTW/LAX flight (as discussed), DTW/CUN goes 8x weekly (up from 2x weekly)
Notable subtractions: DTW/BGR (as discussed)

Of course, this is all preliminary and it wouldn't shock me if a market like DTW/GRR that's tagged as 6x717 now switches to 2xCRJ, 3xCR9 & 739 in May.

DTW/CUN is welcome news, and something that's long ticked me off -- the traffic to operate this route at least 5x weekly is there (and competing hubs like ORD have seen 7x daily service) but DL route planners masturbate to the thought of having an hourly ATL/CUN shuttle. Meanwhile, those of us who take Wed-Sun trips (and there are a lot of us, including many local businesses) are forced to connect.

flymco753 wrote:

I wonder why, the O&D is high all year, I wonder if it's because of how many LCC's on the route. Also according to RITA, a year ago the MCO route had 480,000 pax through, by the end of this year it should be 580,000. I've flown every airline on this route this year and every single time they're full.

ATL & MSP are seeing similar drops in capacity. But it's not limited to MCO -- DL is planning less capacity into Florida next summer than it offered this past summer. That's really not surprising, considering tourism to Florida is declining. Should that reverse in 2017, DL will adjust its schedules accordingly.

-

So CUN will run daily, that looks good. MBJ and PUJ are extended through the summer on Saturday's again so that's another good thing, SJU will be a 757 again in march, maybe this is a new era of Caribbean flying for Detroit, I still would like to see SXM up on Saturday's in the winter as a nonstop because MSP can do it, so can DTW and the morning ATL flight in the winter is full of PTY, SXM and SJO passengers.

flymco753 wrote:

So CUN will run daily, that looks good. MBJ and PUJ are extended through the summer on Saturday's again so that's another good thing, SJU will be a 757 again in march, maybe this is a new era of Caribbean flying for Detroit, I still would like to see SXM up on Saturday's in the winter as a nonstop because MSP can do it, so can DTW and the morning ATL flight in the winter is full of PTY, SXM and SJO passengers.

Not a new era -- it's pretty much the same schedule & frequency that NW/DL have operated into Mexico & the Caribbean for over two decades. Not including PUJ, of course, which is rapidly growing; I'm surprised DL's service is only weekly during the winter. I'm also surprised that SJD & PVR are daily 738 during the winter, beating the 320 operated to both markets from ATL. PUJ is larger during the winter, and DL is operating widebodies to the region from ATL (333 to CUN, 764 to AUA, etc.)

Going forward, I expect DL's services to Mexico & PUJ to grow (and Cuban beach markets in the distant future), but I wouldn't be shocked to see markets like NAS & SJU (weak O/D) dropped. I would not expect PTY, SXM, SJO, etc. DTW has always been Florida-centric, whereas MSP has followed the footprint of traditional Canadian markets.

On a related note, DL also recently trimmed planned DTW/CUN service this upcoming winter. The 2x-3x Saturday flights is the lowest in many, many years.

compensateme - I actually agree with much of your analysis. You did set forth a good hypothesis a few years ago that still holds true.
- DL uses ATL to flow a huge amount of connecting flow that could in theory go over any hub
- ATL predominantly uses mainline narrowbody aircraft at high frequency to move huge volumes of connecting flows
- This includes a large amount of East-West traffic out of the Northeast/Mid-Atlantic and/or traffic that could flow over DTW or MSP
- DTW, MSP, SLC capacity is keep in check because of the amount of flow over ATL
- DTW lost a connecting flow to ATL for Florida and beach markets post-merger

I recently bought my ticket on DL (peak travel season to MCO), they routed me MCO-MSP-DTW and the return leg is DTW-ATL-MCO. Called and got it fixed because of various reasons I also paid $50 for Economy + on my nonstop flights. Why would they switch them to that route? I understand ATL but MSP? I never connect to DTW from MCO, never have and never will.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

compensateme - I actually agree with much of your analysis. You did set forth a good hypothesis a few years ago that still holds true.
- DL uses ATL to flow a huge amount of connecting flow that could in theory go over any hub
- ATL predominantly uses mainline narrowbody aircraft at high frequency to move huge volumes of connecting flows
- This includes a large amount of East-West traffic out of the Northeast/Mid-Atlantic and/or traffic that could flow over DTW or MSP
- DTW, MSP, SLC capacity is keep in check because of the amount of flow over ATL
- DTW lost a connecting flow to ATL for Florida and beach markets post-merger

Why would anyone in their right mind who lives in the Northeast or even Mid Atlantic back track to ATL when booking a flight chose a flight over ATL the traveling public can shoulder some of the blame for booking these ridicules out of the way connections. I understand when Delta arbitrary rebooks you because they can but I have never seen more people flying out of their way to get from point A to point B than I have today. If more people would chose to book away from ATL this problem would correct itself but they chose to just swallow what Delta forces on people flying is a customer based service and that seems to have been lost when in the translation when Delta serves up it's product.

There is a cargo flight every day from Marquette to Lancing. Can anyone tell me about this? And Lancing? How did they get to receive cargo? It must be forwarding from there???

kitplane01 wrote:

There is a cargo flight every day from Marquette to Lancing. Can anyone tell me about this? And Lancing? How did they get to receive cargo? It must be forwarding from there???

My guess is that Lansing is used as a connecting point for UPS cargo from SDF, and ABX cargo from CVG. Appears the FedEx cargo comes in on the flight from MKE.

Out of all of the international LCC's which one do you think is the best potential candidate or candidates for DTW?

I can see Volaris being the next international add, low cost service between DTW/MEX and GDL. GDL is a vital auto destination and the Mexican population in the Detroit area is predominately from that area of Mexico next to Monterrey. Who knows, XL Airways could be the next airline, we don't know what conversations and agreements are being held.

Thought I'd point out some Delta adjustments.
Next summer, several stations will be all 2 class jets as opposed to a CRJ. These markets are: ALB, BHM, BUF, BTV, CVG, CLE, GRR, GRB, IND, MSN, MHT, and MKE.
All mainline from RJs: GRR, BWI, BOS, CLT, MCI, BNA, PHL, PVD, DCA.
Loss of mainline for RJ's: IND
International: LHR capacity and frequency reduced from 2x daily (333*, 764) to 10x weekly (76W), MUC capacity reduced from 764 to 76W, MEX capacity increased from 319 to 757, CUN increased from 2x weekly (739) to 8x weekly (757, 739), MTY increased from 1x daily E175 to 2x daily E175 and E190*.

Predictions: DL could make some good adds if both sides are aggressive. DL could add 1x daily A319 to GDL (auto & population could benefit from it), Add MAN daily on the 76W, Add domestic markets that specifically target Detroit like ABQ, ELP, SMF, SJC, SNA, BOI, GEG, DAB and MLB. I think that's really it.

flymco753 wrote:

Thought I'd point out some Delta adjustments.
Next summer, several stations will be all 2 class jets as opposed to a CRJ. These markets are: ALB, BHM, BUF, BTV, CVG, CLE, GRR, GRB, IND, MSN, MHT, and MKE.
All mainline from RJs: GRR, BWI, BOS, CLT, MCI, BNA, PHL, PVD, DCA.
Loss of mainline for RJ's: IND
International: LHR capacity and frequency reduced from 2x daily (333*, 764) to 10x weekly (76W), MUC capacity reduced from 764 to 76W, MEX capacity increased from 319 to 757, CUN increased from 2x weekly (739) to 8x weekly (757, 739), MTY increased from 1x daily E175 to 2x daily E175 and E190*.

Predictions: DL could make some good adds if both sides are aggressive. DL could add 1x daily A319 to GDL (auto & population could benefit from it), Add MAN daily on the 76W, Add domestic markets that specifically target Detroit like ABQ, ELP, SMF, SJC, SNA, BOI, GEG, DAB and MLB. I think that's really it.

I wouldn't get excited about the summer schedule. DL continues to tweak its winter schedule; the general trend is to cut capacity, and the cuts are disproportionately impacting DTW. For example, just a few weeks ago DL was planning to operate a 753, 763 & 333 DTW/SFO the second half of winter, now it's 3x753, with the 332 substituting on select days for a few weeks (for comparison, the flights operated 3x763 this year). During the same period, LAX had been 4x739 & 2x753, but is now listed at 738, 3x739 & 2x757 (operated with a mixture of 4x739/757 and 2x763 this year). The impact on fares is noticeable -- nonstops DTW/LAX booked in less than 14 days generally sold for RT$600-$750, but most flights are now pricing $800-$1000. You'll also have to pay for a "preferred" seat if you don't want to risk sitting in the middle. You can get a lower fare if you connect, but at that point you might as well shop around.

As for your predictions, only SMF, SNA and DAB are realistic -- DL already crashed & burned on the former two, and the latter would be doable Saturdays only for a week weeks at best. NW's vacation arm briefly operated charted flights DTW/DAB (on Champion Air) and NW itself intended on launching service in the mid-2000s, but scrapped plans for whatever reason.

compensateme wrote:

DL's recent summer 2017 schedule revision vs. actual 2016 for peak-day departures:
connection-mainline--total:
2016: 276-191--467
2017: 258-204--462

Overall physical capacity is down about 2%. On the bright side, the % of flights operated with 50-seaters drops to less than 25% vs. 30% a few months ago (and over 50% a few years ago).

Notable additions: seventh DTW/LAX flight (as discussed), DTW/CUN goes 8x weekly (up from 2x weekly)
Notable subtractions: DTW/BGR (as discussed)

Of course, this is all preliminary and it wouldn't shock me if a market like DTW/GRR that's tagged as 6x717 now switches to 2xCRJ, 3xCR9 & 739 in May.

DTW/CUN is welcome news, and something that's long ticked me off -- the traffic to operate this route at least 5x weekly is there (and competing hubs like ORD have seen 7x daily service) but DL route planners masturbate to the thought of having an hourly ATL/CUN shuttle. Meanwhile, those of us who take Wed-Sun trips (and there are a lot of us, including many local businesses) are forced to connect.

flymco753 wrote:

I wonder why, the O&D is high all year, I wonder if it's because of how many LCC's on the route. Also according to RITA, a year ago the MCO route had 480,000 pax through, by the end of this year it should be 580,000. I've flown every airline on this route this year and every single time they're full.

ATL & MSP are seeing similar drops in capacity. But it's not limited to MCO -- DL is planning less capacity into Florida next summer than it offered this past summer. That's really not surprising, considering tourism to Florida is declining. Should that reverse in 2017, DL will adjust its schedules accordingly.

-

Is there anywhere that these figures are published, or did you have to manually look up the entire DTW schedule? I'd be interesting in seeing this for the other hubs for 2016 vs 2017.

Jeremy

SESGDL wrote:

compensateme wrote:

DL's recent summer 2017 schedule revision vs. actual 2016 for peak-day departures:
connection-mainline--total:
2016: 276-191--467
2017: 258-204--462

Overall physical capacity is down about 2%. On the bright side, the % of flights operated with 50-seaters drops to less than 25% vs. 30% a few months ago (and over 50% a few years ago).

Notable additions: seventh DTW/LAX flight (as discussed), DTW/CUN goes 8x weekly (up from 2x weekly)
Notable subtractions: DTW/BGR (as discussed)

Of course, this is all preliminary and it wouldn't shock me if a market like DTW/GRR that's tagged as 6x717 now switches to 2xCRJ, 3xCR9 & 739 in May.

DTW/CUN is welcome news, and something that's long ticked me off -- the traffic to operate this route at least 5x weekly is there (and competing hubs like ORD have seen 7x daily service) but DL route planners masturbate to the thought of having an hourly ATL/CUN shuttle. Meanwhile, those of us who take Wed-Sun trips (and there are a lot of us, including many local businesses) are forced to connect.

flymco753 wrote:

I wonder why, the O&D is high all year, I wonder if it's because of how many LCC's on the route. Also according to RITA, a year ago the MCO route had 480,000 pax through, by the end of this year it should be 580,000. I've flown every airline on this route this year and every single time they're full.

ATL & MSP are seeing similar drops in capacity. But it's not limited to MCO -- DL is planning less capacity into Florida next summer than it offered this past summer. That's really not surprising, considering tourism to Florida is declining. Should that reverse in 2017, DL will adjust its schedules accordingly.

-

Is there anywhere that these figures are published, or did you have to manually look up the entire DTW schedule? I'd be interesting in seeing this for the other hubs for 2016 vs 2017.

Jeremy

All manual from what everyone can see on the website.

compensateme wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

Thought I'd point out some Delta adjustments.
Next summer, several stations will be all 2 class jets as opposed to a CRJ. These markets are: ALB, BHM, BUF, BTV, CVG, CLE, GRR, GRB, IND, MSN, MHT, and MKE.
All mainline from RJs: GRR, BWI, BOS, CLT, MCI, BNA, PHL, PVD, DCA.
Loss of mainline for RJ's: IND
International: LHR capacity and frequency reduced from 2x daily (333*, 764) to 10x weekly (76W), MUC capacity reduced from 764 to 76W, MEX capacity increased from 319 to 757, CUN increased from 2x weekly (739) to 8x weekly (757, 739), MTY increased from 1x daily E175 to 2x daily E175 and E190*.

Predictions: DL could make some good adds if both sides are aggressive. DL could add 1x daily A319 to GDL (auto & population could benefit from it), Add MAN daily on the 76W, Add domestic markets that specifically target Detroit like ABQ, ELP, SMF, SJC, SNA, BOI, GEG, DAB and MLB. I think that's really it.

I wouldn't get excited about the summer schedule. DL continues to tweak its winter schedule; the general trend is to cut capacity, and the cuts are disproportionately impacting DTW. For example, just a few weeks ago DL was planning to operate a 753, 763 & 333 DTW/SFO the second half of winter, now it's 3x753, with the 332 substituting on select days for a few weeks (for comparison, the flights operated 3x763 this year). During the same period, LAX had been 4x739 & 2x753, but is now listed at 738, 3x739 & 2x757 (operated with a mixture of 4x739/757 and 2x763 this year). The impact on fares is noticeable -- nonstops DTW/LAX booked in less than 14 days generally sold for RT$600-$750, but most flights are now pricing $800-$1000. You'll also have to pay for a "preferred" seat if you don't want to risk sitting in the middle. You can get a lower fare if you connect, but at that point you might as well shop around.

As for your predictions, only SMF, SNA and DAB are realistic -- DL already crashed & burned on the former two, and the latter would be doable Saturdays only for a week weeks at best. NW's vacation arm briefly operated charted flights DTW/DAB (on Champion Air) and NW itself intended on launching service in the mid-2000s, but scrapped plans for whatever reason.

You are very correct there really is nothing to be excited about as there is not much in the pipeline as far as added capacity and as you say Detroit always get's cut deeper in favor of transfer of passengers at other hubs.

No moves by NK recently, but things are cooking up for some additions in the next few weeks. What can you see coming off of NK?

So as expected, Lufthansa will bring the 744 to DTW next summer for 3 months. An increase in capacity of 112 seats per day each direction (based on higher density configuration in comparison to A340-300). Dates: 01JUL17 to 29SEP17

BEFORE: A340-300 (30C28E221M)
AFTER: B747-400 (53C32E308M) alternatively the A/C could be configured (67C32E272M)

hjulicher wrote:

So as expected, Lufthansa will bring the 744 to DTW next summer for 3 months. An increase in capacity of 112 seats per day each direction (based on higher density configuration in comparison to A340-300). Dates: 01JUL17 to 29SEP17

BEFORE: A340-300 (30C28E221M)
AFTER: B747-400 (53C32E308M) alternatively the A/C could be configured (67C32E272M)

That's wonderful news, especially given the heavy reduction to LHR on DL/VS.

In the 2000s, LH regularly operated the 744 into DTW before upgouging the route to two 333. When the economy bust -- especially when Daimler left Chrysler for death, VW moved to D.C. and oodles of German auto suppliers closed shop -- the two 333 were replaced with a single 346. In recent years, the route settled into a 333/343. I didn't think we'd see anything larger.

The reason for the A333/A343/A346 mix has more to do with lack of suitable aircraft as well as aircraft being retrofitted with new seats, IFE etc. LH has a lot of VLA aircraft and they have to be deployed. VW moved their HQ to Reston, VA but they still have their technical facilities in Auburn Hills. Additionally, I'm not sure many German auto suppliers closed shop in Detroit... they all have remained. Also DaimlerChrysler ran a A319CJ from PTK - STR so there was only marginal traffic on DTW-FRA.

In 2007 there was a significant increase in capacity TATL from Detroit. NW launched DTW-DUS, DTW-BRU and responded to LH's 10x weekly FRA-DTW, with their own DTW-FRA. 2007 was the height of the housing bubble and once it burst, along with banks being cash strapped, financing consumerism ended. People with poor credit (who typically purchased American vehicles) no longer could finance these purchases (let alone their adjustable rate mortgages), pushing GM and Chrysler into bankruptcy as auto sales disappeared. The fact that the automakers didn't build quality vehicles only hurt them as their clientele (with poor credit and relying on incentives and financing specials) no longer could purchase their cars, and those with disposable incomes continued to buy other vehicle brands (I believe Subaru grew sales during the auto crisis). Hyundai bucked this trend by introducing Hyundai Assurance. In end, you had a double-whammy in 2007 on the DTW-Europe market. Too much capacity drove down yields and up-front premium traffic tanked after the banking crises since the collapse of the Automotive Industry. Ripple effects across the food/supply-chain.

On a related note, I'm a bit worried about the amount of capacity AC is adding into the market. With YYZ up the road, we will see if Toronto will be able to provide the demand to support all the new ASKs to Europe. Yields are down heavily, and we are already seeing DL reduce capacity to Italy.

klm617 wrote:

Why would anyone in their right mind who lives in the Northeast or even Mid Atlantic back track to ATL when booking a flight chose a flight over ATL the traveling public can shoulder some of the blame for booking these ridicules out of the way connections.

To answer your somewhat garbled question, there are several good reasons, including a) extra miles, b) pricing, or c) end-to-end schedule. A connection thru ATL may be just as fast to one's final destination as a more direct flight, depending on layover time; or, it might be significantly cheaper.

Once I'm in the air I don't care where the plane goes as long as I end up at the right place at more or less the scheduled time. Just to take some simple examples, I've flown PIT-EWR-MCI in the past and it was not only the cheapest but also the fastest option at the time (some years back). I've flown PIT-IAH-LHR which sounds crazy but saved me $500, easily worth the extra couple hours.

I'd say that the traveling public is not necessarily as "ridicules" as you seem to imply.

PITingres wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Why would anyone in their right mind who lives in the Northeast or even Mid Atlantic back track to ATL when booking a flight chose a flight over ATL the traveling public can shoulder some of the blame for booking these ridicules out of the way connections.

To answer your somewhat garbled question, there are several good reasons, including a) extra miles, b) pricing, or c) end-to-end schedule. A connection thru ATL may be just as fast to one's final destination as a more direct flight, depending on layover time; or, it might be significantly cheaper.

Once I'm in the air I don't care where the plane goes as long as I end up at the right place at more or less the scheduled time. Just to take some simple examples, I've flown PIT-EWR-MCI in the past and it was not only the cheapest but also the fastest option at the time (some years back). I've flown PIT-IAH-LHR which sounds crazy but saved me $500, easily worth the extra couple hours.

I'd say that the traveling public is not necessarily as "ridicules" as you seem to imply.

And you don't think there is something wrong in the market place when you have to fly from PIT to LHR over IAH to get a decent fare well I'm sorry I do that isn't how the market place works airlines are in the service sector which means they deliver a service. I don't understand why so many people are in love with the idea that companies in the service industry can do what ever they like and if you don't like it lump it, it is suppose to be the best get the most customers but since all this consolidation the customer really has very little choice but to deal with this crap. Yes if I want to fly out of my way OK but I shouldn't be subject to that type of itinerary to get a good price or have to drive 4 hours to an airport to get an affordable fare and yes it is ridicules that someone should have to deal with those kind of parameters when making travel plans
.

compensateme wrote:

hjulicher wrote:

So as expected, Lufthansa will bring the 744 to DTW next summer for 3 months. An increase in capacity of 112 seats per day each direction (based on higher density configuration in comparison to A340-300). Dates: 01JUL17 to 29SEP17

BEFORE: A340-300 (30C28E221M)
AFTER: B747-400 (53C32E308M) alternatively the A/C could be configured (67C32E272M)

That's wonderful news, especially given the heavy reduction to LHR on DL/VS.

In the 2000s, LH regularly operated the 744 into DTW before upgouging the route to two 333. When the economy bust -- especially when Daimler left Chrysler for death, VW moved to D.C. and oodles of German auto suppliers closed shop -- the two 333 were replaced with a single 346. In recent years, the route settled into a 333/343. I didn't think we'd see anything larger.


.

It still bewilders me that Delta put out that huge press release saying they were taking over the second daily DTW-LHR flight from Virgin only to lie and make it 3 weekly. This is exactly why the WCAA should not trust Delta their intentions for Detroit are not honorable.

klm617 wrote:

compensateme wrote:

hjulicher wrote:

So as expected, Lufthansa will bring the 744 to DTW next summer for 3 months. An increase in capacity of 112 seats per day each direction (based on higher density configuration in comparison to A340-300). Dates: 01JUL17 to 29SEP17

BEFORE: A340-300 (30C28E221M)
AFTER: B747-400 (53C32E308M) alternatively the A/C could be configured (67C32E272M)

That's wonderful news, especially given the heavy reduction to LHR on DL/VS.

In the 2000s, LH regularly operated the 744 into DTW before upgouging the route to two 333. When the economy bust -- especially when Daimler left Chrysler for death, VW moved to D.C. and oodles of German auto suppliers closed shop -- the two 333 were replaced with a single 346. In recent years, the route settled into a 333/343. I didn't think we'd see anything larger.


.

It still bewilders me that Delta put out that huge press release saying they were taking over the second daily DTW-LHR flight from Virgin only to lie and make it 3 weekly. This is exactly why the WCAA should not trust Delta their intentions for Detroit are not honorable.

Yes but BA is a confident airline and I'm sure they could easily compete with DL on LHR in Detroit if they wanted to. I feel like it opens up the gate for BA and a 788, if they want to they could do the 777 even. DY could even do 2x weekly (probably only 1x) to LGW and make it work, without the connection sector. The numbers have proved that LHR among O&D is increasing and BA knows that. I wouldn't be surprised if BA is back by 2020.

klm617 wrote:

PITingres wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Why would anyone in their right mind who lives in the Northeast or even Mid Atlantic back track to ATL when booking a flight chose a flight over ATL the traveling public can shoulder some of the blame for booking these ridicules out of the way connections.

To answer your somewhat garbled question, there are several good reasons, including a) extra miles, b) pricing, or c) end-to-end schedule. A connection thru ATL may be just as fast to one's final destination as a more direct flight, depending on layover time; or, it might be significantly cheaper.

Once I'm in the air I don't care where the plane goes as long as I end up at the right place at more or less the scheduled time. Just to take some simple examples, I've flown PIT-EWR-MCI in the past and it was not only the cheapest but also the fastest option at the time (some years back). I've flown PIT-IAH-LHR which sounds crazy but saved me $500, easily worth the extra couple hours.

I'd say that the traveling public is not necessarily as "ridicules" as you seem to imply.

And you don't think there is something wrong in the market place when you have to fly from PIT to LHR over IAH to get a decent fare well I'm sorry I do that isn't how the market place works airlines are in the service sector which means they deliver a service. I don't understand why so many people are in love with the idea that companies in the service industry can do what ever they like and if you don't like it lump it, it is suppose to be the best get the most customers but since all this consolidation the customer really has very little choice but to deal with this crap. Yes if I want to fly out of my way OK but I shouldn't be subject to that type of itinerary to get a good price or have to drive 4 hours to an airport to get an affordable fare and yes it is ridicules that someone should have to deal with those kind of parameters when making travel plans
.

Price is king. You are dealing with consumers and draws parallels for the same behavior that causes the following:
1) People to drive 30 mile out of their way to save $0.10 on 15 gallons of gas
2) People to travel to other states to buy cigarettes
3) People to stand in line for hours outside a store on Thanksgiving night to save 30% on a flat screen TV

There is a concept of of the value of one's time. Different people have a different threshold for what value they point on their time/convenience.

You continue to find new ways to not people to have a rationale discussion on anything.

I think everyone is pretty much in agreement on how Delta treats their DTW operation, but where we all differ is on the basis of how a for-profit entitiy operates their business versus how we think their should operate their business for the public good. Much of this transcends just DL or DTW and is a broader struggle of the airline industry for a better part of the past 30 years in the most-deregulation environment.

We all agree on the following:
1) DL keeps capacity in check in DTW with the intent of keeping yields high and uses that to offset less-profitable areas of their network
2) DL could flow more connections over DTW, particularly East-West flows, but pushes a significant amount over ATL but can do so a lower overall cost as ATL operates heavily on large narrowbody aircraft (with lower CASM) and the huge number of flights to allocate fixed costs.
3) DTW is not viewed as a strategic growth market worthy of increased allocation or investment for the purposes of market growth
4) DTW is not a high-growth metro in comparsion to other coastal regions. 1% annual growth in enplanements is not a huge opportunity in comparsion to other high-growth markets

Where we differ is on the accusations and conspiracy theories. We don't necessarily agree on that DL is "out to get DTW" or that WCAA doing something unethical or the likes.

flymco753 wrote:

The numbers have proved that LHR among O&D is increasing and BA knows that.

What numbers? "Proved" indicates that there is hard data that you have access to or that is public.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

I think everyone is pretty much in agreement on how Delta treats their DTW operation, but where we all differ is on the basis of how a for-profit entitiy operates their business versus how we think their should operate their business for the public good. Much of this transcends just DL or DTW and is a broader struggle of the airline industry for a better part of the past 30 years in the most-deregulation environment.
We all agree on the following:
1) DL keeps capacity in check in DTW with the intent of keeping yields high and uses that to offset less-profitable areas of their network
2) DL could flow more connections over DTW, particularly East-West flows, but pushes a significant amount over ATL but can do so a lower overall cost as ATL operates heavily on large narrowbody aircraft (with lower CASM) and the huge number of flights to allocate fixed costs.
3) DTW is not viewed as a strategic growth market worthy of increased allocation or investment for the purposes of market growth
4) DTW is not a high-growth metro in comparsion to other coastal regions. 1% annual growth in enplanements is not a huge opportunity in comparsion to other high-growth markets
Where we differ is on the accusations and conspiracy theories. We don't necessarily agree on that DL is "out to get DTW" or that WCAA doing something unethical or the likes.

That is an excellent summary, and I think everyone (except for the inveterate whiner who thinks the sky is falling at DTW) can weigh these theories and understand why 1) DTW will not become another JFK, EWR, or LAX; 2) DTW will remain an Asian jumping-off point for traffic east of the Mississippi, while SEA will become a more conventeint (and less expensive to operate) hub for traffic originating in the west; and 3) DTW should not expect to achieve the traffic levels of ATL, DFW, or IAH, which will likely continue to be the most important hubs for each of their dominant carriers.

All in all, it appears DTW will continue to be a solidly-successful second tier airport, playing above its weight with both European and Asian non-stops, as well as a handy connecting point for flights to Eastern Canada. Not too shabby at all!

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

I think everyone is pretty much in agreement on how Delta treats their DTW operation, but where we all differ is on the basis of how a for-profit entitiy operates their business versus how we think their should operate their business for the public good. Much of this transcends just DL or DTW and is a broader struggle of the airline industry for a better part of the past 30 years in the most-deregulation environment.

We all agree on the following:
1) DL keeps capacity in check in DTW with the intent of keeping yields high and uses that to offset less-profitable areas of their network
2) DL could flow more connections over DTW, particularly East-West flows, but pushes a significant amount over ATL but can do so a lower overall cost as ATL operates heavily on large narrowbody aircraft (with lower CASM) and the huge number of flights to allocate fixed costs.
3) DTW is not viewed as a strategic growth market worthy of increased allocation or investment for the purposes of market growth
4) DTW is not a high-growth metro in comparsion to other coastal regions. 1% annual growth in enplanements is not a huge opportunity in comparsion to other high-growth markets

Where we differ is on the accusations and conspiracy theories. We don't necessarily agree on that DL is "out to get DTW" or that WCAA doing something unethical or the likes.

I agree with you that a business is out to make money yes but I also disagree with the fact that you now have really only 3 basic players that dictate the rules and you either have to abide by them or chose another mode of transportation if you don't live in one of the markets deemed worthy of low cost survive and again the high yields from the high fares that are charged supplement the seats they basically give away to gain market share in cities like New York, Chicago and Los Angeles. In the current environment a new start up has little to no chance of succeeding because of these three powerful players and that is not the free market place working for the betterment of all this is a market place that only benefits investors and that's it. To say that deregulation caused airlines to fail is an untruth what caused airlines to fail was very poor management with ego driven decisions being made rather than logical decision with out any vision. In fact under deregulation Southwest strived and made a profit year after year with very slow and careful expansions unlike the likes of all the other majors that had to fly every where there was an airport. I also have a problem with Delta being able to restrict the amount of seat to basically get the fare they want for each seat being they control most of the capacity at DTW so it's not the price the market will bear it's the artificial price they create with the amount of capacity they put on the route and if there were more competition in the market place they couldn't get away with this and that is where the WCAA is failing miserably at DTW because they are not aggressively searching to bring competition into the Detroit market to stop this unethical practice by Delta of basically dictating the pricing in the Detroit market. I was looking for fares from DTW to MIA and TPA next April and every thing was north of $600 now what should I do take the bus to not have to pay the prices they dictate by aggressively controlling the capacity to get this kind of artificially high fare. and the WCAA turns a blind eye to this kind of stuff. I bet people in BOS, NYC of CHI are not paying that because those airports have not put all their eggs in one basket and why should I living in Detroit subsidize cheap travel for those people living in a major market in the USA. That is not a free market that is pay the price or walk type of market not what this country is about at all.

klm617 wrote:

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

I think everyone is pretty much in agreement on how Delta treats their DTW operation, but where we all differ is on the basis of how a for-profit entitiy operates their business versus how we think their should operate their business for the public good. Much of this transcends just DL or DTW and is a broader struggle of the airline industry for a better part of the past 30 years in the most-deregulation environment.

We all agree on the following:
1) DL keeps capacity in check in DTW with the intent of keeping yields high and uses that to offset less-profitable areas of their network
2) DL could flow more connections over DTW, particularly East-West flows, but pushes a significant amount over ATL but can do so a lower overall cost as ATL operates heavily on large narrowbody aircraft (with lower CASM) and the huge number of flights to allocate fixed costs.
3) DTW is not viewed as a strategic growth market worthy of increased allocation or investment for the purposes of market growth
4) DTW is not a high-growth metro in comparsion to other coastal regions. 1% annual growth in enplanements is not a huge opportunity in comparsion to other high-growth markets

Where we differ is on the accusations and conspiracy theories. We don't necessarily agree on that DL is "out to get DTW" or that WCAA doing something unethical or the likes.

I was looking for fares from DTW to MIA and TPA next April and every thing was north of $600 now what should I do take the bus to not have to pay the prices they dictate by aggressively controlling the capacity to get this kind of artificially high fare. and the WCAA turns a blind eye to this kind of stuff. I bet people in BOS, NYC of CHI are not paying that because those airports have not put all their eggs in one basket and why should I living in Detroit subsidize cheap travel for those people living in a major market in the USA. That is not a free market that is pay the price or walk type of market not what this country is about at all.

I can't believe I'm still feeding the troll, but oh well.

BOS, NYC, and CHI metro areas are each considerably larger than DTW's by every measure. They can support more than one hub/dominant airline. DTW can not, and NWA simply got there first decades ago. Delta just inherited it, and WCAA would be stupid to throw that away. Delta's presence sustains the airport, if the relationship between the two were to fall apart, DTW would be setting itself up for financial ruin and severe reduction of service. DTW is a large airport; it's got a lot of runways, a lot of gates, a lot of everything. It needs to utilize all it has to be sustainable, and Delta gives them that utilization.

Would I like to see some increased competition? Of course. But I'm also happy to see Delta continuing to support the airport and maintain a consistent level of service. You have to keep in mind that DTW is by no means the only fortress hub in the US, we're not alone in having a single, highly dominant carrier at our airport.

There are a lot worse airport scenarios than this one, and it's time you wake up and smell the jet fuel, and try to appreciate what you've got.

flyDTW1992 wrote:

I can't believe I'm still feeding the troll, but oh well.

BOS, NYC, and CHI metro areas are each considerably larger than DTW's by every measure. They can support more than one hub/dominant airline. DTW can not, and NWA simply got there first decades ago. Delta just inherited it, and WCAA would be stupid to throw that away. Delta's presence sustains the airport, if the relationship between the two were to fall apart, DTW would be setting itself up for financial ruin and severe reduction of service. DTW is a large airport; it's got a lot of runways, a lot of gates, a lot of everything. It needs to utilize all it has to be sustainable, and Delta gives them that utilization.

Would I like to see some increased competition? Of course. But I'm also happy to see Delta continuing to support the airport and maintain a consistent level of service. You have to keep in mind that DTW is by no means the only fortress hub in the US, we're not alone in having a single, highly dominant carrier at our airport.

There are a lot worse airport scenarios than this one, and it's time you wake up and smell the jet fuel, and try to appreciate what you've got.

I have to dissent with the principle of your argument. The lions' share on postings within this discussion forum are driven by passion rather than fact. I think it's great some people are showing passion towards DTW, although they should contain themselves within this thread.

I find it fascinating how DTW has long been overlooked. It's interesting how NW/DL was able to monopolize markets like BOS, DCA and SFO for so long; heck, NW monopolized LGA in the 1990s when DTW was one of the most prosperous, populated communities in the country. It's interesting how five airlines operate 16 peak day departures MSP/LAX or how at one point, there was nearly twice as much capacity on MSY/LAX than DTW/LAX -- despite a local market half the size, and no large hub -- and yet when these are brought up for discussion, some people pounce on them. "Golly gee, if airlines thought DTW/LAX was a good market, there'd be more flights" (authored by the same people who start 'who so few 380 at DFW' and 'next international carrier to IAH' mind you).

I attribute much of this to the poor quality of the forums. The MSP crowd hammered for years that DTW maintained a hub 'only because NW/DL owned it' and the CVG crowd pretends that DTW would've been de-hubbed in favor of CVG had it not been for facilities.

klm617 wrote:

I was looking for fares from DTW to MIA and TPA next April and every thing was north of $600 now what should I do take the bus to not have to pay the prices they dictate by aggressively controlling the capacity to get this kind of artificially high fare. and the WCAA turns a blind eye to this kind of stuff. I bet people in BOS, NYC of CHI are not paying that because those airports have not put all their eggs in one basket and why should I living in Detroit subsidize cheap travel for those people living in a major market in the USA. That is not a free market that is pay the price or walk type of market not what this country is about at all.

Absolutely false. I just arbitrarily picked a date in April and looked at the lowest fares:

April 6 - 13 - DTW-MIA $200.20
April 6 - 13 - DTW-TPA $201.19

For comparison:

April 6 - 13 - ORD-MIA $164.19 (only on F9; the next lowest fare is $278.70)
April 6 - 13 - ORD-TPA $261.20
April 6 - 13 - LGA-MIA $242.20
April 6 - 13 - LGA-TPA $304.70

While I definitely believe your previous statement that you "are not interested in facts", there are facts out there - and, in this case, they indicate that DTW gets the lowest fares, not the highest.

klm617 wrote:

[ I bet people in BOS, NYC of CHI are not paying that because those airports have not put all their eggs in one basket and why should I living in Detroit subsidize cheap travel for those people living in a major market in the USA.

You have lost that bet.

If you are cherry-picking dates around Easter weekend I'm not surprised to see sky-high fares. Thats not unique to DL or DTW those are peak travel days of the year into sun/Florida markets.

Also, using DTW-MIA & DTW-TPA are poor examples for your point. Both are competitive routes out of DTW.
DTW-MIA: AA & DL, in fact AA operates almost as much capacity on this route at DL does. Then there is FLL as an option giving you NK
DTW-TPA: DL & NK.

Looks to me like AA is driving DTW-MIA pricing -- DTW-MIA roundtrip 12/13 - 12/20 is $108.20 (flights 1923 and 2641). DL on these dates is $206.20. Don't like DL's pricing, simple solution, fly AA.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

If you are cherry-picking dates around Easter weekend I'm not surprised to see sky-high fares. Thats not unique to DL or DTW those are peak travel days of the year into sun/Florida markets.
Also, using DTW-MIA & DTW-TPA are poor examples for your point. Both are competitive routes out of DTW.
DTW-MIA: AA & DL, in fact AA operates almost as much capacity on this route at DL does. Then there is FLL as an option giving you NK
DTW-TPA: DL & NK.

I offered those destinations because the previous poster was whining about prices between DTW and MIA, and DTW and TPA, in April. I just arbitrarily chose two daes, a week apart, without considering any holidays or other factors. Actually, Easter is on April 17.

My point was that DTW does not have sky-high fares;; indeed, DTW fares are generally lower - on these dates and to these destinations - than flights from ORD or LGA, which that poster-whose-name-cannot-be-spoken claimed - without evidence - had lower fares than DTW.

I wasn't questing you alfa164.....I was supporting your data.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

I wasn't questing you alfa164.....I was supporting your data.

Thank you - I misunderstood!

alfa164 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

I was looking for fares from DTW to MIA and TPA next April and every thing was north of $600 now what should I do take the bus to not have to pay the prices they dictate by aggressively controlling the capacity to get this kind of artificially high fare. and the WCAA turns a blind eye to this kind of stuff. I bet people in BOS, NYC of CHI are not paying that because those airports have not put all their eggs in one basket and why should I living in Detroit subsidize cheap travel for those people living in a major market in the USA. That is not a free market that is pay the price or walk type of market not what this country is about at all.

Absolutely false. I just arbitrarily picked a date in April and looked at the lowest fares:

April 6 - 13 - DTW-MIA $200.20
April 6 - 13 - DTW-TPA $201.19

For comparison:

April 6 - 13 - ORD-MIA $164.19 (only on F9; the next lowest fare is $278.70)
April 6 - 13 - ORD-TPA $261.20
April 6 - 13 - LGA-MIA $242.20
April 6 - 13 - LGA-TPA $304.70

While I definitely believe your previous statement that you "are not interested in facts", there are facts out there - and, in this case, they indicate that DTW gets the lowest fares, not the highest.

klm617 wrote:

[ I bet people in BOS, NYC of CHI are not paying that because those airports have not put all their eggs in one basket and why should I living in Detroit subsidize cheap travel for those people living in a major market in the USA.

You have lost that bet.

April 1st to April 8 $641 on AA and $841 on DL DTW MIA So please don't tell me I have no clue. AA is $441 from O'Hare. $309 from Boston and $269 from EWR and $242 from LGA from YYZ $259 I just looked them all up so my high fare is subsidizing all these other markets and I call BS on that. These are the dates I need to travel on so basically it's screw me because Detroit is my home airport . So explain to me your thesis on why this is I'll tell you because there is more capacity in those market far more than what is needed or the prices wouldn't be that low so why do we not have this capacity in the Detroit market because Delta controls the pricing in this market that's why.

klm617 wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

I was looking for fares from DTW to MIA and TPA next April and every thing was north of $600 now what should I do take the bus to not have to pay the prices they dictate by aggressively controlling the capacity to get this kind of artificially high fare. and the WCAA turns a blind eye to this kind of stuff. I bet people in BOS, NYC of CHI are not paying that because those airports have not put all their eggs in one basket and why should I living in Detroit subsidize cheap travel for those people living in a major market in the USA. That is not a free market that is pay the price or walk type of market not what this country is about at all.

Absolutely false. I just arbitrarily picked a date in April and looked at the lowest fares:
April 6 - 13 - DTW-MIA $200.20
April 6 - 13 - DTW-TPA $201.19
For comparison:
April 6 - 13 - ORD-MIA $164.19 (only on F9; the next lowest fare is $278.70)
April 6 - 13 - ORD-TPA $261.20
April 6 - 13 - LGA-MIA $242.20
April 6 - 13 - LGA-TPA $304.70
While I definitely believe your previous statement that you "are not interested in facts", there are facts out there - and, in this case, they indicate that DTW gets the lowest fares, not the highest.

klm617 wrote:

[ I bet people in BOS, NYC of CHI are not paying that because those airports have not put all their eggs in one basket and why should I living in Detroit subsidize cheap travel for those people living in a major market in the USA.

You have lost that bet.

April 1st to April 8 $641 on AA and $841 on DL DTW MIA So please don't tell me I have no clue. AA is $441 from O'Hare. $309 from Boston and $269 from EWR and $242 from LGA from YYZ $259 I just looked them all up so my high fare is subsidizing all these other markets and I call BS on that. These are the dates I need to travel on so basically it's screw me.

You specifically picked Spring Break Week for Detroit schools; any fool knows those fares are already driven higher than average.

Trying to tell us that DTW has "artificially" high fares - then trying to justify it by picking the one week in a year that Spring Break occurs - is worse than dishonest.

Do you think everyone else is buying that bull?

Look I'm not necessarily defending DL and their pricing strategy, but the first week of April is the week of spring break for most public schools in Southeast Michigan. Almost every school district is out that week so its one of the peak travel weeks of the year for travel from Michigan to Florida. Not suprised to see sky-high fares that week. If you two weeks earlier in March, fares are half the price.

You seem the same concept in other markets:
For example - Spring Break week for most of the public schools in the NYC area is the following week in April (4/8-4/15). Fares on LGA-FLL for Sat-Sat r/ts are in the low $300 range in the weeks prior, then the dates of 4/8-4/15 jump up to $500+

Airlines aren't dumb, they know when peak demand/holiday/break weeks are and price accordingly. Not just airlines, but the hotels/resorts do the same exact thing. They price peak demand periods accordingly. You can save more money by being flexible on your dates/times.

alfa164 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

alfa164 wrote:

Absolutely false. I just arbitrarily picked a date in April and looked at the lowest fares:
April 6 - 13 - DTW-MIA $200.20
April 6 - 13 - DTW-TPA $201.19
For comparison:
April 6 - 13 - ORD-MIA $164.19 (only on F9; the next lowest fare is $278.70)
April 6 - 13 - ORD-TPA $261.20
April 6 - 13 - LGA-MIA $242.20
April 6 - 13 - LGA-TPA $304.70
While I definitely believe your previous statement that you "are not interested in facts", there are facts out there - and, in this case, they indicate that DTW gets the lowest fares, not the highest.

You have lost that bet.

April 1st to April 8 $641 on AA and $841 on DL DTW MIA So please don't tell me I have no clue. AA is $441 from O'Hare. $309 from Boston and $269 from EWR and $242 from LGA from YYZ $259 I just looked them all up so my high fare is subsidizing all these other markets and I call BS on that. These are the dates I need to travel on so basically it's screw me.

You specifically picked Spring Break Week for Detroit schools; any fool knows those fares are already driven higher than average.

Trying to tell us that DTW has "artificially" high fares - then trying to justify it by picking the one week in a year that Spring Break occurs - is worse than dishonest.

Do you think everyone else is buying that bull?

It's spring break in every city so the fares should be just as high in those markets.

Not they are not, Spring Break week for the public schools vary by region (and even district) over about a 6 week period in March through Mid-April. Many regions have similar school calendars as many districts coordinate at the county or state level on calendars.

Example:
Texas schools Spring Break is typically the 2nd week of March
Chicago area schools spring break is the week of 3/27
Southeast Michigan schools spring break is the week of 4/3
New York City area spring break is the week of 4/10

ORD-TPA on the Sat 3/25-4/1 which book-ends their spring break week nonstop on AA $543-$771 r/t. If you select one week later, Sat-Sat nonstop on AA its $351-$445 r/t

Peak flights on peak demand days will command a heavy premium.

klm617 wrote:

It's spring break in every city so the fares should be just as high in those markets.

No, it is not...

Do you just make those claims and hope somebody will believe you?