jbs2886 wrote:

Sounds like DL could be operating EWR-AMS and PHL-CDG in the off-season with KLM and AF, respectively, operating in the summer? Otherwise "suspend" seems weird.

It's also odd considering PHL-CDG is seasonal and it's a rather short season. I guess you can't rule out KLM and AF.

Midwestindy wrote:

What's the reason for DL running IND-CDG 5x weekly instead of 3x weekly during the off-peak season....

I think the original announcement said at least 3x weekly. 5x weekly is at least 3x weekly

Ferryflight wrote:

Seems like DL will end JFK-ARN & CPH s18.

CPH is staying. ARN & SVO are ending. .

panamair wrote:

Ferryflight wrote:

Seems like DL will end JFK-ARN & CPH s18.

I believe only ARN is ending (already not available for sale); CPH still seems to be around for S18. Do you have confirmation of CPH ending?

USA Today says ARN and SVO are ending.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 689599001/

SCQ83 wrote:

izbtmnhd wrote:

klwright69 wrote:

WOW... PDL. The Azores.
When UA announced OPO, I questioned if a US carrier would fly to the Canarias Islands or the Azores...
We have a winner folks.. Ding Ding.

Who from the States or Canada really vacations in the Azores? I know a few people that have gone there but it's not nearly as popular as CUN, NAS, PUJ, SJU, etc.

Azores and mainland Portugal are two quite distinctive markets.

As for the Azores, it depends. I have lived in Boston and I know people who have been there on city-breaks (b/c of SATA, now Azores Airlines). And yes SATA did some shy advertisement about those services for holidaymakers in the Boston area. So it is about the old say of "put them non-stop flights and they will fly"

IMO the new "Azores boom" has some similarities with the Iceland boom. It is a very AirBNB - Internet kind of holiday, "authentic" and mid-Atlantic so it can be reached easily from both the US and Europe (Ryanair has started recently services to PDL)

Also with the EUR so low for American tourists, and Portugal being quite a cheap country, I don't think Azores will end up being more expensive than some Central or South American countries. And even if Portugal is quite poor for European standards, it is way ahead in terms of safety, infrastructures, etc. compared to any country south of Texas. So it can have some attraction of American holidaymakers looking for a quiet and relaxed holiday.

There's got to be a few BOS/PVD based Azoreans who will stop in JFK to escape S4 too. I can't wait to see how the numbers shake out.

Moscow ending the year where you'd likely get better yield than ever before (World Cup) is surprising. You'd think they'd have kept it around one more season anyway.

Unfortunately I wouldn't be surprised to see PIT-CDG get axed in favor of the new IND route... will have to see how this plays out.

flymco753 wrote:

I'm pumped for this new MCO-AMS flight, if it does well I suppose more will come, like CDG. Also DL identified MCO as a gateway, wouldn't this practically mean a focus city?

I love you but please stop asking this. Like a tenth of the stuff you post here is "is MCO a Delta focus city?"

KATL2 wrote:

panamair wrote:

Ferryflight wrote:

Seems like DL will end JFK-ARN & CPH s18.

I believe only ARN is ending (already not available for sale); CPH still seems to be around for S18. Do you have confirmation of CPH ending?

USA Today says ARN and SVO are ending.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 689599001/

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

Pittsburgher wrote:

Unfortunately I wouldn't be surprised to see PIT-CDG get axed in favor of the new IND route... will have to see how this plays out.

If the route is selling I doubt DL would ax it.

Pittsburgher wrote:

Unfortunately I wouldn't be surprised to see PIT-CDG get axed in favor of the new IND route... will have to see how this plays out.

PIT is on a 757. IND is on a 767. The cities are not near each other. Why would IND affect PIT? If anything does it's the new competition from Condor and WOW.

AaronPGH wrote:

Pittsburgher wrote:

Unfortunately I wouldn't be surprised to see PIT-CDG get axed in favor of the new IND route... will have to see how this plays out.

PIT is on a 757. IND is on a 767. The cities are not near each other. Why would IND affect PIT? If anything does it's the new competition from Condor and WOW.

I am fully aware of all of this. When adding a new secondary city TATL route like this however, I would imagine there needs to be some bit of give and take and the PIT-CDG route seems reasonable for DL to axe in order to direct funds to make IND-CDG work. The subsidy isn't going to last forever.

Pittsburgher wrote:

I am fully aware of all of this. When adding a new secondary city TATL route like this however, I would imagine there needs to be some bit of give and take and the PIT-CDG route seems reasonable for DL to axe in order to direct funds to make IND-CDG work. The subsidy isn't going to last forever.

The subsidy has been over since 2011ish. The flight has been standing on it's own. It is profitable.

AaronPGH wrote:

Pittsburgher wrote:

I am fully aware of all of this. When adding a new secondary city TATL route like this however, I would imagine there needs to be some bit of give and take and the PIT-CDG route seems reasonable for DL to axe in order to direct funds to make IND-CDG work. The subsidy isn't going to last forever.

The subsidy has been over since 2011ish. The flight has been standing on it's own. It is profitable.

I meant the IND subsidy. Regardless, we will have to wait and see. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see it stay but I just don't think it will.

And yet, nothing from AUS to either AMS or CDG...........

Amazing. I am utterly shocked AUS has not been able to land a second year round full service TATL flight.

So the 777 from LAX sits in AMS for 7.5 hours before turning back to LAX?

Again , how does IND impact PIT? PIT is on a 757 and has operated on its own without subsidy for many years.
What "give and take" are you referring to below? What do you mean when you say "...seems reasonable for DL to axe in order to direct funds to make IND - CDG work.". What does that even mean? DL is getting a subsidy for IND - CDG. That in no way has anything to do with PIT - and what funds are you talking about? the subsidy used to initially get PIT - CDG going are gone and PIT has been successful on its owns for many years. IND - CDG is a separate subsidy that has nothing to do with PIT. So your argument doesn't really make sense. Talking about how Condor and WOW might impact the PIT route might make sense, but you're not doing it. You're tying the viability of PIT- CDG to IND - CDG, which really has nothing to do with it.

Pittsburgher wrote:

AaronPGH wrote:

Pittsburgher wrote:

I am fully aware of all of this. When adding a new secondary city TATL route like this however, I would imagine there needs to be some bit of give and take and the PIT-CDG route seems reasonable for DL to axe in order to direct funds to make IND-CDG work. The subsidy isn't going to last forever.

The subsidy has been over since 2011ish. The flight has been standing on it's own. It is profitable.

I meant the IND subsidy. Regardless, we will have to wait and see. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see it stay but I just don't think it will.

[twoid][/twoid]

ADrum23 wrote:

And yet, nothing from AUS to either AMS or CDG...........

Amazing. I am utterly shocked AUS has not been able to land a second year round full service TATL flight.

Widebody GSE equipment has been sent here. ULDs arrive next month. AMS will likely stay after trial run in March. Rumor from DL accounting Services is they've already labeled the station a Micro Hub. Phase 2 of AUS expansion (30+ gate expansion minimum) starts after 9 gate concourse opened next summer. The DL TATL routes will come in time.

AAvgeek744 wrote:

Digdas wrote:

RJNUT wrote:

I believe TWA back in the early 70's served the Azores , but not PDL, but rather the airport at Santa Maria, on a nearby island. It may have also been some sort of US military installation there, if a recall?!

Yep TWA flew to SMA back then.

IIRC, it was a weekly nonstop from BOS, and continued on to LIS.

Yes, TW908 was a once weekly non-stop JFK-BOS-Santa Maria-LIS with a 707 in the late-60s. Offered Royal Ambassador first class service with "superb cuisine and fine wines" in the first class cabin. Not sure when the service ended. Details here:

http://www.timetableimages.com/ttimages ... w68-03.jpg

The service to Santa Maria went way back on TWA to the Constellation days. Here, for example, in 1956 an L749 went BOS-Santa Maria-LIS twice a week and IDL-Gander-Santa Maria-LIS once a week, so thrice weekly service in the prop days. The longer range 1049Gs were flying all the transatlantic non-stops, and the Azores still got the shorter range L749. Details here:

http://www.timetableimages.com/ttimages ... 569-17.jpg

Thank you as always to timetableimages

Okay now back to fighting about Detroit!

reggiet wrote:

[twoid][/twoid]

ADrum23 wrote:

And yet, nothing from AUS to either AMS or CDG...........

Amazing. I am utterly shocked AUS has not been able to land a second year round full service TATL flight.

Widebody GSE equipment has been sent here. ULDs arrive next month. AMS will likely stay after trial run in March. Rumor from DL accounting Services is they've already labeled the station a Micro Hub. Phase 2 of AUS expansion (30+ gate expansion minimum) starts after 9 gate concourse opened next summer. The DL TATL routes will come in time.

Correction: DL Revenue Accounting

clrd4t8koff wrote:

Interesting add for JFK-PDL. It seemed that the Azores was more VFR - Does PDL have much tourism?

BOS/PVD has a large (believe the largest outside of the Azores) Azores ex-pat community, surprised DL didn't do BOS-PDL instead. Would it be too competitive with S4 and that's why they went with JFK?

It doesn't make much sense to me to start service to a brand new destination from a secondary hub which would be BOS. When DL started BOS-DUB they had a presence in BOS and already went to DUB from JFK and ATL. It's a lot different IMO going to a brand new destination so that's why going from JFK makes more sense.

jasoncrh wrote:

Again , how does IND impact PIT? PIT is on a 757 and has operated on its own without subsidy for many years.
What "give and take" are you referring to below? What do you mean when you say "...seems reasonable for DL to axe in order to direct funds to make IND - CDG work.". What does that even mean? DL is getting a subsidy for IND - CDG. That in no way has anything to do with PIT - and what funds are you talking about? the subsidy used to initially get PIT - CDG going are gone and PIT has been successful on its owns for many years. IND - CDG is a separate subsidy that has nothing to do with PIT. So your argument doesn't really make sense. Talking about how Condor and WOW might impact the PIT route might make sense, but you're not doing it. You're tying the viability of PIT- CDG to IND - CDG, which really has nothing to do with it.

Pittsburgher wrote:

AaronPGH wrote:

The subsidy has been over since 2011ish. The flight has been standing on it's own. It is profitable.

I meant the IND subsidy. Regardless, we will have to wait and see. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see it stay but I just don't think it will.

Calm down, it was just a thought.

My logic is pretty simple though, the airline only has finite assets. Therefore, by "giving" IND the CDG route, there logically will need to be a "take" from somewhere else in the network. And I proposed that it could possibly be PIT. Thats all.

Sure the subsidy will get IND-CDG off the ground but how long can that last? And obviously I am not referring to the particular airframe directly given that PIT uses a 752. However placing PIT's 752 on a different TATL route may free up a 763 for IND elsewhere. Again, just a thought.

I understand you disagree, but is it really necessary to be so typical, Anet snarky with me?

flymco753 wrote:

Also DL identified MCO as a gateway, wouldn't this practically mean a focus city?

Shouldn't you be more concerned with what they offer, instead of what they call it?

There's not many places from which DL flies to destinations in three different continents. Be happy.

Pittsburgher wrote:

When adding a new secondary city TATL route like this however, I would imagine there needs to be some bit of give and take

Um, why?

ADrum23 wrote:

And yet, nothing from AUS to either AMS or CDG.
Amazing. I am utterly shocked AUS has not been able to land a second year round full service TATL flight.

At the risk of stating (what should be) obvious:
AUS is not Hong Kong, it is not Paris, it is not New York... nor is it anything remotely approaching their caliber. Ya wouldn't know it from some of these posts though.

It's a midsized gateway that's only just completed a 3rd full year of longhaul travel in any form. It already punches well above its weight, and by next summer it'll have double the seats over the ocean that it initially started with. What he heck more do you realistically want?

reggiet wrote:

[twoid][/twoid]

ADrum23 wrote:

And yet, nothing from AUS to either AMS or CDG...........

Amazing. I am utterly shocked AUS has not been able to land a second year round full service TATL flight.

Widebody GSE equipment has been sent here. ULDs arrive next month. AMS will likely stay after trial run in March. Rumor from DL accounting Services is they've already labeled the station a Micro Hub. Phase 2 of AUS expansion (30+ gate expansion minimum) starts after 9 gate concourse opened next summer. The DL TATL routes will come in time.

What is a Micro Hub? And where does it fall in between the Hub-focus city-spoke spectrum?

Midwestindy wrote:

reggiet wrote:

[twoid][/twoid]

ADrum23 wrote:

And yet, nothing from AUS to either AMS or CDG...........

Amazing. I am utterly shocked AUS has not been able to land a second year round full service TATL flight.

Widebody GSE equipment has been sent here. ULDs arrive next month. AMS will likely stay after trial run in March. Rumor from DL accounting Services is they've already labeled the station a Micro Hub. Phase 2 of AUS expansion (30+ gate expansion minimum) starts after 9 gate concourse opened next summer. The DL TATL routes will come in time.

What is a Micro Hub? And where does it fall in between the Hub-focus city-spoke spectrum?

You beat me to it. That is one of the most non-sensical made up terms I have ever heard used here. Pretty much every station that has service to more than one city is a micro-hub...

B747forever wrote:

With the DL flight arriving into AMS at 7:55, the first connections you can make will be at 8:55. There is no way that KLM has 50 EU connections between 8:55 and 10:05 (1 hour after arrival of KL602). Heck, does KLM even serve 50 EU cities?

So the only benefit of the new DL LAX-AMS flight will be for any connecting flights between 8:55 and 10:05.

KLM says the minimum transfer time is 50 minutes. But if you use 60 minutes it will be 5 flights less flights at the start, but also a couple more between 10:05 and 10:15, the number stays roughly the same. Still more then enough quick transfer options for the DL flight.

tjerome wrote:

clrd4t8koff wrote:

Interesting add for JFK-PDL. It seemed that the Azores was more VFR - Does PDL have much tourism?

BOS/PVD has a large (believe the largest outside of the Azores) Azores ex-pat community, surprised DL didn't do BOS-PDL instead. Would it be too competitive with S4 and that's why they went with JFK?

It doesn't make much sense to me to start service to a brand new destination from a secondary hub which would be BOS. When DL started BOS-DUB they had a presence in BOS and already went to DUB from JFK and ATL. It's a lot different IMO going to a brand new destination so that's why going from JFK makes more sense.

Azores seems to be a "mini tourism boom" in Europe linked to low-cost flights. I have seen advertisement for the Azores in the streets of Madrid or Rome, so there is certainly a government campaign behind.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/por ... a594577b5c

http://www.travelpulse.com/news/destina ... ation.html

So as I mentioned there are some parallelisms with Iceland.

JFK makes more sense since it is a bigger market to stimulate for tourism, and they also can get connections. SATA (Azores) flies or used to fly from Oakland, so they could get California-JFK-Azores connections.

[

B747forever wrote:

With the DL flight arriving into AMS at 7:55, the first connections you can make will be at 8:55. There is no way that KLM has 50 EU connections between 8:55 and 10:05 (1 hour after arrival of KL602). Heck, does KLM even serve 50 EU cities?

So the only benefit of the new DL LAX-AMS flight will be for any connecting flights between 8:55 and 10:05.

At a minimum transfer time of 50 minutes this enables 52 connections. Some of the destinations are flown many more times per day so they also have nice connections to the other LAX flights, but destinations like BIO, LPI, GRZ, TRN, SXB, INV only see two flights and are real new opportunities here:
0850 BUD
0900 LUX
0900 NWI
0900 TLS
0905 BRU
0910 VCE
0910 CWL
0915 BIO
0915 LCY
0920 STR
0920 TRD
0920 BOD
0920 OSL
0920 ORK (EI operaed)
0920 ZAG
0925 PRG (OK operated)
0925 MME
0925 GRZ
0925 HAJ
0930 CDG (AF operated)
0930 AGP (HV)
0930 HUY
0930 TRN
0930 KBP
0930 OTP
0930 BLL
0930 NCE
0935 FCO
0935 LPI
0935 MUC
0940 ZRH
0940 SKG (HV operated)
0940 DUB
0940 FLR
0940 LBA
0940 KRS
0940 GVA
0940 INV
0945 EDI
0945 CPH
0945 NCL
0945 WAW
0945 NTE (AF)
0950 GOT
1000 BEG (JU)
1000 SVG
1000 HEL
1000 CPT
1000 SXB (AF)
1000 ABZ
1000 FRA
1010 MAN

tjerome wrote:

clrd4t8koff wrote:

Interesting add for JFK-PDL. It seemed that the Azores was more VFR - Does PDL have much tourism?

BOS/PVD has a large (believe the largest outside of the Azores) Azores ex-pat community, surprised DL didn't do BOS-PDL instead. Would it be too competitive with S4 and that's why they went with JFK?

It doesn't make much sense to me to start service to a brand new destination from a secondary hub which would be BOS. When DL started BOS-DUB they had a presence in BOS and already went to DUB from JFK and ATL. It's a lot different IMO going to a brand new destination so that's why going from JFK makes more sense.

I'm going to push back a little here. I don't think DL started BOS-DUB because they spent years building their presence with their JFK and ATL. DL started it because EI is printing money and had a monopoly on BOS-DUB. The other part that that doesn't seem right is that if JFK is such a large market to easily stimulate from PDL - then why doesn't SATA/Azore Airlines fly there? My guess is the reason DL went with JFK-PDL is because they simply don't have the gate space at BOS for another evening EU flight until WN moves.

If DL ran BOS-PDL it would be competing for the VFR traffic that Azores Airlines has been getting out of BOS/PVD. That's going to focus heavily on price. Running it out of JFK means it has a good range of connecting traffic into and out of JFK. BOS-DUB is an outlier for Delta.

MIflyer12 wrote:

If DL ran BOS-PDL it would be competing for the VFR traffic that Azores Airlines has been getting out of BOS/PVD. That's going to focus heavily on price. Running it out of JFK means it has a good range of connecting traffic into and out of JFK. BOS-DUB is an outlier for Delta.

BOS-DUB is an outlier for Delta? They fly from BOS to multiple destinations in EU - LHR, CDG, AMS and DUB. What makes DUB an outlier? BOS is a hub for DL.

PIT-CDG, IND-CDG are outliers for DL.

adamh8297 wrote:

There's got to be a few BOS/PVD based Azoreans who will stop in JFK to escape S4 too. I can't wait to see how the numbers shake out.

The fares would have to be dirt cheap. I have flown S4 a few times and while they are crap, they are still by far the quickest and most affordable way of getting to the Azores. They also allow 2 free checked bags i think, which is very important for the VFR crowd.
I think DL will have no problem filling a 752 from JFK on O&D alone. There are plenty of Azoreans in the CT/NY/NJ tri-state area who will love the idea of not having to connect in or drive to Boston. There are also the "other" Portuguese who will love vacationing in the Azores or have a stop-over on the way to/from the mainland.

MIflyer12 wrote:

If DL ran BOS-PDL it would be competing for the VFR traffic that Azores Airlines has been getting out of BOS/PVD. That's going to focus heavily on price. Running it out of JFK means it has a good range of connecting traffic into and out of JFK. BOS-DUB is an outlier for Delta.

I don't understand why they don't run a flight out of BOS either. Must have something to do with aircraft positioning, or gate space, or any of 100 reasons. In the Summer this market from BOS is huge and the fares aren't exactly cheap. VFR traffic is not the same as leisure traffic. Having said that, in my opinion there will be enough VFR out of JFK to fill a 752 in the Summer. BOS is also a DL hub. For this specific flight, they would have had just as much connection potential out of BOS as they do out of JFK.

clrd4t8koff wrote:

tjerome wrote:

clrd4t8koff wrote:

Interesting add for JFK-PDL. It seemed that the Azores was more VFR - Does PDL have much tourism?

BOS/PVD has a large (believe the largest outside of the Azores) Azores ex-pat community, surprised DL didn't do BOS-PDL instead. Would it be too competitive with S4 and that's why they went with JFK?

It doesn't make much sense to me to start service to a brand new destination from a secondary hub which would be BOS. When DL started BOS-DUB they had a presence in BOS and already went to DUB from JFK and ATL. It's a lot different IMO going to a brand new destination so that's why going from JFK makes more sense.

I'm going to push back a little here. I don't think DL started BOS-DUB because they spent years building their presence with their JFK and ATL. DL started it because EI is printing money and had a monopoly on BOS-DUB. The other part that that doesn't seem right is that if JFK is such a large market to easily stimulate from PDL - then why doesn't SATA/Azore Airlines fly there? My guess is the reason DL went with JFK-PDL is because they simply don't have the gate space at BOS for another evening EU flight until WN moves.

SATA had some plans to expand the NA market including NY (not 5x weekly tho), even before the "boom" but their LH fleet is very old at the moment and not reliable at all. A plan to replace the A310s came late (get rid of the 4 A310s and get 2 A332s) and has been scrapped (they only phased out 1 A310 and phased in 1 A332) due to a change in the administration of the airline. Right now, it's very rare to have a week where at least one of their A310s doesn't have any kind of problems. For the past two years, their summer schedule has been a "festival" of ACMIs (lots of replacements by HiFly/EuroAtlantic and even Wamos Air) but now with the A21N/A21N LR coming, things might change, they plan a strong operation for BOS in the summer (they tried this year, but again lots of problems with the A310s) and might expand the NA market, I doubt it will include NY tho.

Also Azores Airlines is going through a lot at the moment with a restructuring (supposedly) coming soon.

clrd4t8koff wrote:

tjerome wrote:

clrd4t8koff wrote:

Interesting add for JFK-PDL. It seemed that the Azores was more VFR - Does PDL have much tourism?

BOS/PVD has a large (believe the largest outside of the Azores) Azores ex-pat community, surprised DL didn't do BOS-PDL instead. Would it be too competitive with S4 and that's why they went with JFK?

It doesn't make much sense to me to start service to a brand new destination from a secondary hub which would be BOS. When DL started BOS-DUB they had a presence in BOS and already went to DUB from JFK and ATL. It's a lot different IMO going to a brand new destination so that's why going from JFK makes more sense.

I'm going to push back a little here. I don't think DL started BOS-DUB because they spent years building their presence with their JFK and ATL. DL started it because EI is printing money and had a monopoly on BOS-DUB. The other part that that doesn't seem right is that if JFK is such a large market to easily stimulate from PDL - then why doesn't SATA/Azore Airlines fly there? My guess is the reason DL went with JFK-PDL is because they simply don't have the gate space at BOS for another evening EU flight until WN moves.

My point on DL BOS-DUB was that 1. DL already flies to DUB and 2. DL already has a small hub at BOS. Yes EI is printing money on that route which is why it made sense for them to jump on it. What I was trying to emphasize that it makes a lot more sense for a destination that AFAIK DL has never served to be started from a major hub. DL can generate more connecting traffic from JFK vs. from BOS. There would be a lot more one stops at JFK vs. two stops via JFK or other hubs to go through BOS too. Yes DL would be competing at BOS but for them it makes sense to start it from JFK where they have a major international hub and a lot of domestic connections.

DL doesn't have the gate space for much at BOS these days and they keep on adding plenty of domestic flights so that isn't the issue.

clrd4t8koff wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

If DL ran BOS-PDL it would be competing for the VFR traffic that Azores Airlines has been getting out of BOS/PVD. That's going to focus heavily on price. Running it out of JFK means it has a good range of connecting traffic into and out of JFK. BOS-DUB is an outlier for Delta.

BOS-DUB is an outlier for Delta? They fly from BOS to multiple destinations in EU - LHR, CDG, AMS and DUB. What makes DUB an outlier? BOS is a hub for DL.

PIT-CDG, IND-CDG are outliers for DL.

CDG is a hub for DL. I wouldn't not call these outliers. You just said BOS is a hub for DL (which I was not aware it is) so BOS-DUB isn't an outlier. CDG is a hub for DL too.

Anything on DL to CDG or AMS isn't an outlier.

tjerome wrote:

DL doesn't have the gate space for much at BOS these days and they keep on adding plenty of domestic flights so that isn't the issue.

I don't really know the details of the gate space at DL's terminal A but I suspect that gate space at terminal E which is extremely limited could also have played a role.

jbs2886 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

KATL2 wrote:

USA Today says ARN and SVO are ending.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 689599001/

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.

On EWR-AMS going seasonal - do you think its because 9W will start the route year round - say EWR-AMS-BOM with DL adding capacity in the summer when more Americans are flying to Europe? Winter is peak season to India and EWR is one of the largest, if not the largest, origin/destination point for VFR traffic to India. I think when DL originally invited 9W to the transatlantic JV some years ago, they talked about 9W operating EWR-AMS. I actually think 9W should operate three NA routes: YYZ-AMS-DEL, SFO-AMS-BLR and EWR-AMS-BOM. These are really the only US cities that have enough O&D traffic to justify 9W flying to them via EU (nonstop would be another story). The rest of the flying should be left to DL/KL/AF.

With AF announcing CDG SEA for summer 2018, and no word here of DL ending the route on their own metal, does this mean 2x CDG SEA in S18?

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.

You realize that people are poking fun at you for your constant gloom and doom about DTW, right?

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.

[photoid][/photoid]

AF773 wrote:

With AF announcing CDG SEA for summer 2018, and no word here of DL ending the route on their own metal, does this mean 2x CDG SEA in S18?

Really ? Any source for the resumption of the AF flight to SEA ? Nice to see AF back at SEA.
I think, in this circumstances, that DL will stop it. I don't think there's enough pax for 2x daily SEA-CDG.

CaliguyNYC wrote:

On EWR-AMS going seasonal - do you think its because 9W will start the route year round - say EWR-AMS-BOM with DL adding capacity in the summer when more Americans are flying to Europe? Winter is peak season to India and EWR is one of the largest, if not the largest, origin/destination point for VFR traffic to India. I think when DL originally invited 9W to the transatlantic JV some years ago, they talked about 9W operating EWR-AMS. I actually think 9W should operate three NA routes: YYZ-AMS-DEL, SFO-AMS-BLR and EWR-AMS-BOM. These are really the only US cities that have enough O&D traffic to justify 9W flying to them via EU (nonstop would be another story). The rest of the flying should be left to DL/KL/AF.

Delta’s EWR-AMS going seasonal? Is that a guess or did you see that release? The press release yesterday (sept 21) states “suspending service”.

goldorak wrote:

[photoid][/photoid]

AF773 wrote:

With AF announcing CDG SEA for summer 2018, and no word here of DL ending the route on their own metal, does this mean 2x CDG SEA in S18?

Really ? Any source for the resumption of the AF flight to SEA ? Nice to see AF back at SEA.
.

Yes, alongside TPE Putting those B789 to good use. There is a thread about it:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1374419

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.

Interesting that KL/DL are having another go at direct AMS-Florida flights. I think KL already flies seasonal AMS-MIA service (after the failed attempt in 2011/2012) and now DL is launching AMS-MCO.

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.