FA9295 wrote:

SANFan wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

More from PDX August 2018 report:

Condor +5%
(same, 36 flights)
Howdy PDX-ers. I was looking at this data and have a question. Using DE as an example, I don't understand the counts given.

AFAIK, Condor flew twice weekly -- Tue & Sat -- between PDX and FRA in August, I counted on the calendar and that should be 8 days of service which I would count as either 8 flights or 16 depending on whether I count one ways (16) or roundtrip, which would be 8.

So how does the PDX-issued figure (above) come up with '36 flights'? I must be missing something or have really lost my arithmetic skills! Help! (Until I figure this out, I haven't bothered with any of the other cx numbers.)

Thanks in advance guys.

bb.

Condor's FRA-PDX-FRA flights have been very inconsistent over the past few months. Most of the time, it's twice a week (as it currently is on Tue and Sat), and sometimes it operates around 3 to 4x weekly flights instead of 2. This mostly happens in the peak summer months (July and August, give or take), while in the slower summer months (June, September and October), the flight operates 2x weekly instead of 3 to 4x weekly.

I'm guessing that the stats that were posted above represent flights in all of 2018 up until August (so January through August). So from when the summer seasonal flight started in June up until the end of August, Condor operated 36 PDX-FRA flights, which would make sense considering the fact that the route is only operated through October.

Also, the flights in those stats are being represented as one-way, not round-trip, so one FRA-PDX-FRA round-trip rotation would count as two total flights.

Hmmm. OK. Thank you much FA9'. I do appreciate the response. (I'm NOT arguing with you but just trying to understand the numbers.)

What you're saying then is that PDX has had 18 days of service (36 flights) in 2018 -- over June, July & August -- which would average ~6 days per month; that could work but does seem a bit low.

So if that's how POP posts the numbers -- as year-to-date vs. monthly totals -- that's fine. But more realistically, and to be more meaningful, it seems to me that the August numbers should be reported as "16". (I haven't actually seen the actual report by them so I don't know how the numbers are represented.)

Anyway, thanks again for your usual helpfulness.

bb

The number is total flights for August only. It was 4x/week for most of the month.

[url][/url]

jbpdx wrote:

The number is total flights for August only. It was 4x/week for most of the month.

Umm, okay. All the Condor timetables I've found on their website definitely show 2 flights per week -- Tue & Sat out of PDX for 2018. To operate twice that many flights on a regular basis sounds strange to me; does DE really have the a/c sitting around to double scheduled frequencies in one market for a whole month?

And apparently they did the same thing last year? (Since 2018 numbers show the same as 2017.)

Time for me to visit FlightAware or FlightRadar24 and try to check August flight records!

Again, thanx for the feedback guys.

bb

I really wouldn't worry about Delta pulling LHR from PDX. From everything I've heard, the flight is doing well. That being said, if it's doing as well as I hear, than hopefully making it year-round will happen.

flyoregon wrote:

I really wouldn't worry about Delta pulling LHR from PDX. From everything I've heard, the flight is doing well. That being said, if it's doing as well as I hear, than hopefully making it year-round will happen.

The thing about LHR, and why the route is probably seasonal instead of year-round is due to the very limited slots available at LHR. With that being said, If Delta got access to more slots at LHR, I'm not sure if converting PDX-LHR to year-round would be on their priority list. Maybe at the very least, making it 7x weekly (daily) instead of 4x weekly.

I used the LHR flight once this year.
Need to go back in February, and will have to connect.

I’d almost always do PDX-AMS-xXX, but I’m going to try the 787 out of Seattle on virgin atlantic.

Really can’t wait for pdx to be year round. Even if it’s 3-4x weekly year round. Just so much easier than dumb connections.

Also, where is pdx-icn?? This has to be coming in 2019 no??

SANFan wrote:

[url][/url]

jbpdx wrote:

The number is total flights for August only. It was 4x/week for most of the month.

Umm, okay. All the Condor timetables I've found on their website definitely show 2 flights per week -- Tue & Sat out of PDX for 2018. To operate twice that many flights on a regular basis sounds strange to me; does DE really have the a/c sitting around to double scheduled frequencies in one market for a whole month?

And apparently they did the same thing last year? (Since 2018 numbers show the same as 2017.)

Time for me to visit FlightAware or FlightRadar24 and try to check August flight records!

Again, thanx for the feedback guys.

bb

DE's PDX-FRA schedule was supposed to be as
follows. Whether they flew it as published I couldn't tell you:

01MAY-26JUN.....TU/SA
27JUN-10SEP.....TU/TH/FR/SA
11SEP-27OCT.....TU/SA

Hope this helps!

FA9295 wrote:

flyoregon wrote:

I really wouldn't worry about Delta pulling LHR from PDX. From everything I've heard, the flight is doing well. That being said, if it's doing as well as I hear, than hopefully making it year-round will happen.

The thing about LHR, and why the route is probably seasonal instead of year-round is due to the very limited slots available at LHR. With that being said, If Delta got access to more slots at LHR, I'm not sure if converting PDX-LHR to year-round would be on their priority list. Maybe at the very least, making it 7x weekly (daily) instead of 4x weekly.

You're right about the slot issue with LHR. In the "DEN-LHR on UA" thread, it's mentioned that UA has the same issue with not being able to make that route year-round, and that they shift it over to EWR during the winter.

Regarding PDX-LHR on DL, I think we'll continue to see the same frequency for the next year or so. I find it interesting that Icelandair is down nearly 8%, if that trend that continues, that will certainly help this route as well as PDX-AMS. Condor is doing ok to FRA, but sounds like their schedule is all over the place? Delta has a large enough and stable customer base in the PDX area, so they will support PDX-LHR and PDX-AMS to keep their mileage and medallion status.

I haven't heard anything more about PDX-ICN on either DL metal or KE.

BlatantEcho wrote:

I used the LHR flight once this year.
Need to go back in February, and will have to connect.

I’d almost always do PDX-AMS-xXX, but I’m going to try the 787 out of Seattle on virgin atlantic.

Ha I’m doing the same. Taking DL from AMS to PDX but wanted to try the VS 787 on the way back. I’m flying out of LAX.

Alaska just added ELP to SEA/SAN today.

It seems as though PDX hasn't really been a priority for them (for whatever reason).

We've gotten second daily flights to BOS and ORD, as well as TUS which will also go 2x daily in December, so at least they're not "drastically" removing PDX routes altogether. With that being said though, I'm not very confident that Alaska is going to add anything else to PDX in the near future, given that their focus attention is pretty much solely on SEA and SAN within the past few years or so. If they can't even make year-round service to ATL, BWI and PHL work, let alone DTW at all, then I would not count on seeing any new routes to/from PDX from them within the near future. However, maybe more frequencies will be added to existing routes...

LH just announced Austin which means that Condor will likely cease flights to/from AUS. Chances of two carriers to Germany from there are very slim which is what happened in San Diego. Why hasn’t that happened in Portland?

I don’t want to sound whiny, but I’m about to anyway. It seems like ever since Curtis Robinhold took over, the airport ceased to even try to attract new service. It seems like marketing for international has gone down and the airport is just staying where it was a year or two ago. You use to see ads for Icelandair and Condor all over the place and even the occasional Delta to London billboard.

I get it, the PoP is into real estate. But they are also in charge of the airport and because of that people need to hold them to a standard to drive business in and out of the state by providing connections that are attractive to people here. The 24-26 flights per day to/from Seattle aren’t there because everyone LOVES Seattle. They’re there because airlines will just funnel Portlanders through SEA to whatever flight to whatever destination. Why doesn’t Alaska do that from San Diego to Lon Angeles? Surely there are people there that are traveling internationally that can just take a quick hope up to LAX and connect to an AS partner flight.

Again, I’m not asking for the throngs of international options. What I am asking for in addition to support what we have, is for the Port to work more closely with the business community and travel groups I.e. travel Oregon and travel Portland.

It seems as if Portland is often taken advantage of beyond the obvious overshadowing by Seattle. This city CAN support year round flights to more than just AMS and NRT. But somebody at the Port needs to actually start working for once and make that a reality.

flyoregon wrote:

LH just announced Austin which means that Condor will likely cease flights to/from AUS. Chances of two carriers to Germany from there are very slim which is what happened in San Diego. Why hasn’t that happened in Portland?

I don’t want to sound whiny, but I’m about to anyway. It seems like ever since Curtis Robinhold took over, the airport ceased to even try to attract new service. It seems like marketing for international has gone down and the airport is just staying where it was a year or two ago. You use to see ads for Icelandair and Condor all over the place and even the occasional Delta to London billboard.

I get it, the PoP is into real estate. But they are also in charge of the airport and because of that people need to hold them to a standard to drive business in and out of the state by providing connections that are attractive to people here. The 24-26 flights per day to/from Seattle aren’t there because everyone LOVES Seattle. They’re there because airlines will just funnel Portlanders through SEA to whatever flight to whatever destination. Why doesn’t Alaska do that from San Diego to Lon Angeles? Surely there are people there that are traveling internationally that can just take a quick hope up to LAX and connect to an AS partner flight.

Again, I’m not asking for the throngs of international options. What I am asking for in addition to support what we have, is for the Port to work more closely with the business community and travel groups I.e. travel Oregon and travel Portland.

It seems as if Portland is often taken advantage of beyond the obvious overshadowing by Seattle. This city CAN support year round flights to more than just AMS and NRT. But somebody at the Port needs to actually start working for once and make that a reality.

Totally agree with you.

Does anyone know if our international routes are subsidized? If not, and if Delta just added PDX-LHR without any incentive at all, then that might be a cause of investigation. I'm not saying that the PoP should just carelessly throw out money to the airlines for new routes, but lots of airports push for new routes by giving airlines financial security in order to make sure that they're proposed new route will make them money in the long run.

flyoregon wrote:

LH just announced Austin which means that Condor will likely cease flights to/from AUS. Chances of two carriers to Germany from there are very slim which is what happened in San Diego. Why hasn’t that happened in Portland?

I don’t want to sound whiny, but I’m about to anyway. It seems like ever since Curtis Robinhold took over, the airport ceased to even try to attract new service. It seems like marketing for international has gone down and the airport is just staying where it was a year or two ago. You use to see ads for Icelandair and Condor all over the place and even the occasional Delta to London billboard.

I get it, the PoP is into real estate. But they are also in charge of the airport and because of that people need to hold them to a standard to drive business in and out of the state by providing connections that are attractive to people here. The 24-26 flights per day to/from Seattle aren’t there because everyone LOVES Seattle. They’re there because airlines will just funnel Portlanders through SEA to whatever flight to whatever destination. Why doesn’t Alaska do that from San Diego to Lon Angeles? Surely there are people there that are traveling internationally that can just take a quick hope up to LAX and connect to an AS partner flight.

Again, I’m not asking for the throngs of international options. What I am asking for in addition to support what we have, is for the Port to work more closely with the business community and travel groups I.e. travel Oregon and travel Portland.

It seems as if Portland is often taken advantage of beyond the obvious overshadowing by Seattle. This city CAN support year round flights to more than just AMS and NRT. But somebody at the Port needs to actually start working for once and make that a reality.

I agree. And not to mention, Seattle's constrained and run down facilities compared to the dream airport that is PDX. SEA punches way above its weight and a lot of that is supported by PDX passengers. While I'm happy PDX has the intl flights it has, I think we can do better. I can't believe we only have one TPAC flight. Why on earth hasn't PDX-ICN been announced?

TransWorldOne wrote:

flyoregon wrote:

LH just announced Austin which means that Condor will likely cease flights to/from AUS. Chances of two carriers to Germany from there are very slim which is what happened in San Diego. Why hasn’t that happened in Portland?

I don’t want to sound whiny, but I’m about to anyway. It seems like ever since Curtis Robinhold took over, the airport ceased to even try to attract new service. It seems like marketing for international has gone down and the airport is just staying where it was a year or two ago. You use to see ads for Icelandair and Condor all over the place and even the occasional Delta to London billboard.

I get it, the PoP is into real estate. But they are also in charge of the airport and because of that people need to hold them to a standard to drive business in and out of the state by providing connections that are attractive to people here. The 24-26 flights per day to/from Seattle aren’t there because everyone LOVES Seattle. They’re there because airlines will just funnel Portlanders through SEA to whatever flight to whatever destination. Why doesn’t Alaska do that from San Diego to Lon Angeles? Surely there are people there that are traveling internationally that can just take a quick hope up to LAX and connect to an AS partner flight.

Again, I’m not asking for the throngs of international options. What I am asking for in addition to support what we have, is for the Port to work more closely with the business community and travel groups I.e. travel Oregon and travel Portland.

It seems as if Portland is often taken advantage of beyond the obvious overshadowing by Seattle. This city CAN support year round flights to more than just AMS and NRT. But somebody at the Port needs to actually start working for once and make that a reality.

I agree. And not to mention, Seattle's constrained and run down facilities compared to the dream airport that is PDX. SEA punches way above its weight and a lot of that is supported by PDX passengers. While I'm happy PDX has the intl flights it has, I think we can do better. I can't believe we only have one TPAC flight. Why on earth hasn't PDX-ICN been announced?

We can talk and talk all we want on this forum that likely goes unread by anyone at the Port or the airlines. We can have page after page complaining about this topic for years on end which won’t change a thing. So the question is this: how do we change that and what do we do to make those changes? This thread has turned more into a support group than a group that promotes or takes action.

Southwest is dropping PDX-MCI in April. Alaska’s E175 will not be enough for this route. They will have to switch to 737 or A320.

As for subsidies, those would have to be public. I’m not aware of any existing subsidies or incentives to any airline at PDX.

The port is in for some major criticism. For starters, maybe port officials should be prohibited from attending any Routes conferences until they deliver some results.

flyoregon wrote:

TransWorldOne wrote:

flyoregon wrote:

LH just announced Austin which means that Condor will likely cease flights to/from AUS. Chances of two carriers to Germany from there are very slim which is what happened in San Diego. Why hasn’t that happened in Portland?

I don’t want to sound whiny, but I’m about to anyway. It seems like ever since Curtis Robinhold took over, the airport ceased to even try to attract new service. It seems like marketing for international has gone down and the airport is just staying where it was a year or two ago. You use to see ads for Icelandair and Condor all over the place and even the occasional Delta to London billboard.

I get it, the PoP is into real estate. But they are also in charge of the airport and because of that people need to hold them to a standard to drive business in and out of the state by providing connections that are attractive to people here. The 24-26 flights per day to/from Seattle aren’t there because everyone LOVES Seattle. They’re there because airlines will just funnel Portlanders through SEA to whatever flight to whatever destination. Why doesn’t Alaska do that from San Diego to Lon Angeles? Surely there are people there that are traveling internationally that can just take a quick hope up to LAX and connect to an AS partner flight.

Again, I’m not asking for the throngs of international options. What I am asking for in addition to support what we have, is for the Port to work more closely with the business community and travel groups I.e. travel Oregon and travel Portland.

It seems as if Portland is often taken advantage of beyond the obvious overshadowing by Seattle. This city CAN support year round flights to more than just AMS and NRT. But somebody at the Port needs to actually start working for once and make that a reality.

I agree. And not to mention, Seattle's constrained and run down facilities compared to the dream airport that is PDX. SEA punches way above its weight and a lot of that is supported by PDX passengers. While I'm happy PDX has the intl flights it has, I think we can do better. I can't believe we only have one TPAC flight. Why on earth hasn't PDX-ICN been announced?

We can talk and talk all we want on this forum that likely goes unread by anyone at the Port or the airlines. We can have page after page complaining about this topic for years on end which won’t change a thing. So the question is this: how do we change that and what do we do to make those changes? This thread has turned more into a support group than a group that promotes or takes action.

I admire your gusto but I really don't think there's much we can do other than buy high fare business class fares on the intl we do have and refuse to connect in Seattle. But enough people have to do that for it to make a difference. Most folks are price sensitive and for those who aren't (high end corporate traffic, primarily Nike), they fly the nonstops to AMS and NRT on DL. I think we'll see more intl flights in time. As for the port, they're probably satisfied with what we do have and not willing to throw subsidies at an airline to attract new service. I actually think PDX is pretty adequately served from Europe, even if most of the routes are seasonal. Portland is, after all, a very seasonal destination as is a lot of Europe traffic. What I don't understand, is how PDX has only one flight to Asia while Seattle has nearly a dozen flights to Asia a day. Surely, ICN has to be in the pipeline or Hainan to PEK.

TransWorldOne wrote:

What I don't understand, is how PDX has only one flight to Asia while Seattle has nearly a dozen flights to Asia a day. Surely, ICN has to be in the pipeline or Hainan to PEK.

Here are my theories:
1). The PDX airport terminal is way too small to handle several widebodies at once. I suspect concourse D may need to be expanded at least a little bit.

2). SEA has a Delta hub, so that increases traffic flow through connecting flights from many U.S. destinations bound for Asia. PDX does not have a legacy airline hub, and probably never will again unless Delta wants to make PDX a "reliever airport" of sorts due to limited gate space at SEA.

3). The foreign airlines that Alaska partners with are enticed to serve SEA because their partnership with Alaska allows for onward connections to LOTS of destinations throughout the U.S. and Canada. While Alaska's presence at PDX would allow them to do the same thing, PDX isn't nearly as strong as SEA is (because Alaska has more than twice the amount of total destinations offered from SEA than it does from PDX).

4). Portland locals can easily just hop on a QX prop-plane from PDX to SEA in order to catch lots of TPAC flights that are offered from SEA. From the time a passenger checks in at PDX and flies to SEA to catch their TPAC flight, only 2-3 hours passes by in total time.

Perhaps I can suggest contacting the Port of Portland. If one can eloquently state the express needs/wants from a consumers point of view...the Port does listen and will respond. I've contacted David Zielke before and I've no doubt that he is hard at work building synergies and exploring options for new/enhanced air routes from PDX. Frankly there is not much to complain about in my opinion when it comes to PDX or what the PoP has or hasn't done.

[email protected]

flyoregon wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

What's your point?

The point is, unacceptable for an airport handling 20 million passengers a year. I’m not suggesting all these routes need to be filled immediately, some of them, yes. In a booming economy, if we can’t fill unserved routes or make seasonals year round now, when? Interesting, just today Southwest announced it was dropping PDX-MCI, which had 182 PDEW in April 2017 for the city pair.

Why is it that San Diego can get out from under LAX’s shadow but PDX can’t shake SEA? I’m an Alaska FF and I’ll never connect thru SEA.

Maybe they should consider renaming PDX as Rodney Dangerfield International, because it gets no respect.

jbpdx wrote:

flyoregon wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

What's your point?

The point is, unacceptable for an airport handling 20 million passengers a year. I’m not suggesting all these routes need to be filled immediately, some of them, yes. In a booming economy, if we can’t fill unserved routes or make seasonals year round now, when? Interesting, just today Southwest announced it was dropping PDX-MCI, which had 182 PDEW in April 2017 for the city pair.

Why is it that San Diego can get out from under LAX’s shadow but PDX can’t shake SEA? I’m an Alaska FF and I’ll never connect thru SEA.

Maybe they should consider renaming PDX as Rodney Dangerfield International, because it gets no respect.

I suggest that PDX needs to get other carriers involved other than AS, SY seems inclined to grow and add some of those cities and as a result it could wake up AS and get them to be proactive.

Midwestindy wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

flyoregon wrote:

What's your point?

The point is, unacceptable for an airport handling 20 million passengers a year. I’m not suggesting all these routes need to be filled immediately, some of them, yes. In a booming economy, if we can’t fill unserved routes or make seasonals year round now, when? Interesting, just today Southwest announced it was dropping PDX-MCI, which had 182 PDEW in April 2017 for the city pair.

Why is it that San Diego can get out from under LAX’s shadow but PDX can’t shake SEA? I’m an Alaska FF and I’ll never connect thru SEA.

Maybe they should consider renaming PDX as Rodney Dangerfield International, because it gets no respect.

I suggest that PDX needs to get other carriers involved other than AS, SY seems inclined to grow and add some of those cities and as a result it could wake up AS and get them to be proactive.

But regardless, AS is still going to eat SY's lunch. Unless if they suddenly decide to move half of their fleet to PDX and add a crew base here, they're not going to have a fighting chance against AS.

Also, SY's LF% on PDX-MCO was absolutely horrendous and I have serious doubts that it'll return next year.

jbpdx wrote:

flyoregon wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

What's your point?

The point is, unacceptable for an airport handling 20 million passengers a year. I’m not suggesting all these routes need to be filled immediately, some of them, yes. In a booming economy, if we can’t fill unserved routes or make seasonals year round now, when? Interesting, just today Southwest announced it was dropping PDX-MCI, which had 182 PDEW in April 2017 for the city pair.

Why is it that San Diego can get out from under LAX’s shadow but PDX can’t shake SEA? I’m an Alaska FF and I’ll never connect thru SEA.

Maybe they should consider renaming PDX as Rodney Dangerfield International, because it gets no respect.

Gotcha. And I agree.

I'm an Alaska MVP, and luckily most of the destinations I go to are flown non-stop from Portland, but, if it's not, I'll just take Delta. I refuse to go through Seattle. Even in the event of international flights, I will take the non-stop out of Portland if offered, but if it's not, I go through San Francisco, Chicago, or even Vancouver.

As long as the 26 flights a day to Seattle are "full", then Portland will continue to be overlooked.

flyoregon wrote:

As long as the 26 flights a day to Seattle are "full", then Portland will continue to be overlooked.

Yes. For example, when Aer Lingus announced SEA-DUB, Alaska put several extra flights on PDX-SEA. I think the same thing happened when Thomas Cook announced SEA-MAN as well.

FA9295 wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

The point is, unacceptable for an airport handling 20 million passengers a year. I’m not suggesting all these routes need to be filled immediately, some of them, yes. In a booming economy, if we can’t fill unserved routes or make seasonals year round now, when? Interesting, just today Southwest announced it was dropping PDX-MCI, which had 182 PDEW in April 2017 for the city pair.

Why is it that San Diego can get out from under LAX’s shadow but PDX can’t shake SEA? I’m an Alaska FF and I’ll never connect thru SEA.

Maybe they should consider renaming PDX as Rodney Dangerfield International, because it gets no respect.

I suggest that PDX needs to get other carriers involved other than AS, SY seems inclined to grow and add some of those cities and as a result it could wake up AS and get them to be proactive.

But regardless, AS is still going to eat SY's lunch. Unless if they suddenly decide to move half of their fleet to PDX and add a crew base here, they're not going to have a fighting chance against AS.

Also, SY's LF% on PDX-MCO was absolutely horrendous and I have doubts that it'll return next year.

MCO was a dumb add. I never understood that one. SY barely has any name recognition in Portland, so to go from nothing, to PDX-MSP, then PDX-MSP/MCO was very odd. Now, I think with adds to more popular destinations, the name recognition will build and be just enough of an annoyance to Alaska that it might do something.

If I were SY, I'd look into adding destinations like PDX-SAT / MCI / CVG / BNA or even places like FAI / JNU / OGG just to give AS the middle finger. I think Portland is ripe for the picking, much like Austin is. Just need someone with the bean bags to go up against Alaska. Sometimes a little risk is good.

flyoregon wrote:

FA9295 wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

I suggest that PDX needs to get other carriers involved other than AS, SY seems inclined to grow and add some of those cities and as a result it could wake up AS and get them to be proactive.

But regardless, AS is still going to eat SY's lunch. Unless if they suddenly decide to move half of their fleet to PDX and add a crew base here, they're not going to have a fighting chance against AS.

Also, SY's LF% on PDX-MCO was absolutely horrendous and I have doubts that it'll return next year.

MCO was a dumb add. I never understood that one. SY barely has any name recognition in Portland, so to go from nothing, to PDX-MSP, then PDX-MSP/MCO was very odd. Now, I think with adds to more popular destinations, the name recognition will build and be just enough of an annoyance to Alaska that it might do something.

If I were SY, I'd look into adding destinations like PDX-SAT / MCI / CVG / BNA or even places like FAI / JNU / OGG just to give AS the middle finger. I think Portland is ripe for the picking, much like Austin is. Just need someone with the bean bags to go up against Alaska. Sometimes a little risk is good.

I think the issue with SY adding PDX routes to unserved destinations is that they don't really have any idea whether or not the route will be successful, because no one has ever flown it before. By adding routes to some of PDX's most popular destinations, they can see that other airlines are having success on those routes as well.

Very bizarre day for our PDX-NRT flight today.

Delta flight 69 PDX-NRT was diverted to SEA: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/DAL ... /KPDX/RJAA

The flight path on this one looks extremely odd, and it was in the air for more than 5 hours before eventually landing in Seattle at 4:59 PM.

However, at 7:09 PM the plane took off from Seattle and was headed for Tokyo/Narita, but then turned around yet again to divert the flight back to Seattle, landing there at 9:04 PM: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/DAL ... /KSEA/RJAA

As far as I know, the plane/passengers are still in Seattle. Gotta feel sorry for the passengers involved on this flight, yikes! Kind of reminds me of the PDX-AMS incident back in February...

FA9295 wrote:

Very bizarre day for our PDX-NRT flight today.

Delta flight 69 PDX-NRT was diverted to SEA: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/DAL ... /KPDX/RJAA

The flight path on this one looks extremely odd, and it was in the air for more than 5 hours before eventually landing in Seattle at 4:59 PM.

However, at 7:09 PM the plane took off from Seattle and was headed for Tokyo/Narita, but then turned around yet again to divert the flight back to Seattle, landing there at 9:04 PM: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/DAL ... /KSEA/RJAA

As far as I know, the plane/passengers are still in Seattle. Gotta feel sorry for the passengers involved on this flight, yikes! Kind of reminds me of the PDX-AMS incident back in February...

Initially there was a maintenance issue, causing the flight to divert to Seattle. After the issue was resolved and the flight was re-crewed, there was a medical issue causing the aircraft to divert back to Seattle for a second time. What are the chances of two diversions in a day? Craziness.

DL PDX-LHR will be going daily next summer. New PDX departure time: 6:08pm

^^^ really?? That'd be rad. Still summer seasonal?
Any chance to expand year round?

BlatantEcho wrote:

^^^ really?? That'd be rad. Still summer seasonal?
Any chance to expand year round?

Still showing summer seasonal at this point in time.

Well, that’s a big win for pdx regardless.
Hopefully this means it’s doing well enough where in 2020 it will operate a few times a week in winter.

Shame is most of my UK trips are spring and fall.
But, this is really exciting news.
Departure time is even a little better than before. Very nice.

(Where do you find these things out anyway?)

BlatantEcho wrote:

Well, that’s a big win for pdx regardless.
Hopefully this means it’s doing well enough where in 2020 it will operate a few times a week in winter.

Shame is most of my UK trips are spring and fall.
But, this is really exciting news.
Departure time is even a little better than before. Very nice.

(Where do you find these things out anyway?)

It’s on delta.com...

Well that’s one way to do it

ANA787 wrote:

DL PDX-LHR will be going daily next summer. New PDX departure time: 6:08pm

Finally, some positive news out of PDX even though its' still summer seasonal..I'll definitely be taking advantage of this summer 2019...........

lhpdx wrote:

ANA787 wrote:

DL PDX-LHR will be going daily next summer. New PDX departure time: 6:08pm

Finally, some positive news out of PDX even though its' still summer seasonal..I'll definitely be taking advantage of this summer 2019...........

It is just a placeholder schedule

Midwestindy wrote:

lhpdx wrote:

ANA787 wrote:

DL PDX-LHR will be going daily next summer. New PDX departure time: 6:08pm

Finally, some positive news out of PDX even though its' still summer seasonal..I'll definitely be taking advantage of this summer 2019...........

It is just a placeholder schedule

Sounds to me like DL is offering the flight daily now, then around the first of the year, about 5-6 months out, they'll trim it back in frequency, to the days of the week that have been booked the most. Not an uncommon practice. Heck, I've seen evidence that AS is doing the same thing these days, and prolly most other cx as well.

We all know that in the modern day world of aviation, a schedule this far out is not exactly reliable! Of course if ALL days of the week do very well, it's possible that DL might actually offer the flight daily on the finalized schedule for next summer.

bb

Midwestindy wrote:

lhpdx wrote:

ANA787 wrote:

DL PDX-LHR will be going daily next summer. New PDX departure time: 6:08pm

Finally, some positive news out of PDX even though its' still summer seasonal..I'll definitely be taking advantage of this summer 2019...........

It is just a placeholder schedule

The placeholder schedules are created way in advance. Now would be the time to update the summer schedules (as Delta clearly just did).

Great news, if this holds to be true.

SANFan wrote:

Sounds to me like DL is offering the flight daily now, then around the first of the year, about 5-6 months out, they'll trim it back in frequency, to the days of the week that have been booked the most. Not an uncommon practice.
bb

Yeah, both of our PDX-NRT and PDX-AMS flights go from daily to 5x weekly in the winter months. Usually the Tuesday and Wednesday flights are axed in January and February but then return in mid March right around when spring break starts...

FA9295 wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

lhpdx wrote:

Finally, some positive news out of PDX even though its' still summer seasonal..I'll definitely be taking advantage of this summer 2019...........

It is just a placeholder schedule

The placeholder schedules are created way in advance. Now would be the time to update the summer schedules (as Delta clearly just did).

Great news, if this holds to be true.

Everything after February right now is basically placeholder schedule, meaning it will most likely be changed in some shape or form.

It may stay daily it may not, I'm just saying it currently is a placeholder schedule

OAG 9/30/2018:

DL LHR-PDX JUN 0.6>1.0[0.6] JUL 0.6>1.0[0.5]

WN BUR-PDX APR 0.2>0.9[0.9] JUN 0>0.2[1.0]
WN DAL-PDX APR 0.2>1.0[1.0] JUN 0>0.3[1.0]
WN DEN-PDX APR 0.9>4[4] MAY 0>5[4] JUN 0>1.2[4]
WN LAS-PDX APR 0.9>4[4] JUN 0>1.1[4]
WN LAX-PDX APR 0.6>2[1.9] MAY 0>2[1.9] JUN 0>0.6[1.8]
WN MDW-PDX APR 0.4>1.7[1.7] JUN 0>0.4[3]
WN OAK-PDX APR 1.4>6[6] MAY 0>6[5] JUN 0>1.5[6]
WN ONT-PDX APR 0.2>0.9[1.0] MAY 0>0.9[1.0] JUN 0>0.2[1.0]
WN PDX-PHX APR 0.8>3[3] JUN 0>0.8[4]
WN PDX-SAN APR 0.6>3[3] JUN 0>0.6[3]
WN PDX-SJC APR 1.5>6[5] MAY 0>6[5] JUN 0>1.4[5]
WN PDX-SMF APR 1.1>5[5] JUN 0>1.2[5]
WN PDX-STL APR 0.2>1.0[1.0] JUN 0>0.3[1.0]

- It's official. DL PDX-LHR is going daily!!!
- All of the WN action appears to be just them updating their schedule, since most of this seems to align up with last year's schedule. Also, they are not reducing flights in June, that's just where their schedule currently ends. So no worries there...

TransWorldOne wrote:

I agree. And not to mention, Seattle's constrained and run down facilities compared to the dream airport that is PDX. SEA punches way above its weight and a lot of that is supported by PDX passengers. While I'm happy PDX has the intl flights it has, I think we can do better. I can't believe we only have one TPAC flight. Why on earth hasn't PDX-ICN been announced?

I REFUSE to connect through Seattle. Customs is a mess and takes forever. Exactly as you say, compared to PDX it's a dump. I prefer to use the NRT or AMS connections, or go to YVR and connect through there.

If more from Portland would do just that, we'd be getting more international flights.

MatthewDB wrote:

TransWorldOne wrote:

I agree. And not to mention, Seattle's constrained and run down facilities compared to the dream airport that is PDX. SEA punches way above its weight and a lot of that is supported by PDX passengers. While I'm happy PDX has the intl flights it has, I think we can do better. I can't believe we only have one TPAC flight. Why on earth hasn't PDX-ICN been announced?

I REFUSE to connect through Seattle. Customs is a mess and takes forever. Exactly as you say, compared to PDX it's a dump. I prefer to use the NRT or AMS connections, or go to YVR and connect through there.

If more from Portland would do just that, we'd be getting more international flights.

PDX FIS is the best, hands down that I've experienced, Much as you indicated I will avoid SEA as much as possible, it's difficult at times of day & woefully understaffed at peak times. Heck even an evening arrival into JFK on VS is a breeze through INS.

I also have had good luck with YVR, YYZ, HNL & LAS.

If I could only arrive in the US via PDX, I'd consider Global Entry not worth it. I don't think it has actually saved me much time at PDX since even the regular line is comparable to the Global Entry time at places like LAX. It's been a mixed bag at YVR; for Canadian domestic flights customs has been very fast, it is the international connections that take time.

Just curious, where were you going that you connected through HNL? Throwing a vacation in on a trip from Asia? It's quite out of the way for anywhere but NZ / AUS.

Did we ever determine if a Icelandair was going to 10x weekly next year?

flyoregon wrote:

Did we ever determine if a Icelandair was going to 10x weekly next year?

Nope. That was a misfile on their part.

A few things for you guys:
http://www.breakingtravelnews.com/news/ ... xt-summer/
"Portland is fast becoming one of the hippest US destinations; a vibrant, friendly city that’s compact enough to explore by bike yet has some of America’s best national parks on its doorstep.

We’re upping our frequencies in response to customer demand,” said Roberto Ioriatti, Delta vice president, transatlantic.

Also from Airline Weekly here are some interesting capacity trends for Q4 2018 y/y:
Airline Airport Q4 seats y/y
AS PDX 1,275,147 +5%
SY PDX 28,896 +199%

AMS goes back to A333 starting tomorrow.
Not sure for how long, but loads must be very good!

BlatantEcho wrote:

AMS goes back to A333 starting tomorrow.
Not sure for how long, but loads must be very good!

It'll be on the A333 for almost all of October. Goes back to the B763 on October 28th.

One of five A-10’s that was at HIO for the 2018 Oregon International Air Show arriving in some great light.

If anyone wants to know why there were 2 Condor 767s here today. The one last night was late in arriving. It also had a no flaps landing hence all the ARFF vehicles greeted it upon arrival. The crew timed out and it never left.