I guess this has become a Haneda thread. I’m still waiting for more MSP-ICN News.

Official Release

http://news.delta.com/delta-begin-nonstop-service-minneapolisst-paul-seoul-incheon-cooperation-jv-partner-korean-air-2019

Looks like they're launching with a refurbished 777 on both the ICN and HND routes so that will be exciting for MSP travelers. It'll be interesting to see what Tokyo routes survive long term. I do think DL will move the HND flight as soon as it can but it sounds like they'll sit on the slot from MSP until then.

kiowa wrote:

SteveXC500 wrote:

kavok wrote:

With MSP-HND, DL can fly three flights to Tokyo from US cities in the East and Central time zones. If the HND slot is moved somewhere else, that 70% LF likely goes somewhere else too, with a good portion of it going to competitors. The 70% LF may not be generating a lot of money, but it is still better to have those pax then have them flying with someone else.

Ultimately, this speculation of whether the route makes money is crazy. Only internal finance and network staff would know, so why discuss?

Internal finance and network staff are speculating too.

Correct but with for more factual data than we have

While I will be the first to admit that MSP-HND could be gone at the first economic downturn, for now it's "making money." As has been mentioned, Bastian can't outright lie. So, while it may be underperforming other DL APAC routes, it's not losing money. From the Star Tribune:

“This is not a bait and switch, Haneda is doing well, too, “ Bastian said.

http://www.startribune.com/delta-plans- ... 485382501/

Interesting that they didn't give a launch date....

Is it doing as well as the MEM hub was in ~2011?....

toobz wrote:

flyfresno wrote:

BlatantEcho wrote:

Sounds like the rounds of switching XXX-NRT to XXX-ICN have begun.

Expect PDX and a few other markets to follow for 2019.

How is PDX-NRT doing? I would imagine it sees a fair amount of connecting traffic from SLC/LAX/MSP for people not going to HND or connecting onward?

I can tell you the flights are full. Very full. What that equates to in yield is unknown. But butts are definitely in the seats.

True. Load Factor for the year ending Feb 2018 was 86.7%. That's unquestionably high.

The topic is DL announcing MSP-ICN, not whether MSP-HND is profitable. Please remain on topic.

janders wrote:

Good, they should take the opportunity to end MSP-HND at the same time. They only average low 70% LF for 2017.

Uh? I just flew that route in May round trip and there was not a single open seat...

Congrats to MSP for landing this new route.

FCOTSTW wrote:

janders wrote:

Good, they should take the opportunity to end MSP-HND at the same time. They only average low 70% LF for 2017.

Uh? I just flew that route in May round trip and there was not a single open seat...

Uh? and your single anecdotal experience trumps actual data? Sorry, but no. Although of note is that T100 shows MSP-HND's LDF for 2017 was 79.5%. Not sure where janders is getting his or her data showing 70%.

klm617 wrote:

FSDan wrote:

I wonder if DL can shuffle things around and find the slack to fly MSP-HND on the A330-200 year round (they've used that aircraft on the route before, but only in the winter). Moving from a 291-seat aircraft to a 234-seat aircraft would help the loads quite a bit. The timing would probably work pretty well if the aircraft was routed LOS-ATL-MSP-HND-MSP-ATL-XXX. If nothing else, DL might be able to get AF, KL, or VS to take over an additional TATL frequency to create some slack for the 332 fleet.

But I agree that in the grand scheme of things, MSP-HND and MSP-ICN serve two completely different types of traffic flows, and they're not redundant.

KLM is more than welcome to take over a DTW-AMS rotation or two so that MSP-HND can continue.

Let's see, who was it again that said MSP-ICN would never happen? Hmmm, could it have been klm617?

SUNCTRY738 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

FSDan wrote:

I wonder if DL can shuffle things around and find the slack to fly MSP-HND on the A330-200 year round (they've used that aircraft on the route before, but only in the winter). Moving from a 291-seat aircraft to a 234-seat aircraft would help the loads quite a bit. The timing would probably work pretty well if the aircraft was routed LOS-ATL-MSP-HND-MSP-ATL-XXX. If nothing else, DL might be able to get AF, KL, or VS to take over an additional TATL frequency to create some slack for the 332 fleet.

But I agree that in the grand scheme of things, MSP-HND and MSP-ICN serve two completely different types of traffic flows, and they're not redundant.

KLM is more than welcome to take over a DTW-AMS rotation or two so that MSP-HND can continue.

Let's see, who was it again that said MSP-ICN would never happen? Hmmm, could it have been klm617?

You can't be right all the time. Interesting how they didn't list the specifics of the new service perhaps it will be part of a bigger announcement later. I think this new route has some political posturing to it wonder what Delta was given as far as incentives. The news release said this is the first time Seoul is being linked to MSP but that's not true Northwest flew the route for a while back in the 90's.

The ICN route makes a lot of sense. With the JV in place, and the quality airport and connection opportunities, it is fair to say that ICN is becoming the AMS of East Asia.

MSP was very much the next logical add, and with it being operated by DL, the flight helps balance the amount of JV TPAC routes flown on DL metal (which is still underrepresented in comparison to KE operated flights). As such, I wonder if there will be more ICN additions by DL, or if any of the existing KE operated flights shift to DL metal?

One thing to remember as we hear announcement such as MSP-ICN is that international flying balance within the JVs is going to be issue number 1 for ALPA in the 2019 contract negotiations at Delta. Delta pilots are very frustrated with what they see as the loss of long haul, high paying jobs to JV partner flying. The pilots are going to push the company to make adds like MSP-ICN without corresponding drops. This of course does not mean that unprofitable routes will be kept. Rather, I think we will see some long haul adds for DL as part of that negotiation process. JFK-East Asia is an obvious place for this, as are additional US hub-ICN flying.

TW870 wrote:

One thing to remember as we hear announcement such as MSP-ICN is that international flying balance within the JVs is going to be issue number 1 for ALPA in the 2019 contract negotiations at Delta. Delta pilots are very frustrated with what they see as the loss of long haul, high paying jobs to JV partner flying. The pilots are going to push the company to make adds like MSP-ICN without corresponding drops. This of course does not mean that unprofitable routes will be kept. Rather, I think we will see some long haul adds for DL as part of that negotiation process. JFK-East Asia is an obvious place for this, as are additional US hub-ICN flying.

DL is starting LAX-CDG/AMS 4x daily in a couple of days, so this may already be happening. DL originally started LAX-PVG in 2015 as MU was supposed to be DL's main Asian partner but that fell through so maybe it could be moved to LAX-ICN in addition to JFK-ICN potentially on DL metal.

TW870 wrote:

One thing to remember as we hear announcement such as MSP-ICN is that international flying balance within the JVs is going to be issue number 1 for ALPA in the 2019 contract negotiations at Delta. Delta pilots are very frustrated with what they see as the loss of long haul, high paying jobs to JV partner flying. The pilots are going to push the company to make adds like MSP-ICN without corresponding drops. This of course does not mean that unprofitable routes will be kept. Rather, I think we will see some long haul adds for DL as part of that negotiation process. JFK-East Asia is an obvious place for this, as are additional US hub-ICN flying.

So i wonder what ALPA is willing to give up to get more International flying?

I always expected a flight to China first. They have a fast growing economy. But ICN works too.

SteelChair wrote:

TW870 wrote:

One thing to remember as we hear announcement such as MSP-ICN is that international flying balance within the JVs is going to be issue number 1 for ALPA in the 2019 contract negotiations at Delta. Delta pilots are very frustrated with what they see as the loss of long haul, high paying jobs to JV partner flying. The pilots are going to push the company to make adds like MSP-ICN without corresponding drops. This of course does not mean that unprofitable routes will be kept. Rather, I think we will see some long haul adds for DL as part of that negotiation process. JFK-East Asia is an obvious place for this, as are additional US hub-ICN flying.

So i wonder what ALPA is willing to give up to get more International flying?

Probably nothing. The company has the best margins in the industry, and the carriers are competing to get pilots with a relatively restricted pipeline of new pilots. These are not the conditions for concessionary bargaining on ALPA's part. Most likely what you will see is a push to re-balance the JVs - and especially with Korean Air. Its not that the pilots are going to force the airline into marginal or experimental flying. Rather, it is going to be routes like the poster above just named. I see JFK-ICN and LAX-ICN as the most obvious initial candidates. The company is already planning for this as they delayed the 339 deliveries until the newer, heavier MGTOW is available, giving the airplane the ability to cover ICN trips from most of the US.

TW870 wrote:

SteelChair wrote:

TW870 wrote:

One thing to remember as we hear announcement such as MSP-ICN is that international flying balance within the JVs is going to be issue number 1 for ALPA in the 2019 contract negotiations at Delta. Delta pilots are very frustrated with what they see as the loss of long haul, high paying jobs to JV partner flying. The pilots are going to push the company to make adds like MSP-ICN without corresponding drops. This of course does not mean that unprofitable routes will be kept. Rather, I think we will see some long haul adds for DL as part of that negotiation process. JFK-East Asia is an obvious place for this, as are additional US hub-ICN flying.

So i wonder what ALPA is willing to give up to get more International flying?

Probably nothing. The company has the best margins in the industry, and the carriers are competing to get pilots with a relatively restricted pipeline of new pilots. These are not the conditions for concessionary bargaining on ALPA's part. Most likely what you will see is a push to re-balance the JVs - and especially with Korean Air. Its not that the pilots are going to force the airline into marginal or experimental flying. Rather, it is going to be routes like the poster above just named. I see JFK-ICN and LAX-ICN as the most obvious initial candidates. The company is already planning for this as they delayed the 339 deliveries until the newer, heavier MGTOW is available, giving the airplane the ability to cover ICN trips from most of the US.

Exactly. There are two ways to even the balance. The first is to add new flights on DL metal like ICN-MSP. The second is to shift existing flights operated on KE metal to DL metal. It will interesting to see how much of each happens.

kavok wrote:

TW870 wrote:

SteelChair wrote:

So i wonder what ALPA is willing to give up to get more International flying?

Probably nothing. The company has the best margins in the industry, and the carriers are competing to get pilots with a relatively restricted pipeline of new pilots. These are not the conditions for concessionary bargaining on ALPA's part. Most likely what you will see is a push to re-balance the JVks - and especially with Korean Air. Its not that the pilots are going to force the airline into marginal or experimental flying. Rather, it is going to be routes like the poster above just named. I see JFK-ICN and LAX-ICN as the most obvious initial candidates. The company is already planning for this as they delayed the 339 deliveries until the newer, heavier MGTOW is available, giving the airplane the ability to cover ICN trips from most of the US.

Exactly. There are two ways to even the balance. The first is to add new flights on DL metal like ICN-MSP. The second is to shift existing flights operated on KE metal to DL metal. It will interesting to see how much of each happens.

Two or three years ago, the Company was out of compliance with the production balance, not enough flying was on Delta metal and the Company had to cut a check to ALPA. As part of the agreement, ALPA also agreed to lower the amount of Delta flying within the alliances. With all that in mind, why would the Company now bring that flying back without a "give" from ALPA? ALPA has said they want it, wouldn't it be natural for the Company to see how bad they want it?

Also, the is no pilot shortage now or in the forseeable future for Delta or other US majors. They're lined up areounf the block to fly for the US majors. Now, the regional carriers and the ME3, those carriers have real pilot retention problems. Delta actually has about 560 too many pilots right now and is paying them not to fly (sit at home for 25 hours pay and full bennies and continue on seniority list) this summer season.

SteelChair wrote:

Delta actually has about 560 too many pilots right now and is paying them not to fly (sit at home for 25 hours pay and full bennies and continue on seniority list) this summer season.

You haven’t given all the info for real perspective. This part of your post is true only if pilots bid for them. I’ll be shocked if all SIL slots get taken. Like KLOAs just because pilots request doesn’t mean the company ends up granting them.

Congratulations to MSP, Seoul, and Delta!

Is anyone else thinking wistfully of the days of named flights (like "The Golden Argosy")? "Heart(land) and Seoul," anyone? Too bad the flight doesn't originate in MEM--it would be the Seoul Plane.

I'll be here all night, folks...

SumChristianus wrote:

Interesting that they didn't give a launch date....

At least they announced both cities, unlike the Mumbai to wherever route that starts whenever...

I have to wonder if KE will ever launch a route like ICN-BOS now, on a 787-9, without cannibalizing service to JFK which right now is double-daily A380. (On the East Coast, KE also serves IAD and ATL, and both ATL and JFK are served with dedicated 777 freighters.) I give ICN a leg up on the UA and AA JVs because ICN is quick to transit.

THANK YOU, DELTA !
not so much for the ICN-MSP route...... but for "The 220 all-new Main Cabin seats are the widest in the Delta international fleet in a 9-abreast configuration..."
really do appreciate you continuing to buck the 10AB trend; but get on the PE train, won't you?

In the meantime, the world thanks you for your unusual but continuing commitment to a humane seat width.

After having experienced the new A350 on ATL-ICN and DL/KE Terminal 2, it's the best place to connect inter-asia.

Ed has done a wonderful job re-building up the KE relationship.

As for China, I expect once they get their hands on LAX-PEK, it's also a matter of time until MSP gets one.

FlyHappy wrote:

THANK YOU, DELTA !
not so much for the ICN-MSP route...... but for "The 220 all-new Main Cabin seats are the widest in the Delta international fleet in a 9-abreast configuration..."
really do appreciate you continuing to buck the 10AB trend; but get on the PE train, won't you?

In the meantime, the world thanks you for your unusual but continuing commitment to a humane seat width.

Uh, the A350's have Premium Economy...and the 777's are getting it as part of their retrofit.

Ed also mentioned that the 764's will be modded next...not sure if they'll get Suites AND Premium Select...but he did say mods are coming.

VC10DC10 wrote:

Congratulations to MSP, Seoul, and Delta!

Is anyone else thinking wistfully of the days of named flights (like "The Golden Argosy")? "Heart(land) and Seoul," anyone? Too bad the flight doesn't originate in MEM--it would be the Seoul Plane.

I'll be here all night, folks...

Wasn’t the Golden Argosy a 707 flight to Rome?

I wonder what additional markets the DL/KE joint venture will add to ICN. BOS, PDX, SJC, and SLC come to mind.

BoeingGuy wrote:

VC10DC10 wrote:

Congratulations to MSP, Seoul, and Delta!

Is anyone else thinking wistfully of the days of named flights (like "The Golden Argosy")? "Heart(land) and Seoul," anyone? Too bad the flight doesn't originate in MEM--it would be the Seoul Plane.

I'll be here all night, folks...

Wasn’t the Golden Argosy a 707 flight to Rome?

Wasn’t that the name of the flight in the movie “Airport”?

lavalampluva wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

VC10DC10 wrote:

Congratulations to MSP, Seoul, and Delta!

Is anyone else thinking wistfully of the days of named flights (like "The Golden Argosy")? "Heart(land) and Seoul," anyone? Too bad the flight doesn't originate in MEM--it would be the Seoul Plane.

I'll be here all night, folks...

Wasn’t the Golden Argosy a 707 flight to Rome?

Wasn’t that the name of the flight in the movie “Airport”?

Correct, hence my comment. In fact it was filmed at MSP.

Lootess wrote:

After having experienced the new A350 on ATL-ICN and DL/KE Terminal 2, it's the best place to connect inter-asia.

Ed has done a wonderful job re-building up the KE relationship.

As for China, I expect once they get their hands on LAX-PEK, it's also a matter of time until MSP gets one.

How many other places have you tried to connect inter Asia?

As for china, msp with little o&d sharing connection traffic with dtw sea icn to the lowest yielding market in the world would be funny.

PWMRamper wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

THANK YOU, DELTA !
not so much for the ICN-MSP route...... but for "The 220 all-new Main Cabin seats are the widest in the Delta international fleet in a 9-abreast configuration..."
really do appreciate you continuing to buck the 10AB trend; but get on the PE train, won't you?

In the meantime, the world thanks you for your unusual but continuing commitment to a humane seat width.

Uh, the A350's have Premium Economy...and the 777's are getting it as part of their retrofit.

Ed also mentioned that the 764's will be modded next...not sure if they'll get Suites AND Premium Select...but he did say mods are coming.

The reconfiguration of the 77E/77L planes is basically less J and more W.

PWMRamper wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

THANK YOU, DELTA !
not so much for the ICN-MSP route...... but for "The 220 all-new Main Cabin seats are the widest in the Delta international fleet in a 9-abreast configuration..."
really do appreciate you continuing to buck the 10AB trend; but get on the PE train, won't you?

In the meantime, the world thanks you for your unusual but continuing commitment to a humane seat width.

Uh, the A350's have Premium Economy...and the 777's are getting it as part of their retrofit.

Ed also mentioned that the 764's will be modded next...not sure if they'll get Suites AND Premium Select...but he did say mods are coming.

Well, the A350's don't help MSP
I did not realize "Delta Premium Select" = PE . Bad on me for reading too fast.

Is it just me, or am I the only guy who thinks that both Y and PE will be more comfortable on DL's 777 than the A350 ? (I don't mind engine noise, thank you)

just to repeat myself: "THANK YOU, DELTA" !

tphuang wrote:

Lootess wrote:

After having experienced the new A350 on ATL-ICN and DL/KE Terminal 2, it's the best place to connect inter-asia.

Ed has done a wonderful job re-building up the KE relationship.

As for China, I expect once they get their hands on LAX-PEK, it's also a matter of time until MSP gets one.

How many other places have you tried to connect inter Asia?

As for china, msp with little o&d sharing connection traffic with dtw sea icn to the lowest yielding market in the world would be funny.

Aside from ICN, it's only been NRT and HND.

FlyHappy wrote:

PWMRamper wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

THANK YOU, DELTA !
not so much for the ICN-MSP route...... but for "The 220 all-new Main Cabin seats are the widest in the Delta international fleet in a 9-abreast configuration..."
really do appreciate you continuing to buck the 10AB trend; but get on the PE train, won't you?

In the meantime, the world thanks you for your unusual but continuing commitment to a humane seat width.

Uh, the A350's have Premium Economy...and the 777's are getting it as part of their retrofit.

Ed also mentioned that the 764's will be modded next...not sure if they'll get Suites AND Premium Select...but he did say mods are coming.

Well, the A350's don't help MSP
I did not realize "Delta Premium Select" = PE . Bad on me for reading too fast.

Is it just me, or am I the only guy who thinks that both Y and PE will be more comfortable on DL's 777 than the A350 ? (I don't mind engine noise, thank you)

just to repeat myself: "THANK YOU, DELTA" !

It's just you, apparently you hadn't flown long-range in the A350, the cabin air pressure is much better than the old 777.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

I have to wonder if KE will ever launch a route like ICN-BOS now, on a 787-9, without cannibalizing service to JFK which right now is double-daily A380. (On the East Coast, KE also serves IAD and ATL, and both ATL and JFK are served with dedicated 777 freighters.) I give ICN a leg up on the UA and AA JVs because ICN is quick to transit.

My opinion is that nothing can really cannibalize NYC flights especially large markets like ICN . People like to avoid connecting at JFK.

adamh8297 wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

I have to wonder if KE will ever launch a route like ICN-BOS now, on a 787-9, without cannibalizing service to JFK which right now is double-daily A380. (On the East Coast, KE also serves IAD and ATL, and both ATL and JFK are served with dedicated 777 freighters.) I give ICN a leg up on the UA and AA JVs because ICN is quick to transit.

My opinion is that nothing can really cannibalize NYC flights especially large markets like ICN . People like to avoid connecting at JFK.

Yep. If anything ICN-BOS on a KE 787 could be a way to nibble away at some of JL's NRT-BOS 787 yields, and connecting traffic. Regardless, this would be a good DL/KE JV route to consider when you think of O&D factor and expansion.

flyfresno wrote:

cokepopper wrote:

I.e SVO

Way off topic, but am I the only person who sees SVO and automatically thinks "Sarajevo," and only later comes up with "Moscow"?

You may be the only one, but that isn't bad, is it?

Lootess wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

Is it just me, or am I the only guy who thinks that both Y and PE will be more comfortable on DL's 777 than the A350 ? (I don't mind engine noise, thank you)

just to repeat myself: "THANK YOU, DELTA" !

It's just you, apparently you hadn't flown long-range in the A350, the cabin air pressure is much better than the old 777.

perhaps, but just as I like engine noise, I have no issue with "old 777" pressure, humidity or vibration.
I loved the 747 long haul experience, and DC-10, and DC-8, and 707, etc.................

FlyHappy wrote:

Lootess wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

Is it just me, or am I the only guy who thinks that both Y and PE will be more comfortable on DL's 777 than the A350 ? (I don't mind engine noise, thank you)

just to repeat myself: "THANK YOU, DELTA" !

It's just you, apparently you hadn't flown long-range in the A350, the cabin air pressure is much better than the old 777.

perhaps, but just as I like engine noise, I have no issue with "old 777" pressure, humidity or vibration.
I loved the 747 long haul experience, and DC-10, and DC-8, and 707, etc.................

The old 777 has the same cabin altitude as the A330, A321, 747, or almost any other model. 8000 feet.

The 787 cabin altitude is 6000 feet. I’m inferring from the previous comments that the A350 is lower also.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

I have to wonder if KE will ever launch a route like ICN-BOS now, on a 787-9, without cannibalizing service to JFK which right now is double-daily A380. (On the East Coast, KE also serves IAD and ATL, and both ATL and JFK are served with dedicated 777 freighters.) I give ICN a leg up on the UA and AA JVs because ICN is quick to transit.

And one of the best airports for international transferring imop. I like SIN a lot also.

BoeingGuy wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

Lootess wrote:

It's just you, apparently you hadn't flown long-range in the A350, the cabin air pressure is much better than the old 777.

perhaps, but just as I like engine noise, I have no issue with "old 777" pressure, humidity or vibration.
I loved the 747 long haul experience, and DC-10, and DC-8, and 707, etc.................

The old 777 has the same cabin altitude as the A330, A321, 747, or almost any other model. 8000 feet.

The 787 cabin altitude is 6000 feet. I’m inferring from the previous comments that the A350 is lower also.

Yep, A350 and 787 is 6000 feet. More humidity, a difference to your heart, and lungs. It's instantly noticeable when you travel 12+ hours, sleeping is much easier on the body.

Anyone who thinks the old 777 is better hasn't experienced why these planes are the most comfortable ones in the air today.

grbauc wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

I have to wonder if KE will ever launch a route like ICN-BOS now, on a 787-9, without cannibalizing service to JFK which right now is double-daily A380. (On the East Coast, KE also serves IAD and ATL, and both ATL and JFK are served with dedicated 777 freighters.) I give ICN a leg up on the UA and AA JVs because ICN is quick to transit.

And one of the best airports for international transferring imop. I like SIN a lot also.

I have heard that it's often less than 20 minutes on average through immigration and customs. I see NRT having only a handful of flights that can't be moved to ICN (unless DL is granted fifth freedom rights from ICN). This is something DL should have done a lot sooner.

For ICN-BOS, 3x weekly could be what it starts at.

Lootess wrote:

adamh8297 wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

I have to wonder if KE will ever launch a route like ICN-BOS now, on a 787-9, without cannibalizing service to JFK which right now is double-daily A380. (On the East Coast, KE also serves IAD and ATL, and both ATL and JFK are served with dedicated 777 freighters.) I give ICN a leg up on the UA and AA JVs because ICN is quick to transit.

My opinion is that nothing can really cannibalize NYC flights especially large markets like ICN . People like to avoid connecting at JFK.

Yep. If anything ICN-BOS on a KE 787 could be a way to nibble away at some of JL's NRT-BOS 787 yields, and connecting traffic. Regardless, this would be a good DL/KE JV route to consider when you think of O&D factor and expansion.

I do believe ICN-BOS is just a matter of time. I also believe KE's 787 is probably the best plane for it. That being said, there is an imbalance in the JV that DL pilots are not particularly happy about, and thus any addition I believe would have to be a net gain in DL metal TPAC service (or at least break even by a new DL addition somewhere else).

Thus if ICN-BOS is added by KE on a 787, I believe the concession would be that an existing route flown by KE would have to change over to DL metal, or a new TPAC route gets added that flies DL metal. If I had to bet, I think the existing KE flight to ATL gets swapped to a DL operated A350 once a few more frames are received.

[quote="kavok
Thus if ICN-BOS is added by KE on a 787, I believe the concession would be that an existing route flown by KE would have to change over to DL metal, or a new TPAC route gets added that flies DL metal. If I had to bet, I think the existing KE flight to ATL gets swapped to a DL operated A350 once a few more frames are received.[/quote]

KE would maintain ATL. Large O&D / DL hub and being the only KE operated southeastern US-ICN route, they would want to stay visible in spite of the JV. If anything DL may hand over ATL-ICN to KE and use the A350 on another route or KE just keep the A380 that returns soon.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

grbauc wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

I have to wonder if KE will ever launch a route like ICN-BOS now, on a 787-9, without cannibalizing service to JFK which right now is double-daily A380. (On the East Coast, KE also serves IAD and ATL, and both ATL and JFK are served with dedicated 777 freighters.) I give ICN a leg up on the UA and AA JVs because ICN is quick to transit.

And one of the best airports for international transferring imop. I like SIN a lot also.

I have heard that it's often less than 20 minutes on average through immigration and customs. I see NRT having only a handful of flights that can't be moved to ICN (unless DL is granted fifth freedom rights from ICN). This is something DL should have done a lot sooner.

For ICN-BOS, 3x weekly could be what it starts at.

According to this: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/south-korea-and-usa-sign-open-skies-deal-36522/, US carriers should have fifth freedom rights in South Korea so presumably DL could eventually launch fifth freedom flights from ICN to SIN and/or MNL. It'll be interesting how DL approaches Japan going forward.

n2dru wrote:

[quote="kavok
Thus if ICN-BOS is added by KE on a 787, I believe the concession would be that an existing route flown by KE would have to change over to DL metal, or a new TPAC route gets added that flies DL metal. If I had to bet, I think the existing KE flight to ATL gets swapped to a DL operated A350 once a few more frames are received.

KE would maintain ATL. Large O&D / DL hub and being the only KE operated southeastern US-ICN route, they would want to stay visible in spite of the JV. If anything DL may hand over ATL-ICN to KE and use the A350 on another route or KE just keep the A380 that returns soon.[/quote]


I also think that KE should add DTW-ICN to complement the already existing Delta Seoul flight there is a lot of cargo on that route and a maybe 3X per week flight to start. There is a lot of passenger and cargo traffic between Detroit and Korea tied to the automotive industry.

kavok wrote:

Lootess wrote:

adamh8297 wrote:

Thus if ICN-BOS is added by KE on a 787, I believe the concession would be that an existing route flown by KE would have to change over to DL metal, or a new TPAC route gets added that flies DL metal. If I had to bet, I think the existing KE flight to ATL gets swapped to a DL operated A350 once a few more frames are received.

Definitely not.

People don't realize how huge ATL-ICN is from an O&D perspective. ATL is the 5th largest US-Korea O&D market. Only LAX, NYC, HNL, and SFO are larger. ICN is ATL's single largest international O&D market (not LHR, not even CUN or YYZ). Much of this traffic originates from Korea as well.

There is simply no way KE leaves the ATL market. No way at all.

klm617 wrote:

E and use the A350 on another route or KE just keep the A380 that returns soon.

I also think that KE should add DTW-ICN to complement the already existing Delta Seoul flight there is a lot of cargo on that route and a maybe 3X per week flight to start. There is a lot of passenger and cargo traffic between Detroit and Korea tied to the automotive industry.[/quote]

Assuming KE has the frames, I don't think thats a bad idea at all.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Definitely not.

People don't realize how huge ATL-ICN is from an O&D perspective. ATL is the 5th largest US-Korea O&D market. Only LAX, NYC, HNL, and SFO are larger. ICN is ATL's single largest international O&D market (not LHR, not even CUN or YYZ). Much of this traffic originates from Korea as well.

There is simply no way KE leaves the ATL market. No way at all.

I don't doubt your statistics at all, there must be a reason KE sent A380s and 747s there for years. But do you have any links to back them ? I'd be interested in knowing more