• 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 16
 
FSDan
Posts: 2559
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 4:45 am

LAXdude1023 wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
enilria wrote:
So, I get that they fly PDX-NRT now, but without a hub on either end PDX-HND is a disaster. No idea why that's in there. HNL-HND is likely also chaff. That made sense with a hub in NRT, but it makes little sense without a hub in Tokyo. Clearly they would close NRT completely.

Also kinda surprised PDX is a better choice than their hubs in SLC or JFK. Perhaps because they failed at it before? But they tried some of those other before as well.


PDX-NRT is 169 PDEW as of 2018


I question that’s true. That would make it the 5th largest US-Japan market. Are you sure that isn’t the total market?


From DL's application, it appears the 169 figure is the PDX-Asia PDEW. I assume PDX-TYO makes up the largest chunk of that total, but it's not the whole 169. I wonder if DL would be able to sell connections on KE, MU, CI, and/or GA on the HND end? They could theoretically connect some lower fare passengers to the likes of SLC, ATL, JFK, etc. at PDX too. Seems odd to me that DL would consider upgauging this route to the 332 if they thought they were going to lose a bunch of connections with the move, and presumably they've done their homework...
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
C010T3
Posts: 1956
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 5:48 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 5:28 am

kavok wrote:
General Question:
Each of the carriers has submitted a preferential order. What are the chances the DOT would “skip” a choice and award another route further down the list for that carrier?

For example, if the DOT preferred UA’s 5th choice of IAH over their 4th choice of LAX, would they actually choose to award UA the IAH, route but not LAX? Similar question about AA’s bids of DFW#2 (third choice) vs LAS (fourth choice).


The chances are fairly high considering how the DOT already did that in the first proceeding.

enilria wrote:
So, I get that they fly PDX-NRT now, but without a hub on either end PDX-HND is a disaster. No idea why that's in there. HNL-HND is likely also chaff. That made sense with a hub in NRT, but it makes little sense without a hub in Tokyo. Clearly they would close NRT completely.

Also kinda surprised PDX is a better choice than their hubs in SLC or JFK. Perhaps because they failed at it before? But they tried some of those other before as well.


It's simple, it's all about tactics. PDX has a better chance of working in the application, because DL already operates it allegedly successfully.

Competitors would have plenty of arguments to minimize Delta's chances at JFK and SLC. It's a complete different situation compared to AA's LAS bid, because American never discontinued a LAS-TYO route like Delta did with JFK, nor has LAS a small PDEW like SCL has.
 
c933103
Posts: 3808
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 5:47 am

nomorerjs wrote:
tkoenig95 wrote:
nomorerjs wrote:
What about JL and NH predictions? These could be impacted by what AA / UA receive.

JL:
BOS
DFW (AA will get 1 for sure)
ORD (AA will probably drop NRT)
CLT / MIA / PHX / PHL (tie into AA hubs)
AUS (I’m reaching)

NH:
BOS
DEN (UA didn’t apply)
IAD / IAH / ORD (depending on UA)
LAX
SEA

Did NH and JL announce their slot allocation applications?


I believe JL / NH are each given a number of slots and they pick the cities.

What if e.g. AirAsia Japan become interested in those slots?
When no other countries around the world is going to militarily stop China and its subordinate fom abusing its citizens within its national boundary, it is unreasonable to expect those abuse can be countered with purely peaceful means.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2063
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:02 am

From the ajc link, "“Delta is the only U.S. carrier serving Asia from the Southeast, and has seen growing success with its current Narita service."
They left out the corollary: as soon as DL gets additional HND route authorities, DL will replace NRT with HND for each one of those route authorities. Maybe DL can revive Song to fly CONUS/NRT. :lol:
 
codc10
Posts: 2529
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:26 am

tkoenig95 wrote:
Since the moderators thinks its so incredibly smart to move the IAH conversation over here I will ask the question again: What is the connections benefit UA will have moving the IAH route from NRT to HND? UA and NH rely on a good chunk of connection traffic between the two and it would be great to see more intra-Japan possibilities .


NH would theoretically retain the similarly-timed NRT flight for connections behind NRT into Asia (which remain stronger from NRT for now). HND really shines in terms of its connectivity within Japan, as set forth in United's application. It's also clearly the preferred airport for local traffic.
 
B1168
Posts: 507
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:46 pm

obelau24 wrote:
According to the press release Delta sent out, the B767-300ER is “currently being retrofitted with a new cabin interior and inflight entertainment system.” That’s the first I heard of a -300 refurbishment; is this new? Does anyone have any details about what a new cabin interior means?


I suppose IFE and finer business class. They recently sent a B763ER to CAN for something absolutely not passenger transporting (or it won’t arrive at 2am). That must be some retrofitting done in GAMECO.
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 1865
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 1:12 pm

FSDan wrote:
Based on the applications, these are the awards I'd personally like to see:
AA LAX-HND #2
AA DFW-HND #2

This spreads the love around between alliances a bit, and allows DL and AA to pull their own metal out of NRT and simplify their TYO ops. NH could pretty easily fill in the rest of UA's requests with the likely 7 frequencies they'll get awarded.


I'm curious as to why you think AA should be awarded a 2nd frequency at both DFW and LAX before UA would be awarded a 1st frequency on some of their requests? I don't believe it's the DOTs job to spread the wealth between carriers but instead award routes based on the best US consumer interest...regardless of which US carrier operates the route. Awarding AA a 2nd LAX frequency before allowing UA to even have it's 1st LAX frequency would seem like the government is trying to pick favorites.
Every zoo is a petting zoo......if you're a man!
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 5824
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 1:58 pm

Here is what I would like to see:

DL:
SEA
DTW
ATL
PDX

AA
DFW 1
LAX
LAS

UA
EWR
IAD
ORD
IAH

HA
HNL
"I dance and laugh among the rotten"
 
tkoenig95
Posts: 287
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2017 8:39 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 2:11 pm

Since slots will be shifting to HND will NRT have open slots for potential new routes?
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 9579
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 3:15 pm

C010T3 wrote:
enilria wrote:
So, I get that they fly PDX-NRT now, but without a hub on either end PDX-HND is a disaster. No idea why that's in there. HNL-HND is likely also chaff. That made sense with a hub in NRT, but it makes little sense without a hub in Tokyo. Clearly they would close NRT completely.

Also kinda surprised PDX is a better choice than their hubs in SLC or JFK. Perhaps because they failed at it before? But they tried some of those other before as well.


It's simple, it's all about tactics. PDX has a better chance of working in the application, because DL already operates it allegedly successfully.

Competitors would have plenty of arguments to minimize Delta's chances at JFK and SLC. It's a complete different situation compared to AA's LAS bid, because American never discontinued a LAS-TYO route like Delta did with JFK, nor has LAS a small PDEW like SCL has.

AA's LAS is also cray-cray, but at least they can use JAL to sell it as a de facto JL flight catering to the JL FFP base. DL can't do that with HNL and PDX just won't work. Do you think they will do as they did before? Operate PDX. Let it fail. Cry about the powerful Japanese JVs and then try to move it to SLC?
WPvsMW wrote:
From the ajc link, "“Delta is the only U.S. carrier serving Asia from the Southeast, and has seen growing success with its current Narita service."
They left out the corollary: as soon as DL gets additional HND route authorities, DL will replace NRT with HND for each one of those route authorities. Maybe DL can revive Song to fly CONUS/NRT. :lol:

I'm fairly angry that DL is squandering U.S. 5th freedom rights at NRT. I'd love to see a U.S. ULCC similar to DY use those rights.

tkoenig95 wrote:
Since slots will be shifting to HND will NRT have open slots for potential new routes?

NRT was already adding to capacity. They will have a lot of extra room.
 
golfingboy
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 5:03 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 4:04 pm

I highly doubt AA will get more than two slots with this application. AA’s application is very disappointing from this AA FF’s perspective. I do not think AA’s LAS ploy will work as the DOT will view this as a route that should be allocated on the Japanese side (operated by JL/NH) given Japan POS is the target not USA. I think some overlook how big of a market GUM-Japan is and Japanese tourism is crucial for the Guam economy (similar to Hawaii). HND is much better for intra Japan connections as well as allowing GUM to remain a competitive market for leisure traffic offering a convenient flight option. DOT also likes to encourage choice and competition so with UA’s LAX application, AA’s chance of getting a 2nd LAX frequency is slim. Regardless here is my guess:

DL

ATL
DTW
SEA
PDX
HNL (1)

AA

DFW (1)

UA

IAD
ORD
LAX
EWR
GUM

HA
HNL (1)
 
kavok
Posts: 572
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 4:19 pm

I would bet money on these 10 getting picked:
AA: DFW1, LAX
DL: SEA, DTW, ATL, PDX
HA: HNL1
UA: EWR, ORD, IAD

Then it gets interesting. By process of elimination, there are 9 bids for the last 2 spots. I would guess:
- DL's HNL#1 eliminates HA's HNL#2 & HNL#3, because if the DOT awards any more HNL service, they will deem it better to have a competitor (DL) provide the service given HA will already have 2.5 HND slots after winning HNL#1 above. This brings it down to 7 bids remaining.
- Even with the JV argument, DL is not going to get two HNL slots. They only have one HNL-NRT flight today anyway. DL's HNL#2 is eliminated, bringing it down to 6.
- With only 12 slots, I just can't see the DOT giving United 6 bids, especially with the JV. GUM is on the bottom of UA's list, and can still be served via NRT. Down to 5 bids.
-AA's LAS is interesting and in a new city, but the market is unproven. It also would primarily serve Japanese leisure traffic that would probably be better flown by JL (or NH). I think LAS doesn't make the cut, and it is also AA's last choice. This brings it down to 4 remaining bids.

4 bids for 2 spots. Now it gets very tricky, and I honestly could see any of these last 4 getting picked.
-DL's HNL #1. Pros- It would provide competition to HA on the route. DL flies it today to NRT. Cons: How many HND slots should really be used on HNL?
-AA's DFW#2. Pros- It would give AA a third slot. Cons-I have a hard time believing the DOT would deny IAH to give DFW a second HND slot.
-UA's LAX - Pros- LAX is a big market. Cons- LAX will already have 3 HND slots (2xAA, 1xDL) from US carriers alone. Does it need a 4th?
-UA's IAH - Pros- UA flies it today. New HND destination. Cons- UA has this listed behind LAX in preference. Do you award UA's 5th choice, but deny them their 4th choice?
 
ldvaviation
Posts: 1241
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 7:21 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 4:38 pm

kavok wrote:
I would bet money on these 10 getting picked:
AA: DFW1, LAX
DL: SEA, DTW, ATL, PDX
HA: HNL1
UA: EWR, ORD, IAD

Then it gets interesting. By process of elimination, there are 9 bids for the last 2 spots. I would guess:
- DL's HNL#1 eliminates HA's HNL#2 & HNL#3, because if the DOT awards any more HNL service, they will deem it better to have a competitor (DL) provide the service given HA will already have 2.5 HND slots after winning HNL#1 above. This brings it down to 7 bids remaining.
- Even with the JV argument, DL is not going to get two HNL slots. They only have one HNL-NRT flight today anyway. DL's HNL#2 is eliminated, bringing it down to 6.
- With only 12 slots, I just can't see the DOT giving United 6 bids, especially with the JV. GUM is on the bottom of UA's list, and can still be served via NRT. Down to 5 bids.
-AA's LAS is interesting and in a new city, but the market is unproven. It also would primarily serve Japanese leisure traffic that would probably be better flown by JL (or NH). I think LAS doesn't make the cut, and it is also AA's last choice. This brings it down to 4 remaining bids.

4 bids for 2 spots. Now it gets very tricky, and I honestly could see any of these last 4 getting picked.
-DL's HNL #1. Pros- It would provide competition to HA on the route. DL flies it today to NRT. Cons: How many HND slots should really be used on HNL?
-AA's DFW#2. Pros- It would give AA a third slot. Cons-I have a hard time believing the DOT would deny IAH to give DFW a second HND slot.
-UA's LAX - Pros- LAX is a big market. Cons- LAX will already have 3 HND slots (2xAA, 1xDL) from US carriers alone. Does it need a 4th?
-UA's IAH - Pros- UA flies it today. New HND destination. Cons- UA has this listed behind LAX in preference. Do you award UA's 5th choice, but deny them their 4th choice?


I like your reasoning.

I think in the interest of maintaining competitive balance between AA, UA, and DL that the "third slot argument" makes the most sense in the final cut, provided of course that LAS does not make the final cut.

(I still think LAS will be AA's third slot pair. The politics are right for LAS.)
 
jrkmsp
Posts: 148
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 1:33 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 4:53 pm

kavok wrote:
I would bet money on these 10 getting picked:
AA: DFW1, LAX
DL: SEA, DTW, ATL, PDX
HA: HNL1
UA: EWR, ORD, IAD

Then it gets interesting. By process of elimination, there are 9 bids for the last 2 spots. I would guess:
- DL's HNL#1 eliminates HA's HNL#2 & HNL#3, because if the DOT awards any more HNL service, they will deem it better to have a competitor (DL) provide the service given HA will already have 2.5 HND slots after winning HNL#1 above. This brings it down to 7 bids remaining.
- Even with the JV argument, DL is not going to get two HNL slots. They only have one HNL-NRT flight today anyway. DL's HNL#2 is eliminated, bringing it down to 6.
- With only 12 slots, I just can't see the DOT giving United 6 bids, especially with the JV. GUM is on the bottom of UA's list, and can still be served via NRT. Down to 5 bids.
-AA's LAS is interesting and in a new city, but the market is unproven. It also would primarily serve Japanese leisure traffic that would probably be better flown by JL (or NH). I think LAS doesn't make the cut, and it is also AA's last choice. This brings it down to 4 remaining bids.

4 bids for 2 spots. Now it gets very tricky, and I honestly could see any of these last 4 getting picked.
-DL's HNL #1. Pros- It would provide competition to HA on the route. DL flies it today to NRT. Cons: How many HND slots should really be used on HNL?
-AA's DFW#2. Pros- It would give AA a third slot. Cons-I have a hard time believing the DOT would deny IAH to give DFW a second HND slot.
-UA's LAX - Pros- LAX is a big market. Cons- LAX will already have 3 HND slots (2xAA, 1xDL) from US carriers alone. Does it need a 4th?
-UA's IAH - Pros- UA flies it today. New HND destination. Cons- UA has this listed behind LAX in preference. Do you award UA's 5th choice, but deny them their 4th choice?


I agree that your first 10 are mortal locks. No way any of those get passed over. After that, I think your final four plus AA's LAS are where the other two will come from. I think Delta to HNL gets one, and then it's down to AA DFW/LAS vs UA LAX/IAH. Because Star has a lot more slots at HND than OW, I could see one of the AA choices getting picked. But I think UA at IAH is probably the best proposal overall. So it seems to me it comes down to AA LAS/LAX vs UA IAH for the final slot.
 
chonetsao
Posts: 292
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 3:55 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 5:02 pm

Why everyone is saying that the slot will be awarded in daily terms? Would there be possibilities that DOT will award 3 weekly + 4 weekly 'share' of the daily slot?

So what we know so far is:
AA request: DFW/LAX/DFW/LAS in order
DL request: SEA/DTW/ATL/PDX/HNL/HNL
HA request: HNL/HNL/HNL and
UA request: EWR/ORD/IAD/LAX/IAH/GUM


And we know DOT evaluation metrics regarding new market and beneficial to American consumers and others. So safe to say new destination may have some priority over existing market.

So I am going to say that LAS/SEA/DTW/ATL/PDX/IAD/IAH and GUM are safe bet. (EWR would be a close call)

To balance out, HA will get at least 1 daily HNL. AA is likely to get 1 DFW and 1 LAX.

So for 12 daily pairs, I think what would happen is:
AA gets : daily LAX/DFW/LAS (total 3)
DL gets: SEA/ATL/HNL daily and 3 weekly PDX and 4 weekly DTW (total 4)
or SEA/DTW/HNL daily and the remaining 7 weekly spread between PDX and ATL
HA gets: 10 weekly HNL (total 1.3)
UA gets: daily EWR/ORD/IAH and 4 weekly IAD or LAX (total 3.4)

I believe DOT needs to look at the size of the market as well as new destinations. If a market is over saturated DOT should give less priority. If a market is proven not able to have a sizeable PDEW, DOT should prioritise other route while give consideration to a less than daily schedule.

Thus I think we should look at possible award of 3 weekly or 4 weekly slots in the spirit or encouraging calculated competition.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2559
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 5:10 pm

jetblastdubai wrote:
FSDan wrote:
Based on the applications, these are the awards I'd personally like to see:
AA LAX-HND #2
AA DFW-HND #2

This spreads the love around between alliances a bit, and allows DL and AA to pull their own metal out of NRT and simplify their TYO ops. NH could pretty easily fill in the rest of UA's requests with the likely 7 frequencies they'll get awarded.


I'm curious as to why you think AA should be awarded a 2nd frequency at both DFW and LAX before UA would be awarded a 1st frequency on some of their requests? I don't believe it's the DOTs job to spread the wealth between carriers but instead award routes based on the best US consumer interest...regardless of which US carrier operates the route. Awarding AA a 2nd LAX frequency before allowing UA to even have it's 1st LAX frequency would seem like the government is trying to pick favorites.


Because I'm looking at UA/NH as one airline (since for all intents and purposes they operate that way to Japan). UA/NH already have HND flights from SFO, LAX, ORD, JFK, and HNL. AA/JL have HND flights from SFO, LAX, and JFK. Giving UA their requested LAX or ORD flights, in my view, is absolutely no different from giving AA/JL two LAX or two DFW flights since UA really already has a flight in each of those markets through NH, and now are asking for second frequencies. The only difference is that UA/NH already have more flights to begin with.

I think the DOT will probably give UA one or two fewer awards than they give AA, just to try to maintain competitive balance. At some level it is the DOT's job to spread the wealth around, insofar as having a more level playing field benefits consumers through more competition and lower prices. Say the DOT granted all 5 of UA's mainland requests - then NH will get an additional 6 frequencies of their own, and the UA/NH JV would end up with 16 out of the total 36 U.S.-HND flights. Nearly half!

Also, the more awards the DOT grants to UA, the harder it will be for NH to find good places to put their 6 additional frequencies. Say UA is granted EWR and IAD (both seem to me to have good chances as currently unserved markets to HND). NH already has LAX, ORD, and JFK covered, so they could move their SEA, SJC, and IAH flights to HND, and then they still have half their allocation to toy around with some combination of moving one of their two LAX-NRT flights over to HND, moving their SFO-NRT, or their ORD-NRT flights to HND, or adding capacity to Hawai'i/Guam. And that's just if UA gets two awards. If they were to get four (EWR, IAD, ORD, and LAX or IAH), then NH probably wouldn't want to move their LAX or ORD flights to HND so that they maintain a presence to NRT from those markets and boost connections at NRT. For the same reason, I don't see NH moving their JFK-NRT flight to HND - that would leave NRT without JFK service by the JV.

So I guess I'm trying to look at what the overall picture might look like in the U.S.-TYO market when all is said and done. If the best case scenario happened for DL (all 6 frequencies awarded) and the DOT split the other 6 evenly between UA and AA, you could have something like this:
SEA-HND (1x NH + 1x JL + 1x DL)
PDX-HND (1x DL)
SFO-NRT (1x UA)
SFO-HND (1x UA + 1x NH + 1x JL)
SJC-HND (1x NH)
LAX-NRT (1x UA + 1x NH + 1x JL + 1x SQ)
LAX-HND (2x NH + 2x AA + 1x DL)
SAN-HND (1x JL)
LAS-HND (1x JL)
DEN-NRT (1x UA)
IAH-NRT (1x UA)
IAH-HND (1x NH)
DFW-NRT (1x JL)
DFW-HND (2x AA)
MSP-HND (1x DL)
ORD-NRT (1x NH + 1x JL)
ORD-HND (1x UA + 1x NH + 1x JL)
DTW-HND (1x DL)
ATL-HND (1x DL)
IAD-NRT (1x NH)
IAD-HND (1x UA)
EWR-NRT (1x UA)
EWR-HND (1x UA)
JFK-NRT (1x NH + 1x JL)
JFK-HND (1x NH + 1x JL)
BOS-HND (1x JL)
HNL-NRT (2x NH + 4x JL + 1x HA)
HNL-HND (1x NH + 1x JL + 1.6x HA + 2x DL)
KOA-NRT (1x JL)
KOA-HND (0.4x HA)
GUM-HND (1x NH)

In other permutations where DL doesn't get their full award, just shuffle the above flights around between carriers. For example, maybe HA ends up with 2.6x HNL-HND and DL with 1x HNL-HND. Maybe UA/NH get fewer awards than AA/JL and ORD ends up being split ORD-NRT 1x UA, ORD-HND 2x NH, with AA flying LAS-HND instead of JL, JL adding a HNL frequency instead of LAS, and NH not flying to GUM from HND... There are lots of ways this could shake out, but I do hope DL gets 5 or 6 of their requests when looking at the overall U.S.-TYO picture.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
klm617
Posts: 4379
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 5:15 pm

Here is the thing if passed over on LAS-HND would it then be likely that JL picks up LAS-HND with the slots they are awarded and what makes AA better on LAS-HND than JL. Is this just a ploy by these two carriers to get a extra slot because if AA is awarded LAS-HNL then JL doesn't have to waste a slot on that route.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
kavok
Posts: 572
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 5:59 pm

chonetsao wrote:
Why everyone is saying that the slot will be awarded in daily terms? Would there be possibilities that DOT will award 3 weekly + 4 weekly 'share' of the daily slot?

So what we know so far is:
AA request: DFW/LAX/DFW/LAS in order
DL request: SEA/DTW/ATL/PDX/HNL/HNL
HA request: HNL/HNL/HNL and
UA request: EWR/ORD/IAD/LAX/IAH/GUM


And we know DOT evaluation metrics regarding new market and beneficial to American consumers and others. So safe to say new destination may have some priority over existing market.

So I am going to say that LAS/SEA/DTW/ATL/PDX/IAD/IAH and GUM are safe bet. (EWR would be a close call)

To balance out, HA will get at least 1 daily HNL. AA is likely to get 1 DFW and 1 LAX.

So for 12 daily pairs, I think what would happen is:
AA gets : daily LAX/DFW/LAS (total 3)
DL gets: SEA/ATL/HNL daily and 3 weekly PDX and 4 weekly DTW (total 4)
or SEA/DTW/HNL daily and the remaining 7 weekly spread between PDX and ATL
HA gets: 10 weekly HNL (total 1.3)
UA gets: daily EWR/ORD/IAH and 4 weekly IAD or LAX (total 3.4)

I believe DOT needs to look at the size of the market as well as new destinations. If a market is over saturated DOT should give less priority. If a market is proven not able to have a sizeable PDEW, DOT should prioritise other route while give consideration to a less than daily schedule.

Thus I think we should look at possible award of 3 weekly or 4 weekly slots in the spirit or encouraging calculated competition.



Past practice indicates that the DOT is also respectful of the carrier's order of preference list. As in, the DOT is not going to award UA its 6th choice in GUM, but not its 2nd choice in ORD. I do agree with some of the earlier posts that AA's 4th choice in LAS is probably more compelling than their 3rd choice in DFW#2. A similar argument could be made that UA's 5th choice in IAH is also more compelling than their 4th choice in LAX (which already will also be served by AA/DL/NH/JL). I would still imagine any "skipping over" by the DOT will likely be very minimal, if it happens at all. There is a reason both UA and AA made their rankings the way they did.

That being said, if the final slot comes down to being between UA/IAH, UA/LAX, AA/DFW2, AA/LAS... things could get very interesting.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2559
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 7:45 pm

kavok wrote:
I do agree with some of the earlier posts that AA's 4th choice in LAS is probably more compelling than their 3rd choice in DFW#2. A similar argument could be made that UA's 5th choice in IAH is also more compelling than their 4th choice in LAX (which already will also be served by AA/DL/NH/JL).


The question in my mind is still how much the DOT will factor in the Japanese partners. IAH-HND on UA isn't all that compelling in my mind if their JV partner NH is all but guaranteed to serve that route if UA isn't awarded it... Same with JL and LAS-HND. The Japanese carriers will have to place their 12 flights somewhere...
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 5824
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 7:54 pm

FSDan wrote:
kavok wrote:
I do agree with some of the earlier posts that AA's 4th choice in LAS is probably more compelling than their 3rd choice in DFW#2. A similar argument could be made that UA's 5th choice in IAH is also more compelling than their 4th choice in LAX (which already will also be served by AA/DL/NH/JL).


The question in my mind is still how much the DOT will factor in the Japanese partners. IAH-HND on UA isn't all that compelling in my mind if their JV partner NH is all but guaranteed to serve that route if UA isn't awarded it... Same with JL and LAS-HND. The Japanese carriers will have to place their 12 flights somewhere...


Has NH said they will fly IAH-HND? If not, how can it be considered.
"I dance and laugh among the rotten"
 
FSDan
Posts: 2559
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 8:10 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
FSDan wrote:
kavok wrote:
I do agree with some of the earlier posts that AA's 4th choice in LAS is probably more compelling than their 3rd choice in DFW#2. A similar argument could be made that UA's 5th choice in IAH is also more compelling than their 4th choice in LAX (which already will also be served by AA/DL/NH/JL).


The question in my mind is still how much the DOT will factor in the Japanese partners. IAH-HND on UA isn't all that compelling in my mind if their JV partner NH is all but guaranteed to serve that route if UA isn't awarded it... Same with JL and LAS-HND. The Japanese carriers will have to place their 12 flights somewhere...


Has NH said they will fly IAH-HND? If not, how can it be considered.


They haven't, which makes It a tricky situation. On the one hand, NH has not said they'll fly that route. On the other hand, I don't believe the DOT can afford to completely ignore the dynamic the Japanese JV partners bring to the table either. If UA isn't awarded IAH-HND, it's all but certain that NH will fly it. That's a reasonable statement to make because the two airlines coordinate schedules, and it can be assumed that they've talked together about which additional HND routes they want the JV to fly. NH isn't going to just decide on their own that they want to use their frequencies on 3x additional daily LAX-HND, daily ANC-HND, daily ABQ-HND, and daily MEM-HND, and then leave UA to suck up the resulting losses...
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
User avatar
OA412
Moderator
Posts: 4667
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2000 6:22 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 8:14 pm

enilria wrote:
AA's LAS is also cray-cray, but at least they can use JAL to sell it as a de facto JL flight catering to the JL FFP base. DL can't do that with HNL and PDX just won't work. Do you think they will do as they did before? Operate PDX. Let it fail. Cry about the powerful Japanese JVs and then try to move it to SLC?

Why go through all that when they could have just applied for SLC-HND in this round? As a brand new route in the US-Tokyo market, it would have a high likelihood of being selected. I think they applied for PDX-HND because they actually want to fly the route, and they probably have corporate contracts that depend on them serving Tokyo from PDX.

enilria wrote:
I'm fairly angry that DL is squandering U.S. 5th freedom rights at NRT. I'd love to see a U.S. ULCC similar to DY use those rights.

UA also has 5th freedom rights at NRT that they're not using at all. Would the Japanese even allow either carrier to sell those rights off at this point? I highly doubt it.
Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
 
User avatar
deltacto
Posts: 443
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:49 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 11:04 pm

pnwpdx wrote:
I wonder if DL will keep some NRT operation.... what happens to MNL and SIN service? I guess we will see...


LAXintl wrote:
With reduced, or potentially even no feed, the intra-Asia flights are toast from NRT.


Since the Manilla and Singapore flights are fifth freedom, the flight numbers must be a continuation of a flight from the US, although not necessarily the same aircraft. Currently:

DL181 / 180 ... HNL-NRT-MNL / MNL-NRT-HNL
DL167 / 166 ... SEA-NRT-SIN / SIN-NRT-SEA

If DL does move all their USA-Tokyo flights to Haneda, there is no way they could operate the MNL and SIN tags even if DL still wanted to
 
TigerFlyer
Posts: 192
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Fri Feb 22, 2019 11:52 pm

NRT 5ths are a red herring. They have zero value today, and are open and available to any US carrier that wants them. On a segment basis, they operated at a loss but were necessary to feed the more profitable TPAC routes that were over-gauged with 747s. The only plane that could fly them at the time. Now, with smaller gauge twins, demand can be right sized to TYO, and network feed provided by Asian partners. DL is done at NRT. If SIN and MNL remain on DL metal they will flow via ICN.
 
klm617
Posts: 4379
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 12:02 am

deltacto wrote:
pnwpdx wrote:
I wonder if DL will keep some NRT operation.... what happens to MNL and SIN service? I guess we will see...


LAXintl wrote:
With reduced, or potentially even no feed, the intra-Asia flights are toast from NRT.


Since the Manilla and Singapore flights are fifth freedom, the flight numbers must be a continuation of a flight from the US, although not necessarily the same aircraft. Currently:

DL181 / 180 ... HNL-NRT-MNL / MNL-NRT-HNL
DL167 / 166 ... SEA-NRT-SIN / SIN-NRT-SEA

If DL does move all their USA-Tokyo flights to Haneda, there is no way they could operate the MNL and SIN tags even if DL still wanted to


Why can't they use KIX and NGO to serve MNL and SIN

SEA-KIX-SIN
DTW-NGO-MNL

Not saying they will but this scenario is possible.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
N174UA
Posts: 1010
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:17 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 12:41 am

FSDan wrote:
OA412 wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
Delta: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... -0014-0005

In order of priority:

1. Seattle (SEA) 339
2. Detroit (DTW) 359
3. Atlanta (ATL) 772
4. Portland (PDX) 332
5. Honolulu #1 (HNL) 763
6. Honolulu #2 (HNL) 763


I've included DLs proposed aircraft type for each route. Also of note, p. 37 of the proposal includes the DL's 339 seat map.


Interesting that the PDX-HND application is proposing the 332 rather than the 763 currently used for PDX-NRT. Many on here (myself not included) have been speculating that DL would cut PDX-TYO in favor of PDX-ICN, but this would represent a slight upgauge.


I also found it interesting that the new departure time for PDX-HND would be 14:15, which is 3 hours later than the current departure to NRT. What that tells me is not only is DL committed to PDX-TYO long term with the aircraft upguage, and the we likely won't see PDX-ICN anytime soon. Also interesting is that while DL is planning to upgrade SEA-NRT to the A359 next month, the SEA-HND slot would go to A339, not the A359. For PDX, the current Flight 68/69 already originates/terminates in LAX, with the plane change in PDX. By pushing back the departure time, it allows potentially more feed from SEA, DTW, JFK, BOS for this flight.

I definitely think DL will get this PDX-HND slot, and it will be good for PDX for sure! The PDF document I saw all showed "summer season". I'm assuming DL would operate all of these slots year round and daily?
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2125
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 12:55 am

klm617 wrote:
deltacto wrote:
pnwpdx wrote:
I wonder if DL will keep some NRT operation.... what happens to MNL and SIN service? I guess we will see...


LAXintl wrote:
With reduced, or potentially even no feed, the intra-Asia flights are toast from NRT.


Since the Manilla and Singapore flights are fifth freedom, the flight numbers must be a continuation of a flight from the US, although not necessarily the same aircraft. Currently:

DL181 / 180 ... HNL-NRT-MNL / MNL-NRT-HNL
DL167 / 166 ... SEA-NRT-SIN / SIN-NRT-SEA

If DL does move all their USA-Tokyo flights to Haneda, there is no way they could operate the MNL and SIN tags even if DL still wanted to


Why can't they use KIX and NGO to serve MNL and SIN

SEA-KIX-SIN
DTW-NGO-MNL

Not saying they will but this scenario is possible.


They actually used to do NGO-MNL I believe. That’s definitely a possibility.

Also me agreeing with you is a first.
 
N174UA
Posts: 1010
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:17 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 1:02 am

N174UA wrote:
FSDan wrote:
OA412 wrote:

I've included DLs proposed aircraft type for each route. Also of note, p. 37 of the proposal includes the DL's 339 seat map.


Interesting that the PDX-HND application is proposing the 332 rather than the 763 currently used for PDX-NRT. Many on here (myself not included) have been speculating that DL would cut PDX-TYO in favor of PDX-ICN, but this would represent a slight upgauge.


I also found it interesting that the new departure time for PDX-HND would be 14:15, which is 3 hours later than the current departure to NRT. What that tells me is not only is DL committed to PDX-TYO long term with the aircraft upguage, and the we likely won't see PDX-ICN anytime soon. For PDX, the current Flight 68/69 already originates/terminates in LAX, with the plane change in PDX. By pushing back the departure time, it allows potentially more feed from SEA, SLC, JFK, and BOS for this flight.

I definitely think DL will get this PDX-HND slot, and it will be good for PDX for sure! The PDF document I saw all showed "summer season". I'm assuming DL would operate all of these slots year round and daily?
 
klakzky123
Posts: 653
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 4:05 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 1:06 am

klm617 wrote:
deltacto wrote:
pnwpdx wrote:
I wonder if DL will keep some NRT operation.... what happens to MNL and SIN service? I guess we will see...


LAXintl wrote:
With reduced, or potentially even no feed, the intra-Asia flights are toast from NRT.


Since the Manilla and Singapore flights are fifth freedom, the flight numbers must be a continuation of a flight from the US, although not necessarily the same aircraft. Currently:

DL181 / 180 ... HNL-NRT-MNL / MNL-NRT-HNL
DL167 / 166 ... SEA-NRT-SIN / SIN-NRT-SEA

If DL does move all their USA-Tokyo flights to Haneda, there is no way they could operate the MNL and SIN tags even if DL still wanted to


Why can't they use KIX and NGO to serve MNL and SIN

SEA-KIX-SIN
DTW-NGO-MNL

Not saying they will but this scenario is possible.


They could but why would they? You can get to SIN and MNL via ICN now. DL has a strong partner hub now. They don't need to operate their own flights to gain access to Asian airports.

Also competing for local traffic on both of those routes is silly. KIX-SIN has Jetstar, Scoot and SIA while NGO-MNL has Cebu Pacific, Jetstar and Philippine Airlines. Yields on intra-Asia flights are pretty bad now. Gone are the days when NW could run the fifth freedom routes profitably. They're all loser routes now.
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1301
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 1:56 am

B1168 wrote:
obelau24 wrote:
According to the press release Delta sent out, the B767-300ER is “currently being retrofitted with a new cabin interior and inflight entertainment system.” That’s the first I heard of a -300 refurbishment; is this new? Does anyone have any details about what a new cabin interior means?


I suppose IFE and finer business class. They recently sent a B763ER to CAN for something absolutely not passenger transporting (or it won’t arrive at 2am). That must be some retrofitting done in GAMECO.

Or they could be just there for regular heavy maintenance. Remember GAMECO is a very large maintenance contractor and IIRC DL sent their birds there before.

DL also sends its birds to PVG for maintenance as well.

Michael
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2063
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 2:11 am

DL at NRT gives us armchair CEOs a front row seat to watch an airline economics drama. Above the wing costs are 100% portable. Below the wing costs are 100% fixed. As an operator's traffic through a port decreases, the operator's cost per emplanement goes up. DL's CEO is on record saying NRT will be drawn down to zero... the drama is how gracefully it is done (mgmt, labor, pax, cost). If DL gets the HND slots it seeks, IMO NRT will go to zero for DL with afterburners lit, including ex-NRT service to SIN, MNL, and HNL (the sole surviving beach market). SIN and MNL will move to ICN on KE metal, and HNL will move to HND. 1x daily to HNL, SIN, and MNL cannot cover DL's costs at NRT. I'm surprised the NRT Sky Club has survived until now. KE or LJ (JinAir) may add a frequency using 5th freedom NRT/HNL. LJ now operates ICN/HNL.

Back to costs... the more traffic moves to HND and ICN, the faster other uses of DL's equipment now serving NRT will provide higher yields than keeping NRT as a port. DOT's slot allocations are Occam's Razor for DL at NRT.
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 9579
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 2:18 am

OA412 wrote:
enilria wrote:
AA's LAS is also cray-cray, but at least they can use JAL to sell it as a de facto JL flight catering to the JL FFP base. DL can't do that with HNL and PDX just won't work. Do you think they will do as they did before? Operate PDX. Let it fail. Cry about the powerful Japanese JVs and then try to move it to SLC?

Why go through all that when they could have just applied for SLC-HND in this round? As a brand new route in the US-Tokyo market, it would have a high likelihood of being selected. I think they applied for PDX-HND because they actually want to fly the route, and they probably have corporate contracts that depend on them serving Tokyo from PDX.

enilria wrote:
I'm fairly angry that DL is squandering U.S. 5th freedom rights at NRT. I'd love to see a U.S. ULCC similar to DY use those rights.

UA also has 5th freedom rights at NRT that they're not using at all. Would the Japanese even allow either carrier to sell those rights off at this point? I highly doubt it.

The rights are ultimately the property of the U.S. govt. I'm fairly sure that a foreign govt can't dictate which carrier uses rights allocated to the United States absent something like anti-trust.
 
B1168
Posts: 507
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 2:40 am

eamondzhang wrote:
B1168 wrote:
obelau24 wrote:
According to the press release Delta sent out, the B767-300ER is “currently being retrofitted with a new cabin interior and inflight entertainment system.” That’s the first I heard of a -300 refurbishment; is this new? Does anyone have any details about what a new cabin interior means?


I suppose IFE and finer business class. They recently sent a B763ER to CAN for something absolutely not passenger transporting (or it won’t arrive at 2am). That must be some retrofitting done in GAMECO.

Or they could be just there for regular heavy maintenance. Remember GAMECO is a very large maintenance contractor and IIRC DL sent their birds there before.

DL also sends its birds to PVG for maintenance as well.

Michael


Eh, sure. I only claimed so because I was told once that a 764 received retrofitting also to GAMECO in CAN, not too long ago. Sorry about that.
Though if they really do “heavy maintenance”(C/D checks?), they will be less likely do get rid of them within a few years, and that is a justification on retrofitting it.
 
lavalampluva
Posts: 1376
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:33 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 4:00 am

If DTW is awarded the HND route it’ll be a net gain of zero. DL will eliminate the flight to NRT.
Remind me to send a thank you note to Mr. Boeing.
 
User avatar
bigfoot0503
Posts: 413
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:17 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 4:39 am

N174UA wrote:
FSDan wrote:
OA412 wrote:

I've included DLs proposed aircraft type for each route. Also of note, p. 37 of the proposal includes the DL's 339 seat map.


Interesting that the PDX-HND application is proposing the 332 rather than the 763 currently used for PDX-NRT. Many on here (myself not included) have been speculating that DL would cut PDX-TYO in favor of PDX-ICN, but this would represent a slight upgauge.


I also found it interesting that the new departure time for PDX-HND would be 14:15, which is 3 hours later than the current departure to NRT. What that tells me is not only is DL committed to PDX-TYO long term with the aircraft upguage, and the we likely won't see PDX-ICN anytime soon. Also interesting is that while DL is planning to upgrade SEA-NRT to the A359 next month, the SEA-HND slot would go to A339, not the A359. For PDX, the current Flight 68/69 already originates/terminates in LAX, with the plane change in PDX. By pushing back the departure time, it allows potentially more feed from SEA, DTW, JFK, BOS for this flight.

I definitely think DL will get this PDX-HND slot, and it will be good for PDX for sure! The PDF document I saw all showed "summer season". I'm assuming DL would operate all of these slots year round and daily?


I absolutely agree with your thoughts regarding the PDX-HND slot. It's been rather amusing to read a few of the comments herein regarding the perceived notions of the PDX to Tokyo market. In particular the few assumption that this route may have little to no merit and is ''allegedly successfully" operated by Delta. With nearly a 15 year run thus far... relying mostly on O&D traffic, it's clear that Delta probably has found plenty of merit and enough business reasoning to continue to operate from PDX to Tokyo (albeit to Narita). Frankly as a Medallion member with Delta and one who flies regularly from PDX to Tokyo, the upgrade from the B767 to the A330-200 is remarkable to see and welcomed.
 
jrkmsp
Posts: 148
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 1:33 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:18 am

enilria wrote:
OA412 wrote:
enilria wrote:
AA's LAS is also cray-cray, but at least they can use JAL to sell it as a de facto JL flight catering to the JL FFP base. DL can't do that with HNL and PDX just won't work. Do you think they will do as they did before? Operate PDX. Let it fail. Cry about the powerful Japanese JVs and then try to move it to SLC?

Why go through all that when they could have just applied for SLC-HND in this round? As a brand new route in the US-Tokyo market, it would have a high likelihood of being selected. I think they applied for PDX-HND because they actually want to fly the route, and they probably have corporate contracts that depend on them serving Tokyo from PDX.

enilria wrote:
I'm fairly angry that DL is squandering U.S. 5th freedom rights at NRT. I'd love to see a U.S. ULCC similar to DY use those rights.

UA also has 5th freedom rights at NRT that they're not using at all. Would the Japanese even allow either carrier to sell those rights off at this point? I highly doubt it.

The rights are ultimately the property of the U.S. govt. I'm fairly sure that a foreign govt can't dictate which carrier uses rights allocated to the United States absent something like anti-trust.


US-Japan is an Open Skies market now. ANY carrier can fly 5th freedom ex-NRT. Haneda is a special carve-out because of the slot regime, but the rest of the Japan-US market, any flag carrier of either country is eligible to fly 5th freedom flights.

Same applies to US-S.Korea — if Delta wants to move its fifth freedom flights to ICN, it's just a matter of getting the slots from the airport operator (and making sure they don't infuriate their JV partner).
 
User avatar
FA9295
Posts: 1770
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:44 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:53 am

FSDan wrote:
SEA-HND (1x NH + 1x JL + 1x DL)

There's absolutely no way that three separate airlines will be operating this route. The market is strong, but not that strong. NH will probably keep their route at Narita, but JL has expressed interest in moving their SEA-NRT route over to HND in the future.

With that being said, JL has feed from AS, and DL has feed from their own route network--leaving NH with no U.S.-based feed at all aside from a few codeshare routes from UA hubs, so NH would probably benefit from an HND move more than JL, but who knows what will happen there...


enilria wrote:
So, I get that they fly PDX-NRT now, but without a hub on either end PDX-HND is a disaster. No idea why that's in there. HNL-HND is likely also chaff. That made sense with a hub in NRT, but it makes little sense without a hub in Tokyo. Clearly they would close NRT completely.

Also kinda surprised PDX is a better choice than their hubs in SLC or JFK. Perhaps because they failed at it before? But they tried some of those other before as well.

As biased as I am with this route, I really don't understand your argument here.

NRT is hardly a hub for DL anymore, and anyone who thinks otherwise is just kidding themselves. They're still flying PDX-NRT today with no hub on either end, and it's doing just fine. Sure, there's MNL and SIN from NRT, but that's about it. There's nothing else on the NRT end of the route at all. And I bet those two flights are not used all too often from PDX-originating passengers anyway. Moving that route over to HND would only improve loads due to the more convenient location to downtown Tokyo, hence the proposed upgrade from the 763 to the A332.

Also, if Delta continues to thrive in the trans-pacific market by using SEA as it's main gateway to Asia, SLC will probably never get a flight to Asia. At least not with Delta, even with Ed Bastian's apparent affinity for their SLC hub, it's not gonna happen. The logistics there just don't add up. SLC is just too small of a local market to make it work and any connecting passengers would just be routed through SEA anyway. Although SLC-SEA-Asia is likely a very popular itinerary for SLC folks needing to get to Asia, connecting passengers through SEA makes a lot more sense here, and that type of operation has proven to be sufficient enough to meet any little existing demand/need for a nonstop flight from SLC to Asia. PDX is a better choice than SLC because the local market is stronger, and SLC-HND would very likely end up cannibalizing SEA-HND. As for JFK, even though the NYC-TYO market is very strong, it is also very saturated--which is likely why they quit flying JFK-NRT in the first place.

PDX is Delta's 4th priority for their HND slots. So if the DoT wants to evenly split up how many slots each airline gets, then the big U.S. 3 + HA would get three slots each, which leaves out PDX. While I don't think they would award HA with 3 HNL-HND slots, the possibility is still there if the DoT wants to "fairly split" the slots evenly by giving each of the four airlines three slots each. HA probably would have more of a chance of getting 3 slots if they proposed to make KOA-HND up to operating on a daily basis and then apply any leftover HND slots that they have over to HNL.

Anyhow, enough rambling on from me... ;)

In conclusion, I think it's pretty much a 50/50 toss-up chance as to whether or not PDX makes the cut. While Delta has presented a very good case for the route, in my opinion, it is still only their 4th priority route of the mix. SEA-HND and DTW-HND are pretty much locked in, although the other airlines may try to argue that Delta has tried both routes before and failed. ATL-HND has a strong chance as well, but not quite yet guaranteed, in my opinion. And there's absolutely no way that DL will get any of their requested HNL-HND slots/routes...
 
hkcanadaexpat
Posts: 3853
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:33 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:57 am

FA9295 wrote:
NRT is hardly a hub for DL anymore, and anyone who thinks otherwise is just kidding themselves. They're still flying PDX-NRT today with no hub on either end, and it's doing just fine. Sure, there's MNL and SIN from NRT, but that's about it. There's nothing else on the NRT end of the route at all. And I bet those two flights are not used all too often from PDX-originating passengers anyway. Moving that route over to HND would only improve loads due to the more convenient location to downtown Tokyo, hence the proposed upgrade from the 763 to the A332.

I would caution people seeing the 332 as an upgrade. the reality is that the post D-Suites 332s will most likely have very similar seat count to the current 763ERs. Definitely an upgraded product (although the 763ERs will also eventually get the D-Suites) but not necessarily added capacity.
 
kavok
Posts: 572
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 1:40 pm

FA9295 wrote:

In conclusion, I think it's pretty much a 50/50 toss-up chance as to whether or not PDX makes the cut. While Delta has presented a very good case for the route, in my opinion, it is still only their 4th priority route of the mix. SEA-HND and DTW-HND are pretty much locked in, although the other airlines may try to argue that Delta has tried both routes before and failed. ATL-HND has a strong chance as well, but not quite yet guaranteed, in my opinion. And there's absolutely no way that DL will get any of their requested HNL-HND slots/routes...


I don’t think HA/UA/AA is going to spend too much effort arguing against DL on SEA, DTW, ATL. Just like DL won’t argue about DFW#1 or UA on EWR. Those routes are all but givens, and I am sure the other airlines want to focus their arguments targeting other routes that have the possibility of not happening. Basically, what is the value in drawing the DOTs attention away from their gripe about DL on HNL, to argue about an ATL flight that is going to happen.

I expect strong responses from UA and AA on HNL in general, thus targeting the last requests of both DL and HA. I also expect strong arguments against DFW#2. Interestingly, it will be difficult for AA to target UAs 4th choice in LAX without making their own LAX bid look bad.
 
simpv
Posts: 164
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2016 12:19 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 3:13 pm

What is the long-term prospect for NH/JL at NRT? With those 12 additional frequencies, combined with US carriers moving to HND, how viable are some of those NRT routes that rely on connecting passengers? This expansion at HND seems to have the potential to scale down some of NH/JL's operations.
 
N174UA
Posts: 1010
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:17 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 4:23 pm

kavok wrote:
FA9295 wrote:

In conclusion, I think it's pretty much a 50/50 toss-up chance as to whether or not PDX makes the cut. While Delta has presented a very good case for the route, in my opinion, it is still only their 4th priority route of the mix. SEA-HND and DTW-HND are pretty much locked in, although the other airlines may try to argue that Delta has tried both routes before and failed. ATL-HND has a strong chance as well, but not quite yet guaranteed, in my opinion. And there's absolutely no way that DL will get any of their requested HNL-HND slots/routes...


I don’t think HA/UA/AA is going to spend too much effort arguing against DL on SEA, DTW, ATL. Just like DL won’t argue about DFW#1 or UA on EWR. Those routes are all but givens, and I am sure the other airlines want to focus their arguments targeting other routes that have the possibility of not happening. Basically, what is the value in drawing the DOTs attention away from their gripe about DL on HNL, to argue about an ATL flight that is going to happen.

I expect strong responses from UA and AA on HNL in general, thus targeting the last requests of both DL and HA. I also expect strong arguments against DFW#2. Interestingly, it will be difficult for AA to target UAs 4th choice in LAX without making their own LAX bid look bad.


I think the PDX-HND slot is basically a lock also. With 12 slots, and assuming UA and AA each get their top 3, Delta will get their top 4 (maybe 5), and then the last going to Hawaiian. PDX is their fourth priority, sure, but its still ahead of the two HNL slots they want. In their application, Delta offered more "flexibility" on the proposed departure times for this proposed route. Assuming it remains 14:15, it would be the last U.S-Japan flight to HND of the day, meaning it can pick up overflow from SEA, feed from SLC, and potentially from JFK, BOS, and even ATL, too.

Delta knows their numbers on PDX-Tokyo...they have made a VERY strong case for PDX-HND, especially by making it daily year round, and on a slightly bigger/newer aircraft. With more feed and cargo opportunities, and HND being closer to downtown Tokyo, PDX-HND will be a success. In their presentation, Delta included a graph that compared US-Japan growth from SEA, PDX, DTW, and ATL. Guess which market had the highest growth at 38%? Yep...PDX!

Lastly, UA, AA or even Hawaiian aren't going to put up any sort of protest against PDX-HND. No other carrier flies it now,and neither Japanese carrier does either, and neither Japanese carrier has it on their radar in the proposed slots they want for the U.S. Customers in the PDX market still have a choice on other carriers by transferring via SEA, SFO, LAX, or even HNL, so there is no anti-competitive harm done in this market.
 
User avatar
jbpdx
Posts: 730
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 6:37 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:21 pm

75,000 Japanese tourists visited Portland/Oregon in 2018 and the number has been increasing every year. Business travel is strong: DeltaOne seats on the PDX-NRT route are usually sold out. The 480-room Toyoko Inn, the first West Coast location for the Japanese no-frills business hotel chain, will open in 2021. They wouldn’t make this investment unless they were confident about the growing Portland market.

The 767-300ER Delta is using has 226 seats, the A332 has 234, not much of a capacity increase, yet switching to Haneda will increase demand on both ends.*

The alliances/partnerships will play a major role in the decision and Delta has a slight advantage. I don’t see Hawaiian getting three of the 12 slots. Given the Oregon-Japan ties, overflying Japan to ICN wouldn’t work here. I’d say the Portland-Tokyo route is safe, one way or another.

*[If Delta wanted to bulk up Tokyo-bound connecting traffic thru PDX by adding a few unserved South-Northwest city pairs (efficient GC routes PDX-MSY, PDX-MIA?), they could use the A333, like they do PDX-AMS.]
Next: AS PDX-OGG-PDX
DL PDX-LHR-PDX
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3342
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:06 pm

So PDX-NRT, a a flight that is currently isn't daily for most of the year, uses some connections on both ends (on the US side, that means because the fares are cheap. Cheap fares = weak demand that isn't serving the high demand), and still has trouble filling up sees an increase to daily, a loss of connections on one end, and an upgauge? No wonder DL wanted "flexibility" with frequencies.

FSDan wrote:
I think the DOT will probably give UA one or two fewer awards than they give AA, just to try to maintain competitive balance. At some level it is the DOT's job to spread the wealth around, insofar as having a more level playing field benefits consumers through more competition and lower prices. Say the DOT granted all 5 of UA's mainland requests - then NH will get an additional 6 frequencies of their own, and the UA/NH JV would end up with 16 out of the total 36 U.S.-HND flights. Nearly half!


The fatal error in your logic is that NRT and HND have to be separate markets. They are clearly not separate markets. They are strongly complementary. Not fully of course, as HND demand is a little stronger, but they keep each other in check with prices. DL's application is horrible for competitive purposes. They've made no secret that HND flights will replace NRT flights, leaving essentially no increase in capacity to TYO. Not surprisingly they don't mention this desire in the application, unlike UA's honesty in which they label the flights that that are additions and substitutions. And not only is TYO capacity not significantly increased, NRT-SIN/MNL are sure to be gone as well, leaving a net negative capacity/competitive impact for the American consumer.

DL's entire application is "woe is me, I don't have a JV to Japan" (although they do now to ICN - think DL is complaining about controlling that market?). It's pushing the the DOT to "right the wrong" of two JVs they failed to secure in Japan. The DOT's job is not to"fix" past business decisions, although I expect they will and improperly award at least 5 frequencies to DL.
 
77H
Posts: 1458
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:19 pm

kavok wrote:
chonetsao wrote:
Why everyone is saying that the slot will be awarded in daily terms? Would there be possibilities that DOT will award 3 weekly + 4 weekly 'share' of the daily slot?

So what we know so far is:
AA request: DFW/LAX/DFW/LAS in order
DL request: SEA/DTW/ATL/PDX/HNL/HNL
HA request: HNL/HNL/HNL and
UA request: EWR/ORD/IAD/LAX/IAH/GUM


And we know DOT evaluation metrics regarding new market and beneficial to American consumers and others. So safe to say new destination may have some priority over existing market.

So I am going to say that LAS/SEA/DTW/ATL/PDX/IAD/IAH and GUM are safe bet. (EWR would be a close call)

To balance out, HA will get at least 1 daily HNL. AA is likely to get 1 DFW and 1 LAX.

So for 12 daily pairs, I think what would happen is:
AA gets : daily LAX/DFW/LAS (total 3)
DL gets: SEA/ATL/HNL daily and 3 weekly PDX and 4 weekly DTW (total 4)
or SEA/DTW/HNL daily and the remaining 7 weekly spread between PDX and ATL
HA gets: 10 weekly HNL (total 1.3)
UA gets: daily EWR/ORD/IAH and 4 weekly IAD or LAX (total 3.4)

I believe DOT needs to look at the size of the market as well as new destinations. If a market is over saturated DOT should give less priority. If a market is proven not able to have a sizeable PDEW, DOT should prioritise other route while give consideration to a less than daily schedule.

Thus I think we should look at possible award of 3 weekly or 4 weekly slots in the spirit or encouraging calculated competition.



Past practice indicates that the DOT is also respectful of the carrier's order of preference list. As in, the DOT is not going to award UA its 6th choice in GUM, but not its 2nd choice in ORD. I do agree with some of the earlier posts that AA's 4th choice in LAS is probably more compelling than their 3rd choice in DFW#2. A similar argument could be made that UA's 5th choice in IAH is also more compelling than their 4th choice in LAX (which already will also be served by AA/DL/NH/JL). I would still imagine any "skipping over" by the DOT will likely be very minimal, if it happens at all. There is a reason both UA and AA made their rankings the way they did.

That being said, if the final slot comes down to being between UA/IAH, UA/LAX, AA/DFW2, AA/LAS... things could get very interesting.


I doubt DL gets HNL or even truly cares. HNL is one market that could afford to stay at NRT as it is a purely a leisure route. The “burden” of trekking to NRT is less impactful to the vacationing traveler than a business traveler originating from a Mainland origin. UA also flies HNL-NRT but did not request a slot for HNL. DL’s move, in my opinion seems more about potentially blocking the award of a competitor to another market.

AA’s request for LAS is an interesting choice. When the first slots were opened to the US carriers years ago, many (including the ConUS based airlines) argued HA from HNL was not a good candidate because it would be majority Japan PoS. I don’t have the numbers on hand but I would imagine demand is higher on the Japan PoS side to LAS than LAS demand is to TYO. It’ll be interesting to see if these same arguments surface during this go around.

77H
Last edited by 77H on Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 4409
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:22 pm

simpv wrote:
What is the long-term prospect for NH/JL at NRT? With those 12 additional frequencies, combined with US carriers moving to HND, how viable are some of those NRT routes that rely on connecting passengers? This expansion at HND seems to have the potential to scale down some of NH/JL's operations.


NRT is growing on its own, the airport continues to set traffic records, and slots are also being expanded with curfew extension, and eventually a new runway.

There is no way either ANA or JAL can consolidate at HND, and a split Tokyo operation remains very much the fact serving a 100mil+ market.
mercure f-wtcc
 
KMCOFlyer
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:32 am

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:32 pm

77H wrote:
kavok wrote:
chonetsao wrote:
Why everyone is saying that the slot will be awarded in daily terms? Would there be possibilities that DOT will award 3 weekly + 4 weekly 'share' of the daily slot?

So what we know so far is:


And we know DOT evaluation metrics regarding new market and beneficial to American consumers and others. So safe to say new destination may have some priority over existing market.

So I am going to say that LAS/SEA/DTW/ATL/PDX/IAD/IAH and GUM are safe bet. (EWR would be a close call)

To balance out, HA will get at least 1 daily HNL. AA is likely to get 1 DFW and 1 LAX.

So for 12 daily pairs, I think what would happen is:
AA gets : daily LAX/DFW/LAS (total 3)
DL gets: SEA/ATL/HNL daily and 3 weekly PDX and 4 weekly DTW (total 4)
or SEA/DTW/HNL daily and the remaining 7 weekly spread between PDX and ATL
HA gets: 10 weekly HNL (total 1.3)
UA gets: daily EWR/ORD/IAH and 4 weekly IAD or LAX (total 3.4)

I believe DOT needs to look at the size of the market as well as new destinations. If a market is over saturated DOT should give less priority. If a market is proven not able to have a sizeable PDEW, DOT should prioritise other route while give consideration to a less than daily schedule.

Thus I think we should look at possible award of 3 weekly or 4 weekly slots in the spirit or encouraging calculated competition.



Past practice indicates that the DOT is also respectful of the carrier's order of preference list. As in, the DOT is not going to award UA its 6th choice in GUM, but not its 2nd choice in ORD. I do agree with some of the earlier posts that AA's 4th choice in LAS is probably more compelling than their 3rd choice in DFW#2. A similar argument could be made that UA's 5th choice in IAH is also more compelling than their 4th choice in LAX (which already will also be served by AA/DL/NH/JL). I would still imagine any "skipping over" by the DOT will likely be very minimal, if it happens at all. There is a reason both UA and AA made their rankings the way they did.

That being said, if the final slot comes down to being between UA/IAH, UA/LAX, AA/DFW2, AA/LAS... things could get very interesting.


I doubt DL gets HNL or even truly cares. HNL is one market that could afford to stay at NRT as it is a purely a leisure route. The “burden” of trekking to NRT is less impactful to the vacationing traveler than a business traveler originating from a Mainland origin. UA also flies HNL-NRT but did not request a slot for HNL. DL’s move, in my opinion seems more about potentially blocking the award of a competitor to another market.

AA’s request for LAS is an interesting choice. When the first slots were opened to the US carriers years ago, many (including the ConUS based airlines) argued HA from HNL was not a good candidate because it would be majority Japan PoS. I don’t have the numbers on hand but I would imagine demand is higher on the Japan PoS side to LAS than LAS demand is to TYO. It’ll be interesting to see if these same arguments surface during this go around.

77H


I feel that DL would get a HND-HNL slot over HA recieveing another one. Some days HNL-HND on HA is already 2X daily. Would the DOT seriously pass over DL having any access to a HND-HNL slog while giving HA another one to let it fly at 3x daily some days with no other US competition on it?
 
N174UA
Posts: 1010
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:17 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:40 pm

jbpdx wrote:
75,000 Japanese tourists visited Portland/Oregon in 2018 and the number has been increasing every year. Business travel is strong: DeltaOne seats on the PDX-NRT route are usually sold out. The 480-room Toyoko Inn, the first West Coast location for the Japanese no-frills business hotel chain, will open in 2021. They wouldn’t make this investment unless they were confident about the growing Portland market.

The 767-300ER Delta is using has 226 seats, the A332 has 234, not much of a capacity increase, yet switching to Haneda will increase demand on both ends.*

The alliances/partnerships will play a major role in the decision and Delta has a slight advantage. I don’t see Hawaiian getting three of the 12 slots. Given the Oregon-Japan ties, overflying Japan to ICN wouldn’t work here. I’d say the Portland-Tokyo route is safe, one way or another.

*[If Delta wanted to bulk up Tokyo-bound connecting traffic thru PDX by adding a few unserved South-Northwest city pairs (efficient GC routes PDX-MSY, PDX-MIA?), they could use the A333, like they do PDX-AMS.]


The proposed PDX-HND flight will become daily year round, so the capacity increase is realized that way. PDX-NRT is 4x during the winter season, The other proposed routes will have newer, larger aircraft: A339 for SEA-HND, 772 for ATL-HND, and A359 for DTW-HND, all have the newer Delta premium Select. The A332 that would operate on PDX-NRT will have D1, Comfort+ and Economy only. Assuming HNL gets a slot, it would be on the 763.
 
User avatar
jbpdx
Posts: 730
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 6:37 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:54 pm

There are three US airlines/alliances (UA/Star Alliance, DL/SkyTeam, AA/OneWorld) and two Japanese airlines (JL/OneWorld, NH/Star Alliance). Who exactly is Delta supposed to partner with in Japan?
Next: AS PDX-OGG-PDX
DL PDX-LHR-PDX
 
airportlover
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 7:07 pm

FSDan wrote:
jetblastdubai wrote:
FSDan wrote:
Based on the applications, these are the awards I'd personally like to see:
AA LAX-HND #2
AA DFW-HND #2

This spreads the love around between alliances a bit, and allows DL and AA to pull their own metal out of NRT and simplify their TYO ops. NH could pretty easily fill in the rest of UA's requests with the likely 7 frequencies they'll get awarded.


I'm curious as to why you think AA should be awarded a 2nd frequency at both DFW and LAX before UA would be awarded a 1st frequency on some of their requests? I don't believe it's the DOTs job to spread the wealth between carriers but instead award routes based on the best US consumer interest...regardless of which US carrier operates the route. Awarding AA a 2nd LAX frequency before allowing UA to even have it's 1st LAX frequency would seem like the government is trying to pick favorites.


Because I'm looking at UA/NH as one airline (since for all intents and purposes they operate that way to Japan). UA/NH already have HND flights from SFO, LAX, ORD, JFK, and HNL. AA/JL have HND flights from SFO, LAX, and JFK. Giving UA their requested LAX or ORD flights, in my view, is absolutely no different from giving AA/JL two LAX or two DFW flights since UA really already has a flight in each of those markets through NH, and now are asking for second frequencies. The only difference is that UA/NH already have more flights to begin with.

I think the DOT will probably give UA one or two fewer awards than they give AA, just to try to maintain competitive balance. At some level it is the DOT's job to spread the wealth around, insofar as having a more level playing field benefits consumers through more competition and lower prices. Say the DOT granted all 5 of UA's mainland requests - then NH will get an additional 6 frequencies of their own, and the UA/NH JV would end up with 16 out of the total 36 U.S.-HND flights. Nearly half!

Also, the more awards the DOT grants to UA, the harder it will be for NH to find good places to put their 6 additional frequencies. Say UA is granted EWR and IAD (both seem to me to have good chances as currently unserved markets to HND). NH already has LAX, ORD, and JFK covered, so they could move their SEA, SJC, and IAH flights to HND, and then they still have half their allocation to toy around with some combination of moving one of their two LAX-NRT flights over to HND, moving their SFO-NRT, or their ORD-NRT flights to HND, or adding capacity to Hawai'i/Guam. And that's just if UA gets two awards. If they were to get four (EWR, IAD, ORD, and LAX or IAH), then NH probably wouldn't want to move their LAX or ORD flights to HND so that they maintain a presence to NRT from those markets and boost connections at NRT. For the same reason, I don't see NH moving their JFK-NRT flight to HND - that would leave NRT without JFK service by the JV.

So I guess I'm trying to look at what the overall picture might look like in the U.S.-TYO market when all is said and done. If the best case scenario happened for DL (all 6 frequencies awarded) and the DOT split the other 6 evenly between UA and AA, you could have something like this:
SEA-HND (1x NH + 1x JL + 1x DL)
PDX-HND (1x DL)
SFO-NRT (1x UA)
SFO-HND (1x UA + 1x NH + 1x JL)
SJC-HND (1x NH)
LAX-NRT (1x UA + 1x NH + 1x JL + 1x SQ)
LAX-HND (2x NH + 2x AA + 1x DL)
SAN-HND (1x JL)
LAS-HND (1x JL)
DEN-NRT (1x UA)
IAH-NRT (1x UA)
IAH-HND (1x NH)
DFW-NRT (1x JL)
DFW-HND (2x AA)
MSP-HND (1x DL)
ORD-NRT (1x NH + 1x JL)
ORD-HND (1x UA + 1x NH + 1x JL)
DTW-HND (1x DL)
ATL-HND (1x DL)
IAD-NRT (1x NH)
IAD-HND (1x UA)
EWR-NRT (1x UA)
EWR-HND (1x UA)
JFK-NRT (1x NH + 1x JL)
JFK-HND (1x NH + 1x JL)
BOS-HND (1x JL)
HNL-NRT (2x NH + 4x JL + 1x HA)
HNL-HND (1x NH + 1x JL + 1.6x HA + 2x DL)
KOA-NRT (1x JL)
KOA-HND (0.4x HA)
GUM-HND (1x NH)

In other permutations where DL doesn't get their full award, just shuffle the above flights around between carriers. For example, maybe HA ends up with 2.6x HNL-HND and DL with 1x HNL-HND. Maybe UA/NH get fewer awards than AA/JL and ORD ends up being split ORD-NRT 1x UA, ORD-HND 2x NH, with AA flying LAS-HND instead of JL, JL adding a HNL frequency instead of LAS, and NH not flying to GUM from HND... There are lots of ways this could shake out, but I do hope DL gets 5 or 6 of their requests when looking at the overall U.S.-TYO picture.


I agree. The only thing that confuses me with UA’s proposal is that they are keeping a 773 on EWR-NRT and only using a 772 on EWR-HND. I feel like it should be the opposite. If any of UA or AA’s requests are denied (and obviously some will be), their partner airlines will just pick up those routes. In fact, I could even see NH picking up EWR-HND in addition to (or instead of, assuming denial) UA. EWR-HND needs to be served, and UA/NH are the only ones who can do it well. I do not think the DOT should award AA twice-daily DFW or another LAX frequency. For LAX, UA should get the frequency because they do not currently operate the route, even though NH does.
 
User avatar
FA9295
Posts: 1770
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:44 pm

Re: US-Japan agree on additional Haneda slots; DOT to allocate

Sat Feb 23, 2019 7:35 pm

jbpdx wrote:
There are three US airlines/alliances (UA/Star Alliance, DL/SkyTeam, AA/OneWorld) and two Japanese airlines (JL/OneWorld, NH/Star Alliance). Who exactly is Delta supposed to partner with in Japan?

No one. That's the main argument that Delta is making as to why they should have the majority of the HND slots.
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 16

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

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

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

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

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

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

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

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos