MSPNWA
Posts: 3478
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 2:29 am

Largely as expected. The DOT is very predictable. The only one seemingly in question would be DL getting HNL.

DL must have some good friends at the DOT. Not only do they get a gateway they argued wasn't deserving just two years ago (HNL), it conveniently gets to replace every current NRT flight with HND, eliminating the issue of having to decide to retain the NRT station for the one or two flights that would have to remain. Must be frustrating to be the leadership of the other three airlines.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2657
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Fri May 17, 2019 2:41 am

STT757 wrote:
FSDan wrote:
FSDan wrote:
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.


Given these tentative awards, I think the above overall picture of the U.S.-TYO market could still end up being fairly accurate, with a few changes:
  • DL only gets 1x HNL-HND, with HA picking up an additional HNL-HND as well for a total of 2.6x daily on HA and 1x on DL. I think JL still adds at least one daily HNL-HND as well.
  • AA only gets 1x DFW-HND award. I'm going to go ahead and say that JL maintains their daily DFW flight from NRT, given that the DFW-TYO O&D isn't huge. I'll also say that AA operates ORD-NRT instead of JL given that AA will probably need to keep NRT open as a station anyway at this point.
  • UA gets awarded LAX-HND. So maybe NH just stays at 1x daily on LAX-HND and drops their 2nd daily LAX-NRT flight since UA will also continue operating LAX-NRT. That would give the UA/NH JV 2x daily from LAX to each TYO airport. Then again, maybe UA adds their LAX-HND flight and NH moves their 2nd daily LAX-NRT to LAX-HND, giving the JV 5x daily in LAX-TYO (NH is going to have to dump their awards somewhere...).

So here's my updated estimate of the full picture as of next summer:
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 (1x UA + 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 AA + 1x JL)
DFW-HND (1x AA)
MSP-HND (1x DL)
ORD-NRT (1x NH + 1x AA)
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 + 2.6x HA + 1x DL)
KOA-NRT (1x JL)
KOA-HND (0.4x HA)
GUM-HND (1x NH)


UA also flies HNL-NRT, and GUM-NRT.


Good call - I missed those two.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 1875
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

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

Fri May 17, 2019 2:48 am

FSDan wrote:


So here's FSDan's updated estimate of the full picture as of next summer per alliance:
SEA-HND (1x *A + 1x OW + 1x DL)
PDX-HND (1x DL)
SFO-NRT (1x *A)
SFO-HND (2x *A + 1x OW)
SJC-HND (1x *A)
LAX-NRT (3x *A + 1x OW)
LAX-HND (3x *A + 2x OW + 1x DL)
SAN-HND (1x OW)
LAS-HND (1x OW)
DEN-NRT (1x *A)
IAH-NRT (1x *A)
IAH-HND (1x *A)
DFW-NRT (2x OW)
DFW-HND (1x OW)
MSP-HND (1x DL)
ORD-NRT (1x *A + 1x OW)
ORD-HND (2x *A + 1x OW)
DTW-HND (1x DL)
ATL-HND (1x DL)
IAD-NRT (1x *A)
IAD-HND (1x *A)
EWR-NRT (1x *A)
EWR-HND (1x *A)
JFK-NRT (1x *A + 1x OW)
JFK-HND (1x *A + 1x OW)
**NYC-TYO (4x *A + 2x OW)**
BOS-HND (1x OW)
HNL-NRT (3x *A + 4x OW + 1x HA)
HNL-HND (1x *A + 1x OW + 2.6x HA + 1x DL)
KOA-NRT (1x OW)
KOA-HND (0.4x HA)
GUM-HND (1x *A)
GUM-NRT (1x *A)
 
Ishrion
Posts: 1327
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 2:52 am

Apparently AA already released news about its awarded slots 4 hours and 30 minutes ago.

http://news.aa.com/news/news-details/20 ... fault.aspx

Pretty sure it was already in the application: LAX-HND 788 and DFW-HND is a 772.

They didn't mention NRT once so... I don't think they'll be moving NRT to HND flights?
 
x1234
Posts: 514
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 2:59 am

So which friend does DL have in DOT!? I find it interesting that the highest O&D cities for Tokyo are from United (Houston should have won out over Honolulu as its a leisure route)...
 
FSDan
Posts: 2657
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:00 am

MSPNWA wrote:
Largely as expected. The DOT is very predictable. The only one seemingly in question would be DL getting HNL.

DL must have some good friends at the DOT. Not only do they get a gateway they argued wasn't deserving just two years ago (HNL), it conveniently gets to replace every current NRT flight with HND, eliminating the issue of having to decide to retain the NRT station for the one or two flights that would have to remain. Must be frustrating to be the leadership of the other three airlines.


I think it shows again that the DOT places a pretty high priority on maintaining some equity between the three major players in the market. UA and DL should both be very happy with these results. UA+NH should end up with 15 total HND-U.S. frequencies when all is said and done, with the nearest competition in AA+JL ending up with 11, DL ending up with 7, and HA ending up with 3.

I know UA tried to play the card that they don't have any say in what NH decides to do, but if that's the way the UA+NH JV works, then I don't see the point in it at all... I'm willing to bet they'll coordinate equipment, schedules, fares, etc. utilizing their combined portfolio of HND assets. Hard to feel too sorry for them.

As for AA... as others have said, they didn't put together the strongest application package. If the leadership is frustrated, a large part of it is on them.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 1327
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:06 am

x1234 wrote:
So which friend does DL have in DOT!? I find it interesting that the highest O&D cities for Tokyo are from United (Houston should have won out over Honolulu as its a leisure route)...


It's the lack of friends that got DL 5 slots at HND. AA/UA have their JVs with JL/ANA. DL has no partner. It would be fair if DL got the most slots.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3478
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:17 am

FSDan wrote:
I think it shows again that the DOT places a pretty high priority on maintaining some equity between the three major players in the market. UA and DL should both be very happy with these results. UA+NH should end up with 15 total HND-U.S. frequencies when all is said and done, with the nearest competition in AA+JL ending up with 11, DL ending up with 7, and HA ending up with 3.

I know UA tried to play the card that they don't have any say in what NH decides to do, but if that's the way the UA+NH JV works, then I don't see the point in it at all... I'm willing to bet they'll coordinate equipment, schedules, fares, etc. utilizing their combined portfolio of HND assets. Hard to feel too sorry for them.

As for AA... as others have said, they didn't put together the strongest application package. If the leadership is frustrated, a large part of it is on them.


Except that the DOT only votes for equality in this process. For example, The DOT is okay with a near-monopoly in the U.S.-ICN market, favoring a certain carrier of course. It's generally okay with anti-competitive JVs across the board. Then it turns around and uses slot authorities to "level" the pseudo-duopoly field in TYO, favoring a certain carrier again after its self-inflicted failure in Tokyo. The mission of the DOT isn't to "correct" mistakes by corporations and give the public the least utility from a public asset. But that's what they've done yet again, and the public is the loser.

The fact that a carrier can strongly argue against a gateway and then be granted the very same gateway just two years later tells us the process is deeply flawed and biased. HA, AA, and UA have every right to be frustrated.
 
Prost
Posts: 2474
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:23 am

ICN has no restraints on new entrants.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:25 am

PDX? What a waste. No connecting traffic on either end and Delta has cut the route twice in the past. It should have been saved for JAL or ANA.
 
Prost
Posts: 2474
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:26 am

JAL and ANA weren’t part of these awards, they are only for US carriers.
 
andrewying
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri May 06, 2016 7:11 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:31 am

2 years ago is very long time ago in any industry, let alone aviation industry. I don’t see how one could use DL’s argument two years ago to conclude that DL should not get HNL. DOT’s job is to ensure fairness, hence maintaining competition. Had DL listed JFK as the sixth option. It would be fair for DL to take all six pairs.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 23897
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:32 am

Statement from United.


The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) today announced that United was tentatively granted a total of four daily nonstop flights to HND (Tokyo Haneda), expanding United's best-in-class Japan route network to better meet demand. The slots will be allocated for flights from EWR, ORD, IAD and LAX. Pending completion of an aviation agreement between the U.S. and Japanese governments later this year, the flights are expected to begin service by the summer of 2020.

The decision was due in no small part to the strong support of our employees and many other influential supporters of United’s application. “As the largest U.S. carrier to Asia, we are excited to see we were granted additional slots to Haneda to help more Americans travel between our nation and Japan’s capital city, which will offer our customers an unparalleled experience while maximizing choice,” said President Scott Kirby. “We would like to thank the U.S. Department of Transportation for its work in reviewing our proposal and advocating for what is best for the American public and for our economy. We also recognize the efforts of the U.S. State Department’s work with the DOT to enable additional service at Haneda.”

This announcement will strengthen our broad-based and end-to-end network between the United States and Japan. Our proposed flights to Haneda would allow U.S. consumers to make connections to 37 points in Japan via United's joint venture partner All Nippon Airways (ANA), strengthening United's existing comprehensive network. Throughout this proceeding United has been the only U.S. airline to recognize the unique benefits that Tokyo Haneda and Tokyo Narita offer to the traveling public.

Only United has committed to providing service to both Tokyo airports from regions across the United States. United has proven its long-term commitment to Tokyo as a key gateway in Asia, serving Tokyo from all seven of its U.S. mainland hubs. United also serves 31 markets in the Asia/Pacific region, more than any other U.S. carrier, and has successfully launched 11 new nonstop flights from the U.S. mainland to destinations throughout the Asia/Pacific region since 2014.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3478
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:41 am

Prost wrote:
ICN has no restraints on new entrants.


That argument is tired and weak. First we know there's a large competitive restraint to entry, made stronger by the DOT of course. And second, NRT isn't subject to the restrictions that HND is, and HND and NRT have been proven themselves to be strong substitutes. The argument can't have it both ways. DL can choose to compete at NRT, just like UA and AA will continue to.
 
Sightseer
Posts: 955
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 6:04 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:43 am

MSPNWA wrote:
The fact that a carrier can strongly argue against a gateway and then be granted the very same gateway just two years later tells us the process is deeply flawed and biased.

Not really. There are now more than double the number of slots there were two years ago. The low-hanging fruit has been picked.

TTailedTiger wrote:
PDX? What a waste. No connecting traffic on either end and Delta has cut the route twice in the past. It should have been saved for JAL or ANA.

Why and how would the USDOT award slots to Japanese airlines?
 
Prost
Posts: 2474
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:45 am

If someone felt the ICN market warranted 20 flights tomorrow they’d be welcome to start it.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:46 am

Sightseer wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
The fact that a carrier can strongly argue against a gateway and then be granted the very same gateway just two years later tells us the process is deeply flawed and biased.

Not really. There are now more than double the number of slots there were two years ago. The low-hanging fruit has been picked.

TTailedTiger wrote:
PDX? What a waste. No connecting traffic on either end and Delta has cut the route twice in the past. It should have been saved for JAL or ANA.

Why and how would the USDOT award slots to Japanese airlines?


Wouldn't they still have to grant ANA or JAL permission to fly to PDX if they ever want to? There is no doubt that either of them would be a better fit for Portland since they can offer onward connections throughout Asia.
 
Sightseer
Posts: 955
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 6:04 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:47 am

MSPNWA wrote:
HND and NRT have been proven themselves to be strong substitutes. The argument can't have it both ways.

Not sure I buy that, considering how contested these slots are. And I know UA said in its application that it gets a notable fare premium on SFO-HND compared to -NRT. It doesn't sound like NRT is a "strong" substitute in that case.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3478
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:49 am

Sightseer wrote:
Not really. There are now more than double the number of slots there were two years ago. The low-hanging fruit has been picked.


This argument would only make some sense if HNL was the final gateway remaining among all carriers. It wasn't. In fact, by DL's own argument two years ago, DFW #2, LAS, and IAH should have been selected over their HNL request.

Sightseer wrote:
Why and how would the USDOT award slots to Japanese airlines?


I'm taking that comment as the DOT should have declined PDX with the hope that NH or JL will pick it up and add more utility. I can see the point to it. With DL there with a dead-end at HND, it provides much less utility to PDX O&D traffic.
 
Sightseer
Posts: 955
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 6:04 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:52 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
Wouldn't they still have to grant ANA or JAL permission to fly to PDX if they ever want to? There is no doubt that either of them would be a better fit for Portland since they can offer onward connections throughout Asia.

Either carrier can start NRT-PDX tomorrow if they want, or HND-PDX once they get their new HND slots. That's not the DOT's business.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3478
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:59 am

Sightseer wrote:
Not sure I buy that, considering how contested these slots are. And I know UA said in its application that it gets a notable fare premium on SFO-HND compared to -NRT. It doesn't sound like NRT is a "strong" substitute in that case.


Strong substitutes =/= perfect substitutes. HND and NRT are not perfect substitutes. There is demand differences. But they are strong ones. If they are not strong substitutes, explain why UA still has more capacity (including premium cabin) on SFO-NRT.
 
YYZORD
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:26 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 4:14 am

So when will JL and NH announce the destinations that they picked to use their Japan-USA service slots for? They both get 6 so I'd say they choose carefully.
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2846
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 4:19 am

MSPNWA wrote:
I'm taking that comment as the DOT should have declined PDX with the hope that NH or JL will pick it up and add more utility. I can see the point to it. With DL there with a dead-end at HND, it provides much less utility to PDX O&D traffic.


But maybe neither JL nor NH wants to fly to PDX? While DL outright requested to operate PDX-HND? I don't see how it's "a waste". Like other said, JL (or NH...but probably JL due to the AS codeshare) could start their own TYO (Probably NRT)-PDX if they wanted, but they passed over that.

Hack, for all the talk that MSP-HND is "a waste", that route seems to still be going strong.

MSPNWA wrote:
Except that the DOT only votes for equality in this process. For example, The DOT is okay with a near-monopoly in the U.S.-ICN market, favoring a certain carrier of course. It's generally okay with anti-competitive JVs across the board. Then it turns around and uses slot authorities to "level" the pseudo-duopoly field in TYO, favoring a certain carrier again after its self-inflicted failure in Tokyo. The mission of the DOT isn't to "correct" mistakes by corporations and give the public the least utility from a public asset. But that's what they've done yet again, and the public is the loser.


Near-monopoly as in KE-DL JV? Actually it's mainly KE that dominates US-Seoul market anyway, with DL playing a second fiddle. Then there's still OZ, as bad as their finances are.
Free Hong Kong! Free China!
 
ITSTours
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:51 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 4:25 am

YYZORD wrote:
So when will JL and NH announce the destinations that they picked to use their Japan-USA service slots for? They both get 6 so I'd say they choose carefully.


Japanese are busy dealing with the domestic slot redistribution due Jan 2020. There is no single discussion going on about the new international slots.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2657
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 4:28 am

MSPNWA wrote:
The DOT is okay with a near-monopoly in the U.S.-ICN market, favoring a certain carrier of course. It's generally okay with anti-competitive JVs across the board. Then it turns around and uses slot authorities to "level" the pseudo-duopoly field in TYO, favoring a certain carrier again after its self-inflicted failure in Tokyo.


Apples and oranges; access to HND is extremely restricted, unlike access to ICN. You can claim that DL would be just fine competing with AA+JL and UA+NH from NRT, but UA in their own application called out that they've seen strong preference on their own SFO-TYO flights for O&D traffic to go to HND. LHR/LGW is a much more apt comparison to HND/NRT, and it's not often you hear people advocating on here for how viable it is to compete from LGW as a full service carrier...

MSPNWA wrote:
The mission of the DOT isn't to "correct" mistakes by corporations and give the public the least utility from a public asset.


What mistakes are we talking about here? The attempt DL made to pry JL away from OneWorld? If I remember correctly, they made a good effort there and nearly succeeded. Maybe there's an obvious DL misstep I don't know about that caused JL to cling to OneWorld in the end...

Or perhaps the failures you're referring to are DL's attempts at middle-of-the-night flights to HND from SEA and DTW? Hardly DL's fault, as those were the slot times available at the time. AA failed too, and from a larger O&D market to boot. DL, UA, and HA were able to stick out the poor times from LAX, SFO, and HNL, respectively, simply due to the size of those markets, but all other U.S.-HND flights from that initial allocation failed eventually, until viable slot times were made available.

MSPNWA wrote:
But that's what they've done yet again, and the public is the loser.


How is the public the loser in any way in this proceeding? I'm unaware of any metro areas that will be losing their flights to TYO as a result of this, and many will have increased options. Of the requests that didn't get awarded, we have:
  • AA LAS-HND - there's a good chance JL will start this, which is actually a better fit for the market than AA anyway given the Japan-heavy point of sale
  • UA IAH-HND - I'd say it's all but certain that NH will move their IAH-NRT flight to HND
  • AA DFW-HND #2 - oh well... I'm pretty sure DFW-TYO already proportionately is the smallest O&D market per available capacity, but if a 2nd HND flight is really warranted, JL can consider moving their DFW-NRT flight to HND
  • HA and DL additional HNL-HND - plenty of capacity here already, with likely more to come from one or both of the Japanese carriers
  • UA GUM-HND - oh, I see... this is where the American public truly loses out

MSPNWA wrote:
The fact that a carrier can strongly argue against a gateway and then be granted the very same gateway just two years later tells us the process is deeply flawed and biased.


In total, three times the frequencies are available now compared to the last round. But let's just ignore that.

MSPNWA wrote:
HA, AA, and UA have every right to be frustrated.


And yet based on AA's and UA's initial responses (I haven't seen HA's yet), they don't seem to be... Perhaps they're quite happy with their leading positions in the market, and even pleasantly surprised (in the case of UA) that they were able to walk away with as much as they got.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
ctrabs0114
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:09 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 4:28 am

aemoreira1981 wrote:
United needed HND and got it. I would not be surprised if UA moves the B77W that goes to NRT to HND and put a B789 or B77E on the NRT flight. It's telling that only United among US carriers even tries for the NYC to Asia market. The one gap for UA from EWR might be ICN, but DL and KE have a JV out of there and UA feels it can transfer passengers in Tokyo to NH.

As for AA, they should call themselves Dallas and Miami Airlines. Oh they may have a large fleet, but they're going to end up being a South regional airline.


I'm sure the folks in PHL will have something to say about that, but that's not an unreasonable argument.
2019: DAL, MCI, PHX, LAS, DFW, SAT, ORD, SLC, SEA, DTW, PHL, MIA, LAX; B73G (WN x3), B738 (WN, AA, DL), A20N (NK), MD83 (AA), B788 (AA x2), CS1 (DL), B739 (DL), B712 (DL), B752 (AA), B763 (AA), B77W (AA), B789 (AA)
Next: TBA
 
NW
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 9:37 pm

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

Fri May 17, 2019 4:31 am

BAINY3 wrote:
I suppose DL will probably stop SIN/MNL on its own metal and rely on KE connections through ICN. It would remind me of how NW/DL (forget when exactly it happened) pulled out of AMS-BOM and gave it to KL. (Or, decades earlier, did the same thing with their Scandinavian network.)


The route was not given to KL per se. It was never indended for NW/DL to fly the route it was simply a way to get around KL only having the route authority of 7 flights a week. Once KL gained the authority for more flights a week the need for DL to fly the route was eliminated. KL can now fly to both BOM and DEL on their own metal. Not even sure if India is still part of the JV.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6314
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 4:35 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
PDX? What a waste. No connecting traffic on either end and Delta has cut the route twice in the past. It should have been saved for JAL or ANA.


Didn’t DL cut the route about 20 years ago? NW started it about 15 years ago and it hasn’t been cut since.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3300
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

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

Fri May 17, 2019 5:30 am

77H wrote:
I’m surprised the DoT granted DL a slot for HNL. DL was one of the airlines who fiercely opposed HA getting its initial slots to serve HND. With DL coming onboard that’s 3 airlines operating HND-HNL, 4 if JL reapplied for a slot to serve HNL. AA should come out swinging against that route. While I don’t think Hawaii should be overlooked simply because it’s primarily leisure/VFR traffic that favors JP POS, I do think having 3 carriers on the route is overkill especial considering quite a few carriers were not awarded slots to operate brand new routes such as HND-LAS.

77H


Japanese are more likely to go to Macau or Ho Chi Minh City than to Las Vegas. Better casino's & closer.
 
ITSTours
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:51 pm

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

Fri May 17, 2019 5:33 am

rbavfan wrote:
77H wrote:
I’m surprised the DoT granted DL a slot for HNL. DL was one of the airlines who fiercely opposed HA getting its initial slots to serve HND. With DL coming onboard that’s 3 airlines operating HND-HNL, 4 if JL reapplied for a slot to serve HNL. AA should come out swinging against that route. While I don’t think Hawaii should be overlooked simply because it’s primarily leisure/VFR traffic that favors JP POS, I do think having 3 carriers on the route is overkill especial considering quite a few carriers were not awarded slots to operate brand new routes such as HND-LAS.

77H


Japanese are more likely to go to Macau or Ho Chi Minh City than to Las Vegas. Better casino's & closer.


Las Vegas is indeed a very popular destination for Japanese people. Of course that doesn't mean it warrants an HND slot.
Probably JAL's ZIPAIR can serve LAS...
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 5:55 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
PDX? What a waste. No connecting traffic on either end and Delta has cut the route twice in the past. It should have been saved for JAL or ANA.


Didn’t DL cut the route about 20 years ago? NW started it about 15 years ago and it hasn’t been cut since.


They would have canceled it around 2009 had the city not agreed to subsidize it.

https://www.oregonlive.com/business/201 ... s_off.html
 
jbpdx
Posts: 752
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 6:37 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 6:00 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
PDX? What a waste. No connecting traffic on either end and Delta has cut the route twice in the past. It should have been saved for JAL or ANA.


Didn’t DL cut the route about 20 years ago? NW started it about 15 years ago and it hasn’t been cut since.


They would have canceled it around 2009 had the city not agreed to subsidize it.

https://www.oregonlive.com/business/201 ... s_off.html



The PoP subsidy lasted one year. There have been no subsidies since.
Major airports with no PDX nonstops: MIA, FLL, TPA, IND, MSY, CLE, CVG, PIT, RDU; +BWI, +PHL, +YYZ
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3478
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 6:48 am

FSDan wrote:
Apples and oranges; access to HND is extremely restricted, unlike access to ICN. You can claim that DL would be just fine competing with AA+JL and UA+NH from NRT, but UA in their own application called out that they've seen strong preference on their own SFO-TYO flights for O&D traffic to go to HND. LHR/LGW is a much more apt comparison to HND/NRT, and it's not often you hear people advocating on here for how viable it is to compete from LGW as a full service carrier...


One type of apple and another type of apple. ICN is competitively a highly restricted market and the opposite of what the DOT is working towards at TYO. There's no doubt about that.

Your argument is only valid if HND is an isolated market. It is not. You need the same question Sightseer received. Why does UA run more capacity (including premium cabin) on SFO-NRT if it isn't a strong substitute for HND? How is that possible without also strong demand from NRT?

The fact of the matter is that the DOT is okay with anti-competitive changes in some decisions and not okay in others. There's one constant in the difference between these two. If you won't accept those facts, I can't help that issue.

FSDan wrote:
What mistakes are we talking about here? The attempt DL made to pry JL away from OneWorld? If I remember correctly, they made a good effort there and nearly succeeded. Maybe there's an obvious DL misstep I don't know about that caused JL to cling to OneWorld in the end...

For starters:

1) Not having a Japanese partner/failing to secure one in JL
2) Not possessing the transpacific gateways that don't rely on a JV partner
3) Lacking options in equipment to economically fly such routes to TYO and beyond.

FSDan wrote:
How is the public the loser in any way in this proceeding? I'm unaware of any metro areas that will be losing their flights to TYO as a result of this, and many will have increased options. Of the requests that didn't get awarded, we have:


I'll state it again. DL's request will undoubtedly result in a net negative capacity to Asia. They've not hidden the fact that the plan is to shift everything from NRT and HND, and it seems the DOT is backing up the moving truck for them by awarding all five current NRT gateways. DL's NRT-SIN/MNL is undoubtedly gone with the change. And the added HND awards also weakens the MSP-HND flight as competition for its connecting traffic increased greatly.

It's hard to argue that the nebulous "competitive balance" of connecting traffic to HND or Japanese tourists to HNL brings more utility to U.S. demand than more U.S.-Asia capacity, flights from cities with higher U.S. demand, and the opportunity for U.S. demand to travel beyond TYO.

FSDan wrote:
In total, three times the frequencies are available now compared to the last round. But let's just ignore that.


Completely irrelevant, and you know it. It could be 50 times the authorities. It doesn't matter. DL wanted it both ways, and the DOT obliged. That's a deeply flawed, biased process.

FSDan wrote:
And yet based on AA's and UA's initial responses (I haven't seen HA's yet), they don't seem to be... Perhaps they're quite happy with their leading positions in the market, and even pleasantly surprised (in the case of UA) that they were able to walk away with as much as they got.


Do you expect UA and AA to complain in press releases announcing tentative new service? Seriously?
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3878
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 7:57 am

MSPNWA wrote:
. . .
Except that the DOT only votes for equality in this process. For example, The DOT is okay with a near-monopoly in the U.S.-ICN market, favoring a certain carrier of course. It's generally okay with anti-competitive JVs across the board.


MSPNWA wrote:
Sightseer wrote:
Why and how would the USDOT award slots to Japanese airlines?


I'm taking that comment as the DOT should have declined PDX with the hope that NH or JL will pick it up and add more utility. I can see the point to it. With DL there with a dead-end at HND, it provides much less utility to PDX O&D traffic.


So you are blaming the DoT for approving anti-competitive JV's in the first place. OK.

And then you are blaming DoT for approving DL PDX-HND because HND is a dead-end with having no JV partner at that end.
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12566
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 9:22 am

x1234 wrote:
Houston should have won out over Honolulu as its a leisure route

Why?

Honolulu generates+handles farrrrrr more traffic to Tokyo (and Japan in total) than Houston ever has, and since you don't actually know the yield for either destination on any given carrier: what exactly would you argue is the value of not being a "leisure route," in this regard?



PW100 wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
Except that the DOT only votes for equality in this process. For example, The DOT is okay with a near-monopoly in the U.S.-ICN market, favoring a certain carrier of course. It's generally okay with anti-competitive JVs across the board.
MSPNWA wrote:
I'm taking that comment as the DOT should have declined PDX with the hope that NH or JL will pick it up and add more utility. I can see the point to it. With DL there with a dead-end at HND, it provides much less utility to PDX O&D traffic.

So you are blaming the DoT for approving anti-competitive JV's in the first place. OK.

And then you are blaming DoT for approving DL PDX-HND because HND is a dead-end with having no JV partner at that end.

To get it, you must know the context at hand:
"Big mean bad Delta took away my super-best-most-awesome Northwest, so I have to strain the parameters of logic with each and every post, in order to make smelly ol' Delta look like a villain; regardless to whatever dearth of sense that may require or entail!"

Understand these posts now? :smile:
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
luckyone
Posts: 2842
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 10:34 am

Apparently it’s warranted to point out the same *tired* argument that US-South Korea is Open Skies for almost twenty years, well before any DL/NW merger or DL-KE JV. ICN is not, and has never been slot restricted. Why is it warranted? Because some people still don’t get it.
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4954
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 11:30 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
PDX? What a waste. No connecting traffic on either end and Delta has cut the route twice in the past. It should have been saved for JAL or ANA.

DL runs so many flights between SEA and PDX, plus the fairly short drive time between the two, that PDX-HND is effectively a surrogate additional SEA-HND frequency, for any seats that PDX itself doesn't fill.
 
kavok
Posts: 598
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 11:37 am

It is also worth pointing out that USA-Japan traffic is not growing at a significant rate. USA-Asia isn’t growing that fast either (meaning significant additional flights to Japan to make connections aren’t necessary either).

My point being, the market can only support so many USA-Tokyo flights. Sure HND is more convenient and will likely stimulate some traffic, but not much. So for those complaining about DL, AA or anyone else using these new slots to essentially move their NRT flights to HND and dropping NRT service,the truth is the market can’t support both flights... and if there is only going to be one location served, at least the better location for most (HND) is being served. If anything, the DOT has helped ensure maximum passenger convenience by allowing airlines to move to HND.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 6021
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 12:06 pm

HPRamper wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
PDX? What a waste. No connecting traffic on either end and Delta has cut the route twice in the past. It should have been saved for JAL or ANA.

DL runs so many flights between SEA and PDX, plus the fairly short drive time between the two, that PDX-HND is effectively a surrogate additional SEA-HND frequency, for any seats that PDX itself doesn't fill.


I don't think the DOT sees it that way. The flip side of your argument is that PDX travelers can just connect in SEA. If the DOT thought that it wouldn't have awarded PDX-HND.
 
User avatar
OzarkD9S
Posts: 5404
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 2:31 am

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

Fri May 17, 2019 12:18 pm

CriticalPoint wrote:

I’m pretty sure CO never served HND.


They did, in the 70's via Continental Micronesia to SPN/GUM.
"True, I talk of dreams,
Which are the children of an idle brain." -Mercutio
 
User avatar
Keith2004
Posts: 297
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 11:59 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 12:44 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
x1234 wrote:
Houston should have won out over Honolulu as its a leisure route

Why?

Honolulu generates+handles farrrrrr more traffic to Tokyo (and Japan in total) than Houston ever has, and since you don't actually know the yield for either destination on any given carrier: what exactly would you argue is the value of not being a "leisure route," in this regard?



PW100 wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
Except that the DOT only votes for equality in this process. For example, The DOT is okay with a near-monopoly in the U.S.-ICN market, favoring a certain carrier of course. It's generally okay with anti-competitive JVs across the board.
MSPNWA wrote:
I'm taking that comment as the DOT should have declined PDX with the hope that NH or JL will pick it up and add more utility. I can see the point to it. With DL there with a dead-end at HND, it provides much less utility to PDX O&D traffic.

So you are blaming the DoT for approving anti-competitive JV's in the first place. OK.

And then you are blaming DoT for approving DL PDX-HND because HND is a dead-end with having no JV partner at that end.

To get it, you must know the context at hand:
"Big mean bad Delta took away my super-best-most-awesome Northwest, so I have to strain the parameters of logic with each and every post, in order to make smelly ol' Delta look like a villain; regardless to whatever dearth of sense that may require or entail!"

Understand these posts now? :smile:


I would add that some NWA fans are still mourning the loss off the NRT hub and days of 747s taking masses to connect there.
The Market changed once technology allowed Long Haul twins to skip over the hub. If NWA was around today they would probably try to get out of NRT too.
 
carljanderson
Posts: 149
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 5:29 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 1:00 pm

Keith2004 wrote:
The Market changed once technology allowed Long Haul twins to skip over the hub. If NWA was around today they would probably try to get out of NRT too.


wasn't that the point of the NW 787 order?
 
User avatar
Keith2004
Posts: 297
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 11:59 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 1:13 pm

carljanderson wrote:
Keith2004 wrote:
The Market changed once technology allowed Long Haul twins to skip over the hub. If NWA was around today they would probably try to get out of NRT too.


wasn't that the point of the NW 787 order?


I think so, but we never got to see it in action so no way to know for sure, however i suspect that if NW was around today a similar scenario could have played out with NW Asia network looking like the below

HKG, TPE, MNL, BKK, SIN - 787 service
HND - DTW/MSP/MEM/HNL - 332/333
NRT - Station Closed
 
FSDan
Posts: 2657
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:18 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
FSDan wrote:
Apples and oranges; access to HND is extremely restricted, unlike access to ICN. You can claim that DL would be just fine competing with AA+JL and UA+NH from NRT, but UA in their own application called out that they've seen strong preference on their own SFO-TYO flights for O&D traffic to go to HND. LHR/LGW is a much more apt comparison to HND/NRT, and it's not often you hear people advocating on here for how viable it is to compete from LGW as a full service carrier...


Your argument is only valid if HND is an isolated market. It is not. You need the same question Sightseer received. Why does UA run more capacity (including premium cabin) on SFO-NRT if it isn't a strong substitute for HND? How is that possible without also strong demand from NRT?


UA runs more capacity on SFO-NRT because NRT is their primary gateway (via NH) to cities in East Asia they don't serve themselves (SGN, BKK, RGN, MNL [sure, they technically serve MNL, but who's going to connect XXX-SFO-HNL-GUM-MNL?], etc.). Do you really think UA would have more capacity on SFO-NRT than SFO-HND if they weren't able to sell any international connections beyond NRT? I don't. Another factor is that UA uses NRT to bridge 77Ws between SFO and EWR.

MSPNWA wrote:
FSDan wrote:
What mistakes are we talking about here? The attempt DL made to pry JL away from OneWorld? If I remember correctly, they made a good effort there and nearly succeeded. Maybe there's an obvious DL misstep I don't know about that caused JL to cling to OneWorld in the end...

For starters:

1) Not having a Japanese partner/failing to secure one in JL
2) Not possessing the transpacific gateways that don't rely on a JV partner
3) Lacking options in equipment to economically fly such routes to TYO and beyond.


I'll give you #3, because that's actually something DL had/has full control over. The other two are areas where DL has made demonstrable efforts to improve their situation, but where factors out of their control play significant parts.

MSPNWA wrote:
FSDan wrote:
How is the public the loser in any way in this proceeding? I'm unaware of any metro areas that will be losing their flights to TYO as a result of this, and many will have increased options. Of the requests that didn't get awarded, we have:


I'll state it again. DL's request will undoubtedly result in a net negative capacity to Asia. They've not hidden the fact that the plan is to shift everything from NRT and HND, and it seems the DOT is backing up the moving truck for them by awarding all five current NRT gateways. DL's NRT-SIN/MNL is undoubtedly gone with the change. And the added HND awards also weakens the MSP-HND flight as competition for its connecting traffic increased greatly.

It's hard to argue that the nebulous "competitive balance" of connecting traffic to HND or Japanese tourists to HNL brings more utility to U.S. demand than more U.S.-Asia capacity, flights from cities with higher U.S. demand, and the opportunity for U.S. demand to travel beyond TYO.


NRT-MNL/SIN were going to be going away regardless of how many awards DL was given in this proceeding. If they had been awarded SEA, DTW, and ATL only, the end result would be that PDX, HNL, MNL, and SIN would have lost their DL NRT service sooner or later, and the public would have been left with fewer options and even stronger duopolies at HND.

The net capacity change from this proceeding across all carriers is likely to be strongly positive, regardless of whether or not the current market warrants that increase. Seems to me that the DOT is doing a fine job of balancing the considerations.

MSPNWA wrote:
FSDan wrote:
In total, three times the frequencies are available now compared to the last round. But let's just ignore that.


Completely irrelevant, and you know it. It could be 50 times the authorities. It doesn't matter. DL wanted it both ways, and the DOT obliged. That's a deeply flawed, biased process.


If it was irrelevant, I wouldn't have brought it up. There are only so many markets that have the demand to sustain TYO service, and there are enough awards to cover them all now. When there were only 6 frequencies available to U.S. carriers, it didn't make sense to award half of them or even a third of them to Hawai'i service. The proportion of total frequencies allocated to Hawai'i now is much more reasonable than what it would have been when there were far fewer frequencies available. 4 out of 18 U.S. carrier frequencies, vs. 2 or 3 out of 6; those pie charts look pretty different.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
Sightseer
Posts: 955
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 6:04 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:35 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
You need the same question Sightseer received. Why does UA run more capacity (including premium cabin) on SFO-NRT if it isn't a strong substitute for HND? How is that possible without also strong demand from NRT?

You'd have to ask UA route planning, but my first guess would be better connections at NRT. It's also worth noting that the 789 on SFO-HND has a higher proportion of both business class and premium Y seats than the 77W on SFO-NRT. In any case, I wonder why DL and HA would rush to add as much HND service as they can, and presumably in DL's case exit NRT entirely, if NRT were a worthy substitute.

I'm also curious why you keep saying access to ICN is highly restricted. KE (and now DL by proxy) are the largest players by a good bit, but to my knowledge anyone else is free to start US-ICN service as they wish, unlike HND. Saying the market isn't competitive is different from saying access to it is restricted.

PW100 wrote:
So you are blaming the DoT for approving anti-competitive JV's in the first place. OK.

And then you are blaming DoT for approving DL PDX-HND because HND is a dead-end with having no JV partner at that end.

I don't get it either.
 
flyoregon
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 5:29 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:40 pm

HPRamper wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
PDX? What a waste. No connecting traffic on either end and Delta has cut the route twice in the past. It should have been saved for JAL or ANA.

DL runs so many flights between SEA and PDX, plus the fairly short drive time between the two, that PDX-HND is effectively a surrogate additional SEA-HND frequency, for any seats that PDX itself doesn't fill.


It’s not a short nor is it a convenient drive at all. That argument is tired.
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2846
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 3:52 pm

flyoregon wrote:
It’s not a short nor is it a convenient drive at all. That argument is tired.


And I don't understand why people keep thinking everyone will just drive 2+ hours to catch a flight. The fact is, most people don't.

Sightseer wrote:
I'm also curious why you keep saying access to ICN is highly restricted. KE (and now DL by proxy) are the largest players by a good bit, but to my knowledge anyone else is free to start US-ICN service as they wish, unlike HND. Saying the market isn't competitive is different from saying access to it is restricted.


For me, it's telling that UA only fly to ICN from SFO but nowhere else (Not even EWR, nor ORD), and AA only from DFW but not LAX or well...ORD. People often act like as if East Asian carriers doesn't exist and is actually preferred (over US3) by a majority of travelers on those routes.
Free Hong Kong! Free China!
 
ITSTours
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:51 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 4:07 pm

UA could start additional ICN frequencies whenever they want to.
In fact they added 4x weekly SFO-ICN just last month.
AA as well, and there is a longtime rumour that says AA will start LAX-ICN. (I doubt.)

None of DL, AA and UL can start additional HND frequencies like ICN. If they can then why do they go through such a proceeding like this?

If you don't get this and continue to insist that ICN is restricted like HND then ... I don't know what to say more.
 
flyoregon
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 5:29 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 4:56 pm

zakuivcustom wrote:
And I don't understand why people keep thinking everyone will just drive 2+ hours to catch a flight. The fact is, most people don't.


Exactly right. The same argument can be said for San Diego to LAX...most people don't. They fly out of the airport that's closest to them. The only time I've driven up to Seattle and flown out of SEA instead of PDX was because I was non-revving and that was the best option available.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2161
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Updated: US DOT awards Haneda slots

Fri May 17, 2019 5:05 pm

Sightseer wrote:
PW100 wrote:
So you are blaming the DoT for approving anti-competitive JV's in the first place. OK.

And then you are blaming DoT for approving DL PDX-HND because HND is a dead-end with having no JV partner at that end.

I don't get it either.


Its so frustrating to have one poster that literally finds anything about DL to post negatively, predominantly with false information (i.e., a troll). I've reported it many times.

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