Just in case anyone is wondering about the p2p demand between Seattle and India, it is as follows over the past year:

*Round trip pax*

DEL - 59,000
HYD - 38,000
BOM - 37,000
BLR - 36,000
MAA - 27,000

Yes HYD has more p2p demand from SEA than BLR, but the latter's yields are about 12% higher. Plus BLR has more overall demand to feeder cities in USA versus HYD.

Delta and their entire management team has been sleeping. Way too many "Yes-Men" nodding to Ed and Team today. Not a single creative thinker in the entire org. Good for AA.

Saludos,
Alex

Cointrin330 wrote:

usflyer msp wrote:

MAH4546 wrote:

Have you seen how many 787s AA has been flying to Hawaii and Cancun during the winter off season? Not to mention it continues to receive more 787s and there is nothing forcing 763s to be retired if AA wants them to stick a little longer.

The excess winter capacity is mostlu 788's, the 789 fleet is almost completely spoken for at the moment. I really think this is a sign that LAX-PEK/PVG are going to be suspended for at least a year.

I do agree the suspensions of all mainland China flights by the US3 will be extended. For a year, maybe, maybe not. No one in the right mind wants to fly to China right now.

God I hope not. I’m not alone in having business in China that is being deferred. I would be surprised if BLR was a replacement for a China flying permanently.

behramjee wrote:

Just in case anyone is wondering about the p2p demand between Seattle and India, it is as follows over the past year:

*Round trip pax*

DEL - 59,000
HYD - 38,000
BOM - 37,000
BLR - 36,000
MAA - 27,000

Yes HYD has more p2p demand from SEA than BLR, but the latter's yields are about 12% higher. Plus BLR has more overall demand to feeder cities in USA versus HYD.

What are the numbers for PDX? PDX-India travel was likely also taken into account.

747megatop wrote:

Two routes from SEA (LHR and BLR) do not an international gateway make.

Actually it's 1 route from SEA and 1 route from LHR. People forget that LHR is the hub in this picture. SEA will be just another spoke from the LHR hub.
In fact wouldn't be surprised if the same aircraft coming from LHR continues to BLR although that might not provide the best utilization pattern.

747megatop wrote:

I am really scratching my head on SEA BLR. There are so many one stop options
1) BA via LHR
2) LH via FRA
3) DL via CDG/AMS
4) EK via DXB
5) JAL via NRT

Take a look at the distance traveled. Any route via Europe is at least 20% longer which leaves you with EK and JL basically. But if your're a premium passenger and can afford to pay for a J seat the non-stop is a no brainer over the alternatives.

subramak1 wrote:

I also wonder what the routing would be, a direct routing is not possible as it would fly over Himalayas down to DEL. Probably SEA SVX and then down to BLR. It will add 200 miles to the GC routing.

It will probably be very similar to SFO-DEL:
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL ... /VIDP/KSFO
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL ... /KSFO/VIDP

airbazar wrote:

747megatop wrote:

Two routes from SEA (LHR and BLR) do not an international gateway make.

Actually it's 1 route from SEA and 1 route from LHR. People forget that LHR is the hub in this picture. SEA will be just another spoke from the LHR hub.
In fact wouldn't be surprised if the same aircraft coming from LHR continues to BLR although that might not provide the best utilization pattern.

747megatop wrote:

I am really scratching my head on SEA BLR. There are so many one stop options
1) BA via LHR
2) LH via FRA
3) DL via CDG/AMS
4) EK via DXB
5) JAL via NRT

Take a look at the distance traveled. Any route via Europe is at least 20% longer which leaves you with EK and JL basically. But if your're a premium passenger and can afford to pay for a J seat the non-stop is a no brainer over the alternatives.

subramak1 wrote:

I also wonder what the routing would be, a direct routing is not possible as it would fly over Himalayas down to DEL. Probably SEA SVX and then down to BLR. It will add 200 miles to the GC routing.

It will probably be very similar to SFO-DEL:
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL ... /VIDP/KSFO
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL ... /KSFO/VIDP

The equipment type for LHR will be a 77E, BLR will be a 789. Most prob LHR will come in from LHR and back out to LHR, BLR will moat probably come in as a domestic flight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

speedbird52 wrote:

Top ten anime plot twists.

SEATAC Is going to need a whole new terminal now. Maybe on the 34L/16R side?

Right now SEA is in my view a hell pit. It is a big version of LaGuardia. It is a series of band-aid projects stapled around a 1960s terminal. They need to start over.

abrelosojos wrote:

Delta and their entire management team has been sleeping. Way too many "Yes-Men" nodding to Ed and Team today. Not a single creative thinker in the entire org. Good for AA.

Saludos,
Alex

Why do you think that? Because AA launched an ULH from a city from which they don’t have a hub, but rather a newly enhanced partnership with a spurned DL partner? I think if SEA-BLR makes it 18 months then AA can celebrate.

Cointrin330 wrote:

usflyer msp wrote:

MAH4546 wrote:

Have you seen how many 787s AA has been flying to Hawaii and Cancun during the winter off season? Not to mention it continues to receive more 787s and there is nothing forcing 763s to be retired if AA wants them to stick a little longer.

The excess winter capacity is mostlu 788's, the 789 fleet is almost completely spoken for at the moment. I really think this is a sign that LAX-PEK/PVG are going to be suspended for at least a year.

I do agree the suspensions of all mainland China flights by the US3 will be extended. For a year, maybe, maybe not. No one in the right mind wants to fly to China right now.

The world economy will be in unprecedented trouble if flights are canceled for a year.

incitatus wrote:

speedbird52 wrote:

Top ten anime plot twists.

SEATAC Is going to need a whole new terminal now. Maybe on the 34L/16R side?

Right now SEA is in my view a hell pit. It is a big version of LaGuardia. It is a series of band-aid projects stapled around a 1960s terminal. They need to start over.

Start over? Easier said then done.

abrelosojos wrote:

Delta and their entire management team has been sleeping. Way too many "Yes-Men" nodding to Ed and Team today. Not a single creative thinker in the entire org. Good for AA.

Saludos,
Alex

Just busy with NYC, BOS, SEA, and spending $Billions on terminals at LAX, LGA and JFK; the LATAM equity stake. Yep, just doing nothing...

SEA-BLR is excellent news for Indian secondary markets. I hope AA did its homework and is in for the long run and sincerely hope this is not a short term gig. That would be bad for secondary airports in India. They cannot blame AI like they still do for ORD-DEL withdrawal.

Having said that,

Is this a knee-jerk reaction to China's situation? Whenever China is in trouble, the west starts courting India and on a dime goes back to China. India pinned a lot of hopes on the US-China trade war, that is gone, now virus for a few months. The bottom line, it is BLR yields vs China yields. BLR has to bring it home, rather than saying we are better than other Indian airports.

Is BLR overselling its potential? Like AIG underwriting in pre-GFC2008, insure the same $1 five times.

SEA backtracking at least on days it takes Atlantic route. How large is AS feed @SEA to India? What are those cities?

There are no full-service domestic carriers at BLR. Vistara has a single connection to DEL, no use. LCC partners and/or self-connect are the only options.

AA for sure will capture O&D non-stop market, but there are too many one-stop options.

EK and BA must be fuming. Both can offer one-stop to five major p2p destinations in India. EK will use superior service PR and offer competitive fares. BA and AA service quality is a wash.

onwFan wrote:

kavok wrote:

QXAS wrote:

Is there a rendering of the AS OneWorld livery?

We had the discussion a while back about AS being a connect member but full membership will be great. My only wish is that it takes effect earlier than 2021 as I have a bunch of travel on AA scheduled for this summer. Excited to see what AA can do intercontinentally from SweEA. Thinking HND to complement JL from NRT could be a good option.

The problem with HND-SEA is OW doesn’t have that many HND slots that can be used, and they’d have to sacrifice an existing one to launch SEA-HND. AA only has 3 slots (LAX, LAX, DFW) and can’t move them anyway. JAL only has 8: (JFK, JFK, LAX, SFO, DFW, ORD, HNL, HNL). Only JAL could move their slot to SEA anyway, so which one of those 8 would they drop?

Oh, don’t worry about taht. When DL starts dropping HND routes one by one, they will be available. Come on, the only reason why DL requested the slots is because they knew they would get it and could delay them from going to AA/UA.

What a ridiculous comment. DL is consolidating at HND. What makes you think they are going to start dropping routes? Oh wait, based on your name it looks like you drink the AA/ow kool-aid. Dream on.

The obvious next question is who in India might become a code-share or even a JV partner? Especially if AA adds other flying from the East Coast to the bigger India cities?

aaflyer777 wrote:

Anyone know where this LHR slot is coming from?

This could come from a BA frequency.

TYWoolman wrote:

Delta needs to take this opportunity to negotiate a sweet new terminal deal at Seattle. If the current infrastructure is benefitting mostly one airline (Alaska) and now American is jumping on the shoulders of Alaska with no real investment and potentially creating more traffic, then the free market is basically hindered due to infrastructure constraint. Delta needs to get creative in the interim and negotiate better gate leases and be very much part of a master plan for the airport.

You do realize that sea allocates gates based on the number of seats offered by each airline right?

If delta wants to get more gates, it needs to be upgauging even faster than it has been.

SFOtoORD wrote:

abrelosojos wrote:

Delta and their entire management team has been sleeping. Way too many "Yes-Men" nodding to Ed and Team today. Not a single creative thinker in the entire org. Good for AA.

Saludos,
Alex

Why do you think that? Because AA launched an ULH from a city from which they don’t have a hub, but rather a newly enhanced partnership with a spurned DL partner? I think if SEA-BLR makes it 18 months then AA can celebrate.

I agree. AA has been out of India for eight years now, and couldn't make it work for them in one of their bigger hubs- ORD. The launch is also a year away- which is plenty of time to withdraw it if they get cold feet, or if DL decides to launch something themselves out of SEA.

LHR is less of a surprise/risk- they could either be taking this over from BA, or supplementing the flight.

UA772IAD wrote:

SFOtoORD wrote:

abrelosojos wrote:

Delta and their entire management team has been sleeping. Way too many "Yes-Men" nodding to Ed and Team today. Not a single creative thinker in the entire org. Good for AA.

Saludos,
Alex

Why do you think that? Because AA launched an ULH from a city from which they don’t have a hub, but rather a newly enhanced partnership with a spurned DL partner? I think if SEA-BLR makes it 18 months then AA can celebrate.

I agree. AA has been out of India for eight years now, and couldn't make it work for them in one of their bigger hubs- ORD. The launch is also a year away- which is plenty of time to withdraw it if they get cold feet, or if DL decides to launch something themselves out of SEA.

LHR is less of a surprise/risk- they could either be taking this over from BA, or supplementing the flight.

BLR launches in Oct 2020, less than a year away.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

behramjee wrote:

Just in case anyone is wondering about the p2p demand between Seattle and India, it is as follows over the past year:

*Round trip pax*

DEL - 59,000
HYD - 38,000
BOM - 37,000
BLR - 36,000
MAA - 27,000

Yes HYD has more p2p demand from SEA than BLR, but the latter's yields are about 12% higher. Plus BLR has more overall demand to feeder cities in USA versus HYD.

For average daily numbers, from your data:

DEL - 161
HYD - 104
BOM - 101
BLR - 99
MAA - 101

chepos wrote:

UA772IAD wrote:

SFOtoORD wrote:

Why do you think that? Because AA launched an ULH from a city from which they don’t have a hub, but rather a newly enhanced partnership with a spurned DL partner? I think if SEA-BLR makes it 18 months then AA can celebrate.

I agree. AA has been out of India for eight years now, and couldn't make it work for them in one of their bigger hubs- ORD. The launch is also a year away- which is plenty of time to withdraw it if they get cold feet, or if DL decides to launch something themselves out of SEA.

LHR is less of a surprise/risk- they could either be taking this over from BA, or supplementing the flight.

BLR launches in Oct 2020, less than a year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry, I was looking at SEA-LHR launch. Thanks. I still think SEA-BLR is a bit of a hail mary, we shall see!

TYWoolman wrote:

tphuang wrote:

TYWoolman wrote:

Delta needs to take this opportunity to negotiate a sweet new terminal deal at Seattle. If the current infrastructure is benefitting mostly one airline (Alaska) and now American is jumping on the shoulders of Alaska with no real investment and potentially creating more traffic, then the free market is basically hindered due to infrastructure constraint. Delta needs to get creative in the interim and negotiate better gate leases and be very much part of a master plan for the airport.

You do realize that sea allocates gates based on the number of seats offered by each airline right?

If delta wants to get more gates, it needs to be upgauging even faster than it has been.

So how exactly does that work? So the city now finds itself in a position that in order for Delta to expand and offer a one-airline solution for domestic and international travel, it must confiscate another airline's gate? And what if Delta announces 100 new flights? Alaska hands over gates?

Well it doesn't have the gates to operate that many flights. The only way it can get more gate is utilizing what it has more aggressively by scheduling more flights per gate and upgauge.

There is a reason as did so much upgauging and added so many flights out of Seattle this summer.

So

does OneWorld give Alaska the national brand the naysayers were lamenting the Alaska livery does not have?

So

Could Alaska paint all of its remaining Airbus aircraft in OneWorld colors so Alaska Airlines remains all Boeing?

DFW17L wrote:

N62NA wrote:

jfern022 wrote:

This would be news if AA did not have a trash can of an operation. AS loyals will expect a good run operation, which AA is not. DP better ensure focus is placed at SEA for their operation.

I'm at 1.6M miles with AA and I've not ONCE had a bad experience with them.

yeah i've only ever had one bad experience with an AA staff member. by and large they're great

enilria wrote:

The REAL QUESTION is what happened with this??? The aviation market now is even less competitive than 2016.

>>>2016: Justice Department Requires Alaska Airlines to Significantly Scale Back Codeshare Agreement with American Airlines in Order to Proceed with Virgin America Acquisition

Settlement Ensures that Alaska Will Have Incentive and Ability to Vigorously Compete with Larger Airlines

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice- ... -agreement

The political environment as it pertains to regulation and monopoly has considerably changed since 2016.

Zudnic wrote:

enilria wrote:

The REAL QUESTION is what happened with this??? The aviation market now is even less competitive than 2016.

>>>2016: Justice Department Requires Alaska Airlines to Significantly Scale Back Codeshare Agreement with American Airlines in Order to Proceed with Virgin America Acquisition

Settlement Ensures that Alaska Will Have Incentive and Ability to Vigorously Compete with Larger Airlines

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice- ... -agreement

The political environment as it pertains to regulation and monopoly has considerably changed since 2016.

I thought the requested scale back was with respect to certain routes only: basically any overlapping route and any hub to hub route? I don’t think their partnership is intended to cover these anyway. AA/AA can codeshare on SEA feeder routes and LA feeder routes that only one of the carriers fly. Not sure if there is any rationale to blocking that? Especially if it leads to increased international competition, as it is now?

musman9853 wrote:

DFW17L wrote:

N62NA wrote:

I'm at 1.6M miles with AA and I've not ONCE had a bad experience with them.

yeah i've only ever had one bad experience with an AA staff member. by and large they're great

Me too. AA employees rock. I have 2.1 m miles and I have never had a bad experience with American Airlines.

TYWoolman wrote:

tphuang wrote:

TYWoolman wrote:

So how exactly does that work? So the city now finds itself in a position that in order for Delta to expand and offer a one-airline solution for domestic and international travel, it must confiscate another airline's gate? And what if Delta announces 100 new flights? Alaska hands over gates?

Well it doesn't have the gates to operate that many flights. The only way it can get more gate is utilizing what it has more aggressively by scheduling more flights per gate and upgauge.

There is a reason as did so much upgauging and added so many flights out of Seattle this summer.

Unless there is a new Seattle plan for new domestic gates (for which Delta can make use of, who has demonstrated a grass-roots desire to expand by true investment in the community), you have to wonder who at SeaTac is in bed with Alaska Airlines.

What are you talking about? This is about as fair of a gate allocation process as can be expected. If delta wanted more gate space, it should have upgauged a lot sooner and used gates more aggressively. Do you think the point of all these airport is to just give delta more gate access and say no to other airlines?

Delta could have chosen to partner with Alaska and just handled the international and unique stuff. They just wanted it all it seemed. It was a good plan at the time, they saw the opportunity, but they seemed to underestimate loyalty to AS in the SEA area and now with AS in one world, it's only gonna get harder.

Delta has certainly given alot of resources and patience with SEA, it's gonna be hard to give much more resources to it. They almost have to just watch and see what one world does there and make their own decisions. I have to imagine one world sees the chance to run Delta into a focus city instead of all out hub.

AA has Alaska with tons of feed

behramjee wrote:

Just in case anyone is wondering about the p2p demand between Seattle and India, it is as follows over the past year:

*Round trip pax*

DEL - 59,000
HYD - 38,000
BOM - 37,000
BLR - 36,000
MAA - 27,000

Yes HYD has more p2p demand from SEA than BLR, but the latter's yields are about 12% higher. Plus BLR has more overall demand to feeder cities in USA versus HYD.

If I recall correctly DEL and HYD are the two biggest markets by PDEW from both SEA and DFW. In fact, DFW-HYD is one of the most underserved markets between India-US overall! This SEA flight will really only be an efficient routing from the west coast and I personally only see SAN as a big source of connecting traffic. SFO and LAX have the ME3 flights, and east of there you will be backtracking. With the inevitable announcement of UA SFO-BLR (the biggest unserved US-India market iirc) the viability of this AA flight does not add up.

I still think AA would have been better off just doing DFW-DEL. They can get significant connections from Houston, Austin, San Antonio, Phoenix and SoCal as DFW is positioned in between them and India. I would imagine AA corporate contracts in DFW and AUS would be a lot more prominent that in SEA. Not to mention, the gulf states are among the fastest growing in terms of Indian-born population.

I don't know if this is a brilliant strategy from AA, but rather an out of the box move that could work out or could backfire. AS to me is the big winner here. They need some short term help while they adjust their strategy to most likely north/south of west coast and route all the midcon/transcon flow through SEA. right now, if you want to go from California to east of business, you have to first fly to SEA. Not great for their network out of SFO/LAX, right? Well, that's just temporary situation. Long term, AS will eventually tap out at SEA in terms of ability to grow. SEA as a city will continue to grow in wealth, so SEA will become more profitable over time. And then, they will have the resource to build up SFO/LAX again. Pretty brilliant strategy from AS if you ask me.

For AA in the short term, this helps them by giving them a better location to launch TPAC flights and also a more solid network for possible ff in west coast. But in the long terms, AA is grooming a potentially dangerous competitor in AS. It's not like they can just kick AS out of OW down the road if they realize they made a mistake. The biggest advantage legacies have over an airline like AS is their international connection and domestic coverage. And now, they are giving AS both. AS's product is better than AA's domestic product. What's going to entice people to pay more to pay premium to fly ff if it doesn't have network advantage over AS?

RIP the Alaska-Emirates partnership.

I think AA has only had one int'l route from Sea-Tac, the MD-11 SEA-NRT route (1991-2002).

Will DEL/BOM/MAA/HYD be future destinations on this JV? Also how much traffic will be captured from YVR/YYJ/YYC/YEG?

incitatus wrote:

speedbird52 wrote:

Top ten anime plot twists.

SEATAC Is going to need a whole new terminal now. Maybe on the 34L/16R side?

Right now SEA is in my view a hell pit. It is a big version of LaGuardia. It is a series of band-aid projects stapled around a 1960s terminal. They need to start over.

A little tough to start over when there's no space available on the airfield. The best we can hope for is a well-connected north terminal and a relocated cargo area. The completed North Satellite and new IAF will be impressive, but the existing B, C, and D concourses need to be leveled some day.

leftcoast8 wrote:

RIP the Alaska-Emirates partnership.

AS didn’t have to end any of their existing partnerships to join oneworld; the EK partnership will remain in place unless either AS or EK choose to end it for some reason.

I'm pretty excited about this as an AS flyer but agree with many that SEA is a hellhole. For selfish reasons I hope AA launches 5-10 rotes from PDX with their smaller widebodies to test the viability of using this as a new West Coast gateway to Asia and Europe. They can leave LHR to BA but certainly flights to Germany and possibly CDG would have potential..Germany would seem to be a lock with Adidas in town. On the plus side it's such a great terminal with solid AS feeder traffic and virtually zero long haul Int'l presence. Point to point to One World hubs seems worthy of an attempt. Japan, Korea, China, India and Germany seem to me they'd be viable with 788s or 332s.

voxkel wrote:

behramjee wrote:

Just in case anyone is wondering about the p2p demand between Seattle and India, it is as follows over the past year:

*Round trip pax*

DEL - 59,000
HYD - 38,000
BOM - 37,000
BLR - 36,000
MAA - 27,000

Yes HYD has more p2p demand from SEA than BLR, but the latter's yields are about 12% higher. Plus BLR has more overall demand to feeder cities in USA versus HYD.

If I recall correctly DEL and HYD are the two biggest markets by PDEW from both SEA and DFW. In fact, DFW-HYD is one of the most underserved markets between India-US overall! This SEA flight will really only be an efficient routing from the west coast and I personally only see SAN as a big source of connecting traffic. SFO and LAX have the ME3 flights, and east of there you will be backtracking. With the inevitable announcement of UA SFO-BLR (the biggest unserved US-India market iirc) the viability of this AA flight does not add up.

I still think AA would have been better off just doing DFW-DEL. They can get significant connections from Houston, Austin, San Antonio, Phoenix and SoCal as DFW is positioned in between them and India. I would imagine AA corporate contracts in DFW and AUS would be a lot more prominent that in SEA. Not to mention, the gulf states are among the fastest growing in terms of Indian-born population.

Sounds like you really want a DFW to India flight, but SEA-BLR does make sense due to the partnership with AS. Any US company that can route their employees on a shorter flight on US airlines will likely do so, and note that routings like SFO/LAX-DXB-BLR are 1,000 miles longer than SFO/LAX-SEA-BLR. Plus, there are other tech-centric cities east of the Pacific coast that will still benefit from a one-stop in SEA over two stops. Examples: DEN-SEA-BLR and SLC-SEA-BLR will be faster than any 2-stop options. Even cities further east, like MCI or even (gasp!) DFW could work. People traveling from such places aren't going to be charting their course to obsess over backtracking over the continental US for a few hundred miles, especially if it saves them a stop in DEL or a much longer routing through Europe.Again, this route is all about getting business fliers to BLR in the most efficient manner.

wingman wrote:

I'm pretty excited about this as an AS flyer but agree with many that SEA is a hellhole. For selfish reasons I hope AA launches 5-10 rotes from PDX with their smaller widebodies to test the viability of using this as a new West Coast gateway to Asia and Europe. They can leave LHR to BA but certainly flights to Germany and possibly CDG would have potential..Germany would seem to be a lock with Adidas in town. On the plus side it's such a great terminal with solid AS feeder traffic and virtually zero long haul Int'l presence. Point to point to One World hubs seems worthy of an attempt. Japan, Korea, China, India and Germany seem to me they'd be viable with 788s or 332s.

Yeah, wait until your dreams come true with PDX service in a very short timeframe, then you'll see what happens when it runs out of gates. D'oh!

tphuang wrote:

I don't know if this is a brilliant strategy from AA, but rather an out of the box move that could work out or could backfire. AS to me is the big winner here. They need some short term help while they adjust their strategy to most likely north/south of west coast and route all the midcon/transcon flow through SEA. right now, if you want to go from California to east of business, you have to first fly to SEA. Not great for their network out of SFO/LAX, right? Well, that's just temporary situation. Long term, AS will eventually tap out at SEA in terms of ability to grow. SEA as a city will continue to grow in wealth, so SEA will become more profitable over time. And then, they will have the resource to build up SFO/LAX again. Pretty brilliant strategy from AS if you ask me.

For AA in the short term, this helps them by giving them a better location to launch TPAC flights and also a more solid network for possible ff in west coast. But in the long terms, AA is grooming a potentially dangerous competitor in AS. It's not like they can just kick AS out of OW down the road if they realize they made a mistake. The biggest advantage legacies have over an airline like AS is their international connection and domestic coverage. And now, they are giving AS both. AS's product is better than AA's domestic product. What's going to entice people to pay more to pay premium to fly ff if it doesn't have network advantage over AS?

AA is definitely also a winner here

From AA's perspective:
1. AA can't grow LAX meaningfully, and adding AS feed will be big for TPAC flights and also big for adding depth to AA's existing network from LAX
2. In markets like AUS, AA's network just got a lot better
3. Completes their network, they are now #1 on both coasts, and are a major player in nearly every major market.

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet but will AS start to serve MIA from SEA once they join OneWorld?

speedbird52 wrote:

Top ten anime plot twists.

SEATAC Is going to need a whole new terminal now. Maybe on the 34L/16R side?

Funny! Just must not be familiar with the geography of the area. In order to build 34L/16R (the "third runway"), the entire airfield plateau had to be extended with 500,000 truckloads of fill contained by a 1,430 foot-long, 130-foot-high retaining wall. It cost $1 billion and took almost 20 years to complete due to lawsuits from property owners (an entire neighborhood was removed).

The actual expansion will be on the other side of the airfield, where a very slender north terminal will likely be built where a portion of the current cargo area and hardstands currently exist, along with a parking lot. But it can't go too far to the east, as there's a cemetery bordering the site... unless they want to go all Poltergeist on us!

rentonview wrote:

wingman wrote:

I'm pretty excited about this as an AS flyer but agree with many that SEA is a hellhole. For selfish reasons I hope AA launches 5-10 rotes from PDX with their smaller widebodies to test the viability of using this as a new West Coast gateway to Asia and Europe. They can leave LHR to BA but certainly flights to Germany and possibly CDG would have potential..Germany would seem to be a lock with Adidas in town. On the plus side it's such a great terminal with solid AS feeder traffic and virtually zero long haul Int'l presence. Point to point to One World hubs seems worthy of an attempt. Japan, Korea, China, India and Germany seem to me they'd be viable with 788s or 332s.

Yeah, wait until your dreams come true with PDX service in a very short timeframe, then you'll see what happens when it runs out of gates. D'oh!

Fortunately the Port of Portland is proactive about new service, PDX is in the midst of gate increases & extra terminal space, with a new Concourse B & E. Our FIS has 5 gates, none of which have been full at the same time, since the DL hub days of the 90's. This next Summer DL will have 3 gates for HND, LHR & AMS, in addition BA to LHR, DE to FRA & FI to KEF. Y4 is at night & AS PVR, SJD flights are also evening arrivals. This may be the first year in decades, where D will be fully used up during the mid-day exchange.

Adds some logic to the AS move to Terminal 7 at JFK. I wonder if they will move to 8 with BA when 7 closes.

dfwjim1 wrote:

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet but will AS start to serve MIA from SEA once they join OneWorld?

A logical add to the network, maybe from PDX, too.

cledaybuck wrote:

Consider me skeptical that SEA-BLR is going to work.

Think i might say the same for SEA-LHR....