Quoting jb1087xna (Reply 41):

Thats excatly why i was complaining. We are going on an Alaska cruise...leaving out of Vancouver and coming back from Anchorage. On the way there we go through MSP which works great, but on the way our MSP flight got cancelled and now have to go ANC-SEA-ATL-XNA. Not too thrilled about it.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 47): Absolutely nothing ($0). This is one of a.net's biggest myths; the terminal was built and is owned by Wayne County (MI).

Oh really? I think it is certainly fair to say that Northwest "built" the McNamara terminal. This is direct from a Northwest financial report --

"The Company was responsible for managing and supervising the design and construction of a new $1.2 billion passenger terminal at Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport."

Delta, via Northwest, has a long term lease agreement with the airport for the facility. Specifically, it is a 30 year agreement. "South Terminal" below refers to the McNamara. Again from the same financial report.

"Except as expressly provided otherwise in Article IB.1., Lessee shall have full authority to use the premises and facilities and to exercise the rights, licenses and privileges set forth in Article I hereof for a term beginning on the Date of Beneficial Occupancy of the South Terminal and ending on September 30, 2032."

The airport is owned by the Wayne County Airport Authority. It is not longer owned by the county itself. This is a separate intergovernmental authority that was spun out of the county in 2002 via Michigan Public Act 90.

Quoting michman (Reply 51): The airport is owned by the Wayne County Airport Authority. It is not longer owned by the county itself. This is a separate intergovernmental authority that was spun out of the county in 2002 via Michigan Public Act 90.

The airport is owned by Wayne County, it is operated by the Wayne County Airport Authority.

Quoting michman (Reply 51): Oh really? I think it is certainly fair to say that Northwest "built" the McNamara terminal. This is direct from a Northwest financial report --

You got a word game going on here*. I was responding to a poster who implied that NW/DL had spent money their money building DTW, which is false; the airport was built, funded & is owned by Wayne County. Yes, NW was PAID to manage the development, as I mentioned above. But they did not spend their own money on the facility.

*It's kinda like if I said 'this is our dream house that we built several years ago,' and you corrected me with 'no, Pulte built your dream home.'  

I've defend the other poster and say that the way all the press releases and media articles were worded at the time, it gave the appearance than NW funded the McNamera Terminal. The way they kept saying than $1.2B metric, it gave the appearance that it was their money.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 42): slowly, little by little, DL is turning DTW into an RJ hub ala CVG. It's a matter of time before DL pulls the plug on DTW hub status, IMO.

The percentage of flights operated on mainline equipment from DTW has gone up over the last few years, and will likely continue to do so as more 717s come online.

Quoting DTW.SCE" class="quote" target="_blank">PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 53): I've defend the other poster and say that the way all the press releases and media articles were worded at the time, it gave the appearance than NW funded the McNamera Terminal. The way they kept saying than $1.2B metric, it gave the appearance that it was their money.

NW's original press releases were clear that the terminal was paid for "by passenger facility surcharges" and was "owned and operated by Wayne County;" if anything it gave the impression that the terminal had already been paid for (when Wayne County had issued bonds that were being repaid primarily through PFC).

There's really no need to defend the other poster; a.net is about learning & sharing informatioin and I'm always more-than-happy to do so. My pet peeve on this topic is that there's historically several (and specifically one) "anti-DTW" -for lack of a better term- posters on these forums who repeatedly make this claim to justify why DTW is still a hub, even after I've taken the time to debunk it multiple times for them.

Another piece of a.net's "Legend of DTW" is that NW paid for & built Midfield because they had huge plans for it, but DTW was unable to support those plans... in reality, Midfield was constructed because the former facilities were obsoleted both operationally and from a passenger's standpoint (some small, four-gate airports have more concessions than the formal terminals did) and building new had a similar NPV vs. reconstructing the old.

The $1.2B price tag was for the entire project -- including several hundred million toward the construction of an additional runway (which involved relocating wetlands). The actual cost of Midfield's facilities was less than $400M (excluding subsequent expansion). Despite the "Legend of DTW," Midfield was actually a low-cost terminal project focused more on functionality and less on flash.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 52): Quoting michman (Reply 51): The airport is owned by the Wayne County Airport Authority. It is not longer owned by the county itself. This is a separate intergovernmental authority that was spun out of the county in 2002 via Michigan Public Act 90. The airport is owned by Wayne County, it is operated by the Wayne County Airport Authority.

And paid for by Delta, each month in the form of rent paid to the Airport Authority.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 55): Another piece of a.net's "Legend of DTW" is that NW paid for & built Midfield because they had huge plans for it, but DTW was unable to support those plans... in reality, Midfield was constructed because the former facilities were obsoleted both operationally and from a passenger's standpoint (some small, four-gate airports have more concessions than the formal terminals did) and building new had a similar NPV vs. reconstructing the old.

Yeah....remember the fund of the Davey Terminal:
Concourse F with 2 744s and 2 DC-10s all departing within 30 minutes of each other and close to 2000 people camped out refuge-style in the hot, humid, concourse that smelled like a Cinnabon

Concourse C with 1960s era original concourse, with a 1970 era extension, and a 1980s era addition, and a 1990s era addition.

The Davey Terminal baggage claim that would flood everytime a thunderstorm dumped on the airport, would lose power every so often, and had the felt like the basement of Cobo Hall.

Concourse G...aka the Golfcourse, aka Mesabaland with all of the hardstands. Always loved to see all the drenched passengers arriving where the busses dropped off and then the bum-rush for the escalators.

The main terminal building, where it was a holiday or summer vacation rite of passenger to stand on snaking lines for the check-in counters that stretched outside on the curb.

The fine dining establishments in the Davey Terminal which were essentially limited to a Burger King, a Cinnabon, and a genric-cafeteria style option by the hotel.

The penality box where flights that landed 20 minutes early were sent to turn into flights arriving 25 minutes late to the gate....while waiting for the DC-9 to MBS to pushback but its delayed missing a late crew member who is running the gauntlet from F7 to C22

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 55): The $1.2B price tag was for the entire project -- including several hundred million toward the construction of an additional runway (which involved relocating wetlands). The actual cost of Midfield's facilities was less than $400M (excluding subsequent expansion). Despite the "Legend of DTW," Midfield was actually a low-cost terminal project focused more on functionality and less on flash.

This is true, which was particularly the case for the original Concourse C. When the project was in the design phase, this was right before the RJ boom and Concourse C was more or less designed for Saab / turboprop operations. It was quickly found to no be sufficient for large-scale RJ operations, let alone 2-class RJs that are there now.

Quoting bchandl (Reply 21): [In Steve Irwin's voice] And here we have one of the most rare creatures in the world... 5 years ago there were millions but today we only have one left in existence. I heard rumors this animal still existed in Cincinnati, but is rarely spotted. They've become a local urban legend. This rare beast, called a "CVG connection passenger" is rarely seen in it's natural habitat. Many have been moved to zoos in Detroit and Atlanta. She's a beaut! We have found one in it's natural habit, time to wrangle with this rare animal! bchandl

My understanding is that hte "CVG Connecting Passenger" has been deemed to be an invasive species by the local authorities and they are working hard to eradicate it.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 52): The airport is owned by Wayne County, it is operated by the Wayne County Airport Authority.

So Wayne County "owns" the airport, but the WCAA "is not subject to any county charter requirements or the direction or control of either the Wayne County Executive or Commission". That's a funny kind of ownership where you have no real say in the running of the airport.

Quoting DTW.SCE" class="quote" target="_blank">PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 57): Yeah....remember the fund of the Davey Terminal: Concourse F with 2 744s and 2 DC-10s all departing within 30 minutes of each other and close to 2000 people camped out refuge-style in the hot, humid, concourse that smelled like a Cinnabon Concourse C with 1960s era original concourse, with a 1970 era extension, and a 1980s era addition, and a 1990s era addition. The Davey Terminal baggage claim that would flood everytime a thunderstorm dumped on the airport, would lose power every so often, and had the felt like the basement of Cobo Hall. Concourse G...aka the Golfcourse, aka Mesabaland with all of the hardstands. Always loved to see all the drenched passengers arriving where the busses dropped off and then the bum-rush for the escalators. The main terminal building, where it was a holiday or summer vacation rite of passenger to stand on snaking lines for the check-in counters that stretched outside on the curb. The fine dining establishments in the Davey Terminal which were essentially limited to a Burger King, a Cinnabon, and a genric-cafeteria style option by the hotel. The penality box where flights that landed 20 minutes early were sent to turn into flights arriving 25 minutes late to the gate....while waiting for the DC-9 to MBS to pushback but its delayed missing a late crew member who is running the gauntlet from F7 to C22

Whenever I fly into the shiny new North Terminal at DTW (which always seems so spacious and quiet) it's hard to remember the madhouse that used to stand on the same site. That Concourse F rotunda was often wall-to-wall people. The long, dreary glass-block corridors connecting everything together were the icing on the cake. The place had real character and a whiff of the "golden days", but it was beyond obsolete by the time NW replaced it.

Quoting mcg (Reply 56): And paid for by Delta, each month in the form of rent paid to the Airport Authority.

Wrong. As I noted above, the bonds are being repaid predominantly though PFC which are paid by passengers. If DL were to de-hub DTW but continue to pay its lease obligations, the airport would have no way of repaying the bonds.

Quoting michman (Reply 59): So Wayne County "owns" the airport, but the WCAA "is not subject to any county charter requirements or the direction or control of either the Wayne County Executive or Commission". That's a funny kind of ownership where you have no real say in the running of the airport.

Again, the airport is owned by Wayne County but managed by WCAA:

http://www.metroairport.com/Traveler...lInfo/AboutDTW/AirportHistory.aspx
"Senate Bill 690, signed by Governor Engler on March 26th established the Wayne County Airport Authority. The independent Authority will manage Detroit Metropolitan Airport and Willow Run Airport . Both airports will remain Wayne County facilities."

http://www.metroairport.com/TravelerInfo/GeneralInfo/AboutDTW.aspx
"Wayne County Airport Authority was established under State of Michigan Senate Bill 690, which was signed into law on March 26, 2002, and became effective April 24, 2002. The Authority is responsible for the management and operation of Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport and Willow Run Airport - including the power to plan, promote, extend, maintain, acquire, purchase, construct, improve, repair, enlarge, and operate both Airports. "

This is really petty anyway and just diverts attention away from my original intention which was to dispell the ongoing a.net myth that DTW remains a hub only because NW-DL paid for the new terminal & is responsible for the debt.

Quoting DTW.SCE" class="quote" target="_blank">PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 57): The fine dining establishments in the Davey Terminal which were essentially limited to a Burger King, a Cinnabon, and a genric-cafeteria style option by the hotel.

Who could forget about the Cinnabon carts?   The only dining option in many of the concourses. And let's not forget about Cheers Bar.

Much of the Midfield project's cost is allocated to projects that would've moved forward, anyway -- re-construction of the field, including a fourth runway (which was costly since it involved environmentalists & rebuilding wetlands), access to 275, additional parking structures (there was insufficient parking -- including offsite lots -- during peak travel periods), heavy refurbishment of the Marriott hotel into a convention-luxury property, etc. The old terminals/concourses needed expensive modernization efforts (including new roofs, new HVAC systems, etc.) and the airport concluded that such modernization & expansion effort (which would've razed G & the Barry Terminal) would've had similar NPVs as constructing a new terminal. And a modernization effort would've still left the facility with many of the same fundamental problems for both passengers (long walks, lack of concessions, inadequate space) and NW (less automation, certain gates only being able to handle certain equipment, etc.)

The point is that Midfield (McNamara Terminal) was a low-cost project (again, the actual facilities were less than $400M) designed for functionality because the prior facilities were obsoleted to the point that refurbishment didn't make economic sense. Yes, NW heavily promoted the terminal -- no doubt in large part because the old terminals had such a poor reputation that it took several years before DTW was no longer listed as the worst place to connect. But the "Legend of DTW" on a.net that DTW was built to be something it never materialized into is just that - a legend.

DTW Terminal Maps, 2000

DTW Davey Terminal, Concourse E

[Edited 2014-08-26 17:59:09]

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 55): There's really no need to defend the other poster; a.net is about learning & sharing informatioin and I'm always more-than-happy to do so.

Thanks for debunking that myth for me.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 61): If DL were to de-hub DTW but continue to pay its lease obligations, the airport would have no way of repaying the bonds.

A careful read of the bond offering documents might lead one to a different conclusion.

Quoting mcg (Reply 64): A careful read of the bond offering documents might lead one to a different conclusion.

Earlier you made the assertion that DL is paying for Midfield through its leases, which is false as the terminal is being funded via PFC.

Now let's assume DL de-hubs DTW and there insufficient PFC to repay the bonds. Since it seems you have read the bonds and are familiar with the preferential leases/usage fees, would you be kind enough to tell us how such scenario would play out and what DL's future obligations for DTW would be?

[Edited 2014-08-26 20:43:40]

That picture above of the old Concourse E is actually too modern and uncrowded to be a good representative of the old Davey Terminal.

They did a refresh/modernization with new lighting, signage, carpet, and paint in about 1995/1996. This helped brighten-up the concourses but was essentially putting lipstick on a pig. I remember NW still had many of those blue-screen TV screen flight information displays that would flicker, be misaligned, or just not work altogether.

Concourse E was the least crowded of all of the concourses. D was not too bad. C, F, and G were overcrowded refuge camps. There were numerous DC-9 only gates, and many that when a DC-10 or 757 used an adjacent gate, it had to be closed.

Does anyone know how long delta has the gates leased at Dtw? I had heard that with the draw down of the 50 seat jet the c concourse may be shut down and all the 900s moved to a while the remaining 700 and 200s occupy b concourse

Quoting dtwpilot225 (Reply 67): Does anyone know how long delta has the gates leased at Dtw? I had heard that with the draw down of the 50 seat jet the c concourse may be shut down and all the 900s moved to a while the remaining 700 and 200s occupy b concourse

That the first I've ever heard that rumor and I highly doubt it is even possible.

Many gates on C have been reconfigured to handle CR7 & CR9 aircraft - particularly those on the east side of the concourse. They can easily reconfigure more on the west side too.

Some gates are only able to fit CR2 / ERJs.
The ground level gates at the north end of C and the bottom the escalator may not be necessary. The ground level gates at the south end of C - those gates are not able to fit CR7 or CR9s but their close proximity to the tunnel and SkyClub and the fact there is a common hold room and allow operations to be shared across multiple gates makes them convenient to continue to use for remaining ops.

There are not enough gates on A and B to fit that type of operation even with the re-gauging.

The magical beauty of DTW McNamara, is that it was extremely well designed, enough attention to detail was made during concept, and that the facility itself, despite being relative inexpensive is overall very impressive.

If only BER which is costing billions more than McNamara could take page from that book.

Another note, DTW McNamara is not even nearing full utilization, so there is ample space for expansion... What I'm not too sure about is whether additional international gates were added to the design after it went operational? I don't understand why the WCAA decided to move international non-SkyTeam airlines over to the new North Terminal and open a second immigrations and customs facility. (was this mandated by DL/NW?) It seems like for the token RJ and daily LH flight and maybe the odd NK flight from Mexico, there isn't much use for those facilities.

My question is whether DTW will actually continue to grow as has been projected by the FAA and WCAA... It seems that over the past 10 years the size of the airport has stagnated to it's current levels of approximately 32-36 million pax p.a.

Maybe someone can correct as to what what the planned capacity for the McNamara and North Terminals ? They surely can handle quite a bit more passenger flows.

I think DTW is a superb example of how to build and refurbish an airport. The airport for Metro Detroit has played a significant role in changing the mindset of connecting travelers in regards to the region, as the airport itself is quite sophisiticated.

I can only hope for continued prosperity for the facility, and for smart, innovate growth. I hope that one day, the elevated train line between the terminals, rental car facility and soon-to-be airport rail station will become a reality.

After doing some more digging on the topic, one of the reasons for the arrangement where NW managed the project of building the McNamera / Worldgateway was because they had no faith in Wayne County being capable of managing the project on-time and within budget. NW had major concerns that the County would incur significant cost overruns which would ultimately fall in the lap of the airport's users, which NW would by far have the largest and most significant burden.

In hindsight that is a good thing with the rampant corruption, cronyism, nepotism, theft, graft, misallocation of funds, and favoritism that has been a part of Wayne County (and City of Detroit) politics for decades. I'm sure many of palms would've been greased, some contractors and "appointees" would have some nice new homes, bonuses, and lavish pension plans had the county been running the project.....anyways..

Quoting hjulicher (Reply 69): What I'm not too sure about is whether additional international gates were added to the design after it went operational? I don't understand why the WCAA decided to move international non-SkyTeam airlines over to the new North Terminal and open a second immigrations and customs facility. (was this mandated by DL/NW?) It seems like for the token RJ and daily LH flight and maybe the odd NK flight from Mexico, there isn't much use for those facilities.

After opening, they did convert 2 additional widebody gates into international gates, but building the escalator/stairs down to the lower level international arrivals and processing area. A24 & A28 I believe were the two.

There are 2 more gates that I believe are capable of being converted to international arrivals - on the north side before the tram station - A60 & A64

I can't specifically cite if it was part of an agreement, but NW did want exclusive use of the facilities for them.

It does make sense for the North Terminal to have its own facilities - to support LH, RJ, NK Mexico flights. Also ORD diversions. A few times a year, AA and UA will divert international flights to DTW and they usually just hold on the ground but the facility there does give them the ability to offload and process passengers in the event of IRROPS.

Quoting hjulicher (Reply 69): My question is whether DTW will actually continue to grow as has been projected by the FAA and WCAA... It seems that over the past 10 years the size of the airport has stagnated to it's current levels of approximately 32-36 million pax p.a.

Like most industry growth projections they are probably a little ambitious. The US market is mature and relatively stagnant. Not just DTW but for most of the country. Actual demand is influenced by the economy and airlines are generally maintainign flat capacity.

DTW is in the case of rising tides raise all boats.

Quoting hjulicher (Reply 69): Maybe someone can correct as to what what the planned capacity for the McNamara and North Terminals ? They surely can handle quite a bit more passenger flows.

Both are well underutilized from their comfortable carrying capacity.

Quoting hjulicher (Reply 69): I can only hope for continued prosperity for the facility, and for smart, innovate growth. I hope that one day, the elevated train line between the terminals, rental car facility and soon-to-be airport rail station will become a reality

Probably a long ways out in the environment where airlines do not want to pay for additional/expensive infrastructure and the generally lack of public funding for more dire needed infrastructure.

Quoting DTW.SCE" class="quote" target="_blank">PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 66): That picture above of the old Concourse E is actually too modern and uncrowded to be a good representative of the old Davey Terminal.

I've got a pretty thorough video of the Davey Terminal, shot in 1995. Given the lack of pictures/videos of it on the Internet, I may upload it to YouTube. It features such fond memories that we're all familiar with, like people #!*@$ in baggage claim about the one-hour wait to get their bag (for those who don't know, NW had a whopping four baggage carousels... and it common for one to breakdown). It's pretty personal (I was young & dumb) so I'll have to make some extensive edits LOL.

Quoting DTW.SCE" class="quote" target="_blank">PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 70): After doing some more digging on the topic, one of the reasons for the arrangement where NW managed the project of building the McNamera / Worldgateway was because they had no faith in Wayne County being capable of managing the project on-time and within budget. NW had major concerns that the County would incur significant cost overruns which would ultimately fall in the lap of the airport's users, which NW would by far have the largest and most significant burden.

DTW had practically no capex projects in the 1980s because of heavy opposition from the Signatory Airlines, including RC-NW. The roadway to 275 was planned, and groundwork began, in the 1980s but it was ultimately part of the $1.2B Midfield Terminal project (the roadway was about $150M).

The 1996 agreement between NW & DTW called for a $900M project. NW added onto the project slightly, and the fourth runway cost something like $100M more than estimated (in order to satisfy environmentalists, they built some "replacement" wetlands in Superior Township, which remains open as a public park) but still, given the labor shortage and soaring construction costs in this era, the ultimate price was a bargain. Just look at the disaster AA turned MIA into.

The consolidated rental facility was also proposed as part of the original project, but vigorously opposed by NW.

Quoting dtwpilot225 (Reply 67): Does anyone know how long delta has the gates leased at Dtw? I had heard that with the draw down of the 50 seat jet the c concourse may be shut down and all the 900s moved to a while the remaining 700 and 200s occupy b concourse

DL's exclusive leases expired in 2009 and its now operating on preferential use leases that expire in about 20 years. The crux of DL's cost are tied to usage fees; in short, if DL were to de-hub DTW, PFC would be insufficient to pay the bonds, CPE would rise and usage fees for all carriers would soar. DL's current contract is pretty sweet for it should it decide to hub DTW... so no, despite continued insistence, DL is not de facto paying for Midfield.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 65): Quoting mcg (Reply 64): A careful read of the bond offering documents might lead one to a different conclusion. Earlier you made the assertion that DL is paying for Midfield through its leases, which is false as the terminal is being funded via PFC.

Take a look at the offering docs and you will see the "the bonds are payable from Net Revenues from the operation of the Airport". Look at the financial data and you will see that the primary sources of revenue are landing fees and lease revenue.

Quoting mcg (Reply 72): Take a look at the offering docs and you will see the "the bonds are payable from Net Revenues from the operation of the Airport". Look at the financial data and you will see that the primary sources of revenue are landing fees and lease revenue.

Yes, but the bonds specific to the terminal construction designate PFC as the primary source of net revenues and short falls coming from other revenues, which are determined by the usage agreement. The PFC has only been depleted once, and IIRC, DTW refinanced its bonds and was even able to cut fees substantially for a short time.

NW's lease was designated as exclusive via 2009, then became a preferred lease with most costs based on usage fees. This was done to give DTW time to refurbish the Davey Terminal - NW was at a competitive disadvantage in terms of cost since the carriers at the LC Smith Terminal paid among the lowest rent in the country. NW was worried they'd oppose a new terminal, or that a carrier like NK would occupy the Davey Terminal as-is and build a healthy operation at a lower cost than NW's. Thus usage fees were meant to carriers to share the burden of the terminal construction costs.

So my question is... if DL de-hubbed DTW, how would that impact the usage fees? I'm under the impression that all airlines would share the pain of the high CPE... DL would be responsible for its leases, but not much more.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 73): So my question is... if DL de-hubbed DTW, how would that impact the usage fees? I'm under the impression that all airlines would share the pain of the high CPE... DL would be responsible for its leases, but not much more.

The Authority is required to "collect fees, rentals and charges" sufficient to pay debt service. So if DL de-hubbed somebody has to pay up. I'd imagine the other airlines would not be willing to suffer an increase in their fees to any great extent, thus DL pays (IMO).

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 71): I've got a pretty thorough video of the Davey Terminal, shot in 1995. Given the lack of pictures/videos of it on the Internet, I may upload it to YouTube. It features such fond memories that we're all familiar with, like people #!*@$ in baggage claim about the one-hour wait to get their bag (for those who don't know, NW had a whopping four baggage carousels... and it common for one to breakdown). It's pretty personal (I was young & dumb) so I'll have to make some extensive edits LOL.

This would be awesome to see - if you can come up with a way to get it on Youtube that'd be fantastic.

From a business travel perspective, I really like Concourse A at DTW, but I would kill for some better dining options on Concourse C.

Quoting DTW.SCE" class="quote" target="_blank">PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 57): Yeah....remember the fund of the Davey Terminal: Concourse F with 2 744s and 2 DC-10s all departing within 30 minutes of each other... Concourse C with 1960s era original concourse, with a 1970 era extension, and a 1980s era addition, and a 1990s era addition. The Davey Terminal baggage claim that would flood everytime a thunderstorm dumped on the airport, would lose power every so often, and had the felt like the basement of Cobo Hall. Concourse G...aka the Golfcourse, aka Mesabaland... The main terminal building, where it was a holiday or summer vacation rite of passenger to stand on snaking lines for the check-in counters that stretched outside on the curb. The fine dining establishments in the Davey Terminal which were essentially limited to a Burger King, a Cinnabon...

I started flying into DTW in 1987. Your memory of the facilities seems excellent!

Trying to steer back to the original thread topic, DTW does have a lot of DL CRJ-200 flights. Unless a particularly large fraction of the target 100-125 50-seaters for all DL at end 2015 is used at DTW, it would seem a lot of change is coming to the schedule and destination set.

Quoting FSDan (Reply 54): Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 42): slowly, little by little, DL is turning DTW into an RJ hub ala CVG. It's a matter of time before DL pulls the plug on DTW hub status, IMO

And then AS will come in build a new hub in DTW because the evil DL will downsize their hub...   

DTW is fine and plays a vital role in the DL network.

[quote=MIflyer12,reply=77]Trying to steer back to the original thread topic, DTW does have a lot of DL CRJ-200 flights. Unless a particularly large fraction of the target 100-125 50-seaters for all DL at end 2015 is used at DTW, it would seem a I tend to think that DTW is still going to see a disproportionately high number of CRJ-200 flights post-2015.

LGA, SLC, and ATL will have a very minimal if any remaining CRJ-200s.

I can't tell if the ERJ numbers are included in that number, but I know they are intended to fulfill their obligations with them through 2016.

DTW

ER4: 37
CR2: 172

From the other thread this was the count for Summer 2014. I would suspect this number will land closer to between 120-150 ERJ + CRJ departures. At 6 segments a day for a total of 300 segments that amounts for about 50 aircraft worth of flying.

Quoting mcg (Reply 74): The Authority is required to "collect fees, rentals and charges" sufficient to pay debt service. So if DL de-hubbed somebody has to pay up. I'd imagine the other airlines would not be willing to suffer an increase in their fees to any great extent, thus DL pays (IMO).

Midfield switched to preferential leases/use agreements in 2009 (which was pushed by NW in the 1996 agreement; it was an insurance policy in case DTW didn't re-build Davey); North used these agreements from its opening in 2008. Cost is based on fixed and variable components, with the latter based on use. My interpretation (which I'm pretty confident of) is that if DL were to de-hub DTW, all airlines would share the pain of increased CPE; DL would be stuck with its leases, and its variable component would weigh heavier because of the number of gates it's agreed to, but no, it doesn't appear DL would be stuck "paying" for Midfield.

DTW and MSP are both similar in terms of local passengers carried by DL, as well as yield per coupon mile. DTW's come a long ways in the past several years -- MSP use to be well ahead in the latter.

The 'DL doesn't de-hub DTW because it's paying for the terminals' is just pure a.net myth.

For fall, 50-seaters make up less than 40% of the departures from DTW, which is the lowest it's been since the merger.

Flight banks are being retimed slightly.... the 3PM bank is being pushed toward 4PM, and the 7PM bank is being pushed toward 8PM. The 3PM->4PM shift is 'new,' but DL likes to bounce the late bank between 7PM->8PM->7PM.

Also of note is that FNT-ATL is going all-717 for the Holiday season... it'll be interesting if DL decides to keep the route like that, especially since most of their traffic to/from FNT is not business.

- - -

DL's communication in schedule changes drives me nuts... on Monday, I received notice that I needed to contact Expedia ASAP regarding a significant change to my upcoming itinerary. The change wasn't viewable in DL's downloadable timetable until Wednesday, and won't go live until Saturday. Expedia tells me they just receive a list of PNRs from DL that require manual intervention but no specific details. I know DL's procedure so I wasn't surprised, but most people don't. Thus why doesn't DL wait until AFTER its changes go live to notify consumers?

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 82): How can anyone say that DTW is anymore solid than CVG was?

Because DTW serves 32+ million passengers a year (2002 and now), and CVG even in it's heyday (2002, for reference) served 20+. Delta accounts for over 80% of the traffic at DTW. I'll admit growth has stagnated at DTW, but that's presumably due to the local economy.

From a July 30th, 2014 press release from the WCAA:

"Delta also increased its London service, giving DTW its first ever double-daily option to Heathrow for the Summer starting back in June, and is bulking-up on its largest aircraft in Detroit starting this Fall. Detroit Metro Airport will have four daily Boeing 747-400 flights to Asia, the most since 2008. Seoul, Shanghai, Nagoya, and Tokyo will all see the jumbo jets on their Detroit flights."

Avoiding the rediculous sidebar about DL downsizing DTW, which is 100% false.....

Some additional fall updates:

DTW-LAS gets a 763 flight/turn for the month of November (except on Saturdays) - the 3:55pm afternoon westbound, red-eye overnight eastbound. This is the first scheduled widebody flying on this route since the NW DC-10-40 days from pre-2002.

DTW-BOS is currently getting a 757 turn for Sept & Oct. In November, the morning flight becomes a 717 turn.

Still waiting for ROC-DTW to go mainline (on 717's - one can only hope) . No DTW mainline since NW DC-9 days.

CMH-DTW drops to 3 ERJ, 1 E75 some days in late October, down from 7-8 flights a day on an ERJ/CRJ/CR7/CR9/E70/E75 mix.

Quoting jsnww81 (Reply 60): The place had real character and a whiff of the "golden days", but it was beyond obsolete by the time NW replaced it.

Reminds me of MEM, or The Delightful Cesspool as I call it. Dated, but fun to visit.

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 71): I've got a pretty thorough video of the Davey Terminal, shot in 1995. Given the lack of pictures/videos of it on the Internet, I may upload it to YouTube. It features such fond memories that we're all familiar with, like people #!*@$ in baggage claim about the one-hour wait to get their bag (for those who don't know, NW had a whopping four baggage carousels... and it common for one to breakdown). It's pretty personal (I was young & dumb) so I'll have to make some extensive edits LOL.

Please do it & post a thread when it's up. Would love to "revisit" the old DTW.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 82): Who said anything at all about AS? You're way too full of yourself, but that's typical

I think it was just a joke...

Quoting DTW.SCE" class="quote" target="_blank">PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 84): Avoiding the rediculous sidebar about DL downsizing DTW, which is 100% false.....

Then please, show me some numbers where DL has increased the number of flights/destinations at DTW since they've taken over. I don't think it's so ridiculous but I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 88): Then please, show me some numbers where DL has increased the number of flights/destinations at DTW since they've taken over. I don't think it's so ridiculous but I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

What reasoning / evidence do you have supporting that DL is intending on de-hubbing DTW?

From WCAA, a comparison of annual seats at trunk DL hubs (excluding CVG & MEM) of 2008 (pre-merger) to 2013:
ATL: +9.1%
DTW: -12.9%
MSP: -16.2%
SLC: -12.4%

As a percentage, MSP saw the biggest overall reduction, whereas DTW & SLC weren't far behind it; DTW actually overtook MSP in overall seats. Does this mean DL's also planning on de-hubbing MSP & SLC?

[Edited 2014-09-12 19:47:28]

The notion of DL de-hubbing DTW is ridiculous. Comparing it to CVG is like Apples to Oranges. DTW's metro population is at least double CVG's and contains more O&D traffic than CVG ever did. DL's gleaming DTW hub isn't going nowhere, its a beautiful facility, probably one of the nicest hub facilities in the country and in fact it is their largest Asian gateway. Yes some traffic can be better served via MSP or ATL but in all regards its a good option in the midwest vs AA/UA through OHare and always scores well in customer satisfaction ratings . I think they are getting a major overhaul on the concessions soon as well, not sure if DL is behind it but they are getting more options like Chick Fil A and Longhorn Steakhouse like you see in other DL hubs.

Quoting CIDFlyer (Reply 90): DL's gleaming DTW hub isn't going nowhere, its a beautiful facility, probably one of the nicest hub facilities in the country and in fact it is their largest Asian gateway.

I agree with this. For the amount of effort they seem to be pouring into the facility itself, it seems unlikely that they'd suddenly scale down.

I have to setup a few flights for October soon and I am hoping to connect through DTW, as it has been about a year since I was through.

So much unwarranted speculation in this thread. While, Delta has indeed been refining its network at DTW over the past several years, traffic has remained remarkably stable. And revenue and profitability have improved dramatically. As 50-seaters continue to be drawn down, expect more changes in marginal markets. But DTW plays a huge role in the DL network. Too often, people get caught up in the short-term ups and downs. Many recent changes are being driven by Delta's strategic need to focus resources in ATL (due to WN pull-down), NYC, SEA and LAX. Long-term, DTW is secure as an important and growing piece of the Delta network.

Some numbers to ponder:

Quoting CompensateMe (Reply 89): What reasoning / evidence do you have supporting that DL is intending on de-hubbing DTW? From WCAA, a comparison of annual seats at trunk DL hubs (excluding CVG & MEM) of 2008 (pre-merger) to 2013: ATL: +9.1% DTW: -12.9% MSP: -16.2% SLC: -12.4% As a percentage, MSP saw the biggest overall reduction, whereas DTW & SLC weren't far behind it; DTW actually overtook MSP in overall seats. Does this mean DL's also planning on de-hubbing MSP & SLC?

Where do you get your statistics from? According to mspairport.com, MSP went (for NW-DL) from 25,871,757 passengers enplaned in 2008 to 24,502,530 in 2013, that's far from a 16.2% decrease.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 82): How can anyone say that DTW is anymore solid than CVG was? CVG was one of DL's largest hubs, with a fair amount of international service, and an impressive domestic roster. Where is it now? And it was dwindling way before the DL/NW merger - it had already become an RJ hub by the time the merger happened. Why is DTW so much more solid? Just asking the question.

CVG never served the role that DTW in the DL network. CVG never had multiple flights to Asia or flights to Latin America. CVG also had astronomically high fares, a smaller market, and a need for DL to concentrate its Midwest operations there because they had no other options. DL and DTW are entirely different that that. DTW hasn't grown since the DL/NW merger, but neither have the other hubs (save ATL and JFK). LGA, LAX, and SEA have all become new areas of focus since the merger was completed, and let's not even start talking about MEM. Growth will start to occur again at all the hubs as DL is FINALLY back in growth mode, with a 3% forecast-ed growth in ASMs this year over last year. While unlikely to be due to much of an increase at DTW, there's been no indication whatsoever that DL intends to make any drastic changes to DTW's portfolio. While DTW doesn't have many growth prospects left on an international scale, gauge increases are imminent due to DL's shift away from 50-seaters; this is already being witnessed in markets like PVD, which haven't had mainline service since the DC-9s retirement. The assertion that DTW is going to be dehubbed or even significantly downsized are simply silly.

Jeremy

First of all, let me say that I love the Detroit airport. It's a beautiful facility. I'm not knocking DTW in any way. I'm not even knocking DL. I hope that DTW does, indeed, become a larger part of the DL network. I'm just stating an opinion, which there are no shortage of at Airliners.net. I'll admit, I don't have all the facts and figures in front of me, which is why I asked if someone else did. From my perspective it seems like, since the NW/DL integration, DTW has lost service consistently YOY. 2013 had the lowest number of flights since 2004, about 100 daily flights less. Perhaps there are larger planes on some routes now that have mitigated the number of total seats lost - CR9's instead of CRJ's, CR7's instead of CRJ's and CRJ's instead of SF3's mostly - but the total number of daily flights is down significantly from 10 years ago. And it's been on a consistent downward trajectory since the integration. Perhaps it has to do with the economy, I don't know. And maybe DTW will be a key part of DL's network going forward. That would be great.

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 93): CVG never had multiple flights to Asia or flights to Latin America. CVG also had astronomically high fares, a smaller market, and a need for DL to concentrate its Midwest operations there because they had no other options

SEA already has more flights to Asia than DTW does, and it seems as though DL is moving forward in making SEA their North American Asian gateway. I don't think DTW will lost a lot of Asia service, but it's entirely possible that they won't maintain their existing roster if SEA continues to grow. DTW has one flight to South America and two flights to non beach destinations in Mexico (MTY and MEX). At least two of those are flights geared towards very specific niche markets (GRU and MTY) - both aimed at the large auto manufacturing business in each city. CVG, at it's peak, had a larger European network than DTW does currently. Are there differences between CVG and DTW? Absolutely. But DL had a significant investment in CVG and didn't hesitate on pulling the plug, despite their continued monetary commitment there. CVG is a shadow of it's former self. I fail to see where DTW (or any other city in their hub network, save for ATL) is 100% safe. Things change on a dime in this industry and DL has not been shy about changing their business model as needed to maximize their investments.

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 93): The assertion that DTW is going to be dehubbed or even significantly downsized are simply silly.

But DTW has already been significantly downsized, in terms of daily flights, by about 20% over the last 10 years. That, to me, seems significant.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): From my perspective it seems like, since the NW/DL integration, DTW has lost service consistently YOY. 2013 had the lowest number of flights since 2004, about 100 daily flights less. Perhaps there are larger planes on some routes now that have mitigated the number of total seats lost - CR9's instead of CRJ's, CR7's instead of CRJ's and CRJ's instead of SF3's mostly - but the total number of daily flights is down significantly from 10 years ago. And it's been on a consistent downward trajectory since the integration. Perhaps it has to do with the economy, I don't know. And maybe DTW will be a key part of DL's network going forward. That would be great.

But check out my data in Reply 92. While departure are indeed down, ASMs are at the highest point since 2007. They are basically at the same level today as they were at the point of NW's Chapter 11 filing. That should be the end of all arguments. ASM are the ultimate measurement of capacity in this industry.

And just for some perspective, DL's ATL hub is down more than 100 fights from its all-time peak as well. Does anyone worry about ATL? Departures aren't a good metric in the post-RJ world.

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 95): While departure are indeed down, ASMs are at the highest point since 2007. They are basically at the same level today as they were at the point of NW's Chapter 11 filing. That should be the end of all arguments. ASM are the ultimate measurement of capacity in this industry.

Eh. I get the point you're making, and completely agree with you that any suggestions of doom and gloom for DTW are completely unfounded, but while ASMs are, indeed, considered the "ultimate measurement of capacity" for an airline's network, they are not at all the "ultimate" measurement when it comes to a particular airport or market. For airports, frequency and capacity (seats) are quite often considered far more important - witness the fact that virtually every airport in the U.S. report flight operations (frequency) and boardings (seats), but I don't know of one that publishes ASMs.

Quoting commavia (Reply 96): Eh. I get the point you're making, and completely agree with you that any suggestions of doom and gloom for DTW are completely unfounded, but while ASMs are, indeed, considered the "ultimate measurement of capacity" for an airline's network, they are not at all the "ultimate" measurement when it comes to a particular airport or market. For airports, frequency and capacity (seats) are quite often considered far more important - witness the fact that virtually every airport in the U.S. report flight operations (frequency) and boardings (seats), but I don't know of one that publishes ASMs.

That is partly because they don't have access to ASM data until it is reported by DOT a few months later. The metrics you mention are maintained locally and can be published immediately. Its also true that ASMs are a whole lot more difficult for the public to understand.

If the conversation is about the strength of the hub and the hub carrier's history and future intentions, ASMs are far more important. For example, one thing that is very clear here is that Delta has traded in a lot of short-haul, small-city flying at DTW for long-haul international flying. Thats how ASMs have grown even in the face of frequency reductions. If you include partner flying from AF and now VS, the long-haul shift is even more profound. There is no one that can convince me that trading a few single frequency RJ markets like ROA and CAE for GRU, for example, isn't Delta expressing its long-term commitment to DTW.

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 97): That is partly because they don't have access to ASM data until it is reported by DOT a few months later.

... and partly because, contrary to the prior assertion, ASMs are simply not the "ultimate" metric - not for airports, nor the DOT, nor the airlines.

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 97): If the conversation is about the strength of the hub and the hub carrier's history and future intentions, ASMs are far more important.

I'm sorry, but I simply do not agree. Again - ASMs are a metric, but they're hardly the "ultimate" metric, particularly with respect to airports. In fact, I don't think it's possible to fully gauge the relative "strength" of a hub based on a single metric alone because different metrics tend to skew things in different ways - seats alone tells one story, while flights can tell another, and ASMs tell another still.

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 92): So much unwarranted speculation in this thread. While, Delta has indeed been refining its network at DTW over the past several years, traffic has remained remarkably stable. And revenue and profitability have improved dramatically. As 50-seaters continue to be drawn down, expect more changes in marginal markets. But DTW plays a huge role in the DL network. Too often, people get caught up in the short-term ups and downs. Many recent changes are being driven by Delta's strategic need to focus resources in ATL (due to WN pull-down), NYC, SEA and LAX. Long-term, DTW is secure as an important and growing piece of the Delta network. Some numbers to ponder:

Jetlanta,

Do you have this data for DL's other hubs for the same period?

Jeremy

Ok, I was hesitant to even respond, but here I go.......

ASFlyer, your opinion and observation has no factual basis based on DL's current business plan.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): I hope that DTW does, indeed, become a larger part of the DL network.

DTW already is a huge part of DL's network it is its' 2nd/3rd largest hub (depending on what metric you choose to support your viewpoint). There at the moment is very little organic growth from DTW, only thing will be incremental domestic capacity which will be dependent on the regional/national/global socioeconomic trends.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): I'm just stating an opinion, which there are no shortage of at Airliners.net.

True, however you are in the extreme minority on this one. In A.net land, one can say whatever they want and choose to ignore whatever they choose.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): I'll admit, I don't have all the facts and figures in front of me, which is why I asked if someone else did.

Many people are telling you otherwise.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): From my perspective it seems like, since the NW/DL integration, DTW has lost service consistently YOY.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): 2013 had the lowest number of flights since 2004, about 100 daily flights less.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): Perhaps there are larger planes on some routes now that have mitigated the number of total seats lost - CR9's instead of CRJ's, CR7's instead of CRJ's and CRJ's instead of SF3's mostly - but the total number of daily flights is down significantly from 10 years ago.

First of all, you cannot use simplistic trends over a 10 year period without any context to draw conclusions about the future. 10 years is an extremely long time in this rapidly changing industry. A lot has changed in the past 10 years, let alone the past 5.

History lesson:
In the fat, dumb, happy, go-go 90's, fuel was cheap, RJs barely existed and there were many more players in the industry. 9/11 happened and susequent economic downturn happened. Airlines were losing money hand over fist.
NW started to add capacity back into the network in 2003/2004 as the economy started to recover, but they were still losing a ton of money. They filled bankruptcy in August 2005, and they shed a bunch of excess capacity and aircraft. In 2007-2008, NW parked a significant portion of the DC-9-30 fleet, and also brought on the CR9s and E75s as they were exiting bankruptcy. Then in 2008 they announced the merger with DL. There was also the huge run-up in fuel price in 2008. 2008 was the last year that DTW was scheduled independently by NW. Merger related changes started in 2009. The remaining DC-9-30s/40s were retired, then the Saab 340s were retired and DL exited some EAS markets. There was the economic downturn and auto industry collaspse which disproportionally hit DTW hard.

So many significant events that have to be put into context than can help explain each and every data point change.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): And it's been on a consistent downward trajectory since the integration. Perhaps it has to do with the economy, I don't know.

2004-2008 was NW - bankruptcy, fleet realignment, and shedding unprofitable capacity
2009-2014 was been DL - and the post-merger network

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): And maybe DTW will be a key part of DL's network going forward.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): SEA already has more flights to Asia than DTW does, and it seems as though DL is moving forward in making SEA their North American Asian gateway. I don't think DTW will lost a lot of Asia service, but it's entirely possible that they won't maintain their existing roster if SEA continues to grow.

DTW - NRT, NGO, ICN, PVG, PEK
SEA- NRT, HND, ICN, PVG, PEK, HKG

SEA is getting capacity from NRT and building a west coast Asian gateway
DTW is the gateway to Asia for the core of their network (Eastern and Central timezone)

SEA cannot replicate the traffic flows to/from Asia that DTW handles. SEA has the benefit of being able to use 76W and A330 equipment deeper into Asia. I actually believe since DTW will have 4 daily 744s to Asia this fall, they will have more seats to Asia than SEA (or be very close, I'm too lazy to do the math)

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): DTW has one flight to South America and two flights to non beach destinations in Mexico (MTY and MEX).

So? What do other hubs have like ORD, MSP, EWR, PHL????
What other non-beach market destinations are they missing??

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): DTW has one flight to South America and two flights to non beach destinations in Mexico (MTY and MEX). At least two of those are flights geared towards very specific niche markets (GRU and MTY) - both aimed at the large auto manufacturing business in each city.

DTW connects the manufacturing heartland of the US (the Midwest) to the manufacturing heartland of Mexico and South America

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): , at it's peak, had a larger European network than DTW does currently.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): Are there differences between CVG and DTW? Absolutely. But DL had a significant investment in CVG and didn't hesitate on pulling the plug, despite their continued monetary commitment there. CVG is a shadow of it's former self.

CVG was based on a disproporate amount of connecting traffic, with a smaller local market, primarily using RJs - that were much more economical when fuel was a fraction of the cost and the aircraft has less intensive maintenance, and in an environment with an entirely different revenue and cost environment.

With the run-up in fuel on the cost side. Socio-economic changes in the regional/national/global economy, shrinking middle class, changes in the competitive landscape; a huge amount of traffic vaporized on the demand side and/or became unprofitable for the airlines to attempt to capture.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): I fail to see where DTW (or any other city in their hub network, save for ATL) is 100% safe. Things change on a dime in this industry and DL has not been shy about changing their business model as needed to maximize their investments.

Hyperpole? I mean nothing is set in stone or 100% sure but I wouldn't go around talking like it could happen. It makes you sound silly.

Quoting ASFlyer (Reply 94): But DTW has already been significantly downsized, in terms of daily flights, by about 20% over the last 10 years. That, to me, seems significant.

No one is debating that, but it is meaningless when making a forward looking statement.