DOT Proceeding for Re-allocation of DL SEA-HND

a380787 · Fri Jan 16, 2015 4:41 pm

AA and HA stealing DL's authority has succeeded. The question now is LAX or KOA :

"We have determined that, in light of Delta’s extensive winter-season cutbacks, and the submissions filed on the record in this case, the public interest requires a fresh examination of whether the best use of the Seattle-Haneda opportunity is to allow Delta to retain its underlying authority to operate the slot pair for Seattle-Haneda service, or whether the public interest would be better served by reallocating the slot pair for service from another U.S. city by another U.S. carrier or by Delta. Delta has presented no information that would lead the Department to alter that conclusion. The Department has instituted this proceeding under its general powers to review the public interest bases of current awards, the procedures set up by the department will provide Delta, as well as any other interested carriers, ample opportunity to argue its position and present any evidence it may wish to present.”"

commavia · Fri Jan 16, 2015 4:45 pm

No.

All that the DoT's Order on Reconsideration from yesterday did was deny Delta's contention that the entire proceeding was unlawful and exceeded the DoT's authority in the first place:

"As indicated in Order 2014-12-9, the Department has determined that, in light of Delta’s extensive winter-season cutbacks, and the submissions filed on the record in this case, the public interest requires a fresh examination of whether the best use of the Seattle-Haneda opportunity is to allow Delta to retain its underlying authority to operate the slot pair for Seattle-Haneda service, or whether the public interest would be better served by reallocating the slot pair for service from another U.S. city by another U.S. carrier or by Delta. Delta has presented no information that would lead the Department to alter that conclusion.

The Department has instituted this proceeding under its general powers to review the public interest bases of current awards. The Department believes that procedures established in Order 2014-12-9, will provide Delta, as well as any other interested carriers, ample opportunity to argue its position and present any evidence it may wish to present."

The DoT has not formally stripped the authority from Delta, and could still choose to leave the HND authority with Delta for SEA.

[Edited 2015-01-16 08:46:01]

a380787 · Fri Jan 16, 2015 4:50 pm

Quoting commavia (Reply 1):

The DoT has not formally stripped the authority from Delta, and could still choose to leave the HND authority with Delta for SEA.

Sure, if you REALLY think DOT would go through the whole hassle only to return the authority back to DL with no change. They could've easily rejected AA/HA's filings and left everything intact, but they chose to proceed with new selection.

But feel free to bet real money on DL.

PSU.DTW.SCE · Fri Jan 16, 2015 6:11 pm

This is the DOT and would not bet money on any one way or another on any of the applications.

Sometimes that have to follow a process in order to either set or maintain a precedent. Doing otherwise would or could open up other situations in the future or have unintended consequences.

enilria · Fri Jan 16, 2015 6:18 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 2):
Sure, if you REALLY think DOT would go through the whole hassle only to return the authority back to DL with no change. They could've easily rejected AA/HA's filings and left everything intact, but they chose to proceed with new selection.

But feel free to bet real money on DL.

I suspect you are correct in practice, but not technically correct.

delimit · Fri Jan 16, 2015 6:20 pm

There are slots worth fighting for (LGA/JFK/LHR), and then there's HND. DL should let it go.

uberflieger · Fri Jan 16, 2015 6:32 pm

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 3):
This is the DOT and would not bet money on any one way or another on any of the applications

Never mind Delta is complying with the provisions of the route authority. You may think those rules are absurd, and I do

but that doesn't change the fact DL isn't violating them.

a380787 · Fri Jan 16, 2015 6:43 pm

Quoting uberflieger (Reply 6):

Never mind Delta is complying with the provisions of the route authority. You may think those rules are absurd, and I do but that doesn't change the fact DL isn't violating them.

Agreed. DOT was the one who set that really low-bar dormancy rule, so DL used their lawyers and accountants to figure out how to bleed the least.

Maybe DOT will learn a lesson on how *not* to set dormancy rules. Just hate to see these HND slots thrown around like musical chairs.

Sightseer · Fri Jan 16, 2015 8:04 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 2):
Sure, if you REALLY think DOT would go through the whole hassle only to return the authority back to DL with no change. They could've easily rejected AA/HA's filings and left everything intact, but they chose to proceed with new selection.

Recall that this is similar to what initially happened when DL tried to start SEA-HND in the first place. DL asked the DOT to move DTW-HND to SEA, the DOT requested a completely new application process, and in the end DL kept the slot and started SEA anyway. So yes, the DOT has done something similar before, and I wouldn't read anything more into this process until a final decision is reached. The DOT is just doing due diligence right now.

a380787 · Fri Jan 16, 2015 8:21 pm

Quoting Sightseer (Reply 8):

Recall that this is similar to what initially happened when DL tried to start SEA-HND in the first place. DL asked the DOT to move DTW-HND to SEA, the DOT requested a completely new application process, and in the end DL kept the slot and started SEA anyway. So yes, the DOT has done something similar before, and I wouldn't read anything more into this process until a final decision is reached. The DOT is just doing due diligence right now.

That was a bit different. DL asked for a transfer then, while this time DOT forced the review even though technically DL is in compliance with the dormancy rule. That time DL returned the DTW-HND authority and applied for SEA-HND.

From the way I read DOT's verbiage, they seem strongly in favor of yanking it. I see AA having the best chance of winning.

airliner371 · Fri Jan 16, 2015 8:24 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 2):
Sure, if you REALLY think DOT would go through the whole hassle only to return the authority back to DL with no change. They could've easily rejected AA/HA's filings and left everything intact, but they chose to proceed with new selection.

But feel free to bet real money on DL.

I don't think he was necessarily saying that DL would get it. He was correcting your incorrect information that "AA and HA stealing DL's authority has succeeded." Because simply a decision has not been made and DL still has the opportunity to keep its authority.

a380787 · Fri Jan 16, 2015 8:34 pm

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 10):

I don't think he was necessarily saying that DL would get it. He was correcting your incorrect information that "AA and HA stealing DL's authority has succeeded." Because simply a decision has not been made and DL still has the opportunity to keep its authority.

Fine. I'll rephrase it "DL efforts to retain authority has 1% chance of success left"

LAXdude1023 · Fri Jan 16, 2015 8:36 pm

I would like to see HA get it. The have an excellent track record with HND and deserve it the most IMO.

surfdog75 · Fri Jan 16, 2015 9:25 pm

Taking the authority from DL and giving it to AA to fly LAX-HND against DL already flying that route would be the ultimate in government idiocy. Wouldn't surprise me though.

32andBelow · Fri Jan 16, 2015 9:34 pm

Quoting surfdog75 (Reply 13):

Taking the authority from DL and giving it to AA to fly LAX-HND against DL already flying that route would be the ultimate in government idiocy. Wouldn't surprise me though.

Letting DL sit on the slot and not operate at all is even worse...

Sightseer · Fri Jan 16, 2015 10:44 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 9):

Either way, the DOT went through the whole application process only to give DL what they originally wanted to begin with. That was the point I was trying to make, so just because they're proceeding with a full review doesn't necessarily mean DL will lose the slot (although I think there's a good chance HA gets it).

[Edited 2015-01-16 14:49:33]

PDX88 · Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:37 pm

Any particular reason HA would run the route from KOA over OGG?

32andBelow · Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:39 pm

Quoting PDX88 (Reply 16):
Any particular reason HA would run the route from KOA over OGG?

I think someone mentioned runway length in an earlier thread.

BestWestern · Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:57 pm

Hawaiian brings in much needed Japanese tourist dollars and promotes regional growth on the island.

azjubilee · Sat Jan 17, 2015 12:52 am

Quoting PDX88 (Reply 16):
Any particular reason HA would run the route from KOA over OGG?

Because the runway in OGG is too short for a flight of that length and fuel load, there is no customs in OGG and finally Kona has the next highest Japanese arrival rate after Honolulu. Also, Kona is the largest market for Japan arrivals at the moment without a nonstop flight.

Quoting a380787 (Thread starter):
AA and HA stealing DL's authority has succeeded. The question now is LAX or KOA :

Stealing? Nobody is stealing anything. Let's not inject drama to the situation.

Sevensixtyseven · Sat Jan 17, 2015 1:08 am

Quoting a380787 (Reply 2):

Yes..maintaining the status quo may indeed be the best route in this instance.

Quoting 32andBelow (Reply 17):

OGG's runway is only 6,995' long. They do, however fly from OGG to the US Mainland with A330s, and AA flies a 767-300 from DFW nonstop to and from OGG..so it's entirely possible from a runway perspective that it is technically possible to do. Only 240 mile difference using the great circle route..

Just..no customs in OGG.

With a related question, I read somewhere that OGG's runway 2/20 is in desperate need of resurfacing/rebuild because it is going on 70+ years old..is there any validity to that?

32andBelow · Sat Jan 17, 2015 1:10 am

Quoting Sevensixtyseven (Reply 20):
OGG's runway is only 6,995' long. They do, however fly from OGG to the US Mainland with A330s, and AA flies a 767-300 from DFW nonstop to and from OGG..so it's entirely possible from a runway perspective that it is technically possible to do. Only 240 mile difference using the great circle route..

Just..no customs in OGG.

I am sure HA will have a nice 717 to finish the trip to OGG for anyone interested

azjubilee · Sat Jan 17, 2015 1:24 am

Quoting Sevensixtyseven (Reply 20):
OGG's runway is only 6,995' long. They do, however fly from OGG to the US Mainland with A330s, and AA flies a 767-300 from DFW nonstop to and from OGG..so it's entirely possible from a runway perspective that it is technically possible to do. Only 240 mile difference using the great circle route..

HALs 330s that depart for the west coast carry FAR less fuel than would be required for a westbound trip to Japan. I haven't done any numbers, but I'm willing to bet money that the runway is too short. The great circle distance and comparing eastbound mainland departures is moot.

And yes, the runway in OGG is old and in need of repair. There are several plans out for the project, but I'm not sure of the timeline.

PDX88 · Sun Jan 18, 2015 2:24 am

Quoting Sevensixtyseven (Reply 20):

And UA runs a 777 to ORD from OGG, which is more than 200 miles longer than OGG-HND.

I'm surprised there's no customs in Maui. The city seems like they could boost tourism with a customs hall and a runway expansion project.

Sevensixtyseven · Sun Jan 18, 2015 5:06 am

Quoting PDX88 (Reply 23):

I forgot about the ORD-OGG nonstop! It appears that the route is nonstop on the way back..so getting a 777 all that way is possible. So all that is technically needed is a customs hall..preclearance is out of the question because if they open that door to one....it's more hassle than it's worth.

haynflyer · Sun Jan 18, 2015 5:34 am

There is a fair amount of local opposition to making OGG an international airport.

Residents do not agree with the elevation of Kahului Airport to a permanent international airport. Project opponents cite concerns about increased introduction of invasive species and other issues, as evidenced by the common Maui bumper sticker "Big city airport, big city problems."

Having said that, there was an earlier drive a few years ago to stop a golf course from being built in the small town of Hana. The slogan went: "Keep Hana for Hawaiians," or something like that. From what I understand (having lived on Maui for several years), it was not the local Hana residents who wanted to stop development, but the rich mainland folks who had vacation homes in the area. The local residents actually wanted the golf course and the jobs it would have brought. So the opposition to OGG being an international airport, may not not be from the "local" residents at all.

In conclusion, the lack of customs facilities at OGG as nothing to do with it being able to accommodate international flights. In fact, Royal Airlines used to fly into OGG with their A310's from Canada in the 90's.

airportugal310 · Sun Jan 18, 2015 6:19 am

Quoting haynflyer (Reply 25):
So the opposition to OGG being an international airport, may not not be from the "local" residents at all.

I agree with this sentiment 100% on that island. As you know, Oahu is different but in Maui...fah sure!

JBAirwaysFan · Mon Jan 19, 2015 3:04 pm

Quoting azjubilee (Reply 22):
HALs 330s that depart for the west coast carry FAR less fuel than would be required for a westbound trip to Japan. I haven't done any numbers, but I'm willing to bet money that the runway is too short. The great circle distance and comparing eastbound mainland departures is moot.

Agreed. Especially with prevailing winds that typically run west to east in the northern hemisphere the planes don't need as much time to fly to the mainland because they usually catch a tailwind. Hence less fuel needed. Flying west requires more fuel due to the winds, especially in the winter (hence why OGG would require a longer runway for Japan flights). Besides, you always land lighter than you do when you take off.

OzarkD9S · Mon Jan 19, 2015 3:10 pm

Quoting haynflyer (Reply 25):

In fact, Royal Airlines used to fly into OGG with their A310's from Canada in the 90's.

From any airports without U.S. pre-clearance?

ozark1 · Mon Jan 19, 2015 3:15 pm

Question. I know AA stopped JFK to HND because of time restrictions (at least I think that's why), Why has Haneda not worked before? Would appreciate any info on the difference between this airport and NRT. I think it's more close in to the city? But less connectivity? Thanks in advance for any info

Sightseer · Mon Jan 19, 2015 4:51 pm

Quoting ozark1 (Reply 29):

It's basically because of slot times. Under the current US-Japan air agreement, flights to and from HND must land and take off between 10 pm and 7 am, times which are undesirable for many passengers and also have limited public transportation available, negating the advantage of being closer to downtown. As a result, so far the only routes that have been at least somewhat viable are LAX, SFO, and HNL, all of which are relatively short flights to Japan and very high on O&D. If/when the US-Japan agreemeet is revised, both sides will get four daytime slot pairs for HND (I think).

IrishAyes · Mon Jan 19, 2015 9:44 pm

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 12):

I would like to see HA get it. The have an excellent track record with HND and deserve it the most IMO.

Agreed. And HA also stands the least to lose by launching KOA-HND. The Island needs it more than the others do considering how LAX and SEA are well-served to/from TYO. The nighttime slots work viably for Kona passengers given that there is really no other option other than 1-stops via HNL.

Quoting ozark1 (Reply 29):
Question. I know AA stopped JFK to HND because of time restrictions (at least I think that's why), Why has Haneda not worked before? Would appreciate any info on the difference between this airport and NRT. I think it's more close in to the city? But less connectivity? Thanks in advance for any info

As sightseer mentioned, the timing agreements essentially only work for US West Coast and Hawaii flights without requiring an aircraft to RON at HND for a long period of time (overnight essentially) and incur additional costs from lack of utilization. Hence, why DTW and JFK didn't work for DL and AA, but the arrangements are possible for LAX, SFO, SEA and HNL.

Quoting Sightseer (Reply 30):
If/when the US-Japan agreemeet is revised, both sides will get four daytime slot pairs for HND (I think).

Is it one or is it four? I was under the impression that it would start off as one.

In my opinion, if AA loses out to HA, it would be luck in disguise. Then, when a daytime slot becomes available, and the DOT has to choose again, AA's bid will be a slam-dunk.

Sightseer · Mon Jan 19, 2015 11:12 pm

Quoting irishayes (Reply 31):
Is it one or is it four? I was under the impression that it would start off as one.

I'm not exactly sure. I thought it was more than one, but maybe I'm just thinking of the initial round of HND slots. LAXintl, among others, would know the specifics better than I do

.

uberflieger · Tue Feb 03, 2015 7:49 pm

Los Angeles & Seattle politicians are lining up behind AA & DL

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/ne...g-of-war-over-delta-air-lines.html

azjubilee · Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:42 pm

Quoting uberflieger (Reply 33):

Los Angeles & Seattle politicians are lining up behind AA & DL http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/ne...g-of-war-over-delta-air-lines.html

As they are in Hawaii, including many employees, friends as well as the tourist trade. But you'd never guess that from the poorly written article you're linking.

HALFA · Tue Feb 03, 2015 10:09 pm

Quoting azjubilee (Reply 34):
As they are in Hawaii, including many employees, friends as well as the tourist trade. But you'd never guess that from the poorly written article you're linking.

I was thinking the exact same thing! If you only had that article to go by, you'd think that HA is not even in the running!

jetblastdubai · Tue Feb 03, 2015 10:12 pm

Quoting uberflieger (Reply 33):

Los Angeles & Seattle politicians are lining up behind AA & DL

Seems a bit odd for Los Angeles to actively campaign for AA when it would no doubt hurt DL, another huge LAX tenant vying for the same market. It could really sour the relationship between DL and LAWA (Los Angeles World Airports) if AA is actually selected for the service and ends up competing head-to-head with DL.

a380787 · Tue Feb 03, 2015 10:16 pm

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 36):

Seems a bit odd for Los Angeles to actively campaign for AA when it would no doubt hurt DL, another huge LAX tenant vying for the same market. It could really sour the relationship between DL and LAWA (Los Angeles World Airports) if AA is actually selected for the service and ends up competing head-to-head with DL.

I don't think LAWA is one bit concerned about DL. If they shrink their LAX operation back to just their own hubs, tons of airlines are more than willing to backfill any capacity void that DL left behind.

MAH4546 · Tue Feb 03, 2015 10:30 pm

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 36):
Seems a bit odd for Los Angeles to actively campaign for AA when it would no doubt hurt DL, another huge LAX tenant vying for the same market. It could really sour the relationship between DL and LAWA (Los Angeles World Airports) if AA is actually selected for the service and ends up competing head-to-head with DL.

No, its not odd. Airports don't - and legally can't - pick favorites and have a duty to foster competition.

a380787 · Tue Feb 03, 2015 10:34 pm

Quoting Mah4546 (Reply 38):

No, its not odd. Airports don't - and legally can't - pick favorites and have a duty to foster competition.

Go ask DFW. It's no secret they play favorites with AA. Just look at how few Far East Asian carriers DFW managed to attract versus a much smaller and poorer neighbor IAH.

MAH4546 · Tue Feb 03, 2015 10:38 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 39):
Quoting Mah4546 (Reply 38):

No, its not odd. Airports don't - and legally can't - pick favorites and have a duty to foster competition.

Go ask DFW. It's no secret they play favorites with AA. Just look at how few Far East Asian carriers DFW managed to attract versus a much smaller and poorer neighbor IAH.

I know its no secret, but there's nothing to "ask." What they are doing is skirting the law.

aaway · Tue Feb 03, 2015 10:43 pm

I'd not rely on the newspaper article and rather follow the action directly from D.O.T.

http://www.regulations.gov/#!searchR...;fp=true;dct=FR%252BPR%252BN%252BO

IrishAyes · Tue Feb 03, 2015 11:28 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 39):
Go ask DFW. It's no secret they play favorites with AA. Just look at how few Far East Asian carriers DFW managed to attract versus a much smaller and poorer neighbor IAH.

They don't "play favorites" with AA, but rather are open about how the relationship between the Cities of Dallas and Fort Worth and the hometown carrier are exceptionally close, much like between WN and HOU, DL and ATL, AS and SEA, etc. etc. They know that American has an exceptionally strong loyalty base in North Texas and is obviously the go-to carrier for both domestic and international flights to various markets.

For years, DFW was overlooked by both Asian, European and even Latin American carriers for growth opportunities outside of the US, and American was unable to support many routes due to its cost structure and impending restructuring. Once it was able to emerge from Chapter 11, merge with US Airways, and acquire aircraft that would permit routes like DFW-HKG, then opportunities became more of a reality.

Noticeably, AA has not been the only carrier to grow at DFW: you have the ME3 + Qantas, which is very big, along with growth from Transborder/American carriers (AM, Y4, WS, NK).

IAH has always been much more fragmented among foreign carrier competition, owing partly to its attraction as an international O&D market with yield-rich traffic that brings in the likes of SQ, SK and others, as well as its relationships with Star carriers that are arguably stronger than OneWorld. Plus, UA doesn't seem to be interested in growing IAH-Asia as much as AA has been keen on expanding DFW-Asia, primarily bc UA has transPacific gateway hubs in markets like SFO that are far superior to IAH. AA does not have that same luxury, so they went for DFW, but I wouldn't be surprised if over time, LAX sees more growth to Asian markets that DFW cannot support.

ldvaviation · Wed Feb 04, 2015 12:08 am

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 36):
Seems a bit odd for Los Angeles to actively campaign for AA when it would no doubt hurt DL, another huge LAX tenant vying for the same market. It could really sour the relationship between DL and LAWA (Los Angeles World Airports) if AA is actually selected for the service and ends up competing head-to-head with DL.

What would LAX stand to lose if LAWA hurt Delta's feelings?

jetblastdubai · Wed Feb 04, 2015 3:27 pm

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 43):
What would LAX stand to lose if LAWA hurt Delta's feelings?

Good point.

I just can't recall anytime in history where an airport or City actively campaigned for "competing" service before. I've seen campaigns for new service, just never duplicating service.

commavia · Wed Feb 04, 2015 3:35 pm

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 44):
I just can't recall anytime in history where an airport or City actively campaigned for "competing" service before. I've seen campaigns for new service, just never duplicating service.

It's hardly new or unique. Municipal, state and federal politicians campaigning on behalf of AA's LAX-HND application are not actively campaigning for "competing" service, but rather "additional" service - in the minds of politicians who don't know nor care to know about the airline industry, they simply see it singularly as "more," without any understanding nor concern for competitive implications.

Other recent examples of such activity would include AA's applications for ORD-China service, which drew wide support from substantial elements of local and state government in Chicago and Illinois, and a substantial portion of the Illinois congressional delegation, despite the fact that AA's new service would compete with that already provided by United - itself, obviously, headquartered in Illinois.

In general, airports want, and will advocate for and support, flights and passenger volume - no matter what airline provides it.

CV880 · Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:31 pm

Quoting PDX88 (Reply 23):
And UA runs a 777 to ORD from OGG, which is more than 200 miles longer than OGG-HND.

(That's an eastbound trip with tailwinds. DL used to fly a 763ER nonstop to ATL. It's a bit different flying westbound with strong headwinds, esp in the winter.)

I'm surprised there's no customs in Maui. The city seems like they could boost tourism with a customs hall and a runway expansion project.

Many of the locals don't want direct flights from overseas. The runway extension was approved by the FAA 15 years ago. It still has not been done because of local opposition. The problem now is that they will be forced to do something as the current main runway needs a big overhaul, so there is a proposal to lengthen the secondary runway, 05-23, then reconstruct and lenghthen 02-20 to 9600'. This proposal has been on the table for a couple of years, so things move slowly.

LAX772LR · Wed Feb 04, 2015 10:10 pm

Quoting haynflyer (Reply 25):

In conclusion, the lack of customs facilities at OGG as nothing to do with it being able to accommodate international flights. In fact, Royal Airlines used to fly into OGG with their A310's from Canada in the 90's.

Bad example. Most large Canadian airports are US pre-cleared, so a permanent customs facility capability isn't needed.

syncmaster · Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:25 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 2):
Sure, if you REALLY think DOT would go through the whole hassle only to return the authority back to DL with no change. They could've easily rejected AA/HA's filings and left everything intact, but they chose to proceed with new selection.

Probably not, this sets precedent if they do. Making it easier for other carriers to try the same in the future.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net