DL JFK-TLV changes

[WorldTraveler]

correct... and as with LHR, the AMS flights rotate off of Asia flights.

PEK is also becoming a 332 city from the US, further leveraging the 332 as an aircraft capable of flying 14 hour Pacific flights. It appears that the 332 will only fly the Pacific.

I would strongly bet that the movement of the 777s back to the Atlantic is in part to start freeing them up for new 14 plus hour flights across the Pacific next year - and I am betting JFK will get one of them.

 

[700UW]

And no more 744s at JFK, they will all be out of DTW.

 

[WorldTraveler]

the 744s have been moved in and out of most of the NRT gateways over the past several years.... ATL and JFK have been the most constant but I'm not sure it is quite time to proclaim the end of the NW/DL 744s at JFK.

and yes, DL has really increased capacity at DTW.

You'll note that it is the 2nd largest gateway to Asia by a US airline in terms of seats.

I'm not even sure that UA operates 4 744s per day from SFO during the winter. Let me know if I am wrong - like you need to be asked

 

[eolesen]

I think it's just a matter of time before UA starts to parks 744s. They've got 24, 10 of which are over 20 years old, and they tend to winter in China...

 

[WorldTraveler]

DL has already said that they are finding it harder and harder to find places to profitably fly the 744 since it was acquired by NW and continued with DL primarily to feed NRT from the biggest US hubs.

It isn't a surprise that DTW was the first big hub to lose 744 service to NRT and the downgrade to a 777 came with the addition of several new routes from DTW to China.

The whole reason the new 333s and the 330neo makes sense and DL wants them is because it provides the range of that approaches the 744 but with the 100 fewer passengers that Anderson has said he wants new generation aircraft to have for DL but without the $250M price tag that come with the new plastic planes.

The 744's days might have been numbered anyway but the devaluation of the yen and the shrinkage of the yen accelerated the need as the Japan local market shrunk. at some point it becomes a lot cheaper to no longer push thousands of passengers per day thru NRT if the local market is not what it used to be.

 

[eolesen]

They're clearly a liability to both carriers, but DL could more easily afford to park them now and take the one-time hit. One of UA's excuses has been selling too many seats too early. Far better to have a 777 or 330 size shell that you can price up versus having to worry about filling it up at a discount.

 

[WorldTraveler]

the real reason why DL can make them work is because DL's NRT hub still works due to its presence in the local market. DL sees the margins going down and wants the 744s out because they can't support the margins DL needs to maintain its financial results.

UA's network is already focused almost entirely on US - to non-hub Asia routes which means they have to put their 744s into markets where they also have multiple frequencies from the US.

Given that UA's RASM is underperforming the industry, the best strategy is to get the 744s out.

I'd give both DL and UA's 744s 3 years max - which is also part of the reason for pushing for a new widebody solution that is available early rather than later.

 

[700UW]

The 744 is returning to DTW, that is where they will be flying in and out of.

 

[WorldTraveler]

for now, yes.

it will be used now to reinforce DL's position at DTW as the largest gateway to Asia outside of the west coast.

In time, I am certain that DL would prefer to have smaller planes at DTW and open more flights from other eastern US gateways, including JFK and ATL. DL has said they still want to add more ATL-Asia flying.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

for now, yes.

it will be used now to reinforce DL's position at DTW as the largest gateway to Asia outside of the west coast.

In time, I am certain that DL would prefer to have smaller planes at DTW and open more flights from other eastern US gateways, including JFK and ATL. DL has said they still want to add more ATL-Asia flying.

 
This may be slightly off topic, but here is goes:  I was under the impression that flying the 744s across the Pacific is the region to utilize the aircraft because the demand, especially to China is so strong.  So how come UA and DL are having trouble?  Is it just the high cost of operating a somewhat dated aircraft (compared to the B777 for example)?
 
Also, if the 744s are too expensive to operate across the Pacific, would DL consider to  bring them back to fly across the Atlantic to AF/KL hubs?  IIRC, back in the day when it was just NW-KL, the 744s were common on routes like DTW-AMS.  Is there actually a EU destination that sees DL 744's on a regular basis?  (I don't count TLV as a part of EU, for me EU ends at Turkey.......)

 

[WorldTraveler]

the reason for the lack of interest in the 744 is the same as what happened on the Atlantic several decades ago when it got replaced by smaller twins.

At one time, traffic flowed from a few hubs in the US to a few hubs in Europe. With the arrival of the 767, it became possible for carriers to open multiple gateways in the US to places in Europe that had little if any nonstop service - routes such as ATL to Stuttgart.

NRT existed as a hub because the Pacific was concentrated in the hands of DL and UA from the US carrier perspective.

NW had little choice but to continue to rely on NRT because it didn't have the presence outside of the Midwest to have service to most of Asia - and there were few planes that could fly to multiple points in Asia from the Midwest.

NW was counting on the 787 but it was delayed and then they got bought by DL who built up DTW to Asia using the 77, the first non-747 that could really develop Asia.

UA has been flying the Pacific extensively as a result of the Pan Am acquisition and focused first on developing SFO to Asia and later ORD. Other gateways such as EWR came with the CO acquisition.

UA has been able to diversify away from NRT because of its stronger west coast presence and its ability to use 744s on routes into China and HKG based on the amount of demand.

As the Pacific continues to develop and historical strengths become less important, including AA's push into the region and the strength of foreign carriers outside of Japan, DL and UA have to shift their networks to smaller, more efficient aircraft and serve as many cities as possible from their strongest hubs in the US and not just the west coast or NRT.

The US carriers compete successfully to Europe based on using multiple US hubs and by serving smaller points in Europe which Euro carriers cannot serve as well because they don't have access to the strong hubs in the US - except as part of joint ventures.

The 787 and 350 will further fragment the Pacific and allow long, thin routes from many hubs.

DL is using current generation 767s and 330s to get what it can with minimal aircraft investment, similar to what CO and TW did with the 757s from NYC to Europe.

The 744s are just too big to compete in a fragmenting market.

As to uses on the Atlantic, it is possible. DL runs multiple 333s or 777s (just under 300 seats) from DTW to AMS so the 744 is not a big step up in capacity.

DL also tried to bring the 744 to GRU but the Brazilian aviation authority did not want any more large aircraft until the newest terminal is open and some carriers change terminals.

DL since has received a 2nd ATL-GRU flight so I'm not sure the 744 will come to GRU even though multiple airlines have moved or will move out of the current terminals to the new terminal.

frequency counts as much or more than adding bigger aircraft from the perspective of US carriers.

Foreign carriers have one or two major hubs at most. US carriers have multiple hubs. They get higher revenues by having multiple smaller flights per day from multiple hubs than Euro carriers get with one or two 744s or A380s from many foreign cities to their hubs.

 

[737823]

So the final 744 is operating in a few days. Safe to say the 744 won't be returning before they are retired. Is DL planning to add a second frequency or re-open ATL? Seems TLV works well for DL it's unfortunate they are walking away from a good portion of the market and leaving BE with an inferior seat and overall experience.

Josh

 

[WorldTraveler]

DL noted that some of the weaker markets in the most recent quarter were Moscow (because of conflicts in the Ukraine), TLV, and west Africa.

so, no, a 2nd frequency is not likely.

We have yet to see the schedules for the new 333s but it would not be surprising if DL puts a 333 on the route if DL believes the same plane can make JFK-NRT.

the capacity between the 777 and the 333 is very similar.

 

[737823]

I thought the new 333s were meant for growth. At any rate it's too bad DL is pulling capacity especially for such an important route from JFK. The DL product on the 744 UD was the best direct US-TLV but at this point either AC or LX/LY are better options and cheaper.

Josh

 

[WorldTraveler]

DL said overall its plans for 2015 are basically flat int'l capacity.

UA also noted capacity pressure on the Pacific. DL and UA appear comfortable enough with their networks that they don't need to throw a bunch of capacity that can't be profitable.

If DL is cutting capacity, obviously they intend to get rid of the lowest yielding passengers and retain those who pay higher fares.

Given DL's revenue premium to the industry, they should do just fine with 90 less seats per flight.