DL requests authority to begin LAX-PVG service

Status
Not open for further replies.

WorldTraveler

Corn Field
Dec 5, 2003
21,709
10,721
to begin daily service July 9, 2015 on a 777LR. TYO and PVG service from both LAX and SEA.

apparently DL doesn't think they are out of space to grow LAX either.

I am sure this is not related to AA's desire to gain LAX-HND service.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
WorldTraveler said:
to begin daily service July 9, 2015 on a 777LR. TYO and PVG service from both LAX and SEA.

apparently DL doesn't think they are out of space to grow LAX either.

I am sure this is not related to AA's desire to gain LAX-HND service.
has more, much more, to do with just how well PVG is doing for Delta. Everyone route they have started, other than ATL, has been a homerun. SEA-PVG was in the black right out of the gate and quickly went from 767 to 330. DTW is on the 747. 
 
MU is a key piece to that. 
 
having said that I thought they would add LAX-PEK first. 
 
Oh and it sounds like MSP-PVG will be next. (was being looked at for now, but the fleet didn't have the slack.) 
 
topDawg said:
 
Oh and it sounds like MSP-PVG will be next. (was being looked at for now, but the fleet didn't have the slack.)
I would have thought JFK-PVG before LAX, less US carrier competition.
 
BABABOOY said:
I would have thought JFK-PVG before LAX, less US carrier competition.
Long flight, more risk and ties up more airplanes. 
 
ATL/JFK China will come (again) but not till Delta gets more long haul jets. LAX-PEK/HKG, MSP-PVG and DTW-HKG would all the routes I put money on for being next. 
 
Yeah, nothing retaliatory there.

I'm sure DL will manage to pull premium traffic away from MU -- they're not exactly a carrier I ever felt safe flying (not to mention their levels of onboard service made Iberia look good), but I'm sure MU won't go down without undercutting DL to keep their share of the Skyteam traffic (shades of KE, eh?).

Certainly, there are cities with a better pattern of service to LAX than to SEA, but hopefully DL is smart enough to leave those infographics out of their request.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
eolesen said:
Yeah, nothing retaliatory there.

I'm sure DL will manage to pull premium traffic away from MU -- they're not exactly a carrier I ever felt safe flying (not to mention their levels of onboard service made Iberia look good), but I'm sure MU won't go down without undercutting DL to keep their share of the Skyteam traffic (shades of KE, eh?).

Certainly, there are cities with a better pattern of service to LAX than to SEA, but hopefully DL is smart enough to leave those infographics out of their request.
why add the route when it.....and all of China....is a big big big black hole for money for the boys in Dallas. 
 
So many other routes they could add that make more sense....... 
 
As it is, its a hub to hub route for Delta. I don't think they will be the ones struggling here. 
 
I agree that PVG is a great fit . I always wondered why DL didn't utilize PVG more when DL is the only airline that has a partnership with the two PVG airlines. Totally agree that JFK- PVG would be last place for DL to look at. JFK - Hong Kong would be my choice. By the way the last letter from Steve Dixon stated that DL next move was to strengthen the SEA -HND route not give it up.
 
dawg and meto,
you are absolutely right.

the point is that DL will show AA how vulnerable they are in the Pacific.

DL could easily have jumped into LAX to China earlier but was content to let AA and UA battle it out.

DL has a stronger alliance presence and help AA realize that if they want to move into key DL markets just as LAX-Tokyo, DL can do the same thing on AA's network.

I've only said it for years

it just happens that PVG does do very well for DL.

and yes DL will fight hard to hold onto SEA-HND.
 
Yeah, nothing retaliatory there.
Lol.

No... Nothing at all...
 

I agree that PVG is a great fit .
Agreed, though on a personal note, I 'm curious how it's going to work logistically (gate space, manpower, etc.).

Note: Before the usual pedantic BS from others starts flowing, I'm just mentioning it because those logisitcs pieces are part of our operation that interest me the most.

At any rate, on another site, Commavia opined that AA is at last in a position where they can act/react aggressively to these sorts of moves. I happen to agree with that, and it will be interesting to see what happens here.

 
 
 
By the way the last letter from Steve Dixon stated that DL next move was to strengthen the SEA -HND route not give it up.
I get it, but at the same time don't get it.
 
why is it though when AA or any other airline would start that service with a 777 that is bad  the plane is too heavy  yet that mighty ole Widget wants to start that run with the same type plane its ok..   
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
robbedagain said:
why is it though when AA or any other airline would start that service with a 777 that is bad  the plane is too heavy  yet that mighty ole Widget wants to start that run with the same type plane its ok..
Not only that but DL is using the -200LR which is meant for ultra long flying routes in DLs network like ATL-DXB/JNB and LAX-SYD. My guess it they are using the 777 because of aircraft staging, the 777 cycles through to NRT and SYD (and sometimes ATL) so possibly with minor adjustments they can free up aircraft time for this new flying.

But I agree 77L is ambitious surprised they didn't give it a go with the 332 or 763 initially. But then again maybe DL knows this market needs volume and is okay dumping capacity for trash yields.

Josh
 
metopower said:
I agree that PVG is a great fit . I always wondered why DL didn't utilize PVG more when DL is the only airline that has a partnership with the two PVG airlines. Totally agree that JFK- PVG would be last place for DL to look at. JFK - Hong Kong would be my choice. By the way the last letter from Steve Dixon stated that DL next move was to strengthen the SEA -HND route not give it up.
Not to long ago DL/MU/CZ came out and said they would be focusing more on PEK. That is why i thought LAX-PEK would happen. (CZ/MU can't fly the route) 
 
WorldTraveler said:
dawg and meto,
you are absolutely right.

the point is that DL will show AA how vulnerable they are in the Pacific.

DL could easily have jumped into LAX to China earlier but was content to let AA and UA battle it out.

DL has a stronger alliance presence and help AA realize that if they want to move into key DL markets just as LAX-Tokyo, DL can do the same thing on AA's network.

I've only said it for years

it just happens that PVG does do very well for DL.

and yes DL will fight hard to hold onto SEA-HND.
Well You also have to remember when AA/UA start LAX-China Delta hadn't finished building SEA to China. 
 
One city at a time kids. Four corners etc. 
 
 
Oh and idk what Delta is talking about HND. That sucker is gone. 
 
Kev3188 said:
Lol.

No... Nothing at all...
 


Agreed, though on a personal note, I 'm curious how it's going to work logistically (gate space, manpower, etc.).

Note: Before the usual pedantic BS from others starts flowing, I'm just mentioning it because those logisitcs pieces are part of our operation that interest me the most.

At any rate, on another site, Commavia opined that AA is at last in a position where they can act/react aggressively to these sorts of moves. I happen to agree with that, and it will be interesting to see what happens here.

 
 
 


I get it, but at the same time don't get it.
I am curious to see how this plays out. LAX-DTW/MSP maybe....? 
 
I think AA and DL are both in the spot where they can have these...... fights(?) with each other. 
 
United is the one who is going to be hurting (on the overall scale. On the LAX-PVG scale United is the network leader for sure. They have tight control over the corporate market in LA to China)
 
robbedagain said:
why is it though when AA or any other airline would start that service with a 777 that is bad  the plane is too heavy  yet that mighty ole Widget wants to start that run with the same type plane its ok..   
well not to stick up for WT here but AA's 777 being much less dense and having F is hurting them badly. I fully expect they will go 787 aspa. (right after ORD-China though) 
 
Or maybe a 37J 777 once they start showing up. 
 
737823 said:
Not only that but DL is using the -200LR which is meant for ultra long flying routes in DLs network like ATL-DXB/JNB and LAX-SYD. My guess it they are using the 777 because of aircraft staging, the 777 cycles through to NRT and SYD (and sometimes ATL) so possibly with minor adjustments they can free up aircraft time for this new flying.

But I agree 77L is ambitious surprised they didn't give it a go with the 332 or 763 initially. But then again maybe DL knows this market needs volume and is okay dumping capacity for trash yields.

Josh
the LR is more efficient than the ER on routes 4000 or 5000nm FWIW. at 6500nms LAX-PVG falls into that bucket. 
 
but also because its to long for the 767 and they don't have the capacity in the 332 fleet. (also kind of long for a 332) 
 
Fair enough just seems like a lot of capacity in the market. AA doesnt yet have 37J 772s, the two configurations are 16F/37J/194Y and 45J/45W/170Y. A smaller J-cabin 2-class bird is planned but it will not be 37J per the latest. They are still reevaluating those plans. I agree 53 premium seats is too much to PVG/PEK, it's a non-rev easy street to FC.

Josh
 
If DL had 359s, it would undoubtedly use them but DL is not going to sit around and wait for a new airplane

The 77L has enormous cargo capacity. China is a huge cargo market. I'm not sure what the 77L will do that the 777ER couldn't do but the chances are indeed fairly high that DL will reduce the number of 77L flights that operate between ATL and LAX in order to use some of that airplane time operating to PVG.

As for your question about logistics, Kev, the PVG flights will operate during relatively off-peak periods at LAX. The afternoons are slower and that works fine given that the flight will be focused on west coast connections.
As for AA's ability to fight back, there isn't much they can do if DL succeeds at winning key clients and in offering a service that the market perceives to be at least equal to what AA or UA offers. And before someone spouts off about the first class that they have, I have YET to see any evidence that first class on AA or UA delivers revenue premiums on routes that are directly competitive with DL using 2 class aircraft. The perfect example would be LAX-NRT which all 3 airlines serve but in which DL gets a revenue premium.

finally, AA can have all the gates it wants but DL, as I have said before, will be fighting an uphill battle to establish itself in the west coast to Asia market. UA jumped in with AA's LAX-PVG route and DL is now undoubtedly happy to put even more pressure on AA's position as the weakest carrier across the Pacific.

I'm also not convinced the SEA-HND route is a goner yet - but even if it is, I can just about guarantee you that DL will upgrade LAX-HND to a 330. DL is not going to allow a new competitor into the market without doing as much to welcome them as AA did when DL tried to start JFK-EZE.
 
WorldTraveler said:
If DL had 359s, it would undoubtedly use them but DL is not going to sit around and wait for a new airplane
Probably not. Same size plane and would be the one off route. (ill touch more on this below) 
 
WorldTraveler said:
The 77L has enormous cargo capacity. China is a huge cargo market. I'm not sure what the 77L will do that the 777ER couldn't do but the chances are indeed fairly high that DL will reduce the number of 77L flights that operate between ATL and LAX in order to use some of that airplane time operating to PVG.
Its not so much what the LR will do as much as it is that the LR is just a more efficient of an airplane. It can carry more and at a greater distance but if you put a ER and an LR on the same route and same weights as long as it is over 5000nm the LR is going to post better numbers. Boeing made many improvements to the airframe when they basically NGed the 777 for the F 200LR and 300ER. 
 
WorldTraveler said:
As for your question about logistics, Kev, the PVG flights will operate during relatively off-peak periods at LAX. The afternoons are slower and that works fine given that the flight will be focused on west coast connections.
As for AA's ability to fight back, there isn't much they can do if DL succeeds at winning key clients and in offering a service that the market perceives to be at least equal to what AA or UA offers.
The thing is, as it is right now the planes will be able to do LAX-NRT-LAX-PVG-LAX-SYD-LAX-NRT. 
So basically Delta, the way things are right now will be able to add LAX-PVG and only need one extra airframe. 
 
Now as to why it wouldn't go A350, in my opinion. With this flight Delta now has 3 777 flights. That is enough to justify a pilot base. I fully expect to see NRT/SYD/PVG stay on the 777 for a while.  
 
WorldTraveler said:
And before someone spouts off about the first class that they have, I have YET to see any evidence that first class on AA or UA delivers revenue premiums on routes that are directly competitive with DL using 2 class aircraft. The perfect example would be LAX-NRT which all 3 airlines serve but in which DL gets a revenue premium.
AA will be pulling F from this route soon and UA uses a 787 with is J only. (though I think it is going 789 which is nearly 50 J) 
 
WorldTraveler said:
finally, AA can have all the gates it wants but DL, as I have said before, will be fighting an uphill battle to establish itself in the west coast to Asia market. UA jumped in with AA's LAX-PVG route and DL is now undoubtedly happy to put even more pressure on AA's position as the weakest carrier across the Pacific.
With in reason I agree
 
WorldTraveler said:
I'm also not convinced the SEA-HND route is a goner yet - but even if it is, I can just about guarantee you that DL will upgrade LAX-HND to a 330. DL is not going to allow a new competitor into the market without doing as much to welcome them as AA did when DL tried to start JFK-EZE.
 LAX-HND isn't going 330. 
 
737823 said:
Fair enough just seems like a lot of capacity in the market. AA doesnt yet have 37J 772s, the two configurations are 16F/37J/194Y and 45J/45W/170Y. A smaller J-cabin 2-class bird is planned but it will not be 37J per the latest. They are still reevaluating those plans. I agree 53 premium seats is too much to PVG/PEK, it's a non-rev easy street to FC.

Josh
Pretty sure its 30 something J
 
Status
Not open for further replies.