DL to start LAX-LHR, VS to start ATL-LHR

[WorldTraveler]

looks like DL's desire to build out LAX gets a big step forward with the addition of one flight on its own (small) metal while VS will start ATL service.

DL will start LAX LHR with a 763 while VS will bring a 333 to ATL.

http://www.businesstraveller.com/news/100533/delta-and-virgin-to-transfer-transatlantic-flights

DL will operate its own metal from BOS, JFK, ATL, DTW, MSP, SEA, and LAX to LHR - a pretty big jump from just a few years ago.

 

[700UW]

What about the ORD flight?

 

[WorldTraveler]

it is obvious that the aircraft that was going to fly ORD-LHR ended up in a market with much greater potential for DL.

I believe I also said that one of DL's real goals would be LAX-LHR.

It isn't clear that this is a long-term change but I doubt that DL will start LAX-LHR and then stop flying it when summer arrives. The ORD route was an additional DL flight only in the winter.


AA, DL, and UA will each operate LAX-LHR, one of the few int'l routes served by all 3 large US carriers and it also makes AA, DL, and UA each 4 continent airlines from LAX.

The LAX-LHR aircraft is clearly rotating from something on the east coast.

This will be one of the longest TATL flights by DL which should make the pilots happy.

Meanwhile, Virgin's stature in DL's network will be greatly enhanced by flying to ATL.

 

[yoyodyne]

What about the ORD flight?

What about PIT...

 

[WorldTraveler]

you mean that former US hub where DL now provides the int'l service?

 

[700UW]

What about DFW, MCO, CVG and MEM?

 

[WorldTraveler]

is that all you can do?

how about SJC, STL, BNA, RDU, BWI, PIT....

DL is starting LAX-LHR which will be the only LHR route that all 3 US megacarriers will operate simultaneously.

It will be very interesting to see how DL fares relative to AA and UA.

I fully expect that DL won't have anywhere near the average fare discrepancy to LHR that DL's competitors have compared to DL across the Pacific.

 

[eolesen]

UA's the potential loser here, but it's interesting that VS is taking its brand away from LAX.

Is parking their A346 fleet leaving a hole they can't fill? From a branding standpoint, it's odd that they'd swap out in places where the other guy has the stronger brand influence.

It's also going to be interesting to see how VX travelers react... They were able to get Elevate credit on VS, but presumably won't on DL metal.

 

[WorldTraveler]

VS will still operate one flight. DL and VS will each serve the market.

and yes this is yet another indication that DL is looking for advantages relative to UA on the west coast.

AA might not lose as much but the mere fact that DL is serving a route that AA has long served eliminates one of the advantages that AA has had in LAX - and LHR is a very big and significant market.

Add in BOS and the north-south buildup from LAX and DL isn't near as far strategically behind in LAX as some would like to believe. Smaller than AA by about 10%, yes. In terms of extent of global coverage and market presence, not near as much.

 

[robbedagain]

BA does just fine with a 763 from BWI    its rather amazing VS is moving from LAX to ATL and DL doing LAX to LHR 

 

[WorldTraveler]

correct, sir.

The 767 has been DL's aircraft of choice to LHR since it began service there.

Some are 764s and some are 763s but the cabin is essentially the same.

Evidence is strong that DL's product is strong enough to compete including the fact that DL is now the only US carrier operating its own metal from BOS to LHR and that DL's average fare from JFK to LHR is now within a few percent of AA's.

UA and DL's direct competition to LHR and along the west coast increases with this move.

The 767 seat is not as spacious as what other carriers have on their larger widebodies but there are a whole lot less seats to fill on the aircraft as a whole. Given that Virgin hasn't consistently operated a 2nd daily flight for much of the year, this is an increased presence in the market for the DL-VS JV.

Also, by virtue of operating from the DL terminal, there will be connections that are available precisely because it is a same terminal operation than if it involved a terminal change and simply DL's code on Virgin's flight.

here's the press release

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/delta-virgin-atlantic-unveil-schedule-172200057.html

 

[737823]

WT why doesn't DL send the 332/333 to LHR as they offer a far superior product to the 764 with similar capacity. LHR is a very competitive market and while it may not be the most optimal use of the aircraft it could lead to stronger fares and revenue perfromance.
 
Josh

 

[WorldTraveler]

when DL started LHR, the 330s had the old cradle business seat while the 764s were the first of DL's aircraft to get a lie flat BE product. The 330s also have a lower percentage of business class seats than the 767s do. The 330 BE seat is closer to the 777 seat than it is to the 767 seat.

I suspect in time the 330s will see action at LHR.

the 767 is way too small for the market in the summer.

LAX-LHR is a long flight for a 767 or the current 333s even in the summer.

 

[eolesen]

I see no impact on AA/BA. They've got the premium product necessary now that they've put the 773 and A380 into the LAX-LHR market.

UA is the one at risk. Their product doesn't come close right now. They'd be better off dropping the market and codesharing on NZ's daily LAX-LHR service. People I know who are Star beholden already pick NZ over UA on that route.

 

[yoyodyne]

WT why doesn't DL send the 332/333 to LHR as they offer a far superior product to the 764 with similar capacity. LHR is a very competitive market and while it may not be the most optimal use of the aircraft it could lead to stronger fares and revenue perfromance.
 
Josh

 
 
Because AIRBUS...