DL to suspend SEA-HND Flights

[robbedagain]

Dawg I did not know PA had a hub in MIA I knew Eastern had one there n in ATL

 

[WorldTraveler]

Pan Am's headquarters after the TATL asset sale was MIA. EA's HDQ was also MIA.

 

[eolesen]

DL can "win" the "we bought the most employees" award hands down. It's a dubious award, but have at it.

When AA bought the EA LatAm routes, they didn't take on any airplanes. Likewise with the LHR routes from TW.

Therefore, they had no immediate need to take on employees. Out of respect for the politics involved, they offered employment to over 1,000 EA employees outside the US.

Both UA and DL chose to do multiple deals which required transferring airplanes and crews, and both wound up dumping those airplanes.

Yes, PA did have a hub in MIA before the DL debacle -- in 1985, they were already operating dailies to POS-BGI-CCS-FPT-GUA-MAR-MEX-SXM-STT-GIG and weekly frequencies to EZE and SCL. By 1990, that had grown to include PTY, SAP, SAL, MGA, SJO, MBJ, KIN, GCM, PLS, SDQ, PUJ, SJU and NAS. Domestically in 1990, they had MIA-LAX/DFW/IAH in addition to JFK.

 

[topDawg]

Dawg I did not know PA had a hub in MIA I knew Eastern had one there n in ATL

Yep. United got it. The plan was for Delta to end up with it, but Ron Allen over paid for the Europe network. Then, because of Delta's lack of name in Europe, the network started quickly bleeding cash.
 
which is also the reason Delta backed out of its other agreements with PA. 
 

DL can "win" the "we bought the most employees" award hands down. It's a dubious award, but have at it.

When AA bought the EA LatAm routes, they didn't take on any airplanes. Likewise with the LHR routes from TW.

Therefore, they had no immediate need to take on employees. Out of respect for the politics involved, they offered employment to over 1,000 EA employees outside the US.

Both UA and DL chose to do multiple deals which required transferring airplanes and crews, and both wound up dumping those airplanes.

Yes, PA did have a hub in MIA before the DL debacle -- in 1985, they were already operating dailies to POS-BGI-CCS-FPT-GUA-MAR-MEX-SXM-STT-GIG and weekly frequencies to EZE and SCL. By 1990, that had grown to include PTY, SAP, SAL, MGA, SJO, MBJ, KIN, GCM, PLS, SDQ, PUJ, SJU and NAS. Domestically in 1990, they had MIA-LAX/DFW/IAH in addition to JFK.

Delta only dumped the planes because the A310s were complete crap. 
like basically everything equipment wise from PA. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

and the 310s that Airbus built for DL as replacements still couldn't fly the Atlantic.

The employees that DL hired were retained.

 

[topDawg]

and the 310s that Airbus built for DL as replacements still couldn't fly the Atlantic.

The employees that DL hired were retained.

they weren't "replacements" 
Delta ordered the 310s that they did to add to the fleet. 
 
however once they saw that 1) the PA stuff was crap 2) the TATL market without the PA name was a complete money pit and most importantly 3) the 767-300ER was a much better airplane then they quickly moved to dump the 310s and go with a 767 TATL fleet.
 
Having said that, the A310 could fly the Atlantic from NYC easy. Delta had the L15s and M11s to fly the FRA stuff that wasn't in range of the 310.  

 

[WorldTraveler]

yes, the 310s DL bought were to retire the Pan Am delivered 310s which were rustbuckets.

and no, the 310s could not even fly NYC-Europe easily ... or correctly they could not get back.... from much more than Ireland and the UK unless the wind was favorable.

The L10s and M11s were considerably larger aircraft and were not used for the same types of markets. The 310s were used for continental Europe, largely outside of FRA.

and DL had routes out of CVG and DTW including to LGW that the 310 could not make.

and the 310 still was an Airbus version of a 762 but without the range. If DL wanted a plane that small, they would have bought the 762ER.... DL already had the 762 instead they bought the 763 and it is one of the most versatile aircraft in the world. Not many aircraft work well on domestic routes and can also fly the Pacific and most of DL's int'l network and make money doing it all.

 

[robbedagain]

dawg  what was the capacity of the 310 and the  md 11 as well as the L15s

 

[WorldTraveler]

dawg can jump in if he can remember but the 310s had about 180 seats.

The L15s were in the 225 to 240 range, the L1011-250s were about 250 seats, and the MD-11s were slightly larger.

The 310s and L12s never flew the Pacific, which is the discussion of this thread. The L15 was DL's first aircraft operating the first route to NRT from ATL via PDX. The M11s were originally used from LAX and then later PDX.

I don't think the M11 was ever used from NYC to Europe but was used from JFK to the Middle East on 9/10/01 and the final trip back to the US might have been the end of their life across the Atlantic or close to it.
The M11 had already proven it couldn't do most of the flying across the Pacific which the 777 now easily does.

 

[robbedagain]

I had always heard the MD11 was not that effective of an aircraft  But for quite a while World Air operated them  even based 2 or 3 of them at BWI for MAC flights..  now its Omini with 2 777s both 2 and 3 models and a 763    The question regarding the MD11 is  what made it not as good of an airplane

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

and no, the 310s could not even fly NYC-Europe easily ... or correctly they could not get back.... from much more than Ireland and the UK unless the wind was favorable.

Did AF or LH ever operate their A310s across the Atlantic? Were they restricted as well?

 

[WorldTraveler]

I had always heard the MD11 was not that effective of an aircraft  But for quite a while World Air operated them  even based 2 or 3 of them at BWI for MAC flights..  now its Omini with 2 777s both 2 and 3 models and a 763    The question regarding the MD11 is  what made it not as good of an airplane

 
I'll defer to dawg - and I hope he will respond - but the M11 was heavy and the wing had not been reengineered from the D10.

Unfortunately, McD D ran out of financing to keep improving its aircraft.

being competitive from an engineering perspective is far more important on longhaul widebody aircraft than on short haul domestic aircraft which is why the M90 still has life (at least for DL) but there is no room for operating an inferior aircraft from an engineering and performance standpoint.

BTW, Richard Anderson made a comment in MSP recently that indicated that DL is leaning towards at least one of the new generation widebodies (A350 or 787) which could be used to expand MSP to Asia service.

I've always thought that DL needed to develop MSP to Asia; there is a strong auto industry in DTW but MSP has a lot of high value global business and MSP is of course an outstanding hub.

Having Pacific operations as well as hubs on both sides of ORD would mirror the success DL has from the Midwest as whole right now, including to Europe.
 

Did AF or LH ever operate their A310s across the Atlantic? Were they restricted as well?

not that I know of, Frugal.

 

[eolesen]

Did AF or LH ever operate their A310s across the Atlantic? Were they restricted as well?

No shortage of 310's back then (aside from the fact that there weren't too many airlines operating them).

AF flew the 310's into JFK and ORD back in the 90's. LH flew them into JFK, ORD, PHL and YMX.

TP, OK & SN also operated out of YUL/YMX/BOS to LIS/PRG/BRU.

Clearly a short range mission. Not much over 4500 miles, and that was back in the day of much lower cabin densities.

 

[topDawg]

yes, the 310s DL bought were to retire the Pan Am delivered 310s which were rustbuckets.

No the original plan was for the 45 aircraft, 21 from PA the rest new from AB, to all operate the Euro network.
 
Once Delta got the 310s they realized that 1) the airplane was crap 2) the PA airplanes were really crap.  
So Delta took the fresh 310s from AB and parked the PA 310s. Then as they got enough 763s to dump the 310 all together they did.
 
Delta din't plan on dumping any 310-300s. They might have parked the 7 310-200s from PA but the majority of the order was to grow the network. 

and no, the 310s could not even fly NYC-Europe easily ... or correctly they could not get back.... from much more than Ireland and the UK unless the wind was favorable.

OALs did it for years. 
The -200 had issues, the -300 didn't. The 763ER has all of 600nm of range over the 310-300. that is an issue for LAX-FRA but not for JFK-FRA. 

The L10s and M11s were considerably larger aircraft and were not used for the same types of markets. The 310s were used for continental Europe, largely outside of FRA.

The 310s were used on both. 
but yes the M11 (and later 777) did routes like CVG-LGW for example. 
 

and DL had routes out of CVG and DTW including to LGW that the 310 could not make.

at ~3000nm the A310-300 would have 2000nms of range to spare. 

and the 310 still was an Airbus version of a 762 but without the range. If DL wanted a plane that small, they would have bought the 762ER.... DL already had the 762 instead they bought the 763 and it is one of the most versatile aircraft in the world. Not many aircraft work well on domestic routes and can also fly the Pacific and most of DL's int'l network and make money doing it all.

 The 310-200 was basically the 762. The 300 was like 500nm short of a non-wingleted 763ER. 
 

dawg  what was the capacity of the 310 and the  md 11 as well as the L15s

 I can't remember the 200s but the PA 300s were 10F 26C 138Y. the New 300s were 10F/28C/134Y
the M11 were C50/Y218
L15s were 12F/40C/189Y
L12s were 12F/54C/203Y
 
I can't remember what the M11 were when they had F class. 

dawg can jump in if he can remember but the 310s had about 180 seats.

The L15s were in the 225 to 240 range, the L1011-250s were about 250 seats, and the MD-11s were slightly larger.

The 310s and L12s never flew the Pacific, which is the discussion of this thread. The L15 was DL's first aircraft operating the first route to NRT from ATL via PDX. The M11s were originally used from LAX and then later PDX.

I don't think the M11 was ever used from NYC to Europe but was used from JFK to the Middle East on 9/10/01 and the final trip back to the US might have been the end of their life across the Atlantic or close to it.
The M11 had already proven it couldn't do most of the flying across the Pacific which the 777 now easily does.

 
 

I had always heard the MD11 was not that effective of an aircraft  But for quite a while World Air operated them  even based 2 or 3 of them at BWI for MAC flights..  now its Omini with 2 777s both 2 and 3 models and a 763    The question regarding the MD11 is  what made it not as good of an airplane

It worked for World because they got them on the cheap and don't need to stretch the legs. ATL-HHN isn't a big deal for the M11. Much cheaper to run the MD11 on flights like that than a brand new 777. 
 

Did AF or LH ever operate their A310s across the Atlantic? Were they restricted as well?

Yes and I don't know. For the most part the A310-300 shouldn't have had issues from CDG/FRA to around the middle of the country. 
 

I'll defer to dawg - and I hope he will respond - but the M11 was heavy and the wing had not been reengineered from the D10.

Unfortunately, McD D ran out of financing to keep improving its aircraft.

being competitive from an engineering perspective is far more important on longhaul widebody aircraft than on short haul domestic aircraft which is why the M90 still has life (at least for DL) but there is no room for operating an inferior aircraft from an engineering and performance standpoint.

BTW, Richard Anderson made a comment in MSP recently that indicated that DL is leaning towards at least one of the new generation widebodies (A350 or 787) which could be used to expand MSP to Asia service.

I've always thought that DL needed to develop MSP to Asia; there is a strong auto industry in DTW but MSP has a lot of high value global business and MSP is of course an outstanding hub.

Having Pacific operations as well as hubs on both sides of ORD would mirror the success DL has from the Midwest as whole right now, including to Europe.
 

not that I know of, Frugal.

MSP won't see anything like what DTW has seen, but MSP-ICN will end up happening. 
 
Maybe MSP-PVG but Delta has bigger fish to fry to China for right now. 
 
The M11 was overweight and never hit the numbers MD promised. However, the only real issue route I remember was LAX-HKG. 
I liked the M11. Weren't terrible to work on(But I never really worked them. I did some drop ins but never did an overhaul) and a nice airplane to fly on. I loved riding up front on ATL-MCO. I miss the MD11 honestly. 
 
but for the most part the 777 just kicked the M11s butt. MD I guess didn't see the 777 coming. Three engines vs two engines, the two engines will win almost every time. Same deal we are seeing with the 747 now. Why pay for 4 engines when the 77W is basically a 744 and does it with two?  
 
Oh and on LAX-HKG. Delta Started the route LAX-ANC-HKG with the L15. A big selling point was that the airplane could do it non-stop. (like the 744 but cheaper and smaller capacity) 
but it couldn't. Delta had to mod two M11s with extra fuel tanks to do the flight. (even with the extra tanks it couldn't always make it HKG) 
I believe Delta said they could get 3 M11s for the price of two 744s.

 

[WorldTraveler]

you might have read the 310-300s stats in some book but I can absolutely assure you that they could not - even the new build versions - make it from many of the Europe cities on which DL used them to JFK, CVG, and DTW in any kind of heavy wind without diversions.  I worked AND rode on enough 310s to know that the 767 is and always will be far superior aircraft than the 310 could ever dream to be.
 
The 330, OTOH, is an outstanding aircraft.  
 
I don't think there is a DL 310-300 that was ever in the air for more than 10 hours.  763ERs regularly go past 12 hours IN THE AIR. 
 
thanks for the seat counts.
 
LAX-HKG was one of DL's bigger mistakes by using an aircraft that couldn't operate the route no matter how cheap it was to acquire.