New PHL-China Route

[LTOSlave]

Now that Delta has moved from Terminal A East in PHL when does the flights to China start. Remember they said that if Delta moved to Terminal A that we would not be able to fly to China. So now they are gone

 

[700UW]

They killed the China route several months ago.

 

[PHL]

Delta in terminal A was never cited as the reason for not going to China. It was the economy (and, more likely, lack of ability to obtain an appropriate aircraft).

 

[nycbusdriver]

I think Parker did use that "no China flight" as an idle threat to the City Of Philadelphia. Little did Philly know that Parker hadn't done his homework and there never would be a China flight from Philadelphia (unless, of course, an airline with the proper airplane to do it steps up.)

 

[BuffaloJoe]

Maybe now they could use that 757 from PHL-ANC to continue on to Beijing! lol

 

[HP2USFA]

LOL!!! That's hilarious! 🙂 I'm sure we'll see that now!

 

[NAPAUS]

Dont give the BUFFOONS in Tempe any ideas

 

[LTOSlave]

Delta in terminal A was never cited as the reason for not going to China. It was the economy (and, more likely, lack of ability to obtain an appropriate aircraft).

Winging It
The frustrations and joys of travel in and out of Philadelphia« US Airways: China service in jeopardy over gates | Main | Southwest will add three new PHL routes next year »

Anger over US Airways' China route threat
We had a busy day yesterday. In addition to a story about new Southwest service at PHL, we teamed up with Inquirer Washington correspondent Steve Goldstein for an update on the continuing saga over how to use PHL gates and US Airways' vow to give up plans for a China route if Delta moves to Terminal A-East. A furious Sen. Arlen Specter gave US Airways CEO Doug Parker a piece of his mind about the airline's threat.

Posted by Tom Belden on November 8, 2007 10:19 AM | Permalink

 

[FWAAA]

LTOSlave, just because Drunken Parker the Liar said it doesn't make it fact. Parker could have blamed AA's MD-80 fiasco or the plot of the Simpsons that week and they wouldn't have been any further from the truth as the Delta move to Terminal A.

When Parker said what you quoted, most of us were convinced that Parker had no real plans to initiate service to China. There were multiple threads discussing the very small chance that US would start service to China.

Parker the Liar simply wanted to make an outrageous point - that US was somehow entitled to all of Terminal A to the exclusion of all other airlines and he threatened to cancel the China flight if he didn't get his way. Even if Delta had not moved into Terminal A, the US China flight would never have happened.

No capable airplane on the property and none expected (A350) until 2017 or so.

 

[IronWalt]

Parker the Liar simply wanted to make an outrageous point - that US was somehow entitled to all of Terminal A to the exclusion of all other airlines and he threatened to cancel the China flight if he didn't get his way. Even if Delta had not moved into Terminal A, the US China flight would never have happened.

And you are upset for what reason???

1. Because he is using deceptive tactics to defend our MONEY MAKING HUB in PHL and trying to dominate an international terminal that WE FINANCED AND BUILT?

or

2. Because he is conserving cash in a tight economy and tight finance market by not buying expensive aircraft to do another international route that you can bid for, work six or nine days a month on and get the rest of the month off??

If it is number two then I agree with you!!!! Lets take 750 Million that we don't have, go buy some Boeing 777's, place them in service, run them for a year, and run out of money at the next financial or world crisis and go out of business. Just so we can make you happy.

 

[zethya]

And you are upset for what reason???

1. Because he is using deceptive tactics to defend our MONEY MAKING HUB in PHL and trying to dominate an international terminal that WE FINANCED AND BUILT?..........

Although I do agree with your comments, it should be noted that the DL fiasco was associated with Terminal A-East. US funded A-West, not A-East.

 

[PHL]

And you are upset for what reason???

1. Because he is using deceptive tactics to defend our MONEY MAKING HUB in PHL and trying to dominate an international terminal that WE FINANCED AND BUILT?

or

2. Because he is conserving cash in a tight economy and tight finance market by not buying expensive aircraft to do another international route that you can bid for, work six or nine days a month on and get the rest of the month off??

If it is number two then I agree with you!!!! Lets take 750 Million that we don't have, go buy some Boeing 777's, place them in service, run them for a year, and run out of money at the next financial or world crisis and go out of business. Just so we can make you happy.

#1 is false. US did not finance and build the terminal (A-West). The city of Philadelphia built it and it serves more than just USAirways. Did US contribute to this? Likely. Did they finance and build it? Unlikely. LH, BA and Frontier also use it, although to a lesser extent.

#2 is irrelevant. If that were the case, then Dougie shouldn't have announced it a year prior to that whole conflict about DL, gates, etc. When they dropped it, the reason cited was the softened economy in the year after the launch announcement. What Dougie never publicly admitted was that they couldn't even get their hands on some A340's, which were specified in the DOT application. The whole thing was smoke and mirrors and just speaks volumes about the credibility of those jokers in Tempe.

 

[BoeingBoy]

#1 is false. US did not finance and build the terminal (A-West). The city of Philadelphia built it and it serves more than just USAirways. Did US contribute to this? Likely. Did they finance and build it? Unlikely. LH, BA and Frontier also use it, although to a lesser extent.

US, like the other airlines that use A-West, finance it by way of gate leases. I've forgotten the exact number but US leases a little less than half the gates on A-West so provides something under half the money to repay the bonds that were issued to finance that concourse. As I recall, US is the only "sole leasor" of A-West gates so pays less per gate, meaning US pays an even smaller portion of the financing.

Jim

 

[Travel Is My Life]

LTOSlave, just because Drunken Parker the Liar said it doesn't make it fact.

Like the man or not, but seriously the DUI thing is old news. Why do some people insist on continuing to bring it up... It doesnt make your argument any stronger.

 

[zethya]

As I recall, US Air and the city of Philadelphia JOINTLY designed AND funded the construction of A-West. Further, US MANAGED the construction process - not the city. US paid roughly $250M of the $550M cost - up front and there was no Bond involvement other than with the city's portion. If anyone can prove me incorrect, I'd appreciate the reference/link (hint: 8K/Bankruptcy Filings 1999-2003 and other historical relevant links). Sorry if this is off topic, but one has to attempt to set the record straight - assuming I am correct.