Delta's Plans for Chicago O'Hare

KTPAFlyer · Fri Feb 17, 2017 3:25 pm

Delta definitely can't dislodge AA or UA, but there is no question that they can build up a hub comparable to the level of AA/UA. Look no further than SEA, people on A.net laughed a couple years ago that DL could ever make a dent in AS, and now they have over a 100 daily flights and plans to match 200. If DL wants to take on AA/UA it can. With DTW and MSP in the catchment region, DL will never endanger their other hubs, but will punch above their weight when it comes to frequency to all 1st and the bigger 2nd tier cities. Delta isn't stupid; if they're going to invest their own money into ORD, you better believe they want to expand. Obviously not to the level of a mega hub, but enough to convince business FF to use DL in the future as a truly competive option to fly to a large number of cities where AA/UA dominate today.

Rajahdhani · Fri Feb 17, 2017 3:26 pm

deltadawg wrote:
All this while expanding SEA and now RDU. Should be fun to watch.

This line read heavily. I agree with your logic through most of the post (the advantages that DL has at ORD to work with, aircraft selection et al), however - the idea that it has so much to do, in such a short time - and you're right - as much as I would love to see ORD grow, I hope that DL does not over-extend itself, and/or lose some focus. That said, the numbers (improvements) in the article impressively demonstrate that they do know how to make it work, and are doing a fine job of it. Quotes from the article fully and flatly demonstrate that DL representatives on the ground are properly focused on growth, and also understranding of their current possibilities (which is manifested here, in the gate space issue). The saving grace is that they are seeing those impressive numbers for that summer; without the use of the CSeries, or the 717 (in as broad a usage as you had envisioned). Here's to hoping that the 2016 data was better (and that the future is bright). A little competition to AA and UA is a good thing, and good for Chicago!

flymco753 · Fri Feb 17, 2017 5:33 pm

I honestly don't see DL expansion happening at ORD as we've seen at RDU or even MCO to an extent. As a poster said above, DL won't put their other hubs in danger, people already drive from Detroit, Indianapolis, and even Minneapolis if they want a good fare, so why put a "focus city" or something of that caliber, smack dab between 2 DL fortress hubs? RDU is an exception because people don't drive from Raleigh to Atlanta or New York to catch a good fare. You may see LAX but that could prompt AA to add DTW-LAX (speculation is if one or the other does, it'll be the same result). I guess you could see SEA (<-ha!) to compete with AS, but again, you're going up against 4 different carriers. MCO, TPA, FLL would get blown away because of how low yields already are. RDU is a possibility, but the point is you'll probably see increased service to destinations already served if not 3 new routes at the most (LAX, SEA. and RDU).

N717TW · Fri Feb 17, 2017 5:48 pm

phluser wrote:
aaflyer777 wrote:
I can definitely see them trying ORD-BOS. ORD is the largest domestic market from BOS and DL seems committed to building its BOS hub/focus city.

BOS-WAS is the largest for BOS, and DL doesn't service any BOS-WAS routes nonstop.

Am I the only one who feels that DL's gates aren't that terrible at ORD? Its not as nice as the C gates or AA's H/K gates but I just flew B6 from ORD last week and it was the first time in L since DL moved...and man it was an '80s flashback.

DL actually has more gates than they are using. They are leasing out several gates to UA, showing that they don't need the space right now. That said they are making small moves to sure up ORD business: besides the LGA "Shuttle" (and I agree that E75s are a better travel experience) they are pushing "all Chicago flights with First Class" in CVG, etc. Their moves at ORD appear to be focused on the outer markets rather than CHI, which makes sense given that CHI is a hub city for three other airlines. So any growth will mean if there is business from other markets to CHI that DL feels it can grab or needs to offer to win corporate contracts then DL will offer said service. Be that from LAX, SEA, LHR, BOS or MCI (to pick a random unlikely city).

That turns to the BOS conversation. Five airlines (in you include NK) offer BOS-CHI service. It is an important business market but can BOS-ORD really support another 3-4 r/ts even if DL uses a CRJ-900? That's a lot of capacity especially when everyone other than B6 has connections on the other end. BOS-WAS was dropped because of the LGA slot swap with USAir. Having 120 more flights from LGA and being #1 was worth a whole lot more than being a weak #2 at DCA (which they still are, btw even with 33 fewer flights). And I say that as someone who really feels the pain of not having DL on BOS-DCA, a route that DL/NE ran for over 60 years.

compensateme · Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:31 pm

KTPAFlyer wrote:
Delta definitely can't dislodge AA or UA, but there is no question that they can build up a hub comparable to the level of AA/UA. Look no further than SEA, people on A.net laughed a couple years ago that DL could ever make a dent in AS, and now they have over a 100 daily flights and plans to match 200. If DL wants to take on AA/UA it can. With DTW and MSP in the catchment region, DL will never endanger their other hubs, but will punch above their weight when it comes to frequency to all 1st and the bigger 2nd tier cities. Delta isn't stupid; if they're going to invest their own money into ORD, you better believe they want to expand. Obviously not to the level of a mega hub, but enough to convince business FF to use DL in the future as a truly competive option to fly to a large number of cities where AA/UA dominate today.

ORD is not SEA. DL's growth is heavily limited / constrained by gates at ORD and there aren't any vacant ones to pick up. UA, AA and WN dominate the corporate Chicago travel market, yields on everything else generally tend to be less-than-spectacular -- and DL will never have the volume to compete. DL may one day add SEA & LAX to compete for SEA/LAX-ORD POS -- much in the same way it added NYC -- but it's doubtful DL will ever make an aggressive push into ORD.

Reality is, neing "big" at ORD is more important to some a.net fan boys than it is to DL.

N717TW wrote:
Am I the only one who feels that DL's gates aren't that terrible at ORD? Its not as nice as the C gates or AA's H/K gates but I just flew B6 from ORD last week and it was the first time in L since DL moved...and man it was an '80s flashback.

DL actually has more gates than they are using. They are leasing out several gates to UA, showing that they don't need the space right no

DL's not subleasing any gates. NW had long subleased its gates to other airlines (including CO, which then subleased its gates to UA so it could be side-by-side with NW and operate the joint WC/PC) but those gates are now under DL's control.

T2 looks a lot better now that UA has cleaned it up. Before the recent renovation, it was a hot mess -- literally a hodgepodge of different era. It's cleaned up now but the facility design shows its age. DL (and NW, CO, US, etc.) always took care of its gate space, that was never an issue, but the gates are still quite a hike.

phluser · Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:46 pm

N717TW wrote:

That turns to the BOS conversation. Five airlines (in you include NK) offer BOS-CHI service. It is an important business market but can BOS-ORD really support another 3-4 r/ts even if DL uses a CRJ-900? That's a lot of capacity especially when everyone other than B6 has connections on the other end. BOS-WAS was dropped because of the LGA slot swap with USAir. Having 120 more flights from LGA and being #1 was worth a whole lot more than being a weak #2 at DCA (which they still are, btw even with 33 fewer flights). And I say that as someone who really feels the pain of not having DL on BOS-DCA, a route that DL/NE ran for over 60 years.

I know the history of DL dropping BOS-DCA because of DCA slots, but there is still BWI for WAS, where it can offer BOS-BWI if DL is all about starting down the list from the TOP O&D markets for it's large base of BOS customers. Helping it would be DL would be the only carrier offering F class service (as B6 WN and NK don't) and it can offer connects for BWI customers although it would dilute BWI-DTW/ATL/JFK-Europe if some of those European gateway connects went to BWI-BOS-Europe (even though this is shorter than connecting through DTW or ATL, and it could free JFK slots).

United1 · Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:50 pm

It doesn't sound like DL has any plans of growing in Chicago....

http://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/news ... yptr=yahoo

"Though Delta has no plans to grow its presence in the Chicago market in the foreseeable future, the carrier does operate 53 flights daily to eight destinations from Chicago's O'Hare International Airport, and another 19 flights to three destinations from Midway Airport."

drdisque · Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:51 pm

ORD-LGA does not run with CRJ's. It has always been E170/5.

ORD-JFK has been CR9 for about a decade.

Sightseer · Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:56 pm

IMO there is little for DL to gain by trying to grow massively in CHI. While there are some potential routes that would make sense - namely LAX, SEA, RDU, and BOS - those have much more to do with DL's product offering in those specific cities than in CHI. UA, AA, and WN have huge advantages with CHI point-of-sale, and trying to fill flights with connecting traffic will just cannibalize DTW and MSP.

commavia · Fri Feb 17, 2017 7:09 pm

drdisque wrote:
ORD-LGA does not run with CRJ's. It has always been E170/5.

ORD-JFK has been CR9 for about a decade.

I remember when the sum total of Delta's entire presence in the CHI-NYC market was a single daily 727 ORD-JFK. My, how times change!

drdisque · Fri Feb 17, 2017 7:20 pm

commavia wrote:
drdisque wrote:
ORD-LGA does not run with CRJ's. It has always been E170/5.

ORD-JFK has been CR9 for about a decade.

I remember when the sum total of Delta's entire presence in the CHI-NYC market was a single daily 727 ORD-JFK. My, how times change!

Even better in the mid 90's when DL's DTW-NYC presence was a single daily BAe 146 in BEX livery. I seem to recall that the thing spent an extraordinarily long period on the ground at DTW, I'm not really sure how the flight was timed. I have a DL timetable and an OAG from that time period but they're in a box at in my parents' house. If anyone has a timetable to look it up in I'd be curious to know. Departed flights shows it operating in their 1995 OAG summary (they don't have full OAG's uploaded and the newest DL timetable is from 1983).

DocLightning · Fri Feb 17, 2017 7:33 pm

intotheair wrote:
It's ridiculous to think that DL is attempting to build a hub at ORD. That's absurd.

Really, DL sees an opportunity at UA hubs to grow its presence in those markets. They did it at SFO, and now they're doing it at DEN with additions to SEA, LAX, JFK, LGA, and in addition to all of DL's long-established service ex-DEN. DL is the fastest growing carrier in DEN, and they're even advertising across the city in the first time since, ever. DL had some really incredible sales to Europe from UA hubs this summer too. They must see opportunity at ORD to grow as well.

Exactly this. With both DTW and MSP within one hour's flying time at ORD, DL can offer itself as an alternative for flyers who are unhappy with UA and AA's products and services.

In order to turn ORD into a hub they'd have to oust one of the two majors there and then figure out a way to operate three Midwest hubs in close proximity. That just isn't realistic.

N776AU · Fri Feb 17, 2017 7:45 pm

deltadawg wrote:
Obviously ATL and SLC are run with larger equipment but it stands to reason that IF they truly want to expand at ORD they will need larger and more comfortable aircraft to dislodge the UA/AA customers and win them over to DL.

Even that isn't quite like they used to. Looks like now It's a mix of the T-tails and 737s. I remember back in 2009 flying ORD-ATL on a 757, and a 75X at that.

jagraham · Sat Feb 18, 2017 12:25 am

jayunited wrote:
jagraham wrote:
Why would Delta expand in Chicago? 10 million people?? Lots of corporate headquarters???

DTW and MSP are about an hour away by plane, but six to eight hours by car. With AA, UA, and WN hubs, why would Chicagoans drive eight hours? Or make an extra connection?? So Delta will expand in Chicago. About time.

There is one small problem, gate space. If we go back to the time when DL merged with NW and moved to T2 DL has 9 gates at T2, DL had the entire even side of the "E" concourse from E4 through E14 and they had 3 gates on the odd side of "E", US Airways had E7, and E9. Fast forward to today and you will see that UA has quietly been acquiring more and more gates on the "E" concourse intact UA now has almost every gate on the even side on "E" the only exception is E14 and from what I hear UA has their eyes set on acquiring that gate as well and overall UA wants all of T2 although that is probably not going to happen because DL would have no where to go do to the fact that T3 is now completely full and the city like to limit the number of domestic arrivals at the international terminal. that being said DL is down to just 6 gates at ORD and if they should loose E14 which is a strong possibility that number would drop to five gates. Every time DL has tried to acquire more gates at ORD those gates slip through their fingers remember they wanted US Airways gates on the "F" concourse but lost that battle to UA.

Make no mistake both AA and UA will do whatever it takes to keep DL pinned down at ORD. But before DL can expand they first need to stop UA from acquiring more of their gates, however UA is not letting up and later this year both AA and UA enter into negotiations with the city to discuss their leases and the up coming moving of the employees parking lot to an offsite area (the old remote parking lot F which is under construction) to make room for the last phase of the O'Hare modernization project which included the addition of another parallel runway, runway and the extension of runway 9L-27R. I think during these lease negotiations UA will try to acquire more of DL's gates. With the city allow it, will DL fight back it remains to be seen but one thing is for sure both AA and US have been successful in recent years in acquiring more gates DL has not.

I agree that DL should have held on to its real estate at ORD, and since they did not, UA and AA will make it as difficult as possible. But Chicago is the biggest hole in DL network and AA, UA, and WN don't have that problem. When the move to add the sixth east-west runway is done, a terminal expansion will come with it. That is when DL can make their move in ORD. At least to the point where it becomes a focus city . .

GSPSPOT · Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:07 am

With AA and UA entrenched at ORD, not...gonna...happen.

globalcabotage · Sat Feb 18, 2017 2:23 am

ORD will be a large/important "SPOKE" in the DL network. The shuttle to LGA at the MAT is great! You can't beat the schedule to ATL and JFK. CVG, MSP, DTW, and SLC hold their own. Just add a few flights to BOS/LAX/RDU/SEA and possibly LHR JV, and ORD is set. Approximately 70 flights per day would be a great spoke! Even better with corporate contracts.

Cubsrule · Sat Feb 18, 2017 2:55 am

commavia wrote:
drdisque wrote:
ORD-LGA does not run with CRJ's. It has always been E170/5.

ORD-JFK has been CR9 for about a decade.

I remember when the sum total of Delta's entire presence in the CHI-NYC market was a single daily 727 ORD-JFK. My, how times change!

More recently than that (as late as 2004 or so) it was a single daily CR2, and IINM that was the only CHI-JFK service as well.

planespotter20 · Sat Feb 18, 2017 2:36 pm

This is how I see that the entire DL at ORD thing will go down.

1) not much is going to happen until the new T2 is built. That being said, we can hold off on anything major until then (which speaking of, when will T2 terminal be constructed?).

2) I see that ORD will become significantly larger than it is today, and maybe could even create a triangle between MSP and DTW that then fan off into many different parts of the country. Also, the CS100 and maybe even CS300 could become aircraft that will be used for routes like JFK-ORD.

3) More connections with international partners VA, KL, AF, AZ, etc. That would give passengers more connectivity options, even though from my experiences ORD connections are a nightmare.

Overthecascades · Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:28 pm

KTPAFlyer wrote:
Delta definitely can't dislodge AA or UA, but there is no question that they can build up a hub comparable to the level of AA/UA. Look no further than SEA, people on A.net laughed a couple years ago that DL could ever make a dent in AS, and now they have over a 100 daily flights and plans to match 200. If DL wants to take on AA/UA it can. With DTW and MSP in the catchment region, DL will never endanger their other hubs, but will punch above their weight when it comes to frequency to all 1st and the bigger 2nd tier cities. Delta isn't stupid; if they're going to invest their own money into ORD, you better believe they want to expand. Obviously not to the level of a mega hub, but enough to convince business FF to use DL in the future as a truly competive option to fly to a large number of cities where AA/UA dominate today.

200?? Source?

commavia · Sat Feb 18, 2017 5:29 pm

globalcabotage wrote:
ORD will be a large/important "SPOKE" in the DL network. The shuttle to LGA at the MAT is great! You can't beat the schedule to ATL and JFK. CVG, MSP, DTW, and SLC hold their own. Just add a few flights to BOS/LAX/RDU/SEA and possibly LHR JV, and ORD is set. Approximately 70 flights per day would be a great spoke! Even better with corporate contracts.

Exactly. I'm still trying to figure out why it is that some people seem to think that Delta has the slightest need for turning ORD into a "focus city," let alone a hub - particularly given that Delta has two excellent megahubs, both of which it dominates, a few hundred miles east and west of ORD. CHI is obviously one of the nation's largest population centers and local economies, so of course it makes sense for one of the nation's largest airlines to have a major presence there. And I further agree that, gate space allowing, it might make sense for Delta to link ORD nonstop to BOS, LAX, SEA and maybe RDU - although, frankly, driven more by Delta's presence in those focus cities as opposed to the "large spoke" that is ORD.

jagraham · Sat Feb 18, 2017 6:23 pm

70 or so flights per day is a focus city. And the reason for needing a focus city in the 3rd biggest metro area is that people will not choose to change planes when they can fly nonstop to where they want to go. 90% of trips start or end in the ten biggest metro areas. AA for example has hubs or focus cities in 9 of them. When AA gets their act together, they will be offering multiple nonstop flights between any two of the top ten cities. At which point, why change planes (unless you hate AA) (I will admit metro areas 10 thru 20 or so are more complicated, but their time will come).

commavia · Sat Feb 18, 2017 7:04 pm

jagraham wrote:
70 or so flights per day is a focus city.

No it's not. As the other poster said, that's a large and important spoke. When Delta starts meaningfully and consciously building connections over ORD, we can call it a "focus city." Until then, it's the same thing that DFW is for Delta, or MCO is for AA or LAS is for United - a very large spoke.

jagraham wrote:
people will not choose to change planes when they can fly nonstop to where they want to go.

Sure people will, and do, connect in spite of nonstop options all the time. Thousands, and I'd guess tens of thousands, do it every day in the U.S. No airline can or will ever be able to cater to all passengers in all markets with nonstops - absent Ameriflot, that simply isn't possible. So, as said, it is certainly plausible that Delta could add nonstop flights from ORD to a few remaining large U.S. O&D markets where Delta actually does operate focus cities. But that won't make ORD a "focus city" itself, and - to the original commentary from several months ago - it certainly won't allow Delta to "displace" AA, Southwest or United in CHI.

compensateme · Sat Feb 18, 2017 7:16 pm

jagraham wrote:
70 or so flights per day is a focus city. And the reason for needing a focus city in the 3rd biggest metro area is that people will not choose to change planes when they can fly nonstop to where they want to go. 90% of trips start or end in the ten biggest metro areas. AA for example has hubs or focus cities in 9 of them. When AA gets their act together, they will be offering multiple nonstop flights between any two of the top ten cities. At which point, why change planes (unless you hate AA) (I will admit metro areas 10 thru 20 or so are more complicated, but their time will come).

- There is no formal definition of a hub or focus city. The target of ORD's high frequency to ATL, MSP, DTW & NYC is ATL, MSP, DTW & NYC -- not ORD -- POS.

- DL does not need a "focus city in the 3rd biggest metro area" to be successful. Status quo, DL is the most successful of the legacies despite having a very, very, very minor share of CHI POS. AA and UA "getting their act together" isn't going to change this -- a large portion of the reason DL is so successful is because its hubs & key markets lack the competition than AA & UA's have. Sometimes it's good to be #1 at MSP & DTW than compete in a brutal three-way battle at CHI (AA, UA, WN).

- Barring an acquisition of AA, UA & WN's CHI operations, DL is never going to be able to successfully compete for corporate contracts or develop the volume to carry CHI's low-yielding leisure traffic. Nor is DL going to spend (as suggested) billions of its dollars to invest in expansion of CHI's facilities; beyond the practicality of such suggestion, it'll never yield a strong enough return to make such investment.

- Having comprehensive networks covering America's "sexy" cities is more important to a.net fan boys than it is to DL (whose primary goal is to make $$$).

wjcandee · Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:41 pm

piedmontf284000 wrote:
You mean the same airline that currently doesn't even fly non-stop to it's hub in Seattle and flies to NYC with regional jets? I won't hold my breath...

With all due respect to your uninformed, snarky comment, DL is killing it on the LGA-ORD route. Its "regional jets" (which is a dubious characterization of the E-Jets) contain almost exclusively high-value O/D pair travel. DL is skimming the cream of NYC-based travellers to ORD by providing a better product for business travelers, with the Marine Air Terminal arrivals and departures (which is the only terminal you can get to reliably at LGA these days), 2x2 seating, etc.

LGA-ORD is the largest O/D pair in the United States, and I wouldn't be caught dead flying anything but the DL shuttle if I were going to do business in Chicago these days.

Because AA and UA both have hubs there, there is a lot of connecting traffic on those carriers, necessitating larger jets for those carriers. But that certainly doesn't mean that those carriers have a better product or are more successful on the route. Fact is, organic ORD travelers are going to be FFs on UA or AA and so likely would stick to them. However, with all the drama at LGA these days, DL is seeing some defectors among people who actually have to have reliable transportation. (The others are going to JFK or EWR, which are less-convenient but offer a somewhat-more-reliable travel time to the airport than does LGA right now.)

jagraham · Sat Feb 18, 2017 11:23 pm

DL has 83 flights per day at BOS. RDU Airport ( https://www.rdu.com/airline-information/flight-status/ ) shows 28 flights in the next 24 hours. Admittedly Im writing this on a Saturday. Point is, 70 flights daily is way more than a spoke. It may be that ORD has more flights than RDU now, even before any expansion.

Let me repeat that in the near and mid term, I do not expect Delta to hub ORD. Focus city is as far as it gets for probably the next decade. There is no reason for Delta to hub ORD; the reason to grow is to provide more nonstop O/D at ORD. And according to other posters, 70 flights per day is less than 20 flights above what DL has now - growth, yes; significant growth, no.

commavia · Sat Feb 18, 2017 11:39 pm

jagraham wrote:
70 flights daily is way more than a spoke

No it's not. It's a large spoke.

I'd submit that what differentiates a "focus city" or "hub" is some type of logical, conscious connecting scheduling. That does not exist for Delta at ORD, nor do I suspect it will anytime soon - if ever. That's the key difference between ORD and both BOS and RDU - both of those stations actually do cater, logically and consciously, to connecting traffic in addition to O&D. As said - when Delta is consciously building connecting itineraries for, say, BOS-ORD-SEA or RDU-ORD-LAX, we'll talk about a "focus city." Until then, as another poster stated, ORD is and will remain a large spoke for Delta - just like numerous other large markets all around the U.S. are for all of the major U.S. carriers that don't have a hub in said markets.

jagraham · Sun Feb 19, 2017 12:27 am

Focus city. In the airline industry, a focus city is a destination from which an airline operates several point-to-point routes. Thus, a focus city primarily caters to the local market rather than to connecting passengers. However, with the term's expanded usage, a focus city may also function as a small-scale hub.

Focus city - Wikipedia

planespotter20 · Sun Feb 19, 2017 12:27 am

Wouldn't more DL flights at ORD give international connecting passengers from KLM and Air France more options? I can see more DL flights at ORD as nothing but more good stuff. It may be a spoke, large spoke, focus city, or hub but all that matters is that more flights= more competitiveness+more options+ better fares.

commavia · Sun Feb 19, 2017 12:35 am

planespotter20 wrote:
Wouldn't more DL flights at ORD give international connecting passengers from KLM and Air France more options?

Yes, just as adding more domestic routes could also, theoretically, cater to connections. The challenge is that this directly bypasses the massive connecting hubs that Delta (and all network airlines) have carefully constructed to serve precisely this purpose. So if Delta started ORD-SEA, a connecting passenger could theoretically fly AMS-ORD-SEA, but that would be catering to the exact same connections as are already available to transport that passenger over numerous other Delta hubs, or nonstop. It's a very tricky business to direct overfly major hubs in order to consciously, logically connect passengers over a "focus city" - there's a reason it doesn't happen often.

As said, Delta already operates a large spoke operation at ORD catering to O&D, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. But it seems implausible that Delta would construct at ORD the same type of "focus city" operation - complete with conscious, logical connections - that it currently operates at BOS, RDU and CVG. Much more likely is what many of us have been suggesting since this thread started months ago - a few additional targeted adds, facilities allowing, that cater to O&D and connections at the non-ORD ends of these routes, and/or are focused more on increasing relevancy and connectivity for local corporate customers in those "focus city" markets at the non-ORD end of these routes. So, for example, ORD is almost certainly one of the largest nonstop gaps for Delta's corporate customers in BOS, RDU, LAX and SEA. That's who such additional ORD routes would primarily be targeting, along with longhaul connections over many of those gateways. Delta is not going to seriously challenge AA, Southwest and United in any meaningful, material way for ORD corporate customers.

jagraham · Sun Feb 19, 2017 12:42 am

Hey Guys,

Let me begin my saying that this is purely a rumor that was heard by a Delta flight attendant at ORD. I asked him if the airline planned on closing its Chicago flight attendant base and he responded, "To the contray. Delta is only going to get bigger in Chicago." He went on to say that he's heard from multiple sources that in addition to the seasonal Paris flights, Delta plans on beginning Chicago to Asia service late next year. He didn't have specifics, but said to "mark his words."

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1346041

usxguy · Sun Feb 19, 2017 12:48 am

didn't TWA coin the term "focus city" when they added a bunch of flying to ATL back in the mid 90s?

mcogator · Sun Feb 19, 2017 12:55 am

Fares are ridiculously cheap on MCO-ORD. It's routinely under $100 rt for NS flights. Not sure DL would want to add extra capacity to that saturated market.

ERJ170 · Sun Feb 19, 2017 1:18 am

jagraham wrote:
DL has 83 flights per day at BOS. RDU Airport ( https://www.rdu.com/airline-information/flight-status/ ) shows 28 flights in the next 24 hours. Admittedly Im writing this on a Saturday. Point is, 70 flights daily is way more than a spoke. It may be that ORD has more flights than RDU now, even before any expansion.

Let me repeat that in the near and mid term, I do not expect Delta to hub ORD. Focus city is as far as it gets for probably the next decade. There is no reason for Delta to hub ORD; the reason to grow is to provide more nonstop O/D at ORD. And according to other posters, 70 flights per day is less than 20 flights above what DL has now - growth, yes; significant growth, no.

RDU has 70+ flights.. BOS is called a hub by Delta.. RDU is called a focus city.. I would think ORD would need to have flights to more than just the hubs/focus to be in contention to becoming a focus city. CMH, BDL, and IND would probably be the next in line for focus cities since they have point-to-point service.. and some connections.. but, just my thought

flymco753 · Sun Feb 19, 2017 1:35 am

jagraham wrote:
Hey Guys,

Let me begin my saying that this is purely a rumor that was heard by a Delta flight attendant at ORD. I asked him if the airline planned on closing its Chicago flight attendant base and he responded, "To the contray. Delta is only going to get bigger in Chicago." He went on to say that he's heard from multiple sources that in addition to the seasonal Paris flights, Delta plans on beginning Chicago to Asia service late next year. He didn't have specifics, but said to "mark his words."

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1346041

I don't think DL would add ORD-Asia before doing ATL-PVG or MSP-PVG while axing MSP-HND.

flymco753 · Sun Feb 19, 2017 1:36 am

mcogator wrote:
Fares are ridiculously cheap on MCO-ORD. It's routinely under $100 rt for NS flights. Not sure DL would want to add extra capacity to that saturated market.

I would certainly not expect ORD or MDW-MCO even on weekends in the winter, DL isn't interested in competing in a route with a route that is already showing extremely low yields.

flymco753 · Sun Feb 19, 2017 1:37 am

ERJ170 wrote:
jagraham wrote:
DL has 83 flights per day at BOS. RDU Airport ( https://www.rdu.com/airline-information/flight-status/ ) shows 28 flights in the next 24 hours. Admittedly Im writing this on a Saturday. Point is, 70 flights daily is way more than a spoke. It may be that ORD has more flights than RDU now, even before any expansion.

Let me repeat that in the near and mid term, I do not expect Delta to hub ORD. Focus city is as far as it gets for probably the next decade. There is no reason for Delta to hub ORD; the reason to grow is to provide more nonstop O/D at ORD. And according to other posters, 70 flights per day is less than 20 flights above what DL has now - growth, yes; significant growth, no.

RDU has 70+ flights.. BOS is called a hub by Delta.. RDU is called a focus city.. I would think ORD would need to have flights to more than just the hubs/focus to be in contention to becoming a focus city. CMH, BDL, and IND would probably be the next in line for focus cities since they have point-to-point service.. and some connections.. but, just my thought

MCO would be considered a focus city too. I've seen connections to CUN, GRU and to an extent MAN, LGW, GLA, BFS and MEX with other carriers.

448205 · Sun Feb 19, 2017 2:11 am

jagraham wrote:
Hey Guys,

Let me begin my saying that this is purely a rumor that was heard by a Delta flight attendant at ORD. I asked him if the airline planned on closing its Chicago flight attendant base and he responded, "To the contray. Delta is only going to get bigger in Chicago." He went on to say that he's heard from multiple sources that in addition to the seasonal Paris flights, Delta plans on beginning Chicago to Asia service late next year. He didn't have specifics, but said to "mark his words."

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1346041

lol

yeogeo · Sun Feb 19, 2017 2:27 pm

jayunited wrote:
jagraham wrote:
Every time DL has tried to acquire more gates at ORD those gates slip through their fingers...

They did acquire the two US gates E7 & E9 fairly recently, did they not?
yeo

compensateme · Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:43 pm

yeogeo wrote:
jayunited wrote:
jagraham wrote:
Every time DL has tried to acquire more gates at ORD those gates slip through their fingers...

They did acquire the two US gates E7 & E9 fairly recently, did they not?
yeo

US was subleasing the gates from DL (which acquired the leases via NW).

I made an error in my previous posting -- DL is apparently subleasing some of its gates to UA in T2. That kinda kills the rumor that they want more gates but just can't get them...

planespotter20 · Sun Feb 19, 2017 5:26 pm

commavia wrote:
planespotter20 wrote:
Wouldn't more DL flights at ORD give international connecting passengers from KLM and Air France more options?

Yes, just as adding more domestic routes could also, theoretically, cater to connections. The challenge is that this directly bypasses the massive connecting hubs that Delta (and all network airlines) have carefully constructed to serve precisely this purpose. So if Delta started ORD-SEA, a connecting passenger could theoretically fly AMS-ORD-SEA, but that would be catering to the exact same connections as are already available to transport that passenger over numerous other Delta hubs, or nonstop. It's a very tricky business to direct overfly major hubs in order to consciously, logically connect passengers over a "focus city" - there's a reason it doesn't happen often.

As said, Delta already operates a large spoke operation at ORD catering to O&D, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. But it seems implausible that Delta would construct at ORD the same type of "focus city" operation - complete with conscious, logical connections - that it currently operates at BOS, RDU and CVG. Much more likely is what many of us have been suggesting since this thread started months ago - a few additional targeted adds, facilities allowing, that cater to O&D and connections at the non-ORD ends of these routes, and/or are focused more on increasing relevancy and connectivity for local corporate customers in those "focus city" markets at the non-ORD end of these routes. So, for example, ORD is almost certainly one of the largest nonstop gaps for Delta's corporate customers in BOS, RDU, LAX and SEA. That's who such additional ORD routes would primarily be targeting, along with longhaul connections over many of those gateways. Delta is not going to seriously challenge AA, Southwest and United in any meaningful, material way for ORD corporate customers.

I was thinking maybe something along a "Midwest Triangle" and ORD feeds DL's two other Midwest hubs (MSP and DTW). By no means are we gonna see DL operating as large as AA or UA, ORD would need a significant expansion to host a hub for America's three largest carriers. Who knows, maybe by mid-next decade when we see the final stages of ORD being finalized is when we will actually see how much DL will expand into ORD. Chicago is a huge city that deserves attention from all 3 legacy carriers, so I don't see anything bad with DL expanding into ORD.

commavia · Sun Feb 19, 2017 5:37 pm

planespotter20 wrote:
I was thinking maybe something along a "Midwest Triangle" and ORD feeds DL's two other Midwest hubs (MSP and DTW).

planespotter20 wrote:
Chicago is a huge city that deserves attention from all 3 legacy carriers, so I don't see anything bad with DL expanding into ORD.

So essentially ... what already exists now. ORD already feeds Delta's MSP and DTW hubs, and Delta already pays plenty of "attention" to CHI. Nobody said there was anything "bad" about Delta expanding at ORD, but I continue to find it implausible that Delta would do any more than, as already said many times, add a few select, specific, targeted nonstop routes to a few major Delta focus cities/longhaul gateways.

compensateme · Sun Feb 19, 2017 5:52 pm

planespotter20 wrote:
I was thinking maybe something along a "Midwest Triangle" and ORD feeds DL's two other Midwest hubs (MSP and DTW). By no means are we gonna see DL operating as large as AA or UA, ORD would need a significant expansion to host a hub for America's three largest carriers. Who knows, maybe by mid-next decade when we see the final stages of ORD being finalized is when we will actually see how much DL will expand into ORD. Chicago is a huge city that deserves attention from all 3 legacy carriers, so I don't see anything bad with DL expanding into ORD.

It's not practical.

- Chicago has three established carriers (AA, UA, WN) with large, long-time presences competing hard for the corporate travel market;
- The investment required for DL to successfully compete, even on a smaller scale, would seep into the billions (DL would be required to finance expansion of the facilities as well as an expensive marketing campaign);
- Local residents would heavily oppose & protest a project whose goal is to establish another hub at ORD, thus increasing noise pollution;
- It'd deteriorate feed at MSP & DTW (both of which have ample capacity), reducing their profitability;
- DL would be splitting corporate travel four ways and getting -- by far -- the smallest slice.
- Put simply, there's better investments for the funds required to complete such project (whose profitability is doubtful anyway).

There's absolutely no evidence that DL wants to expand at ORD; in fact, DL subleased some of its gates to UA in recent years, which goes against such assertion.

Reality is... the "rumors" are better described as "things some ORD fanboys made up."

usxguy · Sun Feb 19, 2017 6:09 pm

I think people are reading WAY WAY too much into this.

Delta could add service to a few markets without much investment needed. Its all going to point to their corporate contracts. Adding 2 a day to LAX or RDU isn't going to "kill" DTW or SLC. It will in fact, have the opposite. Delta has quite high load factors out of Chicago. So any additions will spread the loyal travelers, but also give DL a better chance to grow.

See, those 100 people flying on Delta to LAX, for example, are taking up seats to SLC, and then to LAX from SLC. If those travelers move to a nonstop on DL ORD/LAX, that opens up more opportunities for other travelers to fly to SLC and onward to other destinations; just as the 100 seats now open from SLC to LAX would allow someone from, lets say Cody Wyoming - to connect to LAX; because the connection seats were otherwise taken. So now that CRJ leaving Cody, that once had only 20 people booked, may now have 25 booked since 5 of those pax can now get seats from SLC to LAX. And using the same example, travelers from Chicago to Cody, who may not have otherwise found an affordable fare ORD-SLC-CDY because ORD-SLC was so full - will now see lower fares, thus backfilling those people who once flew ORD-SLC - (LAX). And now SLC-CDY will be busier because of it.

this is just mere hyperbole. But the hubs have shrunk in capacity in many markets, and we're no longer connecting Embraer 120s to Lockheed L1011s. We're connecting a 70 seat jet to a 180 seat jet, which has had a negative effect on smaller communities. As the load factors have grown on the trunk routes, the concept of "hub" connections has been limited since those travelers can't quite get affordable fares or seats at all to many busy markets.

compensateme · Sun Feb 19, 2017 7:07 pm

usxguy wrote:
I think people are reading WAY WAY too much into this.

Delta could add service to a few markets without much investment needed. Its all going to point to their corporate contracts. Adding 2 a day to LAX or RDU isn't going to "kill" DTW or SLC. It will in fact, have the opposite. Delta has quite high load factors out of Chicago. So any additions will spread the loyal travelers, but also give DL a better chance to grow.

Reading "way way too much into" what? DL has never discussed or disclosed ANY plan to grow at ORD and in fact has subleased some of its gate space to UA (which suggests against expansion) in recent years. Growth is the primary way airlines increase revenue, so naturally DL will consider adding service to key markets -- SEA, LAX, BOS, RDU, etc, -- just as they will consider doing so from CLE, CMH (which already has some of that service), etc. But DL WON'T start ORD-CLE/CMH/etc. and that's the difference.

The notion that DL desires an ORD hub seems to have been manufactured by a few a.net users. Unless you got your hand into the corporate cookie jar (and that's not going to happen; future services will target SEA, LAX, BOS, RDU, etc. POS), ORD is quite low-yielding.

MSPNWA · Sun Feb 19, 2017 7:59 pm

DL's plans for ORD should be just two things--ORD-LAX/SEA. Those are two of the largest domestic holes from any carrier.

papatango · Sun Feb 19, 2017 8:29 pm

compensateme wrote:
yeogeo wrote:
jayunited wrote:

They did acquire the two US gates E7 & E9 fairly recently, did they not?
yeo

US was subleasing the gates from DL (which acquired the leases via NW).

I made an error in my previous posting -- DL is apparently subleasing some of its gates to UA in T2. That kinda kills the rumor that they want more gates but just can't get them...

How many gates at ORD does Delta have?

OzarkD9S · Sun Feb 19, 2017 11:24 pm

usxguy wrote:

didn't TWA coin the term "focus city" when they added a bunch of flying to ATL back in the mid 90s?

Actually ATL was planned to be and marketed as, a hub. The old phrase "mini-hub" dates from the 80's and has since evolved into "focus city" or sometimes "scissor hub" or whatever an airline chooses to call it. The first time I saw a city marketed as a "focus city" for TWA was SJU. LAX was the second. TWA was planning on a third, but never made it that far. My guess for the third would have been BOS, as they had started a few weekend flights to the Caribbean and had some extra gate space there.

slcdeltarumd11 · Mon Feb 20, 2017 12:10 am

I agree i am sure they dont want a focus city. It is similar to what we saw in Denver they wanted a few more gates to reduce congestion and delays and to add frequent enough service to SEA and LAX to give them a shot. Delta knows a market like ORD you need frequency, and its a full airport they want assets so they have them or can trade later etc. Delta is smart they see this is the time to go in. ORD is a huge market and important for skyteam to have good service. Its not foucs city, its what they already did in Denver.

yeogeo · Mon Feb 20, 2017 12:23 am

papatango wrote:
How many gates at ORD does Delta have?

currently in use:
E7, E9, E11, E13, E14 & E15 = 6

yeo

chicawgo · Mon Feb 20, 2017 4:12 pm

yeogeo wrote:
papatango wrote:
How many gates at ORD does Delta have?

currently in use:
E7, E9, E11, E13, E14 & E15 = 6

yeo

They use E16 and E17 as well. Heavily.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net