GSP psgr wrote:

I would have to think the decision to move more internationally equipped 752s to the Delta One Domestic Operations would be a blow for seeing DTW-MAN/DUB/DUS, etc any time soon.

I agree that's why it is imperative that the airport beat a path to EI headquarters as EI has stated they are interested in adding cities in North America for the A321. Let's see how bad the WCAA wants to add international service at DTW. If Delta is not going to do it than it's time to look for other options to grow the airport. I also find it very interesting that after the airport circulated the petition to add Dubai they have said nothing about this any more wonder if Delta has a gag order on the airport about adding a DTW-DXB flight the airport was pretty vocal about wanting this route and now silence.

GSP psgr wrote:

I would have to think the decision to move more internationally equipped 752s to the Delta One Domestic Operations would be a blow for seeing DTW-MAN/DUB/DUS, etc any time soon.

DTW-MAN and DTW-DUS were never going to happen anyway. In the case of DUS, there are not enough pax from DUS for two DL TATL flights, and God forbid DL not serve ATL. As for MAN, there simply isn't enough PDEW to DTW to make it work. As far as connections, there isn't that much traffic to/from the Midwest to MAN either, so DTW (+connections) never made sense.

If EI started DTW-DUB, then DL would probably add the route as well. It would be a repeat of the scenario that happened when AS added DTW-PDX. EI adds it. DL matches. Competition reduces profits. EI cuts back on frequencies. But who knows, maybe with the onward connections from DUB, EI might work.

kavok wrote:

GSP psgr wrote:

I would have to think the decision to move more internationally equipped 752s to the Delta One Domestic Operations would be a blow for seeing DTW-MAN/DUB/DUS, etc any time soon.

DTW-MAN and DTW-DUS were never going to happen anyway. In the case of DUS, there are not enough pax from DUS for two DL TATL flights, and God forbid DL not serve ATL. As for MAN, there simply isn't enough PDEW to DTW to make it work. As far as connections, there isn't that much traffic to/from the Midwest to MAN either, so DTW (+connections) never made sense.

If EI started DTW-DUB, then DL would probably add the route as well. It would be a repeat of the scenario that happened when AS added DTW-PDX. EI adds it. DL matches. Competition reduces profits. EI cuts back on frequencies. But who knows, maybe with the onward connections from DUB, EI might work.

I think with competitive pricing EI would work well at DTW even better than WOW Air because flying over DUB is less time consuming because it's right on the way to most places in central Europe and Aer Lingus is a well established airline with a long history and they run a far better operation than WOW Air does. I think DL wouldn't even blink at a 5X weekly EI 757 to DUB

klm617 wrote:

GSP psgr wrote:

I would have to think the decision to move more internationally equipped 752s to the Delta One Domestic Operations would be a blow for seeing DTW-MAN/DUB/DUS, etc any time soon.

I agree that's why it is imperative that the airport beat a path to EI headquarters as EI has stated they are interested in adding cities in North America for the A321. Let's see how bad the WCAA wants to add international service at DTW. If Delta is not going to do it than it's time to look for other options to grow the airport. I also find it very interesting that after the airport circulated the petition to add Dubai they have said nothing about this any more wonder if Delta has a gag order on the airport about adding a DTW-DXB flight the airport was pretty vocal about wanting this route and now silence.

You weren't supposed to know about that. Delta has a gag order on DTW, and Ed Bastian personally contacted some "friends" in Sicily to take out a contract on anyone who talked about any flights to DXB. You shouldn't say any more about it.

I know it is true... I heard it on Faux News...

jordanh wrote:

klm617 wrote:

GSP psgr wrote:

I would have to think the decision to move more internationally equipped 752s to the Delta One Domestic Operations would be a blow for seeing DTW-MAN/DUB/DUS, etc any time soon.

I agree that's why it is imperative that the airport beat a path to EI headquarters as EI has stated they are interested in adding cities in North America for the A321. Let's see how bad the WCAA wants to add international service at DTW. If Delta is not going to do it than it's time to look for other options to grow the airport. I also find it very interesting that after the airport circulated the petition to add Dubai they have said nothing about this any more wonder if Delta has a gag order on the airport about adding a DTW-DXB flight the airport was pretty vocal about wanting this route and now silence.

You weren't supposed to know about that. Delta has a gag order on DTW, and Ed Bastian personally contacted some "friends" in Sicily to take out a contract on anyone who talked about any flights to DXB. You shouldn't say any more about it.
I know it is true... I heard it on Faux News...

Be careful; some people (at least, one person) will believe that.

I wonder how many trips the WCAA has made to China to land some new Detroit China links since this region has such strong business tie to China or are they just going to sit back and allow ORD to get all the new China links. As big a market as the China-USA market is now Detroit should be able to land one Chinese carrier.

Just another example of how Detroiters are being gouged. Was looking for flight from Detroit to Genoa in mid May and guess what flights from Toronto to Genoa are 50% cheaper than flights from Detroit so I may be making that 4 hour drive but it will be over $700 in my pocket rather than a greedy airlines pocket. May do a Detroit Frankfurt on WOW Air and then another ticket from Frankfurt to Genoa booking travel shouldn't be this hard in 2017.

klm—
have you ever reached somebody at WCAA to talk to them? it's a public agency, so I'm sure somebody there would be willing to meet you somewhere to explain more about where DTW is positioned right now relative to the market and peer airports. maybe it's worth getting a hold of one of their strategic planners for a 45 minute conversation over lunch or something. maybe that's a more productive path forward than harping into the void on a.net

klm617 wrote:

Just another example of how Detroiters are being gouged. Was looking for flight from Detroit to Genoa in mid May and guess what flights from Toronto to Genoa are 50% cheaper than flights from Detroit so I may be making that 4 hour drive but it will be over $700 in my pocket rather than a greedy airlines pocket. May do a Detroit Frankfurt on WOW Air and then another ticket from Frankfurt to Genoa booking travel shouldn't be this hard in 2017.

This is the price you pay as a DL hub. DL is arguably the US's best airline in terms of performance, reliability, and product, but that comes at a high price. DL tickets never have and never will be cheap, and DL knows that their customers know that and that they choose to pay for better service, reliability, benefits, and support. It may be $700 more, but there is a fractional chance that your flight will ever be moved - it is expensive to maintain such stable and reliable ops.

How do I know this? I'm a Delta frequent flyer and skyteam elite and I live in SLC. It sucks having Delta fighting off any competition out of SLC, but I haven't had a single cancelled flight since January of 2015, and they moved me onto a flight one hour later; it was a SLC-LAX leg connecting onto China Airlines to TPE and eventually BKK. It was already a tight connection, but 1h less would have made it impossible. I had both a CI and DL representative at the gate who escorted me to the TBIT, through security, and to my gate to get to my flight on time, along with another passenger I didn't know who was on the same two segments and was in economy for both of them. That level of service is incredibly expensive. I don't think any other carrier with a hub here could justify SLC-AMS (including KLM, thank you alliances) / SLC-CDG / SLC-LHR. The high price is what drives an exceptional level of service and connectivity with Delta. I doubt that if DTW was a hub for any other airline, we would be seeing the exceptional level of transoceanic flights that it has now. I guess you really do have to pay for the appeal of having so many TPAC/TATL flights.

jubguy3 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Just another example of how Detroiters are being gouged. Was looking for flight from Detroit to Genoa in mid May and guess what flights from Toronto to Genoa are 50% cheaper than flights from Detroit so I may be making that 4 hour drive but it will be over $700 in my pocket rather than a greedy airlines pocket. May do a Detroit Frankfurt on WOW Air and then another ticket from Frankfurt to Genoa booking travel shouldn't be this hard in 2017.

This is the price you pay as a DL hub. DL is arguably the US's best airline in terms of performance, reliability, and product, but that comes at a high price. DL tickets never have and never will be cheap, and DL knows that their customers know that and that they choose to pay for better service, reliability, benefits, and support. It may be $700 more, but there is a fractional chance that your flight will ever be moved - it is expensive to maintain such stable and reliable ops.

How do I know this? I'm a Delta frequent flyer and skyteam elite and I live in SLC. It sucks having Delta fighting off any competition out of SLC, but I haven't had a single cancelled flight since January of 2015, and they moved me onto a flight one hour later; it was a SLC-LAX leg connecting onto China Airlines to TPE and eventually BKK. It was already a tight connection, but 1h less would have made it impossible. I had both a CI and DL representative at the gate who escorted me to the TBIT, through security, and to my gate to get to my flight on time, along with another passenger I didn't know who was on the same two segments and was in economy for both of them. That level of service is incredibly expensive. I don't think any other carrier with a hub here could justify SLC-AMS (including KLM, thank you alliances) / SLC-CDG / SLC-LHR. The high price is what drives an exceptional level of service and connectivity with Delta. I doubt that if DTW was a hub for any other airline, we would be seeing the exceptional level of transoceanic flights that it has now. I guess you really do have to pay for the appeal of having so many TPAC/TATL flights.

Actually the fare out of YYZ is on LH far better service than Delta. You are lucky my friend because about 30% of all of my Delta flights are late by an hour or more. Perhaps SLC is not that much effected by delays at the ATL hub like Detroit is and Delta has left me in ATL and there was NO ONE there to help my I had to fond another flight alternative on my own. I was traveling to a destination where every flight was over booked and eventually flew to the next closest airport just to get home so exceptional service is a stretch my friend. I am to the point where I don't want to buy a connection because I know how much capacity has been trimmed and the chances of getting on another flight in a timely matter is like playing Russian roulette. CS at Delta leaves a lot to be desired although I have to admit the on-board product has come a long way I was very pleased with my last flights on Delta to and from Frankfurt..

klm617 wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Just another example of how Detroiters are being gouged. Was looking for flight from Detroit to Genoa in mid May and guess what flights from Toronto to Genoa are 50% cheaper than flights from Detroit so I may be making that 4 hour drive but it will be over $700 in my pocket rather than a greedy airlines pocket. May do a Detroit Frankfurt on WOW Air and then another ticket from Frankfurt to Genoa booking travel shouldn't be this hard in 2017.

This is the price you pay as a DL hub. DL is arguably the US's best airline in terms of performance, reliability, and product, but that comes at a high price. DL tickets never have and never will be cheap, and DL knows that their customers know that and that they choose to pay for better service, reliability, benefits, and support. It may be $700 more, but there is a fractional chance that your flight will ever be moved - it is expensive to maintain such stable and reliable ops.

How do I know this? I'm a Delta frequent flyer and skyteam elite and I live in SLC. It sucks having Delta fighting off any competition out of SLC, but I haven't had a single cancelled flight since January of 2015, and they moved me onto a flight one hour later; it was a SLC-LAX leg connecting onto China Airlines to TPE and eventually BKK. It was already a tight connection, but 1h less would have made it impossible. I had both a CI and DL representative at the gate who escorted me to the TBIT, through security, and to my gate to get to my flight on time, along with another passenger I didn't know who was on the same two segments and was in economy for both of them. That level of service is incredibly expensive. I don't think any other carrier with a hub here could justify SLC-AMS (including KLM, thank you alliances) / SLC-CDG / SLC-LHR. The high price is what drives an exceptional level of service and connectivity with Delta. I doubt that if DTW was a hub for any other airline, we would be seeing the exceptional level of transoceanic flights that it has now. I guess you really do have to pay for the appeal of having so many TPAC/TATL flights.

Actually the fare out of YYZ is on LH far better service than Delta. You are lucky my friend because about 30% of all of my Delta flights are late by an hour or more. Perhaps SLC is not that much effected by delays at the ATL hub like Detroit is and Delta has left me in ATL and there was NO ONE there to help my I had to fond another flight alternative on my own. I was traveling to a destination where every flight was over booked and eventually flew to the next closest airport just to get home so exceptional service is a stretch my friend. I am to the point where I don't want to buy a connection because I know how much capacity has been trimmed and the chances of getting on another flight in a timely matter is like playing Russian roulette. CS at Delta leaves a lot to be desired although I have to admit the on-board product has come a long way I was very pleased with my last flights on Delta to and from Frankfurt..

LH is not really a perfect comparison. I'm sure the fact that toronto is a star hub has to help keep prices a bit lower... from May 16th onwards the roundtrip cost on Lufthansa with one stop in Frankfurt (3h30) appears to be close to $7000. But that is obviously not going to be the cheapest option, and european travel out of DTW is particularly expensive. If you're willing to spend 19h in the air each way, I'm seeing prices around $900 on United, TAP Portugal, and Lufthansa (EWR, LIS, MUC).

Detroit is the 6th most ontime airport in the country, from [url]this source.[/url] I don't think SkyTeam status has a significant effect on DL's efforts to find you a new flight, but I'm suspicious of you twisting in beef with Atlanta because seemingly everything you spout out about Atlanta is unfactual and created with the explicit intent of whining about DL in Detroit. I'm not really going to fall for vague statements like "I was travelling to a destination where every flight was overbooked and eventually flew to the next closest airport just to get home so exceptional service is a stretch, my friend." Every single flight? Spirit might book like that, but DL offers large accommodations to overbooked passengers (they will now pay up to $9950 to overbooked passengers who volunteer). It is their corporate policy to offer money to overbooked people if there are no volunteers, usually starting around $400, and they will continue to go up until someone volunteers - they also offer the quickest alternative flights for those who volunteer in addition to compensation. So unless this happened decades ago I do not believe you at all.

If you want to get to Genoa and you're so concerned with prices, just fly into Milan (84mi from Genoa). I'm seeing around $400 one way from DTW to MXP with two stops in Boston and Lisbon on JetBlue and TAP Portugal.

klm617 wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Just another example of how Detroiters are being gouged. Was looking for flight from Detroit to Genoa in mid May and guess what flights from Toronto to Genoa are 50% cheaper than flights from Detroit so I may be making that 4 hour drive but it will be over $700 in my pocket rather than a greedy airlines pocket. May do a Detroit Frankfurt on WOW Air and then another ticket from Frankfurt to Genoa booking travel shouldn't be this hard in 2017.

This is the price you pay as a DL hub. DL is arguably the US's best airline in terms of performance, reliability, and product, but that comes at a high price. DL tickets never have and never will be cheap, and DL knows that their customers know that and that they choose to pay for better service, reliability, benefits, and support. It may be $700 more, but there is a fractional chance that your flight will ever be moved - it is expensive to maintain such stable and reliable ops.

How do I know this? I'm a Delta frequent flyer and skyteam elite and I live in SLC. It sucks having Delta fighting off any competition out of SLC, but I haven't had a single cancelled flight since January of 2015, and they moved me onto a flight one hour later; it was a SLC-LAX leg connecting onto China Airlines to TPE and eventually BKK. It was already a tight connection, but 1h less would have made it impossible. I had both a CI and DL representative at the gate who escorted me to the TBIT, through security, and to my gate to get to my flight on time, along with another passenger I didn't know who was on the same two segments and was in economy for both of them. That level of service is incredibly expensive. I don't think any other carrier with a hub here could justify SLC-AMS (including KLM, thank you alliances) / SLC-CDG / SLC-LHR. The high price is what drives an exceptional level of service and connectivity with Delta. I doubt that if DTW was a hub for any other airline, we would be seeing the exceptional level of transoceanic flights that it has now. I guess you really do have to pay for the appeal of having so many TPAC/TATL flights.

Actually the fare out of YYZ is on LH far better service than Delta. You are lucky my friend because about 30% of all of my Delta flights are late by an hour or more. Perhaps SLC is not that much effected by delays at the ATL hub like Detroit is and Delta has left me in ATL and there was NO ONE there to help my I had to fond another flight alternative on my own. I was traveling to a destination where every flight was over booked and eventually flew to the next closest airport just to get home so exceptional service is a stretch my friend. I am to the point where I don't want to buy a connection because I know how much capacity has been trimmed and the chances of getting on another flight in a timely matter is like playing Russian roulette. CS at Delta leaves a lot to be desired although I have to admit the on-board product has come a long way I was very pleased with my last flights on Delta to and from Frankfurt..

You can't blame Detroit's delays on ATL, amigo. DTW gets lake effect wind mucking with its ops all on its own.
I don't know much about Delta's ops, but I sincerely doubt their largest bases are so operationally interdependent as to cascade delays onto each other.
And even if Atlanta is delay-land, that'd hit the small bases like SLC (that have a lot of planes cycling from ATL) much more than DTW.

reasonable wrote:

klm—
have you ever reached somebody at WCAA to talk to them? it's a public agency, so I'm sure somebody there would be willing to meet you somewhere to explain more about where DTW is positioned right now relative to the market and peer airports. maybe it's worth getting a hold of one of their strategic planners for a 45 minute conversation over lunch or something. maybe that's a more productive path forward than harping into the void on a.net

Nah, it’s easier to complain than act.

Although this would be an interesting topic for the High School Junior Research Paper this poster cold Work on!

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

klm617 wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

This is the price you pay as a DL hub. DL is arguably the US's best airline in terms of performance, reliability, and product, but that comes at a high price. DL tickets never have and never will be cheap, and DL knows that their customers know that and that they choose to pay for better service, reliability, benefits, and support. It may be $700 more, but there is a fractional chance that your flight will ever be moved - it is expensive to maintain such stable and reliable ops.

How do I know this? I'm a Delta frequent flyer and skyteam elite and I live in SLC. It sucks having Delta fighting off any competition out of SLC, but I haven't had a single cancelled flight since January of 2015, and they moved me onto a flight one hour later; it was a SLC-LAX leg connecting onto China Airlines to TPE and eventually BKK. It was already a tight connection, but 1h less would have made it impossible. I had both a CI and DL representative at the gate who escorted me to the TBIT, through security, and to my gate to get to my flight on time, along with another passenger I didn't know who was on the same two segments and was in economy for both of them. That level of service is incredibly expensive. I don't think any other carrier with a hub here could justify SLC-AMS (including KLM, thank you alliances) / SLC-CDG / SLC-LHR. The high price is what drives an exceptional level of service and connectivity with Delta. I doubt that if DTW was a hub for any other airline, we would be seeing the exceptional level of transoceanic flights that it has now. I guess you really do have to pay for the appeal of having so many TPAC/TATL flights.

Actually the fare out of YYZ is on LH far better service than Delta. You are lucky my friend because about 30% of all of my Delta flights are late by an hour or more. Perhaps SLC is not that much effected by delays at the ATL hub like Detroit is and Delta has left me in ATL and there was NO ONE there to help my I had to fond another flight alternative on my own. I was traveling to a destination where every flight was over booked and eventually flew to the next closest airport just to get home so exceptional service is a stretch my friend. I am to the point where I don't want to buy a connection because I know how much capacity has been trimmed and the chances of getting on another flight in a timely matter is like playing Russian roulette. CS at Delta leaves a lot to be desired although I have to admit the on-board product has come a long way I was very pleased with my last flights on Delta to and from Frankfurt..

You can't blame Detroit's delays on ATL, amigo. DTW gets lake effect wind mucking with its ops all on its own.
I don't know much about Delta's ops, but I sincerely doubt their largest bases are so operationally interdependent as to cascade delays onto each other.
And even if Atlanta is delay-land, that'd hit the small bases like SLC (that have a lot of planes cycling from ATL) much more than DTW.

Are you kidding me DTW has many more planes the circulate through it and ATL more than SLC. The operations at ATL effect every eastern hub including MSP and to a much lesser extent SEA and SLC. Because most of theor equipment touchs ATL on any given day you better believe that what ever happens at ATL effects the entire network. I was once delayed well over an hour flying ORD-DTW when the crew was late getting into ORD from ATL on an inbound.

Let me make this clear, ATL, SLC, and DTW have nearly the same ontime rate. DTW is actually better than ATL in ontime rankings. You can always count on DTWers to be weirdly pessimistic and negative about their home base. DTW is the 6th most ontime airport in the country, and I can't remember where but I have access to a breakdown by airline of the top 30 airports and delta is actually around 91% in Detroit. Impressive if you ask me.

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

klm617 wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

This is the price you pay as a DL hub. DL is arguably the US's best airline in terms of performance, reliability, and product, but that comes at a high price. DL tickets never have and never will be cheap, and DL knows that their customers know that and that they choose to pay for better service, reliability, benefits, and support. It may be $700 more, but there is a fractional chance that your flight will ever be moved - it is expensive to maintain such stable and reliable ops.

How do I know this? I'm a Delta frequent flyer and skyteam elite and I live in SLC. It sucks having Delta fighting off any competition out of SLC, but I haven't had a single cancelled flight since January of 2015, and they moved me onto a flight one hour later; it was a SLC-LAX leg connecting onto China Airlines to TPE and eventually BKK. It was already a tight connection, but 1h less would have made it impossible. I had both a CI and DL representative at the gate who escorted me to the TBIT, through security, and to my gate to get to my flight on time, along with another passenger I didn't know who was on the same two segments and was in economy for both of them. That level of service is incredibly expensive. I don't think any other carrier with a hub here could justify SLC-AMS (including KLM, thank you alliances) / SLC-CDG / SLC-LHR. The high price is what drives an exceptional level of service and connectivity with Delta. I doubt that if DTW was a hub for any other airline, we would be seeing the exceptional level of transoceanic flights that it has now. I guess you really do have to pay for the appeal of having so many TPAC/TATL flights.

Actually the fare out of YYZ is on LH far better service than Delta. You are lucky my friend because about 30% of all of my Delta flights are late by an hour or more. Perhaps SLC is not that much effected by delays at the ATL hub like Detroit is and Delta has left me in ATL and there was NO ONE there to help my I had to fond another flight alternative on my own. I was traveling to a destination where every flight was over booked and eventually flew to the next closest airport just to get home so exceptional service is a stretch my friend. I am to the point where I don't want to buy a connection because I know how much capacity has been trimmed and the chances of getting on another flight in a timely matter is like playing Russian roulette. CS at Delta leaves a lot to be desired although I have to admit the on-board product has come a long way I was very pleased with my last flights on Delta to and from Frankfurt..

You can't blame Detroit's delays on ATL, amigo. DTW gets lake effect wind mucking with its ops all on its own.
I don't know much about Delta's ops, but I sincerely doubt their largest bases are so operationally interdependent as to cascade delays onto each other.
And even if Atlanta is delay-land, that'd hit the small bases like SLC (that have a lot of planes cycling from ATL) much more than DTW.

SLC is not a "small base", it has roughly the same number of daily departures as LaGuardia and JFK, and more than LAX and SEA. It is the 5th, nearly 4th largest DL hub.

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

You can't blame Detroit's delays on ATL, amigo. DTW gets lake effect wind mucking with its ops all on its own.
I don't know much about Delta's ops, but I sincerely doubt their largest bases are so operationally interdependent as to cascade delays onto each other.
And even if Atlanta is delay-land, that'd hit the small bases like SLC (that have a lot of planes cycling from ATL) much more than DTW.

Lake-effect wind? Do you mean lake-effect snow? DTW is well outside the lake-effect snow regions in Michigan.

klm617 wrote:

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

MSP is more likely to get ICN service before DTW gets a second-daily flight.

Coming from you I will take that as meaning we won't see KE or a second Delta flight to ICN here in DTW anytime soon. Shame one of Delta's top hubs to Asia and we have less service to ICN than both ATL and SEA. Albeit at Second DTW-ICN is way better than a ICN-MSP flight as any potential MSP connections can be handled very easily by either DTW or SEA.

You do realize that ATL and SEA to ICN are MUCH larger local markets than DTW right??? Hell, ATL-ICN is larger than SEA-ICN. ATL-ICN could almost fill a 777 with O&D alone.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

MSP is more likely to get ICN service before DTW gets a second-daily flight.

Coming from you I will take that as meaning we won't see KE or a second Delta flight to ICN here in DTW anytime soon. Shame one of Delta's top hubs to Asia and we have less service to ICN than both ATL and SEA. Albeit at Second DTW-ICN is way better than a ICN-MSP flight as any potential MSP connections can be handled very easily by either DTW or SEA.

You do realize that ATL and SEA to ICN are MUCH larger local markets than DTW right??? Hell, ATL-ICN is larger than SEA-ICN. ATL-ICN could almost fill a 777 with O&D alone.

While that maybe true until the JV between KE/DL Delta had no desire to serve ICN-ATL. That says a lot right there that Delta was serving DTW over ATL to ICN meaning in Delta's eyes DTW even though it my have been a smaller market it brought om yields n but yet when the JV went through right away they up ATL rather than bringiong in KE at Detroit and using DTW for it's connections to Asia. So while the ATL market may be bigger I suspect that DTW makes a bigger profit but there again Delta is choking the capacity at Detroit.

The usual suspects are asleep, NK has landed DTW a SAN and PDX nonstop for next summer! The last 2 years have included major west coast expansion which only will solidify NK's DTW hub, peak departures next summer is currently 33 daily departures which is a record high, also it will increase NK's overall share in the DTW market, the only way for DL to keep their share is if they added a 3rd PDX flight and a 5th SAN flight which we know they won't do.

Let's talk about SAN...finally! This route was well overdue and now that the monopoly is broken, it'll offer affordable fares to both ends and I can see the route doing very well. The only downside, AS will become uninterested.

PDX is has mixed feelings, but nonetheless exciting. IF and only IF AS decides to stay on PDX, someone is going to hurt and it won't be Delta because they can easily pick a few airports, force connections through DTW and fill a flight. AS will probably be the one to hurt and hopefully it doesn't deter them from continuing the route.

klm617 wrote:

[While that maybe true until the JV between KE/DL Delta had no desire to serve ICN-ATL. That says a lot right there that Delta was serving DTW over ATL to ICN meaning in Delta's eyes DTW even though it my have been a smaller market it brought om yields n but yet when the JV went through right away they up ATL rather than bringiong in KE at Detroit and using DTW for it's connections to Asia. So while the ATL market may be bigger I suspect that DTW makes a bigger profit but there again Delta is choking the capacity at Detroit.

No, in the early 2010s, DL operated ATL/ICN and ATL/PVG alongside DTW; at the time, the four routes operated with 777. But after investing tens of millions of dollars into maintenance and cabin upgrades within the 744 fleet, DL decided the type wasn't a good fit for its network, ordered 359 as its replacement and consolidated operations at DTW (ending ATL/ICN & PVG) while sunsetting the fleet. It was always an interim solution -- it was inevitable that DL would grow ATL once the new aircraft were on property. ATL is, after-all, the largest hub in the world.

Over the past five years, a.net has predicted the demise of DTW's transpacific network, insisting JFK, SEA & LAX would become the cornerstone of DL's transpacific network. Instead, DTW remains the largest transpacific gateway, wheras JFK has no service, SEA's service has shrunk since its initial inception & LAX has grown by a single flight.

Over the past year, there were many a.net "rumors" that DL was reconsidering the 359 launch between SEA & LAX, or possibly ATL. These weren't rumors -- they were "stuff a.net made up." DL was always committed to launching the 359 from DTW, and over the past 18 months aggressively marketed the product to its prime clientele. Switching the 359 launch to LAX/SYD did nothing for DL's core consumer base and really would serve no purpose other than enabling a group of a.net posters to pleasure themselves to the thought of their favorite airline operating the 359 on a route they will never travel on.

flymco753 wrote:

The usual suspects are asleep, NK has landed DTW a SAN and PDX nonstop for next summer! The last 2 years have included major west coast expansion which only will solidify NK's DTW hub, peak departures next summer is currently 33 daily departures which is a record high, also it will increase NK's overall share in the DTW market, the only way for DL to keep their share is if they added a 3rd PDX flight and a 5th SAN flight which we know they won't do.

Let's talk about SAN...finally! This route was well overdue and now that the monopoly is broken, it'll offer affordable fares to both ends and I can see the route doing very well. The only downside, AS will become uninterested.

PDX is has mixed feelings, but nonetheless exciting. IF and only IF AS decides to stay on PDX, someone is going to hurt and it won't be Delta because they can easily pick a few airports, force connections through DTW and fill a flight. AS will probably be the one to hurt and hopefully it doesn't deter them from continuing the route.

NK's service is likely seasonal and will have minimal impact on DL.

DL's currently scheduled to operate 4x daily to SAN, with all flights operated with 321; the route operated 4x daily 739 this past summer. This route has grown tremendously in capacity in recent years -- even during the peak capacity of the DTW hub (late 1990s/early 2000s), it operated 2x757; when NW synergized its east-west flows post-bankruptcy, it dropped to 1x320. Pretty amazing to see this growth under DL, even overtaking MSP in capacity (in NW's final years, it operated 5x MSP and 1x DTW). Alas, at the most, DL may place a 753 on the morning departure/late morning return, but more likely they'll use revenue management -- they'll sell cheaper seats, but attempt to increase loads a few points.

PDX is scheduled with 10 weekly 738; the route operated as a daily 757 this past summer. NW/DL have run a 757 departure late evening, returning overnight for many years (although it was a 739 a couple of times). I expect the same to happen next year, given it will match NK's times. The only question is the impact on additional services -- AS itself is operating a third redeye PDX-DTW, and I suspect that will have to change if it wants to succeed in the market. I doubt NK will have much impact, but it'll be interesting to watch this route develop. Pretty remarkable to think that NW operated 3x757 in the market for over a decade -- until its bankruptcy and the subsequent decision to synergize east-west flows -- and now we're worried 3 flights may be too much!

klm617 wrote:

You are lucky my friend because about 30% of all of my Delta flights are late by an hour or more. .

How many flights per month do to take on Delta?

The new NK DTW-PDX & DTW-SAN service is seasonal, per the press release.
http://ir.spirit.com/releasedetail.cfm? ... ID=1050172
In theory, I could see DTW-SAN being year-round, but no way DTW-PDX and that more or less a reflection of NK's operating model and best use of aircraft based on seasonality of routes. I'm actually pretty impressed with how NK has evolved into moving capacity between its key markets from north/south sun & leisure routes in the winter and flipping it to more west/east flying in the summer months.

DTW-SAN is a daytime flight. DTW-PDX is a evening departure / red-eye return that more or less is like utilization flying.
This kind of makes AS odd-man out on the DTW-PDX route, with both a lack of connecting feed and lack of recognition in the DTW market.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

The new NK DTW-PDX & DTW-SAN service is seasonal, per the press release.
http://ir.spirit.com/releasedetail.cfm? ... ID=1050172
In theory, I could see DTW-SAN being year-round, but no way DTW-PDX and that more or less a reflection of NK's operating model and best use of aircraft based on seasonality of routes. I'm actually pretty impressed with how NK has evolved into moving capacity between its key markets from north/sun sun routes in the winter and flipping it to more west/east flying in the summer months.

DTW-SAN is a daytime flight. DTW-PDX is a evening departure / red-eye return that more or less is like utilization flying.
This kind of makes AS odd-man out on the DTW-PDX route, with both a lack of connecting feed and lack of recognition in the DTW market.

True about AS, but because AS is also a red-eye, it means AS is also at least in part utilization flying and thus can afford lower margins on the routes.

It will be interesting to see if DL continues the daytime PDX-DTW flight. As long as they do, they will maintain the business traffic on the route. Even a loyal AS flyer may opt to fly DL if it means avoiding the dreaded red eye.

A few things:

DL hasn't really announced any of their new Summer 2018 domestic network changes. We should be hearing some of those in the next few weeks.
While I wouldn't look for any big drastic changes, it will be interesting to see how much additional capacity DL plans for Summer 2018 considering the strength of the economy, the increased projections for travel over 2017, and overall positive trends and leading indicators for domestic flying.



I think we are possible to see DL launch DTW-SJC.
I could also see a Saturday-only DTW-ANC flight.
Perhaps DTW-BGR resumes as summer seasonal

I noticed DL has scheduled DTW-YVR at 2x Saturday-only this summer? Did they operate 1-2 Saturday flights in the past? I feel like this has been on of those on and off again seasonal routes.

kavok wrote:

True about AS, but because AS is also a red-eye, it means AS is also at least in part utilization flying and thus can afford lower margins on the routes.

It will be interesting to see if DL continues the daytime PDX-DTW flight. As long as they do, they will maintain the business traffic on the route. Even a loyal AS flyer may opt to fly DL if it means avoiding the dreaded red eye.

DTW-PDX isn't exactly a business-heavy route, at least from an DTW O&D perspective. There aren't a ton of natural business ties between the two cities. However the day-time flight connects well in both directions with large connecting banks with many of the Northeast/Midwest/Mid-Atlantic market. Its a strong leisure market in the summer months.
DL has enough diversified connecting feed and traffic flows and they don't directly compete for a lot of the same passengers as NK in a lot of these cases. They can easily sustain 1x year-round, 2x summer seasonal on DTW-PDX.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

DTW-PDX isn't exactly a business-heavy route, at least from an DTW O&D perspective. There aren't a ton of natural business ties between the two cities. However the day-time flight connects well in both directions with large connecting banks with many of the Northeast/Midwest/Mid-Atlantic market. Its a strong leisure market in the summer months.
DL has enough diversified connecting feed and traffic flows and they don't directly compete for a lot of the same passengers as NK in a lot of these cases. They can easily sustain 1x year-round, 2x summer seasonal on DTW-PDX.

PDX was clearly undeserved. For most of this decade, DTW has averaged 2/3 of the local traffic as MSP, significantly higher average fares (~25%-33%, depending on the quarter and year)... and had a whopping one flight that operated 4x-5x weekly on a seasonal basis, compared to 5x-7x daily 757 at MSP. NW synergized its east-west traffic flows during bankrupcy, and DL's largely maintained it. The DTW hub could easily sustain 2x daily (sans Saturday) service most of the year. This was a major pet peeve of mine a few years ago, when I was flying to PDX a few times a year.

It's like SNA. I've been on the eastbound portion three times now and while it's a small sample, the First Class upgrade list was 40 deep two times and 60 deep one time, so clearly DL's attracting premium traffic -contrary to a.net's predictions (and the baggage claim at DTW has been crowded, which is a good sign given that I'm an outlier among business travelers when it comes to checking bags). I pray this flight remains -- I can get from my hotel room to the gate in less than 40-minutes; for a similar departure time, I had given myself 3-hours for LAX, got on the plane right before the door closed, gave myself 4-hours the next time... and missed my flight.

A few years back my wife and I just flew nonstop to SEA and drove down into Oregon instead of flying to PDX since the schedule and fares were so bad from DTW. The lone nonstop was the evening departure/red-eye return and going for over $700 r/t versus 5 daily nonstop flights for about $450 to SEA.

I just have a strong disdain for domestic West Coast-DTW red-eye flights since they are too short to get any meaningful rest.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

A few years back my wife and I just flew nonstop to SEA and drove down into Oregon instead of flying to PDX since the schedule and fares were so bad from DTW. The lone nonstop was the evening departure/red-eye return and going for over $700 r/t versus 5 daily nonstop flights for about $450 to SEA.

I just have a strong disdain for domestic West Coast-DTW red-eye flights since they are too short to get any meaningful rest.

When it was easier to manipulate fares, I could manufacture a DTW-SEA-PDX routing on NW-DL/AS for a small premium over DTW-SEA -- and significant discount over DTW-PDX. I'm with you on redeyes -- you can always tell who's a frequent traveler, because road warriors know that most redyes suck whereas the a.net community thinks that 2-hour LAS-DFW redeye -- where you're lucky to get an hour's sleep -- "prints money" because the times are so convenient (and anybody who's ever taken a similar flight knows it takes a week to fully recover from).

But PDX will forever be a mystery to me -- DL actually carries a larger amount of traffic via ATL/MSP/SLC than nonstop, and at a significant premium. Apparently, most people are willing to pay more to NOT fly the evening departure/redeye return, yet for whatever reason, DL refuses to let a daytime flight stick (and it's generally cancelled months out, well before most people purchase their tickets).

compensateme wrote:

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

A few years back my wife and I just flew nonstop to SEA and drove down into Oregon instead of flying to PDX since the schedule and fares were so bad from DTW. The lone nonstop was the evening departure/red-eye return and going for over $700 r/t versus 5 daily nonstop flights for about $450 to SEA.

I just have a strong disdain for domestic West Coast-DTW red-eye flights since they are too short to get any meaningful rest.

When it was easier to manipulate fares, I could manufacture a DTW-SEA-PDX routing on NW-DL/AS for a small premium over DTW-SEA -- and significant discount over DTW-PDX. I'm with you on redeyes -- you can always tell who's a frequent traveler, because road warriors know that most redyes suck whereas the a.net community thinks that 2-hour LAS-DFW redeye -- where you're lucky to get an hour's sleep -- "prints money" because the times are so convenient (and anybody who's ever taken a similar flight knows it takes a week to fully recover from).

But PDX will forever be a mystery to me -- DL actually carries a larger amount of traffic via ATL/MSP/SLC than nonstop, and at a significant premium. Apparently, most people are willing to pay more to NOT fly the evening departure/redeye return, yet for whatever reason, DL refuses to let a daytime flight stick (and it's generally cancelled months out, well before most people purchase their tickets).

There's a daytime departure now for PDX-DTW, although I think it may only be temporary...

flymco753 wrote:

PDX is has mixed feelings, but nonetheless exciting. IF and only IF AS decides to stay on PDX, someone is going to hurt and it won't be Delta because they can easily pick a few airports, force connections through DTW and fill a flight. AS will probably be the one to hurt and hopefully it doesn't deter them from continuing the route.

This is probably why AS's PDX-DTW flight is a red-eye. Because if the plane were to land back at PDX in the morning, then passengers could use that as a gateway/connection to HNL, OGG, ANC, and others as well...

compensateme wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

The usual suspects are asleep, NK has landed DTW a SAN and PDX nonstop for next summer! The last 2 years have included major west coast expansion which only will solidify NK's DTW hub, peak departures next summer is currently 33 daily departures which is a record high, also it will increase NK's overall share in the DTW market, the only way for DL to keep their share is if they added a 3rd PDX flight and a 5th SAN flight which we know they won't do.

Let's talk about SAN...finally! This route was well overdue and now that the monopoly is broken, it'll offer affordable fares to both ends and I can see the route doing very well. The only downside, AS will become uninterested.

PDX is has mixed feelings, but nonetheless exciting. IF and only IF AS decides to stay on PDX, someone is going to hurt and it won't be Delta because they can easily pick a few airports, force connections through DTW and fill a flight. AS will probably be the one to hurt and hopefully it doesn't deter them from continuing the route.

NK's service is likely seasonal and will have minimal impact on DL.

DL's currently scheduled to operate 4x daily to SAN, with all flights operated with 321; the route operated 4x daily 739 this past summer. This route has grown tremendously in capacity in recent years -- even during the peak capacity of the DTW hub (late 1990s/early 2000s), it operated 2x757; when NW synergized its east-west flows post-bankruptcy, it dropped to 1x320. Pretty amazing to see this growth under DL, even overtaking MSP in capacity (in NW's final years, it operated 5x MSP and 1x DTW). Alas, at the most, DL may place a 753 on the morning departure/late morning return, but more likely they'll use revenue management -- they'll sell cheaper seats, but attempt to increase loads a few points.

PDX is scheduled with 10 weekly 738; the route operated as a daily 757 this past summer. NW/DL have run a 757 departure late evening, returning overnight for many years (although it was a 739 a couple of times). I expect the same to happen next year, given it will match NK's times. The only question is the impact on additional services -- AS itself is operating a third redeye PDX-DTW, and I suspect that will have to change if it wants to succeed in the market. I doubt NK will have much impact, but it'll be interesting to watch this route develop. Pretty remarkable to think that NW operated 3x757 in the market for over a decade -- until its bankruptcy and the subsequent decision to synergize east-west flows -- and now we're worried 3 flights may be too much!

I never really was into West Coast back in the NW days because #1 I wasn’t really old enough to understand and #2 my first focus was on Florida routes so I appreciate a background of where NW stoood with PDX. Let’s see where this goes, will this be a BOS situation? Where 2 new carries are in the market and it stimulates, or the market remains what it is and someone will either scale back or withdrawal.

FA9295 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

PDX is has mixed feelings, but nonetheless exciting. IF and only IF AS decides to stay on PDX, someone is going to hurt and it won't be Delta because they can easily pick a few airports, force connections through DTW and fill a flight. AS will probably be the one to hurt and hopefully it doesn't deter them from continuing the route.

This is probably why AS's PDX-DTW flight is a red-eye. Because if the plane were to land back at PDX in the morning, then passengers could use that as a gateway/connection to HNL, OGG, ANC, and others as well...

You bring up a good point, I think that’s why AS might survive with PDX because of the connections. I’m super excited to see what happens with this and where it goes.

flymco753 wrote:

PDX is has mixed feelings, but nonetheless exciting. IF and only IF AS decides to stay on PDX, someone is going to hurt and it won't be Delta because they can easily pick a few airports, force connections through DTW and fill a flight. AS will probably be the one to hurt and hopefully it doesn't deter them from continuing the route.

Also, if for whatever reason, AS decides to back out of the PDX market, I'm sure DL would be all over that in a heartbeat even with PDX's proximity to DL's SEA base. I'm sure PDX would become a focus city for DL, sort of similar to their RDU base...

Edit: Oh nevermind, I thought you were talking about all of AS's PDX operations, not just the DTW route...

globalcabotage wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Coming from you I will take that as meaning we won't see KE or a second Delta flight to ICN here in DTW anytime soon. Shame one of Delta's top hubs to Asia and we have less service to ICN than both ATL and SEA. Albeit at Second DTW-ICN is way better than a ICN-MSP flight as any potential MSP connections can be handled very easily by either DTW or SEA.

You do realize that ATL and SEA to ICN are MUCH larger local markets than DTW right??? Hell, ATL-ICN is larger than SEA-ICN. ATL-ICN could almost fill a 777 with O&D alone.

Logic and the DTW fan club can not be used in the same sentence. This thread is all about why DTW is the greatest airport in the world, but not up to potential due to DL, Wayne County, Chicago, Toronto, and the fact that the cities population has shrunk from 1.8M to under 700K (shocked, given the liberal democrat policies in the city).

Until DTW has more airlines than JFK, LAX, MIA, SFO combined and more flights and seats than ATL & ORD combined, these posters will be in total F the world mentality.

DTW is the ME3 hubs all rolled into one. It’s unfortunate that the world doesn’t realize this.

Youre not helping. This is the other extreme.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

globalcabotage wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

You do realize that ATL and SEA to ICN are MUCH larger local markets than DTW right??? Hell, ATL-ICN is larger than SEA-ICN. ATL-ICN could almost fill a 777 with O&D alone.

Logic and the DTW fan club can not be used in the same sentence. This thread is all about why DTW is the greatest airport in the world, but not up to potential due to DL, Wayne County, Chicago, Toronto, and the fact that the cities population has shrunk from 1.8M to under 700K (shocked, given the liberal democrat policies in the city).

Until DTW has more airlines than JFK, LAX, MIA, SFO combined and more flights and seats than ATL & ORD combined, these posters will be in total F the world mentality.

DTW is the ME3 hubs all rolled into one. It’s unfortunate that the world doesn’t realize this.

Youre not helping. This is the other extreme.

Thanks. I wrote a similar response, it was deleted, but the moderators decided to let his listing stand. Maybe if they did their jobs, this crap would end.

FA9295 wrote:

compensateme wrote:

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

A few years back my wife and I just flew nonstop to SEA and drove down into Oregon instead of flying to PDX since the schedule and fares were so bad from DTW. The lone nonstop was the evening departure/red-eye return and going for over $700 r/t versus 5 daily nonstop flights for about $450 to SEA.

I just have a strong disdain for domestic West Coast-DTW red-eye flights since they are too short to get any meaningful rest.

When it was easier to manipulate fares, I could manufacture a DTW-SEA-PDX routing on NW-DL/AS for a small premium over DTW-SEA -- and significant discount over DTW-PDX. I'm with you on redeyes -- you can always tell who's a frequent traveler, because road warriors know that most redyes suck whereas the a.net community thinks that 2-hour LAS-DFW redeye -- where you're lucky to get an hour's sleep -- "prints money" because the times are so convenient (and anybody who's ever taken a similar flight knows it takes a week to fully recover from).

But PDX will forever be a mystery to me -- DL actually carries a larger amount of traffic via ATL/MSP/SLC than nonstop, and at a significant premium. Apparently, most people are willing to pay more to NOT fly the evening departure/redeye return, yet for whatever reason, DL refuses to let a daytime flight stick (and it's generally cancelled months out, well before most people purchase their tickets).

There's a daytime departure now for PDX-DTW, although I think it may only be temporary...

Prior to the AS addition, DL just flew once daily PDX-DTW (a red eye). When AS added their PDX-DTW flight, DL countered with adding a second daily PDX-DTW flight (with the second PDX flight being a non-red-eye daytime departure).

Then, for this winter, DL reduced their schedule back down to the one daily PDX-DTW flight... but instead eliminated the red eye and kept the “new” morning departure flight. I am unsure if next summer 2018 DL will bring back the double daily flight and reinstate the red eye, keep it at just the one current daytime PDX-DTW flight, or do something different.

compensateme wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

globalcabotage wrote:

Logic and the DTW fan club can not be used in the same sentence. This thread is all about why DTW is the greatest airport in the world, but not up to potential due to DL, Wayne County, Chicago, Toronto, and the fact that the cities population has shrunk from 1.8M to under 700K (shocked, given the liberal democrat policies in the city).

Until DTW has more airlines than JFK, LAX, MIA, SFO combined and more flights and seats than ATL & ORD combined, these posters will be in total F the world mentality.

DTW is the ME3 hubs all rolled into one. It’s unfortunate that the world doesn’t realize this.

Youre not helping. This is the other extreme.

Thanks. I wrote a similar response, it was deleted, but the moderators decided to let his listing stand. Maybe if they did their jobs, this crap would end.

Alright, I don't want to start any trouble here, so if people don't respond to this, or if this gets deleted, then that's just fine... but I'm fairly new to a.net (I registered this account almost two years ago but have only been substantially active here for the last three months)...

This may not be the correct way to go about seeking this information, so I apologize in advance here... but I've heard on a lot of separate threads/forums about this DTW "doom and gloom" trolling here, and I'm not really sure what's going on. Would someone be willing to PM/private message me what the big deal is (and who these trolls are), cause as I'm reading this discussion, I'm getting kind of lost here...

Anyone know why LAX-DTW (DL1326) on Dec. 6th has been switched over to a 772? Auto show traffic coming back? Can't say I mind a whole lot, having never flown on a Delta 777, but just curious.

klm617 wrote:

While that maybe true until the JV between KE/DL Delta had no desire to serve ICN-ATL. That says a lot right there that Delta was serving DTW over ATL to ICN meaning in Delta's eyes DTW even though it my have been a smaller market it brought om yields n but yet when the JV went through right away they up ATL rather than bringiong in KE at Detroit and using DTW for it's connections to Asia. So while the ATL market may be bigger I suspect that DTW makes a bigger profit but there again Delta is choking the capacity at Detroit.

Maybe that's because DTW serves more direct markets in Asia than ATL. ATL passengers have to connect in ICN while DTW passsengers can have nonstop flights to more destinations.

FA9295 wrote:

compensateme wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Youre not helping. This is the other extreme.

Thanks. I wrote a similar response, it was deleted, but the moderators decided to let his listing stand. Maybe if they did their jobs, this crap would end.

Alright, I don't want to start any trouble here, so if people don't respond to this, or if this gets deleted, then that's just fine... but I'm fairly new to a.net (I registered this account almost two years ago but have only been substantially active here for the last three months)...

This may not be the correct way to go about seeking this information, so I apologize in advance here... but I've heard on a lot of separate threads/forums about this DTW "doom and gloom" trolling here, and I'm not really sure what's going on. Would someone be willing to PM/private message me what the big deal is (and who these trolls are), cause as I'm reading this discussion, I'm getting kind of lost here...

The reality is that there is no doom and gloom. Growth at airports tends to be cyclical. Every airport gets their day in the sun. For example, ATL had explosive growth between 2006 and 2010. Thats when you had DXB, JNB, ICN, VIE, PRG, etc. come on board. Of course, some of those are no longer there. DFW got its day in the sun around 2013-2015 when ICN, LIM, BOG, UIO, HKG, PVG, and PEK were launched. Those are all still there. IAH had an explosion of international carriers around 2013-2014 when you had TK, BR, CA, KE, and NH come in. KE since left.

To the point, DTW got selected as DL's main Asia hub. Its held on to all the destinations it got except HKG.

The "doom and gloom" (if you want to call it that) comes from two things: jealousy and the expectation that growth should never stop after a airport growth spurt. Airports cannot continue growing indefinitely. Airlines try experiments and sometimes they dont work. When they do work that doesnt mean the growth trends need to continue. The jealously comes when people think that, because another airport has a specific route, their airport should have it. Look at all the back and forth on the DL growth thread about DTW-MAN. There is no reason whatsoever that route should be flown. DL flies it from ATL and VS has it with the DL code from JFK. Those (especially JFK) are decent sized markets to MAN. DTW-MAN couldnt fill King Air. It would be like someone from ATL complaining that, because DTW-NGO is flown, they should have it too. Then to complete the jealousy, some people turn it into a conspiracy. They think an airline is "out to get them". It makes them look like Alex Jones (and that isnt a compliment).

There is no doom and gloom. DTW is a stable market at this point in time. I wouldnt look for explosive growth, but a couple of additions will be likely.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

FA9295 wrote:

compensateme wrote:

Thanks. I wrote a similar response, it was deleted, but the moderators decided to let his listing stand. Maybe if they did their jobs, this crap would end.

Alright, I don't want to start any trouble here, so if people don't respond to this, or if this gets deleted, then that's just fine... but I'm fairly new to a.net (I registered this account almost two years ago but have only been substantially active here for the last three months)...

This may not be the correct way to go about seeking this information, so I apologize in advance here... but I've heard on a lot of separate threads/forums about this DTW "doom and gloom" trolling here, and I'm not really sure what's going on. Would someone be willing to PM/private message me what the big deal is (and who these trolls are), cause as I'm reading this discussion, I'm getting kind of lost here...

The reality is that there is no doom and gloom. Growth at airports tends to be cyclical. Every airport gets their day in the sun. For example, ATL had explosive growth between 2006 and 2010. Thats when you had DXB, JNB, ICN, VIE, PRG, etc. come on board. Of course, some of those are no longer there. DFW got its day in the sun around 2013-2015 when ICN, LIM, BOG, UIO, HKG, PVG, and PEK were launched. Those are all still there. IAH had an explosion of international carriers around 2013-2014 when you had TK, BR, CA, KE, and NH come in. KE since left.

To the point, DTW got selected as DL's main Asia hub. Its held on to all the destinations it got except HKG.

The "doom and gloom" (if you want to call it that) comes from two things: jealousy and the expectation that growth should never stop after a airport growth spurt. Airports cannot continue growing indefinitely. Airlines try experiments and sometimes they dont work. When they do work that doesnt mean the growth trends need to continue. The jealously comes when people think that, because another airport has a specific route, their airport should have it. Look at all the back and forth on the DL growth thread about DTW-MAN. There is no reason whatsoever that route should be flown. DL flies it from ATL and VS has it with the DL code from JFK. Those (especially JFK) are decent sized markets to MAN. DTW-MAN couldnt fill King Air. It would be like someone from ATL complaining that, because DTW-NGO is flown, they should have it too. Then to complete the jealousy, some people turn it into a conspiracy. They think an airline is "out to get them". It makes them look like Alex Jones (and that isnt a compliment).

There is no doom and gloom. DTW is a stable market at this point in time. I wouldnt look for explosive growth, but a couple of additions will be likely.

The reality is several airports in the same class size as Detroit are gaining new service right and left. At least NK is showing some commitment in the market but they really havn't significantly increased there departures from Detroit they just keep moving the planes around keeping Detroit growth pretty flat at around 20 to 25 departures. There is less diversity in this market than markets with similar O/D numbers except for maybe Charlotte. Every airport and city of it's size has some kind of dedicated cargo service Detroit has none.

klm617 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

FA9295 wrote:

Alright, I don't want to start any trouble here, so if people don't respond to this, or if this gets deleted, then that's just fine... but I'm fairly new to a.net (I registered this account almost two years ago but have only been substantially active here for the last three months)...

This may not be the correct way to go about seeking this information, so I apologize in advance here... but I've heard on a lot of separate threads/forums about this DTW "doom and gloom" trolling here, and I'm not really sure what's going on. Would someone be willing to PM/private message me what the big deal is (and who these trolls are), cause as I'm reading this discussion, I'm getting kind of lost here...

The reality is that there is no doom and gloom. Growth at airports tends to be cyclical. Every airport gets their day in the sun. For example, ATL had explosive growth between 2006 and 2010. Thats when you had DXB, JNB, ICN, VIE, PRG, etc. come on board. Of course, some of those are no longer there. DFW got its day in the sun around 2013-2015 when ICN, LIM, BOG, UIO, HKG, PVG, and PEK were launched. Those are all still there. IAH had an explosion of international carriers around 2013-2014 when you had TK, BR, CA, KE, and NH come in. KE since left.

To the point, DTW got selected as DL's main Asia hub. Its held on to all the destinations it got except HKG.

The "doom and gloom" (if you want to call it that) comes from two things: jealousy and the expectation that growth should never stop after a airport growth spurt. Airports cannot continue growing indefinitely. Airlines try experiments and sometimes they dont work. When they do work that doesnt mean the growth trends need to continue. The jealously comes when people think that, because another airport has a specific route, their airport should have it. Look at all the back and forth on the DL growth thread about DTW-MAN. There is no reason whatsoever that route should be flown. DL flies it from ATL and VS has it with the DL code from JFK. Those (especially JFK) are decent sized markets to MAN. DTW-MAN couldnt fill King Air. It would be like someone from ATL complaining that, because DTW-NGO is flown, they should have it too. Then to complete the jealousy, some people turn it into a conspiracy. They think an airline is "out to get them". It makes them look like Alex Jones (and that isnt a compliment).

There is no doom and gloom. DTW is a stable market at this point in time. I wouldnt look for explosive growth, but a couple of additions will be likely.

The reality is several airports in the same class size as Detroit are gaining new service right and left. At least NK is showing some commitment in the market but they really havn't significantly increased there departures from Detroit they just keep moving the planes around keeping Detroit growth pretty flat at around 20 to 25 departures. There is less diversity in this market than markets with similar O/D numbers except for maybe Charlotte. Every airport and city of it's size has some kind of dedicated cargo service Detroit has none.

DTW and MSP don't have dedicated cargo services because most of that is all routed through ORD and CVG. Also, I was quoting other people saying "doom and gloom" referring to DTW, I certainly don't think that at all... I guess in summary, the ongoing issue here is that natives from "rival cities" (the smaller ones) are jealous of the larger cities getting all of the service.

Anyhow, DL's strategy with DTW/MSP has always confused me. For instance, PDX-MSP has up to 4x-5x daily and PDX-DTW only has 1x-2x daily. Seems a bit odd. There's a lot more examples where MSP has more routes than DTW and vice versa...

FA9295 wrote:

[Anyhow, DL's strategy with DTW/MSP has always confused me. For instance, PDX-MSP has up to 4x-5x daily and PDX-DTW only has 1x-2x daily. Seems a bit odd. There's a lot more examples where MSP has more routes than DTW and vice versa...

It has always appeared to me (as an admitted "outsider"). that DTW's main role is as an international feeder, particularly for flights from the eastern half of the country to Asia, and from the midwest (and even far west) to Europe, servicing communities without convenient connections to Seattle (for Asia) and JFK or ATL (going to Europe). This role meshes well with the needs of the auto industry as well, which provided premium traffic in both directions.

MSP, on the other hand, is a stronger collector for midwest passengers; it has a strong domestic network, but a relatively weaker schedule for international travel. It also seems that corporations based in and around Minnesota are more likely to demand travel domestically that Detroit's industries, and are less likely (I am thinking of Target, UnitedHealth, the banks and insurance companies, etc.) to be traveling overseas.

So each airport caters differently not only to their locally-based traffic, but also has a distinctly different role as a hub as well.

FA9295 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

The reality is that there is no doom and gloom. Growth at airports tends to be cyclical. Every airport gets their day in the sun. For example, ATL had explosive growth between 2006 and 2010. Thats when you had DXB, JNB, ICN, VIE, PRG, etc. come on board. Of course, some of those are no longer there. DFW got its day in the sun around 2013-2015 when ICN, LIM, BOG, UIO, HKG, PVG, and PEK were launched. Those are all still there. IAH had an explosion of international carriers around 2013-2014 when you had TK, BR, CA, KE, and NH come in. KE since left.

To the point, DTW got selected as DL's main Asia hub. Its held on to all the destinations it got except HKG.

The "doom and gloom" (if you want to call it that) comes from two things: jealousy and the expectation that growth should never stop after a airport growth spurt. Airports cannot continue growing indefinitely. Airlines try experiments and sometimes they dont work. When they do work that doesnt mean the growth trends need to continue. The jealously comes when people think that, because another airport has a specific route, their airport should have it. Look at all the back and forth on the DL growth thread about DTW-MAN. There is no reason whatsoever that route should be flown. DL flies it from ATL and VS has it with the DL code from JFK. Those (especially JFK) are decent sized markets to MAN. DTW-MAN couldnt fill King Air. It would be like someone from ATL complaining that, because DTW-NGO is flown, they should have it too. Then to complete the jealousy, some people turn it into a conspiracy. They think an airline is "out to get them". It makes them look like Alex Jones (and that isnt a compliment).

There is no doom and gloom. DTW is a stable market at this point in time. I wouldnt look for explosive growth, but a couple of additions will be likely.

The reality is several airports in the same class size as Detroit are gaining new service right and left. At least NK is showing some commitment in the market but they really havn't significantly increased there departures from Detroit they just keep moving the planes around keeping Detroit growth pretty flat at around 20 to 25 departures. There is less diversity in this market than markets with similar O/D numbers except for maybe Charlotte. Every airport and city of it's size has some kind of dedicated cargo service Detroit has none.

DTW and MSP don't have dedicated cargo services because most of that is all routed through ORD and CVG. Also, I was quoting other people saying "doom and gloom" referring to DTW, I certainly don't think that at all... I guess in summary, the ongoing issue here is that natives from "rival cities" (the smaller ones) are jealous of the larger cities getting all of the service.

Anyhow, DL's strategy with DTW/MSP has always confused me. For instance, PDX-MSP has up to 4x-5x daily and PDX-DTW only has 1x-2x daily. Seems a bit odd. There's a lot more examples where MSP has more routes than DTW and vice versa...

Well the reason MSP has no dedicated cargo flights is because there is very little manufacturing done there while the northern OH and Southeast Michigan is on of the largest manufacturing regions in the USA. So if PIT warrants twice weekly QR flights then a Detroit dedicated bulk cargo flight should be given from Korea or China at the very least.

klm617 wrote:

So if PIT warrants twice weekly QR flights then a Detroit dedicated bulk cargo flight should be given from Korea or China at the very least.

There you go, cherrypicking again. PIT would love to have a quarter of the destinations that DTW has. Who cares about cargo flights? You're really grasping at straws now.

klm617 wrote:

Well the reason MSP has no dedicated cargo flights is because there is very little manufacturing done there while the northern OH and Southeast Michigan is on of the largest manufacturing regions in the USA. So if PIT warrants twice weekly QR flights then a Detroit dedicated bulk cargo flight should be given from Korea or China at the very least.

YIP is the de-facto cargo hub for the on-demand integrated logistics needs of the automotive industry. The air cargo needs vastly differ by region and industry.

Listen I tend to ignore you posts about 50% of the time but you continually choose to not listen to other posters, have made zero effort to educate yourself or learn from other posters who attempt to provide other perspectives or data, go off on nonsensical diatribes ad-naseum about the same things over and over again, and literally pollute every thread that remotely involves DTW, ATL, MSP, any DL hub, and new route that doesn't include DTW, NK, or the WCAA.

Like others have said, go schedule a meeting with the WCAA and report back on what you find.
You have made DTW the laughing stock of a.net with your rants.

/rant over.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

A few things:

DL hasn't really announced any of their new Summer 2018 domestic network changes. We should be hearing some of those in the next few weeks.
While I wouldn't look for any big drastic changes, it will be interesting to see how much additional capacity DL plans for Summer 2018 considering the strength of the economy, the increased projections for travel over 2017, and overall positive trends and leading indicators for domestic flying.



I think we are possible to see DL launch DTW-SJC.
I could also see a Saturday-only DTW-ANC flight.
Perhaps DTW-BGR resumes as summer seasonal

I noticed DL has scheduled DTW-YVR at 2x Saturday-only this summer? Did they operate 1-2 Saturday flights in the past? I feel like this has been on of those on and off again seasonal routes.

DTW-SJC is very likely since it’s now the largest underserved market and premium heavy.

I don’t see why they’d do a Saturday ANC. I also don’t see them bringing BGR back. YVR was 2x 320 on Sat, it never left or got in light.

Perhaps we can expect an SMF return too, DL does a good job with SFO so they won’t add OAK to counter NK.

flymco753 wrote:

]DTW-SJC is very likely since it’s now the largest underserved market and premium heavy.

I don’t see why they’d do a Saturday ANC. I also don’t see them bringing BGR back. YVR was 2x 320 on Sat, it never left or got in light.

Perhaps we can expect an SMF return too, DL does a good job with SFO so they won’t add OAK to counter NK.

SMF was an odd route. NW did not operate the route prior to the merger, nor did DL offer service from CVG. It operated summer seasonal for two years but in limited frequency; both years it was scheduled in advance as an MD-88 but switched to the A320 right before launch (of course, DL had mainline equipment shortages during that timeframe). Frankly, I'd be surprised if the route returned. SJC, OTOH, was launched circa 1997 alongside RNO as a preemptive strike against Reno Air. RNO ended in 2000 but SJC lasted until 2003. I'm skeptical DL will venture into SJC, as it'd cannibalize SFO -- with average fares on direct flights trending well into the $400-range, DTW/SFO is one of DL's top performing routes -- one that it and NW have notoriously constrained capacity on to inflate fares. OAK won't happen -- DL doesn't even operate it from ATL even though WN serves San Francisco via OAK, simply because one must discount OAK to make it attractive, impacting performance at SFO.

NW inaugurated DTW/ANC in 1990, and the route operated seasonally annually until DL whacked it a couple years ago, in favor of upgauging ATL from the 757 to 763. With ATL scheduled to operate as a 757 next summer, limited service from DTW is definitely a possibility for natural growth.