So, just as the DL/KE joint venture is poised to take off, North Korea has flared as a major threat to the US and the Asia Pacific region. I would posit that many passengers would be reluctant to connect via ICN within range of North Korean artillery. I wonder if this will cause DL to reevaluate its Asia strategy and focus on nonstops from SEA that bypass the potential war zone.

I'm connecting through ICN in two weeks and I'm not concerned. Some people may think twice, but usually these events flare up for a few weeks and die off just as quickly. Tensions with North Korea are very cyclical in that respect, and have been for many, many years. In the overall scheme of a JV, this is likely a blip on the radar, because they're in this for the long term.

atcsundevil wrote:

I'm connecting through ICN in two weeks and I'm not concerned. Some people may think twice, but usually these events flare up for a few weeks and die off just as quickly. Tensions with North Korea are very cyclical in that respect, and have been for many, many years. In the overall scheme of a JV, this is likely a blip on the radar, because they're in this for the long term.

And keep in mind that North Korea's "dear leader" has threatened to aim his missiles towards Tokyo, too. A deranged narcissist shouldn't deter anyone's plans.

Should probably edit the title.

Korean Air = KE
KLM = KL

TigerFlyer wrote:

So, just as the DL/KL joint venture is poised to take off,

Surely this title and thread are about DL/KE and not DL/KLM.

I generally agree - I don't think it will have a major effect. I think if it becomes an active military conflict, we will see impacts in travel to the western pacific rim.

If you've seen how "reliable" North Korea's missile systems have been in testing, any such war between North and South Korea will end fast and that it will be North Korea that agrees to unconditional surrender. And a DL/KE JV could be key to helping American companies and American suppliers get the air links they need to invest in a reunified Korea. The likes of Samsung, LG, and such would also benefit.

But on a different note, I wouldn't be surprised if North Korea seizes some KE and OZ jets and repaints them in Air Koryo colors at the beginning of such a war, a la Iraqi Airways-livery KU jets.

FWAERJ wrote:

But on a different note, I wouldn't be surprised if North Korea seizes some KE and OZ jets and repaints them in Air Koryo colors at the beginning of such a war, a la Iraqi Airways-livery KU jets.

If there is a war and North Koreans are invading you will likely see KE/OZ get their jets out of Seoul as quickly as possible. The Iraq invasion into Kuwait was basically a sneak attack in the middle of the night, North Korea would be far less successful at such a strategy.

Polot wrote:

FWAERJ wrote:

But on a different note, I wouldn't be surprised if North Korea seizes some KE and OZ jets and repaints them in Air Koryo colors at the beginning of such a war, a la Iraqi Airways-livery KU jets.

If there is a war and North Koreans are invading you will likely see KE/OZ get their jets out of Seoul as quickly as possible. The Iraq invasion into Kuwait was basically a sneak attack in the middle of the night, North Korea would be far less successful at such a strategy.

I agree completely, but even an airport like ICN designed for ultra-high volume could still have a small amount of planes unable to make it out.

And I don't think either KE or OZ will let new flights arrive at ICN in the event of conflict - it would be departures to other Asian countries only. Watch Japanese and Chinese airports become to KE and OZ what Canadian airports were to US carriers after 9/11.

FWAERJ wrote:

I agree completely, but even an airport like ICN designed for ultra-high volume could still have a small amount of planes unable to make it out.

True, but if we are the point where North Korea has control of ICN and is able to repaint planes then there are bigger issues to be concerned about than KE/OZ's partnerships.

Aircraft left behind are more likely to be blown up in warfare than sent into Air Koryo's fleet.

Sort of dumb, just look at what surronds Israel. American carriers still fly and operate to Tel Aviv.

Polot wrote:

If there is a war and North Koreans are invading you will likely see KE/OZ get their jets out of Seoul as quickly as possible. The Iraq invasion into Kuwait was basically a sneak attack in the middle of the night, North Korea would be far less successful at such a strategy.

I'm not sure that evacuating aircraft from ICN would be a successful strategy in the event of a surprise attack from the DPRK; the airport is 25 miles from the border and I certainly wouldn't put it past the Supreme Leader to bomb the runways or shoot down evacuating aircraft.

IMHO the brand new OP is trying to talk himself into thinking he'll be flying widebodies TPAC for Delta from SEA.

Longtime lurker, first time poster. I don't fly wide bodies, nor do I have any aspirations to. And I want DL to succeed. Just sayin' that setting up a new hub in the middle of a potential war zone is a dubious proposition. But, granted, implementation is at least a year away. Things may calm down by then. Hopefully. In the meantime, if i were Ed, I'd be taking a long hard look at this before committing to an irrevocable hub and fleet strategy for Asia.

Nonstop from SEA is a possibility. DL also has an alliance and strategic investment in China Eastern that could be a powerhouse if CAAC would facilitate rather than obstruct US carrier cooperation. These options require aircraft with more range and different capabilities than an ICN partnership. Intra-asia flying is not practical on a 5th freedom basis after the US caved and collapsed the DL/NW hub at NRT in the so-called "open skies" agreement that gave JL and NH monopoly positions at HND which is the overwhelmingly preferred TYO airport. IMO, DL needs flexibility with regard to orders and a wait-and see approach until things settle down on the Korean peninsula.

Also, in reply to the previous post, Israel and Korea are not comparable. Israel is the dominant military power in the region with overwhelming superiority over hap-hazard attacks that might be launched against it. If the Palistinians had comparable artillery trained on Tel Aviv as North Korea does on Seoul, it would be gone.

I doubt it will have an effect in the short term. I think eventually this situation could escalate into some sort of military operation, but its not like it will come out of nowhere, there would be adequate knowledge beforehand that something would happen within the next few days. Tensions have not been raised to the point that anyone is going to attack. That said, I would be much more worried about one of their missile tests going wrong and hitting a civilian aircraft, if its even possible for them to hit one . It's not like DL does not offer other Asian connections, I frequently use PVG to connect to China Eastern and find it very convenient.

If an actual war breaks out, connecting in ICN is the least of anyone's worries. Let's just say there won't be much passenger traffic crossing the Pacific, be it to Korea, Japan or the PRC if there is a war going on with a potentially nuclear power.

North Korea's anti aircraft capabilities are pretty limited to begin with. I would be more concerned with N. Korean artillery hitting ICN directly.

Varsity1 wrote:

North Korea's anti aircraft capabilities are pretty limited to begin with. I would be more concerned with N. Korean artillery hitting ICN directly.

You're kidding me. North Korea has a bunch of:

KN-06
BUK (you know that one)
S-200s
And others. Look them up!

All capable of taking down commercial airliners arriving/departing from ICN even as we speak from their side of of the Demarcation Line.

But it's a mute point. At the outbreak of any hostilities whether it be preemptive by us and/or allies or whether Kim junior initiates it, all civil aircraft movements would cease at ICN or SEL. The unfortunate aircraft that got caught on the ground at those airports would remain there for the duration of the conflict however long that may be.

RetiredWeasel wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

North Korea's anti aircraft capabilities are pretty limited to begin with. I would be more concerned with N. Korean artillery hitting ICN directly.

You're kidding me. North Korea has a bunch of:

KN-06
BUK (you know that one)
S-200s
And others. Look them up!

All capable of taking down commercial airliners arriving/departing from ICN even as we speak from their side of of the Demarcation Line.

But it's a mute point. At the outbreak of any hostilities whether it be preemptive by us and/or allies or whether Kim junior initiates it, all civil aircraft movements would cease at ICN or SEL. The unfortunate aircraft that got caught on the ground at those airports would remain there for the duration of the conflict however long that may be.

All of these will be primary targets for the US to establish air superiority. It would take weeks or even longer to knock out all the tubes pointed south.

Varsity1 wrote:

RetiredWeasel wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

North Korea's anti aircraft capabilities are pretty limited to begin with. I would be more concerned with N. Korean artillery hitting ICN directly.

You're kidding me. North Korea has a bunch of:

KN-06
BUK (you know that one)
S-200s
And others. Look them up!

All capable of taking down commercial airliners arriving/departing from ICN even as we speak from their side of of the Demarcation Line.

But it's a mute point. At the outbreak of any hostilities whether it be preemptive by us and/or allies or whether Kim junior initiates it, all civil aircraft movements would cease at ICN or SEL. The unfortunate aircraft that got caught on the ground at those airports would remain there for the duration of the conflict however long that may be.

All of these will be primary targets for the US to establish air superiority. It would take weeks or even longer to knock out all the tubes pointed south.

I agree with you on the targeting...but many of these systems are mobile and knocking all them out within a short amount of time will be next to impossible. I'm just saying that any airliner flying around Seoul at the outbreak of hostilities would be in serious jeopardy. But I have faith that if tensions rise to the Defcon 3 level, the airlines will recognize the risk and would cancel all flights into the ROK.

Any actual attack on the US or our allies from the DPRK will likely mean a very quick end to the regime. If they strike first, China will almost surely pull any support, and the allied forces will combine to destroy any relevant military targets within the first few days. Yes, the DPRK has one of the largest military forces in the world, but the vast majority of troops there are under paid and under fed, only being kept in line by fear. Once they see what's going on, most will likely move to save themselves. In short, any hostility will end up in an end to North Korea as we know it, and the leadership there knows that. They will rattle their swords, yes, but just like every other time they have done this, it's likely nothing will come of it. If it does, they might get a couple shots off, and while I am fairly confident we can shoot down anything they will try to lob at us, it's possible that they could actually hit something, which would be a very sad tragedy (along with any civilian losses on their side...I really do feel bad for 99% of the people in that country, it's not their fault that they are being oppressed). But as I said above, everything would be over in a week, tops.

Varsity1 wrote:

All of these will be primary targets for the US to establish air superiority. It would take weeks or even longer to knock out all the tubes pointed south.

That's the kind of unmerited overconfidence that got the USA mired in Iraq-- 14yrs later, are we still in the "shock" stage, or have we moved on to the "awe" yet?

One of the biggest issues with N.Korea is that the West has such little strategic intel on what/where their primary targets even are. They've spent decades building huge underground tunnel systems (capable of moving an estimated 30,000 troops per hour, and/or or tons of artillery) that give them the ability to relocate strike-posts with little outward signs of movement.

That's one reason that the Republican hawks are so giddy over this M.O.A.B. usage; of course, the problem there, is that the Chinese might not react so kindly or with such restraint if we start using those indiscriminately only 400mi from Beijing. And if Trump is stupid enough to unilaterally use a nuke in that regard, then all bets with the Chinese are truly off.

flyfresno wrote:

Once they see what's going on, most will likely move to save themselves.

Wishful, but unfortunately fallacious, thinking.

You're attempting to use Western logic against a populace who for 3 generations, have been told that their nation's ruling family consists of demigods capable of remotely judging the honor of their soul; and who've had no external source of education to counteract that. To them, turning their back on the nation in crisis would be dooming themselves, not saving.

flyfresno wrote:

.. Once they see what's going on, most will likely move to save themselves. In short, any hostility will end up in an end to North Korea as we know it, and the leadership there knows that. They will rattle their swords, yes, but just like every other time they have done this, it's likely nothing will come of it........ But as I said above, everything would be over in a week, tops.

I fear that a lot of Americans take your view and compare a conflict with North Korea as something like our effort against the Taliban or even Sadaam's Republican Army. Like LAX727 said, the North Korean soldier has been indoctrinated to despise the American soldier and his ally since they were 16 years old. If hostilities were to kickoff, even if Dear Leader was disposed, those soldiers would proceed with their mission unrestrained when you consider the chaos of war and command and control problems they would encounter.

A one week war is way too optimistic. Casualties on both sides would be something we haven't seen since the last Korean War. Yes we would prevail but the suffering would be immense.

Our generals at the Pentagon and the Joint Chief of Staff realize this. I believe they can knock sense into our civilian leadership that a military solution should only be used if concrete, undeniable intelligence show that Kim junior is about to launch an attack whether nuclear or conventional. That's been the philosophy (regarding military action) for the last 40 years and it shouldn't change.

BTW, North Korean soldiers are fed adequately. I don't know where you get that..underfed stuff. In fact famine among the civilian population is overblown according to this article: http://www.latimes.com/world/asia/la-fg ... story.html

(IMHO after being stationed for a year and half in Korea in the 80s)

TigerFlyer wrote:

the potential war zone.

You are more likely to get shot at around numerous American airports than a conflict breaking out because lil Kim is afraid of an appeasement faction taking control and destroying his family legacy.

If a real war breaks out and DPRK does fire its missiles all around the place, then you have way more than ICN to worry about, even if you just focus on aviation. North Korea is not going to just assert its force on South Korea. It's quite certain that it will hit Japan too. And if it is unhappy enough with China siding with US, given that the "dear leader" even killed his brother and uncle, I don't think we can guarantee China is not in his hit list. Connections via ICN, NRT, KIX, PEK and PVG will all be severed. Even overflying northern China and northwestern Pacific (i.e. the normal route that planes from Asia to North America take) would not be safe. It is a real possibility that, during the war, direct air traffic between East Asia and North America will be completely cut off. Passengers will need to be routed via ME, Europe or Australia. If it is an all-out conflict, ICN will most likely be reduced to rubble. Airports like HND, KIX, NRT may suffer damage too, depends on how crazy this guy goes. And then the region will recover. If there is one thing East Asian countries have proven they are really good at in the last 70 years, it is how quickly they can rebuild and renew their infrastructure.

If North Korea's dear leader decides to start any kind of hostility many of the responses, in addition to destroying North Koreas military structure, would be to destroy infrastructure such as power, transportation and food. Remember an army fights on it's stomach. I do not know how much food storage they have and if they would be able to supply their troops with food over any sustained length of time. China wants North Korea to survive, but this is no longer the 1950s and China is now dependent on international trade. I am also sure that all North Korea sea ports would be blocked and most likely mined making it more difficult for the survival of North Korea. If North Korea would decide to use nuclear weapons on any of the Korean peninsula I do not know how much radioactive fallout would affect China. I am sure China does not want a war on the peninsula as the only way they could prevent the downfall of North Korea would to cross into North Korea and I do not think that is something that the Chinese would like to do now unless they are willing to make North Korea a province of China. I do not think China wants to get into a war with the United States.
If any of North Koreas acts of aggression would involve the Japanese Islands it automatically result in the action of the United States and China must fully aware of this.

RetiredWeasel wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

North Korea's anti aircraft capabilities are pretty limited to begin with. I would be more concerned with N. Korean artillery hitting ICN directly.

You're kidding me. North Korea has a bunch of:

KN-06
BUK (you know that one)
S-200s
And others. Look them up!

All capable of taking down commercial airliners arriving/departing from ICN even as we speak from their side of of the Demarcation Line.

But it's a mute point. At the outbreak of any hostilities whether it be preemptive by us and/or allies or whether Kim junior initiates it, all civil aircraft movements would cease at ICN or SEL. The unfortunate aircraft that got caught on the ground at those airports would remain there for the duration of the conflict however long that may be.

Pet peeve on my part, I'll admit it, but.... it's moot point, not mute. Similar to lose vs. loose that's seen all the time here on a.net.

Ok, back to the discussion. As they say, there's no D in the DMZ, so any move by either side will be well noticed and responded to by the other. The issue is what happens after that. Of course, ultimately, the DPRK would lose, but how much damage and suffering ensues before that is the question.