I saw something similar to this on Anet for AA, so let’s have some fun here. This is for the years 2025-2030 and onward. What routes/specific cities do y’all predict each widebody aircraft will serve in Delta’s fleet? Also, if any, what possible widebody additions may we see by then?

Airbus A330-200:
Airbus A330-300:
Airbus A330-900neo:
Airbus A350-900XWB:
Boeing 767-300ER (in the process of being phased out, if not already phased out):
Boeing 767-400ER:
Boeing 777-200ER:
Boeing 777-200LR:

I know that the 777 fleets, as well as the 767-400 fleet and very likely the A330neo fleet will all have the same onboard products as the A350 fleet. Not sure about the A330-200/300 though.

grjplanes wrote:

From what I understand reading threads over the years it seems that DL's ATL-JNB route is performing reasonably well?
So while DL have struggled in the past with other Africa destinations, what is the main limiting factor preventing them for increasing JNB route then (from ATL or perhaps another DL hub)...the lack of enough available aircraft suitable for the route nonstop, only having the 10 777-200LR's?
Couple of years ago they did operate some extra flights over certain periods seasonally...ever since business and high-end tourism continued increasing and now with renewed optimism in South Africa and the region.

Perhaps the option of a triangular routing with CPT...dynamics in tourism and economics have changed drastically over the years since DL served
CPT many years ago. (Yes, there is the current drought issue, however this could be short-term)
Chances of a 3 or 4 weekly ATL-JNB-CPT-ATL route...say departing ATL 2 or 3 hours earlier than the current DL200, arriving in JNB between 1 and 2pm in the afternoon giving it still some options of connections onwards to some other regional and domestic destinations which the current DL200 doesn't really offer, arriving too late for most.
Something roughly like this:
15:45 ATL-JNB 14:00
15:15 JNB-CPT 17:30
19:00 CPT-ATL 05:00

Does DL do any triangular type long-haul routes?

I don't they think they do triangular routes internationally. Domestically (in different years) they have flown MSP-RHI-IMT and MSP-IMT-ESC-DTW which are (sort-of) similar routings, but for long-haul I can't recall any triangle routes. CPT 4x weekly on an A359 I could see, but CPT may help sustain JNB at present through ATL-JNB-CPT interlines. The Boeing 787 would be very useful to these types of routes for DL, which would also include such routings as LAX-AKL, ATL-BSB (Brasila, I believe), DTW-HKG, JFK-BOM, SEA-HKG, SEA-TPE, SEA-KIX, MSP-ICN, SLC-ICN, JFK-NRT, etc.

With the current Boeing/Delta relationship, this seems unlikely, which is unfortunate, given how well the Boeing 787 might work for the DL network for routes too thin for the A350 and too long for the B767/A330 at good economics.

Does yesterday's ITC C-Series ruling increase the chances of DL getting more of the type?

I think they could eventually build up to a fleet of ~90 CS100, ~120 CS300, and ~80 of a hypothetical CS500.

On the regional side, unless DL increases capacity or decreases frequency by a lot, cities like Dothan, Fort Wayne, Casper, St. George, Binghamton, and Houghton will be in trouble as they are currently only served by CRJ200s. I doubt DL keep a few CR2s solely for EAS flying, so in the present trends, unless a more economical 50 seat aircraft is developed and pilot availability increases, those cities could lose a lot/most service. AA/UA are in a worse place in that regard, and I'm impressed by DL's upgauging compared to AA/UA, but maintaining their current network would seem to require at least some regional jets.

Check this out to:
https://blueswandaily.com/airline-insight-delta-air-lines/



The chart really demonstrates the difference in size between ATL and DTW for DL. AA is much more balanced, but with smaller hubs:

Delta does not serve Houghton. It is served by United to ORD.

I personally think that the 787-8 is the perfect replacement for the 763ER. Delta only has 50 widebodies on order, and American and United have way more. (Ok, maybe not American but they just received a BUNCH of 787’s and have a lot of 777W’s.) All I’m saying is, 50 widebody orders from Airbus aren’t enough, and they aren’t really relaplacing any of the smaller 767-300’s which have 212 seats. The A350 and A330Neo will prab have between 280-306 seats. The A350-1000 with around 330 seats would work well at DTW.

BenflysDTW wrote:

I personally think that the 787-8 is the perfect replacement for the 763ER. Delta only has 50 widebodies on order, and American and United have way more. (Ok, maybe not American but they just received a BUNCH of 787’s and have a lot of 777W’s.) All I’m saying is, 50 widebody orders from Airbus aren’t enough, and they aren’t really relaplacing any of the smaller 767-300’s which have 212 seats. The A350 and A330Neo will prab have between 280-306 seats. The A350-1000 with around 330 seats would work well at DTW.

The 330neos and 767s will still be overlapping for a while, so there’s still some time for additional orders if they become necessary. If I had to speculate also, I could see DL acting stereotypically DL and leaping on some poor-sellers. While something like the 787-8 or A330-800 might not have the best economics, if they get a good enough deal, it could be worth it.

Here are the largest indirect passenger flows from DTW: Passengers who connect at city on way to final destination. There are some potential DL targets for expansion/new service as bolded.
DestinationIndirect PDEWFare
LAX 181 $255.64
SFO 141 $279.82
SAN 136 $253.58
PDX 123 $262.52
SNA 106 $281.22
SJC 99 $280.34
ATL 93 $259.97
SMF 90 $287.29
TPA 89 $181.47
AUS 87 $203.03
LAS 86 $211.69
MCO 78 $172.02
SEA 73 $261.74
SAT 67 $224.20
HOU 65 $216.88
ANC 64 $371.84
PHX 63 $201.83
SLC 62 $267.23
JAX 62 $244.58
DEN 60 $216.49
OAK 59 $255.59
RNO 58 $285.07
HNL 54 $529.13
RDU 54 $225.27
RSW 51 $207.40
ELP 50 $321.50
ONT 50 $275.38
ABQ 48 $252.71
MCI 46 $226.88
BOS 43 $174.21
IAH 42 $250.48
MSP 42 $255.24
DFW 42 $214.74
SJU 41 $268.47
LGA 38 $204.79
DAL 37 $173.40
CHS 36 $228.03
FLL 35 $166.24
SAV 35 $229.43
TUS 35 $259.00
MSY 35 $202.50
GEG 34 $280.66
OGG 32 $574.25
BZN 32 $255.24
BOI 30 $282.18
BNA 28 $184.11
PNS 28 $253.16
MEM 26 $259.38
PBI 25 $230.22
LIT 24 $279.67
TUL 23 $288.97
GSP 23 $272.27
MIA 22 $180.95
OKC 22 $250.67
DAB 22 $188.45
ICT 21 $243.92
AGS 21 $189.92
BDL 20 $223.03
FAI 20 $368.41
ORF 20 $240.33
CLT 20 $259.33
BHM 20 $297.38
PVD 19 $176.55
BUR 18 $272.70
OMA 18 $227.18
JAN 17 $350.62
STL 17 $219.21
ECP 17 $242.10
FAY 16 $172.72
FCA 16 $321.54
PWM 16 $217.36
FAT 16 $349.81
EWR 15 $199.97
COS 15 $240.37
SRQ 15 $289.09
JAC 15 $355.57
ILM 14 $229.95
KOA 14 $527.19
JFK 14 $205.14
DCA 14 $181.53
VPS 14 $223.10
CAE 13 $301.92
LIH 13 $487.52
XNA 13 $288.28
MFE 13 $385.33
AVL 12 $302.17
PHL 12 $204.66
MHT 12 $210.42
EYW 12 $263.25
ORD 12 $138.37
STT 12 $324.01
HSV 12 $369.58
BGR 12 $271.93
OAJ 11 $222.87
MSO 11 $354.81
PSP 11 $327.35
GNV 11 $190.22
FSD 11 $394.39
CHO 11 $162.08
SGF 11 $332.00
EUG 11 $310.91
RAP 10 $279.17
ALB 10 $216.06
BWI 10 $185.64
MYR 10 $205.64
BIL 10 $330.34
BRO 10 $346.62
RIC 9 $222.77
TLH 9 $299.41
MLB 9 $208.73
BTR 9 $299.69
RDM 9 $295.11
SBA 9 $306.58
ROA 9 $283.01
ASE 8 $352.09
FAR 8 $336.78
MOB 8 $337.90
PSC 8 $341.37
DLH 8 $330.45
DSM 7 $251.57
MFR 7 $292.24
MGM 7 $327.14
SHV 7 $376.45
RST 7 $200.38
GPT 7 $258.47
MAF 6 $274.33
LBB 6 $268.44
SDF 6 $192.96
JNU 6 $334.59
ISP 6 $221.13
CRP 6 $273.17
GJT 6 $320.67
HRL 6 $249.04
DRO 5 $304.76
LGB 5 $306.91
GTF 5 $280.44
BIS 5 $318.40
TRI 5 $330.26
CHA 5 $314.24
AMA 5 $317.72
IND 5 $218.21
MKE 5 $452.70
EWN 5 $217.00
GSO 4 $331.23
TYS 4 $343.01
SBP 4 $345.68
LRD 4 $478.58
IDA 4 $360.79
FSM 4 $346.97
BTV 4 $256.98
LYH 4 $203.12
LFT 4 $318.90
MOT 3 $348.93
HLN 3 $256.06
MRY 3 $261.19
SGU 3 $362.33
MLU 3 $334.39
GRK 3 $301.04
ACK 3 $242.63
BQN 3 $179.94
STX 3 $325.78
LSE 3 $364.25
IAD 3 $227.57
CMI 3 $256.09
MSN 3 $272.11
AEX 3 $430.81
PHF 2 $292.83
MTJ 2 $365.27
SBY 2 $236.35
CRW 2 $243.25
VLD 2 $242.30
BFL 2 $326.26
HPN 2 $230.15
CPR 2 $262.14
MVY 2 $231.11
ROC 2 $266.99
COD 2 $385.03
SAF 2 $301.68
GFK 2 $316.41
LNK 2 $326.65
CSG 2 $301.75
PGV 2 $246.18
ABY 2 $269.84
CMX 2 $248.01
YUM 2 $232.20
HHH 2 $320.49
SYR 2 $290.10
BLI 2 $390.06
TXK 2 $272.39
KTN 1 $341.23
CLL 1 $255.47
ABI 1 $214.02
MDT 1 $248.36
STS 1 $257.37
ACT 1 $317.24
ATW 1 $327.16
LWS 1 $273.09
TWF 1 $427.92
MHK 1 $301.65
PIH 1 $454.47

DL should also really look at LAX-ORD, they carry around 40 PDEW on that specific airport pair, 103 PDEW to California from ORD, and additional (not yet calculated passengers) out of MDW.

With their market share at LAX, LAX-ORD should be feasible 2-3x daily, while LAX-MKE, LAX-PHL, and LAX-RNO should also be targets.

ShinyAndChrome wrote:

BenflysDTW wrote:

I personally think that the 787-8 is the perfect replacement for the 763ER. Delta only has 50 widebodies on order, and American and United have way more. (Ok, maybe not American but they just received a BUNCH of 787’s and have a lot of 777W’s.) All I’m saying is, 50 widebody orders from Airbus aren’t enough, and they aren’t really relaplacing any of the smaller 767-300’s which have 212 seats. The A350 and A330Neo will prab have between 280-306 seats. The A350-1000 with around 330 seats would work well at DTW.

The 330neos and 767s will still be overlapping for a while, so there’s still some time for additional orders if they become necessary. If I had to speculate also, I could see DL acting stereotypically DL and leaping on some poor-sellers. While something like the 787-8 or A330-800 might not have the best economics, if they get a good enough deal, it could be worth it.

The recent Boeing/Bombardier debacle aside, I don't understand why DL has not ordered the 787 Dreamliner. They couldn't have negotiated a new deal when they cancelled the order they inherited with NW? They are the only major North American airline (that flies overseas) that is not flying the 787 nor has any on order. With their tendency to launch TATL point to point routes, you'd think the 787-8 would be perfect for them to replace their 767's. I wish they'd put an order in for the 787, but I don't think they will.

What routes can we expect the A321neo to operate? Will they be primarily the same domestic routes as the A321ceo and B739? Could we expect some long and thin TATL routes that the 75S are currently doing, as kind of a 75S replacement? Will the A321neo be a replacement for the 75S, or will we not see one until the Boeing 797/MOM comes along?

SumChristianus wrote:

DL should also really look at LAX-ORD, they carry around 40 PDEW on that specific airport pair, 103 PDEW to California from ORD, and additional (not yet calculated passengers) out of MDW.

With their market share at LAX, LAX-ORD should be feasible 2-3x daily, while LAX-MKE, LAX-PHL, and LAX-RNO should also be targets.

Agreed, I don't understand why DL is not on ORD-LAX already. More than enough PDEW to capture some of the market share.

NateGreat wrote:

What routes can we expect the A321neo to operate? Will they be primarily the same domestic routes as the A321ceo and B739? Could we expect some long and thin TATL routes that the 75S are currently doing, as kind of a 75S replacement? Will the A321neo be a replacement for the 75S, or will we not see one until the Boeing 797/MOM comes along?

They'll replace some 75S, but not all.

I see the A321neo going on the Hawaii routes and maybe routes such as RDU-CDG.

Does anyone know if they have an option to substitute some of the order for the A321LR?

ADrum23 wrote:

ShinyAndChrome wrote:

BenflysDTW wrote:

I personally think that the 787-8 is the perfect replacement for the 763ER. Delta only has 50 widebodies on order, and American and United have way more. (Ok, maybe not American but they just received a BUNCH of 787’s and have a lot of 777W’s.) All I’m saying is, 50 widebody orders from Airbus aren’t enough, and they aren’t really relaplacing any of the smaller 767-300’s which have 212 seats. The A350 and A330Neo will prab have between 280-306 seats. The A350-1000 with around 330 seats would work well at DTW.

The 330neos and 767s will still be overlapping for a while, so there’s still some time for additional orders if they become necessary. If I had to speculate also, I could see DL acting stereotypically DL and leaping on some poor-sellers. While something like the 787-8 or A330-800 might not have the best economics, if they get a good enough deal, it could be worth it.

The recent Boeing/Bombardier debacle aside, I don't understand why DL has not ordered the 787 Dreamliner. They couldn't have negotiated a new deal when they cancelled the order they inherited with NW? They are the only major North American airline (that flies overseas) that is not flying the 787 nor has any on order. With their tendency to launch TATL point to point routes, you'd think the 787-8 would be perfect for them to replace their 767's. I wish they'd put an order in for the 787, but I don't think they will.

The 787 is a great fit for DL’s TATL strategy (and TPAC, if you think about it) when looking at the operational and network sides of the equation. It’s all the stuff behind the scenes like aircraft pricing that probably put the kibosh on it. With the 787 selling as well as it is, Boeing probably didn’t have much need to sell at too much of a discount. If the price differential is big enough, even passing up what might be a great operational fit could be worth it.

That’s why I mentioned the possibility of them jumping on a poor seller down the line if A or B finds themselves with inventory they need to sell quickly.

ADrum23 wrote:

ShinyAndChrome wrote:

BenflysDTW wrote:

I personally think that the 787-8 is the perfect replacement for the 763ER. Delta only has 50 widebodies on order, and American and United have way more. (Ok, maybe not American but they just received a BUNCH of 787’s and have a lot of 777W’s.) All I’m saying is, 50 widebody orders from Airbus aren’t enough, and they aren’t really relaplacing any of the smaller 767-300’s which have 212 seats. The A350 and A330Neo will prab have between 280-306 seats. The A350-1000 with around 330 seats would work well at DTW.

The 330neos and 767s will still be overlapping for a while, so there’s still some time for additional orders if they become necessary. If I had to speculate also, I could see DL acting stereotypically DL and leaping on some poor-sellers. While something like the 787-8 or A330-800 might not have the best economics, if they get a good enough deal, it could be worth it.

The recent Boeing/Bombardier debacle aside, I don't understand why DL has not ordered the 787 Dreamliner. They couldn't have negotiated a new deal when they cancelled the order they inherited with NW? They are the only major North American airline (that flies overseas) that is not flying the 787 nor has any on order. With their tendency to launch TATL point to point routes, you'd think the 787-8 would be perfect for them to replace their 767's. I wish they'd put an order in for the 787, but I don't think they will.

Never say never! I think that somewhere down the road, Delta could place an order for 787s that could help with the 767 replacements. I just don’t think 25 A330neo will be enough to replace the 80 or so 767s. Then, there’s the 764ER that will need replacing in the coming years (They’re getting an all-new cabin starting in 2019, I think. So, they still have quite some time before retirement). Sure, the A330neo is a little bit larger than the 767s, they will need more than just 25 airframes to replace a fleet of aircraft that is more than 3 times the size of the A330neo order.

NateGreat wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

ShinyAndChrome wrote:

The 330neos and 767s will still be overlapping for a while, so there’s still some time for additional orders if they become necessary. If I had to speculate also, I could see DL acting stereotypically DL and leaping on some poor-sellers. While something like the 787-8 or A330-800 might not have the best economics, if they get a good enough deal, it could be worth it.

The recent Boeing/Bombardier debacle aside, I don't understand why DL has not ordered the 787 Dreamliner. They couldn't have negotiated a new deal when they cancelled the order they inherited with NW? They are the only major North American airline (that flies overseas) that is not flying the 787 nor has any on order. With their tendency to launch TATL point to point routes, you'd think the 787-8 would be perfect for them to replace their 767's. I wish they'd put an order in for the 787, but I don't think they will.

Never say never! I think that somewhere down the road, Delta could place an order for 787s that could help with the 767 replacements. I just don’t think 25 A330neo will be enough to replace the 80 or so 767s. Then, there’s the 764ER that will need replacing in the coming years (They’re getting an all-new cabin starting in 2019, I think. So, they still have quite some time before retirement). Sure, the A330neo is a little bit larger than the 767s, they will need more than just 25 airframes to replace a fleet of aircraft that is more than 3 times the size of the A330neo order.

Yeah, I don't get the A330neo order either. Do they have options to add more A330neo's?

Maybe they'll add the 787 in time, but I have my reservations.

ADrum23 wrote:

NateGreat wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

The recent Boeing/Bombardier debacle aside, I don't understand why DL has not ordered the 787 Dreamliner. They couldn't have negotiated a new deal when they cancelled the order they inherited with NW? They are the only major North American airline (that flies overseas) that is not flying the 787 nor has any on order. With their tendency to launch TATL point to point routes, you'd think the 787-8 would be perfect for them to replace their 767's. I wish they'd put an order in for the 787, but I don't think they will.

Never say never! I think that somewhere down the road, Delta could place an order for 787s that could help with the 767 replacements. I just don’t think 25 A330neo will be enough to replace the 80 or so 767s. Then, there’s the 764ER that will need replacing in the coming years (They’re getting an all-new cabin starting in 2019, I think. So, they still have quite some time before retirement). Sure, the A330neo is a little bit larger than the 767s, they will need more than just 25 airframes to replace a fleet of aircraft that is more than 3 times the size of the A330neo order.

Yeah, I don't get the A330neo order either. Do they have options to add more A330neo's?

Maybe they'll add the 787 in time, but I have my reservations.

I can see them retiring a handful of the early-to-mid-90s 763 airframes, while holding onto the mid-90s-to-2001 763 airframes for quite a while. I can see them using the 764s (which will have a brand new cabin, including the Suites) for high-density/Premium TATL, such as AMS, CDG, and LHR.

SumChristianus wrote:

SJC 99 $280.34
[b]SMF 90 $287.29

It’s a darn shame none of these were added for 2018 either. 2 perfectly good markets, particularly SJC who is exploding with auto tech growth, and Delta does JFK-SJC instead. I don’t understand why it couldn’t have poasibly worked out of DTW. DL lost a good opportunity and I hope another airline can have the opportunity to do it even though nobody else probably will.

flymco753 wrote:

I have a wishlist.


MCO-AUS CR9

Not really allowed to say where I got this from, but MCO-AUS will become a thing, prolly on mainline

flymco753 wrote:

SumChristianus wrote:

SJC 99 $280.34
[b]SMF 90 $287.29

It’s a darn shame none of these were added for 2018 either. 2 perfectly good markets, particularly SJC who is exploding with auto tech growth, and Delta does JFK-SJC instead. I don’t understand why it couldn’t have poasibly worked out of DTW. DL lost a good opportunity and I hope another airline can have the opportunity to do it even though nobody else probably will.

NW did fly SJC-DTW with A319/320s at one time. Does seem like a route waiting to be resumed. DL did just resume SNA-DTW, which NW also flew.

deltal1011man wrote:

SumChristianus wrote:

Your right, LAX is probably the best gateway for DL to Australia. There probably isn't much demand Australia-East Coast U.S.

What do you think about the chances of ATL-OGG, ATL-India, or ATL-KEF?

OGG wont happen. Frequency will be added over LAX/SEA/SLC. /quote]

OGG is close to out of gates/slots, and people are looking for better was to get to HNL/OGG from the east coast. I could see ATL-OGG at least three times a week on a 76W

Shields wrote:

If the AUS buildup is for real, I would expect to see DL add AUS-BNA. BNA has gotten some love lately (SEA; RDU; 3rd daily to BOS). AUS-BNA is currently served only by WN.

Not really allowed to say who this is from, But Delta is going to be adding PLENTY from Austin soon, including AMS year round!

KAUSavgeek wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

I have a wishlist.


MCO-AUS CR9

Not really allowed to say where I got this from, but MCO-AUS will become a thing, prolly on mainline

I would love to see AUS-TPA on a CR9.

KAUSavgeek wrote:

Shields wrote:

If the AUS buildup is for real, I would expect to see DL add AUS-BNA. BNA has gotten some love lately (SEA; RDU; 3rd daily to BOS). AUS-BNA is currently served only by WN.

Not really allowed to say who this is from, But Delta is going to be adding PLENTY from Austin soon, including AMS year round!

Are they putting a focus city there, or a full blown hub?

I guess I never really added a detailed wish list:
-CMH-SEA A319/738
-CMH-SLC A319/E175
-CMH-AMS/CDG 757
-CMH-MCO goes daily
-More point-to-point

And, since this is a thing:

KAUSavgeek wrote:

Shields wrote:

If the AUS buildup is for real, I would expect to see DL add AUS-BNA. BNA has gotten some love lately (SEA; RDU; 3rd daily to BOS). AUS-BNA is currently served only by WN.

Not really allowed to say who this is from, But Delta is going to be adding PLENTY from Austin soon, including AMS year round!

...even though it'd make three airlines starting it at the same time, how about CMH-AUS CR7/CR9/E175?

Don’t think there’ll be much happening with DL in Seattle on the long haul international front before the new IAF completes which is Q4 2019. Domestically DFW and AUS are possible in 2018.

SumChristianus wrote:

Here are the largest indirect passenger flows from DTW: Passengers who connect at city on way to final destination. There are some potential DL targets for expansion/new service as bolded.
s.

What does that list look like for MSP?

I'm convinced one of the factors for lack of PVD-MSP as its the only medium market in the NE that would be over a 3 hr block time (something like 3:05), yet ROC/SYR/ALB all have a daily MD90.

KAUSavgeek wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

I have a wishlist.


MCO-AUS CR9

Not really allowed to say where I got this from, but MCO-AUS will become a thing, prolly on mainline

From a disclosed source, I agree.

flymco753 wrote:

KAUSavgeek wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

I have a wishlist.


MCO-AUS CR9

Not really allowed to say where I got this from, but MCO-AUS will become a thing, prolly on mainline

From a disclosed source, I agree.

So is DL going to build up AUS into a focus city or a hub?

RL757PVD wrote:

SumChristianus wrote:

Here are the largest indirect passenger flows from DTW: Passengers who connect at city on way to final destination. There are some potential DL targets for expansion/new service as bolded.
s.

What does that list look like for MSP?

I'm convinced one of the factors for lack of PVD-MSP as its the only medium market in the NE that would be over a 3 hr block time (something like 3:05), yet ROC/SYR/ALB all have a daily MD90.

Here is MSP

Destination PDEW Fare
SAN 107 $233.60
ATL 106 $262.22
RDU 90 $231.15
BOS 89 $232.31
TPA 84 $233.68
SMF 83 $265.17
LAX 82 $225.93
PDX 78 $197.09
AUS 74 $211.52
FLL 73 $189.05
RNO 72 $257.77
SFO 71 $220.40
LGA 70 $264.58
SLC 68 $257.57
MSY 68 $206.43
BNA 68 $197.32
MCO 64 $197.67
PVD 59 $249.82
CHS 59 $254.07
LAS 59 $185.99
SEA 58 $218.04
CLE 58 $219.88
BWI 58 $190.35
PHL 56 $220.32
ORF 53 $237.21
CMH 52 $240.55
ONT 51 $265.37
PBI 51 $244.66
PWM 49 $246.98
ANC 49 $306.73
PIT 47 $218.19
RSW 46 $244.82
SAT 46 $250.67
HNL 45 $511.01
SNA 44 $268.86
CVG 44 $213.72
DAL 43 $154.73
SAV 43 $236.51
BDL 43 $269.70
JAX 42 $252.32
MHT 42 $249.65
RIC 41 $251.17
GSP 41 $272.57
DTW 41 $262.34
DCA 40 $213.73
PHX 40 $175.45
ABQ 40 $238.83
TUS 39 $242.06
ALB 39 $261.97
CLT 38 $278.01
BHM 38 $257.38
IND 38 $235.69
HOU 37 $248.50
MFR 35 $226.76
ELP 33 $231.10
SJC 33 $246.83
BUF 33 $237.81
EWR 32 $278.55
BTV 32 $301.70
OAK 31 $228.59
OGG 31 $441.65
MYR 31 $238.44
LIT 30 $279.62
SJU 29 $362.85
PNS 29 $261.09
PSP 28 $237.98
MIA 27 $221.72
FAT 25 $306.91
GSO 24 $349.94
ROC 24 $265.83
MDT 23 $358.36
SDF 22 $247.29
EUG 22 $251.47
JFK 22 $247.77
BUR 22 $219.59
VPS 22 $222.23
ILM 21 $252.87
CHA 21 $212.17
IAH 20 $276.39
SYR 19 $264.82
FAI 19 $315.28
MEM 19 $253.10
LIH 18 $515.88
MDW 18 $130.88
COS 18 $209.14
STL 17 $252.56
DFW 17 $213.61
GEG 17 $223.45
CHO 17 $226.21
SRQ 16 $264.23
KOA 16 $455.34
CAE 16 $307.79
BGR 16 $272.95
ECP 16 $232.27
JNU 15 $318.46
RDM 15 $248.23
TYS 15 $330.34
TUL 15 $242.29
CAK 14 $242.46
AGS 14 $230.82
DEN 14 $194.79
HSV 14 $340.19
JAN 14 $396.78
SBA 14 $273.73
BOI 13 $274.35
GPT 13 $221.60
OKC 13 $256.06
ROA 13 $348.15
HPN 13 $270.13
AVL 12 $322.66
GRR 11 $214.06
SGF 11 $360.73
IAD 11 $246.23
FWA 10 $291.73
DAY 10 $254.98
DAB 10 $203.94
LBB 10 $304.61
GNV 10 $282.81
FAY 10 $235.61
AVP 10 $272.36
ABE 10 $332.55
DRO 10 $261.64
LEX 10 $267.57
MCI 10 $201.53
JAC 10 $305.40
TLH 9 $308.47
GJT 9 $294.32
MAF 9 $330.68
MOB 9 $343.03
BTR 9 $254.38
AMA 9 $291.60
ASE 8 $384.69
SCE 8 $304.39
EWN 8 $221.56
SBP 8 $260.71
CRP 8 $314.52
XNA 8 $361.32
STT 7 $430.18
IDA 7 $306.70
HRL 7 $233.20
OAJ 7 $224.60
ITH 7 $247.55
CRW 7 $317.52
ERI 7 $269.14
MFE 7 $346.57
SHV 7 $345.85
ELM 6 $278.56
EVV 6 $305.12
KTN 6 $356.99
CMI 6 $231.54
TRI 6 $332.99
EYW 6 $276.80
PHF 6 $227.32
CPR 5 $208.55
MRY 5 $272.55
BFL 5 $282.14
ICT 5 $218.29
SIT 5 $276.56
PSC 5 $251.62
FNT 5 $223.70
MGM 5 $323.21
MSO 5 $243.54
LFT 4 $370.44
BRO 4 $233.48
ABI 4 $268.09
FCA 4 $238.55
BGM 4 $280.40
SAF 4 $274.78
ISP 4 $191.36
SGU 4 $214.25
SUN 4 $329.57
PIA 4 $250.91
LWS 4 $275.16
YUM 4 $180.04
BZN 3 $261.72
BLI 3 $286.04
MTJ 3 $321.89
MKE 3 $229.18
LAN 3 $217.28
MBS 3 $400.10
TVC 3 $279.06
SBY 3 $237.57
ORD 3 $213.15
GRK 3 $297.72
LYH 3 $266.01
MLB 3 $285.27
AZO 3 $300.27
SWF 3 $316.46
LRD 3 $324.93
FLG 3 $321.01
AEX 3 $371.44
ACT 3 $236.80
GTF 3 $329.82
ACV 3 $418.09
COU 3 $233.35
LGB 2 $302.04
MLU 2 $400.73
TWF 2 $407.65
YKM 2 $296.26
TYR 2 $258.71

DL carries 17.5 PDEW MSP-PVD (mostly through DTW; MSP-DTW-PVD at a $281 fare higher than the $249 market average). Its the largest carrier in the market (barely above WN) with a 29% share. I think I've heard E175s are moving out of MSP, and as those would seem the most logical equipment to start such a route, I'd question DLs immediate interest in overflying DTW to an airport near its growing BOS station. With B6 entering MSP-BOS I think DL will work to defend MSP-BOS more and may increase capacity on that route instead, BUT as always, JUST A GUESS of MINE.

BWIAirport wrote:

Could we see more o&d routes from CDG, like they have CDG-PIT/IND/RDU? I could see CDG-BWI/CLE/BDL/PHL/BNA tried out on a 752/763 seasonally.

CRAA revealed the day before IND-CDG was announced that they're in talks with DL for CMH-AMS/CDG. If/when it might happen is unclear.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I257 using Tapatalk

Varsity1 wrote:

Word on the street is delta will start directly capacity dumping on the transatlantic LCC routes. Blood in the water at Norwegian.

I find that difficult to believe that Delta would go after the bottom feeders. They have branded themselves as being the choice for the business traveler.

MSY-CDG would be great. Likely on AF 787, if ever, but it would be great. A hub/focus in AUS would also be really helpful because I'm frequently having to go east to ATL to then turn around and go west.

ADrum23 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

KAUSavgeek wrote:

Not really allowed to say where I got this from, but MCO-AUS will become a thing, prolly on mainline

From a disclosed source, I agree.

So is DL going to build up AUS into a focus city or a hub?

What do you mean by hub?? 200+ daily flights, 50+ destinations and connection banks? That's not going to happen. DL does not use the term "focus city" in it's marketing materials, so they will publicly refer to it as a "hub", but in reality it will be what most people would refer to as a "focus city". Maybe 70+ flights with very much an O&D focus on destinations and flight timings, but also allowing for some connections if the flight times happen to line up. This is basically how RDU, CVG, and BOS all work (and DL has referred to them as "focus cities" in some of their investor presentations).

DeltaRules wrote:

BWIAirport wrote:

Could we see more o&d routes from CDG, like they have CDG-PIT/IND/RDU? I could see CDG-BWI/CLE/BDL/PHL/BNA tried out on a 752/763 seasonally.

CRAA revealed the day before IND-CDG was announced that they're in talks with DL for CMH-AMS/CDG. If/when it might happen is unclear.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I257 using Tapatalk

I believe that if Delta does not move on either AMS or CDG from CMH we will see one of the LLCs move in and Delta will have lost a great opportunity. Time for both Delta and the CRAA to make this happen!

Nola wrote:

MSY-CDG would be great. Likely on AF 787, if ever, but it would be great. A hub/focus in AUS would also be really helpful because I'm frequently having to go east to ATL to then turn around and go west.

Air France is too premium-heavy to operate a 787 to MSY. This is very wishful thinking.

jubguy3 wrote:

Nola wrote:

MSY-CDG would be great. Likely on AF 787, if ever, but it would be great. A hub/focus in AUS would also be really helpful because I'm frequently having to go east to ATL to then turn around and go west.

Air France is too premium-heavy to operate a 787 to MSY. This is very wishful thinking.

Agreed. New Orleans is too small of a market to support two legacy TATL flights right now.

jubguy3 wrote:

Nola wrote:

MSY-CDG would be great. Likely on AF 787, if ever, but it would be great. A hub/focus in AUS would also be really helpful because I'm frequently having to go east to ATL to then turn around and go west.

Air France is too premium-heavy to operate a 787 to MSY. This is very wishful thinking.

This gets back to an oft repeated A.net fallacy that there is a market for a MSY-CDG flight because 100 years ago there was the historical tie between Louisiana Cajuns and the French Speaking Arcadians.

There are probably more viable markets for AF or DL to serve from MSY whilst BA matures the market first.

michman wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

From a disclosed source, I agree.

So is DL going to build up AUS into a focus city or a hub?

What do you mean by hub?? 200+ daily flights, 50+ destinations and connection banks? That's not going to happen. DL does not use the term "focus city" in it's marketing materials, so they will publicly refer to it as a "hub", but in reality it will be what most people would refer to as a "focus city". Maybe 70+ flights with very much an O&D focus on destinations and flight timings, but also allowing for some connections if the flight times happen to line up. This is basically how RDU, CVG, and BOS all work (and DL has referred to them as "focus cities" in some of their investor presentations).

Why can't it be a hub? DL needs a presence in Texas, it is the biggest hole in their network. Texas is home to 3 of the top 5 fastest growing city economies according to a recent Forbes magazine article, so DL is missing out.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/karstenstrauss/2018/01/03/the-10-big-u-s-cities-with-the-fastest-growing-and-slowest-growing-economies/#4c3f51c74734

They'll probably start out with a focus city like operation (along the lines of CVG, RDU, BOS, etc), but it would be in their long term interest to establish a hub similar to SLC, expect a little bit bigger. Of course, AUS doesn't have the space right now for a hub, but a new satellite concourse could be added to the south of the existing terminal building and connected via an underground tunnel (which I believe is one of the future growth scenarios AUS has in its master plan anyway).

BoeingGuy wrote:

jubguy3 wrote:

Nola wrote:

MSY-CDG would be great. Likely on AF 787, if ever, but it would be great. A hub/focus in AUS would also be really helpful because I'm frequently having to go east to ATL to then turn around and go west.

Air France is too premium-heavy to operate a 787 to MSY. This is very wishful thinking.

This gets back to an oft repeated A.net fallacy that there is a market for a MSY-CDG flight because 100 years ago there was the historical tie between Louisiana Cajuns and the French Speaking Arcadians.

There are probably more viable markets for AF or DL to serve from MSY whilst BA matures the market first.

I cannot speak to any A.net fallacy, but while there are still some sizable economic ties (particularly in the chemical industry), the rationale for this route (or AMS) is that AA is expanding in MSY and with the BA flight, there is a risk to DL that AA will pick up loyalty in what has, heretofore, been a strong market for DL.

SumChristianus wrote:

Here are the largest indirect passenger flows from DTW: Passengers who connect at city on way to final destination. There are some potential DL targets for expansion/new service as bolded.
DestinationIndirect PDEWFare

XNA 13 $288.28

I won't hold my breath over this one. DL tried XNA-DTW before, I think ~3+ years ago, but settled on MSP and CVG(P&G/WM Express), in addition to ATL.

ADrum23 wrote:

Why can't it be a hub? DL needs a presence in Texas, it is the biggest hole in their network. Texas is home to 3 of the top 5 fastest growing city economies according to a recent Forbes magazine article, so DL is missing out.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/karstenstrauss/2018/01/03/the-10-big-u-s-cities-with-the-fastest-growing-and-slowest-growing-economies/#4c3f51c74734

They'll probably start out with a focus city like operation (along the lines of CVG, RDU, BOS, etc), but it would be in their long term interest to establish a hub similar to SLC, expect a little bit bigger. Of course, AUS doesn't have the space right now for a hub, but a new satellite concourse could be added to the south of the existing terminal building and connected via an underground tunnel (which I believe is one of the future growth scenarios AUS has in its master plan anyway).

Both the demographics and geography of AUS are suboptimal. AUS would be, by a considerably margin, the smallest metro in the U.S. to support a network carrier hub, other than SLC (more on that shortly). In addition, AUS is quite far south to serve as a convenient hub for anything but east-west flows (largely already covered by ATL). Neither of those challenges is insurmountable - again, SLC is smaller, and IAH is further south. But perhaps the biggest impediment to AUS as a viable hub is its situation within 200 miles of two of the largest and strongest hubs in the country. SLC (like CLT) benefits from being the second hub in its region. I remain skeptical that Texas can support three network carrier hubs. Regional markets that would presumably feed a hypothetical AUS hub are all already sufficiently served by competitors.

I think what's far more likely, if anything, is a CVG- or RDU-style, O&D-tailored "focus city" with nonstop links to hubs and key O&D markets. Delta is already doing that, and could plausibly do more. But I suspect doing so will be at network-dilutive yields given that both AA and United have very strong penetration with the AUS corporate market and, in AUS as in so many other places, both of those competitors benefit from having hubs in many of the nation's largest and most important O&D markets. And oh yeah, then there's this little airline called Southwest.

At some point, well in the future, maybe. But for the foreseeable future - with respect - it just doesn't seem plausible.

commavia wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

Why can't it be a hub? DL needs a presence in Texas, it is the biggest hole in their network. Texas is home to 3 of the top 5 fastest growing city economies according to a recent Forbes magazine article, so DL is missing out.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/karstenstrauss/2018/01/03/the-10-big-u-s-cities-with-the-fastest-growing-and-slowest-growing-economies/#4c3f51c74734

They'll probably start out with a focus city like operation (along the lines of CVG, RDU, BOS, etc), but it would be in their long term interest to establish a hub similar to SLC, expect a little bit bigger. Of course, AUS doesn't have the space right now for a hub, but a new satellite concourse could be added to the south of the existing terminal building and connected via an underground tunnel (which I believe is one of the future growth scenarios AUS has in its master plan anyway).

Both the demographics and geography of AUS are suboptimal. AUS would be, by a considerably margin, the smallest metro in the U.S. to support a network carrier hub, other than SLC (more on that shortly). In addition, AUS is quite far south to serve as a convenient hub for anything but east-west flows (largely already covered by ATL). Neither of those challenges is insurmountable - again, SLC is smaller, and IAH is further south. But perhaps the biggest impediment to AUS as a viable hub is its situation within 200 miles of two of the largest and strongest hubs in the country. SLC (like CLT) benefits from being the second hub in its region. I remain skeptical that Texas can support three network carrier hubs. Regional markets that would presumably feed a hypothetical AUS hub are all already sufficiently served by competitors.

I think what's far more likely, if anything, is a CVG- or RDU-style, O&D-tailored "focus city" with nonstop links to hubs and key O&D markets. Delta is already doing that, and could plausibly do more. But I suspect doing so will be at network-dilutive yields given that both AA and United have very strong penetration with the AUS corporate market and, in AUS as in so many other places, both of those competitors benefit from having hubs in many of the nation's largest and most important O&D markets. And oh yeah, then there's this little airline called Southwest.

At some point, well in the future, maybe. But for the foreseeable future - with respect - it just doesn't seem plausible.

You make some fair points, but I disagree with some of them. Texas is the second largest state in the Union (population wise), there is plenty of traffic to go around. AUS (and SAN, since it has been admitted that they sometimes overlap) have the second and third fastest growing city economies according to the article I mentioned above. There is plenty of market for DL to tap into as combined, the AUS/SAN region boasts some 3 million+ inhabitants (and growing!). None of the US3 have a strong presence within the area. As the business community grows in the area, there will be much more demand for nonstop flights (both domestic and international) and DL can serve that.

Sure, they could fly to DFW or IAH to use AA or UA respectively, but will travelers really want to connect in those airports forever? I also might add DL is becoming the preferred airline of choice for younger professionals and with no presence in Texas currently, the Austin/San Antonio area opens up some intriguing opportunities. Not only could a hypothetical AUS hub become a reliever for E/W traffic, it could also become a gateway to Mexico/Latin America, much better than any of their existing hubs do now.

You are right, I wouldn't say a hub is likely, but I will say it is certainly a possibility down the road. Right now, DL only flies from AUS to their hubs/focus cities, they do yet fly to any non hub/focus cities. I anticipate that will be changing here shortly. With 9 new gates opening and DL putting a large/state of the art SkyClub at AUS (bigger than they typically do), it is clear DL intends to build up its presence at AUS. Whether this results in simply another CVG-style focus city or a full blown hub, remains to be seen.

This all being said, I would imagine if DL does intends to hub AUS, it will do so slowly as doing so would require the construction of a whole new Concourse south of the existing one. That will cost a lot of $$$. Trying out a focus city first to test the waters would be good.

KAUSavgeek wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

I have a wishlist.


MCO-AUS CR9

Not really allowed to say where I got this from, but MCO-AUS will become a thing, prolly on mainline

Yes, I also heard the MCO-AUS rumor in the framework of 757 service in July.

reggiet wrote:

KAUSavgeek wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

I have a wishlist.


MCO-AUS CR9

Not really allowed to say where I got this from, but MCO-AUS will become a thing, prolly on mainline

Yes, I also heard the MCO-AUS rumor in the framework of 757 service in July.

Not saying your wrong, but I believe that when I see it. Do you know how much DL is going to build up AUS?

ADrum23 wrote:

Texas is the second largest state in the Union (population wise), there is plenty of traffic to go around.

I disagree. I don't think there is enough traffic in Texas to support a third network carrier hub on top of DFW (the second largest hub in the country) and IAH (the fifth largest), and on top of Southwest. The market is already well served - and doesn't need excess capacity from Delta. Smaller Texas markets already have lots of flights and capacity to IAH and especially DFW, and larger Texas markets get plenty of service all over the U.S., and within the state - including to AUS! - on Southwest.

ADrum23 wrote:

AUS (and SAN, since it has been admitted that they sometimes overlap) have the second and third fastest growing city economies according to the article I mentioned above. There is plenty of market for DL to tap into as combined, the AUS/SAN region boasts some 3 million+ inhabitants (and growing!).

The combined Austin and San Antonio population is approaching five million but a hub would likely require a single, well-situated airport (a la DFW). As it is, the two airports pull from their respective cities' catchment areas.

ADrum23 wrote:

None of the US3 have a strong presence within the area. As the business community grows in the area, there will be much more demand for nonstop flights (both domestic and international) and DL can serve that.

AA, Southwest and United have large presences at both AUS and SAT, offering ample nonstop access to major markets throughout the U.S., on top of ample connectivity through their enormous hubs nearby.

ADrum23 wrote:

Sure, they could fly to DFW or IAH to use AA or UA respectively, but will travelers really want to connect in those airports forever?

In smaller markets - that would presumably be feeding a hypothetical AUS hub - I suspect travelers will be quite content to continue connecting in DFW/IAH where they enjoy a level of convenient connectivity that can't be replicated elsewhere. AUS travelers already have nonstop access virtually every single city of consequence in the U.S. So as said, can Delta add more capacity on top of AA, Southwest and/or United? Sure. But as said, that is almost certainly going to dilute yields.

ADrum23 wrote:

commavia wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

Why can't it be a hub? DL needs a presence in Texas, it is the biggest hole in their network. Texas is home to 3 of the top 5 fastest growing city economies according to a recent Forbes magazine article, so DL is missing out.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/karstenstrauss/2018/01/03/the-10-big-u-s-cities-with-the-fastest-growing-and-slowest-growing-economies/#4c3f51c74734

They'll probably start out with a focus city like operation (along the lines of CVG, RDU, BOS, etc), but it would be in their long term interest to establish a hub similar to SLC, expect a little bit bigger. Of course, AUS doesn't have the space right now for a hub, but a new satellite concourse could be added to the south of the existing terminal building and connected via an underground tunnel (which I believe is one of the future growth scenarios AUS has in its master plan anyway).

Both the demographics and geography of AUS are suboptimal. AUS would be, by a considerably margin, the smallest metro in the U.S. to support a network carrier hub, other than SLC (more on that shortly). In addition, AUS is quite far south to serve as a convenient hub for anything but east-west flows (largely already covered by ATL). Neither of those challenges is insurmountable - again, SLC is smaller, and IAH is further south. But perhaps the biggest impediment to AUS as a viable hub is its situation within 200 miles of two of the largest and strongest hubs in the country. SLC (like CLT) benefits from being the second hub in its region. I remain skeptical that Texas can support three network carrier hubs. Regional markets that would presumably feed a hypothetical AUS hub are all already sufficiently served by competitors.

I think what's far more likely, if anything, is a CVG- or RDU-style, O&D-tailored "focus city" with nonstop links to hubs and key O&D markets. Delta is already doing that, and could plausibly do more. But I suspect doing so will be at network-dilutive yields given that both AA and United have very strong penetration with the AUS corporate market and, in AUS as in so many other places, both of those competitors benefit from having hubs in many of the nation's largest and most important O&D markets. And oh yeah, then there's this little airline called Southwest.

At some point, well in the future, maybe. But for the foreseeable future - with respect - it just doesn't seem plausible.

You make some fair points, but I disagree with some of them. Texas is the second largest state in the Union (population wise), there is plenty of traffic to go around. AUS (and SAN, since it has been admitted that they sometimes overlap) have the second and third fastest growing city economies according to the article I mentioned above. There is plenty of market for DL to tap into as combined, the AUS/SAN region boasts some 3 million+ inhabitants (and growing!). None of the US3 have a strong presence within the area. As the business community grows in the area, there will be much more demand for nonstop flights (both domestic and international) and DL can serve that.

Sure, they could fly to DFW or IAH to use AA or UA respectively, but will travelers really want to connect in those airports forever? I also might add DL is becoming the preferred airline of choice for younger professionals and with no presence in Texas currently, the Austin/San Antonio area opens up some intriguing opportunities. Not only could a hypothetical AUS hub become a reliever for E/W traffic, it could also become a gateway to Mexico/Latin America, much better than any of their existing hubs do now.

Actually the Austin and San Antonio metropolitan areas combined have over 4.5 million people. Both metros each have over 2 million.

commavia wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

Texas is the second largest state in the Union (population wise), there is plenty of traffic to go around.

I disagree. I don't think there is enough traffic in Texas to support a third network carrier hub on top of DFW (the second largest hub in the country) and IAH (the fifth largest), and on top of Southwest. The market is already well served - and doesn't need excess capacity from Delta. Smaller Texas markets already have lots of flights and capacity to IAH and especially DFW, and larger Texas markets get plenty of service all over the U.S., and within the state - including to AUS! - on Southwest.

ADrum23 wrote:

AUS (and SAN, since it has been admitted that they sometimes overlap) have the second and third fastest growing city economies according to the article I mentioned above. There is plenty of market for DL to tap into as combined, the AUS/SAN region boasts some 3 million+ inhabitants (and growing!).

The combined Austin and San Antonio population is approaching five million but a hub would likely require a single, well-situated airport (a la DFW). As it is, the two airports pull from their respective cities' catchment areas.

Our metros may connect but our cities are not as close together as Dallas and Fort Worth. Having a DFW style airport would not work quite the same way. ABIA is conveniently located where it can be accessed fairly quickly across the Austin metro. I can get to ABIA in less than 10 min. I would not support losing that convenience for an airport in between. That possibility has long since passed. It makes more sense to have two anchor ports. I've said this in the past more than once but eventually SA should build a new airport south of their city which would move their current port out of ABIA's 90 min drive radius. Would open up better air connectivity to south Texas.

ADrum23 wrote:

reggiet wrote:

KAUSavgeek wrote:

Not really allowed to say where I got this from, but MCO-AUS will become a thing, prolly on mainline

Yes, I also heard the MCO-AUS rumor in the framework of 757 service in July.

Not saying your wrong, but I believe that when I see it. Do you know how much DL is going to build up AUS?

With the current estimates of tripling their gate
Footprint it would grow to about 70 flights a day.

reggiet wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

reggiet wrote:

Yes, I also heard the MCO-AUS rumor in the framework of 757 service in July.

Not saying your wrong, but I believe that when I see it. Do you know how much DL is going to build up AUS?

With the current estimates of tripling their gate
Footprint it would grow to about 70 flights a day.

How many gates will DL have compared with UA/AA/WN?

I'm highly skeptical but at best is an O&D focus city to capture more premium traffic to/from AUS and markets where DL has a strong position. No way is it meant to be a connecting hub or linking small markets with minimal O&D traffic to AUS.

At best, you are looking at an IND/BNA/RDU type operation.

[twoid][/twoid]

ADrum23 wrote:

reggiet wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

Not saying your wrong, but I believe that when I see it. Do you know how much DL is going to build up AUS?

With the current estimates of tripling their gate
Footprint it would grow to about 70 flights a day.

How many gates will DL have compared with UA/AA/WN?

Current AUS US3 & WN gates. Alaska and Virgin have a few gates mixed in.

DL
3

UA
5

AA
5

WN
6